It is currently Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:05 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
 Claiming Jurisdiction 
Author Message

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Claiming Jurisdiction
Mr. Lane wrote this on the forum in June 2012 (Emphasis added):

John Lane wrote:
Hello all,

I understand that there are some who find Gerry's newest views plausible and you may wish to discuss them here.

I'm sorry, but life is too short.

This whole "jurisdiction" theme is a red herring. The traditional clergy - the respectable ones anyway - do not claim jurisdiction. They do not claim to have a mission from the Church, in the canonical sense that matters. They do not claim to have authority over us. They are quite clear that they act at our request, and that the only jurisdiction they can lay claim to is that which is supplied for each act, under condition of "danger of death." This is a world away from habitual jurisdiction.

In principle their acts are essentially on the same basis as Gerry's own preaching of the faith. He has no mission either, yet if he presents Christian doctrine publicly he does not breach the law. To all those who demand to know "Who sent the traditional clergy?" we respond, "Who sent YOU?"

If there is a fault in the general view of the traditional clergy, it is in not claiming habitual jurisdiction. That is, it would be immeasurably better if Bishop Rangel had declared the see of Campos vacant in 1991 and assumed the office himself, on the basis of the election of the remaining Catholic clergy of the diocese. This would have been a classical and perfectly defensible act, with precedent in the history of the Church and no great difficulty even with the text of canon law (and certainly none with the intention of the lawgiver). This would have been done with the explicit statement that the approval of the Roman Pontiff is presumed until he appears and gives his actual decision.

Likewise the clergy in other places could make the case against their local modernist prelate, ideally by issuing a canonical admonition first, then proceed to elect a bishop, and have the SSPX or other bishops consecrate him, and thus begin the restoration of the hierarchy.

Such clear, canonically regular, and eminently defensible procedures would force the Novus bishops to face the reality of the crisis and decide to which church they really wish to belong. It would be likely that some of them would convert under such pressure, and could be conditionally re-consecrated and take their places as undoubted Successors of the Apostles.

But none of this makes the traditional clergy today illegitimate. The absence of a canonical mission does not make them non-Catholics, and it does not make their ministrations unlawful. If a Jew can lawfully baptise under canon law, as he can in danger of death, then a Catholic priest can offer the Holy Sacrifice without fearing that he acts illegitimately. If a half-instructed convert like Gerry can lawfully preach the faith, then so can a cradle-Catholic priest who has undergone six years of training in a professional institute of formation.

If you find Gerry's latest views plausible and you think that those who decline to debate him are hiding from the truth, then so be it.

If Gerry reads this, I have a message for him: Start again, Gerry, from scratch. You have no idea what you're talking about, and you bear a grave responsibility before God for whatever damage you do.


It has taken me quite a while to find this because it was in a topic about Gerry Matatics, which was not what I was thinking. In any event, I am wondering if John still agrees with what he wrote above or anyone thinks that today, in 2014, what is italicized above could ever be validly accomplished. And I was also wondering what the canonical and theological issues would be in doing such a thing.

I wonder how many actual validly ordained priests there exists in the archdiocese where I live, or, indeed, in many jurisdictions. Clearly, at least to my mind, asking the Novus Ordo priests in a diocese to be involved in such an action would be like asking the local Anglican, Lutheran, and Presbyterian priests to be involved.


Mon Mar 24, 2014 2:36 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Claiming Jurisdiction
Dear TKGS,

Yes, I believe this approach to be absolutely viable and also the best approach, because traditional, clear, and almost certainly fruitful of a better outcome than this "treading water whilst slowly sinking" approach we currently endure.

But it isn't going to happen. :)

So Providence has permitted what we are currently witnessing and experiencing, and just as the Passion was "unnecessary" (Our Lord chose every detail of it), so the passion of the Mystical Body is proceeding as it is, by God's will.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:04 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 3:57 am
Posts: 391
Location: Indiana, USA
New post Re: Claiming Jurisdiction
Ok. Stupid question then: Why isn't it going to happen? Obviously, the SSPX bishops aren't going to do so because they "recognize" the jurisdiction of the Conciliar bishops (albeit, they don't seem to recognize their jurisdiction over the SSPX), but why do you think that no traditional and sedevacantist clergy will do this? If even one actually started the ball rolling, do you think it would catch on? If even one actually started the process, would that not begin to re-establish Apostolic succession within the believing Church?


Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:59 pm
Profile

Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 4:53 pm
Posts: 100
New post Re: Claiming Jurisdiction
To build on your stupid question TKGS,I will add a dumb one of my own. Just because it is unlikely, or likely going to be extremely difficult to visibly reastablish the hierarchy of the Church, does that mean the proper individuals (the clergy) should not even try or do not have a obligation to try. Yes this is the apostasy of the end times, but many writers also mention the Antichrist persecuting the Church with many martyrs in the last days. To me unless the Church is restored at least in part the devil cannot feel very threatened and there is not many to persecute. If the devil feels like he is winning via subversion, why would he change strategies to oppression. It seems to me it would only be after he knew his deceit had failed would he switch gears.


Tue Mar 25, 2014 1:44 am
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Claiming Jurisdiction
TKGS wrote:
If even one actually started the ball rolling, do you think it would catch on?


Yes, I do. But no, it won't happen. I am confident in that because there are three general views amongst trad clergy. 1. Sedeplenist. It's obvious why they won't act, although Archbishop Lefebvre explicitly advised that some traditionalists -i.e. those in Campos - do what we are discussing: http://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archb ... _Mayer.htm ) 2. Guerardian. They certainly won't act. Their practical outlook is essentially, "we can't do anything because there's an unresolvable legal lock-up". 3. Sedevacantist "laissez faire". Without criticising the men who hold this view, they have come from an irregular background themselves, in one way or another - e.g. the SSPX, or Schuckardt, etc., and can't really be blamed for not seeing themselves as the clergy of any particular diocese. Indeed, the CMRI sees itself as a religious congregation (albeit self-erected and irregular) as does the SSPV and the SSPX. None of the large groups of traditional priests have come from a diocesan background and do not see any reason to head in that direction. It's simply not on their radar. Indeed, their quasi-religious character is a result of the situation, I'd say. They have adopted a form of organisation suited to the extraordinary circumstances they find themselves in - i.e. scattered groups of the faithful in countless different dioceses. So the last thing they are thinking about is ordinary jurisdiction, or any territorial structures at all.

The collapse of the Campos resistance was really the death-knell of this idea, I think.

The other thing to keep in view is that an essential modesty restricts all sound-minded people from taking steps that are not clearly necessary. So a traditional priest offering the Holy Sacrifice and providing the sacraments to the faithful who ask for them is on safe ground, whereas doing something more radical in an effort to "save the Church" would look like a temptation (and probably is).

Anyway, we don't need to stress about any of this. It's not our responsibility, and if God wanted the crisis to proceed differently, or end, He would arrange it. He is in charge, as He was in His Passion. He commanded the Jews not to touch His disciples in the garden of Gethsemane, and so they didn't (which would explain why St. Peter was not touched despite cutting off a man's ear!). He prevented the Jews from breaking His legs and having His Body thrown into the public pit as all victims of public execution were, and instead arranged for His Side to be opened, so that like Adam in his sleep, His spouse (the Church) could emerge, and likewise He arranged an honourable burial in a noble tomb. This crisis will humiliate the Church just in those ways and to that degree that He ordains, by His infinitely wise permission, and no more. Then she will rise glorious again.

_________________
In Christ our King.


Tue Mar 25, 2014 3:06 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:14 pm
Posts: 210
New post Re: Claiming Jurisdiction
Reminds me very much of what +ABL said in his 1986 talk on whether the Pope was really the Pope.

He talks about how few priest there are and how huge is the need of the whole world. His response is that he is not going to worry about that, because if the Good Lord put him in those circumstances then essentially he has nothing to worry about.

It might even be possible that the current scenario is the one which saves the MOST amount of people, and since we are missing so much knowledge about the big picture we remain dumbfounded when we even attempt to answer these sort's of questions. Essentially a Divine abandoment to Providence is what is needed for the soul, most especially our wicked times. Trust that the Good Lord never fails any particular soul, we just have to remain faithful to His Divine commandments.

_________________
Laudare, Benedicere et predicare...
Bitcoin donations: 15aKZ5oPzRWVubqgSceK6DifzwtzJ6MRpv


Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:15 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:44 am
Posts: 76
New post Re: Claiming Jurisdiction
Jorge Armendariz wrote:
It might even be possible that the current scenario is the one which saves the MOST amount of people, and since we are missing so much knowledge about the big picture we remain dumbfounded when we even attempt to answer these sort's of questions. Essentially a Divine abandoment to Providence is what is needed for the soul, most especially our wicked times. Trust that the Good Lord never fails any particular soul, we just have to remain faithful to His Divine commandments.

This makes sense to me. The human race has to learn the hard way that its sophisticated but boneheaded liberal modernist ideas just don't work.

And the very best way, perhaps only way, to do that is to get the Church out of the way for a while and let the liberal modernist ideas be fully implemented... and since they don't work, they will be completely discredited.


Mon Apr 28, 2014 2:42 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.