Article Seventh. On Sacrilege

174. Notion. In the broader sense sacrilege is any sin against religion, in which sense also divination, magic, blasphemy, etc., are sacrileges; but strictly and properly sacrilege is defined as: the unworthy treatment of a sacred thing. Therefore sacrilege is committed by any action by which the reverence owed to sacred things is injured.

a. Sacred thing is here taken broadly, so that under this name are comprehended sacred persons, sacred places, and sacred things: for these three are accustomed to be consecrated to God and His worship.

b. That is called a sacred thing which by the authority of God or of the Church has been deputed to divine worship. Therefore a person who by private purpose or vow has dedicated himself to God is not properly called sacred, but only that person who by the public authority of the Church has been consecrated to the worship of God.

c. So that it can be known whether some action is sacrilegious, attention must be given: a. to that for which the thing which is violated has been consecrated; b. whether the action is against that for which the thing has been consecrated. For only those actions committed by a sacred person or against a sacred person are sacrileges which injure him in that in which he is sacred. Thus a priest by fornicating commits sacrilege, because he has been consecrated to God for living chastely; by blaspheming or making himself drunk he does not commit sacrilege, because he has not been consecrated to God for avoiding these sins. Likewise sins, besides those to be enumerated below, which are committed against a priest, such as calumnies and insults, are not sacrileges, because these do not injure the sacred person himself, but his external goods: reputation and honor.

175. Division of sacrilege. A threefold sacrilege is distinguished: personal, local, and real, according as there is a threefold genus of sacred things: sacred persons, sacred places, and sacred things.

a. Besides these, however, there is no other sacred thing whose violation constitutes sacrilege, for example time, which is called sacred: for time is not in a special way consecrated to God. Therefore he does not commit sacrilege who sins on a feast day, or in Lent, or on the day of holy communion, nor must there be opened in confession the circumstance of the sacred time at which the sin had been committed.

b. Yet it is admitted that it is a grave sin to exhibit public games on Friday in Parasceve, such as are customarily exhibited on carnival days, especially if this is prohibited by a special law, not because irreverence is inflicted upon sacred time, but because irreverence is inflicted upon the Passion of the Lord and grave scandal is given to the faithful.

176. Moral and specific malice. 1. Sacrilege is a sin against religion, grave from its genus: for from the fact that something has been deputed to divine worship, special reverence is owed to it, and if this is injured, the irreverence redounds upon God; but it admits smallness of matter, because the irreverence which is inflicted on things consecrated to God affects God Himself only mediately.

2. Personal, real, and local sacrilege differ from each other in species, because, since there are three diverse genera of sacred things, the virtue of religion is injured by this threefold sacrilege in a morally diverse way.

And indeed all agree in this affirmation; but whether those three species of sacrilege are the lowest species, or whether in each one circumstances must be admitted which change the species of sacrilege, authors do not agree. Suarez affirms this latter opinion;¹ but to St. Alphonsus, who followed St. Thomas,² the denying opinion seems more probable (n. 34). Therefore according to him, he commits the same sacrilege specifically who violates a nun by striking her or by fornicating with her, and he who treats some sacrament or sacred image irreverently. And indeed we can follow this opinion in practice.

¹ Suarez, De religione, tr. 3, l. 3, c. 1, n. 8.

² St. Thomas, II-II, q. 99, a. 3, ad 2.

177. On personal sacrilege. 1. Personal sacrilege is defined as: violation of a sacred person. A twofold consecration of persons must be distinguished: one by which a person through ordination, to which tonsure also is referred, or through admission to the religious state, is deputed to divine worship; the other by which through a public vow of chastity, emitted either in sacred ordination or in religious profession, both solemn and simple, he is consecrated to God for preserving chastity.

2. The actions by which personal sacrilege is committed are three:

a. Violent laying on of hands upon a cleric or religious against the privilege of the canon.

b. Usurpation of jurisdiction over ecclesiastical persons by dragging them to a secular tribunal against the privilege of the forum, or by imposing on them a servile burden, for example of military service or of tribute, against ecclesiastical immunity, unless the Church consents.

c. A sin of lust committed by a person consecrated to God for preserving chastity, against the vow of chastity. Here it must be noted: a. that sacrilege is committed not only by the sacred person, but also by that one who, even if he is not sacred, participates in the sin of lust; wherefore, if this latter person also is sacred, a double sacrilege is committed on both sides; b. that by a sacred person sacrilege is committed not only through external sins, but also through merely internal sins against chastity.

