Section 11: The Cessation of Law

A law may cease to be binding either for the whole of a community or for particular individuals only.

1. A law ceases to bind the whole community: a) By abrogation (abrogatio), which is a complete annulment of the whole law; b) By derogation (derogatio), which is the annulment of a portion of the law, the rest remaining intact; c) By the introduction of a contrary custom (consuetudo vim legis habens); d) By the fact that the law has ceased to be useful because it no longer attains the purpose for which it was made (cessante causa cessat effectus); 2. A law ceases to bind individuals, i. e., in particular cases: a) By a dispensation (dispensatio); b) By a privilege (privilegium); and c) By epikia, or equity, i. e., a benign interpretation of the law, by which it is deemed not to apply to some particular case.

Cases sometimes arise where it may be assumed that the lawgiver, not having foreseen all possible contingencies, would, if he were consulted, excuse the person so situated.

Epikia (ἐπιείκεια) is the application of a law according to the mind of the lawgiver and contrary to its wording. It applies to human and positive divine laws only, never to the moral law of nature. Epikia is not a self-dispensation, as is sometimes claimed, but may be likened to an act of justifiable self-defense or self-help, when there is a conflict of duties and one has to follow his own judgment or moral conviction in determining which is the higher duty.¹

¹ St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 1a 2ae, qu. 96, art. 6; 2a 2ae, qu. 120, art. 1-2.

Such equitable interpretation is permitted in affirmative and negative or prohibitive laws, not in nullifying laws, i. e., in those which make an act contrary to them null and void,² and only in cases where the observance of a law is attended by serious difficulties and no important interests of Church or State are at stake.³

² Thos. Slater, S.J., A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. I, p. 103.

³ Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor., I, p. 147; Sweens, Theol. Mor. Fund., pp. 202 sqq.; Tanquerey, Synopsis Theol. Mor., Vol. II, pp. 169 sq.

READINGS. —Codex Iuris Can., can. 22 sq. —St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 2a 2ae, qu. 120. —Th. Slater, S.J., A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. II, p. 103. —E. Taunton, The Law of the Church, London 1906, pp. 294 sqq., 324, 266 sqq. —Suarez, De Legibus, I, c. 2, n. 9-11. —A. Lehmkuhl, S.J., Theologia Moralis, 11th ed., Vol. I, pp. 149 sqq. —A. Sweens, Theologia Moralis Fundamentalis, 2nd ed., pp. 232 sqq. —A. Vermeersch, S.J., Theol. Mor., Vol. I, pp. 174 sqq., 223 sqq., 254 sqq.