§ I. On Excommunications Latae Sententiae Reserved to the Roman Pontiff in a Special Manner

1701. - Query. How many and which are the excommunications latae sententiae reserved to the Roman Pontiff in a special manner?

Resp. They are the following thirteen.

I. "All apostates from the Christian Faith," and all and each heretics, by whatever name they are reckoned, and of whatever sect they exist, and those believing them, and their receivers, favorers, and generally any defenders whatever of them." Bull Coenae, § 1.

1° By "apostates from the Christian Faith" are understood those whom we defined in n. 266 at the end. But whether the crime of apostasy consists in withdrawal alone, so that profession of some false religion is not required, is disputed. I think withdrawal suffices.¹

For practice it matters little whether withdrawal alone suffices for apostasy, since this most certainly suffices for heresy, and to that extent is subject to the censure. Besides, apostates do not differ essentially from heretics, but only according to more and less, which, according to the axiom of Law, do not diversify the species. Wherefore apostates are named in the Constitution only for greater clarity, because they are not accustomed to be called heretics.²

But withdrawal certainly is required, that someone be called an apostate. But since the condition of withdrawal certainly is present in Pantheists, Naturalists, Rationalists, and many others of this kind, who commonly are called Unbelievers, Freethinkers, or Liberals, it can be asked whether, in the opinion which holds withdrawal to suffice, such as, alas! among Catholics themselves in this our age some (and would that there were not many) are found, who are more or less imbued with the aforesaid errors, or even, the duties of a Christian man neglected, live indifferently as if having no religion, yet without having denied the Christian Faith, or at least having deserted it in such a way that they do not wish any longer to be numbered among the faithful of Christ, are subject to the censure as apostates? I respond that these cannot be considered as true apostates, but it can happen that they are to be held as heretics.

2° By "all and each heretics, by whatever name they are reckoned, and of whatever sect they exist," understand those guilty of heresy: a) properly taken (n. 265); b) so formal (n. 266. 1°; 268. q. 1° and 2°), that no ignorance, not even affected, is present (n. 268. q. 1°. R. 2°); c) manifested by word or deed; d) at least occult (n. 266. 3°).

Note. - 1) From heresy that is notorious and brought to the judicial forum in whatever way (i.e., even if the heretic has spontaneously brought his delict to that forum), the Bishop absolves for both forums, either by himself or through a delegate.³ - 2) The Pope alone can absolve from heresy, whether notorious or occult, which has not yet been treated in the judicial forum.¹ See nevertheless the faculty of our Bishops, p. LXXI. 15. - 3) The Bishop (and among us any priest laboring in the Sacred Ministry) can receive in both forums the abjuration of new converts. Cf. n. 1264.

3° "And those believing them." - Believers in apostates or heretics are those who indeed have not given their name to an unbelieving or heretical sect, nor subjected themselves to such a sect, but externally show themselves to adhere to or believe the errors of apostates or heretics, for instance if someone were to say: "Doellinger rightly thinks concerning the Primacy,"² or, with the intention of assenting to the errors of a heretic (or not only from curiosity or another motive), were to hear his preaching or read his writings.

4° "And their receivers, favorers, and generally any defenders whatever of them" (i.e., of apostates or heretics). See n. 1700. q. 4°. Resp. c). d). f), and cf. Nouv. Revue Theol.³ Hence, as a defender, he is held by the censure who either praises the doctrine of a heretic (certainly in particular that doctrine which is contrary to the Faith), or disputes for the heretic, or responds to an objection against him; but not he who praises the learning, eloquence, or talent of a heretic.

Note. - In order that the censure be incurred, it suffices that the apostate or heretic to whom one believes, whom one favors, etc., be known as such to the one believing, favoring, etc.; nor is it necessary that he be denounced or even notorious.⁴

1702. - II. "All and each persons knowingly reading without the authority of the Apostolic See the books of the same apostates and heretics defending heresy, and also the books of any author prohibited by name through Apostolic Letters, and those retaining, printing, and in any way defending the same books." Bull Coenae, § 1, and Rule X of the Index.

The reading of books can be prohibited by natural law, or by positive law, or by laws of both kinds.

Namely, the reading of those books is prohibited by the law of nature itself whose use brings danger of sin, and indeed insofar as the same law commands that this danger be avoided. - See n. 1448. 1449.

