|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 15, 2023 12:10:10 GMT -5
Thommie wrote: This is a good question. From the get-go, these ordinations did not take place outside of the Church, as with orthodox ordinations, for example. So, that's not at issue here. One will not find any Catholic sources to support the idea of "traditional bishops or traditional priests," but the reasoning has been that due to the the Novus Ordo Missae and also the new sacramental rites, and also the loss of Faith, in the Latin rite of the Church, that it was an emergency and justified episcopal consecrations and ordinations of priests in this extraordinary manner, so as to continue to provide unquestionable sacraments to Catholics during this crisis. In my opinion, whether or not the reasoning is justifiable and correct, it really doesn't matter for lay Catholics, who are specifically authorized to request the sacraments from these men, in our situation. I'm happy you are reading the writings of John Daly, as he understands these matters very well. I would also urge you to read "The Brussel’s Syllabus Commented - What All Catholics Must Know About the Present State of the Church," also by John Daly linked HERE I think it may help to better understand the subtle problems found in the thinking of the Home-Aloners and others. I will get to your other points soon.
|
|
|
Post by Clotilde on Feb 15, 2023 12:16:53 GMT -5
Unfortunately, this is very true. Differences have come up between my friends and myself over fasting laws. I mentioned that they followed the law of Pius XII when they went to one chapel and then when they moved to a chapel aligned with another group, they switched over to different fasting laws as well as fully adopting the position of the new chapel.
This is problematic as our rite, the Roman rite, should be fairly universal in all things, especially within one country. (I acknowledge some customs, practices, and disciplines vary across the globe). How can we criticize the inconsistency of the Vatican II sect for having essentially two forms of the Roman rite (EF/OF) when we ourselves do not keep the same fasting laws or, in some cases, use the same missal?
I have always thought this accusation of Fr. Cekada was somewhat ironic when the exact same thing was happening in his own back yard.
On the topic regarding marriage, if anyone believes that these issues do not have the potential to hurt martial peace and unity, they are sorely mistaken. Many have no qualms about disrupting the lives of the married by introducing these issues. Such people do not have to go home to the hell that is an unhappy, divided marriage and never think of the consequences of their counsel.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 15, 2023 18:35:52 GMT -5
Thommie wrote:
In order to understand this, you really have to take yourself back to the beginning of the crisis. Catholics saw the Novus Ordo, and began fleeing from their parishes all around the world, and priests likewise recognized that this new rite had deviated from the Catholic rite, and began ministering to the laypeople. At the beginning, this was more simple, as the first priests that rejected the mass, were priests sent by the Catholic Church. The problem soon became obvious, how would this continue if the crisis did not end?
This problem was solved with a new idea, that a bishop, namely, Archbishop Lefebvre would ordain men to work in the SSPX, and bring the sacraments to Catholics of the Latin rite. This idea cannot be found in any Catholic book, and it is novel, so it's debatable whether this was the correct course of action. There is presently, and obviously, no one to settle this debate.
With all of that said, let's say for a hypothetical argument, that Archbishop Lefebvre, followed later by the other traditional bishops, was wrong in ordaining these men without them having any legitimacy by having a mission from the Church. The same can be said of all of the episcopal consecrations, as well. There are two canons relevant to laypeople in this situation, canons 2261 and 2284. If the traditional bishops and priests should not have been ordained/consecrated, then that fact is irrelevant as to whether Catholics may request the sacraments from them.
