The Role of Diocesan Finance
Officer
A Comparative Study of Eastern
& Latin Codes
(Cf. Mathew John, “The Role of the Diocesan Finance Officer; A Comparative Study of the
Eastern and Latin Codes”, in Justitia,
vol. 5, no. 1 (June 2014), pp. 101-118).
1. The Introduction
There must
be a person in every diocese to manage the finance under the direction of the
bishop. The office of finance officer is also one of the obligatory offices in every
diocese (cf. CIC c. 494 § 1; CCEO c. 262 § 1)[1]. This is one of the stable offices.
The finance officer and finance council are the two offices which assist the
bishop in the administration of the temporal goods of the diocese. There are
four purposes for having a finance officer and a finance council for the
diocese. The first purpose is decentralization, that is, the bishop is free
from ordinary temporal administration. The second purpose is expertise, that
is, use is made of the service of the experts. The third purpose is
transparency, that is, the bishop is free from suspicion of dishonest dealing.
The fourth reason is freedom, that is, the bishop is free from temporal
administration and can have more time for pastoral ministry[2].
2. The Appointment of the
Finance Officer
In the
early Church, the Apostles appointed seven deacons who were of good repute to
serve the table so that they could be free for prayer and ministry of the Word
(cf. Acts 6: 1-6). During the first five centuries the deacons, archdeacons and
archpriests managed the administration of the temporal goods of the diocese[3]. The office of the finance officer
arose when the Church obtained a public status in the Roman Empire and its
right to own property was recognized by the civil authority. Bishops were
relieved from the temporal responsibilities and it afforded them the freedom to
fulfil their spiritual and pastoral responsibilities.
The office
of the finance officer is not optional but mandatory now under CIC and CCEO. The reason for a separate finance officer is that the bishop
as the head of the diocese should be relieved from the temporal administration
in order to be free to devote all his efforts to the pastoral aspects of his
official duties[4]. Therefore, the legislator expects
that the bishop must appoint a finance officer. He must personally appoint the
finance officer. The vicar general or the episcopal vicar does not have the
authority to appoint a finance officer (cf. CIC
c. 494 § 1; CCEO c. 262 § 1)[5]. According to CCEO if the bishop, after having been given a warning, has failed
to appoint a finance officer, the metropolitan of the Patriarchal Church has
the power to appoint a finance officer (cf. CCEO
c. 133 § 1, 6°). Even if the metropolitan appoints a finance officer, he does
not acquire any power over the finance officer whom he has appointed (cf. CCEO c. 945).
3. The Manner of Appointment
The finance
officer carries extensive responsibilities and therefore the bishop must take
the utmost care in selecting a person for this office[6]. Therefore, before appointing a
finance officer, the bishop must consult two bodies, that is, the College of Consultors
and Members of Finance Council (cf. CIC
c. 494 § 1; CCEO c. 262 § 1). The
bishop has to consult these two bodies separately. They must be convened
according to the norm (cf. CIC
c. 166; CCEO c. 948), unless
particular or proper law has established differently[7]. It must be convoked formally and
the bishop must seek out the opinion of each member of both groups in a
face-to-face meeting[8]. Asking the advice individually and
not in a group may be necessary in cases where there is great difficulty and
cost involved in bringing a large consultative body together, or due to great
distances or the urgency of an issue. There should be an atmosphere of open
discussion and free exchange of opinions in the meeting. All members must be
given sufficient information regarding the persons presented. This consultation
would include a discussion of the candidate, and his qualifications, character,
family life, ecclesial life, etc. This consultation should be as thorough as
possible, as he is playing an important role in the financial management of the
diocese[9]. However the bishop need not obtain
the consent of either of these two bodies. Consultation with these two bodies
is essential to the extent that if he neglects it or does not follow the
procedure required by the law, the appointment of the finance officer will
remain invalid[10].
During the
vacancy of the diocese if the finance officer (who is a priest) is elected as
the diocesan administrator, he cannot continue as the finance officer as these
two offices are incompatible (cf. CIC
c. 152; CCEO c. 942). Therefore, a
new interim finance officer is to be elected by the finance council (cf. CIC c. 423 § 1; CCEO c. 225 § 2). If the term of the finance officer comes to an
end during the vacancy of the diocese,
the diocesan administrator can appoint a new finance officer as he has the rights
and obligations of the bishop (cf. CIC
c. 427 § 1)[11]. According to CCEO, an eparchial administrator cannot appoint a finance officer
during the vacancy of the eparchy. It is the right of the Patriarch, if the
eparchy is in his proper territory, to appoint a new finance officer after
consulting the bishops of the patriarchal curia, if there are any, or after
consulting the permanent synod. If the eparchy falls outside the proper
territory of the Patriarch, the finance officer is elected by the college of
consultors (cf. CCEO c. 232 § 3)[12].
4. The Qualifications
The
qualifications of the finance officer are twofold: professional and personal.
The law has no qualifying statement regarding the state of life of the finance
officer. The CCEO states that the finance
officer must be a member of the Christian faithful (cf. CCEO c. 262 § 1). The Latin term used in canon is christifidelis. Therefore, the finance
officer can be a cleric, religious, or a lay person of either gender[13]. As per CCEO, he must be a Christian and need not be a catholic[14]. According to Green, since the
finance officer holds an ecclesiastical office, the candidate must presumably
be a catholic[15]. The CIC does not say anything of this sort. We have to apply the
general norm that in order to promote a person to an ecclesiastical office he
must be in communion with the Church (cf. CIC
c. 149 § 1). He need not be in full communion with the Church[16]. Though appointing a non-catholic
as the finance officer is not against the law, a catholic is to be preferred,
as far as possible, since his role is very important in the diocese. There are
many who argue that bishops, priests and religious are to be freed from the
general duties of day-to-day administration so that they can devote their time
and energy to the Word of God and to the administration of Sacraments[17]. Moreover the office of finance
officer does not require the potestas
ordinis. From the wordings of the Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of
Bishops Apostolorum successores it
seems that a priest is not expected to be appointed as the finance officer. It
says: “The finance officer, who may be a permanent deacon or a lay person, must
possess extensive experience in the administration of financial affairs. He
must have a good knowledge of civil and canonical legislation concerning
temporal goods and of any legal agreements with the civil authority concerning
the ecclesiastical goods”[18]. Traditionally, priests are
appointed as finance officers. It is time to change our mindset and to accept a
lay person as the finance officer. It is an open secret that clerics are often
not trained for financial administration. They are basically trained for the
spiritual care of souls. There are many lay persons who are experts in the
field of finance management. They could be appointed as the finance officer and
priests could easily engage themselves in pastoral works. Appointing a lay
person as the finance officer may be advantageous for dioceses where there is a
shortage of priests or for mission dioceses where many priests are required for
the evangelization. Here, in these situations, a suitable lay person can
function as the finance officer and leave priests free for pastoral works.
The most
important qualities of the finance officer are summarized in one sentence, in
both Codes: he must be an expert in financial matters and outstanding in
integrity/honesty (cf. CIC c. 494 §
1; CCEO c. 262 § 1)[19]. Though it is a simple sentence, it
is an important sentence and its meaning is manifold. Honesty must be evident
in everything that he does. Unless he is an honest person, the bishop and
finance council members will not trust the accounts he presents. His honesty
must be evident in all his actions. He must be sincerely accountable to the
bishop and to the members of the finance council as well. Unless they receive a
sincere and clear picture of the financial situation of the diocese, they may
not be able to plan for the future. He must not only have true skills in
financial matters and have the ability to comprehend the breadth of the
temporal holdings of the diocese, but also be able to supervise others for the
purpose of accomplishing the common goal[20]. The bishop may not be an expert in
financial matters; therefore, he may have to depend on the finance officer. If
the finance officer does not have a basic knowledge of canon law or in
administration of temporal goods, he should be given basic training.
In CIC there is no reference to civil law
expertise although this quality might be very useful for the finance
officer. Whereas the finance officer of
the eparchy should be an expert in civil law as he is one of the members of the
finance council who are to be experts in civil laws whenever it is possible
(cf. CCEO c. 263 § 1).
Both CIC and CCEO say that those who are related to the bishop up to the fourth
degree of consanguinity or affinity cannot be appointed as members of the
finance council (cf. CIC c. 492 § 3; CCEO c. 263 § 3). Since the finance
officer according to CCEO is an
ex-officio member of the finance council, he cannot be closely related to the
bishop. According to CIC 1983, the
finance officer need not be a member of the finance council by virtue of his
office. A close relative of the bishop is not prohibited from functioning as
the finance officer if he is not a member of the finance council. Even though
there is no prohibition in CIC, it is
wise and prudent to avoid appointing a close relative of the bishop as the
finance officer since the general intent of the Code is to avoid any appearance
of nepotism in the governance of the diocese[21].
5. The Term of Office
The office
of finance officer is more stable than any other office in the diocese. Like
vicar general or episcopal vicar, the finance officer does not cease from
office when the diocese becomes vacant. Since it is a stable office, the CIC
prescribes that he must be appointed for five years (cf. CIC c. 494 § 2). This is the only office in the diocesan curia for
which CIC prescribes the term of
office. After the completion of five years, the appointment can be renewed (cf.
CIC c. 494 § 2). Each renewal must be
for five years[22]. There is no limit on the number of
terms for which the finance officer can be re-appointed. The CCEO does not prescribe the term of
office, but leaves it to particular law of each Church sui iuris (cf. CCEO c.
262 § 2). The particular law of each Church sui
iuris can decide whether such an appointment is renewable or not upon the
expiration of the time, the number of renewals, etc.
6. Removal from Office
The finance
officer enjoys a certain stability because of the nature of his
responsibilities. Like the vicar general or the episcopal vicar, he cannot be
removed from the office ad nutum episcopi[23]. He cannot be removed only for a
just reason, but there should be a grave reason for the removal from the office
prior to the expiration of his term (cf. CIC
c. 494 § 2; CCEO c. 262 § 2)[24]. The law does not define the grave
reason but it is to be assessed by the bishop after consulting the college of
consultors and members of the finance council[25]. The bishop losing faith in the
finance officer could be considered a grave reason[26]. Even if there is a very grave
reason for removing the finance officer, the bishop cannot remove him freely
but he has to consult the college of consultors and members of the finance
council prior to the removal (cf. CIC
c. 494 § 2; CCEO c. 262 § 2)[27]. This is the one office in the
diocese where the bishop has to follow a procedure to remove the person whom he
has appointed. The consultation is to be done in separate meetings with both
groups[28]. The bishop need not explain the
reason in detail, if it is very confidential or to protect the good name of the
finance officer. At least he has to present the matter in a summary form. This
consultation is not only for legality but also for validity
[29]. The bishop himself judges the
seriousness of the reason. There is no other specific process for the removal,
but exigencies of justice and equity are to be considered. When he removes the
finance officer, he has to see that the diocese does not suffer in any way due
to his removal.
The
diocesan administrator can remove the finance officer after consulting the
college of consultors and members of the finance council (cf. CIC c. 427 § 1) in the Latin Church[30]. Though the finance council has the
right to elect a new finance officer if the finance officer is elected as the
diocesan administrator (cf. CIC c.
423 § 1), the council has no power to remove the finance officer. In the
Eastern Churches, the patriarch with the consent of the permanent synod can remove
a finance officer of an eparchy inside his territory. Only the Apostolic See
can remove a finance officer of an eparchy in all other cases (cf. CCEO cc. 231 § 2, 232 § 2).
7. Resignation from Office
The finance
officer can resign from his office. He has to submit his resignation in writing
to the bishop or express his intention of resignation before two witnesses (cf.
CIC c. 189 § 1; CCEO c. 969). Acceptance of resignation is not required since it is
not specified in the Codes. The finance officer should continue in office till
his resignation is accepted by the bishop. If he arbitrarily relinquishes the
office and as a consequence if any damage takes place, he is bound to make
restitution (cf. CIC c. 1289; CCEO c. 1033).
8. The Functions of the Finance Officer
The functions of the finance officer are summarized in one canon in CIC c. 494 § 3-4.
It is the responsibility of the
financial administrator, under the authority of the Bishop, to administer the
goods of the diocese in accordance with the plan of the finance committee, and
to make those payments from diocesan funds which the Bishop or his delegates
have lawfully authorized (§ 3).
At the end of the year the finance
administrator must give the finance committee an account of income and
expenditure (§ 4).
The canon prescribes three functions of the finance officer. They are:
1) to administer the goods of the diocese according to the plan of the finance
council, 2) to make payments from the diocesan funds which the bishop or his
delegates have lawfully authorized, and 3) to prepare a financial report to be
submitted to the finance council.
The CCEO c. 262 § 3 is broader
in its description of the functions of the finance officer.
Under the power of the eparchial bishop, who is to determine in greater
detail the rights and relationships of the eparchial finance officer to the
finance council, the eparchial finance officer is to administer the temporal
goods of the eparchy, to oversee the administration of the ecclesiastical goods
throughout the eparchy, to provide for their preservation, safety and increase,
to supply for the negligence of local administrators and to administer the
goods that lack an administrator designated by the law.
The CCEO prescribes five functions for the
finance officer in the canon. They are 1) to administer the temporal goods of
the eparchy, 2) to supervise the administration of ecclesiastical goods[31] in the entire eparchy, 3) to
provide for their preservation, safety and increase, 4) to compensate for the
negligence of local administrators, and 5) to administer the ecclesiastical
temporal goods which lack an administrator designated by the law. The finance
officer exercises his office under the direction and supervision of the bishop
because the bishop is the head and legal representative of the juridical
person, the diocese. There should be a close and mutual understanding between
them. Since the bishop is busy with the pastoral activities of the diocese, he
entrusts the administration of the temporal goods to the finance officer. The
most important responsibility of the finance officer is to administer the
temporal goods under the authority of the bishop (sub auctoritate Episcopi). First and foremost he should realize
that he is not the real administrator, but he does it on behalf of the bishop.
While the finance officer administers the temporal goods of the diocese, it is
the responsibility of the bishop to keep vigilance over the administration of
all ecclesiastical goods. It is to be noted that the finance officer has no
role over the temporal goods belonging to other juridic persons such as
provinces or houses of Religious Congregations, Societies of Apostolic life,
etc., as they have their own administrators.
8. 1. The Functional
Difference in CIC and CCEO
There is a
difference in the functions of finance officer in CIC and CCEO. The CCEO offers a slightly more detailed job
description of the finance officer than does the CIC. The finance officer of CIC,
while exercising his power under the bishop, has to function “secundum rationem a concilio a rebus
oeconomicis definitam”[32]. The Coetus “De Sacra Hierarchia”
in its sixth session thought of making the finance officer the president of the
finance council (“Consilium de rebus
oeconomicis, cui praeest oeconomus, vere peritus...”). But later they
decided to have the bishop as its president and to separate the finance officer
from the finance council[33]. He has to function according to
the budget determined by the finance council and meet the expenditures
authorized by the bishop or the person deputed by him[34]. He is not even a member of the
finance council according to CIC. He
just follows the direction of the finance council. He functions like an
accountant. Therefore, his role is limited. On the other hand, CCEO does not state explicitly that the
finance officer has to follow the plan of the finance council. Since he is an ex-officio member of the finance
council, he has an important role to play in the finance council. He is also
involved in the decision making process. Therefore, greater responsibility is
invested on the finance officer under CCEO.
He is fundamentally responsible to the bishop and not to the finance council.
The bishop has to determine in detail the rights and relationship of the
eparchial finance officer to the finance council.
One of the
functions of the finance officer in CIC
is “to make those payments from diocesan funds which the Bishop or his
delegates have lawfully authorized” (CIC
c. 494 § 3). He just follows the directions of the bishop and the finance
council. He has no freedom to make any other payments which the bishop or his
delegate has not authorized. He has to follow the policy of the diocese. The
finance officer under the CCEO has
more freedom with regard to this matter since the law does not limit his power
as in CIC. Therefore, he has greater
freedom to make use of his discretion and prudence when handling the finance of
the diocese.
8. 2. Responsibilities in
General
There are
many functions for the finance officer to carry out for the benefit of the
diocese. The jurisdiction of the finance officer is not limited to a particular
area but he has to supervise the administration of the temporal goods of the
entire diocese (cf. CIC c. 494 § 3; CCEO c. 262 § 3). While administering
the temporal goods of the diocese, he has to perform his responsibilities with
the diligence of a good householder (cf. CIC
c. 1284 § 1; CCEO c. 1028 § 1). He
has to supervise the temporal goods of juridic persons subjected to the bishop[35].
He has to exercise vigilance so that no goods entrusted to his care are
in any way lost or damaged. If it is necessary, he can arrange insurance
contracts (cf. CIC c. 1284 § 1, 1°; CCEO c. 1028 § 2, 1°). He has to ensure
that the ownership of the ecclesiastical goods is safeguarded in ways which are
valid in civil law (cf. CIC c. 1284 §
1, 2°). He has to observe the laws, both canon and civil, and laws imposed by
the founder, donor or legitimate authority. He has to see that no damage comes
to the Church from the non-observance of civil law (cf. CIC c. 1284 § 1, 3°; CCEO
c. 1028 § 2, 2°). He has to collect the return of goods and income accurately
and on time, preserve what is collected and use them as per the intention of the founder or lawful
norms (cf. CIC c. 1284 § 1, 4°; CCEO c. 1028 § 2, 3°). He has to see
that the interest which is due on a loan or mortgage is paid in time and also
the sum of the capital (cf. CIC c.
1284 § 1, 5°; CCEO c. 1028 § 2, 4°).
With the consent of the bishop he can profitably invest the money which may be
left over after expenses and can be usefully set aside for the purpose of the
Church (cf. CIC c. 1284 § 1, 6°; CCEO c. 1028 § 2, 5°). He has to
maintain accurate records of income and expenditure (cf. CIC c. 1284 § 1, 7°; CCEO
c. 1028 § 2, 6°). He also has to preserve records and documents of property,
and deposit authentic copies of them in the diocesan archive (cf. CIC c. 1284 § 1, 9°; CCEO c. 1028 § 2, 8°). He has to observe
meticulously, as per Church principles, the civil law pertaining to the labour
and social policies in the employment of workers (cf. CIC c. 1286, 1º; CCEO c.
1030, 1º). He has to pay a just and decent wage to those who work for the
diocese. Their salary must be for their needs and those of their dependents, if
they have any (cf. CIC c. 1286, 2º; CCEO c. 1030, 2º). In every diocese
there are many juridic persons such as seminaries, parishes, etc. The
administrators of ecclesiastical goods, if they are not lawfully withdrawn from
the power of governance by the bishop, must make an annual report of their
administration to the local ordinary (cf. CIC
c. 1287 § 1; CCEO c. 1031 § 1). As a
supervisor of the temporal goods, he must check these reports and can intervene
if some kind of negligence is found. He has to write up an accurate inventory
of movable and immovable goods with a description and estimate of their values
(cf. CIC c. 1283, 3°; CECO c. 1026, 2). One copy of it is to
be kept in the office of the finance officer and the other copy is to be
preserved in the diocesan archive. If there is any change that takes place
affecting property or patrimony, it is to be marked on both copies (cf. CIC c. 1283, 2°; CECO c. 1026). Having an inventory will help him to function in a
systematic way as well as guiding his successors to function in the office.
While he has
to fulfil many functions, he is prohibited from doing certain things while
administering the temporal goods. He cannot act validly beyond the limits and
procedures of ordinary administration unless the bishop has given him a written
consent (cf. CIC c. 1281 § 1; CCEO c. 1024 § 1). The limit of the
ordinary administration should be specified in diocesan laws. He is also
prohibited from making donations from the movable goods that do not belong to
the stable patrimony, unless it is for a just cause of piety or charity. These
donations must be in moderate amounts and according to legitimate custom (cf. CIC c. 1285; CCEO c. 1029). He should not initiate or contest a law suit in
civil court in the name of the diocese without the written permission of the
bishop (cf. CIC c. 1288; CCEO c. 1032)[36]. This permission of the bishop is
not for validity, but only for lawfulness. He shall not sell or lease
ecclesiastical goods to himself, unless they are of little value, or to his
relatives up to the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity without the
written[37] permission of the bishop (cf. CIC c. 1298; CCEO c. 1041). The purpose of this norm is to safeguard the good
reputation of the finance officer. If he sells valuable things to his close
relatives, even if sold for a high price, people may misinterpret this. As per
the law, he has no authority to make policy for the diocese or authorize
expenditures but he has to just follow the decisions of the finance council and
of the bishop.
8. 3. Multiplying the Finance
of the Diocese
The finance
officer has not only to preserve, protect and increase the temporal goods of
the diocese but also has to take every effort to multiply the fund of the
diocese. He has to discover different ways and means to increase the fund. The
dioceses in mission countries may be in need of financial support from outside.
Therefore, he has to take initiatives to approach various funding agencies
which support the dioceses financially for evangelization and social
developmental works in the diocese. When he receives offerings from different
sources, he should apply them for the purpose for which the offering was made.
He should never change the purpose of the donor. The intention of the donor
must be respected and most carefully observed (cf. CIC c. 1267 § 3; CCEO c.
1016 § 1). Once he has received temporal goods from various sources, they
become the goods of the diocese.
He
has to make sure that all the resources of the diocese are properly used. He
should see that income is generated from within the diocese as far as possible.
For example, if a diocese has agricultural land, it has to be utilized properly
for income generation for the diocese. He has to see that all resources of the
diocese are used properly in view of raising funds. While making efforts to
increase the wealth, he should not take imprudent risk with the funds of the
diocese such as investing it in an unauthorized bank or share market, etc.
There should be an investment policy for the diocese[38].
He should not be like the servant in the parable who buried the one talent
given to him by the master (cf. Mt 25: 14-30). Due to his negligence the
diocese should not be harmed financially.
8. 4. Taking Care of Public
Juridic Persons
The bishop
must carefully supervise the administration of all the goods that belong to
public juridic persons subject to him. It is the responsibility of the bishop
to have vigilance over the administration of the ecclesiastical goods within
the boundaries of his diocese and which have not been removed from his power of
governance. The bishop does not administer the temporal goods of public juridic
persons, but only supervises their administration. He fulfils his function
through pastoral visits and the inspection of public juridic persons[39]. He has to ensure that the general
principles of administering the goods of the Church are observed according to
universal and particular laws (cf. CIC
c. 1276 § 1; CCEO c. 1022 § 1)[40]. He need not do it by himself, but
can entrust his responsibility of vigilance to the finance officer (cf. CIC c. 1278). If the finance officer is
entrusted with this task, he has to oversee the administration of the temporal
goods of public juridic person subject to the bishop. The bishop can appoint
the finance officer as the administrator of a public juridic person, if there
is no administrator by law or documents of foundation or by its own statutes
(cf. CIC c. 1278)[41]. In that case the role of the
finance officer must be clearly specified.
In certain
dioceses, there may be foundations or other kinds of public juridic persons
which were established without having any financial administrators. According
to CCEO, the finance officer is the
administrator of the temporal goods which lack an administrator designated by
law (cf. CCEO c. 262 § 3). He need
not have a special appointment for it. This responsibility is not entrusted to
the finance officer of the CIC by
law. As per CIC, if an administrator
is not appointed for a public juridic person by law or by the documents of
foundation or by its own statutes, the ordinary is to intervene and appoint a
suitable person as the administrator for a term of three years (cf. CIC c. 1279 § 2). In this case, the
bishop can appoint the finance officer as the administrator, instead of appointing
another person, for such public juridic persons when it is deemed appropriate
(cf. CIC c. 1278)[42].
8. 5. Preparing a Report of
His Administration
The finance
officer must prepare a report of his administration including a statement of
income and expenditures. According to CIC,
this report is to be submitted to the finance council at the end of the year
(cf. CIC c. 494 § 4) as he is
responsible to the finance council. The report is to be presented only once a
year. CCEO, however, says that the
finance officer has to submit this report to the bishop through the finance
council. He has to submit it every year and as often as it is requested by the
same bishop (cf. CCEO c. 262 § 4).
Therefore he is not bound to present the report to the members of the finance
council. It is to be observed that the finance council does not have a right to
demand a report from the finance officer nor has the finance officer an
obligation to submit a report to the finance council according to CCEO. The bishop has to study this report
with the help of the members of the finance council (cf. CCEO c. 262 § 4). Since the finance officer is an ex-officio member of the finance
council, he is present at the finance council meeting.
8. 6. Presenting the Accounts
to the Faithful in the Diocese
The finance
officers, in both CIC and CCEO, are bound to render an account to
the faithful each year. There are some differences between CIC and CCEO in this
regard. We read in CIC: “Administrators are to render accounts to the faithful
concerning the goods which the faithful have given to the Church, in accordance
with the norms to be laid down by particular law” (CIC c. 1287 § 2). The CCEO
says: “According to the manner determined by the particular law, an
administrator of the ecclesiastical goods is to render as account publicly concerning the goods offered
to the Church, unless the local hierarch establishes otherwise for a grave
reason” (CCEO c. 1031 § 2). Both CIC and CCEO do not prescribe the method of publishing this account, but
both Codes leave it for the legislation of particular law. According to CIC, he is to give the account of the
goods given by the faithful only. During the revision process there was a
discussion about presenting the whole account to the faithful including returns
on investment, sales of property, other sources of income, etc. It was found
that in certain cases it would be praiseworthy but sometimes it could harm the
Church. Finally it was decided not to present the complete account to the
faithful, but only what they contribute to the Church[43]. Therefore, the bishop can decide
the mode of presenting the account to the faithful. As per CCEO, the finance officer has to present an account of the temporal
goods received by the Church from all sources, that is, not only the offerings
of the faithful made to the Church but also the contributions made by
non-Christians, donations given by funding agencies, etc. According to
Nedungatt, the income from farm, agriculture, investment, etc., does not come
under ‘goods offered to the Church’[44] and therefore, there is no
obligation to present these accounts. As in CIC,
particular law is to be legislated regarding the manner of publication of the
account to the faithful. Even if there is a particular law, the local hierarch
need not follow the particular law, if there is a grave reason, and he can
decide whether to make an exception[45]. This should be seen only as an
exception, in a particular context.
9. Conclusion
The office
of Diocesan Finance officer is an ancient office. Bishops are to be free from
the temporal administration of the diocese, so that they may have the time and
energy for their pastoral functions. Therefore, the law obliges him to appoint
a finance officer. Therefore, we see the seriousness of the office. It is one
of the stable offices in the diocese. The bishop is not so free in the
appointment of a finance officer of his choice. Before appointing the finance
officer, he is bound by obligation to consult the college of consultors and the
members of the finance council (cf. CIC
c. 494 § 1; CCEO c. 262 § 1). If he
neglects to consult these two bodies, his act would remain invalid. The law
demands certain qualifications for the finance officer. The bishop can remove
the finance officer, not for a just reason alone but only for a grave reason.
Again the bishop has to consult the college of consultors and the members of
the finance council prior to the removal. The finance officer may resign from
the office if he so desires. While resigning, he should see that the diocese
does not suffer in any way because of his resignation.
The finance
officer has many functions to fulfil. Primarily, he has to administer the
temporal goods of the diocese under the authority of the bishop. There is a
minor functional difference between CIC
and CCEO. According to CIC, the finance officer has to function
under the direction of the finance council (cf. CIC c. 494 § 3), whereas this is not specified in CCEO. The finance officer in CIC is directly responsible to the
finance council, but the finance officer in CCEO
is responsible to the bishop.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Possible
Offices of the Laity in the Diocesan Curia:
A Comparison of CCEO and CIC
It is published in:
Mathew John Puthenparambil, “The Possible Offices of the Laity in the Diocesan Curia: A Comparison of CCEO and CIC”, in Eastern Legal Thought, Vol. 11 (2015), pp. 129-148.
Introduction
In
today’s situation, the laity have specialized in all fields such as science,
politics, economics, commerce, and so on. There are many lay persons who are
well versed in ecclesiastical subjects such as Sacred Scripture, theology,
canon law, and so on. They have the right and duty to work so that the divine message
of salvation may be made known to all and freely accepted[1].
