TITLE I. ECCLESIASTICAL LAWS (Cann. 7 - 22) · TITLE II. CUSTOM (Cann. 23 - 28) · TITLE III. GENERAL DECREES AND INSTRUCTIONS (Cann. 29 - 34). 1/ the Code of Canon Law promulgated in ;. 2/ other universal or particular laws contrary to the prescripts of this Code unless other provision is expressly. The Code of Canon Law. . Chapter I: The Canonical Status Of Physical Persons. Chapter I: The Provision Of Ecclesiastical Office.
|Language:||English, Spanish, German|
|Genre:||Health & Fitness|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
The Code of Canon Law Table of Contents BOOK I: GENERAL NORMS 8 Title I: Ecclesiastical Laws 8 Title II: Custom 10 Title III: General Decrees And. This Pocket Manual of Canon Law is a digest of the entire Code. It contains all that the average priest should know, more than our Sisterhoods need to know. The revised Code of Canon Law has made a difference in the life of the The current Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church was promulgated on.
In , the pan-textual Comentario Exegetico al Codigo de Derecho Canonico, supervised by the canonical faculty at the University of Navarra, made its appearance in eight volumes to favorable, if perhaps somewhat fewer than might have been expected, reviews. The relatively small number of reviews that the Spanish Comentario Exegetico received was, I think, simply because review copies of an eight volume work would be scarce; and because few, if any, individual authors would attempt a comprehensive review of a text assembled by more than one hundred scholars and practitioners from several countries.
In any event, ten years and two slightly revised Spanish editions later, the Comentario Exegetico now makes its appearance in English as the Exegetical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, and it is a magnificent achievement.
It is, of course, beyond the ability of this reviewer to assess comprehensively these 8, pages, and I do here but briefly introduce the work to the English-speaking canonical community. Those already familiar with the Spanish Comentario Exegetico will immediately recognize that the many strengths of the original have been incorporated into the English Exegetical Commentary. These include presenting the original Latin and English revised from the original British English translation texts of all the canons of the code, the official fontes of the same, and, very helpfully, suggesting crossreferences with the law.
The commentary on each canon runs from half a page in length to ten pages or more, and is individually signed. The physbook reviews the jurist ical layout text size, paper and binding quality, margin width, etc. As is true of all pan-textual commentaries on the code, the quality of the remarks on each canon varies according to the skill of the author , but anyone familiar with the international panoply of learned persons writing on canon law today will immediately recognize in the Exegetical Commentary many names worthy of deference.
Moreover, even those less well-known authors have offered in my opinion, formed as I have used the set over the last year or so consistently useful remarks.
I especially appreciate their guidance to European commentaries and sources of particular law, though, like mostAnglo-Americans using continental legal texts, I would have preferred more and fuller footnotes.
In any case, every consultation I have ever made in the Exegetical Commentary has been of real benefit. This is a religious area of conscience. Leaving by formal act - you have to be first a heretic, apostate or schismatic. And in fact you remain a member but not in communion.
Canon Full Communion Those baptized are in full communion with the catholic Church here on earth who are joined with Christ in his visible body, through the bonds of profession of faith, the sacraments and ecclesiastical governance. Full communion - is joined by profession of faith, sacraments and ecclesiastical governance: 3 munera, but not in the order of the code: regendi, docendi, sanctificandi. One can offend regendi and docendi at the same time, e.
Legally unbaptized, but they get some benefits of the community. Each state has also has active, articulate, educated, nonpracticing. Religious are part of both - but no legal consequences here later there is specific legislation. However, this didn't occur, it would have made them formally superior to the rest of the code. Ordering of the section start with rights of all the christian faithful, then rights of the lay faithful.
Onclin developed this idea, under the title of subjective rights already in the s; it took some time before this theory made its way into the church. This comes with some difficulty into the church where leaders still claim absolute divine right.
Free zones for the person implies a conflict of interest between those in charge and the people. Torfs says when a right becomes an obligation, it becomes a duty, not a right.
What is the status of the canons ? What is the nature of these obligations and rights? Four trends regarding the nature First, legal approach is advanced by J.
Beyer [Gent]. Let's take the catalogues of rights developed in the secular state. There could be limits, but you could have right to life, right of association, due process, many of these have canonical origins in the first place.
Freedom of religion and freedom of expression would have to be nuanced. Second, theological position is advanced by Munich U. Hinder, Correcco.
They are against Beyer, they want to start from the nature of the church and build on this. These are church obligations and church rights; start from an ecclesiological model. Rights based on word, sacraments and apostolic succession.
Each has active and passive rights. You end up with different rights than Beyer, these are not human rights, but christian rights. Legal theory with theological correction, later left the priesthood. Freedom of expression, this is accompanied with respect. Freedom of scientific research, but with accommodation for the hierarchs.
Fourth, Anthropological method was proposed by Greimacher and Walf. The discussion gives the impression the Church can decide, instead, they are embedded in the nature of the person.
People cannot abandon them at the church door, and the church can't deny them for the same reason. It questions the legitimacy of the question. Code did not choose among these - there is a mix of theories, you can invoke various theories that lead to one or another result. Legal theory is found in equality, association, , privacy, Theological theory is found in holy life, proclaim the gospel, spiritual assistance.
Castillo-Lara says the rights listed are merely a sampling, but there are more - like the anthropologists. Because of the variety of underlying legal theories, sometimes it is not clear how theological or legal a norm should be interpreted and applied. Canon with the right to assistance by Pastors, especially word and sacrament. Soft right, but also duty to have enough pastors to provide the sacraments, don't hinder those who would like to minister.
