Appendix of Annotations (Volume II)

APPENDIX OF ANNOTATIONS.

Reader's note: The following printed appendix annotations have also been attached to their corresponding places in the body text. The links below jump from this printed appendix to those attached in-body notes.

Attached annotation links, part 1 of 5.

Attached annotation links, part 2 of 5.

Attached annotation links, part 3 of 5.

Attached annotation links, part 4 of 5.

Attached annotation links, part 5 of 5.

(alpha) n. 1268. q. 7°, p. 35, col. 1.

"Only women who have given birth from legitimate Matrimony have a right to the blessing after childbirth," responded S. C. C. in Wratislavia, June 18, 1859.¹ "From this response of S. C.," add the Acta,² "by which any distinction is cut away, one would not rightly deduce that pastors are prohibited from blessing the women of whom there is question" (those, namely, who have given birth from illegitimate intercourse). "For it is inferred only that the aforesaid women cannot demand the said blessing by right, according to that which was posited in the question." Therefore, scandal arising by reason of a notoriously illegitimate birth being set aside, an exception can be made as regards those women who secretly, and especially being deceived, yielded to human weakness. Nor do those have a right to that blessing who with public scandal entered Matrimony before a civil Magistrate or a little minister, unless by penance they have repaired the scandal. Resolve the same concerning those concerning whom it is notorious that they never approach the church and do not satisfy the Paschal precept."³

To the question: "Women after childbirth are accustomed to present themselves before the priest for receiving the blessing, even if the offspring has sometimes died without Baptism. In that case, however, the words of the prayers of the Roman Ritual now in force in this Diocese cannot be verified, and on the other hand the blessing would not be omitted without some wonder of the people, and without aggravation of the grief of women of this kind. It is asked what is to be done, and whether it is lawful, after removing those things which are not verified after the woman has been introduced into the church, some prayer from those which are contained in the Missal being substituted, to impart the blessing as in the Ritual?"

Resp. "The Roman Ritual must be entirely observed."

To this Resp. the Past. Bl. für N. Amer.¹ observes that in the case concerning which the question is asked the blessing can be given, since its primary end is the postpartum woman herself, and the offspring is only secondary.

It is clear per se that the blessing is not to be imparted unless the (living) offspring has previously been baptized.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 1.

1 Acta, T. I. p. 347. | 2 Ib. p. 349. | 3 Past. Bl. für N. Amer. 10th year, p. 8.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 2.

1 10th year, p. 8. (beta) n. 1403. q. 4°. R. 2°, p. 140, col. 2.

The Constitution Apostolicae Sedis does not speak of the burden of presentation except after the enumeration of excommunications which it willed to be reserved in a special manner to the Pope. Therefore it is to be judged to have willed that, for these only, the obligation of standing by the mandates of the Church remains firm. Therefore, as often as a dying person is bound by other bonds which are not reserved in a special manner to the Pontiff, the obligation of presentation no longer seems to be present, and therefore it is not to be enjoined except for cases reserved in a special manner to the Pontiff, whether they are public or even occult; but for the remaining Pontifical cases, whether occult or public, such a burden is no longer present.² Therefore I now think that one must depart from St. Alphonsus.³

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 2.

2 The Theologians of Padua on the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, Quest. n. 164. | 3 H. A. Tr. XVI. 96.

(gamma) n. 1523. q. 3°, p. 216, col. 1.

The reason is that the faculty granted to a Bishop of conferring Holy Orders outside the times is strictly local, and he cannot exercise it outside the territory of the diocese, either by himself or through another Bishop, although furnished with a similar Indult; for into that Indult, as being contained in n. 1 of the Faculties Form I (p. LXX), falls the clause of those faculties: "nor can he use them outside the boundaries of his diocese" (p. LXXII. n. 29), concerning the sense of which clause see the Appendix to this volume (p. 398, col. 1, 4°). The same observation holds for dispensation in irregularities (p. LXX. n. 2). Both are clear from the grace granted to the Bishops of the Province of Westminster (Collectio Lacensis, T. III. p. 963. XLV. XV.) in favor of those who are staying in a seminary common to several dioceses, yet with the clause: with the consent of the respective Ordinary. The Bishops of the Province of Quebec obtained the same grace.

The faculty of dispensing in age, as is clear per se, is subject to the same limitation.

(delta) n. 1551, p. 239, col. 1.

It is pleasing here to add a double case.

John and Paulina, unbelievers, entered legitimate Matrimony. Paulina, after obtaining from a civil judge a sentence of divorce on account of John's adultery, is converted to the Catholic Faith. It is asked whether, since Paulina is not held to cohabit with John on account of his adultery, she ought to interrogate him before she can contract with another?

I respond yes; for the end of the law of interrogation has ceased only partially, since the unbeliever is to be interrogated so that it may be known both whether he wishes to be converted, and whether he wishes to cohabit peacefully; and in the case in which he is converted, cohabitation cannot be refused on account of adultery committed in infidelity, which is washed away through Baptism.

Cornelius, a Jew, took Iphigenia, an unbeliever, as wife. A sentence of divorce having been issued by a civil judge, Cornelius after some time embraced the sect of the Episcopalians, and, Iphigenia having been interrogated in vain for cohabitation, contracted with Lucia, a follower of the same sect. But after several years Iphigenia is converted to the Catholic Faith; afterward, however, Cornelius and Lucia also desired to be received into the bosom of the Catholic Church. - It is asked whether they can be received without being separated? - Resp. "Those are not lacking who opine¹ that then also the privilege of faith is valid when someone passes from infidelity to non-Catholics and is validly baptized. This can deservedly be defended for cases in which all things required by divine law as regards interrogation have been fulfilled, and in which no license of the Roman Pontiff or declaration of divine law is needed, at least so that the new Matrimony may safely be held as valid. But in the remaining cases it seems that the privilege of faith cannot be acknowledged, at least in such a way that the new nuptials may safely be held as valid. But that license, or dispensation, or declaration of divine law, that new Christian certainly would never obtain from the Roman Pontiff, and the faculties of dispensing granted by him to others are restricted to converts to the Catholic Faith."² After I had written these things, I learned from a certain Bishop that the Matrimony of Cornelius with Lucia, in the year 1876, had been declared valid by the Holy See. Cf. n. 1551. p. 238, col. 1 under 4.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 3.

1 Cf. Perrone in Giovine, T. I. p. 528. Ballerini on Gury, T. II. n. 759 under 8° at the end. | 2 Feije, de Imp., n. 502.

(epsilon) n. 1591. q. 1°. R. 1°, p. 258, col. 1.

It is pleasing here to transcribe the declaration of which there is question. Namely, the following doubts having been proposed: "1. Can an unbelieving man, who while still placed in infidelity knew, either publicly or privately, but illicitly, some woman, whether faithful or unbelieving, after receiving Baptism validly and licitly contract Matrimony with the blood relative of that same woman known, if this blood relative received Baptism either before or after the intercourse of which there is question? 2. And insofar as affirmatively (concerning which there is great doubt), could the same unbeliever converted to the faith after the death of his legitimate unbelieving wife contract Matrimony with the blood relative (up to the 4th degree inclusive) of that same deceased wife, whether that blood relative received Baptism before or after the death of the aforesaid unbelieving wife?" S. C. responded: To 1. negatively. To 2. negatively.

The decision given by S. C. O. to the second doubt of the Archbishop of Quebec, Feria V, September 16, 1824, agrees with this; in it the following reason of the decision is given: "For affinity in itself and physically considered must be distinguished from the impediment of affinity. Moreover affinity in itself is contracted even by unbelievers; because even among unbelievers it is true that a man and a woman through carnal intercourse become one flesh. Therefore, as is had in cap. Fraternitatis, 35, question 10, if they shall have been one flesh, how could someone near to one of them pertain to one, unless he pertained to the other? ... This only is the difference, that affinity does not bring forth an ecclesiastical impediment for unbelievers, but it does for the faithful. Therefore, since through Baptism there is not removed from Balbina the affinity already physically contracted by her with Paul, this very affinity radically inhering in her, which for the same unbeliever was not an impediment to contracting, becomes an impediment after Baptism, by which she is subject to the Church, and consequently subject to its laws."

(zeta) n. 1598. q. 5°. R. 1°, p. 262, col. 1.

EXTRACTS.

1. From the Letter of I. Cardinal Antonelli, February 28, 1874, to the Archbishop of Oregon.

... S. C. of the Holy Office, Feria IV, May 11, 1864, wrote back to the Bishop of Natchez: "that proclamations can be made in mixed nuptials which are contracted with Apostolic dispensation, but with the mention of the religion of the contracting parties suppressed."

And when in the month of May of the year 1871 it called back for examination the Acts and Decrees of the Provincial Synod of Smyrna, this S. Congregation of Propaganda Fide decreed: "the proclamations which are premised in Matrimonies are not to be made in mixed marriages, except when they seem necessary and opportune, in the judgment of the Ordinary, for detecting impediments, and with mention of the religion of those who are to contract nuptials omitted."

2. From the Letter of the Same Cardinal Franchi, September 28, 1874, to the same.

After those things which this same S. Congregation was writing to Your Excellency under the day February 28 just past, concerning the authenticity of the letters of the same S. Council of the day July 3, 1847, in that which pertains to proclamations in mixed Matrimonies, you asked again how this can be composed with the Note which appears in the Baltimore Ritual printed in the year 1866, p. 189. But the matter will be easily explained if you observe that that Note was affixed to the Ritual without this S. Congregation knowing it. ... I shall add also that in the aforesaid letters it is not simply read, as the Note reports, "that proclamations be made even when there is question of mixed Matrimonies," which words would contain an absolute precept, "but since this publication of banns ought to be held as having the place of a caution and as a prudential remedy, no sufficiently firm reason seems to stand in the way why proclamations should be made even when there is question of mixed Matrimonies." From this it is clear that the Note is to be rejected from a double head. Therefore, all hesitation being set aside, hold what long ago was signified to you, namely, that proclamations can be made also in mixed marriages which are contracted with previous permission of the Church, with mention of the religion of the spouses however suppressed, but only when, for detecting impediments, if any there are, the Ordinary in the Lord shall have judged them necessary and opportune. ...

3. From the Letters of the Same Cardinal Franchi to the Archbishop of Baltimore, January 30, 1875.

... It is certain that the Holy See in these most recent times has declared that proclamations can be made in mixed nuptials which are contracted by Apostolic dispensation.

(eta) n. 1606. b), p. 266, col. 1.

These things are confirmed and illustrated by the following words, which I took from an Instruction of S. C. de P. F. given to the Archbishop of San Francisco in California from the resolution of the Holy Office on Feria IV, December 14, 1859, and kindly communicated to me. "Perhaps the case could be excepted in which, with the lapse of time, Missionaries and Faithful being lacking in the aforesaid territory, others had come, especially if they were non-Catholics, and knowingly or unknowingly had begun to contract Matrimonies without the form of the Council being observed, bringing the past and published law into desuetude; since the Tridentine law, although territorial, nevertheless affects men, and where they either are lacking, or bring it into desuetude by general non-observance, the sanction of the same would be urged in vain."

(theta) n. 1606. f), p. 266, col. 2.

I said: for a month, as is clear from the Resp. of S. C. Off., Feria IV, given on the day July 1, in the year 1863, to the Most Rev. O'Connell, Bishop of Grass Valley in California, and kindly communicated to me. Namely to question II: "The same Eminent Fathers declared: When access is difficult and not safe, and it is unknown when the Pastor can be had, and it is foreseen that he will be absent from the place for a space of at least one month, and there is no other who may supply the place of the Pastor, the Matrimony is valid without the presence of the Pastor, the form of the Council however being observed insofar as possible, namely by employing at least two witnesses."

(iota) n. 1612. R. 2°. p. 272, col. 1.

Therefore "in practice," says Feije,¹ "the Matrimony could not be held as invalid without recourse to the Apostolic See." - Nevertheless I cannot fail to say that the opinion which denies validity seems to me much more probable. Namely I adhere to the opinion which holds the Tridentine law as both territorial and personal at once, as the Instruction to the Archbishop of San Francisco in California has it, given by S. C. de P. F. from the resolution of the Holy Office on Feria IV, December 14, 1859, and kindly communicated to me. Behold the words of the said resolution: "Once promulgation has been made, and its observance remaining, the law affects the territory, so that, adequately speaking, it is local and personal, as is confessed by all; insofar as local, it affects the territory and obliges those who are to be joined there in Matrimony; but insofar as personal, it obliges those who, having domicile or quasi-domicile in a place where the Tridentine Decree has been published and is in force, would wish to contract in another place where it does not urge." These things also seem to be confirmed from the New York case, January 25, 1873.²

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 4.

1 De Imp., n. 338. | 2 Acta, T. VII. p. 545.

(kappa) n. 1622, p. 278, col. 2.

I. Unbelievers are bound: 1° directly by all impediments of divine law, whether positive or natural; 2° indirectly by the following impediments of ecclesiastical law, which directly affect the faithful person with whom they are about to contract: - disparity of cult; - consanguinity; - legal relationship; - affinity from conjugal intercourse; - public honesty from ratified Matrimony; - crime from homicide alone³ (n. 1593), from homicide perpetrated by the faithful person after adultery (n. 1596), and, according to several, from adultery alone⁵ (n. 1594); - vow; - Order; - age; - servile condition, abduction, fear, if the faithful person is ignorant of the servile condition of the other party, is abducted, is compelled by fear, and this either because these impediments contain a privilege in favor of the baptized person. - That clandestinity does not affect them even indirectly is a sufficiently common opinion (n. 1612. q. 1°. 1) before R. 1°).

II. Baptized unbelievers are bound by all and only those ecclesiastical impediments which either 1° arose in them after Baptism, or 2° rest on a natural bond already existing before Baptism, such as certainly is that which exists from consanguinity, and (see n. 1590. q. 1°. R. 1°) from affinity contracted licitly or illicitly. But, from the Resp. of S. C. Off., April 19, 1837,¹ such is not that on which the impediment of public honesty is founded, whether from betrothals or from ratified Matrimony. On account of parity of reason I opine that this Response holds also as regards legal relationship. - But they are not bound by impediments which arise from another fact placed before Baptism, as I argue by parity from the Response which I allege on p. 260, col. 1. Note.

III. It is controverted: - 1° whether unbelievers contracting among themselves are bound by impediments which are not of divine law, whether natural or positive, but are constituted by civil power (n. 1574. q. 1°), - by consanguinity in the direct line beyond the 1st degree, and in the 1st degree of the collateral line, - by affinity in the 1st degree of the direct line from conjugal intercourse, - by fear; - 2° whether an unbeliever is indirectly affected by public honesty from betrothals and by spiritual relationship. Sanchez denies, against others,² because these impediments are a relation, arising from a bond, not natural, but one which has been constituted by the law of the Church alone; but a relation cannot be contracted by one party without being contracted by both. Since, therefore, a relation which arises from the law of the Church alone cannot be imposed on an unbeliever, the consequence is that he (also in the case in which he is afterward baptized) is not bound by these impediments. De Angelis³ agrees with Sanchez at least as regards spiritual relationship, namely when a faithful person baptized (or, I add, held) the child of an unbeliever.⁴ - Sanchez also denies⁵ (although on account of ecclesiastical custom he assents to the opposite opinion) that an unbeliever is even indirectly affected by affinity from illicit intercourse, as being that from which (he says) no natural bond arises. This reason [as is clear from annotation (epsilon), p. 394, col. 2] is not admitted by S. C. Off.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 5.

3 Sanchez, L. 7. D. 78. n. 5. | 4 In St. Alphonsus, L. VI. 1087. | 5 In those species of this impediment which require two acts, e.g., adultery and promise of Matrimony, when one act (e.g., adultery) has been placed by two unbelievers before Baptism, and the other (the attempted Matrimony or promise of Matrimony) after the Baptism either of both or of one, the impediment does not subsist. The reason is that the impediment cannot arise except from both acts placed at the time when at least one delinquent is subject to the Church. Thus Sanchez, L. 7. D. 79. n. 43 against others. 1 Collect. p. 379. n. 875. | 2 L. 7. D. 60. a. n. 7. D. 65. n. 7. | 3 V. S. L. 4. T. 11. 39. | 4 Since for contracting this relationship it is required that the one baptizing or receiving be baptized, it is clear that an unbeliever baptizing is not bound by it. | 5 L. 7. D. 65. n. 12.

(lambda) n. 1623, p. 279, col. 1.

But note that this quasi-ordinary faculty cannot be invoked except for cases in which the faculty expressly delegated does not belong to the Bishop,¹ which indeed belongs to our Bishops for more frequent cases, and does not require all the conditions which the quasi-ordinary one demands. The reason why the quasi-ordinary power then cannot be invoked is that there can be no place for the presumed or tacit will of the Pontiffs, on which it is founded, where the express will is clear. The Acta, T. 14, p. 155 sq., contradict.

The things which we have said concerning occult impediments sometimes dispensable by the Bishop are also applied by some to public impediments.

"This opinion," says St. Alphonsus,² "I think scarcely ever can have place in practice, because, when the impediment is public, the reason of scandal ceases, if the spouses desist from such a Matrimony; indeed, especially for avoiding scandal, they are held to desist from the nuptials." - See also the celebrated Feije,³ where it is reported that the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition judged that opinion to be false and temerarious.

But what if there is question of an impediment public in its nature, but by accident occult to others, e.g., concerning the impediment of public honesty from occult betrothals? There is a twofold opinion. - See the reasons for each in the same Feije.⁴

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 6.

1 Feije, de Imp., n. 634 at the end. | 2 L. VI. 1122. | 3 Ib. n. 633. | 4 Ib. n. 638 sq.

(mu) n. 1623, § end, p. 279, col. 1.

