Words
(in Canon Law) - The Catholic Encyclopedia
To give the right value to words is a
very important factor in the proper interpretation of law, and hence canonists
give many rules for the exact acceptation of words, in order that decrees may
be correctly understood and the extent of their obligation determined. In
general, the authentic interpretation of a law may be made by the legislator,
or his successor or superior, but when this is not the case recourse must be
had to what is called magisterial, or doctrinal, interpretation. It is for this
latter mode that rules have been formed. The words of a law must be understood
according to their usual signification, unless it is certain that the
legislator intended them to be taken in another sense. When the words are not
ambiguous, they must not be twisted into some far-fetched meaning. If the
intention of the legislator is known, the interpretation must be according to
that, rather than according to the words of a law, even though they seem to have
another sense, because the words are then said not to be nude, but clothed with
the will of the lawgiver. When a law is conceived in general terms, it is
presumed that no exception was intended; that is, where the law makes no
exception, interpreters are not allowed to distinguish. In all interpretations,
however, that meaning of the words is to be preferred which favours equity
rather than strict justice. An argument can be drawn from the contrary sense of
the words, provided that nothing follows which is absurd, inappropriate, or
contradicted by another law. The provisions of a previous statute are not
presumed to be changed beyond the express meaning of the words of a new law.
When a law is penal, its words are to be taken in their strictest sense
and not to be extended to their cases beyond those explicitly mentioned; but
when a law concedes favours, its words are to be interpreted according to their
widest sense. “In contracts, words are to be taken in their full [plena]
meaning, in last wills in a wider [plenior] sense, and in grants of
favours in their widest [plenissimi] interpretation” (c. Cum Dilecti, 6
de donat.). When there is a doubt as to the meaning of the words, that sense is
to be preferred which does not prejudice the rights of a third person. No words
of a law are ever presumed to be superfluous. In interpreting a law the words
must be considered in their context. To give a meaning to words that would
render a law useless is a false interpretation. When the words of a law are in
the future tense, and even when they are in the imperative mood concerning the
judge, but not concerning the crime, the penalty is understood to be incurred,
not ipso facto, but only after judicial sentence. When the words of a
law are doubtful the presumption is in favour of the subjects, not of the
lawgiver.
1917 Code versus 1983 substitute
The Second Vatican Council could not impose innovation in the presence
of the 1917 Code of Canon Law. So this Code was ignored and suspended while a
friendlier code was fabricated by a commission that slithered to the hasty beat
of a diffident drummer. Under the pretext of updating, faithless experts
dropped or modified every law inconsistent with implementation of innovations
of the Second Vatican Council or its omnipresent “spirit.”
Only a few laws remained, so the experts filled the gaps with piously
poetic, modernist (heretical) concepts, needed only to enshrine innovation into
law. Should anyone question an absurdity, he can be shown that it is the law
of the Church.
This tactic is demonstrated often and at length in substitution of terms
and definitions, which are short and to the point in the 1917 Code. In the
canon laws on the sacraments you can see the initial definition (Canon 731)
replaced in the 1983 joke with an irrelevant essay (canons 840-841) bearing
little or no resemblance to law.
1917 Canon
731
§1 As all the Sacraments instituted by Christ our Lord are the principal means
of sanctification and salvation, the greatest care and reverence should be employed
in their suitable and proper administration and reception. (concise law with
no axe to grind.)
1983 Canon 840 The sacraments of the New Testament were
instituted by Christ the Lord and entrusted to the Church. As actions
of Christ and of the Church, they are signs and means by which faith is
expressed and strengthened, worship is offered to God and our sanctification is
brought about. Thus they contribute in the most effective manner to
establishing, strengthening and manifesting ecclesiastical communion.
Accordingly, in the celebration of the sacraments both the sacred ministers and
all the other members of Christ’s faithful must show great reverence and due
care. (new verbiage underlined)
1983 Canon 841 Since the sacraments are the same throughout the
universal Church, and belong to the divine deposit of faith, only the supreme
authority in the Church can approve or define what is needed for their
validity. It belongs to the same authority, or to another competent
authority in accordance with Canon 838 §§3 and 4, to determine what is required
for their lawful celebration, administration and reception and for the order to
be observed in their celebration. (assumption of competence at
convenient times to correct tradition and Jesus Christ Himself).
As you peruse the following treatments and examples, keep in mind the
criterion: nothing new is Catholic.
Whence the 1983 "Code of Canon Law?"
Secure in the knowledge that this curious
document cannot apply to Catholics, we have had no great interest in it. There
was ever the suspicion that it was intended to supersede the 1917 Code which
the usurpers so grievously infringed since 1958, to bury the evidence and to
justify the violations. Having read the new code, we find higher motives.
The Second Vatican Council, despite its
continuous, endless implementation, has been imposed as a pastoral council,
somehow lacking infallibility. A “pope” could promulgate its heresy-laden
decrees and documents officially─though with crossed
fingers─without risking his own imputed infallibility. But no one in
Rome, or in the local parish, could feel really comfortable defending all that
fogwash.
So the usurpers inserted it, hog and all,
liberally and almost verbatim into the new Code. Now they need not try to
defend or explain it─it’s the law! And if we were to
grant the usurpers’ legitimacy or authority, we would be subject to innovation
and a fait accompli.
Nothing new, including a new kind of pope who
perverts the papal preservative purpose, is Catholic.
It would be exceedingly rash to prejudge limits
to what God will allow to happen to the Holy See, particularly since we have
seen what was allowed to happen to Jesus Christ Himself.
So let’s see how
Catholic is the 1983 Code of Canon Law.
One fatuous phrase, dispensers of the mysteries, to which attention has
often been drawn as characteristic of the sixteenth-century continental
reformers, recurs in Lumen Gentium, 32 & 41, and in Presbyterorum
Ordinis, 15, excerpts from which follow.
32. And if by the
will of Christ some are made teachers, pastors and dispensers of mysteries on behalf of others, yet all share a true equality with regard to the dignity
and to the activity common to all the faithful for the building up of the Body
of Christ.
41. Ministers of
lesser rank are also sharers in the mission and grace of the Supreme Priest. In
the first place among these ministers are deacons, who, in as much as they are dispensers
of Christ's mysteries and servants of the Church, should keep themselves
free from every vice and stand before men as personifications of goodness and
friends of God. Cf. I Tim, 3,, 8-10 & 12-1.
15. … bishops are
the principal dispensers of the mysteries of God, as well as being the
governors, promoters, and guardians of the entire liturgical life in the church
committed to them.
Then, though it is
hardly subject matter for a law, it is imposed in:
Canon
835 §1. First
and foremost, the bishops exercise the office of sanctifying; they are high priests,
principal dispensers of the mysteries of God and moderators, promoters
and custodians of the whole liturgical life of the church committed to them.
This canon
displays no visible aspect of a law; it is merely a statement─and not
even a statement of fact. When has a bishop’s office entitled him to meddle
with the Mass? This is question beggary with a vengeance, and without
question.
Of the 1752 canons
in the new code 112 feature that useless novelty, the Episcopal Conference.
Canons 447-459 appear to establish and define it. The other 96 recommend
chances for interference and extra administrative steps, half of these
frivolous. Of the remaining 48, canons 242-258 concern a Charter of
Priestly Formation, to be drawn up for each country by its Episcopal
Conference, taking account of the norms issued by the supreme authority, to be
approved by the Holy See; moreover, to be adapted to new circumstances,
likewise with approval of the Holy See. This Charter is to define overall
principles governing formation in the seminary and the general norms which take
account of pastoral needs of each region or province.
Canons 294-297
deal with another innovation, personal prelatures, which may be established by
the Apostolic See after consulting Episcopal Conferences concerned. They are
composed of deacons and priests of the secular clergy. Their purpose is to
promote an appropriate distribution of priests, or to carry out special
pastoral or missionary enterprises in different regions or for different social
groups. The presiding Prelate has the right to establish a national or an
international seminary, and to incardinate students and promote them to orders
with the title of service of the prelature. Lay people can dedicate themselves
to the apostolic work of a personal prelature by way of agreements made with
the prelature.
The statutes are
to define the relationships of the prelature with the Ordinaries in whose
Churches the prelature, with prior consent of the diocesan Bishop,
exercises … pastoral or missionary activity. [So what concerns the Conference?]
Garrulous Karolus
the Koran Kisser published this excuse for a legal code January 25, 1983 with
declared purposes clearly substantiating my own charges.
With apologies for
partial repetition of a promulgation, most of which was quoted [with my
bracketed comments] in my book, The Enemy Is Here!:
In promulgating
this Code today, therefore, we are fully conscious that this act stems from our
pontifical authority itself, and so assumes a primatial nature. [One begged question
begs another.] Yet we are no less aware that in its content this Code reflects
the collegial solicitude for the Church of all our brothers in the episcopate.
Indeed, by a certain analogy with the Council itself, the Code must be viewed
as the fruit of collegial cooperation, which derives from the combined energies
of experienced people and institutions throughout the whole Church. [The code
it replaced derived from the revelation complete at the death of the last
Apostle, and the combined experience of nineteen centuries.]
A second question
arises: what is the Code? For an accurate answer to this question, it is
necessary to remind ourselves of that distant heritage of law contained in the
books of the Old and New Testaments. It is from this, as from its first source,
that the whole juridical and legislative tradition of the Church derives.
[Until 1983.]
For Christ the
Lord in no way abolished the bountiful heritage of the law and the prophets
which grew little by little from the history and experience of the People of
God in the Old Testament. Rather he fulfilled it (cf. Matt.5,17), so that it
could, in a new and more sublime way, lead to the heritage of the New
Testament. Accordingly, although St Paul in expounding the mystery of salvation
teaches that justification is not obtained through the works of the law but
through faith (cf. Rom.3,28; Gal.2,16), nonetheless he does not exclude the
binding force of the Decalogue (cf. Rom.13,8-10; Gal.5,13-25; 6, 2), [Works
of the law were the burnt offerings of the Old Testament; they did not
refer to the Decalogue. Even the author of this promulgation knew this.]
nor does he deny the importance of discipline in the Church (cf. 1 Cor.5 and
6). …
… the purpose of
the Code is not in any way to replace faith, grace, charisms and above all
charity in the life of the Church or of Christ’s faithful. On the contrary, the
Code rather looks towards the achievement of order [something new?] in the
ecclesial society, such that while attributing a primacy to love, grace and the
charisms, it facilitates at the same time an orderly development [something
new!] …
As the Church’s
fundamental legislative document, and because it is based on the juridical and
legislative heritage of revelation and tradition the [1983] Code
must be regarded as the essential instrument for the preservation of right
order [which we obviously lacked until this new code], both in individual and
social life and in the Church’s zeal. Therefore, over and above the fundamental
elements of the hierarchical and organic structure of the Church established by
the Divine Founder based on apostolic or other no less ancient [Hebrew?]
tradition, …
The instrument,
such as the Code is, fully accords with the nature of the Church, particularly
as presented in the authentic teaching of the Second Vatican Council seen as a
whole, and especially in its ecclesiological doctrine. In fact, in a
certain sense, this new Code can be viewed as a great effort to translate
the conciliar ecclesiological teaching into canonical terms. If it is
impossible perfectly to transpose the image of the Church described by
conciliar doctrine into canonical language, nevertheless the Code must
always be related to that image as to its primary pattern, whose outlines,
given its nature, the Code must express as far as is possible.
Hence flow certain
fundamental principles by which the whole of the new Code is governed, within
the limits of its proper subject and of its expression, which must reflect that
subject. Indeed it is possible to assert that from this derives that
characteristic whereby the Code is regarded as a complement to the authentic
teaching proposed by the Second Vatican Council and particularly to its
Dogmatic and Pastoral Constitutions.
From this it
follows that the fundamental basis of the ‘newness’ which, while never straying
from the Church’s legislative tradition, is found in the Second Vatican Council
and especially in its ecclesiological teaching, generates also the mark of
‘newness’ in the new Code.
Foremost among the
elements which express the true and authentic image of the Church are: the
teaching whereby the Church is presented as the People of God (cf. Const. Lumen
Gentium, n. 2) and its hierarchical authority as service (ibid n. 3); the
further teaching which portrays the Church as a communion and then spells out
the mutual relationships which must intervene between the particular and the
universal Church, and between collegiality and primacy; likewise, the teaching
by which all members of the People of God share, each in their (sic) own
measure, in the threefold priestly, prophetic and kingly office of Christ (an oft repeated conciliar catch-phrase), with which teaching is associated
also that which looks to the duties and rights of Christ’s faithful and
specifically the laity; and lastly the assiduity which the Church must
devote to ecumenism.
If, therefore, the Second Vatican
Council drew old and new from the treasury of tradition, and if its newness is contained in these and other elements, it is abundantly clear
that the Code receives into itself the same mark of fidelity in newness and
newness in fidelity [literally, double-talk], and that its specific content
and corresponding form of expression is in conformity with this aim.
The new Code of
Canon Law is published precisely at a time when the Bishops of the whole Church
are not only asking for its promulgation but indeed are insistently and
vehemently demanding it. [What a coincidence!]
And in fact a
Code of Canon Law is absolutely necessary for the Church. Since the Church
is established in the form of a social and visible unit, it needs rules, so
that its hierarchical and organic structure may be visible; that its exercise
of the functions divinely entrusted to it, particularly of sacred power and of
the administration of the sacraments, is properly ordered; that the mutual
relationships of Christ’s faithful are reconciled in justice based on charity,
with the rights of each safeguarded and defined; and lastly, that the common
initiatives [novelties] which are undertaken so that Christian life may
be ever more perfectly carried out, are supported strengthened and promoted by
canonical laws.
[According to The
Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) it appears that the Church never had a Code of
Canon Law until 1917:
“Even in the private collections of the early centuries, in which the series of conciliary canons
were merely brought together in more or less chronological order, a constant
tendency towards unification is noticeable. From the ninth century onwards the
collections are systematically arranged; with the thirteenth century begins
the first official collections, thenceforth the nucleus around which the
new legislative texts centre, though it is not yet possible to reduce them to a
harmonious and coordinated code. The name ‘canonical collections’ is given to
all collections of ecclesiastical legislative texts, because the principal
texts were the canons of the councils. At first the authors of these
collections contented themselves with bringing together the canons of the different
councils in chronological order; consequently these are called ‘chronological’
collections; in the West, the last important chronological collection is that
of Pseudo-Isidore. After his time the texts were arranged according to subject
matter; these are the ‘systematic’ collections, the only form in use since the
time of Pseudo-Isidore. All the ancient collections are private, due to
personal initiative, and have, therefore, as collections, no official
authority: each text has only its own intrinsic value; even the ‘Decretum’ of
Gratian is of this nature. On the other hand, official or authentic
collections are those that have been made or at least promulgated by the
legislator. They begin with the ‘Compilatio
tertia’ of Innocent III [1198-1215]; the later collections of the ‘Corpus
Juris’ [circa 1500], except the ‘Extravagantes’, are official. All the texts in
an official collection have the force of law.”]
Finally, canonical
laws by their very nature demand observance. For this reason, the greatest
care has been taken that during the long preparation of the Code there should
be an accurate expression of the norms and that they should depend upon a sound
juridical, canonical and theological foundation [as opposed to the 1917 Code?].
In view of all
this, it is very much to be hoped that the new canonical legislation will be an
effective instrument by the help of which the Church will be able to perfect
itself in the spirit of the Second Vatican Council, …
11. Faculties of
Sacred Sciences
The Church expects
much from the zealous endeavors of the faculties of the sacred sciences.(34)
For to them she entrusts the very serious responsibility of preparing her own
students not only for the priestly ministry, but especially for teaching in the
seats of higher ecclesiastical studies or for promoting learning on their own
or for undertaking the work of a more rigorous intellectual apostolate.
