A Question of Rights
Inactive Priests & Sacramental Validity
By James E. Biechler
"A recent article in a Catholic
paper reported how a midwest parish, closed by its bishop, successfully
persuaded a married priest to celebrate the Eucharist there each week.
An adjacent story told of a Catholic woman who has produced a brochure
advising Catholics of the procedures they can follow in obtaining the services
of married priests. The article claims there are nineteen canons which
'give married priests the continued power to minister the sacraments and
lay people the right to receive them.' Are these people anarchists or can
a serious case be made in canon law for their actions?"
--P.M.B., Lisle, IL
I think I read the same stories
you did and am not at all surprised by your question. In the story I read,
the reporter did not go on to cite any of the canons which allegedly legitimate
public ecclesiastical ministry by married priests. The clear assumption
of the articles is that the priests in question either have lost the clerical
state by laicization or have been suspended (prohibited from exercising
sacramental ministry) by their "attempting" marriage. These two categories
would include nearly all of the 110,000 "former" priests in the world.
It is generally understood
that the Code of Canon Law prohibits resigned priests, even those who remained
unmarried, from exercising the normal ministerial functions reserved to
priests. Since the sacramental priesthood cannot be lost--a priest cannot
be "unordained"--those sacraments which require only Holy Orders for their
validity, i.e., Holy Eucharist and the Anointing of the Sick, can be validly
performed even by resigned or "non-clerical" priests. When sacramental
validity depends upon jurisdiction in addition to Holy Orders, then the
sacraments of Reconciliation and Confirmation for those in danger of death
can be added to the list. Canon 976 specifically allows a suspended priest
to grant absolution to a person in danger of death and Canon 883, n. 3
does the same for Confirmation. Canon 1335 goes even further in permitting
those suspended from the exercise of the priestly ministry, as long as
their suspension has not been juridically declared (an extremely rare procedure),
to celebrate the sacraments, sacramentals and acts of governance whenever
requested by a member of the faithful "for any just cause whatsoever."
Thus we see how the Code
of Canon Law implements its general rule given in Canon 213 which states
that "the Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from
the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially
the word of God and the sacraments." The very last canon of the Code (1752)
states that "the salvation of souls...is always the supreme law of the
Church." Canon 843 gives another general principle about the sacraments
when it states that "the sacred ministers cannot deny the sacraments to
those who ask for them at appropriate times, are properly disposed and
are not prohibited by law from receiving them." The clear intent of canon
law is to insure that no one is denied any of the resources of spiritual
ministry.
We must conclude that not
only may a priestless parish request the services of a married priest,
the priest himself ought to respond in a positive way if he is able. A
Catholic group need not wait until the situation is dire before taking
steps to find a suitable Eucharistic minister. In matters of this kind
the broadest interpretation of the law should be used. In fact, there are
good theological arguments supporting a priestless group's right and duty
to simply designate one of its members to preside over the celebration
of its Eucharistic meal. The grace of God cannot be confined by the laws
of men.
Dr. Biechler, an emeritus
professor of religion, is a member of ARCC's board of directors. He also
holds a licentiate in canon law and is a longtime member of the Canon Law
Society of America.
E-mail
Comments to Dr. Biechler |
