Chapter V: On Religious In A State Of Dispersion

2192. • Principles. I. It is certain that no juridical effect can arise from those dispersions or suppressions of religious families which the civil Power decrees without the consent of the Supreme Pontiff. The reason is that the religious state draws its origin from law, both divine and ecclesiastical. Therefore, it belongs to the Church alone to judge concerning affairs pertaining to it.¹⁹

II. The dispersion or suppression of religious families can bring it about that something is diminished in the obligations of the regular state, and that the use of privileges is interrupted for some time. This is established from various responses of the sacred Congregations, from which we judge it opportune to excerpt the following decisions.²⁰

1. Vows among Religious dispersed by force remain in their perfect vigor. This is established from the Brief of Pius VI to the Bishop of Brunn, the day before the Ides of April, 1782, and from the response of the Sacred Penitentiary, 18 April 1867.²¹

2. Remaining bound by the vow of poverty, dispersed Religious cannot possess goods in their own name, accumulate monies,

spend expenses upon useless things, nor make testaments (but see n. 2176).

3. As regards the vow of Obedience, the Sacred Penitentiary, 18 April 1867, declared to all Regular Superiors: "their jurisdiction over their own suppressed subjects, even those dwelling outside the cloisters, has by no means ceased. For although each Regular dwelling outside the cloisters, as regards polity and ecclesiastical discipline, is not exempt from the jurisdiction of the Ordinary of the place in which he dwells: nevertheless, as regards regular discipline and the obligations which flow from religious profession and are compatible with his new state, he is subject to his own Superiors and is bound to obey them."¹ - If he dwells outside his own Province, he is subject both to the local Superior and to the Provincial in whose territory he is staying. Thus from the decree of the Sacred Congregation ON REGULAR DISCIPLINE, 5 Aug. 1872.²

4. "Care must be taken that Regulars expelled from their own houses, insofar as they cannot be received into another monastery, come together into some particular house to be designated by their Superiors; and there they must not omit to observe the rule which they have professed, in the better manner in which it can be done, with prohibition made to each one of departing without due license." Thus the Sacred Penitentiary, 18 April 1867.³

Note. An indult of secularization, or license of dwelling in the world for a time or in perpetuity, from a just cause, e.g. for assisting parents, for caring for one's own health, etc., is sometimes conceded by the Sacred Congregation of BISHOPS AND REGULARS. But ordinarily it is required that the Religious observe the substantial things of the vows compatible with the new state, that (having been provided with a suitable patrimony, if he is a priest) he live under the obedience of the Ordinary of the place even by force of the religious vow, and that he continually wear some trace of the religious habit. Hence, if he has been solemnly professed, he cannot (without another special Indult) make a testament; and when he has died, the pensions or goods which he was holding belong by right of spoils not to his heirs or legatees (unless by permission of the Holy See), but to his Order or to the Holy Camera: to the Order, if he had been restored to the world for a time; to the Camera of spoils, if in perpetuity.⁴ Thus Pius VIII, 26 June 1829.⁵

For the whole time of the Indult, such a Religious must confess before a Confessor approved by the Ordinary of the place, by whom nevertheless he can be absolved even from censures and cases reserved in his own Order, if they are by no means reserved in the Diocese. Thus PIUS IX, 27 Aug. 1852.⁶

2193. • IT IS ASKED. Whether Religious DISPERSED by force enjoy all the PRIVILEGES of their own Religion?

Resp. 1. If several live together IN COMMUNITY and form a family, although an imperfect one, they retain all the rights and privileges of Regulars. - And hence it is that the Sacred PENITENTIARY, on 18 April 1867, declared: 1. "that houses, provided at least three Regulars have come together into them to dwell there, of whom at least one is a priest, will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Provincial Minister, and must be governed through a particular Superior to be constituted there. - 2. In houses, provided at least four Regular priests dwell in them, a private oratory can be erected, with those things being observed which must by law be observed, first to be visited and approved by the Provincial Minister..., in such a way that in it Mass can be celebrated by Regular priests, the Most Holy Eucharist reserved, and Holy Communion received by Religious and Oblates only, and the precept of hearing the Sacred rite satisfied. - 3. The Apostolic See grants besides that in Oratories so erected the Regulars themselves can enjoy all Indulgences conceded to the churches of their own Order."⁷

