Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  religious Superior
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
PL
The main purpose of the present submission relates to the matter of the postulation regulated by the legal disposition expressed in canons 180 e 181 CIC/83. The main emphasis is not placed on the correct application of the canon law, in the case concerning the dispensation granted to who is ineligible to the canonical office or other assignment.Instead, the Author tries to highlight the meaning and importance that must be given to the discernment undertaken by the collegial Authority in the case of election. The article presents the certain conditions required from the candidate and, at the same time, supplies these criteria, which usually are considered by the Congregation of Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life in the matter of admission of the postulation.
Prawo Kanoniczne
|
2016
|
vol. 59
|
issue 2
23-39
PL
Głównym zamierzeniem niniejszego elaboratu było poszukiwanie odpowiedzi na pytanie o doktrynalne i praktyczne zastosowanie prawa zakonnika (ius cum supremo Mderatore comunicandi), względem którego właściwy przełożony rozpoczął postępowanie wydające. W celu właściwego określenia prawnego charakteru postępowania, autor odwołał się do narzędzi procesowych jak apelacja czy przejęcie przez władzę wyższą kompetencji instancji niższej (avocare), jak również przywołał normę ogólną wyrażoną przez kan. 139 KPK/1983. Przytoczone rozwiązania, w świetle rozważanej ustawy nie przyniosły jednak wystarczającej i pełnej odpowiedzi na postawiony problem. W zakończeniu autor proponuje, by najwyższy przełożony określił dekretem brak kompetencji przełożonego wyższego in loco, ustanawiając – jeśli to konieczne – inny podmiot do uzupełnienia dochodzenia. 
EN
The paper proposes the constructive reflection on the possible procedural configuration inherent in the proceedings of dismissal, in particular consideration of the hypothesis exposed in the can. 698. The Legislator assures to the accused religious the right to communicate and to offer his proper defenses directly to the supreme Moderator of the Institute. The Author tries to indicate the competent religious Authorities in order to receive the legal claim from the religious, accused for having committed crimes or illegal acts specified in the can. 695 and can. 696. Using the legal instruments like appeal and call to the proper jurisdiction – foreseen in the Code of canon law - helped to verify whether and how the exercise of the right to communicate with the supreme Moderator may be equivalent to the mentioned procedural instruments. Unfortunately, the conclusions we reached do not allow assigning any nomen iuris to the hypothesis in which the demand submitted by the accused religious could be accept by the highest Authority of his proper Institute. Eventually, the Author proposed the possible solution of the specified doctrinal problem. It is likely that the supreme Moderator, having determined his exclusive competence in order to lead the entire case and having communicated it to the Superior in loco, could have a burden to supplement the evidences and finalize the cause. It was also considered inopportune or inadvisable to accept the demand forwarded by the religious simultaneously with the notification of the arguments against him. It can’t be excluded another hypothesis according to which the same supreme Moderator will end the dispute using the extra canonical solutions.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.