" The Dolan Decree - New York archbishop lays down the law on SAME-SEX Marriages "

  • Thread starter Thread starter ANNE_2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ANNE_2 said:
Thank you for your response. I again respectfully disagree with some of your statements. My post of today’s date above stands.
Sacrilege and Scandal take precedent in the USA in today’s society.

Canon 915 should be upheld regarding those who obstinately manifest grave sin.
I am NOT demanding excommunication.
When responding to my post, please respond to what I wrote, not someone else.

US Bishops should obey Canon Law to prevent Sacrilege and Scandal and confusion amongst their flock.
In fact, I would state that by doing nothing when this continuous Scandal is well known by the Bishop and his flock, that the Bishop may be participating in remote material cooperation if he does not enforce 915.
(Similar to the remote cooperation dicussed by Cardinal Ratzinger in “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion”.)

We are not talking about the danger of murderous Nazi’s in today’s USA society.
This is mixing apples and oranges in this thread.

I think you are incorrect about the Bishop’s primary task is to protect his Church. What document states this ? Please provide a link.

CCC - "** **888 Bishops, with priests as co-workers, have as their first task “to preach the Gospel of God to all men,” in keeping with the Lord’s command.
They are “heralds of faith, who draw new disciples to Christ; they are authentic teachers” of the apostolic faith "endowed with the authority of Christ. "

Their main job is to Save Souls through their teaching office.
Click to expand...
You just stated it. The bishop is the teacher and head of the local Church. The souls of the local Church are his to protect. What we have to understand is that often, there is a great deal going on, not just one issue. The moral law always requires that you choose the greater good, even if it’s not the perfect good.

I am not opposed to denying Holy Communion to those who promote or defend abortion. I hope that I am not giving that impression. In fact, I have made it my life’s work to proclaim the Gospel of Life, not only to those who are parents, but also to politicians, healthcare professionals and anyone else who is directly or remotely related to this issue.

The case in question here is not about abortion. It’s about same-sex marriages and civil unions. We can’t apply more than the canon allows for. Some people want to the bishops to go further. That’s what Father and I are trying to explain. The bishops cannot go beyond what the canon allows. To do so is an abuse of power and the Holy See can turn it around on them, which would place the bishop in a very uncomfortable situation.

Archbishop Dolan is staying within the parameters allowed to him. He has the authority to impose canonical sanctions on those who do those things that he mentions in his letter. When people ask why he does not deny Holy Communion to someone who is in favor of same-sex unions, the answer is that there is no canon that requires such an action.

Let’s look at what the canon actually says.

Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.

The politician who supports same-sex unions or marriages is not excommunicated, because there is no law that says he or she should be.

He is not interdicted. There is no law that says that he or she should be interdicted.

Is he persevering in manifest grave sin? The answer here is not quite clear. We know that those who engage in homosexual intercourse are objectively culpable of grave sin. That’s clear.

Then there are those who believe that civil law should allow for marriage or civil unions. Are they wrong in thinking this way? Yes, they are. Are they in an objective state of grave sin for thinking this way? The answer is complicated. The CCC says that such actions can never be condoned. It does not say that those who think differently are to be penalized. What it seems to suggest is that they need to be educated.

I’m remembering when Tony Blair was received into the Church. Someone asked Pope Benedict about Mr. Blair’s past political positions on this subject. Pope Benedict’s response was that Mr. Blair was on a journey or in progress. It was one of those two words. Basically, he said that he was comfortable receiving Mr. Blair into the Church and the sacraments. He did not say that Mr. Blair’s position was the correct one. What was clear was that the Holy Father was comfortable with bringing him along rather than turning him away.

These questions are not as easy to answer as they may seem. That would explain why the Archbishop does not apply Can 915 to these politicians. He’s not even applying it to his clergy and religious. He’s talking about very specific actions, specific places and specific uses for liturgical and sacred instruments.

We are glad that the Archbishop making the rules very clear for the clergy and religious in his diocese. I for one, will not push him to go further than he feels comfortable going, because it may be the wrong thing to do. Archbishop Dolan is not an amateur. I say, trust his judgment. He has not given us any reason not to trust.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Bro. JR,

I kind of get the impression that, generally speaking perhaps(?), that, over all, the Church makes clear her laws, but that doesn’t means she feel pressed to impose swift penalties but would rather act in a fraternal love to bring about conversion of heart?

