Sugawara Temporal Goods Flashcards Preview

Canon Law - Hastings > Sugawara Temporal Goods > Flashcards

Flashcards in Sugawara Temporal Goods Deck (29)
Loading flashcards...

1-In che punto il libro V riflete l’insegnamento del vaticano II?

The Code of Canon Law reflects and ‘canonises’ the Magisterium of the Second Vatican Council; of particular import for Book V are the Council’s teaching on the use of temporal goods to support the poor and the ‘communion of goods’ (GS 76d), and on inter-ecclesial communion (LG 13c, 23c), particularly between the Bishops on an inter-diocesan (CD 6c, PO 21a) and intra-diocesan (CD 28c, PO 17c) level, and within religious institutes (PC 13c).

Can 1254 is a good starting place. Explain it, and then explain how DH and GS exist as its fonts.

Can. 1254 §1. To pursue its proper purposes, the Catholic Church by innate right is able to acquire, retain, administer, and alienate temporal goods independently from civil power.
§2. The proper purposes are principally: to order divine worship, to care for the decent support of the clergy and other ministers, and to exercise works of the sacred apostolate and of charity, especially toward the needy.

DH, 4:Provided the just demands of public order are observed, religious communities rightfully claim freedom in order that they may govern themselves according to their own norms, honor the Supreme Being in public worship, assist their members in the practice of the religious life, strengthen them by instruction, and promote institutions in which they may join together for the purpose of ordering their own lives in accordance with their religious principles.

DH, 13: Among the things that concern the good of the Church and indeed the welfare of society here on earth-things therefore that are always and everywhere to be kept secure and defended against all injury-this certainly is preeminent, namely, that the Church should enjoy that full measure of freedom which her care for the salvation of men requires.(31) This is a sacred freedom, because the only-begotten Son endowed with it the Church which He purchased with His blood. Indeed it is so much the property of the Church that to act against it is to act against the will of God. The freedom of the Church is the fundamental principle in what concerns the relations between the Church and governments and the whole civil order.

GS, 76: There are, indeed, close links between earthly things and those elements of man's condition which transcend the world. The Church herself makes use of temporal things insofar as her own mission requires it. She, for her part, does not place her trust in the privileges offered by civil authority. She will even give up the exercise of certain rights which have been legitimately acquired, if it becomes clear that their use will cast doubt on the sincerity of her witness or that new ways of life demand new methods. It is only right, however, that at all times and in all places, the Church should have true freedom to preach the faith, to teach her social doctrine, to exercise her role freely among men, and also to pass moral judgment in those matters which regard public order when the fundamental rights of a person or the salvation of souls require it. In this, she should make use of all the means—but only those—which accord with the Gospel and which correspond to the general good according to the diversity of times and circumstances.

While the Principle of Subsidiarity is not strictly part of this question, it would be good to add. There are only three explicit references to the PS in VatII; two are in Gravissium educationis and one is in Gaudium et spes. None of these refer to the Church’s use of goods. That said, if the CIC is, indeed, the last document of the council, the 1967 guiding norms from Paul VI include the PS as principle #5. The simplest definition of the PS is “higher authority assisting lower authority in fulfilling its munus.”


Cosa vuol dire «canonizzazione delle leggi civili»? Potete dare alcuni esempi di essa sui beni temporali?

Certain civil laws are ‘canonised’, giving them effect in the Church; this is not on the basis of the authority of the state, but the will of the Church. Civil laws can be ‘canonised’ when they are not contrary to divine law and when canon law does not provide otherwise (cf. c 22); examples include the canons on prescription (cf. c 197-199) and contracts (cf. c 1290).

Can. 22: Can. 22 Civil laws to which the law of the Church yields are to be observed in canon law with the same effects, insofar as they are not contrary to divine law and unless canon law provides otherwise.
Can. 1290 The general and particular provisions which the civil law in a territory has established for contracts and their disposition are to be observed with the same effcts in canon law insofar as the matters are subject to the power of governance of the Church unless the provisions are contrary to divine law or canon law provides otherwise, and without prejudice to the prescript of can. 1547.
Example: If the parish school buys a car to take kids on field trips, the laws regarding the contract for the car become canonized in canon law.

You can also mention prescription, but it doesn’t have a huge amount of bearing on temporal goods.
Can. 197: The Church receives prescription as it is in the civil legislation of the nation in question, without prejudice to the exceptions which are established in the canons of this Code; prescription is a means of acquiring or losing a subjective right as well as of freeing oneself from obligations.


Quali sono i fini propri della Chiesa per i quali essa ha diritto ai beni temporali come “ius nativum”?

First of all, let’s look at “ius nativum”. This is part of the patrimonial law of the Church. It comes straight out of c. 1254.1:
Ecclesia catholica bona temporalia iure nativo, independenter a civili potestate, acquirere, retinere, administrare et alienare valet ad fines sibi proprios prosequendos.
Note the key words here. The Church acts independenter a civili potestate. Also, it acts to acquirere, retinere, administrare et alienare. But, this is only ad fines sibi proprios.
But, the ends are described in 1254.2:
Fines vero proprii praecipue sunt: cultus divinus ordinandus, honesta cleri aliorumque ministrorum sustentatio procuranda, opera sacri apostolatus et caritatis, praesertim erga egenos , exercenda.
This paragraph gives the following ends:
Cultus divinus ordinandus
Honesta cleri aliorumque ministrorum sustenatio procuranda
Opera sacri apostolatus et caritatis praesertim erga egenos
Note that this implies a hierarchy of purposes. The first two are specific and third is quite general. Is this list exhaustive? No. If we take an especially broad approach? Maybe. For example, the fixing of the furnace in the church, while not specifically for divine worship, could be taken to be ordered towards sacred worship in a general way. The text of this paragraph is lifted nearly word-for-word from Presbyterorum ordinis, 17. PO deals with the Church’s relationship to the world and temporal goods, and to voluntary poverty.


Cosa significa “sub suprema auctoritate Romani Pontificis” del. Can. 1256?

