Gratian, the “Father of Canon Law”. Public Domain.
Hey everybody:
At The Pillar Podcast, some of you have asked us to launch a recurring feature in which we do a five-minute deep dive into some canonical topic. As you might know, Ed and I are canon lawyers. And journalists.
We’re game.
But we’re not sure what you’d like to know about. People always ask us who the bishop of the moon is. People always ask us about communion in the hand. People always ask us for the basics of annulments. Sure, we can talk about those topics. We’ll put them in the rotation, but we’d like some fresh questions.
So we’d like to hear from you about, well, about what you want to hear.
If we were to spend time on The Pillar Podcast deep-diving into weird, trivial, or interesting canonical questions- what would they be?
If a couple gets "married" in the Church but only one of is Catholic and the other has not yet received the baptism?, what does the Church says about being intimate? Asking for a friend....
Some day I'd love y'all to give us your unvarnished opinions on the requirement of canonical form for the validity of marriage and whether deacons are required to practice continence. ;)
But mostly, I'd like to hear from you experts: what canons do you think are most often overlooked or unenforced that you think the Church would most benefit from if they were actually implemented?
Thanks! It also addressed my bination, trination, and “quadrination” question. Their answer about deacons and continence is just a bit evasive, but that seems to be reflective of the Church’s way of dealing with it. The debate goes on
Mass stipends and Mass intentions. Not that it's particularly interesting, but the few priests I've asked about it didn't really know much about how that all works.
Also, not canon law but a 5 (or more) minute primer on Vatican Finance (How is Vatican finance supposed to work? What is the IOR/APSA? What is Peter's Pence? What public records/audits are there already? How much money does the Vatican have? How does the Secretariat of State fit in with the rest of the Vatican? I like the reporting but I feel like I only have half the background knowledge I need to really grasp what I'm reading.
Canon 927 says that it is absolutely forbidden, even in extreme urgent necessity, to consecrate one matter without the other or even both outside the eucharistic celebration. So is it forbidden but possible, or forbidden and impossible, to consecrate the Eucharist outside of Mass? What does that mean for priests who are incarcerated unjustly, and are smuggled in bread and wine to use for Mass, but cannot celebrate the whole of Mass due to the circumstances?
If a genetically engineered sapient animal were to be created, could it be baptized? If a human were genetically engineered, how much of their DNA could be changed before they couldn't be baptized? If a human and a non-human could hybridize, could the offspring be baptized?
A bit of a historical canon law question: How did canon law governing papal elections function throughout the first millennium, and what then-operative canons were available to help people properly identify true successors of Peter vis-a-vis antipopes?
Also, in general, would love to hear, with respect to various specific canons of ecclesiastical law, how those canons came to be and what the rationale was/is for them.
By law the family takes the rite of the father, but I believe that special permissions exist for the preservation of the Eastern traditions that allow a family to go East if the mother is Eastern.
This would not be the case if the father is Byzantine, but the mother is Roman — in this case, the rule is to follow the father's particular church because both conditions support this: special permissions to the East and the rite of the father.
How does canon law differ from civil law in terms of its sources and its interpretation?
Also, it would be helpful to clearly understand licaity and validity, and practically what the category of licaity means. Are there moral consequences to doing something illicit? What about in the face of “pastoral necessities?” For example, I have been told by a canon lawyer that unless there is a prescribed penalty for transgressing a canon, it’s not immoral. I recognize that this may be broad. Perhaps you could talk specifically about a priest’s relationship with liturgical law or to the issue of the amount of Masses priests are allowed to celebrate in a given day. To this latter point, it’s distressing to me that the widespread practice in many places of one priest celebrating 4 or 5 Masses on a given day is actually illicit.
Even if there is not an invalidating clause or a penalty attached to a violation of a particular law, it seems to me that the observance of even ecclesiastical laws is morally binding for Catholics. In what other way can those laws be binding? I am open to contrary opinions, but I don't see another way in which canon law can be binding in the absence of explicit penalties/invalidating clauses.
On more than one occasion, I’ve heard canon 1752 (salus animarum lex suprema) used as a hermeneutic for all those pesky canons that get in the way of “pastoral decisions” that must be made... Hence, are you, properly speaking, breaking canon law by enacting the “spirit” of it?
