Here’s why a popular canon law website will have to remove much of its content


null / Credit: Alex Verrone/Shutterstock

Washington D.C., Mar 16, 2023 / 16:35 pm (CNA).

A popular canon law website, CanonLaw.Ninja, is removing much of its content by Friday, March 17, to comply with a copyright complaint, which will leave the website without an English translation of the Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law.

The website, which describes itself as “a resource for both professional and armchair canonists,” includes an up-to-date translation of the Code of Canon Law with a tool that helps users easily find the information they’re seeking. Father Paul Hedman created the website when he was a seminarian and pays for the website’s upkeep with donations from users.

“Prior to my site, the only place that the code was online was, which was out of date, poorly formatted, and unsearchable,” Hedman said on Twitter.

“So I made a tool to be of help. Sourcing the canons from the Vatican website and other places the code was freely available, I put together a website that for the past several years has helped hundreds of canonists, students, and Christian faithful know the law of the Church,” he wrote.

Hedman was served with a cease-and-desist order from the Canon Law Society of America (CLSA), which is the copyright holder of the translation.

“The Code of Canon Law, Latin-English Edition,” which is the society-owned translation, is sold on the CLSA website for $75 but is currently out of stock. “The Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches” is available for $50. “Dignitas Conubii: Norms and Commentary” is also available for $50.

The Minnesota priest tweeted that the letter “came as a shock” and wondered why “the CLSA [would] want to prevent people from accessing the law” and why they had not contacted him before taking legal action, based on the principles of Canon 1446.

“If the CLSA chooses to make their fine translation of the code less accessible, the study [and] application of canon law will suffer,” Hedman said. “I beg them to reconsider: rather than make an adversary of a priest trying to serve the Church, be a team for the salvation of souls — the Lex Suprema.”

Hedman said he requested several alternative solutions to the problem, which would have allowed the content to stay on the website, but the CLSA did not accept any of them. He offered to stop collecting donations, split the donations with CLSA, pay yearly royalties, or even give the CLSA rights to the tool.

“I am asking the CLSA to reconsider their course of action and allow for licensing of their translation of the code so that it may be used on,” Hedman said. “It would be regrettable if the resource had to be temporarily disabled until another translation can be found.”

The CLSA did not respond to requests for comment from CNA.

Some priests took to Twitter to voice their opposition to the legal action.

“The reality is that whether it’s a biblical translation (USCCB) or translation of the code (CLSA), these things need to move into the public domain after cost is recouped,” Father Josh Miller tweeted. “Instead, they end up paying for the cocktail parties, and that’s pretty disgraceful.”

Father Matthew Schneider, a priest with the Legionaries of Christ, urged the CLSA to work with Hedman to ensure the website can continue to function as it has.

“Please find some way to work with Fr. Paul & keep operating with the best English translation of canon law,” he tweeted to the Canon Law Society’s Twitter handle.

The cease-and-desist letter demands Hedman remove and destroy all copyrighted material from the website and halt any further use, reproduction, and transmission that would infringe on CLSA’s copyright. It further demands that Hedman destroy all materials, including physical copies, of the copyrighted translation, except for publications purchased from CLSA.

According to the cease-and-desist letter, copyrighted materials include the website’s Code of Canon Law translation, the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches translation, and the Dignitas Connubii translation, which is a Vatican document on the nullification of marriages. This would not affect the other material on the website.

The letter requests that the content be removed on March 16, but Hedman told CNA that he was given a one-day extension. He said he will comply with all of the demands in the letter and remove the copyrighted materials by Friday, March 17.

“I fully intend to comply with the cease-and-desist order and remove the content that the CLSA owns, if that is what it comes to,” Hedman said in a tweet. “I hold no animosity against the society, and if I ever became a canonist would plan to join.”

Ecclesiastical documents are often copyrighted, except for older documents that have entered the public domain. According to Canon 828: “It is not permitted to reprint collections of decrees or acts published by some ecclesiastical authority unless the prior permission of the same authority has been obtained and the conditions prescribed by it have been observed.”

