There are some "traditional" American Catholics too. Check out for instance www.atcc.com

This site is just too funny! I especially like there trumped up episcopal lineag lines. They don't even start with one of the apostles!

Joe Zollars

Thanks, Joe. Those sites are often good for a larf. Just never go to church at one of the places advertised on them.

Serge

P.S. I see a complete cast of vagante characters (Mathew, Vilatte, Aftimios, Carfora et al.) in that hilarious list of ‘lines of succession’.

<A HREF="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus’</A>

[This message has been edited by Rusnak (edited 08-21-2001).]

Dear Serge,

I certainly never would. Basements make my asthma act up . . .

Alex

Careful, guys.

If you accept the 'zap-meister' theology of sacramental validity (i.e., the 'legitimate orders' perspective) then these folks are 'legit'. And they've got the 'papers' to prove it. If validity of ordination or consecration is based upon the legitimate orders of the consecrator(s), then they have a point.

For me, I agree with the perspective of the marking of the ordinand with the 'seal' of the sacrament, but (and I suppose that this is heresy), I see this only in the context of the consecrator being part of the communion of bishops. (I keep coming back to this, but I think that the bishop and his synodal/conciliar role is absolutely critical in his exercise of the office. A 'vagante' is not really a bishop because he has broken communion with his brother bishops. Thus, his 'orders' are not really real.)

However, I have to step back a minute and realize that many of these folks were responding to specific circumstances that caused them to break communion. (I'm not talking about the 'holy orders' chasers who go from bishop to bishop to 'ensure' that their orders are valid. Or the folks who broke communion because they they had other 'agendas'.)

For those who left because of conscience, I would hope that we could exercise Christian charity towards them, and despite their 'non-canonical' and 'non-sacramental' [stricte dictum] status, we should be non-judgemental and receive them with the kindness that the Lord requires of all His followers. Even for those who are clearly 'flaky', while avoiding participation in their communities, we still have an obligation of charity and kindness.

Blessings to All!

Dear Dr. John,

An excellent, insightful post!

Despite our disagreement over monarchy . . .

God bless y'a, Suh, God bless y'a!

Alex

If you accept the 'zap-meister' theology of sacramental validity (i.e., the 'legitimate orders' perspective) then these folks are 'legit'.

As you know, ‘zap-meister’ theology isn’t Orthodox. You’re right, though, that, if these fellows have the lineage(s) they claim, Catholicism recognizes their orders.

For me, I agree with the perspective of the marking of the ordinand with the 'seal' of the sacrament, but (and I suppose that this is heresy), I see this only in the context of the consecrator being part of the communion of bishops.

Actually it sounds Orthodox.

I wonder if Don, a former vagante priest, has read this thread.

Serge

<A HREF="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus’</A>

Dear Serge,

Could we perhaps ask Fr. Don whether he ever considered himself to have been a vagante priest?

I'm sure that the Orthodox Church considers him such.

But then again the Orthodox Church sees nothing wrong with bishops collaborating with demonic organizations like the KGB, or does it?

Alex

I'm sure that the Orthodox Church considers him such.

But then again the Orthodox Church sees nothing wrong with bishops collaborating with demonic organizations like the KGB, or does it?

Alex, I am really surprised at you! That is on the same level as the secular world equating Catholicism with Nazism because Hitler was raised Catholic. Stydno!

The Russian Orthodox Church’s bishops were as coerced and therefore about as guilty — or not — as your grandfather.

Serge

<A HREF="http://oldworldrus.com">Old World Rus’</A>

Dear Serge,

Well, actually my grandfather was coerced into becoming an Orthodox priest against his will. Unless you feel that that is as bad as serving the KGB, I don't see the connection.

I don't see how this equates with collaborating with the KGB that we know certain Orthodox bishops did - not all, of course, and no one is condemning the Russian Church for this.

The Russian Church was also a willing collaborator with the Russian government even prior to the Soviet period as an arm of its imperialistic agenda. That too is a fact. St Arsenius Matsievich was among those who opposed such collaboration and he paid for it dearly.

I don't feel that I need to "stydatysia" too much about my comments. Uniates have been compared to Nazis by others on this forum. It's all par for the course.

But if it can be demonstrated that a certain bishop did collaborate with the KGB, for whatever reason, should he not be taken from his position?

Did not the Roumanian Church do this with their own Patriarch after the fall of communism there?

And my earlier point was simply that we shouldn't call Don anything that he himself would not call himself, including vagante.

As an Orthodox Christian, you or others might also question the validity of Roman Catholic or other non-Orthodox orders.

I know Don and, for me, he is what the ideal Priest should be.

Canons, rules and regulations aside, I believe courtesy dictates that we try to be civil in talking about one another.

If he is a vagante, then may we have many more like him!

I apologize for giving offense and I know I did because I have sinned in wanting to.

I should not have, and I should not have done this against a great follower of Christ that I know you to be.

Forgive me and I will remain silent for now as a penance.

Alex