It’s a really good question - I have also heard c. 1752 used to justify the disregard of other laws in the name of the salvation of souls.
But to me, the arbitrary violation of laws at subjective whims based on human judgments regarding an individual’s eternal salvation does not seem to be the true spirit of the law. Treating law that way reduces it to mere guidelines which are optional at the discretion of practically anyone. If that is the case, why bother observing any ecclesiastical laws whatsoever? Heck, why bother legislating?
Notably, we actually do have a mechanism within the law itself regarding when other laws can licitly be relaxed in particular cases, but this mechanism itself is governed and limited by other laws (cc. 85-93) so as to remain reasonable within the legal system as a whole.
Ultimately, my opinion is that the salvation of souls is best achieved by the charitable observance of the laws established by the Church. I would really love to hear what JD and Ed have to say about this topic though!
Is the difference between Saint and Blessed universal allowance of memorials vs. local allowance? Because I definitely don't understand the difference between Saint and Blessed.
You hear about some older saints who left behind families (like children after a spouse dies) to found religious orders, and they just drop the kids with some aunt or something. Does canon law say anything about this today? Would that ever be allowed?
Related to the bination/trination discussion, the rule and rationale for how often a (lay) person may receive the Eucharist in a day would be interesting.
Also, diaconal blessings: can deacons bless people when asked (not just talking about objects or a congregation at the end of Morning or Evening Prayer here)?
Can. 1169 §3 seems to limit things. But the Book of Blessings para. 2046 (intro to “Solemn Blessings and Prayers over the People”) seems to make it wide open again. I always thought that only priests could give a blessing to people when approached, but now I don’t know.
What would happen if an Eastern Orthodox "crosses the Tiber" but there is no corresponding Eastern Catholic church where they live? For example, a Macedonian or Bulgarian Orthodox person in the United States wanting to become Catholic, but not change Rites.
In the Walking Dead, Glenn and Maggie meet, fall in love, and "marry." If they were a Catholic couple, wanting to get married in the Church, is it possible for them to do so when all of society has collapsed and, so far as they know, they might never find a priest again in their lives? Is there a canon regarding Catholic marriage when the ordinary means of marriage are impossible to find?
I'm interested in the rules that apply to priests disobeying their ordinaries. I've gotten the impression that bishops have near-dictatorial power over their priests and can choose to exercise it in quite arbitrary ways with little justification other than "because I said so." Given the fact that this sort of unaccountable episcopal power frequently plays a key role in covering up abuse and stuff like that, what kinds of canon-legal protections do whistleblower priests have?
Also, this is not a canon law question, but I would be interested in an explainer of diocesan officials and entities. Chanceries, chancellors, vicar generals, etc... I have no idea what they all do, which of them must be priests, etc.
What is the specific liturgical mechanism by which a requested/stipended Mass intention is offered in the Mass? Let's say a particular Mass has been requested for the repose of the soul of Vinnie Boombatz. It's published in the bulletin, it's incorporated into the intercessory prayers. Then during the liturgy, the lector looks at the wrong page and declares the Mass is offered for Sally Schlabotnik. So whom has the Mass actually been offered for? Is it still being offered for the original intention as intended, or for the accidental intention read publicly in the liturgy?
I don't know if that would be covered in Canon Law, but it seems to me that the Mass has been offered per the intention the priest has, which (let's hope) is as has been requested. The lector's slip-up has no bearing on the reality of the priest's intention as he offers the Mass.
"What's in a name?" With parish mergers in full-swing in my Diocese, I'm curious about church nomenclature. Does a church always necessarily retain its first name, or what may cause it to be renamed? Assuming the church's title now differs from the parish name, is it just the church's titular day that may be elevated to a Solemnity, or would the parish's patronal feast day be one as well?
What exactly is the scope of "sanatio in radice"? Could this be used, for example, to retroactively validate or establish a sacramental marriage between two lapsed catholics that only ever procured a civil marriage?
This question concerns an “Old Catholic” priest. While I presume his priesthood is valid but his ordination was not licit, my question concerns his possible conversion/submission to Rome. If he converted/submitted to Rome, what would his status be? Would he need to be reordained or conditionally ordained?
