Addenda

1. (Pag. 83.) § 2. The proper parish priest or Ordinary of a vagus is the parish priest or Ordinary of the place in which the vagus is actually staying.

§ 3. Also of those who have only a diocesan domicile or quasi-domicile, the proper parish priest is the parish priest of the place in which they are actually staying (Can. 94).

2. (Pag. 85.) § 1. The place of origin of a son, even a neophyte, is that in which, when the son was born, the father had domicile, or, in defect of domicile, quasi-domicile; or, if the son is illegitimate or posthumous, the mother had it.

§ 2. If there is question of the son of vagi, the place of origin is the very place of birth; if of an exposed child, it is the place in which he was found (Can. 90).

3. (Pag. 212.) Let all whom it concerns take care that in churches that cleanliness be preserved which befits the house of God; from the same let trading and markets be warded off, although held for a pious end; and generally whatever is discordant with the holiness of the place (Can. 1178).

4. (Pag. 282.) Vaginal washings with water made by women for the sake of cleanliness, after three or four hours have elapsed from the last intercourse, do not seem illicit to us. For such washings, although perhaps some part of the semen is lost, of themselves do not impede conception; for in fact in this case the quantity of semen necessary and sufficient for conception, and the time useful for the ascent of the semen into the womb, are already had. - Cf. Marc. n. 2112. - Noldin, n. 69. - Arregui, n. 814. But others require a time more distant from intercourse. Cf. Bucceroni, V. 4, n. 1067. - Tanquerey, Supplementum, n. 51. - Surbled, La Morale, V. 1, c. 12.

5. (Pag. 1056.) Rescript, 28 Nov. 1924. Most Reverend Father.

This S. Congregation, after maturely weighing the doubt set forth, whether, under the law of the Code, someone endowed with all the other qualities and of excellent talent is to be called irregular for receiving Sacred Orders on account of the defect alone of the left eye, with no deformity or difficulty of exercise existing; with attention to all things bearing upon the matter, judged that it must be rescripted, as it rescripts: "As it is set forth in the case, it is not established that there is irregularity." This was to be communicated by me to Your Most Reverend Paternity, for whom I pray all prosperous things from the Lord, and I remain. Most devoted, Maurus M. Serafini, Ab. O.S.B., Secretary. - To the Most Reverend Father Procurator General of the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin.

6. (Pag. 490.) As often and as long as the necessity of the Church, in the judgment of the proper Ordinary, requires it, and unless a legitimate impediment excuses, the office which shall have been committed to clerics by the Bishop must be accepted and faithfully fulfilled (Can. 128).

7. (Pag. 524.) The things which are established concerning religious, although expressed by a masculine word, hold also by equal law concerning women, unless from the context of the speech or from the nature of the matter something else is established (Can. 490).

8. (Pag. 528.) In religions in which there are two classes of members, a novitiate completed for one class is not valid for the other (Can. 558).

9. (Pag. 569.) To the question: "Whether the blessings which are first of all to be imparted to Catholics, and which, according to can. 1149 of the Code of Canon Law, can also be given to catechumens, are to be understood also of public sacramentals, and consequently catechumens can be admitted to the imposition of ashes, the handing over of candles and palms?" the Sacred Congregation of Rites, on 8 March 1919, judged that the response should be: Affirmatively.

Catholics who shall have dared to contract a mixed marriage, even if valid, without the dispensation of the Church, remain by the very fact excluded from legitimate ecclesiastical acts and from Sacramentals, until they shall have obtained dispensation from the Ordinary (Can. 2375).

10. (Pag. 614.) In the house of nuns the ordinary confessor, or he who performs his duties, has the right and office of administering the Eucharistic Viaticum and Extreme Unction.

In another lay religion this right and office belongs to the parish priest of the place or to the chaplain whom the Ordinary shall have supplied according to the norm of can. 464, § 2. Cf. Can. 514, §§ 2, 3.

11. (Pag. 626.) The practice of using, for the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, hosts made three or two months before cannot be approved; and the prescription of the Roman Ritual and of the Code of Canon Law must be observed. S. C. de disc. Sacr. 7 Dec. 1918.

12. (Pag. 652.) The obligation of applying Mass for the people is contained in the pastoral office itself; for, as is clear from the Council of Trent, sess. 23, De ref. c. 1, with this office there is joined the burden of offering sacrifice for the sheep; but this burden, according to the Constitutions of the Roman Pontiffs, imports the obligation of applying Mass for the flock, so that those to whom the care of souls has been entrusted must apply the middle fruit of the Mass to the people committed to them. Cf. Benedict XIV, Const. Cum semper; Pius IX, Const. Amantissimi.

The most recent Declaration solves the doubts. Sacred Consistorial Congregation - declaration - concerning the nature of quasi-parishes or missions of certain dioceses after the promulgation of the Code of Canon Law. From the dioceses which, before the Constitution Sapienti consilio, were subject to the jurisdiction of the S. C. de Propaganda Fide, but afterwards were transferred into the common law, certain doubts were proposed concerning the nature of the parishes or missions into which the same dioceses are divided and concerning the rights and offices of their rectors.

But this Sacred Congregation, having heard most of the Ordinaries of the aforesaid dioceses and the matter having been maturely weighed, judged that these things must be declared in the matter:

I. From Can. 216 of the Code of Canon Law it is indubitable that the parts of dioceses as above, to which a particular rector has been assigned for the care of souls, must henceforth be held as parishes and called by that name; the appellation of quasi-parishes or missions being reserved to the parts into which, for the care of souls, Apostolic Vicariates and Apostolic Prefectures are divided.

II. For constituting parishes, indeed, a decree of the Ordinary is required, by which the boundaries of the territory, the parish seat, and the endowment both for worship and for the support of the priest are determined; nevertheless it is not necessary that irremovability be assigned to the rector; indeed, if just causes are present, removability can be declared in the very decree of creation, according to canons 1411, § 4, 454, § 3, and 1438.

III. But if the small or fluctuating number of the faithful, or the absolute lack of a congruous endowment, by no means counsels the erection of certain churches into parishes, churches of this kind are to be held as subsidiary churches or chaplaincies within the boundaries of some parish, in whose jurisdiction and dependence they will remain, until they shall be able to attain their own parochiality.

IV. In constituting the endowment of parishes to be erected, those things are to be kept before the eyes which are established in the Code, cann. 1409, 1410, and 1415, § 3.

V. Moreover, the erection having been canonically carried out as above, the rector of the parish, whether a parish priest or a vicar oeconomus, is held by the obligation of applying Mass for the people; from which the rectors of a subsidiary church or chaplaincy are exempt. But if this burden is found too grave, recourse must be had to the Holy See for an opportune reduction. Rome, from the buildings of the S. C. Consistorial, on the day 1 August 1919. C. Card. De Lai, Bishop of Sabina, Secretary. A.A.S., V. xi, p. 346.

13. (Pag. 666.) § 1. In the liturgical sense there is understood:

1°. By the name immovable or fixed altar, the upper table together with the supports consecrated by way of one thing with the same;

2°. By the name movable or portable altar, a stone, for the most part small, which alone is consecrated, and which is also called a portable altar or sacred stone; or the same stone with a support which nevertheless was not consecrated together with it.

§ 2. In a consecrated church at least one altar, especially the greater one, must be immovable; but in a blessed church all the altars can be movable (Can. 1197).

14. (Pag. 666.) § 1. A priest about to celebrate Mass is to wear a suitable garment which reaches to the ankles and the sacred vestments prescribed by the rubrics of his rite (Can. 811).

15. (Pag. 669.) § 1. A priest is not to celebrate Mass without a minister who serves and responds to him.

§ 2. The minister serving Mass is not to be a woman, unless, when a man is lacking, for a just cause, and on this condition, that the woman respond from a distance and in no way approach the altar (Can. 813).¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1115, n. 63.

16. (Pag. 824.) Besides, the local Ordinary, if there is question of those ordained from the secular clergy, or the major Superior, if of religious ordained with his dimissorial letters, is to transmit notice of the celebrated ordination of each subdeacon to the parish priest of baptism, who is to note it in his book of the baptized according to the norm of can. 470, § 2 (Can. 1011).

17. (Pag. 863.) By force of the clause "the celebration of Mass always excluded," which is appended in rescripts concerning mixed marriages, there is prohibited not only the Mass for the spouses ... but any Mass, even a private one, which is celebrated before the spouses and companions, after the marriage, although a distinct seat is not given to the spouses, so that it is held as a complement of the ceremony of marriage. - S. Off. 17 Jan. 1872.

18. (Pag. 940.) "Whether the Const. Provida of 18 Jan. 1906, as a particular law opposed to the prescription of Can. 1099, has now been abrogated according to the norm of Can. 6, 1°; or whether, as a privilege or indult, it remains intact according to the norm of Can. 4?"

Card. Gasparri, President of the Pontifical Commission for authentically interpreting the canons of the Code, responded to the doubt proposed to the Holy See on 30 March 1918: "It has been abrogated."

The Constitution Provida established the following: 1°. In the whole German Empire all Catholics among themselves could celebrate a valid marriage in no other way than before the parish priest and two or three witnesses. 2°. Mixed marriages which were contracted by Catholics with heretics or schismatics without the Tridentine form being observed were to be held valid, provided that no other canonical impediment stood in the way. 3°. Mixed marriages already clandestinely contracted were likewise to be held valid, provided that no impediment stood in the way, nor had a sentence of nullity on account of the impediment of clandestinity been legitimately issued before Easter day of the year 1906, and the mutual consent of the spouses had persevered up to the said day. 4°. The same, and under the same conditions and restrictions, was decreed concerning marriages of non-Catholics, whether heretics or schismatics, among themselves, in the same regions, contracted up to that time or afterwards to be contracted without the Tridentine form being observed. This Constitution began to have force from Easter day of the year 1906 in the whole German Empire. It must be noted that no privilege is given by this Constitution to marriages of Catholics with non-baptized persons.

Concerning this one exception certain doubts were resolved by the S. Congregation of the Council:

1°. "Whether in the German Empire Catholics who have passed over to a heretical or schismatic sect, or converts to the Catholic faith who afterwards defected from it, even at a youthful or infant age, must, in order to contract validly with a Catholic person, employ the form established in the decree Ne temere, namely so that they must contract before the parish priest and two witnesses?" And insofar as affirmatively,

2°. "Whether, in view of the peculiar circumstances existing in the German Empire, it is fitting that provision be made by an opportune dispensation?"

3°. "Whether the exception introduced in Germany by the Const. Provida is to be judged as merely local or also personal?" The Sacred Congregation responded, 1 Feb. 1908, to the first, "Affirmatively"; to the second, "Negatively, and therefore let the decree Ne temere be observed"; but to the third, 28 March 1908, "The exception holds only for those born in Germany contracting marriage there, the word having been made with His Holiness."

19. (Pag. 943.) If a petition of dispensation has been sent to the Holy See, the Ordinaries of places are not to use their faculties, if they have any, except according to the norm of Can. 204 § 2 (Can. 1048). But Canon 204 § 2 establishes: Nevertheless, after a matter has been brought to a Superior, an inferior is not to involve himself in it, unless from a grave and urgent cause; and in this case he is immediately to warn the Superior concerning the matter.

20. (Pag. 948.) DECREE. - Concerning Certain Faculties of Ordinaries. - Although, by the mercy of God, the conflict having been removed, peace seems near, nevertheless, since we have not yet obtained it and the causes on account of which indults concerning the dispensing of impediments and the sanating of marriages were conceded to Ordinaries of places still persevere, at least in part, the Most Holy Lord Benedict PP. XV, to forestall doubts and remove anxieties in a matter of such great moment, ordered that it be established and declared, as by this decree of the Sacred Consistorial Congregation he declares and establishes, that the faculties conceded to Ordinaries by decrees of the same S. Congregation on the days 25 April and 2 August 1918 still persevere in their force, and that Ordinaries can use them until six whole months after peace has been signed among the nations which contended in war. Given at Rome, from the buildings of the Sacred Consistorial Congregation, on the day 4 March 1919. C. Card. De Lai, Bishop of Sabina, Secretary.

21. (Pag. 970.) DECREE. - Concerning Mixed Marriages Null by Reason of Clandestinity. - The Ordinary of the Diocese N., having already obtained the faculty of sanating in the root mixed marriages which are null by reason of clandestinity because they were not celebrated according to the norm of the Decree Ne temere, when the non-Catholic party refuses to present himself before the Catholic parish priest, now asks:

22. Whether, when the non-Catholic party does not refuse to present himself before the Catholic parish priest, but nevertheless altogether refuses to furnish the due cautions, provision must be made by dispensation and renewal of consent before the Catholic parish priest passively assisting, or rather by sanation in the root; and insofar as provision must be made by sanation in the root:

23. Whether the faculty of sanating in the root in this second case is to be judged as comprehended or not in the faculty already obtained of sanating in the root mixed marriages null by reason of clandestinity, or

24. Whether a new faculty must or must not be petitioned from the Holy See.

In the plenary meeting of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office held on feria IV, the day 20 Nov. 1912, after the above-written doubts had been proposed, the Eminent and Most Reverend Lord Cardinals, General Inquisitors in matters of faith and morals, all things having been maturely weighed, decreed that the response should be:

To the 1st: Negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second.

To the 2nd: Not to be comprehended.

To the 3rd: Provision has been made in the second. And His Holiness is to be supplicated that he deign to sanate in the root marriages null by this reason, which up to this time perhaps have invalidly been sanated by Bishops.

And on the following feria V, the day 21 of the same month, the Most Holy Lord, our Lord Pius, by divine providence PP. X, in the usual audience granted to the Reverend Father Lord Assessor of the same Supreme Sacred Congregation, deigned benignly to approve and confirm the resolution of the Eminent Fathers and to grant the sanation in the root of marriages which, null by this reason, up to this time perhaps have invalidly been sanated by Bishops. Anything whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding. Given at Rome, from the buildings of the S. Office, on the day 22 December 1916. Aloisius Castellano, Notary of the Sacred Roman and Universal Inquisition.

22. (Pag. 1065.) The faithful of the Oriental Rite can gain all Indulgences conceded by the Supreme Pontiff by universal decree. Thus the Sacred Penitentiary, 7 July 1917.

23. (Pag. 1084.) He who has not made the oblation into the hands of the Blessed Virgin Mary can designate the soul to which he wishes to apply his satisfactions. Cf. Il Mon. Eccl. vol. viii, pt. 2, p. 235.

24. (Pag. 765, 1032.) Secretariat of State. The preceding one of 1 December 1918, concerning the manner of transmitting denunciations to the S. Office, is revoked.

Circular, 6 August 1926.

Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord. - This Secretariat of State, by letters given on the day 1 December in the year 1918, warned the individual Ordinaries of the Catholic world that whatever matter is customarily brought to the Sacred Congregation of the S. Office - since for the most part there is question of facts which could be learned by others not without scandal - should be brought not directly to the Tribunal of the S. Office, but to the Eminent Cardinal Secretary of State.

And it prescribed this only with the counsel that knowledge of those most grave matters might in no way be acquired by public couriers or by those to whose censorship letters were subject in those days. But since at present that condition of things no longer has force, the letters of this Secretariat which had introduced such a prescription have lost every force. Wherefore all those things concerning which the same Tribunal decrees by its proper and native right must be brought directly to the aforesaid Congregation of the S. Office.

Reporting these things to you, having obtained a suitable occasion, I profess the sentiments of my greatest esteem toward you and confirm myself.

Most devoted to Your Amplitude, P. Card. Gasparri. Cf. Il Mon. Eccl. v. 39, p. 198.

25. (Pag. 522.) Whether it is licit for Bishops habitually to communicate to presbyters of their jurisdiction the power of blessing rosaries, etc., of which in canon 349, § 1, n. 1, with application of indulgences, the rites prescribed by the Church being observed? The Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary, the matter having been maturely considered, judged that the response should be: Negatively. This judgment, reported through the undersigned Cardinal Major Penitentiary to the Most Holy Lord Benedict PP. XV in the Audience of this day, His Holiness deigned to approve and ordered it to be made of public law.

Given at Rome, on the day 18 July 1919. A.A.S., V. xi, p. 332.

26. Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code. - Doubts Solved in the Plenary Meetings of the Eminent Fathers.

Pag. 80. Can. 10. Whether simple perpetual religious vows on the part of the one vowing, emitted before the promulgation of the Code in Religions of solemn vows, whether of men or of women, are to be governed, as regards the manner of dismissal of religious and as regards the effects of dismissal, by the ancient law before the Code.

Resp. Affirmatively.

Pag. 664. Can. 822, § 4. Whether the faculty of celebrating Mass in a private house is to be interpreted restrictively by the Ordinary, according to the norm of Canon 822, § 4.

Resp. Affirmatively.

Pag. 1060. Can. 987. Whether, according to the norm of Can. 987, there is to be numbered among the impeded one whose father or mother only is Catholic, the other parent being non-Catholic. And, insofar as affirmatively, whether also in that case in which the mixed marriage was contracted with dispensation in this prohibition after the cautions had been given.

Resp. Affirmatively in all things.

Pag. 840. Can. 1990. Whether the Ordinary, the solemnities of law required in the Apostolic Constitution Dei miseratione being omitted, can declare a marriage null, yet with the intervention of the defender of the matrimonial bond, without there being need of a second sentence, in these cases, namely:

1°. If two Catholics, in a place certainly previously subject to chapter Tametsi of the Council of Trent, or after the Decree Ne temere, entered a civil marriage only, the ecclesiastical rite being omitted, and, a civil divorce having been obtained, strive to enter a new marriage in the Church, or to convalidate in the forum of the Church a new marriage entered civilly.

2°. Or if the Catholic party who, with a non-Catholic, in contempt of the laws of the Church, contracted marriage in the temple of a Protestant sect, in a place certainly previously subject to chapter Tametsi of the Council of Trent and where the Benedictine declaration has not been extended, or after the Decree Ne temere, having obtained a civil divorce, wishes to enter a new marriage in the face of the Church with a Catholic consort.

3°. Or if apostates from the Catholic faith, who in apostasy joined themselves civilly or by an alien rite, having obtained a civil divorce, repentant, desire to return to the Church and celebrate second nuptials in the Church with a Catholic party.

Resp. The above-mentioned cases require no judicial process or intervention of the defender of the bond, but are to be resolved by the Ordinary himself, or by the Parish Priest, the Ordinary having been consulted, in the prior investigation for the celebration of marriage, of which in Can. 1091 and following.

Rome, 16 October 1919.

Peter Card. Gasparri, President.

Aloisius Sincero, Secretary.

Pag. 319. Can. 1251, § 1. Can the doctrine taught by some authors be held with safe conscience, that after the publication of the Code it is permitted on days of fast only to eat meat several times during the day?

The Eminent President of the Commission responded on the day 29 October 1919: Negatively.

27. (Pag. 85, 814.) Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code. - Most Eminent Prince, - To the doubts proposed by Your Most Reverend Eminence, namely: 1°. Who is the proper Bishop for the ordination of those who have no domicile (Can. 956). 2°. Whether he who is ordained by his proper Bishop for the service of another diocese is incardinated into this other diocese according to Canon 111, § 2, or rather into the diocese of his proper Bishop according to Canon 969, § 2.

And, insofar as negatively to the first part, 3°. At what time he must be incardinated into the diocese for whose service he is ordained. 4°. Whether a peregrinus is held to the reservations of the place in which he is.

The Eminent Fathers of this Pontifical Commission, in the plenary meeting of the day 3 August 1919, responded:

To 1°. As the doubt is set forth, it is the Bishop of the place in which the ordination takes place, provided nevertheless that the one to be ordained previously acquire domicile with an oath according to the norm of Canon 956.

To 2°. Affirmatively to the first part; negatively to the second.

To 3°. Provision has been made in the response to the 2nd.

To 4°. Affirmatively.

While I make these things known to Your Most Reverend Eminence, I reverently kiss the hands of Your Most Reverend Eminence, and profess myself

the most humble and devoted servant, P. Card. Gasparri, Aloisius Sincero, Secretary.

28. (Pag. 166.) Doubt - On Theosophism - Feria IV, the day 16 July 1919. In the plenary meeting held by the Eminent and Most Reverend Lord Cardinals, General Inquisitors in matters of faith and morals, with the doubt proposed: Whether the doctrines which today they call theosophical can be composed with Catholic doctrine; and therefore whether it is licit to give one's name to theosophical societies, to be present at their meetings, and to read their books, periodicals, newspapers, and writings.

The same Eminent and Most Reverend Lords, the vote of the Lord Consultors having first been had, decreed that the response should be: Negatively in all things.

And on feria V, the day 17 of the same month, the Most Holy Lord, our Lord Benedict, by Divine Providence PP. XV, in the usual audience granted to the Reverend Father Lord Assessor of the S. O., approved the resolution of the Eminent Fathers reported to him and ordered it to be published.

Given at Rome, from the buildings of the S. Office, on the day 18 July 1919, A. Castellano, Notary of the Supreme S. C. of the S. Off. A.A.S. v. XI, p. 317.

29. (Pag. 662.) From the Sacred Congregation of Rites the solution of the following doubts was sought; namely:

1°. "Whether a Priest who, on account of weakness of vision or another just cause, by Indult of the Apostolic See celebrates some one of the votive Masses or the daily Mass of the Dead, can on the day of the Commemoration of All the Faithful Departed perform the Sacred rite three times, repeating the same daily Mass of the Dead?"

2°. "Whether the same Priest who likewise by Indult of the Apostolic See celebrates the votive Mass of the Mother of God or another votive Mass, is able hereafter on the day of the Nativity of the Lord to say the entirely same Mass three times?"

And the same Sacred Congregation, the vote of the special Commission having been heard, all things having been weighed, judged that it must be rescripted:

"Affirmatively to each question, the word having been made with the Most Holy One; for the rest, with both the Apostolic Constitution Incruentum altaris Sacrificium, 10 August 1915, and the Rubrics and Decrees regarding the days of the Nativity of the Lord and the Commemoration of All the Faithful Departed duly to be observed."

