Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Ecclesia supplet
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Znaczenie zasady «supplet Ecclesia». Od kan. 209 KPK z 1917 roku do kan. 144 obecnego KPK – interpretacja i aplikacja

100%
DOHNALIK J.
Prawo Kanoniczne
|
2017
|
vol. 60
|
issue 4
15-40
EN
The article is divided into three parts. In the first one works on the formulation of the norm on jurisdiction supply by the Church during the first codification have been reviewed. The author quotes archival documents and preparatory schemata in which one can notice the evolution of what is to become the canon 209. The scope of application of the rule supplet Ecclesia as well as the conditions in which doubt or common error may occur have been specified in the light of authentic interpretations and the canonical heritage of the first half of the 20th century. In the second part the process of creation of the current canon 144 and its interpretation has been outlined. Discussion of these issues during preparation of the new codification and subsequent drafts are quoted after the periodical Communicationes.  The meaning of particular elements of the traditional rule’s new formulation is presented in the perspective of former and current commentaries. The third part is dedicated to the application of the supplet Ecclesia principle in the specific situations of the Church’s life. The first paragraph of the canon can be applied among the others in case of invalid acquisition of an ecclesiastical office for undisclosed reasons as well as the death of the ordinary if it remains unknown to the public. The reader will also find discussions about the implementation of the rule in question in connection with canon 883, the circumstances in which the Church supplies the faculty to celebrate the sacrament of penance or the scope of application of the canon 144 in the assistance at marriages.  The present elaborate shows that the outline of the history of the interpretation of the supplet Ecclesia principle in the last 100 years helps to better understand and apply the canon 144 of the current Code.  
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Problematyka ważności i godziwości sakramentu pokuty sprawowanego w Bractwie Kapłańskim Świętego Piusa X (FSSPX) w latach 1970-2015

82%
Pietras D.
Teologia i Moralność
|
2023
|
vol. 18
|
issue 1(33)
119-136
EN
The analyzes concern the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) in the context of the validity and licity of their celebration of the Sacrament of Penance during the years 1970-2015. The study utilizes the dogmatic-legal method and consists of the analyzes of existing legal regulations. The status of the priests of the Society who administered the Sacrament of Penance without the required ad validitatem jurisdiction/faculty is detailed. In consequence, this sacrament was invalid. However, it has to be assumed that this sacrament may have been valid and legitimate in some cases, due to common error or positive and probable doubt, in which case the Church provides the necessary jurisdiction/faculty (CIC/17, can. 209; CIC/83, can. 144). It could also have been valid when the faithful requested this Sacrament for a just cause, as the suspension of these priests was not declared (CIC/17, can. 2261 §2, 2284; CIC/83, can. 1335 §2).
PL
Celem artykułu jest wyjaśnienie kwestii ważności i godziwości sakramentu pokuty celebrowanego przez kapłanów Bractwa Kapłańskiego Świętego Piusa X (FSSPX) w latach 1970-2015. Zastosowano w nim metodę dogmatyczno-prawną, polegającą na analizie istniejących uregulowań prawnych. Ukazano status kapłanów, którzy szafowali sakramentem pokuty bez wymaganej ad validitatem jurysdykcji/upoważnienia, w rezultacie czego sakrament ten był nieważny. Założyć jednak należy, że mógł być w niektórych przypadkach ważny i godziwy z powodu błędu powszechnego lub wątpliwości pozytywnej i prawdopodobnej, kiedy Kościół uzupełnia potrzebną jurysdykcję/upoważnienie (CIC/17, kan. 209; CIC/83, kan. 144). Mógł być ważny także, kiedy wierni ze słusznej przyczyny prosili o ten sakrament, gdyż suspensa tych kapłanów nie została zadeklarowana (CIC/17, kan. 2261 § 2, 2284; CIC/83, kan. 1335 § 2).
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.