12.11.2019
Головна » 2019 » Серпень » 4 » A 'Hidden Pope', Cardinal Achille Liénart, etc.
18:57
A 'Hidden Pope', Cardinal Achille Liénart, etc.

Question 1: First of all, about the "New Siri theorists".

Although I personally do believe in a hidden Pope, that does not necessarily mean that I feel represented by the website of Mr.X.

Whatever Mr.X writes on his website, is his personal responsibility, not mine.

Answer 1: Yes, I recall you told me that you don’t believe that Cardinal Giuseppe Siri was a ‘hidden pope’ “Gregory XVII”, because he was not persecuted by the Novus Ordo ‘church’, but felt himself safe and comfortable within that ‘church’ as a highly ranked official of its ‘hierarchy’.

If I’m not mistaken, you told me that you believe in the ‘hidden pope’ “Gregory XVIII”.

Question 2: Why do I believe in a hidden Pope? Very simple: because I am a Catholic.

Since the death of Pope Pius XII some 72 years ago, we haven't had a publicly known Catholic Pope, we only had "enlightened" imposters, pseudo-popes who followed the anti-Catholic heretical teachings of Vatican II. That means that if there wasn't hidden Pope somewhere in the world, the Apostolic Succession would have been lost. No Sedes Vacante ever lasted 72 years and it is preposterous to believe that the Church of Christ can be without a lawful Pope for almost a century. So, Catholic logic dictates that there HAS to be a hidden Pope somewhere, lest the Church be without proper guidance. If we cannot believe in a hidden Pope then we might as well stop being Catholics, because the Church would be dead.

Answer 2: Indeed, I do agree with you that the Vatican II ‘popes’ are pseudo-popes.

On the other hand, is it not preposterous to believe that the Visible Head of the Church of Christ has been a ‘hidden’ for 61 years now (not 72 years), from 1958 until 2019?

If you believe that there has to be a hidden Pope somewhere, then your belief is inconsistent with the Canon promulgated on July 18, 1870 in the 4th Session of the Holy Ecumenical Vatican Council (1869-1870):

“If anyone, therefore, shall say that Blessed Peter the Apostle was not appointed the Prince of the Apostles and the visible head of the whole Church militant, or that the same directly and immediately received from the same our LORD JESUS CHRIST a primacy of honour only, and not of true and proper jurisdiction; let him be anathema.” (1)

It would take much space in this letter to explain the reasons for a very prolonged period of vacancy of the Holy See. One can read about this topic in my articles:

“The Visible Head and Perpetuity of the Primacy”
“A Perpetual Legal Person and Jurisdiction”
“The Unbroken Succession of the Bishops of Rome”.

However, I will write some additional words in this letter.

The thesis, “Catholic logic dictates that there HAS to be a hidden Pope somewhere, lest the Church be without proper guidance”, can be refuted by just one counterargument, and that is: – This thesis is inconsistent with Catholic Teaching because it gives a pretext for any man to become a ‘hidden pope’, possessing all 'rights' to guide the Church, while the Church is commanded to pay blind obedience to a man known by no one.

Therefore, the 'hidden pope' thesis should be rejected, because it proposes and advocates the adoration of a man instead of God.

Catholics should know that jurisdiction is a visible thing, and a Pope must exercise his power to grant jurisdiction in a canonical, visible way.

A Pope in exile it is not the same as a 'hidden pope'. One cannot recall from the recorded history of the Church that an exiled or imprisoned Pope was equated with a ‘hidden’ or ‘unknown’ 'Pope'.

A Pope known to the Church, although being in exile, can guide the Church. But a person who has hidden himself from the Church for 61 years, with nobody knowing where, when and by whom he was elected, who consecrated him, etc., cannot guide the Church. It is just totally absurd to believe in such 'pope'.

How could a ‘hidden pope’ issue an Apostolic letter which must be in the hands of bishops before they would be allowed to administer the Episcopal consecration?

Also, how could bishops obtain written certificates from a ‘hidden pope’ whom they have never met in person? And how could such bishops grant missio canonica in writing to the priests, if those bishops do not possess any jurisdiction, given to them in a canonical way?

How could a bishop obtain a papal mandate for a new consecration, if nobody knows where the 'hidden pope' is hiding from the Church and his origin is covered in deep secrecy?

