sacraments

Imposter Priests

in sacraments, theology 61 Comments

Mary raises a very difficult question. What if a man enters the priesthood for evil motives, whether to gain money or have access to boys. Is his ordination valid? Is it possible for the recipient of ordination to have such inadequate or wrong motives that his ordination is invalid?

In diocesan files I came across a brief discussion by Dallas church officials as to whether they should seek to have the abuser Rudy Kos’s ordination annulled. They did not explain the grounds.

I can only guess they thought his motivation for ordination was not simple inadequate but evil, and that rendered his ordination invalid. I also guess they decided not to pursue the annulment because it would create a crisis of conscience among Catholics who had received the Eucharist or the sacrament of penance from him. Perhaps the lien of reasoning was the bishop intended to ordain a man who had presented himself as a devout Christian; but Kod was not, he was a pederast and perhaps not even a believer.

There are also sheer imposters who pretend to be priests, but I don’t think God punisher those who think they are receiving the sacraments from such imposters.

For example, the Council of Trent, I believe, taught that a spiritual communion is fully as efficacious as a sacramental communion. Protestants who communicate at their services may not receive Jesus in the elements, but their communion with Him can be as fully sanctifying as a Catholic’s. Those who receive the sacraments from imposters, I suggest, receive grace of the sacrament but not through the sacrament, which does not exist in that case.

God is not out to trick us; he desires that we be saved.

But bishops who knowingly or carelessly ordain such evil men will have much to answer for at the Judgment – although the way some bishops act, I doubt whether they believe in the Judgment or even God. It would not be the first time the Church had deistic or agnostic bishops.

Leave a Comment

Visible and Invisible Channels of Salvation

in Catholic Church, sacraments 3 Comments

Several people have raised the question of the effects of “invalid” sacraments. 

Underlying this question are two views of God’s offer of salvation:

1.     The existence of the Church and the sacraments narrows God’s offer of salvation (Augustine). That is, only those who are in the juridical boundaries of the Church and therefore receive valid sacraments have at least a chance at salvation – although few in fact will be saved.  Outside the Church there is no salvation, and very little within.

or

2.     The church is a sign and visible channel of God’s grace, but He is free to operate outside those channels. The Spirit came down on Cornelius and his household even before they were baptized. God loves all that He has created and wills to save all men.

The Augustinian view is full of contradictions. If baptism is necessary for salvation why is not reception of the Eucharist just as necessary (“Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man etc.”)? But the Western Church does not offer communion to infants. Moreover, anyone, even a pagan, can baptize, if he uses the proper words, pours the water, and intends to do what the Church does. Traditionally this was justified because baptism is necessary for salvation. But isn’t the Eucharist just as necessary? 

It is common Catholic teaching that a spiritual communion (that is, without the reception of the consecrated elements) has all the grace and fruits of a sacramental communion. Presumably Protestants, even if they are celebrating an “invalid” Eucharist because they lack orders, can and do make spiritual communions which are as efficacious as sacramental communions. 

Similarly, one can confess one’s sins to a fellow Christian, not just to a priest. Or if one by mistake confesses to a person who is not really a priest, or the penitent’s sins not forgiven?  

The sacraments are not ways to limit salvation, but to broaden it and make it visible. They establish a physical, historical continuity with the Incarnate Word, who is entirely free to operate outside them to achieve His saving purposes. 

Why bother with the visible Church then? Why did not God save men without their visible cooperation? 

The human race is not a collection of individuals but a communal project – there are no self-made men. Christ is the head and source of the regenerate human race, and the visible channels that bring his salvation are His will to establish His visible presence within history, although He also continues to work invisibly or in a half-hidden way to draw all men to Himself.

Leave a Comment

Put Not Your Trust In Princes…Nor in Committees

in Catholic Church, clergy sex abuse scandal, sacraments 10 Comments

Credo Ut Intellegam has been suffering through the news from the German Church, and I feel largely the way he does: 

Wenn mir etwas Angst macht, dann ist es die Naivität, mit der momentan die üblichen Patentrezepte als Allheilmittel ins Spiel gebracht werden: vox temporis – vox Dei, verheirateter Weltklerus, Laienmitsprache und -mitverantwortung, innerkirchliche Frauenförderung etc. Ich habe inzwischen einiges an Laiengremien gesehen, von innen und von außen, ich kenne meine Mitchristen recht gut und fürchte, sie sind genauso unheilig wie ich. Sie sind genauso egoistisch, rechthaberisch, feige, heuchlerisch, geistig rigide und glaubensmäßig frigide wie ich und wie viele der aktuellen geweihten “Machthaber”. Woher der Optimismus, Hochwürdigster Herr Erzbischof, Ihr Damen und Herren der Räte und Komitees? Ich fürchte, ich kann da nicht folgen.

