No Diocesan Priestly Faculties Granted

[juicekman]

Hey guys,

WOW! Very good comments. Thank you very much for all your ideas and insight.

Sorry I have not been able to respond to all your questions. I think this is maybe going in the wrong direction. I started this forum only to get an answer to the question about this priest being allowed to say mass with x amount of people without faculties in the diocese.

My conflicting opinions came from the priest himself and a prominent theologian in the area who holds a STD and is a deacon. I asked the deacon this question: “if a priest does not have faculties within the diocese and celebrates a “private mass” who can attend?” He said nobody. But it is very possible he misunderstood my question. Maybe he was thinking that this priest had his faculties removed or something. In this case he is a foreign priest and is celebrating mass at his house. He does not have his faculties removed from anywhere. He just does not have them here. I am not discerning the order, but helping out and have been for the past year since he has been in this country. The reason for him not applying for faculties is too complicated of a question and is not worth getting into. The bottom line is he may not continue his order here and he has a number of bishops in different parts of the world who may receive his order. So, this is more of a temporary question for the immediate future. He is not looking to minister at local parishes for the time being.

So, all I really want to know is if it is licit for him to have other people at his masses.

Thanks.

 

[puzzleannie]

thanks for the clarification, it sounds much more like the situation I described, and yes any Catholic who happens to be present may participate in Mass, at least according to our deacon, but he cannot advertise this as a regularly scheduled Mass. If you have doubts specifically about that issue, attending his Masses, or whether they fulfill your obligation, you will still have to ask the bishop’s office. That is not launching a full scale investigation, it is just asking, anonymously if you prefer. these situations are more complicated with foreign born clergy and the issues usually have nothing to do with relgion, more with the civil immigration laws. There are procedures, they are slow, but that does not necessarily prevent him meanwhile from going about his duties.

 

[FrDavid96]

Hey guys,

WOW! Very good comments. Thank you very much for all your ideas and insight.

Sorry I have not been able to respond to all your questions. I think this is maybe going in the wrong direction. I started this forum only to get an answer to the question about this priest being allowed to say mass with x amount of people without faculties in the diocese.

My conflicting opinions came from the priest himself and a prominent theologian in the area who holds a STD and is a deacon. I asked the deacon this question: “if a priest does not have faculties within the diocese and celebrates a “private mass” who can attend?” He said nobody. But it is very possible he misunderstood my question. Maybe he was thinking that this priest had his faculties removed or something. In this case he is a foreign priest and is celebrating mass at his house. He does not have his faculties removed from anywhere. He just does not have them here. I am not discerning the order, but helping out and have been for the past year since he has been in this country. The reason for him not applying for faculties is too complicated of a question and is not worth getting into. The bottom line is he may not continue his order here and he has a number of bishops in different parts of the world who may receive his order. So, this is more of a temporary question for the immediate future. He is not looking to minister at local parishes for the time being.

So, all I really want to know is if it is licit for him to have other people at his masses.

Thanks.

Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, you may indeed attend when he’s saying Mass. No problem.

I think what happened here is that the deacon had a different idea in mind when you said “private Mass” combined with the fact that the priest doesn’t have faculties from the diocese. He was (probably) thinking of a priest who has been told by his bishop that he cannot celebrate Mass in public, but is still permitted to say Mass in private (example: a priest who has been accused of something but the canonical trial to determine guilt or innocence hasn’t yet happened). The difficulty comes in the term “private Mass” which isn’t a canonical term as such, but one which different people use different ways.

“Private Mass” might mean either “Missae sine populo” aka “Mass at which only one minister participates” celebrated by a priest who is in every way “in good standing.”

Or “private Mass” might refer to a Mass said by a priest who has been told by his bishop that he’s prohibited from saying Mass in a public setting–which depending on circumstances, might or might not actually be attended by more than just a few people.

If that priest were trying to establish a parish without the permission of the local bishop, and he were going around inviting people to join, that would be a problem. But given the circumstances that you’re living in the same building, it’s only natural that he would invite you to his Mass. To put that another way, it’s hardly a situation where this priest is going around knocking on doors and saying “I’m starting a new parish, come join me.” It’s pretty clear, at least now, from the context, that this is not what’s happening here.