Whether violation of a simple and private vow of chastity is sacrilege. It is certain that that violation is sacrilege in the broader sense; therefore he who violates a private vow of chastity commits a twofold sin, against chastity and against religion. That this violation is sacrilege strictly such must indeed be denied from the definition of a sacred person; yet because to St. Alphonsus (n. 35) it is more probable that sacrilege is committed also through injury of a vow of chastity privately emitted by a person, the affirming opinion can be held in practice as probable.¹

¹ Ballerini-Palmieri, II, n. 386 ff.

178. On local sacrilege. 1. Local sacrilege is the violation of a sacred place.

a. A sacred place in the strict sense is called that place which by the authority of the Church has been deputed to divine worship, and therefore consecrated or at least blessed. In this sense sacred places are churches, public oratories (not private nor semi-public), and cemeteries. A religious or sacred place in the broader sense is called any place destined by the authority of the Church for a pious and religious use, as the palace of a bishop, a parochial house, a seminary, a monastery, a hospital erected by the authority of the Church which has an oratory for celebrating, etc.

From a sacred and religious place there must be distinguished a pious place, which without the authority and intervention of the Church has been erected for exercising pious works, as a private oratory, a hospital erected by laymen.

b. Because sacrilege is committed by violation of the sanctity and immunity of a sacred place, there must be distinguished the sacred place to which sanctity belongs and the sacred place to which immunity belongs. Sanctity belongs only to a place strictly sacred, and indeed from the ceiling down to the pavement, even if it is interdicted or polluted; therefore sacrilege because of injured sanctity of a sacred place is committed only within this area. But immunity belongs also to a place sacred in the broader sense, and to a strictly sacred place also in its exterior parts, such as are the portico, sacristy, tower, roof above the church, underground crypt, stairway, and door of the church.

2. The actions by which local sacrilege is committed are these four.

First of all there must be noted the doctrine of those who with de Lugo¹ teach that all sins committed in a sacred place have some notion of sacrilege, because it is against the reverence owed to a sacred place that a place destined for the worship of God be converted into a place of divine offense; but grave sacrilege to be declared in confession is committed especially by those actions which by positive law are prohibited from being done in a church, of which kind are the four following.

a. Sins by which a church is polluted, even if they remain hidden and therefore the church is not in fact polluted.

The sins by which a church (oratory and cemetery) is polluted, if they have become notorious by notoriety of law or of fact, are these five:

a. Unjust shedding of human blood: therefore if blood is shed in a church either by chance or for just defense, it is not polluted. Besides, copious shedding of blood is required, and that the wound at least be inflicted in the church, even if the blood is poured out outside the church. Hence the shedding of human blood which happens, for example, from the nose or teeth because of a slap inflicted, neither pollutes the church nor consequently constitutes sacrilege in the said sense.

b. Unjust homicide, even without shedding of blood: therefore if a just homicide were done in a church, the church would not be polluted; but it suffices that the cause of death be placed in the church, even if death follows outside the church.

c. Illicit effusion of human seed, which can happen either through voluntary pollution, or through fornication, or through conjugal intercourse, which apart from necessity is illicit in a church; but necessity because of the danger of incontinence renders it licit even in a church; therefore by this licit intercourse the church is not polluted.

Other external sins of lust (touches, looks, filthy speech), although grave, probably are not grave sacrileges. But grave internal sins (impure thoughts and desires) certainly are not grave sacrileges, unless there is a desire of an act by which the church is polluted, and this desire is conceived of perpetrating that act within the church.

d. Burial of an excommunicated person, which must be understood of ecclesiastical burial, and indeed of a person specially and by name excommunicated. The burial of others in a sacred place is indeed interdicted, but from this the church or cemetery is not polluted.

e. Burial of a non-baptized person, which must be understood of pagans, Jews, and other unbelievers, whose burial in a sacred place causes that place itself to be polluted. As for the infants of the faithful who die without baptism, probably their burial in a sacred place does not induce its pollution.²

b. Profane actions, even indifferent ones, which either by their nature or from the prohibition of the Church are opposed to the sanctity of a sacred place, such as judicial actions and markets, public banquets, theatrical plays, secular parliaments, and generally all those actions, whether illicit or profane, which according to the common estimation of men are very unbefitting to the sanctity of the place, such as stabling of horses, evacuations of nature, dances, grave quarrels, etc.

