Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9

Author Topic: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition  (Read 7057 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Johannes

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 441
  • Reputation: +68/-220
  • Gender: Male
Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
« Reply #90 on: November 20, 2024, 02:24:35 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Meg on November 20, 2024, 01:57:11 PM
    You do presume to have authority here. You have been a forum member....for what....13 days or so? And you are presuming already to tell us what we are supposed to believe, as if you have authority here. But you do not.
    I will give you this last piece of free and unsolicited advice that I know you may not want, but may prove helpful to you;

    I have been reading on this forum for over 6-months and remained silent - not a peep. Length of time, thumbs up, number of posts - means absolutely NOTHING. This is a place for knowledge sharing and debate - not a knitting club.

    Neither You, nor me, nor anyone here has any "authority" over others in this virtual space and only one's Confessor and themselves has authority over their own internal forum.

    The members of this forum are not some kind of council of "hallowed elders". We are all in the same boat more-or-less. You may think that new members should take a backseat and let you drive, but some of us have real questions and want to engage with others (you generally do not seem to be that type to me from what I have observed). You troll and gang up when someone bigger than you start kicking the guy who is down. Your trigger is anyone telling you what to do. Your skin is as soft as the fresh-driven snow in that regard. This I wager is because you are insecure, which is understandable. 

    You may choose to think or feel that I am presuming to have authority - go ahead and argue it to the high heavens, shout it from the rooftops, hold it to your dying breath - makes no difference to me. Or, come after me by addressing my question(s) and arguments. If you won't do that - I refuse to speak to you anymore - Go ahead, you can have the last word. 

    I truly hope God fills you with His choicest blesses and I mean that prayers for you now.
    Logged

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #91 on: November 20, 2024, 02:32:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 20, 2024, 02:04:20 PM
    The part about "unimpaired by any error" is talking about the pope when he speaks ex cathedra.
    The pope speaks ex cathedra much more than you would like to admit. He speaks "from the chair" whenever he acts as teacher for all Christians. R&R commonly conflates ex cathedra with "solemn definition". I know we could go in circles over this point ad nauseum - so I am happy to let it go at - agree to disagree.

    Do you think Francis is Catholic?
    Logged

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6727
    • Reputation: +3440/-2967
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #92 on: November 20, 2024, 02:45:03 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on November 20, 2024, 02:24:35 PM
    You may choose to think or feel that I am presuming to have authority - go ahead and argue it to the high heavens, shout it from the rooftops, hold it to your dying breath - makes no difference to me. Or, come after me by addressing my question(s) and arguments. If you won't do that - I refuse to speak to you anymore - Go ahead, you can have the last word. 

    It's an over-reaction to think that I want to shout it from the rooftops, or to hold it to my dying breath. What an odd thing to say. 

    You cloak your "questions" with an air of charity which you obviously do not really have. Your arrogance betrays you. 
    Logged
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14554
    • Reputation: +5957/-890
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #93 on: November 20, 2024, 02:46:21 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on November 20, 2024, 02:32:50 PM
    The pope speaks ex cathedra much more than you would like to admit. He speaks "from the chair" whenever he acts as teacher for all Christians. R&R commonly conflates ex cathedra with "solemn definition". I know we could go in circles over this point ad nauseum - so I am happy to let it go at - agree to disagree.

    Do you think Francis is Catholic?
    No need to go in circles if we simply adhere to the infallible definition V1 gave us, i.e. the pope is in fallible when he defines a doctrine ex cathedra. They prefaced that by saying he is not infallible when he makes known new doctrines. New doctrines = heresies. V1 never said popes would not be able to make known new doctrines.

    I do not think the pope is Catholic, I think he is an anti-Catholic heretic. And I profess that (to paraphrase St. Thomas More)....I remain the pope's good subject, but God's first.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #94 on: November 20, 2024, 03:01:42 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 20, 2024, 02:46:21 PM
    No need to go in circles if we simply adhere to the infallible definition V1 gave us, i.e. the pope is in fallible when he defines a doctrine ex cathedra. They prefaced that by saying he is not infallible when he makes known new doctrines. New doctrines = heresies. V1 never said popes would not be able to make known new doctrines.

