Last week’s post examined the right of defence of an accused. Today’s post examines the loss of ecclesiastical office in the context of the right to defence.
First, penal law aims to restore justice, reform the offender and repair scandal (Can. 1311 §2). Canon 1341 states: “The Ordinary must start a judicial or an administrative procedure for the imposition or the declaration of penalties when he perceives that neither by the methods of pastoral care, especially fraternal correction, nor by a warning or correction, can justice be sufficiently restored, the offender reformed, and the scandal repaired.” This means initiating a penal process is the last resort towards the misconduct of Church personnel.
“An ecclesiastical office is any function constituted in a stable manner by divine or ecclesiastical ordinance to be exercised for a spiritual purpose” (Can. 145 §1). Normally, every priest or religious occupies an ecclesiastical office, and the diocesan bishop always appoints diocesan priests to an office by free conferral (cf. Can. 157).
There are five ways through which one loses an ecclesiastical office (cf. Cann 184 -196).
(a) Resignation:
This means that the person relinquished the office, making it vacant. The Second Vatican Council’s Decree Concerning the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church, Christus Dominus, states: “Pastors who are unable to fulfill their office properly and fruitfully because of the increasing burden of old age or some other serious reason are urgently requested to tender their resignation voluntarily upon the invitation of the bishop. The bishop should provide suitable support for those who have resigned” (Christus Dominus, 31). Pope Francis also emphasised resignation in his 2018 motu proprio, Learn to take your leave, when he said that “the conclusion of an ecclesial office must be considered an integral part of the service itself, since it calls for a new form of amenability.”
(b) Expiration of predetermined time:
This refers to the termination of the time stated in the appointment letter. The office becomes vacant when the predetermined time expires.
(c) Transfer:
This refers to being moved to another office, making the former office vacant. Christus Dominus affirmed that “the distinction between removable and irremovable pastors is to be abrogated and the procedure for transferring and removing pastors is to be re-examined and simplified. In this way the bishop, while observing natural and canonical equity, can better provide for the needs of the good of souls” (Christus Dominus, 31). Hence, canon 522 states: “A parish priest must possess stability and therefore is to be appointed for an indefinite period of time. The diocesan bishop can appoint him only for a specific period if the conference of bishops has permitted this by a decree”. Nigeria is among the countries where the Episcopal Conference permits the appointment of parish priests for a specific period. Hence, there is some misconception that if parish priests in Nigeria are appointed indefinitely and installed, they can no longer be transferred or transferred without their consent.
Canon 1748 states: “If the good of souls or the necessity or advantage of the Church demands that a pastor be transferred from a parish which he is governing usefully to another parish or another office, the bishop is to propose the transfer to him in writing and persuade him to consent to it out of love of God and souls.” Canon 1749: “If the parish priest does not intend to submit to the counsel and persuasions of the bishop, he is to explain the reasons in writing.” If the bishop decides not to withdraw his proposal, he consults two parish priests, and if the bishop insists, he exhorts the parish priest again to depart (cf. Can. 1750). Canon 1751 §1: “When this has been done, if the parish priest still refuses and the bishop thinks that the transfer must be made, he is to issue a decree of transfer, establishing that the parish will be vacant after the lapse of a set time. §2. “If this period of time has passed without action, he is to declare the parish vacant.”
(d) Removal:
This is the loss of office, revoking all the rights, privileges, and authority associated with that office so that it becomes vacant. A person is removed from office by a decree issued by the competent authority or by the law itself (cf. Can. 194). Removal is often disciplinary but not necessarily penal, suggesting misconduct of the officeholder, though not necessarily due to a delict.
Canon 193 §1 states: “A person cannot be removed from an office conferred for an indefinite period of time except for grave causes and according to the manner of proceeding defined by law.” §2. The same is valid for the removal of a person from an office conferred for a definite period of time before this time has elapsed, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 624, §3.” (Canon 624 §3 talks about the transfer or removal of religious superiors before their mandate expires, according to their proper law).
An installed parish priest for an indefinite period can be removed. Canon 1741: “The reasons for which a parish priest can lawfully be removed from his parish are principally: 1° a manner of acting which causes grave harm or disturbance to ecclesiastical communion; 2° ineptitude or permanent illness of mind or body, which makes the parish priest unequal to the task of fulfilling his duties satisfactorily; 3° the loss of the parish priest’s good name among upright and serious-minded parishioners, or aversion to him, when it can be foreseen that these factors will not quickly come to an end; 4° grave neglect or violation of parochial duties, which persists after a warning;5°bad administration of temporal goods with grave harm to the Church, when no other remedy can be found to eliminate this harm.”
Before removing a parish priest, the bishop must inform him of the reasons for doing so, ad validitatem (cf. Can. 1742 §1). Therefore, for a valid removal, the parish priest must be allowed to exercise his right of defence, which could be sufficient or insufficient to change the bishop’s judgement (cf. Can. 1745).
(e) Privation:
Privation is the loss of office due to a penalty for a delict. Here, a delict must occur, and the privation of office is imposed after the consequent penal trial. Of course, for validity, the right to self-defence must be exercised during the penal trial.
Precautionary measures imposed at any stage of the investigation or penal trial also require citing the accused, giving the accused a right to defence before the measures are imposed. Canon 1722 states: “To prevent scandals, to protect the freedom of witnesses, and to guard the course of justice, the ordinary, after having heard the promoter of justice and cited the accused, at any stage of the process can exclude the accused from the sacred ministry or from some office and ecclesiastical function, can impose or forbid residence in some place or territory, or even can prohibit public participation in the Most Holy Eucharist. Once the cause ceases, all these measures must be revoked; they also end by the law itself when the penal process ceases.” Precautionary measures are not penalties. However, they can become penalties after the penal trial and the accused is convicted.
May God continue to help us🙏🏾
K’ọdị🙋🏾♂️
