How to respond to clergy breaking canon law?

  • Thread starter Thread starter myorthodoxyisshowing
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

myorthodoxyisshowing

Guest
Hello all, I am but a lowly layperson in the Catholic church, but recently with everything happening due to the Covid-19 pandemic, I have been dealing with interesting developments in the liturgy to say the least. I was sent an article from a dear friend of mine (google canon law made easy communion in the hand it’s the first result). I would put a link here but this is my first post so I can’t. In this article (if I understood this correctly) it states that it is a violation of Canon Law for a priest to deny the reception of Holy Communion in the mouth. I then sent this article to a very dear friend of mine who is a priest and he conferred with a friend of his that is a canon lawyer who confirmed my suspicion. Now my local parish, which I love dearly, states that no one can receive communion on the tongue for the foreseeable future which is in direct violation of Canon Law. I do not wish to cause more strife in the church than there already is but I also don’t feel like I should let this slide. Our priests are supposed to be our shepherds and, with this in mind, they should not be breaking canon law. What should I do? Is there someone that I need to contact? My one priest friend (who happens to be the associate pastor for this parish) had tried to challenge this decision but instantly got shot down. I think what I’m trying to ask is when and how should the laity speak up for instances like the breaking of Canon Law?
 
How to respond to the clergy breaking canon law? With charity, respect, and humility! Period!
 
Many bishops in the US have suspended Communion on the tongue due to the pandemic. The priest is likely obeying his Bishop’s directives, the Bishop being the chief liturgist for his diocese. Perhaps you should accept this temporary situation with humility and gratitude that the Eucharist is available - finally.
 
This has been argued and debated ad nauseum in many forums (not just here), and even canon lawyers disagree on whether a bishop can make this kind of declaration in such highly unusual times as a pandemic. I would give my shepherd the benefit of the doubt and try to humbly focus on obedience.
 
If you have a problem with something your priests are doing at your parish, then you need to first contact your pastor and discuss.

If you are not satisfied by the response from your pastor then you contact the diocese.

If your diocese is not very receptive, then you have to just live with it.
 
myorthodoxyisshowing said:
canon law made easy
Click to expand...
I have found this site to be unreliable.
myorthodoxyisshowing said:
states that no one can receive communion on the tongue for the foreseeable future which is in direct violation of Canon Law
Click to expand...
Many bishops have mandated this. Some have, some have not.

Guess what? You don’t have to receive the Eucharist if you don’t want to receive in the hand.
myorthodoxyisshowing said:
What should I do?
Click to expand...
Chill. And recognize this is a serious situation with conflicting science and evolving needs.
myorthodoxyisshowing said:
I think what I’m trying to ask is when and how should the laity speak up for instances like the breaking of Canon Law?
Click to expand...
How about after the pandemic is over?

Write your letter and mount your campaign another day.

Because frankly, right now bishop and the Holy See have bigger fish to fry than a person complaining about communion in the hand versus on the tongue.
 
Last edited:
Contact the St. Joseph Foundation. They support priests and laity who have Canon Law concerns, and they often provide solutions to various problems like this.
 
myorthodoxyisshowing said:
My one priest friend (who happens to be the associate pastor for this parish) had tried to challenge this decision but instantly got shot down. I think what I’m trying to ask is when and how should the laity speak up for instances like the breaking of Canon Law?
Click to expand...
They should thank God for having a priest - many areas of the world don’t; and if they think they have an issue with the matter, they should appeal to the appropriate dicastery in Rome. That can be done with the assistance of a Canon lawyer.

How Communion is received is disciplinary, not doctrinal. I suspect that discipline is less absolute than the OP thinks.
 
Nobody is going to listen to you. Maybe you could tell your pastor you are displeased with the “fake law” (which it is - as the universal law indicates you always have the right to receive on the tongue), but that’s probably about all that would be worth it. Maybe a respectful letter to your bishop too, if he is the sort that is very sympathetic to such things… Anyway, everyone is aware of this issue, and everyone is discussing it already, so…
 
myorthodoxyisshowing said:
Now my local parish, which I love dearly, states that no one can receive communion on the tongue for the foreseeable future which is in direct violation of Canon Law.
Click to expand...
That’s not just your local parish. A good number of dioceses throughout the world, including mine, have prohibited communion on the tongue for the time being, because there is a pandemic going on.

Bishops are doing this, as has been pointed out again and again, in order to save lives – and also in order to be permitted to reinstate public Mass by the governments of their respective countries.

I just feel grateful I’ll get to go to Mass tomorrow for the first time in almost three months, even though I cannot receive anyways.
 
You could write to your bishop and explain that you have a right to receive Communion on the tongue, regardless of any health threat it might pose to your fellow parishioners.

If enough people complain, he’ll have to listen—and then suspend all Masses again, in order to protect the majority of parishioners from the few who can’t bend at all, even out of charity for their brothers and sisters.
 