If I am (kind of) right in that observation base on what you have posted, Im guessing what part of the problem is our American (western) sort of thought of laws mean law enforcement and breaking of laws leads to penalties and punishment.

But that is not the way the Church deals with her “law breakers”.?

Does that make sense?

Thanks
 
Marie5890 said:
Bro. JR,

I kind of get the impression that, generally speaking perhaps(?), that, over all, the Church makes clear her laws, but that doesn’t means she feel pressed to impose swift penalties but would rather act in a fraternal love to bring about conversion of heart?

If I am (kind of) right in that observation base on what you have posted, Im guessing what part of the problem is our American (western) sort of thought of laws mean law enforcement and breaking of laws leads to penalties and punishment.

But that is not the way the Church deals with her “law breakers”.?

Does that make sense?

Thanks
Click to expand...
Bingo!

The Church is a mother. She corrects, but she goes slowly and methodically. She never jumps to the gravest measure first. Contrary to the secular world, she begins with the lightest measure first. She tries to draw people home. She raises the bar slowly.

The idea is to correct, not to get even.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JR Reducation -
  1. Canon 915 is very clear and applies to those who are obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.
    It does not only apply to abortion. Please provide a link that states it only applies to abortion. This link is not about abortion, but same sex marriage only.
  2. Most Bishops in the USA agree that same-sex marriage violates the common good.
    Jesus teaches us to love our Neighbors. And that is to do everything in our power so they will not go to Hell.
  3. Again, you are mixing excommunication with Canon 915, which you personally pointed out are not the same.
  4. The Church as a good mother must correct those in Mortal Sin and those who commit Scandal. Not being able to receive Holy Communion is a correction.
    (Many ‘Catholic’ politicians in the USA have already been warned and know exactly what they are obstinately doing. Those who have not been warned by their own Bishop and should be.)
  5. Each Bishop including Archbishop Dolan has the authority to impose Canon 915 without with any artificial time limit.
    In his Decree he clearly gives the warning that those disobeying his Decree may suffer Canonical penalties.
    A good parent first teaches, then warns, then imposes a penalty for persistent bad behavior.
    This is exactly what Abp Dolan is doing.
    If it is an individual, he would talk or write to them privately, prior to enforcing Canon 915.
  6. Here is the study from **Canon Lawyer **Edward Peters which he directly links to public scandal.
    The link which provides his statement is very thorough and includes documentation.
    There are no gottcha moments if read it its entirety with all the documented links he provides.
" 1983 CIC 915. Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion. (See also CCEO 712)
Olim: 1917 CIC 855. § 1. All those publicly unworthy are to be barred from the Eucharist, such as excommunicates, those interdicted, and those manifestly infamous, unless their penitence and emendation are shown and they have satisfied beforehand the public scandal [they caused]. § 2. But occult sinners, if they ask secretly and the minister knows they are unrepentant, should be refused; but not, however, if they ask publicly and they cannot be passed over without scandal. (See also: Canon Law Digest I: 408-409.) "

canonlaw.info/canonlaw915.htm

Because Abp Dolan specifically stated in his decree that it applies to **all **those under his “moral authority”, it therefore includes every Catholic in his Diocese, even though the thrust is for Priests and employees.
 
JReducation said:
Bingo!

The Church is a mother. She corrects, but she goes slowly and methodically. She never jumps to the gravest measure first. Contrary to the secular world, she begins with the lightest measure first. She tries to draw people home. She raises the bar slowly.

The idea is to correct, not to get even.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
Thank you.

More and more I see how my own American prism effects how I view the Church.
I’m hoping to better understand how the Church sees herself thru her prism.

I think it would clear up a lot of misunderstanding I keep smacking up against in my own journey.

Appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut as always. 🙂
 
Cardinal Raymond Burke - PERIODICA DE RE CANONICA
vol. 96 (2007) pag. 3-58
The Discipline Regarding the Denial of Holy
Communion to Those Obstinately Persevering
in Manifest Grave Sin
R. L. BURKE
ROMA
PONTIFICIA UNIVERSITÀ GREGORIANA
PIAZZA DELLA PILOTTA, 4
PERIODICA 96 (2007) 3-58

Cardinal Burke was appointed by Pope Benedict, and is the **Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura - the highest judicial authority in the Catholic Church **(apart from the Pope himself, who as the supreme ecclesiastical judge, is the final point of appeal for any ecclesiastical judgment). In addition, this office oversees the administration of justice in the Church.

