Folia Canonica 8. (2005)
STUDIES - Wojciech Kowal: Norms for Preparing the Process for the Dissolution of the Matrimonial Bon din Favour of the Faith
96 WOJCIECH KOWAL OMI § 2. The favour of the dissolution is not granted unless this declaration is done in writing and signed by both parties.28 As some commentators remark,29 there is a certain discrepancy between the promises required in mixed marriages and the cautiones needed for the dissolution of marriage in favour of the faith. Canon 1125,1° demands that the Catholic party declare that he or she is prepared to remove dangers of defecting from the faith, and make a sincere promise to do all in his or her power in order that all the children be baptised and brought up in the Catholic Church, while art. 5, § 1 of Potestas Ecclesiæ requires that the Catholic party “[...] must declare that he or she is ready to remove dangers of departure from the Faith [...]” without any explicit mention regarding promises concerning Catholic baptism and upbringing of children in the Catholic faith. Nevertheless, as the cautiones are made in view of a future marriage with a non-Catholic party, therefore, logically speaking, nothing less than the requirements of c. 1125 should be required of both parties. In truth, in rescripts in favour of the dissolution, pennission for the subsequent mixed marriage is being granted,30 which would suggest that c. 1125 indeed obtains in this case.31 One might conclude, therefore, that the wording of art. 5 of Potestas Ecclesiæ is somewhat lacking as to the promises required from the Catholic party. The communication of the Notes Regarding the Documentary and Procedural Aspects of Favour of the Faith Cases to the English speaking dioceses, signed by the under-secretary Gianfranco Girotti,32 includes a model for the 28 “§ 1. Si pars catholica novum matrimonium intendit contrahere vel convalidare cum persona non baptizata vel baptizata non catholica, declaret se paratam esse pericula a fide deficiendi removere atque pars acatholica declaret se paratam esse relinquere parti catholicae libertatem propriam religionem profitendi atquæ filios catholice baptizandi et educandi. § 2. Gratia solutionis non conceditur nisi haec declaratio in scriptis ab utraque parte subsignata fuerit” (Potestas Ecclesiæ, art. 5, 9). 29 See AMBORSKI, The Development of the Process for the Dissolution of the Matrimonial Bond in Favour of the Faith, 41-45. 30 The customary text of the rescript includes the following: “In praesenti concessione includitur quoque, quatenus opus sit, dispensatio ab impedimento vel licentia a prohibitione, iuxta cann. 1086 et 1125 C/C.” 31 Cf. AMBORSKI, The Development of the Process for the Dissolution of the Matrimonial Bond in Favour of the Faith, 44-45: “[...] it seems that CDF [Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] would require a non-Catholic person to provide for the Catholic baptism and education of all the children as Catholic. The only logical explanation and most likely acceptable interpretation is that the CDF would demand this promise from a Catholic party.” 32 The document bears 29 January 2002 as the date of reception by the chancery office. The memorandum of Bp Wilton D. Gregory, then President of the Conference of Bishops of the USA, to all diocesan bishops, dated 11 March 2004, includes the correspondence from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (the cover letter is signed
