-
Le Chiese Sui Iuris. Criteri di Individuazione e Delimi-Tazione by Luis Okulik (review)
- The Jurist: Studies in Church Law and Ministry
- The Catholic University of America Press
- Volume 68, Number 2, 2008
- pp. 595-597
- 10.1353/jur.2008.0002
- Review
- Additional Information
book reviews 595 dialogue could benefit immensely from deliberate reflection on this third step of ecumenical methodology, which often is neglected, if not overlooked entirely. To the author’s credit, this volume is admirably researched—ranging from archival materials, to obscure publications, to well known ecumenical literature. Yet there are two deterrents to the wide ecumenical readership that this well written book deserves: first, most citations from the work of the Groupe des Dombes are reproduced in French without translation, thereby excluding those who do not read that language; second , as the interpretive matrix for analysis and commentary, the author has chosen the much admired theological methodology of Bernard Lonergan , which may be unfamiliar to many readers, especially nonCatholics . Such deterrents not withstanding, this work is an important contribution to both the history and theology of ecumenism. Moreover, the use of Lonergan en passant poses the intriguing question of whether his theological methodology could also furnish a methodological breakthrough for ecumenical dialogue. John T. Ford, C.S.C. The School of Theology and Religious Studies The Catholic University of America Washington, D.C. LE CHIESE SUI IURIS. CRITERI DI INDIVIDUAZIONE E DELIMITAZIONE by Luis Okulik, ed.Venice: Studium Generale Marcianum, 2005. Pp. 240. In March 2004, European canonists dedicated to the study of Eastern canon law participated in a congress in Kolice, Slovakia, to reflect on the ecclesiological and juridical configuration of the church sui iuris. The present work, a collection of the twelve presentations made at the congress , does not intend to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject, but only to provide interested scholars recent developments in the area. It is quite often presumed—especially in the context of Latin canonical discussions—that only at the level of the universal Church and the diocese is the reality of the Church truly manifested. Intermediate structures such as Eastern Catholic patriarchal churches are often not regarded as ecclesial entities (in spite of their status as “churches sui iuris”) and are construed only as the consequences of sociological factors. Pablo Gefaell argues that these intermediate structures are indeed manifestations of the universal Church, each expressing a unique form of the faith, i.e., rite. The 1974 principles governing the revision of the Eastern code included a provision for a clarification of the term ritus and the hierarchical structures of the Eastern churches. Sunny Kokkaravalayil provides a synthesis of the process and offers insights regarding the application or non-application of the notion of the equality of all the churches. The juridic being a church sui iuris is a recognition of the power of these churches to govern themselves to a greater or lesser degree vis-àvis the supreme authority of the Church. JobeAbbass examines how subsidiarity is applied in the Eastern code by relegating matters to particular law either explicitly or implicitly (i.e., what the Eastern code does not say) in comparison with previous norms. Peter Szabo tackles a highly technical issue with practical consequences : the scope of legislative autonomy of the churches sui iuris. CCEO canon 985 §2 states that an inferior legislator cannot enact a law contrary to the norms of a superior. By taking a narrow interpretation of “contrary” legislation, the author gives broad scope to the synods and councils of the churches sui iuris in the creation of particular law in places not only expressly mentioned in the Eastern code, but also in those places where the code is silent or requires clarity or adaptation in its implementation. Cyril Vasil examines the Annuario Pontificio to demonstrate how, since 1944 (when the Eastern Catholic churches were treated separately ), political and ethnic factors influence the determination of the ecclesial nature of certain groups, especially those of the former Republic of Yugoslavia, the Apostolic Exarchate of Lemkowszczyzna, and the Ruthenians. After demonstrating that the constitutive elements of ecclesia sui iuris and ritus (cf. CCEO canons 27 and 28) influence, and are influenced, by territoriality, Natale Loda advocates the territorial extension of the churches sui iuris according to the pastoral needs of the faithful. Lorenzo Lorusso treats practical issues regarding religious houses belonging to a different church sui iuris: the ascription of the religious house (CCEO canon 432), the erection...