Article II. On the Causes Required for Dispensing

I say, 1st. For the liceity of a dispensation some cause is always required. The reason is that otherwise the superior will not be a faithful dispenser. For this reason he also sins who in such a case asks for a dispensation; for he induces the dispenser to an illicit thing, and therefore sins in the same kind of sin in asking as the legislator does in granting. - Cf. St. Thomas, 1-2, q. 97, art. 4.

I say, 2nd. But for validity no cause is required on the part of the one granting, if he dispenses in his own law or in the law of an inferior. The reason is that he who can bind can also loose; but it is otherwise if he dispenses in the law of his superior, because he is not presumed to have received the power of dispensing rashly.

I say, 3rd. For validity on the part of the petitioner, it is required that there be no essential obreption or subreption in the petition, or one which falls upon the motive cause, because the superior does not dispense except under a tacit condition, namely, if the prayers rest upon truth. Concerning pontifical matrimonial dispensations of a lesser grade, see below n. 921. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 185.

These three statements are now confirmed by canon 84:

§ 1. From an ecclesiastical law let no dispensation be made without a just and reasonable cause, having taken into account the gravity of the law from which dispensation is made; otherwise a dispensation given by an inferior is illicit and invalid.

§ 2. A dispensation, in doubt concerning the sufficiency of the cause, is licitly sought and can licitly and validly be granted (Can. 84).

Question 1. Does a superior dispensing without cause in a grave matter sin gravely?

Response. Negatively, probably of itself, as regards the legislator; because, scandal or harm to others having been set aside, grave disorder in the commonwealth will not arise from the fact that one or another person does not observe the law by dispensation. But it must be said otherwise as regards an inferior, because he is not judged delegated to dispense except for a just cause; and therefore if he acts otherwise, he gravely abuses the power granted to him, and admits a fault grave from its kind. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, nn. 178-180.

Question 2. Is it licit to ask for or grant a dispensation in doubt whether the cause suffices?

Response. Affirmatively, as to both; as is clear from the canon 84, § 2, cited just now. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 187.

You Will Resolve. 1st. A dispensation granted from a just cause to some wicked person, whom the superior reputed upright, is valid, even if, had the wickedness been known, he would not have dispensed; the reason is that uprightness is not reputed a motive cause, but merely an impulsive cause. Except unless someone was moved on account of uprightness.

2nd. A dispensation is valid, although several false causes, even causes motive of themselves, have been set forth with true and sufficient causes; because where some true motive cause is present, a sufficient foundation of dispensation is supplied.

3rd. A dispensation granted by a superior is valid, although it had already been denied by an inferior and no mention is made of this denial.

4th. A dispensation obtained for someone ignorant of it, or even unwilling, is valid when necessity demands this. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 186.