Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments

new

« Prev
1
Next »

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments Mar 21, 2019 12:18:01 GMT

Post by Admin on Mar 21, 2019 12:18:01 GMT

Quotes by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of the Conciliar Sacraments

Archbishop Lefebvre :I sincerely believe that it is the Council which is at the back of all this since many of the bishops … had never studied Thomist philosophy and so do not know what a definition is. For them, there is no such thing as essence; nothing is defined any longer; one expresses or describes something, but never defines it. Moreover, this lack of philosophy was patent throughout the whole Council. I believe this to be the reason why the Council was a mass of ambiguities, vagueness, and sentimentality, things which now clearly admit all interpretations and have left all doors open. thecatacombs.org/thread/1987/bishop-speaks-1972

1972

… that is how things stand today. It is evangelization which predominates, no longer sanctification. So, yet another bad definition of the priest, and so long as the true definition is no longer given, all the consequences must be borne. The same is true of all the sacraments. Consider all the sacraments one after the other; they are no longer defined as in the past. thecatacombs.org/thread/1987/bishop-speaks-1972

1974

It can happen that the Sacraments are not valid. In any case it can occur that the Sacraments are doubtfully valid, that is, that they are doubtful. For the holy Chrism is the matter of the Sacrament of Confirmation, and today, unfortunately, it is heard that the holy Chrism is sometimes made with oils which, according to what the writers of theology have taught us—these are not personal feelings—these matters are doubtful. We have always been taught that not just any oil can be used to make the holy Chrism. www.angelusonline.org/index.phpsection=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=1311

Declaration
We hold fast, with all our heart and with all our soul, to Catholic Rome, Guardian of the Catholic Faith and of the traditions necessary to preserve this faith, to Eternal Rome, Mistress of wisdom and truth. We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it. All these reforms, indeed, have contributed and are still contributing to the destruction of the Church, to the ruin of the priesthood, to the abolition of the Sacrifice of the Mass and of the sacraments…This Reformation, born of Liberalism and Modernism, is poisoned through and through; it derives from heresy and ends in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is therefore impossible for any conscientious and faithful Catholic to espouse this Reformation or to submit to it in any way whatsoever. thecatacombs.org/thread/80/1974-declaration-archbishop-lefebvre

1975

I know you do not want priests who may administer Sacraments invalidly.³

Footnote: 3. With respect to Sacraments of doubtful validity, today bishops rarely confirm. They delegate their vicars-general or other priests, and many of these may change the authorized formulae. Because the particular sacramental grace of each Sacrament has to be signified explicitly and because many of these changes in wording do not signify the Sacrament in question, it follows that the Sacrament is doubtfully valid. It is not permissible to toy with the formulae of the Sacraments, just as in the Sacrifice of the Mass we may not tamper with the wording of the Consecration. It is necessary to perform as the Church has always intended. www.angelusonline.org/index.php?section=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=2285

It is because we believe that our whole Faith is endangered by the post-Conciliar reforms and changes that it is our duty to disobey, and to maintain the traditions of our Faith. The greatest service we can render to the Catholic Church, to Peter’s successor, to the salvation of souls and of our own, is to say “No” to the reformed Liberal Church, because we believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God made Man, Who is neither Liberal nor reformable. Letter to Friends and Benefactors, September 1975

1976

The balance-sheet for the ten years following the Council is catastrophic in all departments. Churchmen, herein following numerous bad examples, thought that they could replace what Our Lord instituted with institutions better suited to the modern world, forgetting that Jesus Christ is God “yesterday, today and for ever” (Heb. 13:8), and that His Work is suited to all times and to all men. (Letter to Friends and Benefactors, March 1976)

In these critical moments, we must remain with that which is surest. We must avoid doubtful things. We must make our stand on things that are certain, absolutely certain, without a thousandth per cent of doubt: our Creed, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Sacraments, devotion to the Most Blessed Virgin. We cannot go wrong there. www.sspxasia.com/Documents/ArchbishopLefebvre/Sermon_by_Archbishop_Lefebvre_on_May_2_1976.htm

Sermon at Lille

The union desired by these Liberal Catholics, a union between the Church and the Revolution and subversion is, for the Church, an adulterous union, adulterous. And that adulterous union can produce only bastards. And who are those bastards? They are our rites: the rite of Mass is a bastard rite, the sacraments are bastard sacraments-we no longer know if they are sacraments which give grace or which do not give grace. We no longer know if this Mass gives the Body and Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ or if it does not give them. The priests coming out of the seminaries do not themselves know what they are. In Rome it was the Archbishop of Cincinnati who said: "Why are there no more vocations? Because the Church no longer knows what a priest is." How then can She still form priests if She does not know what a priest is? The priests coming out of the seminaries are bastard priests. They do not know what they are. They do not know that they were made to go up to the altar to offer the sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ, to give Jesus Christ to souls, and to call souls to Jesus Christ. That is what a priest is.

Ordination Sermon of Fr. Denis Roch

It is for that that Ecône remains in being, it is for that that Ecône exists, because we believe that what the Catholics have taught, what the Popes have taught, what the Councils have taught for twenty centuries, we cannot possibly abandon. We cannot possibly change our faith: we have our Credo, and we will keep it till we die. We cannot change our Credo, we cannot change the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we cannot change our Sacraments, changing them into human works, purely human, which no longer carry the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ. thecatacombs.org/thread/1906/excerpt-occasion-first-solemn-mass

1977

“The radical and extensive changes made in the Roman Rite of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and their resemblance to the modifications made by Luther oblige Catholics who remain loyal to their faith to question the validity of this new rite.”(Écône, February 2, 1977)

The important thing is to save the Catholic Faith inscribed in our catechisms, to save the means of living it by the grace of the Sacrifice of the Mass and of the Sacraments, to save the means of passing it on to future generations through Catholic schools and seminaries. (Letter to Friends and Benefactors, October 1977)

1978

Satan, the father of lies, as Our Lord Jesus calls him, has the extraordinary talent of finding out some words, to which he assigns a new meaning so that from their ambiguity, he achieves acceptance of the destructive falsehood which overthrows the best established societies. He found it in this “ecumenism” of the Council which has created an ecumenical liturgy, an ecumenical Bible, and ecumenical catechism, uniting truth and falsehood – marrying the true and the false. The most disastrous result of this marriage is the Catholic-Protestant Mass, the poisoned source afterwards yielding countless ravages: relinquishment of the Church, of the true Faith, sacrileges, tearing of the unity of the Church, proliferation of diverse sorts of creeds unworthy of the Church. ... The ecumencial Mass leads logically to apostasy. One cannot serve two masters, one cannot nourish oneself indifferently from truth or falsehood. One must, at all costs, remain bound to truth without mingling. Pope Pius IX vigorously denounced these liberal Catholics who believe they can unite falsehood and truth, good and evil, in order to please their contemporary fellowmen. Whether this poisoned ecumenism reaches us through the hierarchy or not, the channel is not important – it is the poison that one must refuse to swallow. It is a matter of strict obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ, to the Church of all times, to all the successors of Peter. We will, therefore, keep the Catholic liturgy, the Catholic Bible and catechism. (Letter to Friends and Benefactors, March 1978)

