Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => SSPX Resistance News => Topic started by: Kazimierz on August 13, 2023, 03:25:10 PM

Title: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Kazimierz on August 13, 2023, 03:25:10 PM
I am humbly seeking insight as to what the probability of Huonder oils having been used for priestly ordinations in Econe this past June. The priory that serves us has just received one of the new ordinands from Econe. He said his first Mass at our chapel and gave his first public priestly blessings this weekend. 
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on August 13, 2023, 03:46:06 PM
I am humbly seeking insight as to what the probability of Huonder oils having been used for priestly ordinations in Econe this past June. The priory that serves us has just received one of the new ordinands from Econe. He said his first Mass at our chapel and gave his first public priestly blessings this weekend.


The oils are not part of the matter used for the validity of holy orders, fortunately. The imposition of hands is the matter, so the oils would not affect the validity.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on August 13, 2023, 03:47:55 PM

BTW, they would affect the validity of extreme unction.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Kazimierz on August 13, 2023, 04:30:37 PM
My thanks for the responses. I will have to do some stealth work to find out where our priory obtained their oils from.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Ladislaus on August 13, 2023, 04:51:57 PM
BTW, they would affect the validity of extreme unction.

I agree on it impacting the validity of Extreme Unction but not Holy Orders.

I’m unsure myself about Confirmation.  Do you or anyone know?
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 05:06:50 PM
I am humbly seeking insight as to what the probability of Huonder oils having been used for priestly ordinations in Econe this past June. The priory that serves us has just received one of the new ordinands from Econe. He said his first Mass at our chapel and gave his first public priestly blessings this weekend.

Although Sacramentum Ordinis limited the imprinting "the character" to laying on of hands (matter) and saying the words of the preface (form), you need to know that the Church has always required "consecration" of the Priest's hands, the paten, and the chalice before he is able to exercise his priesthood with the full "power."

The oils (real Chrism oil from a real bishop) have always been required for that sacerdotal "power." You can read what Aquinas has to say and decide for yourself.

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.IIISup.Q37.A5

Sacramentum Ordinis did NOT say that the "consecrations" of the hands, paten and chalice were no longer necessary. In fact, Pius XII said that the entire Rite found in the Roman Pontifical had to be fulfilled. That full Rite included the "consecrations."

I would say that a priest pseudo-consecrated with fake oils from a fake bishop would need to have his hands, paten, and chalice re-consecrated by a real bishop with real oils. That would be the safer course. But he would not need to be re-ordained.

Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 05:08:45 PM
I agree on it impacting the validity of Extreme Unction but not Holy Orders.

I’m unsure myself about Confirmation.  Do you or anyone know?

Sacred Chrism is necessary matter for Confirmation.

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.III.Q72.A3

Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on August 13, 2023, 05:25:09 PM
Although Sacramentum Ordinis limited the imprinting "the character" to laying on of hands (matter) and saying the words of the preface (form), you need to know that the Church has always required "consecration" of the Priest's hands, the paten, and the chalice before he is able to exercise his priesthood with the full "power."

The oils (real Chrism oil from a real bishop) have always been required for that sacerdotal "power." You can read what Aquinas has to say and decide for yourself.

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.IIISup.Q37.A5

Sacramentum Ordinis did NOT say that the "consecrations" of the hands, paten and chalice were no longer necessary. In fact, Pius XII said that the entire Rite found in the Roman Pontifical had to be fulfilled. That full Rite included the "consecrations."

I would say that a priest pseudo-consecrated with fake oils from a fake bishop would need to have his hands, paten, and chalice re-consecrated by a real bishop with real oils. That would be the safer course. But he would not need to be re-ordained.


This is absolutely wrong. Pope Pius XII declared that the matter is the imposition of hands. Period. :


“In the Ordination to the Priesthood, the matter is the first imposition of hands of the Bishop which is done in silence, but not the continuation of the same imposition through the extension of the right hand, nor the last imposition to which are attached the words: “Accipe Spiritus Sanctum: quorum remiseris peccata, etc.” And the form consists of the words of the “Preface,” of which the following are essential and therefore required for validity:

“Da, quaesumus, omnipotens Pater, in hunc famulum tuum Presbyterii dignitatem; innova in visceribus eius spiritum sanctitatis, ut acceptum a Te, Deus, secundi meriti munus obtineat censuramque morum exemplo suae conversationis insinuet.””
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on August 13, 2023, 05:30:59 PM
                                                               Sacramentum Ordinis
On the Sacrament of Order
Pope Pius XII - 1947




Apostolic Constitution Of Pope Pius XII on the Sacrament of Order
1. The Catholic Faith professes that the Sacrament of Order instituted by Christ, by which are conferred spiritual power and grace to perform properly ecclesiastical functions, is one and the same for the universal Church; for, just as Our Lord Jesus Christ gave to the Church but one and the same government under the Prince of the Apostles, one and the same faith, one and the same sacrifice, so too He gave her but one and the same treasury of efficacious signs of grace, that is, Sacraments. For these Sacraments instituted by Christ Our Lord, the Church in the course of the centuries never substituted other Sacraments, nor could she do so, since, as the Council of Trent teaches (Conc. Trid., Sess. VII, can. 1, De Sacram, in genere), the seven Sacraments of the New Law were all instituted by Jesus Christ Our Lord, and the Church has no power over “the substance of the Sacraments,” that is, over those things which, as is proved from the sources of divine revelation, Christ the Lord Himself established to be kept as sacramental signs.
2. As regards the Sacrament of Order, of which We are now speaking, it is a fact that, notwithstanding its unity and identity, which no Catholic has ever dared to question, in the course of time, according to varying local and temporal conditions, various rites have been added in its conferring; this was surely the reason why theologians began to inquire which of the rites used in conferring the Sacrament of Order belong to its essence, and which do not; it also gave rise to doubts and anxieties in particular cases; and as a consequence the humble petition has again and again been addressed to the Holy that the supreme Authority of the Church might at last decide what is required for validity in conferring of Sacred Orders.
3. All agree that the Sacraments of the New Law, as sensible signs which produce invisible grace, must both signify the grace which they produce and produce the grace which they signify. Now the effects which must be produced and hence also signified by Sacred Ordination to the Diaconate, the Priesthood, and the Episcopacy, namely power and grace, in all the rites of various times and places in the universal Church, are found to be sufficiently signified by the imposition of hands and the words which determine it. Besides, every one knows that the Roman Church has always held as valid Ordinations conferred according to the Greek rite without the traditio instrumentorum; so that in the very Council of Florence, in which was effected the union of the Greeks with the Roman Church, the Greeks were not required to change their rite of Ordination or to add to it the traditio instrumentorum: and it was the will of the Church that in Rome itself the Greeks should be ordained according to their own rite. It follows that, even according to the mind of the Council of Florence itself, the traditio instrumentorum is not required for the substance and validity of this Sacrament by the will of Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. If it was at one time necessary even for validity by the will and command of the Church, every one knows that the Church has the power to change and abrogate what she herself has established.
4. Wherefore, after invoking the divine light, We of Our Apostolic Authority and from certain knowledge declare, and as far as may be necessary decree and provide: that the matter, and the only matter, of the Sacred Orders of the Diaconate, the Priesthood, and the Episcopacy is the imposition of hands; and that the form, and the only form, is the words which determine the application of this matter, which univocally signify the sacramental effects – namely the power of Order and the grace of the Holy Spirit – and which are accepted and used by the Church in that sense. It follows as a consequence that We should declare, and in order to remove all controversy and to preclude doubts of conscience, We do by Our Apostolic Authority declare, and if there was ever a lawful disposition to the contrary We now decree that at least in the future the traditio instrumentorum is not necessary for the validity of the Sacred Orders of the Diaconate, the Priesthood, and the Episcopacy.
