jeudi 3 mai 2012

THE CANON LAWYER RESPONSE TO PEDOPHIC CASES


THE CANON LAWYER RESPONSE TO PEDOPHIC CASES
By Claude Kakule Siriwayo, AA

Today the media are bringing to light the abuse of children-minors and vulnerable young people by the Church members. This has drawn the attention of ecclesiastical authorities who have issued a lot of normative and disciplinary legislations dealing with Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors, of children and vulnerable you people by the members of the Church, particularly priests and religious (cf. Benedict XVI, Pastoral Letter to the Catholics of Irland, 19 March 2010).  Following this situation which is almost worldwide spread in one way or the order, let us listen to what Claude Kukule Siriwayo, a canon lawyer student, has to say (response) about the seven questions related  to the offence against the six commandment of the Decalogue.  Q= Question . R=Response.

Q/  The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has given  a diocesan bishop go-ahead to conduct administrative penal process of his priests for alleged offences against the sixth commandment with a minor less than eighteen years of age”  (Cf. can 1395). What is your opinion about this account?
R/ Actually when it comes to matters of discussing opinions we must be extraordinary cautious since we might end up going astray and disregard the fact that some of the issues are already talked of and about by important people. According to Rev. William H. Woestman, a Promoter of Justice, Archibishop of Chicago, the major problem of the above concern related to the sixth commandment, is to understand the exact meaning of the words “an offence against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue”. This problem faces Diocesan bishops, provincial superiors, Major superiors, Church administrators, and ecclesiastical Judges with a serious responsibility to interpret strictly sins and crimes against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue.
Q/ If the Code of Canon Law on this issue includes consummated sexual acts, what about sexual inclinations like touches, salacious conversation, looks, etc? Are these practices amongst the offences or delicts listed in c. 1395?
R/ I would like to be epigrammatic and straightforward. Bishops, Church administrators, major Superiors and other decision-makers, who are proficient to deal with child sexual abuse litigation, have the prerogative to determine the seriousness of the alleged act (be they touches, actions or other practices). That means, they are deputed to adjudicate not only  the alleged act proved to have taken place but also they have to see in it that the alleged act and its imputability are in accordance with canonical just penalties attached to the contravention of canon 1395 &2.

Q/ What if the pedophiles are not aware of the canonical implication of one involved in such a behavior? If those involved in abuse of minors or children are ignorant of the canonical repercussions of such an act, why and how can they be held as lawbreakers?  
R/ We have to bear it in mind that “ignorance is no excuse in law”. You cannot claim obtuse ignorance to justify your illegal behavior.   According to canon 15 “Ignorance of facts excuses, but not of law”[Ignorantia facti excusat, Ignorantia juris not excusat]. While we cannot stick to the letter of this canon, we have to be aware that law always presumes knowledge of the law, even if one is ignorant of it. Accordingly, we have to approach this question in its complexity. There is a risk to apply directly canon law principles and make more injuries instead of healing the “wounders” and the “wounded”. We have to be aware of what pedophilia is all about before applying some legal principles. This is almost what Rev, Jerome Paulson wrote in Studia Canonica, 22 (1988), p. 77-124 as he said “stigmatizing and ostracizing pedophiles is neither helpful nor Christian. That means we have to hold people guilty for the pedophilic behavior but at the same time if someone has a problem of that kind, we have to help him in the best of Christian tradition. This is not a way of canonizing pedophilic act on the ground that it is a disease just like alcoholism or HIV which are sometimes beyond our control. Today there are clinics for mental disorders, and psychological heath care and counseling centers where such pathology like pedophilia would be eradicated in one way or another. Unfortunately some pedophiles assume that it is a normal way of living forgetting that to pedophilic inclination is a mental disorder which needs a special psychological counseling.
Q/  Does the involvement in minors` abuse have civil impact? If yes, to which extend?
R/ First of all, the abuse of minors is a criminal offence that means it does not just deal with the relationship of individuals but it becomes an offence which involves the state which has the right to protect its members. At this level, abusing minors will be referred to as a Statutory rape. A statutory rape is the term generally used to describe the crime of sexual intercourse by a man with a woman who is not his wife and who is below an age specified by statute. It is a crime whether or not the woman gives her consent. This crime is based on the premise that people below a certain age, known as minors, are incapable of making an informed, intelligent decision to consent to sexual intercourse. Consequently, even if the man reasonably believes the woman is over the age of consent (which varies among jurisdictions) or the woman lies about her age, the man is generally liable for the offense. Some states have rewritten their forcible and statutory rape laws to make them gender neutral. Under these modern statutes a male can be considered a victim of rape — either at the hands of a woman or another man.
Q/ The way you are talking of the issue divulges that you opt for the ministry of pedophiles that means, you advocate for a special accompaniment of those predatory pedophiles and you wish that there be an appropriate ministry dealing with pedophiles so as to understand better the implication of this crisis. Is it that what you want to mean?
R/ In a way, yes. In fact, the understanding of the complexity of pedophilia is a prerequisite for both ministry to the pedophiles and ministry to the wounded people, those who have grievously been affected by pedophilic acts.
Q/ If pedophilia is a disease, can you elaborate more what you understand by pedophilia? Besides, what do you think could be the real drives for child sexual abuse?
R/ First of all the diagnostic and statistical manual of Mental disorders classifies pedophilia as one of the Paraphilias. Among the main paraphilias that we know we can record: fetishism (use of non-living objects for sexual arousal, zoophilia (use of animals), exhibitionism (exposing genitals to strangers), voyeurism (peeping Toms) sexual sadism, sexual masochism and pedophilia ( involvement with children). It means that, pedophilia is one of the psychosexual dysfunctions. By definition, we can say that pedophilia is an act of engaging in sexual activity with pre-pubertal or post-pubertal children as a way of achieving sexual excitement. According to some analysts, there are however two types of pedophiles people. On one hand, we have the heterosexual-oriented-pedophiles. These ones tend to prefer the eight-to-ten-old girls and they limit their pedophilic acts to looking or touching but these acts can end up into physical union of bodies. On the other hand, we have the homosexual-oriented-pedophiles. These ones prefer older children. This division was subdivided in Keller`s article on human Development (1986) as follow:
-          The fixated pedophiles: They have a restricted interest in children, with no interest in adults. In this category there are the fixated homosexual pedophiles: interested only in young boys and the fixated heterosexual pedophiles: interested only in young girls.
-          Regressed pedophiles: These ones are able to be interested in both boys and girls.
As a way of summary, there are three subdivisions of pedophilia:
1.      The homosexual pedophiles (attracted to boys only)
2.      The heterosexual pedophiles ( engrossed in girls only)
3.      The bisexual pedophiles (  Interested in both boys and girls)