Likewise it is the role of these very faculties to make more penetrating
inquiry into the various aspects of the sacred sciences so that an ever
deepening understanding of sacred Revelation is obtained, the legacy of
Christian wisdom handed down by our forefathers is more fully developed, the
dialogue with our separated brethren and with non-Christians is fostered, and
answers are given to questions arising from the development of doctrine.(35)
─ Declaration on Christian Education
[It is clearly
implied here that Jesus Christ failed miserably in presentation of His Gospel,
and that the Second Vatican Council has brought us up to date. This immediately
calls into question the authority of the supposedly erring Church on which is
necessarily based the authority of its latest heir, the Second Vatican Council,
which implicitly recognizes the varying truths of our separated brethren, and
the outright denial of the basis of our religion by Judaism and Islam. In this
the Council and its postconciliar “Church” have adhered to tradition─the
tradition of Arius, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, the Koran, and the Talmud.]
9. The declaration
of this Vatican Council on the right of man to religious freedom has its
foundation in the dignity of the person, whose exigencies have come to be more
fully known to human reason through centuries of experience. What is more,
this doctrine of freedom has roots in divine revelation, and for this reason
Christians are bound to respect it all the more conscientiously. Revelation
does not indeed affirm in so many words the right of man to immunity from
external coercion in matters religious. It does, however, disclose the dignity
of the human person in its full dimensions. It gives evidence of the respect
which Christ showed toward the freedom with which man is to fulfill his duty of
belief in the word of God and it gives us lessons in the spirit which disciples
of such a Master ought to adopt and continually follow. Thus further light is
cast upon the general principles upon which the doctrine of this declaration on
religious freedom is based. In particular, religious freedom in society is
entirely consonant with the freedom of the act of Christian
faith.
─ Declaration on Religious Freedom
[All this
innovative nonsense clarifies Christ’s words, He who believes not shall be
condemned. The 1917 Code took Him seriously in:
Canon 1322: Christ
our Lord confided to the Church the deposit of faith, in order that she, with
the perpetual assistance of the Holy Ghost, might faithfully preserve and
expound the revealed doctrine. Independently of any civil power whatsoever, the
Church has the right and duty to teach all nations the evangelical doctrine,
and all are bound by the divine law to acquire a proper knowledge of this
doctrine and to embrace the true Church of God.]
11. In the end,
when He completed on the cross the work of redemption whereby He achieved
salvation and true freedom for men, He brought His revelation to
completion.
─
Declaration on Religious Freedom
[A classic multi-heretical lie!]
12. In
faithfulness therefore to the truth of the Gospel, the Church is following the
way of Christ and the apostles when she recognizes and gives support to the
principle of religious freedom as befitting the dignity of man and as being in
accord with divine revelation. Throughout the ages the Church has kept safe and
handed on the doctrine received from the Master and from the apostles. In the
life of the People of God, as it has made its pilgrim way through the
vicissitudes of human history, there has at times appeared a way of acting that
was hardly in accord with the spirit of the Gospel or even opposed to it.
Nevertheless, the doctrine of the Church that no one is to be coerced into
faith has always stood
firm.
─ Declaration on Religious Freedom
[Why, then, has
the postconciliar “Church” on its pilgrim way tried to coerce Catholics into
belief in its innovations?]
Among the
innovative laws made necessary by the Second Vatican Council and its new
“Church” are:
Canons 336-341,
six “laws” which permit “bishops” to gather in colleges to agree with a “pope”
who made them “bishops” because they agree with him.
Canons 342-348,
seven “laws” which constitute a treatise on an innovation, the Synod of
Bishops, and which lack any shadow of equivalent in the 1917 Code and its
sources.
Canons 362-367, six laws which replace four laws of the 1917 Code with
virtually identical content.
Canons 511-514, four laws which actually establish another innovation, a
Pastoral Council to advise the diocesan bishop. “In each diocese … a pastoral
council is to be established … to investigate … all those things which
pertain to pastoral works, to ponder, and propose practical conclusions about,
them. … consists of (the usual suspects) and especially lay persons.” The
bishop appoints, convokes, and presides over the Council, which “enjoys only a
consultative vote; it is for the bishop alone to make public what has
been done in the council.”
[That says it all,
except: “When the see is vacant” (in our time a practically universal
condition) “the pastoral council ceases to exist.”]
Canon 2335 (1917)
Those who enlist in Masonic sects or other associations of the same kind, which
plot against the Church or against lawful civil authority, ipso facto incur excommunication simply reserved to the Apostolic See.
has been updated:
Canon 1374
(1983) One who joins an association which plots against the Church is to
be punished with a just penalty; one who promotes or moderates such an
association, however, is to be punished with an interdict.
The marriage
canons have lost their rigor through loss and modification, though marriage
itself supposedly endures.
Among the missing
are 1917 canons:
1917 Canon1081
§1. Marriage is effected by the consent of the parties lawfully expressed
between persons who are capable according to law; and this consent no human
power can supply.
§2. Matrimonial consent is an act of the will by which each party gives and
accepts a perpetual and exclusive right over the body, for acts which are of
themselves suitable for the generation of children.
1917 Canon1082
§1. In order that matrimonial consent be possible it is necessary that the
contracting parties be not ignorant that marriage is a permanent society
between man and woman for the procreation of children.
[Both substituted
in the 1983 Code by Canon
1096:
§1. For
matrimonial consent to be valid it is necessary that the contracting parties at
least not be ignorant that marriage is a permanent consortium between a man and
a woman which is ordered toward the procreation of offspring by means of
some sexual cooperation.]
1917 Canon 1092
A condition once placed and not revoked:
˚ If it is a
condition regarding a future event which is necessary, or impossible, or
immoral but not contrary to the substance of marriage, is to be considered as
not having been made; 2˚ If it concerns the future and is contrary to the
substance of marriage, it makes the marriage
invalid;
3˚ If it concerns the future and is licit, it suspends the validity of the
marriage;
4˚ If it concerns the past or the present, the marriage will be valid or
not according as the matter concerning which the condition is made, exists or
not.
[Replaced in the
1983 Code by:
Canon 1102: §1.
Marriage based on a condition concerning the future cannot be contracted
validly. §2. Marriage based on a condition concerning the
present or the past is valid or invalid, insofar as the subject matter of the
condition exists or not.
§3. The condition mentioned in §2 cannot be placed licitly without the written
permission of the local ordinary.]
1917 Canon1101
§1. The pastor should see to it that the parties receive the solemn blessing,
which may be given to them even after they have lived a long time in the
married state, but only at Mass, with the observance of the special rubric, and
except during the forbidden
time.
§2. The solemn
blessing can be given either in person or through a representative, by that priest
alone who can validly and licitly assist at the marriage.
1917 Canon1102
§1. In marriages between a Catholic and a non-Catholic party, the questions
regarding consent must be put according to canon 1095, §1, n.
3. §2. But all
sacred rites are forbidden; in case it is foreseen that greater evils will
result from this prohibition, the Ordinary may permit some of the usual
ecclesiastical ceremonies, excluding always the celebration of Mass.
[The new Code buries this with six canons:
1983 Canon 1124 Without the express permission of the
competent authority, marriage is forbidden between two baptized persons, one of
whom was baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it after baptism and
has not left it by a formal act, and the other of whom is a member of a church
or ecclesial community which is not in full communion with the Catholic
Church.
1983 Canon
1125 The local authority can grant this
permission if there is a just and reasonable cause; he is not to grant it
unless the following conditions have been fulfilled:
1˚ the Catholic party declares that he or she is prepared to remove
dangers of falling away from the faith and makes a sincere promise to do all in
his or her power to have all the children baptized and brought up in the
Catholic Church;
2˚ the other party is to be informed at an appropriate time of
these promises which the Catholic party has to make, so that it is clear
that the other party is truly aware of the promise and obligation of the
Catholic party.
3˚ both parties are to be instructed on the essential ends and properties
of marriage, which are not to be excluded by either party.
1983 Canon
1126 The conference of
bishops is to establish the way in which these declarations and promises,
which are always required, are to be made, what proof of them there should be
in the external forum, and how they are to be brought to the attention of
the non-Catholic party.
1983 Canon 1127 §1. The prescriptions of canon 1108 are to
be observed concerning the form to be employed in a mixed marriage; if a
Catholic party contracts marriage with a non-Catholic of an oriental rite, the
canonical form of celebration is to be observed only for liceity; for validity,
however, the presence of a sacred minister is required along with the
observance of the other requirements of law.
§2. If serious difficulties pose an obstacle to the observance of the canonical
form, the local ordinary of the Catholic party has the right to dispense from
the form in individual cases, but after consulting the ordinary of the place
where the marriage is to be celebrated and with due regard, for validity, for
some public form of celebration; the conference of bishops is to issue norms by which such a dispensation may be granted in an orderly
manner.
§3. Before or after the canonical celebration held in accord with the norm of
§1, it is forbidden to have another religious celebration of the same marriage
to express or renew matrimonial consent; it is likewise forbidden to have a
religious celebration in which a Catholic and a non-Catholic minister,
assisting together but following their respective rituals, ask for the consent
of the parties.
1983 Canon
1128 Local ordinaries and other pastors of souls are to see to it
that the Catholic spouse and the children born of a mixed marriage do not lack
spiritual assistance in fulfilling their obligations and are to aid the spouses
in fostering the unity of conjugal and family life (after removing all
support formerly afforded the Catholic party).
1983 Canon
1129 The prescriptions of canons 1127 &1128 are also to be
applied to marriages involving the impediment of disparity of cult
mentioned in canon 1086, §1.]
1917 1107 concerns recording of a marriage of
conscience.
1917 1109 §1. Marriage between Catholics should be celebrated in the
parish church; it may however be celebrated in another church or oratory,
whether public or semi-public, only with the consent of the Ordinary of the
place or the pastor.
§2.
Ordinaries of places can permit that marriage be celebrated in a private house
only in an extraordinary case and always on condition that there be a just and
reasonable cause; but Ordinaries must not permit it in churches or oratories of
a seminary or of religious women, unless in case of necessity and with suitable
safeguards.
§3. But
marriages between a Catholic and a non-Catholic party are to be celebrated outside
the church; in case the Ordinary prudently judges that this cannot be observed
without giving occasion to greater evils, it is left to his prudent discretion
to dispense from this requirement, without prejudice however to the provision
of canon 1102, §2.
[The 1983 Code
updates this in Canon
1118
§1. Marriage between Catholics is
to be celebrated in a parish church; with the permission of the local ordinary
or the pastor, it can be celebrated in another church or
oratory.
§2. The local ordinary can
permit marriage to be celebrated in some other suitable
place.
§3. Marriage between a
Catholic and a non-baptized party can be celebrated in a church or in some
other suitable place.]
More 1983
novelties
Canon 1108
§2. The one assisting at a marriage is understood to be only that person who,
present at the ceremony, asks for the contractors’ manifestation of consent and
receives it in the name of the Church.
Canon
1112
§1. With the prior favorable opinion of the conference of bishops and
after permission of the Holy See has been obtained, the diocesan bishop can
delegate lay persons to assist at marriages where priests or deacons are
lacking.
§2. A suitable lay person is to be chosen who is capable of giving instruction
to those to be wed and qualified to perform the marriage liturgy correctly.
Canon 1116 (approximates canon 1098 of the 1917
Code)
§1. If the presence of or access to a [lay?] person who is competent to
assist at marriage in accord with the norm of law is impossible without serious
inconvenience, persons intending to enter a true marriage can validly and
licitly contract it before witnesses
alone.
1˚ in danger of
death;
2˚ outside the danger of death, as long as it is prudently foreseen that
such circumstances will continue for a
month.
§2. In either case and with due regard for the validity of a marriage
celebrated before witnesses alone, if another priest or deacon who can be
present and is readily available, he must be called upon and must be present at
the celebration of the marriage, along with the witnesses. [Here you are, in
danger of death, and you must canvass the local region for a priest or deacon
not attached to your parish!]
Canon
833
Profession of Faith
Final paragraph of the 1983 Profession of
Faith:
“Moreover, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to
the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops
enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do
not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act.”
[This binds the
clergy to the decrees and documents of the Second Vatican Council, their
implementations, and that horde of postconciliar innovations which it never
suggested, such as the idolatrous novus ordo missae, sacraments of human
invention, and this code of silly proposals.]
Law
promulgated by Pope St. Pius V omitted in 1917 Code
Against Clerics
whomsoever, whether secular or regular, guilty of abominable crime.
For perpetual remembrance of the matter.
That fearful
crime, by which the polluted joined (papal) states have been consumed by the
terrible judgment of God, attaches to Us bitterest sorrow, and gravely
violently stirs our mind, that toward restraining it, as much as possible, we
concentrate our efforts.
1. It was properly noted by the Lateran Council, that whatsoever Cleric
will have been discovered to suffer from that incontinence which is against
nature, on account of which the wrath of God falls upon the sons of unbelief
(cf. Vulg. Eph. 5, 6), is to be ejected from the ranks of the clergy and be
reduced to do penance in a monastery.
2. But lest the contagion of such a scourge, from the hope of impunity
which is the greatest lure of sinning, more confidently grows in power, We
determine that clerics guilty of this execrable crime are to be quite gravely
punished, so that whoever does not abhor the ruination of the soul, the
avenging secular sword of civil laws will certainly deter.
3. And thus because We have made a decree in this matter at the beginning
of Our Pontificate, now in a fuller and stronger way intending it to be
followed strictly, each and all priests, whoever they are, other secular
clerics, and regular clerics of any grade and dignity, busy at such a
monstrosity, We deprive of every clerical privilege, of every office, dignity,
and ecclesiastical benefice by the authority of the present legal instrument.
So it is enacted that once they are degraded by the Ecclesiastical Judge, they
be handed over immediately to the secular arm, which will exact upon them the
same penalty, which is ascertained to have been constituted by legitimate
sanctions against laymen who have slid down into this ruin. Nothing to the
contrary withstanding, etc.
Given at Rome at St. Peter’s, 30 August in the Year of the Lord’s
Incarnation 1568 during the third year of Our Pontificate.
*
*
*
*
*
*
As Hugo Maria
Kellner demonstrated, Canon 968 (1917 Code) falsified Church doctrine by
listing apostasy and excommunication as “irregularities”—thus preserving
non-existent Catholic rights of ex-Catholics.
The 1917 Code was
a codification of the many overlapping sources of the law, not intended
as a correction. It removed laws for which no purpose remained, but
freemasonry remains a major foe, entitled to no benefit from our laws. Only
treachery could have introduced this “loophole.”
Certain laws
enacted against enemies of the Church by the Third National Council of Toledo
(589) were ignored in the 1917 codification.
Obviously these
laws would have greatly impeded the modernist usurpation of the highest offices
in the Church. So we look to the background of those who guided and approved
the 1917 codification. We find that though the codification was ordered under
the authority of Pope St. Pius X, it was committed to known Freemasons Gasparri
and Rampolla (cf. The Underminig of the Catholic Church, Mary Martinez),
and approved by their crony, Benedict XV after the opportune death of St. Pius
X. We are almost forced to the conclusions that (1) Randy Engels could have
gone further back in her research for her book, The Rite of Sodomy, and
(2) Gasparri, Rampolla, and Benedict XV were protecting themselves. It is
extremely difficult to construe their omission of vital legal protection of the
Church as mere coincidence.
The Second Council of Nicaea (787)
Canon 4
… So if it is discovered that somebody, because of a demand for
gold or something similar, or because of some private infatuation of his own,
has excluded from the liturgy or excommunicated one of the clerics under his
authority, or has closed off one of the holy churches, preventing the
celebration of God's liturgies in it, pouring out his own madness against
insensible things, then he is truly senseless himself and he should be
subjected to suffer what he would inflict and the penalty imposed by him will
turn upon his own head, because he has transgressed both the law of God and the
rulings of the apostles. …
1917 Code Part One. Of The Sacraments
1917 Canon
731 §1 As all the Sacraments instituted by Christ our Lord are the
principal means of sanctification and salvation, the greatest care and
reverence should be employed in their suitable and proper administration and
reception. (concise law with no axe to grind.)
