The Tribunal Handbook: Procedures for Formal Matrimonial Cases ed. by Lawrence G. Price, Daniel A. Smilanic, Victoria Vondenberger, RSM (review)

book reviews 613 THE TRIBUNAL HANDBOOK: PROCEDURES FOR FORMAL MATRIMONIAL CASES edited by Lawrence G. Price, Daniel A. Smilanic &VictoriaVondenberger, RSM.Alexandria,VA: Canon Law Society of America, 2005. What is a handbook? Britannica informs a handbook is a ready reference ; a concise guide. The Tribunal Handbook: Procedures for Formal Matrimonial Cases readily accomplishes this purpose and more. With its glossary, cross references, index, footnotes, sample letters/decrees, etc., the text is a must for anyone whose ministry includes the possibility of assisting someone in presenting a formal matrimonial case. Likewise, the handbook should also be required for students studying for a degree in most Church related fields. The editors might even consider publishing some chapters, e.g., chapter one, “Initial inquiries;” or chapter four, “Starting a formal case,” as articles in popular religious and secular journals . The text will provide a number of eye-openers to many members of the Church as well as non members. The importance of the respondent’s rights is woven fittingly throughout the book, a reality that unfortunately does not gain enough attention and respect. From the respondent’s right to propose proofs (p. 53) through the particular mention of the respondent’s reviewing information (p. 85), to the respondent’s filing a complaint (p. 135), the text performs a great service pointing out that justice is for all. Chapter nine, “Resolution without a sentence,” puts to rest the assertion that all petitions are resolved (p. 157); the chapter reinforces the methodology of law qua law. The text references the Eastern code (CCEO), highlighting the richness of the Eastern churches’ law [pp. 6, 116, 135, passim]. Sadly, many Latin Catholics have a limited sense of the whole Church. The cited texts will introduce many to an awareness of the Eastern churches’history, organization , etc. A more global sense of Church is also offered by the text’s attending to the development of tribunal operations. Giving a scriptural background [p. 110] or incorporating Pius XII’s 1944 allocutions, let alone the 1936 instruction, Provida Mater, [p. xi]. speaks volumes of a constantly examined and evaluated process. Improvement is something all tribunals seek, particularly since tribunal workers, Church leaders and those whom we serve, need to enlarge our understanding of marriage procedures [p. 159]. An example: the need to inspect the adequacy of marital preparation [p. 162]—an understatement, if ever there was one. The USCCB “Marriage Initiative” addresses this very question. This reviewer would have liked a paragraph included [p. 154] acknowledging that those with graduate degrees [e.g., STL, STM] in other than canon law disciplines; or in arts/sciences [e.g., psychology, criminology ] are authorized tribunal members. Referring to such simply as non-degreed in canon law is misleading and limiting; especially if they are duly appointed, experienced practitioners, and members of the CLSA.A paragraph or at least an expansion of the inclusion of indults (p. 145) could affirm these ecclesial ministers and help recruit others. In conclusion, this addition to the CLSA handbook series is, by far, a “must have and use” volume for all serving in tribunals. Michael A. Boccaccio Pastor, St. Philip Church, Norwalk, CT Diocese of Bridgeport, CT AMMISSIONE ALLE NOZZE E PREVENZIONE DELLA NULLITÀ DEL MATRIMONIO edited by Miguel A. Ortiz. Milano: Giuffrè, 2005. Pp. xiii–371. There are probably few practicing tribunal canonists in the Church today who would not appreciate opportunities to assist even indirectly in the pastoral and canonical preparation of couples planning marriage, i.e., to have pastors and engaged couples pay attention to the jurisprudence that canonists and their predecessors have developed over the years in repeatedly reflecting on and applying the Church’s canonical understanding of marriage to marriage nullity cases. The difficulty, of course, is that tribunal canonists and canon law teachers specializing in matrimonial jurisprudence are not usually called upon to provide canonical insight into what should constitute tomorrow’s successful marriages but rather to decide whether, in law and in fact, yesterday’s putative marriages were proven invalid. Moreover, it would seem, at least at first glance, that there is, at best, tenuous grounding for such jurisprudential insights to serve as a positive support for marriage preparation; for...