To My Readers: This week's guest poster, John Gregory, tells us about the awe and reverence all should have for the Name of God, especially in this age where God's Name is used more as a "curse word" when people are angry than in prayer and with the great respect it commands. Please feel free to comment as usual. If you have a specific question or comment for me, I will respond as always, but it may take me a bit longer to do so this week.
God bless you all, my dear readers---Introibo
Holy Is His Name
By John Gregory
His name was called Jesus, which was called by the angel,
before he was conceived in the womb (St. Luke 2: 21)
We shall be rewarded if we bless, honor and reverence the Name of the Lord. What shall be the case if we curse, dishonor or treat His Most Holy Name with contempt? The question answers itself. Punishment will need to be inflicted upon us. I have taught my children well that they should not get into bad habits, in the first place so as to avoid having to overcome them and dealing with the inevitable punishments that await them in this and or the next life. Consider the man who as a child grew up in a neighborhood where all his “friends” used the Lord’s Name in Vain regularly. The example rubs off and he eventually falls into the habit himself. By the grace of God, he with much effort eventually overcomes the habit. This he does in part by saying “God bless America” rather than what used to follow the first word in that phrase. For decades he never uttered the phrase again. Then one day the person closest to him, thereby the one who can have the most positive or negative effect on him, betrayed him in the worst possible ways. The man the utters a tirade of bad language and uses the Lord’s Name in Vain once again.
Now the poor soul finds himself in the predicament where it becomes a moral impossibility to stop the habit again. For his last state has become worse than the first and it would have been better for him not to have converted to the ways of God and strayed again. This sounds dire, but for those of good will nothing is impossible with God, and He will grant the extraordinary graces, now needed to overcome the habit if the person strives as best he can to overcome it, asking the prayers from others and begging God to help him. The point is that there are many reasons not to purposely try to anger others. Not just because it is wrong to do so in and of itself. But because a person can ultimately be damned because of it. No small thing. It is enough to be responsible for our own sins!
Have you noticed how the Ave and Pater start out praising our Lady and our Lord before they petition them? Not a coincidence. In prayer our first duty is to honor Our Lord’s Most Holy Name. Let us see what the Catechism of Trent [CoT] has to say about this:
“Hallowed be thy name”
WHY THIS PETITION IS PLACED FIRST
What we are to ask of God and in what order, the Master and Lord of all has Himself taught and commanded. For prayer is the ambassador and interpreter of our thoughts and desires; and consequently we pray well and properly when the order of our petitions follows the order in which the things sought are desirable.
Now, genuine charity tells us to direct our whole soul and all our affections to God, for He alone being the one supreme Good, it is but reasonable that we love Him with superior and singular love. On the other hand, God cannot be loved from the heart and above all things else, unless we prefer His honor and glory to all things created. For all the good that we or others possess, all that in any way bears the name of good, comes from Him, and is therefore inferior to Him, the sovereign Good.
Hence, that our prayers may be made with due order, our Saviour has placed this Petition regarding the sovereign Good at the head of all the other Petitions of the Lord’s Prayer, thus showing us that before asking the things necessary for ourselves or for others, we ought to ask those that appertain to God’s honor, and to manifest and make known to Him the affections and desires of our hearts in this regard. Acting thus, we shall be faithful to the claims and rules of charity, which teaches us to love God more than ourselves and to ask, in the first place, those things we desire on His account, and next, those things we desire on our own.
