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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18

Author Topic: Universal doubtful intention  (Read 8062 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Benedikt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 52
  • Reputation: +15/-3
  • Gender: Male
Re: Universal doubtful intention
« Reply #240 on: Yesterday at 10:49:16 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on Yesterday at 10:42:51 AM
    Quote from: Pax Vobis 2025-08-19, 8:42:51 AM
    Ok, so your entire argument rests on the claim that the matter for Confirmation/Holy Orders is "oil" (of any kind).

    Even though, the greek word used in Scripture = olive.
    Even though, all throughout the Old Testament, olive oil was used EXCLUSIVELY, for annointing of all kinds, in religious ceremonies.
    Even though, as pointed out, the symbolic meaning of Christ's agony in the Garden, is "mount olives".
    Even though Florence says the MATTER is olive oil.
    Even though Trent says that olive oil is in Scripture.
    Even though Paul 6 says the matter is olive oil and it's in Scripture.

    But you say "just oil".  :laugh1:

    Please provide evidence.
    You are correct: the matter for Confirmation and Holy Orders is specifically olive oil, as Scripture, Tradition, Florence, Trent, and Paul VI all confirm. It is not “just any oil.”

    That said, a far greater concern today is the doubtfulness of episcopal consecrations in the new rite, particularly within the Neo-SSPX. For example, they openly accepted the conciliar and sacramentally doubtful Bishop Huonder, whose holy oils were so suspect that Bishop Tissier refused to use them. This shows that in the Neo-SSPX, holy oils and other sacramental matter are frequently mixed and unreliable, making the question of validity far more urgent than the type of oil.


    Logged

    Offline Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 189
    • Reputation: +103/-64
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #241 on: Yesterday at 11:02:09 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Angelus on Yesterday at 10:12:33 AM
    No, you are trampling on the infallible Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. The Church made that "box" as you call it. You take the side of the modernist infiltrators against the unified voice of all the saints and Popes over the millennia.

    And why would anyone care what some Jesuit named Bligh has to say on the matter? Do you really think that what he says is more authoritative than various Popes, Trent, and the Angelic Doctor?
    Sorry, you are in Fr. Hesse's box. Your understanding of the teachings of the Church have been distorted by him and others like him. Do you believe the Pope is the Pope? Because if you don't you should hear what the infallible Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church have to say about that. I am on the side of this eternal Church founded on St. Peter and therefore am against all infiltrators who attack her; both the ones inside the Church and those outside of it trying to get everyone to leave her. Our poor Church is fighting a war on two fronts and needs every soldier of Christ to come to her aid. We have a universal Muslim threat growing as we speak and the only thing that has any hope of keeping that checked, is the visible presence of the Church; the rallying point of all Catholics. All the monarchies have fallen so the Church is the last bastion against hell itself.

    Christ promised he would be with us always - The Body of Christ - the visible Church. That is the teaching of all the Popes, Trent, and the Angelic Doctor.
    Logged

    Online Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14802
    • Reputation: +6109/-913
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #242 on: Yesterday at 11:10:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Boru on Yesterday at 10:27:15 AM
    Context, dear boy, context.
    You crack me up, I mean that in a good way lol

    In my previous post, Florence, IMO, is as clear as it can possibly be. Florence explicitly said: "Olive Oil is the Matter." If Olive Oil is not used, then Florence said: "the sacrament is not effected."

    Roma locuta causa finita / Rome has spoken, the case is closed. 

    Do not be fooled, no theologian, pope or council (hell bent on destroying the Church) can do anything about it.

    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12456
    • Reputation: +7910/-2448
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #243 on: Yesterday at 11:51:38 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on August 18, 2025, 06:15:44 AM
    Pope Paul VI

    "Further, since olive oil, which hitherto had been prescribed for the valid administration of the sacrament, is unobtainable or difficult to obtain in some parts of the world, we decreed, at the request of numerous bishops, that in the future, according to the circuмstances, oil of another sort could also be used, provided it were obtained from plants, inasmuch as this more closely resembles the matter indicated in Holy Scripture...."
    If something is in Holy Scripture, then the Church didn't create it.  The Church cannot change Holy Scripture.

    Jєωιѕн Law used olive oil ==  God the Father created Jєωιѕн Law
    Holy Scripture says olive oil == God the Holy Ghost inspired Scripture
    Christ's passion started in "Mount Olives" and Gethsemane (which means 'olive press') == God the Son

    St James, Florence, Trent, St Thomas, etc all say olive oil is essential.

    Paul6 says olive oil is Scriptural (i.e. created by God).  But then argues he can change it.

