Folia Theologica et Canonica, Supplementum (2016)
Péter Artner, Preventive Disciplinary Measures Before the Application of a Penalty
46 PETER ARTNER gical therapy. If the therapy is successful, the priest can go back to active ministry.” Furthermore the ordinary may use singular decrees instead of penal process. He can remove someone from an office instead of depriving him from the same. The result is the same: the person to be punished will not possess the office any more, but the ordinary does not have to bring the case under penal, even administrative trial. Removal from an office can be a mere administrative act, can be a disciplinary act and can be carried out as a punishment. Either way is used, the reason behind is the same: repairing scandal, restoring justice and reforming the offender. It has to be always made clear that the action carried out by the ordinary was merely administrative, disciplinary or punitive.23 24 We cannot speak about the success of the preventive methods when the offender doesn’t want to reform himself or to repair the harmed justice, and he/she persists in causing scandal. But if the aim of the penalty can be achieved by these preventive methods, the ordinary has to disregard the application of the real penalties.25 In fact, the disregard of the application of the penalties depends on the behavior of the offender. If he is not malicious, a warning, a reprove, a penance or a precept to which a penalty is attached can cause his reform. The ordinary has to take into consideration at the time of the use of these measures if these measures really do resolve the problem and reach the goals of a punishment, or they just postpone the truly necessary steps and hinder the solution of it. V. The possibility of judicial or administrative procedure After all of these possibilities, if there is no success, the ordinary has to start either the judicial or the administrative procedure for the imposition or the declaration of the penalty. The normal way for the application of the penalty is the juridical penal process, but if it is not prohibited by the law, he may choose the easier extra-judicial (administrative) process. The juridical one is longer, but helps to reveal the facts and circumstances in a better way and can lead to moral certitude in a more complex way to make the best decision. It is forbidden to impose perpetual penalties by administrative process i.e. by form of a decree. At any stage of the process, according to c. 1722, to prevent scandals, to protect the freedom of witnesses, and to guard the course of justice, the ordinary, 23 Lagges, P. R., The Use of Canon 1044, § 2, 2° in the Removal of Parish Priests, in Studia Canonica 30(1996) 64. 24 Lüdicke, K. (Hrsg.), Münsterischer Kommentár zum Codex luris Canonici, Essen 1985kk. Can. 1341/3 (Lüdicke, K.). 25 De Paolis, V., Irregolarità e sanzioni penali, in Periodica 88 (1999) 705.
