Vatican Confirms SSPX Is Being Offered Personal Prelature

[Marie5890]

My friend . . . I can see that you’ve never had dealings with the Vatican. Numbers, age, degree of consecration, and services rendered to the Church matter very much to the Holy See.

The Jesuits, Franciscans, Dominicans and Salesians have the controlling number of votes in the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life.

They have seniority by virtue of their age.

The Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits have seniority by virtue of their degree of consecration. They’re orders in solemn vows.

Opus Dei is the pope’s personal apostolate

All of these orders have made many more contributions to the Church than the SSPX.

All of this put together carries a great deal of weight as evidenced by several facts.

1. All of the confessors and preachers at the Vatican must be Franciscans, including in the papal household.
2. All of the theologians of the papal household must be Dominicans and Jesuits.
3. All of the sacred places must be run and controlled by Franciscans.
4. The Jesuits are exempt from most laws governing religious life and priesthood.
5. An Opus Dei, Dominican and Jesuit put together the Preamble for this dialogue. They made up the committee that worked with Cardinal Levada.
6. The Secretary for the Defense of the Faith is a Jesuit. Jesuits have held this position off and on more than anyone else.
7. Most regular bishops are pulled from among Salesians, Franciscans and Dominicans, because they have earned the trust of the Vatican.

The Vatican takes all of this into consideration.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

I always appreciate it Bro., when you bring up a part of the historical tradition of the Church that most of us never think about or even consider.

We tend to forget about it, if we even know it, when we think of “tradition” in the Church.

This post of yours was very helpful in showing even a greater and more full view of tradition in the Church. Helps me keep things in perspective.

 

[Megan7]

My friend . . . I can see that you’ve never had dealings with the Vatican. Numbers, age, degree of consecration, and services rendered to the Church matter very much to the Holy See.

The Jesuits, Franciscans, Dominicans and Salesians have the controlling number of votes in the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life.

They have seniority by virtue of their age.

The Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits have seniority by virtue of their degree of consecration. They’re orders in solemn vows.

Opus Dei is the pope’s personal apostolate

All of these orders have made many more contributions to the Church than the SSPX.

All of this put together carries a great deal of weight as evidenced by several facts.

1. All of the confessors and preachers at the Vatican must be Franciscans, including in the papal household.
2. All of the theologians of the papal household must be Dominicans and Jesuits.
3. All of the sacred places must be run and controlled by Franciscans.
4. The Jesuits are exempt from most laws governing religious life and priesthood.
5. An Opus Dei, Dominican and Jesuit put together the Preamble for this dialogue. They made up the committee that worked with Cardinal Levada.
6. The Secretary for the Defense of the Faith is a Jesuit. Jesuits have held this position off and on more than anyone else.
7. Most regular bishops are pulled from among Salesians, Franciscans and Dominicans, because they have earned the trust of the Vatican.

The Vatican takes all of this into consideration.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Thanks Brother JR!

Great post!

PAX

 

[malphono]

English speakers, in general, tend to enjoy varieties of English. It’s a sign of linguistic success.

This is, of course, all totally off-topic, but I just can’t stand it: what is “linguistic success” supposed to mean???

 

[Julia_Mae]

A prelature is governed directly by the pope. The FSSP is not governed by the pope. They have their own superior general

The prelature will have statutes and constitutions handed to it by the Vatican. Prelatures do not get to write their own statutes,

Opus Dei is governed by a Prelate who answers directly to the Pope. I believe the Franciscans are, also? Opus Dei has it’s own Code, comprising it’s own statutes and constitutions. There are also a few guidelines from the Pope.

This is the first Prelature. Now, a Pope might impose something different on a new Prelature, but in fact, the one we have governs itself for the most part and wrote their own rules.

 

[Luigi_Daniele]

Opus Dei is governed by a Prelate who answers directly to the Pope. I believe the Franciscans are, also? Opus Dei has it’s own Code, comprising it’s own statutes and constitutions. There are also a few guidelines from the Pope.

This is the first Prelature. Now, a Pope might impose something different on a new Prelature, but in fact, the one we have governs itself for the most part and wrote their own rules.

Nope, the Fransciscans (all three orders) are governed directly by their own superior, who only has to “clear” things with the Holy Father if they are asked.