a. To eat something privately in a church, even without necessity, does not exceed venial sin.³

b. It is customary to permit that plays which conduce to fostering piety be performed in church, and in like manner literary exercises.

c. Laymann judges that, if it happens without disturbance of the divine offices, it can be permitted, or at least tolerated, that in a cemetery or in the temple itself candles or other things which pertain to the devotion of the people be sold.⁴

c. Theft committed in a sacred place; yet in order that by theft perpetrated in a sacred place grave sacrilege be committed, it is required that the thing taken be grave and be joined by some special bond with the church, and therefore either belong to the church or at least be entrusted to its custody or use.

By law sacrilege is committed by taking away a sacred thing from a sacred place, or a non-sacred thing from a sacred place, or a sacred thing from a non-sacred place;⁵ by these words it is significantly said "from a sacred place," not "in a sacred place," so that it may be signified that theft committed in a sacred place is not sacrilege unless the thing taken belongs in some way to the church. Therefore he who in a church steals the purse of a rich man does not commit local sacrilege; but he who steals a sacred thing from a sacred place commits a double sacrilege, real and local.

d. Actions by which the immunity of a sacred place is violated, therefore actions by which the right of asylum is injured.

Ecclesiastical immunity is a privilege by which ecclesiastical things (persons, things, places) are free from certain burdens which are customarily imposed on other things in civil society. Local ecclesiastical immunity comprises the privilege granted to sacred places, by which criminals fleeing thither cannot be dragged out by lay power. This privilege is called the right of asylum. Although civil laws today do not acknowledge the right of asylum, nevertheless the Church does not yield her right unless she has derogated from it by concordats; indeed she inflicts excommunication on all who, by rash daring, order the immunity of ecclesiastical asylum to be violated, or violate it.⁶

Note. By burning or breaking into a sacred place real sacrilege is committed: for the place is injured insofar as it is a sacred thing.

¹ De poenit., disp. 16, n. 466.

² Schmalzgrueber, in l. 3, t. 40, n. 47.

³ Cf. Lacroix, l. 6, pr. 2, n. 266.

⁴ Laymann, l. 4, tract. 10, c. 7, n. 9.

⁵ c. Quisquis 21, c. 17, q. 4.

⁶ Constit. Apostolicae sedis, II, 5.

179. On real sacrilege. Real sacrilege is committed especially in three ways: a. by treating sacred things unworthily; b. by usurping sacred things unjustly; c. by buying or selling sacred things against the prohibition of the Church, which is the sin of simony.

Sacred things are of two genera: some which are ordered to divine worship by their essence, others which are so ordered only by the dedication of the Church. Of these, some (for example, sacred vessels) are deputed to divine worship by special consecration; others (as ecclesiastical goods) without special consecration. The former serve this end proximately, the latter only remotely. Therefore sacred things are:

1. The sacraments, of which the chief is the sacrament of the Eucharist.

a. Therefore sacrilege is committed: a. if the sacraments are invalidly confected, unworthily ministered, or unworthily received; b. if the sacred species are not renewed in their time with danger of corruption; c. if the most holy sacrament is left for a longer time (a whole day) without a burning lamp; d. if the most holy Eucharist is touched irreverently, but most of all if it is trampled upon or employed for superstitions; e. if vessels, corporals, etc., very unclean are employed for the sacrifice of the Mass.

b. Although Christ the Lord is really present in the most holy sacrament of the Eucharist, nevertheless the violation of this sacrament is not personal sacrilege, but real, because Christ in this sacrament does not exhibit Himself in His own person, but under inanimate species.¹

2. Sacred objects: sacred vessels, altars, crosses, images of saints, sacred oils, relics, Sacred Scripture, sacred buildings, and blessed things.

a. Grave sacrilege is committed: a. if sacred vessels which immediately serve for the sacred ministry, and therefore are accustomed to be consecrated or at least blessed, are employed for profane uses, for example chalices for banquets; but to employ for profane uses vessels which serve only mediately in the sacred ministry, such as cruets, a basin, etc., would not be a sin; b. if sacred oils, relics, sacred images are profaned by throwing away the former or by breaking images from contempt, etc.

