Remaining Bishops appointed by Pius XII and John XXIII

Ordained
Bishop   Years   Name   Current Title
24 Aug 1951   61.96   Ján Chryzostom Cardinal Korec, S.J.   Bishop Emeritus of Nitra, Slovakia

25 Mar 1954   59.38   Bishop Jan van Cauwelaert, C.I.C.M.   Bishop Emeritus of Inongo, Congo (Dem. Rep.)

28 Aug 1955   57.95   Archbishop José de Jesús Pimiento Rodriguez   Archbishop Emeritus of Manizales, Colombia

9 Sep 1955   57.92   Bishop Dominik Kalata, S.J.   Titular Bishop of Semta

29 Jun 1956   57.12   Archbishop George Hamilton Pearce, S.M.   Archbishop Emeritus of Suva, Fiji, Pacific (Oceania)

29 Jul 1956   57.03   Fiorenzo Cardinal Angelini   President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers, Roman Curia

22 Sep 1957   55.89   Archbishop José Maria Pires   Archbishop Emeritus of Paraíba, Paraiba, Brazil

29 Sep 1957   55.87   Bishop Felice Leonardo   Bishop Emeritus of Cerreto Sannita-Telese-Sant’Agata de’ Goti, Italy

27 Apr 1958   55.29   Archbishop Bernardino Piñera Carvallo   Archbishop Emeritus of La Serena, Chile

10 Aug 1958   55.00   Bishop Caetano Antônio Lima dos Santos, O.F.M. Cap.   Bishop Emeritus of Ilhéus, Baia, Brazil

14 Sep 1958   54.91   Bishop Antonio José Ramírez Salaverría   Bishop Emeritus of Maturín, Venezuela

19 Mar 1959   54.39   Bishop John Jobst, S.A.C.   Bishop Emeritus of Broome, Australia

7 May 1959   54.26   Serafim Cardinal Fernandes de Araújo   Archbishop Emeritus of Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil

24 Apr 1960   53.30   Archbishop Moisés Julio Blanchoud   Archbishop Emeritus of Salta, Argentina

21 Jun 1960   53.14   Archbishop Arturo Antonio Szymanski Ramírez   Archbishop Emeritus of San Luis Potosí, México

25 Jul 1960   53.04   Bishop Eloy Tato Losada, I.E.M.E.   Bishop Emeritus of Magangué, Colombia

28 Aug 1960   52.95   Archbishop Armando Círio, O.S.I.   Archbishop Emeritus of Cascavel, Parana, Brazil

18 Jan 1961   52.56   Bishop Paul-Émile Charbonneau   Bishop Emeritus of Hull, Québec, Canada

16 Apr 1961   52.32   Bishop Mario Renato Cornejo Radavero   Auxiliary Bishop Emeritus of Lima, Peru

22 Apr 1961   52.30   Bishop Albert-Georges-Yves Malbois   Bishop Emeritus of Evry-Corbeil-Essonnes, France

14 May 1961   52.24   Archbishop Carlos Quintero Arce   Archbishop Emeritus of Hermosillo, Sonora, México

21 May 1961   52.22   Bishop Placidus Gervasius Nkalanga, O.S.B.   Bishop Emeritus of Bukoba, Tanzania

9 Jul 1961   52.09   Bishop Louis Nganga a Ndzando   Bishop Emeritus of Lisala, Congo (Dem. Rep.)

16 Jul 1961   52.07   Nasrallah Pierre Cardinal Sfeir   Patriarch Emeritus of Antiochia {Antioch} (Maronite), Lebanon

30 Jul 1961   52.03   Giovanni Cardinal Canestri   Archbishop Emeritus of Genova {Genoa}, Italy

24 Aug 1961   51.96   Bishop William John McNaughton, M.M.   Bishop Emeritus of Incheon {Inch’on}, Korea (South)

8 Sep 1961   51.92   Bishop José de Jesús Sahagún de la Parra   Bishop Emeritus of Ciudad Lázaro Cárdenas, Michoacán, México

15 Oct 1961   51.82   Bishop Andrés Sapelak, S.D.B.   Bishop Emeritus of Santa María del Patrocinio en Buenos Aires (Ukrainian), Argentina

