CCHA, Study Sessions, 50 (1983), 141-158
The Development of Ecclesiastical
by Francis G. MORRISEY, O.M.I.
Saint-Paul University
Ottawa, Ont.
INTRODUCTION
The second
Vatican Council, in its constitution on the Church, insisted on the
significance of particular Churches in the Catholic Church. In paragraph 23, it
states:
Collegial union is apparent also in the mutual
relations of the individual bishop with particular churches and with the
universal Church. The Roman Pontiff, as the successor of Peter, is the
perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity of the bishops and of
the multitude of the faithful. The individual bishop, however, is the visible
principle and foundation of unity in his particular church, fashioned after the
model of the universal church. In and from such individual churches there comes
into being the one and only Catholic Church.1
The individual or particular Church that interests us
today in a particular fashion is the Church in Canada; we are especially
concerned with the legislation passed by the leadership of the Church
throughout the period of development of Catholicism in Canada. Four particular
periods stand out in this area of legislative activity: the period of early
synods and regional councils; the plenary council of Quebec and its
application; legislation in the Vatican II period; application of the 1983 Code
of Canon Law.
We shall
examine each of these periods in turn to note trends in the legislation and to
see how the Church of tomorrow is being shaped through the legislative activity
of the bishops, both in the particular churches and as part of the universal
Church.
I. THE PERIOD OF EARLY SYNODS AND REGIONAL COUNCILS
Since there
was only one diocese in Canada during the entire period of the French regime,
the local legislation is diocesan in scope, even though it necessarily applies
to the entire territory. Such legislation finds its more concrete expression in
the enactments of synods. As the number of dioceses increased, the bishops
began to legislate together in regional councils. While most of the councils
took place in Quebec, a number of other such meetings were held elsewhere in
the country up to the end of the nineteenth century.
a. Synods in Quebec during the French regime
Under Bishop
de Laval, the first legislation was concerned with more particular problems,
such as the sale of alcohol to the Indians (May 5, 1660), the regulation of
funerals (July 10, 1661), tithes (November 10, 1663), reserved sins (April 21,
1669), as well as with the establishment of a Chapter, the Seminary, and the
ecclesiastical court. Bishop de Laval, given the circumstances of the diocese,
did not hold any synods during his term of office. This was left to his
successor, Bishop de St-Vallier, who held the first one in Quebec City, November
9, 1690. Some 26 decrees were issued, concerning such matters as the offering
of Mass in private homes, assistance at Mass on Sunday, norms for burials,
relationship between pastors and churchwardens, prayers for the King and for
the Church.
A second
synod was held in Ville-marie (Montreal) on March 1011, 1694. Some 27 decrees
were issued at the time; most of these were concerned with details, but some
had special significance for the sacrament of penance. For instance,
jurisdiction for hearing confessions extended only to a priest’s parish, except
when travelling in a place where there was no resident priest; it was to be
renewed every three years. Pastors were reminded of the need of providing other
priests at times to help with confessions and to assure peace of conscience for
the faithful.
A third
synod was held in Quebec, February 27, 1698. In all, some 43 decrees were
promulgated. They concerned observance of the Lord’s day, organization of
catholic schools in each parish, importance of music during the liturgy, and
reservation of sins.
The fourth
and final synod of the French Regime was again held in Quebec City, October 8,
1700, with some 33 decrees issued. Once again, specific reference is made to
the sacrament of penance, and to the life and ministry of priests.