Q/ Let us turn now to the question of celibacy. What would you say about the modern tendency to consider that “ Pour lutter contre la pédophilie, abolissons le célibat des prêtres”  (To avoid pedophilia, we have to abrogate the law of celibacy of priests) [Hans Kung]?
R/ This is a very challenging issue since it targets the very strength of the Church. I would like to point out, before hand that, I have read and reread scores of articles advocating for abrogation of celibacy, women ordination to ministerial priesthood, marriage of priests, etc. If you look at these issues critically, you will find that there are anticlericalist and anticatholicist movements which are deputed to assail the very quintessence of the Roman Catholic Church. One the core elements of the Roman Catholic Church, is “celibacy”. When the above quotation states that “ Pour lutter contre la pédophilie, abolissons le célibat des prêtres = To avoid pedophilia we have to abrogate the law of celibacy”, it has to be understood with extraordinary attention. As Roman Catholic faithful of the One, Holy, Apostolic and Adjudicative Church, I have to stand for what the Church holds true and not let myself be driven by individualistic dividing and emotional opinions. As cogent beings, we are free to think whatsoever we want but, we should not impact our way of thinking on others until to make it a legal norm of conduct. It is not because there are a lot of allegations on sexual abuses that we have to be compelled to derogate the bylaw of celibacy; rather we have to see in it that the value of celibacy is not in contrario with the life of the Church and that we are called for more fidelity and dedication to our vocation. Chastity and celibacy for priests are interconnected. One cannot be chaste without being celibate, and one cannot abrogate chastity without reprobating at the same time celibacy of the priesthood in the Roman Catholic Church.  As religious and clergymen of the Catholic Church, we are called to live both celibate and chaste life.
Q/ What would you give as recommendation to those engaged in the ministry of pedophiles and to the pedophiles themselves, especially to religious and priests.
To those called to assist the pedophiles, I urge that they be well erudite, well clued-up about the illness of pedophilia in order to avoid unnecessary injuries and injustices while dealing with pedophilia cases. If possible and according to circumstances, ecclesiastical authorities ought not to be constrained to hurry for extremist penalty of the abusers. There must be an appropriate peremptory time for immediate investigations before sentencing the indicted person. It is only after the inquiry legitimately carried out that the person will be either accountable or acquitted. However, there is also need to look first for pastoral means which would help the prosecuted person to uphold his good repute in the society. In fact, this does not gainsay the end of law in the Church which is the salvation of souls. (Cf.can.1752). In the same perspective, there is a call to go for canonical equity (canon 19) by applying justice tempered with sweetness of mercy, but this should not be prejudicial to the victims who also have to vindicate their right to fair treatment and legal action.
To the pedophiles and impending pedophiles, I would like to replicate the words of Alfonso Card. Lopez Trujillo, President of the Pontifical Council for the Family, that every person should be acquainted with the fact that chastity and celibacy entail discarding certain thoughts, words and evil actions, (cf. Romans 1:18; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11). To attain this requires an attitude mind, of self-mastery and of forbearance which are signs of self-determination and accountability for ones `actions. Such self-mastery implies both avoiding occasions which might lead to or encourage sin as well as knowing how to triumph over one's own natural instinctive impulses and other human sexual proclivity.


By Claude Kakule Siriwayo, AA

Appendix



Appendix 1: Questionnaire

QUESTIONS TO FORMATORS, SUPERIOURS AND OTHER MEMBERS IN CHARGE OF FORMATION
1.      What are the possible main reasons for dropping out religious life?
2.      Why do people seek to transfer?
3.      What are the means/ strategies that you use to minimize the drop-outs?
4.      How do you care for those dismissed from the Institute?
5.      Does the institute have any obligation to pay for the work done by a dismissed member?
6.      What are the stages where we have more drop-outs (Postulancy, Philosophy, Theology, Post-theology)?
7.      What are your suggestions to the young formators with regards the transfers, departure and dismissal from the institute?
8.      What are the canonical reasons and other reasons not found in the Code of canon law that may lead to exclaustration or dismissal from the religious institute?
9.      What is the impact of transfer, departure and dismissal on the institute?
10.  Do you give a chance to the members to defend themselves before dismissal?


QUESTIONS TO THOSE TRANSFERRED, EXCLAUSTRATED AND DISMISSED MEMBERS
11.  What were the reasons for your dismissal?
12.  Did you choose to leave or you were told to do so?
13.  Why did you choose to transfer?
14.  What were the joys and difficulties encountered during the moment of transfer?
15.  After the period of exclaustration, do you feel like continuing with religious life?
16.  After being dismissed, did you wish to go to another religious institute? Why?
17.  What was your relationship with the members of the institute, confreres and superiors?

QUESTIONS ADRESSED TO OTHER PEOPLE
18.  How do non religious react about dismissal?
19.  What are the effects of dismissal from religious life on the faith of the Christians?
20.   What are the civil implications of dismissal?
21.  How does the institute protect the good reputation of the dismissed members?
22.  How could we avoid various separations from religious institutes?
23.  What is the impact of the modern society on religious vocation today?
24.  Do we need an ecclesiastical tribunal to deal with cases of Church members?

Appendix 2: List of informants

KAMBERE KAGHANIRYO Vincent, AA, Provincial Superior of the Africa,      interviewed in             Butembo-DRC, on 5th July,        2011.
KAPITULA Ephraim, AA, Responsible for Formation in the Province of Africa,   interviewed in             Butembo, on 5th July, 2011.
KWALIKWALAVA Jeannine, OA, Teacher by Profession at the Assumption Academy in Tanzania, Oblate of the Assumption, interviewed in Nairobi on 25th   February, 2012
MUMBERE PALUKU Jules, AA, Postulant Master at Katendere Community,     interviewed in             Kyondo- DRC, on 20th June, 2011
NZANZU Nicole, ORA, Novice Mistress of Orante Sisters in Tanzania, interviewed in     Nairobi on 24th April, 2011.
SINDIRIGHA Simon, AA, Novice Master at Maison Lwanga-Butembo (Noviciate          House), interviewed in Butembo, on 1st July, 2011.
WASUKUNDI Francine Anuarite, ORA, Local Superior of Orante Siters at Karen-          Kenya, interviewed in Nairobi, on 23rd, April, 2011.

Photo claude siriwayo


CHAPTER FOUR MEANS OF AVOIDING SEPARATION OF MEMBERS AND RECOMMANDATIONS





            This chapter will sketch out some of the values to be promoted as found in the Rule of Life, the role of the superior and the obligation to obey the universal law as well as the particular law of the institute. The section on recommendations will take into consideration the care for the separated members from the religious institute of the Augustinians of the Assumption.
            4. 1. 1. The Rule of Life
          
           The institute defines in its constitutions the manner in which the evangelical counsels of chastity, poverty, and obedience must be observed. This must also be in accordance with the character and purposes of the institute (cf. c. 598). The Rule of life is therefore the fundamental Code (Codex fundamentalis) which gives the guidelines of the life of the members in the institute.
           The members of the institute are obligated to live not only according to the universal law of the Church but also according to the proper law of their institute. Since religious are to live the evangelical counsels of obedience, poverty and chastity, each institute must define how the members are to live accordingly. For the Augustinians of the Assumption, the Rule of Life and the Ratio Institutionis are the two particular pillars which direct the members. On the one hand, the Rule of Life of the Augustinians of the Assumption is added to the Rule of Saint Augustine in order to make one Rule of Life proper to the Assumptionists. This Rule of life gives the orientations regarding the identity of the Assumptionists:
                  Assumptionits, we are religious who live in apostolic community. Faithful               to our   founder, Father d’Alzon, we choose before all else to work, out of love for Jesus      Christ, for the Coming of the Reign of God in ourselves and around us.[1][212]
              In the Rule of Life there are values proper to the Assumptionists such as, frankness, cordiality, simplicity, daring, initiative, disinterestedness, unity, service of truth, unity, solidarity, zeal, hospitality, and charity. All these values are geared towards the extension of God in us and around us.[2][213]
              In order to help the members feel at home in the institute, the Rule of Life talks of the importance of common life. The community is an essential element because it is in common life that fraternal life is lived in relationship among brothers whose differences of opinion and distinctions based on background, age, mentality or health, become richness.[3][214] Thus, the community, through periodic meetings, communal and personal prayers, strengthens the unity of the members. It is in this respect that the Superior, who is the first animator of the community, is tasked to be attentive to each person; he must ensure the freedom of each and the unity of all.[4][215]

