Section — Konings, Theologia Moralis
§ II. On Sacrilege
- Sacrilege is the violation or unworthy treatment of sacred things. It is distinguished as threefold: 1° personal; 2° local; 3° real.
Principles. - I. Sacred here is called whatever is deputed to divine worship from divine or ecclesiastical institution, and therefore deserves special reverence. - St. Thomas.1
Hence 1° Sacred persons are those who are deputed to divine worship through Sacred Tonsure, or through religious vows, or more probably also through any vow of chastity.
2° Sacred places are those which by the authority of the Church are dedicated to worship, as temples and public chapels (not private ones), yet consecrated or blessed; likewise blessed cemeteries. L. IV. 460.
3° Sacred things are those which pertain to divine worship or are proximately referred to it, as Sacraments, consecrated vessels, Relics or images of Saints; likewise those things which pertain to the adornment of the Church or of ministers; finally ecclesiastical goods, even movable ones. - St. Thom.2
II. Sacrilege is a mortal sin from its genus, because it is opposed to the most excellent moral virtue, namely Religion, and for the most part regards grave matter. - Yet it can become light by reason of smallness of matter or imperfection of the act.3
III. Sacrilege differs in species according as it affects a person, place, or sacred thing; hence in confession those circumstances must be explained. - St. Alph.4 St. Thom.5
- You will resolve. - 1° Personal sacrilege is committed: 1) by inflicting violent hands on a Cleric or Religious; 2) by any sin of luxury perpetrated by or with a person bound by a vow of chastity; 3) by violation of personal immunity. - But it will not be sacrilege to detract from a priest, because his person alone is sacred, but not his reputation.6
2° Local sacrilege is committed: 1) by all sins by which a Church is polluted by Law, namely by illicit shedding of human blood or seed, homicide, or burial of an excommunicated person or infidel in the Church; 2) by all sins which are done against the immunity and sanctity of a sacred place, as breaking in, despoiling, theft, quarrels, and similar things; 3) by actions unbecoming the sanctity of the place, as are markets, assemblies, and the din of judgments, unless a grave cause excuses.1
3° Real sacrilege is committed: 1) by unworthy administration or reception of the Sacraments; 2) by unworthy treatment of sacred Relics, images, etc.; 3) by profanation of sacred vessels, instruments, or ornaments; 4) by theft of a thing pertaining to divine worship or to the Church; 5) by abuse of Scripture, for example by twisting its words to vain things, etc.; 6) by neglect of sacred vessels, corporals, etc., in those who ought to care for these things religiously.2
Notes to n. 347. (1) 2. 2. q. 99. a. 1. (2) 2. 2. q. 99. a. 3. (3) L. IV. 33. (4) L. IV. 34. (5) 2. 2. q. 99. a. 1. (6) L. IV. 35.
- Questions. - Quaer. 1° Is violation of a person bound by a simple vow of chastity outside Religion sacrilege?
Resp. It is controverted. The more probable opinion of St. Alph.3 affirms, because through any vow of chastity man is truly consecrated to God. For one's own will suffices for consecrating one's own acts to God, while for public consecration public authority is required.4 See p. LXXXIX. 7.
Besides, whoever is bound by a vow of chastity, as often as he violates this, certainly commits a twofold sin: namely one against chastity, and the other against Religion. - Lacroix.5
Quaer. 2° Are all sins of luxury committed in a Church or cemetery sacrileges?
Resp. 1° Merely internal sins are not to be held as sacrileges, because they do not seem specially to affect the sacred place, unless there is a desire of sinning externally in the sacred place itself. - Thus commonly.6
Resp. 2° As to external sins, it is certain that sacrilege is committed through consummated acts, namely through voluntary pollution, fornication, etc. This is openly clear from Canon Law. But whether it is also committed through other grave external sins, for example gravely impure touches, is controverted. St. Alph.,7 Collet, etc., more probably affirm.
Quaer. 3° Is every theft in a Church sacrilege?
Resp. 1° It is established that every theft of a sacred thing is sacrilege, and also theft of a non-sacred thing nevertheless committed to the custody of a sacred place, as is clear from Canon Law.1
Resp. 2° As to things which by chance or by accident are found in the Church, as purses, a watch, etc., it is probably controverted on both sides.
Notes to n. 348. (1) L. IV. 36, 37. (2) L. IV. 40-48. (3) L. IV. 47. Cf. Vind. P. III, q. II. (4) Billuart, Diss. 10, de rel. (5) L. III. 55. (6) L. IV. 462. (7) L. IV. 459. Cf. Vind. P. III, q. III.
- Quaer. 4° Does the injury of any goods whatever belonging to Clerics constitute sacrilege?
Resp. Negatively, but only injury of goods which Clerics possess not in their own name but in the name of the Church, and of which they cannot dispose, and of those which pertain to the adornment of the church, because these alone are sacred.2 (II) p. 479.
Quaer. 5° To whom is it licit to touch sacred vessels?
Resp. If they actually contain the Blessed Sacrament, outside a case of necessity or danger of profanation, it is licit for no one, without grave sin, to touch them, even mediately, except for a priest or deacon; otherwise, for all Clerics without special permission. The same is licit for sacristans, whether regular laymen, or oblates of secular congregations, or nuns; likewise for those who in clerical dress serve churches. For other laymen it is prohibited under venial sin to touch them immediately, unless a reasonable cause excuses.3
But it is licit for all to touch other sacred things, of which sort are, for example, Agnus Dei, at least from modern custom, Relics of Saints, sacred ornaments, except those which immediately touch the holy Eucharist, as, for example, corporals, palls, purificators after use and before washing. But the first washing of these must be performed by a cleric in sacred orders, yet probably it can also be performed by a tonsured cleric; but it cannot be done without venial sin by a layman, or even by a nun or pious women living a common life under rule;4 but the second and third washing, although more suitably done by a cleric, can nevertheless be done without sin even by a layman. It would also be venial not to throw the water of the washing into the sacrarium.5
Notes to n. 349. (1) C. 21. § 2. causa 17. q. 4. (2) L. IV. 42. (3) L. IV. 48, VI. 382. (4) S. R. C. 12 Sept. 1857. (5) L. IV. 48, VI. 382, 387. Q. retr. 72. Appendix annotation (Π), to n. 349. q. 4°. p. 158. col. 1. It is asked whether it is sacrilege unjustly to retain legacies left to the Church for its service? Lessius affirms, L. II. c. 16. n. 30. But Tamburini and others deny, because until the said goods are possessed by the Church, they are not sacred. St. Alphonsus, L. IV. 42. q. 3. It is likewise asked whether it is sacrilege not to pay tithes? Some affirm; others deny. Yet they say it is a graver sin of irreligiosity, because the payment of tithes is ordered to the recognition of divine dominion. Ib. q. 4.