Dignitas Connubii
English translation:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20050125_dignitas-connubii_en.html
The Instruction Dignitas Connubii, on the norms to be observed
at ecclesiastical tribunals in matrimonial proceedings, was compiled by the
Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts with the collaboration of the other
most closely concerned Dicasteries of the Holy See. The Instruction was
presented to journalists accredited to the Holy See Press Office on Tuesday,
8 February [2005].
Speakers at the press conference included Cardinal Julián Herranz,
President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts; Archbishop Angelo
Amato, S.D.B., Secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith;
Archbishop Domenico Sorrentino, Secretary of the Congregation for Divine
Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments; Bishop Velasio De Paolis, C.S.,
Secretary of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura; and Mons.
Antoni Stankiewicz, Dean of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota....
Cardinal Julián
Herranz
President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts
Most Rev. Mons.
Antoni Stankiewicz
Dean of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota
Bishop Velasio
De Paolis, C.S.
Secretary of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura
Cardinal Julián
Herranz
President of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts
A simple purpose: helping tribunals
handle their work better |
The Instruction Dignitas Connubii which we are presenting today is
the result of the lengthy endeavour that the Dicasteries of the Holy See here
represented embarked on, at the Holy Father's explicit request, in 1996: in addition
to the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline
of the Sacraments, the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura and the
Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota.
Reason for this Document
The purpose of the Instruction is very simple: to offer the ministers of
justice who work in ecclesiastical tribunals a practical Document, a sort of vademecum that will serve as an easy guide to enable them to handle their work better
in canonical processes of matrimonial nullity. Thus, it was desired to repeat
the positive experience that the similar Instruction, Provida Mater,
met with in 1936.
Both Instructions were published about 20 years after the respective Codes
of Canon Law (1917 and 1983), not in order to compare the Codes with another
legislative text nor, still less, to abrogate them, but merely to facilitate
their consultation and application.
On the one hand, the Instruction presents in a unified manner all that
concerns the canonical process of matrimonial nullity, as distinct from the
Code of Canon Law in which the relative norms are scattered in the various
sections.
On the other hand, it integrates the juridical developments that occurred
in the period immediately following the promulgation of the Code: the
authentic interpretations of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts,
the responses of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, the
jurisprudence of the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota.
As usually happens with norms that are less important than laws, this
Instruction does not only reiterate the text of the canonical code, but also
contains interpretations, explanations of what the laws prescribe and further
measures concerning procedures for their execution.
With this Document the Holy See intends once again to exercise its
universal mission regarding the administration of justice throughout the
Church: in this case, concretely in the context of the Latin Church. Far from
diminishing the responsibility of diocesan Bishops for the individual
tribunals dependent upon them, it seeks with this mission to strengthen and
encourage them in a positive way.
As the Holy Father reasserted a few days ago, the diocesan Bishops are
"by divine law judges in their communities.... It is on their behalf
that the tribunals administer justice. Bishops are therefore called to be
personally involved in ensuring the suitability of the members of the
tribunals, diocesan or interdiocesan, of which they are the Moderators,
and in verifying that the sentences passed conform to right doctrine.
Sacred Pastors cannot presume that the activity of their tribunals is merely
a 'technical' matter from which they can remain detached, entrusting it
entirely to their judicial vicars (cf. CIC, cann. 391, 1419, 1423 §
1)" (Address to the Roman Rota, 29 January 2005, n. 4; L'Osservatore
Romano English edition, [ORE], 2 February, p. 3).
The full and dynamic involvement of the particular Churches is in fact
crucial if the functioning of tribunals and the training of ministers of
justice are to be improved, inconsistencies set right and abuses in
proceedings corrected, and if sentences are to conform fully to the Church's
legislation and doctrine on marriage.
On this subject, it is also increasingly necessary to activate the synergy
of ecclesial communion between the universal Church and the particular
Churches, understanding that the Apostolic See's interventions constitute
neither an interference nor an intention to relieve any of the competent
bodies of responsibility: indeed, their purpose is quite the opposite.
Reason for the canonical process of matrimonial nullity
This Instruction confirms the need to submit the question of the validity
or nullity of a marriage of the faithful to a truly judicial trial.
Sometimes, this traditional praxis of the Church is the subject of
criticism or reservations, as though an excessive formalism were entailed.
Simpler ways to a solution are suggested that would even solve the problem
solely in the internal forum, through the so-called "nullity of
conscience", in which the Church would do no more than to register the
conviction of the spouses themselves as to whether or not their marriage was
valid.