5. As to the matter and form in the conferring of each Order, We of Our same supreme Apostolic Authority decree and provide as follows: In the Ordination to the Diaconate, the matter is the one imposition of the hand of the Bishop which occurs in the rite of that Ordination. The form consists of the words of the “Preface,” of which the following are essential and therefore required for validity:
“Emitte in eum, quaesumus, Domine, Spiritum Sanctum, quo in opus ministerii tui fideliter exsequendi septiformis gratiae tuae munere roboretur.”
In the Ordination to the Priesthood, the matter is the first imposition off hands of the Bishop which is done in silence, but not the continuation of the same imposition through the extension of the right hand, nor the last imposition to which are attached the words: “Accipe Spiritum Sanctum: quorum remiseris peccata, etc.” And the form consists of the words of the “Preface,” of which the following are essential and therefore required for validity:
“Da, quaesumus, omnipotens Pater, in hunc famulum tuum Presbyterii dignitatem; innova in visceribus eius spiritum sanctitatis, ut acceptum a Te, Deus, secundi meriti munus obtineat censuramque morum exemplo suae conversationis insinuet.”
[“Grant, we beseech Thee, Almighty Father, invest this Thy servant with the dignity of the Priesthood; do Thou renew in his heart the spirit of holiness, so that he may persevere in this office, which is next to ours in dignity, since he has received it from Thee, O God. May the example of his life lead others to moral uprightness.”]
Finally in the Episcopal Ordination or Consecration, the matter is the imposition of hands which is done by the Bishop consecrator. The form consists of the words of the “Preface,” of which the following are essential and therefore required for validity:
“Comple in Sacerdote tuo ministerii tui summam, et ornamentis totius glorificationis instructum coelestis unguenti rore santifica.”
[“Perfect in Thy priest the fullness of thy ministry and, clothing him in all the ornaments of spiritual glorification, sanctify him with the Heavenly anointing.”]
All these things are to be done as was determined by Our Apostolic Constitution “Episcopalis Consecrationis” of 30 November, 1944.
6. In order that there may be no occasion for doubt, We command that in conferring each Order the imposition of hands be done by physically touching the head of the person to be ordained, although a moral contact also is sufficient for the valid conferring of the Sacrament.
Finally, what We have above declared and provided is by no means to be understood in the sense that it be permitted even in the slightest detail to neglect or omit the other rites which are prescribed in the Roman Pontifical; on the contrary We order that all the prescriptions laid down in the said Roman Pontifical be religiously observed and performed.
The provisions of this Our Constitution have not retroactive force; in case any doubt arises, it is be submitted to this Apostolic See.
These things We proclaim, declare, and decree, all things to the contrary notwithstanding, even those worthy of special mention, and accordingly We will and order that in the Roman Pontifical they be clearly indicated. Let no man therefore infringe this Constitution which We have enacted, nor dare to contravene the same.
Given at Rome from Saint Peter’s, on the thirtieth of November, Feast of Saint Andrew the Apostle, in the year nineteen hundred and forty-seven, the ninth of Our Pontificate.
AAS 40-5; Pius XII, Apostolic Constitution, 30 Nov., 1947 Cf. Periodica, 37-9 (Hurth): Commentarium pro Religiosis, 1948, p. 4 (Pujoiras).
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on August 13, 2023, 05:40:00 PM
Sacred Chrism is necessary matter for Confirmation.

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.III.Q72.A3


I believe you are correct on this.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Incredulous on August 13, 2023, 06:00:49 PM
I am humbly seeking insight as to what the probability of Huonder oils having been used for priestly ordinations in Econe this past June. The priory that serves us has just received one of the new ordinands from Econe. He said his first Mass at our chapel and gave his first public priestly blessings this weekend.

Well... I'd like to say, "Good eye Kazimierez!"