    I do not think the pope is Catholic, I think he is an anti-Catholic heretic. And I profess that (to paraphrase St. Thomas More)....I remain the pope's good subject, but God's first.
    I consider ^^ this to be a twisting/misreading of Papal Infallibility. Some competent theologians argue otherwise than you have about the pope being able to teach heresy for the Universal Church (I know you are aware these theologians exist, everyone who is a vocal member here is) You may feel the need to defend you interpretation of Papal Infallibility as the correct one for the 1000th time - go ahead - we have all heard it before - the impasse remains - the problem cannot be overcame with argumentation - better minds than ours have tried.

    So, we as I said, we will have to agree to disagree because we cannot agree, and we are at an impasse. That's OK with me, I don't need everyone to think like I do, I don't need to impose my understanding of things on others as dogma. I have made my arguments against the presumed validity of N.O. baptisms and trad priests who were baptized in the N.O. - that is my position. You have explained why you follow the SSPX in deciding these things - that is your choice, and you have the responsibility to make that choice for yourself during this time. I choose not to trust those judgments, unless someone can sway my mind with better arguments. I still consider you a Catholic (for what that is worth) and I am thankful for your contribution to this thread. 


    Logged

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #95 on: November 20, 2024, 03:03:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Meg on November 20, 2024, 02:45:03 PM
    It's an over-reaction to think that I want to shout it from the rooftops, or to hold it to my dying breath. What an odd thing to say.

    You cloak your "questions" with an air of charity which you obviously do not really have. Your arrogance betrays you.
    You are 100% correct I have very little charity - please pray for me. Thank you
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14554
    • Reputation: +5957/-890
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #96 on: November 21, 2024, 05:06:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on November 20, 2024, 03:01:42 PM
    I consider ^^ this to be a twisting/misreading of Papal Infallibility. Some competent theologians argue otherwise than you have about the pope being able to teach heresy for the Universal Church (I know you are aware these theologians exist, everyone who is a vocal member here is) You may feel the need to defend you interpretation of Papal Infallibility as the correct one for the 1000th time - go ahead - we have all heard it before - the impasse remains - the problem cannot be overcame with argumentation - better minds than ours have tried.
    And other theologians agree with me, so there's that. But for me, I can read what is written in V1 and it is in perfect unity with all of the doctrines of the Church. OTOH, if what you say is actually true, then all trads are exactly wrong and need to convert to the NO.

    I like this snip from a sermon given by Fr. Wathen....
    "….All of you know very well, what God has revealed both in the Old Testament and Through Christ and His Apostles, is one doctrine. Not only does it mean one thing, but it is a single, as it were, a single cloth woven from the top so that there are no seams, there is a perfect unity. Therefore, anyone who in any way teaches contrary to any one of it’s doctrines, any part of this holy deposit, violates it’s holiness and of course the truth of God.  And if anyone comes forth and presents a doctrine contrary to it, he necessarily rouses the ire of Almighty God because he substitutes his puny human ideas and preferences to the holiness of the Divine Revelation."


    Quote
    So, we as I said, we will have to agree to disagree because we cannot agree, and we are at an impasse. That's OK with me, I don't need everyone to think like I do, I don't need to impose my understanding of things on others as dogma. I have made my arguments against the presumed validity of N.O. baptisms and trad priests who were baptized in the N.O. - that is my position. You have explained why you follow the SSPX in deciding these things - that is your choice, and you have the responsibility to make that choice for yourself during this time. I choose not to trust those judgments, unless someone can sway my mind with better arguments. I still consider you a Catholic (for what that is worth) and I am thankful for your contribution to this thread.
    Well, baptisms are too easy to administer validly even when illicit, even for NO baptisms. And yes, ultimately it is my choice - which is why I ask the priest face to face as and consider that a major factor in making my decision. This hasn't been a concern of mine for decades, but for those who have this concern, I recommend that they need to do the same. If they still have doubts then do not go to that priest.

    I consider sedes Catholic, albeit a kind of "special needs Catholic" because their faith seems to depend very much on presuming with some degree of certainty papal invalidity.   
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #97 on: November 21, 2024, 08:16:17 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 21, 2024, 05:06:21 AM
     OTOH, if what you say is actually true, then all trads are exactly wrong and need to convert to the NO.
    Can you clarify?

    Quote from: Stubborn on November 21, 2024, 05:06:21 AM
    Well, baptisms are too easy to administer validly even when illicit, even for NO baptisms. 
    Don't be so sure, The *DDF* has said there have been reports of an "increasing number of cases". I would copy the text of the whole note here, but the Vatican website has been down since yesterday. How many N.O. baptisms have you witnessed and could swear to they were done correctly, proper form, and water hitting the skin/scalp? It may seem easy to someone who has faith and cares, but to those who don't they are often careless and flippant about things. That is why those reports came out about the null priest and the deacon using "we" and the subsequent fallout i.e., invalid confessions, last rites, non-sacramental marriages, etc. Then Tucho comes out and confirms, "it is a real problem". So, now positive doubt has entered into the mix for N.O. baptisms at the highest level - IMO.

