A Medieval Scholar reading the Sacred Scripture
.jpg "Fr. Abe, CRS"){kind=small}
[I think a close reading of the decree lifting the excommunication of SSPX bishops is in order. [Allow me to direct you all to the last paragraph of the decree:]
THANK YOU.
["Based on the faculties expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, in virtue of the present Decree, I remit from Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta the censure of latae sententiae excommunication declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988, while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time."
Normally when we read this part of the decree, we interpret it as simply the lifting of the excommunication of the existing SSPX bishops. We fail to read closely this phrase: "...excommunication declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988, while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time.""]
I THINK THAT INTERPRETATION IS ERRONEOUS. BECAUSE PRIOR TO THE STATEMENT: "...while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time." THE DECLARATION MENTIONED THE FOUR LIVING BISHOPS BY NAME. THEREFORE THE EFFECT SHALL ONLY BE VALID ON THE FOUR BISHOPS AND IT IS NOT EXTENDED ON THOSE WHOM THE HOLY FATHER DIDN'T SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED.
[According to many commentators who are expert in Canon Law, this declaration "de facto" lifts the excommunication of those who were involved in the illicit ordination and have already died, e.g. Archbishop Lefebre. The decree of July 1, 1988 no longer has "any juridical effect".]
THEY CAN SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT SPECIALLY IF THEY BELONG TO THE SSPX. BUT THE FACT THAT THE FOUR LIVING BISHOPS WERE MENTIONED BY NAME AND LEFEBVRE WAS DELIBERATELY LEFT OUT OF THE LIST THEN IT IS A CATEGORICAL AND EXPLICIT AND DIRECT PROOF THAT THE REMOVAL OF EXCOMMUNICATIONS ARE ONLY EFFECTIVE ON THOSE FOUR ONLY. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. THE DECREE REFERRED TO THERE IS NOT THE DECREE OF EXCOMMUNICATION OF LEFEBVRE BUT THE DECREE OF EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE FOUR.
EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE EXCOMMUNICATED TOGETHER THE EXCOMMUNICATION WAS HANDED TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM. THE REMOVAL OF ONE DOESN'T MEAN THE REMOVAL OF ANOTHER UNLESS OTHERWISE 'SPECIFICALLY' MENTIONED.
IT MUST NOT BE BASED ON THE OPINIONS OF THE COMMENTATORS BUT ON THE 'SPECIFIC' AND DIRECT AND CATEGORICAL STATEMENT OF THE HOLY SEE.
OPINIONS ARE NICE BUT THE REMOVAL MUST BE UNEQUIVOCAL AND CLEAR.
[We may be right in saying that Lefebre died an "excommunicated"]
IT IS NOT "MAY BE"... IT IS "SURELY". HE HE HE...
[but NOW, he is not, as well as all the rest.]
THIS IS "MAY BE"... BUT IT HAS NO OFFICIAL STATUS UNLESS THE HOLY SEE DECLARED THAT SUCH AN INTERPRETATION IS TRULY CORRECT, THAT INDEED THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF LEFEBVRE HAS BEEN REMOVED. IT IS STILL EFFECTIVE UNLESS OTHERWISE REVOKED BY THE SAME AUTHORITY. UNFORTUNATELY FOR YOU THE DEFINITIVE AUTHORITY IS THE POPE AND NOT THOSE COMMENTATORS. HE HE HE... IN ADDITION, THE PROVISION IN THE CANON LAW PROHIBITING THE ORDINATION OF BISHOP WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE HOLY SEE IS STILL ACTIVE AND NOT YET ABROGATED. THE REMOVAL OF LEFEBVRE'S EXCOMMUNICATION SHALL HAVE A TREMENDOUS AND TERRIBLE EFFECT IN THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. IT WILL ALLOW BISHOPS TO ORDAIN OTHERS TO THE BISHOPRIC WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE POPE. THAT IS VERY VERY DANGEROUS.
IT IS OK IF LEFEBVRE WILL EXPRESS APOLOGY FOR WHAT HE HAS DONE. THEN THE EXCOMMUNICATION CAN BE REMOVED BECAUSE OF ADMISSION OF ERROR. BUT IN THE ABSENCE OF APOLOGY AND REPENTANCE FROM ERROR IT IS DANGEROUS TO MAKE A CANONICALLY AND ECCLESIALLY EVIL ACT AS IF IT IS "OK". NO, NO, NO.
[AS to the question: are they Catholic (their priests and lay people)? Yes, they are.]
BY NAME, BUT BASED ON OUR ACTUAL ENCOUNTER WITH THEM THAT IS VERY QUESTIONABLE. THEY ARE CALLING THE HOLY SEE MODERNIST AND THE POPE 'HERETICAL'. THEY ARE JUSTIFYING DISOBEDIENCE TO THE POPE... THAT IS VIOLATION OF THE DOGMA OF THE POPE'S SUPREME AUTHORITY OVER THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH WHICH IS DIRECT AND ABSOLUTE. THAT IS VIOLATION OF THE VATICAN I. HE HE HE... WHICH IS PRIOR TO VATICAN II IF THEY ARE NOT AWARE. HE HE HE...
[Are their priests validly ordained? Yes.]
THE ORTHODOX PRIESTS AND GREGORIO AGLIPAY ARE ALSO VALIDLY ORDAINED. YET, THEY REFUSE TO OBEY THE POPE. WHO CARES IF THEIR ORDINATION IS VALID? IT DOES NOT MAKE THEM CANONICALLY IN COMMUNION WITH THE VICAR OF CHRIST. THE VALIDITY OF THEIR ORDINATIONS MAKES THEIR DEFIANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE ALL THE MORE GRAVE AND MORTAL.
[Are their priests in regular status? Certainly NOT.]