They are entrusted with this mission and apostolate by virtue of their baptism
and confirmation. The Church provides them with many roles for their active
involvement. They shall witness to Christ in the world. Being members of the
one Church clerics, religious and laity have to co-operate with each other in
the apostolate. No one can carry out the apostolate effectively in isolation. The
laity must not carry out their apostolate separated from the clergy and clergy
should not see the laity as solely the object of their pastoral care. Clergy
and the laity need each other. It is the priest who celebrates, but the whole
body offers; it is he who teaches but all bear witnesses; it is he who has the
care of souls but all have the mission to the apostolate[2].
Clergy and the laity must consider each other, as Paul says, “subject to one
another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5: 21)[3]. Lay
persons can play an important role in the curia. The Church cannot be fully
active without the co-operation of the laity. They can bring more professional
qualifications, experience, and personal talents to certain offices especially
as the finance officer, as members of finance council, defender of the bond,
promoter of justice, and so on, than do their clergy counterparts.
Role of the
Lay Persons in the Church
In the early Church, there was no difference between
the Apostles and the common people. The Apostles considered the common people
as their fellow workers (cf. 2 Tim 1: 6). The faithful gathered under the
leadership of the Apostles to elect a substitute for Judas. They cast their
votes and elected Mathias as the substitute (cf. Acts 1: 26). It was not a
consultative but a deliberative vote. We see the role of the common people in
electing seven deacons. The twelve Apostles called together the whole community
of the disciples and asked them to select among themselves seven men of good
standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom. The whole community chose these
seven deacons (cf. Acts 6: 1-6). Again in the Acts of the Apostles, we see that
the elders of the community joined with the Apostles to solve various problems
in their community (cf. Acts 15: 1-6). The believers are asked to choose a
judge to solve the problems among them (cf. 1 Cor 6: 4-5). All these instances
point out the important role of the laity in decision making in the primitive
Church. There was no distinction between clergy and laity. They all felt as if
they were the different parts of the same body (cf. Rom 12: 5).
When we study the teachings of the Fathers of the
Church, we see that they gave much importance to lay participation, especially
for the election of bishops in the West and in the East. Sometimes, the consent
of the people was sought. Ambrose was elected as the bishop of Milan by lay
persons[4]. The Didache
also reports the role of the laity in the election of bishops in the early
Church. Clement of Rome, Origen, Hippolytus, Cyprian of Carthage, and so on,
stressed the role of the laity, especially their role in choosing the bishops[5].
The lay persons even participated in the various
councils held in the first millennium. A few lay persons participated in the
First Ecumenical Council of Nicea held in the year 325[6].
When we come to the second millennium, we see a shift in the role of the laity
in the participation of governance of the Church. Participation of the lay
persons in the process of the election of bishops was slowly minimized. With
the Council of Trent, the participation of the laity in the election was
completely prohibited and the Church became more clerically oriented. The First
Vatican Council also did not give any importance to the laity. They were not
given due importance in the previous legislations, the 1917 Code and the Cleri sanctitati. The role of the laity
was understood in reference to the clergy. The perception of the role of the
laity was negative and they did not have much involvement in tria munera Christi.
The role assigned to the laity prior to the Second
Vatican Council was very little. It was the Second Vatican Council that gave a
positive outlook toward the laity. The laity are described as those faithful
who are neither in Holy Orders nor those who belong to a religious state
sanctioned by the Church (cf. LG
31). Unlike the 1917 Code and the Motu
proprio Cleri sanctitati, the Second
Vatican Council considers the people of God in three categories, that is,
clerics, religious and the laity.
There are no separate categories of the people of God
in the Church. All the faithful have equal status. There are different
functions for different people, but these differences do not make them
superiors or inferiors, slave or freeman. The laity are presented as a part of
the Church. They too have their rights and duties in the Church. They are no
more considered as only the objects of the ministry of the clergy. Everything
which has been said concerning the people of God applies equally to the laity
(cf. LG 30). By incorporation into
Christ and into the Church, they share in the threefold mission of Christ, that
is, priestly, prophetic and kingly missions (cf. LG 31; AA 2). It also
speaks of the various rights and duties of the lay persons in the Church (cf. LG 33; AG 21; GS 62; GE 3; PO 9).
Paul VI speaks of the role of the laity in field of evangelization
in his Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii
nuntiandi (cf. EN 70). In the
Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Christifideles
laici, John Paul II speaks of the vocation and mission of the lay person in
the Church and in the world (cf. CL
9, 14, 15, 23, 25, 33)
In his allocution to the Code Commission in 1965, Paul
VI asked them to give a more active role to the laity in the Code[7].
The CIC and CCEO are the attempt to translate the theology of the Second
Vatican Council into juridical language. As John Paul II says, the Codes are in
tune with the teachings of the Second Vatican Council[8].
Both Codes have a positive approach to the laity.
One of the important differences we observe in CIC and CCEO is that CIC divides
the christifideles into two categories,
that is, clerics and laity (cf. CIC
c. 207 § 1). Following the teachings of the Second Vatican Council (cf. LG 31), CCEO divides the christifideles
into three categories, that is, clerics, religious and the laity (cf. CCEO c. 399). Religious are considered
as a separate group in CCEO, whereas
according to CIC, religious are not a
separate group, but they either belong to the group of clerics or to the
laity. While CIC uses the phrase ‘obligations and rights’, CCEO prefers the phrase ‘rights and obligations’ of the laity as it
wants to give priority to ‘rights’ of the laity.
Lay Persons
Cooperate in the Power of Governance
The Codes do not say that lay persons have no capacity
to exercise the power of governance, but say that they can only cooperate (potest cooperari) with clerics in
exercising this power (cf. CIC c. 129
§ 2; CCEO c. 979 § 2). They cooperate
in the power of governance only when they are authorized to do so, either by
law or by personal delegation. They too have active involvement in the power of
governance. It is to be kept in mind that not any lay person can cooperate in
the power of governance but only those who have the required qualifications
such as communion with the Church, moral qualities, academic qualifications,
required age, and so on, as per the law.
The laity also participate in tria munera Christi. The
participation of the laity in tria munera
Christi is not in the way that ordained persons participate. There is an
essential difference between ministerial priesthood and common priesthood. The
laity too share the priesthood of Christ in their own way (cf. LG 10). They share the sanctifying
mission of Christ especially by participating and celebrating the sacraments.
Lay men (vir laici) can receive the
stable ministries of lector and acolyte. Though these are ministries in the
Latin Church, they are minor orders in the Eastern Churches. Lay persons (laici) can receive temporal assignment
as lector. They also function as commentator, cantor, and so on, in the
Church. They function as the
extra-ordinary ministers of baptism; can be delegated to receive matrimonial
consent, can administer sacramentals, and so on. They do participate in the
prophetic mission of Christ. They can be authorized to preach in
non-Eucharistic celebrations; can teach catechism, and so on. They do
participate in the kingly mission of Christ. Though they do not have
legislative power, they have a consultative role in councils and synods. They
also participate in the executive power in the curia. As judge in the tribunal,
they participate in judicial power too.
Lay Persons in the Curia
Our concern of this article is
the role of the laity in the eparchial/diocesan curia. The lay persons can take
up various offices in the curia such as the offices of the chancellor, finance
officer, members of the finance council, one of the judges in the collegiate
tribunal, defender of the bond, promoter of justice, advocates, procurators,
and notary. Priesthood is required only for the offices of the vicar general,
judicial vicar, episcopal vicar, and moderator of the curia. Out of these four,
the last two offices are optional in the curia.
Lay Person as the Chancellor
Every diocese should have a
chancellor. It is mandatory for the bishop, under both Codes, to appoint a
chancellor (cf. CIC c. 482 § 1; CCEO c. 252 § 1). There is a fundamental
difference between CIC and CCEO with regard to the office of the
chancellor. According to CCEO, a lay
person cannot be appointed as chancellor validly but only a cleric (cf. CCEO c. 252 § 1). According to CIC, a lay person of either sex can be appointed to the office of
the chancellor. Power of ordination is not involved in the office. The
appointment could be for definite or indefinite period of time. The bishop need
not consult anyone prior to the appointment. If it is required, the chancellor
could be given an assistant, known as the vice-chancellor (cf. CIC c. 482 § 2; CCEO c. 252 § 2). Since he has to do a clerical job, a lay person
can be appointed and clerics need not spend their time and talent for this
office in the Latin Church. Only a trustworthy lay person should be appointed
to the office as he has to deal with many confidential matters of the diocese.
The bishop has to appoint a lay
person who has the required qualification as per the law. The most important
qualification, as required by both Codes, is that the chancellor must be a
person of unblemished reputation and above all suspicion (cf. CIC
c. 483 § 2; CCEO c. 253 § 2). These are very essential
qualities as the reason is very self evident. A lay person will have better experience
in the management of administrative affairs. Besides these basic qualities,
other qualities such as knowledge of canon law[9],
archive management, and so on, are to be considered prior to the appointment.
Even after the appointment, they could be given training in these fields. The
bishop can remove the chancellor from the office, but with due regard to
justice and equity (cf. CIC c. 485; CCEO c. 255). The chancellor is free to
resign from the office.
The chancellor has a variety of
functions in the curia. The bishop may assign him many more duties other than
what is prescribed in the Codes as principal duties. To write down the acts of
the curia, dispatch them when it is required and to conserve the documents in
the curia are his prime duties (cf. CIC
c. 482 § 1; CCEO c. 252 § 1). There
are various departments in the curia. It is the chancellor who takes care of
the documents of all these departments. The bishop has to direct the chancellor
regarding the nature of documents which are to be preserved for future
reference; surely documents which have civil and juridic value are to be kept
safe. He has to counter sign all the documents that come from the local
ordinary, even though it does not invalidate the document if he does not. He
has to closely collaborate with the vicar general and the moderator of the
curia, if there is one. Since he is the one who takes care of the documents, he
takes care of the archives of the diocese as per the direction of the bishop.
Right of entry to the archives is restricted to the bishop and the chancellor
alone. Only these two persons have the key to the archive. Therefore, he takes
care of the key to the archive and ensures that no unauthorized person enters
into the archive (cf. CIC c. 487 § 1;
CCEO c. 257 § 1). He maintains the
documents in the archive as per the law. He also provides documents to those
who ask for them legitimately. Though the bishop is the one who takes care of
the secret archive, the chancellor may be entrusted the care of it. In that
case, besides preserving the documents, he has to remove the documents after
the expiration of the time limit, as per the law (cf. CIC c. 489 § 2; CCEO c.
259 § 2). He also takes care of the historical archive in the curia (cf. CIC c. 491 § 2).
The chancellor and vice-chancellor
are ipso iure notaries of the curia
(cf. CIC c. 482 § 3; CCEO c. 252 § 3) and even notaries “par excellence”[10].
There can be more than one notary for a diocese. The chancellor remains always
the principal notary of the diocese[11].
The chancellor is ipso iure secretary
of the curia in the Latin Church (cf. CIC
c. 482 § 3). The role of the secretary is neither stated in the canon nor found
in other places of the Code. However the word et indicates the difference of meaning. The notary is the one who
carries out the functions described in the CIC
c. 484 and the secretary is the one who maintains the documents of the curia[12].
The office of the secretary involves overseeing the good ordering of curial
administrative tasks in close collaboration with the vicar general and the
moderator of the curia[13].
As the secretary of the curia, he can arrange periodical curia meetings. He can
convoke the meeting of the members of the curia with the approval of the
moderator, if there is one, or of the bishop. The CCEO does not mention that the chancellor is the ipso iure secretary of the curia.
Lay Person as the Finance Officer
Another office the lay person
can assume in the curia is the office of the finance officer. It is an ancient
office in the diocese. Bishops are to be free from the temporal administration
of the diocese, so that they may have the time and energy for their pastoral
functions. Therefore, the law obliges him to appoint a finance officer. CCEO specifically states that if the
eparchial bishop fails to appoint a finance officer, the metropolitan of the
Patriarchal Church has to intervene and appoint a finance officer (cf. CCEO c. 133 § 1, 6º). It shows the
seriousness of the office. It is one of the stable offices in the diocese.
Normally, priests are appointed as finance officers
especially in India. It is time to change our mindset and to accept a lay
person as the finance officer. It is an open secret that clerics are often not
trained for financial administration. They are basically trained for the spiritual
care of souls. There are many lay persons who are experts in the field of
finance management. They could be appointed as the finance officer and priests
could easily engage themselves in evangelization and pastoral works. Appointing
a lay person as the finance officer may be advantageous where there is a
shortage of priests or for mission dioceses where many priests are required for
the evangelization. Here, in these situations, a suitable lay person can
function as the finance officer and leave priests free for pastoral works.
The bishop is not so free in
the appointment of a finance officer. Before appointing a finance officer, he
is bound by obligation to consult the college of consultors and the members of
the finance council (cf. CIC c. 494 §
1; CCEO c. 262 § 1). It must be
convoked formally and the bishop must seek out the opinion of each member of
both groups in a face-to-face meeting[14].
If he neglects to consult these two bodies, his act would remain unlawful. The
law demands certain qualifications for the finance officer. The principal
qualification of the finance officer is that he should be an expert in
financial matters and outstanding in integrity/honesty (cf. CIC c. 494 § 1; CCEO c. 262 § 1)[15].
The demand for this qualification is self explanatory. The CCEO specifically states that he must be a member of the Christian
faithful (cf. CCEO c. 262 § 1),
whereas the CIC does not mention
anything of this sort. According to CCEO,
a person related to the bishop up to the fourth degree of consanguinity or
affinity cannot be appointed as the finance officer, but there is no such
prohibition in CIC. According to CIC, the finance officer is to be
appointed for the period of five years (cf. CIC
c. 494 § 2). CCEO does not prescribe
any time limit, but leaves it to the particular law of Churches sui iuris (cf. CCEO c. 262 § 2). According
to the particular laws of the Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara Church, the
finance officer is appointed for the period of three years[16].
The bishop can remove the finance officer, not for a just reason alone but only
for a grave reason. Again the bishop has to consult the college of consultors
and the members of the finance council prior to the removal. The finance
officer may resign from the office if he so desires. While resigning, he should
see that the diocese does not suffer in any way because of his resignation.
The finance officer has many
functions to fulfil. Primarily, he has to administer the temporal goods of the
diocese under the authority of the bishop. There is a functional difference
between CIC and CCEO. According to CIC,
the finance officer has to function under the direction of the finance council
(cf. CIC c. 494 § 3), whereas this is
not specified in CCEO. The finance
officer in CIC is directly
responsible to the finance council, but the finance officer in CCEO is responsible to the eparchial
bishop.
The jurisdiction of the finance
officer is extended to the entire diocese. While administering the temporal
goods, he has to follow both civil and canon law. He maintains a proper account
of income and expenditures of the goods of the diocese. He has to make all due
payments and maintain a proper inventory of movable and unmovable goods. He is
not only a just administrator or accountant, but has to try to multiply the
fund of the diocese using appropriate means. He also takes care of the goods of
public juridic persons which are under the governance of the bishop. He
prepares a report of his administration. There is a slight difference in
presenting this report in CIC and CCEO. According to CIC, he submits this report to the finance council at the end of
the year. CCEO prescribes that the
finance officer has to submit the report to the bishop through the finance
council every year and as often as it is requested. The finance officer also
has to prepare a budget of income and expenditure each year (cf. CIC c. 1284 § 3, CCEO c. 1028 § 3). The Code of Particular Law of the Syro-Malabar
Church states that the annual account prepared by the finance officer shall get
the approval of the finance council and the college of eparchial consultors (cf.
Art. 210 § 3).
He is bound by obligation to
present an account to the faithful of the diocese every year. Again there is a
difference between CIC and CCEO with regard to this presentation.
According to CIC, he has to present
the account concerning the goods given by the faithful (cf. CIC c. 1287 § 2), but for CCEO it must be the account of all
sources (cf. CCEO c. 1031 § 2). The
manner of publishing this account is to be legislated in particular law,
according to both Codes. The finance officer functions under the diocesan
administrator during the vacancy of the diocese. CCEO alone states that the finance administrator must render an
account of his administration during the vacancy of the eparchy to the new
bishop, and after submitting this report he ceases from the office unless the
new bishop confirms him in office (cf. CCEO
c. 232 § 4).
Lay Persons in the Diocesan Finance Council
The finance council is another
area where lay persons can assume the office. This is the only council which is
a part of the curia. The bishop has a serious obligation to establish a finance
council in his diocese. While composing it, he should give due representation
to lay persons on the council. Without any doubt, we say that lay persons may
be more suitable for this office. For better functioning of the council, it is
to be composed of lay persons and clerics. It may not be prudent to appoint
only lay persons in the finance council.
According to CIC, the bishop is free to appoint
suitable lay persons to this council; he need not consult anyone prior to the
appointment. But CCEO demands bishop to
consult the college of eparchial consultors before appointing members of the
finance council.
According to CIC, the finance council is to be
composed of at least three persons and the maximum number of the council is to
be decided by the bishop (cf. CIC c. 492 § 1). The CCEO does not mention the minimum or
maximum number of members. It can be legislated in the particular law of each
Church sui iuris. According to CIC, the members of the finance council
are appointed for five years. CCEO leaves
this matter to the particular law of Church sui
iuris. The members could be re-appointed. The bishop may remove any of its
members before the expiration of the term only for a grave reason. The members
have the right to renounce the office for a serious reason.
The most important
qualification for the members of the finance council is that they are to be
truly experts in matters of finance and civil law (cf. CIC c. 492 § 1; CCEO c.
263 § 1). They also should be persons of outstanding integrity and well-known
for their love for the Church and its apostolate[17].
Those who are related to the bishop up to the fourth degree of consanguinity or
affinity are prohibited from being members of this council (cf. CIC c. 492 § 3; CCEO
c. 263 § 3).
The bishop has to preside over
the council. It has many functions to fulfil. It is the finance council which
prepares the budget for the diocese under the guidance of the bishop (cf.
CIC c. 493; CCEO c. 263 § 5). It
reviews the report of the finance officer regarding his administration (cf. CIC c. 494 § 4; CCEO c. 262 § 4) and the report sent by other administrators such
as parishes, shrines, and so on (cf. CIC
c. 1287 § 1; CCEO c. 1031 § 1).
Another very important role of the council is to elect an interim finance
officer, if the finance officer has been elected or appointed as the diocesan
administrator when the diocese falls vacant (cf. CIC c. 423 § 1; CCEO c.
225 § 2). The bishop has to consult the finance council on a few occasions.
They have to give counsel to the bishop for the appointment and removal of the
finance officer (cf. CIC cc. 494 § 1, 494 § 2; CCEO cc. 262 § 1, 262 §
1), for the administration of major important acts (cf. CIC c. 1277; CCEO c. 263
§ 4), before the investment of endowment capital (cf. CIC c. 1305; CCEO c.
1049), before diminishing a will (cf. CIC
c. 1310 § 2; CCEO c. 1054 § 2), and
before imposing a tax in the Latin Church (cf. CIC c. 1263). Though basically it is a consultative body, on rare
occasions the bishop requires its consent to act validly. The members have to
give their consent to the bishop to perform the acts of extra-ordinary
administration (cf. CIC c. 1277; CCEO c. 1036 § 1), for alienation of
property (cf. CIC c. 1292 § 1; CCEO c. 1036 § 1), and before imposing a
tax in the eparchies (cf. CCEO c.
1012 § 1). When the bishop asks consent of the members of the finance council,
he cannot vote or break the tie[18].
Therefore, this body plays a prominent role in the administration of the
diocese. The Code of Particular Law of the Syro-Malabar Church says that the
annual account of the eparchy prepared by the finance officer shall get the
approval of the finance council (cf. Art. 210 § 3). Because of its major role
in the diocese, preferably, there should be a few clerics also on the finance
council. It is not advisable that it be composed entirely of the laity.
Lay Person as Judge in the Tribunal
The judiciary is also a part of
the curia. The bishop is the judge in the diocese. He entrusts his judicial
power to the judicial vicar and other judges. Therefore, the power of the
judicial vicar is the ordinary vicarious power. The bishop has the right to
reserve certain cases to himself. An appeal against the decision of the
judicial vicar cannot be lodged with the bishop as they both constitute one
tribunal (cf. CIC c. 1423 § 1; PB 124 § 3; CCEO c. 1067). There
are collegiate tribunals and sole judge tribunals. The collegiate tribunal is
the normal practice in the Church and the other is an exception. When there are
not a sufficient number of qualified tribunal personnel, several bishops of the
same region can erect a common tribunal with the proper permission from the
competent authority. The bishops of the Latin Church have to obtain this
permission from the Apostolic See and the bishops of the Eastern Churches from
the Patriarch/metropolitan. The CCEO
alone provides another provision that the bishops of different Churches sui iuris of the same territory can
erect a common tribunal. Thus, there can be a common tribunal for the Latin and
the Eastern eparchies in the same territory (cf. CCEO c. 1068 § 1).
All the tribunal offices could
be occupied by lay persons except the office of the judicial vicar. Thus, lay
persons can be appointed as judge, defender of the bond, promoter of justice,
advocates, procurator, notary, and so on. A collegiate tribunal is composed of
three judges. One of these three judges could be a lay person while the other
two judges must be clerics (cf. CIC c. 1421 § 2; CCEO c. 1087 § 2).
The tribunal personnel have
certain obligations. All those who work in the tribunal have to fulfil their
duties faithfully and properly. The CIC
says that they have to take an oath for this (cf. CIC c.
1454), whereas CCEO
asks only that they make a promise (cf. CCEO c. 1112). They also have serious obligations to
maintain secrecy of their knowledge (cf. CIC c. 1455 § 1; CCEO c. 1113 § 1). They are forbidden to accept any gift in the form
of any kind, cash, etc., from any person involved in the trial (cf. CIC c. 1456; CCEO c.
1114). They are asked to be impartial toward the parties. They should
not have any personal interest in the trial. Therefore, they shall not take up
the cases of their close relatives, friends, enemies, etc. (cf. CIC c. 1448 § 1; CCEO c. 1106 §
1). They are
also asked to avoid delay in handling cases as far as possible (cf. CIC c. 1453; CCEO c. 1111). The tribunal personnel can be punished with
penalties for the abuse of their office (cf. CIC c. 1457; CCEO c. 1115).
It is the right of the bishop
to appoint judges who could be either male or female. He can appoint many lay
judges in a tribunal. If possible, every tribunal shall have a few lay judges.
Lay judges also should be involved in matters affecting lay persons.
Under CIC
1917 and the Motu proprio Cleri
sanctitati, no lay person could be appointed judge in the tribunals. After
the Second Vatican Council there was a shift that lay persons were permitted to
function as judges[19]. To
appoint a lay person as judge, the bishop should obtain proper permission.
Bishops of the Latin Church get this permission from the Bishops’ Conference (cf. CIC c. 1421 § 2) while bishops of the Eastern Churches get
permission from the Patriarch/metropolitan of the Church sui iuris.
Bishops of the other Churches sui iuris
have to get permission from the Apostolic See (cf. CCEO c. 1087 § 2). It is good to have a lay judge, along with other
two clerical judges, in the collegiate tribunal as he understands family
problems better. Appointing judges of both sexes is to be encouraged as far as
possible. A judge may be removed for a grave reason and at the same time he
also has the freedom to renounce his office.
Besides the moral
qualifications, the academic requirement is very important for judges. They
should have at least a licentiate in canon law (cf. CIC c. 1421 § 3; CCEO c.
1087 § 3). A mere degree is not sufficient, but they should have thorough
knowledge of law and jurisprudence. They should be persons who update their
knowledge from time to time. The CCEO
exclusively mentions that they should be persons of prudence and should have
zeal for justice (cf. CCEO c. 1086 §
4). They are to be of good repute (integra
fama). Good reputation presupposes that no one can reasonably point out
against the person any allegation[20].
To be faithful to the law is an
important responsibility of judges. They should be pastors to the parties when they approach them.
As far as possible, they have to try to reconcile them together when they
demand annulment. Fixing the terms of controversy, instruction of the parties
and witnesses, evaluation of the documentary proof, obtaining moral certitude,
giving judicial sentence, etc., are their other functions.
Lay Person as Defender of the Bond or Promoter of Justice
Lay persons can also hold the
offices of defender of the bond and promoter of justice in the tribunal. The
Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum successores also recommends that lay persons be
appointed to these offices[21].
Priests need not be appointed to these offices as lay persons can easily
function in these areas. More lay persons should be trained and appointed as
per the need. The defender of the bond is essential for the declaration of the
nullity of sacred ordination, and nullity or dissolution of marriage cases (cf.
CIC c. 1432; CCEO c. 1096). The promoter of justice is appointed for the
maintenance of justice in a diocese and he has to act in the penal and
contentious cases. A lay person cannot be involved in the cases of penal trials
of clerics accused of sexual abuses, and cases of more grave delicts reserved
to Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. They could be appointed ad universitatem causarum or ad singulas causas. One person cannot
hold these two offices in the same cases. The qualifications for both these
offices are the same. They should be persons of unimpaired reputation, prudence
and zeal for justice[22].
Like judges, they too should have at least a licentiate in canon law (cf. CIC c. 1435; CCEO c. 1099 § 2). They can be appointed for definite or indefinite
periods of time. The bishop can remove them for a just cause.
The defender of the bond and
the promoter of justice have the right to inspect the judicial act, they have
the right to be present at the trial, and they have the right to be heard. The
defender of the bond can intervene in documentary proof, in Ratum et non-consumatum process, in
cases of privilege of the faith, etc. He also has a say in the nullity of
sacred ordination. The promoter of justice has an obligation to protect the
common good (cf. CIC c. 1430; CCEO c. 1094). He plays an important
role in the penal process.
Lay Person as Advocate in the Tribunal
The advocate is a person who protects the rights of
the parties during canonical processes[23]. He
provides advice and technical assistance, in preparing the evidence for
annulment cases[24].
A party, if he so desires, can appoint an advocate and a procurator on
his behalf. These are optional offices, not mandatory. A judge also may appoint
an advocate if the situation so requires (cf. CIC c. 1481; CCEO c. 1139). Normally, there
can be only one advocate and one procurator for a party. They should be persons
of good repute. Having a degree in canon law is not essential (cf. CIC c. 1483; CCEO c. 1141), but the advocate should have a good knowledge of it.
Like any other official in the tribunal, he too can be removed. The advocate
has to give technical and juridical advice to the parties. He can examine
documents and proofs; can be present at the time of examination of parties; can
provide supplementary questions to the judge, etc.
Lay Person as Notary in the Tribunal
The office of the notary is an
essential part of the tribunal. There can be more than one notary in a
tribunal. He, also known as magister
actorum[25],
is a technician for the judicial proceedings who draws up acts with technical
skill[26].
He can be appointed for all cases or for a single case. He cannot function as
the judge, defender of the bond or promoter of justice in the same case. He
only needs the moral qualification of an unimpaired reputation and of being
above suspicion, and no academic qualification is required of him. A lay person
cannot function in a case which could involve the reputation of priests, and
according to CCEO
even of deacons. A lay person is forbidden to function as notary in
cases of more delicts reserved to Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith.
The main responsibility of the notary is to be present at the time of
examination of parties and witnesses. He has to note down all the acts
faithfully without any alteration (cf. CIC
c. 1567 § 1; CCEO c. 1248 § 1) and authenticate it with
his signature (cf. CIC c. 1437 §
1; CCEO c. 1101 § 1).
Conclusion
We have seen that the Second Vatican Council has given
due importance to, and promoted the role of the laity in the Church. The Codes
of the Latin as well as of the Eastern Churches have incorporated the spirit of
the Second Vatican Council into legislations. The role and functions of the
laity are be encouraged and supported, not to fill the vacancy of the clerics
but to have them as participants in the administration of and the building up
of the diocese. As the diocese is
composed of clerics, religious and laity, ideally speaking, the diocesan curia
should be composed of all the sections of the people of God. The CCEO clearly speaks of the persons who
belong to the eparchial curia (cf. CCEO
c. 243 § 2) whereas CIC does not. It
is composed of various officials such as vicar general, episcopal vicar,
chancellor, finance officer, members of the finance council, judicial vicar and
judges, defender of the bond, promoter of justice, notaries, etc. The offices
of vicar general, episcopal vicar, and judicial vicar can be held by priests
alone under both Codes and lay people are capable of holding other offices in
the curia. As members of the curia, they
too have the same functions as clerics having an office in the curia. The CCEO
norms are broader in scope with regard to the role of the laity in the Church.