How does the church justify the imposition of canonical form to marriage attaching the penalty of invalidity (as opposed to merely illicity) when such a requirement was not present for 1500 years of Church History? Canonical form feels very much like a bureaucratic law-imposed requirement, so should the consequence not be a law-related one (such as considering the marriage illicit)? Why does a violation of the law attach so strongly to the actual substance of the sacrament when it did not for 1,500 years --- 2/3 of Church history? This feels more like a decree by fiat. What is next: invalidity of marriage if the certificate lacks a seal of the right kind which can only be attached by a special Church official wearing a specific garment of the correct shade of purplish orange?
I would like to hear a scary campfire story but told by a canon lawyer rather than an exorcist. I am confident that (in our postlapsarian state) such things exist.
How about: "The tale of the woman who has three previous declarations of nullity and a serious alcohol problem, who is now looking to get married a fourth time, to a man who himself had two previous marriages" (N.b., that's made up, but not unrealistic!) Or alternatively, "The tale of the needed baptismal certificate, where the parish of baptism is located in a developing country without a functional postal system." This is the real stuff of nightmares for canon lawyers!
I'm preparing for the birth of our first child in May. We'd really like our daughter to be baptized by the priest who married us (not in our diocese) at my parents' home parish (not in our diocese) for ease of travel for all guests, provided we can safely gather this summer. What steps must we take for this to happen and why?
Can Anointing of the Sick be administered to someone who suffers from a chronic condition in the hope of being healed, or is it solely for those in mortal peril or the like? If it can be administered for a chronic illness, how often is too often to receive the sacrament? If not, why such a limited scope of the word "sick?"
If the only criteria for becoming pope are to be a man and unmarried, why have a college of cardinals and/or conclave? That seemingly limits the pool from "all unmarried men" to "all the old celibate men in this one chapel."
Would it make sense canonically to have rad-trads have their own rite in the Church? It feels like there is a schism in the Latin rite anyways and might make sense to have the SSPX and FSSP and all the others have their own rite of the old liturgy in order to resolve canonical 'irregularities' and thus come into communion with Rome with strict authority/bishops placed over them so as not to scatter the flock. The strict Latinists act like their own rite anyways and do their own thing without any authority of a bishop, it might make sense to clean up the mess.
Well, in a certain way, it is its own rite. Are you instead suggesting those societies should be constituted as a sui iuris church, akin to the various Eastern ones?
Personally, I would not be a fan of such a measure. It would cause further division in the Western Church, would marginalize the traditional liturgy and those who follow it, and would further engrain the idea that the classical Roman Rite is now alien and unfitting for the use of the Roman Church.
As a common law lawyer I'd enjoy learning how a civilian system like canon law works in general. Might be helpful to explain the framework - what the code is, how it works, and how it differs from the common law system with which I expect most of your lay listeners are at least vaguely familiar.
Are there any penalties under Canon law for clerics stealing goods from a parish, diocese, religious order, etc. or is it assumed that this would be covered by Civil law?
Parish boundaries-- what are they, do they matter, does anyone care about them any more? I know someone who made it through 8 years of seminary and heard 0 mentions of parish boundaries...
I don't know if this exactly fits the category you have in mind, but given the news you broke this morning, I'd be interested in hearing you and Ed talk about exactly what canonical status (if any) the bishops' conferences have? And a related question -- if my archbishop (Hebda) wanted to put out a similar statement to the one suppressed by the Vatican, could he do it without interference? Is it when bishops seem to be speaking in concert that the Vatican gets antsy?
This one might be a bit more into the field of theology than law, but given the latest confusion from Francis, I'm trying to figure out exact what /is/ a cleric? Is it only a legal designation, or is there something more than that?
In previous years, the minor orders did have canonical status as clerics. Now, they do not. But, some orders are still using them (with permission from Rome). So, what is actually being conferred by these rites? Is a seminarian tonsured in the FSSP seminary actually a cleric, and if so, in what way? Given that the ministries of acolyte and lector, as maintained under current canon law, are direct analogues of the former minor orders, are they clerical in nature, even if they don't have the legal status of clerics? This is especially confusing, since Paul VI said that the ministry of acolyte could be called that of subdeacon, and could be considered equivalent. The subdiaconate is clearly clerical in nature, and if the modern position of instituted acolyte is equivalent, then does that mean that we now have female clerics? Are female clerics even theologically possible?