But by positive law books are proscribed either immediately by the Supreme Pontiff, or by Councils, even general ones, or by the Index of prohibited books, or by another competent authority, e.g., by Ordinaries of places, and indeed either by name, i.e., with the title of the book expressed, or in general, indicating namely not individual works, but certain classes of works, the use of which is forbidden to the faithful. But the prohibition embraces the reading, retention, defense, and printing of such works.¹

There are added ecclesiastical laws by which especially the edition or printing of books without approval, e.g., of the S. C. of Indulgences or of the Ordinary, is prohibited.²

1703. - In this article a twofold species of prohibited books is contained: the former embraces the books of apostates and heretics; the latter, books prohibited by name through Apostolic Letters.

Books of the former species, that they may fall under excommunication, must bear before themselves two conditions, namely: 1° That they be of apostates or heretics; 2° That they defend heresy.

Books prohibited through Apostolic Letters, that they may fall under excommunication, must 1° be prohibited either in the form of a Brief, as most often happens, or in the form of a Bull, or through encyclical letters, or through any other extrinsic form, when in the letters themselves is read: from the fullness of Our Apostolic authority, or by Apostolic authority; for all these are called by the generic name Apostolic Letters. Therefore the censure does not comprehend books prohibited through decrees of the Index; but it is extended to books prohibited through Apostolic Letters before the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, provided they were prohibited, or, if there is question of prohibiting them, are prohibited under excommunication reserved to the Roman Pontiff. Thus Avanzini. Godschalk otherwise.³ But in the Index it is enunciated in what manner individual books are proscribed. 2° They must be prohibited by name, or by their proper titles.⁴

1704. Questions. - Query 1° Whether the books of those who believe apostates and heretics, of whom there is discussion in n. 1701. 3°, or of favorers and defenders (ib. 4°), if they defend heresy, are comprehended under this censure?

Resp. Negatively, because the books defending heresy are prohibited of those who pertain to the first class, i.e., of those who are leaders of apostates and heretics, or who formally pertain to their sects, or to true and certain heretics. Thus Avanzini.¹

Nevertheless it is not required that the author have been juridically condemned as a heretic or apostate, or have been born in a heretical sect; nor that the book have been written by heretics or apostates alone, with Catholics not cooperating; nor that the author's name be expressed; namely it suffices that: 1) in the book there be contained an indubitable defense of heresy or of apostasy from the Faith, and 2) that the defense have been made so pertinaciously that it cannot be doubted that the author of the book is certainly a heretic or apostate; and thus books of believers, favorers, etc., can be comprehended under the censure. - But books of infidels or of Jews are not comprehended under the censure, since they are neither apostates nor heretics.

Query 2° Whether books of apostates and heretics in which heresy is simply handed down, without being defended, are comprehended under this censure?

Resp. Negatively, since in the Constitution, which in this respect differs from the Bull Coenae, defense of heresy is required. Yet it suffices that the author has applied his talent for this end, that heresy be defended, whatever otherwise may be the matter of the book. Nouv. Rev. Th. T. II. p. 623.

Query 3° Whether periodicals, or newspapers, of the same persons, defending heresy, are prohibited under this censure?

Resp. They do not seem to be; because newspapers, insofar as the sheets remain complete by themselves, do not come under the name of books.² Nevertheless periodical writings, or fascicles destined for composing a volume, are comprehended by the censure.³

Query 4° Whether under the name of a book there also come little books of too slight a bulk, for instance a letter, a sermon, and whether manuscripts come under it?

Resp. to the 1st. Negatively. The reason is, because a penal law is to be interpreted strictly. Say the same concerning sheets separated from the book itself.¹

Resp. to the 2nd. Affirmatively, according to the more common opinion, to which St. Alphonsus adheres more, and which he says is altogether to be counseled.²

Note. - Under the name of a book there comes also the translation of the same, made in whatever language.³

Likewise, according to the opinion to which St. Alphonsus adheres more, there come books of Catholics to which a heretic has added notes so copious that they must be said to consist from these rather than from the writings of Catholics.⁴

Query 5° Whether under the censure there come books of very ancient heretics, or books containing errors wholly obsolete, which, every danger having been removed, are held as merely historical documents?

Resp. Negatively, because as to these the end of the law has entirely ceased.⁵

Query 6° Who in the Constitution come under the name of a) those reading, b) those retaining, c) those printing, d) those defending in any way?

