Lay Simony on Indolent Clergy

Lay Simony on Indolent Clergy

Problem of laymen exerting undue influence

by their financial contributions,

governing in fact certain indolent priests,

in contempt of episcopal authority.

 

Table of Contents

 

Introduction

1. The State of the question
2. Definition of the problem according to traditional Catholic doctrine
3. Millenary historical roots
4. Current situation: jurisdiction of suppliance due to the vacancy of the Apostolic See
5. Analysis of causes and effects according to Thomistic logic
6. Proposed solution: conforming to the canons and to traditional doctrine

Conclusion

 

Introduction

 

Here is a doctrinal and moral study intended to correct the grave abuses constituted by the undue influence exercised by laymen through financial donations upon indolent priests, as well as the submission of these priests to such domination, to the detriment of legitimate episcopal authority.

 

This study relies exclusively upon the certain doctrine of the Catholic Church and aims to rectify these abuses by recalling the divine order, without any personal opinion, but adhering to the facts and to verified authentic texts.

 

1. The state of the question

 

The disorder examined here is profound and contrary to the hierarchical nature of the Church, a perfect society instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ. Laymen, through their material contributions, arrogate to themselves a de facto power over priests who, through indolence, submit to their wills instead of obeying their bishop. This evil is not recent; it has roots in past centuries, such as the quarrels of the investitures and the case of simony.

In the current context of the vacancy of the Apostolic See for more than sixty years, the Church subsists through supplied jurisdiction, provided by God Himself in cases of necessity. This analysis demonstrates the sinful character of this practice, its historical origins, its present aggravation, and proposes a certain canonical solution.

 

2. Definition of the problem according to traditional Catholic doctrine

 

The Church is a hierarchical society in which jurisdiction belongs to the sacred hierarchy: bishops and priests, under the supreme authority which, in ordinary times, resides in the Pope. Laymen have no share in this jurisdiction, but only a subordinate cooperation.

 

– On episcopal authority: The priest owes obedience to his bishop. The Council of Trent teaches exactly: « Si quis dixerit, episcopos non esse superiores presbyteris […] anathema sit » (Session XXIII, canon 7). English translation: If anyone says that bishops are not superior to priests […] let him be anathema.

 

– On the role of laymen: They can and must offer temporal goods (tithes, filial support, collections, Mass intentions, Lenten alms etc.), but without exchange for spiritual influence. And if this takes on the character of “payment” in one way or another, it constitutes the grave sin of simony.

Saint Thomas Aquinas explains, in the Summa Theologica (IIa-IIae, q. 104), that obedience is a special virtue, obliging inferiors to submit to superiors for the common good, and that any inversion is against the natural order.

 

– On the indolence of priests: It violates pastoral zeal.

 

The Code of Canon Law of 1917 stipulates in canon 128: « As often and as long as, in the judgement of the proper Ordinary, this will be required by the necessity of the Church, and unless a legitimate impediment excuses them, clerics must assume and faithfully accomplish the function which would have been entrusted to them by their bishop. »

 

Canon 336 reaffirms:

« §1. Bishops must ensure that ecclesiastical laws are observed

• 2. They must ensure that abuses do not creep into ecclesiastical discipline, especially in the administration of sacraments and sacramentals, in the worship of God and the saints, in the preaching of the word of God, in holy indulgences and the execution of pious wills. They must devote their efforts to the conservation of the purity of faith and morals in the clergy and the people. »

 

This simoniacal practice, when donations aim at spiritual power, is prohibited and sanctioned, see canon 727 of the 1917 Code:

Ǥ1. Simony of divine law is the deliberate will to buy or sell for a temporal price things intrinsically spiritual, for example the sacraments, ecclesiastical jurisdiction, a consecration, indulgences, etc.; or a temporal thing annexed to a spiritual thing in such a way that the temporal thing cannot exist without the spiritual element, for example an ecclesiastical benefice, or that the spiritual thing is the object, although partial, of the contract, for example the consecration in a sale of a consecrated chalice.

• 2. Simony of ecclesiastical law is the act of giving temporal things annexed to a spiritual thing in exchange for temporal things annexed to a spiritual thing, or spiritual things for spiritual things, or even temporal things for temporal things, if this is prohibited by the Church because of the danger of irreverence for spiritual things. »

 

3. Millenary historical roots

 

This evil reappears when vigilance diminishes, as historical facts attest.

 

– In patristic epochs: Saint Gregory the Great condemns clerics submissive to powerful laymen in his Letters (Book IX, letter 26): « Non enim potentum mundi favor, sed Ecclesiae disciplina regenda est ». English translation: For it is not the favour of the powerful of the world, but the discipline of the Church which must be observed (verified in authentic editions of the works of Saint Gregory).

