Catechism of the Crisis in the Church PART 30 Fr. Matthias Gaudron The Final Chapter This selection concludes the “Catechism of the Crisis.” It is a continuation of last month’s questions concerning the Society of St. Pius X, the episcopal consecrations, and relationships with Rome. 98) Didn’t the episcopal consecrations of 1988 cause a schism? Schism is the rejection in principle of the pope’s authority, and not a simple act of disobedience. But the Society of St. Pius X acknowledges the authority of the pope, and its priests pray for him at every Mass. The episcopal consecrations, which exteriorly constituted an act of disobedience, did not give rise to any schism. Besides, the reasons given above fully justify this apparent disobedience to the pope. Isn’t it contradictory to protest one’s recognition of the pope’s authority while resisting him? A man might say to his father “You are not doing right” without telling him “You are no longer my father, I
“Necessity Knows No Law” On Extreme Cases and Uncodifiable Necessities Alon Harel and Assaf Sharon... ... In the Summa Theologica Aquinas addresses the case of necessity by focusing on the limits of legislation. Aquinas asserts that: The lawgiver cannot have in view every singl e case, he shapes the la w according to what happens more frequently by directing his atte ntion to the common good. Wherefore, if a case arises wherein the observance of that law would be hurtful to the general welfare, it should not be observed. 11 Furthermore, Aquinas recognizes that cas es falling into this category are not “legislatable” and adds that: He who in a case of necessity acts besides the letter of the law does not judge of the law but of a particular case in which he sees that the letter of the law is not to be observed. Last, Aquinas stresses that agents operating under these exceptional circumstances are not accountable to the law as in ordinary cases.