Author Topic: Letter from Superiors of the SSPX and of Friendly Religious Communities  (Read 2287 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr G

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1037
  • Reputation: +623/-66
  • Gender: Male
From Non Possumus;

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com%2F&langpair=auto%7Cen&hl=en

Marriage in the FSSPX
Letter from Superiors of the SSPX and of Friendly Religious Communities
Of May 7, 2017

(...) a letter signed by seven superiors of the French district of the SSPX and by all the superiors of friendly male communities of the SSPX, argue the right of the faithful in this area and the true nature of the state of necessity that still Exists today. That is why the jurisdiction of substitution is strongly remembered. This text was published in the Le Chardonnet newsletter this month and was read in many of the chapels of the FSSPX in France.
We profoundly thank our good priests for speaking in public defending Monsignor Lefebvre's rightful position in the Church's crisis, and showing how the confusion in relation to the desire of some to join modernist Rome sows disorder everywhere.
Christian LASSALE
-------------------------------------------------- -------
Text of the letter

Dear faithful,

On April 4, the president of the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, Cardinal Müller, issued a letter on marriages by priests of the SSPX. Expressly approved by the Pope, who has ordered its publication, this document intends to regulate marriages within the Catholic tradition.
After this letter, a wide campaign of communication, from very different origins, wants to suggest that with this gesture, the Pope recognizes the marriages we celebrate and the validity of the marriages we celebrated earlier. The reality is, unfortunately, very different.
Because this problem touches them closely, it is about their family ... their future, we must clarify the real scope of this Roman document.

[The evident validity of our marriages]

You know that for forty years the Roman authorities refuse to recognize the validity of the marriages we celebrate, despite the law of the Church.
Certainly, this law establishes that the sacrament of marriage is celebrated before the parish priest or his delegate, as well as before at least two witnesses [1] . This is known as the canonical form of marriage and is necessary for validity. But since the priests of the Society of St. Pius X are not parish priests or delegated by them, there are those who maintain that the marriages celebrated by them are not valid, by default canonical form. On this basis, the diocesan and Roman courts do not hesitate to declare such marriages void. In doing so, however, they oppose the most fundamental law of the Church [2] .
In fact, the same canon law [3] provides for the situation in which "it is not possible to have or have without serious inconvenience those who are competent to attend marriage under the law." If this situation is expected to last thirty days, the ecclesiastical law recognizes the right to validly and lawfully carry out the exchange of consents before only two witnesses; Without parish priest, therefore, no priest delegated by him. However, for the legality of the act, the bride and the groom should appeal, if possible to any priest. A marriage celebrated with the so-called extraordinary form. It is in this way that, for forty years, we validly and lawfully receive the exchange of consents, without any doubt it is possible.

[State of necessity]

As you know, there is unfortunately and no doubt a tragic extraordinary situation in the Church [4] . Even today, Monsignor Lefebvre is called "the master blow of Satan": "to spread revolutionary principles by the authority of the Church itself." 5 We see that, in fact, the authorities of the Church, from the See of Peter to Pastor, directly damage the Catholic faith through a false humanism, that worshiping conscience, even destroys our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, the kingdom of Christ in human societies is simply ignored or impeded, and the Church is taken by the liberal spirit manifested especially in religious freedom, ecumenism and collegiality. Through this spirit, the nature of the Redemption realized by Christ is put in doubt, and the Catholic Church, the only ark of salvation, denies itself in practice. Catholic morality, already shaken to its foundations, is annulled by Francis, for example when he explicitly opens the path to Communion for the divorced "remarried."

This dramatic attitude of the church authorities undoubtedly causes a state of need for the faithful. In fact, there is not only a serious inconvenience, but a real danger in putting their salvation in the hands of pastors impregnated with this spirit "adultery" [6] harmful to both faith and morality. We have no choice but to protect ourselves from those authorities, because "they are in a situation of permanent inconsistency and contradiction" and that "until this ambiguity is resolved, disasters will continue to multiply in the Church." Which true obedience calls to disobey [8] , because "one must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29).

