Validity of Consecration

[MarkThompson]

surly just because a man takes holy orders does not make him different from the rest of us.

Actually, the Church teaches that it does. The Catechism explains:
1582. As in the case of Baptism and Confirmation this share in Christ’s office is granted once for all. the sacrament of Holy Orders, like the other two, confers an indelible spiritual character and cannot be repeated or conferred temporarily.

1. It is true that someone validly ordained can, for a just reason, be discharged from the obligations and functions linked to ordination, or can be forbidden to exercise them; but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense, because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever. The vocation and mission received on the day of his ordination mark him permanently.
   Similarly, the Catechism touches on the issue you raise in your initial question:
2. Since it is ultimately Christ who acts and effects salvation through the ordained minister, the unworthiness of the latter does not prevent Christ from acting. St. Augustine states this forcefully:
   
   As for the proud minister, he is to be ranked with the devil. Christ’s gift is not thereby profaned: what flows through him keeps its purity, and what passes through him remains dear and reaches the fertile earth… the spiritual power of the sacrament is indeed comparable to light: those to be enlightened receive it in its purity, and if it should pass through defiled beings, it is not itself defiled.​
   In short, Holy Orders is a sacrament, not an appointment or a job, and for that reason it has a spiritual character over and above the personality of the priest himself.

 

[choy]

to add

it is the power of God that makes the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. there is nothing from the priest that goes into it, it is all from God. so it doesn’t matter if the priest is sinful or in a state of grace, it should not accept the Sacraments (Eucharist or the 6 other ones) because all grace comes from Christ and there is nothing that can defile the grace of God

i meant it should not AFFECT the sacraments

 

[Ginkgo100]

surly just because a man takes holy orders does not make him different from the rest of us.

Actually, yes, it does.

Or are some sacrements greater then others?

Actually, yes, some are. For example, only one of the sacraments, the Eucharist, is called “the source and summit” of our Christian life. But rather than measuring “quantity of greatness” of each sacrament, it may be better to remember that each has different purposes and effects.

Each man has to face god ALONE. just because he has a collar does’nt give him a leg up.

True, but the validity of the consecration of an ordained priest has nothing to do with the priest’s eternal judgment before God. Frankly I don’t even see the connection; one occurs during life, the other after death.

as previous noted he must be held to a higher standard.

Agreed… because of their special graces and the possibility of causing scandal, priests face harsher judgment for their sins when they die.

To divorce the actions of a man from his soul so that at long as he has received the right to consecrate the host he always retains that right no matter what he does does not make sense.

Valid consecration does not depend on sanctifying grace. That’s the core issue here. When a person commits a grave sin, he or she loses sanctifying grace. To help visualize this, we may say that the soul is “unclean” or even “dead,” but technically it is a soul without sanctifying grace. The permanent effects of baptism, confirmation, and ordination remain no matter what else happens.

 

[anthony_c]

These are better answers. I can understand that god can work through 'broken vessels.
but to non catholic friends they cannot see the difference. They see that if you agree that god can use bad men to do his work then that man can claim to be doing god’s work. That leads to a very slippery slope.
They see that catholics seem to treat clergy with a deferrence that is not extended to the laity that seems to be putting a gap between us actions that a priest may take would not be allowed or accepted by lay person .

In my own case My wife left me with three children to bring up alone. I remained single for twelve years then met a very good women and fell in love. To show our commitment to each other we deceided to get married. Now by that action i am denieded communion.
So act act of love disbarrs me yet a continuing act of evil still allows that person to receive commuinon and to administer the scarements. Why?

surely this is a question millions of divorced catholics ask. Why are we disbarred when others who have commited evil are allowed to remain.

I also understand that the scarements are gods gift to men and are not a right but must be accepted as a sign of gods love .

 

[anthony_c]

Just another thought.

A priest may break his vows but because he remains a priest can still receive and administer the host. A lay person who breaks his vow in marriage cannot.That definnetly seems to me to be seperating us.

In an earlier post i said that we must stand before god alone. what i mean by that is god does not differenciate between us we are all the same. why do we treat each other as though one is better than another just because holy orders have been taken (and in a very few cases abused).

 

[Seatuck]

Just another thought.

A priest may break his vows but because he remains a priest can still receive and administer the host. A lay person who breaks his vow in marriage cannot.That definnetly seems to me to be seperating us.

In an earlier post i said that we must stand before god alone. what i mean by that is god does not differenciate between us we are all the same. why do we treat each other as though one is better than another just because holy orders have been taken (and in a very few cases abused).

Anthony, if a priest is in a state of sin he will not receive any grace from the Eucharist and is in fact putting his soul in serious risk of eternal damnation.As is anyone who knows of his sin who could do something about it. It is the same for us. Holy Orders is not a vow that says no sin will occur. Sinning or acting in a sick way does not take away the charisms associated with the sacrament. This does not make a priest better than a lay person or a married person better than a single person. The responsibilities associated with the sacrament remain.

