Embedded Files
Simplified Explanation
Notes written for uninformed readers.
In traditional Catholic canon law, there are three kinds of jurisdiction: ordinary, delegated, and supplied.
Ordinary jurisdiction is the authority that clergymen can have to rule and judge people in the Church in matters of Church discipline. This is different from the power of order which are the powers a man automatically gets from the moment he is made a priest or bishop: these powers come with being a priest or bishop, so nobody else can really take them away. Examples of the powers bishops get by just being bishops are making other people bishops through the ceremony called episcopal consecration and being able to make new holy oils which are needed for sacraments like confirmation and extreme unction.
Usually, the Pope must approve anyone who wants to become a bishop before he is made a bishop by another bishop. Because there has been no truly Catholic Pope for so many years (since 1958) and bishops are needed to do things which are very important in order for people to be able to go to heaven, there is a really bad need for new bishops. Because of this, bishops since the death of the latest truly Catholic pope don't have to follow the usual law of bishops having to wait for the Pope to agree that someone is worthy of becoming a bishop. The idea that there can be exceptions like that for laws is called epikeia. People who follow the rules of the Church can use epikeia only when there’s a really good reason and only if they’re really trying to do what Jesus and the Church really want, and what the Pope would want if he was alive. Those men who have become bishops after 1958, called episcopi vagantes, were made bishops to do the things necessary for people to go to heaven, but they don't have any part of the world they rule nor do they have the authority which comes with having ordinary jurisdiction because only a real living pope can give someone ordinary jurisdiction.
In normal times, a bishop with ordinary jurisdiction would have a part of the world in which he had the power and authority to do things like censor bad books about religion, make people have to fast or attend Mass on specific days of the year, establish new parishes, and judge cases about marriage. These are called jurisdictional acts, and they cannot be done by anyone who does not actually have ordinary jurisdiction. It's not just that the should not be done, but it's actually not possible. If someone went around claiming they had the power to do things like these, they would be lying, and by wrongly pretending to have these powers, they would be trying to set up a rival fake Church: this would be a schismatic act. When people overstep their authority and try to separate true believing Catholics from other true believing Catholics, they commit a grave sin against the unity of the Church called schism.
Ordinary jurisdiction is the authority that clergymen can have to rule and judge people in the Church in matters of Church discipline. This is different from the power of order which are the powers a man automatically gets from the moment he is made a priest or bishop: these powers come with being a priest or bishop, so nobody else can really take them away. Examples of the powers bishops get by just being bishops are making other people bishops through the ceremony called episcopal consecration and being able to make new holy oils which are needed for sacraments like confirmation and extreme unction.
Usually, the Pope must approve anyone who wants to become a bishop before he is made a bishop by another bishop. Because there has been no truly Catholic Pope for so many years (since 1958) and bishops are needed to do things which are very important in order for people to be able to go to heaven, there is a really bad need for new bishops. Because of this, bishops since the death of the latest truly Catholic pope don't have to follow the usual law of bishops having to wait for the Pope to agree that someone is worthy of becoming a bishop. The idea that there can be exceptions like that for laws is called epikeia. People who follow the rules of the Church can use epikeia only when there’s a really good reason and only if they’re really trying to do what Jesus and the Church really want, and what the Pope would want if he was alive. Those men who have become bishops after 1958, called episcopi vagantes, were made bishops to do the things necessary for people to go to heaven, but they don't have any part of the world they rule nor do they have the authority which comes with having ordinary jurisdiction because only a real living pope can give someone ordinary jurisdiction.
In normal times, a bishop with ordinary jurisdiction would have a part of the world in which he had the power and authority to do things like censor bad books about religion, make people have to fast or attend Mass on specific days of the year, establish new parishes, and judge cases about marriage. These are called jurisdictional acts, and they cannot be done by anyone who does not actually have ordinary jurisdiction. It's not just that the should not be done, but it's actually not possible. If someone went around claiming they had the power to do things like these, they would be lying, and by wrongly pretending to have these powers, they would be trying to set up a rival fake Church: this would be a schismatic act. When people overstep their authority and try to separate true believing Catholics from other true believing Catholics, they commit a grave sin against the unity of the Church called schism.
