Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: soulguard on January 12, 2014, 05:19:47 AM
-
Discuss.
-
Are you sure you want it discussed? Normally when you ask for something you violently disagree with those who choose to answer you. You have given that exact reaction to this very topic twice already.
-
Doubtful.
-
Are you sure you want it discussed? Normally when you ask for something you violently disagree with those who choose to answer you. You have given that exact reaction to this very topic twice already.
And the difference between my "violent" (?) reaction and yours is...?
I seek information. You on the other hand set yourself up as a professional theologican who thinks he knows all about everything church like. Hate to break it to you, but you have no authority to speak on anything, lest of all to provide advice to me on this matter. All you have is your opinion, and that is all it is, an OPINION.
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
-
Are you sure you want it discussed? Normally when you ask for something you violently disagree with those who choose to answer you. You have given that exact reaction to this very topic twice already.
And the difference between my "violent" (?) reaction and yours is...?
I seek information. You on the other hand set yourself up as a professional theologican who thinks he knows all about everything church like. Hate to break it to you, but you have no authority to speak on anything, lest of all to provide advice to me on this matter. All you have is your opinion, and that is all it is, an OPINION.
You're 100% correct. So why did you start the thread? Do you think a theologian who enjoys the Church's approbation will appear on the thread to answer your question?
Anyways, I agree with 2vermont. N.O. confessions are doubtful. If a priest with undoubtedly valid orders hears the confession, I think it's valid. The new rite of confession is butchered but it's essential form is not, which is ultimately what matters for validity (beyond matter and intention, of course).
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
A perfect act of contrition has the same effect as absolution in the confessional, but the whole point of confession is that perfect contrition is both difficult to come by, and it also can never be presumed. Perfect contrition is being sorry for your sins because of the offense levied against the Infinitely Perfect Creator, rather than fear for your own soul and the fires of Hell.
The SSPX in recent years appears to have become much less apprehensive about the new rites of ordination (another example of a clear break from the holy Archbishop) but there are definitely priests in the SSPX who have their doubts. And yes, the Church has been reduced to a remnant and there are many doubtful priests.
-
Are you sure you want it discussed? Normally when you ask for something you violently disagree with those who choose to answer you. You have given that exact reaction to this very topic twice already.
And the difference between my "violent" (?) reaction and yours is...?
I seek information. You on the other hand set yourself up as a professional theologican who thinks he knows all about everything church like. Hate to break it to you, but you have no authority to speak on anything, lest of all to provide advice to me on this matter. All you have is your opinion, and that is all it is, an OPINION.
You're 100% correct. So why did you start the thread? Do you think a theologian who enjoys the Church's approbation will appear on the thread to answer your question?
Anyways, I agree with 2vermont. N.O. confessions are doubtful. If a priest with undoubtedly valid orders hears the confession, I think it's valid. The new rite of confession is butchered but it's essential form is not, which is ultimately what matters for validity (beyond matter and intention, of course).
Yeah well all I posted in the OP was "Discuss".
So discuss. I want info. This is CathINFO after all.
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
A perfect act of contrition has the same effect as absolution in the confessional, but the whole point of confession is that perfect contrition is both difficult to come by, and it also can never be presumed. Perfect contrition is being sorry for your sins because of the offense levied against the Infinitely Perfect Creator, rather than fear for your own soul and the fires of Hell.
The SSPX in recent years appears to have become much less apprehensive about the new rites of ordination (another example of a clear break from the holy Archbishop) but there are definitely priests in the SSPX who have their doubts. And yes, the Church has been reduced to a remnant and there are many doubtful priests.
Yet Francis is still your pope right?
Hypocrisy anyone?
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
I lean SV and although not all SV's think alike on this matter, I have positive doubts about the validity of the new rite of episcopal consecrations. As a result, I have positive doubt about the validity of many newly ordained priests.
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
A perfect act of contrition has the same effect as absolution in the confessional, but the whole point of confession is that perfect contrition is both difficult to come by, and it also can never be presumed. Perfect contrition is being sorry for your sins because of the offense levied against the Infinitely Perfect Creator, rather than fear for your own soul and the fires of Hell.
The SSPX in recent years appears to have become much less apprehensive about the new rites of ordination (another example of a clear break from the holy Archbishop) but there are definitely priests in the SSPX who have their doubts. And yes, the Church has been reduced to a remnant and there are many doubtful priests.
Yet Francis is still your pope right?
Hypocrisy anyone?
???
Who said Francis is my pope?
Do you want to discuss your thread or not?
-
yeah, soulguard, I think you're mixing up posters here.
-
There is no such thing as Novus Ordo confessions, it is either confession to a catholic priest or it is not.
If you go to confession: only go to priests ordained prior to 1970 who profess the Catholic Faith to the best of your knowledge.
Or to priests ordained after 70 in the SSPX, CMRI or independent who profess the Catholic Faith.
-
There is no such thing as Novus Ordo confessions, it is either confession to a catholic priest or it is not.
If you go to confession: only go to priests ordained prior to 1970 who profess the Catholic Faith to the best of your knowledge.
Or to priests ordained after 70 in the SSPX, CMRI or independent who profess the Catholic Faith.
