Questioni giuridiche del pontificato piano

Abstract

On the centenary of the death of Pope Pius X (August 20, 1914), many conferences and study days have been organized in order to re-examine his pontificate and his contribution to Canon Law. The multiple readings of this Pope’s work in the second half of the 20th century have been framed within the opposition between modernism and anti-modernism, reducing this Pope’s massive reforms to a task of traditionalist restoration. A study which pays greater attention to the historical and cultural context will allow us to focus on these events more respectfully and evaluate his pontificate in a different light. If we were only to analyze the reform of the Roman Curia, the Roman Vicariate and the re- form of Canon Law, especially regarding the impressive work that went into the first codification of canon law, it would become obvious that Pope Pius X was responsible for mod- ernizing the Church on a major level. This reform was not free from certain risks, as is demonstrated in the «Code of Canon Law» itself, and in the repression of «modernism» by means of instruments that were modern but that were not adequate to the life of the Church. In contrast to focusing his pontificate within the dichotomy of modernism and anti-modernism, we would like to suggest that the complexio oppositorum of modernity-anti-modernity, as proposed by Fantappiè, offers a more suitable framework.

En el centenario de la muerte de Pío X se están celebrando congresos y jornadas de estudio que reproponen el pontificado piano y su aportación al derecho canónico. Las múltiples lecturas efectuadas en la segunda mitad del siglo XX sobre este papa, están marcadas por la contraposición modernismo-antimodernismo, relegando su enorme obra de reforma a una operación restauradora y tradicionalista. Un estudio más atento del contexto histórico y cultural permite una valoración diferente y más respetuosa de los acontecimientos. Analizando solo la reforma de la Curia romana, del Vicariato de la Urbe y del Derecho canónico con el imponente trabajo de su primera codificación, se pone de manifiesto que Pío X ha llevado a cabo una de las más grandes modernizaciones de la Iglesia. Aún así, el modelo institucional asumido no estuvo exento de riesgos, como demuestra el mismo «código» y la «represión» del «modernismo», con instrumentos que aunque eran modernos no eran adecuados para la vida eclesial. Al binomio modernismo-antimodernismo es preferible el binomio, sugerido por Fantappiè moderni- dad-antimodernidad como complexio oppositorum.