Sometimes, it is also hoped that the Church would give up any sort of
trial and leave this kind of juridical problem in the hands of courts of
civil law.
On the contrary, the Church reaffirms her competence to deal with these
causes, for in them is at stake the existence of the marriage of at least one
of her faithful, especially if we remember that marriage is one of the seven
sacraments instituted by Christ himself and entrusted to the Church. To forgo
involvement in this problem would be equivalent, in practice, to obscuring
the sacramental holiness of marriage.
This would be even harder to understand in the present circumstances of
confusion about the natural identity of marriage and the family in some civil
legislation that not only accepts and facilitates divorce but in certain
cases even casts doubt on the indispensable feature of heterosexuality in
marriage.
Furthermore, neither in the Church nor in civil society can marriage be
considered an exclusively private matter whose validity could be judged by
the parties themselves with a juridic efficacy that would permit them to
contract another union.
Apart from the great unreliability of human judgment on matters of a
strong personal involvement where there can obviously be discrepancies
between the parties themselves, it is necessary above all to understand that
the conjugal bond, the true foundation of a family, does not only concern the
spouses but also any children who may be born to them, and the whole of
society, both ecclesial and civil.
Marriage, therefore, in conformity with a conviction rooted in the
civilizations of all the ages, is a public union. Hence, those who contract
it cannot declare its nullity themselves.
What is necessary instead is a true ascertainment of the objective truth
concerning the validity or invalidity of the union.
This commitment to seeking the truth must satisfy two fundamental
conditions: it must permit the defence and discussion of the arguments both
for and against nullity, as well as the gathering of evidence that proves the
one or the other. It must also assign the task of judgment to an impartial
third party.
These two prerequisites are essential to judicial proceedings, a juridic
institution which, moreover, the Church herself has largely contributed to
shaping throughout history.
In the case of the processes of matrimonial nullity, a specific role has
been introduced that enables those characteristics to be maintained when both
parties are in agreement in requesting the declaration of nullity: in each
case it is the task of the defender of the bond to contribute all that can be
deduced in favour of the existing validity of the marital bond.
Everyone knows human fallibility can lead to a practical decision in which
there is no true justice, or in which it may be delayed: Of course, it is not
easy to judge when these situations actually do occur, so it is essential to
be cautious in providing information on proceedings, avoiding the
superficiality of a tabloid scandal with no proper basis.
On the other hand, it would be absurd to denigrate in general a means
valid in itself such as an ecclesiastical tribunal, merely because it may not
have functioned well in a few cases.
In this regard, the Church intends to take the only wise path: to persevere
in her intention to improve the seriousness and rapidity of proceedings,
facilitating access to them for all concerned, providing equal opportunities
and rendering the decisions of all tribunals increasingly uniform.
Basic question: the good of marriage and of the family
Through the efforts by personnel and the means that she designates to this
pastoral field, the Church desires to make a positive contribution to
achieving an important objective which is central to John Paul II's
Pontificate: the good of marriage and the family.
"The future of humanity passes by way of the family!" (Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio, 22 November
1981, n. 86): this heartfelt exclamation of the Pope shows the urgent need
for the commitment of the Church, of Christians and of a multitude of people
of good will to protect and promote marriage and the family in the
contemporary historical context.
The pressures of hedonism and selfishness that subordinate everything to
their own satisfaction is a tremendous pastoral challenge in our day. What
stands in danger of passing unperceived is the goodness and beauty of the
matrimonial and family institution in its genuine essence as a profoundly
personal reality.
People forget that it is necessary to fight to stay faithful to a
commitment of love and justice, which by its nature embraces the whole of
life: the reciprocal gift of husband and wife for the purpose of creating a
family open to life and that death alone can dissolve (cf. can. 1141).
In the context of a divorce mentality, canonical proceedings of annulment
can also easily be misunderstood as no more than a means to obtain a divorce
with apparent Church approval. The difference between nullity and divorce
would be merely nominal. By skilful manipulation of the causes of nullity,
every failed marriage would be annulled.
The Roman Pontiffs, especially in their annual Address to the Roman Rota,
have often demonstrated the true meaning of matrimonial nullity which is
inseparable from the search for the truth, since the declaration of nullity
is in no way the dissolution of an existing bond but merely an observation,
in the name of the Church, of the inexistence of a true marriage from the
start.
