8/12/2019 To Deny or Not to Deny Holy Communion - Fr Joaquin G
Bernas SJ
1/2
Sounding BoardTo deny or not to deny Holy CommunionBy Fr.
Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J.Philippine Daily InquirerFirst Posted
22:47:00 11/29/2009
Filed Under: Religion & Belief , Laws
I ALREADY WROTE ABOUT THIS MORE THAN a year ago but, as election
season againapproaches, potential candidates who value their
Catholic affiliation are asking about the samematter. It is no
secret that some politicians do not agree with moral positions
taken by some
bishops and understandably they are concerned about what their
bishop might do to them. Let metherefore rehearse what I said
earlier.
What is the church law on this subject? I do not profess to be
an expert in Canon Law. But what Ihave to say is what I myself
follow. And when I first wrote about this, no canon lawyer nor
any
bishop contradicted me. That probably says something.
Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law enumerates three categories
of persons who should berefused Holy Communion: (1) those
excommunicated through a penalty that has been imposedor declared;
(2) those interdicted through a penalty that has been imposed or
declared; (3) thosewho obstinately persist in manifest grave sin.
Some explanation is necessary.
First, what is the difference between an excommunicated person
and an interdicted person? Ingeneral, an excommunicated person is
excluded from the public life of the church. This wouldinclude
holding church office or receiving the sacraments. An interdicted
person, on the otherhand, is one who is excluded only from certain
liturgical functions.
How does one incur the penalties of excommunication or
interdiction? According to church law,there are two ways of
incurring a penalty: (1) automatically (or in church jargon latae
sententiae)upon the commission of certain external acts clearly and
specifically defined by law, and (2)upon the intervention of a
competent ecclesiastical authority who declares officially and in
legalform that a penalty has been imposed (ferendae
sententiae).
What is important for purposes of refusal of communion under
Canon 915 is that theexcommunication or interdiction must have been
incurred not automatically but through anofficial imposition or
declaration (ferendae sententiae). This means that to be
legitimatelyrefused communion under Canon 915 there is need for a
competent church authority (a bishop, a
judge of an ecclesiastical court, a superior with respect to his
subject through an extrajudicial oradministrative act) to have
issued a public instrument declaring that a penalty
ofexcommunication or interdiction has been incurred by or imposed
on a person. This should be arelatively rare case and would
normally also be highly public and notorious.
The third category of persons who may be refused communion under
Canon 915 are those whoobstinately persist in manifest grave sin.
As one canon lawyer wrote, The description of thethird category is
bristling with qualifications; not ordinary run-of-the-mill sinners
but sinners
http://services.inquirer.net/tagcloud/keyword.php?tag=Religion%20&%20Belief&id=328&imp=http://services.inquirer.net/tagcloud/keyword.php?tag=Religion%20&%20Belief&id=328&imp=http://services.inquirer.net/tagcloud/keyword.php?tag=%20Laws&id=33&imp=http://services.inquirer.net/tagcloud/keyword.php?tag=%20Laws&id=33&imp=http://services.inquirer.net/tagcloud/keyword.php?tag=%20Laws&id=33&imp=http://services.inquirer.net/tagcloud/keyword.php?tag=%20Laws&id=33&imp=http://services.inquirer.net/tagcloud/keyword.php?tag=Religion%20&%20Belief&id=328&imp=