As long as the misunderstandings of the authorities of the Church do not dissipate, the serious inconvenience persists in accordance with canon 1098, and therefore the celebration of weddings in the extraordinary form is justified.
On the other hand, marriage supposes, like every sacrament, a profession of faith, we can deny the right of the faithful in regard to the sacraments, through the imposition of a minister who normally conducts his ministry in the adulterous line officialized in Vatican II , If they have the possibility of resorting to a priest free of this prevarication of the faith.

[The scope of the Roman document]

In light of these principles the true scope of the Roman document appears. By persisting in the disastrous line of Vatican II, the Roman authorities simply seek to deprive you of the extraordinary form of marriage by denying the state of necessity. Therefore, this document obliges you to use a diocesan priest for your marriages, leaving the priests of the SSPX only the opportunity to celebrate the following mass. The Ecclesia Dei Commission states that " whenever possible, the delegation of the Ordinary to attend the wedding [of the faithful of the SSPX] will be given to a priest of the diocese ... so that he can receive the consent of the parties [ ...], followed by the celebration of Holy Mass by a priest of the Fraternity. "

It is only "if it is not possible or if there is no priest of the diocese to receive the consent of the parties, it is [that] the ordinary can directly grant the necessary powers for the priest of the Fraternity. " In other words, it is unique and Only if there is a case of necessity ... that the bishop can delegate to a priest of St. Pius X. any other marriage celebrated by a priest of the SSPX delegation not explicit of the ordinary will still be considered invalid by the current holders of the supreme authority .

In addition to that decision also void as well as unfair, as it is a new deviation from the spirit of the law. The commission Ecclesia Dei, makes even the new code of canon law be interdicted by putting under the control of the Ordinary to the extraordinary form of marriage, and this at the expense of the natural right to marriage.
[Our marriages, certainly valid yesterday, today and always]

As long as this tragic situation of the Church persists and the destructive misconception of the high authorities of the Church, we will continue to use the extraordinary form of marriage without letting it be unduly ruled by the Ordinaries.

We will continue to celebrate marriages validly and lawfully in our churches and chapels, as we have always done so far, based on the old canon 1098 and the new canon 1116, regardless of any prior agreement with the Ordinary.

For those who maintain that such a practice would now be invalid because the ecclesiastical authorities offer a possible delegation of the Ordinary, we reply that the state of necessity that justifies our action is more dogmatic than canonical and that the impossibility of appealing to existing authorities is not Physical but moral. We only want to not abandon souls who, cornered by circumstances, trust in our ministry. They flee from the imposition of prevaricating authorities in one of the most important ceremonies of their lives. On the other hand those who make us such objections show that they know little the law of the Church. This makes it possible for the faithful to voluntarily put themselves in case of need validly and lawfully marry according to extraordinary form, even if they have the opportunity to do otherwise [10] .

If some of the faithful can have the opportunity to celebrate their marriage in their parish, we will be in the habits already established over time. To the extent that this priest is usually well disposed in regard to the Tradition of the Church and beware of preaching, he would see no objection in receiving consent according to the traditional ritual, while allowing a cure to Our Fraternity celebrate Mass   [11] . But we will refuse to make that celebration of the Mass, if the delegation that was denied us and was given, for example, to a priest Ecclesia Dei .

For the sake of the sacrament of matrimony, for the sake of their homes, for the sake of their souls, we do not intend to present the cause of their marriage with an ecclesiastical jurisdiction that the courts declare annulling marriages certainly valid under the false Pretext of the lack of psychological maturity of the contracting parties. We also know how these same courts endorse the fact of Catholic divorce through the simplified procedure of nullity of marriage promulgated by Francis. That is why we continue to recognize as the last judge of these cases the San Charles Borromeo commission that the FSSPX had to establish precisely because of these no doubt invalid statements of invalidity.

