Not at all.
I wanted to make a point. Even*** I*** could be a Catholic bishop according to your theory, all I need to do is contact a vagante bishop with the proper “lines” and, with a little persuasion…voile…Catholic bishop, valid but illicit. My credentials would be as good to your church as any Orthodox bishop would be to your church.
In other words, this way of determining who is and who is not a valid bishop is fraught with danger. Witness the recent Milingo consecrations. You have a Pandora’s box.
Even a heretic can be a Catholic bishop, and pass his “lines” to an athiest who believes in Gay marriage, abortion and women’s ordination. You cannot control these people but they are, according to your theory…valid bishops.
This is a very flawed theory, as the Vatican has begun to realize. It’s reaction to Milingo consecrations is very different from prior events.
The point is, properly, a bishop or priest is irrelevant if he detaches himself from the church. If you recognize that a man can be a bishop outside of and separated from the Truth of Christ, you are trafficking in magic, not sacraments.
It is the Faith of Christ which these men are supposed to carry, and that is the only real justification for having bishops. If they do not share this Faith, what good are they to the church?
Your best bet is to not pass judgment on these people, leave them to God’s judgment…and protect your flock from any who cannot affirm with utter sincerity that they believe and teach Christ’s Truth as received through the Apostles, and nothing else.
Pax et Bonum,
Michael
I have to admit, I am not aware of what the situation is with Milingo. My understanding, as the church teaches, is that the sacrament of Holy Orders is akin to Baptism in that it imparts an indelible character on the soul. Once a validly consecrated priest, always a consecrated priest. However, the Church has the authority in discipline on how/when/where the sacraments are performed, apart from the requisite matter, form, and intent that is unchangeable. So to break the law regarding discipline is illicit and a sin, but someone who has been validly ordained has
the ability to confect the Eucharist regardless of canonical status. That one would choose to do so outside the authority of the Church is a grave sin. The same goes with Bishops ordaining new priests.
Your logic would have anyone who sins be left at the wayside, since they have “detached themselves from the Church”, rather than being as the father in the parable of the prodigal son, welcoming back the penitent (a prerequisite, of course) son, who though he sinned gravely against his father who had authority, didn’t cease to be his son.
If such a one as you claim were to attempt ordination, there would be severl circumstances that would make the sacrament of dubious validity, if not outright invalid. First the heretic bishop would have to observe the proper matter and form of the sacrament. (perhaps his heresy is in this area and that in itelf would render the sacrament null) Most telling, though would be his intent. If he is a heretic, is his intent that of the Church? Is he intending to ordain someone who will adhere to doctines he rejects? Not likely in the least. As for the recipient - is he baptized? (An atheist
could have been baptized in infancy, so let’s assume this is the case.) Does he intend to receive the sacrament? It is likely such an attempt at reception by such a person is mere mockery or attempt at infiltration, rather than true reception of the Sacrament as defined by the Church. So ultimately, an appeal to such an extreme situation doesn’t advance your case.
Another example is the situation of the Eucharist. One must be in a state of grace to licitly receive the sacrament. That doesn’t mean that if he is in a state of sin and receives the Eucharist it ceases to be the Body of Christ - it’s still a valid Eucharist, just not received licitly.
Christ gave us the sacraments, but he didn’t guarantee that those who receive them, or even those who are their ministers would always remain pure in faith and morals. But no sacrament can be “undone.”
By the way, what would be your suggestion as to what the “proper” way is to determine if someone is a bishop or not?