Resp. to a). He who reads by himself, but not, at least probably, he who hears one reading, although the reader reads either by the counsel or by the command of the hearer. The reason is, because he does not read. - Nor does he incur the censure who reads himself, if he is ignorant of the language in which the book is written. - But when a book is prohibited, not only that part which gave cause for the prohibition, but the whole book is prohibited from being read, and besides this whatever part of the book is understood to be prohibited, as the dedicatory epistle, the prologue, the index. - But if the work has been distributed into several volumes, the Doctors dispute whether the prohibition is extended to those in which heresy is not defended, or which did not give cause for the prohibition. The opinion of Lugo pleases us more, who denies this if the subject matter of the work admits division, as history; but otherwise affirms it. - The prohibition ceases if you have withdrawn, or erased, or blackened that part which gave cause for the prohibition, so that it can no longer be read, provided the book was not proscribed because it treats of Religion expressly, or in hatred of the author.¹

Resp. to b). 1° The owner of the book, although it is deposited with another; 2° the depositary; 3° the borrower; 4° one retaining it in pledge. Nor is it enough to hand the book to another torn into sheets for wrapping medicines, salted goods, etc., or to hand it to one having license to retain it, unless you hand it over on this condition, that you do not reclaim it until you have obtained license of reading.²

Resp. to c). Immediate cooperators in the printing (n. 315), whether material cooperators, or (according to the truer opinion) those hiring their labor as conducive to this, as the owner of the printing-house, the editor, etc.³

Resp. to d). See n. 1700, q. 4°, R. c), d). But under the name of those defending there probably do not come those who would praise only the style or talent of the author, but not his doctrine.⁴

Resp. It is required:

1° That they act knowingly, as is said in the Constitution. Hence ignorance, at least gross ignorance, and probably even affected ignorance, excuses. Yet it suffices to know by report, or by a witness worthy of faith. (Cf. n. 1664, q. 3°, R. 2°.)⁵

2° That grave matter be present.⁶ - But smallness of matter: a) On the part of those reading or printing is to be considered formally, and thus sometimes a few lines suffice, if they defend heresy.⁷ - b) On the part of those retaining it is present, if someone retains a book for a short time, e.g., one or another day, or retains it while awaiting the opportune time to hand it over to the Ordinary, or to one having license, or to a confessor. Otherwise, if he were to retain it for a long time, even though he abstained entirely from reading it.¹ - c) On the part of those defending, smallness of matter does not seem admissible.²

3° That these things be done "without the authority of the Apostolic See," as the Constitution speaks, except however the case of a pious and learned man, who from necessity reads in order to convict a heretic, recourse to the Superior not being open.³ By what reason our Bishops can communicate the faculty of reading prohibited books, see p. LXXI. 21, and p. LXXII. 2.

But the clause: for the purpose of attacking them, does not cause that you sin gravely or incur the censure, although you do not read for that end, but e.g., from curiosity.⁴

Query 8° Who among those who belong to literary societies, among which books prohibited by this article are kept, incur the censure?

Resp. 1° Certainly the society as such does not incur it, since a community cannot be struck with excommunication. See n. 1669, q. 6°.

Resp. 2° As to individuals, distinguish. For they belong to the society either a) in such a way that they have co-ownership of the books, or b) in such a way that they belong to the assembly of those who preside over the society and direct its affairs by counsel, vote, etc., or c) in such a way that they are mere ministers of the society, as e.g., a librarian, or d) in such a way that by a contribution of money they procure for themselves the right to the use of the books.

If a), they incur the censure as owners of the books [this number, q. 6°, R. to b)].

If b), subdistinguish. The president will incur it, as is plain of itself; but not the remaining members who in no way favor the purchase of prohibited books. Thus in the hypothesis that those members lack co-ownership of the books.

If c), the librarian is held by the censure, because he comes under the name of those retaining [this number, q. 6°, R. to b)]. As to the others, see whether perhaps from the circumstances they are to be numbered among those defending [this number, q. 6°, R. to d)].

If d), they do not incur it, if they do not use their right for the use of prohibited books. Except if in a particular case they defend prohibited books or by circumstances are judged to defend them.

Thus, saving a better judgment; for I have sought this question in vain among the Doctors, even among those who have written expressly on the prohibition of books.