Our starting point here is c. 331:
Ecclesiae Romanae Episcopus, in quo permanet munus a Domino singulariter Petro, primo Apostolorum, concessum et successoribus eius transmittendum, Collegii Episcoporum est caput, Vicarius Christi atque universae Ecclesiae his in terris Pastor; qui ideo vi muneris sui suprema, plena, immediata et universali in Ecclesia gaudet ordinaria potestate, quam semper libere exercere valet.
So, the RP is potens. This canon is connected in patrimonial law to c. 1273:
Romanus Pontifex, vi primatus regiminis, est omnium bonorum ecclesiasticorum supremus administrator et dispensator.
Again, the RP is potens. But, (and this is big “but”) the law describes how this is carried out in c. 1256:
Dominium bonorum, sub suprema auctoritate Romani Pontificis, ad eam pertinet iuridicam personam, quae eadem bona legitime acquisiverit.
So, while the RP is, indeed, potens—nearly potentissimus—he is not the owner of all ecclesiastical goods. There is, in fact, a multiplicity of juridic subjects in the Church. These subejcts have the dominium bonorum, which means that they own goods. This sub suprema auctoritate Romani Pontificis means that all juridic persons need to use their goods in fulfillment of the Church’s objectives. So, this is a juridic explanation and a theological one. Communion in the Church is predicated, in part, on communion with the RP. So, the RP is not completely detached from the Church’s patrimony.

Note that this has applications beyond what is simply stated here. It is not just the RP that does not have ownership of all goods. This has a trickle-down effect. The diocese does not own the parish’s goods. The generalate house of the Conventual Franciscans does not own the goods one of their provinces, etc. Of course, taxes can be levied, but that’s another question. Quidem, proxima est quaestio...


Quali sono le condizioni con cui il Vescovo diocesano può imporre “tributum” nella propria diocesi? E cuali sono le condizioni nel caso di “exactio”?

Before you stand on your desk and shout “Nulla exactio sine praesentatione!” or “Noli calcare super me!”, have a close look at this. C. 1263 is the canon in play here. It says:
Ius est Episcopo diœcesano, auditis consilio a rebus œconomicis et consilio presbyterali, pro diœcesis necessitatibus, personis iuridicis publicis suo regimini subiectis moderatum tributum, earum redditibus proportionatum, imponendi; ceteris personis physicis et iuridicis ipsi licet tantum, in casu gravis necessitatis et sub iisdem condicionibus, extraordinariam et moderatam exactionem imponere, salvis legibus et consuetudinibus particularibus quæ eidem potiora iura tribuant.
Note the two key words. One of these words is tribute and the other is tax. The former is the standard diocesan levy that parish priests far and wide know, detest, and oft-evade. The tricky part is that we often call the tribute a “tax”. When we speak of the diocesan tax, we are speaking of the tributum. Just take a deep breath and keep your terms straight.

The context of this paragraph is the preceeding one. C. 1262 established that the ordinary material support of the Church comes through offerings of the faithful. That happens in a variety of ways, such as in the collection or in the national tax system (e.g., Germany and Italy). C. 1263 is talking about something which is over and above the typical offering of the faithful. (The word in c. 1262 is: subsidia.)

Now, let’s answer Fr. Sugawara’s question. The conditions by which a diocesan bishop (and those equivalent to him in law, per c. 381.2) can impose a tributum are:
1. This can only be imposed by a diocesan bishop and those equivalent to him in law. So, the EpConf cannot impose this.
2. The diocesan bishop must consult the fincnace committee and the priests’ council. Note that he must consult them, not get their consent.
3. The diocesan bishop can levy this tribute on public juridic persons subject to his authority. He cannot impose this on private juridic or physical persons.
4. This sum cannot be fixed, but must be “moderate and proportionate to the income”. So, it functions like a percentual tax.
5. This is not in the text of the canon, but the fact that it is not there is important. This levy can be permanent, temporary, or ad actum.

The conditions by which a diocesan bishop can impose an exactio are:
1. It must be moderate.
2. It can only be imopsed “in grave necessity”. A good example here is the building of a seminary or cathedral. That said, it does not need to be an emergency. So, it’s not as if the prior cathedral needed to have burned down in order to impose an exactio for a new one.
3. It can be imposed on public juridic, private juridic and physical persons.
4. It cannot be permanent. But, it may last a while. Remember that the Temple took 46 years to build.
5. The other conditions are the same, so it needs to be moderate and proportionate and it requires the same consultations.
6. Because of other particular laws and customs, the diocesan bishop may have even wider powers, such as those that might arise from concordat law.

Note that these are both different from the stips that is mentioned in c. 1266, which referes to special collections taken up in churches for various needs.


Quali sono le persone giuridiche soggette al potere del Vescovo del can. 1263?

The response to this question is taken from the NCCCL, pp. 1463-1465.

Most of the response here is straightforward. Just see the answer above. But, there are a few tricky points.

First, there was a dubium submitted to LegTexts asking if “public juridic persons subject to his authority” includes the external schools of religious institutes of pontifical right. The answer was negative. (That’s too bad, because all those Jesuit high schools are way more plush than our fair alma mater.)
Second, there is a question of whether or not an exactio can be imposed on a public juridic person not otherwise subject to the diocesan bishop. We could argue in favorem by saying that c. 264 already provides for taxes for the support of seminaries on all juridic persons, even if not otherwise subject to the bishop. We could argue ad contrarium by saying that any imposition of tax on persons not subject to the bishop is highly unusual. So, in the lack of clarity, it looks like we have to apply c. 14, noting a dubium iuris and the non-application of law. So, if a bishop tries to do this, a pontifical institute of pontifical right can ignore him.

Third, Mass stipends are not immune to this taxation. The 1917 prohibition of their taxation was not renewed in the 1983 CIC. But, such an immunity is expressed in the CCEO. So, it looks like a judgment call.


In quale materia il legislatore ha datto alle conferenze episcopali e all’assemblea dei vescovi della Província le facoltà di emanare le norme sull’acquisto dei beni?

1262 – subventiones rogatae – The faithful are to give their support to the Church in response to appeals and in accordnace with the norms laid down by the Bishops’ Conference. – This form is still secondary to regular offerings made by the faithful.

1265.2 – stipe quaeritanda – The Bishops’ Conference can draw up rules regarding question, qhich must be observed by akk, including those who from their foundation are called and are “mendicants”. – This regards the begging of alms.

1272 – beneficiorum regimen – In those regions where benefices properly so called still exist, it is for the Bishops’ Conference to regulate such benefices by appropriate norms, agreed with and apporved by the Apostolic See. The purpose of these norms is that the income and as far as possibile the capital itself of the benefices should by degrees be transferred to teh fund mentioned in 1274.1.

1264 – Taxas and Oblationes – Unless the law prescibes otherwise, it is for the privincial Bishops’s meeting to: 1. Determine the taxes, to be approved by the ApSee, for acts of executive authority which grant a favor for the execution of rescripts from the ApSee; 2. Determine the offerings on the occasion of the administration of the sacraments and sacramentals.


In che occasione un Superiore/Amministratore ecclesiastico puo rifiutare un’offerta fatta alla Chiesa?

