Q: If a pastor grants general delegation to a parochial vicar to assist at marriages within the parish, does the parochial vicar have the authority to subdelegate this power to another priest or deacon to witness a specific marriage, or is subdelegation prohibited unless explicitly permitted by the pastor?
… Additionally, is it permissible for a subdelegated priest or deacon to further subdelegate this power, and under what conditions? –James
A: James is a seminarian, who’s been discussing this with his fellow seminarians; and it’s only natural that this issue should be of interest to future parish priests. Current parish priests, of course, should likewise be keenly aware of the rules pertaining to delegation when it comes to celebrating weddings—since the validity of the marriage can hinge on it! The Church’s basic rules about who can or can’t validly celebrate a particular wedding have been discussed repeatedly in this space (in “Why Would a Wedding in Our College Chapel be Invalid?” and “Why Can’t These Priests Ever Celebrate a Valid Catholic Wedding?” to cite a couple of examples), but the rules about delegation add an additional twist to the equation. Let’s have a look.
To begin with, as regular readers already know, a marriage involving at least one Catholic must be celebrated in accord with canonical form, outlined in canon 1108.1. We’ve looked at this issue numerous times, in the abovementioned articles as well as “Our Priest Cancelled Our Wedding, So Who Else Can Validly Marry Us?” and “Can a Catholic Ever Elope?” among others. We saw that for validity, a marriage must be celebrated by the local bishop, the pastor of the parish, or another priest (or deacon) delegated by either of them. If he isn’t one of these, the marriage is invalid.
Both the diocesan bishop and the pastor of a parish possess the faculty to officiate at weddings by virtue of their office. Canon 1109 tells us that within the confines of their territory they assist validly at the marriages not only of their subjects, but also of those who are not their subjects—provided that one of them is of the Latin rite. So the Bishop of X Diocese can celebrate a Catholic wedding anywhere in X diocese (whether the spouses are from his diocese or not), and he can also validly celebrate a Catholic wedding outside the territory of X Diocese, if it involves at least one spouse from his diocese. The authority of a parish priest is comparable: he can validly celebrate a Catholic wedding in his parish, regardless of whether the spouses are his parishioners or not; and he likewise can marry his own parishioners validly outside the territory of his parish.
(By the way, there’s nothing random or arbitrary about these rules, which are grounded in theology. A bishop is responsible for the spiritual wellbeing of the faithful of his diocese {see esp. c. 387}; a parish priest is similarly responsible for the spiritual welfare of his parishioners {cc. 528 ff; as for marriage, see esp. c. 1063}. Preparing them for the sacrament of matrimony is obviously a big part of their spiritual wellbeing—and so it wouldn’t make a lot of theological sense for the Church to allow any and all Catholics to be married by any and all clergy, including clergy who don’t even know who they are. The reverse is equally true: theologically, it wouldn’t make sense to hold a bishop/pastor responsible for the spiritual welfare of the faithful of their diocese/parish, if any Catholic cleric could waltz in and marry them without the bishop’s or pastor’s knowledge or consent!)
But as we all know, there are plenty of other priests out there who are neither the local bishop nor the parish priest. Many parishes have one or more parochial vicars (see “What’s the Job Description of a Parochial Vicar?” for more on this), and while they are priests just like the pastor, you’ll note that they aren’t mentioned at all in canon 1108. Sure, they can celebrate weddings; but they have to be delegated first in order to do so validly. Along similar lines, when (for example) a couple tells the pastor that they’d really like their wedding to be celebrated by the bride-to-be’s uncle, who’s a Catholic priest in another diocese, that’s totally doable—but the priest-uncle must first be delegated to do this.
So what needs to happen procedurally, when a Catholic couple want to get married in a Catholic wedding ceremony, but a cleric other than their local bishop or the parish priest is going to celebrate it? Canon 1111.1 explains:
… [T]he local ordinary and the pastor can delegate to priests and deacons the faculty, even a general one, of assisting at marriages within the limits of their territory.
There are a number of different things going on in this brief canon simultaneously, so let’s unpack it. First of all, note who can delegate a cleric to celebrate a wedding. As was discussed in “Canon Law and Making Private Vows,” the term local ordinary is defined in canon 134.1 and .2, and includes the diocesan bishop himself, the diocesan Vicar General (defined in c. 475), and any Episcopal Vicars (defined in c. 476) which the diocese might have. (See “Our Priest Cancelled Our Wedding, So Who Else Can Validly Marry Us?” for more on the local ordinary.) Add to these men the pastor of the parish, and you have a list of all those who have the power to delegate the authority to celebrate a Catholic wedding.