My dear friends, we have been betrayed. Betrayed by all of those who ought to be giving us the truth, who ought to be teaching the Ten Commandments, who ought to be teaching us the true catechism, who ought to be giving us the true Mass – the one that the Church has always loved; the one that was said by the Saints; the one that has sanctified generations and generations! Likewise, they must give us all the Sacraments, without any doubt concerning their validity, Sacraments which are certainly valid. It is a duty for us to ask them for these things and they have a duty to give them to us. [...] We have the duty not to collaborate in the Church's destruction. But, on the contrary, to work – to work ardently, calmly, serenely, for the Church's construction, for the re-construction of the Church, for the preservation of the Church. Each one of you can do your duty in this regard-in your villages, in your parishes, in your institutions, in your professions – wherever you are. Set up true parishes, Catholic parishes. And let these Catholic parishes be confided to true priests. (Sermon - Ordinations June 29, 1978)

1979

Michael Davies – Apologia Vol. I

Preface and Footnote:

The Archbishop appreciated that the liturgical reform in particular must inevitably compromise Catholic teaching on the priesthood and the Mass, the twin pillars upon which our faith is built.¹ The sixteenth-century Protestant Reformers had also realized that if they could undermine the priesthood there would be no Mass and the Church would be destroyed. The Archbishop founded the Society of St. Pius X with its seminary at Econe not as an act of rebellion but to perpetuate the Catholic priesthood, and for no other purpose.

1. Let anyone who doubts this compare the new and old rites of ordination. A detailed comparison has been made in my book The Order of Melchisedech. sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Apologia/Vol_one/Introduction.htm

Letter to Pope John Paul II

The majority of Catholics find themselves either without priests or directed by priests who no longer have the Catholic faith. Indeed, where priests are less than forty years old, and there are few of these, they have been badly trained in groups of formation that have a Modernist, Protestant, even Marxist spirit. If priests are older, they are using catechisms replete with errors, even heresies, and they use ecumenical Bibles to instruct their parishioners. The extent of the disaster is enormous. We rejoice at your insistence that the priest must be holy. But who will give him holiness if the seminaries have bad teachers? If the Church is to be renewed the priesthood must be renewed at all costs, and so, accordingly, must the seminaries. But true seminaries cannot be established without restoring the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to the spirit defined by the Council of Trent, and at the same time restoring the Sacraments and the entire Liturgy in this same spirit. (Archbishop Lefebvre, Letter to Pope John Paul II, 25 April 1979, Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre, Volume II)

1980

Venice 1980

But one cannot change what Jesus Christ has established. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Sacraments, the Creed, our catechism, the Sacred Scriptures - all come from Jesus Christ. To change them is to change the establishment of Jesus Christ. Impossible! One cannot say that the Church has been mistaken; if something is wrong one must look for the reason somewhere, but not in the Church. They also say that the Church must change as modem man changes, that as man has a new way of life, so too the Church must have another doctrine - a new Mass, new Sacraments, a new catechism, new seminaries - and, in this way, everything has gone to ruin. Everything has been ruined! ... The Church is hardly recognizable today. The ceremonies - the half - Protestant, half-Catholic liturgy - are a circus; it is no longer a Mystery. The Sacred Mystery of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - a great Mystery, heavenly and sublime - is no longer considered such. thecatacombs.org/post/1527

We must refuse to compromise with those who deny the divinity of Our Lord, or with any false ecumenism. We must fight against atheism and laicism in order to help Our Lord to reign over families and over society. We must protect the worship of the Church, the Sacrifice of the Mass, and the sacraments instituted by Our Lord, practicing them according to the rites honored by twenty centuries of tradition.Thus we will properly honor Our Lord, and thus be assured of receiving His grace. ... It is because the novelties which have invaded the Church since the Council diminish the adoration and the honor due to Our Lord, and implicitly throw doubt upon His divinity, that we refuse them. These novelties do not come from the Holy Ghost, nor from His Church, but from those who are imbued with the spirit of Modernism, and with all the errors which convey this spirit, condemned with so much courage and energy by St. Pius X. This holy Pope said to the bishops of France with regard to the Sillon movement: “The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but the men of tradition.” ... The Church cannot content herself with doubtful sacraments nor with ambiguous teaching. Those who have introduced these doubts and this ambiguity are not disciples of the Church. Whatever their intentions may have been, they in fact worked against the Church. The disastrous results of their industry exceed the worst examinings, and are not lessened by the apparent exceptions of a few regions. When Luther introduced the vernacular into the liturgy, the crowds rushed into the churches. But later? It is consoling to note that in the Catholic world, the sense of faith of the faithful rejects these novelties and attaches itself to Tradition. It is from this that the true renewal of the Church will come. And it is because these novelties were introduced by a clergy infected with Modernism, that the most urgent and necessary work in the Church is the formation of a profoundly Catholic clergy. We give ourselves to this work with all our heart, aided henceforth by our eighty young priests, and encouraged by the presence of our two hundred and ten major seminarians. The countries of South and Central America give us hope. The Church was saved from Arianism. She will be saved as well from Modernism. Our Lord will triumph, even when, humanly speaking, all seems lost. His ways are not our ways. Would we have chosen the Cross to triumph over Satan, the world and sin? (Letter to Friends and Benefactors, April 1980)

1982

It provided the opportunity to generalize, to extend the sickness which already existed in the Church, and to extend it in an official manner, to the extent that one can almost say now that error spreads in the Church through obedience, which is something unheard of in the Church; that we are obliged by obedience to accept doctrine which is no longer truly orthodox, and sacraments which are doubtful. www.angelusonline.org/index.phpsection=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=642

On the contrary, the Novus Ordo is precisely the banner of this false ecumenism, representing the annihilation of the Catholic religion and the Catholic priesthood. For the honor of Jesus Christ and for the honor of the Church, let us be faithful to the Catholic Mass, symbol of our Faith, banner of our holy religion. To continue this Catholic Mass we need priests, and so we need Catholic, and not Modernist seminaries, where, as always in the Church, young clerics can direct their formation and apostolate entirely towards the altar of divine Sacrifice. (Letter to Friends and Benefactors, February 1982)

... the Virgin Mary had the faith and she saw beyond the wounds, beyond the pierced Heart. She saw God in her Son, her Divine Son. We too, in spite of the wounds in the Church, in spite of the difficulties, the persecution which we are enduring, even from those in authority in the Church, let us not abandon the Church, let us love the Holy Church our mother, let us serve her always in spite of the authorities, if necessary. In spite of these authorities who wrongly persecute us, let us stay on the same road, let us keep to the same path: we want to support the Holy Roman Catholic Church, we want to keep it going and we will keep it going by means of the priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the true sacraments of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the true catechism. (1982 Ordination Sermon)

