May a retired judge who is periodically recalled take unpaid roles in church marriage-annulment proceedings?

Plain-English summary

A retired judge periodically recalled for temporary judicial service asked about unpaid participation as an advocate, law clerk, or diocesan judge in church annulment proceedings. The church process involved investigation, factual findings, and recommendations to church authorities.

The Committee concluded that ecclesiastical annulment is separate from civil divorce and has no civil-law significance. It reconsidered and reversed its earlier view in Opinion 1973-08 that the advocate function should be performed by a lawyer rather than a judge.

It found no ethical objection to the judge continuing substitute judicial service while participating in the described church process. The PDF is dated March 27, 1987, so the opinion-number year is recorded without a conflicting month or day.

In practice

The opinion permits the retired judge’s unpaid ecclesiastical roles alongside periodic recall, based on the separation from civil proceedings.

Common questions

Q: Could the judge continue sitting on recall?

A: Yes. The Committee found no conflict with the described church work.

Q: Did the church annulment affect civil marital status?

A: The opinion says it had no civil-law significance.

Q: Did an earlier opinion take a different view?

A: Yes. The Committee expressly reversed its earlier Opinion 1973-08 position on the advocate role.

Background and rules framework

The opinion discusses recall under Article IV, § 3A of the Maryland Constitution and reverses the earlier Maryland JEC Opinion Request 1973-08; it does not cite a specific Canon.

Citations and references

• Maryland Constitution, Article IV, § 3A.
• Maryland JEC Opinion Request 1973-08, reversed in this opinion.

See also

• Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee opinion index

Source

• Landing page: Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee opinion index
• Original PDF: Opinion 1986-08

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Maryland Judicial Ethics Committee

Opinion Request Number: 1986-08

Date of Issue: March 27, 1987

O Published Opinion G Unpublished Opinion G Unpublished Letter of Advice

Retired Judge Subject to Recall May Participate in Ecclesiastical Proceedings Involving Annulments of Marriages

A retired judge, who is temporarily recalled from time to time pursuant Art. IV, § 3A of the Maryland Constitution, has requested an opinion as to the extent to which, if at all, he may participate, without remuneration, in certain ecclesiastical proceedings involving requests for the annulment of marriages under canon law. The process at issue involves conducting investigations, making findings of fact, and forwarding recommendations as to requested annulments to Church authorities ) much as a Domestic Relations Master functions in our civil courts. Specifically, the judge inquires: “Can I continue to sit as a retired judge while I act as an Advocate? As an Ecclesiastical Law Clerk? As a Diocesan Judge?” For the reasons that follow the Committee believes that the retired judge may do so. [Opinion Request No. 1973-08 (unpublished)] (issued July 30, 1973) concluded that “the function of the Advocate could best be performed by a member of the Bar and not by a member of the judiciary.” The Committee has carefully reconsidered the issue and is of the opinion that this previous position should be reversed. The crucial point is that the ecclesiastical proceeding is totally independent of the civil proceeding. Ecclesiastical annulments have no legal significance in the civil law, whether rendered prior to, or subsequent to, civil divorce.
The Committee, therefore, finds no conflict and ethical objection to a judge continuing to sit as a substitute judge while participating in annulment proceedings within his archdiocese.