Legal suits in ecclesiastical tribunals – can the faithful make use of canon law courts for dispute resolution?

The Christian faithful have various rights under both natural law and canon law, but what remedies are available when those rights are violated?  Canon law provides various options, including the ability to vindicate rights through a legal suit in an ecclesiastical court.  Although the Church does not claim the jurisdiction to determine all legal disputes, the Code of Canon Law (1983) (“Code”) explains that the Church adjudicates cases regarding or connected to spiritual matters, as well as certain violations of ecclesiastical laws and matters involving a question of sin (can. 1401).  Canon 221§1 further provides that the Christian faithful “can legitimately vindicate and defend the rights which they possess in the Church in the competent ecclesiastical forum according to the norm of law”.  This article will give some brief historical remarks on the Church’s role in judicial dispute-resolution, before surveying a number of present-day canonical rights which may be the object of vindication through a lawsuit and certain aspects of procedural law relating to such a suit.  Finally, an interesting decision of the Roman Rota will be considered in which a priest sued two bishops for defamation.  Importantly, this is an area in which canon law may overlap significantly with relevant civil laws, so it is important to obtain both canonical and civil law advice before attempting to sue anyone in an ecclesiastical court.

Since the times of the Roman Empire, the Church has been involved in settling disputes between her members.  One of the very early aspects of canon law, and a major reason why historical and current canon law draws so heavily from the Roman legal tradition, was the so-called ‘episcopal audience’.  By the reign of the Emperor Constantine in the early fourth century, bishops were often called upon to resolve disputes among the faithful through a form of arbitration.  After granting liberty to the Church, Constantine recognized the competence of bishops to judge certain civil cases among the faithful, rendering these episcopal decisions enforceable by the imperial administration subject to verification by an imperial judge that the bishop was a Catholic (i.e. not a heretic) and had followed correct legal procedure.  In the subsequent centuries, the Church continued to develop her own law and courts, as well as influencing the development of European secular law.  For example, the body of English law known as ‘equity’, including the law of trusts and certain aspects of inheritance law, was heavily influenced by ecclesiastically trained lawyers prior to the English Reformation.

In the present day, canon law furnishes the faithful with various rights which may be vindicated or pursued in canonical courts.  Among others, for example, the Christian faithful enjoy various rights relating to the exercise of religion, such as the right to engage in evangelization and apostolic action (cans. 211, 216), the right to communicate their needs and desires to their pastors (can. 212), and the right to receive spiritual and especially sacramental assistance from the Church (can. 213).  Beyond these typically religious rights, the Code also enumerates some canonical rights which are closer to civil law rights.  For example, somewhat akin to the civil law of defamation, the Code provides that “[no-one] is permitted to harm illegitimately the good reputation which a person possesses nor to injure the right of any person to protect his or her own privacy” (can. 220).  Canon law also recognizes certain aspects of contract law (can. 1290).  Catholics also enjoy a certain freedom of association under canon 215 “to found and direct associations for purposes of charity or piety or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world and to hold meetings for the common pursuit of these purposes”.  The lay faithful also have a broad right “to have recognized that freedom which all citizens have in the affairs of the earthly city” (can. 227).

Under present canon law, canonical rights of physical or juridic persons may be pursued or vindicated in a ‘contentious trial’.  Through such a trial, a party whose rights have been violated illegitimately either by a juridic act or “by any other act placed with malice or negligence” may also be able to seek the reparation of damage, such as compensation or a public retraction of defamatory statements (can. 128).  However, a controversy arising from an act of administrative power cannot be determined in a contentious trial; rather, such administrative controversies can only be brought before the relevant superior or an administrative tribunal through a process called ‘hierarchical recourse’ (can. 1400§2).  It is important to obtain canonical advice to navigate the issue of whether a dispute should proceed by way of hierarchical recourse or a contentious trial, as will be seen shortly in a decision of the Roman Rota.  For completeness, an action to repair damages may also be available in a penal trial.

The Code contains detailed provisions governing which forum is competent to adjudicate a legal dispute, however the tribunal competent to determine a contentious trial will often be a diocesan tribunal.  Certain interesting exceptions include that only the Pope is competent to judge cardinals, papal legates and those who hold the highest civil office of a state (can. 1405§1), and the judgment of bishops in contentious matters is reserved to the Roman Rota (can. 1405§3).  Although canon law enables the faithful to make use of litigation, the Code exhorts potential litigants to avoid litigation as much as possible, without prejudice to justice (can. 1446§1). Once legal proceedings have been initiated, judges are asked to “encourage and assist the parties to collaborate in seeking an equitable solution to the controversy” (can. 1446§2), and the Code encourages the use of both mediation and arbitration as potential means of alternative dispute resolution.

The decision Coram Erlebach of the Roman Rota (5 June 2018, reported in Ius Ecclesiae 32/2 (2020), 623–629) will illustrate some of these points.  In that case, a priest instituted a contentious trial in the Roman Rota against two bishops for defamation, abuse of power and culpable negligence.  The complainant contended that the defendants “abused their power by using canon law to exact personal revenge” against him for his role in suspending a $3 million construction contract with a close friend of the defendants.  In particular, the complainant alleged in his libellus that the defendants generated, or allowed to be generated, non-existent accusations against him in the context of a diocesan review board presided over by one of the defendants.  However, the Rota considered that the defamation and other damages alleged had their direct or immediate origin in acts of administrative power, not in acts done by a defendant as a private person.  For this reason, the Rota judged that it was not competent to admit the contentious case; rather, the complainant should have proceeded by way of hierarchical recourse in accordance with canon 1400§2.  Even though the complainant was unsuccessful before the Rota, the tribunal’s judgment confirms that canonical courts are competent to vindicate the rights of the faithful, including awarding damages where appropriate.

Although contentious trials for the vindication of rights are currently rare in practice, canon law contains the complete legal procedure necessary for this type of lawsuit.  The Code confers many rights and obligations on clerics and laity, and specifies which canonical tribunals are competent to adjudicate disputes relating to them.  Importantly, all the Catholic faithful may make use of these legal mechanisms, not only the clergy.  However, the complexity of contentious legal proceedings, including their interaction with hierarchical recourse, necessitates the involvement of a canonical advisor throughout the process.