Like I said, this may not be strictly within your expertise as canonists, but I'd still love to hear your thoughts on the matter, since it is a veritable Gordian knot, and you have both proven accomplished at untangling such knots.
I'd also be interested to learn some about the history and origins of canon law. When did it first originate, and how did it develop over time? I understand that the 1917 code was the first compiled volume of canon law, so what did it look like before then? Are there any differences in style/approach between current and historical canon law? Do you have a favorite iteration or period of canon law?
Not a specific question really- but it would be great if there was something like a 100 level Catholic civic class. Working in parish finance, lay people could really benefit from it.
I’m not smart enough to even know how to formulate a good question, but I’m thinking about the financial scandal and the idea that “follow the money” might explain a lot of the corruption in the Church: are there canons that explicate the appropriate role of money in local or world wide governance of the Church? Are there limits on how bishops and priests are meant to have and/or use the Church’s wealth?
The part of canon law that gets the most interest from the laity has to do with marriage. Explaining the different types of marriage, natural versus sacremental, how a marriage can be judged null, requirements of proper form and how the lack of form can invalidate a marriage would be a great place to start.
I would mind hearing an explanation on why failure to attend divine services on a holy day of obligation is grave matter, particularly in light of the disjuncture between Eastern and Latin Rite churches. One may be an Eastern Catholic and not attend Mass on New Years, but one cannot be Latin Rite and fail to do so without incurring the risk of damnation. It would seem that in this case the act ought to be or not be sinful on a universal basis unless it is rooted in something else... disobedience? If it is simply a matter of obedience, how does it not flirt with legal positivism in canon law?
Should I become a canon lawyer? I'm seriously considering it. Interested to hear what you would say to people considering it, how do you actually get a job doing it, general advice, etc.
Question, How much attention should Catholics pay to the non canonical books. Such as The book of Enoch or the Gospel of James? Should they be a part of our faith formation?
How are dioceses formed/established and suppressed? And also where did the practice of Auxiliary Bishops and Titular Sees come from? I thought Titular Sees were random towns that haven't existed since the 700's or uninhabited rock islands off the coast of Malta, but apparently there are two Titular Sees for modern towns in Kansas (I live near one of those places). A discussion on where that tradition came from, its place in Cannon Law, and maybe some funny examples of places made Titular Sees would edify the dear readers/listeners.
When the Sunday Mass obligation is in force in the diocese, are diocesan parish priests obliged to celebrate Mass for the faithful at their parish on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation? the neighboring "personal parish" had zero Masses on Christmas and Feast of the Holy Family (last Sunday of the year), and I know the priests of that parish had not been exposed to COVID or anything, in fact the lack of Masses on these days was announced 2 or 3 weeks in advance with no explanation whatosever given and no advice of what their parishioners should do about it. The alleged rationale was just that a low number of attendees was projected. Other adjoining parishes were restricting Christmas Masses to sign ups for their own parishioners only due to misplaced concern that there would be too many attendees for the 50% COVID capacity limit.
In fact, when the Sunday Mass obligation is in force is it canonically acceptable to restrict Sunday and Holy Day Masses to only the parishioners of the parish? If the parish can exclude non parishioners, can this determination be made by a territorial parish on the basis that counts people who "register as parishioners" as parishioners regardless of whether they live in the parish territory, but excludes Catholics who live in the parish territory on the basis that they are not "registered" to receive emails, envelopes etc?
Is this the same Gratian who is also Pope Gregory VI, or a different Gratian entirely?
Hello.
If a couple gets "married" in the Church but only one of is Catholic and the other has not yet received the baptism?, what does the Church says about being intimate? Asking for a friend....
Thanks!
it is a true marriage, so I would think procreation is completely fine
Thanks!!! I understood it was called natural marriage... Thanks for the answer
I've heard it said that the Latin Mass was never abrogated. Is this accurate, and by the same logic, can priests celebrate the 1965 missal?
People ask about the moon but what about the ISS?
