Valid but illicit?

[Annabelle_Marie]

So, for a little background. Through a mutual friend, I was Facebook friends with a priest who then got removed from his parish. No one knows why but the Bishop said he didn’t do anything illegal and was still a priest in good standing. Now, 7 months later after the Vatican denied his appeal, this priest has decided to leave the Roman Catholic Church for the Evangelical “Catholic” Church. I said I would pray for him and was so sad to hear that he was leaving the one true church Well, that started some of his “groupies” to talk like they would still be going to a Catholic Church…sort of like they would be just going to another parish. I explained that no it was not the same. One person said it wasn’t any more a Protestant Church then the Greek or Russian churches. I explained the differences to them. I told them all that they had to follow their own conscience but I wanted them to make an informed decision. They did not like that at all. I was explaining to them that yes, while the sacraments from this priest would be valid, they would be illicit. And that they would be seperating themselves from the Church.

When I was telling my husband all this, he wanted to know how the Eucharist could be valid but illicit at the same time and what it meant for this priest and for the people who knowingly follow him. (name removed by moderator)ut?

 

[malphono]

If one were personally familiar with the situation, that’s one thing, but this “Facebook” business is something else. Evidently there is a lot more to this story than came through the “Facebook” medium, and I wouldn’t waste my time speculating. Frankly, I wouldn’t waste my time with “Facebook” in the first place, but that’s me.

 

[MJE]

Annabelle Marie,
Here is a link to a discussion re: valid but illicit. This was 2005 here @ CAF.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=69246

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

If one were personally familiar with the situation, that’s one thing, but this “Facebook” business is something else. Evidently there is a lot more to this story than came through the “Facebook” medium, and I wouldn’t waste my time speculating. Frankly, I wouldn’t waste my time with “Facebook” in the first place, but that’s me.

Why? I’m not speculating on why this priest was removed But it is a fact and he himself announced that he is leaving the Roman Catholic Church for this other church.

So, valid but illicit sacrament - if one were to receive such knowing it was that way…would they still receive the grace?

 

[marywarfield]

So, for a little background. Through a mutual friend, I was Facebook friends with a priest who then got removed from his parish. No one knows why but the Bishop said he didn’t do anything illegal and was still a priest in good standing. Now, 7 months later after the Vatican denied his appeal, this priest has decided to leave the Roman Catholic Church for the Evangelical “Catholic” Church. I said I would pray for him and was so sad to hear that he was leaving the one true church Well, that started some of his “groupies” to talk like they would still be going to a Catholic Church…sort of like they would be just going to another parish. I explained that no it was not the same. One person said it wasn’t any more a Protestant Church then the Greek or Russian churches. I explained the differences to them. I told them all that they had to follow their own conscience but I wanted them to make an informed decision. They did not like that at all. I was explaining to them that yes, while the sacraments from this priest would be valid, they would be illicit. And that they would be seperating themselves from the Church.

When I was telling my husband all this, he wanted to know how the Eucharist could be valid but illicit at the same time and what it meant for this priest and for the people who knowingly follow him. (name removed by moderator)ut?

It’s a good question. However since the views stated
for this new Church- at least the one in Bend- are
heretical and definitely misleading.
If the parishioners are in a snit because they are
angry the Bishop reassigned the priest without cause
causing him to resign?
Frankly they are all in great sin therefore.
The Bishop is within his rights to change priest
assignments any time he so pleases.
Worse- this priest has created for himself an independent
group of devoted followers. This is the most usual
reason Bishops reassign- to keep that from happening
Third the priest and followers while in sin create
an atmosphere welcoming gay marriage and women
priests.
Do the followers and priest know these are heretical
acts? Yes.
Was he validly ordained? Yes.
So no- if any parishioner knowing these facts
deliberately encourages, supports, and receives?
They are in grave danger.
Bottom line both the priest and the most vocal
parishioners going with him claim to completely
reject the church heirarchy and Magesterium. In
which case is there really still valid apostolic
succession and is the Consecration valid but illicit
or is it invalid AND illicit?

 

[malphono]

Why?

Because in your OP you said you were “Facebook friends” …

I’m not speculating on why this priest was removed But it is a fact and he himself announced that he is leaving the Roman Catholic Church for this other church.

In the OP you stated that the bishop said this person was a priest in good standing, but then Rome refused his appeal. To me, that means there’s more to the story than meets the eye, any announcement that the priest may have made notwithstanding. That he joined some sort of pseudo-church adds to that. If there was nothing amiss, why would there have been an appeal and why would he have jumped ship? That’s where the speculation comes in.

So, valid but illicit sacrament - if one were to receive such knowing it was that way…would they still receive the grace?

