Posted on 03/24/2014 6:24:52 AM PDT by Arthur McGowan
Here is the text of Canon 915: “Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.”
Several American bishops have made statements to the effect that a bishop must exercise “discretion” regarding whether to “impose the penalty” of denial of Communion. Among them: Chaput, Dolan, O’Malley, and Wuerl.
All bishops who refuse to “impose the penalty” are participating in a lie. Namely, that denial of Communion is a penalty.
Denial of Communion is NOT a penalty.
So? What is the import of this fact?
It means that denial of Communion is not an option that MAY be chosen. It is MANDATED by Canon 915. No bishop, priest, or other minister of Communion is free to disobey Canon 915, for the simple reason that the action Canon 915 forbids is ALWAYS gravely sinful.
It needs to be emphasized that Canon 915 is NOT a canon that may be “applied” or “not applied.” Canon 915 can only be obeyed or disobeyed. And disobeying Canon 915 is always gravely sinful.
Canon 915 exists precisely because giving Communion to a person “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin” is always gravely sinful. Doing so is always to give grave scandal, and to participate knowingly in a sacrilegious act.
Let that sink in. Always gravely sinful.
In terms perhaps more familiar to the laity: To give Communion knowingly and deliberately to ANYONE delineated in Canon 915 is ALWAYS a mortal sin.
Cardinal Donald Wuerl has been the most outspoken of those bishops who refuse to obey Canon 915, but all of them are on record, as he is, as endorsing the commission of MORTAL SINS by their priests and other ministers of Communion. Cardinal Wuerl has even punished those who have obeyed Canon 915.
Of course, this is something he has no right to do, because no bishop has the authority to command anyone to commit a mortal sin!
“Bearing in mind the nature of the above-cited norm (cfr. n. 1), no ecclesiastical authority may dispense the minister of Holy Communion from this obligation in any case, nor may he emanate directives that contradict it.” Cardinal Wuerl and many other bishops have been doing PRECISELY what they are EXPRESSLY forbidden to do by this statement from the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts!
They have also emanated specious arguments. Here are some of Cardinal Wuerl’s preposterous, irrelevant statements, made in these or very similar words:
That’s not my style.
I follow a “pastoral approach” rather than a “canonical approach.
”We need to find out if the canon was written for the purpose of bringing politicians to heel.
I will not deny Communion to anyone who has not been formally excommunicated.
Now, that is a stunning statement, because the divorced-and-illicitly-remarried are not excommunicated. Yet, does anyone doubt that, were Cardinal Wuerl to direct all ministers of Communion in his jurisdiction to give Communion to the divorced-and-illicitly-remarried, the news would flash around the world, and Rome would take action within hours?
But Canon 915 mentions no particular SPECIES of sin! That is, the KIND of sin in which a would-be communicant is publicly involved is of no account!
In other words, Cardinal Wuerl’s long-standing determination to give pro-abortion people Communion is precisely as outrageous and scandalous as would be a directive to give Communion to the divorced-and-illicitly-remarried. Yet, there is no evidence that this massive scandal has attracted the attention of Rome.
It is said by many, including Cardinal Wuerl, that Communion should not be used as a political weapon.
Absolutely true. And the reception of Communion is being used as a political weapon—by pro-abortion politicians. As long as they are permitted to receive Communion, the bishop (e.g., Cardinal Wuerl) endorses their claim to be “ardent Catholics” whose promotion of abortion is NO SIN.
Abraham Lincoln is credited with the statements: You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can fool some of the people all of the time. Cardinal Wuerl and other bishops appear to be relying on the truth of these observations. It appears that it has been left up to the laity to demonstrate the truth of Lincoln’s further statement: But you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.
If this scandal is to end, Rome needs to hear a great deal more noise from the laity. As Pope Francis told the youth of Brazil: “Raise a ruckus.”
For further reading on Canon 915, please see the following links:
http://tinyurl.com/canon915 http://www.canonlaw.info/a_denialofeucharist.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_915
A native of Washington, DC, Fr. Vincent Fitzpatrick is a retired priest of the Diocese of Fargo.