Most stuff----------->superior
In a few cases----------->superior–reports–>Pope

Prelature:

some mundane stuff------------>Prelate
Most/all important stuff------->Prelate–reports/seeks premission–>Pope

At least to my understanding

 

[Julia_Mae]

The FSSP gets to elect its superior general. A prelature does not get to elect the prelate. The prelate is appointed by the pope.

JP 2 appointed the first Opus Dei Prelate, after that they elect their own who is confirmed by the Pope.

The FSSP has to ask for permission to enter a diocese, so does the prelature.

Actually, they don’t. The Prelature of Opus Dei, by it’s own Code, can, indeed, enter a Diocese without the knowledge or consent of the local Ordinary through the erection of a dependent Center, or in a few other ways. Mostly through the Personal or Dependent Center, though. In fact, there can be a Center complete with Oratory that is reserving the Eucharist, having Mass, and so forth, without the local knowing a thing about it.

The prelature has ordinary authority over the laity. Guess who is morally responsible for the laity . . . bingo! The prelature, not the local bishop,

Again, not at all how it works with Opus Dei, the only Prelature we really have to go by. The laity that attach to Opus Dei by contract do not change their Canonical status and are still under the jurisdiction of the local Ordinary. (Hence, Michael Voris had to change the name of his “apostolate.”) Now, this doesn’t stop the “faithful of Opus Dei” from abandoning their parishes and attending Mass and so forth only at an Opus Dei Center. But technically, they are under their Bishop. The Prelate only has authority over them in matters that concern the person and the Prelature by whatever contract they have between them, which, of course, each is able to end at any time.

Of course, these lay people mostly don’t go to Diocesan churches or donate to them or in any other way participate, but the legal issue is that they are under the local Ordinary.

If the SSPX decides to have a happy hour and there are complaints, the prelate has to deal with them and he has to inform the pope.

No he doesn’t. I have to ask where you are getting all these ideas? You know what it says in the CoCL about Prelatures? This is it:

PERSONAL PRELATURES (Cann. 294 - 297)

Can. 294 After the conferences of bishops involved have been heard, the Apostolic See can erect personal prelatures, which consist of presbyters and deacons of the secular clergy, to promote a suitable distribution of presbyters or to accomplish particular pastoral or missionary works for various regions or for different social groups.

Can. 295 §1. The statutes established by the Apostolic See govern a personal prelature, and a prelate presides offer it as the proper ordinary; he has the right to erect a national or international seminary and even to incardinate students and promote them to orders under title of service to the prelature.

§2. The prelate must see to both the spiritual formation and decent support of those whom he has promoted under the above-mentioned title.

Can. 296 Lay persons can dedicate themselves to the apostolic works of a personal prelature by agreements entered into with the prelature. The statutes, however, are to determine suitably the manner of this organic cooperation and the principal duties and rights connected to it.

Can. 297 The statutes likewise are to define the relations of the personal prelature with the local ordinaries in whose particular churches the prelature itself exercises or desires to exercise its pastoral or missionary works, with the previous consent of the diocesan bishop.

A prelature is like a diocese without physical boundaries. It certainly has many other boundaries and a lot more oversight from the Vatican.

Of course, I have no idea how much oversight the Pope exercises over Opus Dei, but they only have to submit a report of their activities every 4 or 5 years, I forget exactly. And whole a lot of people describe it like you did, like a Diocese without geographical boundaries, the one Prelature we have is organized like the Church more than anything you’d see in a Diocese as the Regional Counselors are defined by the Code as Vicars.

In fact, giving the SSPX standing as a Prelature really means the Pope is giving them the whole world as their operating arena, just like Opus Dei. One estimate puts the number of priests in Opus Dei, actual Opus Dei priests, not diocesan priests who associate with it, at over 20k. That’s not a diocese.

So, I’m thinking making the SSPX a Prelature, pretty sweet deal for them. In fact, the Vatican could just do away with the Diocesan system altogether.

 

[JReducation]

Brother JR, would you please comment on this statement made by Bishop Fellay: “Rome no longer makes total acceptance of Vatican II a prerequisite for the canonical solution” of the fraternity’s return." tinyurl.com/ctq28wy If you have already discussed this, I apologize.

I find this statement quite disturbing; it was brought to my attention by a good friend who is a brilliant, holy, and very orthodox priest in our diocese, who himself asked “So what, then, are the aspects of Vatican II that Bp Fellay implies do not need to be accepted?” I would very much like to know!