Other Catholics have also had similar problems when trying to republish ecclesiastical works and specific translations. Matthew Warner, who founded a church communications software company called FlockNote, sent free daily emails with excerpts from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which was meant to cover the entire catechism in one year.

He discontinued that practice after he received a cease-and-desist letter from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, which owns the copyright to the catechism.

The English version of the Code of Canon Law is available on the Vatican’s website.

If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!

Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.

About Catholic News Agency 9059 Articles
Catholic News Agency (


  1. Just petty in the extreme and a disgrace. The church would have been better served if the copyright holder had a simple discussion with this priest about how to correct the situation. That could have been by an acknowledgement of exactly WHO was the actual copyright holder, or the imposition of a nominal fee charged for a web search. This kind of over the top action is worthy of the neighborhood brat saying he’s taking his ball and going home.

  2. Yours truly has sometimes wondered about copyrighted New Testament Bibles—the word as inspired by the Author of the entire Universe! And what, too, of the Old Testament; what do Moses and the Prophets have to say about the foregone royalties???

    And, then, there’s the question of early editions of divine Scripture into vernacular languages! Should der Synodale Way and the German Church tax compensate today’s Vatican for Luther’s copyright violation—with compound interest? Reparations are becoming the “in” thing these days!

    And what, too, about the monastic copyists prior to the printing press?
    A detailed survey of Bible publications shows a rich history of partial or total translations—copies!—even many centuries before Luther’s 1521 translation at the Castle of Wartburg from Erasmus’ Greek and a Hebrew Bible.

    By the 2nd Century translations of scripture already had been made in the vernacular—from the Greek to Latin for those Western Christians who did not understand the original Greek. The most common was the Old Latin, or Itala. Of the complete translations, a Gothic version is dated in the 4th Century still near the same time that St. Jerome in the East translated the Vulgate from Greek to Latin. A sampling of either partial or complete and mostly early translations (copies!) are in Gaelic, Anglo-Saxon, Italian (1500), Cyrilic (9th Century and which first required Sts. Cyril and Methodius to invent a Slavic written script), German (980) Armenian (4th and 13th Century), Icelandic (1297), French (807 under Charlemagne, others in the 15th and early 16th Centuries), Russian (New Testament, 10th Century), Flemish (1210), Polish and Bohemian (six editions beginning in 1478), Italian (1471), Spanish (1478 and 1515), and Slavonick (early 16th Century). Between the invention of printing and Luther’s extolled German version, early complete German editions after 1462 were numerous, with 5 editions at Mentz, 15 at Augsburg, and others at Wittenberg, Nuremburg and Strasburg. The vast majority of other translations or copies no longer exist due either to religious wars, invasions and the pillaging of the Reformation. In the modern languages, and before the first Protestant version was issued from the press, some 626 complete or partial editions of the Bible were published by the Church, and of these 198 were in the language of the laity. (Buckingham, “The Bible in the Middle Ages,” 1853)

    Quick, alert the attorneys. There’s money to be made here. So to hell with the statute of limitations! Send the invoice to the European Union! Oh, wait, these early copies were published by members of the authoring Church itself…

    While in the litigious world of today, website Catholics apparently aren’t really members of the same Church–not even with the proposed prophet/profit sharing…

  3. The USCCB pulled the same stunt with the website that provided a free and easy to use issue of the Liturgy of the Hours. No interest (In spite of Paul VI) to spread the use of the LOTF. Many months of negotiations and (perhaps?) healthy payments to the USCCB.

    These attacks sure help spread the Faith (sarc)!

  4. Ham-fisted, high-handed, disgusting, disgraceful, petty and pathetic behavior by “The Canon Law Society of America.”

  5. This is precisely why I quote the Douay-Rheims translation of the Bible on my Internet radio channel– not because I am an inveterate traditionalist, but just to keep someone from making my life miserable in this way. It’s sad, but necessary.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. While vigorous debate is welcome and encouraged, please note that in the interest of maintaining a civilized and helpful level of discussion, comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published. Thank you.