Why doesn't The SSPX just deep six the "Hawaii Six" polemics?


The Hawaii Six case





This piece was first published on sspx.org in June 2011.

The Hawaii Six: In Memoriam

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.


The status of the SSPX was not at issue in the case. The chapel in Hawaii was not staffed by the SSPX. Moreover, the bishop did not excommunicate all persons who attended Mass at the chapel, but only those who had been particularly critical of the bishop himself. The only thing that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith decided was that the actions of the six persons in question did not constitute schism. However, the Congregation did find fault with the six persons and said that a different penalty could be inflicted upon them (though none ever was)

http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage_print.asp?number=359307&language=en

ABS guesses the primary reason the SSPX will not take down this mendacious claim is that "it works."

Over the years (and just a day or so ago over at Vox Cantoris) ABS has seen this referenced many times as "proof" the Hierarchy is jake with the schism because it ain't a schism.