this seems to answer the question while the language is a little confusing for me
You’ll get used to it…
Here’s the thing: The OP asked “who is my bishop?”
Answer: Read canon 107. Through both (key word for the OP is “both”) domicile and quasi-domicile, each person acquires his own ordinary (“bishop”* for the sake of other readers here)
So what does that mean? What do those terms mean?
Go back to canons 100 & 102.
Domicile means “a permanent residence” or at least as permanent as it gets–living in a place with the intention of making that place one’s home.
Quasi domicile means living in a place for at least 3 months (or having that intention) while at the same time, not-intending to make that place one’s home.
It actually helps to “think” using the words of the translator from canon 100. The words “resident,” “temporary resident” and “traveler” are more natural for English speakers.
In the OP’s question, the key words were that she would be living there “for 2 months” (2, not 3) and “I might be coming back, but I’m not sure.” So clearly she doesn’t intend to be there for 3 months or more. So we eliminate the possibility of quasi-domicile. If circumstances change and she does indeed live there for 3 months, then she will have a quasi-domicile–but that doesn’t apply yet.
Since she has neither a domicile nor a quasi-domicile in that place, she does not “acquire an ordinary”–meaning (again, for all readers here) that the bishop of that “other” place is not “her bishop.” At the same time, she is a “traveler” in that other diocese, so there are times when that other bishop may have certain jurisdiction (for example, as a traveller in his diocese, he can dispense her from the Sunday obligation).
Because she might be returning to her original home (her domicile at the present), she still has connections there, and she retains her domicile. In other words, she likewise doesn’t fit into the category of “vagus” (transient, or more literally vagrant, or even homeless).
Your own situation is actually a very typical example of quasi-domicile. College students living at school have a quasi-domicile (that’s what makes it so typical); because they live there for at least 3 months, but that’s not actually their permanent home (at least that’s the typical arrangement). College students have 2 pastors; the pastor of the place where they permanently live and the pastor of the place where they are living at the moment. They likewise have 2 “bishops” (okay, “ordinaries”).
This becomes very important if they decide to get married while at school. What is their proper parish and pastor? Both.
Likewise, for you. You have 2 bishops–the bishop of your home diocese and the bishop of the diocese in which you now live (albeit temporarily). Your own obligations, with respect to your formation, toward your home bishop are, of course, different from those toward the bishop of the place where you’re living; but still, under canon law, both bishops are your own proper Ordinaries.
You actually retain your “own” bishop not because of your attachment to the diocese as a seminarian, but because your home diocese is your true home–you have every intention of returning there and resuming your life there (I only say this because you’ve said as much yourself). This would still apply if you were not a seminarian or not a diocese employee. Ones ordinary depends on where he actually lives (permanent or temporary) but does not depend at all on ones employment status.
- Let’s just leave it as “bishop” for the moment instead of getting distracted by the distinctions between “bishop” and “ordinary.” Different topic.
that just makes it more confusing for me, does anyone have any thoughts? Fr David? 