DEFINITELY NOT. AND THEY ARE NOT ONLY IRREGULAR THEY DON'T HAVE CANONICAL STATUS. THEY HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO CELEBRATE THE SACRAMENTS IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. THE MORE THEY PRETEND TO POSSESS THIS AUTHORITY IN DEFIANCE THE MORE THEY COMMIT SIN AGAINST THE CHURCH AND AGAINST THE LORD WHO GAVE THE SUPREME AUTHORITY TO THE OFFICE OF PETER.
[I am optimistic that very soon, we will find them regularized in our One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.]
IF THEY WILL ACCEPT THE DEMAND OF THE HOLY SEE THEN IT IS POSSIBLE OTHERWISE THEY WILL BECOME A CULT OF THEIR OWN. I AM MORE HOPEFUL THAT MANY OTHER ANGLICAN CLERGY SHALL RETURN TO ROME THAN THE SSPX DOING SO. THE SSPX ARE MORE ANTI-POPES THAN MOST OF THE ANGLICAN CLERGY TODAY. ECONE IS THE NEW CANTERBURY.
.jpg)
![ST. JEROME EMILIANI [1486-1537]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_6dKQTchkJaA/R0lo013dyBI/AAAAAAAAB_4/XzUAPDESwwQ/s1600/St.+Jerome+in+prayer,+small_1.jpg)
You are correct Father because the lifting of a decree of excommunication must be express, meaning, those excommunicated must be named if the decree is lifted.
ReplyDeleteOthers not named could be deemed included if there is at least any reference to them.
The SSPX may interpret it to their favor all they want but who decides whose interpretation is correct? Which forum? The proper authorities of the Church, and definitely not the SSPX. Their interpretation is self-serving.
The basis for the lifting of the decree, Father, is they no longer deny the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. Pope Benedict explained that in his interview Light of the World. Lefebvre was long dead to reconsider his view on the Roman Primacy. Death caught up with him and he could no longer change his views.
Furthermore, the decree has no retroactive effect. It states categorically, "while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, FROM THE PRESENT DATE, the Decree emanated at that time," which means that the deprivation of the juridical effect precisely commenced on that present date, i.e., the date of the lifting of the excommunication.
ATTY. MARWIL N. LLASOS, O.P.
THANK YOU SO MUCH ATTY. MARS. HE HE HE...
ReplyDeletefather ask lang ako granted that marcel was included according to the claim above mention correct me if I am wrong it is applicable to the lutheran who ask the pope about the lifting of the excommunication. they ask that two years ago published by the Mindanao daily mirror that was I remembered. hehehehehhehe salamat father
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=12572
ReplyDeleteito po yung tinutokoy ko father....
GREGORIO AGLIPAY ARE ALSO VALIDLY ORDAINED
ReplyDeletecorrection father Abe, hindi po valid ang ordinations ng mga aglipayans since its leader, Gregorio aglipay was consecrated bishops by 12 priests (only a bishop can consecrate another bishop). and even if they trace their origin in the anglican communion, it is still invalid since anglican orders are declared "null and void" by Leo XIII in "Apostolicae Curiae"
The excommunication of Marcel Lefebvre was not lifted for the simple reason that he is already dead. There's no point in lifting canonical suspensions on someone who has already been judged by God.
ReplyDeleteGod willing, Father, I will write an extended commentary on this which I would like to share in your widely read blog.
ReplyDeleteTHANK YOU SO MUCH BRO. CALOY.
ReplyDelete[GREGORIO AGLIPAY ARE ALSO VALIDLY ORDAINED
ReplyDeletecorrection father Abe, hindi po valid ang ordinations ng mga aglipayans since its leader, Gregorio aglipay was consecrated bishops by 12 priests (only a bishop can consecrate another bishop). and even if they trace their origin in the anglican communion, it is still invalid since anglican orders are declared "null and void" by Leo XIII in "Apostolicae Curiae"]
HE HE HE... THANK YOU BRO. EDNARD. BUT I DID NOT SAY THAT THE PRIESTHOOD OF AGLIPAYAN PRIESTS ARE VALID. I ONLY MENTIONED GREGORIO AGLIPAY. HE WAS VALIDLY ORDAINED BUT A TRAITOR TO THE POPE. SO MUCH FOR VALIDITY OF THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE TRAITORS. HE HE HE...
[http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=12572
ReplyDeleteito po yung tinutokoy ko father....]
CARDINAL RATZINGER STATED THAT EVEN NOW THE HERESY OF LUTHER IS STILL A HERESY AND IF HE WILL TEACH IN THE SAME MANNER HE WILL STILL BE EXCOMMUNICATED. AND IN FACT, THE EXCOMMUNICATION REMAINS.
ACTUALLY, THE SSPX IS DOING THE SAME. THEY ARE ALSO ASKING FOR THE REMOVAL OF EXCOMMUNICATION OF LEFEBVRE. SO THEY ARE VERY SIMILAR.
THE HOLY SEE IS IN DIALOGUE WITH THE LUTHERANS. AND IT IS ALSO IN DIALOGUE WITH SSPX. HE HE HE... WE ALSO RECOGNIZE THE GOOD THINGS OF THE LUTHERANS AND ALSO OF THE SSPX. LUTHER BELIEVED THAT MARY IS "EVER VIRGIN"... HOW CAN YOU DENY THAT? HE HE HE...
[father ask lang ako granted that marcel was included according to the claim above mention correct me if I am wrong it is applicable to the lutheran who ask the pope about the lifting of the excommunication. they ask that two years ago published by the Mindanao daily mirror that was I remembered. hehehehehhehe salamat father]
ReplyDeleteWALANG GRANTED GRANTED DIYAN. BOTH THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF LEFEBVRE AND LUTHER STAY AND ARE STILL EFFECTIVE. HE HE HE...
[father.
ReplyDeletegood day po]
GOOD DAY TOO, ARIEL.
