Canon 915

Any excommunication or interdict obliges the person involved to refrain from receiving Holy Communion, but a minister is obliged to deny Holy Communion only to those on whom an ecclesiastical superior or tribunal has publicly imposed the censure or declared that it has in fact been incurred. Canon 915 thus does not apply in cases of undeclared latae sententiae (automatic) excommunication, such as that incurred, according to canon 1398,[13] by someone who actually procures an abortion. While someone in this situation should not receive Communion until the excommunication is lifted, a priest may not on the grounds of the automatic excommunication refuse to administer the sacrament even if he knows of its existence.[5]

It can be more difficult[5] to determine whether in a particular case all four elements referred to are simultaneously present:

1. a sin,
2. which is grave,
3. which is manifest,
4. and which is obstinately persevered in.

The action must be a sin in the eyes of the Church, not merely something distasteful or irritating; personal guilt on the part of the person concerned is not required.[14][15][16][17]

The sinful action must be "seriously disruptive of ecclesiastical or moral order".[14]

To be manifest, the sin must be known to a large part of the community, a condition more easily met in a rural village than in an anonymous urban parish. Knowledge by the priest alone, in particular through the sacrament of confession, is not a justifying cause for denying Holy Communion.[5] Public withholding of the Eucharist for little-known sins, even grave sins, is not permitted under canon law.[14]

Neither an attitude of defiance nor a prior warning are required to determine the existence of obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin.[18]

The Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts issued on 24 June 2000 a declaration on the application of canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law to divorced Catholics who have civilly remarried. Even if such people, while being unable for serious reasons, such as the upbringing of children, to separate, live in full continence, their publicly known objective situation as divorced and remarried Catholics excludes them from receiving Eucharistic Communion. Public denial of Communion must be avoided and so the reasons for exclusion must be explained to them, but if such precautionary measures fail to obtain the desired effect or are impossible, Communion is not to be given to them.[19]

However, in September 2016, Pope Francis declared the apostolic exhortation Amoris laetitia to be a teaching of the "authentic magisterium", and agreed with the interpretation of Argentine bishops that "in certain circumstances, a person who is divorced and remarried and is living in an active sexual partnership might not be responsible or culpable for the mortal sin of adultery, 'particularly when a person judges that he would fall into a subsequent fault by damaging the children of the new union.' In this sense, 'Amoris Laetitia opens up the possibility of access to the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist'.”[20]

A memorandum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on "Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion", signed by its Prefect Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and published in July 2004, declared that, if a Catholic politician's formal cooperation in "the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia" becomes manifest by "consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws", the politician's pastor is obliged to instruct the politician about the Church's teaching and inform him that he should not present himself for Holy Communion as long as the objective situation of sin (regardless of whether subjective guilt exists or is absent) persists, warning him that, if he does present himself in those circumstances, he will be refused. As in the case of divorced and remarried Catholics, if these precautionary measures fail to obtain the desired effect or are impossible, "and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, 'the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it'".[21]

This ruling of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was cited in an article by Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke, Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura in Periodica de re canonica, vol. 96 (2007), which listed precedents for it in the writings of the Church Fathers and theologians, in both older and more recent canon law and in ritual texts.[2]

The ruling spoke of the obligations of the politician's pastor. With regard to the obligations of the diocesan bishop, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops declared in 2004: "The question has been raised as to whether the denial of Holy Communion to some Catholics in political life is necessary because of their public support for abortion on demand. Given the wide range of circumstances involved in arriving at a prudential judgment on a matter of this seriousness, we recognize that such decisions rest with the individual bishop in accord with the established canonical and pastoral principles. Bishops can legitimately make different judgments on the most prudent course of pastoral action. ... The polarizing tendencies of election-year politics can lead to circumstances in which Catholic teaching and sacramental practice can be misused for political ends. Respect for the Holy Eucharist, in particular, demands that it be received worthily and that it be seen as the source for our common mission in the world."

Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington has declared his opposition to such political use, with the Washington Post's Melinda Henneberger describing "Communion wielded as a weapon": in Wuerl's view, which he attributes also to the great majority of bishops in the United States and elsewhere, canon 915 "was never intended to be used this way", that is, to bring politicians to repentance.[22]

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith commented on the United States bishops' 2004 document: "The statement is very much in harmony with the general principles 'Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, sent as a fraternal service – to clarify the doctrine of the Church on this specific issue – in order to assist the American Bishops in their related discussion and determinations'."[2]

In an article written before publication of the 2004 memorandum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and the statement by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, canonist John P. Beal had argued that canon 915 did not apply to pro-choice Catholic politicians.[23]

Pope Francis reaffirmed the Catholic doctrine that politicians who encourage abortion and euthanasia shouldn't take communion, in the Aparecida Document, in March 2013: "We hope that legislators [and] heads of government... will defend and protect [the dignity of human life] from the abominable crimes of abortion and euthanasia; that is their responsibility... We must adhere to "eucharistic coherence", that is, be conscious that they cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals."[24]

• Code of Canon Law (CIC). Vatican Publishing House. 1983.
• Vere, Pete, & Michael Trueman, Surprised by Canon Law: 150 Questions Catholics Ask About Canon Law (Cincinnati, Ohio: St. Anthony Messenger Press, 2004).