Ammissione Alle Nozze e Prevenzione Della Nullità Del Matrimonio ed. by Miguel A. Ortiz (review)

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 how can canonical criteria developed for determining what marriage is not help clarify what marriage is and should be at least canonically? In other words, can what has been learned about marriage nullity help ensure better informed pastoralcanonical preparation of couples for marriage and, thereby, prevent or at 614 the jurist book reviews 615 least reduce the possibility of invalidity and nullity taking root in couples ’ planned marital unions? Evidently, several persons engaged in the disciplines of canon law and pastoral theology and psychiatry considered these questions timely and worthy of their consideration and discussion at a convention sponsored by the Faculty of Canon Law at the University of the Holy Cross in Rome in 2003. This work is a compilation of the papers presented at that convention. In a brief but informative Presentazione, Miguel Ángel Ortiz, editor of this work, attributes the incentive for the convention to Pope John Paul II’s recognition in his apostolic exhortation Familiaris consortio 68 of the urgent need today for an effective pre- and post-matrimonial evangelization and catechesis of men and women intending marriage within the Christian community. Ortiz, who authored one of the papers, identifies the other contributing authors: Héctor Franceshi, F. Sergio Lanza, Feliciano Gil de las Heras, Pedro-Juan Viladrich, Paolo Bianchi, Jean-Pierre Schouppe, Montserrat Gas I Aixendi, Karl Josef Romer, Andrei Bettetini , Franco Poterzio, Grzegorz Erlebach, Virgilio La Rosa, and Arturo Cattaneo, and briefly describes the topics of a few of the papers. The president of the convention, Carlos J. Errázuriz M., in his Introduzione ai lavori identifies the underlying motivation of the convention and the papers it produced. He articulates its unifying theme and implications which he sees as a paradox widespread in the Church today: Admission to the celebration of marriage according to canonical form generally occurs without particular difficulty; yet the requirements of marital capacity and consent are so severe as to favor an eventual declaration of nullity. The fundamental question then that the convention intended to confront is whether preventing marriage nullity at the moment of welcoming the engaged couple to the celebration of marriage according to canonical form is possible. The papers are the consequence of the convention’s efforts to flush out the issues involved in such an undertaking. The work consists of fourteen essays of varying lengths (the longest is fifty pages; the shortest, ten pages). The first eight essays treat in order: the...