Tag Archives: Canon Law

Canon Law favoring Traditionis custodes? Lane-splitting and one of my Hier-stehe-ich moments

Just a bit of lane splitting is going on here. But that would never happen with Canon Law would it?

Hours after this was published yesterday – “I’m stunned you say *Traditionis* custodes is evil” – a long conversation with a superb Canon Lawyer ensued about there being no doubt about what the law intends to be done practically, which is quite a separate issue, he said – merely playing the devil’s advocate here (which is very helpful) – it’s a separate issue from anything that might be theologically evil in the law. Thus, his argument ensued: regardless of any theological evil in the law, the clear practical demand put upon you to offer Holy Mass is not in itself evil, even if the rite is limited to the Novus Ordo.

My response, in summary, was this: “I can’t stand [it]. I think every word [he] writes is false, including ‘and’ and ‘but.'” What is paraphrased here was met with a poker face. So I added that for me to act upon a practical law based upon theological evil is to give that theological evil my fiat, something more than any “silence gives consent.” A slight nod indulging my disability of scrupulosity in this matter was performed, encouraging me to continue.

If I were to accept offering Holy Mass only according to the Novus Ordo because of my being forced to bow down to Traditionis custodes in its practical application — and even prescinding while doing this from any criticism of theological error regarding the Ancient Rite (that it is invalid in se – in itself – as a rite of Holy Mass) — I would be accepting the Novus Ordo in it’s celebration as that which is also invalid as a rite of Holy Mass. If you invalidate the consecrations of the Ancient Rite wrought by a validly ordained priest, you invalidate the consecrations of the Novus Ordo as well. Any dissing of the Sacrifice of the Mass which is itself brought about by the consecrations, by the Lex orandi, the Law of Praying, in one rite also disses that Sacrifice, that Lex orandi, those consecrations, in all rites. See the reasoning in “I’m stunned you say *Traditionis* custodes is evil”.

I don’t want to have anything to do with Traditionis custodes. There is no amount of lane-splitting that is going to convince me that it is somehow good to follow this law in any way. It is an insult to Jesus, to His Sacrifice, to the members of the Body of Christ since the time of the Last Supper until today. I just can’t go there. Ain’t gonna happen.


Filed under Liturgy, Pope Francis

Last Rites from an unvaxed priest! Faster than a speeding bullet! More powerful than a locomotive! Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound! Look!

  • “Last Rites given by an unvaxed priest! Faster than a speeding bullet! More powerful than a locomotive! Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound! Look! Up in the sky! It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s Super-Troublemaker! Father George!”

To those who think that I do something extraordinarily heroic… sigh… all I do is jump not over tall buildings but merely into a beat-up vehicle, having an absolute blast driving through the absolutely gorgeous Blue Ridge Mountains on the super-cool curvy roads of far, far Western North Carolina, North Georgia, etc., blasting through any number of parishes and (arch)dioceses and states to do what I’m supposed to do as a priest. That’s it. Nothing heroic. Nothing out of the ordinary. It’s what any priest would do, at least if they could.

Some priests are locked down, commanded by their bishops not to provide the Sacraments of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, not even Last Rites to those in the throws of death. What’s it gonna hurt the person who’s dying? What’s it gonna hurt the priest even if he catches Covid and dies? Giving the Last Rites gets both to heaven, and isn’t that what we want? We’re all gonna die. But the dying need the Last Rites and the priest must provide the Last Rites.

Even bishops sitting mightily in power denying Last Rites to their subjects will die. We priests are to ignore them as Canon Law bids us to do. And I’m not bucking any authority in all this: regardless of any jurisdiction any bishop thinks he has, when it’s a matter of someone dying on the spot any priest whomsoever has the right and duty to provide the Sacraments, even someone who is excommunicated, even if a priest in good standing is right there. And anyway, I’m in good standing with both Church and State.

By “Last Rites” I mean any number of things that can include but are not limited to rites of Confession and Anointing, also known as Extreme Unction. While Confession is expressly mentioned in Canon Law (Canon 976), I include Anointing since it covers what happens in Confession when Confession cannot otherwise be made. The supreme law is the salvation of souls, right?

To those who think that I do something criminal, being unvaxed and being with… gasp!… other people who are dying, even while I am spot-tested, enrobed, masked and gloved (but not gloved for a few seconds when I actually provide the sacraments), to those who judge me as being an old meanie for comforting the dying and sending them to heaven in their last minutes, to them I say… well, actually… I am speechless… But I’ll just keep doing what I do best, to be with the dying, to hear Confessions, to provide the Last Rites… and that’s NOT heroic, it’s just a priest being a priest.

If I myself were to die in moments, desiring the Last Rites, and some traitor (arch)bishop somewhere somehow forbade any priest to come to my assistance, and would not in any event show up himself, say, in a Covid Ward, you know, so that he could score some political points with who knows who, I would be tempted to sin with thoughts of exaggerated bitterness against him (not good, I know). That’s not the state of mind I would otherwise want when preparing to go before the Lord in just some minutes. Much better to ask the Lord for His mercy, for the forgiveness of all my terrible sins, for the grace of final perseverance in those last seconds, for the joy of going to heaven to thank Him forever.

