§ 3. On The Excommunications Existing Today

Here we append very briefly a list of the excommunications of the common law which are in force today and which are distinguished into five categories, according as absolution from them is reserved: 1. to the Holy See in the most special manner; 2. to the Holy See in a special manner; 3. to the Holy See simply; 4. to the Ordinary; 5. to no one.

506. I. Excommunications reserved in the most special manner to the Apostolic See.

There are four excommunications latae sententiae of this kind (besides those which either are contained in the Constitution of Pius X, December 25, 1904, Vacante Sede Apostolica, or have been imposed against those violating the secret of the Holy Office). Namely, the following are excommunicated:

1. One who has cast away the consecrated species either of the body or of the blood of Christ, or has taken them away or retained them for an evil end; for example, a sacrilegious breaker of the tabernacle, but not one who from a devotion indeed unhealthy, yet good considered subjectively, takes a consecrated host from his mouth and reverently places it away in a fitting place. The guilty person of this most wicked crime is furthermore: a) suspected of heresy; b) infamous ipso facto; c) to be deposed, if he is a cleric.¹⁴²

2. One who has laid violent hands upon the person of the Roman Pontiff. The guilty person of this crime is furthermore: a) infamous ipso iure; b) to be degraded, if he is a cleric.¹⁴³

3. One who has absolved or feigned to absolve an accomplice in a shameful sin, and this even at the point of death, if another priest, although not approved for confessions, could have heard the confession of the dying person without some grave infamy and scandal likely to arise, except in the case in which the dying person refused to confess to another. - Nor does one escape the same excommunication who has absolved or feigned to absolve an accomplice who indeed did not confess the sin of complicity, from which he has not yet been directly absolved, but kept silent about it because he was induced to do so either directly or indirectly by the accomplice confessor.¹⁴⁴

4. A confessor who has presumed directly to violate the sacramental seal.¹⁴⁵ What a direct violation of the sacramental seal is, see above, n. 447.

¹⁴² Code of Canon Law, c. 2320.

¹⁴³ Ibid., c. 2343.

¹⁴⁴ Code of Canon Law, c. 2367.

¹⁴⁵ Ibid., c. 2369.

507. II. Excommunications reserved in a special manner to the Apostolic See.

Eleven are ordinarily enumerated.

1. "All apostates from the Christian faith and all and each of the heretics or schismatics" (can. 2314, § 1).

What heretics and apostates are was said above in I, n. 512 ff. Schismatics are not only non-uniate Greeks and Old Catholics, but also those baptized persons who pertinaciously refuse obedience to the Roman Pontiff insofar as he is head of the Church, such as the Mariavites and perhaps also the so-called associations of worship. One suspected of heresy who has not amended himself within six months from the penalty contracted is regarded as a heretic, subject to the penalties of heretics (can. 2315). Those are suspected of heresy ipso iure, for example, who presume to offer their children to non-Catholic ministers to be baptized (can. 2319).

If the delict of heresy, apostasy, or schism has been brought in any manner (even through voluntary confession) to the external forum of the local Ordinary, that same local Ordinary (but not the vicar general without a special mandate) can by his ordinary authority absolve the repentant person in the external forum, after an abjuration has first been performed juridically and the other things to be observed by law have been observed; but one thus absolved can afterward be absolved from the sin by any confessor in the forum of conscience. An abjuration is regarded as juridically performed when it is made before the local Ordinary himself or his delegate and at least two witnesses (can. 2314, § 2). - This statute has very practical value in the reception of new converts into the bosom of the Church.

508. 2. "Publishers of the books of apostates, heretics, and schismatics which defend apostasy, heresy, or schism, and likewise those who defend those same books or others prohibited by name through Apostolic Letters, or knowingly read or retain them without due permission" (can. 2318, § 1).

This censure was already contained in the Bull Apostolicae Sedis, but has been changed slightly. To explain it, we indicate briefly: a) what books they are; b) what actions are prohibited under penalty of excommunication. We note beforehand, however, that there are many other books which indeed are prohibited under grave sin by the Code of Canon Law, c. 1399, although not under excommunication. Cf. our Man. iur. can., q. 419.

a) What books are prohibited under excommunication?

a) All books of heretics, apostates, or schismatics which defend heresy, apostasy, or schism, that is, which defend them with deliberate purpose, and not merely contain heresy. - Under the name of a book there does not come a manuscript, nor a pamphlet of small size, nor a newspaper. Nevertheless, from the declaration of the Holy Office of January 13, 1892,¹⁴⁶ those "knowingly reading periodical publications bound into volumes, having a heretical author and defending heresy" incur excommunication.

b) Books of any author prohibited by name through Apostolic Letters. Hence it is required that such a book be prohibited through Apostolic Letters, such as bulls, briefs, and so forth, but not decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office or of another Congregation. There are not many books of this kind, which in the new Index of prohibited books are marked with a dagger. - Then it is required that such a book be prohibited by name, that is, with an indication of its proper title. Therefore a prohibition in globo or in general does not suffice, as when all the works of some author are proscribed. - Finally it is required (at least probably) that such a book be prohibited under excommunication reserved to the Roman Pontiff.

