What's the point of Canon Lawyers?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adawgj
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

adawgj

Guest
I don’t understand what Canon lawyers do and why we have them?
Whats the point of having trials? I mean aren’t inquisition days over?
Maybe someone could make my ignorant brain enlightened on this topic.

Also how does one become a canon lawyer?

This topic is both cool and strange to me.
 
Canon lawyers are experts in Canon Law. Canon Law is obscure - most laypeople have never read a single sentence. 20 years ago, I bought a copy at a Catholic bookstore (remember those?). They didn’t stock them, so it had to be special ordered.

Becoming a canon lawyer is similar to becoming a civil lawyer, except there is no Bar and no licensing authority. You may call yourself a “canon lawyer” if you have appropriate educational credentials.

Bishops will have a canon lawyer on staff to advise them and oversee the Diocese’s judicial court system, and, depending on the size of the Diocese, there may be several canon lawyers who serve in tribunals.

An individual may retain a canon lawyer to represent him in court. Someone might do this if he were facing excommunication, for example, and wanted an expert to present his case. As in the US civil law system, a canon lawyer can be appointed on behalf of someone who cannot afford to retain one.

Ecclesiastical courts are similar in most respects to US civil courts, except there is not a jury (though there are multiple judges).

Most Catholics have little interaction with the Church’s system of jurisprudence. Some will encounter it when filing a petition for a marriage annulment (which comprises the bulk of the court’s cases). In the case of the annulment, the lawyer representing the Church (the “defender of the bond”) will argue for the validity of the marriage.
 
Actually, there IS an equivalent to the Bar - as the requisite academic credentials are those issued by Rome.

Any person with an JCL degree has been accredited a “Juris Canonici Licentia” - the equivalent of a Masters in Canon Law.

A person with a JCD has the doctorate rather than licentiate.

The JCOL and JCOD are for Eastern Catholic Canon Law, but are otherwise identical.

Most persons serving as lawyers in canon law have licentiates. Officers of Canonical Courts, including defenders of the bond, promoters of justice, and the judges, must hold at least the JCL or JCOL.

Rome requires that an examination be sat in order to complete it; from what I’ve heard, the exam is in Latin for the JCL and JCD.
 
Same as the point of any other lawyer really - law of any kind is not always easy to interpret or apply.

As for trials - well, Canon Law does set some penalties for some violations, and does forbid some behaviour. Of course people should neither be punished nor stopped from doing something without a chance to see the evidence against them and make their case.
 
The history of the Ecclesiastical Court system under for example British law is a fascinating subject and one which most lawyers under the Common law code (as compared to the European Napoleonic code ) has to be familiar with to understand the difference between Equity and the Common law which had separate courts until the Judicature Act when their jurisdictions were combined.
The Courts of Equity were the remnant of the Church courts that held jurisdiction beside the King’s Courts. They were known for their reliance on morality and natural law rather than the very legalistic framework of the King’s Courts. Equity maintains this tradition as found in the famous decisions of Lord Denning
Canon law is thus a further remnant of those very courts that determined Canon Law when the Church’s courts had greater relevance throughout Europe.
 
same thing as all lawyers… to gum everything up with jargon… 😉
 
They deal mostly with annulment processes. They have to determine whether or not marriages can be dissolved or not. It’s a rigid system; Cardinal Mahony’s own brother couldn’t even get one, so contrary to what people think, wealth and connections mean squat.

But they also have a part in things like causes for saints, excommunications, the canonical status of religious communities, Catholic universities and a bunch of other stuff.

To get an idea, check out the Ewtn experts forum. There’s a special portion dedicated to Canon Law.

It doesn’t involve the inquisition and isn’t as medeival as American culture might make you think it is.
 
Aramis said:
Actually, there IS an equivalent to the Bar - as the requisite academic credentials are those issued by Rome.

Any person with an JCL degree has been accredited a “Juris Canonici Licentia” - the equivalent of a Masters in Canon Law.

A person with a JCD has the doctorate rather than licentiate.

The JCOL and JCOD are for Eastern Catholic Canon Law, but are otherwise identical.

Most persons serving as lawyers in canon law have licentiates. Officers of Canonical Courts, including defenders of the bond, promoters of justice, and the judges, must hold at least the JCL or JCOL.

