This article refers to the legislation of the Church, in particular, to the Code of Canon Law, promulgated in 1983 by John Paul II.
The connotation of the term "commissioner"
The term "commissioner" in the current language in Brazil usually refers to a police authority, but also has other uses, such as in the expression "flight attendant", that is, who provides service to passengers during a flight.
In history, the term has unpleasant resonances, whether in the "commissioners" of the "Committee of Salut Publique" in the French Revolution, enforcers of the "law of suspects", condemning without trial; or in the "commissioners of the people" of the Russian Communist Revolution, executors of forced migrationof crowds to Siberia; or in the "political commissioners" of the Spanish Republic in the 1936 war, which easily and promptly sent those who disagreed with them to the terrible "Czechs", where the person was tortured to death without trial!
Already in the juridical-canonical language – that is, the legal language of the Church – the term "commissioner" has another meaning today.
What is a "commissariat" in church law currently
Appointing a "commissioner" (in the legal language of the Church, in our day) is to suspend one person from his ability to rule and put another in his place.
In the common language of Brazil can be assimilated to the official called "intervenor", the person appointed by the central power to replace a governor, a mayor or other authority, due to a serious deviation of conduct.
Thus, we can say that the current notion of "commissioner" in the language of the Church corresponds to the concept that the average Brazilian has to "intervene", in the civil world.
Difference between public and private entities
But what the federal government can do (and may even have an obligation to do so in certain cases), that is, appointing an "intervenor" in relation to public officials (such as governor, mayor or others), cannot be done in relation to the manager of a factory, say, soaps, privately owned. That is, appoint ing an "intervenor" for this private company.
The Aguiar brothers' "Soaps Clean Well" factory, for example, originated on the free initiative of one or more people, and is governed according to the statutes of the Civil Society created in the foundational act. The factory is a private entity because born of the free agreement of individuals.
Government bodies (national, state, municipal) are public entities because they are created by the legitimately established government.
Public entities arise at the initiative and will of the government; private entities, on the initiative and will of individuals.
It is therefore understood the fundamental difference between a public entity and a private entity. The former come on the initiative and will of the government; seconds, on the initiative and will of individuals. The former, the public, may be the subject of intervention by the public authority; seconds, the private ones, no. They may be dissolved, closed, etc., no, however, "intervened".
In Brazil, as in any country in the world, there is a huge variety of public entities (at the federal, state and municipal level) and another immense abundance of private entities (trade societies, sports associations, etc.).
Public entities and private entities in the Church
Similarly, in the Church there are several groups with different purposes and characteristics; even much more different than those between a town hall (public entity) and a sports club (private).
In addition to the bodies of government of the Church (dioceses, with their bishops, their Councils of Consultants and Presbyteries, episcopal conferences, parishes, etc.), there are societies called "public", as are all religious institutes (Jesuits, sisters of charity, Franciscans, Clarissas, Carmelites, Salesians, etc.), and some "public associations" of clerics or faithful. All these "public" entities can be "commissariat" by the authority on which they depend. If they are diocesan in nature, by the bishop of the place; are internationalin nature, by the Holy See.
But there are also "private associations of the faithful", born of the free agreement between some Catholics who wish to help themselves to seek holiness, proper and others, by the practice of acts of charity, piety, formation, etc.
Does the Church have any power over these "private associations of the faithful"?
The duty of the Church authorities to ensure morality and good doctrine, both individuals and public and private entities
On all persons, such as all existing entities in the Church, whether public or private, pastors must at the same time play a role of stimulus and vigilance, with regard to the practice of morals, the dissemination of doctrines in accordance with the church teaching and obedience to ecclesiastical discipline. Which is usually summarized in the Latin phrase "fide et moribus", watch over faith and morals, both individual and when grouped into entities, whether public or private.
