Bishop Upholds Decision to Deny Durbin Holy Communion at Springfield Parish

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Abyssinia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

_Abyssinia

Guest
Springfield Illinois Bishop Thomas Paprocki has reportedly decided to uphold a decision from Blessed Sacrament Parish denying communion to U.S. Senator Dick Durbin because of his “pro-choice position.”
Click to expand...
“Senator Durbin was informed several years ago by his pastor at Blessed Sacrament Parish here in Springfield that he was not permitted to receive Holy Communion per canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law,” Bishop Paprocki reportedly wrote in response to a pro-life activist’s query, the Illinois Review reported. “My predecessor upheld that decision and it remains in effect. It is my understanding that the senator is complying with that decision here in the Diocese of Springfield in Illinois.”
Click to expand...
Canon 915 states that those who have been “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.”
Click to expand...
nbcchicago.com/news/local/Bishop-Upholds-Decision-to-Deny-Durbin-Holy-Communion-at-Springfield-Parish-254045031.html
 
Let’s hope it doesn’t stop there. There are many others who shouldn’t be presenting themselves for communion, not just Democrats.
 
Canon 915 FTW. Archbishop +Cordileone spoke about 916, now he should take the next logical step.
 
ProVobis said:
Let’s hope it doesn’t stop there. There are many others who shouldn’t be presenting themselves for communion, not just Democrats.
Click to expand...
Very true! But if we are only considering abortion, those on the political left tend more to be pro-abortion. If we consider all sins, the communion lines should be very short! 😦
 
captainrick said:
Very true! But if we are only considering abortion, those on the political left tend more to be pro-abortion. If we consider all sins, the communion lines should be very short! 😦
Click to expand...
We shall do neither. Let us consider the canon as it actually stands:
Can. 915 Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to holy communion.
Click to expand...
The canon sets a high bar indeed. If we consider abortion, then a latae sententiae excommunication is already in place per Canon 1398. If we ignore interdict and consider other sins, there are only a minority which will meet the requirements placed here. They must be (1) obstinate (obstinate) (2) persisting (perseverantes) (3) manifest (manifesto) and finally (4) grave (gravi). Now if you are thinking that Canon 915 would knock all the masturbators out of communion, you must consider whether that particular sin is ever manifest. Not likely, unless someone has a defect of character such that they brag aloud to parishioners and pastor alike. What about the murderers out there? Well, do they obstinately persist? Or was it a crime of passion, they’ve confessed, they’re convicted, they’re serving their time in prison. No Canon 915 for them.

So I think that the majority of ordinaries are reasoning that this high bar allows them to ignore the canon altogether. Notable and distinguished canonists have begged to differ, but the difference between canonists and ordinaries is that only the latter get to enforce this one. But I see some similarities here with the liturgical prescriptions of the Vatican II document, Sacrosanctum Concilium, in that the rules put forth are more honored in the breach. And thereby we become a Church that ignores certain rules entirely because they are inconvenient and threaten to empty pews of valuable donors. It is the antinomianism of the time, and I, who am sometimes guilty of being too legalistic and rigid, am greatly disappointed by that antinomianism.
 
captainrick said:
Very true! But if we are only considering abortion, those on the political left tend more to be pro-abortion. If we consider all sins, the communion lines should be very short! 😦
Click to expand...
Anyone committing mortal sin or advocating mortal sin should be refraining from Communion. Not just abortion. In regards to political leaders, being pro abortion, pro embryonic stem cell research, pro euthanasia, gay marriage, and/or human cloning are automaticity bad. catholic.com/sites/default/files/voters_guide_for_serious_catholics.pdf

But also bad are Catholic politicians who publicly disagree with any other teaching of the Church.

If the Church denies Communion (which I’m in favor of) they must be consistent and deny anyone guilty of publicly supporting the 5 non-Negotiables, or anything else which goes against Church teaching or the Church itself (i.e. Obamacare)
 
phil19034 said:
Anyone committing mortal sin or advocating mortal sin should be refraining from Communion. Not just abortion. In regards to political leaders, being pro abortion, pro embryonic stem cell research, pro euthanasia, gay marriage, and/or human cloning are automaticity bad. catholic.com/sites/default/files/voters_guide_for_serious_catholics.pdf

But also bad are Catholic politicians who publicly disagree with any other teaching of the Church.

