Removing a Bishop or Priest

  • Thread starter Thread starter SouthernSister
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SouthernSister

Guest
I’m not certain that I’m in the right forum (my, how they’ve grown!) but I have a question about how a heretical Priest or Bishop is actually removed from his position. I know that there have been times in our history where there had been bad teaching and the Priest or Bishop refuses to comply.

Can you tell me how this works? Canon Law citations would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

SouthernSister
 
SouthernSister said:
I’m not certain that I’m in the right forum (my, how they’ve grown!) but I have a question about how a heretical Priest or Bishop is actually removed from his position. I know that there have been times in our history where there had been bad teaching and the Priest or Bishop refuses to comply.

Can you tell me how this works? Canon Law citations would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge (which isn’t a whole lot), there isn’t much in the Code of Canon Law about heretics. You have canon 751 defining heresy and canon 1364 defining the penalties. And that’s about it.

Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.

Can. 1364 §1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

§2. If contumacy of long duration or the gravity of scandal demands it, other penalties can be added, including dismissal from the clerical state.

I can tell you what I would do, though. 1) If it were a priest, I’d report him to the bishop. If the bishop did nothing, I’d then report both the bishop and the priest to the Holy See. 2) If it were a bishop, I’d report him to the Holy See (more specifically, to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith).

Maria
 
Dr. Edward Peters begins to discuss this on his blog, in reference to a call for Cdl. Mahoney to resign, citing canons 1401 and 1405 as justifications for the clear canonical mandate for papal removal of a bad bishop, but he doesn’t bother explaining what canonical mechanisms might be in place or how they function.
canonlaw.info/2007/03/prof-bainbridges-call-for-cdl-mahonys_23.html

Presumably, the procedures of trial for a specific offense would be the same as in general, and if the offense were such as to warrant suspension or degradation the appropriate authority could carry this out.
 
pray. It typically takes an act of God. You can also write the Congragation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
 
SouthernSister said:
I’m not certain that I’m in the right forum (my, how they’ve grown!) but I have a question about how a heretical Priest or Bishop is actually removed from his position. I know that there have been times in our history where there had been bad teaching and the Priest or Bishop refuses to comply.

Can you tell me how this works? Canon Law citations would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

SouthernSister
Click to expand...
It does take a long time and lots of patience. Remember the diocese of Seattle. The ArchBishop got a new Coadjutor Bishop to “Help” him. Slowly He gave up more and more responsibilities, but did not leave until retirement I believe.
 
SouthernSister said:
I’m not certain that I’m in the right forum (my, how they’ve grown!) but I have a question about how a heretical Priest or Bishop is actually removed from his position. I know that there have been times in our history where there had been bad teaching and the Priest or Bishop refuses to comply.

Can you tell me how this works? Canon Law citations would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

SouthernSister
Click to expand...
Thank you for your replies so far!

Actually, my situation is hypothetical! There is no Priest or Bishop that I know of, who should be removed. I’m just curious as to the process. What does it look like?
  1. The faithful complain to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
  2. It’s decided by them (?) that yes, this is a rogue Bishop.
  3. They censure the Bishop (?).
  4. The Bishop ignores the warning (?).
  5. I don’t know!
Who actually makes the final decision. Is it the Pope? Or can a synod of local Bishops (that would be the USCCB in the case of America, yes?) make the decision?

And can a Bishop remove a Priest by himself? Or does that have to be approved by the Pope?

I just don’t understand the process and that’s where I’m heading with this! Simple terms please. 🙂 And then I guess I want the Canon Law to see that it is so (even though my eyes will likely glaze over when trying to read it)!

SouthernSister
 
SouthernSister said:
Thank you for your replies so far!

Actually, my situation is hypothetical! There is no Priest or Bishop that I know of, who should be removed. I’m just curious as to the process. What does it look like?
  1. The faithful complain to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?
  2. It’s decided by them (?) that yes, this is a rogue Bishop.
  3. They censure the Bishop (?).
  4. The Bishop ignores the warning (?).
  5. I don’t know!
Who actually makes the final decision. Is it the Pope? Or can a synod of local Bishops (that would be the USCCB in the case of America, yes?) make the decision?

And can a Bishop remove a Priest by himself? Or does that have to be approved by the Pope?

I just don’t understand the process and that’s where I’m heading with this! Simple terms please. 🙂 And then I guess I want the Canon Law to see that it is so (even though my eyes will likely glaze over when trying to read it)!

SouthernSister
Click to expand...
The removal would ultimately stem from authoritative action of the pope, no matter whose action initiated the proceedings.
 
Andreas_Hofer said:
The removal would ultimately stem from authoritative action of the pope, no matter whose action initiated the proceedings.
Click to expand...
So the Pope is the ultimate authority, yes? There would be no situation where a group of Bishops removed another Bishop – unless the Pope agreed.

Just trying to confirm the way I think it works.

Thanks in advance.

SouthernSister
 
What happened here in Seattle in the 80’s was the Catholic faithful, after years of witnessing heterodox teaching and practices both advocated and practiced by the then Archbishop Hunthausen, wrote in large numbers to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, headed by then Cardianl Ratzinger. An Apostolic Visitation took place (a team of Bishops from Rome) to investigate, interview and observe. As you can see by the letter the above poster linked, it was found that indeed our previous Archbishop was leading the Catholic faithful astray and an auxiliary Bishop was appointed to assume most of the Archbishop’s duties. Although Hunthausen protested, he eventually quieted down and a few years later another Bishop (Murphy) was appointed. Hunthausen retired a few years later.