Note. Some authors judge that two categories of books (although they defend heresy) are not prohibited under this censure:

1. Books of heretics from the first centuries of the Christian era, such as certain writings of Tertullian, Origen, Pelagius, and so forth. Thus Lehmkuhl,¹⁴⁷ citing Lacroix, Pennacchi, D'Annibale, and Lugo for this opinion.

2. Books defending heresy which were written not by heretics but by pagans, Jews, and so forth. Thus Noldin,¹⁴⁸ Cappello,¹⁴⁹ and others.

b) What actions are prohibited under excommunication? There are four: a) publication; b) defense; c) reading; d) retention. For the last two actions perfect knowledge of the censure is required, and consequently crass and supine ignorance excuses; not so for the first two actions.

a) Publication. Under this title the following incur excommunication: 1. the author of the book; 2. the printer; 3. the publisher.¹⁵⁰ Whether all those also who proximately cooperate in printing, such as typesetters, proofreaders, and so forth, are punished with this censure is not so certain. It appears, however, that this is to be denied, since they cannot properly be called publishers of the book; and therefore the old controversy concerning printers has been removed today.

b) Defense. For incurring excommunication it is required that an evil book be defended not on account of elegance of style and other good qualities, but notwithstanding the errors manifestly contained in it.

c) Reading. Someone is said formally to read a book if he surveys with his own eyes and understands in some manner the things which are contained in the book. Hence one who hears another reading does not incur the censure, provided he did not command it to be read;¹⁵¹ nor does one who does not at all understand the things which he reads. Likewise the censure is not present if the things which have been read constitute only light matter. But authors do not agree about what light matter is. Let this be the general rule: that is grave matter which of itself and ordinarily induces a grave danger of perversion in the reader. Thus sometimes a few pages are grave matter, while at other times not even thirty pages which are not so dangerous constitute grave matter.

d) Retention. For excommunication to be incurred from this, it is required: 1. that gravity be present on the part of time; one day is certainly a short time, but to retain such a book beyond a month is grave matter; 2. that the one retaining it act in his own name and not as the mandatary of another. Hence those who are custodians in the libraries of others, those who bind books,¹⁵² and so forth, are not excommunicated. Booksellers, however, who have books of this kind for sale appear to need a special permission.

Note. 1. Since only those "knowingly" reading and retaining incur this censure, any diminution of imputability, whether on the part of the intellect or on the part of the will, excuses from it (c. 2229, § 2). Hence not only prepubescent persons but, more probably, also minors do not incur this censure (c. 2204).

2. Besides the excommunication just explained, there exists another (reserved, however, to no one) against those who without due permission print or cause to be printed books of Sacred Scripture or annotations or commentaries upon them.¹⁵³

3. "One not promoted to the priestly order, if he has simulated the celebration of Mass or heard a sacramental confession" (can. 2322).

This excommunication has been newly introduced. A layman perpetrating such a crime is furthermore to be deprived of a pension or office, if he has any in the Church, and is to be punished with other penalties according to the gravity of the fault; but a cleric is to be deposed. If any non-priest has usurped other priestly functions, he is to be punished by the Ordinary according to the gravity of the fault.

¹⁴⁶ Collect. de Prop. Fide, n. 1777.

¹⁴⁷ Theol. mor. II, n. 1183.

¹⁴⁸ De poenis eccl.¹², n. 61.

¹⁴⁹ De censuris, n. 226.

¹⁵⁰ Noldin, loc. cit., n. 62, teaches that neither the author nor the printer incurs this censure.

¹⁵¹ St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor. l. 7, n. 292.

¹⁵² Commonly: bookbinder (French relieur, German Buchbinder).

¹⁵³ Code of Canon Law, c. 2318, § 2; cf. below, n. 526.

509. 4. "All and each persons of whatever status, rank, or condition, even if they are of royal, episcopal, or cardinalitial dignity, who appeal from the laws, decrees, or mandates of the Roman Pontiff for the time being to a universal Council" (can. 2332).

This excommunication, which sometimes occurred in the Middle Ages, will be very rare today; but it strikes all physical persons whatsoever who appeal to a universal Council. If juridical persons, such as universities, colleges, or chapters, make such an appeal, they incur an interdict reserved in a special manner to the Roman Pontiff.¹⁵⁴

¹⁵⁴ Ibid.; cf. below, n. 530.

510. 5. "Those having recourse to the lay power to impede letters or any acts proceeding from the Apostolic See or from its Legates, and those directly or indirectly prohibiting their promulgation or execution, or on account of them injuring or terrifying either those to whom the letters pertain or others" (can. 2333).

This censure formerly had place frequently, especially in those places where the "royal placet" was in force; today, however, acts of the Apostolic See are more rarely impeded (at least efficaciously) by private men.

511. 6. "Those who publish laws, mandates, or decrees against the liberty or rights of the Church; those who directly or indirectly impede the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction in either the internal or external forum by having recourse for this purpose to any lay power" (can. 2334).

