Excommunication and Sacramentals

[DL82]

In a tract on the Catholic Answers website about excommunication it states:
“Canon 1331 prohibits an excommunicated person from sharing in any ministerial function in the liturgy, including receiving or celebrating the sacraments and sacramentals and exercising any ecclesiastical office, ministry, function, or act of governance within the Church” catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0711fea4.asp

I note that it says that an excommunicated person cannot receive or celebrate sacramentals.

Does that mean they can’t bless themselves with holy water or pray the rosary for example? Would praying the rosary while excommunicated constitute a further sin?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

In a tract on the Catholic Answers website about excommunication it states:
“Canon 1331 prohibits an excommunicated person from sharing in any ministerial function in the liturgy, including receiving or celebrating the sacraments and sacramentals and exercising any ecclesiastical office, ministry, function, or act of governance within the Church” catholic.com/thisrock/2007/0711fea4.asp

I note that it says that an excommunicated person cannot receive or celebrate sacramentals.

Does that mean they can’t bless themselves with holy water or pray the rosary for example? Would praying the rosary while excommunicated constitute a further sin?

I would guess that this is saying that a person cannot participate in a public celebration of a Sacramental, like Ashes on ash Wednesday, Blessing of the Throats, the final Blessing at Mass, Sprinkling with Holy Water during a Liturgy. Private prayer using Sacramentals should bring Actual Grace prompting the person to seek resolve the Excommunication situation.

 

[PBP]

I never understood excommunication as a way to bring about repentance. It seems it would just widen the gap. I understand that praying and meditating with the rosary is something not reserved for Catholics only but can and should be used by all Christians. Now if the church hopes for the repentance of an excommunicated person then I cant see where praying the rosary would not be allowed. I cant understand barring a person from using a tool that could bring about repentance. There are many degrees and exceptions in what we read so far. I think we need more explanation. Have a great day.

 

[teadough]

The Rosary is not a Sacrement nor is Holy water. I do both and I have not been confirmed into the Church yet. I have previously had a valid Baptism outside the Catholic Church.

If I understand.These are things that are “Sacramental” but not part of the Sacraments.

hope that helps

 

[Digitonomy]

I would guess that this is saying that a person cannot participate in a public celebration of a Sacramental, like … the final Blessing at Mass, Sprinkling with Holy Water during a Liturgy.

So if an excommunicated person is attending mass, does he simply not acknowledge the holy water that splashed his face with a sign of a cross, and ignore the priest’s instruction to bow his head and pray for God’s blessing? I had never known the rule applied to saramentals, and as the OP noticed it seems a bit hard to make this rule work, even with the examples you chose.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

So if an excommunicated person is attending mass, does he simply not acknowledge the holy water that splashed his face with a sign of a cross, and ignore the priest’s instruction to bow his head and pray for God’s blessing? I had never known the rule applied to saramentals, and as the OP noticed it seems a bit hard to make this rule work, even with the examples you chose.

Yet in real life, there is no checklist to each person who comes up to receive the sacraments. An “excommunicated” person can still receive without much hassle (which is a good thing). Around CAF, there seems to be a tendency towards a frequent application of or towards excommunication based on this or that or whatever (usually related to the automatic definition). Even under a more liberal/frequent application the Sacrament would still be valid for the person receiving it, as what truly happens is between the person and God.

 

[Digitonomy]

Yet in real life, there is no checklist to each person who comes up to receive the sacraments. An “excommunicated” person can still receive without much hassle (which is a good thing).

My question, and I think that of the OP, is how an excommunicated person who wishes to follow Canon Law is to act with regard to sacramentals, not whether someone who rejects the judgment of the church on this issue can get away with it.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

My question, and I think that of the OP, is how an excommunicated person who wishes to follow Canon Law is to act with regard to sacramentals, not whether someone who rejects the judgment of the church on this issue can get away with it.

I would think it would matter with a more conservative approach to excommunication (more formal approach), or if it is related to the often more liberally used automatic definition, which then often gets down to personal perception on what may or may not have happened and if it is relevant or not to earn the term excommunication.

If we use the latter approach, then, being all sinners have more than likely breached Cannon Law (assuming strict, literal, black and white interpretation), are not aware of it, and life goes on.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Yet in real life, there is no checklist to each person who comes up to receive the sacraments. An “excommunicated” person can still receive without much hassle (which is a good thing). Around CAF, there seems to be a tendency towards a frequent application of or towards excommunication based on this or that or whatever (usually related to the automatic definition). Even under a more liberal/frequent application the Sacrament would still be valid for the person receiving it, as what truly happens is between the person and God.

“An “excommunicated” person can still receive without much hassle (which is a good thing).” I’m not sure I would look at it that way. A person commits grave sacrilege by receiving the Sacraments while under Excommunication. That is really not a good thing.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

My question, and I think that of the OP, is how an excommunicated person who wishes to follow Canon Law is to act with regard to sacramentals, not whether someone who rejects the judgment of the church on this issue can get away with it.

In my opinion they should not in public approach the Sacraments, or sacramentals like Ashes, and Blessings. When present, like at the end of Mass. I would think that they should not Make the sign of the cross in Public at the final Blessing.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I never understood excommunication as a way to bring about repentance. It seems it would just widen the gap. I understand that praying and meditating with the rosary is something not reserved for Catholics only but can and should be used by all Christians. Now if the church hopes for the repentance of an excommunicated person then I cant see where praying the rosary would not be allowed. I cant understand barring a person from using a tool that could bring about repentance. There are many degrees and exceptions in what we read so far. I think we need more explanation. Have a great day.

But that IS that purpose of Excommunication to get the person to realize what they have done and work towards resolving the issue.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

“An “excommunicated” person can still receive without much hassle (which is a good thing).” I’m not sure I would look at it that way. A person commits grave sacrilege by receiving the Sacraments while under Excommunication. That is really not a good thing.

Yet I have seen two approaches here at CAF and elsewhere on the definition of “excommunication”. The more formal approach, and the automatic approach. The automatic definition can be applied either conservatively or liberally depending on how you interpret the written Canon Law. While I think the OP refers mostly to the former, the latter still is also relevant in this discussion. What are the thoughts on automatic excommunication when it happens and the person is not aware of it? And if that automatic excommunication can even be agreed upon as being an automatic excommunication or is it something else with further study of the situation?

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Yet I have seen two approaches here at CAF and elsewhere on the definition of “excommunication”. The more formal approach, and the automatic approach. The automatic definition can be applied either conservatively or liberally depending on how you interpret the written Canon Law. While I think the OP refers mostly to the former, the latter still is also relevant in this discussion. What are the thoughts on automatic excommunication when it happens and the person is not aware of it? And if that automatic excommunication can even be agreed upon as being an automatic excommunication or is it something else with further study of the situation?

A person cannot be Excommunicated and not know it! Even an automatic Excommunication is not effective if the person did not know they would be Excommunicated by doing the act. They must know full well that by doing it they will be excommunicated and still chose to do it.