This resolution, reported to Our Most Holy Lord Benedict Pope XV by the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, His Holiness held ratified and approved, on the day 26 January 1920. A. Card. Vico, Bishop of Porto and S. Rufina, Prefect of the S. R. C.

30. (Pag. 729.) Whether according to the norm of Canons 199, § 1, and 874, § 1, Parish Priests, Vicars of parish priests, or other priests delegated for the universality of causes, can delegate to priests, whether secular or religious, jurisdiction for receiving confessions, or at least extend for the same already approved priests jurisdiction beyond the limits of place or persons within which, according to the norm of Can. 878, § 1, it had been circumscribed; or whether for this they need the special faculty or mandate of the Ordinary of the place. Resp. Negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second. Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code, 16 Oct. 1919.

31. (Pag. 747.) But if some religious woman, for the tranquillity of conscience, approaches a confessor approved for women, and makes confession in an open place, e.g., in a private oratory, or in another confessional customarily used for women, even if placed outside the oratory, the confession, the prescriptions of Canons 909, § 2, 910, § 1, on the use of the confessional being observed, seems to us valid and licit. The reason is that Canon 522 refers in full, concerning this point, to number 14 of the decree of the S. C. de Religiosis, 13 Feb. 1913. In both places the words are had: in any church or oratory, even semipublic. But the S. C. de Religiosis, 3 July 1916, declared that this number does not contain a prohibition of making confession in another decent place; and Canon 6, 3° teaches that canons, insofar as they agree with the old law, are to be estimated from the old law. Therefore - Cf. Aertnys, n. 378, who consents in the same. "The same holds in a confessional lawfully erected wherever, as is clear from the response of the Holy See given 3 July 1916." Thus Lehmkuhl, Quaestiones, p. 8. Vermeersch concurs, Periodica, t. 9, p. (15.)

The response of the S. C. has itself thus.

"Most Blessed Father. Regarding the Decree of the S. C. de Religiosis, dated Feb. 1913, 'On the Confessions of Nuns and Sisters,' in these regions grave controversies have arisen concerning the following:

I. If at any time Nuns or Sisters happen to be outside their own house, for whatever cause, whether it is licit for them, from N. 14 of the same Decree, to make confession in any church or oratory, even a semipublic one, before any Confessor approved for both sexes. Further, that word 'it is licit' is understood by some in such a way that it affects the very validity of absolution, if at any time Nuns or Sisters make confession not in a church or oratory, at least semipublic, but in a strictly private oratory; others, on the contrary, understand that word 'it is licit' only of the prohibition of confession outside an oratory at least semipublic, but think that the very validity of absolution is by no means to be denied.

II. Since from the mentioned disposition of the Decree it is certain that, as regards the liceity of confession outside one's own house, either a church or an oratory at least semipublic is required; there is further doubt whether the Ordinary can permit that Nuns or Sisters, who not rarely among us lack even a semipublic oratory, make confession 'within their own house' in some decent room, in which daily religious exercises are performed, and indeed in a confessional with a grate interposed. For there seems to be required from the Decree an oratory at least semipublic for confession to be performed at least licitly, not only outside but also within one's own house....

By force of the special faculties granted by Our Most Holy Lord, the S. Congregation set over the Affairs of Religious Sodalities, after maturely weighing the things set forth, judged that it must be rescripted, as it rescripts:

To the first: The word 'it is licit,' of Number 14 of the Decree Cum de Sacramentalibus, neither regards the validity of confessions, nor contains a prohibition of making confession in another decent place.

To the Second: 'Affirmatively'; that is, the Ordinary can permit that Sisters make confession within their own house in another decent place, outside the church or semipublic oratory if one is present, but always in a Confessional, with a grate interposed.... Given at Rome, on the day 3 July 1916."

32. (Pag. 867.) Hence the privilege of two months for deliberating about entrance into a religious Order is suppressed. - Cf. Il Mon. Eccl. v. 31, p. 361.

33. (Pag. 490.) The allocution of the Most Holy Lord, our Lord Benedict PP. XV, makes known in the clearest words the mind of the Church concerning celibacy. - "Indeed there were also those who did not fear to assert this: that the Apostolic See was inclined to mitigate the severity of the law concerning sacred celibacy, by releasing from that law those who had deserted the ecclesiastical order. Indeed we certainly do not think it necessary to linger here and show how far this whole thing is from the truth. For it is clear that, if the Latin Church lives and flourishes, a great part of its strength and glory flows from the very celibacy of clerics, and for that reason it is altogether to be preserved intact and safe. And perhaps at no other time was this ever so necessary as in this most wretched time, when, amid so many and so widely diffused enticements of corruptions, the untamed and unbridled cupidities of souls dominate everywhere, nor does anything else seem to be proposed to men except rashly to indulge themselves and to enjoy the passing pleasures of this life. Therefore let the Catholic priest, who ought to be a leader to the rest in restraining the disturbed movements of the soul, see to it that he himself not limp in this so great office of duty, but continue to strengthen all by his example, and always remember Saint Siricius the Pontiff thus exhorting: 'that from the day of our ordination we devote both our hearts and our bodies to sobriety and chastity.'" The day 16 December 1920.

34. (Pag. 668.) The decree of a certain Provincial Council has itself thus: "We expressly prohibit giving Masses to be celebrated outside the bounds of each diocese without the permission of the Ordinary." To the question: Whether and how the disposition of Provincial Council N. is sustained in the case, the Eminent and Most Reverend Fathers of the S. Congregation of the Council on the day 19 Feb. 1921 judged that the response should be: "As regards founded Masses, or Masses after the manner of manual Masses, or manual Masses given with regard to a pious Cause, affirmatively; in the rest let Can. 838 of the Code of Canon Law be observed."

35. (Pag. 840.) Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments. Instruction to the Most Reverend Ordinaries of places on proof of free status and denunciation of entered marriage.

Again not a few Ordinaries of places have complained that parish priests, especially in foreign and distant regions to which workers frequently emigrate from Europe, sometimes assist at their marriages without the prescriptions of law, both concerning the status of freedom and concerning the denunciation of an entered marriage, being duly observed; from which it happens that not rarely a new marriage is attempted against right by those who are still bound by a prior bond.

For forestalling an evil of this kind, by which the sacred rights of the Christian family are ruined, parents are ensnared in bonds of condemnation, and children are easily exposed to the danger of perversion, this Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments on the day 6 of the month of March of the year 1911 gave an Instruction to Ordinaries, which was published in the Official Commentary Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. III, p. 102, under the day 15 of the same month.

But lest anyone, in so grave a business, think that anything has been derogated from this Instruction by the Code of Canon Law, the Eminent Fathers of this Sacred Congregation, in the general meeting held on the day 26 of the month of June of the current year, judged that it, supported by the prescriptions of the Code itself, must again be given to Ordinaries in the following tenor.

1. Let Ordinaries strive to call back to the memory of parish priests that it is not licit for them to assist at a marriage, not even under the pretext and intention of turning the faithful away from base concubinage, or of forestalling the scandal of the marriage which they call civil, unless it is legitimately established for them concerning the free status of the contracting parties, the things to be observed by law being observed (can. 1020 and 1097 § 1, n. 1, Cod. jur. can.), and let the same be warned not to omit, according to the norm of can. 1021, to require from the contracting parties the testimony of baptism, if this was conferred upon them in another parish.

2. By force of can. 1103 § 2, the parish priest who was present at the marriage is to hasten to transmit to the parish priest of baptism the denunciation of the contract entered; and this denunciation, so that the prescriptions of the same canon may duly be observed, must contain the names and surnames of the spouses and of their parents, the ages of the contracting parties, the place and day of the nuptials, likewise the names and surnames of the witnesses, and finally the name and surname of the parish priest himself together with the parish seal.

But let him be accurately informed concerning the parish, the diocese, and the place of baptism of the spouses; and let the other things be observed which pertain to writings to be safely transmitted by public carriers.

3. In order that either testimony concerning free status may be had more safely from the parish priest of those about to marry, or denunciation concerning the marriage that has followed may reach the parish priest of baptism, let parish priests request or transmit these documents through the chancery of the Ordinary of the place.

4. But parish priests must weigh this, that some marriages of emigrating workers of this kind are to be held as marriages of vagi, at which, according to can. 1032, the parish priest must not assist unless he shall have obtained due license for assisting from the Ordinary of the place. But if there is not question of vagi, nevertheless with difficulty, as regards other emigrants, is doubt absent concerning the existence of an impediment; and therefore, according to can. 1032 § 1, n. 3, the parish priest cannot assist at their marriage without consulting the Ordinary, with the prescription of can. 1023 § 2 also having been kept before the eyes. For these causes this Sacred Congregation orders and commands that parish priests are not to assist at the marriages of the faithful of whom there is question in this Instruction, except in a case of necessity or chiefly in danger of death, without consulting the Ordinary of the place.

5. If perhaps it happens that, even with the cautions of which in n. 1 employed, the parish priest of baptism, in receiving the denunciation of marriage, discovers that one or other of the contracting parties is already bound by other nuptials, he will signify the matter as quickly as possible, through the chancery of the Ordinary, to the parish priest of the marriage attempted against right.

6. Let Ordinaries sedulously watch that these prescriptions be religiously observed; and let them take care to call back to duty violators of them, if they find any, even employing canonical sanctions if there is need.

Our Most Holy Lord Benedict PP. XV, in an audience had by the undersigned Secretary of this Sacred Congregation on the day 26 June 1921, approved and confirmed this Instruction, and commanded it to be observed by all whom it concerns. Given at Rome, from the buildings of the S. C. de Sacramentis, on the day 4 July 1921. - M. Card. Lega, Prefect. - A. Capotosti, Bishop of Terme, Secretary.

36. (Pag. 872.) Concerning Cautions: As regards the offspring of the non-Catholic party already born from a prior marriage: "although it must be cared for according to one's powers that ... they be instructed in the Catholic religion, nevertheless this is by no means absolutely to be required for granting the dispensation, unless the same children were born from the other mixed marriage, and the parent did not observe the prior conditions." Thus the S. C. de Prop. Fide to the Bishop of Haarlem, 20 March 1899. - Cf. Vlaming, v. 1. n. 218.

37. (Pag. 942.) Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code. Doubts Solved in the Plenary Meetings of the Eminent Fathers.

IV

Whether, according to the norm of can. 1045, § 1, the clause "as often as an impediment is detected when now all things are prepared for the nuptials," must be understood in the strict sense, namely that the impediment was previously wholly unknown and then is learned, or rather in this sense, that although it was previously known, only then nevertheless was it brought to the notice of the Parish Priest or the Ordinary? Resp.: Negatively to the 1st part, affirmatively to the 2nd. Rome, 1 March 1921. Peter Card. Gasparri, President. Aloisius Sincero, Secretary.

38. (Pag. 948.) Sacred Consistorial Congregation - Concerning the faculties of Ordinaries. Since sometimes Most Reverend Ordinaries offer petitions to the Sacred Congregations, that special faculties be conceded to them according to the formulas which formerly were given by the S. Congregation de Propaganda Fide, it is declared to the same that a definitive norm concerning this matter will be established and notified as soon as possible. In the meantime, however, let the Most Reverend Ordinaries know that the faculties which during the war had been conceded by the S. Consistorial Congregation, by decrees on the day 25 April 1918 and 2 August of the same year, still have force. Given at Rome, from the buildings of the Sacred Consistorial Congregation, on the day 7 March 1921. C. Card. De Lai, Bishop of Sabina, Secretary. Aloisius Sincero, Assessor.

39. n. (Pag. 978.) Response of the S. Penitentiary, 3 Apr. 1916.

Doubt. Whether a woman can licitly cooperate with the action of a husband who, that he may indulge pleasure, wishes to commit the crime of Onan or of the Sodomites, and threatens her under penalty of death or of grave molestations unless she obeys?

Resp. (a) "If the husband in the use of marriage wishes to commit the crime of Onan, namely by pouring out the semen outside the vessel after copula has begun, and the same threatens his wife either with death or with grave molestations unless she accommodate herself to his perverse will, the wife, according to the judgment of approved theologians, can licitly in this case thus come together with her husband: since she herself on her part gives work to a licit thing and action, but permits the sin of the husband from a grave cause which excuses her; because charity, by which she would be held to impede it, does not oblige with so great an inconvenience."

(b) "But if the husband wishes to commit with her the crime of the Sodomites, since this sodomitical coitus is an act against nature on the part of each spouse so coming together, and is gravely evil by the judgment of all Doctors: hence for plainly no cause, not even of avoiding death, can the wife licitly in this matter comply with her shameless husband. And the S. Penitentiary vehemently marvels that the opposite opinion, with disgrace to human nature, could have settled in the minds of certain priests, as is reported." - Cf. Marc, t. 2, n. 2116.

Response of the S. Penitentiary, 3 June 1916. Questions. 1° Whether a woman, in the case in which the man wishes to use an instrument for exercising onanism, is held to positive resistance?

2°. If negatively, whether reasons equally grave as for natural onanism, without an instrument, suffice for making honorable passive resistance on the part of the woman, or rather reasons altogether most grave are necessary?

3°. Whether, so that this whole matter may be evolved and taught by a safer path, a man using such instruments must truly be equated with a violator: to whom, therefore, the woman must oppose that resistance which a virgin opposes to an attacker?

Resp. To the first: Affirmatively. To the second: Provision has been made in the first. To the third: Affirmatively. Carolus Perosi, Regent of the S. Penitentiary. Cf. Marc, t. 2, n. 2117.

40. (Pag. 1005.) Suspected of heresy are:

Those who in any way willingly and knowingly assist the propagation of heresy; or who communicate in divine things with heretics against the prescription of Can. 1258 (Can. 2316); - Cf. n. 152;

Those who are united in marriage with an explicit or implicit pact that all or some offspring be educated outside the Catholic Church (Can. 2319, §§ 1, 2);

Those who knowingly presume to offer their children to be baptized by non-Catholic ministers (Can. 2319, §§ 1, 2);

Parents or those holding the place of parents who knowingly hand over their children to be educated or instructed in a non-Catholic religion (Can. 2319, §§ 1, 2);

One who has thrown away the consecrated species or taken or retained them for an evil end (Can. 2320) - Cf. n. 978;

Those who appeal from the laws, decrees, and mandates of the current Roman Pontiff to a universal Council (Can. 2332); - Cf. n. 983;

One who, with hardened mind, has persisted for a year in the censure of excommunication (Can. 2340, § 1); - Cf. n. 954.

Those who knowingly have promoted others to orders through simony or have been promoted, or have administered or received other Sacraments (Can. 2371); - Cf. n. 218.

41. (Pag. 1022.) The things which are said in number 975, Q., obtain an excellent confirmation from the following. The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, by Letter on the day 5 Nov. 1920 to the Ordinaries of places, excites their vigilance concerning certain new efforts of non-Catholics against the faith and wishes them to attend "how certain new associations of non-Catholics, with their adherents from every nation assisting, for a long time now have been accustomed most perniciously to lay snares for our people, especially adolescents, by offering them a great variety of aids, by which indeed in appearance they strengthen bodies and cultivate minds and souls, but in truth they corrupt the integrity of the Catholic faith and snatch sons from the embrace of Mother Church. Certainly, because associations of this kind flourish by the favor, resources, and zeal of most distinguished men, and because they are occupied most usefully in manifold kinds of beneficence, it is not to be wondered at if they put paint upon the matter for the inexperienced, who do not have their nature thoroughly seen through and known. But what sort they are can now be doubtful to no one who is wise, since they have gradually indicated up to this time the end toward which they look, but now they openly declare it, and this by booklets, newspapers, and periodical writings, which they use as their own organs. For they say that they wish to cultivate the talents and morals of youths by good disciplines, and holding this culture in place of religion, they define it: a most free license of thinking, alien and loosed from any religion or confession. Therefore, having professed that they bring light before adolescents, they turn them away from the magisterium of the Church, which itself is the light of truth divinely constituted, and exhort the same to seek from their own inner spirit, and therefore from the narrowness of human reason, the light by which they may be led.

Into snares of this kind adolescents of both sexes devoted especially to studies are driven; and they indeed, when they chiefly need another's help for learning Christian wisdom and for preserving the faith handed down by their fathers, on the contrary fall among men by whom, having been displaced from possession of that great inheritance, they are gradually brought to this: first, that they waver among contrary opinions; then that they doubt concerning all things whatsoever; finally that they rest in a certain vague and undefined form of religion, which sane religion is altogether other than what Jesus Christ preached.

Now indeed from these societies it will suffice to mention that one which, as if the mother of several others, is most widespread, and especially while the cruel war remained was of very great profit to very many unfortunate persons, and is most furnished with resources: namely the society called by the title Young Men's Christian Association, contracted into the acronym Y.M.C.A.; and to this, indeed, both non-Catholics of good faith unknowingly show favor, judging it salutary for all or at least harmful to no one, and certain more indulgent Catholics give support, to whom its nature is unknown. For this society indeed boasts a sincere love toward youths, as if it had nothing more ancient than to be of use to their bodies and minds; but at the same time it weakens their faith, since it contends that its purpose is to purify it, and to hand over to them a better knowledge of true life 'above every Church and apart from any religious confession.'"

42. (Pag. 1074.) Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary. - Section on Indulgences. Declaration and indult concerning the custom of adding certain words to the angelic salutation in the recitation of the Most Holy Rosary. - In the recitation of the Most Holy Rosary, for the easier meditation of the mysteries, there has force in certain regions the custom of adding to each angelic salutation after the word "Jesus" a brief enunciation of the mystery to be meditated, so that, for the sake of example, it is said: "Blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus, who sweated blood for us." But with attention to canon 934 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law, according to which Indulgences attached to some prayer completely cease on account of any addition, detraction, or interpolation, it was privately asked by a certain petitioner: "Whether the aforesaid custom can be observed and propagated, the Indulgences attached to the Most Holy Rosary remaining intact." And on the day 27 July in the year 1920 this Sacred Penitentiary responded: Negatively.

But since a response of this kind had been made known by the aforesaid petitioner, some Ordinaries of the Swiss and German Territory explained that the aforesaid custom had so prevailed in their dioceses from a remote age that it cannot be removed without scandal and disturbance of the faithful, and that, moreover, Pius IX of holy memory, in the year 1859, had kindly indulged for places where the custom had already prevailed that the faithful reciting the Rosary in such a manner are able to gain its Indulgences.

Therefore the Sacred Penitentiary, after the matter had been maturely weighed, judged: (1) that it must be declared that canon 934 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law contains a general law, which in no way revokes the Pian indult; (2) that His Holiness must be supplicated for the extension of the same indult, in favor of all who, according to the aforesaid custom, have been accustomed to recite the Most Holy Rosary in any places whatsoever.

But when a report had been made concerning the premises to Our Most Holy Lord Benedict, by Divine Providence PP. XV, by the undersigned Cardinal Major Penitentiary, in the audience of the day 21 of this month, His Holiness approved the enunciated declaration and deigned kindly to concede the extension of the indult, as above. Given at Rome, in the Sacred Penitentiary, on the day 22 January 1921. O. Card. Giorgi, Major Penitentiary. F. Borgongini Duca, Secretary.

Doubt Concerning Indulgences Commonly Called "Apostolic." Whether canon 924 § 2 of the Code of Canon Law, according to which "Indulgences attached to rosaries or other things cease only then, when the rosaries or other things wholly cease to exist or are sold," has abrogated the Decree of Alexander VII of holy memory, issued on the day 6 February in the year 1657, renewed by individual Supreme Pontiffs at the beginning of their pontificate, and also confirmed on the day 5 September in the year 1914 by the Most Holy Lord Benedict, by Divine Providence PP. XV, by which it is expressly declared that Indulgences commonly called "Apostolic" are attached to rosaries or other things in such a way that they do not pass beyond the person of those for whom things of this kind have been blessed, or of those to whom by these persons they shall have been distributed the first time, and likewise that these things cannot be lent or handed over to others on loan for the sake of communicating Indulgences?

The Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary, after the matter had been maturely weighed, judged that the response should be: Affirmatively. But this response, reported to the same Most Holy Lord by the undersigned Cardinal Major Penitentiary in the audience on the day 4 of the current February, His Holiness approved, confirmed, and ordered to be made of public law. Given at Rome, in the Sacred Penitentiary, on the day 18 February in the year 1921. O. Card. Giorgi, Major Penitentiary. F. Borgongini Duca, Secretary.

43. (Pag. 1096.) Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code. Whether the words of canon 522: "confession made in any church or oratory, even semipublic, is valid and licit," are to be understood in such a way that confession made outside those places is not only illicit, but also invalid.

Resp. Canon 522 is to be understood thus: that confessions which religious women make, for the tranquillity of their conscience, before a confessor approved by the Ordinary of the place for women, are licit and valid, provided that they are made in a church or oratory, even semipublic, or in a place legitimately destined for hearing the confessions of women.¹

(Pag. 904 [printed as 1904].) Whether, according to the norm of canon 893, § 1 and 2, a peregrinus is held to the reservations of the place in which he is staying.

Resp. Affirmatively.

(Pag. 796.) Whether can. 909 § 2: "The confessional seat is to be furnished with a fixed grate, finely perforated, between the penitent and the confessor," is to be observed only for women; or generally for penitents as the proper form of hearing confessions in churches and public oratories.

Resp. Negatively to the 1st part, affirmatively to the 2nd, yet with the prescription of canon 910, § 2, remaining firm.

(Pag. 323.) 1. Whether according to the norm of can. 1252 § 4, the fast ceases when the feast day which has a fast attached on the vigil falls on feria II, so that the fast itself must no longer be anticipated on the preceding Saturday.

2. Whether the words: "nor are vigils anticipated," regard only the excepted time of Lent, or also the whole year.

Resp. To the 1st: Affirmatively, with the prescription of canon 1253 preserved.

To the 2nd: They regard the whole year.

1. Whether, if the feast of S. Joseph, of the day 19 March, falls on Friday or Saturday, only the law of fast holds, or also the law of abstinence.

And insofar as affirmatively to the first part, negatively to the second,

2. Whether the law of abstinence ceases, even if the feast of S. Joseph should fall on some day of the Four Times.

Resp. To the 1st: Let canon 1252, § 4 be observed, or rather neither the law of fast nor the law of abstinence ceases.