This censure, which was already contained in nearly the same manner in nn. 6 and 7 of the Bull Apostolicae Sedis, would be most frequent in our days if ignorance or grave fear did not excuse. Thus, for example, this censure is objectively incurred by those who impede a pastor from visiting schools; who prevent a bishop from freely administering his diocese; who impede the execution of the decrees of the Supreme Pontiff, and so forth.

Ecclesiastical jurisdiction is here taken in the strict sense, as it is distinguished: a) from the power of order; b) from an ecclesiastical office; c) from the jurisdiction of regular superiors. Ecclesiastical jurisdiction taken in this sense is the power of governing the faithful in order to eternal life. To it belongs, for example, to issue laws and mandates, to punish, absolve, dispense, instruct, and so forth.

Those impeding jurisdiction of this kind are all those who unjustly, for example, by threats, command, coercion, and so forth, cause an efficacious obstacle so that jurisdiction is not exercised. Hence one who without effect has recourse to the lay power for the purpose of impeding the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction does not incur this censure.¹⁵⁵

The penalties established by can. 2237 against a pastor or another priest impeding the jurisdiction of the Ordinary are also to be observed.

7. "One who (without permission of the Holy See) has dared to draw before a lay judge any of the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, Legates of the Apostolic See, or major Officials of the Roman Curia on account of matters pertaining to their office, or his own Ordinary" (can. 2341).

The violators of the privilege of the forum which belongs to these preeminent persons are punished with this excommunication. Violation of the same privilege which belongs to other ecclesiastical persons is also punished with other penalties, namely: a) excommunication simply reserved to the Apostolic See, if anyone without permission of the Holy See has dared to draw before a lay judge another bishop, or an abbot or prelate nullius, or any of the supreme superiors of religions of pontifical right; b) suspension from office reserved to the Ordinary, if a cleric, without obtaining the permission of the local Ordinary, has dared to draw before a lay judge another person enjoying the privilege of the forum. A layman, however, is to be punished with suitable penalties according to the gravity of the fault by his own Ordinary.¹⁵⁶ In some regions the privilege of the forum no longer exists on account of concordats or other legitimate causes.

8. "One who has laid violent hands upon the person of a Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, a Legate of the Roman Pontiff, a Patriarch, an Archbishop, or a Bishop, even a titular one" (can. 2343, §§ 2 and 3).

Those who commit a personal sacrilege against the princes of the Church are punished with this excommunication. What that personal sacrilege from violation of the privilege of the canon is, see above, II, n. 541. One who commits violence of this kind against Cardinals or Legates of the Roman Pontiff furthermore becomes infamous ipso iure and is to be deprived of benefices, offices, dignities, pensions, and any duty which he may have in the Church.

¹⁵⁵ Pontifical Commission, July 26, 1926 (Acta Ap. Sed. XVIII, 394).

¹⁵⁶ Cf. what was said above in II, n. 542, concerning the privilege of the forum.

512. 9. "Those usurping or detaining, personally or through others, goods or rights pertaining to the Roman Church" (can. 2345).

There were five excommunications imposed against those who violated ecclesiastical goods, namely, two reserved in a special manner to the Holy See, two reserved simply to the Holy See, and one reserved to no one. Now, however, there exist only two excommunications latae sententiae, namely, this one and another simply reserved, concerning which below in n. 518. This excommunication, imposed for protecting the goods and rights of the Roman Church, strikes those usurping and detaining them. Those are called usurpers who take them away by authority, namely, rulers who have secularized the goods and rights of the Roman Church; therefore ordinary thieves and robbers are not punished by this censure. Those are detainers who purchased or leased such goods for themselves; but not officials of the state who administer those goods or acquired and detain them not for themselves but for the common use of the republic.

10. "All fabricators or falsifiers of letters, decrees, or rescripts of the Apostolic See, or those knowingly using the same letters, decrees, or rescripts" (can. 2360, § 1).

This crime is committed very rarely today, especially by laymen. Clerics committing it, however, are moreover to be coerced by other penalties, which can extend even to privation of benefice, office, dignity, and ecclesiastical pension; religious, however, are to be deprived of all offices which they have in the religion and of active and passive voice, besides other penalties established in the proper constitutions of each.¹⁵⁷

¹⁵⁷ Code of Canon Law, c. 2360, § 2.

513. 11. "If anyone personally or through others has falsely denounced a confessor to Superiors for the crime of solicitation, by the fact itself he incurs an excommunication reserved in a special manner to the Apostolic See, from which he cannot in any case be absolved unless he has formally retracted the false denunciation and has repaired according to his ability the damages, if any followed from it, with a grave and lasting penance furthermore imposed" (can. 2363).

This excommunication has been newly introduced. A calumnious denunciation of a confessor (which is made juridically before the local Ordinary or before the Holy Office) induces not only a reserved censure, but also a sin reserved by reason of itself.¹⁵⁸ Therefore, although the censure may not be incurred, for example, on account of ignorance, nevertheless the reserved sin remains.

Absolution from this censure cannot be granted except under a twofold condition: 1. the penitent must first formally retract the false denunciation before the superior or his delegate; an implicit retraction therefore does not suffice; 2. the penitent must repair according to his ability the damages, if any followed from his calumny. When these conditions have been fulfilled and the faculty of absolving has first been obtained, the confessor can absolve the penitent, but must impose upon him a grave and lasting penance, for example, five decades of the Rosary to be said daily for six months.

