Announcing Release Date of Church Triumphant Ebook

Church Triumphant ebook

Church Triumphant ebook

I announced in January that I would release a book about the saints during Lent. I am now happy to announce that Church Triumphant: 25 Men and Women who Gave Their Lives to Christ will be released on Easter Sunday. Starting next week, it will be available for preorder on Amazon, Smashwords, iTunes, and other ebook stores. Stay tuned for links when I upload it.

Also, take a moment to sign up for my new e-newsletter. Every time a new article is posted, you will get an email. Email subscribers will also get special offers on this and all upcoming ebooks.

Posted in Announcement | Tagged | Leave a comment

Ebooks coming

If you enjoyed my saint biographies, I have good news for you. I’m planning to release a collection of 20 saint biographies in ebook form. I’m going to add to the ones I have written already and write several new ones. I don’t have a title. Feel free to suggest one in the comment section. I’m aiming to release it during Lent this year.

I’m also planning to published a second ebook collecting the articles I have written on SSPX. That should be published by the middle of the year.

Stay tuned for more updates, including covers.

Posted in Announcement | Tagged | Leave a comment

Chasing Liberty: a Review – Part 1

Chasing Liberty by Theresa Linden

Chasing Liberty by Theresa Linden

Note: I received an advanced reader’s copy of this book from the author for this review.

This is part one of a two-part review of Theresa Linden‘s new book Chasing Liberty. Part 1 will take a look at the religious aspects of Chasing Liberty. Part 2 will examine the overall writing and will be published on my writing blog.

Book Description

Liberty 554-062466-84 of Aldonia lives in a responsible society that cares for the earth and everyone on it. They have learned to balance resource consumption with replacement initiatives, unavoidable pollution with clean-environment efforts. Science ensures that every baby born is healthy. The government ensures that every baby born is needed. All are cared for, taught, and given a specific duty to perform, their unique contribution to society. Why is Liberty so unsatisfied?

In less than two weeks, Liberty must begin her vocation. Every girl in Aldonia wishes she had Liberty’s vocation. Liberty would rather flee from Aldonia and live on her own, independent of the all-controlling government, the Regimen Custodia Terra. The high electrical Boundary Fence crushes any thought of escape. The ID implant imbedded in her hand makes it impossible to hide. She has no choice but to submit. Liberty is slated to be a Breeder.

As vocation day draws near, a man with an obsession for Liberty attacks her and injects her with a drug. She’s about to lose consciousness when someone comes to her rescue, a man in a mottled cape and dark glasses. She wakes in an underground facility where people watch over Aldonia with an array of monitors and surveillance equipment. These people are full of secrets, but she discovers one thing: they rescue a man scheduled for re-education. They rescued him. They can rescue her.

Now for the Review

Theresa has skillfully constructed a world that is a combination of George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. In this future possible, the building blocks of society have been purged from common knowledge. A one world government teaches the people that such ancient ideas as “family”, “God”, and “free-will” are evil and lead to disaster and ruin. Theresa said that she based her novel on what she read in the news headlines and I’m afraid she’s right. We live in a society that is trying to undermine the traditional family structure and trivialize faith and religion. In the world of the Regimen, science has replaced religion.

The main character of the story, Liberty 554-062466-84, has been raised in a Godless society, but still feels a strange stirring in her soul. When she’s troubled or worried, she often feels the comforting presence of her “Friend”. It seems that at least one or two other characters share her yearning for something more. That leads me to something I just read a couple of days ago.

In 1969, Fr. Joseph Ratzinger (the future Pope Benedict XVI) gave a series of talks in the future of Catholicism that were later compiled and published in a book entitled Faith and the Future. I came upon this quote after finishing Chasing Liberty:

Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.

In the world of Chasing Liberty, the citizens of the Regimen fill their lives with entertainment, so they can no longer hear God calling to them. It’s sad to say, but that is true of today’s culture and it will only get worse. Pope Benedict’s words are coming true in front of our eyes.

Conclusions of Part 1

Overall, Chasing Liberty stands as a warning of what will surely come to pass if we do not change and pray. The family will be destroyed and children will eventually become a product of the State. Religion will be replaced with science and the worship of nature. Free-will will be replaced by State designated vocations.

I will give my final recommendation and rating in part 2.