The decrees
of the various synods were transposed to some extent into the Catechism of the
Diocese of Quebec (1702) which presented a unified teaching, but did not wish
to present a codified collection of laws. However, the Catechism clearly
outlines the legislation of the Church on marriage impediments and similar
matters. In practice, we must recognize that this Catechism and accompanying
documents constituted the local legislation of the Church during the French
Regime. It is good to recall that, during the same period, the Church universal
did not have a unified Code of law, and such would not have been readily
possible in Quebec at the time.2
b. The seven provincial councils of Quebec
After the
Catholic Church received its freedom to operate in Quebec, the number of
dioceses increased and the bishops undertook certain forms of joint
cooperation. The most publicized form of such was the provincial council,
grouping all the bishops who were members of the ecclesiastical province. These
councils were held in 1851, 1854, 1863, 1868, 1873, 1878 and 1886.3
Among the trends to be noted in these
councils, we could mention the gradual adoption of Roman practices and the
growing centralization of Church activity. In 1851, for instance, the new Roman
Ritual was made mandatory in all dioceses, replacing henceforth the revised
ritual of the diocese of Quebec in use since 1704. The practical problems faced
by the bishops were then treated officially: preparation of a new catechism,
obligation to follow the moral teachings of St. Alphonsus (against rigorism),
love of the Holy Father promoted, especially during a time of strife in Europe
(1870). After Vatican I, the bishops stressed the notion of papal infallibility
defined at the Council. Parents were to be refused absolution if they sent
their children to public schools. The independence of the Church as a perfect
society was restated in 1873, using the vocabulary of the time.
In the last two councils, we notice once
again a rather strong preoccupation with moral issues; the bishops condemned a
number of sins against virtue: dancing walzes, polkas, walking in the night, intemperance,
tobogganing, snow-shoeing and so forth.
It is relatively easy to trace the
influence of various trends in public life and in society as we read the
decrees promulgated by the Fathers; they range from matters relating to the
internal life of the Church (legislation regarding the reception of the
sacraments), to politics, to the role of the Holy Father, and, finally,
towards a moralistic approach which so characterized the Church at the end of
the nineteenth century, possibly under the influence of the Victorian age.
c. Other councils
held outside Quebec City
In addition to the seven councils of
Quebec, there were also councils held in Halifax, Toronto, Saint Boniface and
Montreal.
The Council of Halifax (1857) showed special
concern for the purity of the faith and for Catholic education. We also note a
condemnation of abortion, something that had been mentioned in the Quebec legislation
also.4 The council could
not resist the temptation of entering into details and so it is not surprising
to see norms against priests attending horse races, helping relatives with
Church money, being absent from their rectories without the bishop’s
permission.
The Council of Toronto (1875) shows special
interest for the pastoral care of the sick and of prisoners; the bishops were
also especially concerned with the problems surrounding Catholic education. At
the same time, they established norms regarding the salaries of priests, norms
which remained substantially in effect in Canada until after Vatican II:
pastors could retain all stole fees, one-half of the funeral fees, the
Christmas and Easter collections, and the clergy dues.
The Council of Saint Boniface, held in
1889, was of special interest in a number of ways. It was the first legislative
gathering of bishops in Western Canada; all the participants were members of
the Congregation of the Oblates of Mary Immaculate. Ages for first communion
were determined, mixed marriages forbidden, permission of the bishop was
required before building churches or contracting debts. For the first time in
legislation, we note a prescription to the effect that church property is to
carry sufficient insurance.
The Council of Montreal, 1895, promulgated
the same type of decrees.
Looking at the decrees today, we note that
they were not of earthshattering proportions. Nevertheless, they established
the bases for a fruitful celebration of the sacraments and a good ordering of
the Catholic community. But it would seem that the greatest benefit to derive
from such gatherings was that the bishops began to meet regularly and work
together, thus preparing the way for the day when they would be acting
regularly as an Episcopal Conference, and as a group, without one or two
bishops being considered the leaders of the Church. The road towards collective
leadership has been a hard one, a road that even today seems to have its bumps,
ruts and detours.
II. THE PLENARY
COUNCIL OF QUEBEC AND
ITS APPLICATION (1909)
One of the first legislative activities of
the bishops of Canada that extended from the Atlantic to the Pacific, was the
holding of the Plenary Council of Quebec in 1909. Because of the significance
of this event, it requires more detailed study.
a. Preparation for
the Council
The question of a Canadian Plenary Council
was already posed in 1876 when Canada consisted of only four ecclesiastical
provinces. First definite reference to the council is found in 1902 when the
Apostolic Delegate to Canada wrote to the Canadian Archbishops concerning the
holding of such a gathering. He pointed out the many advantages of such an
assembly: the elaboration of a collection of ecclesiastical laws which would be
adapted to the place, the time, and the circumstances; which would define in a
precise manner the rights and the responsibilities of all Catholics; which
would give more strength to ecclesiastical discipline and would in a special
way provide a norm to solve difficulties.