Maybe the Orthodox or even the SSPX, but as I see it, there are far too many of these evangelical (or “independent”) “Catholic” churches around, and I wouldn’t darken the door of any of them.

 

[Cricket123]

In brief:

Valid: the priest is still a priest, so the Eucharist is validly confected: it is actually the Body of Christ.

Illicit: He wasn’t supposed to be celebrating Mass under the circumstances. IOW, he really did it, but shouldn’t have.

I’d assume that someone who unknowingly received Eucharist illicitly confected is ok, or who received absolution unknowingly etc. If you are aware, though… that’s likely a sin.

 

[malphono]

In brief:

Valid: the priest is still a priest, so the Eucharist is validly confected: it is actually the Body of Christ.

Illicit: He wasn’t supposed to be celebrating Mass under the circumstances. IOW, he really did it, but shouldn’t have.

I’d assume that someone who unknowingly received Eucharist illicitly confected is ok, or who received absolution unknowingly etc. If you are aware, though… that’s likely a sin.

Yes, but without knowing that this “evangelical catholic” church, or whatever it’s called, is and what they practice, one is not at all assured even of validity (to use Western terminology) .

 

[glendab]

It sounds as if this priest may have involved himself with one of those “Independent” Catholic churches that unfortunately exist outside of Communion with Rome and his involvement has cost him his faculties. This means although he remains a priest, he is no longer allowed to represent the Church or offer Sacraments to anyone.

Of course I don’t really know since there is no other information about the story than what the OP has stated. As has already been said, he might be involved in the SSPX or heading in another totally different direction. The only information is that his problem isn’t of a legal nature. ??? That leaves an awful lot of possibilities.

If anything, it is proof that we need to pray for our priests that they find a holy way of life and do not fall for the myriad of temptations that assail them daily in this crazy, mixed up world.

Glenda

 

[runningdude]

…
When I was telling my husband all this, he wanted to know how the Eucharist could be valid but illicit at the same time …

The Eucharist elements he consecrates are not themselves illicit, but rather their reception by Catholics is illicit. The priest’s performance of the consecration is also illicit.

… and what it meant for this priest and for the people who knowingly follow him. (name removed by moderator)ut?

“Whoever should [knowingly] lead these little ones astray, it would be better had he never been born at all”.

As a Father, this priest has a duty to point his parishioners, his adoptive little ones, always to the one true church. We can only hope he his motivated by ignorance, and that the Holy Spirit will enlighten him.

“Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do…”

 

[pnewton]

In addition to the sin of schism this situation involves, there is also the rather distressing problem that if he tries to administer other Sacraments, specifically Reconciliation or Confirmation, the will be no more valid than ordering a burger at McDonalds. These two Sacraments are rooted in the authority of the bishop.

 

[Vico]

In addition to the sin of schism this situation involves, there is also the rather distressing problem that if he tries to administer other Sacraments, specifically Reconciliation or Confirmation, the will be no more valid than ordering a burger at McDonalds. These two Sacraments are rooted in the authority of the bishop.

Marriage is also invalid without jurisdiction, for example, from SSPX priests.

 

[christopher_r]

The Bishop is within his rights to change priest
assignments any time he so pleases.

we seem to miss the key point of leadership when we talk about the bishop being within his rights.

Servant leadership is caring, nurturing, teaching, nourishing to the community.

I observe Pope Francis talking much more about these things than his rights.

Yes, leaders have authority. They also have responsibility. This diocese seems to be suffering. It needs healing.

Peace

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

marywarfield;11938174:

The Bishop is within his rights to change priest
assignments any time he so pleases.

we seem to miss the key point of leadership when we talk about the bishop being within his rights.

Servant leadership is caring, nurturing, teaching, nourishing to the community.

I observe Pope Francis talking much more about these things than his rights.

Yes, leaders have authority. They also have responsibility. This diocese seems to be suffering. It needs healing.

Peace

Yes it does. And the Bishop wrote a very nice letter on his website, invite this priest to come back in peace and reconciliation. However, this priest will only do so if he gets his parish back. That is not going to happen. It’s akin to me saying to my husband…"“wait a minute…I don’t think I care for the bad times…see you later”

 

[christopher_r]

christopher r;11947965:

Yes it does. And the Bishop wrote a very nice letter on his website, invite this priest to come back in peace and reconciliation. However, this priest will only do so if he gets his parish back. That is not going to happen. It’s akin to me saying to my husband…"“wait a minute…I don’t think I care for the bad times…see you later”

I read that. It was good to write. It is usually better to speak in person, prayerfully.

I suspect that the only solution to this was loving action by all long ago.

I wish all peace