|
A FEW WORDS ABOUT "POWER
OF ORDERS" and "POWER OF
JURISDICTION"
Sometimes people get confused when they hear that some priest
has "left" or "retired from" the priesthood.
They say "How can a priest leave or retire from the priesthood?
Isn't the priesthood something permanent?"
Well, let's put it this way: Even
if a priest were to leave the priesthood, whether voluntarily
or involuntarily, the priesthood cannot leave the priest.
(You might recall that, in last weekend's bulletin, we said that
a man who receives Ordination to the Order of Priest acquires
an indelible mark on his soul (an ontological change).
The same applies to anyone who receives Baptism, Confirmation,
Ordination to the Order of Deacon and Ordination to the Order
of Bishop.
In order to deepen our understanding, we should become familiar
with two terms: "power of orders" and "power
of jurisdiction".
One cannot lose "power of orders" nor can it be taken
away.
One can, however, lose "power of jurisdiction" and
this can be taken away.
Let me use myself as an example.
On 21 May 1966, I received the power of orders proper to the
Priesthood. This conferral of orders was and is absolutely irrevocable.
A few days later, I was handed a document by Bishop McShea.
This document was called "faculties". It was a "license"
to practice as a priest in the Diocese of Allentown. The document
said that it was good "usque ad revocationem". In
other words, the Bishop was saying to me: "I am allowing
you to function as a priest in the Diocese of Allentown and to
do all those things that are appropriate for a priest to do.
This permission that I am giving you is good unless and until
I tell you otherwise." These faculties were and are a kind
of limited sharing in the jurisdiction of the Bishop. (So far,
knock wood, my faculties have not been taken away!)
It is possible for a priest to lose his power of jurisdiction,
but not his power of orders.
It is possible for the Bishop of a diocese to withdraw from a
priest his faculties, but it is not possible for him to withdraw
from a priest his power of orders.
The Bishop of a diocese may forbid a priest to exercise his power
of orders. However, if the priest were to act in defiance of
the Bishop (which he certainly should not), the power of orders
remains in effect.
For example: If a priest were forbidden by his Bishop to celebrate
the Mass but he did so anyway, in utter defiance of the Bishop,
the bread and wine would still be transubstantiated and would
become the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. It would be a valid
Mass. But it would be an illicit (unlawful) Mass.
What about the situation with
Bishop Cullen? He has retired as "Bishop of Allentown",
but is still serving as "Administrator of (the Diocese of)
Allentown". He will cease to be the Administrator on 30
July 09, when Bishop-elect Barres is ordained and installed.
Bishop Cullen will then be "Bishop Emeritus of Allentown".
Q - Has Bishop Cullen lost any or all of his authority (jurisdiction)?
A - He has lost some of his authority (jurisdiction), but still
retains some, at least until 30 July.
Q - Has Bishop Cullen lost any or all of his power of orders?
A - No! Not at all! He will never lose his power of orders.
He will always be a bishop - for the rest of his life and into
eternity.
Q - Why?
A - Because the power of orders is irrevocable.
Q - Will he continue to be in charge of the Diocese of Allentown?
A - No.
Q - Why not?
A - Because he will no longer have power of jurisdiction (authority).
Q - You said in last weekend's bulletin that bishops have the
power to ordain men to be deacons, priests and bishops. Will
Bishop Cullen still be able to do these things?
A - We have to make a distinction between CAN and MAY. CAN pertains
to power of orders. MAY pertains to power of jurisdiction.
Bishop Cullen will always have the power of orders for ordaining
men to be deacons, priests and bishops. However, as a retired
bishop, he will not have the power of jurisdiction for ordaining
men to be deacons or priests. The new Bishop of Allentown could,
of course, give Bishop Cullen the power of jurisdiction to do
so within the Diocese of Allentown, if he chose to do so. If
a bishop were to ordain anyone without having jurisdiction to
do so, the ordinations would be valid, but illicit. In regard
to ordaining someone to be a bishop, a VERY LARGE RED LIGHT flashes here. Although a bishop CAN ordain another
man a bishop, he MAY NOT do so without a mandate (permission)
from the Pope. If he were to do so, both he and the man he ordained
would be excommunicated but, nevertheless, the man he illicitly
ordained would be a valid bishop!
|
Saturday, 18
July