You have to decide, Duane, what validity entails. If the argument is that validity requires AS, then you have to say that those abbots were not validly ordained, even if the pope said so.
Wrong, Jon. The validity comes when the ordinations are done in
communion with, and permission of a bishop who has AS. Those monks ordained while in communion with,
and the permission of a bishop who had AS, in this case the pope. The minute he withdrew permission they stopped ordaining.
If you claim, OTOH, that the pope has to approve ordination, then the priests and bishops of the PNCC, for example, are not valid, even though Rome says they are.
Nowhere did I make that claim. Notice, I said permission of a competent authority, in the case of the PNCC, their ordinations were done by bishops who retained AS (competent authority).
It say that the Cistercian Abbots were valid without AS, then say that other forms of presbyter ordination are not. Presbyter ordination either is, or is not valid.
Where does it say that the abbots ordinations were done without AS? Are you saying the pope does not have AS?
The point you are missing, or do not care to admit, is that priests have the power to ordain, but it can only be unlocked and done validly while in communion, and with the permission of a bishop who has AS. That is what happened with those monks. The
second a bishop withdraws his permission for presbyter ordination, a priests power is locked up again.
That said, the pope’s authority is only over those who choose to be in communion with him. And while their ordinations are obviously valid, so are those of the PNCC, Orthodoxy, Lutherans whether in succession of via presbyter ordination, Anglicans, etc. regardless of what the Vatican thinks of them, all due respect extended.
Non-recognition of an authority does not entail that such authority does not exist. Many people do not recognize that Jesus is the Messiah, this does not mean that He is not. Likewise, failure to recognize the pope’s authority, does not mean that Jesus does not recognize the authority that He has given him. Did Peter have the power to bind and loose, and if yes, does his successor retain that authority? If yes, then you must recognize the pope’s power to bind even you Jon. If no, then it is a poor power that only lasts for one generation of the Church.
EDIT: I might add, Duane, that if all the pope has to do is declare that our presbyter ordinations are valid, like he did the Cistercian abbots, we would welcome his recognition of them, be thankful for the gesture, but we don’t have to have it to know without doubt that they are valid.
He can’t, because Luther willfully threw away AS. There were two Catholic bishops who became Lutherans, but Luther refused to let them do ordinations. Lutherans could have easily retained AS right there, but Luther obviously did not think that it was important. And as a result, you have to say that it is not important.
And I have no doubt that Lutheran and Anglican ordinations are not valid, as the successor of Peter has bound them as not being valid, all due respect intended.