Indeed, wherever possible, the Church encourages the convalidation of
marriages that are null. John Paul II explained it as follows: "The
spouses themselves must be the first to realize that only in the loyal quest
for the truth can they find their true good, without excluding a priori the
possible convalidation of a union that, although it is not yet a sacramental
marriage, contains elements of good, for themselves and their children, that
should be carefully evaluated in conscience before reaching a different
decision" (Address to the Roman Rota, 28 January 2002, n. 6; ORE,
6 February, p. 6).
In short, it is necessary to rediscover the dignity of marriage in the
dimensions of both human nature and salvation in Christ.
As an indispensable good for persons and societies, the riches of marriage
and the family, which in Christ are transformed into a real process of
sanctification and of an apostolate, is what this Instruction intends to
promote, in accordance with its specific juridic dimension.
Most Rev. Mons.
Antoni Stankiewicz
Dean of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota
Moral certainty and the search for
the objective truth |
Proofs, concept and need for the moral certainty of the judge
The Instruction presented here coordinates in 61 articles (155-216) the
instruments or proofs in the search for the objective truth in the marriage
process. These proofs are made available by the parties and the judge to enable
ascertainment of the evidence put forward by the spouses in the cause, which
are important in proving the nullity of the impugned marriage.
Only on the basis of the efficacy of the outcome of testing the proofs
admitted in matrimonial proceedings, such as the declarations of the parties
(arts. 177-182), the documents (arts. 183-192), the witnesses (arts.
193-202), the expert opinions and the presumptions (arts. 214-216), can the
judge reach moral certitude about the cause in question so as to pass a sentence
or a confirmative decree.
The moral certainty in question in this process should be understood to
mean the judge's state of mind, his conviction and his firm adherence to the
truth, made known and proven in the trial, concerning the existence of factors
that already invalidated the marriage at the moment of its celebration.
It is not, therefore, a matter of an absolute certainty, in which every
possible doubt about the truth of the facts to be judged is totally excluded,
nor is it a purely subjective certainty based on personal opinion, sentiment
or an impression of the cause; rather, it is a matter of an objective moral
certitude, objectively founded on those things [ex actis] which have
been carried out and proven in the process (cf. art. 247 § 3).
Indeed, the new norm states: "In order to declare the nullity of a
marriage there is required in the mind of the judge moral certainty of its
nullity" (art. 247 § 1).
To reach this, "a preponderance of the proofs and indications is not
sufficient, but it is required that any prudent positive doubt of making an
error, in law or in fact, is excluded, even if the mere possibility of the
contrary remains" (art. 247 § 2).
Probative value of the parties' declaration
Consequently "the judge who, after a diligent study of the cause, is
not able to arrive at this certainty, is to rule that the nullity of the
marriage has not been proven" (art. 247 § 5).
On the lines of the norms in the Code (cf. cann. 1536, § 2; 1679),
recognizing the probative force of the declarations and confessions that the
parties have submitted for judgment, the Instruction also explains the
meaning of "judicial confession" in cases of the nullity of
marriage, such as the admission of a fact that is contrary to the validity of
the marriage (cf. art. 179 § 2).
Even if the trust shown to the personal dignity of the parties concerned
ensures recognition of the probative value of their confessions and
declarations, which are to be assessed by the judge together with all the
other circumstances of the case, nonetheless the force of full proof cannot
be attributed to them unless other elements of proof are present that
entirely corroborate them (cf. art. 180 § 1).
To this end, should it be impossible to provide full proof otherwise, the
judge may avail himself of witnesses to corroborate the credibility and
veracity of the parties with regard to the nullity of their marriage, in
addition to other indications and helps (cf. art. 180 § 2).
All this demonstrates the sensibility of the legislator to the spouses-parties
in the cause of the marriage that is challenged and the positive appreciation
in the norms, as far as possible, that is attributed to the judicial account
of their painful matrimonial situation.
In the tension between the search for the objective truth, which is the
purpose of and reason for the process, and justice corroborated with equity
(cf. can. 221 § 2), which is the means for achieving this goal, the
Instruction fits into the form of a procedural canonical tradition,
preserving the principle of the second or higher grade of trial (arts.
263-289) and the double conforming sentence (arts. 290-294).
Indeed, whether it is formally (cf. art. 291 § 1), substantially or
equivalently conforming (cf. art. 291 § 2), the double conforming sentence precludes
a further appeal (cf. art. 290 § 1); moreover, should it declare the nullity
of a marriage, providing there is no impediment, it offers the parties the
possibility of remarrying (cf. art. 301 § 1).
