185. Salvation of Souls: The Guiding Principle of Canon Law

Last week’s post examined the relationship between spirituality and canon law in Church history, emphasising how the salvation of souls became fundamental in the relationship between these two concepts and developed as the supreme law of the Church.

In the year 2000, Archbishop Julián Herranz, the then President of the then Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, presented a paper at a conference organised by Pontificia Università della Santa Croce titled: “Salus Animarum, Principio dell’ordinamento canonico” (Salvation of Souls, The Principle of the Canonical System), where he emphasised the salvation of souls as the supreme guiding principle of the new Corpus Iuris Canonici (1983 Code of Canon Law) in its formulation and authentic interpretation. Today’s post summarises the article.

Two questions influence the article: How is salus animarum the supreme guiding principle of canonical legislation, and how is it the essential principle to scientifically delimit the proper legality of canon law? Herranz cites Javier Hervada’s distinction of ‘salus animarum’ as the ultimate goal of canon law and the ‘salus animarum’ as the supreme interpretative criterion for determining the iustum, the right thing, the proper goal of canon law, according to the followers of legal realism.

A. Salvation of souls: limited clause or the supreme guiding principle of canonical legislation?

The archbishop affirms that the members, consultors, and officials of the Pontifical Commission for the Revision of the 1917 Code of Canon Law never doubted that salus animarum was the purpose of the Church, and at least indirectly, if not immediately, of the entire canonical system. However, among the consultants, a debate arising primarily within the Italian dogmatic school existed concerning whether salus animarum was to be considered a “limited clause” (clausula-limite) the legislator imposed while emanating and interpreting norms or as an absolute guiding principle of the entire canonical system. 

However, Pope Paul VI, on 20 November 1965, the day of the official inauguration of the revision of the 1917 Code, largely resolved this academic aspect of the debate when he reminded the Commission of the words of Pope Pius XII: “Canon law strives entirely for the care of souls, so that people may be possessed by the protection and guidance of the laws of truth and the grace of Christ and may live, grow, and die holy, piously, and faithfully.” Pope Paul also added: “that is to say, it aims to achieve this highest end through the Church, which, in order to compose and direct it with correct institutions and norms, belongs closely to canon law itself.”

Therefore, there is no longer confusion between morality and law because of the “celsissimum finem” (highest end), salus animarum. Hence, the legislator considers salus animarum as the reason (ratio)and absolute guiding principle of the entire canonical system, affirming in the last canon that the salvation of souls must always be the supreme law (Can. 1752).

B. Salus Animarum as a determining factor of the CIC

The sacramental and juridical structure of the Church serve as a means to communicate divine grace to the community of faith, hope and love, that is, the People of God. In such a way, the first principle for revising the 1917 Code emphasises that canonical norms, in regulating the social life of the Church, fulfil this function at the service of salus animarum. In fact, the juridical nature of the canonical norm is perfectly compatible with its intrinsically pastoral nature.

Furthermore, to ensure that the application of the adjective ‘pastoral’ to canon law is not cosmetic or merely an addition, the Revision Commission, in its third principle, states: “The sacred and organically structured nature of the Church community makes it clear that the juridical character of the Church and all her institutions are ordered to foster supernatural life. Thus, the juridical order of the Church, the laws and precepts, the rights and duties that flow from it, must contribute to the supernatural end”.

The archbishop then set out to answer the following: What is the concrete influence of the principle of salus animarum as an instrumental factor in the renewal of Church Law? What has been the effectiveness of this principle in overcoming the well-known dialectical oppositions between charisma and canonical norm, canon law and ecclesial co-responsibility, and pastoral spirit and canonical order?

First, the fundamental equality of all Christ’s faithful rooted in baptism and the expression of the basic concept of ecclesiastical communio entails the vocation to holiness and the communal responsibility to actively participate in Christ’s salvific mission entrusted to the Church. Achieving this mission requires an adequate visible, institutional, and juridical system. Hence, the revision principles, especially the fifth and seventh, introduced the application of the principle of legality in the exercise of ecclesiastical authority, in the service of salus animarum, and to prevent the abuse of power—the greatest threat in the exercise of ecclesiastical authority.

Second, the doctrinal enrichment of munus Petrinum (Petrine office) on sacramentality and episcopal collegiality, on the relationship between the universal and particular Church, and on the notion of ecclesiastical office also contributes to the principle of salus animarum, as it led to a deeper understanding of communio in the universal Church and within the particular Church. This prevents the Church from degenerating into a so-called phenomenon of “ecclesiastical assemblyism” (assemblearismo ecclesiastico), manifesting in the multiplication of meetings which may not be necessary, thereby affecting the obligation residence of the pastor; an obligation intrinsically connected to an ecclesiastical office with the care of souls (cura animarum), especially in the case of a diocesan bishop (Cann. 395 & 410).

Third, the pastoral nature of canonical norms also contributes to the topic of salus animarum, manifesting itself in aequitas and epikeia wherein the pastoral charity of the legislator, judge or ecclesiastical administrator manifests a desire for justice tempered by prudence, kindness and understanding towards individuals, always for their spiritual good.

C. Salus Animarum in the interpretative moment of Canonical Norm

Since the affirmation of the salus animarum as the guiding principle of the Church’s legislation does not in any way mean denying the juridical nature of the canonical system, it is logical that this principle should also be operational in the interpretative and applicative moment of the norms.

Therefore, those who exercise executive and judicial power in the Church must take this principle into maximum consideration both in investigating and ascertaining the rationale (ratio) of a specific legislative text and in interpreting and applying positive norms most correctly and responsively not only to the letter but also and above all to the intention of the legislator (mens legislatoris). This interpretation and application also help resolve any antinomies between the various provisions of the law and make up for any legislative gaps in the regulation of a given matter or in the resolution of a particular controversial practical case.

In light of this supreme principle, the two essential aspects of authentic interpretation must be implemented, namely: 1) to specify what the “mens” (intention) and the “voluntas Legislatoris” (will of the legislator) were, that is, the spirit and the heart of the norm that beats beneath the visible surface of the words of the legislative text; 2) to facilitate the adequate incarnation of the law in the social reality on which the salvific mission of the Church operates.

In light of the principle of salus animarum,  the interpretation of the law must always be done with realism, a sense of historicity and teleological criteria.

Realism of interpretation entails the relationship between legal norms and social reality; that is, the canonical system is part of peculiar reality, which is the Church of Christ. A sense of historicity implies that the juridical structures of the Church have a doctrinal background, meaning that the interpreter of canonical norms must take careful account in individual cases of what ecclesiological doctrine the legislator has translated into a canonical discourse (in sermonem canonisticum). The teleological criterion means interpreting the law in line with the meaning and purpose of the law, namely, the salvation of souls.

In conclusion, Archbishop Herranz argues that salus animarum is not simply a limit clause or cosmetic principle applied to canon law; instead, it is the absolute guiding and directive principle, without which the legality of canonical norms is undermined. 

May God continue to help us🙏🏾

K’ọdị🙋🏾‍♂️