Folia Canonica 5. (2002)
STUDIES - Jobe Abbass: Alienating Ecclesiastical Goods in the Eastern Catholic Churches
ALIENATING IN THE EASTERN CATHOLIC CHURCHES 139 members of the study group entrusted with the revision of the Eastern norms governing temporal goods were keenly aware of this need and thoroughly reworked PAL canons 281-282 with a view to applying the principle of subsidiarity fully in the case of alienation within the territories of the patriarchal Churches. The Praenotanda to the 1981 proposed schema of norms on temporal goods in the Church stated: Those things which the principle of “subsidiarity”, as it is called, seems to require (cf. Nuntia 3 pp. 6-7) as well as those things which were established by Vatican Council II regarding the authority of the Patriarchs and their Synods in the Decree “Orientalium Ecclesiarum” n.9, led the Consultors of the Commission to review thoroughly PA canons 281 and 282. Therefore, these canons (nn. 107 and 108 in the schema) were drafted so that in the Patriarchal Churches the permission of the Apostolic See is never to be required regarding the alienation of ecclesiastical goods, since the superior authority is attributed to the Synods of Bishops of the same Churches in effectively watching over the temporal goods of these Churches.44 As a result, within the territories of the patriarchal Churches, CCEO canons 1036-1037 recognize the patriarch with the consent either of the permanent synod or the synod of bishops to be the superior authority for all alienations which exceed the maximum amount established by the same synod. The consent of the Roman See is never required in these cases. CCEO canon 1036 §2 deals first with the alienation of goods whose value exceeds the defined maximum sum, but not by double. Then, CCEO canon 1036 §3 establishes the norms for alienation of goods whose value exceeds twice the established maximum amount as well as all alienations, regardless of value, involving precious goods or goods donated to the Church by reason of a vow. 1036§2 (Value Exceeds Maximum, but not by Double). Regarding the alienation of goods whose value exceeds the maximum amount set by the synod of bishops, but not twice that amount, CCEO canon 1036 §2, like §1 of the same canon, foresees three cases and establishes which consents are called for in each one. 1036 §2, 1 (Goods of an Eparchy). If the alienation concerns goods of an eparchy within the territory of a patriarchal Church, then consent is required of the patriarch and his permanent synod, unless the particular law of the same Church determines otherwise. Regarding the example given above (c. 1036 §1, 1), in the alienation of an eparchial bishop’s residence whose value exceeds the defined maximum sum, but not by double, then the consent of the patriarch and his permanent synod are required. Because the norm only refers to their consent, are the consents of the relevant bishop, finance council and college of eparchial 44Nuntia 13 (1981) 9.