I would ask you to think about what is going on and why. We are in an extraordinary situation and sometimes extraordinary measures have to happen.
 
The exception confirms the law. Any law that puts principle ahead of humanity at all times, is a fundamentally unjust law. The Sabbath was made for Mankind, not Mankind made for the Sabbath.

Or think of it as an ambulance or fire truck breaking the speed limit. Canon Law was not written with a pandemic in mind. It was written for normal circumstances. This is an abnormal circumstance.

Lastly think charitably about the poor priest. I know a monk priest who is principle minister of the Eucharist at our abbey. I asked him if he ever had accidental contact with saliva in his duties. He replied normally no, but at every Mass there’s at least one or two communicants who make a wrong move that results in contact. The priest gives communion to many faithful whereas you only have contact with the priest once during a Mass.

So: do you really want to expose our beloved priests to so much risk just to satisfy a point of law?
 
I think there is a great misunderstanding of what canon law is in the Church today, at least by many of the laity. Canon Law is neither dogmatic or doctrinal. It is not infallible. It is specifically a tool with which the bishops help to govern and standardize the workings of the Church. When dealing with ordinary workings of the diocese, the bishop is the ultimate authority. Even the Pope could not overrule the bishop, if that bishop chooses not to follow a specific precept of canon law, should it not violate dogma, doctrine, decrees of an Ecumenical Council, or other Extraordinary Magisterial authority.

Canon law has changed many times before. Before the 1917 Code of Canon Law, many of the bishops promulgated local decrees which adapted Canon Law to fit the specific needs of their dioceses. The 1917 Code pulled back many of the specific regulations and allowed the bishops to fill in the gaps themselves.

The concept of “rights” within the Church finds its roots in the United States in the 19th century. During this time, two separate groups arose within the local Church which would eventually be lumped under the general umbrella of the ‘Americanism’ heresy which Pope Leo XIII wrote against in his encyclical Testem Benevolentiae Nostrae in 1899.

The first Americanism heresy group viewed the Church as an organ of the people: that the way in which the Church manifests itself (in a doctrinal or dogmatic way) must adapt to the local culture and people it serves.

The second Americanism heresy group saw that every Catholic had certain ‘rights’ that the Church must meet, no matter the circumstances. In the most extreme cases, this would be like someone demanding to receive communion even if they were not in a state of grace simply because he held a ‘right’ to the sacraments of the Church and the Church had no authority to regulate them. The majority of those prescribing to this form of the Americanism Heresy simply demanded their ‘right’ to be ministered to in a specific way which conforms to their culture.

Any ‘rights’ of the Catholics of a diocese are only guaranteed through the decree of the bishop. The following bishops, by the very nature of his status of the ordinary of the diocese and ultimate judiciary of canon law, were not bound by the document and hold the power to legislate and judicate canon law as they desir within the bounds of dogma, doctrine, Ecumenical Council decree, or Extraordinary Magisterial authority.

While the doctrinal and dogmatic elements of the Americanism heresy has faded away, the concept of Catholic ‘rights’ has simmered primarily among American Catholics.

In short, the only time a Catholic has an absolute right to communion on the tongue is if the current bishop of the diocese has signed a document binding himself to that resolution. That ‘right’ disappears when a new bishop is installed as the diocese’s ordinary.

God Bless,
Ben
 
Last edited:
JulianN said:
If enough people complain, he’ll have to listen—and then suspend all Masses again, in order to protect the majority of parishioners from the few who can’t bend at all, even out of charity for their brothers and sisters.
Click to expand...
This. 👍

(Actually, he might suspend distribution of communion at Mass to the congregation, which is one of the three options that the USCCB mentioned.)
 
CRM_Brother said everything beautifully and he has a grasp on what’s really going on here.

An anecdote from my recent past: I had decided that I was the kind of Catholic who knelt to receive Holy Communion, no matter what. This was hunky dory at my home parish, and some friends even followed suit.

Then I went to a nearby Catholic community and started the same thing. The pastor stopped me in line with a finger. He said “it’s not the norm” and we won’t be doing that here. I did not argue, and I accepted the Sacred Host standing.

After Mass, I was momentarily incensed, so to speak. How could he violate my rights like that? This is an outrage! And I came to my senses and realized that love for Father was greater than appearances, and he deserved my obedience above all. And that is what I gave him. My priest-counselor said it was the right decision.

Don’t get me wrong: I have friends who don’t even know how to receive in the hand, because they’ve never done it. But if told to receive that way, I would obey, because there is a greater good than “rights” and “being right” and “the law”.

And that’s exactly what Jesus taught.
 
Last edited:
Let. It. Go.

You may unintentionally and unknowingly infect and kill another human being. Did not God grant the virtue of prudence to the shepherds?

What happened to humble submission and obedience?
 
CRM_Brother said:
I think there is a great misunderstanding of what canon law is in the Church today, at least by many of the laity. …
Click to expand...
What is the source of your understanding? I disagree with several of your statements.

Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top