In 1903, the Archbishop of Halifax,
Archbishop O’Brien, then dean of the Archbishops, notified his colleagues of
the desire of the Sacred Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith and
suggested that the preparatory work could be accomplished by a commission of priests,
with each Archbishop choosing two. The plan that would be elaborated by this
commission would then be submitted to the examination of the Archbishop and his
suffragans. Some four months later, March 2, 1904, the first commission of the
representatives of the Archbishops met in Ottawa. They studied the general plan
of the Council, discussing the project that had already been prepared by Msgr
C.A. Marois, Vicar General in Quebec, and the elected president of the
commission. The participants noted a lack of unity in the drafts and asked to
have the documents sent to all the bishops for study by their canonists and
theologians. The committee met again in October 1905 and finalized the drafts
which were first sent to the bishops on February 16, 1905. Again, a lack of
unity in the development was mentioned, and a request was made that the decrees
be shortened. Msgr Louis-Adolphe Paquet was eventually entrusted
with the task of coordinating the documents.
In 1908, the schemas were ready and it was
thought possible to hold the Council in the near future. However, there were
certain hesitations about holding it at that time because of the impeding
promulgation of the Code of Canon Law. However, on February 17, 1909, Cardinal
Gennari, Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, charged the
Apostolic Delegate to convoke the Council as soon as possible. The opening date
was subsequently fixed for September 19, 1909. In the letter issued by the
Archbishop of Quebec, June 27, 1909, it was stated that the aim of the Council
was to correct errors, repress abuses, indicate current dangers to faith and
morals, regulate all that concerns cult and discipline, destroy vice, spread
everywhere holy ideas, and establish the honour of the practice of Christian
virtues.5
b. The Council and
its decisions
The solemn opening took place on September
19, as announced, with the Council in session for six weeks. The final decrees
were read on November 1, 1909. They were then submitted to the Holy See for
confirmation. Authorization to publish was granted on April 30, 1911, without
substantial changes. The official text was published in June, 1912. It
contained the acts of the Council and 688 conciliar decrees, the pastoral
letter of the Fathers of the Council, both in English and in French, and the
pontifical documents. The decrees had been officially promulgated by the
Apostolic Delegate on April 25, 1912. The legislation extended to all dioceses
in Canada, except those of Newfoundland. At that time, Newfoundland was
separated both politically and ecclesiastically from the rest of Canada.
However, a titular Archbishop, Ronald McDonald, retired bishop of Harbour Grace,
attended the Council and signed its decrees.
As all other Councils, the Plenary Council
of Quebec studied the dangers threatening the Church and its faithful, and the
means to serve better the Gospel and the Church; however, it is significant
that it also studied problems particular to its territory. This is manifested
not only in the decrees of the Council, but also in the Pastoral Letter of the
Fathers where they discussed the Christian spirit in the individual, in the
family, and in society. When speaking of private life, the Fathers made
particular reference to the model of the Christian life, the characteristic
features of the Christian life, and its sources. It was particularly in this
section that they made reference to various aspects of the liturgy, with
special reference to the Eucharist.
The importance of the first Plenary Council
is difficult to evaluate, but it is certain that it has been the main guide in
particular legislation for Canada. The fact that the religious leaders from
coast to coast came together to discuss the development of the Canadian Church
was in itself a great event when we consider the divisions among the hierarchy
in the last half of the nineteenth century. At that time, there were 34
Archbishops, Bishops, Vicars and Prefects Apostolic. There were eight
ecclesiastical provinces, 29 regularly constituted dioceses, 3 vicariates and 2
prefectures.
The promulgation of the Code of Canon Law
in 1917 – the world was still in the throes of a universal conflict – took away
some of the impact of the particular legislation. Indeed, with a few
exceptions, the decrees became rather obsolete since all attention was focussed
more on the universal legislation which the Church had received for the first
time in codified form, than on the local laws which were not provided for too
readily in the Code.
Norms regarding studies in preparation for
ordination remained in effect until Vatican II (Nos. 168, 173, 175, 177, 179,
184 and 185). Special norms regarding the hearing of confessions throughout the
country remained in effect after the promulgation of the Code, as well as
regulations concerning the administration of temporal goods. Looking at such
details now, they do not seem to have been of major importance. Nevertheless,
they too helped shape the community of believers and provided for a
consolidation of Church activity as it prepared to embark upon an era of
expansion and consolidation of its authority in the aftermath of World War I.