To the 2nd: Provision has been made in the response to the 1st. Rome, 24 November 1920. Peter Card. Gasparri, President. Aloisius Sincero, Secretary.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1125, n. 82.

44. (Pag. 654.)

Pontifical Commission for the Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law.

Rome, 26 September 1921.

Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord:

In response to the doubts sent by Your Reverence on the date 29 September 1921 (n. 1578-f) to the S. Consistorial Congregation, and remitted by it to this Commission, as by letter of 20 March 1921: namely:

1. For the validity of the erection of a parish which does not have the character of a benefice, is it necessary that the Ordinary issue a formal decree, by which he explicitly declares that he erects a certain district as a parish, or is it enough that, once the division of a given territory into several districts with determined boundaries has been made, he assign to each district a rector who has care of the people, with a corresponding church, according to the tenor of Can. 216, §§ 1, 3?

2. Insofar as affirmatively to the first part and negatively to the second, did the districts in which, before the Code, the three conditions now indicated were verified become parishes after the promulgation of the Code, even if for them there has not been the decree which would be necessary for those which were erected after the Code?

3. In those territories in which, before the Code, there existed cumulatively several parishes, or better, quasi-parishes, namely one quasi-principal for the inhabitants of the territory, independently of their nationality or stock, one or more others for the people of a certain nationality or stock, as for example the Italians, the Poles, the Negroes, etc., does the Ordinary need the apostolic beneplacitum in order to erect the ancient districts into parishes, if the parishes which are found there for peoples of different nationality or stock are left intact?

The undersigned Cardinal, President of the Commission, responds: To the first: negatively to the first part; affirmatively to the second, with the warning that a parish according to the norm of Canon 1411, n. 5, is always an ecclesiastical benefice, whether it has a congruous endowment, constituted according to the norm of Canon 1410, or whether, in lack of it, it is erected according to the norm of Canon 1415, § 3.

To the second: provision has been made in the first.

To the third: negatively.

P. Card. Gasparri.

Luigi Sincero, Secretary.

Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord Monsignor Giovanni Bonzano Archbishop of Melitene Apostolic Delegate United States of America

45. (Pag. 654.)

Apostolic Delegation United States of America.

Washington, D. C. November 10, 1922.

Your Grace:

Notwithstanding the fact that several years have elapsed since the promulgation of the new Code of Canon Law, there still seems to be some uncertainty in the United States as to the nature of the parishes in this country and as to the consequent obligation of the pastors who are in charge of them. Both these questions have been debated in published articles from time to time. In order definitively to end this uncertainty I deem it my duty to communicate to you an official answer which I received from the Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Canons of the Code.

Under date of March 20, 1921, I submitted to the said Commission the following dubium: "For the erection of a parish which has not the character of a benefice: (1a pars), is it necessary that the Ordinary should issue a formal decree declaring explicitly that he erects a certain district into a parish; or, (2a pars), is it sufficient that, having divided a certain territory into several districts, the respective limits of which are definitely indicated, he assigns to each district a rector to take charge of the people and the church thereto pertaining, according to Canon 216, No. 1 and No. 3?"

Under date of Sept. 26, 1921, His Eminence, Cardinal Gasparri, President of the above-mentioned Commission, answered: "Negative ad primam partem," i.e., that a special decree of the Ordinary is not necessary for the erection of a parish; and, "Affirmative ad secundam partem," i.e., that it is sufficient, quoad hoc, for the erection of a parish, that the Ordinary define the territorial limits and assign a rector to the people and the church within said limits.

His Eminence, the President of the Commission, added, moreover, that a parish is always an ecclesiastical benefice, according to Canon 1411, No. 5, whether it has the proper endowment (resources or revenue) as described and defined in Canon 1410, or even if lacking such endowment (resources or revenue), it be erected according to the provisions of Canon 1415, No. 3.

In a second dubium, I asked further, if, after the promulgation of the New Code, a special decree on the part of the Ordinary was necessary to constitute as canonical parishes those which, previous to the promulgation of the New Code, had been established in the manner described in the second part of the first dubium as set forth above. The answer was that no decree is necessary, and that such parishes became canonical parishes, ipso facto, on the promulgation of the Code.

It is evident, from this official answer, that all the parishes of the United States having the three necessary qualifications, viz. (1), a resident pastor; (2), endowment (resources or revenue according to the provisions of Canon 1410 or 1415, No. 3); and (3), boundaries, are not only parishes in the strictly canonical sense, but are also ecclesiastical benefices. Hence pastors in the United States are real, canonical pastors (parochi), having all the duties and obligations pertaining to such an office and (according to Canons 466 and 339) are specifically bound to apply the Missa pro populo on Sundays and on feast-days of obligation (including those that have been suppressed), this obligation binding them in conscience unless dispensation or commutation be received from the Holy See.

With sentiments of esteem and best wishes, I am

Yours sincerely in XT.,

John Bonzano, Archbishop of Melitene, Apostolic Delegate.

46. (Pag. 629.) The use of reason of which in can. 854, n. 4, 859, n. 1, 906, for determining the year of discretion, is manifestly that which suffices for committing only venial sin, not that which is required for mortal sin. Cf. Il Mon. Eccl., V. 32, p. 224.

47. (Pag. 107.) "Canon 4, concerning acquired rights not removed by the Code, has its foundation in this, that law, of itself, does not act backward, or does not have retroactive force, as it is usually said, since it 'regards future things, not past things,' as canon 10 has it. Yet this does not mean generally that law cannot suppress for the future a right which someone has while it is promulgated, but only that it cannot take away for the future a right which someone, while the law is promulgated, has dependently on a past fact, while it certainly can take away such a right for the future if it is independent from some past fact. Thus, for example, a deacon who before the Code received the collation of a parish has, from the past fact of collation, an acquired right in the parish; wherefore the law of Can. 453, requiring 'the presbyterate' for the office, assuredly cannot take away from such a deacon capacity; by the very fact that it cannot act backward, it cannot take away an acquired right, while it would act backward and would take away an acquired right if it pretended to take away a capacity dependent altogether on a past fact. On the contrary, a man constituted in the fifteenth year of age on the vigil of Pentecost of the year 1918 was able to contract marriage, which ability assuredly Canon 1067 of the Code, requiring the sixteenth year of age, removed on the following day. For there was question of suppressing for the future a right in no way dependent on a past fact; and therefore the law taking away that ability in no way acted backward nor removed an acquired right. For the reason why a youth of fifteen years is incapable of marriage is his present age, not a past fact, because at no time whatsoever has anyone had an acquired right to marriage before the age permitted by the law itself." Cuneen and Utinen, Animadversiones, A.A.S., v. xi, p. 351.

48. (Pag. 83.) Pontifical Commission - For Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code - Doubts - Solved in the Plenary Meetings of the Eminent Fathers.

I - On the acquisition of domicile (Can. 93) - Whether a wife maliciously deserted by her husband can, according to the norm of Can. 93, § 2, obtain her own and distinct domicile. Resp. Negatively, unless she shall have obtained from an ecclesiastical judge perpetual separation, or separation for an indefinite time.

(Pag. 516.) IV - On parish priests (Can. 460). - 1°. Whether Can. 460, § 2, is applied only to parishes to be erected after the promulgation of the Code, or also to parishes already erected. And insofar as negatively to the 1st part, affirmatively to the 2nd: 2. Whether the same prescription of the canon is applied also to parishes in which plurality of parish priests has been introduced not by custom or privilege, but by legitimate statute. And insofar as affirmatively: 3°. Whether the rights already acquired by parish priests, as they say, proportionary or cumulative, remain intact both as regards spiritual things and as regards temporal things; or whether they are revoked also as regards temporal things. And insofar as negatively to the 1st part, affirmatively to the 2nd: 4°. Whether the principal and sole care of souls is to be attributed to the parish priest who has preeminence of honor before the others, or rather to the one more ancient in possession. Resp.:

To 1. Negatively to the 1st part; affirmatively to the 2nd.

To 2. Affirmatively.

To 3 and 4. Provision has been made in the preceding; but for the application of the canon to these particular cases recourse must be had to the S. C. of the Council.

(Pag. 517.) V - On substitute and supplying vicars as regards assistance at marriages (Can. 465, §§ 4, 5) - 1°. Whether a substitute vicar, of whom in Can. 465, § 4, can after approval of the Ordinary licitly and validly assist at marriages, if no limitation shall have been appended. 2°. Whether the same vicar can do this also before approval of the Ordinary. 3°. Whether the same vicar of a religious parish priest can do this after approval of the Ordinary, but before approval of the religious Superior.

4°. Whether a vicar, or supplying priest, of whom in the cited Can. 465, § 5, can do this before approval of the Ordinary. Resp. To 1. Affirmatively. To 2. Negatively. To 3. Affirmatively. To 4. Affirmatively, until the Ordinary, to whom the designation of the supplying priest was signified, shall not have established otherwise.

(Pag. 653.) VI - On vicars oeconomi as regards the application of Mass for the people (Cann. 466, 473). - Whether a vicar oeconomus who rules several parishes in time of vacancy must apply only one Mass for the peoples committed to him on the prescribed days. Resp. Affirmatively, according to the norm of Can. 473, § 1, compared with Can. 466, § 2.

(Pag. 594.) VIII - On notation of conferred baptism (Can. 777). - Whether the word illegitimate of Canon 777, § 2, comprehends all altogether who were born illegitimately, even adulterine, sacrilegious, and the other spurious, so that it is licit to inscribe the surnames of their parents in the notation of conferred baptism. Resp. The names of the parents are to be inserted in such a way that every occasion of infamy is avoided; but in particular cases recourse must be had to the S. C. of the Council.

(Pag. 1060.) IX - On irregularities or other impediments (Can. 987). - Whether by the name of sons, of whom in Can. 987, n. 1, only descendants in the paternal line up to the first degree are to be understood. Resp. Affirmatively.

(Pag. 993.) XV - On a subject liable to coercive power (Can. 2233). - Whether, according to the norm of Can. 2233, § 2, on account of violation of a particular precept which had been fortified with a censure ferendae sententiae, the censure can be inflicted immediately after the delict has been proved; or whether a new warning must be premised. Resp. Affirmatively to the 1st part; negatively to the 2nd. Rome, 14 July 1922. P. Card. Gasparri, President. Aloisius Sincero, Secretary.

49. (Pag. 804.) Sacred Congregation of Rites - Additions To Be Made in the Roman Ritual - Title V - Chapter I - On the Sacrament of Extreme Unction - After rubric n. 20, let the following instruction be added: 21. When this Sacrament is ministered to several sick persons at the same time, the Priest is to offer the cross to each sick person to be piously kissed, recite once all the prayers which precede the anointings in the plural number, perform the anointings with the respective forms upon the individual sick persons, but say once, in the plural number, all the prayers which follow the anointings. The day 9 August 1922. A. Card. Vico, Bishop of Porto and S. Rufina, Prefect of the S. R. C. Alexander Verde, Secretary.

50. (Pag. 324.) Sacred Congregation of the Council - Namur and Others, on Abstinence - The day 9 February 1924 - Question. - By letters reverently given to this Sacred Congregation, the Reverend Father Lord Bishop of Namur recently explained that, by pontifical disposition, in his diocese, as in the neighboring dioceses of Belgium and France, the faithful of Christ are altogether held to observing abstinence during the whole time of Lent on Wednesday in place of Saturday. But since controversy had arisen concerning peregrini, whether they are held by the same law or not, for duly settling it he asked the opinion of this Sacred Council, before which therefore it is asked: "Whether, and on what day, in the time of Lent, peregrini are held to observe the abstinence of Saturday in places where, by special disposition of the Holy See, the same abstinence must be observed on Wednesday."

Observation - It is plain that in the law of abstinence the substance of the precept must be distinguished from the mode by which it is to be observed in some region. The substance of the precept, in the case, is that during Lent abstinence be observed twice in the week, on prefixed days, and this is a general law; but the mode, in the case, is that by particular law these days are prefixed as Wednesday and Friday. Now even peregrini, according to the norm of Can. 14, § 1, 3°, are held to observe general laws in the place where these have force; and therefore it is by no means doubtful that the same, both in the Diocese of Namur and in the others of which in the case, are held by the substance of the precept which plainly has force there. Conversely, from n. 2° of the same paragraph, peregrini are not held to observing the particular laws of the territory in which they are staying, although they can freely do this; and therefore, in the case, of themselves they are not obliged to observe abstinence on Wednesday in place of Saturday, as the inhabitants of the place are held, although they can freely do this. Hence it flows in a ready channel that they are indeed held, besides Friday, to abstain from meats either on Wednesday or on Friday, as they shall prefer, namely with an option permitted to them, in this, between the common law and the particular law. Wherefore, etc. Resolution. - Moreover, in the plenary Meetings of the S. Congregation of the Council, held in the Vatican Apostolic Palace on the day 9 of the month of February, in the year 1924, the Eminent Fathers judged that the response to the proposed doubt should be: They are held on either day at choice, yet scandal being removed. This resolution, the undersigned Secretary of the S. C. afterwards reporting, Our Most Holy Lord Pius, by Divine Providence PP. XI, deigned to approve and confirm. + Julius, titular Bishop of Lampsacus, Secretary.

51. (Pag. 634.) 1. Supreme Sacred Congregation of the S. Office. - Letter Given to the Ordinaries of Places, On the Eucharistic Fast Before Mass. - Most Illustrious and Reverend Lord, Your Amplitude knows very well with what most diligent care this Holy Apostolic See has always guarded the ecclesiastical law of the Eucharistic fast, especially as regards priests about to celebrate the most holy sacrifice of the Mass; nor is there any doubt that its observance must generally be urged also hereafter. But lest perhaps, from the ecclesiastical law by which due homage is shown to the real Body of Christ, the mystical Body of Christ, or the salvation of souls, should take detriment, this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, weighing from the heart the multitude of offices by which priests on feast days must be occupied for nourishing the flock committed to them with salutary food, and that on account of shortage of clergy many of them are compelled to repeat the celebration of Holy Mass, and this not rarely in places far distant, difficult of access, troubled by an inclement condition of the air, or in other contrary circumstances of things and places, decreed in certain cases and under determined conditions to mitigate in some part the same law of fasting through opportune dispensations.

Therefore, as often as priests, according to Can. 806, 2, have necessity to repeat Mass on the same day or even to approach the Sacred Altar at a later hour, if indeed they cannot observe to the rigor the law of the Eucharistic fast, without grave harm, either by reason of infirm health, or on account of excessive labor of sacred ministry, or other reasonable causes, the Ordinaries of places will be able to have recourse to this Supreme Congregation, after all the circumstances of things have been diligently explained. It will provide opportunely according to the diversity of cases, whether by dispensing with the individual persons itself, or, when a true and proved necessity altogether counsels it, by also granting habitual faculties to the Ordinaries themselves. These faculties indeed for more urgent cases, in which time is not sufficient for recourse to the Holy See, are already from now conceded to Your Amplitude, to be exercised by You yourself, conscience being gravely burdened; yet under these conditions, that only something by way of drink, intoxicating things being excluded, be permitted to be taken; that scandal be effectively removed; and that as soon as possible the Holy See be made more certain concerning the conceded dispensation.

Finally, know that the relaxation of this most grave law is to be conceded only when the spiritual good of the faithful requires it, but not on account of the private devotion or utility of the priest himself.

These things decreed for rendering your pastoral ministry easier and more useful, with Our Most Holy Lord Pius PP. XI approving, while I gladly communicate them to you, I also pray prosperous and happy things for you from the Lord. Rome, from the buildings of the Holy Office, 22 March 1923. R. Card. Merry del Val, Secretary. A.A.S., 5 April 1923. Pag. 151.

2. Supreme Sacred Congregation of the S. Office. - Declaration. - Concerning Dispensation From The Law Of The Eucharistic Fast Before Mass. A question was proposed to the Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office: "Whether Priests dispensed from the Eucharistic fast before the second Mass can take the ablution in the first." And the Sacred Congregation, feria IV, on the day 2 May 1923, commanded the response to be: Affirmatively. But on the following feria V, the day 3 of the said month and year, the Most Holy Lord, our Lord Pius by Divine Providence Pope XI, in the usual audience granted to the Reverend Father Lord Assessor of the S. Office, approved the resolution of the Eminent Fathers. Given at Rome, from the buildings of the S. Office, on the day 16 November 1923. Aloisius Castellano, Notary of the Supreme S. C. of the S. Office. A.A.S. 16 Nov. 1923, Pag. 585.

52. (Pag. 910.) Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code - Doubts - Solved in the Plenary Meetings of the Eminent Fathers.

I

I. On national parishes. (Can. 216, § 4.) Whether in regions of mixed language, which politically form one State, but use diverse languages, as they say, official languages, by force of Canon 216, § 4, an apostolic indult is required for erecting a parish destined exclusively to the faithful of a determined speech or language, even if this determined language is one of the official languages of the same nation, and the parish to be erected has its own distinct territorial part in the diocese. Resp. Affirmatively.

(Pag. 740.) IV. On the Minister of Confession. (Can. 883.) - 1°. Whether the adverb obiter in Can. 883, § 2, is to be understood in such a way that a priest duly endowed with the faculty, according to § 1 of the same canon, of hearing Confessions, can, as often as a ship remains in port, go onto land and there in a church or chapel receive the Confessions of those who ask to confess, and validly and licitly absolve them, even from cases reserved to the Ordinary of the place, for an entire day, or for entire two or three days, if the ship remains in port so long. 2°. Whether the said priest can do this for an entire day, or for entire two or three days, as often as in order to continue the same journey he must leave one ship so as to board another, if he must wait in port for this ship so long. 3°. Whether in each case the said priest can do the same even beyond three days. Resp. To the 1st and 2nd, Affirmatively. To the 3rd, Negatively, if the Ordinary of the place can easily be approached.

(Pag. 922.) V. On License of Assisting at Marriages. (Can. 1096, compared with Cann. 465, 472-476.) - 1°. Whether a vicar oeconomus, legitimately constituted in a vacant parish according to the norm of Cann. 472 and 473, can give license of assisting at a marriage to a determined priest for a determined marriage. 2°. Whether a substitute vicar, of whom in Can. 465, § 4, can do this after approval of the Ordinary, if the Ordinary has appended no limitation. 3°. Whether a vicar of a religious parish priest can do this after approval of the Ordinary, but before approval of the religious Superior. 4°. Whether a vicar, or supplying priest, of whom in the cited Can. 465, § 5, can do this before approval of the Ordinary. 5°. Whether an assistant vicar of a parish priest unequal to duly performing his duties, legitimately constituted according to the norm of Can. 475, § 1, can do this. 6°. Whether a cooperator vicar, of whom in Can. 476, can do this without the parish priest knowing. Resp. To the 1st, Affirmatively. To the 2nd, Affirmatively. To the 3rd, Affirmatively. To the 4th, Affirmatively, until the Ordinary, to whom the designation of the supplying priest was signified, shall not have established otherwise. To the 5th, provision has been made in the cited Can. 475, § 2. To the 6th, provision has been made in the cited Can. 476, § 6.

VI. Concerning Assistance at Marriages. (Can. 1096, § 1.) - Whether according to the norm of Can. 1096, § 1, a priest is determined, if the parish priest declares to the Superior of a monastery in a particular case that he delegates for a marriage to be celebrated on the next Sunday in a filial church some religious priest who by the Superior on the following days will be deputed for Mass to be celebrated there on Sunday. Resp. Negatively.

(Pag. 337.) VIII. Doubt Concerning versions of the Sacred Scriptures. (Can. 1391.) - Whether the particle and of Canon 1391, by which it is prescribed: "Versions of the sacred Scriptures into the vernacular language cannot be printed, unless they have been approved by the Apostolic See, or unless they are published under the vigilance of Bishops and with annotations," etc., is to be interpreted copulatively or disjunctively?

Resp. Affirmatively to the 1st part; negatively to the 2nd. The day 20 May 1923. P. Card. Gasparri, President. Aloisius Sincero, Secretary.

II

(Pag. 662.) Doubt - Solved by the Eminent Cardinal President of the Commission. - Whether by Can. 824, § 2 of the Code those things must be judged abrogated which the S. C. of the Council had established under the day 15 October 1915 in the response to III, concerning remuneration not to be received, not even by reason of an extrinsic inconvenience, in the second and third Mass on the day of the Commemoration of All the Faithful Departed; or whether they still remain in their force. Resp. Affirmatively to the 1st part; negatively to the 2nd. The day 13 Dec. 1923. P. Card. Gasparri, President.

53. (Pag. 527.) Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code - Doubts Solved in the Plenary Meeting of the day 12 November 1922 - II. On the whole year of Novitiate. (Can. 555, § 1, 2.)

1°. Whether the whole year of novitiate, prescribed in Can. 555, § 1, 2, is to be computed according to the norm established in Can. 34, § 3, 3. And insofar as affirmatively: 2°. Whether a norm of this kind for computing the year in order to the novitiate must be observed for validity, or only for liceity. Resp. To the 1st, affirmatively, or rather the prescription of Canon 34, § 3, 3 must be observed. To the 2nd, affirmatively to the 1st part, negatively to the 2nd, or rather the Canon must be observed for the validity of the novitiate.

(Pag. 941.) V. On Dispensation Over Matrimonial Impediments (Cann. 1044 and 1045, § 3.) - Whether in the cases of which in Canons 1044 and 1045, § 3, the Ordinary must be judged unable to be approached when recourse to him can be had neither by letters, nor by telegraph, nor by telephone; or also when it is impossible only by letters, although this can be done by telegraph or telephone. Resp. Negatively to the 1st part, affirmatively to the 2nd, or rather, for the effect of which in Cann. 1044 and 1045, § 3, the Ordinary must be judged unable to be approached if recourse to him can be had only by telegraph or telephone.

