Author Topic: Bp. Rifan--Valid Bishop? (Read 2244 times)

Jim · « **on:** December 03, 2011, 02:32:30 AM »

From a sedevacantist assumption that the 1968 episcopal consecrations are invalid, is Mons. Rifan a validly consecrated bishop? Dario Card. Castrillon Hoyos, consecrated in the 1968, was principal consecrator, but Mons. Licinio Rangel, consecrated in the traditional rite, was a co-consecrator.

Please see

At the 06:27 mark, Dom Licinio Rangel, I think, if not he is the first one, lays his hand and recites something, maybe the rore santifica.

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #1 on:** December 03, 2011, 04:03:19 AM »

I stumbled over this a year ago or so, and indeed, as far as I can tell he is a valid Bishop.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #2 on:** December 03, 2011, 07:06:45 AM »

Quote from: Jim

From a sedevacantist assumption that the 1968 episcopal consecrations are invalid, is Mons. Rifan a validly consecrated bishop? Dario Card. Castrillon Hoyos, consecrated in the 1968, was principal consecrator, but Mons. Licinio Rangel, consecrated in the traditional rite, was a co-consecrator.

Please see

At the 06:27 mark, Dom Licinio Rangel, I think, if not he is the first one, lays his hand and recites something, maybe the rore santifica.

1) One need not be a sedevacantist to question the validity of the 1968 rite; I am not a sedevacantist (though like ABL, I acknowledge the theoretical possiobility, without declaring it as fact), but am far from certain on the validity of the new rite (and Ordinal, for that matter);

2) If the 1968 rite is invalid, the the presence of a pre-1968 consecrated bishop (i.e., Rangel) will not sanate the consecration using that same invalid rite;

3) If the 1968 rite is valid, but Hoyos placed himself outside the Church (e.g., by heresy/schism, which I am not accusing him of), the consecration would still be valid, just as Orthodox using valid rites validly consecrate.

Pyrrhos · « **Reply #3 on:** December 03, 2011, 07:16:18 AM »

The old rite was used, as can be clearly seen in the video.

The problem with Hoyo is not his schism (whether he is in schism/heresy or not I don´t want to judge here), but that he was consecrated in the new rite.

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #4 on:** December 03, 2011, 07:23:50 AM »

Quote from: Pyrrhos

The old rite was used, as can be clearly seen in the video.

The problem with Hoyo is not his schism (whether he is in schism/heresy or not I don´t want to judge here), but that he was consecrated in the new rite.

In that case, the presence/participation of Rangel would sanate the defect potentially present in Hoyos.