Author Topic: Claim - "SSPX are in schism, confessions invalid" (Read 4226 times)

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #30 on:** February 03, 2023, 10:24:31 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont on February 03, 2023, 08:33:04 PM

Really? Is jurisdiction considered matter in the Sacrament of Confession? I don't think the two are analogous at all.

I thought sacramental validity is based on form, matter and intention. What part does jurisdiction fall under?

If Orthodox priests provide valid absolutions because they are true priests and they aren't even in the Church, then why does the validity of a Roman Catholic priest's absolution change if he absolves in a different state? Again, to me this sounds more like an issue of liciety not validity.

Does someone have church teaching on what makes the Sacrament of Confession valid?

.
The analogy was to say that the requirement for jurisdiction is as obvious, plain, settled, and elementary a doctrine as is the requirement for water in the sacrament of baptism.
.
The above material from Trent should satisfy any doubts.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #31 on:** February 03, 2023, 11:37:15 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan on February 03, 2023, 05:26:22 PM

I read his posts, not sure what the miscommunication is. Absolution offered without jurisdiction is invalid-- this is about as controversial as saying baptism done with kool-aid is invalid.
.
If a priest doesn't have jurisdiction or doesn't attract a supply of it for some reason, then his absolutions are invalid.
.

I was giving a example where the Church would supply due to common error. Also, various other states of necessity would have the Church supply. But there has to be some extraordinary scenario, like necessity or common error. If a boat was wrecked on a deserted island, and one of the passengers were a priest outside his normaly jursidiction, the Church would supply for the hearing of Confessions there. What's intended by the jurisdiction requirement is the necessity of right order during normal situation. If I were a priest in the 1940s and travelled to a foreign country, I couldn't just start hearing confessions. But any kind of unusual or abnormal circuмstance, provideed there's no schismatic intent, and the Church always supplies the necessary jurisdiction for the good of souls.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #32 on:** February 03, 2023, 11:42:04 PM »

Quote from: 2Vermont on February 03, 2023, 08:33:04 PM

Really? Is jurisdiction considered matter in the Sacrament of Confession? I don't think the two are analogous at all.

It's not JUST a Sacrament, but is an extension of the power of the keys granted to St. Peter and the Papacy, the power of binding and loosng. No, jurisdiction is no the matter of the Sacrament, but is nevertheless required for valid exercise of the power of the keys. We need not be concerned about jurisdicton these days, though, as the heretics have infiltrated, taken over, and obstructed the normal channels of ordinary jurisdiction.

Christ is the source of all jurisdiction, and He can and does supply it when necessary outside the normal channels, i.e. through the Pope then through the bishops. Who is daft eough to think that the confessions heard by a St. Athanasius as he travelled into Arian territory did not receive the necessry supplied jursidiction?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #33 on:** February 03, 2023, 11:43:56 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan on February 03, 2023, 10:16:21 PM

Session 14, 7 of Trent:

.
This is but one example of the Church's teaching on the matter, although probably the most definitive. As Trent itself points out, this has always been the mind of the Church; it is neither an obscure nor contentious doctrine. I'm not sure why it's eluded you, 2Vermont, but be assured it is the truth.
.

Yes, that statement from Trent explains it very well. While there's a Sacrament that takes place, there's also a judgment of the Church regarding who should receive the Sacrament and who shouldn't, the binding and loosing.

Stubborn · « **Reply #34 on:** February 04, 2023, 05:55:40 AM »

Quote from: DigitalLogos on February 02, 2023, 04:01:48 PM

I have a guy on Twitter arguing that confessions with SSPX priests are "invalid" because they are in schism.

https://twitter.com/DigitalLog0s/status/1620624364059398144?t=rnCC_JTfbKU5qW-xYyLd_g&s=19

Aside from the other points refuting that guy, even (valid) priests who are in schism can absolve sins in an emergency. Whatever the confused guy thinks, since V2 we've been in emergency times.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Claim - "SSPX are in schism, confessions invalid" (Read 4226 times)

Mithrandylan

Re: Claim - "SSPX are in schism, confessions invalid"

Ladislaus

Re: Claim - "SSPX are in schism, confessions invalid"

Ladislaus

Re: Claim - "SSPX are in schism, confessions invalid"

Ladislaus

Re: Claim - "SSPX are in schism, confessions invalid"

Stubborn

Re: Claim - "SSPX are in schism, confessions invalid"