历史传统和现实国情决定民法法典化是我国民事立法的必然趋势,但《德国民法典》代表的“总则一分则”编纂模式、以民法典总则编统帅财产法和身份法的潘德克吞体系,并非最好的选择。相反,由于财产法和身份法立法原则的不同——物权法和债法是按照法律效果类似原则构建的,亲属法是依据生活事实类似原则构建的,民法典总则编基本不适用亲属法。由于财产关系本质上是作为的、便宜的、目的的结合,是因偶然的动机而结合,而身份关系是自然的、必然的、本质的结合,是一种不得不结合的社会关系。财产关系和身份关系的主体、客体、内容以及引起财产关系和身份关系的主要法律事实——财产行为和身份行为,都存在着显著的差异,由此导致在财产法和身份法之间难以建立“共同的规定(总则)”。既然民法典总则实际上是一个财产法总则,基本不能适用于身份法,而身份法又是近现代民法的重要组成部分。因此,不设立总则、改设序编,或许是摆脱潘德克吞体系固有矛盾的有效途径。 Historical traditions and reality determine that the codification of civil law is the inevitable trend of civil legislation in our country. However, the “general rule of the German Civil Code” is a “one-part” compilation model, and is based on the general rules of Civil Code, System, not the best choice. On the contrary, due to the differences in the legislative principles of the property law and the status law, the property law and the debt law are constructed according to similar principles of legal effect. The kinship law is based on the similar principle of life facts. Because the property relationship is essentially as a combination of cheap, the purpose is due to accidental motivation and the combination of identity is a natural, necessary and essential combination is a combination of social relations. The main body, object, content and the main legal facts that cause the relationship of property and the status of property - the property behavior and the identity behavior have obvious differences, which makes it difficult to establish between the property law and the status law “Common Provisions (General) ”. Since the general rules of civil code is actually a general rule of property law, it can not be applied to identity law basically, and identity law is an important part of modern civil law. Therefore, the absence of a general guideline or a change in the editorial code may be an effective way to get rid of the inherent contradictions of the Pandecton system.