See Also
OPINIONOn Ordinary Jurisdiction
Written on 12 March 2026, Updated 23 June 2026by Juan P. Flores
Written on 12 March 2026, Updated 23 June 2026by Juan P. Flores
The ceremony of consecration leaves an indelible character on the soul giving the bishop the permanent potestas ordinis to perform episcopal ceremonies like blessing holy oils, but no ability to govern until the Pope grants the potestas jurisdictionis. None of the sedevacantist bishops operating today without a papal mandate (called episcopi vagantes) have any right to claim ordinary jurisdiction.
The power of jurisdiction cannot be intrinsically tied to the physical or sacramental act of consecration. If ordinary jurisdiction came from the ceremony of consecration itself, then every validly consecrated schismatic bishop (such as Eastern Orthodox or Old Catholic bishops) would possess divinely-sanctioned ordinary jurisdiction over their flocks, but the Church teaches that schismatic bishops exercise no jurisdiction even if their orders remain valid. Rather, the ceremony of episcopal consecration does not automatically grant bishops any authority of governance over the faithful. The essential form of episcopal consecration, those words necessary for a candidate to be validly made a bishop, signifies the power of the order being conferred (the plenitude of the priesthood) and the grace of the Holy Ghost: it evidently does not grant ordinary jurisdiction by its very nature.
“Perfect in Thy priest the fullness of Thy ministry, and, clothed in the raiment of all glory, sanctify him with the dew of heavenly anointing.”—Pontificale Romanum, 1888 (as confirmed by Pope Pius XII in Sacramentum Ordinis, 1947)
Even though it is certain that Christ grants men the full power of the priesthood upon being consecrated bishops, both the overwhelming consensus of theologians and the decrees of the popes throughout history make it clear that bishops can be granted ordinary jurisdiction only directly and immediately from a living pope. The rite of episcopal consecration bestows an aptitude, but not an active power, to govern the faithful. Like a man finishing law school might have the aptitude to judge but cannot legally try a case until the state appoints him as a judge, a bishop has the sacramental aptitude to rule from his consecration, but he remains completely powerless to exercise ordinary jurisdiction until the Pope assigns him a part of the world.
“...By the laying on of hands, a bishop receives his spiritual character; but by the word of the Roman Pontiff, he receives his distinct territory and the people over whom he may exercise that character.”—Pope Innocent III, Consecratione Pontificis, Sermo 2
That episcopal authority in the world remains dependent upon the Apostolic See as its source was also taught by Pope St. Innocent I, addressing the bishops of Carthage in the fifth century, and by the most eminent theologians down through the years, such as St. Bonaventure (1221–1274).
“...No one receives an ordinary power of governing except through the supreme head, who is the Vicar of Christ. It is from this fountainhead that all local waters of episcopal authority must flow.”—St. Bonaventure, Breviloquium, Part VI, Chapter 12
Likewise, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) in his Summa (P. II-II, q. 39, a. 3) distinguishes between the power of order and that of jurisdiction, noting that the latter is bound directly to the subjection to the Pope. The “power of jurisdiction,” he says, “does not adhere immovably to the recipient” so therefore “the Pope can take away or give jurisdiction to bishops.” Francis de Vitoria (1483–1546), another Dominican theologian, discussed whether the apostles received jurisdiction directly from Christ or through St. Peter, and in that context he says that the origin of a bishop's authority is immediately from Christ, then clarifying in his Relectiones that the twelve apostles were the first and only persons to receive the power directly from Christ as an extraordinary personal privilege that died with them. While he speculates that one territorial bishop could appoint another of that province without waiting for a papal mandate, he concludes like other theologians that if no canonical mission is granted or recognized by the pope, it would be null and illicit, as the authority of jurisdiction now depends on the see of Peter. St. Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621) came to the same conclusion about the issue.
“[...T]he Apostles themselves received their jurisdiction from Christ, but for the future, bishops were to receive it from the successor of Peter.”—St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book IV, Chapter 24
Bellarmine teaches that not only the particular assignment, but the power of jurisdiction itself is contingent on a pope. Catholic theologians teach that there is a three-fold power in a bishop: the power of order, the power of jurisdiction, and the assignment of a particular place. These last two are not to be exercised without the approval of the Pope, as the magisterium of the Church expresses. The Redemptorist founder St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori (1696–1787) taught in his manual of moral and dogmatic theology that “the power of jurisdiction is given immediately by the Roman Pontiff” and the Jesuit Cardinal Louis Billot (1846–1931) wrote that “it is impossible to conceive of an ordinary power over a portion of the flock except by assignment” from the Pope. This constant teaching is practically settled with the encyclicals of Pope Pius XII. Writing to the true Catholics in China following the Communists' illicit consecrations, Pius XII clearly separated the power of order from jurisdiction.
“The power of holy Orders, which is conferred by the sacred rite of consecration, is distinct from the power of jurisdiction... Jurisdiction is given to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff, as We recalled in Our Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis.”—Pope Pius XII, Ad Sinarum Gentem, 1954
Up until the year he died, in his encyclical Ad Apostolorum Principis (1958), Pope Pius XII reiterates that bishops who have not been named or confirmed by the Holy See have no power of governing. Episcopal consecration confers the potestas ordinis, the power to ordain, as bishops are the usual ministers of the sacrament of Holy Orders, by which men are made priests at the laying on of hands. Only a valid papal appointment can confer the auctoritas jurisdictionis, the moral and legal authority of jurisdiction to command, judge, and teach a group of the faithful. This appointment by the pope to judge a group of the faithful is tied to a tangible part of the world, even if it is a vacant diocese somewhere on the planet. Monsignor G. Van Noort explains this principle.
“Ordinary jurisdiction is, by definition, bound to an office. But an episcopal office cannot exist abstractly. Christ willed that the Church be ruled by bishops tracking localized flocks. Therefore, when the Pope grants a canonical mission, he simultaneously creates the office by carving out a piece of the earth, and then infuses that office with authority. Consecration gives a man the fitness to rule, but the Pope gives him the territory to rule.”—Gerardus van Noort (1861–1946), Dogmatic Theology, Vol. II: Christ's Church
It was often the pro-government partisans of Gaul who advanced the untenable idea that bishops gain ordinary jurisdiction by Christ's direct institution in an attempt to turn the Catholic episcopate into pawns of the French government. The Gallicans argued that bishops, as successors of the Apostles, receive their jurisdictional authority directly from Christ, yet the mind of the Church shows the opposite. The decisions of the Church throughout history, eventually accepted by the bishops themselves, demonstrate that the jurisdiction of bishops is dependent on the Pope as he clearly has the authority to strip any bishop of jurisdiction as he sees fit. For example, all the bishops in France lost their sees after Pope Pius VII agreed to the Concordat of 1801 with Napoleon I and Pope Benedict XV in 1919 compelled the bishops of Strasbourg and Metz to resign after the Prussian handover of Alsace and Lorraine.
Contrary opinions, claiming that bishops are granted jurisdiction by virtue of their consecration “to teach and to govern the entire Church,” were floated at preparatory congregations before the Vatican Council of 1870, but these were never made a teaching of the Church. Among the followers of Vatican Council II (1962–1965), the destructive error has prevailed: Lumen Gentium, one of its principal documents, taught that episcopal consecration “confers the office of teaching and governing,” paving the way for the heretical idea of collegiality, in which not only the Pope, but also all bishops also possess supreme and permanent power over the universal Church by virtue of their consecration.
