.



Are you sure there isn't some mistake here? This sounds like a story that would result from something like, his parishioners are modernists so they wear jeans to Mass on Sunday, which is a modernist practice, and he tried to explain this to them, and they maliciously distorted his words to mean that wearing jeans anywhere, any time is modernist, and that's what got repeated to you.

Did you actually hear him say this with your own ears, and in those terms? It's pretty hard for me to imagine any traditional priest saying exactly what you described.

I will add to that that I did follow up in an email with Fr. Ernesto Cardozo about the blue jean mess just to see if that was universal among all the priests in Brazil. Fr. Cardozo more or less said it was nonsense and that if denin makes you a modernist because it is a modernist material than what do they think polyester blends are!

.

You know, the more I think about it, the more this video seems to me to imply the opposite of what is being claimed here.

Fr. Chazal is asked if Vigano was re-concsecrated, and he says "the necessary has been done". Well, what does the resistance think is necessary in every case of modernist holy orders? They think an investigation is necessary; they do NOT think re-ordination/consecration is always necessary. This was stated emphatically by Bp. Thomas Aquinas, as quoted earlier in this thread. So it makes more sense to take Fr. Chazal's words to mean, "The necessary has been done, [which is to investigate the validity of Vigano's holy orders, which has been done]"

Furthermore, the refusal to answer implies that Vigano was NOT re-consecrated. Think about it. Vigano is a diplomat, and as such he doesn't want to offend trads. Being consecrated sub-conditione wouldn't offend anyone. The sedevacantists would think this was necessary anyway, and the non-sedevacantists could just be told, "We figured his validity was a bit shaky, so we did it again just in case," as has been done with numerous priests in the SSPX who came in from the Novus Ordo. No one would have any objection that I can think of. Even the conservative Novus Ordos wouldn't care all that much either; they know and care very little about things like repetition of sacraments that imprint a character, or the validity of holy orders.

Not one person would object to Vigano receiving condition consecration.

On the other hand, sedevacantists would have a major problem if Vigano had declined to receive conditional consecration, and that seems to be the position Vigano has been wooing recently. So it seems Vigano is trying not to get on that group's bad side by saying he won't be re-consecrated.

What other possible reason could there be keep the re-consecration secret? To avoid putting a target on Vigano's back? Vigano has been putting targets on his own back for the past five years. He obviously isn't worried about that.

The only explanation of this that makes any sense to me is that there was no re-consecration.

Could it affect his new seminary somehow?  Because I keep going back to...why did he go public with that first?

.

I strongly agree with every word of this.

I just don't see it. Why would those people care that much if he got consecrated again, if they didn't think it was necessary? Worst case scenario, they would say he received a sacrament that was unnecessary or invalid, and that it was sacrilegious (though I doubt most conservative Novus Ordos have any concept of such things). But as far as discouraging new-rite priests from joining ... why would it? It certainly wouldn't take away his power to ordain priests, even if it was unnecessary. Whatever sin might be involved in an invalid conditional consecration would be only on his conscience in the worst case scenario. At most they might think it was a bit scrupulous. None of this amounts to an adequate reason for keeping the conditional consecration secret, if it did happen.

What about his "Brother Bishops"?