Archbishop of Johannesburg Says Priests Guilty of Sex Abuse Should be Excommunicated Latae Sententiae

Archbishop Tlhagale: Priests who have been found guilty of the sexual abuse of minors, should be excommunicated latae sententiae.

(Pretoria) The Archbishop of Johannesburg in South Africa, Msgr. Buti Tlhagale, calls for the excommunication, latae sententiae by priests who have been found guilty of sexual abuse of minors.

Archbishop Tlhagale made the request in the context of his sermon last Saturday on the occasion of a priestly ordination.

The offense is so grave and so badly destroys the perpetrator's priesthood that serious consideration should be given in the Church to including sexual abuse of minors in the catalog of crimes that automatically lead to excommunication.

"There is a tangible indignation against the Church's hierarchy for its complicity, for its silence and for its cover-up," said the archbishop, who showed great understanding for this indignation.

"The halo of the Catholic priesthood has been broken by perpetrators," who commits such crimes, and should have no share in the priesthood.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi

Image: Youtube (screenshot)

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

AMDG

Archdiocese Reports Four Priests to Secular Authorities

The accused are in these cases priests from the Archdiocese of Cologne, where sanctions have already been pronounced and canon law proceedings were initiated.

Cologne (kath.net/pek) On 29 October, the Archdiocese of Cologne sent information to the public prosecutors in Bonn, Düsseldorf and Koblenz in four cases on suspicion of sexual abuse. The information provided is about alleged acts from the 1970s and 1980s. The reports that have now been issued are based on new information from those affected or on the findings of internal file processing.

The accused are in these cases, priests from the Archdiocese of Cologne, where sanctions have already been pronounced and canon law proceedings initiated. All the accused are currently not on duty and they are not allowed to perform priestly ministry in public.

Vicar General Dr. Markus Hofmann said: "All findings, including these new findings, will be passed on to the prosecutor. This is how we consistently and transparently continue along the path our archbishop has set. "At present, additional files are being systematically recorded and reviewed,” Hofmann says. Regardless, these cases will all be reviewed and evaluated once again in the announced independent investigation.

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG

Merciful Pope Demands Unanimity at German Bishops' Meeting in Rome -- His Unanimity, No Doubt

Edit: at Katholische.de is the site of the German Catholic Bishops of Germany, most of whom want to officially sanction the sacrilegious communions which go on almost everywhere anyway. Remember when a priest tried to enforce that by refusing Communion to an unrepentant aberrosexual in Washington, and Wuerl gave him the sack? Catholic conservative fall guy, Edward Peters, even agreed with Wuerl and false mercy, applying his canonical folderol.  We expect a that Cardinal Woelki, a notable and frequent defender and promoter of Old Liberal positions himself, will take the fall in the fifth.  The Pope expects unanimity, we expect Woelki to give it to him after a half-hearted defense of the Church's position.

+++Marx is probably enjoying his multimillion euro villa during the affair and isn't too worried about the outcome of this meeting.

 [KNA] The German bishops have ended their conversation with representatives of the Curia in the Vatican on a dissent on the issue of communion reception on Thursday evening. The Vatican has remanded the conflict to the German bishops. Pope Francis asked them to find a unanimous agreement in the spirit of ecclesial communion, according to the German Bishops' Conference and the Vatican. The Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Archbishop Luis Ladaria, explained in his speech in German that the Pope acknowledges the ecumenical commitment of the German bishops.
Various points of view were discussed in the conversation, such as the relationship of the question to faith and pastoral care, its relevance to the world Church and its legal dimension. Ladaria will inform Francis about the content of the conversation. According to the Episcopal Conference and the Holy See, the meeting was "in a warm and fraternal atmosphere."
 
The parties to the conflict, led by Cardinal Reinhard Marx and Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki, had discussed the reception of Communion for non-Catholic spouses for about three and a half hours on Thursday afternoon, under the direction of the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Archbishop Luis Francisco Ladaria Ferrer, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, explained that Pope Francis appreciates the ecumenical commitment of the German bishops and asks them to find as unanimous a settlement as possible in the spirit of ecclesial communion.

KNA

There is dissent in this question within the Episcopal Conference. A majority of German bishops including their President, the Munich Cardinal Reinhard Marx, advocates that Protestant spouses in Catholic churches may receive Communion. Seven bishops around the [Neoconservative] Cologne Cardinal Rainer Maria Woelki, however, expressed disapproval and formal reservations against a corresponding pastoral care and turned to the Vatican. At the request of Francis, a meeting of some bishops with senior leaders of the Holy See was agreed.
 

The conflicting parties traveled separately to the conversation at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The group around Cardinal Marx arrived at 15:45 at the headquarters of the Vatican. Since then, people have been meeting behind closed doors. In addition to the cardinals Marx and Woelki, the bishops Karl-Heinz Wiesemann (Speyer), Felix Genn (Münster), Gerhard Feige (Magdeburg) and Rudolf Voderholzer (Regensburg), as well as the secretary of the German Bishops' Conference, Father Hans Langendörfer, took part in the deliberations. (Lu / bod / KNA)
 
04.05.2018, 8:50 am: updated with reference to source (Vatican) and first paragraph specified
 Photo: KNA
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
AMDG 

Whoever Adheres to Freemasonry

a.) Anyone who joins Freemasonry automatically incurs excommunication, which is simpliciter reserved to the Apostolic See.

The connection to Freemasonry is that one can be registered as a member. A special rite for reception is not required to incite excommunication. It is also not necessary for someone to take part in the Masonic meetings.

