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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 22

Author Topic: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations  (Read 48332 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline RoughAshlar

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #90 on: January 06, 2019, 06:50:07 PM »
Quote from: Stubborn on January 06, 2019, 04:45:48 PM
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.
You are correct. Fr. Hesse really does sum it up quite clearly. God bless his soul.
Logged

Offline Nadir

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #91 on: January 06, 2019, 08:12:45 PM »
Quote from: Miseremini 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. ::)
https://ordinariate.net/q-a


The Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter is a structure, similar to a diocese, that was created by the Vatican in 2012 for former Anglican communities and clergy seeking to become Catholic. Members of the Ordinariate are fully Roman Catholic, while retaining elements of Anglican heritage in their celebration of Mass and in the hospitality and ministries of their Catholic parishes. 
.........
What is the process for an Anglican priest to become a Catholic priest?
Anglican clergy seeking to be ordained as Catholic priests must first complete an extensive process that includes background checks; approval by the head of the Ordinariate and by the Vatican; completion of an approved Ordinariate formation program; and an examination. Celibacy is the norm for the clergy. Permission has been given on a case-by-case basis by the Pope for former Anglican priests who are married to be ordained Catholic priests for the Ordinariate. If widowed, they may not remarry.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #92 on: January 07, 2019, 11:30:34 AM »
Quote
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:

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.
The doubts about protestant Baptisms/marriage are small compared to those involving ordinations/consecrations.  What i'm saying is that the investigative process is flawed because all doubts cannot be answered.


Quote
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.
1.  Doubt 1 - Was the new-rite Bishop who performed the ordination, actually a bishop?  This cannot be answered, nor does the sspx attempt to.
2.  Doubt 2 - Was the new-rite of ordination followed by the Bishop and did he have a proper intention?  This can probably be answered.
3.  Doubt 3 - Did the ordained "priest" have the right intention?  This can probably be answered.

I'm not advocating conditional ordination without investigation.  I'm saying that since the investigative process can only answer 2 out of the 3 doubts, therefore, practically speaking, it's worthless.  It can NEVER answer doubt #1, so even if doubts 2 and 3 are investigated and said to be valid, Doubt #1 still casts its dark shadow over the legitimacy of the "priest".

Since it's obvious that Doubt 1 can't be answered, and since Doubt 1 is serious, then it follows logically that the investigative process is inadequate and therefore, conditional ordination is necessary.
Logged

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #93 on: January 07, 2019, 12:47:16 PM »
I listened to about 30 minutes of Fr Hesse and I'm more confused now than before because he contradicts himself (in a way).  First, he says that the new rites of ordination/consecration are valid because they say essentially the same thing as the old rite.  Ok, that's fine.  Secondly, he goes on to give all these examples of priests (including himself) who were ordained in the new rite and says they are priests.  Ok, that's fine.  But...he specifically mentions that all these priests (including himself) were ordained by OLD RITE bishops.

The contradictory part is he then explains that there are MANY (he said Rome is filled with them) new rite bishops who are "crack pots" who think they are bishops, but are not.  So how are we to know who is/isn't a bishop in the new rite?  How can he know they aren't bishops, if the new rite is valid?  He doesn't explain this at all, and this is a problem.

Therefore, I must conclude that if there are many new rite bishops that aren't bishops at all, then the ordinations of priests TODAY are doubtful, since those bishops who ordained them are not bishops.  And I'm back at square one - lots of doubt.

If the sspx has some way to find all this out, then I applaud them.  As far as I can see, they don't give the details of their investigation process on the web (which they should...there's no reason it should be a secret.  It should be a public investigation process since the ordination/consecration is a public process as well), then I guess their process is super secret.  But that's unnecessary, since the faithful have a right to know what's going on.
Logged

Offline mcollier

Re: SSPX official position re: validity of new rite of episcopal consecrations
« Reply #94 on: January 07, 2019, 04:36:12 PM »
Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 05, 2019, 10:11:22 PM
I've never heard this.  In fact, what I've heard (and what was posted earlier in this thread) is that the new rites of consecration/ordination resemble the anglican rites, which were eventually deemed invalid.


The sspx is comparing apples-oranges because in the old rite the intention was made explicit in the language of the sacrament.  This is why the Church presumes that the sacraments are valid in the old rites - because the INTERNAL intention of the bishop/priest DOES NOT MATTER - since the intention is spelled out and made clear.

In the new rites, the intention is ambiguous, therefore, for it to be valid the bishop and priest MUST SUPPLY the INTERNAL intention (which is impossible to judge, investigate or know for certain).  In other words, the intention of the Church is not part of the prayers, it's only in the mind of the participants in the ceremony.  In other words, the "intention of the Church" is not outwardly expressed; but only inwardly.  How can anyone ever judge/investigate this?  You can't.

I'd venture to guess that the Coptic/Syrian rites spell out the intention of the sacrament.  We know for certain that the new rites do not.  When someone says that the Coptic/Syrian rites are "similar" to the new rites, what do they mean?  It has a similar ceremony?  It has similar liturgical movements?  We'd have to do a side-by-side comparison of the 2 rites to see.  My bet is that the new rites aren't very similar, in essentials.
The SSPX article attempts to carefully build the case that the new rite is identical to (and not in any artificial way) the Coptic and Western Syrian Rites of episcopal consecration. It also attempts to claim that the new rite is not like the Anglican Rite and does not share in the problems that it had. It goes on to make the claim that the new rite (as published by the Vatican) is valid and because it is a rite of the Church that intention must be determined by the externals. 
The only exception they make is with translations and adaptations which they clearly say can have defective intention and thus render the sacrament invalid or at least doubtfully valid. 
At several points, they make the claim that conditional ordination is still a prudent precaution (I would have to go back and read the article more closely to pick out if they say in every case, many cases, or just some cases). 
Here is a link to their article: http://sspx.org/en/validity-new-rite-episcopal-consecrations
What do you think of the arguments they present in this article? 
Are they valid arguments? Are they sound/truthful? 
Thank you again for all the comments. God bless. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 [19] 20 21 22
« previous next »