Author Topic: Is Bishop Williamson excommunicated after illicitly ordaining a bishop (Read 7743 times)

Stubborn · « **on:** March 19, 2015, 04:28:39 PM »

God Bless Bishop Williamson and Bishop Faure for their courage!

Elizabeth · « **Reply #1 on:** March 19, 2015, 04:33:07 PM »

Carol Glatz, :smoke-pot:

Stubborn · « **Reply #2 on:** March 19, 2015, 04:36:01 PM »

Oops, here is OP again

Source

Bishop tells his supporters that Rome has been occupied by 'modernist cuckoos'

Bishop Richard Williamson has been automatically excommunicated along with the priest he illicitly ordained a bishop.

Bishop Williamson violated Church law when he ordained Fr Jean-Michel Faure, 73, a bishop without papal approval during a ceremony in Nova Friburgo, Brazil, on the feast of St Joseph.

While the Vatican did not comment immediately, canon law provides automatic excommunication for the newly ordained bishop and for the bishop ordaining him in cases where the ordination goes against the will of the pope.

Bishop Williamson had been excommunicated in 1988 when he and three other traditionalist bishops were ordained against papal orders by the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, founder of the Society of St Pius X.

Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications in 2009 as a first step toward beginning formal talks aimed at reconciliation with the group. However, there was widespread outrage at revelations that Bishop Williamson had denied the gassing of Jєωs in nαzι cσncєnтrαтισn cαмρs. The Vatican said the pope had been unaware at the time of the bishop’s radical views on the h0Ɩ0cαųst.

Bishop Williamson, who opposed the Society of St Pius X holding reconciliation talks with the Vatican, was ousted from the society in 2012.

He and a number of followers did not support reconciliation with Rome because they believe the Vatican had strayed from the Catholic faith since the Second Vatican Council.

Fr Faure, who was ordained a priest by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1977, was also in opposition to reconciliation and left the society in 2013.

In an interview posted on the blog “Non Possumus”, the priest said he was willing to be ordained a bishop despite the penalties because “we cannot leave the resistance without bishops”.

“As Archbishop Lefebvre said, Catholic bishops are indispensible for the conservation of the true doctrine of the faith and the sacraments,” he said.

In a commentary emailed to subscribers of his newsletter on February 28, Bishop Williamson said the Catholic Church in Rome – referring to it as “the nightingales’ nest” – was unjustly occupied by “modernist cuckoos”.

“Wherever the remainder of the true nightingales are visibly gathered, in whatever makeshift nest, they are in the Church, they are the true visible Church, and their beautiful song testifies to anyone who has ears to hear that the cuckoos are nothing but cuckoos who have stolen the Catholic nest which they presently occupy,” he wrote.

He criticised the leaders of the SSPX for being “tone deaf” and unable “to distinguish the song of cuckoos from that of nightingales”.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #3 on:** March 19, 2015, 04:37:59 PM »

Tell that to Bishop Tony Palmer :smoke-pot:

Charlemagne · « **Reply #4 on:** March 19, 2015, 05:15:06 PM »

I'd take it as a high honor to be excommunicated from the Conciliar Church. "Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?" -- 2 Corinthians 6:14

Croix de Fer · « **Reply #5 on:** March 19, 2015, 06:03:43 PM »

Excommunicated from ʝʊdɛօ-masons, but still a member of the true Catholic Church, and a Catholic in the Eyes of the Lord.

Maybe Francis - the celebrant of judaism - should take heed to what Pope Eugene IV declared ex cathedra at the Council of Florence: The Law of the OT - the Mosaic Law, which is divided into ceremonies, rites, sacrifices and sacraments, ceased upon promulgation of Gospel. Any observance of Old Law sins mortally and leads to eternal damnation. Not fit for eternal salvation.

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #6 on:** March 19, 2015, 08:36:54 PM »

Nothing will rob traditionalists of the joy in this glorious Feat of St. Joseph. Thank you Bishop Williamson and Bishop Faure!

Iuvenalis · « **Reply #7 on:** March 20, 2015, 02:09:26 AM »

I think the consecration was necessary and all, but I don't understand it:

Why one consecration? Abp Lefebvre consecrated more than one for a reason, to serve the needs of a burgeoning "traditionalist" movement, to provide valid sacraments and preserve the true Catholic Faith

That still needs to be done, and +Williamsob isn't getting any younger-- so why *one* consecrations, and Faure is not a young man...

This consecration confuses me from a few practical aspects.

