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

« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3

Author Topic: Thuc bishops  (Read 3092 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bataar

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 145
  • Reputation: +53/-32
  • Gender: Male
Thuc bishops
« on: September 19, 2019, 09:14:16 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I understand there is some confusion over the validity of the Thuc bishops. I'm trying to understand the situation myself so I'm looking for some information on the subject. Why wouldn't they be valid? If the bishops ordained by Lefebvre are valid, why wouldn't the ones ordained by Thuc?
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41839
    • Reputation: +23907/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #1 on: September 19, 2019, 09:42:20 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • I do not agree with this assessment, but this is Bishop Kelly's argument:
    http://www.congregationofstpiusv.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/SacredandProfane.pdf

    ... and

    Here's the refutation:
    http://www.thucbishops.com/Open_Letter_to_%20Bp_Kelly_FULL.pdf

    In my opinion, the Refutation wins.
    Logged

    Offline songbird

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4670
    • Reputation: +1765/-353
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #2 on: September 20, 2019, 04:18:48 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • The consecration at Econe were conferred after John Paul II refused permission and despite the formal prohibition against them. And this while both consecrator and those consecrated recognized John Paul II as a  legitimate pope. To act in this manner could be? schismatic behavior?  On the other hand, those performed by Archbishop Thus were performed by someone? who  had recognized and publicly  declared that the Holy See lacked a formalitur pope.  Two fortunate things followed from this recognition of the absence of any authority.  It allowed both consecrator and those consecrated to invoke the principle of epikeia in presuming an apostolic mandate and as a result rendered the consecrations conferred, not only valid, but also licit.
     
    Then, while the consecrations of Archbishop Thus were conferred in a secret manner, great publicity surrounded the consecrations at Econe.  But after the consecrations of Guerard des Lauriers and the Mexican priests, the attacks on Archbishop Thuc led to their losing their secret character. They became public and so rapidly so that Rome was immediately aware of them and intervened.  This, on the part of Rome provided these consecrations with the notoriety which they formerly lacked.

    So, I can not say where the above info came from.  I wish.  But for what it is worth, it was something I cut out years ago.  I was to understand that Bishop Camona was correct in his consecrations, not being secret, but speaking of epikeia.

    Now I understand a little more about what Pope Pius XII wrote about the next elections for pope, whether they be layman, excommunicated.... they may hold office  (?) but they have not authority.  I remember the pope being referred to as a "cardboard pope".
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41839
    • Reputation: +23907/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #3 on: September 20, 2019, 04:28:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: songbird on September 20, 2019, 04:18:48 PM
    ... Pope Pius XII wrote about the next elections for pope, whether they be layman, excommunicated.... they may hold office  (?) but they have not authority.  I remember the pope being referred to as a "cardboard pope".

    Do you have a citation for this?
    Logged

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 10051
    • Reputation: +5251/-916
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #4 on: September 20, 2019, 04:41:43 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on September 20, 2019, 04:28:35 PM
    Do you have a citation for this?
    Yeah, this is news to me.  Something seems off about it, but would be happy to see a source.
    Logged
    For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. (Matthew 24:24)

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 9519
    • Reputation: +6239/-940
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #5 on: September 20, 2019, 06:10:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on September 19, 2019, 09:42:20 PM
    I do not agree with this assessment, but this is Bishop Kelly's argument:
    http://www.congregationofstpiusv.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/SacredandProfane.pdf

    ... and

    Here's the refutation:
    http://www.thucbishops.com/Open_Letter_to_%20Bp_Kelly_FULL.pdf

    In my opinion, the Refutation wins.
    Did Bp. Kelly respond to Mr. Derksen's letter?
    Logged

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5767
    • Reputation: +4620/-480
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #6 on: September 20, 2019, 06:41:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: songbird on September 20, 2019, 04:18:48 PM
    Then, while the consecrations of Archbishop Thus were conferred in a secret manner, great publicity surrounded the consecrations at Econe.  
    While there was not great publicity surrounding the consecrations of Archbishop Thuc, they were not conferred in secret.  
    Logged

    Offline Alexandria

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2677
    • Reputation: +484/-122
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #7 on: September 20, 2019, 06:45:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on September 20, 2019, 04:28:35 PM
    Do you have a citation for this?
    Is this what she is talking about?  
    https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/does-1917-canon-law-abolish-papal-bull-pope-paul-4/

    Quote
    34. No Cardinal, by pretext or reason of any excommunication, suspension, in-terdict or other ecclesiastical impediment whatsoever can be excluded in any way from the active and passive election of the Supreme Pontiff. Moreover, we suspend such censures for the effect only of this election, even though they shall remain otherwise in force.” (Cons. “Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis,” 8 December 1945)
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4184
    • Reputation: +2431/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #8 on: September 20, 2019, 06:52:44 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Mark 79 on September 20, 2019, 06:10:11 PM
    Did Bp. Kelly respond to Mr. Derksen's letter?
    No, and none of the SSPV/CSPV members ever will. Do you want to know why? Because they are wrong and will never admit their mistake. Also, it’s a rallying point or a cohesive factor that keeps their “group” (I’m being charitable here) together.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Offline TKGS

