Author Topic: The SSPX and the new rite of ordination. (Read 4111 times)

Matto · « **on:** March 07, 2013, 04:59:51 PM »

My question is this. What is the official position of the SSPX on the validity of the New rites of ordination and consecration. Do they hold that they are always valid, never valid, or sometimes valid. I know the SSPX considers the new rite of Confirnmation to be suspect, which is why she gives conditional re-Confirmations. Does she also conditionally re-Ordain those priests who come to her from the Novus Ordo?

I think that the SSPX holds that the new rites are sometimes valid, depending on the intentions of the minister. Is this true?

Matto · « **Reply #1 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:08:56 PM »

Thank you.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #2 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:18:26 PM »

Quote from: Thomas More

Quote from: Matto
My question is this. What is the official position of the SSPX on the validity of the New rites of ordination and consecration. Do they hold that they are always valid, never valid, or sometimes valid. I know the SSPX considers the new rite of Confirnmation to be suspect, which is why she gives conditional re-Confirmations. Does she also conditionally re-Ordain those priests who come to her from the Novus Ordo?

I think that the SSPX holds that the new rites are sometimes valid, depending on the intentions of the minister. Is this true?

The SSPX commonly allows priests into their Society from the Novus ordo without conditional ordination. This obviously says they believe the new rite of ordination is valid.

This used to not be the case. Archbishop Lefebvre conditionally re-ordained many who had been ordained in the New Rite.

Matto · « **Reply #3 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:24:12 PM »

I don't know that this is true, but I heard that once and once only, Archbishop Lefebvre used the new Rite of Ordination to ordain a priest. I forget the priest's name.

Quo Vadis Petre · « **Reply #4 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:32:16 PM »

I think that it were true, the post-conciliar press would jump on that and declare in triumph about how Archbishop Lefebvre was inconsistent in not saying the Novus Ordo Missae, yet using the Novus Ordo ordination rite!! As it is, I only know one Novus Ordo website, which lifted that accusation from a group of sedes, the jloughnan one.

Matto · « **Reply #5 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:33:57 PM »

Quote from: Quo Vadis Petre

I think that it were true, the post-conciliar press would jump on that and declare in triumph about how Archbishop Lefebvre was inconsistent

It was a rumor, so it may be false.

I apologize now for saying it. I shouldn't have said on a public forum what I am not sure to be true.

Quo Vadis Petre · « **Reply #6 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:34:50 PM »

Quote from: Matto

Quote from: Quo Vadis Petre
I think that it were true, the post-conciliar press would jump on that and declare in triumph about how Archbishop Lefebvre was inconsistent

It was a rumor, so it may be false.

Maybe, but the anti-SSPX site cited it as fact.

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #7 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:48:43 PM »

Quote from: Matto

I don't know that this is true, but I heard that once and once only, Archbishop Lefebvre used the new Rite of Ordination to ordain a priest. I forget the priest's name.

Considering the fact that the Archbishop thought the New Rite of Ordination is at least questionable, I doubt whoever stated that rumor is correct.

Matto · « **Reply #8 on:** March 07, 2013, 05:52:52 PM »

Quote from: ServusSpiritusSancti

Considering the fact that the Archbishop thought the New Rite of Ordination is at least questionable . . .

Does this mean that the SSPX has changed its position on the new Rite of Ordination? Did they used to hold it questionable and conditionally re-ordain, but now they hold it valid and no longer re-ordain?

If there was a change in position, does anyone know when this change occurred?

In case anyone is interested, I don't have an opinion as to whether the New Rites are valid. The question is beyond me and I don't know the answer either way.

Nishant · « **Reply #9 on:** March 07, 2013, 06:25:09 PM »

Fr. Peter Scott has pointed out that a positive doubt about the per se validity of the 1968 form of ordination as promulgated does not exist, for the strictly essential part of the form is practically identical to that defined by Pope Pius XII in 1947. It may be invalid in specific cases, he said, owing to defect of intention or poor vernacular translation.

The case of episcopal consecration is slightly more nuanced. In this case Fr. Pierre Marie published a study, which Fr. Scott also referenced in his work, which establishes more or less the same (the per se validity) based on a slightly more complicated argument, namely, that the new rite of consecration is substantially similar to that contained in a third century text of St. Hippolytus called Apostolic Tradition which had been used in Eastern rites, specifically the Coptic and West Syrian.

Both works are an impressive and significant study of the question, and distinguish well something that laymen in particular often forget, the distinction between positive and negative doubt.

Matto · « **Reply #10 on:** March 07, 2013, 06:36:07 PM »

Thank you Nishant. I found this.

Matto · « **Reply #11 on:** March 07, 2013, 07:23:10 PM »

The article I linked to says that when a Novus Ordo priest joins the SSPX, they investigate the priest's ordination and sometimes decide to conditionally re-ordain and sometimes decide not to based on what they find in the investigation.

TKGS · « **Reply #12 on:** March 08, 2013, 06:47:31 AM »

I don't think the SSPX ever had an "official position" on the matter in terms of being able to point to a particular docuмent and identifying a specific determination on the matter from the point of view of the SSPX.

Some priests said that Novus Ordo ordinations (and consecrations) were invalid while other said they could be questionable while still others claimed that they were valid. If one searches articles of The Angelus one can find articles that defend various positions on the matter.

However, by their actions over the years, it is now clearly evident that the SSPX is convinced of the validity of all Novus Ordo sacraments but is willing to conditionally repeat any of them if the individual who received the sacrament has personal doubts about the matter.

So the "official position" of the SSPX today seems to be that Novus Ordo ordinations are valid but if you prefer that you had received the traditional sacrament, the SSPX is willing to confer it conditionally.

Stubborn · « **Reply #13 on:** March 08, 2013, 06:55:00 AM »

Quote from: Matto

Thank you Nishant. I found this.

Good find!

Stubborn · « **Reply #14 on:** March 08, 2013, 07:15:31 AM »

Quote from: TKGS

I don't think the SSPX ever had an "official position" on the matter in terms of being able to point to a particular docuмent and identifying a specific determination on the matter from the point of view of the SSPX.

Some priests said that Novus Ordo ordinations (and consecrations) were invalid while other said they could be questionable while still others claimed that they were valid. If one searches articles of The Angelus one can find articles that defend various positions on the matter.

However, by their actions over the years, it is now clearly evident that the SSPX is convinced of the validity of all Novus Ordo sacraments but is willing to conditionally repeat any of them if the individual who received the sacrament has personal doubts about the matter.

So the "official position" of the SSPX today seems to be that Novus Ordo ordinations are valid but if you prefer that you had received the traditional sacrament, the SSPX is willing to confer it conditionally.

Yes, I think you are right - - back in late 70s early 80s, one SSPX priest told us that SSPX considered each case on a case by case basis, but even back then there was no official position that I can remember. Then again, there really was no reason to question the validity for priests ordained only 10 - 15 years prior to that time either.

I want to say that priests ordained in the new rite who left the NO for the SSPX were usually conditionally re-ordained, but I personally cannot remember any time that actually ever happened - seems like it did tho.