Canons 828 and 829...Calling canon lawyers!

[CrossofChrist]

How are canons 828 and 829 to be understood? What if the ecclesiastical authority mentioned in 828 died long ago (e.g does the Syllabus of Errors need some sort of permission to be republished or reprinted or put online? How about independent translations of other Vatican documents? etc.)? Does this or should this impact what we quote on these forums?

I’m very confused.

 

[FrDavid96]

The authority applies to the office, not the person.

Example: the archbishop of Metropolis publishes a book of local particular law (decrees & acts). He dies. His successor can authorize further publication.

Example: in 1965 Pope Paul VI authorizes publishing the documents of Vatican II. 50 years later, Pope Francis can approve a new translation of the same.

Canon 828 applies to publishing collections of decrees and acts. It does not apply to merely quoting some lines or some individual statues.

 

[CrossofChrist]

The authority applies to the office, not the person.

Example: the archbishop of Metropolis publishes a book of local particular law (decrees & acts). He dies. His successor can authorize further publication.

Example: in 1965 Pope Paul VI authorizes publishing the documents of Vatican II. 50 years later, Pope Francis can approve a new translation of the same.

Canon 828 applies to publishing collections of decrees and acts. It does not apply to merely quoting some lines or some individual statues.

Ah I see, thanks!

So should we assume random (well, maybe not random, I don’t know) translations like these (amazon.com/Decrees-Ecumenical-Councils-Volume-Set/dp/0878404902) are authorized? Is there a way of finding out or is it always assumed?

 

[FrDavid96]

Ah I see, thanks!

So should we assume random (well, maybe not random, I don’t know) translations like these (amazon.com/Decrees-Ecumenical-Councils-Volume-Set/dp/0878404902) are authorized? Is there a way of finding out or is it always assumed?

That book provides translations of ancient documents, going back literally to the First Council at Nicaea.

The canon would not apply to texts of such antiquity. They have already been copied and re-copied so many times over the past 1700 years, that any notion of a “copyright” is meaningless at this point. Essentially, that’s what canon 828 is about. It establishes a sort of “ecclesiastical copyright” for collections of decrees.

I don’t know at what point the canon would take effect. Laws deal with the future, not the past, unless otherwise stated. Canon 1389 of the 1917 Code would also apply.

Can 1389. Collectiones decretorum Romanarum Congregationum rursus edi nequeunt, nisi impetrata prius licentia et servatis conditionibus a Moderatoribus uniuscuiusque Congregationis praescriptis.

So if we’re talking about collections of decrees from the Holy See, then it would apply going back at least to 1917.

When we’re discussing a book like Tanner’s book on the Councils, suffice to say that for modern texts, whatever permission was needed was obtained. Remember that civil copyright laws also apply, so a publisher would need to obtain necessary permission anyway. For ancient texts, the issue is just irrelevant.

I can confidently say that canon 828 was not meant to prohibit publishing translations of the Council of Nicaea from 325 AD.

Fr Tanner’s book is a “standard” in the seminary. I have one myself (somewhere…) It’s a great resource.

I would like to say that I opened the front cover and can attest that whatever permissions were needed to publish the book were obtained. I just don’t have it handy.

What I can say is that it’s a respected and very common resource in Catholic seminaries and university libraries. We can safely assume that no canons were violated in its publication, and whatever copyright permissions were needed were granted.

Georgetown University Press is a respected publisher. I doubt they broke any laws (civil or ecclesial) by publishing the book.

If you’re looking to expand your knowledge of the ecumenical councils, Fr Tanner’s book is a great resource (but not the only one).

I would suggest not worrying about canon 828 until you have a good solid formation in canon law first.

I think I’ve said all I can on the subject.

 

[CrossofChrist]

That book provides translations of ancient documents, going back literally to the First Council at Nicaea.

The canon would not apply to texts of such antiquity. They have already been copied and re-copied so many times over the past 1700 years, that any notion of a “copyright” is meaningless at this point. Essentially, that’s what canon 828 is about. It establishes a sort of “ecclesiastical copyright” for collections of decrees.

I don’t know at what point the canon would take effect. Laws deal with the future, not the past, unless otherwise stated. Canon 1389 of the 1917 Code would also apply.

Can 1389. Collectiones decretorum Romanarum Congregationum rursus edi nequeunt, nisi impetrata prius licentia et servatis conditionibus a Moderatoribus uniuscuiusque Congregationis praescriptis.

So if we’re talking about collections of decrees from the Holy See, then it would apply going back at least to 1917.

When we’re discussing a book like Tanner’s book on the Councils, suffice to say that for modern texts, whatever permission was needed was obtained. Remember that civil copyright laws also apply, so a publisher would need to obtain necessary permission anyway. For ancient texts, the issue is just irrelevant.

I can confidently say that canon 828 was not meant to prohibit publishing translations of the Council of Nicaea from 325 AD.

Fr Tanner’s book is a “standard” in the seminary. I have one myself (somewhere…) It’s a great resource.

I would like to say that I opened the front cover and can attest that whatever permissions were needed to publish the book were obtained. I just don’t have it handy.

What I can say is that it’s a respected and very common resource in Catholic seminaries and university libraries. We can safely assume that no canons were violated in its publication, and whatever copyright permissions were needed were granted.

Georgetown University Press is a respected publisher. I doubt they broke any laws (civil or ecclesial) by publishing the book.

If you’re looking to expand your knowledge of the ecumenical councils, Fr Tanner’s book is a great resource (but not the only one).

I would suggest not worrying about canon 828 until you have a good solid formation in canon law first.

I think I’ve said all I can on the subject.

Well, that was very informative. Thank you!