141. On Ordination outside the Times

1. Antonius, a regular prelate, thinks that all regulars can be ordained outside the times. Hence he earnestly asks the Ordinary to be willing to confer orders outside the times on his subjects. The Ordinary refuses; but Antonius insists, asserting that this is a privilege common to all regulars, which was not abrogated by the Council of Trent; and was newly conceded to the Hierosolymitan Order by the Bull Circumspecta of Pius IV, without any clause of incommunicability. It was besides recognized by the Roman Council, since c. 2, title 5, says: "We decree that regulars, without a new Apostolic Indult, can safely be ordained outside the times." Finally, it was admitted by the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars in the Decision of June 25, 1730, and of July 18, 1732. Cf. Bizzarri, Collect., ed. 1885, pp. 341, 343. But the Ordinary replies that this privilege is proper only to the Society of Jesus, and is incommunicable to other Orders from the Bull Pium et utile of Gregory XIII. This, moreover, is confirmed from the practice prevailing at Rome, where only members of the Society enjoy this privilege.

It is asked: What is to be said to the Case?

R. Benedict XIV, Notif. 23, n. 3 ff., has these things concerning the present question: "Since the Sacred Council of Trent at sess. 23, c. 8 determined that sacred ordinations are to be celebrated at the times established by law, from this it follows that it derogated from the privileges which religious orders could have had previously, that their religious be ordained outside the times; all the more because Pontiff Pius IV, in his Bull 94, at t. 2 of the Bullarium, in which he confirms the Sacred Council of Trent, says that privileges contrary to what was established in it are understood to have ceased and to be annulled and reduced to the terms of the same ...

"And since We had the honor of serving for many years as Secretary of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, We did not have occasion to see admitted by it any privilege other than that of the Fathers of the Society of Jesus, and not indeed that conceded to it by Paul III, of which there is speech in his Constitution 48, § 19, t. I of the Bullarium, because it was prior to the Council; but rather that of Gregory XIII, posterior to the said Council and inserted in his Constitution 77 at t. 2 of the Bullarium, which privilege was afterward confirmed by Paul V, as is seen in the Bullarium of the said Religion, and also by Innocent XII, who, having established some rules concerning particular indults of extra tempora, naming Regulars, solemnly declared, at the request of the Religious of the Society, that he had never intended to bring any prejudice to the privilege conceded to them by Gregory XIII, as can be seen in a paper printed at Rome in his Pontificate and reprinted apud La-Croix, l. 6, n. 2194, without this particular privilege being able to be extended to the other Regular Orders, which participate in the privileges of the said Society, since Gregory XIII, in § 4 of the cited Bull, determined that this privilege not pass to others who participate, or were going to participate, in the privileges of the Jesuit Fathers: Moreover we altogether prohibit the communication of the present grace to be made in the future in any way to all others, even those who share abundantly and will be able to share their privileges with the same Society ...

"And although in the last Roman Council, held under the Holy Memory of Benedict XIII, at title 5, c. 2, it is thus read: But as regards regulars having privileges from the Supreme Pontiffs, whether expressly or conceded by way of communication, namely of receiving sacred orders outside the times, since the privileges themselves persist in their force, and it is not established that derogation has been made from them, we therefore decree that these same regulars, without a new Apostolic Indult, can safely be ordained outside the times; nevertheless, since in the said chapter it is not read: whether expressly or by way of communication conceded before the Council of Trent, from this it follows that one cannot say that the controversy was decided by force of the Roman Council; the reason mentioned above always remaining in its force, namely that derogation was made by the Council of Trent, in the place mentioned, from prior privileges. Nor should this reason be judged either subtle or unsubstantial; for in consequence of the same, today at Rome none are admitted to the privilege of extra tempora except only the Fathers of the Society, who had it after the Council of Trent ... and no other regular now appears at Rome to be ordained extra tempora without having dispatched his particular indult."

From these things it sufficiently appears that the reasons of the regular prelate are not altogether demonstrative; but the assertion and reason of the Ordinary are sufficiently sustained. Yet the opinion of the regular prelate is not lacking every probability, and therefore the Ordinary, if he wishes, can acquiesce to him, although he does not seem to be bound. Let Honorante, Prax. Secr., c. 12, be heard: "But whether the ancient privileges conceded by the Apostolic See to Regulars, of receiving orders outside the times, were revoked by the Council of Trent, sess. 23, c. 8: several doctors affirm it ... Several doctors also have come to the contrary opinion ... But it must be asserted that each assertion of the doctors departing into diverse opinions is an opinion, but not a certain sentence, as Passerinus, distinguished member of the Order of Preachers, well observes ... And although in the Roman Council the following Decree exists: 'But as regards Regulars having privileges from the Supreme Pontiffs, whether expressly or conceded by way of communication, namely of receiving sacred orders outside the times, since the privileges themselves persist in their force, and it is not established that derogation has been made from them, we therefore decree that the same regulars, without a new Apostolic Indult, can safely be ordained outside the times'; title 5, c. 2. Nevertheless, since in the said chapter it is not read: whether expressly or by way of communication conceded before the Council of Trent, it cannot be said that the controversy was decided by the Roman Council, since the same reason always persists in its force, namely that derogation was made by the Council of Trent, in the cited place, from antecedent privileges. Finally Benedict XIV, Const. Impositi, Sept. 27, 1747, declared that privileges of this sort favor only those regulars to whom, after Trent, they had been conceded by name and directly, but not by communication ...

