Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Paper
On
LEGAL RESEARCH
(Church) and Civil or Family (State) Laws always bring about the influences affecting or
Both have separate definitions of marriage as well as the requisites that will
nullify such. However, both also distinguish and pride themselves with independent
In this paper, it will look into the applications of the requisites nullifying a
marriage from both sides, i.e. Canon vis a vis Civil Codes.
Further, this paper will cite cases that use both as points of reference, contention
as well as dissent. However, this paper only seeks to define and compare the
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
It is a known fact that both Church and State play predominant roles in Philippine
society. In order to understand the Philippines as a sovereign state, complete with its
acknowledge a parallel set of hierarchic mirror coming from the Church herself.
The Civil Code of the Philippines (Civil Code of the Philippines, Wikipedia) is the
product of the codification of private law in the Philippines. It is the general law that
governs family and property relations in the Philippines. It was enacted in 190, and
(Ibid.), which was first enforced in1889 within the Philippines, then a colony of the
Kingdom of Spain. The Codigo Civil remained in effect even throughout the American
Luis Quezon formed a Commission tasked with drafting a new Civil Code.
The Code Commission completed the final draft of the new Civil Code by
December 1947, and this was submitted to Congress, which enacted it into law through
Republic Act # 386. The Civil Code took effect in 1950 (Ibid.)
In 1987, President Corazon Cojuangco Aquino enacted into law the Family Code
of 1987, which was intended to supplant Book 4 of the Civil Code concerning persons
and family relations. Work on the Family code had begun as early as 1979, and it had
been drafted by two successive committees. The Civil Coded needed amendment via
the Family Code in order to, among others, alter certain provisions derived from foreign
The Family Code covers fields of significant public interest, especially the laws
on marriage. The definition and requisites for marriage, along with the grounds for
annulment are found in the Family Code, as is the law on conjugal property relations,
The Catholic Church, with its headquarters in the Vatican City State in Rome,
Italy, has the most developed system of Canon Law. The foundations of the Catholic
System are the Holy Bible (both Old and New Testaments), the teachings of the
Apostles and the Churchs ordinary magisterium and custom (Canonical Impediment:
apparatus of the Roman Empire with districts such as dioceses and archdioceses (or, in
the Eastern, Greek-speaking parts of the Empire, eparchies and metropolia) (Ibid.)
Through time, although there was much canon law, it was poorly systematized.
The upheavals of the French Revolution and Napoleonic Era, combined with the
growing secularism of the 19th century impelled the Catholic Church to codify its Canon
Law in order to have a specific source for addressing many areas of Church life and
apostolate (Ibid.).
The results were the first Code of Canon Law for the Roman Rite, published in
1917. Following the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) came a new edition of the
Code of Canon Law in 1983, this time exclusively for the Roman Rite (Ibid.)
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Under the Colonization of Spain over the Philippines that spanned over three
applications of the Filipino way of life. The Church and the State are acutely intertwined
to each other and separation from the other seems next to impossible.
Here the line between Church and State has dimmed and when it comes to basic
terminologies, one cannot fail to notice the resemblance and influence the one has over
the other.
MARRIAGE
contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance
with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the
family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequence, and incidents are
governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix
the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.
On the other hand, the Code of Canon Law defined marriage in Can. # 1055 as
partnership of the whole of life ad which is ordered by its nature to the good of the
spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the
Under Spain, only the religious or canonical marriages were recognized in the
Philippines. The Civil Marriages in the Spanish Civil Code of 1889 were never extended
to the Philippines. The Americans introduced Civil Marriage in General Order (Art. 1;
DISCUSSION
In the much discussed article by Gerald W. Healy, S.J. entitled Marriage: The
1983 Code of the Canon Law, and the 1987 Family Code of the Philippines, he noted
that the Bishops of the Catholic Church were already insistently and vehemently
Healy took note that both Codes have made profound changes inasmuch as
both have opened up to the behavioral sciences in evaluating the existential reality of
contemporary marriages.
Further, he stated that the People of the Philippines, as Catholics, live under
both the Church and the Family Codes. In the area where the Family Code overlaps
the Canon Law, Healy underlines the fact that the two will be compared to see the
practical consequences of such overlapping and to draw out the pastoral applications.
The author also underlines on those who appreciate the historical and theological
roots, and the weakness of those who remain within a strict juridical horizon, with little
There is an uneasy co-existence that is inevitable due to the radical nature of the
change from the 1917 Code where the laws displayed the characteristics of an
ideology: logically they were clear and consistent but often in conflict with the concrete
The Church has always espoused that marriage is a covenant (foedus) as this
was used to describe the relationship of Yahweh to his people, his covenant with Israel.
