Quote: But Fr. Jenkins, like all university presidents, must consider the will of the school’s governing board.
The bishops do not have the authority to do that to a religious congregation of Pontifical Right. These congregations are exempt from the authority of the local bishop as long as they operate within their own jurisdiction. Notre Dame, Franciscan University, St. Bonaventure, Georgetown, Loyola and others such as these are within the jurisdiction of the major religious superior of the congregation or order, not the bishop. Bishops and Major Superiors are equal in power and authority, because these are disciplinary matters, not sacramental or parish matters. The Vatican can’t do it either, because civil law will not allow it. The priests and brothers at these colleges get their faculties from their major superior, not the local bishop.
You cannot defrock a religious in solemn vows. Fr. Jenkins is not only a priest, he is also a Religious Brother of the Holy Cross. There is no provision for defrocking religious brothers. They are protected by Papal Bulls. You can excommunnicate, but you have to prove cause.
The USCCB can take away the university’s Cathlic status. However, there is a question of whether this is fair to the students, faculties and Holy Cross Brothers who are faithful to the Church.
That cannot be done. Most of our bishops in the USA are secular men. They are not religious. Only religious have authority over religious. The Holy Father has already delegated all cases dealing with religious life to the Sacred Congregation for Religious Institutes and Societies of Apostolic Life. The USSCB has to go through them. But the question remains, should the Holy Cross Brothers be punished over the sins of one member?And what if he dicideds to delegate the enforcing power over the Holy Cross Brothers to the USCCB?JR
He won’t be Obama’s new best friend. Jenkins’ sad brown nosing is just going to blend in with the rest of them. If nothing in this at all had been self serving to Obama he wouldn’t have been there, period. Jenkins will just look even more pathetic in the future than he does now b/c all he’ll be remembered for is how he sold out to kiss up to Obama, but Obama won’t remember his name weeks from now.
Thank you for the article Havard. I’ve been trying to explain these points on this thread and several other threads for days; but somehow I get the impression that people are not listening.
This is something I don’t think people are understanding. The Pope protecting the Holy Cross Brothers as an institution is not the same as the Pope protecting, or agreeing with, Fr. Jenkins. That’s the way I’m reading this at least. He’s not going to let one person (Fr. Jenkins) take down the entire institution that is directly under his protection. Correct?In this situation, Pope Benedict is going to protect the Holy Cross Brothers and leave Fr. Jenkin’s future and consequences to his Provincial Superior. JR
Ironic isn’t. Everyone in the world wanted Bishop Williamson of the SSPX, flogged, excommunicated, hanged, whatever, for believing in something that was yes wrong. And they basically got it. He was silenced. But now that the shoe is on the liberals foot. Not a single thing can be done about it, because he is protected. Well my advice, if anyone wants to attend an SSPX Mass or be part of their prayer services. THEN GO FOR IT!!!. They are equally as Roman Catholic if not way more then these liberals!!. And God is our protection!!. And yes it was during or after Vatican 2, that this whole mess started!!. I believe 1967. When our Catholic identity went down the drain!.Thank you for the article Havard. I’ve been trying to explain these points on this thread and several other threads for days; but somehow I get the impression that people are not listening.
I walk away with the feeling that everyone wants things done their way and very dramatically. The Church doesn’t function that way. It is a very legal organization. She also tries to be very fair to all parties. In this case, she must try to be fair to the Congregation of the Holy Cross, the faithful students, faculty and parents and the benefactors of the university.
I understand that some people are so frustrated about this issue that they want the Holy Father to intervene personally. However, as the article clearly sets out, the Congregation of the Holy Cross is protected by the Church, meaning the Holy Father. There are certain religious communities that are what we call exempt religious communities. The pope reserves the authority to intervene in their affairs and institutions for himself.
They are exempt from the authority of the bishops, the opinion and wishes of the laity and from certain civil authorities. Among them the more popular ones are: Holy Cross, Franciscans, Jesuits, Dominicans, Carmelites, Augustinians, Benedictines, Poor Clares, Opus Dei, and Maryknoll. There are others.
In this situation, Pope Benedict is going to protect the Holy Cross Brothers and leave Fr. Jenkin’s future and consequences to his Provincial Superior. As to the university, the Holy Father cannot touch it, because it is not the property of the Church. Canon law does not recognize joint ventures between a religious congregation and a lay body. Therefore, as far as the Vatican is concerned, the university is autonomous, since it approved its separation from the Holy Cross Congregation decades ago.
What is the Vatican’s concern is that any individual who calls himself Catholic comply with the wishes, teachings and laws of the Church. This includes the laity who want to see Notre Dame and Fr. Jenkins punished. That is not the law of the Church or the process. Fr. Jenkins is the responsibility of his Provincial Superior and until the contract is completed, there is little that the Provincial can do.
We have to be patient and let the process work.
Fraternally,
JR
It seems lately that many on these boards think that human emotion, an action driven by it, can do anything from define to take down the Catholic Church.
Under the principle of subsidiarity, you allow the people in the chain of command to do their job. Fr. Jenkins is the responsibility of the Provincial Superior, not the Pope’s. The Holy Father will let him deal with the issue.
Bishop Williamson is not in the same situation because he is a conservative and Fr. Jenkins a liberal. Their situations are different because of their status.
JR, would explain the reasoning behind some of this? I’m wondering if some of us might hear, “Bishops are not protected, religious are,” and ignore the “Pontifical Rights and Papal Bulls” part, etc. Does it have something to do with the fact that religious communities are not bound to a geographical area and therefore it wouldn’t make sense for bishops who have authority over certain geographical areas to have authority over part of a religious community?
Actually John there are many people that disagree with you. The students themselves invited the high profile pro-life activists. I go to the March for Life in DC and the ND chapter is always there and they are an active group. ndresponse.com/index.html
From the beginning of Christian history bishops were responsible for local churches, later called dioceses. The local churches were composed of secular men and women.
Thanks for the lesson! Even though this may be straying off topic (and stop me or move this post if it does), are there religious communities of nuns that are counterparts to the diocesan priests? I guess what I mean is are there secular nuns? Or are all nuns religious?From the beginning of Christian history bishops were responsible for local churches, later called dioceses. The local churches were composed of secular men and women.
Religious are not seculars. They are consecrated men and women. Therefore, they did not belong under the jurisdiction of the bishop whose job it was to care for the laity.
Religious communities grew into national and international families, since they were not limited to any local church. This allowed them to spread the mission and spirit of their founders around the world.
As they grew in size, they needed to answer to someone. The papacy took them under its wing. The papacy governed them and protected them. Thus it remains to this day.
A lay person belongs to the diocese where he was baptized and where he lives. A religious belongs to no diocese. He belongs to the universal Church. His mission is to serve the universal Church, not one jurisdiction.
Bishops often contract religious to help them run parishes, schools and other diocesan ministries when they have a shortage of qualified people to do so. But these are contractual relationships that can be terminated by either side at any time.
This also protects the bishops and the diocese. The diocese is not responsible for the financial or physical well-being of religious or for their education. They can make no demands on the diocese or its people.
This began with the first hermits of the desert and later with the first monastic communities founded by St. Benedict in the west and St. Basil in the east.
The two reasons that they do not fall under the authority of bishops:
There is one thing that we should fear above all things. When man allows himself to be guided by his punitive passions and desires to punish every infraction and over stepping the system, we run the risk of turning the Church into a theocratic dictatorship. The Bride of Christ is a mother, not a dictator.
- They are not secular or lay
- They belong to the universal Church, not any local Church
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
All nuns and sisters are religious. Even secular orders such as the Secular Franciscans belong to a religious family.