More Mayhem on the Way?
Vatican’s Rules on Communion for Protestants could be further Relaxed
On October 7, 2013, the Anglican Communion News Service published a report by the Church of Ireland Gazette according to which the Novus Ordo “Archbishop” of Birmingham, Mr. Bernard Longley, stated that since the 1983 Novus Ordo Code of Canon Law changed the pre-Vatican II blanket prohibition against non-Catholics receiving Holy Communion and thus allowed a Protestant reception in principle, he can envision that in the future, the Vatican will expand the limited circumstances to allow a more frequent reception by heretics. Said Mr. Longley:
Given that that represents a change, and a very significant shift away from the impossibility to the limited possibility, then I could imagine and foresee one of the fruits of our ecumenical engagement as moving towards a deeper understanding of communion and a deeper sharing, a deeper communion between our Churches which perhaps would lead to reconsideration of some of the circumstances.
(Church of Ireland Gazette, “Vatican’s Rules on Eucharistic Sharing Could Be Further Relaxed”, published at Anglican Communion News Service, Oct. 7, 2013)
These comments come at a time when “Pope” Francis has announced an extraordinary synod of bishops for October 5-19, 2014, to discuss further “reforms” in the Vatican II Church (meaning further destruction of any resemblance to the Roman Catholic Church of Pope Pius XII), specifically regarding “communion” for people in adulterous relationships, and laws governing marriage annulments. They also coincide with a decision of the German “Archdiocese” of Freiburg to allow public adulterers to receive their putative sacraments.
Longley’s statement serves as a wonderful opportunity for reminding all who desire to be Catholic and yet still adhere to the Novus Ordo Church because they mistakenly believe it to be the Catholic Church, that as of 1983, it is indeed true that Non-Catholic Christians, that is, Protestant and Orthodox heretics and schismatics, are indeed allowed by law (!) to receive the Novus Ordo “sacraments” of “Holy Communion”, Penance, and Anointing of the Sick — without converting to Catholicism!
Yes, you read that right. This isn’t some sort of horrible future “possible” happening but is already a reality — and has been since 1983. That’s when John Paul II published his nefarious Novus Ordo Code of Canon Law, which replaced the one compiled under Pope St. Pius X and solemnly promulgated by Pope Benedict XV in 1917.
Now, keep in mind that the 1983 Bogus Ordo Code of Canon Law is simply an adaptation of church law to the new teachings of the Second Vatican Council. It is a direct application of the ecumenism and false ecclesiology taught by Vatican II, and it comes with the (putative) “authority” of “Pope” John Paul II. Remember this next time someone tells you that Vatican II taught nothing new — oh yes, it did! This idea that Non-Catholics can participate in the reception of Catholic sacraments (in clear violation of the words of our Lord in Matthew 7:6), already hinted at in the Council’s Decree on Ecumenism, Unitatis Redintegratio, par. 8, is a direct result of the false ecclesiology of the Council, its false new teaching that Non-Catholic Christians are in “imperfect communion” with the Catholic Church merely in virtue of a valid baptism, the profession of heresy notwithstanding (this false teaching has been nicknamed “Frankenchurch” and is exposed and refuted here and also here).
But see for yourself what the Novus Ordo Code of Canon Law legislates verbatim:
Novus Ordo Canon 844:
3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.
4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.
(Antipope John Paul II, Novus Ordo Code of Canon Law , Canon 844.3-4)
In 2003, the same John Paul II reaffirmed this wicked law in his “encyclical” Ecclesia De Eucharistia, par. 45: “While it is never legitimate to concelebrate [the New Mass] in the absence of full communion, the same is not true with respect to the administration of the Eucharist under special circumstances, to individual persons belonging to Churches or Ecclesial Communities not in full communion with the Catholic Church.” This goes for the Latin church as much as it does for the Eastern Novus Ordo churches, whose Code of Canons for the Eastern Churches, published in 1990, likewise by John Paul II, legislates the same thing (Canon 671 §§ 3-4).