Stayed tuned for part 2.

Posted in Book, review | Tagged | 1 Comment

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas

I would like to wish all of my readers a Very Merry Christmas and a Holy and Happy New Year. You are all in my prayers as we near a new year. May this be a time of peace and holiness for each of you. Be sure to check out my Christmas story Silent Night, Holy Night.

God Bless,

John Paul Wohlscheid

Posted in Christmas | Tagged | Leave a comment

Cardinal Dolan Does It Again

DolanObamaSome of you may remember that during that last conclave, I posted an article entitled Cardinal Dolan, the Man Who Must Never be Pope. I’m sure than many people thought I was to hard on the happy-go-lucky cardinal from New York. However, several things have come to my attention recently, which proved to me I was right.

First, there is the news that the upcoming New York’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade will be the first to allow openly homosexual groups and Cardinal Dolan will be the parade’s grand marshal. When this news came out, there was a giant backlash from Catholics who were confused and angered that a leading member of that Catholic Church would be involved in any thing.like this. Dolan replied to this by basically saying homosexuals are God’s children and should be allowed to identify themselves as such, besides it as the Parade Planning Committee’s idea, not his. This a cop-out and a chance for Dolan to show how accepting and politically correct he is, while letting people know that homosexuals should be accepted and not judged. I guess he forgot about Sodom and Gomorrah.

Second, the canonization process of Venerable Archbishop Sheen had been put on hold indefinitely. Why? Because the Archdiocese of New York refused to turn Sheen’s body over to his home diocese of Peoria. WHAT? From what I read, Bishop Jenky of Peoria expected Sheen to be canonized as early as next year. But now that’s out the window. Sheen was arguable the founder of televangelism and would have been the perfect patron saint of the new forms of internet evangelization. If this was a decision made by one of Dolan’s subordinate, why didn’t change the ruling (or whatever it was) and release Sheen’s body? Since he didn’t, there must be a reason he doesn’t want Sheen canonized and I can figure out why.

Lastly, in June South African priest Fr. Justin Wylie was removed from his parish and sent back to South Africa. On top of that a disciplinary complaint was filed against him in his home diocese. I’m sure this is something only a bishop or cardinal can do. Now his former parish, Holy Innocents Church, is in danger of being closed down. It’s also the only church in New York offering the Latin Mass. What did Fr. Wylie do to get his shipped home? He dared to complain in a homily about how Catholic who love the Latin Mass are persecuted and mistreated. You can read his sermon below. Does this sound like a good reason to send a priest back to South Africa? In fact, I heard that Fr. Wylie’s new parish is in such bad shape that he is forced to live in the church’s sacristy. The parish has done through five priests in the last couple of years. Keep Fr. Wylie in your prayers. Dolan has a history of persecution priests in his diocese who love the Latin Mass or try to defend the Church from liberalism.

Dear friends – and mark well that I speak to you now from the prophetic heart of my sacerdotal paternity – Dom Prosper Gueranger has something important to say also about threes. Hear it well:

“[T]he sacraments, being visible signs, are an additional bond of unity between the members of the Church: we say additional, because these members have the two other strong links of union – submission to Peter and to the pastors sent by him and profession of the same faith. The Holy Ghost tells us, in the sacred Volume, that a threefold chord is not easily broken [Eccles. Iv 12]. Now we have such a one, and it keeps us in the glorious unity of the Church: hierarchy, dogma, and sacraments, all contribute to make us one Body. Everywhere, from north to south, and from east to west, the sacraments testify to the fraternity that exists amongst us; by them we know each other, no matter in what part of the globe we may be, and by the same we are known by heretics and infidels. These divine sacraments are the same in every country, how much soever the liturgical formulae of their administration may differ; they are the same in the graces they produce, they are the same in the signs whereby grace is produced – in a word, they are the same in all the essentials” (pp. 228-9).

Dom Gueranger writes these words for us under his entry for precisely this Fourth Sunday after Easter, when in this parish, as I understand, you will meet to discuss a path forward for the precarious existence of your own worshipping community. Will this be the path Christ charts or will we make of ourselves instruments of the evil one for division and derision? The test of this, as in all things, is charity. Deus caritas est; et ubi caritas est vera, Deus ibi est. Where there is a breakdown of charity, there also is the spirit of the antichrist. I urge you, therefore, to be obedient and to be charitable with your legitimate superiors in all this, as well as with each other. Be firm and clear, also, and just; however, let charity always be the litmus test of whom it is you serve.