So, why is this even a question? Well, c. 1267.1 tells us that offerings made to superiors and administrators of any ecclesiastical juridic person, even a private one, are presumed to have been made to the juridic person itself. So, think of this from a secular example. If you work for the local Meals on Wheels club, and someone gives you $500 while you are wearing your Meals on Wheels nametag, it is likely that the giver does not intend to give the money to you as you, but to you as representative of Meals on Wheels. So, the offering doesn’t belong to you. It belongs to the club (or however Meals on Wheels is setup). If you think that you need to refuse a donation, you are suddenly speaking for someone with whom you are not coequal, and you are refusing something which is not for you but for the club. So, you need to be careful about what you are doing. Bearing this in mind, let’s look at 1267.2
Oblationes, de quibus in § 1, repudiari nequeunt nisi iusta de causa et, in rebus maioris momenti, de licentia Ordinarii, si agitur de persona iuridica publica; eiusdem Ordinarii licentia requiritur ut acceptentur quae onere modali vel condicione gravantur, firmo praescripto can. 1295.
First of all, we are talking about oblationes. These are offerings. In order to refuse the offering, there needs to be a just cause. So, let’s say that you are running Catholic Charities. Someone comes to you and tells you that they stole the money that they are giving you from their friends. You’ve got just cause to refuse. Or, in a more common example, say that you are running a parochial school, and a parishioner comes to you to offer you a large donation, which he can write off for taxes. He asks that you then not charge tuition for his children, since the offering will more than cover what he would have paid anyway. The problem in the US, however, is that this is illegal, since he was not, in fact, just giving a donation. So, you’d have a just cause to tell him that you can’t accept that donation in that circumstance.

The matters of greater importance – in redbus maioris momenti – are vague. They could be spelled out in a public juridic person’s statutes (c. 117), or could just be a question of prudence. Perhaps a local politician is in a serious bid to improve his image before an upcoming election. So, he offers to give a large sum of money to the local Catholic Charities office, which just so happens to have public juridic personality. He’s also an avid supporter of abortion and homosexual marriage. But, he teaches Catholic values to his kids and sends them to large Jesuit universities. It is likely that he would use this as a move to bolster his image as a faithful Catholic. The head of Catholic Charities doesn’t want to refuse him outright. What does he do? He calls the bishop and lets the bishop know what’s coming in the media storm tomorrow if he refuses, and he lets the decision become the bishop’s.

Finally, those offerings which are onere modali vel condicione require the ordinary’s permission. This is really easy to see. Perhaps an old bachelor rancher is near death and he’d like to give half of his ranch to the seminary as a place to build a retreat center, but on the condition that the retreat center is built within two years of his death. In this case, the rector needs the permission of the ordinary to proceed, as the gift is under a condition.


Che diferenza c’è tra la prescrizione nel sistema giuridico civile e quella nel sistema canonico?

Prescription, in both canon and civil law, is a means of acquiring or losing a right, or of freeing onself of an obligation, by the passage of time under conditions prescribed by law. The primary canons are 197-199. Thought the Church canonizes civil law on prescription, there are some exceptions.

198: The Church requires that good faith (as regards prescription) be maintained at the beginning and throughout the period in question. Not all civil law requires this. This is also not required by Roman law. One who acts in good conscience acts in good faith. There is a distinction between positive and negative good faith. Postive means that the good faith has been declared. Negative means that there is the absence of fraudulent concealment or other deliberate justice. US law requires positive at the beginning and negative afterwards. The Church requires positive throughout.

199: This canon lists things not subject to prescription. There are seven things. Cf. the canon.

1269: Privately owned sacred objects can be acquired by other private persons via prescription, but not for profane use, unless they have lost their dedication or blessing. However, if such goods belong to a public juridic person, they can only be acquired via prescription by another public juridic person, not a private person. Sacred objects are things destined for divine worship by dedication or blessing. The notes say that a public juridic person could acquire a sacred object from a private person by prescription.

1270: Immovable property, precious movable objects and personal or real rights and actions of the ApSee are prescribed only after 100 years. For another public ecclesiastical juridic person, the period is 30 years. “Precious” refers to materials or artistic/historical value. A personal right is claim against a person. A real right is to property. Meanwhile, the civil law would establish much lower times than these established by canon law.
Also, canon law prohibits the alienation or prescription of any sacred objects for profane use. Civil law would not limit this.


Spiegare i termini: beni ecclsiastici, questua, «beneficum»

Ecclesiastical Goods: c. 1257§ 1.
Bona temporalia omnia quae ad Ecclesiam universam, Apostolicam Sedem aliasve in Ecclesia personas iuridicas publicas pertinent, sunt bona ecclesiastica et reguntur canonibus qui sequuntur, necnon propriis statutis.

Beneficium: CIC17 c. 1409:
Beneficium ecclesiasticum est ens iuridicum a competenti ecclesiastica auctoritate in perpetuum constitutum seu erectum, constans officio sacro et iure percipiendi reditus ex dote officio adnexos.

(Cf. c. 1272) A beneficium, or benefice, is an autonomous patrimony ordered towards the support of the title-holder. The Fathers of the Second Vatican Council wanted to abolish the system of benefices; it wished that no further benefices be erected, and that the system at least reformed so that the right to an income attached to a particular office should be regarded as secondary, and that the principal emphasis in law be given to the ecclesiastical office itself (PO 20b). Furthermore, Bishops were to ensure that ‘a fair distribution of goods is provided for, including the income from benefices’ (Ecclesiae Sanctae I, 8).

Questua (Stips): a begging for alms. The begging for alms is governed by can. 1265. This is an attempt to minimize misrepresentation, fraud, exploitation of generosity, indecorous sales-pitches, selling of indulgences, and interference with other methods of raising money for dioceses.


Qual è il ruolo particolare del Romano Pontefice riguardo l’acquisto e l’amministrazione dei beni temporali?

Can. 1273 is the relevant canon:
Romanus Pontifex, vi primatus regiminis, est omnium bonorum ecclesiasticorum supremus administrator et dispensator.

This question is very much like #4 above. Note the text of the canon. The RP is the supreme adminsitrator and dispenser by power of the primacy of governance. This underscores, as does c. 1256, that the RP is the locus on unity as the Vicar of Christ. This also underscores the need for all goods to be administered in pursuit of the Church’s proper ends, which is the common good.

Note, again, that this does not give the RP dominium over all goods. They still belong to their proper juridic persons. However, because of his primacy of governance, he has teh task of watching over all of the Church’s goods. He does this through universal law and through reserving certain acts of administration to the ApSee. So, if alienation exceeds a certain amount (c. 638.3), the ApSee is involved. Or, 1292.2, “The permission of the Holy See is also required for the valid alienation of goods whose value exceeds the maximum amount, goods given to the Church by vow, or goods precious for artistic or historical reasons.”

