Fraternite Notre Dame, "Bishop" Jean Marie Roger Kozik, Archbishop P.M. Ngo-Dinh-Thuc


#1

Yesterday I goofed and posted a rarther long and complex question to Ask an Apologist before reading the FAQ. I subsequently asked that the question be moved to another thread, if possible, so I wouldn’t have to retype the whole thing. It looks like that wasn’t possible, so as as my pennance I’m going to have to retype it. :wink:

Yesterday I spoke with 3 nuns from a community called Fraternite Notre Dame. They were upset because a local news release described them as not being in union with the Roman Catholic Church, and the local diocese wished to inform local Catholics that this organization was not in ecclesial communion with local bishops or with Pope John Paul II (the news release had been written a few weeks ago.) When questioned about this the nuns acknowledged that they do not recognize the authority of the local bishop or the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. They do say they recognize Pope Benedict XVI and their own “bishop”, Jean Marie Roger Kozik, who is the founder of their religious community. They say they are 100% Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. They answered evasively when asked if they were members of the Ukranian Catholic Church or one of the other Eastern Catholic Churches.

Fraternite Notre Dame’s website has a page describing Bishop Kozik’s succession:

fraternitenotredame.com/Old%20Pages/En/Suc/Succession.htm ,

claiming succession from Archbishop Pierre Martin Ngo-Dinh-Thuc, whom this website claims had a special mandate or moto prio from Pope Pius XI authorizing him “…to perform episcopal consecrations without referring to the Holy See…” and “…all the pontifical powers of the pope himself, that are not from uncommunicable divine right…”

I have seen (Arch)bishop Ngo-Dinh-Thuc’s name before, in connection with some sedevacantist organizations. These nuns do say that they recognize Pope Benedict, so they probably should not be described as sedevacantist, but as they do not submit to the authority of local bishops, and as their “bishop” is not in ecclesial communion with other Catholic Bishops, I would guess that their community was in schism, presuming that Boshop Kozik’s episcopal orders are valid. The nuns strongly object to this, saying that they are as wholly Catholic as Roman Catholics and Eastern Catholics, and that their bishop is equal to other Catholic Bishops. (As an aside, they also disagreed with my assertion that Jesus founded the Roman Catholic Church, calling that heresy, but that’s another story.)

The nuns didn’t really contradict anything the news release except a report that these nuns had been soliciting donations in the area. (The nuns say they have not solicited donations, I’m willing to give them the benefit of the doubt on this.) The nuns’ main complaint seems to be that the Chancery issued the news release about them at all, informing the Diocese that this organization promoting itself as a Catholic organization was not in ecclesial communion with local Catholic Bishops and that they had not sought prior written permission from the local Bishop to establish their community within his Diocese in conformity with Canon 609. The nuns’ position is that the Bishop has no authority over them and that the Chancery should not have written anything about them at all.

I don’t think this issue is going to be resolved any time soon, If anyone else here has any other definite information on the status of Fraternite Notre Dame (besides their own press releases), on Bishop Kozik, on Archbishop Ngo-Dinh-Thuc and his alleged special mandate, or anything else relevant to this issue, I would appreciate your information.

Thank you.


#2

Thanks for the information, Joseph.

I came into contact with a French sister (nun?) of this Fraternite this morning at a market here in suburban Chicago. She was selling baked goods and I bought some (in line behind a couple from my parish), and she gave me some information about how I could get more if I wanted, including the web site you indicated. I didn’t really think much about it (I see sisters in habit almost every day) until I left, and I began to wonder.

So I went to their web site and looked around. I began to wonder even more, but there was nothing quite definite. There was also nothing to reassure me. They call themselves ‘Traditional Catholic’ on one page. Their ‘bishop’ is only styled as “Bishop Jean Marie”, almost never ‘Bishop Kozik’ and they call him “An Apostle in our times”. They mention an apparition of Mary that I’d not heard of before. And, even though they began relatively recently, they make no mention that I saw of either Pope John Paul or Pope Benedict, which is unusual in recent orders in my experience.

There was nothing definitive, but now I was suspicious. I found your lonesome post here, then I found this book, which says “[Thuc] consecrated Roger Kozik and Michael Fernandez who used their valid consecrations to start their own religion and defraud people of a lot of money.” So perhaps the consecration is valid, but from elsewhere in the text it is almost certainly not licit.

I haven’t had any of the bakery yet, four different tarts (strawberry, apple, lemon creme, and chocolate).


#3

The information in the book linked above can also be found here, which might be more convenient.

I have to say, on further (though still incomplete) reading, I find the book to be somewhat suspect theologically; it may be sedevacantist.


#4

Hello,

After reading the Sun-Times account of Sister Marie Marot’s acquittal in the traffic accident, I became curious about the order. While I praise the valuable work done with the poor - so very much needed - I find the label “tradtional” to be so non-specific, as to be meaningless.

The Bishop Kozik link seems odd, as does the relatinship with the slain president of Vietnam - in 1963.

As an avowed Francophile, I applaud the sisters for combining entrepenurship with charity, but cannot help but wonder about the history of the order, and why they are not in communion with Rome, or sought the permission of Cardinal George to come here.

Anyone have any news, or information?

God Bless


#5

Do yourself a favor and check this out www.vaticancatholic.com All those sexual scandals, changes in liturgy, kissing qu'ran, praying at the wall of Herod, giving communion to luciferian, masonic pro-choice and pro-gay marriage politicians (John Kerry), praising charismatic movement (speaking in tongues),ecumenical movement, claiming that Jews theology (Jesus is not Messiah) is valid, Islam is a "holy" and highly esteemed acording to Ben the xvith etc, WHO IN A RIGHT STATE OF MIND WOULD WANT TO BE WITH ROME (the whore of the babylon)! It's cause they don't bow to anti-popes I attend their Church.

Again it is www.vaticancatholic.com or mhfm1 (their you tube channel) see their video on the real secret of Fatima and an imposter sister Lucia and other videos as well. Yes it is rather shocking but true. I'll give you a heads up - The real 3 secret was NEVER revealed and Russia was never consecrated to the immaculate heart of Mary. Yes All the anti popes since 1958 have lied to us and DISREGARDED WISHES OF THE MOST HOLY MOTHER OF GOD!


#6

Reported.


#7

'Tis an interesting work of fiction, mixing in just a little truth to suggest plausibility to the uninformed.

To not be in union with Rome — with Peter, Violetka, is to be less than completely Catholic or Christian.


#8

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.