[bkt andami na po bang branches ng catholic ?]
ANG CATHOLIC CHURCH AY COMPOSED OF LOCAL CHURCHES WHICH ARE IN COMMUNION OF FAITH AND SACRAMENTS AND OF ADMINISTRATION WITH ONE ANOTHER UNDER NG AUTHORITY OF THE BISHOPS AND THE POPE.
ANG CHURCH A ONE BUT COMPOSED OF GROUPS UNITED TO THE CHURCH OF ROME. KAGAYA NG ARCHDIOCESE OF MANILA, CEBU, ETC. O KAYA DOMINICAN ORDER, BENEDICTINE ORDER, SOMASCAN ORDER, AUGUSTINIAN, ETC.
[iba pa po ba ung aglipayan church sa apostolic catholic church na located naman sa may edsa... ung national shrine of ina poon bato(apostolic catholic church)]
ANG AGLIPAY AT ANG APOSTOLIC CATHOLIC CHURCH AY HINDI MGA CATHOLICS SILA AY MGA HERETICO AT SCHISMATICO. MGA EREHE. MGA TRAIDORES.
HINDI SILA KABILANG SA SANTA IGLESIA.
[and iba pa po ba ung orthodox church?
bkt parang ang dami naman po...]
IBA PA RIN IYON.
BAKIT AKO ANG TINATANONG MO TANUNGIN MO SILA? HE HE HE... HINDI NAMAN SILA CATHOLICS SO BAHALA SILA SA BUHAY NILA. MAGTANONG SILA SA MGA SSPX, MGA MAGKA URI SILA.
[panu po ba nagkaroon ng divisions ang ROMAN CATHOLIC?]
WALANG DIVISIONS ANG CATHOLIC CHURCH. THE CHURCH IS ONE AND ONLY.
Father I would suggest that you tell the truth about the divisions that happened to the Roman Catholic Church and re read the Vatican 2 Documents, take a refresher's course on Church History and the Philippine Church History. A Nationalist historian, Ranato Constatino wrote in one of his books that the Iglesia Filipina Independiente(more derisively called by priests of your kind "Aglipayan Church")..."AS THE ONLY LIVING AND TANGIBLE RESULT OF THE 1896 REVOLUTION"...Hence, the luxury and privilege you are enjoying now is part and fruit of the struggles for indentity, integrity and independence of the Philippines by the Katipuneros and the Nationalist Filipino Clergy led by Fr. Gregorio L. Aglipay(Military Vicar General of the Revolutionaries) whom you and your kind perpetually label as traitors and heretics for fighting for the rights of your ancestors and yours as well as human beings and not just "BESTIADAS CARGADAS DE ORO" or 'BEASTS CLOTHED WITH GOLD" as your predecessors fondly call the Filipinos/Indios during those crucial times in the history of the Philippines. Anyway, I have relatives, acquaintances and friends who were also in "the ministry" like you. But I am glad they do not espouse the contempt, bias and hatred that you are showing in your answers to some of the questions directed to you against the churches and personalities mentioned. May the Holy Trinity guide you in your ministry...maraming mga pari ngayon ang naliligaw ng landas at nagdudulot ng malaking kahihiyan sa ating simbahan. Tatawagin mo rin ba silang heretico, schismatico at mga traidores? HE HE HE
Deletewhat? fr. try to visit your notes on Church history!
DeleteWELL, VISIT THEN YOUR NOTES ON CHURCH HISTORY.
DeleteTama si Father sa lahat, binasa ko ang lahat na blog na ito, its all true and correct. Isang bagay lang ang ayaw ko at hindi ko nagustuhan dito sa blog na to, ang Yellow Media Fever. Maka Tita Cory din pala ito si Father. Ako kase maka magsasaka, maka peasant, maka para-uma sabi sa bicol. Si Cory Aquino hindi maka magsasaka, maka pyudalismo siya, gahaman sa Lupain sa Tarlak. Wala siyang ginawa sa reporma sa lupa noong 80s kundi naging dahilan pa ito ng pagkamatay ng ilang magsasaka sa Mendiola na tinawag na Mendiola Massacre noong January 1987. Diyan tayo nagkakaiba Father. Pero bilib ako sa galing mo about Catholic faith, parehong pareho tayo ng paniniwala. Dati ako seminarista sa OLPS jan sa Sorsogon City way back early 90's. Mabuhay ka Father.Mabuhay ang simbahang Katoliko, ang tunay na simbahan na tinatag ni Kristo kay San Pedro. Kumusta din pala si Father Lino jan sa AI, sana mangitlog ng ginto ang kanyang alagang ganso.
ReplyDeleteDear Bro. Santiago,
ReplyDeleteI think there is one post that you have missed reading. The one in which I apologized for voting Pnoy as President.
I was reading the last part of your comment father above you said if they will accept the demand the holy see (referring to SSPX) then the Lutheran after the Catholic-Lutheran talks has the possibility also to be accepted?
ReplyDeleteBro. Lasos is right in saying that the Pope cannot lift the excommunication of a deceased. However, the pope can nullify the effectiveness of a particular decree and, therefore, its consequences.
ReplyDeleteWe should also note that the Vatican is very careful in the use of language. Vatican is not verbose. That is why in this particular decree, it is amazing that the Vatican felt the need to say "while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time" in addition to the declaration of lifting the excommunication.
Actually, it was enough to lift the former decree of excommunication of the four sspx bishops by saying "Based on the faculties expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, in virtue of the present Decree, I remit from Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta the censure of latae sententiae excommunication declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988".