According to CIC the lay person can
take up only those offices which are permitted by the law. In CCEO lay persons can take up any
ecclesiastical office except those offices which the law prohibits or reserves
to the clergy alone[27].
Let lay persons also feel that they too are fully part of the eparchy/diocese.
Dr Mathew John
PUTHENPARAMBIL
[1]
Cf. Vatican Council II, Dogmatic
Constitution on the Church Lumen gentium (21
November 1964), no. 33, in AAS
57 (1965), p. 30; English translation in Austin Flannery (ed.), Vatican
Council II: The Conciliar and Post-Conciliar Documents, Costello Publishing
Company, New York 1996, p. 390 (Hereafter it will be cited as LG).
[2]
Cf. Yves M. J. Congar, Priest and Layman, P. J. Hepburne-Scott (Trans.), Darton Longman,
London 1962, p. 99.
[3]
In this article, the biblical passages are cited from The Holy Bible: The New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition,
Theological Publications in India, Bangalore 2011.
[4]
Cf. Philip Schaff - Henry Wace (eds), A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the
Christian Church, vol. 2, WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Michigan
1979, p. 113.
[5]
Didache, Chapter 15: 1, in William A. Jurgens,
The Faith of the Early Fathers, p.
4.
[6]
Cf. Charles J. Hefele, A History of the Christian Councils, From
the Original Documents to the Close of the Council of Nicea A. D. 325, vol.
1, AMS Press, New York 1972, pp. 270-271.
[7] Cf. Paul
VI, “Allocutio ad E. Mos Patres Cardinales et ad Consultores Pontificii
Consilii Codici Iuris Canonici Recognoscendo” (20 November 1965), in AAS 57 (1965), p. 985.
[8]
Cf. John Paul II, Apostolic
Constitution Sacrae disciplinae legis, in AAS 75/2 (1983), p.
viii.
[9]
Cf. Congregation for Bishops,
Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum successores (22 February 2004), no. 179, Libreria
Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City 2004, p. 194
(Hereafter it will be cited as Apostolorum
successores).
[10] Cf. Alberto Perlasca, “La Funzione notarile del cancelliere e degli
altri notai della curia”, in Quaderni di Diritto Ecclesiale 14
(2001), p. 133; Dennis W. Morrow,
“The Chancellor as Archivist”, in CLSA
Proceedings 50 (1988), p. 222.
[11]
Cf. Ernest Caparros - Hélène Aubé (eds), Code of Canon Law Annotated, Second edition, Wilson & Lafleur
Limitée, Montréal 2004, p. 401.
[12]
Cf. Francesco Cocopalmerio, “The
Chancellor, Other Notaries and the Archives”, in Ángel Marzoa - Jorge Miras
- Rafael Rodriguez-Ocaña (eds), Exegetical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, vol. 2, Midwest
Theological Forum, Chicago 2004, p. 1138.
[13]
Cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum successores 179.
[14]
Cf. Thomas J. Green, “Shepherding
the Patrimony of the Poor: Diocesan and Parish Structures of Financial
Administration”, in The Jurist 56
(1997), p. 711.
[15]
Cf. Joseph T. Martin De Agar, A Handbook on Canon Law, Wilson &
Lafleur Limitée, Montréal 1999, p. 90.
[16]
Code of Particular Law of the Syro-Malabar
Church, Article 13, Syro-Malabar Major Archiepiscopal Curia, Mount St.
Thomas, 2013; The Code of Particular
Canons of the Syro-Malankara Catholic Church, Can 104, Major Archiepiscopal
Curia, Catholicate Centre, Trivandrum 2012.
[17]
Cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorom seccessores 192.
[18]
Cf. Pontifical Council for Interpretation
of Legislative Texts, Authentic Interpretation De superiore eiusque consilio (5 July 1985), in AAS 77 (1985), p. 771.
[19]
Cf. Pietro L. Frattin, “Lay Judges
in Ecclesiastical Tribunals”, in The
Jurist 28 (1968), pp. 177-184.
[21]
Cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum successores 180.
[22]
Cf. Harmon D. Skillen, “Officials
of the Tribunal: Terminology, Qualification, Responsibility”, in CLSA Proceedings 45 (1983), p. 51.
[23]
Cf. J. Bajada, “The Tribunal’s
Advocate: A Minister of Truth and Justice”, in Forum 5 (1994), p. 71.
[24]
Cf. Marilyn R. Vassallo, “Lay
Advocates: Collaborative Bridge between Tribunals and Parishes”, in CLSA Proceedings 68 (2006), p. 190.
[25] Cf. Francisco J. Ramos, I Tribunali Ecclesiastici:
Costituzione, Organizzazione, Norme Processuali, Millenium Romae, Rome 1998,
p. 153.
[27]
Cf. Jean Gaudemet, “The Lay
People”, in George Nedungatt (ed.),
A Guide to the Eastern Code: A Commentary on the Code of Canons of the
Eastern Churches, Pontifical Oriental Institute, Rome 2002, p. 340; Jobe Abbass, “The Incomparable Canons on the
Role of the Laity”, in CLSA Proceedings
71 (2009), p. 35.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
6
Role of Laity in Diocesan Finance
Council
A
Comparative Study of Latin and Eastern Codes
This
article is published: cf. Mathew John Puthenparambil, in The Living Word: Identity and Witness, vol. 119
(No. 4), July-August 2013, pp. 257-274. (Published
from (St. Joseph’s Pontifical Seminary Carmelgiri, Aluva).
Introduction
Traditionally, priests are appointed as
members of the Finance Council. However, now lay people, who are outstanding in the requisite
knowledge, prudence and integrity, can be appointed as
members in the Finance Council. The Diocesan Finance Council forms a part of the
diocesan curia. It is the only collegial body which is a part of the diocesan
curia. In general, it is a consultative body of the diocesan bishop with regard
to the temporal goods of the diocese[1]. The bishop is obliged to
constitute (constituendus est) a
Finance Council in his diocese[2]. The Finance Council in its
present form is the effect of the reformation of the Second Vatican Council[3]. While composing it, he should
give due representation to lay persons on the council. Without any doubt, one can
say that lay persons will be more suitable for this office. This work is a search for the role of the laity in
the Diocesan Finnace Council according to CIC
and CCEO.
1.
The Appointment of Lay Persons as Members
There was an institution called
the council of administrators in CIC
1917 as well as in the Motu proprio
Postquam apostolicis litteris. This council was to be established in all
dioceses. It was composed of two or more suitable men who were experts in economic
and legal matters. It would advise the bishop and sometimes the bishop was
required to obtain its consent (cf. 1917 CIC
c. 1520; PA c. 263). It is this
council that opened the way for the institution of the Finance Council in its present form[4].
The CIC 1917 required the ordinary to consult the cathedral chapter or
the diocesan consultors before appointing members to the administrative
council. After 1917, the diocesan consultors themselves were appointed as the
council of administration in many dioceses and they were consulted on temporal
matters. According to CIC 1983 the
diocesan bishop can freely select and appoint its members. The Finance Council is
a good area where the diocesan bishop can involve the participation of the
laity in the governance of the diocese. By appointing lay persons to the Finance
Council the diocesan bishop can implement the teachings of the Second Vatican
Council which says that lay persons who are outstanding in requisite knowledge,
prudence, and integrity are capable of being experts or advisors who are to be
heard (cf. LG 33; CD 10; AA 20)[5]. There are many lay people who
are experts in financial matters and therefore, they will be able to advise the
diocesan bishop in a proper and fitting manner. It is important that he
receives counsel from experts. There are lay persons who are working in various
financial enterprises. Their service shall be used for the welfare of the diocese.
According to CIC the diocesan bishop is not bound to consult anyone prior to the
appointment of the members[6]. On the contrary, CCEO asks the eparchial bishops to
consult the college of consultors before appointing members (cf. CCEO c. 263 § 1). Particular laws of a
Church sui iuris can be legislated to establish any other procedure for
selecting the members of the Finance Council, possibly by election, in which
case the eparchial bishop has to confirm the election (cf. CCEO c. 263 § 1). Since the members of the Finance Council are part of the diocesan curia each of them
should be given an appointment letter[7].
2.
President of the Finance Council
The diocesan bishop has to
preside over the Finance Council as he is the chief administrative person in
the diocese. Even though he is its president, he is neither a member, nor does
he vote in a consultative or deliberative context. The Pontifical Council for
the Interpretation of Legislative Texts has clearly stated that the diocesan
bishop cannot even break the tie[8]. The CIC alone gives a provision that a diocesan bishop can delegate
another person to preside over the Finance Council (cf. CIC c. 492 § 1)[9]. He can delegate his vicar
general or any other priest to preside over the meetings of the Finance Council.
He may delegate even a lay person to preside since presiding over the Finance Council
is not a distinctly priestly function requiring the power of orders for its
valid exercise[10]. Presiding over the meeting
includes calling the meeting, approving the agenda, taking care of proper
recording of the minutes and acts of the meeting, etc.,[11]. Whenever he needs to get the
consent of the members of the Finance Council or to consult them, as per the
requirement of the law, it is advisable that he himself presides over the
meeting[12]. The provision for delegating
another person is not given in CCEO
and therefore the eparchial bishop remains as the president of the Finance Council[13]. Even though he is the ex-officio president of it, there is
nothing wrong with the protosyncellus or any other person presiding over its
particular sessions. According to the CCEO,
the finance officer is included in the Finance Council ipso
iure (cf. CCEO c. 263 § 2)[14].
3.
The Number of Members
According to CIC, the Finance Council is to be composed of at least three
persons (cf. CIC c. 492 § 1). The
members do not represent any category of the people as in the case of the Presbyteral
Council (cf. CIC c. 497) or Pastoral Council
of the diocese (cf. CIC c. 512 § 2).
The Code does not prescribe the maximum number for the council. It is the
diocesan bishop who decides the maximum number considering the size of the
diocese and the extent of work to be done. A larger body is always better to
make more appropriate decisions especially in the areas of extra-ordinary
administration, alienation of diocesan property, etc. At the same time it is
not advisable to have too many members on the Finance Council as there can be
too many opinions and deliberations. Whatever may be the number of the members,
an odd number may be preferable, as in some cases there can be vote in the
council and it will make the decision clearer.
Nothing is mentioned in CCEO regarding the minimum or maximum
number of members of the council. It is left to the discretion of the eparchial
bishop depending upon the particular situation of his eparchy. According to the
Motu proprio Postquam apostolicis
litteris[15], it was composed of two or more
suitable men (cf. PA c. 263 § 1).
Particular law can be made regarding the minimum and maximum number of members
on the Finance Council . There must be at least two or more as the word “some”
is used in the canon. It is better that the council should consist of at least
three persons as a college must consist of at least three [16].
4.
The Qualifications of Members
The general qualifications for
any ecclesiastical office are to be considered, besides the qualifications
mentioned particularly for the members of the Finance Council. The members of
the council must be Christian faithful (christifidelibus), but need not
always be Catholics[17]. Therefore, it could be composed
of clerics alone, religious alone, laity alone or a mixture of two or three
categories. According to CCEO the
members of the Finance Council need not
be Christian faithful, but can be non-Christians as the term ‘persons’ is used
in the canon[18]. It says: “The eparchial bishop
is to erect a Finance Council consisting
of a president, who is the eparchial bishop himself, and of some suitable
persons who are expert, if possible, also in canon law …” (CCEO c. 263 § 1). The Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Pastores gregis[19]
says
that it is appropriate to entrust the finance administration of the diocese to
the individuals who are competent as well as honest, so that it can become an
example of transparency for other similar Church institutions (cf. PG 45).
An important qualification
mentioned is that they must be truly experts in financial matters as well as in
civil law; this is required of them as they are to counsels the bishop
on extraordinary administration, taxation, diminishing the will, alienation of
diocesan property, etc. This is to assure appropriate professional expertise
and distinctive ecclesial service in areas such as budgeting, insurance,
construction, auditing, etc., and to enable the diocesan bishop to protect the
Church’s financial patrimony as effectively as possible[20]. Specialization in civil law is
not an essential quality for the members of the Finance Council in CCEO. The eparchial bishops are asked to
appoint persons who are experts in financial matters, and only if possible they
must be experts in civil law (cf. CCEO
c. 263 § 1).
Another quality mentioned only in
CIC is that they should be of
outstanding integrity (cf. CIC c. 492
§ 1). They are to be noted for their integrity which will help the diocese in
its dedication to principles of administrative honesty and forestall any
implications of scandal in relation to the patrimony of the Church[21]. Though it is not mentioned in CCEO, it is presumed that Finance Council
members must be known for their honesty. The Directory for the Pastoral
Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum
successores adds another quality: the members of the Finance Council are to
be renowned for their love for the Church and its apostolate[22]. It again says: “In those places
where the permanent diaconate has been instituted, steps should be taken to
arrange the participation of the deacons in Finance Council s, according to the
charism of their order”[23].
The members of the Finance Council
should stand for truth and justice. If they disagree with a certain idea of the
bishop, they should be able to express it in a polite manner. According to
Bennett, the so called ‘yes-men’ or ‘rubber stamp’ appointment would appear to
be a violation of the intent of the law[24].
According to the canon, a person
who is related to the diocesan bishop up to the fourth degree of consanguinity
or affinity cannot be a member of the Finance Council (cf. CIC c. 492 § 3; CCEO c.
263 § 3). Therefore, a bishop cannot appoint his brothers, sisters, nieces,
nephews, uncles, aunts and their spouses as members of the Finance Council. This
is to prevent the possibility of nepotism and favouritism[25]. In a similar way, two persons
from the same family or close relatives as members is to be avoided as far as
possible on the Finance Council. As close relatives of the diocesan bishop are
avoided, it is better to avoid the close relatives of the finance officer too.
These will help the smooth function of the Finance Council.
5.
The Term of Office and Resignation from Office
The members of the council are
appointed for a period of five years (cf. CIC
c. 492 § 2). The duration of five years may be connected with the office of the
finance officer which is also for five years as per the Latin Code (cf. CIC c. 494 § 2). The appointment can be
renewed again once they complete the term in office[26]. The CCEO does not speak of the duration of the Finance Council.
Therefore, particular law can specify the period of duration. The members of
the Finance Council may resign from office for a just cause (cf. CIC c. 187; CCEO c. 967). They have to communicate their intention of
resignation to the diocesan bishop either in writing or expressing it in front
of two witnesses (cf. CIC c. 189 § 1;
CCEO c. 969). Both Codes say nothing
about acceptance of the resignation being required, and therefore it takes
effect immediately.
6.
Removal from the Finance Council
The diocesan bishop can remove
any member from the council before the expiration of his term only for a grave
reason (cf. CIC c. 193 § 2; CCEO c. 975 § 1)[27]. Both Codes do not specify the
grave reasons for removal. Therefore, the diocesan statute can specify them.
There is no particular procedure to be followed to remove a member from the
council. There is no requirement for the
bishop to consult the college of consultors or members of the Finance Council prior
to the removal of a member. While removing a person, the bishop has to observe
justice and equity. A decree of removal must be communicated in writing for the
validity of the action (cf. CIC cc.
192, 193 § 4; CCEO c. 974 § 1-2).
Since the members of the Finance Council are appointed after consulting the
college of eparchial consultors in the Eastern Churches (cf. CCEO c. 263 § 1), it is advisable that
the eparchial bishop consult the college of eparchial consultors before the
removal, even though CCEO does not
demand this.
7.
Statutes for the Finance Council
The diocesan bishop is free to
make statutes for the Finance Council . He can define the concrete rights and
duties of the members in the statutes. If the bishop considers it necessary he
can create an office of the secretary for the Finance Council to take accurate
minutes of the meetings. His other duties are to be prescribed in detail in the
statutes. He may be appointed by the bishop himself or elected by the members
of the Finance Council. The secretary need not be a member of the Finance
Council; he could be any other person like the bishop’s office secretary,
chancellor, etc. All these are to be specified in the statutes.
8. The
Functions of the Members
The diocesan financial council is
an essential part of the diocese and it plays an important role in the diocese.
As a council they assist the diocesan bishop to administer the temporal goods
of the diocese. The law does not allow the diocesan bishop always to act alone.
He has to listen to the Finance Council on important matters of financial
administration (cf. CIC c. 1277; CCEO c. 263 § 4). In certain cases, he
has the obligation to consult the Finance Council and in a few other cases he
has to get the consent of the council for the administration. If the diocesan
bishop is asked to get the consent of the members of the Finance Council, his
acts are invalid if he does anything without the consent of the Finance Council
. In the same manner, if he is asked to consult the Finance Council, his acts
are invalid if he does not consult them (cf. CIC c. 127 § 2; CCEO c.
934 § 2). When consent is required, an absolute majority of those present must
be secured[28].
When the bishop asks consent of the members of the Finance Council, he cannot
vote or break the tie[29].
Asking consent or consulting the members should not be seen as merely a
formality but it is a serious responsibility of the bishop. All the members of
the Finance Council have a serious obligation to give their opinions sincerely
(cf. CIC c. 127 § 3; CCEO c. 934 § 4). The bishop has the
moral obligation to follow the opinions of the members, especially if all or a
majority of them have the same opinion.
The CCEO alone says that the eparchial bishop who asks the consent or
consults the Finance Council should provide necessary information in advance.
He should also see that they are given sufficient freedom to express their
opinions to him (cf. CCEO c. 934 §
3). When they receive the agenda well in
advance they are given sufficient time to reflect on the topic, and if needed
they can even consult experts confidentially without breaching the secrecy,
before they attend the meeting. It will
be praiseworthy if bishops of the Latin Church also take the spirit of this
canon of CCEO and provide the agenda
to the members of the Finance Council in advance.
8. 1. Giving Counsel for the
Appointment and Removal of the Finance Officer
The members of the Finance Council
have a serious obligation to give counsel to the diocesan bishop when asked.
Before appointing a finance officer, the members of the Finance Council are
consulted by the diocesan bishop (cf. CIC
c. 494 § 1; CCEO c. 262 § 1). This
consultation is essential to find out the best person for the office. The
bishop may not have complete knowledge of a particular person whom he wishes to
appoint. When he discusses with them he gets more information regarding the
candidate. Therefore, there must be a thorough consultation so that the right
person may be selected.
In similar way, if the bishop
wants to remove the finance officer before the expiration of his term of
office, he has to consult the Finance Council (cf. CIC c. 494 § 2; CCEO c. 262 § 1). A bishop cannot remove the finance officer
according to his whims and fancies and therefore he has to consult the members
before executing his decision. Without consulting the Finance Council, he
cannot remove him even if there is a grave cause. The members of the Finance Council
have the right to know the reason for the removal. If they are not convinced of
the reasons presented by the bishop, they should advise him not to remove him
from the office[30].
8. 2 Giving Counsel for Major
Important Acts
The diocesan bishop is obliged to
consult the members of the Finance Council for the administration of more
important acts. The CIC demands that the
diocesan bishop consult also the college of consultors (cf. CIC c. 1277; CCEO c. 263 § 4). The Code does not describe what are ‘the acts of
administration of major importance’ (CIC)
or ‘the more important acts concerning financial matters’ (CCEO). A major act for a poor diocese could be a minor act for a
rich diocese. The evaluation of administrative acts of major importance is not
absolute, but only relative[31].
We have to understand these terms in the circumstance of each diocese. Therefore, the diocesan bishop has to clearly
specify in diocesan laws a list of acts that would come under major importance
in his diocese[32]. Once he has specified the acts of major
importance in his diocese, he has to consult the Finance Council before
administering these major important acts.
8. 3 Giving Counsel before the
Investment of Endowment Capital
Law demands that money and other
movable goods which are assigned as an endowment must be deposited in a safe
place approved by the ordinary. They must be invested in the best interest of
the foundation as soon as possible with an express and individual mention of
the obligation, in accordance with the prudent judgment of the ordinary.
Depositing in a savings bank account or in any other short term deposit is not
to be considered as an investment[33].
Since it is a delicate transaction, the bishop has the obligation, before
investing, to consult experts and necessarily the members of the Finance Council
and the interested parties (cf. CIC
c. 1305; CCEO c. 1049)[34].
Therefore, when a bishop consults them on this matter, they should express
their opinions sincerely.
8. 4 Giving Counsel before
Diminishing the Will
The Ordinary has the power to
diminish a will in an equitable manner under the following conditions: 1) the fulfillment
of the obligation established in the foundation has become impossible due to
reduced income, 2) the impossibility is not due to the fault of the
administrator, and 3) after hearing the interested parties and the members of
the Finance Council (cf. CIC c. 1310
§ 2; CCEO c. 1054 § 2)[35].
The will of the founder must be respected as much as possible while diminishing
it. As a general principle reduction of the obligations of celebrating the Holy
Mass cannot be diminished by the diocesan bishop, but only by the Apostolic See[36].
For all other cases, before doing so he has to consult the members of the Finance
Council as well as the interested parties. The interested party could be the
administrators of the public juridic person in whose favour the will was made.
If the members of the Finance Council do not find a sufficient or a just reason
they have the obligation to express this to the bishop.
8. 5 Giving Counsel/Consent for
Taxation
The diocesan bishop has the
authority to impose a tax which is moderate and proportionate to their income,
on public juridic persons subject to him as means of raising funds for the
needs of his diocese. He can also impose an extra-ordinary and moderate tax on
physical and juridical persons when there is a grave need. Before imposing a
tax, he has to follow the procedure for the same. According to CIC, he needs to consult the members of Finance
Council and presbyteral council to impose a tax in the diocese (cf. CIC c. 1263)[37].
Before giving advice they should study the need to impose a tax, how it is
going to affect physical and juridic persons, etc. The Finance Council members
are aware of the income of each juridic person as they are reviewing its annual
report and therefore this consultation is very useful to the bishop. The CCEO is more strict in this regard. It
says that eparchial bishop has to obtain the consent of the Finance Council to
impose a tax (cf. CCEO c. 1012 § 1).
A tax on physical persons can be imposed only according to the norms of
particular law of each Church sui iuris
(cf. CCEO c. 1012 § 2). There is no
obligation for the bishop to consult the Presbyteral Council as is the case in CIC.
Kennedy says that if a tax is
going to be annual or regular, a single consultation may not be sufficient.
According to him the bishop has to consult again when a tax is collected for a
second time[38].
My view is that if the bishop discusses with the members of the Finance Council
his intention of collecting a tax every year, he need not consult again in the
following year.
8. 6 Giving Consent for Acts of
Extraordinary Administration
There are two types of
administration, ordinary and extraordinary. According to Kennedy the acts of
ordinary administration are those which occur regularly or whose financial
consequences are moderate while acts of extra-ordinary administration are those
which occur irregularly or whose financial consequences are considerable[39].
As a general principle, a diocesan bishop should have the consent of both
bodies, that is, the members of the college of consultors and the Finance
Council for any acts of extra-ordinary
administration (cf. CIC c. 1277; CCEO c. 1036 § 1)[40].
Codes do not define what are the acts of extra-ordinary administration.
According to Farrelly, purchase of land, construction of a new building,
acceptance or refusal of a gift or bequest, opening of a new cemetery,
establishing a school or any other parochial institution, investment of any
kind of capital whether liquid or stable, etc.,
are some of the examples traditionally considered as acts of
extraordinary administration[41].
Alienation is not considered as an extraordinary administration as it is a
special category[42].
The amount can vary from country to country. An ordinary act of a diocese in a
developed country can be an extra-ordinary act for a diocese in an undeveloped
country. Therefore, the Bishops’ Conferences for the Latin Church and Synod of
Bishops of the Patriarchal Church or the Apostolic See for other Eastern
Churches are asked to establish criteria for extraordinary administration for
each country and for Churches sui iuris
(cf. CIC c. 1277; CCEO c. 1036 § 1)[43].
8. 7 Giving Consent for the
Alienation of Property
According to Morrisey, alienation
is any act by which the ownership of the property is transferred to another
person[44].
If the diocesan bishop wishes to alienate property within the minimum and
maximum limits decided by the Bishops’ Conference for the Latin Church and
Synod of Bishops of the Patriarchal Church or Apostolic See for other Eastern
Churches, the consent of the members of the Finance Council and the college of
consultors is required (cf. CIC
c.1292 § 1; CCEO c. 1036 § 1)[45].
If the amount exceeds the maximum amount decided by the Bishops’ Conference or
Synod of Bishops, an extra permission from the Apostolic See for the Latin
Church or the Patriarch with consent of the permanent synod for the Eastern
Churches is required in addition to the consent of the members of the Finance Council
(cf. CIC c.1292 § 2; CCEO c. 1036 § 2)[46].
The members of the Finance Council shall not give their consent for alienation
of goods unless they have been informed precisely both about the economic
condition of the juridic person as well as the detailed report of previous
alienations which have already taken place (cf. CIC c. 1292 § 4; CCEO c.
1038 § 1)[47].
They also should study the purpose of the alienation. They should see whether
there is a just cause, urgent necessity or any other advantage for alienating
the property of the diocese. Since it really affects the financial situation of
the diocese, the members of the Finance Council must seriously study and
reflect before giving their consent. There is a provision in law that if a
bishop alienates ecclesiastical goods without the prescribed permission or
consent he can be punished with just penalty. If the members of the Finance Council
are not consulted the action of the bishop is invalid and therefore, he can be
punished according to the gravity of the offence (cf. CIC c. 1377; CCEO c.
1449).
Besides giving consent and
counsel to the diocesan bishop, the Finance Council has the following important
functions to fulfill.
8. 8 Preparation of the Diocesan
Budget
According to CIC c. 493 and CCEO c.
263 § 5, it is the responsibility of the Finance Council to prepare every year
the budget for the whole diocese under the direction of the diocesan bishop[48]. The budget involves the income and
expenditures foreseen for the following year. It has a number of meanings: it
is a balance sheet or statement of estimated receipts and expenditures; it is a
plan for the co-ordination of resources and expenditures; it is the amount of
money that is available for or assigned to a particular purpose[49].
The budget must be a plan for the resources and expenditure of the whole diocese.
The preparation of the budget is not an easy task for the members of the
council. They have to see the actual income and also foresee the possible
income for the financial year in order to plan out the possible expenditures.
The allotment of the money must be based on priority. It will help the members
of the Finance Council, if the diocesan bishop presents his vision and the
various needs of the diocese in order of priority before the members of Finance
Council prepare the annual budget. Preparations of the budget not only include
allocation and distribution of income, but also raising of funds[50].
The CIC explicitly says that the
budget is to be prepared under the direction of the diocesan bishop (cf. CIC c. 493). It is understood in CCEO that the budget is prepared under
the direction of the eparchial bishop as he himself is always the president of
the Finance Council (cf. CCEO c. 263
§ 1)[51].
8. 9 Review of the Annual Report
The Finance Council has to
examine the report of the finance officer every year regarding his
administration. This report has to include the income and expenditures of the
past year (cf. CIC c. 494 § 4; CCEO c. 262 § 4)[52].
The manner in which the reports are prepared is to be decided by the diocesan
bishop. He can even prescribe a format for this report. According to CIC, this report is sent to the Finance Council
and the Finance Council examines it. As per CCEO
the report is sent to the diocesan bishop and he examines it through the Finance
Council. In both cases, it is the Finance Council that examines this report and
approves the report of receipts and expenses of the past year. When they go
through the report, naturally they have every right to ask for clarifications
from the finance officer. They can give suggestions and corrections to the
finance officer. Each one is to take his responsibility seriously in reviewing
the report.
The Finance Council has also to
examine the reports sent by the administrators of ecclesiastical goods to the
local Ordinary. Thus, administrators of parishes, shrines, hospitals, etc., are
to send a report to the diocese. The CIC
expressly mentions that the administrator has to pass this report to the Finance
Council for the inspection (cf. CIC
c. 1287 § 1)[53].
The diocesan bishop and the Finance Council come to know the income of such
juridic persons from the report. Though CCEO
does not say anything about it, the eparchial bishop can pass it to the Finance
Council for better understanding and co-ordination.