 

[antonabe]

Must be your not paying attention to what is going on in the church right now. Perfect example of the Old Boys Network tap dancing to save themselves and this is about a 1600 year tradition among these guys. [edited]
I was very close to going into the seminary at one point in time. I have probably more training in the Roman Catholic Church than the average practicing Catholic. I’ve also read the Bible and the Catechism more than once. I’ve also personally witnessed priests so drunk that they could hardly stand up say mass and you want to tell me this is valid!

Reply;

Agree there are Priests in the Catholic Church who are not touched by God and does not have faith.They are the bad eggs which bring the Chuirch into disrepute.Any organisation has these bad apples.Let me also explain what touched by God means.Although you have been trained and studied the teachings of the Church no amount of teachings can give you this light which takes you close to divinity and gives you the gift of faith.You and the Catholic Church as well must thank God that you did not pursue your Religous studies and become a priest as it would have been to your detriment,a burden to society and also a detriment to thje Church.I am sure there will be a large number of people in this forum who will acknowledge that there are a large section of the clergy who are Holy,devout, and comitted to service of the People and manifest the Glorification of God.As mentioned before by several the state of grace of the celebrant does not matter as he is the instrument which makes our offering,consecrates it and the inflow of graces will hwever not flow to the priest if he is not in the state of grace but will directly to the participants of the offering.I reiterate we the faithful are participants of the mass and the offering.

 

[anthony_c]

I understand that God’s grace flows through a priest to the congregation so that his individual status is illrelivant. He is mearly a Channel.

The problem is the precived difference in attitude between the clergy and the laity.

If as previously mention i went to receive communion and the priest knew of my remarriage I would be refused. I know that no gace would be received by taking communion that i accept.

However when a priest is in the same position no one stops him. The church knowing that he is not in a state of grace still allows him to take and distribute the host. which means as a proir note states all people who know of his act and did not stop it are also guilty of sin.

This is the sin of ommission. Now non catholics cannot see the difference. to them the church is condoning a sin by allowing a sinner to continue to act as a priest.

But rejects those who by no fault of their own are put in a position where they are refused communion.

By not acting the church loses credibility . It seems to the general public that they allowed the evil actions to continue so as to keep the number of priest up. The idea that a sinner is only acting as a channel is meaningless to them.

That is the crux of the problem that faces the church. The church is using doctrine to explain its actions When common sense is what matters. A blind man could see why did’nt the church.

I know the vast majority of the clergy are good men But mud sticks. The actions of the bad were not in isolation the rest of the clergy did know but did not denounce. was this a case of see no evil speak no evil.

 

[antonabe]

I understand that God’s grace flows through a priest to the congregation so that his individual status is illrelivant. He is mearly a Channel.

The problem is the precived difference in attitude between the clergy and the laity.

If as previously mention i went to receive communion and the priest knew of my remarriage I would be refused. I know that no gace would be received by taking communion that i accept.

However when a priest is in the same position no one stops him. The church knowing that he is not in a state of grace still allows him to take and distribute the host. which means as a proir note states all people who know of his act and did not stop it are also guilty of sin.

This is the sin of ommission. Now non catholics cannot see the difference. to them the church is condoning a sin by allowing a sinner to continue to act as a priest.

But rejects those who by no fault of their own are put in a position where they are refused communion.
RESPONSE;

Ther are two issues here on which the mind should be focussed.1)One is the herarchy of the Church and 2) the other the Faith of a Catholic in Jesus Christ and his teachings.The hierarchy is composed of men and they could err and they could be prone to sin.But knows whether the member of the clergy has sinned or not it is that individual and perhaps God and if he is celebrating mass the congregation is unaware of his sin and he is performing an act of sacrilege which is known to God and for which the priest has to atone.However there are sins which can be classified as public sins where a man or woman currently married is living with another and is in a state of sin.It could also be a politician who is a strong supporter of Abortion, or same sex marriage.In such a situation the Priest can refuse communion.
The actions of the priest, if he too is living in Sin, if he is is paedophile or a Homosexual,or is promiscuous should be brought to the notice of the Chiurch hierarcy by the faithful and it is their sacred duty, and the Church has to take immediate action to remove him from his priestly obligations until he is truly repentant.However if he is a pediphile since it is a criminal offense he must be reported to the Civil authorities and the Pope has clearly stated this today in a circular to the Bishops.
I agree in the past the Hiearchy has exposed themselves by not acting early and effectively, particularly in the case of paedophiles.Certainly the Church hierarcy has erred.Having said that the actions of the preist should not in any way impact our faith as we have a direct line with God and we are responsible for our actions and the Clergy is supposed to serve and guide us. If the clergy has failed in their responsibilities they too have a direct line of responsibility to god and they will have to answer and atone for their sins.

 

[anthony_c]

A good answer.

Do you think that we should view priests in a different light. More as teachers rabbi’s if you will than as a person who only by the wearing of a collar are deamed to be more spritual than the laity. This should bring them closer to the people rather than appearing to be seperate.

Their ordination is the right to teach, to lead, to inspire, to give spritual advice and comfort.
to administer the scarements. It does Not make them better than the ordinary joe.

The traditional defference shown to the priesthood in the past i belive has lead to no questions being asked No one being held to account. The congregation themselves should have the right to remove those priests who do not act in the manner of their calling.

