Author Topic: Adult Confirmation Class in Novus Ordo Church (Read 12147 times)

Matto · « **Reply #30 on:** February 28, 2014, 05:41:27 PM »

I am not an expert on this matter. Here is a defense of the Thuc ordinations and consecration. It is long but I am posting it for anyone who is interested. This address was given at a CMRI conference.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/embed/iLJIqLd5Gh8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen[/youtube]

AgnesRoma · « **Reply #31 on:** February 28, 2014, 05:44:38 PM »

if we can go to take class and attend Mass at "Our Lady Help of Christian" in Garden Grove , that is best for us. we have attended Mngr Perez Wednesday night class for a while, may be half year. I am contacted OLHC, and they said they will get back with me.
we have not really left OLHC , however, we are church hopper. we just go to different churches, time to time, OLHC is one of our church. thanks for information.

PG · « **Reply #32 on:** February 28, 2014, 05:53:33 PM »

Francis - For the longest time I too hadn't heard about this. I had to become my own church historian and canon lawyer. I relied on the word of those who point the finger at the idea of judging the pope and not at the idea of committing potential sacrilege for about a year before stumbling upon this docuмent.

PG · « **Reply #33 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:03:33 PM »

Matto - cmon, this isn't fair

- videos are so much easier than books.

Matto · « **Reply #34 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:05:00 PM »

Quote from: + PG +

Matto - cmon, this isn't fair - videos are so much easier than books.

Sorry for taking this thread off course.

PG · « **Reply #35 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:14:25 PM »

Matto - I sense no dirty tactics with you.

Neil Obstat - you are the only one looking suspicious of disinformation by posting an entire page's worth of quotes and opinion in order to leave my post in the past. And, nobody wants to have to click through 20 pages of discussion in order to learn something. Surely, we don't all have high speed internet.

TKGS · « **Reply #36 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:28:52 PM »

Quote from: + PG +

(Msgr. Perez and company along with CMRI have doubtful sacraments).

There is no doubt of the validity of CMRI sacraments. However, if you have evidence that they are not, please share it, otherwise your comments are pure calumny. Sacraments are presumed to be valid unless there is positive evidence that they may be invalid, not the other way round.

PG · « **Reply #37 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:31:44 PM »

Neil Obstat - Concerning the Fr. Perez Msgr. title(made a Msgr. specifically in order to be chaplain to o.s.j.), Fr. Cekada has this to say -

http://www.traditionalmass.org/articles/article.php?id=56&catname=1

PG · « **Reply #38 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:37:08 PM »

TKGS - you are wrong concerning the seven sacraments. You have it backwards. And, I did provide a link with evidence defending my position. Please review!

PG · « **Reply #39 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:50:52 PM »

TKGS - I think what happened was that when you saw all of Neil Obstats copy and pasted posts, you had to speed up so as not to fall asleep, and you accidentally missed seeing my comment to matto(which had the link to the docuмent). But, it can also be found here -

http://congregationofstpiusv.net/SacredandProfane.pdf

TKGS · « **Reply #40 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:51:02 PM »

Quote from: + PG +

TKGS - you are wrong concerning the seven sacraments. You have it backwards. And, I did provide a link with evidence defending my position. Please review!

You are the first person I have ever heard claim that all sacraments are presumed to be invalid unless there is positive evidence that the sacraments are valid.

Your claim is interesting. I guess you must fully accept the Novus Ordo Annulment machine since it also seems to operate under the premise that marriages are invalid unless proven to be valid.

From which theologian did you discover this gem or did you make it up?

On Bishop Kelly's book: I have read it and there are numerous refutations available in many places, including the video posted above.

PG · « **Reply #41 on:** February 28, 2014, 06:54:47 PM »

TGKS - correction - with the exception of baptism and holy matrimony.

PG · « **Reply #42 on:** February 28, 2014, 07:05:53 PM »

TKGS - actually I may have been wrong about saying baptism in my last post as well. Don't chew at me for that one. I did all of my research quite a while ago, but it is useful even if it doesn't come out eloquently the first time. It eventually will.

And, I have every right to post what I posted concerning CMRI and Perez sacraments, it was not calumny in any way to post as I did. I presented it in a respectful manner, and I provided my list of docuмents for reference. Don't be wrongfully accusing me.

PG · « **Reply #43 on:** February 28, 2014, 08:03:15 PM »

TKGS - why would you play dumb if you had already read Bp. Kelly's book? Did you not read the entirety of my post before you chose to accuse me of calumny(if you did, than the fault is on you)?

CMRI have Thuc sacraments. Can you not do the math, resulting therefore in there being trads that reject them? As for Fr. Perez, he was ordained(yes, in the old rite) by Cardinal Stickler(who was consecrated in the new rite).

AgnusRoma is clearly new to tradition(so new that he or she doesn't yet know to avoid the NO). So I will indeed share what I believe is important from the start, even if it is controversial.

IllyricumSacrum · « **Reply #44 on:** February 28, 2014, 08:16:08 PM »

Quote from: + PG +

Matto - yes, you have basically heard correctly. But, I will rephrase it. Trad catholics reject his consecrations because they do not believe that he(post v2) was mentally competent. His actions lead one to believe that he was not in possession of his faculties. It is the sspv clergy and laity as a whole to be specific who hold to this.

"The nine" split over the issue of the validity of consecrations by Abp. Thuc. The split was not(as you may have been led to believe by Fr. Dolan and Fr. Sanborn) because Fr. Kelly(as the superior) "lorded" over them. They split because after a serious investigation into the consecrations(where they all agreed the consecrations were doubtful - which required them to be treated as invalid in the practical order), Fr. Sanborn flip flopped and decided to accept them despite what canon lawyers had taught concerning the relationship between mental state and validity.

The life of and consecrations by Thuc, the investigation of the consecrations by "the nine", and the events that followed are all thoroughly docuмented in this book(online copy) that you will not hear about on restoration radio(Bp. Kelly provides names and dates, and the gloves are off) -

http://congregationofstpiusv.net/SacredandProfane.pdf

Its still Fr. Kelly, not bishop. Kelly (a veteran of military intelligence and all the baggage that comes with it) only claimed to have been consecrated some time after the physically and mentally ailing +Mendez had passed away. No photographic evidence exists of the ceremony which was said to have been done in private, in a small room with only one witness. It seems the cultish SSPV suffers from projection.