Posted on 09/20/2004 7:38:56 AM PDT by NYer
Taking a break from judging annulments earlier today, I visited a number of French traditionalist websites. I also had the opportunity, yesterday, to speak with a friend of mine who is a canonist from France following the situation as well as another friend who keeps tabs on the traditionalist movement in both the English and the French speaking world. Everyone agrees -- the situation has degenerated into total chaos, as nobody knows exactly what is going on with the highly-respected French SSPX clergy that have criticized what they see as the SSPX's growing rigidity.
It does appear that Rome has refused to take competency over the case, more-or-less stating that the SSPX denied Rome's jurisdiction over them when Lefebvre carried out a schismatic act through the 1988 episcopal consecrations. Beyond that, Rome refuses to comment other than to say, "Our door remains open for their return to full communion."
Beyond that, the rhetoric, polemic and accusations suggest that indeed civil war is breaking out among the laity and clergy within the SSPX's French District. In fact, two websites have now popped up that are exclusively devoted to tracing all the news stories associated with the crisis. What I find personally find interesting is that every news report, commentary, polemic, etc... mentions Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion from the SSPX around this time last year.
In the months that followed, it appears that the SSPX more-or-less tried to sweep Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion under the rug. But in so doing, even the regime currently in charge of the SSPX had to admit the important role played by Fr. Aulagnier in the founding of the SSPX. This is probably why the SSPX appeared to hope the issue would go away.
Yet it is also well-known that Fr. Aulagnier was a close friend of Fr. Laguerie as well as Fr. de Tanouarn -- two of the SSPX's leading priests. (As Fr. Laguerie's assistant, Fr. Henri appears to have just happened into the situation). It is also well-known that a number of French (and some American) SSPX priests were not happy with Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion. Therefore, I will venture to guess that the current SSPX chaos is the effect of Fr. Aulagnier's expulsion coming back to haunt Bishop Fellay. As for the particular details, this is the first time in almost fourteen years of being a traditionalist that I find the fog of war too thick to reasonably discern what is going on. (What I find even more troubling is that behind the scenes, under the flag of truce, other SSPX and traditionalist commentators with whom I am in contact have admitted to having the same problem.)
So if I can end on a personal note to the moderate SSPX clergy and their supporters who follow this blog, I'm more than happy to abide by the flag of truce and keep you guys in prayer while you fight whatever battles need to be fought, but I honestly cannot make heads-or-tails of what is happening. But like Rome has said, the door is open for you to return. I will pray that God gives you the necessary strength to walk through it.
As the streetwise in New Yawk might say, you do appear to be a real Mark at least if not a real Catholic.
Looks like Vere just blogged another update. Interesting background information:
"Okay, things have sufficiently calmed down in the SSPX's French District for me to more-or-less patch together what is going on. By calmed down, I don't mean the fighting has stopped -- far from it -- but that the rhetoric and polemic has been lowered a notch to allow for outsiders to follow along more easily. In fact, "gorilla" is probably the worst insult I have heard one priest call another in the last two days. So here we go:
"Fr. Laguerie, who was ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre in 1979, and is a popular folk hero among French SSPX supporters (he was the leader of thousands of SSPX supporters who squatted St. Nicholas-de-Chardonet church back in the eighties) denies being a traitor or insurgent within the SSPX. He claims to have only the good of the SSPX in mind, as he remembers it when the Archbishop was alive. He refuses to engage in further polemic, stating he seeks only the spiritual welfare of those within the SSPX who persecute him. Thus he stands on principle, but will turn the other cheek to insults. Additionally, it is being reported by the locals on both sides that Fr. Laguerie enjoys the support of most of his SSPX parishioners.