Pastors play, in the Church, a role of encouragement and vigilance in matters of morals, doctrine and ecclesiastical discipline
For example, if in a diocesan seminary (public entity of the Church) there are often cases contrary to morals, the diocesan bishop and even the Holy See have an obligation to intervene, even "commissado" this seminary. In recent history, several cases like this have been recorded. The same is said whether in a seminary practices contrary to the Faith are taught, what it would be like to promote not the liturgy, the Divine Office or the recitation of the third (all this is established by Canon law), but ceremonies of umbanda, macumba or other types of syncretism. Ecclesiastical authority would have an obligation to "commisariar" who promotes such acts contrary to the Catholic Faith and sacred liturgy.
If a religious institute (public) is the cause of internal moral scandals, or promotes teachings contrary to church doctrine (e.g., members who leave the institute to join the guerrilla skirtion, or who teach in favor of abortion, euthanasia or infanticide), the Holy See can "commissariat" this institute, temporarily replacing its superiors with other Vatican appointees. And even in certain cases it must do so, for the good of souls.
For the good of souls, their eternal salvation and lead them to Heaven, is called the supreme law of the Church: "the salvation of souls in the Church must always be the supreme law" (cf. CIC, c. 1752). Take people out of the clutches of sin and the devil, and to unite them ever and more to Christ our Redeemer, to his Most Holy Mother, that they may be with Them for all eternity!
In relation to public entities, sometimes the good of souls requires such loved ones to be "commissariat".
What about private ones?
The vigilance that the authority of the Church must have on the doctrine and morality of private associations
With private associations pastors should encourage their training at the initiative of the faithful, to approve those who show impeccable moral conduct of their members, of teachings in accordance with Catholic doctrine, of promotion among the faithful of practices of piety, whether by assistance to Mass, frequency to the sacraments, catechesis, regularization of marital situations, etc., or by legitimate private devotions, such as the third, the novenas, the worship of the Blessed Sacrament, etc.
If an association promoted participation, not in novenas and liturgical acts, but in interfaith ceremonies such as candomblé, the authority of the Church should take action. And in the case of a public association, perhaps "to commend it"; if it were a private association, and it was not possible to "commend" and if there was some just, serious and proven cause, it could deny legal-canonical recognition. Or even declare that she, as an association, is no longer recognized by the Church.
The Heralds of the Gospel are a private association of lay people
The Heralds of the Gospel were born, grew, and developed as a group of lay faithful desirous of "actively participating in the communion and mission of the Church" as lay people, assisting acts of worship, promoting private devotions, editing and spreading Books of Christian formation, helping parish priests in evangelization, Catholics in their family life, attracting those who are not baptized to the faith, returning those who have moved away from ecclesial practice to their reintegration into their parish, etc.
The Heralds of the Gospel were born, grew, and developed as a group of lay faithful, committed to promoting "intimate unity between practical life and faith"
This has become public and notorious in Brazil as in the numerous countries where there are heralds committed to promoting "the intimate unity between practical life and faith", as stated in its stated purpose in the Statutes (cf. art. 2).
The Heralds' "religious family"
From within the Heralds (as is so often the case with the foundations originated by a very comprehensive charism) people emerged who wanted to lead a "more radical" life, with the evangelical radicality of an integral dedication, in poverty, in chastity, in Obedience. They thus constituted two public associations in the Church: the "Virgo Flos Carmeli Clerical Society", and the "Regina Virginum Women's Society". Each with its constitutions, its superiors, its internal system, as of consecrated persons (according to legal-canonical terminology), or as religious (according to popular use).
Relations between the members of the Association of Heralds of the Gospel faithful and these who – assigning to a more perfect life want to follow God "more closely", "with an undivided heart" consecrating themselves only to God "in virginity or celibacy, a gift of divine grace that the Father grants of some" (cf. Lumen Gentium, 42) – constituted public societies, it is like those existing among brothers, all children of a prolific couple: each constitutes their independent family, but does not break with another brother, for all have a common father and mother.
The emergence, from within the charism of the Heralds of the Gospel, these groups of men and women who embrace religious life does not prevent the thousands – we can even say millions – of members of the Heralds Association of the Gospel to continue their lives of baptisms who they seek, in temporal realities, to live a life in accordance with the Commandments of god's law and the teachings of the Catholic Church.