Try describing it this way to your deacon friend, and I’m sure he’ll agree:

A priest has faculties from his own diocese and is “in good standing.”
He is a temporary resident of another diocese.
He has not applied to the local bishop for faculties.
He has not been prohibited by the local bishop from saying Mass.
He is saying Mass, but not in a way that he’s inviting the public.
If he extends a personal invitation to me to join him, may I participate in that Mass?

I’m sure if you put it something like that, he’ll say “yes.”

 

[peary]

There is a priest who is a founder of a religious community who has come into our diocese to establish his house of formation and has been here for the past year. He has never applied to have priestly faculties within this diocese. If he holds a private mass who is allowed to attend? He claims that he is allowed by something he calls “universal faculties” to have up to 50 people at a private mass. Is this true?

Thank you

No. First, as a matter of protocol, he needs to contact the bishop and ask for permission to come into the diocese and establish a house of formation. So, not only is he rude and disrespects the bishop, he makes up some imaginary ‘claim’ about “universal faculties” which is just ridiculous. The bishop would have every right to order his house of formation closed and have him leave the diocese. I would not give him the time of day, personally. He is a disobediant priest.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

No. First, as a matter of protocol, he needs to contact the bishop and ask for permission to come into the diocese and establish a house of formation. So, not only is he rude and disrespects the bishop, he makes up some imaginary ‘claim’ about “universal faculties” which is just ridiculous. The bishop would have every right to order his house of formation closed and have him leave the diocese. I would not give him the time of day, personally. He is a disobediant priest.

It seems from my reading that the house of discernment existed prior to this priests arrival.

I would not jump at calling him a “disobedient priest” as we only have one side of the story and it seems very confused to me.

 

[FrDavid96]

No. First, as a matter of protocol, he needs to contact the bishop and ask for permission to come into the diocese and establish a house of formation. So, not only is he rude and disrespects the bishop, he makes up some imaginary ‘claim’ about “universal faculties” which is just ridiculous. The bishop would have every right to order his house of formation closed and have him leave the diocese. I would not give him the time of day, personally. He is a disobediant priest.

I’m curious to know how you can make the statement that he doesn’t have permission from the bishop to do what he’s doing. That’s an unknown from what has been posted on this thread. Yes, we know that he doesn’t have faculties, but nothing has been said one way or the other as to whether or not he has permission–the two are not the same.

Also, you should know that, as a general rule, all priestly faculties are “universal” unless the bishop granting them places restrictions (which is rather unusual), or the bishop of a diocese specifically denies a particular priest permission to celebrate Mass in his diocese (also very unusual).

 

[juicekman]

Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, you may indeed attend when he’s saying Mass. No problem.

I think what happened here is that the deacon had a different idea in mind when you said “private Mass” combined with the fact that the priest doesn’t have faculties from the diocese. He was (probably) thinking of a priest who has been told by his bishop that he cannot celebrate Mass in public, but is still permitted to say Mass in private (example: a priest who has been accused of something but the canonical trial to determine guilt or innocence hasn’t yet happened). The difficulty comes in the term “private Mass” which isn’t a canonical term as such, but one which different people use different ways.

“Private Mass” might mean either “Missae sine populo” aka “Mass at which only one minister participates” celebrated by a priest who is in every way “in good standing.”

Or “private Mass” might refer to a Mass said by a priest who has been told by his bishop that he’s prohibited from saying Mass in a public setting–which depending on circumstances, might or might not actually be attended by more than just a few people.

If that priest were trying to establish a parish without the permission of the local bishop, and he were going around inviting people to join, that would be a problem. But given the circumstances that you’re living in the same building, it’s only natural that he would invite you to his Mass. To put that another way, it’s hardly a situation where this priest is going around knocking on doors and saying “I’m starting a new parish, come join me.” It’s pretty clear, at least now, from the context, that this is not what’s happening here.

Try describing it this way to your deacon friend, and I’m sure he’ll agree:

A priest has faculties from his own diocese and is “in good standing.”
He is a temporary resident of another diocese.
He has not applied to the local bishop for faculties.
He has not been prohibited by the local bishop from saying Mass.
He is saying Mass, but not in a way that he’s inviting the public.
If he extends a personal invitation to me to join him, may I participate in that Mass?

I’m sure if you put it something like that, he’ll say “yes.”

Thank you very much for this clarification, Father. God bless you.

