Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: What are the limits to the authority of a priest in civil and personal matters?  (Read 3157 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

.
What you call a "diocesan priest" doesn't have the authority to command a dog to roll over. He is a heretic posing as a Catholic priest.
Not to someone who attends "mass" there and believes it is the true Faith.

Offline ElwinRansom1970

  • Supporter
.
What you call a "diocesan priest" doesn't have the authority to command a dog to roll over. He is a heretic posing as a Catholic priest.
As the occupant of an ecclesial office, a Novus Ordo "parish pastor" does possesses numerous juridical powers and authority even should his Holy Orders be invalid. These are powers derived from office rather than from ordination. The same holds true for Novus Ordo bishops ordinary as well as Bergoglio as putative Bishop of Rome. This necessary distinction between juridical and sacramental powers is partly what distinguishes a sedeprivationist like myself from a sedevacantist.


Offline Yeti

  • Supporter
As the occupant of an ecclesial office, a Novus Ordo "parish pastor" does possesses numerous juridical powers and authority even should his Holy Orders be invalid. These are powers derived from office rather than from ordination. The same holds true for Novus Ordo bishops ordinary as well as Bergoglio as putative Bishop of Rome. This necessary distinction between juridical and sacramental powers is partly what distinguishes a sedeprivationist like myself from a sedevacantist.
.
This is news to me. I know quite a bit about the Thesis, and I know a lot of people that adhere to it, and as far as I know it doesn't propose that Novus Ordo hierarchs have any authority. The Thesis says they only hold material possession of the see, whereas having actual jurisdiction over Catholics requires formal possession. I'd be happy to read the text you're referring to, though.

If a priest (or anyone worthy of respect) requests not to share emails, you should respect the request.  It’s not a matter of ecclesiastical authority.  A priest may not abuse ecclesiastical authority by demanding information or actions not pertaining to faith or morals.  Example, a priest may withhold absolution if a penitent lacks contrition or shows no effort in eliminating a persistent mortal sin.  He may skip over a person who presents for Communion while wearing certainly immodest or inappropriate clothing.  He may ban a person from Mass or from entering the church or premises in extreme situations, usually involving the civil authorities, but also if disturbing the Faith or well-being of others.  
A priest may not impose ecclesiastical restrictions in personal or private matters.  Example, the case of an elderly woman banned from the Sacraments because she included the priest’s rival in a group of people invited for tea.  He told her she must confess this as a mortal sin before being readmitted to receiving Our Lord.  A priest may not impose unreasonable penances because of his personal dislike of a parishioner.  A priest may not inquire into parishioners’ private lives without a reason to do with the salvation of his soul.  He may not demand to know someone’s income, the worth of his home or other possessions, command that he cut off friendship with a non-Catholic for the sole reason that he is not Catholic.  A priest may not gain private information about others by asking his family or friends.  
It’s really not complicated.  A priest should confine himself to the duties of the priesthood, the salvation of the souls under his care.  In turn, a parishioner should show the priest like respect.  

.
This is news to me. I know quite a bit about the Thesis, and I know a lot of people that adhere to it, and as far as I know it doesn't propose that Novus Ordo hierarchs have any authority. The Thesis says they only hold material possession of the see, whereas having actual jurisdiction over Catholics requires formal possession. I'd be happy to read the text you're referring to, though.
Perhaps as uninitiated we lack the familiarity with the fine philosophical and theological distinctions necessary to grasp the authority and juridical powers held by New Order laymen occupying  ecclesial office.  I mean the dogma of the Papacy and the Sacrament of Holy Orders has always been a mystery of the faith like the Blessed Trinity right?  Like so much straw, how can one grasp these things? If only I could move to Brooksville, I could join the initiated in the great mystery of sedeprivationism.