|
NEWSLETTER: No. 137 MARCH 2004
- Holy Father’s 2004 Address to
Rotal Officials
- Vatican Norms Concerning Grave
Offences Including Sexual Abuse of Minors
- Derogation from these Norms
- Departure from and return to the
Sacred Ministry
- Safeguarding Rights on
Investigation of Allegations of Misconduct
(Clergy and Religious)
- Canon Law Society and the Nolan
Report
- Interpretation of Canon 1598 §2 3
- Notice Concerning MDGBI
- News Items
- New Publication by Father
William Woestman, OMI
- Endpiece: The Compensation
Culture
DOCUMENTS
I. Address
of the Holy Father to the Rota
II.
Apostolic Letter: Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela
III. Letter
of Cardinal Ratzinger Concerning the Apostolic Letter
IV. Norms
Concerning the Apostolic Letter
V.
Derogations from these Norms [February 2003]
VI. Comment
on the Norms [Mgr. Gordon Read]
VII.
Readmission to the Sacred Ministry [Congregation of the
Clergy]
VII.
Departure from sacred Ministry at the Initiative of the
Apostolic See and Readmission [Comment by Mgr Gordon Read]
IX.
Safeguarding Rights when Investigating Allegations of
Misconduct by Clergy and Religious
X. Comment
[Mgr. Gordon Read]
XI. Letter
from CLS to the Bishops’ Conference [9 October, 2002]
XII.
Memorandum of the CLS Working Party on the Nolan Report to
the Bishops’ Conference
XIII.
Interpretation of Canon 1598 §2 [Extract from Roman
Replies]
The topic
chosen by the Pope for his discourse to the “College of
Prelate Auditors, Officials and Advocates of the Roman Rota”
for this year is the presumption of the validity of marriage
(Canon 1060). The Pope addressed the Roman Rota on Thursday
29 January 2004. He draws attention to the fact that there
are critics of this favor juris who wonder if it
might not be more correct to presume the invalidity of a
marriage contracted rather than its validity. The Pope says
that “to grasp the significance of this presumption one
should first remember that it does not represent an
exception with regard to a general rule. On the contrary, it
is a matter of applying to marriage a presumption that
constitutes a fundamental principle of every juridical
disposition: human acts, licit in themselves and that affect
juridical relations, are presumed valid, even if proof of
their invalidity is obviously admissible”. [Translation from
L‘Osservatore Romano 11 February, 2004].
It will be
recalled that CLSN No. 129 for March 2002 the APOSTOLIC
LETTER MOTU PROPRIO Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela
(pp.20-2!), of 30 April 2001, together with the letter
of Cardinal Ratzinger of 18 May 2001. The motu proprio
also referred to Norms issued on 30 April 2001. However,
these Norms were not available when the March 2002 CLSN went
to press. There has now been certain derogations to these
Norms. Accordingly to simplify reference to these documents,
this number of CLSN contains the following: (a) The motu
proprio Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela of 30 April
2001; (b) The letter of Cardinal Ratzinger on the motu
proprio dated 18 May 2001; (c) The Norms promulgated
with the motu proprio of 30 April 2001; (d) Revisions
of these Norms dated 7 February 2003.
It will be
noted that very soon after the publication of the documents
mentioned above, namely, (a), (b), (c) and (d) certain
important derogations were made to this law. As Monsignor
Read says in his further comment, it is now already
anticipated that there will be a volume of cases referred to
the CDF and as a result, greater flexibility will be needed
to deal with such matters, specially locally e.g. a
dispensation from the requirements of the priesthood and the
requirements for a doctorate in Canon Law (cf. Article 8
about Judges; Article 9 about the Promotor of Justice,
Article 10 about Notaries). Monsignor Read looks at these
Norms to see how well the Revisions (and the Derogations)
balance the rights of those concerned. He pays special
attention to two important articles in The Furrow
2/2003; one by Father Patrick Hannon; and the other by Nuala
O’Loan, then the police ombudsman in Northern Ireland.
Father
Gregory Ingels, a name much familiar to those who watch the
Canon Law website, gave a paper to the Canon Law Society of
Australia and New Zealand’s thirty sixth Conference at
Christchurch, New Zealand (16-19 September, 2002; pp.
41-60). A word of caution needs to be raised here concerning
a possible misunderstanding of the point of departure
(whatever that may have been) from the active ministry;
and return to it. There is, of course, a procedure
for someone who seeks legitimate permission for dispensation
from the clerical state (and receives an appropriate
rescript) and does not follow this with a marriage in the
Roman Catholic Church; or a cleric who leaves the sacred
ministry and attempts a (invalid) marriage which is not
convalidated. For such situations there are provisions
established by the Roman Curia. In the case of cleric who
has not sought a dispensation and yet leaves the ministry
and priesthood for the time being, and wishes to return to
the active ministry, the competent Congregation is the
Congregation of the Clergy. For those who did seek (and
received) dispensations, but have not married in the Church,
the competent Congregation is the one which dealt with the
request for laicisation. The Norms concerning readmission to
the active ministry of the Church were published (in
English) in Roman Replies for 2001, pp.2-25. For the ease of
readers, these Norms are reproduced at Document No.VII.
However, this kind of situation is quite different from the
one being dealt with by Father Gregory Ingels. Father Ingels
deals with four different situations relating to departure
from the clerical state. Monsignor Gordon Read has prepared
a Comment but deals only with the situation of a cleric who
has left the clerical state “at the initiative of the Holy
See”.