Rome requires that an examination be sat in order to complete it; from what I’ve heard, the exam is in Latin for the JCL and JCD.
Click to expand...
Most people hear of canon lawyers in today’s world only when they know of Catholics in marriage nullity cases. But as an example of the importance of canon law and canonists, allow me to use the person quoted above as an example, if she or he does not mind.

Aramis is a Byzantine Catholic. As a member of the Catholic communion, Aramis is permitted to receive Holy Communion in any of the 22 or 23 Catholic churches (in full communion with the Holy Father and with each other). But not many Roman Catholics know about the Byzantines, and quite possibly some of the Latin priests. Suppose Aramis presents her- or himself to Holy Communion at a Latin parish but is denied when someone finds out beforehand that Aramis is Byzantine. The first thing to do is to discuss the matter with the pastor or parish administrator after Mass. If Aramis is not satisfied with the response, she or he could take the case to the bishop or ordinary of the diocese or ordinariate. If still Aramis is not satisfied with the ordinary’s response, she or he could consult a canon lawyer and lodge a complaint with the Holy See (there is at least one group of canon lawyers that I know, the St. Joseph Foundation, which deals with non-matrimonial issues).
 
angelic06 said:
Most people hear of canon lawyers in today’s world only when they know of Catholics in marriage nullity cases. But as an example of the importance of canon law and canonists, allow me to use the person quoted above as an example, if she or he does not mind.

Aramis is a Byzantine Catholic. As a member of the Catholic communion, Aramis is permitted to receive Holy Communion in any of the 22 or 23 Catholic churches (in full communion with the Holy Father and with each other). But not many Roman Catholics know about the Byzantines, and quite possibly some of the Latin priests. Suppose Aramis presents her- or himself to Holy Communion at a Latin parish but is denied when someone finds out beforehand that Aramis is Byzantine. The first thing to do is to discuss the matter with the pastor or parish administrator after Mass. If Aramis is not satisfied with the response, she or he could take the case to the bishop or ordinary of the diocese or ordinariate. If still Aramis is not satisfied with the ordinary’s response, she or he could consult a canon lawyer and lodge a complaint with the Holy See (there is at least one group of canon lawyers that I know, the St. Joseph Foundation, which deals with non-matrimonial issues).
Click to expand...
Don’t mind at all.

I’ve never had to go further than pointing out can. 844. But the fact is, said priest did call his diocese’s canon lawyer to confirm. (The irony - my pastor at that time WAS said canon lawyer… he was biritual.)

To bring up a few other issues - Canon law is very convoluted - specific jurisdictions overlap and abut.

Take, for example, a hypothetical Dominican friar assigned as a pastor and superior of a house. When functioning as a secular pastor, he’s acting under the CIC, the particular law of the ecclesiastical province, and the particular law of the diocese, and any special law applicable to the parish. As a superior of the attached house of Dominicans, he functions under the CIC and under the Dominican Order’s particular law, the provincial particular law, the Dominican Order’s charter, and under the general canon law relating to papal right religious orders. And, when both practical and not sinful, he has also to obey local civil and criminal law while doing so. As a friar, he’s not subject to the particular laws of the diocese or province, but is subject to the CIC, the dominican charter, etc. But, when acting as a pastor, he has to obey it in as much as what rights the faithful have have to be provided for.

And, in dealings with people of different churches (properly, Churches Sui Iuris) within the Catholic Communion, things can get even more convoluted.

Almost all Western religious are papal right; most Eastern are patriarchal or diocesan right, and so may be subject to diocesan law. Western law allows marriages to be witnessed by a deacon; eastern does not, and requires a priest. Roman law allows for a screen for confession, and requires a confessional be available; Eastern does neither - in fact, confessions are often done in the front of the nave. Roman Law requires a divine worship service - The mass or a Liturgy of the Word using the same readings as would a mass - for sunday and holy day obligation; eastern allows communal vespers or matins to fulfil the obligation if it is the tradition of the Church Sui Iuris.
 
