Catholic Caucus: Canon 916 and Father John Jenkins, CSC

1983 Code of Canon Law/Situation with Notre Dame Commencement 2009 | April 19, 2009 | vanity

[topher]

Canon 916 of 1983 Code of Canon Law

Anyone who is conscious of grave sin may not celebrate Mass or receive the Body of the Lord without previously having been to sacramental confession, unless there is a grave reason and there is no oppourtunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, which includes the resolve to go to confession as soon as possible.

With the above, can Father John Jenkins be celebrating Mass?

The answer should be no -- until he has repented of the sin of the serious situation and scandal at Notre Dame.

If he had gone to confession about this, I am sure that either (1) he would be required to make a public statement denouncing what he has done or (2) be told as part of the terms of his confession to renounce the invitation to Obama.

This is the case of Scandal and it is also the case of disobedience to the Church (Honor thy Father and Mother).

With at least 33 Bishops, Archbishops and Cardinals condemning his actions, he must know how serious this is... Adn it is serious sin.

[Venturer]

If Obama had any class he would let father Jenkins off the hook by refusing to come to Notre Dame, but that would be less divisive , and Obama can never be acused of that.

[Mach9]

Unfortunately, this is a stretch. If you construe the meaning of scandal correctly, there’d be no difference between a priest who personally advocates abortion and a priest who, even for the purpose of discrediting abortion, hosts an advocate of the procedure. What may, however, very well be ‘scandalous’ (not to mention moronic) is the conferral of a doctorate-of-laws degree on a LEGAL-abortion-proponent. The irony just drips.

[presently no screen name]

If he had gone to confession about this

Repentance must come from the heart. By now, if he doesn't know this is sin, his repentance will be bogus - he'll only be speaking words because of a demand. God judges us by our heart. He should be removed and let him go about his life until he is firmly convicted. His heart is hardened.

[maxwellsmart_agent]

People are not acting sensible about this issue. There is no chance that Father Jenkins did not know Obama’s stance on the issues involved here. He is a highly edjucated man and very intelligent. You can assume he is well versed in current events. There is no question he understood what he was doing when he invited Obama to speak. Do not nievely extend him a pass on inviting a man with no ethic or morals with regard to the gift of life to a human being, an invitation to speak to a bunch of young people who’s heads can easily be turned by men of great stature, thereby contaminating them with a twisted view of the Christian faith. His intent and his agenda is clear. If this were not true, he would have rescinded his invitation by now.

[topher]

I disagree that it is a stretch...

He is clearly violating the rules of the USCCB and he has been told by a number of Cardinals, Archbishops, and Bishops that what he has done is wrong.

Add to it the damage done to Notre Dame University, over the controversy.

[topher]

His local bishop strongly disagrees with him, and has let know that he is in violation of USCCB rules regarding a Catholic University. Since Notre Dame University is one of the most prominent Catholic Universities in the United States, it makes the scandal that more severe.

Why do you consider it a stretch? Were you aware that he was violating USCCB rules? Maybe I should have put that in the article... USCCB is the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops...

[topher]

In 2004, the USCCB issued:

Catholics in Political Life

There are 5 "bullets" on the web page. Here is the 4th bullet:

The Catholic community and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our fundamental moral principles. They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions.

This is found on the webpage:

Catholics in Political Life

In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus warned: "To one given much, much is expected."

The context is from Luke 12:41-49.

The key text is Luke 12:47-48, which is:

Luke 12:47-48

47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows.

48 But the one who does not know and does things deserving punishment will be beaten with few blows. From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked. (NIV)

[topher]

Ping... I don’t know if this is of interest, but I am concerned that Canon 916 affects Father Jenkins and the Masses he celebrates while the scandal is ongoing, and he does not to abate the scandal...

[Mrs. Don-o]

I was re-reading this, and I must say I'm still baffled. When I was in Catholic grade school (back in the Jurassic)we were taught that there are 9 ways in which a person can be an accessory to another's sin:

• By counsel;

• By command;

• By consent;

• By provocation;

• By praise or flattery;

• By concealment;

• By partaking;

• By silence;

• By defense of the ill done

Fr. Jenkins hasn't actually done these things.

Yes, he has flattered Obama, but hasn't flattered abortion; yes, he has been nearly silent about Obama's crimes against life, but only <>nearly-silent, acting as if Obama's crimes are but a small argument to lodge against giving him the highest honors the University of Notre Dame has to offer.

For that matter: yes, he has disobeyed the stand taken by the USCCB against giving platforms and honors to those who defy the fundamental norms of morality; but he says (1)he understood that to apply only to Catholic honorees, and not to non-Catholic honorees, and (2)besides, the USCCB does not have direct canonical authority over him: only his Father Superior in Rome does.

