Sedevacantism

Sedevacantism is the position held by a minority of Traditionalist Catholics[1][2] who hold that the present occupant of the papal see is not truly Pope and that, for lack of a valid Pope, the see has been vacant since the death of either Pope Pius XII in 1958 or Pope John XXIII in 1963.

Sedevacantists believe that Paul VI (1963–1978), John Paul I (1978), John Paul II (1978–2005) and Benedict XVI (since 2005) have been neither true Catholics nor true Popes, by virtue of allegedly having espoused the heresy of Modernism, or of having otherwise denied or contradicted solemnly defined Catholic dogmas. Some of them classify John XXIII (1958–1963) also as a Modernist antipope.

The term "sedevacantism" is derived from the Latin phrase sede vacante, which literally means "the seat being vacant", the seat in question being that of a bishop. A specific use of the phrase is in the context of the vacancy of the Holy See between the death or resignation of a Pope and the election of his successor. "Sedevacantism" as a term in English appears to date from the 1980s, though the movement itself is older.[3]

Among those who maintain that the see of Rome, occupied by what they declare to be an illegitimate pope, was really vacant, some have chosen an alternative pope of their own, and thus in their view ended the vacancy of the see. They are sometimes called "conclavists".

Contents

Early history

One of the earliest proponents of sedevacantism was the American Francis Schuckardt. Though he was still working within the "official" Church in 1967, he publicly took the position in 1968 that the Holy See was vacant and that the Church that had emerged from the Second Vatican Council was no longer Catholic.[4] An associate of his, Daniel Q. Brown, arrived at the same conclusion. In 1969, Brown received episcopal orders from an Old Catholic bishop, and in 1971 he in turn consecrated Schuckardt. Schuckardt founded a congregation called the Tridentine Latin Rite Catholic Church.

In 1970, a Japanese layman, Yukio Nemoto (1925–1988), created a sedevacantist group called Seibo No Mikuni.[5]

Another founding figure of sedevacantism was Fr. Joaquín Sáenz y Arriaga, a Jesuit theologian from Mexico. He put forward sedevacantist ideas in his books The New Montinian Church (August 1971) and Sede Vacante (1973). Sáenz's writings gave rise to the sedevacantist movement in Mexico, led by Sáenz, Fr. Moisés Carmona and Fr. Adolfo Zamora, and also inspired Fr. Francis E. Fenton in the United States.

In the years following the Second Vatican Council other priests took up similar positions. They include:

Positions

Sedevacantism owes its origins to the rejection of the theological and disciplinary changes implemented following the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). Sedevacantists reject this Council, on the basis of its documents on ecumenism and religious liberty, which they see as contradicting the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church and as denying the unique mission of Catholicism as the one true religion, outside of which there is no salvation. They also say that new disciplinary norms, such as the Mass of Paul VI, promulgated on 3 April 1969, undermine or conflict with the historical Catholic faith.

Other traditionalist Catholics recognize as legitimate the line of Popes leading to Pope Benedict XVI. Some of them hold that one or more of the most recent Popes have held and taught unorthodox beliefs, but do not go so far as to say that they have been formal heretics or have been widely and publicly judged to be heretics. Sedevacantists, on the other hand, claim that the infallible Magisterium of the Catholic Church could not have decreed the changes made in the name of the Second Vatican Council, and conclude that those who issued these changes could not have been acting with the authority of the Catholic Church. Accordingly, they hold that Pope Paul VI and his successors left the true Catholic Church and thus lost legitimate authority in the Church. A formal heretic, they say, cannot be the Catholic Pope.

Claims used by sedevacantists to defend their position include the following:

A number of writers have engaged sedevacantists in debate on some of these points. Brian Harrison of Puerto Rico, for example, has argued that Pope Pius XII's conclave legislation permitted excommunicated cardinals to attend, from which he argues that they could also be legitimately elected.[8]

Opponents of Harrison have argued that a phrase in Pope Pius XII's legislation "Cardinals who have been deposed or who have resigned, however, are barred and may not be reinstated even for the purpose of voting", though it speaks of someone deposed or resigned from the cardinalate, not of someone who may have incurred automatic excommunication but has not been officially declared excommunicated, means that, even if someone is permitted to attend, that does not automatically translate into electability.

There are estimated to be between several tens of thousands and more than two hundred thousands of sedevacantists worldwide, mostly concentrated in the United States, Canada, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, and Australia, but the actual size of the sedevacantist movement has never been accurately assessed. (See further the section on statistics in the article Traditionalist Catholic.)

Catholic doctrine teaches that the four marks of the true Church are that it is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, and sedevacantists base their claim to be the remnant Roman Catholic Church on what they see as the presence in them of these four "marks", absent, they say, in the Church since the Second Vatican Council. Their critics counter by saying that sedevacantists are in fact not one, forming numerous splinter groups, each of them in disagreement with the others.

Most sedevacantists hold the holy orders conferred with the present revised rites of the Catholic Church to be invalid due to defect both of intention and form. They conclude that the great majority of the bishops listed in the Holy See's Annuario Pontificio, including Benedict XVI himself, are in reality merely priests or even laymen.

Bishops and holy orders

Catholic doctrine holds that any bishop can validly ordain any baptised man to the priesthood or to the episcopacy, provided that he has the correct intention and uses a doctrinally acceptable rite of ordination, whether or not he has official permission of any sort to perform the ordination, and indeed whether or not he and the ordinand are Catholics.