              Superiors in the community are to exercise the power, received from God through the ministry of the Church, in the spirit of service. Their authority proceeds from the Spirit of the Lord in connection with the sacred hierarchy of the Church. Thus, docile to the will of God in carrying out their duty, they are to govern their subjects as children of God and, promoting their voluntary obedience with reverence for the human person, they are to listen to them willingly and foster their working together for the good of the institute and of the Church, but with the superior`s authority to decide and prescribe what must be done remaining intact.[5][216]
              It means that superiors exercise lawful authority in the religious community; they have the responsibility to decide and to take action but this right does not diminish the participative pre-decisional consultative processes. The word “power” (potestas) and “authority” (auctoritas) are both used in this canon; though they are related, they are not identical. Power is the capacity to act. All power, whether physical, intellectual or spiritual, has its source in God.[6][217]
              Authority, however, connotes the possession and use of power. That authority has as its correlative the obedience of members. For that reason, religious should be humbly submissive to their superiors, in a spirit of faith and of love for God`s will, and in accordance with their rules and constitutions. Religious should bear on the execution of commands and on the fulfillment of the tasks laid down upon them, and in this sense, they contribute to the building of the Body of Christ.[7][218]
              Obedience is defined by the Second Vatican Council as “the sanctuary of a person where he is alone with God, whose voice echoes in the depths of his being.”[8][219] That inner voice is the conscience. But this does not make obedience to be supreme and final in matters of discernment; it is not the arbiter of moral worth of the actions which it inspires; it must take account of objective norms of each group of people.
            When religious are no longer submissive to their superiors, when they no longer look at the Rule of Life as relevant for their life, when they start selecting what they want and find good in the Rule of Life, there start behaviours which might lead to great danger of separation from the institute. It is in this respect also that punishment may be used to correct some members who do not conform to the Rule of Life. Even though the Church is not a police state or a concentration camp, it is a system with rules and sanctions attached to the violation of rules. However, physical force or coercion has no place as an expression of authority.[9][220]
            4. 1. 3. Observance of Law
             
              It is written that “a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law (Rm3, 28)” and Rudolph Sohm[10][221] thinks that Church and law are mutually exclusive.[11][222] Among many reasons for which religious leave the institute, there is the disregard of religious rules. In this section, one may expect that we treat about the three vows of obedience, poverty and chastity as to see how they are lived out. But, our concern is more than that and it will deal with the general look on how religious should accommodate the law.
              It is when a religious disregards the observance of the Rule of Life or the constitutions of the institute and universal law of the Church that he or she can fall under situations which lead to separation from the institute.
              With regard to transfer, for instance, some religious usually say that they made a wrong choice that the charism of the institute does not respond to the expectations of those religious.  Those who transfer may decide to do so for the reason that they made a wrong choice of charism, while others can be pushed to quit because their life is not matching with a particular way of living in religious life.[12][223] However, the behavior of some uncharismatic leaders or poor leaders may contribute to the uncomforting life of some weak members who may not support easily that kind of leadership and therefore they will choose to leave the institute and look for a better place for themselves.
              The institute must therefore train its formators so that they may lead the members in a way which brings all the members together and who can actually exercise power and authority in the spirit of service.[13][224] In other words, today, there is a need of forming not only heroic leaders, visionary leaders, charismatic leaders, transformational leaders but also and more importantly servant-leaders. Servant-leadership is that which empowers people with example, caring, understanding, appreciation, trust, sensitivity, reinforcement and shared vision. That is a type of leadership which is rooted in Jesus Christ, model of servant-leader.[14][225] 
              If disobedience is becoming so increasing in religious life it is because in the modern society where religious live there is a growing mood of lawlessness. According to Cormac Burke, authority which used to be understood as the moral force behind the law is no longer looked on any better. Authority is not always looked upon or accepted; it is, on the contrary, hated and generally despised. This anti-law, anti-authority outlook pervades modern society and it is affecting religious today.[15][226]
              Religious must be aware that authority and law are intertwined and that a community cannot achieve its common goals except under the guidance and coordination of some authority. Each one who wants to belong to a particular community with its concrete goals, freely and personally must look to the common authority; he/she must accept that authority and can only resist authority if it is no longer serving the common good. Resistance of authority can simply occur because it seems contrary to one’s personal interests which would show a loss of sense of community. Henceforth, it is an individualistic and selfish approach that estranges him/her from the community, putting what he/she regards as his/her own personal good above the common good.[16][227]
              Furthermore, when the members of the community are no longer respecting the regulations proper to the institute, the authority must intervene to bring order; if someone is violating particular rights or the common good, the authority is to address a moral requirement to that person. The members of the institute are called to be loyal to the commitments which they freely undertake in choosing to belong to a particular voluntary body.
              According to Cormac Burke, it would be childishness in wanting to belong to a voluntary body, yet refusing to accept any authority within it. That would look like the attitude of someone who wants to play a game, but only on condition that he or she does not have to obey the referee or that he or she can play it according to the rules that he himself or she herself makes up at any given moment.[17][228]
              If people are not respecting the rule of the game, they can be subjected to sanctions. It is in this way that the authority may punish those who violate the religious ecclesiastical rules. However, in applying punishment he or she must follow the provision of the proper law of the institute, the universal law of the Church and, if necessary, the civil law. But the goal of punishment must be to reform the offender, to restore justice and to repair damages. Indeed, application of penalty comes as a last resort after exhausting the pastoral means in order to reform the offender.[18][229]
              Since some behaviours of religious are rooted in trauma or other pathologies, the formator must be trained to discern vocations. It is in this regard that the Congregation for Catholic Education has issued the “Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of the Candidates for the Priesthood.”  This document shows the need for preparation of formators who must have a good knowledge of the human person. The document underlines that formators should have meetings with experts in psychological sciences in order to help religious before problems arise. The same recourse to experts in psychological sciences should be made both before admission to the seminary and during formation in order to help the candidate overcome the psychological wounds.[19][230] Psychological check up at the admission and during formation to priesthood must be well taken into account by the religious institutes because
            errors in discerning vocations are rare, and in all too many cases psychological        defects, sometimes of a pathological kind, reveal themselves only after ordination to the   priesthood. Defecting defects earlier would help avoid many tragic             experiences[20][231]
           The Church has the right to verify the suitability of future priests, including by means of recourse to medical and psychological experts. In other words, Superiors have the right to know the medical status of their subjects.[21][232] Canon 1051 foresees that, for the scrutiny of qualities required in view of ordination, one should provide for an evaluation of the state of the candidate’s physical and psychic health.[22][233] But this must not be harmful to the good reputation of the candidate as prescribed in c. 220 of the Code of Canon Law. All psychological and medical consultation must be done with the explicit, informed and free consent of the candidate; formators must provide clear and comprehensive motivations subjecting a candidate to psychological consultation. This calls for openness and trust for both formators and candidates. All impression that such a psychological or medical consultation will prelude to inevitable dismissal from the seminary or house of formation should be avoided.[23][234]
           In brief, the institute should look well at the conditions of admitting candidates to religious life. It is not enough to recruit candidates. Formators and vocational animators must know well the culture, the history, the background/ the social status of the candidates in order to facilitate their accompaniment during and after their religious formation.[24][235] 
           We will tackle the question of exclaustration and its effects, then dismissal and its effects in this section. Even though transfer is a type of separation, we will not include it here since we are very much concerned with those who suffer the most during separation and especially when it is imposed on the members of the institute.
          