Certainly, the words "while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time" do not suggest a repudiation of a former decree as if it did not exist in 1988. As a matter of fact, the new decree recognizes the previously imposed excommunication but declares effective the date of the issuance of the new decree, the older one ceases to have any effect. As a consequence of this nullification of an older decree, effective on the date of the new decree the Vatican "rehabilitated" all the rest without the need of saying that their excommunication has been lifted precisely because this is technically impossible since they are already dead. Ratzinger must have known so well the position of Lefebre, and in the light of Summorum Pontificum, now as Pope, he must have thought that, save his imprudence to ordain bishops against the wishes of the Holy See, Lefebre inevitably should be rehabilitated.
Well, I concede that the Vatican up to now is silent on this matter. They did not clarify that seemingly mysterious statement in the decree (i.e., "while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time."). Perhaps, one day, we might be surprised to find Lefebre lifted to the altar of the Church. If I am not mistaken, there is already a precedent of a formerly excommunicated person who was believed to remian cut from the Church but was raised to the glory of her altars.
I CANT UNDERSTAND YOUR QUESTION. IT SEEMS THAT YOU HAVE NOT READ MY STATEMENT ABOVE. READ CAREFULLY:
ReplyDelete"IF THEY WILL ACCEPT THE DEMAND OF THE HOLY SEE THEN IT IS POSSIBLE OTHERWISE THEY WILL BECOME A CULT OF THEIR OWN. I AM MORE HOPEFUL THAT MANY OTHER ANGLICAN CLERGY SHALL RETURN TO ROME THAN THE SSPX DOING SO. THE SSPX ARE MORE ANTI-POPES THAN MOST OF THE ANGLICAN CLERGY TODAY. ECONE IS THE NEW CANTERBURY."
THERE IS NO CATHOLIC-LUTHERAN MENTIONED THEREIN. SO, WHERE DID YOU GET THAT?
Catholics in Poland celebrate what they see as miraculous communion wafer
ReplyDelete("Associated Press," October 2, 2011)
Warsaw, Poland - Roman Catholics in Poland gathered Sunday for a special Mass celebrating what they see as a miracle: the appearance on a communion wafer of a dark spot that they are convinced is part of the heart of Jesus.
The communion wafer in question developed a brown spot in 2008 after falling on the floor during a Mass in the eastern Polish town of Sokolka. Two medical doctors determined that the spot was heart muscle tissue, church officials have said.
Bialystok Archbishop Edward Ozorowski said during the Mass that in history, the “substance of Christ’s body or blood has become available to the human senses, and this also happened in Sokolka.”
“For God, nothing is impossible,” Ozorowski said.
The dark-spotted wafer was carried aloft in a reliquary by a golden-robed priest in a procession and was put on display in the town’s church of St. Anthony as about 1,000 faithful looked on, according to a report and footage carried by the TV station TVN.
Catholics believe that the bread and wine that priests use during the sacrament of communion — or the Eucharist — are changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
The wafer was dropped by a priest celebrating communion in 2008. In accordance with church practice, the priest placed the wafer in water to dissolve it. Several days later a nun found that the wafer had not dissolved completely, and found a red mark on it.
The nun’s discovery sparked huge interest among the faithful in this deeply Roman Catholic country, sparking large numbers to flock to Sokolka. Though some believers consider the object miraculous, the Vatican is still examining the matter and has not yet officially decided whether to declare it a miracle, church spokesman Andrzej Debski said.
A group of rationalists complained about the matter in 2008, and called on authorities to investigate if a murder or other crime was involved if human flesh was indeed found on the wafer. Police say they have no evidence of any crime.
(http://wwrn.org/articles/36298/?&place=europe)
Jeffrey Paloga
Bro. Lasos is right in saying that the Pope cannot lift the excommunication of a deceased. However, the pope can nullify the effectiveness of a particular decree and, therefore, its consequences.
ReplyDeleteTHE POPE CANNOT NULLIFY THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF THAT WACKY OLD FOOL LEFEBVRE BECAUSE HIS EXCOMMUNICATION IS "IPSO FACTO". IT ARISES FROM THE VERY ACTION PERSONALLY AND WILLFULLY COMMITTED BY LEFEBVRE. IT WAS LEFEBVRE WHO ACTUALLY EXCOMMUNICATED HIMSELF BY DOING THE SOMETHING PUNISHABLE BY EXCOMMUNICATION DESPITE THE WARNINGS.
IT IS STUPID TO REMOVE ITS EFFECTIVENESS BECAUSE THE PROVISION OF THE LAW WHICH HE VIOLATES IS STILL EFFECTIVE AND THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THAT WACKY OLD FOOL TO DO WHAT HE DID.
[We should also note that the Vatican is very careful in the use of language. Vatican is not verbose. That is why in this particular decree, it is amazing that the Vatican felt the need to say "while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time" in addition to the declaration of lifting the excommunication.]
THE VATICAN IS INDEED CAREFUL IN ITS STATEMENT BUT YOU ARE NOT CAREFUL IN YOUR INTERPRETATION. YOU ARE GOING BEYOND THE TEXT OF THE DECLARATION. YOU ARE TRYING TO INSERT THE CASE OF LEFEBVRE WHEN IN ACTUALITY ONLY THE DECREE CONCERNING THE CASE OF THE FOUR IS BEING REFERRED TO. THE DECREE OF LEFEBVRE EXCOMMUNICATION IS NOT LIFTED AT ALL AND STILL EFFECTIVE.
[Actually, it was enough to lift the former decree of excommunication of the four sspx bishops by saying "Based on the faculties expressly granted to me by the Holy Father Benedict XVI, in virtue of the present Decree, I remit from Bishops Bernard Fellay, Bernard Tissier de Mallerais, Richard Williamson, and Alfonso de Galarreta the censure of latae sententiae excommunication declared by this Congregation on July 1, 1988".]
ReplyDeleteTHAT IS ENOUGH TO REMOVE THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF THE FOUR BUT THE HOLY FATHER WAS MORE CHARITABLE. HE WANTED THEM TO BE GIVEN A FRESH START BY SAYING FURTHER THAT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE DECREE OF EXCOMMUNICATION CONCERNING THEM IS ALSO BEING LIFTED.