A freemason who wants to reconcile himself to the Church can only obtain the acquittal if he is completely separated from Freemasonry and removed from the membership list. He also has to promise never to pay a contribution, nor to participate in meetings of the lodge brothers. As far as possible, such a freemason must hand over all badges, books and documents to the ecclesiastical superior or his delegate. Furthermore, he must also make reparation for the offense as much as possible.

...

(b) The same punishment as the Freemasons fall into those who join a similar union which fights or agitates against the Church or the legitimate state power.

Because it must be an association similar to that of Freemasonry, the organization (but not the members) must be secret, as the members must observe silence about the structure, purpose, and means of the association. It is not, however, required that they should commit themselves by an oath.

A society fosters or acts against the Church, if it (perhaps among other good purposes) has the purpose of combating the Church, its authority, its powers, rights, privileges, etc., or its offices (not certain persons for personal reasons) ,

An organization fights against the powers of the state if, like the nihilists and anarchists, they want to eliminate any state authority or even to eliminate the existing state form, by revolution. But it does not belong here to the political parties who want to gain political power by law and then to change the state form. - It remains the same whether the association mentioned publicly or secretly to agitate against or strangle the Church or state.

Canon 2335 CIC, quoted from P. Heribert Jone OFM Cap .: Book of Canon Law. Explanation of canons, III. Vol. Litigation and Criminal Law. 1940, Paderborn.

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

AMDG

  

Catholic Cardinal and Masonic Lodge Master (at least honorary)

(Rom) Gianfranco Ravasi has been a Cardinal of the Catholic Church since  2010. Since March 2016 he has also been an honorary Masonic Grandmaster.  Thanks to the Grand Lodge of Spain for a letter which the Cardinal sent last February to "dear Brother Freemasons." 

Cardinal Ravasi's Letter 

ANZEIGE

HIER KÖNNEN SIE WERBEN »

Just weeks after Cardinal Ravasi, President of the Pontifical Council for Culture, addressed his letter to the Lodges, these have shown themselves to be pleased by the recognition shown them by the prominent ecclesiastical figure, and  at the highest levels.

For the beaproned brothers, "the Cardinal's words are a recognition of our noble goals," so says the Grand Lodge.

"Freemasonry is incompatible with Christianity, even if Cardinal Ravasi calls himself 'honorable Brother Gianfranco,' in order to build a bridge to the Lodge," writes news site InfoVaticana.

 Ravasi's letter which was originally published on14. February in the business newspaper  Il Sole 24, was an appeal to overcome the centuries of confrontation between the Church and the Lodge.  

Is Cardibal Ravasi on the same level with Oscar de Alfonso Ortega, the Grandmaster of the Grand Lodge of Spain?

The letter did not call into question the numerous condemnations by the Church, not even the statements of incompatibility by the Magisterium and the ban on Lodge membership in the Codex of Canom Law, explicitly in 1917, implicitly in the 1983. Cardinal Ravasi wrote however :

"These various declarations of incompatibility between the two affiliations of the Church and the Lodge do not impede dialogue."

At the same time he mentioned the dialogue of the German bishops with the Lodges in the 1970s.  Because, so says the Cardinal, there are commonalities, "like the dimension of community, good will, the battle against materialism, the worth of the human person and learning about one another."  

Cardinal Ravasi did not mention that a Catholic who is the member of a Lodge is in serious sin. And automatically excluded from the Sacraments.

The answer of the Grand Lodge in Spain 

The Grand Lodge of Spain is one of the most influential Masonic associations in the Iberian peninsula answered the "honorable Brother Gianfranco." This is the manner that the aproned brothers address each other, as soon as they have stood initiation.  The Cardinal's letter ships "great courage," said the Grand Lodge.

The honorary mention went so far as to actually recognize Cardinal Ravasi  as "Master"  and imply that he is an initiate.  The "Master" is a Lodge Brother  who has presided directly over a Lodge, and directs their work. In the last passage of the Grand Lodge's letter it reads:

"The  Cardinalhas extended his brotherly hand in which he called us brothers.  It's a relationship in which anyone can participate, when they enter our Order.  The dear brother initiate strives for virtue as in every mystery school, of which the Master embraces. The mystery schools seek the self-transformation of each one who strives for the higher.  If the initiate is accepted and elected as a master, to lead the work of the Lodge, to which he is called by all, he ceases to be addressed as dear brother.  His new treatment, as honorable brother, means re same for the Church as it does for the Freemasonry: he is someone of wise and flawless good.  That is the freemasonic ideal. Honorable brother Gianfranco, thank you for the courageous gesture, which has opened a space for brotherly harmony. Like all of the worthy, you call into labor."

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Bild: InfoVaticana

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

AMDG

 Artikel drucken

The New Mercy as Interpreted by a Sexual Predator?

[Collegeville] what happens when a canon lawyer with all of the appropriate degrees is also a credibly accused sexual predator?  Saint John's Abbey houses what just might be the  largest concentration of free ranging sexual predators in the world. It was once the largest monastery in the world, but its numbers have dwindled considerably, and when encountering the monks, clear and distinct ideas develop as to why.

Father Dan Ward is going to attack the sacrament of marriage using his credentials in the appearances of legitimate ministry.

Ward has been credibly accused by former college students on four occasions of sexual exploitation. One by a young monk, and one student who came to St. John's Abbey for a visit after high school.

Now he's going to help stage manage the New Mercy in the annulment process, away from objectivity to the murk of sentiment.

Some Bishops have been dismissed and hounded out of their positions for far, far less. How about some mercy for the Church and take a long exile in the desert or leave the ministry entirely?

Jesuit-Professor Bullies Faithful Catholic Student

Philosophical-Theological University of St. George
Frankfurt am Main

Experience with Jesuit professors of Philosophy and Theology at College in Frankfurt on the subjects of lay preaching and Christology.

A Gloss by Hubert Hecker.