           Concerning exclaustration, it happens that a religious is exclaustrated for one reason of the other. During exclaustration, the Superior and all the members of the institute should remain in contact with the exclaustrated person because
            An exclaustrated religious should not be abandoned to his or her own devise. This man or woman is experiencing loneliness and rejection, however much he or she denies this, and needs to be encouraged and to feel the love of the members of the Institute. A Superior or some other member should regularly visit the estranged brother or sister if only by a telephone call each week. Whenever realistically possible there should be face-to-face visits, but only to demonstrate concern and support and not to reinforce the person’s feelings of resentment and anger. The member who is exclaustrated needs to sense eventually that he or she will be welcomed back.[25][236]
            But before exclaustration, especially when it is voluntary or qualified, efforts must be made to maintain the religious in the community or to send him or her in another community. It is in this respect that Vincent Kambere, Provincial Superior of the Augustinians of the Assumption in Africa says that there is wound in the province when a religious asks for exclaustration instead asking for advice in order to be helped while still living in the community. It is not normal that a religious hides the real reasons when the community members are ready to help him solve some problems.[26][237]


            There are canonical implications related to the exclaustration of religious from the institute. When a religious is exclaustrated, charity and justice are to be applied especially when involuntary exclaustration is imposed on a religious. The reason is that, in case of the religious on whom exclaustration was imposed is having problems that make his/her adaptation or employment difficult, the institute has a higher level of obligation to provide support for him/her. This is valid because, in any event, if a religious on exclaustration is in need, the institute seems to have an obligation to provide support.[27][238]
            Apart from canonical considerations, civil law considerations must be taken into account.  The juridical status of exclaustration raises more questions than solutions. Some institutes wish to maintain some ties and give some assistance to the religious departing on exclaustration. That is very important for
It is also the obligation of the proper superiors to intervene, at times, and obtain professional help for the religious who are not of getting it for themselves. I have in mind, especially those religious who become addicted to substances, such as alcohol and drugs, or who manifest serious emotional problems and require special help. Primarily, it is the responsibility of the institute to help them, not that of their relatives and friends outside the Institute, understanding as their concern may be.[28][239]
Since the institute has less control over the religious, it may wish to decrease the likelihood that the institute will be responsible for debts of the religious or be liable in tort for his/her misconduct. To avoid some liabilities, the institute must take precaution by clarifying the object of making it clear in the indult and accompanying agreement that the exclaustrated religious is not an agent and has no power to bind the institute and the institute is not responsible for actions of exclaustrated religious.[29][240]
            With regard to debts and obligations, there should be a statement that the institute is not liable for debts or obligations of exclaustrated religious unless it has accepted liability in writing; for credit cards, the religious departing on exclaustration should surrender the institute credit cards and other juridical documents.[30][241]
            Other juridical consequences of exclaustration include social security, health insurance, professional counseling, liability insurance, release claims, income tax and other civil law considerations. With regard to social security matters, some religious have elected social security coverage for all members. The institute may treat religious on exclaustration as it would for any member working outside the institute. If the religious has control over his or her income, he or she will be liable for income tax. Concerning heath insurance, the institute is obligated to help an exclaustrated religious in case of need, and a major illness could constitute such a need.
            With regard to professional counseling, it is the obligation of the institute to pay for conseling of an exclaustrated religious especially in the case of imposed or indefinite exclaustration, where a psychological[31][242] condition is part of the reason for exclaustration. Also psychiatric services should be available to those who are likely to leave religious life. The institute must seek advice from professional counselors and psychotherapists while dealing with troubled religious. But at the same time the religious himself or herself is the first responsible for the success of the therapy programme because he or she refuses to be helped. In this regard,
            There should be some kind of professional therapy offered and hopefully eventually accepted. Such therapy, however, is not going to be successful unless it is voluntarily accepted and he or she should have reasonable freedom of choice of a therapist or program such as group therapy. I speak of reasonable freedom because the superior or liaison religious needs to have confidence in the therapist or program and should be able, with the permission of the exclaustrated person, to communicate with the therapist or facilitator concerning progress or lack thereof.[32][243]
            For liability insurance, if an exclaustrated religious is involved in a business venture, the institute should advise him or her to obtain the appropriate liability or malpractice insurance. In effect, it is forbidden for religious to practice commerce or trade, either personally or through another, for their own or another`s benefit, except with the permission of the lawful authority.[33][244]
Concerning the release of claims,
Religious institutes should be concerned not only about civil-law claims brought by the third parties but also lawsuits by the exclaustrated or departed members for past services, for other obligations alleged owed them, or for personal property that the institute retains.[34][245]
            The institute must be aware of the civil implication of any agreement with the exclaustrated religious. Any agreement with the exclaustrated religious or departing on exclaustration does not bind a third party who did not sign the agreement. Writing and signing the agreement is a helpful description of the relationship set out before any litigation arises.
             
There are various reasons for which a religious may be dismissed from the institute. In most cases many religious leave for contracting marriage or attempting marriage (c. 694); or for other reasons mentioned in c. 696. Since contracting marriage or attempting marriage coupled with the abuse of the minor seem to be alarming today in the society as well as in the Church, how can we care for the dismissed members from the institute? Since we are not able to deal with each case related to dismissal (murder, abortion, abandonment of the Catholic faith. ..), we will only dwell on one illustrative case, that of a religious dismissed for contracting marriage and who may seek to be readmitted in the institute.
            Once there is a matrimonial bond involving the religious, he or she must be dismissed from the institute. If the religious who attempted or contracted marriage wants to be readmitted in the institute, it should be checked whether he or she has responsibility towards children, parents or other close relationship. If there are children, the religious should continue to provide spiritual, emotional, and financial support for them until they reach the age of majority. If the religious has no children, and had a reasonably good relationship with his wife who has died, and had led a decent Christian life, and now shows genuine remorse for his defection, serious consideration can be given to assisting his readmission. If he is readmitted, in large institutes, he can be assigned to a different province or region different from the one to which he was attached before his dismissal.[35][246]
            Care should be taken to make certain that he does not return to the same area where he ministered or where he lived during his marriage. He must be dispensed from all irregularities attached to marriage. Such a dispensation is reserved to the Apostolic See (c. 1047, § 3) on the request of the supreme moderator. The same supreme moderator can also request the removal of the latae sententiae[36][247] suspension incurred by the priest in attempting marriage (c.1 394, § 1).[37][248]

It must be noted that whoever lawfully leaves an institute cannot claim anything from the institute for the work done in it but, the institute is to show equity and charity towards the members who are separated from it (cf. c. 702). For the separation of members from the institute of the Augustinians of the Assumption,
            If a religious, even after his definitive commitment, wants to leave the Congregation, the procedures established in canon law shall be followed. The same holds true in the case of exclaustration and of dismissal by the congregation. A religious who leaves us cannot claim any compensation for the work he did while he was in the congregation. Nonetheless, the congregation shall treat him with great charity and in all fairness.[38][249]
             Canonical equity is a fruit of kindness and gospel charity; it is recalled in canons 19, 702 and 1752. Equity is an ethical principle borrowed from Roman law. By this principle, judges and superiors apply the law with mercy; they avoid mere juridical formalism, take into account the situation of the person and the concrete circumstances of the case, bearing in mind the overall purpose of the law that is salus animarum (cf. c. 1752). Equity therefore corrects the rigor of law and tempers it with mercy. Equity is a higher form of justice, an expression of Christian love, or charity.[39][250]
            When penalty is inflicted on the cleric, the institute is obligated to support the penalized yet non-dismissed cleric. Unless it is a question of dismissal from clerical state, provision must be made that the cleric does not lack those things necessary for his decent support (cf. c. 1350). Even though the cleric has violated the law, he has right to appropriate support (cf. c. 281). Since with dismissal, vows, rights and obligations are terminated, only dismissal from clerical state technically extinguishes that right to decent support and assistance (cf. c. 292).[40][251]
            What is delicate in the case of clerics is that while charity is the motivating factor for support, the ordinary is juridically obliged to provide as best as he can for the dismissed cleric who is truly needy because of the penalty. Even after being dismissed, the cleric maintains a certain relationship to the institution in which he was incardinated (cf. c. 266). In some cases, ecclesiastical penalties with possible financial implications must take cognizance of legitimate civil law claims of individuals (e.g. regarding pensions).[41][252]
            With regards to goods, it is ascertained that
 if the member retained ownership of his or her goods by profession, these still belong to him or her and the cession of administration, disposition of use and usufruct, as well as the will mentioned in c. 668, should be returned to the person who should alter them. If the member renounced ownership by profession or by choice, this renunciation would no longer hold with respect to future acquisition of goods.[42][253]
            In brief, dismissal is a penal procedure through which the bonds and obligations stemming from religious profession are terminated. And so, in order to regularize the status of the dismissed religious, the religious dismissed must seek the dispensation from vows and, the lifting of sanctions and irregularities for the exercise of orders.[43][254] Even though the institute uses dismissal as a way of separation of members from the institute, dismissal must be the last resort after exhausting all the pastoral means used to maintain the religious.