"And in fact, in the Secretariat of the Tribunal, even before the said Constitution issued, from the beginning of the Pontificate of the holy memory of Clement XII up to these times, no other privilege concerning extra tempora was admitted, except only that conceded to the brothers of St. Paul the First Hermit of the Hungarian Province, studying in the City by force of the Decree of the S. C. de P. F., Sept. 26, 1718; and the privilege conceded to the Fathers of the Society of Jesus, not indeed that conceded by Paul III, since it issued before the Council, but that of Gregory XIII after the Council, which afterward was confirmed by Paul V and by Innocent XII; nor can it be extended to other regular orders which participate in the privileges of the said Society.

"But this must not here be passed over, that to the Friars Minor of the Observance dwelling in parts of the West Indies the aforesaid privilege was conceded after the Council by Urban VIII in the Constitution Cum sicut."

St. Alphonsus, de Privil., n. 115, treats the question: "Whether religious can be ordained outside the times." And he responds: "Vasquez, Lezana, etc., deny it; for they say that although Gregory conceded this to the Jesuits, nevertheless he prohibited communication. But today it is no longer to be called into doubt that they can, both from the many privileges conceded to other Religions and from the Declaration lately made by Benedict XIII in the Roman Council, title 5, c. 2, in which it was established that such privileges persist in their force and that it is not established that derogation had been made from them." And in l. 6, n. 797, the same Holy Doctor moves the question and says: "Vasquez, etc., deny it. But Laymann with Marchant, etc., more truly affirm it. The reason is that after Gregory XIII, Clement VIII absolutely conceded this privilege to all mendicants, and Urban VIII conceded it to the Order of Discalced of the Most Holy Trinity. And most recently Benedict XIII, apud Benedict XIV, Not. 23, n. 5, in the Roman Council, title 5, c. 2, confirmed this privilege."

Yet doubt is truly present in this matter. Whence D'Annibale, n. 294, note 2, says: "Sacred orders can be conferred on religious of the Society of Jesus on any feast days of precept by privilege conceded to them by Gregory XIII. Whether also on other religious is disputed; and so the matter is left to the judgment of the bishop, and, if he is unwilling to ordain, it is not lawful to approach another bishop. Clement VIII, March 15, 1569; Benedict XIV, Not. 23." And in reality Benedict XIV himself, accommodating regulars, admits in the place cited that he often conferred sacred orders on them outside the times.

But it must be noted in the last place that although the Roman Council, in the place cited, does not expressly say that the privileges of regulars persist in their force, whether expressly or by way of communication conceded before the Council, nevertheless it speaks absolutely and indefinitely. Moreover, if those privileges conceded before the Council have been abrogated, what finally are those privileges, whether expressly or BY WAY OF COMMUNICATION conceded, which persist in their force and from which derogation has not been made? Besides, the Council speaks of privileges persisting in their force and from which it is established that derogation has not been made, namely by the Council of Trent; and surely in the cited sess. 23, c. 8 no clause derogating from privileges is found.

But the established resolution is confirmed from the S. C. of Bishops and Regulars, which on July 18, 1732, replied: "that the bishop can, but is not bound" to ordain regulars outside the times, although the same Sacred Congregation openly admits in its Decision of July 13, 1730, that the privilege of ordination outside the times is in its force. Bizzarri, Collect., 1885, pp. 342, 344.

2. "A certain regular, lacking the privilege that he can be ordained by any Catholic prelate, exhibits to an outside bishop attestations of the Ordinary in whose diocese there exists the convent where the regular dwells, by which it is declared that the Ordinary himself does not hold ordination outside the established times. Hence it is asked: 1.º Whether, according to the Constitution Impositi of Benedict XIV, Feb. 27, 1746, the outside bishop can, outside the times established by the canons, ordain the regular lacking the aforesaid privilege in the Case? And insofar as affirmatively: 2.º Whether the attestation of the diocesan Ordinary suffices, as in the Case; or whether there is required an attestation by which it is declared that the bishop of the place where the regular dwells will not hold ordination at the established times?

R. To the 1st. Affirmatively. To the 2nd. The attestation that the bishop will not have ordination at the next legitimate time is required." S. C. C., Aug. 18, 1888.

3. "The Decree of the Synod of Meath in Ireland, by which it is declared that no one in the future, whether secular or regular, in this diocese is to be promoted to sacred orders except with the intervals observed, nor without diligent examination by the Ordinary, unless the utility or necessity of the Church should persuade the bishop otherwise; and that this judgment also with regard to regulars does not pertain to regular superiors, but to the Ordinary, is to be reformed with regard to those who have a contrary privilege conceded after the Council; and in the rest Decrees of the following tenor are to be given and observed: June 30, 1597; Sept. 30, 1609 ... that remission of the intervals for causes expressed by the Council pertains to the ordaining bishop, even with regard to regulars receiving orders from him, but not to regular superiors; yet that the bishop himself concerning the causes of remission is bound to give credence to and defer to the testimony of the regular superior." S. C. C., Aug. 24, 1686.