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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 22

Author Topic: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations  (Read 48267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline clarkaim

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #80 on: January 05, 2019, 10:16:58 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 02, 2019, 03:07:24 PM
If we lived in orthodox times, i'd agree with you.  But in the post-V2 world, where we have multiple modernists in the Church who OPENLY claim and boast of trying to change and corrupt ecclesiastical practices, there is more than enough evidence to cast doubt on EVERY new rite consecration/ordination.

The fact that the sspx tries to investigate each and every situation is both a waste of time and a symptom of their bi-polar treatment of new-rome, wherein they call new-rome modernist on monday and then for the rest of the week treat new-rome as the True Church.  The sspx officials hide behind this "potential sacrilege" excuse in an attempt to not "rock the boat" with new-rome officials.  I think it's much more politics than actual theological caution.

What's worse, committing 1 sacrilege by conditionally ordaining a priest who was actually a priest, or NOT conditionally ordaining him and allowing him to commit WEEKLY SACRILEGES, for the REST OF HIS LIFE, every time he says a fake mass?  The answer is to conditionally ordain and it's not even debatable.  We faithful have a RIGHT to CERTAINTY in our mass/sacraments.
:DTne notion of a conditional ordination being sacriligeouis is kind of like your uncle the Rabbi, joining the NSDAP? it's kind of a non-sequiter isn't it?
Logged

Online Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #81 on: January 05, 2019, 10:20:45 PM »
Quote
And I do agree with you that the SSPX - or anyone for that matter - "can NEVER do an investigation which is thorough enough to clear all doubts", but when there is doubt, automatic conditional ordination is *not* the solution for the simple reason that it is not allowed by the Church. 
Your original posts asserted that the Church does not allow re-ordination without investigation, under pain of sin.  I agree with this logic, because you can't just re-ordain anyone, for any reason, without investigating.  To do so, would be to declare the person's original ordination as invalid, without a shred of evidence.  And that view is too extreme and has no proof.

But CONDITIONAL ordination, when doubts are present to the extent they are with the new rites, is NOT the same thing as re-ordination.  You are confusing the Church's precaution against re-ordination and applying it to conditional ordination, which exists entirely for situations where there is doubt, however small.




Logged

Online Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #82 on: January 05, 2019, 10:34:36 PM »
Here is from the sspx's own website.  They clearly state that to conditionally ordain, just like conditional baptism, is not a sacrilege, or close to it.  In fact, the practice before Vatican 2 was to conditionally baptize all converts who came into the Faith.

http://sspx.org/en/must-priests-who-come-tradition-be-re-ordained


4) When a doubt arises in the administration of a sacrament that cannot be repeated, it is possible and even obligatory to reiterate the sacrament “sub conditione,” that is under the condition that it was invalid the first time.

Thus it is that both moral certitude as to the administration of the sacrament is acquired and the sacrilege of simulating a sacrament that has already been administered is avoided. This is frequently spoken of in the rubrics of the Roman Ritual, for example in the case of adult converts from heresy in whom there is a positive doubt as to the validity of baptism, or even foundlings who “should be baptized conditionally, unless there is a certainty from due investigation that they have already been baptized.” The condition is thus expressed: “if you are not baptized....” In fact, the custom before Vatican II was to baptize all adult converts from Protestantism, it being impossible to guarantee with moral certitude the form, or intention, or simultaneity of matter and form necessary for certain validity. Likewise, it is the custom to administer conditionally the sacrament of Confirmation to those confirmed in the new rite, in the frequent case that a valid form and intention cannot be established with certitude.

Under similar circuмstances, there is no sacrilege in reiterating conditionally a priestly ordination, as Archbishop Lefebvre himself did many times.
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #83 on: January 06, 2019, 10:02:47 AM »
This is an excellent video from Fr. Hesse on the validity and invalidity of the NO sacraments. Whoever is interested in this discussion we are having, it is well worth listening to the whole thing, but if you only want to listen to about 15 minutes that deals pretty much directly the subject that we are discussing, start at 51:20. If you start from this area, he speaks of the SSPX's SG's and Bishops that would not re or conditionally ordain him.

Otherwise, if I did this right, I started the video right at the pertinent part @ 56:40, just listen for the next 7 seconds, this is what the Church has always taught:
 
https://youtu.be/2gPX7XEBdUQ?t=3400


Here is a quote from Trent's catechism below, it is a teaching is regard to conditional of Baptism, which also applies to Confirmation and Holy Orders. If I understand you correctly, you would have the SSPX cause very great injury to the sacrament, automatically abusing it as a rule, with the idea of automatic conditional ordination:

"In this connection, however, there are some matters, in which, to the very great injury of the Sacrament, abuses
are of almost daily occurrence, and which therefore demand the diligent attention of pastors. For there are not
wanting those who think that no sin is committed if they indiscriminately administer conditional Baptism.
Hence if an infant be brought to them, they think that no inquiry need be made as to whether it was previously
baptised, but proceed immediately to baptise the child. Nay more, although they be well aware that the Sacrament was administered at home, they do not hesitate to repeat its administration in the Church conditionally, making use of the solemn ceremonies of the Church.

This certainly they cannot do without sacrilege and without incurring what theologians call an irregularity.
According to the authority of Pope Alexander the conditional form of Baptism is to be used only when after due
inquiry doubts are entertained as to the validity of the previous Baptism.

In no other case is it ever lawful to administer Baptism a second time, even conditionally.
Logged

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #84 on: January 06, 2019, 10:28:24 AM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 05, 2019, 10:20:45 PM
Your original posts asserted that the Church does not allow re-ordination without investigation, under pain of sin.  I agree with this logic, because you can't just re-ordain anyone, for any reason, without investigating.  To do so, would be to declare the person's original ordination as invalid, without a shred of evidence.  And that view is too extreme and has no proof.

But CONDITIONAL ordination, when doubts are present to the extent they are with the new rites, is NOT the same thing as re-ordination.  You are confusing the Church's precaution against re-ordination and applying it to conditional ordination, which exists entirely for situations where there is doubt, however small.
Actually, when there is doubt, validity is still first presumed. Fr. Hesse uses the sacrament of Matrimony as a good example to apply in this situation. If one of the spouses doubts that their own marriage is doubtful - as many who were married within the SSPX have actually done - they must not separate or go off and marry someone else on that account. The Church always first presumes sacramental validity - always. I urge you to listen to 15 minutes of what Fr. Hesse says, starting at about 51:20.

What you are doing Pax, is creating positive doubt 100% of the time where there is no positive doubt at all, then making conditional ordination, automatic due to this non-existent positive doubt. All the while paying no mind whatsoever to the fact that it is a teaching of the Church that without due inquiry into the NO ordination, conditional ordination is forbidden by the Church. "This certainly cannot be done without sacrilege" says Trent's catechism.

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18 19 ... 22
« previous next »