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 3158 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

  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. 
Regarding the first point, you are absolutely wrong.  A priest is allowed to skip someone who presents himself for Holy Communion if and only if the person is a public mortal sinner.

Regarding the second point, you may want to inform sspx priests of such.  A friend was barred entry, specifically by name in an announcement posted on the outside front door of an sspx chapel, for attending mass of a sedevecanti priest when he came to town once a month.  This lasted 6 months or more, 15 years ago. 

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.
We just need to do unto others as we would have them do unto us, priest or no priest.
God knows the heart.


Offline Emile

  • Supporter
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. 
Just a footnote to confirm the bolded statement (happened to have read it recently)

A PAPAL DECREE CONCERNING MODESTY

HIS HOLINESS POPE PIUS XI,  12 January 1930


Quote
...
9. Women and girls who wear immodest clothes are to be prohibited from Holy Communion and from the office of sponsor in the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation, and in certain cases, they are to be prohibited even from entry into the church.
...



Wearing clearly immodest clothes in the church and at the Communion rail in front of Our Lord and the entire congregation IS a public mortal sin.  I’m speaking of extreme cases, not clothing that is merely questionable or too casual.

As for a priest putting someone’s name on the door denying entry because he went to the Mass of a sedevacantist priest 15 years ago is ridiculous.  First of all, that doesn’t make him a notorious public sinner.   The priest may know who he is, but the majority of parishioners after 15 years?  Hardly!  Secondly, if the priest thinks it’s a mortal sin to attend the Mass of a  sedevacantist, who is he to commit another mortal sin by detraction?  Thirdly, it’s lacking in class, totally tasteless, and immature.

" for attending mass of a sedevecanti priest when he came to town once a month"
SedevacanTIST.  Sedevacanti (if it were Latin) would either be plural, meaning "many sedevacantists" or genitive singular, meaning "of a/the sedevacantist"

You give yourself away by using the term in that (incorrect) way ;)