Author Topic: Bishop Paul Morgan giving the reasons for the consecration of Resistance bishops (Read 28651 times)

Horatius · « **Reply #5 on:** December 02, 2023, 05:40:40 AM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on December 01, 2023, 04:53:12 PM

Has it gotten to the point where there are almost more bishops than there are priests serving the faithful? ... one "in every garage", as Father Cekada might say?

When the next quarantine comes, I think we will find that the current bishops, even though there be one in "every garage," will find it hard if not impossible to reach all of the faithful needing Sacraments. This thing that people say about there being too many bishops is a strange way to dismiss certain churchmen. As if the number of priests or bishops itself actually mattered and wasn't apportioned to the dictates of the apostolate.

Put it this way, if the archdiocese of Naples boasts an ecclesiastical territory of 247sq km. and counts 4 bishops(1 arch, 3 coadjutant), what is there that is unreasonable about not even 10 bishops servicing the globe in a time of utter cataclysm?

As PV says above- not necessarily that I agree- a very sound argument can be made that there are still not nearly ENOUGH bishops for our present needs.

In passing, does anyone not find it strange that Sean Johnson has time to post sardonic messages on Taylor Swift threads but has nothing to say about the current Resistance situation vis-à-vis the bishops? Surely there is more than a feast's worth of discussion of these matters for a fully traditional protagonist.

2Vermont · « **Reply #6 on:** December 02, 2023, 07:09:50 AM »

Sixth Objection: Perhaps have recourse to the conservative bishops
who love us.
So the same answers apply to those bishops who love us more,
because even if those bishops respect tradition, respect the good
mass, etc. two questions arise about these so-called
"conservatives", - they remain very attached to the Conciliar
Church, nor have they renounced the Conciliar errors on a personal
level. Furthermore, there is the question about their consecration
too. You have seen the recent study published by the Dominicans of
Avrille; Father Calderon; showing that there are questions raised
regarding each sacrament of the modern Church. It doesn't mean
that everything is invalid, but nevertheless they are
questionable. So there! It is true that Msgr. Vigano, very
courageous, renounced the error of the Conciliar Church etc.; Msgr
Vigano has impressed us a great deal, a good bishop, but he is 83
years old...and we mustn't wait for the impossible.

So, it seems that the Resistance bishops decided not to wait on Vigano. I had been wondering whether Vigano was open to conditional consecration. This seems to answer that question.

TheRealMcCoy · « **Reply #7 on:** December 02, 2023, 07:57:00 AM »

The world is so distracted by so much noise that the next lock down and persecution will catch most everyone off guard. The internet most likely will be shut down and so you won't even have access to information about where there is a mass. And when you are in a life or death situation things like politics and marriage troubles never enter your mind. The only thing you're concerned about is dying in a state of grace. I can attest to this as I recently had a serious health crisis that I posted about in another thread. Issues like "Sol Invictus" and "he ain't kissing me right" become so utterly irrelevant. How many bishops will the world need when the 15 minute rule is in place?

TruthUnchained · « **Reply #8 on:** December 05, 2023, 09:19:27 AM »

An excellent article by Fr Pivert on this topic. (It is a rushed translation. For 'coronation' read consecration --

We are very saddened to hear criticism of the coronation of Mgr Ballini by Mgr Williamson, especially since these criticisms relate to details which have no seriousness, no harmful consequences and which would not even be worth the trouble of stop there. What is the importance of whether Mgr Ballini was consecrated in private or in public, whether the revelation of the consecration was made sooner or later? To criticize these details is to forget the perverse nuisance of the world hostile to the Church and its servants. We have a new bishop, defender of the faith, zealous, friend of priests, devoted to the faithful, who, in Ireland, was the only priest to continue and extend the care of souls through journeys as courageous as they were numerous while not a single priest of the modern Church, not a priest of the Society of Saint Pius Those who do not rejoice in this really have a serious problem and are playing into the hands of the adversary of the Church.
We therefore questioned the main person concerned as well as the Church. Here are their answers.

Bishop Williamson
I consecrated Bishop Ballini privately because of the Covid crisis in Ireland which was in full swing at that time. He was on a short visit to Broadstairs, and any passage from Ireland to England or the reverse seemed at any moment in danger of being cut off. This way the Catholics in Ireland would at least have something to protect the Faith. In fact, contacts were not cut then, but in the future...?

