Canon Law - No code of ethics needed

[Andrew49]

Imagine practicing law in a land where there is no code of ethics, simply because it is not needed.

Imagine lawyers doubling as judges in order to keep the system moving

Imagine a system of law where parties do not confront witnesses and, where witnesses can telephone in their testimony

Imagine a system of law that is universal, whose subjects are found all over the world, in every culture.

This system of law is canon law.

Canon law is a body of law legislated by ecclesiastical authority to organize and govern the Catholic Church. One thing that makes this system unique is that many baptized Christians do not know that these laws exist in relation to them. In order that a person be bound by canon law four factors must be present:


One must be baptized;
One must have the use of reason;
One must have attained 7 years of age;
The law must be in force in the place where one is.


Therefore, in theory, the Catholic Church had jurisdiction over all baptized persons. A second unique factor is that this system of canon law comes under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The ultimate purpose of the system of canon law is to aid the Holy Spirit to work in and through the visible organization of the Catholic Church on Earth, to preach the message of Christ, and to administer His sacraments. It was Pius X in 1904 who established a commission of cardinals to draft that first Code of Canon Law. That code was written in short articles called canons in much the same way as all modern states were codifying their legislation. On Pentecost Sunday, 1917, Pope Benedict XV finally promulgated the completed Codes Juris Canonici. The Code itself consists of 1,752 canons or laws, divided into seven books. Book I is “The General Norms”, a long and dense recitation of the definitions of the basic legal principles and terms used in the rest of the Code. Book II, “People of God”, deals with who’s who and where they fit into the system, not to mention the basic rights of the people as guarantee by the Code. The third Book encompasses “The Teaching Office of the Church” and dictates the laws on mission work and Catholic education. This is the section that establishes the Pope as infallible, heretics as insufferable and university professors as tenable only if they are a Catholic in “good standing”.

Book V involves the area that most vexes civil attorneys. It is titled “The Temporal Goods of the Church.” This book rules the acquisition and administration of property and assets, as well as contracts and alienation of property. Because even the Church recognizes that money talks, it frequently finds itself with interests conflicting to civil parties, and even religious orders and lay people functioning within the Church. Many find Book VI to be the most contemporarily provocative of the books in that it deals with sanctions in the Church. These run the gamut of actions from striking the Pope to aborting a baby. Within it there are outlines of penalties each as suspension from the office of the priest to excommunication of a lay person, or the firing of a Bishop. The final Book VII, achieves the most difficult part of the legal system, the process by which all of the order aspired to by the system is maintained. Jurisdiction is observed, parties are defined and tribunals are established, along with rules of proofs and procedures.

It seems sad that those first Ten Commandments were not enough. With martyrs to be canonized and popes to elect, the Church’s need for law instantly became gnawing.

Link (http://the-knitter.blogspot.com/2005/10/imagine-no-code-of-ethics-needed.html)

SOURCE (http://www.patriciamdugan.com/inc/Article%20on%20Canon%20Law.htm)

[C. Flower]

Therefore, in theory, the Catholic Church had jurisdiction over all baptized persons


Canon law has no standing in society. It does not affect anyone's rights any more than the rules of the local golf club.

If someone belongs to that club, and wants to stick to its rules, that is entirely their decision.

But it does not in any way mean that the Church or its members can ignore national and international law.

[RosaLuxembourg]

From the 11 th century onwards the Vatitican began to teach that all political legitimacy and power flowed through the Papacy which therefore had the right to dethrone goverments. Of course this remained a controversial point much fought over through the Middle Ages. Im sure however many within the bureaucracy of the RCC still believe this and so would see canon law as transcending the law of the land so to speak.

It would be interesting to have a discussion here on the nature or even the possibility of political legitimacy.

[moss]

Canon law has no standing in society. It does not affect anyone's rights any more than the rules of the local golf club.

If someone belongs to that club, and wants to stick to its rules, that is entirely their decision.

But it does not in any way mean that the Church or its members can ignore national and international law.

Current affairs says otherwise :mad:

[C. Flower]

The Pope today said he would be issuing a letter on ethics.

