In my opinion due to the invalidity of the (Novus Ordo ) Episcopal Consecration we can look only to the East, at this point in time, for bishops with Ordinary Jurisdiction (from my point of view as Catholic of the sedevacantist persuasion). I also think it is a jump to state that an Eastern rite bishop(validly consecrated) who erroneously follows a false pope loses jurisdiction. In our present case, it appears to me that any Eastern bishop, who has retained Ordinary Jurisdiction (or obtained ordinary jurisdiction through common error) is trying to remain united to Peter by adhering to those they (wrongly) believe have held and do hold the papal office.
We are not talking about a bishop going rogue and ignoring a lawful pope, or bishops such as the Greeks who severed themselves from the Church, we are talking about bishops, who, in the greatest fog of confusion in the history of the Church have wrongly identified who the pope is.
Another point to consider, it cannot automatically be assumed that the bishops in question adhere to the heresies of the post Vatican II church. The act of adhering to the man, Francis-Bergoglio, does not in and of itself, cause one to believe heretical or erroneous ideas taught by him.
In addition to the confusion about who the pope is, there is also serious confusion about what Catholics must believe. Many Catholics in our times erroneously believe that they can disagree with the pope, unless he teaches ex cathedra.
It may be that these bishops either do not understand or have not followed the teachings of the post Vatican II (false) popes or it may also be possible that they believe they are not bound to the teachings, but they are bound to the man they believe is Peter.
In order for a lawfully appointed bishop to lose his jurisdiction, he must be a heretic, schismatic or an excommunicate. We may privately study the words and actions of these bishops and draw our conclusions, but we must be slow and careful in our approach. In the case of the post Vatican II claimants, we have a two-fold approach to determine their status. We may more easily make a determination about them by observing their official teaching and laws, and state they have done things that popes cannot do, therefore they do not possess the office. In the case of bishops, we must observe their words and actions and determine if they are indeed heretics. In some cases a determination may be obvious but in others I think it is a very complex process.
Topic: Bishops with Ordinary Jurisdiction: Publicly Condemn Heresies of Vatican II? (Read 3605 times)