We also use Our Lord’s Name in Vain by uttering the name of Jesus in anger or in a causal or other disrespectful way. Perhaps if we catch ourselves doing this we can add “please help me” after uttering His Name aloud in anger and then say an Ave, Pater and Gloria afterwards, turning a negative into a positive as it were. This is why we do not let our children watch TV or have phones, Our Lord’s sacred Name is blasphemed everywhere and all the time. When the disrespectful use of Our Lord’s Name enters the head, it is not too far from the mouth. This is especially the case with children. Parents. Take heed. You will have to render a strict account. Please do something about this now, while you still can. Don’t find out what the repercussions will be the hard way. Let us turn to the Catechism once again to reaffirm what has been discussed:
“Jesus”
Jesus is the proper name of the God-man and signifies Savior: a name given Him not accidentally, or by the judgment or will of man, but by the counsel and command of God. For the Angel announced to Mary His mother: Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus. (Luke 1: 31) He afterwards not only commanded Joseph, who was espoused to the Virgin, to call the child by that name, but also declared the reason why He should be so called. Joseph, son of David, said the Angel, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son and thou shalt call his name Jesus. For he shall save his people from their sins. (St. Matthew 1: 20)
In the Sacred Scriptures we meet with many who were called by this name. So, for example, was called the son of Nave, who succeeded Moses, and, by special privilege denied to Moses, conducted into the land of promise the people whom Moses had delivered from Egypt; and also the son of Josedech, the priest. But how much more appropriate it is to call by this name our Savior, who gave light, liberty and salvation, not to one people only, but to all men, of all ages—to men oppressed, not by famine, or Egyptian or Babylonian bondage, but sitting in the shadow of death and fettered by the galling chains of sin and of the devil—who purchased for them a right to the inheritance of heaven and reconciled them to God the Father! In those men who were designated by the same name we see foreshadowed Christ the Lord, by whom the blessings just enumerated were poured out on the human race.
All other names which according to prophecy were to be given by divine appointment to the Son of God, are comprised in this one name Jesus; for while they partially signified the salvation which He was to bestow upon us, this name included the force and meaning of all human salvation.
As the priest, the alter Christus turns the wrath of almighty God away from the people, primarily through the Mass, what does the use of Jesus Christ’s Most Holy Name, when used in vain, and especially by priests do?
“Christ”
To the name Jesus is added that of Christ, which signifies the anointed. This name is expressive of honor and office, and is not peculiar to one thing only, but common to many; for in the Old Law priests and kings, whom God, on account of the dignity of their office, commanded to be anointed, were called christs. For priests commend the people to God by unceasing prayer, offer sacrifice to Him, and turn away His wrath from mankind. Kings are entrusted with the government of the people; and to them innocence and the punishment of guilt. As, therefore, both these functions seem to represent the majesty of God on earth, those who were appointed to the royal or sacerdotal office were anointed with oil. Furthermore, since Prophets, as the interpreters and ambassadors of the immortal God, have unfolded to us the secrets of heaven and by salutary precepts and the prediction of future events have exhorted to amendment of life, it was customary to anoint them also.
“Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain” (Exodus 20: 7) [CoT]
As an aside, the Protestants list the Commandments differently than the Catholics. They split the first two Commandments into three and combine the ninth and tenth into one. This way they make the part about not making graven images stand out so they can accuse Catholics of worshipping statues, and they lump together the coveting of another’s wife and the coveting of his material goods as if they are the same species of sin when they are quite different, as coveting another’s wife can be linked more with the sixth Commandment – Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery.
It is important to understand that if you are in such a bad habit of using the Lord’s Name in Vain that it comes out of your mouth without any premeditation you are not guilty of a mortal sin in this instance, but you are guilty of forming the habit in the first place, and it is incumbent upon you to do all in your power to get out of that habit. Sometimes we are about to use the Lord’s Name in Vain without malice of forethought, but for one instant before it comes out, we are given the grace to refrain, but say it anyway in our anger. Woe to us guilty of this crime, this is anything but doing all in our power to overcome this blasphemy. If we are serious about eliminating this habit, and we must be, we must avoid the occasions where we are most likely to commit it. Apart from drinking, these occasions are often those which we are most fond of, whether it be playing chess, and making a blunder that loses the game, or watching football, such as when your team loses on a bad call or turnover. We break the first commandment when we love something more than we love God. If we cannot give up watching our favorite team for the love God, guess what we love more than God. Yes, a woke-driven, greedy corporation.