           To conclude this chapter, it can be said that it is better to prevent than to cure. Since the Rule of Life is the guiding tool for each religious institute, the members are obligated to comply with what they freely choose to live with regard to that law. The role of the superior who is the moral authority behind the law is to exercise his authority and power for the common good of the institute. His authority and power are exercised in the spirit of service. It is in this respect that we stressed the need for a servant-leader who is able to serve, to unite and to bring harmony among the members.
           The members are called to obey the regulations found in the institute at the individual and communal level. Most of those who decide to leave the institute are those who find it burdening to follow the law and want to make their own principle of life. The authority behind the law may then be obligated to apply the penal law for the good of the member or for the common good of the institute. However, in applying sanctions like exclaustration and dismissal, canonical and civil considerations must be taken into account since the rights and obligations of the victim are affected by the sanction.




            In bringing this study of the separation of members from the religious institute, there are several questions which have been raised and that have been answered in one way of the other. This thesis is a tentative answer to the reasons why people leave religious institutes. We have explained that the discipline of separation of members is found in the Scriptures and this was continued by the Church Fathers and the Conciliar Fathers in order to help the individuals or to protect the common good of the Church.   Since the Church has its laws for the good and smooth running of its activities, it has the right to sanction those who violate the Church laws for the good of the offender and for the integrity of the community. In canon 1311, the Church claims the right to punish its offending members with penal sanctions. However, not every offense is punishable and not every mistake, sinful action, or violation of a canon can be punished by the Church authority. But only canonical offences with external violation, grave imputability and reasonable proofs beyond reasonable doubts can be punishable.[44][255]
            As regards the types of separation, that is transfer, departure, exclaustration and dismissal, we examined the reasons and the juridical effects because during separation the rights and obligations of the person are affected and justice must be done in treating the separated members. In the case of transfer of a cleric for instance, excardination can only be granted if the cleric has found a Bishop willing to incardinate him.
            With regard to exclaustration, especially when it is imposed, the institute must take its responsibility by clarifying the implications of this penalty. But, equity and charity must be observed and at the same time the exclaustrated religious is obliged to self-support. The religious must be aware that the obligation of being chaste and celibate remains unmitigated during exclaustration. For dismissal, also, equity and charity must be the guiding principles; vows as well as rights and obligations deriving from profession cease ipso facto; the religious loses rights and obligations arising from profession.
            However, in all these types of separation, canonical procedures as provided in the Code of canon law must be followed. The procedures for warnings and monitions must be observed. For instance, the religious has the right to be given the opportunity for defense or for appeal or recourse; he/ she has also a right to good reputation and privacy.  At the same time, the institute has the right to safeguard the common good. Above all, whichever penalty could be inflicted, the salvation of souls must be the supreme law (c. 1752).
            Finally, in considering the ways of avoiding or preventing separation of members from the religious institute, we emphasized the importance of abiding to the Rule of Life because it gives the ways and means to remain faithful religious. In the Rule of Life of the Augustinians of the Assumption for instance, action and contemplation lived in the community and at the individual level are very important. Furthermore, the superiors play a great role in terms of helping religious to love their vocation. They must exercise their authority in the spirit of service as servant-leaders. But also individual religious are obligated to observe the universal law of the Church and the proper law of the institute because in most cases, they contribute a great deal to what may affect the life in the institute.
            All in all, the institute does not take please in seeing its members leaving. It is always a loss for an institute to have some members who transfer, who are exclaustrated or dismissed. Each institute is called to find ways and means for avoiding separation of members from the institute.










The Good News Bible, Today`s English Version, Collins, Great Britain 1985.
The Bible. Revised Standard Version, second edition, Harper Collins Publishers, New York 2006.
           
Canonical Sources
CODEX IURIS CANONICI, PII X Pontificis maximi iussu digestus Benedicti XV                     auctoritate promulgates, in AAS 9(1917), pp. 3-521.
CODEX IURIS CANONICI, Auctoritate Ionnis Pauli PP. II Promulgatus, in AAS            75(1983), pp. 1-317.
CODE OF CANON LAW, Latin-English ed., translation prepared under the auspices of              the Canon Law Society of America, Washington DC 1983.
CODEX CANONUM ECCLESIARUM ORIENTALIUM, Auctoritate Ioannis
            Pauli PP. II Promulgatus, in AAS 75 (1990), pp. 1033-1363.
CODE OF CANONS OF THE EASTERN CHURCHES, Latin-English edition:                          Translation Prepared under the Auspices of the Canon Law Society of America,                       Washington DC 1992.
CODICE DI DIRITO CANONICO, Testo Officiale e versione italiana  sotto il                               patrocinio della Pontificia Università Lateranense e della Pontificia Università         Salesiana Terza edizione Riveduta, corretta e aumentata, Unione Editori  e Librari Cattolici Italiani, Roma 1997.
FRIEDBERG Aemilius, Corpus Iuris Canonici, Editio Lipsiensis secunda,                                     Decretum Magistri Gratiani, Akademsche Drck- U Verlagsanstalt 1959.
PETERS Edward N. (ed.), The 1917 or Pio-Benedictine Code of Canon in English                        translation, Ignatius Press, San Franscisco 2001.
PETERS Edward N, Incrimenta in progressu 1983 Codicis iuris canonici, with                  multilingual introduction, Wilson & Lafleur, Notre         Dame 2005.

CONCILIUM OECUMENICUM VATICANUM II, Constitutio Dogmatica de Ecclesia                         Lumen Gentium, 21 Nov, 1964, in AAS 57 (1965), pp. 5-71.
_____, Decretum De Accomodata Renovatione Vitae Religiosae: Perfectae                                       Caritatis, 28 Oct. 1965, in AAS 58 (1966), pp.702-712.
 _____, Decr. Perfectae Caritatis  (28 Octobris 1965), in AAS 58 (1966),                                         pp. 702-712.

Pontifical Sources
BENEDICT XVI, Pastoral Letter to the Catholics of Irland, 19 March, 2010                                  in htt://www.vatican.vat/holy father/benedict xvi/letter/2010/documents/ht-xvi let      20…3/28/2010.
JOANNES PAULUS II, Adhortatio Apostolica post-Synodis Ecclesia in Africa, 14                      Sept. 1995, in AAS 88 (1995), pp. 5- 82.
______, Post-Synodal Exhortation  Vita Consecrata, 25 Mars 1996, in AAS 88 (1996),                  pp. 377-486.
 _____, Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Vita Consecrata, Paulines                                           Publications Africa, 1996.
PAULUS VI, Evangelica Testificatio, On the Renewal of    Religious Life, 29 June,                      1971; Latin text, in AAS 63 (1971), pp. 497-526.