VIII. On Absolution From Censures. (Can. 2252.) - Whether in Canon 2252, by which there is established the obligation of having recourse to the S. Penitentiary or to the Bishop or another endowed with faculty, etc., those words endowed with faculty are to be restricted to the word another; or whether they must also be said to pertain to the other word Bishop, so that a Bishop who is not endowed with faculty cannot give mandates. Resp. Negatively to the 1st part, affirmatively to the 2nd, or rather a Bishop cannot give mandates unless he has the faculty by law or from concession of the Apostolic See. Rome, 12 November 1922. P. Card. Gasparri, President. Aloisius Sincero, Secretary.

54. (Pag. 914.) To the Consultation of the Most Reverend Ordinariate of Prague the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office Responded thus. - In the session held on feria IV, the day 26 November 1919, after the petitions of that Archiepiscopal Curia had been proposed, given on the day 5 April 1918, by which you ask how the priest who assists at the celebration of a marriage between a Catholic and a non-Catholic, who do not give cautions, ought to conduct himself in receiving consent: the Eminent and Most Reverend Lord Cardinals, General Inquisitors together with me, commanded that the response be: that in all things the prescriptions of the Code of Canon Law must be observed. Hence the priest cannot assist at these marriages unless, the cautions having been furnished, dispensation over the impediment of mixed religion or disparity of cult shall have been obtained according to the norm of Canons 1060 and 1061; but the consent must be required according to the norm of Canons 1102 and 1095. Contrary prescriptions of the Holy See and contrary indults have been abrogated by the Code of Canon Law itself. R. Card. Merry del Val. Linz.-Quartalschrift, vol. 74, Pag. 249.

55. (Pag. 917.) True domicile for the effect of validly contracting marriage in the face of the Church must be understood as that in which one dwells and sleeps with his family. 12 May 1875. S. C. of the S. Office.

56. (Pag. 509.) Resolution. - Moreover, when in the plenary meetings of the Eminent and Most Reverend Fathers of the S. C. of the Council on the day 11 June 1921 there was proposed the doubt conceived in this formula: "Whether a Bishop can prohibit his clerics hunting, even not clamorous, under penalty of suspension to be incurred ipso facto," the same Eminent Fathers judged that the response should be: "Negatively, unless grave and special reasons are present."

But when on the following day a report had been made concerning the premises to Our Most Holy Lord Benedict, by Divine Providence PP. XV, through the undersigned Secretary of the Sacred Congregation, His Holiness deigned to approve and confirm the given resolution. I. Mori, Secretary. A.A.S., v. 13, p. 501.

57. (Pag. 1074.) Nevertheless Pius PP. XI, with that piety which he has toward the faithful departed, most recently explains the privileges and indulgences conceded to the Pious Society called "of the Passing of Saint Joseph," among which there is also this: "But that priests enrolled or to be enrolled in the Union of the Passing of Saint Joseph may everywhere enjoy peculiar privileges, we concede to them the personal indult of a privileged Altar for the dying." Thus the Brief, Romani Pontifices, 29 of the month of July, in the year 1923. The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the S. Office gave the interpretation of this privilege conceded by Benedict PP. XV, 9 Nov. 1922: Rescript. - I. Whether after Can. 930 of the new Code the existence of a privileged altar for the dying still perseveres, and insofar as affirmatively: II. How the plenary indulgence for the dying is to be understood. III. Whether one celebrating for several dying persons must determine to whom he applies the plenary Indulgence. IV. What in the case in which the Priest determines no one. Resp. To I. Affirmatively; To II. That the Indulgence is to be understood as for the living, by way of absolution; To III. Negatively; Finally to IV: Provision has been made in III.

58. (Pag. 287.) You Will Resolve. - Belligerent nations are held: to keep their agreements with other nations; to stand by sworn faith; to fulfill promises; not to violate the neutrality of non-belligerent peoples; not to pursue peaceful citizens with arms; not to attack open cities with bombs from aerial ballistae; not to destroy ships by ships submerged under water or "submarines," by which sailing travelers or goods of commerce are carried away, without previous warning and without care for protecting the life of travelers.

The same are prohibited: to compel old men, infants, and women to go before soldiers and thus constitute a rampart with their own bodies; to diminish the number of enemies by killing the sick or captives; to deport citizens, no account having been taken of the bond of families or of the first moral principles; to separate daughters and women from their parents, brothers, or relatives, who protect them against the unbridled ferocity of the passions of soldiers; deliberately and by an applied plan of fire to destroy cities, villages, and estates.

59. (Pag. 546.) Regulars have not lost the privileges which were directly conceded to them by the Apostolic See, Can. 4; Can. 613. But what of those faculties in which by force of communication of privileges they rejoiced up to the introduction of the New Code? For example, do regular confessors retain the faculty of absolving from cases reserved by common law to Ordinaries which they had before? There are those who simply deny it, because according to them by canon 613 § 1 all privileges conceded by force of communication have been taken away. Thus Führich, De Religiosis, p. 258. But others respond affirmatively, because it is not established that this faculty has been taken away by this canon; for the canon says: "any communication being excluded hereafter." Therefore future communication is excluded, but not past communication. Thus Creusen-Vermeersch, Summa Novi Juris n. 222. Aertnys n. 1067. Prümmer p. 303. Therefore there is present at least a doubt of law, and indeed a positive and probable doubt. Wherefore the Church supplies according to Canon 209. But those Religions, if there are any, to which such a privilege has been directly conceded by force of a Pontifical faculty, without doubt continue licitly to employ it. And since these cases are rather judged Papal cases from which the faculty of absolving is conceded by law to Bishops, there are authors to whom it does not seem lawful for the Ordinaries of places to take away this faculty from those Regulars. But whatever may be concerning this matter, certainly Regulars are held to use their privileges cautiously and prudently.

60. (Pag. 746.) It must be noted that from the response of Cardinal Gasparri as President of the Pontifical Commission for the authentic interpretation of the Code of Canon Law, on 16 Jan. 1921, to the Ordinary of Luxembourg, there follows:

(a) that the obligation of assigning an ordinary and extraordinary confessor to each religious house of women remains, even if it numbers fewer than six religious women;

(b) that the solution of the Pontifical Commission for the authentic interpretation of the Code of Canon Law given on 24 November 1920 is to be understood thus: that confession made by a religious woman by force of canon 522 for the tranquillity of conscience to a confessor approved for hearing the confessions of women is valid only then when it is made in a church or in a public or semipublic oratory or in a place legitimately destined for hearing the confessions of women. Cf. Linz. Quartalschrift, 64, p. 631, where the letters of the Ordinary of Luxembourg are found.

61. (Pag. 587.) With relation to the conferral of baptism in danger of death, the following are to be kept before the eyes.

1°. Dispositions which, on account of the good faith of the one receiving or from a proportionate cause, can be lacking without an obstacle being placed to the value or fruitfulness of the sacrament, can be lacking in part, indeed wholly, according to the degree of infirmity of the subject and of the danger in which he is situated.

Thus, if the one to be baptized cannot be more diligently instructed in the principal mysteries of faith, let the principal mysteries be summarily proposed to him, and then it will be enough that in some way he show that he offers the assent of faith to the same, or that he wishes to be baptized and grieves for sins, and seriously promises that he will observe the mandates of the Christian religion.

2°. Even if the dispositions which probably are required for value or fruitfulness certainly are lacking, when necessity is urgent baptism can be administered.

Thus, for example, as regards faith in the mysteries of the incarnation and of the Most Holy Trinity, probably necessary for the salvation of the soul. Likewise, as regards habitual intention, required for the value of the sacrament. For authors agree that an intention contained in the will of embracing the Christian religion suffices, but they dispute whether a general intention of fulfilling the will of God and of employing means necessary for salvation suffices, which intention is included in attrition.

Certainly, when the subject is not deprived of the senses, very rarely will a very brief time be lacking so that the priest can safely propose the mysteries of the incarnation and of the Most Holy Trinity, and so that the one to be baptized may be able to show the assent of faith in some way.

3°. Dispositions which are certainly required for value or fruitfulness, when necessity is urgent, ought at least probably to be present; but in extreme necessity the slightest probability suffices.

Thus, as regards faith in points certainly necessary by necessity of means and the intention of receiving the sacrament, the S. C. of the S. Off., 11 Dec. 1850, approved the manner of acting of the Apostolic Vicar of the Sandwich Islands, baptizing "some deaf-mutes whom we saw make some signs of religion, without being very certain that they knew the principal mysteries of the faith," and "old persons in danger of death (in proximate and morally certain danger), and often without knowledge, when we believed that it was not without reason that divine providence was leading us near them; and that besides we had certainty that they had renounced idolatry....

Attrition, when it cannot be manifested, is presumed from the will of receiving baptism, as long as the contrary is not established. In doubt whether it is present, baptism is not to be given conditionally, because attrition is required for fruitfulness alone.

Note. Adult insane persons and those who suffer from lethargy or phrenesis are to be baptized when danger of death is imminent, if, before they became insane, they showed a desire of receiving baptism (Can. 754. § 3, § 4), after the manner of those things which were said above. In this case the other necessary dispositions are presumed to be present.

If it is doubted whether or not an adult is to be baptized, the dispositions of which we have treated are required only probably. Therefore, when the case occurs, let the things said under 2 be applied. - Cf. Can. 752, § 1, § 2, § 3.

62. (Pag. 638.) Moreover, there are understood not only the infirm who have already been lying ill for a month, but also the infirm who, although seized by grave disease and by the judgment of a physician not able to observe the natural fast, nevertheless cannot lie in bed, or can rise from it for some hours of the day, S. C. Con. 25 March 1907. Therefore, since first, the Congregation itself interprets more mildly those lying ill, there is no reason why we should interpret the word to the apex of strictest law and exclude infirm persons held by grave disease who, without any hope of swift convalescence, can rise for some hours of the day and drag themselves, as it were, to the Church. One thing is required: that we take care lest, by their example, the same be permitted to others who are rightly not held to be such infirm persons; for the word prudent counsel is deliberately placed in the canon. Secondly, it must be noted that in the canon these words are not had: "Those who cannot observe the natural fast in its integrity," which were had in the Question to which Pius X responded. Therefore, provided that they are the infirm described in the canon or are deservedly held as such, they are not to be deprived of the benefit of the second paragraph of canon 858. - Vermeersch, Theol. Mor., v. 2, n. 366. Genicot-Salsmans, Cas. Cons. p. 456. Capello, n. 506.

63. (Pag. 669.) On celebration of Mass without a minister. But if there is present a minister who does not know how to respond, yet performs the other ceremonies, the Priest alone himself can respond to himself, as is prescribed by the rubric of the Missal, IV. Rit. Serv., for the case in which neither the minister nor those who are present respond at the Kyrie Eleison: "he alone says it nine times." By equal reason, if the minister knows how to respond, but is not able to perform the other ceremonies, the priest himself will be able to minister to himself. In these cases we judge mere devotion to suffice for celebrating.

But if the people are present waiting, but no minister is at hand, let the priest take care to find someone who may serve at the altar, and let him celebrate; but if he finds no one, let him take care that someone, or some woman from a distance, respond, and let him celebrate. But if he finds neither one nor the other, he can celebrate alone in the presence of the people; for it certainly seems among us to be a grave cause that otherwise the people would be deprived of daily Mass.

The mind of the Church seems to be that witnesses always be at hand for the celebrating Priest during the Most Sacred Sacrifice. And the same Holy Mother requires that at least there be present one who both responds in the name of the people and furnishes other things to the priest. Hence it is clear that the burden rests upon parish priests and Superiors of religious to take care that ministers are present who will serve the Sacred rites.

All care having been employed, what if even then ministers are not present? Let the priest understand what good priests do in the diocese, with the Ordinary knowing and at least being silent; and let him do what he shall have seen them do. Meanwhile, if the case happens more often, let him, through the Ordinaries, seek a dispensation from the Sacred Congregation, the matter having been manifested integrally.

64. (Pag. 751.) The words of Canon 897: cases to be reserved are to be altogether few, must be understood only of sins which by reason of themselves are reserved without censure. This is clear from the title of the second chapter, which is, On the reservation of sins; from canon 893, § 3 itself, by force of which reservation of censures is made according to the prescription of canons 2246, 2247; finally from the words of canon 895: Let Ordinaries of places not reserve sins, and of canon 898: Completely from those sins to be reserved to themselves.

On account of similar reasons, and comparison having been made between canons 2252, 2253, and 2254, and canon 899, § 3, it must be said that the words: by the law itself from cases which Ordinaries have in any way reserved to themselves are not to be understood of censures reserved by Ordinaries to themselves.

Finally, when canons 2252, 2254, § 1, § 2 and canon 900 have been inspected, this clause: any reservation lacks all force, is to be referred to any sins reserved by reason of themselves and not to censures.

65. (Pag. 842.) You Will Resolve. The parish priest, before the nuptials are contracted, must approach the Ordinary: If a party has stayed in another place for six months after having attained puberty, Can. 1023, § 2; If there is some suspicion of a contracted impediment even for a shorter stay, Can. 1023, § 3; If there is question of obtaining dispensation from publications, Can. 1028; if after the investigation made by the parish priest and the banns having been published a doubt still perseveres concerning the existence of an impediment, Can. 1031, § 1; If a certain impediment is detected, Can. 1031, § 2; If there is question of the marriage of vagi, Can. 1032; If minors wish to contract against the will of their parents, Can. 1034; If he knows that the spouses will violate or have already violated the law concerning not going to a non-Catholic minister either before or after the marriage has been duly contracted, Can. 1063, § 2; If question is made of the marriage of a Catholic with those who notoriously either have cast off the Catholic faith, or are enrolled in societies condemned by the Church, or who are public sinners or notoriously censured persons who have refused to make sacramental confession or to be reconciled, Can. 1065 and Can. 1066.

66. (Pag. 972.) Artificial fecundation can be understood: 1°. If without any conjunction of male and female, male semen obtained by pollution is introduced artificially into the organ of the female, e.g., by means of a little siphon; 2°. If, after copula has first been had, the man emits semen outside the due place, then pours it into the organ of the woman.

Each of these two modes, 1, 2, is prohibited; 3°. If copula is duly completed and the semen emitted into the organ of the woman is, by means of an instrument, injected more deeply within the vessel, and thus nature is aided, this mode seems legitimate to us; for nothing is had which is repugnant to the laws of nature.

Related to this is the question: Is it licit for semen obtained artificially from the testicles of the legitimate spouse without venereal delectation to be introduced into the womanly organ of his wife by means of an instrument? It is controverted: Affirmatively, i.e., it is licit, where copula cannot duly be had; because the end of marriage is obtained without any venereal commotion or abuse. Cf. Vermeersch, De Castitate, 241, 3; Genicot 546 note 1. Nevertheless this opinion, as we frankly confess, displeases us; for the right to have children is only the right to conjugal acts apt for generation; but such is not the action described in the mode. For the conjugal act is carnal copula itself. And therefore any licit fecundation supposes true copula in some manner, although, after this has been legitimately completed, nature may afterwards be aided by art.

67. (Pag. 976.) Response, Rome, on the day 1 December 1922.

Most Illustrious and Reverend Lord. In the general Session held on feria IV, the day 22 of last November, there were proposed three doubts transmitted by Your Amplitude, in the name of the Episcopate of the Netherlands, to this Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office. That is: I. Whether it can be tolerated that confessors of their own accord teach the practice of half-completed copula, and recommend it promiscuously to all penitents who fear lest more numerous offspring be born. II. Whether a confessor is to be blamed who, after all remedies for turning away from this evil a penitent abusing marriage have been tried in vain, teaches him to exercise half-completed copula for forestalling mortal sins. III. Whether a confessor is to be blamed who, in the circumstances under II, recommends half-completed copula already known from elsewhere to the penitent, or, to a penitent asking whether this mode is licit, responds simply that it is licit without any restriction or explanation.

And the Eminent and Most Reverend Lord Cardinals, General Inquisitors together with me, after the question had been diligently weighed, and the vote of the Lord Consultors first had, commanded the response:

To doubt I, Negatively. To II and III, Affirmatively.

But on the following feria V, the day 23 of the said month, the Most Holy Lord, our Lord Pius XI, in the usual audience granted to the Reverend Reverend Lord Assessor of this Holy Office, approved the resolution of the Eminent Fathers reported to him.

Signifying these things to Your Amplitude for my office, I pray all prosperous and happy things for you from the Lord. To Your Most Reverend Amplitude, most devoted. Signed R. Card. Merry del Val.

"As often as the man indeed penetrates the vessel of the wife, but little, e.g., for a half or third part, and deposits semen in the vagina," it is half-completed copula in the sense of the Response, as is clear from the relation of the case. It renders conception more difficult, but not impossible. Nouvelle Rev. Théol. t. 50, p. 269.

68. (Pag. 1040.) Whether the resolution of the S. C. C. given in the Wroclaw case, Irregularities, on the day 9 Aug. 1890, still has force today, in the case? The S. Congregation of the Council responded, 10 Feb. 1923: Affirmatively.

69. (Pag. 868.) Can. 1116. For the sake of example: Tarsus had relations with Anna, the wife of his brother; the latter dies, and the adulterer obtains dispensation for entering marriage with the woman pregnant from sin. Anna, before she marries the man, gives birth. At the time of conception of the offspring the parents were incapable; at the time of gestation and birth they were now capable; wherefore the offspring is legitimated by the subsequent marriage.

Titius had commerce with Martha, a consanguinea, who thence became pregnant; wherefore he himself obtains dispensation for entering nuptials with her. But Martha afterwards married another man and during this marriage gives birth to offspring. The woman, having become a widow a little afterwards, enters marriage with Titius. In the case, at the time of conception and birth the parents were incapable, but at the time of gestation they had become capable, and hence the offspring is legitimated by the marriage.

70. (Pag. 883.) Can. 1067. Titius, having begun the sixteenth year of age, enters marriage with Martha, who is in her twentieth year.

The marriage is null on account of the impediment of age on the part of Titius.

Marcella, born on the twenty-first of the month of June 1905, married Titus on the twenty-first of the month of June 1919. Titus is now in his twentieth year. The marriage is null on account of the impediment of age on the part of the woman, because the fourteenth year of age has not yet been completed. The fourteenth year of age supposes that the terminus a quo does not coincide with the beginning of the day; according to Can. 34, § 3, 3°, the first day is not to be computed and the time is ended when the last day of the same number has been completed; wherefore in the case the fourteenth year is completed when the twenty-first day of June 1919 has been completed; therefore on the twenty-second day of June 1919 at last marriage can be validly entered by them.

Pag. 886. Can. 1068. 1°. Joannes, deprived of both testicles, entered marriage with Bertha, who did not know the defect of the man. The marriage is null.

2°. After marriage had been entered, Titius was deprived of the testicles on account of a surgical operation. The marriage remains valid.

Pag. 886. Can. 1069. Titius, baptized, entered nuptials with Bertha, baptized, who once, as a married woman, believed her husband to be dead. After two years Bertha's husband appears. The second marriage of Bertha is invalid.

Pag. 889. Can. 1070. Thomas, baptized in the Catholic Church, entered marriage with Bertha, not baptized. The marriage is null.

The same Thomas, after declaration of nullity of the prior union, married Anna, who was always held to have been baptized, who, nevertheless, as afterwards became clearer than midday light, certainly had never been baptized. The marriage is null.

Pag. 891. Can. 1072. Titus, a subdeacon, enters with Martha. The marriage is null.

Can. 1073. A Regular solemnly professed enters with Blanda. Joannes, a Scholastic of the Society of Jesus, enters with Bertha. Each marriage is null.

Pag. 892. Can. 1074. Marcus enters with Bertha, who has been abducted with a view to marriage and is existing in the power of Marcus the abductor. The marriage is null.

Albus now violently detains Marca in a place with a view to marriage. Marca had freely approached the place. But now they enter marriage. The marriage is null.

Pag. 895. Can. 1075. Martha, married, commits adultery with Titus, a celibate, after both had promised to enter marriage with each other.

Marca, likewise adulterating with Baldus, a married man, attempted marriage with him.

Likewise, during the same marriage Joannes and Bertha commit adultery, and Bertha kills the spouse.

Marcus and Macrina by mutual conspiracy kill the spouse of each.

In all these cases the impediment of crime exists.

Pag. 900. Can. 1076. Berta enters with her father but does not know that he is her father.

Bertina, in the second degree of consanguinity with Bertinus, marries him.

Each marriage is null.

Pag. 903. Can. 1077. Titus enters marriage with Anna, who was consanguineous with his deceased prior wife doubly in the second degree. The marriage is null; and indeed on account of a double impediment of affinity.

Pag. 903. Can. 1078. Titius enters marriage with Berta, which nevertheless is invalid; afterwards he enters with the daughter of Berta. The marriage is null.

Tibinus lived in concubinage with Bertina. The fact could be proved by five persons. Afterwards the man entered marriage with the daughter of this Bertina. The marriage is invalid.

Tarda lived in notorious concubinage with Maldus. Maldus has a son, with whom Tarda enters nuptials. The nuptials are null.

71. (Pag. 944.) Dispensation was conceded from the impediment of consanguinity in the second degree in a double and distinct case:

But in the first case the parties were consanguineous in the third degree touching the second;

in the second case they were consanguineous in the third degree.

The dispensation is valid although in the petition or in the concession an error concerning the degree has crept in, provided that the degree really existing is lower. Can. 1052.

But it is not valid if the concession were for the third degree and the existing impediment were of the second degree, or of the third degree mixed with the second.

Cf. Fourneret, Le Mariage Chrétien, p. 302.

Two brothers enter marriage with two sisters. Their offspring are among themselves doubly consanguineous in the second equal degree. And therefore a double impediment stands in the way of their marriage. This notwithstanding, such consanguineous persons, after obtaining a single dispensation from the impediment of the second degree without having manifested in the petition that they were doubly entangled, contracted marriage, and validly; since a dispensation from the impediment of consanguinity conceded in some degree is valid, although another impediment of the same species in an equal or lower degree was withheld, as is expressly said in Canon 1052.

In equal manner, Titius and Bertinus, brothers, take as wives two sisters, namely Titius Anna, but Bertinus Martha. After Bertinus and Anna have died, Titius wishes to enter nuptials with Martha and obtains dispensation from affinity in the first degree of the collateral line, without having added a word in the petition about the double impediment. The dispensation is valid although an impediment of the same species and of equal degree had been withheld. Can. 1052.