This theological novelty was rejected by almost all of those who purported to continue traditional Catholic practices following the crisis of widespread apostasy in the twenieth century. Both Archbishop Thục of Huế and Bishop Méndez of Arecibo invoked the principle of epikeia to justify their consecrations without a papal mandate without ever claiming that their bishops would possess ordinary jurisdiction. Addressing concerns about his 1988 consecration of four bishops without an affirmative papal mandate, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre explicitly stated that he was not giving his newly consecrated bishops ordinary jurisdiction, acknowledging that the bishops he consecrated had no territorial power, diocesan seats, or authority to govern a local flock. These statements, consistent with Catholic canonists, deliniate that the extraordinary jurisdiction supplied by the Church in such cases is limited to the administration of sacraments as things important for the Salvation of souls, not to the advantage of the clerics, but for the usefulness of the faithful whose souls would otherwise be emperiled by a lack of valid sacraments. The Jesuit Fr. Felix Cappello (1879–1962) in his Tractatus Canonico-Moralis de Sacramentis notes that the Church can supply jurisdiction, even if the priest is fully aware that he lacks jurisdiction because She supplies it thence “not in his favor, but for the common utility of the faithful, so that they may not be easily defrauded of the benefit of the sacraments.”
“The Church, in her maternal care for souls, grants supplied jurisdiction when the faithful would otherwise be exposed to the danger of receiving invalid sacraments. This happens in cases of common error or probable doubt. The Church acts thus for the spiritual benefit of her children, who might otherwise be gravely deceived.”—Father Henry Davis, S.J., Moral and Pastoral Theology, Vol. III: The Sacraments
During an interregnum, the Code of Canon Law remains the unalterable rule of action for the clergy and faithful. In his 1948 pastoral manual, the Franciscan Fr. Matthew Ramstein explicitly addressed the legal limits of clergymen when there is a vacancy, countering the idea that an emergency grants them the right to legislate. The canons bind strictly, so any attempt by a bishop to establish new disciplines, alter the sacraments, or act different from the existing canonical framework is totally invalid. “No subordinate authority—whether he be a bishop, a religious superior, or a priest—can usurp the rights of the Supreme See during its vacancy,” he writes. “The law protects the Church from human innovation during the period of a vacancy.” Canonists compare the cessation of jurisdiction upon the death of the pope to the loss of the head leading to the incapacitation of the rest of the members of the body. Dominicus de Sancto Geminiano (1375–1424) describes how cardinals are like the primary limbs of the body, not the head itself, so analogically “they can protect the corpse from being violated, but they cannot give it new life or new commands until a head is restored.” Archbishop Giovanni Battista de Luca (1614–1683) in his Theatrum Veritatis et Justitiae (Lib. XV, P. II, Disc. III) teaches that not even the college of cardinals has the power of jurisdiction during such a vacancy, which he says could occur if the pope, God forbid, incurs the crime of heresy. The 1917 Code of Canon Law laid down the principle sede vacante nihil innovetur (Canon 436), that no innovations may be made during interregnums, and the canonists doubtlessly apply this to the episcopate.
“The permanent authority of the episcopal office is suspended during a vacancy.”—Fr. Charles Augustine, O.S.B., A Commentary on the New Code of Canon Law, Vol. II: Clergy and Hierarchy, 1918
Church laws regarding papal interregna are clearly binding on sedevacantists today no less than at any other time, so one might struggle to understand why anyone claiming to be Catholic would contradict them, and yet there are a few who do so even now in an apparent quest for money or power. These rogue bishops might have been consecrated under the principle of epikeia to administer the sacraments and perform duties necessary for people to go to heaven, but they do not have any part of the world they rule nor do they have the authority which comes with having ordinary jurisdiction: nobody is bound to follow the particular judgments or new rules set up by these rogue clerics. If they insist otherwise, or propose that they are not bound by these laws, it is simply a blatant lie, in direct contradiction to Catholic teaching and the command of the latest universally recognized Pope.