 

– Quarrels of the investitures (XIth century): Emperor Henry IV claimed to invest bishops against allegiance. Saint Gregory VII affirms in the Dictatus Papae (1075), point 2: « Quod solus Romanus pontifex iure dicatur universalis ». English translation: That only the Roman pontiff is rightly called universal. The First Lateran Council (1123) prohibits powerful laymen from investing clerics, bishops and abbots (superiors of abbeys) (canon 2): « Interdicimus etiam laicis dare investituras ecclesiarum » (we also prohibit laymen from giving the investitures of churches; exact text verified).

 

Other examples include medieval lords imposing abbots against rents, or the Pragmatic Sanction of 1438 in France, revoked by the Concordat of Bologna in 1516. The Church has always reacted by excommunication.

 

According to Thomistic logic: The efficient cause is cupidity (concupiscence of the eyes, 1 John 2:16); the perverted final cause is temporal power instead of salvation.

 

4. Current situation: supplied jurisdiction due to the vacancy of the Apostolic See

 

Since the vacancy of the See in 1964, Catholic bishops (validly consecrated before 1968 or by traditional lineage) exercise a jurisdiction supplied by the Church in necessity. Priests must obey them, not laymen. Indolence is aggravated by the isolation of parishes and the lack of structures, rendering clerics vulnerable to financial pressures. Any priest accepting lay governance commits a grave sin against the obedience due to the supplying bishop and against the common good of the community for which he is responsible.

 

5. Analysis of causes and effects according to Thomistic logic

 

– Material cause: Financial donations (legitimate in themselves and necessary, cf. 1 Corinthians 9:11). “Money is the sinew of war”.

 

– Efficient cause: The cupidity of indolent priests; the ambition of laymen. Concupiscences worthy of Freemasons.

 

– Formal cause: The hierarchical inversion (laymen acting as patrons). The inventor of this sin is the demon.

 

– Final cause: The loss of the salvation of souls (scandals, financed heterodoxy). The mean particular good harms the prior common good.

 

Effects: Schism in fact, simony, weakening of supplied episcopal authority.

 

6. Proposed solution: conforming to the canons and to traditional doctrine

 

The restoration of order must be achieved by canonical and pastoral means, under supplied jurisdiction.

 

6.1. Immediate action of the bishop: Written reminder to priests, citing canon 125 of the 1917 Code (obedience), with threat of suspension a divinis if persistence (canon 2279: « Suspensio a divinis est censura qua clericus prohibetur exercitio ordinum »; exact text: suspension a divinis is a censure by which the cleric is prohibited from the exercise of orders).

 

Prohibition to laymen of interference: Pastoral letter citing Pius X, Vehementer Nos (1906): « The Church is essentially an unequal society, that is to say a society comprising two categories of persons: the pastors and the flock ».

 

6.2. Financial measures: Accounting under exclusive episcopal control. Refusal of conditioned donations (simony, canon 729: « Simonia in sacramentis est graviter prohibita »; simony in sacraments is gravely prohibited).

 

6.3. Formation and vigilance: Insistence on obedience in seminaries (Summa Theologica, IIa-IIae, q. 104). Regular canonical visits: Canon 343: « Bishops visit their dioceses each year, in such a way that in five years each parish has been visited ».

 

6.4. Sanctions: Exclusion from sacraments, from Holy Oils, from Mass intentions, until repentance.

Canon 2291 gives: « The vindictive penalties admitted in the Church and which can affect all the faithful according to the gravity of their delicts are especially the following: 1° Local interdict and interdict on a community or a college, perpetual or for a determined time, or at the discretion of the superior. 2° Interdict from the entrance of the church, perpetually, or for a determined time, or at the discretion of the superior; 3° Penal transfer or suppression of an episcopal or parochial seat; 4° Infamy of law; 5° Deprivation of ecclesiastical burial, in conformity with canon 1240 §1. 6° Deprivation of sacramentals 7° Deprivation or temporary suspension of a pension paid by the Church or on Church goods, or of another ecclesiastical right or privilege. 8° Exclusion from legitimate ecclesiastical acts; 9° Inability for ecclesiastical favours, or for charges in the Church which do not require the clerical state, or for academic degrees granted by ecclesiastical authority; 10° Deprivation or temporary suspense of a charge, a faculty or a grace already obtained; 11° Deprivation of the right of precedence, of active and passive voice or of the right to bear honorific titles, habits or insignia granted by the Church; 12° Pecuniary fine. »

 

6.5. In the context of suppléance: Catholic bishops coordinate through conferences for the faithful. Appeal to prayer for the end of the vacancy, but immediate action.

 

This solution rests upon the prudent judgement of the bishop in charge, in light of the particular circumstances of the cases.

 

Conclusion

 

This millenary problem attacks the hierarchy established by Christ. In the current vacancy, obedience to the supplying bishop is imposed more than ever. Let the bishop act with prudence and firmness, following the canons and the saints, so that the Church, although eclipsed, triumphs until the reestablishment of a legitimate Pope.