The greatest advantage that was to derive
from the Council was an indirect one. The bishops agreed to continue with some
kind of regular meeting to retain contacts. This eventually led to the
establishment of the episcopal conference for the country.6
Indeed, after the Plenary Council, the
Archbishops decided to hold annual meetings. These began in November 1911, in
Ottawa, and were held on the first Wednesday of October. In 1928, all the bishops
met in Quebec under Cardinal Rouleau, and agreed to meet at five year
intervals; in fact, they met in 1933, 1938 and 1943. In October 1943, they
requested that “n organ to interpret the mind”of the hierarchy be established.
It was proposed to hold a meeting every two years. A national board was elected
at that time, consisting of the Archbishop of Quebec, two French and two
English-speaking bishops. A permanent secretariat was established on January 3,
1944. On August 20, 1946, the Holy See gave permission to prepare a
constitution which was approved in June 1948 for five years. It was decided at
that time that the meetings of the Conference would be held in Ottawa, where
the representative of the Holy See resides. The first constitution was given definitive
approval on January 23, 1955.
c. Implementation
of the Conciliar decisions in Canada
The 1917 Code of Canon Law provided for
diocesan synods and provincials councils. A small number of such were held, but
never according to the frequency envisaged by the Code. Nevertheless, the
bishops were able to enact a number of legislative documents applying certain
canons to Canadian situations. Among the particular actions of he bishops,
their efforts at reorganizing the matrimonial tribunals deserve special
mention. The Code had called for tribunals to be established in each diocese,
with qualified personnel and support available. However, most of the dioceses
were unable to provide the personnel; furthermore, the number of cases were
relatively rare.
The Holy See had recently reorganized the
tribunals in Italy and the Philippines, establishing regional courts instead of
diocesan ones. This enabled the courts to function more smoothly and reduced
the demands on personnel. On May 13, 1946, the Holy See agreed to the
bishops’request and established regional tribunals in Vancouver, Regina,
Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City and Halifax.7 Later on, a new
court was opened in Edmonton (1952).8 While the number of cases
processed was relatively small in number, the operation of the courts on a
regional basis proved that forms of inter-diocesan cooperation could be
advantageous for all. Such undertakings were then extended to other areas of
Church life. Arrangements were also made to establish a Military Vicariate in
the country. The formal establishment of a separate entity was authorized by
the Holy See on February 17, 1951.
Norms were issued on various occasions
concerning ecclesiastical attire in the country. Even before the Plenary
Council, the roman collar had been substituted for the rabat (November 1, 1875)
in the Archdiocese of Quebec, in accordance with the practice established
informally in other dioceses.9 The Plenary Council, in
decree No. 215, asked that the cassock be maintained where the custom existed;
otherwise, a black suit extending to the knees was to be used. In 1916,
travelling priests were authorized to adopt the ecclesiastical attire of the
place they were in, even though such was not worn in their home diocese.10 In 1961, the
Archbishops of Montreal and Ottawa issued letters forbidding the wearing of
the cassock on the streets, and this was soon followed by other dioceses in Quebec.
On February 24, 1943, the bishops of Quebec
issued uniform norms for prenuptial inquiries and for the preparation of
marriage files. This was one of the first joint actions of the Quebec bishops
in matters of legislation. In 1944, they issued a joint faculty sheet adopted
in all the dioceses. In the years that followed, other examples of joint
activity among the Quebec bishops were abundant, especially in the area of
pastoral letters and instruction of the faithful.
