Timestamps: 0:00 - Intro 1:03 - Welcome & Prayer requests 3:40 - Fr Jenkins "inconsistency" in referring to Fr Williamson, Fr Sanborn and Archbishop Viganò 42:32 - Where to get a marriage annulment? 52:16 - More details on Trump's assassination attempt
Some thoughts: 1. Fr. Jenkins never names his one "very reliable witness", who supposedly knows more about sacramental theology than Father Cekada and Arcebishop Levebvre. That would be the minimum for a matter so serious like that. 2. In the Eastern Rites, who were always considered as valid by the church, only one hand is used at the ordination. Why Fr. Jenkins omits that? 3. The burden of proof is on Father Jenkins to proof both hands are required to the validity of ordination.
I was witness to the two hand imposition over Father Dolan's head by Archbishop Lefebvre in June 1976. Not of Father Williamson's consecration in June 1988.
Can Fr Jenkins publicly confirm next episode he has never been made aware of the public letter by a former SSPX priest that contradicts this anonymous witness? This letter has apparently been public for 12 years.
If you look at the consecration ceremony of the TH-cam Chanell “ la Porte Latine” you can see that the 4 priests received the laying on of Hands at about 11:30 where Archbishop Lefebvre used BOTH HANDS.
I am finally convinced Fr Jenkins does not care at all about the Catholic Faith only that people go to his masses and no others, he is completely ignoring all counter points this is not real doubt its essentially slander and he should be ashamed of himself.
Fr. Jenkins. What do you say about the letter signed and dated by Fr. F. Egregyi, on Nov. 8 2012, attesting that he personally saw Archbishop Lefebvre lay 2 hands when he consecrated BISHOP Williamson? Are we supposed to take the word of your unnamed source over Fr. Egregyi?
I am Father Egregyi. I think the person who wrote this comment is mistaking Father Williamson with Father Dolan. I was witness to Father Dolan's ordination in June 1976, I was not a witness to Father Williamson's consecration in June 1988!
Dear Fr. I was referring to the priestly ordination of Bishop Williamson in 1976, not his consecration as bishop in 1988. Bishop Williamson was ordained with Fr. Dolan.
I was a Thuc witness. The Ordinand presumptuously interrupted Thuc during the Deaconate ceremony, Long wait and consultations. the peaceful Thuc was proven right. He didn't get upset but remained supremely peaceful.
Could you elaborate more on the subject? As someone seeking to find a traditional catholic seminary these talks are very upsetting. It casts doubt on every line.
Which Thuc ordination/consecration was this? Do you know which Pontificale he used? Did he record the ordination in either a local diocese register or as through his Vicar Apostolic register?
@@glennso47 The fact still remains. Necessary corrections will happen. The time will come to hash it all out. After we have the proper pope, cardinals, bishops in leadership. And they all have appropriate leadership sacraments using Tridentine Rites.
The charitable thing here, since this is now public, would be for WCB to facilitate a chance for Ricard Williamson to publicly respond to the claims of the unnamed source. What does he say happened? If he contradicts the unnamed source, and the unnamed source is not willing to step forward publicly, it's really not reasonable for this doubt to be taken seriously. As Fr Jenkins himself said near the end of the section, his own subjective confidence in a witness can only go so far. PS: Given that there has indeed been a public letter out since November 8th, 2012 by Father Francois Egregyi testifying the use of two hands by Abp Lefebvre on June 29th, 1976, the onus is indeed on Fr Jenkins (as replies below say) to tell us he has never been aware of this 12-years-old public testimony that contradicts his anonymous witness. If this anon is not willing to step up, Fr Jenkins should immediately apologize to Bishops Williamson and Dolan for spreading gossip about their ordinations. Given this, the Father-calling is really outrageous and disappointing.
No, the first thing that needs to happen is for the person making the assertion to do so publicly and not anonymously. Did this person not have anything to say in 1988 at the time of the Econe consecrations, if not why not?
@@AS-yz2iz Fr Jenkins has no standing to expect a response. The purported witness to the invalid ordination is the one who may have the right to expect answers. Btw, someone told me your baptism was invalid because the priest didn't use the Trinitarian formula.
@@nonnobis2232 Whose baptism is invalid? SSPV? They use the same rite used before any of the changes. Proper matter and form. I've witnessed MANY of them That's ridiculous. And no, the "witness" is not the only one who has a right to answers. Any priest who has accusations brought against him, whether valid or not, has a duty to answer them when questioned by anyone who is trying to do their due diligence in finding the proper place to attend Mass and receive the sacraments. There are no guarantees given to us by the authorities of the Church as to validity these days, so every traditional Catholic priest and bishop has to do their part to provide answers to those asking sincere questions.
Actually this opens a new question: Was Richard Williamson baptized in the traditional rite of the Catholic Church? Or the Novus Ordo / Protestant rites?
Some thoughts: 1. Fr. Jenkins never names his one "very reliable witness", who supposedly knows more about sacramental theology than Father Cekada and Arcebishop Levebvre. That would be the minimum for a matter so serious like that. 2. In the Eastern Rites, who were always considered as valid by the church, only one hand is used at the ordination. Why Fr. Jenkins omits that? 3. The burden of proof is on Father Jenkins to proof both hands are required to the validity of ordination.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9ob no, the first thing to do is to establish the allegation is actually true. Who saw this one hand? Why have they never gone public? Might this be a joke that grew legs? Did Fr Cekada seriously work with a fake priest for all those years? Did Archbishop Lefebvre consecrate a deacon in 1988?
Did you not listen? Fr Jenkins quotes from a papal bull by Pius XII signifying that two hands are to be used in ordination and one hand over for deaconate.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9ob it doesn't matter what happens in the Eastern Rites. The question is there is nobody who witnessed the alleged invalid ordination who has come out publicly and given testimony. No testimony = gossip.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9obyes, Pius XII I did make that distinction. . That is what popes are supposed to do, define and make it a dogmatic definition binding on the faithful.
Dear Father, when did you first become aware of this information regarding Bishops Williamson, and Dolan? You say you haven’t made an issue of it until now, but if you really believe in your heart they were not properly ordained, then surely many, many souls have been, and are being lost to hell? Those of us who want to love and follow Jesus faithfully are already feeling pinched and pulled having come away from the NO trying to figure out what is true/false. Many of us, myself included don’t even have weekly Mass to attend as it is. Should you not have spoken about this much earlier, and much louder?
The society of St Pius V has always spoken out about these doubtful ordinations, consecrations and sacraments. They have always took the "better safe than sorry" stance and offered the remedy of providing to conditionally ordain , baptize , confirm etc. to anyone who has doubts about sacraments received outside of St Pius V society.
@SoldadodoRosário it is indeed shameful. We'll probably learn the source has conveniently recently died so this FABRICATED doubt will be allowed to fester. I tell you one proof this is a lie: nobody accused Archbishop Lefebvre of consecrating "Deacon Williamson" in 1988 during the Econe consecrations because had there been any doubt it definitely would have come up then!
@SoldadodoRosárioThey do NOT think that they are the Church. They have requested prayers for other independent priests many times. I guess you don't want them to point out possible issues with other priests or bishops? We should just turn a blind eye? and Ft. Jenkins does cite theologians. Does he do it in every episode? No. I'm sure if you asked for a specific reference he would. Stop slandering a priest of God based on your own opinion. You have no proof that what he says is not backed up by theologians or Church law.