Furthermore, even if the capacity for appeal of the principle of the
second grade of jurisdiction is weakened with the abbreviated first grade of
trial (cf. arts. 264-265), it nonetheless guarantees greater reliability in
the ascertainment of the truth relative to the value of every marriage and of
the judgment on it, and thus safeguards the "favor matrimonii"
(can. 1060) and the "favor indissolubilitatis" that must
always inspire the judicial activity of the Church.
Bishop Velasio
De Paolis, C.S.
Secretary of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura
Instruction provides reliable
explanation of the tribunal procedure
General considerations on matrimonial causes today |
The Instruction Dignitas Connubii concerns the approximately 800
diocesan or interdiocesan tribunals of the Latin Church that deal almost
exclusively with cases of matrimonial nullity.
The number of nullity cases has increased enormously in recent decades,
especially in countries with an ancient Christian tradition. Numerous factors
have given rise to this increase, among which, in general, the following can
be pointed out:
1. Widespread secularization, which brings with it erroneous conceptions
of marriage compared to the ideal proposed by the Church; as a result, many
marriages today are null, precisely because the faithful exclude from them
constitutive elements essential to their existence.
2. A more precise knowledge of the human mind leads to the realization
that in specific cases matrimonial consent does not suffice to bind people to
the covenant of marriage.
3. A third reason is without any doubt also a factor of conscience: many
of the faithful who have obtained a divorce and are therefore permitted by
civil law to marry again, ask for a declaration of nullity because they know
that, for Catholics, a valid marriage can only be one that is celebrated
according to the laws of the Church.
Some statistical data
It is first of all necessary to provide some statistics concerning causes
of matrimonial nullity. The source is the Annuario Statistico della Chiesa for 2002. However, the cases of matrimonial nullity introduced at the
tribunals of the Eastern Catholic Churches are also included here.
According to the above-mentioned Annuario, 56,236 ordinary trials
for the declaration of matrimonial nullity were concluded, 46,092 of them
with an affirmative sentence and 2,894 with a negative one; 4,649 were
quashed and 2,601 were discontinued.
It can be presumed that in a considerable number of the suits overturned
or abandoned, there was no prospect of reaching an affirmative verdict on the
nullity of the marriage.
Of the 46,092 affirmative sentences of the tribunal of the first instance
after an ordinary trial, 343 were pronounced in Africa, 676 in Oceania, 1,562
in Asia, 8,855 in Europe and 36,656 in America, 30,968 in North America and
5,688 in the whole of Central and South America.
The vast majority of these so-called affirmative decisions are then
confirmed by the local court of appeal.
Indeed, the Roman Rota receives few cases from the tribunals of the second
and third instance, that is, fewer than 150 a year. These are usually very
complicated causes in which a lower tribunal has often issued a negative
sentence.
Some reflections on the statistical data
The interpretation of statistical data is far from easy. However, it can
be said that:
— The total number of cases of marital nullity in the world shows that
this is no insignificant or purely academic phenomenon, but a reality that
should not be underestimated.
— In various parts of the world, there is only a very limited chance of
obtaining such a declaration.
The faithful do not, of course, have the right to obtain the annulment of
their marriage whenever they wish; but in the case of a well-founded and
probable doubt about the nullity of their marriage they must have a real
possibility to introduce their case and to obtain a just decision.
— In countries where ecclesiastical tribunals are functioning and
accessible, the number of cases of marital nullity and affirmative sentences
differ. Concerning this observation, it is vital to avoid coming to hasty
conclusions.
Much depends, in fact, on the actual availability of resources and
especially of trained personnel.
Indeed, it should be remembered above all that statistics only have a
relative value.
The real question, in fact, does not concern the possibly high number of
sentences pro nullitate matrimonii, but the seriousness of the
jurisprudence together with the real possibility of obtaining a declaration
of nullity within a reasonable period of time, should the marriage truly be
invalid.
— Since the Apostolic Tribunal of the Roman Rota usually judges only the
most complicated cases of matrimonial nullity, it does not seem correct to
compare the percentage of negative decisions issued by the Roman Rota with
the percentage of negative decisions issued by lower tribunals.
The recently published Instruction certainly offers ministers of justice
who work in the ecclesiastical tribunals a clear and reliable explanation of
the procedure for bringing cases of marital nullity to conclusion, with both
the seriousness and speed required by their very nature.
Taken from:
L'Osservatore Romano
Weekly Edition in English
9 March 2005, page 6
|