“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, 'You are mad; you are not like us.” ― St. Antony the Great
I visited his FB yesterday. Wrote twice, was twice deleted. Being pro-life (as opposed to pro-birth) is really killing those pesky babies (he says -fetuses), who (he says - which) appear out of nowhere and like viruses, interfere with quality of life.
He likes to talk of sanctity of all life and... (wait for it) life issues. I asked for a definition of "sanctity of life issues", but had no luck. It is probably a sacredness of the woman's choice, choice to kill her fetus baby. Comments on this moron's FB (the ones not deleted) are full of gratitude and worship... of the guy.
Dan, back to that old nagging question. Without Proper Intention for the reception of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, how can they be valid priests ? We know hx Seminary Rectors ,Order Superiors and Vocation Directors are known to have screened out hetero good young men. This NOT Donatism , nor is there any ex operantis for the lack of Proper Intention on the part of the recipient.
'While the sacraments act ex opere operato (by the action itself), the graces they confer are validly received ex opere operantis — that is, according to the rightful and proper intention and disposition of the recipient to worthily receive the graces that the sacraments confer. When all the conditions required by divine and ecclesiastical law are met a sacrament is received validly. In the Latin-rite Church, a determination of the valid reception of a sacrament would include several considerations.'
Are these men valid priests? Did THEY have the Proper Intention for the reception of the Sacrament of Holy Orders?
"Father Dulibber G. Gonzalez and Fr. Marcin Bradtke are alleged to have been in a homosexual relationship dating to before their respective ordinations. Father Gonzalez was ordained in May of 2018, and Fr. Bradtke was ordained in May of 2016."
There is a distinction here, Deacons, Priests, and Bishops are ordained while Cardinals and Pope are installed offices. Heretics lose their office ipso facto but once ordained, the soul is marked for eternity.
Tom , what difference does any distinction make if men who are INVALID priests become Bishops or Cardinals? Why would they care if they are heretics? They are not even validly Ordained priests to begin with! " Heretics lose their office ipso facto but once ordained, the soul is marked for eternity." The sodomites in the article linked above were marked before they even went through their sham Ordinations. How about all the Faithful who believe them to be valid? What do they get by way of the Sacraments? They get a church that does not even resemble the One Christ and His Apostles founded. It is looking like this is where it is now more and more.
Your assertion that an active sodomite is ineligible for the sacrament of Holy Orders is an error. You are misapplying the meaning of "intention." There are far more credible arguments pointing to the invalidity of all NO Ordinations based on form, not intention.
While I do not restrict comments from those holding the sedevacantist view for a number of reasons, I cannot let these comments go unchallenged.
Ordination to the priesthood and episcopate in the New Rite is Valid. It is valid as long as the proper form, matter and intent is used. The words within the Form in which the Apostles and their successors administered the sacrament is surely not the same as what was codified at Trent or after Vatican II or in any of the Eastern rites. The sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred by a bishop and deacon with the intent to do what the Church teaches regarding it. It is conferred by the laying on of hands with the intent to provide the power of priesthood and to receive it. While it would be unusual, in an emergency, the bishop could confer on this man in his kitchen the sacrament of Holy Orders if he were to choose to do it and I receive it (obviously, in a state of necessity). The new rite of consecration of a bishop is identical to that used for centuries, as far back as can be determined, in the Maronite Rite and others. Nobody questions the validity of Maronite bishops.
The sacraments are always presumed to be valid.
I must ask, with all respect, that the idea otherwise is not propagated here. Debate? Yes. Questioning? Yes. But not a propagation of that which is simply not true.
Vox, this is your blog and I respect your wishes and thank you profusely for allowing all manner of debate. I would like to point out one fact on this matter and then I will not bring it up again. The form of Novus Ordo episcopal ordinations does not come from any valid Eastern Catholic Rite episcopal rite but instead comes from an Eastern Catholic installation of a Patriarch. There is a huge distinction between installation into an office and ordination of Holy Orders. So the assertion that NO episcopal ordinations must be valid since they are used for other valid ordinations is false. They are used for installation to an office, which is not a sacrament. Thank you for the ability to posit my position, I shall say no more on this topic at this time.
