Denver Newsroom, Aug 22, 2020 / 02:10 pm (CNA).-
If you think you’re a priest, and you really aren’t, you have a problem. So do a lot of other people. The baptisms you performed are valid baptisms. But the confirmations? No. The Masses you celebrated were not valid. Nor the absolutions or anointings. And the marriages? Well…it’s complicated. Some yes, some no. It depends on the paperwork, believe it or not.
Father Matthew Hood of the Archdiocese of Detroit learned all this the hard way.
He thought he’d been ordained a priest back in 2017. He’d been doing priestly ministry since then.
And then this summer, he learned he wasn’t a priest at all. In fact, he learned he wasn’t even baptized.
If you want to become a priest, you must first become a deacon. If you want to become a deacon, you must first be baptized. If you’re not baptized, you can’t become a deacon, and you can’t become a priest.
Of course, Fr. Hood thought he had been baptized as a baby. But this month, he read a note issued by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The note said that changing the words of baptism in certain ways make it invalid. That if the person doing the baptizing says “We baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” instead of “I baptize you…” the baptism is not valid.
He remembered a video he’d watched of his own baptism ceremony. And he remembered that the deacon said “We baptize you….”
His baptism wasn’t valid.
Father Hood called his archdiocese. He needed to be ordained. But first, after three years of acting like a priest, living like a priest, and feeling like a priest, he needed to become a Catholic. He needed to be baptized.
In short order, he was baptized, confirmed, and received the Eucharist. He made a retreat. He was ordained a deacon. And on Aug. 17, Matthew Hood finally became a priest. For real.
The Archdiocese of Detroit announced this unusual circumstance in a letter released Aug. 22.
The letter explained that after he realized what had happened, Fr. Hood “was recently validly baptized. Furthermore, since other sacraments cannot be validly received in the soul without valid baptism, Father Hood also was recently validly confirmed and validly ordained a transitional deacon and then a priest.”
“Let us give thanks and praise to God for blessing us with Father Hood’s ministry.”
The archdiocese released a guide, explaining that people whose marriages were celebrated by Fr. Hood should contact their parish, and that the archdiocese was making its own efforts to contact those people.
The archdiocese also said it was making efforts to contact other people who had been baptized by Deacon Mark Springer, the deacon who invalidly baptized Hood, and is believed to have invalidly baptized others, during 14 years at St. Anastasia Parish in Troy, Michigan, using the same invalid formula, a deviation from the rite clerics are required to use when performing baptisms.
The guide clarified that while absolutions performed by Fr. Hood before his valid ordination were not themselves valid, “we can be assured that all those who approached Father Hood, in good faith, to make a confession did not walk away without some measure of grace and forgiveness from God.”
“That said, if you recall any grave (mortal) sins that you would have confessed to Father Hood before he was validly ordained and you have not yet been to a subsequent confession, you must bring them to your next confession explaining to any priest what has happened. If you cannot remember if you confessed any grave sins, you should bring that fact to your next confession as well. A subsequent absolution will include those sins and will give you peace of mind,” the guide said.
The archdiocese also answered a question it expects many Catholics will be asking: “Isn’t it legalistic to say that, even though there was an intention to confer a sacrament, there was no sacrament because different words were used? Won’t God just take care of it?”
“Theology is a science that studies what God has told us and, when it comes to sacraments, there must not only be the right intention by the minister but also the right ‘matter’ (material) and the right ‘form’ (words/gestures – such as a triple pouring or immersion of water by the one saying the words). If one of those elements is missing, the sacrament is not valid,” the archdiocese explained.
“As far as God ‘taking care of it,’ we can trust that God will assist those whose hearts are open to Him. However, we can have a much greater degree of confidence by strengthening ourselves with the sacraments He has entrusted to us.”
“According to the ordinary plan God has established, the Sacraments are necessary for salvation: baptism brings about adoption into the family of God and places sanctifying grace in the soul, since we are not born with it, and the soul needs to have sanctifying grace when it departs from the body in order to spend eternity in heaven,” the archdiocese added.
The archdiocese said it first became aware that Deacon Springer was using an unauthorized formula for baptism in 1999. The deacon was instructed to stop deviating from liturgical texts at that time. The archdiocese said that, though illicit, it had believed the baptisms Spring had performed to be valid until the Vatican’s clarification this summer.
The deacon is now retired “and no longer in active ministry,” the archdiocese added.
No other Detroit priests are believed to be invalidly baptized, the archdiocese said.
And Fr. Hood, newly baptized and newly ordained? After an ordeal that began with a deacon’s liturgical “innovation,” Fr. Hood is now serving at a parish named for a deacon saint. He’s the new pastor at St. Lawrence Parish in Utica, Michigan.
.
[…]
If the Pope gets to decide from afar, what role in worship does the local Ordinate have? Does he just enforce the dictates of the Pope or does he not have a say over the manner in which his flock engages Our Lord in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? I understand he has charge over catechesis, confirmation and ordination; but, does he not also form the conscience of the flock under his care? I feel pity for any Bishop who wishes to grow his flock, instill right worship and true devotion and ONLY have one tool in his tool chest with with to accomplish his task: the NO Missae of Paul VI.
Every bishop of a diocese is a successor to an apostle and is sole the sole authority in his diocese. No bishop or Pope can in anway impose their personal views or opinions on any bishop/apostle of a diocese. Pope Francis is going way beyond his role as the successor of Peter.
There can be honest disagreement about the direction in which PF is leading the Church, but this tendency to micro-manage the bishops is surely unsettling to the liberal mind.
Fortunately, in my diocese we are ignoring Traditionis Custodes. And should things get uglier after April 3, plans are already being made to continue with the TLM with a diocesan priest and a real church location. The octogenarian modernists have already lost. They just don’t realize it yet, so blinded are they by envy and hate.