1705. - The Index was composed and published by order of Paul IV in the year 1558. - Pius IV perfected it with the Council of Trent, and published it in the year 1564. - Clement VIII enlarged it in the year 1595. - The Congregation of the Index was instituted by St. Pius V.¹

But the Index prohibits books partly by certain classes, as in the ten Rules of the Index, and in the Decrees concerning prohibited books not expressed by name in the Index;² partly by indicating, in alphabetical order, either the titles of books or the names of authors.

1706. - I. There are prohibited absolutely: 1° all books of heresiarchs (both of those who after the year 1515 invented or stirred up heresies, and of those who are or have been Heads or Leaders of heretics, such as Luther, etc.), even if not erroneous, or not treating expressly of Religion.

2° Books of heretics which treat expressly of Religion.

3° Books treating expressly of obscene things, with the exception of ancient books written by pagans, which, on account of elegance and propriety of speech, and insofar as there is question of ecclesiastical law alone, are permitted; nevertheless they are by no reason to be read before boys.

4° All books treating of astrology, divination, and sorceries.

5° All books entered into the Index without any addition.

II. There are prohibited under clauses:

1° All books which, before the year 1515, either the Supreme Pontiffs or Ecumenical Councils condemned, in the same way as they had formerly been condemned. By this rule however there are not prohibited the old books of pagans, nor even, according to Theologians (see n. 1704, q. 5°), the books of heretics of earlier centuries, as of Tertullian, Eusebius, etc.

2° Books written either a) by heretics, although not treating of Religion; or b) by those who afterward fell into heresy, or after a fall returned to the bosom of the Church, although written in a Catholic manner, unless they have been approved.

3° Bibles in the vernacular language, unless they have been approved by the Holy See, or published with notes drawn from the Holy Fathers, or from learned and Catholic men. Thus, not without foundation, Craisson interprets the Decrees and Responses of the Holy See.¹ I add: provided that a special prohibition has not been made by the Bishop concerning those versions which have been published without the approval of the Holy See or of the Ordinary. But Bishops cannot approve versions without the aforesaid notes, as is plain from the concession made to them in the year 1757.²

4° Books entered into the Index with the clause: until they are corrected, i.e., until they have appeared in a new corrected edition, which has been approved by the Sacred Congregation of the Index.

III. It is established that no book and no writing be printed without the license of the Ordinary.

1707. Questions. - Query 1° Whether the law of the Index, prohibiting the reading of certain books, obliges by natural law, or only by positive law?

Resp. It presses by both laws, at least of itself; because it prohibits books only because they are pernicious, and bring in a proximate danger of perversion or of sin; but by natural law each one is held to flee danger of this kind. Hence even if the obligation of the Index were not acknowledged somewhere, nevertheless the reading of books entered into the Index would be prohibited under grave sin, at least in general. On this matter St. Alphonsus observes:³ "All Theologians ... add, that not even with the license of the Pontiff can the reading of that book be permitted, which could be an occasion of subversion to someone."¹

Two things besides are to be noted.

1° Private persons ought to obey the commands of the confessor in these things which regard the reading of books. Thus the Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition responded in the year 1832 to the Bishops of Switzerland asking: "Whether the faithful, with a safe conscience, can read Periodicals or books which have not undergone the censure of the Ordinary?" Resp. "Let them have recourse to the confessor."

2° The confessor himself ought carefully to seek the direction of the Bishop, and diligently to keep before his eyes the very grave warning which St. Alphonsus¹ handed down, namely: "In this matter it is expedient ordinarily to follow the stricter opinions."

Query 2° Whether among us the rules of the Index are to be observed and urged?

Resp. Affirmatively, if, when they are neglected, Faith or morals are exposed to proximate danger; indeed, even apart from this danger, those rules which have not been abrogated and morally speaking can be observed, are to be observed and, if it can be done prudently, urged.²

Especially: a) "Obscene books ... expressly so called cannot be read by anyone without grave sin, because of the proximate danger of exciting lust."³

b) "Those who read books treating of history, geography, and other matters of this kind, in which many things opposed to the Faith are found here and there, seem to be excused, because of the very great difficulty which exists in discerning and comparing books; for since most books written in the English language have non-Catholic authors, it can scarcely happen that Catholics, without very grave detriment to knowledge and other inconveniences, abstain from them. Therefore the kindness of the Church seems to indulge this, lest otherwise pious souls be ensnared. Moreover, care must diligently be taken that an occasion of perversion not arise; and therefore one must labor with every zeal, that expurgated books be had."⁴

c) Those things are to be observed which were said in n. 1706, II. 3°, concerning Bibles in the vernacular language. - Kenrick however observes:⁵ "If there are any recently converted to the Faith, who retain Bibles handed down by the hands of their ancestors, in which also the names of parents and children are inscribed, as is the custom, they do not seem to be compelled against their sentiments and affections, to cast them away, the Apostle admonishing: Receive him who is weak in faith."¹

d) As to the printing of books, the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore² recalls the law of the Church forbidding that "books concerning Religion and the worship of God" be committed to the press without the approval of the Ordinary.