8. 10 The
Election of an Interim Finance Officer
During the vacancy of the
diocese, if the finance officer is elected / appointed as the diocesan
administrator, a new finance officer is to be elected. The offices of the
finance officer and the diocesan administrator are considered to be
incompatible and cannot therefore be held by the same person. Though the
diocesan administrator has the right of the diocesan bishop, he has no right to
appoint a finance officer. It is the responsibility of the members of Finance Council
under the presidency of the diocesan administrator to elect an interim finance
officer (cf. CIC c. 423 § 2; CCEO c. 225 § 2). A great responsibility
of electing a suitable person as the finance officer is entrusted to the Finance
Council. They should elect a person with all qualities required by the law.
This is one of the rare instances in both Codes where we see that a
consultative body (cf. CCEO c. 263 §
4) exercises executive power of appointment.
Conclusion
In certain dioceses, there is no
participation of lay persons in the Finance Council. If a particular bishop
does not appoint lay persons in the Finance Council, in spite of having many
experts in the diocese, it is against the spirit of the Second Vatican Council.
The whole Finance Council need not be composed of lay persons, but at least a
few could be lay persons. If the finance officer is a cleric, it is always
praiseworthy that at least a few lay persons are appointed as the members of
the Finance Council. On the other hand, if the finance officer is a lay person,
all the members of the council should not be lay persons; a few clerics are to
be included.
[1]
Cf. Kevin M. McDonough, “The
Diocesan and Pastoral Finance Council ”, in Kevin E. McKenna - Lawrence A. Dinardo
- Joseph W. Pokusa (eds), Church Finance Handbook, Canon Law
Society of America, Washington D. C. 1999, p. 140.
[2] Cf. Mauro Rivella
(ed.), Partecipazione e corresponsabilità
nella Chiesa, Ancora, Milan 2000, p. 171.
[3] Cf. Luigi Chiappetta,
Il Codice di Diritto Canonico: Commento giuiridico-pastorale,
vol. 1, Edizione Dehoniane Bolongna, Bologna 20113, p. 599.
[4]
Cf. John J. Myers, “The Diocesan Fiscal
Officer and the Diocesan Finance Council ”, in CLSA Proceedings 44 (1982), p. 182.
[5] Cf. Angelo Vizzarri, “Consiglio diocesano per gli affari economici”, in
Monitor Ecclesiastcus 119 (1994), p.
400.
[6] Cf. Mario Marchesi,
“Il Laico e l’amministrazione dei beni nella chiesa”, in Quaderni di Diritto Ecclesiale 2 (1989), p. 339.
[7]
Unlike the Presbyteral Council or Pastoral Council, there are no ex-officio members in a Finance Council.
All members are to be appointed. It is opportune to appoint the vicar
general/protosyncellus as a member of the Finance Council (cf. Mauro Rivella (ed.), Partecipazione e corresponsabilità nella Chiesa, p. 173).
[8]
Cf. AAS 77 (1985), p. 771; Thomas J. Green, “Shepherding the Patrimony of the
Poor: Diocesan and Parish Structures of Financial Administration”, in The Jurist 56 (1997), p. 715.
[9]
Cf. Communicationes 24 (1992), p. 65.
[10]
Cf. Communicationes 24 (1992), p. 53;
Francesco Coccopalmerio, “The
Chancellor, Other Notaries and the Archives”, ”, in Ángel Marzoa - Jorge Miras - Rafael Rodriguez-Ocaña (eds), Exegetical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, vol. 2, Midwest
Theological Forum, Chicago 2004, p. 1169; Thomas J. Green, “Shepherding the Patrimony of the Poor: Diocesan and
Parish Structures of Financial Administration”, p. 711.
[11]
Cf. John J. Myers, “The Diocesan
Fiscal Officer and the Diocesan Finance Council ”, p. 183.
[12]
Cf. Barbara Anne Cusack, “The
Internal ordering of Particular Churches”, ”, in John P. Beal - James A. Coriden - Thomas J. Green
(eds), New Commentary on the Code of
Canon Law, Theological Publications in India, Bangalore 2007, pp. 646-647.
[13]
Cf. Marco Brogi, “Eparchies and
Bishops”, in George Nedungatt
(ed.), A Guide to the Eastern Code: A Commentary on the Code of Canons of the
Eastern Churches, Pontifical Oriental Institute, Rome 2002, p. 240.
[14] Cf. Juan Ignacio Arrieta, Codice di
Diritto Canonico: E leggi complementari commentato, Coletti a San Pietro,
Rome 2004, p. 382.
[15]
The Motu proprio Postquam apostolicis
is comprised of 231 canons on religious, 70 canons on Church property and 34
canons providing definitions of certain canonical terms. It was promulgated for
the Eastern Catholic Churches on 9 February 1952 and acquired legal force on 21
November 1952.
[16]
Cf. George Nedungatt, Laity and Church Temporalities: Appraisal of
a Tradition, Dharmaram Publications, Bangalore 2000, p. 242.
[17]
Cf. Thomas J. Green, “Shepherding
the Patrimony of the Poor: Diocesan and Parish Structures of Financial
Administration”, p. 714.
[18]
Cf. George Nedungatt, Laity and Church Temporalities: Appraisal of
a Tradition, p. 243.
[19]
Cf. John Paul II, Post-Synodal
Apostolic Exhortation Pastores gregis
(16 October 2003), in AAS 96 (2004),
pp. 825-924; English translation in Pope
John Paul II: Apostolic Exhortations, Carmel International Publishing
House, Trivandrum 2005, pp. 3-120.
[20]
Cf. Thomas J. Green, “Shepherding
the Patrimony of the Poor: Diocesan and Parish Structures of Financial
Administration”, p. 715; Solomon Amanchukwu Amatu,
The Role of the Finance Council in the Administration of a Diocese in the
Light of the 1983 Code of Canon Law [cc. 492 and 537], Pontificia
Università Lateranense, Rome 1990, pp. 99-100.
[21]
Cf. Barbara Anne Cusack, “The
Internal ordering of Particular Churches”, p. 647.
[22]
Cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum successores (22 February 2004), no. 192, Libreria
Editrice Vaticana, Vatican City 2004; Ecclesiae
imago 135.
[23]
Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum successores 192.
[24]
Cf. Augustine P. Bennett, “The
Practical Effect on the Fiscal Administration of Church Finances of Book Five:
The Law Regarding Church Possessions”, in CLSA
Proceedings 42 (1980), p. 176.
[25]
Cf. Thomas J. Green, “Shepherding
the Patrimony of the Poor: Diocesan and Parish Structures of Financial
Administration”, p. 715.
[26] Cf. Mauro Rivella
(ed.), Partecipazione e corresponsabilità
nella Chiesa, p. 174.
[27]
Cf. Barbara Anne Cusack, “The
Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, p. 648.
[28]
Cf. Myriam Wijlens, “Juridic
Acts”, in John P. Beal - James A. Coriden - Thomas J. Green (eds), New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Theological Publications
in India, Bangalore 2007, p. 181.
[29]
Cf. Pontifical Council for Interpretation
of Legislative Texts, Authentic Interpretation De superiore eiusque consilio (5 July 1985), in AAS 77 (1985), p. 771.
[30]
The members of the college of consultors are also consulted prior to the
appointment and removal of the finance officer (cf. CIC c. 494 § 1-2; CCEO c.
262 § 1-2).
[31]
Cf. Communicationes 12 (1980), p.
414.
[32]
Cf. Francis G. Morrisey, “Ordinary
and Extraordinary Administration: Canon 1277”, in The Jurist 48 (1988), p. 717.
[33]
Cf. Robert T. Kennedy, “The
Temporal Goods of the Church”, in John P. Beal
- James A. Coriden - Thomas J. Green (eds), New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Theological Publications
in India, Bangalore 2007 p. 1519.
[34]
Cf. René Metz, “The Temporal Goods
of the Church”, in George Nedungatt
(ed.), A Guide to the Eastern Code: A
Commentary on the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, Pontifical
Oriental Institute, Rome 2002, p. 709.
[35]
Cf. Jobe Abbass, “The Temporal
Goods of the Church: A Comparative Study of the Eastern and Latin Codes of
Canon Law”, in Periodica 83 (1994),
p. 690.
[36]
There are some exceptions for diminishing the Mass intentions by the diocesan
bishop (cf. CIC c. 1308; CCEO c. 1052).
[37]
Cf. Communicationes 5 (1973), p. 95.
[38]
Cf. Robert T. Kennedy, “The
Temporal Goods of the Church”, in John P. Beal
- James A. Coriden - Thomas J. Green (eds), New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Theological Publications
in India, Bangalore 2007, p. 1463.
[39]
Cf. Ibid., pp. 1478-1479.
[40]
Cf. Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops Apostolorum successores 192; Francis G. Morrisey, “Ordinary and Extraordinary Administration: Canon
1277”, in The Jurist 48 (1988), p.
717.
[41]
Cf. Adrian Farrelly, “The Diocesan
Finance Council : Functions and Duties according to the Code of Canon Law”, in Studia Canonica 23 (1989), p. 157.
[42]
Cf. Communicationes 12 (1980), p.
396.
[43]
The Conference of Catholic Bishops of India (CCBI) has decided that an
expenditure of Rs 4,00, 000/ or more is to be considered as extra-ordinary
administration. Nothing is mentioned in the particular laws of the Syro-Malabar
Major Archiepiscopal Church regarding the extra ordinary administration.
[44]
Cf. Francis G. Morrisey, “The
Alienation of Temporal Goods in Contemporary Practice”, in Studia Canonica 29 (1995), p. 295; Benjamin Fiiriter, The Temporal
Goods of the Particular Church in the 1983 Code: Acquisition, Admission and
Alienation, Pontificia Univeresitas Urbaniana, Rome 2009, pp. 126-127.
[45]
The Conference of Catholic Bishops of India (CCBI) has established Rs 1,00,
000/ as minimum and Rs 10,00, 000/ as maximum amount for alienation for the
Latin Church in India. For the Syro-Malabar Major Archiepiscopal Church:
“Alienation of property exceeding Rs 10 Lakhs up to 10 Crores, is to be done
with the consent of the Finance Council and eparchial consultors. An amount
exceeding Rs 10 Crores upto 50 Crores, needs the permission of the Major
Archbishop with the consent of the Permanent Synod, and
for an amount exceeding 50 Crores, the permission of the Major Archbishop with
the consent of the Synod of Bishops” (cf. Synodal
News, Bulletin of the Syro-Malabar Major Archiepiscopal Church, 17 (2009),
Major Archiepiscopal Curia, Kochi 2009, p. 48).
[46]
Cf. Nuntia 13 (1981), p. 9; Jobe Abbass, “The Temporal Goods of the
Church: A Comparative Study of the Eastern and Latin Codes of Canon Law”, in Periodica 83 (1994), p. 686.
[47]
Cf. Austin P. Bennet, “The
Practical Effect on the Fiscal Administration of Church Finances of Book Five:
The Law Regarding Church Possessions”, in CLSA
Proceedings 42 (1980), p. 178.
[48]
Cf. Juan Ignacio Arrieta, Governance Structures within the Catholic
Church, Wilson & Lafleur Ltée, Montréal 2002, p. 231; Marie Breitenbeck, “The Requirements for
Experts in Church Law”, in The Jurist
50 (1990), p. 269.
[49]
Cf. Adrian Farrelly, “The Diocesan
Finance Council: Functions and Duties according to the Code of Canon Law”, p.
154.
[50]
Cf. Ibid.
[51]
According to CIC c. 492 § 1, the
diocesan bishop can delegate someone to preside over the Finance Council .
[52]
Cf. George Nedungatt, Laity and Church Temporalities: Appraisal of
a Tradition, p. 243.
[53]
Cf. Martin Igwemezie Uzoukwu, The Diocesan Finance Committee and the
Finance Officer (Canons 492-494), Pontificia Universitas Urbaniana, Rome
1991, p. 96.
5
(This article is Published: cf. Mathew John Puthenparambil, “The Office
of Protosyncellus”, in Eastern Legal
Thought, Vol. 9 & 10 (2010-2011), pp. 111-123).
Introduction
The office of
the protosyncellus is the highest office in an eparchy after the office of
eparchial bishop. He is the pre-eminent official of the eparchial curia. He has
to get closely associated with eparchial bishop and assist him in the governance
of the entire eparchy. There is a juridical obligation for eparchial bishop to
appoint a protosyncellus. There cannot be two
protosynceli even if the eparchy is too large in number or size.
1. Origin and Appointment of Protosyncellus
It was the
custom in the east that bishops were appointed from among the monks and these
bishops continued to maintain their monastic life by taking another monk as
companion and secretary. This companion shared the same room or cell with the
bishop. He had a great influence in local Church. He often represented the Bishop
in ecclesiastical affairs. They had a close relationship with each other as they
lived together in the same cell and thus he became the first person in the
eparchy after the bishop[2].
The Motu proprio Cleri sanctitati recommended the appointment of a protosyncellus
if the proper governance of the eparchy recommended it. “Whenever the proper
government of the eparchy demands it, a syncellus is to be appointed by the
bishop, to help him in the entire territory with ordinary jurisdiction” (CS can.
432 § 1)[3].
Therefore it was not an obligatory office under Motu proprio Cleri sanctitati.
The document of
Vatican Council II, Decree on the Pastoral office of Bishops in the Church,
says that bishops must appoint a protosyncellus, the pre-eminent official of
the eparchial curia, who is to assist him in the governance of the eparchy. “In
the diocesan curia the office of vicar general is preeminent”[4].
The Directory on the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops speaks about the appointment
of the protosyncellus. It says: “The vicar general, whose office is the highest
in the diocesan curia (CD 27), is appointed wherever, in the bishop’s judgement,
the proper government of the diocese would require it, and indeed several
vicars general may be appointed (ES 1, 14)”[5].
Eparchial bishop
has to appoint a protosyncellus in his eparchy to assist him in the governance
of the entire eparchy. It is obligatory for eparchial bishop to appoint a
protosyncellus even though the eparchy is very small[6]. “In
each eparchy a protosyncellus is to be appointed who, endowed with ordinary
vicarious power in accord with the norm of common law, assists the eparchial
bishop in governing the whole eparchy” (can. 245). Only one protosyncellus can
be appointed in an eparchy[7].
Protosyncellus
is freely appointed by the eparchial bishop. As the protosyncellus is very
closely associated with the eparchial bishop, it is necessary that eparchial
bishop must be free to appoint or remove him. Therefore eparchial bishop has
full freedom to appoint any priest who has got required qualifications as the
protosyncellus.
Protosyncellus
can be appointed for a determinate or indeterminate time[8].
The code does not speak explicitly about the appointment of the protosyncellus
‘ad tempus’ but at the same time it
does not prohibit either. Such an indication is a proof of its possibility[9].
Coadjutor or auxiliary bishop is appointed as protosyncellus for an indeterminate
time. Eparchial bishop cannot appoint them for determinate time unless there
are two auxiliary bishops in the eparchy. When there are two auxiliary bishops
one may be appointed for determinate time and at the completion of the term the
second auxiliary bishop could be appointed as protosyncellus.
One who is
appointed as protosyncellus must make a promise to carry out the office faithfully
in the manner determined by the law or by the eparchial bishop. He has also the
obligation to observe secrecy in the manner determined by law or by the
eparchial bishop (can. 244 § 2).
2. Qualifications of Protosyncellus
Since the office
of the protosyncellus is an ecclesiastical and above all the most important
office in the eparchy, the eparchial bishop cannot appoint any person to this
office. Certain qualifications prescribed by the code are to be considered
while appointing one to this highest office in the eparchy. The general
requirements needed for a person to an ecclesiastical office are given in can.
940. It says: “To be promoted to an office, a person must be suitable, that is,
endowed with those qualities required by law”. The qualities required for the
protosyncellus are given in can. 247 § 2. For some offices, the person need not
be a priest. But in the case of protosyncellus code clearly says that he must
be a priest. The requirement of priestly order is very essential for
protosyncellus because he exercises a potestas
sacra et vera episcopalis since he is the alter ego of the bishop in authority and responsibility[10].
The protosyncellus must be a celibate priest. The particular law of Church sui iuris can make provision to appoint
a married priest to this office. The protosyncellus must be a priest ascribed
to the same eparchy if possible[11].
The prior prohibition of appointing a member of religious order or institute
has not been repeated in CCEO[12].
Therefore the protosyncellus could be a priest belonging to a religious
order/institute, or ascribed to another eparchy or even a priest belonging to
another Church sui iuris (can. 247 §
4). The law recommends the eparchial bishop to appoint priest ascribed to the
same eparchy as protosyncellus. The law says: “…if possible, they should be
from the clerics ascribed to the eparchy;…” (can. 247 § 2). The protosyncellus must be not less than
thirty years of age at the time of his appointment. Canonists are divided on
the opinion whether the candidate must have completed the age of thirty or he
must have begun the age of thirty since the wording of the canon ‘annos nati non minus triginta’ is not
very clear[13]. The
reason for keeping this age is that one should reach the adequate human
maturity before he assumes the office of protosyncellus that involves great
responsibility[14]. Though
the law prescribes that protosyncellus should not be less than thirty years
old, Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops issued in 2004 says that
when possible, it is preferable that protosyncellus should be forty years old
or more[15].
Another qualification of protosyncellus is that he holds a doctorate,
licentiate or expertise in some sacred science. The last qualification
prescribed by the common law is that he should have personal qualities of sound
doctrine, uprightness, prudence and practical experience[16].
The same Directory speaks, “They should be wise, honest and morally upright,
with pastoral and administrative experience, capable of establishing a good
human rapport with others and competent in dealing with diocesan affairs”[17].
A person related
by blood to the eparchial bishop up to the fourth degree (brother, first
cousin, nephew or uncle) cannot be appointed as protosyncellus. This is to
safeguard bishop’s own freedom in taking decisions as well as to maintain
objectivity and integrity in assessing and deciding on matters which concerns
the good of the eparchy[18]. This also helps to prevent favoritism or
nepotism in the eparchy. Canon says: “The office of protosyncellus or syncellus
is not to be conferred on the blood relatives of the eparchial bishop up to the
fourth degree inclusively” (can. 247 § 3). As a general rule, the judicial
vicar shall not be appointed as protosyncellus unless the eparchy is very small
or the eparchy has very few marriage cases (can. 1086 § 1)[19].
3. Place of Protosyncellus among the Clergy
While they are
in office, priests who hold the office of protosyncellus enjoy all the rights
and privileges immediately subordinate to episcopal dignity. “The
protosyncellus and the syncelli who are presbyters have the privileges and insignia
of the dignity next to that of the bishop during their function (durante munere)” (can. 250). The
precedence of the protosyncellus over all others, a provision given in Cleri sanctitati, is removed in CCEO.
But it is natural that the protosyncellus would enjoy precedence immediately
after the eparchial bishop in the eparchy.
4. Powers of Protosyncellus
The power of
protosyncellus is understood as a faculty to perform an act. Power of
governance (potestas regiminis) is
defined as the public power ordained towards the governance of others. The
power of governance is distinguished as legislative, executive and judicial (can.
985 § 1). The power of protosyncellus is described in can. 248 § 1. It says:
Unless it is expressly provided otherwise by common
law, the protosyncellus throughout the whole eparchy and syncelli within the
limits of the office conferred on them have the same executive power of
governance as the eparchial bishop, excepting those things that the eparchial
bishop has reserved to himself or to others or that by law require his own
special mandate, so that if this mandate is not obtained, the act for which the
mandate is required is null.
According to can.
981 § 1, the ordinary power of governance is that which is joined to a certain
office by the law itself. Ordinary power is by law itself attached to an
office. Therefore a person cannot have ordinary power without an office. The
power of the protosyncellus is ordinary, attached to the office[20].
The ordinary
power of governance can be either proper or vicarious (can. 981 § 2). Proper
power is exercised in one’s own name (nomine
proprio) while vicarious power is exercised in the name of another (nomine at vice alterius) as a substitute
as collaborators[21]. Power
of the protosyncellus is vicarious, exercised in the name of eparchial
bishop.
As we have
already seen that the power of governance is distinguished as legislative,
executive and judicial (can. 985 § 1). Legislative power refers to the issuance
of laws and precepts for the People of God under his care in accordance with
the norms of law. Executive power is the administration of laws of the Church
in the exercise of his office. Judicial power is the power possessed by judges
and exercised according to the law. The eparchial bishop has got all these three
powers. He cannot delegate his legislative power to anyone. Usually he
exercises his executive power through protosyncellus and syncellus, and
judicial power through judicial vicar. In virtue of his office the
protosyncellus has the same executive power throughout the eparchy as that
which belongs to the eparchial bishop. According to can. 986, the
protosyncellus can exercise executive power over his subjects even when he is
outside his eparchy or faithful are away from the eparchy. He can also exercise
his power over travellers who are actually living in the eparchy. The very
definition of protosyncellus tells that he has to assist the eparchial bishop
in the governance of the entire eparchy (can. 245). This confirms his executive
power throughout the eparchy over persons and things. It is the responsibility
of the protosyncellus to extend his help to the eparchial bishop in governing
the eparchy[22].
Protosyncellus
can exercise executive power and he can also perform all administrative acts.
He can issue general executory decrees i.e., decrees which defines more
precisely the manner of applying a law or which urge the observance of the law.
Executive power of protosyncellus is also performed by issuing administrative
acts through which laws are applied to individual persons or group of persons.
He can issue singular decrees and precepts and grant rescripts which contain
privileges and dispensations. The eparchial bishop usually grants privileges,
the protosyncellus shares with eparchial bishop the power to grant most of the
dispensations especially with regard to the impediments of marriage[23].
Protosyncellus is also local hierarch in the eparchy (can. 984 § 2)[24].
The eparchial
bishop, if he wants, can reserve certain powers to himself or to another priest
other than protosyncellus. In that case the protosyncellus has no power in
dealing with those matters. But the authority of the protosyncellus should not
be limited to such an extent that the office itself is modified. Reservation of
powers shall be exceptional otherwise it shall be contrary to the law which
defined the positions so that the protosyncellus could function as the alter ego of the eparchial bishop[25].
Protosyncellus
requires a special mandate from the eparchial bishop to perform certain
executive powers which are reserved to eparchial bishop by common law or
particular law of a Church sui iuris.
“Within the context of the executive power of governance, those things that in
common law and particular law of a Church sui
iuris are attributed by name to the eparchial bishop are understood to
belong only to an eparchial bishop and an exarch, excluding the protosyncellus
and the syncelli except by special mandate” (can. 987).
The
protosyncellus should be convoked to the eparchial assembly and he has the
obligation to attend the same (can. 238 § 1) since his role in the eparchy is
very significant. The eparchial bishop is bound to visit his eparchy in whole
or in part each year so that at least every five year he will have visited the
entire eparchy. If the eparchial bishop is legitimately impeded, the
protosyncellus can go for the visit provided that he gets the delegation from
the bishop (can. 205 § 1). All actions legitimately taken by the protosyncellus
have effects until he receives certain notification of vacancy of eparchial See
(can. 224 § 3).
While granting
or refusing of favour, the protosyncellus has to keep in mind the principles of
governance. “A favour denied by a higher authority cannot be validly granted by
a lower authority, unless the higher authority has expressly consented” (can.
1530 § 1). Therefore, protosyncellus cannot grant a favour which was denied by
the eparchial bishop without obtaining bishop’s consent first. This is to avoid
contradictions and conflicts in the eparchy. Another principle is that “A
favour denied by one authority cannot be validly granted by another equally
competent authority or a higher authority if no mention of the denial is made
in the petition” (can. 1530 § 2). Therefore, the protosyncellus cannot validly
grant a favour which was denied by the syncellus unless the denial is mentioned
in the petition. In the same way eparchial bishop also cannot validly grant a
favour which was denied by the protosyncellus or syncellus unless the denial is
mentioned in the petition[26].
The office of
protosyncellus is neither another centre of authority nor a collegial body
responsible for the governance of the eparchy. Even though the eparchial bishop
extends his authority by permitting another person to act in his own name, he
remains as ultimately responsible person for all affairs of the eparchy[27].
Therefore, the protosyncellus must inform all the important matters of the
eparchy to the eparchial bishop. The eparchial bishop must be informed of
important acts and decisions that the protosyncellus has taken already and are
under consideration. He should not act against the wish of the eparchial
bishop. Canon says: “…They are [protosyncelli] never to act against his [eparchial
bishop’s] intention and mind” (can. 249).
5. Loss of Office
The office of
the protosyncellus can be lost in various ways. It can be lost either by
cessation of the office or by resignation from the office or by removal from
the office. Canon says: “The
protosyncellus and syncelli cease from office with the expiration of the
determined period, by resignation accepted by the eparchial bishop, or by
removal” (can. 251 § 1). If the protosyncellus was appointed for a determined
time the office ceases upon expiry of the term. But the office does not cease
automatically on the date at the end of the term[28].
“Loss of an office by the lapse of a determined time or by the reaching the age
determined by law takes effect only from the moment when the competent
authority has intimated it in writing” (can. 965 § 3). Therefore the eparchial
bishop has to notify the protosyncellus in writing. If the eparchial bishop
does not inform him in writing, the protosyncellus continues in office based on
the above mentioned canon.
The
protosyncellus can resign from the office for a just cause. Any person who is
responsible for himself (sui compos)
can resign freely from his office for a just cause (can. 967)[29]. He
has to submit his resignation to the eparchial bishop in writing or orally in
the presence of two witnesses. “To be valid, a resignation must be made in
writing or in the presence of two witnesses, to the authority to whom it
pertains to make canonical provision of the office in question; unless
acceptance is needed, it takes effect immediately” (can. 969). The resignation
of the protosyncellus needs to be accepted by the eparchial bishop as it is
said expressly in the canon, “renunciatione
ab Episcopo Eparchiali acceptata”
(can. 251 § 1)[30]. Unless
and until it is not accepted it has no effect. Law does not explicitly say that
acceptance of resignation is to be communicated in writing[31]. If
the eparchial bishop does not accept the resignation of the protosyncellus
within three months of submission it lacks all force (can. 251 § 1).
As the
protosyncellus is freely appointed by the eparchial bishop, he can also be
removed freely by the eparchial bishop. “The protosyncellus and syncelli are
freely appointed by the eparchial bishop and can freely be removed by him,
without prejudice to can. 215, §§1 and 2” (can. 247 § 1). He can be freely removed
for a just cause and not necessarily for a grave reason. The eparchial bishop
need not observe any procedure for the removal, but he should respect the
natural equity and justice and also the right of a person to a good reputation[32].
In order to be effective the eparchial bishop should issue the decree of
removal in writing to the protosyncellus[33].
6. Loss of Office When See is Vacant
Protosyncellus
exercises authority of the eparchial bishop vicariously and, therefore he loses
his office unless he is an ordained bishop, as a general rule, when eparchy
becomes vacant. “The eparchial see becomes vacant by the death, resignation,
transfer or privation of the office of the eparchial bishop” (can. 219). The
protosyncellus does not cease from his office always when the eparchy becomes
vacant. Some exceptions are treated in can. 224 § 1. It says: “Upon the vacancy
of the eparchial See, the protosyncellus and the syncelli immediately cease
from office unless they are: 1°
ordained bishops; 2°
constituted in the eparchy of the patriarch; 3°
constituted in an eparchy located within the territorial boundaries of
the patriarchal Church, until the administrator of the eparchy takes canonical
possession of his office” (can. 224).
An Ordained Bishop Does Not Cease from the
Office: The Vatican Council II wished that when the eparchial See is vacant
the auxiliary bishop, if there is one, becomes the administrator of the
eparchy. Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church says: “It is
indeed desirable, unless there are grave reasons to the contrary, that the
responsibility of governing the diocese during the vacancy of the see should be
entrusted to the auxiliary bishop, or if there are several, to one of them”[34].
It was not incorporated in the legislation and therefore a priest could be
appointed or elected as eparchial administrator upon the vacancy of the
eparchial See (can. 225 § 1). Nevertheless, if the protosyncellus was an
ordained bishop he does not cease from the office but retain ‘ex iure’
his office and enjoys the powers which he enjoyed earlier. He exercises his
authority under the new eparchial administrator[35].
