CathInfo.com

Computer translation of Fr Calderon's Conclusion

2014 - Si las consagraciones episcopales reformadas por P.pdf (isidore.co)


Conclusion: 

If we consider the matter, form and intention of the new rite of episcopal consecration in the context of the rite and in the circuмstances of its institution, it seems to us that it is very probably valid, because not only does it mean what it should mean, but most of its elements are taken from rites received by the Church. 

But we also believe that there is no certainty of its validity, because it suffers from two important defects, which we could classify as one canonical and the other theological: - 

Canonical defect. For what has been said above, the institution of this new rite cannot be considered legitimate.  

Theological defect. The novus ordo is not equal but only similar to other rites accepted by the Church. Although certainly valid, these rites, on the one hand, are not very precise in their concepts; and on the other hand, the differences introduced by the novus ordo follow tendencies of bad doctrine, all of which makes theological judgment, always difficult in these matters, even more difficult. 

Now, in a matter of the utmost importance for the life of the Church, such as the validity of the episcopate, it is necessary to have absolute certainty. Therefore, in order to be able to accept this rite with peace of conscience, it would be necessary to rely not only on the judgement of theologians, but also on the infallible judgement of the Magisterium. 

As for the practical attitude to be taken towards the new episcopal consecrations, the one that the Fraternity has held up to now seems to us to be justified: 

1. The very probable validity of the rite seems to us to make it morally acceptable to occasionally attend Mass (traditional rite) celebrated by a priest or a bishop ordained or consecrated in the new rite, and even to receive communion there; it seems to us acceptable, in case of necessity, to receive absolution from them; to treat them as priests and bishops and not as laymen in disguise; it seems to us acceptable to allow them to celebrate in our own homes. For the shadows that hover over the validity of their priesthood are but shadows and in all these activities our responsibility for the priesthood exercised is not engaged. And the remote risk that a communion or an absolution may be invalid is not serious. 

2. But the positive and objective defects from which this rite suffers, which prevent us from being certain of its validity, it seems to us that until there is a Roman judgement, for which many things would have to change, they justify and make necessary the conditional reordination of priests consecrated by new bishops and, if necessary, the conditional reconsecration of these bishops. One cannot suffer such uncertainties at the very root of the sacraments. 

Father Alvaro Calderon

Now, in a matter of the utmost importance for the life of the Church, such as the validity of the episcopate, it is necessary to have absolute certainty. Therefore, in order to be able to accept this rite with peace of conscience, it would be necessary to rely not only on the judgement of theologians, but also on the infallible judgement of the Magisterium.

  There need be no teaching of the Magisterium, like some Encyclical or Bull, teaching "We declare that the Catholic Rites of Ordination and Episcopal Consecration are valid."  That's a given.  If a Pope promulgates Sacramental rites, then they're valid.  Period.

It is the judgment of "the Pope" and "the Church" that these rites are all valid.

How ludicrous that know can't "know" that Jorge is a heretic even when he verbatim contradicts defined dogma, since we need the judgment of the Church, and yet you reject the same "judgment of the Church" that tells you V2 is Catholic and the new Rites are valid and pleasing to God.  You can know that these things are not Catholic contrary to the judgment of the Church but cannot know that Jorge is a heretic without this same judgment of the Church.  If the Church can get an Ecuмenical Council and rite of Mass wrong, then why is this same "Church" right about Jorge being pope?

1151 1. It is not illicit in conferring sacraments to follow a probable opinion regarding the value of the sacrament, the safer opinion being abandoned, unless the law forbids it, convention or the danger of incurring grave harm. Therefore, one should not make use of probable opinions only in conferring baptism, sacerdotal or episcopal orders. - CONDEMNED

You're not allowed to follow a probable (possible) opinion, you must take the safer course.

What's interesting is that the condemned statement even makes exceptions for the ordinations and consecrations as if it's obvious that those mustn't be doubtful in any way.

Thanks Maralus.

The condemnation speaks of “probable” opinions in the conferral of sacraments.

Do you read that statement as also pertaining to/condemning any/every degree of probability (eg., “more probable,” “very probable”)?

Is there a source which would show that, in the Church’s condemnation of the tutiorist/rigorist moral system, the Church left in place their conclusions regarding the conferral of sacraments?

Did the Church’s condemnation of tutiorism predate or post date the quote you have supplied?