The liturgy of the coronations
The study of coronations is also interesting for the history of the liturgy. Accustomed as we are to grandiose and solemn ceremonies, it is difficult to imagine today that in past centuries episcopal consecrations took place without any pomp or pageantry. These were “low masses”, as they used to say in the past. It was only in the middle of the ^19th century, when coronations began to take place in the provinces, that they were given some luster. In Italy, we had to wait until the beginning of the ^20th century to see coronations multiply outside of Rome.

This is how things happened in the Eternal City from the Council of Trent. The consistories were usually held on Mondays; the recommended bishops of Italy were consecrated the following Sunday in different churches in Rome, and very often in groups of two, three or four. The very short time between the nomination and the coronation prevented the ceremony from being given much luster.
To fully understand the coronations in France, we must remember the concordat procedure, whatever the concordat. The pontifical bulls of canonical institution are not sent to the elected official but to the head of state who appointed. The bubbles are examined by the judicial authorities of the moment which, during periods of tension, take the opportunity to quibble or contest the text. A royal or presidential act is then required which declares the bulls admissible. The chosen one can then withdraw them; he must therefore come to Paris, especially since after his coronation he will have to take the oath to the head of state. He goes into preparatory retreat and is crowned without ceremony in a seminary or community chapel, in front of a few friends and relatives. Those who know, for example, the chapel of Lorette in Issy, which was very fashionable under the Restoration, will have an idea of what a coronation ceremony could have been like when three bishops decided to be ordained together in the said chapel. .

In this regard, here is an unpublished and particularly interesting testimony, which has remained ignored by Talleyrand's numerous biographers, on his episcopal coronation. The ceremony took place in the Saint-Sauveur chapel, in the garden of Issy, now demolished. Its progress is known to us from the manuscript of the Saint-Sulpice ceremonial (p. 71). The simplicity of the decor seems to have been pushed to the extreme. (…) “In 1789, on January 4, the coronation of the Bishop of Autun in the chapel of Saint-Sauveur in Issy. This chapel is narrow and more awkward than at Laurette even for a coronation with two bishops. The cold was at ^14th degree on the thermometer. The prayer tables, chests, chairs and armchairs were removed from the chapel. The two credenzas were placed in the corners of the wall, the small altar in the left corner. He was holding part of the window. We could not remove the doors, which is a considerable inconvenience, they are only held together with nails and there was a fear that the wood would break. The stove had been lit the day before, wood had been put in it to maintain it during the night. We put more wood there in the morning. The doors of the chapel had been left open so that the heat could be communicated everywhere. A tapestry was placed in the corridor over the door leading into the chapel. The master of ceremonies did his best to avoid confusion, in which he was not always successful. At the end of the ceremony, he urged all the people who were both in the chapel and at the door to line up around the room for the procession, so that the prelate would have someone to whom he could give the blessing. The solitary gentlemen performed the ceremonies alone and were entertained. »

Secret or discreet coronations
Given the number of years and coronations, it was inevitable that certain consecrations were distinguished by some particularity. In past centuries and in all countries, there were coronations that we could call discreet, carried out at night for various reasons. To name just one, one of the best known in France was that of the first vicar apostolic of Canada, Blessed François de Laval-Montigny, consecrated on the night of December 8, 1658 in Saint-Germain-des-Prés by the nuncio, with all doors closed. The reason was that the Archbishop of Rouen, François de Harlay de Champvallon, believed he had jurisdiction over Canada Lands because the boats going there left from his diocese. He was violently opposed to the appointment of a vicar apostolic. Let us add that this same Harlay, who became archbishop of Paris, will be the strongest supporter of the erection of Quebec into a diocese in 1674! In 1831, due to the political situation and the precarious position of the consecrating archbishop of Paris, Romain Gallard, bishop of Meaux, was consecrated at night on April 17, among the ladies of Saint-Thomas de Villeneuve.
But our century would see the birth of a new kind of coronation, the secret coronation in communist countries. The first seems to have been that of Father Neveu in 1926 in Moscow. Pius The ceremony was not very solemn, it was only witnessed by the sacristan, the snuffer served as a pastoral staff. Since then, in certain Eastern countries, secret coronations have multiplied, often carried out in incredible conditions, a hotel room, a scullery, a work camp, in Romania, in Czechoslovakia, among attached Ukrainians. force on the Orthodox Church by Stalin. The names of these bishops are never published in the Annuario pontificio.
Andrew hat. Episcopal ordinations in the Catholic Church from the 16th century to the present. In: Revue d'histoire de l'Église de France, volume 76, n°196, 1990. pp. 73-84; doi: https://doi.org/10.3406/rhef.1990.3486 https://www.persee.fr/doc/rhef_0300-9505_1990_num_76_196_3486