Allow me to say, first of all, that it has been my great privilege to serve this community during my term in New York. I have benefitted and learned so much from you and from your piety and fidelity, vivacity and zeal. I refer to all of you, now – you know who you are, I hope, from the love that I bear for you. Some I know better than others, through service at the altar – your acolytes and MCs; others I have loved with my voice and through my ears (like the organists and choir); others yet through my eyes, such as those who keep the church so beautiful, restored and adorned with flowers; others yet I bear with love, such as those who source and restore such magnificent vestments; many of you are known to me in the intimacy of the confessional or through the rich friendship of spiritual direction: upon all of you I gaze from this pulpit with a father’s love and admiration. Yet I must make my own the words of our Blessed Lord when I tell you that my heart breaks with pity to behold those who seem to be as though sheep without a shepherd.

Allow me to explain. When I first came to New York, I marveled at the freedom traditional Catholics had always enjoyed in New York. When the Mass of the Ages seemed everywhere in the world effectively to have been banned, here in New York it found a home. “What freedom!” I thought, “What magnanimity from the pastors of the Church here in this place!” Now, however, with the benefit of time and deeper understanding, I see the superficiality of this first appreciation. Indeed, such a conclusion would be more befitting the 1980s and 1990s when Catholic laypeople were organizing such masses here and there on an ad hoc basis. First at St. Agnes, I believe, and then elsewhere, “homes” were found for such communities … and this indeed did give for their members here a happier prospect than in many parts of the world. But in a post-Summorum Pontificum Church, after Pope Benedict courageously proclaimed that the extraordinary form of the liturgy pertains equally to the fulness of the Roman rite, this approach cannot any more, I think, be characterised as true magnanimity.

As I said: during the dark days of prohibition, New York seemed to be a happy place to be for you because of the indult-masses at places like St. Agnes, but in the fresh juridical freedom Summorum Pontificum brings, New York has become, in my view, a less felicitous place for traditional Catholics: because nothing is structured, nothing acknowledged. Who takes responsibility for you pastorally?

Pastores dabo vobis, the Lord promises Jeremiah: I will give you shepherds!  Fundamentally – and this is something about which I urge you to think well and pray much about – as a priest, I have to say: I worry about the situation of traditional Catholics in the Archdiocese. Yes, the archdiocese ‘permits’ a traditional mass here or there — but responsibility for the matter continues to rest upon the initiative and resourcefulness of the laity, who with enormous difficulty have to source priests hither and thither as though we were seemingly still living in Reformation England or Cromwellian Ireland. Isn’t it high time for the Church to take pastoral responsibility also for these sheep? Do they not deserve a shepherd? a parish? or at least some sense of juridical security? What happens to you when the parish you are harbouring in closes its doors?

What will become of the priestly vocations aplenty I see in these numerous young men of such quality as we have in abundance serving here at Holy Innocents, St. Agnes and elsewhere – remaining as they do at the mercy (and sometimes, caprice) of ‘landlords’ who, for one reason or another, ‘permit’ their presence in their parishes? Doors everywhere seem closing to them. Our Saviour has closed its doors to them. St. Agnes, for its part, guards its doors vigilantly to make sure they don’t enter the building 5 minutes too early or don’t overstay their welcome by 5 minutes more. Now, it seems, the doors of Holy Innocents will be closed to them, too. Taken together, this is, in my view, a clear instance of exclusion: an injustice which you should bring to the attention of your shepherd, I think. You are fully-fledged members of the baptised Faithful, for heaven’s sake: why are you scurrying about like ecclesiastical scavengers, hoping for a scrap or two to fall from the table for your very existence? The precariousness of your community cannot hinge on a church building being available to you as though you were a mere sodality or guild. The days of renting space in hotels and the like must surely be over. You are not schismatics! Are you schismatics?