Meanwhile his Father Superior in Rome has cooked up this 13-page savory toasted-shit-casserole of a letter in which he butters up Obama, and raises moral charges against his policies, and then butters him up again, sequentially, in layered creamy crumb-topped paragraphs.

All of this is stomach churning. It gives scandalous honor to a global abortion-enthusiast, and a scandalous back-of-the-hand to the bishops, but never in a clear-cut way breaks a law.

See what I mean? Maddening.

Just think of Jenkins' statment that "I think it's unfortunate that the great event of President Obama coming to this campus has been a little clouded by that controversy..."

So the parading of prestige and power is "great" but the monstrous tsunami of the blood of the innocent is just a little whisp of a thing...

It's a kind of idiocy. The man seems to have no sense of proportion. But you can't quote chapter and verse where that is against some specific canon or commandment. "Thou shalt not be a moral idiot." You know?

I hope there's a huge, LOUD protest. I hope for weeping and howling, for bagpipes, whistles, and megaphones. I hope ten thousand very serious Catholics shut down the streets of South Bend.

[Salvation]

The bishops who have so far expressed disapproval of Notre Dame's invitation to Obama (in alphabetical order) are:

1. Bishop John D'Arcy - Fort Wayne-South Bend, IN
2. Bishop Samuel Aquila - Fargo, ND
3. Bishop Gregory Aymond - Austin, TX
4. Bishop Gerald Barbarito - Palm Beach, FL
5. Bishop Leonard Blair - Toledo, OH
6. Archbishop Daniel Buechlein - Indianapolis, IN
7. Bishop Robert Baker - Birmingham, AL
8. Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz - Lincoln, NE
9. Archbishop Eusebius Beltran - Oklahoma City, OK
10. Auxiliary Bishop Oscar Cantú - San Antonio, TX
11. Bishop Paul Coakley - Salina, KS
12. Cardinal Daniel DiNardo - Houston, TX
13. Archbishop Timothy Dolan - New York, NY
14. Bishop Thomas Doran - Rockford, IL
15. Auxiliary Bishop John Dougherty - Scranton, PA
16. Bishop Robert Finn - Kansas City-St. Joseph, MO
17. Cardinal Francis George - Chicago, IL; President, USCCB
18. Bishop Gerald Gettelfinger - Evansville, IN
19. Archbishop José Gomez - San Antonio, TX
20. Bishop William Higi - Lafayette, IN
21. Archbishop Alfred Hughs - New Orleans, LA
22. Bishop Joseph Latino - Jackson, MS
23. Bishop Jerome Listecki - La Crosse, WI
24. Bishop William E. Lori - Bridgeport, CT
25. Bishop George Lucas - Springfield, IL
26. Bishop Robert Lynch - St. Petersburg, FL
27. Bishop Joseph Martino - Scranton, PA
28. Bishop Charles Morlino - Madison, WI
29. Bishop George Murry - Youngstown, OH
30. Archbishop John J. Myers - Newark, NJ
31. Bishop R. Walker Nickless - Sioux City, IA
32. Archbishop John C. Nienstedt - St. Paul-Minneapolis, MN
33. Archbishop Edwin O'Brien - Baltimore, MD
34. Bishop Thomas Olmsted - Phoenix, AZ
35. Archbishop Daniel E. Pilarczyk - Cincinnati, OH
36. Bishop Kevin Rhoades - Harrisburg, PA
37. Bishop Alexander Sample - Marquette, MI
38. Bishop Edward J. Slattery - Tulsa, OK
39. Bishop Richard Stika - Knoxville, TN
40. Bishop Anthony Taylor - Little Rock, AR
41. Bishop Robert Vasa - Baker, OR
42. Bishop Thomas Wenski - Orlando, FL

This is from LifeSiteNews.com web site...

BTW, I truly believe that Pope Benedict is watching this fiasco at Notre Dame and taking notes!

[Mrs. Don-o]

Hope you're right. We have to make this so publically embarrassing and so politically costly for the corrupt Notre Dame power structure that they never consider pulling a stunt like this again.

Did you see the Notre Dame's Head Hypocrite Video?

Click on the Vortex from 4/17. (It's a free registration site).

Three more weeks...

[Salvation]

I’ll check it out.

Did you see Diago’s thread about Fr. Jenkins flying to Washington D. C. rumor — at this time?

Will Jenkins un-invite him?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Didn’t see that!~ Where??

[topher]

There are two ways this is a very serious sin.

One is the disobedience to the USCCB. The guidelines are quite specific and clear: you may not honor a person like Obama at a University. The Honorary Degree is one problem. The other is the honor of Obama giving the Commencement speech. Thus there are two violations of the USCCB directive -- which is a very serious sin.

