Abbots and Confirmation

[malphono]

I’m not well-versed on the canonical status of monasteries, but I do understand that many of the abbots in the US have ordinary jurisdiction within the monastery itself. In other words, some have a regular diocese with parishes (that’s an abbatia nullius, right?), but in the US that ordinary jurisdiction (which is equivalent to the jurisdiction of a bishop-ordinary) applies only to the monks of that community and not to anyone else–but they do still have it. Belmont being the one exception? Comments, corrections?

That’s pretty much that way I understand it as well. Belmont Abbey was (is?) the one abbatia nullius in the US, meaning that the it had (has?) ordinary jurisdiction over a defined territory. As I recall, there are (were?) several similar situations in Europe and perhaps elsewhere.

 

[Pacbox]

I apologize for the lack of clarity, and upon reflection agree with both your concern for the confirmandi as well as the lack of information in my post. I had assumed it was obvious that the abbot would have gone through all the proper measures. For those curious, this was our regular scheduled confirmation.

Joe, hearing from you that it is common is a little discomforting, considering I too am of said diocese. Now I think I’ve blown my cover. Anyway, I was wondering if you knew anyone confirmed by an abbot, anywhere. It’s nice he had his own crosier/staff though, he, he… I know he came a great distance from his abbey, and that his community is planning on moving to the border of the county to expand as well as move away from damaged buildings. Can you guess who he is yet?

It’s alright. I was just trying to understand and gain clarification. Sometimes, it’s better to err on the side of caution and give a lot of information so readers who read won’t be confused like I was. Like I said, I’d never heard of an abbot being able to confirm before. This was new to me.

 

[Pacbox]

I think that one should not second-guess the church.

There is a dangerous growing tendency for Catholics all too often to assume they might be catching a cleric messing up. There is no possibility of a Confirmation happening in a parish without the bishop knowing about it, he owns the place and employs the pastor.

It does happen to be the case that many (if not all) Benedictine Abbots are actually bishops. It has been this way for many centuries. That is why so many attend General Councils of the church. They are also able to ordain clergy, which is good, in some monasteries half the monks are ordained and these can be a great relief to the local diocese in a pinch to supply clergy.

I wasn’t trying to second guess, I just wasn’t sure I had all the information and responded to the information in the original post. Like I said, I’d never heard of an abbot confirming before. It was new to me.

I would like not to have to worry or concern myself about catching a priest messing up but unfortunately, I’ve had too many experiences in the parishes I have been in over the years to not be cautious of behaviors and actions taken. I know and am aware most priests desire to live their vocation to the best of their ability. Unfortunately, there are a few who choose not to follow Jesus and behave in a manor contrary to their vocation. Unfortunately, the rare bad apple affects the impression of the whole bunch.

 

[Hesychios]

I wasn’t trying to second guess,

I am sorry my post came off the way it did.

I was not chastising you, it was more of a general comment to everyone. I am truly sorry.

I am not a Roman Catholic, and yet I have a fond attachment to the church. It bothers me tremendously to read about the various scandals and the priests and bishops who are not trusted by their own flocks.

All too often we read of this or that priest celebrating in a way that may not be ‘licit’ but really I think that it must be terrible for them serving like this as if under a microscope. If I had just one thing to say to my Roman Catholic brothers and sisters it would be “trust your bishops and priests”, at least a little bit more!

After all, the Pope has universal jurisdiction and every appointment is a reflection on his judgment. If the clergy are not trusted to do the right thing that really undermines the Papacy as an institution in the view of the rest of us. If visitors like me were to see more confidence and pride by the faithful in their own bishops it would make a much better impression.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

A technical point, but at the Easter Vigil the bishop does not need to give a dispensation for pastors to confirm; they have that right by law.

Only for those they baptize. Our bishop has given a general permission for the pastors to confirm those who were previously baptized in other faith communities. Specific delegation must be obtained, in our diocese, to confirm adults who were previously baptized in the Catholic Church. A common case is the spouse of a catechumen who was baptized but never confirmed.

