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 8790 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Yeti

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 4132
  • Reputation: +2431/-528
  • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • 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."

    Offline AMDGJMJ

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4090
    • Reputation: +2487/-95
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • 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.)


    "Jesus, Meek and Humble of Heart, make my heart like unto Thine!"

    http://whoshallfindavaliantwoman.blogspot.com/


    Offline epiphany

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3535
    • Reputation: +1097/-875
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    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.  

    Offline epiphany

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3535
    • Reputation: +1097/-875
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1

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

    Offline AMDGJMJ

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4090
    • Reputation: +2487/-95
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • 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

    "Jesus, Meek and Humble of Heart, make my heart like unto Thine!"

    http://whoshallfindavaliantwoman.blogspot.com/


    Offline AMDGJMJ

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4090
    • Reputation: +2487/-95
    • Gender: Female
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • Not true.  In some orders, priests are given authority to ordain.
    Sorry...  Are you saying a priest can ordain a priest?  Or are you talking about the minor orders?

    I apologize for not being specific about the difference in regards to that.  Priests often have been given authority to give minor orders.  😅
    "Jesus, Meek and Humble of Heart, make my heart like unto Thine!"

    http://whoshallfindavaliantwoman.blogspot.com/

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4132
    • Reputation: +2431/-528
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!1
  • Only Rome has the authority to approve an annulment.  Once given, it must be accepted. 
    First of all, this is your opinion and you cannot bind the consciences of others by it. On the contrary, what I said about the sacrament of matrimony is the teaching of the Church, which is taught by the authority of Rome, and that must be accepted.

    Secondly, while this might be a logical statement from a mainstream Novus Ordo practitioner, it makes no sense being used by a traditional Catholic whose religion involves rejecting countless things currently coming from Rome.

    Offline epiphany

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3535
    • Reputation: +1097/-875
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • First of all, this is your opinion and you cannot bind the consciences of others by it. On the contrary, what I said about the sacrament of matrimony is the teaching of the Church, which is taught by the authority of Rome, and that must be accepted.

    Secondly, while this might be a logical statement from a mainstream Novus Ordo practitioner, it makes no sense being used by a traditional Catholic whose religion involves rejecting countless things currently coming from Rome.
    I cannot bind others to anything.
    The Church is the only valid authority to approve an annulment.  

    Traditional Catholics must reject what should be rejected and accept what must be accepted.


    Offline epiphany

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3535
    • Reputation: +1097/-875
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Sorry...  Are you saying a priest can ordain a priest?  Or are you talking about the minor orders?

    I apologize for not being specific about the difference in regards to that.  Priests often have been given authority to give minor orders.  😅
    A priest may be the extraordinary minister of minor or major orders with papal dispensation.

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4132
    • Reputation: +2431/-528
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • I cannot bind others to anything.
    The Church is the only valid authority to approve an annulment. 

    Traditional Catholics must reject what should be rejected and accept what must be accepted.
    Agreed. The new practices related to marriage annulments must be rejected.

    The bond must be considered valid unless the contrary is proven. But a statement from a modernist cannot prove the marriage bond is invalid. Therefore it must be considered valid.

    Why would we reject the New Mass and accept the new marriage annulments? This makes no sense.

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4132
    • Reputation: +2431/-528
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • In some orders, priests are given authority to ordain.

    The episcopal character is required to confer the priesthood on someone. You can look this up in any textbook of theology.


    Offline epiphany

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3535
    • Reputation: +1097/-875
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Agreed. The new practices related to marriage annulments must be rejected.

    The bond must be considered valid unless the contrary is proven. But a statement from a modernist cannot prove the marriage bond is invalid. Therefore it must be considered valid.

    Why would we reject the New Mass and accept the new marriage annulments? This makes no sense.
    We have no choice but to accept them, as Rome is the only authority to do such 

    Offline epiphany

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3535
    • Reputation: +1097/-875
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The episcopal character is required to confer the priesthood on someone. You can look this up in any textbook of theology.
    A bull of Pope Boniface IX granted the Abbot of Saint-Osith, London the power to ordain priests, even though he was NOT a bishop.

    Pope Martin V granted the same provision to the Abbot of Altzelle in Saxony.

    Both dispensations were granted in the 1400s.


    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4132
    • Reputation: +2431/-528
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • We have no choice but to accept them, as Rome is the only authority to do such
    I'm not sure why you keep saying Rome is the only authority to approve annulments, since I'm not saying there is any other authority that can do so. What I'm saying is that someone claiming an annulment must prove that his first marriage was invalid, and a statement from a modernist does not prove anything.

    Do you have no choice but to accept the Novus Ordo too? Isn't Rome the only authority to approve a liturgy of the Mass?

    Offline epiphany

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3535
    • Reputation: +1097/-875
    • Gender: Male
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm not sure why you keep saying Rome is the only authority to approve annulments, since I'm not saying there is any other authority that can do so. What I'm saying is that someone claiming an annulment must prove that his first marriage was invalid, and a statement from a modernist does not prove anything.
    I understand what you are saying but, since only Rome can grant an annulment, we must accept it, modernist Rome or not.  Rome will be on the hook with God for this, not priests, not laity (unless the laity knowingly abuse it).