    Quote from: Stubborn on November 21, 2024, 05:06:21 AM
    I consider sedes Catholic, albeit a kind of "special needs Catholic" because their faith seems to depend very much on presuming with some degree of certainty papal invalidity. 
    All I need is grace so in that case all my needs are "special" :)

    I could spin the same back at you. Is not your faith too some degree dependent on acknowledging that Francis is pope? I mean would you die a martyr's death to uphold that he is?
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 11615
    • Reputation: +7251/-2111
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #98 on: November 21, 2024, 08:43:40 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • The topic of infallibility is irrelevant.  V2's rites aren't infallible, they don't claim to be and no V2 pope ever said they were.  
    Logged

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #99 on: November 21, 2024, 09:18:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on November 21, 2024, 08:43:40 AM
    V2's rites aren't infallible, they don't claim to be and no V2 pope ever said they were. 
    Right, and because they are not infallible, this is further proof that the V2 church and its popes are not true. The V2 popes/church don't need to claim their rites are infallible, it is assumed by Catholics that if a pope modifies and promulgates a change to a Sacramental Rite by changing/adding/omitting ceremonies, that the Rite would still be both effective and pleasing to God. But both the R&R and SVs admit the N.O. is evil. For some their loophole is "Paul VI never abrogated the TLM", "He did not command us with the strongest language to use only the new rite", etc.

    It is because the pope cannot issue defective rites for the universal Church that the topic of infallibility is coming up (Trent Session VII, Can, 13).

    IMO, while there is nothing inherently missing to make the new rite of Baptism invalid if done according to the book, it is the hetropraxis of the false church that taints all that they do and creates positive doubt around all their Sacraments.

    Why trust anything they do? Or those who "investigate" and say they think it is good-2-go?

    Logged

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #100 on: November 21, 2024, 09:58:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I feel a bit like the kid passing notes between fallen out friends but, Ladislaus has a lot to offer (MUCH more than I) so I will drop this here:

    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14554
    • Reputation: +5957/-890
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #101 on: November 21, 2024, 11:26:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Johannes on November 21, 2024, 08:16:17 AM
    Can you clarify?
    If you agree with those theologians teaching that the pope is unable to teach heresy for the Universal Church, then all the heresies taught since V2 are not heresies at all.

    It sounds as if you agree with Fr. Fenton, who agrees with some other theologians of which you speak: 
    Quote
    "In this field, God has given the Holy Father a kind of infallibility distinct from the charism of doctrinal infallibility in the strict sense. He has so constructed and ordered the Church that those who follow the directives given to the entire kingdom of God on earth will never be brought into the position of ruining themselves spiritually through this obedience. Our Lord dwells within His Church in such a way that those who obey disciplinary and doctrinal directives of this society can never find themselves displeasing God through their adherence to the teachings and the commands given to the universal Church militant. Hence there can be no valid reason to discountenance even the non-infallible teaching authority of Christ’s vicar on earth".
    If this is a teaching of the Church, which it isn't, but if it were, then all trads of whatever persuasion are altogether wrong, because per the above quote it is impossible for a pope to preach heresy.

    OTOH, it is because so many wrongfully believe the above to be what the Church teaches, that they've done one of two things, 1) they follow the conciliar popes and are NOers, 2) they are sedes.

    For those in my #1, they demonstrate their faith in a [false] Church teaching by following the conciliar popes. For those in my #2, they demonstrate they have zero faith in a [false] Church teaching by their sedeism.


    Quote
    I could spin the same back at you. Is not your faith too some degree dependent on acknowledging that Francis is pope? I mean would you die a martyr's death to uphold that he is?
    No, my faith is not dependent to any degree on the status of the pope. I pray daily for him and pray extra for him when I happen across an article or news bit telling of some of the things he does. Beyond that I pay no attention to him. If he were to ever command something, I would do it out of obedience - as long as it wasn't sinful.

    And no, I would not die a martyrs death to uphold that he is the pope - that'd be a wasted martyrdom whether he's the pope or not. 