Aramis said:
Actually, there IS an equivalent to the Bar - as the requisite academic credentials are those issued by Rome.
Click to expand...
You apparently don’t know what a “Bar exam” is. It is an exam administered AFTER attaining a degree (a JD in civil law). A person can have a JD from Yale or Harvard, but if he does not pass his Bar exam, he cannot practice civil law. A civil lawyer (in the US) must have a license to practice law (and will be issued a “Bar card” as evidence of this license, and this license is limited (in the US) to a particular state.). There is no such “Bar card” in Canon Law.

There is no such parallel in Canon Law. Once the necessary academic credentials are met, a person may call himself a canon lawyer. There is no Bar. There is nothing even remotely similar to a Bar. I am not aware of any mechanism in Canon Law to “disbar” a canon lawyer (because there is no Bar).

I said, correctly:
there is no Bar and no licensing authority. You may call yourself a “canon lawyer” if you have appropriate educational credentials.
Click to expand...
 
adawgj said:
I don’t understand what Canon lawyers do and why we have them?
Whats the point of having trials? I mean aren’t inquisition days over?
Maybe someone could make my ignorant brain enlightened on this topic.

Also how does one become a canon lawyer?

This topic is both cool and strange to me.
Click to expand...
Hello,

Basically, we help others correctly apply the law or apply it ourselves. We have canon lawyers because the Church is a visible institution that needs law in order to function. The law needs to be understood and utilized appropriately and, occasionally, reformed. Lawyers help do all those things.

The point of having trials is to decide controversial matters, vindicate rights, determine facts, apply penalties.

One becomes a canon lawyer by completing the required course of study, which can be found here: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20021114_decree-canon-law_en.html

To points raised in this thread: yes, all canon lawyers have to complete a comprehensive, oral examination at the conclusion of their licentiate program. And, no, this exam is not conducted in Latin.

Dan
 
=adawgj;11857184]I don’t understand what Canon lawyers do and why we have them?
Whats the point of having trials? I mean aren’t inquisition days over?
Maybe someone could make my ignorant brain enlightened on this topic.
Click to expand...
Also how does one become a canon lawyer?
Click to expand...
This topic is both cool and strange to me.
Click to expand...
Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke is the Head of the Apostolic Signatura [the Church’s High Coutr] and the International Director of the** Marain Catechist Lay Apostolate**, to which I have been called.

“Trails” as such are primarily dealings with priest, bishops and religious issues. The Court does very much more than that. For example approving the Official language of Church Teaching Documents, dealing wiith Marriage issues and Divorice and much more.

Except that being restricted to “church matters and issues”; the court’s range of responsibilities is not hugely differnt than civil court lawyers.

God Bless,
patrick
 
While Canon Lawyers primarily deal with annulment cases, Canon Lawyers also help with the facilitation of sainthood causes, appeals for decisions handed down by an Ordinary or a tribunal – for example, loss of faculties for a priest, priest assignment issues, or parish closings, working on legislative texts for the Vatican, and of course, teaching Canon Law.
 
DavidFilmer said:
You apparently don’t know what a “Bar exam” is. It is an exam administered AFTER attaining a degree (a JD in civil law). A person can have a JD from Yale or Harvard, but if he does not pass his Bar exam, he cannot practice civil law. A civil lawyer (in the US) must have a license to practice law (and will be issued a “Bar card” as evidence of this license, and this license is limited (in the US) to a particular state.). There is no such “Bar card” in Canon Law.

There is no such parallel in Canon Law. Once the necessary academic credentials are met, a person may call himself a canon lawyer. There is no Bar. There is nothing even remotely similar to a Bar. I am not aware of any mechanism in Canon Law to “disbar” a canon lawyer (because there is no Bar).

I said, correctly:
Click to expand...
Knowing a former JCL, the credential can be revoked by the Rota. The Rota essentially is the licensing authority. When he was suspended, so was his JCL.
 
Aramis said:
Knowing a former JCL, the credential can be revoked by the Rota. The Rota essentially is the licensing authority. When he was suspended, so was his JCL.
Click to expand...
Hello,

I guess anything is possible but that is directly contrary to canon 1338.2, which says there can be no deprivation of academic degrees. Even if there was such a thing, I don’t see how the Rota could ever be involved. Perhaps what happened is that this person was prohibited from acting as a canon lawyer before the Rota or before ecclesiastical courts. I recall that then-Archbishop Burke made this decision in St. Louis in regard to a certain doctor of canon law. But, that was just for his diocese and, again, I don’t see how the Rota could make this decision for tribunals throughout the world. The Signatura could do it, I think.

