What would happen practically if a rogue Bishop ordained massive quantities of men?

[Crusading_Canuk]

There is a big difference between half of the Church and a renegade bishop. Your right, the sexual abuse scandal was a crisis, and it was proportionately taken out of context. The Archbishop directly defied the papacy and incurred automatic excommunication. What Archbishop Lefebvre was doing was against the Successor of Peter, head of the twelve apostles. The bishops are the successors of the apostles and are therefore subject to the Pope.

Big difference between half the Church and a renegade bishop? The current crisis in the Church has very little to do with the actions of Lefebvre, it was the result of perverted, sodomite priests being sheltered by their superiors, the changing of the liturgy and a general watering down of Catholic teaching; end result being a significant lack of faith amongst the laity and a clearing out of the seminaries. This is a crisis, and Archbishop Lefebvre responded by consecrating those four Bishops so that Catholics would have access to tradition, good liturgy and orthodox instruction of the faith through the SSPX. It cannot be denied that there is certainly a crisis in the Church now, perhaps His Grace was able to recognise this and acted; I cannot help but point out again that in the case of a crisis in the Church, the same canon which refers to the illicit consecration of clergy and the automatic excommunication, allows that ordaining clergy even without authorisation from the Holy See is allowed… and possibly necessary.

 

[WAC]

Big difference between half the Church and a renegade bishop? The current crisis in the Church has very little to do with the actions of Lefebvre, it was the result of perverted, sodomite priests being sheltered by their superiors, the changing of the liturgy and a general watering down of Catholic teaching; end result being a significant lack of faith amongst the laity and a clearing out of the seminaries. This is a crisis, and Archbishop Lefebvre responded by consecrating those four Bishops so that Catholics would have access to tradition, good liturgy and orthodox instruction of the faith through the SSPX. It cannot be denied that there is certainly a crisis in the Church now, perhaps His Grace was able to recognise this and acted; I cannot help but point out again that in the case of a crisis in the Church, the same canon which refers to the illicit consecration of clergy and the automatic excommunication, allows that ordaining clergy even without authorisation from the Holy See is allowed… and possibly necessary.

People took advantage of Vatican II and subjected it to their whims. Latin was never meant to be fully taken of liturgy; however, the main texts are in the vernacular-as it was in the early Church. People simply did what they wanted and refused to listen to the bishops. I agree that the teachers in the seminaries were whimps. The liturgy of Vatican II was orthodox; it just faced hell when it was implemented because in the specific language the teachings were mistranslated. That is why we have a new translation of the Roman Missal which is how liturgy was supposed to be after Vatican II. If you wouldn’t mind, what line of Canon law is that in. And it wasn’t necessary, the Archbishop lost hope in Christ’s Church, of which Christ said" the Gates of Hells would not prevail against his Church." All that the Archbishop would have had to do was wait for John Paul II to okay the Latin mass which JPII did with the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. The schism was all for nought. The Archbishop couldn’t stand obedience.

 

[PLAT]

Please pray for the Chinese Catholic community… Ministers are physically forced to attend ordinations and Priests are being unlawfully consecrated. There is no religious freedom in China at all.

Only a Priest can be ordained a Bishop iirc, (i.e. if a layperson is to be ordained a Bishop, he must go through the Deacon and Priest ordination steps) and excommunication does not fall on anyone who is not aware of the church laws (although hardly any priest doesn’t know this).

 

[Hokomai]

Why say ‘misguided’? Why not just say ‘wrong’? Or ‘willfully wrong’, holding an absurd position based on internet chatter from nutters in the face of massive scholarship. The same could be said about his ‘misguided’ views on 9/11. I agree he is not ‘simply’ a nasty holocaust denier. No one is ‘simply’ any one thing. But he is, among other things, a nasty holocaust denier.

I realise I should not have said that Bishop Williamson is a nasty holocaust denier. I know only that his denial was nasty, in that it rejected the eye-witness testimony of victims. I do not know that he is himself nasty in any way.

 

[TrueLight]

Yikes, can we not turn this into an SSPX thread?

 

[Joannm]

It takes three bishops to validly consecrate a man, so that there is no doubt about his consecration.

It takes three bishops to ordain a priest a bishop. Only one bishop is required to ordain a priest although others are often present.

 

[WAC]

It takes three bishops to ordain a priest a bishop. Only one bishop is required to ordain a priest although others are often present.

I stated earlier that it only takes on bishop to ordain a priest, and that it takes three bishops for the consecration of a priest as a bishop in my earlier comments.

 

[AJV]

I admit that this is kind of a bizarre theoretical question.

What if a (Valid) Bishop were to go slightly off his rocker and go around Validly but Illicitly ordaining massive quantities of men to the Priesthood or to the Episcopacy? (e.g. ordaining every man who walks into a church on a specific day, or approaching random people in public and ordaining them.

E.g.:

Bishop approaches random guy on the subway.
Bishop: “Good morning I ordain you a Bishop…blah blah blah”
Random Guy: “Hey, get your hands off me! Police!”
Bishop reaches for another man…
etc.

What would be the practical effect of having lots of illicit but Valid Priests or Bishops running around parishes and dioceses?

E.g.:

“Father Murphy, as part of your transfer to the Diocese of New York, there’s something I have to tell you about St. Peter’s downtown.”
“What’s that?”
“Well, we had a little incident a few years ago with the former Bishop. Half the men sitting in the pews are actually fully Valid but illicit Bishops of the Catholic Church, and that fact has gotten into the heads of some of them.”

A receipient has to have the intention of at the very least, receiving a sacred rite. Some theologians go further and say that they must have a “virtual” intention to be ordained.