If the Church denies Communion (which I’m in favor of) they must be consistent and deny anyone guilty of publicly supporting the 5 non-Negotiables, or anything else which goes against Church teaching or the Church itself (i.e. Obamacare)
Click to expand...
You are mixing canons here in your post. I want everyone to remember that there are two major canons governing reception of Holy Communion, 915 and 916. 915 binds the ministers of the sacrament, while 916 binds the recipients. This thread is about Canon 915 being applied. This is the canon that many of us cite when we talk about un-Catholic politicians being denied. Canon 916 is broader and more well-understood.
Code of Canon Law:
Can. 916 Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.
Click to expand...
But Canon 916 is not the topic of this thread, so let us leave that discussion for another time.
 
captainrick said:
Very true! But if we are only considering abortion, those on the political left tend more to be pro-abortion. If we consider all sins, the communion lines should be very short! 😦
Click to expand...
Just heard on the news that the Senator will be going up to get the blessing in his own home parish when he attends there. But that’s another argument.
 
Elizium23 said:
So I think that the majority of ordinaries are reasoning that this high bar allows them to ignore the canon altogether. Notable and distinguished canonists have begged to differ, but the difference between canonists and ordinaries is that only the latter get to enforce this one. But I see some similarities here with the liturgical prescriptions of the Vatican II document, Sacrosanctum Concilium, in that the rules put forth are more honored in the breach. And thereby we become a Church that ignores certain rules entirely because they are inconvenient and threaten to empty pews of valuable donors. It is the antinomianism of the time, and I, who am sometimes guilty of being too legalistic and rigid, am greatly disappointed by that antinomianism.
Click to expand...
Good points. The existing herd mentality (that everyone must receive at Mass among other things) simply can’t be used to set church doctrine. Nor wisdom, for that matter.
 
It may be off-topic, but I wonder how much the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden tithe to the Church, and I wonder which direction that number might go if they were denied Holy Communion.

I suppose neither of those bits of information are likely to be public.
 
Deo gratias. The fact that, nowadays, it is news when a Bishop of the Church of Christ upholds Canon Law should really make us think.
 
Elizium23 said:
It may be off-topic, but I wonder how much the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden tithe to the Church, and I wonder which direction that number might go if they were denied Holy Communion.

I suppose neither of those bits of information are likely to be public.
Click to expand...
Well it certainly couldn’t go down much.

weeklystandard.com/blogs/bidens-increase-charitable-donations-187-percent-income_716310.html

This year, Joe and Jill Biden increased their charitable donations from 1.5 percent of their income to 1.87 percent.

“The Vice President and Dr. Jill Biden also released their 2012 federal income tax returns, as well as state income tax returns for both Delaware and Virginia. The Bidens filed joint federal and combined Delaware income tax returns. Dr. Biden filed a separate non-resident tax return for the state of Virginia. Together, they reported adjusted gross income of $385,072. The Bidens paid $87,851 in total federal tax for 2012. They paid $13,531 in Delaware income tax and $3,593 in Virginia income tax. The Bidens contributed** $7,190 **to charity in 2012,” writes the White House, summarizing the Bidens’ income tax return.

That means the Bidens donated** 1.87 percent **of their income to charity

mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2012/07/pelosi-fdtn-giving-down-35-aids-orphans.html

The 2011 IRS 990 tax filing from the Paul and Nancy Pelosi Charitable Foundation was recently posted online and the amount of grants it gave out last year $84,950, is down 35% from 2009 when the amount was $131,500.

Here’s what a July 2011 article in The Hill reported about her net worth when Congress released members’ financial disclosure reports:

Mind you, Pelosi is worth upwards of at least $100M.
 
Sad to hear he is denied the Eucharist, and happy to hear it too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top