Note. - Let these things said be understood insofar as there is question of the Index alone, apart from those things which we have explained in nn. 1702-1704 according to the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, and which we shall say in n. 1741, 1°, according to the same Constitution.

1708. - III. "Schismatics, and those who pertinaciously withdraw themselves from, or recede from, the obedience of the Roman Pontiff existing for the time." C. 5. Dist. 19. caus. 43. q. III. can. 26. Bull Coenae, § I.

1° By "schismatics" are understood those who pertain to perfect schism, namely those who arrogate to themselves an authority independent of the Roman Pontiff, and, thus setting themselves up as an authority, constitute new churches, make assemblies, dispose concerning the affairs of the Church after the likeness of a supreme independent authority.

2° By "those who pertinaciously withdraw themselves from, or recede from, the obedience of the Roman Pontiff existing for the time," are understood those who pertain to imperfect schism, namely who with full malice and obstinacy refuse to obey the person of the Roman Pontiff, holding themselves released from his supreme divine authority. I said: 1) holding themselves released from his supreme authority. Hence this censure does not hold those who refuse to obey on account of the thing commanded, e.g., in fasts, etc.; but only those who cast off the authority of the Roman Pontiff. I said: 2) from his supreme divine authority. Hence they do not contract this censure who decline his temporal dominion.

Note. - a) He who refuses to be subject to his own Bishop, because he does not wish to have him as his proper and legitimate Pastor, is the same as not wishing to be subject to the Roman Pontiff who sent him. If however someone perseveres in subjection to the Roman Pontiff and in communion with the other Churches, separation from communion with his own Bishop alone does not subject him to the censure.

b) It is not necessary that they be rebels against the authority of the Holy See taken universally; but it suffices that they are rebels against the obedience of that person who actually and legitimately occupies the See of Blessed Peter.

3° "Pertinaciously withdraw themselves," i.e., in the same way as heretics from the Faith, or knowingly and willingly. Wherefore the censure would not hold him who refused to be subject to a Pontiff insofar as he was suspect to him, or hateful, or doubtfully legitimate, i.e., not yet received by the universal Church because of an election doubtfully valid.

1709. - IV. "All and each, of whatever state, grade, or condition they shall be, appealing from the ordinances or mandates of the Roman Pontiffs existing for the time to a future universal Council, and also those by whose aid, counsel, or favor the appeal has been made." Bull Coenae, § II.

1° "To a future Council." Therefore if appeal has been made to a future Roman Pontiff, or to a present Council, there is no place for the censure.

2° By "ordinances, or mandates" here are not understood ordinances or mandates as to matters which pertain to temporal life and civil government; but only ordinances which regard the government of the universal or particular Church, and which pertain to its spiritual authority, even if exercised upon private persons.

1710. - V. "All killing, mutilating, striking, capturing, imprisoning, detaining, or hostilely pursuing Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, Patriarchs, Archbishops, Bishops, and Legates or Nuncios of the Apostolic See, or casting them out from their dioceses, territories, lands, or dominions, and also those commanding these things, or holding them ratified, or furnishing aid, counsel, or favor in them." St. Pius V, c. Infelicis. Bull Coenae, § XI.

1° "Hostilely pursuing," i.e., with the intention of harming, not merely of frightening.

2° "From their dioceses," etc., i.e., from places subject to their jurisdiction.

3° "Casting out," i.e., expelling one previously received, and indeed from the whole tract of jurisdiction. Therefore they are not bound by this censure who simply do not receive, or who expel from some city of the diocese.

4° "Those commanding" ... "furnishing counsel" in these things. See n. 1700, q. 4°.

