English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith recently published a Vademecum to guide the ecclesiastical investigation and adjudication of cases of sexual abuse of minors committed by Catholic clergy. By collecting existing regulations, the Vademecum provides some remarkable insights into how the congregation operates its penal trials. The document inter alia discloses that the congregation operates with three verdicts in penal trials, ‘constat’, ‘non constat’, and ‘constat de non’, which roughly correlate with the verdicts ‘guilty’, ‘not proven’, and ‘not guilty’ of Scottish law. It is particularly this differentiation of two acquittals, with the same legal effects but different implications, which fundamentally impacts how the congregation decides penal cases. I will shed more light on this issue by introducing the regular canonical verdict system and the congregation’s innovation, by comparing it with secular two- and three-verdict systems, and by discussing my findings to discover the merits and demerits of three verdicts.

oxford journal of law and religion/the oxford journal of law and religion

Guilt, Innocence, and Remaining Doubts: Some Considerations on the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s Three-Verdict System of Deciding Cases of Sexual Abuse