In my opinion, I believe that the priests in question only role in the Church in regards to the use of their orders is to provide the sacraments to laypeople who request these sacraments. They have no other role, as to their orders, and any other role that they may play is equivalent to the role of the laity. These priests have no office in the Catholic Church, they may not exercise any authority over laypeople. They are not pastors or diocesan bishops. They are "sacramental bishops" snd "sacramental priests," who in charity answer the requests for the sacraments snd provide them.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 15, 2023 19:23:55 GMT -5
Thommie wrote: There are clear differences between the consecrations of bishops by other bishops during the time of sedevacante in the past and the current "traditional bishops." The bishops in the time of the vacant see during the pontificates of Clement IV and Gregory XI, were consecrated by neighboring bishops to fill vacant sees. They were not consecrated to be wandering bishops with no office or title. It's an interesting question as to whether the law in such a situation would have become harmful and a practice that was once allowed, neighboring bishops consecrating new bishops to fill vacant sees in the absence of a pope in a long term sedevacante would be permissible. I think it's arguable, and even probable that the bishops acted correctly. Our present situation is not the same. The "traditional bishop" model is justified by a "state of necessity," and it's core tenet is that any bishop may justify the consecration of another bishop if the need justifies it. A bishop could in theory consecrate hundreds of men, and no one who holds this position, should have any problem with the lawfulness of this. Everything is dependent on the subjective judgment of each and every traditional bishop. The position has no set governing rules, as there are none. In practice, what I see are bishops who keep consecrating more bishops to guarantee that each group has their own episcopal lines, therefore each group may operate independently of any other group, as the episcopal orders gives them long term and perhaps permanent independence. Does not anyone other than me see the obvious harm this does towards the unity of the Church, with each group having is own little fiefdom, with its bishops, priests and governing structures? The Catholic Church has never had anything even remotely like this, ever! There is no set understanding between these bishops as to any geographical areas, so in theory, any one area may have many bishops operating in it. The bishops seem to service Catholics more by adherence to a group, to a particular theological position or a response to the crisis. There is no restrictions within this model as to how many traditional bishops may exist, so it's very possible that we will see more and more be consecrated, and you never know, one may come along and start doing mass ordinations and consecrations, which according to this model, that it's the subjective judgment of each traditional bishop to judge the need, would be a permissible act, even though many or most would be revolted by it. Fwiw, I do not see this model as ever being the tacit will of the pope, and although, I think the response of neighboring bishops of filling sees during a time of long term sedevacante, discussed above, may be justifiable, I do not see this response as being anything even remotely as a correct Catholic response to the crisis. With that said, who am I? Do any of these traditional bishops care what I believe? I doubt it. So, they will most likely keep doing what they are doing, and Catholics can keep requesting the sacraments from them, so I think unless the status quo changes, this will be the way it is for the foreseeable future. The quote by Fr. McGovern is very powerful, and it gives you the answer you are looking for. This response of the creation of traditional bishops who have no mission from the Church, is obviously not compatible with the explanation given by Fr. McGovern. Fr. McGovern was not isolated in what he said, what he said was standard and is found easily in many approved Catholic references. For those reading this not familiar with the entire quote, it can be found here: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/48/apostolic-succession-mcgovern-1906More later....
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 16, 2023 12:54:42 GMT -5
Thommie wrote:
Certainly, Archbishop Lefebvre was legitimate, although he was retired.
Regarding the SSPX bishops and all of the others, including the Thuc and Mendez lines along with the many obscure bishops who refer to themselves as Traditional bishops, it's arguable, although not settled, that they would not be thieves and robbers, so long as they kept their use of orders strictly in the minimalist role as "sacramental bishops and sacramental priests." Any claim to an office, or exercising of jurisdiction, would, in my opinion, certainly cause the guilt party to self-indict himself as a usurper and a thief who is is taking what is certainly not his, the power given by Our Lord to his hierarchy.
Regarding those who do indeed maintain a minimalist role, I think that it's best to leave that matter for a future Pope to settle, whether or not a "sacramental bishop or sacramental priest" in an emergency can exist in the first place. The most I can tell you is that I personally would not seek or accept orders under this circumstance.
There is no need for any particular bishop to save the Divine mission given to bishops and priests or for that matter the Apostolic Succession. Our Lord promised that the Church cannot and will not fail, so we can rely on Him who taught us this, not on any man, even a bishop, to safeguard what is already safeguarded for us.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 16, 2023 13:16:23 GMT -5
Thommie wrote:
Regarding Cardinals, they are not essential to the Church itself, so it's possible that they may all fall away or die, and no more will remain in the world. Such is not possible with the hierarchy, which is composed of the successors of the Apostles.
