News / Papers
The serious crisis that today afflicts marriage in the West is due to several causes, including its reduction to amour-passion and its secularization. The rediscovery of the natural reason underlying the institute should be promoted by a positive law aware of its educational function. Above all we need a resacralisation of marriage, which has a more solid foundation in religion. Canon law has an important role about and, in prospect of a support for young married couples, historically dating provisions could be effectively reused, such as that one relating to the witnesses in the common celebration of the marriage.
Family and parenting are the anthropological foundations of the human being, beyond the religious views of each; are the “Pillars of Hercules” posed to guarantee the formation and growth of new generations. Gender theories deny the right to dual parenting and severed the right of those who are born to be accepted, and cared for, in a human way, with affection and complementary care of father and mother. Moreover, the so-called “Surrogacy” introduces a new form of slavish use of the body and the psyche of the woman, to meet the wishes of others. In the bio-ethical debate today are in play essential principles of humanistic anthropology to be protected, if you want to protect the weaker parties and ensure a future integral to new generations.
The study first outlines the current framework of the matrimonial canonical process, focusing in particular on the "double conforming sentence" as a condition of the enforceability of the judgment. Subsequently, the Author proposes some possible changes of the current process, which could make it faster and more attentive to the pastoral needs of the faithful. Among these changes, there is the hypothesis that in these proceedings should not necessarily express a judgment conforms to the first to reach the enforceability of the judgment.
The essay, which is mainly devoted to the analysis of a law recently enacted in Italy to prevent and punish gender violence in the family, emphasizes the worth of religious sensibility (as articulated in the Relatio Synodi on the new challenges posed to the pastoral care of families) in contributing to a widening and deepening of the scope of criminal provisions. The approach deemed best conducive to a stable and effective protection of victims of these crimes should not be limited to rash punishment or detachment of the wrongdoer from the family. Instead the overall ‘wounded’ relationship should be addressed with a gamut of social and psychological interventions. Every attempt should be made to save the ability of the prospective serious offender to verbalize his emotional discomforts, thus gradually removing him from the idea that the recourse to violence be a viable way to recover the lost balance between family roles or to reassert his dominance on the female partner.
According to the pluralistic and personalistic feature of our Constitution, the religious marriage freedom - as a freedom to choose a religious legal order for own marriage and the right to have such marriage recognized by the State - should be at the center of our law and jurisprudence. Concordat, agreements between State and religious communities and law on "tolerated cults" do not grant such right, although they give civil relevance to the religious marriage. In a future perspective, arranging a different structure (as the Lebanon's personal statutes) may be advantageous. The return of the sacred in our societies should be an opportunity to revitalize religious marriages. But such revitalization cannot be just a legal response to the challenges of secularization. Not only the law and its instruments, but social custom and pastoral theology have a fundamental role in dealing with and winning the challenges of the secularization with regard to the model of family.