Concerning the meaning of these faculties note the following:

1° The 6th faculty of Form I (p. LXX), insofar as it regards converts from heresy or infidelity, is to be understood concerning those converted heretics and unbelievers who entered not just any fornicarious unions, but those which, according to the customs of the regions or of the unbelievers or heretics, had the form and appearance of Matrimony. Thus S. C. O. in Feije.¹

The same faculty, just like the 2nd among the Extraordinary D (p. LXXIII), as regards the words: "in simple and mixed degree," understood 1) concerning equality and inequality of degrees, in the case of mixture of unequal degrees, comprehends not the same degree mixed with some nearer one, but with some more remote one only. Feije.² 2) Understood concerning multiplicity of impediment, it comprehends both the same degrees multiplied³ (see above, n. 1583. q. 2°. R. 2° § end. p. 253, col. 2, and n. 1588, § But it can), and the impediments of consanguinity and affinity joined together.⁴ This is also clear from the response of S. C. Ing., June 15, 1875, to questions 1 and 2 of the Vicar General of St. Louis: "Bishops who enjoy the quinquennial faculty of dispensing in the 3rd and 4th of consanguinity and affinity in simple degree, and mixed only; and in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th, but not in the second alone, as regards future marriages, can dispense in the 3rd and 3rd, in the 4th and 4th, in the 3rd mixed with the 4th; and also in the 3rd and 4th mixed with the 2nd, whether the degree arises from one stock or from a multiple stock, once the matter has been spoken of with His Holiness."⁵

The same faculty insofar as it regards Catholics not converted from heresy or infidelity holds only for Matrimonies to be contracted; but no difficulty arises from this for our Bishops, since they can also dispense in nearer degrees, both as regards those already contracted and those to be contracted. See p. LXXIV. Fac. Extr. E.

2° The 7th faculty of Form I, p. LXX, cannot per se be extended to the impediment of public honesty from ratified Matrimony. I said: per se; for since to our Bishops there is granted the faculty of dispensing even in the first and second degree of affinity of the transverse line, and this includes public honesty, no difficulty arises from this for them.⁶

3° The 8th faculty of Form I, p. LXX. - The loss of the right of asking the debt indicated in this faculty is that which is induced by adultery. See n. 1647. III. 1°. Cf. Feije.¹

4° N. 29 Form I, p. LXXII. - The words: "nor can he use them outside the boundaries of his diocese" are to be understood not only concerning those who have domicile or quasi-domicile in the diocese, but also concerning vagi existing in the diocese while the dispensation is granted. But it is necessary that he to whom the dispensation is granted exist at that moment - not indeed at the moment when it is handed over for execution, but - at which it is granted, in the diocese of the one dispensing. See Acta.² But today it is certain³ that the one dispensing himself [(Z) p. 412] does not have to be in the diocese while he dispenses. But this clause or these words are not to be understood as implied "in faculties which are granted to Bishops by the Apostolic See, unless they have been expressed or it is otherwise clear from the mind of the Supreme Pontiff, or unless the subject matter requires it."⁴ But the faculty of dispensing concerning the impediment of mixed religion, from the mind of the Supreme Pontiff, is granted with that clause.

5° It must be carefully observed that our Bishops do not have the faculty of dispensing in the impediment of disparity of cult in the case of Matrimony with a Jewish man or woman, nor in this same impediment or in the impediment of mixed communion with Italians, concerning whom it is not clear that they have altogether abandoned Italian domicile. See p. LXXIV. n. 8. 4.

6° A Bishop cannot use faculties granted for the forum of conscience, as is that which is listed on p. LXXIII under n. 2, for the external forum; and conversely Feije thinks it must altogether be said that he cannot exercise faculties obtained for the external forum for the forum of conscience, even if the impediment is occult to others.⁵

7° Whether in Matrimonies contracted nullly among Catholics, in which the Tridentine form was not observed, our Bishops can dispense, because in their faculties there is not found the clause that the faculty is to be understood only of Matrimonies nullly contracted "before the Church," is disputed. There are those who, after a distinction has been made between places in which Matrimony was not invalid on account of clandestinity, and those in which it was also invalid on account of this, opine that in the former case the Bishop can use the faculty, provided the union is of such a kind in which the circumstances indicated under 1° are verified; but in the latter case he cannot use the faculty; indeed Feije thinks that even in the former case one must abstain.¹ Beware, however, lest you confuse this question with that concerning which we treat at n. 1630. q. 2°. 1634. q. 2°. q. 8°.

8° Can a Bishop use faculties with those who rashly neglected proclamations, or who in bad faith, or knowing the impediment and the invalidity of the Matrimony because of it, contracted nullly? - It must indeed be affirmed, both if there is question of a Matrimony formerly contracted in heresy or infidelity, and if there is question of a Matrimony contracted by Catholics, one of whom was in good faith, and therefore celebrated with the proclamations premised or dispensed; for if these are rashly neglected, good faith is judged to be lacking, even if knowledge of the impediment is not had, as Feije proves.² But the doubt turns on the case in which each was in bad faith, and there are those who deny the Bishop's power. But others, as Feije, admit it, provided either one now repents, and the things which in their place were indicated, and other things necessarily to be expressed, are expressed in the supplicatory letter. See the reasons in the same Feije.³

9° From the letters of S. C. de P. Fide to the Vicar Apostolic of Pondicherry, dated June 7, 1853 (Collect. p. 378. n. 855), it is clear that "the words of Indults are to be understood as they present themselves," and therefore "through a faculty of dispensing," e.g., "concerning the impediment of the second mixed with the first, there has not also been bestowed an Indult of dispensing when the first is found mixed with the third." Hence also faculties cannot be extended from one impediment to another, although less grave, unless this is contained in that one, nor from one species of impediment to another, nor from one line to another, nor from contracted Matrimony to one to be contracted. - Feije.⁵

10° Can our Bishops dispense in impediments diverse in species, by which the same persons about to marry are bound, while the faculty of dispensing such impediments is bestowed on them either in diverse indults (e.g., in the Faculties Form I, n. 8, p. LXX, and in Fac. Extr. E. n. 2, p. LXXIV), or in a diverse tenor or period of the same indult (e.g., in Fac. Form I. n. 8 and 9)? Resp. No without a special Indult, as is clear from several responses both of S. C. de Prop. Fide itself and of its Prefect communicated to me by several Bishops. Cf. Collect.¹ The same holds if, with an impediment either diriment or impedient in which our Bishops can dispense, another concurs for which recourse must be made or is made to the Apostolic See. Namely, in this case it does not suffice to have recourse to Rome for this one and to be dispensed in the other by the Bishop, but he lacks his power of dispensing, as is clear both from the Rescript of S. Pont., April 15, 1853, and from the necessity of expressing all impediments in the same supplicatory letter, as was said at n. 1625. q. 2° R. 5. Cf. Feije.² - Resolve the contrary if the Bishop dispenses in accumulated impediments not by force of faculties, but by quasi-ordinary law. Therefore S. Paen., June 30, 1873, responded that "the faculty of dispensing, only for the forum of conscience, in Matrimonies to be contracted concerning the occult impediment of affinity from illicit intercourse, when all things are prepared for the nuptials and there is no time for recurring to the Apostolic See, is exercised validly and licitly, even if the aforesaid impediment" (of affinity from intercourse both with the mother and with the sister of the bride) "is multiple."³

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 1.

1 De Imp. n. 625. p. 527. | 2 Ib. n. 626. 3°. 630. c. | 3 Ib. n. 630. c. d. | 4 Ib. c. | 5 Past. Bl. für N. Amer. 9th year, p. 85. | 6 Tr. Mechl. de Matr. n. 101.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 2.

1 De Imp. n. 615. N. 5. | 2 T. II. p. 670. | 3 From the Resp. of S. C. I. to the Synod of Maynooth. | 4 Acta, T. II. p. 671. | 5 De Imp. n. 624. 1°.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 3.

1 De Imp. n. 625. p. 528, 529. | 2 Ib. n. 264. | 3 Ib. n. 625. p. 530. | 4 Ib. | 5 Ib. n. 630. a.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 4.

1 p. 485, n. 1012. | 2 n. 631. | 3 Past. Bl. für N. Amer. 15th year, p. 108.

(nu) n. 1625. q. 2. R. 5°, p. 280, col. 1.

St. Alphonsus writes, L. VI. 1136, that Benedict XIV in the Brief Etsi matrimonialis declared "that the Matrimony is indeed illicit, but not invalid, provided the relationship is not of the first or second degree of consanguinity or affinity." But Benedict XIV does not say this concerning the second degree, but in § 6 expressly reports that after St. Pius V invalidity was restricted to the 1st degree concealed. Thus also St. Alphonsus, ib. 1030. H. A. Tr. XVIII. 86.

If the nearer degree is not the first, declaratory letters must be obtained concerning it, so that the Matrimony may be licit, or so that scandal may be avoided, i.e., letters by which it is declared that concealment of the nearer degree does not obstruct the Matrimony.

(xi) n. 1717, p. 344, col. 2.

A fourteenth excommunication has been added, as is clear from the following Response of S. Paen.

Most Eminent and Most Reverend Lord,

Certain priest confessors in the gracious City humbly set forth that at this time there is being circulated through it a certain sheet containing a program printed in type with annexed tickets of association, by which the faithful are solicited to adhere to a certain Society instituted or to be instituted for this end, that whenever the Apostolic See shall be vacant, the Roman people may concur in the election of the Supreme Pontiff. ... But those who give their name to this society must expressly declare, ... that they assent to the doctrines stated in the program, and they contract an obligation before two witnesses that they will give effort so that such doctrines be propagated, and the Society itself be extended. Therefore, when those approach Sacramental Confession who have existed as promoters of this depraved Society, or who have subscribed, and the other adherents and supporters, the aforesaid confessors, so that they may be able rightly to absolve them, ... request the solution of the following doubts.

1. Whether all and each giving their name to the aforesaid Society, or promoting it, or favoring it in any way whatsoever, or adhering to it, incur by the very fact the penalty of major excommunication?

2. And insofar as affirmatively, whether an excommunication of this kind is reserved to the Roman Pontiff?

S. Paen., all things set forth having been considered, and the nature and end of this society inspected, a report of the premises having been made to Our Most Holy Lord Pope Pius IX, and the same Most Holy Lord approving, responds to the proposed doubts as follows: To 1. Affirmatively. To 2. That an excommunication latae sententiae reserved in a special manner to the Roman Pontiff is incurred. (August 4, 1876.)

(omicron) n. 1226. q. 2°. R. 2°. p. 10. col. 2.

Benedict XIV speaks otherwise in de Syn., L. XIII. c. 19, not mentioning the Decree of S. C. Conc. of the year 1576 approved by Gregory XIII, by which it is declared: "that the Pastor is held to minister to his parishioners laboring under plague only the Sacraments necessary for salvation, namely Baptism and Penance." But he adduces the Response to the postulate of the Vicar Apostolic of Julia Caesarea (Algiers), by which Viaticum also and Extreme Unction are declared to be ministered by them in time of plague. l. c. n. 1. 10.

(pi) n. 1235. 3°. p. 14, col. 2.

In a Capuchin case it was asked: "Whether the custom of saying Agnus Dei and Domine non sum dignus in the vernacular language is to be eliminated." ...? And S. R. C. responded: "The custom is to be eliminated," May 23, 1835, ad 5, n. 4748. - And most recently as regards the aforesaid custom S. R. C., in a Ratisbon case, April 15, 1880, ad 6, declared: "The formulae which pertain to the administration of the Sacraments must be expressed altogether in the Latin language, except the responses of the godfather and godmother in the Sacrament of Baptism, and the words of consent of spouses in the Sacrament of Matrimony." I believe the priest must recite in the Latin language, but the recipients can recite in the vernacular, as the same De Herdt notes, Pr. Rit. Rom. p. 32 under 9, from Martinucci.

(rho) n. 1240. 6°. p. 16, col. 2.

To the question: Of what Sacraments, and of which ones, are deaf-mutes capable? Craisson responds, Manuale, n. 3239-3241.

"Either they have been taught according to modern methods, or not; if the former, they can validly receive all the Sacraments just like other men, indeed also licitly receive them (Order excepted), provided no other impediments are present.

"If the latter, the Sacrament of Baptism can validly and licitly be conferred on them" and Confirmation, "at least if, insofar as can be done, they are taught Christian doctrine.

"As regards the other Sacraments: concerning Matrimony Innocent III speaks thus (cap. Cum apud sedem 23 de spons.): 'If such a person wishes to contract, it cannot or ought not be denied to him, since what he cannot declare by words, he can declare by signs.'

"It is also supposed by most Doctors that other Sacraments can be administered to the deaf and mute, if in them the required dispositions appear, or nothing appears from which they are to be judged indisposed; but almost all those Doctors wrote before the time in which the modern method of teaching the deaf and mute was invented. Moreover, by many experiments it seems to be established that the deaf and mute who are not taught by this new method have no true knowledge of God and of the rules of morals, and a fortiori do not arrive at the knowledge of the mysteries and supernatural truths; consequently they cannot have any human will of receiving the Sacraments, nor the dispositions necessary for receiving them with fruit (see Montaigne, Recherches sur les sourds et les muets). Nevertheless the Ritual of Belley, at the end of the first volume, thinks that the Sacraments of Confirmation and the Eucharist can be conferred on them, since these were administered of old (and still today in the Eastern Church) to children; but it says that Penance and Extreme Unction can be conferred on them under condition; as regards Matrimony, that the question was solved by Innocent III above reported; but that it is not lawful to admit them to Orders, because they are irregular.

"Although we would not wish to reject those who think the aforesaid solutions are to be embraced, nevertheless in practice we would not dare, especially, to join in Matrimony mutes and deaf persons not taught according to modern methods. For although Innocent III says that they ought not to be repelled from Matrimony, if they wish to contract, nevertheless the Pontiff supposes or requires that they wish to contract; but in this, today especially, is the difficulty: since, as we have already said, from many experiments it seems to be established that such deaf and mute persons, not taught, do not have a moral will, on account of defect of moral cognitions; but the contract of Matrimony is a human and moral act, for which true human will is required." (Yet not all agree with Montaigne. See Philosophia Christ. of Sanseverino, reduced into compendium, T. I. n. 82. 3°.) "Whatever may be the case concerning Matrimony, Penance and Extreme Unction are not to be administered to deaf and mute persons not taught except under condition."

(sigma) n. 1251. II. p. 28. col. 1.

Wherefore a physician and a midwife, in the case in which they are compelled to administer Baptism, are bound under grave obligation beforehand, insofar as it can be done, to cleanse the hands from blood and other filth, or to pour clean water from some vessel. Capellmann, Past.-Med., p. 138.

(tau) n. 1267. 3°. p. 34. col. 1.

"In necessity," says De Herdt, Prax. Rit. Rom., p. 36, "if a layman or a cleric inferior to a deacon baptizes, he must abstain from all the ceremonies. But if a priest or deacon baptizes, then, if the infant brought to the church is so gravely sick that danger threatens lest he die before Baptism is completed, he must only ask, if time is given, whether anything has been attempted concerning Baptism, and immediately, all other things omitted, baptize him absolutely or conditionally in baptismal water, and, if this has not been prepared, in common water, pouring water three times, or even once if necessity urges, upon the head in the form of a cross. Then, if the infant survives, he anoints him with chrism on the crown, imposes the white garment, and gives the lighted candle, as otherwise. When these things have been done, if he is still living, the ceremonies which precede Baptism are to be supplied; but the two omitted infusions are not to be repeated, if Baptism was conferred by one infusion. But the priest must beware of saying or doing anything when he has seen that the infant is entirely dead, because the ceremonies of Baptism were instituted for the living only, and not for the dead.

"If a priest in necessity baptizes outside the church, he must omit all the ceremonies which precede Baptism, even if the infant seems about to live so long; but when Baptism has been conferred as above, he anoints the infant on the crown with chrism, if he has it, imposes the white garment, and gives the lighted candle. But when the infant has recovered, he is to be presented in the church; and there, and never outside the church, the omitted ceremonies which precede Baptism are to be supplied." S. R. C., 23 Sept. 1820, n. 4422. 4572; Baruffaldus, tit. 11. n. 59.

(upsilon) n. 1286. q. 2°. p. 47. col. 1.

In the Brief to the Patriarch of Antioch of the Melchite Greeks, dated 8 May 1822, Pius VII forbids anyone, whether publicly or privately, to defend or maintain the opinion of the schismatics which teaches that the form of the Eucharist "does not consist in the words of Jesus Christ alone." Bullar. S. C. de Prop. Fide, T. IV. p. 388 sq.

(phi) n. 1298. III. p. 52. col. 2.

"If," says De Herdt, Prax. Rit. Rom., p. 80, "the Most Holy Sacrament is to be administered at the same time to several sick persons in the same place, whether as Viaticum or from devotion, as can happen rather often in hospitals and in contagious diseases, then the antiphon Asperges me is said only once, and meanwhile the sick are sprinkled; likewise the verse Adjutorium, the prayer Exaudi, the Confiteor, Misereatur, Indulgentiam, and Ecce Agnus Dei are recited once, just as these also are said only once in church, however many there are to be communicated; then, under the respective form, Holy Communion is given to each sick person; and finally the prayer Domine sancte is recited once, and the blessing is given once."

It is said: in the same place; for the things said do not hold if the sick are separated by intervals of places, even of the same house, in such a way that, precisely by reason of the interval, by no external sense can they - I do not say perceive - but be able to perceive the prayers and actions of the minister, and according to the common estimation of men the minister would not be judged to be acting with them. The case would be if different sick persons were lying in different stories of the same building, or even in the same story indeed, but in rooms so separated from one another that one could in no way be judged joined with the other. Thus Past.-Bl. für Nord Amer., 12th year, p. 22. 23.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 8.

1 In the plural: vestri, vestrorum, etc. | 2 fratribus, etc., in place of fratri.

(chi) n. 1298. IV. p. 52. col. 2.

To give the ablutions is not the office of the priest, but of the sick person or of another. - To avoid the difficulty joined with throwing the ablutions into the fire or into the sacrarium of the church, the following seems to be an easy method of washing the fingers: the purificator is placed beside the little vessel of water; the thumb and index finger of the right hand are held over the purificator beside the same little vessel; with the fingers of the left hand water is sprinkled upon the index finger and thumb of the right hand, as much as is sufficient to wash them, and then the index finger and thumb are immediately wiped with the purificator. If this method is observed, nothing is to be cared about the remaining water or wine left in the little vessel. See Baruffaldus, tit. 26. n. 186. De Herdt, Pr. Rit., p. 75.

(psi) n. 1300. III. p. 55. col. 1.

"This lamp is to be kept not above the doors of the church, nor in a side place, but before the tabernacle, or in the middle before it, so that those entering may notice where they must adore." De Herdt, Prax. Rit. Rom., p. 60. S. C. R., 22 Aug. 1699. n. 3376. 3825.

"If several lamps are hung, it is fitting that they be of an odd number, as is prescribed in the Ceremonial of Bishops." Id. ib., p. 61.

(omega) n. 1305. q. 4°. p. 59. col. 2.

If the cough were so vehement that it seemed about to excite vomiting, Communion, as is clear of itself, would have to be abstained from, or at least deferred until that more vehement cough has ceased. Capellmann, Past.-Med., p. 154.

(Alpha) n. 1305. q. 4°. p. 59. col. 2.

