Article One. On Irregularities in General

123. Notion. Irregularity is an impediment established by ecclesiastical law, which of itself and directly prohibits the reception of orders, and indirectly their use, perpetually.

a. Irregularity is established of itself and directly on account of the dignity and reverence of the divine ministry, namely to avoid indecency in the same divine ministry. For the dignity and excellence of the Christian religion demand that its ministries be performed with great decency, lest the faithful be offended and their reverence toward sacred functions be diminished. For this end it was necessary that all be kept from sacred ministry who, according to the judgment of the Church, could not exercise it with due decency and dignity.

b. Therefore of itself irregularity does not have the nature of penalty, neither vindicative nor medicinal, but only of inability; the Roman Catechism calls it a stain,² which makes a man unfit to be received into the clerical state. Hence it happens that irregularity is frequently contracted without any fault.

c. Only an inability which has been introduced by ecclesiastical law is called irregularity; for irregularity affects those who by reason of natural and divine law are indeed fit for receiving orders, such as illegitimate persons, bigamists, etc., but by ecclesiastical law are kept from receiving them. But if it affects those who are prohibited from orders by divine natural or positive law, by divine law they are indeed unfit or unworthy, yet not irregular. Hence it is held as an axiom: no irregularity is incurred unless it is expressed in law.³

d. By the name of order from which irregularity keeps one, first tonsure also is understood; for although this is not properly an order, nevertheless by statute of law first tonsure also is here comprehended under the name of order,⁴ because it would be given in vain to those who are kept from orders.

e. Perpetually. Whether perpetuity belongs to the nature of irregularity is disputed; but the opinion of those who with Laymann establish that temporary impediments which can cease by the fact itself without dispensation, such as the impediment of age, knowledge, canonical title, etc., are not irregularities properly so called, seems to be preferred.⁵

f. It prohibits of itself: for although censure also often prohibits from receiving or exercising orders, nevertheless it does this not of itself, but consequently to the penalty imposed; irregularity, however, is established of itself and directly for keeping the unfit from the clergy.

¹ Suarez, De censuris, Disp. 40. Laymann, Theol. moralis l. 1. tr. 5. part. 5. De irregularit. Holzmann, Theolog. moralis t. III. tr. 2. disp. 3. De irregularit. St. Alphonsus l. 7. n. 231 ss. Gasparri, De sacra ordinatione I. n. 155 ss. Hilarius a Sexten, De censuris eccl. (Mainz, Kirchheim, 1898). Appendix de irregularit. Ballerini-Palmieri, Opus theol. mor. VII. c. 5. Boeninghausen, De irregularitatibus, 3 fasc. (Munster, Theissing, 1863). Fr. Wernz, Ius decretalium II. p. 118 ss. Eichert, Die Anfange der Irregularitaten (Freiburg, Herder, 1901).

² De baptismo n. 57.

³ C. Is qui 18. De sentent. excomm. in 6. (V. 11).

⁴ C. Cognoscamus 14. dist. 34.

⁵ Cf. Gasparri I. n. 169.

124. Effects of irregularity. 1. The immediate effect of irregularity is that of itself and directly it impedes the reception of orders: for of itself it keeps one from the clerical state; but indirectly it also impedes the exercise of orders received. For he who is prohibited from receiving orders is consequently prohibited also from exercising orders, if as irregular he has received any or already had them.

Irregularity now does not prohibit the exercise of all orders, but only of sacred orders: for since today the offices of minor orders are commonly performed by laymen, it has happened that irregular clerics are no longer kept from their exercise.

2. Irregularity does not render the reception of orders invalid, but only illicit, since it is not an invalidating impediment, but only a prohibiting one.

Therefore both he who promotes an irregular person, even to tonsure alone, and the irregular person who receives or exercises an order, sin gravely, unless smallness of matter or grave inconvenience excuses, because both transgress a precept of the Church in a grave matter.

3. Irregularity prohibits the collation and reception of a benefice to which there is annexed an office which the irregular person is forbidden to exercise.

a. Since a simple benefice does not have annexed the exercise of sacred order, but only the recitation of hours or an office which even an irregular person can exercise, therefore it can of itself licitly be conferred upon an irregular person and accepted by him.

b. Authors dispute whether the collation and acceptance of a benefice which requires the exercise of sacred order is only illicit or also invalid. The opinion denying that the collation is invalid is probable, because by no certain law can it be proved that a collation of this kind is invalid. Wherefore both he who confers such a benefice upon an irregular person and the irregular person who accepts it indeed sin, but the collation and acceptance are valid.¹

4. A supervening irregularity does not render one incapable of retaining or receiving ecclesiastical jurisdiction, whether ordinary or delegated. Wherefore an irregular person can also licitly exercise acts of jurisdiction which do not require the exercise of order; thus he can confer upon another the faculty of absolving, can dispense in vows, etc.

¹ Cf. Gasparri I. n. 172 ss.

125. Division of irregularity. 1. One irregularity is from defect, which proximately arises from defect of a quality required for the reception of orders; another is from delict, which proximately arises from one's own delict. For the indecency which irregularity intends to guard against can arise both from defect alone without delict and from delict.

a. Irregularity from defect sometimes supposes a delict, whether another's, as irregularity from defect of birth, or one's own, as infamy contracted on account of an enormous delict.

b. Although irregularity from delict is not a penalty, nevertheless it has itself after the manner of penalty: for it is inflicted on account of fault, namely insofar as from certain delicts a stain is contracted which renders the delinquent incapable for sacred ministry. Wherefore, if fault is not present, neither is irregularity present; and what excuses from fault likewise excuses from contracting irregularity.

c. Sometimes it is uncertain whether an irregularity is to be numbered among those which arise from defect or among those which arise from delict. But if each is probable, the irregularity is to be called from delict, both because this is more difficultly contracted, and because dispensation is more easily granted in it.

2. Irregularity is either total, which impedes the reception of every order or the use of every order received, as homicide; or partial, which impedes either only ascent to a higher order or only the exercise of some order. Thus a deacon who lacks the left eye, according to the opinion of some, is incapable for priesthood, yet can exercise his own order; and a priest who without fault is deprived of a thumb is prohibited only from celebration, but not from hearing confessions.

3. Irregularity is perpetual, which of itself always endures unless it is removed by dispensation; and it is temporal, which endures only for some time, because it ceases either spontaneously or by the effort of the irregular man, as irregularity from defect of age or from defect of knowledge.

Note. Concerning these divisions it must be noted that only total and perpetual irregularity is irregularity properly so called; others ought to be called irregularities improperly. For it belongs to the nature of irregularity that it simply keep one from the clerical state or from the exercise of clerical ministry, unless it is removed by dispensation. But he who is entangled by partial or temporal irregularity is not simply kept from the clergy or from clerical ministry. What keeps one only partly from clerical ministry is rather a prohibition or privation, and is called irregularity only improperly.

126. Subject of irregularity. 1. The subject of irregularity is every and only baptized male subject to ecclesiastical law.

Because only a baptized male is capable of order, therefore he alone is called the subject of irregularity. Therefore all baptized male human beings, whether laymen or clerics, even bishops and cardinals, can contract irregularities established in law; but neither the supreme pontiff nor boys before the completed seventh year, because they are not subject to common law. Therefore one mutilated, e.g. before baptism or before the use of reason, is not irregular except fundamentally, i.e. he has a defect on account of which, when baptism or the use of reason has been received, he becomes formally irregular.

2. Someone can contract several irregularities at the same time, all of which must be expressed in the petition for dispensation. But irregularities are multiplied: a. from causes diverse in species; b. but if the cause is of the same species, irregularities from defect are not multiplied; c. irregularities from delict, however, are multiplied from repeated acts upon a diverse subject, but not from repeated acts upon the same subject.

a. From homicide and repetition of baptism, likewise from defect of birth and defect of liberty, a twofold irregularity is contracted, because there is a twofold diverse cause.

b. A judge who has condemned ten men to death contracts one irregularity from defect of lenity.

c. He who rebaptizes several times, or who commits several homicides, contracts several irregularities.

d. He who several times rebaptizes the same person contracts only one irregularity; likewise a suspended person who celebrates several times.

3. All irregularities, once the required conditions have been placed, are contracted by the fact itself, even if the action on account of which it is contracted is entirely occult: for there is no irregularity which by disposition of law demands a sentence of a judge, not even a declaratory one.

127. Conditions required for contracting irregularity. 1. That the irregularity be certain; therefore a doubtful irregularity, whether the doubt is of law or of fact, is no irregularity: for impediments, as odious things, are not to be established unless they are certainly established. Nevertheless an irregularity contracted from homicide is excepted.

a. Although one who has a doubtful irregularity can licitly receive orders, nevertheless in doubt of fact it is to be advised that dispensation be sought, lest the one ordained be impeded in the exercise of order if perhaps afterward the fact itself, and therefore the irregularity contracted, has been established.

b. By disposition of law irregularity is contracted in doubt of fact concerning homicide, i.e. if someone doubts whether he committed homicide. Nevertheless two things must be noted concerning this matter:

a. The disposition of law refers to this doubt of fact, namely if someone is indeed certain concerning the homicide, e.g. concerning the abortion that followed, but doubts whether his action was its cause; for he who doubts concerning the homicide itself is not irregular.

b. This disposition of law affects priests alone and keeps them from celebration alone, but not from other ministries. Therefore a layman who doubts whether a homicide certain in itself has followed from his action is not irregular.