5° "Holding ratified." Ratification here requires: a) that the striking, etc., was done in the name of the one ratifying; because "no one can hold ratified what has not been done in his name"; b) that at the time when these things had been perpetrated, they themselves could have admitted them, and therefore could have commanded them; for thus ratification is drawn back and is equated to mandate;¹ c) that not only by intention, but by some grave external action, e.g., writing, congratulation, applause, praise, etc., they approve the indicated delicts.²

1711. - VI. "Those impeding directly or indirectly the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, whether of the internal or external forum, and those recurring for this purpose to the secular forum, and those procuring or issuing its mandates, or furnishing aid, counsel, or favor." L. III. T. XXIII. c. 3 in 6°. Bull Coenae, § XVI.

1° They are struck by this excommunication who impede the exercise of ordinary or delegated jurisdiction, whether of the internal or external forum. - I say: of jurisdiction, namely insofar as it is distinguished from the exercise of Order, which two however are not always easily discerned from one another. Generally the power of Order pertains chiefly to the sanctification of souls; the power of Jurisdiction chiefly to the governing of the society of the faithful; therefore it belongs to the former to bless and consecrate; to the latter to rule and govern. Wherefore to the power of Order it pertains to perform Sacred things, to administer the Sacraments, to bless and consecrate persons and things, etc. To the power of jurisdiction it pertains to issue laws, mandates; to bind, loose; to confer benefices, ecclesiastical offices; to determine or take away ecclesiastical things, to send preachers, to visit a diocese, and to commit to others those things which belong to Order.

2° In this article those who impede the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and those who elude the effect of the same jurisdiction by recourse to a lay tribunal are entirely distinct. Therefore the particle: and those recurring for this purpose, has a disjunctive force, so that it signifies the other class of those who likewise are comprehended under the same censure. Hence both those impeding and those merely recurring are struck with this excommunication.

3° "Those impeding," namely by some deed, for instance by force, threats, command; for he is said to impede who causes another unwillingly to cease from an action. Therefore if someone uses counsels, entreaty, fraud, he is rather said to persuade, obtain, deceive. - "Those impeding directly," namely if someone obstructs the very person wishing to exercise jurisdiction, and in that thing which he intends to do, e.g., while he threatens the Bishop with recourse to the lay forum, if he is transferred by him to another parish. - Indirectly, namely if he obstructs him in another matter or in another person, as if he threatens him with some grave evil under pretext of an injury brought upon himself, but in truth that the Bishop may desist from transferring him to another parish; if by threats he prohibits judges given to him by the Bishop from undertaking those things which belong to their office.

4° "Those recurring." In order to incur the censure on this account, according to some it is required that a mandate or prohibition be obtained against ecclesiastical judges; according to others this is not required, but it suffices that one merely have recourse. - By forum some¹ understand civil power, whether legislative, executive, or judicial; others² only judicial power.

5° By "those issuing" are understood judges, and all others of the secular forum, who issue mandates which impede the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, but not actuaries writing them out, etc.³

6° "Those furnishing aid, counsel, or favor." See n. 1700, q. 4°. But these incur the censure only after by this reason the exercise of jurisdiction has been impeded, or recourse (in the opinion of those who think this suffices) has taken place.

1712. - VII. "Those compelling, either directly or indirectly, lay judges to draw ecclesiastical persons to their tribunal contrary to canonical dispositions: likewise those issuing laws or decrees against the liberty or rights of the Church." Martin V, c. Ad reprimendas. Bull Coenae, § XV.

Query. Whether lay judges, who by an office imposed by the laws either of a kingdom or of an empire, which are contrary to ecclesiastical sanctions, draw ecclesiastical persons to their tribunal, that they may discharge their said office, incur a censure of this kind?

Resp. Negatively, according to the authentic response which was given in the Instruction of the S. C. U. Inq., February 1, 1871, by which it was declared: "The excommunication does not touch those who are subordinate, even if they have been judges, but has been laid only upon those who, compelled by no one, either do such things, or compel others to do them."

1° "Those compelling directly or indirectly." Indirectly, e.g., by fear impressed upon the relatives of a judge, or through another upon the judge himself.

2° "Contrary to canonical dispositions," there is allusion to Concordats of a kingdom or of an empire with the Apostolic See, which remain in force. - There is allusion also to the case in which some ecclesiastical person has been duly degraded, and delivered to a lay judge to be punished. - Likewise to other cases: when, e.g., an ecclesiastical person draws lay persons into judgment; for an ecclesiastical person can present himself in a lay court in a non-ecclesiastical cause as plaintiff; but he himself cannot be drawn as defendant. - The Commentators add:¹ "This censure ceases in those places where the privilege of forum, the Holy See permitting or being silent, has been abrogated; for it is utterly incredible that the most wise Pontiff wished suddenly, and with scarcely one word, to stir up a very wide and very tangled crop of controversies and annoyances. Cf. nn. 112-114."

