Dr.

Ed Peters Guide to Gasparris Sources in CIC/ 1917

1. Getting acquainted
Large blocks of finely printed, densely packed, alpha-numeric Latin abbreviations. What
could be less inviting? (okay, besides going to the Albuquerque ball with Danny the co-pilot at 4
a.m.)? Put-off by the seeming impenetrability of Pio-Benedictine footnotes, many novice
researchers give up on consulting them without even trying. And that's a pity. The provisions of
the Pio-Benedictine Code reflect nearly two millennia of accumulated pastoral and legal wisdom,
and their footnotes identify more effectively than can be imagined the almost-countless
occasions for refining that wisdom. Let's see how.
The first canon of Book II of the 1917 Code of Canon Law reads as follows:

Can. 87. By baptism a human is constituted a person in the Church of Christ

with all of the rights and duties of Christians unless, in what applies to rights,
some bar obstructs, impeding the bond of ecclesiastical communion, or there
is a censure laid down by the Church.
There is a footnote to this canon, as it happens, one that contains a sample of almost everything
one might find in a Pio-Benedictine footnote. We will use this footnote as a model below, but for
now let's just see what it looks like:
C. 31, C. XXIV, q. 1; c. 51, D. I, de poenit.; c. 2, 15, de haereticis, V, 2, in VI; Conc.
Trident., sess. VII, de baptismo, can. 7, 8, 13, 14; sess. XIV, de poenitentia, c. 2;
Eugenius IV (in Conc. Florentin.), const. "Exsultate Deo", 22 nov. 1439, 10;
Benedictus XIV, const. "Etsi pastoralis", 26 maii 1742, VII, n. XI; ep. encycl. "Inter
omnigenas", 2 febr. 1744, 16; ep. "Postremo mense", 28 febr. 1747, n. 52; ep.
"Singulari", 9 feb. 1749, 2, 12-16; Pius IX, litt. ap. "Multiplices inter", 10 iun. 1851;
Syllabus errorum, prop. 54; Leo XIII, litt. encycl. "Sapientiae", 10 ian. 1890; S. C. S.
Off., instr. (ad Archiep. Quebecen.), 16 sept. 1824, ad 2; 19 apr. 1837; instr. 22 iun.
1859; 7 apr. 1875; (Bucarest), 8 maii 1889; instr. (ad Vic. Ap. Nankin.), 26 aug. 1891; S.
C. de Prop. Fide (C. G. - Albaniae), 18 apr. 1757, ad 5; (C. G.), 19 aug. 1776; instr. (ad
Praef. Ap. Mission. Epiri), 25 febr. 1837; litt. encycl. (ad Ep. Indiar.), 25 apr. 1902.
Don't be concerned if almost nothing in this footnote makes sense yet. Almost nothing in
Plan Nine from Outer Space makes sense, but that doesn't detract from the fun of watching it. So,
after you've let your how-am-I-ever-going-to-do-my-JCL-thesis-if-I-can't-even-read-thefootnotes-to-the-1917-Code anxiety recede, take a deep breath, and look more carefully at each
line in the note.
Surely you recognized the names of some popes (e.g., Benedict XIV or Pius IX). That tells
you something, namely, that papal writings contributed to the formation of Pio-Benedictine law.
You probably also recognized several dates (e.g., November 22, 1439, and April 25, 1902). From
that you see first that Cdl. Gasparri used the European dating convention (day-month-year) in his
citations but, more importantly, you see that documents from many centuries were culled during
the drafting of this canon. The 1917 Code was not thrown together by folks with no sense of
canonical history. Finally, you might have recognized the names of some locations such as
1

Quebec, Bucharest, or Nanking. Even that is useful: it underscores that the 1917 Code, a law
intended to be applied throughout the Catholic world, drew on experiences garnered from around
the world. Or at least in this canon it did.
Not a bad set of observations for someone who thinks he can't figure out what's contained in
the footnotes to the 1917 Code. But now, on to bigger things.