In this sense, the word in English which best corresponds to the RP’s role is steward. While he does not have a full, undivided ownership (dominium), he does have it in a partial way. In other words, he can be involved as he wishes. If the RP comes to your parish and tells you taht you cannot give away a 9th C. chalice that’s been there since Christopher Columbus brought it over, you can’t give it away. Also, he can probably slap you for your foolishness, but you won’t find that in the code.


Per il sostentamento del clero della propria diocesi, cosa deve fare il Vescovo?

First of all, since benefices no longer exist (except in the rarestestest of cases), we need some kind of a solution. So, the sustenance of clerics falls to bishops. Note that clerics includes permanent deacons, auxiliary bishops, coadjutors, and bishops emeriti. It does not include those clerics who reside in a diocese, but who are not dependent on that bishop. So, if you live in a nursing home in another diocese across the river from your own, you pertain to the bishop of the diocese into which you have been incardinated. This is pretty much just common sense. Note that, except for titular bishops, this canon generally follows incardination, though it is legally extended to those who offer service for the benefit of the diocese.

The relevant canon here is 1274. It says:
§ 1. Habeatur in singulis dioecesibus speciale institutum, quod bona vel oblationes colligat eum in finem ut sustentationi clericorum, qui in favorem dioecesis servitium praestant, ad normam can. 281 provideatur, nisi aliter eisdem provisum sit.
§ 2. Ubi praevidentia socialis in favorem cleri nondum apte ordinata est, curet Episcoporum conferentia ut habeatur institutum, quo securitati sociali clericorum satis provideatur.
§ 3. In singulis dioecesibus constituatur, quatenus opus sit, massa communis qua valeant Episcopi obligationibus erga alias personas Ecclesiae deservientes satisfacere variisque dioecesis necessitatibus occurrere, quaque etiam dioeceses divitiores possint pauperioribus subvenire.
§ 4. Pro diversis locorum adiunctis, fines de quibus in § § 2 et 3 aptius obtineri possunt per instituta dioecesana inter se foederata, vel per cooperationem aut etiam per convenientem consociationem pro variis dioecesibus, immo et pro toto territorio ipsius Episcoporum conferentiae constitutam.
§ 5. Haec instituta, si fieri possit, ita constituenda sunt, ut efficaciam quoque in iure civili obtineant.
This canon needs to be read in light of c. 281, which says:
§ 1. Clerici, cum ministerio ecclesiastico se dedicant, remunerationem merentur quae suae condicioni congruat, ratione habite tum ipsius muneris naturae, tum locorum temporumque condicionum, quaque ipsi possint necessitatibus vitae suae necnon aequae retributioni eorum, quorum servitio, egent, providere.
§ 2. Item providendum est ut gaudeant illa sociali assistentia, qua eorum necessitatibus, si infirmate, invaliditate vel senectute laborent, apte prospiciatur.
§ 3. Diaconi uxorati, qui plene ministerio ecclesiastico sese devovent, remunerationem merentur qua sui suaeque familiae sustentationi providere valeant; qui vero ratione professionis civilis, quam exercent aut exercuerunt, remunerationem obtineant, ex perceptis inde reditibus sibi suaeque familiae necessitatibus consulant.
The nisi aliter of 1274.1 can be fulfilled by benefices, payment by the military, payment by a university, etc. Married permanent deacons, per 281.3, ought to look after themselves.

Note that a fund should be established to provide remuneration. It ought to be funded by the faithful, since the worker deserves his wage. In countries without something like social security, the Bishops’ Conference needs to take care of this by establishing a special fund (c. 1274.2). It seems that this fund ought to be separate from the one mentioned in c. 1274.1. The needs to 1274.2 could be met jointly by various dioceses (c. 1274.4, 1275). Such funds should have standing in civil law (c. 1274.5)


In que cosa consitono i compiti di «vigilanza» dell’Ordinario sui beni temporali?

The applicable canon here is 1276. It says:

§ 1. Ordinarii est sedulo advigilare administrationi omnium bonorum, quae ad personas iuridicas publicas sibi subiectas pertinent, salvis legitimis titulis quibus eidem Ordinario potiora iura tribuantur.
§ 2. Habita ratione iurium, legitimarum consuetudinum et circumstantiarum, Ordinarii, editis pecularibus instructionibus intra fines iuris universalis et particularis, universum administrationis bonorum ecclesiasticorum negotium ordinandum curent.

The key word in the first paragraph is advigilare. So, the task of the bishop is supervise, or be vigilant. (There exists the now dead word advigilate in English, but it is quite obsolete.) This applies to ordinaries, so the RP, diocesan bishops, those equivalent to them in law (c. 368, 381.2), those who have ordinary executive power in particular churches (VG and EV), major superiors of clerical religious institutes and societies of apostolic life of pontifical right, and the prelates of personal prelatures.

Thus, ordinaries have a ius advigilandi, which is covers all goods which belong to public juridic persons sibject to them. This is distinct from the role of administrators, who are more directly involved. His duties in regard to public juridical persons means that he is to:

• Regulate the administration of ecclesiastical goods, by issuing special instructions (cf. c 1276 §2).
• Intervene in cases of negligence (cf. c 1279 §1).
• Appoint administrators for public juridical persons which fail to provide for them (cf. c 1279 §2).
• Authorise acts of extraordinary administration (cf. c 1281 §1).
• Determine limits of ordinary administration where statutes fail to do so (cf. c 1281 §2).
• Receive personally or through a delegate the oath required of administrators (cf. c 1283 §1).
• Consent to long term investments (cf. c 1284 §2 6º).
• Receive annual reports from the administrators of ecclesiastical goods, and transmit them to the diocesan finance council (cf. c 1287 §1).
• Give or withhold consent to institute or contest legal proceedings in a civil court (cf. c 1288)
• Execute all pious dispositions, whether made mortis causa or inter vivos (cf. c 1301).
• Grant or deny permission to accept a non-autonomous foundation (cf. c 1304 §1).
• Approve provisions for the safekeeping and investment of non-autonomous foundation (cf. c 1305).
• Approve the renunciation of a trial regarding temporal goods (cf. c 1524 §2).

Note that c. 1298 allows the diocesan bishop (not the ordinary) to entrust the workof vigilance to the diocesan financial adminsitrator.

Paragraph 2 of this canon explains the means of regulate of adminsitration. The chief means is the issuing of intructions (c. 34).