The Remnant faithful should always be watchful and suspicious of the infiltration and it's potential impact.

In a way, Huonder is like Fr. Joe Pfieffer. 
One who has the potential of causing great damage with the Faith and the Sacraments.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 06:57:21 PM

This is absolutely wrong. Pope Pius XII declared that the matter is the imposition of hands. Period. :


“In the Ordination to the Priesthood, the matter is the first imposition of hands of the Bishop which is done in silence, but not the continuation of the same imposition through the extension of the right hand, nor the last imposition to which are attached the words: “Accipe Spiritus Sanctum: quorum remiseris peccata, etc.” And the form consists of the words of the “Preface,” of which the following are essential and therefore required for validity:

“Da, quaesumus, omnipotens Pater, in hunc famulum tuum Presbyterii dignitatem; innova in visceribus eius spiritum sanctitatis, ut acceptum a Te, Deus, secundi meriti munus obtineat censuramque morum exemplo suae conversationis insinuet.””

You are failing to make a distinction. I agree that the "matter" for the imprinting of the indelible character is, as you say, "the imposition of hands." But the consecration of the hands of the ordinand is a separate step in the Rite that has a special purpose.

As I said, Aquinas makes the distinction between the three steps, (1) the blessing, (2) the imposition of the hands and (3) the consecration by anointing with Chrism oil. These three things had always been required in the full Rite of Ordination.

Pius XII simply said that the Sacrament of Order (the indelible character) is imprinted using the matter and form that he referenced. At the same time, he stated that the rest of the Rite was absolutely necessary and must not be left out.

However, St. Thomas and Pius XII disagreed concerning the exact point that the indelible character was imprinted. Pius XII settled the centuries old controversy on that issue. But the consecration by anointing with Chrism is still necessary to make efficacious the fullness of the sacerdotal priesthood. St. Thomas explains what that step does, again here:

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.IIISup.Q37.A5

Pius XII does not even discuss that step because that was not the subject of Sacramentum Ordinis. But he makes clear that the full Rite must be done exactly as it always had been, presumably for the reasons stated by St. Thomas.

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm

"Finally, what We have above declared and provided is by no means to be understood in the sense that it be permitted even in the slightest detail to neglect or omit the other rites which are prescribed in the Roman Pontifical; on the contrary We order that all the prescriptions laid down in the said Roman Pontifical be religiously observed and performed.

The provisions of this Our Constitution have not retroactive force; in case any doubt arises, it is be submitted to this Apostolic See.
These things We proclaim, declare, and decree, all things to the contrary notwithstanding, even those worthy of special mention, and accordingly We will and order that in the Roman Pontifical they be clearly indicated. Let no man therefore infringe this Constitution which We have enacted, nor dare to contravene the same."

Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: AnthonyPadua on August 13, 2023, 07:31:54 PM
So does mean all those confirmed by this new oil would not be valid?

I was 'confirmed' in the novus ordo so when I find an opportunity to get conditionally confirmed (assuming I need one) this is something I will need to consider.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on August 13, 2023, 07:44:05 PM
You are failing to make a distinction. I agree that the "matter" for the imprinting of the indelible character is, as you say, "the imposition of hands." But the consecration of the hands of the ordinand is a separate step in the Rite that has a special purpose.

As I said, Aquinas makes the distinction between the three steps, (1) the blessing, (2) the imposition of the hands and (3) the consecration by anointing with Chrism oil. These three things had always been required in the full Rite of Ordination.

Pius XII simply said that the Sacrament of Order (the indelible character) is imprinted using the matter and form that he referenced. At the same time, he stated that the rest of the Rite was absolutely necessary and must not be left out.

However, St. Thomas and Pius XII disagreed concerning the exact point that the indelible character was imprinted. Pius XII settled the centuries old controversy on that issue. But the consecration by anointing with Chrism is still necessary to make efficacious the fullness of the sacerdotal priesthood. St. Thomas explains what that step does, again here:

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.IIISup.Q37.A5

Pius XII does not even discuss that step because that was not the subject of Sacramentum Ordinis. But he makes clear that the full Rite must be done exactly as it always had been, presumably for the reasons stated by St. Thomas.

