Case LXXXIII: Invalid Ordination of a Penitent and the Seal of Confession

Case.—The case here related has actually happened, though along time ago. To Father Aurelius there came to confession a priest, whom we will call Ignotus. He mentioned a doubt about what seemed to him a substantial defect in the nature of his ordination, which Aurelius recognized as justified, and for this reason he appealed to the Sacred Penitentiary. Since an invalid ordination does not admit of sanation, as does marriage, the repetition of the ordination would be necessary. However, the Penitentiary esteemed the seal of confession so highly, and gave so much consideration to the good name of the one (be it bona or mala fide) invalidly ordained, that it required no disclosure of the defect to a bishop, not even by the penitent himself. The whole matter of the confession, at least concerning the person of the priest, should remain. perfectly unknown.

Solution.—Rome’s wisdom solved the case as follows: The confessor Aurelius was summoned and, in presence of no one, was consecrated a bishop at a low Mass, everything necessary having been secretly provided. Thereupon the secret Bishop Aurelius sent for the invalidly ordained Ignotus (who did not even get a glimpse of the bishop who had ordained Aurelius, and became known to no one) and ordained him at a low Mass, likewise without anyone present. The whole proceeding fell under Aurelius’ seal of confession, indeed, this ordination might have taken place in confession. Immediately after this secret ordination, Aurelius was suspended entirely from the episcopacy, ab ordine as also a dignitate, and he could no longer act as bishop, not indeed per modum poenae but in the form merely of a judicial act. Rome considers that either he will not be elected bishop, or not so appointed; but will see to it that, if his nomination (election) should come to Rome, there will not be a repetition of the ordo episcopalis; in this case he might be called to Rome “to take over the Episcopate” and, as if he had now been ordained in Rome, would return in order to be installed.

Regarding Ignotus’ priestly functions thus far the following may be said: His baptisms are valid; the marriages performed by him equally so, because, if he was at least a cleric and had the lesser orders, he was capax beneficii (parochiae), for to undertake a pas-. torate according to the Council of Trent the ordines minores are sufficient, though the cleric is under obligation to receive the higher orders within the year: however, if he assisted at a marriage delegated by a pastor, according to the Council of Trent he must be a priest. A resulting invalidity of marriages may be removed without knowledge of the contracting parties. In case of necessity even the titulus beneficii may be validated as well as the previous enjoyment

-of the fruits thereof, as well as all blessings for indulgences and all other non-sacramental acts. His penitents so far have received no valid absolution from him; this defect could only be cured by God’s mercy, through granting the grace of perfect contrition. It is to be hoped concerning the departed that this was so, if they have been in good faith and have done everything possible on their part. Ignotus disposed his congregation by a sermon to a sincere repentance of all the sins of their lives, and aroused in them the firm intention of going to confession in case they knew that it was necessary, and then absolved them sub conditione in secret. In individual confessions he disposed penitents to a general contrition; he will not require a repetition of former confessions, because his penitents are in good faith, and he need not make known the invalid ordination. (In the same way a priest would act who for some time had absolved without jurisdiction in casu quo Ecclesia non supplet.) Indeed, if his faithful meantime have been to confession elsewhere with a general contrition they are already absolved.

His administering Extreme Unction was invalid, but it is not a sacrament absolutely necessary for salvation. Where scandal is not to be feared he may repeat this sacrament in the case of those gravely sick persons still living. In receiving hosts consecrated by him the faithful did not receive Holy Communion, at most they obtained the merits of a spiritual Communion; but Communion is not “necessitate medii” necessary to salvation.

All Masses said by Ignotus were invalid; as far as there was present in their application a duty of justice, they must be said over or reduced (condoned); moreover the Pope can supply their fruits from the spiritual treasury of the Church. The case is one of special interest, because it is an extraordinary illustration of the sanctity of the seal of Confession and of the avoidance of any odium, and it also offers an example to what extent and in what manner the official actions of individual priests, where there is lack of validity, may be validated or supplied.