1983

The Society does not say that all the sacraments according to the new post-conciliar rites are invalid, but that due to bad translations, the lack of proper intention, and the changes introduced in the matter and form, the number of invalid and doubtful sacraments is increasing. In order, then, to reach a decision in the practical order concerning the doubtfulness or invalidity of sacraments given by priests imbued with the ideas of the Council, a serious study of the various circumstances is necessary. thecatacombs.org/thread/1992/american-friends-benefactors-1983

April, 1983 Archbishop Lefebvre to the seminarians in Ridgefield, CT: "Concerning the Validity of the New Rite Sacraments"
"Fr. Williamson tells me some of you have a difficulty in understanding, concerning the New Rite of ordination, and over the 'New Rite' Sacraments. The rule of theology for the condition of validity of Sacraments, can be found in (your manuals) of Theology. We must perform an application of these conditions. . .to the new rite Sacraments of the reform of Vatican II. In some cases it is very difficult to know if it is valid or not. Especially in the vernacular translations of the form of the sacraments. In Latin it is easier to know if its valid or invalid, but in the vernacular, it is very difficult to know if some words invalidate a sacrament. So we must do, in some cases, a detailed study of that case. You know that many priests today change the form of the Sacrament! That is another difficulty in determining validity or invalidity, e.g. 'What did this bishop say when he did this sacrament? ... We must perform an examination of these things before we can say they are valid or invalid. We must study each case."

1985

And so they reformed the Mass, [they made] the New Mass, the new sacraments, the new catechisms, the new Bible. All is changed by the spirit of ecumenism, to be closer to the Protestants. And the result is that many Catholics abandon their Faith and many become Protestants, or another religion, or they abandon all religion. We can see in your seminaries, in your convents, in your monasteries—where are the vocations? That is the destruction of the Church! thecatacombs.org/thread/1902/changes-sacraments-protestants-1985

1986

Interview with Archbishop Lefebvre

Q. About the sacraments, when do we know if they are invalid or valid in the New Mass? It is very confusing. Will there be a point when they are not valid any more? What about baptism, marriage?

A. The answer to that is found in the principles of theology. For the validity of a sacrament you must have three things: proper matter, proper form and proper intention, the intention of the priest. Those are the three conditions which determine the validity of the sacrament. I cannot say, myself, that for all sacraments in the Conciliar Church, these three conditions are never met. I don't think we can say that. But I think with new priests, with priests who no longer have Catholic intentions, they don't know what the proper intention is, the intention of the Church, so that perhaps the validity of their sacraments is at least doubtful.

Interpolation by Father Laisney: There are three things required for a valid sacrament: valid matter, proper form and the proper intention in the minister and it is not true to say that it never happens that the sacraments are invalid in the Novus Ordo. There are some valid baptisms, some valid Masses, but, especially with new priests who are not trained properly, who do not know what should be the intention of the Church—for instance with the Mass, they think the Mass is just a meal—then the intention becomes doubtful, and there is at least a doubt in many modern Masses. At least a doubt. Moreover, you must add the bad translation. For instance, with "for many" replaced by "for all men," which is a change in the very words of consecration. This raises another doubt on the validity of the consecration. And so you have the intention of the minister that becomes doubtful. If the minister in baptism, for instance, says: "Oh, it's just a rite of initiation"—if they reject the intention to remove Original Sin, then the intention is not proper. Because they are trained in the new way, then the intention is sometimes doubtful. www.angelusonline.org/index.phpsection=articles&subsection=show_article&article_id=1196

1988

Consecration Sermon

When God calls me - no doubt this will be before long - from whom would these seminarians receive the Sacrament of Orders? From conciliar bishops, who, due to their doubtful intentions, confer doubtful sacraments? This is not possible.

Ordination Sermon
Why Ecône? At that time perhaps you did not perfectly realize the fight that Ecône leads. You came because of your desire to be formed in Tradition. Indeed, it seemed to you that to separate oneself from Tradition was to separate oneself from the Church and, therefore, to receive possibly doubtful sacraments and a formation which is certainly not according to the principles of the Magisterium of the Church of All Times.
thecatacombs.org/thread/1926/prepared-fight-ordination-sermon-june

Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre on the necessity of reordinations
Ecône, 28 oct. 1988
Very dear Mr. Wilson,

thank you very much for your kind letter. I agree with your desire to reordain conditionnaly these priests, and I have done this reordination many times. All sacraments from the modernists bishops or priests are doubtfull now. The changes are increasing and their intentions are no more catholics. We are in the time of great apostasy. We need more and more bishops and priests very catholics. It is necessary everywhere in the world. ... We must pray and work hardly to extend the kingdom of Jesus-Christ. ...Marcel Lefebvre

thecatacombs.org/thread/1746/questionable-priestly-ordinations-conciliar-church

Archbishop Lefebvre as quoted by the Dominicans of Avrille

And we quoted the remarks of Archbishop Lefebvre on the subject of the episcopal consecration of Bp Daneels, auxiliary bishop of Brussels:

“Little booklets were published on the occasion of this consecration. For the public prayers, here is what was said and repeated by the crowd:
Be an apostle like Peter and Paul; be an apostle like the patron of this parish; be an apostle like Gandhi; be an apostle like Luther; be an apostle like (Martin) Luther King; be an apostle like Helder Camara; be an apostle like Romero. Apostle like Luther, but what intention did the bishops have when they consecrated this bishop, Bp. Daneels²?”

“It is frightening…Was this bishop really consecrated? We can doubt it anyway. And if that is the intention of the consecrators, it is incomprehensible! The situation is even more serious than we thought³.”

We could quote numerous examples of sacraments given in the conciliar Church that were certainly invalid: confirmations given without using holy oils; baptisms where one person pours the water, while another pronounces the words, etc4.

This is why the position of Archbishop Lefebvre in the letter that we have quoted here, appears wise: because of the particular importance of the sacrament of ordination, it is necessary to conditionally re-ordain the priests who come from the conciliar Church to the Traditional one.

