Milingo schism grows with ordination of another bishop [CWN]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CWN_News

Guest
Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo, who incurred automatic excommunication in 2006 when he ordained four men bishops without Vatican approval, ordained Father Daniel Kasomo as a bishop of his …

More…
 
This is really sad, but what can be done about it? He has already repeatedly rejected Vatican guidance.
 
This is really sad, but what can be done about it? He has already repeatedly rejected Vatican guidance.
Here is a canon law analysis from In the Light of the Law:
Insordescence. It’s not a likable word. It’s not a likable thing. But Abp. Milingo is insordescent. And he needs to be dealt with.
In the old days (that is, before codified law), they had a term for an excommunicate who passed one (nb: one) year without seeking reconciliation: Insordescence, a status that made one (especially clerics) liable to heightened penalties. See Taunton, Law of the Church (1906) at 371. For clergy, these penalties were more or less along the lines of what we would today call “dismissal from the clerical state”.
Though mentioned just once the Pio-Benedictine Code (see 1917 CIC 2340 and Pistocchi’s Lexicon at 83), and not used at all in the Johanno-Pauline Code, the basic concept of insordescence nevertheless survives, I suggest, in such norms as 1983 CIC 1326.1.1: “A judge can punish the following more gravely than the law or precept has established: a person who after a condemnation or after the declaration of a penalty continues so to offend that from the circumstances the obstinate ill will of the person can prudently be inferred”. Other norms reinforce this canon, but this one should suffice to get the ball rolling.
. . . . .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top