1983 Code
Part I: The Sacraments
1983 Canon 840 The
sacraments of the New Testament were instituted by Christ the Lord and entrusted to the Church. As actions of Christ and of the Church,
they are signs and means by which faith is expressed and strengthened, worship
is offered to God and our sanctification is brought about. Thus they contribute
in the most effective manner to establishing, strengthening and manifesting
ecclesiastical communion. Accordingly, in the celebration of the sacraments
both the sacred ministers and all the other members of Christ’s faithful must
show great reverence and due care. (new verbiage underlined)
1983 Canon 841
Since the sacraments are the same throughout the universal Church, and belong
to the divine deposit of faith, only the supreme authority in the Church can
approve or define what is needed for their validity. It belongs to the same authority, or to another competent authority in accordance with Canon 838 §§3 and 4, to
determine what is required for their lawful celebration, administration and
reception and for the order to be observed in their celebration. (assumption
of competence at convenient times to correct tradition and Jesus Christ Himself)
1917 Canon 731 §2
It is forbidden to administer the Sacraments of the Church to heretics or
schismatics, even though they err in good faith and ask for them, unless they
have first renounced their errors and been reconciled with the Church.
1983 Canon 844 §1 Catholic ministers may
lawfully administer the sacraments only to Catholic members of Christ’s
faithful, who equally may lawfully receive them only from Catholic ministers, except
as provided in §§2, 3 and 4 of this Canon and in Canon 861 §2.
§2 Whenever necessity (deathbed) requires or a genuine
spiritual advantage commends it, and provided the danger of error or
indifferentism is avoided, Christ’s faithful for whom it is physically or
morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, may lawfully receive the
sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and (new) anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.
§3 Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance,
the Eucharist and anointing of the sick to members of the eastern Churches
not in full communion with the Catholic Church, if they spontaneously ask
for them and are properly disposed. The same applies to members of other
Churches which the Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the
aforesaid eastern Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned. (new)
§4 If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgment of the
diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other grave and
pressing need, Catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same sacraments
to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot
approach a minister of their own community and who spontaneously ask for them,
provided that they demonstrate the Catholic faith in respect of these
sacraments and are properly disposed. (new)
§5 In respect of the cases dealt with in §§2, 3 and 4, the diocesan
Bishop or the (new) Episcopal Conference is not to issue general norms
except after consultation with the competent authority, at least at the
local level, of the non-Catholic Church or community concerned.
1917 Canon 733 In the celebration, administration and reception of
the sacraments, the liturgical rites and ceremonies prescribed in the rituals
approved by the Church must be accurately observed . Each one shall
follow the rite to which he belongs, except in the cases mentioned in Canons
851 and 866.
1983 Canon
846 §1 The liturgical books, approved by competent (?)
authority, are to be faithfully followed in the celebration of the sacraments.
Accordingly, no one may on personal initiative add to, omit, or alter anything
in those books.
§2 The ministers are to celebrate the sacraments according to their own rite.
1917 Canon
734 The holy oils required in the administration of several of the
Sacraments must have been blessed by the bishop on the Holy Thursday
immediately preceding, and the oils blessed previously are not to be used
except in a case of necessity. If there is danger of the holy oils giving out,
more olive oil which has not been blessed may be added even repeatedly, but
always in a quantity less than the holy oils.
1917 Canon
735 The pastor must obtain the holy oils from his own Ordinary, and keep
them under lock and key in a safe and becoming place in the church. Only under
pressure of necessity or other reasonable cause may he keep them in his house,
and in such a case he needs also the permission of the Ordinary.
1983 Canon 847
§1 In
administering sacraments in which holy oils are to be used, the minister must
use oil made from olives or other plants, which, except as provided in Canon
999, n. 2, has recently been consecrated or blessed by a Bishop. Older
oil is not to be used except in a case of necessity.
§2 The parish priest is to obtain the holy oils from his own Bishop and
keep them carefully in fitting custody.
1917 Canon
736 Regardless of the reason or the occasion, the minister shall not
either directly or indirectly exact or ask for any remuneration for
administering the Sacraments, except the offerings spoken of in Canon 1507.
1983 Canon 848 For
the administration of the sacraments the minister may not ask for anything
beyond the offerings which are determined by the competent authority, and he must
always ensure that the needy are not deprived of the help of the sacraments by
reason of poverty.
1917 Canon 737 §1. Baptism, the door and foundation of the
Sacraments, necessary to salvation for all in fact or at least in desire,
is not validly conferred, if not through ablution of true and natural water
with the prescribed form of words.
§2 Baptism
administered with the observance of all the rites and ceremonies prescribed in
the ritual is called solemn; otherwise it is called not solemn, or private.
[Nothing further is stated in the Code about the matter and form of
Baptism, because these subjects belong to the domain of dogmatic and moral
theology.─Woywod]
1983 Canon 849
Baptism, the gateway to the sacraments, is necessary for salvation, either by
actual reception or at least by desire. By it people are freed from (original?)
sins, are born again as children of God and, made like to
Christ by an indelible character, are incorporated into the Church. It is
validly conferred only by a washing in real water with the proper form of
words. (heirs of heaven?)
1917 Canon
738 §1 The
ordinary minister of Solemn Baptism is the priest. Its administration, however,
is reserved to the pastor or another priest acting with the permission of the
pastor or of the local Ordinary, which permission is legitimately presumed in a
case of necessity.
§2 Even a peregrinus (i.e., a person who is at the time outside the parish where he has his domicile
or quasi-domicile) should receive Solemn Baptism from his proper pastor in his
own parish, if this can be easily done and without delay; otherwise, any pastor
may within his territory solemnly baptize a peregrinus.
1917 Canon 739 No priest is allowed, without due permission, to
baptize solemnly even a resident of his own parish in the territory of another
pastor.
1917 Canon
740 Where parishes or quasi-parishes are not yet established, the particular
statutes and accepted customs must be consulted in order to determine what
priest, besides the Ordinary, has the right to baptize, either in the entire
territory or in some particular district.
1917 Canon
741 The deacon is the extraordinary minister of Solemn Baptism. He
shall not, however, use his power without the permission of either the local
Ordinary or the pastor, which may be given for a just reason; when necessity
urges, that permission is legitimately presumed.
1983 Canon 861
§1 The ordinary minister of baptism is a Bishop, a priest or a deacon, without prejudice
to the provision of Canon 530, n. 1.
§2 If the ordinary minister is absent or impeded, a catechist or some
other person deputed to this office by the local Ordinary, may lawfully confer
baptism; indeed, in a case of necessity, any person who has the requisite
intention may do so. Pastors of souls, especially parish priests, are to be
diligent in ensuring that Christ’s faithful are taught the correct way to
baptize.
1917 Canon
743 The pastor should take care that the faithful, especially midwives,
doctors and surgeons, learn how to baptize properly in a case of necessity.
1983 Canon 862
Except in a case of necessity, it is unlawful for anyone without due permission
to confer baptism outside his own territory, not even upon his own subjects.
1917 Canon
744 The baptism of adults, where it can be conveniently done, should be
referred to the local Ordinary, so that, if he so desires, he himself or his
delegate may baptize more solemnly.
1983 Canon
863 The baptism of adults, at least of those who have completed their
fourteenth year, is to be referred to the Bishop, so that he himself may
confer it if he judges this appropriate.
1917 Canon 745
§1 The
subject capable of Baptism is omnis et solus homo viator (that is, every
living human being, and such alone), who has not yet been baptized.
§2 In connection
with Baptism:
1° the term parvulus or infans means, according to Canon
88, one who has not yet the use of reason, and persons insane from infancy are
regarded as equivalent to parvuli, no matter what age they may be.
2° The term adults here implies those who have the use of reason: for
admission to Baptism, it is sufficient if these of their own free will ask
individually for it.
1983 Canon
864 Every unbaptized person, and only such a person, can be baptized.
1983 Canon 842
§1 A person
who has not received baptism cannot validly be admitted to the other
sacraments.
§2 The sacraments of baptism, confirmation and
the blessed Eucharist so complement one another that all three are required
for full Christian initiation.(new─but law?)
1917 Canon
732 The Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation and Orders which imprint a
character cannot be received a second time. If, however, there is a prudent
doubt whether they have been conferred at all, or whether they were validly
conferred, they may be conditionally repeated.
1983 Canon 845
§1 Because (?) they imprint a character, the sacraments of baptism, confirmation and order
cannot be repeated.
§2 If after diligent enquiry a prudent doubt remains as to whether the
sacraments mentioned in §1 have been conferred at all, or conferred validly,
they are to be conferred conditionally.
1983 THE
CELEBRATION OF BAPTISM
1983 Canon
850 Baptism is administered according to the rite prescribed in the
approved liturgical books, except in case of urgent necessity when only those
elements which are required for the validity of the sacrament must be observed.
1983 Canon
851 2° the parents of a child who is to be baptized, and those who are to
undertake the office of sponsors, are to be suitably instructed on the
meaning of this sacrament (Joining the mob) and the obligations
attaching to it. The parish priest is to see to it that either he or others
duly prepare the parents, by means of pastoral advice and indeed by prayer
together; a number of families might be brought together for this purpose and,
where possible, each family visited (new). (not on golf day!)
1983 Canon 852
§1 The provisions of the Canons on adult baptism apply to all those
who, being no longer infants, have reached the use of reason.
§2 One who is incapable of personal responsibility is regarded as an
infant even in regard to baptism.
1983 Canon
853 Apart from a case of necessity, the water to be used in conferring
baptism is to be blessed, in accordance with the provisions of the liturgical
books.
1983 Canon
854 Baptism is to be conferred either by immersion or by pouring, in
accordance with the provisions of the (new) Episcopal Conference.
1917 Canon
749 Infants who have been abandoned and found shall be baptized
conditionally, if after careful investigation there is no certainty about their
Baptism.
1983 Canon
870 An abandoned infant or a foundling is to be baptized unless diligent
enquiry establishes that it has already been baptized.
1917 Canon 752
§1 An adult shall not be baptized except with his own
knowledge and consent and after due instruction.
§2 He is,
moreover, to be admonished to repent of his sins. In danger of death, if he
cannot be more thoroughly instructed in the principal mysteries of faith, it
suffices for the conferring of baptism that he manifest in some way his assent
to these mysteries, and promise solemnly that he will keep the commandments of
the Christian religion.
§3 If he cannot
even ask for baptism, but has either before or in his present condition given
some probable manifestation of an intention of receiving it, he should be
baptized conditionally. If afterwards he gets well, and there remains doubt
as to the validity of the Baptism, he shall be baptized again conditionally.
1983 Canon
851 The celebration of baptism should be properly prepared. Accordingly:
1° an adult who intends to receive baptism is to be admitted to the (new) catechumenate and, as far as possible, brought through the various
stages to sacramental initiation, in accordance with the rite
of initiation as adapted by the (new) Episcopal Conference
and with the particular norms issued by it;
1983 Canon 865
§1 To be
admitted to baptism, an adult must have manifested the intention to receive
baptism, must be adequately instructed in the truths of the faith and in the
duties of a Christian, and tested in the Christian life over the course of
the (new) catechumenate. The person must moreover be
urged to have sorrow for personal sins.
§2 An adult in danger of death may be baptized if, with some knowledge
of the principal truths of the faith, he or she has in some manner manifested
the intention to receive baptism and promises to observe the requirements of
the Christian religion.
1917 Canon 753
§1 The Code
desires that the priest who baptizes an adult be fasting, and that the adult
baptized be also fasting, if he is in good health.
§2 Unless grave and
urgent reasons prevent it, the baptized adult should immediately after Baptism
assist at Holy Mass and receive Holy Communion.
1983 Canon
866 Unless there is a grave reason to the contrary, immediately after
receiving baptism an adult is to be confirmed (bishop?), to
participate in the celebration of the Eucharist and to receive holy
communion.
1917 Canon 755
§1 Baptism
shall be given solemnly, except in the cases spoken of in Canon 759.
§2 The local
Ordinary may for a grave reason allow the use of the ceremonies prescribed in
the baptism of infants for the baptism of adults.
1917 Canon 757 §1
In Solemn Baptism water blessed specially for this purpose shall be used.
§2 If the water in
the baptismal font is so diminished that it does not suffice, other common
water may be added in smaller quantity than the remaining blessed water, and
this may be done repeatedly.
§3 If the baptismal
water has become putrid, or has escaped from the font, or is lacking for any
other reason, the pastor should have the font well cleaned, then put fresh water
into it and bless it with the form prescribed in the liturgical books of his
own rite.
1917 Canon
758 Though Baptism may be conferred validly in any of the three ways:
infusion, immersion, aspersion, nevertheless the first method or the second or
a mixture of the two, whichever may be more widely in use, shall be retained,
according to the approved rituals of the various dioceses.
1983 Canon 867
§1 Parents
are obliged to see that their infants are baptized within the first few weeks.
As soon as possible after the birth, indeed even before it, they are to
approach the parish priest to ask for the sacrament for their child, and to
be themselves duly prepared for it. (!)
§2 If the infant is in danger of death, it is to be baptized without any
delay.
1983 Canon 868
§1 For an
infant to be baptized lawfully it is required:
1° that the parents, or at least one of them, or the person who lawfully
holds their place, give their consent;
2° that there be a well-founded hope that the
child will be brought up in the Catholic religion. If such hope is truly
lacking, the baptism is, in accordance with the provisions of particular law,
to be deferred and the parents advised of the reason for this.
§2 An infant
of Catholic parents, indeed even of non-Catholic parents, may in danger of
death be baptized even if the parents are opposed to it.
1983 Canon 869
§1 If there
is doubt as to whether a person was baptized or whether a baptism was conferred
validly, and after serious enquiry this doubt persists, the person is to be
baptized conditionally.
§2 Those baptized in a non-Catholic ecclesial community are not to be
baptized conditionally unless there is a serious reason for doubting the
validity of their baptism, on the ground of the matter or the form of words
used in the baptism, or of the intention of the adult being baptized or of that
of the baptizing minister. (formerly the fact that the minister was not
Catholic constituted serious doubt.)
§3 If in the cases mentioned in §§1 and 2 a doubt remains about the
conferring of the baptism or its validity, baptism is not to be conferred until
the doctrine of the sacrament of baptism is explained to the person to be
baptized, if that person is an adult. Moreover, the reasons for doubting the
validity of the earlier baptism should be given to the person or, where an
infant is concerned, to the parents. (s. o. p. into law)
1917 Canon
761 The pastors shall endeavor to see that the person baptized receives
a Christian name; if they cannot accomplish this, they shall add to the name
given by the parents the name of some saint, and enter both names in the
baptismal record.
1983 Canon
855 Parents, sponsors and
parish priests are to take care that a name is not given which is foreign to
Christian sentiment. (Really?)
1917 Canon
770 Infants shall be baptized as soon as possible. Pastors and preachers
shall often remind the faithful of this grave obligation.
1917 Canon
771 Private Baptism may, in case of necessity, be given at any time and
in any place.
1917 Canon
772 Solemn Baptism may he given on any day. However, in accordance with
the most ancient rite of the Church, it is a becoming practice to baptize
adults on the vigils of Easter and Pentecost, especially in metropolitan and cathedral
churches, if it can be done conveniently.
1917 Canon
773 The proper place for the administration of Solemn Baptism is the
baptistry in a church or public oratory.
1983 Canon
856 Though baptism may be celebrated on any
day, it is recommended that normally it be celebrated on a Sunday or, if
possible, on the vigil of Easter.
1983 Canon 857
§1 Apart from
a case of necessity, the proper place for baptism is a church or an oratory.
§2 As
a rule and unless a just reason suggests otherwise, an adult is to be baptized
in his or her proper parish church, and an infant in the proper parish church
of the parents.