3° "Those issuing laws or decrees against the liberty and rights of the Church." Only those issuing them, or the authors of laws or decrees, are excommunicated, as for instance among us the members of legislative or municipal assemblies, and likewise the President, Governor, or Prefect of a City who do not veto laws or decrees of this kind. - Laws are those things which are constituted perpetually by the Supreme Power. - Decrees are those things which are issued generally by any power whatever, as for instance by a Prefect of a City, by Municipalities, etc. - Against the liberty or rights of the Church. These words are very widely open, and strike every kind whatever of laws or decrees by which not only the exercise of ecclesiastical power, whether of jurisdiction or of Order, but any other right is intercepted, restricted, disturbed. See examples in the Syllabus, pp. 19-21, 24-33, 41-54, p. XLII-XLIV.

1713. - VIII. "Those recurring to lay power for impeding letters, or any acts whatever proceeding from the Apostolic See, or from its Legates or Delegates of whatever kind, and those prohibiting their promulgation or execution directly or indirectly, or on account of them injuring or greatly frightening either the parties themselves or others." L. III. T. XXIII. c. 4 in 6°. Bull Coenae, § XIII.

1° By the words: "letters," namely Apostolic, what is understood, see n. 1703. - "Acts" are called those things which are done at Rome by the Roman Pontiff, whether they contain a spiritual or temporal matter; or by his command, as citations, processes, etc.

2° This article comprises a threefold kind of persons: 1) "Those recurring" to lay power for impeding letters, or any acts whatever proceeding from the Apostolic See, or from the Legates or Delegates of the same Apostolic See, of whatever kind.

2) "Those prohibiting" directly or indirectly the promulgation or execution of the same acts.

3° "Those injuring" (the body, goods), or "greatly frightening" (with exceedingly grave fear) the parties themselves, i.e., the persons who have obtained some Rescript either of grace or of justice from the Holy See or its Legates, or some sentence favorable to themselves, etc., or those injuring or greatly frightening others, for instance the patrons of the same parties by reason of the acts obtained, or executors, or persons to whom the acts obtained are referred by some reason.

1714. - IX. "All forgers of Apostolic Letters, even in the form of a Brief, and of supplications concerning grace or justice, signed by the Roman Pontiff, or by the Vice-Chancellors of the Holy Roman Church or by those acting in their place, or by mandate of the same Roman Pontiff; and also those falsely publishing Apostolic Letters, even in the form of a Brief, and also falsely signing supplications of this kind under the name of the Roman Pontiff, or of the Vice-Chancellor, or of those acting in the place of the aforesaid." L. V. Decr. T. XX. c. 7. Bull Coenae, § VI.

Note. - It is required that these things have been committed with evil intent, and, if the interest of another is involved, that they gravely harm or can harm this other. For the crime of forgery is "an alteration or suppression of the truth made to the fraud of another."¹

As to those using false Apostolic letters, see n. 1735.

1715. - X. "Those absolving an accomplice in a base sin, even in the article of death, if another priest, although not approved for Confessions, can receive the Confession of the dying person without any grave infamy and scandal about to arise." Benedict XIV, c. Sacramentum Poenitentiae, § IV. Cf. c. Apostolici muneris, §§ III, IV.

1° "Those absolving": but not merely those hearing the Confession of an accomplice,² nor those absolving with ignorance, even gross ignorance, of the censure; for the Constitution of Benedict XIV, from which the censure is taken, requires daring (cf. n. 1406, 2°, Note, and n. 1664, q. 3°). Those feignedly absolving are held by the censure. (47) p. 428.

2° "An accomplice" (see n. 1404, I, 1405, q. 2°), "in a base sin" (see n. 1405, q. 1°).

3° "Even in the article of death, if," etc. (see n. 1405, q. 3°, q. 4°, q. 5°).

Note. - Concerning absolution from this censure, see p. LXXI, n. 16, note 2, b).

1716. - XI. "Those usurping, or sequestrating, jurisdiction, goods, revenues, belonging to ecclesiastical persons by reason of their churches or benefices." Bull Coenae, § XVII. L. I. T. VI. c. 13 in 6°.

