What is a Monsignor?

[dochawk]

The trend these days is to move pastors around (like public school principals), but there is nothing in canon law that requires this and it is ultimately up to the bishop. Some bishops still subscribe to the “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” rule.

Under canon law, appointment as a pastor is without a term, and effectively permanent–unless the bishops of that country have approved terms appointments, as they have in the Latin rite in the US.

A pastor cannot be arbitrarily reassigned; he actually has certain rights to retain his position.

this may have something to do with why my local RC diocese has so many parishes run by administrators rather than pastors . . .

hawk

 

[TimothyH]

In the early 40’s I lived a couple of years in Eastport, Maine. The pastor there told us that the bishop had tried to force him to take an assignment that he didn’t want. He told the bishop that the bishop couldn’t force him to go because he had paid for his own education. *.

The bishop told him fine, and he hoped he liked Eastport, because there was no rule which required the bishop to give him a new assignment. As far as I know he spent the rest of his life there.*

This is happening in the diaconate, where parishes have traditionally paid for the education of the deacon. These parishes have traditionally had the deacon for as long long as the deacon lived and worked in the area.

Here in the Archdioces of Atlanta, I have been told that the Archdioces is starting to pay for education of some deacons in some circumstances, with the understanding by the deacon that the bishop reserves the right to assign the deacon as needed.

I’m unsure of how this works - if there is some rule or regulation or canon law which states that the one who pays for the education has authority over the assignment. But it is happening.

-Tim-

 

[jakenny1k]

An honorary title recognized by Rome to individual priests

age has nothing to do with it nor does retirement status

It is not a senior priest, but one honored by Rome

 

[Chatter163]

Under canon law, appointment as a pastor is without a term, and effectively permanent–unless the bishops of that country have approved terms appointments, as they have in the Latin rite in the US.

This is not something that the bishops’ conference has any say over. The conference does not create policy that individual bishops must follow; that is not their function. Unless a matter has been specifically delegated by the Holy See to bishops’ conference to decide by majority vote, a bishop is not answerable to the conference.

 

[dans0622]

This is not something that the bishops’ conference has any say over. The conference does not create policy that individual bishops must follow; that is not their function. Unless a matter has been specifically delegated by the Holy See to bishops’ conference to decide by majority vote, a bishop is not answerable to the conference.

Hello,

Your basic premise is correct, as far as the role of the conference related to the autonomy of an individual, diocesan bishop. In regard to “term limits” for pastors, the conference has the authority to decide if that is acceptable. If they say it is, then the bishop can appoint pastors for a certain length of time. If they do not allow it, the bishop cannot do it. See canon 522. vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1U.HTM

Dan

 

[dans0622]

… Household, even though the title of “monsignor”, which is to be distinguished from a prelatial rank, has not been withdrawn from vicars general, as can be seen, for instance, from the placing of the abbreviated title “Mons.” before the name of every member of the secular (diocesan) clergy listed as a vicar general in the Annuario Pontificio. (Honorary titles such as that of “Monsignor” are not considered appropriate for religious.)

That is interesting. The Annuario does indeed address all Vicars General in that way. In the USA, though, if a Vicar General is not an appointed monsignor, he is simply addressed as “Very Reverend” (as far as I know).

Having read Paul VI’s 1968 motu proprio (English can be found in Canon Law Digest, vol. 7), I suspect that he did not intend for Vicars General to be “automatically” monsignors since he did not say anything about this in the document but did say that members of the Pontifical household are such because they “are named by the Supreme Pontiff” (I, 3, 1). But, it seems to happen automatically anyway, at least in the view of those who put the Annuario together.

Dan

 

[Chatter163]

Hello,

Your basic premise is correct, as far as the role of the conference related to the autonomy of an individual, diocesan bishop. In regard to “term limits” for pastors, the conference has the authority to decide if that is acceptable. If they say it is, then the bishop can appoint pastors for a certain length of time. If they do not allow it, the bishop cannot do it. See canon 522. vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P1U.HTM

Dan

I am not aware that the bishops’ conference has made such a binding decree and the Holy See confirmed it. I know of too many pastors who have been at parishes for more than a dozen years. This article suggests that a bishop must adopt the practice in his diocese: dioceseofscranton.org/2011/07/07/announcement-regarding-term-limits-for-pastors/

 

[dans0622]

I am not aware that the bishops’ conference has made such a binding decree and the Holy See confirmed it. I know of too many pastors who have been at parishes for more than a dozen years. This article suggests that a bishop must adopt the practice in his diocese: dioceseofscranton.org/2011/07/07/announcement-regarding-term-limits-for-pastors/

Hello,

Sorry. I could have provided a link to the norm: usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/canon-law/complementary-norms/canon-522-stability-of-office-of-pastor.cfm

The norm says it all, I suppose: the bishop can appoint for a 6 year term, renew it if he wants, however many times he wants, or he can appoint pastors for an indeterminate time. So, it is not really a “binding” decree. All canon law permits the conference to do here is allow for term limits. The USCCB has allowed them but cannot impose the practice. If the conference were to do nothing, (that is what I meant by “not allow” in the other post) then the bishop cannot use term limits. I guess that may be confusing. I apologize if my posts are not well-worded or misleading. I don’t know how else to say it.

Dan