Fr Hesse talks about this topic in this conference. Im sorry I cannot tell you at which minute mark. Somewhere in the first half I think. 

to Frank and Yeti.

1. where in video does Fr. Hesse say this? That a man cannot be a priest without being a deacon first?

2. Yeti, where does Saint Thomas Aquinas say a priest cannot become a priest without being a deacon first? And, Yeti, where is this listed in the docuмent you sent on Pope Pius XII?

I am really wanting to know what they said.

Thanks a million!

Can a man become a Priest without being a Deacon? Or, can a Bishop become a Priest without being Ordained a Priest first? Someone said Saint Thomas Aquinas had an answer to this? Or, maybe another reference?


What about the Thuc-line? Were they Deacons before they were Ordained? And, by who?

Thanks.

A priest can be validly ordained without being a deacon beforehand, though it's an irregular situation. It's called per saltum.

A bishop must be a valid priest beforehand since being a bishop is achieving the fullness of the priesthood.

The Thuc-line through +des Lauriers and +Carmona have no issues with ordinations to my knowledge. Priests ordained through those two branches tend to receive proper seminary training and receive all minor and major orders on the path to the priesthood. The other branches of the Thuc-line are more of a gamble.

I appreciate all the comments but without any docuмentation what is to be believed?

Believe what you are told by these knowledgeable posters, or Google it up yourself.  It's certain that me can be ordained validly to the priesthood without prior reception of the diaconate.  St. Thomas would not be definitive on this matter anyway.

As for episcopal consecration, I believe that it's mostly due to the way the essential form of the Latin Rite is worded.  I suspect that episcopal consecration COULD be conferred directly if the form were different, or if one of the Eastern Rite forms were used (though I haven't studied these).

It is not certain that a man must be ordained a priest before being consecrated a bishop.  There are many theologians who have taught that consecration "per saltum" is valid.

The matter has not been fully decided by the Church.

Again, where's the beef?

Where is the Docuмentation supporting your claims?

Can a man become a Priest without being a Deacon? Or, can a Bishop become a Priest without being Ordained a Priest first? Someone said Saint Thomas Aquinas had an answer to this? Or, maybe another reference?


What about the Thuc-line? Were they Deacons before they were Ordained? And, by who?

Thanks.

I have actually had this almost exact conversation with one of my novus ordo brothers recently.

I think that this is the Saint Thomas Aquinas Reference you are looking for from the Summa Theologica:

It is not necessary for the higher orders that one should have received the minor orders, because their respective powers are distinct, and one, considered in its essentials, does not require another in the same subject. Hence even in the early Church some were ordained priests without having previously received the lower orders and yet they could do all that the lower orders could, because the lower power is comprised in the higher, even as sense in understanding, and dukedom in kingdom. Afterwards, however, it was decided by the legislation of the Church that no one should present himself to the higher orders who had not previously humbled himself in the lower offices. And hence it is that according to the Canons (Decretals) those who are ordained without receiving a preceding order are not reordained, but receive what was lacking to them of the preceding order."

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.IIISup.Q35.A5

From what I understand...  Each of the major orders was always required in sequence and Saint Thomas is saying that eventually the Church made the minor orders a rule first even though not necessary for validity.