Author Topic: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line  (Read 1096 times)

ubipetrus

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2018, 01:27:16 PM »
Sede Vacante! Part Two (pages 185-212) discusses the Thuc consecrations in detail, showing most importantly the great care and great pains he went to in order to ensure that his succession obtained not merely a materially (sacramentally) valid episcopacy, but the apostolic-canonical Mission as well.  That said, obviously not everyone who obtained an episcopacy from him obtained a valid mission owing to deception on their part (Palmar de Troya) as to their Catholicity.  He was also approached by a number of Old Catholics, already bishops (s) per the orders thereof, and their concern with Thục, as presented, was not so much to confirm the sacramental validity of their orders, but to be regularized by him into the Church as repentant formerly schismatic bishops.  It is not clear as to how many of these, if any, were truly repentant of their former schismatic status.  Given the crazy direction of Palmar de Troya it is best and safest to reject them outright as even their sacramental validity is suspect.  Further inspection of each individual case would be required to evaluate the (hopefully only former) Old Catholics, and des Laurier, Carmona, and Zamora must be accepted.
"My food is to do the will of Him that sent me." - John 4:34
 

Marcellus

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2018, 03:19:34 PM »


The doubts that the SSPV have about the orders given from Thuc to des Lauriers, Carmona, and Zamora are just negative doubts, borne out of a clinging to ignorant suppositions which have all been disproved (Thuc wasn't crazy, he had witnesses, the consecrations were publicized, there are certificates, etc.).  But we don't have, at least not as a matter of any public record, these types of proofs for people like Taylor.

The certificates are available.  I was shown them before I received any orders from Bishop Taylor, and others have their own personal copies of the certificates.

Quote
Doubts about the orders that trace back to Thuc through the Palmarians are quite well founded.  The Palmarians changed the rites for the sacraments, and Adamson's lineage (and therefore Taylor's) come through several Palmarian bishops.  If anyone in the lineage was consecrated or ordained according to a non-Catholic rite (a real possibility when dealing with Palmarians), then the whole house of cards comes down unless it can be shown that such persons were conditionally consecrated/ordained in the Roman rite (by someone with the power to do so).  As far as Duarte Costa goes, I think that's a complete dead-end, and I'd venture to say that Taylor would probably agree given that he sought conditional rites through Adamson.

Bp. Adamson's line comes through Bp. Christian Dattesen.  Where is this Palmarian bishop connection coming from?  +Dattesen was one of, if not the, LAST consecration that +Thuc performed.  The lineage goes:

   Thuc > Dattesen > Salle > Olivares > Lopez-Gaston > Urbina > Adamson > Taylor


Quote
It seems to me that Taylor should definitely provide whatever proofs he has, and publicly.  It doesn't have to be super complicated, even just a free blogspot where the lineage is stated and the available proofs for its validity and posted (pictures, certificates, etc., not just of Taylor's own reception of those orders but of the men who led up to him).  There's really no onus on any Catholic to recognize extra-canonical orders, the onus is on those who receive(d) them to prove them.  For the most part this hasn't been a problem throughout the tradosphere, but here and there we run into certain clerics were legitimate questions are raised and those clerics are really the one's responsible for answering them.

I'm sure he'd be willing to hear your opinion regarding this, and perhaps you could give him a call and speak to him about this and your concerns?  The phone number for his parish, St. Basil's in Beckley, WV, is readily available online.

God bless.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2018, 09:03:00 PM by Marcellus »
 
The following users thanked this post: Vinny Zee

Marcellus

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2018, 03:26:45 PM »
Sacramental Theology 101 - WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR A VALID SACRAMENT -

1)  Proper Form
2)  Proper Matter
3)  Proper Intention
4)  Valid Minister


Whether or not one has a mission, is schismatic, is married, etc, HAS NO BEARING ON THE VALIDITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY ORDERS.

These things concern licitness, not validity. 

To say that the holiness or worthiness of the minister (or recipient) of a Sacrament affects the validity of a Sacrament is a condemned heresy known as Donatism.  This heresy has, unfortunately, resurfaced under the guise of scrupulosity of the validity of Holy Orders it seems.

