Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 13.8K
- General Category 10.9K
- General Announcements 184
- Faith Issues 3.4K
- Coptic Orthodox Church 2.5K
- Personal Issues 1.4K
- Prayer Requests 423
- Random Issues 1.8K
- Introductions 294
- Non-Orthodox Inquiries 232
- Youth Corner 606
- Hymns 2.5K
- Hymns Discussion 2.5K
- Technicial Difficulties 368
- Technical Topics 368
How can the Pope resign?? What does it mean?
As you all must be aware, Pope Benedict is going to step down.
If a couple who get married suddenly divorce then was that decision to marry from God?
If the Catholics believe that the selection of their pope was from God- how can God select or allow something that would shake His Church?
Spiritually and ecclesiologically speaking, what does this mean??
Has a Coptic Orthodox Pope ever resigned.
I feel so bad for our catholic brothers! They have had to endure a lot. Apparently, 4000 priests were found guilty of child molestation involving around 10000 victims.
Now to be told that the Holy Spirit that was meant to have at least selected a pope , a leader to their Holy See, did so on a temporary basis will be hard for them.
If a couple who get married suddenly divorce then was that decision to marry from God?
If the Catholics believe that the selection of their pope was from God- how can God select or allow something that would shake His Church?
Spiritually and ecclesiologically speaking, what does this mean??
Has a Coptic Orthodox Pope ever resigned.
I feel so bad for our catholic brothers! They have had to endure a lot. Apparently, 4000 priests were found guilty of child molestation involving around 10000 victims.
Now to be told that the Holy Spirit that was meant to have at least selected a pope , a leader to their Holy See, did so on a temporary basis will be hard for them.
Comments
According to the Code of Canon Law (Catholic) Canon 332 : 2
Should it happen that the Roman Pontiff resigns from his office, it is required for validity that the resignation be freely made and properly manifested, but it is not necessary that it be accepted by anyone.
As you all must be aware, Pope Benedict is going to step down.
If a couple who get married suddenly divorce then was that decision to marry from God?
If the Catholics believe that the selection of their pope was from God- how can God select or allow something that would shake His Church?
Spiritually and ecclesiologically speaking, what does this mean??
Has a Coptic Orthodox Pope ever resigned.
I feel so bad for our catholic brothers! They have had to endure a lot. Apparently, 4000 priests were found guilty of child molestation involving around 10000 victims.
Now to be told that the Holy Spirit that was meant to have at least selected a pope , a leader to their Holy See, did so on a temporary basis will be hard for them.
Ya it is really sad Zoxsasi, I hope they elect someone who brings the Church back to its Apostolic roots. We can only pray for them.
What does it mean spiritually/ecclesiologically for a pope to retire?? What is that saying in spiritual terms?
Is it wrong for Popes to grow old? No.
It means that he feels incapable of fullfilling his roles, from what he says.. so why not assign tasks to cardinals and bishops whom he trusts??? That's the whole point! You delegate!!
What is going on!???? This is not normal, NOR spiritual for a Pope to resign.
What is the spiritual meaning behind this?
Spiritually speaking, would you rather have a pope that may be physically and mentally disable potentially making bad decisions or a father who is resting in a monastery who passed over authority to someone else duly chosen by the Holy Spirit?
Regarding the point of delegating, that's what fully functional patriarchs do anyway. When he is disable and still delegates, what do you think the results would be? Additionally, if he is disable in some capacity, how do you know he will delegate correctly or to the most adequate person?
Finally, while the Roman Catholic Church has made many mistakes in theology, dogma and ecclesiology, I think is unfair for us to adjudicate the Roman Catholic Church as abnormal and unspiritual. The RCC is an Apostolic church. She has living saints who perform miracles. She has some incredibly spiritual people who only seek to shepherd Christ's people and be with Christ.. We don't have to agree with all their actions to consider them abnormal and unspiritual. We have to stop thinking anything or anyone who is not Coptic is bad. This is the definition of Coptic racism.
Has a Coptic Orthodox Pope ever resigned.