We did have a case a few years back of two Maronites who somehow had not been chrismated when baptized. Since the local Maronite church had no program for confirming adults they let them come to our program. When it came Easter our pastor was delegated by the Maronite bishop to confirm them for him.

 

[Pacbox]

I am sorry my post came off the way it did.

I was not chastising you, it was more of a general comment to everyone. I am truly sorry.

I am not a Roman Catholic, and yet I have a fond attachment to the church. It bothers me tremendously to read about the various scandals and the priests and bishops who are not trusted by their own flocks.

All too often we read of this or that priest celebrating in a way that may not be ‘licit’ but really I think that it must be terrible for them serving like this as if under a microscope. If I had just one thing to say to my Roman Catholic brothers and sisters it would be “trust your bishops and priests”, at least a little bit more!

After all, the Pope has universal jurisdiction and every appointment is a reflection on his judgment. If the clergy are not trusted to do the right thing that really undermines the Papacy as an institution in the view of the rest of us. If visitors like me were to see more confidence and pride by the faithful in their own bishops it would make a much better impression.

You didn’t offend me. The unfortunate problem with an online forum is that we can’t see the facial and body expressions of the other person so posts aren’t always clear.

I get what you mean. People are more focused on people screwing up rather than living a holy life. And priests and the like are an even greater target. Which is really sad. For me, knowing I have no say leads me to do the one thing that is effective: pray. People aren’t perfect but I can pray that they become perfect.

 

[LilyM]

True. I just find it odd that beyond Easter Vigil, a Bishop would grant a dispensation to a priest to do so. I’ve never heard or seen anyone but the Bishop or specifically designated priest and situation (Easter Vigil) being given this dispensation before. I just found it odd that an Abbot, whose main role is to lead his monastic community, would be given such a dispensation. My concern was that the abbot may not have permission and the faculty to do so and had done so without permission and faculty and then there would be cause for concern about the validity of the sacrament. Like I posted, there was a lack of information and I responded to the information given.

Well, as has been stated, it appears that bishops are fairly free in their power to delegate. It’s also possible that a bishop or auxiliary, if initially scheduled to do them in the original case, became ill or something, and so the Abbot had to step in.

 

[dans0622]

I’m not well-versed on the canonical status of monasteries, but I do understand that many of the abbots in the US have ordinary jurisdiction within the monastery itself. In other words, some have a regular diocese with parishes (that’s an abbatia nullius, right?), but in the US that ordinary jurisdiction (which is equivalent to the jurisdiction of a bishop-ordinary) applies only to the monks of that community and not to anyone else–but they do still have it. Belmont being the one exception? Comments, corrections?

Hello Father David,

Yes, an abbot is always considered an ordinary (not a local ordinary). The same is true for any other “major superior” in a religious institute or society of apostolic life of pontifical right (canons 134 & 620). All these major superiors would have ordinary jurisdiction only in regard to their subjects in the order or society.

I tried to find updated statistics and now there are only 11 territorial abbacies (in the former Code called an abbacy “nullius dioeceseos”) which are similar to a diocese and the abbot is equivalent to a diocesan bishop. Belmont was suppressed, as a territorial abbacy, in 1970 or something like that.

Hope that is clear.

Dan

 

[FrDavid96]

Hello Father David,

Yes, an abbot is always considered an ordinary (not a local ordinary). The same is true for any other “major superior” in a religious institute or society of apostolic life of pontifical right (canons 134 & 620). All these major superiors would have ordinary jurisdiction only in regard to their subjects in the order or society.

I tried to find updated statistics and now there are only 11 territorial abbacies (in the former Code called an abbacy “nullius dioeceseos”) which are similar to a diocese and the abbot is equivalent to a diocesan bishop. Belmont was suppressed, as a territorial abbacy, in 1970 or something like that.

Hope that is clear.

Dan

So a major superior also has ordinary jurisdiction, not only an abbot? That part I did not know. Thanks.