" If the lack of right disposition is serious and public, and the person, nevertheless, approaches to receive the Sacrament, then he is to be admonished and denied Holy Communion.
In other words, the Church cannot remain silent and indifferent to a public offense against the Body and Blood of Christ. " - Cardinal Raymond Burke

Link provided - forums.catholic-questions.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=8562789
 
Grave Sins (Mortal Sins) including but not limited to - **homosexual acts (same sex marriage) **and Scandal are in the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”.
 
The moderators would like us to return to the original topic. So, let’s commend Archbishop Dolan for his letter and understand that just because other dioceses have not publicly released their letters does not mean they have different rules…
 
I’m the OP.
Certain posters questioned Archbishop’s ability under Canon Law to impose certain sanctions regarding receiving Holy Communion.
Hopefully, links to Dr. Edward Peters and Cardinal Burke have answered all their questions and corrected mis-statements.

Further all or most Bishops in the US have not sent out a Decree similar to Abp Dolan.
In order to go into effect, all Priests, all employees, and all others who may be affected within each Diocese must be notified.
This is not done in secret or privately.

BTW, there is a way to unsubscibe at the pull down top of each thread if one is no longer interested.
 
JReducation said:
Archbishop Dolan is staying within the parameters allowed to him. He has the authority to impose canonical sanctions on those who do those things that he mentions in his letter. When people ask why he does not deny Holy Communion to someone who is in favor of same-sex unions, the answer is that there is no canon that requires such an action.
Click to expand...
Few people would expect communion to be withheld from everyone who supports same sex unions, but that is an entirely different question than expecting canon law to be followed in cases where it obviously applies. Let’s focus on the real question of the proper response to the actions of Governor Cuomo.
Let’s look at what the canon actually says.
Click to expand...
Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.
Click to expand...
Is he persevering in manifest grave sin? The answer here is not quite clear.
Click to expand...
It isn’t? Are we unclear as to whether his actions represent grave sin? The answer here is a good bit clearer than for most of the moral choices we face so if this question is unclear then the rationalization light has been turned on for us all.
We are glad that the Archbishop making the rules very clear for the clergy and religious in his diocese. I for one, will not push him to go further than he feels comfortable going, because it may be the wrong thing to do.
Click to expand...
I am glad he has promulgated these rules as well because it is a concrete action based on Church doctrine in response to a public challenge to those teachings. What I and many others cannot understand is why other responses - apparently required by canon law - are not applied.

When you say that questions are not easy to answer which on the surface seem quite obvious I wonder if you realize the implications of that position. Canon 915 is easy to understand. Governor Cuomo’s actions seem to clearly meet the criteria for the canon to be applied, but we are told there are other considerations, other ways of looking at the situation. Oh. Well perhaps there are other ways of looking at the Church’s teaching on contraception as well. Why should I not rationalize away the teachings that conflict with my inclinations when it appears that the bishops are doing the same thing? Those appearance may be wrong but I’ve seen no convincing argument that makes the point.

The Dolan Decree is an action that reinforces Church teaching. The failure to apply Canon 915 is an inaction that weakens them.

Ender
 
Further all or most Bishops in the US have not sent out a Decree similar to Abp Dolan.
In order to go into effect, all Priests, all employees, and all others who may be affected within each Diocese must be notified.
This is not done in secret or privately.
Click to expand...
Bishops in dioceses where gay marriage or civil unions exist have already sent out similar statements/notifications to their clergy and property administrators. They simply didn’t release it to the press/public. And even if no “decree” goes out that does not mean that everything is up for grabs.
 
NewEnglandPries said:
Bishops in dioceses where gay marriage or civil unions exist have already sent out similar statements/notifications to their clergy and property administrators. They simply didn’t release it to the press/public. And even if no “decree” goes out that does not mean that everything is up for grabs.
Click to expand...
This is true, Father. What I’m not sure is why people insist that these letters be made public. We have such a statement sent out by our bishop through the diocesan pastoral buletin, which is only available to clergy, religious and lay diocesan staff. They’re the only ones who need to know the rules, since they have to enforce them. When the buletin came out with these guidelines, most of us looked at each other and said, “So . . . tell me something I didn’t know.” 🤷