The three decades after the Council meant  wild times for the liturgical experiments. One of the errors was the lay preaching at Holy Mass. In many parishes, the parish priest spared himself sermon preparation, leaving a layman to interpret the Gospel. This practice was also an effect of the anti-Roman tendencies at that time, because according to what was (and is) canon law,  preaching is an integral part of the priestly liturgy and is the task exclusively of the clergy.  The Vatican instruction of the Congregation for Worship from 2004 "recalled" once again the fact that the homily "is part of the liturgy itself and is subject to  the priest or deacon" as a special form of preaching.

To date, reports from participants in   Catholic message fora is that in dioceses with modernist bishops, lay preaching is still spreading. Some bishops even encourage pastoral assistants, parish officials or council members are tolerated, sometimes receive downright encouragement to do so.

Another attempt to make the lay preaching attractive

The rector of the Jesuit-run University of Philosophy and Theology in St. George in Frankfurt has recently launched a new attempt to undermine the Church's ban on lay preaching. This act of ecclesiastical disobedience comes on very soft soles, therefore with such mellifluous words such as "enlivening the Annunciation" and search "for open forms of preaching". Father Ansgar Wucherpfennig SJ apparently mastered the method of  hollow  persuasion when he can lead his submissions in the rhetorical question: "Why should a family man and a professor can not interpret the Scriptures according to the Gospel?" Yes, why not? - You can sense an echo from St. George students. After all, the social experiences (eg. As a father) are recently considered to be a  third source of revelation alongside Scripture and Tradition!

In a reader forum, there have been heated discussions about this initiative by the Frankfurt university rector. One participant said, "at the Philosophical-Theological University of St George everything is taught, not only Catholic doctrine. In this respect it is of little importance, whether a lay person preaches against the doctrine or a priest."  This statement, however, is clearly excessive,  insofar as it lumps the sum of all professors in St. Georgen as deviating from the Catholic doctrine. Nevertheless, the statement has  a grain of truth.

Parody of the Gospel

Dieter Boehler SJ

According to information from a student of St. George, there is evidence  from the lectures of at least three professors that they do not believe in the divine sonship of Jesus Christ.  One of them is likely to be Prof. Dr. Dieter Boehler SJ lic.  In a lecture in one of the IK-circles, he stated his theory of divine sonship a few years ago  that that it was a write-up of later authors. Jesus himself had not been seen as divine, as the Evangelists saw him. A listener of the talk protested against this presentation in  the discussion, but was silenced.

In a lecture a few days later, Professor Boehler made fun of the incident: A listener of his lecture had contradicted him by claiming the divine self-consciousness of Jesus Christ. He then directed the remark at him: "Jesus was sitting in the sandbox and had said, 'I am the Son of God! I am the Son of God.'" There was loud laughter of the students at such naivety of dumb believers.  With this parody of the Gospel he obviously meant to ridicule  all faithful Catholics, who adhere to the biblical witness of the Gospels and the dogmatic statements of the early Church.

Freedom of speech about everything

• The one ridiculed then wrote to the then rector of the Jesuit college and asked that Prof. Boehler should review the joke from the auditorium in a meeting with the ridiculed student.
• For this, the university teacher was of course too cowardly and also, the rector wanted to take no action against the offending statement.
• Not even against public deviation from the teachings of the Church?
• No, insisted the Rector. That is the freedom of teaching that professors instructing the students should express their opinion - and that includes questioning of the divine sonship of Jesus Christ.

Of course, the professors are allowed to tell  their students  their opinion, thus the objection - for example in recreational encounters.  But as a university teacher of theology, professors are not asked for their private opinion, but commissioned by the Church and paid from  (Church) taxes  to communicate the Church's teaching.

Introduce the pluralism of professorial opinion in homiletic preaching

This is yet again only one opinion! - is how the followers of  such Jesuits  should counter, who want to reduce all biblical and doctrinal truth statements to opinions. This approach is followed logically in an appreciation of the diversity of opinions for the homily. Accordingly, any preacher could contribute to "enliven the proclamation". Looking "for open forms of preaching" would soon begin a homiletical debate in the university chapel - about the question: Jesus Christ - true God and man, or only subsequent fiction? Here, a family man could then contribute to this question with his experience of social reality as a third source of revelation. The student audience should be able to contribute. For the purposes of the active participation in the liturgy they are likely to ask, heckle and applaud,  statements contributing to a quick lively exchange of opinions about the gospel. However, then, such debates in a sermon would be deceptively similar to a seminar-discussion. The next step would then be logically to assert that real seminar debates are actual preaching and to refrain from preaching in the Church altogether.

Text: Hubert Hecker
Image: Wikicommons / Youtube (Screenshot)

Anti-Kasper Front: From Brandmüller and Caffara Come De Paolis and Bassetti

(Vatican)  Kasper has been slowly forming resistance behind the lines.  This is according to Archbishop Carlo Cardinal Caffarra of Bologna in the newspaper Il Foglio and Cardinal Walter Brandmüller in the daily newspaper The Daily Mail, a third wearer of the Purple  has publicly and thoroughly taken a position on the issue of remarried divorcees. And he opposes himself against the theses of Cardinal Walter Kasper, who was the only speaker at the recent Cardinal consistory of February 20 and 21 at the request of the Pope. Kasper was therefore able to give his opinion from a privileged position.

A position that secured him a considerable advantage in the public debate.  Or would have had at least, if the historian Roberto de Mattei had not immediately countered him with a profound contradiction. Not coincidentally, it was the German Cardinal Brandmüller who publicly disagreed with the German Cardinal Kasper first among the purple hats. Everyone knows this and is disillusioned.

