The Holy See
APOSTOLIC LETTER MOTU PROPRIO OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF FRANCIS
MITIS IUDEX DOMINUS IESUS
BY WHICH THE CANONS OF THE CODE OF CANON LAW PERTAINING TO CASES REGARDING THE NULLITY OF MARRIAGE ARE REFORMED
The Gentle Judge, our Lord Jesus, the Shepherd of our Souls, entrusted to the Apostle Peter and
to his successors the power of the keys to carry out the work of truth and justice in the Church; this
supreme and universal power of binding and loosing here on earth asserts, strengthens and
protects the power of Pastors of particular Churches, by virtue of which they have the sacred right
and duty before the Lord to enact judgment toward those entrusted to their care.
Through the centuries, the Church, having attained a clearer awareness of the words of Christ,
came to and set forth a deeper understanding of the doctrine of the indissolubility of the sacred
bond of marriage, developed a system of nullities of matrimonial consent, and put together a
juridical process more fitting to the matter so that ecclesiastical discipline might conform more and
more to the truth of the faith she was professing.
All these things were done following the supreme law of the salvation of souls insofar as the
Church, as Blessed Paul VI wisely taught, is the divine plan of the Trinity, and therefore all her
institutions, constantly subject to improvement, work, each according to its respective duty and
mission, toward the goal of transmitting divine grace and constantly promoting the good of the
Christian faithful as the Church’s essential end.
It is with this awareness that we decided to undertake a reform of the processes regarding the
nullity of marriage, and we accordingly assembled a Committee for this purpose comprised of men
renown for their knowledge of the law, their pastoral prudence, and their practical experience. This
Committee, under the guidance of the Dean of the Roman Rota, drew up a plan for reform with
due regard for the need to protect the principle of the indissolubility of the marital bound. Working
quickly, this Committee devised within a short period of time a framework for the new procedural
law that, after careful examination with the help of other experts, is now presented in this motu
Therefore, the zeal for the salvation of souls that, today like yesterday, always remains the
supreme end of the Church’s institutions, rules, and law, compels the Bishop of Rome to
promulgate this reform to all bishops who share in his ecclesial duty of safeguarding the unity of
the faith and teaching regarding marriage, the source and center of the Christian family. The
desire for this reform is fed by the great number of Christian faithful who, as they seek to assuage
their consciences, are often kept back from the juridical structures of the Church because of
physical or moral distance. Thus charity and mercy demand that the Church, like a good mother,
be near her children who feel themselves estranged from her.
All of this also reflects the wishes of the majority of our brother bishops gathered at the recent
extraordinary synod who were asking for a more streamlined and readily accessible juridical
process. Agreeing wholeheartedly with their wishes, we have decided to publish these
provisions that favor not the nullity of marriages, but the speed of processes as well as the
simplicity due them, lest the clouds of doubt overshadow the hearts of the faithful awaiting a
decision regarding their state because of a delayed sentence.
We have done this following in the footsteps of our predecessors who wished cases of nullity to be
handled in a juridical rather than an administrative way, not because the nature of the matter
demands it, but rather due to the unparalleled need to safeguard the truth of the sacred bond:
something ensured by the juridical order.
A few fundamental criteria stand out that have guided the work of reform.
I. – A single executive sentence in favor of nullity. – First of all, it seemed that a double conforming
decision in favor of the nullity of a marriage was no longer necessary to enable the parties to enter
into a new canonical marriage. Rather, moral certainty on the part of the first judge in accord with
the norm of law is sufficient.
II. – A single judge under the responsibility of the bishop. – In the first instance, the responsibility of
appointing a single judge, who must be a cleric, is entrusted to the bishop, who in the pastoral
exercise of his juridical powers must guard against all laxism.
III. – The bishop himself as judge. – In order that a teaching of the Second Vatican Council
regarding a certain area of great importance finally be put into practice, it has been decided to
declare openly that the bishop himself, in the church over which he has been appointed shepherd
and head, is by that very fact the judge of those faithful entrusted to his care. It is thus hoped that
the bishop himself, be it of a large or small diocese, stand as a sign of the conversion of
ecclesiastical structures, and that he does not delegate completely the duty of deciding
marriage cases to the offices of his curia. This is especially true in the streamlined process for
handling cases of clear nullity being established in the present document.