I’m not sure what he means either.

• If he means that we can ask questions, this is true.
• If he means that the documents don’t carry authority, this is false.
• If he means that they don’t all carry the same weight of authority, this is true.
• If he means that they don’t all affect the same group of people, this is also true.
• If he means that they contain dogma that has already been defined, but they do not define dogma; therefore, their commentary on dogma can be debated, this is also true.

That’s all that I can see.

Opus Dei is governed by a Prelate who answers directly to the Pope. I believe the Franciscans are, also?

Franciscans have never been a prelature and we’re not governed by a prelate. We have rule of our own, written by St. Francis, which has a bull on it so that it cannot be changed. Our constitutions are written at a constitutional chapter and are approved by the Sacred Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life. Superiors general are elected for each branch to implement the constitutions. The Council of Trent ruled that we, along with several other religious communities are exempt religious. Neither the Vatican nor the bishops intervene in our government. The pope can intervene in anyone’s government, because he’s the highest ranking superior in the Church. He’s the only one.

Opus Dei has it’s own Code, comprising it’s own statutes and constitutions. There are also a few guidelines from the Pope.

This is the first Prelature. Now, a Pope might impose something different on a new Prelature, but in fact, the one we have governs itself for the most part and wrote their own rules.

Canon Law says that the prelature receives its constitutions from the pope. This is very important, because the pope can allow a prelature to create its constitutions and then submit them to him for his approval and he may add or delete here and there or he can have them written at the Vatican and hand them to the prelature. That’s the difference between a prelature and a exempt community. You can’t write the constitution for an exempt community unless you abrogate the Right of Exemption. Currently, the FSSP also has the Right of Exemption, because it’s a fraternity. Prelatures are not fraternities. There is the difference. Prelatures are like dioceses without boundaries. The prelate is not as autonomous as is a superior general . . . that is, as long as the Right of Exemption remains in existence. The pope can abrogate everything in Trent that was not dogma and start all over. The Right of Exemption is not dogma. It’s discipline.
**
Can. 295 §1. The statutes established by the Apostolic See govern a personal prelature, and a prelate presides offer it as the proper ordinary; he has the right to erect a national or international seminary and even to incardinate students and promote them to orders under title of service to the prelature.

§2. The prelate must see to both the spiritual formation and decent support of those whom he has promoted under the above-mentioned title.

Can. 296 Lay persons can dedicate themselves to the apostolic works of a personal prelature by agreements entered into with the prelature. The statutes, however, are to determine suitably the manner of this organic cooperation and the principal duties and rights connected to it.

Can. 297 The statutes likewise are to define the relations of the personal prelature with the local ordinaries in whose particular churches the prelature itself exercises or desires to exercise its pastoral or missionary works, with the previous consent of the diocesan bishop.
**

These are the canons that apply to a prelature. As we can see, they do not grant prelature that right to compose its statutes. The statutes are established by the Holy See. However, this does not mean that the Holy See cannot allow the prelature to compose them and then review and revise them. It simply means that the prelature cannot claim the right to compose its own statutes. It’s really up to the Apostolic See (pope). Every time pope comes in, this can change . . . not that it has to change.

We must also say this about Opus Dei or we would be unfair. Opus Dei is probably the most faithful society in the Church. I was educated by them at the post graduate level. They are very orthodox. There is no reason not to cut them some slack and let them write their own statutes.

It’s also important to note that current law also requires that the prelature coordinate with the local bishop. It does not exist in a vacuum. It does not have the same freedom as say the Eastern dioceses or the Military Archdioceses in the USA and the military ordinariates in other countries.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

JP 2 appointed the first Opus Dei Prelate, after that they elect their own who is confirmed by the Pope.

Actually, they don’t. The Prelature of Opus Dei, by it’s own Code, can, indeed, enter a Diocese without the knowledge or consent of the local Ordinary through the erection of a dependent Center, or in a few other ways. Mostly through the Personal or Dependent Center, though. In fact, there can be a Center complete with Oratory that is reserving the Eucharist, having Mass, and so forth, without the local knowing a thing about it.

