NEWSLETTER NO. 156 DECEMBER 2008
1. Ordination of women: Further
Repercussions [Mgr Gordon Read]
2. Children's Adoption in England &
Wales [Mgr Gordon Read]
3. Laicisation of Bishop Lugo,
President of Paraguay [Mgr Gordon Read]
4. Approval of the Statutes of the
Neocatechumenate [Mgr Gordon Read]
5. Summorum Pontificum:
Questions & Answers [Mgr Gordon Read]
6. Entrustment of Parishes to
Juridical Persons [Fr Paul Gargaro]
7. Data Protection & Access to
Tribunal Papers [Mgr David Cousins]
8. The Mormon Church: Access to
Sacramental Records [Mgr Gordon Read]
9. Confession & Mass [Mgr Gordon
Read]
10. Electric Sanctuary Lamps [Mgr
Gordon Read]
11. Tribunal Statistics 2007 [Fr
Peter Kravos]
12. Global Tribunal Statistics 2005
[Fr Peter Kravos]
13. US Survey of Catholic Marriages
[Fr Peter Kravos]
14. Sentence from the Philippines
coram Odchimar (Deceit) (22nd September, 2006)
15. Prefect of the Signatura
Apostolica: Archbishop Raymond Burke
Monsignor Gordon Read commented upon a
recent rescript issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith concerning penalties for the attempted ordination to the
priesthood of women in the United States. Whilst all this was
happening at the CDF (19 December 2007), a similar procedure was
taking place at the hands of Archbishop Raymond Burke in the Diocese
of St Louis. The date of that decree was 12 March 2008. The St Louis
decree is complete with details concerning the canonical penalties
imposed on Sister Louise Lears. Monsignor Read has given all the
details of the penalties for Sister Louise. He hints that these two
events may well be merely the tip of an iceberg concerning attempts
to ordain Roman Catholic women to the priesthood (see Document No.I).
The Equality Act (Sexual Orientation)
Regulations are a statutory instrument which took effect on 30th
April 2007. They do not apply in Northern Ireland. Everyone will
be aware of the impact these regulations have had upon the highly
delicate matter of adoption. After considerable thought and
discussion three sets of implications appear to emerge: (a) Because
of the difficulties affecting Catholic Adoption Agencies, some of
these will close; (b) due to these same regulations a number of
Catholic Agencies for Adoption will cease to describe themselves as
Catholic; (c) a third option may be tested before the English
Courts. This extremely complicated situation is explained and
described by Monsignor Gordon Read (see Document No.II).
Monsignor Gordon Read has already
described the situation of Bishop Fernando Amindo
Lugo Mendez, S.V.D.(CLSN No. 150, June 2007) now President of
Paraguay. Bishop Lugo felt the need to be allowed to stand in the
presidential elections in Paraguay in 2007. To do this, if he was to
fulfil the terms of the Code of Canon Law he needed to ask the Holy
See for a dispensation from his obligations as a priest and bishop.
This request was denied by the Holy See at the end of 2007.
Nonetheless for his own reasons of
conscience, Fernando Lugo did indeed stand in the Presidential
Elections and he was elected. He then re-applied for the
dispensation from the priesthood and the episcopate in 2007; and the
Holy Father granted this request. It was also noted that the return
of Fernando Lugo as a bishop later on would be considered if the
matter arose. Monsignor Read has also pointed out at least two
other previous requests for a dispensation from the priesthood in
such unusual circumstances. Archbishop Talleyrand and (Cardinal)
King Henry II of Portugal were examples. (see Document No.III
for comment by Monsignor Read).
The history in England and Wales goes
back a long way in connection with the Neocatechumenate. The
establishment of the Neocatechumenate back in the late 1970s in this
country was associated with quite a large amount of writing for and
against. The establishment of the movement came about in a very calm
fashion. Priests who had been exposed to “the way” thought it had
particular value and many of them introduced some of the
Neocatechumenate elements into their parishes.
Priests (and people) were “for” the
Neocatechumenate or “against it”; or “knew nothing about it”. It
seemed to some as a very intense form of catechesis, with long
liturgies and curious ways. Those who were “for” the movement were
usually very much for it. Those against were usually very
much against it. Some clergy regarded the whole movement as in
need of eradication; others took the view of Rabbi Gamaliel: “If it
is of God, it will succeed”.