Healy notes that Orly points out that this does not exclude the contractual elements or
deny them but puts them in a sacred context (i.e. a covenant between God and the
In this context, Gods own promises, through the sacramental covenant between
couples, becomes the source of the firmness of Christian marriage. On the other hand,
Civil Law has restricted marriage to a more pragmatic term. It allocates the secular
To illustrate this dichotomy, the author reiterates that the dividing line between
the two situations must be drawn in the field of operation of the human psyche, obscure
such refined theoretical distinctions that even the experts find hard to explain. Within
the legal parameters of Civil Law, voidable marriages becomes a concept unknown to
Church Law. Here, the victim could sanate or heal his or her own marriage eliminating
the defect.
On the other end of the spectrum, Canon Law has no allowance for couples
healing nor sanating their own marriages. Either it was valid or invalid (ab initio) at the
Healy underscores that for Catholics, a marriage cannot heal itself which greatly
facilitates the work of matrimonial tribunals when such marriages break up, making the
authority in Canon Law, _____ Orsy would consider the Family Code superior to Canon
Law.
This makes the new codes recent opening to the behavioral sciences
acknowledges the necessary requirement that the Tribunal staff include an expert in
psychiatry or psychology since so many cases today are based on lack of due
Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines therefore, based against the
liberalization of the New anon Law has every reason to believe that it will be understood
in the same way as the ecclesiastical Canon 1095, paragraph 3. However, at present,
there is still no distinctive connection between canonical and civil jurisprudence in the
Philippines.
Conflict arises in fact as when even though the Church declares a marriage null
and void according to Canon 1095, it still remains civilly valid according to Philippine
Law. Here, the author acknowledges that with the new Family Code of the Philippines,
the same arguments and proofs that sufficed for a church declaration of nullity could in
certain cases also merit a declaration of nullity if the case was brought to the Civil Court,
allowing always for certain obvious differences in the Codes, e.g. prescription.
It is a good thing to note that the new Code favors the institution over the
individual. The author postulates however that, in synchronicity with Orsys opinion that
illustrated Southeast Asia fitting into the existential Tribunal Situation. That the whole
value of the law was found in the need to put an end to clandestine marriages, pointing
acknowledges this by stating that the Church most conveniently applies common error
The law of marriage like any other law is subject to the law of history, it must
in Healys article, a need to bring to the table some of the more urgent among the
questions needing to be faced and treated namely, (a.) separating the contract from the
Sacrament; (b.) the limits of indissolubility; and (c.) the problem of admitting divorce and
marriages, after repentance for the faults in the failed first marriage. The Eastern notion
Oikonomia empowers it to heal and redress a situation that cannot be helped in any
other way.
unbreakable bond. The 1983 Canon Code Law does not allow divorce which always
involves setting aside a valid marriage. In fact, the only way to gain permission for a
second marriage in the Church is to obtain a Church declaration of nullity of the former
marriage. This is the irony between the Family Code of the Philippines and the Canon
Code Law. Although free to remarry under Philippine Law (FCP), a Filipino must seek a
the Church is the only competent forum for such a declaration, any divorce decrees of
any Civil Court are not honored by the Church as the Church espouses the belief that
for a Church declaration of nullity for many non-Catholic marriages in todays world.
That a previous marriage wherein one or both parties was/were not baptized might
possibly merit a papal dissolution to permit marriage to a Catholic, but this is quite rare
and uncommon.
Republic of the Philippines vs. Court of Appeals and Roridel Olaviano Molina.
G.R. No. 10873. February 13, 1997.
Article 36 has been described as the most liberal divorce procedure in the
world. It is clear that Article 36 was taken by the Family Code Revision Committee from
Canon 1095 of the New Code of Canon Law, which became effective in 1983 and which
provides:
The very purpose to this is to harmonize our civil laws with the religious faith of
our people, it stands to reason that to achieve such harmonization, great persuasive
weight should be given to decision of such appellate tribunal. Ideally- -subject to our law
void.
The ponente further states that the State and the Church, while remaining
independent separate and apart from each other, shall walk together in synodal
cadence towards the same goal of protecting and cherishing marriage and the family as
of the Canon Code Law needs further elucidation as its roots are primarily ecclesiastical
1. gravity
Guidelines in the interpretation and application of Article 36 were also laid down
perceivable);
4. Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or
spouse);
marriage;
Articles 220, 221, and 222 of the same Code with regards to
and
and the Secretary General to appear as counsel for the State while
Noel B. Baccay, petitioner versus Maribel C. Baccay and Republic of the Philippines.