(Taken from “Le Sel de la terre” 98)

Footnotes:

1. We can make an exception for the new rite of Confirmation that permits the use of oils other than olive oil, which introduces a doubt concerning the validity, by reason of a defect of matter. We also point out that Fr Alvaro Calderon (SSPX), in the Spanish language review Si Si No No (#267, November 2014), speaks of a “slight doubt,” a “shadow” concerning the validity of the new rite of episcopal consecration in itself (see Le Sel de la terre 92, p. 172).
2. Archbishop Lefebvre, Conference in Nantes (France), February 5, 1983.
3. Archbishop Lefebvre, Conference in Ecône (Switzerland), October 28, 1988.
thecatacombs.org/thread/1746/questionable-priestly-ordinations-conciliar-church

1989

60th Anniversary of Ordination Sermon
And there can be no Catholic priests without Catholic bishops. We could have had, as you know, after the conversations with Rome, one bishop. But what would this bishop have been? They demanded that he have the "profile desired by the Vatican." What does that mean? That he have the spirit of the Council, the spirit of Vatican II. It is precisely to protect ourselves from that spirit which is not the Spirit of God, which is not the Catholic Spirit, that we decided to make these dear four Catholic bishops, and to transmit to the coming generations of seminarians the Catholic Priesthood. This way, you are assured that some priests shall continue to teach you and your children the True Catholic Faith and to transmit the grace through true Sacraments and the true Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. thecatacombs.org/thread/1904/60th-anniversary-archbishops-ordination-1989

1990

Letter of Archbishop Lefebvre to Bishop de Castro Mayer:
... because priests and faithful have a strict right to have shepherds who profess the Catholic Faith in its entirety, essential for the salvation of their souls, and to have priests who are true Catholic priests.

Secondly, because the Conciliar Church, having now reached everywhere, is spreading errors contrary to the Catholic Faith and, as a result of these errors, it has corrupted the sources of grace, which are the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments. This false Church is in an ever-deeper state of rupture with the Catholic Church. thecatacombs.org/thread/713/letter-bishop-castro-mayer-december

OTHER SOURCES QUOTING ARCHBISHOP LEFEBVRE ON DOUBTFUL ORDINATIONS

Dominicans of Avrille – footnote to “The Art of Confessing”

Today, we must be precise: “a traditional priest validly ordained”. We know that there is a doubt on the validity of the new rite of priestly ordination (look at the letter of Archbishop Lefebvre on our website). There is also a doubt about the validity of the ordinations performed by conciliar bishops, even when they use the traditional rite. In his sermon of the consecration of four bishops (June 30, 1988), Archbishop Lefebvre said: “If God calls me, from whom will these seminarians receive the priestly ordination: from conciliar bishops whose sacraments are ALL doubtful? www.dominicansavrille.us/the-art-of-confessing-part-1-of-3/

Dominicans of Avrille - Le Sel de la Terre 54

“Due to the generalized disorder, both at the liturgical and dogmatic levels, we can have serious reasons to doubt the validity of certain episcopal ordinations.” thecatacombs.org/thread/1746/questionable-priestly-ordinations-conciliar-church

Fr. Peter Scott wrote the following conclusion in a 2007 Angelus article, entitled, "Must priests who come to Tradition be re-ordained?":

It would, indeed, be tragic if all traditional priests did not have moral certitude as to their ordination, and if there existed two different grades of priests, a higher grade ordained in Tradition, and a lower grade. It is for this reason that the superiors have the right to insist on conditional re-ordination for any priest turning towards Tradition, and will only accept ordinations in the conciliar Church after having investigated both priestly and episcopal ordinations and established moral certitude.

Archbishop Lefebvre clearly recognized his obligation of providing priests concerning whose ordination there was no doubt. It was one of the reasons for the episcopal consecrations of 1988, as he declared in the sermon for the occasion:

You well know, my dear brethren, that there can be no priests without bishops. When God calls me—this will certainly not be long—from whom would these seminarians receive the sacrament of Orders? From conciliar bishops, who, due to their doubtful intentions, confer doubtful sacraments? This is not possible."

He continued, explaining that he could not leave the faithful orphans, nor abandon the seminarians who entrusted themselves to him, for “they came to our seminaries, despite all the difficulties that they have encountered, in order to receive a true ordination to the priesthood...” (Fr. Francois Laisney, Archbishop Lefebvre and the Vatican, p.120). He considered it his duty to guarantee the certitude of the sacrament of holy orders by the consecration of bishops in the traditional rite, who would then ordain only in the traditional rite.

We must observe the same balance as Archbishop Lefebvre. On the one hand, it is our duty to avoid the excess of sedevacantism, which unreasonably denies the very validity and existence of the post-conciliar Church and its priesthood. On the other hand, however, we must likewise reject the laxist and liberal approach that does not take seriously the real doubts that can arise concerning the validity of priestly ordinations in the post-conciliar Church, failing to consider the enormous importance and necessity of a certainly valid priesthood for the good of the Church, for the eternal salvation of souls, and for the tranquility of the consciences of the faithful. Given the gravity of these issues, it is not even a slight doubt that is acceptable. Hence the duty of examining in each particular case the vernacular form of priestly ordination, the intention of the ordaining bishop, the rite of consecration of the ordaining bishop, and the intention of the consecrators.

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.

For regardless of the technical question of the validity of a priest’s holy orders, we all recognize the Catholic sense that tells us that there can be no mixing of the illegitimate new rites with the traditional Catholic rites, a principle so simply elucidated by Archbishop Lefebvre on June 29, 1976:

We are not of this religion. We do not accept this new religion. We are of the religion of all time, of the Catholic religion. We are not of that universal religion, as they call it today. It is no longer the Catholic religion. We are not of that liberal, modernist religion that has its worship, its priests, its faith, its catechisms, its Bible."

Bp. Tissier de Mallerais, quoted by Dominicans of Avrille:

Bp Tissier de Mallerais, in his sermon from June 29, 2016 at Econe, spoke as follows concerning the rite of ordination for priests:

“Clearly, we cannot accept this faked new rite of ordination that leaves doubts concerning the validity of numerous ordinations done according to the new rite. Thus this new rite of ordination is not Catholic. And so we will of course faithfully continue to transmit the real and valid priesthood by the traditional priestly rite of ordination.”

Bishop Richard Williamson

Should priests ordained with the new rite of Ordination of 1972 be conditionally re-ordained with the old and certainly valid rite of Ordination ? Catholic doctrine on the validity of sacraments is clear, but the sacramental rites of the Newchurch seem to have been designed to lead gradually to invalidity (see EC 121 of Oct 31, 2009). The « gradually » is the problem. How far along was that gradual process in any given case ? [...]

In brief, were I Pope, I think I might require that all priests or bishops ordained or consecrated with the « renewed » rites should be conditionally re-ordained or re-consecrated, not because I would believe that none of them were true priests or bishops, on the contrary, but because when it comes to the sacraments all serious doubts must be removed, and that would be the simplest way of removing all possible doubts. Newchurch rot of the sacraments could not be left hanging around. Newchurch Ordinations I - EC #356 May 10, 2014

[...] the Newrite of episcopal Consecration is an entirely new Rite. As such, is it valid? It is certainly illegitimate, because no Pope has the right to make such a break with Catholic Tradition. On the other hand in the context of the Newrite and its institution, the Newmatter, Newform and Newintention are very probably valid, because they signify what needs to be signified and most of their elements come from Rites accepted by the Church. But the validity is not certain because the break with Tradition is not legitimate, and because the Newrite is only similar to Rites approved by the Church, and all the changes go in a modernist direction. Therefore the absolute need for certain validity in sacramental Rites applies: until the restored Magisterium of the Church pronounces that the Newrite of Consecration is valid, then to be safe, Newbishops should be reconsecrated conditionally, and Newpriests ordained only by Newbishops should be re-ordained conditionally. Valid Bishops? II - EC#450 - January 27, 2016

[...] the sacraments call for absolutely certain validity, especially the consecration of bishops on whom the Church hangs. Therefore newbishops and newpriests were best conditionally re-consecrated and re-ordained. Valid Bishops? III EC#451 - March 5, 2016

Catechism of timely truths: The rallies (seen by Archbishop Lefebvre), abbot FM. Chautard - July 8, 2018 [Translated from the French]

17) Are the sacraments of the rallied priests valid?
The sacraments of the rallied priests are valid to the extent that their ordinations are valid (for the sacraments which require the priesthood in the minister). However, one can have a doubt about the priesthood of clerics rallied who were ordained by bishops themselves doubtfully sacred [consecrated] because of ambiguous intentions and the new rite of episcopal consecrations (after 1968).