The coronations in the Gulag
Besides the ancient case of Saint Eusebius, it seems useful to us to report those of the secret episcopal consecrations, and even without the knowledge of Rome, in the Gulag. To do this, we consulted an eminent specialist in these questions: Mr. Maurice de Nessy, whose response we reproduce below, for which we warmly thank him. As a preliminary remark, what is valid for the safeguarding of a limited portion of the Church, where Catholics are nevertheless found in limited numbers, must be a fortiori valid when it is, as we say, we said, of the survival of Tradition, and of the spiritual life of all faithful Catholics throughout the Church.

There were numerous ordinations and coronations in secret in the Gulag, according to the long tradition of the Church. The bishops in distress in the unlimited Gulag therefore only did their duty as creators of priesthood and episcopate without negotiations with Rome... Subsequently there could be communication of these ceremonies to the Roman congregations, as was the case for the secret ordinations made at Dachau by Mgr Piguet, deported bishop of Clermont-Ferrand. Similar events happened in Albania, according to what was told to me (in secret) there. In any case, there is clarity on these dramatic cases that the horizon frees up, but, Ostpolitik obliges, Rome is in silence on this subject.

In Romania, I was able to have (discreet) contact with a Uniate bishop, Mgr Gorcea (is that his real name?) consecrated in secret at the camp by Metropolitan Cardinal Hossiu. Released together, they both died today.
In the USSR, there were coronations by Mgr d'Herbigny: NNSS Neveu, Sloskans, Frison, Malecki. This one consecrated in prison, before the post, the bishops Matulonis and Amoudrou.

In Ukraine, I was certain of secret ordinations, as well as clandestine consecrations: Mgr Alexandre Chira, by Mgr Ronya (disappeared in the Gulag); Mgr Vassil Welytchkovski (thirteen years in prison then deported, died in Canada in 1973); Mgr Pavlo Vassilik, Mgr Ivan Sémédé, came out of the forests to sign with twenty-three priests, twelve religious and one hundred and seventy-four lay people, a petition delivered on August 2, 1987 to Gorbachev for the recognition of their Church. These four bishops therefore received their powers in the Gulag or “in the forest” from the hand of incarcerated or fugitive bishops, without physical or postal links with Rome and for good reason, because it was absolutely necessary for the permanence of the Uniate Church, a priesthood and above all an episcopate: it seems that Patriarch Slipyi achieved this at least five times. For this you must address (but he will perhaps be very careful) to the Father… to…
Maurice de Nessy in Sacres by Mgr Lefebvre, a schism?

OABrownson1876 · « **Reply #9 on:** December 11, 2023, 12:40:04 PM »

One could maintain the position that Abp. Lefebvre consecrated far too few bishops. Other than the Thuc consecrations, no one in the world was consecrating bishops to my knowledge. The good archbishop was facing pressure from Rome. Were he to consecrate ten bishops, he might have feared Rome saying, "Dang, look at the Abp., he is setting up a parallel church." Bp. Williamson told us in seminary that Rome originally only wanted Lefebvre to consecrate one bishop. It would have been a cleaner break if the Abp. had said, "Nearly all the bishops in the Church act like heretics, the New Mass is a grave sacrilege, and I am consecrating ten bishops because we need them."

Besides, its a numbers game as well. A bishop might consecrate ten bishops with the understanding that three or four of them might end up being turncoats, leaving us with five or six faithful ones.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Bishop Paul Morgan giving the reasons for the consecration of Resistance bishops (Read 28651 times)

Horatius

Re: Bishop Paul Morgan giving the reasons for the consecration of Resistance bishops

2Vermont

Re: Bishop Paul Morgan giving the reasons for the consecration of Resistance bishops

TheRealMcCoy

Re: Bishop Paul Morgan giving the reasons for the consecration of Resistance bishops

TruthUnchained

Re: Bishop Paul Morgan giving the reasons for the consecration of Resistance bishops

OABrownson1876

Re: Bishop Paul Morgan giving the reasons for the consecration of Resistance bishops