Confessionals without Priests

Now they just need an actual priest to go with the actual confessionals…

Confessionals without Priests

The indult blog Rorate Caeli has posted an article that tells of a Novus Ordo parish that has experienced an increase in people going to confession after having installed traditional confessional boxes and abandoning the modernist “reconciliation room”. “Actual confessionals mean  more actual confessions,” titles Rorate Caeli. This is true, and by the same token, actual priests mean more actual absolutions. And there’s the problem: You can confess all you like, even in a traditional confessional box, but if the man on the other side isn’t a validly ordained priest, you’re not obtaining forgiveness of your sins (which was probably the point of you going to confession in the first place). You will have confessed but not have been absolved.

We are quite aware that this is an ugly subject to talk about, but very necessary. A lot of people who consider themselves Roman Catholic traditionalists are happy to bash Vatican II, but when it comes to the issues of validity of sacraments, they refuse to look into the matter – probably because of what they’re afraid they will find. This is especially true among the indult/motu crowd. But, of course, ignoring a problem doesn’t make it go away. Certainly, one can receive an invalid sacrament innocently, without being aware of it, and so incur no guilt in the matter, but that doesn’t make the sacrament valid, nor does it dispense with the obligation to ensure one is receiving valid sacraments.

Catholics must always go by principle, not by emotion. (This is why, by the way, sedevacantism is the only possible conclusion to come to in response to the Novus Ordo church, but that’s another topic.) The following essay was published in 1981 and explains, in an easy-to-read way, why men ordained in the 1968 Novus Ordo rite of Paul VI cannot be considered valid priests.

The New Ordination Rite:
Purging the Priesthood in the Conciliar Church
[PDF]

by Fr. William Jenkins

While the 1968 priestly ordination rite must be considered doubtful (at best) in theory and therefore invalid in practice, as Fr. Jenkins explains above, the same cannot be said about the 1968 rite of episcopal consecration: it is definitely invalid – which eventually renders the whole question about the priestly ordinations moot, since a man cannot be ordained  a true priest even with a valid rite if the bishop in question is not in fact a bishop at all. Therefore, even more importantly, consider these articles by Fr. Anthony Cekada:

• Absolutely Null and Utterly Void: The 1968 Rite of Episcopal Consecration [PDF]
• Why the New Bishops are Not True Bishops [PDF]
• Still Null and Still Void: Replies to Objections [PDF]
• New Bishops, Empty Tabernacle [PDF]