@SoldadodoRosário And you know it's pride that leads to his doubts? Because why? It couldn't possibly be out of concern for souls? It's slander and rash judgement to say it's his pride. If he was so prideful, he would have agreed to be consecrated a bishop when Bishop Kelly was, as Bishop Mendez wanted to. Shame on you for spreading your opinion that it's pride that motivates Fr. Jenkins.
@@AS-yz2iz Fr Jenkins is a gossip, but he can prove he's not by inviting the witness he quotes to join him on the show to give a detailed description of what he saw in the 1976 ordinations. Without testimony this is just gossip.
If Bp. W. is not a Bp., then the priests he ordained aren’t priests. So by now, tens, or maybe 100’s of thousands are going to hell? # for Vigano. This sounds like extreme nit-picking given the regarding confusion over what practice was commanded when and by whom. That would include me having gone to SSPX for entire Catholic life. In which case, what hope is there for correcting an oversight that happened before people were born? Of which most of us could have possibly known? So, what should now be done? How many times does one get conditionally rebaptized, redo six decade’s worth of bad confessions, sacrilegious communions, confirmations, marriages, extending down through children, grandchildren, great grandchildren. Our parents, grandparents so apparently faithful to the true Catholic Faith, given invalid Last Rites, buried falsely in Catholic graves, and presumably condemned to Hell? What hope is there for us? This is gravely scandalous to the scrupulous. If true, why do you wait until 2024 to speak out? There’s no redoing for most of us. This news, if it is news, and true, means my entire religious life is a lie, my parents are in hell along with my grandparents. It’s all a great hoax. Worse, there’s no magisterial authority to whom to appeal. Apparently, God wills for most of us to be lost.
this is absolutely terrifying... why NOW, in 2024, instead of years earlier, if he knew about this supposed invalid consecration ? enough to put folks into a total tailspin and whirlpool to go right on down the drain ... abomination !!
Stop listening to these over nit picky priests and bishops, I’m finding a lot of them have grave sins they conceal… which in my mind reveals them to be false prophets (some but probably not all); I believe Jesus is far more merciful than they seem to convey; in the words of St. Pio, pray, hope and don’t worry!! First and foremost pray for grace to overcome your sins and God will respond. I think all of us searching too deep into this are in fact dealing with scruples (me included); let’s pray our rosaries, go to the catholic masses the Holy Spirit guides us to and overcome our flesh and the world; I think simplicity is lost when we make it into too much of a science project, I’ve been finding this more harmful than helpful for me
The guidance to the true Church is not found in the Vatican II false church. The Pius X Society has adopted the John the XXIII indult Mass , recognized the NO along with their sacraments in order to be in communion with Rome. This was just the compromise that some priests have left and became independent and is when the SSPV formed to preserve Tradition. Fr. Jenkins cited the authority that we should turn to in these confusing times and that is the papal bulls of all the pre Vatican II popes, doctors of the church, Council of Trent + Catechism.
Firstly, scrupulosity is a sin, so confess to your Spiritual Director, explain the situation, and consider well his counsel. Secondly, if we're going to be legalists, bordering on Talmudists even, then we must add into the equation the following question: Can a modo proprio change the matter (or the form) of a sacrament? Don't despair.
Fr. Jenkins is exacting when it comes to doctrine, validity, proper actions, rules, etc. of the Church. This is very important for us to understand. We, in these last six decades or so, have become, little by little, resistant to "rules". As we all get influenced by "modernism" over our lifetimes, drip by drip, we almost automatically resist any information that will challenge us in any way, especially in what we "want" to believe. Since being in the SSPV we're learning more and more how critical it is to realize what it means to by holy and how much more critical it is to be eternally thankful for God's Mercy; since walking in holiness is quite a job for most of us. God bless Fr. Jenkins for his faithfulness in sharing with us and God bless all the Priests and Sisters of the SSPV.
In some Eastern Rites one hand is used for priestly ordination...does this make it invalid?....I and a friend investigated this and were able to confirm it by asking Eastern priests about their rites.
What would happen if all traditional groups came together instead of fighting and separating? You want Saints, good marriages, children who have vocations yet you all fight and add to the already confused state we are in. You all need to meet come together and fight the true enemy.
@billkelly9033 Pope or no Pope, we need to come together as traditional Roman Catholics, all in unity. Setting aside our trivial disagreements for the greater good, which is salvation of souls. We are no different than the Protestants right now, fighting and splitting. May Our Lord and Lady have mercy on us and help us to see truth.
😺He may even doubt himself😸 Seriously though, he’s detail oriented and through and he doesn’t miss. Old school and very well informed. One of our Church treasures.
Right. Because in this day and age, you should trust everyone. 🙄 I'd rather have a cautious priest intent on doing things the way the Church always did, than than one who naively trusts everyone and gets sucked into error.
@@PM-nr1yo Did he "laicize" anyone? I didn't know he had that power. You don't think it's prudent to mention concerns? And what if they are valid, and there was a serious issue with the ordinations, and people found out he knew about it and didn't say anything? Then what? He'd get raked over the coals for not making it public. Just take it how you want. If you don't think there's an issue, then go to Williamson and his priests. If you're not comfortable with them and the situation, then don't. It's not that complicated.
We know that. Public opinion is not to be trusted at all. Today it is for me, tomorrow it is against me. What matters is fidelity to our faith. We should have that conviction and stay calm.” ~Archbishop Lefebvre Father Jenkins do your words help everyone remain calm? Or do they cause distrust and dispare. Please go back to the SSPX, this separation should have never been. They have the fruits, The Holy Mass, Valid Sacraments Saintly Bishops, Holy Priests, Holy Sisters, Brothers and religious. A.M.D.G.
The fruits of the sspx? They are indistinguishable from the Novus ordo now. The laity are riddled with children apostatizing and laity who don't know their faith. Holy Bishops? Bp Fellay was covering up child crimes for decades! Holy mass? They have Novus ordo clergy in their ranks!
The implication of what Fr. Jenkins is saying is that many ordinations in the past have been invalid because theologians previously believed 2 have was not necessary for validity so in the past would not have conditionally redone the ordinations. This would lead me to doubting all ordinations that don't have a video, and videos are a very recent phenomenon in history combined with 1 hand instead of 2 being an easy mistake (as Fr Jenkins stated) so any ordination prior to videos should be considered doubtful. Therefore the net accumulation would eventually mean all priesthoods would be invalid if the bps were not valid. A doubtful sacrament is no sacrament at all so therefore I shouldn't go to Fr. Jenkins or anyone else for that matter. Ah, if only we knew this prior to Fr. Jenkins interpreting the 1947 document! Although this reasoning seems sound given the premise, the conclusion is absurd so this should lead one to at least question the premise. In contrast, council of Trent certainly defined the reduced essential form of the consecration of the holy Eucharist. However, according to what I know of the history, previously it was thought to be longer, not shorter, so the council of Trent refined it. I didn't hear any real reason to doubt those validity, as in the Thuc line bps (and in that case the SSPV argument sounds more like Donatism than Catholic).
