Succession assured – Haarlem-Amsterdam gets a coadjutor

20181222_coadjutor-xl
Bishops Jan Hendriks and Jos Punt

The announcement had been long expected, but it was a surprise nonetheless, coming as it did just before year’s end, and only weeks after another new bishop’s installation (in a country as small as the Netherlands, a fairly rare event) in Roermond.

Last Monday morning, the pope’s birthday,, Bishop Jan Hendriks, auxiliary bishop and vicar general of the Diocese of Haarlem-Amsterdam, received a phone call from the nunciature in The Hague, informing him that he was appointed as bishop coadjutor of Haarlem-Amsterdam. With the nuncio, Archbishop Cavalli, being in Rome, a Wednesday meeting with the secretary, Msgr. Mendez, resulted in yesterday’s announcement. Bishop Hendriks suggests in his blog that the timing is due to other appointments – ‘s-Hertogenbosch in March of 2016, Groningen-Leeuwarden in April of 2017 and Roermond in October of this year. “It is clear that Rome – since everything is connected in a small country like the Netherlands – has wanted to wait for these appointments,” the bishop writes.

As coadjutor bishop, Msgr. Hendriks remains an auxiliary bishop, but is assured of becoming the new bishop of Haarlem-Amsterdam upon the retirement of Bishop Jos Punt, the current ordinary. His name had been whispered for other positions over the past years, but Haarlem-Amsterdam is the perfect fit for Bishop Hendriks, familiar as he is with the diocese. His appointment can be seen as a natural culmination of his previous ‘career’: from parish priest to seminary rector to auxiliary bishop and vicar general.

In a letter to the parishes Bishop Jos Punt explains that his request for a  coadjutor was made same time ago.

“I presented this request to the pope some time ago, after my second stroke. I have been carrying the final responsibility for our beautiful diocese for more than 20 years now. Much has happened in that time and I do my work with love, but I have been struggling with my health for several years. The appointment of Msgr. Hendriks as coadjutor gives me the opportunity to gradually transfer more managerial tasks to him, and also assures the continuity of management and policy. With his experience as rector, and the last few years as auxiliary bishop and vicar general, he knows the diocese like not other, and is widely respected.”

While no one can be sure when exactly Bishop Hendriks will succeed Bishop Punt, the latter suggests a tie frame in the aforementioned letter, saying “when my time comes, at most in two years time when I reach the age of 75, he will be the new bishop of our beloved Diocese of Haarlem-Amsterdam.” Given Bishop Punt’s health issues, an early retirement seems a distinct possibility, but it will likely take place no later than 10 January 2021, when Bishop Punt will turn 75, and it will probably be a quick succession at that. There is no need for the new bishop to be chosen after a retirement letter has been received in Rome, nor does he have to be consecrated, as he is already a bishop. And his installation can be planned ahead of time.

Coadjutor bishops are fairly rare in the Netherlands. There have been 11 in the past century, with the most recent being Bishop Hans van den Hende, who was coadjutor of Breda in 2006 and 2007. Haarlem-Amsterdam had one in 1983 (Bishop Hendrik Bomers, who succeeded Bishop Zwartkruis after a mere two days as coadjutor bishop) and from 1958 to 1960 (Bishop van Dodewaard).

Bishop Hendriks continues his duties as auxiliary bishop and vicar general in the diocese, and also serves as consultor to the Congregation for the Clergy and as a judge in the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, both in Rome.

Bishop Jos Punt has served as Bishop of Haarlem-Amsterdam since 2001. Before that he had been the apostolic administrator from 1998 to 2011 and auxiliary bishop since 1995. He has also been the apostolic administrator of the Military Ordinariate of the Netherlands since 1995.

Photo credit: arsacal.nl

Advertisements

Tweeting the Synod

Today the Synod of Bishops will convene for the first session of their fifteenth ordinary general assembly on “Young People, Faith and Vocational Discernment”, which will run until the 28th of October. In the past, the daily deliberations and individual contributions of delegates were summarised and published by the Holy See press office, but this is no longer the case. An unwise decision, in my opinion, as it makes the entire process a secretive one. As outsiders, all we will have are rumours and the eventual final document. During the previous Synod we have seen what damage rumours can do, especially when they are neither confirmed nor denied in any clear way..

twitterThat said, there is always social media, and a number of Synod delegates are enthousiastic (or less so) users of those media. Below, I present a short (probably incomplete) list of delegates who use Twitter. It is mostly western prelates using the medium, with English being the dominant language. Other languages used are Italian, French, Spanish, German and Maltese.

