MAGNUM PRINCIPIUM: FOR A BETTER MUTUAL COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE ROMAN CURIA AND BISHOPS’ CONFERENCES GIACOMO INCITTI The adaptation and translation of liturgical books have been an object of constant concern, not only to safeguard the substantial unity of the Roman Rite1, but also because it is through the language of the liturgy that our common encounter with God is effected by means of prayer. We propose here an approach to the recent ‘motu proprio’2 , also with the aim of presenting aspects of this legislative intervention in a way which presents it within the vision of Pope Francis for renewal. In the context of problematic issues concerning the liturgical books, the modifications that are introduced into can. 838 of the Code of Canon Law (CIC) also concern a significant theme of ecclesiology: the vital and fundamental relationship between Primacy and Episcopacy. Among the presuppositions of the ‘motu proprio’, there predominantly appears the necessity of clarifying a matter in which, according to the proemium (introduction), “quaedam difficultates exortae sunt in hoc longo itinere laboris inter Conferentias Episcoporum et hanc Apostolicam Sedem”3. Even before the existence of the new formulations of the canon, it is possible to read most explicitly in the same introduction the aim of the legislative provision. It is the pope himself who affirms the peremptory character of this legislation: «decernimus quod disciplina canonica nunc vigens in can. 838 C.I.C. clarificetur, ut, ad mentem Constitutionis Sacrosanctum Concilium, praesertim in nn. 36, §§ 3-4, 40 et 63 expressam, necnon Litterarum Apostolicarum Motu Proprio datarum Sacram Liturgiam, n. IX, evidentior appareat competentia Apostolicae Sedis»*. It is timely, however, to begin with ecclesiological basis which justifies the presence and the service of the Roman Curia. 1. The Roman Curia and the munus petrinum The Council4 several times identifies the raison d’être of the Roman Cuia in its link with the munus petrinum and with the ministry of the Bishops5. In its service to Peter, the Curia is at the 1 Cf. Sacrosanctm Concilium, 38. 2 FRANCISCUS, Litterae apostolicae motu proprio datae Magnum principium, quibus nonnulla in can. 838 Codicis Iuris Canonici immutantur, (3 sept. 2017), L’Osservatore Romano, 10 september 2017, 4-5. 3 As the object of our Motu Proprio, the Roman Curia and Apostolic See is to be understood as the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments and the practices used in this Dicastery, which for the sake of convenience in this paper we will continue to call the Congregation for Worship. (…difficulties have arisen between the Episcopal Conferences and the Apostolic See in the course of this long passage of work). 4 See for example Christus Dominus n. 9 where it deals with the Pope and the Dicasteries of the Roman Curia and affirms that they “nomine et auctoritate illius munus suum explent in bonum Ecclesiarum et in servitium Sacrorum Pastorum” (perform their duties in his name and with his authority for the good of the churches and in the service of the sacred pastors). 2 service of the Bishops, and by means of this service it finds its own ecclesiological substance and the reason for its existence. From this springs the diaconal ministry of the Curia and above all its close link with the Bishops, a dimension which not only impedes any form of barrier between the episcopate and the pope6, but it also identifies the Bishops as the first beneficiaries of the work of the Curia7. Moreover, the Roman Curia is called upon to position itself with regard to the Episcopate in an analagous way to which the Pope himself is called to funtion. From the time of the Council, theological reflection has always evidenced the collegial dimension of the exercise of supreme authority, underlining its diaconal nature8. The Code did not fail to take this into consideration, not only adding a canon to legislation regarding the Pope which concerns the College of Bishops9, but also affirming the intrinsic limits of primacy by ennumerating them definitively within the communion with the other Bishops and indeed with the whole of the Church, and simultaneously, in its consideration of the needs of the Church herself10. 2. The Conferences of Bishops and the recognitio of the Roman Curia From the earliest days of the Council, reliable and certain teaching was evidenced whereby the sense of collegiality is that which “asserts and identifies churches again within the Church, and therefore, if so desired, promotes ‘particular collegiality’ that is of course, precisely of central * “I order … that the canonical discipline currently in force in can. 838 of the CIC be made clearer so that, according to what is stated in the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium, in particular in articles 36 §§ 3.4, 40 and 63, and in the Apostolic Letter Motu Proprio Sacram Liturgiam, n. IX, the competency of the Apostolic See … be made clearer”. 