Author Topic: CM makes good point against BoD!!! (Read 5157 times)

CM · « **Reply #60 on:** October 07, 2009, 11:52:29 PM »

Quote from: Raoul76

The irony of all this is that Catholic Martyr, baptized in the Novus Ordo, may not even be validly baptized. Maybe none of us are, since the clergy is essentially kaput.

I was baptized by an Anglican minister. My family didn't go N.O. until I was a couple years old. I was 'confirmed' in the N.O.

I have since asked a person I know to conditionally baptize me. He is a pagan, and I am honestly still wondering if I am actually baptized.

At one point he stopped pouring while he was saying the words, and I don't really know if this has any nullifying affect, or if it might have been a manifestation of his intention not to do what the Church does.

SJB · « **Reply #61 on:** October 08, 2009, 05:36:40 AM »

Quote

The Church teaches very unequivocally that for the valid conferring of the sacraments, the minister must have the intention of doing at least what the Church does. This is laid down with great emphasis by the Council of Trent (sess. VII). The opinion once defended by such theologians as Catharinus and Salmeron that there need only be the intention to perform deliberately the external rite proper to each sacrament, and that, as long as this was true, the interior dissent of the minister from the mind of the Church would not invalidate the sacrament, no longer finds adherents. The common doctrine now is that a real internal intention to act as a minister of Christ, or to do what Christ instituted the sacraments to effect, in other words, to truly baptize, absolve, etc., is required.

You CANNOT know the internal disposition of anybody unless it is externally indicated. This passage, where ever it came from, is not at odds with that truth.

The "real internal intention" is manifest by the performance of the proper external rite and no external indications of the lack of an intention.

If this was not the case, NOBODY would ever know if they were receiving a valid sacrament.

gladius_veritatis · « **Reply #62 on:** October 08, 2009, 05:43:02 AM »

Quote from: Catholic Martyr

Just like you might intend to go buy milk after work, but you drive straight home instead, because of an ingrained repetitious pattern of behaviour.

Please read about HABITUAL intentions in St Thomas' article on this subject. He is in complete harmony with the mind if the Church.

CM · « **Reply #63 on:** October 08, 2009, 02:49:14 PM »

Very interesting. Thank you.

Quote from: St. Thomas

Reply to Objection 3. Although he who thinks of something else, has no actual intention, yet he has habitual intention, which suffices for the validity of the sacrament; for instance if, when a priest goes to baptize someone, he intends to do to him what the Church does. Wherefore if subsequently during the exercise of the act his mind be distracted by other matters, the sacrament is valid in virtue of his original intention. Nevertheless, the minister of a sacrament should take great care to have actual intention. But this is not entirely in man's power, because when a man wishes to be very intent on something, he begins unintentionally to think of other things, according to Psalm 39:18: "My heart hath forsaken me."

Quote from: Pope Leo XIII

The Church does not judge about the mind and intention, in so far as it is something by its nature internal; but in so far as it is manifested externally she is bound to judge concerning it. A person who has correctly and seriously used the requisite matter and form to effect and confer a sacrament is presumed for that very reason to have intended to do (intendisse) what the Church does. On this principle rests the doctrine that a Sacrament is truly conferred by the ministry of one who is a heretic or unbaptized, provided the Catholic rite be employed.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #64 on:** October 08, 2009, 03:21:57 PM »

Quote from: SJB

Quote
The Church teaches very unequivocally that for the valid conferring of the sacraments, the minister must have the intention of doing at least what the Church does. This is laid down with great emphasis by the Council of Trent (sess. VII). The opinion once defended by such theologians as Catharinus and Salmeron that there need only be the intention to perform deliberately the external rite proper to each sacrament, and that, as long as this was true, the interior dissent of the minister from the mind of the Church would not invalidate the sacrament, no longer finds adherents. The common doctrine now is that a real internal intention to act as a minister of Christ, or to do what Christ instituted the sacraments to effect, in other words, to truly baptize, absolve, etc., is required.

You CANNOT know the internal disposition of anybody unless it is externally indicated. This passage, where ever it came from, is not at odds with that truth.

The "real internal intention" is manifest by the performance of the proper external rite and no external indications of the lack of an intention.

If this was not the case, NOBODY would ever know if they were receiving a valid sacrament.

It's from the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on intention. Sorry I left out the link.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #65 on:** October 08, 2009, 03:24:21 PM »

Quote from: gladius_veritatis

Quote from: Telesphorus
It isn't merely a matter of externals.

Please quote my words that say I believe it IS.

Quote
Which means that it's possible to "fake it."

Again: HOW would you PROVE such in any given case?

You generally can't prove it but you can certainly suspect that it has happened in certain cases.