[OLDCATH-L] In Re Milingo From +Marty

[Sibyl Smirl]

Update the Holy See has finally issued a final on former Abp. Milingo.

Some Old Catholics Bishops received ordinations from Milingo have been 
ruled valid/illicit.

And, Rome will not recognize these consecrations; any further 
consecrations of those bishops and Milingo will be considered by the 
Holy See as invalid and illicit. Accumulating additional lines of 
Apostolic Succession will always create invalidity and should always be 
avoided. The issue lies in the belief that the original ordination to 
bishop did not follow Apostolic Succession, if it did then additional 
ordinations becomes invalid and illicit. The lines from the original 
Consecrating Bishop and His Co-consecrators are the only lines 
recognized as being valid.

In other words, if you feel you should shop around for a more valid 
consecration then you believe that you were invalidly consecrated to 
begin with, thus the logic goes you are invalidly consecrated.

Read the details below!!!

Merry Christmas

And a Happy New Year

Fr. Marty

God Bless Us, Everyone!

Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
The last act in the Milingo story?

by John L Allen Jr on Dec. 17, 2009

In what may be the final act of the long-running Catholic drama 
centering on Zambian Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo, the Vatican announced 
today that Milingo has been formally removed from the clerical state – 
in layman’s terms, defrocked.

As today’s Vatican statement noted, such a step is highly unusual for a 
bishop. The Vatican said it was compelled to act because of Milingo’s 
“persistent contumacy,” especially his decision to ordain several 
bishops without papal permission for his “Married Priests Now!” 
movement, which seeks to promote optional celibacy in the Catholic church.

The last case of a bishop being removed from the clerical state came in 
2008, with Fernando Lugo, the president of Paraguay and former Bishop of 
San Pedro who resigned in 2005 in order to pursue a political career. 
Lugo had requested laicization in 2006 but the Vatican had consistently 
refused, relenting only after he won the presidency in April 2008.

Milingo had been considered excommunicated since 2006 on account of his 
defiance of church authority.

In Catholic theology, ordinations by a bishop without papal 
authorization are considered valid but illicit – meaning that the men 
ordained by Milingo are really bishops, but they have no authority to 
exercise any ministry. Today’s Vatican statement indicated that the 
Catholic church does “not recognize these ordinations, nor does she 
intend to recognize them, or any subsequent ordinations based on them,” 
and that “the canonical status of the supposed bishops remains as it was.”

A Vatican spokesperson said this morning that since Milingo has been 
removed from the clerical state, any future ordinations he performs will 
be not only illicit, but invalid.

Milingo, who was made a bishop by Pope Paul VI in 1969 at the age of 39, 
had long been a thorn in the side of church authorities because of his 
controversial practice of mass exorcism ceremonies. During much of the 
1980s and 1990s, he was one of the highest-profile Catholic prelates in 
the world because of his best-selling musical CDs and his international 
reputation as an exorcist and faith healer.

In 2001, Milingo broke away from the Catholic church and wed a follower 
of Moon, a then-43 Korean acupuncturist named Maria Sung. After a 
tempestuous few weeks, including a surprise meeting with Pope John Paul 
II at his summer residence of Castel Gandolfo, Milingo returned to 
obedience.

He was allowed to resume a limited form of his healing ministry outside 
Rome.

In 2006, however, Milingo disappeared from Italy and reappeared in the 
United States at the side of Archbishop George Stallings, leader of his 
own breakaway group, the African American Catholic Congregation, based 
in Washington, D.C., as well as followers of Rev. Sun Myung Moon.

Shortly thereafter, Milingo launched his “Married Priests Now!” 
movement, while insisting that he had no intention of launching a “new 
sect.”

The following is the full text of today’s Vatican announcement.

Communication of the Press Office of the Holy See: Removal from the 
Clerical State of Emmanuel Milingo

For a number of years the Church has followed with great concern the 
difficulties caused by the regrettable conduct of Archbishop Emmanuel 
Milingo. Many attempts have been made to bring Archbishop Milingo back 
into communion with the Catholic Church, including the consideration of 
suitable ways to enable him to exercise the episcopal ministry. Pope 
John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI were directly involved in those 
efforts and both Popes personally followed the case of Archbishop 
Milingo in a spirit of paternal solicitude.

In the course of this unhappy series of events, Archbishop Milingo 
became irregular in 2001 as a result of his attempt to marry Mrs. Maria 
Sung, and incurred the medicinal penalty of suspension (cf. Canons 1044 
§ 1, n. 3; 1394 § 1 of the Code of Canon Law). Thereafter, he headed 
certain groups calling for the abolition of clerical celibacy and gave 
numerous interviews to the media in open disobedience to the repeated 
interventions of the Holy See, creating serious upset and scandal among 
the faithful. Then, on 24 September 2006 in Washington, Archbishop 
Milingo ordained four Bishops without pontifical mandate.

