Author Topic: Catechism Class  (Read 6892 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SeanJohnson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3417
  • Reputation: +3438/-462
  • Gender: Male
Catechism Class
« on: January 19, 2018, 06:19:47 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I recently heard an SSPX priest state:

    "The three criteria necessary for a valid sacrament are:

    1) Form

    2) Matter

    3) Intention"

    Question: Can anyone tell me what's wrong with that statement?
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline Motorede

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 160
    • Reputation: +114/-33
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #1 on: January 19, 2018, 07:06:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I recently heard an SSPX priest state:

    "The three criteria necessary for a valid sacrament are:

    1) Form

    2) Matter

    3) Intention"

    Question: Can anyone tell me what's wrong with that statement?
    Not enough information. Are you referring to "transubstantiation" here or the validity of all the Seven Sacraments? In case of Matrimony all the three above could be present but still be invalid b/c of the impediment of age, jurisdiction, first marriage with spouse still living and no annulment,etc. But in general the above criteria sounds like good Catholic sacramental theology. 


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3417
    • Reputation: +3438/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #2 on: January 19, 2018, 07:14:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here's a hint:

    There's actually a 4th criteria.

    Anyone know what it is?
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline Student of Qi

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 478
    • Reputation: +265/-39
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #3 on: January 19, 2018, 07:24:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Here's a hint:

    There's actually a 4th criteria.

    Anyone know what it is?

    It must be instituted by Jesus Christ!
    Many people say "For the Honor and Glory of God!" but, what they should say is "For the Love, Glory and Honor of God". - Fr. Paul of Moll

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3417
    • Reputation: +3438/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #4 on: January 19, 2018, 07:27:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It must be instituted by Jesus Christ!
    Truly, but not what I am looking for.

    Another hint:

    If you were going to an FSSP Mass, this would be a concern.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-



    Offline Motorede

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 160
    • Reputation: +114/-33
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #5 on: January 19, 2018, 07:30:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Truly, but not what I am looking for.

    Another hint:

    If you were going to an FSSP Mass, this would be a concern.
    Gotta be a valid priest.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3417
    • Reputation: +3438/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #6 on: January 19, 2018, 07:36:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Gotta be a valid priest.
    Bingo!

    1) Form

    2) Matter

    3) Intention

    4) Valid Minister

    In the conversation in which the SSPX priest mentioned the first three criteria, he was responding to a question as to whether or not the faithful could attend an FSSP Mass, and whether it would be valid.

    Seems like the 4th criteria is no longer in the SSPX' s radar.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline Nadir

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4886
    • Reputation: +2723/-72
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #7 on: January 19, 2018, 08:05:38 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hey Mr Johnson! This is fun. Give us another one.


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3417
    • Reputation: +3438/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #8 on: January 19, 2018, 08:16:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hey Mr Johnson! This is fun. Give us another one.
    OK, in the same vein:

    If an FSSP priest was ordained according to the traditional rite, why might one still have reservations about the validity of his sacraments?
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline Maria Regina

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1207
    • Reputation: +295/-68
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #9 on: January 19, 2018, 08:26:21 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • OK, in the same vein:

    If an FSSP priest was ordained according to the traditional rite, why might one still have reservations about the validity of his sacraments?
    One might have reservations about the validity of the FSSP priest's sacraments if he himself were ordained by a bishop who was consecrated according to the Novus Ordo rite.
    Lord have mercy.

    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +454/-468
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #10 on: January 19, 2018, 08:38:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • seanjohnson - wouldn't this #4 traditionally fall under the category of #2 Matter firstly and #3 Intention secondarily?  Because, it is certainly understood that if some layman says the words of consecration, nothing happens, implying the necessity of valid orders.  I wasn't at this catechism class, so I cannot comment on the spirit of the session, but not mentioning this # 4 explicitly doesn't necessary alarm me.  

    I will grant that silence on the particulars concerning this subject(post v2 validity) while at the same time approaching Rome is very dangerous if not impossible to succeed without, that does not mean that accepting the validity of post v2 orders is wrong or a change of core belief.  What the sspx needs to do is be open and explanatory about how exactly tradition can have relations with new church.  Because, up until this point, the sspx code of conduct for relations with the NO has been practically schismatic(in some ways for good reason).  And, that leaves everything in between no mans land, and that is a deadly area, which tradition and the sspx is partly to blame for, because it is inhabited. 

