Folia Canonica 5. (2002)
STUDIES - Jobe Abbass: Alienating Ecclesiastical Goods in the Eastern Catholic Churches
ALIENATING IN THE EASTERN CATHOLIC CHURCHES 145 college of eparchial consultors. However, regarding the required consent of the college of eparchial consultors in relation to the patriarch, CCEO canon 271 §6 states: Whenever the law establishes that the eparchial bishop needs the consent of the college ofeparchial consultors, it is sufficientfor the patriarch, in the matters of the eparchy that he himself governs, that he consult this college. Therefore, rather than seeking the consent of both his finance council and college of eparchial consultors, as the model in CCEO canon 1036 §1,1 prescribes, the patriarch must seek the counsel of his college of eparchial consultors and obtain the consent of his finance council before alienating the ecclesiastical goods of his eparchy in this case.55 1037, 2 (Value Exceeds Maximum, but not by Double). If the alienation involves goods either of the patriarchal Church or the patriarch’s eparchy and the value of these goods exceeds the defined maximum sum, but not by double, then the patriarch needs the consent of his permanent synod to alienate the goods validly. 1037, 3 (Value Exceeds Maximum by Double). If the alienation concerns goods either of the patriarchal Church or the patriarch’s eparchy and their value exceeds twice the maximum sum56 established by the synod of bishops, then the patriarch requires the consent of the synod of bishops for the validity of the transaction. The patriarch needs the same consent if the alienation regards precious goods or goods given to the Church by reason of a vow. Regarding the alienation of precious images and icons belonging to the patriarchal Church or the patriarch’s eparchy, CCEO canon 887 §2 also calls for the written consent of the hierarch who exercises authority over the church where those precious objects are located. 55Compare, however, Mitrofan, Les biens de l’église (nt. 4), 441. Regarding CCEO c. 1037, 1, the author states: “The patriarch must: a) seek the advice of the permanent synod if the value of the good falls within the minimum and maximum amount set by the synod of bishops of the patriarchal Church and if it concerns goods of the said patriarchal Church; but if the goods belong to the eparchy of the patriarch the norms foreseen for the first case mentioned above (CCEO c. 1036 §1,1) will be followed.” Also: Coppola, Beni temporali (nt. 4) 866. The author’s commentary to CCEO canon 1037 reads: ’’The canon refers to the temporal goods of the patriarchal Church qua talis and of the patriarchal eparchy. It is obvious that, in the case of alienation, the patriarch acts strictly personally but, in relation to their value, he must decide the questions with the competent bodies on the basis of the model of values specified in c. 1036 and depending on if it concerns goods of the eparchy or of the patriarchate.” 56 Although CCEO c. 1037, 3 does not specify that ’’double the same sum” (eandem summam duplo) means double the maximum sum, that is its intention within the context of the canon.
