15 Comments

This is excellent news, though one wishes that the Holy Father had gone further and not left this as a subject or special approval from the Curia. As a priest and canonist I know once expressed, it isn't very coherent to insist that governance in religious orders must be tied to Holy Orders, when abbesses and other female major superiors have been exercising governance in their communities for over 1500 years. The real reason for the law preventing lay brothers from holding leadership in institutes consisting of both priests and brothers is a clericalist aversion to the thought that a priest might be under obedience to someone who is not also a priest.

Expand full comment

The power of governance was always tied to Holy Orders. In the case of certain abbesses, were granted the pontificalia and governed as a bishop over their monasteries and sometime surrounding areas. These were parcels of land owned by the monastery and rightly governed by the abbess. These abbesses had jurisdiction over priests for the Sacramental needs of the monastery but the abbesses themselves had no authority over the Liturgy and still received the abbatial blessing from the local bishop. Is this "clericalization of the laity?"

And yes, the Gilbertines in England and a few other groups had double communities ruled over by an abbess. But we are not dealing with the Church of the past.

With rise of mendicant orders and then clerical institutes many who are worldwide the situation is different.

I think this falls under the the motto of the pontificate of Pope Francis', "Hacer un lio."

How can a layman, dispense or deal with internal form issues? How can he deal with matters that require Holy Orders?

"Clericalist aversion" to lay leadership or the fact that Holy Orders does confer the offices of shepherd, teacher and sanctifier? Maybe the pope and change this too?

Expand full comment

The power of governance was always tied to Holy Orders.

In the case of certain abbesses, were granted the pontificalia and governed with "quasi episcopal" authorities over their monasteries and sometime surrounding areas. These were parcels of land owned by the monastery and rightly governed by the abbess. These abbesses had jurisdiction over priests who served the Sacramental needs of the monastery. The abbesses themselves had no authority over the Liturgy and still received the abbatial blessing from the local bishop. Is this "clericalization of the laity?"

And yes, the Gilbertines in England and a few other groups had double communities ruled over by an abbess. But we are not dealing with the Church of the past.

With rise of mendicant orders and then clerical institutes many who are worldwide the situation is different.

I think this falls under the the motto of the pontificate of Pope Francis', "Hacer un lio."

How can a layman, dispense or deal with internal form issues? How can he deal with matters that require Holy Orders?

"Clericalist aversion" to lay leadership or the fact that Holy Orders does confer the offices of shepherd, teacher and sanctifier? Maybe the pope can change this too? He rules by "fiat" and as President Obama did, by the equivalent of "executive orders."

Expand full comment

Story idea: how has the munus of governance (as connected with the ordained priesthood) been understood in the Church's tradition?

Among the people I know, I foresee a fierce divide between -- if I may straw man both sides -- "priests are for sacraments, authority is irrelevant to priesthood, this is a great step away from clericalism" and "the priesthood is primarily about authority and hierarchical structure, and lay people grow in holiness by unthinking obedience to their confessor."

I'd be really interested in a walk through how the Church has understood priestly authority throughout its history and as inculturated in different cultures.

Expand full comment
May 18, 2022Liked by JD Flynn

This has got to be one of the nerdiest articles you've published. Keep it up!

Expand full comment

“A non-clerical member of an Institute of Consecrated Life or of a Clerical Society of Apostolic Life of pontifical right is appointed major superior, after having obtained a written license from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life at the request of the Supreme Moderator with the consent of the Council,”

At the risk of asking a stupid question, what exactly are Institutes of Consecrated Life and Clerical Societies of Apostolic Life of Pontifical Right? Are Clerical Societies groups that have priestly ministry as its main focus? Or are they groups that just happen to have priests? What are some examples of each of these groups?

Expand full comment
May 19, 2022·edited May 19, 2022

A question: does this change (or existing canon law) address the hierarchical supervision of the major superior? To whom, and how, would this uber-layperson be accountable? For example: could a cleric, having been disciplined by a major superior, make a "skip-level" appeal to another cleric?

Expand full comment

Forgive me for not keeping up with this, but what was the impetus for this change? Was there any specific situation that brought this change, or is this just opening things up in general to more lay involvement in leadership positions?

Expand full comment

Is this related to difficulties in the Order of Malta?

Expand full comment

Motus proprios? Just wondering.

Expand full comment