Pope Francis speaks in St. Peter’s Square on March 8, 2023. / Vatican Media
Rome Newsroom, May 18, 2023 / 09:10 am (CNA).
Is the new Fundamental Law issued by Pope Francis last week simply a modernization of Vatican City’s civil constitution or something much more — perhaps even a Copernican revolution in how the city-state functions and understands itself?
Pope Francis said he issued the new law “to respond to the needs of our times.” And Professor Vincenzo Buonomo, a councilor of the Vatican City State and rector of the Lateran University, stressed this week that this reform, the first in 23 years, merely aims at emphasizing and valuing some of the aspects of the state, while at the same time giving it what he called a renewed “missionary push.”
Yet in some respects, Francis’ May 13 promulgation moves the state closer to the model of a modern, secular state.
To be sure, the new law leaves no doubt that the civil government remains very much an absolute monarchy, with the supreme pontiff possessing all “legislative, executive, and judicial powers.”
But the new law gives Vatican City’s civil entities a more central role, even in international relations, and it now emphatically makes the city-state the guarantor of the Holy See’s sovereignty.
Other notable changes include allowing for lay appointees to its legislative body, the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State; restructuring the state councilors who advise the commission as a “college”; and modernizing and tightening fiscal oversight.
In addition, the role of the secretary of state is de-emphasized while the pope’s powers are centralized, as has been manifested in other reforms during Francis’ pontificate.
Guaranteeing independence
Francis’ new constitution is the third Fundamental Law since 1929, the year in which the Vatican City State was founded with the Lateran Treaty.
The treaty put an end to the so-called “Roman question.” After Rome and the Papal States had been annexed to the Kingdom of Italy in 1871, the problem arose of how to guarantee the independence of the Holy See, which was by then in Italian territory.
It was not just an Italian question because the material and moral independence of the pope and of the bodies through which he carries out his service to the universal Church is in the interest of all Catholics and all states.
From the birth of modern states, the Holy See had understood that the only guarantee of independence would be to manage its own state. And so, the solution to the Roman question involved the creation of a territory so small as to seem almost symbolic but with all the constituent elements of a state: territory, population, sovereignty, and legal system.
Today, the civil government provides security, public order, civil protection, health protection, health care, general hygiene, the environment and ecology, economic activities, postal, philatelic, customs services, connectivity and network infrastructures, construction activities, technical systems, plumbing, and electricity.
It also is responsible for the Vatican Museums’ conservation, enhancement, and use, as well as “superintendence over the assets of the entire artistic, historical, archaeological, and ethnographic heritage.”
After 1929 there were, over time, various adjustments to the state constitution, but it was only under John Paul II that a new Fundamental Law was promulgated, on Nov. 26, 2000.
In 1929, it was envisaged that the legislative power would be exercised directly by the pope, with the possibility of “delegating the legislative power for certain matters or individual objects to the governor of the state.”
The 2000 law instead established that the Pontifical Commission directly exercised legislative power, except for cases in which the pontiff reserved it for himself. The state remained an absolute monarchy, but John Paul II handed over the management of power and administration, making concrete the fact that the pope, despite being king, did not act like a king.
‘Functions,’ not ‘powers’
The Secretariat of State was mentioned four times in the law of 2000 and, in all cases, acted as an intermediary for presenting draft laws or the state budget to the pope.
However, with Pope Francis’ new Fundamental Law, the pope returns to the center of everything.
The Secretariat of State is mentioned only once — in Article 2, which underlines that “the representation of the Vatican City State in relations with States and with other subjects of international law, in diplomatic relations and for the conclusion of treaties, are reserved to the Supreme Pontiff who exercises them through the Secretariat of State.”
This article remains practically unchanged from the previous law, except that it sets forth a more decisive role of the civil administration, which “participates in the international institutions of which the Holy See is a member in the name and on behalf of the State” and which “maintains relations and subscribes, with bodies and foreign bodies, acts necessary to ensure supplies, connections, facilities, and public services.” In this way, the state takes on a more critical role.
But the centralization of the pope’s authority is highlighted in the new constitution by the fact that power is reserved to the pope while other entities are assigned only functions. For this reason, the new law does not refer to the “powers” of the Secretariat of State, the administration, and the Pontifical Commission. Instead, the various bodies have legislative, executive, and judicial functions.
The new law also confirms the legislative function of the Pontifical Commission, until now composed of a cardinal president and other cardinals appointed by the pope. But now there is this novelty: “other members” may also be designated in the commission, including lay men and women.