De Paolis' Detailed Polemic Against Walter Kasper

Now Cardinal Velasio De Paolis has taken up a feather to cross blades  with Kasper in the dispute. The well-known canon is Prefect Emeritus of the Prefecture for the Economic Affairs of the Holy See and was from the beginning, an apostolic delegate of the Legionaries of Christ.  The cardinal has expressed on several occasions his appreciation for Pope Francis.

De Paolis took advantage of this past March 27, the opening of the new judicial year at the church court of Umbria, to  challenge  Cardinal Kasper in the ring. The title of his speech was: "The Remarried Divorcees and the Sacraments of the Eucharist and of Penance" .

De Paolis counter reply is more extensive than   Kasper's paper  before the Cardinals. 40 pages  have been published in full by the church court on the Internet, the intention of the Cardinal of the Order of the Missionaries of St. Charles Borromeo (CS)  also called the Calabrians,  is trying to set his brother back on track.

Support for De Paolis of Neocardinal Bassetti

"Moderator" of the church law of Umbria  is Archbishop Gualtiero Bassetti of Perugia, whom Pope Francis has made ​​Deputy President of the Italian Bishops' Conference and a cardinal.  Archbishop Bassetti was not only the only resident Italian who has been created cardinal by Pope Francis. As Archbishop of Perugia he stands in front of a diocese whose bishop's throne is not connected in accordance with the Concordat, to  the dignity of Cardinal, like Venice and Turin, whose occupants,  however, have come up empty-handed.

It was Neocardinal Bassetti, whom De Paolis invited to give the opening speech. It was also Bassetti, in the ceremony gave the floor on March 27, De Paolis in advance and said that  De Paolis'  introductions, "are valuable, and very current  as well as very enriching for us."

"What is to be Said on the Question of Cardinal Kasper?"

Cardinal De Paolis  combined these theses of Kasper together to refute them: "What's to say about the question posed by Cardinal Kasper on February 21, 2014 in the Consistory?" According to Kasper the way of the Church is to balance between rigor and laxity, a way of repentance, which flows first in the sacrament of penance, and then in the sacrament of the Eucharist. Kasper had wondered if this way is feasible also for remarried divorcees and described conditions under which in his opinion it was possible. Kasper listed five conditions and formed them into questions  on whether the remarried divorcees communion even then could be refused if they fulfill these conditions. Whereat Kasper had clearly allowed to keep the admission to communion possible and desired.

Kasper posed his "opening",  as an exception that should not be a general rule. One limitation, however, seems to serve more for the enforcement of its goal to open to remarried divorcees access to communion. As an argument  the German Cardinal also claimed, again in the form of a question, whether the worst case could be averted, such as the loss of an entire generation, namely, the children of remarried divorcees. "Life is not just black and white, but many shades," said Kasper with a less original, but trendy commonplace.

"No Positive Response Possible"

Then Cardinal De Paolis rebutted: "Apart from  good intentions, it does not seem to be possible to answer positively  to this question. Apart from the various situations in which there are  remarried divorcees, all these situations, but the same problem is common: the inadmissibility of cohabitation, "more uxorio" between two people who are not connected to each other by a real marriage bond. The civil marriage is no marriage bond in reality. According to church doctrine, it has not even the semblance of a marriage, which is why the Church speaks of an attack against marriage. Given such a situation it is not clear how one divorced  could receive sacramental absolution to get access to the Eucharist. In order to justify access to the Eucharist for remarried divorcees, reasons are often cited, which have more the appearance of good nature and legitimacy."

Kasper's "Aberration" - "Misunderstood" Pastoral and Mercy

Among these "justifications"  Cardinal De Paolis described "pastoral" and "mercy." Against the   "misunderstandings"  associated with this, the cardinal takes his position ending with a pointed reference with the infamous comment by  Pope Francis, "who am I to judge".

"Often and with justification it is said  that we are not called to condemn the people. The judgement is in fact God's.  It's another thing though, to order to evaluate a completely different situation morally, to distinguish what is good and what is evil; to check whether or not something corresponds to the plan of God for man. This review is imperative. Given the different life situations, such as that of remarried divorcees, can and must say that we do not condemn, but to help. However, we can not confine ourselves not to condemn. We are called to assess the situation in the light of faith and the divine plan, the well-being of the family, the persons concerned and especially the law of God and His love. Otherwise, we run the risk of no longer being able to appreciate the law of God. What's more, almost to consider it an evil, since we put the blame for all evil in a law. Due to a certain representation of things it just seems as if it would make us feel better, if it were not for the law of the indissolubility of marriage. An aberration  that we can recognize in the mistakes in the way we think and argue."  This goes an excerpt from Cardinal De Paolis' rejection of Kasper's theses.

It is generally expected in Italy so that Pope Francis is going to appoint Cardinal Bassetti  soon as the new President of the Italian Episcopal Conference. Even his appointment as deputy chairman was seen as the disempowerment of the Chairman in Office of Cardinal Angelo Bagnasco.

 The Vatican expert Sandro Magister is not presently of this opinion.  He assumes that Cardinal Bagnasco remains in office until the end of the regular term of office in 2017. Magister, says it is also that Bassetti  is aligned  in the group  resisting  Cardinal Kasper, because he called Cardinal De Paolis to Perugia and who already knew in advance his unambiguous rejection of Kasper-theses and approved of them, as is clear from his words in greeting and announcement of De Paolis.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Picture: Wikicommons

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com

Katholisches....

AMGD

Horror Missae --- Discuss the Sermon in Church

(Rome) Liturgy Free Day worship instead of Holy Mass, instead of confession, general absolution. The  abuse as sham knows many forms of expression. Even the sermon was not exempt. A pastor invented as the latest novelty for Lent a "sermon in dialogue”. He moved the sermon to the very end of  Holy Mass and opened to the faithful, to replicate in the church on his sermon, discuss and express their opinion.