To the best of my knowledge, no Coptic Orthodox pope has ever resigned. However, when Pope John VII was elected in 1262, Gabriel was running against him. Six years later, with the help of some bishops, Gabriel III became pope and John VII was spent 3 years in exile. Then in 1270, John VII was reinstated for another 23 years. It is the only time the Coptic Church had 2 patriarchs at the same time from 1267/68-1270.
So now the question we should ask ourselves, is voluntary resignation more palatable than forced resignation? More importantly, do we still believe that RCC is spiritually inept and erroneous while the Coptic Church is immune from the same actions but somehow faultless?
I think it is because of their theology with original sin. The Holy Spirit is not weighted toward conscience and guilt. The Pope stated his conscience had a lot to do with his decision. It's alright with me. He has served the ones under his care exellently.
The Holy Spirit would guide a new Pope in the same capacity, I'm sure.
But if they did go back to their Apostic traditions, they would be stronger. Repentance is not only about guilt. It's not only about conscience. If they went back to where they should probably be they would have a broader veiw of repentance. Then the Holy Spirit could do more for them than is otherwise the case.
Yes the RCC has made mistakes with their theology. But the question was about the validity and spirituality of Pope Benedict's resignation. I think you agree with me that it's ok for him to resign and the Holy Spirit will choose a worthy shepherd after him.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say about repentance. Are you saying repentance in the RCC is inadequate and un-Apostolic? First, this is a very broad subject. But if one were to make a claim like this, it helps to elaborate on specific doctrine. Generalization simply does not prove anything. Secondly, why do you say the Holy Spirit will do more for them if they had a broader view of repentance? I don't really know what the means to begin with but I also don't see any scriptural or patristic evidence to support this. How does anyone know what the Holy Spirit will do? "Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counselor?" Romans 11:34
Notwithstanding, we can discuss individual RCC theology from a Coptic Orthodox point of view. Original sin was discussed a few months ago and I tried to show that the official RCC catechesis on original sin is different than what we Copts believe is the RCC position on original sin. I'll try to find a link to that discussion.
Totally agree with your comment here.
What I'm trying to say with repentance is that their believe in original sin has the Holy Spirit focas on conscience. So the sacrement in which the Holy Spirit performs has more to do with conscience.
When Jesus chose the Apostles, He did not concentrate on conscience.
You are right Remnkemi, It doesn't matter on my thoughts of repentance. The Holy Spirit is full-filling the Word of scripture.
Being the patriarch is a huge responsibility that requires working around the clock. I heard a story once about our own blessed Pope Shenouda. When he used to go for dental care he would insist that any work done would be performed without anesthetic. His rationale was that as he is responsible for making decisions on behalf of the Church he didn't want to have anything in his system that would impair his judgement so he went through the pain of dental procedures in this way.
I'm not sure if you remember the end of Pope John Paul's papacy but he was barely able to give speeches when he was required to. I don't think the historical Church had the situation we have today where an elderly, suffering person can be kept alive for a prolonged period.
A service at this level demands someone who can give their full attention to it and if that individual can't and needs to focus on their health, why isn't resigning a viable option?
Pope Benedict has stepped down from his post as Bishop of Rome, but has not left the episcopal calling. For example, we have many priests who, becoming too old to work, have retained their priesthood, but retired from pastoral abilities. This may be due to age, or health reasons (just like Pope Benedict.) The priesthood and episcopacy cannot be retired from, but the post of service can.
In the Coptic church, we have Bishops who have retired (and have been forced to retire as well.) For example, Bishop Mettias has retired, through his rank has not been stripped. He is simply retired from pastoral responsibility. Similarly, Met. Mikhail of Assiut has retired as Aboot of St. Macarius Monastery. Being Abbot, like being Bishop of an area (like Rome) is a post, and not a divine institution. The institution is the clerical ordination, the service is the post.
To bring back a darker history of our church, one may recall the "Sunday School movement" headed by a much loved figure of our time, which called for the resignation of Pope Yousab. One may also recall St. Isaac the Syrian, Bishop of Niniveh who retired from pastoral care, and returned to the desert.
In essence, this is great humility on the Part of His Holiness.
