Let us return to our sheep. From Maistre Pierre Pathelin.
To what must be the great delight of friend and foe, after a short and very productive sabbatical, Pistrina is ready to resume its good and holy work of exposing sede ignorance and cant.
We have lots of new material to share with you.
One of our great successes was drafting a summary of our surgically precise evisceration of the Blunderer's defense of one-handed orders. It's now almost ready for translation into French, Spanish, Italian, and German. In the future, no one will cite the Bonehead's work.
In addition, our Power Point presentation to the Lay Governance Congress met with great success, for the body voted to require re-ordination of any priest ordained by "One Hand" as a condition of employment. (The SW Ohio cult won't last forever, and the hapless young Levites, most of whom have no degree or profession, will need to look for bed and board in another chapel.)
Most fruitful of all was a lively discussion with a very lucid 89-year-old Dominican in Milan, an erstwhile student at the Angelicum, who concurred that one-handed conferral of priestly orders was sufficiently dubious as to call for conditional ordination.
But, whoa! We're getting ahead of ourselves. We still have some loose ends to tie up from our last two series, such as the saltus and Holy-Office policy. Plus, we're just about a month out from the Rev. Mr. Nkamuke's ordination to the priesthood, so we have to monitor that situation to make sure the rector, not "One Hand," is the ordaining bishop. (We're also interested in finding out who will attend: Will the so-called "bishop for Africa" be conspicuously absent from the priestly ordination of a future [and real in every sense] African bishop?)
We'll wait a week or so before we engage these important topics. During the hiatus, many of our supporters, detractors, and observers may have gotten out of the habit of checking-in regularly. After all, we don't want them to miss out on all the good information urging "One-Hand Dan" to seek conditional priestly and episcopal orders and then re-ordain those poor losers who received their orders from him.
L
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
See my final comment on today's post at www.introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com
ReplyDeleteToo long a sojourn among unthinking cultists has enfeebled your mind: You have missed our point entirely. We will summarize briefly.
DeleteFirst, we have never said "One-Hand's" orders were invalid. All along we have insisted we don't know whether they are invalid or not. What we have asserted -- and proved -- is that, given Pius's clear and specific teaching, conferral of orders with one hand is a defect, which should be cured by conditional ordination to remove all doubt. (We have also shown the Blunderer's defense of one-handed orders to be of no use whatsoever, like his amateur and error-filled "Work of Human Hands." You yourself agreed that he mistranslated Pius's words, and we're sure that you acknowledge the other errors we exposed.)
You don't understand your own position or plain English. You have not proven that the alleged ordination with one hand ever took place. Even if it did, conditional ordination is only required if there is a possibility that the defect was a substantial defect. If the defect is only accidental, there is no doubt about validity and hence, no need for any reordination, conditional or otherwise. Pope Pius XII clearly placed the ordination of deacons (which uses one hand) along with priestly and episcopal orders declaring that the matter for all three was the imposition of HANDS (plural). The phrase can refer to one hand or two as is adequately demonstrated from the theology manuals of such theology giants as Davis and Pohle. The ultimate defeater for your position that one handed ordinations are a defect that requires reordination is the Eastern Rites. At least three of them employ only one hand in priestly and/or episcopal orders. Thus one hand is valid matter for the all ordinations--period. Pope St. Pius X and Pope Leo XIII taught that the Church has no authority to change the substance of the sacraments. Pope Pius XII can only make two handed ordinations necessary for it to be licit in the Latin Rite, not valid. He can't declare unleavened bread invalid matter in the Latin Rite either, since he would be attempting to do that which can not be done--change the substance of the sacraments. The substance for the sacraments remains the same for the whole Church; Eastern and Latin. Pope Pius also declared the form for each order. The Eastern Rites use different words. Does this mean if a Latin Rite bishop uses an Eastern Rite form, the ordination is defective and requires reordination? According to your logic (or rather the lack thereof) such would be the case. Ordinations with one hand are--at most--only accidentally defective. Accidental defects do not in any way render a sacrament invalid. Hence, it was certainly valid beyond any doubt, if indeed, the one handed ordination occurred at all. Since there is no doubt, no reordination is needed.
ReplyDeleteI wish you were a lawyer and would practice here in NY. With arguments like yours, defeating you in court would be so simple I'd have lots of free time! Now, why don't you think up some more childish names for clerics? I put them on the same level of buffoonery as your so-called arguments.
Case Closed.
Pay attention: we have never asserted one-handed sacerdotal orders were invalid.
ReplyDeleteOur point: "One-Hand Dan" was ordained a priest into the Latin Rite. Pius required for the Latin Rite the hand for deacons, hands for priests and bishops. One-handed conferral for priests is a deviation from the pope's explicit teaching. Without the Church's ruling on the matter, the safe way is conditional ordination (and consecration).
Pay closer attention: If you are not seerting one handed ordinations to be invalid or dubious, you have no problem. The orders are certainly valid and there is no need to be "safe." If you're claiming the need for "safety", it can only come from an assertion that not using two hands could constitute a substantial defect resulting in invalid orders. That a deviation from using two hands is NOT a substantial defect is proven by the use of one hand in the Eastern Rites. One hand is sufficient, and the Pope can not change the substance of the sacraments. Hence, there is no need to be safe since one handed ordinations are certainly valid--what is there to be "safe" about when you have a valid priest?
ReplyDeleteI am beginning to see your point. Now maybe if you wear a hat and part your hair just right no one will notice.
Typo: If you are not ASSERTING one handed ordinations to be invalid or dubious, you have no problem.
ReplyDeleteWe confine opinions to the Latin Rite alone and to Latin-rite ordaining bishops. While we do not assert invalidity, we do assert that in the Latin rite the defect is serious enough, in light of the pope's explicit and formal teaching and in the absence of an authoritative decision on the issue from the Church, to raise gave doubt. The sacrament of orders is too important not to be overly careful. The safe way and the cure for any doubt is the former practice of the Holy Office and the recommendation of many theologians (some of whom we have cited) in cases of defective ceremonial gesture in the sacrament of orders: conditional ordination and/or consecration. Soon we'll discuss that sound safety-first policy of the Holy Office in a separate post.
Delete