By so doing, he incurred the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae 
(Canon 1382) which was declared by the Holy See on 26 September 2006 and 
is still in force today. Sadly, Archbishop Milingo has shown no sign of 
the desired repentance with a view to returning to full communion with 
the Supreme Pontiff and the other members of the College of Bishops. 
Rather, he has persisted in the unlawful exercise of acts belonging to 
the episcopal office, committing new crimes against the unity of Holy 
Church. Specifically, in recent months Archbishop Milingo has proceeded 
to several other episcopal ordinations.

The commission of these grave crimes, which has recently been 
established, is to be considered as proof of the persistent contumacy of 
Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo. The Holy See has therefore been obliged to 
impose upon him the further penalty of dismissal from the clerical state.

According to Canon 292 of the Code of Canon Law, the penalty of 
dismissal from the clerical state, now added to the grave penalty of 
excommunication, has the following effects: loss of the rights and 
duties attached to the clerical state, except for the obligation of 
celibacy; prohibition of the exercise of any ministry, except as 
provided for by Canon 976 of the Code of Canon Law in those cases 
involving danger of death; loss of all offices and functions and of all 
delegated power, as well as prohibition of the use of clerical attire. 
Consequently, the participation of the faithful in any future 
celebrations organized by Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo is to be 
considered unlawful.

It must be pointed out that the dismissal of a Bishop from the clerical 
state is most extraordinary. The Holy See has felt obliged to act in 
this way due to the serious consequences for ecclesial communion 
resulting from repeated episcopal consecrations carried out without 
pontifical mandate; nevertheless, the Church hopes that Archbishop 
Milingo will see the error of his ways.

As for those recently ordained by Archbishop Milingo, the Church’s 
discipline in imposing the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae 
upon those who receive episcopal consecration without pontifical mandate 
is well-known. While expressing hope for their conversion, the Church 
reaffirms what was declared on 26 September 2006, namely that she does 
not recognize these ordinations, nor does she intend to recognize them, 
or any subsequent ordinations based on them, in the future. Hence the 
canonical status of the supposed bishops remains as it was prior to the 
ordination conferred by Archbishop Milingo.

At this moment, as the Church experiences profound sorrow for the grave 
acts perpetrated by Archbishop Milingo, she entrusts to the power of 
prayer the repentance of the guilty party and of all those who - be they 
priests or lay faithful - have in any way cooperated with him by acting 
against the unity of Christ’s Church.

In the Light of the Law

A canon lawyer's blog on current issues

By Edward Peters, JCD, JD.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Milingo's case is closed canonically, but it raises some interesting 
questions

The bizarre antics of Abp. Emmanuel Milingo, suspended in 2001 for 
attempting marriage, and excommunicated in 2006 for ordaining to men to 
the episcopate without pontifical mandate, have finally resulted in his 
dismissal from the clerical state. This is unquestionably the right 
thing to do.

The HSPO press release leaves only a few questions:

1. Is Milingo's "persistent contumacy" (what Decretal Law would have 
called "insordescence", a concept worth recovering, I suggest) is it, I 
ask, being assessed under Canon 1326.1.1, with dismissal therefore being 
added in punishment of the original offenses, or is this dismissal being 
applied directly under Canon 1392 (whereby one who violates the 
obligations imposed by an earlier penalty can be punished additionally), 
or is this a matter wherein the Holy See is proceeding ex officio, in 
poena against a bishop whose conduct can, I think, find parallels only 
in the dustiest tomes of Church history? Any one of these theories would 
account for today's news, I'm just wondering which one it is.

2. Has Milingo been released from the obligation of celibacy? That favor 
would have required a separate act by the Roman Pontiff (c. 291), and 
there's no report that such dispensation was included in the decree of 
dismissal.

3. Most interestingly, what does the Holy See mean when it says about 
the ordinations attempted by Milingo, that the Church "does not 
recognise these ordinations, nor does she intend to recognise them, or 
any subsequent ordinations based on them, in the future. Hence the 
canonical status of the supposed bishops remains as it was prior to the 
ordination conferred by Archbishop Milingo."

That's really interesting language, folks. I said so in 2006, but now 
it's being reiterated.

If the line refers to the "ordinations" of people incapable of receiving 
episcopal orders (basically, unbaptized men or even-baptized women, per 
c. 1024), then the line makes perfect sense. Of course the Church does 
not recognize such "ordinations". Likewise, if Milingo has so modified 
the "form" (the words) used in his rites that the form no longer conveys 
the sense of the sacrament (as happened with Anglican orders centuries 
ago, leading to their perpetual invalidity) the Church would never 
reconize them. But, if Milingo is using proper form (as he easily 
could), and if he is attempting to confer orders on baptized, consenting 
males (as we know he did at least few times), then the Holy See's stance 
would be truly remarkable. In one of two ways, if not in both ways, that 
I have in mind.

But let's not get ahead of things here. More facts are required before 
more words.

In any event, the disturbing Milingo case is closed canonically, but 
it's not closed pastorally. He still might repent, and the joy in Heaven 
would be great.

Update, same day: John Allen has more information here, including the 
following unattributed assertion: "A Vatican spokesperson said this 
morning that since Milingo has been removed from the clerical state, any 
future ordinations he performs will be not only illicit, but invalid." 
Can anyone suggest a single precedent for such a stance?