Folia Theologica et Canonica 4. 26/18 (2015)
IUS CANONICUM - Szabolcs Anzelm Szuromi. O.Praem., Interpretation of the Church's discipline without the former sources?
260 SZABOLCS ANZELM SZUROMI, O.PRAEM. II. The Corpus Iuris Canonici as Indispensable Basis in the Interpretation of the Current Canonical Norms The material of the six canon law collections (Decretimi Gratiani \ 1140], Liber Extra [1234], Liber Sextus [1298], Clementinae [1317], Extravagantes Iohan- nis XXII [1325/1500], Extravagantes communes [1500/1503]) supplied with the decisions of the Council of Trient (1545-1563) and further papal and curial legislation, caused serious and difficult situation for those canonists who liked to applicate the Church’s norms to a concrete canonical case. Even so, considering the specialties of that canonical material which we have already presented, such a using of the accumulated rich canonical texts intended to promote a most precise and much clearer application of the constant ecclesiastical disciplinary principles. This interpretation form kept in mind truly and conscientiously the Church's goal on the jurisprudential level. This very reason motioned the participants of the first codification to be watchful when they observe the almost two thousand years legislative, canonical interpretative and jurisprudential heritage of the Church, for fear of the canonical essential peculiarities and the contents of those norms which have crystalized in the most ancient times of the Church may suffer structural or even essential modification. Finally, they used Can. 6 of CIC ( 1917) to prevent this problem. Can. 6 expressively touched upon those particular cases when the canonist basically needs to consider the old law. Such a case could be when a particular text from the Corpus iuris canonici literally had taken place in the Code. We cannot find too many of this type of fragments in CIC (1917), however CIC (1917) Can. 88430 31 and Can. 235T'1 belong to this group. If the canon in the Code was partly equal to the old law, but partly differing. the old law could be used to enlighten the meaning of the new one, keeping in mind the new canon’s specific meaning too. The best example for 30 CIC (1917) Can. 884 - Absolutio complicis in peccato turpi invalida est, praeterquam in mortis periculo; et edam in periculo mortis, extra casum necessitatis, est ex parte confessarii illicita ad normám constitutionum apostolicarum et nominatim constitutionis Benedicti XIV Sacramentimi Poenitentiae, 1 Iun. 1741. Cf. Benedictus XIV, Const. Apostolici muneris (8 febr. 1745) §§ 2-4; Benedictus XIV, Const. Convocatis (25 nov. 1749) n. XXIII; Benedictus XIV, Ep. Enc. Inter praeteritos (3 dec. 1749) §§. 56ff.; Benedictus XIV, Litt. Enc. Benedictus Deus (25 dec. 1750) § 5; etc. 31 CIC (1917) Can. 2351 - § 1. Servato praescripto can. 1240, § 1, n. 4, duellum perpétrantes aut simpliciter ad illud provocantes vei ipsum acceptantes vem quamlibet operám aut favorem prae- bentes, nec non de industria spectantes illudque permittentes vei quantum in ipsis est non pro- hibentes, cuiuscunque dignitatis sint, subsunt ipso facto excommunicationi Sedi Apostolicae simpliciter reservatae. - § 2. Ipsi vero duellantes et qui eorum patrini vocantur, sunt praeterea ipso facto infames. Cf. § 1 : X 3. 50. 9; X 5. 14. 1-2; Conc. Trid. Sess. XXV c. 19. - § 2; Conc. Trid. Sess. XXV c. 19.
