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
82 KURT MARTENS his inalienable rights.16 Grocholewski sees two goals for the proposed reform in principle seven: (1) it creates the possibility for an adequate protection of the rights of the faithful against ecclesiastical executive power, and (2) it avoids an arbitrary exercise of ecclesiastical administrative power, which is also the goal of principle six.17 2. Various Powers in Canon Law: From Societas Perfecta to the 1983 Code of Canon Law According to canon 135, §1, “power of governance is distinguished as legislative, executive, and judicial.”18 The distinction seems obvious and is taken for granted. Msgr. Willy Onclin, then adjunct secretary of the Commission for the Revision of the Code of Canon Law, proposed to introduce such a distinction and also suggested the current wording of the text.19 20 Until then, however, a distinction between the various powers in the Church according to canon law was not always very clear and certainly subject of debate in the canonical literature.21' From the 18'h century onwards, the lus Publicum Ecclesiasticum developed to safeguard and protect the hierarchical organization of the Church against the emerging nation state.21 The organization of the Church and the State were compared. It is in this context that the idea of the societas perfecta emerged. A so- cietas perfecta or perfect society is a society that has in itself possesses all necessary means and tools to achieve its goal(s).22 A helpful definition of the societas perfecta was offered by Joseph Kleutgen. In his view, 16 Grocholewski, Z., U sistema dei ricorsi e la giurisdizione dei tribunali amministrativi, 464— 466. 17 Grocholewski, Z., Il sistema dei ricorsi e la giurisdizione dei tribunali amministrativi, 466467. 18 CIC Can. 135 - § 1. Potestas regiminis distinguitur in legislativam, exsecutivam et iudicialem. - English translation from Code of Canon Law, Latin-English Edition: New English Translation, Washington, DC. 1998. All subsequent English translations of canons from this code will be taken from this source unless otherwise indicated. 19 Cf. supra, nt. 10. 20 For an overview, see Huysmans, R. G. W., De administratieve macht in de r.k. Kerk (see nt. 11 ). 21 Listl, J., Kirche und Staat in der neueren katholischen Kirchenrechtswissenschaft (Staatskirchenrechtliche Abhandlungen 7), Berlin 1978. Nacci, M., Origini, sviluppi e caratteri del jus publicum ecclesiasticum (Corona Lateranensis 40), Città del Vaticano 2010. 22 Ottaviani. A., Institutiones ìuris Publici Ecclesiastici, I: Ecclesiae constitutio socialis et potestas, Romae 1958. 46: “Societas iuridice perfecta ea est quae bonum in suo ordine completum tamquam fìnem habens, ac media omnia ad illud consequendum iure possidens, est in suo ordine sibi suffìciens et independens, idest piene autonoma.”