1° "Those usurping," i.e., occupying a thing from another as if by right to it, or as if it pertained to themselves. Therefore thieves, robbers, plunderers, etc. do not incur this censure (S. C. O., March 9, 1870), nor those who acquire a thing usurped by others by acts either of last will or among the living.¹

2° "Or sequestrating," i.e., jurisdictionally impeding lest goods, etc., be received by the said ecclesiastical persons.

3° "Jurisdiction," whether spiritual or temporal, e.g., of the Roman Pontiff in his dominion.

4° "Goods," whether immovable or movable, or rights. Cf. n. 593.

5° "Revenues," i.e., whatever the thing bears, or is received by reason of the thing, not stole fees.

6° "Belonging to ecclesiastical persons by reason of their churches or benefices." Therefore not those things which belong to hospitals, lay sodalities, Monasteries (others however affirm²), cemeteries; nor goods assigned to preserving or repairing sacred buildings, or to performing sacred things.³

Moreover current law establishes four excommunications incurred by the very fact against those who dispose illicitly of ecclesiastical goods, etc.: the first, of which in this number; the second, third, and fourth, of which in nn. 1717, 1738, 1740. The first and second are reserved specially to the Supreme Pontiff; the fourth simply to him; the third is reserved to no one.

1717. - XII. "Those invading, destroying, detaining, by themselves or through others, cities, lands, places, or rights pertaining to the Roman Church; or usurping, disturbing, retaining supreme jurisdiction in them, and also those furnishing aid, counsel, or favor to each one of the aforesaid." Bull Coenae, § XX.

1° This excommunication looks to the defense of temporal dominion belonging to the Holy See. Hence rights and jurisdiction are here understood as temporal; nor are any rights whatever meant, but principal rights, or those which are proper to a Prince as such; and supreme jurisdiction, i.e., that which belongs to the Prince alone, as for instance the right of life and death, the right of imposing taxes, of creating Magistrates, etc.

2° They are excommunicated: a) who destroy or invade cities, etc., force being used; b) who usurp or disturb the supreme jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff in these things, e.g., who impede the Roman Pontiff himself from publishing laws in these cities, imposing taxes, etc.; c) who retain this jurisdiction, or cities, lands, etc.; d) who furnish aid, counsel, favor to each one of the aforesaid. - Concerning those who furnish these things, i.e., aid to those invading, destroying, disturbing, usurping, there is no difficulty.

What concerning those who furnish these things to those detaining them? The Commentators respond:¹ "There is a twofold kind of these, ... one of those who exercise some public office. But public offices pertain either to the necessities or utilities of citizens, or to maintaining the government, or to both. The former" (under which I think comes the office of consuls, who live in foreign ports or cities, and also of legates before the pretended king of Italy) "it is harmless, other things being equal, to undertake, because a society cannot kill itself; not likewise the latter; but as to censures one must advert whether someone can abstain from these without grave inconvenience." (Cf. n. 1664, q. 5°.)

"The other kind is of those who undertake no public office. These are understood to favor, if they furnish proximate work to those retaining them, so that they remain in possession: as for instance by money, ... by writings, etc.; if remote work, not likewise; as if they rent houses to them, serve them, etc."

Note. - At the beginning of this paragraph I said that there are thirteen excommunications reserved specially to the Supreme Pontiff. Namely, to the twelve which in the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis are reserved specially to the Pope, on the fifth day before the kalends of September, 1873, there acceded:

XIII. By which, in the Constitution Romanus Pontifex, there are struck:

1° The Canons and Dignitaries of vacant Cathedral Churches, who have dared to grant and transfer the care, governance, and administration of the vacant Church under whatever title, name, or color sought ... to one nominated and presented by lay power by concession or privilege of the Holy See, or, where custom is in force, elected by the Chapter members themselves to the same vacant Church.

2° Those nominated and presented, or as above elected, to vacant Churches, who dare to take up the care, governance, and administration of them, etc....

3° All those who have obeyed the aforesaid things, or have furnished aid, counsel, or favor, of whatever state, condition, preeminence, and dignity they shall be.

Moreover there is added: "But if any of the aforesaid are marked with the episcopal character, they incur by the very fact, without any declaration, the penalty of suspension from the exercise of Pontificals and of interdict from entrance into the Church, likewise reserved to the Holy See."

Besides: 1° the aforesaid Canons are deprived of fruits; - 2° those nominated are deprived of the right acquired by them.¹ (E) p. 399.