There's no "right" way to organize a Traditional group ... given the crisis we're in.  Really, the only RIGHT way is currently unavailable, namely, to have all organization leading ultimately back to Rome.  With the Conciliar hierarchy either absent or in total breakdown, it's all about prudential judgments given the circuмstances with which various individuals are presented.

I remember sitting at table with Father Peter Scott and Father Kenneth Novak at the Regina Caeli House (which was then the District headquarters).  We were listening to something during a meal, and the (non-Trad) speaker mentioned how SSPX are disobedience.

So the last part of this wasn't included in the post.  Father Kenneth Novak protested aloud that "we're not in disobedience."  To which, I responded, "Of course we are."  So both Father Novak and I looked at Father Peter Scott to referee our disagreement.  After about 30 seconds of silence, he blurts out loud (in typical Father Peter Scott fashion) "We are." and then he starts in with his very distinct laugh.

So what kind of replacement "hierarchical congregation" besides, you know, the CATHOLIC CHURCH HIERARCHY, qualifies as enough to make it legitimate and moral?

What traits must it have before it qualifies?

Is it a 501.3 (c) that gives legitimacy? Would having this IRS non-profit status change the moral situation of a priest offering Mass outside normal ecclesiastical structures and authority? Or perhaps some other government form you fill out?

What if an independent priest works with a trad bishop of some kind, albeit very loosely and doesn't see him on a regular basis? Does the priest have to attend official yearly Priest Meetings at an ex-Dominican Novitiate building in, say, Winona MN to be in a legitimate "hierarchical" situation?

Does the priest's superior have to give him 3 significant commands a year to establish this hierarchical situation, or what?

Or does the replacement Church hierarchy pretty much have to be called "SSPX" to be legitimate?

Great post.

Condemned:

3453 Dz 2053 53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable, but Christian society, like human society, is subject to perpetual evolution.
Condemned error of the modernists about the Church, revelation, Christ and the sacraments [From the Decree of the Holy Office Lamentabili, of July 3, 1907]

While we're posting things that have nothing to do with anything or anyone in this thread:

The Sixth Commandment: "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery"


Seriously, Sean? Where in this thread did ANYONE utter any Modernism similar to "The Church has/is/will evolve, or needs to evolve, or is expected to evolve"?

No one suggested ANY KIND of mutability for the Church.

While we're posting things that have nothing to do with anything or anyone in this thread:

The Sixth Commandment: "Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery"


Seriously, Sean? Where in this thread did ANYONE utter any Modernism similar to "The Church has/is/will evolve, or needs to evolve, or is expected to evolve"?

No one suggested ANY KIND of mutability for the Church.

The constitution of the Church is essentially hierarchical.  Ergo, if you dispense with hierarchy, you have mutated the constitution of the Church (and created something else).

Next you will say that the crisis in the Church dispenses with the law, to which I will reply thusly:

1) What is of the essence of a thing cannot be mutated without changing the essence, and therefore the thing itself;

2) Even were this not so, there are several Resistance organizations, male and female, secular and religious, active and contemplative.  As such, being ordained into independence is without excuse (and again, without justification).

But the hierarchical congregation of the SSPX is not part of the hierarchical constitution of the Church.  The constitution of the Church consists of lawfully established apostolic or episcopal sees in union with the Apostolic See of Rome. The Society is not an episcopal see at all and it never was.  It was founded as a pious union (essentially a lay organization) under the authority of the diocese of Fibourg, but it even lost that status in 1975. So, the SSPX might be a hierarchical congregation, but it is not part of the hierarchical constitution of the Catholic Church.  I agree with Matthew that the SSPX vis-a-vis the divine constitution of the Church is no different than the independent Thuc groups.     

John-

You are talking about legality.

I am talking about the hierarchical constitution of the Church.

In the long history of the Church, we find several notable examples manifesting extraordinary episcopal power (eg., Athanasius, Eusebius, et al, ordaining priests and consecrating bishops to supply for the needs of the faithful).

But what we do not see, ever, is the consecration and ordination of vagus independents.  

If you will then retort, “What diocese or congregation were/are SSPX or Resistance priests/bishops incardinated into?” I will respond, “They are incardinated into their own various congregations via supplied jurisdiction (which endows a priest and bishop with all that is necessary to supply for the needs of the apostolate).”  

Conversely, one ordained or consecrated as an independent is incardinated into nothing (rejecting the hierarchical constitution of the Church).

But the hierarchical congregation of the SSPX is not part of the hierarchical constitution of the Church.  The constitution of the Church consists of lawfully established apostolic or episcopal sees in union with the Apostolic See of Rome. The Society is not an episcopal see at all and it never was.  It was founded as a pious union (essentially a lay organization) under the authority of the diocese of Fibourg, but it even lost that status in 1975. So, the SSPX might be a hierarchical congregation, but it is not part of the hierarchical constitution of the Catholic Church.  I agree with Matthew that the SSPX vis-a-vis the divine constitution of the Church is no different than the independent Thuc groups.     

The SSPX is indeed part of the hierarchical constitution of the Church. It is a "society of the common life without vows". To say that it is essentially a lay organisation, a pious union, is simplistic to say the least. Read the study by the canonist, Fr Glover, here: https://sspx.org/en/legal-existence-sspx

A priest, in order not to be a vagabond and to be permitted to exercise his power of orders, must be incardinated either into a diocese or a religious institute. The SSPX truly falls into the latter category, having been erected in the diocese of Fribourg, praised by Rome, permitted by Rome to open houses in other dioceses in Switzerland and Italy, and allowed to incardinate priests from outside of the Society directly into it.

The suppression of the SSPX in 1975 was unlawful - more properly a criminal affair! - and should not be accepted.

The problem now with the subversion of the SSPX is that both forms of a priest receiving his approval to exercise his power of orders - through the diocesan bishop or through the religious institute - are equally broken, which is basically what Ladislaus and Matthew have been arguing. The sedes, because of their convictions, considered it a broken affair long ago. The supreme shepherd is struck and so the faithful bishops have to assume greater responsibilities to continue the mission of the Church. It is the state of necessity which justifies this law of necessity and ultimately invokes the supreme law of the Church, the salvation of souls. I don't think this is against the constitution of the Church! Whether a bishop erects a religious institute for his priests to work in, or simply "sends" them, giving them a spiritual jurisdiction over souls rather than a territorial one which is not possible, I think it is a judgement for the bishop and not for us... imo...

Do you differentiate between the Catholic Church and the conciliar church? It sounds like you might not believe that there's such a thing as a conciliar church.

Well, the Catholic Church before Vatican II is the same organization as the "Conciliar Church" after Vatican II. Same governing structure, same diocese, same parish churches, same seminaries, etc.  If organization that was the true Church before Vatican II became a new false Church after Vatican II, the gates of hell would have prevailed.  The Church is in a crisis, but the organization is still the same Church.  It couldn't be otherwise.