Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2017 9:35:21 GMT -5
I have read varying opinions on the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration. Some say that the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is valid even though they dismiss the Novus Ordo and Vatican II. Can someone explain this?
|
|
|
Post by michaelwilson on Jan 3, 2017 14:45:44 GMT -5
I would heartily recommend that you read Fr. Cekada's articles on this subject: www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/NewEpConsArtPDF2.pdf It takes about 30 minutes of your time, but it is well worth it. A shorter version is also available here: www.traditionalmass.org/images/articles/NotTruBps1.pdf The argument goes like this: 1. Pope Pius XII in Sacramentum Ordinis laid down what was the essential "matter" and "form" of the Sacrament of Orders. 2. The "form" of the rite of the Consecration of Bishops, must signify two things: a) The conferring of the Holy Ghost and b) the conferring of the power of orders. 3. Paul VI's new rite of the Consecration of Bishops replaces the old rite with a new rite which was essentially concocted by a group of experts in the aftermath of Vatican II. 4. The new rite's 'form' lacks the essential signification of one of the two powers that have to be expressly conferred i.e. The power of orders. 5. This lack of necessary signification leaves the validity of new rite at least in doubt.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2017 10:56:46 GMT -5
Can somebody tell me why Pope Pius XII changed the Episcopal Consecration from what it had been for hundreds of years?
|
|
|
Post by Marya Dabrowski on Jan 20, 2017 11:03:24 GMT -5
Can somebody tell me why Pope Pius XII changed the Episcopal Consecration from what it had been for hundreds of years? I've never really heard this before... what I understand is that he stated what needed to be included. Where did you get the information?
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 11:05:24 GMT -5
Can somebody tell me why Pope Pius XII changed the Episcopal Consecration from what it had been for hundreds of years? I've never really heard this before... what I understand is that he stated what needed to be included. Where did you get the information? Marya - The source for the information which I obtained can be found at the following link: bishopjosephmarie.org/doctrine/EpiscopalConsecrationRite.html. (Traditional Catholic Rite of Consecration of a Bishop According to Roman Pontifical dated 30 March, 1892).
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 21, 2017 14:16:58 GMT -5
Can somebody tell me why Pope Pius XII changed the Episcopal Consecration from what it had been for hundreds of years? Veronica, Pope Pius XII did not make any significant changes to the episcopal consecration rite. He made a rubrical change, very minor actually, in that he ordered the co-consecrators to recite along with the principal consecrator, specific parts of the Rite, some to be said in a low voice, and other prayers out loud. One principle to remember is that the power to make changes to the Church's rites are always within the power of the Roman Pontiff. Our duty is to trust the Pope, and accept the changes he makes, knowing that whatsoever Peter binds is bound and whatsoever he loosens in loosened.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 14:29:27 GMT -5
Pacelli - Didn't Pope Pius XII change the Preface which stated "Receive the Holy Ghost"? Also, I don't understand what "Rubics" are?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 21, 2017 14:44:54 GMT -5
Pacelli - Didn't Pope Pius XII change the Preface which stated "Receive the Holy Ghost"? Also, I don't understand what "Rubics" are? Veronica, I will dig up a source which explains exactly what he did and post it in the resource section. The only thing he did affected the participation of the co-consecrators, not a change in the wording of the Rite. Rubrics are the rules for the saying of mass, all sacramental rites, the breviary, etc. Btw, just a friendly warning, I looked at the website you used as a source, be careful of them, that "bishop" is from the Francis Schuckardt line and is his "successor." I would avoid them if I were you.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2017 17:33:42 GMT -5
Pacelli - Didn't Pope Pius XII change the Preface which stated "Receive the Holy Ghost"? Also, I don't understand what "Rubics" are? Veronica, I will dig up a source which explains exactly what he did and post it in the resource section. The only thing he did affected the participation of the co-consecrators, not a change in the wording of the Rite. Rubrics are the rules for the saying of mass, all sacramental rites, the breviary, etc. Btw, just a friendly warning, I looked at the website you used as a source, be careful of them, that "bishop" is from the Francis Schuckardt line and is his "successor." I would avoid them if I were you. Pacelli - Thanks for the warning regarding the source being from the Schuckardt line!! Also, if the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is invalid doesn't that mean that the Apostolic Succession is broken?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 21, 2017 21:19:01 GMT -5