In 1993, the Modernist Unholy See published a lengthy documented entitled Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism, and it is a veritable manual for implementing the ecumenism and ecclesiology of Vatican II. It was approved, confirmed, and ordered to be published by Antipope John Paul II on March 25, 1993. This impious document states:
129. …[I]n certain circumstances, by way of exception, and under certain conditions, access to these sacraments [Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick] may be permitted, or even commended, for Christians of other Churches and ecclesial Communities.
130. In case of danger of death, Catholic ministers may administer these sacraments when the conditions given below (n. 131) are present. In other cases, it is strongly recommended that the diocesan Bishop, taking into account any norms which may have been established for this matter by the Episcopal Conference or by the Synods of Eastern Catholic Churches, establish general norms for judging situations of grave and pressing needand for verifying the conditions mentioned below (n. 131). In accord with Canon Law, these general norms are to be established only after consultation with at least the local competent authority of the other interested Church or ecclesial Community. Catholic ministers will judge individual cases and administer these sacraments only in accord with these established norms, where they exist. Otherwise they will judge according to the norms of this Directory.
131. The conditions under which a Catholic minister may administer the sacraments of the Eucharist, of penance and of the anointing of the sick to a baptized person who may be found in the circumstances given above (n. 130) are that the person be unable to have recourse for the sacrament desired to a minister of his or her own Church or ecclesial Community, ask for the sacrament of his or her own initiative, manifest Catholic faith in this sacrament and be properly disposed.
(Antipope John Paul II via Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, Directory for the Application of Principles and Norms on Ecumenism , nn. 129-131; underlining added.)
So, let’s get this straight: As long as they’re baptized, non-Catholic Christians can legitimately, according to Novus Ordo law, ask to be given “Holy Communion”, “absolution”, and “Anointing of the Sick” — and then just as legitimately receive the same — without converting to Catholicism, as long as they have a “grave and pressing need”, even outside the danger of death (as in, “I have no intention of becoming a Catholic, but I just need Catholic sacraments”), which is verified and/or judged in part by the “competent authority” of the non-Catholic’s false religion, as long as the non-Catholic is “unable to have recourse” to a false minister of his own heretical church!
This is unbelivable! How in the world could any Semi-Traditionalist, especially those of the Society of St. Pius X, possibly believe this junk can come from the Catholic Church of our Blessed Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? That this disgusting mockery of the sacraments could come from a true Catholc Pope?! Absurd!
But it’s official Novus Ordo Church law, put in place by the great “conservative” John Paul II, the man who “ordained” the Rev. John Zuhlsdorf in 1991. Perhaps Mr. Zuhlsdorf cares to comment on this? Does he give “Catholic sacraments” to non-Catholics? Does he think it is a permissible, even commendable, thing to do?
Picture the scenario: Mildred is an Anglican, and she’s currently in the hospital. She’s not dying but she needs serious medical attention. She calls on her heretical minister to come to her and assist her spiritually, but he’s out of town. Instead, “Fr. Fred” from the local Novus Ordo passes by her room and visits her. So, she “spontaneously” asks “Fr.” Fred to give her the “Anointing of the Sick” (the Novus Ordo version of Extreme Unction), and she does so “of her own initiative.” In fact, she tells Fred that, though she is an Anglican, she is “conservative”, and so she really does believe in the Novus Ordo understanding of the Anointing, and in order to be “properly disposed” for the reception of this “sacrament,” she’s willing to make a confession. But that confession does not, of course, in any way include a rejection of her Anglican religion; it is, so to speak, not a Catholic confession but an Anglican confession (remember, she really wanted her own presbyter to come and assist her and is only turning to Fred because her own “priest” is out of town).
