Courtesy of SSPX.org
Valid: SSPX's confessions and marriages
January 15, 2014
District of the US
The SSPX's priests are often accused of not being able to validly hear confessions or perform marriages. But this false claim falls flat upon a close examination of Canon Law — particularly in light of the crisis in the Church.
A frequent accusation made by opponents of the Society of St. Pius X is that the confessions and marriages undertaken in its chapels are invalid because its priests lack jurisdiction. This false assertion not only ignores the Church's jurisprudence on supplied jurisdiction, but more importantly, the reality that astate of necessity exists due to the post-conciliar crisis.
On the canonical side of things, we re-present here the important and comprehensive 3-part study of Fr. Ramon Angles, The Validity of Confessions & Marriages in the Chapels of the Society of St. Pius X which in summary demonstrates:
In conclusion, a dilemma for our opponents: If the SSPX is outside the Church, both marriages and confessions are valid... If the SSPX is not outside the Church, jurisdiction is supplied by the Church for marriages and confessions, because of common error, positive probable doubt, the right of the faithful asking for the Sacraments, and also in danger of death.
Fr. Angles shows that the Holy See has never declared the SSPX's confessions and marriages to be invalid:
We can and we should have recourse to the suppliance in case of positive and probable error in order to answer those adversaries who oppose our canonical reasoning. Let us tell them that because our case is supported on solid canonical grounds, on the old and the new legislation, on the practice of the Church, on the sentences of the Roman jurisprudence, on the doctrine of renowned authors, even on favorable opinions of cardinals, bishops and diocesan chanceries throughout the world, we can definitely affirm that in such doubt Ecclesia supplet iurisdictionem.The Vatican itself takes our arguments so seriously that in the Protocol of May 5, 1988, the Holy See called for a sanatio in radice AD CAUTELAM of the marriages celebrated by our priests without the required delegation. So for the Vatican there is a chance that such marriages are valid. Again, this doubt is positive and probable, and once more the Church supplies jurisdiction.
Two additional proofs came to light after Fr. Angles wrote his study, as Bishop Bernard Fellay related during a conference he gave in 2002:
On this point, let me tell you about the bishops from Gabon [Africa] going to Rome to ask about the validity and lawfulness of the sacraments administered by our mission priests there and whether they should record them in the sacramental registers of that country’s local churches. Rome answered that the sacraments of the Society must be recorded in the local registers. "Also the marriages?" the bishops asked. "Yes," said Rome. That was the statement from Rome. With these words — despite all the things you may have heard! — Rome says our sacraments are to be considered valid. This is the policy in official Rome about sacraments administered by priests of the Society of St. Pius X.If you examine the decree of Rome’s acknowledgment of the official existence of the Priestly Union of St. John Baptist Mary Vianney [Campos, Brazil], there is no mention regarding the years of marriages officiated by the Latin Mass priests of Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer. This means Rome considers these marriages valid. If they aren’t valid, Rome would have to say so and do something about it. The priests of the Society of St. Pius X officiate at the sacrament of Matrimony no differently than did Bishop de Castro Mayer’s priests so this shows what official Rome thinks of our work. This is interesting, because it settles the confusion around this important question. So many opinions; even in Rome, you get different answers.
Comments
Post a Comment