III. Excommunications reserved simply to the Apostolic See.

According to the discipline now in force, there are eleven excommunications of this kind. The following are excommunicated:

¹⁵⁸ Ibid., c. 894.

514. 1. "Those making profit from indulgences" (can. 2327).

This excommunication was already imposed in the Constitution of St. Pius V Quam plenum, January 2, 1569, which nevertheless is now restricted to indulgences alone and not to other spiritual graces. All those make profit from indulgences who gain a temporal price from them; nor is it required that they acquire that price for themselves. Therefore even those who obtain temporal gain from indulgences for pious causes are punished with this censure, for example, those who sell blessed rosaries at a higher price for a poor religious house.

2. "Those perpetrating the delict of simony in any ecclesiastical offices, benefices, or dignities" (can. 2392).

Simoniacs are furthermore punished with various other penalties.¹⁵⁹ This excommunication, however, appears to be the only one¹⁶⁰ imposed for the crime of simony; and therefore simony on account of entrance into religion, or on account of profit sought from collected Mass stipends, is no longer punished with excommunication, since the Code of Canon Law is silent concerning these penalties, and all penalties of which no mention is made in the Code are regarded as abrogated.

¹⁵⁹ Code of Canon Law, c. 2392 and c. 729; cf. above, II, n. 565.

¹⁶⁰ Cf., however, below, n. 534 (2).

515. 3. "Clerics constituted in sacred orders, or male religious or nuns after a solemn vow of chastity, and likewise all those presuming to contract marriage, even merely civilly, with any of the aforesaid persons" (can. 2388, § 1).

In the Bull Apostolicae Sedis this excommunication was reserved to the Ordinary. If the clerics and other persons indicated intend nothing but concubinage, they do not incur excommunication. Clerics attempting marriage, if, after being warned by the Ordinary, they have not repented within the time prescribed according to the diversity of circumstances, are to be degraded;¹⁶¹ and as soon as they have contracted marriage, by that very fact they lose all ecclesiastical offices.¹⁶²

4. "Those perpetrating a duel, or simply challenging another to it, or accepting it, or furnishing any assistance or favor, and likewise those deliberately watching it, and those permitting it, or not prohibiting it insofar as lies within their power, of whatever dignity they may be" (can. 2351, § 1).

Enough was already said above in II, n. 126 concerning this censure.

¹⁶¹ Code of Canon Law, c. 2388, § 1.

¹⁶² Ibid., c. 188, n. 5.

516. 5. "Those giving their names to the Masonic sect or to other associations of the same kind which plot against the Church or legitimate civil powers" (can. 2335).

For explaining this excommunication it is useful to set forth: a) what sects are prohibited under censure; b) what persons are excommunicated.

a) As regards the prohibited sects. On May 10, 1884, the Holy Office distinguished between societies prohibited simply and those prohibited under censure.

All societies which pursue an evil end, or employ evil means, or "which exact from their adherents by oath a secret to be disclosed to no one and complete obedience to be rendered to hidden leaders," are simply prohibited. For such secrecy and such obedience, which extend to all matters, even illicit ones, constitute a grave sin. Societies simply prohibited of this kind are, for example, several American societies (Odd Fellows, Sons of Temperance, Knights of Pythias,¹⁶³ Independent Order of Good Templars¹⁶⁴); then, societies for promoting the cremation of corpses.¹⁶⁵

The following are prohibited under censure:

a) the Masonic society;¹⁶⁶

b) all societies which plot against the Church or legitimate civil powers. Such societies are those of the Carbonari,¹⁶⁷ the former Fenians,¹⁶⁸ and all anarchistic and nihilistic societies. Whether modern socialist societies incur this censure is disputed among authors, and therefore is doubtful. In practice socialists of diverse regions cannot be judged in the same manner. For in some regions they seek scarcely anything except the betterment of the condition of the common people; but in other regions they openly plot against the Church and legitimate power. In that case they appear subject to the censure; indeed, sometimes they also incur a censure on account of heresy admitted.

b) The persons who are excommunicated on account of these sects are only those

giving their names, namely, those who become members of such a sect. Formerly those furnishing favor and those not denouncing hidden leaders were also included under this censure, but the new Code of Canon Law is silent concerning them; therefore they are no longer excommunicated, although they sin gravely if they truly foster these most wicked societies.

