FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Archives (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Theology and Philosophy (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments (/showthread.php?tid=49184)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Melkite - 10-01-2011

(10-01-2011, 01:21 AM)Doce Me Wrote: Of course scholastics  may misunderstand the true principles of scholasticism, or wrongly have contempt for mysticism (and in that sense overuse scholasticism).  But will you in turn admit that "mysticism is not inherently bad, but only when it is overused and stripped from scholasticism".?

The Catholic Church has always praised scholasticism as foundational to her teachings - but this is in no way to put down mysticism.  Shouldn't scholasticism and mysticism join hands instead of being at war with each other? St. Thomas had at least one of the greatest of mystical experiences near the end of his life.

Oh, absolutely!  Without scholasticism to ground mysticism to reality, then mysticism alone is incapable of distinguishing truth from fantasy.

Aquinas did have a mystical experience at the end of his life.  I don't know the story, but what I was told is that because of it, he believed his writings were like straw and so the summa is an incomplete work.  If that is accurate, why use as a theological and philosophical cornerstone what it's own author refused to complete?


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Doce Me - 10-01-2011

(10-01-2011, 06:51 AM)Melkite Wrote: Oh, absolutely!  Without scholasticism to ground mysticism to reality, then mysticism alone is incapable of distinguishing truth from fantasy.

Aquinas did have a mystical experience at the end of his life.  I don't know the story, but what I was told is that because of it, he believed his writings were like straw and so the summa is an incomplete work.  If that is accurate, why use as a theological and philosophical cornerstone what it's own author refused to complete?

St. Thomas'  teachings are like the straw in Christ's manger.  They are as nothing compared to Christ Himself, but  on earth Christ Himself chose to use them. They are foundational in the greatest possible sense. St. Thomas had another vision, where Christ told him "You have written well of Me, Thomas".    St. Thomas did not complete his works, having had a far greater vision, but the Church used them  for they were approved by Christ.  We don't all have mystical experiences, in the sense that St. Thomas did.  On this earth most of us have to start with the foundations.


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - INPEFESS - 10-01-2011

(10-01-2011, 09:36 PM)Doce Me Wrote:
(10-01-2011, 06:51 AM)Melkite Wrote: Oh, absolutely!  Without scholasticism to ground mysticism to reality, then mysticism alone is incapable of distinguishing truth from fantasy.

Aquinas did have a mystical experience at the end of his life.  I don't know the story, but what I was told is that because of it, he believed his writings were like straw and so the summa is an incomplete work.  If that is accurate, why use as a theological and philosophical cornerstone what it's own author refused to complete?

St. Thomas'  teachings are like the straw in Christ's manger.  They are as nothing compared to Christ Himself, but  on earth Christ Himself chose to use them. They are foundational in the greatest possible sense. St. Thomas had another vision, where Christ told him "You have written well of Me, Thomas".    St. Thomas did not complete his works, having had a far greater vision, but the Church used them  for they were approved by Christ.  We don't all have mystical experiences, in the sense that St. Thomas did.  On this earth most of us have to start with the foundations.

Yes, Scholasticism is used to explain Christian doctrine and reconcile apparent theological contradictions. It does not claim to remove theological mysteries.

In fact, it reconciles Christian doctrine while acknowledging at the same time the beautiful mysteries that far excede human knowlege. The deeper it probes, the deeper the unfolding mystery becomes.

For example, this is how Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange ends his writings on Predestination in his book, Reality:
Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange, Reality, Chapter 11 Wrote:Against all deviations in this matter, toward predestinationism, Protestantism, and Jansenism, on the one hand, and, on the other, toward Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism, we must hold fast these two truths, central and mutually complementary: first, "God never commands the impossible," and second, "No one would be better than another were he not loved more by God." Guided by these truths we can begin to see where the mystery lies. Infinite justice, infinite mercy, sovereign liberty are all united, are even identified, in the Deity's transcendent pre-eminence, which remains hidden from us as long as we do not have the beatific vision. But in the chiaro oscuro of life here below, grace, which is a participation of the Deity, tranquillizes the just man, and the inspirations of the Holy Spirit console him, strengthen his hope, and make his love more pure, disinterested, and strong, so that in the incertitude of salvation he has the ever-growing certitude of hope, which is a certitude of tendency toward salvation. The proper and formal object of infused hope is not, in fact, our own effort, but the infinite mercy of the "God who aids us," [459] who arouses us here to effort and who will there crown-that effort. [460].

He approaches the question from the Thomistic perspective in order to reconcile several confusing and apparently contradictory principles from Sacred Scripture that are unable to be successfully reconciled with the Mystical approach. At the end of the chapter, however, he acknowledges that these apparently conflicting principles come together in such a way which, although not without contradiction, nevertheless evades human understanding.


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Erudite Celt - 10-12-2011

(09-24-2011, 02:57 PM)Jesse Wrote: I just finished reading Malachi Martin's book "Hostage to the Devil."  One of his cases involves a possessed priest.  This priest would regularly change the words of the sacraments in Latin.  He would baptize in the name of the sky, earth, and water.  For the consecration, he would say, "this is my tombstone" or "this is my sexuality."  He would absolve in the name of the lord of light, or the name of the sky, earth, and water.  He said that since it was in Latin, he was never really caught, though one of his assistance heard him say at Mass, "The Lord of light be with you."