    Traditions problems do not revolve around validity of orders and their implication.  That is an easy one.  Traditions problems revolve around the legitimacy of orders, and their implication.  I say this because concerning the clergy, the concern is legitimacy.  Concerning the universal laity, the concern is validity.  Those two statements entail much, and they need to be explained in our catechism classes.   However, I would prefer to let the law of prayer establish the law of belief, because I don't much enjoy explaining it.  
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3417
    • Reputation: +3438/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #11 on: January 19, 2018, 08:38:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • One might have reservations about the validity of the FSSP priest's sacraments if he himself were ordained by a bishop who was consecrated according to the Novus Ordo rite.

    Bravo!
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3417
    • Reputation: +3438/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #12 on: January 19, 2018, 09:46:39 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • seanjohnson - wouldn't this #4 traditionally fall under the category of #2 Matter firstly and #3 Intention secondarily?  Because, it is certainly understood that if some layman says the words of consecration, nothing happens, implying the necessity of valid orders.  I wasn't at this catechism class, so I cannot comment on the spirit of the session, but not mentioning this # 4 explicitly doesn't necessary alarm me.  

    I will grant that silence on the particulars concerning this subject(post v2 validity) while at the same time approaching Rome is very dangerous if not impossible to succeed without, that does not mean that accepting the validity of post v2 orders is wrong or a change of core belief.  What the sspx needs to do is be open and explanatory about how exactly tradition can have relations with new church.  Because, up until this point, the sspx code of conduct for relations with the NO has been practically schismatic(in some ways for good reason).  And, that leaves everything in between no mans land, and that is a deadly area, which tradition and the sspx is partly to blame for, because it is inhabited.

    Traditions problems do not revolve around validity of orders and their implication.  That is an easy one.  Traditions problems revolve around the legitimacy of orders, and their implication.  I say this because concerning the clergy, the concern is legitimacy.  Concerning the universal laity, the concern is validity.  Those two statements entail much, and they need to be explained in our catechism classes.   However, I would prefer to let the law of prayer establish the law of belief, because I don't much enjoy explaining it.  

    Greetings PG-

    No.

    All four criteria are distinct, and none of them subsists in any of the others.

    For example: A layman can feign a sacrament with valid matter, or a priest can feign a sacrament with invalid matter, etc.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


    Offline PG

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1734
    • Reputation: +454/-468
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #13 on: January 19, 2018, 11:39:17 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • seanjohnson - I actually meant to type form instead of matter, but it doesn't make much difference now because on second thought I actually think intention may be more important than form if your number 4 does fall under any category.  Do you have an authoritative source proposing that there are four instead of three?  Because, from memory, I only recall three being mentioned.  

    Another concern I have about this is that a number four is not something tangible.  Matter can be observed(seen, felt, smelt, tasted and even heard).  Form can be observed(heard and seen).  Intention can be observed(seen and heard).   From all of these, if they are or are not followed, one I image can deduce the validity of the sacrament and perhaps even the minister.  Which, is why there would be three criteria, and not four.  But, a number four is an invisible mark on the soul.  It is definitely different from the other three.  And, that may be the reason why the sspx bunches only the three together.  
    "A secure mind is like a continual feast" - Proverbs xv: 15

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3417
    • Reputation: +3438/-462
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Catechism Class
    « Reply #14 on: January 20, 2018, 07:08:51 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • seanjohnson - I actually meant to type form instead of matter, but it doesn't make much difference now because on second thought I actually think intention may be more important than form if your number 4 does fall under any category.  Do you have an authoritative source proposing that there are four instead of three?  Because, from memory, I only recall three being mentioned.  

    Another concern I have about this is that a number four is not something tangible.  Matter can be observed(seen, felt, smelt, tasted and even heard).  Form can be observed(heard and seen).  Intention can be observed(seen and heard).   From all of these, if they are or are not followed, one I image can deduce the validity of the sacrament and perhaps even the minister.  Which, is why there would be three criteria, and not four.  But, a number four is an invisible mark on the soul.  It is definitely different from the other three.  And, that may be the reason why the sspx bunches only the three together.  

    Good Morning PG-

    Can you absolve your mother's sins, or confect the Holy Eucharist?

    Why not?

    You are certainly able to muster proper form, matter, and intent.

    But you are not a valid minister of those sacraments.

    Hence, criteria #4 is lacking, and the sacraments would not be valid

    Many of the manuals speak only of form, matter, and intent because the validity of the minister is presumed.
    Romans 5:20 "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    -I retract any and all statements I have made that are incongruent with the True Faith, and apologize for ever having made them-


     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16