Too many strange things with confessions in the NO and that includes Indult and FSSP.
-
Discuss.
They are valid if ministered by a valid Priest. The essential valid form is "I absolve you of your sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen."
"Ghost" can be replaced with "Spirit" and the formula is still valid of course.
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
A perfect act of contrition has the same effect as absolution in the confessional, but the whole point of confession is that perfect contrition is both difficult to come by, and it also can never be presumed. Perfect contrition is being sorry for your sins because of the offense levied against the Infinitely Perfect Creator, rather than fear for your own soul and the fires of Hell.
The SSPX in recent years appears to have become much less apprehensive about the new rites of ordination (another example of a clear break from the holy Archbishop) but there are definitely priests in the SSPX who have their doubts. And yes, the Church has been reduced to a remnant and there are many doubtful priests.
Of course one in a state of mortal sin, who can go to Confession is obliged to do so, even if he made a perfect act of contrition after committing that sin. If he is not damned for that mortal sin he will be damned for purposely avoiding Confession if he culpably does so.
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
I lean SV and although not all SV's think alike on this matter, I have positive doubts about the validity of the new rite of episcopal consecrations. As a result, I have positive doubt about the validity of many newly ordained priests.
Doubtful clergy, like doubtful Sacraments must be considered no clergy. We can't play around with our souls. I believe officially there is no doubt that the rite of consecration of bishops is invalid though there is some doubt the ordination rite is invalid, though some try to make a case for it.
The new Church is not the Catholic Church and its clergy are not Catholic. It should be avoided entirely.
-
http://www.christorchaos.com/AtTheMercyOfTheMerciless.htm
One of the reasons that there is such utter mercilessness and madness in our world today is that the forces of Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism have made their "reconciliation" with the false premises of the modern civil state.
Catholics yet attached to the counterfeit church of conciliarism find themselves subsidizing the spiritual abortion of souls from the pulpit and in allegedly "Catholic" schools and colleges and universities and seminaries and professional schools.
Catholics attached to the counterfeit church of conciliarism have helped to subsidize the Protestant and Masonic Novus Ordo service, which is offensive to God in se and gives rise to abuses that are "unapproved" by the conciliar authorities, thereby accruing a massive international debt that is owed to God for these offenses.
Catholics attached to the counterfeit church of conciliarism have helped to subsidize the corruption of the young by "priests" and have subsidized the protection of these "priests" by chancery offices and the attorneys they have hired, only to be asked to help to subsidize the over $2 billion in payments that have had to be made to the victims of this "episcopal" and "clerical" corruption, a subject that will be revisited, if ever so briefly in an upcoming article.
Catholics attached to the counterfeit church of conciliarism have helped to subsidize various "inter-religious" prayer meetings and youth jamborees and have paid for chancery and parish officials to attend conferences to further the doctrinal and liturgical agendas of the conciliar revolution.
Catholics attached to the counterfeit church of conciliarism have helped to subsidize "papal" offenses against God by means of their "Peter's Pence" contributions, including the establishment of an "ecuŠ¼enical chapel" in the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls in Rome, Italy, where God, who hates false religions, can be offended by various blasphemies.
Every single bit of this breeds mercilessness in the world.
Catholics yet attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism have donated the monies that the lords of conciliarism have used to spit in the face of the Mother of God and of one true pope after another as they reaffirm adherents of false religions in beliefs that do not "guarantee for them the security of salvation."
They have donated the monies that have been used to incorporate pagan rituals into the context of what have been purported to be Catholic "liturgies." They have donated the monies that have been used for "workshops" and "breakout sessions" and "conferences" that have deformed the souls of priests and consecrated religious and members of the laity.
They have donated the monies that have been used to purchase textbooks full of heresy and moral relativism.
They have donated the monies that have paid the salaries of priests living lives of unrepentant sin, both natural and unnatural, as the conciliar "bishops," having lost, at least in very large measure, a sense of sin, have themselves reaffirmed those living in such states of sin.
The apostasies and blasphemies and sacrileges propagated by the counterfeit church of conciliarism have made it more possible for Catholics to become the willing slaves of the lords of Modernity's multiple naturalist lies and schemes. A respect for errors in the Order of Grace will lead to a respect for errors in the Order of Nature and, of course, vice versa.
-
:dancing-banana:
Yes, IF the priest is validly ordained and the penitent has the right disposition.
-
If the priest was validly ordained and uses the formula "I absolve you", it's valid.
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
A perfect act of contrition has the same effect as absolution in the confessional, but the whole point of confession is that perfect contrition is both difficult to come by, and it also can never be presumed. Perfect contrition is being sorry for your sins because of the offense levied against the Infinitely Perfect Creator, rather than fear for your own soul and the fires of Hell.
The SSPX in recent years appears to have become much less apprehensive about the new rites of ordination (another example of a clear break from the holy Archbishop) but there are definitely priests in the SSPX who have their doubts. And yes, the Church has been reduced to a remnant and there are many doubtful priests.
Yet Francis is still your pope right?
Hypocrisy anyone?