The distinguished Capellmann, Past.-Med., p. 154 sq., judges that case must be distinguished from case. In place of a rule he has these things: If the sick person has suffered much more frequent vomitings through shorter intervals of time, and then after a longer space of time, which according to the circumstances can be shorter even than six hours, has been free from vomiting, in doubt it can be presumed that the stomach, now somewhat settled, will not at once again be excited to vomiting from the slight irritation through the Sacred Species. Thus those who are laid low by cholera are very frequently accustomed to vomit; but if these have been free from vomiting for 2, 4, or certainly for 6 hours, it will be a sign that the condition of the sick has been so changed that the danger of vomiting is much less to be feared.

On the contrary, if vomiting has taken place through irregular intervals, now longer, now shorter, and the general condition of the sick person has not been changed, Holy Communion cannot be given to him, even if he has been free from vomiting for the space of six hours. Thus, for example, they would have to be free from vomiting at least for 12 hours who have strangulated hernia, or who labor under cerebral diseases, or who are laid low from a wound of the brain, or from a disease of the kidneys, or from peritonitis, that is, inflammation of the bowels. Say the same of pregnant women while they suffer the vomiting proper to them. In particular cases the physician, if he can be had, should be consulted; or, when Viaticum is in question, some solid or liquid food, or even water, should be given by way of experiment to the sick person who has taken absolutely nothing after the last vomiting. After Communion has been administered in these circumstances, let the sick person remain quiet and drink nothing, or, if he must drink something to swallow the Sacred Species, let him drink a little. Cold water will be best, or, if it can be had, water cooled with ice. Ice itself especially is an excellent remedy against vomiting, and one so harmless that, even without consulting a physician, it can be used for this end. But the most advisable thing in this case will be that the sick person swallow ice in little pieces which scarcely exceed the size of a hazelnut.

Concerning the so-called morning vomiting, the same author, p. 156, remarks these things. It arises from chronic catarrh of the stomach or throat. Those who are affected by it, and drinkers are affected before others, in the morning, after they have risen from bed or have thrown something into the stomach, are tormented as though by no slight suffocation; and, when the stomach is empty or almost empty, they vomit a certain quantity of phlegm with some remains of food. To these, indeed, if outside the case of Viaticum they are to communicate, nothing remains except that they rise very early in the morning and not approach the church before they have freed themselves by their vomiting.

Pregnant women also are accustomed to be tormented by morning vomiting, whether fasting or after the first food has been thrown into the stomach, and this in the first and second, or even the third or fourth, month of gestation. These, as is clear of itself, outside the case of Viaticum, must defer Communion until the danger of vomiting has ceased.

(Beta) n. 1305. q. 7°. R. 1°. p. 59. col. 2.

What if someone had fallen into madness while he was existing in mortal sin? A case could be if someone, having contracted delirium tremens from long-protracted drunkenness, entirely deprived of reason, without a lucid interval, had been reduced to extremities.

St. Alphonsus answers, L. VI. 302, that Communion cannot be administered to this man if it is certainly presumed that he fell into madness utterly impenitent, that is, not even attrite.

(Gamma) n. 1305. q. 7°. R. 2°. p. 60. col. 1.

Yet it must be seen in what degree the semi-fatuous are; for there are some who can be equated with those deaf-mutes who, as St. Alphonsus says, L. VI. 303, with Holzmann, are not endowed with any discretion whatever, and whom you would with equal right call dull and semi-fatuous; these, like those deaf-mutes, will often be able to communicate.

(Delta) n. 1305. q. 7°. R. 3°. R. 4°. p. 60. col. 1.

It is also advisable to give to those delirious persons, and generally to those who are destitute of their senses, a little water or wine together with the Sacred Species or immediately after this has been put into the mouth, since these persons easily retain solids, and therefore also the Sacred Species, in the mouth. Thus Capellmann, Past.-Med., p. 152. 153.

(Epsilon) n. 1305. q. 8°. R. 8°. p. 60. col. 1.

Except if the paroxysms followed one another at intervals so brief that there was almost no moment at which danger of them was absent. Yet in this case the disturbance of reason progresses at so swift a pace that they are to be treated as mad or semi-fatuous. There are also some who have learned by experience that paroxysms befall them precisely in church very often, or even always. Communion can be administered to these at home. Capellmann, Past.-Med., p. 153.

(Zeta) n. 1329. p. 81. col. 1.

"By the misfortune of the times," writes the distinguished Van de Burgt, De celebr. Miss., n. 218, "and by the malice of men, it happens not infrequently that a sacrilegious injury is inflicted upon Catholic churches through crimes other than those which have been set forth thus far. And we must touch upon these briefly. Suppose that temples have been used as the place of quarrels and tumultuous fighting, for the exercise of the worship of heretics or schismatics, as a lodging for soldiers, as taverns, as workshops, as stables, and that neither report nor fame has spread of any one of the crimes previously mentioned being perpetrated there. Such a church has by no means need of the reconciliation which the sacred laws mention. Nevertheless, it seems very congruous to the sense of piety and religion that the temple, before the Most Holy Sacrifice is immolated in it, first be expiated from the stain of profanation by the designated rite of reconciliation." See St. Alphonsus, L. VI. 367. That this is accommodated to the mind of the Holy See is shown by the Responses of S. R. C. in Carpet., 3 March 1821, apud Van de Burgt, ib., and 27 Feb. 1847 in Tolent.

(Eta) n. 1335. p. 86. col. 2.

Sacred song can be of very great help to sacred worship, since it is able both to express the very text of the Sacred Liturgy with the greatest perfection possible, and to excite the minds of the hearers to devotion, and to impress the signification of the liturgical words more deeply upon the hearts of the faithful. But when song of this kind is such that it serves for expressing and exciting human passions rather than pious affections, and keeps the minds of the faithful intent upon the music rather than upon the words of the Sacred Liturgy, it will hinder true devotion more than it will help it. This was the reason why Holy Mother Church, while on the one hand she has never not taken upon herself both the care and patronage of song, on the other hand has always attempted, insofar as it could be done, to turn away abuses and dangers from it. Wherefore she has never omitted to prescribe by whom, what, and in what manner singing is to be done in churches.

a. By whom it is to be sung. - Besides the priest, the choir ought to sing. Mention is also made sometimes in the Sacred Liturgy of the people singing together, for example at the Kyrie eleison and at the Litanies, while in the consecration of a church a procession is made around the church with the Relics. In sung Masses the choir holds the place of the people, as the minister does in private Masses. The singers, and musicians, as completing a liturgical action, have a distinct place in the church; they must attend processions clothed in a surplice and not in secular dress; they are forbidden to converse, make noise, or turn their back to the altar; they are commanded to perform their office with a recollected and devout mind, and to believe with the heart and profess by deed what they believe; or at least not to lead a notoriously depraved life, nor to be non-Catholics. Conc. Prov. Col. II. 20; Conc. Prov. Prag. III. 1; Conc. Prov. Vien. IV. 6.

It is resolved. - Universally women are to be excluded from the choir, and a fortiori those who sing on stages. Thus demands the ancient custom of the Church, the liturgical law commanding women to be far from the service of the altar, the dignity of ecclesiastical song, and the edification of the faithful. Conc. Prov. Col. l. c.; Westmon. I. Decr. XVIII. n. 20. Except if there is question of churches of Nuns; a case of necessity; a long-standing custom.

b. What is to be sung. - 1) Nothing is to be sung except those things which the Church prescribes, or at least, says De Herdt, P. I. n. 112, "a long-standing, reasonable, and praiseworthy custom, with the consent of the Ordinaries of places, tacit or express, has approved." 2) The rubrics of the Missal, Tit. XVI. 3, indicate those things which are to be sung or intoned by the celebrant. 3) "By the choir are sung the introit, Kyrie eleison, Gloria, gradual, Alleluia, tract, sequence, Credo, offertory, Sanctus, Agnus Dei, communion, and whatever things are to be answered to the celebrant." De Herdt, P. I. n. 111. For the sake of brevity nothing is to be omitted, and the Mass is to be sung as it stands in the Missal. Thus answered S. R. C., 5 July 1631. 5. n. 776. 923, concerning Masses of the dead. Hence, according to the decrees of S. R. C., either Masses of the dead are not to be celebrated, or all things are to be sung which regard the prayer of suffrage, such as also are the sequence Dies irae and the offertory; yet in the sequence the singers can omit some strophes. In a conventual Mass in which the choir is bound to sing the Symbol, it is to be sung entire and in an intelligible voice; the verses cannot be supplied alternately by the organ, nor meanwhile can the celebrant proceed with the Mass. The Kyrie, Gloria, gradual, sequence, Sanctus, and Agnus Dei can be supplied alternately by the organ; but wherever the organ is used, the beginning and end, and those things which require an inclination and genuflection, are always to be sung. - The singers can and must begin the introit only when the celebrant reaches the altar. The Sanctus is sung after the preface, but Benedictus qui venit according to the Ceremonial of Bishops is reserved until after the elevation of the Most Holy Sacrament; this disposition of the Ceremonial is to be observed in Pontifical Masses, and is laudably observed in others. But if the Benedictus in other Masses is sung before the Consecration, under the elevation, or rather afterward, the Tantum ergo or some antiphon proper to the Most Holy Sacrament can be sung. The communion is to be sung after the celebrant has consumed the Most Holy Blood, during the distribution of Holy Communion; but if this does not take place, during the purification.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 9.

1 There is no need to say that this does not apply where, from the obligation of singing the sequence, as in parish churches, they are to be taught to sing it insofar as circumstances permit.

c. In what manner it is to be sung. - Plain and firm song, which is called Gregorian, if it is performed rightly and decently, is heard more gladly by pious men and is deservedly preferred to the other, which is called harmonic or musical. Benedict XIV, c. unus, 19 Feb. 1749, § 2. Students of Seminaries are to be taught the discipline of this song from the salutary prescription of the Council of Trent, Sess. 23. c. 18. de Ref.; and the Fathers of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, n. 380, judge it greatly to be desired that its rudiments be explained and practiced in parish schools. - As to the matter of the tone in which Gospels, Epistles, Chapters, etc., are to be sung, the Ceremonial of Bishops, L. I. c. 27, sends one to other books, the Pontifical, Sacerdotal, Directory of the Choir, and similar books, and describes only the tone of the prayers; having described it, it adds: "It is regular that in both," namely solemn and simple, "the prayers be recited in a grave and fitting voice, with some pause interposed at the end of each clause, and especially in the final clause, and with decorum and gravity." - It is clear of itself that Graduals, Antiphonaries, etc., endowed with the approval of the Holy See are to be preferred.

Although Gregorian chant is preferred, nevertheless musical chant and also the use of musical instruments has been permitted and received by use, and abuse alone is reproved. Benedict XIV, const. cited, §§ 3. 6. 7; Ferraris, V. Musica, n. 1. 2.

I have said that musical chant is permitted. Yet it is by no means consonant with the mind of the Church that it be used regularly; for by the very fact that she prefers Gregorian, she shows sufficiently that musical chant is to be used only exceptionally. Moreover, musical chant was forbidden to Nuns by several Pontiffs, and expressly by Clement VIII, 12 July 1592, apud Craisson, Man., n. 5180. Finally, the Ceremonial of Bishops, L. I. c. 28. n. 13, also has these things: "In Masses and offices of the dead we use neither organ nor music, which they call figured, but firm chant, which also during the time of Advent and Lent" - feasts and the third Sunday of Advent and the fourth of Lent are not comprehended in this rule, according to the same Ceremonial - "it is fitting to use." (52) p. 430.

I have said further that abuse alone is forbidden. Wherefore musical chant must be grave, decorous, sweet and pious, distinct, intelligible. Cer. Ep. L. I. c. 28. n. 12; Circular Letters of the Eminent Cardinal Vicar of His Holiness, 18 and 20 Nov. 1856, apud Anal. J. P., month of May 1857. Hence in it these abuses are to be reproved and guarded against: 1° lest whether in organ or song anything lascivious or impure be mixed in, such as music is to be kept away from churches; lest profane melodies be introduced, or those which breathe levity, or by excessive noise dissipate rather than foster and excite affections of piety; lest theatrical, military, or worldly songs or modulations be transferred to sacred concerts; so that from sacred music there be removed whatever is alien from its scope, and serves only the curiosity or pleasure of the hearers, or even the fame of the authors. 2° Lest the text be notably altered by mutilating, putting before, putting after, and altering the words and the sense of them, and by adapting them to the modulation in such a way that the music does not seem to serve the words and sense, but these to serve the music; which S. R. C. judged to need reform, 21 Feb. 1643. 1. n. 1285. 1432. For this reason Benedict XIV prescribes in the cited Constitution, § 9, that care is to be taken that the words which are sung be perfectly and plainly understood. 3° Lest those things which are sung under the introit, offertory, elevation, and communion be so prolonged that the celebrant, by waiting, is compelled to interrupt the Sacrifice and to linger distracted longer at the altar, so that music does not serve the Mass, but the Mass serves music. S. R. C., 21 Feb. 1643. 2. n. 1285. 1432; Benedict XIV, Const. cited, § 13.

The Ceremonial of Bishops, L. I. c. 28. n. 1, says that it is fitting that the organ be played while in Mass the Most Holy Sacrament is elevated, but with a graver and sweeter sound. De Herdt, ib. n. 113, 114.

Concerning the use of instruments, Benedict XIV notes these things in the cited Constitution: "If instruments sound continuously, and only sometimes ... rest for some moments, so that they may offer free space for hearing harmonic modulations and rippled ejaculations of voices ... but otherwise overwhelm and bury the voice of the singers and the sound of the words, the use of instruments of this kind is vain and useless, indeed forbidden and interdicted." Which instruments are forbidden, see apud the same Benedict XIV, Const. cited, § 11.

(Theta) n. 1366. q. 1°. p. 111. col. 2.

"Per accidens, however," cautiously remarks the distinguished Van Egeren, de Conf. Sacr., p. 88, "an integration of this kind" - namely, of a Confession in which a sin was omitted without fault - "will have to be completed immediately after the cessation of the impediment, namely in danger of thereafter lacking the occasion of a new Confession; as not rarely happens among the sick, who here and now, on account of the violence of the disease, are excused from material integrity, but afterward, without grave inconvenience, are able to supply the omissions before approaching death. Therefore the confessor, having heard the Confession of such a sick person which is formally only integral, should indeed render him altogether quiet; but at the same time, if it can be done, let him exhort him concerning the obligation of soon supplying the omissions, when, the violence of the disease being calmed for the time, his state conveniently permits this and the danger of death continues to exist. But so that the aforesaid exhortation may be brought to effect with the sacramental seal uninjured, the confessor, if the circumstances allow it, should address the sick person in this or a similar way: My son! now be quiet and with greatest confidence commend your spirit into the hands of the Lord, who, according to His infinite paternal goodness, does not require of you at present a further Confession of your sins, etc. Indeed it is necessary that, when the state of your illness has changed, you accuse in a new Confession the sins now omitted, if you conveniently can; but do not be disturbed in any way about this obligation. I shall return to you shortly and often, and then you yourself should ask again to confess, if you conveniently can; or rather, if it pleases you, permit me here and now to admonish you concerning that obligation and to help you in fulfilling it, when I notice that it urges."

(Iota) n. 1383. p. 128. col. 1.

To the preceding resolutions I also add these things from the distinguished Van Egeren, De Satisf. Sacram.

"This is most worthy of observation for a confessor, yet it is not attended to often enough: namely, that the devil is the con-cause of many causes of sin, so that the greater part of sins, especially those which are admitted by persons more fearful, is not to be judged to have been perpetrated without any instigation of the demon. And hence the practice of those is very much to be approved who, with other causes sometimes less attended to, once or twice impose for penance principally remedies specially adapted to the assault of the demon, for example, repeated invocation of the Most Holy Names of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph, imploration of the help of the Guardian Angel, veneration of the Crucifix, sprinkling with holy water, carrying blessed images, etc."

To the question: What penances, considering present-day morals, are generally useful for all? he responds: "Those penances generally are useful for all which, while small mortifications or modest alms are not altogether always excluded, nevertheless consist principally in vocal prayers or other not unusual works of piety, provided these very things, insofar as it can be done, are adapted according to the diversity of cases to punish and amend sins salutarily and fittingly. But such adaptation will often be made with success through determination of the mode of execution, for example, of kneeling, of extension of the arms, etc.; - through determination of the time, for example, as often as perhaps you have relapsed; each morning or evening; at the time of Mass during the elevation of the Sacred Host and Chalice; - through determination of the place, for example, in church before the Most Holy, before an image of the Crucifix, of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of St. Joseph, before the bed before going to sleep, etc.; - but above all through determination of the intention with which they are done, while nevertheless guarding against confusion and always seeing what the capacity of the penitent can do, what it refuses to bear. And indeed, the highest importance of positively determining an intention of this kind will become more clearly evident even from these few examples, namely:

"To the proud man enjoin a prayer to be recited devoutly with the express intention, that by being lifted up you may never provoke the divine indignation, like the proud Pharisee; or another time, that God may be propitious to you, as to the humble Publican; or another time, if there is question of one more devout, that some humiliation may befall you from men, etc.

"To the avaricious man, a prayer with the express intention, lest by accumulating temporal goods you lose eternal goods; or another time, that you may obtain the grace of Christian mercy toward the poor, etc.

"To the lustful man, a fervent prayer to the most pure Heart of Jesus, or to the Blessed Virgin conceived immaculate, that not so many men be damned eternally by reason of lust; or another time, that henceforth you may serve God with a chaste heart and please Him with a clean heart; or again, that you may be filled with a holy shame of yourself, who, created to the image of God, have plainly assimilated yourself to uncomprehending beasts, etc.

"To the drunken man, a prayer for all who have seen you drunk, that they may not imitate your evil example; or another time, for your household family, that, with God providing, it may not miserably perish by your scandal and wasting, but by the Consoler of those who mourn and the Protector of the innocent; or again, that the Savior thirsting on the Cross may preserve you from the outcry of everlasting thirst in hell, etc.

"To the thief, a prayer that the paternal Divine Providence may rather send some misfortune upon you than permit you again to stretch out your hands to the goods of others; or another time, that, with the help of the grace of God, you may vividly believe that the thief will be excluded from the kingdom of heaven, or that his sin is not forgiven him unless what has been taken away is restored, etc.

"To the distrustful man, a prayer before the Crucifix, that, considering the mercy of God, you may be raised up into hope and firmly trust that God, on account of Christ, will be propitious to you; to which prayer afterward for some time a pious aspiration of this kind should be joined: O Cross of Jesus, my one hope, hail; or another time, which we read was more frequently recommended by St. Alphonsus and St. Leonard: O my Jesus! mercy; or again: O Mary, show thyself to be a mother. Hail, my life, sweetness, and hope! etc.