Even if there were a defect in his ordination to the priesthood, in the case of +Williamson, would this have not been sanated by his consecration as a bishop?
No, because in order to be validly consecrated a bishop you have to have been validly ordained a priest beforehand. There's no jumping from one order to another.
@@francoisegregyi233that's not true, the majority opinion of theologians is that the priesthood is automatically conferred during a consecration. It's theoretical as the Holy See never made a pronouncement on this.
@@JacquesMigne For clarification (at least for everyone else, if you are already aware), the majority opinion of theologians (as far as I can tell) was historically the contrary (i.e., that episcopal consecration does pre-require priestly ordination). The change in opinion occurred with Sacramentum ordinis in 1947, which held that episcopacy is a sacrament rather than a mere grade of order, whereas the former majority opinion was that episcopacy was merely a grade of priesthood (thus, the major orders were considered subdiaconate, diaconate, priesthood, rather than diaconate, priesthood, episcopacy).
12 out of the 23 ordination rites in the catholic church expressly author ONE hand. This is before and after Sacramentum Ordinis, none of them in use changed. This is from Sacrae Theolgiae volume IVB - i am pretty sure this is on the bookshelf in your room in the video Fr Jenkins. You need to retract your statements and offer public penance.
Sacramentum Ordinis is online. I just slowly read it. It is pretty clear that as of Nov 30 1944, It is decreed that the matter for diaconate is one hand, priest and bishop two hands. Also that it does not have retroactive force unless there is any doubt , it should be taken up with the Holy. See.
@@joanlafleur9349 yes the matter is hands, having only one hand still does not invalidate it. Why do you reject the Catholic Church which teaches this?
@@joanlafleur9349 the Sacrae Theologiae literally references the document and says it would seem that two hands is necessary but that is not the case and then shows how sacred scripture is not clear on one or two hands and then shows that the church rites do not require two hands, and then finishes with church father's in support of the fact that sacramentum ordinis is not creating a new teaching about 2 hands.
@@JacquesMigne Why do you reject Pius XII decree? The purpose of his Motu Proprio was to settle this question because it did arise. Apparently , you're not happy with his clarification. When he stated that the force of his decree was not retroactive, it meant that it did not invalidate former ordinations.
@@joanlafleur9349 Name one theologian that states this is what Sacramentum Ordinis was for. Otherwise you have rejected the church. Aertnys-Damen, De Jorio, BAC scholastics - they all say the opposite of you. They actually have authority not the SSPV.
Okay. Thank you, Fr. Jenkins. Why not just go ahead and start always calling bishop Williamson, “Bishop Williamson.”You know, the same way you actually call NO archbishop Vigano, “Archbishop Vigano?”
So Fr Jenkins rejects all the theologians and canonists that say there is no doubt with one handed ordinations and the decision of the Holy Office as was described by Regatillo? And then you defer to YOUR interpretation of Sacramentum Oridnis (which is absurd as for centuries priests were ordained with one hand as well as easterns), over all the theologians even after 1947. And no theologians claim your interpretation of this document. This is sacramental FEENEYISM. It is the same exact logic as the deniers of BOD.
@@joanlafleur9349 it actually uses the singular 3 times. So you are appealing to the Bible over the consensus of the theologians? So you are protestant? And you reject the eastern rite priesthood? So you are schismatic? And you reject the centuries of one handed ordinations in the Latin rite? So you deny apostolic succession? Good logic there bro
@@joanlafleur9349 if you're wondering where I got the 3 times figure. It is from the Sacrae Theologiae from the BAC Jesuits in 1950s. They say scripture doesn't clearly support one or two hands. So your comment is going against the teachers within the church.
@@JacquesMigneIs one hand indicated in Old or New testament ? I think that before Pius XII motu proprio, the single hand consecration was valid but after that , his direction should be obeyed.
very simple... one hand on head for diaconate and two for Priesthood. To do otherwise is to invalidate the Sacrament. All rubrics must be adhered to. They mostly go back to Jesus Christ Himself in their institution. Fr Luc
But for centuries priests were ordained with one hand, easterns are ordained with one hand to this day, all the theologians say there is no doubt about one hand ordinations even after 1947. Pseudo-Dionysus describes ordinations being done with specifically only one hand. And there isn't even any proof it was done one handed LOL. Name one theologian that says it invalidates it, otherwise you are arrogantly lying.
Also so you believe that not following a single article of the prescribed rite invalidates a sacrament? lol. Have you ever read sacramental theology or cases in canon law? It takes a lot wrong to make a sacrament even doubtful. There are many books that talk about what part of the ordination right have to be done correctly and what part not in order to make it doubtful. Are you claiming to be a priest? Because you need to go back to minor seminary
I like Williamson, but if his ordination is doubtful, it had to be considered. I was sorry to learn, Father Cekada strayed off the trail. His personal maner of illustrating the truth was striking.
@quipotestcaperecapiat1123 . He defected from the SSPV an the apostolic succession contained therein. He went on his own over the invaludc Thuc ordinations. Donald Sanborn also defected. Pride is the issue. See what Catholic believes Ohio . There is a show which covers the issue.
If you disagree with Fr. Jenkins then do you also disagree with Pius XII? Seems to me you will walk away because it is another one of those "hard sayings".
@@joanlafleur9349 It's not about hard sayings, it's about not believing hearsay from an anonymous source and the absence of any evidence whatsoever to support the allegation.
@@nonnobis2232 That is why Fr. Jenkins uses the word "doubtful". I attend the Mass , receive sacraments, and recognize that they really do "hold fast to tradition." I am confident that I'm in the true church. If anyone wishes to receive the sacraments or even a priest from the NO wishes to join, they look into their situation and re-do the sacraments if there is any doubt.
Was Richard Williamson baptized conditionally in the traditional rite of the Catholic Church? If so, does anyone have proof of this with church registry entry reference? I understand he was received in 1971 when the Novus Ordo baptism by Fr. John Flanagan was already imposed by Paul VI.
@@rioblanco-rivas64 I do not understand what you are referring to. I am simply asking the question of evidence concerning whether Flanagan followed the Holy Office decree on the matter and the binding rubrics of the traditional Ritual and registered these facts into the church register. According to the Holy Office there must be an investigation about the validity of the baptism from a heretical sect to verify it was valid or doubtful or invalid. In the case the fact cannot be established (never presumed for heretical sects), then a conditional baptism in the traditional rite of the Catholic Church and its registration is necessary (not optional). If this was skipped then there remains a prudent doubt about the validity of Williamson's baptism. Also there must be an abjuration and profession of faith for a convert also recorded (and absolution of censures if incurred).
Understandably our country needs prayers, but bringing so much politics into this show is not appealing. There are those of us who have the opinion that the Dems and Republicans are flip sides of the same coin. If we wanted political commentary, all we have to do is scroll the channels. We do not come to WCB for that. No rudeness intended.
I think a Catholic perspective is extremely important when discerning the political situation in the world today. It's all interconnected. You can't pigeon hole what's going on in the world and not seeing the web that connects them all.
David Pagliarani current head of SSPX does not seem to be supporting excommunicated Vigano but the Modernist Novus Ordo instead Williamson also does not seem to support Vigano either unlike Father Francois Chazal Mel Gibson has come out in full support
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9obThe Eastern rite is not the Roman rite. Priest are not allowed to marry in the Roman rite, but they are in the Eastern. Does that make one valid and the other invalid?