Yet another change is a requirement for more robust fiscal management.
Under the new law, a three-year financial plan approved by the commission is to be submitted “directly for the approval of the Supreme Pontiff” without going through the Vatican economic bodies or the Secretariat of State, as the old law required. In addition, the budget of the Vatican City State administration is to be “subjected to the control and auditing of a Board, made up of three members, appointed for a three-year term by the Pontifical Commission, to which it reports.”
How this new constitution will affect the Holy See is yet to be understood.
The Vatican City State remains, in the end, the pope’s domain. Nonetheless, the new law suggests that the city-state is no longer merely considered a support to the Holy See but an entity closer to the secular and modern states, as it has never been in the past. It might be a necessary and welcome update to the state’s structure, but could it also undermine the institution of the Holy See?
[…]
Summorum Pontificum was abrogated in 2021. This is just clinging to a past that is beyond its expiration date.
I see the Monopoly Man in the last picture took off his hat in church.
The TLM has lost. Trads just don’t realize it yet.
“Has lost”? I didn’t know it was a contest. Thanks a lot for letting me know that it is, from one perspective anyway.
It’s not a contest or competition. We’re a universal Church with room for many Rites and liturgies.
Unity, not uniformity.
Yeah but that was the Rupnik-Pontificate, so it’s to be ignored.
Scott Walker: you come across as an angry & bitter man. Try Christ.
Classic. Argumentum ad hominem followed with the obligatory ipse dixit.
Scott Walker. You have the perspicacity to have spotted the Monopoly Man in this very rare photo. Perhaps a premonition that the gods of good fortune are betting on the restoration of the TLM [why else would the Monopoly Man, an obvious traditionalist, have attended this Mass?].
Yours exhibits perfectly the problem at hand.
Scott;
Re: your 10/25 @9:51 p.m. – Do yourself a favor and go to a TLM. Get there about 30-45 minutes early, sit quietly (notice that the others are doing so) perhaps say a Rosary. Read from your Missal or just sit there and enjoy the silence until the Mass begins.
If you have to get up before dawn and then drive 50 or more miles to get there – tant mieux.
When in God’s universe and God’s eternity and human worship of God and His revelations of immutability has truth ever changed or been timebound?
Our patrimony.
Let the Extraordinary Form of the Mass BREATHE freely alongside so many other Rites in the Church each of which have their own form. Lets stop the warring among Catholics. If we don’t, we’re no better than Hamas v. Jews and Ukrainians v. Russians. But if we do, we’re more like Christ.
Right on, Deacon!
Deacon and Br Jaques: agreed. Liturgical peace is the only way forward. But who is making war? It’s been a one-sided liturgical-genocide since 16.07.2021.
“The pilgrimage began on the evening of Oct. 24 with vespers in Rome’s Basilica of San Lorenzo in Lucina, presided over by Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, archbishop of Bologna. A solemn closing Mass of Christ the King will be celebrated at the Church of Santissima Trinità dei Pellegrini on the final day of the pilgrimage, Oct. 26.”
Summorum Pontificum pilgrimage began with vespers in Rome’s Basilica of San Lorenzo in Lucina, presided over by Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, who has defected from The Catholic Faith through his public manifest heresy that denies Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture. And The Teaching Of The True Magisterium of The Catholic Church, Grounded In Sacred Tradition And Sacred Tradition, The Deposit Of Faith Christ Has Entrusted To His Church For The Salvation Of Souls, by his desire to Bless and have Christ’s One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church begin to Bless, disordered sexual relationships that deny Christ’s teaching regarding lust and the sin of adultery? Who would approve such a denial of The Deposit Of Faith , Christ Has Entrusted To His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, for The Salvation Of Souls and claim such an act is an act of compassion?
The question is, how can both Cardinal Zuppi and Cardinal Burke both be Baptized Catholics who desire to keep their Baptismal Promise to remain in communion with Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, And Apostolic Church, and thus be United in Prayer With The One Word Of God, Jesus The Christ?
“They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us; but that they may be manifest, that they are not all of us.”
https://www.ncregister.com/blog/cardinal-zuppi-same-sex-blessing
Grace a Dieu
Blessed are the Peacemakers.
Amen, Knowall.
And those who save souls.
Apparently the purpose of depriving Catholic faithful of the TLM is for the Church Establishment to show that they own and control everything in their “Bugnini-ized-NGO-of-the-decapitated-Body.”
As JP2 and B16 observed, they are incapable of “generosity.”
And Insane.
See, when you write things like that, it confirms that trads are recalcitrant and will never agree to be integrated into the post-Vatican II Church. Peter Kwasniewski published a screed on Friday saying that trads will never compromise nor assimilate nor yield. Pope Francis was correct that TLM adherents and communities inculcate insular separation from the rest of the Church.
Donald:
As I believe you are replying to me, I do not have the opportunity (any longer) to attend The Mass I served and sang at as a boy, so I am like millions more aptly labeled a “Bugnini-Mass-hostage.”
I simply observe that the Church Establishment is utterly incapable of being “generous” (as JP2/ B16 specifically directed) to faithful who desire the TLM, and as their just reward they deserve to wear the badge of their malice, as a sign of how miserly they are.
I suppose their miserliness flows from the apostasy that their “thought leaders” profess, and that do many of them silently assent to.
Poor darlings that they are..,
That’s just silly, Donald. I love the TLM but it’s not a deal breaker for me. I know many other Catholics who feel likewise.
Choices are good and so is diversity in a catholic and universal Church. It’s not all one or the other.
Donald: you sound angry. Why call fellow Catholics “trads”? It’s offensive. Does anyone have a gun pressed to your temple forcing you to attend Mass in the Extraordinary Form?
Why should Catholics be forced to make compromises with beliefs that are not catholic or damage the faith?
The church is dying because of all a the compromises that have been.
If the faith that is being taught and practiced today is the same as before the council, then why such hatred and anger towards the pre vatican II liturgy and practices?
The evidence is that there is a small cadre of prelates led by the late Pope for whom the suppression of this liturgy is an imperious exercise of ecclesial power. Now that we know the putative reasons for TC were contrived, it should be annulled.
Francis famous enjoined others to make a mess. Nobody can accuse him of not leading by example.
How many of vernaculars can the Mass be said? No restrictions that I am aware, but the Latin Mass is supposedly divisive. Nearly Verboten. It’s not about God or faith. It’s ungodly power politics baby.
I am not “a trad” but I would refuse to participate in that grand TLM in the Vatican because I do not wish to land myself to manipulation. It would be unthinkable for me to participate in such Mass while the same TLM is being suppressed/restricted to the point of suffocation elsewhere.
Most “trads” seem not to realize that they are being used by the Vatican as a tool for proving credibility to its current course. I have seen “trads” lashing those Catholics who criticize the Pope for his inconsistencies and watering down the faith or turning it into something else. Those “trads” appear not to realize that an occasional TLM given to them is only to buy their allegiance or at least to be quiet.
This is a brilliant technique, actually, “see, even the most traditional Catholics approve me so I am not deviating from the faith”.
However, there is an obvious flavour of insincerity and absurdity in a situation when TLM is pompously celebrated in the Vatican yet it is being suffocated elsewhere – in the common parishes, among common people who need it. If TLM is to be suppressed, it must be suppressed everywhere – but PL needs TLM, not as a people’s Mass but as a part of his entourage, as an artefact in a museum.
I don’t see any manipulation going on. I don’t know that we should even be looking for that. Why not be grateful for this opportunity & move forward?
Anna:
That is a very shrewd observation.
It’s all part of the cult and practice of deceitfulnees.
This Sunday November 2 will be the beginning of Eastern Daylight time, meaning that if I want to go to the Latin Mass in Lewiston, 55 miles away I can, since I won’t have to drive in the dark.
So I’ll be on my feet at 5:30 and around 6 Rachel and I will be on the road and we’ll proceed westerly to Lewiston to the magnificent Sts. Peter & Paul Basilica, built around 1900 or so by the Franco-American Catholics there (the Stations of the Cross are in French). Does all this make me a “trad”? I haven’t the slightest idea.
It’s been a long time since I’ve been there – I can’t wait!!
As a simple matter of ecclesiological liturgical coherence, the TLM should be completely eliminated. Yes, even the Ecclesia Dei religious communities should be told that they may no longer accept new candidates for ordination unless they agree to switch from celebrating the old Mass to the new Mass.
The TLM is no longer an adequate liturgical expression of Catholic faith after Vatican 2. That’s the crux of the matter. It would be liturgically incoherent to maintain both liturgical expressions simultaneously, and to continue with the unrevised Mass.
“The TLM is no longer an adequate liturgical expression of Catholic faith after Vatican 2.”
And The Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom? Should it go as well? After all, the priest has his back to the people much of the time, some parts aren’t in English, the icon screen keeps the people from seeing all that is happening up front, and the reverence is overwhelming. Surely that’s not adequate for 2025, right?