The Labour Party have called on the Gardai to investigate Sean Brady.

[moss]

Fair play to Labour.
What about PSF (catholic in the 6C, secular in the 26C, pretend socialists everywhere and neo-cons while in the US) or other parties ?
Are Irish political parties so neutered by the RCC that they can't call for the prosecution of facilitators of rape ?

[C. Flower]

What has the Government said about it ?

[mutley]

Fair play to Labour.
What about PSF (catholic in the 6C, secular in the 26C, pretend socialists everywhere and neo-cons while in the US) or other parties ?
Are Irish political parties so neutered by the RCC that they can't call for the prosecution of facilitators of rape ?

I don't think SF would be wise to raise their head above the parrapet on this one, due to similar allegations made against Gerry Adams

[moss]

I don't think SF would be wise to raise their head above the parrapet on this one, due to similar allegations made against Gerry Adams

First rule in a cult. Don't question the cult leader.

Have the SDLP said much on the issue ?
Since Hume has gone they can no longer be described as a cult.

[RosaLuxembourg]

First rule in a cult. Don't question the cult leader.

Have the SDLP said much on the issue ?
Since Hume has gone they can no longer be described as a cult.

Im not calling the RCC a cult but I think there is a lot to be said for seeing PSF's (and RSF's) belief in a one true Republican movement outside of which there is no Republicanism as a secularized version of 19 th century ultramontane eccellisolgy...Factual on P.ie definitely seems to believe in Gerry's infallibility.

[johnfás]

Therefore, in theory, the Catholic Church had jurisdiction over all baptized persons.

Canon law has no jurisdiction over anybody, certainly not in a criminal matter. Canon law is an internal body of rules which govern interactions within the Roman Catholic Church. It has no legal standing except perhaps where someone seeks to contract to its application within a civil law context. Our Constitution, in Article 37.1, explicitly prohibits the use of alternative forums, such as ecclesiastical courts, from arbitrating on any criminal matter. The Catholic Church is deluding itself in this regard.

[moss]

Canon law has no jurisdiction over anybody, certainly not in a criminal matter. Canon law is an internal body of rules which govern interactions within the Roman Catholic Church. It has no legal standing except perhaps where someone seeks to contract to its application within a civil law context. Our Constitution, in Article 37.1, explicitly prohibits the use of alternative forums, such as ecclesiastical courts, from arbitrating on any criminal matter. The Catholic Church is deluding itself in this regard.


The catholic church in cohorts with the state has turned this delusion into reality.

[johnfás]

The catholic church in cohorts with the state has turned this delusion into reality.

Correct, but that is a failure of implementation, rather than law. Catholic Canon law has no legal standing outside of the Catholic Church, just as Church of Ireland Canon law has no standing outside of the Church of Ireland or the Manual of Laws of the Methodist Church has no standing outside of the Methodist Church. However, the most concerning thing about Catholic Canon law (speaking as someone with no expertise) is its attempt to legislate on a broad ambit of matters with questionable relationship to the Church as a body. That is where the blurring seems to arise from. I know little about Catholic Canon Law though, not being a Catholic and having relatively little interest to read up on it. But I know plenty about the law of the land and Canon Law has absolutely no legal standing outside of what I have stated above.

[RosaLuxembourg]

Correct, but that is a failure of implementation, rather than law. Catholic Canon law has no legal standing outside of the Catholic Church, just as Church of Ireland Canon law has no standing outside of the Church of Ireland or the Manual of Laws of the Methodist Church has no standing outside of the Methodist Church.

But the Methodist Church and the Church of Ireland dont claim that all political legitimacy flows from them...

[johnfás]

But the Methodist Church and the Church of Ireland dont claim that all political legitimacy flows from them...

