St. Paul ordains St. Timothy as Bishop
I don't believe that the ordination of the SSPX is invalid. First of
all, you have to know FR. Abe that ordination is only a later
development in the church. Hans Kung would even say that, "There appears
to have been no ordination in the Pauline communities; there have been
no mention anywhere in Paul's letters of laying on of hands." One thing
more when we speak of Apostolic Succession it is not transmitted by
imposition of hands in purely juridical and formal manner. Primarily it
is a succession of apostolic faith. Remember too that when we speak of
the apostolicity of ministry, it demands apostolicity of doctrine, the
faith, the call of Christ, the conferring of a charisma of the Holy
Spirit for the service of the community. All these are preliminary
conditions for the effectiveness of the rite of imposition of hands.
Apostolic
succession is not also restricted to hierarchical succession in the
Church but an attribute of the whole Church deriving from the universal
mission of all baptized Christians i.e. it is not few individuals who
succeeded the Apostles but the whole Church.
Apostolic Succession is,
therefore, primarily a succession in apostolic life, faith service. All
of these are present in most Christian denominations. Kaya po, sana
huwag nyo sarilihin ang apostolic succession. At para patas po ay
i-approve nyo lahat ng comments para mabasa din po ng inyong mga ibang
mambabasa ang kanilang saloobin..jpg "Fr. Abe, CRS")
Fr. Abe, CRS
said...
[I don't believe that the ordination of the SSPX is invalid.]
YOU
ARE OUT OF THE TOPIC. THE ISSUE RAISED IS THAT THE ORDINATIONS WERE
ILLIGITIMATE WHICH MEANS ILLICIT OR ILLEGAL OR UNCANONICAL. IT FURTHER
MEANS THAT IT IS DONE WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE CHURCH.
[First of all, you have to know FR. Abe that ordination is only a later development in the church.]
REALLY? THAT HERESY IS RECENTLY INVENTED. HA HA HA...
[Hans Kung would even say that, "There appears to have been no
ordination in the Pauline communities; there have been no mention
anywhere in Paul's letters of laying on of hands."]
I DO NOT
RECOGNIZE THE AUTHORITY OF THAT THEOLOGICAL MONKEY. HANS KUNG WHO? NEVER
MIND. OUR POPE IS BENEDICT XVI AND NOT THAT WACKY OLD FOOL.
CONCERNING
ORDINATIONS TO THE PRIESTHOOD HANS KUNG IS IGNORANT OF THE FACT THAT IT
ORIGINATED NOT IN THE PAULINE COMMUNITIES BUT IN THE DIVINE WORSHIP OF
THE PEOPLE OF GOD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AS IN THE CASE OF MELCHIZEDEK IN
THE BOOK OF GENESIS AND GOD THE FATHER EXPLICITLY MADE IT AN 'OFFICE' OF
HIS 'MINISTERS' IN THE EXODUS WORSHIP UNTIL THE TEMPLE WORSHIP:
Gen 14:18 And Melchizedek, who was king of Salem and also a priest of the Most High God, brought bread and wine to Abram,
FROM THE EARLIEST LIFE OF THE PEOPLE OF GOD THERE IS A PRIESTHOOD WHICH IS FURTHER CLARIFIED AND ESTABLISHED BY GOD THE FATHER:
Ex
28:1 Take unto thee also Aaron thy brother with his sons, from among
the children of Israel, that they may MINISTER to me in the PRIST'S
OFFICE: Aaron, Nadab, and Abiu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. [Douay-Rheims
Bible]
GOD THE FATHER ESTABLISHED A PRIESTLY OFFICE EXCLUSIVE FOR
MALES WHO WILL MINISTER IN HIS SANCTUARY. THE RECEPTION INTO THE
PRIESTHOOD IS MANIFESTED BY 'CONSECRATION' WHICH IS DONE DURING
ORDINATIONS OF PRIESTS:
Ex 28:41 And with all these things thou
shalt vest Aaron thy brother, and his sons with him. And thou shalt
CONSECRATE THE HANDS OF THEM ALL, and shalt SANCTIFY THEM, that they may
do THE OFFICE OF PRIESTHOOD unto me.
SEE, IT WAS GOD THE FATHER
WHO STARTED THE LITURGY OF CONSECRATION OF PRIESTS BY ANOINTING THEIR
HANDS WITH OIL by which they were sanctified and they can minister in
the OFFICE OF PRIESTHOOD.
[One thing more when we speak of
Apostolic Succession it is not transmitted by imposition of hands in
purely juridical and formal manner.]
IT IS FORMAL AND
JURIDICAL... WHEN JESUS CALLED THE APOSTLES: "COME FOLLOW ME" THAT WAS
FORMAL AND JURIDICAL. IT WAS DIVINE AUTHORITY COMMANDING AND THEN THE
PERSON RESPONDING... IT WAS THE LAWGIVER GIVING THE ORDER AND THUS IT
CALLED 'ORDINATION':
Titus 1:5 For this cause left I thee in
Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and
ORDAIN ELDERS in every city, as I had appointed thee... [KJV]
IN CATHOLIC TRANSLATION:
Titus
1:5 For this cause I left thee in Crete: that thou shouldest set in
order the things that are wanting and shouldest ORDAIN PRIESTS in every
city, as I also appointed thee [DOUAY-RHEIMS]
THE TERM ORDINATION
REFERS PRIMARILY TO GOD'S CALL TO SPECIAL PERSONS IN THE CHURCH TO
SERVE AS HIS MINISTERS. AND THIS SPECIAL CALLING IS VERY VERY ANCIENT IN
THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH, NOT ONLY THE CHURCH OF THE NEW TESTAMENT BUT
ALSO THE PEOPLE OF GOD IN THE OLD TESTAMENT WHICH IS THE CHURCH OF THE
FIRST BORN [cf. Hebrews 12:23]
[Primarily it is a succession of apostolic faith.]