[Conclusion]

Finally, we would like to express our astonishment at this Roman decision and the echo it has received. The personal prelature ... for the Society of St. Pius X is supposed to recognize us as we are, and will keep us in independence from the local Ordinaries. If it is now decided to unjustly submit our marriages to such Ordinaries, tomorrow will be conditioned the opening of our new house to its approval. This shows how the language of duplicity does not prevail only in the field of faith and morality, but also in these canonical questions.

In addition, in this year of the centenary of the apparitions of Fatima, we invoke the Immaculate Heart of Mary, not to end our canonical situation, considered irregular by some, but to have the church liberated from the occupation by the modernists In their highest positions, rediscovered the path followed by the Church to Vatican II. Then our bishops will put their charges in the hands of the Supreme Pontiff [12] .
May 7, 2017.

Fr. David ALDALUR , Prior of Bordeaux.
Fr. Xavier BEAUVAIS , Prior of Marseilles.
Fr. Francis Xavier CAMPER , Prior of Lyon.
Fr. Bruno FRANCE , Prior of Nantes.
P. Thierry GAUDRAY , Prior of Lille.
Fr. Patrick de la ROCQUE , Prior of Paris.
P. Thierry LEGRAND , Prior of St. Malo.
They also sign the letter:
RP JEAN-MARIE , Superior of the Fraternity of the Transfiguration.
RP PLACIDE , Prior of the Benedictine Monastery of Bellaigue.
RP ANTOINE , Guardian of the Capuchin monastery of Morgon.
***
[1] Mons Lefebvre, Public declaration on the occasion of the episcopal consecration of several priests of the FSSPX , in fideliter , series 29 and 30 of June of 1988
[2] It is, in fact, the fundamental axioms of the law at stake: The supreme law is the salvation of souls , and the sacraments are for the willing man
[3] 1917 Code 1098 canon; 1983 Code 1116 canon.
[4] There would even have been doubts as to the existence of this exceptional situation which authorizes the use of the extraordinary form of marriage, it must be emphasized that, under the law, the church would compensate for the lack of competence (Code of 1917, Canon 209, code 1983, canon 144), thus keeping the act fully valid.
[5] Archbishop Lefebvre Satan's master stroke , St. Gabriel Publishing, 1977, p. 5-6
[6] Mons Lefebvre, Public declaration on the occasion of the episcopal consecration of several priests of the FSSPX , in fideliter , out of series 29 and 30 of June of 1988
[7] Archbishop Lefebvre Satan's master stroke , St. Gabriel Publishing, 1977, p. 5-6
[8] Mons Lefebvre, Obedience can force us to disobey? Takes note of 29/03/1988 in fideliter , out of series 29 and 30 of June of 1988
[9] See Andrew Sale, The stratified form and il minister della Celebrazione marriage of the secondo il codice e This America editions Pontificia Università Gregoriana , Rome, 2003, pp. 142-154: on the eve of Vatican II, several bishops and the cardinal asked for a modification of the barrel of 1098 concerning the special form of marriage. To avoid abuse in using this form, they proposed that it can not be used without the spouses have tried at least one use of the common, and never against the advice of the latter. In addition, a draft amendment to that weapon was proposed at the 4th session of the Council: " [extraordinary form celebrationis Matrimonii] Notice valid contrahendum Matrimonium coram solis testibus periculum additional conditiones mortis praeter praescriptas en lata 1098 CIC requiritur: a) C petitio Ordinary loci facienda if possit fieri, omissa no fuerit , vel no matrimonium celebretur nisi poste mensem ab interposita petitione responsione sinusoidal; b) matrimonium ut no celebretur vetitum Ordinarii Contra (Conc. II). Periodus III in AS 3, pars 8, 1075) [The extraordinary form of marriage] For a valid marriage contract outside the danger of death and presence of witnesses only, and beyond the conditions prescribed in can. 1098, it is required: a) that the request to do with the common, is not Has omitted, if possible, or that the marriage is not celebrated before the deadline of one month following the sending of the request and without having received a reply Sta b, that marriage is not held against the Ordinary's ban. "After a difficult discussion, the majority Parent Council decided to leave the decision in the hands of the Pope and the Commission for the revision of canon law. The Commission approached this several times (in 1970, 1975, 1977, 1978 and 1982), but the discussions were difficult. Finally, in 1116 the canon of the new Code substantially resumed can. 1098, without introducing any obligation to use ordinary to use the extraordinary form of marriage. The reason was to achieve the natural right to marriage in all circumstances.
[10] On March 13, 1910, the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments declared valid marriage before witnesses only those who surrender, to avoid the law, in an area where there is common impossibility. See Naz, Treaty of Canon Law in. Can. 1098, T.II. No. 426 p.377 Note 2.
[11] Thus, our intention not to hear what is going to endorse the manifest injustice of the new Roman decision, which makes it inappropriate for a priest of the SSPX to receive jurisdiction of a parson, and frustrates the latter a power that Still ordinary.
[12] Mons Lefebvre, Public declaration on the occasion of the episcopal consecration of several priests of the FSSPX , in fideliter , outside series 29 and 30 of June of 1988.