2. That the action by which irregularity from delict is contracted be gravely culpable: for since irregularity from delict is after the manner of penalty, the law establishing this irregularity must be restricted to a gravely sinful act; but irregularity from defect is contracted without fault.

3. That the action on account of which irregularity is contracted, whether from delict or from defect, be external and consummated, because there is question of an odious law.

a. Therefore everything that excuses from mortal sin also excuses from irregularity to be incurred from delict, such as inadvertence, good faith, smallness of matter, grave fear, ignorance, concerning which a special question follows.

b. Therefore just as no one becomes irregular on account of a merely internal intention of killing another, so also on account of a gun discharged at an enemy no one incurs irregularity unless he has in fact killed or mutilated him. Likewise, to contract irregularity from defect on account of a sentence of death, it is required that the action be external and consummated.

128. Whether ignorance excuses from contracting irregularity. 1. Ignorance does not excuse from contracting irregularity from defect, not even invincible ignorance: for irregularity from defect is mere inability; but inability is contracted even by those who are ignorant of the law.

2. Ignorance of the ecclesiastical law prohibiting the delict certainly excuses from contracting irregularity from delict, unless it was crass.

a. The delicts on account of which irregularity is inflicted are already prohibited by the law of nature, which cannot be unknown to the delinquent. The question concerns ignorance of ecclesiastical law, which is twofold: prohibiting the delict and inflicting irregularity after the manner of penalty.

Of itself, indeed, knowledge of ecclesiastical law would not be necessary for contracting irregularity, because there is no question of punishing contumacy against the power of the Church, but of removing the indecency which crime induces, even if it is committed against natural law alone. Nonetheless it must be said that ignorance excuses from contracting irregularity.¹

b. The positive reason for this opinion is drawn from the disposition of law: for it is established that the Church established this irregularity in such a way that it would not be incurred by those who were ignorant of the law of the Church.² Suarez (l. c.) proposes the internal reason in this way: irregularity which has the nature of penalty is not inflicted except upon a transgressor of law; but certainly not upon a transgressor of natural law, but upon a transgressor of ecclesiastical law. But one who is ignorant of ecclesiastical law does not transgress ecclesiastical law. Therefore irregularity is not inflicted upon those who are ignorant of the law of the Church. For the Church, establishing a penalty on account of a delict prohibited by the law of nature, adds a new law to divine law. Therefore one who sins with ignorance of ecclesiastical law indeed sins against divine law and incurs the penalty of divine law; but he does not sin against ecclesiastical law and does not incur the penalty of ecclesiastical law.

3. Ignorance of the ecclesiastical penalty alone, namely irregularity, probably also excuses from contracting irregularity from delict, unless it was crass: for irregularity has the nature of a vindicative penalty, and indeed of an extraordinary and exorbitant one, since it is very hard to be perpetually kept from certain offices; but a vindicative penalty, if it is extraordinary and exorbitant, is not incurred by those ignorant of it.

¹ Suarez, De censuris disp. 40. sect. 5. n. 10.

² C. Proposuisti 2 dist. 82, from which it is established that the supreme pontiff Innocent I declared incontinent clerics, whom Pope Siricius had made irregular, immune from irregularity because they had been ignorant of the law of Siricius, but declared them affected by irregularity if after the law had been known they had sinned against it.

129. Note. The older theologians, in recounting irregularities, not rarely exceed measure. Further, to eliminate those which have been invented gratuitously, and to establish those which really exist, one must especially insist first upon the principle that there is no irregularity which is not expressed in law; then irregularity, especially that which is from delict, must be carefully distinguished from suspension, with which it can easily be confused.¹ For suspension is a censure which is directly inflicted on account of fault; irregularity is a canonical impediment which is directly established on account of reverence for the divine ministry. Suspension affects clerics alone; irregularity affects clerics and laymen. Suspension primarily keeps one from the exercise of order or jurisdiction, or from a benefice; irregularity primarily keeps one from the collation and reception of orders, and only secondarily from the exercise of orders and from the collation of a benefice. Suspension removes jurisdiction; irregularity does not remove it. One violating suspension through the exercise of order becomes irregular; one violating irregularity contracts no irregularity.

¹ Cf. D'Annibale, Summula I. n. 399 s. Gasparri I. n. 175 s.