On the other hand, while unapproved and irregular ordinations are valid in that the recipient truly becomes a priest or bishop, they are canonically illegal (or illicit), and can entail penalties under church law for those involved. Absent specified conditions, Canon law forbids ordination to the episcopate without a mandate from the Pope,[9] and both those who confer such ordination without the papal mandate and those who receive it are subject to excommunication.[10] Sedevacantists take the position that the normal legal requirements, such as the need for a papal mandate for an episcopal consecration, cannot be applied in the context of a collapse of the Church's structures and the prolonged lack of a Pope.

In a specific pronouncement in 1976, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith declared devoid of canonical effect the consecration ceremony conducted for the Palmarian Catholic Church by Archbishop Ngô Ðình Thuc on 31 December 1975, though it refrained from pronouncing on its validity. This declaration applied also to later ordinations by those who received ordination in the ceremony.[11] Of those then ordained, seven who are known to have returned to full communion with Rome did so as laymen.[12] Again, when Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo conferred episcopal ordination on four men in Washington on 24 September 2006, the Holy See's Press Office declared that "the Church does not recognize and does not intend in the future to recognize these ordinations or any ordinations derived from them, and she holds that the canonical state of the four alleged bishops is the same as it was prior to the ordination."[13] This denial of canonical status simply means that he has no authority to exercise any ministry. However, the Rev. Ciro Benedettini of the Holy See Press Office, who was responsible for publicly issuing, during the press conference, the communique on Milingo, stated to reporters that any ordinations the excommunicated Milingo had performed prior to his laicization were "illicit but valid", while any subsequent ordinations would be invalid.[14][15]

However, on June 11, 2011, the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts issued a statement about illicitly ordained bishops,including those ordained by Archishop Emmanual Milingo, incidently Milingo was never accused of being schismatic but merely disobedient, before he was reduced to the lay state in 2009 and those ordained for the schismatic Palmar movement by the late Archbishop Thuc, pointing out the canons which provide for an automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication for both the ordaining bishop and those ordained. Bishop Juan Ignacio Arrieta, Secretary of the Council, explained that the statement applied to the bishops ordained by Milingo as well as to more recent cases.[16]

The bishops who are or have been active within the sedevacantist movement can be divided into four categories.

Criticism

Against sedevacantism, mainstream Catholics advance arguments such as:

Sedevacantists advance counter-arguments, such as:

Groups

See also

References

  1. ^ R. Scott Appleby, Being Right: Conservative Catholics in America (Indiana University Press 1995 ISBN 9780253329226), p. 257
  2. ^ Martin E. Marty, R. Scott Appleby, Fundamentalisms Observed (University of Chicago Press 1994 ISBN 9780226508788), p. 88
  3. ^ See this article by sedevacantist priest Fr. Antony Cekada.
  4. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Schuckardt#Tridentine_Latin_Rite_Catholic_Church
  5. ^ Seibo No Mikuni (Zoccatelli) — CESNUR
  6. ^ [1]
  7. ^ This being the date of the compilation of church bulletins quoted on this page
  8. ^ [2]
  9. ^ canon 1013
  10. ^ canon 1382
  11. ^ "As for those who have already thus unlawfully received ordination or any who may yet accept ordination from these, whatever may be the validity of the orders (quidquid sit de ordinum validitate), the Church does not and will not recognize their ordination (ipsorum ordinationem), and will consider them, for all legal effects, as still in the state in which they were before, except that the… penalties remain until they repent" (Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Decree Episcopi qui alios of 17 September 1976 — Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1976, page 623).
  12. ^ See Thuc Consecrations
  13. ^ Declaration in Italian and English
  14. ^ Frances D'Emilio (December 18, 2009). "Vatican dismisses defiant archbishop from clergy". Boston Globe. http://articles.boston.com/2009-12-18/news/29255245_1_archbishop-milingo-ordaining-ordinations. 
  15. ^ John L. Allen Jr. (December 17, 2009). "Last act in the Milingo story?". http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/last-act-milingo-story. 
  16. ^ Jesús Colina (June 14, 2011). "Vatican Calls China's Illicitly Ordained to Examine Hearts". ZENIT News Agency. http://www.zenit.org/article-32850?l=english. 
  17. ^ See list and line of descent at Thuc Consecratons
  18. ^ The Most Reverend Clarence Kelly, Sacred and Profane (Oyster Bay Cove, NY: 1997), 101. http://congregationofstpiusv.net/SacredandProfane.pdf
  19. ^ See photos of consecration at http://www.stpiusvchapel.org/photos/consecration2/consecration2.html
  20. ^ For the many who look to him as the origin of their episcopal orders see Costa Consecrations.
  21. ^ Pastor Aeternus
  22. ^ [3]
  23. ^ The Holy Catholic Mercedarian Church
  24. ^ Most Holy Family Monastery
  25. ^ A more comprehensive list of objections can be found at http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=48&catname=12
  26. ^ "A Statement of Principles in a Time of Crisis," The Roman Catholic Association, Inc., (1988): http://www.stpiusvchapel.org/flash_paper/articles/003_declaration_principles.swf
  27. ^ The Society of the Immaculata

External links

Sedevacantist sites

Criticism