It is not enough for Catholic bishops and priests to have their ‘jurisdiction’ ‘granted’ by the new Siri theorists or by any other similar heretical group.

According to Can. 200 any jurisdiction, ordinary or delegated must be given by a written document.

Also, all Catholics should know that a Pope is a valid bishop. They must know the name or names of the bishop(s) who consecrated him. The date and place of such a consecration should be known as well.

Catholics must know the names of the cardinals who took part in a conclave. The date and place of the conclave should be known as well.

All required canonical documents must be presented, and all Catholics must have full certainty about all of the above mentioned points.

Therefore, Catholic logic dictates that a fairy-tale invented by the new Siri theorists or by any similar group should be rejected, because it draws people into a world of ridiculous fantasies that are inconsistent with Catholic Doctrine and right reason.

The thesis “if we cannot believe in a hidden Pope then we might as well stop being Catholics, because the Church would be dead”, is confirmed neither by Holy Scripture nor by Holy Tradition.

A Pope, mortal man, is the Vicar of Christ and a Visible Head of the Church Militant. But the Church never dies, because Jesus Christ Our Lord, as the Invisible Head of the whole Church, Militant, Suffering, Triumphant, never dies. God, not a man, gives the life to the Church.

When a Vicar of Christ dies, the Church Militant lives on, and the death of the Visible Head of the Church Militant can neither stop nor cancel out the communion of Saints, i.e., the spiritual union of the Faithful on Earth with the Saints in Heaven and the Souls in Purgatory.

The Faithful on Earth, members of the Catholic Church constitute the Church Militant; the Souls in Purgatory, the Church Suffering; and the Saints in Heaven, the Church Triumphant; yet these three Churches are, strictly speaking, one in different states. This spiritual union is called the Communion of Saints.

The Communion of Saints is based on the Love of God which never dies, as St. Paul the Apostle says “For I am sure that neither death, not life, nor Angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Roman 8:38-39)

"No Pope - No Church" is a non-Catholic teaching.

The Chair of Peter became vacant for a while whenever a Pope died. This has happened more than 260 times since the death of St. Peter, the first Pope.

So, if anyone says, “If we cannot believe in ‘hidden pope’, then the Church would be dead”, he thereby, indirectly attempts to say that Jesus Christ, the Invisible and Immortal Head of the whole Church, Militant, Suffering, Triumphant, is ‘dead’. But that would be a blasphemy.

Question 3: - About Cardinal Achille Liénart:

It is true that a cleric who becomes a freemason does not loose his power of consecration, but that power of consecration only becomes a power to ordain priests if the person in question receives a lawful elevation to the office of bishop. It is important to see the difference between consecrative power and lawful office. The episcopal elevation itself is NOT a sacrament, but it allows the sacrament of Priesthood to become Power of Ordination.

Now that is precisely where Mr. Liénart falls short. Assuming that the stories about his Masonic membership are true (which of course I do not know) Achille Liénart seems to have been a fully initiated freemason PRIOR TO his episcopal elevation, and that fact makes the elevation itself null and void, because a freemason cannot lawfully exercise a public office in the Catholic Church. Masonic membership doesn't invalidate his sacerdotal powers, true, but those sacerdotal powers never became Power of Ordination in the first place, because that demands a lawful elevation to bishop. It would have been totally different, if he had become a mason AFTER his episcopal consecration.

So the reason why Liénart’s episcopate was doubtful is NOT because Masonic membership invalidates consecrative power, but because consecrative power can never become power of ordination without a lawful elevation to the position of bishop. And that is where mr.Lienart falls short. If he had become a freemason AFTER his episcopal elevation, then there would be no problem, because once a power of ordination has been given, it cannot be undone, not by a thousand Masonic memberships.

But because he already was (or seems to have been) a high freemason PRIOR to his "becoming a bishop" that is why ordinations by Achille Liénart must be considered at least "doubtful", because masons cannot be lawfully elevated to the position of bishop. And you know as well as I do, that in the Catholic Church, a doubtful sacrament is no sacrament at all. At any rate it is a sacrament which Catholics are not allowed to receive.

Answer 3: It is commonly known that two Popes, Pius XI and Pius XII recognized Cardinal Achille Liénart to be a valid Catholic Bishop in good standing in their times (Can. 953). All Holy Orders conferred by Cardinal Liénart were approved by both of these Popes. So, it automatically means that they ratified his election/elevation to the Episcopacy according to Can. 177.

