Independent priests.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cojuanco
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cojuanco

Guest
A note: This has nothing to do with me personally. I attend the TLM when possible, but I always go with those offered by the diocesan clergy or groups like the FSSP (mostly the former).

That said, I have a friend that attends the TLM regularly in a “chapel” in Garden Grove, CA. After some research, her priest it turns out had been excommunicated twenty years ago by a bishop in NJ, and further denies the authority of the local diocesan bishop (in this case, that of Orange). However, from what i’ve read of what he says, he recognizes Benedict XVI as the true Pope.

My questions then, are:
  1. Does my friend recieve the sacraments validly from her priest?
  2. In adhering to him, is it a schismatic act? Is it heresy?
  3. If not, what is it?
  4. In general, if one denies the authority of the local diocesan bishop, but still professes loyalty to the Pope, what does that make the aforementioned person?
 
  1. Once a Priest is ordained he is always a Priest. If the Priest was validly ordained, then the sacraments he confects are also valid, provided they are carried out according to proscribed Canon Law. However, they would be illicit because they are carried out without proper jurisdiction.
  2. Potentially, but that’s probably going to be a subjective determination.The mere fact of attending an independent chapel is unlikely to be schismatic or heretical without some wilful action or desire taken on the part of the person to separate oneself from either the Church or one of Her dogmas. Merely attending an independent chapel because you like the TLM is unlikely to satisfy this. Especially when, as you say, the chapel is not openly adopting sedevacantist views.
  3. Again, that’s subjective. If it is not schismatic or heretical, then it is nothing. Laity do not automatically incur penalties due to the lack of faculty of the Priest.
  4. As a Priest, you would still be validly ordained but you would be without jurisdictional faculties (unless, for example, there was a personal prelature in place or something unusual like that). Laity would be laity. I don’t believe that attending an independent chapel changes anything unless you’re wilfully attempting to separate yourself from the Church or denying Her teaching.
 
What if, then, said person attends a school affiliated with such chapel? Is that sufficient for the “willful action” standard? Because some friends of mine have argued I should have nothing more to do with her, while I’m a little hesitant to sever all ties of affection with someone I’ve known for a while.
 
Cojuanco said:
What if, then, said person attends a school affiliated with such chapel? Is that sufficient for the “willful action” standard? Because some friends of mine have argued I should have nothing more to do with her, while I’m a little hesitant to sever all ties of affection with someone I’ve known for a while.
Click to expand...
Again, it’s going to be a subjective determination most likely. If you’re sending your kids to the school because you want them to have a traditional Catholic education (which is the motivation of a lot of parents) then I don’t think that you can call that a schismatic act. However, if you’re attending the Independent chapel or sending your kids to the school because you want nothing to do with Rome, then that is probably going to present a problem.

I don’t believe there is any good reason to “shun” someone who attends an Independent chapel and we should assume that they are just as “Catholic” as you or I, unless there is something to show otherwise. Consider this in context: Would you shun your friend if they attended an extremely liberal parish? Would you shun them if they were Protestant?

In my opinion, the willingness of modern Catholics to embrace extremely liberal Catholics, Protestants and people of other religions while feeling that they should “shun” Catholics that are associated with traditionalist sects is problematic. Consider all these things in context and don’t intentionally seek out error on the part of someone who may be perfectly innocent.

I would suggest reading up on the case of the “Hawaii Six”, parishoners who were supposedly excommunicated by the local bishop for attending an SSPX chapel. It contains some clear statements by Rome as to the status of laity who attend Masses said by Priests who do not possess jurisdiction.
 
Cojuanco said:
What if, then, said person attends a school affiliated with such chapel? Is that sufficient for the “willful action” standard? Because some friends of mine have argued I should have nothing more to do with her, while I’m a little hesitant to sever all ties of affection with someone I’ve known for a while.
Click to expand...
Have you talked to her about this? What is her reasoning behind going to the independent chapel?
 
Cojuanco said:
AMy questions then, are:
  1. Does my friend recieve the sacraments validly from her priest?
  2. In adhering to him, is it a schismatic act? Is it heresy?
  3. If not, what is it?
  4. In general, if one denies the authority of the local diocesan bishop, but still professes loyalty to the Pope, what does that make the aforementioned person?
Click to expand...
#4 makes him disobedient, and he cannot say Mass except for himself privately or confect sacraments in any diocese w/o that bishop’s permission. Your friend should consult her bishop to find out the answer to the first 3 questions.
 