If you have time, watch the video that Voxx posted above, to better understand the idea that there are priests and in my opinion many bishops who do not have it clear in their mind about Francis' legitimacy, but who still do nevertheless still have the Faith. When one comes to the conclusion that Francis cannot be Pope, he doesn't at the moment become a Catholic. If one was already a Catholic, baptized and believes the Faith, then the understanding of sedevacantism is something that assists one to better grasp the state of the Church and put it all together, so to speak, it's not something that is part of of the Faith itself. In my opinion, ether are many bishops and priests like the two in the video, Catholics who have not settled their minds on whether sedevacantism is correct or not.
I wrote a post on this very topic, so I'll post it again here, as it covers the question you brought up in detail:
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 16, 2023 13:35:53 GMT -5
Thommie wrote:
Well, this question is based on whether these bishops and priests in question are actually claiming a mission from the Church, or are they relying exclusively on the authorization to use their orders in accordance with canons 2261 and 2284?
If they are claiming to have a mission from the Church, then this must be proved, not just assumed. Can one receive a mission in some other way than that which is given to him by one authorized to send him, giving him that mission? Who is authorized to send priests in the Catholic Church? It is only the Successors of the Apostles, as they gave the authority to do that, no one else.
St. Francis of de Sales, among others states that extraordinary missions do not happen unless those with the ordinary mission approve of it, and secondly, if God ever did send one with an extraordinary mission, miracles would accompany it to prove the claim.
I think that if one wishes to accuse the bishops and priests of the SSPX and also the other groups, of claiming a mission from the Church, then one must prove that assertion. I am not certain that all of them are claiming this, and I am also not certain that any that do, truly understand the gravity of what they are asserting.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 16, 2023 15:44:18 GMT -5
Thommie wrote:
I'm not sure which orders that the SSPX currently affiliates with. I am not sure about a priestly vocation that would include joining a traditional group, so I cannot advise you on that. I am not telling you one way or the other. We are in very strange times, so it's not as though you are living in a time with a Pope and all dioceses with their seminaries and religious orders submitted to him. If you join any of these groups, just realize all of the issues with that choice that go along with it. None of these groups is being governed by ecclesiastical authority, and that is enough for me, at least, to not want to join them, if I were a young man. But, with that said, pray about your life, follow God's Will, and I am sure He will lead you to what He wants you to do.
If it were me, I would consider the best of the eastern rites, the ones most distant from the Conciliar church and its errors, and possibly consider the priesthood or the religious life there.
Thommie wrote:
I think this should be clear, one must not be deceptive in this matter. In my opinion, the best match will be, at least theologically speaking, the husband and wife who hold the sedevacantist position, but are not sectarian, believing in false teachings on the apostolic succession, or NUCs. Pray daily and constantly that God will send you a wife, and if it is His Will, I am sure He will hear you and answer you.
Thommie wrote:
Do you mean papal elections? I am not sure that he wrote a book on this. Do you have the name of the book you are thinking of?
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Feb 16, 2023 20:45:26 GMT -5
Thommie wrote: I'm not sure which orders that the SSPX currently affiliates with. I am not sure about a priestly vocation that would include joining a traditional group, so I cannot advise you on that. I am not telling you one way or the other. We are in very strange times, so it's not as though you are living in a time with a Pope and all dioceses with their seminaries and religious orders submitted to him. If you join any of these groups, just realize all of the issues with that choice that go along with it. None of these groups is being governed by ecclesiastical authority, and that is enough for me, at least, to not want to join them, if I were a young man. But, with that said, pray about your life, follow God's Will, and I am sure He will lead you to what He wants you to do. If it were me, I would consider the best of the eastern rites, the ones most distant from the Conciliar church and its errors, and possibly consider the priesthood or the religious life there. Thommie wrote: I think this should be clear, one must not be deceptive in this matter. In my opinion, the best match will be, at least theologically speaking, the husband and wife who hold the sedevacantist position, but are not sectarian, believing in false teachings on the apostolic succession, or NUCs. Pray daily and constantly that God will send you a wife, and if it is His Will, I am sure He will hear you and answer you. Thommie wrote: Do you mean papal elections? I am not sure that he wrote a book on this. Do you have the name of the book you are thinking of? I don't know how to thank everyone for their time and charity for answering my concerns, I really appreciate it. Some things that Clotilde, Vox etc. I can no longer see, I suppose they were deleted or not all can be seen, I am not sure, I am a bit ignorant in the use of the forums. I have been with great concerns for some time and I have been able to answer them thanks to the writings of John Lane and John Daly In this forum , thank you very much Pacelli , I have perfectly understood your answers . I only have the question of what reliable Eastern Catholic rites are there? , I don't know anything about the oriental rite God bless you all and the Blessed Virgin. I have written badly, my English is bad, I was referring to a book that John Daly a book on the choice of religious vocation or marriage I think John Lane wrote on the subject of the Papal election. ¿what happened to them today? They should intervene in YouTube videos or things like that, they really do a lot of good, but I understand that they must be tired of so many debates.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 3:46:41 GMT -5
Hey Didymus . John Lane did a series of interviews with Louie from AKA Catholic a few years ago. You can find them here.