Therefore, it would be totally wrong to apply the title “Mr.” to the priest whose election/elevation to the Episcopacy (not a sacramental procedure) and the following Episcopal Consecration (the Sacrament of Holy Order) had been ratified and confirmed by two Popes, Pius XI and Pius XII.

The following facts are true evidence that Cardinal Achille Liénart was a valid priest and bishop:

- On October 6, 1928 Fr. Achille Liénart was appointed Bishop of Lille by Pope Pius XI.
- Fr. Liénart received his Episcopal Consecration on December 8, 1929 from Bishop Charles-Albert-Joseph Lecomte of Amiens, with Bishops Palmyre Jasoone and Maurice Feltin serving as Co-Consecrators.
- Bishop Achille Liénart was created Cardinal Priest of the Basilica of San Sisto Vecchio by Pius XI in the consistory of June 30, 1930.
- Cardinal Achille Liénart participated in the 1939 Papal Conclave at which Pope Pius XII was elected.

If someone says that Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII acted contrary Canon Law, then it seems that he accuses and condemns both of these Popes. How in such a case can that person call himself a Catholic?

Answering to these words “masons cannot be lawfully elevated to the position of bishop”, I can only say that there is no evidence that Card. Achille Liénart ‘was a mason’.

‘Evidence’ presented by the new Siri Theorists or other individuals holding a strange belief is false, because this ‘evidence’ is ‘based’ on gossip and silly fantasies.

Popes Pius XI and Pius XII did not investigate Card. Achille Liénart’s ‘Masonic case’ (only the Holy See investigates such cases); therefore this means that any accusation or suspicion against him is baseless and, therefore, false.

You should know that Canon Law forbids accepting the accusation of memebership in Freemasonry based on gossip. Also, no canonical warning or judiciary hearing of witnesses is permitted.

Also, you will not find a Canon Law stating that membership in Freemasonry of a candidate invalidates his Holy Orders. According to Canon Law and Moral Theology, a heretic can validly receive all three degrees of the major Holy Orders – diaconate, priesthood and episcopate. The reception of these Orders would be unlawful, but they would be valid provided valid Matter and Form were properly applied.

Lack of right intention on the part of a minister or a recipient cannot be proved, because the intention is an internal act of the will. Faith and state of grace are not required.

“The Church does not judge about the mind and intention in so far as it is something by its nature internal, but in so far as it is manifested externally she is bound to judge concerning it. When any one has rightly and seriously made use of due form and the matter requisite for effecting or conferring the Sacrament, he is considered by the very fact to do what the Church does. On this principle rests the doctrine that a Sacrament is truly conferred by the ministry of one who is a heretic or unbaptized provided the Catholic rite be employed.” (Pope Leo XIII on Anglican Orders)

Below is what Pope Leo XIII and Canon Law say about penalties for joining the sect of the Masons. Not even a word can be found indicating that membership in Freemasonry invalidates Holy Orders:

THE GREAT ENCYCLICAL LETTERS OF POPE LEO XIII
Encyclical Letter Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884 by Pope Leo XIII:


The first warning of the danger was given by Clement XII in the year 1738, and his Constitution was confirmed and renewed by Benedict XIV. Pius VII followed the same path; and Leo XII., by his Apostolic Constitution, "Qwo graviora," put together the acts and decrees of former Pontiffs on this subject, and ratified and confirmed them forever. In the same sense spoke Pius VIII., Gregory XVI., and many times over Pius IX.

For as soon as the constitution and the spirit of the Masonic sect were clearly discovered by manifest signs of its action, by cases investigated, by the publication of its laws, and of its rites and commentaries, with the addition often of the personal testimony of those who were in the secret, this Apostolic See denounced the sect of the Freemasons, and publicly declared its constitution, as contrary to law and right, to be pernicious no less to Christendom than to the State; and it forbade any one to enter the society, under the penalties which the Church is wont to inflict upon exceptionally guilty persons. (1.1)

THE NEW CANON LAW
A Commentary and Summary of the New Code of Canon Law:


Penalties Incurred "Ipso Facto" ("Latae Sententiae").