Di quali organismi deve e può servisi il vescovo diocesano per gestire l'amministrazione dei beni temporali dell'diocesi?

The key canon for this question is c. 1277. It says:

Episcopus dioecesanus quod attinet ad actus administrationis ponendos, qui, attento statu oeconomico dioecesis, sunt maioris momenti, consilium a rebus oeconomicis et collegium consultorum audire debet; eiusdem tamen consilii atque etiam collegii consultorum consensu eget, praeterquam in casibus iure universali vel tabulis fundationis specialiter expressis, ad ponendos actus extraordinariae administrationis. Conferentiae autem Episcoporum est definire quinam actus habendi sint extraordinariae administrationis.

So, we have the finance committee, the college of consultors, and the Bishops’ Conference. Note that the finance committee is mandated by law (c. 492), and with it comes the economo (financial administrator, c. 494.1). The college of consultors exists, as you may well guess, to consult (acts of major importance) and to consent (acts of extraordinary administration).

Note that the bishop, even though he has this assistance, is still competent as the administrator of diocesan goods.


Quali sono i compiti principali dell’amministratore del beni?

This question is asking about all administrators of goods, so don’t limit it to the diocesan financial administrator.

There are four pertinent canons: 1279, 1284, 1286, and 1287. This question has a lot of info. Note that c. 1283 also refers to acts of adminsitrators at the undertaking of their office, namely, the oath, inventory, and reservation of inventory.

This begins with can 1279:
§ 1. Administratio bonorum ecclesiasticorum ei competit, qui immediate regit personam ad quam eadem bona pertinent, nisi aliud ferant ius particulare, statuta aut legitima consuetudo, et salvo iure Ordinarii interveniendi in casu neglegentiae administratoris.
§ 2. In administratione bonorum personae iuridicae publicae, quae ex iure vel tabulis fundationis aut propriis statutis suos non habeat administratores, Ordinarius, cui eadem subiecta est, personas idoneas ad triennium assumat; eaedem ab Ordinario iterum nominari possunt.

This explains that the adminsitration of ecclesiastical goods pertains to the one who immediately governs the juridic person to which the goods belong, although it underlines that the ordinary can intervene in the case of negligence by an administrator. This person can be appointed by the ordinary to whom the juridic person is subject if they do not have a way to determine their own administrator. The ordinary can reappoint the same person when their term is up.

C. 1284 is filled with little details. Here you go:
Can. 1284 — § 1. Omnes administratores diligentia boni patrisfamilias suum munus implere tenentur.
§ 2. Exinde debent:
1° vigilare ne bona suae curae concredita quoquo modo pereant aut detrimentum capiant, initis in hunc finem, quatenus opus sit, contractibus assecurationis;
2° curare ut proprietas bonorum ecclesiasticorum modis civiliter validis in tuto ponatur;
3° praescripta servare iuris tam canonici quam civilis, aut quae a fundatore vel donatore vel legitima auctoritate imposita sint, ac praesertim cavere ne ex legum civilium inobservantia damnum Ecclesiae obveniat;
4° reditus bonorum ac proventus accurate et iusto tempore exigere exactosque tuto servare et secundum fundatoris mentem aut legitimas normas impendere;
5° foenus vel mutui vel hypothecae causa solvendum, statuto tempore solvere, ipsamque debiti summam capitalem opportune reddendam curare;
6° pecuniam, quae de expensis supersit et utiliter collocari possit, de consensu Ordinarii in fines personae iuridicae occupare;
7° accepti et expensi libros bene ordinatos habere;
8° rationem administrationis singulis exeuntibus annis componere;
9° documenta et instrumenta, quibus Ecclesiae aut instituti iura in bona nituntur, rite ordinare et in archivo convenienti et apto custodire; authentica vero eorum exemplaria, ubi commode fieri potest, in archivo curiae deponere.
Note that Fr. Sugawara paid a significant quantity of attention to the diligentia boni patrisfamilias. This is the lens through which we ought to view the work of the administrator. He is the administrator of goods that effect the present and future of others who are dependent upon him. This comes from VatII in PO, 17. #s 2, 5, and 8 in this list are new for the CIC83.

C. 1286 explains the role of administrators for contracts and wages of employees:
Can. 1286 - Administratores bonorum:
1° in operarum locatione leges etiam civiles, quæ ad laborem et vitam socialem attinent, adamussim servent, iuxta principia ab Ecclesia tradita;
2° iis, qui operam ex condicto præstant, iustam et honestam mercedem tribuant, ita ut iidem suis et suorum necessitatibus convenienter providere valeant.

C. 1287 explains for us the drawing up of accounts. Note that it only applies to those who are under the governance of the diocesan Bishop. So, religious institutes, societies of apostolic life, poublic associations, monasteries sui iuris and private juridic persons are not involved here. Note, also, the phrase reprobata contraria consuetudine. This is a good application of c. 5.

Can. 1287 – § 1. Reprobata contraria consuetudine, administratores tam clerici quam laici quorumvis bonorum ecclesiasticorum, quæ ab Episcopi diœcesani potestate regiminis non sint legitime subducta, singulis annis officio tenentur rationes Ordinario loci exhibendi, qui eas consilio a rebus œconomicis examinandas committat.
§ 2. De bonis, quæ a fidelibus Ecclesiæ offeruntur, administratores rationes fidelibus reddant iuxta normas iure particulari statuendas.


Come si distinguono gli atti di amministrazione straordinaria da quelli di amministrazione ordinaria? A chi spetta indicare la distinzione?

The pertintent canons here are c. 638.1 c. 1277 and c. 1281.

C. 638.1: (Religious Institutes)
Ad ius proprium pertinet, intra ambitum iuris universalis, determinare actus qui finem et modum ordinariae administrationis excedant, atque ea statuere quae ad valide ponendum actum extraordinariae administrationis necessaria sunt.
C. 1277:
Can. 1277 — Episcopus dioecesanus quod attinet ad actus administrationis ponendos, qui, attento statu oeconomico dioecesis, sunt maioris momenti, consilium a rebus oeconomicis et collegium consultorum audire debet; eiusdem tamen consilii atque etiam collegii consultorum consensu eget, praeterquam in casibus iure universali vel tabulis fundationis specialiter expressis, ad ponendos actus extraordinariae administrationis. Conferentiae autem Episcoporum est definire quinam actus habendi sint extraordinariae administrationis.