To designate both the members of the Heralds Association of the Gospel and the members of the "Clerical Society of Apostolic Life Virgo Flos Carmeli", and the sisters of the "Regina Virginum Women's Society of Apostolic Life", some have employed the expression "family of the Heralds." It has a sociological meaning, not legal. More or less as when popes speak of the "Carmelite family", to refer to the various institutes arising from the same charism: devotion to Our Lady of Carmo. Among them there are differences, and in certain centuries even divisions, almost "irreconcilable", such as between "footwear" and "barefoot", missionary sisters and cloistered nuns, third orders, etc. However, popes sometimes refer to all of them as members of the "Carmelite religious family". However, when it comes to legal matters (as could be a commissariat of some of these public entities) it would be indispensable to specify whether the commissioner penalises the Male Order of barefoot Carmelites or the Carmelite Order of The Old Observance, if it is aimed at a particular cloistered convent (because each of them is legally independent, constituting a singular and autonomous public entity), or the Missionary Carmelites. Each has constitutions and governments of their own, although all emerged from the same foundational charism: devotion to Our Lady of Carmo, which some bring back to the prophet Saint Elijah and his exploits against idolatry on Mount Carmel (cf. 1Rs 18).
The Heralds Association cannot be "commissariat"
We see how, in accordance with Church legislation, the International Private Association of Herald faithful of the Gospel is, like wisely, as all baptized, subject to the vigilance of pastors in what it says to doctrine and good customs ("of fide et moribus"); but, when it comes to a private entity, it cannot be the subject of a "commissariat", as the Decree mistakenly wanted in case.
The Heralds Association of the Gospel is subject to the vigilance of pastors in what it says to doctrine and good manners, but cannot be the subject of a commissariat
The commissioner provided for by canon 318 concerns exclusively companies or public associations.
Like the hypothetical Soap Factory, invented above to exemplify, could not be the subject of federal intervention; could even be closed if illegality is proven, but evidence to justify this interference in the life of the private entity would be presented. If there is no evidence (and if they have not been presented should be considered non-existent), the closure of the Soap Factory will constitute an illegality and injustice, an attack on the free initiative of every citizen and all honest Brazilians who seek collaborate in the common effort to carry forward the progress of this immense Brazil.
Meeting of D. Damascene with the President of the Heralds Association of the Gospel
When the Card. Archbishop Raymundo Damasceno Assisi was at the headquarters of the Private Association of Herald faithful of the Gospel (dated October 18), in order to present the Decree of the so-called Commissioner, was received by the President General, Mr. Felipe Lecaros Concha, along with his Governing Council. The cardinal had been accompanied by D. José Aparecido Gonçalves de Almeida, Auxiliary Bishop of Brasilia and phD in Canon Law, quoted in the said Decree as "auxiliary" of D. Damasceno.
In the speech, Mr. Felipe Lecaros made it clear that "commising a Private Association would infringe the sacred and inviolable right of the faithful to associate in the Church with their own statutes and their own authorities."
Lack of legal competence in those who issued the Commission Decree
Moreover, the President of the Heralds Association of the Gospel noted that just like each private entity in civil society depends organically on an authority – for example, the trade of a city will be regulated by municipal norms, while the qualification and road traffic by the DMV and DENATRAN, or if it is aviation, competence falls within ANAC – thus also the Heralds of the Gospel, being an "international private association of faithful", depend organically on the Dicastery for the Laity, the Family and the Life. However, the Decree brought by the Card. Damascene comes from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, that is, what in the common language are called "religious". A "lack of competence" for any kind of intervention in a private association of the faithful was therefore evident.
The Decree says there was an "agreement" between these two organs of the Church government; however, to have legal value it is not enough for an "agreement" whose terms are unknown (there is not even the protocol number of such an "agreement" document), but a "formal delegation" becomes necessary, which does not appear anywhere, which raises the suspicion of not that existed, since this is not the only error in the text of the Decree.
