Codex Iuris Canonici

La cuestión sobre la celeridad de los procesos de nulidad matrimonial no es una novedad. La doble conformidad pro nullitate fue un problema estudiado por la doctrina desde la promulgación del CIC de 1917. Esta preocupación por la celeridad fue constante antes, durante y después del Concilio Vaticano II, y en el Sínodo de los Obispos. Esta inquietud estuvo presente también en la primera fase de reforma codicial y en las Procedural Norms, de 28 de abril de 1970. Como consecuencia de ello, el MP Causas matrimoniales de 1971 emanó el processus brevior contenido en el CIC de 1983 y en la Instr. DC. Este processus brevior sigue parcialmente vigente en el MP Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus, junto con el nuevo procedimiento abreviado.
The question about the celerity of the proceeding for the nullity of marriage is not a novelty. The dual compliance pro nullitate was a problem studied by the Doctrin, since the promulgation of the CIC of 1917. to the MP CM of 1971. This solicitude for celerity was constant before, during and after the 2nd. Vatican Council and in the Synod of the Bishops. This consideration was present too during the 1st. phase of the reform of the Code and in the Procedural Norms of 28. April 1970. Following this, the MP Causas matrimoniales of 1971 decreed the same processus brevior contained in the CIC of 1983 and in the Instr. DC. This processus brevior has a partial validity in the MP Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus, against the new briefer process.

Jego celem jest odpowiedź na pytanie zawarte w tytule: czy regulacja
wykładni prawa kanonicznego w przedmiotowych kodeksach jest taka sama, tj. czy został utrzymany status quo, czy też Najwyższy prawodawca wprowadza w kodeksie z 1983 r. w tej kwestii jakieś istotne novum?
Ogólny wniosek będący odpowiedzią na pytanie badawcze
artykułu jest następujący – kodeks z 1983 r. w porównaniu z kodeksem
z 1917 r. utrzymuje w przedmiocie wykładni prawa kanonicznego
normatywny status quo wprowadzając jedynie niewielkie
novum.

Regulation of interpretation in CIC 1971 and CIC 1983:
status quo or novum?
The 100th anniversary of the promulgation of CIC 1917 is
the opportunity for reflections about the law in question. Many
scholars pay attention to the similarities and dissimilarities between
CIC 1917 and the CIC 1983. The paper’s aim is to juxtapose
the regulations of interpretation from the two codes of the
Latin Church. First, the paper presents the genesis of the normative
character of the rules of interpretation in the Church. Next, it
offers the explanation of raison d’être of the rules of interpretation
in the context of the rules of legislation. The center of the paper is
the third part, which presents the comparison and analysis of the
norms that regulate the interpretation. The general conclusion,
which is the answer to the research question of the paper, is that
the CIC 1983 in comparison with CIC 1917 maintains the normative status quo, introducing only a small amount of novum.

Equity and charity: Prescribed aequitas and caritas upon leaving the monastery and in some similar cases. On the relevance of Catholic natural law.-The distinction between "principles" and "laws" helps us to understand the relevance of the natural law principle of aequitas (equity, fairness) and the Christian principle of caritas (charity) as they appear in codified Catholic canon law of the twentieth century. Based on these principles, the Codex Iuris Canonici 1983 contains several provisions that require an ecclesiastical institution to provide benefits in several similar cases of hardship which the institution would not be obliged to provide under strict law.