29 Oct 1961   51.78   Archbishop Antônio Ribeiro de Oliveira   Archbishop Emeritus of Goiânia, Goias, Brazil

6 Jan 1962   51.60   Bishop José Mauro Ramalho de Alarcón Santiago   Bishop Emeritus of Iguatú, Ceara, Brazil

11 Feb 1962   51.50   Bishop Gregorio Garavito Jiménez, S.M.M.   Bishop Emeritus of Villavicencio, Colombia

19 Mar 1962   51.39   Bishop Roberto Reinaldo Cáceres González   Bishop Emeritus of Melo, Uruguay

10 Jun 1962   51.17   Archbishop Robert-Casimir Tonyui Messan Dosseh-Anyron   Archbishop Emeritus of Lomé, Togo

25 Jul 1962   51.04   Bishop Jacques Landriault   Bishop Emeritus of Timmins, Ontario, Canada

22 Aug 1962   50.97   Duraisamy Simon Cardinal Lourdusamy   Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, Roman Curia

22 Aug 1962   50.97   Bishop Anselmo Zarza Bernal   Bishop Emeritus of León, Guanajuato, México

30 Aug 1962   50.95   Archbishop Raymond Gerhardt Hunthausen   Archbishop Emeritus of Seattle, Washington, USA

12 Sep 1962   50.91   Bishop Myles McKeon   Bishop Emeritus of Bunbury, Australia

14 Dec 1962   50.66   Bishop Remi Joseph De Roo   Bishop Emeritus of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

24 Feb 1963   50.46   Bishop Yves-Georges-René Ramousse, M.E.P.   Vicar Apostolic Emeritus of Phnom-Penh, Cambodia

19 Mar 1963   50.39   Bishop José Guadalupe Padilla Lozano   Bishop Emeritus of Veracruz, México

19 Apr 1963   50.31   Emmanuel III (Emmanuel-Karim) Cardinal Delly   Patriarch Emeritus of Babylon {Babilonia} (Chaldean), Iraq

21 Apr 1963   50.31   Bishop Salvatore Nicolosi   Bishop Emeritus of Noto, Italy

9 May 1963   50.26   Bishop Géry-Jacques-Charles Leuliet   Bishop Emeritus of Amiens, France

- Ambrose

Quote from: Guest

I have a question for Ambrose or Lover of Truth or whoever:

Do you think the sede clergy have the authority to deny Holy Communion and the other Sacraments to the "Feneeyites"?

If so, why? If not, why?

The Church gives explicit rules for Holy Communion.   The right to receive Holy Communion is guaranteed to Catholics by Divine law.  

As a general rule, I believe they should not be denied Holy Communion for the following reasons.

1.  They have not been taught by the lawful pastors of the Church for decades.
2.  They believe (erroneously) that they are upholding the teaching of the Church.
3.  The lawful authorities of the Church, i.e. the bishops or the Pope, have not authoritatively warned them.  

Without the judgment of the Church, any private judgment that another is a heretic is a very complex matter.  I would urge you to read John Daly's essay on this, titled, The Right To Judge Heresy:  Can Private Individual Recognize Someone As A Heretic Before The Direct Judgment Of The Church, found on the Aquinas site.  (I would link it for you, but links do not work in the anonymous subforum.)

Thank you so much Ambrose. You and SJB make very cogent and edifying arguments.

There are certain posters here who have erred grossly regarding jurisdiction, canonical mission, office, &c. (just take a look at SJB's exchange with that Cathedra kid). These individuals must be corrected before they make a further embarrassment of traditional Catholicism altogether.

Their ideological aberrations would make their own arbitrarily designated petite église usurp the Holy Church established by Christ. There is also a tendency amongst them to revive the old heresies of Hus in positing that the Church does not the Roman Pontiff and the episcopal college to function and that the Church is made up of an invisible body of the faithful, which are condemned heresies.

And yet these hooligans must not be denied Communion on account of the very principles that you, Ambrose, have so lucidly presented. The very doctrines which they militantly deny with such pertinacity and contumacy are the very ones which save them from excommunication or other censures. However, clerics who have the audacity to make of themselves self-appointed/self-sent teachers like Fr. Cekada may be imputable of immense guilt for having so scandalized and confused the faithful.

By their fruits, you shall know them...

I have a question for Ambrose or Lover of Truth or whoever:

Do you think the sede clergy have the authority to deny Holy Communion and the other Sacraments to the "Feneeyites"?

If so, why? If not, why?

VERY good question.  They do not have the authority to deny it over the Thuc-line issue.  I can hang my hat on that.  They do not have the authority to deny it over the una cuм issue.  I can hang my hat on that.

Objectively there may be a definitive answer to that question that a valid Pope could settle.  

Subjectively, I believe we live in the most confusing time in the history of the Church and that the greater the confusion the greater the leniency with God.  So long as this bishops, whether they allow the Feeneyites to receive Holy Communion or not, are acting in accordance with a conscience that they have formed to the best of their ability on this topic they will be okay either way.  