@@AS-yz2iz We are talking about Matter and Form. If one hand is valid in the eastern rite, then it is valid in the roman rite also, even if ilicit. If an eastern priest switched to the roman rite, would his mass be invalid because of the "one hand" ordination? Of course not.
Fr., why bother? Can’t trust the Church, the govt, education, healthcare, business, your neighbors, your family. Can’t trust myself to properly hear from God. What’s the point? Why bother getting up in the morning?
@@kbeauticianYes, but if the Church’s shepherds may be imposters, ie. Bishops not bishops? Therefore, those they’ve ordained not priests, the only solution for the laity is to go it alone, trust in God the Father, the Son, Christ, the Holy Ghost, Mary, the angels and saints. Trusting in our fellow men is out as well-meaning as they may be, it’s ultimately the blind leading the blind into the ditch. The Lone Ranger Tradcat, just me and Heaven is all that’s left. Same for every Catholic who wants, no, needs, One in Whom trust can be 100% be reliable for salvation. But hmmmm, sounds an awful lot like the Protestant’s “trust in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.” There is no one on earth to look for advice and guidance in the spiritual life.
@@kbeauticianYes, but if the Church’s shepherds may be imposters, ie. Bishops not bishops? Therefore, those they’ve ordained not priests, the only solution for the laity is to go it alone, trust in God the Father, the Son, Christ, the Holy Ghost, Mary, the angels and saints. Trusting in our fellow men is out as well-meaning as they may be, it’s ultimately the blind leading the blind into the ditch. The Lone Ranger Tradcat, just me and Heaven is all that’s left. Same for every Catholic who wants, no, needs, One in Whom trust can be 100% be reliable for salvation. But hmmmm, sounds an awful lot like the Protestant’s “trust in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.” There is no one on earth to look for advice and guidance in the spiritual life.
@@mariekatherine5238 Yes. We already know the Church is in a state of disaster since Vat2. And apparently, we must hold firm to the unchanged Catholic teachings. Despite all that. >>>Why bother getting up in the morning?
Fr. Jenkins, since you have no authority, and presumably recognize this fact, how can you then say that annulments issued by the Church are "invalid" and "sanction adultery"? Such decrees issued by the proper authority - and you don't point us to any other so-called authority in the matter of determining such cases - are presumed valid and thus do not "sanction adultery." By those very decrees the Church is saying there was NO valid marriage, therefore the people involved are free to marry in the Church. These decrees are judicial in nature, which means that the matter is settled legally once a decree is issued. No one else has a say in the matter. The New Testament urges us to even acknowledge the secular powers and to obey them. How much more so the judgments of the Church in such matters? Who else do we go to? The Church has a right to judge whether or not a valid sacrament took place. But don't you see the irony involved in you casting doubt upon basically all sacraments in the Church anyway but then saying that decrees of annulment are also invalid? If all our sacraments are basically empty rituals to you, then why are you even bothering to exempt marriage as also an empty ritual? You can't have it both ways, saying on the one hand that all 'Novus Ordo' sacraments are invalid, doubtful, etc., yet on the other also claiming that none of the annulment decrees are valid! If all our sacraments are trash, then all the marriages are trash too (in your view) and thus all the annulment decrees ought to be, by that same 'logic', valid. Have you even thought this through? You claim that the entire visible Church teaches and believes in modernism, not Catholicism, so how can all these 'Catholics' even be married according to you? They would have received, according to you, teaching on a "false religion" including the teachings on marriage. They would have not been prepared for Catholic marriage in the least as they are not even Catholic, according to you, so how can they ALL enter into valid Catholic marriages which then are somehow immune from a decree of annulment? Get your story straight.
When the so-called "authority" of the Church starts doing things that have always been contrary to the teachings and practices of the Church, that "authority" becomes unreliable. Not even the Church can change the teachings of Christ. I thought that would be clear.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9ob Again, you can't have it both ways. If the Church is not the Church but teaches "The Novus Ordo Religion," whatever that is, then there are no valid 'Catholic' marriages in the whole Church, therefore all annulment decrees would have to be valid.
@@AS-yz2iz Does the authority of the Church vanish in all places and for all time because some in authority have erred? Certainly not. Any errors on the part of clergy is their fault and on them individually. Sin does not nullify God's decrees, and the sinfulness of the ministers does not invalidate the sacraments (look up Donatism).
@@MillionthUsername This has nothing to do with individual sinfulness of certain clergy. This has to do with the "official" position the NO Church is taking regarding annulments. They are giving out annulments for things that were never considered valid reasons before. They are distorting and disregarding the teachings of the Church going back to the times of the Apostles. It has nothing to do with the individuals and everything to do with the official contradiction between the current marriage tribunals and those pre V2. The rest of the mess in the NO Church goes even deeper.
Dude open your eyes up and actually read some things for yourself. There is no proof it was done with one hand, actually contrary witness testimony, and he rejects all the theologians that say one handed is not doubtful. Don't be a cult member be a Catholic.
Timestamps:
0:00 - Intro
1:03 - Welcome & Prayer requests
3:40 - Fr Jenkins "inconsistency" in referring to Fr Williamson, Fr Sanborn and Archbishop Viganò
42:32 - Where to get a marriage annulment?
52:16 - More details on Trump's assassination attempt
Some thoughts:
1. Fr. Jenkins never names his one "very reliable witness", who supposedly knows more about sacramental theology than Father Cekada and Arcebishop Levebvre. That would be the minimum for a matter so serious like that.
2. In the Eastern Rites, who were always considered as valid by the church, only one hand is used at the ordination. Why Fr. Jenkins omits that?
3. The burden of proof is on Father Jenkins to proof both hands are required to the validity of ordination.
Fr Francois Egregyi (ex-SSPX) witness against the "one hand" event.
I was witness to the two hand imposition over Father Dolan's head by Archbishop Lefebvre in June 1976. Not of Father Williamson's consecration in June 1988.
Can Fr Jenkins publicly confirm next episode he has never been made aware of the public letter by a former SSPX priest that contradicts this anonymous witness? This letter has apparently been public for 12 years.
@@francoisegregyi233 June 29th, 1976 is exactly what's in question. He's claiming an anonymous source told him that class was ordained with one hand.
If you look at the consecration ceremony of the TH-cam Chanell “ la Porte Latine” you can see that the 4 priests received the laying on of Hands at about 11:30 where Archbishop Lefebvre used BOTH HANDS.
I'm just zooming in on the book titles in the background to help build my own library
I am finally convinced Fr Jenkins does not care at all about the Catholic Faith only that people go to his masses and no others, he is completely ignoring all counter points this is not real doubt its essentially slander and he should be ashamed of himself.
Wow. What an ignorant statement.
I fear you are right.
Fr. Jenkins. What do you say about the letter signed and dated by Fr. F. Egregyi, on Nov. 8 2012, attesting that he personally saw Archbishop Lefebvre lay 2 hands when he consecrated BISHOP Williamson? Are we supposed to take the word of your unnamed source over Fr. Egregyi?
Amen! We don't need anymore division among us. And you are right, where are the facts?
