John Lewis
Full Member
Reviewing the Knowledge
Posts: 373
|
Post by John Lewis on Sept 5, 2023 21:04:48 GMT -5
In a rite that is supposed to based on the rite of Hippolytus and also the Coptic rite, the critical function of the order received that is specific to bishops rather than priests is strangely omitted. The other powers are not part of the order, but are part of the jurisdiction of a bishop, meaning that not all bishops have these powers as they are consecrated as bishop and are not able to then use these powers, such as auxiliary bishops, and those assigned to Titular Sees. The one power that all bishops have inherent in the order received is to ordain, and that one specific power is not requested in this rite. In my view this is critical.
|
|
|
Post by sdwright on Sept 9, 2023 7:04:29 GMT -5
Well @didymus, I don't rule out adding anything more, but I don't have much more clear things to say here (not that all this leads anywhere clear either) and I don't want to try the good Pacelli 's patience by having us repeat our points! Regarding the other points in question, I think Pacelli would agree that the polemics on the Unacum and Holy Week are two good examples. Hello sdwright , You are not trying my patience, and I hope I am not trying yours. I think you and I have the same goal which is the truth. You and I also share the same goal of neither proving the rite either valid or invalid, which is something that really should fall under the competence of theologians anyway. [cont]Thank you for your further comments Pacelli, which have been interesting. Perhaps I shall take them up again in the future, but for now I shall be leaving it as mentioned. I mainly wrote this to say: No, you were not trying my patience!
|
|
|
Post by Didymus on Dec 21, 2023 8:21:14 GMT -5
Regarding your final points, I accept that there are questions to be raised over the third, although I'm not sure that they can't be answered with moral cetainty. (I have not done so, personally.) However I struggle to see how the preface / consecration prayer as a whole does not specify the power of order and the grace of the Holy Ghost. Perhaps one could argue that, in the hands of non-Catholics distorting the meaning of the word "bishop" etc, over time words could come to mean something else and so violate your third point. But given that it was received in 1968 in the context of a stripped down version of the true Mass, rather than (say) 1970 in the context of the new Mass - and given that it was received without protest by the Catholic bishops, I think that this is a hard thing to argue about the rite itself, and about early ordinations in this rite, if used by serious Catholic bishops. SDWright Are you referring to the fact that the 1968 prayer was accepted in the 1965 Missal before the imposition of the Novus Ordo and the new Missal of Paul VI? Does anyone have a photo or image of this prayer in that missal? , maybe I misunderstood here.
|
|
|
Post by sdwright on Jan 7, 2024 17:15:29 GMT -5
Regarding your final points, I accept that there are questions to be raised over the third, although I'm not sure that they can't be answered with moral cetainty. (I have not done so, personally.) However I struggle to see how the preface / consecration prayer as a whole does not specify the power of order and the grace of the Holy Ghost. Perhaps one could argue that, in the hands of non-Catholics distorting the meaning of the word "bishop" etc, over time words could come to mean something else and so violate your third point. But given that it was received in 1968 in the context of a stripped down version of the true Mass, rather than (say) 1970 in the context of the new Mass - and given that it was received without protest by the Catholic bishops, I think that this is a hard thing to argue about the rite itself, and about early ordinations in this rite, if used by serious Catholic bishops. SDWright Are you referring to the fact that the 1968 prayer was accepted in the 1965 Missal before the imposition of the Novus Ordo and the new Missal of Paul VI? Does anyone have a photo or image of this prayer in that missal? , maybe I misunderstood here. Yes that's right. You won't find it in the Missal because it would be a different book.
|
|