  1. Pope Francis (obviously). As pope he convenes the Synod and acts as its president, although he delegates that duty to four delegate presidents. Pope Francis will not be commenting on the Synod proceedings, but offer prayers and short items to reflect on spiritually.
  2. Archbishop Charles Scicluna. Archbishop of Malta. One of three members of the Commission for Disputes.
  3. Bishop Robert Barron. Auxiliary Bishop of Los Angeles and CEO of Word On Fire.
  4. Bishop Frank Caggiano. Bishop of Bridgeport, Connecticut.
  5. Archbishop José Gómez. Archbishop of Los Angeles.
  6. Archbishop Leo Cushley. Archbishop of Edinburgh.
  7. Archbishop Eamon Martin. Archbishop of Armagh.
  8. Archbishop Anthony Fisher. Archbishop of Sydney.
  9. Leonardo Cardinal Sandri. Prefect of the Congregation for the Oriental Churches.
  10. Robert Cardinal Sarah. Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.
  11. Kevin Cardinal Farrell. Prefect of the Dicastery for Laity, Family and Life.
  12. Peter Cardinal Turkson. Prefect of the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development.
  13. Gianfranco Cardinal Ravasi. President of the Pontifical Council for Culture.
  14. Gérald Cardinal Lacroix. Archbishop of Québec.
  15. Daniel Cardinal Sturla Berhouet. Archbishop of Montevideo.
  16. Blase Cardinal Cupich. Archbishop of Chicago.
  17. Carlos Cardinal Aguiar Retes. Archbishop of Mexico City.
  18. Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia. President of the Pontifical Academy for Life,
  19. Archbishop Peter Comensoli. Archbishop of Melbourne.
  20. Father Antonio Spadaro. Member of the Vatican Media Committee.
  21. Christoph Cardinal Schönborn. Archbishop of Vienna.
  22. Wilfrid Cardinal Napier. Archbishop of Durban.
  23. Luis Cardinal Tagle. Archbishop of Manila.
  24. Vincent Cardinal Nichols. Archbishop of Westminster.
  25. Carlos Cardinal Osoro Sierra. Archbishop of Madrid.

KLqGjJTk_400x400Not all of the prelates above use their accounts equally often or in the same way. For example, Cardinal Tagle only posts links to his ‘The Word Exposed’ Youtube catechesis talks, Cardinals Sturla Berhouet and Farrell mostly retweet, Archbishop Fisher hasn’t tweeted since February of 2017, and most use Twitter as a one-way channel. Among those who do respond to what their followers say are Cardinal Napier, Archbishop Comensoli (his Twitter profile picture at left) and Bishop Barron.

Other delegates, such  as Philadelphia’s Archbishop Charles Chaput and Passau’s Bishop Stefan Oster, are active on Facebook, while Belgian Bishop Jean Kockerols keeps the youth of his country up to speed via a blog.

Several delegates have already shared their arrival in Rome, and it is these (such as Archbishop Comensoli and Bishop Barron) who will perhaps offer the best idea of what goes on in the coming weeks. That said, all we will get are glimpses, and no tweeting delegate will share what goes on in the debates. So, in this age of social media and high-speed communication, the Synod of Bishops remains firmly behind closed doors.

 

Case study – Bishop Hendriks casts a canonist’s eye on the German bishops’ proposal and the Roman response

At the risk of becoming a one-topic bore, one more post about the Communion question, after another Dutch bishop comes out in, well, understanding of the German proposal.

jan_hendriksBishop Jan Hendriks, auxiliary bishop of Haarlem-Amsterdam, studies the matter in his blog and comes to the conclusion that, yes, a bishops’ conference has the authority to draft a pastoral outreach that allows non-Catholics to receive Communion. But, he explains, there are certain specific conditions that must be applied.