WHY THIS COMMANDMENT IS DISTINCT FROM THE FIRST
The second Commandment of the divine law is necessarily comprised in the first, which commands us to worship God in piety and holiness. For he who requires that honor be paid him, also requires that he be spoken of with reverence, and must forbid the contrary, as is clearly shown by these words of the Lord in Malachy: The son honoureth the father, and the servant his master; if then I be a father, where is my honour? (Mal 1: 6)
However, on account of the importance of the obligation, God wished to make the law, which commands His own divine and most holy name to be honored, a distinct Commandment, expressed in the clearest and simplest terms. [CoT]
In addition to the offensive and common phrases that combine the Most Holy Name of God with the use of the word “damn” in anger, and the use of the Holy Name of Jesus disrespectfully (which are in seemingly every movie in existence, and it is as if Hollywood makes it mandate to insert these blasphemies into each movie) is the common “Oh my God” phrase. I doubt I am the only one sick and tired of hearing this phrase from everyone, everywhere, all the time. Do I need to remind the parents again to keep their children away from the cinema. There is nothing good there, there is almost without exception something in each and every movie inserted to rape and warp the innocence of our youth. They, more than anyone, copy what they hear. The “oh my God” phrase is not just an innocent phrase, unless it is part of a legitimate prayer. It is using the Lord’s Name in Vain. It is the commonization and belittling of the Name above all Names, the source of all existence, the most Holy and Pure, Goodness Itself.
Blasphemy is contumely against God and is directly opposed to the desire of worshiping God. It is primarily a sin of the tongue, but blasphemous thoughts, writing, actions are equally offensive to God. Direct blasphemy takes place when contumelious speech is used intentionally to dishonor God; it is indirect blasphemy, if God’s dishonor is foreseen but not intended. There is no specific difference between these two kinds of blasphemy.
Heretical blasphemy contains expressions of heresy, such as the denial of God’s mercy, providence, justice, and this is an added sin against faith. Imprecatory [a spoken curse] blasphemy contains imprecations against God that evil may come to Him. Blasphemy is sometimes directed against God in His Person or Attributes, sometimes against His Saints, Angels, men, universe—in their relations to Him. (See theologian Davis, Moral and Pastoral Theology, Vol. II, [1935]).
To make sure we have a proper understanding of blasphemy and of who and to what extent one may be guilty of it, let take a glance at the work of Father Walter Ferrell:
Further attacks on the foundation of hope: Blasphemy
The angry man who spouts blasphemies is not necessarily guilty of sin; ordinarily he is only the victim of a limited vocabulary. Though she is struggling for emphasis, not expletive, the vivacious young lady swaying on the subway strap and shouting the name of God above all the roar of the train is suffering from the same limitation. These two are not at all in the same class as the university professor who calmly assures us that God is a symbol. His is a sin, but a dry, dusty, languid sin, with little heart in it. The complete blasphemer is seen in the atheist who viciously attacks the notion that God is good, that God is omnipotent, that He is the provider of His children in this world. Here we have the sin which stands at the peak of all the sins of infidelity, a sin which consists in verbally insulting God.
By it we attribute to God something which does not belong to Him, or deny Him something that is His divine prerogative. In its full stupidity it outstrips all sins against the moral virtues, even sins of despair and presumption against the virtue of Hope; it gives place reluctantly, only to that supreme sin which is hatred of God. When blasphemy proceeds from hatred of God itself, then blasphemy is the supreme sin.
However brief it be, however softly whispered, there is nothing small about the smallest of blasphemies; for just one, any one, destroys our union with God. In the human order an insulting word or a moment of infidelity does not necessarily destroy the love that binds a man and a woman together; but then that love is a natural thing, with roots deep in nature. The love that binds us to God is not at all natural; its roots are not in nature. From our side it must always be a frail, engrafted thing; in cherishing our union with God we must tread fearfully, carefully with the fear and caution looking out, not towards God, but towards ourselves.
