![]() He did ordain priests on Jand was subsequently suspended a divinis for this act. (an act which Archbishop LeFebvre appealed as unlawful) Pope Paul VI upheld the Bishop’s suppression of the SSPX and warned the Archbishop not to ordain priests in 1976. The Bishop of Fribourg suppressed the SSPX in the 1975. Priests ordained during those years would have been validly and licitly ordained and would have had jurisdiction from the bishop of Fribourg. In 1971 they moved the seminary to Econe. The SSPX was founded properly in the Diocese of Fribourg as a pious union ad experimentum for 6 years. The situation of priests of the SSPX before the 1988 excommunications was problematic. Wickens was not a member of the SSPX but was what is euphemistically called “independent.” The technical term is “Vagus”.Īny special permissions given to the SSPX would not have applied to him. A priest needs the faculty to confer Confirmation validly and licitly.Įrgo, an SSPX bishop confirms validly but illicitly.Īn SSPX priest, however, cannot confirm validly without the faculty, which he would have to obtain from proper authority or, in danger of death, from the law itself. So, a bishop without faculties or permission to function in a place validly but illicitly confers Confirmation. This is essentially the same in the older, 1917 Code. To administer confirmation licitly in another diocese, a bishop needs at least the reasonably presumed permission of the diocesan bishop unless it concerns his own subjects. ![]() 882 The ordinary minister of confirmation is a bishop a presbyter provided with this faculty in virtue of universal law or the special grant of the competent authority also confers this sacrament validly.Ĭan. Lefebvre did it, you were validly confirmed.Ĭan. I received confirmation from Archbishop Lefebvre in the early 80s (pre-excommunication if that makes a difference). Right on schedule, I received another email directly after posting the above. Hence, don’t dawdle, but you don’t have to dash from your computer or drop the phone, leaving supper on the burner and junior in the bathtub to fend for himself. However, I am sure that you want to know for sure and be at ease about having the sacramental character that Confirmation confers and you want the grace of this wonderful sacrament. ![]() If you didn’t know about any of this before, you are not guilty of the sin of simulating the administration of sacraments. This won’t be their first rodeo with his illicit and invalid acts. I also suspect that the chancery has had to deal with this before, since Wicken’s chapel was there for a long time. I suspect that they would determine that you would need to be confirmed absolutely and not conditionally. That priest should then consult with the chancery quickly and determine a way for you validly to be confirmed. You should get in touch with your parish priest or the priest at the legitimate traditional chapel which you may now be frequenting and explain the situation. To the form (spoken words) of the sacrament there would be added “If you are not baptized/confirmed, …”. Sometimes when the unrepeatable sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation are doubtfully conferred, the rite is repeated conditionally. Hence, the validity of the confirmation is highly doubtful. Wickens would not have had the faculty to confirm. 822 says that a priest who has the “faculty in virtue of universal law or the special grant of the competent authority also confers this sacrament validly.” The local bishop could give a priest the faculty and the law itself gives a priest the faculty in danger of death. The ordinary minister of Confirmation is a bishop. There is little doubt that Wickens baptized validly. Therefore, people really did receive Holy Communion from him.Īny person can baptize validly, provided they do what the Church intends. However, being validly ordained, Wickens did truly confect the Eucharist when he validly, but illicitly, celebrated Holy Mass. Wickens did not have faculties from proper authority to function as a priest.Įverything that Wickens did was illicit, except in the case of danger of death (when the law itself provides faculties for valid absolution, etc). This reminds me of the early Church’s Donatist controversy. Were these sacraments valid? Licit? Does anything have to be done on our part? Wickens was in schism, what does that mean in regards the sacraments my wife and her sibling received from him? She received First Communion and Confirmation, and some her of siblings were baptized by him. We attend Holy Mass at the chapel he built (now run by ICKSP with approval of the the archdiocese). All we ever knew about him, we learned from our family. My wife and I recently discovered that Fr.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |