Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Dolan v. Sanborn - Bp. Sanborn replies  (Read 34443 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Dolan v. Sanborn - Bp. Sanborn replies
« Reply #160 on: January 11, 2022, 02:09:41 PM »
I don't have a dog in the fight, but personally I'm very much NOT A FAN of Bp. Dolan, of "Dolan/Cekada" fame. NOTHING I have ever heard about that group (and I've heard quite a bit!) has piqued my interest in a good way.

As a matter of fact, everything I've heard about the Dolan/Cekada milieu made me glad I live FAR, FAR away from Cincinnati, OH.

ESPECIALLY their schismatic "una cuм" novelty, which has no theological basis whatsoever. That scam is an obvious ploy to eliminate the competition.
I have been to SGG twice and was very pleased with Bishop Dolan's fine sermons.  My father accompanied me once and he liked Bishop Dolan very much.  While he could still speak, my father said of Francis "that man's no pope".  That was just a gut-level sentiment with no sophisticated theology behind it, my father's faith was a simple, traditional one, and he just told it like he saw it.

Offline gladius_veritatis

  • Supporter
Re: Dolan v. Sanborn - Bp. Sanborn replies
« Reply #161 on: January 11, 2022, 04:53:59 PM »
Bp. Dolan doesn't know whether it happened or not. I've asked him. I think either his eyes were closed or he was looking down or something.

This could be read to mean that DD's eyes were closed or down when you asked him.  Oddly enough, that sounds possible as his eyes are a dead giveaway that something is amiss.


Offline gladius_veritatis

  • Supporter
Re: Dolan v. Sanborn - Bp. Sanborn replies
« Reply #162 on: January 11, 2022, 04:57:20 PM »
I'm pretty doubtful this even happened.

Again, so many priests watching such an important ceremony, and not one of them claims to have seen Abp. Lefebvre impose only one hand.

So, how do you explain that the issue was ever raised at all?  SOMEONE claimed SOMETHING at SOME POINT, no?

Offline Yeti

  • Supporter
Re: Dolan v. Sanborn - Bp. Sanborn replies
« Reply #163 on: January 11, 2022, 05:03:28 PM »
This could be read to mean that DD's eyes were closed or down when you asked him.  Oddly enough, that sounds possible as his eyes are a dead giveaway that something is amiss.
No, what I meant was that I think his eyes were closed or his head was down at this moment of the ordination ceremony, not when he was speaking to me. Regardless, he didn't see whether one hand was imposed on him or two.

Offline gladius_veritatis

  • Supporter
Re: Dolan v. Sanborn - Bp. Sanborn replies
« Reply #164 on: January 11, 2022, 05:06:01 PM »
As I said, the Eastern Rite uses one hand for ordination, and the Roman Rite did as well ... which clearly indicates that two hands is not essential for the validity of ordination to the priesthood.

A gross oversimplification of the issue.  Please see B.d.V's reply.