Author Topic: What Has Happened to the Catholic Church (Read 10538 times)

MyrnaM · « **Reply #15 on:** June 24, 2011, 04:20:55 PM »

Yes, Spiritus he did seem a bit biased, we read wiki with one eye brow raised.

Getting back to priest then Bishop, I believe Bishop Francis Schuckardt was a priest for only moments before he was ordained Bishop. Not sure but I remember hearing that about the consecration. It all happened together somehow.

MyrnaM · « **Reply #16 on:** June 24, 2011, 06:08:52 PM »

Thanks for the information of how it was in normal times of the Church; by normal I mean not in the age of the great apostasy.

I am not qualified to argue or debate what you posted, and it really doesn't effect me personally since as I mentioned to Spiritus, CMRI's current Bishop was elevated to the episcopate in Mexico by Moises Carmona.

Looks like IF you are correct, God corrected the situation at CMRI. Either way He continues to bless us as we try to live our Faith.

So where do you go for the Sacraments, Confession, reception of the Eucharist, Mass all those treasures of the Church?

ServusSpiritusSancti · « **Reply #17 on:** June 24, 2011, 08:14:01 PM »

I'm guessing he's a home-aloner. He talks down about the CMRI and SSPX, and being a sede I know he doesn't attend the FSSP. After reading some of his posts, it appears Hermenegild is a home-aloner.

Hobbledehoy · « **Reply #18 on:** June 24, 2011, 10:00:56 PM »

Hermenegild,

What exactly is your position regarding the present-day state of affairs pertaining to the Church?

You pose interesting questions, but they seem to be negative (in the strict sense of the word, not in the sense of necessarily entailing an adverse emotive connotation). You remark about what shouldn't have been done in the past (by this individual, or this organization), but you don't say what should be done in the present.

I would be interested to read your personal views in positive (in the strict sense of the word, not in the sense of necessarily entailing an agreeable emotive connotation) statements.

Whensoever you would vouchsafe me (and the other posters here) this favor, I would be most appreciative.

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #19 on:** June 25, 2011, 01:31:12 AM »

Quote from: s2srea

How then do we explain Christ in his consecration of the Apostles without a formal elevation to the priesthood first?

If I remember correctly the Presbyterate as being completely distinct from the Episcopacy came somewhat later in the history of the Church.

The Apostles were ordained and consecrated to the fullest extent of the priesthood. There is no absolute necessity for the Church to make it two distinct ceremonies.

But I should have rather shut my mouth, since the matter whether the Episcopacy is a distinct Ordo is disputed.

Quote from: St. Thomas Aquinas, Tertia Pars, Supp. Q. 40 a. 5

One Order does not depend on a preceding order as regards the validity of the sacrament. But the episcopal power depends on the priestly power, since no one can receive the episcopal power unless he have previously the priestly power. Therefore the episcopate is not an Order.
[...]
I answer that, Order may be understood in two ways. In one way as a sacrament, and thus, as
already stated (Q[37], AA[2],4), every Order is directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist. Wherefore since the bishop has not a higher power than the priest, in this respect the Episcopate is not an Order.
In another way Order may be considered as an office in relation to certain sacred actions: and thus since in hierarchical actions a bishop has in relation to the mystical body a higher power than the priest, the episcopate is an Order. [...]
Reply to Objection 2: Order considered as a sacrament which imprints a character is specially directed to the sacrament of the Eucharist, in which Christ Himself is contained, because by a character we are made like to Christ Himself [*Cf. TP, Q[63], A[3]]. Hence although at his promotion a bishop receives a spiritual power in respect of certain sacraments, this power nevertheless has not the nature of a character. For this reason the episcopate is not an Order, in the sense in which an Order is a sacrament.

Ludwig Ott says that it is a theologically certain that the Episcopacy is a sacrament, especially after Pius XII.´ Sacramentum Ordinis. In the V2-Church, this was also made especially clear.