💖🕊️😇
I am Father Egregyi. I think the person who wrote this comment is mistaking Father Williamson with Father Dolan. I was witness to Father Dolan's ordination in June 1976, I was not a witness to Father Williamson's consecration in June 1988!
Dear Father, Bishop Williamson was ordained a priest at the same ordination as Bishop Dolan in 1976@@francoisegregyi233
Dear Fr. I was referring to the priestly ordination of Bishop Williamson in 1976, not his consecration as bishop in 1988. Bishop Williamson was ordained with Fr. Dolan.
Yes, you are correct. Both received both hands on their heads by Archbishop Lefebvre. I know because I was there, having just been ordained subdeacon.
Individual? What individual? Need names. Need facts.
🕊️
I was a Thuc witness. The Ordinand presumptuously interrupted Thuc during the Deaconate ceremony, Long wait and consultations. the peaceful Thuc was proven right. He didn't get upset but remained supremely peaceful.
Could you elaborate more on the subject? As someone seeking to find a traditional catholic seminary these talks are very upsetting. It casts doubt on every line.
Which Thuc ordination/consecration was this? Do you know which Pontificale he used? Did he record the ordination in either a local diocese register or as through his Vicar Apostolic register?
De Jorio, a high level canonist, says in 1958 that NO ONE DOUBTS a one-handed ordination. If no catholic doubts it, what does that make the sspv?
❤Fr. Jenkins, ❤Bishop Williamson, ❤Bishop Sandborn , ❤Fr. Cekada, ❤Bishop Kelly,❤ Archbishop Lefebvre, I thank God for them all!🙏🙏🙏
YEP💯The last thing Trad Caths need is infighting amongst.
Time for Trad leadership to suspend all the quibbles. Period..
@@kbeauticianRemember when Paul and Silas split up? There really is nothing new under the sun.
@@glennso47 The fact still remains. Necessary corrections will happen. The time will come to hash it all out. After we have the proper pope, cardinals, bishops in leadership.
And they all have appropriate leadership sacraments using Tridentine Rites.
The charitable thing here, since this is now public, would be for WCB to facilitate a chance for Ricard Williamson to publicly respond to the claims of the unnamed source. What does he say happened?
If he contradicts the unnamed source, and the unnamed source is not willing to step forward publicly, it's really not reasonable for this doubt to be taken seriously. As Fr Jenkins himself said near the end of the section, his own subjective confidence in a witness can only go so far.
PS: Given that there has indeed been a public letter out since November 8th, 2012 by Father Francois Egregyi testifying the use of two hands by Abp Lefebvre on June 29th, 1976, the onus is indeed on Fr Jenkins (as replies below say) to tell us he has never been aware of this 12-years-old public testimony that contradicts his anonymous witness. If this anon is not willing to step up, Fr Jenkins should immediately apologize to Bishops Williamson and Dolan for spreading gossip about their ordinations. Given this, the Father-calling is really outrageous and disappointing.
No, the first thing that needs to happen is for the person making the assertion to do so publicly and not anonymously. Did this person not have anything to say in 1988 at the time of the Econe consecrations, if not why not?
@@nonnobis2232 Fair. His explanation was exasperating.
I'm sure that Fr. Jenkins would welcome Williamson's response.
@@AS-yz2iz Fr Jenkins has no standing to expect a response. The purported witness to the invalid ordination is the one who may have the right to expect answers.
Btw, someone told me your baptism was invalid because the priest didn't use the Trinitarian formula.
@@nonnobis2232 Whose baptism is invalid? SSPV? They use the same rite used before any of the changes. Proper matter and form. I've witnessed MANY of them That's ridiculous.
And no, the "witness" is not the only one who has a right to answers. Any priest who has accusations brought against him, whether valid or not, has a duty to answer them when questioned by anyone who is trying to do their due diligence in finding the proper place to attend Mass and receive the sacraments. There are no guarantees given to us by the authorities of the Church as to validity these days, so every traditional Catholic priest and bishop has to do their part to provide answers to those asking sincere questions.
Fr. Jenkins needs to abandon this embarrassing argument.
Actually this opens a new question: Was Richard Williamson baptized in the traditional rite of the Catholic Church? Or the Novus Ordo / Protestant rites?
Bishop Williamson as consecrated by the Archbishop. 👍⚜️God Bless BISHOP Williamdon!🙏🙏⚜️⚜️
Some thoughts:
1. Fr. Jenkins never names his one "very reliable witness", who supposedly knows more about sacramental theology than Father Cekada and Arcebishop Levebvre. That would be the minimum for a matter so serious like that.
2. In the Eastern Rites, who were always considered as valid by the church, only one hand is used at the ordination. Why Fr. Jenkins omits that?
3. The burden of proof is on Father Jenkins to proof both hands are required to the validity of ordination.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9ob no, the first thing to do is to establish the allegation is actually true. Who saw this one hand? Why have they never gone public? Might this be a joke that grew legs? Did Fr Cekada seriously work with a fake priest for all those years? Did Archbishop Lefebvre consecrate a deacon in 1988?
Did you not listen? Fr Jenkins quotes from a papal bull by Pius XII signifying that two hands are to be used in ordination and one hand over for deaconate.
@@joanlafleur9349 Does Pius VII say that 2 hands are necessary for the validity? In the Eastern Rites only 1 hand is used.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9ob it doesn't matter what happens in the Eastern Rites. The question is there is nobody who witnessed the alleged invalid ordination who has come out publicly and given testimony. No testimony = gossip.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9obyes, Pius XII I did make that distinction. . That is what popes are supposed to do, define and make it a dogmatic definition binding on the faithful.
Dear Father, when did you first become aware of this information regarding Bishops Williamson, and Dolan?
You say you haven’t made an issue of it until now, but if you really believe in your heart they were not properly ordained, then surely many, many souls have been, and are being lost to hell?
Those of us who want to love and follow Jesus faithfully are already feeling pinched and pulled having come away from the NO trying to figure out what is true/false. Many of us, myself included don’t even have weekly Mass to attend as it is. Should you not have spoken about this much earlier, and much louder?
The society of St Pius V has always spoken out about these doubtful ordinations, consecrations and sacraments. They have always took the "better safe than sorry" stance and offered the remedy of providing to conditionally ordain , baptize , confirm etc. to anyone who has doubts about sacraments received outside of St Pius V society.
@SoldadodoRosário it is indeed shameful. We'll probably learn the source has conveniently recently died so this FABRICATED doubt will be allowed to fester. I tell you one proof this is a lie: nobody accused Archbishop Lefebvre of consecrating "Deacon Williamson" in 1988 during the Econe consecrations because had there been any doubt it definitely would have come up then!
@SoldadodoRosárioThey do NOT think that they are the Church. They have requested prayers for other independent priests many times. I guess you don't want them to point out possible issues with other priests or bishops? We should just turn a blind eye? and Ft. Jenkins does cite theologians. Does he do it in every episode? No. I'm sure if you asked for a specific reference he would. Stop slandering a priest of God based on your own opinion. You have no proof that what he says is not backed up by theologians or Church law.
@SoldadodoRosário And you know it's pride that leads to his doubts? Because why? It couldn't possibly be out of concern for souls? It's slander and rash judgement to say it's his pride. If he was so prideful, he would have agreed to be consecrated a bishop when Bishop Kelly was, as Bishop Mendez wanted to. Shame on you for spreading your opinion that it's pride that motivates Fr. Jenkins.
