Canon Law and Planet 9 From Outer Space
January 1, 2007, 10:11 am
Posted by Cathleen Kaveny
I have to say, I found this delightful. Sacred Heart Major Seminary canonist Edward Peters presents the footnotes to the 1917 Code of Canon Law in terms of the worst movie of all time– or more precisely, the best worst movie of all time: Planet 9 From Outer Space.
And Jody Bottum fears we lawyers aren’t intellectuals.
I wish someone would do this for the contract law–maybe the Battle of the Forms in UCC 2-207. But what movie should be used?
I couldn’t help being reminded of Dr. Panglos, in Bernstein’s Candide (original edition),singing this is the best of all possible worlds and answering the scholastic objection, “What about war?”
He tells us that canon ;law brings privileged and commoner togetjer – hence war improves relations – hence this is the best of all possible worlds.
A second thought was how many of our Bishops are JCDs and absorbed all this stuff?
I actually think canon law is a good thing– a very good thing, and a real achievement of the Church, because its goal, ultimately, is set up rules for a community in light of the values of the Gospel.
And I think Professor Peters does a good job with a very hard topic–I wasn’t joking when I said I thought it was delightful. I am mesmerized by his combination of pop culture with clear presentation of intricate legal materials.
I bet he’s a good teacher.
Hey, this is hilarious!
Similar idea: A former colleague and I discovered at an office party that we shared an interest in Lizzie Borden, a murder case that was never solved. Eventually, we decided we should use what we knew about the case to write one of those executive self-help books, a la “The Management Secrets of Atilla the Hun” titled “Woman of Action: Lizzie Borden’s Success Tips for Executive Women.”
Chapter titles included:
“Some Families Just Can’t Live Together: Identifying Problem Employees Who Need to Change or Go”
“Sharpening the Axe: Tools and Strategies for Helping Employees Accept Change or Resign”
“Forty Whacks: 40 Tips for Successful Employee Terminations”
“Where’s the Blood? Cleaning up After a Restructuring”
“Not Guilty: What To Do if Pesky Litigations Arise”
We actually developed an almost-complete outline before people started looking at us funny. But we worked on the project sporadically until my friend got a job offer with the Headache Institute.
Sigh. We could have made millions.
For the record, after a court failed to convict Lizzie, she lived on in the house where her family was murdered. She inherited a tidy income, and she became a generous donor to local animal shelters and was kind to the neighbor children.
This is not only fascinating but actually rather appealing. If I were going to undertake a course of transcendental metempsychotic personal re-invention, I would definitely consider canon lawyer among other possible choices.
Lawyers are too plentiful in government despite the paucity of their intellects. Cathy, Cuomo and some others are exceptions.
Canon law might be a good thing but the Curia has always found a way to ignore it when convenient. Canon law has had serious problems with fraud. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05773a.htm
Here are some pertinent canons which bishops and pastors hardly encourage:
Canon 212 #2
The Christian faithful are free to make known their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires to the pastors of the Church.
Canon 212 #3
In accord with the knowledge, competence and preeminence which they possess, they have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and they have a right to make their opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard for the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward their pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons.
Canon 215
The Christian faithful are at liberty to freely to found and to govern associations for charitable and religious purposes or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world; they are free to hold meetings to pursue these purposes in common.
But the canons are there –canon lawyers can make arguments based on those canons on behalf of their clients. And those arguments will be public. And even if those arguments have no effect on those deciding the case, they have an effect on future lawyers, and future citizens.
Not long after the passage of the Anti-Slavery Amendments in the South, there came about a series of so-called Jim Crow laws which were designed to relegate African-Americans to second class status, they lasted for a century, until successfully challenged by smart black laweyrs like (later Justice) Thurgood Marshall.
The flip side of the discussion about the right not to obey unjust laws is the duty to obey just laws. The reason we need smart canon lawers — and smart civil lawyers is to hold our respective communities to our own, best, norms about how we want to live together.
I continue to think that just as we have a whole bunch of lawyer jokes, we could use a series pf canon lawyer jokes.
I guess tht’s because I see canon law as a kind of handmaid of theology/doctrine/pastoral practice analgous to the way rubrics should support liturgy,
Hence, my concern that many leaders are primarily canonists rather than theologians who also have broad pastoral experience.
Moreover, the problem is not just “just” or “unjust” law, but also that lawgivers have great power and can use it as a tool to leverage further power.
The liturgical reforms of the GIRM strike me as ways of enhancing clrricalism.
In canonical matters, Bill’s cites are relevant here also.
Then there’s this: I’ve heard canon law refered to as “sacred” canons – what makes them sacred?
Any evaluation of current canon law must balance the ned for good order with not only whether it is “just” but also meet and right.