The Archdiocese is still picking up the pieces.
 
There have been numerous cases of defrocked bishops and priests over the years. The most recent one I can think of is the African bishop (I’m sorry that I don’t remember his name) who married in a Unification Church ceremony several years ago. The French too have had some schmismatic traditionalist bishops in recent years.
Usually I think the Church tries to remove priests quietly. Of course there was great publicity in regards to the priests convicted of sexual abuse of children a few years back, and of course they were finished with their dioceses.
I don’t find all this particularly depressing. Christ said there would be weeds among the crops, and they will not be separated out until the judgement.
 
SouthernSister said:
So the Pope is the ultimate authority, yes? There would be no situation where a group of Bishops removed another Bishop – unless the Pope agreed.

Just trying to confirm the way I think it works.

Thanks in advance.

SouthernSister
Click to expand...
In the Latin Church as our canon law is currently structured, I don’t believe there would be a situation in which a group of bishops could remove a brother bishop from office without the consent of the Pope - we don’t really have intermediate authority structures that would handle it (national bishops conferences are designed to have very minimal authority and only make binding decisions in strictly delimited cases, often only with Roman approval). I would imagine this could be more likely in an Eastern Catholic church, where the synod of the whole church deposed one of its own bishops, but don’t really know if their canons are structures so as to allow for this or not. I’m not a canonist, though, or a specialist in ecclesiology, so just remember these represent my best guesses.
 
But what is to be done about these priests who do not teach necessarily the faith (and/or do not proclaim the truth as taught and only dance around Church teaching) or who do not peform the Liturgy correctly?

Such a thing has happened at my parish (indeed, many of the parishes around here) and I think our Bishop (ive met him) will be sympathetic. But what if, for pastoral reasons (or other things take precedence) he can not/will not do anything?
Who do I write to?

It is a hard pill to swallow to accept that certain priests can actually exommunicate themselves. Does disobeying Liturgical law incur this penalty?
Any recommended resources?

God Bless
Mordoai
 
Mordocai said:
But what is to be done about these priests who do not teach necessarily the faith (and/or do not proclaim the truth as taught and only dance around Church teaching) or who do not peform the Liturgy correctly?

Such a thing has happened at my parish (indeed, many of the parishes around here) and I think our Bishop (ive met him) will be sympathetic. But what if, for pastoral reasons (or other things take precedence) he can not/will not do anything?
Who do I write to?

It is a hard pill to swallow to accept that certain priests can actually exommunicate themselves. Does disobeying Liturgical law incur this penalty?
Any recommended resources?

God Bless
Mordoai
Click to expand...
Liturgical abuse does not carry the penalty of excommunication, automatic or otherwise. The situation you describe, however, is different from the case of a rogue bishop - priests are much easier to remove from office because they are under the jurisdiction of the bishop and he has many ways of dealing with them. For instance, he controls their assignments within the diocese, so he can remove a priest from parish work without even having to impose a canonical penalty - he can just shuffle him off to become a nursing home chaplain (not that the elderly don’t need good guidance and care, he’s just got less of a platform for dissident preaching and abusive liturgy) or even into the curia as, for instance, an assistant to the archivist where he’ll be closely watched and not have direct contact with the laity. Of course, priests also perform certain sacramental functions only with faculties from the bishop, so if a priest’s problem is mainly giving destructive advice in the confessional the bishop could revoke his faculties, in which case he could no longer hear confessions. If the bishop really sees a need to totally remove the priest from ministry he can also suspend or, in very serious cases, “defrock him” so there is much greater room for binding action.

If a bad bishop is protecting bad priests, though, you can always ultimately appeal to Rome, where Peter has the task of strengthening the brethren, which sometimes involves censure.
 
I am not sure who to write to when it comes to a denial of Catholic doctrine, but when it comes to liturgical abuses, you could write to:
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the
Sacraments
Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City State
Europe
Code: 
 (This is the address for this congregation provided in the Official Catholic Directory.)
 Numerous U.S. Catholics have written to this Vatican Congregation in recent years, and occasionally they have taken public action upon people's complaints. A year or two ago they wrote to the bishop of a diocese in Texas where some priests would not give communion to those who knelt, and this letter said that this must be stopped. The letter was made public too.
If you do write you should provide proof of what you say if at all possible. I think it would be best to complain to this congregation.only in serious matters, though, but of course you are the one to judge if a matter is serious or troubling to the faithful.
Mordocai said:
But what is to be done about these priests who do not teach necessarily the faith (and/or do not proclaim the truth as taught and only dance around Church teaching) or who do not peform the Liturgy correctly?

Such a thing has happened at my parish (indeed, many of the parishes around here) and I think our Bishop (ive met him) will be sympathetic. But what if, for pastoral reasons (or other things take precedence) he can not/will not do anything?
Who do I write to?

It is a hard pill to swallow to accept that certain priests can actually exommunicate themselves. Does disobeying Liturgical law incur this penalty?
Any recommended resources?

God Bless
Mordoai
Click to expand...
 
mdgspencer said:
I am not sure who to write to when it comes to a denial of Catholic doctrine, but when it comes to liturgical abuses, you could write to:
The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the
Sacraments
Apostolic Palace
00120 Vatican City State
Europe
Click to expand...
Doctrinal questions go to the CDF:

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Piazza del S. Uffizio 11
00193 Roma
Italy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top