Some day I'd love y'all to give us your unvarnished opinions on the requirement of canonical form for the validity of marriage and whether deacons are required to practice continence. ;)
But mostly, I'd like to hear from you experts: what canons do you think are most often overlooked or unenforced that you think the Church would most benefit from if they were actually implemented?
Regarding your first paragraph, they discuss both items in the CNA Editor's Desk episode from November 27, 2019.
Thanks for this, but I couldn’t find a part with them addressing continence in the diaconate. Do you have the time stamp?
I apologize, I conflated the past two Thanksgiving episodes. The continence in the diaconate is addressed in 2020's Thanksgiving episode.
Thanks! It also addressed my bination, trination, and “quadrination” question. Their answer about deacons and continence is just a bit evasive, but that seems to be reflective of the Church’s way of dealing with it. The debate goes on
Mass stipends and Mass intentions. Not that it's particularly interesting, but the few priests I've asked about it didn't really know much about how that all works.
Also, not canon law but a 5 (or more) minute primer on Vatican Finance (How is Vatican finance supposed to work? What is the IOR/APSA? What is Peter's Pence? What public records/audits are there already? How much money does the Vatican have? How does the Secretariat of State fit in with the rest of the Vatican? I like the reporting but I feel like I only have half the background knowledge I need to really grasp what I'm reading.
Can a Catholic in good standing really be turned away from the Mass (not communion, the whole Mass)? If so, for what reasons?
who is Fr. Frank Pavone's ordinary?
I'm not sure Fr. Pavone even knows
What's your take on parishes charging fees for sacramental preparation, baptisms, weddings, etc? Are they like stole fees? When does it become simony?
Canon 927 says that it is absolutely forbidden, even in extreme urgent necessity, to consecrate one matter without the other or even both outside the eucharistic celebration. So is it forbidden but possible, or forbidden and impossible, to consecrate the Eucharist outside of Mass? What does that mean for priests who are incarcerated unjustly, and are smuggled in bread and wine to use for Mass, but cannot celebrate the whole of Mass due to the circumstances?
If a genetically engineered sapient animal were to be created, could it be baptized? If a human were genetically engineered, how much of their DNA could be changed before they couldn't be baptized? If a human and a non-human could hybridize, could the offspring be baptized?
A bit of a historical canon law question: How did canon law governing papal elections function throughout the first millennium, and what then-operative canons were available to help people properly identify true successors of Peter vis-a-vis antipopes?
Also, in general, would love to hear, with respect to various specific canons of ecclesiastical law, how those canons came to be and what the rationale was/is for them.
If a Roman Rite father and a Byzantine Rite mother have their child baptized, which rite does the child belong to?
By law the family takes the rite of the father, but I believe that special permissions exist for the preservation of the Eastern traditions that allow a family to go East if the mother is Eastern.
This would not be the case if the father is Byzantine, but the mother is Roman — in this case, the rule is to follow the father's particular church because both conditions support this: special permissions to the East and the rite of the father.
How does canon law differ from civil law in terms of its sources and its interpretation?
Also, it would be helpful to clearly understand licaity and validity, and practically what the category of licaity means. Are there moral consequences to doing something illicit? What about in the face of “pastoral necessities?” For example, I have been told by a canon lawyer that unless there is a prescribed penalty for transgressing a canon, it’s not immoral. I recognize that this may be broad. Perhaps you could talk specifically about a priest’s relationship with liturgical law or to the issue of the amount of Masses priests are allowed to celebrate in a given day. To this latter point, it’s distressing to me that the widespread practice in many places of one priest celebrating 4 or 5 Masses on a given day is actually illicit.
Even if there is not an invalidating clause or a penalty attached to a violation of a particular law, it seems to me that the observance of even ecclesiastical laws is morally binding for Catholics. In what other way can those laws be binding? I am open to contrary opinions, but I don't see another way in which canon law can be binding in the absence of explicit penalties/invalidating clauses.
On more than one occasion, I’ve heard canon 1752 (salus animarum lex suprema) used as a hermeneutic for all those pesky canons that get in the way of “pastoral decisions” that must be made... Hence, are you, properly speaking, breaking canon law by enacting the “spirit” of it?
It’s a really good question - I have also heard c. 1752 used to justify the disregard of other laws in the name of the salvation of souls.