Onegin said:
  1. provided they are carried out according to proscribed Canon Law.
Click to expand...
I think the word you need is “prescribed” as in “prescribed by Canon Law.” “proscribe” has an opposite meaning to what you intend.
 
I would agree with the posters here. Although the Mass is probably valid, it is illicit.

But why was he excommunicated? Is it because he disobeyed his own bishop for saying the Latin Mass? Because if so, he can now say either the OF or EF without permission from his bishop per 2007 SP. Some of these “independent” priests have been granted full faculties by virtue of their own bishops and the local bishops so it may behoove you to encourage him to pursue this route. Every priest needs some support so, if you really like his Masses, hey, do what you can. No sin in trying.
 
Onegin said:

“In my opinion, the willingness of modern Catholics to embrace extremely liberal Catholics, Protestants and people of other religions while feeling that they should “shun” Catholics that are associated with traditionalist sects is problematic. Consider all these things in context and don’t intentionally seek out error on the part of someone who may be perfectly innocent.”

Bravo! It would be interesting to get to the root of why modern Catholics feel they should “shun” Catholics that are associated with traditional groups while embracing every other kind of person imaginable to the modern mind without a qualm.
 
Lormar said:
Onegin said:

“In my opinion, the willingness of modern Catholics to embrace extremely liberal Catholics, Protestants and people of other religions while feeling that they should “shun” Catholics that are associated with traditionalist sects is problematic. Consider all these things in context and don’t intentionally seek out error on the part of someone who may be perfectly innocent.”

Bravo! It would be interesting to get to the root of why modern Catholics feel they should “shun” Catholics that are associated with traditional groups while embracing every other kind of person imaginable to the modern mind without a qualm.
Click to expand...
I guess you’re right. Though some other things stick me in the craw with her, they have no direct relationship to religion. I won’t relate them here, for that would be unfair detraction…
 
Cojuanco said:
A note: This has nothing to do with me personally. I attend the TLM when possible, but I always go with those offered by the diocesan clergy or groups like the FSSP (mostly the former).

That said, I have a friend that attends the TLM regularly in a “chapel” in Garden Grove, CA. After some research, her priest it turns out had been excommunicated twenty years ago by a bishop in NJ, and further denies the authority of the local diocesan bishop (in this case, that of Orange). However, from what i’ve read of what he says, he recognizes Benedict XVI as the true Pope.

My questions then, are:
  1. Does my friend recieve the sacraments validly from her priest?
  2. In adhering to him, is it a schismatic act? Is it heresy?
  3. If not, what is it?
  4. In general, if one denies the authority of the local diocesan bishop, but still professes loyalty to the Pope, what does that make the aforementioned person?
Click to expand...
In addition to what others have said, there is one really important point. Your friend cannot validly receive absolution from this priest.

Can. 966 §1. The valid absolution of sins requires that the minister have, in addition to the power of orders, the faculty of exercising it for the faithful to whom he imparts absolution.
§2. A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself or by a grant made by the competent authority according to the norm of can. 969.

Can. 969 §1. The local ordinary alone is competent to confer upon any presbyters whatsoever the faculty to hear the confessions of any of the faithful. Presbyters who are members of religious institutes, however, are not to use the faculty without at least the presumed permission of their superior.
​
So if the ordinary from the diocese of Orange has not granted this priest faculties to hear confession, any absolution he has given is **invalid **(not illicit…invalid).
 
Now that’s even *worse *that I had come in assuming… Confession is, to understate it greatly, a pretty big deal.:eek:
 
Cojuanco said:
Now that’s even *worse *that I had come in assuming… Confession is, to understate it greatly, a pretty big deal.:eek:
Click to expand...
This is not a statement against this priest. He might be a fine man.

But it is what it is.

(Consider this, what about all of those SSPX followers??)
 
markomalley said:
This is not a statement against this priest. He might be a fine man.

But it is what it is.

(Consider this, what about all of those SSPX followers??)
Click to expand...
Neither did I intend it as a statement against the priest, but a statement of shock for a friend, who has been operating under the assumption that her confessions were valid. I’m going to have to find a nice way to break it to her…

That said, this is why we need to pray that the SSPX et. al. are able to reenter in full communion with Rome.
 
She probably already knows. Many SSPX/Independent chapel goers attend confession elsewhere, just FYI. So, chances are, I don’t think you’ll need to “break” anything to her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top