The “accidents” of bread remain, which include the effects of allergy or disease reaction from consumption. This is what Trent teaches. Since gluten makes up more than 50% of a grain of wheat, it can’t be completely removed to make bread, because “gluten free” wheat is not true wheat. As long as there is at least a trace of gluten in the flour used to make the bread, that bread is capable of being transubstantiated. Gluten-free bread is not.
Accidentia panis non manent sine subjecto [Accidents of the bread does not remain without the subject] / Denz. 582 - if you believe in the above, you are condemned together with Mr. Wycliffe by the Holy Church.
"sine subjecto" is in fact Catholic (as there is no substance of bread/wine after the consecration) so they are NOT actually condemning this part but "non manent"
Thus, the Catholic Encyclopedia says:
"The second, so far as the text is concerned, might be considered as merely a different wording of the first, were it not that the history of the council shows that Wyclif had directly opposed the Scholastic doctrine of "accidents without a subject" as absurd and even heretical (cf, De Augustinis, De re sacramentariâ, Rome, 1889, II, 573 sqq.), Hence it was the intention of the council to condemn the second article, not merely as a conclusion of the first, but as a distinct and independent proposition; wherefore we may gather the Church's teaching on the subject from the contradictory proposition; "Accidentia panis manent sine subjecto," i.e. the accidents of bread do remain without a subject. Such, at least, was the opinion of contemporary theologians regarding the matter; and the Roman Catechism, referring to the above-mentioned canon of the Council of Trent, tersely, explains: "The accidents of bread and wine inhere in no substance, but continue existing by themselves." "
"The gentlemen above... by "accidents" mean what the Catechism calls "species" - Yes, that is true but my comment referred to the stance of the "gentleman" attacking Fr. Goldade and wondering "how can our Lord when received in the ‘proper state’ by a person allergic to gluten cause that person great harm" Which is, as far as I observed, quite a popular error today i.e. some kind of idealism rejecting reality of the accidents and taking them a sort of illusion.
The list includes none of the prominent liberal priests, which is a relief. Does anyone have any information on the candidates? Any positive or negative indications?
I was expecting someone from Switzerland, but I was not expecting two Frenchmen, one of whom comes from a notable family, possibly French nobility (Bp. de Galarreta comes from Spanish nobility). Also, they all come from large (probably all Traditional Catholic) families.
"However, the lifting of the excommunications legitimised the SSPX in the eyes of many, leading to an influx of a certain number of persons seeking the Latin Mass, without sharing the SSPX’s perspective on the Crisis in the Church. It seems probable that at least some of these persons will detach themselves from the SSPX if excommunications are indeed declared."
--
Yes, it is very probable especially as SSPX had a great influx of the faithful during&after the Cov-19 scamdemic. These people were convinced by closed NO churches or using para-liturgical fetishes and working SSPX ministry at the same time - not by "Vatican II" or "post-Vatican II" crisis analysis.
Could be that the society wants to continue to fit its foot in the print of Archbishop Lefebvre. Or a restraining tactic; if eight men were consecrated there is a likelihood of one or two reaching the faithful conclusion of 'sedevacante'.
Curious if there is any follow up to the potential for excommunication of the entire society as schismatic given it will adhere to the act of consecration by acceptance. Difference in 1988 was creation of ED groups as an escape but that doesn't hold now as they already exist even though less wide spread than they were, after TC.
My hope for the consecrations is that these men rise as new bishops and declare the Novus Ordo, V2 and Prevost – his predecessors and comrades – “anathema”. One can hope.
As for "excommunication" - any distancing between the fraud and the attempt to hold the faith is welcome.
“While we agree with the sentiment, we cannot agree with the idea that an excommunication by a true Pope can serve as a badge of honour.” The priests of the Society are living in a fog, when it comes to this. They, for the most, are of good will and sincerely believe in R&R, but listening to them ‘work’ it out is excruciating. There was this thing a few years ago of some scientist playing music to spiders as they wove their webs. Bach and Beethoven produced a beautiful balanced thread. Pop music and Heavy metal produced a lopsided entangled mess. R&R is theological ‘heavy metal’.
I'm guessing they didn't want to deconcentrate power too much in picking only four bishops. I think six would've been more prudent. There should be one based in the Asia-Pacific region and one for Africa.
Could you quote his exact statement?
All the accidents of the bread and wine remain (the appearance, the smell, the taste), but not the substance.
