Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]

Author Topic: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations  (Read 7518 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Clemens Maria

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2246
  • Reputation: +1484/-605
  • Gender: Male
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #105 on: January 10, 2019, 10:03:24 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 06, 2019, 03:41:21 PM
    Validity should be presumed of the old rites.  The new rites are closer to the Anglican rite, which the Church has said is 100% invalid.  So the automatic presumption doesn’t apply to the new rites, in my, admittedly untrained, opinion.   But others who are trained have said the changes to the new rites are Anglican-esque.  This can’t be ignored.
    Bishop Pivarunas (CMRI) ordains former Novus Ordo priests unconditionally.  Makes sense.  Even before Pope Leo officially declared the Anglican rite invalid, Catholic clergy everywhere already assumed it was invalid and acted accordingly.
    Logged

    Offline Cantarella

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 7782
    • Reputation: +4577/-579
    • Gender: Female
    Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
    « Reply #106 on: January 10, 2019, 10:18:28 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on January 08, 2019, 05:12:53 AM
    :facepalm: I was wondering when the sede's would chime in lol.

    Quote the doctrine being defined in an ordination ceremony. Infallibility is only promised to the pope when, speaking ex cathedra, he defines a doctrine. You can read that in V1, it's quite explicit.

    The Sede problem is that they attribute infallibility where it does not exist, then cry invalidity when that non-existent infallibility is breached.


    This is not about Church infallible definitions, but more concerns the Church indefectibility. It really is a matter of common sense. Holy Mother Church cannot give us invalid, false, evil Sacraments for our spiritual nourishment. That would be inconsistent with Our Lord's promises, and a complete defection of the Church's Sacred mission. "The indefectibility of the Roman Catholic Church is the teaching that it will endure to the end of the world and never become corrupt in faith, authority, morals, or sacraments.  In other words, the Roman Catholic Church will always be the proper representation of Christianity even though its members may err".

    If you want to wholly reject the Novus Ordo Sacraments, then you need to also wholly reject the Authority (in the monarchical Catholic Church, hinges upon no one but the Pope) which promulgated them. Otherwise, there is no consistency but only ambivalence, which is the problem with the SSPX.
    Logged
    If anyone says that true and natural water is not necessary for baptism and thus twists into some metaphor the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit" (Jn 3:5) let him be anathema.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 13817
    • Reputation: +5566/-865
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
    « Reply #107 on: January 11, 2019, 05:32:18 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Cantarella on January 10, 2019, 10:18:28 PM
    This is not about Church infallible definitions, but more concerns the Church indefectibility. It really is a matter of common sense. Holy Mother Church cannot give us invalid, false, evil Sacraments for our spiritual nourishment. That would be inconsistent with Our Lord's promises, and a complete defection of the Church's Sacred mission. "The indefectibility of the Roman Catholic Church is the teaching that it will endure to the end of the world and never become corrupt in faith, authority, morals, or sacraments.  In other words, the Roman Catholic Church will always be the proper representation of Christianity even though its members may err".
    I don't imagine that anyone could possibly disagree with you here, Holy Mother Church most certainly cannot give us invalid, false, evil Sacraments for our spiritual nourishment. Our Lord gave us the sacraments, that's how we know they are true, Holy Mother the Church is the keeper of the same sacraments that were given to the Church by Our Lord. Thankfully, the pope is not the Church.


    Quote
    If you want to wholly reject the Novus Ordo Sacraments, then you need to also wholly reject the Authority (in the monarchical Catholic Church, hinges upon no one but the Pope) which promulgated them. Otherwise, there is no consistency but only ambivalence, which is the problem with the SSPX.
    But of course, again, I cannot imagine that anyone could possibly disagree with you here either. The popes' authority does not extend to changing the sacraments. I would have to listen to Fr. Hesse again to find out which pope said that there is an oath that popes take, saying that if he were to change the sacraments, that "Almighty God will not have mercy on me" or words to that effect. But it's not as if he can't do it. He can do it alright, and imo, he is paying for it.

    Of the many problems with the SSPX, I believe at it's core is it's dilution of the dogma EENS.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline clarkaim

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 295
    • Reputation: +166/-39
    • Gender: Male
    Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
    « Reply #108 on: January 22, 2019, 06:39:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on January 02, 2019, 03:02:10 PM
    They must be very careful because to conditionally ordain one who is already validly ordained is a sacrilege. That's just the way that works.

    this is wrong on just about every level.  To Ordain would be sacriligeous in this situation, but in fact, that is the point of CONDITIONALLY ordain, so as to NOT commit a sacrilege.  The condition is the operative word here.



    If you ever get the chance, simply ask any SSPX priest about it, they will tell you that each case is investigated separately. I've asked quite a few SSPX priests over the last 30 years and they have all said this exact same thing.

    What else would/could they say? SSPX'ers are NOTHING if not party-liners.   AS to "investigations" at best, if they discover the new rite is used, there lies the positive doubt, as the Church has spoken, not twenty years prior, in a Papal encyclycal, SACRAMENTUM, ORDINIS on ALL the forms henceforth to be used.  if those forms aren't used, there is doubt.  Case Closed.    Hey Mr. Manson? are you an evil cult leader who ordered a bunch of your Hippy followers to kill some people and start a race war?  Me?  No it wasn't me, just some guy that looks like me.   Okay Kowalski let him go, he's innocent.  I asked him and he said so. 

    Also consider that any priest who leaves the NO for tradition, their own validity is probably one of their own greatest, if not *the* greatest of all their concerns. They want to be sure themselves that they're really priests first and foremost. It would seem that every NO priest who leaves the NO for the SSPX would want to be conditionally ordained just to be sure - but that really is not the way that's supposed to work. The matter must be investigated on a case by case basis first.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]
    « previous next »