    So, since Paul6 contradicts himself, which Paul6 are we to believe?
    a.  His first statement, which agrees with all pre-V2 authorities and with Jєωιѕн customs of time immemorial (and with all 3 persons of the Blessed Trinity)?
    b.  Or with his "change", which is novel, anti-scripture, anti-Florence, anti-Trent, anti-St Thomas, etc.  :laugh1:
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12456
    • Reputation: +7910/-2448
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #244 on: Yesterday at 12:00:33 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Boru on Yesterday at 11:02:09 AM
    Christ promised he would be with us always - The Body of Christ - the visible Church.
    Ok, but the Church has never defined (for all catholics) what this means, in detail.  You obviously have a personal-opinion as to what this means.  And it clouds your thinking, because you view everything through this pre-conceived, definition of "what Christ being with us" means.  Or, you have this OPINION on "the gates of hell not prevailing", and what lines God will not let His enemies cross.

    But none of us knows EXACTLY what God will allow His enemies to do.  We just know the Church will never cease.
    And none of us knows EXACTLY what the "visible" church means.  Some saints have said that as long as 1 bishop remains on earth, the church survives.

    There are HUNDREDS of opinions.  But that's all they are.  The Apostles didn't expect the Messiah to be crucified and put to death.  They were scandalized and ran out of fear.  The current crisis in the Church is scandalous and shocking.  And it's not over.

    Your personal views on the crisis are NOT part of the Faith.  Principles come first, then opinions.  You don't define principles via your OPINION on the crisis.
    Logged

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1192
    • Reputation: +506/-99
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #245 on: Yesterday at 12:06:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Boru on Yesterday at 11:02:09 AM
    Sorry, you are in Fr. Hesse's box. Your understanding of the teachings of the Church have been distorted by him and others like him. Do you believe the Pope is the Pope? Because if you don't you should hear what the infallible Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church have to say about that. I am on the side of this eternal Church founded on St. Peter and therefore am against all infiltrators who attack her; both the ones inside the Church and those outside of it trying to get everyone to leave her. Our poor Church is fighting a war on two fronts and needs every soldier of Christ to come to her aid. We have a universal Muslim threat growing as we speak and the only thing that has any hope of keeping that checked, is the visible presence of the Church; the rallying point of all Catholics. All the monarchies have fallen so the Church is the last bastion against hell itself.

    Christ promised he would be with us always - The Body of Christ - the visible Church. That is the teaching of all the Popes, Trent, and the Angelic Doctor.

    Boru, you are the one who is stuck in a "box." You see every dogmatic point we bring up by reference to your false paradigm. You have assumed that the "visible Church" is identical to its end times counterfeit. You correctly want to defend "the Church," but, in your cluelessness, you defend the antichurch.
    Logged

    Online Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14802
    • Reputation: +6109/-913
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #246 on: Yesterday at 12:14:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on Yesterday at 11:51:38 AM
    Paul6 says olive oil is Scriptural (i.e. created by God).  But then argues he can change it.

    So, since Paul6 contradicts himself, which Paul6 are we to believe?
    a.  His first statement, which agrees with all pre-V2 authorities and with Jєωιѕн customs of time immemorial (and with all 3 persons of the Blessed Trinity)?
    b.  Or with his "change", which is novel, anti-scripture, anti-Florence, anti-Trent, anti-St Thomas, etc.  :laugh1:
    If you notice, PPVI said:
    "We thought fit to modify the sacramental formula in such a way that, in view of the words of Saint James, the effects of the sacrament might be better expressed."

    So the reason for the change was because "We thought fit to modify" it, and why not? they modified everything, absolutely everything else, so with that it mind, it only makes sense to change the matter. Or to look at it another way, to *not* change the matter would make no sense.

    Anointing of the Sick is not the same sacrament as Extreme Unction, so he could have made the Matter whatever substance he wanted. As he said:
    "THE SACRAMENT OF THE ANOINTING OF THE SICK IS ADMINISTERED TO THOSE WHO ARE DANGEROUSLY ILL, BY ANOINTING THEM ON THE FOREHEAD AND HANDS WITH OLIVE OIL, OR, IF OPPORTUNE, WITH ANOTHER VEGETABLE OIL PROPERLY BLESSED..."

    This whole debate is silly.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 189
    • Reputation: +103/-64
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #247 on: Yesterday at 12:26:31 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on Yesterday at 10:42:51 AM
    Ok, so your entire argument rests on the claim that the matter for Confirmation/Holy Orders is "oil" (of any kind).

    Even though, the greek word used in Scripture = olive.
    Even though, all throughout the Old Testament, olive oil was used EXCLUSIVELY, for annointing of all kinds, in religious ceremonies.
    Even though, as pointed out, the symbolic meaning of Christ's agony in the Garden, is "mount olives".
    Even though Florence says the MATTER is olive oil.
    Even though Trent says that olive oil is in Scripture.
    Even though Paul 6 says the matter is olive oil and it's in Scripture.

    But you say "just oil".  :laugh1:

    Please provide evidence.
    Pax, really? You disregard every other piece of evidence I presented to home on the one personal mistake I made - and yes it was a mistake - and make it out to be my theme after everything else I have posted. That's not genuine. I said, and have always said that the matter decreed and preferred by the Church is Olive Oil. No question. But it is the Church that decreed it and thus the Church can change or makes exceptions to it:

    "Then they (Peter and John) laid their hands on them and they received the holy Spirit'. In place of this imposition of hands, confirmation is given in the church." - Council of Florence.