G.R. No. 173138. December 1, 2010.
This case also supplements the preceding case as it tries dissecting the terms of
1. a celebration of marriage;
2. non-performance of marital obligations;
3. the marital obligations which are not performed are essential obligations;
5. the cause/s are present during the celebration of marriage although they may
The incapacity should make the party disabled from rendering what is due in the
marriage, within the context of justice, not merely in the sphere of good will. In this
This case also pointed out that Article 36 of the Family Code was based on
Canon 1095 of the New Canon Law of the Catholic Church. Canon 1095 states that
accepted; and
Once more, this case underlines that the third paragraph of Canon 1095 provided
for the model for what is now Article 36 of the Family Code:
Church decisions held that a person may appear to enjoy full use of his faculties,
but because of some psychotic defect, he/she may be incapable of assuming the
obligations of marriage, although, he/she may have a conceptual understanding of such
obligation.
Arguments in the way the Church has limited the third paragraph of Canon 1095
to refer only to lack of capacity to fulfill essential marital obligations (lack of due
capacity) and where Article 36 of the Family Code should also be interpreted as limited
concept of psychological incapacity that the members of the Family Code Revision
Committee had in mind, the interpretation of Canon 1095 from the provision was
modeled after, and the existing laws, both procedural and substantive.
(e.g. a relationship where no marriage could have been validly conducted because the
parties, or one of them, by reason of grave and incurable psychological illness existing
at the time when the marriage was celebrated, was incapacitated to fulfill the essential
marital obligations, and thus, could not have validly entered into a marriage).
Edward Kenneth Ngo Te vs. Rowena Gutierrez Yu-Te and Republic of the Philippines.
G.R. No. 161793. February 13, 2009.
Another notable case, Te vs. Te & RP illustrates that marriage is the Christian
indissoluble social institution upon which the family and society are founded. The
ponente describes here that the two committees did not pursue the idea of absolute
divorce. Instead, it is the action for judicial declaration of invalidity of marriage based on
grounds available in the Canon Law that is called to underscore the remedy.
However, this still does not solve the nagging truth of Church annulments of
marriages on grounds not recognized by the Civil Law of the State. It is important to
note however that the New Family Code decided to consolidate the present provisions
in the enumeration of void marriages in the present Canon Code where any person
psychologically or mentally incapacitated to discharge the essential marital obligations,
even if such lack or incapacity is made manifest after the celebration may call for the
unnecessary.
On the other end, the Catholic Church has been declaring marriages null and
void on the ground of lack of due discretion. This acknowledges the reality that a lot of
anomaly).
Justice Caguioa, in his comment, also used the term psychological or mental
impotence which Archbishop Oscar Cruz opened (1984) that this term is an invention
phrase.
This case puts forward a committee classification on the bases for determining
Distinctively, Canon 1095 states inter alia that the following persons are
marriages with respect to their validity: VALID or VOID while on the other end, Civil Law
For the Ecclesiastical Tribunal the word annuls means the marriage is declared
null and void (i.e. it never really existed in the first place, for a valid sacramental
process which entails a full tribunal procedure with a Court selection and a formal
hearing.
The ironic truth however is that, again, Church annulments are not recognized
by Civil Law as severing ties as to capacitate the parties to enter lawfully into marriage
as Civil Law grounds not being congruent with those laid down by Canon Law.
that the Civil Law Revision Committee decided to engraft the Canon Law concept of
psychological incapacity into the Family Code and classified the same as a ground for
annulment was given a broader approach to the kinds of proof necessary paved the
way for Diocesan Tribunals to begin accepting proof of serious psychological problems
that manifested themselves shortly after the ceremony as proof of an inability to give
In this line, the Courts are aware of the parallel decisions of Catholic marriage
Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, while not controlling or decisive,
should be given great respect by our courts. It is clear that Art. 36 was taken by the FC
Revision Committee from Canon 1095 of the New Code of Canon Law, which became
effective in 1983.
Once more, the purpose of including such provision in our Family Code was to
harmonize our Civil Laws with the religious faith of our people and it stands to reason
should also be decreed civilly void. The State and the Churchwhile remaining
independent, separate and apart from each other, shall walk together in synodal
cadence towards the same goal of protecting and cherishing marriage and the family as
It is also interesting to note that the Secretary General, as counsel of the State
also discharges the equivalent function of the defensor vinculi contemplated under
Canon 1095. For the Church, however, this new openness did not amount to the
addition of new grounds for annulment; rather an accommodation by the Church to the
annulment cases that a person who could intellectually understand the concept of
incapacity not only to sexual anomalies but to all kinds of personality disorders that
incapacitate a spouse/s and since 1973 have refined the meaning of psychological or
marriage depends.