PRIMARILY IT
IS THE BESTOWAL OF THE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST GIVEN TO CHOSEN MEN WHO WILL
SERVE AS MINISTERS OF CHRIST AND OF THE CHURCH. IT IS AUTHORITY AND
SERVICE FOR THE EDIFICATION OF CHURCH AND THE PRESERVATION OF THE FAITH
FROM ONE GENERATION TO THE OTHER. IT IS ALSO A GIFT OF CHRIST TO THE
CHURCH TO ENSURE THAT THE EUCHARISTIC SACRIFICE WILL CONTINUE BEING
OFFERED FOR THE SANCTIFICATION OF THE WORLD.
[Remember too that
when we speak of the apostolicity of ministry, it demands apostolicity
of doctrine, the faith, the call of Christ, the conferring of a charisma
of the Holy Spirit for the service of the community.]
OF COURSE, THE DOCTRINE OF THE SSPX IS NO LONGER APOSTOLIC INSTEAD THEY DESTROYED THE FAITH BY ABANDONING IT.
[ All these are preliminary conditions for the effectiveness of the rite of imposition of hands.]
ON
THE PART OF GOD IT IS GRACE BY WHICH HE CHOOSES PARTICULAR PERSONS TO
PRIESTHOOD AND ON THE PART OF THE CANDIDATE IT IS FAITH BY WHICH HE
RESPONDED TO THE CALL OF GOD AND BASED ON THE SAME FAITH HE WILL WORK
ARDENTLY AND FAITHFULLY FOR THE PRESERVATION AND PROPAGATION OF THE
FAITH. OF COURSE, FAITH IS NECESSARY FOR THE IMPOSITION OF THE HANDS. AN
ATHEIST WILL NEVER BE ORDAINED AS LONG AS IT IS EVIDENT THAT HE DENIES
THE FAITH.
[Apostolic succession is not also restricted to
hierarchical succession in the Church but an attribute of the whole
Church deriving from the universal mission of all baptized Christians
i.e. it is not few individuals who succeeded the Apostles but the whole
Church.]
APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION IS NOT RESTRICTED TO HIERARCHICAL
SUCCESSION IN THE CHURCH BUT IT CANNOT DISCARD THE PRESENCE OF THE
HIERARCHY OF BISHOPS, PRIESTS AND DEACONS WHOSE PRESENCE IS ROOTED IN
THE VERY NATURE OF THE CHURCH. THE HIERARCHY IS ESSENTIAL TO THE CHURCH FOR ITS BEING APOSTOLIC AND BIBLICAL.
[Apostolic Succession is,
therefore, primarily a succession in apostolic life, faith service. All
of these are present in most Christian denominations.]
APOSTOLIC
SUCCESSION IS PRIMARILY THE CONTINUATION OF THE OFFICE OF BISHOPS,
PRESBYTERS AND DEACONS IN THE CHURCH AS WILLED BY CHRIST AND PROMPTED BY
THE HOLY SPIRIT DURING THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES. WITHOUT THE PRESENCE
OF THESE MINISTERS IN THE CHURCH THERE IS NO APOSTOLIC LIFE TO TALK TO
AND THAT IS WHY THERE IS NO APOSTOLIC LIFE IN MOST CHRISTIAN
DENOMINATIONS AND SECTS EXISTING.
STOP YOUR HALLUCINATIONS THAT
YOU HAVE APOSTOLIC LIFE. YOURS IS A BASTARDIZED DENOMINATIONS BEREFT OF
THE HIERARCHY PRESENT DURING THE APOSTOLIC LIFE.
[ Kaya po, sana huwag nyo sarilihin ang apostolic succession.]
WE
ARE NOT CLAIMING IT FOR OURSELVES INSTEAD YOU HAVE DENIED AND ABANDONED
APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE IT. BY REJECTING THE
HIERARCHY YOU HAVE MADE YOUR DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE OF APOSTOLIC
SUCCESSION BEREFT OF MEANING AND EMPTY IN REALITY. ANY CHURCH WITHOUT THE HIERARCHY IS LIKE A BODY WITHOUT A HEAD. IT IS MONSTROUS AND DISASTROUS.
YOUR VERY OWN EXPLANATION ATTESTS TO THE FACT THAT YOUR APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION IS VERY SUPERFICIAL AND EMPTY, SO WHY BLAME US FOR WHAT IS LACKING IN YOUR DENOMINATIONS?
[At para patas po ay i-approve nyo lahat ng comments para mabasa din po ng inyong mga ibang mambabasa ang kanilang saloobin.]
THIS ONE IS APPROVED AND I HOPE YOU ARE HAPPY WITH THAT.
No comments:
Post a Comment