The Founders and Foundresses of
Religious Orders and Movements through the Church’s
history have usually had to deal with intense opposition from
various quarters – not always from the Episcopate. In the case of
The Way whereas it received high praise from ecclesiastical
authorities (even Popes) it has also been the butt of savage attacks
from its opponents.
The foundation of “The Way”
is set out in Document No. IV as well as the temporary
statutes that were drawn up and initially approved by Pope John
Paul II. These statutes were approved ad experimentum
for five years on 29 June 2002. This period of “approval” ended on
29 June 2007. The statutes were renewed and the Decree of formal
approval was dated 11 May 2008; and issued by Cardinal Rylko,
President of the Council for the Laity. There were a number of
qualifications of the liturgical implications expressed in this
approval. All these can be seen in a letter from Cardinal Arinze
(Congregation of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the
Sacraments) of 1 December 2005. There are details about liturgical
books, liturgies on Saturdays and Sundays, the homily and so on.
These details made vital reading to the accompanying approval of the
statutes. As Monsignor Read comments “it is to be hoped that the
observance of the norms set out by the Conference of Divine Worship
will be of mutual benefit to all concerned”. One sees this final
remark of Monsignor Read as an expression of great importance. (See
Document No.IV)
As Monsignor Gordon Read
points out in Document No. V it is now a year since the
emergence of the motu proprio about the Mass and
Summorum Pontificum (14 September 2007). Since its issue
various points have arisen which indicate the need for some “fine
tuning in the interpretation of the document”. One may comment that
the motu proprio shows signs of haste in its preparation.
Most of the questions which have arisen could all have been
foreseen; and taken into account during the preparation of the
document.
As Monsignor Read notes there has
been the need for certain textural revisions, none of which
is especially significant. However, there are three changes
called for which do alter the meaning of the text; these centre on
Articles 3 (Habitualiter), 5 §1 (Stabiliter) and 7 (Non
potest becomes Non vult).
There are other points also made
which have some significance. One concerns Holydays of
Obligation; and the second relates to female altar servers,
extraordinary ministers, and Communion in the hand. There are also
points about the Eucharistic fast, marriage in England and Wales and
the subdiaconate. As Monsignor Read notes other questions will be
raised (or may already have been). “It may be that the tentative
answers in this comment will be rendered obsolete by definitive
statements from Ecclesia Dei”. (see Document No.V)
Father Paul Gargaro has entered into a
jungle on this topic. The basis is that juridical persons may not be
parish priests; but there is a variation which allows
Clerical Religious Institutes and Clerical Societies of Apostolic
Life to have parishes entrusted to them by the Diocesan Bishop. The
arguments for and against this are presented in a set of
considerations with the authors and their views about the whole
topic. Clearly this is an area which must be watched very carefully
for advances in the future. However, Father Gargaro who quotes
outstanding authors for each view, says wistfully “which Canonist –
alumnus of the Gregorian – would want to be caught between Father
Ghirlanda and Bishop De Paolis in such a canonical dispute?” Which
indeed? (See Document No.VI)
Members will recall nearly thirty
years ago all the discussions and arguments about Data Protection
and the new act which was being introduced: the Data Protection Act
of 1988. Back then, there was a rising concern about what
organisations knew of other people and who could know this; and the
extent of any harm caused by this knowledge of “my business”. A
fearfully intricate Act of Parliament was eventually constructed and
came into law in 1988.
Essentially, in general, there are two
situations involved here. One of those situations concerned the
extent to which the “little citizen” can be dominated and indeed
even bullied by “Big Brother”. Of course, the 1984
situation is always a frightening prospect; things like personal
reputation, credit worthiness, security all grouped together under
this heading. There is also the element of spite or malice or even
the domination of someone else’s life. It is freely considered that
one of the very personal areas is marriage and divorce. There are
those (well known to Tribunals) who will adopt any kind of activity
with which to inhibit another person’s freedom. The very threat of
“the Data Protection Act” could prove to be a very powerful element
of domination over another party. Freedoms involved in a marriage
nullity process can be deployed against a person’s freedom to obtain
a divorce and to remarry.