God bless.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 03:40:56 PM by Marcellus »
 
The following users thanked this post: Vinny Zee

Joe Cupertino

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2018, 04:59:31 PM »
Bp. Adamson's line comes through Bp. Christian Dattesen.  Where is this Palmarian bishop connection coming from?  +Dattesen was one of, if not the, LAST consecration that +Thuc performed.  The lineage goes:

   Thuc > Dattesen > Salle > Olivares > Lopez-Gaston > Urbina > Adamson > Taylor

We'd need to also know the lines of priestly ordination.
 

Rubecorks

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2018, 04:59:53 PM »
Sacramental Theology 101 - WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR A VALID SACRAMENT -

1)  Proper Form
2)  Proper Matter
3)  Proper Intention
4)  Valid Minister


Where or not one has a mission, is schismatic, is married, etc, HAS NO BEARING ON THE VALIDITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY ORDERS.

These things concern licitness, not validity. 

To say that the holiness or worthiness of the minister (or recipient) of a Sacrament affects the validity of a Sacrament is a condemned heresy known as Donatism.  This heresy has, unfortunately, resurfaced under the guise of scrupulosity of the validity of Holy Orders it seems.

God bless.

Doubt is obviously subjective, as we know that a man is EITHER validly ordained OR he is not. God knows the either-or, but man must doubt when he has at least one good reason to doubt.

The Church says that for the importance of baptism and holy orders, a slight doubt is sufficient to treat them as not valid (because of doubt), and conditionally perform them again.

It's on the Catholic books that even Protestants who are known to use the Catholic rite of baptism (such at high-church Anglicans), are conditionally baptized when they convert to the Catholicism. Protestants are known for negligence statistically in performing that rite correctly, that is why we doubt.

This doubt will extend to schismatic "Orthodox" going back to 1929. It depends on the history of the lineage and whether any of it suffered through and behind the Iron Curtain years. If they did, they would be doubtfully valid.
 
The following users thanked this post: Nick

TKGS

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #15 on: January 18, 2018, 05:44:58 PM »
Can you clarify what you mean by being troubled by Mith's comments? In a positive way or negative?

I found a directory that directs back to http://www.traditio.com

Their list directs masses to stay away from, such as Novus Ordo Latin Masses, but notes positively if the Mass was safe (for lack of a better word.) Therefore, that was what I was looking for in the area where I'll be traveling. I checked out the list you've provided and this church is on the list from ecclesia.luxver.org as well. Thanks for the comments.

The reason I would be troubled by Mith's comments is that he indicates that he has positive doubts and concerns about the orders of the individual; therefore, I would also have doubts and concerns since I have no other knowledge of the individual.  Essentially, Mith is someone I would trust to absolutely cause me to steer clear of any traditional priest.  If he provides a reason for doubt based on his knowledge, I would trust that doubt.

The reason I stay clear of the traditio directory is that traditio seems to list any and all chapels that claim to have a traditional Mass.  The Lux Vera directory is usually quite good but when there is a change in clergy they aren't necessarily informed so one still needs to confirm the status--in other words, Lux Vera is a good starting point for researching a chapel.

I believe the Duarte and Palmarian lines should be completely avoided.  While in the U.S., I have adopted the practice of sticking to the CMRI, Bishop Sanborn, Bishop Dolan priests (in that order).  And since I no longer have a valid passport, this will likely be what I will be doing for the foreseeable future.  If none of these are available and I can't absolutely confirm some other chapel, I remain home, pray the Fifteen Decade Rosary and the Mass Propers.
 
The following users thanked this post: Nick

Vinny Zee

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2018, 07:01:11 PM »

The reason I would be troubled by Mith's comments is that he indicates that he has positive doubts and concerns about the orders of the individual; therefore, I would also have doubts and concerns since I have no other knowledge of the individual.  Essentially, Mith is someone I would trust to absolutely cause me to steer clear of any traditional priest.  If he provides a reason for doubt based on his knowledge, I would trust that doubt.

