Chinese (Simplified) 
Chinese (Traditional) 
English 
French 
Alemão 
Italian 
Japanese 
Norwegian 
Spanish 
5 min read
84 comments
The Brazilian Union of Catholic Jurists claims that the project led by Rodrigo Pacheco imposes profound changes without public debate and threatens to widen social division in the country by altering historical concepts of Family Law.
A Brazilian Union of Catholic Jurists (Ubrajuc) released this Wednesday (15) a public manifesto in which it demands inclusion in the debate on the new Civil Code. The entity states that the reform proposal, conducted in the Senate under the leadership of Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), is being treated in an imposing manner, without space for a broad discussion with society.
According to the document, if dialogue is not guaranteed, Catholic organizations "declare from now on their commitment to promote, by all legitimate and peaceful means, a broad campaign for the archiving of the Civil Code Reform Project". The tone of the manifesto reflects the growing dissatisfaction of religious entities with the structural changes proposed in the text.
Pacheco's bill proposes profound changes to Family Law
O Bill No. 4/2025, presented by Senator Rodrigo Pacheco, aims to update the rules governing the Civil Law in Brazil, which is now governed by 2002 version. However, religious and conservative groups argue that the text brings radical changes, especially on topics related to family, marriage and divorce.
-
Brazilian Chamber approves bill that limits land expropriation and changes agrarian reform rules three decades after the original law.
-
With the new law signed by Lula, banks are required to disclose all costs, allow automatic salary portability, and create credit options with lower interest rates.
-
'CPF for Real Estate' starts in 2026 and could change how your property tax is calculated, but the tax authorities deny a tax increase.
-
So, does paying tolls infringe on the right to come and go? Here's what the law clearly states.
Among the main changes is the introduction of unilateral divorce, allowing one spouse to end the marriage without the consent of the other. Furthermore, the bill provides for the end of mandatory separation of goods, a rule currently applied in marriages in which one of the partners is over 70 years old.
Another highlight is the legal recognition of parental family, a concept that encompasses both blood ties and socio-affective and affinity ties. For its supporters, the measure reflects the plurality of modern family relationships; for critics, it represents a break with traditional foundations of the Brazilian family institution.
“Changes without debate deepen social divisions,” says Ubrajuc
In a note, Ubrajuc maintains that “such a radical change to our main legal diploma cannot be made without a truly democratic debate”. The group warns that the country is experiencing a moment of intense polarization, and to approve a new Civil Code without hearing all parties “does not help to pacify Brazil – on the contrary, it further deepens the social rupture".
The organization asks the Senate to promote public hearings with representatives from different segments of society, including religious ones, before continuing with the text. According to Ubrajuc, exclusion from the debate creates legal uncertainty and the risk of loss of legitimacy for the new code.
What changes in the new Civil Code and why there is so much controversy
Discussions about the new Brazilian Civil Code focus especially on changes involving the legal concept of marriage. The text replaces the expression “man and woman” with “two people”, explicitly recognizing the same-sex marriage. This point has been one of the most sensitive in the debate, being pointed out by religious groups as an attempt to redefine the traditional family structure.
Another point that sparks debate is the redefinition of parental responsibility. The proposal establishes a responsibility “collaborative manner.” between both, including determining the duty to supervise the children's access to the internet and electronic devicesAccording to the project's supporters, these measures seek to update Civil Law to contemporary realities, but critics argue that the text was drafted without consulting experts from various fields.
As reported by Gazeta do Povo, Ubrajuc's criticisms reflect a larger movement within the legal and religious community, which demands transparency and social participation in the development of laws that directly impact the lives of Brazilian families. The entity emphasizes that it is not against modernization, but rather against lack of dialogue and the speed at which the project advances in the Senate.
The project is still under analysis in the Senate.
Currently, the Bill No. 4/2025 remains under analysis by a specific thematic committee, responsible for reviewing the proposed devices. Despite this, reports of obstacles to the participation of civil entities have been recurring. For Ubrajuc, the process needs to be urgently reevaluated, otherwise it could compromise the legitimacy of one of the country's most important laws.
The institution's note concludes by reaffirming the entity's commitment to the Democratic Rule of Law and peaceful dialogue, but maintains the national mobilization alert if the doors to debate remain closed. "We are ready to defend, legitimately and peacefully, the principles that underpin Family Law and Brazilian society," the document concludes.
In seeking to update Civil Law for modern times, Congress runs the risk of ignoring essential voices in the debate — but to what extent is it possible to advance sensitive issues without listening to the society that will be directly impacted by them?
The portal team CPG thanks all readers for their contributions. The response was so significant that we selected three comments to compose this new material. The debate is always welcome and enriches the construction of plural journalism, grounded and open to dialogue.
The CPG portal team thanks all our readers for their contributions. The response was so significant that we selected three comments to compose this new article. Debate is always welcome and enriches the development of pluralistic, well-founded journalism that's open to dialogue. Click the link below.
https://clickpetroleoegas.com.br/advogados-lancam-ofensiva-em-defesa-de-juristas-catolicos-e-acusam-reforma-do-codigo-civil-de-romper-valores-cristaos-ampliar-poder-de-juizes-e-ameacar-a-protecao-a-familia-a-propr-fpsv/
Have you ever noticed that no association of lawyers, whether Catholic, neo-Pentecostal, or thousands of other religious groups, accuse each other or do the same when the subject is the removal of workers' rights, for example?
This happens because their "god" clearly wrote in the "holy book" that the slave must have blind obedience to his master and owner, among other absurdities.
Think about it!
The church always hindering development
Are you serious? It wasn't enough to have an association of evangelical jurists; there's also one for Catholics? Is there one for Buddhist jurists? Shintoists? And other religions from around the world? Isn't it enough that the Bible-believing caucus wants to force their hypocritical morality down the throats of the entire country?
Hi João Togni. In this case, what is the point of an association of jurists with a specific purpose linked to their faith that offends? What prevents an association of jurists from expressing any other faith? I don't think so, perhaps just in their own interest.
It offends me when they interfere in the democratic rule of law, wanting to impose their morality, without respecting mine.
Is that enough for you?
And another detail, law is a technical profession, if you want to use religious issues, you can be theologians, priests, pastors, etc. If you want to preach your morals, preach in your churches, the legal system orders the country and has nothing to do with religious principles.
Is there by any chance an exclusion of those mentioned here by you, citizen!? If so, I agree with you; but if it's just a fallacy, oh well, friend! Don't let ideological nonsense change your critical thinking. Good afternoon!
Exclusion exists when they push their morality over mine, thinking they own the truth.
But since you brought it up, define IDEOLOGY below: