Editor’s Note: The article’s headline is canonically erroneous, since “with impunity” only has meaning if someone has denounced him for his heresy and sought his punishment. — Here is another example of grifting on orthodoxy, that is, claiming you are catholic merely because you lament heresy, but never denouncing heresy, because if the problem went away, no one would read your newspaper.
The Archbishop’s heresy is now a documented canonical fact, since he published it in a 2000 word, five page, declaration, the sum of which is, ““it is no longer possible to say that all who are in any so-called irregular situation are in a state of mortal sin and have lost sanctifying grace”. — The only thing that would make such a saying impossible is apostasy, the personal rejection of the Revealed Truth.
The Archbishop of Berlin can be denounced in a provincial council of the Ecclesiastical Province of Berlin, which is composed of the Dioceses of Berlin, Dresden-Meißen (Meissen) and Görlitz. Since the Archbishop has put his heresy in writting, the other two bishops can proceed to convoke the Provincial Council on their own initiative and summon him to it. There they can demand his recantation and emendation, and if he refuses declare him deposed ipso facto on the grounds of formal pertinacious heresy, in virtue of canon 1364. — Catholics can write the Bishop of either diocese demanding such an action be undertaken. — After all, no one should be afraid of dialoging with the truth. And the mere fact that he be summoned, does not mean he has to persist in his error.
Hello Brother Alex I’ve been searching for a way to contact you on another topic of great urgency. I hope you respond to my plea for information.
With a Catholic funeral with mass in 21 days I am looking for information. I am trying to arm myself with facts to support that it is morally and spiritually wrong for a priest to knowingly permit a nonpracticing Catholic to read Sacred Scriptures at a funeral mass. Doing so would be blasphemous and a great insult to God.
The individual who wants to do the readings left the church 10+ years ago “because of issues with the church”, is not in the state of grace, and it’s questionable he has upheld the Laws and commands of God as evidenced by his actions
I told the priest it was my moral Christian duty to inform him of this individual and requested that he take what I had to say into consideration. His reply was that it was okay for this person to do the readings.
I am waiting to hear back from the local Archdiocese which will be some time next week for their position on this and I hope to have facts, doctrine etc to back up what I am saying. Can you please help me with this?
Alas, the abuse of which you speak is very common. Priests have the mistaken idea that it’s o.k. to do at a funeral as a way of making the funeral welcoming to the whole family. But in this they misconstrue the ministry of reading the Scriptures at Mass, as if it were a non sacred act such as feeding the poor. The key problem here is clericalism, which has de fact declared every part of the Mass non-sacred, except that which is said by the priest during the Canon. That denies the priestly character of the whole mystical body as well as the sacred character of every part of the Divine Liturgy. If you are the member of the family, you could perhaps only successfully argue that choosing that person is divisive. But if the one reading is the son or nearer relation, that argument probably will not work. Your argument would be stronger if the person was not a baptized Catholic.
Brother Alex, thank you for your most valued perspective.
Sadly everyone in this family is baptized and the majority are nonpracticing; a sad reflection of the time we live in. It’s the son-in-law that is to do the readings. No one else wishes to do them. I have requested someone else i.e. a volunteer from the church office do it but the priest said the decision is in place.
Adding further insult to God the priest also says he will not counsel the nonpracticing (of 10-30 years) and atheist family members (of this small family) about not receiving the host. He would not acknowledge or entertain the thought it’s his moral and spiritual duty to do so and said he could not prevent them.
There are certain truths within Gods Laws and the church. The priest is blatantly ignoring them offering weak rationalizations for his actions. Fortunately there is a higher authority he will have to answer to on his day of judgement.
Ironically, he mentioned sacred music needs to be played within the service/church and that my father’s wish for Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah could not be played. I had only relayed my father’s wish that I had promised him I would. I see it would be inappropriate because it is secular music and does not belong in a church. I only mention it here to highlight the priests inconsistent morals – he’ll let nonpracticing and atheist family members do the readings and receive Holy communion because they want to and he “can’t do anything about it.” Lord help us all if this is the norm.
I would counsel you to immediately write the bishop and denounce this priest for his grave failure in his duty to admonish non believers and non practicing Catholics to abstain from communion.
Thank you for your sound advice on this. I will do as you recommended.