Offline Last Tradhican

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3787
  • Reputation: +1993/-1092
  • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • There's some priests with common sense and conviction.
    The Vatican II church - Assisting Souls to Hell Since 1962

    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Mat 24:24


    Offline wallflower

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1866
    • Reputation: +1982/-94
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  •  :pray: God keep them! I can never tire of hearing this type of news. I hope there are many more who are perhaps addressing +Fellay privately.

    Offline Mr G

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1037
    • Reputation: +623/-66
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/ 

    The District Superior, Father Christian BOUCHACOURT  responds to the 7 French SSPX Priors:

     
     + May 7, 2017
      To all the priests of the district of France

     
     Subject: Marriage FSSPX.

     
     Dear Colleagues,

     This morning you had to receive or read on the internet a statement signed by seven priors and the superiors of the Capuchins, Benedictines and Fathers of Mérigny.

     I totally and firmly condemn and reject the subversive manner in which this statement has been spread.  Prepared in secret, among selected brethren, in order to surprise, to destabilize and to put the superiors before the fact already consummated, this one takes to the faithful like hostages and constitutes them judges of the priests and superiors.

     The authors of this statement want to precipitate, as the only just and possible, their interpretation of the letter of Cardinal Müller on our marriages.  Persuaded that they are right, they were not prudent to submit their text to their superiors.  They regard their appreciation as the only true one, which must be imposed by all means, even the least legitimate.

     God can not bless such an initiative whose deadly fruits are manifested from now on: internal quarrels and additional divisions within and between our communities.  The faithful are the first to suffer it.  How can vocations germinate and develop in a religious family that is torn apart?

     It is up to each of us to confront this new test that runs through our district, rejecting   All cooperation to the diffusion of this comment, to have it for nothing and despise it as insignificant and good thing to be discarded.

     For some days, I asked the brethren theologians to prepare a text giving the clarifications on the letter of Cardinal Müller.  Having received the endorsement of the General House, I hereby inform you with the present.  [NP will publish this document as soon as possible]

     I entrust to your prayers, dear Brotherhoods, our district that must face a new storm that arose unfortunately in our ranks.  May Our Lord and Our Lady help us to rediscover our unity in truth and charity for the good of our souls and that of the faithful who are entrusted to us.
     
     Father Christian BOUCHACOURT

    Offline Against the Heresies

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 67
    • Reputation: +76/-1
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pour Fr. Bouchacourt has nothing to say about the contents of the statement of his confreres, he is pleased with swinging the moral club :fryingpan:.

    At the root of this division is Bishop Fellay's autocratic effort for an agreement with the conciliar curch. Now again the superiors will have to learn that not everbody is happy with their betrayal of Msgr. Lefebvre.