To our dear readers, this might seem off-topic but it realy is on-topic because it helps us to define who is “equivalent to the diocesan bishop” in terms of jurisdiction, and that goes to the heart of the original question.

 

[dans0622]

So a major superior also has ordinary jurisdiction, not only an abbot? That part I did not know. Thanks.

To our dear readers, this might seem off-topic but it realy is on-topic because it helps us to define who is “equivalent to the diocesan bishop” in terms of jurisdiction, and that goes to the heart of the original question.

Yes, they have ordinary jusrisdiction. But, just to make sure I am clear, that does *not *make them equivalent, in canon law, to a diocesan bishop. That is why the law is quick to point out that while these men are “ordinaries,” they are not “local ordinaries.”

There are these institutions that are similar to a diocese–the territorial prelature, territorial abbacy, apostolic prefecture, apostolic vicariate, apostolic administration, military ordinariate–and only those who are appointed to be the pastor of these institutions are equivalent to a diocesan bishop.

Practically speaking, there are only dioceses in the USA. So, these other structures, except the military ordinariate, do not exist. When a diocese is vacant, by the way, the diocesan administrator has the faculty, by law, to confer confirmation, even if he is not a bishop.

I’m probably belaboring the point…

Dan

 

[The_Fool]

To our dear readers, this might seem off-topic but it realy is on-topic because it helps us to define who is “equivalent to the diocesan bishop” in terms of jurisdiction, and that goes to the heart of the original question.

I tend to put my foot in my mouth often, but I thought the original question asked if anyone knew anyone else who was confirmed by an abbot. Although I can understand misunderstandings regarding my original post, and see the misleading information I wrote, I have yet to receive a direct answer to the original question. A few people acknowledged the possibility. A few people implied direct knowledge of having seen it done, or events in which it has occurred, but I have yet to see anything that really answers the question save for those who said, yeah, it happens around where I am. I suppose the original question was asked with the intent of determining how common a similar occurrence truly is. But, hey, it’s fun reading all this, and informative too!

Thanks everyone!

 

[roselily]

I tend to put my foot in my mouth often, but I thought the original question asked if anyone knew anyone else who was confirmed by an abbot. Although I can understand misunderstandings regarding my original post, and see the misleading information I wrote, I have yet to receive a direct answer to the original question. A few people acknowledged the possibility. A few people implied direct knowledge of having seen it done, or events in which it has occurred, but I have yet to see anything that really answers the question save for those who said, yeah, it happens around where I am. I suppose the original question was asked with the intent of determining how common a similar occurrence truly is. But, hey, it’s fun reading all this, and informative too!

Thanks everyone!

testing, testing… ابپتث جچحخ دذرزژ سشصضطظ عغفقکگ لمنوهی I think it’s out of order and missing a few letters.

Why?
Why do you missing a few letters?
What word?

 

[diggerdomer]

I tend to put my foot in my mouth often, but I thought the original question asked if anyone knew anyone else who was confirmed by an abbot. Although I can understand misunderstandings regarding my original post, and see the misleading information I wrote, I have yet to receive a direct answer to the original question. A few people acknowledged the possibility. A few people implied direct knowledge of having seen it done, or events in which it has occurred, but I have yet to see anything that really answers the question save for those who said, yeah, it happens around where I am. I suppose the original question was asked with the intent of determining how common a similar occurrence truly is. But, hey, it’s fun reading all this, and informative too!

Thanks everyone!

Sorry if your original question wasn’t answered.

In response to what I thought your original question was, I can say yes.

 

[The_Fool]

testing, testing… ابپتث جچحخ دذرزژ سشصضطظ عغفقکگ لمنوهی I think it’s out of order and missing a few letters.

Why?
Why do you missing a few letters?
What word?

It’s a little off topic… okay it’s quite off topic. Maybe I should change the signature. The above are supposed to be the Persian alphabet as I remember it, broken up into chunks so it’s not a long, near continuous line. Someone else mentioned they are the same as in the Arabic alphabet, which doesn’t surprise me, but Arabic does use some characters and sounds that Farsi does not. I can’t help but feel like something is out of order in there, or missing, besides the short vowels. I don’t know where the short ones go anyway. This was more of an exercise to see if I remembered where all the keys were on my keyboard.

