Can SSPX Priests be given faculties by the Ordinary of a Diocese

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeusSalusNostra
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DeusSalusNostra

Guest
Hi,

I’m wondering if an SSPX Priest can be given faculties to celebrate Holy Mass and to hear Confession in the diocese he is living.

I ask this because there was a Solemn Requiem Mass in my diocese that was in a normal Diocesan Parish, but the Mass was celebrated by an SSPX Priest with the permission of the Bishop. Is this perfectly allowed? I would hope so.

Any statements from PCED would be helpful in the matter!
 
I guess, from what I know, that would all be up to the discretion of the local bishop. From what you’ve said, he allowed it and therefore is okay. It seems as though a lot of bishops nowadays are starting to become a little more tolerant of the SSPX and are starting to grant them faculties.
 
The SSPX aren’t formally in schism or anything of the sort so I don’t see why not. It would seem to fall under the competence of the diocesan ordinary.

Now, what concessions the bishop asked for in return for regularization, I don’t know and wouldn’t speculate. 😉
 
Fr. Z had a blog post on this the other day, which read in part:

*Just to review, here are the key canons in the 1983 Code for the Latin Church (my emphasis):
Code: 
Can. 966 §1 For the valid absolution of sins, it is required that, in addition to the power of order, the minister has the faculty to exercise that power in respect of the faithful to whom he gives absolution.

§2 A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself, or by a concession issued by the competent authority in accordance with can. 969.

Can. 969 §1 Only the local Ordinary is competent to give to any priests whomsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of any whomsoever of the faithful. Priests who are members of religious institutes may not, however, use this faculty without the permission, at least presumed, of their Superior.

§2 The Superior of a religious institute or of a society of apostolic life, mentioned in can. 968 §2, is competent to give to any priests whomsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of his own subjects and of those others who live day and night in the house.
So, a man must be validly ordained and must have the Church’s permission to use the power to absolve sins validly.*

Check out the rest HERE
 
Okay, so it is/was perfectly allowed then? Glad to hear it! I do hope the SSPX will eventually make a more formal union with Rome.

And I saw what Fr. Z said, and it seems that in this case and in any case the Local Ordinary can give such permissions. Also, I see it talks about the Superior of an institute being able to grant faculties in the Code of Canon Law, thus one could conclude that the SSPX are technically always licit. I say technically. Considering that the SSPX were a validly approved Priestly Society to start off with.

Thanks for the help!
 
DeusSalusNostra said:
Okay, so it is/was perfectly allowed then? Glad to hear it! I do hope the SSPX will eventually make a more formal union with Rome.

And I saw what Fr. Z said, and it seems that in this case and in any case the Local Ordinary can give such permissions. Also, I see it talks about the Superior of an institute being able to grant faculties in the Code of Canon Law, thus one could conclude that the SSPX are technically always licit. I say technically. Considering that the SSPX were a validly approved Priestly Society to start off with.

Thanks for the help!
Click to expand...
I don’t believe that the superiors of societies of apostolic life have power to grant faculties. This seems to be the case with the FSSP, which has to have the bishops’ blessing before it can set up shop.
 
DeusSalusNostra said:
Okay, so it is/was perfectly allowed then? Glad to hear it! I do hope the SSPX will eventually make a more formal union with Rome.

And I saw what Fr. Z said, and it seems that in this case and in any case the Local Ordinary can give such permissions. Also, I see it talks about the Superior of an institute being able to grant faculties in the Code of Canon Law, thus one could conclude that the SSPX are technically always licit. I say technically. Considering that the SSPX were a validly approved Priestly Society to start off with.

Thanks for the help!
Click to expand...
I’m not so sure on that last point. At best they would be licitly able to absolve the sins of those in SSPX or those who “live day and night in the house.” They cannot validly (or licitly) absolve sins in a Diocese without the express permission of the ordinary.

§2 The Superior of a religious institute or of a society of apostolic life, mentioned in can. 968 §2, is competent to give to any priests whomsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of his own subjects and of those others who live day and night in the house.
 
sw85 said:
I don’t believe that the superiors of societies of apostolic life have power to grant faculties. This seems to be the case with the FSSP, which has to have the bishops’ blessing before it can set up shop.
Click to expand...
As long a the SSPX priest functions within the realm of the SSPX property, he has the faculties to offer the sacrament. Should he wish to do so outside of the SSPX, like any other priest of any other jurisdiction, he would then have to obtain the permission of the local Ordinary or Superior if on the property of one of the Orders.

