Well actually I have been talking to someone about that :reporter: , would it be licit for the sake of scrupulous souls to re-consecrate even though you have certainty of them being valid. I kind of know the question to that already because I had previously answered that with Apostolicae Curae of Leo XIII saying that it was never the practice of the Church to re-ordain valid priest's. Kind of like how the CMRI got conditional re-ordination of their priest from their Old Catholic line even though it was certain that they were valid before. Everyone knows that they did it for the sake of the faithful who were concerned.
I disagree. Some people can never be placated and seem to wish to remain obdurate in their Pharisaical scandal.
For example you have the position of the SSPV that says any +Thuc line Bishop incurs the excommunication of +Thuc for consecrating several unworthy men. There is no doubt that he was actually excommunicated by the Canons and decrees of the Church for consecrating unworthy uncanonically fit men. This is why the SSPV condemns ALL of those that are ordained through +Thuc.
The SSPV is an example of what I've just said. This arguments ignores the fact that every traditionalist group incurs the excommunication for consecrating without papal mandate, if one goes by the text of the Sacred Canons. The SSPV, or anyone else, has no authority to say who is fit or who is unfit, except the personal testimony regarding those men whom these groups have trained themselves. If they have actual proof that someone out there is completely unfit, then they are obliged to present it objectively.
Even if they somehow resurrected Mendez and those whom the SSPV treats as adversaries would have recourse to him for Sacred Orders, they would still find some excuse to condemn them and to advertise themselves as the one and only place to find the Church.
I am wondering but what justification does the CMRI have for forming a new Catholic order when there is no Pope? Why not just become religious of a traditional order? I am just wondering it kind of does not make sense for me. What is the whole point, this is another argument that SSPV makes although it is a weaker argument. The main point they will make is that by not destroying ALL TIES with Schukardt they join in his schism. Even if they have made an abjuration of error, made a public profession of faith etc... It still does not make sense why you would still use the same name for the congregation that started out with a schismatic (even if you did it in good faith).
What justification does anyone have of what they are doing as traditionalists? I mean, if you're going to ask these sorts of questions you have to be fair about it and not just target the CMRI.
This is parroting the same propaganda that Bp. Sanborn has been telling everyone, despite the fact that he himself has the same Canonical predicament as an
episcopus vagus (having been ordained and consecrated without Apostolic mandate). What authority is Bp. Sanborn to tell the CMRI what they should do? He doesn't even try to make peace with the CMRI.
Why does not Bp. Sanborn himself establish these ancient Orders if he is so solicitous for the Religious life? Maybe it's "corporate jealousy" or something worse that motivates his vitriol against the CMRI?
Furthermore, it would be even more problematic to re-establish an already existent Order or restore an abandoned one because it would be fully contrary to the norms of the Sacred Canons and the Rules and constitutions of the Order in question. If people are complaining that they have established something new, then they will also complain that they have established something already existing or reviving something gone with absolutely no ties or connections historically, canonically, or otherwise.
It is far more prudent to establish a new
Institute rather than attempt to establish or restore an old Order.
It would really be recommendable if we REALLY believed in the principle of epikea (the same goes with the SSPX by the way, not picking on anyone particularly) to create nothing new and to stick to the old and established religious orders. Is it maybe that by forming new religious orders, you think that the older religious orders are insufficient for what you are trying to accomplish in the modern apostasy?
The principle of epikeia has in mind the salvation of souls, which, together with the glory of God, is the greater good. There is no authority to tell any group how exactly to do this (at the logistical, practical level) as long as they observe as much as they can the norms of the Sacred Canons.
I believe that it would be more problematic, as I've written above, to have something already existing or something restored only to meet with criticism that there is no logical, historical or canonical connection with the Order in question. Archbishop Lefebvre knew this instinctively and this is why he did not attempt to revive the Holy Ghost Fathers, of whom he was General-Superior. He had reached to various Religious and help them established new convents, monasteries, chapels, &c., but these Religious has already been professed in their respective Orders when they approached Archbp. Lefebvre. It was not something "
ex nihilo."
It kind of looks like with me as a double standard and definitely it is imprudent. In both cases you have perverts that founded a religious order, whether they intended to have a good start and later succuмbed to their lust, this does not make a difference. Even if the constitution is completely and totally different then the initial, even if they repudiate their founder. Why would anyone in their right mind not change the name, what is so hard about that? Does it have to do with some legal fees :confused1:? There has never ever been in the history of the Church something that has been the work of the Church that started with such bad foundations :reading:.
No, the double standard is selectively raising such questions in regard with particular groups or individual and not asking them in regard to
everyone. Besides, the CMRI had already repudiated Schuckhardt. However, he seems to be a convenient propaganda tool for those who have an agenda against the CMRI, as the SSPV and Bp. Sanborn illustrate.
This is just the "politics" of traddieland, and little to do with facts (like the fact that Schuckhardt was "repudiated" when Fr. Chicone kicked him out) and everything to do with groups and individuals competing for who is to be regarded as the paragon of traditionalism ("Come to us," they say, "for we never had any perverts nor had them begin what we are doing").
It is as I have written elsewhere:
I understood that the CMRI Priests were conditionally Ordained?
Yes, this is true: those who were ordained by Schuckhardt submitted to conditional Ordination after he was out of the picture, and those who were yet to be ordained at that time had recourse to traditionalist Bishops for Sacred Orders. The objection raised on the part of SSPV and other adversaries of the CMRI regarding Schuckhardt is therefore moot, but that has not stopped them from bringing this up time and time again.
However, it is difficult for me to preach the principle of minimalist survival with respect to the sacraments (epikea), when you have everyone stepping outside the bounds of tradition doing their own thing.
No one has asked you to preach anything. You are just a layman with no theological training, just as I am. It seems that "the principle of minimalist survival" is something that is subjective and can be construed to mean anything in any context. I do not believe that the CMRI adhere to "the principle of minimalist survival" insofar as the endeavor to save souls is concerned. In fact, I don't know who else would get out of their way to visit the infirm who live hours from the Priest, or provide the Sacraments for home-bound or far-off people like the CMRI Fathers do.
Now the question of encouraging contemplative vocations would be a valid question, but it is not necessarily related to this issue. If something were wrong with the CMRI alone, then you would have Bps. Sanborn and Dolan with flourishing "good 'ol time" Orders by now.
Topic: Continuing the line of validly ordained priests (Read 2931 times)