On the Second Precept of the Decalogue

"1. Whether it is lawful for the Bishops and Clergy to swear the Spanish civil Constitution of the year 1869 according to the formula prescribed by the Government? 2. Whether the Spanish Bishops and the other Ordinaries of places ought, through Pastoral letters, to teach the faithful people concerning the true sense of taking the oath? - As regards the first question, it is easily evident to anyone that the prescribed oath is illicit both for clerics and laymen, the formula of the same oath being considered, circumscribed by no limits. For it cannot be permitted to a Catholic man that he swear that he will observe those laws which are opposed both to divine and to ecclesiastical sanctions. Moreover, the Bishops of Spain do not fail to know, and Your Eminence knows well, that in that Constitution laws are contained by which Catholic unity is gravely wounded, the widest liberty of worships and doctrine is introduced and constituted, and other things opposed to divine and ecclesiastical right are established, which were reproved by the unanimous voice of the Bishops and by the wishes of almost all Spaniards. Hence it happened that there were not lacking those who, with a praiseworthy plan indeed, preferred to resign public offices rather than, with conscience resisting, bind themselves by an oath of this kind. Nevertheless, if the Government perseveres in what it has begun, which may God avert, and the Clergy is driven to issuing this oath, then, in order to avoid greater evils and only in the case of coercion, the Sacred Penitentiary judged that it can be tolerated that the taking of the oath be made according to the prescribed formula, provided that to the text of the formula itself the limitation be added: excepting those things which are opposed to the laws of God and of His Holy Catholic Church. - But as regards the second question, since from the taking of this kind of oath, especially when done by ecclesiastics, occasion of scandal would easily be provided because of the peculiar condition of the Spanish people, unless they are rightly taught about the aforesaid appended limitation, hence this Sacred Penitentiary judged it supremely expedient that Bishops and Ordinaries of places admonish and instruct the flock committed to them concerning the appended limitation by pastoral letters. Indeed, it would be desirable that these pastoral admonitions become known to the people before the mentioned oath is issued. But since similar questions have also been proposed by other sacred Prelates of Spain, I most readily persuade myself that Your Eminence will courteously and willingly deliver a copy of these letters to them, so that in so great a matter all may be able and willing to walk with equal step." Cf. Fr. Villada, Cas. Consc. his present. tempor. accommod., Part 1, De liberalismo, Brussels, 1884, p. 266 f.; Acta S. Sed. Vol. 2, p. 675.

"Whether the oath proposed by the intruding Government is lawful in these or similar words, in which unlimited obedience is contained: I swear fidelity and obedience to Victor Emmanuel, king of Italy, and to his successors. I swear that I will observe the Statute, and every other law of the state, as for the inseparable good both of the king and of the fatherland of Italy. Resp. The oath, as it is set forth, is not lawful; but the oath of merely passive obedience can be tolerated in all those things which are not opposed to Divine and Ecclesiastical Laws, according to the form approved by Pius VII of holy memory, and expressed in these words, namely: I promise and swear that I will never give assistance to conspiracy of any kind, whether assembly or sedition, against the actual Government; and likewise that I will be subject to and obey the same in all those things which are opposed neither to the laws of God nor of the Church." S. Poenit. 10 Dec. 1860. Cf. Acta S. Sed. Vol. 1, p. 561.

"Can a Bishop, when asked, pronounce an oath, or at least what observance can he promise to the new order of things? - Resp. In the negative; both because it is prohibited by the Sacred Canons for Ecclesiastics to issue an oath before lay authorities, and because the oath as proposed is illicit, as is clear from the Response in the Letters of 10 Dec. 1860." S. Poenit. 14 Dec. 1866. Cf. Acta S. Sed. Vol. 2, p. 675.

"But it has been reported that in several regions of the Indies, Catholics have been accustomed, if the issuing of an oath occurs, to swear upon Bibles corrupted by Protestants and exhibited by the Government; but from another side, it is by no means difficult to obtain from the civil Government itself that Catholics be granted the power of issuing the oath upon their own Bibles. Therefore all Apostolic Vicars in whose Missions a use of this kind has been accustomed to be employed should diligently take care that the Anglo-Indian Government leave to the faithful the liberty of swearing upon Sacred Scripture received by the Catholic Church.

But until they have obtained this from the civil authority, let them prudently be silent, if they see the faithful furnishing oaths upon Bibles of Heretics, provided that there is question of a lawful oath. Meanwhile let them teach the Sacred Congregation whether the Bibles of heretics, exhibited for the oath, are substantially corrupted, whether they are exhibited so as to be approved by Catholics, whether our Latin Vulgate is customarily excluded. Finally, by whom, and in what circumstances, and for what object, oaths of this kind are exacted." Instr. S. C. de P. F. 8 Dec. 1869.

The vow of Communities to celebrate certain Feasts of precept with vigil and procession, insofar as it is by the force of a vow, although confirmed by the Bishop, obliges no one except those making the vow. S. R. C., in the decrees apud Gardellini, nn. 1444, 1624, 1874, 1963, 2019, 4152.