+
JMJ
This is a recent accusation by Mr. Voris:
Let's unpack this, shall we?
- Even if true, this would not be a 'very definition of Schism'. Michael should know better. It would mean that there is doubt about either the form, matter or intention.
- Accepting the authority and obedience to a higher authority are not incompatible.
- Conditional ordination does not need 'quotes'. For example, there is a case where a young priest was watching his baptism video and was aghast to discover that the officiating priest seemed to invalidate the Sacrament by messing with it. He has to be conditionally baptized, confirmed and ordained.
- The SSPX doesn't automatically re-ordain. There have been priests who had doubts and after an investigation are conditionally ordained privately to address the issue. There are also priests ordained in the modern rite who were not conditionally ordained.
Here's the truth from the SSPX website to remove the sting of Mr. Voris' ignorant accusations, see the link for the full explanation:
Just as the superiors take seriously their duty of guaranteeing the moral certitude of the holy orders of their priests, whether by means of conditional ordination or careful investigation (when possible), so also must priests who join the Society accept conditional ordination in case of even slight positive doubt, and so also must the faithful recognize that each case is different and accept the decision of those who alone are in a position to perform the necessary investigations.https://sspx.org/en/must-priests-who-come-tradition-be-re-ordained
P^3
Comments
Post a Comment