2. Really getting started

Patrolman Jamie was right: It's tough to find
something when you don't know what you're
looking for.
There are basically only four kinds of
canonical resources listed in the footnotes of the
1917 Code. Not every Pio-Benedictine footnote
presents citations to all four types of sources, but
if you know in advance what you can find, it
will make it much easier to determine whether
you've found it. The four types of sources that
might be listed in a given footnote are: Corpus
Iuris Canonici, Council of Trent, Papal
Writings, and Roman Curia.
If we color-code those categories thus
Corpus Iuris
Canonici

Council of Trent

Papal Writings

Roman Curia

and highlight them in our Canon 87 footnote, we see:

C. 31, C. XXIV, q. 1; c. 51, D. I, de poenit.; c. 2, 15, de haereticis, V, 2, in VI; Conc. Trident.,
sess. VII, de baptismo, can. 7, 8, 13, 14; sess. XIV, de poenitentia, c. 2; Eugenius IV (in Conc.
Florentin.), const. "Exsultate Deo", 22 nov. 1439, 10; Benedictus XIV, const. "Etsi pastoralis",
26 maii 1742, VII, n. XI; ep. encycl. "Inter omnigenas", 2 febr. 1744, 16; ep. "Postremo
mense", 28 febr. 1747, n. 52; ep. "Singulari", 9 feb. 1749, 2, 12-16; Pius IX, litt. ap.
"Multiplices inter", 10 iun. 1851; Syllabus errorum, prop. 54; Leo XIII, litt. encycl. "Sapientiae",
10 ian. 1890; S. C. S. Off., instr. (ad Archiep. Quebecen.), 16 sept. 1824, ad 2; 19 apr. 1837; instr.
22 iun. 1859; 7 apr. 1875; (Bucarest), 8 maii 1889; instr. (ad Vic. Ap. Nankin.), 26 aug. 1891; S.
C. de Prop. Fide (C. G. - Albaniae), 18 apr. 1757, ad 5; (C. G.), 19 aug. 1776; instr. (ad Praef. Ap.
Mission. Epiri), 25 febr. 1837; litt. encycl. (ad Ep. Indiar.), 25 apr. 1902.
See? That's not so bad. Again, don't worry if you can't decipher the citations within each
grouping. For now, we only want to establish that virtually all Pio-Benedictine footnotes are
limited to these four fundamental categories. Moreover, citations to these sources will always be
presented in the above order. Thus, with only a little practice, one will be able to tell instantly
whether, say, any Corpus Iuris Canonici references are found in a given footnote. Likewise, if
one is looking only for, say, Tridentine contributions to legal formulations, there is no need to
2

hunt through an entire, sometimes quite lengthy, footnote to find out whether there are any
Tridentine citations. You now know exactly where in the footnote to look for such cites.
It's not getting ahead of ourselves to observe that, within each of these
four categories of sources, further subdivisions will become apparent, all of
which are easy to understand once they are pointed out. You might have
already noticed, e.g., that Tridentine citations refer to conciliar sessions in
their chronological order, as do citations to papal writings. There are
logical subdivisions within Corpus Iuris Canonici and Roman Curia
citations, but those are more complicated and will be discussed below. In
all cases, though, a semi-colon (;) separates specific entries.
Note, finally, that the category-sequence rule is followed even if an entry
in one category predates an entry in an earlier category (as above, one of
the papal citations pre-dates the Council of Trent). Makes no difference, all
citations in an earlier category are listed before any citations in a
subsequent category are given.
Speaking of practice, now might be a good time to get some. Examine
the footnotes to the following canons, and verify whether you can identify
the categories and number of references in those categories that are found
in each.
Footnote to
1917 CIC 91
1917 CIC 94
1917 CIC 95
1917 CIC 104
1917 CIC 107
1917 CIC 118
1917 CIC 137
1917 CIC 151

Categories
Papal writings (2); Roman Curia (2)
Roman Curia (1)
No sources cited.
Corpus Iuris Canonici (1); Roman Curia (1); Vide etiam (2)
Council of Trent (1); Papal writings (1)
Corpus Iuris Canonici (10); Council of Trent (4); Papal writings (7);
Roman Curia (4)
Corpus Iuris Canonici (1)
Corpus Iuris Canonici (2); Papal writings (1); Roman Curia (1)

