Canon Law

In the light of evolving financial regulations and emerging challenges related to the management of material assets within religious institutions, priests and members of religious orders are becoming increasingly hesitant to assume the role of Treasurer, Procurator, or Financial Administrator for a Province or an entire Congregation. Given this context, is it permissible to appoint a layperson to fulfill these responsibilities?

Canon 636 of CIC explicitly throws light into the appointment of Treasurer (Procurator/ Financial Administrator) in the Congregation in the following words: “In each institute and likewise in each province which is governed by a major superior, there is to be a Finance officer, distinct from the major superior and constituted according to the norm of proper law, who is to manage the administration of goods under the direction of the respective superior. Insofar as possible, a Finance officer distinct from the local superior is to be designated even in local communities. §2. At the time and in the manner established by proper law, Finance officers and other administrators are to render an account of their administration to the competent authority”. Canon 516 of CCEO provides the same norm concerning the appointment as follows “§1. There shall be finance officers in orders and congregations for the administration of temporal goods; a general finance officer who administers the goods of the entire order or congregation; a provincial finance officer for the province, a local finance officer for each single house; all of whom shall discharge their duties under the authority of the superior… §3. If the statutes are silent on the manner of designating finance officers, they shall be appointed by the major superior with the consent of the council”. Canons 447 & 558 of CCEO give the similar norms for Monastery and Societies of Apostolic life.

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

I am Sister Zaina, a young religious. In my classes on the vow of poverty, I learned that the vow of poverty implies being “poor in reality and in spirit”. Can you explain the canonical nuances of the vow?

The vow of poverty, as taken by religious men and women, often raises questions among people who observe them living in well-established communities, running schools, hospitals, and having access to basic necessities. To truly grasp the canonical implications of this vow, we can turn to Canon 600 of the Code of Canon Law (CIC). “The evangelical counsel of poverty in imitation of Christ who, although he was rich, was made poor for us, entails, besides a life which is poor in fact and in spirit and is to be led productively in moderation and foreign to earthly riches, a dependence and limitation in the use and disposition of goods according to the norm of the proper law of each institute”.

The vow of poverty is a voluntary choice made by every religious person, inspired by their desire to closely follow the example of Jesus, who embraced a life of simplicity and poverty. In the context of consecrated life, this canonical commitment entails two aspects: (i) living in both material and spiritual poverty, and (ii) accepting dependence and limitations in the use and control of material goods. To truly embody the essence of poverty in both reality and spirit, those who take this vow commit to living simply, foregoing personal ownership of properties and relinquishing the possession of their own salary. More than mere absence of material possessions, being “poor in spirit” indicates a profound detachment from worldly goods, reflecting their inner disposition towards the things of this world.

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To subscribe to the magazine, click Subscribe

I am Sr. Zenit, a Religious nun. My parents are aged and need someone to support. Since I am an only child, I do not wish to leave my Religious life only to look after my parents. Is there any possibility that canon law offers to be able to stay with them and serve them in their last days?

The essential elements of Religious life are public vows of three evangelical counsels and community life. Therefore both CIC (c.602) and CCEO (c.410) oblige the Religious to live in a canonically established house; it is natural, and inherent to their membership into particular Religious Congregation. However canon 665 of CIC gives a possibility of “absences”. The canon skillfully regulates this possibility by stating; “the major superior, with the consent of the council and for a just cause, can permit a member to live outside a house of the Institute, but not for more than a year, except for the purpose of caring for ill health, of studies, or of exercising an apostolate in the name of the institute”.

From this it is evident that the permission to be “absent” can only be extended in the cases of ill health, studies, or when the member is exercising an apostolate in the name of the Congregation. Otherwise, the extensions can only be granted by the Holy See. It can be given only up to one year, then if it may be further needed it can be granted after a period of her/his presence in a canonical house. Many of the canonists are of the opinion that ill health can be extended to the ill health of parents who have no one else to take care of them. Therefore, Sr. Zenit can request for a “leave of absence” that can be extended up to one year. Yet it must always be borne in mind that a “leave of absence” is a benevolence of the Superior; thus cannot be demanded for. This provision is for all Religious in CIC (Latin Church).

