New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law Review

Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)Are you looking to buy New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law? Here is the right place to find the great deals. we can offer discounts of up to 90% on New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law. Check out the link below:

>> Click Here to See Compare Prices and Get the Best Offers

New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law ReviewWhile the overall scholarship of the new commentary is impressive, there are some serious, significant and grave errors which compel me not to recommend this book. Instead of relying on sound jurisprudence, this edition degenerates with theological dissent, speculation and confusion. Book Three (the Teaching Office of the Church) is where it begins. The footnote on page 913 in reference to canon 749 on Infallibility attacks ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS when it says: "the statement by the CDF [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] of October 28, 1995, that the teaching to the effect that the Church has no authority to confer priestly ordination on women requires the definitive assent of the faithful since `it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium' is an exaggeration" Classifying the authortative interpretation of the CDF on Ordinatio Sacerdotalis as being an 'exaggertion' is going well beyond the bounds of judicial commentary and now enters the realm of theological dissent. Cardinal Ratzinger's Responsum ad Dubium (10-28-95) made it clear that while Ordination Sacerdotalis itself was not an EX CATHEDRA statement (like the papal document MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS of Pius XII defining the dogma of the Assumption of Mary in 1950), nevertheless the TEACHING (doctrine) that only baptized males can be ordained (deacons, priests and bishops) IS infallible as it has been a consistent element of the ORDINARY MAGISTERIUM. "All members of the faithful are required to give their assent to the teaching stated therein." The Commentary continues in the footnote to attack the infallibility of the teaching when this is not a canonical issue, rather it is obviously doctrinal and the proper authority (CDF) has made a definitive ruling, not the CLSA.
Canon 752, according to the new Commentary "leaves room for dissent." This is based on the mistranslation of OBSEQUIUM by the Commentary. Ironically, the translated text in the same book reads "religious SUBMISSION of intellect and will" must be given to the authentic Magisterium (as opposed to an ASSENT of faith required of infallible teachings) whereas the commentary below the translated text keeps translating OBSEQUIUM not as SUBMISSION but as "RESPECT" or "DEFERENCE". Austin Flannery, OP, had no problem using SUBMISSION for OBSEQUIUM when he translated LUMEN GENTIUM #25 upon which canon 752 is based.
Another of many examples of an underlying agenda is shown in Book Four as well as Book Three. Canon 914 explicitly and unequivocally mandates First Penance BEFORE First Communion, yet the Commentary (p. 1110) suggests ""if the parents, who have the primary responsibility for the child's catechesis, should determine that their child is not yet ready for first penance but is ready for first communion, the child should not be denied the right to the sacrament." If that is not encouraging the faithful to oppose the law, what is it? Certainly not orthodox teaching or canonically licit behavior.
All in all, it is sad that the good scholarship has to be eclipsed by the creeping heterodoxy and subtle dissent in major portions of the book.New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law Overview

Want to learn more information about New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law?

>> Click Here to See All Customer Reviews & Ratings Now