@@AS-yz2iz Fr Jenkins is a gossip, but he can prove he's not by inviting the witness he quotes to join him on the show to give a detailed description of what he saw in the 1976 ordinations. Without testimony this is just gossip.
If Bp. W. is not a Bp., then the priests he ordained aren’t priests. So by now, tens, or maybe 100’s of thousands are going to hell? # for Vigano. This sounds like extreme nit-picking given the regarding confusion over what practice was commanded when and by whom. That would include me having gone to SSPX for entire Catholic life. In which case, what hope is there for correcting an oversight that happened before people were born? Of which most of us could have possibly known? So, what should now be done? How many times does one get conditionally rebaptized, redo six decade’s worth of bad confessions, sacrilegious communions, confirmations, marriages, extending down through children, grandchildren, great grandchildren. Our parents, grandparents so apparently faithful to the true Catholic Faith, given invalid Last Rites, buried falsely in Catholic graves, and presumably condemned to Hell?
What hope is there for us?
This is gravely scandalous to the scrupulous.
If true, why do you wait until 2024 to speak out?
There’s no redoing for most of us. This news, if it is news, and true, means my entire religious life is a lie, my parents are in hell along with my grandparents.
It’s all a great hoax. Worse, there’s no magisterial authority to whom to appeal. Apparently, God wills for most of us to be lost.
this is absolutely terrifying... why NOW, in 2024, instead of years earlier, if he knew about this supposed invalid consecration ? enough to put folks into a total tailspin and whirlpool to go right on down the drain ... abomination !!
Stop listening to these over nit picky priests and bishops, I’m finding a lot of them have grave sins they conceal… which in my mind reveals them to be false prophets (some but probably not all); I believe Jesus is far more merciful than they seem to convey; in the words of St. Pio, pray, hope and don’t worry!! First and foremost pray for grace to overcome your sins and God will respond. I think all of us searching too deep into this are in fact dealing with scruples (me included); let’s pray our rosaries, go to the catholic masses the Holy Spirit guides us to and overcome our flesh and the world; I think simplicity is lost when we make it into too much of a science project, I’ve been finding this more harmful than helpful for me
Yes, indeed, It's just more misinformation on current clergy.
The guidance to the true Church is not found in the Vatican II false church. The Pius X Society has adopted the John the XXIII indult Mass , recognized the NO along with their sacraments in order to be in communion with Rome. This was just the compromise that some priests have left and became independent and is when the SSPV formed to preserve Tradition. Fr. Jenkins cited the authority that we should turn to in these confusing times and that is the papal bulls of all the pre Vatican II popes, doctors of the church, Council of Trent + Catechism.
Firstly, scrupulosity is a sin, so confess to your Spiritual Director, explain the situation, and consider well his counsel.
Secondly, if we're going to be legalists, bordering on Talmudists even, then we must add into the equation the following question: Can a modo proprio change the matter (or the form) of a sacrament?
Don't despair.
Fr. Jenkins is exacting when it comes to doctrine, validity, proper actions, rules, etc. of the Church. This is very important for us to understand. We, in these last six decades or so, have become, little by little, resistant to "rules". As we all get influenced by "modernism" over our lifetimes, drip by drip, we almost automatically resist any information that will challenge us in any way, especially in what we "want" to believe. Since being in the SSPV we're learning more and more how critical it is to realize what it means to by holy and how much more critical it is to be eternally thankful for God's Mercy; since walking in holiness is quite a job for most of us. God bless Fr. Jenkins for his faithfulness in sharing with us and God bless all the Priests and Sisters of the SSPV.
@@marynadononeillCreates schism? How so?
Denying holy communion to people is a big deal so sspv has made a big deal of this.
In some Eastern Rites one hand is used for priestly ordination...does this make it invalid?....I and a friend investigated this and were able to confirm it by asking Eastern priests about their rites.
Where can we find Bishops and Priests not ordained or consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre, or Archbishop Thuc? It now seems that both are doubtful?
What would happen if all traditional groups came together instead of fighting and separating?
You want Saints, good marriages, children who have vocations yet you all fight and add to the already confused state we are in.
You all need to meet come together and fight the true enemy.
Perfect proof that we have no Pope who would step in and settle the matter.
@billkelly9033
Pope or no Pope, we need to come together as traditional Roman Catholics, all in unity. Setting aside our trivial disagreements for the greater good, which is salvation of souls.
We are no different than the Protestants right now, fighting and splitting.
May Our Lord and Lady have mercy on us and help us to see truth.
This priest has doubts about everyone. He may even doubt himself. God bless Bishop Williamson,the greatest man of God.😊
😺He may even doubt himself😸
Seriously though, he’s detail oriented and through and he doesn’t miss. Old school and very well informed. One of our Church treasures.
Right. Because in this day and age, you should trust everyone. 🙄 I'd rather have a cautious priest intent on doing things the way the Church always did, than than one who naively trusts everyone and gets sucked into error.
@@PM-nr1yo Did he "laicize" anyone? I didn't know he had that power. You don't think it's prudent to mention concerns? And what if they are valid, and there was a serious issue with the ordinations, and people found out he knew about it and didn't say anything? Then what? He'd get raked over the coals for not making it public. Just take it how you want. If you don't think there's an issue, then go to Williamson and his priests. If you're not comfortable with them and the situation, then don't. It's not that complicated.
We know that. Public opinion is not to be trusted at all. Today it is for me, tomorrow it is against me. What matters is fidelity to our faith. We should have that conviction and stay calm.” ~Archbishop Lefebvre
Father Jenkins do your words help everyone remain calm? Or do they cause distrust and dispare.
Please go back to the SSPX, this separation should have never been. They have the fruits, The Holy Mass, Valid Sacraments Saintly Bishops, Holy Priests, Holy Sisters, Brothers and religious.
A.M.D.G.
The fruits of the sspx? They are indistinguishable from the Novus ordo now. The laity are riddled with children apostatizing and laity who don't know their faith. Holy Bishops? Bp Fellay was covering up child crimes for decades! Holy mass? They have Novus ordo clergy in their ranks!
The implication of what Fr. Jenkins is saying is that many ordinations in the past have been invalid because theologians previously believed 2 have was not necessary for validity so in the past would not have conditionally redone the ordinations. This would lead me to doubting all ordinations that don't have a video, and videos are a very recent phenomenon in history combined with 1 hand instead of 2 being an easy mistake (as Fr Jenkins stated) so any ordination prior to videos should be considered doubtful. Therefore the net accumulation would eventually mean all priesthoods would be invalid if the bps were not valid. A doubtful sacrament is no sacrament at all so therefore I shouldn't go to Fr. Jenkins or anyone else for that matter. Ah, if only we knew this prior to Fr. Jenkins interpreting the 1947 document!
Although this reasoning seems sound given the premise, the conclusion is absurd so this should lead one to at least question the premise.
In contrast, council of Trent certainly defined the reduced essential form of the consecration of the holy Eucharist. However, according to what I know of the history, previously it was thought to be longer, not shorter, so the council of Trent refined it.