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

I am Sr. Meera, a perpetually professed member of a Religious Institute.  I would like to receive information on the canonical procedures required for transferring from one Religious Institute to another.

Canons 684- 685 of CIC and canons 487-488 & 544-545 of CCEO explicate the norms concerning the transfer of perpetually professed religious to another Religious institute or to another Institute of Consecrated life. There are significant considerations inextricably bound up with this decision: a re-orientation of one’s vocation.

Only perpetually professed members can request to transfer to another Institute due to a strong attraction to its charism or a calling for a higher vocation. Before making the decision, the member should prayerfully deliberate with their major superiors, vicars for religious, spiritual directors, or counselors to ensure the intention to transfer is not due to bitterness or problems with authority, ministry placement, or community life. If essential elements of religious life are problematic in their current Institute, they should consider if they can be lived in the new Institute before proceeding with the transfer process.

Canons of both Codes require that the member seeking to transfer to another Institute must obtain permission from the Superior General of each institute with the consent of their respective councils, particularly in large institutes with provinces. If the member has difficulties in observing the essentials of Religious life, the Superior General should help them realize that these same difficulties may arise in the new institute. The Superior General of the receiving institute should request an evaluation of the petitioner from the initial institute’s Superior General, and an honest appraisal should be given before seeking consent from the council.

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

I am Sr. Prisca, a temporary professed member belonging to a Diocesan Congregation. I am often unsure about the juridical consequence of being a Diocesan congregation. Could you please explain the differences in Canon Law between Diocesan Congregations and Pontifical Congregations?

Both the CIC and CCEO make distinctions based on whether an Institute of consecrated life is under the authority of the Pope (Pontifical right), the local bishop (Diocesan right), or the Patriarch of an Eastern Catholic Church (Patriarchal right). Canon 589 of the CIC and canons 434 and 505 of the CCEO define the constitutive elements of Institutes of Consecrated Life.

Institutes of Pontifical right are those approved or erected by the Apostolic See, while those established by a diocesan bishop without approval from the Apostolic See are considered as Institutes of Diocesan right. Similarly, Canon 505 §2, 2° defines Institutes of Patriarchal Right as those recognized by the decree of a Patriarch without approval from the Apostolic See. Canon 589 of the CIC states: “An institute of consecrated life is said to be of pontifical right if the Apostolic See has erected it or approved it through a formal decree. It is said to be of diocesan right, however, if it has been erected by a diocesan bishop but has not obtained a decree of approval from the Apostolic See”.

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

In the recent past one of our communities had taken a loan from a particular bank to build a part of the school building with the permission of the then Major Superior. However due to the pandemic, they could not pay back the stipulated money. Now though they are able to pay back, the community is not ready to return the amount, rather they have just left the burden of payment on the Major Superior. We are aware of civil consequences; however we would like to know about the canonical admonitions in this regard.

The juridical system of the Church recognizes physical persons and juridical persons. “Juridical persons”, are similar to a civil “Society” or “Trust” or “Company”; and thus are aggregates of persons or things (can. 114 of CIC; can. 921 of CCEO). Juridical persons are perpetual by nature. There are a number of juridical persons in the Church with rights and obligations. They are represented by an administrator (head/president of such a person); for example a Bishop on behalf of a diocese, a parish priest on behalf of a parish or a Major religious superior on behalf of a religious institute. Certain juridical persons are “public”, in the sense that they operate in the name of the Church itself; others are private, resulting from private initiatives (can.116 of CIC). Among public juridical persons listed by virtue of the law itself, we could mention the following:  the Conference of Bishops; the Diocese; the parish; a religious institute, a province of an institute, and a juridically established religious house (Canon 634, §1of CIC). Among the consequences of acquiring a juridical personality, the most important one is regarding the administration of temporal goods (can. 1256 of CIC; can. 1009 of CCEO).

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

I am Sr. Bertha, the Provincial of a Religious Congregation. We had begun our Formation house in a particular place. However as the number of candidates is becoming less, we shifted our formation to another place and would like to begin a tailoring class for school drop-out girls in the existing building. Can we make such changes in the ministry on our own?