IV. – Briefer process. – For indeed, in simplifying the ordinary process for handling marriage
cases, a sort of briefer process was devised – besides the current documentary procedure –, to be
applied in those cases where the alleged nullity of marriage is supported by particularly clear
Nevertheless, we are not unaware of the extent to which the principle of the indissolubility of
marriage might be endangered by the briefer process; for this very reason we desire that the
bishop himself be established as the judge in this process, who, due to his duty as pastor, has the
greatest care for catholic unity with Peter in faith and discipline.
V. – Appeal to the metropolitan see. – It is necessary that the appeal process be restored to the
metropolitan see, especially since that duty, insofar as the metropolitan see is the head of the
ecclesiastical province, stands out through time as a stable and distinctive sign of synodality in the
VI. The duty proper to episcopal conferences. – Conferences of bishops, which above all should
be driven by apostolic zeal to reach out to the dispersed faithful, should especially feel the duty of
participating in the aforementioned “conversion” and they should respect the restored and
defended right of organizing judicial power in their own particular churches.
The restoration of the proximity between the judge and the faithful will never reach its desired
result unless episcopal conferences offer encouragement and assistance to individual bishops so
that they may carry out the reform of the matrimonial process.
Episcopal conferences, in close collaboration with judges, should ensure, to the best of their ability
and with due regard for the just compensation of tribunal employees, that processes remain free of
charge, and that the Church, showing herself a generous mother to the faithful, manifest, in a
matter so intimately tied to the salvation of souls, the gratuitous love of Christ by which we have all
VII. – Appeal to the Apostolic See. – In accord with a revered and ancient right, it is still necessary
to retain the appeal to the ordinary tribunal of the Holy See, namely the Roman Rota, so as to
strengthen the bond between the See of Peter and the particular churches, with due care,
however, to keep in check any abuse of the practice of this appeal, lest the salvation of souls
should be jeopardized.
Nevertheless, insofar as necessary, the respective law of the Roman Rota will be adapted as soon
as possible to the rules of the reformed process.
VIII. – Provisions for Easter Churches. – Finally, given the particular ecclesial and disciplinary
arrangement of Eastern Churches, we have decided to publish, separately and on this very day,
revised norms for updating the handling of matrimonial processes as presented in the Code of
Canons of Eastern Churches.
Therefore, having taken all of this into consideration, we have determined and established the
following changes to the Code of Canon Law, Book VII, Part III, Title I, Chapter I, “Cases to
Declare the Nullity of Marriage” (cann. 1671-1691), which will take effect beginning December 8th,
Art. 1 – The Competent Forum and Tribunals
The Competent Forum
Can. 1671 § 1. Marriage cases of the baptized belong to the ecclesiastical judge by proper right.
§ 2. Cases regarding merely the civil effects of marriage belong to a civil magistrate, unless the
particular law establishes that such cases, if carried out in an incidental or accessory manner, can
be recognized by and determined by an ecclesiastical judge.
Can. 1672. In cases regarding the nullity of marriage not reserved to the Apostolic See, the
competencies are: 1° the tribunal of the place in which the marriage was celebrated; 2° the tribunal
of the place in which either or both parties have a domicile or a quasi-domicile; 3° the tribunal of
the place in which in fact most of the proofs must be collected.
Can. 1673 § 1. In each diocese, the judge in first instance for cases of nullity or marriage for which
the law does not expressly make an exception is the diocesan bishop, who can exercise judicial
power personally or through others according to the norm of law.
§ 2. The bishop is to establish a diocesan tribunal for his diocese to handle cases of nullity of
marriage without prejudice to the faculty of the same bishop to approach another nearby diocesan
or interdiocesan tribunal.
§ 3. Cases of nullity of marriage are reserved to a college of three judges. A judge who is a cleric
must preside over the college, but the other judges may be laypersons.
§ 4. The bishop moderator, if a collegial tribunal cannot be constituted in the diocese or in a
nearby tribunal chosen according to the norm of § 2, is to entrust cases to a single clerical judge
who, where possible, is to employ two assessors of upright life, experts in juridical or human
sciences, approved by the bishop for this task; unless it is otherwise evident, the same single
judge has competency for those things attributed to the college, the praeses, or the ponens.
§ 5. The tribunal of second instance must always be collegiate for validity, according to the
prescript of the preceding § 3.
