Folia Canonica 5. (2002)

STUDIES - Jobe Abbass: Alienating Ecclesiastical Goods in the Eastern Catholic Churches

136

JOBE ABBASS

Thirdly, although in the former Eastern legislation {PAL cc. 281-282) minimum and maximum amounts were set in terms of the price of goods, CCEO canons 1036-1037 refer to the same amounts established in relation to the value of the goods to be alienated. Since this value, in turn, will determine whose consent or counsel will ultimately be required for the alienation, the expert appraisals {CCEO c. 1035 § 1, 2) become all the more important. However, if the proposed alienation concerns precious goods or goods given to the Church by reason of a vow, regardless of the value, the consent of the patriarch and synod of bishops is required in the patriarchal Churches {CCEO cc. 1036 §3 and 1037, 3), while the consent of the Holy See is required in all other cases {CCEO c. 1036 §4).

Fourthly, CCEO canon 1036 effectively establishes that the Roman See is to set the minimum and maximum amounts regarding alienations outside the territorial boundaries of the patriarchal Churches and in the metropolitan as well as the other Eastern Catholic Churches sui iuris (§ 1 ). In addition, if the value of the proposed alienation in these cases exceeds the defined maximum amount, the consent of the same Holy See is needed for validity (§4). Which dicastery of the Roman Curia is intended in these cases? In the Latin Church, it is the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life for alienations in those institutes {PB 108) and the Congregation for the Clergy in all other cases {PB 98).36 However, in the Eastern Catholic Churches, the Congregation for the Eastern Churches is the competent dicastery. PB 58 § 1 states: “The competence of this Congregation extends to all matters which are proper to the Eastern Churches and which are to be referred to the Apostolic See...” Even though the Congregation’s competence is not as broad as it was in the previous legislation,37 the matter of alienation of ecclesiastical goods of the Eastern Churches clearly comes within the scope of PB 58 §1.38 Besides, the Eastern

goods given by a vow that must be alienated outside the territory of the patriarchal Church, the authorization has to be given by the same Holy See (§4).”

36Compare, however, Kennedy, Temporal Goods (nt. 4), 1499, footnote 153. The author states: “When the Holy See is involved, the competent congregations are CICLSAL for institutes of consecrated life and societies of apostolic life, and CFC for all others {PB 108, 98)”

37 Article 45 §1 of Regimini Ecclesiae Universae [cf. AAS 59 (1967) 900] stated: “The (Eastern) Congregation enjoys all the faculties which the other Congregations have in relation to the Churches of the Latin rite, remitting however to the other Dicasteries matters concerning them, and with the exception always by law of the Apostolic Penitentiary.”

38 For more detail, see: J. Abbass, Pastor bonus and the Eastern Catholic Churches, in Orientalia Christiana Periodica 60 (1994) 602-607, especially at 606. See also: M. Brogi, La Congregazione per le Chiese Orientali, in P.-A. BONNET — C. Gullo (eds.), La Curia Romana nella Cost. Ap. "Pastor Bonus" (Studi Giuridici 21), Vatican City 1990, 254.