Before the second Vatican Council, the
bishops of Canada simplified the rules regarding fasting and abstinence
(January 13, 1960).11 These rules were mitigated again in 1966. The
few examples of joint action taken in legislative matters paved the way for a
concerted effort at the time of Vatican II and in the period immediately
following. What seems to be important in these years is not the matter of the
legislation, but rather the fact that the bishops were able to work together
more readily for the common good.
d. Particular
legislation for Oriental Rite Catholics
One particular area called for special
action on the part of the bishops: the immigration to Canada of Catholics of
different rites who had to have their spiritual needs provided for. The first
immigration to Canada of Oriental Rite Catholics occurred in September 1891. It
appears that the Canadian government even favoured the policy of immigration to
counter-balance the number of Roman Catholics in the West! The Church was not
ready to cope with this new and unexpected situation. The immigrants were first
placed under the Latin Ordinaries. On April 12, 1894, the Sacred Congregation
for the Propagation of the Faith forbade married priests to immigrate to Latin
Rite regions. On July 15, 1912, the Apostolic Exarchate for the Ukrainians was
erected under Bishop Nicetas Budka. It grouped 9 Ukrainian priests and 9
bi-ritual Latin rite priests. The efforts of the Latin rite bishops to provide
for the pastoral care of the Orientals have been well documented.12 Archbishop Adélard
Langevin and Father Albert Lacombe were among the pioneers in this area.
The Holy See issued special norms for the
administration of the Ukrainian exarchate on August 18, 1913, and these were
revised on May 24, 1930, after Bishop Basil Ladyka succeeded Bishop Budka.
Three exarchates were established in 1948, and a fourth one in 1951.
On November 3, 1956, the ecclesiastical
province of Winnipeg for the Ukrainians was established. At that time there
were some 425,000 Ukrainians in Canada, of whom 235,000 were Catholics; some
260 priests and 250 sisters worked for the people.
In 1974, a new eparchy was established in
New Westminster for the Ukrainians. Since then, the hierarchy has been
established for the Slovaks, Maronites, Melkites and Armenians. The presence of
Oriental rite Catholics has given a special colour to the Canadian Church,
although to date there is little legislation that is specifically Canadian in
content. Rather, the bishops are working through their synods to adapt their
particular law to new situations. The recent establishment, in Ottawa, of “Holy
Spirit Seminary” for the Ukrainians has completed the implementation of the
special Canadian norms laid down in 1930.
III. LEGISLATION IN
THE VATICAN II PERIOD
a. The mode of
functioning of the Canadian bishops
We have already referred to the
establishment of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops as an outgrowth of
the Plenary Council of Quebec. The establishment of the Conference meant that
the Canadian bishops had available a suitable organism for the implementation
of the Vatican II decrees.
The implementation of the Constitution on
the Liturgy provided an excellent opportunity for the Conference to work
together as a group, either in its sectors (English and French), or as a whole.
The publication of the National Bulletin on Liturgy provided a suitable
means of expression of the bishops’ decisions in liturgical matters. Since the
period of changes in rites has just about elapsed, the Bulletin has now
taken on a new role, that of informing and instructing in liturgical matters.
Some twelve decrees were promulgated by the Conference in the years immediately
following the Council. Most of these concerned the introduction of the
vernacular, the revision of rites and the publication of revised texts.13
Another area of particular concern of the
bishops was the reorganization of the marriage court system in the country.
The divisions established in 1946 no longer corresponded entirely to the
population distribution, particularly at the level of the second instance. A
first redistribution was effected in 1965,14 with the
establishment of a new appeal court in Montreal. The number of cases presented
for adjudication called for a simplification of the procedural norms to be
observed. With the assistance of the Canadian Canon Law Society which had been
established in 1966, the bishops presented a number of requests to the Holy
See. Many of these were granted, particularly in 1971 and 1974.15 This, along with a
broadening of the grounds of nullity, has enabled the Canadian courts to
process some 3,000 cases annually, against a total of some 200 per annum in the
1960’s. The bishops also actively promoted the presence of women in the courts,
something that was not foreseen in the 1917 Code and the conciliar documents.
Some forty women received their degrees in Canon Law, a number as yet
unsurpassed by any other country in the world.
These decisions, and similar ones, were
taken by the bishops after extensive consultation among the persons involved in
the matter, whether it be in liturgy or in tribunals. The use of professional
associations enabled the Conference to rely on expertise found in the country
and to involve more people in the decision-making process. This has certainly
been one of the characteristics of the mode of functioning of the Conference.