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Feb 18, 2023 13:43:06 GMT -5
Hey Didymus . John Lane did a series of interviews with Louie from AKA Catholic a few years ago. You can find them here. Thank you very much Resolution, I have seen all the material from the interviews, there are things that I don't understand since I speak Spanish, but in general yes. I was referring more specifically to participating again in forums and perhaps in content more often on YouTube, I think Lane's material is from 2 years ago. But well, I think that I have already understood the fundamentals and all of you have been very helpful to me and I am very grateful, if a new question arises I will ask it God bless you !
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 18, 2023 21:05:44 GMT -5
Thommie wrote: I'm not sure which orders that the SSPX currently affiliates with. I am not sure about a priestly vocation that would include joining a traditional group, so I cannot advise you on that. I am not telling you one way or the other. We are in very strange times, so it's not as though you are living in a time with a Pope and all dioceses with their seminaries and religious orders submitted to him. If you join any of these groups, just realize all of the issues with that choice that go along with it. None of these groups is being governed by ecclesiastical authority, and that is enough for me, at least, to not want to join them, if I were a young man. But, with that said, pray about your life, follow God's Will, and I am sure He will lead you to what He wants you to do. If it were me, I would consider the best of the eastern rites, the ones most distant from the Conciliar church and its errors, and possibly consider the priesthood or the religious life there. Thommie wrote: I think this should be clear, one must not be deceptive in this matter. In my opinion, the best match will be, at least theologically speaking, the husband and wife who hold the sedevacantist position, but are not sectarian, believing in false teachings on the apostolic succession, or NUCs. Pray daily and constantly that God will send you a wife, and if it is His Will, I am sure He will hear you and answer you. Thommie wrote: Do you mean papal elections? I am not sure that he wrote a book on this. Do you have the name of the book you are thinking of? I don't know how to thank everyone for their time and charity for answering my concerns, I really appreciate it. Some things that Clotilde, Vox etc. I can no longer see, I suppose they were deleted or not all can be seen, I am not sure, I am a bit ignorant in the use of the forums. I have been with great concerns for some time and I have been able to answer them thanks to the writings of John Lane and John Daly In this forum , thank you very much Pacelli , I have perfectly understood your answers . I only have the question of what reliable Eastern Catholic rites are there? , I don't know anything about the oriental rite God bless you all and the Blessed Virgin. I have written badly, my English is bad, I was referring to a book that John Daly a book on the choice of religious vocation or marriage I think John Lane wrote on the subject of the Papal election. ¿what happened to them today? They should intervene in YouTube videos or things like that, they really do a lot of good, but I understand that they must be tired of so many debates. You're welcome. May God bless you too! Regarding the eastern rites, from what I know about them, the Syro-Malankara in India is good. I think the traditional dioceses of the Syro-Malabar are good too, as they have been fighting since the 1970's to keep their rite intact with no changes. I have never heard or read any criticism of the Coptic Catholics in Egypt. I am not sure one way or the other about many of the others, but I am sure there are still many keeping the Faith. The most liberal from what I have seen are the Maronites and the Chaldeans, and some Ukrainians and Ruthenians at least in the diaspora. Maybe in the homeland they are better. It's so hard to get accurate information on each of them, so we can only piece together what little we can find out. I don't speak the languages of these eastern rites, so I can't read their publications, and read or listen to what their bishops are saying, so we can only form judgements on inadequate information, so all judgments in a case like this are not firm. I can tell you from personal experience with knowing eastern rite priests, that many that I have known over the years certainly kept the Faith, they love the Catholic Faith, so I have witnessed personally the Faith alive in the eastern rites, although, I will say at the same time, that there are others that are certainly liberal and maybe even heretics, so it's a complex situation, which doesn't allow for generalizing. I hope this helps. I wish I could give you a more clear answer.
