Editor's Note: We'll continue our summer mailbag series with a short-answer to a paragraph from a tiresome missive we received in response to our "Anniversary Special" -- tiresome because we've answered this and related objections many times, in particular in Question XXII in our refutation/rebuttal of Checkie, titled "The Dubiety of Ordination Conferred with One Hand."
Let me make this simple for you disordered wing nuts. The unnamed SSPX priest's testimony about Bishop Dolan as the only candidate of his class to receive one-handed priestly orders is USELESS, even if it be true. (Which I very much doubt.) "The episcopate is the fullness of the priesthood" or "the completion to fullness of the Sacrament of Holy Orders" and so it COMPLETES the priesthood. Get it, you freaking idiots? Any defect would have been "cured," as you pompously say, when His Excellency Bishop Pivarunas consecrated then Father Dolan in 1993. Therefore, in Catholic theory, His Excellency Bishop Dolan has no need to "seek conditional orders."Whew! That was self-righteously angry, wasn't it?
As you regular readers know, we've said all along that it's disputed among theologians whether the leap from deacon to bishop results in a valid episcopacy. Some say yes, others no. And in our rebuttal of the Blunderer, we cited instances of the opposing positions.
Our own rebuttal to this correspondent's position -- to wit, that the episcopacy completes the priesthood and consequently does not require in its subject the presbyterate -- comes from the linguistically informed legal reasoning of the Jesuit G. Huarte.* His argument goes like this:
The espicopate has indeed always been a complementum of -- "something that completes" -- the priesthood. But by its very nature a complementum supposes the presence of something that has to be completed. Accordingly, it would seem, valid conferral of espicopal orders cannot in any way take place without presupposing the presence of the priesthood in the bishop-elect.Therefore, the defect wasn't cured in '93, and in leaping he fell flat on his face.
As a reply to our cultling's bold assertion of "Catholic theory," we quote from Archabbot Stehle's chapter "De Supplendis Defectibus in Ordinatione Commissis" (lit. on supplying defects committed in ordination).**
In praxi, Ordinum collationem quod attinet, pars tutior semper est sequenda -- in practice, with regard to the conferral of orders, the safer course must always be followed. (Our emphasis.)
Again, as we've always said, no one can know whether one-handed orders are valid or not until the restored Church decides. But, in light of the doubts first raised back in 1990 by the nine priests and later by our refutation/rebuttal of the Blunderer's erroneous defense of such orders, the safer course for His Deficiency -- according to Catholic practice -- is conditional ordination and consecration.
ASAP!
The down-on-their-luck losers he's "ordained" are anxiously waiting to be fixed. And so, by the way, are the deeply worried cult followers, who piously insist they cannot live without the sacraments.
*Tractatus de Ordine et Matrimonio (3rd ed.), p. 103, Rome, 1931.
** In his Manuale Ordinandorum or Ordinatiion Rite According to the Roman Pontifical, p. 75, Beatty, Pa., 1917.
I must say very good comments.We always enjoy reading your postings.God bless you in your work.We were shocked to read the various comments on your last article about the babarian behaviour of that sede priest.He will answer for his crimes.Keep up the good work.
ReplyDeleteYou know, if such accounts were few and far between, you could brush them off as just a bad apple or two. The tragedy is that we hear so many stories of sede priests "breaking bad" in all sots of ways. Many of them have appeared on our posts and comments sections, but we assure you that there are many, many more horror stories. (Owing to our particular focus on the SGG-Brooksville cartel, we don't publish them unless the cult kingpins are in some way involved: our adversaries would accuse us of shotgunning the Trad movement.) Judging from the volume of reports, we'd have to say that the whole barrel of organized sedeism is rotten. The few decent priests we can name are all independent. However, not all who call themselves independent are worthy of respect. Many of them are in some way attached indirectly to the cult masters. Our advice is to be careful and do your background investigation whenever selecting a priest.
DeleteReader.we live in Melbourne,Australia.Here is some infro about that priest Gilchrist who was ordained by Pivarunas.It appears he made the annoucement a long time ago at someones home in Wanganui,New Zealand that he was not offering the Mass anywhere else except there.If people wanted the Mass and Sacraments,they had to travel there.He was not traveling anywhere else when visiting.These people where the Mass was held in their home were very kind and very generous with funds.He then turned around and dumped them.Its really grave,don't you think.Father Gilchrist doe's not care about Souls.He lost missions in Fiji,etc.A very interesting website.
ReplyDeleteIn our experience, we find very few genuine pastoral instincts in the "clergy" belonging to the big sede cult organizations. It all goes back to poor or non-existent formation and an absence of real, adult supervision.
DeleteWhat's genuinely surprising in your account is that a sede "priest" turned down good money! Here in the US, if the sedes get a whiff of cold, hard cash, they're usually off to the "missions" immediately to rake in the greenbacks and pocket as many freebies as their greedy hands can grasp.
Yank sedes don't care about souls either, but they love filthy lucre and like to travel. Generally it's only when they don't see any personal advantage that they write off the laity. But if the money's right, they're right there, particularly if the bucks can fill the bank accounts of the dying cult corporations.