HOWEVER, THE HOLY SEE DIDN'T SAY THAT THE EXCOMMUNICION WAS INVALID OR INEFFECTIVE AT THAT TIME. IT WAS VALID AND EFFECTIVE. THEY DESERVED IT. WHEN THEY REQUESTED ITS REMOVAL IN HUMILITY IT WAS GRANTED OUT OF CHARITY. LEFEBVRE REFUSED TO SUBMIT TO THE HOLY SEE UNTIL DEATH SO HE DIED OUTSIDE THE CHURCH WHERE THERE IS NO SALVATION AS HE WAS STRONGLY TEACHING. HE WILL BE CONDEMNED BY HIS OWN VERY WORDS.
IF THERE IS NO TRUE REPENTANCE THERE IS NO WAY TO REVOKE THAT EXCOMMUNICATION. GOD THE FATHER SURELY WANTED TO FORGIVE ADAM AND EVE BUT WHEN THEY REFUSE TO REPENT THEN AUTOMATIC PUNISHMENT BECAME EFFICACIOUS.
[Certainly, the words "while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time" do not suggest a repudiation of a former decree as if it did not exist in 1988. As a matter of fact, the new decree recognizes the previously imposed excommunication but declares effective the date of the issuance of the new decree, the older one ceases to have any effect. As a consequence of this nullification of an older decree, effective on the date of the new decree the Vatican "rehabilitated" all the rest without the need of saying that their excommunication has been lifted precisely because this is technically impossible since they are already dead. Ratzinger must have known so well the position of Lefebre, and in the light of Summorum Pontificum, now as Pope, he must have thought that, save his imprudence to ordain bishops against the wishes of the Holy See, Lefebre inevitably should be rehabilitated.]
ReplyDeleteTHAT DECREE MENTIONED THERE IS NOT THE DECREE OF EXCOMMUNICATION OF LEFEBVRE BUT THAT OF THE FOUR BISHOPS WHOSE HUMBLE REQUEST WAS HANDED BY OFFICIAL LETTER. IT IS TOO MUCH STRETCH OF IMAGINATION THAT LEFEBVRE IS INCLUDED IN THERE. NO, NO, NO...
THE EXCOMMUNICATION OF LEFEBVRE IS NOT BASED ON A DECREE BUT ON HIS UNCANONICAL ACTS OF ORDAINING. HE HE HE... DECREE OR NO DECREE HE OBTAINED EXCOMMUNICATION FOR HIS SOUL. IT CAN ONLY BE REMOVED IF HE HIMSELF WILL BE SORRY FOR IT BUT HE DIED UPHOLDING IT. SO HIS EXCOMMUNICATION CANNOT BE REMOVED. HE DIED OUTSIDE THE CHURCH WHERE THERE IS NO SALVATION.
[Well, I concede that the Vatican up to now is silent on this matter. They did not clarify that seemingly mysterious statement in the decree (i.e., "while I declare deprived of any juridical effect, from the present date, the Decree emanated at that time.").]
THE VATICAN IS CLEAR AND DIRECT. LEFEBVRE INCURRED IPSO FACTO EXCOMMUNICATION. THERE IS NO DECREE REMOVING HIS EXCOMMUNICATION AND ITS EFFECTIVITY. NOTHING, NADA, NUNCA. IN RUSSIAN: NYET NYET. HE HE HE...
IT IS WRONG TO NULLIFY ITS EFFECTIVITY. WHY? THEN OTHER BISHOPS CAN ORDAIN PRIESTS AS THEY WANT. HE HE HE... THAT IS VERY VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. NO, NO, NO...
[Perhaps, one day, we might be surprised to find Lefebre lifted to the altar of the Church.]
REBELS OF HIS KIND WILL ROT IN INFAMY BUT NOT UNDER THE ALTAR OF THE CHURCH. THE RELICS OF BLESSED JOHN XXIII AND BLESSED JOHN PAUL THE GREAT ARE VENERATED BY COUNTLESS PILGRIMS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD BUT THE BODY OF LEFEBVRE IS ROTTING LIKE THE CORPSE OF LUTHER. THE SENSUS FIDELIUM CANNOT BE FOOLED BY HIS FAKE PIETY ROOTED IN DISOBEDIENCE TO THE SUCCESSOR OF PETER. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE ONE WHO WILL BE RAISED UP ON THE ALTAR IS THE SERVANT OF GOD PAUL VI, OF HAPPY MEMORY, THE PROPHET OF HUMANAE VITAE.
[If I am not mistaken, there is already a precedent of a formerly excommunicated person who was believed to remian cut from the Church but was raised to the glory of her altars.]
WHO IS?
THAT CASE IS BASED ON MISUNDERSTANDING OF PEOPLE WHO JUDGED HIS OR HER CASE BUT NOT OF THE POPE. ST. JOAN OF ARK WAS CONDEMNED BY OTHERS BUT SHE WAS DEMANDING TO BE TRIED BY THE POPE. LEFEBVRE DISOBYED AND COMMITTED HIS CANONICAL CRIME DIRECTLY AGAINST THE COMMAND OF THE POPE. HE WILL ROT IN HELL FOR THAT BECAUSE HE REJECTED THE POWER OF THE KEYS THAT CAN OPEN AND CLOSE THE GATE OF HEAVEN.
Dear Father,
ReplyDeleteMaitanong lang po,bakit pa tinangal ang EX Communication ng SSPX sa Catholic church na kung saan wala namang nagbago ang kanilang pananaw tungkol po sa ating vernacular liturgy?Hangang ngayon hindi parin nila matanggap ang validity ng Pauline Mass at legality ng vatican 2...sana hindi nalang tinangal ang kanilang EX COMMUNICATION para tuluyang silang wala ng connection sa Catholic Church.