    In place of? So the matter was changed from the imposition of hands to the chrism of oil and balsam...how interesting.

    This is my theme. The changing of matter has a precedent, as stated by the Council of Florence. That the Church has the power to change the matter it had chosen or modify it or add things to it, that is my theme.

    Tell me Pax, how is it that the early Sacraments of Confirmation were considered valid before the Church even decreed anointing with Olive Oil?  Were St. Peter and St. John going about conferring invalid Sacraments? Think! Put all the information together. Stop making this about scoring points.

    "Pope Pius XII asserted that the Church has the authority to change the matter and form of sacraments, as these were established by the Church rather than directly by Christ. This principle was notably applied in his Apostolic Constitution "Sacramentum Ordinis," which revised the requirements for ordination."  - this come up in basic Search Assist. It is so clear what St. Pius XII was teaching.



    Logged

    Offline Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 189
    • Reputation: +103/-64
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #248 on: Yesterday at 12:34:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on Yesterday at 10:36:32 AM
    This guy Bligh is a Modernist.  :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
    Why do you say that? 
    Logged

    Offline Boru

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 189
    • Reputation: +103/-64
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #249 on: Yesterday at 12:43:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on Yesterday at 11:10:30 AM
    You crack me up, I mean that in a good way lol

    In my previous post, Florence, IMO, is as clear as it can possibly be. Florence explicitly said: "Olive Oil is the Matter." If Olive Oil is not used, then Florence said: "the sacrament is not effected."

    Roma locuta causa finita / Rome has spoken, the case is closed.

    Do not be fooled, no theologian, pope or council (hell bent on destroying the Church) can do anything about it.
    Don't laugh too much at my expense - what the Council of Florence said was if the matter is not used, then the sacrament is not effected. What that matter is is determined by the Church. At the time of St. Peter, it was the laying of hands. At the time of the Council of Florence it was Olive Oil. At the time of Pope Paul IV, it is Olive Oil with the exception of another similar plant-based oil in cases of necessity. Rome has an eternal voice that carries across the ages of time :)
    Logged

    Online Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14802
    • Reputation: +6109/-913
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #250 on: Yesterday at 01:02:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Boru on Yesterday at 12:43:08 PM
    Don't laugh too much at my expense - what the Council of Florence said was if the matter is not used, then the sacrament is not effected. What that matter is is determined by the Church. At the time of St. Peter, it was the laying of hands. At the time of the Council of Florence it was Olive Oil. At the time of Pope Paul IV, it is Olive Oil with the exception of another similar plant-based oil in cases of necessity. Rome has an eternal voice that carries across the ages of time :)
    No, you are mistaken. At the time of St. Peter it was the same as at the time of St. James, it was Olive Oil, and ever since then it was Olive Oil, and it still is Olive Oil.

    Only for the NO Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick PPVI said to use either Olive Oil or whatever plant based oil you want.  PPVI replaced Extreme Unction with Anointing of the Sick, just like he replaced the True Mass with the new mass and the True faith with the new faith, and the True Religion with the new religion, and on and on it goes.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12456
    • Reputation: +7910/-2448
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #251 on: Yesterday at 01:26:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on Yesterday at 12:14:22 PM
    Anointing of the Sick is not the same sacrament as Extreme Unction, so he could have made the Matter whatever substance he wanted. As he said:
    Good point.  Does the V2 church even consider 'anointing of the sick' a sacrament?  Because it's not the same as Extreme Unction.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12456
    • Reputation: +7910/-2448
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #252 on: Yesterday at 01:29:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Boru on Yesterday at 12:26:31 PM
    I said, and have always said that the matter decreed and preferred by the Church is Olive Oil. No question. But it is the Church that decreed it and thus the Church can change or makes exceptions to it:
    For the 53,000th time --  The.church.did.not.decree.the.matter.   SCRIPTURE DID.  THE HOLY GHOST DID.  

    The. church. cannot. change. scripture.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12456
    • Reputation: +7910/-2448
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #253 on: Yesterday at 01:32:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on Yesterday at 10:36:32 AM
    This guy Bligh is a Modernist.  :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

    Hence it was concluded that the Church has no power to altar the matter and form of any of the sacraments. This erroneously conclusion
    The. Church. cannot. change. the. matter. and. form. because. Christ/God. created that.
    Logged

    Offline Benedikt

    • Newbie
    • *
    • Posts: 52
    • Reputation: +15/-3
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Universal doubtful intention
    « Reply #254 on: Yesterday at 01:44:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Vatican II is Illegitimate, The Novus Ordo in its entirety, its “rites” its “sacraments” ARE illegitimate.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 15 16 [17] 18
    « previous next »