I believe most Feeneyites are of good will.  The most vocal ones give them a bad name.  If I were running a parish and they did not stir things up too much (confusing all my parishioners on the issue) I would let them receive.  I would let them receive even if they bad mouthed me publicly and repeatedly (if it was over non doctrinal issues such as I'm a coward or wrong about SV or I over enforce the modesty issue).

I would be very careful before I would deny the Sacraments to anyone.  If they were a public sinner that is one thing.  If they come immodestly dressed to the Communion rail I'd pass them over and explain why.  But if they keep to themselves and are trying to sanctify their souls why would I prevent them from receiving.  

Many of these people weed themselves out.  I would just need to give a sermon on the issue and they would stop going because "I'm a heretic.".  

Not sure if what I say above is right.  But the question posed, quoted above, is a very good one.  I would be interested in the responses.

Guest wrote:

Quote

Of the small handful of those appointed by Pope Pius XII who are still alive, almost all have resigned their office.

But anyway, it would not matter. If you accept the point, the near extirpation of Apostolic succession is virtually guaranteed under sedevacantism. Apostolic succession is closely linked to the Petrine succession. Let me ask, do you acknowledge a limit to the length of an interregnum? If so, what is it? In my opinion, the limit is when every bishop appointed by the last true Pope dies off.

As to the other opinion, you and I about agree, at least that trad bishops today do not have ordinary jurisdiction, they did not receive a canonical mission and Apostolic mandate. Simple consecrations can be carried out during interregna, but not the conferral of jurisdiction, which is reserved to the Sovereign Pontiff.

When a bishop consecrates another, the formal cause of Apostolicity is not the consecrating bishop but the Supreme Pontiff, specifically the supreme universal jurisdiction he possesses in act. Consecrations performed during interregna cannot confer jurisdiction, and a bishop who claims to do it nonetheless would incur schism, by usurping to himself an authority proper to the Pope. Almost every traditional cleric and bishop knows this and only a very few laymen claim they in fact have ordinary jurisdiction.

The question I would ask you is this:  If the Pius XII bishops resigned their office, then who accepted their resignations?  Those who have no jurisdiction in the Church have no more authority than you or I to receive resignations.  

There is no limit to length of an interregnum.  The real question you seem to be asking is:  Is it beyond God's power to extend the lives of the remaining bishops to maintain the existence of the hierarchy, and furthermore to extend the lives of the remaining Roman clerics who have not defected in order to preserve the diocese of Rome from failing?

I am certain that you will not explicitly deny God's power, so what is the question here?

Good post Ambrose.  :cheers:

Remaining Bishops appointed by Pius XII and John XXIII

Ordained
Bishop   Years   Name   Current Title
24 Aug 1951   61.96   Ján Chryzostom Cardinal Korec, S.J.   Bishop Emeritus of Nitra, Slovakia

25 Mar 1954   59.38   Bishop Jan van Cauwelaert, C.I.C.M.   Bishop Emeritus of Inongo, Congo (Dem. Rep.)

28 Aug 1955   57.95   Archbishop José de Jesús Pimiento Rodriguez   Archbishop Emeritus of Manizales, Colombia

9 Sep 1955   57.92   Bishop Dominik Kalata, S.J.   Titular Bishop of Semta

29 Jun 1956   57.12   Archbishop George Hamilton Pearce, S.M.   Archbishop Emeritus of Suva, Fiji, Pacific (Oceania)

29 Jul 1956   57.03   Fiorenzo Cardinal Angelini   President Emeritus of the Pontifical Council for Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers, Roman Curia

22 Sep 1957   55.89   Archbishop José Maria Pires   Archbishop Emeritus of Paraíba, Paraiba, Brazil

29 Sep 1957   55.87   Bishop Felice Leonardo   Bishop Emeritus of Cerreto Sannita-Telese-Sant’Agata de’ Goti, Italy

27 Apr 1958   55.29   Archbishop Bernardino Piñera Carvallo   Archbishop Emeritus of La Serena, Chile

10 Aug 1958   55.00   Bishop Caetano Antônio Lima dos Santos, O.F.M. Cap.   Bishop Emeritus of Ilhéus, Baia, Brazil

14 Sep 1958   54.91   Bishop Antonio José Ramírez Salaverría   Bishop Emeritus of Maturín, Venezuela

19 Mar 1959   54.39   Bishop John Jobst, S.A.C.   Bishop Emeritus of Broome, Australia

7 May 1959   54.26   Serafim Cardinal Fernandes de Araújo   Archbishop Emeritus of Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil

24 Apr 1960   53.30   Archbishop Moisés Julio Blanchoud   Archbishop Emeritus of Salta, Argentina

21 Jun 1960   53.14   Archbishop Arturo Antonio Szymanski Ramírez   Archbishop Emeritus of San Luis Potosí, México

25 Jul 1960   53.04   Bishop Eloy Tato Losada, I.E.M.E.   Bishop Emeritus of Magangué, Colombia

28 Aug 1960   52.95   Archbishop Armando Círio, O.S.I.   Archbishop Emeritus of Cascavel, Parana, Brazil

18 Jan 1961   52.56   Bishop Paul-Émile Charbonneau   Bishop Emeritus of Hull, Québec, Canada

16 Apr 1961   52.32   Bishop Mario Renato Cornejo Radavero   Auxiliary Bishop Emeritus of Lima, Peru

22 Apr 1961   52.30   Bishop Albert-Georges-Yves Malbois   Bishop Emeritus of Evry-Corbeil-Essonnes, France

14 May 1961   52.24   Archbishop Carlos Quintero Arce   Archbishop Emeritus of Hermosillo, Sonora, México

21 May 1961   52.22   Bishop Placidus Gervasius Nkalanga, O.S.B.   Bishop Emeritus of Bukoba, Tanzania

9 Jul 1961   52.09   Bishop Louis Nganga a Ndzando   Bishop Emeritus of Lisala, Congo (Dem. Rep.)

16 Jul 1961   52.07   Nasrallah Pierre Cardinal Sfeir   Patriarch Emeritus of Antiochia {Antioch} (Maronite), Lebanon

30 Jul 1961   52.03   Giovanni Cardinal Canestri   Archbishop Emeritus of Genova {Genoa}, Italy

24 Aug 1961   51.96   Bishop William John McNaughton, M.M.   Bishop Emeritus of Incheon {Inch’on}, Korea (South)

8 Sep 1961   51.92   Bishop José de Jesús Sahagún de la Parra   Bishop Emeritus of Ciudad Lázaro Cárdenas, Michoacán, México

15 Oct 1961   51.82   Bishop Andrés Sapelak, S.D.B.   Bishop Emeritus of Santa María del Patrocinio en Buenos Aires (Ukrainian), Argentina

29 Oct 1961   51.78   Archbishop Antônio Ribeiro de Oliveira   Archbishop Emeritus of Goiânia, Goias, Brazil

6 Jan 1962   51.60   Bishop José Mauro Ramalho de Alarcón Santiago   Bishop Emeritus of Iguatú, Ceara, Brazil

11 Feb 1962   51.50   Bishop Gregorio Garavito Jiménez, S.M.M.   Bishop Emeritus of Villavicencio, Colombia

19 Mar 1962   51.39   Bishop Roberto Reinaldo Cáceres González   Bishop Emeritus of Melo, Uruguay

10 Jun 1962   51.17   Archbishop Robert-Casimir Tonyui Messan Dosseh-Anyron   Archbishop Emeritus of Lomé, Togo

25 Jul 1962   51.04   Bishop Jacques Landriault   Bishop Emeritus of Timmins, Ontario, Canada

22 Aug 1962   50.97   Duraisamy Simon Cardinal Lourdusamy   Prefect Emeritus of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches, Roman Curia

22 Aug 1962   50.97   Bishop Anselmo Zarza Bernal   Bishop Emeritus of León, Guanajuato, México

30 Aug 1962   50.95   Archbishop Raymond Gerhardt Hunthausen   Archbishop Emeritus of Seattle, Washington, USA

12 Sep 1962   50.91   Bishop Myles McKeon   Bishop Emeritus of Bunbury, Australia

14 Dec 1962   50.66   Bishop Remi Joseph De Roo   Bishop Emeritus of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

24 Feb 1963   50.46   Bishop Yves-Georges-René Ramousse, M.E.P.   Vicar Apostolic Emeritus of Phnom-Penh, Cambodia

19 Mar 1963   50.39   Bishop José Guadalupe Padilla Lozano   Bishop Emeritus of Veracruz, México

19 Apr 1963   50.31   Emmanuel III (Emmanuel-Karim) Cardinal Delly   Patriarch Emeritus of Babylon {Babilonia} (Chaldean), Iraq

21 Apr 1963   50.31   Bishop Salvatore Nicolosi   Bishop Emeritus of Noto, Italy

9 May 1963   50.26   Bishop Géry-Jacques-Charles Leuliet   Bishop Emeritus of Amiens, France

- Ambrose

Do these guys all say the traditional Mass and hold the Catholic faith?  If yes, have they been kicked out of the NO by the anti-Popes?