Some of the attribution errors, in the Decree that tried to "commend" the Heralds
There were fundamental attribution errors:
- From those who dictated the Decree (the Congregation for Religious), which cannot emanating decrees for a private association;
- In the qualification of the Heralds of the Gospel as "public association", when it is a "private association" (with alvar and surprising ignorance of the reality that one wants to "commend");
- In the desire to impose an inapplicable penalty, i.e. "commissariar" a private association (as it would be inapplicable to want to remove the driver's license to a six-year-old boy, unable to have it).
Damascene and D. Aparecido agreed to the existence of relevant errors in the
These errors have been recognized both by the card. D. Raymundo Damasceno Assis, as for the canonista who accompanied him, D. José Aparecido Gonçalves de Almeida
These errors have been recognized both by the card. D. Raymundo Damasceno Assis, as well as by the canonista who accompanied him, D. José Aparecido Gonçalves de Almeida, having both declared it a relevant issue, which would be taken by them to the Holy See, as will be narrated later.
Damasceno and D. Aparecido declare that they do not know what are the charges that led to issue this Decree of "commissioner"
In addition, they reiterated the two prelates – presumed Commissioners of the Heralds – not knowing any other accusatory information, in addition to the generalities contained in the text of the Decree, with regard to the "problems" and "shortcomings" to be corrected in the Heralds.
This generates a real situation of impossibility of performing its role as commissioners. Indeed, how can a doctor help a patient, from whom he does not know the disease?
They also stated that they had no access to the Final Report of visitors, nor the dossier of "Answers to the Last Questions" (572 pages of text, with over 18,000 pages of documents and testimonials) provided by the Heralds.
All these elements indicate not only the incompetence in those who issued the Decree of presumed commissioner, but the inability of the presumed commissioners to exercise the function effectively and validly, out of ignorance of the facts on which they intended to interfere " to help," as D. Damasceno stated.
The legal doctrine of the Church, regarding the impossibility of commising private associations of the faithful
In the conversation with the two Prelates, the President of the Heralds Association of the Gospel, Mr. Felipe Lecaros also read the opinion of insignes commentators of the Canonlaw, such as the canonist bishop, specialist in associations of the faithful, D. Lluis Martinez Sistach, who states that:
"Only for public associations it is foreseen that the competent ecclesiastical authority, in special circumstances and when they require serious reasons, may appoint a commissioner who on his behalf will time-guide the association. In the case of private associations, since the ecclesiastical authority does not intervene in the appointment of the President, there is no reason for him to intervene in his removal and appointment of a Commissioner" (cf. Ius Canonicum, v. 26, n. 51, 1986, p.173).
This has even been recognized by the civil justice of countries that signed Concordata with the Holy See, such as Portugal. A judgment in the Court of Appeal of Coimbra, Portugal, of 17 May 2011, by unanimous vote, ruled:
"The private associations of the faithful are subject to the surveillance of the competent ecclesiastical authorities, but cannot the competent ecclesiastical authority, covered by this duty of vigilance, appoint commissioners representing the Association."
More significant testimony is given by the Dicastery himself for the Laity, the Family and life in an attempt to commisariate the Private Association of living Word faithful by the Archdiocese of Diamantina (MG). Such an attempt was declared unfair and unlawful by the Holy See on 15 March 2016 in the following terms:
"In the tangent to the legitimacy of the measures, the appointment of a commissioner (can. 318) is indicated in law among the measures provided for only for public associations of the faithful (can. 312-320) and therefore cannot be applied to a private association of the faithful. Therefore, the appointment of a commissioner in this case is not legitimate" (cf. Decree 264/16/S-61/B-169, 15/3/2016).
This litigation-criminal process, between the Archdiocese of Diamantina and the Private Living Word Association, extended for several years, and several interventions of the Central Government of the Church were needed, always in favor of freedom of the association, and condemning the unjust attempt by the archbishop. The Pontifical Council for the Laity – recently replaced in his duties by the Dicastery for the Laity, Family and Life – reaffirmed that this interpretation of the Church Law: "The appointment of a commissioner in this cas[de uma associação privada de fiéis]e is not legitimate," the Decree says.
