|
|
| |
|
The Hawaii Six: In
Memoriam |
|
|
6-29-2011 |
|
Twenty years ago in January 1991, a canonical decree of
excommunication was issued in Honolulu, Hawaii against six lay
persons by the local bishop of that diocese. Their supposed
crime was attending the SSPX’s
Our Lady of Fatima Chapel in that city and utilizing one of the Society’s bishops
for conferring the sacrament of confirmation. Two years later
in 1993, this decree was overturned by none other Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, one of the first
actions he would take in favor of Tradition.
This landmark canonical case—which earned the moniker of
"The Hawaii Six”—was an important and crucial one for
Catholic Tradition, as it proved beyond a doubt that the
faithful who attend the chapels of the Society of St. Pius X,
or receive the sacraments from its clergy (either bishops or
priests) are neither schismatic nor excommunicated for doing
so—thus proving the claims made by the SSPX for many years.
Eighteen years later since Cardinal Ratzinger’s decree in
favor of The Hawaii Six, Tradition has yet to be completely
exonerated and restored to its rightful position. However, as
the Supreme Pontiff he has recently confirmed the full legal
rights of the traditional Roman Mass as well as declaring null
and void the “excommunications” of the Society’s four bishops
consecrated in 1988. His Holiness has also allowed the SSPX to
present its dubia about the errors of the Second
Vatican Council through a theological commission.
Sadly for the living representation of Catholic Tradition,
during this period several members of the Hawaii Six have
passed away, particularly during the past eight months, the
most recent being Mr. John O’Connor on June 8th. It was Mr.
and Mrs. O’Connor who were amongst the first families in the
Hawaiian Islands to host the priests of the Society, who
stayed at their home and celebrated Mass in their garage. They
were also responsible for hosting Bishop Richard Williamson to
confirm the first confirmations for the SSPX in Hawaii, thus
sparking the canonical case of the supposed excommunications
by the Honolulu diocesan bishop.
In
connection with this memoriam to the deceased members
of The Hawaii Six (for who we request prayers for the repose
of their souls), we present below the details and documents
about their important case for the Catholic Tradition.
read about the June 2004 Regina Coeli Report about the
Catholic radio show started by the Hawaii Six members
> |
|
RIP
Patricia Ann Morley
July 9, 1941- May 19, 1996
Herb John Carlos
June 26, 1928 - Nov 17, 2010
Francis Louise Santos
Mar 12, 1949 - Dec 5, 2010
John Joseph O'Connor
Feb 4, 1929 - June 7, 2011 |
|
|
| |
|
click to enlarge
images
The first of the
Hawaii Six to pass away was Mrs. Patricia Morley just
3 years after the Ratzinger Decree (see below). This
is the last photo taken of the remaining 5 members
with then District Superior, Fr. John Fullerton |
Long-time Honolulu
chapel coordinator, Mr. Carl Loando (left) with
now-deceased Hawaii Six member Mr. Herb Carlos
(center) and Fr. Phillipe Pazat (right)
|
4 of the surviving
Hawaii Six pose for a group shot with Frs. Le Roux
(seminary rector) and Emeric Baudot (SSPX's General
Bursar)* during their visit to
Fr. Damien of Molokai (*not Fr. Bourmaud as
the linked RCR states)
A Visit to Fr. Damien's Kalaupapa |
|
|
|
|
THE
HAWAII SIX |
 |
 |
 |
|
Mrs.
Patricia Morley (RIP)
Housewife, Radio Hostess |
Mr.
Christopher Morley
Automobile Salesman |
Mrs.
Shirley Cushnie
Mother of 3, Grandmother of 1 |
 |
 |
 |
Mr.
John O'Connor
Publisher |
Mr.
Herber Carlos
Semi-retired Property Manager |
Mrs.
Louis Santos
Mother of 4, Grandmother of 3 |
|
|
Hawaii 6: The Ratzinger Decree
Article derived from the April 1994 issue of The Angelus magazine
On January 18, 1991,
Bishop Joseph Ferrario, the local Ordinary of Honolulu (now deceased),
served The Hawaii Six a Formal Canonical Warning, threatening them with
excommunication.
On May 1, 1991, they were
formally declared to be excommunicated, mainly for this reason contained
in the Canonical Warning:
"Whereas you performed,"
Bishop Ferrario said, "a schismatic act, not only by procuring the
services"
of Bishop Williamson to perform confirmations at Our Lady of Fatima
Chapel, "but also by that very association with the aforementioned
bishop (you) incurred ipso facto the grave censure of
excommunication."
|
 |
|
The Formal Canonical Warning
given by Bishop Ferrario on January 18, 1991 |
|
|
|
 |
|
June
28, 1993: the Pro-Nuncio's letter gives the Ratzinger Decree,
but includes his
own idea of interdict |
|
|
The "Excommunicated Six" immediately
appealed the case to Rome. Finally, in a letter dated June 28, 1993, the
USA's Apostolic Pro-Nunico, Archbishop Cacciavillan, declared on
Cardinal Ratzinger's behalf:
From the examination of the case,
conducted on the basis of the Law of the Church, it did not result that
the facts referred to in the above-mentioned decree are formal
schismatic acts in the strict sense, as they do not constitute the
offense of schism; and therefore the Congregation holds that the Decree
of May 1, 1991 lacks foundation and hence validity.
This is a declaration that the automatic
(ipso facto) excommunication claimed by Bishop Ferrario for the
followers of Archbishop Lefebvre is in fact totally non-existent.
|
|
|
Though a major milestone to proving that
those who follow and support the SSPX are neither
schismatic nor excommunicated, reference number 2 of Archbishop Cacciavillan's June 28, 1993 letter, marred the clarity of the decree and the innocence of the
petitioners by implying that sufficient guilt remained for them to placed
under interdict by Bishop Ferrario.
This was to say that while the Hawaii Six were not excommunicated and thereby members of the
Catholic Church, they could have imposed upon them the "foreseen
punishment of interdict...", an episcopal declaration that none
of the Six could receive the sacraments of the Church. Because Archbishop
Cacciavillan had opened the letter saying he was writing "upon the
instruction of His Eminence, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger," it
appeared to all that the punishment of interdict was the recommendation of
the cardinal himself. Well, it wasn't.
|
 |
|
...9
months later on February 28, 1994
the Pro-Nuncio admits in this cover letter to the actual
Ratzinger Decree that the
idea of interdict
was his alone |
|
|
|
 |
|
The
actual Ratzinger Decree.
No mention of interdict here! |
|
|
After nine months' insistence by the
Hawaii Six, Cardinal Ratzinger's official, hand-signed decree
of June 4, 1993 nullifying the excommunications was finally released by
Archbishop Cacciavillan to the petitioners under his February 28, 1993
cover letter.
In this signed cover letter (reproduced in full at immediate
right), Archbishop Cacciavillan admits that Cardinal Ratzinger said
nothing about imposing interdict and, in fact, all of reference 2 is his
idea alone and that Cardinal Ratzinger never said anything about "foreseen
punishment of interdict or other penalties..." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