3. Using the four fundamental categories of citations

I'm now going to explain in some detail how to use all four categories of Pio-Benedictine
footnotes, but the first category, the Corpus Iuris Canonici, is frankly the most difficult. Feel free
to skip to Council of Trent (very easy), Papal Writings (easy), or Roman Curia (pretty easy once
someone shows you), and save Corpus citations till your confidence is built up on the other three
categories. Or, just dive in. Your call.
Category 1. Corpus Iuris Canonici. This monumental work was compiled between 1140 and
1500 and actually consists of six smaller works. The six constituent parts of the Corpus Iuris
Canonici are:

Concordia discordantium canonum

Quinque Libri Decretalium Gregoriani
3

IX
Liber Sextus
Clementinae
Extravagantes Joannis XXII, and
Extravagantes communes.
The Corpus Iuris Canonici is usually laid out in
this manner, and Gasparri always cited its parts in
this order. Given the relative ease with which the
Corpus could, and still can, be accessed by
researchers, Gasparri did not republish it in his
Fontes. The most accessible version of the Corpus
Iuris Canonici is A. Friedberg, CORPUS IURIS
CANONICI EDITIO LIPSIENSIS SECUNDA POST
AEMILI LUDOUICI RICHTER, in 2 vols., Bernhardi
Tauchnitz, 1881. Let's look at these six parts
sequentially.

Luther once burned the Corpus Iuris Canonici.

He should have burned something dangerous,

Concordia discordantium canonum (c. 1140)

Gratian's masterpiece is known by various titles: Concordia discordantium canonum,
Decretum Gratiani, Gratian's Decree, all refer to the same work. Cited hundreds of times in PioBenedictine footnotes (See Fontes IX: 14-55), Gratian's Decretum is divided into three parts.
Part One groups its materials into 101 "Distinctions",
most of which are subdivided into "canons". This
information is traditionally provided, however, in
reverse order, so that "c. 7, D. I" means "canon 7 of
Distinction I of Part One of Gratian's Decree".
Part Two is organized under 36 "Cases", most of
which are divided into "questions", most of which in
turn contain one or more "canons". This information
also provided counter-intuitively, so that "c. 1, C. I, q.
1" means "canon 1 of question 1 in Causa 1 of Part Two
of Gratian's Decree".
Part Three is arranged into 5 "Distinctions", all of
which contain at least some "canons". Potential
confusion owing to the fact that abbreviation letter "D"
was used above is eliminated by the addition of "de
cons" (or a closely related version thereof), short for
"de consecratione", the general title of the third part, to
all citations.
Predictably then, "c. 1, D. I, de cons." means "canon 1 of Distinction 1 of Part Three (called
de consecratione) of Gratian's Decree."
4

There are only two (well, maybe three) things that can confuse folks in Gratian citations.
First, question 3 of Cause 33 is divided into "Distinctions", which are in turn divided into
"canons". It is also not called "Question 3 of Cause 33" but rather, "de poenit." short for "de
poenitentia". Thus, "c. 6, D. I., de poenit." means "canon 6 of Distinction I of Question 3 of
Cause 33 of Part Two of Gratian's Decree." Second, the Roman numeral letter "X" for number
10, can be confused with a very common abbreviation for the second part of the Corpus Iuris
Canonici, the Liber Extra, to which we'll turn immediately below. Third, one will might be
confused by the fact the letter "c." stands for "canon" in Gratian, but, as we shall see, for
"chapter" in the rest of Corpus.
Quinque Libri Decretalium Gregoriani IX (1234)
The single work, Five Books of the Decretal (Letters) of Pope Gregory IX ,was known
commonly as the Liber Extra, or the book of things "outside" of Gratian's Decree. It is always
identified by the single letter "X" and is cited hundreds of times in the 1917 Code. See Fontes
IX: 55-102. The Liber Extra is divided into five "books", all of which are in turn divided into
"titles", all of which contain "chapters" (not canons). The illogic of the common citation system
is distressing, but here goes: "c. 7, X, I, 2" means "chapter 7 of title 2 in book I of the Liber
Extra." Everyone admits the citation system makes little sense. Too bad, really. The vitally
important Decretals of Gregory were actually quite well laid out by St. Raymond Peyfort.
The remaining four parts of the Corpus Iuris Canonici, when
compared with the first two parts discussed above, seem to be of
minor significance; nevertheless, there are hundred of citations to
them in Pio-Benedictine footnotes, the great majority of those being
to the Liber Sextus. See Fontes IX: 102-118.
Liber Sextus (1298)
The "Sixth Book" consists of materials not found in Pope
Gregory's Five Books, specifically the decretal letters of Pope
Boniface VIII. Abbreviated in Pio-Benedictine footnotes as "in VI"
(in Sexto [Libro]), it is patterned on Gregory's much larger
collection, being divided into the same five books and subdivided
into titles and then chapters. There is not a strict correlation
between Gregory and Boniface in regard to titles and chapters
because Boniface did not legislate in all the areas that Gregory had
dealt with. Thus, "c. 1, de constitutionibus, I, 2, in VI" means
"chapter 1, of title 2 (called de constitutionibus) of Book 1 of the
Liber Sextus".
Clementinae (1317)
The Clementinae are the constitutions of Pope Clement V, though their final form was given
by Pope John XXII when he promulgated them in a revised state. Abbreviated in Pio-Benedictine
footnotes as "in Clem." they, like the Liber Sextus, basically followed the organization of
Gregory's Decretals. Thus "c. 2, de electione et electi potestate, I, 3, in Clem." means "chapter 1
of title 3 (called de electione et electi potestate) of Book I of the Clementinae."
5

