NEWSLETTER NO. 140 DECEMBER 2004
- The Lynwood Lecture: 2004
(Bishop John McAreavey)
- Rotal Jurisprudence: Exclusion of
the bonum coniugum (Professor Augustine Mendonca)
- Offences Against Religion in the
UK (Father Nicholas Kavanagh)
- Visit to Roman Dicasteries by
Tribunal Personnel (Father John Chaloner)
- Third Instance Hearings Outside
the Rota
- Book Review: Surprised by Canon
Law (Father James Webb)
- Books Available: "Ritual, Text and
Law" (Ed. K.G. Cushing & R.F. Gyug)
"Sacraments: Initiation, Penance & Anointing of the Sick"
(3rd edition) (Father William Woestman, OMI)
"Exegetical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law"
(8th volume) (ed. E Caparros)
- General Information: Pontifical
Council for Legislative Texts (members)
Bishop Geoffrey Robinson
Father Robert Ombres, OP
Address of Canon Law Abstracts
Canon David Cousins
Bishop John McAreavey, Bishop of
Dromore, and a
long standing member of the Canon Law Society,
gave the Lyndwood Lecture for 2004 at Archbishop’s House,
Westminster on 15 November 2004. The topic was:
Mixed Marriages: Conversations in Theology,
Ecumenism, Canon Law and Pastoral Life.
The Bishop
made clear at the outset that the term Mixed Marriage
referred (so far as his paper was concerned) to marriages between
Roman Catholics and other baptised Christians. As he says the topic
is extremely important because it “impinges directly on the lives of
many people, as well as on ecumenical relationships”.
He quotes Cardinal Kasper saying: “We
live still in a transitional period which will probably last for
some time to come… the Churches did not only diverge through
discussion; they diverged through the way they lived, through
alienation and estrangement. Therefore, they need to come closer to
each other again in their lives; they must get accustomed to each
other, pray together, work together, live together, bearing the
sting of the incompleteness of a communio and of the
still impossible Eucharistic communion around the Lord’s Table."
The issue of Eucharistic sharing
remains a painful one. But the Bishop comments that it
would not be correct to ignore a significant development in
Britain and Ireland. “One Bread One Body” (issued
jointly in 1998 by the three Bishops’ Conferences) permits
Eucharistic sharing on the occasion of a celebration of a mixed
marriage provided the normal conditions laid down in Canon law are
fulfilled.
The Bishop is clear that canonically the
Churches are living in a time of flux. “Since it is the
nature of the law to favour certainty and stability it has
been suggested the Canon Law could be an obstacle to ecumenism”.
The Bishop quotes Father Robert Ombres OP that faced with this
tension between stability and change “the best a Canon Lawyer can do
is to weigh the values involved and see how the law can be adjusted
to the legitimate postulates of the life of Christian bodies”.
Father Ombres adds that “anyone doing this ‘weighing’ and
‘adjusting’ should be as competent in ecclesiology as in Canon Law”.
[See Document No.I].
It is well to remember back in the
late 1960s when the grounds of the grave lack of due
discretion showed delicately in the fields of English speaking
jurisprudence. Of course, the references were all to much older
Rotal decisions; and even quotations back to St Thomas. The real
impetus was given by the production of Keating’s Doctoral Thesis on
Mental Impairment which was being perused in the late
1960s. It is true to say that there was a little nail biting at
that time when the first lack of due discretion decision appeared in
MDEW for 1967. The whole idea of a ground of nullity being used
which was not within the Code gave pause for caution! However, with
the quoted Rotal Decisions from Keating, English speaking Canon
Lawyers became bold. Now, not only is this ground mentioned in the
law; but a vast proportion of nullity cases rest upon the grounds in
Canon 1095 specially no.2.
The new area of intention contra
bonum coniugum is less venturesome; but nonetheless breaks
(or broke) new ground. The reason why this as a ground for nullity
is not quite so breathtakingly new is because it follows from
consideration of marriage as a consortium totius vitae.
This heading has been in use now for a few years in local Tribunals;
but the Rota had not produced any decisions. Indeed, Monsignor
Cormac Burke (in 1998) indicated that there had been no Rotal
decisions on the exclusion of the bonum coniugum.
Professor Augustine Mendonça
acknowledges this to have been a true statement (up until 1998).
