Author Topic: For all those SSPXers who are upset with the novus ordo “bishop” joining... (Read 4693 times)

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #10 on:** May 31, 2019, 09:14:03 AM »

Here's a monthly-updated list of all latin masses for the entire US. They do a great job with this:

www.traditio.com

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #11 on:** June 10, 2019, 06:37:31 AM »

Quote from: ByzCat3000 on May 21, 2019, 09:25:05 PM

What would be required for positive doubt?

There must be actual proof or reliable testimony that something invalidating occurred. It can’t be something that you think may have happened, that would be a negative doubt. For example, if a credible person who was there, at the consecration, testified that the proper matter or form was not used, that would be a positive doubt. If someone conjectures that the bishop must be crazy for doing a certain consecration, that is a negative doubt.

RomanTheo · « **Reply #12 on:** June 10, 2019, 05:29:59 PM »

Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on June 10, 2019, 06:37:31 AM

There must be actual proof or reliable testimony that something invalidating occurred. It can’t be something that you think may have happened, that would be a negative doubt. For example, if a credible person who was there, at the consecration, testified that the proper matter or form was not used, that would be a positive doubt. If someone conjectures that the bishop must be crazy for doing a certain consecration, that is a negative doubt.

What you wrote is correct, provided the rite is performed lawfully and publicly, but the principle does not apply in the case of an illicit and secret consecration.

There are many reasons to question the validity of the Thuc consecrations. Here is an interesting article written by Fr. Cekada on the subject. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZJwJkybg61akQum--MJVx9eYozHX2wFv/view

Quo vadis Domine · « **Reply #13 on:** June 10, 2019, 05:44:16 PM »

Quote from: RomanTheo on June 10, 2019, 05:29:59 PM

What you wrote is correct, provided the rite is performed lawfully and publicly, but the principle does not apply in the case of an illicit and secret consecration.

There are many reasons to question the validity of the Thuc consecrations. Here is an interesting article written by Fr. Cekada on the subject. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZJwJkybg61akQum--MJVx9eYozHX2wFv/view

Not true. I’m sure you know that Fr. Cekada refuted his own paper?

Alexandria · « **Reply #14 on:** June 11, 2019, 12:11:22 PM »

Does anyone know where to go anymore to hear the hard truths of our faith without them being avoided or watered down so as not to offend?

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: For all those SSPXers who are upset with the novus ordo “bishop” joining... (Read 4693 times)

Pax Vobis

Re: For all those SSPXers who are upset with the novus ordo “bishop” joining...

Quo vadis Domine

Re: For all those SSPXers who are upset with the novus ordo “bishop” joining...

RomanTheo

Re: For all those SSPXers who are upset with the novus ordo “bishop” joining...

Quo vadis Domine

Re: For all those SSPXers who are upset with the novus ordo “bishop” joining...

Alexandria

Re: For all those SSPXers who are upset with the novus ordo “bishop” joining...