The reason I stay clear of the traditio directory is that traditio seems to list any and all chapels that claim to have a traditional Mass.  The Lux Vera directory is usually quite good but when there is a change in clergy they aren't necessarily informed so one still needs to confirm the status--in other words, Lux Vera is a good starting point for researching a chapel.


I appreciate your comments but I know you, Myth and the priest of this church just about all the same, which is to say not at all. However, Myth's comments and concerns were noted. Additionally, as I stated before, the list you provided and traditio both list the same church.
 

2Vermont

Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2018, 04:36:16 AM »

The reason I would be troubled by Mith's comments is that he indicates that he has positive doubts and concerns about the orders of the individual; therefore, I would also have doubts and concerns since I have no other knowledge of the individual.  Essentially, Mith is someone I would trust to absolutely cause me to steer clear of any traditional priest.  If he provides a reason for doubt based on his knowledge, I would trust that doubt.

The reason I stay clear of the traditio directory is that traditio seems to list any and all chapels that claim to have a traditional Mass.  The Lux Vera directory is usually quite good but when there is a change in clergy they aren't necessarily informed so one still needs to confirm the status--in other words, Lux Vera is a good starting point for researching a chapel.


I appreciate your comments but I know you, Myth and the priest of this church just about all the same, which is to say not at all. However, Myth's comments and concerns were noted. Additionally, as I stated before, the list you provided and traditio both list the same church.

That would probably be true of any other internet poster, no?  If so, why do you bother asking these questions on the internet?
"Anything, but sedevacantism"

(If you are open to sedevacantism and not a rabid anti-sede, then this is not about you)
 

Mithrandylan

  • Administrator
  • TTF Apprentice
  • *****
  • Posts: 445
  • Thanked: 276 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Divínum auxílium ✝ máneat semper nobíscum
Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2018, 09:41:58 AM »
Marcellus,

You're right, I'm sorry.  I was confusing Taylor with Neal Webster.  Though Webster's website is now offline so I can't double-check that, but looking over some emails and notes, I'm fairly certain that his (Webster's) orders come through Palmarians.

As Joe Cupertino said, that doesn't settle the issue, but it does narrow the focus.  Sorry for misleading folks.    Taylor and Adamson's episcopal lineage does not come from Palmarians. 

There are lots of questions about the ordinations contained within that line, though, with Terry Boyle's research drawing up blanks regarding many of the names and places of those in the line: (just do a ctrl+f for "Adamson" to find the relevant part): http://www.tboyle.net/Catholicism/Thuc_Consecrations.html
« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 09:43:51 AM by Mithrandylan »
I wear it for a memorable honor,
For I am Welsh, you know, good countryman.
 
The following users thanked this post: Marcellus

Mithrandylan

  • Administrator
  • TTF Apprentice
  • *****
  • Posts: 445
  • Thanked: 276 times
  • Gender: Male
  • Divínum auxílium ✝ máneat semper nobíscum
Re: Traditional Catholic Church Clergy Line
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2018, 10:05:21 AM »
Sacramental Theology 101 - WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR A VALID SACRAMENT -

1)  Proper Form
2)  Proper Matter
3)  Proper Intention
4)  Valid Minister


Where or not one has a mission, is schismatic, is married, etc, HAS NO BEARING ON THE VALIDITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY ORDERS.

These things concern licitness, not validity. 

To say that the holiness or worthiness of the minister (or recipient) of a Sacrament affects the validity of a Sacrament is a condemned heresy known as Donatism.  This heresy has, unfortunately, resurfaced under the guise of scrupulosity of the validity of Holy Orders it seems.

God bless.

Agreed completely.

Had Taylor or Adamson's orders come from the Palmarians, the argument wasn't one to the worthiness of the ministers, but to the form of the consecrations.  That is, it is a public fact that the Palmarians discontinued use of the Tridentine (Pian) rite of Holy Orders, so if a man was ordained/consecrated by Palmarians, there is positive doubt regarding the form.  But as you point out, they were not from Palmarians, so that particular concern need not exist.



I wear it for a memorable honor,
For I am Welsh, you know, good countryman.