"We must be thoroughly convinced that nobody is worthy to receive the Holy Eucharist," the cardinal said. "It means therefore, that whoever is in a position under the rules of the church to approach the holy Eucharist must do so with fear and trembling and with deep humility."
Did the Cardinal actually make the argument he was attempting to quash?
Did the Cardinal display the inherent abuse of logic which is crippeling Jesus message "....in the church and in the world?  The "therefore" declaration of inerrant logic and dictate of absolute conclusion (that only people who follow the rules...) does not seem to fall inerrantly or absolutely, or at all, from the premise: "...that nobody is worthy to receive the Holy Eucharist".  In fact, the opposite, it seems.
I also ask, should anyone "approach the holy Eucharist...with fear and trembling"?
His approach to "logic" is that of a clerical patriarch who really means - to heck with reason, it's MY authority that counts, i.e., the usual.