Clerics and religious giving their names to the Masonic sect and other similar associations must be denounced to the Holy Office and are furthermore to be punished by privation of benefice, office, dignity, pension, function, and active and passive voice.¹⁶⁹

The manner of acting in confession with members of a forbidden sect. a) It rarely happens that a member of this kind is in good faith, because these sects are so often and so openly proclaimed illicit by the Church. Nevertheless, if such a member is in good faith and neither causes scandal nor incurs a proximate danger of perversion, he ought not to be compelled to leave the sect with the gravest inconvenience. For then perhaps he would not obey, and his material sin would be changed into a formal one.

b) A member of such a forbidden sect (who is not in good faith) cannot be absolved unless he breaks off communication with the sect and abjures it at least before the confessor.¹⁷⁰ But if external communication with the sect cannot be broken off without a very grave inconvenience, then, scandal and the proximate danger of perversion being excluded, the penitent can for some time persevere in paying dues and attending the meetings of the sectarians, until the danger of grave harm has ceased.¹⁷¹

c) The penitent must deliver the sect's books, manuscripts, insignia, and so forth (if he has any) to the confessor, who is to transmit them to the bishop as soon as possible or, if this is impossible, burn them.

¹⁶³ Holy Office, August 20, 1894.

¹⁶⁴ Holy Office, August 9, 1893.

¹⁶⁵ Holy Office, May 19, 1886.

¹⁶⁶ Clement XII, Constitution In eminenti, April 28, 1738; Benedict XIV, Constitution Providas, May 18, 1751, and several other Supreme Pontiffs, among whom was Leo XIII, Encyclical Humanum genus, April 20, 1884.

¹⁶⁷ Pius VII, Constitution Ecclesiam, September 13, 1821; Leo XII, Constitution Quo graviora, March 13, 1825. The members of this society called themselves carbonari, Köhler, fendeurs, buoni cugini. Cf. Wetzer and Welte, Kirchenlex., s.v. "Carbonari."

¹⁶⁸ Holy Office, January 12, 1870.

¹⁶⁹ Code of Canon Law, c. 2336.

¹⁷⁰ Holy Office, August 5, 1898 (Anal. eccl. VI [1898] 387).

¹⁷¹ Thus Noldin, De poenis eccl.¹², n. 76, citing for this opinion a decision of the Holy Office of January 18, 1896.

517. 6. a) "Those violating the enclosure of nuns, of whatever class or condition or sex they may be, by entering their monasteries without legitimate permission, and likewise those introducing or admitting them."

b) "Women violating the enclosure of male religious, and superiors and any others whatsoever introducing or admitting them, of whatever age they may be."

c) "Nuns illegitimately leaving the enclosure" (can. 2342).

The enclosure with which we are concerned here is only the papal enclosure, which by common law is found only in religious Orders with solemn vows. Those violating another enclosure, therefore, are not touched by this censure. The enclosure of nuns is stricter than that of men. Under certain conditions the following can enter the enclosure of nuns: a) the canonical Visitor; b) the confessor; c) Cardinals, supreme rulers of peoples, and their wives with an entourage; d) a physician and workmen, if necessity demands it.¹⁷² Nuns, that is, solemnly professed women, can leave the enclosure: 1. with special permission of the Holy See; 2. if there is imminent danger either of death or of another most grave evil. Women also are prohibited under penalty of excommunication from entering the enclosure of nuns; likewise infants and prepubescent persons, but these no longer incur excommunication by entering. For in the text cited above one no longer reads, as formerly, "of whatever class or condition, sex, or age they may be," but "age" is omitted. Now prepubescent persons generally incur no censures,¹⁷³ as was said above in n. 481. On the contrary, the superioress and any adult illegitimately introducing or admitting prepubescent persons into the enclosure of nuns do not appear to escape excommunication. It is certain that excommunication is incurred by one who admits or introduces little girls, even those not yet seven years old, into the enclosure of male religious. The same holds for prepubescent girls entering the enclosure of male religious and for adults who introduce or admit them. The wives of those who actually hold the supreme rule of peoples can enter the enclosure of male religious with an entourage.¹⁷⁴ We treated the enclosure more broadly in Man. iur. can., q. 227.

¹⁷² Code of Canon Law, c. 600.

¹⁷³ Ibid., c. 2230.

¹⁷⁴ Ibid., c. 598, § 2.

518. 7. "If anyone has presumed, through himself or through others, to convert and usurp for his own uses ecclesiastical goods of any kind, whether movable or immovable, whether corporeal or incorporeal, or to impede the fruits or revenues of the same from being received by those to whom they pertain by law, let him remain subject to excommunication until he has restored the goods themselves integrally, removed the aforesaid impediment, and thereafter obtained absolution from the Apostolic See" (can. 2346).

This excommunication was already imposed by the Council of Trent, sess. 22, c. 11, de reform. (although in slightly different words). Ecclesiastical goods are taken here in the broadest sense; namely, they are temporal goods which belong to some moral person in the Church,¹⁷⁵ for example, to a parish, to a monastery, and so forth, but not those which belong to physical ecclesiastical persons. Three actions are punished: converting to one's own uses, usurping, and impeding. Each of these actions appears to induce the censure, and usurpation includes not only authoritative but also private usurpation.¹⁷⁶ Thieves and robbers of ecclesiastical goods, however, do not incur this censure.¹⁷⁷ Thus the probable opinion even in the new law. Likewise it is not incurred by city councillors and a mayor,¹⁷⁸ who acquired ecclesiastical goods not for their own but for the common uses of the city;¹⁷⁹ nor by those who freely undertook the function of administering ecclesiastical goods thus taken away.¹⁸⁰ But those who purchased or leased these confiscated goods for themselves incur excommunication.¹⁸¹ Likewise intruded pastors and other benefice-holders. Absolution from this censure cannot be given except after restitution of the goods. In France and Italy, however, bishops possess a special faculty for giving or facilitating this absolution.¹⁸²

¹⁷⁵ Ibid., c. 1497, § 1.

