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

Author Topic: Traditional Powers of the Priesthood absent in novus ordo ordinations  (Read 10373 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Yeti

  • Supporter
Acceptance of NO annulments was the other issue.  On that, I actually agree with +Lefebvre.  SSPX had no actual authority to impose its view of any given annulment on consciences.  At best, they could offer advice:  "We believe that your annulment is illegitimate or doubtful at best.  If you carry on as you are, you're putting your soul in grave danger."
.
Actually, a priest is forbidden to give the sacraments to a public sinner, such as an adulterer.

The priest could say to such person, "The Church teaches that when two people get up in front of a priest and exchange matrimonial promises, that creates a spiritual bond that lasts until death. In any doubt as to whether that bond was formed, it must be presumed to have been formed unless the contrary is proved. Your statement from modernists whom everyone agrees are untrustworthy provides proves nothing since both you and we agree that they are untrustworthy with regard to the Faith. So we cannot accept your annulment here, and you must go back and live with the person you originally married, or we must consider you to be an adulterer."

This line of thinking seems to imply that someone can receive half a sacrament. It doesn't make sense. :confused:

A man is either a priest or he is not. He cannot be half priest half layman.

If he is a priest, than he has all the sacramental powers. He may need jurisdictional powers to hear confessions, to witness marriages, but regarding sacraments, any real priest is a full priest.

The emergency baptism administered by nurses was not re-done conditionally afterwards. Only the rest of the baptismal ceremonies were done.

I don't understand how holy orders would be different.
Holy Orders is special because there isn't just one form involved and then you have everything as with the other 6 sacraments. 

There are many layers and three separate sacraments within it (diaconate, priesthood, and episcopate). 

Each major order leaves a specific Sacramental mark making the recipient separate on a new level from the laity.

The powers of the Episcopate also have been called the "fullness of the priesthood" indicating that the powers of a normal priest are limited in some sacramental sense until he is consecrated. 

(Only a Bishop can ordain and consecrate, but a priest can be given special orders and privileges to bestow Confirmation at least in the Eastern Rites.)




.
Actually, a priest is forbidden to give the sacraments to a public sinner, such as an adulterer.

The priest could say to such person, "The Church teaches that when two people get up in front of a priest and exchange matrimonial promises, that creates a spiritual bond that lasts until death. In any doubt as to whether that bond was formed, it must be presumed to have been formed unless the contrary is proved. Your statement from modernists whom everyone agrees are untrustworthy provides proves nothing since both you and we agree that they are untrustworthy with regard to the Faith. So we cannot accept your annulment here, and you must go back and live with the person you originally married, or we must consider you to be an adulterer."
Only Rome has the authority to approve an annulment.  Once given, it must be accepted.  


(Only a Bishop can ordain and consecrate, 
Not true.  In some orders, priests are given authority to ordain.

Here are some well-known and respected theologians who believed that these two commands should never be left out in the Ordinations of a priest and that through them priests were given the "powers of the priesthood":


Saint Robert Bellarmine

De Lugo

Hallier

Vasquez

Maldonatus

Ledesma

Billuart

Berti

Gotti

Louis Cardinal Billot 

Msgr. Gutberlet