"To the blasphemer, a prayer lest your house be deprived of heavenly favor and blessing, as experience testifies happens so often by reason of blasphemy; or another time, lest you learn further on earth those infernal canticles which the damned will sing eternally; or again, that, with the grace of God exciting and helping, as soon as perhaps you relapse, under a humble striking of the breast you may proclaim: Praised be Jesus Christ, or Hallowed be thy name, etc.

"To the tepid man, a prayer lest the merciful God begin to vomit you, neither cold nor hot, out of His mouth, etc.

"But it is not to be passed over here in silence that the discreet choice itself of various prayers or pious exercises is intimately connected with a determination of intention of this kind; by this the attention of the penitent is accustomed to be much strengthened, while now these, now those, now certain, but few, are imposed together according as the thing calls. Suppose, for example, the case in which to one approaching Confession on the feast of Pentecost there seems to be enjoined a devout invocation of the Holy Spirit, that He may kindle in his heart the fire of His love, exceedingly diminished by venial sins. What prayer will you choose for this end? Indeed you will be able suitably to choose that any prayer proper to this Feast be recited once, for example, the Litany of the Holy Spirit; but, to excite the greater attention of the penitent, you will sometimes more aptly choose that the prayer which is found after the Litany of the Holy Spirit in prayer books be recited daily through the octave.

"Moreover, there are almost innumerable prayers or other works of piety from which this choice can be made." See, for example, n. 1387 of this Compendium. "Several will occur finally" to one reading "spiritual books, or investigating the mind of holy confessors, who have committed to writing their salutary thoughts on this matter. Thus, for example, St. Alphonsus in Praxis, n. 14, while inquiring rather diligently, among penances generally useful, recounts in the first place: to be joined to some congregation; and certainly, as I note in passing, you will find no penance more useful than this. ... Thereafter the same Holy Doctor, l. c., testifies: 'I have been accustomed mostly to enjoin, or at least to advise for those who were not accustomed to use it, the penance of reciting the Angelic Salutation three times morning and evening, with the supplication: My Mother, help me today, lest I sin against God.' To not a few it has also often seemed good to enjoin for penance: for some time, and especially in the event of a base temptation or of a relapse into lust, five Pater and Ave in honor of the five Wounds, with the successive veneration of each, namely, with kissing. Still, according to all, it will be of very great profit to impose that for some time each morning a firm purpose of vigorously fighting such a vice on that day be renewed before God."

It is useful besides to note three things expressly:

A. Concerning suffrages for the faithful departed. - That suffrages for the dead constitute matter generally apt for all, which may sometimes be enjoined for sacramental satisfaction, the Roman Catechism is a witness of the highest authority. Moreover, for penitents accustomed to confess venial sins only, a penance of this kind will then especially become most useful when it is imposed under some mode by which they may better understand that venial sins also merit a great punishment before the divine Judge, for example under this or a similar mode: say five Pater and Ave for those faithful departed who are paying penalties in purgatory because of voluntary distractions in prayer; or another time, for those just souls which are tormented by the fire of purgatory because of disobediences toward parents, because of sins of the ears or tongue, because of tepidity in approaching the Sacraments, etc.

B. Concerning the Way of the Cross. - The exercise of the Way of the Cross is one thing when public, which at fixed times is accustomed to be performed solemnly in churches; another when private, which is customarily done separately by the faithful. The imposition of the first exercise for the most part can be accommodated sufficiently to all; but the imposition - I do not say the persuasion - of the second exercise will not rarely be less accommodated to those who thus far have had no or little use of it. - But when these things have been attended to by a prudent confessor, concerning the eminent aptitude of the Way of the Cross for penance it will be useful to recall these words, most worthy of mention, from the Mystical Discourse of St. Leonard: An easier satisfaction for sins is also furnished by the frequenting of the Way of the Cross, both on account of the value of the indulgences, because of the gaining of which a penance less than just can often be imposed, and on account of the memory of the Lord's Passion, which is satisfactory in the highest degree, as Blosius says, and also because it is a most noble alexipharmacum preserving against further falls. And hence, with as much exertion and efficacy of spirit as I can, I ask and beseech all confessors that they show to their penitents the very great treasure of the Way of the Cross, enjoining in place of penance a visitation of the Way of the Cross to be completed so many times, for example; I for now would say: once or twice; and when this has been done, let them set down the scruple whether the other imposed penances are proportionate, since a single visitation of the Way of the Cross very abundantly supplies many other penances.

C. Concerning penances for priests confessing. - A confessor receiving the Confession of a priest, upon which not only this man's salvation but also that of many can happen to depend, should before all else recall in his mind that he will render to God a terrible account if, overcome by human respect and having let go the holy liberty of spirit and speech, he exercises this office almost cursorily, as though it were the simple office of absolving, with some small penance indifferently chosen. Namely, without doubt, he must direct the penitent priest, who, otherwise than the rest of the faithful, is accustomed to have no Ananias outside Confession, as much as will seem necessary, to perfection and perseverance in the first charity of the priesthood received, by opportune admonitions, and no less by penances efficaciously salutary and suitable to him. But he will be able to choose penances of this kind sometimes from works which are generally useful for all, sometimes from works specially appropriated to the priestly state, such as, for example, are judged:

"a) Prayers from the Roman Missal to be said at will on certain days: for the priest himself; for the petition of tears; for the remission of sins; for repelling evil thoughts; for asking continence; for asking humility, patience, etc.

"b) A brief meditation concerning the very great utility of daily mental prayer of at least one quarter-hour, without which, says St. Alphonsus, it will be most difficult to be a good priest.

"c) Prayers for deceased priests who are paying penalties in purgatory because of defects committed in the hearing of Confessions, in the visitation of the sick, in the instruction of children, etc.

"d) Prayers for oneself and other priests associated in the priesthood in the same parish, that, united by the bond of charity, you may collaborate with fruit in the salvation of souls.

"e) Prayers for resuscitating in you, according to the admonition of the Apostle, the priestly grace received in the Ordination of the presbyter.

"f) Examination of conscience concerning your priestly duties.

"g) A fitting preparation for Mass, with an added act of charity and contrition; or a fitting thanksgiving with the joined prayer: O good and sweetest Jesus, etc., for gaining the indulgence.

"h) To be read ... from the Roman Pontifical, if it is at hand, some part of the prayers of the Ordination of a presbyter; or from the Roman Ritual, concerning the care and visitation of the sick, etc.

"i) A prayer for asking the grace of fervent devotion toward the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, the Most Blessed Virgin, the mother specially of the ministers of her Son, etc.; or sometimes also a prayer for obtaining the grace of receiving the Sacraments of those departing this life, of which, if you consult experience, not a few priests have been deprived, with divine Providence so permitting."

And many similar things, very easy for a zealous confessor, as is fitting, to find.

(Kappa) n. 1401. q. 8°. p. 139. col. 1.

"A case reserved in the diocese of the confessor is not withdrawn from reservation for this reason, that it is not reserved in the diocese of the penitent." Thus Syn. Pl. apud Maynooth, 1875, n. 86. p. 84, Dublin, 1877.

(Lambda) n. 1618. III. p. 277. col. 1.

It is said: it renders the use of Matrimony illicit. "But if there is question of consequent perpetual impotence, per se, or with the danger of pollution excluded, those acts are licit which it is lawful for spouses to perform without the intention of completing copula. Which those acts are, see n. 1651. 1°. 3°. But it is clear that the danger of pollution is much more easily present in those about whom there is question here, precisely because they must perpetually abstain from copula; and this is especially true when there is speech of the touches set forth in the cited n. 1651 under 3°. See L. VI. 1095. § Dixi 2."

(Mu) n. 1619. 1°. p. 277. col. 1.

In the man, moreover, impotence is present from defect, or even from the extraordinary size of the virile member; and likewise from such contusion of both testicles that neither is fit for its office. In the woman it is present from defect of the uterus or vagina; likewise from constriction, which can be the cause of perpetual and also temporary impotence; for constriction does not always impede fecundation, and can often be removed through the dilating means of the medical art, Van de Burgt, de Matr., n. 202, or is often removed through repeated experiment of copula. Capellmann, Past.-Med., p. 116.

Besides these natural impotences existing from organic defects, there are also accidental impotences arising from moral defects, namely from frigidity or excessive heat. In a case of impotence of this kind, it must especially be investigated whence that state draws its origin, so that, when the cause is removed, if it can be done, the impotence may be removed. The cause of that frigidity can be malefice, but often, as several observe, not malefice but other causes produce this state. Zacchias, the celebrated Roman physician, teaches, Qu. medico-legales, L. III. T. I. q. 5, that impotence by reason of moral defect often arises either from shame and modesty, or from excessive love, or from hostile hatred of the wife. It can also arise from the excesses of a lustful life. - Moreover, what Bouvier notes, in Sext. Prec., the cause sometimes is deformity in the wife, a foul-smelling breath, negligence in dress and cleanliness, hatred, contempt. Van de Burgt, ib.

Those to whom the name Hermaphrodites or Androgyni is given are not kept from nuptials by reason of impotence if they possess all things which are necessary for completing the conjugal act; on the contrary, impotence is ascribed to them where they lack the necessary organs; concerning which, and therefore also concerning the sex to which they pertain, it is necessary that physicians or surgeons pronounce judgment. Van de Burgt, ib., n. 203. Most so-called Hermaphrodites, says Capellmann, Past.-Med., p. 116. 117, when subjected to the examination of physicians, have been discovered truly to enjoy only one sex and to have only the appearances of the other.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 10.

1 This is not always perpetual, and it can happen that it is only relative, or even not impeditive of fecundation; see n. 1618, Note.

(Nu) n. 1628. q. 7°. R. 2°. p. 285. col. 1.

Dispensations for the forum of conscience conceded by quasi ordinary power, or not by force of faculties of the Holy See, do not necessarily have to be fulminated in Confession, unless the Ordinary has placed this condition. Feije, de Imp., n. 757. § fin.

It can sometimes be foreseen that the parties, or one or the other of them, cannot be induced to make Confession; and this same thing sometimes happens in dispensations of the external forum. In a case of this kind, prudently, in the petition itself by which the dispensation is requested, it is asked that the clause not be added. Feije, ib., n. 746. 757.

(Xi) n. 1698. q. 1°. p. 327. col. 2.

Instruction of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide

Concerning the manner to be observed by the Bishops of the Federated States of North America in cognizing and defining criminal and disciplinary causes of Clerics.

Although the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, recognized by the Apostolic See, decreed that a certain form of judgment, already previously sanctioned by the Provincial Council of St. Louis, was to be observed in the criminal causes of Clerics to be handled by the ecclesiastical courts of the dioceses of the Federated States of North America, nevertheless experience has shown that the established order of judgment is not everywhere equal to forestalling the complaints of those whom it may happen to be punished with some penalty. For often in these last times it has happened that presbyters condemned by judgments begun in that manner and by sentences rendered, especially those removed from the office of Missionary Rector, have complained here and there about their Prelates and frequently have also brought recourse to the Apostolic See. But it must be lamented that not rarely it happens that in the acts transmitted several things, and those necessary, are lacking, and, all things having been weighed, grave doubts often arise concerning the faith to be had or denied to the documents brought forward in these causes.

The Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide, seriously weighing all these things proposed to it, judged that some remedy must be prepared for these inconveniences, and that justice must be consulted in such a way that neither innocent Clerics be afflicted with penalty by injury, nor those guilty of some crime escape deserved penalty on account of a less correct form of judgments. And this indeed would be obtained by an easy arrangement, if it prescribed that all the prescriptions wisely issued by the Sacred Canons for ecclesiastical judgments, especially criminal ones, to be begun and completed, were altogether to be observed. But, considering in mind that in the aforesaid regions of the Federated Orders this cannot easily be observed, it judged that provision should be made in such a way that at least those investigations concerning the admitted crime be accurately performed which are judged altogether necessary before one comes to imposing penalty.

Therefore, with Our Most Holy Lord Leo XIII, Pope by Divine Providence, approving, in the general meetings held on the 25th day of June 1878, the Sacred Congregation decreed, and strictly commanded, that the individual Sacred Antistites of the mentioned region, in a Diocesan Synod to be convoked as soon as possible, select five, or where because of peculiar circumstances of things so many cannot be had, at least three presbyters from the most approved and, insofar as can be done, skilled in Canon Law, by whom a certain judicial council, or, as they call it, a Commission of investigation, is to be constituted, and that they set one from among those chosen over the same. But if for some grave cause the Diocesan Synod cannot be held immediately, five or three, as above, ecclesiastical men are meanwhile to be deputed by the Bishop to the office in question.

The chief office of the Commission thus constituted will be to recall to examination, duly to cognize, and thus to furnish help to the Bishop in defining them, the criminal and disciplinary causes of presbyters and other clerics, according to the norm soon to be proposed. Moreover, those chosen ought to take care for this purpose that investigations be accurately made, that testimonies be brought forward, and that from the one presumed guilty all things be sought out which are judged necessary for eliciting the truth, and that certain or sufficiently firm arguments be supplied for rendering a just sentence safely and prudently.

But if there is question of the removal of some Rector of a mission, he cannot be cast down from the office entrusted to him unless at least three members of the aforesaid Commission have been employed by the Bishop for cognizing the cause and their counsel has been heard.

The chosen Counselors will remain in the office received until the next celebration of the Diocesan Synod, in which either they themselves are confirmed in office or others are designated. But if meanwhile, by death, resignation, or another cause, the prescribed number of Counselors is diminished, the Bishop, outside the Synod, should substitute others in the place of those lacking, as was established above.

In cognizing causes, especially those in which there is question of definitively removing a Missionary Rector from his office, the judicial Commission will follow this manner of acting.

1. Let recourse not be had to the Commission of investigation unless first, when the cause moving to final deposition has been clearly and precisely set forth by the Bishop, the Missionary Rector himself prefers that the matter be referred to the Council rather than that he spontaneously resign from his charge and office.

2. When the matter has been referred to the Council, let the Bishop commit to his Vicar General, or to another priest deputed by him for this purpose, that he compose in writing a relation of the cause, with an exposition of the investigation performed up to that point and of the circumstances which specially affect the cause or the demonstration of the same.

3. Let him indicate a suitable place, day, and hour for coming together, and this by letters to the individual Counselors.

4. By letters also let him call the Missionary Rector about whom there is question to the appointed place and day for holding the Council, setting forth, unless prudence forbids it, as in the case of an occult crime, the cause moving to deposition fully, and admonishing the Rector himself that he prepare in writing, supported by his own reasons, a response to those things which have been related in the exposition of the cause, either already previously orally, or then in writing.

5. When the Counselors have assembled at the time and place prefixed, let the Bishop prescribe silence to be observed concerning those things which are heard in the Council; let him admonish that the investigation is not a judicial process, but is held for this end and is to be made in this way, that one may arrive at the knowledge of truth by the more diligent method possible, so that each Counselor, all things having been weighed, may be able to form as accurately as possible an opinion concerning the truth of the facts on which the cause rests. Let him also admonish that nothing be done in the investigation which exposes either themselves or others to danger of damage or grievance, especially lest a place be given to an action for libel, or to any other process before a civil tribunal.

6. Let the relation of the cause be read before the Council by the Bishop's official, who will also respond to the questions to be made by the president or by the other counselors through the president, for obtaining a fuller knowledge of the matter.

7. Then let the Missionary Rector be introduced into the Council; he will read the response composed by himself and will likewise respond to the questions, with full faculty being given to him of bringing forward all those things, within the time nevertheless to be determined by the Council, which can contribute to his proper defense.

8. If it happens that the Missionary Rector whose cause is being treated does not wish to approach the Council, let him be called again by letters given, and let a congruous space of time for appearing be prefixed for him; and if on the appointed day he shall not have appeared, provided that he has not been legitimately impeded, let him be considered contumacious.

9. When all these things have been duly completed, let the Counselors confer their counsels together, and, if the greater part of the Counselors judges that the facts are sufficiently established, let each Counselor set forth his sentence in writing, with the reasons on which it rests expressed; let the sentences be compared; let the acts in the Council be drafted by the Bishop's official, signed by the president in the name of the Council, and together with the sentences of the individuals in full be referred to the Bishop.

10. But if further investigation seems necessary or congruous, on that very day, or on another appointed by the Council for coming together, let the witnesses be called whom the Council has judged opportune, after the Missionary Rector has also been heard concerning those whom he himself has wished to be called.

11. Let the individual witnesses for the cause be examined separately and accurately by the President and by others through the President, the Missionary Rector being absent at first. An oath is not required; but if the witnesses themselves do not refuse, and declare themselves prepared to confirm by oath, when occasion is given, those things which they have declared, let a notation of a disposition or declaration of this kind be made in the acts.

12. With the witnesses consenting, and the prudence of the Council directing, let the testimony be repeated before the Missionary Rector, who himself also, if he wishes, may question the witnesses through the President.

13. In the same manner in which the witnesses for the cause are examined, let the witnesses against the cause be examined.

14. When counsels have then been compared, let it be done as above, n. 9.

15. But if the witnesses are unwilling or unable to attend the Council, or their testimony renders the matter not yet sufficiently clear, let at least two from the Council be deputed, who, going to the witnesses, inspecting the places, or in whatever other way they can, seeking light for resolving doubts, may bring the relation of their investigation to the Council, so that no way be left unattempted for cognizing the truth morally certainly before one comes to the pronouncement of sentence.

16. Let all the acts brought forward in the occasion of the judgment be carefully kept in the Episcopal Curia, so that in the case of appeal they may conveniently be exhibited.

17. But if it happens that appeal is made from the sentence pronounced in the Episcopal Curia to the Archiepiscopal Curia, let the Metropolitan proceed by the same method in the cognition and decision of the cause.

JOANNES CARD. SIMEONI, Pr.

JOANNES BAPTISTA AGNOZZI, Sec.

Given at Rome from the buildings of the aforesaid Sacred Congregation, on the 20th day of July in the year 1878.

(O) n. 1719. 8°. p. 346. col. 1.

It is said: "Tertiaries ... living in community." For "women leading a virginal or celibate, or chaste widowed, life by express vow and under the said habit, ought to enjoy the privileges by which the brothers of the Order whose habit of the third rule they wear enjoy." Thus Leo X, Const. Dum intra, issued in the Fifth Lateran Council, Sess. 21.

(P) n. 1759. 8°. p. 366. col. 1.

