CathInfo.com

You're an idiot and uneducated.  There are only 2 types of doubt, in regards to sacraments.  Negative and Positive. 



There is no positive doubt in regards to +Thuc ordinations...the only *possible* exception being the Palmaranians in Spain...  Outside of this, all of his Traditional rites were witnessed, and were involving other priests who were there.  They had no positive doubts.  They are eye witnesses.

Hooray. Lad's back. Welcome home we missed you

You're an idiot and uneducated.  There are only 2 types of doubt, in regards to sacraments.  Negative and Positive. 

Negative is based on feelings or imagination or facts which don't apply or heresay. 
"Oh, I don't think Fr X is a priest because I heard that 20 years ago, he skipped a year of seminary."
"Did you check to see if this accusation of missing a year is true?"
"No."  or "I don't know."
Conclusion -- this "doubt" is not based on reality.  Negative doubts are not factual.


Positive doubt is based on factual events, or evidence, which according to canon law, would make a rational person question validity.
The areas of positive doubt involve the sacraments themselves.
-- Was +Thuc a valid bishop?  Yes.  No one denies this.
-- Did +Thuc perform valid ordinations?  This is what everyone questions, but you have to look at the details.

-- Did +Thuc perform the ordination ceremonies validity and completely?  No one denies this.
-- Were the proper matter/form used?  Yes.
-- Did +Thuc know who he was, where he was, what he was doing, etc?  (i.e. was he sane?)  Yes, everyone says he was sane.


+Thuc's PERSONAL/INTERNAL intention (which he allegedly made public, though this has never been confirmed) does not affect the sacraments.  The Church's intention is all that matters.  And the Church's intention = the form of the sacrament (i.e. the prayers which the bishop says).

The PERSONAL/INTERNAL intention does not affect sacraments, or else an atheist could not validly baptize.  An atheist surely doesn't have ANY intention towards the sacraments, but he can still baptize.  Why?  Because the CHURCH'S INTENTION IS ALL THAT MATTERS.

There is no positive doubt in regards to +Thuc ordinations...the only *possible* exception being the Palmaranians in Spain...  Outside of this, all of his Traditional rites were witnessed, and were involving other priests who were there.  They had no positive doubts.  They are eye witnesses.

Lol. love the way you declare me to be uneducated when you literally know nothing about me and yet I clearly am to any smart observer, well educated and do know what I am talking about. But you still insist on trying to tell me what a positive and negative doubt is.

You sedes are truly bitter and angry people. It only confirms more and more how much I think that sedevacantism is more of a mental illness than a theological position. Though it is the latter also. 


I mean I literally explained how this was closer to a positive doubt in the VERY POST YOU ARE QUOTING. Watching you people not understand this is tragic. But I mock your stupidity because you deserve every bit of it, as you are literally bringing people to their eternal damnation. A good beating won't go far astray for you.

Anyway, the Catholic Church does indeed teach that personal intention, if manifestly and directly against what the Church teaches does indeed count. I already gave you the relevant citations to prove that, but you call me uneducated. Where do I begin. I only repeat myself because there are others reading here who might not have seen my response to you. Why are you ignoring this like a some kind of stubborn mule?

Please stop repeating this long debunked and possible HERESY that personal intention does not matter. It 110 percent does. 

Hooray. Lad's back. Welcome home we missed you

If he was off for lent it was good for him. 

He clearly is addicted.