In case you were curious, the sign says, “My Farsi is bad.” I apologize for the confusion, but it’s a great conversation starter, no?

 

[diggerdomer]

It’s a little off topic… okay it’s quite off topic. Maybe I should change the signature. The above are supposed to be the Persian alphabet as I remember it, broken up into chunks so it’s not a long, near continuous line. Someone else mentioned they are the same as in the Arabic alphabet, which doesn’t surprise me, but Arabic does use some characters and sounds that Farsi does not. I can’t help but feel like something is out of order in there, or missing, besides the short vowels. I don’t know where the short ones go anyway. This was more of an exercise to see if I remembered where all the keys were on my keyboard.

In case you were curious, the sign says, “My Farsi is bad.” I apologize for the confusion, but it’s a great conversation starter, no?

Not knowing any language that remotely resembled the characters you indicated, I had no choice but to ignore them. Which, unfortunately, made it harder to respond sincerely to your postings.

 

[The_Fool]

Sorry if your original question wasn’t answered.

In response to what I thought your original question was, I can say yes.

It’s all right. I was just putting something out I was curious about. The gentleman who said he was an MC for confirmations the abbot did implied knowledge of such occurrences and people with his declaration. Another person said that such occurrences were common place where he was. That answered an unasked question as to whether it was common in the Diocese of Orange in California.

Ultimately, I know we have a shortage of priests, but are we getting a shortage of bishops as well, or is it something else?

 

[The_Fool]

Not knowing any language that remotely resembled the characters you indicated, I had no choice but to ignore them. Which, unfortunately, made it harder to respond sincerely to your postings.

Noted. I will make a change that will hopefully be less… inappropriate?

 

[diggerdomer]

It’s all right. I was just putting something out I was curious about. The gentleman who said he was an MC for confirmations the abbot did implied knowledge of such occurrences and people with his declaration. Another person said that such occurrences were common place where he was. That answered an unasked question as to whether it was common in the Diocese of Orange in California.

Ultimately, I know we have a shortage of priests, but are we getting a shortage of bishops as well, or is it something else?

My experience (which is worth nothing more than that) is that it’s something else. Primarily, the demands on a bishop’s time. That’s all. No big deal in my mind.

 

[The_Fool]

My experience (which is worth nothing more than that) is that it’s something else. Primarily, the demands on a bishop’s time. That’s all. No big deal in my mind.

I always figured the bishops were genuinely busy myself. He’s either busy because he was non-confirmation duties to look to, or there’s more of us than he can cover. So at what point is a diocese too big though? Is there one? You don’t have to answer, I’m just being silly and need to sleep. Good night diggerdomer!

 

[diggerdomer]

I always figured the bishops were genuinely busy myself. He’s either busy because he was non-confirmation duties to look to, or there’s more of us than he can cover. So at what point is a diocese too big though? Is there one? You don’t have to answer, I’m just being silly and need to sleep. Good night diggerdomer!

Actually, I think the question raised by your query is incredibly significant for our Church.

Look at a diocese like New York City or Los Angeles. How many MILLIONS of Catholics are under the guidance of one bishop? Do people even know that New York City has more than one diocese? Now let’s look at a diocese in a less-populated state…how many fellow Catholic could name the diocese(s) that serve the states of Utah, Wyoming, or the Dakotas? (just an example…I of course mean no disrespect for any of the examples I use). How can we equate these? Theologically? sure. Practically? Hmmm…a very different question imho.

I love your question. “So at what point is a diocese too big?” I would love to see the bishops in our Church spend a Synod wrestling with this question (with lay participation of course).

Vatican II refers to the “local Church” as being the Bishop with the faithful united in the Eucharist…how many dioceses really feel a connection to their Bishop?

You asked the bazillion dollar question (given our current economic crises) imho.

Thanks so much