Yet more on removing bishops
By Domenico Bettinelli, Jr. (articles ) | May 08, 2003 11:33 AM
Cheshire, a canonist friend sent this along as well:
Dom, basically, the more likely possibility would be that Rome appoint a co-adjutor or apostolic administrator, and give him full administrative power. This would then have the effect of making the diocese more or less ungovernable for the bishop who refused to leave. If the new guy is able to politically assert himself, he gets to stay; if not, Rome eventually accepts the resignations of both when the clergy and laity rebel, then appoints a third individual. This is more or less what happened in the Toronto Ukrainian Catholic Eparchy a few years ago.
... This is not a scenario the Code envisions for the most part, since the assumption is that this would play out between the Roman Pontiff and the Bishop in question. Thus Chesire's comments are more or less implicit in canons 16, 17, 333, and 334.
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach five million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our final 2013 goal ($26,829 to go, assuming receipt of matching funds):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!