Post by Pacelli on May 6, 2019 13:42:58 GMT -5
Sacrament of Confession during the Crisis
A correspondent wrote in part:
1. Let’s start off with this, I am not an authority. I cannot tell you what to do in this matter. I will only tell you what I do and why I do it.
2. I only go to two types of priests for confession (1) old Roman Rite priests, those ordained prior to the new Paul VI rite of June, 1968. (2). Eastern rite Catholic priests.
3. Even if a Roman rite priest says the Novus Ordo, and recognizes the current antipope, it is not a proof of heresy and by that it is not a proof that he has lost his membership in the Church.
4. If the Roman Rite priest’s faculties from his lawful ordinary are expired, and he is regarded by Catholics who go to his confessions as being an authorized confessor, his jurisdiction will be supplied, canon 209.
5. Regarding eastern rite priests, (excluding the very few cases of potentially invalidly ordained men), all priests would operate under lawful faculties to hear confessions and would certainly have the jurisdiction to absolve.
6. Regarding traditional priests, if there is a danger of death, there is no doubt that the Church will supply the jurisdiction, canon 882. The appeal to the jurisdiction of a priest in the danger of death for people who are not actually dying, but may die without having access to an authorized confessor, however, presumes that Catholics in in such a situation would not have access to an authorized confessor.
7. If a Catholic is dying, any validly ordained priest, even a schismatic or heretic may hear his confession and absolve him, and the jurisdiction will be supplied by the Church.
8. I remain unconvinced that most Catholics are in situations without access to authorized confessors. Those that think this seem to believe, without evidence, that any particular priest near them, whether validly ordained Pre-June 1968 Roman Rite or Eastern Rite are heretics and therefore must be avoided, or are members of a non-Catholic sect. If anyone thinks that, the onus is on them to support the accusation in each and every case, or the accusation is rash, and a sin against the Eighth Commandment. Every person has the right to his good name, and if one thinks evil against his brother without proof, and therefore rashly, he sins.
9. The same argument, based on canon 882, that some believe would give jurisdiction to a traditional priests universally without any qualification, also gives jurisdiction to the Orthodox, Old Catholics, defrocked priests, etc. Can we also make our monthly confession to them? The Code is clear that all validly ordained priests, schismatics, heretics, members of a non Catholic sect, etc., can hear a Catholic’s confession in the danger of death.
10. If anyone is persuaded by the SSPX argument, or the reliance on canon 882, I am not going to tell you otherwise. I am only telling other Catholics what I do and why I do it. It is for the legitimate authority of the Church to tell you what you must do.
A correspondent wrote in part:
I am reading a thread on another forum about confession and supplied jurisdiction. I know you wrote on this previously, can you explain your position again for me.
1. Let’s start off with this, I am not an authority. I cannot tell you what to do in this matter. I will only tell you what I do and why I do it.
2. I only go to two types of priests for confession (1) old Roman Rite priests, those ordained prior to the new Paul VI rite of June, 1968. (2). Eastern rite Catholic priests.
3. Even if a Roman rite priest says the Novus Ordo, and recognizes the current antipope, it is not a proof of heresy and by that it is not a proof that he has lost his membership in the Church.
4. If the Roman Rite priest’s faculties from his lawful ordinary are expired, and he is regarded by Catholics who go to his confessions as being an authorized confessor, his jurisdiction will be supplied, canon 209.
5. Regarding eastern rite priests, (excluding the very few cases of potentially invalidly ordained men), all priests would operate under lawful faculties to hear confessions and would certainly have the jurisdiction to absolve.
6. Regarding traditional priests, if there is a danger of death, there is no doubt that the Church will supply the jurisdiction, canon 882. The appeal to the jurisdiction of a priest in the danger of death for people who are not actually dying, but may die without having access to an authorized confessor, however, presumes that Catholics in in such a situation would not have access to an authorized confessor.
7. If a Catholic is dying, any validly ordained priest, even a schismatic or heretic may hear his confession and absolve him, and the jurisdiction will be supplied by the Church.
8. I remain unconvinced that most Catholics are in situations without access to authorized confessors. Those that think this seem to believe, without evidence, that any particular priest near them, whether validly ordained Pre-June 1968 Roman Rite or Eastern Rite are heretics and therefore must be avoided, or are members of a non-Catholic sect. If anyone thinks that, the onus is on them to support the accusation in each and every case, or the accusation is rash, and a sin against the Eighth Commandment. Every person has the right to his good name, and if one thinks evil against his brother without proof, and therefore rashly, he sins.
9. The same argument, based on canon 882, that some believe would give jurisdiction to a traditional priests universally without any qualification, also gives jurisdiction to the Orthodox, Old Catholics, defrocked priests, etc. Can we also make our monthly confession to them? The Code is clear that all validly ordained priests, schismatics, heretics, members of a non Catholic sect, etc., can hear a Catholic’s confession in the danger of death.
10. If anyone is persuaded by the SSPX argument, or the reliance on canon 882, I am not going to tell you otherwise. I am only telling other Catholics what I do and why I do it. It is for the legitimate authority of the Church to tell you what you must do.