According to Novus Ordo law, Mildred’s course of action is not only legitimate but commendable, and “Fr.” Fred is supposed to give her “absolution” and “anointing” — all of this without her renouncing any of her deeply-held errors. Remember, she is officially the member of a false religion, a non-Catholic sect, and with that religion, which persecuted and killed St. John Fisher and St. Thomas More, she professes a host of heresies. Yet, the Modernist Vatican II Sect says she can be absolved and anointed, even given “Holy Communion” if she believes in the dogma of the Real Presence.
Think we’re making this up? We’re misunderstanding something? We’re exaggerating? Oh no. See the video below, published by [Non-] Catholic Answers, to verify for yourself that we are quite rightly understanding Novus Ordo law:
Video: James “Jimmy” Akin explains on Catholic Answers Live that heretics can receive “Holy Communion” in the Novus Ordo Church in certain circumstances
Are you shocked? Well then, all we can say is: “Where have you been?” This mockery of the sacraments has been around for 30 years. Maybe you need to stop watching The Vortex and reading Mr. Zuhlsdorf’s “conservative” spin blog and wake up to the real Vatican II Church.
But it gets better still… that is, worse. Specifically with regard to giving the Novus Ordo sacraments to the Eastern Orthodox (better called Eastern Schismatics or Eastern Heterodox), John Paul’s Directory enjoins upon Novus Ordo clergy the duty to avoid any suggestion of seeking the recipient’s conversion to Catholicism:
125. Catholic ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist and the anointing of the sick to members of the Eastern Churches, who ask for these sacraments of their own free will and are properly disposed.
In these particular cases also, due consideration should be given to the discipline of the Eastern Churches for their own faithful and any suggestion of proselytism should be avoided.
(Antipope John Paul II, Directory on Ecumenism, n. 125; underlining added.)
Yes, “proselytism” rears its ugly head again! In a footnote, the Directory indicates that it understands “proselytism” to mean that which was described by Vatican II’s heretical declaration Dignitatis Humanae as follows: “In spreading religious belief and in introducing religious practices everybody must at all times avoid any action which seems to suggest coercion or dishonest or unworthy persuasion especially when dealing with the uneducated or the poor” (n. 4; cf. Directory on Ecumenism, footnote 41).
In other words, do not even think about making the administration of Novus Ordo sacraments to the Eastern Orthodox dependent on their prior conversion to Catholicism! That would be “coercive”, “dishonest” or “unworthy.” Of course, the true practice, rooted in dogma, of the real Catholic Church has always been that Catholic sacraments can only be given to, well, Catholics, so this is a direct attack on the authentic Catholic practice of requiring non-Catholics’ conversion to the True Faith before giving them access to the sacraments — which only stands to reason! See for yourself:
It is forbidden that the Sacraments of the Church be ministered to heretics and schismatics, even if they ask for them and are in good faith, unless beforehand, rejecting their errors, they are reconciled with the Church.
(Pope Benedict XV, Code of Canon Law , Canon 731.2; underlining added.)
This is the Roman Catholic law. What a stark contrast to that of the Vatican II Sect!
Clearly, the Novus Ordo law is wicked. It is antichrist. It is an abomination. And yet, it is the official law of the Vatican II Sect. Plus, apparently now “Rome is considering updating the Directory,” so this may get even worse and more ridiculous in the near future — especially with “Pope Francis” at the helm (see “Anglicans Could Receive Roman Catholic Communion, Archbishop Suggests”).
The clear teaching and practice of the true Catholic Church, now eclipsed but whose last known Pope is Pius XII, is quoted further below under “Reality Check.”