The SSPX function under their own Bishops with supplied jurisdiction.
 
VeritasEst said:
As long a the SSPX priest functions within the realm of the SSPX property, he has the faculties to offer the sacrament.
Click to expand...
No he doesn’t, because faculties were universally removed by Rome. The SSPX also never received a Right of Exemption, so they can’t claim the “properties” argument.

Remember, the SSPX is not an Order. They’re not even a Society of Apostolic Life, they never made it that far in the process.
VeritasEst said:
Should he wish to do so outside of the SSPX, like any other priest of any other jurisdiction, he would then have to obtain the permission of the local Ordinary or Superior if on the property of one of the Orders.
Click to expand...
He would need this period because again, the SSPX cannot provide the faculties.
VeritasEst said:
The SSPX function under their own Bishops with supplied jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
The Bishops of the SSPX cannot provide such jurisdiction, they have no authority to do so. Their canonical powers have been stripped.
 
Melchior said:
No he doesn’t, because faculties were universally removed by Rome. The SSPX also never received a Right of Exemption, so they can’t claim the “properties” argument.

Remember, the SSPX is not an Order. They’re not even a Society of Apostolic Life, they never made it that far in the process.

He would need this period because again, the SSPX cannot provide the faculties.

The Bishops of the SSPX cannot provide such jurisdiction, they have no authority to do so. Their canonical powers have been stripped.
Click to expand...
Not true. The Pope himself would not be in active talks with Bishops who had no authority. Moreover, Rome’s actions toward the SSPX have been outside the required canonical procedures making them null and void. But I did not intend my response to be an occasion for another bashing session by those afraid of Tradition. I was simply responding to a person who already accepts Traditional Catholicism and needed some advice on finding a Traditional Catholic parish.
 
VeritasEst said:
Not true. The Pope himself would not be in active talks with Bishops who had no authority. Moreover, Rome’s actions toward the SSPX have been outside the required canonical procedures making them null and void. But I did not intend my response to be an occasion for another bashing session by those afraid of Tradition. I was simply responding to a person who already accepts Traditional Catholicism and needed some advice on finding a Traditional Catholic parish.
Click to expand...
This isn’t a bashing session. “Until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers - even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty - do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.” If you deny Rome the authority to govern the Church, we might as well through away the Papacy and the Magisterium. If a person wants a traditional parish, they should find an FSSP parish, since they actually dispense the sacraments licitly.
 
VeritasEst said:
Not true. The Pope himself would not be in active talks with Bishops who had no authority. Moreover, Rome’s actions toward the SSPX have been outside the required canonical procedures making them null and void. But I did not intend my response to be an occasion for another bashing session by those afraid of Tradition. I was simply responding to a person who already accepts Traditional Catholicism and needed some advice on finding a Traditional Catholic parish.
Click to expand...
Because anytime someone follows the Pope and Canon Law they are afraid of tradition…?

The Pope is talking to the Bishop (singular), as in Bishop Fellay. And it’s not even him, he’s appointed others on his behalf. The only reason a Bishop is involved is because of the illicit consecrations that helped result in this mess in the first place, otherwise he would be dealing with a superior who would, in this case, be a plain ol’ priest.

The “highest” level the Society got as that of a Pius Union, which is still diocesan level. Even with their founder, they still would have had at that time received permission and faculties from the local ordinaries. His Grace did not have any ordinary jurisdiction. This has not changed at all since their founding.

And that’s the key element of this; ordinary jurisdiction. One of the backbones of how people attempt to say SSPX confessions are “valid” is through supplied extraordinary jurisdiction. If the SSPX Bishops had true ordinary jurisdiction, this wouldn’t be an issue and they wouldn’t have canonical irregularities

Also, your use of the capital T is misleading, it implies that traditions/practices are on par with Sacred Tradition, which is not the case.
 
VeritasEst said:
Not true. The Pope himself would not be in active talks with Bishops who had no authority. Moreover, Rome’s actions toward the SSPX have been outside the required canonical procedures making them null and void.
Click to expand...
Actually, it is true; the Pope (Benedict 16) was in active talks with the bishops for the very reason that they had no authority. and they had no authority because the Pope, who is the lawgiver, said they had no authority. The purpose of the talks was reconciliation, which, if accomplished, would move the bishops forward towards having that authority.

