Images de page
PDF
ePub

of all this was a vast, disordered, scattered mass of legislation, in many parts obsolete, in many utterly unsuited to the needs of modern times.

The first general expression of the prevailing desire for reformation is to be found in the records of the Vatican Council. Many Bishops there put forward the codification of Canon Law as one of the most urgent of their demands; 1 but the sudden dissolution of the Council prevented any practical steps from being taken on that occasion.

The difficulties in the way were felt to be immense : they seemed comparable to the herculean labours of the jurists responsible for Justinian's wonderful collections, or of those who, under the eagle eye of Napoleon, reduced the undigested mass of old French jurisprudence to the systematic body of laws known as the Napoleonic Code. These difficulties, we have no doubt, were the cause why the inception of the task was delayed until a much later period.

It was reserved for our late Holy Father, Pope Pius X, to initiate this work, and thus immortalize his name in the domain of Canon Law. As the renewal and development of the Church's life from within was the motto with which he began his reign, it is not surprising that one of his earliest acts was the publication of the Motu proprio, Arduum Nobis, which at last brought the project of codification into the domain of reality. The programme outlined involved the consultation of the Bishops of the entire world, to obtain their views as to changes needed; the appointment of a number of skilled canonists in Rome, under the presidency of Cardinal, then Archbishop, Gasparri, to whom the main work of codification was to be entrusted; and the establishment of a Commission of Cardinals to whom the finished work of the preceding body was to be submitted for approval or rejection as the case might be.

But Pius X was not destined to see the consummation of that work so auspiciously begun in the early portion of his pontificate. Ten years of unremitting labour saw the great task, though well advanced, still incomplete in 1914, when the Pontiff passed to his reward, an early victim, it is thought, of that catastrophe which has since brought such devastation on the world.

To our present Holy Father the honour of completing the Code has been reserved. At his hands it received the

1 Vacat, Constitutions du Concile Vatican, vol. i. p. 84.

1

final sanction in the Bull of promulgation issued on the 19th May last; but it will not come into force as a whole until next Pentecost. Though Pope Benedict modestly applies to himself in this connexion the words of the Evangelist, Others have laboured, and you have entered into their labours,' we have no doubt that the last three years have contributed not a little to the work of codification; and we feel convinced that posterity will attach some of the glory of this achievement to his reign.

Cardinal Gasparri, the chief architect of the new legislation, when presenting a beautifully bound copy of the new Code to the Holy Father, put himself the question, 'What is the intrinsic value of the Code? The answer to this difficult question,' he replies, must be left to posterity; but I may mention to your Holiness that in these last months I have consulted on this point great canonists who have been engaged on the Code day and night, and all have given comforting and cheering replies." 2 only posterity will have seen the practical working of the Code, and consequently they alone will be able to give a final judgment on its value. Contemporaries, however, may be permitted to make intelligent anticipations.

Yes,

Personally, we are convinced that it is a work of very high order. All who are interested in Canon Law must have been struck by the brevity and clearness which characterized the decrees emanating in recent years from the Roman Curia. This brevity and clearness have been reproduced on a more extended scale in the Code. The cumbrous decretals and constitutions of olden times have now given place to short pithy canons. The compilers, too, have adopted a much more perfect order than any of the former collections could lay claim to. It may be objected, indeed, that on many points there is a lack of detail; but it must be remembered that complete detail, even if it were desirable, is scarcely possible in a work of this kind. As even an imperfect, but authentic, collection of laws would be a welcome change from the existing condition of things, we feel certain that a Code of such high menit as the one just issued will prove an inestimable boon to all who are interested either practically or theoretically in the science of Canon Law.

It would be a mistake to suppose that with the publication

1 St. John iv. 38.

2 Il Monitore Ecclesiastico, July, 1917, p. 267.

VOL. X-26

of the new Code the old law has lost altogether its importance. From the historical standpoint, of course, it must always be reckoned with by the student; but even in the practical conduct of life it still retains considerable significance. The new law is in very many points but a repetition of the old, and on these its interpretation must be harmonized with existing views.

Unfortunately, too, the functions of the commentator have not been altogether eliminated. Language, even when very carefully chosen, as in the present case, is still but an imperfect vehicle of thought. Moreover, as we have already indicated, the Code in many places lacks detail : it confines itself rather to the enumeration of broad general principles, the explanation of which and their application to the practical cases will sometimes be attended with considerable difficulty. We purpose, therefore, to discuss, from time to time, in the I. E. RECORD Some of the more practical matters in the Code, to indicate the changes introduced, and to attempt a solution of any difficulties which may suggest themselves. In the present article we shall confine ourselves to the consideration of the first five or six canons which deal with the general relations between the old and new discipline. Some of them are of extreme importance, as they affect the interpretation of the Code right through. This is our reason for discussing them, rather than any peculiar difficulties which they present; though, indeed, we have heard opinions advanced in regard to a couple of them which involve the most fundamental differences.