    Offline Meg

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3442
    • Reputation: +1698/-2696
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • http://nonpossumus-vcr.blogspot.com/

    The District Superior, Father Christian BOUCHACOURT  responds to the 7 French SSPX Priors:

     
     + May 7, 2017
      To all the priests of the district of France

     
     Subject: Marriage FSSPX.

     
     Dear Colleagues,

     This morning you had to receive or read on the internet a statement signed by seven priors and the superiors of the Capuchins, Benedictines and Fathers of Mérigny.

     I totally and firmly condemn and reject the subversive manner in which this statement has been spread.  Prepared in secret, among selected brethren, in order to surprise, to destabilize and to put the superiors before the fact already consummated, this one takes to the faithful like hostages and constitutes them judges of the priests and superiors.

     The authors of this statement want to precipitate, as the only just and possible, their interpretation of the letter of Cardinal Müller on our marriages.  Persuaded that they are right, they were not prudent to submit their text to their superiors.  They regard their appreciation as the only true one, which must be imposed by all means, even the least legitimate.

     God can not bless such an initiative whose deadly fruits are manifested from now on: internal quarrels and additional divisions within and between our communities.  The faithful are the first to suffer it.  How can vocations germinate and develop in a religious family that is torn apart?

     It is up to each of us to confront this new test that runs through our district, rejecting   All cooperation to the diffusion of this comment, to have it for nothing and despise it as insignificant and good thing to be discarded.

     For some days, I asked the brethren theologians to prepare a text giving the clarifications on the letter of Cardinal Müller.  Having received the endorsement of the General House, I hereby inform you with the present.  [NP will publish this document as soon as possible]

     I entrust to your prayers, dear Brotherhoods, our district that must face a new storm that arose unfortunately in our ranks.  May Our Lord and Our Lady help us to rediscover our unity in truth and charity for the good of our souls and that of the faithful who are entrusted to us.
     
     Father Christian BOUCHACOURT

    Such an uncharitable and heavy-handed response by Fr. Bouchacourt! He doesn't even address the concerns of the 7 priests at all. He just dismisses them as being disobedient and causing trouble. It's very callous of him to take this approach.

    It will be interesting to see the clarifications on the letter from Cardinal Muller, from the SSPX General House, which it seems that Non Possumus will publish soon.
     
    "This forum is a space for discussion to defend the Catholic Faith following Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre. It is therefore not for rallying to the conciliar church nor for sedevacantism"
    - From the French Resistance forum (Francophone forum, in France)

    Offline Student of Qi

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 573
    • Reputation: +293/-49
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • In case non of you remember the things this man has said in the past, let me just say that he is incompetent and has no business in the position of District Superior of France...
    There are other more capable priest who could fill that role.
    Many people say "For the Honor and Glory of God!" but, what they should say is "For the Love, Glory and Honor of God". - Fr. Paul of Moll

    Offline wallflower

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1866
    • Reputation: +1982/-94
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Oh, NOW they are offended by secrets!

    THEY have been keeping secrets for how long and the faithful would have no idea if it weren't for leaked documents and "subversive" priests warning them.

    The faithful have every right to know what is happening with the organization that they choose to follow for very specific reasons and that they can leave just as easily if those very specific reasons no longer stand. If there is a serious rift among the priests over this, why again, are the faithful not allowed to know it? I believe they have every right to consider the criticisms and both sides of the story as part of due diligence. Or is it that exact due diligence the leaders are afraid of?

    The "leaders" simply want to have their cake and eat it too. Go to NO Rome AND keep the faithful in the pews. How dare the subversive priests sabotage such pure and lofty intentions.

    ::)

    Thank God for priests whose care for the souls of those entrusted to them takes precedence over worldly gain.





    Offline Against the Heresies

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 67
    • Reputation: +76/-1
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It will be interesting to see the clarifications on the letter from Cardinal Muller, from the SSPX General House, which it seems that Non Possumus will publish soon.

    It seems the theological commentary from the French district can be found here (in French):

    Les réflexions des théologiens de l’abbé Bouchacourt


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16