In the begining christ appointed the apostles but each community had a say in whom was to lead and teach them and only then were they annointed . Why not bring this back.

 

[Lutheranteach]

Actually, yes, it does.

Actually, yes, some are. For example, only one of the sacraments, the Eucharist, is called “the source and summit” of our Christian life. But rather than measuring “quantity of greatness” of each sacrament, it may be better to remember that each has different purposes and effects.

True, but the validity of the consecration of an ordained priest has nothing to do with the priest’s eternal judgment before God. Frankly I don’t even see the connection; one occurs during life, the other after death.

Agreed… because of their special graces and the possibility of causing scandal, priests face harsher judgment for their sins when they die.

Valid consecration does not depend on sanctifying grace. That’s the core issue here. When a person commits a grave sin, he or she loses sanctifying grace. To help visualize this, we may say that the soul is “unclean” or even “dead,” but technically it is a soul without sanctifying grace. The permanent effects of baptism, confirmation, and ordination remain no matter what else happens.

that is an area where protestants and Catholics do not agree, and I am definitely on the protestant side. I fully believe there is no difference between a clergy member and a lay person other than the college courses and a calling for the job. No special abilities. No special powers.

 

[choy]

that is an area where protestants and Catholics do not agree, and I am definitely on the protestant side. I fully believe there is no difference between a clergy member and a lay person other than the college courses and a calling for the job. No special abilities. No special powers.

the difference is the Holy Orders

 

[roadsend]

Well said,in adddition we also associate ourselves in the offering,The priest says “Pray bretheren that our sacrifice may be acceptable to God,our almighty father” …

Actually the “our sacrifice” is a mistranslation of “meum ac vestrum sacrificium”.
If the “our sacrifice” were accurate the Latin would say “nostrum sacrificium”.
I see the “meum ac vestrum sacrificium” as reflecting the joining of our daily sacrifices to that of Christ as effected through the ministry of His priest.
“Our sacrifice” is just plain wrong, since it at least implies that we in some way join the priest in effecting the Sacrifice of the Mass, which of course is false.
Hopefully this error will be corrected in the new translations.

 

[antonabe]

that is an area where protestants and Catholics do not agree, and I am definitely on the protestant side. I fully believe there is no difference between a clergy member and a lay person other than the college courses and a calling for the job. No special abilities. No special powers.

In the perfromance of the act of consecration the priest is the medium through which the transformation takes place.A similar thing happens in healing.Healers may not even be a member of the clergy but he or she is able to invoke the Holy Spirit in curing people of Illness.I have seen people cured of even dreaded deseases like Cancer by Healers.Healers are also mediums and the difference between a priest and the Healer is that although they may not have holy orders but they are in a state of grace without Sin.I have encountered Priests who perform the act of healing and they fast for long periods before the healing service and they have to be without sin.In the sacrifice of the mass it is different.The Priests do not have special powers but the act of Holy Orders makes them a medium through which the consecration takes place and if they are not in the state of grace they are committing sacrlege.Yes the Protestants says that there is no actual transformation taking place but that it is symbolic of the sacrfice at Calvary.Cathoilics believe in the actual change at consecration.

 

[antonabe]

Actually the “our sacrifice” is a mistranslation of “meum ac vestrum sacrificium”.
If the “our sacrifice” were accurate the Latin would say “nostrum sacrificium”.
I see the “meum ac vestrum sacrificium” as reflecting the joining of our daily sacrifices to that of Christ as effected through the ministry of His priest.
“Our sacrifice” is just plain wrong, since it at least implies that we in some way join the priest in effecting the Sacrifice of the Mass, which of course is false.
Hopefully this error will be corrected in the new translations.

In my opinion judging from the text of Eucharistic Parayers one of which is reproduced below we are all the cpngregation participating in the offering along with the priest
"We come to your, Father, with praise and thanksgiving, through Jesus Christ your Son. Through him we ask you to accept and bless + these gifts we offer you in sacrifice. We offer them for your holy catholic Church, watch over it, Lord, and guide it; grant it peace and unity throughout the world. We offer them for {Benedict} our Pope, for {name of Bishop in local diocese} our bishop, and for all who hold and teach the catholic faith that comes to us from the apostles.

Remember, Lord, your people, especially those for whom we now pray, {names}. Remember all of us gathered here before you. You know how firmly we believe in you and dedicate ourselves to you. We offer you this sacrifice of praise for ourselves and those who are dear to us. We pray to you, our living and true God, for our well-being and redemption.

• In union with the whole Church we honor Mary, the ever-virgin mother of Jesus Christ our Lord and God. We honor Joseph, her husband, the apostles and martyrs Peter and Paul, Andrew, [James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Jude; we honor Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian] and all the saints. May their merits and prayers gain us your constant help and protection. [Through Christ our Lord. Amen.]
• Father, accept this offering from your whole family. Grant us your peace in this life, save us from final damnation, and count us among those you have chosen. [Through Christ our Lord. Amen.]

Bless and approve our offering; make it acceptable to you, and offering in spirit and in truth. Let is become"

Accoding to the above we the congregation along with the priest are making the offering to God.