Home Alone?
In the present crisis of the Church, with the defection of even nearly all the bishops, with the possible exception of Bishop Peter Martin Ngo, (and there is a great deal of legitimate doubt about him), many souls believe and teach that one must shun as unlawful the priests and bishops who have put themselves forward for irregular ordinations and consecrations by invoking Epikeia for the preservation and continuation of the priesthood and the Episcopacy in the Church.
However, this attitude is gravely defective.
For one thing, aside from Epikeia, canon 2261 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law seemingly legitimises such solicitation and reception of Holy Orders (priesthood and Episcopacy) by Catholics at the hands of excommunicates, a term presumably including heretics and schismatics.
The Canon, 2261, Para 2, as reproduced from the Bawden - Benn book, in Latin and in English translation: "Fideles, salvo praescripto par. 3, possunt ex qualibet iusta causa ab excommunicato Sacramenta et Sacramentalia petere, maxime si alii ministri desint, et tunc excommunicatus requisitus potest eadem ministrare neque ulla tenetur obligatione causam a requirente percontandi."
"... The faithful may for ANY JUST REASON ask the sacraments and sacramentals from an excommunicate, ESPECIALLY if there is no other minister available and the excommunicate, at their request, may minister to them without any obligation to inquire the reason for their request."
However, I have grave problems with the provisions of this canon, which, admittedly a human law, seemingly contradicts the Divine Law prohibiting 'Communicatio in Sacris' - the participation in unlawful assemblies and liturgies, since, again by Divine Revelation, we know that these, even when offered by those schismatics and heretics possessing valid sacerdotal or Episcopal character, because they are offered in disobedience and not in union with Holy Mother Church, are offered to Satan and not to God.
A possible explanation is that receiving the Sacraments does not necessarily constitute worshipping together. It is worshipping together with non-Christians - schismatics, heretics, apostates, etc. that constitutes the crime of 'Communicatio in Sacris.' However, this is merely my speculation. I am still searching for the explanation of the Church.
Therefore, the interpretation of this canon is something which requires a necessary clarification to remove this doubt that it contradicts Divine Law.
However, nevertheless, even if there is no legitimate priest or bishop and therefore no legitimate Mass, the Church tells Catholics that they must not stay at home, but that they must gather together and follow the Mass, offering the prayer of the Spiritual Communion.
This is the procedure followed by the Church down the ages.
Thus, for example, when priests and missionaries were few and far apart, and parishes huge, so that the priests could not offer Mass for all their parishioners, they instructed the faithful that in those areas where the priests would not be present for Mass, they must nevertheless gather together and follow the Mass spiritually.
Thus the Home Alone attitude is gravely defective and un-Christian. Worse, it hurts as the believers do not get the opportunity to worship together and so they drift apart. It is precisely this danger which the Church seeks to guard against!
Prakash Mascarenhas, Bombay, India. 3rd March 2002.