Protosyncellus of the Eparchy of the
Patriarch: When the patriarchal See becomes vacant, the eparchy of the patriarch
also becomes vacant. The senior bishop according to the episcopal ordination
among the bishops of the patriarchal curia or, if there is nobody, the senior
bishop of the permanent synod becomes the administrator of the patriarchal Church
(can. 127) and he automatically becomes the administrator of the eparchy of the
patriarch. In this situation a priest who is the protosyncellus of the eparchy
of patriarch does not lose his office[36].
Protosyncellus of an Eparchy inside the
Proper Territory: The priest who is a protosyncellus of an eparchy
constituted inside the proper territory of the patriarch does not lose his
office until the eparchial administrator is appointed as per can. 220 § 3° and takes canonical
possession of his office.
Protosyncellus of an Eparchy outside the
Proper Territory: A priest who is appointed as the protosyncellus
immediately ceases from the office upon the vacancy of the eparchial See. He loses his office not at the moment of
vacancy of the eparchy, but at the moment of notification he receives. The
authority he exercises is valid till he gets the notification of the vacancy of
the eparchy[37].
Suspension of the Eparchial Bishop: If
the eparchial bishop is suspended from the office, power of the protosyncellus,
if he is a priest, is suspended. However a bishop who holds the office of
protosyncellus continues in office and exercises the power while an eparchial
bishop is suspended (can. 251 § 3)[38].
The reason behind this norm is the intrinsic relationship between the eparchial
bishop and protosyncellus. The power possessed by the protosyncellus is
vicarious. Therefore unless he has episcopal dignity, his power is suspended
when the bishop is suspended from the office. The office of the eparchial
bishop can be suspended through canonical penalties[39].
If the protosyncellus places juridic acts during the period of suspension,
those acts may be considered valid but unlawful[40].
7. Auxiliary or Coadjutor Bishop as
Protosyncellus
The general rule
is that protosyncellus is freely appointed by the eparchial bishop. The only
exception to this legislation is that when there is a coadjutor bishop in an
eparchy, he is to be appointed as protosyncellus or when there is an auxiliary
bishop, he is to be appointed as protosyncellus. When there are two or more
auxiliary bishops in an eparchy, one auxiliary bishop is to be appointed as
protosyncellus and the other is to be appointed as syncellus (can. 215 § 1-2)[41].
As the eparchial
bishop has no choice of appointing a coadjutor or auxiliary bishop as
protosyncellus, in the same way he cannot remove the coadjutor bishop from the
office of protosyncellus. He may remove an auxiliary bishop from the office of
protosyncellus but has to appoint him as syncellus[42].
A protosyncellus
who is an auxiliary bishop does not lose his office when the eparchial See is
vacant (can. 224 § 1).
Conclusion
The
protosyncellus has ordinary vicarious power and he is also local hierarch in
the eparchy. As it is very important office in an eparchy, the common law
prescribes certain qualifications for those who hold the office. He has to co-operate
with eparchial bishop and work according to the mind and will of the eparchial
bishop.
[1] Protosyncellus
is identical with the vicar general in Latin Church.
[2] George
Nedungatt, “Glossary of the Main Terms Used in the Code of Canons of the
Eastern Churches”, in The Jurist, 51 (1991),
p. 457.
[3] English
translation of Motu proprio Cleri
sanctitati is taken from Victor J. Pospishil, Code of Oriental Canon Law: The Law on Persons, Ford City, St
Mary’s Ukranian Catholic Church, 1960.
[6] Velasius De Paolis, “De vicario
episcopali secundum decratum Concan. Oecum. Vatican II ‘Christus
Dominus’”, in Periodica, 56 (1967),
pp. 311-312.
[7] Thomas
J. Green, “Diocesan and Parish Structures: A Comparison of Selected Canons in
the Codex Iuris Canonici and Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium”, in
Studia canonica, 33 (1999), p. 378;
There can be more than one vicar general in a diocese of the Latin Church (can.
475 § 2 of CIC 1983).
[8] Augustine
Mendonça, “The Structural Components of the Diocesan Curia”, in Canonical Studies, 16 (2002), p. 114.
[9] Roch Pagé, Les Églises particulières, vol. 1, Montréal, Les Éditions Paulines, 1985, p. 95.
[10] William
W. Bassett, “The Office of Episcopal Vicar”, in The Jurist, 3 (1970), pp.
308-309.
[11] Green,
“Diocesan and Parish Structures: A Comparison of Selected Canons in the Codex Iuris Canonici and Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium”,
p. 379.
[12] Motu
proprio Cleri sanctitati prohibited
appointing a non-eparchial priest as protosyncellus (CS can. 433 § 1).
[13] Luigi Chiappetta, Il
codice di diritto canonico, vol. 1, 2nd edition, Roma,
Edizioni Dehoniane, 1996, p. 602.
[14]
Arulselvam Rayappan, “The Office of Vicar General and Episcopal Vicar”, in Canonical Studies, 16 (2002), p. 153.
[15] Apostolorum successores 178.
[16] Davide
Mussone, L’ufficio del vicario
generale nel codice di diritto canonico
del 1917 e del 1983, Città del Vaticano, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2000,
p. 92.
[17] Apostolorum
successores 178.
[18]
Mendonça, “The Structural Components of the Diocesan Curia”, p. 123.
[19] Canon
penitentiary also cannot be appointed as vicar general as per can. 478 § 2 of
CIC 1983.
[20] Julio García Martín, Le norme generali del Codex Iuris Canonici, Roma, Ediurcla, 1999,
p. 484.
[21] John M.
Huels, The Pastoral Companion: A Canon
Law Handbook for Catholic Ministry, Quincy, Franciscan Press, 1995, pp.
20-21; George Nedungatt, “Authority of Order
and Power of Governance”, in Kanon,
14 (1998), p. 77.
[22]
Rayappan, “The Office of Vicar General and Episcopal Vicar”, p. 160.
[23] Ibid.,
pp. 160-161.
[24] Local hierarch
is the term used in CCEO for local Ordinary. Vicar general is Ordinary and
local Ordinary as per can. 134 § 1-2 of CIC 1983. But protosyncellus is only a
local hierarch and not a hierarch as per can. 984 § 1-2 of CCEO.
[25] John D.
Faris, Eastern Catholic Churches:
Constitution and Governance, New York, Saint Maron Publications, 1992, p.
521.
[26] Joseph
P. Penna, “The Office of Episcopal Vicar”, in CLSA Proceedings, 52 (1990), p. 116; Ecclesiae sanctae I 14.
[27] Barbara
Anne Cusack, “The Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, in John P. Beal,
James A. Coriden and Thomas J. Green (eds), New
Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Bangalore, Theological Publications in
India, 2003, p. 633.
[28] Victor George D’Souza, “Cessation of Office of a
Vicar General and Episcopal Vicar: Toward Refinement of Canon 481 § 1”, in Studies in Church Law, 2 (2006), p. 372.
[29]
Mussone, L’ufficio del vicario generale
nel Codice di diritto canonico del 1917 e del 1983, p. 182.
[30] The
corresponding can. 481 of CIC 1983 does not speak of acceptance of the
resignation of the Vicar General.
[31] Paul L.
Golden, “Retraction of Resignation from Office”, in Arthur J. Espelage (ed.), CLSA Advisory Opinion 2001-2005,
Washington, Canon Law Society of America, 2006, p. 37.
[32]
Randolph R. Calvino and Nevin J. Klinger, Clergy
Procedural Handbook, Washington, Canon Law Society of America, 1992, p.
122; Chiappetta, Il codice di diritto
canonico, p. 601.
[33] D’Souza,
“Cessation of Office of a Vicar General and Episcopal Vicar: Toward Refinement
of Canon 481 § 1”, p. 373.
[34] Christus Dominus 26.
[35] Marco
Brogi, “Eparchies and Bishops”, in George Nedungatt (ed.), A Guide to the Eastern Code: A Commentary on the Code of Canons of the
Eastern Churches, Rome, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 2002, p. 236.
[36] Victor
J. Pospishil, Eastern Catholic Church Law,
2nd Revised edition, New York, Saint Maron publications, 1996, p.
228.
[37] Faris, Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution and
Governance, pp. 490-491.
[38]
Mussone, L’ufficio del vicario generale
nel codice di diritto canonico del 1917 e del 1983, p. 207.
[39]
Mendonça, “The Structural Components of the Diocesan Curia”, p. 140.
[40] Chiappetta, Il codice di diritto canonico, p. 226.
[41] Christus
Dominus 26; Apostolorum successores 71-72.
[42] Penna,
“The Office of Episcopal Vicar”, p. 118.
4
The Notion of Eparchy and Bishop in Oriental Code
(This article is Published: cf Mathew John
Puthenparambil, “The Notion of Eparchy
and Bishop in Oriental Code”, in Journal
of St Thomas Christians, vol. 22, no. 2 (April-June 2011), pp. 40-57)
Introduction
In this article
I would like to explain the notions of eparchy and eparchial bishop. The
eparchy and eparchial bishop are like two sides of the same coin. There is a
certain profound identity between the eparchy and its bishop, which prevents
the precedence of one over the other. The eparchy and eparchial bishop
constitute one thing. Eparchial bishop
has no existence without an eparchy and eparchy is incomplete without an
eparchial bishop.
The first part of
this article explains the origin of the term eparchy. The Vatican Council II
has defined eparchy. When we analyse this definition we see two important
elements. Eparchy is a portion of the People of God and it is entrusted to a
bishop to shepherd with the cooperation of priests. The manner of erection of
the eparchy, the competent authority to erect, modify and suppress the eparchy
are also explained in the first part. The
second part of this article explains the notion of bishops in the Church. There
are two types of bishops in the Church, eparchial and titular bishops.
Designation of bishops, office of pastoral ministry of bishops, the rights,
duties and obligations of eparchial bishops are explained in detail in this
second part of this article.
Emperor
Constantine divided the Empire into four prefectures. These four prefectures
were again divided into dioceses, which were subdivided into eparchies. By the
year 297 AD, Emperor Diocletian rearranged these divisions. He divided the
empire into different dioceses each one of them further divided into numerous
provinces, which were called eparchies. Later, in order to indicate the
ecclesiastical area of the local Church entrusted to the governance of a
bishop, the West adopted the term diocese and the East accepted the term ‘eparchy’[2].
The word ‘eparchy’ comes from two Greek words: epi means over and archia
means ruling[3]. The
word ‘eparchy’ was used ecclesiastically for the first time in the First
Council of Constantinople in 381 AD. It is very clearly mentioned in canon two
of the Council of Constantinople[4].
1. 2 Notion of Eparchy in the Vatican Council II
The Vatican Council II defined eparchy in terms of the People
of God. It says: “A diocese is a section of the People of God entrusted to a
bishop to be guided by him with the assistance of his clergy so that, loyal to
its pastor and formed by him into one community in the Holy Spirit through the
Gospel and the Eucharist, it constitutes one particular church in which the
one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ is truly present and active”[5].
This definition was drawn up from Dogmatic Constitution on the Church which said about the eparchy as a
portion of the People of God assigned to the eparchial bishop, over which he
exercises his pastoral office and not over other Churches or the Church
universal. Eparchies are constituted after the model of the universal Church.
The universal Church exists in eparchies[6].
The Vatican Council II viewed
the eparchy as the essential form of the Church, containing and
representing the reality of the Church in its entirety-Holy, Catholic, Apostolic-excepting its universality, just as
when water is divided, each drop will contain the whole substance of water. The eparchy is 1) A portion of the People of God,
2) Entrusted to the pastoral care of
a bishop and his presbyterate. They gather the faithful through the exposition of the Gospel and the celebration
of the Eucharist (can. 177 § 1). The faithful are in communion with the universal Church by being in communion
with the bishop [7].
1. 3 Notion of Eparchy in the Canonical
Legislation
The code gives
the definition for the eparchy in the following words: “An eparchy is a portion
of the People of God that is entrusted to a bishop to shepherd, with the
cooperation of the presbyters, in such a way that, adhering to its pastor and
gathered by him through the Gospel and the Eucharist, it constitutes a
particular Church in which the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of
Christ truly exists and is operative” (can. 177 § 1).
The canon defines eparchy as a “portion of the People
of God”, that is, a group of the faithful. These faithful are not considered
only as a set of persons bound together by certain common interests, nor even
as an association of faithful united by the bond of charity. Common interest
and reciprocal charity do not suffice for the constitution of an eparchy; there
is something more-the action of the bishop. By an act of the competent
ecclesiastical authority, these faithful are entrusted to the pastoral care of
an eparchial bishop, assisted by his priests[8].
The bishop gathers the portion of the People of God in the Holy Spirit through
the Gospel and the Eucharist. In every eparchy the one, holy, catholic and
apostolic Church of Christ is truly present and operative[9].
The eparchy is not a mere administrative division of the universal Church. The
role of the eparchial bishop is presented not in terms of his power but of his
shepherding or pastoral ministry[10].
1. 4 Constitutive Elements of an
Eparchy
1) Eparchy is a portion of the People of God: This is the dominant theological-canonical construction, in light of which the
various provisions for intra-ecclesial
relationships are formulated. It is to be noted that in the first schema
of Christus Dominus the eparchy was defined as pars quaedam dominici gregis which was not liked by the Council Fathers as it
might indicate that the particular Church is a quantitative fraction of the
universal Church. So the term populi Dei portio was preferred. Thus,
the eparchy is a community of the
faithful of different categories of faithful such as laity, sacred ministers:
deacons, priests and bishops[11]
and not a subdivision of the universal Church. The emphasis is on the community of the faithful rather than on the
criterion of territory[12],
even though it is determinative and the territorial factors such as domicile and quasi-domicile have a
bearing on the legal status of
believers. The eparchy is established for the full care of the souls of this portion of the faithful[13].
2) Eparchy is entrusted to a bishop to shepherd with the
co-operation of the presbyterium.
The bishop is the visible principle and
foundation of its unity[14].
He has ordinary, proper and immediate power for the exercise of his pastoral ministry[15].
The eparchy is to be nurtured by him with the co-operation of the presbyterium,
through the Gospel and the holy Eucharist.
Thus the bishop governs and represents
the eparchy and acts in the communion of Churches[16].
It is the responsibility of the eparchial bishop to gather the people in Holy
Spirit through the proclamation of Gospel and the celebration of the Eucharist.
Authority of the bishop in this area is not simply a responsibility entrusted
to him, but a fundamental part of his role as eparchial bishop. When the People
of God are so gathered and animated, the one, holy, catholic and apostolic
Church is truly present and fully active[17].
1. 5 Manner of Erecting an Eparchy
Eparchies are not to be understood as subdivisions of
the universal Church bifurcated for the purposes of administrative convenience.
In other words the universal Church is not a federal union of eparchies after
the model of civil states. It is rather a communion of different eparchies (Corpus Ecclesiarum) in which subsists
its configuration and fullness. The relationship between the universal Church
and eparchies is a mystery and cannot be compared to that which exists between
the whole and the parts in a purely human group or society[18].
Eparchies are erected based on either of the following two factors[19].
Territoriality:
As a rule, that portion of the People of God which constitutes an eparchy
is to have a specific geographic territory so that it comprises all the
faithful who live in that territory. It is the general and primary criterion of
division of eparchies[20].
Christians living in a precisely defined area are formed into a community whose
spiritual head is the eparchial bishop. Territoriality is not a constitutive
element of an eparchy, but a determining element of the portion of the People
of God. Territorial dwelling place (domicile or quasi-domicile) determines a
person’s pastor and hierarch[21].
Territory is the normal criteria for the distinction of eparchies. However,
there is a provision to erect a new eparchy in the same territory since
territory alone cannot be considered as the only criterion to distinguish one
eparchy from other eparchies[22].
Personality:
In addition to territoriality, the eparchy is circumscribed according to
one or more personal factors. The criterion of membership in a Church sui iuris[23]
is a factor which can be taken into consideration in the formation of an
eparchy. An eparchy can be established for a community of faithful belonging to
a Church sui iuris, for example, the
eparchies of Kalyan, Chicago in USA etc. An eparchy can be erected also on the basis of
language, ethnic group, land of origin etc. An example of eparchy erected on
the basis of ethnic group would be the archeparchy of Kottayam which was
erected only for the Knanaya
Community[24]. Thus
the same geographic territory can fall within the jurisdiction of different
eparchial bishops like eparchies/dioceses in Kerala[25].
1. 6 Erection, Modification and Suppression of an
Eparchy
In every eparchy
the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church of Christ is truly present and
active[26].
Therefore it enjoys certain stability. When we erect a new eparchy we are
creating a new Church. Therefore eparchies are erected only for a serious
reason. The patriarch with the consent of the synod of bishops is competent to
erect an eparchy within the territorial boundaries of his Church[27].
Prior to the erection of an eparchy he should have consulted the Apostolic See.
Viability of the community, personnel and financial resources are to be taken
into consideration when a new eparchy is erected[28].
If there are faithful belonging to his Church sui iuris living outside the proper territory, he can only propose
to the Apostolic See to erect an eparchy for those faithful.
Patriarch after
having obtained the consent of the synod of bishops and after consulting the
Apostolic See can modify an eparchy. Modification of an eparchy can be done in
two ways. It can be done by changing the boundaries or changing the
hierarchical status i.e., elevating en eparchy into an archeparchy. Outside the
territorial boundaries of the patriarch, only the Apostolic See is competent
to modify an eparchy[29].
In a similar way
the patriarch has the right to suppress an eparchy inside the territorial
boundaries of his Church after getting the consent of the synod of bishops. He
cannot suppress an eparchy without consulting the Apostolic See even if he has
obtained the consent of synod of Bishops. Suppression of an eparchy is to be
done only for serious reasons[30].
Only the Apostolic See can suppress an eparchy outside the territorial
boundaries of the patriarchal Church.
1. 7 Intervention of the Roman Pontiff in an Eparchy
Conflicts
between bishops and the Apostolic See are not a recent phenomenon in the
Church. The reasons for the disputes and the form and frequency of papal
interventions have differed greatly. Rome had conflicts with Cyprian, Arian and
many other bishops in the past[31].
The Roman Pontiff can intervene directly and immediately in any eparchy without
recourse to any juridical process, and his decision is subject to further
review by no one, not even an ecumenical council. From the definition of papal
primacy in Vatican Council I, it follows, from a canonical point of view at
least, that the Roman Pontiff can appoint, transfer, restrict, suspend, or
excommunicate any bishop[32].
Likewise he is free to conduct an apostolic visit in any eparchy.
2. 1 Notion of Bishops
There are two
types of bishops in the Catholic Church. They are eparchial bishops and titular
bishops. All those bishops to whom eparchies are entrusted for the governance
are called eparchial bishops and other bishops (to whom an eparchy has not been
entrusted) are called titular bishops[33].
2. 2 Notion of Eparchial Bishops
The canon very clearly describes the notion of an eparchial bishop. “The
eparchial bishop, to whom the eparchy has been entrusted to shepherd in his own
name, governs it as the vicar and legate of Christ; the power which he
exercises personally in the name of Christ, is proper, ordinary, and immediate,
although by the supreme authority of the Church its exercise is ultimately
regulated and can be circumscribed within certain limits in view of the benefit
of the Church or of the Christian faithful” (can. 178). This canon has direct
reference to Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen gentium no. 27) and Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops
in the Church (Christus Dominus no.
8). The canon emphasizes by using the phrases vicar and legate of Christ (can. 178)[34] that eparchial bishop functions not as
the representative of the Roman Pontiff but as the representative of Christ. He
is the chief shepherd of the eparchy. He has to shepherd the people entrusted
to him by his example of personal holiness, simplicity of life, charity,
humility, his pastoral solicitude etc. His power of governance is exercised in
three sphere of activity i.e., legislative, executive and judicial.
By divine right,
the eparchial bishops as the successors of the Apostles enjoy proper, ordinary
and immediate powers which are necessary to govern the eparchy[35].
Proper power means in so far as the bishop exercises the authority in his own
name by virtue of his office as successor of Apostles, not as a representative
of Roman Pontiff. Ordinary power is that power which is attached to an office
by law itself[36]. The
office of bishop is of divine law itself and the power flowing from episcopacy
is ordinary[37].
Immediate Power means bishop exercises his power on behalf of the faithful
entrusted to his care without any intermediary[38].
The power of eparchial bishop can be restricted by the Roman Pontiff to himself
or to some other authority like patriarch, major archbishop or metropolitan[39].
For example, dispensation from the canonical form for the celebration of
marriage is reserved to the patriarch inside the proper territory of his Church
sui iuris or to the Apostolic See (can.
835). The former law, Motu proprio Cleri
sanctitati, reserved many powers to the Roman Pontiff and the eparchial
bishop acted in many cases only in virtue of the faculties delegated to him.
The present arrangement reflects the post-conciliar documents which accorded
broad powers to the eparchial bishops[40].
2. 3 Notion of Titular Bishops
We have seen that titular bishops are those bishops to whom eparchies have
not been entrusted for the pastoral care. There are different kinds of titular
bishops. Some titular bishops assist the eparchial bishop as coadjutor or
auxiliary bishops; others are in no way directly related to an eparchy like
papal legates, bishops of patriarchal curia, bishops of Roman Curia, retired
bishops etc. In the past all titular bishops were given titles of eparchies in
the middle east and which were once residential Sees[41].
They were called titular as they had been given the title (name) of a once
existing eparchy[42].
The titular bishop can hold any office in the Church except the office of an
eparchial bishop. He does not govern an eparchy as vicar and legate of Christ
with proper power. The munus pastorale
does not belong to a titular bishop properly[43]. The code has given a negative definition to
the titular bishop. It says: “Bishops to whom no eparchy has been entrusted for
governance in their own name, no matter what other function they exercise or
have exercised in the name of the Church, are called titular bishops” (can. 179).
The appointment of titular bishops is up to the Apostolic See or synod of
bishops in the case of patriarchal Church[44].
All titular bishops except those who are already resigned from office also have
serious obligation to attend the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church (can.
104 § 1). The following are the five types of titular bishops.
Coadjutor Bishops: When circumstances so
suggest, patriarch with consent of synod of bishops may appoint a coadjutor
bishop in any of the eparchies inside the proper territory of his Church sui iuris. Patriarch cannot appoint a
coadjutor bishop in his eparchy. A coadjutor bishop has the right to succession
to the eparchial bishop to whom he is assigned. “In more serious circumstances,
even of a personal nature, a coadjutor bishop can be appointed ex officio with the right of succession
and endowed with special powers” (can. 212 § 2). Coadjutor bishop is appointed
in the cases where the eparchial bishop suffers from personal limitations, such
as age, sickness etc[45]. Their
rights and duties are given in canons and in their letter of appointment. The
coadjutor bishop does not become eparchial bishop immediately when an eparchy
becomes vacant[46]. When
the eparchial See is vacant he becomes the eparchial administrator automatically
and he becomes eparchial bishop only after the enthronement (cann. 189 &
222)[47].
If there is a coadjutor bishop in an eparchy, the eparchial bishop is obliged
to appoint him as protosyncellus (can. 215 § 1).
Auxiliary Bishops: At the request of the
eparchial bishop one or more auxiliary bishops can be appointed to assist him
in the pastoral work of the eparchy (can. 212 § 1). Auxiliary bishop is the principal
co-worker of the eparchial bishop and he is appointed when the size of the
eparchy or the number of faithful are too large for the eparchial bishop to
minister alone adequately[48].
The right and obligations of the auxiliary bishops are formulated in the common
law (can. 213 §
3)[49]. When
there is only one auxiliary bishop in an eparchy he is to be appointed as
protosyncellus and when there are two or more auxiliary bishops one is to be
appointed as protosyncellus and others as syncelli (can. 215 § 2).
Bishops of the Patriarchal Curia: The code
makes the provision for the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Churches to
appoint maximum number of three bishops to assist patriarch in the
administration of the affairs of his Church[50].
Provision is to be made for their support by the patriarch and synod of bishops[51].
“The patriarch can see that certain bishops, though not more than three, are
elected for the patriarchal curia by the synod of bishops of the patriarchal
Church according to the norms of cann. 181 § 1 and 182-187 as long as provision
is made for their support; he confers on them an office with a residence in the
patriarchal curia….” (can. 87).
Bishops of the Roman Curia, Nuncios etc.: Roman
Pontiff may appoint some bishops in Roman Curia as prefect of a Congregation,
secretary etc. He may also appoint certain bishops as nuncio in various
countries. All those bishops also come under the category of titular bishops.
Resigned and Retired Bishops: Bishops who completed
the age of seventy-five or who are having poor health are requested to submit
their resignation from office (can. 210). A bishop who was an eparchial bishop
of a particular eparchy holds the title of bishop emeritus of that particular
eparchy (can. 211 § 1). An auxiliary bishop or coadjutor bishop who has
resigned from the office also holds the title of emeritus of the office they
previously carried out (can. 218).
2. 4 Designation of Bishops
Designation of
bishops in the Church is very important. It includes several distinct steps
like papal approval of the candidates, election of the bishop inside the
territorial boundary, appointment of the bishop outside the proper territory of
the patriarchal Church by Roman Pontiff etc.
It is the
exclusive right of the members of the synod of the bishops of patriarchal or
major archiepiscopal Church to propose candidates to the episcopacy (can. 182 §
1). They will have to collect the
information and documents that are necessary to demonstrate the suitability of
the candidate. Qualifications for a bishop are mentioned in can. 180. Six
qualities are narrated in the canon. 1) The virtues of solid faith, good
morals, piety, zeal for souls and prudence are quite general, but can be
considered as fundamental to any consideration of a man for the episcopate. 2)
In so far as the notion of legitimacy of birth is not included in the Code, it
is not mentioned as a requirement for the episcopate; the code has added the
requirement of a good reputation[53].
3) An episcopal candidate cannot be bound by any marriage bond. Thus, a widower
or one who has had his marriage annulled can be admitted to the episcopate. 4)
The minimum age to become a bishop is thirty-five. In Cleri sanctitati the required age for the candidate of episcopacy
was thirty (CS can. 394 § 1). According to the suggestion of the Study Group
the age was raised to thirty-five in the code[54].
The patriarch could conceivably dispense from this age requirement[55]. 5) The candidate must have been ordained to
the priesthood for at least five years. This requirement is based upon the need
for a certain amount of pastoral experience prior to assuming the
responsibility of the episcopate. Patriarch has the right to grant dispensation
from this norm also. 6) To be suitable
for the episcopate the candidate must possess a doctorate or master’s degree in
sacred science or at least have expertise in some sacred science[56].
If a bishop
considers it necessary he may consult with priests and other christian faithful
who are outstanding in prudence and christian life to know their opinions about
the candidate (can. 182 § 1). Then he will have to inform the patriarch of his
finding before the convocation of the synod of bishops. If the patriarch, after
adding his own opinion, deems it appropriate, he sends the proposal to the
members of the synod (can. 182 § 2). Synod of bishops will have to prepare a
list of candidates by secret ballot and the patriarch shall submit the list of
the candidates to the Apostolic See to obtain the assent of the Roman Pontiff (can.
182 § 3). The code does not fix any minimum or maximum number of names that may
be presented to Roman Pontiff for his assent[57].
Once the assent of the Roman Pontiff is obtained it is valid until it is
revoked explicitly (can. 182 § 4). The revocation can be done by Apostolic
See itself or on the request of the synod of bishops[58].
For an election
of a bishop, two-third of the members of the synod are obliged to attend the
synod which is validly convoked (can. 183 § 1). Bishops are free to elect one
candidate whom they consider worthy and suitable before all others (can. 183 §
2). There is no obligation for bishops to elect only those candidates who are already
approved by Roman Pontiff[59].
In the election of a bishop for a specific office, an absolute majority (more
than half) is required in the first three ballots (can. 183 § 3). If there is a
tie between the candidates in the third ballot, the senior according to the
priestly ordination is to be declared elected. If both of them are ordained on
the same day, the senior in age is to be declared elected (can. 183 § 4). If
nobody has got absolute majority or tie in the third ballot, the fourth ballot
is done between those two candidates who received the greater number of votes
in the third balloting (can. 183 § 3). If there is a tie between the candidates
in the fourth ballot, the senior according to the priestly ordination is to be
declared elected. If both of them are ordained on the same day, the senior in
age is to be declared elected (can. 183 § 4).