It has long been my belief that clergy should be allowed to (and in fact encouraged to) retire their office if they become ill. Senility is a real factor, and so, it must be taken into account. Pope Benedict, in great humility, has illustrated (contrary to many of the ambitious bishops who's tales have filled ears) that the office of Patriarch is not something to be sought after. It is a service, and it is such a heavy burden that it musn't be taken lightly. If one cannot do the job, humble yourself, decrease, and let God increase through someone else.
Ray
Everyone relax LOL.
Pope Benedict has stepped down from his post as Bishop of Rome, but has not left the episcopal calling. For example, we have many priests who, becoming too old to work, have retained their priesthood, but retired from pastoral abilities. This may be due to age, or health reasons (just like Pope Benedict.) The priesthood and episcopacy cannot be retired from, but the post of service can.
In the Coptic church, we have Bishops who have retired (and have been forced to retire as well.) For example, Bishop Mettias has retired, through his rank has not been stripped. He is simply retired from pastoral responsibility. Similarly, Met. Mikhail of Assiut has retired as Aboot of St. Macarius Monastery. Being Abbot, like being Bishop of an area (like Rome) is a post, and not a divine institution. The institution is the clerical ordination, the service is the post.
To bring back a darker history of our church, one may recall the "Sunday School movement" headed by a much loved figure of our time, which called for the resignation of Pope Yousab. One may also recall St. Isaac the Syrian, Bishop of Niniveh who retired from pastoral care, and returned to the desert.
In essence, this is great humility on the Part of His Holiness.
It has long been my belief that clergy should be allowed to (and in fact encouraged to) retire their office if they become ill. Senility is a real factor, and so, it must be taken into account. Pope Benedict, in great humility, has illustrated (contrary to many of the ambitious bishops who's tales have filled ears) that the office of Patriarch is not something to be sought after. It is a service, and it is such a heavy burden that it musn't be taken lightly. If one cannot do the job, humble yourself, decrease, and let God increase through someone else.
Ray
I was just thinking about Anba Metias before reading your post, but yes, retirement from pastoral responsibility is acceptable, even in Orthodoxy, though I'm sure its not encouraged. The only debate in my opinion is whether or not the Catholic Church, according to the Canons, is allowed to choose a new Pope while the predecessor is alive. From my knowledge, the only exception to this rule is when a bishop is excommunicated. I believe this is why Anba Metias' diocese remains vacant.
Spiritually speaking, would you rather have a pope that may be physically and mentally disable potentially making bad decisions or a father who is resting in a monastery who passed over authority to someone else duly chosen by the Holy Spirit?
That's just it!!!!
According to Catholics, HE CANNOT make bad decisions. That to them is a dogma.
While I will not defend the RCC doctrine of Papal infallibility as correct because it's not, I think we have to hear it from their point of view, not what we think is their point of view. There are certain specific conditions to be met in order for infallibility to be recognized.
Pope Benedict himself and his predecessor did not believe in absolute infallibility. According to this article, "In July 2005 Pope Benedict XVI stated during an impromptu address to priests in Aosta that: "The Pope is not an oracle; he is infallible in very rare situations, as we know".[18] His predecessor Pope John XXIII once remarked: "I am only infallible if I speak infallibly but I shall never do that, so I am not infallible".[19] A doctrine proposed by a pope as his own opinion, not solemnly proclaimed as a doctrine of the Church, may be rejected as false, even if it is on a matter of faith and morals, and even more any view he expresses on other matters. A well-known example of a personal opinion on a matter of faith and morals that was taught by a pope but rejected by the Church is the view that Pope John XXII expressed on when the dead can reach the beatific vision.[20]
According to the teaching of the First Vatican Council and Catholic tradition, the conditions required for ex cathedra papal teaching are as follows:
1. "the Roman Pontiff"
2. "speaks ex cathedra" ("that is, when in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority"....)
3. "he defines"
4. "that a doctrine concerning faith or morals"
5. "must be held by the whole Church" (Pastor Aeternus, chap. 4)[16]
This is important, as I showed above, he is not infallible on personal opinions, even if its on matters of faith. He can only be infallible if he is defining a doctrine. He would not infallible, for example, if he says Bishop so and so is a liar. He would be infallible if he says Bishop so and so is wrong about Doctrine X.