Further, there are precious few, if any Canon lawyers who would agree that there was anything making Rome’s actions null and void. This is an argument the SSPX have been making since Archbishop Lefebvre ordained the four bishops, and the only place it gains any traction is within the SSPX.
 
DeusSalusNostra said:
Hi,

I’m wondering if an SSPX Priest can be given faculties to celebrate Holy Mass and to hear Confession in the diocese he is living.

I ask this because there was a Solemn Requiem Mass in my diocese that was in a normal Diocesan Parish, but the Mass was celebrated by an SSPX Priest with the permission of the Bishop. Is this perfectly allowed? I would hope so.

Any statements from PCED would be helpful in the matter!
Click to expand...
There is a difference between allowing the use of a building, and granting facilities. I saw a report that the bishop of the diocese had allowed the SSPX to say the Mass in a diocesan church, but nothing was said that he had, or had not, granted facilities.

It may be that the bishop had granted facilities; but that would seem to be in direct contradiction with Rome’s stance viz a viz the SSPX in general.
 
otjm said:
Actually, it is true; the Pope (Benedict 16) was in active talks with the bishops for the very reason that they had no authority. and they had no authority because the Pope, who is the lawgiver, said they had no authority. The purpose of the talks was reconciliation, which, if accomplished, would move the bishops forward towards having that authority.

Further, there are precious few, if any Canon lawyers who would agree that there was anything making Rome’s actions null and void. This is an argument the SSPX have been making since Archbishop Lefebvre ordained the four bishops, and** the only place it gains any traction is within the SSPX.**
Click to expand...
👍
 
DeusSalusNostra said:
…I’m wondering if an SSPX Priest can be given faculties to celebrate Holy Mass and to hear Confession in the diocese he is living.

I ask this because there was a Solemn Requiem Mass in my diocese that was in a normal Diocesan Parish, but the Mass was celebrated by an SSPX Priest with the permission of the Bishop. Is this perfectly allowed? I would hope so.

Any statements from PCED would be helpful in the matter!
Click to expand...
Hello,

I’d say that a diocesan bishop has the authority to grant any priest faculties and/or permit him to minister in his diocese (canon 381.1, canon 391). At the same time, he must be mindful of the exception at the end of canon 381 and the requirement of canon 392.

I don’t think that there is “a law or a decree of the Supreme Pontiff” that “reserves to the supreme authority or to another ecclesiastical authority” the ability to allow an SSPX priest to minister in his diocese (cf. c. 381.1). However, since the whole SSPX affair is an issue that the Holy See has been dealing with since the 1970’s, I think it would be prudent for a bishop to confer with the Holy See before going ahead with allowing an SSPX priest to carry out some ministry in his diocese, in particular if it is something more long-term than just one Requiem Mass. If it’s just one Mass, I don’t know that I would think the bishop should discuss the matter with the Holy See.

If an SSPX priest wanted to leave that Society and become incardinated in a diocese, the bishop could do that on his own and would not need to confer with the Holy See.

Referenced canons are here: vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1E.HTM

I am not an expert in all the statements of the PCED. I can only say that I don’t recall any statements on this particular issue.

Dan
 
Beware of too much misinformation that is not good for the general public.

When discussing issues of Canon Law, please refrain from giving it your interpretation. This has the potential to do harm. Please reference the appropriate Canon Law commentaries of which there are some very good ones or ask for assistance from someone who knows Canon Law.
 
Thomas_Casey said:
Beware of too much misinformation that is not good for the general public.

When discussing issues of Canon Law, please refrain from giving it your interpretation. This has the potential to do harm. Please reference the appropriate Canon Law commentaries of which there are some very good ones or ask for assistance from someone who knows Canon Law.
Click to expand...
That is what causes a lot of trouble - lay “experts” - whether in Canon Law or theology. I believe Brother Jay mentioned this once too.

Thanks for the reminder.
 
Yes, the bishop may give him faculties. The SSPX has its own Superior-General, but since their status with the church is irregular, the Superior-General does not have the power to grant faculties.

God Bless. :highprayer:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top