    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #102 on: November 21, 2024, 12:03:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 21, 2024, 11:26:55 AM
    If you agree with those theologians teaching that the pope is unable to teach heresy for the Universal Church, then all the heresies taught since V2 are not heresies at all.
    This would only make sense if I believe that the V2 popes were actually popes, and that the V2 church was actually the Catholic Church, I believe neither of those things. A false church led by fake imposter "popes" could deceive the masses of people who say that they are Catholic and teach & preach heresy from sunup to sundown and this has no bearing on the true Church or the promises of Christ. Its all a dog-n-pony show and not real. 

    I do like that quote from Fenton - thanks! It in no way would make "all the trads wrong". Because if the pope were to preach heresy, he would fall ipso facto from the papacy. He already lost the papacy internally when he subscribed to the heresy, and he manifests the heresy when we see him say/write it. He shows everyone that he is a heretic, and this God allows to show forth His judgement against the heretic, which already happened in the internal forum and now God allows it to come out so the rest of us who cannot see into the internal forum will be able to recognize and cast forth the heretic by this external sign. We simply acknowledge that God has judged him to no longer be the pope as a matter of fact as clear as saying, "the sky is up".

    And if you won't die to uphold the "Dogmatic Fact" (which you believe it is) that Francis is pope - wouldn't that be tantamount to denying the dogma of Papal Supremacy with which that fact is "intimately connected"?

    "...it [the Church] must be infallible in its judgment of doctrines and facts which, even though not revealed, are so intimately connected with revelation that any error or doubt about them would constitute a peril to the faith."
    Van Noort, Christ's Church #87

     
    Logged

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14554
    • Reputation: +5957/-890
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #103 on: November 21, 2024, 01:25:18 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on November 21, 2024, 12:03:20 PM
    This would only make sense if I believe that the V2 popes were actually popes,
    Well, the popes were elected by the college of cardinals, they all accept him as pope and we have to also. There is no getting around this.

    Quote
    I do like that quote from Fenton - thanks! It in no way would make "all the trads wrong". Because if the pope were to preach heresy, he would fall ipso facto from the papacy.
    The quote you like from Fr. Fenton says that the pope has an additional infallibility, not sure where it came from, it's not taught in V1 but because of that infallibility...."those who follow the directives given to the entire kingdom of God on earth will never be brought into the position of ruining themselves spiritually through this obedience." 

    So you say "if the pope were to preach heresy, he would fall ipso facto from the papacy." Yet per Fr. Fenton, that is an absolute impossibility for the pope to preach heresy. Per Fr. Fenton, he has an additional infallibility that prevents him from preaching heresy.

    And this is the conundrum: The Pope cannot preach heresy, but if he does, he is no longer pope - but popes cannot preach heresy! - but if he does he is no longer pope. Again, conundrum.

    Quote
    And if you won't die to uphold the "Dogmatic Fact" (which you believe it is) that Francis is pope - wouldn't that be tantamount to denying the dogma of Papal Supremacy with which that fact is "intimately connected"?
    We can die a martyr's death defending any one of the Church's doctrines, the status of the pope is not a doctrine. Now we could hope to die a martyr's death defending the dogma from Unam Sanctam: "Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff." But to die defending the status of the pope? I wouldn't.
    Logged
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Johannes

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 441
    • Reputation: +68/-220
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Doubtful Validity of Sacraments Outside Tradition
    « Reply #104 on: November 21, 2024, 01:36:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Stubborn on November 21, 2024, 01:25:18 PM
    Well, the popes were elected by the college of cardinals, they all accept him as pope and we have to also. There is no getting around this.
    To me, they all the "cardinals" manifested their heresy when they signed the docuмents of VII. They had already lost their offices by internally consenting to the heresies within and they manifested it externally by signing the docuмents. Many of them may not have even been cardinals for the following reason(s):

    John XXIII may not have even been canonically elected, too much suspicion around him (suspect of Modernism file at the Holy Office) he was an unworthy candidate (cuм ex) and/or there are other theories like the whole Siri thing, it will probably all come out in the end. Him taking the name of an anti-pope should have been a clue.

    So, "getting around this" is not that hard for me. God made this world from nothing, He took on mortal flesh, walked on water, rose from the dead and gives Himself to us in what looks like bread. By the grace of God, I believe much more difficult things then what happened before/during V2, I may not know exactly what happened, but then I don't have to. The pope cannot teach condemned heresy from his magisterium. That I have to believe.
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9
    « previous next »