Documents of the Roman Curia
SCCE, Ratio fundamentalis institutionis sacerdotalis, ad normam novi codicis iuris             canonici recognita, Vatican Press, March 1985.
_____, Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and   Formation of the         Candidates      for the Priesthood, Paulines Publications Africa, Nairobi 2009.
SCRSI, Normae Directivae de Institutione in Religiosis Institutis Potissimum Institutioni, 2 Feb. 1990, in AAS 82 (1990), pp. 472- 532.

CONGREGATIO PRO DOCTRINA FIDEI, Epistula a Congregatione pro Doctrina Fidei           missa   ad totius Catholicae Ecclesiae Episcopos aliosque        Ordinarios et   Hiearachas interesse habentes: De delilictus   Gravioribus reservatis, Ad   exsequendam   ecclesiasticam legem, mai 18, 2001,   in AAS 93 (2001), pp. 785-     788.
PONTIFICAL COMMISSION FOR THE AUTHENTIC INTERPRETATION OF THE            CODE             OF CANON LAW, Reply, 29 April 1987, in L’Osservatore                                           Romano, English edition, 28 September 1987.
SCR Decr. Religiorum laicorum 31 mai 1966, AAS 59 [1967], pp. 362-364.
SCRIS Decr. Dum Canonicarum legume, 8 dec. 1970, in AAS 63 (1971), p. 319.

BEAL J. P., CORIDEN J., GREEN T. (eds.), The New Commentary on the Code                         of Canon Law, Theological Publications in India, Bangalore 2004.
CAPARROS E., THERIAUT M., THOREN J. (eds.), Code of Canon                                            Law Annotated, Wislon & LaFleur Limitée, Montréal, 2004.
CORIDEN J. P., GREEN T., and HEINTSCH D. (eds.), The Code of Canon                                Law. A Text and Commentary, Commissioned by the Canon Law Paulist Press,          New York/Mahwah 1985.
FLANNERY A (ed.), Vatican Council II. The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents,   Costello Publishing Company, New York 1979.
FLANNERY A. and COLLINS L. (eds.), Light for my Path. The New Code of                             Canon Law for Religious. Digest. Sources Material. Commentary, Michael               Glazier, inc. & Dominican Publications, Wimington 1983.
MARZOA A., MIRAS J., and RODRIGUEZ-OCAÑA R. (eds.), Exegetical                                 Commentary of on the Code of Canon Law, Prepared under the responsibility of           AZPILCUETA Martin Institute, Faculty of Canon Law, University of      Navarre, vol. II/2, l, Wilson & LaFLeur, Montréal 2004.
PAZHAYAMPALLIL T., A Commentary on the New Code of Canon Law, Kristu                        Jyoti College Publications, Bangalore 1985.
PAZHAYAMPALLIL T., Pastoral Guide. Vol. 3 A Handbook on the Latin and Oriental                          Codes of Canon Law. 3rd Revised edition, Bangalore 2004.
CANON LAW SOCIETY OF AMERICA, Guide to the Implementation of the U.S.                                  Bishop’s Essential Norms for Diocesan/ Eparchial Polices Dealing with                                 Allegations of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Priests or Deacons, CLSA,                                   Washington DC 2003.

Dictionaries and Encyclopediae
DUAGENSIS, Dictionnaire de Droit Canonique, Tome V, Duagensis Collection, Intérêt                          et Usure, Librarie Letouzey et Ané, Paris 1953.
RAHNER Karl, Encyclopedia of Theology. The Concise Sacramentum Mundi, The                                    Seabury Press, New York 1975, p. 32.

Sources from the Augustinians of the Assumption
AUGUSTINIANS OF THE ASSUMPTION, Rule of Life of the Congregation of the         Augustinians of the Assumption, General House, Rome 1984.
______, Rule of Life, Part II: Capitular Rules, General House, Rome 2005.
______, Ratio Institutionis. Formation for Life and Mission. General Chapter of the            Augustinians of the Assumption Rome, May 1-22, 2005, General House, Rome   2005.
______, Statuts de la Province Assomptionniste d`Afrique, Maison Provinciale, Butembo    2005.
______,Documents Assomption n. 31, Maison Généralice, Rome 2006.
            Actes du Colloque d`Histoire de l’Evangélisation du Diocèse de Butembo-Beni.      1906-2006 Bilan et Perspectives, Diocese de Butembo-Beni, Butembo 2007.
_____, Documents Assomption,n. 33, Maison Généralice, Rome 2008. 
 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­_____, Documents Assomption n.35, Maison Généralice, Rome 2010.
______, Norms Applicable in the Congregation of the Augustinians of the Assumption in    Cases   of Sexual Abuse. Procedures to be Followed in the Case of Accusations of      Abuse and the Prevention of Abuse, General House, Rome   2010
______, Directory of religious, General House, Rome 2011.
______,General Chapter of the Augustinians of the   Assumption. Report of the Superior    General, Maison Généralice, Rome 2011.
BECK A., AA, Father Emmanuel d’Alzon: Founder of the Augustinians of the       Assumption, Catholic Truth Society, London 1933.
BERNOVILLE G., Emmanuel d’Alzon. A Champion of the XIX th Century            Catholic Renaissance in France, translated by Claire Quintal & Alexis             Babineau, Bayard,  Paris 2003.
D`ALZON E., « Brouillon de la lettre à l’Abbé Fabre du 23 aout 1834 », in SAGE            Athanase, (éd.), Ecrits Spirituels du Serviteur de Dieu Emmanuel d’Alzon    Fondateur des Augustins de l’Assomption et des Oblates de l`Assomption, Maison            Généralice, Rome 1956, p. 759.
DUFAULT W., AA, The Spiritual Legacy of Emmanuel d’Alzon, Milton,   Massachussetts 1988.
FORTIN R., (ed.), Windows on Assumptionist History,  Bayard,  New York 2002.
______, The Origins of the Assumption Family. Founders and Foundresses,           Foundations, Intuitions, Relations and Disagreement. Acts of the            Inter     Assumption Colloquium Paris, January 6-10, 2004, Bayard Press, Paris 2004.
GUISSARD L., The Assumptionists: From Past to Present, Bayard Publications,   London 2002.
LAMOUREUX R., Facing a New Century With a Passion for God,The General Chapter of the   Augustinians of the Assumption, 2-21 May 1999, General House, Rome 1999.
 _____, Report of the Superior General.  A Look at the Congregation Today. Some             Thoughts Regarding the Future, Roma  2010.
_____, General Chapter of the Augustinians of the Assumption. Report        of the Superior              General House, Rome 2010.
MARECHAL C., The Apostolic Spirit of the Assumption. The Passion for the Kingdom of             God in Today’s World, General Chapter 05-25 March, 1993, General House,           Rome 1993.
NGWESE F.,  Les Sorties de l’Assomption de 1999 à 2010, inédit, Nairobi 2011.
SITONE M., « Mgr Henri-Joseph Pierard et la Prise en Charge de l’Eglise de         Butembo-Beni par les Assomptionnistes (1929-1966) », in Actes du             Colloque d’Histoire     de l’Evangélisation du Diocèse de Butembo-Beni,            1906-   2006. Bilan et Perspectives,    Diocèse de Butembo Beni, Butembo 2007,
            pp. 52-68.
PERIER-MUZET J.-P., L’Assomption : Les Assomptionnistes, les Oblates.             Documentation Recensée et référencée. Série des Cahiers du Bicentenaire de la   Naissance du P. Emmanuel d’Alzon (1810-2010), n. 7, General House, Roma 2009.
______, Petit Manuel Histoire de l’Assomption, Maison Généralice, Rome 2003.
______, Father d’Alzon in His Own Words, General House, Rome 2003.
 RAKOTOARILA M., The Obligation to Sustain Members of he Augustinians of the          Assumption in the Vice-Province of Madagascar According to Canon 670. A            Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Theology in Partial Fulfillment of the         Requirements for the   Degree of Licentiate in Canon Law, CUEA, Nairobi 2007.
RICHARDS R., D’Alzon Fighter For God,  D’Alzon Series, 2, New York 1974

Books
BURKE C., The Lawless people of God. Authority and Freedom in the Church, Four         Courts Press, Dublin 2009.
CHRISTIANI L., Heresies and Heretics, Hawthorn Books Publishers, New York 1959.
CORIDEN J., An Introduction to Canon Law, Paulist Press, New York 1990.
COGAN P., CLSA Advisory Opinions 1984-1993, Canon Law Society of America,           Washington DC 1995.
CONGAR Y., Lay People in the Church. A Study for a Theology of the Laity, Geoffrey     Chapman, London 1985.
D`SOUZA A., Leaders for Today Hope for Tomorrow, Paulines Publications Africa,         Nairobi 2004.
DVORNICK F., The General Councils of the Church, Bruns & Oates, London 1961.
FLANNERY A. P. (ed.), Vatican II: The Conciliar and Post Consiliar Documents,            Dominican Publications, St. Saviour`s, Dublin 1984.
FLANNERY A. (ed.), Vatican II, Most Post Conciliar Documents, Northport, New York             2007.
GUITRANCOURT P., Introduction Sommaire à l’Etude du Droit en Général et du Droit Canonique Contemporain en Particulier, Sirey, Paris 1963.
HUILLIER, The Church of the Ancient Councils. The Disciplinary Mark of the First          Four    Ecumenical Councils, St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, New York 2000.
IHESIABA ELEKWACHI M., An Exegetical Study of Canons 204-207 in the207 in the   Light of Canon 129, Urbaniana Facultas Iuris Canonici, Roma 1988.
AROSLLAV P., The Spirit of Eastern Christendom (600-1700), The University of             Chicago Press, Chicago 1974.
JOLWICZ H. and NICHOLAS B. (eds.), Historical Introduction to the Study of Roman    Law, 3rd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1972.
LONEMA F., Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, Class notes,     CUEA, Nairobi 2010.
MARTY M., A Short History of Christianity, The World Publishing Company,
            New York 1967.
McDERMOTT R., Consecrated Life.  Cases, Commentary, Documents, Readings, Canon             Law Society of America, Alexandria 2006.
BARRY N., An Introduction to Roman Law, Oxford, Clarendon 1962.
OKERE H., The Juridical Status of Baptized Non-Catholics and their Communities in                   Canon             Law, An Analytical Study of the Evolution in Recent Ecclesiological             Context, Pontifica Universitas Urbaniana, Roma 1982.
ORSY L., Theology and Canon Law, New Horizons for Legislation and Interpretation,      The Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota 1992.
SIDNEY E., Twenty Centuries of Church and State. A Survey of their Relations in Past      and Present, The Newman Press, Westminster 1957.
VAN BAVEL, The Basic Inspiration of Religious Life, Augustinian Press, Villanova         1996.
VAN DE WIEL C., History of Canon Law, Peeters Press, Louvain 1983.
WOESTAMN W., Ecclesiastical Sanctions and the Penal Process, 2nd ed., St. Paul            University, Ottawa 2003.
WRENN L., Authentic Interpretations on the 1983 Code, Washington DC 1993

Articles
ARIS J.,“Principios basicos para la reforma del derecho penal canonico,” in Ius      Canonicum 10 (1970), pp. 193-208.
GREEN T., “Sanctions in the Church,” in BEAL J. P., CORIDEN J., GREEN T. (eds.),   The New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, Theological Publications in             India, Bangalore 2004, pp. 1529-1604.
HILL R., “The Troubling Religious,” in Review for Religious, vol. 48, n. 3 (May-June                   1989), pp. 459-463.
HOLLAND S.,“Separation of Members from the Institute [cc.684-704],”  in BEAL J. P.,             CORIDEN J., GREEN T. (eds.), The New Commentary on the Code of Canon      Law, Theological Publications in India, Bangalore 2004, pp. 851- 873.
HUISING P., “Crime and Punishment,” in Concilium 28 (1967), pp. 113-128.
JOMBART E., “Exclaustration,” in NAZ  R. (sous la direction de),  Dictionnaire de Droit            Canonique, Tome V, Duagensis Collection, Intérêt et Usure, Librarie Letouzey et       Ané, Paris 1953, pp. 610-615. 
McDERMOTT R., “Separation of Members from the Institute [cc. 684-704],” in    CORIDEN J. A., GREEN T., HEINTSCHEL, The Code of Canon Law. A Text     and Commentary, Paulist Press, New-York/ Mahwah 1985, pp. 512-524.
McDONOUGH E., “Separation of Members from the Institute: canons 684-709,” in         HITE J., HOLLAND S. and WARD D. (eds.), A Handbook on Canons         573-     746, Collegeville, Liturgical Press, Minnesota 1985, pp. 221-273.
 _____, “Exclaustration: Canonical Categories and Current Practice,” in The           Jurist   49 (1989), pp. 568-606.
MORRISEY F. G., “The Advocacy for the Accused and the Right of Defense,” in           DUGAN P. M. (ed.), Advocacy Vademecum, Wilson & Lafleur, Montréal 2006,
            pp. 3-19.
O’ CONNOR D., “Trends in Canon Law: The Question of Penalties,” in Studia Canonica            3 (1969), pp. 209-237.
_____,What does a Religious Institute owe its Members?” in Review for Religious 43,   n. 4 (July-August 1984), pp. 558-566.
PENNINGTON K., “Innocent Until Proven Guilty: The Origins of Legal Maxim,” in        DUGAN P. (ed.), Penal Process and the Protection of Rights in Canon Law. Proceedings of a Conference held at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross,           Rome, March 25-26, 2004, Wilson and Lafleur, Montréal 2005, pp. 45-56.
QUITEREZ A., “De exclaustratione qualificata,” Commentarium  pro Religiosis   34(1955),
            pp. 374-379.
RAMOS F., “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in MARZOA A., MIRAS J. and           RODRIGUEZ-OCAÑA R. (eds.), Exegetical Commentary of on     the Code of      Canon             Law,    Prepared under the responsibility of  AZPILCUETA Martin       Institute, Faculty of Canon Law, University of Navarre, vol. II/2, l, Wilson &         LaFLeur, Montréal, 2004, pp. 1838-1869.
SABBARESE L., “Esclaustrazione, Uscita E Demissione dei religiosi dall`Istituto,” in      Euntes             Docte. Commentaria Urbaniana Nova Series LXIV, vol. 2, (2011),
             pp. 99-130.
SCICLUNA J., “The Procedure and Praxis of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith             Regarding Graviora Delecta”, in DUGAN P. M. (ed.), The Penal Process and the       Protection of Rights in Canon Law. Proceedings of  a Conference Held at the      Pontifical University of the Holy Cross Rome, March 25-26, 2004, Wilson &         Lafleur Ltée,   Montréal 2005, pp. 235- 243.
SEPER F., “Procedure for Return to the Lay State,” in The Jurist, A Quarterly Review,     31-32   (1971/72), pp. 672-680.
SMITH R., “Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life,” in BEAL     J. P., CORIDEN J., GREEN T. (eds.), The New Commentary on the Code          of         Canon Law, Theological Publications in India, Bangalore 2004, pp. 780- 850.
STRICKLAND A. J., “To Protect and To Serve: the Relationship Between the Victim      Assistance Coordinator and Canonical Personnel,” in Proceedings of the Seventy-     First     Annual Convention. October 12-15, 2009, Louisville, Kentucky, CLSA,   Washington DC 2009, pp. 232-242.
SULLIVAN T. G., “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in M. JOYCE M.,                      DARCEY C., KSLYN R. and SULLIVAN M. (eds.), Procedural             Handbook for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, The Catholic         University of America, Washington DC 2001, pp. 135-166.
VONDENBERGER V., Judicial Processes,” in JOYCE M., DARCEY C.,                        KASLYN R. and SULLIVAN M., Procedural Handbook fore Institutes of      Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, The Catholic University of            America, Washington DC 2001, pp. 213-218.
WILLIAMSON E., “The Notion of Charism in Religious Life,” in Studia Canonica          19(1985), pp. 99-115.

Internet Sources
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2006. © 1993-2005 Microsoft Corporation



[1][212] AUGUSTINIANS OF THE ASSUMPTION, Rule of Life, n. 1.
[2][213] Cf. Ibid., nn. 3, 4, 5, 10 and 20.
[3][214] Cf. Ibid., n. 8.
[4][215] Cf. Ibid., n.11.
[5][216] Cf. C. 618. See also Directives Mutae Relationes, for Mutual Relations Between Bishops and Religious Institutes, 23 April 1978, in A. FLANNERY (ed.), Vatican II, Most Post Conciliar Documents, Northport, New York 2007, p. 241; Cf. F. WASUKUNDI, ORA, interviewed in Nairobi, on 20th February, 2012.
[6][217] Cf. S. HOLLAND, “Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life,” in J. BEAL, et al. (eds.), The New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, p. 871.
[7][218] Cf. Perfectae Caritatis, n. 14.
[8][219] PAULUS VI, Evangelica Testificatio, Apostolic Exhortation on the Renewal of Religious Life, 29 June, 1971, n. 20; Latin text, in AAS 63 (1971), pp. 497-526.
[9][220] Cf. C. BURKE, The Lawless people of God. Authority and Freedom in the Church, Four Courts Press, Dublin 2009, pp. 213-214.
[10][221] R. SOHM (1841-1917) of German nationality was a professor of civil and legal history with special interest in the development and theoretical foundations of Church law. For him, there is no conceivable relation between the church and a system of laws; theology can only point out the incompatibility of the two.
[11][222] Cf. L. ORSY, Theology and Canon Law. New Horizons for Legislation and Interpretation, pp. 183-184.
[12][223] Cf. J. MUMBERE, Interviewed in Butembo, on 20th June, 2011.
[13][224] Cf. Id.
[14][225] A. D’SOUZA, Leaders for Today Hope for Tomorrow, Paulines Publications Africa, Nairobi 2004, p. 20.
[15][226] Cf. C. BURKE, The Lawless People of God. Authority and Freedom in the Church, Four Courts Press, Nairobi 2009, p. 13.
[16][227] Cf. C. BURKE, The Lawless People of God. Authority and Freedom in the Church, p. 110; Cf. T. VAN BAVEL, The Basic Inspiration of Religious Life , Augustinian Press, Villanova 1996, p. 219.
[17][228] Cf. C. BURKE, The Lawless People of God. Authority and Freedom in the Church, p. 22.
[18][229] Cf. c. 1341.
[19][230] Cf. SCCE, Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of the Candidates for the Priesthood, Paulines Publications Africa, Nairobi 2009, nn. 3, 4 and 5.
[20][231] Ibid., n. 4.
[21][232] Cf. CLSGB, Canon Law Abstracts. A Half-yearly Review of Periodical Literature in Canon Law, Liber II, Pars II: De Religiosis, 530 PL II/ 66, 629. W. Allen: Psychiatric inquiries (Reply), January-June, n. 15 (1966), p. 42.
[22][233] Cf. cc. 1051; SCCE, Ratio fundamentalis institutionis sacerdotalis, ad normam novi codicis iuris canonici recognita, Vatican Press, March 1985, n. 39.
[23][234] Cf. SCCE, Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of the Candidates for the Priesthood, nn. 11-12.
[24][235] Cf. KAPITULA Ephraim, Interviewed in Butembo, on July 15th, 2011.
[25][236]R. HILL, “The Troubling Religious,” in Review for Religious, vol. 48, n. 3 (May-June 1989), pp. 459-463.
[26][237] Cf. Fr. V. KAMBERE, interviewed in Butembo, on 05th July, 2012.
[27][238] Cf. T.  G. SULLIVAN, “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in M. JOYCE et al. Procedural Handbook for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, p. 139.
[28][239] D. O’CONNOR,What does a Religious Institute owe its Members?” in Review for Religious 43, n. 4. (July-August 1984), p. 563.
[29][240] Cf. T. G. SULLIVAN, “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in M. JOYCE et al., Procedural Handbook for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, p. 145.
[30][241] Cf.  Ibid.
[31][242] Today, individuals with problems arising from personality disorders, childhood abuse, or substance abuse may experience some difficulty living in community. Often unwittingly, they become disruptive of it. Treatment for substance abuse or counselling for healing from childhood trauma is the preferred solutions (Cf. S. HOLLAND, “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in J. BEAL, et al. (eds.), The New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, p. 856).
[32][243] D. O’CONNOR,What does a Religious Institute owe its Members?” in Review for Religious 43, n. 4. (July-August 1984), p. 562; Cf. M. RAKOTOARILA, The Obligation to Sustain Members of he Augustinians of the Assumption in the Vice-Province of Madagascar According to Canon 670. A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Theology in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Licentiate in Canon Law, CUEA, Nairobi 2007, p. 76.
[33][244] Cf. cc. 672 and 286.
[34][245] Cf. T. G. SULLIVAN, “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in M. JOYCE, et al. (eds.), Procedural Handbook for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, p. 147.
[35][246] Cf. R. McDERMOTT, Consecrated Life. Cases, Commentary, Documents, Readings, Canon Law Society of America, Alexandria 2006, p. 207.
[36][247] According to c. 1314, a penalty is ferendae sententiae, when it binds the guilty party until after it has been imposed; however, a penalty is latae sententiae if it is incurred ipso facto when the delict is committed.
[37][248] Cf. R. McDERMOTT, Consecrated Life. Cases, Commentary, Documents, Readings, Canon Law Society of America, Alexandria 2006, p. 207.
[38][249] AUGUSTINIANS OF THE ASSUMPTION, Rule of Life, n. 161.
[39][250] J. CORIDEN, An Introduction to Canon Law, Paulist Press, New York 1990, p. 195.
[40][251] Cf. L. WRENN, “Processes,” in J. BEAL, et al. (eds.), The New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, p. 1564.
[41][252] Cf. Idem
[42][253] Cf. E. McDONOUGH, “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in J. HITE, et al. (eds.), Handbook on Canons 573-746, p. 262.
[43][254] S. HOLLAND., “Separation of Members from the Institute,” in J. BEAL, et al. (eds.), The New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, p. 872.
[44][255] J. CORIDEN, An Introduction to Canon Law, p. 173.