|
Post by Didymus on Jun 30, 2023 20:11:09 GMT -5
From this list there are 2 or 3 who have already died. There are currently 6-5 living prelates in the Latin Roman Rite who participated in a session of the Second Vatican Council. Would many of these continue to retain the Apostolic succession to call a conclave if they became aware of the Novus Ordo? I have not looked for others, but once these are dead, would it only be left to trust in Eastern rites or in charges provided by the Church?
Alphonsus Mathias, 93, Archbishop Emeritus of Bangalore. He participated in the third and fourth sessions.
Daniel Verstraete, 97, Bishop Emeritus of Klerksdorp. He participated in the last session.
Francis Arinze, 89 years old, prefect emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. He participated in the last session.
Gabino Díaz Merchán, 95 years old, archbishop emeritus of Oviedo. Participated in the last session.
José de Jesús Sahagún de la Parra, 100 years old, Bishop Emeritus of Ciudad Lázaro Cárdenas. He attended the entire council except the third session.
Laurent Noël, 101 years old, bishop emeritus of Trois-Rivières. He attended the entire council except the first session.
Luigi Bettazzi, 98 years old, Bishop Emeritus of Ivrea. He attended the entire council except the first session. He was one of the signatories of the pact of the catacombs.
Victorinus Youn Kong-hi, 97, Archbishop Emeritus of Gwangju. He attended the entire council except the first session.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jul 1, 2023 9:51:36 GMT -5
From this list there are 2 or 3 who have already died. There are currently 6-5 living prelates in the Latin Roman Rite who participated in a session of the Second Vatican Council. Would many of these continue to retain the Apostolic succession to call a conclave if they became aware of the Novus Ordo? I have not looked for others, but once these are dead, would it only be left to trust in Eastern rites or in charges provided by the Church? Alphonsus Mathias, 93, Archbishop Emeritus of Bangalore. He participated in the third and fourth sessions. Daniel Verstraete, 97, Bishop Emeritus of Klerksdorp. He participated in the last session. Francis Arinze, 89 years old, prefect emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. He participated in the last session. Gabino Díaz Merchán, 95 years old, archbishop emeritus of Oviedo. Participated in the last session. José de Jesús Sahagún de la Parra, 100 years old, Bishop Emeritus of Ciudad Lázaro Cárdenas. He attended the entire council except the third session. Laurent Noël, 101 years old, bishop emeritus of Trois-Rivières. He attended the entire council except the first session. Luigi Bettazzi, 98 years old, Bishop Emeritus of Ivrea. He attended the entire council except the first session. He was one of the signatories of the pact of the catacombs. Victorinus Youn Kong-hi, 97, Archbishop Emeritus of Gwangju. He attended the entire council except the first session. Hello Didymus, If the bishops of the Church, those who are successors of the Apostles gather in an imperfect Council, it would only have two legitimate tasks, to state that that the Roman See is vacant, and secondly, to determine if there are any Cardinals left to lawfully elect, and if it is determined that there are not, then right of election would devolve to either them, or the remaining clergy of Rome. The fact of whether the bishops participated at Vatican II really doesn't matter. This would be an act of the remaining successors of the Apostles, the ruling bishops of the Church. I am not convinced, though, that the Church is without Cardinals, as there have been many appointments made by the undeclared antipopes, which would be an act supplied by the Church, and a case of heresy has never been made against each of them. What if the remaining Cardinals that have kept the Faith gathered to elect a Pope? It seems to me it would be valid. There are two issues which are good to keep separate, the continuance of the Apostolic Succession, which seems to be with a high degree of certainty to be accomplished mostly in the eastern rites, and the second issue is how can we have a new pope again with all of this uncertainty of who can elect and how the principle of devotion applies, and who gets to determine that. The successors of the Apostles would by Divine Law have the right to elect, but that would only happen if the Cardinals ceased to exist, through death or falling away into heresy. But, the fact of the Cardinals all falling away is not certain, therefore the right to elect would remain with them, assuming there are any left. It's also worth noting that in the absence of the Cardinals the remaining Roman Clergy would also have the right to elect.