My question is this:  how does God view those who received such sacraments?  Obviously a child baptized in the name of sky, earth, and water has received an invalid sacrament.  Yet the priest was possessed.  Does God supply, as it were, the grace of the sacrament?  Or, take confession for example.  Since the intention of the faithful was to confess and receive absolution, is absolution granted despite the priest mucking it up?

My gut feeling says that charity trumps all and God is not going to damn a faithful Catholic who, through no fault of their own, received an invalid sacrament from a possessed priest.

The book didn't say, but I wondered if the parish, after the exorcism, contacted all the parishioners who received sacraments from this priest and told them about it.  I would want to be conditionally "re-"baptized if I found out my priest had been possessed.

Thoughts?

Pax,
Jesse

A good reason if ever there was one for giving the Sacraments in the Mother tongue of the one receiving them!


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Jesse - 10-12-2011

(10-12-2011, 06:21 PM)Erudite Celt Wrote:
(09-24-2011, 02:57 PM)Jesse Wrote: I just finished reading Malachi Martin's book "Hostage to the Devil."  One of his cases involves a possessed priest.  This priest would regularly change the words of the sacraments in Latin.  He would baptize in the name of the sky, earth, and water.  For the consecration, he would say, "this is my tombstone" or "this is my sexuality."  He would absolve in the name of the lord of light, or the name of the sky, earth, and water.  He said that since it was in Latin, he was never really caught, though one of his assistance heard him say at Mass, "The Lord of light be with you."

My question is this:  how does God view those who received such sacraments?  Obviously a child baptized in the name of sky, earth, and water has received an invalid sacrament.  Yet the priest was possessed.  Does God supply, as it were, the grace of the sacrament?  Or, take confession for example.  Since the intention of the faithful was to confess and receive absolution, is absolution granted despite the priest mucking it up?

My gut feeling says that charity trumps all and God is not going to damn a faithful Catholic who, through no fault of their own, received an invalid sacrament from a possessed priest.

The book didn't say, but I wondered if the parish, after the exorcism, contacted all the parishioners who received sacraments from this priest and told them about it.  I would want to be conditionally "re-"baptized if I found out my priest had been possessed.

Thoughts?

Pax,
Jesse

A good reason if ever there was one for giving the Sacraments in the Mother tongue of the one receiving them!

The problems caused by changing sacraments to the vernacular far outweigh the minuscule risk of receiving invalid sacraments from a possessed priest.  It is a poor reason for the use of vulgar tongues.


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Erudite Celt - 10-12-2011

(10-12-2011, 08:38 PM)Jesse Wrote:
(10-12-2011, 06:21 PM)Erudite Celt Wrote:
(09-24-2011, 02:57 PM)Jesse Wrote: I just finished reading Malachi Martin's book "Hostage to the Devil."  One of his cases involves a possessed priest.  This priest would regularly change the words of the sacraments in Latin.  He would baptize in the name of the sky, earth, and water.  For the consecration, he would say, "this is my tombstone" or "this is my sexuality."  He would absolve in the name of the lord of light, or the name of the sky, earth, and water.  He said that since it was in Latin, he was never really caught, though one of his assistance heard him say at Mass, "The Lord of light be with you."

My question is this:  how does God view those who received such sacraments?  Obviously a child baptized in the name of sky, earth, and water has received an invalid sacrament.  Yet the priest was possessed.  Does God supply, as it were, the grace of the sacrament?  Or, take confession for example.  Since the intention of the faithful was to confess and receive absolution, is absolution granted despite the priest mucking it up?

My gut feeling says that charity trumps all and God is not going to damn a faithful Catholic who, through no fault of their own, received an invalid sacrament from a possessed priest.

The book didn't say, but I wondered if the parish, after the exorcism, contacted all the parishioners who received sacraments from this priest and told them about it.  I would want to be conditionally "re-"baptized if I found out my priest had been possessed.

Thoughts?

Pax,
Jesse

A good reason if ever there was one for giving the Sacraments in the Mother tongue of the one receiving them!

The problems caused by changing sacraments to the vernacular far outweigh the minuscule risk of receiving invalid sacraments from a possessed priest.  It is a poor reason for the use of vulgar tongues.

Latin is a vulgar tongue. That was the prime reason for Jerome translating it from Hebrew, Greek  and Old Latin to Common Latin. Latin Vulgate translates as Common Language it has nothing to do with the sanctity of the language. If that had been the original purpose Pope Damasus would have probably commissioned Jerome to produce an Aramaic translation.


