Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 9.djvu/82

 L4W

67

L4W

tivUe), and later we have the " Corpus juris canonici ", B8 we have the "Corpus juris civuis''. Canon law is also called "ecclesiastical law" ( jus ecdeaiasticum) ; however, strictly speaking, there is a slight difference of meaning between the two expressions: canon law denotes in particular the law of the "Corpus Juris", including the regulations borrowed from Koman law; whereas ecclesiastical law refers to all laws made by the ecclesiastical authorities as such, including those made after the compiling of the "Corpus Juris" (BSfipQller, "Kirchenrecht", 3). Contrasted with the unperial or Cnsarian law (Jua ccesareum), canon law is sometimes styled pontifical law (Jus pontifir cium), often also it is termed sacred law ^U8 sacrum), and sometimes even Divine law (jus divinum: c. 2, De privil.)> as it concerns holy things, and has for its object the wellbeing of souls in the society divinely established by Jesus Christ.

Canon law may be divided into various branches, according to the points of view from which it is con- ffldered: (1) If we consider its sources, it comprises Divine law, including natural law, based on the nature of things and on the constitution ^ven by Jesus Christ to His Church; and human or positive law, formulated by the legislator, in conformity with the Divine law. We shall return to this later, when treating of the sources of canon law. (2) If we consider the form in which it is found, we have the written law (jvs scrip- turn) comprising the laws promul^ted by the com- petent authorities, and the unwntten law (jiAS turn acriptum), or even customary law, resulting irom practice and custom; the latter however became less miportant as the written law developed. (3) If we consider the subject matter of the law, we have the public law (jus j^licum) and private law (jus privor turn). This division is explained in two different ways by the different schools of writers: for most of the ad- herents of the Roman school, e. g. Cavagnls (Instit. jur. publ. eccL, Rome, 1906, 1, 8), public law is the law of the Church as a jperfect society, and even as a perfect society such as it has been established by its Divine founder: private law would uierefore embrace all the regulations of the ecclesiastical authorities concerning the internal organization of that society, the func- tions of its ministers, the rkhts and duties of its mem- bers. Thus understood, the public ecclesiastical law would be deriv^ almost exclusively from Divine and natural law. On ^le other hand, most of the adher- ents of the Genuaii school, following the idea of the Roman law (Inst., I I, 4; "Publicum jus est quod ad statum rei Roma : d; ectat: privatum quod ad priva- torum utilitatem"), acfine public law as the body of laws determining t e riehts and duties of those in- vested with ecclesias caTauthoritv, whereas for t^em fjfivate law is that wiiich sets lortn the rights and du- ties of individuals as such. Public law would, there- Core, directly intend the welfare of society as such, and indirectly that of its members; while private law would look primarily to the wellbeing of the individual and secondarily to that of the communitv.

(4) Public law is divided into external law (jta ex- ternum) and internal law (jus internum). External law determines the relations of ecclesiastical society with other societies, either secular bodies (the rela- tions therefore of the Church and the State) or reli- gious bodies, that is, interconfessional relations. In- ternal law is concerned with the constitution of the Church and the relations subsisting between the law- fuUy constituted authorities and their subjects. (5) Considered from the point of view of its expression, canon law may be divided into severaJ branches, so doselv allied, that the terms used to designate them are often employed almost indifferently: common law and special law; universal law and particular law; general law and singular law (jus commune el speciale; tu$ wnivarsaie ei parUctdare; rus generale et singvlctre), Xi 18 ea^ to point out the difference between thei^;

the idea is that of a wider or a more limited scope; to be more precise, common law refers to things, univer* sal law to territories, general law to persons; so regular tions affecting only certain things, certain territories, certain classes of persons, bein^ a restriction or an ad- dition, constitute special, particular, or singular law. and even local gr mdividual law. This exceptional law is often referred to as a privilege (privHegium, lex jjrivata), though the expression is applied more usu- ally to concessions made to an indivicfual. The com- mon law, therefore, is that which is to be observed with regard to a certain matter, unless the legislator has foreseen or granted exceptions; for instance, the laws regulating oencfices contain special provisions for benefices subject to the right of patronage. Uni- versal law is that which is promulgated for the whole Church; but different countries and different dioceses may have local laws limitins; the application of the former and even derogating From it. Finally, differ- ent classes of persons, the cleig>', religious orders, etc., have their own laws which are superadded to the gen- eral law.

(6) We have to distinguish between the law of the Western or Latin Church, and the law^ of the Eastern Churches, and of each of them. Likewise, between the law of the Catholic Church and those of the non- Catholic Christian Churches or confessions, the Anjgli- can Church and the various Oriental schismatical Churches. (7) Finally, if we look to the history or chronological evolution of canon law, w^e find three epochs: from the beginning to the "Decretum" of Uratian exclusively; from Gratian to the Council of Trent; from the Council of Trent to our day. The law of these three periods is referred to respectively as the ancient, the new, and the recent law (jils anti- quum, novum, novissimum), though some writers pre- fer to speak of the ancient law, the law of the Middle Ages, and the modern law (Laurentius, " Instit.", n.4^.

II. Canon Law as a Science. — As we shall see in treating of the gradual development of the material of canon law (seeoelow, IV), though a l^islative power has always existed in the Church, and though it has always been exercised, a long period had necessarily to elapse before the law^s were imuced to a harmomous systematic body, serving as a basis for methodical study and giving rise to general theories. In the first place, the legislative authority makes laws only when circumstances require them and in accordance with a definite plan. For centuries, nothing more was done than to collect successively the canons of councils, an- cient and recent, the letters of popes, and episcopal statutes; guidance was sought for in these, when ai^- pgous cases occurred, but no one thought of extracting ceneral principles from them or of systematizing all the laws then in force. In the eleventh century certain collections group under the same headings the canons that treat of the same matters; however, it is only in the middle of the twelfth century that we meet in the " Decretum" of Gratian the first really scientific treatise on canon law. The School of Bologna had just revived the study of Roman law; Gratian sought to inaugurate a similar study of canon law. But, while compilations of texts and ofiicial collections were available for Roman law, or "Corpus juris civilis". Gratian had no such assistance. He therefore adoptea the plan of inserting the texts in the body of his gen- eral treatise; from uie disordered mass of canons, col- lected from the earliest days, he selected not only the law actually in force (eliminating the regulations which had fallen into desuetude, or which were re- voked, or not of general application) but also the prin- ciples; he elaborated a system of law which, however incomplete, was nevertheless methodical. The science of canon law, i. e. the methodical and co-ordinated knowledge of ecclesiastical law, was at length estab- lished. Gratis'? "P^retum" wi^s a wonderful work; wel*-