As for the confirmations given in the rallied communities, the doubt of the validity arises moreover with regard to the material used for the Holy Chrism. If the oil is not olive oil, as is now authorized and practiced, a doubt remains.

Louis Salleron, 1979

"It is a completely new doctrine of the priesthood which, today, is poisoning "The Church of France." According to this doctrine, the priest is no longer a man set apart and endowed, by the Sacrament of Orders, with the power to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, with the special mission to preach the Gospel and to teach the truths to be believed. He is now only a member of the faithful, man or woman, married or celibate, chosen by the community to serve them and give thanks to God." The Pope, the Bishops, and the Priests

Fr. Peter Scott - 2003

"Everything that comes from the hierarchy, such as the rites of Mass and the sacraments, the laws of the Church, and everything that belongs to ecclesiastical law is treated as if it is not sacred, that it is changing, and that it is has no permanent value. All Catholic customs, prayers, rites, and all sense of the sacred is in one fell swoop thrown out the window, since they are all the product of a hierarchy which is a service, and the strange paradox is that this has been done by the hierarchy itself, in the name of its new function of a service. (Fr. Peter Scott, "How are Catholics to Respond to the Present Crisis?"The Angelus: April 2003)

[Emphasis - The Catacombs]

Last Edit: Feb 12, 2020 12:32:00 GMT by Admin

"So let us be confident, let us not be unprepared, let us not be outflanked, let us be wise, vigilant, fighting against those who are trying to tear the faith out of our souls and morality out of our hearts, so that we may remain Catholics, remain united to the Blessed Virgin Mary, remain united to the Roman Catholic Church, remain faithful children of the Church."- Archbp. Lefebvre 1980

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments Apr 1, 2019 13:34:14 GMT

Post by Admin on Apr 1, 2019 13:34:14 GMT

Liturgical Time Bombs in Vatican II: Excerpts

The Destruction of Catholic Faith Through Changes in Catholic Worship
by Michael Davies

The Mass and Sacraments Reformed by a Freemason?

It would be impossible to place too much stress upon the fact that Archbishop Bugnini was the moving spirit behind the entire liturgical reform-----a point which, with surprising lack of discretion, L'Osservatore Romano emphasized when it attempted to camouflage the reason for his abrupt dismissal by lavishing praise upon him. Archbishop Bugnini was, the Vatican journal explained, the co-ordinator and animator who had directed the work of the commissions. [L'Osservatore Romano, July 20, 1975.]

It also needs to be stressed that the liturgical reform was not concerned solely with the Mass, but extended to all the Sacraments, not hesitating to interfere in some instances with their very matter and form. The wholesale and drastic nature of this reform constitutes a breach with Tradition unprecedented in the history of the Church-----and the fact that the co-ordinator and animator who directed it was removed from his position because Pope Paul VI believed him to be a Freemason must rightly give every faithful Catholic cause for alarm. This book has been concerned primarily with the Mass, but the changes made in some of the other sacramental rites give equal cause for concern. The modifications made in the Rite of Ordination are, if anything, even more serious than those made in the Mass. [Cf. M. Davies, The Order of Melchisedech (Harrison, NY: Roman Catholic Books, 1993).] Pope Paul himself had to intervene and personally correct the very serious deficiencies in the new Order of Baptism for Infants, which had been promulgated with his approval in 1969." [Notitiae, No. 85, July-August, 1973, pp. 268-272.] This provides another demonstration of the fact that papally approved liturgical texts are not, and should not be, exempt from criticism-----particularly when they involve changes in traditional rites. Had the Pope not been made aware of the serious disquiet aroused by the new Order of Baptism for Infants, he might not have re-examined it and made the important revisions which he promulgated in 1973.

Finally, some comfort at least can be taken from the fact that Archbishop Bugnini's alleged Masonic associations were discovered in time to prevent his fully implementing the fourth and final stage of his revolution. He had divided this revolution into four stages-----firstly, the transition from Latin to the vernacular; secondly, the reform of the liturgical books; thirdly, the translation of the liturgical books; and fourthly, as he explained in his journal Notitiae,

"the adaptation or 'incarnation' of the Roman form of the liturgy into the usages and mentalities of each individual Church is now beginning and will be pursued with ever increasing care and preparation." [Notitiae, No. 92, April 1974, p. 126.]

Archbishop Bugnini made this boast in 1974, and in some countries, India in particular, the fourth stage was already well advanced when he was removed from his position in 1975. Only time will reveal whether it has been possible to contain or even reverse this process of adaptation-----and the extent to which the desire to reverse it exists in the Vatican.

Source

[Emphasis - The Catacombs]

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments Apr 2, 2019 11:32:42 GMT

Post by Admin on Apr 2, 2019 11:32:42 GMT

Fr. Carl Pulvermacher, summarizing Archbishop Lefebvre on doubtful Novus Ordo sacraments, specifically the New Mass and Ordinations:

The Angelus - June 1982

Ask Me ... Fr. Carl Pulvermacher

Question:

If the Novus Ordo Masses and recent ordinations are not intrinsically invalid, they must be capable of conferring grace. Does this follow? If they can confer grace, why are we warned (in the pages of your magazine, and in statements by His Grace, unless I am deceived by my memory) to avoid the New Mass? What about my elderly parents who live four hundred miles from a traditionalist Mass station? Should they not attend their local church until a place for the ancient Mass is within reach? A.P.N., Houston, Tx.

Answer:

You refer, of course, to the Michael Davies book review in our May issue. When Mr. Davies or the Archbishop say that the New Mass and Sacraments are not per se, or intrinsically, of themselves, or of their very nature, invalid, they do not mean to say that they are good or grace giving. The Greek Orthodox Mass and sacraments can be valid. Even so, I must avoid them. The Church, the Pope, in the fullness of their authority, cannot approve for all the faithful a rite that is certainly invalid. This would deny the dogma of infallibility. The new Rite of Mass approved by Pope Paul VI, sad to say, was developed with the assistance of six Protestant theologians. Cardinal Ottaviani, a Catholic theologian of repute, warned Pope Paul VI that this new rite was a notable departure from Catholic theology and practice. It is my opinion that this new rite, in the way it is said now, is often doubtfully valid and is poisoned or spoiled. Please consult the interview of Archbishop Lefebvre in this issue for more and better clarification.

