172. Violation of Censure

Paulus, believing himself bound by excommunication on account of reading a book prohibited in the Index, done without permission, absolved a penitent who was his accomplice in a shameful sin. When afterward he had occasion of reading the book of a certain heretic championing heresy, he again absolved the accomplice. Is Paulus irregular?

R. Although Paulus believed himself excommunicated by reading a book listed in the Index, in reality he was not excommunicated; and therefore, by absolving the accomplice the first time, he did not incur irregularity, because he does not truly violate a censure. Paulus certainly incurred excommunication by reading the heretical book; wherefore then certainly, when he again absolved the accomplice, he incurred irregularity from violated censure. But Paulus had already before, on another occasion, absolved the accomplice, and because of this also was excommunicated. Wherefore when the second time he absolved the accomplice, he was bound by a double excommunication. Nevertheless he incurs only one irregularity, because all censures forbid the exercise of order with regard to one virtue of religion, on account of reverence for the sacred ministry. But since this irregularity is equivalent to several, "in the petition for dispensation he ought to express this." St. Alph., l. 7, n. 359; I. M. 1325.