This is true. However, it is also an irrelevance in law, and should be in practice. I think a good analogy to another area of law to draw upon here is the law relating to the enforcement of foreign judgments. We have a regulation within the European Union which says the judgments of other Member State courts have got to be enforced in our courts. This essentially means if I get a judgment for 100,000 euro against an Irish resident in a court in Madrid, I can go to the High Court in Dublin and have it automatically enforced against that Irish resident. However, outside of the EU we do not have such recognition. We recognise only on a case by case basis - demonstrating our legal sovereignty. A court in New York can kick and scream all it likes regarding its legitimacy as the right forum in which a case should be heard and the legitimacy of its judgment. However, it is at the discretion of the Irish court whether it recognises that legitimacy. In that sense, the Catholic Church can claim anything it likes regarding the legitimacy of Canon Law, but you can take it from me that from a legal point of view it has no legal standing in our system, unless parties agree that it should do so in their interactions - other than in criminal proceedings where our Constitution explicitly excludes all bodies except the courts.

[moss]

Correct, but that is a failure of implementation, rather than law. Catholic Canon law has no legal standing outside of the Catholic Church, just as Church of Ireland Canon law has no standing outside of the Church of Ireland or the Manual of Laws of the Methodist Church has no standing outside of the Methodist Church. However, the most concerning thing about Catholic Canon law (speaking as someone with no expertise) is its attempt to legislate on a broad ambit of matters with questionable relationship to the Church as a body. That is where the blurring seems to arise from. I know little about Catholic Canon Law though, not being a Catholic and having relatively little interest to read up on it. But I know plenty about the law of the land and Canon Law has absolutely no legal standing outside of what I have stated above.

Agreed. The only point I'm making is that effectively the RCC, in many cases, is above the law. Not legally, but in practice.

[RosaLuxembourg]

Agreed. The only point I'm making is that effectively the RCC, in many cases, is above the law. Not legally, but in practice.

And theologically many in the RCC's bureacracy believe themselves above the law.

[Andrew49]

What has the Government said about it ?

Nothing - I'm sure Cowen, Harney & Gormley are delighted the spotlight is off them.

[Dagger John]

Canon Law is recognised as legal and has the same standing as other legal systems such as french or german - this has been established in court in the case of O Callaghan v O Sullivan [1925] 1 IR 60. Nothing in the constitution contradicts this.

Also look at the case on this study guide, bottom of page 6
http://www.jrcls.org/publications/perspectives/Attorney%20Client%20Privilege%20Lesson%20by%20Keit h%20Thompson%20FINAL%20Jan%2030%202008.pdf

more cases include Goodman v The Honourable Mr. Justice Hamilton and Others 27th May 1993, ER v .JR, [1981] ILRM 125 (High Court),

All support the canon law stance of confidentiality and some refer especially to the position of the Catholic Church and its priveleges under common law and subsequent case law.

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Completely off his rocker. Digger John, do you actually read any of the threads?

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

Canon Law is recognised as legal and has the same standing as other legal systems such as french or german - this has been established in court in the case of O Callaghan v O Sullivan [1925] 1 IR 60. Nothing in the constitution contradicts this.

Also look at the case on this study guide, bottom of page 6
http://www.jrcls.org/publications/perspectives/Attorney%20Client%20Privilege%20Lesson%20by%20Keit h%20Thompson%20FINAL%20Jan%2030%202008.pdf

more cases include Goodman v The Honourable Mr. Justice Hamilton and Others 27th May 1993, ER v .JR, [1981] ILRM 125 (High Court),

All support the canon law stance of confidentiality and some refer especially to the position of the Catholic Church and its priveleges under common law and subsequent case law.


I've taken a look at that link and it appears to be a discussion paper around confidentiality of the confessional. It has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on canon law being a part of Irish law.

In fact I believe there are obligations on priests to breach the confessional where they believe there are serious criminal matters involved- so the link you supplied actually undercuts your case.

Once more for luck- Digger John, could you please supply any link or reference within the body of Irish law which says canon law is recognised as 'statutory'?

And this time couold you try not chancing your arm? You are not at the 15th Thursday now with people who rely on sunbeams to guide their way through life.

[Captain Con O'Sullivan]

A deliberate attempt to claim that confidentiality in the confessional means canon law is part of statutory law in Ireland. Either very stupid or a deliberate attempt at conflation.