Resp. 2. Dispersed Regulars who live SEPARATELY in their own houses retain only personal privileges conceded to Religious, but not real privileges; because the subject of these privileges no longer exists. And hence it is, e.g., that, short of a special Indult of the Bishop, they are subject to the pastors of places as regards Paschal Communion, as regards the last Sacraments, and as regards funeral right.⁸

Response of the Sacred Congregation of BISHOPS AND REGULARS. - Whether and to whom belongs, in the case, the right of funerals as regards Religious dispersed by force of present circumstances? - R. The Sacred Congregation, on 11 March 1881 (in Casertana), responded: "Affirmatively in favor of Regulars, whenever Religious live together under a legitimate Superior at least in the number of three, and others dwelling outside depend upon the same; otherwise, in favor of pastors."⁹

2194. • Concerning the actual state of Nuns in France we shall note these few things:¹⁰

1. Today, in France (Savoy excepted), in Belgium, and in the other places where the same Code of civil laws is in force, the vows of nuns are not held as solemn, as has several times been responded by the Sacred Congregation of BISHOPS AND REGULARS and by the Sacred PENITENTIARY.¹¹ - Yet this does not run as regards men, who can still emit solemn vows in those regions: as is established from the authentic testimony of GREGORY XVI as regards the Religious of St. Benedict of Solesmes.

2. Papal enclosure does not exist in the same regions, nor therefore do transgressors incur the canonical penalties established by St. PIUS V and renewed by PIUS IX. - Nevertheless, the law of enclosure in monasteries in which, by force of the Constitutions, it ought to exist, cannot be cast off without fault of itself mortal; because thus it seems to be commonly apprehended, and Bishops are judged to wish to oblige thus, since this discipline has always been held as supremely necessary. Thus Bouvier.¹²

3. The obligation of the Divine Office does not press, for the aforesaid nuns, from a law of the Church; but only from the respective Constitutions of the Orders, which generally do not oblige under grave sin. - Thus the Sacred PENITENTIARY to the Bishop of Perigueux, 26 Nov. 1852.¹³

4. As regards entrance into Religion, "the vow of a woman whose intention had regard to monasteries as they now exist in France is not reserved; namely because the same monasteries, by the Apostolic Holy See, with attention given to the peculiar circumstances, are not regarded as Orders truly and properly religious, but as families of very pious women." Thus the Sacred PENITENTIARY to the Bishop of Le Mans, 23 Dec. 1835.¹⁴

5. To the same Bishop asking "whether the Ordinary can DISPENSE concerning vows emitted by nuns, a sufficient reason having been given, with the vow of perpetual chastity remaining," - it was responded: "From the declaration of His Holiness, Bishops of France, while things stand thus, can dispense."¹⁵

But it must be adverted: 1) this Indult has regard only to Institutes in which formerly solemn vows were emitted, say the Order of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary; but not to Congregations in which simple vows are emitted from a law of the Institute approved by the Holy See; nor to nuns who emit vows accepted by a third party, or a vow of perseverance or stability (cf. n. 2175, 3). - 2) It is not customary for an absolute dispensation concerning the simple vow of perpetual chastity to be conceded by the Holy See; but only a commutation mixed with dispensation: especially under this condition, that if the woman survives her husband, she cannot enter other nuptials without a new commutation of the Holy See¹⁶ (cf. n. 2176).

6. In some Institutes SIMPLE VOWS (the vow of chastity not excepted) are so emitted that they endure as long as the professed woman shall have remained in the Institute: in which case the vows of those who either depart spontaneously or are dismissed by Superiors cease without any dispensation. - Yet generally "in Congregations of women it is by no means in use that simple vows are perpetual on the part of those vowing and are dissolved on the part of the Institute. Rather, vows are customarily emitted first for a time, and then perpetual, for whose dispensation recourse must be had to the Apostolic See."¹⁷

"But it is established that the Sisters or girls of Charity, instituted by St. Vincent de Paul, pronounce only simple vows, whose obligation is not extended beyond a year; so that, if they wish to remain in the Congregation, they must renew the same vows each year when the time of the Chapter recurs: and this practice, while it opens to each one the liberty of deserting the Congregation, also leaves to Superiors the liberty of dismissing sisters giving bad examples and the unteachable, by which it happens that the individual Sisters are more easily contained in duty."¹⁸