Q: Ok, as per Archbishop Viganó what is an “extrajudicial penal trial”? If it is extrajudicial, how can it be a trial?
That sounds like being called into the principal’s office, not appearing before a magistrate.
Do we assume they have no real legal case against him, as some commentators claim? Or, do they not want to make public evidence that would be part of a canonical trial? –Father V. Continue reading
Q: I read your “Obedience and Canon 1752,” about the people in Texas who claim God is telling them the Pope is a usurper. It led me to wonder: did the bishop of that diocese ever investigate their alleged claims to divine apparitions? Did he establish whether God really is speaking to them or they’re lying frauds? It doesn’t sound like the bishop ever stopped to consider that maybe they’re having genuine mystical experiences. Do you know if there was any diocesan investigation?
… I’m not saying that these people are legit. Their disobedience instantly tells me their messages are not from God. However, it would be more helpful for the bishop to tell the public that these alleged claims to apparitions from God are based on mental illness or daydreams or fakery, based on an impartial investigation into the facts. In my opinion this would be a more factual message to the diocese than “I didn’t like what they’re saying, so I told them to be quiet, and they refused.” It would be easier for ordinary Catholics to accept too, I think… —Rosie Continue reading
Q: Could you elaborate on Canon 1752, and whether it can legitimately be used to argue that “what is illicit in ordinary times, can in a time of crisis be a good and holy act”? I ask because of what is going on in the Archdiocese of San Antonio [Texas, USA] with the Mission of Divine Mercy. Members of the Mission are claiming to receive locutions from Our Lord and Our Lady. Although the Archbishop has forbidden them from sharing these messages, they began to publish them…
In response, the Archbishop … removed the Mission’s status as a Catholic apostolate of the Archdiocese. Despite this, the Mission remains open … the Mission’s response to the question of obedience to the Archbishop is to claim that Canon 1752 permits their illicit Mass, and the faithful should rest assured that because of the crisis of the times, attending mass at the Mission can be a “good and holy act.”
… The Mission is causing confusion, I have family members who have been ensnared by the confusion and I am looking for ways to pull them out of it. –Cathryn Continue reading
Q1: Could you please explain if according to the Canon Law, a Latin Catholic living in a region where there is a Mass in his rite let’s say once a month only, is obliged to attend the Mass every Sunday in another Catholic rite, if there is such possibility every Sunday? —Michal
Q2: I have a question regarding your article on the Sunday obligation. My Ruthenian Catholic pastor in the U.S. tells people that one does not have an obligation to attend any Liturgy in any rite in any location that doesn’t have a church of one’s rite (not positive he meant rite or church sui iuris).
I confronted him about this, and he stated that Eastern Canon Law does not state that you have an obligation to attend Liturgy if there are no Liturgies of your Rite there. He said: “You find me an Eastern canon lawyer” to tell him he’s wrong. –Daniel Continue reading
Q: My (big mouthed!) spiritual director directly broke the seal of confession (names and sins) privately to me not once but twice (same conversation)…. When it happened, I called him out on it and told him he had just excommunicated himself and was under latae sententiae penalty and needed to rectify the situation immediately.
… Is that all that needed to be done? Was I supposed to notify the bishop? Was he supposed to notify the bishop? –Nicole Continue reading
Canon lawyers are not responsible for the content of canon law. The Supreme Legislator is. Only Pope Francis can change the Code of Canon Law, so if you're not happy with what the law says, please take it up with him.