At the present time, the particular interests of French and English-speaking
groups is making it more difficult to continue this general approach; however,
the mode of operation adopted in the post-conciliar years has certainly produced
its results. In the particular area of Canon Law, the Conference established a
Canon Law Commission, composed of a number of bishops and assisted by a group
of consultors, most of whom are former presidents of the Canadian Canon Law
Society. The Commission was given the responsibility of preparing the new
decrees for presentation to the assembly and, subsequently, to the Holy See.
b. Significant
decisions of the Canadian bishops
Two areas of intense decision-making were
referred to above revision of liturgical law, the re-organization of the
marriage courts. However, these are not the only areas of concern of the
Conference. Norms regarding change of rite were approved by the Holy See on
January 4, 1974,16 providing for a more unified pastoral approach
to a sometimes delicate question. The Conference also revised its norms
regarding the selection of bishops and has been preparing revisions of these
norms as circumstances warrant.17
In 1968, the practice of appointing pastors
for a term of office, rather than indefinitely, was introduced into certain
parts of the country through indults.18 On March 19, 1967,
the bishops of Quebec agreed to give jurisdiction for hearing confessions to
all priests who held confessional faculties. This decision was then taken up by
the Conference as a whole and approved on September 8 of the same year, in
order to provide for better pastoral care in the country. This decision was one
of those most appreciated by priests in the country.
The Conference also revised the norms on
mixed marriages and approved these definitively in September 1971. These norms
applied both to Latin rite Catholics and to Orientals. The laws regarding the
observance of holydays of obligation was simplified on February 14, 1968.19 Similarly, the
legislation regarding penitential discipline in the country.
Significant efforts were spent at revising
the norms for priestly formation in Canada. The work was carried out by each
sector, so that there are two programmes of priestly formation for the country.
This was necessary in part because of the different education system used in
the Provinces. The English-sector norms were approved on May 15, 1980 by the
Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education.
Each of these decisions, taken alone,
appears rather easy to prepare. But it must be recalled that all this work was
being undertaken at the same time as the conciliar decisions were being
implemented. Almost every point assigned to the Conference by the Council was
implemented, either on a provisional or a permanent basis, by the bishops
within a seven-year period. While this work of revising laws was being undertaken,
the bishops were also called upon to contribute to the revision of the Code of
Canon Law, promulgated January 25th 1983.
c. Revision of
Church law
The Pontifical Commission for the Revision
of the Code of Canon Law began its work in earnest in 1967. A number of draft
texts were prepared, representing the work of fourteen sub-commissions. As of
1971, the Conference began receiving proposals from the Holy See for the
revised Latin Code. The Oriental texts were distributed as of 1978.
Each of the drafts was the object of
extensive comment, most of the time favourable. Committees were established
throughout the country, enabling canonists and other interested persons to
submit recommendations, which were then reviewed by the Canon Law Commission
and approved by the Conference. As the process of revision went on, the
Conference decided that it would be opportune to collaborate more closely with
other Conferences, so that a unified approach could be made to the papal
commission. Thus, meetings were held in Dublin (1977) and in Ottawa (1978),
grouping the representatives of some sixteen major Conferences.
Now that the Code of Canon Law has been
promulgated for the Latin Church, it is interesting to examine the input and
influence of the Canadian bishops in the revision. A study of the proposals
submitted and of the final text shows that some 80% of the requests were
accepted by the commission, at times even according to the letter. This is a
very significant factor. One of the reasons for the success of this undertaking
lies in the fact that the bishops, when raising objections against a proposed norm,
submitted a revised version stating clearly what they wanted in its place. It
was this alternate reading that was often accepted. The influence on the
revision of the Oriental Code is still uncertain because only the first round
of consultation is completed and the consolidated draft has not yet been made
available.
The work of the Canadian Canon Law Society
is of paramount importance in this regard, and provides a good model for other
forms of joint collaboration with the bishops and the Holy See. Of all the
projects undertaken by the bishops during the post-conciliar period, this one
seems to have produced the greatest results in the area of law. A number of
norms approved by the Conference after Vatican II will now have to be revised
to bring them in harmony with the new laws.