Dan
 
dans0622 said:
I guess anything is possible but that is directly contrary to canon 1338.2, which says there can be no deprivation of academic degrees. Even if there was such a thing, I don’t see how the Rota could ever be involved. Perhaps what happened is that this person was prohibited from acting as a canon lawyer before the Rota or before ecclesiastical courts. I recall that then-Archbishop Burke made this decision in St. Louis in regard to a certain doctor of canon law. But, that was just for his diocese and, again, I don’t see how the Rota could make this decision for tribunals throughout the world. The Signatura could do it, I think.
Click to expand...
It seems to me that you and Aramis are saying basically the same thing. IOW, a canon lawyer is actually “admitted to the bar” within a given diocese despite the fact that there is no “bar exam” as such. The lawyer’s acceptance by the diocese is the equivalent.

It’s not that the academic degree itself that is negated, but rather the right to practice, which is consistent with the idea of “disbarment” in civil law. A disbarred attorney still has his JD (or LLD or whatever) but he simply cannot practice in the jurisdiction in which he was disbarred. The example of Abp Burke is a good one: the lawyer in question was prohibited from practicing before ecclesiastical courts in his Archdiocese, and by extension, apparently in other courts on appeal from that same Archdiocese. And FWLIW, I agree that the Signatura could likely “disbar” a lawyer universally.
 
One of the canons says that ;you have the right to complain about anything to your local bishop. It’s stated a little more positively than that – to bring any matter to his attention.

I have an anxiety problem which I exacerbated by people who are talking in church, both before Mass and during Mass. I asked to be excused from the requirement for attending Mass.

The bishop declined to give me a blanket exemption, but told me I did not have to confess if I did not attend Mass for this reason.

After about a year, I went back to Sunday Mass and it was same-o, same-o. Ushers standing in the back talking almost non-stop during Mass. People in the pews doing pretty much the same – during Mass. There was one woman who answered her cell phone during Christmas midnight Mass and was talking for a while.

I’m trying to pray the rosary before Mass and there’s a couple nearby talking about how to operate their new digital camera.

One lady shows up in church BEFORE Mass trying to hand out her homemade candies; she even enlists the priest to announce at the end of mass that she is still handing out candy in the vestibule, on the way out.

With my disorder, this stuff is not only distracting, it makes me angry. At that point, there’s no reason for me to be in church.

I also attend weekday Mass, where there is USUALLY but not always more respectful conduct.

see next post
 
In my diocese, there’s a lot of parish consolidation going on. So, although a new combined parish may have the name, St. Jane, the old churches still keep their history names, in accordance with what? canon law.
 
=sirach2v4;11872718]One of the canons says that ;you have the right to complain about anything to your local bishop. It’s stated a little more positively than that – to bring any matter to his attention.
Click to expand...
I have an anxiety problem which I exacerbated by people who are talking in church, both before Mass and during Mass. I asked to be excused from the requirement for attending Mass.
Click to expand...
The bishop declined to give me a blanket exemption, but told me I did not have to confess if I did not attend Mass for this reason.
Click to expand...
After about a year, I went back to Sunday Mass and it was same-o, same-o. Ushers standing in the back talking almost non-stop during Mass. People in the pews doing pretty much the same – during Mass. There was one woman who answered her cell phone during Christmas midnight Mass and was talking for a while.
Click to expand...
I’m trying to pray the rosary before Mass and there’s a couple nearby talking about how to operate their new digital camera.
Click to expand...
One lady shows up in church BEFORE Mass trying to hand out her homemade candies; she even enlists the priest to announce at the end of mass that she is still handing out candy in the vestibule, on the way out.
Click to expand...
With my disorder, this stuff is not only distracting, it makes me angry. At that point, there’s no reason for me to be in church.
Click to expand...
I also attend weekday Mass, where there is USUALLY but not always more respectful conduct.
Click to expand...
see next post
Click to expand...
MAKE an APt and discuss this with your Pastor. Its a VALID concern

Patrick
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top