As for your parents attending Mass and receiving the Sacraments, it is a crying shame that they have to endure such a hardship for their faith. I recommend that they stay away from the New Mass and Sacraments, but keep their Sundays and Holy Days the best they can—by prayer, scripture reading, catechism study, spiritual and corporal works of mercy.

Last Edit: Apr 2, 2019 12:12:21 GMT by Admin

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments Jun 23, 2019 14:11:49 GMT

Post by Admin on Jun 23, 2019 14:11:49 GMT

Father Epiney - May 26, 2019

I would like to quote some words of Bishop Tissier de Mallerais. A few years ago he said:

"The great apostasy of which St. Paul speaks continues to grow." The social royalty of Christ is very much destroyed by religious freedom and human rights of the Second Vatican Council.Without the ordinations of Bishop Lefebvre in 1988, we would have died! Neither the [Fraternity of Saint Peter] nor any other, nor Ecclesia Dei, the Tradition would be dead! The "Operation Survival" was a total success thanks to the heroic action of Bishop Lefebvre, who remains excommunicated. Nothing has changed in Rome, blind spirits, the parallel church is the new Vatican II church, its new religion is ecumenical, Archbishop Lefebvre was right: "Only bishops completely free of all influence of liberal Rome can work for the good of the Church."

Bishop Huonder was ordained a priest with the new rite in 1971. In 2007 he was consecrated bishop with the new rite of episcopal ordination. However, Archbishop Lefebvre said: "All the [New Rite] sacraments are doubtful!" Thus, it is no longer clear today in the Ecumenical Council Church if priests are priests, if bishops are bishops It is confusion. We are in full Protestantism. It's almost the same, or even worse!

[They are] letting these bishops into the houses of the fraternity, of whom we are not sure of the validity of their priestly and episcopal ordinations, and who have permanent contacts with other bishops who want to take us back to Vatican II ... Because it is the goal, they also say it: it is about helping to integrate. Yes, he is a disciple of Pope Benedict XVI, who attracted some traditional communities that probably remained faithful to the Mass, but no longer fight against the errors of modernism. They shut up! We can not shut up when it comes to the truth! We must respond! We must react because it is about our faith, our salvation, the salvation of our souls. We must wake up! We must not sleep!

Last Edit: Jun 23, 2019 14:12:14 GMT by Admin

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments Jun 23, 2019 17:59:51 GMT

Post by Admin on Jun 23, 2019 17:59:51 GMT

[SSPX] Newsletter of the District of Asia
December 1998

Priestly Ordination: The New Rite Vs. The Old Rite
Strange Changes

On June 18, 1968, Pope Paul VI promulgated a new rite for the priestly ordination.

The matter and the form of the sacrament [1] remained almost the same as in the rite promulgated by Pope Pius XII in November 1948. There are only two small changes in the form, which do not however affect the meaning of the sacrament; in fact, they specify it better.
The novelty and danger of the new rite consists especially in the abolition of the two ceremonies by which the bishop clearly explains the powers of the Catholic priest:

1) In relation to the power to offer Mass:

Old Rite: “Receive the power to offer the Sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masses for the living and the dead.”

New Rite: “Let our Lord Jesus Christ, whom the Father anointed by the Holy Ghost and by fortitude, guard you in order that you may offer the sacrifice to God and sanctify the Christian people.”

2) In relation to the power to hear confession:

Old Rite: The second imposition of hands along with a quote of Our Lord Himself: “Receive the Holy Ghost, whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.”(John 20:22)

New Rite: Abolished completely

These two ceremonies in the traditional rite of ordination indicated clearly that the priest has two powers:

1. The first, on the physical Body of Christ, consisting in offering the Sacrifice for the living and the dead.

2. The second, on the mystical Body of Christ i.e. the sanctification of the faithful, especially by the forgiveness of sins in the sacrament of Confession.

While these two powers are mentioned in the new formulas, it is not done very clearly:

- The Sacrifice is no longer for the living and the dead.

- The sanctification of the faithful does not come firstly by the forgiveness of sins, which puts souls in the state of grace.

WHY WERE THESE CHANGES MADE?

It is now manifest that the intention leading all these changes in the new rite of ordination is the same intention which lead all the changes in the new order of Mass, i.e. the desire to get closer to the Protestant doctrines.

For Luther, founder of Protestantism, “To be a Christian means to have the Gospel and to believe in Christ. This faith brings forgiveness of sins and divine grace.” [2]

· Also for him, the Mass is only a simple commemoration of the Last Supper, and not the unbloody renewal of the unique Sacrifice of Our Lord on the Cross, applying the merits of the Passion for the remission of sins. All of this is useless according to him because faith is sufficient in order to be saved.

· There is no need of the Sacrament of Penance because our faith in Christ is sufficient to obtain the forgiveness of sins.

· And the priest is a simple preacher.

To answer these errors of Luther, the Council of Trent promulgated the following anathemas:

· “If anyone says that the sacrifice of the Mass is one only of praise and thanksgiving, or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross but not a propitiatory one, or that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions and other necessities, let him be anathema.” (Canon 3 on the Sacrifice of the Mass)

· “If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine Mercy, which remits sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is confidence alone that justifies us, let him be anathema.” (Canon 12 concerning justification)

The abolition of this precision in the new rite of the priestly ordination (even if the rite remains valid in itself by the unchanged matter and form) makes the doctrine expressed by the new rite dangerously close to the Protestant doctrine. This is not surprising since the end of all the liturgical reforms after the Vatican II Council was ecumenism.

Something else, which is also not surprising, alas, is that now, many new priests do not know anymore what the priesthood is. Consequently, this leads to all priestly problems, such as married priests (at least 70,000 priests have abandoned their priesthood since the last Council).

And do the bishops themselves know well what a priest is? We hope so, because with this new rite, some bishops could have an intention opposite to the intention of the Church when they ordain priests, and in that case the ordination would be invalid, or at least doubtful.

[1] The matter of a sacrament is the sensible thing made use of in effecting the sacrament. For the priestly ordination, it is the first imposition of the hands made by the bishop. The form is the words, which are pronounced in order to effect the sacrament. For the priestly ordination, it is some of the words of the consecratory preface.

[2] The Facts About Luther, by Msgr. O’Hare, TAN Books, p.101

[Emphasis - The Catacombs]

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments Jun 23, 2019 18:19:51 GMT

Post by Admin on Jun 23, 2019 18:19:51 GMT

[SSPX] Newsletter of the District of Asia
March - April 1999

The New Sacrament of Extreme Unction

1. Definition and effects of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction according to the traditional doctrine of the Church.

