In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

472 the jurist agement within the context of ecclesiastical goods. The chapter emphasizes the need to know the meaning and extent of this concept which assists the Church in the fulfillment of its human and supernatural ends. Presenting the figure of stable patrimony as a new concept in the 1983 Code of Canon Law draws attention to its proper place in the Church and to the doctrine required to instruct people better about what this canonical institution implies, reclaims, and demands within the juridicalcanonical symphony today where the current legislation has sought to give it its proper place. It cannot be ignored but is to be rediscovered, understood , highlighted, and attended to. This is in order to protect the Church against the arbitrary alienation of its ecclesiastical patrimony and to protect the viability of ecclesiastical public juridic persons. The research of Zalbidea possesses academic, scientific, juridical, and canonical rigor. Doctrinal commentaries from various times enrich the work; and in a very special way it is enriched with varied ecclesial documents , as well as the norms of public ecclesiastical juridic persons such as dioceses and parishes, and the regulations of episcopal conferences from various countries. In short it is an excellent study illustrating with objective, subjective, and practical clarity an understanding of stable patrimony in light of canon law. Ismael Arturo Garceranth Ramos, S.J. Academic Dean Faculty of Canon Law Pontifical University Javeriana Bogota, Colombia LE DÉFENSEUR DU LIEN DANS LES CAUSES DE NULLITÉ DE MARIAGE. ÉTUDE SYNOPTIQUE ENTRE LE CODE ET L’INSTRUCTION «DIGNITAS CONNUBII», FONDÉE SUR LES TRAVAUX DES COMMISSIONS PRÉPARATOIRES DE L’INSTRUCTION by Philippe Hallein. Tesi Gregoriana. Serie Diritto Canonico 83. Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 2009. This doctoral dissertation is a detailed and comprehensive study of the role of the defender of the bond in marriage nullity cases based on the 2005 instruction, Dignitas connubii. The author studies each step of the marriage nullity process (both static and dynamic) comparing the norm in Dignitas connubii with the 1983 code, the 1917 code, the 1936 instruction Provida mater, as well as with Rotal jurisprudence, and commentator ’s opinions. The author also had access to the preparatory documents of the different commissions preparing Dignitas connubii, and he uses their discussions to substantiate his arguments. The author has two purposes throughout this text, to demonstrate how Dignitas connubii protects the indissolubility of marriage, especially through the intervention of the defender of the bond in marriage nullity cases, as well as to prove that Dignitas connubii does not overstep the boundaries of what an instruction is meant to do in law. His conclusion is that Dignitas does not present new law; rather, it elaborates and elucidates norms that already existed in the code or the practice of the Roman Rota. Even though 77.5% of the articles in Dignitas connubii contain novelties when compared with the 1983 code (p. 116, note 196), in his final analysis, the instruction does not go beyond its scope. Dignitas connubii obliges, but not to the point of rendering actions invalidating (p. 135). The role of the defender of the bond in the marriage nullity process is extremely important. The defender of the bond should never participate in the process solely by rendering observations during the discussion phase of the case. Rather, the defender’s role is essential from the moment the petition is accepted (cf. pp. 367–369). A defender who only defends the bond in a pro forma fashion, or who submits to the justice of the court on a regular basis is not fulfilling the defender’s role. The defender ’s role is to aid in the discovery of the truth about the matrimonial bond (pp. 195–196); that means the defender is an active participant in learning the truth. If the defender of the bond is not an active participant throughout the case, the author argues that the sentence could even be invalid (pp. 292–294). The author also discusses what the defender should consider in his/her observations (p. 514). The defender’s observations are structured like a sentence and must address all issues that the judge should take into consideration in coming to a decision...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 472-474
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.