For instance, the kingpins are always talking about how evil lay boards are, but at one rich chapel where there is a very strong lay board and generous donors, the cult "bishop" is willing to play the low and groveling hireling even though the board flat-out denied him control of the chapels considerable assets after he made a failed play for them.
Cash is king on this side of the Pacific.
It appears it got too hot for him to handle.These good people started to ask why he did not visit other desperate souls and was we sure afraid of it coming out about his behaviour in that other former centre of his now turned to the SSPX.
ReplyDeleteDon't you think it is dishonest for CMRI not to list their "seminary" courses and "professor's" on their website.
They don't have any "professors" so that's why they are not listed.In a normal seminary the students would be undertaking serious formation,not out picking apples,ha'ha.
ReplyDeleteWe do believe that all trad "seminaries" should not only list the course of studies but they should also provide complete course descriptions along with the title of the textbook used. In addition, the names and academic degrees of the instructional staff should also be included.
DeleteBut that's not enough. Anyone can write up an impressive subject catalog and post it on the web. But that's no guarantee that the courses are actually offered or that the content is really taught.
What's needed is an independent accrediting group of professional laymen and literate independent priests to periodically visit these "seminaries" for a week at a time to conduct a complete and unbiased assessment. For instance, if the catalog says that Greek is one of the courses, they must ascertain whether it's really being taught on a regular basis and is not just listed for window dressing. They would also evaluate the textbooks used to be sure they were seminary quality and not just low-level material suitable for junior-high or high-school kids.
In addition, the accrediting team would sit in on classes, verify that each instructor had lesson plans for each day of class, observe instructional techniques, evaluate the exams, and interview the "seminarians" to see if they were really being formed correctly and had adequate time for study and prayer.
At the conclusion, the team would write a report, with special emphasis on identifying the deficiencies and outlining steps for improvement. The report would be published on a special website and a letter grade issued to the "seminary" along with a recommendation on whether it is a fit place or not for priestly formation in Sedelandia.
We humbly wager that within a couple of years, the American "seminaries" would make reforms. To be sure, the US sede priest mills could never come close to even the worst seminary in the old days, but they might do less damage.
But, of course, the real answer is to close down the American "seminaries." If someone cannot attend an SSPX or FSSP institution, then give the young man an intensive, professionally taught language course in Spanish or Italian and send him abroad to an institute with standards.
The late Bishop Louis Vezelis wrote on this issue, "per saltum," concerning those bishops that Lefebvre consecrated with Bishop de Castro Mayer and maintained that even though they had a co-consecrator, they were still invalid (due to Liénart's being a Freemason).
ReplyDeletePristina Liturgica.Sound advice.These Cult "seminaries" don't want outside control or advice.Yes,our view is to go to the SSPX or FSSP.
ReplyDeleteWhat is your view on the SSPX Orders(Valid?)We were once told that Bishop Clarence Kelly would conditionally reConfirm anyone who had received this Sacrament from one of the SSPX Bishops.
How many supporters does the late Bishop Vezalis group have?They seem to claim to be the only authority in the Church.
Do you have any idea how many still attend SGG?On their website,they claim 600 members.We believe Immaculate Conception Church in Norwood(SSPV) has over 900.
In reply to the number at Saint Gertrude the Great,we think it is now under 200?
ReplyDeleteWe don't know much about the Vezalis group at all, although we are aware of their claims to exclusivity. As to SSPX validity, we know of the Liénart "problem," but since that argument seems to demand we appeal to the internal forum, we cannot say anything with certainty. We do understand, however, that all the problems with various lineages put Bp. Kelly and Bp. Santay in the catbird's seat.
ReplyDeleteWe don't know the membership numbers for IC, but every time we have attended, the church was packed. We cannot understand how anybody in the Cincinnati area would attend SGG when they can attend IC or the SSPX chapel. Sure, they have their problems, but anything is better than a poorly run cult.
Kelly and Santay would have the same problem, if valid priesthood was necessary to receive the episcopacy, due to Kelly's priestly ordination by Lefebvre.
ReplyDeleteYou've got a good point, but someone once told us that Kelly took care of that difficulty. The informant had no names or dates, but he insisted that Kelly was so cautious that he did so. No one else we know of has ever said anything about this. The only reason we bring it up now is that the reporter is usually very reliable, having been with the SSPV since its inception.
DeleteThere are some on this website that have no better occupation than attacking Fr Gilchrist. How the devil must love you all. So fatal to the work of God. That time lost, talents wasted, good omitted and your days are numbered.
DeleteWe do feel really sorry that you have your head buried in the sand and can't face FACTS.Ask the countless Souls that have been hurt by untrained sede Clerics.Their days are numbered and will have to make account for their crimes before God.Most will burn in Hell.
ReplyDeleteSo your issue is untrained sede Clerics and you also know about their crimes. You are duty bound to pray for them. We see God in every soul and make reparation for sins. The judgement to burn in Hell is reserved for God.
Delete