I think the 1988 Bishop ordinations are what is reffered to as “operational survival”
OK. Now I get it. For others who don’t, that was when Archbishop Lefebvre ordained bishops entirely on his own authority, without papal mandate. That act triggered an automatic excommunication for him and the new bishops (which HH Benedict later lifted).
Thee question itself was
so the so called “operation survival” is a bit stupid?
I’m not sure how to respond. It was certainly not wise, or smart. I suppose from their own perspective it made a certain sense because they knew that without bishops, they would have no new priests.
Let’s get back to the original topic, though.
Most Catholics are not actually aware that priests must have faculties in order to grant absolution. For the everyday Catholic, the simple “if he’s a priest, he’s a priest” is genuinely sufficient. Most Catholics know that they cannot go to non-Catholic ministers for Confession, so they know that going to a Lutheran or Anglican or Baptist would not be a valid confession. But where they get confused is because (if the subject even comes up) they do know that SSPX priests are “real priests.” However, what we need to do is backup a bit, and go back to the original question and the actual heart of the issue.
When we are reconciled, reconciliation has 2 parts. Think of it as a single sheet of paper with 2 sides. On one side of the paper is “forgiveness” and on the other side is “absolution.” Both of these together constitute “reconciliation.”
Forgiveness means that we have been reconciled to God—that He has removed the sin.
Absolution means that we have been reconciled to the Church—returned to the ordinary life of the Church, to whatever degree we are in need, greater or lesser.
Since the Church is the Body of Christ, these two go hand-in-hand; so being “reconciled to the Church” likewise means “reconciled to God” and vice-versa. For that reason, this distinction cannot be taken too far. Again, they are 2 sides of a single sheet of paper. Reconciliation = forgiveness + absolution.
Forgiveness is found in the post-Resurrection Gospel of John “whose sins you forgive are forgiven…” spoken to the new priests of the New Testament, the 11 Apostles in the Upper Room.
Absolution is found in Matthew “Thou art Peter…I give the Keys to the Kingdom…whatever you bind on earth…” This is called “the Power of the Keys” and was given to Peter alone, and by extension, to the successors of Peter (the popes).
That means that a priest must have BOTH the power of orders (a valid ordination) AND the Power of the Keys (given to him as a minister of the Church). It’s always both-and, never either-or.
The power to forgive (in the name of Christ) is from John.
The power to absolve (in the name of the Church) is from Matthew.
This is all explained in the Summa of St. Thomas. It’s basic, Catholic theology, that is not in dispute. In Sacramental Theology, this is taken absolutely as a “given.”
Absolution itself is a juridic act of the Church (in Catholic theology, likewise this is simply a “given” that’s been repeated for over a thousand years, and need not be “proven” in a context like this). It’s a juridic act of the Church. What does that mean? It means that it is a legal act. it means that the priest acts as a legal representative of the Church in Confession. This is not the case for Baptism, or Mass, since these are not juridic acts of the Church. The priest is a judge in the confessional. He is both a judge of the soul, and he is a judge who legally represents the Church.
Because of space limitations, I’m going to continue with the explanation of “juridic act of the Church” in the next post…that will take some time.
