Just for the record, the Declaration of Excommunication 0f St. Stanislaus Board Members Rozanski and Krauze is now posted online with the St. Louis Review, and is reproduced below.
Declaration of Excommunicaton of Stanley Adam Rozanski and Bronsalaa Anna Krauze
Whereas in fulfillment of my solemn duty to protect the unity of that portion of the Universal Church confided to my pastoral care, and of my obligation to exercise vigilance over any human matter in so far as this is required by fundamental human rights or the salvation of souls (can. 747, §2);
Considering, in particular, that both Stanley Adam Rozanski, domiciled at 5462 Chatfield Drive in Saint Louis, Missouri 63129-3552, and Bronsalaa [Bernice] Anna Krauze, née Zygmunt, domiciled at 6301 Winona Avenue in Saint Louis, Missouri 63109-2124, are baptized Roman Catholics and therefore, are obliged to observe the rules of the Code of Canon Law (cf. can. 11);
Taking into account that each member of the Board of Directors of the Polish Roman Catholic St. Stanislaus Kostka Corporation, apart from Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze, as of August 12, 2007, was lawfully declared to have incurred excommunication latae sententiae by reason of having committed the canonical crime of schism on December 15, 2005;
Noting that the Roman Catholic Parish of St. Stanislaus Kostka was suppressed by lawful decree of the undersigned on December 29, 2005;
Considering that, since the Parish’s suppression in 2005, the entity of the Polish St. Stanislaus Kostka Corporation has never been and is not now a part of the Roman Catholic Church but instead is a sect and will remain so for as long as it willfully exists separated from full communion with the Vicar of Christ and the fold of the Archdiocese of Saint Louis, loyally subject to him;
Noting that the undersigned exercises lawful jurisdiction over the two above-mentioned parties by virtue of cann. 1408 and 1412 of the Code of Canon Law;
Taking into account that a canonical admonition (cf. cann. 1339 and 1347, §1) was issued to Mr. Rozanski on July 31, 2007, warning him regarding his obligation, as a baptized Catholic, to resign as an appointed member of the Board of Directors of the aforesaid Corporation, and to refrain from presenting himself as a candidate for election to a position on the Board of Directors of the Polish St. Stanislaus Kostka Corporation;
Considering that Mr. Rozanski, in disregard of the above admonition, and Mrs. Krauze presented themselves for election, and were elected to the Board, on August 12, 2007; that Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze took sacrilegious oaths of office to be directors of said sect; and that both have, in fact, acted as members of the Corporation, and Directors of the Board since that time;
Noting that three summonses (cf. can. 1720, 1) and canonical admonitions (cf. cann. 1339 and 1347, §1), extending the faculty to exercise the right of defense (cf. can. 1720, 1) were delivered to Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze individually on September 4, 2007; December 3, 2007; and December 28, 2007, requiring them to appear before the undersigned to take cognizance of the accusations and corresponding proofs against them, and to be held accountable for their most grave violations of universal ecclesiastical law;
Considering that both Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze have failed to appear each of the three times as required by universal law, without proving the existence of any just cause precluding the observance of their obligations; and that thus decrees of contumacy and forfeiture of the exercise of the faculty of the right of defense were issued in their respect on January 15, 2008, and lawfully notified to them on February 11, 2008, because they had not withdrawn from contumacy in their schismatic conduct in the manner required by can. 1347, §2;
Noting the established and most recent jurisprudence of the Holy See, regarding the finding of the delict of schism; Considering that both Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze are accused of having committed the delict of schism (cf. can. 751; and 1364, §1);
Therefore, after having weighed all of the proofs and the arguments with the assistance of two assessors (cf. can. 1720, 2), with God alone before my eyes, I, by this my definitive sentence consigned to writing, declare and pronounce, by reason of my lawful exercise of jurisdiction, and the quality and preponderance of the proofs extant in the acts of the case, and with moral certitude (cf. can. 1608, §1), that Stanley Adam Rozanski and Bronsalaa Anna Krauze are guilty of having committed the canonical crime of schism (cf. can. 751).
