Canon lawyer breaks down how to stop Catholic church or school closures

Such questionable closures have recently been ordered in the Archdiocese of Chicago, the Archdiocese of Denver, and the Archdiocese of Baltimore, sparking concerns about the closures’ ripple effects on the formation and salvation of souls.

In an exclusive LifeSiteNews email interview, canon lawyer Laura Morrison explained how concerned Catholics can go about challenging the closure of their own church or school.

Because the laity have such a short time frame within which they can canonically challenge closures, she advised that they act as soon as possible and before the closure decree is made if they are able.

The first step: As soon as there is an indication that a church or school might close, the laity should “consult a canonist specialized in administrative law,” Morrison said.

The laity have 10 days from the official closure decree to file a request for reconsideration, called a Remonstratio.

“The moment word reaches them of a potential closure, I strongly advise them to secure the official decree right away. They should request it from the diocesan school office, the chancery, or the school authorities, as this document contains the formal decision made by the ecclesiastical authority to close the school,” Morrison advised.

She explained that there are various canon law grounds to challenge church and school closures. These include, according to Morrison:

• Procedural or Substantive Violations: This occurs when the “rules of the game” are ignored. Common examples include:
  • Failure to Consult: Not seeking the mandatory advice of the Parish or Diocesan Finance Council.
  • Lack of Motivation: Failing to provide a written decree that clearly explains the “why” behind the decision.
  • Lack of Just Cause: Closing the school based on unfounded or insufficient reasons, without a legitimate necessity.
• Lack of Competence: The authority that issued the decree exceeded its specific legal powers or jurisdiction. In short, the person who signed the act did not have the canonical power to do so.
• Issues of Opportunity and Equity: The decree may be technically “legal,” but it is considered harmful or imprudent. The faithful argue that the closure unnecessarily compromises their rights within the Church, seeking a better balance between the common good of the Diocese and the subjective good of the local community.

“A thorough audit of the school’s or church’s financial statements and asset management” is “invaluable when the decision to close the institution is rooted in financial mismanagement,” she shared.

Such an audit was used to challenge the ordered closure of St. Louis Parish and School in the Archdiocese of Denver.

If sufficient grounds for challenging the closure decree have been identified, the next step is to file a formal request for reconsideration (the remonstratio) to “the authority that issued the act.”

Even if the 10-day deadline has passed, Morrison advises that the laity still contact canon lawyers to “explore alternative legal options.”

“If the issuing authority fails to respond or refuses to revoke the decree, the second step is to lodge a hierarchical recourse before the Dicastery for Culture and Education,” Morrison said.

“The Dicastery then opens an investigation, during which the petitioner has the right to submit evidence supporting their case,” she explained.

The Dicastery is expected to reach a decision within six months, although it does not strictly abide by this time frame.

If this decision is unfavorable, “the final step is to appeal the ruling before the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, provided there are sufficient legal grounds to do so,” Morrison said.

Certified Management Accountant and fraud examiner Graham Lapp previously told LifeSiteNews that he believes a pattern of church and school closures is being driven by profit motives.

“In the past year, I have worked on several cases in which secular advisory firms persuaded bishops to sell parishes or schools that were otherwise sustainable. These firms essentially argued that the cash value of the land and buildings outweighed the evangelization taking place at these locations,” Lapp shared.