The Holy Doctor cautiously said: "although others deny this." - And in truth it seems that it must be denied from the Roman Resolutions apud Lucidi, de Visit. SS. Liminum, T. II. p. 567 under 18. "In Carchien.," he says, "the Bishop was refusing to confer Orders upon descendants from Indians, or, as they call them, from Mulattoes. The Sacred Congregation, to which the examination of this matter was committed, on the 18th day of February 1863 judged: 'That supplication is to be made to the Most Holy, that the Bishop of the Indies be warned that Indians and Blacks, and all descending from them by paternal or maternal line, are to be kept away by no right from the reception of Orders and of the other Sacraments, provided they have the other things required by the Sacred Canons.'" Lib. 33. decret. pag. 19.

(Sigma) n. 1614. q. 1°. R. 2°. p. 274. col. 1; p. 398. col. 1. under 4°.

Responses of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition to the postulates of the Synod of Maynooth, Wednesday, 2 May 1877.

To the first postulate concerning the proper Pastor of those contracting Matrimony:

"The Eminent and Most Reverend Lords decreed to the first postulate:

"Let it be answered: that the Pastor of the domicile or quasi-domicile of the contracting parties is to be held as the proper Pastor.

"But for discerning quasi-domicile, the rule handed down in the Instruction of Wednesday, the 7th day of June 1867, to be transmitted to the Bishops of Ireland, is to be attended to.

Instruction.

"For the Bishops of England and the Federated States of America, Wednesday, the 7th day of June 1867.

"For constituting quasi-domicile, which in these cases must necessarily be acquired, two things are required together: namely, habitation in that place where Matrimony is contracted, and the intention of remaining there for the greater part of the year. Wherefore, if it is legitimately established that either both or one or the other of the spouses has the intention of remaining for the greater part of the year, from that first day on which these two things concur together, namely both an intention of this kind and actual habitation, it is to be judged that quasi-domicile was acquired and that the Matrimony which is consequently contracted is valid.

"Nevertheless, if the aforesaid intention is not established, recourse must be had to the indications which are at hand and which produce moral certainty. But in an occult and internal matter it is difficult to have indications of this kind which make the judge secure; hence it is that the rule confirmed by the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XIV must especially be applied, namely that it be inspected whether before Matrimony, for the space of at least one month, either both or one or the other dwelt in the place of Matrimony. But if it is found that this was done, from a presumption of law it must be judged that the intention of remaining for the greater part of the year existed, and that domicile was acquired, and consequently that the Matrimony is valid. But if this presumption of law, which arises from monthly habitation, is destroyed by contrary proofs, by which it is certainly and clearly established that the aforesaid intention existed in no way, then it is manifest that a contrary judgment must indeed be rendered, because presumption must yield to truth. Moreover, it is also manifest that actual habitation is unfit for producing quasi-domicile if someone stays in that region after the manner of a vagus and itinerant, and not as one truly and properly dwelling, namely in the manner in which the rest are accustomed, who in the same place have a true and properly so-called domicile."

To the third postulate concerning the sense of the clause of the Faculties: outside the limits of the diocese, it was answered:

"The words of the related formula are to be understood in this way: that the Bishop can use the faculties toward his own subjects who are actually, at the time when they are to be dispensed, staying in the proper diocese, although the Bishop himself may be outside his diocese."

(T) n. 1628. q. 10°. p. 286. col. 2.

Concerning the defects of matrimonial dispensations and the sanation of them.

The things which I have handed down scattered here and there on this matter in the Treatise on Matrimony, I wish here to exhibit collected together for an easier understanding of the matter and practical use.

The defects of matrimonial dispensations, or causes of nullity of the same, are either extrinsic or intrinsic.

Extrinsic ones especially arise from a defect of power in the one dispensing, in which case a competent Superior is to be approached for sanation; from the invalidity of the fulmination, which, if it was caused by the form of the mandate not being observed, the delegate can execute again. See n. 1628. q. 5°. R. 2°. q. 17. q. 9°. What is to be observed then in certain other rarer cases pertaining to this matter, see Feije, de Imp., n. 735.

Intrinsic ones are subreption and obreption, n. 1625. Nullity arising from subreption or obreption admits a threefold hypothesis:

1°. If the dispensation was sought in the external forum alone, and a new impediment existing before the fulmination of the dispensation is detected, for that which arises only after this does not require sanation of the dispensation, or a defect to be sanated in the external forum is detected, convalidation is sought for the external forum alone. Examples: an impediment not rightly proposed; one only, although several concurred; public incest not set forth; a false final cause. But if a new impediment existing before the fulmination of the dispensation, or a defect, pertains to the forum of conscience, recourse is had for this alone in the same way in which a dispensation for the internal forum is sought when a public and occult impediment stands in the way of the nuptials, n. 1628. q. 1°. q. 2°.

2°. If the dispensation was sought in the forum of conscience alone, and a new impediment or defect also pertains to it, convalidation is asked for the forum of conscience alone. Examples: a dispensation was sought upon an occult impediment of affinity from illicit copula; when the dispensation has been obtained, the confessor understands that at the same moment, together with the impediment of affinity, incest existed between the spouses; or a dispensation was sought upon occult affinity, upon crime, and afterward it is detected that the alleged cause did not exist, or that the impediment was proposed erroneously, not well. But when an impediment or defect pertaining to the external forum has been detected, recourse is had both for this forum and for the forum of conscience, in which, that is, in the forum of conscience, the occult and public impediment will be set forth according to the things said in n. 1628. q. 1°. q. 2°.

3°. If the dispensation was sought both in the external forum and in the forum of conscience, and a new impediment or defect pertains to the external forum, a double convalidating recourse is necessary: one, namely, for the external forum, in which the new impediment or defect is set forth together with the one already previously declared; the other for the internal forum, in which all the impediments or defects already known are set forth, both public and occult. - But when a new impediment or defect pertains to the forum of conscience, convalidation is to be sought in this alone. From Feije and Van de Burgt.

Query 1° What defective dispensations can a Bishop convalidate?

Resp. 1° Dispensations granted by himself, as often as the matter newly detected would not otherwise have exceeded his power at the time at which the dispensation was granted.

2° Dispensations also granted by the Holy See, if and insofar as power of revalidating them has been granted to him. But no such power is granted to our Bishops by force of the Formularies.

In the remaining cases he cannot.

But although he cannot convalidate dispensations granted by the Holy See, nevertheless in this case he will be able himself to dispense if the dispensation sought and granted by the Holy See was upon an impediment in which he himself could have dispensed, and with which nothing occurs which requires recourse to the Apostolic See. From Feije.

Query 2° What is to be done in doubt whether the dispensation was valid?

Resp. It is to be held as valid, n. 1625.

Query 3° What if there is doubt concerning the very fact of obtaining the dispensation?

Resp. A dispensation is to be obtained, as follows from those things which were said concerning a doubtful impediment from a doubt of fact, n. 1574. q. 5°. R. 3°.

Query 4° What if the defect of the dispensation is insanable, for example, on account of defect of an impediment of natural law?

Resp. The things said in n. 1638 are to be applied.

Query 5° Are those about to marry, or, Matrimony having already been contracted, the spouses, always to be admonished concerning the defect, even a sanable one?

Resp. Apply the things said in n. 1423. q. 3°. q. 4°. n. 1556. q. 3°. n. 1639.

(T) n. 1693. p. 327, 328.

To the doubts concerning the manner to be observed by the Bishops of the Federated States of North America in cognizing and defining criminal and disciplinary causes of Clerics.

The Instruction of the 20th day of July 1878 was issued concerning cases in which an ecclesiastical penalty or censure is to be inflicted, or there is place for grave disciplinary coercion. Hence the decrees of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, n. 125, as regards the nature of Missions, and nn. 77, 108, as regards the juridical effects of the removal of Missionaries from office, were in no way innovated or weakened.

But Bishops should take care not to transfer priests unwillingly from one Mission to another without a grave and reasonable cause. But if there is question of the definitive removal of some Rector from his charge to be inflicted as a penalty for a delict, let Bishops by no means order this unless the Council has first been heard.

II. The election of Counselors is to be made in Synod after the likeness of the deputation, or canonical election, of Synodal Judges, who are chosen not by the Clergy, but by the Bishop, indeed with the counsel of the Clerics in Synod heard, although if for causes known to him the Bishop afterward should not wish to embrace it, as Benedict XIV well observes, de Syn., lib. 4. cap. V. num. 5. Hence it is discordant that in the case about which the Instruction treats, the election of these Counselors should pertain to the Clergy.

Outside Synod the election pertains absolutely to the Bishop, whom it befits to hear the vote of the remaining Counselors in the case of the substitution of someone who has failed, just as a Bishop in the case of a Synodal Judge failing ought to seek the counsel of the Chapter, but is not bound to follow it.

III. The vote given by the Council is always consultative, and the definitive sentence is reserved to the Bishop; for when the Canons say that something is to be done by the Bishop with the counsel of the Chapter or Clergy, they do not on that account induce upon the Bishop the necessity of following it, unless this is expressly provided. Hence it is rightly said in the Instruction that these Counselors furnish help to the Bishop in defining causes, but by no means that they themselves decide. But the acts of inquiry and the opinion disclosed by the Counselors are always to be inserted in the process.

From these things it is clear that the office of the Counselors is indeed judicial, since the instruction itself prescribes that they assist the Bishop in the judicial inquest as Assessors; but it is also clear that the pronouncement of the judicial and definitive sentence is reserved to the Bishop alone.

IV. By the Instruction there has not been removed from Bishops the extraordinary faculty of proceeding to suspension from informed conscience, insofar as they judge in the Lord that very grave and canonical causes concur, or of providing by some remedy, even without the counsel being heard, if by grave and urgent necessity this must be done for the salvation of souls.

It is free to each Rector to have with him before the council another Priest, to be approved by the Bishop, either for simple assistance or for presenting his remarks or defense.

JOAN. CARD. SIMEONI SACR. CONGR. Pr.

J. B. AGNOZZI, Sec.

(Phi) Tom. I. p. LX. Tom. II. n. 1340. q. 4°. p. 90. col. 1.

"The Sacred Congregation in the Meetings held on Wednesday of this month," November, "1875, ordered it to be written back ... If there is question of those who must be baptized under condition, then, for the greater ease of the ecclesiastical function, they will be able first to be heard sacramentally as to the accusation of their faults; then, after the conferral of Baptism under condition, the confessor, again taking up by summary heads with the penitent those things concerning which he has already made accusation, may absolve him sacramentally, likewise under condition."

(X) n. 1230. q. 19. p. 19. col. 1.

Lest on account of notoriety, undeservedly judged to be such, a Sacrament be publicly denied, I have judged it useful to hand down a fuller exposition of notoriety.

What the notorious is, in general, was said in n. 522, Resp. 2°.

I say that something is notorious by law by juridical proof or sentence. Here proof is understood as full, such as that is called which produces as much faith as suffices for defining controversies; for example, the spontaneous Confession of the accused made in judgment and not revoked; the depositions of two witnesses greater than every exception, etc. - Sentence in this place is understood as definitive, or one which has passed into a thing judged.

Something is notorious by fact when it is done so publicly that it cannot be concealed by any tergiversation. As that fact itself is, so this notorious is threefold: namely, notorious of a permanent fact, which continually presents itself to the sight of men, as the concubinage of one who is publicly seen retaining a concubine in his house; notorious of a fact immediately passing or momentary, as heresy publicly uttered; notorious of an interpolated fact, which is done publicly indeed, not continuously, but nevertheless is repeated rather often at intervals, as, for example, drunkenness by a drunkard.

That something be notorious by fact, it is required that it be public by reason both of place, which must be public, for example a street, and not some private house; and of time, therefore not committed at night, unless on account of the multitude of those present in the public place where the crime is committed the night seems to be equated to day; and of the multitude of bystanders; for by defect of this the crime perpetrated by day and in a public place could be equated to one admitted at night.

Fame, by reason of the notorious about which there is question here, is not that which is called fame of name, "reputation," and about which there was speech in n. 516, but fame among men, which is so called with respect not to the man made infamous, but to those among whom it prevails or is circulated, that which people say or tell; the common talk, report, saying. Therefore the notorious of fame is public insinuation or proclamation, from suspicion indeed alone, yet proceeding from a certain author; and this, in the present matter, not concerning the general quality of some man, that he is good or bad, but concerning some particular fact, for example, that Titius admitted such a crime.

Fame of this kind, or fame arisen concerning some particular fact, by reason of its origin can still be distinguished in three ways: 1° As it is the vain voice of the populace and rumor among the people, which has no certain authors nor probable causes or reasons for believing thus, "rumor; hearsay"; 2° As it arises from some malicious, suspect persons, or those seeking their own advantage and utility. Neither the former nor the latter is to be attended to; 3° As it has drawn its origin from persons worthy of faith, grave, and concerning whose advantage there is no question, or, as St. Alphonsus says, from sufficient indications, so that it appears from what reason and cause the fame had its origin; and concerning this fame alone there is speech for the present.

Fame accepted in such a way differs from rumor. For fame properly is when the whole city, or neighborhood, or the greater part of a community asserts something; but a community ought to consist of at least ten persons. But rumor is when some smaller part, for instance a half, a third, or a fourth part, speaks thus. Then fame proceeds from a certain author, for instance when it has arisen from certain and honest persons who said among the people that they had seen something and were present; but rumor proceeds from an uncertain author.

Resolves. - 1° In order that some crime be held as notorious, and this, as is required in our matter, in the reason of crime or as formally criminal, it suffices, if there is question of the notorious by notoriety of fact, that the fact be permanent or even interpolated. But if the question is about a fact immediately passing or momentary, for example, someone publicly utters heresy, from the very crime publicly perpetrated, from the very fact of heresy uttered, it is not yet established that he who perpetrated the crime, uttered the heresy, admitted the crime in the reason of crime, the heresy in the reason of heresy or as formally evil. Therefore in this case the Sacraments are not immediately to be denied, but inquiry must first be made whether, just as the fact itself, so also the formal malice of the fact is publicly certain.

2° In order that, on account of the notoriousness of an interpolated fact, for example in the case of a public customary sinner, a Sacrament can be publicly denied, it is required that perseverance in the evil custom be evident and publicly known. Wherefore the Sacrament is to be conferred if either the custom has been interrupted for a longer time, by the work of the customary sinner himself or even by some physical cause, for example illness, or nothing more has been publicly heard about it for a longer time.

3° The notorious of fame, in order to the denial of a Sacrament, is not to be attended to unless the fame, that is, the public insinuation or proclamation itself, is uniform, solid, constant, and perpetual, that is, not vague, light, or contrary, or, as Canonists have it, shaken by contrary allegations. It can be proved by two witnesses greater than every exception, deposing that they have heard it said so publicly, and indeed by the greater part of the people; for it does not suffice to depose that they heard it said so publicly, since it can happen that one alone said this publicly. Besides, they must express the certain persons, at least two, from whom they heard it, so that it may be known whether these are such that faith can be had in them. Finally, they must assign the probable causes by which the people was induced to believe: for example, because those persons, to whom faith can be had and from whom they heard it, asserted that they had seen it thus with their own eyes.

4° Before how many persons a crime ought to have been committed in order to be notorious by fact, and by how many, especially in a more populous community, it ought to be publicly insinuated or proclaimed in order to be notorious by fame, is defined rather by the judgment of a prudent man than by some general rule; compare nn. 522, 1564. But since this matter in practice is not without difficulty, and the judgment concerning the requisites for the notorious both of fact and of fame is also often arduous, in a matter of as much importance as the public denial of a Sacrament, the Ordinary is to be consulted if time permits; but if time does not permit this and the notoriety is doubtful, the Sacrament is not to be publicly refused.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 1.

1 Reiffenstuel, L. 2. T. 19. n. 11. | 2 An apt, legitimate witness greater than every exception is one who can be repelled by no legitimate exception; and if anything differs here from those, it differs only as the comparative from the positive. Reiffenstuel, L. 2. T. 20. n. 7-11. But exception is the same as exclusion, for example of a witness, judge, etc. Id. T. 25. n. 1-5; and it is called legitimate if it is granted by law. |

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 2.

1 A sentence is said to have passed into a thing judged when it has not been appealed from. Reiffenstuel, L. 2. T. 27. n. 2 sq. | 2 Cf. Schmalzgrueber, T. 10. P. 1. Tit. 1. § 1. |

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 3.

1 Lib. VI. 44. | 2 Reiffenstuel, Lib. 2. T. 20. n. 387 sq.

Appendix of Annotations

(Psi) n. 1251. I. p. 23. col. 1.

The common sense of the faithful in matters of Faith and morals, furnished with the required conditions, constitutes the passive infallibility, or the infallibility of the learning Church. - The common practice of the faithful, that is, legitimate custom, moderates the laws of the Church, n. 186. - The common use or estimation of men: 1° interprets ecclesiastical laws, as custom does, and this not rarely against the opinions of physiologists; as when, in interpreting the law of ecclesiastical fast, it holds beer, which for physiologists is food, as drink, or when, in interpreting the law of the natural fast to be observed before the reception of the Eucharist, it does not care about the drawing in of the fumes of foods in a kitchen; 2° sometimes also interprets the divine laws of the Sacraments, insofar as it shows in what signification the matter of some Sacrament is to be taken, for example water in Baptism, n. 1251. I, or wine in the Eucharist. For although some artificial wine perhaps may be true wine for physiologists, nevertheless wine from the vine, even granted that the Church had defined nothing about this matter, would be pronounced by the common estimation or use of men to be understood by the word wine. For Christ is to be judged to have used words in that sense in which the common use of men understands them. Let that text be an example, John 12. 24: "Unless the grain of wheat, falling into the earth, has died." Linz. Past. Bl.

(Omega) n. 1252. p. 24. col. 1; n. 1254. q. 4°. p. 24. col. 2.

Scented waters in which the very substance of the water has been changed are not valid matter of Baptism. Nevertheless dying infants in the case in which, on account of the resistance of unbelieving parents, etc., they cannot be baptized in another way, can and must be baptized with water varied even as to color by some mixture, which nevertheless does not change the substance of the water, by way of washing, "douche," cleansing, remedy, etc., in such a way, however, that at least part of the water flows over the head, or, if this is absolutely impossible, over some principal member of the infant. But if the matter, whether remote or proximate, which was used in the case of necessity, was doubtful, the infant, if perhaps he has recovered, should again be baptized under condition and instructed in whatever better way can be done. S. C. S. Officii, Collect. p. 116 n. 181. - The same is to be resolved if someone baptized a dying infant by wiping his forehead with his hand dipped in natural water, or with a finger or cloth similarly wet, without the water flowing or running down. Ib. p. 117 n. 182.

