|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 24, 2019 16:44:55 GMT -5
I agree with you that logically, the last conditional ordination should be the only one to mention, as there must have been a doubt in order for there to be a conditional ordination in the first place. If we were living in normal times, this would be the end of it. In our times, however, as we lack any real governance of the Church in the Roman rite, the laity have been put in the strange position of having to judge whether or not priests are validly ordained, as they must make such a judgment, since the Church through its hierarchical bishops have not sent such priests, and the matter has to be settled in each individual Catholic’s conscience prior to approaching any traditional priest for the sacraments.
Since there is disagreement about which lines are certainly valid and which are not, the laity may not agree with the priest that conditional ordination was necessary, at least if the reason is the doubt of validity of a particular lineage, as they may be convinced that one such lineage is valid, others are not, or all are valid, or all invalid. I will however add lineage to the list, I will just have to figure out the best way to do it.
I have thought about your point about the laicization by the Novus Ordo, and I will include it. Thank you for arguing your point, you convinced me that it has some value.
I do have a problem with the Catholic Candle groups obvious bias and even open hostility towards sedevacantists. I was hesitant to even link their list for that reason, but I believed with a disclaimer above the link, that Catholics would at least be warned of their views prior to going to their page. They have done an immense amount of research and much of it is factual, such as who ordained which priest and when. Many of the priests they have information on are SSPX so their list is very relevant as SSPX uses men with Paul VI rite orders in their chapels and Catholics need a way to find out if about the holy orders of a new priest or visiting priest.
God bless you as well.
|
|
|
Post by StJoseph on Feb 24, 2019 18:09:20 GMT -5
I agree with you that logically, the last conditional ordination should be the only one to mention, as there must have been a doubt in order for there to be a conditional ordination in the first place. If we were living in normal times, this would be the end of it. In our times, however, as we lack any real governance of the Church in the Roman rite, the laity have been put in the strange position of having to judge whether or not priests are validly ordained, as they must make such a judgment, since the Church through its hierarchical bishops have not sent such priests, and the matter has to be settled in each individual Catholic’s conscience prior to approaching any traditional priest for the sacraments. Since there is disagreement about which lines are certainly valid and which are not, the laity may not agree with the priest that conditional ordination was necessary, at least if the reason is the doubt of validity of a particular lineage, as they may be convinced that one such lineage is valid, others are not, or all are valid, or all invalid. I will however add lineage to the list, I will just have to figure out the best way to do it. I have thought about your point about the laicization by the Novus Ordo, and I will include it. Thank you for arguing your point, you convinced me that it has some value. I do have a problem with the Catholic Candle groups obvious bias and even open hostility towards sedevacantists. I was hesitant to even link their list for that reason, but I believed with a disclaimer above the link, that Catholics would at least be warned of their views prior to going to their page. They have done an immense amount of research and much of it is factual, such as who ordained which priest and when. Many of the priests they have information on are SSPX so their list is very relevant as SSPX uses men with Paul VI rite orders in their chapels and Catholics need a way to find out if about the holy orders of a new priest or visiting priest. God bless you as well. Excellent. Thank you. If a priest receives a conditional ordination without the slightest doubt in his mind that he was ordained in the first place, he commits sacrilege. The sin falls to the priest himself, not the laity, enev though in these difficult times the laity must decide for themselves if they approve of this lineage or that. I have thought of two more "priests" who say a public "mass" (clearly i do not agree with their lineage) which are not on your list: -"Fr." Cordaro, ordained NO, not conditionally ordained, laicised NO - Fr. Poisson, conditionally ordained by William Moran (aka Archbishop Ambrose Moran) I hope others will help keep this list up to date. It will be an invaluable resource. God bless.