An eavesdropper at the keyhole of the gate of heaven would listen in vain for God and His friends to hurl insults. Blasphemy has no place in heaven, and no place among the friends of God on earth. Men do of course blaspheme. The devils too blaspheme, not with lips but with their affections. Once the damned souls in hell are reunited to their bodies the uproar in hell will really commence, and one of the constant activities in the social life of hell will be blasphemy. There is a terrible significance to this truth, for it indicates that there is no limit to the sins and wickedness of hell; in fact, that very wickedness is a part of the punishment of hell. If nothing else would, this truth shows us that there is no joy in sin for if there were, the devils could have none of it. (See A Companion to the Summa, by theologian Walter Farrell [1940]).
I used to wonder why they treated Job’s wife telling Job to “bless” God and die as something reprehensible. The below gives us an idea that she told him to “curse” God and die.
Still more enormous is the guilt of those who, with impure and defiled lips, dare to curse or blaspheme the holy name of God—that name which is to be blessed and praised above measure by all creatures, or even the names of the Saints who reign with Him in glory. So atrocious and horrible is this crime that the Sacred Scriptures, sometimes when speaking of blasphemy use the word blessing. [CoT]
We cannot let you go without a summation of the Angelic Doctor’s teaching on this issue found in Monsignor Paul J. Glenn’s work, A Tour Of The Summa:
Blasphemy is a direct disparaging of the divine goodness. It is therefore a sin in conflict with the faith. For he who has the faith confesses the divine goodness. Blasphemy, by its genus or the general essential class of sins to which it belongs, is always a mortal sin. We have seen that unbelief is the greatest of sins against faith. Blasphemy is an emphatic form of unbelief. Hence, in speaking of sins against faith, blasphemy is often called the worst of sins. The wicked in hell detest the divine goodness and justice, and thus they blaspheme. It is believable that, after the resurrection of the body at general judgment, human beings in hell will utter their blasphemies audibly.
Pastoral Note
The pastor will earnestly exhort the blasphemer to consider what an outrage he is guilty of in the sight of God, if his blasphemy is deliberate. For such deliberate blasphemies the Council of Lateran bade the confessor to impose a most severe penance. If, however, the blasphemies are indeliberate, the penitent will be advised to keep away from occasions of such scandal to others, to repeat the ‘Glory be to the Father” as often as he has blasphemed during the day, to determine seriously each day to diminish the number of his blasphemies that day, not to expect to get rid of an inveterate [long established, unlikely to change] habit in a moment, to curb his temper, for anger is usually the cause of impatient blasphemy, and to avoid, as far as possible, the company of those who are the occasion of his fits of temper. In addition to these helps, he will, of course, be exhorted to go frequently to confession and Holy Communion, and to be faithful to his daily prayers. By using such supernatural means, he may confidently hope to overcome the habit. (Moral and Pastoral Theology, Volume II, cited above).
Lastly, let us get some advice from the great Sainted Doctor of the Church, Saint Alphonsus Liguori (Sermons from Saint Alphonsus Liguori):
Tell me, O blasphemers, if there by any of you present, what benefit do you derive from your accursed blasphemies? You do not receive pleasure from them. Bellarmine says, that blasphemy is a sin which produces no pleasure. You derive no profit from them; for, as I have already said, your blasphemies are the cause of your poverty and wretchedness. You derive no honor from them; your fellow blasphemers have a horror of your blasphemies, and call you a mouth of Hell. Tell me, then, why you blaspheme. Father, the habit which I have contracted is the cause of my blasphemies. But, can this habit excuse you before God? If a son beat his father, and say to him: My father, have compassion on me; for I have contracted a habit of beating you; would the father take pity on him? You say, that you blaspheme through the anger caused by your children, your wife, or your master. Your wife or your master put you into a passion, and you take revenge on the saints. What injury have the saints done you? They intercede before God in your behalf, and you blaspheme them. But the Devil tempts me at that time.
