I hate to have to do this, but there seems to be an enormous amount of people here who seem to be totally reckless when it comes to appreciating the gravity of the sin of simulating a Sacrament.
I am referring of course to the Thuc cultists. So here are some quotes which might help us all realize how serious this situation is:
Cappello, Tractatus Canonico-Moralis de Sacramentis, Vol. I, n. 66 (Latin + translation)
The full simulation section, Articulus VI — De Sacramentorum Simulatione et Dissimulatione:
n. 66.3 — the core prohibition (Latin):
▎ Numquam licet sacramenta simulare seu formaliter seu materialiter, ne ad mortem quidem vitandam; quia simulatio, etiam materialis tantum, est intrinsece mala, cuм sit mendacium quoddam sacrilegum et abusus rei sacrae.
Translation: "It is never permitted to simulate the sacraments, whether formally or materially, not even to save one's life; because simulation, even merely material simulation, is intrinsically evil, since it is a kind of sacrilegious lie and an abuse of a sacred thing."
On material idolatry (Latin):
▎ Haberetur enim inductio ad materialem idololatriam, quam esse intrinsece malam ideoque semper illicitam, compertissimum est.
Translation: "Indeed, it would constitute inducement to material idolatry, which is most certainly intrinsically evil and therefore always unlawful."
On simulation of administration vs. confection:
▎ si quis communicaturo praebeat hostiam non consecratam pro consecrata... in casu vera ac proprie dicta simulatio sacramenti nequaquam adest, sed solum simulatio administrationis, quae omnino differt a simulatione confectionis.
Translation: "If someone gives to a communicant an unconsecrated host in place of a consecrated one... in that case, strictly and properly speaking, simulation of the sacrament is not present at all, but only simulation of administration, which differs entirely from simulation of confection."
n. 67 — On lawful dissimulation (Latin):
▎ Sacramenti dissimulatio est positio signi seu actionis non sacramentalis — in hoc essentialiter differt a simulatione — in iis circuмstantiis, e quibus alii putant sacramentum vere confici aut conferri.
▎
▎ si confessarius poenitenti indisposito simplicem benedictionem det aut aliquas preces recitet, ut sic denegatam absolutionem aliis occultet; si minister conveniat cuм communicaturo ut proferat solum verba: Corpus Domini Nostri Iesu Christi, et sacram hostiam ei non porrigat, sed statim in pyxidem reponat.
Translation: "Dissimulation of a sacrament is the performing of a non-sacramental sign or action — in this it essentially differs from simulation — in circuмstances from which others suppose the sacrament to be truly confected or conferred... if a confessor gives a simple blessing to an indisposed penitent or recites some prayers, so as to conceal from others the fact that absolution has been withheld; if the minister agrees with the communicant that he will pronounce only the words Corpus Domini Nostri Iesu Christi but not hand over the sacred host, instead placing it immediately back in the ciborium."
---
1917 Code of Canon Law — Verbatim Text
Canon 2322:
Regarding those not promoted to sacerdotal orders:
1.° If they simulate the celebration of Mass or the hearing of confessions, they incur upon that fact excommunication specially reserved to the Apostolic See; if such a one is, moreover, a layman, he is deprived of any pension or responsibility that he might have in the Church and is to be punished with other penalties according to the gravity of the fault; a cleric is deposed;
2.° If such a one usurps another sacerdotal responsibility, he is to be punished by the Ordinary according to the gravity of the fault.
Canon 2367 §1–§2:
▎ § 1. One absolving or pretending to absolve an accomplice in a sin of turpitude incurs by that fact excommunication most specially reserved to the Apostolic See; likewise, [he incurs this penalty] even [acting] in danger of death, if there is another priest, even though not approved for confessions, who could, without grave danger or infamy or scandal arising, hear the confession of the dying one, except in the case where the one dying refuses to be confessed by the other.
▎ § 2. One does not escape the same excommunication who, absolving or pretending to absolve an accomplice who is implicated in [the crime of the priest], but who is not yet absolved [because he has not confessed the crime], but rather has so acted because the implicated confessor directly or indirectly induced him.
---
Woywod, The New Canon Law — Verbatim Paragraphs
Para. 1599 — Canon 2367 (excommunication specialissimo modo):
▎ 3. On a priest who absolves, or makes believe to absolve, his accomplice in a sin against the Sixth Commandment. Even in danger of death the priest cannot without incurring excommunication absolve his accomplice so long as another priest can be had without great danger of betraying the priest and giving scandal, except in case the sick person refuses to confess to another priest. The excommunication is incurred also when the penitent does not mention the sin of complicity, if the guilty confessor directly or indirectly induced the penitent not to confess the sin (Canon 2367).
Para. 1600 — Canon 2322 (excommunication speciali modo):
▎ 3. Those who are not ordained priests and pretend to celebrate Holy Mass or hear confessions (Canon 2322).
Para. 1618 — Canon 2322 (ferendae sententiae):
▎ 2. Laymen who pretend to hear confessions, or to say Holy Mass, are to be deprived of any position they hold in the Church, or any ecclesiastical pension. (Canon 2322.)
