COMMENTARY
Paragraph 1: (chronology)
The religious order, Oblates of Mary Immaculate, gave notice on February 14, 2003, of its intent to reduce the number of Fathers in Lowell.
Reconfiguration was formally announced by then-Archbishop Sean O’Malley on January 9, 2004:
“the need to reduce the number of parishes in the entire archdiocese, among other things because of changing demographic conditions, the diminished number of priest and the very bad economic condition of some parishes in the archdiocese.”
The Presbyteral Council was heard from on June 24, 2004.
The suppression was effective on August 30, 2004, with St. Rita designated as the receiving parish for the French-language faithful of Ste. Jeanne d’Arc.
There were Ste. Jeanne parishioner appeals to the Archbishop, and then to the Congregation for the Clergy.
Paragraph 2: (chronology)
There was a parishioner appeal to the Signatura, which issued a decree on Oct. 7, 2006, suspending Cardinal O’Malley’s suppression decree with regard to transferring the assets of Ste. Jeanne to the receiving parish.
SECTION A. (Discussion about the suppression of the parish)
Paragraph 3. (Authority of diocesan bishop; obligations to immigrants)
The bishop has the right to suppress a parish; individuals with an “acquired right” may intervene, i.e. parish “founders” or those who have set up trusts or have made restricted gifts:
“That which must be weighed carefully in deliberating is not only the condition of the parish, but in truth also the entire diocese…nothing ‘recognizes the right of Christ’s faithful to a particular parish’…”
The “spiritual patrimony” of immigrants must be served, but the bishop may suppress such a parish, while providing for the pastoral care of immigrants but not linking this to any particular personal parish.
Paragraph 4. (Claims of irregular procedure within the Presbyteral Council)
The diocesan Presbyteral Council went through a vacancy period (“sede vacante”) between departure of Cardinal Law and the installation of then-Archbishop O’Malley, after which the Presbyteral Council was reconstituted properly; there is no requirement that pastors of to-be-suppressed parishes be members of the Presbyteral Council; it is denied that the Presbyteral Council ever derogated from its obligation of impartiality.
Paragraph 5. (Timing of notification of suppression to parishioners)
There was no irregularity in notifying the parishioners
“the possible suppression was noted long before by the parishioners themselves and the decision was communicated by their pastor on June 25, 2004.”
Paragraph 6. (Spiritual care of French-language faithful)
Claims of improper treatment are “not in any way supported.”
Paragraph 7. (Claims of substantive irregularities)
- Suppression may occur “…for a certain just reason…”
- The appellant thought that with the merger of Ste. Jeanne and St. Rita parishes, Ste. Jeanne would be preserved ahead of St. Rita as a territorial parish
- The Archbishop of Boston had indicated that the suppression decision should be placed in the context of
“…the wider reconfiguration initiative…which will allow the Archdiocese of Boston to more efficiently use its resources…”
- The appeal dwelt too much on the details of the suppressed parish, without getting into
“…what is to be done in the best possible manner, for the whole archdiocese…”
Paragraph 8. (Decision on the issue of suppression of the parish)
“…the asserted violations of law in procedure and in substance are not proven…”
SECTION B. Discussion about the disposition of the assets of the parish
Paragraph 9.
The Congregation for the Clergy suspended this provision [the transfer of the suppressed parish’s assets] contained in Cardinal O’Malley’s suppression decree.
Paragraph 10.
The lawyer for the appellants cited canon 1291, but this does not apply to assets assigned to St. Rita; rather, it applies to that parish’s own fixed assets.
The appellant does not have an acquired right over the assets of Ste. Jeanne d’Arc.
SECTION C. Discussion about the deconsecration of the Ste. Jeanne d’Arc church
Paragraph 11. (Premature to address this)
No decision about deconsecration has been made, either by the Archbishop or by the Congregation; the parishioners may challenge this in accordance with canon law when such a decision is reached.
Paragraph 12. (The decision in the form of a decree)
“The appeal is not to be admitted and in fact is not admitted to discussion before the College [full bench] of Their Excellencies and Their Eminences the Judges of the H.S.T., inasmuch as being manifestly lacking anywhere in foundation.”
Rome, February 1, 2008
|