“During the vacancy of the Apostolic See, regarding the government of the Church, let the laws enacted by the Roman Pontiffs be in no way corrected or changed, nor let anything be added to them or detracted from them...”—Pope Pius XII, Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, 1945
Sedevacantist faithful, lacking living bishops who they must obey, might have to rely more often than the historical norm on their own prudential judgment, yet they differentiate themselves from anarchists by being bound by an unchanging universal standard: the pre-Vatican II Magisterium, the 1917 Code of Canon Law, and centuries of papal decrees. One might speculate on whether or not this lack of visible ecclesiastical authority is a divine punishment effected on humanity for its sins, but what is certain is that no sedevacantist man posing as bishop has any right to govern the affairs of a diocese, establish parishes, or otherwise exercise ordinary jurisdiction; any who would arrogate to themselves the power and authority of ordinary jurisdiction commit the grave sin of schism and should be avoided as schismatics, enemies of the Church, wolves in sheep's clothing, and false shepherds.
“Perfect in Thy priest the fullness of Thy ministry, and, clothed in the raiment of all glory, sanctify him with the dew of heavenly anointing.”—Pontificale Romanum, 1888 (as confirmed by Pope Pius XII in Sacramentum Ordinis, 1947)
Even though it is certain that Christ grants men the full power of the priesthood upon being consecrated bishops, both the overwhelming consensus of theologians and the decrees of the popes throughout history make it clear that bishops can be granted ordinary jurisdiction only directly and immediately from a living pope. The rite of episcopal consecration bestows an aptitude, but not an active power, to govern the faithful. Like a man finishing law school might have the aptitude to judge but cannot legally try a case until the state appoints him as a judge, a bishop has the sacramental aptitude to rule from his consecration, but he remains completely powerless to exercise ordinary jurisdiction until the Pope assigns him a part of the world.
“...By the laying on of hands, a bishop receives his spiritual character; but by the word of the Roman Pontiff, he receives his distinct territory and the people over whom he may exercise that character.”—Pope Innocent III, Consecratione Pontificis, Sermo 2
That episcopal authority in the world remains dependent upon the Apostolic See as its source was also taught by Pope St. Innocent I, addressing the bishops of Carthage in the fifth century, and by the most eminent theologians down through the years, such as St. Bonaventure (1221–1274).
“...No one receives an ordinary power of governing except through the supreme head, who is the Vicar of Christ. It is from this fountainhead that all local waters of episcopal authority must flow.”—St. Bonaventure, Breviloquium, Part VI, Chapter 12
Likewise, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274) in his Summa (P. II-II, q. 39, a. 3) distinguishes between the power of order and that of jurisdiction, noting that the latter is bound directly to the subjection to the Pope. The “power of jurisdiction,” he says, “does not adhere immovably to the recipient” so therefore “the Pope can take away or give jurisdiction to bishops.” Francis de Vitoria (1483–1546), another Dominican theologian, discussed whether the apostles received jurisdiction directly from Christ or through St. Peter, and in that context he says that the origin of a bishop's authority is immediately from Christ, then clarifying in his Relectiones that the twelve apostles were the first and only persons to receive the power directly from Christ as an extraordinary personal privilege that died with them. While he speculates that one territorial bishop could appoint another of that province without waiting for a papal mandate, he concludes like other theologians that if no canonical mission is granted or recognized by the pope, it would be null and illicit, as the authority of jurisdiction now depends on the see of Peter. St. Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621) came to the same conclusion about the issue.
“[...T]he Apostles themselves received their jurisdiction from Christ, but for the future, bishops were to receive it from the successor of Peter.”—St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, Book IV, Chapter 24
Bellarmine teaches that not only the particular assignment, but the power of jurisdiction itself is contingent on a pope. Catholic theologians teach that there is a three-fold power in a bishop: the power of order, the power of jurisdiction, and the assignment of a particular place. These last two are not to be exercised without the approval of the Pope, as the magisterium of the Church expresses. The Redemptorist founder St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori (1696–1787) taught in his manual of moral and dogmatic theology that “the power of jurisdiction is given immediately by the Roman Pontiff” and the Jesuit Cardinal Louis Billot (1846–1931) wrote that “it is impossible to conceive of an ordinary power over a portion of the flock except by assignment” from the Pope. This constant teaching is practically settled with the encyclicals of Pope Pius XII. Writing to the true Catholics in China following the Communists' illicit consecrations, Pius XII clearly separated the power of order from jurisdiction.
