Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

avatar

What canonical consequences might Andrew Cuomo face now?

June 27th, 2011, Promulgated by Ben Anderson

From Ed Peters (ht Fr Z):
What canonical consequences might Andrew Cuomo face now?

In light of the foregoing, I see no way, absent a public reversal of his public conduct, that Andrew Cuomo may present himself for holy Communion (per Canon 916), and, if he does present himself, I see no way that a minister of holy Communion may administer the sacrament to him (per Canon 915). Indeed, the only question in my mind is whether the ordinaries of New York should lift from the shoulders of individual ministers the burden of reaching this decision, by making a determination to this effect themselves and, assuming they do reach this conclusion, whether they should announce it publicly or in a personal letter to Cuomo. (Personally, I think a public announcement more befits the markedly public character of Cuomo’s conduct and responds better to the danger of scandal presented to the faithful by his actions).

Tags:

|

14 Responses to “What canonical consequences might Andrew Cuomo face now?”

  1. avatar Anonymous says:

    Not in Albany/ It’s business as usual.

  2. avatar annonymouse says:

    Canonist Ed Peters mustn’t be familiar with Bishop Hubbard. Howard prefers to deal with such matters privately (chirp chirp).

  3. avatar Anonymous says:

    No. We will proclaim, as did Bishop Hubbard at the mass where he gave communion to the governor, that we can all celebrate with the governor as he works for evangelization.

  4. avatar RochChaCha says:

    I do not expect Bishop Hubbard to deny the Governor communion, but it certainly should be done and done in public. I just don’t understand how politicians or people in general can so publicy dissent with Catholic teaching and publicly mislead Catholic’s and still get away with this. When will the local Catholic Church start leading?

  5. avatar annonymouse says:

    I don’t understand how Bishop Hubbard can disregard some very clear canons, but I expect he will.

  6. avatar Anonymous says:

    Bishops Hubbard and Clark are in disagreement with the Majesterium on many issues. In both dioceses, the faith has been seriously eroded. The two dioceses do business in a similar mannor.

  7. avatar militia says:

    Another candidate for excommunication (or at least being refused Communion by Bishop Clark) is Mark Hare, staff writer for the Democrat and Chronicle for his column
    http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20110628/NEWS0201/306280009/1002/NEWS
    in which he praises turn-coat sell-out Alesi, proclaims himself Catholic and then analogizes the Church’s teaching to Groucho Marx. Hello in Rome? Is anybody listening?

  8. avatar Anonymous says:

    Just deal with it people. Our “leaders” whether in Rome or the U.S. turn the other cheek when it comes to liturgical abuses. If it holds true that silence is a form of acceptance then does that mean the Vatican accepts what’s been going on in our diocese and the dioceses in the United States for all these years?

  9. avatar Anonymous says:

    My only wish is to be present in the presence of the Pope and tell him how he has abandoned the flock. How he allowed so many sheep to be handed over to the slaughter.

  10. avatar annonymouse says:

    13761- Oh, but Rome DID get involved, VERY involved, and forced Bishop Clark’s hand in his dealings with Corpus Christi’s various sacramental and liturgical abuses. Had Corpus Christi and now-ex-Father Callan been handled with some firmness early on, perhaps that situation mightn’t have gotten so out of control.

    Probably at this point they figure with only a year left, they can ride it out.

  11. avatar Anonymous says:

    Yeah of course! What damage can he possibly do in a year’s time? Come on really. More should have been done about all the unfortunate circumstances in our diocese. In other words the Vatican found only ONE abuse in Rochester?

  12. avatar snowshoes says:

    One of the main vices here is cowardice. If WE were scarier than the Guv and Company, the powers that be would be hieing to our chorus. How do you deal with a coward? If salt loses its savor, what is it good for? If a bishop, or a Governor, loses his love for his children, how sad. Let’s continue to pray for their souls, perhaps if we are found worthy, we might suffer martyrdom for them and in union with the infinite merits of Our Lord Jesus, Crucified and Risen, they might be converted and saved. The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church!

  13. avatar Louis E. says:

    Howard Hubbard is the last of the Paul VI ordinaries in the USA,and turns 75 on Halloween of ’13.
    His replacement may be named before Cuomo faces reelection a year after that.Will he be minded to take a stand?…or follow the dictum Archbishop Dolan has cited approvingly,”In the first year,change nothing but your socks”?

  14. avatar Scott W, says:

    or follow the dictum Archbishop Dolan has cited approvingly,”In the first year,change nothing but your socks”?

    I actually agree with that as a general principle with the caveat of your average diocese or parish. With one notorious for dissent? Absolutely not. In those cases bishops or priests should start cleaning house, handing out pink slips, and dumping fluffy programs immediately and let the remnant faithful know there is a new sheriff in town and things are going to be made right.


-Return to main page-