Publication: Conflicto entre normas civiles y canónicas en relación con la patria potestad
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2015
Authors
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
BOE
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Las diferencias de criterio entre los progenitores acerca de la educación religiosa de los menores (recepción de sacramentos, clases de religión, etc.), llegan a plantear conflictos. Se analizan en este trabajo en qué medida incide para la resolución del conflicto el régimen en que se encuentre el menor (acogimiento, patria potestad compartida pero no la custodia, custodia y patria potestad compartidas). La falta de claridad entre las facultades exclusivas de la patria potestad y las propias de la custodia hace que no sea tan relevante en la práctica si el menor está bajo patria potestad y custodia compartidas o si está bajo patria potestad compartida y custodia de uno de los progenitores. Lo verdaderamente relevante es si las medidas relativas al menor de la sentencia de nulidad, separación o divorcio de sus progenitores contemplaban o no alguna previsión acerca de su educación religiosa y moral, de los gastos que lleve consigo, y de si hay o no continuidad con la educación recibida hasta el momento. Asimismo, se pondera la edad a partir de la cual se deberá respetar la libertad del menor, como titular del derecho de libertad religiosa. En el caso de solicitud de bautismo para hijos sin uso de razón por parte de uno de los progenitores, constando la oposición manifiesta del otro, el ministro deberá pedir a los padres que acudan al juez, si no pueden llegar a un acuerdo. El juez debe atender la solicitud del progenitor que pide el bautismo, si los padres celebraron entre sí matrimonio canónico, pues el hecho de la celebración presupone el deseo (o al menos la aceptación) de la educación católica de la prole y será al cónyuge que haya cambiado de creencias a quien corresponde probar en sede civil que el bautismo es un perjuicio para su hijo. En el mismo supuesto, si el matrimonio celebrado fue civil, el juez deberá pronunciarse por el retraso del bautismo del menor, hasta que éste pueda ejercer sus derechos fundamentales por sí mismo.
The different point of view of the parents about the religious education of their minor children (reception of sacraments, religious training, etc.) can take them to a clash of interests and criteria. To solve this conflict, this work tries to analyze the incidence of the minor situation (guardianship, joint legal custody but physical custody to one parent, joint legal and physical custody) on the possible solution. It is not so relevant from a practical point of view, whether the court award child custody to both parents, or legal custody to both and physical custody to one parent. Legal custody encompasses the right to make all decisions concerning the child’s welfare such as education, religion or health care. The real important question is if at the time of divorce, separation or nullity of the child’s parents, the court decision has included any provision about the moral and religious training of the minor, the expenses of all this, and if there is going to be a continuity or not with the education received by the child till that moment. It is also considered the age when it can be recognized the child’s maturity and the possibility of his election of religion, due to the own child’s right to religious freedom. If one parent decides the baptism with the opposition of the other, the religious minister must ask them to go to the court if they cannot reach an agreement; the court will have to take a decision if parents don’t agree to the baptism of the child, not mature enough to make this choice. The judge should accept the baptism asked by one of the parents if they had celebrated a canonical marriage, because the celebration of that marriage means the desire (or at least the acceptance) of the catholic education of their children and it will be the spouse who has changed his creed or his mind who must prove, at the civil court, that the baptism or the other spouse’s religious belief or practice threaten the health or well being of the child. On that same case, if the marriage celebrated was civil, the judge must decide not to celebrate the baptism till the minor is able to choose about his fundamental rights by himself.
The different point of view of the parents about the religious education of their minor children (reception of sacraments, religious training, etc.) can take them to a clash of interests and criteria. To solve this conflict, this work tries to analyze the incidence of the minor situation (guardianship, joint legal custody but physical custody to one parent, joint legal and physical custody) on the possible solution. It is not so relevant from a practical point of view, whether the court award child custody to both parents, or legal custody to both and physical custody to one parent. Legal custody encompasses the right to make all decisions concerning the child’s welfare such as education, religion or health care. The real important question is if at the time of divorce, separation or nullity of the child’s parents, the court decision has included any provision about the moral and religious training of the minor, the expenses of all this, and if there is going to be a continuity or not with the education received by the child till that moment. It is also considered the age when it can be recognized the child’s maturity and the possibility of his election of religion, due to the own child’s right to religious freedom. If one parent decides the baptism with the opposition of the other, the religious minister must ask them to go to the court if they cannot reach an agreement; the court will have to take a decision if parents don’t agree to the baptism of the child, not mature enough to make this choice. The judge should accept the baptism asked by one of the parents if they had celebrated a canonical marriage, because the celebration of that marriage means the desire (or at least the acceptance) of the catholic education of their children and it will be the spouse who has changed his creed or his mind who must prove, at the civil court, that the baptism or the other spouse’s religious belief or practice threaten the health or well being of the child. On that same case, if the marriage celebrated was civil, the judge must decide not to celebrate the baptism till the minor is able to choose about his fundamental rights by himself.