This was ratified by Decrees of the same Vatican body of 3/23/2016 and 25/4/2016, and by the Decree of the Dicastery for the Laity, the Family and Life of 18/10/2016 (070/16/S-61/B-169), which, Moreover, condemns the Archbishop, who has brought in the interference in the legitimate Christian life of this private association of the faithful, to the reimbursement of damages for a value of EUR 64,270, plus 5,000 euros for the illegitimate acts perpetrated by the ecclesiastical authority, and other values that we omitted for brevity.
Regarding exactly the presumed commissariat of the Heralds, Professor Eduardo Baura, of the University of Opus Dei in Rome, declared that the commissariat of an association of faithful "is not foreseen, due to the autonomy they enjoy". What is pointed out above is the obligation to "watch" and, adds the professor at Opus Dei, "if the case comes, dissolve the association, if necessary" (cf. Vida Nueva, 26/10/2019).
There will be someone who unilaterally without evidence, without trial, without possibility of defense, based on slanderous accusations taken from the internet, some anonymous, others of people who are not in communion with the Catholic Church, give an order to "dissolve the Heralds of the Gospel"? Who would benefit this arbitrary dissolution?
Damascene and D. Aparecido agreed to the positioning of the Heralds
It should be noted that the reasons put forward by President Felipe Lecaros were taken into account by the illustrious visitors.
On October 18, 2019, canonist Bishop D. Aparecido sent a message to one of the Heralds of the Gospel attesting:
"As regards the situation of the Heralds association, I will prepare[para a Santa Sé] a letter to explain that there is indeed a plausible objection: which refers to the legal nature of the Association and the type of intervention possible by the competent authority. The issue of the private nature of the association, this is the real and relevant objection on the subject."
Beyond legal arguments, commissariat lay faithful proves ridiculous
At the conclusion of this article, it should also be noted that the Decree under consideration – in addition to the trampling already mentioned – also violates canons 50 and 51, because it is not sufficiently motivated in "serious reasons" (cf. CIC, c. 318), and the Association was not previously heard. For these and other reasons, such decree is absolutely invalid or technically "infectus" (from Latin, "not done"), that is, non-existent. But this is a matter for another article.
The Heralds of the Gospel are now made up of men and women of all ages and conditions, professions and states of life; the very idea of comissariar them results esdrúxula
This, the impossibility of commising the Heralds does not only lead to the right… but even common sense.
A recent report by the well-known agency Gaudium Press cites a very expressive comment, which helps to understand how much the very idea of commisariar a private association of faithful results in sdrúxula. Indeed, as has already been said above, the Heralds of the Gospel have developed as a group of lay faithful, and are now made up of men and women of all ages and conditions, professions and states of life, married and single.
According to the aforementioned report, a lady interviewed – after expressing strangeness that the Vatican is treating, likewise, lay and religious – says she was asked, along with other couples who are also part of the Heralds, such as would be their families if, by absurdity, they were all commissariats. And he concluded, not without a sense of humor: "In a joke, I asked my husband if, the next time we want to change cars, we're going to need the Commissioner's OK. But my husband didn't even call; he laughed, and shrugged"…
The "non-existent" Decree had very real, and strongly negative effects; provided a media sector – prejudiced, strongly ideological and anti-religious – a matter to start a campaign of slander and defamation
Unfortunately, the "non-existent" Decree had very real, and strongly negative effects, whether they intentional or not. Indeed, he was given publicity by the Holy See Press Room, even before it was communicated to interested parties, and provided a media sector – prejudiced, strongly ideological and anti-religious – a matter to start a campaign of slander and defamation that, to date, still continues its efforts to endure against all evidence. To safeguard and defend its fame, the Heralds Association of the Gospel had no other solution but to initiate a series of legal actions against its detractors.
In view of these facts, strength is to see the perplexity of thousands of people who, worldwide, cannot explain the reason for so many singularities in this process. Perplexity generated discontent, and discontent, indignation. How will this worldwide outrage degenerate to continue things as they are? Only the future will say.
(*) José Manuel Jiménez Aleixandre, Spanish, studied Architecture and Journalism at the Complutense University of Madrid, and holds a PhD in Canon Law from the Pontifical St. Thomas Aquinas University (Angelicum) in Rome.