Contributi di Maria Chiara Ruscazio

SOMMARIO: 1. Osservazioni preliminari sul concetto di receptio legis - 2. Fondamenti giustificativi della receptio legis nell’ordinamento ecclesiale - 3. Valore giuridico della receptio legis. Effetti e criteri - 4. La recezione del m.p. Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus. Soggetti, condizioni, forme - 5. Note conclusive.

Some considerations upon the receptio legis in the light of the m.p. Mitis Iudex Dominus Iesus

ABSTRACT: Reception of law can be described as the process by which the recipients of a canonical law verify its reasonableness. This process appears mostly in the material observance of the law. The essay examines firstly the theological and ecclesiological legitimacy of reception, and then it explores which are its effects upon the binding force of the law and when they occur. Finally, it tries to employ this concept in describing the way in which the m.p. Mitis Iudex has been accepted and implemented in some local Churches.

SOMMARIO: 1. Considerazioni introduttive - 2. Il quadro normativo - 3. Le soluzioni giurisprudenziali - 4. Riflessioni conclusive.

The ‘debaptism’, between religious freedom and implicit rules. Hints of comparative law

ABSTRACT: The problem of cancellation from baptismal registers seems to have come to a final solution, thus being no more interesting. Nonetheless, it can still be useful to analyse it from a comparative point of view. The study of the various solutions proposed by the different legal systems allows finding out ‘implicit’ juridical principles, which condition the interpretation and the implementation of positive rules. It can be especially remarked a convergence of arguments and results between legal systems formally inspired to distinct models of State-religions’ relationship - such as the French and the Italian legal systems. This convergence highlights the existence, at a latent level, of common cultural conceptions of the religious experience, fashioned by the Christian religious paradigm; these conceptions tend to shape the concrete contents of both the right to religious freedom, and the right to personal identity, protected by personal data laws.

SOMMARIO: I. Premessa - I I. L’obiezione di coscienza del pubblico funzionario nel diritto statale: - 1. Il conflitto fra i doveri di status e i diritti costituzionalmente garantiti. Il modello francese: la preminenza del principio di neutralità – 2. Il conflitto fra i doveri di status e i diritti costituzionalmente garantiti. Il modello italiano: la molteplicità dei principi e delle interpretazioni - 3. Il riconoscimento difficile del diritto di obiezione del pubblico funzionario. La chiusura positiva del modello francese - 4. Il riconoscimento difficile del diritto di obiezione del pubblico funzionario. L’apertura incerta del modello italiano – III. L’obiezione di coscienza del pubblico funzionario e il diritto canonico: 1. Pertinenza delle diverse tecniche di flessibilità del diritto ecclesiale - 2. Per una applicabilità concreta della tolleranza alle ipotesi di conflitto di coscienza del funzionario.

The conscientious objection of the public official. Considerations in comparative law and canon law

We witness nowadays a wave of judicial cases concerning the problem of the possible right to conscientious objection of those who exert public functions. The problem’s elements are two: on one hand, the existence of juridical principles and obligations incident to the civil service, which are able to lie more heavily on the public official’s freedom of conscience; on the other hand, the acknowledgement or the denial, by the legal order, of the right to object as specific content of freedom of conscience. In this perspective, the comparison between the French and the Italian legal orders can be useful to highlight which consequences come from different approaches. In another perspective, where State law does not recognize the conscientious objection of the public official, we can ask ourselves whether canon law can solve the conscientious conflict of catholic public officials, softening their canonical obligations.