¹⁷⁶ Cf. Hollweck, Die kirchl. Strafgesetze, § 156, n. 18.

¹⁷⁷ Holy Office, March 9, 1870.

¹⁷⁸ Commonly, French maire, German Bürgermeister.

¹⁷⁹ Sacred Penitentiary, January 3 and March 8, 1906 (Anal. eccl. XV [1907] 128 ff.).

¹⁸⁰ Sacred Penitentiary, September 17, 1906.

¹⁸¹ Holy Office, July 8, 1874 (Collect. de Prop. Fide II, 1420); Sacred Penitentiary, August 5, 1907 (Anal. eccl. XVI [1908] 445).

¹⁸² Cf. Letter of the Secretariat of State, September 24, 1907 (Anal. eccl. XVI [1908] 488 ff.); Sacred Congregation of the Council, March 12, 1913.

519. 8. "Those furnishing any assistance or favor to an excommunicated person to be avoided in the delict on account of which he was excommunicated; likewise clerics knowingly and spontaneously communicating with him in divine services and receiving him into divine offices" (can. 2338, § 2).

Two delicts are punished by this censure, which in the Bull Apostolicae Sedis were punished with two distinct excommunications. The first delict consists in assistance or favor furnished to an excommunicated person to be avoided, and that not in any manner whatever, but in the delict on account of which he was excommunicated, or in the criminal delict, as it used to be called. Hence, for example, if someone has been declared an excommunicated person to be avoided on account of rebellion, all who furnish him assistance or favor in this very rebellion incur an excommunication reserved simply to the Holy See. Who is an excommunicated person to be avoided was said above in n. 499.

The other delict consists not in any communication whatever with an excommunicated person to be avoided, but in communication in divine services. Clerics incur this excommunication, under which name probably neither bishops nor lay religious are included. It is required that such clerics:

a) act knowingly and spontaneously; therefore fear and every kind of ignorance excuse, provided it is not affected ignorance;

b) communicate in divine services, that is, authoritatively receive into properly liturgical offices (for example, Mass, ecclesiastical burial, and so forth) one excommunicated by name by the Roman Pontiff.

520. 9. "Those presuming, without due faculty, to absolve from a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See in the most special or special manner" (can. 2338, § 1).

Confessors incur this excommunication who knowingly or with affected ignorance presume (without faculty) to absolve a penitent from an excommunication reserved to the Pope in the most special or special manner. But if a confessor, ignorant of or not advertent to the reservation, absolves a penitent from the censure and sin, he neither sins nor incurs any penalty; indeed, the absolution from the censure is valid, provided it is not: a) a censure ab homine, or b) a censure reserved to the Apostolic See in the most special manner.¹⁸³ It was said above in n. 494 how a simple confessor can absolve from cases of this kind in danger of death and in more urgent cases.

10. "If anyone has dared (without previous legitimate permission) to draw before a lay judge a bishop, even merely titular (not his own Ordinary), or an abbot or prelate nullius, or any one of the supreme superiors of religions of pontifical right" (can. 2341).

Those who have dared to violate the privilege of the forum with respect to certain prelates are punished with this excommunication, provided they did so altogether voluntarily and freely. For any diminution of imputability excuses from this censure. See above, n. 511, for the other penalties inflicted on account of violation of the same privilege with respect to the highest prelates, and below, n. 535, with respect to other ecclesiastical persons.

11. "The capitular vicar and all others, whether of the Chapter or outsiders, who through themselves or through another have taken away, destroyed, concealed, or substantially altered any document whatsoever pertaining to the episcopal curia" (can. 2405).

This excommunication has been newly introduced, but appears to have force only while the episcopal see is vacant. By the name of document there appears to be signified not a private letter, but any writing pertaining to the governance of the diocese, for example, accounts of receipts and expenses, reports concerning a canonical visitation, and so forth.

IV. Excommunications reserved to Ordinaries.

¹⁸³ Code of Canon Law, c. 2247, § 3.

521. Preliminary note. a) By the name of Ordinary are understood not only residential bishops but also all who possess quasi-episcopal jurisdiction. For regulars and religious in exempt clerical religions, the Ordinary is their own major superior, unless the local Ordinary is expressly named.

b) Censures reserved to the Ordinary can by law be absolved by a simple confessor: 1. in danger of death, without an obligation of recourse after recovery that may have occurred;¹⁸⁴ 2. in more urgent cases, with an obligation of recourse;¹⁸⁵ 3. in certain other cases, as was said above in n. 427; 4. by confessors possessing the privileges of the Mendicants, as the more common opinion, safe in practice, teaches.

The excommunications whose absolution is reserved to Ordinaries are six or nine; namely, the following are excommunicated:

¹⁸⁴ Cf. above, n. 494.

¹⁸⁵ Cf. ibid.