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm

"Finally, what We have above declared and provided is by no means to be understood in the sense that it be permitted even in the slightest detail to neglect or omit the other rites which are prescribed in the Roman Pontifical; on the contrary We order that all the prescriptions laid down in the said Roman Pontifical be religiously observed and performed.

The provisions of this Our Constitution have not retroactive force; in case any doubt arises, it is be submitted to this Apostolic See.
These things We proclaim, declare, and decree, all things to the contrary notwithstanding, even those worthy of special mention, and accordingly We will and order that in the Roman Pontifical they be clearly indicated. Let no man therefore infringe this Constitution which We have enacted, nor dare to contravene the same."


He did not say that the rest of the rite is absolutely necessary. I think you are confusing validity with licitness. 
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 08:00:22 PM

He did not say that the rest of the rite is absolutely necessary. I think you are confusing validity with licitness.

Here is Pius XII's exact quote, again, which other readers can use to draw their own conclusions about the Pope's intentions:

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm (https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm)

"Finally, what We have above declared and provided is by no means to be understood in the sense that it be permitted even in the slightest detail to neglect or omit the other rites which are prescribed in the Roman Pontifical; on the contrary We order that all the prescriptions laid down in the said Roman Pontifical be religiously observed and performed.

The provisions of this Our Constitution have not retroactive force; in case any doubt arises, it is be submitted to this Apostolic See.
These things We proclaim, declare, and decree, all things to the contrary notwithstanding, even those worthy of special mention, and accordingly We will and order that in the Roman Pontifical they be clearly indicated. Let no man therefore infringe this Constitution which We have enacted, nor dare to contravene the same."

Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Quo vadis Domine on August 13, 2023, 08:14:18 PM
Here is Pius XII's exact quote, again, which other readers can use to draw their own conclusions about the Pope's intentions:

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm (https://www.papalencyclicals.net/pius12/p12sacrao.htm)

"Finally, what We have above declared and provided is by no means to be understood in the sense that it be permitted even in the slightest detail to neglect or omit the other rites which are prescribed in the Roman Pontifical; on the contrary We order that all the prescriptions laid down in the said Roman Pontifical be religiously observed and performed.

The provisions of this Our Constitution have not retroactive force; in case any doubt arises, it is be submitted to this Apostolic See.
These things We proclaim, declare, and decree, all things to the contrary notwithstanding, even those worthy of special mention, and accordingly We will and order that in the Roman Pontifical they be clearly indicated. Let no man therefore infringe this Constitution which We have enacted, nor dare to contravene the same."


Some theologians believed that for validity of Holy Orders the matter was the imposition of hands, others thought that is the the passing of the instruments, and still others believed that it was both (this is what you believe). Pope Pius XII settled the matter by stating that it was just the imposition of hands that was essential, BUT for the sacrament to be *licit*, all of the rites are to be observed. 
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 08:42:13 PM

Some theologians believed that for validity of Holy Orders the matter was the imposition of hands, others thought that is the the passing of the instruments, and still others believed that it was both (this is what you believe). Pope Pius XII settled the matter by stating that it was just the imposition of hands that was essential, BUT for the sacrament to be *licit*, all of the rites are to be observed.

Again, you misrepresent what I have said. I will say it again. There are multiple things happening in a traditional Priestly Ordination as described by Aquinas (not by me):

1. A blessing is given to prepare the recipient for the graces of the Sacrament.

2. The grace of the Order is conveyed by imposition of hands (matter) and the Preface prayer (form). The indelible character is imprinted here, says Pius XII.

3. The priest's hands and instruments must be consecrated because unconsecrated things cannot touch Our Lord. Aquinas said that the indelible character was imprinted on this step, but he has now been overruled by Pius XII.

