Article in CNSnews.com
*******************************
From Canon Lawyer Ed Peters: My brief replies to Albany’s brief response
A political wag once observed that the fastest way to start a ruckus on Capitol Hill is to point out what the Constitution actually says. In the Church, it seems, the fastest way to start a ruckus is to point out what the Code of Canon Law actually says.
The Diocese of Albany has responded, briefly, to my comments regarding the eligibility of Gov. Andrew Cuomo for holy Communion under Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law.
See them here: http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/my-brief-replies-to-albanys-brief.html
UPDATE:
Michael Sean Winters’ NCRep column “Peters v. Cuomo”: a reply
Re Michael Sean Winters’ National Catholic Reporter column “Peters v. Cuomo”. Hmmm, where to start?
Well, how about with two preliminary observations: (1) even people of obvious intelligence can be of little expertise in an area in which they opine; (2) when unfounded and/or ill-formed opinions are expressed with rhetorical skill and disseminated through the media, they require an extraordinary amount of time and energy to untangle.
But, let’s see what we might try: http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/michael-sean-winters-column-peters-v.html
UPDATE 2:
My brief reactions to Fr. Reese’s characterizations of my position on Canon 915
I was disappointed by the tone, if perhaps less so by the content, of Rev. Thomas Reese’s reactions to my statements regarding the Cuomo-Communion controversy. I make three brief points against Reese’s mischaracterizations of my person and position, here: http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/some-brief-reactions-to-fr-reeses.html
UPDATE 3:
As someone commented, this is the debate that keeps on giving! There have been no serious challenges to my canonical analysis of the Cuomo-Communion situation. There have been several teaching moments for others, however, and I have tried to use them for good. My latest is this reply to NCRep’s Sean Michael Winters.
Re Winters and Canon 915: Sean Michael Winters first commented on my general discussion of Cuomo and Communion here (25 Feb); I replied to him here (25 Feb); SMW acknowledged my comments here (25 Feb), and posted a lengthy reply (28 Feb) here. I read SMW’s latest remarks carefully, and have some brief thoughts to offer: http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/again-re-winters-and-canon-915.html
UPDATE 4:
Is the Cuomo-Communion case about conduct, law, or lawyers?
Phil Lawler, in a thoughtful column over at CatholicCulture.org regarding the Cuomo-Communion controversy, makes a simple but important point: there are two related-but-distinct canons applicable in this case because there are two related-but-distinct issues in this case, namely, private conduct and public scandal.
Read the rest: http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/is-cuomo-communion-case-about-conduct.html
UPDATE:
A rare Saturday missive for “In the Light of the Law” readers
(Holy) Wars and Rumors of (Holy) Wars in the tabloid press: such things must happen
We interrupt our regularly featured canonical commentary for these breaking observations on tabloid journalism…
I read with some bemusement yesterday as the New York Daily News tried to bate Andrew Cuomo and the bishops of New York into a “Holy War” by alleging the governor’s “snub” of the latter’s meeting out of anger that “the Vatican” had rebuked Cuomo’s living arrangements. Now, what I don’t know about New York politics would choke a horse, so I can’t definitively conclude for or against the tabloid theory. But I can say that, to some guy sitting in Detroit, the NYDN headline “Cuomo snubs [NY] bishops after Vatican slap…” doesn’t make much sense.
Read the rest here: http://canonlawblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/holy-wars-and-rumors-of-holy-wars-in.html.
Share
Tweet
Email
Print