But to me, the arbitrary violation of laws at subjective whims based on human judgments regarding an individual’s eternal salvation does not seem to be the true spirit of the law. Treating law that way reduces it to mere guidelines which are optional at the discretion of practically anyone. If that is the case, why bother observing any ecclesiastical laws whatsoever? Heck, why bother legislating?
Notably, we actually do have a mechanism within the law itself regarding when other laws can licitly be relaxed in particular cases, but this mechanism itself is governed and limited by other laws (cc. 85-93) so as to remain reasonable within the legal system as a whole.
Ultimately, my opinion is that the salvation of souls is best achieved by the charitable observance of the laws established by the Church. I would really love to hear what JD and Ed have to say about this topic though!
Is the difference between Saint and Blessed universal allowance of memorials vs. local allowance? Because I definitely don't understand the difference between Saint and Blessed.
Are there any canons concerning beards?
You hear about some older saints who left behind families (like children after a spouse dies) to found religious orders, and they just drop the kids with some aunt or something. Does canon law say anything about this today? Would that ever be allowed?
Related to the bination/trination discussion, the rule and rationale for how often a (lay) person may receive the Eucharist in a day would be interesting.
Also, diaconal blessings: can deacons bless people when asked (not just talking about objects or a congregation at the end of Morning or Evening Prayer here)?
Can. 1169 §3 seems to limit things. But the Book of Blessings para. 2046 (intro to “Solemn Blessings and Prayers over the People”) seems to make it wide open again. I always thought that only priests could give a blessing to people when approached, but now I don’t know.
What would happen if an Eastern Orthodox "crosses the Tiber" but there is no corresponding Eastern Catholic church where they live? For example, a Macedonian or Bulgarian Orthodox person in the United States wanting to become Catholic, but not change Rites.
In the Walking Dead, Glenn and Maggie meet, fall in love, and "marry." If they were a Catholic couple, wanting to get married in the Church, is it possible for them to do so when all of society has collapsed and, so far as they know, they might never find a priest again in their lives? Is there a canon regarding Catholic marriage when the ordinary means of marriage are impossible to find?
Any advice for those of us considering getting a JCL? Especially those of us who have no formal background in philosophy nor theology?
I'm interested in the rules that apply to priests disobeying their ordinaries. I've gotten the impression that bishops have near-dictatorial power over their priests and can choose to exercise it in quite arbitrary ways with little justification other than "because I said so." Given the fact that this sort of unaccountable episcopal power frequently plays a key role in covering up abuse and stuff like that, what kinds of canon-legal protections do whistleblower priests have?
Also, this is not a canon law question, but I would be interested in an explainer of diocesan officials and entities. Chanceries, chancellors, vicar generals, etc... I have no idea what they all do, which of them must be priests, etc.
What is the specific liturgical mechanism by which a requested/stipended Mass intention is offered in the Mass? Let's say a particular Mass has been requested for the repose of the soul of Vinnie Boombatz. It's published in the bulletin, it's incorporated into the intercessory prayers. Then during the liturgy, the lector looks at the wrong page and declares the Mass is offered for Sally Schlabotnik. So whom has the Mass actually been offered for? Is it still being offered for the original intention as intended, or for the accidental intention read publicly in the liturgy?
I don't know if that would be covered in Canon Law, but it seems to me that the Mass has been offered per the intention the priest has, which (let's hope) is as has been requested. The lector's slip-up has no bearing on the reality of the priest's intention as he offers the Mass.
Legality of banning communion on the tongue, especially in reference to recent covid stuff
"What's in a name?" With parish mergers in full-swing in my Diocese, I'm curious about church nomenclature. Does a church always necessarily retain its first name, or what may cause it to be renamed? Assuming the church's title now differs from the parish name, is it just the church's titular day that may be elevated to a Solemnity, or would the parish's patronal feast day be one as well?
What exactly is the scope of "sanatio in radice"? Could this be used, for example, to retroactively validate or establish a sacramental marriage between two lapsed catholics that only ever procured a civil marriage?
This question concerns an “Old Catholic” priest. While I presume his priesthood is valid but his ordination was not licit, my question concerns his possible conversion/submission to Rome. If he converted/submitted to Rome, what would his status be? Would he need to be reordained or conditionally ordained?