The same
Father Gregory Ingels gave another paper to the Canon Law
Society of Australia and New Zealand’s 36th Conference in
Christchurch, New Zealand in September 2002. This paper
itself is included in this issue of CLSN (by kind permission
of the CLSANZ). Monsignor Gordon Read has produced a useful
Commentary on Father Ingels’s paper. The most fundamental
point made by Father Ingels is that we must abide by the
principles set out in the gospels — given expression in our
canonical tradition. “These principles may not be perfect,
but we depart from them at our peril”.
Following
the September 2002 publication of the final Nolan Report, an
invitation was made to the Canon Law Society to be involved
in some sort of working party relating to the Report. The
first overtures made to the Canon Law Society seem to
indicate that the CLS would have some part in the Report;
but the body to prepare the Report would be made up of
members with a variety of expertises. The Canon Law Society,
understandably, chose not to follow this course; and
produced its own group made up of Canonists to produce a
proper canonical comment. The Bishops’ Conference was
advised of this by Monsignor Gordon Read for the CLS on 9
October 2002. (See Document No. Xl). To this there was no
reply. In the spring of 2003, a memorandum of the CLS
Working Party on the Nolan Report was sent to the Bishops’
Conference (See Document No. XI). To date there has been no
reply. The Canon Law Society therefore is presently
preparing an appropriate set of canonical guidelines on the
implementation, so far as is possible, of the Nolan Report.
Readers of
CLSN will recall that in the September number (135,
pp.162-163), there appeared a Comment by Monsignor Gordon
Read on a short article in Roman Replies and Advisory
Opinions 2001. In the light of the views Monsignor Read
expressed, Professor Augustine Mendonįa, who wrote the piece
on Roman Replies asked that the whole of the article which
he prepared for Roman Replies should be made available in
CLSN for the benefit of readers who have been following this
point.
The
following notice was sent with the current numbers of MDGBI.
It was dated 18 December 2003. To avoid any confusion
regarding volume numbers and years of MDGBI, the following
should be understood. The cover of every volume of MDGBI
indicates the year in which the sentences were given; it is
also indicated that the decisions were given between 1
November of the previous year to 31 October of the year in
question. For the benefit of new subscribers, the following
information may be useful:
MDGBI Sentences given in 2002 = Volume 38
MDGBI Sentences given in 2001 = Volume 37
MDGBI Sentences given in 2000 = Volume 36
Congratulations are offered to Monsignor Edward Walker who
has been appointed a member of the Nottingham Chapter. The
new Canon’s brother, who is a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary,
was at the celebration.
The Holy
Father appointed as Major Penitentiary of the Apostolic
Penitentiary, Cardinal James Francis Stafford, until
now President of the Pontifical Council for the Laity (4
Oct, 2003).
The Holy
Father appointed as Under-Secretary of the Congregation for
the Clergy, Rev. Mons. Giovanni Carrų of the
Archdiocese of Turin, Parish Priest of the Cathedral of
Chieri (5 Nov, 2003).
The Holy
Father appointed as Secretary of the Pontifical Council for
the Laity, Mons. Josef Clemens, until now
Undersecretary of the Congregation for Institutes of
Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, raising
him to the dignity of Bishop. He has been assigned the
titular Episcopal See of Segermes (25 Nov, 2003).
The Holy
Father appointed Mons. Raffaello Funghini as
President of the Court of Appeal of Vatican City State (20
Dec, 2003).
The Holy
Father appointed Father Velasio De Paolis, CS., (Dean
of the Faculty of Canon Law at the Pontifical Urban
University) as Secretary of the Supreme Tribunal of the
Apostolic Signatura; and he has been elevated to the dignity
of a Bishop. He succeeds Bishop Francesco Salerno who has
resigned having reached the canonical age limit of
seventy-five.
The
Faculty of Canon Law, Saint Paul University, Ottawa, is
pleased to announce the publication of a new book by Fr
William H. Woestman, O.M.I. Ecclesiastical Sanctions and
the Penal Process: A Commentary on the Code of Canon Law
2 rev, and updated ed.. Faculty of Canon Law, Saint Paul
University, Ottawa, 2003, xviii, 381 p., ISBN 0-919261-53-1
CAN$53.00; US$38.00; other countries US $40.00. Order from:
Publications, Faculty of Canon Law, Saint Paul University,
233 Main Street, Ottawa, ON, K1S 1C4 Fax: (613) 751 4036
Tel: (613) 751 4017 Email:
sjutras@ustpaul.uottawa.ca Invoice upon request:
MasterCard/Visa accepted. (Credit card purchases charged at
CAN$ rate).
This is
widespread in the United Slates of America; it is rapidly
becoming so in England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
Hopefully there are good reasons why this feature should not
start to make its appearance in canonical writings. In the
USA there is now an annual Stella Award, taking its name
from the award made to a lady who was burnt by a hot cup of
coffee that she had purchased from McDonalds. The second
place this year in the Stella Award has gone to Ms Kara
Walton of Claymont, Delaware, who successfully sued a
nightclub in a neighbouring city when she fell from the
bathroom window to the floor and knocked out two of her
front teeth. This occurred whilst Ms Walton was trying to
sneak out of the window in the ladies room to avoid paying
the $3.50 cover charge. She was awarded $12,000 for dental
expenses.
|