 

[juicekman]

No. First, as a matter of protocol, he needs to contact the bishop and ask for permission to come into the diocese and establish a house of formation. So, not only is he rude and disrespects the bishop, he makes up some imaginary ‘claim’ about “universal faculties” which is just ridiculous. The bishop would have every right to order his house of formation closed and have him leave the diocese. I would not give him the time of day, personally. He is a disobediant priest.

This priest has been in constant contact with the new diocese and has indeed applied to have a religious order. That is not the issue of this post. The issue is that he did not apply for faculties to perform public masses. Hence, the reason for my original post. However, I appreciate your concern. Thank you.

 

[FrDavid96]

Something concerns me here. I am worried that people might not understand the distinction between faculties on the one hand, and permission from the local bishop on the other hand.

Strictly speaking, a priest is only required to have formal faculties from his own ordinary (the bishop of the diocese in which he is incardinated–his “home diocese” so to speak).

A priest who has such faculties can exercise them all over the world, unless either the bishop granting them has placed restrictions (which is very unusual and highly unlikely), or if the bishop of the diocese where he is “visiting” has denied this particular priest (again, very unusual). I’m talking about Mass here; things are different when it comes to witnessing marriages or confirming catechumens, etc. or anything else which requires jurisdiction.

People should be aware that it happens all the time that priests regularly minister in another diocese without ever applying for formal faculties from the bishop. This happens not because the priest is trying to go unnoticed, and not because the bishop, or the chancery staff, fails to make the necessary inquiries into the priest’s status. It happens because of the simple fact that applying for formal faculties from the second bishop is unnecessary. A bishop can certainly give a priest permission to minister in his diocese without actually issuing a pagella of faculties. Sometimes that permission is verbal, and sometimes that permission goes so far as the form of a circular letter to all the pastors of the diocese stating that the priest is in-good-standing, not prevented from ministering, and indeed welcome in the diocese. Please know that this happens all the time. Indeed, most of the time, when we’re talking about priest who do not have actual parochial assignments, faculties are more the exception than the norm. Some obvious examples: retired priests, priests who are in continuing education (say working on a doctorate and enrolled at the local university), priests who grew up in one diocese but are incardinated in another and often go back to visit family/friends, priests who live near the diocese border and often minister at the neighboring parishes. The possibilities here are nearly endless for why a priest might have permission but not actually have faculties.

An absence of formal faculties (from the ‘second’ bishop) does not necessarily mean that there is also an absence of permission from that bishop. Yes, it could mean this, but it’s not true that “B always follows from A.”

 

[juicekman]

Something concerns me here. I am worried that people might not understand the distinction between faculties on the one hand, and permission from the local bishop on the other hand.

Strictly speaking, a priest is only required to have formal faculties from his own ordinary (the bishop of the diocese in which he is incardinated–his “home diocese” so to speak).

A priest who has such faculties can exercise them all over the world, unless either the bishop granting them has placed restrictions (which is very unusual and highly unlikely), or if the bishop of the diocese where he is “visiting” has denied this particular priest (again, very unusual). I’m talking about Mass here; things are different when it comes to witnessing marriages or confirming catechumens, etc. or anything else which requires jurisdiction.

People should be aware that it happens all the time that priests regularly minister in another diocese without ever applying for formal faculties from the bishop. This happens not because the priest is trying to go unnoticed, and not because the bishop, or the chancery staff, fails to make the necessary inquiries into the priest’s status. It happens because of the simple fact that applying for formal faculties from the second bishop is unnecessary. A bishop can certainly give a priest permission to minister in his diocese without actually issuing a pagella of faculties. Sometimes that permission is verbal, and sometimes that permission goes so far as the form of a circular letter to all the pastors of the diocese stating that the priest is in-good-standing, not prevented from ministering, and indeed welcome in the diocese. Please know that this happens all the time. Indeed, most of the time, when we’re talking about priest who do not have actual parochial assignments, faculties are more the exception than the norm. Some obvious examples: retired priests, priests who are in continuing education (say working on a doctorate and enrolled at the local university), priests who grew up in one diocese but are incardinated in another and often go back to visit family/friends, priests who live near the diocese border and often minister at the neighboring parishes. The possibilities here are nearly endless for why a priest might have permission but not actually have faculties.

An absence of formal faculties (from the ‘second’ bishop) does not necessarily mean that there is also an absence of permission from that bishop. Yes, it could mean this, but it’s not true that “B always follows from A.”

Thank you very much again, Father.