III. Excommunications Reserved to the Holy See "Simpliciter" Befall:

2. Those who join the sect of the Masons, or other societies of the same nature that scheme against the Church or the lawful civil authority (Canon 2335). (2)

A COMMENTARY ON THE NEW CODE OF CANON LAW
By THE REV. P. CHAS. AUGUSTINE, O.S.B., D.D.:

Can. 501

§ 2. Superioribus quibuslibet districte prohibetur quominus in causis ad S. Omciurn spectantibus se intromittant.

MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE HOLY OFFICE

Religious superiors, according to § 2 of can. 501 are strictly forbidden to handle or interfere with cases belonging to the Holy Office.

e) The Code adds another, viz., religious who become members of a Masonic sect or similar society must be denounced to the Holy Office. 43 Can. 2336, § 2. These and similar matters, then, the religious superiors are not to prosecute, either criminally or judicially, by summoning witnesses or inflicting penalties, or in any way that would savor of inquisitorial procedure, but refer to the Holy Office if any proof is in their hands. They are not obliged to act on mere suspicion or rumor, because prudence and charity require an investigation; but they may administer fraternal correction or admonition. The culprits may be reported to the Ordinary or directly to the Holy Office. 44 H. O., May 15, 1901. (3)

FREEMASONRY

Can. 2335

Nomen dantes sectae massonicae aliisve eiusdem generis associationibus quae contra Ecclesiam vel legitimas civiles potestates machinantur, contrahunt ipso facto excommunicationem, Sedi Apostolicae simpliciter reservatam.

Those who enlist in Masonic sects or other associations of the same kind, which plot against the Church or against lawful civil authority, ipso facto incur the excommunication simply reserved to the Apostolic See.

Can. 2336

For § 1 see supra, p. 339.

§ 2. Insuper clerici et religiosi nomen dantes sectae massonicae aliisque similibus associationibus denuntiari debent Sacrae Congregationi S. Officii.

Clerics and religious who join (nomen dantes) the Masonic sect and other similar associations must be denounced to the Holy Office. Consequently religious superiors are not allowed to meddle in such cases, because they concern matters of faith, according to can. 501, 2. But they may denounce delinquents either to the local Ordinary or to the Holy Office directly, provided there is proof, not mere suspicion based on gossip. No canonical warning or judiciary hearing of witnesses is permitted. (4)

Question 4: “Episcopate is not a Sacrament”.

Answer 4: We should keep in mind that every Sacrament has its external sign, i.e., matter and form. Since the Episcopate has its matter and form, it is certainly Sacrament.

Please see the following Catholic Teaching:

THE SACRAMENTS
A DOGMATIC TREATISE
BY THE RT. REV. MSGR. JOSEPH POHLE, Ph.D.,D.D.:

THE EPISCOPATE

"The Tridentine Council defines (1) that "bishops are superior to priests," and (2) that "they have the power of confirming and ordaining." That episcopal consecration is a true Sacrament follows as a theological conclusion."

"Thesis III: The rite of episcopal consecration is a true Sacrament.

This proposition embodies a theological conclusion.

Proof. Scholastic writers disagree with regard to the sacramental character of Episcopal consecration. Peter Lombard, Alexander of Hales, Blessed Albertus Magnus, St. Bonaventure, St. Thomas, Duns Scotus, and others deny, while William of Auxerre, Durandus, Paludanus, Navarrus, Cardinal Cajetan, and Gabriel Biel affirm it. The later Schoolmen, with the sole exception of Dominicus Soto, defended the affirmative view so vigorously that Peter Soto did not hesitate to say that it was "certa fide tenenda," and Cardinal Bellarmine characterized it as "certissima." To-day our thesis is universally accepted by Catholic divines as a conclusio theologica. The arguments in its favor are, indeed, quite convincing.

a) That there is a Sacrament of Order was demonstrated above from St. Paul's Epistles to Timothy. Now, according to the unanimous interpretation of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, the Apostle speaks in that Epistle of the ordination of bishops. Consequently, the ordination of bishops, or episcopal consecration, is a true Sacrament.

St. John Chrysostom says:"[St. Paul] here speaks not of presbyters, but of bishops; for the presbyters did not ordain the bishop." St. Thomas takes the same view. He says in his commentary on the second Epistle to Timothy: " 'Which is in thee by the imposition of my hands,' that is to say, by whom he was ordained a bishop, in which imposition of hands the grace of the Holy Ghost was given him."