If the one
elected has already received the assent of the Roman Pontiff and accepts the
election, the Apostolic See is to be notified of the election and the day of
proclamation (can. 184). If the one elected has not received the assent of the
Roman Pontiff, the patriarch is to seek the assent from the Roman Pontiff (can.
185 § 1) and the result of the
election cannot be published before getting the assent of the Roman Pontiff[60]. In all cases, without getting
the assent of the Roman Pontiff, patriarch or major archbishop cannot ask the
consent of the one already elected[61].
The procedure
for episcopal election by letter is possible if the synod of bishops cannot be
convened. The patriarch assisted by two bishops who function as tellers could
conduct the election by correspondence but patriarch has to consult the Apostolic
See (can. 186 § 1).
To exercise an ecclesiastical office one requires canonical provision. No
ecclesiastical office can be acquired validly without canonical provision.
Therefore, patriarch is to issue the letter of canonical provision to the
bishop elect within ten days of the proclamation of the election (can. 86 § 3).
2. 6 Appointment of Bishops by Roman Pontiff
In the case of appointing
an eparchial, coadjutor or auxiliary bishop outside the territorial boundary of
the patriarchal or major archiepiscopal Church, the synod of bishops, observing
the procedures for the election of bishops inside the territorial boundary,
elects at least three candidates and proposes them through the patriarch or
major archbishop to the Roman Pontiff for the appointment (can. 149)[62]. The
decision of the Roman Pontiff is communicated to the patriarch[63]. It
is to be noted that Roman Pontiff is not bound to choose one of the presented
candidates for the appointment[64]. The
list of candidates (terna) sent to
the Roman Pontiff is to be kept very secret till the Roman Pontiff appoints one
as he has the freedom to appoint anyone outside the terna as bishop[65]. In
all other Churches other than patriarchal and major archiepiscopal Churches
bishops are appointed by Roman Pontiff[66].
2. 7 Profession of Faith
and Promise of Obedience
Prior to the
episcopal ordination the candidate is to make a profession of faith and a
promise of obedience to the Roman Pontiff and to the patriarch or major
archbishop. “Before episcopal ordination the candidate is to make the
profession of faith and promise of obedience to the Roman Pontiff and, in
patriarchal Churches, also a promise of obedience to patriarch in those matters
in which he is subject to the patriarch in accord with the norm of law” (can.
187 § 2). Making a promise of obedience to the Roman Pontiff is a sign of full
communion with the catholic Church and therefore the episcopal candidate is
obliged to make this profession of faith. A bishop who belongs to the
patriarchal Church is bound to make a promise of obedience to the patriarch in
those matters in which he is subject to the patriarch according to the norm of
law. Every bishop is obliged to obey those laws and directives which common law
determines as having binding force over him. For example, liturgical laws of
the patriarchal Church have the force of law everywhere in the world (can. 140
§ 2). Therefore all the bishops including the bishops outside the territorial
boundary are obliged to observe them.
Bishops who do
not belong to patriarchal or major archiepiscopal Church are obliged to make a
promise of obedience only to the Roman Pontiff and there is no obligation for
them to make a promise of obedience to the head of their sui iuris Church[67].
2. 8 Episcopal Ordination
Canon 25 of the Council
of Chalcedon held in the year 451 states that the person elected to the
episcopate must be ordained bishop within three months of the election unless
the period of delay has been caused to be extended by some unavoidable
necessity[68]. He has
to take canonical possession of the eparchy within another three months. Within
six months from the day of proclamation one had to take possession of an
eparchy. If a particular candidate did
not receive the episcopal ordination or report to the eparchy within the
required time, the patriarch may deprive him of his office[69].
The code makes
it clear now that a priest promoted to the episcopacy must receive episcopal
ordination within three months from the day of proclamation if it is a case of
election or from the receipt of apostolic letter if it is a case of appointment
(can. 188 § 1). Within four months from the day of episcopal election or
appointment bishop has to take canonical possession of the eparchy (can. 188 §
2). If the bishop elect is detained by a legitimate impediment, he is dispensed
from the requirement ipso iure. For
example, if the bishop elect is admitted to a hospital, the tempus utile is suspended and begins to
run the day he is able to exercise his right[70].
Episcopal
ordination is conferred by three bishops except in the case of extreme necessity.
The second and third bishops can be of other Church sui iuris other than that of the principal minister if two bishops
from the same Church cannot be present (can. 746 § 2). One elected or appointed
as bishop must receive episcopal ordination from Roman Pontiff, patriarch,
metropolitan or a bishop designated by patriarch or major archbishop (cann. 86 §
1, 2° and 159, 1°). Any other bishop is
forbidden to confer episcopal ordination without a lawful mandate (can. 745).
2.
9 Enthronement of Eparchial Bishops
The manner in
which the ordained bishop is to assume the governance of an eparchy is
determined in can. 189. The code retains the liturgical act of enthronement as
the means by which the bishop takes canonical possession of the eparchy. During
the time of drafting of the canon there was a proposal to eliminate the use of
the term ‘enthronement’ as it is inappropriate for modern usage. But the
proposal was rejected as the term confirms to the liturgical books of many Churches
sui iuris[71].
The letter of canonical provision conferred by the Roman Pontiff or patriarch
must be publicly read out during the liturgical ceremony (can. 189 § 1). A
record of the enthronement is to be drawn up by the chancellor and it is to be
signed by eparchial bishop, chancellor of the curia and at least two witnesses.
It is to be preserved in the archive of the eparchial curia (can. 189 § 2). The
bishop cannot involve in the governance of the eparchy, either personally or
through others, unless and until he takes canonical possession through
enthronement. Canon does not prohibit to retain and exercise his office in the
eparchy that he was holding at the time of his appointment (can. 183 § 3).
There is no
liturgical celebration for taking procession of the office of co-adjutor and
auxiliary bishops. Co-adjutor bishop is obliged to present his letter of
canonical provision to the eparchial bishop and to the college of consultors in
the presence of the chancellor. Auxiliary bishop need not present his letter of
canonical provision to the college of consultors, but only to the eparchial
bishop in the presence of the chancellor (can. 214).
Conclusion
Eparchy and bishop are closely connected to each other
as both have no existence separately. An eparchy whether it is territorial or
personal is entrusted to an eparchial bishop for the governance. He governs the
eparchy not as the representative or delegate of Roman Pontiff, but as the
vicar and emissary of Christ. For this reason his authority and power in the
eparchy cannot undergo any limitation except reserved to the Roman Pontiff or
to patriarch. Roman Pontiff freely nominates and appoints bishops in universal
Church normally. If it is a patriarchal or major archiepiscopal Church, synod
of bishops elects bishops for the eparchies within the territorial boundaries
of the Church with the approval of the Roman Pontiff. If there is a pastoral
need there can be a coadjutor or auxiliary bishops to assist the eparchial
bishop. For the purpose of pastoral governance the eparchy is divided into
various parishes based on territory, language, rite etc. and entrusted to
pastors.
[1] Diocese is the equivalent term for
eparchy in Latin Code.
[2] Luigi
Sabbarese, “De Eparchiis et de Episcopis”, in Pio Vito Pinto (ed.), Commento al codice del canoni delle Chiese orientali,
Città del Vaticano, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2001, p. 163.
[3] Victor J. Pospishil, Eastern Catholic Church Law, 2nd revised edition, New
York, Saint Maron Publications, 1996, p. 206.
[4] Norman
P. Tanner (ed.), Decrees of the
Ecumenical Councils, vol. 1, Washington, Sheed & Ward and Georgetown
University Press, 1990, p. 31.
[5] Vatican
Council II, Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church, Christus Dominus, 28 October 1965, no.
11, in AAS, 58 (1966), p. 677;
English translation in Austin Flannery (ed.), Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post-Conciliar Documents,
Bombay, St Paul Publications, 1997, p. 509
[6] Vatican
Council II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen gentium, 21 November 1964, no. 23, in AAS, 57 (1965), p. 27; English translation in Austin Flannery
(ed.), Vatican Council II: The Conciliar
and Post-Conciliar Documents, Bombay, St Paul Publications, 1997, p. 342.
[7] Pospishil, Eastern
Catholic Church Law, p. 206.
[8] Marco
Brogi, “Eparchies and Bishops”, in George Nedungatt (ed.), A Guide to the Eastern Code: A Commentary on the Code of Canons of the
Eastern Churches, Rome, Pontificio Istituto Orientale, 2002, p. 228.
[9] Joseph
W. Pokusa, “Dioceses, Parishes, Pastors, and Pastoral Care”, in The Jurist, 67 (2007), p. 159.
[10] John A. Renken, “Particular Churches and Their
Groupings”, in John P. Beal, James A. Coriden and Thomas J. Green (eds), New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law,
Bangalore, Theological Publications in India, 2003, p. 507.
[11]
Gianfranco Ghirlanda, “La chiesa particolare: natura e tipologia”, in Monitor ecclesiasticus, 115 (1990), p.
558.
[12] José Luis Gutiérrez, “Personal Prelatures”, in Ernest
Caparros and Hélène Aubé (eds), Code of
Canon Law Annotated, 2nd edition, Montréal, Wilson & Lafleur
Limitée, 2004, p. 315.
[13] De Rose Andrew, The
Church as Communion in the Code of Canon Law of 1983, Rome, Pontificia
Università Urbaniana, 1995, p. 17.
[14] Joseph
Kaduppil, “Eparchy: A Theologico-Canonical Reality”, in Christian Orient, 25 (2004), p. 115.
[15] James
K. Mallett, “Diocesan Structure and Governance”, in CLSA Proceedings, 42 (1980), p. 152.
[16] Marco Brogi, “Norms on Eparchies and Bishops”, in
Jose Chiramel and Kuriakose Bharanikulangara (eds), The Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches: A Study and Interpretation,
Alwaye, St Thomas Academy for Research, 1993, pp. 108-109.
[17]
Gerard Sheehy et al. (eds), The Canon
Law: Letter & Spirit, London, Geoffrey Chapman, 1995, p. 210.
[18]
Sebastian Karambai, Structures of
Decision-Making in the Local Church, Bangalore, Theological Publications in
India, 2001, p. 20.
[19] Luigi
Sabbarese, La constituzione gerarchica
della Chiesa universale e particolare, Città del Vaticano, Urbaniana
University Press, 1999, p. 59.
[20] Juan
Ignacio Arrieta, Governance Structures within
the Catholic Church, Montréal, Wilson & Lafleur Ltée, 2000, p. 179.
[21] Renken, “Particular Churches and Their Groupings”, p.
509.
[22] James
Arampulickal, The Pastoral Care of the
Syro-Malabar Catholic Migrants, Rome, Pontificia Università Urbaniana,
1993, p. 30.
[23] The term Church sui
iuris is explained in can. 27 of CCEO. It says: “A community of Christian
faithful, which is joined together by a hierarchy according to the norm of law
and which is expressly or tacitly recognized as sui iuris by the supreme authority of the Church, is called in this
code a Church sui iuris”.
[24] Pius X,
Apostolic Letter, In Universi christiani,
29 August 1911, in Directory 2005: Archeparchy of Kottayam, Kottayam, The
Archeparchial Curia, 2005, pp. 30-31.
[25] H. G.
Bowen, “Diocese (Eparchy)”, in New
Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 4, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967, p.
871.
[26] Christus Dominus 11.
[27] George
Nedungatt, “The Patriarchal Ministry in the Church of the Third Millennium”, in
The Jurist, 61 (2001), p. 24.
[28] John D.
Faris, The Eastern Catholic Churches:
Constitution and Governance, New York, Saint Maron Publications, 1992, p. 405.
[29]
Pospishil, Eastern Catholic Church Law,
p. 206.
[30]
Kaduppil, “Eparchy: A Theologico-Canonical Reality”, p. 129.
[31] Patrick
Granfield, “The Church Local and Universal: Realization of Communion”, in The Jurist, 49 (1989), p. 467.
[32] Karl
Rahner, The Episcopate and the Primacy,
New York, Herder and Herder, 1962, pp. 34-35.
[33] Sabbarese, “De Eparchiis et de
Episcopis”, p. 229.
[34] Lumen gentium 27.
[35] Thomas
J. Green, “The Pastoral Governance Role of the Diocesan Bishop: Foundations,
Scope and Limitations”, in The Jurist,
49 (1989), p. 482.
[36] R. A.
Kearney, The Principles of Delegation,
Washington, The Catholic University of America, 1929, p. 50.
[37]
Velasius De Paolis, “De significatione verborum iurisdictio ordinaria,
delegata, mandata, vicaria’’, in Periodica,
54 (1965), p. 514.
[38] Arrieta, Governance
Structures within the Catholic Church, p. 207.
[39] Christus Dominus 8.
[40] Paul VI,
Apostolic Letter, Episcopalis potestatis,
2 May 1967, in AAS, 59 (1967), pp.
385-390.
[41] Thomas
Pazhayampallil, Pastoral Guide, vol.
3, 3rd edition, Bangalore, Kristu
Jyoti Publications, 2004, p. 591.
[42] Myriam Wijlens, “Bishops and Their Relationship to a
Local Church: A Canonical Perspective”, in The
Jurist, 66 (2006), pp. 230-231.
[43] Ibid., p. 230.
[44] Thomas
C. Anslow, “Titular Bishops as an Institution according to the Annuario
Pontificio”, in The Jurist, 58 (1998),
p. 125.
[45] Arrieta, Governance
Structures within the Catholic Church, p. 211.
[46] The
coadjutor bishop, if he has already taken possession of his office, automatically
becomes the diocesan bishop when diocese becomes vacant in Latin Church,
according to can. 409 § 1 of CIC 1983.
[47] Thomas
J. Green, “Diocesan and Parish Structures: A Comparison of Selected Canons in
the Codex Iuris Canonici and Codex Canonum Ecclesiarum Orientalium”,
in Studia canonica, 33 (1999), p.
373.
[48] Michael
Smith Foster, “The Role of Auxiliary Bishops”, in The Jurist, 51 (1991), p. 424; Christus
Dominus 25-26.
[49] Nothing
is mentioned in the code of an auxiliary bishop being endowed with any special
rights or obligations. Canon 403 § 2 of CIC 1983 indicates that an auxiliary
bishop can be endowed with special faculties.
[50] Francis Elavathingal, Patriarchal and Major Archiepiscopal Curias in the Eastern Catholic
Legislations Based on CCEO Canons 114-125, Rome, Pontificium Institutum
Orientale, 2002, pp. 9-10; Pospishil, Eastern Catholic Church Law, p. 208.
[51] George
Nedungatt, “Bishops of the Patriarchal Curia and Their Appointment”, in Eastern Legal Thought, 5 (2006), p.
29.
[52] The
Supreme Pontiff freely appoints bishops in Latin Church except in a few
dioceses in Germany, Austria and Switzerland where the chapters of canons elect
episcopal candidates and their election is confirmed by the Roman Pontiff.
Also, the president of the French Republic has the right to designate the
bishops of Strasbourg and Metz. See René Metz, “Papal Legates and the
Appointment of Bishops”, in The Jurist,
52 (1992), pp. 259-284.
[53] Nuntia, 27 (1988), pp. 9-10 and 16;
Faris, The Eastern Catholic Churches:
Constitution and Governance, p. 417.
[54] Nuntia, 9 (1979), p. 8; Nuntia, 19 (1984), p. 53.
[55]
Pospishil, Eastern Catholic Church Law,
p. 209.
[56] Nuntia, 9 (1979), p. 8; Faris, The Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution
and Governance, p. 418.
[57] Marco
Brogi, “Characteristics of the Eparchial Structure in the New Law for the
Oriental Churches”, in Clarence Gallagher (ed.), The Code of Canons of the Oriental Churches, Rome, Mar Thoma Yogam,
1991, p. 61.
[58] Joseph
Khoury, “La scelta dei vescovi nel Codice dei canoni dei delle Chiese
Orientali”, in Apollinaris, 65
(1992), p. 87.
[59] Nuntia, 9 (1979), p. 10.
[60] Jose
Chiramel, “Synodal System: The Eastern Way of Church Government”, in Tanima, 2 (1994), p. 25.
[61] Brogi,
“Norms on Eparchies and Bishops”, p. 111.
[62] Nuntia, 2 (1976), p. 44.
[63] Francis
John Marini, The Power of the Patriarch,
New York, Saint Maron Publications, 1998, p. 219.
[64] Marco
Brogi, “Nomine vescovili nelle Chiese orientali cattoliche”, in Kanon, 7 (1985), p. 130; John D. Faris,
“The Synod of Bishops and Council of Hierarchs in the Code of Canons of the Eastern
Churches”, in Studies in Church Law,
2 (2006), p. 140.
[65] Marini,
The Power of the Patriarch, p.
220.
[66] Nuntia, 23 (1986), pp. 9-10.
[67] Faris, The Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution
and Governance, p. 430.
[68] Tanner
(ed.), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils,
vol. 1, p. 98.
[69] Faris, The Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution
and Governance, pp. 430-431.
[70] Sabbarese, “De Eparchiis et de
Episcopis”, p. 175.
[71] Nuntia, 23 (1986), p. 16.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3
The Office of the Chancellor
(This article is Published: cf. Mathew John Puthenparambil, "The office of the Chancellor", in Ephrem’s Theological Journal, vol. 15 (March,
2011), pp. 55-64)
Introduction
The office of
the chancellor is one of the mandatory offices in every eparchy. In order to be
appointed to the office of chancellor of an eparchy, the person must be either
a priest or a deacon. In Latin Church, a lay person could be appointed as the
Chancellor of the diocese. The primary
function of the chancellor is to maintain the eparchial curial records.
1. Origin and Appointment of Chancellor
The word
‘chancellor’ comes from the Latin term cancellarius
which means doorkeeper. In the ancient
Roman world the cancellarius was the
doorkeeper at the grill of the Roman law court who eventually assumed the
duties of secretary to the magistrate. Bishop’s chancery was developed in the
twelfth century and in the course of time chancellor became the responsible
person for signing and preserving the letters of the bishop. After the Council
of Trent chancellor was recognized as the principal notary of the bishop and as
such the authenticator of legitimate documents. He also became the custodian of
eparchial archives. The office of the chancellor was incorporated into
legislation for the first time in 1917 code[1].
Motu proprio Cleri sanctitati also
retained the office of chancellor (CS can. 439).
The canon says:
“In the eparchial curia, a chancellor is to be appointed who is to be a
presbyter or a deacon. His principal obligation, unless established otherwise
by particular law, is to see that the acts of the curia are drawn up and
dispatched, and that they are conserved in the archives of the eparchial curia”
(can. 252 § 1). Office of the chancellor is mandatory in the eparchial curia.
Eparchial bishop is obliged to appoint a chancellor. Appointment of the
chancellor could be for a definite or indefinite period of time[2].
2. Vice-chancellor
When it is
necessary a vice-chancellor could be appointed to help chancellor. “If it is
deemed necessary, the chancellor may be given an assistant, who is to be called
vice-chancellor” (can. 252 § 2). Whatever is said in common law regarding
chancellor is applicable to the vice- chancellor.
3. Qualifications of Chancellor
There is not
much expressly stated in law other than that the chancellor must be a priest or
a deacon. The law says: “In the eparchial curia, a chancellor is to be
appointed who is to be a presbyter or a deacon….” (can. 252 § 1). Motu proprio Cleri sanctitati did not allow a deacon
to be appointed chancellor. It says: “In every curia the bishop shall appoint a
chancellor, who must be a priest, …”(CS can. 439 § 1).
Chancellors and
notaries, according to can. 253 § 2, are to be of unblemished reputation and
above all suspicion. This qualification seems to be a very important requisite
for a chancellor’s appointment because from the very nature of his position as
a testis qualificatus for the
authentication of the documents, the affixing of his signature to a written act
or instrument makes it acceptable for the furnishing of full proof in the
ecclesiastical forum[3].
If they are not persons of good character they can manipulate in the curia as
they are officials who declare the authenticity of juridical documents[4].
Another quality that appears to be needed for the chancellor from the nature of
his office is that he must have the characteristic of being neat and systematic[5].
The Directory for the Pastoral Ministry of Bishops issued by the Congregation
for Bishops in 2004, speaks of another quality that chancellor must have
canonical ability and experience in management of administrative affairs[6].
He must be a person who can keep secrecy as he often works with curial
documents that may deal with subject matter of a secret nature[7].
In cases
involving the reputation of a cleric[8],
the notary must be a priest (can. 253 § 2).
Therefore, notaries who are not priests cannot deal in cases of a
deacon, priest and bishop. Such cases include the removal or transfer of a
pastor, a laicization process for a cleric, imposition of penalty on a cleric
etc[9].
4.
Responsibilities of Chancellor
The principal
duty of the chancellor is to gather, arrange, conserve the documents in the
eparchial curia and dispatch them when it is required (can. 252 § 1). All these
responsibilities are to be done in a systematic way. There are various
departments and heads in the eparchial curia. It is the duty of the chancellor
to collect all the documents in order to arrange and safeguard them in the
curia. It is preferable that the chancellor is a qualified person in arranging
the documents in a systematic way, like registering the document with
individual identifying number, preparing the inventory etc[10].
The canon omits
the former legislation “to arrange them in chronological order, and to make an
index of the same” (CS can. 439 § 1) in the present legislation. In many cases
such a systematic arrangement according to the chronological order may be
imprudent and it may not be the most efficient system today[11].
The canon does
not prescribe which ‘acts of the curia’ are to be drawn up and preserved in the
archive (can. 252 § 1). Some other canons in the code give guidance in this
regard. For example, can. 774 § 1 states that documents relating to ordination
are to be recorded in a special book to be kept in the archive of the eparchial
curia. After the consecration of a church, a document is to be drawn up for the
preservation in the archive of the eparchial curia (can. 871 § 2). Upon the
completion of the enthronement, a document is to be drawn up and signed by the
eparchial bishop along with the chancellor and at least two witnesses and it is
to be preserved in the eparchial curia (can. 189 § 2). From these examples we
indirectly understand some of the acts of the curia[12].
The code gives the provision to make particular laws with regard to the
additional duties of the chancellor, if required (can. 252 § 1). If particular
laws are not enacted in a particular Church sui
iuris, the chancellor has no other duties other than specified in common
law[13].
When the
eparchial bishop issues decrees or documents, it is the duty of the chancellor
to countersign it as a legal witness to the bishop’s signature. In the same
manner, the chancellor should countersign the appointments done by the
eparchial bishop. In general, any decree that comes from the eparchial bishop
is to be countersigned by the chancellor[14].
4. 1 Chancellor and Vice-chancellor as
Notaries
Chancellor and
vice-chancellor are ipso iure
notaries of the curia and no special letter of appointment is needed for the
appointment to that office. “The chancellor as well as the vice-chancellor are
by virtue of the law itself notaries of the eparchial curia” (can. 252 § 3)[15].
Duties of
Notary: Duties of the notaries are given in can. 254. It prescribes three
duties.
i) It is the
responsibility of the notaries to prepare documents related to decrees,
decisions or other acts of the curia. Such documents are considered public
ecclesiastical documents and enjoy the accompanying juridic effect (can. 254, 1°).
ii) They have to
prepare faithfully the minutes of the meetings or record the events that took
place in the eparchial curia. The document is to be signed with day, month and
year. Notary’s signature on such a document authenticates it[16].
Certain judicial procedures require the signature of the notary for validity
(can. 1101 § 1).
iii) They have
to furnish acts or documents to those who legitimately request them, and
declare copies made of them to confirm to the original (can. 1101 § 1).
Notaries are authorized to show to those who legitimately request the
documents. Interested parties have the right to obtain an authentic copy of
documents, personally or by proxy, which are by their very nature public and
that concern their own personal status (can. 257 § 2). The chancellor and
notaries are forbidden, without the permission of the judge, to furnish a copy
of the juridical acts and documents that have been acquired for the process
(can. 1133 § 2).
5. Categories of Archives
In terms of
function, we see three types of archives. They are general archive, historical
archive and secret archive[17]. The
code does not speak of historical archives[18].
Every eparchial curia should have a general archive as well as a secret
archive. The archives must be well protected from the attack of insects and
natural phenomenon like moisture, direct sunlight etc.
5. 1 General Archive
In
view of protecting the archives, the access to the archives is restricted. The
archive is to be locked and only two persons- eparchial bishop and chancellor-
can hold the keys to the archive. No one can enter into the archive without the
permission of eparchial bishop or the permission of protosyncellus[19]
along with the chancellor. The canon says: “The archive of the eparchial curia
is to be locked and the key kept by the eparchial bishop and the chancellor; no
one is permitted to enter it without the permission of the eparchial bishop
alone or the protosyncellus along with the chancellor” (can. 257 § 1).
Persons enjoy
the right to obtain authentic copies of documents from the archives which are
by their nature public and regard their personal status. Public documents are
documents such as certificates of baptism, Chrismation, marriage, ordination,
letters of appointment etc. The interested party can make the request either
personally or through a proxy for such kind of documents from the archive[20].
The document may be in the form of an authentic written copy or a photocopy.
The document in question must be public by nature and pertain to the
individual’s own status[21].
We read in the code: “Interested parties have the right to receive, personally
or by proxy, an authentic copy of the documents that are of the nature public
and that concern their own personal status” (can. 257 § 2).
Documents to be Kept in the General Archive:
The canon describes the contents of the archive very generally as “documents
pertaining to the affairs of the eparchy” (can. 256 § 1). A few canons specify certain documents and
records which must be maintained. For example, the special book in which the
names of those ordained, name of ordaining bishop, place and date of the sacred
ordination are recorded is to be kept in the archive (can. 774 § 1). A document
is to be drawn up regarding the consecration or blessing of the cathedral church
and other churches and it is to be preserved in the archive (can. 871§ 2). There
is an obligation to keep a copy of the document of foundation in the archive (can.
1055). Administrators of temporal goods must maintain an inventory of property,
updating it as needed, a copy of which they are to preserve in the eparchial
archive (can. 1028, 8°).
The authority
who admits a candidate for sacred ordination should obtain certain documents
like written declaration of the candidate before the reception of the sacred
order that he freely receives the Holy Order (can. 761), certificate of baptism
and Chrismation with holy myron (can. 769, 1°),
written consent of the wife if the candidate is married (can. 769, 2°), certificates of completed
studies (can. 769, 3°),
conduct certificate from the rector/superior (can. 769, 4°), testimonial letter of the
parish priest of the parish where the name of the candidate to the ordination
was made known (can. 771 § 1), etc. All these documents are to be preserved in
general archive (can. 769 § 2).
The following
records are also to be preserved in the archive: Record of consecration and
canonical possession of eparchial bishop, canonical possession of Apostolic
administrator, minutes of the election of the eparchial administrator, record
of the pastoral visitation of the eparchial bishop, quinquennial report of the
bishop, report of eparchial synod, appointment of curial members, appointment
of members of the college of consultors, appointment of finance officer and finance
council members, appointment of priests, directors of various apostolates,
erection of a seminary, erection of a parish, erection of religious houses,
permission for building a church, permission for alienation of the property,
blessing of a cemetery, etc[22].
Files of clerics
should contain academic records, record of ordination, letters of assignment, funeral
directives, last will, photographs, special award or letters of achievement, etc.
Files of ascription and licit transfer of priests, resigned, laicized or went
on leave of absence are also to be preserved in the archive[23].
Pope John Paul
II says that the historical patrimony is to be kept in archives or also in
libraries and everywhere entrusted to competent curators lest testimonies of
this kind be lost[24]
Documents can be
removed from the archive only for a short time. Motu proprio Cleri sanctitati gave three days time to
keep it back in the archive the document that was taken out. Unless there is a
real necessity it shall not be taken out. In order to remove a document one
needs to get permission either from eparchial bishop or from protosyncellus
along with chancellor. Canon says: “It is not permitted to remove documents
from the archive of the eparchial curia except for a brief time and with the
permission either of the eparchial bishop alone or the protosyncellus along
with the chancellor” (can. 258). General permission can be given to a person
who needs to obtain certain documents regularly.