Good evening Father.
Donato...
THE SSPX BISHOS REQUESTED THE POPE TO REMOVE THE EXCOMMUNICATION. THEY MANIFESTED OBEDIENCE AND HUMILITY DOING SO. THE POPE BEING FATHERLY REMOVED IT THINKING THAT THEY ARE HONEST AND SINCERE. YET, IT APPEARS TO BE ANOTHER PLOY FROM THEIR DECEITFUL LEADERS. --
ReplyDeleteFR. ABE:
ReplyDeleteTHE SSPX BISHOS REQUESTED THE POPE TO REMOVE THE EXCOMMUNICATION. THEY MANIFESTED OBEDIENCE AND HUMILITY DOING SO. THE POPE BEING FATHERLY REMOVED IT THINKING THAT THEY ARE HONEST AND SINCERE. YET, IT APPEARS TO BE ANOTHER PLOY FROM THEIR DECEITFUL LEADERS. --
Ah ok kaya nga pala nagkunwari pala itong mga sspx para matangal lang ang kanilang ex communication...ibig sabibin nagsinungalin sila Pope.
ReplyDelete[Father I would suggest that you tell the truth about the divisions that happened to the Roman Catholic Church]
ReplyDeleteWHAT TRUTH DID I REFUSE TO SAY CONCERNING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?
[and re read the Vatican 2 Documents,]
IT IS YOU WHO NEEDS TO READ THE VATICAN II DOCUMENTS IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT YET.
[take a refresher's course on Church History and the Philippine Church History.]
SO, WHAT IS FRESH IN CHURCH HISTORY AND IN PHILIPPINE CHURCH HISTORY? DON'T TELL ME TO SWALLOW THE LIES AND DISTORTIONS MADE BY COMMUNISTS, ATHEISTS, AGNOSTICS AND FREEMASONS AGAINST THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND ITS HISTORY HERE IN THE PHILIPPINES.
[A Nationalist historian, Ranato Constatino wrote]
RENATO CONSTANTINO A NATIONALIST? EXCUSE ME. HE IS A PRO-COMMUNIST HISTORIAN. HIS SO-CALLED HISTORY IS BASED ON HEARSAY UNLIKE THE WORKS OF GREGORIO ZAIDE WHICH ARE BACKEP UP BY SOLID RESEARCH, FULL OF CITATIONS AND DOCUMENTATIONS. RENATO CONSTANTINO IS NOT A NATIONALIST BUT AN ILLUSIONIST-COMMUNIST-ATHEIST.
[in one of his books that the Iglesia Filipina Independiente(more derisively called by priests of your kind "Aglipayan Church")..."AS THE ONLY LIVING AND TANGIBLE RESULT OF THE 1896 REVOLUTION"]
HA HA HA... THAT IS VERY STUPID. THE GOMBURZA IS A MORE TANGIBLE HEROES OF THE STRUGGLE FOR PHILIPPINE FREEDOM AND JOSE RIZAL DIED A CATHOLIC AND NOT AN AGLIPAYAN.
[...Hence, the luxury and privilege you are enjoying now is part and fruit of the struggles for indentity, integrity and independence of the Philippines by the Katipuneros and the Nationalist Filipino Clergy led by Fr. Gregorio L. Aglipay(Military Vicar General of the Revolutionaries)]
ReplyDeleteHA HA HA... YOU ARE A FOOL. GREGORIO AGLIPAY SEPARATED FROM THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SO THAT HE CAN MAKE HIMSELF A BISHOP AND INDULGE ON HIS LUST FOR FLESH AND CARNAL SATISFACTION BY ALLOWING HIS MINISTERS TO MARRY LIKE THE PROTESTANTS.
THE FREEDOM THAT WE ARE ENJOYING NOW ARE FRUIT OF THE STRUGGLES OF FILIPINOS WHO ARE CATHOLICS. THE EIGHT RAYS OF THE SUN REPRESENTING THE 8 PROVINCES WHO FOUGHT FOR THE FREEDOM OF THE COUNTRY WERE HIGHLY CATHOLIC IN POPULATION. IT IS THE PEOPLE WHO FOUGHT FOR FREEDOM AND THEY ARE CATHOLICS. AND THE FIRST CONSTITUTION WAS DRAFTED IN THE BARASOAIN CHURCH AND NOT IN AN AGLIPAYAN CHURCH. THAT IS WHY AFTER THE SUCCESS OF THE REVOLUTION THE FILIPINOS CHOSE TO REMAIN CATHOLICS AND FOUGHT THE AGLIPAYANS WHO STOLE AND TOOK OUR CHURCHES BY FORCE. THE PEOPLE ROSE IN DEFENSE OF THE FRIARS BECAUSE THESE FRIARS WERE THE ONE WHO TAUGHT SCIENCES AND EDUCATION TO THEIR CHILDREN. THEY ARE THE ONES WHO TAUGHT THEM AGRICULTURE BY PLANTING SUGAR CANE, COFFEE AND MANY OTHER. THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE REVOLUTIONARY LEADERS THEMSELVES WERE CATHOLIC EDUCATED NOT AGLIPAY EDUCATED.
[ whom you and your kind perpetually label as traitors and heretics]
INDEED, AGLIPAY AND HIS COHORTS ARE TRAITORS AND HERETICS TO THE TRUE CHURCH FOUNDED BY JESUS. YOU PRETEND TO BE PRO-FILIPINOS BUT IN ACTUALITY YOU KISSED THE ASSES OF AMERICAN EPISCOPALIAN CHURCHES AND THE BRITAIN'S ANGLICAN CHURCH. YOU ARE A BASTARDIZED EPISCOPALIAN AND ANGLICAN.