1917 Canon 774
§1 Every
parish church shall have a baptismal font; all contrary statutes, privileges
and customs interfering with that right of parish churches are disapproved and
recalled. If other churches have acquired the right to baptize cumulatively,
such cumulative right continues.
§2 The local
Ordinary can for the convenience of the people allow or demand that baptismal
fonts be placed also in another church or public oratory within the limits of a
parish.
1917 Canon
775 If the person to be baptized cannot go or be brought to the parish
church or another church that has the right to baptize without great
inconvenience or danger, on account of the distance or other circumstances,
Solemn Baptism can and should be given by the pastor in the nearest church or
public oratory within the parish, even though there is no baptismal font in
that church or oratory.
1983 Canon 858
§1 Each
parish church is to have a baptismal font, without prejudice to the same right
already acquired by other churches.
§2 The local
Ordinary, after consultation with the local parish priest, may for the convenience
of the faithful permit or order that a baptismal font be placed also in another
church or oratory within the parish.
1983 Canon
859 If, because of distance or other circumstances, the person to be
baptized cannot without grave inconvenience go or be brought to the parish
church or the oratory mentioned in Canon 858 §2, baptism may and must be
conferred in some other church or oratory which is nearer, or even in some
other fitting place.
1917 Canon 776
§1 Solemn
Baptism cannot be given in private houses except under the following
circumstances:
1) If the persons to be baptized are the sons or nephews of the highest
actual ruler of a country, or have the right of succession to the throne,
whenever they properly ask for it;
2) If the local Ordinary with prudent and conscientious judgment should
allow it in some extraordinary case where there is a just and reasonable cause.
§2 In these cases
Baptism must be given in the private chapel of the house, or at least in a decent
place, and baptismal water is to be used.
1983 Canon 860
§1 Apart from
a case of necessity, baptism is not to be conferred in private houses, unless
the local Ordinary should for a grave reason permit it.
§2 Unless the diocesan Bishop has decreed otherwise, baptism is not to be
conferred in hospital, except in a case of necessity or for some other pressing
pastoral reason.
*
*
*
* *
*
Sponsors are
covered in Canons 762-769 (1917) and in canons 872-874 (1983), which
considerably loosen 1917 requirements and end with another
novelty:
874
§2 A baptized person who belongs to a non-Catholic ecclesial community may be
admitted only in company with a Catholic sponsor, and then simply as a witness
to the baptism.
The 1983 code omits Canons 742, §1 & 2, 746, 748, 750-1, 756 (1917),
but introduces:
Canon 843 §2 According to their respective offices in the Church, both
pastors of souls and all other members of Christ’s faithful (They all
know the law?) have a duty to ensure that those who ask for the sacraments
are prepared for their reception. This should be done through proper
evangelization and catechetical instruction, in accordance with the norms laid
down by the competent authority.
Sponsors
1917 Canon 762
§1 According
to the most ancient custom of the Church, nobody shall be
baptized solemnly unless he has, whenever possible, a sponsor.
§2 Even in Private
Baptism a sponsor should be procured, if it is easily possible; if there was no
sponsor in the Private Baptism, one should be procured in the supplying of the
ceremonies, but in such a case he does not contract any spiritual relationship.
1917 Canon 763
§1 When
baptism is repeated conditionally, the same sponsor shall, if possible, be
employed as at the first baptism; except in this case, there is no need of a
sponsor in conditional baptism.
§2 In the
conditional repetition of baptism neither the sponsor of the first nor the
sponsor at the second baptism contracts spiritual relationship, unless the same
sponsor was secured on both occasions.
1917 Canon
764 There shall be but one sponsor, who may be either of the same or of
different sex from the person to be baptized; two sponsors at most, one man and
one woman, shall be employed.
1917 Canon
765 In order that a person may act validly as sponsor, the following
rules apply:
1° He must be baptized, have attained the use of
reason and have the intention of discharging that office;
2° He must not belong to an heretical or
schismatic sect, nor have been excommunicated by a condemnatory or declaratory
sentence, nor suffer from infamy of law, nor be excluded from legal acts, nor
have been deposed or degraded from the clerical rank;
3° The father or mother or spouse of the person
to be baptized cannot be sponsor;
4° He must be designated either by the person to
be baptized or by the parents or guardians, or in their default by the
minister of baptism;
5° The sponsor must, either in person or through
proxy, physically hold or touch the one baptized, or receive him immediately
after baptism from the sacred font or from the hands of the minister.
1917 Canon
766 For licit admission as sponsor, the following conditions must be
observed:
1° The sponsor must be fourteen years of
age, unless for a just reason the minister admits younger persons;
2° The sponsor must not be under excommunication,
nor excluded from legal acts, nor suffer from infamy of law for reason of a
notorious crime, even though no sentence was pronounced against him, nor must
he be under an interdict, or otherwise a public criminal, or disgraced by
infamy of fact;
3°The sponsor must know the rudiments of the
faith;
4° The sponsor must not be a novice or professed
member in any religious organization, unless there is nobody else to be had and
the permission is granted by at least the local superior;
5° The sponsor must not be a cleric in sacred
orders, unless he has the explicit permission of his proper Ordinary.
1917 Canon
767 In case of doubt whether one can validly or licitly be admitted as
sponsor, the pastor shall, if time permits, consult the Ordinary.
1917 Canon
768 The minister of baptism and the sponsor contract spiritual
relationship from baptism with the person baptized only.
1917 Canon
769 In virtue of the office which they have accepted, it is the duty of
the sponsors to take a lasting interest in their spiritual child, and to take
good care that he leads a truly Christian life, as in the solemn ceremony they
have pledged that he would do.
SPONSORS
1983 Canon
872 In so far as possible, a person being baptized is to be assigned a
sponsor. In the case of an adult baptism, the sponsor’s role is to assist
the person in Christian initiation. In the case of an infant baptism, the
role is together with the parents to present the child for baptism, and to help
it to live a Christian life befitting the baptized and faith4fully to fulfill
the duties inherent in baptism.
1983 Canon
873 One sponsor, male or female, is sufficient; but there may be two, one
of each sex.
1983 Canon 874
§1 To be
admitted to undertake the office of sponsor, a person must:
1° be appointed by the candidate for baptism, or by the parents or
whoever stands in their place, or failing these, by the parish priest or the
minister; to be appointed the person must be suitable for this role and have
the intention of fulfilling it;
2° be not less than sixteen years of age, unless a different age has
been stipulated by the diocesan Bishop, or unless the parish priest or the
minister considers that there is a just reason for an exception to be made;
3° be a Catholic who has been confirmed and has received the blessed
Eucharist, and who lives a life of faith which befits the role to be
undertaken;
4° not labor under a canonical penalty, whether imposed or declared;
5° not be either the father or the mother of the person to be baptized.
§2 A baptized person who belongs to a non-Catholic ecclesial community may be
admitted only in company with a Catholic sponsor, and then simply as a witness
to the baptism.
Records And Proof Of Baptism (1917)
1917 Canon 777
§1 The pastor
shall carefully and without delay enter in the baptismal records the names of
the persons baptized, the minister, the parents and sponsors, the date and
place of the baptism.
§2 In the baptism
of illegitimate children the name of the mother is to be entered, if her
motherhood is publicly known, or if she of her own accord asks in writing or
before two witnesses that such entry be made. Also the name of the father is
to be entered, provided he himself demands it of his own accord in writing or
before two witnesses, or if he is known to be the father from some public and
authentic document. In other cases the baptism is to be recorded as of a child
of unknown father or of unknown parents.
1917 Canon
778 If baptism was not given by the proper pastor, or in his presence,
the minister shall as soon as possible inform the pastor of the domicile of the
person baptized about the baptism.
1917 Canon 779
Unless the rights of a third party are prejudiced thereby, one witness who is
absolutely trustworthy, or the oath of the baptized party himself, if he was
baptized at adult age, suffic/es for the proof of baptism.
PROOF AND
REGISTRATION OF BAPTISM (1983)
1983 Canon 875
Whoever administers baptism is to take care that if there is not a sponsor
present, there is at least one witness who can prove that the baptism was
conferred.
1983 Canon 876 To
prove that baptism has been conferred, if there is no conflict of interest, it
is sufficient to have either one unexceptionable witness or, if the baptism was
conferred upon an adult, the sworn testimony of the baptized person.
1983 Canon 877 §1
The parish priest of the place in which the baptism was conferred must
carefully and without delay record in the register of baptism the names of the
baptized, the minister, the parents, the sponsors and, if there were such, the
witnesses, and the place and date of baptism. He must also enter the date and
place of birth.
§2 In the case of a child of an unmarried mother, the mother’s name is
to be entered if her maternity is publicly known or if, either in writing or
before two witnesses, she freely asks that this be done. Similarly, the name of
the father is to be entered, if his paternity is established either by some
public document or by his own declaration in the presence of the parish priest
and two witnesses. In all other cases, the name of the baptized person is to be
registered, without any indication of the name of the father or of the parents.
§3 In the case of
an adopted child, the names of the adopting parents are to be registered and,
at least if this is done in the local civil registration, the names of the
natural parents in accordance with §§1 and 2 subject however to the rulings of
the Episcopal Conference.
1983 Canon 878 If
baptism was administered neither by the parish priest nor in his presence, the
minister of baptism, whoever that was, must notify the parish priest of the
parish in which the baptism was administered, so that he may register the
baptism in accordance with Canon 877 §1.
Private
Baptism (Canon 742-743)
1917 Canon
742 §1
Private Baptism, as spoken of in Canon 759, may be given by any one who uses
the proper matter and form and has the right intention. In so far as possible,
two witnesses, or at least one, should be present, by whom the conferring of
Baptism can be proved.
§2 A priest who
happens to be present, shall be preferred to a deacon; a deacon to a subdeacon;
a cleric to a lay person, and a man to a woman, unless decency demand that a
woman be preferred, or the woman is more conversant with the form and manner of
baptizing.
§3 The father or
mother are not allowed to baptize their own child except in danger of death
when there is no one else at hand who can baptize.
Unusual
Cases Of Infant Baptism (Canon 746-748)
1917 Canon 746
§1 An infant
shall not be baptized while still enclosed in the mother's womb as long as there
is probable hope that it can be baptized when born.
§2 If the infant
puts forth the head, it may be baptized on the head in case of imminent danger
of death, and Baptism shall not afterwards be repeated conditionally if the
child lives.
§3 Should any other
limb emerge, the infant may be baptized on that limb conditionally, if the
danger of death is imminent, but if the infant is born alive it must be
baptized again conditionally.
§4 If the mother
dies in pregnancy, and the fetus, when extracted by those whose duty it is to
do this, shows sure signs of life, it shall be baptized absolutely; conditional
baptism is given if life is doubtful.
§5 If the fetus was
baptized in the mother's womb, it shall, when born, be baptized again
conditionally.
1917 Canon
747 Care should be taken that every fetus born prematurely, no matter at
what stage of pregnancy, be baptized: the baptism shall be absolute, if it is
certain that the fetus is alive, and conditional, if life is doubtful.
1983 Canon 871 Aborted fetuses, if they are alive, are to be baptized,
in so far as this is possible.
1917 Canon
748 Monstrous and unusual forms of the fetus should always be baptized, at
least conditionally; when there is doubt whether the fetus is one being or
several, one should be baptized absolutely and the others conditionally.
Private
Baptism
1917 Canon
759 §1 In
danger of death Private Baptism may be given. If it is administered by a person
who is neither a priest nor a deacon, only that should be done which is
necessary for the validity of baptism. If a priest or a deacon baptizes, and
time permits, he should perform the ceremonies which follow baptism.
§2 Except in danger
of death, the local Ordinary may permit Private Baptism only in the case of adult
converts from heresy who are baptized conditionally.
§3 The ceremonies
which for any reason have been omitted in the conferring of baptism, shall be
supplied as soon as possible in church, except in the case of conditional
baptism of converts from heretical sects.
1917 Canon
760 If baptism is repeated conditionally, the ceremonies should be
supplied if they were omitted in the first baptism, saving the exception of the
foregoing Canon in reference to conditional baptism of converts from heretical
sects. If the ceremonies were employed in the first baptism, one is at liberty
to repeat them or not.
Baptism Of
Mentally Defective Persons (Canon 754)
1917 Canon
754 §1 Insane
and frenzied persons shall not be baptized unless they have been such from
birth, or became afflicted before they had obtained the use of reason, in which
case they should be baptized like infants.
§2 If they have
lucid intervals, they should be baptized during such a moment if they manifest
a desire for baptism.
§3 They should also
be baptized in imminent danger of death, if, before they became insane, they
showed a desire for baptism.
§4 Those suffering
from lethargy or phrenesis shall be baptized only while they are conscious and
desirous of baptism; if the danger of death is imminent and they have shown a
desire for baptism before they lost control of their minds, they should be
baptized.
1983 Canon 843 §1 Sacred ministers may not deny the sacraments to those
who opportunely ask for them, are properly disposed and are not prohibited by
law from receiving them.
§2 According to their respective offices in the Church, both pastors of
souls and all other members of Christ’s faithful have a duty to ensure that
those who ask for the sacraments are prepared for their reception. This should be
done through proper evangelization and catechetical instruction, in accordance
with the norms laid down by the competent authority.
1917 Canon
750 §1 An
infant of unbaptized parents can be lawfully baptized, even despite the
objection of the parents, if the danger of death of the infant is such that it
may be prudently judged the child will die before it comes to the use of
reason.
§2 Provided there
is guarantee for the Catholic bringing up of the child, an infant may be
licitly baptized even though there is no danger of death:
1° if the parents or guardians, or at least one of them, consent;
2° if there are no parents (i.e., father or mother, grandfather or
grandmother) or guardians, or if they lost the right to the custody of the
child, or cannot in any way exercise that right.
1917 Canon
751 In reference to the baptism of an infant whose parents belong to an
heretical or schismatic sect, or have become apostates from the Church, or
have lapsed into heresy or schism, the regulations laid down in the preceding
Canon are to be followed.
Latin And
Oriental Rite Of Baptism (Canon 756)
1917 Canon 756
§1 The child
must be baptized in the rite to which the parents belong.
§2 If one of the
parents belong to the Latin Rite and the other to an Oriental Rite, the child
shall be baptized in the rite to which the father belongs, unless a contrary
ruling has been made by special law.
§3 If only one of the
parents is a Catholic, the child shall be baptized in the rite of the Catholic
Party.
Confirmation
(1917 Code)
Canon
780 The
Sacrament of Confirmation is to be conferred by the imposition of the hand, by
the anointing of the forehead with holy chrism, and by the words prescribed
in the pontifical books approved by the Church.
Canon
781 The
chrism to be used in the Sacrament of Confirmation must be blessed by a bishop,
even though a priest, by law or special indult, confers this Sacrament. The
anointing shall not be done with any instrument, but by the hand of the
minister properly imposed on the head of the person to be confirmed (Sentence
omitted in 1983 Code).
The
Minister Of Confirmation
1917 Canon
782 §1 The
ordinary minister of Confirmation is the bishop only.
§2 The
extraordinary minister is a priest who, either by the common law or by special
indult of the Apostolic See, has received the faculty to confirm.
§3 The following
have this faculty by law: Cardinals, in Canon 239, § 1, n. 23, abbots and
prelates nullius, vicars and prefects Apostolic. With the exception of the
Cardinals, these clergy cannot validly make use of the faculty except within the
limits of their respective territory, and during their term of office only. (omitted
1983)
§4 Unless the
indult explicitly provides otherwise, a priest of the Latin Rite, who has this
power by virtue of an indult, can confer Confirmation validly on Catholics of
his Rite only. (omitted 1983)
§5 It is not lawful
for priests of the Oriental Rite who have the faculty or privilege to give
Confirmation together with Baptism to the infants of their own Rite, to confirm
infants of the Latin Rite. (omitted 1983)
Canon
783
§1 Within his
diocese the bishop can lawfully confirm even strangers, unless an explicit
prohibition of their own bishop forbids it. (omitted 1983)
§2 In the diocese
of another bishop, a bishop must have at least the reasonably presumed
permission of the local Ordinary, except when he confirms his own subjects
privately and without crozier and mitre. (omitted 1983)
1917 Canon
784 A priest who has a local Apostolic privilege to confirm may also
confirm strangers in the territory of his jurisdiction, unless the Ordinaries
of the strangers have explicitly forbidden it. (omitted 1983)
1917 Canon
785 §1 The
bishop is bound to administer Confirmation to his subjects who legitimately and
reasonably ask for it, especially at the time of his diocesan visitation.