(1) n. 1257. IV. p. 26. col. 1.

A priest or deacon entangled in censure or irregularity, if he baptizes because of urgent necessity, is bound to do this, excepting the cases which theologians except, for example n. 1676. 1°. Excipe: b; n. 1688. 1°. Rule, in the manner of laymen.

(2) n. 1259. q. 4°. p. 27. col. 1.

This seems to be opposed by the fact that S. C. de Prop. Fide, on 2 Feb. 1804, wrote back to the Vicar Apostolic of Cochin-China, namely: "The Sacred Congregation has most fully approved the custom of this Mission concerning Baptism, that, when the Priest is absent, it is immediately administered to infants by Catechists or other approved laymen, although they are enjoying good health, concerning which you doubted; for the life of men, especially of infants, is exposed to continual dangers." Collect. p. 121 n. 197. Perhaps, however, the peculiar circumstances of so widely extended a Vicariate had great weight in this response. Thus, for example, the Synod of Suchuen expressly mentions the danger imminent to infants in this Vicariate from the custom of parents placing those recently born in the same bed with themselves. Ib. p. 125 n. 207.

(3) n. 1262. p. 29. col. 2.

S. C. de Prop. Fide on 29 Nov. 1672 declared "that it is lawful for the Pastor to baptize a child, with one of the Catholic parents consenting, even if he certainly knows that the other afterward will take care that the infant be baptized by a heretical minister; but the Catholic spouse is bound to warn the heretical spouse that the child has already been legitimately baptized." Collect. p. 122 n. 209.

(4) n. 1267. p. 34. col. 1.

The S. J. Missionaries in China had asked: "Whether all the Sacramentals are to be employed in the Baptism of adult women? The reason for doubting is the incredible modesty, zeal, and praiseworthy flight among Chinese women from all meeting with men, and not only meeting, but even sight; in which matter, unless great caution is employed by the Missionaries, enormous scandal is given to the Chinese, with the most evident danger of exposing the Christian Religion to persecution." Resp. "For a grave cause Sacramentals can be omitted in the Baptism of women. This response, however, is to be observed according to the things asked, the circumstances, and all the things expressed in them." S. C. S. O., 13 Nov. 1669, Collect. ib. n. 279 and n. 281. And thus it is easily reconciled with other Responses altogether contrary, since they were given for cases in which the circumstances set forth in the alleged doubt were not verified.

(5) n. 1284. q. 3°. p. 42. col. 2.

The controversy seems to some to be a dispute about a name, which owes its origin to the double signification of the word siligo. For the most ancient signification of this word denotes wheat of the first note, and St. Thomas seems to have had this signification before his eyes, P. III. q. 74. a. 3 ad 2, where he pronounces the validity of this matter as undoubted. But siligo, which is sometimes also called secale, also signifies that which the English call rye, the French seigle, the Germans Roggen or Korn, the Italians segala; and siligo taken in this sense is invalid matter. - Linz. P. Bl.

(6) n. 1296. q. 11°. R. 1°. p. 51. col. 1.

When the Sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist must be administered in Paschal time, before or after a Mass of Requiem, Alleluia is not to be added to the versicles. S. R. C. Jan. 29, 1712, in Senen. Acta, T. I. p. 4.

(7) n. 1296. q. 11°. R. 2°. p. 51. col. 2.

It is said in the Response that a stole of the color suited to the Office of that day is to be used. Wherefore, if the Mass does not agree with the Office, not the color of the former but of the latter is to be used in the administration of the Eucharist, which does not take place within, or before or after, Mass. The case can be given on Thursday in the Lord's Supper, and when, according to the Rubrics, the Office is celebrated of the Octave and the Mass of the Vigil or Feria. Where the custom prevails of administering the Most Holy Eucharist with white stoles to the faithful fulfilling the Paschal precept, it is to be tolerated. S. R. C. Venet., 11 Aug. 1877. Acta, T. XIII. p. 430.

(8) n. 1300. p. 54. col. 2.

That canopy can be made from cloth, whether of cotton, wool, or hemp, and from whatever woven fabric; of a color either white or fitting to the character of the time and feast. But if it is not white, in obsequies or Masses of Requiem let it be of black or violet color. S. R. C.

(9) n. 1309. q. 9°. p. 64. col. 1.

Add from the response given by S. C. de Prop. Fide to the Vicar Apostolic of Eastern Tonkin, 13 Feb. 1806, the following case. "When salt has been tasted beforehand by Catechumens in the conferral of Baptism, although the fast seems to be broken, nevertheless there is still no doubt that, after Baptism has been received, they can be admitted to Sacred Communion; indeed, they ought to be admitted. Thus altogether the Church, in whose power it is to dispense in peculiar cases from the general law of the Eucharistic fast, introduced by itself for those who desire to receive Sacred Communion outside danger of death, prescribes in the Roman Ritual, where it hands down the rite by which Baptism is to be conferred upon adults." Collect. p. 161 n. 282.

(10) n. 1317. q. 2°. Note. p. 68. col. 1.

For deceased unbelievers, however, "if they truly die in unbelief, it is altogether not lawful" to offer Sacrifice, S. C. de Prop. Fide responded to the Dominican Missionaries in China, 12 Sept. 1645. Collect. p. 188 n. 369.

(11) n. 1325. q. 7°. p. 74. col. 1. to II.

It is clear of itself that to one celebrating a sung Mass in this and similar cases the ordinary alms is to be given, which has been established for sung Masses. Thus also S. C. C., 25 July 1874. Past. Bl. für N. Am., 1881. p. 34.

(12) n. 1327. q. 7°. p. 78. col. 1.

A bination Mass can also be applied for a deceased priest-confrere by the members of a society who, by agreement, are bound to this. S. C. C., 14 Sept. 1878 in Nancien-Tullen. and Nemausen., apud Nouv. Rev. Théol., T. XI. p. 25, where also the reasons of this resolution are exhibited.

(13) n. 1331. q. 8°. p. 82. col. 1.

Among reasonable causes De Herdt, Pr. Lit., P. 1. n. 155, recounts: "necessity of the church; a gathering of priests for whom vestments of the due color are not sufficient; great solemnity, which brings it about that in less wealthy churches it is useful to use more precious vestments, if even only the cross of the chasuble is of a color conforming to the office. Besides, as several note, it is better on any day to perform the Sacred Rite in whatever color than to omit it."

(14) n. 1331. q. 18°. p. 83. col. 1.

Question. - If a priest celebrates without a minister, ought he to say the Confiteor twice before the introit? S. R. C. in Erien., 4 Sept. 1878, responded: Negatively. Gardellini, Appendix IV. n. 5627.

(15) n. 1334. 14°. p. 86. col. 2.

S. R. C. seems to have receded from the former severity as regards the singing of songs in the vernacular language. For it responded, on 27 Sept. 1864, n. 5336, and 11 March 1871, n. 5472, that this custom of singing before the Most Holy Sacrament, or in its processions, and likewise while, the Sacrament not being exposed, the divine offices are celebrated, can be tolerated and observed. Cf. Nouv. Rev. Th., T. XII. p. 241. n. 27.

(16) n. 1344. q. 8°. p. 94. col. 2.

Note: 1° The alleged cases are not to be referred to taxatively, as if others were not given in which conditional absolution can be given, but by way of example. The two rules set forth in n. 1344. q. 8°. p. 93. col. 2 are always to be kept before the eyes; if the confessor, holding the middle way between laxity and excessive rigor, prudently applies these also to other cases not recounted here, he will be safe. 2° In the case of a penitent doubtfully disposed, one must always labor, insofar as morally it can be done, that from doubtfully disposed he become certainly disposed.

(17) n. 1385. q. 7°. p. 124. col. 1.

If the forgetfulness was gravely culpable, in the following Confession, as is clear, it must be accused, as Müller rightly notes, Th. Mor., V. § 127.

I say: "if the penitent prudently presumes," etc.; for example, because he has just now confessed, or there were few penitents present.

I say besides: "if he can conveniently," that is, without much trouble and without moving the wonder of the bystanders.

Finally I say: "he would have to approach him"; not, however, outside the confessional when, for example, the confessor has already left it; for in the case there is no question of imposing or commuting a penance.

What if the confessor did not impose a penance, for example from inadvertence? If the penitent notices this before he leaves the confessional, and immediately after absolution, he ought to ask the confessor to impose a penance upon him. But if he notices this only after he has left the confessional, he is not bound to this unless he can approach the confessor immediately after absolution has been given, as was established above for Resp. 2. h.

(18) n. 1394. q. 13°. p. 132. col. 2.

On the 28th day of November 1725, "in the General Congregation of the Holy Office, when the sheet sent back from S. C. de Prop. F. to the Holy Office had been reported, containing Ordinations made by the late Most Reverend Father Lord Bishop of Laranda, Vicar Apostolic of the Western Mission in the kingdom of Tonkin, of the following tenor, namely: 1. ... 2. ... 3. ... 4. ... 5. ... 6. ... 7. If some Minister of this Vicariate goes to another Vicariate to confess his sins, and the Minister of the other Vicariate should wish to confess with him, he will not be able to absolve such a Minister, and the same conversely; ... the Eminent Fathers decreed: that the reservation under numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 7 is to be abolished." Why, then, was it to be abolished, if custom does not confer jurisdiction over a stranger?

(19) n. 1403. q. 7°. p. 141. col. 1.

Note, however, that nothing prevents a crime public somewhere from being held as occult in other places. Titius, for example, incurs excommunication reserved to his Bishop because he contracted Matrimony with Caia before a petty minister; the delict is publicly known in the place of the diocese of that Bishop in which he contracted. Titius, having left that diocese, fixes his seat in another where his delict is occult. If the fame of the delict cannot easily pursue him in that other diocese, he will be able to be absolved in that diocese, with the faculty, however, of the Ordinary of that diocese, if there also an excommunication of this kind exists. Cf. Theol. Pat., n. 309; St. Alphonsus, L. VI. 593 and L. VI. 78.

(20) n. 1410. a). 2). 3). p. 144. col. 1.

That phrase "immediately before or after" some understand morally, so that if only something physical intervenes, or the interval is so brief that it ought to be computed as nothing, the confessor is still to be denounced by force of these clauses. The common sentence, which St. Alphonsus follows, L. VI. 617, takes it strictly, that is, physically. Nouv. Rev. Th., T. XII. p. 29. n. XXIX.

(21) n. 1410. a). 4). p. 144. col. 1.

From the examples which I allege it is clear that the word "occasion" here comes in a double signification: one of opportunity, the other of motive. "In both ways," says Passerinus, "Confession can be called an occasion of soliciting, either because they offer opportunity for doing this," as in the example which I bring forward in the first place, "or even because they offer a motive from which the confessor moves himself to solicitation," as in the example which I add in the latter place. Nouv. Rev. Th., T. XII. p. 31. n. XXX.

I say at the end: "provided it is sufficiently established from indications," etc. Indications of this kind will be present if, for example, the confessor, after the sins have been heard, asks the woman where she lives, whether she is accustomed to remain at home alone, or asks some similar things; or, when he has approached for sinning, as Ballerini notes, by words or deeds he has recalled something from those things which he accepted from Confession. Theol. Pat., n. 393; Nouv. Rev. Th., T. XII. p. 34. n. XXXV.

(22) n. 1410. a). 5). p. 144. col. 1.

"But whether a confessor must be denounced who agreed with a woman that, to elude the domestics, she pretend to be sick and call him to the house for perpetrating sin? Concina and Mazzotta, l. c., affirm; likewise Fagundez apud Potestà, num. 513, and Sanchez apud Diana, p. 4. tr. 5. r. 37, because the pretext of confession then seems manifest enough. But more probably they deny, because then it is not verified that the confessor solicits or executes sin under the pretext of confession; thus the pretext of confession then is already ordered not to solicitation but to deceiving the domestics." St. Alphonsus, L. VI. n. 679. Cf. Theol. Pat., n. 394, 395.

"External signs of simulation on the part of the confessor are to sit in a suitable place, to bless the woman, to hold the hand before the face, as is accustomed to be done in hearing confessions, and finally to extend the hand over her head while pretending to absolve her. But on the part of the woman the signs are genuflection, the sign of the cross, striking of the breast, joining of the hands, humble conversation with the confessor, which exteriorly appears as an accusation of sins." Potestà apud Nouv. Rev. Th., T. XII. p. 44. 2.

(24) n. 1439. q. 2°. p. 167. col. 2.

I said: "ordinarily in one case alone ... he can be absolved." For it can happen, even outside danger of death, that 1° the concubine either in no way or here and now cannot be dismissed or avoided, that is, a necessary occasion; 2° the penitent is prepared to remove as soon as possible and in the best way he can the public scandal which exists from the concubinage, and to avoid that which would exist from access to Holy Communion; 3° no good effect can be hoped from the delay of absolution.

If these three things are present together, although they will be very rarely present, some teach that the concubinary, or concubine, can be absolved.

That the first truly be present, two things are required: 1° that the occasion be truly necessary; for the affection by which concubinaries cling to their filthy pleasures not rarely brings it about that either they oppose specious pretexts to separation or exaggerate the difficulties of it; 2° that it is necessary precisely because from separation there would exist damage in goods of fortune so grave that by force of this he would fall from his proper state or be cast into grave necessity. See the example of the maidservant which I bring forward, p. 168. col. 1. under: If 2). For other damages, for example in reputation, in the case of public scandal, which has already stripped the concubinary of reputation, are not to be attended to. Cf. St. Alphonsus, L. IV. n. 437. 441.

The second supposes a penitent who affirms as certain that the base commerce has now ceased for a long time, which nevertheless the people still believes to endure. They say that this man, if the first and third requisite are present, can be absolved, yet with the conditions of the second requisite being observed. For hence, as is supposed, the occasion is necessary, and by the long interruption of the base commerce there is given an extraordinary sign of disposition; but from that, as likewise is supposed, the scandal which endures he cannot remove for the present, and he is prepared to remove it as soon as he can; nor is he going to give a new scandal, as again is supposed, namely by approaching Holy Communion, for he seriously promises that he will not approach it, at least in the place where he is known.

The third requisite would be lacking if, all things considered, the delay of absolution is judged to be the stimulus by which that phrase "as soon as possible and in the best way he can," concerning which in the second requisite, may be completed more quickly. Cf. Berardi, Ed. 2. n. 151; Aertnijs, p. 30.

(25) n. 1449. q. 1°. p. 178. col. 2.

I. From the things said it is clear that the confessor, if there is question of books or newspapers professedly impious or obscene, among other things is bound to these:

1° He is bound, when a prudent suspicion is present, to ask a penitent who is silent about this matter whether he reads them, and this even if he is existing in good faith, which can scarcely be admitted. The reason is that omission of the question does not free from formal sin against Faith or morals a penitent reading books or newspapers of this kind, since, as was said, such books or newspapers are maximally dangerous, that is, they cast those reading them into proximate danger of sinning formally against Faith or chastity.

2° He is bound to warn them, even in the case in which he hopes for no fruit from the warning. The reason is that from the warning greater evils are not to be feared than those which are produced from the reading.

3° He is bound to deny absolution to those refusing to abstain from the reading of them. For they are to be compared to those who do not wish to leave a voluntary proximate occasion.

4° He is bound to compel a penitent who retains such books to cast them away, and one who has subscribed to such a newspaper to withdraw his name. If he sincerely promises that he will do this, he can be absolved. But if afterward he shall not have stood by his promises, ordinarily he is not to be absolved before he has satisfied his obligation. This follows from the things said in n. 1436. q. 17.

5° He is bound to prescribe suitable antidotes to a penitent who from necessity and with due license reads books or newspapers professedly impious, lest the poison harm him: namely, that he at the same time read good books or good newspapers which defend Religion; that he pray for the conservation of faith, frequent the Sacraments, etc. I said: "professedly impious," for with respect to books or newspapers professedly obscene there is given no necessity or license of reading them, outside the case excepted in Rule VII of the Index.

II. As regards books and newspapers which are not professedly impious or obscene, the confessor must: 1. To the best of his powers impede the reading of them: especially a) when the penitent is conscious of the obligation of abstaining from the reading of them, or doubts about it; b) when he is ignorant of the obligation, yet can be warned with hope of fruit, or at least without fear of a greater evil; c) when the Confessor notices that that continual or frequent reading begins to bring notable detriment to the penitent in Faith or morals, for this he can in no way permit.

2. Sometimes to make the obligation of abstaining from the aforesaid reading, namely when the following conditions have been posited: a) that the penitent invincibly is ignorant of the grave obligation of abstaining from continual or frequent reading of this kind; this ignorance in many arises from the marvelous prejudices with which they are imbued; b) that from warning no fruit is hoped, but rather greater evils are to be feared, for example alienation from the Sacraments, from Religion; for a lesser evil can be permitted so that a greater may be avoided, and the Confessor must follow the example of Christ, concerning whom Matthew 12. 20 testifies: "The bruised reed He will not break, and smoking flax He will not extinguish"; c) that the Confessor try to draw his penitent away from reading of this kind by admonitions and persuasions, or at least to insinuate distrust concerning depraved little books and newspapers, and to induce him to the study of Religion; for as a physician he is bound to administer antidotes to the penitent, by which he may remove the danger. - Godschalk, De proh. lib., c. 6, apud Aertnijs n. 86.

(26) n. 1452. q. 2°. p. 174. col. 1.

There are honest taverns, would that there were many, namely such as not only do not spontaneously offer occasions of sinning, for instance depraved newspapers, irreligious and base conversations, secret rooms for lust, prostitutes, dishonest amusements, but in which the tavern-keepers also strive, to the best of their powers, to impede sins. It is clear of itself that frequenting taverns of this kind for the sake of relaxing the mind, if moderation is observed in time, in drink, in play, and in conversations, is not unlawful.

(27) n. 1470. p. 179. col. 2.

I say: from the very nature of the sin. Wherefore, other things being equal, that is, the interval which intervenes between the acts, the character of the penitent, the intensity of the acts, etc., n. 1477. Note, p. 182. col. 1, more acts are required for inducing a habit in sins of work not consummated than in consummated sins, for instance in touches than in fornication; likewise, as regards consummated sins, in those which are committed alone, for example pollution, than in those which are perpetrated with another.

I say besides: from the manner in which it is committed. - For which reason, other things again being equal, more acts are required in order that a habit exist from sins of the mouth or heart than in order that it exist from sins of work. Thus it can happen that from sins of the mouth or heart a habit is not born unless they are repeated twice or three times in a week.