C. 1281:
§ 1. Firmis statutorum praescriptis, administratores invalide ponunt actus qui fines modumque ordinariae administrationis excedunt, nisi prius ab Ordinario facultatem scripto datam obtinuerint.
§ 2. In statutis definiantur actus qui finem et modum ordinariae administrationis excedunt; si vero de hac re sileant statuta, competit Episcopo dioecesano, audito consilio a rebus oeconomicis, huiusmodi actus pro personis sibi subiectis determinare.
§ 3. Nisi quando et quatenus in rem suam versum sit, persona iuridica non tenetur respondere de actibus ab administratoribus invalide positis; de actibus autem ab administratoribus illegitime sed valide positis respondebit ipsa persona iuridica, salva eius actione seu recursu adversus administratores qui damna eidem intulerint.

From the NCCCL:

“In general, acts of ordinary administration are those which occur regularly or whose financial consequences are moderate.

In general, acts of extraordinary administration are those which occur irregularly or whole financial consequences are considerable.”

Note that acts of administration of greater importance are part of ordinary administration.


A chi spetta determinare gli atti di amministrazione straordinaria per una diocese, una parrochia e un instituto religioso?

For diocesan bishops, it is the Bishops’ Conference that defines acts of extaordinary administration (c. 1277). For religious institutes, it is their proper law (c. 638.1). For public juridic persons (including parishes), it is their statutes, the exceeding of which depends ad validitatem on the faculty given by the ordinary (c. 1281.1)

(Regarding parishes: If a parish is arranged as an undifferentiated part of a diocesan corporation sole, certain ramifications arise.)


In che cosa consiste concretamente l’osservanza delle leggi civili per custodire i beni temporali della chiesa?

It looks liek this question is looking for one thing. I cannot find just one, primary answer. So, here are all the answer in this section.

Prescription (c. 197-199)
Fund for Priests (c. 1275)

C. 1284.2.2,3: Protection fo goods by civilly valid means:
§ 2. [Omnes administratores] Exinde debent:
2° curare ut proprietas bonorum ecclesiasticorum modis civiliter validis in tuto ponatur;
3° praescripta servare iuris tam canonici quam civilis, aut quae a fundatore vel donatore vel legitima auctoritate imposita sint, ac praesertim cavere ne ex legum civilium inobservantia damnum Ecclesiae obveniat;

C. 1286.1: Administratores bonorum:
1° in operarum locatione leges etiam civiles, quae ad laborem et vitam socialem attinent, adamussim servent, iuxta principia ab Ecclesia tradita;

C. 1288: Regarding civil proceedings:
Administratores litem nomine personae iuridicae publicae ne inchoent neve contestentur in foro civili, nisi licentiam scripto datam Ordinarii proprii obtinuerint.
C. 1290: Contracts
Quae ius civile in territorio statuit de contractibus tam in genere, quam in specie et de solutionibus, eadem iure canonico quoad res potestati regiminis Ecclesiae subiectas iisdem cum effectibus serventur, nisi iuri divino contraria sint aut aliud iure canonico caveatur, et firmo iure canonico caveatur, et firmo praescripto can. 1547.
C. 1293.2: Alienation
Aliae quoque cautelae a legitima auctoritate praescriptae serventur, ut Ecclesiae damnum vitetur.
C. 1296: More on Alienation
Si quando bona ecclesiastica sine debitis quidem sollemnitatibus canonicis alienata fuerint, sed alienatio sit civiliter valida, auctoritatis competentis est decernere, omnibus mature perpensis, an et qualis actio, personalis scilicet vel realis, a quonam et contra quemnam instituenda sit ad Ecclesiae iura vindicanda.
C. 1297: Leasing
Conferentiae Episcoporum est, attentis locorum adiunctis, normas statuere de bonis Ecclesiae locandis, praesertim de licentia a competenti auctoritate ecclesiastica obtinenda.


Spiegare i termini:consiglio per gli affari economici [finance council], rendiconto annuale.

Finance Council:
We can speak of this obligation for parishes (c. 537), dioceses (c. 492 and 1277) and juridic persons (c. 1280). It is unclear if 1280 is binding on priate juridic persons, so we have a dubium iuris, meaning that privaety juridic persons are not bound by c. 1280. For dioceses, the council is made up of members of the faithful (c. 492) who are “truly expert in financiial affairs and civil law, outstanding in integrity, and appointed by the bishop.” For parishes, the memebers of the council are determined by norms of universal law and particular law. For all other public juridic persons, the council membership is determined by statute.

Annual Report: (Ratio)
This is covered by c. 1287. There are two reports. The first is the annual report from the adminstrator (law or clerical) to the local ordinary, who is to present it for examination by the finance council. Any contrary custom is reprobated. Also, iuxta normas iure particulari statuendas, adminsitrators must submit an account to the faithful concerning the goods offered by the faithful to the Church.

C. 1287 says:
§ 1. Reprobata contraria consuetudine, administratores tam clerici quam laici quorumvis bonorum ecclesiasticorum, quae ab Episcopi dioecesani potestate regiminis non sint legitime subducta, singulis annis officio tenentur rationes Ordinario loci exhibendi, qui eas consilio a rebus oeconomicis examinandas committat.
§ 2. De bonis, quae a fidelibus Ecclesiae offeruntur, administratores rationes fidelibus reddant iuxta normas iure particulari statuendas.


Quali sono gli elementi che costituiscono gli atti che esigono l’applicazione dei canoni sull’alienazione (cann. 1291-1295) nel sistema canonico?

For validity: (c. 1292.1) Permission of competent authority is required for goods that constitute the stable patrimony of a public juridic person, whenever the value exceeds the sum determined by law.
-Stable patrimony: Land, Buildings, and money when either by the will of the donor (e.g., endowments) or formal designation as such by authority (e.g., also endowments)
-Value: Determined by Bishops’ Conference of region
-Competent Authority:
-Dioceses – Bishop with Finance Committee, Coll. of Consultors, Interested Parties
-Parishes – Bishop with Finance Committee, Coll. of Consultors, Interested Parties
-Juridic persons not subject to the diocesan bishop – Statutes (Could include a national seminary or ecclesiastical university)
-Religious Institutes – Sperior with consent of council (638.3) and sometimes, Holy See (1292.2 and 638.3)

For validity: (c. 1292.2) Additional permission of the Holy See is necessary when:
-Value exceeds maximum sum established by Bishops’ Conference
-Goods given to the Church by reason of a vow
-Alienation of objects whicn are precious by reason of their artistic or historical significance

For validity: (c. 1292.3): Requests for alienation of divisible goods must state the parts that have already been alienated

For Justice: (c. 1292.4) Those who are to give advice or consent must be informed before giving it

For Liceity: (1293.1) For goods above the minimum established sum:
-Just reason
-Evaluation in writing by experts of goods to be alienated

For Liceity: (1293.2) The lawful authority can also draw up other precautions

Other Norms: (c. 1294.1) Normally, goods must not be alienated for a price lower that given in valuation

Other Norms: The money gained from alienation must be carefully invested or prudnetly expended according to the purposes of alienation

Other Transactions: The norms of 1291-1294 must be observed not only in alienation, but any transaction whereby the patrimonial condition of a juridic person could be adversely effected.