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Feb 18, 2023 21:55:15 GMT -5
I don't know how to thank everyone for their time and charity for answering my concerns, I really appreciate it. Some things that Clotilde, Vox etc. I can no longer see, I suppose they were deleted or not all can be seen, I am not sure, I am a bit ignorant in the use of the forums. I have been with great concerns for some time and I have been able to answer them thanks to the writings of John Lane and John Daly In this forum , thank you very much Pacelli , I have perfectly understood your answers . I only have the question of what reliable Eastern Catholic rites are there? , I don't know anything about the oriental rite God bless you all and the Blessed Virgin. I have written badly, my English is bad, I was referring to a book that John Daly a book on the choice of religious vocation or marriage I think John Lane wrote on the subject of the Papal election. ¿what happened to them today? They should intervene in YouTube videos or things like that, they really do a lot of good, but I understand that they must be tired of so many debates. You're welcome. May God bless you too! Regarding the eastern rites, from what I know about them, the Syro-Malankara in India is good. I think the traditional dioceses of the Syro-Malabar are good too, as they have been fighting since the 1970's to keep their rite intact with no changes. I have never heard or read any criticism of the Coptic Catholics in Egypt. I am not sure one way or the other about many of the others, but I am sure there are still many keeping the Faith. The most liberal from what I have seen are the Maronites and the Chaldeans, and some Ukrainians and Ruthenians at least in the diaspora. Maybe in the homeland they are better. It's so hard to get accurate information on each of them, so we can only piece together what little we can find out. I don't speak the languages of these eastern rites, so I can't read their publications, and read or listen to what their bishops are saying, so we can only form judgements on inadequate information, so all judgments in a case like this are not firm. I can tell you from personal experience with knowing eastern rite priests, that many that I have known over the years certainly kept the Faith, they love the Catholic Faith, so I have witnessed personally the Faith alive in the eastern rites, although, I will say at the same time, that there are others that are certainly liberal and maybe even heretics, so it's a complex situation, which doesn't allow for generalizing. I hope this helps. I wish I could give you a more clear answer. I also missed a question from Pacelli, I read this article: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/2353/jurisdiction-confessor-crisis but I must be misinterpreting something or doing a bad reasoning, I think it is because of the confusion that I still have. 1) As I understand it, the FSSPX has jurisdiction provided by the Church with the Bergoglio declaration. For the people who confessed before that, does canon 882 apply to them or did they already have jurisdiction? 2) The other bishops, sedevacantist priests, is it a guarantee that canon 882 is applied to them? , since he used the word "could" attract jurisdiction under canon 882. That left me wondering and uneasy. 3) I made my first confession with one of the priests ordained by Sanborn and who today is a bishop who works with Pivarunas but is not of the CMRI position. When this Bishop came, I had to travel to a city that is 1 hour from where the FSSPX is. Does "captivity" apply here or should I have gone to the FSSPX? Should I repeat my confession with the FSSPX? Was there a true acquittal? 4) If this bishop is in the same city as the SSPX, does Canon 882 stop running for this bishop? 5) I know there is an 80-year-old priest here in my town, but I have no idea if he still hears confessions, and when I asked for his name, they didn't give it to me, maybe because of his age. Is it also a factor to take into account? , I'm not sure he wants to use the roman rite if he is a modernist, I definitely think I'm wrong here, it seems to me that I have made a bad reasoning and I am misinterpreting the text itself. I can't get an oriental rite or something similar to what you mention here in South America, my country, with God's help I have a FSSPX chapel 12 hours away. Did I misread the text?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 19, 2023 6:55:04 GMT -5
