New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law: Study Edition

Rating:
Summary: Overall I find this a good commentary...
Review: After reading the debate taking place between the other reviewers, I thought I would share my own feelings as a canon lawyer. Coincidentally, I happen to be friends with some of the reviewers on each side. This sorta summarizes how I feel about this commentary.

Overall, I find it quite useful. Its biggest strength, in my opinion, is the commentary on General Norms, which is the first book of the Code. (For non-canonists, the Code of Canon Law is divided into seven books -- aka major divisions) General Norms are the basic canonical principles that define key terms and determine how the law should be applied. While many find it the most boring book in the Code, it is nevertheless the most important. Thus it is essential to any any good commentary on the Code that its commentary on General Norms be solid. The commentary in this book is stellar and I consult it regularly.

Nevertheless, as others have noted, there are certain parts in this commentary, mainly in the book covering the Sacraments, that I would either question or disagree with. I would not say that any of the commentary is erroneous, but it does push the envelope on occasion.

But overall, it's a good resource and the commentary on General Norms, which is very readable without compromising depth, alone is worth the price.

Rating:
Summary: A Wonderful Discovery
Review: It took me a while to figure out what this Commentary is all about. For one, I am not a catholic and secondly, I did not even know there is such thing as canon law. My curiosity compelled me to research and read more about the topic. In my profession as a foreign medical doctor, I have been trained to search for the "why's" and "how's" of every given thing. The commentary gave me not only a path to follow but ways to understand this so-called canon law, the absolute purpose of which according to its last law is "the salvation of souls". The commentary is very well written in a style and manner that reflects the author(s) intimate knowledge of the complexities of human life and the god that wants to save it. It is not always easy to find books (or commentaries for that matter) that can help one to understand issues, topics and events that are alien in one's mind and faith. The authors have successfully presented opinions and interpretations based on their obvious love and respect for the church they belong and the god they believe. If all laws are approached that way, perhaps not only souls but also lives will be saved as well. My compliments to the writers.

Rating:
Summary: A Second and Indispensable Commentary on the 1983 Code
Review: The Canons, as legal rules in the Church, evolved through theology, and as such they must continue to evolve from the growing faith and experience of the Church. In the forewords of this book, Ladislas M. Orsy, SJ gives an exposition on "Theology and Canon Law" and Fredrick R. McManus gives us "A Canonical Overview of Canon Law" since 1983. These two works by universally respected canonist-professors, justify purchasing this book. They are timeless works to read and reread, without even opening the other eighteen hundred pages.

Pope John Paul II, in his Papal Allocutions to the Roman Rota, has emphasized repeatedly that "In effect, juridical-canonical work is pastoral by its very nature." In 1985, The Canon Law Society of America produced the first Commentary on the current Code of Canon Law promulgated in 1983. This was an extremely brave undertaking for any group. Nothing went before and the responsibility of producing such a maiden work was huge. That first edition became an indispensable tool to canonists universally. It provoked thought and discussion beyond any expectation. This is not a second edition. It is a whole new work with mostly new authors. In the spirit of the instruction of Pope John Paul II, this Commentary brings a veritiable treasure trove of priceless experience and thought. The many contributors to this Commentary include university professors, Tribuanl professionals, administrators of religious institutes, and parish priests. In the years since the 1983 Code was promulgated, there has certainly been change. There have been many documents and official interpretations. The Pontifical Council on the Interpretation of Legislative Texts has issued dozens of authoritative interpretations of the canons. There have been numerous decisions by ecclesial Tribunals all over the world, which have contributed to the meaning of particular canons. In addition there were such important documents as the 1988 Apostolic Constitution on the Roman Curia; the 1990 Ritual for the Celebration of Marriage; the 1993 Directory on Ecumenism; the 1996 Apostolic Constitution on Papal Elections; the 1998 Motu Propio on Episcopal Conferences; and the 1990 Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches. In addition to their consideration of these new documents and decisions, the contributors here bring many varied, lived experiences. And the life experiences of some of these authors is awesome. Two of the authors, also contributors to the first Commnetary, were Professors James H. Provost and Bertram F. Griffin. Both of these men were renowned canonists and their contributions are the last great works we have from these men before their deaths. Their work here proves how greatly they are missed. Contributor Lawrence G. Wrenn has long been an expert on American Catholic jurisprudential thought on marriage annulment. As usual, he excels here.

On the other end of the spectrum, this Commentary shows the depth of some new canonists. Barbara Anne Cusack, Diane L. Barr, John M. Huels, OSM, Rose M. McDermott, SSJ, Robert Geisinger, SJ, and Craig A. Cox, among many others, show that there is still much coming to provoke both thought and canonical action in the Church. The format of this book has each contributor presenting a canon, the state of related issue, and then, his or her own view in the ongoing debates. A commentary is not an authoritative text in the way the Pope is infalible. It is never meant to be. A reader of this type of text is of such a caliber intellectually that any explanation in a vacuum would make the work useless, even insulting. The intended reader is the challenged reader. Challenged to read, to think and to act, with the truest sense of justice, and on the most pastoral path of Christianity.

