Talk:Minister (Catholic Church)

message: The prior edit history of this page can be found here.
The prior edit history of the associated talk page can be found here.  The old talk page contents can be found here.
P.S. If you "move" a page, then the history of that page will go with it to the new location.  When you create a new page by editing it to contain the current contents of another page, then the prior edit history of that other page is not copied. -- Cat Whisperer 05:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Prior edit histories

message: I changed the table in Holy Orders, and the footnote disappeared.  God Bless to anyone who can correct it.  Anyway, the substance is under the 1917 Code and prior law, it was possibly (in theory) for one presbyter to ordain another.  This practice allegedly goes back to Boniface VIII, and because ordinations are always absolute, they have never been declared invalid (this is reflected in the CIC 1917).  Neither Vatican II nor the CIC 1983 takes up the topic of validity, the CIC 1983 says only the minister "est" bishop.  In theory, as this says NOTHING about validity, it would be a valid (though illicit resulting in latae sententiae excommunication).  I also added a line to "ministry."  I hesitate to go into too much more distinction, as the documents, while clear, can seem to those who aren't familiar with them to be overly complex, especially when regarding ministry, pastoral ministry, full care of souls, cooperanti sunt and the list goes on.  If people think that a list of the documents would be worth while, let me know and I am happy to post them in a notes/further reading section.
DaveTroy 13:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Bouscaren and Ellis' Canon Law: A Text and Commentary (3rd edition, 1957), under CIC 1917 c. 951: "The delegated power granted to the extraordinary minister refers only to the orders which are not a sacrament and which have been established by the Church; namely, tonsure, minor orders, and the subdiaconate."  Do you have any references which state that extraordinary ministers of orders could ordain deacons and/or other priests? -- Cat Whisperer 16:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On the basis of this presupposition oriented in terms of content, it is easy to give a plausible explanation to all they typical recurring cases of Latin Theology, such as that of th invalidity of the Sacramental absolution given without the jurisdiction, that of absolute ordination (where Orders and jurisdiction are conferred separately), that of ordinations extra communionem ecclesiaticam (or extra muros) and that of priestly ordinations done by a simple priest, thanks to a papal indult [footnote re given below].  
The Ordinary Minister of sacred ordination is a consecrated Bishop; the extraordinary [minister is one who], although lacking episcopal character, either by the law or by special indult of theApostolic See takes up the power of conferring certain Orders. can. 951, CIC 1917  Trans. Peters, Edward, The 1917 Pio-Benedictine Code of Canon Law...Ignatius:San Fransico 2001.  This quote is the relevant law.  Eugene Correco takes up the topic in his book ( I am quoting the English translation) in Canon Law and Communio: Writings on the Constitutional Law of the Church ed. Borgonovo and Cattaneo where he says  If one leaves aside the problem of absolute ordination, it is sufficient to admit, in order to resolve these cases [ordiations exra muros ecclesiasticam] that the Church is able to render certain sacramental acts valid or invalid in virtue of the power which shee has to confer or take away jurisdiction.  The existence of different grades in the sacrament of Orders (in particular that of the episcopate and the presbyterate) can also be explained on the basis of the different "quantity" of jurisdiction, conferred with the misso canonica. [in the originall text, the following is a footnote, after the first paragraph]  With regard to these cases, [a priest ordaining], which date to the end of the 15th century, cf C Baisi, Il ministro straordinario, loc cit pp 7 -- 28.  There exist a whole series of problems of a historical and doctrinal nature tied to the exercisee of the power of jurisdiction on the part of the laity, which hoever we cannont deal with here.   Correco, Canon Law and Communio, p 195.  Correco goes on later to say about ordinations done by a presbyter on pg 209, same opus The lack of papal indult impedes only the insertion of the newlyl consecrated in the communio hierarchia, but does not invalidate the sacrament as such.  Such an ordination could provoke a formal excommunicatio, which does not deprive, however, either the person consecrating or the person consecrated from the status of belong to the on Church of Christ.  It only deprives him of the exercise of some fundamental rights within the Catholic Church, or within a  non- Catholic Church, if it is that to which he happens to belong
I know I am quoting only parts, and that certainly makes an already complicated argument much more difficult.  It is further complicated by the fact that the references from the Middle Ages themselves are confusing.  In the CIC 1983, we hear only about bishops as ministers, but the text says nothing about validity, probably do to history.  The current code (cf can 10) requires a law to be explictly invalidating to invalidate an action.   Hence, canonists are still quite taken with the topic of presbyters ordaining other presbyters.  To my knowledge, there is no history for presbyters ordaining deacons, who are always co-workers/helpers of the bishop.  Does this answer your question?  I really am trying to answer it, without also typing in several pages of text.DaveTroy 21:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the answer; it helps quite a bit. -- Cat Whisperer 23:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ordination 

message: There is a phrase "ordination to as a subdeacon" in the text of the page which I think should probably just read "ordination as a subdeacon", but since I am not Catholic and sometimes Catholic terminology is not (to my mind) intuitive, I'll leave it for a Catholic or a brave non-Catholic to correct. --Haruo (talk) 05:14, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: to as??

message: I have read this Vatican document that seemingly forbids laymen from performing marriages . It appears relevant to the section dealing with extraordinary ministers. ADM (talk) 16:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I understand, the referenced Vatican document only forbids laity from conferring blessings within the context of Holy Mass. Sacrament of Matrimony is ministered by Husband and Wife to each other with the witness of a clergy under ordinary minister. Sacrament of Matrimony does not necessary be ministered within a Mass, nor blessing is necessary after the minister of the sacrament. ppa (talk) 23:21, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Marriages and Extraordinary Ministers

message: The image :File:Ordination rifan.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Ordination rifan.jpg

message: I found there is also a similar section in Sacraments of the Catholic Church#Validity and liceity of administration of the sacraments. We shoulld conbine the two together and redirect one to the other. ppa (talk) 23:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sacraments Ministers

message: "However, in terms of the sacraments of Catholic marriage and Reconciliation (the Sacrament of Penance), although the priest is the ordinary minister" In the Latin Church, the priest is not the minister of the sacrament -- the people being married are (they confer the sacrament on one another); the priest's function is a witness. So the need for authority has nothing to do with being the minister of the sacrament as such.
(In Eastern canon law, the priest is the minister, though...) 128.194.250.68 (talk) 03:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Minister of Matrimony

message: This whole section is a mess from both a canonical and theological viewpoint. An ordinary minister is not someone who can validly perform a sacrament yet may not have the authority to do so. Being an ordinary minister means having the authority. The example of a bishop not having permission to consecrate another bishop is completely off. The sacrament conferred in ordination and consecration is Holy Orders and the Bishop is always the ordinary (and only) minister of the sacrament. Whether a particular bishop has permission to administer that sacrament is a question of jurisdiction, not who is a minister. Indeed the entire section is predominantly focused on jurisdiction. Not only that, but the understanding presented in this section regarding jurisdiction is wrong. If someone is a minister of any sacrament then they have the jurisdiction (aka permission) to celebrate those sacraments. If someone lacks jurisdiction, for example a suspended or laicized priest, then they are not a ministers of any sacraments at all, even if they can validly confect/confer said sacrament.
This entire section needs to be reworked. Even the table is questionable on some points.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.128.185.189 (talk) 21:08, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ministers of the Sacraments