Case LXI: Marriage Dispensation in a Case of Temporary Vows

The following case came up unexpectedly before Father Arcadius. A Monialis, whose temporary vows would have lasted about three months longer, and who, in order to marry, had secretly left the convent, applied to him for dispensation. Arcadius resolves that this is an impedimentum occultum; and makes application to the Penitentiary Apostolic, enclosing sixty dollars, and asking for a dispensation. No answer came. Then he telegraphs, prepaying the answer; still no reply.

^* By H. Rett, O.F.M.

What is to be done in such a case? The answer is briefly as follows:

1. Arcadius is in error. An impedimentum can be publicum notorium, either notorietate facti (when the fact is known publicly) or notorietate juris—i. e. through a judicial decree, or of course also through an act amounting to the same, an act which may be called before the forum of the (spiritual) tribunal. The public act of a profession of vows (though simple) on entering an Order, is certainly an act of this kind. Arcadius has no privilege to interfere in a notorious impediment, either as confessor or as private adviser, because it belongs before the ecclesiastical court; indeed, if not prevented by the seal of Confession, he was bound to report the case to the ecclesiastical authorities.

2. Arcadius, in his proceeding in this case, made a second mistake: He wrote to the Penitentiary Apostolic. This congregation grants marriage dispensations pro foro interno, and also pro foro externo, where the poor are concerned. And even in their case, when it is a question of a public impediment, the applicant's full name must be given. Arcadius did not do so; which was the third mistake therefore. At any rate this kind of a dispensation (from religious vows) would seem a matter for the forum of the S. Congr. Ep. et R.

3. He enclosed money as fee in advance, a good deal more obviously than required, for answer and agentia, a fourth mistake. Rome never grants a dispensation if any payment is made in advance and apparently with the intention of securing the dispensation; nam: simoniam redolet! I recall a case where a religious, so as to be able to marry, wrote to Rome for a dispensation, and inclosed a sum equivalent to about fifty dollars in our money. The money was retained, of course (and properly so), but the answer came: Let the person apply once more for the dispensation, but not enclose any money; then she will receive dispensation at once.

4. The telegraph should not be used for the purpose of securing a dispensation for marriage, although it sometimes is done.

The case here referred to was eventually disposed of in the following manner: It was reported to Rome expresso nomine, by the Bishop; who subsequently received power to dispense the applicant from her vows, after which there was nothing to prevent the marriage. A congrua poenitentia was to be imposed. As penance for the breaking of religious vows, that should have lasted three months longer, monthly Confession and Communion for a period of three or four months will suffice.