522. 1. a) "Catholics who contract marriage before a non-Catholic minister contrary to the prescription of can. 1063, § 1."

b) "Those who are joined in marriage with an explicit or implicit agreement that all or some of the offspring be educated outside the Catholic Church."

c) "Those who knowingly presume to offer their children to non-Catholic ministers to be baptized."

d) "Parents or those taking the place of parents, who knowingly hand over their children to be educated or instructed in a non-Catholic religion" (can. 2319, § 1).

All these delicts constitute favor toward heresy and before the new Code of Canon Law were punished with an excommunication reserved to the Holy See in a special manner. But since these delicts are customarily public and brought to the external forum of the Ordinary, the same Ordinary can absolve from them; indeed, the censure now imposed by the common law is reserved to the local Ordinary. In some regions the non-Catholic minister is constituted an official of the civil government, before whom all marriages are commanded to be celebrated. Then, certainly, those contracting marriage before such a minister as a civil official do not incur the censure.^185a

In the first case there is question only of mixed marriage, concerning which c. 1063 establishes the law. Therefore, if two Catholics contracted marriage before a non-Catholic minister, they indeed sinned gravely, but they are not excommunicated. It is otherwise in the second, third, and fourth cases. Since in the celebration of marriage before a non-Catholic minister and in the agreement to educate offspring outside the Catholic Church there is manifestly contempt for ecclesiastical authority, grave fear does not appear to excuse from the censure. Hence, for example, if a Catholic girl who has already become pregnant consents to such a celebration and agreement because otherwise she gravely fears that she will be abandoned by her betrothed, she nevertheless appears to incur these censures.¹⁸⁶

Those who are joined in marriage with an agreement (whether explicit or implicit) that the offspring be educated outside the Catholic Church and afterward presume actually to execute this agreement by handing over the offspring to be educated in a non-Catholic religion contract a twofold excommunication; indeed, they are furthermore suspected of heresy and therefore, if within six complete months from the penalty contracted they have not amended themselves, they contract an excommunication reserved to the Holy See in a special manner.¹⁸⁷ Catholics who have dared to enter a mixed marriage without a dispensation of the Church, even if valid, remain by that very fact excluded from legitimate ecclesiastical and sacramental acts until they have obtained a dispensation from the Ordinary.¹⁸⁸

See below, n. 783, for how one is to proceed in the absolution of these four censures. Besides, particular norms are customarily observed in individual dioceses.

2. "One who fabricates false relics or knowingly sells, distributes, or exposes them for the public veneration of the faithful" (can. 2326).

This newly introduced excommunication does not need explanation, since it is clear in itself.

^185a Code of Canon Law, c. 1063, § 3.

¹⁸⁶ Cappello, De cens., n. 371, teaches the contrary.

¹⁸⁷ Code of Canon Law, c. 2319, § 2, and c. 2315.

¹⁸⁸ Ibid., c. 2375.

523. 3. "One who has laid violent hands upon the person of other clerics (not adorned with cardinalitial or episcopal dignity) or of religious of either sex."¹⁸⁹

This excommunication protects the privilege of the canon both in clerics constituted below bishops and in religious. We treated the violation of the privilege of the canon more broadly above in II, n. 541. Clerics who have laid hands upon themselves do not incur any latae sententiae censure, but are to be punished with ferendae sententiae penalties according to can. 2350, § 2.

4. "Those procuring an abortion, with the effect ensuing, the mother not excepted."¹⁹⁰

The controversy concerning the exemption of the mother from the censure, therefore, is now ended. Clerics procuring an abortion are furthermore to be deposed. The procuring of abortion was treated more broadly above in II, n. 137 ff.

5. "A religious who is an apostate from religion incurs by the law itself an excommunication reserved to his own major superior or, if the religion is lay or non-exempt, to the Ordinary of the place in which he resides" (can. 2385).

Apostasy from religion occurs when a religious illegitimately leaves the religion in which he emitted perpetual vows, with the intention of not returning.¹⁹¹ In exempt clerical religions this apostasy induces an excommunication reserved to the major superior of the religious himself;¹⁹² but in other religions the excommunication is reserved to the Ordinary of the place where the apostate resides, not where his monastery or convent is situated. Such apostates are furthermore excluded from legitimate ecclesiastical acts, are deprived of all privileges of their religion, and, if they return, perpetually lack active and passive voice; they must moreover be punished with other penalties by their superiors according to the norm of the constitutions. See below, n. 536, concerning penalties against fugitive religious.

6. "Those professed with simple perpetual vows both in Orders and in religious Congregations, and likewise all those presuming to contract marriage, even merely civilly, with any of the aforesaid persons" (can. 2388, § 2).

If these professed persons are clerics constituted in sacred orders, they contract an excommunication reserved simply to the Holy See, as was already said above in n. 515.

V. Excommunications reserved to no one.

¹⁸⁹ Ibid., c. 2343, § 4.

¹⁹⁰ Ibid., c. 2350.

¹⁹¹ Code of Canon Law, c. 644, § 1.