Rating:
Summary: Leading Christ's Sheep Astray
Review: The Code of Canon Law represents Catholic authority, the voice of the Church itself. Ordinarily, Catholics faithful to the Magisterium look for a Canon Law edition with commentary that offers some depth and background on the canons. It is crucial that the commentary be faithful to the Magisterium; if it is not, the sense of the canons is distorted and the reader is not getting what he expected.

Father John Trigilio, a faithful Catholic scholar who regularly answers questions about the Church on EWTN, wrote in Homiletic & Pastoral Review, March 2001, starting on p. 56, a review of this book. He writes: "Readers will find more than comments, however, as blatant heterodoxy, dissent and outright nonsense punctuate the book. Unlike other English commentaries (Opus Dei's Code of Canon Law Annotated [copyright] 1993, University of Navarre, and the Canon Law Society of Great Britain and Ireland's The Canon Law: Letter & Spirit, [copyright] 1995, Liturgical Press) where orthodox commentary is accompanied by authoritative sources, our American versions on the other hand are a plethora of speculative theology, dissident opinion and at times crass impudence."

Before considering the New Commentary on the Code of Canon Law, I recommend that Catholics faithful to the Magisterium read Father Trigilio's entire review, which backs these statements with about seven pages of solid evidence. Catholics who do not have time or access to his entire article should instead purchase one of the two Canon Law editions that Father Trigilio recommends (see preceding paragraph).

Rating:
Summary: A Wonderful Discovery
Review: The fundamental purpose of canon law is the salvation of souls. It is therefore inherently pastoral in nature. It is a means of ordering the Catholic community and seeing that justice is done in that community.

The new Commentary does an admirable job of presenting the most accurate English translation of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, as well as providing commentary on that Code that reflects accurately the pastoral nature of Church law. Beyond this, the commentary is very practical in its approach.

The articles in the Commentary are written by the leading canonists in America. These commentators are exemplars of real faithfulness to the Church, as well as writing from extensive knowledge of their topics. As a practical resource for ministry in the Catholic Church, you will find nothing better at present.

Rating:
Summary: Canon Law Explained
Review: This text is a clear and concise explanation of Canon Law as found in the Code of Canon Law 1983. This text can be used by both the professional Canon Lawyer as well as the pastoral minister in a parish in order to understand what the law means. This text provides the best explanation of the law, which is meant to be used in real situations in the Catholic Church.

Rating:
Summary: Agenda proliferates instead of canonical comments
Review: While the overall scholarship of the new commentary is impressive, there are some serious, significant and grave errors which compel me not to recommend this book. Instead of relying on sound jurisprudence, this edition degenerates with theological dissent, speculation and confusion. Book Three (the Teaching Office of the Church) is where it begins. The footnote on page 913 in reference to canon 749 on Infallibility attacks ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS when it says: "the statement by the CDF [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] of October 28, 1995, that the teaching to the effect that the Church has no authority to confer priestly ordination on women requires the definitive assent of the faithful since 'it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium' is an exaggeration" Classifying the authortative interpretation of the CDF on Ordinatio Sacerdotalis as being an 'exaggertion' is going well beyond the bounds of judicial commentary and now enters the realm of theological dissent. Cardinal Ratzinger's Responsum ad Dubium (10-28-95) made it clear that while Ordination Sacerdotalis itself was not an EX CATHEDRA statement (like the papal document MUNIFICENTISSIMUS DEUS of Pius XII defining the dogma of the Assumption of Mary in 1950), nevertheless the TEACHING (doctrine) that only baptized males can be ordained (deacons, priests and bishops) IS infallible as it has been a consistent element of the ORDINARY MAGISTERIUM. "All members of the faithful are required to give their assent to the teaching stated therein." The Commentary continues in the footnote to attack the infallibility of the teaching when this is not a canonical issue, rather it is obviously doctrinal and the proper authority (CDF) has made a definitive ruling, not the CLSA.

Canon 752, according to the new Commentary "leaves room for dissent." This is based on the mistranslation of OBSEQUIUM by the Commentary. Ironically, the translated text in the same book reads "religious SUBMISSION of intellect and will" must be given to the authentic Magisterium (as opposed to an ASSENT of faith required of infallible teachings) whereas the commentary below the translated text keeps translating OBSEQUIUM not as SUBMISSION but as "RESPECT" or "DEFERENCE". Austin Flannery, OP, had no problem using SUBMISSION for OBSEQUIUM when he translated LUMEN GENTIUM #25 upon which canon 752 is based.

Another of many examples of an underlying agenda is shown in Book Four as well as Book Three. Canon 914 explicitly and unequivocally mandates First Penance BEFORE First Communion, yet the Commentary (p. 1110) suggests ""if the parents, who have the primary responsibility for the child's catechesis, should determine that their child is not yet ready for first penance but is ready for first communion, the child should not be denied the right to the sacrament." If that is not encouraging the faithful to oppose the law, what is it? Certainly not orthodox teaching or canonically licit behavior.

All in all, it is sad that the good scholarship has to be eclipsed by the creeping heterodoxy and subtle dissent in major portions of the book.