"Extreme Unction is a sacrament instituted for the spiritual as well as for the temporal comfort of the sick in danger of death " - Catechism of St. Pius X

What is the effect of this sacrament?

"The effect is the grace of the Holy Ghost, whose anointing takes away sins, if there are any still to be expiated, and removes the trace of sin; and it comforts and strengthens the soul of the sick person. It gives him great confidence in the divine mercy. Encouraged by this, the sick man more easily bears the inconvenience and trial of his illness and more easily resists the temptations of the devil who lies in wait for his heel. This anointing occasionally restores health to the body, if health would be of advantage to the salvation of the soul. " (Council of Trent. 14 session).

As a consequence,

"it is well to receive Extreme Unction while the sick person retains the, use of his senses, and while there remains some hope of his recovery, because he thus receives it with better dispositions and is hence able to derive greater fruit from it; and because this sacrament restores health of body (should it be for the good of the soul) by assisting the powers of nature; and hence it should not be deferred until recovery is despaired of " (Catechism of Saint Pius X).

2. The change of the doctrine and of the practice since the Council Vatican II.

Principal documents:

Vatican II: Constitution on the Sacred-Liturgy, Dec. 4, 1963.
Paul VI : Apostolic Constitution on the sacrament of the anointing of the sick, Nov. 30, 1972.
New Canon Law (1983)

a. The effects of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction

Traditional Doctrine: "The sacrament of Extreme Unction has been principally instituted to cure the sickness of the sin. " (St. Thomas Aquinas Summa Suppl 30,1) This doctrine is developed by the Council of Trent quoted above.

New Doctrine: The new doctrine of the sacrament of Extreme Unction clearly appears in the new ritual of the benediction of the oil of the sick by the Bishop on Holy Thursday.

Blessing of the oil of The Sick:

Traditional Formula: "Send, O Lord, the Holy Ghost on this olive oil (...) to restore the soul and the body (...) in order that those who will receive this unction will have a help for the soul and the body."

New Formula: "Send, O Lord, the Holy Ghost on this and oil (...) to restore the body (...) in order that those who will receive this unction will have a help for the body

It is clear that the new doctrine insists on the corporal effect of the sacrament. It is an inversion of the traditional doctrine of the Church.

b. The person being able to receive the sacrament of Extreme Unction.

This new doctrine insisting on the effects of this sacrament on the body, we find in the new sacramental discipline a changing concerning those who can receive this sacrament:

Traditional Doctrine: "The sacrament of Extreme Unction can only be administered to the faithful "(...) who are in danger of death because of sickness or old age" (Traditional Canon Law C940). This doctrine had always been taught in the Church. Let us only quote the council of Florence (15th century): "This sacrament should not be given except to the sick whose death is feared. "

New Doctrine: The sacrament of the anointing of the sick can be administered to the faithful (...) who begin to be in danger because of sickness or old age" (New Canon Law. C1004). The word "death " has been suppressed. However, it was mentioned in Vatican II's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, n. 73: "who begin to be in danger of death. "

What happens, if the sacrament is given to somebody who certainly is not in danger of death (because if there is a doubtful danger of death, it is allowed, in the traditional practice of the Church, to give the sacrament "under condition")?

If someone is certainly not in danger of death, the constant teaching of the Church until Vatican II tells that the sacrament is probably invalid (NAZ, Dictionary of Canon Law).

The insistence on the cure of the body and the suppression of the danger of death as a necessary condition for the reception of Extreme Unction have three consequences:

1. The changing of the traditional name "Extreme Unction" into " Anointing of the sick" or "Sacrament of the sick."

2. The administration of the sacrament to the persons who are not in danger of death: "Elderly people may be anointed if they are weak, though not dangerously ill." ("Introduction to the rite of anointing sick and to the pastoral care of the sick" Dec. 7, 1972). This is probably invalid.

And while the catechism of the Council of Trent said that "the danger of death must arise from sickness" (which means: not from an exterior cause), we see frequently today the anointing of persons before a surgery (when the danger of death doesn't come from the illness itself), or of those condemned to death, before their execution - which is again probably invalid.

3. The third consequence concerns the condition for re-administering this sacrament. The new canon Law (n.1004) says that "this sacrament can be given another time (...) if, during the same sickness the danger becomes more serious. " The traditional Canon Law said: "This sacrament cannot be reiterated during the same sickness, unless the sick, after having received the unction, sufficiently recovered and fell again in danger of death" (C.940).

c. Another important change concerns the matter of the sacrament.

"The matter of a sacrament is the sensible thing made use of; in effecting the sacrament. " (Catechism of Saint Pius X)

Traditional Doctrine: "The matter of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction is olive oil blessed by a bishop." (Council of Florence) "Olive oil alone" (Catechism of the Council of Trent) The Holy Office declared September 14,1842), that "it is rash and close to error, to assert that this sacrament could be valid with another oil."

New Doctrine: The "Apostolic Constitution on the sacrament of the anointing of the sick (Nov. 30,1972) says: "The sick are to be anointed with blessed olive oil or, as circumstances suggest, with another oil extracted from plants." There is here an obvious danger of invalidity.

Concerning the Anointing:

Traditional Doctrine: "The anointing should be done on these parts: on the eyes because of sight, on the ears because of hearing, on the nose because of smelling, on the mouth because of taste or speech, on the hands because of touch, on the feet because of walking. " (Council of Florence)

New Doctrine: "The sick are to be anointed on the forehead and hands. " (Paul VI. Apostolic constitution on the sacrament of the anointing of the sick)

The traditional rite has 5 unctions, the new rite has only two. This alone does not render it invalid, because "in case of necessity, only one unction is sufficient" (Traditional Canon Law n.947), but with this reduction of the number of the unctions, the sacrament loses much of its meaning.

It is again a consequence of the changing of the doctrine concerning the effects of this sacrament. In the traditional rite, the anointing of the 5 senses mean that this sacrament cures the sickness of the sins committed by the means of the 5 senses. In the new doctrine, there is an insistence on the cure of the body. Thus, 2 anointments on the body are sufficient.

d. The minister of Extreme Unction

The Council of Trent says:

"If anyone says that the presbyter of the Church, who St. James says should be called in to anoint the person who is sick, are not priests ordained by the bishop, but the older men of any community, and that consequently the proper minister of Extreme Unction is not the priest alone: let him be anathema." (4th Canon on Extreme Unction).

This canon is important today, where, in some cases, Extreme Unction is administered by deacons, sisters or lay people. It is then certainly invalid.

Note re: the Apostolic Blessing in articulo mortis (when death is approaching). The traditional Roman ritual of this sacrament says that this blessing is usually given along with Extreme Unction, and grants a plenary indulgence (remission of the whole penalty of purgatory) for the dying. It is a precious gift for him.

It is usually not given anymore. This is a great lost for the dying.

e. The last important change concerns the form of this sacrament.