How does the church justify the imposition of canonical form to marriage attaching the penalty of invalidity (as opposed to merely illicity) when such a requirement was not present for 1500 years of Church History? Canonical form feels very much like a bureaucratic law-imposed requirement, so should the consequence not be a law-related one (such as considering the marriage illicit)? Why does a violation of the law attach so strongly to the actual substance of the sacrament when it did not for 1,500 years --- 2/3 of Church history? This feels more like a decree by fiat. What is next: invalidity of marriage if the certificate lacks a seal of the right kind which can only be attached by a special Church official wearing a specific garment of the correct shade of purplish orange?
I would like to hear a scary campfire story but told by a canon lawyer rather than an exorcist. I am confident that (in our postlapsarian state) such things exist.
How about: "The tale of the woman who has three previous declarations of nullity and a serious alcohol problem, who is now looking to get married a fourth time, to a man who himself had two previous marriages" (N.b., that's made up, but not unrealistic!) Or alternatively, "The tale of the needed baptismal certificate, where the parish of baptism is located in a developing country without a functional postal system." This is the real stuff of nightmares for canon lawyers!
Oh goodness, apologies, I have 3.
I'm preparing for the birth of our first child in May. We'd really like our daughter to be baptized by the priest who married us (not in our diocese) at my parents' home parish (not in our diocese) for ease of travel for all guests, provided we can safely gather this summer. What steps must we take for this to happen and why?
Can Anointing of the Sick be administered to someone who suffers from a chronic condition in the hope of being healed, or is it solely for those in mortal peril or the like? If it can be administered for a chronic illness, how often is too often to receive the sacrament? If not, why such a limited scope of the word "sick?"
If the only criteria for becoming pope are to be a man and unmarried, why have a college of cardinals and/or conclave? That seemingly limits the pool from "all unmarried men" to "all the old celibate men in this one chapel."
Would it make sense canonically to have rad-trads have their own rite in the Church? It feels like there is a schism in the Latin rite anyways and might make sense to have the SSPX and FSSP and all the others have their own rite of the old liturgy in order to resolve canonical 'irregularities' and thus come into communion with Rome with strict authority/bishops placed over them so as not to scatter the flock. The strict Latinists act like their own rite anyways and do their own thing without any authority of a bishop, it might make sense to clean up the mess.
Well, in a certain way, it is its own rite. Are you instead suggesting those societies should be constituted as a sui iuris church, akin to the various Eastern ones?
Personally, I would not be a fan of such a measure. It would cause further division in the Western Church, would marginalize the traditional liturgy and those who follow it, and would further engrain the idea that the classical Roman Rite is now alien and unfitting for the use of the Roman Church.
As a common law lawyer I'd enjoy learning how a civilian system like canon law works in general. Might be helpful to explain the framework - what the code is, how it works, and how it differs from the common law system with which I expect most of your lay listeners are at least vaguely familiar.
Are there any penalties under Canon law for clerics stealing goods from a parish, diocese, religious order, etc. or is it assumed that this would be covered by Civil law?
Parish boundaries-- what are they, do they matter, does anyone care about them any more? I know someone who made it through 8 years of seminary and heard 0 mentions of parish boundaries...
Seconded! Would love to hear your thoughts.
I don't know if this exactly fits the category you have in mind, but given the news you broke this morning, I'd be interested in hearing you and Ed talk about exactly what canonical status (if any) the bishops' conferences have? And a related question -- if my archbishop (Hebda) wanted to put out a similar statement to the one suppressed by the Vatican, could he do it without interference? Is it when bishops seem to be speaking in concert that the Vatican gets antsy?
This one might be a bit more into the field of theology than law, but given the latest confusion from Francis, I'm trying to figure out exact what /is/ a cleric? Is it only a legal designation, or is there something more than that?
In previous years, the minor orders did have canonical status as clerics. Now, they do not. But, some orders are still using them (with permission from Rome). So, what is actually being conferred by these rites? Is a seminarian tonsured in the FSSP seminary actually a cleric, and if so, in what way? Given that the ministries of acolyte and lector, as maintained under current canon law, are direct analogues of the former minor orders, are they clerical in nature, even if they don't have the legal status of clerics? This is especially confusing, since Paul VI said that the ministry of acolyte could be called that of subdeacon, and could be considered equivalent. The subdiaconate is clearly clerical in nature, and if the modern position of instituted acolyte is equivalent, then does that mean that we now have female clerics? Are female clerics even theologically possible?