That position is much more understandable than your pseudo-sede position in which you recognize the NO ordinations & other sacraments, and the NO "mass" as valid, and giving serious thought about "pilgrimaging" to an NO monastery and perhaps even being "ordained" in the NO.
So if you want to talk about inconsistencies...
Your positions are so inconsistent that they indicate that you have a lot to thoroughly learn in terms of basics before anything the least bit advanced.
-
Doubtful.
If an act of contrition is enough to place someone into a state of grace, then why would it not have the same effect if made before a person who was ordained?
I thought the SSPX considered the new rites as valid? or do you all reject everything from the post conciliar popes? Because if you do, then the church was reduced to a remnant and most clergy are imposters wearing a priest costume.
A perfect act of contrition has the same effect as absolution in the confessional, but the whole point of confession is that perfect contrition is both difficult to come by, and it also can never be presumed. Perfect contrition is being sorry for your sins because of the offense levied against the Infinitely Perfect Creator, rather than fear for your own soul and the fires of Hell.
The SSPX in recent years appears to have become much less apprehensive about the new rites of ordination (another example of a clear break from the holy Archbishop) but there are definitely priests in the SSPX who have their doubts. And yes, the Church has been reduced to a remnant and there are many doubtful priests.
I have always been taught that the perfect act of contrition w/o confession was only good when priest is unavailable and there's a firm resolve to confess the sin as soon as a priest is available.
I can see some mental gymnastics to say that the sins of a sincere Catholic are forgiven by an NO "priests" invalidly ordained. But the stakes are eternal hell-fire, so I won't be gambling.
-
Nope...confessions by Novus Ordo "priests" invalid, null and void.
Read Apostolicae Curae by Pope Leo XIII.
Sums it up in a nutshell.
33. With this inherent defect of "form" is joined the defect of "intention" which is equally essential to the Sacrament. 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. On the other hand, if the rite be changed, with the manifest intention of introducing another rite not approved by the Church and of rejecting what the Church does, and what, by the institution of Christ, belongs to the nature of the Sacrament, then it is clear that not only is the necessary intention wanting to the Sacrament, but that the intention is adverse to and destructive of the Sacrament.
-
Nope...confessions by Novus Ordo "priests" invalid, null and void.
Read Apostolicae Curae by Pope Leo XIII.
Sums it up in a nutshell.
33. With this inherent defect of "form" is joined the defect of "intention" which is equally essential to the Sacrament. 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. On the other hand, if the rite be changed, with the manifest intention of introducing another rite not approved by the Church and of rejecting what the Church does, and what, by the institution of Christ, belongs to the nature of the Sacrament, then it is clear that not only is the necessary intention wanting to the Sacrament, but that the intention is adverse to and destructive of the Sacrament.
This supposes that the church as it was before vatican 2 possessed a world view in which intention was safe to presume for the average doctrinally sound priest. But the early church did not have the sober world view of tridentine style Catholicism, because that was a product of a long evolution of doctrine and discipline. The world view in the beginning was very basic and emotion driven, for the investigations into theology from the likes of St Thomas had not been done. It would have been as doctrinally basic as the novus ordo, and hence the world view within the church can change, if it is still the same church. Vatican 2 was a step backwards to the beginning, but because tradition had been accepted for so long, it was a conscious revolution in world view, and was motivated by desire for apostasy from the faith. If the world view can change then the intention of the novus ordo suffices for the sacraments.
-
I have doubts about the new rites of ordination and consecration so I made sure, when I came to tradition, to make a general confession of all my past sins to a traditional priest, including those I already confessed to Novus Ordo priests. Some people (like Soulguard, I believe) think that Novus Ordo priests are true priests. If they are right then I believe that Novus Ordo confessions would be valid although I would still counsel against confessing to Novus Ordo priests (except in danger of death) because they are usually heretics and may give bad advice in the confessional.
-
I have doubts about the new rites of ordination and consecration so I made sure, when I came to tradition, to make a general confession of all my past sins to a traditional priest, including those I already confessed to Novus Ordo priests. Some people (like Soulguard, I believe) think that Novus Ordo priests are true priests. If they are right then I believe that Novus Ordo confessions would be valid although I would still counsel against confessing to Novus Ordo priests (except in danger of death) because they are usually heretics and may give bad advice in the confessional.
Well if you want advice, it must come from doctrine in order to be good advice.
If the novus ordo priests have basic doctrine, without any depth, they will not know how to, and not even want to, give advice to penitents. This is the reason why so many novus ordo priests are merely empty souls, devoid of doctrine, with a simple emotional attachment to their fellow man being the reason they are priests. They think they do some good for the community, but they in fact only minister to their thirst for entertainment and distraction from worry, and do not give them the spiritual food of doctrine necessary for them to order their lives in such a way as to become worthy of being saved.
-
It would depend entirely on if the NO priest's orders were valid or not.
While the NO absolution prayer has been changed, all that is required for a valid absolution is for a priest to say "I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost (or Holy Spirit)." As far as I know, NO Confession does contain that essential element. So, the only question would be whether the priest is validly ordained.
Of course, there is the question of intent on the part of the NO priest, but that would vary from person to person.