Universally it can be said that the matter depends on the difficulty or facility with which men are accustomed to commit diverse sins; and therefore, other things being equal, as was said above, the more easily some sin is accustomed to be committed by reason of itself, the more acts are required. And from this principle proceed the things just noted and set forth. - Aertnijs, n. 18.

(28) n. 1470. p. 179. col. 2.

The incontinent are found chiefly among those who are habituated in blasphemies and imprecations, and often also among those who have contracted a habit of pollution. You will find those habituated in evil will especially among those who are habituated in hatred, in injustices, and in base love. Aertnijs, n. 13.

(29) n. 1508. q. 2°. p. 202. col. 1.

"Sometimes, when Missionaries are visiting the Christians committed to them, there occurs a sick person laboring under hectic fever or a similar disease, who according to experience will still live for several months, but will die within the year. It is asked whether, in such a case, the Missionary can administer Viaticum and Extreme Unction to him, because when the truer case of receiving them is present, the Missionary will not be able to be had present on account of great distance and other circumstances impeding this?" S. C. de Prop. F. - Affirmatively. February 20. - Collect. p. 184 n. 361.

(30) n. 1508. q. 3°. p. 203. col. 2.

Such, for example, are deficient drunkards who are established to be in mortal sin, L. VI. 782. But this seems then only to be established when it is evident that he has made himself perfectly drunk on purpose. But in the case of solitary drunkenness this will scarcely be able to be evident; it can be, however, if there is question of those drunkards who persevered notoriously in the custom of this vice until the end of life.

(31) n. 1508. q. 8°. p. 203. col. 2.

It is always supposed in this case that that adult has "some intention of receiving Sacred Unction for the benefit of his soul, ordered to the time of death," Collect. p. 323 n. 684; in which case he can also, indeed must, be anointed. Ib. n. 685.

(32) n. 1516. I. p. 209. col. 1.

"Although one key can be sufficient matter for the ordination of an Ostiarius, nevertheless the Rubric is to be observed, which prescribes that keys are to be handed over; these, whether they are of silver, iron, or wood, provided they are apt for opening, constitute the remote matter of this Order." S. R. C. Civitaten., to 1, 11 March 1820.

It is not strictly necessary that the Ostiarius close and open the doors of the church with the key. S. R. C. Marsorum., 12 Nov. 1831.

In the Ordination of an Ostiarius, the keys need not necessarily be the keys of the church, but any key whatever can be employed. S. C. de P. F. to the Vicar Apostolic of Cochin-China, 23 March 1844. Collect. p. 355 n. 818.

(33) n. 1517. q. 1. p. 210. col. 1.

Strength is added to the sentence of St. Alphonsus from the Response of the Holy Office, 19 Aug. 1851, in which the imposition of hands in the ordination of Deacon and Presbyter is said to have to be supplied if it was done without corporal touch. Collect. p. 358 n. 824.

(34) n. 1523. q. 11°. p. 217. col. 2.

The Pontiff says: among other laws; for this is not the only law by which, by force of that promise, they are bound. In order that this may be rightly understood, these things must be noted.

I. The promise about which there is speech adds to the obligation of obedience, by which all diocesan and other secular clerics, yes, and Regulars outside the cases in which they are exempt from it, are bound to their Ordinary, the bond of contract. This is clear from the words of Benedict XIV in the praised Constitution Ex quo dilectus, 14 Jan. 1747: "Nor do We think that that solemn pledge of obedience and reverence, which the Presbyter makes into the hands of the one ordaining, according to the most ancient custom of the Church, is to be held as a bare and empty formula."

II. Obedience embraces the strict obligation of executing whatever the Ordinary, within the limits of his right, prescribes. - I say: within the limits of his right. - Hence:

A. To reject the command of the Ordinary: a) he would be bound, if there were question of a thing evidently evil; b) he could licitly do so if the Ordinary certainly exceeded the limits of his right. I said: evidently and certainly; for in doubt either concerning the liceity of the thing commanded or concerning the right of the one commanding, one must obey. Cf. the things said in n. 101. IV; n. 1171. III; n. 1664. q. 1°. § In doubt concerning obedience.

B. The rights of the Ordinary to which that obligation of obeying responds are reduced to these: 1. The right of teaching; 2. The right of commanding; 3. The right of judging; 4. The right of correcting and punishing; 5. The right of administering, and these indeed are said to be comprehended in the law which they call of jurisdiction; 6. The right of diocesan law, in which are contained the emoluments which pertain to the Bishop.

The Ordinary does not transgress the limits of his power, and therefore he is to be obeyed:

1° In the exercise of the right of teaching, when he condemns depraved opinions which are spread abroad in his diocese against sound doctrine, or concerning which there is danger that they be spread abroad, or when he prohibits books or newspapers by which dangerous novelties, etc., are disseminated. He decides the same when he prescribes a Catechism for procuring uniformity in teaching children. - But a Bishop would transcend the limits of his power if he wished to interdict in his diocese the defense of those opinions concerning which, with Faith and the rule of morals safe, one can freely dispute. This, however, is not so to be understood as if the Bishop did not have the right of interdicting by law, for example, some kind of dances or the manner in which lovers visit one another, etc., if he prudently judges that kind or this manner to be full of danger; for in such things there is no question of licit or illicit by reason of itself, but of licit or illicit by reason of danger. Besides, if even indifferent acts, according to the certain sentence of all theologians, can be the object of a prohibiting law when the prohibition of them conduces notably to the common good, n. 104. II, why not a fortiori dangerous acts? Therefore when the Ordinary prudently judges that such things are to be interdicted by law in his diocese, he acts not from a freely disputed opinion, but from a sentence altogether certain.

2° The right of commanding, or of making laws, embraces:

1. The right of procuring by opportune statutes the execution of the laws of the Church, for example, concerning the residence of pastors, n. 1139, concerning the negative obligations of clerics, n. 1132, etc.; for Bishops are the executors of the Canons in their diocese.

2. The right of decreeing those things which have been left aside by Common Law, or those things which are not against the Canons but outside the Canons, Benedict XIV, de Syn., L. 12. c. 6. n. 1. For although Bishops cannot prohibit those things which are expressly and certainly permitted by Common Law, for example, access to taverns in an itinerary on account of necessity, nor concede by law what is forbidden by the same Common Law, for example, access to taverns in whatever case, nevertheless they can: a. fill up, so to speak, the gaps of Common Law; for Common Law could not foresee all and singular necessities of whatever dioceses, and provide for them. Thus a Bishop, if he has judged it opportune, will be able to interdict to his clergy assistance at horse races. They can also b. in those things which are not passed over by Law, sometimes define by their laws the time, place, and mode not defined by Common Law. Thus Eugenius IV in his Constitution Cantate, 4 Feb. 1441. § 13, and the Roman Ritual, Tit. 2, command that newly born infants be baptized as soon as conveniently can be done; but they do not define the precise time, which nevertheless it is whole and entire for Bishops to determine. Benedict XIV, l. c. n. 7. Indeed, there are not a few heads of universal discipline in which Law itself expressly leaves to Bishops the mode in which they are to be observed to prescribe. Thus Trent, Sess. 14. c. 6 de Ref., indeed prescribes the clerical habit, but wishes the form of this to be determined by the Bishop: "according to the ordination of the Bishop himself." They can besides c. assist Common Law by their decrees, adding penalties, or increasing those which have been established by Common Law; for thus "they do nothing against the Canons, but protect and foster the Canons themselves." Benedict XIV, l. c. n. 2. Finally, they can d. sometimes prohibit certain things concerning which it is controverted among Doctors whether they are contained by Common Law. Let an example be quiet or non-noisy hunting, n. 1132. 2°, which, for example, the Provincial Council of Vienna permits if it is moderate, Coll. Lac. T. V. col. 199. b, but Cologne absolutely forbids, ib. col. 378. c. Cf. Benedict XIV, ib. L. 11. c. 10. n. 8.

In commanding, however, the Bishop must avoid lest the sanction by which he confirms his laws be immoderate and too grave, especially by inflicting censures. Benedict XIV, ib. L. 10. c. 1. 2. 3.

3° The right of judging regards either the internal forum, concerning which we treated in n. 1390 sq., or the external forum, concerning which in the Treatise on Censures.

4° The right of correcting and punishing belongs to the Bishop with regard to all things which have been introduced in the diocese against Faith, good morals, or ecclesiastical discipline; and to this extent this right differs from the right of judging, because in some things, for example in cases in which suspension from informed conscience is brought, n. 1686. 17, it can be exercised by him extrajudicially, especially in the very act of visitation of the diocese, n. 1136. § In all. To this also pertains the right of the Bishop "without the noise and figure of judgment, and with the truth of the fact alone inspected," that is, even the form of summary judgment being omitted, to proceed against Clerics who "dare to keep at home or outside women concerning whom suspicion can be had, or to have any familiarity with them." Trent, Sess. 25. c. 14 de Ref.

5° The right of administration includes among other things the power of the Bishop, with the rules of law, whether common or particular recognized by the Holy See, being observed, such as, for example, is that which was established in the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, of conferring benefices of free collation, or among us quasi-parishes or other ecclesiastical offices, for example of coadjutors or assistants; the right of transferring a Rector to other quasi-parishes; the right of erecting, uniting, dismembering parishes or quasi-parishes; the right of protecting and caring for the temporal goods pertaining to pious places or churches; the right of erecting schools, orphanages, hospitals, etc.

6° Concerning the right belonging to the Bishop from diocesan law, see the things said in n. 631.

Cf. De Angelis, Præl. Jur. Can., L. I. Tit. XXXI. 12° sq., and Linz. Quart. Schr., 1882. p. 15 sq.

(35) n. 1545. q. 8°. p. 235. col. 2.

The conditions which the Church imposes in conceding a dispensation for mixed Marriages or upon the impediment of disparity of cult express obligations to be assumed in the celebration of the union, rather than conditions properly so called concerning the future which are able to suspend the value of the Matrimony.

(36) n. 1548. q. 6°. R. 2°. p. 235. col. 2.

Some contend that an agreement, on the occasion of a mixed Matrimony, of educating all or part of the offspring in heresy, is repugnant to the substance of Matrimony; but the sentence denying this is most common. The reason is that the good of offspring, insofar as substantial to Matrimony, is to be understood as the physical good. Thus Feije, n. 566, who adds: "in practice we judge that Matrimony" with such an agreement "can safely be held as valid, but cannot be held as invalid without consulting the Apostolic See."

(37) n. 1556. q. 2°. p. 242. col. 1.

General decree concerning the nuptial blessing. - S. C. S. R. U. Inq., Wednesday, 31 Aug. 1881.

"The Eminent and Most Reverend Lords decreed:

"That the nuptial blessing, which the Roman Missal exhibits in the Mass for bridegroom and bride, is always to be imparted in the Marriages of Catholics, yet within the celebration of Mass, according to the rubrics, and outside forbidden time, to all those spouses who, in contracting Matrimony, from whatever cause did not obtain it; even if they ask after they have already lived for a long time in Matrimony, provided the woman, if a widow, has not accepted the blessing itself in other nuptials.

"Besides, that the same Catholic spouses who have not obtained the blessing of their Matrimony are to be exhorted to seek it at the first possible time. But it is to be signified to them, especially if they are neophytes or contracted validly before conversion from heresy, that the blessing itself pertains to the rite and solemnity, but not to the substance and validity, of the union.

"All things to the contrary notwithstanding.

"Fr. VINCENTIUS LEO SALLUA,

"Archbishop of Chalcedon,

"S. R. and Un. Inquis. Comm. Gener.

"JUVENALIS PELAMI,

"S. R. U. Inq. Not."

(38) n. 1574. q. 7°. p. 248. col. 2.

Besides the rules handed down in this number, in solving doubts concerning the value of Matrimony let those also be observed which we add here.

I. A negative doubt is never to be attended to. The rule is valid both concerning Matrimony contracted and concerning Matrimony to be contracted. Consequently its value or nullity is to be retained according as either liberty or the law of the impediment is in possession, n. 49. I. Wherefore, for example, a spouse negatively doubting about the death of the other party cannot fly to other nuptials; for the law of the impediment of bond possesses. On the contrary, a vain suspicion that a sister contracted betrothal with the bridegroom does not prohibit her from entering nuptials with him, because not the law of the impediment of public honesty, but liberty, is in possession.

To a negative doubt is equated, at least practically, that which is conceived from the saying of persons who are not worthy of faith; and this both as regards Matrimony to be contracted and as regards Matrimony contracted. The reason is that such a saying is not a prudent reason of doubting, nor consequently a positive doubt, but merely a negative one, n. 48 under 1. - The same, for the same reason, is regularly to be said concerning a doubt conceived from the assertion of the other party that he or she consented fictitiously. See the things said in n. 1548. q. 7°. I say: regularly, that is, unless, on account of the circumstances, the truth of the assertion is to be presumed. Ib. and St. Alphonsus. The same, again for the same reason, is to be said if there is question of a doubt which would exist from fame arisen from no certain author, or from rumor concerning an impediment. See n. 1566. 1°. Yet in this case, as regards practice, careful inquiry must be made whether the fame truly has arisen from no certain author; in other words, it must be asked from what sources the rumor came forth. But if the rumor stands firm, and the truth cannot be investigated by witnesses, the ecclesiastical Superior, before the celebration of Matrimony, will be able to defer oaths against this rumor both to the relatives and to the contracting parties themselves.

II. A positive doubt arisen from the saying of one witness worthy of faith, or from public fame which has a certain author, suffices for the celebration of Matrimony to be inhibited, n. 1566. 1°. But what the effects of a doubt of this kind are upon Matrimony already contracted, see n. 1574. q. 6°.

III. A positive doubt, by reason both of Matrimony to be contracted and of Matrimony contracted, is sometimes solved by proofs sought from presumption, and this either for Matrimony or against it. The cases more obvious than the rest are these:

1° The case in which the impediment is established and it is doubted whether a dispensation was given in it. Then namely the presumption stands for the impediment; for in doubt "a fact," the dispensation, "is not presumed, but must be proved," n. 67. 1°. b. On the contrary, if the dispensation is established and there is doubt concerning the value of it, the presumption stands for the dispensation, according to that very well-known principle: "in doubt one must stand for the value of the act," n. 67. 2° and n. 162. 5°.

2° The case about which there is treatment in n. 1589. II. § As regards practice.

3° The case about which there is speech in n. 1601. q. 3°. R. 3°. In that place a vehement presumption is understood as one which renders the death most probable, so that only a tenuous probability remains that the other party is still surviving.

4° The case of the other party asserting that he or she consented fictitiously, as we said above under I, v. I say: regularly.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 12.

1 L. VI. 908. § Secunda. | 2 Ib. § Prima. | 3 Ib. § Secunda. | 4 Decr. L. IV. T. I. c. 27. Heiss, De Matr., § 70. III.

(39) n. 1598. q. 3°. p. 261. col. 2.

Concerning dispensation in the diriment impediment of disparity of cult, when Matrimony has already been contracted and the unbelieving party refuses to offer the cautions.

Henry, not baptized, contracted before a civil magistrate or petty minister with Ludmilla, a Catholic. After some time she, repenting of the deed, by the persuasion of the pastor approaches the Ordinary, urgently asking from him a remedy for her miserable condition. There is indeed no difficulty in this case if, with a grave cause standing, Henry is prepared to renew consent and to promise what by law in this case must be promised. But what if he wishes to offer neither?

Resp. 1° "When from separation grave inconveniences are foreseen as going to follow, - the spouse remaining in infidelity refuses to be baptized," - a dispensation can be indulged to the party "truly" Catholic, yet in such a way that to this party "there be commended and enjoined also the Catholic education of the offspring, and that they ought to take care, in the way in which it can be done, of the conversion of the unbelieving spouse," with consent renewed, and "the nullity of the prior Matrimony being made known, insofar as it can be done, also to the unbelieving party." Thus nearly the Instruction of the Holy Inquisition, 12 Jan. 1769, apud Collect. p. 388. 389. n. 888 under 2. Cf. the same Collect., p. 383. col. 1. § Hucusque. - It is said: with consent renewed; which I understand according to the things said in n. 1633. III. Rule.

Resp. 2° If Henry not only refuses to offer the cautions, but is also going to impede, for example, the Catholic education of offspring born or to be born, at least of male offspring, a dispensation can be granted only when Ludmilla is found placed in danger of death and there is no other way in which provision can be made for the salvation of her soul, "provided nevertheless" then "she promises that, if she recovers, she will take care by all means of the conversion of the unbelieving party and of the education of whatever offspring in the Catholic religion." - From the letters of S. C. de Prop. Fide, 8 May 1828, to the Vicar Apostolic of Eastern Tonkin, apud Collect. p. 392. n. 896.

Resp. 3° If Henry is conscious of the impediment, no other remedy remains except sanation in the root, n. 1636 under 3. 1°. But this could not be given in this case by our Bishops by force of faculty D, n. 6, T. I. p. LXXIV, since its tenor, "the party conscious of the impediment having been warned," openly implies that it cannot have place when both parties know the impediment.

Concerning dispensation from the impediment of mixed religion as regards Matrimony already contracted.

Rescript of S. C. of the Holy Office to the Vicar Apostolic of Bombay.

"The Most Eminent and Most Reverend Lords Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, General Inquisitors against heretical depravity, in the General Congregation held on Wednesday, the 9th day of the current month of March, having read the letters of Your Excellency, by which you were reporting to the Eminent Cardinal Prefect of the Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide that, in a certain Instruction to your Clergy, you had prescribed to all presbyters exercising the care of souls that they not omit to warn spouses who, grieving and penitent for their mixed Matrimony entered clandestinely, desire to be reconciled to God, concerning the necessity of obtaining from the Bishop a dispensation, so that in the future they may be able licitly to use their Matrimony, contracted validly indeed but illicitly; but that this prescription gave some missionaries occasion to doubt whether an obligation of this kind could be imposed by you: the matter having been carefully and maturely weighed, they judged that the Instruction is to be declared by you thus, namely, that it is fitting that satisfaction be made by the aforesaid spouses to the Church, whose most holy law has been violated, and that the cautions concerning the danger of eternal salvation to be removed from themselves and from their offspring be offered also in the external forum; and that for this end recourse to the Bishop be asked.

"While I signify these things to Your Excellency, I wish the devoted sentiments of my soul to be testified to the same, for whom I pray all favorable things from the Lord.

"Most devoted as a Brother to Your Excellency,

"P. Card. CATALINI.

"Rome, 12 March 1881."

(40) n. 1598. q. 5°. R. 2°. p. 262. col. 1.