If the Devil tempts you, follow the example of a certain young man, who, when tempted to blaspheme, went for advice to the Abbot Pemene. The abbot told him, that as often as the Devil tempted him to this sin, his answer should be: Why should I blaspheme that God who has created me, and bestowed so many benefits upon me? I will for ever praise and bless him. The young man followed the advice, and Satan ceased to tempt him. When you are excited to anger, can you speak nothing but blasphemies? Say on such occasions: Accursed sin, I hate thee; Lord assist me; Mary, obtain for me the gift of patience. And if you have hitherto contracted the abominable habit of blaspheming, renew every morning, as soon as you rise, the resolution of doing violence to yourself to abstain from all blasphemies during the day: and then say three Aves to most holy Mary, that she may obtain for you the grace to resist every temptation by which you shall be assailed.
Conclusion
Blessed be God. Blessed be His Holy Name. Blessed be Jesus Christ, true God and true Man. Blessed by the Name of Jesus. Blessed be His Most Sacred Heart. Blessed be Jesus in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. Blessed be the great Mother of God, Mary most Holy. Blessed be her Holy and Immaculate Conception. Blessed be her Glorious Assumption. Blessed be the name of Mary, Virgin and Mother. Blessed be Saint Joseph, her most chaste spouse. Blessed be God in His Angels and in His Saints. May the heart of Jesus, in the Most Blessed Sacrament, be praised, adored, and loved with grateful affection, at every moment, in all the tabernacles of the world, even to the end of time. Admirable is the Name of God! Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!
Hello John from Brisbane , Australia
ReplyDeleteMay God be praised now and forever .
An excellent writing . Thank you brother . God bless you
Paul
Thank you Paul!
DeleteIntroibo can you make a post about weird and obscure christian denominations? Thank you
ReplyDelete@anon11:51
DeleteCould you please clarify your request? What, precisely, makes a sect "weird" or "obscure"? No denomination is Christian--only Catholics truly bear that name--but perhaps you mean those who profess the Divinity of Christ? I did a series of posts on false religions (including some claiming to be "Christian") in my once per month series "When Strangers Come Knocking," which ran from 2017 to 2022. Here was the first installment on Jehovah's Witness sect:
https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2019/09/when-strangers-come-knocking.html
Please clarify and I'll consider any reasonable request.
God Bless,
---Introibo
All right. I meant the following sects:
DeleteOld Catholics
Christadelphians
The House of Aaron
Remonstrants
Messianic Jews
Shwenkfelder
and the glasites. Thank you
@anon7:10
DeleteIt might be interesting to do a post on some of these sects!
I would have to research first, but later this year is a possibility.
Thank you for the suggestion, my friend!
God Bless,
---Introibo
I second the suggestion of an article on Old Catholics,that would be fascinating,especially given they are now experiencing a slow but gradual growth thanks to YouTube.
DeleteGod bless,
Andrew
Hi John
ReplyDeleteGreat writing again. Thank you very much
Have you ever been to Mt St Michaels (CMRI) IN Spokane ? What about any of their other churches and chapels ?
Thomas
Hi Thomas,
DeleteThank you very much for the compliment which means alot to me.
I wish I have been to Mt St Michaels in Spokane. Since the early 2000's that is one of the main places I have always wanted to go. I have also wanted to go to a Fatima Conference.
I devoured the CMRI website after I became SV. I have a high amount of respect for Bishop Pivarunas.
I also devoured Father Cekeda's site, listened to the SSPV radio show every day. Immersed myself in Daily Catholic, Griff Ruby's works and Novus Ordo Watch, that bastion of orthodoxy that I can't recommend enough.
I was also into the "brothers" for a while fifteen years ago and earlier.
I used to wonder why no one understood EENS like they do. Not Father Martin Stepanich, not Father Cekeda, (both of whom sent me personal correspondence on EENS when I was trying to come to a definitive conclusion on the issue) not all the SV groups and independent SV priests, not SSPX. Not Griff, not Micheal Cain, not Mario Derkson, not Robert Bellarmine or Alphonsus de Ligori.