§ 6. The tribunal of first instance appeals to the metropolitan tribunal of second instance without
prejudice to the prescripts of cann. 1438-1439 and 1444.
Art. 2 – The Right to Challenge a Marriage
Can. 1674 § 1. The following are qualified to challenge a marriage: 1° the spouses; 2° the
promoter of justice when nullity has already become public, if the convalidation of the marriage is
not possible or expedient.
§ 2. A marriage which was not accused while both spouses were living cannot be accused after
the death of either one or both of the spouses unless the question of validity is prejudicial to the
resolution of another controversy either in the canonical forum or in the civil forum.
§ 3. If a spouse dies while the case is pending, however, can. 1518 is to be observed.
Art. 3 – The Introduction and Instruction of the Case
Can. 1675. The judge, before he accepts a case, must be informed that the marriage has
irreparably failed, such that conjugal living cannot be restored.
Can. 1676 § 1. After receiving the libellus, the judicial vicar, if he considers that it has some basis,
admits it and, by a decree appended to the bottom of the libellus itself, is to order that a copy be
communicated to the defender of the bond and, unless the libellus was signed by both parties, to
the respondent, giving them a period of fifteen days to express their views on the petition.
§ 2. After the above-mentioned deadline has passed, and after the other party has been
admonished to express his or her views if and insofar as necessary, and after the defender of the
bond has been heard, the judicial vicar is to determine by his decree the formula of the doubt and
is to decide whether the case is to be treated with the ordinary process or with the briefer process
according to cann. 1683-1687. This decree is to be communicated immediately to the parties and
the defender of the bond.
§ 3. If the case is to be handled through the ordinary process, the judicial vicar, by the same
decree, is to arrange the constitution of a college of judges or of a single judge with two assessors
according to can. 1673, § 4.
§ 4. However, if the briefer process is decided upon, the judicial vicar proceeds according to the
norm of can. 1685.
§ 5. The formula of doubt must determine by which ground or grounds the validity of the marriage
Can. 1677 § 1. The defender of the bond, the legal representatives of the parties, as well as the
promoter of justice, if involved in the trial, have the following rights: 1° to be present at the
examination of the parties, the witnesses, and the experts, without prejudice to the prescript of
can. 1559; 2° to inspect the judicial acts, even those not yet published, and to review the
documents presented by the parties.
§ 2. The parties cannot be present at the examination mentioned in §1, n. 1.
Can. 1678 § 1. In cases of the nullity of marriage, a judicial confession and the declarations of the
parties, possibly supported by witnesses to the credibility of the parties, can have the force of full
proof, to be evaluated by the judge after he has considered all the indications and supporting
factors, unless other elements are present which weaken them.
§ 2. In the same cases, the testimony of one witness can produce full proof if it concerns a
qualified witness making a deposition concerning matters done ex officio, or unless the
circumstances of things and persons suggest it.
§ 3. In cases of impotence or defect of consent because of mental illness or an anomaly of a
psychic nature, the judge is to use the services of one or more experts unless it is clear from the
circumstances that it would be useless to do so; in other cases the prescript of can. 1574 is to be
§ 4. Whenever, during the instruction of a case, a very probable doubt arises as to whether the
marriage was ever consummated, the tribunal, having heard both parties, can suspend the case of
nullity, complete the instruction for a dispensation super rato, and then transmit the acts to the
Apostolic See together with a petition for a dispensation from either one or both of the spouses
and the votum of the tribunal and the bishop.
Art. 4 – The Judgment, its Appeals and its Execution
Can. 1679. The sentence that first declared the nullity of the marriage, once the terms as
determined by cann. 1630-1633 have passed, becomes executive.
Can. 1680 § 1. The party who considers himself or herself aggrieved, as well as the promoter of
justice and the defender of the bond, have the right to introduce a complaint of nullity of the
judgment or appeal against the sentence, according to cann. 1619-1640.
§ 2. After the time limits established by law for the appeal and its prosecution have passed, and
after the judicial acts have been received by the tribunal of higher instance, a college of judges is
established, the defender of the bond is designated, and the parties are admonished to put forth
their observations within the prescribed time limit; after this time period has passed, if the appeal
clearly appears merely dilatory, the collegiate tribunal confirms the sentence of the prior instance
§ 3. If an appeal is admitted, the tribunal must proceed in the same manner as the first instance
with the appropriate adjustments.