Next, let’s look at who can be delegated. Canon 1111.1 states that not only priests, but also deacons can be delegated to validly celebrate a Catholic marriage. See “What Can (and Can’t) a Deacon Do?” and “Why Can’t a Deacon Celebrate This Marriage?” for more on this topic.
Thirdly, the canon notes that it’s possible for the bishop/pastor to grant a general delegation to a cleric. What does this mean? Well, sometimes delegation is needed or requested only once, for a particular marriage; other times, a cleric is given an ongoing, or “blanket” delegation to assist at any and all marriages that are celebrated within the territory of the diocese/parish in the future.
The example already mentioned above, of the bride’s uncle who’s a priest in a different diocese, is a clear and quite common example of a one-time delegation to officiate at a specific wedding. Once the uncle is delegated by the parish priest, he comes into town, celebrates the wedding of his niece, then leaves and that’s the end of it. The priest-uncle has no need for any delegation from the pastor beyond that one case.
But a parochial vicar, who is assigned to ministry in a particular parish for an unspecified period of time, might very well be called upon to celebrate the marriages of scores of parishioners—perhaps because the pastor is unable to do it, perhaps because the spouses request it. It generally doesn’t make a lot of practical sense for the parochial vicar to be delegated every single time a wedding is scheduled, so he’s simply told, “You are delegated to assist at marriages in X parish,” and that delegation is valid unless/until either the bishop/pastor withdraws it, or the parochial vicar of X parish is reassigned to a different ministry elsewhere. Depending on where in the world you live, it may be the norm in your diocese that all parochial vicars are always given blanket delegation to celebrate weddings in the parish where they are assigned.
The second paragraph of canon 1111 fleshes out this concept in more detail:
To be valid, the delegation of the faculty to assist at marriages must be given to specific persons expressly.
If it concerns special delegation, it must be given for a specific marriage; if it concerns general delegation, it must be given in writing (c. 1111.2).
Note the wording of the end of this paragraph: since general delegation must be made in writing, the implication is that a single delegation for a specific case can be done orally. Imagine, for example, that the pastor of St. John’s is the only priest at his parish, and is scheduled to celebrate a wedding on Saturday. But on Friday evening, the pastor is hospitalized after an auto accident, and has to find somebody to cover for him, fast! He can phone a priest at St. Gertrude’s and tell him over the phone, “I delegate you to assist at the wedding tomorrow,” and this is entirely valid. (It would be appropriate to make a notation about this when recording the marriage in the wedding registry at St. John’s, just for the record. Although this is not explicitly required, it certainly would be helpful if someone later on raises a question about the faculties of the cleric who officiated at the marriage. See “Canon Law and Marriage Records” for more on this issue.)
Another point found in canon 1111.2 that’s worth noting involves the first sentence: a delegation to assist at a marriage must be given to a particular cleric. In other words, our hospitalized pastor of St. John’s can’t phone St. Gertrude’s and say, “I delegate one of the priests assigned to your parish to assist at the wedding tomorrow, whoever is available to do it.” This would constitute an invalid delegation, which means that the marriage itself would be invalid.
If your head is spinning at this point, be aware that in practice, this is a lot more straightforward than it may sound! But now let’s focus on James’s specific question: can a priest who is delegated to celebrate a marriage turn around and subdelegate that faculty to yet another cleric?
The canons just cited pertain specifically to the celebration of the sacrament of matrimony, and as we can see they make no mention of subdelegation. For that, we have to turn to canon 137, in the chapter of the code on General Norms. These general canons apply to many situations, of which marriage is only one. Canon 137.3 addresses the issue of subdelegation:
Executive power delegated by another authority who has ordinary power can be subdelegated only for individual cases if it was delegated for all cases. If it was delegated for a single act or for determined acts, however, it cannot be subdelegated except by express grant of the one delegating.
Once again, there’s quite a lot packed into this one paragraph, so let’s take it apart.