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Jul 1, 2023 10:46:54 GMT -5
From this list there are 2 or 3 who have already died. There are currently 6-5 living prelates in the Latin Roman Rite who participated in a session of the Second Vatican Council. Would many of these continue to retain the Apostolic succession to call a conclave if they became aware of the Novus Ordo? I have not looked for others, but once these are dead, would it only be left to trust in Eastern rites or in charges provided by the Church? Alphonsus Mathias, 93, Archbishop Emeritus of Bangalore. He participated in the third and fourth sessions. Daniel Verstraete, 97, Bishop Emeritus of Klerksdorp. He participated in the last session. Francis Arinze, 89 years old, prefect emeritus of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. He participated in the last session. Gabino Díaz Merchán, 95 years old, archbishop emeritus of Oviedo. Participated in the last session. José de Jesús Sahagún de la Parra, 100 years old, Bishop Emeritus of Ciudad Lázaro Cárdenas. He attended the entire council except the third session. Laurent Noël, 101 years old, bishop emeritus of Trois-Rivières. He attended the entire council except the first session. Luigi Bettazzi, 98 years old, Bishop Emeritus of Ivrea. He attended the entire council except the first session. He was one of the signatories of the pact of the catacombs. Victorinus Youn Kong-hi, 97, Archbishop Emeritus of Gwangju. He attended the entire council except the first session. Hello Didymus, If the bishops of the Church, those who are successors of the Apostles gather in an imperfect Council, it would only have two legitimate tasks, to state that that the Roman See is vacant, and secondly, to determine if there are any Cardinals left to lawfully elect, and if it is determined that there are not, then right of election would devolve to either them, or the remaining clergy of Rome. The fact of whether the bishops participated at Vatican II really doesn't matter. This would be an act of the remaining successors of the Apostles, the ruling bishops of the Church. I am not convinced, though, that the Church is without Cardinals, as there have been many appointments made by the undeclared antipopes, which would be an act supplied by the Church, and a case of heresy has never been made against each of them. What if the remaining Cardinals that have kept the Faith gathered to elect a Pope? It seems to me it would be valid. There are two issues which are good to keep separate, the continuance of the Apostolic Succession, which seems to be with a high degree of certainty to be accomplished mostly in the eastern rites, and the second issue is how can we have a new pope again with all of this uncertainty of who can elect and how the principle of devotion applies, and who gets to determine that. The successors of the Apostles would by Divine Law have the right to elect, but that would only happen if the Cardinals ceased to exist, through death or falling away into heresy. But, the fact of the Cardinals all falling away is not certain, therefore the right to elect would remain with them, assuming there are any left. It's also worth noting that in the absence of the Cardinals the remaining Roman Clergy would also have the right to elect. Good clarification Pacelli, now another question, I know that cardinals do not need to be bishops, but if they have to have priestly orders, is it enough to have a diaconate or minor orders, for example, to be named cardinal? In the event that only the diaconate were enough, would some of the deacons ordained with the pre-conciliar rites but who later received major orders, episcopacy and the cardinalate in the new rites of Paul VI and assumed a position under the jurisdiction provided by the Church, be legitimate cardinal electors of a Pope? It is certainly very difficult to determine whether any of these current cardinals received their diaconate or priesthood or episcopate in a valid manner after Paul VI's changes entangled in the Novus Ordo. What leads me to think is that there is greater security in the Eastern rites that maintain this validity of orders and since it is a sui iuris rite, the cardinals chosen from the Eastern rites have this position currently provided by the Church. Is it correct?
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Jul 1, 2023 12:29:05 GMT -5
If so , the cardinals created by JPII could be electors if they convert
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jul 1, 2023 14:15:14 GMT -5
If so , the cardinals created by JPII could be electors if they convert It's not if they convert. It's only if they never defected from Faith at all.
|
|