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 48282 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #85 on: January 06, 2019, 02:29:09 PM »
No, I’m simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the sspx’s stance.  They admit that an investigation is necessary (which I agree with...and which presupposes positive doubt) but said investigation is limited (which is what I find problematic, since such positive doubt cannot be fully allayed).  Ergo, the investigation is a “best guess”, which I find to be negligent.  

I’m not blaming the sspx, because they didn’t create the situation, BUT, being that +Lefebvre used to conditionally ordain moreso that the current sspx leadership, I ask myself what reasons does the current sspx have to trust the new rites now, vs 20 yrs ago, when nowadays there are even FEWER old rite bishops alive?

The main hypocrisy of the sspx is in the change in their investigative process.  They are more accepting now of new rites than they used to be.  This is just more modernism and compromise because the facts should dictate they be less accepting of the new rites, not more. 

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #86 on: January 06, 2019, 02:49:21 PM »
I’m not blaming the sspx, because they didn’t create the situation, BUT, being that +Lefebvre used to conditionally ordain moreso that the current sspx leadership, I ask myself what reasons does the current sspx have to trust the new rites now, vs 20 yrs ago, when nowadays there are even FEWER old rite bishops alive?
See, I don't see that +ABL used to conditionally ordain more than they do now. Nearly everything Brent told me is pretty much the same story numerous different SSPX priests have told me over the last 30-40 years.

In fact, back in the early days of the SSPX, most defecting NO priests were ordained in the old rite, not the new, so in most cases back then, there was no doubt, and even then, there were very few defectors - most defectors were simply coming back to what they had left, and again, even then there were only a very few as far as I know.

It is also true that the new rite was still relatively new back then and there were only very few defectors who were young and ordained in the new rite. To most priests and laypeople outside of the SSPX, the SSPX was in schism, apostates and  disobedient radicals who were scorned, slandered and ran from - much worse than today, so I don't know if there were even a half a dozen young defectors in the SSPX's first 25 years.

Add to that, the confusion and chaos of those earlier years certainly would have made most trads insist that whatever the NO did, was certainly doubtful at best, whether or not it really actually was. I myself still carry this train of thought, I guess I always will, but when it comes to the validity of the NO ordination rite, all that takes a back seat to the constant teaching of the Church that validity is presumed, not presumed invalid.

Because that is the starting point, and because it is a sacrilege to automatically conditionally ordain, read: indiscriminately conditionally ordain, then automatic conditional ordaining is not permitted, it's not even an option.


Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #87 on: January 06, 2019, 03:41:21 PM »
Quote
the constant teaching of the Church that validity is presumed, not presumed invalid.
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. 

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #88 on: January 06, 2019, 04:09:53 PM »
Don't mean to detract from this thread, but, when some Anglican's joined Rome, were they ordained by Rome?
After all Rome had always said they were invalid. ::)

Offline Stubborn

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #89 on: January 06, 2019, 04:45:48 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.
If you listen to that Youtube I posted, Fr. Hesse explains there is a difference between validity and illicit. Schismatics can and often do administer valid sacraments. So you cannot base your argument on the state of the NO, which is heretical, apostate, schismatic and whatever else they are - they're not Catholic, but they still can administer sacraments that are valid. Just the same as invalidity can happen using the old rite. We cannot claim sacraments are certainly invalid when what they are, is certainly illicit, which, the NO sacrament are certainly illicit.

And no, the new rite's sacraments are not closer to the Anglican's, so that argument is no good either. Listen to the 15 minutes of the Youtube, better to listen to the whole thing, but at least spend less than 15 minutes and see if you don't find yourself in agreement with Fr. Hesse's explanation. He explains it very clearly.

I believe he is correct when he says that the important parts needed for validity of the new rite remain present in the new rite, and that mainly, invalidity happens when the NO bishop "ad libs". Beyond that, he basically says that whatever changed in the new rite does not affect validity at all. He explains this if you listen to the video.