Legitimacy and Marital Property
Two late twelfth-century decretals asserted sweeping claims to ecclesiastical juÂrisdiction over legitimacy and marital property issues. Both decretals origiÂnated in English cases involving claims to decedents’ estates in which the outcome hinged on the question of the legitimacy of one party.
In both deÂcretals, Alexander III claimed for the Church courts an exclusive right to adÂjudicate the legitimacy issue and denied the competence of secular tribunals in this matter.[1339] Alexander also claimed the right to determine the circumstances under which a natural child might be legitimized, not only for ecclesiastical purposes, but also for inheritance and succession.[1340]In particular the pope insisted that children born to a couple prior to their marriage were legitimized by the subsequent marriage of their parents and that this legitimation was effective in the secular as well as the ecclesiastical forum. Moreover, Alexander held that while the child of an adulterous union was illegitimate, the child of a valid clandestine marriage was not.[1341] In yet anÂother case he ruled that when a marriage was pronounced null by an eccleÂsiastical court, a child born or conceived prior to final judgment was legitimate and had full inheritance and succession rights.[1342] The same decretal also asserted that legitimate children had a right to support from their parents, even if the parents’ marriage was subsequently held invalid. This child-support doctrine extended significant new protection to the children of divorced and separated parents, a subject that the law up to this point had largely ignored. Alexander also upheld the legitimacy of the children of a second marriage following a nulÂlity judgment against a prior marriage. The status of these children had previÂously been unclear.[1343]
Alexander III dealt with the special property concerns of married crusaders in two other letters. One of these, addressed to King Louis VII of France, held that a crusader, unlike other married men, could alienate property inherited by his wife without first obtaining his wife’s consent—a decision that substantially broadened the property rights conferred on crusaders by Pope Eugene III in Quantum predecessores.[1344] In a later ruling, however, Alexander limited this augmented right of alienation to property that did not form part of the wife’s
Jurisdiction, Evidence, Procedures
dowry. A crusader who sold or mortgaged dowry property, even for the purpose of financing a crusade, was compelled to make immediate restitution, under pain of severe punishment.[1345] [1346]