"The form of a sacrament is the words which are pronounced to order to effect the sacrament. " (Catechism of Saint Pius X).

Traditional Form: "By this holy unction and His pious mercy, may God forgive thee whatever sins thou hast committed by the evil use of sight (hearing, smell, taste and speech, touch)." (Traditional Roman Ritual).

New Form: "By this holy unction and His pious mercy, may God help you by the grace of the Holy Spirit, in order that, delivered from your sins, God save you and restore you in his goodness. "

In the new form, the principal effect of the sacrament (curing the sickness of the sins) is less clearly indicated, and the (secondary and accidental) effect (curing the body) is added ("restore you").

This change doesn't invalidate the sacrament, because the essential meaning is still there, but once again, the signification of the sacrament is reduced. It is again a consequence of the new doctrine on Extreme Unction since Vatican II, which insists more on the cure of the body than on the cure of the sins.

4. Conclusion

If Extreme Unction is administered with another oil than olive oil, it is probably invalid.

If Extreme Unction is administered to persons, who are certainly not in danger of death, or whose danger of death does not come from the sickness itself (anointing of the sick before a surgery, when the danger only comes from the surgery; or anointing of those condemned to death before their execution), it is probably invalid.

If Extreme Unction is administered by anyone who is not a validly ordained priest, it is definitely invalid.

The changes in the new form of Extreme Unction are not essential changes which would invalidate the sacrament in itself. But these changes, with time, present the danger of changing the intention of the priest who administers the sacrament. He can have the intention to restore only the body and not the soul, which then would render the sacrament invalid and not give the grace to the sick.

Therefore, we cannot accept this reform, which is so opposed to the traditional doctrine of the Church on this sacrament; and because of the risks of invalidity. It is therefore prudent to administer it again and conditionally to somebody who would have received it in the new rite.

(From a study of Father Juan Carlos CERIANI, SSPX, in "Le sel de‑la terre " nn. 7 and 10).

[Emphasis - The Catacombs]

Admin
Senior Member

Posts: 5,838

Archbp. Lefebvre on the Doubtfulness of Conciliar Sacraments Jun 24, 2019 9:53:54 GMT

Post by Admin on Jun 24, 2019 9:53:54 GMT

Fr. Calderón Refutes Bishop Fellay

Originally from Non Possumus - Translated by Michael Fuller here

July 7, 2015

Fr Alvaro Calderon, professor of philosophy and dogmatic theology at the seminary of the SSPX in Buenos Aires and author of several texts of extraordinary quality, such as "La Lámpara Bajo el Celemín"(The Lamp Under the Bushel) and "Prometheus, the Religion of Man", has published a study in the journal "Si, Si,No,No" No. 267, November 2014, which is entitled "Are the Episcopal Consecrations Reformed by Paul VI Valid?". Although the main purpose of the article is to respond to the objections of the sedevacantist sectors that oppose the validity of the new rite of episcopal consecration, some seriously erroneous statements made by Bishop Fellay in his never retracted "Doctrinal Declaration" of October 2012 are refuted from the point of view of sacramental theology in this study by Fr. Calderón .

Bishop Fellay said in No. 7 of the Doctrinal Declaration:

"We declare that we recognize the validity of the sacrifice of the Mass and the Sacraments celebrated with the intention to do what the Church does according to the rites indicated in the typical editions of the Roman Missal and the Sacramentary Rituals legitimately promulgated by Popes Paul VI and John-Paul II."

Consequently, the Superior General:

a) Recognizes the validity of all the sacraments reformed by the modernists, provided that they are held with the intention due. There are three components to consider in judging the validity of the sacraments: matter, form and intention of a true minister. Bishop Fellay does not object to anything regarding the matter, nor regarding the form of the Novus Ordo Sacraments, and refers only to the requirement of the necessary intent of the celebrant. However, in the seminaries of the SSPX it has always been taught that there are serious doubts about the validity of various reformed sacraments, due to the changes introduced by the modernists as to the matter, form, or intention. That's why the sound custom of conditionally confirming those confirmed in the Novus Ordo and of conditionally ordaining those priests ordained according to the rite of Paul VI has always existed in the Society. Extreme Unction was always considered as very likely invalid, etc.

b) He states that these sacraments were legitimately promulgated, an ambiguous expression (Does he say that the Sacraments are legitimate or is it only the act of promulgating these that is legitimate?) that has been interpreted by the majority of Catholics as nothing more than an acceptance of the legitimacy of the Sacraments of the Novus Ordo. For the concept of "legitimacy", see here.

Well, Fr. Calderon says the contrary: The rite of episcopal consecration (which is sacramental) is "certainly illegitimate" and "probably valid" (noting that "there is no certainty of its validity").

Here are the essential quotes (bold and italics in original):

"The new rite is certainly illegitimate.

The new rite that Paul VI intended to promulgate by his apostolic constitution Pontificalis Romani is certainly illegitimate by the accumulation of two reasons: firstly, because no pope has authority to destroy the Roman liturgical tradition and much less so to invent a rite that is in rupture with the whole of Catholic tradition; secondly, because the contamination with modernist doctrines causes harm to the faith, and a decision contrary to the common good of the Church cannot have the force of law.

(...)

Because of all this, even though the rite, considered as such, were totally orthodox and a better expression of the doctrine of the episcopate, it would not be legitimate, because no pope has the authority to break the liturgical tradition of the Church. The invention of a new rite is an act which is certainly illegitimate, even if he is a pope or an angel from heaven who intends to establish it. (...)

(...) And the Society is obligated to declare the illegitimacy of the Novus Ordo Missae, because of the doctrines of the Paschal Mystery that inspire it (...), so we must also recognize that the Novus Ordo episcopal consecration is certainly illegitimate.

The new rite is probably valid. A sacramental rite can be certainly illegitimate, but that does not necessarily invalidate it. (...)

If we consider the matter, form and intention of the new rite of episcopal consecration in the context of the rite and the circumstances of their institution, we think it is most likely valid (...)

But we also believe that there is no certainty of its validity (...)

Now, in a matter of utmost importance for the life of the Church, such as the validity of the episcopate, it is necessary to be absolutely certain. Therefore, to accept in good conscience this rite, it would be necessary to not only rely on the judgment of theologians, but on the infallible judgment of the Magisterium. As for the practical attitude to maintain in light of the new episcopal consecrations, it seems justified that which until now had been held by the Society: (Note the past tense, "had been held" NON POSSUMUS.) (...)

(...) the positive and objective defects that this rite suffers, which prevent having certainty of its validity, we feel that (...) they justify and necessitate the conditional ordination of priests consecrated by new bishops and, if necessary, the conditional consecration of these bishops. Such doubts in the very root of the sacraments cannot be tolerated." [Emphasis - The Catacombs]

[All emphasis in the original unless otherwise noted.]

Last Edit: Jun 24, 2019 9:54:33 GMT by Admin