|
|
|
Post by StJoseph on Feb 24, 2019 18:13:53 GMT -5
I agree with you that logically, the last conditional ordination should be the only one to mention, as there must have been a doubt in order for there to be a conditional ordination in the first place. If we were living in normal times, this would be the end of it. In our times, however, as we lack any real governance of the Church in the Roman rite, the laity have been put in the strange position of having to judge whether or not priests are validly ordained, as they must make such a judgment, since the Church through its hierarchical bishops have not sent such priests, and the matter has to be settled in each individual Catholic’s conscience prior to approaching any traditional priest for the sacraments. Since there is disagreement about which lines are certainly valid and which are not, the laity may not agree with the priest that conditional ordination was necessary, at least if the reason is the doubt of validity of a particular lineage, as they may be convinced that one such lineage is valid, others are not, or all are valid, or all invalid. I will however add lineage to the list, I will just have to figure out the best way to do it. I have thought about your point about the laicization by the Novus Ordo, and I will include it. Thank you for arguing your point, you convinced me that it has some value. I do have a problem with the Catholic Candle groups obvious bias and even open hostility towards sedevacantists. I was hesitant to even link their list for that reason, but I believed with a disclaimer above the link, that Catholics would at least be warned of their views prior to going to their page. They have done an immense amount of research and much of it is factual, such as who ordained which priest and when. Many of the priests they have information on are SSPX so their list is very relevant as SSPX uses men with Paul VI rite orders in their chapels and Catholics need a way to find out if about the holy orders of a new priest or visiting priest. God bless you as well. Excellent. Thank you. If a priest receives a conditional ordination without the slightest doubt in his mind that he was ordained in the first place, he commits sacrilege. The sin falls to the priest himself, not the laity, enev though in these difficult times the laity must decide for themselves if they approve of this lineage or that. I have thought of two more "priests" who say a public "mass" (clearly i do not agree with their lineage) which are not on your list: -"Fr." Cordaro, ordained NO, not conditionally ordained, laicised NO - Fr. Poisson, conditionally ordained by William Moran (aka Archbishop Ambrose Moran) I hope others will help keep this list up to date. It will be an invaluable resource. God bless. Sorry. Both Cordaro and Poisson are independent and neither are sedevecanti.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Feb 25, 2019 9:41:43 GMT -5
Why should non sede valid independant priests be considered someone to avoid. Im a sede but dont see any official proclamation on the issue so valid non NO priests are not a problem IMO
|
|
|
Post by StJoseph on Feb 25, 2019 12:07:44 GMT -5
Why should non sede valid independant priests be considered someone to avoid. Im a sede but dont see any official proclamation on the issue so valid non NO priests are not a problem IMO Validity is different than legitimacy. A legitimate independent priest who has received both a legitimate ordination and a valid Catholic ordination are not a problem unless it has been proven that there is a problem. For instance, Fr. Roberts was validly and legitimately ordained a Catholic priest, he is not sedevecanti, but there is much evidence he is a pervert. He is one to avoid IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Feb 25, 2019 12:21:20 GMT -5
well of course...thats a different issue...Im refering to those who think only sedes are Catholics
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 25, 2019 14:55:39 GMT -5
I though that Fr. Cordaro was ordained pre-V2. Does anyone on here know his ordination date? I can’t seem to find it online.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Feb 25, 2019 14:58:11 GMT -5
I agree with this of course, but it addresses a point I was not making. I am not addressing the moral aspect of this, whether or not the priest sins, or whether the laity sins in this case.
In this crisis, Catholics are all over the map as to which lineages, general lineages, or sub-lineages that they regard as valid.
Let me give a hypothetical to make what I am saying more clear: Fr. Smith, ordained through an Old Catholic lineage, begins to have doubts about his orders, and then seeks to find an original Palmerian bishop, to conditionally ordain him. I am not here concerned with whether this act is morally correct or not, but I would say that some Catholics think the Old Catholic lines are safe, others may believe the early Palmerians are safe. So, regardless of what Fr. Smith does, or even why he did it, Catholics may still go to him based on one lineage or another. All of this presumes of course that his conditional ordination was not done for some other reason other than a doubt of the original lineage.
|
|
|
Post by StJoseph on Feb 25, 2019 16:38:25 GMT -5
I agree with this of course, but it addresses a point I was not making. I am not addressing the moral aspect of this, whether or not the priest sins, or whether the laity sins in this case. In this crisis, Catholics are all over the map as to which lineages, general lineages, or sub-lineages that they regard as valid. Let me give a hypothetical to make what I am saying more clear: Fr. Smith, ordained through an Old Catholic lineage, begins to have doubts about his orders, and then seeks to find an original Palmerian bishop, to conditionally ordain him. I am not here concerned with whether this act is morally correct or not, but I would say that some Catholics think the Old Catholic lines are safe, others may believe the early Palmerians are safe. So, regardless of what Fr. Smith does, or even why he did it, Catholics may still go to him based on one lineage or another. All of this presumes of course that his conditional ordination was not done for some other reason other than a doubt of the original lineage. I understand. The last conditional ordination is the one of most importance, for it is the one the priest believes is legitimate. Basically, the second trumps the first. In your example, fr. Smith would be listed palmerian because he believed there was question to his old catholic ordination, no matter why he chose the conditional ordination.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Feb 25, 2019 22:05:52 GMT -5
This gentleman has come to Spain and says he is consecrated by Josep Macek and says that he collaborates with the Guest... I accidentally clicked the wrong button and rejected your membership...please try again...if it doesn’t work get back to me here and we will get you in somehow...I’m sorry..mea culpa
|
|
|
Post by StJoseph on Mar 5, 2019 22:02:09 GMT -5
Fr. Joseph noonan, ofm, is sedevecanti.
|
|
|
Post by Pacelli on Mar 5, 2019 23:43:29 GMT -5
Fr. Joseph noonan, ofm, is sedevecanti. Thank you. The list is updated.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Mar 6, 2019 13:24:53 GMT -5
Fr. Joseph noonan, ofm, is sedevecanti. please try again to join...I accidentally rejected your membership request...the buttons are very close together and my thumb hit wrong one.
|
|
|
Post by StJoseph on Mar 7, 2019 8:44:14 GMT -5
Fr. Joseph noonan, ofm, is sedevecanti. please try again to join...I accidentally rejected your membership request...the buttons are very close together and my thumb hit wrong one. Thank you. I see no reason to, as i can read and post as a guest. God bless.
|
|
|
Post by Voxxkowalski on Mar 7, 2019 12:06:39 GMT -5
That is only a temporary situation...I have the forum set to allow guest participation... But I will be closing that at a undetermined moment in the future. But suite yourself...Im glad to have you.
|
|