Chi e’ l’autorita’ competente per un atto di alienazione di cui parla il can. 1292?

-Competent Authority:
-Dioceses – Bishop with Finance Committee, Coll. of Consultors, Interested Parties
-Parishes – Bishop with Finance Committee, Coll. of Consultors, Interested Parties
-Juridic persons not subject to the diocesan bishop – Statutes (Could include a national seminary or ecclesiastical university)
-Religious Institutes – Sperior with consent of council (638.3) and sometimes, Holy See (1292.2 and 638.3)
-Above the maximum value: Always the Holy See


Quali sono gli atti che chiedono l’applicazione “ad validitatem” dell’autorità competente sui beni temporali?

Tali atti sono:

c. 1281.1: Acts of extraordinary administration
-Administrators require, ad validitatem, the written faculy of their ordinary is required for adminsitrators, without prejudice to statutes

c. 1284.2.6: The investment of money after expenses are paid
-Administrators require, ad validitatem, the consent of the Ordinary to make such investments
c. 1288: Institution or contestation of legal proceedings in a civil court
-Adminsitrators require, ad validitatem, written permission of the Ordinary to do so
c. 1291: Alienation of goods that form part of stable patrimony, whenever their value exceeds the
quantity approved in law
-Administrators, require permission of competent authorty for this, ad validitatem
c. 1292.1: Alienation of goods between min/max sum
-Adminsitrators must seek consent of bishop, finance council, consultors, interested parties, ad validitatem
c. 1292.2: Alienation of goods over max sum, something given by vow, precious objects
-Permission is needed, ad validitatem, from the ApSee
c. 638.3: Religious Institute: Alienation and any transaction by which patrimonial condition of
institute could worsen
- Ad validitatem, written permission of competent superior with consent of council. Also, cosent of Holy See is needed over max sum, or things given to the Church by vow, or precious objects
c. 1295: Not just for alienation, but any transactions whereby the patrimonial condition of a
juridic person could be jeopardized, ad validitatem
c. 1304.1: Acceptance of a pious foundation by a juridic person
-Needs, ad validitatem, written permission of ordinary
c. 1265.1: Collection of stips by mendicants
-Written permission is needed, ad validitatem, from proper and local ordinaries


Che cosa deve fare l`autorità competente qualora i beni ecclesiastici fossero stati alienate senza la dovuta formalita’ canonica?

Short answer: Make a judgment call. He’s not obliged to proceed.

C. 1296:
Si quando bona ecclesiastica sine debitis quidem sollemnitatibus canonicis alienata fuerint, sed alienatio sit civiliter valida, auctoritatis competentis est decernere, omnibus mature perpensis, an et qualis actio, personalis scilicet vel realis, a quonam et contra quemnam instituenda sit ad Ecclesiae iura vindicanda.

From the NCCCL:
“While the view has been expressed that the competent authority referred to in canon 1296 is the authority whose permission was required for the alienation, it would seem more appropriate for decisions about corrective action to be made by the immediate canonical superior of the person responsible for the canonically invalid alienation, since otherwise the decision-making process in regard to corrective action could involve several authorities, consultative bodies, and intereted parties. Whether or not to institute administrative or judicial proceedings to recover the invalidly alienated property, or to seek damages from those who wrongfully transferred civil ownership, would seem best left to the judgment of local authorities in a position to evaluate all relevant circumstances rather than involving the complex authority structure appropriate for initially authorizing an act of restricted alienation. This interpretation would seem to be confirmed by the parallel canon in the more recently promulgated CCEO...”


Chi ha la facoltà di ridurre gli oneri delle sante messe?

This is simply c. 1308. It gives five responses:
-The ApSee, without prejudice to the next four
-If expressly provided for in the charters of foundations, the ordinary can reduce obligations because of diminished revenues
-DBishop: with regard to Massses independently founded in legacies or any other way, because of diminished revenues and for as long as the cause exists, to the level of offering legitimately established in the diocese, provided that there is no one obliged to increase the offering who can effectively be made to do so
-DBishop: Can reduce obligations or legacies of Masses binding an ecclesiastical institute if the revenue has become insufficient to pursue appropriately the proper purpose of the institute
-Supreme Moderator of Clerical Religious Institute: same as DBishop


5. Puoi fornire alcuni esempi di atti su cui si applica il can. 1295 e che non rientrano nella categoria dell’atto di amministrazione (can. 1281) nella tua diocese?

c. 1281 is referring to acts of extraordinary administration. The NCCCL says that 1295 only applies to acts of extraordinary administration. So, according to the NCCCL, the answer to Sugawara’s question is negative. But, presuming that there is a possible answer, it must be something that is not an act of extraordinary administration and that can worsen the patrimonial condition of a juridic person. So, the only thing I can think of is something that may have future value. For example, perhaps the diocese owns a piece of land. It isn’t expensive enough to be extraordinary, but may well be ordinary of greater importance. Let’s presume that there is information that, immediately adjacent to such land, the local NFL team is going to build a new stadium in two years. At its current valuation, renting the land out to a nice farmer for a twenty-year lease would be a good plan. But, the property value is expertly anticipated to skyrocket, on account of the need for parking, auxiliary businesses, etc. Right now, the bishop can rent the land for some steady cash, but be locked into a rental agreement for too-long a time. So, its future value is so high that tying it up now would jeopardize the patrimonial condition of the diocese. In this case, it seems like the bishop ought to have a chat with the necessary folks and before agreeing to the rental.


Quali sono le norme canoniche che il CIC/83 prescrive per la prassi collettiva della povertà evangélica degli Istituti Religiosi?

Can. 634 §1. As juridic persons by the law itself, institutes, provinces, and houses are capable of acquiring, possessing, administering, and alienating temporal goods unless this capacity is excluded or restricted in the constitutions.

§2. Nevertheless, they are to avoid any appearance of excess, immoderate wealth, and accumulation of goods.

Can. 635 §1. Since the temporal goods of religious institutes are ecclesiastical, they are governed by the prescripts of Book V, The Temporal Goods of the Church, unless other provision is expressly made.