Having addressed this question to not only priest but also to a priest Canon Lawyer, I received answers in the affirmative ( refer to the link above on Matter and Form )from both priests. The recipient MUST have the Proper Intention to accomplish the valid RECEPTION of the Sacrament. If the Intention is to continue an active sodomite life with other men, it cannot be the Proper Intention for reception of Holy Orders. No, this is NOT Donatism. Donatism presumes a priest in grave sin cannot confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
Being an active sodomite does not automatically negate the intention. The sodomite would have to publically announce his intention to not receive the sacrament. Of not we have to presume his intention is the recieve.
Interesting conversation! Thanks Vox, for giving others the opportunity. I myself know zero about this topic but enjoy seeing it discussed.
As for this particular priest, if we assume he is a priest, it is completely revealing about where our church really is to realize if Rome were opposed to anything this very out there and public priest were teaching, he would have been stopped in his "ministry". But he is not. And neither is Jim Martin, SJ. Both are apparently doing quite well, and Rome has no problem with either one. But faithful priests are stepped on. Does anyone really need to know more than these facts to see the truth of things.
Not that I find anything theologicaly offensive in the cited article, but it is Novus Ordo source. I simply do not trust a single thing that sect says.
33 comments:
A friend of Fr Martin SJ it seems. No surprises there.
He needs help, he is way too sick in the head, heart and soul!Let's pray for this idiot.
Let's not forget that his "vocation" has been fully approved by the "church" as well as Martin's.
Also from his twitter:
"Let's not water down the legacy of #MLK by making him a "nice guy"—He was a prophet & martyr!"
Actually compares him to Oscar Romero and Jesus Christ.
It's a miracle there are still young people who value human life and have integrity, not because of their spiritual leaders, but in spite of them.
Pretend priest, I find him repulsive. Soros or HRC pay him? 415 likes?
He is probably a luciferian. May God help us through the Mediatrix of grace.
Daniel, don't judge lest ye be judged. The teens are marching for innocent lives that are killed in the womb. What cause do you race marathons for??
I visited his FB yesterday. Wrote twice, was twice deleted. Being pro-life (as opposed to pro-birth) is really killing those pesky babies (he says -fetuses), who (he says - which) appear out of nowhere and like viruses, interfere with quality of life.
He likes to talk of sanctity of all life and... (wait for it) life issues. I asked for a definition of "sanctity of life issues", but had no luck. It is probably a sacredness of the woman's choice, choice to kill her fetus baby. Comments on this moron's FB (the ones not deleted) are full of gratitude and worship... of the guy.
Dan, back to that old nagging question. Without Proper Intention for the reception of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, how can they be valid priests ?
We know hx Seminary Rectors ,Order Superiors and Vocation Directors are known to have screened out hetero good young men.
This NOT Donatism , nor is there any ex operantis for the lack of Proper Intention on the part of the recipient.
'While the sacraments act ex opere operato (by the action itself), the graces they confer are validly received ex opere operantis — that is, according to the rightful and proper intention and disposition of the recipient to worthily receive the graces that the sacraments confer. When all the conditions required by divine and ecclesiastical law are met a sacrament is received validly. In the Latin-rite Church, a determination of the valid reception of a sacrament would include several considerations.'
https://www.osv.com/RSS/365DaysToMercy/TabId/2752/ArtMID/21013/ArticleID/6231/Matter-and-Form.aspx
a heretic is Daniel P. Horan, Franciscan
san Francisco ora pro nobi!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Heretics can and do become priests Bishops Cardinals and even?
Are these men valid priests? Did THEY have the Proper Intention for the reception of the Sacrament of Holy Orders?
"Father Dulibber G. Gonzalez and Fr. Marcin Bradtke are alleged to have been in a homosexual relationship dating to before their respective ordinations. Father Gonzalez was ordained in May of 2018, and Fr. Bradtke was ordained in May of 2016."
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/nj-bishop-tolerates-clergys-double-lives
Danny and Jimmy - best buds.
There is a distinction here, Deacons, Priests, and Bishops are ordained while Cardinals and Pope are installed offices. Heretics lose their office ipso facto but once ordained, the soul is marked for eternity.
Tom , what difference does any distinction make if men who are INVALID priests become Bishops or Cardinals?