What  a sermon is,  is clearly defined in the ecclesiastical regulations. In the introduction to the Missale Romanum  it states in paragraph 65:

The homily is part of the Liturgy and is strongly recommended: For it is necessary to nourish the Christian life. You should present a point of view from the readings of Sacred Scripture or of another text of the Ordinary or the Proper of the Mass of the day - taking account of the Mystery that is celebrated and the particular needs of the listeners.

The conciliar Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium says of the sermon in point 52:

By means of the homily the mysteries of the faith and the guiding principles of the Christian life are expounded from the sacred text, during the course of the liturgical year; the homily, therefore, is to be highly esteemed as part of the liturgy itself; in fact, at those Masses which are celebrated with the assistance of the people on Sundays and feasts of obligation, it should not be omitted except for a serious reason.

So there it is neither a speech nor a talk show and not a discussion board. In the introduction to the Missal states in paragraph 66:

In general, the priest-celebrant has perform the homily, or it is transferred to a priest concelebrating with him (...) but never a layperson. In specific cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by the bishop or by a priest, taking part in the celebration, without being able to concelebrate.

Prohibition of Lay Preaching in Holy Mass for Pastoral Interior

A clarification will be given with reference to Canon 767 Canon Law, which  establishes:

The most important form of preaching is the homily, which is part of the liturgy, and is reserved to a priest or deacon. In the course of the liturgical year, the mysteries of faith and the rules of christian living are to be expounded in the homily from the sacred text.

A ruling, which is found in Article 3 in the Instruction regarding Questions of the Collaboration with the Laity in Functions of the Priest in 1997 is found:

The homily is as an outstanding form of preaching, " qua per anni liturgici Cursum ex textu sacro fidei mysteria et Normae vitae christianae exponuntur ", part of the Liturgy itself.

Therefore, the homily must be during the Eucharist the sacred ministers, priests, and deacons, are reserved. Excluded are lay people, even if they fulfill tasks as "pastoral assistants" or catechists in whatever groups or associations. The issue is not about a possibly better gift presentation or a larger theological knowledge, but rather that of a reserved task, which was equipped with the sacrament of Holy Orders. Therefore, not even the diocesan bishop authorized to dispense from the norm of canon.It is in fact not a merely disciplinary available, but a law that deals with the tasks of teaching and sanctifying, which are mutually closely connected.

If the pastor does not want to preach or may not preach

A look at the documents shows that the statements on the subject are clear and binding. However, this increases the abuse. There are parishes where the pastoral assistant preaches because the pastor thinks this is a "good”  and for "variety". There are also parishes where the pastor may not preach, because the "pastoral team” distributes the ministry  and the pastor appears in the rotation process  only when he is  scheduled. There are parishes where the Protestant pastor preaches in terms of an "ecumenical preaching exchange" in the Catholic Mass. And there are parishes where  instead of preaching a dance or a development project is presented. The "market opportunities", can allow the imagination wide berth.  All these forms have in common that they are not allowed, and thus represent a liturgical abuse.

Reply to the  Preaching, Give Opinion, Discuss

A parish priest of San Carlo Borromeo of Pognano in the home diocese of John XXIII had a new idea.   During Lent, he offers his faithful in the Sunday Mass as a “novelty", the ability to respond in the church on his sermon. The faithful can ask him questions in the church or speak their minds. The whole thing is called "sermon in dialogue".  It supposed, as it is described in the parish sheet, to be a response to the general criticism that the priest is talking from the ambo, "to answer without that, the believers have the opportunity to respond and to argue." Therefore, the priest in the parish journal wrote, "I am celebrating the Mass, closing with the homily from and openning  up the debate.” He put the Sermon arbitrarily at the end of the Eucharistic celebration.

The initiative was singled out for praise in a recent issue of Famiglia Christina, the largest Catholic weekly magazine in the country.

Text: Giuseppe Nardi
Image: Medieval Miniature
Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com
Link to Katholisches…
AMGD

Lex Dubia Non Obligat -- Against an Unjust Law and Legal Positivism Which Has Penetrated the Church

(Rome) The historian Roberto de Mattei is concerned with the sources of law and the legal hierarchy of Church law and the obligation that every Church Law must have its basis in the divine law. On the other hand, says de Mattei, is legal positivism which ignores this central principle, penetrating into the Church. The most recent example is the decree by the Congregation of Religious, which places the order of the Franciscans of the Immaculate under provisional administration and abolishes the celebration of the Old Mass on the 11th of August. Resistance against the positivist thinking undermining the Church's understanding of the law is permissible, says de Mattei. The principle that an unjust law obligates no obedience, could even go so far as to draw excommunication upon himself, rather than to engage in a false obedience. This had already been taught by Saint Thomas Aquinas and all great canonists.

Lex Dubia non Obligat

By Roberto de Mattei

The case of the Franciscans of the Immaculate Conception church brings a canonical, moral and spiritual issues back on the agenda, which often arrested in the post-Conciliar years and occasionally "exploded": the problem of obedience to an unjust law. A law can be unjust not only when it violates the law of God and nature, but even if it hurts a canon law of a higher rank in the legal hierarchy. This is the case with the decree of 11 July 2013, by the Congregation for Consecrated Life , putting the Franciscans of the Immaculate Conception under provisional administration.

The violation of the law is not in the provisional administration, but in the part of the decree, that claims to force the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate to waive the celebration of the Holy Mass according to the traditional Roman Rite. In addition to the Bull Quo Primum of St. Pius V (1570) there is the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum of Pope Benedict XVI. (2007), and thus a universal Church law that gives every priest the right to:

Accordingly, it is allowed, according the sacrifice of the Mass of Blessed John XXIII. promulgated in 1962 and never abolished typical edition of the Roman Missal, to celebrate the Extraordinary Form of the Liturgy of the Church.

