There is nothing earth shattering or new that is stated in this decree, that a faithful Catholic shouldn't already know and believe. Adherence to this decree is mandatory at both the Canonical level and from a Natural Law perspective. Again - there is nothing doctrinally new or original in this decree.
Also, as I expected, the world renowned Vatican Canonist, Dr. Ed Peters, has posted a detailed and precise explanation of the decree as it pertains and relates to Church Canon Law. In doing so, Dr. Peters, as a pre-eminent Canon Lawyer, has laid out the firm foundation upon which "Dolan's Decree" rests. Lest anyone within, or outside, the Church make any qualms over the policy, Peters' analysis is both rock solid and clear.
My Thoughts
···†···
Although I am no Canon Lawyer (I would like to be someday...) I like to discuss these matters because it interests me so. That being said, interest does not equate to expertise. The only reason I even dare tread on the same topics as folks such as +Dolan and Dr. Peters is because I don't think it is fair that they get to have all the Canonical fun.
_______ Authority···†···
Dr. Peters takes a small issue with +Dolan's use of the term "moral authority." He says that he would have suggested canonical authority, but ultimately thinks that moral "works too." I thought this interesting so I did a little searching and quickly began to see that Dr. Peters was on to something.
In the New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law By John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, Thomas J. Green, I did a search for "moral authority" and it was only found in one instance. The concept of morality and its connection to a bishops ecclesial authority is not something that is improperly stated as moral authority, but I do agree with Dr. Peters that canonical is a better fit here. But this is a minor, minor point.
Decree Norm n.1
···†···
The point Peters makes about the first norm in "Dolan's Decree" is why Canon Law, and our Catholic Faith for that matter, are so instructive and interesting. Dr. Peters points out that the decree in essence has clarified that clergy should not even attend the 'same-sex marriage' ceremonies.Decree Norm n.1 states:
(1) No member of the clergy (priest or deacon) incardinated in the Archdiocese of New York, or any person while acting as an employee of the Church, may participate in the civil solemnization or celebration of a same-sex marriage, which includes but is not limited to providing services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, good or privileges for such events. Ecclesiastical solemnization or celebration of same-sex marriages is expressly forbidden by Canon law.Peters position is that:
I would take the decree to prohibit clergy’s mere attendance (as a type of ‘advantage’) at a “same-sex wedding”. Canon 209 § 1 is also relevant here, as is, of course, Canon 273.To the casual or naive reader these Canons do not seem to say what Peters is making them to say, at all. Yet, Canon Law does not exist in a positive vacuum the way that Civil Law must. It is in fact, informed and grounded within the Natural Law. So, we must view the act of participation broadly, and in such a way that we understand it to mean that participation is equated with attendance. This is a fair reading and understanding, in light of Catholic teaching on Marriage. Some will try and read the paragraph in a narrow sense that interprets it as meaning only the acts mentioned or that actual literal act of solemnization or celebration of the marriage. This doesn't make sense in light of the remainder of the paragraph, or in light of a Catholic understanding of what Marriage is, or how it "occurs."
Why the Decree
···†···
What I think is most interesting, is that this decree doesn't say anything new. It essentially reiterates Canon Law, and Catholic teaching, on the subject of Marriage and the Sacrament of Matrimony. It touches, on its periphery, upon the idea of ecclesial and pastoral responsibility and authority, but does so only in terms of the larger Catholic question surrounding: what is marriage?This is in my opinion, as I stated earlier, a shot across the bow. This is not only a public statement of belief by the Shepherd of NY Catholics, but also a warning to dissidents. As you can see from Dr. Peters analysis this is firmly rooted in Canon Law. This gives it a legal basis, as well as a theological one. It will be interesting to see who challenges this decree, and in what manner.
†††
No comments:
Post a Comment