I really must point out that no one in serious Theological circles considered the Angelus propaganda as anything but that... propaganda.  

It was simply Menzingen laying the groundwork for the sellout.  It was necessary as Fr. Ratzinger was "ordained" Bishop in the Bugnini rite.

Which theological circle(s) would that be?

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: Seraphim

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: Neil Obstat

Quote from: Sigismund

The SSPX does not routinely re-ordain priests ordained in the NO, do they?

Under whose judgment should they "routinely re-ordain priests" anyway?  

If they were concerned with Christians' baptisms being invalid, would they
"routinely re-baptize" Christians?  

Are you aware that both Baptism and Holy Orders are sacraments that cannot
be repeated without grave sacrilege? Are you recommending that taking the
chance of commission of grave sacrilege is a reasonable risk?  

Absolutely not.  I think NO ordinations and sacraments are valid, and I agree that repeating the unrepeatable ones would be objectively a sacrilege.  I was simply asking if the SSPX thought so too.

It does now.

So it comes down to this:  either the Novus Ordo ordinations and/or sacraments
are valid, or they're not.  And who is the judge of that?  Normally it would be the
Church, but the fox is in the henhouse, so to speak.  Where's the farmer when
you need him??

A priest recently explained to me that never in the history of the Church has an
ordination been judged to have been invalid.  But he isn't talking about the
Anglican orders, for example.  Okay, now that the Conciliar Church has admitted
certain Anglican groups back 'into the Church' without even so much as an
abjuration of their errors or conditional re-ordination, we now have "Anglican
use Catholics" running around town, right??

IOW a few years ago Anglican orders were still invalid since Leo XIII proclaimed
them so over a hundred years ago, and now, they are no longer invalid??

Quote from: Seraphim

Quote from: Sigismund

Quote from: Ferdinand

Quote from: Sigismund

Absolutely not.  I think NO ordinations and sacraments are valid, and I agree that repeating the unrepeatable ones would be objectively a sacrilege.  I was simply asking if the SSPX thought so too.

You know what they say about opinions.  

Better to refrain from having an opinion, than to risk your salvation or guide others by an opinion.  

Okay.  How about this?

I am quite certain that "NO" ordinations are valid, because I don't believe that God would allow His Church to be reduced to a few hundred priests and a few thousand faithful.  I am absolutely certain that NO sacraments are valid becasue they are acts of the Church using rites officially promulgated by the Vicar of Christ and the Bishops in communion with him.  I am absolutely certain they are valid because they contain no heresy or denial of the faith, despite the fact that some believe they do.  

This is not to say that individual priests might not be validly ordained or that individual sacramental acts might not be invalid because they depart sufficiently from the norms of the Church.  This has always been true however, at every point in Church history.  

Do I seem certain enough now?   :smile:

St Alphonsus says that in the end times the devil will succeed in abolishing the Mass.

Either St Alphonsus was a heretic (impossible, for he was canonized), or one or more of the following will be the cause of it:

1) invalid rite of mass

2) invalid priesthood

3) invalid bishops

4) universal defect of intent all the time.

Since number 4 is ridiculous, one or more of 1-3 must be the case.

Since St Alphonsus is saying it, should he also just admit to being a sedevacantist?

...And the powers of one good bishop can wipe out 1-3 utterly and completely!

Quote from: CathMomof7

I think if you write Fr. Voigt and ask him to clarify who conditionally ordained him and when, you will be satisfied with that answer.

Perhaps the Bishop who conditionally ordained Fr. Voigt would not like to get in a fighting match with the Society of St. Pius X.

Finally, we get to the main point.  Remember what Bishop Williamson said in his
last EC, that he is ready to provide his bishop's powers to those who can wisely
make use of them.  

That would include conditional re-ordinations, would it not?

To quote +Fellay (out of context because it gets his goat):  "I would HOPE so!"



Hey, ........... Fr. Rostand, this one's for you:  ..........  




                      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No Anglican clergyman has ever been admitted to the Catholic priesthood without at least conditional re-ordination.  Even the conditional re-ordinations, when they have happened, have been due to the participation of Old Catholic bishops in the ordinations of some Anglican clergy, not becasue [sp] of anything specifically Anglican.  