5 The Conciliar directives then found their application in the documents concerning the Curia: “Patet igitur Romanæ Curiæ munus, etsi ad propriam Ecclesiæ constitutionem, iure divino conditam, non pertinet, indolem tamen vere ecclesialem habere, quatenus ab universalis Ecclesiæ Pastore suam et exsistentiam et competentiam trahat. Ea enim in tantum exstat atque adlaborat, in quantum ad ministerium Petrianum refertur in eoque fundatur. Quoniam autem Petri ministerium, utpote «servi servorum Dei», sive erga universam Ecclesiam sive erga totius Ecclesiæ Episcopos exercetur, Romana etiam Curia, Petri successori inserviens, ad universam Ecclesiam atque ad Episcopos iuvandos pariter spectat”, IOANNES PAULUS II, Constitutio ap. Pastor Bonus, 28 giugno 1988, in AAS 80 (1988), 841-930, qui introd., n. 7. (Consequently, it is evident that the function of the Roman Curia, though not belonging to the essential constitution of the Church willed by God, has nevertheless a truly ecclesial character because it draws its existence and competence from the pastor of the universal Church. For the Curia exists and operates only insofar as it has a relation to the Petrine ministry and is based on it. But just as the ministry of Peter as the "servant of the servants of God" is exercised in relationship with both the whole Church and the bishops of the entire Church, similarly the Roman Curia, as the servant of Peter’s successor, looks only to help the whole Church and its bishops.) 6 «Quam ob causam non modo longe abest ut Romana Curia personales rationes ac necessitudines inter Episcopos atque Summum Pontificem quoddam veluti diaphragma impediat vel condicionibus obstringat, sed contra ipsa est, atque magis magisque sit oportet, communionis atque sollicitudinum participationis administra», Pastor Bonus, introd., n. 8. (For this reason, not only is the Roman Curia far from being a barrier or screen blocking personal communications and dealings between bishops and the Roman Pontiff, or restricting them with conditions, but, on the contrary, it is itself the facilitator for communion and the sharing of concerns, and must be ever more so.) 7 «Ratione igitur suæ diaconiæ, cum ministerio Petriano coniunctæ, eruendum est tum Romanam Curiam cum totius orbis Episcopis arctissime coniungi, tum eosdem Pastores eorumque Ecclesias primos principalioresque esse veluti beneficiarios operis Dicasteriorum. Quod eiusdem Curiæ etiam compositione probatur», Pastor Bonus, introd., n. 9. (By reason of its diaconia connected with the Petrine ministry, one concludes, on the one hand, that the Roman Curia is closely bound to the bishops of the whole world, and, on the other, that those pastors and their Churches are the first and principal beneficiaries of the work of the dicasteries. This is proved even by the composition of the Curia.) 8 Cf. amongst other recent studies S. PIÉ-NINOT, Verso un “Ordo Communionis Primatus” come primato diaconale, in A. SPADARO-C.M. GALLI (edd.), La riforma e le riforme nella Chiesa, Editrice Queriniana, Brescia 2016, 293-308. 9 Can. 330 (CCEO can. 42) which directly quotes the text of Lumen Gentium 22. 10 Cf. can. 333., CCEO, can. 45. 3 importance for the whole, bringing the conciliar structure of the Church alive, so that it can act at particular times, and becomes, in ecumenical councils, the highest form of collegial activity in the Church of God”11. It obviously falls beyond the scope of our essay to offer a deeper study of the theological and juridical nature of the Conferences of Bishops and the doctrinal development which is still ongoing. Insofar as it lies within the limited parameters of our reflection, we draw attention to the fact that developing the relationships between Conferences of Bishops and the Apostolic See was the subject of the Extraordinary Synod of Bishops in 196912 in which, among other things, the need for collaboration was forcefully underlined13, requesting that practical strategies be adopted in this regard. Unfortunately the promulgation of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus concerning the Roman Curia did not bring about the appropriate assistance of the Congregation for Divine Worship in the specific question of the translation of liturgical texts as the locus of such collaboration. After having affirmed that the Dicastery «Episcopis dioecesanis adest, ut christifideles sacram liturgiam magis in dies actuose participent»14, the notion in the code which foresaw that «versiones librorum liturgicorum eorumque aptationes ab Episcoporum Conferentiis legitime paratas recognoscit»15 was restated. The provision was inserted into a context of the Congregation’s work that was already somewhat problematic, given the limits of the mutual responsibilities of both the Curia and the Conferences16. Interesting documentation concening the Consultation Meeting of the Dicastery in 198817, shows that from the earliest times of this canonical norm being in force, the Congregation encountered difficulties in applying a strict notion of recognitio, not wishing to present the 11 4 J. RATZINGER, Il nuovo popolo di Dio.