Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Cantarella

Quote from: Ambrose

Quote from: Cantarella

Following the sedevacantist logic, all the sacraments dispensed by Post-Vatican 2 clergy (Novus Ordo & Traditional) would be invalid.

How can they be valid if they are dispensed by priests that are themselves invalid given that they were ordained by bishops that were appointed by anti-Popes, and therefore, also invalid?

Are the learned and well versed sedevacantists really aware of the possible implications of their claim? This is not to be taken lightly. Millions of people baptized in the Novus Ordo would not even be validly baptized. Millions of Catholics even in the traditional world would not be really eating Jesus in the Sacrifice of the Mass because these masses would also be invalid, celebrated by invalid priests appointed by invalid bishops appointed by false popes . If this is not so, and the sedevacantist claims that this is a only a harmless personal opinion, then the sedevacantist is clearly ignorant of the Catholic dogma of Apostolic Succession and its necessity for valid dispensation of Sacraments.

 

You should read our claims carefully rather than attribute things to us.

This is the opportunity to clarify.

Catholics know that there is a hierarchical order to everything, so the question is:

Is a cardinal/bishop/priest valid even when he has been appointed by an anti-pope?.

Yes / No

Please support the claim.

Are you referring to the validity of orders or to their lawfulness of their appointment?

Please discuss both, for the edification of the discussion

Regarding holy orders:  so long as a bishop who himself has valid orders uses the correct matter, form and intent, the orders of the man being ordained will always be valid.  This is true for those inside the Church and out.

Regarding the lawfulness of the mission (for a bishop), it must have the express or tacit will of the pope.