Ah, you say, but this “sacraments-for-heretics” business never actually happens in practice, right? Wrong! Case in point: In 2005, “Cardinal” Joseph Ratzinger publicly gave “Communion” to Protestant ecumenist Roger Schutz. Here is a photo:
John Paul II made it possible: Protestant Bro. Roger Schutz, wheelchair-bound, receives “Communion” from “Card.” Ratzinger (and no, he did NOT convert to Catholicism beforehand) / image credit: Getty Images (ullstein bild)
This happened at the funeral of John Paul II on April 8, 2005. You can read an article about it here. Make no mistake about it — Roger Schutz, the founder of the super-ecumenical and heretical Taizé Community, was a well-known man in the Vatican, and there can be no doubt that Ratzinger knew that he was giving the “Blessed Sacrament” to a Protestant.
So, let’s recap:
- Allowing Non-Catholics to receive some of the “sacraments” is already permitted and “commended” in the New Church
- This is nothing new
- This law is the practical application of Vatican II’s “Frankenchurch” ecclesiology, in which the mere baptismal character creates a bond of “communion” with all the baptized, heretics or not
- This has been the official law of the Modernist Church since 1983
- This evil law goes for both the Latin and Eastern churches
- This has been specifically authorized and confirmed by John Paul II
- John Paul II specifically forbade any “proselytism” in connection with this concession, at least in regard to the Eastern Schismatics
- In 2005, “Cardinal” Ratzinger publicly gave “Holy Communion” to a well-known Protestant leader
Can this evil come from the Catholic Church? Anyone care to comment? Mr. Zuhlsdorf? Michael Voris? Christopher Ferrara? Tim Haines? Michael Matt? Marian Horvat? Atila Sinke Guimaraes? Society of St. Pius X? We can’t hear you!
“But,” you say, “this isn’t binding” — you can just “resist” it, right? Ignoring for a moment that even if it weren’t binding, it would still be impossible for the Bride of Christ to even permit such grave sacrilege and heresy-in-action, and ignoring the fact that the Catholic Church teaches that her universal disciplinary laws are infallible (see our “Reality Check” at the end of this post), nevertheless if you believe the Vatican II Sect to be the Catholic Church and John Paul II to have been a valid Pope, then yes, it is definitely binding on your conscience. This isn’t Cafeteria Catholicism, you see, where you can pick and choose what you like. The fact is that if John Paul II was a true Pope, then the following words hold binding authority:
Trusting therefore in the help of divine grace, sustained by the authority of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, with certain knowledge, and in response to the wishes of the bishops of the whole world who have collaborated with me in a collegial spirit; with the supreme authority with which I am vested, by means of this Constitution, to be valid forever in the future, I promulgate the present Code as it has been set in order and revised. I command that for the future it is to have the force of law for the whole Latin Church, and I entrust it to the watchful care of all those concerned, in order that it may be observed.
(Antipope John Paul II, “Apostolic Constitution” Sacrae Disciplinae Leges ; underlining added.)
And the same goes for the Eastern Novus Ordo churches:
And thus, having invoked Divine Grace, supported by the authority of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, looking favorably on the certain knowledge and wishes of the patriarchs, archbishops and bishops of the Eastern Churches who have collaborated with me in a collegial spirit, and having used the fullness of the Apostolic authority with which I am endowed, by this, my Constitution, to be in force for the future, I promulgate the present Code as it has been arranged and revised, and I order and decree that it obtain the force of law for all of the Eastern Catholic Churches. I hand it over to the hierarchs of these same Churches to be observed with care and vigilance.
(Antipope John Paul II, “Apostolic Constitution” Sacri Canones ; underlining added.)
Two words for all non-sedevacantist traditionalists: Game Over. The Novus Ordo goose is cooked. It is absolutely impossible for the Vatican II Sect to be the Catholic Church founded by Christ the Lord, and for its heads to be true Popes of the Catholic Church. In both bogus “apostolic constitutions”, John Paul II makes clear that nothing can contradict his decree: “Notwithstanding any contrary ordinances, constitutions, privileges … or customs” (1983); “Nothing whatever to the contrary withstanding…” (1990). Nothing. That includes articles by The Remnant, protests by “Fr.” Nicholas Gruner, Vortex episodes by Michael Voris, tweets by Tim Haines, videos by John Vennari, blog posts by Rorate Caeli, books by John Salza, even arguments by Christopher Ferrara.