I'll give you a clue, DJ. Doctors also have an obligation of confidentiality which is recognised by law- but they are also obliged to breach that confidentiality where they have reason to believe a crime may have been committed or may be committed.

Which means Doctors are still subject to statutory law. Same as priests.

[Dagger John]

A deliberate attempt to claim that confidentiality in the confessional means canon law is part of statutory law in Ireland. Either very stupid or a deliberate attempt at conflation.

I'll give you a clue, DJ. Doctors also have an obligation of confidentiality which is recognised by law- but they are also obliged to breach that confidentiality where they have reason to believe a crime may have been committed or may be committed.

Which means Doctors are still subject to statutory law. Same as priests.

I will give you a clue - look at the decisions made by judges of the land on this - far better than your opinion.

[Dagger John]

I've taken a look at that link and it appears to be a discussion paper around confidentiality of the confessional. It has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on canon law being a part of Irish law.

In fact I believe there are obligations on priests to breach the confessional where they believe there are serious criminal matters involved- so the link you supplied actually undercuts your case.

Once more for luck- Digger John, could you please supply any link or reference within the body of Irish law which says canon law is recognised as 'statutory'?

And this time couold you try not chancing your arm? You are not at the 15th Thursday now with people who rely on sunbeams to guide their way through life.

Once more for luck, look at O Callaghan v O Sullivan. What you believe is all fine and dandy but the courts have upheld the confidentiality both within and without the confessional.

[disability student]

Once more for luck, look at O Callaghan v O Sullivan. What you believe is all fine and dandy but the courts have upheld the confidentiality both within and without the confessional.

You are pushing your luck here. Canon law per se is irrelevant here.:D

[Andrew49]

Canon Law is recognised as legal and has the same standing as other legal systems such as french or german - this has been established in court in the case of O Callaghan v O Sullivan [1925] 1 IR 60. Nothing in the constitution contradicts this.

Also look at the case on this study guide, bottom of page 6
http://www.jrcls.org/publications/perspectives/Attorney%20Client%20Privilege%20Lesson%20by%20Keit h%20Thompson%20FINAL%20Jan%2030%202008.pdf

more cases include Goodman v The Honourable Mr. Justice Hamilton and Others 27th May 1993, ER v .JR, [1981] ILRM 125 (High Court),

All support the canon law stance of confidentiality and some refer especially to the position of the Catholic Church and its priveleges under common law and subsequent case law.

Canon law
The law of the Christian Church. Has little or no legal effect today. Canon law refers to that body of law which has been set by the Christian Church and which, in virtually all places, is not binding upon citizens and has virtually no recognition in the judicial system. Some citizens resort to canon law, however, for procedures such as marriage annulments to allow for a Christian church marriage where one of the parties has been previously divorced. Many church goers and church officers abide by rulings and doctrines of canon law. Also known as "ecclesiastical law."

Source - Irish Legal Dictionary (http://www.irishclaims.com/index.php?id=47)

PUNISHMENTS ONLY APPEARING IN CANON LAW

Some form of punishments do appear in Ireland exclusively in Canon Law (Church Law). They do not appear in any secular Law texts, so we have to assume that they did not appear in the Law prior to the advent of Christianity.

Mutlilation: In difference to many other lawtexts, mutilation does not seem to have been a suitable punishment in Irish law. The first recorded mutilation as a punishment for a crime is from 1224, where a robber had cut his hands and feet of. Of the Old Irish Lawtexts none mentions mutilation, only Cain Adomnain (a Canon Lawtext) lays down a twofold punishment which includes mutilation (cutting off of the left foot and the right hand) as the first part, the second part however is putting the culprit to death.

Flogging: Also a punishment very often used in many early lawtexts, especially as a punishment for slaves, flogging also appears only in Canon Lawtexts in Ireland. There is, however, no reference to it in the Secular Old Irish Lawtexts.

- - - - - - - -

Seems to me the Irish/Celts were quite humane before the pope's henchmen took over this island.