This argument cannot be shattered by the assertion that St. Paul, in imposing hands on Timothy, merely ordained him to the priesthood, and that the episcopal dignity was added later and is an entirely non-sacramental complement. Timothy had the power of ordaining bishops, and this power could not have come to him by a mere Apostolic command, but must have been based on the episcopal character, which is inseparably bound up with the Sacrament of Orders.

If episcopal consecration were not a true Sacrament and if it did not imprint a character on the soul of the recipient, the hierarchic distinction between the episcopate and the priesthood could not be of divine institution. The Church can take away what she herself has given (e. g. the dignity of an abbot, ecclesiastical jurisdiction); but she cannot take away the power of conferring Holy Orders. An excommunicated bishop can ordain validly even against her will, whereas no ordinary priest can ordain even with papal permission. It follows that episcopal consecration imprints on the soul a sacramental character and is, therefore, a true Sacrament. (4)

Moral Teology:

632. Section VI

Holy Orders

The three major orders are: the subdiaconate, diaconate, and priesthood (C. 940). The subdiaconate is probably not a sacrament. The diaconate and priesthood are certainly Sacraments; and not only the simple priesthood, but also the episcopate. Holy Orders is not physically, but only morally one Sacrament.

- Priesthood confers the power to consecrate the Body and Blood of Christ, to forgive sins and administer Extreme Unction.

– The episcopate gives power to ordain and confirm.

3. For the episcopacy the matter is the imposition of hands which is done by the consecrating bishop.

The form consists of the words of the Preface, of which the following are essential – and therefore required for validity: Comple etc. 635. Chapter II.

THE MINISTER OF HOLY ORDERS

I. Holy Orders can be validly conferred by either an ordinary or an extraordinary minister.

1. The ordinary minister is a consecrating bishop (C. 951).

2. The extraordinary minister is a person who lacks the episcopal character but has faculties to confer orders either by common law or by an indult of the Holy See (C. 951). (6)

Question 5: I would not go as far as to claim that Lefebvre was a "layman", but there are enough reasons to be cautious about sacraments given by FSSPX, for several reasons, not only this one.

Answer 5: It is an obvious and unquestionable fact that Bishop Marcel Lefebvre was a valid Bishop confirmed by Pope Pius XII.

Here are some commonly known historical facts about Archbishop Lefebvre:

- On 22 September 1948, Lefebvre, while continuing as Vicar Apostolic of Dakar, received additional responsibilities: Pope Pius XII appointed him Apostolic Delegate to French Africa. In this capacity he was the papal representative to the ecclesial authorities in 46 dioceses "in continental and insular Africa subject to the French Government, with the addition of the Diocese of Reunion, the whole of the island of Madagascar and the other neighbouring islands under French rule, but excluding the dioceses of North Africa, namely those of Carthage, Constantine, Algiers and Oran." With this new responsibility he was appointed Archbishop of the titular see of Arcadiopolis in Europe.

- As Apostolic Delegate, Lefebvre's chief duty was the building up of the ecclesiastical structure in French Africa. Pope Pius XII wanted to move quickly towards a proper hierarchy (with bishops instead of vicariates and apostolic prefectures). Lefebvre was responsible for selecting these new bishops, increasing the number of priests and religious sisters, as well as the number of churches in the various dioceses.

- On 14 September 1955, the Apostolic Vicariate of Dakar became an archdiocese, and Lefebvre thus became the first Metropolitan Archbishop of Dakar. Lefebvre was the first and foremost advisor to Pius XII during the writing of the encyclical Fidei Donum (1957), which instructed the clergy and laity on the missions in the Third World countries and called for more missionaries.

If someone says that Pope Pius XII acted contrary to Canon Law, then it seems that he accuses and condemns the Pope.

The “Society of St. Pius X” under the leadership of Bp. Fellay, that is another story.

Fr. Valerii

Here the quotations from the books follow:

A Commentary On The New Code Of Canon Law
By The Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B., D.D.:

“The "missio canonica" is necessary for all who are inferior to the Pope. For as the Lord sent his Apostles, so in turn they sent others to exercise their spiritual power with authority, and without such credentials no one has authority in the Church. Formerly (up to the twelfth century) the missio canonica was believed to be included in ordination, but now that absolute ordination is possible, a distinct missio canonica, by which jurisdiction is conferred, is always required.”

Litterae commendatitiae is required for receiving strange clerics or monks into dioceses and monasteries not their own.”

