Dear Peter,
I just read your latest post.
I have been pondering this for some time.
I wonder if a different approach, or an additional one, might be needed. The one thing no one talks about is that it is nigh on certain that the rite of episcopal consecration introduced by Paul VI in 1968 is invalid. (Also, the rite of priestly ordination is also doubtful because of the alteration of the form of the sacrament specified by Pius XII.) Father Cekada's articles about this argued this, and his points were never successfully rebutted. But after that debate around 2005-2006, everyone just let go of it, to continue pointing out the endless accumulation of anecdotes of heresy and apostasy.
Anyone under the age of 30 in 1968 is probably unaware of this, never heard of it.
Most Catholic men of good will who believe in Christ have no idea that the men filling the posts in the hierarchy are almost certainly laymen; that the apostolic succession bids fair to nearly disappear, and with it the channels of grace.
It occurred to me that what you might do, and the moderator of Novus Ordo Watch might do, is something like what Cato the Elder did at the conclusion of everything he wrote or said, always adding, "Carthago delenda est."
Perhaps at the conclusion of everything you post or that NOW posts, there could be a brief statement of these allegations.
The world is under an implicit interdict, and almost no one knows it or adverts to it. These poor priests have no idea.
Just recently the CDF said that some baptisms which used an improper form are invalid. There have been a couple of publicized cases in which N.O. presbyters saw videos of their own baptisms and concluded that they hadn't been baptized, so they had to be baptized and then re-ordained, but with a doubtful rite.
Anyway, here I am meddling again.
May God bless you and yours abundantly.
Comments
Post a Comment