(snip) 

Meine Hoffnung setze ich nicht mehr auf die Strukturen, die “Verfestigungen und Verkrustungen” von heute (Schick) noch auf die Strukturen von morgen, gleich wie liquide und flexibel sie sein mögen. Meine Hoffnung ist Jesus Christus; meine Hoffnung sind die Gottesmutter und die unabsehbare Schar der Heiligen, in denen die Liebe GOttes aufscheint; meine Hoffnung ist die erbarmende Gnade, wie sie mir Unwürdigem im Wort des Wortes, in den Sakramenten entgegentritt, und zwar egal, wie unwürdig der Mund und die Hände des Spenders sind. 

If anything causes me anxiety, then it is naïveté that comes into play with the current patent medicines as cure-alls: vox temporis – vox Dei, married secular clergy, lay dialogue and co-responsibility, promotion of women within the church, etc. I have in the meantime seen some on committees, seen, from within and from without — I know my fellow Christians all too well and fear that they are just as unholy as I am. They are just as egoistic, bossy, lazy, hypocritical, spiritually rigid and coldly mediocre in faith as I am and many of the current ordained Powers-That-Be are. Whence the optimism, Most Honorable Archbishop, ladies and gentlemen of counsels and committees? I am afraid that I can’t follow you there. 

I do not put my hope in structures, neither in the “bastions and fossilized structures” of today nor in the structures of tomorrow, no matter how fluid and flexible they might be. My hope is Jesus Christ, my hope is the Mother of God and the incalculable crowd of saints, through whom the love of God shines. My hope is in merciful grace, which encounters me, all unworthy, in the word of the Word, in the sacraments, and no matter how unworthy the mouth and the hand of the ministers be. 

On the general principle that Malt does more than Milton can, I also recommend his blog “A Song for the Day of German Beer.”

Leave a Comment

Muddying the Waters

in sacraments No Comments Tags: , , , , ,

The Vatican issued a statement that baptisms performed using words that do not refer to the Father, Son, and Spirit are invalid. According to Zenit:

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith clarified that two formulae for baptism that remove the masculine names for God are invalid and undermine faith in the Trinity.

The congregation’s statement, made public today, responded to two questions concerning the validity of baptism conferred without referring to God the Father and Son.

The first question is: “Is a baptism valid if conferred with the words ‘I baptize you in the name of the Creator, and of the Redeemer, and of the Sanctifier,’ or ‘I baptize you in the name of the Creator, and of the Liberator, and of the Sustainer’?”

The second question is: “Must people baptized with those formulae be baptized ‘in forma absoluta’?”

The responses are: “To the first question, negative; to the second question, affirmative.”

That is, the use of the wrong words means that no baptism was performed. The person remains unbaptized, and cannot receive any other sacraments. If he went through the rites of confirmation and matrimony, he did not in fact receive those sacraments. He must be baptized, confirmed, and married for the first time.

But the Brisbane archdiocese in which most of these pseudo-baptisms were performed decided that the Vatican was wrong, the baptisms were valid, but illicit. According to the Chancellor Jim Spence in the Courier Mail:

The Catholic Archdiocese of Brisbane says the blunder may affect anyone baptised at the St Marys Catholic Church before 2004.
The notice has been issued after a fresh directive this week from the Catholic Church in Vatican City.
The baptisms used two illicit formulas: “I baptise you in the name of the Creator and of the Redeemer and of the Sanctifier and “I baptise you in the in the name of the Creator and of the Liberator and of the Sustainer.
The legitimate formula is “I baptise you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
The chancellor of the diocese, Father Jim Spence, said the priests at the parish were ordered to revert to the traditional formula in 2004 but that some people may still be unaware their baptisms were wrongly administered.
He said he was unaware how many people it may affect. The church is currently considering whether there will be a need for those illicitly baptised to have the ritual legitimately.
“It doesn’t mean it’s invalid, it just means it’s illicit, he said.
“It doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen, it means that it shouldn’t have happened.
“I guess (those affected) would have all sorts of reactions. I would hope that anybody whos troubled by it would get in touch.”
Baptism, the first of seven sacraments in the church, is the rite of initiation into the church and is usually administered shortly after birth.
Fr Spence said the illicit baptisms did not invalidate subsequent sacraments, including confirmation, penance and marriage.

The laity of Australia have access ot the Internet, and can read the Vatican’s statement. They can choose between the authority of Jim Spence and Pope Benedict.

Leave a Comment