72. (Pag. 838.) Varca, devoted to theatrical games, has a fixed seat nowhere and therefore neither diocesan nor parochial domicile, and now wishes to enter marriage with Michael, also devoted to the same games, whose domicile is in the parish of S. James. Varca already now resides for two months in the same parish, whose parish priest is the proper parish priest of each contracting party (Can. 94). But since there is question of the marriage of a vaga (Can. 91), the parish priest should never assist unless the matter has been brought to the Ordinary of the place or to the deputed priest (Can. 1032), and unless he receives a recent baptismal document of the woman (Can. 1021). Denunciations must be made in the parish of S. James and, if the party has stayed in another place for six months after having attained puberty, the Ordinary can require denunciations to be made there, or also according to his prudence dispense from the same (Can. 1028), and prescribe other proofs concerning the status of freedom (Can. 1023). Certainly now the danger of concubinage to be averted and the scandal of civil union to be forestalled do not make assistance licit unless the free status has been established, Can. 1020, 1097. Cf. entirely the Instruction of the S. Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments, 4 July 1921.

73. (Pag. 941.) Maria, wife of Jason, while her marriage endured, consummated adultery with Joannes, a celibate, and gave to him and accepted from him the pledge concerning entering marriage. A year after the death of Jason had elapsed, the adulterers contracted marriage, and on the very day of entering the contract they confessed before Paulus, who gave dispensation in the act of confession. And since he could not speak about the matter outside the Sacrament, he could do nothing else.

74. (Pag. 942.) Bertha, a widow, European, arrived at our shores, having left her offspring Anna with her mother in her homeland. In our city NN, she entered marriage with Arnulphus. Immediately after the nuptials celebrated in the Church, they went to the railway station, about to undertake their wedding journey, when, alas! the carriage, not closed but open, moved by electric power, by which they were being drawn, was destroyed by misfortune and she was killed. After three years of widowhood had been spent in another city, Arnulphus meets Anna, and, seized by mutual love, they entered a plan of contracting marriage. On the very day of the nuptials, Anna and Arnulphus first learn that affinity exists between them. Now then, they cannot approach the Ordinary, nor defer the nuptials without danger of grave evil; wherefore, since the matter is known to Anna and Arnulphus alone, the parish priest, to whom it is disclosed by the disturbed spouses immediately before the marriage, dispenses them, for the impediment is of affinity in the direct line from a non-consummated marriage. The non-consummation is established from the misfortune known to the parish priest himself, which rendered it impossible.

The case is occult; hence canon 1045 is duly applied. And since the parish priest conceded dispensation in the external forum, it remains that he render the Ordinary of the place more certain concerning it and inscribe it in the marriage book. Can. 1046.

75. (Pag. 887.) Titius, positively doubting concerning the death of his prior spouse, entered another marriage with Bertha, suspecting nothing, before the Parish Priest of S. Bernard, likewise suspecting nothing, although he had made investigation and Titius asserted by oath that he had been free. These things having been heard in the sacred tribunal, let the confessor send him to the Ordinary of the place, or himself, with faculty accepted from the penitent, manifest the matter to the same with name. Let the Ordinary prescribe those things to be done which solve the knot. Meanwhile Titius is not to ask, but must render the debt to the woman, ignorant of the matter, asking it. If the penitent consents to these things, let the Confessor dismiss him absolved. But if the investigation proves that the first woman had been dead, and indeed at the time of the second marriage having been entered, then the present marriage certainly must be declared valid; but if the investigation proves that she died after this marriage had been entered, then let consent be duly renewed on each side, or let recourse be had to Rome. But if the investigation leaves the death of the wife doubtful, the spouses can cohabit in good faith. Finally, if the investigation proves the wife still living, the present parties must either be separated altogether, or, if this is impossible, can be permitted to live together as sister and brother, due cautions having been employed. Linz-Quartalschrift, v. 74, p. 404.

76. (Pag. 942.) They Contract Invalidly:

1°. Can. 1067. A man before the completed sixteenth year of age; a Woman likewise before the completed fourteenth.

2. Can. 1068. Whether men or women laboring under antecedent and perpetual impotence, whether known to the other party or not, whether absolute or relative.

3. Can. 1069. Those who are held by the bond of a prior marriage, with the privilege of faith preserved.

4. Can. 1070. A non-baptized person with a person baptized in the Catholic Church or converted to the same from heresy or schism.

5. Can. 1072. Clerics constituted in sacred orders.

6. Can. 1073. Religious who have professed solemn vows, or simple vows to which the force of invalidating has been added by prescription of the Apostolic See.

7. Can. 1074. The abducting man and the woman abducted with a view to marriage, as long as she has remained in the power of the abductor.

Violent detention by a man of a woman in a place of stay or of free access with a view to marriage is equal to abduction.

8. Can. 1075. Those who, while the same marriage endured, consummated adultery between themselves and mutually gave each other pledge concerning entering marriage, or attempted the marriage itself even civilly.

Those who, while the same marriage endured, consummated adultery between themselves and one of them committed spouse-killing. Those who by mutual physical or moral cooperation, even without adultery, brought death upon a spouse.

9. Can. 1076. Consanguineous persons in the direct line between all ascendants and descendants; in the collateral line up to the third degree inclusive, so that the impediment is multiplied as often as the common stock is multiplied.

10. Can. 1077. Affines in the direct line in any degree; in the collateral line up to the second degree inclusive; the impediment is multiplied as often as the impediment of consanguinity from which it proceeds is multiplied, and by marriage repeated successively with a consanguineous person of the deceased spouse.

11. Can. 1078. Those held by public honesty in the first and second degree of the direct line between the man and the consanguineous women of the woman, and vice versa.

12. Can. 1079. Those spiritually related enumerated in can. 768: the baptized person with the baptizer, and with the Sponsor.

13. Can. 1080. Those who by civil law are held incapable of entering nuptials between themselves on account of legal relationship.

Can. 1043. In the Article of Death, the Ordinary of the Place, for consulting conscience and the legitimation of offspring, if the case bears it, can dispense over the form of celebration of marriage and over impediments 1; 4; 5, except the impediment arisen from the sacred Order of priesthood; 6; 7; 8; 9, except marriage between consanguineous persons in the direct line, ascendants and descendants, and between brother and sister; 10, with affinity in the direct line excepted, when the marriage has been consummated; 11; 12; 13.

Can. 1044. In the same article, in the same circumstances, only when not even the Ordinary of the place can be approached, the Parish Priest and the Priest assisting at Marriage according to the norm of Can. 1098, § 2, enjoy the same faculty; and for the internal forum and in the act of sacramental confession only, the Confessor.

Can. 1045 § 1. When all things are prepared and do not admit delay, the Ordinaries of Places can dispense over all impediments of which in the cited Can. 1043.

Can. 1045 § 2. This power is valid for convalidating marriage, if there is danger in delay.

Can. 1045 § 3. In these same circumstances the same persons of whom in Can. 1044 enjoy the same faculty, but only for occult cases, when not even the Ordinary of the place can be approached, or only with danger of violation of the secret.

Can. 81. When recourse to the Holy See is difficult and at the same time there is danger of grave harm in delay, and there is question of a dispensation which the Apostolic See is accustomed to concede, the Ordinary of the place can concede the dispensation.

Hence, when the canons of Canon Law have been consulted, it will immediately appear that "Bishops by force of the Code have been fortified with so great a power that, as often as the utility of the Church and the salvation of souls requires it, they are able equally and opportunely to temper the rigor of the common law and to bestow just dispensations." S. C. Consist., 25 April 1918.

77. (Pag. 888.) Before nuptials are entered, the following hypotheses, among others, can be posited with relation to this canon 1070:

First hypothesis: the Catholic party is held as baptized and the other party is not baptized.

Second hypothesis: the Catholic party is held as doubtfully baptized and the other party is not baptized.

Third hypothesis: the Catholic party is certainly baptized and the other is held as baptized.

Fourth hypothesis: the Catholic party is certainly baptized, the other is held as doubtfully baptized.

Fifth hypothesis: the Catholic party is doubtfully baptized and the other certainly baptized.

Sixth hypothesis: the Catholic party is held as doubtfully baptized, the other party also as doubtfully baptized.

In the first hypothesis, they cannot enter nuptials since disparity of cult is present; from this impediment dispensation must first be obtained;

In the second hypothesis, the doubt must be solved before marriage; with this doubt remaining, the Catholic party is to be baptized - and dispensation is to be obtained;

In the third hypothesis, dispensation from the impediment of mixed religion is to be obtained, if this other party is heretical;

In the fourth hypothesis, dispensation from the impediment of mixed religion is to be obtained and, for caution, from disparity of cult;

In the fifth hypothesis, if the doubt remains, the Catholic party is to be baptized and dispensation over mixed religion is to be obtained.

In the sixth hypothesis, if the doubt remains, the Catholic party is to be baptized and dispensation over mixed religion and, for caution, from disparity of cult is to be obtained.

After the nuptials have been contracted:

First hypothesis: the Catholic party is certainly baptized, and the other party is reputed as baptized; or the other party was doubtfully baptized.

Second hypothesis: the Catholic party and the other party are doubtfully baptized.

Third hypothesis: there are two Catholics: one party has been baptized in the Catholic Church and the other party converted to it from heresy, and not baptized under condition because of the supposed validity of baptism.

In the first hypothesis, one must stand for the validity of the marriage until it is certainly established that one party is certainly baptized, but the other is not baptized;

In the second hypothesis, one must stand for the value of the marriage; and, if after investigation has been made, it is established that the Catholic party had not been baptized, because the impediment is not present, the nuptials are valid according to the norm of canon 1070, § 1.

In the third hypothesis, as the case lies, the union must be held valid.

But let us suppose that after three years of conjugal life the spouses, of whom there is question in the third hypothesis, discovered that that converted party had never been baptized. In truth the impediment exists and the marriage is not valid.

78. (Pag. 882.) To be noted. Infidels of themselves and directly are not held by merely ecclesiastical impediments. And therefore they can enter a nuptial covenant among themselves, although they have those qualities by which the faithful, if entangled, cannot enter it. Thus, for example, two infidels consanguineous in the second degree can validly enter marriage.

Formerly, otherwise than now, disparity of cult annulled all marriages between the faithful and infidels. But now this impediment exists only between those baptized in the Catholic Church and the non-baptized; in which case dispensation is always previously required before they contract.

The S. Office responded, 10 April 1837, that the impediment of public honesty does not subsist in the case of a legitimate marriage of pagans not consummated. For this impediment is judged to have been invented and constituted by the Church and therefore does not revive after Baptism. Wherefore in similar manner now it does not arise from an invalid marriage of infidels or from their public and notorious concubinage. - Cf. De Smet, 1, n. 431. But otherwise Vlaming n. 364, who thinks that the impediment arises from an invalid consummated marriage or from concubinage; he gives the reason: for there is present the same propinquity which is identified with ancient affinity from illicit copula, whence the impediment arose. But public honesty is judged an invention of the Church, as Crime is; and therefore it is not contracted in infidelity, nor does it exist after Baptism. Cf. Vermeersch, E.J.C. 2, n. 337.4.

S. C. de P. F., 23 Aug. 1852. On the impediment of crime among infidels:

5. Can an infidel man who before Baptism had copula with the infidel wife of another, to whom, the woman consenting and accepting faith concerning future marriage, he brought death, after the baptism of each enter marriage with the said woman? Resp. to 5. Affirmatively.

6. Can they contract this marriage if, when they perpetrated those crimes, one party had been Christian? Resp. to 6. Negatively.

Affinity does not arise from legitimate marriage validly celebrated between non-baptized persons, nor, at least practically, from a valid marriage between a baptized person and an infidel, provided this party remains infidel without baptism. The first is clear from Canon 97 § 1 itself. The other, because such a marriage would be called ratified only doubtfully, which from Canon 1015 is a marriage of baptized persons. The impediment in the case would be doubtful with a doubt of law, and from Canon 15 is not to be attended to.

But if afterwards each party is baptized, the marriage becomes ratified, from which then only the impediment of affinity begins. - Cf. Collationes Brugenses, t. 20, p. 400. Infidels are judged liable to this impediment by reason of the subjection of the faithful party, and not otherwise; for example, Titia, a Catholic widow from a ratified marriage, wishes to enter new nuptials with an infidel consanguineous person within the prohibited degrees of her deceased Catholic spouse. She cannot.

79. (Pag. 608.) Supreme S. Congregation of the Holy Office - To the Cardinal Archbishop of Tarragona - Eminent and Most Reverend Lord - With relation to the letters of Your Eminence given on the day 2 of the month of May, now elapsed, by which you set forth the doubt whether in the Sacrifice of Mass wine from must, sulphured by addition of sulphurous anhydride or potassium metabisulphite, can be employed, this Supreme Congregation of the S. Office decreed that the response should be: "Affirmatively." While I signify this to Your Eminence, I attest my devoted observance to you and with all veneration kiss your hands. Rome, 2 August 1922. Most devoted to Your Most Reverend Eminence, R. Card. Merry del Val. Cf. Il Monitore, Oct. 1923, p. 289.

80. (Pag. 1029.) What Our Predecessors confirmed several times: let no one think it licit for himself, for any cause whatever, to give his name to the sect of the Masons, if Catholic profession and his own salvation are of such value with him as they ought to be. Let no simulated honesty deceive anyone: for it can seem to some that the Masons demand nothing which openly is contrary to the holiness of religion or morals; nevertheless, because the whole reason and cause of the sect itself is in vice and shameful deed, it is right that it is not licit to gather with them, or to help them in any way." Leo XIII, Humanum Genus, Vos autem. 2 May 1884.

81. (Pag. 324.) Sacred Congregation of the Council. - Most Blessed Father: The Ordinary of Baltimore, while the same causes endure, humbly petitions for his diocese a new benign prorogation of the indult of the S. Congregation of the Council of the day 2 June 1920, by which in the time of Lent the law of abstinence can be transferred from Saturday to Wednesday of the same week, except Saturday of the Four Times, and also prorogation of the indult of the day 3 June 1915 by force of which workers and their families are held to abstain from meats only on Fridays, Ash Wednesday, Holy Saturday before noon, and the vigil of the Nativity of the Lord. The S. Congregation of the Council, with attention to the things set forth, benignly imparted to the Ordinary of Baltimore the petitioned grace of prorogation as to each for five years, in the terms and form of the preceding concessions. Given at Rome, on the day 5 January 1926. D. Card. Sbarretti, Prefect.

82. (Pag. 1102.) From the Secretariat of the Sacred Congregation de Religiosis - Rome, on the day 1 December 1921. - Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord. - To the doubt proposed by Your Amplitude to this S. Congregation concerning the disposition of Can. 522 CJC, namely: "How ought religious women to conduct themselves who, dwelling in their own community, for the tranquillity of their conscience, wish without the superior's knowledge to approach a confessor approved by the Ordinary of the place for women?" This S. Congregation judges that no response is to be given, since there is question of practical cases which can be solved from the opinions of Doctors. Nevertheless I judge it opportune to communicate with Your Amplitude the vote of the Most Reverend Father Consultor, who, having been asked concerning the same matter, judged that the response should be thus: "Canon 522 indeed permits that a religious woman use the occasion, if any shall have offered itself, of approaching, for the quiet of her conscience, any confessor approved for women, and this even without the superior's knowledge; but in no way does it create for either the superior or the Ordinary an office of procuring such an occasion; and much less, for that reason, is anything to be changed in the discipline of cloister or in the constitutions. But to the doubt: How ought religious women to conduct themselves who, dwelling in their own community, for the tranquillity of their conscience, wish without the superior's knowledge to approach a Confessor approved by the Ordinary of the place for women? I judge that the response should be: let them await an occasion by which, no rule concerning egress having been violated, they can do this; and let them patiently bear that no such occasion offers itself to them." These things were to be signified by me to Your Amplitude; having prayed all prosperous things for you from the Lord, I remain, with peculiar deference, most devoted to Your Amplitude, Maurus M. Serafini, Abbot, O.S.B., Secretary. - To the Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord Ordinary of Osnabrück. - Archiv für Katholisches Kirchenrecht, S. 84, Band 102.

83. (Pag. 76.) This power of Bishops has no limits except the general laws of the Church and peculiar decrees of the Pontiffs. Therefore, things which have been constituted neither by general laws of the Church nor by peculiar decrees of the Pontiffs are subject to the power of Bishops. Supreme Apostolic Signatura, 15 Dec. 1923. Acta Apost. Sed. xvi, p. 107.

84. (Pag. 124.) Pontifical Commission for Authentically Interpreting the Canons of the Code. Responses to Proposed Doubts. The Eminent Fathers of the Pontifical Commission for authentically interpreting the canons of the Code, after the doubts which follow had been proposed in plenary meeting, commanded that response be made as below to the individual ones:

Pag. 124. I. On Computation of Time. Whether anywhere on earth, in the cases expressed in canon 33 Par. 1, one can follow the time commonly called zonal.

Resp. Affirmatively, provided that this time is legal.

Pag. 775. VII. On reservation of cases.

Whether any reservation, of which in can. 900, is only by reason of sin or also by reason of censure.

2. Whether canon 900 treats of reservation of cases established by Ordinaries only, or also by the Holy See.

Resp. To the 1st, Affirmatively to the first part, negatively to the second.

To the 2nd, Negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second.

Pag. 932. VIII. On the form of celebration of Marriage. Whether according to canon 1098, for contracting marriage validly and licitly before witnesses alone, the fact of absence of the parish priest suffices, or whether moral certitude is also required, from notoriety or from inquiry, that the parish priest cannot be had or approached for a month without grave inconvenience.

Resp. Negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second.

Pag. 863. IX. On Mass in mixed marriages. Whether by canon 1102 Par. 2 in mixed marriages, besides the Mass for the spouses, another Mass also, although private, is prohibited.

Resp. Affirmatively, if this Mass from the circumstances of things can be held as a complement of the matrimonial ceremony.

Pag. 1017. X. On ecclesiastical burial. Whether, by force of canon 1240 Par. 1, 5°, they are deprived of ecclesiastical burial who have ordered their body to be handed over to cremation and have persevered in this will up to death, even if cremation according to the norm of canon 1203 Par. 2 does not follow.

Resp. Affirmatively.

Given at Rome, on the day 10 November 1925. P. Card. Gasparri, President. Joseph Bruno, Secretary.

85. (Pag. 591.) Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments. Roman and Others. On the Faculty of Conferring Baptism at Home Outside Danger of Death.

It was asked whether the practice is conformable to law according to which infants, who are not situated in danger of death, but cannot be transferred to the church without danger, are solemnly baptized at home, i.e., with all the ceremonies even those preceding ablution, by the parish priest or another priest with the license of the parish priest; for recourse cannot be had to the minister of necessity, and in particular to the midwife, except in necessity strictly so called, namely when danger is positively feared lest the infant die (C. S. Off., 11 Jan. 1899), and only in the same necessity are the ceremonies prior to ablution omitted (S. C. Rit., 17 Jan. 1914. Cod. iur. can., can. 776 § 1).

Wherefore, the doubts having been proposed:

"I. Whether the above-said practice is conformable to canon law and, insofar as negatively:

"II. How one ought to proceed in the case."

In the Plenary Congregation of the Eminent Fathers, held on the day 26 June of the current year, the same Eminent Fathers responded thus:

To I. Provision will be made in the second.

To II. That it is conformable to law that, if the infant is not situated in danger of death, but cannot without danger be transferred to the church according to the norm of can. 775, the Ordinary, by force of can. 776 § 1, n. 2, can permit, according to his prudent judgment and conscience, from a just and reasonable cause, in some extraordinary case, that baptism be solemnly administered at home; but to estimate the gravity of the extraordinary case is remitted to the prudence and conscience of the Ordinary himself in the individual cases.

But when a report had been made concerning the premises to Our Most Holy Lord Pius Pope XI by the undersigned Secretary of the Sacred Congregation on the discipline of the Sacraments in the audience of the day 4 July 1925, Our Most Holy Lord held ratified and confirmed the resolution of the Eminent Fathers. Given at Rome, from the buildings of the Sacred Congregation de Sacramentis, on the day 22 July 1925.

A. Capotosti, Bishop of Terme, Secretary.

86. (Pag. 612.) For understanding more clearly each of Questions 3 and 4 it will help to consult the Roman Missal: De defect. in cel. Miss. occur., n. 1: "But a defect can happen on the part of the matter to be consecrated, on the part of the form to be employed, and on the part of the minister confecting. Whatever of these is lacking, namely due matter, form with intention, and priestly order in the one confecting, the Sacrament is not confected. And with these existing, whatever other things are lacking, the truth of the Sacrament is present." Now the same Missal, in the same place V, 1, adds: "But the words of consecration which are the form of this Sacrament are these: This is my Body; and For this is the Chalice of my Blood ... unto the remission of sins." Therefore the words: Who the day before He suffered, and In like manner pertain to those other things of which the Missal says: "whatever other things are lacking, the truth of the Sacrament is present."

It will also help to add the words of the Holy Synod of Mount Lebanon celebrated in the year 1736, held in great esteem by the Supreme Pontiffs Benedict XIV and Clement XIII and confirmed by the former: "But if anyone should diminish or change something from the form of consecration of the body and blood, and in the very change of the words the words did not signify the same thing, he would not confect the Sacrament. But if he should add something which did not change the signification, he would indeed confect it, but would sin most gravely. (De def. c. Mis. v.)

"But the substantial words and those altogether necessary for completing the consecration are these: This is my body: and This is the chalice of my Blood, or This is my blood: which words, as from the person of Christ and with actual or at least virtual intention of consecrating, must be pronounced clearly and distinctly.

"Nevertheless we profess first that the consecration of the body and blood of the Lord is completed and consummated by those words, This is my Body, and This is the chalice of my Blood, so that nothing else is required for the substantial consecration itself." Const. and Can. of the Holy Synod of Mount Lebanon, a. 1736, Part II c. xii, n. 8. And afterwards in n. 9 they add: "But those who say that the evangelical words: This is my Body; This is my Blood, are not consecrative of the Eucharist, but this prayer, the epiclesis, ... we detest, denounce, and anathematize." And it must be noted that this Synod of Mount Lebanon cites the integral form of the first and the other consecration from the Roman Missal and the words: "if anyone ... should diminish," and then adds "But the substantial words, etc." - Cf. Umberg in Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie, v. 50, p. 83 and following.