Tridentine MT · « **Reply #8 on:** March 20, 2015, 04:40:07 AM »

Quote from: Charlemagne

I'd take it as a high honor to be excommunicated from the Conciliar Church. "Bear not the yoke with unbelievers. For what participation hath justice with injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?" -- 2 Corinthians 6:14

Archbishop Lefebvre used to say that excommunication from the Conciliar Church was a "badge of honour". I'm sure Bishop Williamson is proud of the latest badge gained.

TKGS · « **Reply #9 on:** March 20, 2015, 06:27:51 AM »

Quote from: Iuvenalis

I think the consecration was necessary and all, but I don't understand it:

Why one consecration? Abp Lefebvre consecrated more than one for a reason, to serve the needs of a burgeoning "traditionalist" movement, to provide valid sacraments and preserve the true Catholic Faith

That still needs to be done, and +Williamsob isn't getting any younger-- so why *one* consecrations, and Faure is not a young man...

This consecration confuses me from a few practical aspects.

It confuses me as well...unless...Bishop Williamson has not seemed to have it in him to Consecrate any priests. This priest is different. He was part of the original SSPX. Perhaps Fr. Faure had made it known he was open to consecrating successor priests while Bishop Williamson simply did not want to be the one to carry the torch. Now, as Bishop Faure, we will have to see.

TKGS · « **Reply #10 on:** March 20, 2015, 06:30:09 AM »

The title of this topic also confuses me. Has the Vatican even acknowledged the event or does the title simply note that the "excommunication" is automatic?

Matthew · « **Reply #11 on:** March 20, 2015, 08:28:48 AM »

Quote from: TKGS

The title of this topic also confuses me. Has the Vatican even acknowledged the event or does the title simply note that the "excommunication" is automatic?

I think the latter is the case.

For one thing, SOMEONE updated Bishop Williamson's Wikipedia entry yesterday morning -- while the ceremony was underway. There was a new heading, "Second excommunication".

So they're obviously talking about the ipso facto variety. Which is actually stupid considering the Bishop believes he's doing it for the good of the Church (and the conciliar doofuses should acknowledge and realize this, even if they personally can't understand the Trad movement or they disagree with him), and even if his "for the good of souls" were merely subjective (all in the Bishop's head), it would still prevent an excommunication. Same as Archbishop Lefebvre in 1988.

Remember, there can be no excommunication without a MORTAL sin. Excommunication isn't a contagious disease. Look up your Baltimore catechism. There are 3 conditions for a mortal sin.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #12 on:** March 20, 2015, 08:42:51 AM »

Yeah, so far just some modernist neoCaths salivating about the thought of a Catholic getting excommunicated (while the heretics remain untouched). No official word yet from Rome.

TKGS · « **Reply #13 on:** March 20, 2015, 09:19:34 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: TKGS
The title of this topic also confuses me. Has the Vatican even acknowledged the event or does the title simply note that the "excommunication" is automatic?

I think the latter is the case.

This makes sense. I saw that Novus Ordo Watch indicated that there has been no word from the Vatican. My guess is that they will remain silent on the matter until pressed.

In any event, I find the apparent condemnations from the institutional SSPX curious. I wonder what they will do in the years to come when Bishop Fellay is elderly and has to either allow the SSPX to die for lack of a bishop (with our without a reconciliation) or consecrate a successor bishop without authorization. It seems that by condemning this action of Bishop Williamson, they are setting themselves up for a fall.

Or, has the SSPX been silent? I have read that they condemned the action in advance but I haven't actually read any condemnations.

Graham · « **Reply #14 on:** March 20, 2015, 10:46:30 AM »

Quote from: TKGS

Quote from: Iuvenalis
I think the consecration was necessary and all, but I don't understand it:

Why one consecration? Abp Lefebvre consecrated more than one for a reason, to serve the needs of a burgeoning "traditionalist" movement, to provide valid sacraments and preserve the true Catholic Faith

That still needs to be done, and +Williamsob isn't getting any younger-- so why *one* consecrations, and Faure is not a young man...

This consecration confuses me from a few practical aspects.

It confuses me as well...unless...Bishop Williamson has not seemed to have it in him to Consecrate any priests. This priest is different. He was part of the original SSPX. Perhaps Fr. Faure had made it known he was open to consecrating successor priests while Bishop Williamson simply did not want to be the one to carry the torch. Now, as Bishop Faure, we will have to see.

Fr. Faure wasn't only chosen for his quality and for practical reasons, but to symbolize the Resistance's intention to follow Abp. Lefebvre, and to indicate that it will proceed with prudence. But I believe we may expect more from Bp. Williamson, and of course now Bp. Faure.