If they were kicked out does that make them "irregular".  Un-Apostolic somehow?  If they are "getting away with being Catholic" is it because they are not ministering to souls?  

I have been confused as to whether you believe the NO hierarchy or the hidden hierarchy are the formal successors.

Must there be formal successors for the Church to exist?  If all the above do then Pivurunus and Neville don't count?  The world ends?  

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Can their be formal succession without jurisdiction?

No.

Quote

Can they be formal successors of the Apostles without claiming jurisdiction is a "physical territory" and or "obedience sense?

No.

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Must there be formal successors for the Church to exist?

Yes.

Quote

I have not seen any authoritative writings that claimed the mandate could be implied in a situation like ours.  Have not seen yet where the only visible Catholic Bishops are formal successors to the Apostles.  That might be the sense people get from the writings but I have not seen conclusive evidence.  If it is presented (and I see it as such - I know it is possible for me to misunderstand legitimate evidence) I'll most readily grant the point.

See SJB's posts and what John Lane has to say about this at Bellarmine Forums.

Why don't you ask the Priests and Bishops whom you trust about these questions too?

Can you explain your responses?

I have asked some clergy about it.  I will not go into detail on who they are or what they have said or how much weight I have put into what they said.

Some of our clergy err on whether a public heretic can be Pope or not.

Some err on whether we have to obey what a legitimate binds on the Church or not.

Some err on NFP.

Some err on brain death.

Some err in sacramental theology.

Some err regarding the disciplines they "bind" on their faithful.

Some err on Feeneyism.

I'm open to their being formal successors but I'm not strong on our needing to obey them on things that go against our formed conscience or on their having infallibility.  But so long as they are Catholic, objectively, and not public heretics or worse, I believe they can retain formal succession.  I don't insist on it though.  And I certainly don't condemn the contrary opinion because people more knowledgeable and sound hold the contrary opinion and that gives me some pause.  That being said I am not convinced formal succession is necessary for the Church to exist.

John Lane is not infallible.  He actually could be wrong about something.

His site being more civil and more sound is good but I have seen him not grant valid points to those who refute him.  He does not grant the point and then prevents them from posting or deletes their posts.  That is where I have a problem.  They are being civil and only trying to have their objections answered and if he can not refute it, rather than granting the point he shuts them down.

But I believe he is one of the more studied people in the public view and I also believe his forum is the best.  I am glad that he gives no quarter to the uncivil and prevents error from being posted on his site.  But I am a little disappointed that he will not give some objectors the same hearing we would expect to have if positions were reversed.  

I'm open to their being formal successors but I'm not strong on our needing to obey them on things that go against our formed conscience or on their having infallibility.  But so long as they are Catholic, objectively, and not public heretics or worse, I believe they can retain formal succession.  I don't insist on it though.  And I certainly don't condemn the contrary opinion because people more knowledgeable and sound hold the contrary opinion and that gives me some pause.  That being said I am not convinced formal succession is necessary for the Church to exist.

The Church will always have Successors to the Apostles. Whatever role they (Trad bishops) may play as witnesses to the Faith does not make them Successors to the Apostles.

Thanks, Ambrose, for your answer. Did you see most of them are Emeritus, they have resigned? Okay, you think resignation is not valid if there is no Pope to accept it? Fine, now, for one thing, all these Bishops are very old (some of them are departed by now, that site is usually updated slowly) and their deaths are impending. No I don't doubt God's power, but if God allows them all to die, would you still be certain that sedevacantism is the correct explanation of the crisis? I think that would be divine confirmation that the sedevacantist thesis needs to be revised.

They do update the site, but I do not know how often.  The list of Pius XII bishops used to much longer, many have died and the list has thinned.

If these men were popes, then the Church has defected, and it would no longer be apostolic or holy.  The Conciliar church lacks the marks, it is not the Church.  As Catholics we know the Church must exist in the form Our Lord established it in until the end of time.  Our Lord left us with a solution, it is just that no one either grasps it or those who do understand it do not know how to implement it.

You could also add to your concerns about the hierarchy dying off, the same issue exists for the clergy of Rome.  The diocese of Rome cannot fail.  Therefore, at least one Roman cleric, lawfully appointed must still profess the true Faith, and not have fallen into heresy.  A diocese, even reduced to its minimum must have at least one priest and at least one layperson who adhere to the Faith.  

So, ultimately, there are two problems here, and they are only ones that God can solve for us. our only duty is to trust in Him that He will show us His Will when he is ready to do so.