Can. 1. The Eastern Church.-The general position of Eastern Catholics in reference to Papal decrees has never been precisely defined by written law. Yet since the publication of Innocent III's decretal Licet Graecos the practically unanimous teaching of canonists has been that, without special mention, disciplinary legislation does not affect them. A commission of eminent canonists and theologians formally discussed the question in 1631, in the presence of Cardinal Pamphili, and the conclusion arrived at was the one just mentioned. Leo XIII had occasion to discuss this question in an Encyclical Letter to the Eastern Bishops in 1882, and in it he briefly summarized the prevailing teaching. In Apostolic Constitutions,' he declared, it is not intended to include Easterns except in the three following cases: 1. In points of faith and Catholic

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

doctrine. 2. Where the matter itself demonstrates their inclusion, inasmuch as it is not an ecclesiastical law merely, but a declaration of the divine and natural law. 3. When even though there is question of disciplinary laws, the Easterns are expressly named.' Although Leo did not formally sanction this teaching, yet he spoke of it with approval, and there can be no doubt that he regarded it as correct. It will be remembered that the matter again came into prominence in quite recent times, after the publication of the Ne Temere. Doubts were raised in the beginning about the inclusion of the Easterns, but the Congregations quickly decided the matter in accordance with the received view.2

The first canon merely applies the traditional teaching on this question to the laws of the new Code. Although,' it states, in the Code of Canon Law, the discipline of the Eastern Church is sometimes mentioned, nevertheless the Code itself regards only the Latin Church, nor does it bind the Eastern, unless there is question of these matters which from the very nature of the case affect the Eastern also.' In the three cases mentioned above, and in these alone, Easterns are, from the very nature of the case, affected. Hence we may say briefly that the new Code affects the Eastern Church when there is question (1) of dogmatic laws; (2) of disciplinary laws which are merely a confirmation of the divine law; (3) of disciplinary laws in which the Easterns are expressly included.

[ocr errors]

Can. 2. Liturgical Laws.--In accordance with this canon the Code is silent for the most part regarding the rites and ceremonies which the liturgical books approved by the Latin Church order to be observed in the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the administration of the Sacraments and Sacramentals, and in the performance of other sacred functions. 'Consequently,' it continues, all liturgical laws retain their force unless any of them be expressly corrected in the Code.' The liturgical books approved by the Latin Church are seven in number: the Missal, Pontifical, Breviary, Ritual, Caeremoniale Episcoporum, Memoriale Rituum, and Martyrology. These contain all the liturgical services of the Latin rite and the ceremonies to be observed in their performance. The rubrics which

1 Coll. de Prop. Fide, n. 113.

S. C. Concili, 25 Jan., 1908-1. An decreto Ne Temere adstringantur etiam Catholici ritus Orientalis. Ad 1. Negative.'

they prescribe remain for the most part unaffected by the new legislation: it is only when an express correction has taken place that a change is to be made. As a consequence the official interpretations and decisions, which have been given on these matters, still hold good; and so, the authentic collection of the Sacred Congregation of Rites retains all its old importance.

Can. 3. Concordats.-The third canon is of very little practical importance in English-speaking countries: it concerns Concordats. The Code, in virtue of this regulation, neither abrogates, nor derogates from, agreements between the Church and State, which, accordingly, continue in force just as at present. The slightest consideration shows the reasonableness of this arrangement. Whatever be the correct theory in regard to Concordats, whether it be the theory of contract, or that of privilege, all are agreed that the Holy See may not lawfully withdraw from them, so long as the circumstances under which they were made remain the same, or without a serious cause. When we recall, in addition, that revocation by general law would be an insult to the civil authority, and would be little calculated to promote peace between the two societies, we can easily understand why the Church has been always accustomed to deal with each individual Concordat separately, on its own merits, and after consultation with the particular State interested; and why she has not departed in the least from her traditional policy in the present case.

Can. 4. Acquired Rights, Privileges, and Indults.-This canon declares that acquired rights, privileges, and indults hitherto granted by the Holy See to physical and moral persons, which are still in use and have not been recalled, remain in their entirety, unless they are expressly revoked by the canons of the Code. The words, jura aliis quaesita, signify the rights already acquired by individuals. These will remain, even though they have been acquired in a manner which will be no longer admissible when the new legislation begins to bind. An example will make quite clear the meaning which it is intended to convey. Under the new Code only a priest can be validly appointed to a parish; whereas, hitherto, any cleric, so far as Orders were concerned, was sufficiently qualified for this position. Of course there was always an obligation of receiving priesthood within a year after the appointment, but for the

« PrécédentContinuer »