Like I said, this may not be strictly within your expertise as canonists, but I'd still love to hear your thoughts on the matter, since it is a veritable Gordian knot, and you have both proven accomplished at untangling such knots.
I'd also be interested to learn some about the history and origins of canon law. When did it first originate, and how did it develop over time? I understand that the 1917 code was the first compiled volume of canon law, so what did it look like before then? Are there any differences in style/approach between current and historical canon law? Do you have a favorite iteration or period of canon law?
Can you give an in-depth look into Moto Propios? The history of them. Is the pope infallible through them? Etc.
Not a specific question really- but it would be great if there was something like a 100 level Catholic civic class. Working in parish finance, lay people could really benefit from it.
Tradition as law. Soooooo many people use that to continue practices /contrary to the law/ that have nevertheless been long-standing.
I'd like to hear your thoughts on Confirmation.
How has The Sacrament been damaged by turning it into a quasi-graduation ceremony?
Are exams and community service requirements contrary to Canon Law?
Should the order of the Sacraments be reversed to before First Holy Communion?
I’m not smart enough to even know how to formulate a good question, but I’m thinking about the financial scandal and the idea that “follow the money” might explain a lot of the corruption in the Church: are there canons that explicate the appropriate role of money in local or world wide governance of the Church? Are there limits on how bishops and priests are meant to have and/or use the Church’s wealth?
Oh also: are there laws governing Catholic teachers, professors etc. and canonical punishments for teaching contrary to the faith?
The part of canon law that gets the most interest from the laity has to do with marriage. Explaining the different types of marriage, natural versus sacremental, how a marriage can be judged null, requirements of proper form and how the lack of form can invalidate a marriage would be a great place to start.
I would mind hearing an explanation on why failure to attend divine services on a holy day of obligation is grave matter, particularly in light of the disjuncture between Eastern and Latin Rite churches. One may be an Eastern Catholic and not attend Mass on New Years, but one cannot be Latin Rite and fail to do so without incurring the risk of damnation. It would seem that in this case the act ought to be or not be sinful on a universal basis unless it is rooted in something else... disobedience? If it is simply a matter of obedience, how does it not flirt with legal positivism in canon law?
Should I become a canon lawyer? I'm seriously considering it. Interested to hear what you would say to people considering it, how do you actually get a job doing it, general advice, etc.
Question, How much attention should Catholics pay to the non canonical books. Such as The book of Enoch or the Gospel of James? Should they be a part of our faith formation?
How are dioceses formed/established and suppressed? And also where did the practice of Auxiliary Bishops and Titular Sees come from? I thought Titular Sees were random towns that haven't existed since the 700's or uninhabited rock islands off the coast of Malta, but apparently there are two Titular Sees for modern towns in Kansas (I live near one of those places). A discussion on where that tradition came from, its place in Cannon Law, and maybe some funny examples of places made Titular Sees would edify the dear readers/listeners.
When the Sunday Mass obligation is in force in the diocese, are diocesan parish priests obliged to celebrate Mass for the faithful at their parish on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation? the neighboring "personal parish" had zero Masses on Christmas and Feast of the Holy Family (last Sunday of the year), and I know the priests of that parish had not been exposed to COVID or anything, in fact the lack of Masses on these days was announced 2 or 3 weeks in advance with no explanation whatosever given and no advice of what their parishioners should do about it. The alleged rationale was just that a low number of attendees was projected. Other adjoining parishes were restricting Christmas Masses to sign ups for their own parishioners only due to misplaced concern that there would be too many attendees for the 50% COVID capacity limit.
In fact, when the Sunday Mass obligation is in force is it canonically acceptable to restrict Sunday and Holy Day Masses to only the parishioners of the parish? If the parish can exclude non parishioners, can this determination be made by a territorial parish on the basis that counts people who "register as parishioners" as parishioners regardless of whether they live in the parish territory, but excludes Catholics who live in the parish territory on the basis that they are not "registered" to receive emails, envelopes etc?