Furthermore, I declare that the same delicts are fully imputable to the two guilty parties by reason of malice (cf. can. 1321, §§1-3), without exempting or mitigating circumstances (cf. cann. 1323-1324), within the time limits established by the Code of Canon Law, concerning both criminal (cf. can. 1362, §§1-2) and penal (cf. cann. 1363, §§1-2; and 1720, 3) actions, and, therefore, are fully punishable.
Wherefore, by the commission of the most grave delict of schism, Stanley Rozanski and Bronsalaa Krauze, like the rest of the members of the Board of Directors of the St. Stanislaus Kostka Corporation, have lost membership in, good standing in, and full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, which bond each and every baptized Catholic is obliged to maintain, in accord with cann. 95; 205; 209, §§1 and 2; and 212, §1 of the Code of Canon Law;
Wherefore, in the most sincere hope and with prayer that a medicinal penalty may lead them to seek once again full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, I declare and pronounce that Stanley Adam Rozanski and Bronsalaa Anna Krauze have incurred, latae sententiae, the censure of excommunication (cf. can. 1364, §1);
Wherefore, as excommunicates, both of the guilty parties are forbidden to have any ministerial part whatsoever in the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, or any other sacred rite of the Church; to celebrate and receive any Sacraments, or to celebrate any Sacramentals; and to hold any ecclesiastical office or ministry or function, or posit any act of governance (cf. can. 1331, §1);
Wherefore, the entire Archdiocese of Saint Louis is notified that no ordinary or extraordinary minister, under pain of grave sin, may lawfully administer Holy Communion to Mr. Rozanski or Mrs. Krauze;
Wherefore, every priest of the Archdiocese is notified that Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze may not receive absolution from their sins as long as they have not had the censure of excommunication lifted from them, and have publicly repented and made amends for their commission of the delict of schism (cf. can. 987);
Wherefore, until they withdraw from schism, Mr. Rozanski and Mrs. Krauze, according to the norm of universal law, are barred from burial in blessed ground, and from receiving ecclesiastical funeral rites (cf. can. 1184, §1, 1);
Wherefore, both are notified that, if they should desire to file recourse against this Declaration, they are required, for validity, to submit a petition to the undersigned within ten useful days from the publication of this notice;
So that all may know the present Declaration, I order that it be published in the next edition of the St. Louis Review, which publication, in accord with my decree of particular legislation issued on the ninth day of November, in the Year of the Lord 2007, constitutes notification by edict of this Declaration of Excommunication.
Issued and read at Saint Louis, on the twelfth day of March, in the Year of the Lord 2008.
SEAL
(Most Rev.) Raymond L. Burke
Archbishop of St. Louis
(Rev. Msgr.) Henry J. Breier
Notary
17 March 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Tim,
I've waded through all this and I'd like you or someone to comment on the effect of declaring the St. Stanislaus Corp. a "sect". I've noticed that the "womenpriests" are also declared to be members of a "sect".
Is it not true that in doing so defining both groups as "schismatic sects" ARchbishop Burke is setting up a logic whereby anyone who supports these "Sects" may also be excommunicated.
Is this perhaps the reason His Grace has decided to take such an approach?
In other words if Bozek or Hudson or McGrath show up at St. Cronan's would this be sufficient reason to surpress St. Cronan's?
I've previously commented on this as it relates to the womenpriests. As to what constitutes reason to suppress a parish, that I don't know. I think first and foremost His Grace's intent is exactly what he has stated: to encourage these people to repent and to inform and protect the faithful. It would be wonderful in this Easter season if those who set themselves against Church teaching, Church authority and the natural moral law were to return to the faith.
Can we excommunicate Fr. Biondi also? Check out his monthly message to the University that I forwarded you!
Post a Comment