Veronica, I will dig up a source which explains exactly what he did and post it in the resource section. The only thing he did affected the participation of the co-consecrators, not a change in the wording of the Rite. Rubrics are the rules for the saying of mass, all sacramental rites, the breviary, etc. Btw, just a friendly warning, I looked at the website you used as a source, be careful of them, that "bishop" is from the Francis Schuckardt line and is his "successor." I would avoid them if I were you. Pacelli - Thanks for the warning regarding the source being from the Schuckardt line!! Also, if the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is invalid doesn't that mean that the Apostolic Succession is broken? No, because it only effects Roman Rite bishops post-1968. There are many older Roman Rite bishops, along with countless Eastern Rite bishops consecrated using the Catholic rite.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2017 15:37:52 GMT -5
Pacelli - Thanks for the warning regarding the source being from the Schuckardt line!! Also, if the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is invalid doesn't that mean that the Apostolic Succession is broken? No, because it only effects Roman Rite bishops post-1968. There are many older Roman Rite bishops, along with countless Eastern Rite bishops consecrated using the Catholic rite. Pacelli - What happens when the pre-1968 Bishops die off?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 23, 2017 15:18:35 GMT -5
No, because it only effects Roman Rite bishops post-1968. There are many older Roman Rite bishops, along with countless Eastern Rite bishops consecrated using the Catholic rite. Pacelli - What happens when the pre-1968 Bishops die off? There are still a lot of them, the crisis could end before that happens. Either way, we have 23 Catholic eastern rites with apostolic succession still in the world today. Some may point out that some of these eastern rite bishops are heretics, so, obviously in those cases they are not successors of the apostles, I am only referring to the bishops who have not cut themselves off from the Church.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2017 9:22:22 GMT -5
Pacelli - What happens when the pre-1968 Bishops die off? There are still a lot of them, the crisis could end before that happens. Either way, we have 23 Catholic eastern rites with apostolic succession still in the world today. Some may point out that some of these eastern rite bishops are heretics, so, obviously in those cases they are not successors of the apostles, I am only referring to the bishops who have not cut themselves off from the Church. Pacelli - 1). If the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is invalid what has happened to the lines post-1968? Haven't they broken the succession if they are not valid? 2). Also, what happened with the heretic Bishops at the time of the Arian crisis?
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Jan 24, 2017 14:24:06 GMT -5
There are still a lot of them, the crisis could end before that happens. Either way, we have 23 Catholic eastern rites with apostolic succession still in the world today. Some may point out that some of these eastern rite bishops are heretics, so, obviously in those cases they are not successors of the apostles, I am only referring to the bishops who have not cut themselves off from the Church. Pacelli - 1). If the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is invalid what has happened to the lines post-1968? Haven't they broken the succession if they are not valid? 2). Also, what happened with the heretic Bishops at the time of the Arian crisis? Veronica, 1.) The eastern rite bishops never adopted the Paul VI ordination and consecration rite. They still use their own ancient eastern rites. Their orders are beyond any doubt valid. The only affected group is the Roman rite bishops who adopted the Paul VI rites. With that said, apostolic succession has two components, orders and mission, in my opinion, the eastern rites generally have both. 2.) The Arian heretical bishops lost their jurisdiction by embracing heresy. Heresy causes the loss of membership in the Church, and for clerics, an immediate loss of office. Non-members of the Church cannot hold an office, so if a Catholic publicly professes heresy, he immediately resigns from his office simultaneously with losing his membership in the Church.
|
|
Deleted
Past Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2017 15:03:30 GMT -5
Pacelli - 1). If the New Rite of Episcopal Consecration is invalid what has happened to the lines post-1968? Haven't they broken the succession if they are not valid? 2). Also, what happened with the heretic Bishops at the time of the Arian crisis? Veronica, 1.) The eastern rite bishops never adopted the Paul VI ordination and consecration rite. They still use their own ancient eastern rites. Their orders are beyond any doubt valid. The only affected group is the Roman rite bishops who adopted the Paul VI rites. With that said, apostolic succession has two components, orders and mission, in my opinion, the eastern rites generally have both. 2.) The Arian heretical bishops lost their jurisdiction by embracing heresy. Heresy causes the loss of membership in the Church, and for clerics, an immediate loss of office. Non-members of the Church cannot hold an office, so if a Catholic publicly professes heresy, he immediately resigns from his office simultaneously with losing his membership in the Church. Pacelli - You stated that the apostolic succession has two components, "orders and mission". Can you please explain what each means? What I am trying to understand is why there are some traditionalists who accept the New Rite of Ordinations while they don't accept the Novus Ordo and Vatican II. The only conclusion I can come up with is because of the Apostolic Succession issue. Can you explain why some persons accept the New Rites of Ordinations while not accepting the Novus Ordo and Vatican II? (Thanks for being patient with me as I am fairly new to all of this).
|
|