5. 2 Secret Archive
Every eparchial
curia will have certain documents which must be preserved separately with utmost
care either because of the nature of the document or because it is prescribed
by common law. While the principle is not expressly enunciated, we can
recognize in the canons on secret archives a means of protecting a person’s
reputation and right to privacy. Therefore it is the obligation of the
eparchial bishop to have a secret archive in the curia for this purpose[25].
A distinct secret archive may be located in the curia, or there may be a secret
safe within the general archive. This archive must be completely closed, locked
and it should be one that cannot be removed easily[26].
Key to Secret Archive: Unlike the general
archive, the secret archive shall have only one key. Only the eparchial bishop
can have the key to the secret archive and only he can enter into the secret
archive. Eparchial bishop may dispense from this law (can. 1538 § 1) and he may
give key to his protosyncellus or chancellor so that when it is very necessary,
protosyncellus or chancellor may enter into the secret archive in his absence
to see the document for a legitimate reason[27].
When see is vacant the eparchial administrator is to hold the key and he shall
not open it except in a case of true necessity (can. 260 § 2). It is forbidden
for the eparchial administrator to remove, destroy or alter documents of the
archive when see is vacant[28].
Documents Kept in Secret Archive: The
common law prescribes that certain documents are to be preserved always in
secret archive. Penal procedures involving a question of morals: Till ten
years, description of the case and the definitive sentence are to be kept in
secret archive for ten years. After ten years, only a summary of the case and
the definitive sentence are to be retained in the archive (can. 259 § 2). The
common law says that unless there is a contrary determination in a rescript of
the Apostolic See or of the patriarch or of local hierarch within the limits of
their competency, a dispensation granted in the internal non-sacramental forum
is to be preserved in the secret archive (can. 799). The special marriage
register in which marriages that are secretly celebrated are recorded is to be
kept in the secret archive (can. 840 § 3). The acts of the investigation, the
decrees of the hierarch who initiated and concluded the investigation, and
everything that preceded the investigation are also to be kept in the secret
archive if they are not required for the procedure for imposing penalties (can.
1470).
Though it is not
obligatory, there are various places in the code where it may be presumed that
secret archive is to be made use to keep many other documents like rescripts of
dispensation from impediments and irregularities to orders (cann. 767-768), the
decree of dismissal of a monk or a religious (can. 501), documents relating to
the loss of clerical state by invalidity, penalty or dispensation (cann.
394-398) etc[29].
The list of
documents that are to be preserved in the secret archive is not exhaustive.
Eparchial bishop may place other reports, documents, or information like
personal records, psychic reports into the secret archive when the right to a
good reputation and confidentiality is a danger of being violated, and to lessen
the possibility of scandal. Once it is placed in the secret archive the
documents would be secure and confidential.
Removal of Documents from Secret Archive:
No document can be removed from the secret archive unlike the general archive (can.
260 § 3). Taking photocopy of the document also is prohibited since it would be
equivalent to removal since the intent of the norm is not simply to preserve
the original but to avoid dissemination of the information contained in the
document[30]. There
may be, however, circumstances when this access is necessary. Nevertheless, if
necessary warrants it, the eparchial bishop may permit certified copies to be
made for legitimate confidential use. In such cases, however, the copies should
be returned, as soon as possible, to the chancellor for filing or destruction[31].
A distinction is to be made between documents which are to be placed in secret
archive by common law and documents placed at the discretion of the eparchial
bishop. The documents placed at the discretion of the eparchial bishop can be
removed by him from the secret archive[32].
5. 3 Destruction of Archival Documents
The law requires
that certain documents from the secret archive are to be destroyed after
certain period of time. After ten years of closing the case, only the summary
along with the definitive sentence are retained in the secret archive and acts
of the case are destroyed[33].
If the guilty person dies, the entire files are to be destroyed including the
definitive sentence of the case and not even a summary is to be preserved[34].
“Each year, the procedural acts for inflicting penalties in matters of morals
are to be destroyed whenever the guilty parties have died, or after ten years
have passed from the end of the case. A brief summary of the facts and the text
of the definitive sentence or decree are to be retained” (can. 259 § 2).
6. Removal of Chancellor from the Office
The chancellor
exercises his office ad nutum episcopi,
that is, at the discretion and will of the bishop[35].
According to can. 255, eparchial bishop can freely remove the chancellor from
the office. ‘Freely’ does not mean that he can remove arbitrarily but he has to
follow canonical norms as in the case of removal from any other office and also
the principles of equity[36].
The decree of removal must be issued in writing for validity (can. 974 § 2).
Even though the eparchial bishop can remove the chancellor freely, the
eparchial administrator during the vacancy of the eparchy cannot remove
chancellor or notaries without the consent of the college of eparchial
consultors (can. 255). The eparchial administrator may appoint a new chancellor
if that office becomes vacant during his time of administration. It would be
prudent from his side that he appoints a chancellor for the time being as long
as the eparchial See is vacant and also only after consulting with the college
of eparchial consultors[37].
Conclusion
Though the
office of chancellor is not very important office in the curia, it is an
essential office as there should be someone to record the acts of the curia,
authenticate it etc. One of the principal functions of the chancellor is
drawing and dispatching the acts of the curia. The word “acts” refers to
written documents which are drawn to establish proof. To formulate a document
the chancellor needs experience and expertise in language, method of forming
and canonical knowledge. Often
the chancellor is both notary and archivist in many eparchies.
[1] John A.
Alesandro, “Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, in James Coriden, Thomas
J. Green and Donald E. Heintschel (eds), The
Code of Canon Law: A Text and Commentary, Bangalore, Theological
Publications in India, 1994, p. 392.
[2] Barbara
Anne Cusack, “The Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, in John P. Beal,
James A. Coriden and Thomas J. Green (eds), New
Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Bangalore, Theological Publications in
India, 2003, p. 638.
[3] John
Edward Prince, The Diocesan Chancellor:
An Historical, Synopsis and Commentary, Washington, The Catholic University
of America, 1942, p. 48.
[4] Jose
Porunnedom, “Office of the Chancellor, Chancery and Archives”, in Canonical Studies, 16 (2002), p. 175.
[5] Prince, The
Diocesan Chancellor: An Historical, Synopsis and Commentary, p. 49.
[6] Apostolorum successores 179.
[7] Prince, The Diocesan Chancellor: An Historical,
Synopsis and Commentary, p. 49.
[8] Can. 483
§ 2 of CIC 1983 speaks only cases involving the reputation of priests.
[9] John D.
Faris, Faris, Eastern Catholic Churches:
Constitution and Governance, New York, Saint Maron Publications, 1992, p.
527.
[10]
Porunnedom, “Office of the Chancellor, Chancery and Archives”, p. 176.
[11]
Alesandro, “The Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, p. 392; Faris, Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution and
Governance, p. 525.
[12] Cusack,
“The Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, p. 636.
[13]
Porunnedom, “Office of the Chancellor, Chancery and Archives”, p. 174.
[14] Prince,
The Diocesan Chancellor: An Historical,
Synopsis and Commentary, p. 84.
[15] Can. 482 § 3 of CIC 1983 says that the chancellor and
vice-chancellor are automatically notaries and secretaries of the curia.
Chancellor and vice-chancellor do not become secretaries of eparchial curia
automatically in CCEO.
[16] Cusack,
“The Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, p. 637.
[17] The Pastoral Function of Church Archives,
no. 2.
[18] CIC
1983 speaks of historical archive in can. 491 § 2.
[19] According
to can. 487 § 1 of CIC 1983, it is the moderator of the curia who is
responsible along with chancellor.
[20] C. Van
De Wiel, “The Ecclesiastical Archives: Historical Background and Current
Legislation”, in Ephemerides Theologicae
Lovanienses, 61 (1985), p. 138.
[21] Sharon
L. Holland, “Archives: In Service of Culture and Learning”, in The Jurist, 46 (1986), p. 626.
[22] Higinio
Velarde, “Chancery Procedures and Formularies”, in Philippine Canonical Forum, 6 (2004), pp. 252-253.
[23] Ralph
E. Wiatrowski, “Clergy Records”, in CLSA
Proceedings, 58 (1996), p. 348.
[24] Pastor bonus 101 § 2.
[25] Luigi Sabbarese, “De Eparchiis et de
Episcopis”, in Pio Vito Pinto (ed.), Commento
al codice del canoni delle Chiese orientali, Città del Vaticano, Libreria Editrice
Vaticana, 2001, p. 231.
[26] Kevin
E. McKenna, “Confidential Clergy Matters and the Secret Archives”, in Studia canonica, 26 (1992), p. 202;
Holland, “Archives: In Service of Culture and Learning”, p. 630.
[27] Alesandro,
“The Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, p. 397.
[28] De Wiel,
“The Ecclesiastical Archives: Historical Background and Current Legislation”,
p. 138; Holland, “Archives: In Service of Culture and Learning”, p. 630.
[29]
McKenna, “Confidential Clergy Matters and the Secret Archives”, pp. 202-203.
[30] Faris, Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution and
Governance, p. 531; Alesandro, “The Internal Ordering of Particular
Churches”, p. 397.
[31]
Alesandro, “The Internal Ordering of Particular Churches”, p. 397.
[32] Faris, Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution and
Governance, pp. 531-532; Alesandro, “The Internal Ordering of Particular
Churches”, p. 397.
[33]
McKenna, “Confidential Clergy Matters and the Secret Archives”, p. 202;
Holland, “Archives: In Service of Culture and Learning”, p. 630.
[34] Faris, Eastern Catholic Churches: Constitution and
Governance, p. 531.
[35]
Velarde, “Chancery Procedures and Formularies”, p. 229.
[36]
Porunnedom, “Office of the Chancellor, Chancery and Archives”, p. 173.
[37] Roch Pagé, Les Églises particulières, vol. 1, Montréal, Les Éditions Paulines, 1985, 101.
2
The Role of the Laity in Governance of the Diocese
in Syro-Malabar Church sui iuris
(This paper was presented on the occasion of
Syro- Malabar Heritage Day in the presence of His Beatitude George Cardinal
Alenchery, Archbishops, Bishops, Priests, Religious and Seminarians in Divino
Amore, Rome on 21 October 2012)
1.
Introduction
The Church cannot be active without the co-operation of the
laity. They are entrusted with a mission by virtue of their baptism and
confirmation. In the early Church they had prominent roles in decision making
process. When clericalism entered into the Church, slowly the role of the laity
was minimized. The Second Vatican Council gave much emphasis to the laity.
2. Participation of the
Laity in Decision Making in the Past
The
laity were involved actively in all decision making processes from the
beginning of the Church. We see this fact in the New Testament especially in
the Acts of the Apostles (cf. Chapter 15) and in the letters of St. Paul (cf. I
Cori 5: 3-5; Rom 16: 1- 23), in the teachings of early Fathers of the Church
and of the various Councils of the Church. Laity had an important role in the
election of bishops in the Church from the beginning of the early Church in the
west as well as in the east.
3. The Laity in the
Teachings of the Second Vatican Council
It was the Second Vatican Council that brought a radical
change in the understanding of the laity in the Church. Four of its documents
namely, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen
gentium, Decree on the Apostolate of Lay People Apostolicam actuositatem, Decree on the Church’s Missionary
Activity Ad gentes divinitus and
Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et spes speak of the role of the laity in the Church and in
the world. The Lumen gentium teaches:
Besides
this apostolate which belongs to absolutely every Christian, the laity can be
called in different ways to more immediate cooperation in the apostolate of the
hierarchy, like those men and women who helped the apostle Paul in the Gospel,
labouring much in the Lord (cf. Phil 4-3; Rom 16: 3 ff.). They have, moreover,
the capacity of being appointed by the hierarchy to some ecclesiastical offices
with a view to a spiritual end (LG
33).
Fathers
of the council well understood that unless pastors promote the role of the
laity, they would remain in the same position as in the past. Therefore, the
pastors are asked to make use of the talents of the laity for the service of
the Church. We read in Lumen gentium:
The
pastors, indeed, should recognize and promote the dignity and responsibility of
the laity in the Church. They should willingly use their prudent advice and
confidently assign duties to them in the service of the Church, leaving them
freedom and scope for acting. Indeed, they should give them courage to
undertake works on their own initiative (LG
37).
4. Rights and
Obligations of the Laity as per Canon Law
There
are specific rights and obligations for the laity besides the rights and obligations
common to all faithful (cf. CCEO cc.
7- 26. The specific rights and obligations of the laity are as follows: Right
for liberty; right for the involvement in liturgical celebrations; right for
theological formation; right for marriage and family life; obligation for
evangelization; right for promoting inter-catholic relation; right for holding
an office in the Church; and right for remuneration (cf. CCEO cc. 399- 409).
5. Possible Roles for
the Laity in Governance of the Diocese
The
whole world knows that the laity of the Syro-Malabar Church, whether in
India or in abroad, are highly involved in parish activities. They actively
participate in palliyogam in all our parishes. But the sad fact is that hardly
we see them in any decision making bodies in diocesan level, like diocesan curia,
marriage tribunal, and other high offices. We know that the Second Vatican
Council has provided ample opportunities for them for the active participation
in the governance of the diocese. Let us see some of the possible offices laity
can hold in the diocesan level.
A)
Participation
in Diocesan Curia: As per the canon law, lay people can be appointed in
diocesan curia. They can serve as the Finance Officer of the diocese (cf. CCEO c. 262 § 1) and also as members of Diocesan
Finance Council (cf. CCEO c. 263 §
1). Those lay people who are distinguished for their competence in finance and
civil matters may be appointed. We have a number of persons who are experts in
this field. We do not see any of them having an office in diocesan curia and
participating in its meetings.
B) Office in Ecclesiastical Tribunals:
All the judges of the ecclesiastical tribunal need not be clerics. There is a
provision for lay people to function as judges in a collegial tribunal (cf. CCEO c. 1087 § 2).
They can also function as the Defender of the Bond, Promoter of Justice (cf. CCEO c. 1099 § 2), Advocates (cf. CCEO c. 1141), Auditors, Notaries, etc.
in marriage tribunals. We need to train them for this work.
C) Heads
of Various Commissions of the Diocese: Lumen gentium no. 33 says
that laity have the capacity of being appointed to some ecclesiastical offices
(cf. LG 33). They may hold the
offices as diocesan directors of education apostolate, health apostolate, youth
apostolate, Family apostolate, etc. It will be praiseworthy, if a lay person,
may be a retired headmaster or a principal, is appointed as the co-operative
manager of our schools.
6. Theological
Formation
According
to Gaudium et spes no. 62, laity should be encouraged for higher
education in theological subjects and other ecclesiastical disciplines (cf. GS 62). If they have the required
qualifications, they can obtain a mandate from the competent ecclesiastical
authorities to teach sacred science (cf. CCEO
c. 404 § 2). There are lay persons who teach ecclesiastical sciences in
Catholic universities and theological faculties today. There are lay persons
from various parts of the world doing higher studies in Rome, whereas we do not
see any lay person from Syro-Malabar Church doing higher studies in
Ecclesiastical subjects. It is the right time for us to reflect over it.
7. Involvement in
Evangelization
Laity
and their role in the missionary activity of the Church are frequently referred
in the Decree on the Church’s Missionary Activity Ad gentes divinitus (cf. also
LG 35, EN 70). The Syro-Malabar Church is known for giving birth to
thousands of missionaries all over the world. What about the lay missionaries
in our Church? Ad Gentes no. 41 says:
“Lay people should co-operate in the Church’s work of evangelization and share
in its saving mission both as witnesses and living instruments...” (AG 41).
8. Conclusion
The
role of the laity in the Church is complex. They co-operate in priestly, kingly
and prophetic mission of Christ along with the Church’s sacred ministers. They can be entrusted with certain
ecclesiastical offices and roles that do not require the exercise of power of
governance. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the clerics to promote them
and to get their involvement for the governance of the diocese; otherwise they
will remain always in consultation bodies as today.
1
The Rights and Obligations
of the Faithful
of a Church sui iuris
Migrants in Particular
Prepared By
Fr. Mathew John Puthenparambil
Chapter 1
Church Sui
iuris & Rite
1. Is Catholic Church a communion
of Churches?
“The holy Catholic Church, which
is the Mystical Body of Christ, is made up of the faithful who are organically
united in the Holy Spirit by the same faith, the same sacraments and the same
government. They combine into different groups, which are held together by
their hierarchy, and so form particular churches or rites. Between those
churches there is such a wonderful bond of union that this variety in the
universal church, so far from diminishing its unity, rather serves to
emphasizes it” (Orientalium Ecclesiarum no. 2).
2. What is a Church sui iuris?
A Church sui iuris is
explained in Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches as follows: “A community
of Christian faithful, which is joined together by a hierarchy according to the
norm of law which is expressly or tacitly recognized as sui iuris by the
supreme authority of the Church is called in this code a Church sui iuris”
(CCEO can. 27).
“The holy Catholic Church, which
is the Mystical Body of Christ, is made up of the faithful who are organically
united in the Holy Spirit by the same faith, the same sacraments and the same
government. They combine into different groups, which are held together by
their hierarchy, and so form particular churches or rites” (Orientalium
Ecclesiarum no. 2).
3. How many Churches sui iuris
are there in the Catholic Church?
There are 23 Churches in Catholic
Church. Out of these 23 Churches, 22 Churches are Eastern Catholic Churches and
only one is Western (Latin) Church. Eastern Catholics are only about 20 million
whereas Latin Catholics are about 980 million. Eastern Churches are also known
as Oriental Churches.
Ukrainian Church with more than five
million Catholics is the largest Eastern Catholic Church. The Syro-Malabar
Church with nearly four million Catholics is the second largest. The other Eastern
Catholic Churches with more than a million people are the Maronite, Romanian
and Melkite Churches. Some Churches have just a few thousand Catholics.
There are also Eastern Churches that
do not accept the primacy of the Roman Pontiff. The Marthoma Church, Jacobite
Church and many other Churches in Eastern Europe and west Asia do not accept
Pope as the successor of St Peter and his primacy. Therefore, they are not in
communion with Rome and therefore they are not Catholics. There are 150 million
people in Eastern Churches that are not in communion with Rome.
4. Do all these 23 Churches have
equal rights and Dignity?
“These individual churches both
Eastern and Western, while they differ some what among themselves in what is
called “rite”, namely in liturgy, in ecclesiastical discipline and in spiritual
tradition, are none the less all equally entrusted to the pastoral guidance of
the Roman Pontiff, who by God’s appointment is successor to Blessed Peter in
primacy over the Universal Church. Therefore these churches are of equal rank,
so that none of them is superior to the others because of its rite. They have
the same rights and obligations, even regard to the preaching of the Gospel in
the whole world (cf. Mk. 16: 15), under the direction of the Roman Pontiff”
(Orientalium Ecclesiarum no. 3).
“Finally, in faithful obedience
to tradition, the sacred Council declares that Holy Mother Church holds all
lawfully recognized rites to be of equal right and dignity; that she wishes to
preserve them in the future and to
foster them in every way” (Sacrosanctum concilium no. 4).
Therefore, the Catholic Church
teaches that all these 23 Churches are equal and have equal rights and dignity.
5. What is a Rite?
“A rite is a liturgical,
theological, spiritual and disciplinary heritage, differentiated by the culture
and the circumstances of the history of peoples, which is expressed by each
Church sui iuris in its own manner of living the faith” (CCEO can. 28 § 1).
A rite is not merely the manner of
celebrating the Eucharist. Faithful of a particular Church have a liturgy,
theology, spirituality and discipline of their own, and these are manifested in
the manner of living their faith. We can say that Church is a moral person and
rite is the moral quality of that person. Therefore we do not say that we
belong to a rite, but we say that we belong to a Church sui iuris.
6. Do people have a right and
obligation to worship in their own Rites?
Code of Canons of the Eastern
Churches says: “The Christian faithful have the right to worship God
according to the prescription of their own Church sui iuris and to follow their
own form of spiritual life in accord with the teaching of the Church” (CCEO
can. 17).
The Code of Canon Law (for Latin
Church) says: “Christ’s faithful have the right to worship God according to
the provisions of their own rite approved by the lawful Pastors of the Church;
they also have the right to follow their own form of spiritual life, provided
it is in accord with Church teaching” (CIC can. 214).
“If he (diocesan bishop) has
faithful of a different rite in his diocese, he is to provide for their
spiritual needs either by means of priests or parishes of the same rite, or by
an episcopal vicar” (CIC can. 383 § 2).
7. Is there any duty to preserve
and protect one’s Church (Rite)?
“Provision must be made therefore
everywhere in the world to protect and advance all these individual churches.
For this purpose, each should organize its own parishes and hierarchy, where
the spiritual good of the faithful requires it” (Orientalium Ecclesiarum
no. 4).
“For the Catholic Church wishes
the traditions of each particular church or rite to remain whole and entire,
and it likewise wishes to adapt its own way of life to the needs of different
times and places” (Orientalium Ecclesiarum, no 2).
“All members of the Eastern
Churches should be firmly convinced that they can and ought always preserve
their own legitimate liturgical rite and ways of life, and that
changes are to be introduced only to forward their own organic development.
They themselves are to carry out all these prescriptions with the greatest
fidelity. They are to aim always at a more perfect knowledge and practice of
their rites, and if they have fallen away due to circumstances of times or
persons, they are to strive to return to their ancestral traditions. Those who
by reason of their office or apostolic ministry have frequent dealings with the
Eastern Churches or their faithful should be instructed as their office demands
in theoretical and practical knowledge of the rites, discipline, doctrine,
history and character of the members of the Eastern Churches” (Orientalium
Ecclesiarum no. 6).
“The rites of the Eastern Churches, as the
patrimony of the whole church of Christ in which shines forth the tradition
coming down from the Apostles through the Fathers, and which, in its variety,
affirms the divine unity of the Catholic faith, are to be observed and promoted
consciously” (CCEO can. 39).
“Hierarchs who
preside over Churches sui iuris and all other hierarchs are to take earnest
care to guard faithfully and observe exactly their own rite, nor are they to
allow changes to be made in it except by reason of its organic progress; they
are nonetheless to keep in mind mutual goodwill and the unity of Christians”
(CCEO 40 § 1).
“Also, the
other Christian faithful are to foster the knowledge and appreciation of their
own rite and are bound to observe it everywhere unless an exception is
provided by the law” (CCEO can. 40 § 3).
8. What is the
duty of the Local Ordinaries towards the faithful of other rites?
“…where there
are believers of different rites, the bishop of that diocese should make
provision for their spiritual needs either by providing priests of those rites,
or special parishes, or by appointing episcopal vicars, with the necessary
faculties. If necessary, such a vicar may be ordained bishop” (Christus
Dominus 23).
“If he
(diocesan bishop) has faithful of a different rite in his diocese, he is to
provide for their spiritual needs either by means of priests or parishes of the
same rite, or by an episcopal Vicar” (CIC can. 383 § 2).
“As often as
the good governance of the diocese requires it, the diocesan Bishop can also
appoint one or more episcopal Vicars. These have the same ordinary power as the
universal law gives to a Vicar general, in accordance with the following
canons. The competence of an episcopal Vicar, however, is limited to a
determined part of the diocese, or to a specific type of activity, or to the
faithful of a particular rite, or to a certain group of people” (CIC can.
476).
“An eparchial bishop of any
Church sui iuris, even of the Latin Church, is to inform the Apostolic See on
the occasion of the quinquennial report, about the state and needs of the
Christian faithful who, even if they are ascribed in another Church sui iuris,
are committed to his care” (CCEO can. 207).
“Regarding the pastoral care of
the faithful of the Eastern Rites who are living in Latin-Rite Dioceses, in
accordance with the spirit and letter of the Conciliar Decrees Christus
Dominus, n. 23,3 and Orientalium Ecclesiarum, n. 4, the Latin Rite Ordinaries
of such Dioceses are to provide as soon as possible for an adequate pastoral
care of the faithful of these Eastern Rites, through the ministry of priests,
or through parishes of the rite, where this would be indicated, or through an
Episcopal Vicar endowed with the necessary faculties, where circumstances would
so indi cate (cf. Christus Dominus, 23,3; Code of Canon Law, canons 383 § 2;
476; 518). This latter may have even Episcopal rank should this be determined
as fitting (Christus Dominus 23, 3). Where circumstances would so indicate, the
Apostolic See will establish a proper hierarchy for such faithful” (Letter of
Pope John Paul II to the Bishops of India, dated 28th May, 1987, nn. 3-4).
“Where there are numerous
migrants of the same language, whether settled down or continually in arrival
there may be erected a personal parish which can be conveniently defined by the
local ordinary” (Pastoralis migratorum cura, Motu proprio of Pope Paul VI,
15 august 1969, no. 33 § 1).
9. Can people change their Church
sui iuris (rite)?
“No one can validly transfer to
another Church sui iuris without the consent of the Apostolic See” (CCEO
can. 32 § 1).
“No one is to presume to induce
in any way the Christian faithful to transfer to another Church sui iuris”
(CCEO can. 31).
“A person who, ascribed to any
Church sui iuris, including the Latin Church, and exercising an office, a
ministry or another function in the Church, has presumed to induce any member
of the Christian faithful whatsoever to transfer to another Church sui iuris,
contrary to can. 31 is to be punished with an appropriate penalty” (CCEO
can 1465).
“Finally, each and every
Catholic, as also the baptized members of any non-Catholic church or community
who come to the fullness of Catholic communion, must retain each his own
rite wherever he is, and follow it to the best of his ability, without
prejudice to the right of appealing to the Apostolic See in special cases affecting
persons, communities or districts” (Orientalium Ecclesiarum, no. 4).
10. How do people usually get
membership in a Church sui iuris?
“A son or daughter who has not
yet completed fourteen years of age is ascribed by virtue of baptism to the
Church sui iuris to which his or her catholic father is ascribed; or if only
the mother is Catholic; or if both parents are of the same mind in requesting
it, to the Church sui iuris of the mother, without prejudice to particular law
enacted by the Apostolic See” (CCEO can. 29 § 1).
For example, if both parents belong
to Syro-Malabar Church, then the child must belong to Syro-Malabar Church and
if both parents belong to Latin Church, then the child must belong to Latin
Church. If both parents are of different Churches then child must belong to the
Church of the father, unless both parents give consent for the other way.
11. Can a
person change his Church (rite) at the time of his/her marriage?
“A wife is
free to transfer to the Church of the husband in the celebration of or during
the marriage; when the marriage has ended, she can freely return to the
original Church sui iuris” (CCEO can. 33). Therefore, it is clear that a
man cannot change his Church whereas according to Latin Law a man also can
change his/her Church at the time of his
marriage (CIC can. 112 § 1,2°).
For example, if a
Latin man wants to marry a Eastern woman, he can transfer to Eastern Churches
and if a Eastern man wants to marry a Latin woman he cannot change his Church
(he can marry a Latin woman and will have to remain in the Eastern Church).
Eastern as well as Latin woman can change her Church and join the Church of her
husband.
12. Does a
Catholic get membership in another Church sui iuris automatically?
“The practice,
however long, of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of an
autonomous ritual Church, does not bring with it membership of that Church”
(CIC can. 112 § 2).
“Christian
faithful of Eastern Churches, even if committed to the care of a hierarch or
pastor of another Church sui iuris, nevertheless remain ascribed in their own
Church sui iuris” (CCEO can 38).
No one can get membership in another
Church sui iuris automatically. By the fact a person was baptized in
another Church sui iuris and is an active member of that Church, he or
she does not get membership in that Church. Even if a person practices his
faith in that Church sui iuris for his whole life, he does not become a
member in that Church. For example, a child of a Syro-Malabar couple was
baptized according to the Latin rite and educated in Latin Church. Still the
child (person) is a member of Syro-Malabar Church for ever.
Chapter 2
The
Syro-Malabar Church
1. When & how did Christianity come to India?
Christianity in India owes its origin to St Thomas, one
of the Apostles of Jesus. According to the tradition St Thomas came to India by
sea and landed at Cranganore (Kodungallur) on the Kerala coast in 52 AD. He
preached Gospel to the high caste families of Kerala, many of whom received the
faith. He founded seven Christian communities at Palayur, Cranganore,
Kokkamangalam, Kottakavu (Parur), Quilon, Niranam, and Chayal. The St Thomas
Christians are also known as Marthoma Christianikal.