In reality, there has been only half a dozen times or so papal infallibility has actually been invoked. The last one being RCC's ex cathedra definition of St Mary's Assumption by Pope Piux XII in 1950.
Maybe grassroots Catholics believe the RCC pope cannot make bad decisions. But the RCC catechism and official doctrines says otherwise.
And I also do not think Anba Mettias is excommunicated. I believe he is just removed from his diocese.
God Bless
In reality, there has been only half a dozen times or so papal infallibility has actually been invoked. The last one being RCC's ex cathedra definition of St Mary's Assumption by Pope Piux XII in 1950.
Half a dozen? There is only ONE doctrine made infallible by Pope Pius XII, which is the assumption of the Virgin Mary in body and soul.
Any other statements of doctrine by the papacy before the definition of infallibility at Vatican I are considered statements by the supreme authority of the Pope of Rome, and are not infallible statements -- it is assumed, though, that the Church never teaches anything new, so in retrospect the statements of popes concerning faith and morals may be assumed to be infallible, but they're not defined as such (in the same way that we can assume the Christians before the council of Nicea's Creed were orthodox even though they didn't know of the term consubstantial).
I should add, though, that the Catholic Church is very conciliar. There are more councils, commissions, and committees of bishops and lay people for every subject in the Church imaginable that the Orthodox have not even begun to think about. It's only after years of intensive studies on questions of faith and morals that the pope can write an Apostolic Exhortation, and only after many years of reception by everyone in the Church can the pope pronounce such a doctrine on faith and morals as an infallible teaching of the Church.
Here is a reference from a commentary on Ineffible Deus by Pope Pius XI. "The decree was promulgated on December 8, 1854, the date of the annual Feast of the Immaculate Conception. Mary's immaculate conception is one of only two pronouncements that were made ex cathedra and is therefore considered by the Catholic Church to be infallible through the extraordinary magisterium."
If you look at the actual language of the decree, it complies to the requirements of papal infallibility that I mentioned.
"We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful."
Now I don't defend the RCC Immaculate Conception doctrine, nor the use ofpPapal infallibility to validate the Immaculate Conception doctrine. But it seems clear that according to the RCC's doctrine, the RCC pope is not automatically infallible.
St. Gregory Nazianzen (the Theologian) resigned from the Archbishorpic of Constantinople, and then finding the administration even of the small Bishorpic of Nazianzus too much for his advancing years and declining health, he retired to Arianzus (around the end of 383 A.D.)
My second thought, which shouldn't be stated, and should be kept to myself is this is a prophecy. What I mean by this, is the pope feels that his life will most likely end within days, and is telling the church, be ready to choose a successor.
My advice for the church when choosing a new leader is choose someone who is less than 55. A person may argue with me telling that Pope Tawadros was chosen when he was 60. However, the Catholics need a leader who is someout youthful, but carries with him years of experience and is very active. He will need to fix a lot of things. The Roman Catholic church is verrrrryyy large unlike the coptic church. In Washington state alone they have 10 bishops, this is slightly under the # of bishops in all of the diaspora.
Anyways, I wish the best for them, and I hope that they will listen to my advice.
As for the time being they should make Metropolitan Bachomious ( the disciple of Pope Tawadros) the locum tenen. He may be very afective in these tough times that they are facing.
Note: The day when his resignation was announced, beforehand I was thinking of Pope Benedict and how hes quite old in age
Gob bless you all and glory be to God forever amen
I wonder what you think of Isaac the Syrian who retired from being Bishop of Nneveh? In the Orthodox Church, we have St. Theophan the Recluse who retired from pastoral ability to retreat in prayer? In the British Orthodox Church, Father Micheal Robinson has retired from pastoral responsibility. Abouna Antonios Amin, a famed Coptic Orthodox priest had retired from pastoral ability. These are more modern examples.
The Holy Spirit certainly does not stop doing his job! But man's weakness does not always allow him to work the will of the Holy Spirit. The humility is to know what one is failing, and that the failures of one person's health should not effect the church.
I don't know how it could be fabrication, brother, since the canons of the church do not forbid it, and it has been a commonality in the past. I will look for better sources now, and please give me a little time.