Again, not at all how it works with Opus Dei, the only Prelature we really have to go by. The laity that attach to Opus Dei by contract do not change their Canonical status and are still under the jurisdiction of the local Ordinary. (Hence, Michael Voris had to change the name of his “apostolate.”) Now, this doesn’t stop the “faithful of Opus Dei” from abandoning their parishes and attending Mass and so forth only at an Opus Dei Center. But technically, they are under their Bishop. The Prelate only has authority over them in matters that concern the person and the Prelature by whatever contract they have between them, which, of course, each is able to end at any time.

Of course, these lay people mostly don’t go to Diocesan churches or donate to them or in any other way participate, but the legal issue is that they are under the local Ordinary.

No he doesn’t. I have to ask where you are getting all these ideas? You know what it says in the CoCL about Prelatures? This is it:

PERSONAL PRELATURES (Cann. 294 - 297)

Can. 294 After the conferences of bishops involved have been heard, the Apostolic See can erect personal prelatures, which consist of presbyters and deacons of the secular clergy, to promote a suitable distribution of presbyters or to accomplish particular pastoral or missionary works for various regions or for different social groups.

Can. 295 §1. The statutes established by the Apostolic See govern a personal prelature, and a prelate presides offer it as the proper ordinary; he has the right to erect a national or international seminary and even to incardinate students and promote them to orders under title of service to the prelature.

§2. The prelate must see to both the spiritual formation and decent support of those whom he has promoted under the above-mentioned title.

Can. 296 Lay persons can dedicate themselves to the apostolic works of a personal prelature by agreements entered into with the prelature. The statutes, however, are to determine suitably the manner of this organic cooperation and the principal duties and rights connected to it.

Can. 297 The statutes likewise are to define the relations of the personal prelature with the local ordinaries in whose particular churches the prelature itself exercises or desires to exercise its pastoral or missionary works, with the previous consent of the diocesan bishop.

Of course, I have no idea how much oversight the Pope exercises over Opus Dei, but they only have to submit a report of their activities every 4 or 5 years, I forget exactly. And whole a lot of people describe it like you did, like a Diocese without geographical boundaries, the one Prelature we have is organized like the Church more than anything you’d see in a Diocese as the Regional Counselors are defined by the Code as Vicars.

In fact, giving the SSPX standing as a Prelature really means the Pope is giving them the whole world as their operating arena, just like Opus Dei. One estimate puts the number of priests in Opus Dei, actual Opus Dei priests, not diocesan priests who associate with it, at over 20k. That’s not a diocese.

So, I’m thinking making the SSPX a Prelature, pretty sweet deal for them. In fact, the Vatican could just do away with the Diocesan system altogether.

To answer your question, how do I know this – I was educated by Opus Dei at Holy Cross in Rome.

If you read my post above, Opus Dei has been more than orthodox and more than faithful. There is no reason not to give them more latitude. Canon Law allows for as much or as little as the Holy Father chooses to give them. That’s the difference between a prelature and a religious community or a prelature and a diocese.

The laws that govern religious and dioceses are much more specific and less dependent on the Apostolic See. Let’s say that the Apostolic See wanted control of one of the orders. It would have to be direct control by the Holy Father or an apostolic administrator, but it would not abrogate the rule. The rule remains in place, unless the pope overrules his predecessor who approved the rule. There is no such thing in the case of a prelature.

The other determining factor in government is tradition. Prelature is a very new concept. There is no established tradition. Whereas religious orders and dioceses have an established tradition of government. A pope has much more flexibility with a prelature than with an order or with a diocese. If he changes something major, he’s not going against tradition.

I don’t think that the prelature is as sweet as you believe. Remember, Opus Dei has a proven track record. It is very trusted and very respected. SSPX has made numerous enemies along the way and has issues with obedience, which Opus Dei has never had. I’m not inside the pope’s mind, but I don’t see them having as much latitude as Opus Dei. Canon Law certainly does not grant them that latitude. It is very brief. It is deliberately so, because it allowed the Holy See to make all kinds of changes without having the arguments that this or that is a violation of law or tradition. It was probably written that way, because at the time, the idea was so new that they didn’t want to commit to too much and later have problems. It’s easier to release than to reign in. Therefore, you begin with very narrow rules that allow the law giver room to operate, without giving the subordinate too many rights. As things progress, if they progress in a positive direction, you give more slack. This has been the case with Opus Dei. But Opus Dei has a track record of several decades. I can’t remember when it was founded.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[justme]

I’m aware of that. I meant that their regularisation would be a signal to the wider Church that pre-1960’s Catholicism is no longer equivalent to heresy. I hope also that in a few decades a priest may elect to say the old rite without fear of losing preferment. Maybe even a few years! The message might get 'round.