But he points to Rotal Decisions of 9 June 2000 (coram Pinto) and 8
November 2000 (coram Civili) which deal with the exclusion of
the bonum coniugunm. He has written an article in The
Jurist [62 (2002) 2, pp.378-420]. Cordial thanks are paid to
Father Tom Green, the Editor, and to The Jurist for
permission to reprint the article. Dealing with these two sentences,
professor Mendonça’s aim is twofold: namely, to identify the
judicial principles that have emerged from the two sentences and to
provide some practical insights which could be used by local
Tribunals in evaluating marriage cases put forward on these grounds.
However, Professor Mendonça points
out that the two sentences do not create normative jurisprudence
“although because of their intrinsic logical consistency, even two
sentences could provide further directions in identifying
appropriate principles applicable specifically to this ground of
nullity”.[See Document No.II]. Warm thanks are offered to
Professor Mendonça for allowing his article to be reproduced here.
Recent days have shown up
discussion, debate, even
anger about a new Bill for Parliament [The
Serious
Organised Crime and Police Bill (2004, Schedule 10)]. “Even
comedians, such as Rowan Atkinson, have been brave enough to put
their heads above the power of political correctness to question
what the limits of possible humour will be”. As a result of the Bill
which seeks to repress any stimulation of religious hatred, an
article in the Law Section of The Times that pointed out “to
say all men are created equal is idealistic, but to say that all
ideas are created equal is idiotic”. Father Nicholas Kavanagh has
examined the present Government’s Bill outlawing incitement to
religious hatred in the anti-terrorism legislation then before the
House of Commons. The House of Lords deleted the provision from the
Bill and set up a Select Committee of the House to examine the whole
array of offences against religion before recommending any change of
the present law. Father Kavanagh reviews the avenues of redress open
to those who feel aggrieved as a result of being vilified or abused
on account of religious allegiance. [See Document No.III].
A visit was made by Judicial Vicars to
Roman
Dicasteries some years ago. Another visit took
place in October 2004. A formal report
on the visit was made to the Northern Moot held at the Liverpool
Pastoral Centre on 21 October 2004 by Monsignor Michael Tully.
Father John Chaloner (the priest who can claim to be the parish
priest of the parish in the centre of the United Kingdom, Dunsop
Bridge) has written a less formal piece for the Newsletter [See
Document No IV].
During the visit of Judicial Vicars to
Rome and their special
audience at the Signatua Apostolica
the matter of requests for
Pontifical Commissions (i.e. a Third Instance hearing
outside the Rota) was discussed. A set of guidelines was handed out
which concerned the nature and form of the application to the
Signatura. Apart from both Sentences in the case being sent to
the Signatura with the application, two particular points were
stressed.
One point had to do with the
nature of the disagreement between the two sentences. If the
disagreement between the two sentences is based upon a point of law
or if one of the sentences presents particular difficulties, the
Apostolic Signatura may decide that it would be better to have
the matter resolved by the Roman Rota. The document goes on to say
that “at other times the Signatura may grant the requested favour
but, in the light of some particular difficulties in the case, may
request a Tribunal to whom it entrusts the case in the Third
Instance to send a copy of the sentence to the Signatura”.
The document also stresses the fact that
it must be made quite clear
in the request as to who is the
proper Ordinary of the requesting party.
This is due to the practice of some Tribunals in
England and Wales not to indicate in the sentence the
domicile of the parties (as required by Canon 1612). In order to
avoid serious difficulties for a party in a particular case, a
specific address may be omitted from the sentence, but at least the
diocesan domicile should always be indicated (cf. Canon 102 §3).
[See Document No V].
Canon 1612 §1 states what the sentence
should contain in this order: (a) the invocation of the Divine Name;
(b) the Judge or the Tribunal; (c) the Plaintiff; (d) the
Respondent; (e) the name of the Proxy; (f) the full names of the
parties; (g) the domiciles of the parties (h) the name of the
Defender; (j) the name of the Promotor of Justice if she or he was
involved in the procedure.
The sentence will then set out an
outline of the facts with the views of the parties and the
formulation of the doubt. After this comes the dispositive part of
the sentence, with reference to
the reasons which support it. It must
end with the date and place in which it was given with the
signatures of the Judge or Judges and of the Notary.
This is a short book (129 pages) by two
lay Canonists; and consists of their answer to 150 questions most
commonly put by the person in the pew. The reviewer, Father Jimmy
Webb, says that the authors have done the laity a great service.