 Extravagantes Joannis XXII (1322)

The Extravagantes Joannis XXII arranges decretal letters of John XXII into titles and, under
them, chapters (but not books). Thus "c. 2, de electione et electi potestate, tit. I, in Extravag.
Ioan. XXII" means "chapter 2 of title 1 (called de electione et electi potestate) of the
Extravagantes Joannis XXII.
Extravagantes communes (1499-1502)
The last part of the Corpus Iuris Canonici gathers other materials deemed useful by Chappuis
and de Thebes, and organizes them once again under the book-title-chapter format. Thus "c. un.,
de consuetudine, I, 1, in Extravag. com." means "chapter one [by the way, the only chapter in
that group] of title 1 (called de consuetudine) of Book I of the Extravagantes communes.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how to trace Pio-Benedictine citations to the Corpus Iuris
Canonici. Hmmm, maybe that wasn't so tough after all. Seriously, compared to Corpus citations,
the other three categories really are much easier.
Category 2. Council of Trent. The Nineteenth Ecumenical Council met in 25 sessions from 1545
to 1563. There were some lengthy adjournments during that time, and only half of the sessions
produced anything canonically significant, but it is one of the outstanding legislative councils of
the Church. Over 250 Tridentine provisions were cited in hundreds of Pio-Benedictine norms.
See Fontes IX: 119-135. Reliable editions of the canons and decrees of the Council of Trent were
so widely available that Gasparri did not reprint them in his Fontes. Today, moreover, modern
language translations of Trent are plentiful. In brief, Pio-Benedictine citations to the Council of
Trent are good news for researchers: the council was of great importance in itself, and its
provisions are easy to find in both Latin and the vernacular. But note: Trent is not the only
ecumenical council cited in the footnotes of the 1917 Code.
First, provisions from councils that pre-dated the
completion of the Corpus Iuris Canonici are contained in
that work. There is no way to know, however, whether a
council reference was given indirectly in a 1917 Code
footnote until one actually looks up the specific Corpus
citation.
Second, there are a very few direct citations to
ecumenical councils other than Trent in Pio-Benedictine
footnotes. See Fontes IX: 119, 135. All of these documents
are published in Fontes I: 1-15, and most are available in
English in, e.g., H. Schroeder, DISCIPLINARY DECREES OF
THE GENERAL COUNCILS: TEXT, TRANSLATIONS, AND
Professionals check and recheck
COMMENTARY, (Herder, 1937).
their materials for maximum acuracy.
Third, some of the writings that Gasparri listed as papal
occurred during or in connection with an Ecumenical
Council. See, e.g., the citation to Pope Eugenius IV in our
sample footnote above. While Gasparri noted the conciliar
6