§ 4. If a new ground of nullity of the marriage is alleged at the appellate level, the tribunal can
admit it and judge it as if in first instance.
Can. 1681. If an executive sentence has been issued, one can go at anytime to a tribunal of the
third level for a new proposition of the case according to the norm of can. 1644, provided new and
grave proofs or arguments are brought forward within the peremptory time limit of thirty days from
the proposed challenge.
Can. 1682 § 1. After the sentence declaring the nullity of the marriage has been executed, the
parties whose marriage has been declared null can contract a new marriage unless a prohibition
attached to the sentence itself or established by the local ordinary forbids this.
§ 2. As soon as the sentence is executed, the judicial vicar must notify the local ordinary of the
place in which the marriage took place. The local ordinary must take care that the declaration of
the nullity of the marriage and any possible prohibitions are noted as soon as possible in the
marriage and baptismal registers.
Art. 5 – The Briefer Matrimonial Process before the Bishop
Can. 1683. The diocesan bishop himself is competent to judge cases of the nullity of marriage with
the briefer process whenever:
1° the petition is proposed by both spouses or by one of them, with the consent of the other;
2° circumstance of things and persons recur, with substantiating testimonies and records, which
do not demand a more accurate inquiry or investigation, and which render the nullity manifest.
Can. 1684. The libellus introducing the briefer process, in addition to those things enumerated in
can. 1504, must: 1° set forth briefly, fully, and clearly the facts on which the petition is based; 2°
indicate the proofs, which can be immediately collected by the judge; 3° exhibit the documents, in
an attachment, upon which the petition is based.
Can. 1685. The judicial vicar, by the same decree which determines the formula of the doubt,
having named an instructor and an assessor, cites all who must take part to a session, which in
turn must be held within thirty days according to can. 1686.
Can. 1686. The instructor, insofar as possible, collects the proofs in a single session and
establishes a time limit of fifteen days to present the observations in favor of the bond and the
defense briefs of the parties, if there are any.
Can. 1687 § 1. After he has received the acts, the diocesan bishop, having consulted with the
instructor and the assessor, and having considered the observations of the defender of the bond
and, if there are any, the defense briefs of the parties, is to issue the sentence if moral certitude
about the nullity of marriage is reached. Otherwise, he refers the case to the ordinary method.
§ 2. The full text of the sentence, with the reasons expressed, is to be communicated to the parties
as swiftly as possible.
§ 3. An appeal against the sentence of the bishop is made to the metropolitan or to the Roman
Rota; if, however, the sentence was rendered by the metropolitan, the appeal is made to the
senior suffragan; if against the sentence of another bishop who does not have a superior authority
below the Roman Pontiff, appeal is made to the bishop selected by him in a stable manner.
§ 4. If the appeal clearly appears merely dilatory, the metropolitan or the bishop mentioned in § 3,
or the dean of the Roman Rota, is to reject it by his decree at the outset; if the appeal is admitted,
however, the case is remitted to the ordinary method at the second level.
Art. 6 – The Documentary Process
Can. 1688. After receiving a petition proposed according to the norm of can. 1677, the diocesan
bishop or the judicial vicar or a judge designated by him can declare the nullity of a marriage by
sentence if a document subject to no contradiction or exception clearly establishes the existence
of a diriment impediment or a defect of legitimate form, provided that it is equally certain that no
dispensation was given, or establishes the lack of a valid mandate of a proxy. In these cases, the
formalities of the ordinary process are omitted except for the citation of the parties and the
intervention of the defender of the bond.
Can. 1689 § 1. If the defender of the bond prudently thinks that either the flaws mentioned in can.
1688 or the lack of a dispensation are not certain, the defender of the bond must appeal against
the declaration of nullity to the judge of second instance; the acts must be sent to the appellate
judge who must be advised in writing that a documentary process is involved.
§ 2. The party who considers himself or herself aggrieved retains the right of appeal.
Can. 1690. The judge of second instance, with the intervention of the defender of the bond and
after having heard the parties, will decide in the same manner as that mentioned in can. 1688
whether the sentence must be confirmed or whether the case must rather proceed according to
the ordinary method of law; in the latter event the judge remands the case to the tribunal of first
Art. 7 – General Norms
Can. 1691 § 1. In the sentence the parties are to be reminded of the moral and even civil
obligations binding them toward one another and toward their children to furnish support and
§ 2. Cases for the declaration of the nullity of a marriage cannot be treated in the oral contentious
process mentioned in cann. 1656-1670.