87. (Pag. 661.) Worthy indeed to be commemorated is the concession of offering Mass from midnight in nocturnal adoration in a Eucharistic congress. "But if, at the time of some Eucharistic Congress, the August Sacrament, as is the custom, is exposed for public adoration through the whole night, we grant that one Mass can be offered from midnight, in which it is lawful for all those standing by to approach the sacred Synaxis; priests who have been present at nocturnal adoration of this kind, after the first Mass which we have mentioned has been completed, or after the first hour after midnight has passed, can perform the Sacred rite; but all clerics constituted in sacred Orders, and religious men who are held to reciting the canonical Hours, present at the nocturnal adoration, while the same endures, can recite in place of their proper Office the Office of the Most Holy Sacrament."

Apostolic Letter "Quod ad Conventus," 7 March 1924.

(88. Pag. 664.) The S. C. on the Discipline of the Sacraments thus explains the faculty of celebrating Mass in the open air according to the norm of can. 822 C.J.C.

"From this it is easy to infer that the faculties of Ordinaries in this respect are quite limited, since they cannot be exercised except in some extraordinary case, nor without a just and reasonable cause, which must be uniquely inspired by the highest reasons of divine worship or by the spiritual good of the faithful. It is then useful to inculcate and practice these disciplinary norms with due severity, in order to elevate and purify the religious sentiment of the people."

S. C. on the Discipline of the Sacraments, 26 July 1924.

89. (Pag. 845.) The favor of law which marriage enjoys consists in this, that one must stand for its validity until the contrary is proved.

The reason for this matter is the requirement of the common good, of offspring, and of the family, whenever there is question of a marriage which, duly celebrated, is in possession. Therefore, unless it is proved that the marriage is of no value, one must stand for its validity both in the external forum and in the internal forum. Otherwise all things would be thrown into confusion. And it must be noted that this favor must be given also to marriages contracted in infidelity and in possession.

But the fact of the celebration must be proved, and, if it is doubtful, "one must see whether the marriage concerning whose existence the missionary doubts can deservedly claim possession for itself. For if this happens, it would be judged wrongly by the missionary that one must stand for its invalidity, since the rights of possession must be observed, until the contrary is clearly established." Instruction of the S. C. of the Holy Office, 18 Dec. 1872. That a marriage can show possession for itself "is verified when those joined together in good faith think that they are living in a true and legitimate marriage, and others suffer no scandal from that union, because they think it to be legitimate; even in this case the aforesaid principle (one must stand for the validity of marriage) would prevail, and it would not be lawful to depart from it." S. C. S. O., 24 Jan. 1877, n. 2.

With the prescription of Canon 1127 being saved. That canon has itself thus: in a doubtful matter the privilege of the faith enjoys the favor of law; or, as Benedict XIV says in the Constitution Probe te, "in a doubtful matter one must pronounce in favor of the faith is a constant rule." And indeed this rule is itself divine; and therefore, when a conflict of law seems to exist, this rule itself must be followed; and by force of this favor judgment must be made for the liberty of the Catholic party to enter into new nuptials or to remain in new ones.

Thus, in the case of doubt whether the Pauline Privilege has place only when the infidel departs from hatred of the faith, or also when he departs on account of some other cause different from the faith, the response was: "Since the favor of the faith militates on the part of the converted spouse, he can use it from whatever cause, provided it is just." S. C. of the Holy Office, 5 Aug. 1759. In another case, an infidel woman converted to the faith, when her infidel husband as consort refused to cohabit, was rightly permitted to enter marriage with a Catholic. And "What has been granted to the woman by favor of the faith must also, by favor of the faith, be granted to the man." Hence if that man afterwards is converted to the faith, he can marry a Christian woman. Thus S. C. of the Holy Office, 16 Sept. 1824, ad 1. When there is question of the application of the Pauline Privilege, the doubt varies according to the various conditions of that Privilege. There is doubt concerning the fact of the marriage entered into; concerning the validity of the marriage entered into; concerning the fact or concerning the validity of the baptism of the party who is said to have been converted; concerning the sincerity of the response of the infidel party; concerning other circumstances which can occur.

From canon 1127, according to the responses of the Holy Office, the presumption for the validity of marriage must yield to the presumption in favor of the faith or of the liberty of the one converted to the faith; wherefore, in similar doubts, one must stand for the invalidity of the doubtful marriage. From this a difficulty can arise here; for if the case does not fall clearly under the Pauline Privilege, then for what reason could it be said: "one must stand for invalidity by favor of the faith," since perhaps the marriage was valid? Namely, in order to declare this matter more explicitly, we must recur to the full power of the Supreme Pontiff, insofar as there is need, dissolving the prior marriage.

• Cf. Wernz-Vidal, v. 5, nn. 44, 631 and following. - Arendt, Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, v. 1, p. 174.

Cases. - 1. Titius and Bertha, infidels, formerly mingled together as spouses and have already been separated from one another for four years. Titius, now a Catholic, wishes to enter marriage with a Catholic woman; he does not know whether a conjugal pact ever existed with Bertha.

R. In favor of the faith a document of freedom can be given to him, pontifical power intervening.

2. Titius and Maria entered marriage in infidelity, but the ceremony was omitted which among many is held as necessary for validity; hence there was doubt whether it was really a marriage. After divorce Maria entered nuptials with an infidel. But Titius is converted to the faith and wishes to enter marriage with a Catholic woman.

R. That doubt can be a doubt of law, and then the marriage is null, or of fact, and then in favor of the faith the Pope can intervene.

3. Titius was baptized in a sect, and after the impediment for heretics had been removed, he entered nuptials with Martha, an infidel. The marriage is valid. But now Titius, abandoned by the infidel consort, and received into the Church with baptism conferred conditionally, wishes to be bound by a new marriage. It is not indeed the case of the Apostle; but the prior marriage was legitimate and not ratified. Now Titius can obtain its dissolution, so that he may enter marriage with a Catholic woman. But if before the dissolution of the legitimate marriage the other infidel party has been baptized validly, the marriage becomes ratified; and until it has been consummated, it can be dissolved.

90. (Pag. 851.) Decree of the S. Congregation of the Holy Office. Most Blessed Father: -

The Bishop of Helena, most humbly prostrate at the feet of Your Holiness ...

sets forth: On the day 30 September, 1919, at ..., G. G. M., a non-baptized non-Catholic, entered marriage with F. E. G., a non-Catholic baptized in the Anglican sect, before a heretical preacher of the Anglican sect, and consequently without any dispensation obtained. On the day 4 November, 1920, G. G. M. obtained a civil divorce from F. E. G. Now G. G. M. desires to embrace the Catholic faith and to enter marriage with a Catholic girl. F. E. G. has already entered new nuptials. Wherefore he supplicates Your Holiness that a dispensation be granted over the natural bond of the first marriage.

Feria IV, the day 5 November, 1924.

In the General Congregation of the S. R. and U. Inquisition, when the above-written supplicant libellus had been proposed, and with attention given to what had been set forth and the vote of the Reverend Lord Consultors having been previously had, the Eminent and Most Reverend Lord Cardinals, General Inquisitors in matters of faith and morals, decreed: "That His Holiness be advised for the grace of dissolution of the natural bond of the first marriage contracted by G. G. M. with F. E. G. in favor of the faith."

But on the following Feria V of the same month and year, the Most Holy Lord, Our Lord Pius, by divine providence Pope XI, in the audience granted to the Reverend Father Lord Assessor of the Holy Office, after a report concerning this matter had been had, deigned to approve the resolution of the Eminent Fathers and to grant the requested grace. All things whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding. Aloisius Castellano, Notary of the Supreme S. C. of the Holy Office.

L. + S.

"George, baptized by heretics, was legitimately married to an infidel woman. But, a little afterwards, she abandons her husband, returns into her family, and marries an infidel. George, for his part, embraces the Catholic religion, and since it is too hard for him to keep continence, he regularly interpellates his first wife and afterwards contracts marriage before the missionary with a Catholic person. The missionary, indeed, basing himself on the opinion of certain authors, judged the marriage of the heretical George with an infidel woman equivalent to a marriage concluded in infidelity.

"Consequently it is asked: Is the second marriage of George valid, whether the baptism which he received from the heretical minister was doubtful, or whether it was valid?"

Response. - "Thursday, 10 July 1924.

"Our Most Holy Father Pope Pius XI, in the audience which he granted to the Rev. Assessor of the Holy Office, after hearing the report of the above supplication, deigned to grant the favor of the dispensation from the marriage contracted with the infidel woman, so that, by renewing the consent ad cautelam, the husband may validly contract a new marriage with the Catholic person with whom he lives. All things whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding."

91. (Pag. 852.) The marriage must be contracted with a Catholic party according to canons 1123, 1124; it would be contracted invalidly with an infidel party, illicitly with a baptized non-Catholic party. The Church rarely grants a dispensation either over disparity of worship or over mixed religion; nor can the general faculty over these impediments be applied.

92. (Pag. 853.) Document VI. - From the Constitution of Paul PP. III, "Altitudo," 1 June 1537.

"Indeed, since, as we have received not without great and spiritual joy of our mind, very many inhabitants of western and southern India, although they are without experience of the divine law, nevertheless, with the Holy Spirit cooperating, having been enlightened, have cast entirely from their minds and hearts the errors which until now they have observed, and desire and propose to embrace the truth of the Catholic faith and the unity of the Holy Church, and to live according to the rite of the same Roman Church ...

"But concerning their marriages, we decree that this is to be observed, that those who before conversion had several wives according to their customs, and do not remember which one they first received, being converted to the faith, should receive one of them, whichever they wish, whom they may marry by words of the present, as is customary; but those who remember which one they first received, the others being dismissed, should retain her. And we grant to them that, being joined even in the third degree both of consanguinity and of affinity, they should not be excluded from contracting marriages until it shall have seemed good to this Holy See to establish something else on this matter ..."

a) In this Constitution there is question of polygamists who do not remember which wife they first received;

b) it is granted that converts to the faith, not remembering her, may receive from among the wives whichever they prefer, whom they may marry by words of the present;

c) but those who remember which one they first received must retain this one;

d) the necessity of interpellation is simply taken away.

Document VII. - From the Constitution of S. Pius PP. V, "Romani Pontificis," 2 Aug. 1571.

"Since therefore, as we have received, to Indians remaining in their infidelity several wives are permitted, whom they themselves repudiate even for the lightest causes, hence it has happened that it has been permitted to those receiving baptism to remain with that wife who is baptized together with her husband; and because very often it happens that she is not the first spouse, whence both ministers and Bishops are tormented by very grave scruples, thinking that that is not a true marriage; but because it would be very hard to separate them from the wives with whom those Indians themselves received baptism, especially because it would be most difficult to find the first spouse; therefore we, wishing to provide kindly with paternal affection for the state of the said Indians, and to free the Bishops themselves and ministers from scruples of this kind, of our own motion and from our certain knowledge, and from the fullness of apostolic power, by apostolic authority, by the tenor of the presents, declare that the Indians, baptized thus as is premised, and to be baptized in the future, can remain with the wife who with them has been baptized and shall be baptized, as with a legitimate wife, the others being dismissed, and that marriage of this kind between them legitimately stands, etc."

a) In this Constitution there is question of infidel polygamists who after conversion take as wife one from among the prior wives, whichever they wish, who has been baptized with the husband, although he himself may know which one was first taken;

b) it is established that they can remain with that one thus chosen and baptized, both with regard to the past and with regard to the future;

c) those marriages are declared to be legitimate between them;

d) the necessity of interpellation is taken away.

Document VIII. - Constitution of Gregory PP. XIII, "Populis," 25 January 1585.

"Wherefore we, considering that marriages of this kind contracted among infidels are indeed true, yet are not to be considered so ratified that, when necessity counsels, they cannot be dissolved, moved with paternal piety for the infirmity of such peoples, to all and each of the Ordinaries and parish priests of the said places, and to the priests of the Society of Jesus approved by the Superiors of the same Society for hearing confessions and for the time being sent to the said regions or admitted in them, grant by apostolic authority, by the tenor of the presents, the full faculty of dispensing with any Christian faithful of either sex, inhabitants of the said regions and later converted to the faith, who before baptism received contracted marriage, so that any one of them, while the infidel spouse survives, and with that spouse's consent by no means required, or with the response not awaited, may lawfully contract marriages with any faithful person even of another rite, and solemnize them in the face of the Church, and afterwards, after they have been consummated by carnal copula, remain in them as long as they live: provided that it is established, even summarily and extrajudicially, that the spouse absent as said above cannot legitimately be warned, or, having been warned, did not signify his or her will within the time prefixed in the same warning. And we decree that these marriages indeed, even if afterwards it should become known that the prior infidel spouses, being justly impeded, could not have declared their will, and had even been converted to the faith at the time of the transacted second marriage, nevertheless must never be rescinded, but are valid and firm, and that the offspring to be received thence will be legitimate. Things to the contrary notwithstanding, etc."

a) In this Constitution there is question of any infidels whatsoever;

b) the faculty is granted of dispensing from interpellations in the circumstances commemorated, and of entering marriage in the aforesaid cases; and

c) it is added, "these marriages indeed, even if afterwards it should become known that the prior infidel spouses, being justly impeded, could not have declared their will, and had even been converted to the faith at the time of the transacted second marriage, nevertheless must never be rescinded, but are valid and firm ... we decree." Wherefore

d) new marriages can validly be entered, without any interpellation, from dispensation, and this even though each party of the prior marriage at the time of the second marriage had already received baptism; therefore this is not the case of the Apostle, by which it is permitted to the faithful spouse to contract nuptials if the infidel departs. Wherefore

e) Gregory appeals not to the Pauline Privilege but to the fullness of apostolic power and just causes: "it is expedient to indulge those converted to the Catholic faith concerning liberty of contracting marriages, lest men not at all accustomed to preserving continence should on that account persist less willingly in the faith, and deter others from its perception by their example." "We, considering that marriages of this kind contracted among infidels are indeed true, yet are not to be considered so ratified that, when necessity counsels, they cannot be dissolved." Therefore the Supreme Pontiff has recourse to the fact that those marriages are less firm than those which, when necessity counsels, cannot be dissolved. But, with whatever necessity counseling, the ratified and consummated marriage of two baptized persons cannot be dissolved. Therefore this bond is stronger than the aforesaid marriages concerning which Gregory speaks. Whence a marriage consummated in infidelity, after the conversion of one to the faith, can be dissolved, as is evident.

A marriage entered in the infidelity of both parties, and consummated after the conversion of only one, can similarly be dissolved.

The marriage of two converted persons consummated before baptism, but not afterwards, on account of the reason of the Sacrament, is a stronger bond than a marriage consummated in infidelity before the conversion of one; in the one case the reason of the Sacrament is had on account of the Baptism of both, but not in the other. Since therefore Gregory dissolved the former bond, which certainly was stronger, the Supreme Pontiff can dissolve the other bond, less strong.

It is added: We, considering that marriages of this kind contracted among infidels are not to be considered so ratified that, when necessity counsels, they cannot be dissolved. Hence such pontifical power must be admitted as often as necessity counsels. Therefore, when such a marriage begins, by reason of the baptism of one, to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Church, the Supreme Pontiff must be considered to have the power of dissolving the bond.

The same is evident from other documents: for example, among the Faculties, Form III, this is had:

"The faculty is granted of dispensing with gentiles and infidels, so that after conversion and baptism they can retain whichever of them they prefer, if she also becomes faithful, unless the first should wish to be converted."

This power is certainly not contained in the Pauline Privilege; for if the first should be unwilling to be converted but should wish to cohabit peacefully, by force of the Privilege the faithful party cannot pass to a new marriage. Therefore the dissolution comes from the full pontifical power, in favor of the faith.

Here there is had a case of legitimate marriage which nevertheless the Pontiff can dissolve independently of the Pauline Privilege.

Furthermore, it is evident, since the marriage is not ratified, that the same must be said of a valid legitimate marriage entered after the Code between a baptized heretic, for example an Anglican, and a non-baptized person, before an Anglican minister, as is evident from the very recent example of the use of pontifical power over such a marriage, when one of the consorts entered the Catholic Church. S. Off., 5 Nov. 1924.

93. (Pag. 857.) Cases. -

94. Titius and Bertha, Catholics, duly enter and consummate marriage. It is ratified and consummated.

95. Titius and Berthelda, Catholics, duly enter marriage and do not consummate it. It is ratified only.

96. Marcus, a Catholic, and Bertina, a baptized heretic, duly enter marriage with the due dispensation, and consummate it. It is ratified and consummated.

97. Martinus, a Catholic, and Bertilla, a baptized Episcopalian, enter marriage without dispensation before the parish priest of the place, unaware of the bride's heresy, and they consummate the marriage. It is ratified and consummated.

98. After the Code of Law has been published, Martellus and Bertella, both baptized in the Episcopalian heresy, enter marriage before a little minister of the heresy and consummate it. It is ratified and consummated.

99. Tertius, a baptized heretic, enters marriage after the Code with Maria, non-baptized, before a Judge according to the laws of the State, and they consummate it. The marriage is legitimate.

100. Tertillus and Maldina, both infidels, duly enter marriage and consummate it; then Tertillus receives baptism among the Baptists, and when this has been done Maldina leaves him. The marriage is legitimate.

101. Terentius and Balda, infidels, duly enter marriage, and they consummate it both before and after the Baptism received by Balda in the Episcopalian sect; then Terentius leaves her. The marriage is legitimate.

9 and 10. Terillus and Balbula, infidels, duly enter marriage and consummate it; then, after a civil divorce has been obtained from one another, Terillus is baptized in the Catholic Church and, with dispensation from interpellating Balbula, whom he could not find, at the time when Balbula herself had been baptized, entered marriage with the Catholic Martilla and consummated it. The second marriage is ratified and consummated. The first marriage is dissolved, ratified only.

The first marriage is indissoluble.

The second is dissoluble on account of just causes.

The third marriage is indissoluble.

The fourth marriage is indissoluble.

The fifth marriage is indissoluble.

The sixth marriage is dissoluble.

The seventh marriage is dissoluble.

The eighth marriage is dissoluble.

The ninth marriage is dissolved and the tenth indissoluble.

94. (Pag. 865.) The Sacred Congregation of Rites responded, 14 June, 1918:

When the aforesaid Ordinaries permit the nuptial blessing on the Nativity of the Lord and the Sunday of the Resurrection, it is lawful to add to the prayer of the Mass of the respective Feast a commemoration for the spouses under one conclusion.

When the same Ordinaries, from a just cause, permit the solemn blessing of nuptials in the closed time, the votive Mass for spouses can be celebrated, except however on Sundays, feasts of precept, even of the I and II class, privileged Octaves of the I and II order, privileged Feasts, and the vigils of the Nativity of the Lord, Pentecost, and Epiphany. Acta Apostolicae Sedis, vol. x, p. 332.

95. (Pag. 888.) Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office.

Rome, 21 December 1924.

Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord!

There have been brought to this Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office the petitions of Your Amplitude, in which you ask whether the impediment of disparity of cult, concerning which in Can. 1079, C. J. C., is restricted to the marriage of Catholics with non-baptized persons, or whether it is also to be applied to marriages of baptized non-Catholics with non-baptized persons. I signify to you, in the name of the same Congregation, that this impediment, according to the norm of Can. 1070 itself, binds Catholics, but not non-Catholics, unless these have been baptized in the Catholic Church or converted to it. The matter is so clear that it is lawful to have no doubt about it.

And I pray for all prosperous and happy things for you from the Lord. Most devoted,

R. Card. Merry del Val.

To the Most Illustrious and Most Reverend Lord Archbishop of Freiburg.

"A certain man, by the name Thac, born in the year 1898 of infidel parents, in infantile age was baptized by a certain Catholic physician, when danger of death was imminent, without his parents knowing it; afterwards he was educated entirely in infidelity, and contracted marriage according to the custom of his country, around the end of the year 1918, with a pagan girl whose name was Nam.

"Through the whole year 1919, the spouses conducted themselves happily; but in the year 1920, when the wife was fostering impure loves with a certain gentile, the husband several times gravely reproved her concerning the vice. Bearing this badly, around the end of the year 1920, the most wicked wife bade farewell to the conjugal home.

"In the course of the year 1921, Thac, with his parents and very many other inhabitants of this village, wishing to embrace the Catholic religion, approached the missionary, and asked him that he be enrolled among the catechumens. The missionary, inquiring concerning the past life of the neophyte, discovered that he had already been joined in a legitimate marriage; but that conjugal life had been dissolved on account of the vices of the wife; but now that he was no longer willing to receive the adulteress; wherefore there was in him the desire of entering a new marriage after baptism with some Catholic woman.

"While the neophyte was still learning catechism and prayers, the missionary heard from the Christian physician who formerly had baptized Thac, when danger of death was imminent, that baptism had been conferred validly on him while he was still a little infant, and that this had never been disclosed either to Thac himself or to his parents.

"From this the missionary became perplexed concerning the new marriage intended by the neophyte Thac."

"From the new law, he judges that the marriage contracted by him around the end of the year 1918 was valid, and cannot be rescinded either by the Pauline privilege or in another way, because it is equivalent to a marriage entered with dispensation from the impediment of disparity of cult.

"Since the opinions of missionaries whom I was able to consult concerning a marriage of this kind are diverse, I humbly ask Your Holiness that you deign to solve the following doubts:

"1. Whether the marriage contracted by the man Thac at the end of the year 1918 was valid?

"2. If it was valid, whether it can be rescinded by force of the Pauline privilege, so that Thac can, with the wife interpellated and responding negatively, enter another marriage with some Catholic woman?

"And God ...."

The S. C. of Propaganda responded on 1 April 1922:

"I communicate to Your Amplitude that the S. Congregation of the Holy Office has examined the matrimonial case Thac-Nam of that Vicariate, and responded that this marriage Thac-Nam must be declared by you null, on account of the impediment of disparity of cult.