Both the Codes (CIC & CCEO) vehemently elucidate that in order to establish a house of a religious institute the competent authority of the Institute should obtain the previous written consent of the diocesan bishop of the place. Since Canon is advocating ‘written consent’, a written request should be made by the authority. The consent of the diocesan bishop to erect a religious house of any institute entails also permission to exercise a specific ministry according to the charism of the Institute and the need of the local church.

 Therefore while making a written request to establish the house; the competent authority should also mention the ministry which the Institute will carry out in that place.  In tune with the same juridical formality, canon 612 of CIC and canon 415 of CCEO prescribes that for a religious house to be converted to a place of apostolic works different from those for which it was established, the consent of the diocesan bishop is required.

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

I am Brother Clarion, Superior General of a lay Religious Congregation (only Brothers) of Pontifical rite. One of our brothers was sent for higher studies abroad. For six months he maintained regular communications with his Major Superior. After that he stopped all communication with the Superiors. We have taken recourse to various means to approach him but our efforts have been futile. It is more than a year now that, we have had any communication with him, and we do not know about his whereabouts. Can you suggest the canonical step we would need to take in this matter?

Community life is just as essential as the public vows for those who make public profession of evangelical counsels in the Religious Institutes. Every community is under the authority of a superior (can. 608 of CIC), who resides in the house (can. 629 of CIC). The authority which superiors receive from God through the ministry of the Church is to be exercised by them in a spirit of service (can. 618 of CIC). Religious men and women are to reside in their own house; if they are to be away for a short while, they are to obtain permission to stay elsewhere (can. 665, §1 of CIC).

Assuring the importance of community life for Religious, Pope Francis through a document titled “Communis Vita” (Community Life), amended the Code of Canon Law (can. 694 of CIC) to include the automatic dismissal of religious who are absent without authorization from their community for at least 12 months. Thus, the Pope has made it easier for religious Congregation’s to dismiss a member who leaves the community without permission, stays away and does not communicate with his or her superior. The amendment was made on 19 March, 2019 and it came into effect on 10 April, 2019.

The amended canon 694 of CIC reads: A religious must be held as dismissed ipso facto from an institute who:

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

Dear Sister, I am Sr. Carmen belonging to a Religious Congregation of Pontifical right. I have completed a postgraduate course in Counseling. At present, I am teaching in a primary school of our Congregation. I am also invited by an NGO to work as a part time counselor for their firm. I have agreed to undertake it, but now my Superior has mentioned that I am prohibited from taking up this service. Can I continue to render my service in the NGO?

Canon 671 of the Code of Canon Law for the Latin Rite (CIC) speaks that “Religious are not to undertake tasks and offices outside their own institute without the permission of the lawful Superior”. There is no similar canon in CCEO (Code of Canon Law for the Eastern Rites). This canon embodies two fundamental principles of consecrated life: the vow of obedience and the incorporation into the religious institute through the profession of faith. Incorporation through the profession of vows entitle religious to dedicate their physical and moral faculties to the institute; they become members of the singular body, becoming part of and belonging to it. As a consequence, they must devote all their energy, action, and skills, both intellectual and manual, to and for the benefit of the institute.

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe

I am Sr. Christi, a newly professed Sister. As I have begun my ministry, I have come across different categories of Consecrated persons. The differences that I perceive confuses me and questions come into my mind. Can you explain about the juridical implications of various Institutes of Consecrated Life?

The origin of the Consecrated life in the East and the West may be traced from the letters of St. Paul dating back to 50-65 A.D. In the Pauline corpus we read that in the early church, celibate women dedicated to prayer and charity were honored. The historical evolution of this way of life, reveals that Church admires this vocation “as belonging to the holiness of the Church”. Therefore, Ecclesiastical authorities have given recognition to various forms of Consecrated identity. Latin Code (CIC) recognizes three forms, and the Oriental Code recognizes five forms. Apart from these two the Codes approve the vocation to hermitical life and the life of consecrated virgins.

According to CIC, there are Religious Institutes, Secular Institutes and Societies of Apostolic life. CCEO explains about Monks, Orders, Congregations, Societies in the manner of Religious, Secular Institutes, and Societies of Apostolic Life. Some of the specifications of each category are to be noted to know their juridical status.

Sr Navya Thattil OSF

To read the entire article, click Subscribe