Folia Theologica et Canonica 6. 28/20 (2017)

IUS CANONICUM - Kurt Martens, Hierarchical recourse as a dialogue between particular church and universal Church? Difficulties, challenges and opportunities

HIERARCHICAL RECOURSE AS A DIALOGUE BETWEEN PARTICULAR CHURCH... 79

complaining especially about excessive discretionary power exercised by the executive branch.4

Before the actual revision process started, ten guiding principles for the revision of the Code of Canon Law were approved.5 Those principles would serve as guidelines during the revision process. John A. Alessandro writes:

“One of the main purposes of the ten principles was to guarantee harmony between the Church’s revised law and the conciliar documents. Throughout the revision process, the principles regulated the task of translating the pastoral decisions of the Council into the juridic content of the canons.”6

In light of more recent research and findings,7 * this statement must clearly be nuanced. It is more correct to interpret those principles within the general context of the revision process, and not as absolute principles each in need of precise application. Above all, the principles had to illustrate that the new code would be a new document, and not merely an update of the existing code of canon law. In this context, it is good to recall a statement by Professor Pio Ciprotti. At some point in the 1970s, he made reference to these principles during a conference organized by the archsodality of the Roman Curia. He said he wanted to quote all the principles, because at that time, everyone seemed to ignore them.*

4 For examples, see Bernardini, C, Problemi di contenzioso amministrativo canonico special- mente secondo la giurisprudenza della Sacra Romana Rota, in At ta Congressus luridici Inter- nationalis (VII saeculo a decretalibus Gregorii IX et XIV a codice Iustiniano promulgatis. Romáé 12-17 novembris 1934), IV. Roma 1937. 357-432. Gordon, L. De iustitia administrative! ecclesiastica, turn transat to tempore turn hodierno, in Periodica 61 (1972) 296-298. Mörsdorf, K., Rechtsprechung und Verwaltung im kanonischen Recht. Freiburg im Breisgau 1941. 188-189.

5 Pontificia Commissio Codici Iuris Canonici Recognoscendo, Principia quae Codicis Iuris Canonici recognitionem dirigant a Pontificia Commissione proposito et primi generalis coetus «Svnodi Episcoporum» examini subiectu, Roma 1967. Cf. Caprile, G., Il Sinodo dei Vescovi. Prima assemblea generale (29 settembre-29 ottobre 1967), Roma 1968. Laurentin, R., L'Enjeu du Synode. Suite du Concile. Paris 1967. Laurentin, R., Le premier Synode: histoire et bilan, Paris 1968. Laurentin, R., Enjeu du deuxième Synode et contestation dans l’Église, Paris 1969. For an analysis of and comparison between the guiding principles for the Latin and Eastern Codes, see Green, Th. L, The Latin and Eastern Codes: Guiding Principles, in The Jurist 62 (2002) 235-279.

6 General introduction, in Coriden, J. A. - Green, T. J. - Heintschel, D. E. (ed ). The Code of Canon Law. A Text and Commentary, New York-Mahwah, NJ. 1985. 6 (Alesandro, J. A.).

7 See, on this, Canosa, J. (a cura di), / principi per la revisione de! codice di diritto canonico. La ricezione giuridica del Concilio Vaticano II, Milan 2000.

* Gutierrez, J. L„ La formazione dei principi per la riforma de! Codex Iuris Canonici, in Canosa, J. (a cura di), I principi per la revisione del codice di diritto canonico, 28: "In data che non posso precisare, nel corso degli anni ‘70, in una conferenza organizzata dall’arcisodalizio della Curia Romana - mi pare ricordare che aveva per oggetto il favor iuris - il prof. Pio Ciprotti fece riferimento ai Principia e disse che desiderava citarli, visto che tutti sembravano ignorarli.”