"Fr Hery, who was expelled along with Fr. Laguerie, is still quite upset. I wasn't sure how he got caught in the middle of this, since he is a younger priest, and had speculated the reason likely had something to do with him being Fr. Laguerie's pastoral assistant. Turns out I was wrong. Fr. Hery had agreed to act as Fr. Laguerie's canonical advocate when Bishop Fellay first took action against Fr. Laguerie. This reportedly did not sit well with Bishop Fellay, and as a result he expelled Fr. Hery as well. Needless to say -- and having acted as a canonical advocate myself before several tribunals, I can understand why -- Fr Hery is pretty sore about this injustice. First of all, it is a well-established legal principle that every accused enjoys the right to legal defense. Secondly, it is a well-established legal principle that an advocate cannot be punished for defending his client.
"Fr. de Tanouarn, publisher of a popular French SSPX newsletter and one of the SSPX's young intellectual lights, continues to defend the rights of Fr. Laguerie and Fr. Hery. Thus the speculation continues that Fr. de Tanouarn may also be targetted for expulsion from the SSPX in the near future.
"While a number of SSPX clergy have quietly supported these three priests (and Fr. Aulagnier) in their attempt to restore the spirit of Archbishop Lefebvre to the SSPX, most of the clergy have been reluctant to do so in public. Nevertheless, several French traditionalist sources seem to suggest that Fr. Celier has now weighed in on the side of these three priests. I have not actually read any statements from Fr. Celier, but everyone is listing his name along with the other three.
"Bishop Fellay made the comment that he consulted the other three bishops before expelling Fr. Aulagnier, Fr. Laguerie and Fr. Henry, and he insinuates that it was a joint decision of the four bishops to purge the SSPX of these priests. This is not sitting well with many Lefebvre purists in France, who point out that Lefebvre never wanted the bishops in charge of the SSPX, and deliberately chose not to consecrate the SSPX's Tier 1 priests (ie Schmidberger, Aulagnier, Bisig, Laguerie) for this reason. The bishops were consecrated by Lefebvre purely to fulfill a sacramental function, and that when Lefebvre was alive, no bishop was to be elected superior or hold any other position that involved the exercise of jurisdiction within the SSPX.
"Although unrelated to the above, the English translation of Dom Calvet's traditionalist masterpiece Demain La Chretiente completed by Raymond Lesvesque and I heads out to the printer next week, and should be ready by Christmas."
And again: What are the documentable and proven facts of the life of "St. Philomena"? Was there a cult of St. Philomena 200 years after her death? Why not? Is my favorite pope (Pope St. Pius X) guilty of "novelty"? She may well be a saint. I have asked for bread in the form of the provable and documented facts of her life. You give me stones. Quelle surprise!
Ping post No. 176.
Pretty straightforward and outlined. Perhaps it is the fact that the confessions heard by SSPX priests are invalid keeps the lay people in their confessed sins.
This seems to me to be the most dangerous of slippery slopes to rely upon. Of course, they will claim "universal jurisdiction in a time of crisis," but I am quite certain that there are posted confession times in the Diocese of Charlotte by Catholic priests.
So only if they are in ignorance (not vincible ignorance) that these confessions are invalid, would they actually be valid.
Hmm... Perhaps lots of invalid confessions piled on top of each other over the years could explain some things...
He was an SSPX adherent before he was anti-SSPX and before he was again friendly to the SSPX, or at least some of the SSPX. Sounds like Kerry on Iraq!
So Fr. Laguerie has been around a long time. Wasn't there an SSPX bishop, also from Lefebvre's original group, who was recently expelled?
The magisterium has been, but I do have to agree with the traditionalists that Rome has tolerated far too many bishops and universities spreading heresies and lies.
http://www.sacramentals.com/sacramentals.org/StPhilomena.htm
Would you also agree, then, that all the confessions heard by the Schismatic Orthodox Churches are invalid, as the priests lack proper jurisdiction?
Watch your mouth - are you saying that God wills men to be damned?
Many of the novus ordo faith communities have general reconcillations where you don't even have to go into the box...just get absolved by walking in the door. Of course it's invalid, but then again sins are just an imaginary byproduct of that harmful condition called guilt.
And STILL they are the chosen people.
History matters. The Church is still indefectible, too, you know.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.