The threat of proceedings becoming
subject to the Data Protection Act can terrify a person into
dropping proceedings entirely. Tribunals will know how a violent,
manipulative and threatening Respondent can use the threat of the
Data Protection Act to force someone to drop a perfectly reasonable
request for an examination of a marriage and a declaration of
nullity. In addition to that this threat can scare off witnesses
from assisting in cases. The Metropolitan Tribunal of Birmingham has
had two examples of this in their case history. The Judicial Vicar
of Birmingham, Monsignor David Cousins, was asked to write up the
proceedings of these two cases. It will be seen that a calm head and
hand are the key to such cases being dealt with. (See Document
No.VII)
It has been the practice of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (The Mormon Church)
to “baptise” persons who had never been baptised during their
lifetimes. The knowledge of who was unbaptised came to the Mormons
from surviving relatives. However, the Mormon Church has also made
it a practice to find sources of unbaptised people (records) and
sometimes these sources included persons who had been baptised but
for whom there were no records
An organisation called the
Genealogical Society has been set up which is an affiliate of
the Mormon Church. This is an organisation “dedicated to promoting
the preservation of genealogical information throughout the world”.
It is entirely funded by the Mormon Church. It offers a wide range
of services and, of course, there is a great temptation to make use
of these services simply because of the cost of copying,
microfilming and so on of existing Church records. Monsignor Read
points out that “proxy baptisms” have nothing whatsoever to do with
the living or the dead.
In January 2008 the
Congregation for the Clergy wrote to all the Conferences
of Bishops alerting them to the danger of allowing the
Mormon Church access to records. The actual letter to the
Conferences (29 January 2008) is reproduced in Document No.VIII
together with a useful explanatory comment by Monsignor Gordon
Read.
Back in the late 1950s, it was not
unusual to see two quite fascinating things at Masses being said
mid-morning in Roman Churches. Mass was being celebrated by one
priest; and another priest at the same altar was walking from side
to side apparently preaching on the liturgy of the Mass; and in the
same chapel people lining up outside for confession. Even before the
end of the Second Vatican Council these practices had ceased; and
only Mass was being celebrated; and the other two activities had
disappeared. This also meant that penitents had to look around for
confessionals that were in use; and forego a homily on the liturgy
of the feast of the day!
As the Council came to its end,
there was a certain amount of confusion amongst the people
(general absolution or not) and the number of confessions
diminished, The Roman Curia awoke to the shrinkage in confessions,
and tried to provide regulations to attract people to confession.
The situation was reached when there were no confessions to be heard
during Mass. (See Document No. IX) for the examination of curial
documents about the time, the place and the frequency of
confessions.
Questions concerning such things
as electric sanctuary lamps bring to mind such things
as Fortescue and O’Connell; or Canon Mahoney in Questions and
Answers. Many priests of the era of the late forties will recall
subsequently reading such things about the quality of beeswax in
Mass candles; and the distance between hands when a priest was at
prayer at Mass. One of the big sweeps from the Conciliar Documents
of the Council was to remove some of the minutiae in
celebration of the Sacraments; or at least instructions about
minutiae.
However, it seems that there is a new
move about such peripheral matters. There is a trend that one can
identify in questions (and answers) contained in such sources as
Zenit. A question of recent date dealt with by Zenit
concerns electricity and sanctuary lamps. One might have thought
that such considerations had been overtaken by concerns about Church
finances, consultation and the provisions of pastoral facilities for
various language groups. But Monsignor Gordon Read has been good
enough, at the invitation of CLSN, to explore the background of such
matters as electricity and so on and to demonstrate the wealth of
background material that now exists on such concerns. (See Document
No. X)
It is useful for readers to have such an
up to date account of statistics for Tribunal cases for
2007. These cover the Tribunals of England and Wales, Scotland and
Ireland for 2007, but this will be the last year with figures for
Cardiff, Menevia and Wrexham appearing separately. From 2007 the
Tribunals of these three dioceses merged into one National Tribunal
of Wales with its Appeal Court at Birmingham.
Father Peter Kravos has been able
to compare the figures for 2007 with those of 1997. With one
exception these figures have all gone down; in seven dioceses down
more than 50%. It is interesting to see that the downward trend in
three out of four Appeal Tribunals has been less than 40%.
Interestingly, the number of cases
introduced in 2007 in Dublin showed a 31% rise (from 167 to 220).
The only other Tribunal showing a small rise was Plymouth (57%).
There was an interesting drop in the number of decrees of nullity in
England and Wales: there were 1057 decrees issued in 1997; and 502
in 2007. (See Document No.XI).
Each year every diocese in the
Church is asked to provide statistics for various areas of its work.
Tribunals in England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland are asked to pass
on to the Canon Law Society their Tribunal figures; and these become
part of the statistical review of the Secretariat of State. Each
year a compilation of these figures appears in the Annuarium
Statisticum. The figures presented here concern the year 2005.
