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

Author Topic: Permanent Chapel in Alberta, Canada  (Read 559 times)

1 Member and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Permanent Chapel in Alberta, Canada
« Reply #25 on: Today at 12:50:15 AM »
Attached is a certificate in Latin of Archbishop Thuc detailing his consecration of Fr. Carmona, with signatures from two witnesses. Below is Fr. Cekada's translation of the letter:

“We, Peter Martin Ngô-dinh-Thuc, Titular Archbishop of Bulla Regia, give notice of the following to all: on the 17th day of the month of October, in the year 1981, we conferred the episcopal rank of the Catholic Church on Father Moses Carmona Rivera, with all rights pertaining to said rank. Given on the 18th day of the month of October, in the year of Our Lord 1981. [signature] +Peter Martin Ngô-dinh-Thuc. The eyewitnesses were: Doctor Kurt Hiller and Doctor Eberhard Heller. [signature] Dr. Kurt Hiller. [signature ] Dr. E. Heller.”



You're totally confused. This is not the consecration we are talking about

Re: Permanent Chapel in Alberta, Canada
« Reply #26 on: Today at 12:53:58 AM »
Do you doubt this? I am getting the feeling that your good will is feigned
Can you cite it or not? I am always ready to, and interesting in, reading Church teaching. Your "feeling" means nothing.


Re: Permanent Chapel in Alberta, Canada
« Reply #27 on: Today at 01:02:18 AM »


You're totally confused. This is not the consecration we are talking about
I am not confused. The letter shows he fully intended to consecrate Fr. Carmona as a Bishop. This is proof that one should not reject all the consecrations Archbishop Thuc did, even if one did believe that the Palmar ones were invalid due to lack of intention.

Re: Permanent Chapel in Alberta, Canada
« Reply #28 on: Today at 01:20:02 AM »

Anybody who attends a thuc line, or is a thuc line clergy is the one who is biased.

The Angelus is not "some random" journalist. They would not have printed this without some source to back it up.

I think you are letting your own bias shine through, while having put on a good act for a while.

Because an impartial person reading this would realize that there already was a perfectly good line namely that of Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Castro de Mayer. The only problem for some is that they were not foaming-at-the-mouth sedevacantists. So an impartial person would not feel the need to defend Thuc line at all costs, and can suspend any attachment to it. And look at this question reasonably.


One of the reasons I know I will always win this argument in the eyes of reasonable people is that dogmatic sedes can almost never resist getting extremely emotional, insulting, over bearing and downright childish when you discuss this question in depth.


It's almost as if... Gee... They're trying to hide something...
It is perplexing that the +Thuc Bishops were accused of being heretics, when the article did not name their supposed heresy (and this you did not address), and did not give any citation for when and where +Thuc declared he withheld intention. Claiming The Angelus would not have printed it without a source seems to reveal a personal attachment on your part, and not an objective reality. If they had a source, please share it with us. I agree that dogmatic sedes can be very emotional and biased.

Re: Permanent Chapel in Alberta, Canada
« Reply #29 on: Today at 04:20:45 AM »
Can you cite it or not? I am always ready to, and interesting in, reading Church teaching. Your "feeling" means nothing.


Yes, I quoted it a while back. But I would have to dig it up.
Why dont you go through my posts and find it.

I am less inclined to help you now, knowing that you were hiding you your ill will