Canon Law at 40: Fr. Chris Geiger’s Perspective

The story below was originally published in The Athenaeum, MTSM’s bi-annual magazine. The Athenaeum is published twice a year for alumni, patrons and friends of Mount St. Mary’s Seminary & School of Theology. To be added to the mailing list, contact: Heidi Walsh at 513.233.6159 or hwalsh@athenaeum.edu.

This is the second of three articles featured in the Fall 2023 edition of The Athenaeum magazine reflecting on the 40th anniversary of the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Rev. Christopher Geiger, J.C.L., received his licentiate in canon law from the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. Fr. Geiger’s canonical research included the topics of marriage and marriage nullity and he is a member of the Canon Law Society of America.

When I told others that I had been asked to study canon law, I was surprised that many were dismayed. They expressed a concern that studying canon law would inevitably lead to my being “pastorally obtuse” or even “cold and uncaring.” There seemed to be a prevailing belief that love for the law of the Church necessarily leads to a lack of love for the person.

As I have studied and practiced canon law, I found these concerns to be unfounded. In fact, an authentic love and respect for the Church’s law can lead to a greater love for the person, especially for persons who may be weak and/or vulnerable in the society of the Church. John Finnis argues that, for individuals to realize their dignity, they must be able to order their lives around some project and be free from unjust manipulation by those in authority; the Rule of Law is necessary for this to be realized (Natural Law & Natural Rights, 272-273). For the person to be able to flourish, they must know what to expect from society.

When we consider the society of the Church, it is necessary for people to know what to expect and what is expected of them; they need to know both their rights and their obligations. The knowledge and right practice of the Church’s law gives people the freedom to operate confidently and serenely within the society of the Church, not having to guess at what might be expected of them and confident that their rights will be honored. Anyone who has worked in an organization, or lived in a society, with ambiguous expectations or where rules are enforced erratically knows the chaos that ensues. If we want individual persons to have peace and to be able to flourish in the society of the Church, then the Rule of Law is a necessary foundation.

However, we can also see that the Church’s law is not written so rigidly that it cannot adapt to the particular needs of an individual or of a community. Many love to quote the last half of canon 1752, the final canon in the Code: “…the salvation of souls, which must always be the supreme law in the Church, is to be kept before one’s eyes.” These are not empty words.

The Code of Canon Law is replete with instances in which dispensations from the law for individuals and particular communities are possible. Canons 85-93 give guidelines to dispensations in general, and canon 87 § 1 states that “A diocesan bishop, whenever he judges that it contributes to their spiritual good, is able to dispense the faithful from universal and particular disciplinary laws issued for his territory or his subjects by the supreme authority of the Church.” This canon gives the bishop incredible autonomy when looking at the particular needs and circumstances of the people entrusted to him, and to grant dispensations from the law if he determines that it is in the best interest of their spiritual good. Far from being “cold” or “uncaring,” the law is greatly concerned with the good of the person even if that means suspending the law in particular instances.

In my short time studying and practicing the law, I have discovered that both the knowledge and the right practice of the law are a great gift to the society of the Church and to Her members. It has been a joy to see that this law is not “unpastoral,” but is in fact deeply personal and directed towards the good of the individual and the common good.