In September 2015, Pope Francis issued two landmark apostolic letters by which he reformed the canonical procedures for declaring the nullity of marriage. At the heart of this legal reform was the introduction of the shorter process or the “processus brevior.” Driven by the supreme law of the church, the salvation of souls, Pope Francis sought to simplify and expedite tribunal proceedings without diluting the dogmatic principle of marital indissolubility.
In this two-part series, I first will address in this column the principal reforms that Pope Francis made and the reasons he made them. Next time I will take up the requirements of the “processus brevior” in greater detail.
By way of background, up to this point the canonical process for determining marriage nullity had been largely unchanged since the issuance of the Code of Canon Law in 1983. The procedure was often lengthy, cumbersome and required a “double conforming sentence” — meaning two distinct tribunal judgments at different judicial levels had to agree on nullity before a party was free to remarry in the church.
For many Catholics suffering from the trauma of marital breakdown, this multiyear process felt bureaucratic, emotionally exhausting and financially prohibitive.
Pope Francis initiated the reform out of pastoral solicitude for the faithful who had experienced marital collapse and wished to clarify their standing in the church. The reform includes some important changes.
First, the reform eliminated the mandatory appeal, which was replaced by making a single affirmative judgment of nullity sufficient, provided no appeal is lodged by either party or the Defender of the Bond. Second, the reform declared that the diocesan bishop, as chief pastor of his local church, was also its chief judge, and while he may delegate to others a number of his judicial duties, he is to assume his direct role as judge of the cases within the “processus brevior.”
Third, the reform provides a simple rule as to where a petitioner may file a marriage nullity case: in the diocese where the church wedding took place, or in a diocese where one or both spouses reside. Prior to this important change, cases were often delayed by complicated considerations of where the best venue might be.
Fourth, diocesan tribunals were encouraged to examine the fees they request to cover some of the overhead cost of handling marriage nullity cases, so that financial hardships would never bar access to justice.
Finally, the reform established a streamlined process reserved for cases where marriage nullity is manifestly obvious and supported by clear evidence. This is known as the “processus brevior” or the shorter process for exceptionally strong cases. To qualify for this expedited track, two essential conditions must be met: 1. There must be mutual consent. The petition must be filed jointly by both spouses, or by one spouse with the explicit consent of the other. 2. The grounds must be manifest, such that the facts and circumstances showing the invalidity of the marriage must be so clear and evident, making a lengthy investigation unnecessary. I’ll expand on this in the next part.
The reforms introduced by Pope Francis require both canonical rigor and pastoral tenderness. He streamlined the procedures of the marriage tribunals with an aim of removing unnecessary administrative layers by placing judicial authority directly into the hands of local bishops. By doing so, he wanted the church to remove unnecessary procedural hurdles for wounded believers.
Far from weakening the sanctity of marriage, these reforms seek to clarify the truth of a couple’s marital status with speed and compassionate justice, honoring Christ’s command to offer healing and reconciliation to those seeking to live in full communion with the church.
Reproduced with permission by the Archdiocese of Chicago.