2.
What do we know about the early history of St Thomas Christians?
The
early period span more than three hundred years - from the beginning till the
arrival of the East Syrians on the scene. We do not know much about this
period. It is presumed that the Church founded by St Thomas flourished as a
genuinely Indian Church.
3.
When and how was the Syro-Malabar hierarchy restored?
Pope
Leo XIII decreed in 1887 the separation of jurisdiction of St Thomas Catholics
from that of the Latins. The Pope erected two vicariates apostolic for St
Thomas catholics; Thrissur and Kottayam. However the Pope appointed two Latin
Bishops, Bishop Adolf Medlycott an Ango-Indan, and Bishop Charles Levingne, a
French Jesuit as the vicar Apostolic respectively. As a result of the continued
plea for native Indian Bishops, the Pope decreed in 1896 the erection of three
vicariates for St Thomas christians- Thrissur, Ernakulam and Changanassery.
John Menachery, Louis Pazheparambil and Mathew Makil were appointed bishops
respectively.
Pope Pius X erected
a fourth vicariate in 1911, the vicariate of Kottayam for the Southists or
Knanites, an endogamous community among the St Thomas Christians. They came to
be the decedents of the East Syrian Christians who migrated from Persia along
with Knai Thoma in AD 345. The descendents of the original community of St
Thomas Christians are known as Northists.
Finally, Pope Pius
XI formally reconstituted the Syro-Malabar hierarchy in 1923, although it was
along the lines of the Latin model.
4. What is
the development of Syro-Malabar Church?
On 21 December, 1923,
the Syro-Malabar Hierarchy was established with Ernakulam as the Metropolitan
See and Trichur, Changanacherry and Kottayam as suffragans. In 1956
Changanacherry was raised to the status of a Metropolitan See. On December 16,
1992, Pope John Paul II raised the Syro-Malabar Church to the status of Major
Archiepiscopal sui iuris Church with the See of Ernakulam-Angamaly. Mar
Antony Paidyara, the then Metropolitan of Ernakulam was appointed its Major
Archbishop with Mar Abraham Kattumana as the Pontifical Delegate who discharged
the duties of the Major Archbishop. Archbishop Kattumana died unexpectedly
during his visit to Rome in April 1995 and Mar Padiyara was given the powers of
the Major Archbishop. In November 1996 Cardinal Padiyara resigned from his
office as Major Archbishop. In his place Archbishop Varkey Vithayathil, C.Ss.R.
was appointed as the Apostolic Administrator. In December 1998 he was appointed
Major Archbishop by the Pope. In February 2001 Archbishop Vithayathil was
created a Cardinal by Pope John Paul II.
5. How many dioceses are there in Syro-Malabar
Church today?
At present there are
five Archdioceses - Ernakulam-Angamaly, Changanacherry, Trichur, Tellicherry
and Kottayam and 11 dioceses. They are Bhadravathi, Belthangady, Irinjalakuda,
Kanjirapally, Kothamangalam, Idukki, Mananthavady, Palai, Palghat,
Thamarassery, and Thuckalay within the proper territory of the Major
Archiepiscopal Church. There are 11
dioceses outside the proper territory. They are Adilabad, Bijnor, Chanda,
Gorakhpur, Jagdalpur, Kalyan, Rajkot, Sagar, Satna, Ujjain and the St Thomas
diocese of Chicago in the United States of America. Altogether there are five
archdioceses and twenty-two dioceses in Syro-Malabar Church.
6. What is the
status of Syro-Malabar Church today?
It is one of the 22
Eastern Churches sui iuris in Catholic Communion with its own particular
characteristics expressed in worship, spirituality, theology and disciplinary
laws.
It is a Major
Archiepiscopal Church with nearly four million Catholics and is the second largest
Church sui iuris among the Eastern Catholic Churches. There are
36,74,115 faithful, with 7, 252 priests (3, 617 diocesan and 3,635 religious),
and 34,769 women religious and 4729 men religious.
Chapter 3
Personal
Parishes
1. What is a parish?
A parish is a definite community of
the Christian faithful established on a stable basis in an eparchy, whose
pastoral care is committed to a pastor (CCEO can. 278)
2. What is a personal parish?
A personal parish is a parish
erected on the basis of language, nationality or ascription to another Church sui
iuris or even on some other clearly distinguished basis. Example for a
personal parish is a parish erected only for the faithful of Syro-Malabar
Church in a Latin diocese.
“As a general rule, a parish is
to be territorial, that is to embrace all Christ’s faithful of a given
territory. Where it is useful, however, personal parishes are to be
established, determined by reason of the rite, language or nationality of
Christ’s faithful of a certain territory, or on some other basis” (CIC can.
518).
“Provision must be made therefore
everywhere in the world to protect and advance all these individual churches.
For this purpose, each should organize its own parishes and hierarchy, where
the spiritual good of the faithful requires it” (Orientalium Ecclesiarum
no. 4).
3. Can a person/group start
Syro-Malabar Mass centres in a Latin
diocese?
No one can start Syro-Malabar Mass
centres without the permission of the diocesan bishop in a Latin diocese. It
is the right of the diocesan bishop to establish personal parishes or
Mass centres in his diocese.
4. What happens if somebody
starts a Syro-Malabar Mass centre in a Latin diocese without proper
permission?
If somebody starts a Syro-Malabar
mass centre in any Latin diocese without proper permission it would
be a willful disobedience to the diocesan bishop. If the bishop does not
give permission no one can start Mass centres forcefully and if
somebody starts such Mass centres then it would be a violation of the
Church law.
5. Can there be two or more
dioceses/parishes in the same territory?
There can be more than one
diocese/parish in a particular territory.
6. Is there an obligation to take
membership in a personal parish?
When a person is baptized or
received into the Catholic Church he/she does not become ‘a member at large’,
but is ascribed (enrolled) in one of the twenty-three Churches sui iuris.
He/she cannot opt out of it, but has to live as a member of that Church. By
becoming a member of a parish of a different Church sui iuris and
attending mass of that Church sui iuris, one does not become a member of
that Church sui iuris. The Syro-Malabar Catholics, for example, who are
registered members of a Latin parish and attend Mass of the Latin rite, do not
lose membership in Syro-Malabar Church and become members of Latin Church.
If there is a personal parish
established for the faithful of that rite, then faithful have an obligation to
take membership in the personal parish. Parish priest of the personal parish shall
be their proper pastor. Only he will have jurisdiction over the faithful of
that Church sui iuris. Bishop of that diocese will be their proper
Bishop until a Syro-Malabar diocese is erected. For example, Syro-Malabar
parishes are erected in Delhi. Syro-Malabar faithful must take membership in
Syro-Malabar parish in Delhi and parish priest of that Syro-Malabar parish will
be their proper pastor. Archbishop of Delhi shall be their proper bishop and
the Syro-Malabar parishes will be under the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of
Delhi.
7. What
happens if one does not take membership in a personal parish?
It is the
obligation of the faithful that they take membership in personal parish when it
is erected in a particular place. They cannot remain in their old parish
without the required permission. If one does not take membership, he/she will
not have any right in the parish.
If one does not
take membership in personal parish and remains in Latin parish, his or her
marriage cannot be blessed by Latin Parish priest validly unless he or she gets
an apostolic indult from Rome.
Even if a personal parish is not
erected in a particular diocese and if there is a chaplain appointed for the
faithful of that Church sui iuris, the faithful must make use of this
privilege.
Chapter 4
Jurisdiction and Proper Territory
1. What is jurisdiction?
Jurisdiction is the power of
governance.
2. What is the proper territory
of Syro-Malabar Church?
It is a fact that the archbishop of
the St Thomas Christians had jurisdiction or power of governance over the whole
of India. He used to sign: “Metropolitan Bishop of the see of St Thomas and the
whole Church of the Christians of India”. However, when the Syro-Malabar
hierarchy was restored in 1923, the jurisdiction of Syro-Malabar Church was
confined to the area between the rivers of Pampa in the south and Bharathapuzha
in the north of Kerala. By the decrees of the Apostolic See of 1953 and 1955,
the territory of the Syro-Malabar Church was extended to the whole of Kerala
and to the territories of the Latin dioceses of Mangalore, Chikmangalore,
Mysore and Coimbatore. Its former all-India jurisdiction was not restored to
the Syro-Malabar Church even though it is elevated to the status of a major
archiepiscopal Church. Therefore, the
limited proper territory of the Syro-Malabar Church comprises the combined
territories of the metropolitan provinces of Ernakulam, Changanassery, Thrissur
and Thalassery.
3. What is the
jurisdiction outside proper territory?
The territories
of eleven mission dioceses of the Syro-Malabar Church are not its proper
territory. They are outside proper territory. The Major Archbishop and the
synod of Bishop do not have the power of governance over these dioceses. They
are extraterritorial dioceses of the Syro-Malabar church. Bishops of these
dioceses are members of the synod.
4. What is the
concern of the Syro-Malabar Church for her migrants?
The
Syro-Malabar Church has no jurisdiction over the migrant catholics who live
outside proper territory, in the Latin dioceses of India and abroad. “It is
the right and the obligation of the patriarch to seek appropriate information
concerning the Christian faithful who reside outside the territorial boundaries
of the Church over which he presides even through a visitor sent by himself
with the assent of the Apostolic See” (CCEO can 148 § 1). “When the
visitation is completed, the visitor is to send a report to the patriarch, who,
after discussing the matter in the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church,
can propose suitable measures to the Apostolic See, with a view to providing
everywhere in the world for the protection and enhancement of the spiritual
good of the Christian faithful of the Church over which he presides, even
through the erection of parishes and exarchies or eparchies of their own”
(CCEO can. 148 § 3). Only the Apostolic See has the right to erect dioceses for
migrants outside the proper territory of the Syro-Malabar Church. The
Syro-Malabar Bishops Synod has constituted a commission for the pastoral care
of the emigrants in India and abroad, with Bishop Gregory Karotemprel as its
Chairman. Apostolic See has appointed Bishop Gratian Mundadan CMI as the
Apostolic Visitator in India in 2006: (a) to visit those areas of India where
there is no Syro-Malabar jurisdiction; (b) to interact constitutively with the
Latin hierarchy relative to these area; (c) to observe and thereby identify the
diverse needs of the Syro-Malabar faithful in terms of pastoral care; (d) to
evaluate what is necessary by way of devising necessary canonical and other
structures, with counsel about the manner in which these should be implemented;
and (e) to report accordingly to the Major Archbishop and pertinent Synodal
Committee.
Chapter 5
Grades of
Churches sui iuris
1. What is Grade of Churches?
There are at present twenty-two
Churches sui iuris in the Eastern tradition. All these twenty-two
Eastern Churches are divided into four grades (categories) of Churches sui
iuris in a descending scale of ecclesial autonomy. They are
Patriarchal Church (CCEO cans 55-150), Major Archiepiscopal Church (CCEO cans
151-154), Metropolitan Churches (CCEO cans. 155-173) and Other Churches sui
iuris (CCEO cans 174-176).
2. What is a Patriarchal Church?
The first and highest grade of the
Eastern Catholic Churches sui iuris is the Patriarchal Church. It is
headed by a Patriarch, who has power over metropolitans, bishops, and other
Christian faithful of his Church. He is considered as the father and head of
the Church over which he presides. In legislative and judicial matters the
synod of bishops of the Patriarchal Church is the highest authority. In most
executive matters the Patriarch is the highest authority. Patriarch does not
have direct powers over his entire Patriarchal Church, because his powers are indirect.
He will have direct powers only in his diocese where he is an eparchial bishop.
The Patriarch can exercise his
powers validly only within the territory, and outside the territory it is
exercised by the Pope. He can make pastoral visits to the dioceses outside his
territory. He can transfer metropolitans and bishops for serious reasons but
needs the consent of the synod. The Patriarch can issue decrees, instructions
and encyclical letters (CCEO can. 82 § 1). Patriarchs proceed over all bishops
and metropolitans.
There are six Patriarchal Churches
in the world today. They are Coptic Church, Syrian Church, Maronite Church,
Armenian Church, Chaldean Church and Melkite Church.
3. What is a Major Archiepiscopal
Church?
The Second Vatican Council stated: “What
has been said concerning patriarchs applies also, in accordance with law, to
Major Archbishops who preside over an entire particular Church or rite” (Orientalium
Ecclesiarum no. 10). “What is stated in common law concerning
patriarchal Churches or patriarchs is understood to be applicable to Major
archiepiscopal Churches or major archbishops, unless the common law expressly
provides otherwise or it is evident from the nature of the matter” (CCEO
can. 152). Accordingly, a Church headed by a Major Archbishop has the same
structure and the same autonomy as that of a patriarchal Church. The chief
difference is that the election of a Major Archbishop needs confirmation by
Pope, in order to assume office while the Patriarch elected only requests for
an ecclesiastical communion from the Roman Pontiff (Cf. CCEO can. 153 § 2-3).
There are four
Major Archiepiscopal Churches in the world today. They are Syro- Malabar
Church, Syro-Malankara Church, Romanian Church and Ukrainian Church.
4. What is a
Metropolitan Churches sui iuris?
Metropolitan
Churches sui iuris are immediately subject to the Roman Pontiff, unlike
those Metropolitan Churches that are actually provinces of some Patriarchal or
Major Archiepiscopal Church. As its name implies, a Metropolitan Church sui
iuris is presided over by a Metropolitan. He is appointed by the Roman
Pontiff and assisted by Council of Hierarchs (Cf CCEO cans 155-173).
5. What is Other Churches sui
iuris?
Churches that are neither
Patriarchal nor Major Archiepiscopal nor Metropolitan sui iuris but
entrusted to a hierarch to preside over according to Code of Canons of Eastern
Churches as well as the particular law established by the Roman Pontiff belong
under the caption “Other Churches sui iuris” (CCEO can. 174).
Such Churches may consist of one or more ecclesiastical circumscriptions, like
an eparchy or an exarchy. These Churches have the lowest degree of ecclesial
autonomy, hardly higher than that of any other diocese or eparchy. These are
presided over by a bishop or an equivalent hierarch (Cf. CCEO cans.174-176).
Chapter 6
Major Archbishop of Syro-Malabar Church
1.
Who is the Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Church?
The
Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Church is the Metropolitan of the See of
Ernakulam-Angamali and he presides over the entire Syro-Malabar sui iuris
Church as FATHER and HEAD. His Beatitude Varkey Cardinal Vithayathil is the
present Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Church.
2.
Is it obligatory that he must be the bishop of Ernakulam-Angamaly?
It is
obligatory that whoever is elected as Major Archbishop must be the eparchial
bishop of archdiocese of Ernakulam-Angamaly and also the metropolitan of the
ecclesiastical province of Ernakulam-Angamaly.
3. Who elects Major
Archbishop?
Major
Archbishop is elected by the Synod of Bishops of the Syro-Malabar Church
according to the Law and Roman Pontiff confirms the election (Cf. CCEO can.
153).
4.
Is it obligatory to commemorate Major Archbishop in Divine Liturgy?
“The
patriarch must be commemorated in the Divine Liturgy and in the Divine praises
after the Roman Pontiff by all the bishops and other clerics according to the
prescriptions of the liturgical books” (CCEO can. 91). Therefore, it is
obligatory to commemorate patriarch/ Major Archbishop in the Divine Liturgy and
in divine praises after the Roman Pontiff by all the bishops and other clerics
everywhere in the world according to the prescriptions of the liturgical
books.
5.
How is Major Archbishop addressed officially?
He is
addressed officially as His/Your Beatitude.
6.
Who was the first Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Church?
Cardinal
Antony Padiyara was the first Major Archbishop of Syro-Malabar Church.
Chapter 7
Synod of Bishops
of
Syro-Malabar Church
1. What is Synod of
Bishops of Syro-Malabar Church?
The Synod of Bishops is
the assembly of all the Bishops of the Syro-Malabar Church. Literally it means
in its Greek verbal form to travel in company, to have fellowship with, to
accompany or to walk together along the same path and in its noun form it
signifies an assembly or gathering especially for deliberation. In the
ecclesiastical sense the word synod means the assembly of heads of Churches,
regularly or canonically convoked to deliberate and legislate on religious
affairs. The synodal system of Church structure evolved from the college of
apostles who took important decisions collegially. The very being of Church is
communion and the synodal structure expresses this ecclesiology of communion
with its various principles of autonomy, unity in diversity, equality and the
right of every Church to grow and develop which has been very much emphasized
in the Second Vatican Council. The Synod of Bishops canonically convoked and
presided over by the Patriarch/Major Archbishop constitutes the supreme
authority of a particular Church.
2. What is the nature
of the Synod?
The synod of Bishops of
Syro-Malabar Church is the legislature, superior tribunal and the electoral
college of this Church as per canon 110 § 1, 2 & 3.
3. What is the
competence of the Synod?
The synod is competent
to (1) to enact laws as per canon 110 §1, (2) to administer justice as the
superior tribunal (3) to conduct the election of the Major Archbishop, Bishops,
and candidates for offices mentioned in Can. 149 (can. 110 §3); (4) to accept
the resignation of the Major archbishop after having consulted with the Roman
Pontiff, unless the Major archbishop approaches the Roman Pontiff directly
(can. 126 § 2) (5) and to act in other matters according to the norms of the
common law and the particular law.
4. Who are the
members of Synod?
All and solely the
ordained Bishops of the Syro-Malabar Church whether eparchial, titular or
emeritus, constituted inside or outside the territorial boundaries of the
Syro-Malabar Church, excluding those mentioned in cc. 953 § 1, 1433 and 1434 are members and they enjoy
deliberate vote in the synod.
5. Who can convoke
and preside over the Synod?
Only the Major
Archbishop can convoke and preside over the Synod (CCEO can. 103).
6. Is there
obligation for Bishops to attend the synod?
All the bishops lawfully
called to the synod are bound by serious obligation to attend the same, except
those who have already resigned from the office (CCEO can. 104 § 1).
7. What is the
frequency of the Synod?
The synod must be
convoked at least once a year (CCEO 106 § 2, Particular Law article no. 7. 2.1)
8. How does the synod
elect Bishops?
It is the exclusive right of the members of the synod
of the bishops of patriarchal/ major archiepiscopal Church to propose candidates
to the episcopacy (can. 182 § 1). They
will have to collect the information and documents that are necessary to
demonstrate the suitability of the candidate. If a bishop considers it
necessary he may consult with priests and other christian faithful who are
outstanding in prudence and christian life to know their opinions about the
candidate (can. 182 § 1). Then he will have to inform the Major Archbishop of
his finding before the convocation of the synod of bishops. If the Major
archbishop, after adding his own opinion, deems it appropriate, he sends the
proposal to the members of the synod (can. 182 § 2). Synod of bishops will have
to prepare a list of candidates by secret ballot and the Major archbishop shall
submit the list of the candidates to the Apostolic See to obtain the assent of
the Roman Pontiff (can. 182 § 3). Once the assent of the Roman Pontiff is
obtained it is valid until it is revoked explicitly (can. 182 § 4).
Bishops are free to elect one
candidate whom they consider worthy and suitable before all others (can. 183 §
2). There is no obligation for bishops to elect only those candidates who are
already approved by Roman Pontiff. If the one elected has already received the
assent of the Roman Pontiff and accepts the election, the Apostolic See is to
be notified of the election and the day of proclamation (can. 184). If the one
elected has not received the assent of the Roman Pontiff, the patriarch is to
seek the assent from the Roman Pontiff (can. 185 § 1) and the result of the
election cannot be published before getting the assent of the Roman Pontiff.
9. What is the method of appointing Bishops in
outside proper territory?
In the case of appointing an
eparchial, coadjutor or auxiliary bishop outside the territorial boundary of
the patriarchal or major archiepiscopal Church, the synod of bishops, observing
the procedures for the election of bishops inside the territorial boundary,
elects at least three candidates and proposes them through the patriarch or
major archbishop to the Roman Pontiff for the appointment (can. 149). The
decision of the Roman Pontiff is communicated to the patriarch. It is to be
noted that Roman Pontiff is not bound to choose one of the proposed candidates
for the appointment.
Chapter 8
Sacraments
1. Which is the proper Church for
baptism?
“Outside the case of necessity,
baptism is to be celebrated in a parish church with due regard for
legitimate custom” (CCEO can. 687).
2. Is it obligatory to baptize
the child in a personal parish?
If there is a personal parish
erected then baptism is to be done in that personal parish.
3. Can a Syro-Malabar couple take
their child to a parish of another Church sui iuris to baptize their
child?
If there is no personal parish for
Syro-Malabar faithful, then faithful can take their children to their proper
Latin parish. Even if a Latin
priest/Latin deacon baptizes the children according to the Latin rite liturgy,
the children remain as members of Syro-Malabar Church.
4. Can a Latin parish priest
bless the marriage of two Syro-Malabar faithful?
The Latin parish priest can bless
the marriage of two Syro-Malabar faithful provided that there is no personal
parish established and therefore these people come under his jurisdiction. If there is a personal parish for those
faithful then the Latin priest cannot bless the marriage validly without a
proper delegation from parish priest of the personal parish of the couples.
5. Can a Latin Deacon bless the
marriage of Syro-Malabar faithful?
A Latin deacon may be delegated to
bless a marriage of two Latin faithful, but if one of them is a Syro-Malabar
faithful then no deacon can bless the marriage validly. Though Latin deacon has
the power to bless marriage of two Latin faithful, he has no power to bless a
marriage if one of them or both parties belong to the Syro-Malabar Church. If
such marriages are blessed by Latin deacons even if these couples are members
of Latin parish it will be invalid.
6. Can the Patriarch/Major
Archbishop bless marriages everywhere in the world?
“By the law itself, the patriarch
is endowed with the faculty personally to bless marriages everywhere, as long
as at least one of the parties is ascribed to the Church over which he
presides, observing the other requirements of the law” (CCEO can. 829 § 3)
7. Can a person take partner from
other Churches sui iuris without permission from Local Ordinaries?
A person does not require permission
from his/her local Ordinary to take partner from any other Church sui iuris.
8. Is it obligatory to change
rite at the time of marriage?
There is no obligation to transfer
one’s Church (rite) at the time of marriage. It is only an option given by the
Church. In Eastern Catholic Churches only the wife is given the freedom to
transfer to husband’s Church sui iuris (CCEO can. 33) whereas in Latin
Church, both wife as well as husband are given freedom to transfer to the
Church sui iuris of partner’s Church (CIC can. 112 § 1, 2°). If they do not change their
rites, the couples will have to follow and preserve their respective
rites.
9. Can a catholic receive
sacraments from Orthodox/Jacobite priests?
“If necessity
requires it or genuine spiritual advantage suggests it and provided that the
danger of error or indifferentism is avoided, it is permitted for Catholic
Christian faithful, for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach
a Catholic minister, to receive the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist and
anointing of the sick from non-Catholic ministers, in whose Churches these
sacraments are valid” (CCEO can. 671 § 2).
“Catholic
ministers may lawfully administer the sacraments of penance, the Eucharist, and
anointing of the sick to the members of the eastern Churches not in full
communion with the catholic Church, if they spontaneously ask for them and are
properly disposed. The same applies to the members of other Churches which the
Apostolic See judges to be in the same position as the aforesaid eastern
Churches so far as the sacraments are concerned” (CIC can. 844 § 2).
10. Can the
faithful fulfil Sunday obligation of attending Mass on Saturday?
“In order for
the Christian faithful to fulfill this obligation more easily, the useful time
runs from the evening of the vigil until the end of the Sunday or feast day”
(CCEO can. 881 § 2).
“The obligation of participating in the
Mass is satisfied by one who assists at Mass wherever it is celebrated in a
catholic rite, either on the holy day itself or on the evening of the previous
day” (CIC can. 1248 § 1).
11. Can the faithful fulfil
Sunday obligation of attending Mass in another Church sui iuris?
“With due regard for the right
and obligation to observe everywhere their own rite, lay persons have the right
to participate actively in the liturgical celebrations of any Church sui iuris
whatsoever, according to the prescripts of the liturgical books” (CCEO
can.403 § 1).
The obligation of participating in
the Mass is satisfied by attending Mass wherever it is celebrated in any
Catholic rite. However faithful are encouraged to attend Sunday Mass in their
own parish church.
Chapter 9
Fasting and
Abstinence
1. What is the law on fasting and
abstinence in Eastern Catholic Churches?
Regarding fasting and abstinence
Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches does not prescribe any law. It says: “On
the days of penance the Christian faithful are obliged to observe fast or
abstinence in the manner established by the particular law of their Church sui
iuris” (CCEO can.882). The Syro-Malabar bishops Synod has made particular
laws for fasting and abstinence (Cf Articles 157-159 of Particular Laws of the
Syro-Malabar Church, Synodal News, Vol.11, May 2003).
2. Which are the
days of fasting in Syro-Malabar Church?
“The following
are the days fixed for fasting: fasting is obligatory on the first day of Lent
and on Good Friday. It is recommended on all Fridays in Lent” (Article
158).
3. What is the
manner of observing fast?
“On days of
fasting only one full meal may be taken” (Article 157 § 1).
4. Which are the
days of abstinence in Syro-Malabar Church?
“Abstinence is
obligatory on all Fridays except the Friday/s between Christmas and Epiphany
and the first Friday after Easter” (Article 159 § 1).
“Abstinence is
recommended on all days of Lent, period of Annunciation, all days of
Moonnunombu, Ettunombu, and Pathinanju nombu” (Article 159 § 2).
5. How do we
observe abstinence?
“Abstinence is
observed by abstaining from meat and meat products” (Article 157 § 2).
Chapter 10
Significant Dates
AD 52 Arrival
of St Thomas the Apostle in Kerala
AD 72 Martyrdom
of St Thomas the Apostle near Mylapore, Chennai
AD 345 Arrival
of Thomas of Cana in Kerala
AD 1599 The
Synod of Diamper (Udayamperur)
AD 1653 The Coonan
Cross Oath
AD 1896 Erection
of three Syro-Malabar vicariates- Thrissur, Ernakulam and Changanassery
AD 1911 Erection
of the fourth vicariate- Kottayam for the Southists (Knanites)
AD 1923 Restoration
of Syro-Malabar Hierarchy
AD 1962 Malayalam
translation of Qurbana was introduced
AD 1969 Archbishop
Joseph Parecattil was created as the first cardinal of the Syro-Malabar Church
AD 1986 Beatifications
of Kuriakose Chavara and Alphonsa Muttathupadathu
AD 1990 Promulgation
of Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches
AD 1992 A
Pontifical Commission visits the Syro-Malabar Church
AD 1992 Elevation
of Syro-Malabar Church into Major Archiepiscopal Church, Appointment of Antony
Padiyara as the first Major Archbishop, and appoints Archbishop Abraham
Kattumana as Pontifical delegate to Syro-Malabar Church with all powers of a
Major Archbishop.
AD 1995 Archbishop
Abraham Kattumana dies in Rome
AD 1996 Fr
Varkey Vithayathil C. S.s. R. was appointed as Archbishop, Apostolic
Administrator of Syro-Malabar Church and Eparchial Administrator of the
Archdiocese of Ernakulam-Angamaly
AD 1998 Decree
revoking the reservation of liturgical matters
AD 1999 The
first General Assembly of the Syro-Malabar Church at Mount St. Thomas,
Kakkanad.
AD 1999 Archbishop
Varkey Vithayathil appointed as the second Major Archbishop
AD 2000 Death
of Cardinal Antony Padiyara, the first Major Archbishop, Beatification of
Mariam Thressia
AD 2001 Major
Archbishop Varkey Vithayathil was created Cardinal, and Erection of the first
Syro-Malabar diocese outside India- diocese of St Thomas, Chicago
AD 2004 Erection
of Malayattoor Kurisumudy as an international Shrine in honour of St
Thomas the Apostle
AD 2004 Decree
revoking the reservation to elect Bishops
AD 2006 Beatifications
of Kunjachan and Euphrasia
AD 2008 Canonization
of Alphonsa Muttathupa-dathu, the first woman saint from India
No comments:
Post a Comment