“The power of holy Orders, which is conferred by the sacred rite of consecration, is distinct from the power of jurisdiction... Jurisdiction is given to bishops only through the Roman Pontiff, as We recalled in Our Encyclical Letter Mystici Corporis.”—Pope Pius XII, Ad Sinarum Gentem, 1954
Up until the year he died, in his encyclical Ad Apostolorum Principis (1958), Pope Pius XII reiterates that bishops who have not been named or confirmed by the Holy See have no power of governing. Episcopal consecration confers the potestas ordinis, the power to ordain, as bishops are the usual ministers of the sacrament of Holy Orders, by which men are made priests at the laying on of hands. Only a valid papal appointment can confer the auctoritas jurisdictionis, the moral and legal authority of jurisdiction to command, judge, and teach a group of the faithful. This appointment by the pope to judge a group of the faithful is tied to a tangible part of the world, even if it is a vacant diocese somewhere on the planet. Monsignor G. Van Noort explains this principle.
“Ordinary jurisdiction is, by definition, bound to an office. But an episcopal office cannot exist abstractly. Christ willed that the Church be ruled by bishops tracking localized flocks. Therefore, when the Pope grants a canonical mission, he simultaneously creates the office by carving out a piece of the earth, and then infuses that office with authority. Consecration gives a man the fitness to rule, but the Pope gives him the territory to rule.”—Gerardus van Noort (1861–1946), Dogmatic Theology, Vol. II: Christ's Church
It was often the pro-government partisans of Gaul who advanced the untenable idea that bishops gain ordinary jurisdiction by Christ's direct institution in an attempt to turn the Catholic episcopate into pawns of the French government. The Gallicans argued that bishops, as successors of the Apostles, receive their jurisdictional authority directly from Christ, yet the mind of the Church shows the opposite. The decisions of the Church throughout history, eventually accepted by the bishops themselves, demonstrate that the jurisdiction of bishops is dependent on the Pope as he clearly has the authority to strip any bishop of jurisdiction as he sees fit. For example, all the bishops in France lost their sees after Pope Pius VII agreed to the Concordat of 1801 with Napoleon I and Pope Benedict XV in 1919 compelled the bishops of Strasbourg and Metz to resign after the Prussian handover of Alsace and Lorraine.
Contrary opinions, claiming that bishops are granted jurisdiction by virtue of their consecration “to teach and to govern the entire Church,” were floated at preparatory congregations before the Vatican Council of 1870, but these were never made a teaching of the Church. Among the followers of Vatican Council II (1962–1965), the destructive error has prevailed: Lumen Gentium, one of its principal documents, taught that episcopal consecration “confers the office of teaching and governing,” paving the way for the heretical idea of collegiality, in which not only the Pope, but also all bishops also possess supreme and permanent power over the universal Church by virtue of their consecration.
This theological novelty was rejected by almost all of those who purported to continue traditional Catholic practices following the crisis of widespread apostasy in the twenieth century. Both Archbishop Thục of Huế and Bishop Méndez of Arecibo invoked the principle of epikeia to justify their consecrations without a papal mandate without ever claiming that their bishops would possess ordinary jurisdiction. Addressing concerns about his 1988 consecration of four bishops without an affirmative papal mandate, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre explicitly stated that he was not giving his newly consecrated bishops ordinary jurisdiction, acknowledging that the bishops he consecrated had no territorial power, diocesan seats, or authority to govern a local flock. These statements, consistent with Catholic canonists, deliniate that the extraordinary jurisdiction supplied by the Church in such cases is limited to the administration of sacraments as things important for the Salvation of souls, not to the advantage of the clerics, but for the usefulness of the faithful whose souls would otherwise be emperiled by a lack of valid sacraments. The Jesuit Fr. Felix Cappello (1879–1962) in his Tractatus Canonico-Moralis de Sacramentis notes that the Church can supply jurisdiction, even if the priest is fully aware that he lacks jurisdiction because She supplies it thence “not in his favor, but for the common utility of the faithful, so that they may not be easily defrauded of the benefit of the sacraments.”