You can not make any scripture fit any subject you want it to,
Just a waste of time, its yours so take it and run with it.
Offended you again huh? Sorry. The Lord's Supper is a church ordinance administered by a church, pretty well accepted concept except for those who would be perpetually argumentative and offended by a scriptural definition.
You can not make any scripture fit any subject you want it to,
I referenced 2 passages. The James passage are exact words, hardly a twist.
The Hebrews passage must be the one that caused the excitement. 'not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some,' could sting I suppose if you were one of the 'some'. The admonition remains however, might be time to reflect on whether I'm the one trying to make scripture fit my outlook or could it be...
Offended you again huh?
I referenced 2 passages. The James passage are exact words, hardly a twist.
I’m the one trying to make scripture fit my outlook.
How about the rest? Church ordinance and all that? The James passage was in reference to the notion that the stewart of the LS has no control over it.
I’m the one trying to make scripture fit my outlook.
I agree with you.
The posting hissy fit?
Offended you again huh? What makes you think that?
The posting hissy fit?
It didn't, I am still here, awaiting your response to the questions posed in #40.
It is you who is throwing scripture around which has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
If you want to learn, just listen and read the scripture that has to do with the discussion.
Get the pious religious notion out of your head or you will never see the truth.
LS by yourself offers nothing. There is no scriptural example of that. Sorry if it offends you.
If you want to learn, just listen and read the scripture that has to do with the discussion.
What I posted had to do with the discussion, until we chanced upon un-biblical practice.
Cushing,as bishop,confirmed me. I go waaay back to Richard Cushing and the Spellman family.
They were the Catholic “elite” in those days.
.
What I posted had to do with the discussion, until we chanced upon un-biblical practice.
I started by saying if you don’t believe scripture, that is a bigger problem than communion issues. The un-biblical practice apparently came later. Come now, what’s really bothering you here?
Why, indeed?
Benedict—who we KNOW agrees with Burke on this issue—created two Cardinals at one Mass: Wuerl and Burke.
Why didn’t Burke say: “I will not accept a Red Hat if Wuerl is receiving one”?
People’s minds run in well-worn tracks.
Has Francis thought this issue through, and concluded that it’s not important? Or has he never thought about it at all?
I started by saying if you don’t believe scripture, that is a bigger problem than communion issues. The un-biblical practice apparently came later. Come now, what’s really bothering you here?
What about the plain scripture i showed you?
Here it is again.
1Cor 11
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.
Examine Yourself
27 Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood[a] of the Lord.
28
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
Examine yourself both in 26 and 28
Paul was writing to the leaders of the Church, Let him ( do not forbide him.
It can not be plainer than that.
You examine yourself and i examine myself, as i said, i have examined my self and found myself unworthy so i do not take Communion.
Over.
Ravenwolf, I know which post Xone is referring to and you need to know that the Church teaches that ALL Scripture is from God.
So you take the position that the Nazis took:
Anyone in the Church who said, “You should not be gassing the retarded,” was told to “stay out of politics.”
You position on this is the Nazi position.
You do recognize that, don’t you?
Ravenwolf, I know which post Xone is referring to and you need to know that the Church teaches that ALL Scripture is from God.
Below is what i wrote to Xone
Here it is again.
1Cor 11
26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.
Examine Yourself
27 Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood[a] of the Lord.
28
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.
Examine yourself both in 26 and 28
Paul was writing to the leaders of the Church, Let him ( do not forbide him.
It can not be plainer than that.
You examine yourself and i examine myself, as i said, i have examined my self and found myself unworthy so i do not take Communion.
A wise decision. Were you a known unrepentant sinner, your Pastor should bar you from the sacrament.
Over.
Out.
“That generation did almost NOTHING to oppose abortion”
The Catholic Church stood alone in opposing Roe w. Wade. Last time I checked the American bishops were part of the Catholic Church. As a matter of fact the bishops of 40 years ago where a lot more conservative than Dolan and Wuerl.
And as far as the political affiliation of American Catholic bishops did this 90% tell you how they voted.
A wise decision. Were you a known unrepentant sinner, your Pastor should bar you from the sacrament.
1 cor 11
28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
Over but not out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.