Article 2 of the Motu Proprio clarifies that it neither requires permission from the the Holy See nor from his superior when the Mass is celebrated sine populo.

Article 3 adds that it is not just the individual priest, but Communities of Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life - whether pontifical or diocesan right, is allowed in the Convention or, in its own oratory community's Mass to keep the celebration of the Holy Mass according to the edition of the Roman Missal that was promulgated in 1962.

If an individual community or an entire Institute or a whole society wants to commit such celebrations often, usually or always, it is the responsibility of superiors, to decide according to the norm of law, and according to the laws and particular statutes. In this case there is no need to invoke the divine and natural law, it is sufficient that the Church as the legal source. An eminent jurist like Pedro Lombardia (1930-1986) recalled that Canon 135, paragraph 2 of the new Code of Canon Law which establishes the principle of legitimate legislation in the sense that the legislative power is to be exercised in the manner prescribed in the right way, especially the canons 7-22, the title of the codex form, which is devoted to the ecclesiastical laws.

The Codex recalls that the universal or general laws of the Church are those which were promulgated by publication in the official gazette Acta Apostolicae Sedis (Can. 8), in Can. 12, § 1 states: General Laws require all those for whom they are adopted; Can. 18 states that laws which impose a penalty or restrict the free exercise of rights, or contain an exception to the Act, are subject to strict interpretation, Can. 20 adds: A subsequent law raises a former wholly or partly on when it says this explicitly or opposed to it directly or is the whole matter of the earlier law assigns comprehensive , and finally sets Can. 21 states: In doubt, the revocation of a previous law is not presumed, but later laws are to be set in relation to earlier and to bring with them as far as possible in line.

Canon 135 finally determined the basic principle of the hierarchy: A lower legislator cannot validly issue a law contrary to higher law. Not even a Pope can abolish the act of another pope, except in the prescribed form. The unassailable rule in moral and legal states is that a law of a higher source that affects an area larger and of more universal significance, has title to a superior rule of law, has priority (Regis Jolive, 1959).

According to Canon 14 for the canonical standard to be mandatory, may not be the object of legal doubt ( dubium juris ). If there is a lack of legal certainty, the axiom applies: lex dubia non obligat. If there is a doubt, the honor of God and the salvation of souls will have precedence over any actual consequences that may follow from an act at the personal level. The new Code of Canon Law Canon recalls the past that the Church always has in mind the salus suprema lex animarum (Can. 1752). Saint Thomas Aquinas already taught this when he was in his Quaestiones quodlibetales , explaining that the purpose of canon law aims for the peace of the Church and the salvation of souls (12, q. 16, a 2) and all the great canonists have followed him in this.

The Cardinal Julian Herranz, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts in a speech delivered on the 6th of April 2000 spoke on the salus animarum as a principle of canon law, he recalled that this is the highest principle of ecclesiastical legislation. But that requires basic considerations ahead that are missing in the debate, because often the moral and metaphysical foundation of law is forgotten.

Today there is a purely legalistic and formalistic conception which tends to see the law as a mere instrument in the hands of those who have power (Don Arturo Cattaneo, 2011). According to the legal positivism, which has infiltrated into the Church, what is considered correct, is issued by the authority. In reality, this is jus divinum is the basis for legal expressions and demands the primacy of jus in front of Lex. The principles of legal positivism distort the foundations and replaced legal validity of the jus through the application of the Lex. The law can is only seen the will of the rulers and not the reflection of the divine law, according to which God is creator and foundation of every law. He is the living and eternal law, absolute principle any law (jus divinum, ed. Juan Ignacio Arrieta, 2010).

For this reason, in a conflict between human and divine law, God and not the people is to be obeyed (Acts 5:29). The obedience is owed ​​to superiors because they represent the authority of God, and they represent, because they keep the divine law and apply it. St. Thomas Aquinas affirms that it is better to fall into the current excommunication and exile to foreign lands where the earthly arm of the Church does not reach, than to obey an unjust command: ille debits potius excommunicatione, sustinere (...) vel in alias regiones remotas fugere (Summa Theologiae, Suppl, q. 45, a 4, 3 Upper).

Obedience is not only a formal procedure that causes us to submit to human authority. It is primarily a virtue that leads us on the path of perfection. Not who vested interests, obeying from fear or submissive human attachment is not really obedient, but who chooses the true obedience which is a compound of the human will with the divine will. For the love of God, we must be prepared to obey this highest act of His law and His will, to detach ourselves from the bonds of false obedience, poses the risk to let us lose faith. Unfortunately, today a false sense of obedience is common that sometimes borders on sycophancy and in which the fear of human authority is provided through the divine truth.

The resistance to unlawful commands is sometimes a duty to God and to our neighbor, the need for exemplary acts of metaphysical and moral stolidity. The Franciscans of the Immaculate had obtained from Benedict XVI. the extraordinary goods of traditional, falsely "Tridentine" so-called Mass, accepted and celebrated again today by thousands of priests lawfully throughout the world. There is no better way to express their gratitude to Benedict XVI. and at the same time to express their protest against the injustice done to them, than to continue to celebrate in the serenity of a clear conscience, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the traditional Roman Rite. No law can force their conscience. Maybe only few will do this, but compliance to prevent greater evil, will not help to avert the storm that goes beyond their Order and the Church.

Text: Corrispondenza Romana

translation: Giuseppe Nardi

Image: Corrispondenza Romana

Trans: Tancred vekron99@hotmail.com AMGD Link to katholisches...

