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

Author Topic: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations  (Read 48315 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #15 on: January 02, 2019, 03:39:45 PM »
I pretty much agree with you, but it is the Church who makes the rules. Far as I'm concerned, all NO priests validity is at best, doubtful. From the SSPX priests I've discussed this with, they all say that this is the same view the SSPX holds and has always held.

The fact is, there actually are valid NO priests out there - most likely less and less every year, but that's the way it is. The Church simply forbids them from automatically conditionally ordaining the NO priests. They do however automatically re-train every NO priest, but they cannot automatically conditionally ordain - it's not allowed by Holy Mother the Church, never has been, never will be.

Remember, the devil prefers valid sacrileges over invalid ones - that means valid NO priests are out there, if for no other reason than to commit valid sacrileges.


 
Yes, but how does the SSPX investigate a particular case? 

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #16 on: January 02, 2019, 03:41:56 PM »
If form is so important for baptism why isn't it for holy orders?

Holy orders like baptism need form, matter and intent.
Comparing the two rites of ordination I see in the new rite the priest is not given the faculty to "offer sacrifice for the living and the dead" (the Mass) nor is he given the faculty to forgive sins.
So as I see it "form" is lacking.  (Also some bishops are now using vegetable oil instead of olive oil (matter) but lets just stick with form).
 
https://www.scribd.com/doc/15443209/Comparison-of-Old-and-New-Catholic-Rites-of-Ordination-to-the-Priesthood
 
 

In baptism if the form is deviated from there is no baptism so why wouldn't the same apply with Holy Orders? ::)


Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #17 on: January 02, 2019, 03:46:20 PM »
Note that all the sacraments (Baptism, Confirmation, Confession, Communion, Matrimony, Holy Orders & Consecration of Bishops, and Holy Unction), prayers, and rites of the Roman Catholic Church have now been corrupted and made invalid by the influence of Freemasons in Rome.

Can anyone trust anything that has been corrupted by the ICEL and Rome?
None of the Novus Ordo sacraments are valid precisely because the words have been changed to render these sacramental acts void and fruitless.

In my opinion, the SSPX's investigations are fake and a complete cover-up to ease the conscience of a NO Priest who wants to join the SSPX.

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #18 on: January 02, 2019, 03:47:57 PM »
If form is so important for baptism why isn't it for holy orders?

Holy orders like baptism need form, matter and intent.
Comparing the two rites of ordination I see in the new rite the priest is not given the faculty to "offer sacrifice for the living and the dead" (the Mass) nor is he given the faculty to forgive sins.
So as I see it "form" is lacking.  (Also some bishops are now using vegetable oil instead of olive oil (matter) but lets just stick with form).
 
https://www.scribd.com/doc/15443209/Comparison-of-Old-and-New-Catholic-Rites-of-Ordination-to-the-Priesthood
 
 

In baptism if the form is deviated from there is no baptism so why wouldn't the same apply with Holy Orders? ::)
Instead of Holy Chrism, bishops in the Novus Ordo can use a variety of different oils depending on the area in which they live.

For example, here in California and in Arizona, the bishops will often use Yucca Oil for confirmation.

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2019, 03:53:36 PM »
In any case, what you outline is exactly why I raise the question. Do you happen to know how the SSPX investigates each particular case? Pax Vobis lays out a fairly strong case for why ALL new rite ordinations/consecrations should be treated as doubtful. However, if there is some objective way for the SSPX (or anyone else of good faith) to investigate a particular case of ordination/consecration for validity, I am very interested in learning how this is done.
I only know what I've been told repeatedly by different SSPX priests. I think the last time I asked one of the SSPX priests was a year or two ago, and I asked because it was brought up here ion CI.

I can't remember the process they go through in their investigation, but next time I get the opportunity to discuss it with an SSPX priest, I will ask and post it while it is fresh in my mind.

I personally feel the same as most trads, namely, that many or most NO priests are not really priests at all. Thankfully I have no reason to really be concerned about it, so I do not go out of my way to concern myself with it. Fr. Wathen said something along the lines of - whether valid or not, the NO achieved their goal of adding to the chaos, simply by changing the Rite of Ordination. That's all it took.

Beyond that, it is up to the Church to safeguard the sacraments, She's thankfully been doing that for +2000 years, but in order to safeguard anything, you must first presume validity, otherwise She is safeguarding nothing, nothing at all by first presuming invalidity. Right?