I guess the buletin had to be put out, because there’s someone out there who doesn’t have common sense.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Archbishop Dolan did not put out a press release. His official “DECREE” is posted on his Diocese web site as a teaching tool and that his offical position would be perfectly clear to everyone in his own Diocese.
(California Catholic Daily found it, and published a story, then it was picked up by other Catholic publications, etc. See the Daily editors reply in the comments of Nov 8, bold print - calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=719667ca-ed32-4ab5-b9af-666616447565 )

The States that allow homosexual marriage at this time are: Massachusetts, Connecticut, California*, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York, and the District of Columbia (non State).
(All do not recognize each others same-sex marriages.)
ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=16430
Interesting side note - at least two of these States have ‘Catholic’ Governors who signed it into law - New York/Cuomo and California/Brown.

If your State allows homosexual marriage, and your Diocese has not published an official notice from your Bishop on his Diocese web site, contact your Pastor for verification if an official notice has been received, then contact your Bishop if not.
 
ANNE_2 said:
Archbishop Dolan did not put out a press release. His official “DECREE” is posted on his Diocese web site as a teaching tool and that his offical position would be perfectly clear to everyone in his own Diocese.
(California Catholic Daily found it, and published a story, then it was picked up by other Catholic publications, etc. See the Daily editors reply in the comments of Nov 8, bold print - calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=719667ca-ed32-4ab5-b9af-666616447565 )
Click to expand...
All the same, he made it public and it was there to be picked up by the press. Clergy in my diocese received a similar letter from our bishop when the issue hit home for us. The bishop didn’t post it on any website or publicly issue anything.
The States that allow homosexual marriage at this time are…
Click to expand...
States with “Civil Unions” would also be in the same boat…
If your State allows homosexual marriage, and your Diocese has not published an official notice from your Bishop on his Diocese web site, contact your Pastor for verification if an official notice has been received, then contact your Bishop if not.
Click to expand...
Why? Even if there hasn’t been an official letter that doesn’t mean hosting a gay marriage/civil union event would be allowed by the bishop. I’m sorry, but this looks to me like an overstepping to demand a public letter from an Ordinary. Why do you feel that a bishop has an obligation to satisfy your personal wants in this matter?
 
NewEnglandPries said:
All the same, he made it public and it was there to be picked up by the press. Clergy in my diocese received a similar letter from our bishop when the issue hit home for us. The bishop didn’t post it on any website or publicly issue anything.

States with “Civil Unions” would also be in the same boat…

Why? Even if there hasn’t been an official letter that doesn’t mean hosting a gay marriage/civil union event would be allowed by the bishop. I’m sorry, but this looks to me like an overstepping to demand a public letter from an Ordinary. Why do you feel that a bishop has an obligation to satisfy your personal wants in this matter?
Click to expand...
I was at a meeting where someone asked the bishop why he did not write this for the public and his answer was very simple. Those who need to know, now know. It’s in the memo. He turned around and left the room.

Bishops are not at the beck and call of the people in their diocese: lay, religious or clergy. It’s not up to us to tell the bishop what he should not should not say in public. As Father says, we have to be careful not to overstep our bounds.

On this issue, as long as those who have the controls in their hands know the rules, a public statement would satisfy some people’s curiosity, but it would not change anything.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
JReducation said:
I was at a meeting where someone asked the bishop why he did not write this for the public and his answer was very simple. Those who need to know, now know. It’s in the memo. He turned around and left the room.

Bishops are not at the beck and call of the people in their diocese: lay, religious or clergy. It’s not up to us to tell the bishop what he should not should not say in public. As Father says, we have to be careful not to overstep our bounds.

On this issue, as long as those who have the controls in their hands know the rules, a public statement would satisfy some people’s curiosity, but it would not change anything.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
Click to expand...
In general I think this is where (at least) American Catholics tend to forget that the Church is not formed on democratic principles. It’s not a democracy, a republic.

When we feel upset or annoyed with our public officials we are free and even encouraged to make our voices known.

Sometimes we may take that approach and try to apply it to our Church leaders as well, forgetting that it’s not the same.

I remember just recently studying some of the late 19th and early 20th century popes. I forget which one is which but I know some of them were cautious in their support of democracy, others down right oppose saying it’s “not right” or something along that line.

I know as an American that made my eyebrows shoot up. But again I was reminded that the Church isn’t America nor is She founded on many of the principles that America is… Nor does she deal with her people in the way that I just had assumed she did.

It’s one of those reminders that keep showing up for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top