Scholion. On the Code of Canon Law and the Moral System

I. "Laws, even invalidating and incapacitating laws, do not urge in doubt of law" (can. 15). Now, in establishing these things, the Code altogether abstracts from the moral system, or conforms itself to no system. For the moral system treats of private doubt; but the Code treats of public or objective doubt, so to speak. And indeed order would be disturbed too greatly if Authority rendered the efficacy of law dependent on private doubt. Suppose, for example, the case: Peter doubts whether someone can validly contract marriage with a blood relative in the third degree; relying on canon 15, he enters marriage with Anna, who is related to him in the stated degree. The marriage is certainly invalid; this proves that the canon is not speaking of private doubt.

II. "In doubt, the revocation of a preexisting law is not presumed, but later laws must be drawn to earlier ones and, insofar as can be done, reconciled with them" (can. 23). For the reason alleged under I, it must be said that once again the discourse is about public or objective doubt, and not about private doubt. Hence even if someone, for example, doubts whether the law of abstaining from meats on Saturday has been revoked, the said law is and remains revoked.

III. "In doubt... of fact the Ordinary can dispense in them (i.e., in laws, even invalidating and incapacitating laws), provided there is question of laws in which the Roman Pontiff is accustomed to dispense" (can. 15). This canon establishes only that the Ordinary, in doubt of fact, can dispense as a precaution; but it abstracts from the question of what the law is if the Ordinary does not dispense.