The news story about the Vatican II Church possibly relaxing its rules on “sacramental sharing” with Anglicans has provided a great opportunity to review the facts about the Novus Ordo Religion — the bare, brutal facts without any spin. Again, such “sharing” is really the necessary consequence of Vatican II’s heretical ecclesiology, which considers as belonging to the Church (albeit “imperfectly”) all those who have a valid baptism; but this iniquitous nonsense is absolutely impossible in the Catholic Church, all of which demonstrates very forcefully that the Novus Ordo Church and the Catholic Church are two entirely different religions and cannot be the same church, even regardless of whether any particular “Pope” is personally guilty of the sin of heresy.
Not only is the Novus Ordo religion not Catholic, it is actually anti-Catholic, the very false church that was predicted and against which we have been warned by various authorities (see here), including Holy Scripture itself. In the words of St. Paul the Apostle:
For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way. And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying: That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity. But we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved of God, for that God hath chosen you firstfruits unto salvation, in sanctification of the spirit, and faith of the truth: Whereunto also he hath called you by our gospel, unto the purchasing of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.
(2 Thess 2:7-14)
So much for the “God would never allow this to happen” excuse.
It is a great testimony to the state of the conciliar apostasy if the Novus Ordo authorities further relax their evil laws regarding the “sharing” of their putative sacraments with Anglicans and other baptized heretics. Since the “sacraments” of both parties are invalid, however, they might as well go ahead and share them even more frequently now.
- “It is forbidden that the Sacraments of the Church be ministered to heretics and schismatics, even if they ask for them and are in good faith, unless beforehand, rejecting their errors, they are reconciled with the Church.” (1917 Roman Catholic Code of Canon Law, Canon 731.2)
- “Give not that which is holy to dogs; neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turning upon you, they tear you.” (Matthew 7:6)
- “…as if the Church which is ruled by the Spirit of God could have established discipline which is not only useless and burdensome for Christian liberty to endure, but which is even dangerous and harmful and leading to superstition and materialism, — [this is] false, rash, scandalous, dangerous, offensive to pious ears, injurious to the Church and to the Spirit of God by whom it is guided, at least erroneous.” –Pope Pius VI, Apostolic Constitution Auctorem Fidei [PDF], no. 78 (Denz. 1578)
- “Furthermore, the discipline sanctioned by the Church must never be rejected or branded as contrary to certain principles of the natural law. It must never be called crippled, or imperfect or subject to civil authority. In this discipline the administration of sacred rites, standards of morality, and the reckoning of the Church and her ministers are embraced.” –Pope Gregory XVI, Encyclical Mirari Vos, par. 9
- “The Church is infallible in her general discipline. By the term general discipline is understood the laws and practices which belong to the external ordering of the whole Church. Such things would be those which concern either external worship, such as liturgy and rubrics, or the administration of the sacraments. . . . If she [the Church] were able to prescribe or command or tolerate in her discipline something against faith and morals, or something which tended to the detriment of the Church or to the harm of the faithful, she would turn away from her divine mission, which would be impossible.” –Jean Herrmann, Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae, Vol. 1 (4th ed., Rome, 1908), p. 258
Image source: Getty Images
It is very interesting that in the video Jimmy Akins seems to assume and same as the lady that the husband will be able to have the first marriage annulled so no problem for him to receive the Eucharist. I read that a local diocese issued a rule that anyone who obtained a civil separation without the Bishop’s approval would be ipso facto excommunicated. And whoever is civilly divorced would be ex communicated. This was in 1953. Does it mean a divorced Catholic is not supposed to receive Holy Communion before Vatican II? Did it matter who initiated the divorce since we have no fault divorce system here. What is the rule for Sedevacantists, no communion for divorcees across the board?