I do not agree. If the release of the documents by the pope opening up to wider usage the EF are not enough the reunion of a percentage (we have to acknowledge that all of the SSPX priests will not be reuniting) of a relatively obscure group unknown to the majority of Catholics (I have yet to meet a Catholic on the street who knows who the SSPX are) is not going to make much of a difference.

 

[JReducation]

I do not agree. If the release of the documents by the pope opening up to wider usage the EF are not enough the reunion of a percentage (we have to acknowledge that all of the SSPX priests will not be reuniting) of** a relatively obscure group unknown to the majority of Catholics (I have yet to meet a Catholic on the street who knows who the SSPX are)** is not going to make much of a difference.

Bold is mine. You have reminded me of something funny, which is only remotely related to this. We have five very good Catholic high schools in the town where I’m assigned. Three are run by the same religious community.

A parent was telling me how pleased she was with her son’s high school that she was going to send her daughter to the same high school, to which I responded, “The Piarists are excellent educators and they run very orthodox schools. They have educated several saints, a few popes and some great names.”

The woman said to me, “Oh no Brother, you misunderstood. My kids attend St. Pius X school. It’s run by priests.” :banghead:

You have one child go to school there for four years and are going to send the next child to them, but you don’t know who they are.

The Piarists run three school in one town and no one can tell them apart from any other priest. There is one SSPX chapel in town. No one knows who they are either. I would have to agree that the average Catholic doesn’t pay much attention to these finer points of distinction.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Pork_Roll]

I don’t think Vatican II has anything to do with who is allowed to build in Rome. Rome is part of Italy, not part of the Vatican state.

From what I can figure out, before about 1870, there were no protestant churches in Rome. I think with the forced nationalization of Italy around then and the anti-clerical atmosphere, protestant churches were able to exist in the eternal city. But I don’t really know that history.

 

[JReducation]

From what I can figure out, before about 1870, there were no protestant churches in Rome. I think with the forced nationalization of Italy around then and the anti-clerical atmosphere, protestant churches were able to exist in the eternal city. But I don’t really know that history.

I don’t know what it’s like today. I only go to Rome on short trips. When I was a student there, during the 80s, you didn’t see Protestants in Rome. I’m sure they were there, just not very visible. You didn’t see many Catholics (from Rome) either. Most of your Roman Catholics at Sunday mass were foreigners, many Americans and South Americans.

The Roman province has always had a love/hate relationship with Christianity. Roman Jews are very faithful and orthodox. Roman Christians were traditional Christians. They were lovely people who went to Church three times during their lifetime: for their baptism, their wedding and their funeral. The wedding was optional once cohabitation was no longer shunned.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[Julia_Mae]

To answer your question, how do I know this – I was educated by Opus Dei at Holy Cross in Rome.

The information doesn’t reflect reality. If this was explained to you this way, it’s incorrect.

If you read my post above, Opus Dei has been more than orthodox and more than faithful.

No one but the highest level of Opus Dei knows what they’ve been. I personally think undermining a local Bishop by sneaking your people into his Diocese is not all that orthodox. Faithful? To the Pope, I suppose, if this is what he wants them to do.

I don’t think that the prelature is as sweet as you believe.

I think we only have one example to go by and everything you said is pretty much not correct and there’s no reason to think anything you outlined in your post would apply to SSPX as a Prelature. As far as Opus Dei specifically being “sweet” well, it doesn’t attract me at all, but if you want to be a martinet with a lots of money and power and women servants to do the cleaning cooking and so forth, I guess it’s a great deal.

Remember, Opus Dei has a proven track record. It is very trusted and very respected.

No, it isn’t. Unless you mean the Pope likes it and he’s the only one who counts. And what I explained was the deal going in. Not at some point after they had been a Prelature for say, ten years. It was designed as I outlined.

Canon Law certainly does not grant them that latitude. It is very brief.

Yes, we’ve all read it now. It’s whatever the Pope says it is.

It’s easier to release than to reign in. Therefore, you begin with very narrow rules that allow the law giver room to operate, without giving the subordinate too many rights.

