NO, DIANA. A PARISH IS NOT A DIOCESE!

DianaJanuary 8, 2018 at 9:07 AM
Dear Anonymous at 11:32 pm, 


Could you create a username for yourself? Alexander Chen listed 4 things in his comment, but Tim Rohr only chose to address the first two. The evidence he used to support his claim was the March 7, 2012 Apostolic Delegate letter to Archbishop Apuron. The letter listed Canon Law 537. Unfortunately for the Apostolic Delegate, his advice to Archbishop Apuron went against the Canon Law he cited. 


According to Canon Law Made Easy: 


"The Code of Canon Law (537) mandates Parish Finance Councils in each parish. The role of the Parish Finance Council is to assist and advise the Pastor in overseeing and controlling the financial affairs of the parish, including any schools. The Parish Finance Council is accountable to the pastor who has the responsibility for final decisions. If the advice of the Parish Finance Council is unanimous on a given matter, the pastor will give serious consideration to the recommendation."


http://www.sjeparish.net/forms/financecouncilguidelines.pdf


The Archbishop does indeed have the final decision on the Parish Finance Council. And if there is a unanimous vote in the Parish Finance Council, the Archbishop will give it serious consideration to their recommendation. And that is all their unanimous vote means......a recommendation. The Archbishop makes the final decision. He can choose not to follow the Parish Finance Council. 


Furthermore, the Canon Law is much higher than the letter of the Apostolic Delegate cited by Tim Rohr.

Sigh.

Poor Diana does not even know the difference between a parish and a diocese:

DIANA: "The Archbishop does indeed have the final decision on the Parish Finance Council."

Ummm, no. The Archbishop does NOT even preside over the Parish Finance Council. The PASTOR does! That's why it's called a PARISH finance council and NOT a DIOCESAN finance council! SMH. 

Per Can. 537, the only involvement of the diocesan bishop in the operation of the parish finance council is to issue "norms" and is only to "assist the pastor in the administration of the goods of the parish:"

"In each parish there is to be a finance council which is governed, in addition to universal law, by norms issued by the diocesan bishop and in which the Christian faithful, selected according to these same norms, are to assist the pastor in the administration of the goods of the parish..."

By contrast the DIOCESAN finance council is very different in that the bishop needs the consent of the finance council to "alienate the good of the diocese:"

Can. 1292 §1. ...when the value of the goods whose alienation is proposed falls within the minimum and maximum amounts to be defined by the conference of bishops for its own region, the competent authority is determined by the statutes of juridic persons if they are not subject to the diocesan bishop; otherwise, the competent authority is the diocesan bishop with the consent of the finance council, the college of consultors, and those concerned. The diocesan bishop himself also needs their consent to alienate the goods of the diocese.

Also note the following clarification from ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS REGARDING THE COLLABORATION OF THE NON-ORDAINED:

Art. 5. § 2. Diocesan and parochial Pastoral Councils and Parochial Finance Councils, of which non-ordained faithful are members, enjoy a consultative vote only and cannot in any way become deliberative structures. Only those faithful who possess the qualities prescribed by the canonical norms may be elected to such responsibilities.

Notice the particular council this section leaves out. 

It states that Diocesan and parochial Pastoral Councils and Parochial Finance Councils enjoy a consultative voye and cannot in any way become deliberative structures. Notice that DIOCESAN FINANCE COUNCILS  are not mentioned because in fact DIOCESAN finance councils DO in fact enjoy a deliberative vote in certain cases such as that which is denoted in Can. 1292. 

Dear Diana. You are right to keep your pseudonym. I'd do the same if I was that ignorant.