Moral Certitude
Merits and Demerits of the Standard of Proof Applied in Roman Catholic Jurisprudence
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 23028193 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Judith Hahn (0000-0003-4643-048X, Ruhr University Bochum, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 300-325 |
| Publication date | 2019-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Oxford Journal of Law and Religion (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2047-0770 • E-ISSN: 2047-0789 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ojlr/rwz012 |
| OpenAlex | W2948420603 |
| Language | EN |
In Roman Catholic canon law, moral certitude describes the ecclesiastical judge’s full conviction that a defendant is guilty or that a statement of claim made by a civil plaintiff is rightful. Moral certitude is the requirement for a conviction or a civil sentence in favour of the party under the burden of proof. Secular legal orders apply other standards. Anglo-American legal cultures mostly refer to the beyond a reasonable doubt standard in criminal cases, the preponderance of evidence, or the clear and convincing evidence standard in civil matters. Continental European cultures predominantly refer to the standard of full conviction in criminal and civil matters alike. This article compares those standards of proof with moral certitude in order to better understand its merits and limits. Based on this comparison, it examines the arguments both in favour of and against abiding with moral certitude as a standard of proof in the Catholic Church.
Conviction · Economics · Jurisprudence · Order (exchange) · Plaintiff · Political science · Sentence · Sociology · Statement (logic) · Criminal Law and Evidence · Judicial and Constitutional Studies · Law · Legal processes and jurisprudence · Philosophy
| Highly cited | No |
|---|