“They have made Canon Law interesting”. [see Document No.VI].
"Ritual, Text and Law": Presented
by Roger E Reynolds; and edited by Kathleen Cushing and Richard
F Gyug. The work concerns “the Church, Faith and Culture in the
Medieval West”. The essays in Ritual Text and Law provide a
stimulating exploration of the interrelated fields of medieval Canon
Law and liturgy, chiefly through the scrutiny of texts and their
transmissions. The studies are grouped thematically under the
headings of ‘Ritual ‘ and ‘Text and Law’, with each section having
an introduction by the editors, surveying recent developments in the
study of medieval Canon Law and liturgy. Individually, the
contributors offer new viewpoints on key issues and questions
relating to medieval religious, cultural and intellectual history,
particularly of the period c. 900-1200, and especially in the
Italian peninsula. Collectively, they illuminate the interaction of
medieval Christianity and its rituals, as well as the relationship
of the secular and the sacred as transmitted in liturgico-canonical
texts from the time of the early Church to the 14th
century. Available from Jackie Bressanelli, at Ashgate Publishing
Limited, Gower House, Croft Road, Aldershot, Hants, GU11 3HR: Tel:
01252 331551. Cost: Hardback, 340 pages, £50.
"Sacraments: Initiation,
Penance and
Anointing of the Sick" : This is a
commentary on Canons 840-1007 by Father
William Woestman, OMI., Third edition,
revised and updated. The second edition was printed in 1996. The new
(third) edition contains 22 appendices consisting principally of
documents from the Holy See and published after the promulgation of
the 1983 Code. From: Faculty of Canon Law, St Paul University, 223
Main Street, Ottawa, Ontario, KIF 1C4, Canada. Cost US $46.50,
(shipping extra).
Exegetical Commentary on the
Code of Canon Law: This
is an eight volume set. The publisher says:
This commentary is certain to be considered
among the definitive commentaries on the Codex Iuris Canonici
(CIC). The eight-book set represents the culmination of Professor
Pedro Lombardia’s visionary attempt to provide a thorough commentary
on the CIC. It includes contributions from 115 of the world’s most
respected canonists. An essential research tool for all canonists,
each volume offers an exhaustive, systematic exegesis of the Code.
Features of this new
English edition include:
+ 8-book set,
(8,000 + pages)
+ Latin-English
translation of the Code
+ Research sources
and cross-references
+ Ample commentary
on each Canon
The editor is the well known Ernest
Caparros. From Midwest Theological Forum, 1420 Davey Road,
Woodridge, Illinois, 60517, USA. US $1200. Individual volumes are
also available.
Credit cards are accepted. Telephone:
(630) 739 9750; or Fax (630) 739 9758 for cost of shipping outside
USA.
The Holy Father appointed as Members of
the Pontifical Council: Cardinal
Crescenzio Sepe, Prefect of the Congregation for the Evangelisation
of Peoples; Cardinal Walter Kasper, President of the Pontifical
Council for Promoting Christian Unity; Cardinal Attilio Nicora,
President of the Administration of the Patrimony of the Apostolic
See; and Archbishop Agostino Vallini, Archbishop Emeritus of Albano,
Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura
(20 November 2004).
The Bishop replied to the letter of the
Canon Law Society on
his retirement. His reply is
printed at Document No. VII.
Father
Robert Ombres, OP, was clearly enjoying
his time in Cambridge too much for
his superiors’ liking. Accordingly, he has been moved to higher
things. The Master General of the Dominicans has appointed Father
Ombres to be the Procurator General of the Order. His work there he
describes as “basically the Canonist of our Curia, particularly in
relation to the Holy See”; although one can be certain that he will
be involved with a lot more tasks in Rome than just that. He may
well be involved with a number of Dicasteries. His interest in and
knowledge of England will be so helpful to these Islands. His
address is: Convento di Santa Sabina, Piazza Pietro d’Illiria 1,
Aventino, 00153 Roma, Italy. He is wished some very happy years and
all blessings in his new role.
Please note the correct address of
Father Paul Hayward, the Editor of Canon Law Abstracts is:
Canon
Law Abstracts
The
Reverend Paul Hayward
4 Orme
Court
London
W2 4RL
Monsignor David Cousins has been
appointed to the Cathedral Chapter of St Chad’s in Birmingham. He
was installed on Tuesday, 5 October, 2004. All happiness and
blessings and congratulations are offered to the new Canon.