We have been having entire Anglican faith communities accepted into the
Roman Catholic Church under the new "Anglican Use Rite" as Catholics, and
everyone I have asked about it assures me there are no abjuration of any
errors or conditional re-ordination of their priests.  

So correct me if I'm wrong,

but I don't have any examples of abjuration of error or re-ordination

of these Anglican Use Catholics.  

Do you?

Ferdinand, its sacramental theology is the traditional Thomistic one, no less and no more. The same conclusion of validity is established in more than one way.

Perhaps this part was not clear "Moreover, the validity of the new rite could not be called into question without also calling into question the validity of several Eastern rites recognized by the Church from time immemorial"

This is simply a matter of history, which the article sufficiently docuмents, naming the Coptic and West Syrian rite in particular, and reproducing these entire rites for easy perusal and comparison, not even theology.

Neil, well, here is the relevant portion of Anglicanorum Coetibus regarding profession of faith and ordination.

§5 The Catechism of the Catholic Church is the authoritative expression of the Catholic faith professed by members of the Ordinariate.

...

§ 1. Those who ministered as Anglican deacons, priests, or bishops, and who fulfil the requisites established by canon law[13] and are not impeded by irregularities or other impediments[14] may be accepted by the Ordinary as candidates for Holy Orders in the Catholic Church.

...

Candidates for Holy Orders in an Ordinariate should be prepared alongside other seminarians, especially in the areas of doctrinal and pastoral formation.

Magdalena, yes, I agree. Also, St.Peter does say that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation, so we should understand it as patristic tradition has always understood it, and as commentaries on Scripture from learned priests have explained it for us.

Quote from: magdalena

If toward the end of time the Perpetual Sacrifice will disappear, what better way could it happen than to have invalid bishops and invalid priests?  IMO, that would be Satan's master stroke.  

Look at the Catholic world in absolute ashes.  

Effect: No Compliance With Sacramental Grace
Possible Cause: No Sacramental Grace Available (outside of Baptism and Marriage)

If indeed Satan and his minions (Bugnini et al), were able to effect an invalid "mass" and "holy orders" in the western Church... after 40 years or so (when the men ordained/consecrated in the pre-Bugnini rites were for the most part dead), I can imagine Satan having no problem with a Motu Proprio coming out of "Apostate Rome" allowing the "Extraordinary Form" to be offered by a bunch of laymen.  The net result would again be no Sacramental Grace.

Timing would then be right for the False Resistance to bring the flock back into the "Fold".

In the years to come the NSSPX, will be "ordained" by the "Romans" and they will leave the seminary as they entered... laymen!  Look at the Fraternity, ICK, etc.

With views such as this, is it any wonder that the anti-accordista movement is somehow linked to sedevacantism? Ferdinand, you are just giving fodder to Fr. Rostand! Please cease. I am still glad that Frs. Chazal and Pfeiffer are publicly against sedevacantism.

During the time of the Arian heresy, St. Jerome said the whole world groaned and marvelled to find itself Arian. The Catholic Church will overcome this crisis just like it did before with the Arian heresy.

Attached is some good reading on Anglican "Orders" (and the Bugnini rites for that matter).  

It is worth a thorough read!

I don't think that anyone here is suggesting that Anglican orders are valid, or even that they might be.  

Well, I am not sure how I can express my position any more clearly or with more certainty.

Quote from: Ferdinand

Attached is some good reading on Anglican "Orders" (and the Bugnini rites for that matter).  

It is worth a thorough read!

I don't think that anyone here is suggesting that Anglican orders are valid, or even that they might be.  

My Dear Sigismund,

After you read (perhaps more that once) and sift thoroughly the "Vindication of the Bull" you will come to find the principles that will help you better understand the dubious nature of the "Bugnini Rites" and extent of the sacramental/ecclesiastical crisis in the west.

This most important docuмent is absolutely for our times!  It is of no surprise it is never mentioned by the neo-cons and the "false resistance".

God Bless,
-Ferdinand