(omitted from 1983 Canon 885)
§2 A priest who by
Apostolic privilege has the power to confirm is bound by the same obligation
with respect to those people in whose favor this faculty was given to him.
§3 An Ordinary who
is prevented by a legitimate reason from giving Confirmation, or an Ordinary
who has no faculty to confirm, must see that, at least every five years if
possible, this Sacrament is administered among his subjects. (omitted 1983)
§4 If he is gravely
negligent in administering Confirmation to his subjects, either in person or
through another, Canon 274, n. 4, is to be observed.
1983 Code
1983 Canon
879 The sacrament of confirmation impresses a character and by it the baptized, continuing
on the path of Christian initiation, are enriched by the gift of the Holy
Spirit and bound more perfectly to the Church; it strengthens them and obliges
them more firmly to be witnesses to Christ by word and deed and to spread
and defend the faith. (This completely new legislation of doctrine
imposes the weight of law on new concepts and “obligations.”)
Celebration
1983 Canon 880 §1. The sacrament of confirmation is conferred
through anointing with chrism on the forehead, which is done by the imposition
of the hand, and through the (changed) words prescribed in the approved
liturgical (formerly pontifical) books.
§2. The chrism to be used in the sacrament of confirmation must be consecrated
by a bishop, even if the sacrament is administered by a presbyter. (elder?)
1983 Canon
881 It is desirable that the sacrament of confirmation be celebrated in a
church and during Mass (new mass, new sacrament, new
requisite!), but for a just and reasonable cause it may be celebrated
outside Mass and in any worthy place.
Minister
1983 Canon 882 The ordinary minister of confirmation is the
bishop; a presbyter who has this faculty by virtue of either the common law or
a special concession of competent authority also confers this sacrament
validly.
1983 Canon 883 The following have the faculty of administering
confirmation by the law itself:
1˚ within the limits of their territory, those who are equivalent in law
to the diocesan bishop;
2˚ with regard to the person in question, the presbyter who by reason of
office or mandate of the diocesan bishop baptizes one who is no longer an
infant or one already baptized whom he admits into the full communion of
the Catholic Church (legislated doctrine?);
3˚ with regard to those in danger of death, the pastor or indeed any
presbyter.
1983 Canon 884 §1. The diocesan bishop is to administer
confirmation personally or see that it is administered by another bishop, but
if necessity requires he m8ay give the faculty to administer this sacrament to
one or more specified presbyters.
§2. For a grave cause, a bishop and likewise a presbyter who has the faculty to
confirm by virtue of law or special concession of competent authority may in
individual cases associate presbyters with themselves so that they may
administer the sacrament.
1983 Canon 885 §1. The diocesan bishop is obliged to see that the
sacrament of confirmation is conferred on his subjects who properly and
reasonably request it.
§2. A presbyter who has this faculty must use it for those in whose favor the
faculty was granted.
1983 Canon 886 §1. In his own diocese the bishop legitimately
administers the sacrament of confirmation even to the faithful who are not his
subjects, unless there is an express prohibition by their own ordinary.
§2. To administer confirmation licitly in another diocese a bishop needs at
least the reasonably presumed permission of the diocesan bishop, unless it is a
question of his own subjects.
1983 Canon
887 A presbyter who has the faculty to administer confirmation licitly
confers this sacrament even on externs in the territory designated for him,
unless there is a prohibition of their own proper ordinary; but such a
presbyter may not validly confer the sacrament on anyone in another territory
with due regard for the prescription of canon 883, n 3.
1983 Canon
888 The ministers may administer confirmation even in exempt places
within the territory where they are able to confer the sacrament.
The
Subject Of Confirmation
1917 Canon 786 Persons who have not been baptized cannot be validly
confirmed. To receive Confirmation licitly and with fruit, the recipients must
be in the state of grace, and, if they have the use of reason, they must be
sufficiently instructed
1917 Canon 787 Though this Sacrament is not an absolutely necessary
means of salvation (“corrected” by 1983 Canon 890), none may neglect
to receive it when occasion offers. The pastors shall see that the faithful
receive Confirmation at the proper time.
1917 Canon 788 Although, in the Latin Church, Confirmation is usually
deferred until about the seventh year of age, it may nevertheless be conferred
before this age, if the infant is in danger of death, or if the minister in any
other case thinks it expedient for good and weighty reasons.
1917 Canon 789 If there are several to be confirmed, all should be
present at the first imposition of hands, and should not leave until the
Confirmation rite is completed. (This rule, obviously for protection of
sacramental validity, omitted 1983)
Confirmandi
1983 Canon 889 §1. All baptized persons who have not been
confirmed and only they are capable of receiving confirmation.
§2. Outside the danger of death, to be licitly confirmed it is required, if the
person has the use of reason, that one be suitably instructed, properly
disposed (state of grace?) and able to renew one’s baptismal promises (new!).
1983 Canon
890 The faithful are obliged to receive this sacrament (new
obligation!) at the appropriate time; their parents and shepherds of
souls, especially pastors, are to see to it that the faithful are properly
instructed to receive it and approach the sacrament at the appropriate time. This “corrects” Canon 787, 1917 Code.
1983 Canon
891 The sacrament of confirmation is to be conferred upon the faithful at
about the age of discretion unless the conference of bishops determines
another age (new task for new organization) or there is danger of death or
in the judgment of the minister a grave cause urges otherwise.
Time And
Place Of Confirmation
1917 Canon 790 Confirmation may be administered at any time, but it is
most befitting to administer it during the week of Pentecost. (omitted 1983)
1917 Canon 791 The proper place for the administration of Confirmation
is a church; nevertheless, for a cause which the minister considers just and
reasonable, he may confer this Sacrament in any becoming place.
1917 Canon 792 The
bishop has the right to administer Confirmation also in exempt places within
the confines of the territory of his diocese.
Sponsors
1917 Canon 793 In accordance with a most ancient custom of the Church, a
sponsor should be procured at Confirmation also, if one can be had.
1917 Canon 794 The sponsor should stand for one or two only, although
the minister may for a just reason allow him to stand for more. No candidate
for Confirmation shall have more than one sponsor. (omitted 1983)
Requisites
For Valid Sponsorship
1917 Canon 795 In order that one may validly be sponsor, the
following conditions are required:
1) The sponsor must have received Confirmation, have attained the use
of reason, and have the intention of performing the office of sponsorship;
2) The sponsor may not be a member of an heretical or schismatic
sect (“corrected” by 1983 Canon 874, §2), nor be declared liable
to any of the penalties spoken of in Canon 765, n. 2, by a declaratory or
condemnatory sentence;
3) The sponsor may not be the father or mother of, or married to the
candidate;
4) The sponsor must have been designated by the candidate, or by his
parents or guardians, or, in their default or refusal to appoint a sponsor, by
the pastor;
5) The sponsor must physically touch the candidate in the very act of
the Confirmation, this action being performed personally or by proxy. (omitted
1983)
1917 Canon
796 In order that one may licitly be admitted to the sponsorship,
the following conditions must be observed:
1) The sponsor at Confirmation should not be the same person who
acted as sponsor in Baptism (“corrected” by 1983 Canon 893),
unless for a reasonable cause the minister of Confirmation thinks it proper to
allow an exception to this rule, or unless Confirmation is legitimately given
immediately after Baptism; (continued right column)
2) The sponsor must be of the same sex as
the candidate, (omitted 1983) unless in particular cases the
minister for a reasonable cause thinks it proper to allow an exception;
3) The prohibitions of Canon 766, n. 664, in reference to persons who
may not be lawfully admitted to sponsorship in Baptism shall apply also to
sponsorship in Confirmation.
Spiritual
Relationship Of Sponsor
1917 Canon
797 From valid Confirmation arises a spiritual relationship between
the person confirmed and the sponsor, (omitted 1983) by which
the sponsor is bound to take a permanent interest in the person confirmed and
to care for his Christian education.
Sponsors
1983 Canon
892 As far as possible a sponsor for the one to be confirmed should be
present; it is for the sponsor to see that the confirmed person acts as a true
witness to Christ and faithfully fulfills the obligations connected with this
sacrament.
1983 Canon 893 §1. To perform the role of sponsor, it is necessary
that a person fulfill the conditions mentioned in canon
874.
§2. It is desirable that the one who undertook the role of sponsor at
baptism be sponsor for confirmation. This contradicts Canon 796, 1),
1917 Code.
The remaining
canons on Confirmation of both codes concern the official records.
1917
Code Extreme
Unction (Canon 940-944)
[In these laws the underlined portions are omitted from the 1983 code.]
Canon
940
§1 Extreme Unction
can be given only to a Catholic who, after having attained the use of reason,
incurs a danger of death through sickness or old age.
§2 In the same
illness this Sacrament cannot be repeated, unless the sick person rallied after
the reception of the last anointing and his illness again becomes critical.
Canon
941 When one
doubts whether the sick person has attained the use of reason, whether he is
really in danger of death, or whether he is dead, Extreme Unction shall be
given conditionally.
Canon
942 This
Sacrament is not to be administered to those who obstinately and impenitently
persevere in open mortal sin; if this is doubtful, they may be anointed
conditionally.
Canon
943 Sick
persons who, while they were still conscious, asked for the Sacrament at least
implicitly, or who very likely would have asked for it, may be anointed
absolutely though they have lost consciousness or the use of reason.
Canon
944 Though
this Sacrament is not in itself a necessary means of salvation, nobody may
neglect it. Great care and solicitude must be used to have the sick persons
receive Extreme Unction while they are still fully conscious.
Canon
945 The olive
oil to be used in Extreme Unction must be blessed for that purpose by a bishop,
or by a priest who has received the faculty for this blessing from the
Apostolic See.
Canon
946 The
oil of the sick is to be kept by the pastor in a clean and properly ornamented
place and in a receptacle of silver or white metal; he shall not keep it in his
house except in the case provided for in Canon 735.
Canon
947
§1 The anointings
are to be performed with the words and in the order and manner prescribed in
the rituals. In case of necessity, a single anointing of one of the senses
(preferably on the forehead) with the prescribed shorter form suffices, but
the obligation remains to supply the individual anointings when the
danger ceases.
§2 The anointing
of the loins is always to be omitted.
§3 The anointing
of the feet may be omitted for any reasonable cause.
§4 Except in a case
of grave necessity, the anointings are to be made by the hand of the priest
without the use of any instrument.
1983 Code Anointing (998-1007)
Here the
formulators of the new code demonstrate literary turns of sentimentality. They
demand a priest, who, if available, is probably invalidly ordained, to
administer this invalid “last anointing.”
Where they
change nothing else they change the sequence.
[In these
“laws” the underlined portions vary from or augment the 1917 Code.]
Canon
998 The
anointing of the sick by which the Church commends to the suffering and
glorified Lord the faithful who are dangerously sick so that He relieve and
save them, is conferred by anointing them with oil and using the words
prescribed in the liturgical books.
Canon
999 Besides
a bishop those who can bless the oil to be used in the anointing of the sick:
1˚ who are equivalent in law to a diocesan bishop;
2˚ in case of necessity, any priest but only in the celebration of the sacrament.
Canon 1000 §1. The
anointings are to be carefully performed while observing the words, the order
and the manner prescribed in the liturgical books; but in case of necessity it
is sufficient that one anointing be made on the forehead, or even on another
part of the body, while saying the entire formula.
§2. The minister is to perform the anointing with his own hand unless a serious
reason persuades him to use an instrument.
Canon
1001 Pastors of souls
and persons who are close to the sick are to see to it that they are supported
by this sacrament at an appropriate time.
Canon
1002 The communal
celebration of the anointing of the sick for many of the sick at the same time
who are duly prepared and rightly disposed can be performed according to the
prescription of the diocesan bishop.
Canon 1003 §1. Every
priest, and only a priest, validly administers the anointing of the sick.
§2. All priests to whom the care of souls have been committed have the duty and
the right to administer the anointing of the sick to all the faithful
committed to their pastoral office; for a reasonable cause any other priest can
administer this sacrament with at least the presumed consent of the
aforementioned priest.
§3. Every priest is allowed to carry blessed oil with him so that he can
administer the anointing of the sick in case of necessity.
Canon 1004 §1. The
anointing of the sick can be administered to a member of the faithful who,
after having reached the use of reason, begins to be in danger due to sickness
or old age.
§2. This sacrament can be repeated whenever the sick person falls into a
serious sickness after convalescence or whenever a more serious crisis develops
during the same sickness.
Canon
1005 This sacrament is to
be administered when there is a doubt whether the sick person has attained the
use of reason, whether the person is dangerously ill, or whether the person is
dead.
Canon
1006 This sacrament is to
be conferred upon sick persons who requested it at least implicitly when they
were in control of their faculties.
Canon
1007 The anointing of the
sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in manifest
serious sin.
This innovation is
a sacrament because innovative “law” so designates it.
Indulgences were a major bone of contention
during the Protestant Revolt. To drop them would draw suspicion.
1917
Code (26 canons)
Chapter V. Of Indulgences (Canon 911-936)
Canon
911 All the
faithful should hold in high esteem indulgences or the remission of the
temporal penalty due before God for sins which have already been blotted out as
to their guilt. These indulgences are granted by ecclesiastical authority from
the treasury of the Church to living members by way of absolution, and to the
deceased by way of suffrage.
1983
code (6 “canons”)
Chapter IV: INDULGENCES (Canon 992-997)
Canon
992 An
indulgence is the remission in the sight of God of the temporal punishment due
for sins, the guilt of which has already been forgiven. A member of Christ’s
faithful who is properly disposed and who fulfils certain specific conditions,
may gain an indulgence by the help of the Church which, as the minister of
redemption, authoritatively dispenses and applies the treasury of the merits of
Christ and the Saints.
1917 Code
Canon
912 Besides
the Roman Pontiff, to whom Christ Our Lord has committed the disbursement of
the whole spiritual treasury of the Church, those persons only to whom the
power is expressly given by law can grant indulgences by ordinary power.
1983 code
Canon
995 §1 Apart
from the supreme authority in the Church, only those can grant indulgences to
whom this power is either acknowledged in the law, or given by the Roman
Pontiff.
1917 Code
Canon
913 Persons
inferior to the Roman Pontiff cannot: (1) give to others the faculty of
granting indulgences, unless this power has been expressly granted to them by
the Apostolic See; (2) grant indulgences applicable to the souls in purgatory;
(3) attach further indulgences to an object, or pious work, or society, to
which the Holy See or another authority has already attached indulgences,
unless new conditions for gaining the additional indulgences are prescribed.
1983 code
Canon
995 §2 No
authority below the Roman Pontiff can give to others the faculty of granting
indulgences, unless this authority has been expressly given to the person by
the Apostolic See.
1917 Code
Canon
914 The Papal
Blessing with a plenary indulgence may be given according to the prescribed
formula by bishops in their respective dioceses twice a year—once on Easter
Sunday and again on another solemn feast to be designated by the bishop; the
blessing may be given, even though the bishop does not say the Mass himself,
but only assists at it. Abbots and prelates nullius, vicars and prefects
Apostolic, though they are not consecrated bishops, may give the Papal
Blessing on one of the solemn feasts of the year only.