You will compose a solid instruction concerning the dangers which are joined with mixed Marriages from the letters of Clement XIII, dated 16 Nov. 1763, to the Bishop of Strasbourg, which Collect. p. 394. n. 902 exhibits. Likewise from the booklet An Instruction on Mixed Marriages, by Rt. Rev. Ullathorne, Benziger, New York.

(41) n. 1598. q. 8°. p. 262. col. 2.

But what in doubt whether Baptism, I do not say validly, but in fact, was conferred upon the non-Catholic party?

Resp. 1° If there is question of Matrimony to be contracted with a Catholic party, the doubt persevering after diligence has been employed, there can be place for a dispensation in the diriment impediment of disparity of cult, and this, with a grave cause subsisting, is to be procured. It is clear from the things said in n. 1574. q. 5°. R. 3°.

Resp. 2° Resolve the same if there is question of a Matrimony contracted in the same circumstances without dispensation. It is clear from Resp. 1°.

Resp. 3° Although Matrimony was contracted without dispensation, and not afterward convalidated, nevertheless the party certainly baptized, who has flown or wishes to fly to other nuptials, contracts these nuptials illicitly and remains in them illicitly, unless it has been sufficiently proved that Baptism was not conferred upon the prior party. But sufficient proof of this matter, in my judgment, could also be had from vehement presumption. But a presumption of this kind, as it seems, would be present, for example, if the prior other party had parents who both pertained to a sect which rejects Baptism, for instance to the sect of the Quakers; likewise if they pertained to a sect, for example of the Baptists, which does not admit Baptism of infants; if, namely, in this supposition, the prior other party had been baptized, he or she would have no doubt concerning that matter, as being one which would have been done in adult age; likewise if he or she had parents who never pertained to any sect, who did not belong to any religion, as the common people say.

What likewise if in doubt concerning the value of Baptism certainly conferred, Matrimony was contracted, and afterward the presumption concerning value yields to truth, or the invalidity of Baptism becomes certainly known?

Ballerini responds: "The validity" of Baptism "is to be retained.... For then the Church is judged to dispense."

Finally it is asked "how one must act in the case of the conversion of a non-Catholic joined in Matrimony with another non-Catholic, when a doubt concerning Baptism occurs?"

"Resp. It will have to be distinguished whether the doubt is concerning the Baptism of one or of both spouses; likewise whether it is a doubt of law or of fact?

"I say: 1) If there is doubt concerning the reception of Baptism on each side, the Matrimony will not have to be revalidated by dispensation, because the ecclesiastical law concerning disparity of cult, until the reception of Baptism is proved, does not oblige them, and consequently the Matrimony previously contracted by them was valid. 2) If there is doubt on each side concerning the value of Baptism certainly received, the Matrimony would have to be held as valid. 3) If there is doubt concerning the reception of Baptism on one side, and concerning the value of Baptism received on the other, the Matrimony would have to be revalidated, and indeed by the sole renewal of consent, if the former were converted; and by dispensation, if the latter party returned to the Church. - But the Matrimony could not be dissolved as to the bond, on account of doubt concerning the bond standing in the way of a new Matrimony. - 4) If it is certainly established concerning the Baptism of one party, but the reception of Baptism is doubtful on the other side, the Matrimony must be revalidated, either by renewal of consent, if the second party is converted, or by dispensation, if the first returns to the Faith."

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 13.

1 Note (a) to Gury, P. II. n. 881. | 2 "The privilege, however, promulgated by Ap. I. Cor. 7 for non-converts in this case, if one party is converted to the Catholic Faith, would scarcely have place, because this privilege, since it is against divine law, is deservedly to be held of strict interpretation." Heiss, § 36. III. Quaer. 2°. | 3 Heiss, § 36. III. Quaer. 2°.

(42) n. 1605. c) p. 266. col. 2.

The Bishop of Heliopolis had proposed the following doubt, the third: "Since in some dominion there are very few churches, yet many are to be erected in the future, whether, when the Decree of the Council has been published in those few churches, it is judged published in the whole dominion; or rather, in whatever village in which afterward a church is to be erected, with Christians gathered in some decent house, as is accustomed to be done in celebrations of Mass, publication must be made there, so that meanwhile, since publication is not made in the individual villages, they can contract Matrimony without the pastor and witnesses?" S. C. de Prop. F. responds, 7 July 1670: "That the publication already made suffices, unless new peoples and inhabitants are added and new parishes are erected for them." Collect. p. 446. n. 981.

(43) n. 1614. q. 1°. Resp. ... 3°. p. 275. col. 1.

What under Resp. ... 3°. ... c), p. 274. col. 2, I say, with Murray, De imp., n. 381, I understand as something commonly occurring, or joined to presumption, namely that those detained for punishment have domicile or quasi-domicile in the prison, since they are to be detained there perpetually or for the greater part of the year; but those detained for custody do not even have quasi-domicile in prison, since they are to be detained only for a few months or perhaps weeks. Wherefore, if you suppose someone to be detained for punishment only for a month, or for custody for a year, I judge that the contrary is to be resolved with Murray, ib.; for presumption yields to truth.

"Not a few, especially from the wealthier, merchants, jurisconsults, etc., who inhabit cities or large towns, besides a house in the city, have another in the country, in a different parish, spending the day in the former and the night in the latter. What is to be said of such persons? It would seem that they have two domiciles, for the intention of inhabiting in this way perpetually is supposed; for equally, at least morally, ... they dwell in each parish. I judge that a distinction must be made. 1°. If Caius lives permanently in the country, so that not only does he pass the night there, but also, his family having been transferred there, takes supper, receives friends as guests, etc., while he uses the city house only as a certain office with his ministers, I judge that not the city house, but his villa, 'his country-house,' must be held as his domicile. For in this alone can he be said truly to inhabit; but in the other he only transacts his business. 2°. But if, on the contrary, with the family, etc., remaining in the city house, Caius passes the night in his villa so that he may sleep more quietly and healthily, seeking it late in the evening and departing from it in the morning, I judge that his city house is his domicile and not the villa. 3°. Other middle cases, and more or less doubtful ones, are to be decided from the particular circumstances, or by invoking the due authority." - Ib. n. 383.

(44) n. 1628. q. 6°. p. 284. col. 1.

It can therefore be asked whether a Bishop using the faculties of Formularies D and E, T. I. p. LXXIII, LXXIV, for at least the internal forum himself ought to bestow the dispensation and also validly can do so, since from the practice of the Sacred Penitentiary in the commissory form, p. 279. col. 1, they are granted to the confessor of the petitioner. - The resolution of this question is clear from the Roman response to the following doubts:

"The extraordinary Faculties of Form D ... under n. 8 comprehend also the power of subdelegating, etc."

"Since there are not lacking among Canonists those who, although they admit that a mandate of the Apostolic See or a faculty of dispensing with a determinate person cannot be subdelegated to another unless the Holy See has permitted this, nevertheless teach that otherwise one must judge concerning an indult or general faculty, namely that this can, by the indultary, as one delegated to a universality of causes, by common law itself, be subdelegated to another in a particular case; but others either deny or doubt, because they think in this matter one must proceed rather from the mind of the Holy See than from some general principle, for the peace of my conscience I humbly seek a response to the following doubts.

"1°. Whether I can subdelegate the aforesaid faculties of the Formulae, whatever they are, in particular cases, to another, or rather ought to dispense myself?

"2°. Whether at least, by reason of the style of the curia to be followed by the indultary, I both can and ought to subdelegate the faculty of the aforesaid Formula under n. 2 of dispensing, etc. ... Likewise, at least in a case in which there is question of an impediment of the internal forum, the faculty of the same Formula under n. 6 of sanating, etc. ..."

"It was answered in the following tenor:

"To the doubts proposed by Your Excellency concerning the subdelegation of faculties which are granted by the Apostolic See to Bishops" - the name of the region follows - "I judge that it is to be answered: To the first, that Bishops in the case cannot be considered as delegates to a universality of causes, and therefore cannot indistinctly subdelegate the aforesaid faculties. To the second, that the extraordinary Faculties of Formula D," and by parity of reason the same is to be resolved concerning the Faculties of Form E, "can be subdelegated only in the mode and terms expressed in n. 8," Form D, "and n. 4," Form E, T. I. p. LXXIV, LXXV.

"But if Your Excellency in your prudence judges it necessary to subdelegate to confessors the faculties which are comprehended under 2 and 6," see T. I. p. LXXIII, LXXIV, "it is necessary that you be fortified by a special Indult for this purpose."

(45) n. 1628. q. 7°. p. 285. col. 2.

To the doubt of the Vicar Apostolic of Luchu: "Whether Missionaries, before they grant dispensations in the external forum, ought, by way of caution, to absolve those to be dispensed in the internal forum from Ecclesiastical censures, and whether they can and ought in the external forum?" S. C. de P. F., 26 Sept. 1821, responded: "Affirmatively to the first part; to the second, likewise affirmatively, with faculty obtained from the Ordinary." Collect. p. 490. n. 1020.

(46) n. 1629. p. 286. col. 2.

In whatever way Matrimony is revalidated, the parties, or at least the conscious party, ought to be in the state of grace. Yet if this cannot be taken care of, or if the revalidation of Matrimony must be hastened, nevertheless this is to be done. Cf. Feije, de imp., n. 739.

(47) n. 1715. p. 343. col. 1.

To the doubt: Whether a confessor who, according to the mind of the Bull Apostolicae Sedis, n. 10, simulated absolving his or her accomplice in base sin, for example by reciting a certain prayer or pronouncing other words, or even by being silent, in such a way nevertheless that by signs or gestures of the hands he seemed truly to release the penitent from sins, incurs the excommunication specially reserved to the Supreme Pontiff about which there is question in the aforesaid Bull: - S. Poenitentiaria, having maturely weighed the doubts set forth concerning these things, likewise responded: "Confessors simulating the absolution of an accomplice in base sin do not escape the excommunication reserved in the Bull of Benedict XIV: Sacramentum Poenitentiae. - Given at Rome in S. Poenit., on the 1st day of March 1873."

A similar response, given to St. Alphonsus himself by the same Sacred Penitentiary, on the 9th day of July in the year 1751, did not prevent the Holy Doctor from following the opposite sentence. "When I had run through," he says, "the Constitution of the same Pontiff Benedict XIV, Inter praeteritos, cited several times, I found the opposite declared sufficiently in § 59, as is clear from the following words: 'No less upon the priest accomplice who either outside the article of death receives the confession of the penitent and absolves him, or who in the article of death absolves when another priest is not lacking, ... the penalty of major excommunication was imposed by Us in the cited constitutions.'"

This having been weighed, the authors of the periodical Nouvelle Revue Théologique, Tom. XIV. p. 142, write these things: "Far be it from us to resist the authority of the Sacred Penitentiary; but we would not dare to condemn those who, having imitated St. Alphonsus, still adhere to the letter of the law, until the question is again brought to the Holy See and formally settled by it. It belongs to Bishops to submit questions of this kind to the decision of the Supreme Pontiff."

• In my judgment, no slight weight accrues to the repeated decision of the Sacred Penitentiary precisely from this, that it was given against the sentence of St. Alphonsus, and, if I am not mistaken, of all the theologians who wrote after him. For it must have been that it was repeatedly led into this decision by reasons not slight against their sentence.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 14.

1 L. VI. 556. q. 1.

(48) n. 1721. 1°. d) p. 346. col. 2.

The things which we hand down in the cited place seemed too rigid to the writers of the periodical Acta S. Sedis, App. XIX. p. 614 sq. For they contend that the Response of the Sacred Inquisition, dated 21 Aug. 1850, is prior to the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis and has regard only to the Constitutions of the Pontiffs which precede it. - But that S. C. de P. F. and the Sacred Inquisition itself judge otherwise is openly clear: 1) from the Response by which S. C. de P. F. communicates to the Bishops of Canada the Decree of the Sacred Inquisition dated 1 July 1870; 2) from the Response of S. C. de P. F., 21 Aug. 1879, by which a copy of the same Decree is transmitted to the Bishop of Vincennes; 3) from the Response of S. C. de P. F., 20 Jan. 1877, by which the resolution of the Sacred Inquisition dated the 10th of the same month is given to the Archbishop of San Francisco. These responses certainly are not prior to the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, but posterior. The first two declare in open words all those things which I hand down in n. 1721. 1° under d) and c). The third has these things: "Insofar as nothing illicit is detected in the signs," which the society uses about which the Archbishop of San Francisco was asking, "and the oath is not extended to this, that the secret cannot be manifested to ecclesiastical authority whenever it is required by it, those who have given their name to the aforesaid society are not to be disturbed."

But, ask the Acta, "do not ... also other societies, for example of robbers, commonly of bandits, thieves, etc., sometimes bind themselves by oath both to keeping the secret and to undertaking mutual defense? Do therefore those also who enter societies of these incur excommunication?" I respond that by this very difficulty, if indeed it were a difficulty, the Acta are entangled, when on p. 616 col. 1 they write: "the cited response" of the Sacred Inquisition, dated 21 Aug. 1850, "has regard to the earlier Constitutions of the Pontiffs, in which in fact, especially in that which was issued by Clement XII, assemblies of this kind" - that is, those about which I treat in n. 1721. 1°. under d) and c) - "were comprehended." Therefore, lest they fight with themselves, the Acta would have to admit the very thing which they object, namely that the societies of robbers which they describe were subject to censure before the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis; which nevertheless no theologian will admit.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 15.

2 See Conc. Pl. Balt. II. p. 335. XXVIII.

(49) n. 1779. q. 16°. p. 377. col. 1.

From the Response, however, of the Sacred Penitentiary on the 18th day of July 1881, which Past. Bl. für N. Amer., 1881. p. 117, reports, "that confessors can use this faculty even outside Confession," it does not appear that the Response about whose limiting there was inquiry is to be restricted.

Notes to appendix annotation - note sequence 16.

1 Conc. Pl. Balt. II. p. 335. XXVIII.

(50) n. 1790. q. 3°. p. 387. col. 2.

The Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, 13 Apr. 1878, by which absentees are prohibited from being enrolled in pious sodalities, the same Sacred Congregation, on 26 Nov. 1880, issued a benign interpretation of, whose summary is this:

1. "A distinction must be made between Sodalities canonically erected for the whole Catholic world and Sodalities canonically erected only for a certain diocese or region." In relation to these latter, "the faithful who dwell outside the limits established for the local Sodality are called absent, indeed they can be called not simply absent, but even strangers." In relation to the former, no one is a stranger; and although the personal presence of those to be enrolled is required, nevertheless presence is not required "at the place where the Sodality canonically erected has its proper seat and center; but the presence of those to be enrolled before anyone who, in whatever place, legitimately has the delegated or subdelegated faculty of enrolling suffices. But moral, interpretative, or representative presence by letters or in any other way through intervening persons, even, does not suffice."

2. In receiving members, certain Sodalities, "according to their proper laws for the inscription of members, observe some certain form with some solemnity and rite, such as public petition and presentation of candidates, some probation and novitiate, or at least imposition of a habit, scapular, cincture, which from its nature" requires "personal presence." For these, "no general and ordinary exception is given from the law concerning absentees not to be enrolled; only this is conceded to their Moderators and their delegates, that in singular cases they can dispense from the established form between those present, and also duly enroll absentees by a singular or extraordinary exception."

But "for Sodalities" which "have no form and ceremony between those present for the enrollment of members, let the decree as regards absentees be duly observed insofar as it can be done; and rather let enrollment in person be rendered easier and promoted as far as possible, by multiplying canonically the centers of associations and increasing, as opportunity suggests, the number of Zelators, Zelatrices, Promoters, or by whatever name they are called, who, according to the approved laws of the Sodality, have not only the office of promoting enrollments in whatever way, but also the subdelegated faculty of enrolling. But since this can be done neither always nor everywhere, nor plainly suffices, ... by a broad exception from the letter of the law with apostolic authority," the Sacred Congregation "declares that even absentees can be enrolled in pious Associations of this kind," namely "also by letters," "or by intervening persons who represent them."

3. Special exceptions legitimately existing, for example by force of privilege, etc., the Sacred Congregation holds as ratified and confirms, and

4. It sanates invalid enrollments of absentees, if any were made up to 26 Nov. 1880.

(51) n. 1508. q. 3°. R. to b). p. 202. col. 2.

The response, as regards a surgical operation, is to be understood with this added: if he who is about to undergo it is at present laboring under an internal and dangerous disease. For which reason he cannot be held as a subject capable of Extreme Unction who allows himself to be cut with danger even of life, if that danger does not exist before the cutting. Nevertheless, he ought to be disposed for the Sacrament by Confession, etc., before the cutting, and the Sacred Oil ought to be at hand, so that when a probable danger of life is present, he may be anointed. Linz. P. Bl., 1882. p. 596-598.

(52) p. 405. col. 1.

The words utimur and convenit indicate sufficiently that here there is no question of a strict precept. It is clear as regards Masses of Requiem from the following declaration of S. C. R., 31 March 1629, apud Mühlbauer, Decr. auth., II. p. 588: "The organ can be permitted in Masses of Requiem, but with a certain sad and mournful sound, notwithstanding the prohibition of the Ordinary," that is, unless the Ordinary prohibits the use of the organ.

(53) n. 1590. 5°. p. 257. col. 1.

From the things said under rules 2, 3, 4, and 5, it is clear whether and how the following persons are connected by affinity.

"1. Two brothers with two sisters.

"2. Father and son with mother and daughter.

"3. A stepfather with the widow of a prior stepchild.

"4. A stepmother with the husband of the stepdaughter.

"5. The son of Titius from a first wife with the daughter, stepdaughter, of the same Titius.

"6. Two co-stepchildren, or the children of spouses received from another marriage-bed. Think, namely, that a widower and a widow, each having children from another Matrimony, were married.

"7. The brother of a stepfather with the latter's stepdaughter.

"8. Caius with the mother of his stepfather. Lucia with the father of her stepmother.

"9. Martin with the widow whom the brother of Martin's wife left behind.

"10. George successively with Sophia and Gertrude, whose husbands were two brothers.

"11. The surviving spouses of brother and sister.

"12. A widower with the daughter of his widow from the prior Matrimony of the widow.

"13. With the same daughter, the son of the same widower from a prior Matrimony.

"14. That widower with the daughter of the said daughter, or with the granddaughter in the direct line from the prior nuptials of his widow.

"The persons designated under the first eleven numbers and under the thirteenth are free from the impediment of affinity; but those described under the twelfth are bound in the first degree of the direct line from matrimonial copula, and those described under the fourteenth are bound by affinity in the second degree of the direct line, likewise from matrimonial copula." Van de Burgt, De Matr., n. 194.