Reflections on the changes in the annulment process

Friday, Oct. 23, 2015

The current series on the reform of the annulment process is being presented in three parts: Part I dealt with the announcement and the circumstances at the time of the promulgation of the Motu Proprio Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus and Mitis et Misericors Iesus. This Part II is presenting a comment on the Synod of the Family. Part III will present some reflections on biblical and pastoral perspectives on marriage and annulments.

Archbishop Luis Ladaria, SJ, secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, who was also a member of the reform commission of the annulment process and who was present on the day of the promulgation of the Motu Proprio Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus and Mitis et Misericors Iesus, stated that, “The power of the keys of Peter remains ever unchanged” with the nullity process, because the right to appeal to the Apostolic See is guaranteed to all, in order that the bond between the See of Peter and the particular Churches be confirmed. Archbishop Ladaria added to his comments that, “We all hope that this reform of the Code of Canon Law will bring with it the fruit the Holy Father desires, and that many pastors and faithful desire with him as well.”

The reason why the Motu Proprio was promulgated prior to the celebration of the Synod on the Family was expressed by Pope Francis, who has expressed his concerns that the Synod on marriage and the family must not become focused on a narrow canon of contentious issues, but should instead consider the broad range of challenges to family life, including the impact of poverty, war and forced migration, and should also focus on how the Church can support families. The two Motu Proprio are a clear indication by the pope that the  Synod on the Family will not be embroiled in debating what a hypothetical annulment reform might look like. It is now fait accompli.

Moreover, the two Motu Proprio did not address the significant question of Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried. The Church did not back down from its stand on divorce, but the Church was at least trying to show greater compassion and outreach to those who have experienced a breakup of their marriage. By implementing the compromise in advance, Pope Francis has not resolved the Communion debate; he has put it into a new context. The question must be studied further by the pastors of the Church and perhaps looking at a more pastoral approach rather than a juridical solution.

In terms of future directions, Cardinal Francesco Cocopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, addressed the problem of new civil regulations that exist today relating to marriage and family laws that are incompatible with the doctrine and discipline of the Church. These new civil regulations inevitably have an impact on the Church’s Canon Law and how these new situations needed more study looking on pastoral perspectives of inclusion and welcoming of other people in the Church’s ministry.

In preparing cases for declaration of nullity to the Tribunal, petitioners and their advocates should be especially careful in presenting the sufficient information and the documentation allowing the tribunal to make a quick assessment of the grounds in question and the gravity of the situation at the time of the marriage.