Whatever happens to Holy Innocents – and this will be the decision of your chief-shepherd here, who will base his decision on more information than any of us has at his or her disposal – you need to assert that you belong to the Church as fully as any other community. You have found a home here, largely through your own hard work and perseverence: no good shepherd could dispossess you of your home without providing safety and good pasture elsewhere. Parishioners of a Novus ordo parish closure might easily find another ‘home’ nearby; but what of you? You have a right to find the Mass (and not only on Sundays); and not only the Mass, but the other sacraments and rites of the Church. Closing this parish is more akin to closing a linguistic parish or a Oriental rite parish. What becomes of you?

No longer, I say, should you think of yourselves as squatters in the mighty edifice of Holy Church, nor should you find yourselves turned out like squatters. Shepherds must needs make difficult decisions, such as the erection or suppression of parishes – that is their onerous duty and in this they must have our obedience, charity and prayer: but never should they throw open the sheep-fold and allow the uncertain dispersion of their sheep into a world full of wolves. Charity, of course, is a two-way street.

Dolan is damaging the image of the Church by feeding the world conflicting messages about Church teaching. He also works hard to force traditional Catholic to merge into the mainstream or leave for splinter groups, like SSPX. Please pray for Dolan’s conversion before he causes too much damage.

Posted in Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Latin Mass | Tagged | 1 Comment

Medjugorje Scandals: the Fake Bishop

The Medjugorje “apparition” is one of the biggest and fastest growing phenomenons in the Catholic Church and beyond. In some places, Medjugorje is more widely known than Fatima or Lourdes. However, just because it is popular doesn’t mean its true. In fact, there are problems and scandals surrounding the Medjugorje “apparition”. The following is just one of many.

On October 5, 1997, the sacrament of Confirmation was celebrated at the parish church of Capljina in Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, the minister was not the Bishop of Mostar-Duvno, Bishop Ratko Peric. Instead the “celebrant” was an unnamed man who spoke only German. The man did not give his name and the Franciscans who run the parish did not introduce him. According to a newspaper report, he only described himself by saying “I come to you from a distant yet beautiful country. My homeland is more than a 1,000 miles from your lovely country and your beautiful town.”

Before I go further, I need to tell you some quick background history. In June of 1975, Pope Paul VI issued the decree Romanis pontificibus, which ordered the Franciscans in Bosnia and Herzegovina to hand over half of the parishes they administered to diocesan priests. They refused. In fact, they still refuse. The Franciscans in Bosnia and Herzegovina are so disobedient that their province lost its authority and the General of the Order rules it directly. Furthermore, that province is not allowed to take part in the election of the General. The parish where this event (I don’t know what else to call it) took place was one of parishes that the Franciscans refused to give up. In fact, the front door were bricked up so the diocesan priests could not enter.

Now to talk about how problematic this event was. First off, a bishop can only perform the duties of his office in another diocese when the bishop of that diocese gives him permission to do so (Canon 390). For example, several years ago, far-Left retired Bishop Gumbleton was going to speak at a Catholic Church in the Diocese of Marquette. However, when the bishop of that diocese, Bishop Sample (who is now Archbishop of Portland, Oregon), heard about this he forbade Gumbleton from speak in his diocese. Gumbleton was forced to use a Protestant church as a venue instead (which was more suitable for him anyway). According an article in a local newspaper Slobodna Dalmacija, Bishop Peric did not give permission for this event in Capljina.

Secondly, because the man did not give his name and the Franciscans did not introduce him, there was no way for the participants to know if he truly was a bishop. Luckily, Bishop Peric investigated. What he found was terrible. The supposed bishop turned out to be an Old Catholic seminarian named Srecko Franjo Novak. (For those who don’t know, the Old Catholic Church broke off from the Catholic Church after Vatican I because they did not agree with the doctrine of papal infallibility.) Novak claimed he had been consecrated an Old Catholic bishop, however his superiors told Bishop Peric that they had found him unfit and only ordained him to the diaconate. In effect, there was no sacrament because the person who pretended to confer it did not have the faculties or permission to do so.

To conclude, disobedient Franciscans used a church, that they refused to allow diocesan priests to enter, to told an event where a fake bishop pretended to confer the sacrament of Confirmation. What does this have to do with Medjugorje? Simply put, this is an example of the fruits of Medjugorje. Obviously, if Our Lady was truly appearing at Medjugorje, this nonsense would not be happening. Both Bishop Peric and his predecessor investigated Medjugorje and condemned it. The disobedient Franciscans proceeded to promote it, even going so far as to recruit an apostate seminarian to act as a bishop for them and give them an air of legitimacy. What could possibly be wrong with this picture?