This type of violation got Manhattan Marymount College kicked out of the Catholic Church -- by Cardinal Egan.

The other is that it is a bad example and scandal for children and the innocent.

Father Jenkins has clearly committed the sin of disobedience -- to the USCCB rules. That is evident by the sheer number of Bishops/Archbishops and Cardinals condemning his action...

Scandal and Disobedience are the two very serious sins.

[topher]

Father John Jenkins is guilty of serious sin on three major accounts: COMMAND.

I believe he was involved in inviting Obama and of allowing the Honorary Law Degree.

As president of the University, he is the one who is responsible -- he is in command.

This has caused the following:

(1) Two violations of the USCCB policy set up in 2004 that forbids Catholic Universities from honoring pro-abortion politicians.

(2) This has caused a great scandal in the Catholic Church that is causing confusion among children. Many will believe that Notre Dame is rightn, and the 42+ Bishops are wrong.

[topher]

You wrote:

For that matter: yes, he has disobeyed the stand taken by the USCCB against giving platforms and honors to those who defy the fundamental norms of morality; but he says (1)he understood that to apply only to Catholic honorees, and not to non-Catholic honorees, and (2)besides, the USCCB does not have direct canonical authority over him: only his Father Superior in Rome does.

Notre Dame University must submit to the rules that the USCCB requires them to follow...

Specifically, the directive from Catholics in Political Life FORBIDS honoring people who do not follow the moral principles of the Catholic Church. It does not say that it FORBIDS ONLY HONORING CATHOLICS, BUT EVERYONE.

Obama cannot be honored by Notre Dame for this reason.

Disobedience to this USCCB directive is in fact disobedience to the Church.

[Mrs. Don-o]

I agree with you (!), but some of the head clerics are complicating things by displaying cloudiness and division in their own minds.

We both know that the three most relevant clerical authorities would be Bishop D'Arcy of Ft. Wayne/South Bend, USCCB President Cardinal George, and CSC Father Superior Fr. Hugh Cleary. All of them have come out against honoring Obama, but not one of them has brought up the issue of obedience, or used the word "disobedience."

Why? Probably because the USCCB doesn't have "canonical" authority over Fr. Jenkins. Their resolutions are not (technically, legalistically) binding on him.

The only one who has "binding canonical" authority over Fr. Jenkins is Fr. Cleary, who is presently in the process of bending himself into a pretzel, simultaneously saying Obama is responsible for promoting "intrinic evil" and pouring obsequious flattery all over him. (It's hard to bear reading through the full 13 pages of his letter to Obama.) He hints he could require Fr. Jenkins to do (something) by mentioning that he's Fr. Jenkins' personal superior; but never does he forbid Jenkins to honor Obama; quite the contrary, he congratulates Obama for receiving theh honorary degree!

In other words, the Notre Dame President and Board have evidently had their consciences corrupted by their own Superiors!

With the exception of the 40-or-so bishops who have (verbally) protested against this (with no actual disciplinary action), the whole noodle-spined heirarchy has failed us.

That's why the laity must enforce what the bishops will not. Remember your Confirmation; remember we are an essential part of the Church Militant. Best of all is provoking the withdrawal of donor funding. If Notre Dame worships Mammon, then dammit, let Mammon judge them.

[topher]

One thing is clear: The USCCB set forth guidelines for Catholic Universities and Colleges -- THAT MUST BE FOLLOWED -- for them to be Catholic Universities and Colleges.

Father John Jenkins is a Catholic priest who is president of a Catholic University. If he disobeys the rules for Catholic Universities, HE IS DISOBEYING THE RULES SET FORTH BY THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE CHURCH.

In the Acts of the Apostles, Saint Paul corrects Saint Peter about refusing to dine with the Gentiles... (Saint Peter felt more comfortable dining with Jews instead)...

Saint Peter was Saint Paul's "boss".

In some respects, Saint Paul was Saint Peter's peer (fellow apostle).

Father John Jenkins fellow "Holy Cross" priests have rebuked him...

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thank you topher!

Bishop D'Arcy is getting to his feet and acting as the law-giver in his diocese, a successor to the Apostles, and not just one more munchkin in a circular munchkin chain of command.

This assertion of his authority to decide whether UND is "Catholic" is very important indeed --- and the story is still unfolding. If other Bishops follow his lead, this could have repercussions all over.

And if I were a betting person, I would bet that +Raymond Burke, the head of the Apostolic Signatura (court) and the best canon lawyer in the Church, has been lined up to back up D'Arcy's position all the way.

I am going to write Bishop D'Arcy a fan letter! Will ping to the whole list when I get through.