Can. 1732 Whatever is laid down in the canons of this section concerning decrees, is
also to be applied to all singular administrative acts given in the external forum outside
a judicial trial, except for those given by the Roman Pontiff himself or by an Ecumenical
Can. 1733 ß1 When a person believes that he or she has been injured by a decree, it is
greatly to be desired that contention between that person and the author of the decree be
avoided, and that care be taken to reach an equitable solution by mutual consultation,
possibly using the assistance of serious-minded persons to mediate and study the matter.
In this way, the controversy may by some suitable method be avoided or brought to an end.
ß2 The Episcopal Conference can prescribe that in each diocese there be established a
permanent office or council which would have the duty, in accordance with the norms laid
down by the Conference, of seeking and suggesting equitable solutions. Even if the
Conference has not demanded this, the Bishop may establish such an office or council.
ß3 The office or council mentioned in ß2 is to be diligent in its work principally
when the revocation of a decree is sought in accordance with Can. 1734 and the time limit
for recourse has not elapsed. If recourse is proposed against a decree, the Superior who
would have to decide the recourse is to encourage both the person having recourse and the
author of the decree to seek this type of solution, whenever the prospect of a
satisfactory outcome is discerned.
Can. 1734 ß1 Before having recourse, the person must seek in writing from its author
the revocation or amendment of the decree. Once this petition has been lodged, it is by
that very fact understood that the suspension of the execution of the decree is also being
ß2 The petition must be made within the peremptory time limit of ten canonical days
from the time the decree was lawfully notified.
ß3 The norms in ßß1 and 2 do not apply:
1ƒ in having recourse to the Bishop against decrees given by authorities who are
subject to him;
2ƒ in having recourse against the decree by which a hierarchical recourse is decided,
unless the decision was given by the Bishop himself ;
3ƒ in having recourse in accordance with canon. 57 and 1735.
Can. 1735 If, within thirty days from the time the petition mentioned in Can. 1734
reaches the author of the decree, the latter communicates a new decree by which either the
earlier decree is amended or it is determined that the petition is to be rejected, the
period within which to have recourse begins from the notification of the new decree. If,
however, the author of the decree makes no decision within thirty days, the time limit
begins to run from the thirtieth day.
Can. 1736 ß1 In those matters in which hierarchical recourse suspends the execution of
a decree, even the petition mentioned in Can. 1734 has the same effect.
ß2 In other cases, unless within ten days of receiving the petition mentioned in Can.
1734 the author of the decree has decreed its suspension, an interim suspension can be
sought from the author's hierarchical Superior. This Superior can decree the suspension
only for serious reasons and must always take care that the salvation of souls suffers no
ß3 If the execution of the decree is suspended in accordance with ß2 and recourse is
subsequently proposed, the person who must decide the recourse is to determine, in
accordance with Can. 1737 ß3, whether the suspension is to be confirmed or revoked.
ß4 If no recourse is proposed against the decree within the time limit established,
an interim suspension of execution in accordance with ßß1 and 2 automatically lapses.
Can. 1737 ß1 A person who contends that he or she has been injured by a decree, can
for any just motive have recourse to the hierarchical Superior of the one who issued the
decree. The recourse can be proposed before the author of the decree, who must immediately
forward it to the competent hierarchical Superior.
ß2 The recourse is to be proposed within the peremptory time limit of fifteen
canonical days. In the cases mentioned in Can. 1734 ß3, the time limit begins to run from
the day the decree was notified; in other cases, it runs in accordance with Can. 1735.
ß3 Even in those cases in which recourse does not by law suspend the execution of the
decree, or in which the suspension is decreed in accordance with Can. 1736 ß2, the
Superior can for a serious reason order that the execution be suspended, but is to take
care that the salvation of souls suffers no harm.
Can. 1738 The person having recourse always has the right to the services of an
advocate or procurator, but is to avoid futile delays. Indeed, an advocate is to be
appointed ex officio if the person does not have one and the Superior considers it
necessary. The Superior, however, can always order that the one having recourse appear in
person to answer questions.
Can. 1739 In so far as the case demands, it is lawful for the Superior who must decide
the recourse, not only to confirm the decree or declare that it is invalid, but also to
rescind or revoke it or, if it seems to the Superior to be more expedient, to amend it, to
substitute for it, or to abrogate it.
Can. 1740 When the ministry of any parish priest has for some reason become harmful or
at least ineffective, even though this occurs without any serious fault on his part, he
can be removed from the parish by the diocesan Bishop.