For more information on this story and other problems with Medjugorje, I recommend reading the late Michael Davies book Medjugorje after Twenty-One Years. I have also posted it on the Resources page.

Posted in Medjugorje | Tagged | Leave a comment

Were the Consecrations of the SSPX Bishops Criminal?

Pope Pius XII

Pope Pius XII

There seems to be a consensus among supporters of the Society of St. Pius X that the excommunication of those involved in the 1988 Écône consecrations was the act of a Modernist church against those stands for tradition. However, Pope Pius XII might have disagreed.

In June 1958, Pope Pius XII issued the encyclical Ad Apostolorum Principis. This encyclical addressed the persecution of the Catholic Church in China. He also mentioned the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association, which was created by the Communists to control Catholics. One of the methods they used for control was to install their own bishops, often forcing lawfully ordained bishops to consecrate Communist-friendly men without papal approval. Many good bishops went along with them because they believed it would benefit the laity in the long run. Here is what Pope Pius XII had to say about consecrations performed without papal approval: (Emphasis is mine.)

30. Assuming false and unjust premises, they are not afraid to take a position which would confine within a narrow scope the supreme teaching authority of the Church, claiming that there are certain questions — such as those which concern social and economic matters — in which Catholics may ignore the teachings and the directives of this Apostolic See.

31. This opinion — it seems entirely unnecessary to demonstrate its existence — is utterly false and full of error because, as We declared a few years ago to a special meeting of Our Venerable Brethren in the episcopacy:

32. “The power of the Church is in no sense limited to so-called ‘strictly religious matters’; but the whole matter of the natural law, its institution, interpretation and application, in so far as the moral aspect is concerned, are within its power.

33. “By God’s appointment the observance of the natural law concerns the way by which man must strive toward his supernatural end. The Church shows the way and is the guide and guardian of men with respect to their supernatural end.”[9]

34. This truth had already been wisely explained by Our Predecessor St. Pius X in his Encyclical Letter Singulari quadam of September 24, 1912, in which he made this statement: “All actions of a Christian man so far as they are morally either good or bad — that is, so far as they agree with or are contrary to the natural and divine law — fall under the judgment and jurisdiction of the Church.”[10]

35. Moreover, even when those who arbitrarily set and defend these narrow limits profess a desire to obey the Roman Pontiff with regard to truths to be believed, and to observe what they call ecclesiastical directives, they proceed with such boldness that they refuse to obey the precise and definite prescriptions of the Holy See. They protest that these refer to political affairs because of a hidden meaning by the author, as if these prescriptions took their origin from some secret conspiracy against their own nation.

36. Here We must mention a symptom of this falling away from the Church. It is a very serious matter and fills Our heart — the heart of a Father and universal Pastor of the faithful — with a grief that defies description. For those who profess themselves most interested in the welfare of their country have for some considerable time been striving to disseminate among the people the position, devoid of all truth, that Catholics have the power of directly electing their bishops. To excuse this kind of election they allege a need to look after the good souls with all possible speed and to entrust the administration of dioceses to those pastors who, because they do not oppose the communist desires and political methods, are acceptable by the civil power.

37. We have heard that many such elections have been held contrary to all right and law and that, in addition, certain ecclesiastics have rashly dared to receive episcopal consecration, despite the public and severe warning which this Apostolic See gave those involved.

Since, therefore, such serious offenses against the discipline and unity of the Church are being committed, We must in conscience warn all that this is completely at variance with the teachings and principles on which rests the right order of the society divinely instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord.

38. For it has been clearly and expressly laid down in the canons that it pertains to the one Apostolic See to judge whether a person is fit for the dignity and burden of the episcopacy,[11] and that complete freedom in the nomination of bishops is the right of the Roman Pontiff.[12] But if, as happens at times, some persons or groups are permitted to participate in the selection of an episcopal candidate, this is lawful only if the Apostolic See has allowed it in express terms and in each particular case for clearly defined persons or groups, the conditions and circumstances being very plainly determined.