The bishop, a canon lawyer who also serves as a member of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, the highest court of law of the Catholic Church, first describes that a bishops’ conference has the authority to develop further norms in this matter according to the Code of Canon Law and the Ecumenical Directory, but there is a framework of four conditions that must be followed:

“1. The non-Catholic person requests the sacraments out of his own desire;

2. This person has no access to a minister of his own community;

3. This person professes the Catholic faith regarding these sacraments;

4. This person has the correct disposition.”

Bishop Hendriks contends that in a wedding ceremony between a Catholic and non-Catholic person, the non-Catholic may be allowed to receive Communion, according to N. 159 of the Ecumenical Directory, which says that a bishop may allow a wedding Mass for just cause, and the decision whether or not the non-Catholic partner can be allowed to receive Communion may be made according to the above four points.

“From this the conclusion could be drawn that the condition for the availibility of a minister of one’s own community is relative, and a non-Catholic spouse who asks, has the correct disposition and shares the Catholic faith in Holy Communion, can be allowed to receive Communion in the wedding service, when the bishop gives permission for the celebration of a Mass.”

Of course, the German bishops’ proposal is not limited to wedding Masses. They claim that a non-Catholic partner may receive Communion at other occasions as well. Bishop Hendriks continues:

“In their pastoral outreach the German bishops suggest that this permission for non-Catholic partners in interdenominational marriages may also be given after the wedding ceremony, after a period of discernment and a pastoral conversation with the parish priest, when they in conscience have come to accept the Catholic faith regarding the Eucharist. In the published parts which I have read, I was unable to find anything about the receiving the sacrament of penance and reconciliation and the spiritual disposition. At the same time the description of the document as a “pastoral outreach” suggest that the German bishops present no new norms, but that they operate withing the existing regulations. For new norms – a general decree – the bishops’ conference first needs a mandate from the Holy See, in other words: from the Pope (c. 455 §1). It is well understandable that not all bishops were able to go along with the thought that this is only a pastoral outreach within the existing norms and that seven of them put the case before the responsible parties in Rome.”

What then, considering all this, does the answer, or lack thereof, from the Pope mean?

“In his answer Pope Francis emphasised the unity of the bishops, who must, if possible, arrive at a text unanimously. I am not aware if it has been announced that there are conditions to this possible text, or whether it has to be presented to Rome or if a process has been agreed upon. It is, however, clear that developing such a  document – if the pastoral goal is maintained within the general conditions – is part of the authority and task of a bishops’ conference, which makes the decision of Pope in itself understandable.”

Bishop Hendriks says nothing about his agreement or disagreement with the German bishops’ proposal or the Pope’s response. He simply looks at what it possible within the norms as they exist, and from this he concludes that the German bishops have the authority to draft such a pastoral outreach, but also that they are bound to the conditions described in the Code of Canon Law and the Ecumenical Directory.

[EDIT 19-5]

In a commentary published on their website yesterday, the Archdiocese of Utrecht underlines the importance of canon 844, §4 of the Code of Canon Law. The comments seem to be a direct response to Bishop Hendriks and the reception of his words in the media. The archdiocesan commentary agrees with the bishop that a bishops’ conference has the authority to establish norms for the reception of Holy Communion by non-Catholics, and repeats the four points made by Msgr. Hendriks above. However, the piece states, an important element seems to be overlooked, by the readers if not by the bishop, namely the explicitly named circumstance that there must a be a situation of need (“grave necessity”). In such a situation the four conditions must be fulfilled in order for the non-Catholic person to receive Communion.

The article quotes the instruction Redemptionis Sacramentum from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which states in n. 85: “In addition, the conditions comprising can. 844 § 4, from which no dispensation can be given, cannot be separated; thus, it is necessary that all of these conditions be present together.” In other words, all four conditions must be fulfilled, not just some of them. A bishops’ conference is free to decide what it considers to be situations of grave necessity. The archdiocesan commentary contends that such a situation is not automatically present in the case of a non-Catholic married to a Catholic.

In short, the archdiocesan commentary agrees with Bishop Hendriks that the German bishops are free to establish new norms, but within the framework of establish regulations only. The archdiocese emphasises that the four conditions mentions throughout the blog post above are applicable in situations of grave necessity only, something which seems to be supported by the Ecumenical Directory, as mentioned by Bishop Hendriks, which states that a bishop can allow an interdenominational wedding Mass for “a just cause”. This is not just word play, but indicates that there has to be a very good reason indeed for such a Mass to be celebrated. This reason, it would appear, must be one of the situations of grave necessity as established by the bishops’ conference.