Canon
915 Regulars
who have the privilege of giving the Papal Blessing are obliged not only to
give it with the prescribed formula, but are restricted also in the use of the
privilege to their own churches and those of the nuns and tertiaries
legitimately aggregated to their Order. They may not give the Papal Blessing
on the same day and in the same place where the bishop gives it.
Canon
916 Bishops,
abbots or prelates nullius, vicars and prefects apostolic and major superiors
of exempt clerical communities of religious have the power to designate and
declare one altar as daily and perpetually privileged in the cathedral, or in
the church of an abbey, or in collegiate, conventual, parochial and
quasi-parochial churches (provided there is no other privileged altar in the
church). They cannot declare an altar privileged in public or semi-public
oratories, unless they are united to or subsidiaries of parochial churches.
Canon
917 §1 On All
Souls' Day all Masses have the same privilege as though they were said at a
privileged altar.
§2 All the altars of a church are privileged during the days on which the Forty
Hours’ Devotion is conducted.
Canon
918 §1 To
indicate that an altar is privileged, no other inscription shall be put on the
altar than “privileged altar,” with the addition “perpetual,” “temporary,”
“daily,” or otherwise, according to the wording of the
concession.
§2 A larger stipend may not be demanded on account of the privilege for Masses
which are said at a privileged altar.
Canon
919 §1 New
indulgences which have not been promulgated at Rome, including those granted to
churches of regulars, shall not be published without first consulting the local
Ordinary.
§2 In publishing books, pamphlets, etc., in which concessions of indulgences
for various prayers or good works are enumerated, the law of Canon 1388 is to
be observed.
Canon
920 Persons
who have obtained from the Supreme Pontiff the concession of an indulgence for
the benefit of all the faithful are obliged, under pain of nullity of the favor
received, to submit to the Sacred Penitentiary a copy of that concession.
Canon
921 §1 A
plenary indulgence granted for feasts of Our Lord, or for feasts of the Blessed
Virgin Mary, is understood to have been granted for feasts only which are
contained in the universal calendar of the
Church.
§2 A plenary or a partial indulgence granted for the feasts of the Holy
Apostles is to be understood as granted for the day of their death only.
§3 A plenary indulgence granted either daily and perpetually, or for a limited
time, to those who visit some church or public oratory, is to be understood in
such a manner that it can be gained any day but once a year only by each
individual, unless the contrary is explicitly stated in the document of
concession.
Canon
922 §1
Indulgences attached to feasts, pious exercises, novenas, or seven or three
days’ devotions, held before or after a feast or during its octave, are to be
considered transferred to the day to which the feasts are legitimately changed,
if it is a perpetual transfer of a feast which has Office and Mass but no
external solemnity and celebration, or if it is either a temporary or
perpetual transfer of the solemnity and external celebration of a feast.
Canon
923 To gain
an indulgence attached to a certain day under condition of visiting a church or
oratory, it suffices to make the visit from noon of the preceding day to
midnight of the day itself.
Canon
924 §1 According
to Canon 75, the indulgences attached to a church do not cease if the church is
entirely destroyed but is rebuilt within fifty years on the same or nearly the
same spot and under the same
title.
§2 Indulgences attached to prayer beads and other objects cease only when the
beads or objects are entirely destroyed or are sold.
Article II. Of The Gaining Of Indulgences (925-936)
Canon
925 §1 In
order that a person may be capable of gaining an indulgence for himself, it is
necessary that he be baptized, free from excommunication, in the state of grace
at least at the end of the good works prescribed, and that he be a subject of
the authority granting the indulgence.
§2 To actually acquire indulgences which he is capable of gaining, the person
must have at least the general intention to gain them, and he must perform the
required good works at the appointed time and in the proper manner as
prescribed by the wording of the concession.
1983 code
Canon
996 §1 To be
capable of gaining indulgences a person must be baptized, not excommunicated,
and in the state of grace at least on completion of the prescribed work.
§2 To gain them, however, the person who is capable must have at least the
intention of gaining them, and must fulfill the prescribed works at the time
and in the manner determined by the terms of the grant.
1917 Code
Canon
926 A plenary
indulgence is understood to be granted in such a manner that, if one cannot
fully gain it, he may nevertheless gain it partially according to his actual
dispositions.
Canon
927
Indulgences granted by a bishop may be gained not only by his subjects, though
they are actually outside his diocese, but also by strangers and vagi and all
exempt persons who are actually staying in the diocese, unless the wording of
the concession of the indulgence states otherwise.
Canon
928 §1 Even
though the prescribed good works are performed repeatedly, a plenary indulgence
can be gained once a day only, unless the concession explicitly states
otherwise.
§2 Partial indulgences may be gained repeatedly during the same day by the
repetition of the same good work, unless the contrary is explicitly stated.
Canon
929 The
faithful of either sex who for the purpose of Christian perfection, or studies
and education, or health, live in common in houses which have been established
with the consent of the Ordinaries, but which have no church or public chapel
attached to the institute, may gain all indulgences for which the visit to a
church or public chapel in general is required by visiting the chapel of their
house in which they can by law satisfy the obligation of hearing Mass, provided
they properly perform all the other good works enjoined. All persons who live
in these houses for the purpose of serving the inmates share in this
concession.
Canon
930 Nobody
who gains indulgences can apply them to other living persons. All indulgences
granted by the Roman Pontiff may be applied to the poor souls in purgatory,
unless the contrary is evident from the concession.
1983 code
Canon
994 All members
of the faithful can gain indulgences, partial or plenary, for themselves, or
they can apply them by way of suffrage to the dead.
1917 Code
Canon
931 §1 If
Confession is required for the gaining of any indulgence, that Confession can
be made within eight days immediately preceding the day to which the
indulgence is attached. Holy Communion may be received on the day previous to
the day of the indulgence; both Confession and Holy Communion may also be made
on any day within the octave.
§2 In like manner, Confession and Holy Communion required for the gaining of
indulgences attached to pious exercises conducted for three, seven, or more
days, may be made also within eight days after the close of the exercises.
§3 The faithful who, unless legitimately hindered, are in the habit of going to
Confession at least twice a month, or who receive Holy Communion daily in the
state of grace and with a good and devout intention (though they may abstain
from receiving once or twice during the week), can gain all indulgences
without actually going to Confession, when Confession would otherwise be a
necessary condition for the gaining of the indulgences. Indulgences granted for
an ordinary or extraordinary Jubilee, or after the manner of a Jubilee
indulgence, are excepted from this concession, and the Confession is a
necessary requisite for the gaining of such indulgences.
Canon
932 An
indulgence cannot be gained by a good work which one is already bound to
perform by reason of some law or precept, unless the document of concession
explicitly states the contrary. However, the person who performs a good work
enjoined on him as a penance in Sacramental Confession may, if such work is
perchance enriched with indulgences, perform the penance and also gain the
indulgences.
Canon
933 To one
and the same object or place various indulgences may be attached under
different titles. But by one and the same good work which is enriched with
indulgences from various sources, the several indulgences cannot be gained,
unless the good work required is Confession or Holy Communion, or unless the
concession of the indulgences explicitly allows the cumulative gaining of the
various indulgences by one and the same work.
Canon
934 §1 If
prayer in general for the intentions of the Holy Father is prescribed for the
gaining of an indulgence, mental prayer alone does not suffice. Unless a
special prayer is assigned, it is left to the choice of the people what vocal
prayers they wish to say.
§2 If a special prayer is assigned, the indulgences can be gained by reciting
the prayer in any language provided the exact translation of the same is
attested by the declaration of either the Sacred Penitentiary or one of the
Ordinaries of a locality where the language into which the prayer is translated
is in common use. The indulgences, however, cease absolutely in case of any
addition, omission or interpolation.
§3 For the gaining of the indulgences it suffices to say the prayers
alternately with a companion, or to follow the prayers mentally while they are
recited by some one else.
Canon
935 The good
works prescribed for the gaining of indulgences may be changed by confessors
to others for the benefit of people who for reason of a legitimate impediment
cannot perform the prescribed works.
Canon
936 Mutes can
gain the indulgences attached to public prayers if, praying in the same place
together with the other people, they raise their hearts and minds to God. In
the case of private prayers, it suffices that they say them mentally, or by the
sign language, or merely read the prayers by sight.
1983 code
Canon 993
An indulgence is partial or plenary according as it partially or wholly frees a
person from the temporal punishment due for sins.
Canon
997 As far as
the granting and the use of indulgences is concerned, the other provisions
contained in the special laws of the Church must also be observed.
If asked, the novus
ordo “Church” can plead that it has jettisoned most of its laws on
indulgences. This will presumably quiet the non-Catholics striving for
ecumenism.
∫1917
Code
Interpretation
Of Penal Laws (Canon 2218-2219)
Canon
2218
1
In the application of penalties the punishment should be in just proportion to
the offense, due regard being had to the degree of liability and to the scandal
or damage caused. Wherefore, attention must be paid not only to the subject
matter and gravity of a law, but also to the age, knowledge, education, sex,
state of life, and mental condition of the delinquent, to the dignity of the
person against whom the offense was committed or who committed it, the purpose
intended, the place and time of the offense, whether it was committed in the
heat of passion or by reason of grave fear, whether the delinquent repented of
his misdeed and tried to prevent its evil effects, and other similar
circumstances.
2
Not only the circumstances which excuse from all liability but also those which
excuse from grave guilt, excuse also from any penalty whether latae or ferendae
sententiae even in the external forum, provided the excuse is proved in
the external forum.
3
Mutual injuries extinguish each other, unless one party deserves condemnation
on account of the greater gravity of the injury done by him. In the latter case
the fact that the injury was mutual may on occasion mitigate the penalty.
Canon
2219 In penalties the
milder interpretation is to be applied. Even when one doubts whether a penalty
inflicted by a competent superior is just, the punishment must nevertheless be
accepted in both the external and internal forum, except in a case of appeal in
suspensivo (i.e., an appeal which suspends the sentence). A penalty is not
to be extended from person to person, nor from one case to another, though
there is the same or even a greater reason for holding a person guilty; if,
however, several persons participated in the commission of a single offense,
the precept of Canon 2231 must be observed.
1983 Code
TITLE V: THE
APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
Canon 1341 The
Ordinary is to start a judicial or an administrative procedure for the
imposition or the declaration of penalties only when he perceives that neither
by fraternal correction or reproof, nor by any methods of pastoral care, can
the scandal be sufficiently repaired, justice restored and the offender
reformed.
Canon 1342 §1
Whenever there are just reasons against the use of a judicial procedure, a
penalty can be imposed or declared by means of an extra-judicial decree; in
every case, penal remedies and penances may be applied by a decree.
§2 Perpetual penalties cannot be imposed or declared by means of a decree; nor
can penalties which the law or precept establishing them forbids to be applied
by decree.
§3 What the law or
decree says of a judge in regard to the imposition or declaration of a penalty
in a trial, is to be applied also to a Superior who imposes or declares a
penalty by an extra-judicial decree, unless it is otherwise clear, or unless
there is question of provisions which concern only procedural matters.
Canon 1343 If a
law or precept gives the judge the power to apply or not to apply a penalty,
the judge may also, according to his own conscience and prudence, modify the
penalty or in its place impose a penance.
Canon 1344 Even
though the law may use obligatory words, the judge may, according to his own
conscience and prudence:
1° defer the
imposition of the penalty to a more opportune time, if it is foreseen that
greater evils may arise from a too hasty punishment of the offender;
2° abstain from
imposing the penalty or substitute a milder penalty or a penance, if the
offender has repented and repaired the scandal, or if the offender has been or
foreseeably will be sufficiently punished by the civil authority;
3° may suspend the
obligation of observing an expiatory penalty, if the person is a first-offender
after a hitherto blameless life, and there is no urgent need to repair scandal;
this is, however, to be done in such a way that if the person again commits an
offence within a time laid down by the judge, then that person must pay the
penalty for both offences, unless in the meanwhile the time for prescription of
a penal action in respect of the former offence has expired.
Canon 1345
Whenever the offender had only an imperfect use of reason, or committed the
offence out of fear or necessity or in the heat of passion or with a mind
disturbed by drunkenness or a similar cause, the judge can refrain from
inflicting any punishment if he considers that the person’s reform may be
better accomplished in some other way.
Canon 1346
Whenever the offender has committed a number of offences and the sum of
penalties which should be imposed seems excessive, it is left to the prudent
decision of the judge to moderate the penalties in an equitable fashion.
Canon 1347 §1 A
censure cannot validly be imposed unless the offender has beforehand received
at least one warning to purge the contempt, and has been allowed suitable time
to do so.
§2 The offender is
said to have purged the contempt if he or she has truly repented of the offence
and has made, or at least seriously promised to make, reparation for the damage
and scandal.
Canon 1348 When
the person has been found not guilty of an accusation, or where no penalty has
been imposed, the Ordinary may provide for the person’s welfare or for the
common good by opportune warnings or other solicitous means, and even, if the
case calls for it, by the use of penal remedies.
Canon 1349 If a
penalty is indeterminate, and if the law does not provide otherwise, the judge
is not to impose graver penalties, especially censures, unless the seriousness
of the case really demands it. He may not impose penalties which are perpetual.
Canon 1350 §1 In
imposing penalties on a cleric, except in the case of dismissal from the
clerical state, care must always be taken that he does not lack what is
necessary for his worthy support.
§2 If a person is
truly in need because he has been dismissed from the clerical state, the
Ordinary is to provide in the best way possible.
Canon 1351 A
penalty binds an offender everywhere, even when the one who established or
imposed it has ceased from office, unless it is otherwise expressly provided.
Canon 1352 §1 If a
penalty prohibits the reception of the sacraments or sacramentals, the
prohibition is suspended for as long as the offender is in danger of death.
§2 The obligation
of observing a latae sententiae penalty which has not been declared, and
is not notorious in the place where the offender actually is, is suspended
either in whole or in part to the extent that the offender cannot observe it
without the danger of grave scandal or loss of good name.
Canon 1353 An
appeal or a recourse against judgments of a court or against decrees which
impose or declare any penalty, has a suspensive effect.
Thirteen laws,
that read like a handbook for judges, replace two. They also provide excuse for
failure to punish perverts whose cloth protects them.
I intended to
continue comparison of the 1917 Code of Canon Law with its illegitimate 1983 substitute.
The laws on marriage were next. But there are too many; we would drift quickly
into the land of dreams, where who knows how many legislators we might
encounter.
I cite the first
half of one canon of the 131 in the Code:
Canon 1013 §1. The
primary end of marriage is the procreation and education of children; the
secondary end, mutual support and the relief of concupiscence.
No trace remains
of this basic, highly pertinent and relevant half-canon in the entire 110
“laws” of the 1983 document, though we know the codifiers were aware of it
because they included in their substitute the second half of the original law.
They bowed to a major innovation of the Second Vatican Council:
Vatican II (Church
in the Modern World, 50): Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature
ordained toward the begetting and educating of children .... Hence, while not
making the other purposes of matrimony of less account, the true practice of
conjugal love, etc. (Footnote: The Commission charged with drafting this text
made every effort to avoid any appearance of wishing to settle questions
concerning a hierarchy of the “ends” of marriage.)
So they pretended
that no such hierarchy had been established—or reinforced by Canon Law (Canon
1013).
Decree of the Holy
Office, April 1, 1944, approved by Pope Pius XII, March 30, 1944: Can we
entertain the opinion of some modern authorities who deny that the primary end
of marriage is procreation and education, or teach that the secondary ends are
not necessarily subordinate to the primary one but are equally important and
independent? The members of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office have
decided to reply in the negative.
St. Thomas Aquinas
(Summa Theologiae, Supp III, q. 41, 1): .... for its principal end,
which is the good of the offspring .... for the secondary end of marriage,
which is devoted mutual compliance by the spouses in domestic matters.
This one omission
clearly demonstrates the 1983 code’s bias. For good measure I cite obvious 1983
innovations [Every canon law quoted from this point on is in only the 1983
Code.]:
Canon 1062 §1. A
promise of marriage, be it unilateral or bilateral, called an engagement, is
regulated by particular law which has been established by the conference of
bishops after it has taken into consideration any existing customs and
civil laws.
Canon
1067 The conference of
bishops is to offer norms concerning the examination of the parties, and
the marriage banns and other appropriate means for carrying out the necessary
inquiries which are to precede marriage. The pastor can proceed to assist at a
marriage after such norms have been diligently observed.
Canon 1083 §1. A
man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age, and likewise a woman
before she has completed her fourteenth year of age, cannot enter a valid
marriage.
§2. It is within
the power of the conference of bishops to establish an older age for the
licit celebration of marriage.
Canon 1112 §1.
With the prior favorable opinion of the conference of bishops and after
permission of the Holy See has been obtained, the diocesan bishop can
delegate lay persons to assist at marriages where priests or deacons are
lacking.
§2. A suitable lay
person is to be chosen who is capable of giving instruction to those to be wed
and qualified to perform the marriage liturgy correctly.
Canon
1120 The conference of
bishops can draw up its own marriage ritual, to be reviewed by the Holy
See; such a ritual, in harmony with the usages of the area and its people
adapted to the Christian spirit, must provide that the person assisting at the
marriage be present, ask for the manifestation of the contractants’ consent and
receive it.
Canon 1121 §1.
After a marriage has been celebrated, the pastor of the place of celebration or
the person who takes his place, even if neither has assisted at the marriage,
should as soon as possible note the following in the marriage register: the
names of the spouses, the person who assisted and the witnesses, the place and
date of the marriage celebration; these notations are to be made in accord with
the method prescribed by the conference of bishops or the diocesan
bishop.
Canon
1126 The conference of
bishops is to establish the way in which these declarations and promises,
which are always required, are to be made, what proof of them there should be
in the external forum, and how they are to be brought to the attention of the
non-Catholic party.
Canon 1127 §1. The
prescriptions of canon 1108 are to be observed concerning the form to be
employed in a mixed marriage; if a Catholic party contracts marriage with a
non-Catholic of an oriental rite, the canonical form of celebration is to be
observed only for liceity; for validity, however, the presence of a sacred
minister is required along with the observance of the other requirements of
law.
§2. If serious difficulties pose an obstacle to the
observance of the canonical form, the local ordinary of the Catholic party has
the right to dispense from the form in individual cases, but after consulting
the ordinary of the place where the marriage is to be celebrated and with due
regard, for validity, for some public form of celebration; the conference of
bishops is to issue norms by which such a dispensation may be granted in an
orderly manner.
Symbiosis in
action! Two rank innovations support each other. Obviously both need all
support available.
The relation of
the married(?) to the bishops’ conference has not been determined, nor has the
relevance of the bishops’ conference itself. It is based on Vatican II, which
hoped to find some use for it, aside from the obvious intent to share
responsibility for the disaster. We might blame the pope!
What is an
Episcopal Conference? Whom does it represent? What is its authority or purpose?
No definition. Paul VI himself said that eventually in practice it would become
clear how to define it and demarcate its powers. Ignorant of their objective,
our bishops went straight into conferences. The greater the importance and power
these Conferences assume, the more the individual bishops are eliminated. The
episcopacy, the real structure of the Church of Our Lord, disappears into
committee.
Let us quote
Wojtyla’s Introduction to the 1983 Code:
“If one asks
why John XXIII had clearly perceived the need to reform the current Code,
perhaps the answer is found in the 1917 Code itself. [A pregnant—but
unextended—statement!] There is however another reason, the principal one,
namely that the reform of the Code of Canon Law was seen to be directly sought
and requested by the Council itself [not yet convoked], which had
particularly concentrated its attention upon the Church.
“As is quite
clear, when the first announcement of the revision of the Code was made, the
Council was something totally in the future. Moreover, the acts of its teaching
authority, and particularly its teaching on the Church, were to be developed
over the years 1962-65. Nevertheless, one cannot fail to see that John XXIII’s
insight was most accurate, and his proposal must rightly be acknowledged as one
which looked well ahead to the good of the Church.” …. [Additional proof of his
invalidating intent to impose essential change on the eternal Church.]
“If we now turn
our attention to the nature of the labours which preceded the promulgation of
the Code and to the manner in which they were performed, especially during the
Pontificates of Paul VI, John Paul I and then up to this present day it is
vital to make quite clear that these labours were brought to their conclusion
in an eminently collegial spirit. This not only relates to the external
composition of the work, but it affects also the very substance of the laws
which have been drawn up.
“This mark of
collegiality by which the process of this Code’s origin was prominently
characterized, is entirely in harmony with the teaching authority and the
nature of the Second Vatican Council. The Code therefore, not only because of
its content but because of its origin, demonstrates the spirit of this Council
in whose documents the Church, the universal sacrament of salvation (cf Const. Lumen
Gentium, n. 9, 48), is presented as the People of God, and its hierarchical
Constitution is shown as founded on the College of Bishops [a blatant
innovaton!] together with its Head.
“For this reason
therefore, the Bishops and Episcopal Conferences were invited to
associate themselves with the work of preparing the new Code, so that through a
task of such length, in as collegial a manner as possible, little by little the
juridical formulae would come to maturity and would then serve the whole
Church. ….
“In promulgating
this Code today, therefore, we are fully conscious that this act stems from our
pontifical authority itself, and so assumes a primatial nature. Yet we are no
less aware that in its content this Code reflects the collegial solicitude of
all our brothers in the episcopate.” [Big Shirk!]
Vatican II’s
Decree on the Bishops’ Pastoral Office in the Church, 38, 4):
“Decisions of the episcopal
conference, provided they have been made lawfully and by choice of at least
two-thirds of the prelates who have a deliberative vote in the conference, and
have been reviewed by the Apostolic See, are to have juridically binding
force in those cases and in those only which are prescribed by common law or
determined by special mandate of the Apostolic See, given spontaneously or
in response to a petition from the conference itself.”
Among the
eighty-eight canons of the 1983 Code in which Bishops’ Conferences receive
mention, several reiterate and reëmphasize the fact that these conferences must
submit all majority decisions to Roman (papal) approval.
Canon 237 §2 An
inter-diocesan seminary may not be established unless the prior approval of
the Apostolic See has been obtained, both for the establishment of the
seminary and for its statutes. Approval is also required from the Episcopal
Conference if the seminary is for the whole of its territory; otherwise,
from the Bishops concerned.
Canon 242 §1 In
each country there is to be a Charter of Priestly Formation. It is to be drawn
up by the Episcopal Conference, taking account of the norms issued by
the supreme ecclesiastical authority, and it is to be approved by the Holy See;
moreover, it is to be adapted to new circumstances, likewise with the approval
of the Holy See. ….
Canon 439 §1 A
plenary council for all the particular Churches of the same Episcopal
Conference is to be celebrated as often as the Episcopal Conference, with
the approval of the Apostolic See, considers it necessary or advantageous.
Canon 441 It is
the responsibility of the Episcopal Conference:
1° to convene a plenary council;
2° to choose a
place within the territory of the Episcopal Conference for the
celebration of the council;
3° to elect from
among the diocesan Bishops a president of the plenary council, who is to be approved
by the Apostolic See;
4° to determine
the order of business and the matters to be considered, to announce when the
plenary council is to begin and how long it is to last, and to transfer,
prorogue and dissolve it.
Canon 448 §1 As a
general rule, the Episcopal Conference includes those who preside over
all the particular Churches of the same country, in accordance with Canon 450.
§2 An Episcopal
Conference can, however, be established for a territory of greater or less
extent if the Apostolic See, after consultation with the diocesan Bishops
concerned, judges that circumstances suggest this. Such a Conference would
include only the Bishops of some particular Churches in a certain territory, or
those who preside over particular Churches in different countries. It is for
the Apostolic See to lay down special norms for each case.
Canon 449 §1 It
is for the supreme authority of the Church alone, after consultation with
the Bishops concerned, to establish, suppress, or alter Episcopal
Conferences.
Canon 451 Each Episcopal
Conference is to draw up its own statutes, to be reviewed by the
Apostolic See. In these, among other things, arrangements for the plenary
meetings of the Conference are to be set out, and provision is to be made for a
permanent committee of Bishops, and a general secretary of the Conference, and
for other offices and commissions by which, in the judgment of the Conference,
its purpose [?] can more effectively be achieved.
Canon 455 §1 The
Episcopal Conference can make general decrees only in cases where the universal
law has so prescribed, or by special mandate of the Apostolic See,
either on its own initiative or at the request of the Conference itself.
§2 For the decrees
mentioned in §1 validly to be enacted at a plenary meeting, they must receive
two thirds of the votes of those who belong to the Conference with a
deliberative vote. These decrees do not oblige until they have been reviewed
by the Apostolic See and lawfully promulgated.
Canon 456 When a
plenary meeting of the Episcopal Conference has been concluded, its minutes are
to be sent by the president to the Apostolic See for information, and its
decrees, if any, for review.
Canon 459 §1
Relations are to be fostered between Episcopal Conferences, especially
neighboring ones, in order to promote and defend whatever is for the greater
good.
§2 The Apostolic See must be consulted whenever actions or affairs
undertaken by Conferences have an international character.
Canon
753 Although
they do not enjoy infallible teaching authority, the bishops in communion with
the head and members of the college, whether as individuals or gathered in conferences
of bishops or in particular councils, are authentic teachers and
instructors of the faith for the faithful entrusted to their care; the faithful
must adhere to the authentic teaching of their own bishops with a sense of
religious respect.
Canon 755 §1. It is within the special competence of the entire college of bishops and of the Apostolic See to promote and direct the participation of Catholics in the ecumenical
movement, whose purpose is the restoration of unity among all Christians, which
the Church is bound by the will of Christ to promote.
Canon 756 §1 The
office of preaching the Gospel to the whole Church has been committed
principally to the Roman Pontiff and [by whom?] to the [new]
College of Bishops.
Canon 825 §1 Books
of the sacred Scriptures may not be published unless they are approved by the Apostolic
See or the Episcopal Conference. The publication of translations of the
sacred Scriptures requires the approval of the same authority, and they must
have necessary and sufficient explanatory notes.
§2 With the
permission of the Episcopal Conference, Catholic members of Christ’s
faithful, in cooperation with separated brethren, may prepare and
publish versions of the Scriptures, with appropriate explanatory notes.
Canon
838 §1. The
supervision of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church
which resides in the Apostolic See and, in accord with the law, the diocesan
bishop. [Clearly, new worship and sacraments came not from the bishops’
conferences!]
§2. It is for the Apostolic See to order the sacred liturgy of the universal
Church, to publish the liturgical books, to review their translations into the
vernacular languages and to see that liturgical ordinances are faithfully
observed everywhere.
§3. It pertains to
the conferences of bishops [returned!] to prepare translations of
the liturgical books into the vernacular languages, with the appropriate
adaptations within the limits defined in the liturgical books themselves, and
to publish them with the prior review by the Holy See.
Canon 844 §1
Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments only to Catholic
members of Christ’s faithful, who equally may lawfully receive them only from
Catholic ministers, except as provided in §§2, 3 and 4 of this Canon and in
Canon 861 §2.
§2 Whenever
necessity requires or a genuine spiritual advantage commends it, and provided
the danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, Christ’s faithful for whom it
is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister, may
lawfully receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and anointing of the
sick from non-Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.
§3 Catholic
ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and
anointing of the sick to members of the eastern Churches not in full
communion with the Catholic Church, if they spontaneously ask for them and
are properly disposed. The same applies to members of other Churches which the
Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the aforesaid eastern
Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned.
§4
If there is a danger of death or if, in the judgment of the
diocesan Bishop or of the Episcopal Conference, there is some other
grave and pressing need, Catholic ministers may lawfully administer these same
sacraments to other Christians not in full communion with the Catholic
Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who
spontaneously ask for them, provided that they demonstrate the Catholic faith
in respect of these sacraments and are properly disposed.
§5 In respect of the cases dealt with in §§2, 3 and 4, the
diocesan Bishop or the Episcopal Conference is not to issue general
norms except after consultation with the competent authority, at least at
the local level, of the non-Catholic Church or community concerned. [Canon
844 certainly yells for comment¾from the brothers Grimm! Its concocters appear
to recognize the superiority of traditional sacraments to the empty forms of
the postconciliar “Church.”]
Canon 1031 §1. The
presbyterate is not to be conferred upon those who have not yet completed the
age of twenty-five and who do not possess sufficient maturity; an interval of
at least six months is to be observed between the diaconate and the
presbyterate; men destined for the presbyterate are to be admitted to the order
of diaconate only after they have completed the age of twenty-three.
§2. A candidate for the permanent diaconate who is not married is not to be
admitted to the diaconate unless he has completed at least twenty-five years of
age; if the candidate is married, he is not to be admitted to the permanent
diaconate unless he has completed at least thirty-five years of age and has the
consent of his wife.
§3. The conference of bishops may determine a norm by which an older age
is required for the presbyterate and the permanent diaconate.
§4. The Apostolic See reserves to itself the dispensation from the age
required in §§1 & 2 when it is a question of more than one year.
Canon 1246 …. §2
However, the Episcopal Conference may, with the prior approval of the
Apostolic See, suppress certain holydays of obligation or transfer them to
a Sunday.
Canon 1272 In
those regions where benefices properly so called still exist, it is for the
Episcopal Conference to regulate such benefices by appropriate norms, agreed
with and approved by the Apostolic See. The purpose of these norms is that
the income and as far as possible the capital itself of the benefice should by
degrees be transferred to the fund mentioned in Canon 1274 §1.
Canon 1439 §1 If a
single tribunal of first instance has been constituted for several dioceses, in
accordance with the norm of Canon 1423, the Episcopal Conference must, with
the approval of the Holy See, constitute a tribunal of second instance,
unless the dioceses are all suffragans of the same archdiocese.
§2 Even apart from
the cases mentioned in §1, the Episcopal Conference can, with the approval
of the Apostolic See, constitute one or more tribunals of second instance.
[Now we’re talkin’. We need more tribunals¾to try suits and petitions
from the laity for recovery of church property before it must be sold to
satisfy judgments against monsters like convicted Jesuit priest Donald McGuire.
The new “Church” might even, let us fondly imagine, use them to try
some of these monsters, since they are never turned over to civil authority.]
The remaining
fifty-seven 1983 canons which empower the Bishops’ Conferences furnish useless
tasks for useless men, and constitute an extra administrative level never
needed in nineteen centuries. They are needed only to distract attention from,
and absorb the blame for, the antics of the antipopes.
Novus Ordo Blurbs (NOBS)
573 §1 Life
consecrated through profession of the evangelical counsels is a stable form of
living, in which the faithful follow Christ more closely under the action of
the Holy Spirit, and are totally dedicated to God, who is supremely loved. By a
new and special title they are dedicated to seek the perfection of charity in
the service of God’s Kingdom, for the honor of God, the building up of the
Church and the salvation of the world. They are a splendid sign in the Church,
as they foretell the heavenly
glory.
§2 Christ’s faithful freely assume this manner of life in institutes of
consecrated life which are canonically estab-lished by the competent
ecclesiastical authority. By vows or by other sacred bonds, in accordance with
the laws of their own institutes, they profess the evangelical counsels of
chas-tity, poverty and obedience. Because of the charity to which these
counsels lead, they are linked in a special way to the Church and its mystery.
574 §1 The state
of persons who profess the evangelical counsels in these institutes belongs to
the life and holiness of the Church. It is therefore to be fostered and
promoted by everyone in the
Church.
§2 Some of Christ’s faithful are specially called by God to this state, so that
they may benefit from a special gift in the life of the Church and contribute
to its saving mission according to the purpose and spirit of each institute.
575 The
evangelical counsels, based on the teaching and example of Christ the Master,
are a divine gift which the Church received from the Lord and which by His
grace it preserves always.
