Valid sacrament

[FrDavid96]

How can a priest be a priest but never had a clerical state?

Again, we need to explain vocabulary.

A man becomes a priest by the fact that he was ordained a priest by a validly ordained bishop.

The “clerical state” means that a cleric (deacon, priest, or bishop), has the ability to perform ministry in the Church as a cleric.

Ok, I understand the valid vs illicit part. I understand that one needs permission to hear confessions.

What I don’t understand is why their own Bishops do not have the power to tell them to hear confessions.

OK. I admit, I’m getting a bit frustrated here because I keep repeating things over and over again. I’ll try one more time.

A bishop must have an OFFICE in the Church that allows him to give faculties to a priest. No office means he cannot give faculties.

As I have said a number of times now, some bishops have an office that allows them to grant faculties (such as the bishop of a diocese). Some bishops do not have an office that allows them to grant faculties (such as a perfectly legitimate retired bishop.) In order to grant faculties to a priest, the bishop must be an Ordinary (head of a diocese) or a Major Superior of a religious order. He must have an office in the Church that empowers him to grant faculties to priests.

SSPX bishops have no office in the Church, and so they cannot grant faculties. The fact is, they don’t try to do so, because they know the law and they know that if they did attempt to do it, they would only be weakening their own position.

He had the power to ordain them, he had the power to form them, appove them for the priesthood and make them priests. How can the Church say that ordination is valid even though it was done without permission but confession is not? Why do their Bishops have the power to ordain but not absolve?

Really, how many times do I have to keep repeating the same things? We are just going 'round and 'round in circles here.

I’ve answered that particular question about 4 times today.

You just answered you own question above when you said “I understand that one needs permission to hear confessions.” then you ask “Why do their bishops have the power to ordain but not absolve?”

So, one more time. They cannot absolve because they do not have the permission of the Church to absolve.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Again, we need to explain vocabulary.

A man becomes a priest by the fact that he was ordained a priest by a validly ordained bishop.

The “clerical state” means that a cleric (deacon, priest, or bishop), has the ability to perform ministry in the Church as a cleric.

OK. I admit, I’m getting a bit frustrated here because I keep repeating things over and over again. I’ll try one more time.

A bishop must have an OFFICE in the Church that allows him to give faculties to a priest. No office means he cannot give faculties.

As I have said a number of times now, some bishops have an office that allows them to grant faculties (such as the bishop of a diocese). Some bishops do not have an office that allows them to grant faculties (such as a perfectly legitimate retired bishop.) In order to grant faculties to a priest, the bishop must be an Ordinary (head of a diocese) or a Major Superior of a religious order. He must have an office in the Church that empowers him to grant faculties to priests.

SSPX bishops have no office in the Church, and so they cannot grant faculties. The fact is, they don’t try to do so, because they know the law and they know that if they did attempt to do it, they would only be weakening their own position.

Really, how many times do I have to keep repeating the same things? We are just going 'round and 'round in circles here.

I’ve answered that particular question about 4 times today.

You just answered you own question above when you said “I understand that one needs permission to hear confessions.” then you ask “Why do their bishops have the power to ordain but not absolve?”

So, one more time. They cannot absolve because they do not have the permission of the Church to absolve.

I still don’t get it and you are getting frustrated so I wll just bow out.

Thanks for taking the time to try to explain. Sorry I frustrated you.

I just don’t understand why a Bishop can ordain a priest but not give that priest the ability to hear confessions. I get that they can’t. I just don’t see the logic.

My bad.

Take care. Sorry to bother you.

 

[FrDavid96]

I still don’t get it and you are getting frustrated so I wll just bow out.

Thanks for taking the time to try to explain. Sorry I frustrated you.

I just don’t understand why a Bishop can ordain a priest but not give that priest the ability to hear confessions. I get that they can’t. I just don’t see the logic.

My bad.

Take care. Sorry to bother you.

OK then. That’s different.

I’m sorry if I sounded frustrated, but frankly I was.

When you say “I don’t see the logic.” That changes things.

If you give me a moment, I can try to explain the logic, ok?

The logic is this:

Any priest who absolves reconciles the sinner to the Church. Now, in order to do that, the priest must be a representative of the Church. Make sense?

Let’s say that I am a member of the Raccoon Lodge. I break some rule that means I cannot take part in the activities of the lodge. Now, the rules say that if I apologize and ask an officer of the lodge to reinstate me, I can be reinstated. It’s pretty straightforward, right?

So then, let’s say that I break the rule, I get banned from the annual clam bake. I want to be reinstated. So, I go to an officer of the local Squirrel Lodge, express my contrition, and ask to be reinstated to full membership in the Raccoon Lodge. Can I do that? Of course not, because only an officer of the Raccoon Lodge can reinstate my membership in the Raccoon Lodge.

Why? Because only an officer of the Raccoon Lodge can reinstate my membership. An officer of the Squirrel Lodge cannot do anything for me. Likewise, someone who is an ordinary member of the Raccoon Lodge, but not an officer of the Lodge has no power to reinstate me. Only an officer of the Raccoon Lodge has the legal authority, under the bylaws, to reinstate a member.

Now, get back to the Church. The “faculties to absolve” means that a priest can speak on behalf of the Church—that’s the key here. In absolution, the priest is an official, sacramental representative of the Church. Now, only the Church gets to decide who can represent the Church AND only the Church gets to decide the process by which a priest gets certified to represent the Church. We call that process “faculties.”

A priest with no faculties from the Church cannot stand as an official representative of the Church to grant absolution. That means that any priest who lacks the faculties to absolve likewise lacks any legitimacy when he says that he is reconciling someone to the Church.

When the Church says that a priest does not represent the Church (ie has no faculties), the words that the priest speaks (I absolve you–meaning “I reconcile you to the Church”) have no effect.

Does that help? I truly hope I can help you understand this.