Mario Derksen said something that I consider witty about them, I paraphrase "It is like they are driving the wrong way down a one-way street and wondering why everyone else is going to wrong way." He has it exactly right.
I went to Saint Athanasius in Vienna VA and Saint Hillary's in Baltimore Maryland. I went to Bishop Sanborn's chapel in Florida when my parents paid for my vacation down there back in 2007.
Funny story about that, never hear the full absolution prayers including the "Passio Domini nostri" at the end. The priest there gave me the absolution and started the Passio prayer at the end, as all priests should do, and I left as he was saying it. I just thought he was praying. He must have wondered but he finished it as I walked away. Very embarrassing after the fact.
John and Introibo
ReplyDeleteJust finished watching a video on youtube called Against All Odds Saint Joseph's Church , Las Vegas , Nevada . It is about the Traditional Priest Father Courtney Krier . Another video is about his calling to the Traditional Priesthood and Faith . We were disappointed that he did not give any details about his days in the CMRI . My late mom remembers him . He was known as Frater Matthew Marie and was part of the group that fled with Bishop Francis Schuckardt in June 1984 when they broke with Mount St Michaels . There is no point hiding the past . Otherwise we are very impressed with him and his great work for the poor . Watch them
God bless
It says:
DeleteI am providing this response from Fr. Krier as his assistant, Stephen.
[Ordained by Bishop Guenther Stork, who was ordained by Bishop Blasius Kurz (by Pius XII) and consecrated by Bishop Guerard des Lauriers (by Bishop Pierre Martin Thuc). Fr Krier's ordination was on December 19, 1992 in Munich, Germany at the Seminary then under Bishop Guenther Storck (+4/23/1993)] thank you
Is there a link to the video? Thank you for the information.
DeleteLooks like this is it:
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5Pu2jXAbrk
As far as I know, the only true Mass in the area is there, in downtown Las Vegas. Hopefully, the congregation will grow.
-S.T.
Google Father Courtney Krier .
ReplyDeleteScroll down and you will find info about him being Frater Matthew Marie . God bless
Thank you very much.
ReplyDeleteJohn and Introibo
ReplyDeleteRegarding Father Krier and his early days with the CMRI and Bishop Schuckardt . My uncle was there at Mt St Michaels from 1979 and knew him too as Frater Matthew Marie .
Why are folk so worried about Bishop Schuckardt . At the end of the day if it was not for him there would be no CMRI . True he did have moral problems .
We have copies of most of the publications of the CMRI dated from 1970 and it is indeed interesting to see pictures of the CMRI clerics we have today when they were so young like Father Mary Benedict Hughes , Bishop Pivarunas , etc
God bless
Anon 5:07,
DeleteI watched the videos about him in the youtube channel. I think it's kind of neat how he was ordained by Bp. Gunther Stork who has a good pedigree. I would like to know about more of these lesser known traditionalist priests and bishops. In fact, I would like to know more about what happened to Bp. Peter Hillebrand who ended up serving a traditionalist group in Japan
Bp. Schuckardt was dealt with in the 1980's. The current CMRI cut him off and the priests at the time who were associated with him received conditionally re-ordination by Bp. George Musey. Bp. Pivarunas himself was newly ordained by Bp. Musey at the time all that was going on.
I think it was all handled appropriately because the current CMRI cut itself off from an Old Catholic sect lineage which could have been doubtful and it cut itself off from the cult like behavior and serious scandal caused by Schuckardt. Many of the older CMRI priests were ordained by Bp. Robert McKenna.
Conclusion: The CMRI today are not the same as the CMRI during the Schuckardt era.
Lee
@anon5:07
DeleteI'm in full agreement with Lee's conclusion. I also agree with the CMRI on their opinions to controversial issues, such as Una Cum, 1955 Holy Week, etc.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Thank you very much for the info Anonymous.
DeleteWell stated Lee!