You’re a schismatic. Your bishop does not have the authority to ignore TC. Stop making an idol out of the TLM and start being Catholic.
Dear Friend,
When was the last time you attended a solemn high mass? When was the last time you knelt at the altar of the communion rail to receive Our Lord and do your part to finalize the oblation? When did you last gaze at the pews full of well dressed, well behaved young people, sitting with their (many) siblings and parents attentively “assisting” in the holy offering? Tell me, Friend, when did you last walk into a Catholic Church and NOT fear trampling on the precious body of Our Lord and savior? Every piece, every fraction, every fragment is the WHOLE of His body. He gets handed out like a carnival ticket in the NO Missae. I’ve seen fragments get trampled, or nearly so, because of insensitive, haughty and arrogant, modernist “Catholics” who don’t even believe in the Real Presence. The abuses are plain scandalous and shocking. Do a deep dive this Lent like I did 2 years ago when my local NO priest shut us out of the church for fear of a cold virus. Seek out that which you condemn and go. Study the counsel and its deeply jaded and nefarious players. Start with Michael Davies. He’s a good place to start. God bless. Don’t condemn. God is at the TLM. MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT.
Right, Mr. Tabish. Turning my back on the NO in 2018, I’ve never looked back except to lament the loss of God’s people still stuck there.
Scooter is correct. Pope Francis’ order may be mean-spirited, it may be vicious, it may be malevolent, it may be intended to damage the church–but it is also unquestionably lawful and proper for the pope to approve or disapprove of any liturgical format he sees fit, whether from worthy or unworthy motives. He may have adopted a double standard in dealing with the heterodox, whom he favors, and the orthodox, whom he detests. It does not matter. A lawful order is a lawful order. It doesn’t have to be nice. It doesn’t have to please our sensibilities in order to demand our obedience. Francis has as much right to suppress the TLM as Pope St. Pius V did to suppress many pre-Trenten liturgies, which he did do at the same time he issued the prototype of the Tridentine Mass. If Francis were to order bishops and priests to hold church “weddings” for same-sex couples, that order would have to be defied because it would be an unlawful, immoral order which seeks to overturn the natural law, something no man or woman can do, least of all the pope. But this does not do that. It has been said by some saints that Christ values obedience to the lawful exercise of proper church authority by duly empowered actors above all else, regardless of whether that authority is exercised in a wise or kind manner. Perhaps this is a test of obedience to and by Christ. If so, then anyone who counsels defiance of the order is failing that test. “Scooter Toloody” has said what needs to be said. Francis has as much right to crack down on the TLM as Benedict did to widen its use.
Actually it is not lawful. Read the documents of VII and consult a Canon Lawyer.
Mr. Norton, if you care to read Pius V’s document Quo Primum you will quickly conclude that Pope Francis does not have the legal authority to dispense with the TLM. It is very clear.
It is an unlawful order. The Pope does not own the Church. It is not his possession or plaything. He is charged with preserving the Church, instructing the Church in Truth, not in falsehoods. By your logic, the Pope would be within his authority to outlaw the praying of the rosary. This is extent that papolatry has reached in our era.
Bishops chose to ignore the Vatican regarding the blessing of same sex relationships, yet no one screams schism at them. Communion on the hand was banned by the Vatican, but many Bishops ignored that too. The latin mass was never banned, indeed it can never be banned as the Trent declared an anathema on anyone, including a Pope who alters or bans it.
When the Holy See is schismatic, how can defiance of its anti-canonical actions be schismatic? Not everyone idolizes clown and tango Masses like Francis, nor do they value his mendacity.
How rigid of you!.
Just like Our Lord asks of we Eye pluckers. Love your satire.
Not concerned about the pronouncements of Pope Scooter.
What is significant about April 3″
Rumours abound that on that date there will be issued tighter still restrictions on the TLM.
But go to the Rorate Caeli website where it is strongly averred that PF is losing interest in the liturgy war.
Pope Francis has also confirmed, through his lack of any disciplinary actions taken against the ‘dirty schism’ German Bishops, that if you want to perform immoral acts in the Catholic Mass, go to a Progressive Catholic Church in Germany to do so. Pope Francis confirms that you do not need any Vatican permission to do so.
For crying out loud, it’s time for traditional Catholics to practice the same manner of noncompliance that the DemoCatholics already do to support abortion, same-sex deviancy and whatever other demon driven things they allow for.
Scooter Toloody,
Name-calling… the blunt instrument of thoughtless, last ditch argument. Your judgmental and mean-spirited posting is perfectively representative of Pope Francis and his ilk. Congratulations. A little charity ( and humility) on your part would go a long way.
I suggest you follow Mr. Tabish’s soul-saving advice and get to know that which you condemn. I pray for you to find peace of soul.
Is the letter of Pope Francis’, Guardian of Tradition, a magistrial teaching or simply his personal view point as regards the latin liturgy? Clarification is needed in order to stop all the disunity that is prevailing by this issue.
There can be honest disagreement about the direction in which PF is leading the Church, but this tendency to micro-manage the bishops is surely unsettling to the liberal mind.
What previous generations considered sacred remains sacred and can not be abrogated. The problem within the church is the laity are informed of the dubious formation of the Novus ordo, and the manipulation by its designer (Fr.Bugnini). Young Catholics are attracted to the consistent celebration of the tlm, and the spiritual depth of its customs. Young priests are attracted to its direction of prayers to the sacrifice of Christ to the heavenly Father. The Vatican must be aware of the abuses within the N.O, and foster with the bishops an authentic celebration of the N.O ad orientem with the use of some Latin with gregorian chant. Right now priests are celebrating without consistent guidance. Draconian leadership will only foster more strife and confusion within the ranks.