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 5767
    • Reputation: +4620/-480
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #9 on: September 20, 2019, 07:01:29 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Alexandria on September 20, 2019, 06:45:58 PM
    Is this what she is talking about?  
    https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/does-1917-canon-law-abolish-papal-bull-pope-paul-4/
    Might be what she was thinking but it doesn't apply.  The plain words of the legislation does not allow that a non-Catholic may be elected or be a part of the conclave.  Only ecclesiastical penalties are lifted.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41839
    • Reputation: +23907/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #10 on: September 20, 2019, 07:15:30 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Alexandria on September 20, 2019, 06:45:58 PM
    Is this what she is talking about?  
    https://www.cathinfo.com/crisis-in-the-church/does-1917-canon-law-abolish-papal-bull-pope-paul-4/

    I'm not sure.  I'm curious about the part where she says they hold office but lack authority ... since that would in fact be an endorsement of sedeprivationism.  But I see nothing like that in this quote.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4184
    • Reputation: +2431/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #11 on: September 20, 2019, 07:16:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: TKGS on September 20, 2019, 07:01:29 PM
    Might be what she was thinking but it doesn't apply.  The plain words of the legislation does not allow that a non-Catholic may be elected or be a part of the conclave.  Only ecclesiastical penalties are lifted.
    Absolutely.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41839
    • Reputation: +23907/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #12 on: September 20, 2019, 07:21:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Quo vadis Domine on September 20, 2019, 06:52:44 PM
    No, and none of the SSPV/CSPV members ever will. Do you want to know why? Because they are wrong and will never admit their mistake. Also, it’s a rallying point or a cohesive factor that keeps their “group” (I’m being charitable here) together.

    Once they created the initial FUD (fear uncertainty doubt) about the consecrations, the average lay person was scared enough of even the POSSIBILITY that their Sacraments might be invalid that even the most solid refutation could not offset that.  SSPV preyed on people's scruples and started by articulating the tutiorist principles in such a way as to fan the flames of negative doubt.  What they did there was very serious.  Bishop Sanborn quoted Father Kelly as once having said, "We can't say the Thuc bishops are valid, since people might go to them."  So from that moment on, it was suspect whether Father Kelly was approaching this matter in the interests of ascertaining the truth.  In fact, Dierksen cites cases where Father Kelly so badly distorted and misrepresented his sources (in out-of-context quotations) that it's difficult to believe those were simple mistakes and not done deliberately.
    Logged

    Online Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 41839
    • Reputation: +23907/-4344
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #13 on: September 20, 2019, 07:25:23 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I was myself initially troubled about the validity of the Thuc line, and at the the time I did not have the hours of time to devote to the research that would have been required to debunk the SSPV allegations.  But once I did sit down and look at the arguments, the SSPV case against the Thuc line holds NO WATER whatsoever, and it was extremely irresponsible.  Father Kelly quite literally pulled these made-up principles out of thin air and then found some out-of-context quotes to back them up.

    This requirement that "competent" witnesses are required who can attest specifically to whether the matter and form were correctly applied simply does not exist.  As long as the minister has been properly trained, e.g. a bishop like Thuc who had been a seminary professor and who had personally consecrated a number of men before Vatican II, the competence of the minister is presumed.  During the Cold War, bishops were clandestinely consecrated with no witnesses present (to minimize the risk), and their validity was never doubted by the Church.  In fact, +Thuc himself had one of these commissions to consecrate bishops clandestinely ... since he was operating in Communist territory.  One could argue, even, that, if there were no legit popes since Pius XII, his permission to consecrate endured ... and one could even make a case that they were done with all necessary jurisdiction.

    I mean, what if the priest had botched the Baptism Rite of a man who was being consecrated?  Then he wouldn't be a valid bishop.  Was there anyone present who could swear that the priest poured water correctly on the infant's head and said the proper Latin formula?  Such testimony was never demanded by the Church.  Even though it's theoretically possible that it was botched, the Church leaves it to God's providence to take care of such matters.

    What if I'm assisting at Mass?  Could I please get an altar boy trained in Latin to sign off that the priest got the words of consecration right before I go to receive Holy Communion?  According to Father Kelly, I can never receive Holy Communion, then, since I would have to hold the consecration to be doubtful due to lack of sufficient witnesses.

    It's utter nonsense.
    Logged

    Offline Quo vadis Domine

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4184
    • Reputation: +2431/-557
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Thuc bishops
    « Reply #14 on: September 20, 2019, 08:38:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on September 20, 2019, 07:21:58 PM
    Once they created the initial FUD (fear uncertainty doubt) about the consecrations, the average lay person was scared enough of even the POSSIBILITY that their Sacraments might be invalid that even the most solid refutation could not offset that.  SSPV preyed on people's scruples and started by articulating the tutiorist principles in such a way as to fan the flames of negative doubt.  What they did there was very serious.  Bishop Sanborn quoted Father Kelly as once having said, "We can't say the Thuc bishops are valid, since people might go to them."  So from that moment on, it was suspect whether Father Kelly was approaching this matter in the interests of ascertaining the truth.  In fact, Dierksen cites cases where Father Kelly so badly distorted and misrepresented his sources (in out-of-context quotations) that it's difficult to believe those were simple mistakes and not done deliberately.
    You are absolutely right about the issue with scruples and negative doubt. Sadly, several years ago I had to instruct one of the younger priests on the difference between positive and negative doubt. One thing in their favor is the fact that everyone of the seminarians and priests are upstanding individuals. Even with their serious flaw regarding the Thuc issue, I like all of them.
    Logged
    For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?
    Pages: [1] 2 3
    « previous next »