Firstly, “executive power” does indeed refer (among many other things of course) to the celebration of sacraments by the diocesan bishop and the parish priest. Power of governance, addressed in this section of the code, is divided into executive, legislative, and judicial power (cf. c. 135), and there’s nothing inherently legislative or judicial about the celebration of a sacrament. Thus officiating at a marriage falls into the “executive” category.
Moving on, if the bishop or pastor has granted blanket delegation to a particular cleric, that delegated cleric can subdelegate that authority to yet another cleric—but only in an individual case. Let’s pretend that Fr. George is the parochial vicar at Our Lady of Good Counsel Parish, and has general delegation to assist at any and all marriages which take place there. Imagine that on May 31, Fr. George is already scheduled to celebrate a wedding, since the pastor is going to be out of town on his annual retreat (see “Clergy and Summer Vacation” for more on this right/duty of all priests). So far, so good—but now imagine that on May 29, Fr. George’s mother dies, and he now has to travel to see to her burial. Imagine that because the pastor is already on retreat, he is unreachable.
As per canon 137.3, Fr. George himself can validly subdelegate Deacon Mike at St. Michael’s Parish, to celebrate the wedding on May 31. Fr. George does not need permission from the pastor to do this; but note that Fr. George can only delegate Deacon Mike for this one, individual case. He has no power to give Deacon Mike a blanket delegation to celebrate all weddings at Our Lady of Good Counsel—only the pastor (or the diocesan bishop) can do that.
Sometimes, it can get even more complicated! Let’s say that Deacon Mike, from St. Michael’s, agreed to assist at the marriage at Our Lady of Good Counsel on May 31. But what happens if Deacon Mike slips on the floor that morning, and breaks his leg? Can he, who has been subdelegated, delegate the authority to celebrate that marriage?
No. Canon 137.4 tells us clearly that no subdelegated power can be subdelegated again, unless the one delegating has expressly granted this. Yes, Fr. George can validly subdelegate someone else instead of Deacon Mike; but Deacon Mike himself can’t delegate anyone to take his place.
In other words, there’s no such thing as sub-subdelegation—unless the diocesan bishop, who gave Fr. George blanket delegation to assist at all marriages at Our Lady of Good Counsel, explicitly declared at the time that this sort of scenario would be possible. Since, as we’ve already seen, general delegation must be made in writing, Deacon Mike/Fr. George would have to be able to point to the wording of the written document to justify delegation of subdelegation.
But we’re not done unpacking canon 137.4, so let’s go back and examine the last part of it: “If it [executive power] was delegated for a single act or for determined acts, however, it cannot be subdelegated except by express grant of the one delegating.” A different example will illustrate what is being said here. Imagine that Fr. Paul is the pastor of St. Joseph’s Parish, and a wedding is scheduled there on July 5. Fr. Paul is the only priest at the parish, and he has already booked a much needed, well deserved vacation that week. He has arranged for Fr. Henry, a retired priest friend, to cover for him while he’s away; and has specifically granted Fr. Henry delegation to officiate at that July 5 wedding. Fr. Paul said nothing about Fr. Henry subdelegating anything.
Fine. But let’s say that Fr. Henry has a heart attack a couple of hours before the wedding, and is rushed to the emergency room. Let’s say that Fr. Paul cannot be reached, wherever he is; and the same is true of the diocesan bishop. Can Fr. Henry subdelegate the authority to celebrate that July 5 wedding? Definitely not, as per canon 137.4: Fr. Henry was delegated only for that one wedding, and thus he has no authority to subdelegate—and if he tries to do so anyway, the wedding will be invalid because of a defect in canonical form. (We can see that through no fault of their own, the poor bride and groom have a serious problem here! And if anyone wants to suggest in desperation that ecclesia supplet, see “Ecclesia Supplet: Making Invalid Sacraments Valid” for a thorough discussion of that loophole, which definitely is not applicable here because there is no doubt of fact or of law in this case.)
There are a lot of twists and turns involved in the whole issue of delegation, aren’t there? But now James has his answer. Fortunately, while most engaged Catholics have no idea how serious the need for this delegation really is, priests do. As a rule, they understand the significance of the territorial boundaries of the parish where they reside (or in the case of visiting-priests, where they want to celebrate the wedding), and the need to grant/ obtain delegation/subdelegation. After all, the validity of the marriage depends on it.
Why is Google hiding the posts on this website in its search results? Click here for more information.