IV. APPLICATION OF
THE 1983 CODE OF CANON LAW
a. Legislative
authority of the Canadian bishops
One of the areas where the Canadian
proposals differed from those of other countries was that of the authority
given to Episcopal Conferences to make particular laws for the country. The
various drafts at first assigned almost 300 decisions to the Conference in one
way or another. However, it was felt here that this removed the individual
bishop’s right to legislate and would be contrary to the thrust of Vatican II
which had defined the diocesan bishop as Vicar of Christ with all the ordinary
and immediate authority necessary to govern the particular Church entrusted to
his care. To reserve so many decisions to a higher authority, not to mention
those which required the intervention of the Holy See, would be to go counter
to the conciliar ecclesiology. Consequently, the CCCB (Canadian Conference of
Catholic Bishops) constantly requested that the number of reserved decisions be
reduced. In the final version, only about one hundred such decisions are now
reserved, and some three hundred pertain to the local bishop in his diocese.
On September 16, 1983, the CCCB met to take
decisions on some of the matters referred to the episcopal conference in the
new law. Such decisions concerned the appointment of pastors for a specific
term of office, the authorization granted to lay men and women to act as judges
in courts, the revision of legislation regarding the holydays, fast and
abstinence, preaching by lay persons, and so forth. These decisions, once taken
by the Conference, require confirmation by the Holy See. Since it would not be
possible to take all one hundred decisions at the same time, the Conference
decided to divide the task and spread it over a number of years. Thus, it is
foreseen that each year for the next few ones, there will be further decisions
taken. However, many of these decisions require extensive consultation with
other groups and cannot realistically be made before serious studies are
undertaken.
b. Preparation for
eventual synods and a plenary council
With some 400 canons of the 1752 norms
found in the new Code requiring adaptation at the local level to provide better
for particular needs, we shall see rather intense legislative activity in
Canada in the immediate future. However, before embarking on such an
enterprise, it would be important to keep a number of points in mind. One of
the major shifts in emphasis in the new law could be summarized as follows: in
the 1917 Code, authority in the Church derived from the sacrament of Orders; in
the 1983 Code, mission in the Church derives from baptism and confirmation.
Consequently, the sharing in the triple mission to teaching, sanctifying and
serving is no longer the exclusive prerogative of the clergy. Rather, all the
faithful, clergy, religious and laity, are called to take up their rightful
part in fostering ecclesial communion.
The new Code lays particular emphasis on
diocesan synods and plenary councils to enact the new legislation. One of the
major advantages of such organisms is that they provide for the active
involvement of all members of the faithful in one way or another in drawing up
the legislation. It is not good to proclaim that the Church is the Church of
the faithful, and yet continue to legislate as if it were the Church of the
clergy. It is reasonable to expect that each Canadian diocese will hold a synod
within a few years to take the decisions that are of local import. It will be
important, though, to make sure that there is a solid base of support and
understanding before decisions are taken and implemented. Otherwise, the same
mistakes as were made after Vatican II will be repeated: too many changes, too
quickly, without understanding of the reasons behind the change.
It is also foreseen that a plenary council
can be held for the country. At first sight, it would have appeared preferable
to take five or six years to organize such a council before local synods are
held, so that the diocesan legislation would proceed from a common vision of
Church. However, given the political situation in Canada and the regional
disparity, it does not seem likely that such will be the case. Thus, it
probably will be necessary to begin with the synods, hoping these will lead to
a council. I believe it would be possible to proceed simultaneously with the
preparation of both diocesan synods and a plenary council. In this way,
mentalities are being prepared for the adapted legislation and the decisions
taken reflect a broad base of support where such is possible. In spite of
necessary differences, the Canadian bishops have been able to work jointly on
preparing common legislation in the past, and indeed for the last 100 years.
There seems to be no cogent reason preventing the same in the future, at least
as things stand now. The organization and preparation of synods and a council
would provide an excellent opportunity for some forms of continuing
collaborative action and it is to be hoped that such will be readily applied.
CONCLUSION
At the end of this bird’s-eye view of the
legislative activity of the Canadian bishops, a number of conclusions can be
drawn. Firstly, the desire for collaborative action must be noted and underscored.
Because of this concern for a unified vision of Church, the bishops, according
to the needs and mentality of the times, have responded to the call to provide
the People of God with a Church legislation that is neither repressive nor too
lax. The period of Jansenism which ran its course during the episcopacy of
Bishop de St-Vallier, and again during the nineteenth century, is not evident
in the contemporary legislative enactments of the bishops.