“Ordinary jurisdiction is attached to the office, not to the person; it grows out of the office as the fruit grows on the tree. By law it is attached to the office, because either of divine or human law (to which latter also belong privileges and customs) certain office-holders enjoy jurisdiction in foro externo. Therefore, as soon as one is in full possession of an office, he has the power to exercise the jurisdiction appertaining to that office.”

“Whoever claims to be delegated is obliged to prove the fact.”

“One who pretends to be a delegate must show his credentials.” (2)

A Commentary On The New Code Of Canon Law
By The Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B., D.D.:

CAN. 177
1. Electus, si electio confirmatione indigeat, saltern intra octiduum a die acceptatae electionis confirmationem a competente Superiore petere per se vel per alium debet; secus omni iure privatur, nisi probaverit se a petenda confirmatione iusto impedimento fuisse detentum.
2. Superior, si electum repererit idoneum, et electio ad normam iuris fuerit peracta, nequit confirmationem denegare.
3. Confirmatio in scriptis dari debet.
4. Recepta confirmatione, electus obtinet plenum ius in officio, nisi aliud in iure caveatur.


The competent superior, from whom ratification must be demanded, is the one next in authority. Thus a provincial would have to ask the general’s confirmation; bishops are confirmed by the Holy See. Religious orders and congregations mostly state in their constitutions who has the right of confirming elections. Superiors of diocesan institutions are ratified by the respective Ordinary. The Code says (§ 2) that a superior is not at liberty to refuse ratification arbitrarily. This does not apply to the Supreme Pontiff, who, unless bound by a concordat, may, even without reason, refuse to confirm the elect. Other superiors are obliged to ratify the election if the person elected is fit and the election was valid, because an election and its acceptance produce a right.

Ratification, which must be given in writing (§ 3), creates a full right to the office, unless consecration or benediction is required to enable one to exercise pontifical functions. (3) (3)

MANDATUM DE CONSECRANDO

CAN. 953
Consecratio episcopalis reservatur Romano Pontifici ita ut nulli Episcopo liceat quemquam consecrare in Episcopum, nisi prius constet de pontificio mandate.


Episcopal consecration is reserved to the Roman Pontiff, and no bishop is allowed to consecrate anyone unless he is certain of the papal mandate.

The canon then states: "nisi prius constet de pontificio mandato." This mandate, as noted above, is given orally when the consecration is performed in Rome, but if it takes place outside the City, an Apostolic letter is required, which must be in the hands of the consecrator before he is allowed to perform the function. Without such a mandate he acts unlawfully, though validly. (4) (4)

THE GREAT ENCYCLICAL LETTERS OF POPE LEO XIII
Pope Leo XIII on Anglican Orders:


The Church does not judge about the mind and intention in so far as it is something by its nature internal, but in so far as it is manifested externally she is bound to judge concerning it. When any one has rightly and seriously made use of due form and the matter requisite for effecting or conferring the Sacrament, he is considered by the very fact to do what the Church does. On this principle rests the doctrine that a Sacrament is truly conferred by the ministry of one who is a heretic or unbaptized provided the Catholic rite be employed. On the other hand, if the rite be changed, with the manifest intention of introducing another rite not approved by the Church and of rejecting what the Church does, and what by the institution of Christ belongs to the nature of the sacrament, then it is clear that not only is the necessary intention wanting to the sacrament, but that the intention is adverse to and destructive of the sacrament. (Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae, September 13, 1896). (1) (1)

Moral Theology:

447. Chapter II

THE EFFICACY OF THE SACRAMENTS

I. All the Sacraments either produce or increase sanctifying grace ex opere operato, i.e., by reason of the Rite itself. At the same time they also confer the habit of the supernatural virtues and the gifts of the Holy Ghost.

Requirements for Valid and Lawful Administration

Faith and state of grace are not required.

Requirements for Valid Reception

Valid Reception does not require faith, the state of grace nor attention, not even external attention.

The Sacrament of Penance is exception. (7)

References:

The quotations from the Holy Scripture taken from: THE HOLY BIBLE PUBLISHED WITH THE APPROBATION OF THE CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOPS AND BISHOPS OF IRELAND. The Douay Version of the Old Testament of 1609, and with the Rhemish Version of the New Testament of 1582, Given at Dublin, May 4th, 1857.

