The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1900-04-14
CONSIDERATIONS ON CANON
LAW.

To the Bishops conscience is left the
rejection of the candidate who may
have appeared to the Synodal Examin-
ers by far the most worthy, if the
Bishop from the watchtower from
| which he sees the diocese had discOv-
| cred in him serious wrong doing which
may be entirely unknown to them. As.
however. this candidate for the par
ish has right to appeal from the
Bishops decision, the Bishop must
fortffy himself with evidence Of the
supposed wrong doing. which he must
be- ready to present to the Holy See,
to- which recourse is provided by the
Council of Trent, which allowed in
extraordinary cases such extra judi
ciaI power, where it was incumbent to
prvent wolves from entering the fold in
sleeps clothing Without this suffi-
cient evidence the Holy See would
follow the law Of equity and reverse
the illegal rejection
a special provision is also made in
favor of a candidate who, because OF
his holding a high position in the do
cese, or because Of prolonged work for
the welfare of the Church, is recog-
nized to have given ample proof Of his
learning, the Bishop, after obtaining
the opinion Of the Synodal Examiners,
may exempt such candidate from
this examination.
In Germany and in other countries a.
custom was introduced of basing the
Judgment with regard to leaning upon
a general examination Of the clergy for
any vacancies Of parishes which might
occur within six years from the time Of
the examination, then as q vacancy oc-
Cured the SynodaI Examiners should
pass Judgment on the other requisites
in the candidates for the parish for
which they may make application.
The Holy See has granted the privi-
1ege Of following this custom to any OF
the dioceses in the United States where
because Of the extent of the diocese or.
the great distances to be Travelled. or
for any other serious Inconvenience. it
should become a hardship to have this
examination each time there was a va
cancy to be filled.
1t has not come to our knowledge
that any diocese has as yet awaited it,
self of this privilege. After the six
years. another examination would be
necessary before an removable rec
torship could be bestowed.
The special privilege that follows the
bestOWal Of an irremOvable rectorship
is not that the rector cannot be re-
moved at all, but that for the removal
there must be a cause fixed by the
canons, and proven by the regular. pro-
cedure Of law. To the causes laid
down for the removal Of parish priests
BY the older canons, there are added
by the third Council Of Baltimore sew
eral others which are recognized to
seriously endanger, especially in this
country, the weIfare of the Church.
Such are an unreasonable and serious
infraction of important regulations
made for the temporal administration
Of the mission or for the relief of the
diocesan burdens: a persistent re-
fusal after repeated warnings to main
tain Catholic schools or to establish
them where the mature judgment Of
the Ordinary requires it; the rash bur-
dening a parish with debt. even after
warning and against the Bishops con-
sent, and a clear, unreasonable refusal
to meet the debts already incurred: as
also a combination with the lay trus-
tees for a Justification of the Churchs
Indebtedness and again Justification
of the annual report Of the temporal
or spiritual state Of the parish such as
to seriously mislead the Bishop and
cause serious harm to the parish:
finally a persistent ill-repute affecting
the priestly character to the serious
injury Of souls.
In case the irremovable rector. with
out fault of his. should become or be
found to be VIGOROUSLY and permanent
" incapable Of managing the mission.
he should be led to resign of his own
accord the rectorship. If this were
found impracticable, an administrator
should be appointed. If the revenues
Of the mission should not permit the
extra expense that this appointment Of
an administrator might entail the
rector may then against his will be
removed, but such provision must be
made for his maintenance as viii be
found suitable in the opinion of the
diocesan consultors; however, the title
Of Rector Emeritus" will be secured
to him. AS the salvation Of the people
is the supreme law which govern the
Church, there is provided a remedy
that all must recognize as not unrea-
sonable. The proverb that one must
suffer-. even die. for the welfare of the
people. is true, though it may at times
seem to entail hardshipon an individ-
ual. Yet this rule should never be al
lowed to cover injustice. At times there
arises among a people am unreasOning
dislike and even hatred for a pastor,
whose ministrations become so dis
tasteful that souls are in clear danger
of perishing if he is not removed. This
may occur even from some good work
and zeal displayed by the pastor; the
opposition may be founded on error
As long as there is a chance by proper
explanation of doing away with such
opposition, every reasonable means
must be used; but where it has become
useless, the removal is lawful. Yet it
must be so carried out as to save the
honor Of the removed pastor. There is
no doubt that in the case Of the ir-
removable rector. all this must be
shown clearly through the canonical
procedure prescribed by the third ple-
nary Council of Baltimore, under guild
ance of the Holy See.
A FRIEND OF LAW.
THREE VIEWS OF WEARING OF
THE GREEN