Assigning the precise point where the indelible character of Order was imprinted was the subject matter of Sacramentum Ordinis. It has been settled. I agree with you that this precise issue has been settled. 

The consecration by anointing with oils was not discussed in Sacramentum Ordinis. Pius XII did not have a reason to discuss that subject there. Yes, SO said that "handing over of the instruments" was not the matter of the imprinting of the indelible character. But one should not take that to mean that a priest can now handle Our Lord with unconsecrated hands and instruments. The consecration with oils must still be done as it had always been done to perfect the power Sacrament. Otherwise, the priest is committing a sacrilege by touching Our Lord with unconsecrated hands. It is not just ecclesiastically illicit. It is immoral for theological reasons.

It is similar to a lay person handing out Holy Communion. The reason a lay person should not do this is not because he's a lay person, but, rather, because his hands have not been consecrated.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: ElwinRansom1970 on August 13, 2023, 08:51:14 PM
Again, you misrepresent what I have said. I will say it again. There are multiple things happening in a traditional Priestly Ordination as described by Aquinas (not by me):

1. A blessing is given to prepare the recipient for the graces of the Sacrament.

2. The grace of the Order is conveyed by imposition of hands (matter) and the Preface prayer (form). The indelible character is imprinted here, says Pius XII.

3. The priest's hands and instruments must be consecrated because unconsecrated things cannot touch Our Lord. Aquinas said that the indelible character was imprinted on this step, but he has now been overruled by Pius XII.

Assigning the precise point where the indelible character of Order was imprinted was the subject matter of Sacramentum Ordinis. It has been settled. I agree with you that this precise issue has been settled.

The consecration by anointing with oils was not discussed in Sacramentum Ordinis. Pius XII did not have a reason to discuss that subject there. Yes, SO said that "handing over of the instruments" was not the matter of the imprinting of the indelible character. But one should not take that to mean that a priest can now handle Our Lord with unconsecrated hands and instruments. The consecration with oils must still be done as it had always been done to perfect the power Sacrament. Otherwise, the priest is committing a sacrilege by touching Our Lord with unconsecrated hands. It is not just ecclesiastically illicit. It is immoral for theological reasons.

It is similar to a lay person handing out Holy Communion. The reason a lay person should not do this is not because he's a lay person, but, rather, because his hands have not been consecrated.
Nope. You are confusing what is necessary for validity with what is necessary for liceity.

To get at what is necessary for validity, one examines the ceremonies of ordination across all the liturgical rites in search of what is common to all. In doing this, one sees that the imposition of hands is the only common matter across rites. Hence and contrary to the Council of Florence, Pius XII defined imposition of hands as the necessary matter of Orders for validity.

If you really want to make a the head of a neoscholastic theologian explode, research what is the necessary form for valid ordinations.
🤯
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 08:53:20 PM
So does mean all those confirmed by this new oil would not be valid?

I was 'confirmed' in the novus ordo so when I find an opportunity to get conditionally confirmed (assuming I need one) this is something I will need to consider.

Correct. There is enough "positive doubt" about the "matter" in that case to justify being conditionally confirmed. But the minister is probably a doubtfully-valid New Rite bishop and the "form" is doubtfully-valid in the New Rite of Confirmation. 

It should be done by a bishop consecrated in the Old Rite who uses Chrism oil blessed in the Old Rite using the Old Rite of Confirmation to confirm you. 
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: ElwinRansom1970 on August 13, 2023, 08:57:15 PM
It is similar to a lay person handing out Holy Communion. The reason a lay person should not do this is not because he's a lay person, but, rather, because his hands have not been consecrated.
That is just a dumb statement.

A deacon is an ordinary minister of communion. His hands are not consecrated with Chrism. Further, an acolyte is an extraordinary minister of communion and his hands too are not consecrated with Chrism.