(1) THE DECREES OF THE VATICAN COUNCIL
Edited WITH AN INTRODUCTION
by the REV. VINCENT McNABB, O.P.
NEW YORK, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO
BENZIGER BROTHERS Printers to the Holy Apostolic See 1907
Imprimi potest FR LAURENTIUS SHAPCOTE, O.P., S.T.L. Prior Provincialis
Imprimi potest + GULIELMUS Episcopus Arindelensis Virarius Generalis
Westmonasteril die 19 Oct. 1906
First Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ. pp. 36-39

(1.1) THE GREAT ENCYCLICAL LETTERS OF POPE LEO XIII
TRANSLATIONS FROM APPROVED SOURCES
WITH PREFACE BY
Rev. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J.
New York, Cincinnati, Chicago:
BENZIGER BROTHERS
Printed in the United States of America
Nihil Obstat: REMIGIUS LAFORT, S.T.L., Censor Librorum.
Imprimatur: + JNO. M. FARLEY, Archbishop of New York
New York, August 4, 1903
Copyright, 1903, by BENZIGER BROTHERS
Printers to the Holy Apostolic See
pp. 83-106

(2) THE NEW CANON LAW
A Commentary and Summary of the New Code of Canon Law
By Rev. STANISLAUS WOYWOD, O.F.M.
With a Preface by Right Rev. Mgr. PHILIP BERNARDINI, J.U.D.
Professor of Canon Law at the Catholic University, Washington
New Edition, Augmented by Recent Decrees and Declarations
NEW YORK JOSEPH F. WAGNER (Inc.)
LONDON: B. HERDER
Nihil Obstat:
FR. BENEDICT BOEING, O.F.M.
FR. BENEVENUTUS RYAN, O.F.M.
Imprimi Potest: FR. EDWARD BLECKE, O.F.M. Minister Provincialis, JULY 1, 1918
Nihil Obstat: ARTHUR J. SCANLAN, S.T.D. Censor Librotum
Imprimatur: JOHN CARDINAL FARLEY, Archbishop of New York, NEW YORK, JULY 3, 1918
Copyright, 1918, by JOSEPH F. WAGNER, New York
p. 379

(2) (2) THE NEW CANON LAW
A Commentary On The New Code Of Canon Law
By The Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B., D.D.
Volume II
Clergy and Hierarchy
Publication date 1918
B. HERDER BOOK CO.
17 SOUTH BROADWAY, ST. Louis, Mo.
AND 68, GREAT RUSSELL ST., LONDON, W. C.
1918
CUM PERMISSU SUPERIORUM
NIHIL OBSTAT: Sti. Ludovici, die Sept. 7, 1918
F. G. Holweck, Censor Librorum.
IMPRIMATUR: Sti. Ludovici, die Sept. 8, 1918
+Joannes J. Glennon, Archiepiscopus, Sti. Ludovici.
Copyright, 1918 by Joseph Gummersbach pp. 171-178

(3) A COMMENTARY ON THE NEW CODE OF CANON LAW
By THE REV. P. CHAS. AUGUSTINE, O.S.B., D.D.
Professor of Canon Law
WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY
HIS EMINENCE CARDINAL GASQUET
VOLUME III
De Personis, or Ecclesiastical Persons
Religious and Laymen
(Can. 487-725)
pp. 103, 111, 112
SECOND EDITION
B. HERDER BOOK CO.
17 South Broadway, St. Louis, Mo.
AND 68 Great Russell St. London, W. C.
1919
CUM PERMISSU SUPERIORUM
NIHIL OBSTAT Sti. Ludovici, die Jan. 6, 1919 F. G. Holweck, Censor Librorum.
IMPRIMATUR Sti. Ludovici, die Jan. 8, 1919 +Joannes J. Glennon,
Archiepiscopus, Sti. Ludovici.
Copyright, 1919 by Joseph Gummersbach.
All rights reserved. Printed in U. S. A.