The Canons around Prelatures aren’t narrow at all, they are vague, wide-open and tell us almost nothing. UT SIT tells us rather more, quite a lot, actually, but not as much as the whole Code. The Prelate was given plenty of rights and latitude to operate as he sees fit. Of course, the Pope could dissolve the whole thing at any time. At least, theoretically. The Pope, JP2 in this case, threw out the old Canon and replaced it and any Pope can change it anytime.

As things progress, if they progress in a positive direction, you give more slack. This has been the case with Opus Dei. But Opus Dei has a track record of several decades. I can’t remember when it was founded.

They were not given more of anything as I already stated above. It was like this from the get-go. It was erected as a Prelature in 1982.

As far as SSPX, the real question is: what does the Pope want to accomplish with the SSPX? A Pope makes a Prelature to perfom a task for him, to serve a specific purpose. What does the Pope want SSPX to do?

 

[TrueLight]

I’ve read his sermons. I have also seen his statements of late where he admits that they have a much better understanding of the Council and he has stopped using the term “Conciliar Church”.

As to whether he knows what’s on his website, I wouldn’t bet on that. Most of us who are major superiors never look at those things. That task is assigned to someone else.

I too am curious to see how it works out.

The prelature is not a prize. Ask any superior general and he’ll tell you that he does not want any part of a prelature. You are micromanaged by the Holy See.

The SSPX is a gift to the Church like any other institute. This is what we must all see. There are two dominant tendencies out there and both are wrong. One is to view the SSPX as a bad thing that should be made to go away. The other is to view the SSPX out of context and give it more credit than we give to any other institute in the Church.

The proper Catholic view of the SSPX is that its another gift of the Holy Spirit to His Church. It will not do anything more than what the Holy Spirit has chosen for it to do. I can do less, because the Holly Spirit does not put handcuffs on freedom.

That’s the Rad Trad script. I won’t dignify it with a response. It’s beneath me.

We don’t know that. We will never know. We just can’t know what the alternatives would be if X had not happened. We can speculate . . . I guess.

Bold is mine.

Let’s not get carried away here and let’s not offend. Let’s remember that accepting a sacrament illegally is a grave mortal sin. Whether the person is subjectively culpable or not is only for God to decide.

Objectively it’s grave sin. That’s why they are all suspended. If the attitude is one of “to hell with the law . . . we’re right and the law is wrong,” that’s a problematic mindset, just as problematic as the priest who concelebrates with women priests. It’s a defiant mindset.

On the other hand, if there is a sincere conviction that the law does not apply here or that this is the only way that one can do God’s will, personal culpability is diminished and can even be non-existent.

And let’s not forget the millions of priests during the last 2,000 years who have done it all by the book. Thousands of them are alive today. I don’t see you singing their praises. That’s very offensive. I have three priests in my community who are very good brothers, good priests and would never consider doing something illegal with the sacraments. I’ll go to bat for their holiness any day.

Are the FFV happy with everything we see and hear? No. That’s why we asked to become independent. Did we have to go through hoops? Yepper. Do we have to go through more hoops? Yes Ma’m, maybe for the next 20 years. Would we consider breaking the law, NEVER. God does not call us to where the Church says we cannot go.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

Alrighty then.

 

[Elizium23]

The FSSP gets to elect its superior general. A prelature does not get to elect the prelate. The prelate is appointed by the pope. Remember the word, “personal prelature”. The personal refers to the pope. You’re stuck with the prelate that the pope appoints. He can appoint any bishop, not just an SSPX bishop.

Br. JR, I know this is from a while back in the thread, but I had to ask. I was under the impression that in Canon Law, “personal” is opposed to “territorial” for a parish or prelature or ordinariate. Taking the example of a parish, a personal parish is one that ministers to specific persons, rather than a specific territory. So I am not sure if “personal” refers to the Pope in this sense, it seems that “personal” is more a description of the jurisdiction of the governing body.

 

[The_Scott]

Brother JR, I must ask: is there anything you don’t know? All of your posts are so informative, I feel like I’m in a classroom reading all of them!

 

[curlycool89]

From what I can figure out, before about 1870, there were no protestant churches in Rome.

And your reputable source for this claim is …?