I didn't hear any real reason to doubt those validity, as in the Thuc line bps (and in that case the SSPV argument sounds more like Donatism than Catholic).
The video is called “ Le sacre episcopaux”( something like that)
Even if there were a defect in his ordination to the priesthood, in the case of +Williamson, would this have not been sanated by his consecration as a bishop?
No, because in order to be validly consecrated a bishop you have to have been validly ordained a priest beforehand. There's no jumping from one order to another.
@@francoisegregyi233that's not true, the majority opinion of theologians is that the priesthood is automatically conferred during a consecration. It's theoretical as the Holy See never made a pronouncement on this.
@@JacquesMigne For clarification (at least for everyone else, if you are already aware), the majority opinion of theologians (as far as I can tell) was historically the contrary (i.e., that episcopal consecration does pre-require priestly ordination). The change in opinion occurred with Sacramentum ordinis in 1947, which held that episcopacy is a sacrament rather than a mere grade of order, whereas the former majority opinion was that episcopacy was merely a grade of priesthood (thus, the major orders were considered subdiaconate, diaconate, priesthood, rather than diaconate, priesthood, episcopacy).
12 out of the 23 ordination rites in the catholic church expressly author ONE hand. This is before and after Sacramentum Ordinis, none of them in use changed. This is from Sacrae Theolgiae volume IVB - i am pretty sure this is on the bookshelf in your room in the video Fr Jenkins.
You need to retract your statements and offer public penance.
Sacramentum Ordinis is online. I just slowly read it. It is pretty clear that as of Nov 30 1944, It is decreed that the matter for diaconate is one hand, priest and bishop two hands. Also that it does not have retroactive force unless there is any doubt , it should be taken up with the Holy. See.
@@joanlafleur9349 yes the matter is hands, having only one hand still does not invalidate it. Why do you reject the Catholic Church which teaches this?
@@joanlafleur9349 the Sacrae Theologiae literally references the document and says it would seem that two hands is necessary but that is not the case and then shows how sacred scripture is not clear on one or two hands and then shows that the church rites do not require two hands, and then finishes with church father's in support of the fact that sacramentum ordinis is not creating a new teaching about 2 hands.
@@JacquesMigne Why do you reject Pius XII decree? The purpose of his Motu Proprio was to settle this question because it did arise. Apparently , you're not happy with his clarification. When he stated that the force of his decree was not retroactive, it meant that it did not invalidate former ordinations.
@@joanlafleur9349 Name one theologian that states this is what Sacramentum Ordinis was for. Otherwise you have rejected the church. Aertnys-Damen, De Jorio, BAC scholastics - they all say the opposite of you. They actually have authority not the SSPV.
Okay. Thank you, Fr. Jenkins.
Why not just go ahead and start always calling bishop Williamson, “Bishop Williamson.”You know, the same way you actually call NO archbishop Vigano, “Archbishop Vigano?”
He answered that question. I guess you weren't listening.
How can one think they can get an annulment by the false church?
So Fr Jenkins rejects all the theologians and canonists that say there is no doubt with one handed ordinations and the decision of the Holy Office as was described by Regatillo?
And then you defer to YOUR interpretation of Sacramentum Oridnis (which is absurd as for centuries priests were ordained with one hand as well as easterns), over all the theologians even after 1947. And no theologians claim your interpretation of this document.
This is sacramental FEENEYISM. It is the same exact logic as the deniers of BOD.
Scripture says "hands" not hand
@@joanlafleur9349 it actually uses the singular 3 times.
So you are appealing to the Bible over the consensus of the theologians? So you are protestant? And you reject the eastern rite priesthood? So you are schismatic? And you reject the centuries of one handed ordinations in the Latin rite? So you deny apostolic succession?
Good logic there bro
@@joanlafleur9349 if you're wondering where I got the 3 times figure. It is from the Sacrae Theologiae from the BAC Jesuits in 1950s. They say scripture doesn't clearly support one or two hands. So your comment is going against the teachers within the church.
@@JacquesMigneIs one hand indicated in Old or New testament ? I think that before Pius XII motu proprio, the single hand consecration was valid but after that , his direction should be obeyed.
Don't theologians get their material from the Bible?
Should take up with Our Father and except His response
Jesus Mary and Joseph ❤
😁Ikr😂😂
very simple... one hand on head for diaconate and two for Priesthood. To do otherwise is to invalidate the Sacrament. All rubrics must be adhered to. They mostly go back to Jesus Christ Himself in their institution. Fr Luc
But for centuries priests were ordained with one hand, easterns are ordained with one hand to this day, all the theologians say there is no doubt about one hand ordinations even after 1947. Pseudo-Dionysus describes ordinations being done with specifically only one hand. And there isn't even any proof it was done one handed LOL. Name one theologian that says it invalidates it, otherwise you are arrogantly lying.
Also so you believe that not following a single article of the prescribed rite invalidates a sacrament? lol. Have you ever read sacramental theology or cases in canon law? It takes a lot wrong to make a sacrament even doubtful. There are many books that talk about what part of the ordination right have to be done correctly and what part not in order to make it doubtful.
Are you claiming to be a priest? Because you need to go back to minor seminary
I like Williamson, but if his ordination is doubtful, it had to be considered. I was sorry to learn, Father Cekada strayed off the trail. His personal maner of illustrating the truth was striking.
@quipotestcaperecapiat1123 . He defected from the SSPV an the apostolic succession contained therein. He went on his own over the invaludc Thuc ordinations. Donald Sanborn also defected. Pride is the issue. See what Catholic believes Ohio . There is a show which covers the issue.
Gods will be done
That part.
I am Roman Catholic
This is the last time I watch this non-sense.
Me too. This is the first I've ever heard of this and I've been in the Trad world since 2001!
If you disagree with Fr. Jenkins then do you also disagree with Pius XII? Seems to me you will walk away because it is another one of those "hard sayings".
@@joanlafleur9349 Yeah. Ok. Good luck with the nuts.
@@joanlafleur9349 It's not about hard sayings, it's about not believing hearsay from an anonymous source and the absence of any evidence whatsoever to support the allegation.
@@nonnobis2232 That is why Fr. Jenkins uses the word "doubtful". I attend the Mass , receive sacraments, and recognize that they really do "hold fast to tradition." I am confident that I'm in the true church. If anyone wishes to receive the sacraments or even a priest from the NO wishes to join, they look into their situation and re-do the sacraments if there is any doubt.
The clergy who do not have a focus upon the sufferings of the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, need to repent of the frivolity of their lives.
Was Richard Williamson baptized conditionally in the traditional rite of the Catholic Church? If so, does anyone have proof of this with church registry entry reference? I understand he was received in 1971 when the Novus Ordo baptism by Fr. John Flanagan was already imposed by Paul VI.
You don’t understand how baptismal validity works
@@rioblanco-rivas64 I do not understand what you are referring to. I am simply asking the question of evidence concerning whether Flanagan followed the Holy Office decree on the matter and the binding rubrics of the traditional Ritual and registered these facts into the church register. According to the Holy Office there must be an investigation about the validity of the baptism from a heretical sect to verify it was valid or doubtful or invalid. In the case the fact cannot be established (never presumed for heretical sects), then a conditional baptism in the traditional rite of the Catholic Church and its registration is necessary (not optional). If this was skipped then there remains a prudent doubt about the validity of Williamson's baptism. Also there must be an abjuration and profession of faith for a convert also recorded (and absolution of censures if incurred).