b. Grave sacrilege is committed if the words of Sacred Scripture are employed for indecent and vain things; it would be venial if they were employed for jokes otherwise honorable. But if the words of Sacred Scripture are not employed for mere jokes, but for expressing one's own meanings by the words of Sacred Scripture, even all fault of irreverence can be absent, especially if the words of Christ the Lord Himself are not usurped and this is not done rather often and as if from custom. Yet one must take care lest a joking meaning be placed under the words of Sacred Scripture which occur in Mass and the divine office, lest an occasion be given for distractions that will arise during prayer. To employ fragments of books in which sacred words are contained for profane uses, if this is done without contempt, is not a profanation of Sacred Scripture and therefore not sacrilege. The same must be said concerning images of saints which are not blessed.²

c. It must be noted that no irreverence is committed if bones of meats or shells of eggs which are customarily blessed at Easter time are thrown away, because the blessing does not fall upon the bones or shells, but upon the meats and eggs. Likewise no irreverence is committed if things simply blessed (by an invocative blessing) are applied to profane but nevertheless decent uses, as if blessed candles are employed for having light for study, or holy water for mixing wine, or blessed salt for seasoning foods.³

3. Ornaments of the church or of ministers, which are customarily blessed, such as priestly vestments.

a. Sacrilege is committed: a. if these things are treated unworthily from contempt; b. if they are employed for profane uses. But to employ for profane uses those things which are not customarily blessed, for example curtains, candelabra, etc., to employ them for weddings, would not be a sin.

b. Negligence which is committed in cleaning and cleansing altars, images, or sacred utensils, and in cleaning and repairing sacred vestments, will not be mortal unless the sacred vessels are notably unclean or the vestments notably torn.

c. The canons of the ancient law severely prohibit sacred things ever to be employed for profane uses, not even when their form has been changed, for example stones and wood of a demolished church or worn-out vestments, but they ought either to be burned or employed for other sacred uses. But by contrary custom it has happened that sacred things, even if before they had been consecrated or blessed, are today licitly employed for profane uses, provided their form is first changed. Therefore stones and wood of a demolished church can be sold, and sacred vessels first melted down and vestments first cut apart can be employed for other uses.⁴

4. Ecclesiastical goods, under which name are counted:

a. Goods both movable and immovable of the Church, which are deputed for the sustenance of ministers, for the fabric of the church, or for other sacred uses; but not the goods of the ministers of the Church themselves.

Yet in order that sacrilege be committed by their theft or unjust detention, it is required that the goods have already passed into the dominion of the Church; therefore a legacy left to the Church is not yet a sacred thing unless it has been handed over to the Church.

b. Goods which pertain to some ecclesiastical institute, such as a monastery, a hospice, etc. For since these goods from the will of the donors are destined to no use except a pious one and have been accepted by the Church for this end, they are counted among sacred things, and their theft, detention, or defrauding is everywhere in law called sacrilege.

¹ Cf. Lessius, l. 2, c. 45, dub. 3, n. 16.

² Scavini, Theologia mor. universa, 4th ed., Milan: Oliva, 1890, II, n. 130.

³ Cf. Lacroix, l. 6, pr. 1, n. 227.

⁴ Cf. Gennari, Consultazioni moral. canon. liturg., 2nd ed., Rome: Monitore ecclesiastico, 1901, pr. 2, cons. 33.

180. Whether it is licit to touch sacred vessels. a. Consecrated vessels which are destined immediately to contain the most holy Eucharist, likewise corporals and purificators which after sacred use have not yet been washed, only clerics (even of first tonsure) can touch licitly; the same is granted by privilege to regular lay sacristans and to nun sacristans. Therefore this is not licit for secular lay persons without special faculty, but it does not exceed venial sin, and if a cause is present, it is not even venial.

b. Corporals and purificators before use, vessels and ornaments which do not immediately touch the most holy Eucharist, likewise other sacred things (Agnus Dei, relics, etc.), all can touch licitly.

a. Therefore if palls, corporals, and purificators which have already served for sacred use must be washed, their first washing must be done by a sacred person (this is the office of the subdeacon), and the water of the washing must be sent into the sacrarium.

b. Some authors (Lacroix, Suarez, Pasqualigo) probably affirm that the first washing can also be done by inferior clerics, indeed by tonsured clerics.¹

¹ Cf. St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 387.