DeleteThank you for this article John. Yesterday I was working with this guy who profaned God's name 4 times in less than 5 min. I was so angry, I about left him to do the job himself but thankfully the job was about over at that point. It was so unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteSt. Gemma Galgani used to faint when she heard Our Lord's name blasphemed or used profanely and her guardian angel it is said would catch her by preventing her head from hitting any sharp object.
A good rule of thumb for me personally to prevent myself from taking the Lord's name in vain is to imagine myself turning into a devil, kind of like in a horror movie (not that I promote horror movies) where a person would turn into a hideous werewolf. If our souls are in the state of grace not only do we lose it by mortal sin but our soul in actuality turns into an ugly state like an unnatural beast. The thought of that makes me shutter and increases the fear of the Lord.
Lee
Back around 2009. I was put in a blue color area and I got all the people to stop using the Lord's Name in Vain. I heard they started up again after I left.
DeleteMy children are devoted to Gemma and that story sounds just like her :-)
Thank you very much for the good insight which I will definitely take to heart! I hope all is well with you Lee.
The above response was from me Lee. Not sure why it posts as anonymous sometimes.
DeleteInteresting comments Lee . Prayers for you .
ReplyDeleteJane
Greetings to Introibo and the other readers and collaborators like John Gregory, what do you think of what the priest raises - NOT according to you - about ordinations and consecrations?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.complicitclergy.com/2024/06/13/a-new-and-explosive-dubium/
Very thankful.
Young reader from Spain
Young Reader From Spain,
DeleteThe writer is completely clueless as to Church teaching regarding the Sacraments.
"If the Sacrament of Holy Orders would be granted as a repayment for sexual favors, then it would lack a valid intention. In fact, it would have the intention of the enemy of Christ." This is totally false.
As horrific as sodomy and simony are, the Church has never held that simony implies a contrary positive intention which renders a sacrament invalid.
First, keep in mind these are members of the Vatican II sect, whose orders are invalid from the outset.
Nevertheless, presuming, ad arguendo, that this was Catholic, the sacrament would not be invalid due to lack of intention because of simony or because the bishop was a sodomite.
There is a rebuttable presumption (praesumptio juris tantum) that every time a Catholic cleric seriously undertakes to perform a sacrament it is done validly. It is presumed that the correct matter, form, and intention were all present. Pope Leo XIII clearly teaches:
"A person who has correctly and seriously used the requisite matter and form to effect and confer a sacrament is presumed for that very reason to have intended to do what the Church does." (Apostolicae Curae, [1896]).
According to theologian DeSalvo, "As long as the lack of proper intention is not externally manifested, the Church presumes that the intention of the minister is correct." (See "The Dogmatic Theology on the Intention of the Minister in the Confection of the Sacraments," [1949], pg. 105).
The reason for this principle is clear: Divine Providence will prevent the Church from defecting. While we can never know with absolute certainty (without Divine revelation) if any particular sacrament is valid, we have moral certainty, and the assurance that the Church will continue. Each week at Mass, you don't know if the priest tampered with the bread and or wine. You don't know if he correctly pronounced (and included) all the necessary words of Consecration. He could have done such things, but it is never to be presumed. On moral certainty, the Church allows us to adore that which looks as mere bread as Jesus.
Therefore, absent an external manifestation from the bishop not to intend what the Church does, the sacrament is considered valid. This is another take on the "Masonic membership = invalid Holy Orders" in Traditionalist circles regarding Abp. Lefebvre's ordaining and consecrating bishop, Card. Leinart.
The writer's analogy to a priest attempting to absolve his accomplice being invalid also fails miserably. For the Sacrament of Penance to be valid, in addition to valid orders, the priest must have jurisdiction. The Church REMOVES JURISDICTION from a priest attempting to absolve an accomplice in sexual sin. Holy Orders requires no jurisdiction to be valid.
It never ceases to amaze me how theologically inept those in the Vatican II sect are, even among the so-called "conservatives."
God Bless,
---Introibo
Thank you very much.
DeleteYoung reader from Spain
Hello John and Introibo
ReplyDeleteOn the subject of the SSPX , you don't have a problem attending their Masses so long as the priest is valid?
