Milingo madness, part II - Archbishop installs 4 married bishops

Bettnet ^ | September 25, 2006 | Domenico Bettinelli

[NYer]

Any question as to whether Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo has been excommunicated has been settled because this past weekend he ordained four married men as Catholic bishops. While the Archdiocese of Washington tries to wish this away by saying, “This means nothing within the church,” according to spokesman Susan Gibbs, the fact is that these are valid, if illicit, ordinations. (Unlike the women who attempted ordination as priests this past summer; those were clearly invalid and illicit.)

It’s amusing that one of the four is George Stallings, a schismatic Catholic priest who was calling himself archbishop before. Apparently Milingo’s ordination of him as bishop is a demotion. All five of them claim affiliation with the schismatic Old Catholic Churches.

What’s not amusing is that these five men are now officially excommunicated, if they had not been before, according to Ed Peters. Make no mistake that this is a very serious matter that can and probably will lead many well-meaning Catholics into schism.

I don’t think we can blame Rome for this one, except to ask how this guy got ordained to the episcopacy in the first place. Other than that, you have to ask what could have been done short of locking him up in Castel Sant’Angelo for the rest of his life. He is a loose cannon with no regard for what’s right, obviously an egomaniac with a dubious grip on reality.

Pray for him and for the four men he ordained and their wives that they can repent and avoid the fires of hell.

[NYer]

Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo hugs his wife Maria Milingo while speaking at the Married Priests Conference in Saddle Brook, N.J. on Sunday, Sept. 17, 2006. Archbishop Milingo, whose 2001 marriage caused international scandal within the Roman Catholic Church, pledge to continue to lobby for optional celibacy despite the threat of excommunication. (AP Photo/Tim Larsen)

[wideawake]

There is no presumption that these "consecrations" are valid.

(1) Milingo is mentally unbalanced, and may therefore lack the ability to form the intent necessary for a consecration.

(2) Nowhere in Christendom does any diocese possessed of apostolic succession ordain married men to the episcopacy. It is hard to argue that Milingo "intended to do as the Church does" when he performed this fraudulent ceremony.

[TaxachusettsMan]

Here's the ecclesiastical backgound of one of these stellar churchmen, Peter Paul Brennan:

see: http://www.tboyle.net/Catholicism/The_Costa_lines-_A-E/The_Brennan_lineage.html

Peter Paul Brennan (b. in 1941; still living)

1. Ordained a priest for the Old Roman Catholic Church in North America (Ultrajectine Tradition), on 05/20/1972 at St. Philomena's Chapel, Paterson, New Jersey, by Richard Arthur Marchenna, a bishop of the Old Roman Catholic Church in North America (Ultrajectine Tradition),

2. Later ordained a priest, sub conditione, for the African Orthodox Church, on 06/29/1974 at Our Lady Queen of Heaven Church, Mastic Beach, Long Island, New York, by Francis Anthony Vogt, a bishop of the African Orthodox Church.

3. Consecrated a bishop for the African Orthodox Church, on 06/10/1978 at Our Lady Queen of Heaven Church, Mastic Beach, Long Island, New York, by Richard Thomas McFarland, a bishop of the Holy Orthodox Catholic Church in America, in communion with the African Orthodox Church, assisted by Leonard Joseph Curreri, a bishop of the Tridentine Catholic Church,

4. Then consecrated a bishop, sub conditione, for the African Orthodox Church, on 10/04/1979 at Sacred Heart Chapel, Brooklyn, New York by Leonard Joseph Curreri, a bishop of the Tridentine Catholic Church, assisted by Peter James G. Grazeola, a bishop of the American National Catholic Church and by Holmes Bennett Dayhoff, a bishop of the Tridentine Catholic Church.

5. Subsequently consecrated a bishop, sub conditione, for the Ecumenical Catholic Diocese of the Americas, on 03/14/1987at Holy Angels Chapel, Glendale, California, by Forest Ernest Barber, a missionary bishop of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente and of the Igreja Católica Apostólica Brasiliera, assisted by Paul Christian Gerald W. Schultz, Jr., a bishop of the Iglesia Ortodoxa Católica Apostólica Méxicana, by Daniel Nelson McCarty, a bishop of the American Orthodox Catholic Church, and by Jurgen W. Bless, a bishop of the German American Old Catholic Church.

6. Again consecrated a bishop, sub conditione, on 03/15/1987 at Iglesia San Agustin, Los Angeles, California,
by Emile Federico Rodriguez y Durand (Fairfield), a bishop of the Iglesia Ortodoxa Católica Apostólica Méxicana,
assisted by Paul Christian Gerald W. Schultz, Jr., a bishop of the Iglesia Ortodoxa Católica Apostólica Méxicana.

Bishop Brennan, since 1984, has been the Prime-Bishop of the Ecumenical Catholic Diocese of the Americas, and is also a bishop of the African Orthodox Church. He was educated in Roman Catholic seminaries for high school, for college and for study of theology, and holds advanced degrees. He was a professed religious in a Roman Catholic order. He is now a member of the Federation of Christian Ministries and of Council of Resigned Priests United For Service (CORPUS).

