In reading much of the discussions on here and other forums recently, I am continuing to see a loose use of certain terms, which in reality have very specific meanings. The consequence of this poor usage has consequences, usually very negative ones at that. Some examples are:
Parish: I keep seeing traditional chapels or mass centers being called "parishes." This is inaccurate, as they were never established by legitimate authority. The traditional chapels are privately owned entities, either by individuals or groups with non-profit status. They are not Church owned and operated properties. They have no status in the Catholic Church. Catholics generally do not have any rights at these places that would normally be given to them under Canon Law at Church owned properties.
A Catholic is under no obligation to attend or support any of these mass centers, as they are private and not a parish established in a diocese. If a Catholic chooses to attend one or another private chapel that is his choice.
Read more on Parishes:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11499b.htmPastor: Another commonly misuses term is Pastor, and this is also a very specific Catholic term that does not apply to the priest leader of a private chapel, whether he is a bishop or a priest. A pastor holds an office in the Church, and cannot be self appointed. He has care of souls over Catholics in a certain territory which can only be given by a legitimate bishop of a diocese.
If a Catholic wishes to find their pastor, they can to buy a Catholic directory, and see who the last legitimately appointed pastor of their local parish was, and see if he is still alive. Many of these priests have kept the Faith, and it may be a good exercise for Catholics to visit their true pastors if they are still around and speak to them, and pray for them. If they have not kept the Faith obviously stay away from them.
Read more about what a pastor is:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11537b.htmTraditional Priest: a priest, who, due to the crisis in the Church, is ordained, but who has not been given a mission by the Church, i.e., is not sent by any legitimate bishop of the Church. These priests are trained in unapproved seminaries, and with the exception of those ordained by Archbishop Lefebvre or Bishop Castro de Mayer, have been ordained by bishops who have no standing or approval to ordain priests. These priests have not been given any approval by any legitimate authority to function as a Catholic priest, and do so only under the idea that the the extreme emergency in the Church would allow them to function in order to bring the sacraments to Catholics.
These priests do not receive any supervision from the legitimate authority of the Church, and in effect are policed by no one except each other.
Traditional Bishop: With the exception of Archbishop Lefebvre and Bishop Castro de Mayer, as stated above, who were sent by the Church, all other traditional bishops have no standing in the Church. They have no authority to rule over Catholics in any sense, they along with the traditional priests bring the sacraments, but do not govern the flock. They along with traditional priests cannot bind the conscience of a fellow Catholic.
With this said, one may ask, are traditional clergy permissible? This is a controversial topic, and in the end must be settled by the legitimate authority of the Church, i.e. the pope. Strictly speaking, there is no theologian that I am aware of, that specifically teaches the lawfulness of "emergency priests," but this situation that we are living through is unprecedented, and may not have been forseen by them.
But, regardless of whether they have a right to exist, the fact is that they do, and Catholics need to be aware of who they are and what their place in the Church really is. Too often Catholics longing for a sense of normalcy, as existed in former times, suspend their caution, and begin to treat these extraordinary clergy as they would the true Catholic shepherds and priests. This is a very dangerous trend in my view.
I think we should respect the good extraordinary priests, who long to bring the sacraments, and do so with love and charity, but be very careful about any who seek to control or govern the flock. With that said, Catholics should be very cautious around any bishop priest who attempts to bind their conscience to any issue not specifically written about by the theologians. Such issues in our times, include where one attends Mass, the validity of holy orders, the status of the post Vatican II papal claimants, etc.