Bishops, like it or not, are the ecclesiastical authorities in a diocese
The bishop could also withdraw faculties for the local Catholic university, and it would cease to become a "Catholic university."
Canon Law.
**Those priests at the Polish mission cannot function unless given faculties by the local bishop.**
True with any order. Not just Jesuits.
In this archdiocese we have land owned and operated by the Benedictine's WITH the approval of the archbishop.
Too late. They already claim they are a "Jesuit education," not Catholic University.
That's fine, and the bishop has the right to determine if diocesan priests will offer licit Masses in any building. That right does not include stealing property which he does not own, here or in India. Should the owners sever their connection to the diocese, other priests could celebrate Mass at the owners' discretion. Those Masses would be valid but illicit.
Maeve, does that summarize the India situation correctly?
Did you mean facilities?
I have personal knowledge about the deed to the land for the Polish Mission. It is in the name of the order of priests serving that mission. Further, the same status is true for every Polish Mission throughout North and South America - unless a diocese church was provided to them. This is true in some parts of the United States.
Both the ground-breaking construction blessing and the actually opening of ceremony was officiated by a Polish Bishop from the Vatican. On both occasions the local bishop was not present.
The presence of the Polish order to serve Polish immigrants was approved by Bishop, just as a separate order of priests serve the Croatian community here - who also own their own facilities.
Further, Santa Clara University, buildings and property are owned and administered by the Jesuits long before the establishment of a diocese in Northern California.