Last week’s post examined theft, illicit alienation and grave negligence regarding ecclesiastical goods. Today’s post focuses on the duties of the Ordinary regarding the administration of ecclesiastical goods (temporal goods of public juridical persons such as parish and mission schools) and ecclesial goods (temporal goods of private juridical persons such as pious societies and associations of Christ’s faithful).
The law provides that the universal Church, the Apostolic See, the particular churches, public juridical persons and private juridical persons are capable of acquiring, retaining, administering, and alienating temporal goods (cf. Can. 1255) and that the actual ownership of goods belongs to that juridical person, which lawfully acquired them (cf. Can. 1256). Therefore, a property that a parish legitimately acquires belongs to the parish and not the diocese. While the parish is part of the diocese, the parish is a juridical person (cf. Can. 515 §3) distinct from the diocese, which is another juridical person (cf. Can. 373).
On the other hand, Canon 634 §1 states: “Since they are by virtue of the law juridical persons, institutes, provinces and houses have the capacity to acquire, possess, administer and alienate temporal goods, unless this capacity is excluded or limited in the constitutions.” This means that except the constitution provides otherwise, the property that a province or house of a religious institute legitimately acquires belongs to the province or house and not to the province or institute, as the case may be. In addition to acquisition, each house or province can possess, administer and alienate temporal goods.
By virtue of the law itself, Ordinaries are required to supervise or exercise vigilance over the administration of temporal goods in the Church. However, the extent of the Ordinary’s involvement depends on whether the temporal goods are ecclesiastical or ecclesial goods.
Regarding the administration of ecclesiastical goods, canon 1276 §1 states, “Ordinaries must carefully supervise the administration of all the goods which belong to public juridical persons subject to them, without prejudice to lawful titles which may give the Ordinary greater rights.” This means that the diocesan bishop, Vicar General, Episcopal Vicar (cf. Can. 134 §1) and the Vicar Forane, otherwise known as the Dean (cf. Can. 555 §3), supervise the administration of ecclesiastical goods done by the administrator (this could be the parish priest, principal or any other person entrusted with this duty).
In the same vein, the major superiors of clerical religious institutes of pontifical right and clerical societies of apostolic life of pontifical right (cf. Can. 134 §1) supervise the administration of ecclesiastical goods of their institutes done by the financial administrator (cf. Can. 636 §1). For non-clerical institutes or societies or those of diocesan right, the institute or society’s proper law determines the authority to exercise vigilance (cf. Can. 636 §2). Autonomous monasteries render an annual administration account to the local Ordinary (the bishop, Vicar General, Episcopal Vicar only) (cf. Can. 637).
Furthermore, the local Ordinary has the right to be informed about the financial affairs of a religious house of diocesan right (cf. Can. 637). One emphasises that this is not about the entire institute or society but concerns a single or the various houses within the territory of that local Ordinary. Moreover, any arrangement must respect the true internal autonomy of the institute (cf. Can. 586) and the responsibilities of the bishop of the principal house of the diocesan institute or society (cf. Can 595 §1).
Regarding ecclesial goods, one emphasises from the onset that “all associations of Christ’s faithful are subject to the supervision of the competent ecclesiastical authority”, which is to “ensure that integrity of faith and morals is maintained in them and abuses in ecclesiastical discipline do not creep in” (Can. 305 §1).
Although private associations enjoy their own autonomy (cf. Can. 321) and freely administer their temporal goods according to the provision of their statutes, the competent ecclesiastical authority has the right to ensure that these goods are applied to the purposes of the association (cf. Can. 325 §1).
Since the temporal goods here are ecclesial and not ecclesiastical, the associations are not obliged to present an annual financial report to the competent authority. However, the competent authority can ask for it.
The competent authority differs according to associations. Canon 305 §2 provides a guideline: All public, private, diocesan, national or international associations are subject to the Holy See’s vigilance. For us in Nigeria, it is the Dicastery for Evangelisation, Section for the First Evangelisation and New Particular Churches (Praedicate Evangelium, art. 62). However, the local Ordinary exercises vigilance over diocesan associations and other associations to the extent that they work in the diocese. The extent of intervention and the situation requiring intervention vary according to the case and nature of the association.
Although the law allows private associations to administer their temporal goods freely, these associations are subject to the authority of the local Ordinary regarding the administration and distribution of goods donated or left to them for pious purposes (cf. Canon 325 §2).
This is following canon 1301, which makes the Ordinary the executor of all pious wills, whether mortis causa (concerning gifts made while the donor is alive, but which only takes effect when they die) or inter vivos (concerning gifts by one person to another while both are alive.). This legal empowerment means that the Ordinary has the right and must exercise vigilance over these goods so that the pious wills are fulfilled appropriately. The executors are also bound to render an account to the Ordinary after they have performed their function.
When there is an abuse regarding temporal goods, such as mismanagement, theft, illicit alienation, and grave negligence, the Ordinary can intervene in various ways. One notes that the office of the administrator of ecclesiastical goods is an ecclesiastical office governed by norms regarding such ecclesiastical offices. When it concerns ecclesiastical goods, the Ordinary can remove the administrator or executor if he appointed the person to that ecclesiastical office through a free conferral. An example is a parish priest appointed from the diocesan clergy.
However, if the administrator was presented to the Ordinary for an appointment, then the Ordinary reverts to the one who presented to change the candidate. An example is a religious priest, presented by his congregation to a diocese for the office of the parish priest and was appointed to the office of the parish priest by the bishop. If the administrator was elected and presented to the Ordinary, the Ordinary reverts to the college or group that elected the candidate to re-elect another person. Depending on the situation, the Ordinary can suspend non-basic financial activities, appoint an interim administrator, or even directly take over.
When the public juridical person is suppressed, the ecclesiastical goods go to the diocese (when a parish is suppressed) or the religious community (when a single religious house is suppressed). Nevertheless, the peculiarities and circumstances of each ecclesiastical good may alter who acquires the good. For instance, suppose a community entrusted an open space to a parish for car parking; the donors may decide to retrieve it when the parish is suppressed.
When there is an abuse of ecclesial goods, the action of the Ordinary depends on the association’s statutes. One notes that the office of the administrator of a private juridical person is rarely an ecclesiastical office. Hence, the statutes inform the Ordinary of the next steps. For instance, if the Ordinary judges that the administrator should vacate the post, the statutes might say that the next in line takes control. Statutes also indicate what happens to the temporal goods if the association is extinguished.
Whether it concerns an ecclesiastical or an ecclesial good, the Ordinary does not automatically acquire the goods of the public or private juridical person, respectively. To put it clearly, the diocese cannot validly acquire the goods of a parish or a pious society simply because the parish priest or the president embezzled funds or the diocese needs funds. The parish priest cannot validly acquire the money of any parish pious society or association because the association’s president embezzled funds or because the parish needs money. The only way for a valid acquisition is a valid alienation by the legitimate owner. In the same vein, the parish priest cannot retain, administer or alienate the goods of an association in the parish without their express consent.
Anything short of these is an abuse of ecclesiastical office on the part of the priest or Ordinary. In addition to abuse, it might, in certain cases, include the delict of theft, such as when a priest or an Ordinary illegitimately retains goods received on behalf of a parish or an association.
May God continue to help us🙏🏾
K’ọdị🙋🏾♂