[for fighting for the rights of your ancestors and yours as well as human beings]
THE AGLIPAY DIDN'T HELP MUCH IN THE REVOLUTION. THE CATHOLICS DID. WE COMPOSED THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM JUST LIKE THE RIZAL FAMILY WHO REMAINED CATHOLICS. YOU OWE A LOT OF THINGS FROM US CATHOLICS AND WE DO NOT OWE YOU ANYTHING. YOU CANNOT LIVE WITHOUT US BECAUSE YOU ARE IMITATING US BUT WE CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOU. YOU AGLIPAYANS ARE RELIGIOUS PARASITES.
[and not just "BESTIADAS CARGADAS DE ORO" or 'BEASTS CLOTHED WITH GOLD" as your predecessors fondly call the Filipinos/Indios during those crucial times in the history of the Philippines.]
ReplyDeleteEXCUSE ME. THE FRIARS LOVED THE FILIPINOS. THE SCHOOLS THAT THEY FOUNDED UST, ATENEO, SAN BEDA, LETRAN, ETC. ARE NOT INHERITED BY THE SPANIARDS BUT THEY ENTRUSTED TO FILIPINOS. BUT THE AGLIPAY THEY ARE GIVING THEIR WEALTH TO THEIR CHILDREN AND THEIR WIVES.
THE FRIARS GAVE US THE SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY, THE AGRICULTURE AND THE ARTS, THE EDUCATION AND THE LITERATURE. THEY ENCODED OUR EPICS AND MYTHS, THEY WROTE THE FIRST LOCAL LANGUAGE GRAMMAR AND DICTIONARIES. THEY REFUSED TO IMPLEMENT SPANISH AS OBLIGATORY INSTEAD THEY LEARNED THE NATIVE LANGUAGE AND PREACHED TO THE MOUNTAINS ON FOOT EXPLAINING THE WORD OF GOD IN LOCAL DIALECTS.
THE GREATNESS AND GOODNESS OF THE FRIARS ARE STILL HERALDED IN OUR SOCIETY TODAY BUT THE AGLIPAY HAS NOTHING TO COMPARE TO THE GREATNESS THAT WE HAVE OFFERED TO THE FILIPINO PEOPLE.
YOU SHOULD ASK YOURSELF WHY THE GREAT MAJORITY OF THE FILIPINOS REFUSED TO BECOME AGLIPAYAN AFTER THE SPANIARDS WERE DEFEATED? BECAUSE THEY LOVED THEIR FRIARS. WHEN SOME REVOLUTIONARIES IMPRISONED THE FRIARS THE PEOPLE ROSE WITH INDIGNATION AND FREED THEIR FRIARS.
[Anyway, I have relatives, acquaintances and friends who were also in "the ministry" like you. But I am glad they do not espouse the contempt, bias and hatred that you are showing in your answers to some of the questions directed to you against the churches and personalities mentioned.]
PERHAPS THEY ARE AS IGNORANT AS YOU OR THEY PRETEND TO BE DEAF AGAINST THE LIES THAT YOU ARE VENOMOUSLY TELLING THEM TO THE POINT THAT THEY FIND THEM PALATABLE TO THEIR TASTE. SORRY FOR YOU I DO NOT SWALLOW THE VOMIT OF HISTORICAL LIARS LIKE YOU AND CONSTANTINO.
[May the Holy Trinity guide you in your ministry...]
HYPOCRITE. THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WAS THE ONE WHO DEFINED THE DOGMA OF THE TRINITY HOW DARE YOU USE IT TO PRETEND AS IF YOU BELONG TO THE TRUE CHURCH.
YOU ARE A HERETIC AND A TRAITOR TO THE HOLY TRINITY WHO GAVE US ONE FAITH, ONE BAPTISM, ONE LORD AND ONE GOD.
[maraming mga pari ngayon ang naliligaw ng landas at nagdudulot ng malaking kahihiyan sa ating simbahan.]
KONTI LANG SILA. DAHIL ANG GREAT MAJORITY OF THE PRIESTS ARE FAITHFUL TO GOD. THE ERRING ONES ARE NOT EVEN 1% OF THE ENTIRE CATHOLIC CLERGY. THE GREAT MAJORITY ARE RUNNING THE SCHOOLS, ORPHANAGES, HOME FOR THE AGED AND TEACHERS TO THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE. UNLIKE THE AGLIPAY PRIESTS WHO ARE ONLY EATING THE FLESH OF THEIR WIVES.
IF OUR PRIEST HAD RELATIONS WITH WOMEN IT IS AN ACT OF INFIDELITY. IN AGLIPAY THEY INDULGE IN SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH 'OFFICIAL APPROVAL'. THE EPISCOPAL AND ANGLICAN CHURCHES WHEREIN YOU ARE AFFILIATED HAVE ACCEPTED CONTRACEPTION, ABORTION, SAME SEX MARRIAGE AND OTHERS. YOU ARE ABOMINABLE.
[Tatawagin mo rin ba silang heretico, schismatico at mga traidores? HE HE HE]
I CALL THEM SINNERS AND ERRING MINISTERS WHO SUCCUMBED TO TEMPTATIONS. BUT ON THE PART OF THE AGLIPAY THERE IS NO NEED FOR SATAN TO TEMPT THEM WITH WOMEN BECAUSE GREGORIO AGLIPAY ALREADY ENCOURAGED AND AUTHORIZED THEM TO INDULGE IN CARNAL ACTIVITIES. IN EFFECT YOU ARE A DYING CHURCH. LOOK AT YOUR CHURCH IN MANILA. IT WAS ALMOST EMPTY AND ABANDONED. IT IS THE REFLECTION OF WHAT YOU ARE AS A CHURCH - IN A STATE OF DECAY AND CORRUPTION.
IT IS THE REFLECTION OF WHAT YOU ARE AS A CHURCH - IN A STATE OF DECAY AND CORRUPTION.