Pray for me, brother,
Ray
Hey IP,
I wonder what you think of Isaac the Syrian who retired from being Bishop of Nneveh? In the Orthodox Church, we have St. Theophan the Recluse who retired from pastoral ability to retreat in prayer? In the British Orthodox Church, Father Micheal Robinson has retired from pastoral responsibility. Abouna Antonios Amin, a famed Coptic Orthodox priest had retired from pastoral ability. These are more modern examples.
The Holy Spirit certainly does not stop doing his job! But man's weakness does not always allow him to work the will of the Holy Spirit. The humility is to know what one is failing, and that the failures of one person's health should not effect the church.
I don't know how it could be fabrication, brother, since the canons of the church do not forbid it, and it has been a commonality in the past. I will look for better sources now, and please give me a little time.
Pray for me, brother,
Ray
My point is this:
Catholics believe that it was the Holy Spirit that had chosen this Pope. If it was, why did the Holy Spirit chose someone who would later renounce his Papacy? Is this really from God?
Can we therefore say that the selection of the Pope involved even the Holy Spirit?
If we take that veiw Zoxsasi, then all popes would be great and none of them would make a wrong decision. The Holy Spirit has to work with our human nature. It is the canons and the sacrements that He works through best and if the pope is finds himself unable to support the church, maybe because it is such a large church and takes alot of organisation, then I guess he had the right to resign. Especially if they have a canon which says he can.
Hey IP,
I wonder what you think of Isaac the Syrian who retired from being Bishop of Nneveh? In the Orthodox Church, we have St. Theophan the Recluse who retired from pastoral ability to retreat in prayer? In the British Orthodox Church, Father Micheal Robinson has retired from pastoral responsibility. Abouna Antonios Amin, a famed Coptic Orthodox priest had retired from pastoral ability. These are more modern examples.
The Holy Spirit certainly does not stop doing his job! But man's weakness does not always allow him to work the will of the Holy Spirit. The humility is to know what one is failing, and that the failures of one person's health should not effect the church.
I don't know how it could be fabrication, brother, since the canons of the church do not forbid it, and it has been a commonality in the past. I will look for better sources now, and please give me a little time.
Pray for me, brother,
Ray
RO,
There goes the ecumenical Hegelian dialectic again. Antithesis=Everybody is doing it. Ultimate Synthesis=Ecumenical One World Religion. Why always the same conclusion? Rick Warren would be proud of you, but for what Purpose? I'm resigned, I'll never be a blogger. How about the millions of RC priests who chose the higher secular callings in recent years? Is this resignation just this same recent RC theological "development" just floating up to the top? It took 2000 years to get started, but apostasy really moves fast after it gets started. Why won't ecumenical Orthodox changes follow the same pattern? Orthodox feminism, zoom; Orthodox Psychology, zoom, zoom; Orthodox divorce, zoom, zoom, zoom. Ain't Orthodox "developmental theology" great? No more stupid, old fashioned, Egyptian, Sahidi ways; We're Americans now, uncovered heads, short skirts, tight jeans and all.
God Bless you.
My point is this:
Catholics believe that it was the Holy Spirit that had chosen this Pope. If it was, why did the Holy Spirit chose someone who would later renounce his Papacy? Is this really from God?
Can we therefore say that the selection of the Pope involved even the Holy Spirit?
But Pope Benedict didn't renounce his papacy. He retired from pastoral duty. It has happened many times. The most famous was St Gregory Nazianzus.
Maybe it would help to define how a bishop could renounce his papacy. I see only two ways. 1. Falls into heresy without confessing his error or 2. marries a woman and abandons his clerical duty as prescribed by Church canons.
I forgive you. It was a simple question, and you felt the need to be defensive (as is often)
Anyway, I'm not calling for a united church, but if you feel something is wrong with papal resignation, please explain why. I should warn you, the word, "feminism" translates to me "do not read the rest of my post, it is just me babbling." And I guess Rick Warren would be proud of someone so violently opposed to him that I tried to buy all his books from my church library to stop people from buying them lol.
