Case 2. The Subject of Law

Lucius, an Englishman, having been ordered by his doctor to seek southern regions because of the mildness of the climate, determines within himself to go to Rome and spend the winter there. A man of timorous conscience, he first asks his usual confessor to resolve certain doubts concerning the manner of life to be adopted at Rome. For he doubts whether he will be bound with the Romans to abstain from meat not only on Friday but also on Saturday; whether he can eat meat with them on Wednesday during Advent; whether, notwithstanding a certain decree of the Cardinal Vicar of the City, it is lawful for him to visit Protestant churches there even when offices, or “services” as they are called, are being celebrated; whether he is bound to observe all the holy days of obligation, several of which are not obligatory in England; and finally whether the same answer is to be given even if he remains there for six or seven months. The confessor replies that the simplest rule is to be observed: “When you are at Rome, live according to the Roman manner,” and dismisses him. Hence it is asked:

1. Who is called an inhabitant, a traveler, and a vagrant?

2. By what laws are travelers bound?

3. What is to be said concerning the case?

1. Define the terms inhabitant, traveler, vagrant. A person is called an inhabitant of the place where he has his domicil. A domicil is acquired in a place by actually taking up one’s abode there with the intention of living there perpetually. By ecclesiastical law a quasi-domicil renders a person subject to most ecclesiastical laws like a true domicil. This quasi-domicil is acquired by living in a place with the intention of remaining there for the greater part of a year.

A traveler is one who for a short time, less than six months, takes up his abode in a place other than that in which he has his domicil or quasi-domicil.

A vagrant is one who has no fixed abode, neither domicil nor quasi-domicil, anywhere.

2. To what laws are travelers subject?

Travelers, or strangers, are subject to the common ecclesiastical law which is observed in the place where they stay. They are also subject in the matter of contracts to the law of the place where they conclude them, and if they commit crimes there, they can be punished according to the law of the place where they commit them. Unless required for the avoidance of scandal, a stranger is not bound by the special laws of the place where he is staying, probably not even if there is a similar special law in his own country; for laws only bind subjects, and a stranger is not a subject. Neither is a stranger bound by the special laws of his own country while he is out of their jurisdiction, for a law is restricted to the territory of the legislator.

3. The case. Lucius, an Englishman, determines for reasons of health to pass the winter in Rome. As he is a man of delicate conscience he asks his confessor, before starting, to settle certain doubts as to what he may or should do while staying in Rome. First of all he wants to know whether he will be obliged to abstain from flesh-meat not only on Fridays but on Saturdays as well, as they do in Rome. Inasmuch as Saturday abstinence is part of the common law, though in England and in many other countries a dispensation has been granted, and a stranger is bound by the common law wherever it is observed, Lucius should abstain on Saturdays while he is in Rome, if his health permits him. He may, however, eat meat on the Wednesdays in Advent, for the fast and abstinence observed on those days in England is not part of the common law. By an Instruction of the Cardinal-Vicar of Rome, July 12, 1878, approved by Leo XIII, all were strictly prohibited from visiting Protestant places of worship in Rome during service, and Lucius wishes to know whether he is bound by this law. If this were a merely positive precept, Lucius would not be bound by it, but in the circumstances which exist in Rome it is a precept whose observance is required by the necessity of avoiding scandal and of showing no approbation of heresy. Lucius would therefore be bound by it. With regard to days of obligation he is bound to observe all those which belong to the common law, though they may be suppressed and observed only as days of devotion in England. He is not bound to observe those which are merely local. If he had the intention of staying in Rome for six or seven months, he would become subject to the local law, and would therefore be under the obligation of keeping the local days of obligation. From what has been said it is clear that there are exceptions to the generally wise rule: “When you are in Rome, do as Rome does.”