|
Post by Damaged Goods on Aug 21, 2016 18:40:16 GMT -5
Is it always a mortal sin to conditionally receive a sacrament without a positive doubt (from the recipient's point of view)? I ask in reference to priests coming from the Novus Ordo who personally have no doubts about the validity of their ordination but don't want to cause trouble and divide the faithful by distributing sacraments that many consider invalid or doubtful.
|
|
|
Post by Clarence Creedwater on Aug 21, 2016 19:27:20 GMT -5
Is it always a mortal sin to conditionally receive a sacrament without a positive doubt (from the recipient's point of view)? I ask in reference to priests coming from the Novus Ordo who personally have no doubts about the validity of their ordination but don't want to cause trouble and divide the faithful by distributing sacraments that many consider invalid or doubtful. The bishop himself must believe there is a positive doubt, even if he is objectively mistaken. In such a case of being mistaken there would be no sin, unless the reason for why he is mistaken in the first place he is culpable for - such as being at fault for not being trained well enough to know. In regard to the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Orders, all that is needed is a slight positive doubt.
|
|
|
Post by Damaged Goods on Aug 21, 2016 23:08:39 GMT -5
The bishop himself must believe there is a positive doubt, even if he is objectively mistaken. Do you have a source for this claim?
|
|
|
Post by Damaged Goods on Aug 22, 2016 11:19:58 GMT -5
The case of Cardinal Newman is probably relevant: he accepted outright reordination despite the fact that he was never convinced of the invalidity of his Anglican orders. In the light of Romans 14 and I Corinthians 8, it seems to me that a similar course should be adopted by priests ordained in the New Rite who, without doubting the validity of their orders, want to provide the Traditional faithful with the sacraments. This is especially true when we consider that most acts of Traditional clergy are only permitted because of the demands of the faithful, many of whom would be left out if conditional ordination were refused.
|
|
|
Post by Clarence Creedwater on Aug 22, 2016 18:38:09 GMT -5
The bishop himself must believe there is a positive doubt, even if he is objectively mistaken. Do you have a source for this claim? It's the rule of the Church that one cannot perform a conditional Sacrament unless one personally has positive doubt of validity, otherwise it would be willing a (possible) sacrilege (abuse of a sacrament), which is a pretty serious sin. Sorry I don't have a source, but the Church does not require Catholics to incessantly give a source every time they express a truth they once learned, as if to keep tract of the exact source of what was once learned.
|
|
|
Post by Damaged Goods on Aug 22, 2016 22:55:34 GMT -5
People talk a lot of nonsense online, and using sources to back up your claims is one of the basic principles of scholarship in any field.
|
|