I am not a feminist or psychobabble. I am simply speaking about the right of a clerical rank to retire from pastoral responsibility for human reason. As for you, you are a little too tied up in your fairy tale world of misogyny and schizophrenia to make a coherent point.
God help you.
I don't think you were being fair to irishpilgrim RO. I think irishpilgrim does have genuine concerns that our church in affected by a liberal attitude like the Roman Catholic may of taken. Irishpilgrim may of being RC and see, in his eyes a same liberal approach taken place.
I know you worry less RO and feel the church is in good hands, but we can't ignore others concerns.
Irishpilgrim, I myself don't see any problem with ecumenism as long it incorperates the apostles, because that's where Christ started the church. Who knows maybe we are supposed to be together by the time of the second coming dispite all the trouble those churches had along the way.
I don't think you were being fair to irishpilgrim RO. I think irishpilgrim does have genuine concerns that our church in affected by a liberal attitude like the Roman Catholic may of taken. Irishpilgrim may of being RC and see, in his eyes a same liberal approach taken place.
If one has genuine concerns about something, one cannot revert to ad hominum comments when one disagrees with an argument. Just look at the very first line of his response. Every argument IrishPilgrim doesn't agree with becomes Hegalian dialectic. If he really wants to discuss problems, he needs to have a coherent argument void of name calling.
Secondly, this topic is about papal resignation, not ecumenism, liberalism, freudian psychology, Rick Warren, uncovered heads, short skirts, tight jeans or "developmental theology". If one wants to argue that papal resignation is some sort of developing liberalism or developing liberal theology, the the argument needs logical support. Adding a "zoom" after every word is not logical debate or rhetoric. If one can't find logical support, and can't stick to the topic, don't respond at all. But that's the whole problem. Once you say the word ecumenism, even if your definition includes strict definitions and conditions (and God forbid actual Biblical references), he only hears "feminism and freudism". I am not saying this to attack his character (as I know he will accuse me of). I am saying this based on responses he gave on the topic of ecumenism. We do know for fact that we are supposed to all be together as Christians.
1. "Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others (including other Churches) .... that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Phil 2:4,10) Every knee is not just Coptic knees. Every knee is not just people we agree with. Every knee is every one with no exceptions.
2. "When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place." (Acts 2:1). God the Holy Spirit came when the Apostles were all united, not just physically but also spiritually. When Christ comes in the Second Coming, how should all Christians behave - united physically and spiritually or insisting on divisions?
3. “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one," (John 17:20-23)
Three times Christ calls for unity, not in only in His Apostle but those who will believe. Three times Christ calls for all to be united in the faith that (1) Christ is one with the Father, (2) that we should be one in each other, (3) that we should know God sent Christ, and (4) that we are perfected in unity.
[quote author=ReturnOrthodoxy link=topic=14265.msg163347#msg163347 date=1361083245]
Hey IP,
I wonder what you think of Isaac the Syrian who retired from being Bishop of Nneveh? In the Orthodox Church, we have St. Theophan the Recluse who retired from pastoral ability to retreat in prayer? In the British Orthodox Church, Father Micheal Robinson has retired from pastoral responsibility. Abouna Antonios Amin, a famed Coptic Orthodox priest had retired from pastoral ability. These are more modern examples.
The Holy Spirit certainly does not stop doing his job! But man's weakness does not always allow him to work the will of the Holy Spirit. The humility is to know what one is failing, and that the failures of one person's health should not effect the church.
I don't know how it could be fabrication, brother, since the canons of the church do not forbid it, and it has been a commonality in the past. I will look for better sources now, and please give me a little time.
Pray for me, brother,
Ray
My point is this:
Catholics believe that it was the Holy Spirit that had chosen this Pope. If it was, why did the Holy Spirit chose someone who would later renounce his Papacy? Is this really from God?
Can we therefore say that the selection of the Pope involved even the Holy Spirit?
Why does the Holy Spirit choose humans who die to guide the Church? Does the Holy Spirit die with those bishops who die?
The action of the Holy Spirit through the clergy is ex opera operato -- it has nothing to with the minister of the sacraments (which includes ordination and the holding of offices in the Church), but it is the work of the Holy Spirit only, such that the sacraments are efficacious in and of themselves.