"As I communicate these things to you, I pray God .... + P. Fumasoni-Biondi, Archbishop of Diocletian, Secretary, G.-M. Card. Van Rossum, Prefect."

On Contracted Marriages: (Can. 1070 No. 2.) Titus and Bertha, Catholics, have been joined by the nuptial covenant; and afterwards a doubt arose concerning the Baptism of one or both, which, investigation having been made, cannot be solved. One must stand for the validity of the marriage as long as it is not certainly established that one party was baptized and the other was not baptized. The reason is that marriage enjoys the favor of law - therefore a presumption of law is admitted for it - which nevertheless yields to truth. In the case brought forward, let the doubtfully baptized party be baptized under condition, or both parties, if both are doubtfully baptized; but without prejudice to the marriage, that is, without loss of the presumption in favor of the validity of the marriage.

But if nevertheless afterwards it is clearly established that the Baptism of one certainly did not exist or was invalid, while that of the other was certainly valid, the marriage would be invalid; namely, if the parties did not renew consent.

Thomas, a Catholic, certainly baptized, duly entered marriage with Clarissa, a heretic doubtfully baptized. One must stand for validity. If, investigation having been made, the doubt remains, they are to be held as true spouses, until it is proved with certainty that one party was baptized and the other was not; but if this should occur, the marriage would be null.

Tarsus, a Catholic, doubtfully baptized, entered nuptials with a heretic doubtfully baptized; the marriage must be held valid until it is established with certainty that one party was baptized and the other was not.

Tardus and Cita, Albus and Rubra, Laetus and Afflicta, heretics, who never pertained to the Catholic Church either by reason of baptism in it or by reason of conversion to it, after marriages happily entered were found as follows: Tardus and Cita doubtfully baptized; Albus and Rubra invalidly baptized; Laetus invalidly and Afflicta certainly baptized. All those marriages are valid under this head, because disparity of cult does not comprehend them.

George, held as a Catholic, entered marriage with Martha, a heretic. After some months a doubt was found that the baptism of George and Martha was null. As the law says, one must stand, according to the norm of Can. 1014, for the value of the marriage, until it is certainly proved that one party is baptized and the other not baptized. But this is not certainly proved.

Titius, a dying infant, was baptized in the Catholic Church; he is the son of infidels, who were ignorant of the matter; from infantile age he was educated in heresy and finally entered marriage with an infidel woman. After a year his baptism is certainly proved; the marriage is null. And therefore he who is a heretic, but once subject to the impediments of the Church by reason of baptism in the Catholic Church, is treated as a Catholic in this matter. Cf. Response of the S. C. de Prop. Fide, 1 April 1922.

96. (Pag. 940.) With danger of death pressing, the force of canon 1043 obtains:

1º from whatever source the danger may arise and even though the parties are not sick;

2º even though the danger is not so imminent that time is lacking for having recourse to the Holy See.

97. (Pag. 961.) Doubt: "Whether the response of the Commission for authentically interpreting the canons of the Code, given 2-3 June, 1919, under n. 7, while at the end it added that etc., is to be understood so that marriages of this kind always need dispensation or sanation, or rather can also be convalidated according to the norm of cc. 1133 § 1 and 1135?"

The response was made by the Eminent Cardinal President of the Commission: "In the doubt in question (which for the rest is such as was presented by the bishop of Malta), there is not the word always; and that etc. means precisely that such marriages must be convalidated according to the norm of can. 1133 and following." That is, in Latin: In the doubt concerning which there is question (and which remained as it was offered by the Bishop of Malta) the word always is not read; and that etc. definitely signifies that those marriages are to be convalidated according to the norm of can. 1133 and following. - Cf. at Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. IX, p. 154.

Wherefore, after the impediment has ceased, it is required that at least the party conscious of the impediment renew consent. This renewal must be a new act of the will into a marriage which is established to have been null from the beginning. If the impediment was public, or one which can be proved, consent must be renewed in the form prescribed by law, i.e., before the parish priest and two witnesses (can. 1094); but if the impediment was occult, the renewal of consent can be made without the form prescribed by law. Cf. below, n. 98.

98. (Pag. 965.) Before the Code, when after marriage had been entered a dispensation had been given over an occult impediment known to only one party, the clause was added, "the said woman (or man) having been informed of the nullity of the prior consent, but so cautiously that the delict of the bearer is never detected"; then afterwards the clause was added, "and insofar as this notification cannot be made without grave danger, with consent renewed according to approved authors." Confer Comp. Theol., ed. 24, p. 954. Now, with the Code promulgated, an easier solution seems to be open: for canons 1133, 1134 have established thus: to convalidate a marriage invalid on account of a diriment impediment, it is required that the impediment cease or be dispensed, and that at least the party conscious of the impediment renew consent. Accordingly, after the cessation of the impediment or the dispensation, each party, if each was conscious of the impediment, must furnish new consent, or at least the party conscious of the impediment must consent by a new act into the marriage, knowing that the marriage was null. In the case brought forward, now nothing else is required except that the party conscious of the occult impediment himself or herself consent by a new act.

But the manner of renewing is diverse according to the diverse impediment, namely public or occult. Can. 1135.

(A) Let there be an impediment of consanguinity on account of which the marriage entered between Titius and Bertha is null. With the impediment removed by dispensation, consent must be renewed by each party in the prescribed form, i.e., before the parish priest and witnesses. Can. 1135, § 1. The reason is that it must publicly be established for the Church concerning the validity of the marriage, concerning which it is not established from the prescribed form previously employed, because rather, by reason of the public impediment, the nullity of the marriage is established.

Suppose secondly that Marcus and Martina entered marriage in the prescribed form, concerning which now it is established that it was null on account of that impediment. With a dispensation obtained, Marcus and Martina must renew consent in the prescribed form. Yet they are inhabitants of the countryside, and the absence of the Ordinary, the parish priest, or a delegate is going to last for a month; therefore these persons can enter marriage before witnesses alone. Can. 1098, n. 1.

It must be noted that the convalidation is publicly established by the prescribed form being employed again; indeed, per se it suffices, with the license of the Ordinary, that the public form be used secretly, others besides the Parish Priest and witnesses being excluded.

(B) Titius and Bertha, conscious only of the crime of adultery, entered marriage in the prescribed form with no dispensation obtained. The impediment is known to each party and to the confessor, who, having obtained permission, obtains the dispensation. In the case, since the impediment is occult and known to each party, it is enough that consent be renewed by each party privately and secretly. Since the prior public celebration or external manifestation of consent was of no value, it is now required that each party renew consent between themselves by an external act; nevertheless it is not required that the renewal be made in the prescribed form, because the nullity of the effect of the prior public celebration remained occult; nor is there need that the juridical form be observed, for once this form has been had, it is a sufficient proof of the bond, as long as the nullity from that impediment remains occult.

(C) Tardus and Martha entered marriage in the prescribed form; however, since the marriage was contracted before the Code was promulgated and Tardus, before he contracted, had relations with Martha's sister, the marriage was invalid because of affinity from illicit copula. Now at last Tardus is conscious of this nullity, and narrates the matter to Arnulphus the confessor. In this case, since by the Code the impediment of affinity has been removed, the parties are now able for marriage; and because the impediment was occult and known to only one party, it is enough that only the party conscious of the impediment, i.e., Tardus, privately and secretly renew consent, provided that the other perseveres in consent; and thus the consent renewed by Tardus, joined with the persevering consent of Martha, suffices for convalidating the marriage. Can. 1135, § 3. Nor is it in any way required that it be made known to the other party that an impediment had stood in the way of the marriage.

99. (Pag. 1037.) A priest falls into the sin of procuring abortion. He is the only priest in a sufficiently large village of the diocese N..., and besides he cannot obtain a substitute before two years. The unhappy man is ensnared by excommunication latae sententiae reserved to Ordinaries, Can. 2350, and also by irregularity from delict, Can. 985, § 4. The matter is occult and the case fictitious.

The Ordinary or his delegate can absolve from the excommunication, Can. 2350, § 1, but over that irregularity the Roman Pontiff alone can dispense, Can. 990, § 1.

Therefore, in the case of that priest, the only remedy is to have recourse to the Supreme Pontiff for obtaining a dispensation. The impediment is perpetual, Can. 983.

Is it ever lawful for such a one to exercise any act of order?

1º. Certainly in extreme necessity, and that alone, he can give the sacraments to the dying.

Besides, 2º. It must be noted that the prohibition of exercising an act of order follows the nature of other ecclesiastical prohibitions, and therefore does not urge with grave inconvenience. Thus Gasparri, t. 1, n. 171. But if the irregularity is such that it can in no way be manifested without grave danger, as sometimes it will be able to be, it does not need dispensation. Cf. D'Annibale, n. 486, n. 19; Ballerini, t. 7, n. 417, 5. In these quasi-penalties from delict, irregulars can be treated in a similar way as censured persons or those ensnared by vindicative penalties. Can. 2261, § 2; Can. 2290, §§ 1, 2. In more urgent occult cases, if from observance of the vindicative penalty the guilty party would betray himself with infamy and scandal, any confessor can in the sacramental forum suspend the observance of the penalty with the burden of having recourse.

Hence the priest can perform an act of order in a case of infamy and scandal, when the faithful demand or ask this and he cannot reject them without grave damage. And he can defer the petition of dispensation as long as the danger of revelation is present. When that has been removed, he is bound as soon as possible to ask dispensation from the Holy See.

100. (Pag. 1040.) Resolution. - The Eminent Fathers of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, in the plenary meetings held at the Vatican on the day 13 June 1925, all things having been weighed, to the doubt which follows, namely:

"Whether the declarations of the S. C. C. of the years 1890 and 1923, by which the duels customary in the Universities of Germany, which by the special name Bestimmungmensuren are called, are subjected to ecclesiastical penalties, regard only those duels, according to the opinion of some more recent persons, which are committed with danger of grave wound, or also include those which are done without danger of grave wound in the case?" ordered the response to be made:

"Negative to the first part. Affirmative to the other."

Which resolution, with the undersigned Secretary reporting, in the audience of the day 20 of the same month and year, Our Most Holy Lord Pius PP. XI deigned to approve and confirm. Julius, Bishop of Lampsacus, Secretary. Acta Apostolicae Sedis - Vol. XVIII, p. 137.

101. (Pag. 1076.) Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary. - Doubt Concerning Rosaries Made From Glass.

The following doubt was exhibited to the Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary for an opportune solution:

The Sacred Congregation of Indulgences, on the day 29 February 1820, ad 2, expressly declared that Rosaries can be enriched with Indulgences even if made from glass or crystal, provided that the beads are made from solid and compact glass.

But in Warning n. 1, prefixed to the authentic list of Apostolic Indulgences, edited on the day 17 February 1922, it is read thus: "Things apt to receive the blessing for gaining Apostolic Indulgences are only Chaplets, Rosaries, Crosses, Crucifixes, small Statues, Medals, provided they are not made from tin, lead, glass, or any other similar material, which can easily be broken or consumed." Hence it is asked:

Whether that which in the cited Warning is established thus in general and simply concerning Rosaries which are made from glass must be understood according to the course of the aforesaid declaration of the Sacred Congregation of Indulgences?

And the Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary, on the day 24 November 1925, responded: Affirmatively.

But after a report concerning the premises had been made to Our Most Holy Lord Pius, by divine Providence Pope XI, by the undersigned Cardinal Major Penitentiary, in the Audience of the day 18 December 1925, the same Most Holy Lord kindly approved the response of the Sacred Penitentiary and ordered it to be made public.

Given at Rome, from the Sacred Apostolic Penitentiary, on the day 21 December 1925. Fr. Andreas Card. Fruhwirth, Major Penitentiary. S. Fagiolo, Secretary of the S. P.

102. (Pag. 580.) Monsters and prodigies should always be baptized at least under condition: If you are a human being, I baptize you, etc. But in doubt whether there is one human being or several, one should be baptized absolutely, the others under condition: If you are not baptized, I baptize you, etc. - Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. II, c. 1, n. 22.

103. (Pag. 591.) Let the baptistery be in a decent place and form, and of solid material, and one which contains water well, decently adorned, and surrounded by rails, furnished with lock and key, and so locked that dust or other filth does not penetrate within; and in it, where it can conveniently be done, let there be painted or placed an image of Saint John baptizing Christ. Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. II, c. 1, n. 46.

104. (Pag. 623.) "Consecrated particles, in that number which can suffice for the communion of the sick and of other faithful, are to be preserved perpetually in a pyx of solid and decent material, and this clean and well closed with its own cover, covered with a white silk veil and, as far as the matter permits, adorned." (Can. 1270).

105. (Pag. 331.) "The Parish Priest will also take pains, as far as can be done, that on the very day of Most Holy Easter the faithful communicate; on which day he himself, through himself, unless he is legitimately impeded, will minister this Sacrament to the faithful of his parish. But in other things he will observe what is prescribed below in the book on the state of souls." - Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. IV, c. 3, n. 4.

"He will also carry and minister it to the sick of the parish, even if they have received communion outside the prescribed paschal days, on the paschal days." ib. n. 5.

106. (Pag. 518.) Let the Parish Priest exhort the sick person to receive sacred communion, even if he is not gravely sick, or danger of death is not imminent, especially if the celebration of some feast suggests it; nor will he himself refuse to minister it. Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. IV, c. 4, n. 3.

107. (Pag. 620.) When from a just and reasonable cause sacred communion is carried privately to the sick, let the Priest always have at least a stole covered by his own garments; let him place the pyx in a little pouch or burse, which, hung from the neck by cords, he may place in his bosom; and let him never proceed alone, but be accompanied by at least one faithful person, in defect of a Cleric. But when he has arrived at the room of the sick person, let the Priest also put on a surplice with the stole, if he has not put that on previously. Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. IV, c. 4, n. 29.

108. (Pag. 683.) But when some grave necessity presses in danger of death, the Priest will be able to say briefly: I absolve you from all censures and sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, + and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. - Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. III, c. 2, n. 5.

109. (Pag. 800.) While the Priest anoints the eyes, ears, and other members of the body which are paired, let him take care that by anointing one of them he does not complete the form of the Sacrament before he has anointed both paired members of this kind. Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. V, c. 1, n. 18.

110. (Pag. 804.) The Sacrament of Extreme Unction ... is to be applied with all zeal and diligence to the dangerously sick, and indeed at that time, if it can be done, when for them mind and reason still flourish unimpaired, so that for perceiving a more abundant grace of the Sacrament they themselves may also contribute their faith and pious will of soul, while they are anointed with the sacred Oil. Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. V, c. 1, n. 1.

111. (Pag. 808.) When this sacrament is ministered to several sick persons at the same time, let the Priest offer to each sick person the cross to be devoutly kissed; let him recite once in the plural number all the prayers which precede the anointings; let him carry out the anointings with the respective forms upon each sick person; but let him say once in the plural number all the prayers which follow the anointings. Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. V, c. 1, n. 22.

112. (Pag. 808.) Moreover, the oil itself can be kept either by itself alone or in cotton or a similar thing; but for avoiding the danger of spilling, it is much more conveniently carried to the sick in cotton. Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. V, c. 1, n. 5.

113. (Pag. 123.) Sacred Congregation de Propaganda Fide. - Most Reverend Lord. - I am endeavoring to respond to your letters given on the day 12 of the current month of March, by which you propose some doubts concerning the privileges or faculties granted to Priests enrolled in the Pious Missionary Union of the Clergy.

The first doubt is proposed thus: "Whether an enrolled Priest, even outside the place in which he is approved for hearing sacramental confessions, can use a faculty for the use of which jurisdiction is prerequired?"

Resp. No jurisdiction is prerequired; only for "blessings" is it required that the Priest be approved for hearing sacramental confessions; or that he be a confessor. But since no distinction is made concerning the diverse places in which a Priest member of the Pious Union can be present, this circumstance of diversity of places is not to be attended to. It suffices to observe the limitation which is explicitly enunciated: "outside the City."

Through this response it seems provision has also been made for the fourth doubt concerning the interpretation of the word "place," which word is never materially found in the description of the faculties concerning which above.

The second doubt and the third doubt are proposed thus:

"2. Whether an enrolled priest, even in a place where there is a residence of religious of Orders to whom respectively the blessing and imposition of scapulars, concerning which in the faculty, are reserved, can bless and impose the same?

"3. Whether an enrolled priest, even in a place where there is a residence of Religious of the Friars Minor, can use the faculty of blessing with one sign of the Cross crucifixes with application of the indulgences of the pious exercise called the Way of the Cross?"

Resp. The limitation relative to religious who pertain to Orders whose own scapulars they are, or who are enrolled in the Order of Minors, is not enunciated in the text; and therefore it is not to be attended to.

Perhaps the doubt is founded on this, namely on the privilege proper to the Friars Minor concerning the erection of the Way of the Cross; but it must be noted that, in the case, there is not therefore question of the erection of the Way of the Cross, but only of attaching the Indulgences of the Way of the Cross to images of the Crucified.

These things had to be signified to you for my office; while I pray God O. M. that He may preserve you very long and keep you unharmed.

Your Reverence's most devoted servant. - Rome, 28 March 1927.

G. M. Card. Van Rossum, Prefect. Franciscus Marchetti-Selvaggiani, Archbishop of Seleucia, Secretary. Cf. Il Monitore Ecclesiastico, v. 39, p. 195.

114. Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Code of Canon Law. - Responses to Proposed Doubts. III. On the profession of faith.

(Pag. 158.) D. Whether Superiors in clerical Societies without vows, concerning which canons 673-681 treat, are bound to emit the profession of faith according to the norm of canon 1406, § 1, n. 9?

R. Affirmatively.

V. On those impeding ecclesiastical jurisdiction.

(Pag. 1028.) D. Whether, for incurring the excommunication concerning which in can. 2334 n. 2, recourse to the lay power for the cause of impeding the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction suffices, or whether it is required besides that the recourse obtain its effect.

R. Negatively to the first part, affirmatively to the second, with the prescription of canon 2235 nevertheless remaining firm.

Rome, the day 25 July 1926. A. A. S., v. xviii, p. 394.

115. (Pag. 162.) Although by positive law it is not prohibited to listen to heretical sermons transmitted by Radio, nevertheless by natural law it is prohibited to listen when the hearing constitutes an occasion of sinning or cooperation in evil. And therefore it is illicit to listen with the intention of adhering to perverse doctrine; or from an inclination toward it; or with such frequency that from it there arises danger for the faith, or scandal of others is had, who think the one listening himself to be wavering in faith, or think it lawful for themselves to hear habitually, and thus little by little the faith is endangered, which can easily happen if parents leave to their sons and younger members of the family the free use of the machine when these sermons are transmitted; in general it is illicit when the honor of God or of neighbor and one's own security require that someone not listen.

116. Maximilian Crespo, Archbishop of Popayan, reverently requested from the Sacred Congregation of Rites the solution of the following doubts; namely:

I. The Supreme Pontiff Pius X, of holy memory, on the day 18 May 1907, granted indulgences to the Christian faithful who devoutly look upon the sacred Host when it is elevated in the Sacrifice of the Mass, with the words added in that elevation of the eyes, "My Lord and my God!" Hence it is asked:

(Pag. 243.) 1. Whether the faithful assisting at Mass, at the elevation of the sacred Host, can pronounce with clear and raised voice the words "My Lord and my God!"? Whether also at the elevation of the Chalice?

(Pag. 670.) 2. Whether the celebrant himself can do the same, but in a subdued voice?

But the Sacred Congregation of Rites, after hearing the vote of a special Commission, with the proposed questions accurately weighed, judged that it should be responded thus:

To I. With regard to the first part, negatively in all things, according to the mind of the Ceremonial of Bishops, lib. II, cap. VII, n. 70, and of the general Decree n. 3827, ad III, of the day 22 May 1894.

With regard to the second part, negatively, according to canon 818 of the Code of Canon Law and the Rubrics of the Roman Missal. - The day 6 Nov., 1925. - A. A. S., v. xviii, p. 21.

117. (Pag. 334.) Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office - Instruction - To the Archbishops, Bishops, and other Ordinaries of Places: On the Sensual and Sensual-Mystical Genre of Literature.

Among the most deadly evils of this age, which utterly subvert Christian doctrine concerning morals and greatly harm souls, redeemed by the precious Blood of Jesus Christ, those genres of literature must especially be numbered which indulge sensuality and lust, or even a certain lascivious mysticism. Of this kind are chiefly novels, fictitious little narratives, dramas, comedies, of which writings indeed these times are incredibly fruitful, and everywhere a greater abundance is daily diffused.

But now it is not permitted to grieve sufficiently, as has been said, that from this abundance of books, in which, with a great fascination of frivolity, there is present an equal turpitude, the gravest loss of souls comes to exist. For very many writers of this kind depict immodest deeds with the most brilliant images; they narrate all the most obscene things, now covertly, now openly and impudently, with every law of chastity neglected; by a certain subtle analysis they describe carnal vices or the worst things, and adorn them with all the lights and enticements of speech, so that now nothing in morals is left inviolate. How pernicious all this is, especially to adolescents, for whom the fervor of age makes continence more difficult, there is no one who does not see. But those volumes, often thin, are displayed for sale at a small price at booksellers, through the streets and squares of cities, in the stations, as they are called, of the railway, and they come into the hands of all with marvelous rapidity, and frequently bring Christian families into great and mournful dangers. For who does not know that by literature of this kind the imagination is strongly excited, unbridled lust is vehemently enkindled, and the heart is drawn into the mud of turpitudes?

But far worse than other love stories are those usually put forth by those who, horrible to say, do not fear to give an honorable appearance to the food of diseased sensuality by means of sacred things, weaving into immodest loves a certain piety toward God and a religious mysticism, falsely indeed: as if Faith could be combined with neglect of the norm of living rightly, indeed with most shameless denial of it, and the virtue of religion could be joined with depravity of morals. On the contrary, it is certain that no one can obtain eternal life who, although he believes most firmly the truths divinely revealed, nevertheless does not keep the precepts given by God; since anyone who has professed the faith of Christ but does not walk in the footsteps of Christ does not even deserve the name of a Christian man: "Faith without works is dead" (Jas., 2, 26), and our Savior warned: "Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father, who is in heaven, he shall enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt., 7, 21).