Fr Jenkins, please humbly stand corrected and publicly correct your video. Kind regards, we watch your videos a lot
Understandably our country needs prayers, but bringing so much politics into this show is not appealing. There are those of us who have the opinion that the Dems and Republicans are flip sides of the same coin. If we wanted political commentary, all we have to do is scroll the channels. We do not come to WCB for that. No rudeness intended.
I agree 👍
I think a Catholic perspective is extremely important when discerning the political situation in the world today. It's all interconnected. You can't pigeon hole what's going on in the world and not seeing the web that connects them all.
Agree
David Pagliarani current head of SSPX does not seem to be supporting excommunicated Vigano but the Modernist Novus Ordo instead
Williamson also does not seem to support Vigano either unlike Father Francois Chazal
Mel Gibson has come out in full support
3. The burden of proof in on Father Jenkins to proof both hands are required to the validity of ordination.
@James_RC The Church can't change the matter and form of the sacraments. If one hand was valid in the Eastern Rites, it will always be valid.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9obThe Eastern rite is not the Roman rite. Priest are not allowed to marry in the Roman rite, but they are in the Eastern. Does that make one valid and the other invalid?
@@AS-yz2iz We are talking about Matter and Form. If one hand is valid in the eastern rite, then it is valid in the roman rite also, even if ilicit. If an eastern priest switched to the roman rite, would his mass be invalid because of the "one hand" ordination? Of course not.
Fr., why bother? Can’t trust the Church, the govt, education, healthcare, business, your neighbors, your family. Can’t trust myself to properly hear from God. What’s the point? Why bother getting up in the morning?
Hope. Faith. THE FAITH is why.
KEEP THE FAITH.
I think you know the answer.
@@kbeauticianYes, but if the Church’s shepherds may be imposters, ie. Bishops not bishops? Therefore, those they’ve ordained not priests, the only solution for the laity is to go it alone, trust in God the Father, the Son, Christ, the Holy Ghost, Mary, the angels and saints. Trusting in our fellow men is out as well-meaning as they may be, it’s ultimately the blind leading the blind into the ditch.
The Lone Ranger Tradcat, just me and Heaven is all that’s left. Same for every Catholic who wants, no, needs, One in Whom trust can be 100% be reliable for salvation. But hmmmm, sounds an awful lot like the Protestant’s “trust in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.” There is no one on earth to look for advice and guidance in the spiritual life.
@@kbeauticianYes, but if the Church’s shepherds may be imposters, ie. Bishops not bishops? Therefore, those they’ve ordained not priests, the only solution for the laity is to go it alone, trust in God the Father, the Son, Christ, the Holy Ghost, Mary, the angels and saints. Trusting in our fellow men is out as well-meaning as they may be, it’s ultimately the blind leading the blind into the ditch.
The Lone Ranger Tradcat, just me and Heaven is all that’s left. Same for every Catholic who wants, no, needs, One in Whom trust can be 100% be reliable for salvation. But hmmmm, sounds an awful lot like the Protestant’s “trust in Jesus Christ as your personal Lord and Savior.” There is no one on earth to look for advice and guidance in the spiritual life.
@@mariekatherine5238
Yes.
We already know the Church is in a state of disaster since Vat2.
And apparently, we must hold firm to the unchanged Catholic teachings.
Despite all that.
>>>Why bother getting up in the morning?
Fr. Jenkins, since you have no authority, and presumably recognize this fact, how can you then say that annulments issued by the Church are "invalid" and "sanction adultery"? Such decrees issued by the proper authority - and you don't point us to any other so-called authority in the matter of determining such cases - are presumed valid and thus do not "sanction adultery." By those very decrees the Church is saying there was NO valid marriage, therefore the people involved are free to marry in the Church. These decrees are judicial in nature, which means that the matter is settled legally once a decree is issued. No one else has a say in the matter. The New Testament urges us to even acknowledge the secular powers and to obey them. How much more so the judgments of the Church in such matters? Who else do we go to?
The Church has a right to judge whether or not a valid sacrament took place. But don't you see the irony involved in you casting doubt upon basically all sacraments in the Church anyway but then saying that decrees of annulment are also invalid? If all our sacraments are basically empty rituals to you, then why are you even bothering to exempt marriage as also an empty ritual? You can't have it both ways, saying on the one hand that all 'Novus Ordo' sacraments are invalid, doubtful, etc., yet on the other also claiming that none of the annulment decrees are valid! If all our sacraments are trash, then all the marriages are trash too (in your view) and thus all the annulment decrees ought to be, by that same 'logic', valid. Have you even thought this through? You claim that the entire visible Church teaches and believes in modernism, not Catholicism, so how can all these 'Catholics' even be married according to you? They would have received, according to you, teaching on a "false religion" including the teachings on marriage. They would have not been prepared for Catholic marriage in the least as they are not even Catholic, according to you, so how can they ALL enter into valid Catholic marriages which then are somehow immune from a decree of annulment? Get your story straight.
The Novus Ordo Religion is not the Catholic Church. They have no authority to do anything.
When the so-called "authority" of the Church starts doing things that have always been contrary to the teachings and practices of the Church, that "authority" becomes unreliable. Not even the Church can change the teachings of Christ. I thought that would be clear.
@@MichaelHellmann-jy9ob Again, you can't have it both ways. If the Church is not the Church but teaches "The Novus Ordo Religion," whatever that is, then there are no valid 'Catholic' marriages in the whole Church, therefore all annulment decrees would have to be valid.
@@AS-yz2iz Does the authority of the Church vanish in all places and for all time because some in authority have erred? Certainly not. Any errors on the part of clergy is their fault and on them individually. Sin does not nullify God's decrees, and the sinfulness of the ministers does not invalidate the sacraments (look up Donatism).
@@MillionthUsername This has nothing to do with individual sinfulness of certain clergy. This has to do with the "official" position the NO Church is taking regarding annulments. They are giving out annulments for things that were never considered valid reasons before. They are distorting and disregarding the teachings of the Church going back to the times of the Apostles. It has nothing to do with the individuals and everything to do with the official contradiction between the current marriage tribunals and those pre V2.
The rest of the mess in the NO Church goes even deeper.
this would be such a blatant mistake it would be unbelievable. Ngo Dinh Thuc had similar accusations.
Wow! Father Jenkins gave an irrefutable answer to the diabolically disoriented and they still have itching ears. 😑
@@joanlafleur9349 it's not remotely irrefutable. It's hearsay, he didn't witness the event and can't even name who has. It's gossip!
Dude open your eyes up and actually read some things for yourself. There is no proof it was done with one hand, actually contrary witness testimony, and he rejects all the theologians that say one handed is not doubtful. Don't be a cult member be a Catholic.
I value tradition, but humans make errors. Forgive tthe error and do not make a giant isssue out of it.
Yes, but once the error is recognized, it should be rectified. The SSPV has offered a do-over.
You can always forgive error, but that doesn't make the error disappear.
Have they even said what hit his ear?
You ought to fear Trump getting back in office
Why is Bishop Williamson now "Father Williamson?"