Patres Pontificii Consilii de Legum Textibus Interpretandis, in ordinario coetu diei 4 iunii 1999, dubio, quod sequitur, respondendum esse censuerunt ut infra:

D. Utrum in Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983) CIC et Wetboek
Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium
Codex van Canoniek Recht van de Oosterse Kerken (1 oktober 1991) CCEO verbum « abicere » intelligatur tantum ut actus proiciendi necne.
R. Negative et ad mentem.

Mens est quamlibet actionem Sacras Species volontarie et graviter despicientem censendam esse inclusam in verbo « abicere ».

Summus Pontifex Ioannes Paulus II in Audientia die 3 iulii 1999 infrascripto Praesidi impertita, de supradicta decisione certior factus, eam confirmavit et promulgari iussit.

+ Iulianus Herranz,
Archiepiscopus titularis Vertarensis, Praeses

+ Bruno Bertagna,
Episcopus titularis Drivastensis, a Secretis

In an expression as lapidary as it is rich and pregnant, the Second Vatican Council said: “ In the most blessed Eucharist is contained the whole spiritual good of the Church” 2e Vaticaans Concilie, Decreet, Over het leven en dienst van de priester, Presbyterorum Ordinis (7 dec 1965), 5. And the Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983) summarizes the Council’s abundant teaching on the subject and the Church’s perennial doctrine, asserting: “The most august sacrament is the blessed Eucharist, in which Christ the Lord himself is contained, offered and received, and by which the Church continually lives and grows “ (Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983)); therefore “ Christ’s faithful are to hold the blessed Eucharist in the highesthonour...; they should receive the sacrament with great devotion and frequently, and should reverence it with the greatest adoration “ (Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983)).

Therefore we can understand the care and efforts of the Church’s Pastors to see that this priceless Gift is deeply and devoutly loved, safeguarded and surrounded with that worship which expresses in the best way humanly possible our faith in Christ’s real presence — body, blood, soul and divinity — under the Eucharistic Species, even after the Holy Sacrifice has been celebrated.

Just as believers are asked to express this faith with actions, prayers and objects of noble dignity, so it is also advisable that any kind of carelessness or negligence, the sign of a diminished sense of the Eucharistic divine presence, be carefully avoided in thebehaviourof sacred ministers and the faithful. Indeed, in our age marked by haste even in one’s personal relationship with God, catechesis should reacquaint the Christian people with the whole of Eucharistic worship, which cannot be reduced to participation in Holy Mass and to receiving Communion with the proper dispositions, but also includes frequent adoration — personal and communal of the Blessed Sacrament, and the loving concern that the tabernacle — in which the Eucharist is kept — be placed on an altar or in a part of the church that is clearly visible, truly noble and duly adorned, so that it is acentreof attraction for every heart in love with Christ.

In contrast to such profound veneration for the true Bread come down from heaven, not only can deplorable disciplinary abuses occur, sometimes have occurred and still occur, but even acts of contempt and profanation on the part of individuals who, under almost diabolical inspiration, dare to oppose in this way whatever the Church and the faithful hold, adore and love as most sacred.

In order to deter those who let themselves be misled by such sentiments, the Church not only urges the faithful to avoid any form of disgraceful carelessness and negligence, but also considers the most unfortunate case of deliberate acts of hatred or contempt for the Blessed Sacrament. These actions certainly constitute — by reason of their matter — a very grave sin of sacrilege. The Catechismus-Compendium
Catechismus van de Katholieke Kerk
(15 augustus 1997) says in fact that sacrilege “ is a grave sin especially when committed against the Eucharist, for in this sacrament the true Body of Christ is made substantially present for us “ Catechismus-Compendium, Catechismus van de Katholieke Kerk (15 aug 1997), 2120.

Moreover, in certain cases these sacrileges constitute true and real offences [delicta], according to the canons of both Latin and Eastern Church law, to which a penalty is attached. This is determined in Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983) of the Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983), corresponding to Wetboek
Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium
Codex van Canoniek Recht van de Oosterse Kerken (1 oktober 1991) of the Wetboek
Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium
Codex van Canoniek Recht van de Oosterse Kerken (1 oktober 1991), with the variations proper to that legislation.

Here is the text of Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983): “ Qui species consecratas abicit aut in sacrilegum finem abducit vel retinet, in excommunicationem latae sententiae Sedi Apostolicae reservatam incurrit; clericus praeterea alia poena, non exclusa dimissione e statu clericali, puniri potest”. - "Wie geconsacreerd brood of geconsacreerde wijn wegwerpt of tot een heiligschennend doel wegneemt of bij zich houdt, loopt een excommunicatie van rechtswege op die aan de Apostolische Stoel voorbehouden is; een clericus kan bovendien met een andere straf gestraft worden, wegzending uit de clericale staat niet uitgesloten."

Given the various translations made of the Wetboek
Codex Iuris Canonici
Codex van het Canonieke recht
(25 januari 1983), with the different nuances resulting from the expressions of each language, a dubium was submitted to this Pontifical Council as to whether the word “ abicit “ should be understood only in its proper — but limited — sense of “ to throw way” the Eucharistic Species, or in the overly generic sense of “ to profane “. Therefore, while the two cases of offence consisting in taking away (abducit) or in keeping (retinet) the Sacred Species — in both cases “ for a sacrilegious purpose “ — are clear, an authentic interpretation was requested of the first case, expressed in the word abicit. After careful study, this Pontifical Council has given the following authentic interpretation, confirmed by the Holy Father, who ordered it to be promulgated Vgl. Wetboek, Codex van het Canonieke recht, Codex Iuris Canonici (25 jan 1983), 16. § 2 Vgl. Wetboek, Codex van Canoniek Recht van de Oosterse Kerken, Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium (1 okt 1991), 1498. § 2.

The verb abicit should not be understood only in the strict sense of throwing away, nor in the generic sense of profaning, but with the broader meaning of to scorn, disdain, demean. Therefore, a grave offence of sacrilege against the Body and Blood of Christ is committed by anyone who takes away and/or keeps the Sacred Species for a sacrilegious (obscene, superstitious, irreligious) purpose, and by anyone who, even without removing them from the tabernacle, monstrance or altar, makes them the object of any external, voluntary and serious act of contempt. Anyone guilty of this offence incursin the Latin Church, the penalty of excommunication latae sententiae (i.e., automatically), the absolution of which is reserved to the Holy See; in the Eastern Catholic Churches he incurs a major excommunication ferendae sententiae (i.e., to be imposed).

It is helpful to remember, as was mentioned above, that the sin of sacrilege should not be confused with the offence of sacrilege; in fact, not all sins committed in this area are offences. Canonical doctrine teaches that an offence is an external and imputable violation of an ecclesiastical law, to which a penal sanction is ordinarily attached. Therefore, all the norms and attenuating or excusing circumstances given in the Latin and Eastern Codes apply here. In particular, it should be noted that the offence of sacrilege we are discussing also involves an external but not necessarily public, act.

Even when the Church is forced, as it were, to impose penalties, she is also moved by the need to safeguard the moral integrity of the ecclesiastical community and to seek the spiritual good and correction of the offenders, but in this case she does so, also and primarily, in order to safeguard the greatest Good she has received from the divine mercy, i.e., Christ the Lord himself, who has become "the bread of eternal life" Vgl. Joh. 6, 27 in the most blessed Eucharist.

+ Julián Herranz
Titular Archbishop of Vertara President