Put down Aquinas' Summa for a while and read the Church Fathers and, equally important, read the decrees of the ecuмenical councils and local councils of the early Church.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 09:06:44 PM
Nope. You are confusing what is necessary for validity with what is necessary for liceity.

To get at what is necessary for validity, one examines the ceremonies of ordination across all the liturgical rites in search of what is common to all. In doing this, one sees that the imposition of hands is the only common matter across rites. Hence and contrary to the Council of Florence, Pius XII defined imposition of hands as the necessary matter of Orders for validity.

If you really want to make a the head of a neoscholastic theologian explode, research what is the necessary form for valid ordinations.
🤯

I challenge you to find one time that I used the word "validity" or "valid" in this thread. The Consecration of the Priest's hands and paten and chalice are required not for the "validity" of the Sacrament, but for the perfection of the power of the Sacrament.

And, no, you are wrong, one does not take a least-common-denominator approach to determining validity of a Sacrament. One looks at what the highest Roman Catholic Church authorities have said is necessary for validity in the Roman Rite.

Other Rites (Byzantine, etc.) are different and what is valid in the Byzantine Rite does not necessarily transfer to the Roman Rite automatically. That incorrect assumption is part of the Modernist-Ecuмenist deception. If a Pope has defined "the form" in the Roman Rite to be X (and otherwise said it is invalid), then "the form" in the Roman Rite must be X. It doesn't matter what another Rite does.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Angelus on August 13, 2023, 09:22:03 PM
That is just a dumb statement.

A deacon is an ordinary minister of communion. His hands are not consecrated with Chrism. Further, an acolyte is an extraordinary minister of communion and his hands too are not consecrated with Chrism.

Put down Aquinas' Summa for a while and read the Church Fathers and, equally important, read the decrees of the ecuмenical councils and local councils of the early Church.

Maybe you should brush up on Canon Law, Elwin. In the traditional Catholic Church, the deacon is not "an ordinary minister of communion." And only for a "grave cause" and "legitimate necessity" can a deacon hand out Holy Communion.

Canon 845 (1917):

§ 1. The ordinary minister of holy communion is only a priest.
§ 2. A deacon is an extraordinary [minister], authorized by the local Ordinary or a pastor, granted for grave cause, which in case of legitimate necessity is presumed.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: ElwinRansom1970 on August 14, 2023, 05:51:26 AM
Angelus, clearly we belong to different religions since mine is Catholic (universal, pertaing to the whole Church, all 24 Churches sui juris) and yours is heretodoxically particular (some idolatry of the Latin Church sui juris).
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: SeanJohnson on August 14, 2023, 07:15:08 AM
Maybe you should brush up on Canon Law, Elwin. In the traditional Catholic Church, the deacon is not "an ordinary minister of communion." And only for a "grave cause" and "legitimate necessity" can a deacon hand out Holy Communion.

Canon 845 (1917):

§ 1. The ordinary minister of holy communion is only a priest.
§ 2. A deacon is an extraordinary [minister], authorized by the local Ordinary or a pastor, granted for grave cause, which in case of legitimate necessity is presumed.

From time to time, I have noticed SSPX deacons distributing Communion.

Since there is no grave cause or necessity, am I to presume this practice is justified according to the 1983 Code (which considers deacons as ordinary ministers of the Eucharist)?
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Ladislaus on August 14, 2023, 08:40:34 AM

He did not say that the rest of the rite is absolutely necessary. I think you are confusing validity with licitness.

You are correct.  While these other aspects of the Rite (including the traditio instrumentorum) continue to be required, they are not essential for validity.
Title: Re: Huonder oils and ordinations
Post by: Ladislaus on August 14, 2023, 08:41:39 AM
Sacred Chrism is necessary matter for Confirmation.

https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.III.Q72.A3

Sure, that's St. Thomas' opinion, but as much authority as he has, it does not make a consensus.  I'd want to see a theological manual that summaries the state of the question and the theological consensus.