¹⁹² Major superiors are the Abbot Primate, the Abbot superior of a monastic Congregation, the Abbot of a monastery sui iuris, the supreme moderator of a religion, the provincial superior, their vicars, and others having power after the manner of provincials (Code of Canon Law, c. 488, n. 8).

524. In this series five excommunications are enumerated:

1. "Authors and editors who without due permission cause the books of Sacred Scripture, or annotations or commentaries upon them, to be printed" (can. 2318, § 2).

This excommunication is already found in the Constitution Officiorum et munerum, January 25, 1897 (n. 48). Three local Ordinaries can grant the due permission for printing books of this kind: a) the proper local Ordinary of the author; b) the Ordinary of the place in which they are printed;¹⁹³ c) the Ordinary of the place in which they are published.¹⁹⁴ If one of these three Ordinaries has denied permission, the author cannot seek it from another Ordinary unless he has informed that Ordinary of the permission denied by the other. Religious must furthermore obtain the permission of their major superior.¹⁹⁵

¹⁹³ Place of printing.

¹⁹⁴ Place of publication.

¹⁹⁵ Code of Canon Law, c. 1385, §§ 2 and 3.

525. 2. "Those who have dared to command or compel unbelievers, apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics, or others, whether excommunicated or interdicted, to be given ecclesiastical burial contrary to the prescription of can. 1240, § 1" (can. 2339).

Those endowed with public authority who freely compel notorious heretics, unbelievers, excommunicated persons, or interdicted persons to be buried in a sacred place are punished with this excommunication. In most regions, for example, in Germany, Austria, and so forth, civil law commands and regulates the burial of inhabitants. Therefore, if, for example, the prefect of some place is bound by force of civil law to command that some notorious heretic be buried in a blessed or consecrated Catholic cemetery, he does not appear to incur this censure. For it is not the prefect, but the unjust civil law, that commands this burial.¹⁹⁶ Neither do those themselves who bury or assist at the burial incur this censure, for they do not command or compel. Clerics, however, who perform the burial of one excommunicated by name incur both an excommunication reserved simply to the Roman Pontiff¹⁹⁷ and an interdict.¹⁹⁸

3. "For all guilty in any manner (in the illegitimate alienation of precious ecclesiastical goods or of those exceeding the value of 30,000 francs; namely, if apostolic approval has knowingly been omitted), whether by giving, by receiving, or by furnishing consent, there remains (besides other penalties) a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to no one" (can. 2347, n. 3).

As regards its substance, this excommunication has already existed for centuries, but it has now been changed considerably as regards its circumstances. For first, it is not so clear whether this censure is latae or ferendae sententiae; for it is not incurred by that very fact, but "remains for the guilty." Commonly, however, it is regarded as a latae sententiae censure. Then, apostolic approval is required only if there is question of alienating precious ecclesiastical things whose value is notable by reason of art, history, or material. The value is notable by reason of material if it exceeds 30,000 francs;¹⁹⁹ but by reason of art or history, a lesser value appears already to be notable, for example, a value of 1,000 francs in gold currency. For alienating other ecclesiastical things, other permissions are required and suffice. Those alienating illegitimately are also punished with various other penalties.²⁰⁰

¹⁹⁶ Thus also Noldin, De poenis eccl., n. 97; Cappello, De cens., n. 401.

¹⁹⁷ Cf. above, n. 519.

¹⁹⁸ Cf. below, n. 536.

¹⁹⁹ Code of Canon Law, c. 1532, § 1; c. 1497, § 2.

²⁰⁰ Ibid., c. 2347, nn. 1 and 2.

526. 4. "All, even those adorned with any dignity whatsoever, who in any manner compel either a man to embrace the clerical state, or a man or woman to enter religion or emit a religious profession, whether solemn or simple, whether perpetual or temporary" (can. 2325).

By this excommunication liberty in choosing the clerical or religious state is protected. The religious state includes not only Orders but also approved religious Congregations. Unjustly to impede someone from the clerical or religious state is indeed a grave sin, but does not induce any censure.

5. "A member of the faithful who knowingly has omitted, contrary to the prescription of can. 904, to denounce within a month the one (the confessor) by whom he was solicited incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to no one, and is not to be absolved unless he has satisfied the obligation or has seriously promised that he will satisfy it" (can. 2368, § 2).

Cf. what was said above in n. 460 ff. concerning the matter of this censure. Note furthermore: not only the solicited person himself but also all witnesses, whether immediate or mediate, who know with certainty that the crime of solicitation was committed, are bound under grave sin to denounce; on the contrary, only the solicited person himself, who culpably neglects the required denunciation for a month, incurs the present excommunication. If the solicited person has seriously promised that he will denounce within a month, he can be absolved, even if he has already incurred the censure on account of the neglected denunciation. But if, his will having changed, he afterward does not denounce, the censure appears to arise anew, because otherwise the law would be evaded. Thus the most common opinion.²⁰¹

²⁰¹ Cf. De Smet, Tract. de cas. reserv., n. 167. Noldin (De poenis eccl., n. 103) teaches the contrary, saying: "But if afterward, his will having changed, he does not denounce, the censure does not revive, because there is nothing concerning reincidence." This opinion is scarcely probable.