I “confess” that in the past few days I’ve been to all sorts of hospitals in Covid overflow wards, in Covid lockdown wards, in North Carolina, in Georgia, at private homes… Again, that’s nothing heroic. It’s what all priests are supposed to do. In any other time, people wouldn’t pay one bit of attention. Nothing. But now, wrongly, it’s all, like:

  • “Last Rites given by an unvaxed priest! Faster than a speeding bullet! More powerful than a locomotive! Able to leap tall buildings in a single bound! Look! Up in the sky! It’s a bird! It’s a plane! No, it’s Super-Troublemaker! Father George!”

But let’s talk about being unvaxed for a second. I am unvaxed. There are priests in, say, the Diocese of Lexington who are unvaxed and who are forbidden by their bishop because of that to provide the Last Rites. Does anyone ask them if they have super strong natural antibodies such that they cannot be carriers, unable to get or transmit Covid? No? Why not? What’s the political motivation behind that? Does anyone do spot tests? No? Why not? What’s the political motivation behind that? I wonder who it is who is the real criminal here…

For myself, and I’m sure for those other priests, I would, we would be happy to be considered criminals if only we could provide the Last Sacraments to the dying, because, you know, how could you not? Jesus Himself died for this. Ask His Mother. What does she tell you?


Filed under Confession, Coronavirus, Priesthood

Ministry vs munus: Benedict XVI reigns or resigns? A discussion ever more relevant.

[[[ This following is a transcript of a talk by Alexis. I don’t know him. Some attack him. Whatever. I’m just interested in the argument he has here about the technical terms “ministry” and “munus.” Does it make a difference? Leave your comments. I’m no Canon Lawyer, but I’m willing to be schooled either way. Before you kill this guy, read the comments exchange at the end. ]]]

Munus and Ministerium: A Textual Study of their Usage in the Code of Canon Law of 1983 by Br. Alexis Bugnolo (31 October 2019)

[…] Though popularly many Catholics are amazed that after 6 years there can still be questions and doubts about the validity of the Act of Renunciation declared by Pope Benedict XVI on February 11, 2013, it actually is not so surprising when one knows just a little about the complexity of the problems presented by the document which contains that Act.

Continue reading


Filed under Pope Benedict XVI, Pope Francis

Church Penal Code Canon Law Book VI revision declared as deck chairs rearranged


  • Canon 1321 §1: everyone is considered innocent until the contrary is proven.

Great! But, oh, I forgot. The prophets were stoned to death, cut in two. Jesus was condemned and put to death. Thomas More was decapitated. Fr James Altman was smacked down…

If anyone dares to say that – Hey! It’s all good now! We’ve made progress! – pretty much they are blaspheming. The Code of Canon Law isn’t going to make those attacking the doctrine and morality and the liturgy of the Church and the Sacraments and attacking Jesus and our Blessed Mother into saints who actually obey the 10 Commandments, much less the Code of Canon Law in any iteration. Perhaps it’s a good revision. But do not put your trust in such horses.

You want proof of the foundation for that cynicism?

When I had to endure sitting through the VIRTUS® course at the Pontifical College Josephinum back in the day, a course unique to seminaries, different from that given to the laity, I had to complain about many points which were entirely pro-homosexualist. One in particular that I cite to this day regards “red flags” when deciding whether or not to report a suspicious person. Out of a long list of possible requirements, there had to be at least two in the list that were present before one would be allowed to report on the suspicious behavior of someone possibly crossing boundaries. One of the things on that list was showing pornography to minors. But you can’t report that behavior, mind you, unless you have another indicator to demonstrate not only a pattern but that which is entrenched in a number of ways.

NO! The second I would see someone showing pornography to minors (or anyone else) is the very second that they will find themselves on the ground sucker-punched, possible jaw-broken, eye-socket broken, and only then have 911 called for their medical treatment and for their arrest. I don’t care if this happened to be a rich layman or a narcissist priest or some bishop or cardinal. Ain’t gonna happen at my church. I’m not going to wait for another red flag that there has possibly been a possible boundary violation.

And I’m not going to say that the porn pusher is to be “considered innocent until the contrary is proven.” No, he’s going to out cold, on the spot. Go ahead, burn me at the stake. Hier stehe ich. I kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir.

The newly revised Penal Code in Canon Law does outlaw any such activity. However, the very Holy See are the ones who have strongly pushed VIRTUS® and the homosexualist presenters. Remember the “abuse summit” at the Gregorian some years ago? I’m afraid that however good this all sounds, those who are the top of the heap over in the Holy See ought also to be taken out of ministry regardless of prescription. Promoters of Justice will know of whom I speak, perhaps themselves. What I could only call demonic hypocrisy, scandalizing the entire Church, would seem to undo any “prescription” (time limits) on prosecution. Yes, let’s start with the Promoters of Justice, shall we, you know, the homosexualists, those who sollicit crimes under the guise of ladder-climbing and political correctness?

P.S. I note that the effective date of the new penal code isn’t until the end of 2021. That has lots of implications. But one implication is this: good Canon Lawyers can use this time to put cases together to smack down criminals on day one.


Filed under Holy See