The collection plate appears

With Easter around the corner, it seems that this Lent is, again, a time to shake the collection plate. Not a thing I like to do, but sometimes necessity overrules desire.

So, if you like what I write, consider making a fitting donation via the PayPal button in the sidebar (or at the bottom of this post). Of course, this will not be without anything in return. There are several things in the pipeline which, I hope, will provide good reading.

And if it doesn’t, you can always consider having me write for you. In that case, send me an e-mail at mr.hofer@gmail.com and I will try to get back to you as soon as possible.

For 2018, a somewhat obscure saint

Heilige_AfraEvery year I use the Saint Name Generator to find a patron saint for my blog for the year. Whatever name the generator may come up with, I always try to see it as something of an inspiration and guide for my future endeavours here and in social media. But sometimes, that’s difficult.

This year, I was given the name of Saint Afra. She’s no only a very old saint, having died in 304, but also one of whom we know very little beyond her legend. But at least she hails from the area which I try to cover in this blog: of Cypriot origins, she led a holy life and died in Augsburg, Germany.

Her legend tells us that she was originally a pagan, possibly the daughter of the king of Cyprus, working as a prostitute (perhaps in the service of the local temple of Venus). She converted when she and her mother hid the bishop of Girona, Spain, who was fleeing the persecutions under Emperor Diocletian. Now a Christian, she was arrested when she refused to make a sacrifice to pagan idols, and was killed by being burned at the stake (although some sources say she was actually beheaded). The story of her martyrdom is by far the more reliable part of her legend.

Her patronage includes the city of Augsburg, converts, martyrs and penitent women. There, at least, we may find something to relate to as your author is himself a convert (eleven years ago coming April). Maybe Afra’s steadfastness in the face of adversity will prove to be an inspiration as well.

Sancta Afra, ora pro nobis!

Pope appoints Dutch bishop as member of Church’s highest court

jan_hendriksYesterday Pope Francis appointed five new members of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, the highest court of law of the Catholic Church. In addition to three cardinals and an archbishop, one of the new members is Bishop Jan Hendriks, auxiliary bishop of Haarlem-Amsterdam. He is also the only new member who does not reside in Rome or has been a member of the Signatura before. He will exercise his new duties in addition to his current ones.

Bishop Hendriks is a canon lawyer, having various legal functions in a number of dioceses, and he is also a consultor of the Congregation for the Clergy.

In his blog he descibes the duties of the Apostolic Signatura:

“The Apostolic Signatura is the ‘supreme court’ of the Catholic Church and judges, among other things, certain forms of appeal against judgements of the Roman Rota and appeals against certain decisions of policy (administrative disputes). […] The Signatura generally judges if the decisionmaking process has been correct.”

The other members appointed along with Bishop Hendriks are Cardinals Agostino Vallini (Vicar General emeritus of Rome and Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal from 2004 to 2008), Edoardo Menichelli (Archbishop emeritus of Acona-Osimo and former secretary of the Prefect), Raymond Burke (Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal from 2008 to 2014) and Archbishop Frans Daneels (Secretary emerotis of the Supreme Tribunal).

Blog relaunch, and a request

Summer is ending, so blogging can be expected to pick up again (and I am well aware that I am nowhere near the blogging frequency of earlier years). On the one hand that is good, as it means that there are other parts of life that demand my time and attention (hint: marriage is good one). On the other, it leaves my readers wanting for things to read. And I still think I have some things to say, even when the blogging world, not least the Catholic blogging world, has changed over the years. I still intend to write about Catholic topics (local and international) as they develop, and in that sense it is hard to predict when I will write about what. Still, write I hope to do.

While life on the whole is good, there are always concerns and worries. Lately, finances have been a bit tight, which is why, to borrow a phrase, the tin cup rattles once more.

Bills need paying, food wants a place on the table… And my writing may perhaps contribute to those practical purposes. Hence my humble request for your kind donations. In return I will write, inform, hopefully inspire… and I will remember you in my prayers, at Mass and in the privacy of my home (and perhaps also in the spontaneous prayerful exclamations that slip out in times of need or surprise).

This little button (or its brother in the right side bar) will take you to the right place to donate whatever amount you please.

My thanks is great.