Shouldn't this be in an institutional document - the constitution, the human rights conventions. There was a strong move for lex ecclesiae fundamentalis that would have overarched the Latin and Eastern Codes. Eastern Code drafter Zuzek was advocating this even in the late 80's and early 90's. It would have strengthened the CCEO. It was opposed from the left and the right. Conservatives opposed it because it could be a start of all sort of further rights.
It could also be a problem for ecumenical thinking. Progressives opposed it because they wanted to base the constitution of the church on the Gospel - but that is not a legal document.
Later progressives thought that they had missed an important opportunity. Peter Erdo - Budapest Cardinal said that it is problematic to place natural right norms on a higher level than divine law. No crime, no punishment. The rights of the hierarchy of the hierarchy would be lower than the fundamental rights.
Hervada and Lombardia were the best promoters of the Lex Ecclesia Fundamentalis - since it was an important part of a true legal system. Where does this leave the fundamental rights of all the Christian faithful? Is it possible that these fundamental rights that are spread through the code have a superiority to other canons.
At least there is the tacit foundation of the rights of all, then the laity and clerics as sub groupings. But are the fundamental rights of all above other norms of the code or local norms. What text says is more important that the will of the legislator.
Look first to the text, then to context, then to will of legislator. You can opt for an interpretation of norms that respects the fundamental rights.
But Lex specialis derogat generali. General norm is equality, unless legislative inequality. If you make functions open to laity, you have to have some equality in that. If clerics are chosen, even over laity who are better qualified, why open the function.
The quota of clerics would be a violation. Compare and choose the best - but if there is a bias to clerics, then they should also be on an equal basis. But canon prohibits harming the reputation of another.
Formal superiority of Fundamental rights could improve their protection and could improve the legal culture in the church. Vanity of clerics against could only be punished by because doesn't include a sanction. There isn't a formal hierarchy, however we can apply the law in view of honoring the rights of all the Christian faithful.
This also helps the law to function credibly in the secular system. Schwedenwein - says the right of the individual has to give way to the common good - but is the common good helped by rumor-mongering. But Canon protects the right to privacy. Potius ut valeat quam ut pereat - interpret a norm to have an effect not that it be ineffectual.
In order to do this with Canon on privacy, you have to have it above other norms. There is a formal equality of norms, and in that case, it would have a situation in which this section is completely without effect. However, there may be a clash with 'fundamental rights' and 'divine law' - which would seem to say God opposes fundamental rights. Canon Equality From Christ, there is a genuine equality of dignity and action, equality in contribution according to his or her own condition and office.
Treat equals equally. Equality before the law is most solid - equality in the law: everyone is treated equally - but this isn't always fair, for example, handicapped parking. Equality through the law, make unequals equal: more income, more taxes; affirmative action - compensating one for bad done to ancestors.
Context can determine whether a particular criteria is acceptable for distinguishing between people. Taxing the opposition party's business holdings. Equality is not easy to reconcile to hierarchy It is important to note that it is in a hierarchical context where power of governance and power of ordination are identified; how square this with equality.
Where is vera … aequalitas.
Divine constitution of the church as a basis for non-ordination can't be attacked by fundamental rights. Equality according to dignity and function. Three types of equality - in the law, through the law and before the law. Equality in the law - all treated in the same way: flat tax.
But this doesn't take into actual differences and so it can be unjust. Equality through the law is opposite. The law makes people equal by treating them unequally. Takes from the rich and gives to the poor: e. Both methods are challenged. Equality before the law - threat people appropriately: sometimes you make distinctions, sometimes you treat differently. The crucial point is where to draw the limits. Protected categories get strict scrutiny and there are BFOQs.
Women are bracketed out of all clerical issues. History of women's discrimination: years ago everyone did it, but this has changed in the secular states. Other christian churches ordained women.
Anglicans in early 90s accepted ordination of women. This made fear in RC church and so pope in '94 in ordinatio sacerdotalis - not in my church. Arguments become increasingly weak. Canon Holiness Obligation to lead a holy life, and to promote the growth of the Church. Christian obedience to pastors as teachers of faith and rulers of the Church. This exists, but with many conditions.
Not granted generously. The main problem is that we don't know the borders of this law. A right, and at times the duty. This is a good sign though, and express openly, no double-speak. You can be canonically wrong if you don't speak up. Most theologians don't get into problems because of remaining silent. Competence plays a role as well.
I may have an opinion, but not the competence to support it. First you tell the problems to your pastors then to the public. Public debate may not be so helpful - in the hierarchical system, a Latin approach; Provost says this is too culturally determined, not the way the American system. Dignity of persons all are equal dignity: What type of reverence is to pastors, and what sort of reverence to human dignity.
Perhaps we should also respect offices more, or can one be more honest with the bishop, than with the faithful. You may argue that the higher a person is the more you should be honest with them. Civil courts that attempt to relieve a spouse of his or her full obligation to support the marital home or maintain the common conjugal life, when the other has done nothing grave enough to justify separation, contradict divine and canon law. Separation Plan in Accord with Divine Law When spouses live apart, suitable child support and provisioning for the authentic education of children must always be provided for see canon Historically, Church decrees normally gave the care of the children to the innocent party to be reared at the expense of the culpable partner 7.
The appellate Tribunal of the Roman Rota ruled that a spouse having caused the breakup of a marriage is not due support from the innocent party 8. The spouse that causes a marital breakup without a legitimate cause is obliged to reconcile, and should be accountable to contribute his or her share to the material upkeep of the family home. The parties could confirm these obligations in writing with intent to give them binding effect in the civil forum.
Civil annulment is the process by which a Court states that a marriage never legally existed.