Thursday, April 26, 2007

Canon Law and usurpation of ecclesiastical functions and offenses in their exercise, relevant canons:

Can. 1378

1. A priest who acts against the prescription of can. 977 incurs an automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See.

2. The following incur an automatic (latae sententiae) penalty of interdict or if a cleric, an automatic (latae sententiae) suspension:

(1) One who has not been promoted to the priestly order and who attempts to enact the liturgical action of the Eucharistic Sacrifice;

(2) Outside the case mentioned in (1), a person who attempts to impart sacramental absolution or a person who hears a sacramental confession when one cannot validly give sacramental absolution.

(3) In the case mentioned in (2) other penalties including excommunication can be added in accord with the seriousness of the offense.

Can. 1379

Outside the cases mentioned in can. 1378, one who simulates the administration of a sacrament is to be punished with a just penalty.

Can. 1381

1. Whoever usurps an ecclesiastical office is to be punished with a just penalty.

This is the law of the Church regarding the usurpation of ecclesiastical offices and functions. And so, I will ask the question again: Why has "Brother" Andre Marie of the Saint Benedict Center been photographed at a schismatic church wearing a priestly biretta and what appear to be priestly vestments?

"Since the death of Father Feeney, we have never had a cleric as a religious member of the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, circumstances in the Church [read their own disobedience to Church teaching and authority] making it virtually impossible to attain that goal. Regardless of this, it was the intention of our Founder to have priests in our First Order, and we have never abandoned that desire...Years of searching for priests to assist us have turned up no long-term solution.... The demands of serving our community call for a priest convinced of our position and goals. Otherwise, longevity is not likely. The most obvious question is how will it be done? We have long prayed for this goal, and sought to achieve it through proper canonical channels. Knowing how saturated the hierarchy is with modernism - from Rome on down - we have concluded that passage through these channels is impossible without compromising our Crusade. We are forced to take extraordinary measures to procure ordination. To be precise, we would be seeking ordination without dimissorial letters, the canonical permission granted by a diocesan bishop or other prelate for a man to be ordained. Is this action justified? In a word: Yes....Readers can rest assured that we would never present ourselves to a heretic or schismatic for Holy Orders. Such an action would violate the very principles we are vowed to defend." - "Brother" Francis, "Two Major Announcements - Epiphany 2005."


richmond rising said...

What does it mean when a "Brother" pretends to be a "Father?" Is this an indication of some kind of delusion of grandeur? Do you think Andre is stable?
What can be done about this, if anything? Please help!

Phillip said...

There are canonical penalties for attempting to usurp the priestly office and priestly functions. Brother Andre should be reported to the Manchester Diocese and to Rome.

As to whether or not Brother Andre is stable, I don't think we can make such a determination based solely upon his (apparent) efforts at portraying himself as a Catholic priest. Although such actions are indicative of a highly dishonest personality. If he is passing himself off as something he is not, can we trust anything he says?

What concerns me the most about Brother Andre is his (and his associates) anti-semitic rhetoric and their preoccupation with the Jewish people. Of course, Douglas Bersaw's denial of the Shoah is just plain chilling. As was his remark that Pope John Paul II was one of our worse Popes.

Where there's smoke, there's fire. And there is a lot of smoke coming from the SBC. A thick, black smoke called anti-semitism.

Residents of Richmond should come together and just say no to the SBC's hate. Richmond deserves better.

Carrie said...

If there is a psychiatrist or analyst out there who could read and analyze Andres writings, please do so and let the people of Richmond know what they've got living in their town. It could be very insightful.

Andrew said...

I would have to say Richmond Rising poses an excellent question: "Do you think Andre is stable?"

While no one here (I'm sure) wants to play psychiatrist, still, I get the impression that Andre Marie avoided traditional religious orders because in those he would just be (if they accepted him) "another" monk, brother or priest. He certainly wouldn't be called "Prior."

And he relishes that title. But evidently it is not enough for him. And so he dons a priestly biretta and vestments as his community seeks to have him ordained without the Church's permission.

In my opinion, based upon his own writings, no legitimate religious order would have him. And he certainly wouldn't be ordained a Roman Catholic priest. One has to undergo a rigorous psychological exam these days to approach Holy Orders. And I cannot believe any legitimate religious order or Diocese would ordain a man who believes what Andre Marie believes about the Jewish people.

I think Andre Marie is an egomaniac who suffers from the delusion that only he and his group know understand the Church's teaching about salvation and that the rest of the Church: Pope Benedict XVI and all the world's Cardinals, Bishops, priests, religious and lay faithful are simply wrong.

Although the Catechism is CRYSTAL CLEAR on the correct understanding of the dogma which says: "Outside the Church there is no salvation," and although Pope John Paul II called this Catechism a "sure norm" (Apostolic Letter Fidei Depositum), Andre Marie and his followers believe they know better.

If that's not egoism, what is it? Even "Brother" Francis has said that the Church's hierarchy is corrupted by modernism.

I know that the Diocese of Manchester has said (several times) that the SBC is not in communion with the Church. But perhaps the time has come for the Diocese to excommunicate the group - or better yet - threaten them with excommunication as Bishop Bruskewitz did with dissent groups in his Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska.

At least this would have the effect of abolishing any doubt which may exist in some people's minds as to whether or not the SBC is truly Catholic. It's not.

Blake said...

In an article titled "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective Hate-Mongers," which may be found here: John Vennari writes:

"The Catholic’s quarrel with Judaism has nothing to do with race, but is religious in essence. Our Lord Jesus Christ said, “He who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me.” Our Lord also commanded his Church, “Go forth and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. He who believes and is baptized will be saved. He who does not believe will be condemned.”

The adherents of Judaism reject Jesus Christ, and some are openly hostile to Him and to the Church he established.."

The ordinary Catholic (one faithful to the Church) has no quarrel with the Jewish People as a race. But the so-called "Traditionalist" Catholics cited by the SPLC do. Therefore, John Vennari is not being honest and forthright.

If groups such as the SBC maintain that their "quarrel with Judaism has nothing to do with race, but is religious in essence," why then the Holocaust-denial? Why then the statement by Brother Andre Marie that the Jewish People have a tendency to undermine public morals? Why then did Fr. Feeney refer to Jews as "kikes?"

I submit that John Vennari is not telling the truth.

richmond rising said...

I would like to thank those of you who have responded to my plea. I do believe the time has come to seek an emphatic answer from both the Arch Diocese and Rome. The suggestion made by Andrew seems to be the way to go but how do we proceed from here? Does anyone have information on this?

Matlee said...

Brother Francis wrote, "we would be seeking ordination without dimissorial letters, the canonical permission granted by a diocesan bishop or other prelate for a man to be ordained. Is this action justified? In a word: Yes.."

It is always amazing how people who are disobedient to the Church attempt to justify their disobedience.

Richmond, if you can get a group together, I would file a suit under Canon Law. An attorney could help you with this. The Diocese may be able to recommend a Canon Law expert.

All the best.

Max said...

Matlee, a suit for what? We need a little more info here. There's a group that already has a land use attorney, but what other avenue can be taken? Help is good!!

Site Meter