context for such writings, he treated them as papal for

category assignment purposes.
There, I told you category two citations were easy. Now, on to category three.
Category 3. Papal writings. Beginning with St. Clement I and ending with Benedict XV, many
popes provided resource materials for hundreds of Pio-Benedictine canons. See Fontes IX: 135170. Of course, certain popes stand out for the number and quality of their contributions, for
example, Benedict XIV (not surprisingly) and most of the popes after Vatican I. In any case, the
papal writings category is very simple to master, so let's explain it now.
Gasparri published, in chronological order, all papal writings that served as sources for PioBenedictine law in the first three volumes of his Fontes. There are various ways to find the papal
writings cited in 1917 Code footnotes, but I'll tell you the best.
Remember that Pio-Benedictine footnotes citing papal writings give the name of the pope, the
document title, the date of issue, and often some internal reference numbers. The crucial datum
for you, though, is date of issue.
Make your best guess as to when the pope appeared in Church history (early, middle, late),
open up Fontes volume 1, 2, or 3, and page through it till you see a bold print document header
(it doesn't matter which one it is). The header will always contain a reference number, a papal
name, document type and title, and the date of issue. For example, in Fontes II, p. 434, one finds:
430. Benedictus XIV, const. Pastoralis, 15 jul. 1754.
Disregard the Document Number (I'll explain those later) and
concentrate on the document's date of issue. From that, you'll
immediately know whether to look forward or backward to find your
papal writing. This method sounds dumb, but then, so does getting
your movie cast baptized to placate the Baptist ministers financing
your film. Regardless, just as any baptism conferred in accord with
matter and form suffices for validity, so the just-open-a-book-andsee-where-you-are approach also suffices for research. In fact, with
practice, one will get pretty good at guessing where a given pope's
writings are likely to appear in the Fontes I-III. In the meantime, it
might help to know that papal writings are distributed as follows:
Fontes I
St. Clement I through Benedict XIV (to 1745)
Fontes II
Benedict XIV (from 1746) though Pius IX ( to1865).
Fontes III
Pius IX (from 1867) through Benedict XV.
Remember: many papal writings have been translated into the vernacular. For example, all
papal encyclicals from Benedict XIV though the first part of John Paul II's reign appear in
English in Claudia Carlen, ed., THE PAPAL ENCYCLICALS (1740-1981), in 5 vols., Pierian Press,
1990.
7

Finally, when a reference within a papal writing footnote (e.g., a "", or "n.", etc.) is given,
one may skip directly to that part of the document in the Fontes. Else, one needs to look at the
entire document to determine its relevance for your research. Click here for the standard PapalWriting/Roman Curia Warning.
You've only got one category left, and even that is not hard once you've seen how it's put
together. Really.
Category 4. Roman Curia. Sure, category four citations look scary,
almost as scary as Inspector Clay after Eros has risen him. But once
your electrode gun is working (try dropping it on the floor if it
jams), category four citations are easy.
Materials from the Roman Curia take up five of the nine
volumes of Gasparri's Fontes. In Pio-Benedictine footnotes, Roman
Curia citations always appear in a set order (presumably, that of the
precedence attributed to various dicasteries) and then, subject to
that order, chronologically by document date of issue. In the Fontes
volumes themselves, Gasparri grouped the documents first by
dicastery and then in chronological order.
Most of these materials are in Latin, but one also finds some Italian. Dicastery name
abbreviations can be frustrating, so let's start with them. In the order they appear in both the
footnotes and the Fontes, they are:
Fontes IV
S. C. S. Off.
S. C. Ep. et. Reg.

Sacra Congregatio Sancti Officii

Sacra Congregatio Episcoporum et Regularium

Fontes V
S. C. Consist.
S. C. de Sacramentis
S. C. C.

Sacra Congregatio Consistorialis

Sacra Congregatio de Sacramentis
Sacra Congregatio Concilii (to 1760)

Fontes VI
S. C. C.
Sacra Congregatio Concilii (from 1761)
S. C. super Statu Regularium Sacra Congregatio super Statu Regularium
S. C. de Religiosis
Sacra Congregatio de Religiosis
Fontes VII
S. C. Prop. Fide
S. C. Indulg.
S. C. Indic.
S. R. C.

Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide

Sacra Congregatio Indulgentiis Sacrisque Reliquiis
Praeposita
Sacra Congregatio Indicis
Sacra Rituum Congregatio (to 1790)

Fontes VIII
S. R. C.
S. C. Caeremonial.
S. C. pro Neg. Eccles.

