USA Priest: Canon 915 Mandatory & Failure to Apply, Mortally Sinful

To read the source of the following article, click on the image. All emphases in the original.

A Father Vincent Fitzpatrick, of whom I am totally unfamiliar, has penned a piece for the American Life League that castigates all that great swath of bishops in this country who, for more than 40 years, have refused to enforce Canon 915 by denying the Blessed Sacrament to sinful pro-abort politicians.  According to Fr. Fitzpatrick, enforcement of Canon 915 is not just a duty, it is not an option, it is so mandatory that failing to do so is gravely sinful.

ImageFr. Fitzpatrick (I add emphasis): 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!

I believe he is absolutely correct in this.  Canon Law is Canon Law, and Canon 915 is crystal clear.  For a prelate to so fail in duty that he abrogates a very significant portion of Canon Law is objectively mortally sinful if only from the standpoint of the massive scandal it causes alone.  But add to that fact the reality that the Blessed Sacrament is thus received unworthily, and you add sacrilege and blasphemy on top of the grave scandal.  It seems a pretty clear cut case of objective mortal sin, to me.

Unless one wants to argue that our prelates are so badly formed they are ignorant of the nature of the Blessed Sacrament, scandal, sacrilege, and all the rest.  One might actually have an argument there, which is a scandal of the first rank in its own right.

But really, these men have been corrected so often on this matter, from above and below (including the relegating of then Cardinal Ratzinger’s instruction to enforce Canon 915 by Cardinal McCarrick to the memory hole), that claiming ignorance is to extend a charitable appreciation of the matter beyond the breaking point.

One more point from Fr. Fitzpatrick:

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.

Again, I totally agree.  There is no question in my mind that it is the pro-abort sinners and their episcopal enablers who are politicizing the Blessed Sacrament.  They are also committing sins more severe than even the worst heretics of the past.

One sad fact is that the article lists Fr. Fitzpatrick as a retired priest.  Of course, no active priest could write a missive like this because they would be cashiered instantly Source

Comment…

We’ve had this discussion before, of course, regarding the negligence of priests and bishops who refuse to enforce Canon 915. However, since the “chestnut” moral issues persistently present themselves as a challenge to the clergy and hierarchy, seemingly intent on keeping their heads buried firmly in the sand, it might be useful to give the subject another airing. Is Fr Fitzpatrick right in his claim that “pro-abort sinners and [the bishops] who enable them, are committing sins more severe than even the worst heretics of the past”? And what about “To give Communion knowingly and deliberately to ANYONE delineated in Canon 915 is ALWAYS a mortal sin.” – who are they… those (apart from pro-abortion Catholics) “delineated in Canon 915”?

General Discussion (4)

Image

General Discussion (3)

If there’s something of interest in the news that’s not covered in one of the topic threads, or you have a question to ask, a comment you’d like to make about anything under the sun, more or less, this is the thread for you. However, please check first, to ensure that you haven’t missed a topic thread.  Readers have occasionally gone straight to the General Discussion thread to post news that is already the topic of a thread or to ask a question that is already being discussed elsewhere. So, do your Sherlock Holmes before posting here, please and thank you!

Feel free, also, to share your favourite spiritual reading books, prayers and devotions. Whatever.

Enjoy!

To read General Discussion Thread (1) click here (2) click here (3) click here

Psychology & The Priesthood…

ImageThe term “clerical abuse” is usually associated with the sexual abuse of minors by priests (the seriousness of which I in no way intend to diminish), yet, the far more pervasive, albeit disparate in gravity, reality is that priests are the recipients of abuse by the same churchmen and church entities always crying out in sanctimonious hypocrisy for “the rights of man,” “freedom of conscience,” and “the dignity of the human person.”…In short, bishops and chanceries overtly abuse their power over priests simply because they can. The documented cases which prove this reality could (and probably should) be a hefty tome unto itself. Click here to read more.

Comment: It’s unthinkable that any bishop would send a priest into the Lion’s Den of a place like St Luke’s, as described by ‘Fr Kennedy’ – and there are plenty such centres around the world. It’s times like this that I am thankful women cannot be ordained because under no circumstances would I agree to subject myself to the kind of psychological “treatment” offered by the “professionals” in these places.  What about you?

Orthodoxy Vs Tradition?

Orthodoxy Vs Tradition?

The Flock, a conservative publication edited by Daphne McLeod, has been, for many years now, the mouthpiece of Catholics in the UK, concerned about the dreadful state of religious education in Catholic schools. The current edition, which arrived in my inbox yesterday, is brilliant in its exposé of the latest text-book to be used in Catholic schools in England and Wales. Click on the picture to read it.

However, the thought struck me that it was very late in the day to be still talking about what are essentially “sticking plaster” remedies.  Is it really possible to be an authentic, fully believing  Catholic just by paying lip service to orthodoxy, or must we commit to the entire Catholic Tradition?  Given the recent utterances of Pope Francis alone, the time has surely come to return to the Faith of our Fathers – without compromise. Writing to bishops and Vatican is not making the required difference. Replacing bad textbooks with orthodox textbooks doesn’t change the fact that pupils in Catholic schools are being contaminated with the modernism now endemic in the Church at large. Why, I asked myself, are not all informed Catholics, voting with their feet to receive the traditional Sacraments from the SSPX priests who, whatever their personal shortcomings, have been sent to us by God to see us through this time of crisis?

I asked a reader who doubles as a friend (well, I have to have at least one….) and received a reply by email with the same thought: The Catholic Church has one-ness amongst its four marks and the gates of Hell will not prevail against it, so there is no possibility of the ship sinking altogether. Unfortunately, the present captain of the barque of St Peter, and his 1st, 2nd, 3rd . . . nth officers seem to be having a problem with the ship’s compass just now and they are in need of guidance and assistance from the Coastguard. Whilst there are many people standing on the shore eager to call out directions, most of them are reading from similarly afflicted compasses, and many of them haven’t even got a compass at all. The Coastguard appears to be the only faction which has a reliable compass due to having upheld its connections with traditional sea-faring rules for the last two millenia.

The Coastguard is too wise to come aboard, where its compass might get contaminated by whatever malign influences pertain there, so it is wisely keeping its distance.

Unfortunately, its voice is not being heard amidst the tumult of other well-meaning, but misguided, advice. What is needed is not sticking plaster, but broad-based, militant support from those who are presently not shouting at all, yet who can see what the score is. They need to be marshalled into line behind the Coastguard to add their voices and make themselves heard above all others.

What I am advocating is that the last remaining bastion of Tradition (the SSPX) deserves the support of The Flock and Christian Order and all the blogs et al. Now that Bp. Fellay has nailed his colours so unambiguously to the mast at his week-end Conference in Kansas, he needs to receive assurances of support for greater militancy (à la Militia Immaculata) for the restoration of all things to Christ through Prayer, Penance and Catholic Action from every source that has a platform in the media circus however small.

Only then, when the barque gets back on course, will it be possible to reintroduce Religious Instruction into our Catholic Schools, and all the other aspects of practising, spreading, and upholding the Catholic faith that will eventually lead to the Restoration of the Kingship of Christ. END

Do you agree? Is the battle for the Faith going to be won with sticking plasters? Is it right to continue to expose Catholic children to the drivel through to poison on offer in religious education lessons delivered in the name of the Church, by teachers who are themselves victims of the crisis of faith? Or is it time for something much more radical, as advocated by our reader?