§ 3. In other procedural matters, the canons on trials in general and on the ordinary contentious
trial must be applied unless the nature of the matter precludes it; the special norms for cases
concerning the status of persons and cases pertaining to the public good are to be observed.
* * *
The provision of can. 1679 will apply to sentences declaring the nullity of marriage published
starting from the day this motu proprio comes into force.
Attached and made part hereof are the procedural rules that we considered necessary for the
proper and accurate implementation of this new law, which must be observed diligently to foster
the good of the faithful.
What we have established by means of this motu proprio, we deem valid and lasting,
notwithstanding any provision to the contrary, even those worthy of meriting most special mention.
We confidently entrust to the intercession of the blessed and glorious ever Virgin Mary, Mother of
mercy, and of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, the active implementation of this new matrimonial
Given in Rome, near the tomb of Saint Peter, on the 15th day of August, the Assumption of the
Blessed Virgin Mary, in the year 2015, the third of our pontificate.
The way of proceeding in cases regarding the declaration of the nullity of a marriage
The Third General Assembly of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops, held in October of 2014,
looked into the difficulty the faithful have in approaching church tribunals. Since the bishop, as a
good shepherd, must attend to his poor faithful who need particular pastoral care, and given the
sure collaboration of the successor of Peter with the bishops in spreading familiarity with the law, it
has seemed opportune to offer, together with the detailed norms for the application to the
matrimonial process, some tools for the work of the tribunals to respond to the needs of the faithful
who seek that the truth about the existence or non-existence of the bond of their failed marriage
Art. 1. The bishop, under can. 383, §1 is obliged, with an apostolic spirit, to attend to separated or
divorced spouses who perhaps, by the conditions of their lives, have abandoned religious practice.
He thus shares, together with pastors (cf. can. 529, §1), the pastoral solicitude for these faithful in
Art. 2. The pre-judicial or pastoral investigation, which in the context of diocesan and parish
structures receives those separated or divorced faithful who have doubts regarding the validity of
their marriage or are convinced of its nullity, is, in the end, directed toward understanding their
situation and to gathering the material useful for the eventual judicial process, be it the ordinary or
the briefer one. This investigation will be developed within the unified diocesan pastoral care of
Art. 3. This same investigation is entrusted to persons deemed suitable by the local ordinary, with
the appropriate expertise, though not exclusively juridical-canonical. Among them in the first place
is the pastor or the one who prepared the spouses for the wedding celebration. This function of
counseling can also be entrusted to other clerics, religious or lay people approved by the local
One diocese, or several together, according to the present groupings, can form a stable structure
through which to provide this service and, if appropriate, a handbook (vademecum) containing the
elements essential to the most appropriate way of conducting the investigation.
Art. 4. The pastoral investigation will collect elements useful for the introduction of the case before
the competent tribunal either by the spouses or perhaps by their advocates. It is necessary to
discover whether the parties are in agreement about petitioning nullity.
Art. 5. Once all the elements have been collected, the investigation culminates in the libellus,
which, if appropriate, is presented to the competent tribunal.
Art. 6. Since the code of canon law must be applied in all matters, without prejudice to special
norms, even the matrimonial processes in accord with can.1691, § 3, the present ratio does not
intend to explain in detail a summary of the whole process, but more specifically to illustrate the
main legislative changes and, where appropriate, to complete it.
Title I – The Competent Forums and the Tribunals
Art. 7 § 1. The titles of competence in can. 1672 are the same, observing in as much as possible
the principle of proximity between the judges and the parties.
§ 2. Through the cooperation between tribunals mentioned in can. 1418, care is to be taken that
everyone, parties or witnesses, can participate in the process at a minimum of cost.
Art. 8 § 1. In dioceses which lack their own tribunals, the bishop should take care that, as soon as
possible, persons are formed who can zealously assist in setting up marriage tribunals, even by
means of courses in well-established and continuous institutions sponsored by the diocese or in
cooperation with groupings of dioceses and with the assistance of the Apostolic See.
§ 2. The bishop can withdraw from an interdiocesan tribunal constituted in accordance with can.