Bp. Brennan has consecrated as bishops:

1) 09/xx/1979 Holmes Bennett Dayhoff
2) 06/17/1984 Richard James Ingram
3) 06/17/1984 James Franklin Mondok
4) 03/14/1987 Jurgen W. Bless
5) 03/14/1987 Forest Ernest Barber
6) 03/14/1987 Daniel Nelson McCarty
7) 03/14/1987 Paul Christian Gerald W. Schultz, Jr.

Add the Milingo Miracle to this impressive pedigree and you've got a Solemn High Whackjob, it seems to me.

Speaking of miracles, when did Georgie Porgie Stallings switch from boys to girls?

[Deo volente]

Not only is the archbishop no longer a Catholic, he's not even validly married. His "wedding" was conducted by the Moonies. There were 60 couples, and the spouses were all personally selected by the "Reverend" Moon.

He met his bride two days before the ceremony.

[trisham]

Make no mistake that this is a very serious matter that can and probably will lead many well-meaning Catholics into schism.

*************

Sadly, this is probably true.

[nickcarraway]

You'd be surprised that the Church considers many of the bishops ordained illicitly to be, nonetheless, valid. Even though Archbishop's Thuc's mental competence was questionable at times, the Church considers those valid, but illicit bishops. Sad, but true.

[Dominick]

Milingo is mentally unbalanced

Incompetent in particular. Every picture I have seen of him he looks disassociated...

[wideawake]

the Church considers those valid, but illicit bishops

I've never seen a scintilla of evidence to back that assertion. I have asked Thuc-line supporters who make this claim to present some documentary evidence from the Holy See supporting these claims, and I've seen none.

[ichabod1]

If a bishop ordained illegally is still a valid bishop, that would mean that the Episcopagans have a valid apostolic succession, albeit illicitly, and that the Gaybish, the Gay Gene, Vicki Imogene Robinson is a valid Bishop of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

[nickcarraway]

No, Leo XIII in Apostolicae Curae, that Anglican orders were null and void, principally because changes in the rite of consecration. (There were other issues) Before that, there was some debate on whether some Anglican bishops had valid Holy Orders. In 1998, Cardinal Ratzinger listed Apostolicae Curae as irreversible teaching. The only issue since 1896 is that some Anglicans may have been ordained/consecrated by Old Catholic, who indeed had valid orders.

[Cheverus]

The validity of Old Catholic and Episcopal Holy Orders were addressed in the last century...maybe someone can find a link to the document.

Stallings is a very interesting case, because he was validly and licitly ordained a Priest of the Archdiocese of Washington D.C. before breaking his ordination vows and be suspended a divinis.

Though I think he incurred defacto excommunication when he mocked the Sacraments by "ordaining" some folks within his apostate Church

[wideawake]

The Pope determined over a century ago that Anglican orders were invalid.

[nickcarraway]

The Old Catholic question proves the point. The Church still recognizes them as having valid orders, despite the fact that these groups have been separated for a long time. (Some since the 1700s) This is despite the fact that Old Catholics have dumped much of doctrine of the Catholic Church and know they have. The Orthodox also have valid orders.

[Cheverus]

I would bet that the validity of the their orders is under debate and that an official document has yet to be issued.

After all it took 300 years to address the Anglican question so the Old Catholic Document is due in about ten years by my reconing.

[nickcarraway]

Probably some of the groups may not have valid orders, if they have changed the rite. But my understanding is the Church still recognizes them as valid, even if completely separated from the Church.

[livius]

I think the Old Catholics (unlike the Anglicans, although that may change!) were probably expected to die out. Until they became a harbor for flakes and nuts, they actually were dwindling. But I think it's time to address them now, because they are doing great harm.

That said, I doubt Milingo will really lead many people astray - the folks who were going to Stallings' church, as well as the "churches" of the others in the Milingo band, were already off in their own special weirdo world.

[NYer]

How many times can one be ordained a bishop?

[nickcarraway]

The excommunication decrees against Archbishop Thuc, and those he ordained/consecrated never questiond the validity of the Holy Orders. If the consecrator is a valid bishop, uses a valid right, and lays their hands on the candidate, the Catholic Church considers it valid. The celebrant would have to publicly declare they had an intent other than what the Church intends to intends it to mean, for it to be invalid. I'm not saying I like it, but that's what the Church goes by. The curia has a registry of all these bishops, to keep track of Apostolic Sucession.

Another prrof that these are valid, but illicit is the case of Rev. Alfred Paul Seiwert-Fleige. He was ordained by Archbishop Thuc, then he was consecrated by a Thuc bishop.

In 2001, he reconciled with the Church and concelebrated a Mass with Pope John Paul II. He was regularized as a priest, but he was never even conditionally ordained. Today he serves as a priest in Germany, and he was asked to act as a priest for canonical reasons, though technically he is recognized as a bishop.

If the Church, doesn't recognize the Thuc line as valid, how could John Paul II except a layman acting as a priets?

[wideawake]

There is a difference between a consecration and an ordination.