(3) (3) A Commentary On The New Code Of Canon Law
By The Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B., D.D.
Volume II
Clergy and Hierarchy
Publication date 1918
B. HERDER BOOK CO.
17 SOUTH BROADWAY, ST. Louis, Mo.
AND 68, GREAT RUSSELL ST., LONDON, W. C.
1918
CUM PERMISSU SUPERIORUM
NIHIL OBSTAT: Sti. Ludovici, die Sept. 7, 1918
F. G. Holweck, Censor Librorum.
IMPRIMATUR: Sti. Ludovici, die Sept. 8, 1918
+Joannes J. Glennon, Archiepiscopus, Sti. Ludomci.
Copyright, 1918 by Joseph Gummersbach
pp. 146-147

(4) A COMMENTARY ON THE NEW CODE OF CANON LAW
By THE REV. P. CHAS. AUGUSTINE, O.S.B., D.D.
Professor of Canon Law
VOLUME VIII
BOOK V
Penal Code (Can. 2195-2414) with complete index
p. 339, 340, 346, 347
W. E. BLAKE & SON, LIMITED
CATHOLIC CHURCH SUPPLIES
123 CHURCH ST. TORONTO, CANADA
1922
CUM PERMISSU SUPERIORUM
NIHIL OBSTAT Sti. Ludovici, die 25 Aug., 1922 F. G. Holweck, Censor Librorum.
IMPRIMATUR Sti. Ludovici, die 25 Aug., 1922 +Joannes J. Glennon,
Archiepiscopus, Sti. Ludovici.
Copyright, 1922 by B. Herder Book Co.
All rights reserved. Printed in U. S. A.

(4) (4) A Commentary On The New Code Of Canon Law
By The Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B., D.D.
BOOK III
De Rebus, or Administrative Law
VOLUME IV
On the Sacraments (Except Matrimony) and Sacramental
(Can. 726-1011, 1144-1153)
B. HERDER BOOK CO.
17 SOUTH BROADWAY, ST. Louis, Mo.
AND 68, GREAT RUSSELL ST., LONDON, W. C.
1920
CUM PERMISSU SUPERIORUM
NIHIL OBSTAT: Sti. Ludovici, die 11 Martii, 1920.
F. G. Holweck, Censor Librorum.
IMPRIMATUR: Sti. Ludovici, die 12. Martii, 1920.
+Joannes J. Glennon, Archiepiscopus, Sti. Ludovici.
Copyright, 1920 by Joseph Gummersbach
pp. 414, 415

(5) THE SACRAMENTS
A DOGMATIC TREATISE
BY THE RT. REV. MSGR. JOSEPH POHLE, Ph.D.,D.D.
FORMERLY PROFESSOR OF APOLOGETICS AT THE
CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA
ADAPTED AND EDITED
BY ARTHUR PREUSS
VOLUME IV
Extreme Unction - Holy Orders
Matrimony
Second, Revised Edition
B. HERDER BOOK CO.
17 South Broadway, St. Louis, Mo.
and 68, Great Russell St., London, W. C.
1918
NIHIL OBSTAT: Sti. Ludovici, die 2. April 1918
F. G. Holweck, Censor Librorum
IMPRIMATUR: Sti. Ludovici, die 3. April 1918
+Joannes J. Glennon Acrhiepiscopus Sti. Ludovici
Copyright, 1917 by Joseph Gummersbach
p. 80, 87, 88, 89

(6) Moral Theology
by Rev. Heribert Jone, O.F.M. CAP., J.C.D.,
by Rev. Urban Adelman, O.F.M. CAP., J.C.D.
The Mercier Press Limited, Cork, Ireland
Nihil Obstat: PIUS KAELIN, O.F.M. CAP, Censor Deputatus
Imprimi Potest: VICTOR GREEN, O.F.V. CAP., Provincial, July 2, 1955
Nihil Obstat: RICHARD GINDER, S.T.I., Censor Librorum
Imprimatur: JOHN FRANCIS DEARDEN, D.D., Bishop of Pittsburg, August 15, 1955
pp. 447, 449
Copyright 1929 and 1951
Printed in the United states of America

(7) Moral Theology
by Rev. Heribert Jone, O.F.M. CAP., J.C.D.,
by Rev. Urban Adelman, O.F.M. CAP., J.C.D.
The Mercier Press Limited, Cork, Ireland
Nihil Obstat: PIUS KAELIN, O.F.M. CAP, Censor Deputatus
Imprimi Potest: VICTOR GREEN, O.F.V. CAP., Provincial, July 2, 1955
Nihil Obstat: RICHARD GINDER, S.T.I., Censor Librorum
Imprimatur: JOHN FRANCIS DEARDEN, D.D., Bishop of Pittsburg, August 15, 1955
p. 309, 310, 314, 320.
Copyright 1929 and 1951
Printed in the United states of America

Категорія: Articles in English | Переглядів: 125 | Додав: