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.
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]
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
Cf. Fr. V. KAMBERE,
interviewed in Butembo, on 05th July, 2012.