§2. Nevertheless, each institute is to establish suitable norms concerning the use and administration of goods, by which the poverty proper to it is to be fostered, protected, and expressed.

[636 §2] At the time and in the manner determined in the institutes’ own law, the financial administrator and others with financial responsibilities are to render an account of their administration to the competent authority.

Can. 1265 §1. Without prejudice to the right of religious mendicants, any private person, whether physical or juridic, is forbidden to beg for alms for any pious or ecclesiastical institute or purpose without the written permission of that person’s own ordinary and of the local ordinary.

§2. The conference of bishops can establish norms for begging for alms which all must observe, including those who by their foundation are called and are mendicants.

1267 §3. Offerings given by the faithful for a certain purpose can be applied only for that same purpose.

1285: Within the limits of ordinary administration only, administrators are permitted to make donations for purposes of piety or Christian charity from movable goods which do not belong to the stable patrimony.

1286.2: Administrators of goods:
1/ in the employment of workers are to observe meticulously also the civil laws concerning labor and social policy, according to the principles handed on by the Church;
2/ are to pay a just and decent wage to employees so that they are able to provide fittingly for their own needs and those of their dependents.


Le norme previste dal can. 638 per gli Istituti religiosi sono differenti da quelle previste dal Libro V sull’amministrazione straordinaria e sull’alienazione compiute da una diocesi?

Can. 638 — § 1. Ad ius proprium pertinet, intra ambitum iuris universalis, determinare actus qui finem et modum ordinariae administrationis excedant, atque ea statuere quae ad valide ponendum actum extraordinariae administrationis necessaria sunt.

For other juridic persons, the determination of threshold ordinary and extraordinary adminsitration is done by the regional Bishops’ Conference (c. 1277). Also, c. 1277 and 1281 explain who needs to be consulted (finance committee, consultors, interested parties) and from whom administrators are to obtain consent (ordinary).

§ 2. Expensas et actus iuridicos ordinariae administrationis valide, praeter Superiores, faciunt, intra fines sui muneris, officiales quoque, qui in iure proprio ad hoc designantur.

For dioceses, this is the finance director (c. 1278), while in religious institutes, the proper law may designate others to assist with the making of payments and carrying out of juridic acts of ordinary administration.

§ 3. Ad validitatem alienationis et cuiuslibet negotii in quo condicio patrimonalis personae iuridicae peior fieri potest, requiritur licentia in scripto data Superioris competentis cum consensu sui consilii. Si tamen agatur de negotio quod summam a Sancta Sede pro cuiusque regione definitam superet, itemque de rebus ex voto Ecclesiae donatis aut de rebus pretiosis artis vel historiae causa, requiritur insuper ipsius Sanctae Sedis licentia.

For religious institutes, the mix/max numbers are determined by the ApSee. For others, this is determined by the Bishops’ Conference (c. 1292, 1295). Also, in religious institutes, it is for the competent superior to give hte necessary permissions for those things that could adversely affect the patrimonial condition of the institute. For others, it is the diocesan bishop with consent of finance council, consultors, and other interested parties. Both have the same requirements for seeking permission of the ApSee in certain cases (over max sum, objects given by vow, precious objects).

§ 4. Pro monasteriis sui iuris, de quibus in can. 615, et institutis iuris dioecesani accedat necesse est consensus Ordinarii loci in scriptis praestitus.

So, autonomous monasteris (c. 615) and institutes of diocesan rite go to their local ordinary to seek permissions of c. 638.3.


Spiegare i termini: patrimonio stabile; «negotio quo condicio patrimonialis personae giuridica peior potest» del can. 1295, beni preziosi; pie fondazioni; diritto proprio.

Stable Patrimony: NCCCL: “Stable patrimony is all property, real or personal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible, that, either of its nature or by explicit designation, is destined to remain in the possession of its owner for a long or indefinite period of time to afford financial security for the future. It is the opposite of free or liquid capital which is intended to be used to meet operating expenses or otherwsie disposed of within a reasonably short period of time (within one or, at most, two years).”

“Negotio...”: “Financial transaction, distinct from alienation, which are of considerable importance... a variety of contracts and other financial transactions whose common characteristic is the risk they pose to the overall economic well-being of a publc juridic person... In the framework of the 1983 code, canon 1295 transactions are the more important acts of extraordinary administration, analagous to the more important acts of ordinary administration referred to and specially regulated in canon 1277.” These must all be determined in light of the financial situation of each juridic person.

Precious Goods: Things with special historical, artistic, cultural or monetary value

Pious Foundation: There are two types: (NCCCL)
1. Autonomous: An autonomous foundation is a juridic person which has as its substratum temporal goods which have been set aside for one or more pious causes. It can be either a public or private juridic person. The term “autonomous foundation,” therefore, is synonymous with universitas rerum when the latter is used to designate one or the two principal categories of juridic person, namely, thosw chuch have as their substraum goods roather than people (cf. c. 155.3). Like all juridic persons, the autonomous pious foundation is of its nature perpetual but can, under certain circumstances, be terminated.
2. Non-Autonomous: A non-autonomous foundation is not a juridic person. It is a long-term pious trust, with a public juridic person as trustee, according to the terms of which the annual income (but not the prinicpal) is to be used for a pious cause. It is not by its nature perpetual.

Proper Law: I’m not sure if Fr. Sugawara has anything specific in mind, but it is just the law which governs a juridic person that it is not a particular church and is not part of universal law.


Qual è il diritto e l’obbligo dell’Ordinario del luogo sugli affari economici di un Istituto religioso di diritto diocesano?

The canon in question is c. 637:
Monasteria sui iuris, de quibus in can. 615, Ordinario loci rationem administrationis reddere debent semel in anno; loci Ordinario insuper ius esto cognoscendi de rationibus oeconomicis domus religiosae iuris dioecesani.
NCCCL: “Diocean institutes, both of men and women, have a slightly different financial tie to the diocesan bishop. He has the right to be informed about hte financial affairs of each religious house of diocesan right within his diocese. However, this does not necessarily entail the right to be informed about the entire institute, but rather the right to be informed about each house formally erected as a religious house within the diocese. This would include the general house if it is located within the diocese. The mannter and content of this exchange of information are left to the determination of those inolved, but it should be done in such a manner as to accomplish the intent of the norm, i.e., the exercise of vigilance or special care while still honoring the institute’s internal autonomy.”

The local Ordinary has the right to be informed about the financial status and activity of religious houses of diocesan right, bearing in mind the true autonomy of the institute (cf. c 586) and the responsibilities of the Bishop of the principal house of a diocesan institute (cf. c 595 §1). This right concerns the affairs of a house, and not those of the whole institute.