Roberto Mattei: It Would be Unwise to Consider This Pontificate “Concluded"

by Roberto di Mattei (February 13, 2013,www.conciliovaticanosecondo.it) On February 11, the Feast of Our Lady of Lourdes, the Holy Father Benedict XVI announced to the Consistory of Cardinals and to the whole world his decision to resign from the papacy. The announcement was greeted by the cardinals “almost in disbelief”, “with a sense of bewilderment”, “like a bolt from the blue”, according to the remarks addressed to the Pope immediately afterward by Cardinal Angelo Sodano, Dean of the College of Cardinals.

If the bewilderment of the cardinals was so great, one can imagine how intense the disorientation of the faithful is these days, especially those who have always regarded Benedict XVI as a reference point and now feel somehow “orphaned”, if not downright abandoned, in view of the serious difficulties that the Church faces at the present hour. Yet the possibility that a Pope could renounce the papal throne was not entirely unexpected. The [then] President of the German Bishops’ Conference, Karl Lehmann, and the [then] Primate of Belgium, Godfried Danneels, had put forward the idea of the “resignation” of John Paul II, when his health had deteriorated. Cardinal Ratzinger, in his 2010 book-length interview Light of the World, had told the German journalist Peter Seewald that if a pope “realizes that he is no longer physically, psychologically, and spiritually capable of handling the duties of his office, then he has a right and, under some circumstances, also an obligation to resign” (p. 30). In 2010, then, fifty Spanish theologians had expressed their support for the Open Letter to the bishops of the whole world by the Swiss theologian Hans Küng with these words: We believe that the pontificate of Benedict XVI is worn out. The Pope has neither the vigor nor the intellectual acumen to respond adequately to the serious and urgent problems which the Catholic Church finds that she must face. We think therefore, with due respect for his person, that he ought to tender his resignation from his office.

Continue at SSPX US District Page...

Munich Canonist: Pope May Retract His Resignation

Edit:  the following statement was made at the end of his Lectio Divina lecture where he made some extemporaneous comments, taken from the Italian commentator, Sandro Magister:

"Naturally, there is a false optimism and a false pessimism. A false pessimism that says: the time of Christianity is finished. No: it is beginning again! The false optimism was that after the Council, when the convents were closing, the seminaries were closing, and they were saying: but it's nothing, everything's fine . . . No! Everything is not fine. There are also grave, dangerous downfalls, and we must recognize with healthy realism that this is not all right, it is not all right when wrongful things are done. But also to be sure, at the same time, that if here and there the Church is dying because of the sins of men, because of their unbelief, at the same time it is being born anew. The future really does belong to God: this is the great certainty of our life, the great, true optimism that we know. The Church is the tree of God that lives forever and bears within itself eternity and the true inheritance: eternal life.” 

Stephan Haering:  it is canonically speaking the Pope would have time yet till the 28th of February to retract his resignation.

Munich (kath.net/KNA)  Pope Benedict XVI. will, according to the opinion of the Canon Lawyer Stephan Haering would hold the status of a Bishop Emeritus.  Officially there is no clear ruling for a Pope emeritus, said Haering on Monday to Munich's Church Radio.  Canoically speaking the Pope would still however have until the 28th of February to withdraw his resignation.  Haering expects that Benedict XVI. will withdraw from public.

In relation to the coming Conclave the Professor from Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich in doesn't not venture any speculation on the Pope's decision over the next two weeks.  "I don't think he will name any more Cardinals, but he will probably undertake the usual functions of the Papal office."

Link to kath.net...

Catholic Primate of England Offers Requiem for Suicide at Westminster

Ben Barboza, husband of the late Jacintha Saldanha, with
the couple's children Junal, 16, (l.) and Lisha, 14 (r.). @AP

Edit:  if Ordinaries like Archbishop Nichols don't actually follow established rules because they're too cowardly to face a media storm, what's the point of having laws which even the ordinaries themselves don't follow?

A nurse who committed suicide as the result of a phone prank was also Catholic.  She was found hanging in her room on December 7th three days after a prank was played on her by Australian DJs.  It's not known if she was a practicing Catholic, but there will be a scandalous Requiem Mass for her in London to placate the sentimental and soft-hearted.  This will be done at the expense of the Catholic religion.

The man responsible for this scandalous act, Archbishop Nichols, has often been long on sentimentality and short on orthopraxis. In 2009, he appeared at a Hindu Temple in London and received a "blessing", and he still hasn't put the brakes on the notorious Soho Masses.  It must be things like this which have prevented this Prince of the Church from receiving the honor of a Cardinal's hat.

Here's the following citation from the Church's Canon Law which ++Nicholas has most likely perjured himself over when he swore he would uphold it:

CHAPTER II : THOSE TO WHOM CHURCH FUNERALS ARE TO BE ALLOWED OR DENIED

Can. 1183 §1 As far as funeral rites are concerned, catechumens are to be reckoned among Christ's faithful.

§2 Children whose parents had intended to have them baptised but who died before baptism, may be allowed Church funeral rites by the local Ordinary.

§3 Provided their own minister is not available, baptised persons belonging to a non-catholic Church or ecclesial community may, in accordance with the prudent judgement of the local Ordinary, be allowed Church funeral rites, unless it is established that they did not wish this.

Can. 1184 §1 Church funeral rites are to be denied to the following, unless they gave some signs of repentance before death:

1° notorious apostates, heretics and schismatics;[Suicides]

2° those who for anti-christian motives chose that their bodies be cremated;

3° other manifest sinners to whom a Church funeral could not be granted without public scandal to the faithful.

§2 If any doubt occurs, the local Ordinary is to be consulted and his judgement followed.
Can. 1185 Any form of funeral Mass is also to be denied to a person who has been excluded from a Church funeral.

