Appendix II: Excerpt from the introductory letter to issue 5 of Les Deux Étendards (December 1997)

Christ carrying the cross by Francisco de Zurbarán (1653).

By Fr. Hervé Belmont

It should also be noted that, in this issue, the controversy regarding episcopal consecrations is not pursued. To tell the truth, it was never our intention to engage in a controversy: only the need to correct a truly erroneous expression in our first text (an expression that had been added hastily at the last minute—which is never good work) had prompted us to revisit the subject.

For us, indeed, after much reflection, the matter is settled: we simply wished to make it clear that we could not be counted on to join this venture or to endorse it in any way—either in word or deed. For what good, indeed, would it be to have fought for more than twenty-five years against the forces undermining the unity of the Church (1) as they appeared in reality or in people’s consciousness, only to then give oneself over to this deadly game?

What good would it do to have successively rejected whatever breaks the threefold Catholic unity:

– religious freedom, the false conception of the Church taught at Vatican II, adherence to John Paul II [false rule of faith], and the ramblings of traditionalists regarding the Magisterium, which undermine the unity of the faith;

– Paul VI’s liturgical reform, the una cum, and charismaticism, which undermine the unity of the sacramental order;

– allegiance to a pseudo-authority, conclavism, charismatism once again, and the so-called justification of disobedience, which undermine hierarchical unity...

…so what is the point, if it is for us to do something similar?

It is indeed the hierarchical unity of the Catholic Church that is at stake. This hierarchy is one, and it is ordered according to two distinct principles: order and jurisdiction. The unity of these two aspects exists in the episcopate, which, by divine institution alone, occupies a place simultaneously in the hierarchy of order and in the hierarchy of jurisdiction.

The episcopate is thus indeed the “building block” upon which the hierarchy of the Church is built. Consequently, to ordain a bishop is to establish a hierarchy; and if that bishop is not ordained by the Pope—the sole foundation of the Catholic hierarchy—it is to establish another hierarchy. There is no way around this.

To put it in “existential” terms, we might say that in the crisis the Church is currently facing—a crisis we are exacerbating through our sins, this crisis we are enduring—we must know where to draw the line when it comes to the decisions we make and the attitudes we adopt, in order to preserve our faith and our membership in the Catholic Church. As for refusing to recognize the authority of John Paul II, there is no need for hesitation: the faith clearly prevails; there are simply verifications to be made—serious verifications—because the matter is extremely grave. The continuation of the same imperium of the faith limits judgment to the question of authority, setting aside the individuals, their status, their guilt, and their membership in the Church.

But when it comes to the practical course of action to take, the range of possibilities is wide, and there is a great gulf between, on the one hand, the perilous abstention from all sacramental life, and on the other, the reckless initiative of convening a “conclave.” Faced with this range of possibilities, the worst course of action would be to decide based on one’s own judgment. Only the practice of the Church and the theology of St. Thomas Aquinas (2) can provide a sure criterion for choice—and it so happens that both agree in marking the boundary between the exercise of the priesthood on the one hand, and access to the episcopate on the other. The former, being essentially sacramental in nature, may be the subject of a provision by the Church; the latter, being essentially hierarchical in nature, may not.

We are deeply concerned that the autonomous episcopate will turn into a massive and irreparable disaster: this is why you will find nothing in this issue that would diminish or contradict what we have already written; moreover, the controversy has taken a turn that we do not much like, if only because one can legitimately ask the question: “Are the poor being evangelized there?” It is quite evident that our opposition to episcopal consecrations “solves nothing”; its purpose is not to provide solutions to a problem that is infinitely beyond our grasp, but to ensure fidelity to God’s holy will through fidelity to his Church: this is always possible and necessary. As for the anxiety one may feel in the face of the difficulties of the sacramental life and the question of vocations (3), it is the cross that must be borne courageously in union with that of Our Lord.

Return to the main page of the Dossier on episcopal consecrations without Apostolic mandate by Fr. Hervé Belmont.

Footnotes:

(1) The unity of the Church stems from its divine constitution and is an object of faith; it is therefore unalterable and beyond the reach of human malice. However, certain perverse factors can lead Christians away from this unity; it is these factors that we wish to discuss.

(2) Here is what St. Thomas Aquinas says about the practice of the Church: “The custom of the Church has the greatest authority; her way of acting must be adopted by all, for the teaching of the Catholic doctors itself derives its authority from the Church. Hence, one must adhere more to the authority of the Church than to the authority of Saint Augustine, or Saint Jerome, or any other doctor.” Summa Theologica, IIa IIæ q. X, a.12, c.

(3) Moreover, this question is completely distorted if one fails to carefully distinguish between the priestly vocation and the religious vocation, and if one overlooks the fact that, regarding the former, the Church teaches: “Vocari autem a Deo dicuntur qui a legitimis Ecclesiæ ministris vocantur—those are said to be called by God who are called by the legitimate ministers of the Church.” Catechism of the Council of Trent, de Ordine §1.