Article — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Article Fourth. On Dispensation from Abstinence and Fasting
688. Who can dispense: a. The supreme pontiff for the whole Church. His dispensation, from the known principles, is always valid and, when a just cause exists, also licit.
b. The bishop with his subjects from a just cause in particular cases, but without an indult not with an entire community; therefore neither with an entire diocese, nor with some parish, nor with some family.1
In recent times there has been granted to bishops the faculty, for most grave causes, of dispensing in the law of abstinence if some solemn feast falls on Friday or Saturday, except in the times of Lent and Advent, on Ember days, and on vigils consecrated to fasting. This power is extended also to days on which extraordinary fairs are held with a great concourse of the people.2
c. The pastor, from custom, with his subjects in a particular case, that is, individual persons, but not with the whole parish nor with an entire family, not even for one day.
d. A regular superior with his subjects taken individually, but not with the whole community.
e. Confessors, unless they have been expressly delegated, have no faculty of dispensing, but can only declare whether an excusing cause is present; which, moreover, physicians also can do, and superiors of nuns.
In declaring inability to fast, especially if the excusing cause is not plainly certain, superiors and confessors should attend to what Sanchez wisely warns, that they provide for necessity with the least loss of the law: thus where it suffices to take the morning breakfast or the evening collation more indulgently, they should grant this, but by no means relax the fast entirely.3
1 Constitution of Benedict XIV, Libentissime (June 24, 1745); nevertheless authors grant to the bishop the faculty of dispensing with some particular college or institute from an urgent cause, for example in an epidemic disease.
2 This faculty was granted by Leo XIII through a decree of the Holy Office, Dec. 5, 1894, and Dec. 15, 1897. Cf. Acta S. Sedis XXVII, 512.
3 Consil. l. 5, c. 1, dub. 4, n. 3 s.
689. On the dispensation itself. 1. Universal dispensation by pontifical indult, whether immediately by the supreme pontiff or mediately through the bishop, ordinarily is granted only from the law of abstinence, but not from the law of one eating, because in this matter legitimate excuse suffices. But particular dispensation is customarily granted either from both laws or from either one.
a. An example is not lacking of a faculty generally granted of dispensing in both laws and of the dispensation itself: on Jan. 14, 1892, the supreme pontiff Leo XIII, because of diseases raging in that year, granted to all bishops of the world that they release the faithful from the law by which they are bound to observe abstinence and fasting. The same supreme pontiff, through the Lent of the year 1898, because of diseases raging at Rome, dispensed both from abstinence and from fasting.
b. From the will of Benedict XIV, particular dispensation is to be granted only on the advice of both physicians.1 Therefore to the petition must be joined the testimony both of the pastor or confessor and of the physician; but in some regions this precept has fallen into desuetude.
c. Superiors inferior to the Roman pontiff cannot dispense from the law of not mixing foods without special delegation. Although this dispensation is granted very rarely, nevertheless some examples of it are not lacking.
If sometimes for many indeterminately a general dispensation from the law of abstinence is sought or granted, the cause of the dispensation must affect in some way all those for whom it is sought or granted; thus in places of baths, by reason of infirmity, a dispensation could be granted for all who live in an inn destined for bathers.
He to whom an indult is granted of eating flesh meats on days forbidden by the Church, with the law of fasting nevertheless preserved, can use this dispensation not only on days of abstinence, but also on days of fasting; but on days of fasting only for the meal, and by no means for the evening collation. But if he is not bound to observe fasting, he can eat flesh meats in all eatings.
1 Constitution Non ambigimus, May 30, 1741.
690. Some documents concerning fasting, which are gathered from various decrees of the Holy Office and especially of the Sacred Penitentiary.1
a. Those who, by reason of age or labor or infirmity, are excused from fasting (but not those who have been dispensed from a just cause), can, on days of fasting on which by the general indult of the bishop the eating of flesh meat is permitted, eat flesh meat as often as they take food,2 unless the bishop dispensing by force of an apostolic indult restricts this faculty.3
Those who are excused from fasting from a just cause, by the will of the Holy See, unless from the same cause they are also excused from abstinence, are plainly dispensed from abstinence, unless the bishop establishes otherwise. But the Holy See does not extend this dispensation to those who are not bound to fast only by reason of dispensation. Therefore these need a special dispensation in order that they may eat flesh meat more often than is lawful through the Lenten indult.
b. A dispensation granted to the father of a family of itself is not extended to the whole family; wherefore, if it is permitted to children that in a case of this kind they eat flesh meat, this is not done because of the father's dispensation, but because of the impossibility in which they are placed of observing abstinence.4
c. Bishops dispensing in the eating of flesh meats from a pontifical indult are accustomed to enjoin on the faithful who use the dispensation some pious work (either certain prayers or alms). This precept obliges under light obligation and is affixed to the day; wherefore when the day has passed it ceases.
1 Compare the decrees themselves in Lehmkuhl I, n. 1219 ss.
2 Sacred Penitentiary, Feb. 24, 1819.
3 Sacred Penitentiary, May 27, 1863.
4 Sacred Penitentiary, Jan. 16, 1834; Dec. 19, 1862; Apr. 20, 1865.
691. On the Bull of the Crusade. 1. The Bull of the Crusade was first granted to the Spaniards by Julius II in 1509 and was enlarged by Gregory XIII. The same afterwards was granted also to the Neapolitans by Pius V in 1569.
- The Bull of the Crusade contains various and great indults and privileges, the chief of which are reduced to these four:
a. Of eating flesh meats, eggs, and milk foods in the time of fasts of the whole year (with a few days excepted).1
b. Of commuting simple vows into other pious works and some alms, except vows of chastity and religion and of pilgrimage overseas.
c. Of absolving from sins and censures reserved to any ordinary and even to the Apostolic See, except the crime of heresy and, as regards ecclesiastics, except the censure which is contained in the Bull Sacramentum poenitentiae.
d. Several indulgences, both partial and plenary.
In order that someone enjoy the graces and privileges of the Bull, he must receive the summary of the Bull, pay the assessed stipend, and guard the received summary with prudent diligence. The Bull received is valid for a year; hence each year, after the tax has been paid, it must be taken anew. The summary of the Bull can also be taken twice in any year, the assessed stipend being given for each; he who does this can enjoy the graces of the Bull twice in a year.
The Bull is granted "to all the Christian faithful who dwell in the whole Spanish territory, or who come into it within the year from the publication of the Bull, give alms for pious ends, and receive the summary of the same Bull."
It must be noted: a. The Bull is called of the Crusade because, in likeness to those bulls which once had been granted on the occasion of the "crusade" for recovering the Holy Land, it was granted to the king of the Spains for the conquest of unbelievers.
b. Although the reason because of which it was originally granted is no longer in force, the Bull itself nevertheless still has force, since it has been prolonged several times by the supreme pontiffs. The alms which are collected in this way are spent on other pious causes.
c. The Bull of the Crusade is not a personal privilege, but a local one; therefore outside Spain or the kingdom of Naples it is not lawful to use it.2 The privileges of the Bull are to be interpreted broadly.
1 This privilege is not properly contained in the Bull of the Crusade, but in an added apostolic indult for the use of flesh meats.
2 Holy Office, June 2, 1897.