---
Henry Davis SJ, Moral and Pastoral Theology, Vol. 3 — On Canon 2367
▎ The pretence at absolving an accomplice takes place when the penitent is induced to believe that absolution has really been given, and such deception is necessary that the censure may be incurred by fictitious absolution. Deception of others than the penitent has no bearing on the censure.
And from his list of reserved censures:
▎ (d) Simulating Mass or hearing confessions by one not ordained (c. 2322).
---
Peters, Canon 1379 Commentary — Key Passages
On simulation always being forbidden:
▎ By its very nature, simulating the celebration or administration of a sacrament, as an abuse of a sacred thing, is always forbidden... the simulation of a sacrament, regardless of motive, is always an objective offense against the sacraments and admits of no excuse.
On Cappello's distinction (confection vs. administration):
▎ The great sacramental lawyer Felix Cappello expressly recognized the distinction between confection of a sacrament and administration of a sacrament; given the fact that 1917 CIC, c. 2322, 1° penalized only the confection (celebrationem) of the Eucharist, Cappello held that mere administrators of fictitious hosts, despite their committing a grievously sinful act, were not canonically liable as simulators.
On Woywod and seminarians:
▎ Stanislaus Woywod offered the common-sense example of seminarians practicing the celebration of the Mass. Woywod and others went so far as to say that, if it were obvious that one's imitation of the rites of Mass done out of derision or contempt for the Sacred Synaxis were pure mockery, such acts, though more grievously sinful than mere simulation, still would not constitute "simulation" in the canonical sense and would therefore not be punishable as a delict under canon 2322 of the 1917 Code.
On Sabetti and material idolatry:
▎ Aloysius Sabetti considered the scenario whereby, even though actual recipients of a non-consecrated host know that it is not owed adoration, mere observers of what appears to be the administration of the Sacred Species might be led into material idolatry. He therefore rejected as grievously sinful such administration of pseudo-Communion.(Sabetti, Compendium Theologiae Moralis, 4th ed. rev. by T. Barrett, Pustet 1924, n. 66, 560–561)
On Calabrese — "most grave sin":
"it would be a most grave sin for a cleric or lay person to distribute knowingly unconsecrated hosts to those seeking holy Communion" (Calabrese, Diritto Penale Canonico, Edizioni Paoline 1990, 239–240)
Jone, Moral Theology, §459 — "IV. Simulation and Dissimulation of the Sacraments"
459. — 1. Simulation of a Sacrament is never allowed, not even to save one's life. — It consists in performing the sacramental action without the intention of conferring a Sacrament, although others think a Sacrament is being administered.
▎ It is unlawful, therefore, to fictitiously go through the action of baptizing without the intention of baptizing, or to use non-sacramental wine at the consecration. — It is not really simulating a Sacrament to give a communicant an unconsecrated host; but it is unlawful since this gives others an occasion of idolatry and since the communicant (if he knows the host is unconsecrated) will at least externally feign to adore the unconsecrated bread.
2. Dissimulation of a Sacrament is permissible for a grave reason. — It is pretending to administer a Sacrament or the performing of a non-sacramental action under such circuмstances that bystanders think a Sacrament is being administered.
▎ Hence, it is permissible in confession to make the sign of the cross with the words Miseratur tui...without the formula of absolution over a penitent who is incapable of being absolved, so that others may not know absolution is being refused or lest the seal of confession be broken. For an extremely grave reason a priest may by prearrangement with a person who will approach the Communion rail pretending to receive, make the sign of the cross with the consecrated Host say the words Corpus Domini nostri...and then put the Host back into the ciborium.
Prummer:
Art. 4· Simulation and Pretence in Conferring the
Sacraments
544. DEFINITION. The simulation of a sacrament consists in the minister
changing secretly and unlawfully either the matter or the form or the necessary
intention so that the sacrament becomes invalid and the recipient is led into
error.
Therefore simulation may be practised in one of three ways : I. the
minister may use invalid matter, v.g. by pouring into the chalice some
other liquid in place of wine ; 2. he may secretly change the substantial
form ; 3. he may withhold internally his intention of administering the
sacraments.-One must distinguish carefully between simulation and
pretence ; in the latter neither the matter nor the form of the sacrament
is used, so that although the recipient himself is not led into error others
are ; for instance, a confessor who has to deny absolution to his penitent
expressly informs him of the fact, then recites some prayers and gives a
blessing so that the bystanders will not realise that absolution has been
denied.
545· PRINCIPLE. Although it is sometimes permitted to pretend to administer
a sacrament for a sufficiently grave cause, simulation of the sacraments is never
lawful.
To pretend to administer the sacraments is sometimes lawful, since one
has a sufficient reason for permitting others who have no right to the
truth to fall into harmless error.
Simulation is never permitted, because it is an extremely dangerous lie
and a detestable sacrilege. Consequently Innocent XI condemned the
following proposition (29) : " Urgent grave fear is a just reason for
simulation of the sacraments."
Topic: Simulating a Sacrament - Automatic Excommunication (Read 161 times)