"Under the new law, financial penalties can be imposed for a wide variety of offenses, including disobedience to ecclesiastical authority, misappropriation of Church property, and bribery"
Are there any specifics as to what these offenses are on which they plan to impose these financial penalties?
The canon law professor Fr. Piotr Majer names the following: "Offenses against the faith, abuse of power or disobedience to ecclesiastical authority, violation of pontifical secrets, failure to report a crime, misappropriation of church property, and bribery."
I am immediately filled with terrible and awesome ideas about how fines could be used as a middle ground when there are things a local ordinary cannot or should not ban outright, but feels obliged to discourage.
"The norm in this diocese is X. If you simply must do Y instead, that is permitted...but the bucking-the-norms fee will run you a hundred zlotys a month."
This feels like something that could backfire or be abused in really predictable ways.
But also, there's some great comedic potential in imagining a priest getting fined by the diocese like he's an athlete complaining about officiating or committing penalties.
I agree the possibility of abuse is great. With respect to misappropriation or bribery, are civil laws inadequate? What is the judicial process for these trials? At the risk of hyperbole, I can see a diocese raising money from faithful Catholics by fining men for not wearing neckties to Mass, or women for wearing trousers to Mass. IMHO, canonical penalties should not be prone to abuse like this. A sentence to a period in a monastery would be appropriate, perhaps.
(Bring back sending someone to live in a monastery in saecula saeculorum)
"Under the new law, financial penalties can be imposed for a wide variety of offenses, including disobedience to ecclesiastical authority, misappropriation of Church property, and bribery"
Are there any specifics as to what these offenses are on which they plan to impose these financial penalties?
The canon law professor Fr. Piotr Majer names the following: "Offenses against the faith, abuse of power or disobedience to ecclesiastical authority, violation of pontifical secrets, failure to report a crime, misappropriation of church property, and bribery."
https://misyjne.pl/nowe-kary-finansowe-w-kosciele-w-polsce-to-wykonanie-reformy-papieza-franciszka-rozmowa/
If a financial penalty is brought against a lay person, do they have to pay it prior to receiving any more sacraments?
I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere in the Polish reporting on the decree. .
I am immediately filled with terrible and awesome ideas about how fines could be used as a middle ground when there are things a local ordinary cannot or should not ban outright, but feels obliged to discourage.
"The norm in this diocese is X. If you simply must do Y instead, that is permitted...but the bucking-the-norms fee will run you a hundred zlotys a month."
"We're replacing the church tax revenue in Germany with a new LiturgicalHijinx cap-and-trade system"
It would have to be the whole bishop's conference though, not just a singular bishop.
This feels like something that could backfire or be abused in really predictable ways.
But also, there's some great comedic potential in imagining a priest getting fined by the diocese like he's an athlete complaining about officiating or committing penalties.
I agree the possibility of abuse is great. With respect to misappropriation or bribery, are civil laws inadequate? What is the judicial process for these trials? At the risk of hyperbole, I can see a diocese raising money from faithful Catholics by fining men for not wearing neckties to Mass, or women for wearing trousers to Mass. IMHO, canonical penalties should not be prone to abuse like this. A sentence to a period in a monastery would be appropriate, perhaps.