Can. 1741 The reasons for which a parish priest can lawfully be removed from his parish
1ƒ a manner of acting which causes grave harm or disturbance to ecclesiastical
2ƒ ineptitude or permanent illness of mind or body, which makes the parish priest
unequal to the task of fulfilling his duties satisfactorily;
3ƒ the loss of the parish priest's good name among upright and serious-minded
parishioners, or aversion to him, when it can be foreseen that these factors will not
quickly come to an end
4ƒ grave neglect or violation of parochial duties, which persists after a warning;
5ƒ bad administration of temporal goods with grave harm to the Church, when no other
remedy can be found to eliminate this harm.
Can. 1742 ß1 If an investigation shows that there exists a reason mentioned in Can.
1740, the Bishop is to discuss the matter with two parish priests from a group stably
chosen for this purpose by the council of priests, at the proposal of the Bishop. If he
then believes that he should proceed with the removal, the Bishop must, for validity,
indicate to the parish priest the reason and the arguments, and persuade him in a fatherly
manner to resign his parish within fifteen days.
ß2 For parish priests who are members of a religious institute or a society of
apostolic life, the provision of Can. 682 ß2 is to be observed.
Can. 1743 The resignation of the parish priest can be given not only purely and simply,
but even upon a condition, provided the condition is one which the Bishop can lawfully
accept and does in fact accept.
Can. 1744 ß1 If the parish priest has not replied within the days prescribed, the
Bishop is to renew his invitation and extend the canonical time within which a reply is to
ß2 If it is clear to the Bishop that the parish priest has received this second
invitation but has not replied, even though not prevented from doing so by any impediment,
or if the parish priest refuses to resign and gives no reasons for this, the Bishop is to
issue a decree of removal.
Can. 1745 If, however, the parish priest opposes the case put forward and the reasons
given in it, but advances arguments which seem to the Bishop to be insufficient, to act
validly the Bishop must:
1ƒ invite him to inspect the acts of the case and put together his objections in a
written answer, indeed to produce contrary evidence if he has any;
2ƒ after this, complete the instruction of the case, if this is necessary, and weigh
the matter with the same parish priests mentioned in Can. 1742 ß1, unless, because of
some impossibility on their part, others are to be designated;
3ƒ finally, decide whether or not the parish priest is to be removed, and without
delay issue the appropriate decree.
Can. 1746 When the parish priest has been removed, the Bishop is to ensure that he is
either assigned to another office, if he is suitable for one, or is given a pension in so
far as the case requires this and the circumstances permit.
Can. 1747 ß1 A parish priest who has been removed must abstain from exercising the
function of a parish priest, leave the parochial house free as soon as possible, and hand
over everything pertaining to the parish to the person to whom the Bishop has entrusted
ß2 If, however, it is a question of a sick man who cannot be transferred elsewhere
from the parochial house without inconvenience, the Bishop is to leave to him the use,
even the exclusive use, of the parochial house for as long as this necessity lasts.
ß3 While recourse against a decree of removal is pending, the Bishop cannot appoint a
new parish priest, but is to make provision in the meantime by way of a parochial
Can. 1748 The good of souls or the necessity or advantage of the
Church may demand that a parish priest be transferred from his own parish, which he
governs satisfactorily, to another parish or another office. In these circumstances, the
Bishop is to propose the transfer to him in writing and persuade him to consent, for the
love of God and of souls.
Can. 1749 If the parish priest proposes not to acquiesce in the Bishop's advice and
persuasion, he is to give his reasons in writing.
Can. 1750 Despite the reasons put forward, the Bishop may judge that he should not
withdraw from his proposal. In this case, together with two parish priests chosen in
accordance with Can. 1742 ß1, he is to weigh the reasons which favor and those which
oppose the transfer. If the Bishop still considers that the transfer should proceed, he is
again to renew his fatherly exhortation to the parish priest.
Can. 1751 ß1 If, when these things have been done, the parish priest still refuses and
the Bishop still believes that a transfer ought to take place, the Bishop is to issue a
decree of transfer stating that, when a prescribed time has elapsed, the parish shall be
ß2 When this time has elapsed without result, he is to declare the parish vacant.
Can. 1752 In cases of transfer, the provisions of Can. 1747 are to be applied, always
observing canonical equity and keeping in mind the salvation of souls, which in the Church
must always be the supreme law.