“The Church, in her maternal care for souls, grants supplied jurisdiction when the faithful would otherwise be exposed to the danger of receiving invalid sacraments. This happens in cases of common error or probable doubt. The Church acts thus for the spiritual benefit of her children, who might otherwise be gravely deceived.”—Father Henry Davis, S.J., Moral and Pastoral Theology, Vol. III: The Sacraments
During an interregnum, the Code of Canon Law remains the unalterable rule of action for the clergy and faithful. In his 1948 pastoral manual, the Franciscan Fr. Matthew Ramstein explicitly addressed the legal limits of clergymen when there is a vacancy, countering the idea that an emergency grants them the right to legislate. The canons bind strictly, so any attempt by a bishop to establish new disciplines, alter the sacraments, or act different from the existing canonical framework is totally invalid. “No subordinate authority—whether he be a bishop, a religious superior, or a priest—can usurp the rights of the Supreme See during its vacancy,” he writes. “The law protects the Church from human innovation during the period of a vacancy.” Canonists compare the cessation of jurisdiction upon the death of the pope to the loss of the head leading to the incapacitation of the rest of the members of the body. Dominicus de Sancto Geminiano (1375–1424) describes how cardinals are like the primary limbs of the body, not the head itself, so analogically “they can protect the corpse from being violated, but they cannot give it new life or new commands until a head is restored.” Archbishop Giovanni Battista de Luca (1614–1683) in his Theatrum Veritatis et Justitiae (Lib. XV, P. II, Disc. III) teaches that not even the college of cardinals has the power of jurisdiction during such a vacancy, which he says could occur if the pope, God forbid, incurs the crime of heresy. The 1917 Code of Canon Law laid down the principle sede vacante nihil innovetur (Canon 436), that no innovations may be made during interregnums, and the canonists doubtlessly apply this to the episcopate.
“The permanent authority of the episcopal office is suspended during a vacancy.”—Fr. Charles Augustine, O.S.B., A Commentary on the New Code of Canon Law, Vol. II: Clergy and Hierarchy, 1918
Church laws regarding papal interregna are clearly binding on sedevacantists today no less than at any other time, so one might struggle to understand why anyone claiming to be Catholic would contradict them, and yet there are a few who do so even now in an apparent quest for money or power. These rogue bishops might have been consecrated under the principle of epikeia to administer the sacraments and perform duties necessary for people to go to heaven, but they do not have any part of the world they rule nor do they have the authority which comes with having ordinary jurisdiction: nobody is bound to follow the particular judgments or new rules set up by these rogue clerics. If they insist otherwise, or propose that they are not bound by these laws, it is simply a blatant lie, in direct contradiction to Catholic teaching and the command of the latest universally recognized Pope.
“During the vacancy of the Apostolic See, regarding the government of the Church, let the laws enacted by the Roman Pontiffs be in no way corrected or changed, nor let anything be added to them or detracted from them...”—Pope Pius XII, Vacantis Apostolicae Sedis, 1945
Sedevacantist faithful, lacking living bishops who they must obey, might have to rely more often than the historical norm on their own prudential judgment, yet they differentiate themselves from anarchists by being bound by an unchanging universal standard: the pre-Vatican II Magisterium, the 1917 Code of Canon Law, and centuries of papal decrees. One might speculate on whether or not this lack of visible ecclesiastical authority is a divine punishment effected on humanity for its sins, but what is certain is that no sedevacantist man posing as bishop has any right to govern the affairs of a diocese, establish parishes, or otherwise exercise ordinary jurisdiction; any who would arrogate to themselves the power and authority of ordinary jurisdiction commit the grave sin of schism and should be avoided as schismatics, enemies of the Church, wolves in sheep's clothing, and false shepherds.
Google Sites
Report abuse