Accordingly, having perceived the flood of lascivious literature, which year by year more widely inundates almost all nations, this Sacred Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, placed over the protection of faith and morals, by apostolic authority and in the name of Our Most Holy Lord Pius, by Divine Providence Pope XI, commands all Ordinaries of places that by every help by which they can they strive to remedy so great and so present an evil.

From the buildings of the Holy Office, the day 3 May 1927. R. Card. Merry Del Val, Secretary. Cf. A. A. S., v. xix, p. 186.

117 bis. (Pag. 339.) Sacred Congregation for the Oriental Church. Declaration - Since it had been asked by some whether Orientals are bound, like others, by decrees of condemnation of books and newspapers issued by the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, and special mention was made of the prohibition and penalties inflicted against that which they call "Action Française," the Sacred Congregation for the Oriental Church declares that the aforesaid decrees touch, or oblige in the same way, all the faithful of whatever rite, since they directly regard the doctrine of the Church rather than discipline. For Holy Mother Church wishes by decrees of this kind to preserve and protect faith and morals, and for this purpose the Code of Law, in canon 1396, openly establishes and sanctions that books condemned by the Apostolic See are to be considered prohibited everywhere and into whatever language they may be translated.

Rome, from the Buildings of the Sacred Congregation for the Oriental Church, on the day 26 May 1928. Aloisius Card. Sincero, Secretary. H. I. Cicognani, ad interim Assessor. - A. A. S., v. xx, p. 195.

118. (Pag. 340.) Doubt Concerning the Representation of the Holy Spirit Under Human Form - When a doubt had been proposed to this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office: "Whether the Holy Spirit can be represented under human form, either with the Father and the Son or separately."

Feria IV, the day 14 March 1928.

The Eminent and Reverend Lord Cardinals placed over the protection of faith and morals, after the vote of the Reverend Lord Consultors had been previously had, decreed that it should be responded: Negatively.

And on the following Feria V, the day 15 of the same month and year, Our Most Holy Lord, Our Lord Pius, by Divine Providence Pope XI, in the customary audience granted to the Reverend Father Lord Assessor of the Holy Office, approved and confirmed the response of the Eminent Fathers reported to Him, and ordered it to be published.

Given at Rome, from the buildings of the Holy Office, the day 16 March 1928.

A. Castellano, Notary of the Supreme S. C. of the Holy Office. - A. A. S., v. xx, p. 103.

119. Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office - On Competence in Matrimonial Causes - Doubts - When the following doubts had been proposed to this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office:

(Pag. 571.) I. Whether in matrimonial causes a non-Catholic, whether baptized or non-baptized, can act the part of plaintiff.

II. Whether in any matrimonial causes between a Catholic party and a non-Catholic party, whether baptized or non-baptized, brought before the Holy See in whatever manner, the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has exclusive competence.

Feria IV, the day 18 January 1928.

The Eminent and Most Reverend Lord Cardinals placed over the protection of matters of faith and morals, after the vote of the Reverend Lord Consultors had been previously had, decreed that it should be responded:

To I: Negatively, or one must stand by the Code of Canon Law, especially can. 87. But if special reasons occur for admitting non-Catholics as plaintiffs in causes of this kind, recourse must be had to the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office in the individual cases.

(Pag. 109.) To II: Affirmatively, with regard had especially to can. 247 § 3, and with the prescription of can. 1557 § 1, 1º being saved.

And on Feria V, the day 26 of the same month and year, Our Most Holy Lord, Our Lord Pius, by Divine Providence Pope XI, in the audience granted to the Reverend Father Lord Assessor of the Holy Office, approved and confirmed the resolution of the Eminent Fathers reported to Him, and ordered it to be published.

Given at Rome, from the buildings of the Holy Office, the day 27 January 1928.

Aloisius Castellano, Notary of the Supreme S. C. of the Holy Office.

Can. 1557, § 1, 1º has itself thus:

§ 1. It is the right of the Roman Pontiff alone to judge:

1º. Those who hold the supreme principate of peoples, and their sons and daughters, or those to whom there is the right of next succeeding into the principate.

Cf. A. A. S., v. xx, p. 75.

120. (Pag. 588.) "Most Blessed Father, the Archbishop of Utrecht, prostrate at the feet of Your Holiness, humbly asks the solution of the doubts which are set forth herein: From can. 765, 5º C.J.C., in order that someone be the sponsor of baptism, it is necessary that in the act of baptism he physically hold or touch the one to be baptized through himself or through a proxy, or immediately lift, or receive, him from the sacred font or from the hands of the one baptizing; and from can. 768 the sponsor contracts spiritual cognation with the baptized, which indeed from can. 1079 invalidates marriage. But now, as is customary among us, he who wishes to act as sponsor gives an express mandate to no one, but, unless the sponsor discharges that office through himself, the one baptizing or the parents of the one to be baptized invite another person to act for the absent sponsor.

"Hence the following doubts are proposed to be solved:

"I. whether from such a manner of acting the absent sponsor contracts spiritual cognation, and thence the impediment of can. 1079 arises; and if negatively:

"II. what must be done by the sponsor so that he may be able to act through a proxy; namely:

"a) whether he must confer a special mandate on a determined person;

"b) or whether it suffices that he give, either in writing or by voice, a general mandate for the person to be determined by the parents or by the one baptizing; indeed,

"c) whether a presumed general mandate for any person whatsoever suffices."

To I. If the sponsor, recognizing a custom of this kind, intends to conform himself to the same, and otherwise the sponsor himself can be sponsor according to the norm of can. 765, Affirmatively.

To II. Provision has been made in I. Nevertheless the aforesaid custom must be reprobated: 1º because it must indubitably be established that the sponsor has taken up his proper office in the face of the church, which by the said custom remains uncertain and equivocal; 2º because the sponsor must take up his office with full knowledge and consciousness of the obligation arising thence according to the mind of can. 769, which the aforesaid custom seems to exclude, since it reduces the office of sponsor to a certain empty rite; 3º because from such a received custom the faculty is almost taken away from the parish priest of examining the conditions which are required by can. 765 and 766, so that someone may validly and licitly take up the office of sponsor." S. C. on the Discipline of the Sacraments, 24 July 1925 - A. A. S. v. xviii p. 43 and following, where the Instruction will be read, from which the following things are taken.

For just as no one is to be admitted by the proper parish priest to the office of sponsor who does not furnish the conditions required for the valid or licit undertaking of this office, so whenever in the conferral of the sacrament someone fulfills the parts of sponsor not in his own name, but in the name and by the mandate of another certain and determined person, it is necessary that a mandate of this kind, or the will of the one mandating, be legitimately proved, namely by suitable witnesses or by a written and legitimate document, unless from elsewhere the intention of the one mandating has been certainly and indubitably investigated by the proper parish priest of the one to be baptized or confirmed, so that the parish priest can investigate whether the designated sponsor is endowed with the qualities required by law, and so that in the books, where according to the course of the sacred canons the conferral of the sacrament is to be noted, there may be inscribed the name both of the proxy and of the one mandating, who indeed ought to know that he has taken up the office of sponsor with its legal effects.

121. (Pag. 613.) Roman and Others - Communion of the Sick -

In the plenary Meetings of the Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments held on the day 16 December 1927 in the Vatican Apostolic Palace, when the doubt had been proposed: "Whether the judge of the just and reasonable cause, as is required from canon 847 of the Code of Canon Law in order that Sacred Communion be carried privately to the sick, is any priest ministering, or only the Ordinary of the place," the Eminent and Most Reverend Fathers, the matter having been maturely weighed, judged that it should be responded:

"Negatively to the first part; Affirmatively to the second," with the following mind nevertheless added: "If from common experience and opinion there is present no inconvenience in the diocese or in some particular place for the private carrying of Sacred Communion to the sick, care must be taken by Ordinaries lest, through rules too predefined or general rules prescribing public carrying, or through a reservation made to themselves of giving permission in individual cases for carrying privately the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the consolation of Communion, even daily Communion, be impeded for the sick."

Which response Our Most Holy Lord Pius PP. XI, in the audience of the day 19 December 1927, after hearing the report made by the undersigned Secretary of the same Sacred Congregation, deigned to hold ratified and to approve.

Given at Rome, from the Secretariate of the Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments, on the day 5 January 1928. M. Card. Lega, Bishop of Tusculum, Prefect. D. Jorio, Secretary. A. A. S., v. 20, p. 81. Cf. Annotations, ibid. p. 82.

122. (Pag. 620.) Sacred Congregation - On the Discipline of the Sacraments.

I - Montis Regalis in Piedmont - Whether sacramental confession can be performed and Holy Communion received by the faithful whenever the Eucharist is administered to the sick.

By the Bishop of Montis Regalis in Piedmont, the following doubts were proposed to this Sacred Congregation for their solution:

I. Whether the faithful dwelling in mountain villages, whenever the Sacred Eucharist is carried to the sick, can be refreshed by the Sacred Synaxis in a sacred place, or even, since there is question of so sacred a matter, in a decent and honorable place which exists on the route, since they are unable to seek the church on that day?

II. Whether Holy Communion and the Sacrament of Confession can be administered to those who are staying in the house of the sick person?

III. Whether they must be administered in the stated circumstances to those who are advanced in age or labor under disease?

The Eminent and Most Reverend Fathers of the Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments, after the vote of two Consultors had been sought, in the plenary meetings of the day 22 July 1927, the matter having been maturely weighed, judged that it should be responded:

To I: "Affirmatively, according to the norm of can. 869, joined with canon 822, § 4, or provided that the Ordinary of the place grants it according to the norm of the cited prescription, namely for individual cases and by way of act."

To II and III: "With regard to Communion, provision has been made in the first; with regard to Confession, Affirmatively, the things to be observed being observed according to the norm of cann. 910, §§ 1, 2, and 909, §§ 1, 2."

But when, on the following day 29 July, a report had been made concerning all these things to Our Most Holy Lord Pius Pope XI, His Holiness deigned to approve the resolution of the Eminent Fathers.

Given at Rome, from the Secretariate of the Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments, on the day 5 January 1928. - M. Card. Lega, Bishop of Tusculum, Prefect. D. Jorio, Secretary. A. A. S., v. 20, p. 79. Cf. Annotations, ibid., p. 80.

123. (Pag. 636.) Our Most Holy Lord Pius Pope XI, on the day 29 March 1926, deigned to accede to the prayers for the things asked for seven years, namely that priest members of the Association of Priest Adorers, sick and unable from the attestation of a physician to observe the natural fast prescribed before sacred Communion during the illness, may be able to approach sacred communion to be received in the manner of laypersons even daily, by the counsel of the confessor, after they have taken some medicine or something by way of drink, the Ordinary of the place having been forewarned and his permission having been obtained, the wonder of the faithful being removed, and other things to be observed by law being observed.

Cf. rescript of the S. Cong. of Sacraments in the periodical Il Monitore Ecclesiastico, vol. 39, p. 45.

(Pag. 636, 10º.) Most Blessed Father. - The procurator general of the Congregation of Priests of the Most Holy Sacrament, prostrate at the feet of Your Holiness, most humbly sets forth that some doubts have arisen concerning the interpretation of the Rescript of the day 29 March 1926, by which the faculty is granted to Priest Adorers, during the time of illness, of approaching Holy Communion in the manner of laypersons after they have taken some medicine or something by way of drink.

Namely, there is question concerning the clause: "the Ordinary of the place having been forewarned and his permission having been obtained."

I. Whether this can be understood thus, that the Ordinary is able once for all and in a general way, by an act published in the official Commentary of the Diocese, to grant this permission to members who will be found in the required conditions?

II. Whether the Ordinary can subdelegate, e.g., vicars forane, or superiors of clerical religious houses for their subjects legitimately enrolled in the Association, to grant permission in individual cases.

III. In what way provision can be made so that Priest Adorers are not deprived of Holy Communion through the several days which are necessary for recourse to the Ordinary of the place and for receiving his response?

Rescript - The Sacred Congregation of Sacraments responded to the proposed doubts:

To the first. Negatively.

To the second. Affirmatively, but it is expedient that the Ordinary not grant this subdelegation beyond a year.

To the third. Provision has been made in II.

Given at Rome from the Buildings of the Sacred Congregation on the Discipline of the Sacraments, on the day 4 February 1927. M. Card. Lega, Bishop of Tusculum, Prefect. D. Jorio, Secretary. Cf. Il Mon. Ecclesiastico, v. 39, p. 97.

124. (Pag. 654.) Sacred Congregation of the Council. - Masses for the People. - Question. - Whether a Parish Priest who, besides his own parish, has another or several others in administration, is bound to apply Mass for the people only on the feast day of his own parish, or also on the feasts of the patrons of the other or of the others?

Resolution. In the plenary meetings of the Sacred Congregation of the Council held on 12 November 1927 in the Vatican Apostolic Palace, the Eminent Fathers, when the above-written doubt had been proposed, ordered the response to be made:

"Negatively to the first part; Affirmatively to the other."

But when a report concerning the premises had been made to Our Most Holy Lord Pius, by divine Providence Pope XI, by the undersigned Secretary of the Sacred Congregation, His Holiness, in the audience of the day 20 of the same month and year, approved and confirmed the given resolution. Julius, Bishop of Lampsacus, Secretary.

A. A. S., v. 20, p. 84 and following.

125. Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Canons of the Code. - Responses to Proposed Doubts. - The Eminent Fathers of the Pontifical Commission for authentically interpreting the canons of the Code, when the following doubts had been proposed in the plenary meeting, ordered that response be made as below to each:

I - On the Confession of Religious Women

(Pag. 747.) D. I. Whether the confession of religious women performed outside the places concerning which in canon 522 and in the response of the day 4 November 1920 is only illicit, or also invalid.

II. Whether the word "approaches" of canon 522 is to be understood thus, that a confessor cannot be called by the religious woman herself to the places legitimately destined for confessions of women or religious women.

R. To I. Negatively to the first part, Affirmatively to the second.

To II. Negatively.

II. - On Absolution in danger of death.

(Pag. 738.) D. Whether absolution in danger of death according to canon 882 is limited to the internal forum, or extends also to the external forum.

R. Affirmatively to the first part, Negatively to the second.

III - On matrimonial dispensations.

(Pag. 955.) D. Whether the words "for occult cases" of canon 1045, § 3 are to be understood only of matrimonial impediments occult by their nature and by fact, or also of those public by their nature and occult by fact.

R. Negatively to the first part, Affirmatively to the second.

IV. - On the subdelegation of assisting at marriages.

(Pag. 922.) D. I. Whether an assistant vicar who, according to the norm of canon 1096, § 1, has obtained from the parish priest or the Ordinary of the place a general delegation of assisting at marriages, can subdelegate another determined priest for assisting at a determined marriage.

II. Whether a parish priest or Ordinary of the place, who according to the norm of canon 1096, § 1, has delegated a determined priest for assisting at a determined marriage, can also give him license of subdelegating another determined priest for assisting at the same marriage.

R. Affirmatively to both. - Rome, the day 28 of the month of December, 1927. - P. Card. Gasparri, President. Joseph Bruno, Secretary. A. A. S., v. xx, p. 61.

Sacred Congregation of the Council

Prot. no. 2529/25. Rome, the day 3 February, 1926.

126. (Pag. 915.) In the plenary Meetings held in the Vatican Apostolic Palace on the day 9 of the month of January recently elapsed, the question concerning the power of assisting at marriages to be bestowed on priests who exercise care of souls over those who are enclosed in prisons was proposed under the following doubt:

"Whether it is certainly established that prison Chaplains have been constituted as true parish priests, or at least as assistant vicars for the effect of validly assisting at marriages of prisoners in the case."

The Most Eminent Fathers judged that they should respond:

Negatively to both and according to the mind.

The mind is: With regard to the past, supplication is to be made to His Holiness for the grace of sanation in the root ad cautelam.

With regard to the future, let Bishops constitute Chaplains who are "hauptamtlich" (by principal office) by a legitimate act as proper parish priests for the effect of validly assisting at marriages of prisoners and officials assigned to the prison; but to chaplains who are "nebenamtlich" (by secondary office) let license be conferred, either by the Ordinary or by the parish priest of the place, of assisting for a determined marriage.

Which resolution Our Most Holy Lord Pius, by Divine Providence PP. XI, in the Audience of the following day 14, deigned to approve and confirm, granting the grace of sanation in the root ad cautelam.

127. (Pag. 941.) A Priest called to Titius, a Catholic joined in an invalidly entered mixed marriage and situated at the extremes, must first induce the parties to contract duly in Catholic form. A twofold case is supposed: they entered before a heretical minister, or before a civil magistrate.

In the first case, if they are prepared to enter in Catholic form, first the Catholic party must repent of the sacrilegiously and invalidly entered marriage before the little minister; let the cautions be drawn up in writing, but if this cannot be done in writing, let an oral promise be received before witnesses when they can be present; finally, let the priest absolve from excommunication; to these let sacramental absolution succeed. Furthermore, since the priest himself, by force of canon 1044, enjoys the amplest faculty, after absolution has been given in confession, let him dispense from banns, from mixed religion, and from other impediments perhaps occurring. With permission for acting had and an oath concerning free state obtained, let him receive the renewal of consent before himself and witnesses; nor must it be given to oblivion that he can simply dispense from form.

In the same first case, but when the heretical party legitimately refuses to renew consent, let the priest see whether it should be advised to the Catholic party to leave the heretic when convalescence has set in. If such counsel seems altogether to be given, and the Catholic party agrees, let him be reconciled with the Church and admitted to the sacraments.

If the Catholic party does not agree, or if that counsel does not seem to be given, this party must promise to do what the Church requires; once this promise has been had, let him be reconciled and admitted to the sacraments; then let the priest have recourse to the Ordinary so that he may obtain sanation in the root, and indeed with the true names given, since there is question of a cause of the external forum.

In the second case, the same method must be followed, except that reconciliation is not to be required.

128. Pontifical Commission for the Authentic Interpretation of the Canons of the Code. - Responses to Proposed Doubts. The Eminent Fathers of the Pontifical Commission for authentically interpreting the canons of the Code, when the following doubts had been proposed in the plenary meeting, ordered response to be made as below to each:

(Pag. 930, 934.) I. - On the Form of Celebration of Marriage.

D. Whether canon 1098 is to be understood thus, that it refers only to the physical absence of the parish priest or Ordinary of the place.

R. Affirmatively.

(Pag. 863.) II. - On Illicit Mixed Marriages.

D. Whether by canon 1102, § 1 the faculty, granted by the Holy See somewhere, of passively assisting at illicit mixed marriages has been revoked.

R. Affirmatively. - Given at Rome, on the day 10 of the month of March in the year 1928. P. Card. Gasparri, President. Joseph Bruno, Secretary. A. A. S., v. xx, p. 120.

This very grave response given to the first doubt decides in the stricter sense the question disputed among authors, affirming that in the canon there is question only of the physical absence of an authorizable witness and not of moral absence. Accordingly the canon cannot be applied to the case in which the parish priest is physically present in the parish, although on account of civil law he does not dare to assist. Such difficulty introduces the moral impossibility of assisting at nuptials, but the priest is not physically absent. Therefore, when the authorizable witness is physically absent and cannot be had or approached without grave inconvenience, then only is the case of this canon 1098 verified.

Wherefore, in danger of death, when the parish priest is physically absent and cannot be approached or had without grave inconvenience, it is lawful immediately to proceed to contracting before common witnesses; outside danger of death the same is lawful, provided that it is foreseen that this condition of things will last for a month.

But when the parish priest is physically present but, prohibited by civil law, does not dare to assist: in danger of death it will almost always be possible, by force of can. 1043, 1044, to dispense even over the form itself of celebration; outside danger of death recourse must be had to the Sacred See.

It must be noted: that it does not stand in the way of the value of the marriage if someone, in fraud of the law, has gone to a place in which an authorizable witness cannot be had. Cf. S. C. de Sacr., 13 March 1910, ad III.

The following case was proposed by the Bishop of Linz to the Holy Office on 8 August 1925.

129. (Pag. 1020.) "Most Blessed Father! Since from the prescription of Can. 1240, 1, 5 those who have ordered their body to be handed over to cremation are deprived of ecclesiastical burial, it rather often happens that their surviving Catholic parents or relatives call upon a non-Catholic minister, so that he may apply the rite of a heretical funeral to their bodies before cremation.

"This manner of acting seems to contain not only active communication in divine things with heretics, gravely illicit, but also to be punished by Can. 2316, since especially in Catholic regions it must be said to aid in some way the propagation of heresy.

"Therefore it is asked:

"1. Whether such Catholics are to be said to be suspected of heresy from Can. 2316?

"2. Whether from Canon 2315 they are prohibited from legitimate acts or even are to be held as heretics, liable to the penalties of heretics?

"3. Whether they incur some other ecclesiastical penalty, or whether it is advisable that the penalty of excommunication from Canon 2314 be threatened or inflicted on them?"

On the day 23 February 1926 the response was made, as follows:

"The Sacred Congregation, while it earnestly exhorts you that with vigilant care you not cease to labor not only against the forbidden practice of cremation, but also against the aforesaid abuse of heretical obsequies, at the same time commands you that you endeavor to instruct the faithful accurately, that those who seek funerals of heretics for their own are to be held as suspected of heresy, and consequently are liable to the penalties ferendae sententiae threatened through Canon 2315, in the terms established beforehand by the same; and if, having been warned, they do not come to their senses, they can be punished with the censure of excommunication; nor are they to be admitted to the Sacraments unless beforehand, in whatever better way it could be done according to the judgment of Your Amplitude, they have repaired the scandal."

130. (Pag. 1078.) To the question: "Whether the bands of the Holy Scapular by which the two parts of the little habit are usually joined can validly and licitly be made from any decent material, provided the parts of the Scapular are so disposed that one part hangs from the shoulders, the other from the breast." The Sacred Congregation of Rites, on 8 May 1925, when the doubt had been proposed, judged that it should be responded affirmatively.

(Anal. Ord. Carmel., 1. p. 43. Il Mon. Eccl., v. 39, p. 196.