Understanding Supplied Jurisdiction
In 1960, Catholic Authority split from the Catholic Faith. Is it possible to remain Catholic without compromise?
In today’s Catholic Church, traditionalists face a profound dilemma: how to remain faithful to authentic Catholic teaching while the authority doesn’t support priests that teach the full and non-ecumenist Catholic faith? When the hierarchy has compromised on essential doctrine, where does legitimate authority come from? This question lies at the heart of groups like the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) in 1988 and the SSPX Resistance in 2012.
In this article, we explore the concept of „supplied jurisdiction‟ and how it enables priests to minister to the faithful even in irregular canonical situations. Understanding this theological principle helps us appreciate the challenging balance between preserving tradition and respecting the Church’s divinely established hierarchical nature during times of doctrinal crisis.
Introduction
In the wake of the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965), a crisis emerged within the Catholic Church that continues to this day. Traditional Catholics who believe the Council represented a departure from authentic Catholic teaching have formed various groups to preserve the traditional faith. The most prominent of these is the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. In recent years, some members of the SSPX have formed what is called the „Resistance‟ movement, believing that even the SSPX has compromised too much with modernist Rome.
Both these movements operate largely outside the official structures of the Catholic Church, which raises important questions about authority and jurisdiction. This article explains the concept of „supplied jurisdiction‟ and how it applies to these traditionalist movements.
- Doctrine – The Catholic faith and teachings
- Sacraments – The means of sanctification instituted by Christ
- Hierarchy – The structure of authority from Pope to bishops to priests
Authority in the Church flows downward in this hierarchical structure. Priests receive their authority from bishops, who receive their authority from the Pope. This structure wasn’t invented by men but instituted by Christ Himself when He said, „Go and teach all nations… teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you‟ (Matthew 28:19-20).
In normal circumstances, a priest needs authorization from his bishop to validly hear confessions, a new religious society needs approval from a bishop, and all bishops must be in communion with the Pope. But what happens when this structure is threatened by a doctrinal crisis?
This meant that the SSPX began as a fully authorized Catholic institution within the Church hierarchy. The Archbishop was not acting on his own authority but with the authority that comes from above, ultimately from the Pope.
However, as the crisis in the Church deepened and Archbishop Lefebvre continued to resist dangerous innovations, this official approval was eventually withdrawn. By 1988, when he consecrated four bishops without papal mandate to ensure the survival of tradition, the SSPX was placed in an irregular canonical situation.
Supplied Jurisdiction
When normal channels of authority are disrupted but the salvation of souls is at stake, Catholic theology recognizes the principle of „supplied jurisdiction.‟ This means that in emergency situations, the Church herself „supplies‟ the necessary authority to priests who would not ordinarily possess it. It is a doctrine of the Church that, in an emergency situation, where somebody doesn’t normally have the jurisdiction he needs to perform a function, the Church can supply.
For example, if a priest from one diocese is visiting another country and is asked to hear a confession, even though he doesn’t have the local bishop’s permission, the Church supplies the jurisdiction for the good of the soul seeking absolution.
However, supplied jurisdiction has important limitations:
- It is exercised case by case, not habitually
- It is dependent on the need of the faithful given the state of crisis
- It creates a weaker bond of authority than normal jurisdiction
- Those under supplied authority can withdraw from it at any time
As Archbishop Lefebvre stated: „All authority which is supplied does not have the same characteristics as authority which exists ordinarily in the Church. Supplied authority is exercised case by case, and it’s not habitual. The people who benefit from it can always withdraw from it, and the supplied authority has no power to make them return.‟
The SSPX Resistance
The Resistance movement emerged when some SSPX priests and faithful became concerned that the SSPX leadership was pursuing a problematic reconciliation with Rome without sufficient guarantees for preserving tradition.
The question then arises: What kind of authority exists within the Resistance? If the SSPX’s authority is already based on supplied jurisdiction, what about a movement that has separated even from the SSPX?
The Resistance faces an unavoidable „problem of authority.‟ While the SSPX began with official approval that was later withdrawn, the Resistance has never had any official ecclesiastical approval. This creates a situation where formal authority is even more tenuous.
Some argue that perhaps God does not want the Resistance to have a formal structure with authority because such structures in our time have consistently been corrupted. Instead, they suggest that what God may desire is „a network of pockets of resistance‟ – independent groups preserving the faith without a centralized authority structure.
Fr. Roger Calmel, a French Dominican priest, predicted in the 1970s that „the future for the faith lies in a network of pockets of resistance… Each fort will be constructed by someone who has natural authority… The forts will be in contact with one another. There will be a coordination. There won’t be a subordination.‟
Limits of Supplied Jurisdiction
While supplied jurisdiction allows for the administration of sacraments in extraordinary circumstances, it cannot create the same kind of authority that exists in normal times. A bishop or priest operating under supplied jurisdiction cannot command in the same way as one with ordinary jurisdiction.
For example, Archbishop Lefebvre exercised authority over priests within his society but had no authority over traditional priests outside it. Similarly, when a priest left the SSPX, the Archbishop had no power to compel him to return – unlike the situation 100 years ago when a priest could not simply leave his diocese without his bishop’s permission.
This weakness of authority is not a failing of individuals but a consequence of the crisis in the Church. Until the Church returns to tradition at the highest levels, this problem will remain.
Conclusion
The crisis in the Catholic Church has created extraordinary circumstances where normal channels of authority are disrupted. The concept of supplied jurisdiction allows for the salvation of souls to continue despite this disruption, but it cannot fully replace the normal hierarchical structure that Christ established for His Church.
For Catholics attached to tradition, this means accepting certain limitations while preserving what is essential – the true doctrine, the valid sacraments, and as much of the hierarchical structure as can be maintained in these extraordinary times.
As we navigate these troubled waters, the transcript reminds us that the faith itself must remain primary: „We’re not in this for the chocolate. We’re not in this for the feelings… We’re in this because the Society is changing from a great defender of the faith into an underminer of the faith because it’s going over to the Council, which was a disaster for the faith.‟
While we work and pray for the restoration of full, normal authority in the Church, we must remember that doctrine comes first, then sacraments, then hierarchy. When the hierarchy fails to protect doctrine, extraordinary measures become necessary for the salvation of souls.