You're welcome. May God bless you too! Regarding the eastern rites, from what I know about them, the Syro-Malankara in India is good. I think the traditional dioceses of the Syro-Malabar are good too, as they have been fighting since the 1970's to keep their rite intact with no changes. I have never heard or read any criticism of the Coptic Catholics in Egypt. I am not sure one way or the other about many of the others, but I am sure there are still many keeping the Faith. The most liberal from what I have seen are the Maronites and the Chaldeans, and some Ukrainians and Ruthenians at least in the diaspora. Maybe in the homeland they are better. It's so hard to get accurate information on each of them, so we can only piece together what little we can find out. I don't speak the languages of these eastern rites, so I can't read their publications, and read or listen to what their bishops are saying, so we can only form judgements on inadequate information, so all judgments in a case like this are not firm. I can tell you from personal experience with knowing eastern rite priests, that many that I have known over the years certainly kept the Faith, they love the Catholic Faith, so I have witnessed personally the Faith alive in the eastern rites, although, I will say at the same time, that there are others that are certainly liberal and maybe even heretics, so it's a complex situation, which doesn't allow for generalizing. I hope this helps. I wish I could give you a more clear answer. I also missed a question from Pacelli, I read this article: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/2353/jurisdiction-confessor-crisis but I must be misinterpreting something or doing a bad reasoning, I think it is because of the confusion that I still have. 1) As I understand it, the FSSPX has jurisdiction provided by the Church with the Bergoglio declaration. For the people who confessed before that, does canon 882 apply to them or did they already have jurisdiction? 2) The other bishops, sedevacantist priests, is it a guarantee that canon 882 is applied to them? , since he used the word "could" attract jurisdiction under canon 882. That left me wondering and uneasy. 3) I made my first confession with one of the priests ordained by Sanborn and who today is a bishop who works with Pivarunas but is not of the CMRI position. When this Bishop came, I had to travel to a city that is 1 hour from where the FSSPX is. Does "captivity" apply here or should I have gone to the FSSPX? Should I repeat my confession with the FSSPX? Was there a true acquittal? 4) If this bishop is in the same city as the SSPX, does Canon 882 stop running for this bishop? 5) I know there is an 80-year-old priest here in my town, but I have no idea if he still hears confessions, and when I asked for his name, they didn't give it to me, maybe because of his age. Is it also a factor to take into account? , I'm not sure he wants to use the roman rite if he is a modernist, I definitely think I'm wrong here, it seems to me that I have made a bad reasoning and I am misinterpreting the text itself. I can't get an oriental rite or something similar to what you mention here in South America, my country, with God's help I have a FSSPX chapel 12 hours away. Did I misread the text? Thommie, You can read this and hopefully it will put your mind at ease: tradcath.proboards.com/thread/699/jurisdiction-priest-danger-deathNeither the SSPX and sedevacantist priests are authorized confessors, so you don't need to place precedence on going to SSPX priests. Their sources of jurisdiction differ, in my opinion, as I believe SSPX relies on canon 209 while the others rely on canon 882. I use the word "could" because canon 882 and the concept of a danger of death being extended to one who is healthy may be extended if no authorized confessors are present and will not be present in the long term foreseeable future. Obviously, that presumes one would have knowledge of an authorized confessor, the priest is willing to hear confessions, and the priest is still a Catholic, not a heretic. It sounds from your description that you acted correctly, so in my opinion, I wouldn't worry about it.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Feb 19, 2023 15:00:54 GMT -5
Thom your only obligation as a Lay Catholic is to save your Soul...accept what God has reveled through His Church to save your soul. Step away from politics theology and contoversy. Cling to Our Lady through the Rosary...attend whatever Valid Catholic Mass available...( NO excluded)
|
|