Folia Canonica 5. (2002)
STUDIES - W. Becket Soule: Hermits in Current Eastern Catholic Legislation; CCEO cc. 481-485
158 W. BECKET SOULE canon does not specify that the superior in question must be the superior of the monastery sui iuris; the superior to whom the hermit is subject, at least with regard to the routine supervision of life and activity, could thus be someone other than the superior of the monastery of which he is a member. If another monastery sui iuris were chosen as the place for the hermit to live, particularly if that monastery had better facilities for the eremitical life, the canons on transfer of monks would not necessarily have to be invoked. In such a case, however, the relationship of the hermit to both the superior of his own monastery and the superior of the monastery within whose territory he is living should be carefully and clearly detennined before he begins to pursue the eremitical life. If the place determined as suitable for the hermitage is outside of the monastery’s precincts, even though it may be owned by the monastery, in addition to the designation of the place by the monastic superior, the written consent of the bishop of the territory is also needed, since the hermit will be pursuing the eremitical life within the eparchial territory. V. The Connections of a Hermit with the Monastery Can. 484 - Eremita a Superiore monasterii dependet atque canonibus de monachis et typico monasterii obligatur, quatenus cum vita eremitica componi possunt. Can. 484 - The hermit depends on the superior of the monastery and is bound by the canons on monks and the typicon of the monastery, insofar as they can be reconciled with the eremitical life. The juridical status of the hermit does not change, inasmuch as the hermit remains a monk and is bound by the three religious vows. The hermit also remains a member of the monastery, and is thus bound by the common law on religious and the typicon of his monastery, to which he owes obedience just as any other monk. But all of the law cannot be applied integrally to the hermit, since this chosen way of life is special; nor is the hermit obligated by all of the dispositions of the typicon, since these for the most part concern the normal (cenobitic) life of the monk and the monastery. The monk whom the law permits to live as a hermit must live according to the requirements of that life; the present canon states that the hermit is not bound to observe the provisions of the common law, nor of the typicon, which cannot be followed without damage to the life undertaken. The essential element, dependence on the superior of the monastery, remains as before, however, and the hermit himself remains a member of the monastery.28 The Synod of Lebanon (Maronite - 1736) provided that hermits should still participate in some communal practices, depending on certain circumstances. 28 Cf. Postquam Apostolicis, c. 4; C. PUJOL, De Religiosis Orientalibus ad normam vigentis iuris, Rome 1957, 30 n. 30.