Title II – The Right to Challenge a Marriage
Art. 9. If a spouse dies during the process with the case not yet concluded, the instance is
suspended until the other spouse or another person, who is interested, insists upon its
continuation; in this case, a legitimate interest must be proven.
Title III – The Introduction and Instruction of Cases
Art. 10. The judge can admit an oral petition whenever a party is prevented from presenting a
libellus: however, the judge himself orders the notary to draw up the act in writing that must be
read to the party and approved, which takes the place of the libellus written by the party for all
effects of law.
Art. 11 § 1. The libellus is presented to the diocesan or interdiocesan tribunal which has been
chosen according to the norm of can. 1673 § 2.
§ 2. A respondent who remits himself or herself to the justice of the tribunal, or, when properly
cited, once more, makes no response, is deemed not to object to the petition.
Title IV – The Sentence, Its Appeals and Execution
Art. 12. To achieve the moral certainty required by law, a preponderance of proofs and clues is not
sufficient, but it is required that any prudent doubt of making an error, in law or in fact, is excluded,
even if the mere possibility of the contrary is not removed.
Art. 13. If a party expressly declares that he or she objects to receiving any notices about the
case, that party is held to have renounced of the faculty of receiving a copy of the sentence. In this
case, that party may be notified of the dispositive part of the sentence.
Title V – The Briefer Matrimonial Process before the Bishop
Art. 14 § 1. Among the circumstances of things and persons that can allow a case for nullity of
marriage to be handled by means of the briefer process according to cann. 1683-1687, are
included, for example: the defect of faith which can generate simulation of consent or error that
determines the will; a brief conjugal cohabitation; an abortion procured to avoid procreation; an
obstinate persistence in an extraconjugal relationship at the time of the wedding or immediately
following it; the deceitful concealment of sterility, or grave contagious illness, or children from a
previous relationship, or incarcerations; a cause of marriage completely extraneous to married life,
or consisting of the unexpected pregnancy of the woman, physical violence inflicted to extort
consent, the defect of the use of reason which is proved by medical documents, etc.
§ 2. Among the documents supporting this petition are included all medical records that can clearly
render useless the requirement of an ex officio expert.
Art. 15. If the libellus was presented to introduce the ordinary process, but the judicial vicar
believes the case may be treated with the briefer process, he is, in the notification of the libellus
according to can. 1676, §1, to invite the respondent who has not signed the libellus to make
known to the tribunal whether he or she intends to enter and take an interest in the process. As
often as is necessary, he invites the party or parties who have signed the libellus to complete it as
soon as possible according to the norm of can. 1684.
Art. 16. The judicial vicar can designate himself as an instructor; but to the extent possible, he is to
name an instructor from the diocese where the case originated.
Art. 17. In issuing the citation in accordance with can. 1685, the parties are informed that, if
possible, they are to make available, at least three days prior to the session for the instruction of
the case, those specific points of the matter upon which the parties or the witnesses are to be
questioned, unless they are attached to the libellus.
Art. 18. § 1. The parties and their advocates can be present for the examination of other parties
and witnesses unless the instructor, on account of circumstances of things and persons, decides
to proceed otherwise.
§ 2. The responses of the parties and witnesses are to be rendered in writing by the notary, but in
a summary way and only that which refers to the substance of the disputed marriage.
Art. 19. If the case is instructed at an interdiocesan tribunal, the bishop who is to pronounce the
sentence is the one of that place according to the competence established in accordance with can.
1672. If there are several, the principle of proximity between the parties and the judge is observed
as far as possible.
Art. 20 § 1. The diocesan bishop determines according to his own prudence the way in which to
pronounce the sentence.
§ 2. The sentence which is signed by the bishop and certified by the notary, briefly and concisely
explains the reasons for the decision and ordinarily the parties are notified within one month of the
day of the decision.
Title VI – The Documentary Process
Art. 21. The competent diocesan bishop and the judicial vicar are determined in accordance with
 Cf. Second Vatican Council, the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, n. 27.
 Cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 1752.
 Cf. Paulus VI, Allocutio iis qui II Conventui Internationali Iuris Canonici interfuerunt, September
 Cf. Relatio Synodi, n. 48.
 Cf. Pope Francis, Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, n. 27, in the Acta Apostolicae
Sedis 105 (2013), p. 1031.
© Copyright – Libreria Editrice Vaticana