The “accidents” of bread remain, which include the effects of allergy or disease reaction from consumption. This is what Trent teaches. Since gluten makes up more than 50% of a grain of wheat, it can’t be completely removed to make bread, because “gluten free” wheat is not true wheat. As long as there is at least a trace of gluten in the flour used to make the bread, that bread is capable of being transubstantiated. Gluten-free bread is not.
Accidentia panis non manent sine subjecto [Accidents of the bread does not remain without the subject] / Denz. 582 - if you believe in the above, you are condemned together with Mr. Wycliffe by the Holy Church.
"sine subjecto" is in fact Catholic (as there is no substance of bread/wine after the consecration) so they are NOT actually condemning this part but "non manent"
Thus, the Catholic Encyclopedia says:
"The second, so far as the text is concerned, might be considered as merely a different wording of the first, were it not that the history of the council shows that Wyclif had directly opposed the Scholastic doctrine of "accidents without a subject" as absurd and even heretical (cf, De Augustinis, De re sacramentariâ, Rome, 1889, II, 573 sqq.), Hence it was the intention of the council to condemn the second article, not merely as a conclusion of the first, but as a distinct and independent proposition; wherefore we may gather the Church's teaching on the subject from the contradictory proposition; "Accidentia panis manent sine subjecto," i.e. the accidents of bread do remain without a subject. Such, at least, was the opinion of contemporary theologians regarding the matter; and the Roman Catechism, referring to the above-mentioned canon of the Council of Trent, tersely, explains: "The accidents of bread and wine inhere in no substance, but continue existing by themselves." "
(The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist)
"The gentlemen above... by "accidents" mean what the Catechism calls "species" - Yes, that is true but my comment referred to the stance of the "gentleman" attacking Fr. Goldade and wondering "how can our Lord when received in the ‘proper state’ by a person allergic to gluten cause that person great harm" Which is, as far as I observed, quite a popular error today i.e. some kind of idealism rejecting reality of the accidents and taking them a sort of illusion.
I am bookmarking your website so I can return to it: thank you 📑
The list includes none of the prominent liberal priests, which is a relief. Does anyone have any information on the candidates? Any positive or negative indications?
I was expecting someone from Switzerland, but I was not expecting two Frenchmen, one of whom comes from a notable family, possibly French nobility (Bp. de Galarreta comes from Spanish nobility). Also, they all come from large (probably all Traditional Catholic) families.
"However, the lifting of the excommunications legitimised the SSPX in the eyes of many, leading to an influx of a certain number of persons seeking the Latin Mass, without sharing the SSPX’s perspective on the Crisis in the Church. It seems probable that at least some of these persons will detach themselves from the SSPX if excommunications are indeed declared."
--
Yes, it is very probable especially as SSPX had a great influx of the faithful during&after the Cov-19 scamdemic. These people were convinced by closed NO churches or using para-liturgical fetishes and working SSPX ministry at the same time - not by "Vatican II" or "post-Vatican II" crisis analysis.
Why only four?
very good question.
Could be that the society wants to continue to fit its foot in the print of Archbishop Lefebvre. Or a restraining tactic; if eight men were consecrated there is a likelihood of one or two reaching the faithful conclusion of 'sedevacante'.
Curious if there is any follow up to the potential for excommunication of the entire society as schismatic given it will adhere to the act of consecration by acceptance. Difference in 1988 was creation of ED groups as an escape but that doesn't hold now as they already exist even though less wide spread than they were, after TC.
A personal prelature with Schneider at its head would be a nice conquest from Rome’s vantage point.
Only four; very disappointing.
My hope for the consecrations is that these men rise as new bishops and declare the Novus Ordo, V2 and Prevost – his predecessors and comrades – “anathema”. One can hope.
As for "excommunication" - any distancing between the fraud and the attempt to hold the faith is welcome.
“While we agree with the sentiment, we cannot agree with the idea that an excommunication by a true Pope can serve as a badge of honour.” The priests of the Society are living in a fog, when it comes to this. They, for the most, are of good will and sincerely believe in R&R, but listening to them ‘work’ it out is excruciating. There was this thing a few years ago of some scientist playing music to spiders as they wove their webs. Bach and Beethoven produced a beautiful balanced thread. Pop music and Heavy metal produced a lopsided entangled mess. R&R is theological ‘heavy metal’.
I'm guessing they didn't want to deconcentrate power too much in picking only four bishops. I think six would've been more prudent. There should be one based in the Asia-Pacific region and one for Africa.