LAW
60
L4W
from adoption. The juridical influence of Teutonio law
was mucn less important, if we abstract from the in-
evitable adaptation to the customs of barbarous races,
3ret some survivals of this law in ecclesiastical legisla-
tion are worthv of note: the somewhat feudal system
of benefices; ihe computation of the d^rees of kin-
dred; the assimilating of the pNenitential practices to
the system of penal compensation (u^eAr^e^; finally,
but for a time only, justification from criminal charges
on the oath of guarantors or co-jurors (De purgatione
canonica, lib. V, tit. xxxiv).
Modern law has only a restricted and local influence on canon law, and that particularly on two points. On the one hand, the Church conforms to the civil laws on mixed matters, especially with regard to the ad- ministration of its property; on some occasions even it has finally adoptea as its own measures passed by the civil powers acting independently; a notaole case is the French decree of 1809 on the "Fabriques d'^lise". Chi the other hand, modern legislation is indebted to the canon law for certain beneficial measures: part of the procedure in criminal, civil, and matrimonial cases, and to some extent, the organization of courts and tribunals.
IV. Historical Development op Texts and Col- LECTioNs.—^nsidered under the second aspect, the sources of canon law are the legislative texts, and the collections of those texts whence we derive our knowl- edge of the Church's laws. In order to appreciate fully the reasons for and the utility of the great work of codi- fication of the canon law, recentlv begun by order of Pius X, it is necessary to recall the general history of those texts and collections, ever increasing in number up to the present time. A detailed accoimt of each of the canomcal collections is here out of place; the more important ones are the subject of special articles, to which we refer the reader; it will suffice if we exhibit the different stages in the development of these texts and collections, and make clear the movement to- wards centralization and unification that has led up to the present situation. Even in the* private col- lections of the early centuries, in which the series of conciliarv canons were merely brought together in more or less chronolo^cal order, a constant tendencv towards unification is noticeable. From the ninth century onwards the collections are systematically ar- rang;ed; with the thirteenth century begins the first official collections, thenceforth the nucleus around which the new legislative texts centre, though it is not yet possible to reduce them to a harmonious and co- ordinated code. Before tracing the various steps of this evolution, some terms require to be explained.
The name "canonical collections is given to all collections of ecclesiastical legislative texts, because the principal texts were the canons of the councils. At first the authors of these collections contented themselves with bringing together the canons of the different councils in chronological order; consequently these are called "chronological" collections; in the West, the last important chronological collection is that of Pseudo-Isidore. After his time the texts were arranged according to subject matter; these are the "systematic" collections, the only form in use since the time of Pseudo-Isidore. All the ancient collec- tions are private, due to personal initiative, and have, therefore, as collections, no official authority: each text has only its own intrinsic value; even the "De- cretum" of Gratian is of this nature. On the other hand, official or authentic collections are those that have been made or at least promulgated by the legis- lator. They besin with the "Compilatio tertia of Innocent III; the later collections of the "Corpus Juris ", except the " Extra va^antes ", are official. All the texts in an official collection have the force of law. There are also general collections and particular col- lections: the former treating of legislation in general, ihe latter treating of some special Bubject, for in-
stance, marriage, procedure, etc., or even of the local
law of a district. Finally, considered chronolo^cally,
the sources and collections are classified as previous to
or later than the "Corpus Juris".
A. Canonical Collections in the East, — Until the Church began to enjoy peace, the written canon law was very meagre; after making full allowance for the docu- ments that must have perished, we can discover onhr a fragmentary law, made as circumstances demanded, and aeyoid of all system. Unity of legislation, in as far as it can be expected at that period, is identical with a certain unuonnity of practice, based on ^e prescriptions of Divine law relative to the constitu- tion of the Church, the liturgy, the sacraments, etc. The clergy, organized everywhere in the same wsy, exercisedalmost everywhere the same functions. But at an early period we discover a greater local disci- plinary uniformity between the Churches of the great sees (Rome, Carthage, Alexandria, Antioch, later Constantinople) and the Churches depending im- mediately on them. Further it is the disciplinary de- cisions of the bishops of the various regions that form the first nucleus of local canon law; these texts, spreadii^ gradually from one country to another by means of the collections, obtain imiversal dissemina- tion and in this way arc the basis of general canon law.
There were, however, in the East, from the early days up to the end of the fifth century, certain writ- ings, closely related to each other, and which were in reality brief canon law treatises on ecclesiastical ad- ministration, the duties of the clergy and the faithful, and especially on the liturgy. We refer to works at- tributed to the Apostles, very popular in the Oriental Churches, though devoid of official authority, and which may be called pseudo-epi^raphic, rather than apociyphal. The principal writings of this kind are the " Teaching of the Twelve Apostles " or " Didache ", the "Didascalia", based on the "Didache"; the "Apostolic Constitutions", an expansion of the two preceding works; then the "Apostolic Church Ordi- nance", the "Definitio canonica SS. Apostolorum", the "Testament of the Lord" and the "Octateuch of Clement"; lastly the "Apostolic Canons". Of all this literature, only the "Apostolic Canons" were in- cluded in the canonical collections of the Greek Church. The most important of these documents, the "Apostolic Constitutions", was removed by the Second Canon of the Council in Trullo (692), as having been interpolated by the heretics. As to the eighty-five Apostolic C^nons^ accepted by the same council, they rank yet first m the above-mentioned "Apostolic" collection; the first fifty, translated into Latin by Dionysius Exiguus (c. 5(X)), were included in the Western collections and afterwards in the " Corpus Juris".
As the later law of the separated Eastern Churches did not influence the Western collections, we need not treat of it, but go on to consider only the Greek collec- tion. It begins early in the fourth century: in the dif- ferent provinces of Asia Minor, to the canons of local councils are added those of the oecumenical Council of Nicsea (325) , everywhere held in esteem. The Province of Pontus furnished the penitentiary decisions of An- cyraand Neocsesarea (314); Antioch, the canons of the famous Council " in encseniis " (341), a genuine code of metropolitan oi^ganization; Paphlagonia^ that of the ClTouncil of Gangra (343), a reaction against the first excesses of asceticism; Phrygia, the fifty-nine canons of Laodicea on different disciplinary and lituz|^cal matters. This collection was so highly esteemed that at the 0)uncil of Chalcedon (451) the canons were read as one series. It was increased later by the addition of the canons of Constantinople (381), with other canons attributed to it, those of Ephesus (431), Chalcedon (451), and the Apostolic canons. In 692 the Council in Trullo passed 102 disciplinary can- ons, the second of which enumerates the dements of