I think with the forced nationalization of Italy around then

Forced nationalization? From history, the event you are talking about is the Italian Unification. The unification was undertaken by the Kingdom of Sardinia, which conquered/annexed all the other kingdoms in the Italian Peninsula. That’s how sovereignty worked in the 19th Century (and before that), anyone who could gain control over the physical territories got to be the sovereign. It’s nothing personal, it’s just war and politics.

and the anti-clerical atmosphere, protestant churches were able to exist in the eternal city.

Your reputable source for the anti-clerical atmosphere is …?

But I don’t really know that history.

So why are you making historical claims then if you admit that you don’t really know what you’re talking about?

So, the moral of this post is don’t make claims about stuff you can’t substantiate and pass them off as facts. You can’t even call these opinions, because you can’t have differing opinions about reality (like there being “no protestant churches”. There either was or wasn’t, one of those is true and one is false).

 

[JReducation]

Br. JR, I know this is from a while back in the thread, but I had to ask. I was under the impression that in Canon Law, “personal” is opposed to “territorial” for a parish or prelature or ordinariate. Taking the example of a parish, a personal parish is one that ministers to specific persons, rather than a specific territory. So I am not sure if “personal” refers to the Pope in this sense, it seems that “personal” is more a description of the jurisdiction of the governing body.

I don’t know the exact answer to that. Canon Law uses the term “prealatura personalis” which literally translates as “personal perelature” not “prelature of persons”. When I was a student the Holy Cross Fathers (Opus Dei) always referred to the prelature as a “Personal Prelature of the Holy Father.” I’ve always translated it very literally, using personal as we use personal. “Prelature of Persons” would be " Praelaturae Personarum." The way that you’re suggesting is an interesting possibility. Unfortunately, Canon Law does not give us much to go on.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[JReducation]

The information doesn’t reflect reality. If this was explained to you this way, it’s incorrect.

No one but the highest level of Opus Dei knows what they’ve been. I personally think undermining a local Bishop by sneaking your people into his Diocese is not all that orthodox. Faithful? To the Pope, I suppose, if this is what he wants them to do.

I think we only have one example to go by and everything you said is pretty much not correct and there’s no reason to think anything you outlined in your post would apply to SSPX as a Prelature. As far as Opus Dei specifically being “sweet” well, it doesn’t attract me at all, but if you want to be a martinet with a lots of money and power and women servants to do the cleaning cooking and so forth, I guess it’s a great deal.

No, it isn’t. Unless you mean the Pope likes it and he’s the only one who counts. And what I explained was the deal going in. Not at some point after they had been a Prelature for say, ten years. It was designed as I outlined.

Yes, we’ve all read it now. It’s whatever the Pope says it is.

The Canons around Prelatures aren’t narrow at all, they are vague, wide-open and tell us almost nothing. UT SIT tells us rather more, quite a lot, actually, but not as much as the whole Code. The Prelate was given plenty of rights and latitude to operate as he sees fit. Of course, the Pope could dissolve the whole thing at any time. At least, theoretically. The Pope, JP2 in this case, threw out the old Canon and replaced it and any Pope can change it anytime.

They were not given more of anything as I already stated above. It was like this from the get-go. It was erected as a Prelature in 1982.

As far as SSPX, the real question is: what does the Pope want to accomplish with the SSPX? A Pope makes a Prelature to perfom a task for him, to serve a specific purpose. What does the Pope want SSPX to do?

I guess we now know how you feel about Opus Dei.

Bl. John Paul loved Opus Dei. I don’t know about Pope Benedict except that he gives them many important assignments at the Vatican. My guess is that Opus Dei makes the popes happy. What can I say?

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV

 

[mytruepower2]

Having read JReducation’s fine description of a prelature, I have to admit that while it wouldn’t be a reward to rebels or dissidents, if all you want is to be sure you’re obeying the authentic magisterium, it still sounds like a gift from on high.

I speak as a person who suffers regularly under the heel of weak teachings, passed on by several proxies between myself and the authentic magisterium, at least some of whom have taken it upon themselves to be tight-lipped about the truths of the faith for whatever their reason might be.

Literally, thank God for the internet, and its ready access to the wealth of authentic documents and papal letters.

I guess my point is that only the magisterium and the pope are infallible in teaching faith and morals, and the closer I can be to that, the better. If they really want to serve the Lord, I should hope that the SSPX will see it the same way.