The MagazineManagementOur HistoryEthical CodeDirections for AuthorsIssuesSubscriptionsContacts
Home
Periodica de re canonica
Periodica de re canonica
Articles published in the journal Periodica de re canonica up to 2023 will gradually be made available in PDF format on this website (in the "open access" mode). Currently, the PDFs of 30 percent of the articles published between 1924 and 2018 are accessible.

Issues of the journal that are published as of 2024 are available for purchase from Àncora Editrice (in print or digital format).
DOI10.32060/PERIODICA.4.2022.559-585
AuthorDavide Salvatori
TitleBonum coniugum: ¿fin del matrimonio o elemento esencial del matrimonio, o fin y elemento esencial del matrimonio? Reflexiones sobre algunas aporías lógico-sistemáticas de la jurisprudencia rotal y propuesta de lectura unitaria de la quaestio
PeriodicalPeriodica de re canonica
ISSNISSN print 2610-9212 — ISSN digital 2611-4054
Volume111
Year2022
Pages559-585
Abstract

The Tribunal of the Roman Rota understands the bonum coniugum from a twofold perspective: psychic incapacities (cf. can. 1095, 2°-3°) and simulation (cf. can. 1101 §2). Since jurisprudence recognizes a unity of meaning regarding the content of the bonum coniugum, which can be understood as a ius and an obligatio (cf. can. 1095, 2°), as an onus (cf. can. 1095, 3°), and as an elementum essentiale (cf. can. 1101 §2), and since this position is considered unanimous among Rotal judges, it seems appropriate to say that Rotal jurisprudence has “always” understood the bonum coniugum as an essential element. However, the mens of the Commission for the codification of canon law regarding can. 1055 §1 and certain Rotal jurisprudence have affirmed that the bonum coniugum is an end of marriage, but not an essential element of it. Moreover, the latter has also been identified as a secondary end. This second jurisprudential position faces some logical difficulties: how it is possible to assume an end and how it is possible to exclude an end? While the second difficulty has been solved using the distinction between finis operis and finis operantis, the first appears to remain unsolved in jurisprudence. Furthermore, the Magisterium dealt with the bonum coniugum both as an end (John Paul II) and as an essential element (Benedict XVI and Francis). The central thesis supported in this study is that the difficulties raised, in reality, seem to be apparent, due to the rigid position of the perspective assumed. If, on the other hand, the question is understood in a holistic sense, it may be said that the doctrine on the bonum coniugum has reached, at present, a definitive structuring: the bonum coniugum can now be considered both as an end and as an essential element of marriage, and the content of which would be identified with the secondary end. This does not seem different from the theological-canonical system that developed around the bonum prolis, since it has always been considered both as a (primary) end as well as an essential element.


The PDF of this article is not yet available.
Search in the articles