Head of CDF declares Catholic bishop isn't

[Gerard]

Well, the ecclesiology you are setting forth does sound more like the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion than it does like Trent.

That's a very Protestant statement you just made.  I won't try to back it up.  I'll simply let it stand as is. 


But perhaps others would like a quote or two from the Catechism of the Council of Trent.

"The scrupulous care which in the primitive ages of the Church guarded the right of the ordinary priest is easily seen from the ancient decrees of the Fathers, which provided that no Bishop or priest, except in case of great necessity, presume to exercise any function in the parish of another without the authority of him who governed there. This law derives its sanction from the Apostle when he commanded Titus to ordain priests in every city, to administer to the faithful the heavenly food of doctrine and of the Sacraments.

"The faithful, therefore, will see the great care that each one should take in selecting (as confessor) a priest, who is recommended by integrity of life, by learning and prudence, who is deeply impressed with the awful weight and responsibility of the station which he holds, who understands well the punishment due to every sin, and can also discern who are to be loosed and who to be bound."

[Parmandur]

Well, the ecclesiology you are setting forth does sound more like the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion than it does like Trent.

That's a very Protestant statement you just made.  I won't try to back it up.  I'll simply let it stand as is. 


But perhaps others would like a quote or two from the Catechism of the Council of Trent.

"The scrupulous care which in the primitive ages of the Church guarded the right of the ordinary priest is easily seen from the ancient decrees of the Fathers, which provided that no Bishop or priest, except in case of great necessity, presume to exercise any function in the parish of another without the authority of him who governed there. This law derives its sanction from the Apostle when he commanded Titus to ordain priests in every city, to administer to the faithful the heavenly food of doctrine and of the Sacraments.

"The faithful, therefore, will see the great care that each one should take in selecting (as confessor) a priest, who is recommended by integrity of life, by learning and prudence, who is deeply impressed with the awful weight and responsibility of the station which he holds, who understands well the punishment due to every sin, and can also discern who are to be loosed and who to be bound."

The first paragraph you post is contrary to what you are saying; the due authority of the bishop and priest comes from above, not from the selection of the people.  I referenced the Thirty-Nine Articles, the section of the Book of Common Prayer where such things are laid out.  It is the Protestant ideal to pick and choose authority based on private judgement, rather than that of the Church.

[Phillipus Iacobus]

The SSPX bishops have no authority except that given to them by the faithful who want to hear what they have to say, preach and teach.

No. A bishop's authority comes from the Holy Ghost (cf. this).

But in what way is the authority granted by the Holy Ghost made manifest?

Via the episcopal consecration

Not necessarily, for if this were true, schismatic bishops (Nestorian, Arian, Old Catholic, Greek schismatic) would have authority. What's key is ordinary jurisdiction.

[Parmandur]

The SSPX bishops have no authority except that given to them by the faithful who want to hear what they have to say, preach and teach.

No. A bishop's authority comes from the Holy Ghost (cf. this).

But in what way is the authority granted by the Holy Ghost made manifest?

Via the episcopal consecration

Source?

[Parmandur]

The SSPX bishops have no authority except that given to them by the faithful who want to hear what they have to say, preach and teach.

No. A bishop's authority comes from the Holy Ghost (cf. this).

But in what way is the authority granted by the Holy Ghost made manifest?

Via the episcopal consecration

Not necessarily, for if this were true, schismatic bishops (Nestorian, Arian, Old Catholic, Greek schismatic) would have authority. What's key is ordinary jurisdiction.

Which gets complicated when, historically, some of these (The Old Catholic Bishop of Utrecht, for instance; Greek Orthodox and Miaphysites in general, really) are in fact treated by the Holy See and Catholics as having actual authority and ordinary jurisdiction.  There can be a sort of "genetic" inheritance of authority passed down.

[Phillipus Iacobus]

Which gets complicated when, historically, some of these (The Old Catholic Bishop of Utrecht, for instance; Greek Orthodox and Miaphysites in general, really) are in fact treated by the Holy See and Catholics as having actual authority and ordinary jurisdiction.  There can be a sort of "genetic" inheritance of authority passed down.

It could be political. Even though, they have no ordinary jurisdiction.

[Parmandur]

Which gets complicated when, historically, some of these (The Old Catholic Bishop of Utrecht, for instance; Greek Orthodox and Miaphysites in general, really) are in fact treated by the Holy See and Catholics as having actual authority and ordinary jurisdiction.  There can be a sort of "genetic" inheritance of authority passed down.

It could be political. Even though, they have no ordinary jurisdiction.

Well, that lack doesn't stop some people from trying.  :grin:

[Geremia]

The SSPX bishops have no authority except that given to them by the faithful who want to hear what they have to say, preach and teach.

No. A bishop's authority comes from the Holy Ghost (cf. this).

But in what way is the authority granted by the Holy Ghost made manifest?

Via the episcopal consecration

Not necessarily, for if this were true, schismatic bishops (Nestorian, Arian, Old Catholic, Greek schismatic) would have authority. What's key is ordinary jurisdiction.

Do schismatics have valid episcopal consecrations? Isn't there a part of the consecration rite that swears allegiance to the Pope?

UPDATE: I answered my own question. Here's an interesting quote from Pope Clement VIII's instruction 'Presbyteri Graeci', 30 August 1595 (DZ 1087): "Those ordained by schismatic bishops, who have been otherwise duly ordained, the due form having been observed, receive, indeed, ordination, but not jurisdiction."

[Parmandur]

The SSPX bishops have no authority except that given to them by the faithful who want to hear what they have to say, preach and teach.

No. A bishop's authority comes from the Holy Ghost (cf. this).

But in what way is the authority granted by the Holy Ghost made manifest?

Via the episcopal consecration

Not necessarily, for if this were true, schismatic bishops (Nestorian, Arian, Old Catholic, Greek schismatic) would have authority. What's key is ordinary jurisdiction.

Do schismatics have valid episcopal consecrations? Isn't there a part of the consecration rite that swears allegiance to the Pope?

The Church has historically treated simply schismatic ordinations as valid.  The Anglicans went out of their way to invalidate their Holy Orders; other groups have maintained the sacraments, validly, such as the Old Catholics, the Orthodox, etc.

[Geremia]

The SSPX bishops have no authority except that given to them by the faithful who want to hear what they have to say, preach and teach.

No. A bishop's authority comes from the Holy Ghost (cf. this).

But in what way is the authority granted by the Holy Ghost made manifest?

Via the episcopal consecration

Source?

The Holy Ghost is ultimately responsible for the manifestation: Acts 20:28: "Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."