Here's the story from New York Daily News...

Dutch Bishop Puts Hammer Down on False Ecumenism

Edit: as usual Father Gero Weishaupt is a great source for things happening in the old country.  He presents the following story about a priest being disciplined for liturgical abuses with a just penalty and the cancellation of an Ecumenical service involving "intercommunion".

Not Ecumenism in Feeling, But in Faith

(kathnews)  's-Hertogenbosch (NL).  In an open letter to the parish communities of the Dutch villages of Someren and Lierp, to which belong the Diocese's-Hertogenbosch laying in the Province of Brabant, the Diocesan Vicar General has taken a position on the importance and the manner ecumenical celebrations should take.  The Bishop reacted to it immediately and spoke out in a letter to the Pastor of serious Liturgical abuses and offenses against Ecumenism in its Catholic sense.  The Pastor concerned was informed of penal consequences.  After that the Pastor cancelled the event.  Many parish members showed a lack of understanding of the manner of the Bishop's proceeding.

Letter of the General Vicar

Now the General Vicar of the Diocese, Dr. R van de Hout, briefly laid out the position of the Catholic

Church on Ecumenism in a letter.  Here is the basic text of the letter in an English translation:


"Dear parishioners of Someren and Lierop and all interested believers elsewhere in the diocese!"

 Concern for the catholicity of the parishes in the diocese 

From the reactions of many of them it is clear that it will be difficult to understand why the bishop at a recently proposed ecumenical ceremony in Someren and Lierop must intervene. The confusion seemed to be still larger basis of statements of the Pastor, the non-Catholic minister and the parish council of Lierop, in which, according to the Bishop was accused illicit action. The Bishop must awaken people to the Catholic faith and take care that the Catholic parishes in his diocese to remain in communion with the universal Church. Only then can our faith and the Church have their importance to the people and their happiness.

 Commonality and Boundaries

The Catholic Church promotes ecumenical contacts with Protestant communities. We need to get to know one another, to develop active common social ties. Together we can listen to God's Word and pray together. But it is not permissible to celebrate the Eucharist / Communion. This prohibition has been repeated by the Pope, but always by the Dutch bishops as well.

Different faith 

Why such celebrations are unlawful? Because Supper and Eucharist, although reference is made to both the creation and the command of the Lord, are not the same. The Roman Catholic Church believes that in the Eucharist the sacrifice of Christ is sacramentally preset at the cross and that the bread and wine are transformed and really substantial in the Body and Blood of Christ. The Eucharist is - in the words of the Second Vatican Council - the source and summit of ecclesial life. According to the Catholic view, only a valid ordained priest transform the Eucharist. Protestants have no validly ordained priests. Protestants do not believe in the real transformation of bread and wine and have a more symbolic understanding of this sacrament. [It can't be a sacrament at all, actually] That is the reason why the Church does not allow a joint celebration. The Church also prohibits that non-Catholics receive the Eucharistic Communion or that Catholics participate in Protestant communion. Thus confusion is with regard to this sacrament, for us Catholics, the heart of the faith, to be avoided. 

Harmful to Unity

Superficial ecumenical acts like the common celebration of the Eucharist / Communion Service are harmful to the unity and don't bring ecumenism even a step further. On the contrary, the unity is only then no unity in the faith, but a unity in feeling. It's about discovering that we as a church or religious community and not as a single parish or community through common reflection, discussion and study to learn what the Lord wanted it with his church and with his sacrament of unity.

 Prayer for Unity

 Meanwhile, we pray in the parishes and communities for the assistance of the Holy Spirit. He alone can bring about real unity step by step. Moreover, ecumenism is much wider than the unity between the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant ecclesial communities. It also relates to our relationship with the Orthodox Churches of the East. ... "(Translation: Gero P. Weishaupt)

What does canon law say?

Concelebrated (intercelebration) with ministers of ecclesial communities which are not in full communion with the Catholic Church, according to canon law, one of the very serious offenses in the sacramental-liturgical field, the - is treated by the Glaubenkongreation (see - such as sexual abuse of minors . Liturgical Instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum, No. 172 c).

The Code of the Catholic Church (CIC/1983) reads:

 "Catholic priests are forbidden, together with priests or ministers of Churches or ecclesial communities which are not in full communion with the Catholic Church to concelebrate the Eucharist"

(Canon 908). "Who is guilty of illicitly worshiping in community is to be punished with a just penalty"

(Canon 1365). By law, the bishop or the professor for sanctioning. In the diocese of 's-Hertogenbosch, the bishop could refrain from sanctioning because the responsible minister had taken after a canonical warning from his plan distance.

Link to kathnews... 

Bildquelle: nl.wikipedia.org, user Karrow

2nd review of Injustice Against Father Guarnizo

Edit: Just got this note from "Father Anonymous". It's been posted elsewhere, including Rorate. We'll post it here too. he was a lot more respectful to Ed Peters than I would have been. There's no telling what's going on with Father McDonald.

Canon Law Info

 Father Anonymous Responds

 I would like to take a moment to thank Father Stuart MacDonald and Doctor Ed Peters for their ready willingness to dialogue regarding the canonical case of Father Guarnizo in the Archdiocese of Washington, DC. As canon lawyers, each of us sees that our canonical judgments are limited to the currently available information. The Truth is what we all seek. By way of review, my defense had two parts.

Part 1 - Father Guarnizo sufficiently satisfied the conditions for canon 915.
Part 2 - I question the canonical liceity regarding Father Guarnizo’s “administrative leave”.

 This article serves as a response to their various and thoughtful criticisms regarding certain points of my initial canonical defense of Father Guarnizo. I attempt to make my original points more explicit

. Read further...