Fr. Wiebe+:

While I personally regard the 39 Articles as historical and as a very useful 
guide to interpreting scripture from an Anglican perspective and not 
binding, I have to agree with Article 26 on this point Concerning +Robinson 
since he was consecrated by valid Bishops in Apostolic succession.  His 
consecration is unfortunately valid and so his participation in the 
sacraments will be valid.

The people who receive the sacraments from him will receive them if done 
properly and with the right intention  in spite of the sinfulness of his 
life style. This does not excuse him from his own personal responsibility 
for his own sins and so he will have to answer for his actions to Christ on 
judgment day.

As to women priestesses I do not believe their orders to be valid as that 
the practice does not have scripture or tradition to support it.  Not to 
mention that they cannot function as an "icon" of Christ.

Since the role of women was not intended to include holy orders as far as I 
can tell, I do not personally believe God would honor any invocation to 
impart the gifts to ordain them to holy orders regardless of who the bishop 
was since they were not meant to function in this role.

Thus any effort to dispense a sacrament on their part would not be 
sacramental and would be in essence a spiritual dud.  All beauty with no 
substance.

Bill+
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "The Rev GDVWiebe SSC.,PhD" <gdvw@...>
To: <faithandlife@...>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 5:42 PM
Subject: [FaithandLife] A Sacrament Is A Sacrament


>> Frater: Sorry but no informed AC can accept this statement without a
> pair of caveats at least and the principle of oekonomia. Otherwise we
> end up in chaos. If a man is consecrated by at least 2 (Pedalion/Rudder:
> Apostolic Canons 1 & 2) valid bishops then he is a bishop in the
> Apostolic succession and that is that. If the three rules for
> conferring/confecting a Sacrament (Form, Matter and Intention) are
> observed then like it or not that sacramental act is a valid sacrament.
>
> We can ask: Can we ordain a woman to the priesthood? The answer is that
> we cannot any more than we can baptise a tree. Therefore one of the
> three requirements(Matter) is not met and the act is not achieved.
>                                                                      We
> can ask:Can Mass/Holy Communion be lawfully celebrated by a parrot. The
> answer is obviously not and one of the three portions of the
> requirement(Minister) fails and the act is not achieved.
>                                                            We can ask:
> Can we baptise by saying: In the name of the creator, sustainer and
> enabler. The answer is obviously no and one of the three requirements
> (formula) fails and the act is not achieved.          "...the Sacraments
> remain valid."
>>
>>          We then come to the question of 'can we do something'. If the
> answer is in the affirmative then we must ask 'should we do
> this'? The two are related but the former is not dependent on
> the latter.
>                           Father DiBiasi remarks that the
> events in New Hampshire should not have happened but I do not
> think that he has suggested that the act itself was not valid.
> Blessings. GDVW+
>                                         I disagree. While I
> don't think we can definitely say they are not valid,
>> I
>> don't think there can be any confidence that they are valid.
>>
>> If it were only a question of Robinson being a sinner, then of course the
>> sacraments would be valid, as they are with us. But it's much more than
>> that. It is a question of intent. Should we really give the Episcopal
>> Church
>> of Griswold and Robinson such a benefit of the doubt, that we affirm that
>> they (i.e. Griswold and Robinson in particular) intend to perpetuate the
>> (One Holy Catholic and Apostolic) Faith in their ordinations? I don't
>> think
>> they do. Given their commitments and beliefs, it is fundamentally a
>> different religion. They may use an appropriate form, but they do not
>> intend
>> to perpetuate the Catholic Faith--which makes them more akin to
>> Mormons--who
>> use approprite words in Baptism, but whose sacraments the Church has
>> consistently rejected due to invalid intent.
>>
>> To put it another way, to insist that their sacraments are valid, is to
>> insist that the religion they believe and intend to perpetuate is
>> Apostolic
>> Christianity.
>>
>> Let's not do that.
>>
>> GCM+
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to:
>> faithandlife-unsubscribe@...
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Catholic Financial Services
> Send and Receive all online Payments and Donations
> No Merchant Account Required!
> https://www.catholicfs.org/
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: 
> faithandlife-unsubscribe@...
>
>