Sacra Rituum Congregatio (from 1804)

Sacra Congregatio Caeremonialis
Sacra Congregatio pro Negotiis Ecclesiasticis
8

Extraordin.
S. Studiorum C.
S. C. de Seminariis
S. Poenit.
Secret. Status
Secret. Brevium
Vicariatus Urbis

Extraordinariis
Sacra Studiorum Congregatio
Sacra Congregatio de Seminariis et de Studiorum
Universitatibus
Sacra Poenitentiaria Apostolica
Secretaria Status Suae Sanctitatis
Secretaria Brevium Apostolicorum
Variae regulae in Curia Romana servandae
Vicariatus Urbis

Having selected the volume in which the dicastery you need is reported, the "guess-and-hunt
method" outlined above for finding papal writings is the most efficient way to track down
Roman Curia citations, too. As before, when a reference within a Roman Curia footnote (e.g., a
"", or "n.", etc.) is given, one might want to skip directly to that part of the document in the
Fontes. In some cases, you'll need to look at the whole thing. And don't forget the standard
Papal-Writing/Roman Curia Warning.
Note on Liturgical Sources: The 1917 Code
drew on four liturgical books for a number of
provisions: the Missale Romanum (divided into
titles, chapters, and numbers), Pontificale
Romanum (organized by titles), Caeremoniale
Episcoporum (set out in books, chapters, and
numbers) and the Rituale Romanum (in titles,
chapters and numbers). See Fontes IX: 313-328.
In Pio-Benedictine footnotes, they are always
listed after Roman Curia sources. Consultation
with these sources presents no significant
difficulties, except for finding them, that is.
Remember that editions of liturgical sources must
pre-date the 1917 Code's date of promulgation (27
May 1917). Later versions must be shown to be
consistent with earlier liturgical law.
That's it. That's all four major categories of citations in the footnotes to the 1917 Code. Let's
pull it all together, now, and see if you can find the fontes to our sample footnote above. Find
these sources on your own, and then check with the list below to make sure you are right.
Footnote Citation

Can be found in

C. 31, C. XXIV, q. 1

Friedberg I: 977

c. 51, D. I, de poenit.
c. 2, 15, de haereticis, V, 2, in VI
Conc. Trident, sess. VII, de baptismo,
can. 7, 8, 13, 14

Translation

Friedberg I: 11701171
Friedberg II: 1069,
1075-1076
Schroeder, 331-332

Schroeder, 53-54

[Conc. Trident,] sess. XIV, de poenitentia, c. 2

Schroeder, 337

Eugenius IV (in Conc. Florentin.), const.

"Exsultate Deo", 22 nov. 1439, 10
Benedictus XIV, const. "Etsi pastoralis",
26 maii 1742, VII, n. XI
[Benedictus XIV], ep. encycl. "Inter
omnigenas",
2 febr. 1744, 16
[Benedictus XIV], ep. "Postremo mense",
28 febr. 1747, n. 52
[Benedictus XIV], ep. "Singulari",
9 feb. 1749, 2, 12-16
Pius IX, litt. ap. "Multiplices inter", 10 iun.
1851

Fontes I: 71-77, at 7374

Fontes I: 734-755, at
746

[Pius IX], Syllabus errorum, prop. 54

Leo XIII, litt. encycl. "Sapientiae", 10 ian.
1890
S. C. S. Off., instr. (ad Archiep. Quebecen.),
16 sept. 1824, ad 2

Fontes I: 803-810, at
807

Fontes II: 193-199,

at 193-194 & 197
Fontes II: 855-857
Fontes II: 1000-1009,
at 1006
Fontes III: 325-340
Fontes IV: 146-152,
at 148-149
Fontes IV: 160

[S. C. S. Off.], instr. 22 iun. 1859

Fontes IV: 225-226

[S. C. S. Off.], 7 apr. 1875

Fontes IV: 357

[S. C. S. Off.], (Bucarest), 8 maii 1889

Fontes IV: 446-447

[S. C. de Prop. Fide], (C. G.), 19 aug. 1776

[S. C. de Prop. Fide], instr. (ad Praef. Ap.
Mission. Epiri), 25 febr. 1837
[S. C. de Prop. Fide], litt. encycl.
(ad Ep. Indiar.), 25 apr. 1902

Carlen

Fontes II: 62-91, at 85

[S. C. S. Off.], 19 apr. 1837

[S. C. S. Off.], instr. (ad Vic. Ap. Nankin.),

26 aug. 1891
S. C. de Prop. Fide (C. G. - Albaniae),
18 apr. 1757, ad 5

Schroeder, 102

Fontes IV: 469

Fontes VII: 60-61, at
61
Fontes VII: 104
Fontes VII: 288
Fontes VII: 544

Believe it or not, you are now through all four categories (plus a couple of minor categories)
of Pio-Benedictine footnotes and fontes. You can go to work right now if you want. What follows
are only a few picky points for perfectionists.