A second conclusion is that when the
bishops legislated according to matters and manners entrusted to them, the Holy
See was willing to listen and approve. This points out the need of continuing
dialogue with Rome when matters require particular attention. The recognition
given to the suggestions for the Code is of particular significance and shows
how well-prepared documents can influence, not only the Canadian Church, but
also the Church at large.
A third point is that any legislation today
will have to be prepared in consultation with the faithful. It would be totally
unfair to expect that the bishops have all the expertise required in all
matters affecting the Church. The expansion of knowledge and the multiplication
of situations requiring immediate attention call for a wider base for the
enactment of legislation. The example of the bishops in the past augures well
for the future in this regard.
A fourth point to recall is that the
Canadian Church is but a small part of the Church universal, with some 1.5% of
the world's Catholics living within the territory of the country. Nevertheless,
the local situations encountered here are often repeated elsewhere and whatever
assistance the bishops of Canada can give to smaller Churches in drafting new
legislation will be of immense import for the development and growth of a truly
Catholic Church. The number of persons coming to Canada to study Canon Law from
other countries is an indication in some way of the respect held for the
legislative activity of the Canadian Church and for its concern with the
appropriate application of the law.
Paul VI said that the new law is to be an “instrument of grace,” one that leads the faithful closer to the Lord. Canonists are called upon to “deepen the work of the Spirit,” seeing where the Holy Spirit is leading the Church and to provide for structures and institutions that will protect and enhance this divine intervention in our milieu. This is what is being done and what will, hopefully, continue in the years ahead.
1Vatican
Council II, Constitution “Lumen Gentium,” No. 23 in W.M. Abbott, ed., The
Documents of Vatican II, London, Chapman, 1966, p. 44.
2For
further details on this matter, see James A. Schmeiser, “The Development of
Canadian Ecclesiastical Provinces, Councils, Rituals, and Catechisms,” in Studia
Canonica, 5 (1971), pp. 136-165.
3On
this matter see J. Grisé, Les conciles provinciaux de Québec et l’Église canadienne
(1851-1886), Montréal, Fides, 1979, 454 pp.
4Cf. J. Grisé, op. cit., pp. 299, 303.
5Most of the above
is taken from James A. Schmeiser, loc. cit., pp. 157-161.
6Cf. Bernard A.
Prince, “Foundation of the Episcopal Conference in Canada,”in Studia
Canonica, 1 (1967), pp. 97-109..
7Cf. A.A.S., 38
(1946), pp. 281-287; A.A.S., 44 (1952), p. 280. See also, Francis G. Morrisey,
“he Development of Particular Canonical Legislation in Canada “ in Église et Théologie, 11 (1980), pp.
223-245.
8Cf. A.A.S., 44
(1952), p. 280.
9Cf. Mandements des Évêques de
Québec, 5, p. 318.
10Sacred Consistorial
Congregation, March 31, 1916, in A.A.S., 8 (1916), p. 149.
11Decision in Canon
Law Digest, V, pp. 560-564.
12Cf. Gaston
Carrière, « Les évêques oblats de l’Ouest canadien et les Ruthènes (1890-1903),
» in Vie Oblate, 33 (1974), pp. 95-119, 157-188.
13Details of these
decisions are to be found in Bulletin of the National Commission on Liturgy,
Ottawa, C.C. C. Publications: No. 2, pp. 19-20; No. 8, p. 2; No. 10, p. 3; No.
21, p. 5; No. 23, p. 64; No. 18, p. 220; CCC Official Documents, Nos.
343, 345, 350.
14Sacred Congregation
of Sacraments, letter of August 3, 1965, in Studia Canonica, 1 (1967),
p. 126 (Prot. No. 1021/64 Vg.)
15CCC Official
Documents, Nos. 310, 373. Also, SUPREME TRIBUNAL OF THE APOSTOLIC SIGNATURA,
Prot. No. 1292/71 Vt.
16CCC Official
Documents, Nos. 347, 352.
17CCC Official
Documents, Nos. 177, 404.
18For instance,
indult of the S.C. for the Clergy, No. 11872/I, August 3, 1968.
19CCC Official
Documents, no. 140. (Sacred Congregation for the Clergy, February 14, 1968, Prot.
No. 116593/D).