CONCLUSION
Marriage being one of the most esteemed institutions in civil society and most
importantly, as a covenant and sacrament under the Catholic Church remains one of
the most defended, challenged as well as assailed social contract known to man.
Within the parameters of Philippines society and taken into consideration its long
history as a colony under Spain, Japan and the U.S.A., it is then no surprise that a
is merely to present an initial survey of select decided cases adapting the concept of
The number of cases considered herein may not be the ideal number to
represent a realistic picture of Philippine jurisprudence, two things remain true: either
there are indeed more cases that this researcher has not yet come across or this is
indicative of the ratio of actual repositories of decided cases in the entire archipelago.
discovery this researcher has unveiled through the subject is the fact that despite the
accepted historical basis of Article 36 of the Civil Code as to that derived from Canon
decisions do not go in parallel with each other. In fact, opinions presented by various
This researcher acknowledges her concurring opinion to the need for unification
(Canon Law) or nullification (Civil Code) of failed and dysfunctional marriages in this
country.
REFERENCES:
Annulment of Marriage Simplified. Kinglaw. Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014
at http://kingslaw.ralo.org/home/anullment-of-marriage.
Annulment, Divorce and Legal Separation in the Philippines: Questions and Answers.
(January 11, 2007) Published by Atty. Fred in Annulment and Legal Separation.
Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014 at http://jlp-law.com/blog/annulment-
divorce-legal-separation-in-the-philippines-questions-and-answers/.
Atty Gaby Concepcion. Marriage Laws in the Philippines. Retrieved from the WWW
October 10, 2014 at
http://www.dlsu.edu.ph/research/centers/cberd/pdf/business/vol1/vol1no5.pdf.
Atty. Sales, Emmanuel O. Breaking the Bond of Marriage (The Case of Psychological
Incapacity) (July-August, 1997) Notes on Business Education.
Baccay, Noel B. versus Maribel C. Baccay and Republic of the Philippines. G.R. No.
173138. December 1, 2010.
Canonical Impediment. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved October 10,
2014 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_impediment.
Civil Code of the Philippines. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved October
12, 2014 at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Code_of_the_Philippines.
Civil Marriage.The New Advent. Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014 at
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/p.htm.
Code of Canon Law. Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014 at
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_P3V.HTM.
Executive Order No. 209. The Family Code of the Philippines. Retrieved October 10,
2014 from the WWW at http://www.gov.ph/downloads/1987/07jul/19870706-EO-
0209-CCA.pdf.
Ford, Don. Canon Law Research Guide. (June/July 2007) Retrieved from the WWW
October 10, 2014 at http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/canon_law.htm.
Healy, Gerald W., S.J. Marriage: The 1983 Code of Canon Law, and the 1987 Family
Code of the Philippines. Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014 at
http://journals.ateneo.edu/ojs/index.php/landas/article/download/1031/1061
Holmberg, Tom. The Civil Code: an Overview; The Origins of the Code. Retrieved from
the WWW October 10, 2014 at http://www.napoleon-
series.org/research/government/code/c_code2.html.
Mixed Marriage. The New Advent. Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014 at
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09693a.htm.
Noel B. Baccay vs. Maribel C. Baccay and Republic of the Philippines. G.R. No.
173138. December 1, 2010.
Orlando G. Tongol vs. Filipinas M. Tongol. G.R. 1710. October 19, 20007.
Republic of the Philippines vs. Court of Appeals and Roridel Olaviano Molina.
G.R. No. 10873. February 13, 1997.
Republic of the Philippines vs. Crasus L. Iyoy. G.R. No. 1277. September 21, 2005.
Te, Edward Kenneth Ngo vs. Rowena Gutierrez Yu-Te and Republic of the
Philippines. G.R. No. 161793. February 13, 2009.
The Family Code of the Philippines: Executive Order No. 209. Chan Robles Virtual Law
Library. Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014 at
http://www.chanrobles.com/executiveorderno209.htm.
The Sacrament of Matrimony. Retrieved from the WWW October 10, 2014 at
http://books.google.com.ph/books?id=JKgZEjvB5cEC&pg=PA1379&lpg=PA1379
&dq=marriage+in+canon+law%2Borsy&source=bl&ots=GK2IOHDu2o&sig=O0W
ar9ibC4kzFHPonPX6c-
AQywg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UJQzVJijOtjV8gWSyYLQDg&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAw#v=
onepage&q=marriage%20in%20canon%20law%2Borsy&f=false.