39. Granted this exception, it follows that bishops who have been neither named nor confirmed by the Apostolic See, but who, on the contrary, have been elected and consecrated in defiance of its express orders, enjoy no powers of teaching or of jurisdiction since jurisdiction passes to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff as We admonished in the Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis in the following words: “. . . As far as his own diocese is concerned each (bishop) feeds the flock entrusted to him as a true shepherd and rules it in the name of Christ. Yet in exercising this office they are not altogether independent but are subordinate to the lawful authority of the Roman Pontiff, although enjoying ordinary power of jurisdiction which they receive directly from the same Supreme Pontiff.”[13]

40. And when We later addressed to you the letter Ad Sinarum gentem, We again referred to this teaching in these words: “The power of jurisdiction which is conferred directly by divine right on the Supreme Pontiff comes to bishops by that same right, but only through the successor of Peter, to whom not only the faithful but also all bishops are bound to be constantly subject and to adhere both by the reverence of obedience and by the bond of unity.”[14]

41. Acts requiring the power of Holy Orders which are performed by ecclesiastics of this kind, though they are valid as long as the consecration conferred on them was valid, are yet gravely illicit, that is, criminal and sacrilegious.

42. To such conduct the warning words of the Divine Teacher fittingly apply: “He who enters not by the door into the sheepfold, but climbs up another way, is a thief and a robber.”[15] The sheep indeed know the true shepherd’s voice. “But a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers.”[16]

43. We are aware that those who thus belittle obedience in order to justify themselves with regard to those functions which they have unrighteously assumed, defend their position by recalling a usage which prevailed in ages past. Yet everyone sees that all ecclesiastical discipline is overthrown if it is in any way lawful for one to restore arrangements which are no longer valid because the supreme authority of the Church long ago decreed otherwise. In no sense do they excuse their way of acting by appealing to another custom, and they indisputably prove that they follow this line deliberately in order to escape from the discipline which now prevails and which they ought to be obeying.

44. We mean that discipline which has been established not only for China and the regions recently enlightened by the light of the Gospel, but for the whole Church, a discipline which takes its sanction from that universal and supreme power of caring for, ruling, and governing which our Lord granted to the successors in the office of St. Peter the Apostle.

45. Well known are the terms of Vatican Council’s solemn definition: “Relying on the open testimony of the Scriptures and abiding by the wise and clear decrees both of our predecessors, the Roman Pontiffs, and the general Councils, We renew the definition of the Ecumenical Council of Florence, by virtue of which all the faithful must believe that ‘the Holy Apostolic See and the Roman Pontiff hold primacy over the whole world, and the Roman Pontiff himself is the Successor of the blessed Peter and continues to be the true Vicar of Christ and head of the whole Church, the father and teacher of all Christians, and to him is the blessed Peter our Lord Jesus Christ committed the full power of caring for, ruling and governing the Universal Church….’

46. “We teach, . . . We declare that the Roman Church by the Providence of God holds the primacy of ordinary power over all others, and that this power of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, which is truly episcopal, is immediate. Toward it, the pastors and the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both individually and collectively, are bound by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, not only in matters which pertain to faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the Church spread throughout the whole world, in such a way that once the unity of communion and the profession of the same Faith has been preserved with the Roman Pontiff, there is one flock of the Church of Christ under one supreme shepherd. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth from which no one can depart without loss of faith and salvation.”[17]

47. From what We have said, it follows that no authority whatsoever, save that which is proper to the Supreme Pastor, can render void the canonical appointment granted to any bishop; that no person or group, whether of priests or of laymen, can claim the right of nominating bishops; that no one can lawfully confer episcopal consecration unless he has received the mandate of the Apostolic See.[18]

48. Consequently, if consecration of this kind is being done contrary to all right and law, and by this crime the unity of the Church is being seriously attacked, an excommunication reserved specialissimo modo to the Apostolic See has been established which is automatically incurred by the consecrator and by anyone who has received consecration irresponsibly conferred.[19]

You can read the whole encyclical with footnotes here.

It would seem clear that Pope Pius XII would not approve consecration of bishops without papal approval because it shows a lack of respect for the office of the Pope and it damages the unity of the Church.

As always, please pray for the reunion of SSPX with the Church. I firmly believe that when they return they will be a great force for good.

Posted in Pope Pius XII, SSPX | Tagged , | Leave a comment