Why would they care if they are heretics? They are not even validly Ordained priests to begin with!
" Heretics lose their office ipso facto but once ordained, the soul is marked for eternity."
The sodomites in the article linked above were marked before they even went through their sham Ordinations.
How about all the Faithful who believe them to be valid? What do they get by way of the Sacraments?
They get a church that does not even resemble the One Christ and His Apostles founded. It is looking like this is where it is now more and more.
Your assertion that an active sodomite is ineligible for the sacrament of Holy Orders is an error. You are misapplying the meaning of "intention." There are far more credible arguments pointing to the invalidity of all NO Ordinations based on form, not intention.
How can anyone think for one second that this miscreant is a Catholic Priest of the Catholic Church?
Their ordinations are invalid so there are no marks.
While I do not restrict comments from those holding the sedevacantist view for a number of reasons, I cannot let these comments go unchallenged.
Ordination to the priesthood and episcopate in the New Rite is Valid. It is valid as long as the proper form, matter and intent is used. The words within the Form in which the Apostles and their successors administered the sacrament is surely not the same as what was codified at Trent or after Vatican II or in any of the Eastern rites. The sacrament of Holy Orders is conferred by a bishop and deacon with the intent to do what the Church teaches regarding it. It is conferred by the laying on of hands with the intent to provide the power of priesthood and to receive it. While it would be unusual, in an emergency, the bishop could confer on this man in his kitchen the sacrament of Holy Orders if he were to choose to do it and I receive it (obviously, in a state of necessity). The new rite of consecration of a bishop is identical to that used for centuries, as far back as can be determined, in the Maronite Rite and others. Nobody questions the validity of Maronite bishops.
The sacraments are always presumed to be valid.
I must ask, with all respect, that the idea otherwise is not propagated here. Debate? Yes. Questioning? Yes. But not a propagation of that which is simply not true.
It is not necessary for validity for a priest to intend to be a GOOD priest, or an ORTHODOX priest. It is sufficient that he intend to receive Orders.
Sinfulness does not invalidate an ordination.
Donatism.
More Donatism.
Donatism.
Vox, this is your blog and I respect your wishes and thank you profusely for allowing all manner of debate. I would like to point out one fact on this matter and then I will not bring it up again. The form of Novus Ordo episcopal ordinations does not come from any valid Eastern Catholic Rite episcopal rite but instead comes from an Eastern Catholic installation of a Patriarch. There is a huge distinction between installation into an office and ordination of Holy Orders. So the assertion that NO episcopal ordinations must be valid since they are used for other valid ordinations is false. They are used for installation to an office, which is not a sacrament. Thank you for the ability to posit my position, I shall say no more on this topic at this time.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/nathan-phillips-rally-attempted-to-disrupt-mass-at-dcs-national-shrine-91038
Having addressed this question to not only priest but also to a priest Canon Lawyer, I received answers in the affirmative
( refer to the link above on Matter and Form )from both priests.
The recipient MUST have the Proper Intention to accomplish the valid RECEPTION of the Sacrament. If the Intention is to continue an active sodomite life with other men, it cannot be the Proper Intention for reception of Holy Orders.
No, this is NOT Donatism. Donatism presumes a priest in grave sin cannot confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
Being an active sodomite does not automatically negate the intention. The sodomite would have to publically announce his intention to not receive the sacrament. Of not we have to presume his intention is the recieve.
Interesting conversation! Thanks Vox, for giving others the opportunity. I myself know zero about this topic but enjoy seeing it discussed.
As for this particular priest, if we assume he is a priest, it is completely revealing about where our church really is to realize if Rome were opposed to anything this very out there and public priest were teaching, he would have been stopped in his "ministry". But he is not. And neither is Jim Martin, SJ. Both are apparently doing quite well, and Rome has no problem with either one.
But faithful priests are stepped on.
Does anyone really need to know more than these facts to see the truth of things.
"Does anyone really need to know more than these facts to see the truth of things."
Well said Kathleen.
You mis-spelled his name, it's not Horan, it's Whore-an.
Not that I find anything theologicaly offensive in the cited article, but it is Novus Ordo source. I simply do not trust a single thing that sect says.
Post a Comment