God bless
@anon7:00
DeleteOf course, I do not speak for John. As to my personal view, I have no problem with a so-called "Una Cum" Mass. True, the 1962 Missal was not promulgated by a true pope, but even its biggest detractors will admit, it does not contain any heresy or errors; it is certainly valid.
If the SSPX priest is valid (not a Vatican II sect "priest" who was allowed to join without ordination in the traditional Rite), and there is no sede Chapel available, a person may attend. The problem, in my opinion, arises from those not strong in the Faith hearing sermons that are not sound in doctrine. "The pope can be a heretic and still be pope" is false.
There are those, like my guest poster Lee, who will not attend. I totally respect his position. Since this is a contentious matter and there is no pope to settle the question, each individual must follow their conscience. I have serious issue with those clergy who "invent sins" and tell people they may not attend such Masses under pain of sin. They have no Magisterial authority to declare that, and they twist Church teaching to "settle an issue" never properly before the Magisterium. One such priest had the temerity to write that one "Una Cum" Mass is worse than all abortions. That's actually blasphemous, as abortion is the cold-blooded murder of an innocent unborn baby, and the Una Cum Mass is NOT--despite all protestations to the contrary--taught by the Church to be "in union with a heretic."
God Bless,
---Introibo
Very nicely put Introibo!!! I thought I was going to put in my two cents but you covered it all. This is one of those issues that people can disagree about in a charitable manner. The only thing I'm 100% positive about on this issue is that I am not sure : o) It has not been settled. I will say that one of the reasons I left the Novus Ordo was so I would not have to plug my nose during part of the liturgy, at the una cum heretic Mass I still have to do that. Objectively, in my opinion, such a Mass, where the biggest enemy of God on earth, leading most souls astray, being treated in the liturgy as the head of the Roman Catholic Church is offensive to God, but the priest's guilt is subjective. And I'm not qualified to speak in regard to the guilt, if any, of lay people. The issue has not been settled as Intriobo quite correctly observes.
DeletePerhaps in the future you could do a writing Introibo why the post Vatican Two Ordination rite is invalid .
DeleteThank you and God bless
James
James,
DeleteI already did... here you go... https://introiboadaltaredei2.blogspot.com/2022/04/the-underrated-sacrament.html
Lee
Introibo and John
ReplyDeleteCan I ask a question on the subject of Marriage please .
It just came to my attention that a Novus Ordo " priest " just married a young man and woman ( ages 26 and 24 ) at my former Novus Ordo church after only meeting and engagement of 2 months. Do you agree this is too soon . In our Traditional Churches the rule is at least 6 - 12 months .You need to make sure they are the right one .
2 months that is well too soon . John and Introibo what are your thoughts?
DeleteA concerned Mom
@anon6:18 and @3:03
DeleteFor any couple to get married in less than 6 months is foolhardy to say the least. In my opinion, where both parties are under 35, it should be a minimum of one year. Where both parties are 35 or older, 6 months should be the minimum.
God Bless,
---Introibo
That is sound advice Introibo . Thank you for your quick reply .
DeleteWhat is your thoughts if the two sin and she gets pregnant ?
One year should be a minimum . You have to be sure .
A concerned Mom
Concerned Mom,
DeleteA pregnant woman would be an exception. They must get married as expeditiously as possible. They now must make it work for the child they have brought into the world. Fornication comes with serious consequences even in this life. Yet another reason to only engage in sex within marriage as God intended.
God Bless,
---Introibo
Marry in haste , repent at leisure is the old saying !
ReplyDelete@anon4:55
DeleteInteresting! First time I heard that one. Yet it is most certainly accurate!
God Bless,
---Introibo
Many who do not even believe in Christ use His Name in vain like a swear word. In a sense, they complain against God, as if tacitly acknowledging Him; but in rebellion.
ReplyDeleteWell stated sir.
ReplyDeleteDid anyone ask me a question that hasn't been responded to?
ReplyDelete