[Alex Murphy]

You see, on planet Thomas, so long as you have (1) a validly ordained minister, (2) the correct formula, (3) the proper matter as instituted by Christ, and (4) the deliberate intention to perform the act intended by the Church in this action, your sacrament is valid. It may be illicit (illegal) for a variety of reasons, and its practical effects may be suppressed by the authority of the Church antecedently; but the sacramental effects are there nonetheless.

On planet Augustine, you can be four for four as far as the conditions for a valid sacrament are concerned; but if you don’t have the permission of someone whose permission the Church has declared necessary, it’s all just dress-up and make-believe.

Ping for later

[sitetest]

Interesting read. Thanks.

[sitetest]

Dear Balt,

I have a question (or two). Meant only with the most Thomist of intentions, LOL.

If the consecrations by Archbishop Milingo are invalid, why is it generally conceded that those by Archbishop Lefebvre are not?

I can think of a reason or two. I can also think why Archbishop Milingo’s consecrations aren't valid, as well, without resorting to the Bound Powers theory that you present.

Thanks,

sitetest

[cotton]

“Is the making of a bishop a sacrament?”
My answer was ‘no’. He has already received the sacrament of Holy Orders, he now receives the consecration to fuller authority in that ‘Order’. Now I don’t have the degree in Theology, or any futher studies of doctrine officially, but base this on my understanding of Catholicism. A few years ago I took a pop test, and yes, I was listed as a supporter of Thomas.
I agree this was quite interesting.

[Legatus]

if the making of a bishop is just a consecration via the Bound Powers Theory, then the “unmaking” of a bishop is just as easy.

That's not a can of worms, that's a cargo container.

[triumphant values]

This theory, of course, was rampant in the Church long before the time of St. Thomas, which is why the practice of the Eastern Churches reflects it.1 Guess where it comes from. Go ahead, guess.... St. Augustine!

I don't know why he figures St. Augustine is where the Eastern Catholics got this, because we Eastern Orthodox didn't get it from there.

Our bishops are consecrated, and the only power a bishop has over another bishop is to excommunicate. The consecration is forever valid and irrevocable. The Catholics recognize all Eastern Orthodox consecrations as valid.

[Dajjal]

“Bound Powers” bump

[Cronos]

” if the making of a bishop is just a consecration via the Bound Powers Theory, then the “unmaking” of a bishop is just as easy” —> The logic holds, in my opinion. I agree that the ordination of a Bish is not a sacrament. Good write-up, btw.