Article III. On the Cessation of Dispensation

I say, 1st. A dispensation which has a successive tract ceases in the same ways as a privilege, and also by the certain and total cessation of the motive cause (Can. 86). A dispensation which is virtually multiple, as in the Lenten fast, and, so to speak, renewed on individual days, has a successive tract.

A dispensation which does not have a successive tract, but an indivisible effect, for example, of taking away incapacity or an impediment, is judged to have been granted absolutely and is esteemed perpetual, and does not cease as the former dispensation does.

I say, 2nd. A dispensation altogether ceases when the express revocation of the superior supervenes, because obligation or deobligation depends on the will of the superior. Yet revocation without a just cause would be illicit. But it does not cease on account of the revocation of an inferior without a just cause, because the faculty of revoking is not in his arbitrary power. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 197. - Nor does it cease if the revocation is made, even from a just cause, by one delegated for a particular dispensation; because his delegated power is extinguished after the dispensation has been granted. But it ceases if an inferior Prelate, by ordinary right or by delegation for the universality of causes, granted the dispensation and revoked it from a just cause; because his power is not taken away after the concession has been made. - Cf. Wernz, Jus Decret. v. 1, n. 126.

I say, 3rd. A dispensation also ceases through renunciation; but for its validity acceptance by the superior is required, because only the superior can bind the will, just as he can also loose it from the bond of law. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 198.

A dispensation does not cease by non-use, or by contrary use, or by a new dispensation, or by departure from the territory of the one granting a perpetual dispensation.