|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Mar 30, 2023 7:57:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Mar 30, 2023 10:25:06 GMT -5
I think this introibo blog has done a great job, impressive, he was also going to participate in Kevin Davis's interview but it seems he didn't. i dont sure
|
|
John Lewis
Full Member
Reviewing the Knowledge
Posts: 373
|
Post by John Lewis on Mar 31, 2023 12:38:42 GMT -5
I think this introibo blog has done a great job, impressive, he was also going to participate in Kevin Davis's interview but it seems he didn't. i dont sure Which interview are you referring to? He has been a featured guest on that show previously.
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Apr 1, 2023 7:42:18 GMT -5
Pacelli could you help me with this, the reasoning that Introibo gives here seems to be logical for me
"The section will be brief, as everything necessary has already been written. Home Aloners must agree that the Vatican II sect is not a canonically and formally condemned sect as there was no one with Magisterial authority to do so. If Traditionalist clergy are "without jurisdiction" and "without a mission from the Church"--how could an undeclared heretic priest pre-Vatican II (i.e., outside the Church) have both jurisdiction and mission?
Canon 2261, section 2 makes it clear that the faithful can approach said priest for the sacraments and sacramentals setting a very low bar for going to him, and having no limitation on how many times you can approach him. The Canon does not restrict what sacraments can be received, and it therefore includes Penance; and that sacrament requires jurisdiction for validity. How does a priest outside the Church get jurisdiction? Not from common error, for this Canon presupposes knowledge by the faithful that the priest is a heretic. It must be supplied by the Church.
Moreover, as the Church permits you to receive the sacraments from an undeclared heretic priest, whatever "canonical mission" the Home Aloners think the priest must possess is also granted. Unless you wish to subscribe to the prolix writings of pseudo-scholarship cranked out by Theresa Benns, Home Aloners can be "Home Free"!"
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Apr 1, 2023 7:43:41 GMT -5
I think this introibo blog has done a great job, impressive, he was also going to participate in Kevin Davis's interview but it seems he didn't. i dont sure Which interview are you referring to? He has been a featured guest on that show previously. To the interview that Father Hughes, Louie Verecchio, etc., Mario Derksen, etc., were going to be, it seems that he was not present at the interview.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Apr 1, 2023 8:33:49 GMT -5
Pacelli could you help me with this, the reasoning that Introibo gives here seems to be logical for me "The section will be brief, as everything necessary has already been written. Home Aloners must agree that the Vatican II sect is not a canonically and formally condemned sect as there was no one with Magisterial authority to do so. If Traditionalist clergy are "without jurisdiction" and "without a mission from the Church"--how could an undeclared heretic priest pre-Vatican II (i.e., outside the Church) have both jurisdiction and mission? Canon 2261, section 2 makes it clear that the faithful can approach said priest for the sacraments and sacramentals setting a very low bar for going to him, and having no limitation on how many times you can approach him. The Canon does not restrict what sacraments can be received, and it therefore includes Penance; and that sacrament requires jurisdiction for validity. How does a priest outside the Church get jurisdiction? Not from common error, for this Canon presupposes knowledge by the faithful that the priest is a heretic. It must be supplied by the Church. Moreover, as the Church permits you to receive the sacraments from an undeclared heretic priest, whatever "canonical mission" the Home Aloners think the priest must possess is also granted. Unless you wish to subscribe to the prolix writings of pseudo-scholarship cranked out by Theresa Benns, Home Aloners can be "Home Free"!" Tommie, Yes, I am happy to discuss this. I agree with all of what Introibo wrote, with one exception, Canon 2261 #2 does not grant jurisdiction to the confessor, it only authorizes him to use his orders which he does not have authorization to use ordinarily. For the sacrament of confession, unlike other sacraments there are two separate components in regard to the confessor, one that he has been authorized to use his holy orders, that is that he has a canonical mission to use holy orders from a successor of the Apostles, but that is not enough for confession, he must also have the jurisdiction to absolve also given to him by a successor of the apostles. Canon 2261 #2 resolves the first matter, but not the second. In order to absolve, the confessor must still attract jurisdiction, as he does not have jurisdiction to absolve given to him by the Church, through the a successor of the Apostles, commonly called "faculties." In our present dilemma, the jurisdiction could be attracted by canon 209, supplied through common error, or 882, in danger of death. Does this make it more clear?
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Apr 2, 2023 18:21:40 GMT -5
Yes very clear, thanks Pacelli.
|
|