ReplyDeleteGISING FR. ABE. BASAHIN MO ITO:
By Philip Pullella
VATICAN CITY | Thu Jan 26, 2012 3:20pm EST
(Reuters) - The Vatican was shaken by a corruption scandal Thursday after an Italian television investigation said a former top official had been transferred against his will after complaining about irregularities in awarding contracts.
The show "The Untouchables" on the respected private television network La 7 Wednesday night showed what it said were several letters that Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, who was then deputy-governor of Vatican City, sent to superiors, including Pope Benedict, in 2011 about the corruption.
The Vatican issued a statement Thursday criticizing the "methods" used in the journalistic investigation. But it confirmed that the letters were authentic by expressing "sadness over the publication of reserved documents."
As deputy governor of the Vatican City for two years from 2009 to 2011, Vigano was the number two official in a department responsible for maintaining the tiny city-state's gardens, buildings, streets, museums and other infrastructure.
Vigano, currently the Vatican's ambassador in Washington, said in the letters that when he took the job in 2009 he discovered a web of corruption, nepotism and cronyism linked to the awarding of contracts to outside companies at inflated prices.
In one letter, Vigano tells the pope of a smear campaign against him (Vigano) by other Vatican officials who wanted him transferred because they were upset that he had taken drastic steps to save the Vatican money by cleaning up its procedures.
"Holy Father, my transfer right now would provoke much disorientation and discouragement in those who have believed it was possible to clean up so many situations of corruption and abuse of power that have been rooted in the management of so many departments," Vigano wrote to the pope on March 27, 2011.
In another letter to the pope on April 4, 2011, Vigano says he discovered the management of some Vatican City investments was entrusted to two funds managed by a committee of Italian bankers "who looked after their own interests more than ours."
LOSS OF $2.5 MILLION, 550,000 EURO NATIVITY SCENE
Vigano says in the same letter that in one single financial transaction in December, 2009, "they made us lose two and a half million dollars."
The program interviewed a man it identified as a member of the bankers' committee who said Vigano had developed a reputation as a "ballbreaker" among companies that had contracts with the Vatican, because of his insistence on transparency and competition.
The man's face was blurred on the transmission and his voice was distorted in order to conceal his identity.
In one of the letters to the pope, Vigano said Vatican-employed maintenance workers were demoralized because "work was always given to the same companies at costs at least double compared to those charged outside the Vatican."
For example, when Vigano discovered that the cost of the Vatican's larger than life nativity scene in St Peter's Square was 550,000 euros in 2009, he chopped 200,000 euros off the cost for the next Christmas, the program said.
On March 22, 2011, Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone informed Vigano that he was being removed from his position, even though it was to have lasted until 2014.
In early April, Vigano went over Bertone's head again and wrote directly to the pope, telling him that he had worked hard to "eliminate corruption, private interests and dysfunction that are widespread in various departments."
(Reporting By Philip Pullella)
WELL, IT MEANS THAT THE VATICAN IS INVESTIGATING ALREADY AND KNOWS THE PROBLEM. THAT IS INTERNAL TO US. WHAT IS WRONG? WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? DURING THE TIME OF JESUS THE TREASURER NAMED JUDAS ISCARIOT WAS CORRUPT. SO MALI NA SI JESUS BECAUSE THERE WAS SCANDAL AND CORRUPTION IN THE FINANCIAL LEADERSHIP OF THE APOSTLES?
ReplyDeleteREMEMBER THAT KA ERDY MANALO ADMITTED THAT ALL THEIR MINISTERS HAVE BECOME CORRUPT.
THIS IS THE RESPONSE OF THE VATICAN.
Fr. Lombardi: Vatican corruption charges 'well beyond reality'
VATICAN CITY, January 26 (CNA/EWTN News) .- The official Vatican spokesman says an Italian television broadcast claiming to disclose financial corruption at the Vatican exaggerated the situation.
Fr. Federico Lombardi, S.J., questioned the "debatable" journalistic methods employed in the broadcast's "diffusion of private documents."
The information in the program stretched "well beyond reality," he said in a Jan. 26 statement, adding that "the general situation of the government is not as negative as they want to make people believe."
Accusations of financial mismanagement in the Vatican were broadcast Jan. 25 on a prominent Italian television network in a show entitled "Gli intoccabili."
The program claimed that Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano --€“ now the Pope's official representative to the U.S. --€“ wrote a private letter to Pope Benedict XVI on March 27, 2011, asking not to be transferred to the U.S. while new measures aimed at cleaning up the Vatican's financial situation were being implemented.
Archbishop Vigano was serving as the second in command for the Governatorate of Vatican City, before he was appointed as the new nuncio to the United States in October 2011.
In his work at the Holy See, he introduced financial controls and accountability procedures that transformed a multi-million dollar deficit into a significant surplus in just one year.
In a Jan. 26 statement, Fr. Lombardi responded to the broadcast, lamenting that it has become "all too familiar" to find biased reporting about the Catholic Church.
He stressed that governing the Vatican City-State is very complex, and said that the situation was presented in "a partial and banal way" so as to exalt "the negative aspects."
Fr. Lombardi noted the many positive effects of Archbishop Vigano's actions as Secretary General of the Government. He said that an accurate analysis of the financial changes within the Holy See must take into account changing markets and economic situations, as well as a notable increase in visitors to the Vatican Museums.
He also commented on the "significant expenses" required to meet the Vatican's important non-economic goal of supporting the universal Church.
The Vatican spokesman also underscored that Archbishop Vigano's appointment as the apostolic nuncio to the United States showed Pope Benedict's great trust in him.
Holy See officials, Fr. Lombardi said, continue to be guided by the standards of "healthy administration and of transparency" to which Archbishop Vigano committed himself.
Fr. Lombardi also said that the Vatican government is willing to "pursue all appropriate options," including possible legal action to defend the reputation of the Vatican officials mentioned in the broadcast.