Father Peter Kravos has analysed
these figures and presents a survey of them which covers the
whole world (except for China). The figures are grouped together
under nine areas comprising Africa, North America, South America,
the Antilles, South America, the Middle East, Asia, Oceania and
Europe. The worldwide decrease in the number of cases continues.
However apparent elsewhere the decrease in Europe continues but only
slightly, and certainly not dramatically.
There are various little nuggets
of intriguing information which are revealed by these
statistics. For example, out of the 89,019 nullity cases
throughout the world in 2005, 27% of these were dealt with without
payment being made (or asked); 28% with partial payment; and
surprisingly, 45% with full payment. In Europe it appears that
Italian Tribunals are most successful in managing to receive full
payment (59% ) of their cases.
The number of Bishops have
increased over the last five years by 6.6% (the largest being in
Africa). Apparently 47% of all the world’s permanent deacons are in
the Americas. There has been an increase in the number of female
Religious in Asia (11%) and in Africa (11.8%). Happily, there has
been an increase in seminarians in Asia of 15.6% and in Africa of
15.7%. (See Document No.XII)
A survey of 1008 Catholics was
carried out by the Centre for Applied Research of the
Apostolate at Georgetown University, Washington. It was completed
in 2007 (Origins, 14 February 2008, No.35, Vol.27).
The survey found that Catholics in the USA do not tend to be much
different on matters concerning marriage and divorce as do the rest
of the population.
Of the figures produced, it
emerges that 53% of adult Catholics were curiously apparently
married; 25% have never been married; 5% are widowed and 4%
are living with a partner. One problem with the article in
Origins is that there does not appear to be an indication
of whence the sample surveyed in drawn; hence the age range is
unknown. So all we do know is that 1008 Catholics were involved in
the survey! (See Document No. XIII)
The case comes from the
Philippines in 2006; provided in Philippines Canonical
Forum, IX, 2007 pp.305-322.The Ponens in the case was Bishop
Nereo Odchimiar who gave the First Instance decision on 22 September
2006. The grounds were deceit by the Respondent. The affirmative
decision was ratified by the National Appeal Tribunal of the
Philippines on 27 November 2006.
The Sentence is a set piece in the
organisation of the requirements for the grounds of deceit.
Edwin was the Petitioner who married Lolita in 2005. He was
five years older than his bride. The couple met and courted by
texting. Their actual physical introduction to each other is
difficult to determine. They were married on 7 December 2005. The
couple had had intercourse with each other before the marriage.
Subsequently the couple knew that she was pregnant before the
marriage. However, investigations eventually showed that she had
become pregnant some months before physically meeting the
Petitioner. However, these facts only emerged after the marriage.
Within days the Petitioner realised
that the pregnancy could not be his responsibility and he took
the Respondent back to her mother. This was only five weeks after
the date of the wedding. The Petitioner eventually brought a nullity
case to the relevant Tribunal in the Philippines; and the case was
commenced on the grounds of deception by the Respondent. The case
was heard and an affirmative decision was given on 22 September
2006; it was ratified on 27 November 2006 with a restrictive clause
on the Respondent. The Sentence was reproduced in the periodical
The Philippines Forum (IX,2007, pp.305-322). It has been
reproduced here by kind permission of the Editor of the The
Philippines Forum at Document No. XIV.
The newly appointed (Pro)
Prefect of the Signatura Apostolica is well known
throughout the English speaking Canonical world. For five years
Archbishop Raymond Burke was a Defender of the Bond at the Rota,
and will have greeted a large number of English speaking Canonists
visiting the Rota either individually or within groups from their
Tribunals. He had roles in his own diocese and he was initially
appointed the Bishop of La Crosse. He was a Consultor for the
Pontifical Council for legislative texts; and from 2006 a Judge of
the Signatura Apostolica. All of this went before his present
appointment as (Pro) Prefect of the Signatura. He has written
articles in a wide variety of periodicals and on various specific
topics. The CLS extends a warm welcome to Archbishop Raymond Burke
on his appointment. His curriculum vitae has been gathered together
by Monsignor Gordon Read, together with a list of his writings. His
stature as a Canonist has been recognised by the Canon Law Society
of America by granting him the Role of Law Award in October 2000.
See below Document No. XV.
All the members of the Canon Law
Society send their warm good wishes and congratulations to Monsignor
John Hadley of Narborough, Nottingham as a Privy Chamberlain (since
early 2007).