4. Small points for specialists

Document Numbers
Gasparri published 6,464 documents in his Fontes, some of them only a few lines long, others
running dozens of pages. He (and Seredi, of course) numbered each of them in the Fontes. For
most canonical researchers, however, these document numbers are practically irrelevant. They
are never used in the footnotes, and one need not know them in order to find the fontes to a given
10

canon. Document numbers really have only one interesting use: If one's research point of
departure is the document itself (instead of, as is typical, a provision of the 1917 Code) one can
take the document number to various tables in Fontes IX and identify what other canons, if any,
the document contributed to.
Suppose for example, that you were interested in how an instruction from the Holy Office
dated 6 August 1897 (Fontes IV: 495-496) had been used in the 1917 Code. (Maybe you were
led to that document by a reference in one canon, and you were now wondering what other
canons, if any, might have drawn on that document.) Noting the document number, 1190, you
would turn to Tabella B in Fontes IX and, at col. 183, learn that document no. 1190 had been
referenced in the footnotes to: 1917 CIC 904; 1139 1; 1940; 1941 1, 2; 1942 1, 2; and 1944
1, 2. Pretty handy, if you ever need to know it.
Papal-Writing/Roman Curia Warning
At nearly the end of his Preface to the Pio-Benedictine Code, Gasparri writes "Notes have
been added to the canons at the bottom of each page that indicate the various sources from which
they were taken..." So far so good; we all knew that.
But then Gasparri says "...it is
scarcely necessary to add that the
canons are not always consistent with
all their sources in the parts used..."
There's more here than meets the eye.
First, obviously, not all the sources
to a given canon would agree among
themselves; that was one of the main
reasons for a codification in the first
place: to reconcile different approaches
to legal issues and, when necessary, to
make a definitive choice among them.
In such cases, the value of the fontes
lies in demonstrating what approaches
were tried in the past but ultimately
rejected in favor of those that seemed
better. But something else should be
noted.
Many times one will consult a source document for a given canon and at the end of the
process frankly wonder what the relevance of that document was to the canon. Sometimes the
connection between a document and the norm it allegedly influenced is simply invisible to
modern eyes. Whether this is because we contemporaries have lost contact with the environment
in which the law grew up and so do not recognize connections that our predecessors would have
taken for granted, or whether the disconnect arises from a decision by Gasparri to err on the side
of over-inclusion in his footnotes and fontes, even if that meant including some basically
irrelevant materials in some places, I cannot tell. But the problem is there. If you find yourself
facing it one day, at least know that you are not alone.

11

5. Resources needed to make use of Pio-Benedictine footnotes

A footnoted edition of the Pio-Benedictine Code: CODEX IURIS CANONICI, PII X PONTIFICIS
MAXIMI, IUSSU DIGESTUS, BENEDICTI PAPAE XV, AUCTORITATE PROMULGATUS, Acta
Apostolicae Sedis 9/2 (1917) 11-521, which version, however, does not have the footnotes.
Footnoted copies of the 1917 Code were printed as monographs by various publishers (Herder,
Kenedy, Westminister, and so on). You might find useful E. Peters, curator, THE 1917 OR PIOBENEDICTINE CODE OF CANON LAW IN ENGLISH TRANSLATION WITH EXTENSIVE
SCHOLARLY APPARATUS , 777 pages. Foreword by Bp. John J. Myers. (Ignatius Press: San
Francisco CA, 2001). ISBN: 0-89870-831-1. My translation does not have Gasparri's footnotes,
but it does have citations to relevant dissertation length studies, appearance of the provisions in
CANON LAW DIGEST, and so on.
The Fontes of Gasparri: P. Gasparri (later volumes by J. Serdi), CODICIS IURIS CANONICI
FONTES, in 9 vols., (Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1923-1949). Note that Volume IX uses column
numbers, not page numbers.

12