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Jesse - 10-12-2011

(10-12-2011, 09:18 PM)Erudite Celt Wrote:
(10-12-2011, 08:38 PM)Jesse Wrote:
(10-12-2011, 06:21 PM)Erudite Celt Wrote:
(09-24-2011, 02:57 PM)Jesse Wrote: I just finished reading Malachi Martin's book "Hostage to the Devil."  One of his cases involves a possessed priest.  This priest would regularly change the words of the sacraments in Latin.  He would baptize in the name of the sky, earth, and water.  For the consecration, he would say, "this is my tombstone" or "this is my sexuality."  He would absolve in the name of the lord of light, or the name of the sky, earth, and water.  He said that since it was in Latin, he was never really caught, though one of his assistance heard him say at Mass, "The Lord of light be with you."

My question is this:  how does God view those who received such sacraments?  Obviously a child baptized in the name of sky, earth, and water has received an invalid sacrament.  Yet the priest was possessed.  Does God supply, as it were, the grace of the sacrament?  Or, take confession for example.  Since the intention of the faithful was to confess and receive absolution, is absolution granted despite the priest mucking it up?

My gut feeling says that charity trumps all and God is not going to damn a faithful Catholic who, through no fault of their own, received an invalid sacrament from a possessed priest.

The book didn't say, but I wondered if the parish, after the exorcism, contacted all the parishioners who received sacraments from this priest and told them about it.  I would want to be conditionally "re-"baptized if I found out my priest had been possessed.

Thoughts?

Pax,
Jesse

A good reason if ever there was one for giving the Sacraments in the Mother tongue of the one receiving them!

The problems caused by changing sacraments to the vernacular far outweigh the minuscule risk of receiving invalid sacraments from a possessed priest.  It is a poor reason for the use of vulgar tongues.

Latin is a vulgar tongue. That was the prime reason for Jerome translating it from Hebrew, Greek  and Old Latin to Common Latin. Latin Vulgate translates as Common Language it has nothing to do with the sanctity of the language. If that had been the original purpose Pope Damasus would have probably commissioned Jerome to produce an Aramaic translation.

Latin is NOT a vulgar tongue now, nor has it been for a VERY long time.  Vulgar, in this case, simply means "of the common people."  I suggest you read here:  http://www.fisheaters.com/latin.html




Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Erudite Celt - 10-12-2011

(10-12-2011, 09:25 PM)Jesse Wrote:
(10-12-2011, 09:18 PM)Erudite Celt Wrote:
(10-12-2011, 08:38 PM)Jesse Wrote:
(10-12-2011, 06:21 PM)Erudite Celt Wrote:
(09-24-2011, 02:57 PM)Jesse Wrote: I just finished reading Malachi Martin's book "Hostage to the Devil."  One of his cases involves a possessed priest.  This priest would regularly change the words of the sacraments in Latin.  He would baptize in the name of the sky, earth, and water.  For the consecration, he would say, "this is my tombstone" or "this is my sexuality."  He would absolve in the name of the lord of light, or the name of the sky, earth, and water.  He said that since it was in Latin, he was never really caught, though one of his assistance heard him say at Mass, "The Lord of light be with you."

My question is this:  how does God view those who received such sacraments?  Obviously a child baptized in the name of sky, earth, and water has received an invalid sacrament.  Yet the priest was possessed.  Does God supply, as it were, the grace of the sacrament?  Or, take confession for example.  Since the intention of the faithful was to confess and receive absolution, is absolution granted despite the priest mucking it up?

My gut feeling says that charity trumps all and God is not going to damn a faithful Catholic who, through no fault of their own, received an invalid sacrament from a possessed priest.

The book didn't say, but I wondered if the parish, after the exorcism, contacted all the parishioners who received sacraments from this priest and told them about it.  I would want to be conditionally "re-"baptized if I found out my priest had been possessed.

Thoughts?

Pax,
Jesse

A good reason if ever there was one for giving the Sacraments in the Mother tongue of the one receiving them!

The problems caused by changing sacraments to the vernacular far outweigh the minuscule risk of receiving invalid sacraments from a possessed priest.  It is a poor reason for the use of vulgar tongues.

Latin is a vulgar tongue. That was the prime reason for Jerome translating it from Hebrew, Greek  and Old Latin to Common Latin. Latin Vulgate translates as Common Language it has nothing to do with the sanctity of the language. If that had been the original purpose Pope Damasus would have probably commissioned Jerome to produce an Aramaic translation.

Latin is NOT a vulgar tongue now, nor has it been for a VERY long time.  Vulgar, in this case, simply means "of the common people."  I suggest you read here:  http://www.fisheaters.com/latin.html



Jessie salutationes in me placent, reuerteris vestri pocius lingua. ego semper ad alterum corresponed amator linguis antiquis.disputandi pruritus ecclesiarum scabies.


Re: Possessed Priest and Valid Sacraments - Old Salt - 10-13-2011

In the story of Fr Jonathan Yves in "Hostage to the Devil", once he was possesed, according to Fr Martin, he would take sometimes 30 minutes for the consecration [Missal of 1962] because apparently, the demon within him was struggling with Fr's vestige as a sacerdos of Christ.
He could offer the rest of the Mass at a normal pace but when it came to the Consecration it would slow, slow down, where normally it would take less than two minutes.

The story relates that once when Fr was performing the "consecration" he dipped his right forefinger in the Blood/wine and then scratched the Body/host in a vertical purplish line.
From then on his right forefinger was bent in a hook.