By Chris Starr

The Vatican decision to extend special American marriage court norms has received high praise from two Church lawyers.

One, Father Edward Dillon, Officialis for the Archdiocese of Atlanta, saw the Vatican’s reversal as an interesting example of Rome responding to the special needs of the American Church.

Father Dillon, a member of the Governing Board of the Canon Law Society of American (CLSA) was involved in research and an extensive survey of American tribunals. He also heads the marriage Tribunal for the Archdiocese of Atlanta.

The norms granting extension deal with procedural matters in the church’s marriage courts when someone seeks an annulment. They allow cases to be processed with less paperwork, with fewer judges and usually in less time.

Father Dillon explained that without special norms marriage cases would be bottlenecked in extensive paperwork. “We would be swamped,” he explained, “and this would double and in some cases triple the amount of time required for a case to receive a decision.”

We are also hoping that the best of the American norms will be incorporated in the new Code of Canon law when it is published.”

In an interview with NC News, Father Thomas Lynch, who accompanied a delegation of U.S. bishops to Rome earlier this year, said the Vatican decision was an important example showing that Pope Paul VI and others at the Vatican are serious about collegiality and subsidiary, the principles of extending appropriate freedom and authority downward in the Church.

Father Lynch said there was something “most important” about the marriage court norms themselves.

“It would be a grave mistake to see this issue as a matter of some procedures in canon law only,” he said. “This is a very concrete sign that both the local Church in America and the universal Church in Rome have begun to take seriously the questions of subsidiary and collegiality.”

He cited the American bishops’ initiative and responsible leadership and the Vatican’s willingness to listen and respond positively in that context. “This has strong implications for ecclesiology (the study of the Church’s nature and structures),” he said.

“I can only applaud and thank and be grateful to the Holy Father for giving (the American Church) a fair, open and interested hearing on this issue. It was evident that Rome was taking this quite seriously.”

Father Lynch said that when the U.S. bishops decided at their national meeting last November to send a special delegation to he Pope to ask an extension of the norms – they were due to expire June 30, 1974 – it was evident that the Vatican had already decided not to renew its permission.

“There can’t be any question but that (the latest Vatican decision) was a reversal of a previous decision,” he said. “The earlier decision was made in good faith, by people who had a right to make the decision, but the (U.S.) bishops felt it was inadequate.”

There were three “most significant” factors, Father Lynch said, leading up to the Vatican’s decision to extend the norms:

--The bishops’ case for continuing the norms was based “on the most solid of information and a real in –depth study of tribunals (marriage courts) in the U.S….I have yet to see the Holy See say ‘No’ when you present the facts.”

--When the bishops discussed the issue and their approach last November “there was evident a very, very deep pastoral concern on the part of the hierarchy. They did not just look at it in terms of political expediency – how much then might get from Rome – but they began to look at it from the viewpoint that, as leader of the local Church, the bishop is supposed to be the prime guarantor of justice to his people. They began to look at this in terms of their obligations as bishops.”

--“Thirdly, the unanimity on this issue was one that was rare” for the national Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) in this country.

Father Lynch added that the norms themselves are ultimately inadequate to reach the massive numbers of Catholics in this country who are divorced and remarried, about four to five million according to estimates.

Of the people who actually come to ask for an annulment, “roughly 20 percent have enough evidence to show their case should be heard,” he said. “Using a conservative jurisprudence and acceptable procedures, there are still fairly close to one million viable cases out there waiting to be heard, “ he said. In the past year about 8,500 cases have been resolved under the American procedures.

Asked about the new matrimonial procedures law for the whole Church – part of the over-all reform of Church law which has been in process for over 10 years and may be completed over the next few years –Father Lynch said he had no idea how soon such laws would be forthcoming.

But when the new procedures do come, he said, he hopes they will be at least as good as the special American norms if not better.

An annulment is simply official recognition that a past attempted marriage was not a true marriage. It cannot be given if the previous marriage, in the judgment of the Church, was valid.

“We have to realize that an annulment is not a gift from the Church,” said Father Lynch. “It is a matter of a person’s right in justice.”