Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Biuletyn Stowarzyszenia Absolwentów i Przyjaciół Wydziału Prawa Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego

Vol. 14 No. 16 (1) (2019)

Articles

The Penalty of Lifelong Prayer and Penance According to Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela and the Essential Norms

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32084/sawp.2019.14.1-13  [Google Scholar]
Published: 2019-06-30

Abstract

The article deals with a penalty which is applied in cases of clerics molesting minors in the context of two major regulatory documents: motu proprio Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela by John Paul II and the Essential Norms of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. The first section provides an analysis of the modern understanding of the penalty. Due to the 2002 scandal involving sex abuse of minors perpetrated by Catholic priests in the USA, it became obvious that this issue needs to be addressed urgently. The author focuses his attention on the penalty that is applied when it is not possible to dismiss a cleric from the clerical state. Selected legal documents are examined, starting with the 1917 Code of Canon Law until the present time. The second section provides an analysis of the structure of the penalty, in particular with respect to can. 384 and can. 1350 § 1-2 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. The third section provides comments and some examples of the practical application of the penalty within the context of the Church in the United States of America.

References

  1. Alesandro, John, and Alan Placa. 1996. “Church Agents and Employees: Legal and Canonical Issues.” Canon Law Society of America Proceedings 58:35-82. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bassett, William, and Patrick Shea. 1999. Legal Liability of Ecclesiastical Organizations for Personal Injuries Caused by Inactive Clergy. Washington: DC CLSA. [Google Scholar]
  3. Beal, John P. 1992. “Doing What One Can: Canon Law and Clerical Sexual Misconduct.” The Jurist 52:642-83. [Google Scholar]
  4. Beal, John P. 1993. “Administrative Leave: Canon 1722 Revisited.” Studia Canonica 27:293-320. [Google Scholar]
  5. Boccafola, Kenneth E. 2005. “The Special Penal Norms of the United States and Their Application.” In The Penal Process and the Protection of Rights in Canon Law, ed. Patricia M. Dugan, 257-85. Montreal: Wilson & Lafleur. [Google Scholar]
  6. Donlon, James I. 2004. “Remuneration, Decent Support and Clerics Removed from the Ministry of the Church.” Canon Law Society of America Proceedings 66:93-113. [Google Scholar]
  7. Edlund, Mary. 2004. “The Use of the ‘Leave of Absence’ to Address Non Criminal Sexual Misconduct by Priests.” JCL Thesis, the Catholic University of America. [Google Scholar]
  8. Green, Thomas J. 2000. “Introduction to Book VI.” In New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, ed. John P. Beal, James A. Coriden, and Thomas J. Green, 1564. Paulist Press: New York, NY, Mahwah, NJ. [Google Scholar]
  9. McKenna, Kevin E. 2011. “The Holy See and Protection of US Clergy Rights: A Historical Perspective.” Canon Law Society of America Proceedings 73:162- 76. [Google Scholar]
  10. Morrissey, Francis G. 1992. “Procedure to be Applied in Cases of Alleged Sexual Misconduct by a Priest.” Studia Canonica 26:39-73. [Google Scholar]
  11. Orsy, Ladislas. 2003. “Bishop’s Norms: Commentary and Evaluation.” Boston College Law Review 44, no. 4/5: 999-1030. [Google Scholar]
  12. Scicluna, Charles. 2004. “Sexual Abuse of Children and Young People by Catholic Priests and Religious.” Canon Law Society of Great Britain & Ireland Newsletter 139:12-19. [Google Scholar]
  13. Scicluna, Charles. 2013. “Response to and Prevention of Clerical Sexual Misconduct: Current Praxis.” Canon Law Society of America Proceedings 75:15-27. [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.