577 In the Church
there are many institutes of consecrated life, with gifts that differ according
to the graces given them: they more closely follow Christ praying, or Christ
proclaim-ing the Kingdom of God, or Christ doing good to people, or Christ in
dialogue with the people of this world, but always Christ doing the will of the
Father.
599 The
evangelical counsel of chastity embraced for the sake of the Kingdom of heaven,
is a sign of the world to come, and a source of greater fruitfulness in an
undivided heart. It involves the obligation of perfect continence observed in
celibacy.
600 The
evangelical counsel of poverty in imitation of Christ who for our sake was made
poor when he was rich, entails a life which is poor in reality and in spirit,
sober and industrious, and a stranger to earthly riches. It also involves
dependence and limitation in the use and the disposition of goods, in
accordance with each institute’s own law.
601 The
evangelical counsel of obedience, undertaken in the spirit of faith and love in
the following of Christ, who was obedient even unto death, obliges submission
of one’s will to lawful Superiors, who act in the place of God when they give
commands that are in accordance with each institute’s own constitutions.
602 The fraternal
life proper to each institute unites all the members into, as it were, a special
family in Christ. It is to be so defined that for all it proves of mutual
assistance to fulfill their vocation. The fraternal union of the members,
rooted and based in charity, is to be an example of universal reconciliation in
Christ.
603 §1 Besides
institutes of consecrated life, the Church recognizes the life of hermits or
anchorites, in which Christ’s faithful withdraw further from the world and
devote their lives to the praise of God and the salvation of the world through
the silence of solitude and through constant prayer and penance.
§2 Hermits are recognized by law as dedicated to God in consecrated life if, in
the hands of the diocesan Bishop, they publicly profess, by a vow or some other
sacred bond, the three evangelical counsels, and then lead their particular
form of life under the guidance of the diocesan Bishop .
604 §1 The order
of virgins is also to be added to these forms of consecrated life. Through
their pledge to follow Christ more closely, virgins are consecrated to God,
mystically espoused to Christ and dedicated to the service of the Church, when
the diocesan Bishop consecrates them according to the approved liturgical
rite.
§2 Virgins can be associated together to fulfill their pledge more faithfully,
and to assist each other to serve the Church in a way that befits their state.
607 §1 Religious life, as a consecration of the whole person, manifests
in the Church the marvelous marriage established by God as a sign of the world
to come. Religious thus consummate a full gift of themselves as a sacrifice
offered to God, so that their whole existence becomes a continuous worship of
God in charity. …
§3 The public witness which religious are to give to Christ and the Church
involves that separation from the world which is proper to the character and
purpose of each institute.
618 The authority
which Superiors receive from God through the ministry of the Church is to be
exercised by them in a spirit of service. In fulfilling their office they are
to be docile to the will of God, and are to govern those subject to them as
children of God. By their reverence for the human person, they are to promote
voluntary obedience. They are to listen willingly to their subjects and foster
their cooperation for the good of the institute and the Church, without
prejudice however to their authority to decide and to command what is to be
done.
619 Superiors are
to devote themselves to their office with diligence. Together with the members
entrusted to them, they are to strive to build in Christ a fraternal community,
in which God is sought and loved above all. They are therefore frequently to
nourish their members with the food of God’s word and lead them to the
celebration of the liturgy. They are to be an example to the members in
cultivating virtue and in observing the laws and traditions proper to the
institute. They are to give the members opportune assistance in their personal
needs. They are to be solicitous in caring for and visiting the sick; they are
to chide the restless, console the fainthearted and be patient with all.
673 The apostolate
of all religious consists primarily in the witness of their consecrated life,
which they are bound to foster through prayer and penance.
674 Institutes
which are wholly directed to contemplation always have an outstanding part in
the mystical Body of Christ. They offer to God an exceptional sacrifice of
praise. They embellish the people of God with very rich fruits of holiness,
move them by their example, and give them increase by a hidden apostolic fruitfulness.
675 Apostolic
action is of the very nature of institutes dedicated to apostolic works. The
whole life of the members is, therefore, to be imbued with an apostolic spirit,
and the whole of their apostolic action is to be animated by a religious
spirit. …
§2 Apostolic action is always to proceed from intimate union with God, and is
to confirm and foster this union.
676 Lay institutes
of men and women participate in the pastoral mission of the Church through the
spiritual and corporal works of mercy, performing very many different services
for people. They are therefore to remain faithful to the grace of their
vocation.
677 §1 Superiors and members are faithfully to hold fast to the
mission and works which are proper to their institute. According to the needs
of time and place, however, they are prudently to adapt them, making use of new
and appropriate means.
§2 Institutes which have associations of Christ’s faithful joined to them are
to have a special care that these associations are imbued with the genuine
spirit of their family.
724 Members are to
be formed simultaneously in matters human and divine. The Moderators of the
institute are to have a serious concern for the continued spiritual formation
of the members.
725 The institute
can associate with itself, by some form of bond determined in the
constitutions, other members of Christ’s faithful who seek evangelical
perfection according to the spirit of the institute and who share in its
mission.
Whence all this
piosity? From the 1983 Code of Canon Law! All those numbers are canons,
none of which display any form of law. They impose no obligation. They neither
sanction nor forbid anything. Nor do they define terms. They write fantasy into
“law.” As in the following canon, we see divine vocation to the new “Church” enshrined.
Canon 722 §1 The
initial probation is to be (future) so arranged that the candidates can better
recognize their divine vocation and their vocation to that (novus
ordo) institute, and be trained in the spirit and manner of life of the
institute.
§2 Candidates are to be (future) properly formed to live a life according to
the evangelical counsels. They are to be (future) taught how to translate this
life completely into their apostolate, applying those forms of evangelization
which best correspond to the purpose, spirit and character of the (novus
ordo) institute.
Typical of the
1983 code, all this persuasive irrelevancy cannot be found in the 1917 Code,
which concerns laws—and necessary clarifying definitions.
Sometimes the 1917
Code and the 1983 farce almost agree:
1917 Canon 496 No
religious house shall be established unless it can be prudently judged that the
community will be able to support itself properly, either by a fixed income, or
the usual alms, or by other means.
1983 Canon 610 §2 No house is to be established unless it is prudently
foreseen that the needs of the members can be suitably provided for.
But the 1983 code lacks
all suggestion of the 1917 enabling Canon 492, §1 “The bishop, but not the
vicar-capitular, or administrator, or vicar-general, can create religious congregations.
He shall not establish them, nor allow their foundation, without first
consulting the Holy See. In the case of Tertiaries living in community, it is
required … that the supreme head of the First Order (e.g., Franciscans)
aggregate them to that Order.” However, it fills a notorious gap in the older
Code, which never once regulated hermits. And we cannot really fault the new
“Church” for not providing for monasteries and convents, which it emptied from
its outset.
1917 Code Of Penance (Canon 870)
Canon
870
In the Sacrament of Penance, by judicial absolution given by a legitimate
minister, forgiveness of sins committed after Baptism is bestowed on the
faithful who are properly disposed.
Chapter I.
Of The Minister Of Penance (Canon 871-892)
Canon
871
Priests alone are the ministers of this Sacrament.
Canon
872
For the valid absolution of sins, the minister requires, besides the power of
Orders, either ordinary or delegated power of jurisdiction over the penitent.
Persons Who
Possess Ordinary Jurisdiction (Canon 873)
Canon 873
§1 Besides the
Roman Pontiff, the Cardinals of the Roman Church possess ordinary jurisdiction
for the hearing of confessions for the whole Church. The local Ordinaries have
ordinary jurisdiction in their respective territories, and pastors and other
priests holding the place of pastors have ordinary jurisdiction in their
respective
domains.
§ 2 The canon penitentiary of cathedral and collegiate churches has ordinary
jurisdiction for the hearing of confessions in the diocese, and has power to
absolve also from the episcopal reserved sins and censures, as conceded by
Canon 401. The superiors of exempt religious organizations have ordinary
jurisdiction over their subjects, according to their respective
constitutions.
§ 3 The ordinary jurisdiction for the administration of the Sacrament of
Penance ceases with the loss of the office to which that jurisdiction is
attached (cfr. Canon 183, on the loss of office), and after a declaratory or
condemnatory sentence inflicting excommunication, suspension from office, or
interdict has been passed by a competent ecclesiastical court.
Delegated
Jurisdiction For The Hearing Of Confessions (Canon 874-875)
Canon
874
§ 1 The Ordinary of the place where confessions are to be heard grants delegated
jurisdiction to secular priests as well as to religious (even of an exempt
organization) to hear the confessions of all seculars and religious. The
religious priests, however, should not make use of the jurisdiction without at
least the presumed permission of their superiors. If, however, they do hear the
confessions of religious without the permission of their superior, and the
religious come to confession for the peace of their conscience, the absolution
is nevertheless valid, as stated in Canon 519.
§ 2
The local Ordinary shall not grant habitual faculties for the hearing of
confessions to religious priests who have not been presented by their own
superior. Moreover, the Ordinary should not without a grave reason refuse
jurisdiction to those priests whom the religious superior presents, although he
has the right, according to Canon 877, to test their fitness.
1983 Code
Sacrament of Penance
Canon
959 In the sacrament of
penance the faithful, confessing their sins to a legitimate minister, being
sorry for them, and at the same time proposing to reform, obtain from God
forgiveness of sins committed after baptism through the absolution imparted by
the same minister; and they likewise are reconciled with the Church which they
have wounded by sinning.
[This is a law? Or are we being
snowed by a new concept of lost status in the Church which it may be necessary
to recover before we can receive the sacraments? By sin we offend God, not the
Church. God has provided the sacrament through which we obtain His
forgiveness.]
Canons
960-964
Celebration [Another new concept!]
Canon
960 Individual and
integral confession and absolution constitute the only ordinary way by which
the faithful person who is aware of serious sin is reconciled with God and with
the Church; only physical or moral impossibility excuses the person from
confession of this type, in which case reconciliation can take place in other
ways.
Canon
961 §1. Absolution cannot
be imparted in a general manner to a number of penitents at once without
previous individual confession unless:
1˚ the danger of death is imminent and there is not time for the priest or
priests to hear the confessions of the individual penitents;
2˚ a serious necessity exists, that is, when in light of the number of
penitents a supply of confessors is not readily available rightly to hear the
confessions of individuals within a suitable time so that the penitents are
forced to be deprived of sacramental grace or holy communion for a long time
through no fault of their own; it is not considered a sufficient necessity if
confessors cannot be readily available only because of the great number of
penitents as can occur on the occasion of some great feast or pilgrimage.
§2. It is for the diocesan bishop to judge whether the conditions required in
§1, n. 2 are present; he can determine general cases of such necessity in the
light of criteria agreed upon with other members of the conference of bishops.
Canon
962 §1. For a member of
the Christian faithful validly to enjoy sacramental absolution given to many at
one time, it is required that this person not only be suitably disposed but
also at the same time intend to confess individually the serious sins which at
present cannot be so confessed.
§2. As much as can be done, the Christian faithful are to be instructed
concerning the requirements specified in §1, also on the occasion of receiving
general absolution; an exhortation that each person take care to make an act of
contrition is to precede general absolution, even in danger of death if time is
available.
Canon
963 With due regard for
the obligation mentioned in canon 989, a person who has had serious sins
remitted by a general absolution is to approach individual confession as soon
as there is an opportunity to do so before receiving another general absolution
unless a just cause intervenes.
Canon
964 §1. The proper place
to hear sacramental confessions is a church or an oratory.
§2. The conference of bishops is to issue norms concerning the confessional,
seeing to it that confessionals with a fixed grill between penitent and
confessor are always located in an open area so that the faithful who wish to
make use of them may do so freely.
§3. Confessions are not to be heard outside the confessional without a just
cause.
[Sin and
sorrow are sufficient cause. Five prolix comments to which “law” cannot be
applied, to introduce regular use of emergency measures. We find the sparse
provisions for location at the tail end of the 1917 laws:
Canon 908.
The proper place for sacramental confession is a church or a public or
semi-public oratory.
Canon 909.
The confessional for hearing the confessions of women shall always be placed in
an open and conspicuous place, and as a rule in a church or a public or
semi-public oratory appointed for women. The confessional must be so
constructed that between the penitent and the confessor there is an irremovable
grating with small holes.
Canon 910.
The confessions of women shall not be heard outside the confessional, except in
case of illness or other real necessity, and under the precautions prescribed
by the local Ordinary. The confessions of men may be heard even in private
houses.]
1917 Canon
875
§ 1 In exempt clerical organizations of religious the proper superior also
(that is, besides the bishop) can give delegated jurisdiction to hear the
confessions of the professed, the novices and those who board in the religious
house, as specified in Canon 514. The Constitutions of the respective
organization must determine who has the power to delegate. The same
jurisdiction may be given by the superior also to secular priests and to
priests of another religious organization.
§ 2 In laical exempt organizations the superior proposes the confessor, who, however,
must obtain jurisdiction from the Ordinary of the diocese where the religious
house is located.
Jurisdiction
For Confessions Of Religious Women (Canon 876)
Canon
876
§ 1 Both secular and religious priests, of whatever rank or office, need
special jurisdiction for the valid and licit hearing of the confessions of any
religious women and their novices, and every contrary particular law or
privilege is revoked. The only exceptions to this law are: (1) the faculties of
all Cardinals to hear confessions of religious women in any diocese, as stated
in Canon 239, § 1, n. 1; (2) the liberty granted to all religious women to
confess to any approved confessor of the diocese in any church, or public or
semi-public oratory, as stated in Canon 522; (3) the privilege of religious
women when seriously ill, though not in danger of death, to call for any
approved confessor of the diocese and to confess to him as often as they desire
during the illness, as stated in Canon
523.
§ 2 This special jurisdiction is, in accordance with Canon 525, conferred by
the Ordinary of the diocese where the convent of the religious women is
located.
Examination
Of Priests Before Approval As Confessors (Canon 877)
Canon
877
§ 1 The local Ordinary as well as the religious superiors shall grant
jurisdiction or permission to hear confessions only to priests who have been
found qualified by examination, unless the theological knowledge of the priest
is well known from other sources.
§ 2 If, after the concession of jurisdiction or permission to hear confessions,
the bishop or the religious superior has a justified doubt as to whether a
priest who has been approved by him is still qualified, he should oblige him to
undergo a new examination concerning his knowledge, even though he is a pastor
or a canon penitentiary.
Limitation
Of Delegated Jurisdiction For Confession (Canon 878)
Canon
878
Delegated jurisdiction or permission to hear confessions may be conceded with
certain defined limitations. The local Ordinary and the religious superior,
however, must beware of limiting the jurisdiction or permission excessively
without reasonable cause.
1983 Canons
965-986
Minister
Canon
965
Only a priest is the minister of the sacrament of penance.
Canon
966
§1. For the valid absolution of sins it is required that, besides the power
received through sacred ordination, the minister possess the faculty to
exercise that power over the faithful to whom he imparts absolution.
§2. A priest can be given this faculty either by the law itself or by a
concession granted by competent authority in accord with the norm of canon 969.
Canon
967
§1. Besides the Roman Pontiff, cardinals by the law itself possess the faculty
to hear the confessions of the Christian faithful anywhere in the world;
likewise, bishops possess this faculty and licitly use it anywhere unless the
diocesan bishop denies it in a particular case.
§2. Those who enjoy the faculty of hearing confessions habitually whether
virtue of office or by grant from the ordinary of the place of incardination or
the place in which they have a domicile can exercise the same faculty
everywhere unless the local ordinary denies it in a particular case, with due
regard for the prescriptions of canon 974, §2 & §3.
§3. Those who have been granted the faculty to hear confessions in virtue of an
office or by a grant from the competent superior in accord with the norms of
canons 968, §2 & 969, §2 can by the law itself use the faculty anywhere in
respect to members and others who stay day and night in a house of the
institute or society; such persons also exercise this faculty licitly unless
some major superior has denied it concerning his own subjects in a particular
case.
