Section II. Excommunications Reserved to the Roman Pontiff in a Special Manner (continued)

III. After the work has been made public, publishers of books of apostates, heretics, and schismatics which defend apostasy, heresy, or schism; likewise those defending these same books or others prohibited by name through apostolic letters, or knowingly reading or retaining them without due permission (canon 2318, § 1). First, note that it is required that the work have been made public, in other words, that it have been multiplied for fairly common use, not merely for the use of a few, say only of students; a fortiori a manuscript is excluded. For the rest, it does not matter whether the work was multiplied by type, by polygraph, or by lithograph. Next it is required that the work made public constitute a book. The word "book" is to be taken as it was formerly taken (cf. canon 6, nn. 2-4), that is, for a literary work of a certain bulk and a certain unity. It is said to be of a certain bulk, for example, to choose a middle point among the different opinions, about eighty pages in octavo. Therefore a separately published letter or sermon, small pamphlets, newspapers or periodicals,¹ are excluded; but not periodical publications, whether taken separately, provided they are of sufficient bulk, or bound in fascicles,² and thus constituting the required unity. Moreover, the following are excommunicated:

1. Publishers of books of apostates, heretics, and schismatics which defend apostasy, heresy, or schism. It is said:

a) Publishers, namely those properly so called, so that the author of the book as such is not included, but he is included insofar as he procures the publication (canon 2209, § 3). Nor are the owner of the workshop, the typesetters, or those turning the press excommunicated; for they do not concur in the publication formally taken, that is, in the multiplication insofar as this is ordered to fairly common use, or at least they are not such that without their work the publication would not have taken place (cf. canon 2209, § 3).

b) Of apostates, etc. Thus books of infidels or Catholics are not included, even though perhaps they defend apostasy, etc. Yet one who defends apostasy, etc., is presumed to be an apostate, etc.; nor is it required that the author of the book be enrolled in an apostate sect, etc.

c) They defend, that is, with added arguments they defend or recommend; nevertheless it is not required that the book treat professedly of religion.

2. Those defending, or knowingly and without due permission reading or retaining, either the books mentioned under 1, or others prohibited by name through apostolic letters. As to the latter, some require that the apostolic letters have prohibited them under penalty of excommunication reserved to the Holy See. But neither the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, which first established that censure, nor the cited and clear canon permits that condition to be added.

a) Defenders are, for example, those who prevent a book from being destroyed or denounced, one who praises the doctrine contained in the book, or who disapproves its condemnation; but not one who praises the style or genius of the author, or the good doctrine which is found in the book (St. Alphonsus, VII, 297).

b) Knowingly (n. 858) and without due permission reading; concerning this, observe: 1° formal reading is required, so that one who merely hears another reading is not included (St. Alphonsus, VII, 292), nor one who recites from memory what he formerly read, nor one who reads through a book while ignorant of the language; but a blind person who perceives the type with his fingers is included. 2° Reading of notable matter is required, considered either by quantity alone, as if you read two or three pages, or by quality, that is, by danger; in this case even a few lines can suffice, because in them there can be a danger of perversion (St. Alphonsus, VII, 284, 292).

c) Those retaining, namely knowingly and without due permission; moreover, for a notable time, say for three or four days (St. Alphonsus, VII, 295). For the rest, observe: it is all the same whether one retains his own book or another's; whether he retains the book with himself or with another who does not have the faculty; whether he understands the retained book or not. But one is excused who deposits the book with another who has the faculty, and does this with an agreement not to reclaim it except after permission has been obtained; likewise one who retains the book because he is awaiting either the required permission or an occasion of handing it over to the Superior (St. Alphonsus, VII, 295-298).

A bookbinder is indeed counted among those retaining, but is easily excused if he binds books for one having the faculty to read them, or has another just cause. Likewise the custodian of another's library escapes excommunication, unless he retains the books in his own room or house. Finally, where, as in religious houses, there is a common library, it is licit to keep prohibited books in a locked cabinet.

IV. One not promoted to the priestly order, if he simulates the celebration of Mass or hears a sacramental confession (canon 2322, 1°). It is said:

1. One not promoted to the priestly order. Thus the censure regards both a layman and a cleric who has not yet been raised to the priesthood, but not a priest, even though suspended or degraded.

2. If he simulates the celebration of Mass; that is, if he conducts himself in such a way that others judge that the Sacred Rite is being celebrated.

3. Or hears a sacramental confession. What sacramental confession is, see n. 430. It suffices to have heard a sacramental confession, even if absolution is omitted.

Note. If the delinquent mentioned under IV is a layman, he is to be deprived of a pension or function, if he has any in the Church, and is to be punished with other penalties according to the gravity of the fault; but a cleric is to be deposed (cited canon); each, if he has usurped other priestly functions, is to be punished by the Ordinary according to the gravity of the fault (canon 2322, § 2).

¹ Holy Office, April 21, 1880 (Collectanea, n. 1533).

² Holy Office, January 13, 1892 (Collectanea, n. 1777).

V. All and each, of whatever status, grade, or condition they may be, even royal, episcopal, or cardinalitial, who appeal from the laws, decrees, or mandates of the Roman Pontiff for the time being to a Universal Council (canon 2332).

1. All and each. The excommunication regards only physical persons, not moral persons.

2. From the laws, etc., of the Roman Pontiff for the time being, but not from the laws, etc., of a Sacred Congregation, unless the ordinance was issued by the express or special mandate of the Supreme Pontiff or approved by him in specific form; nor is an appeal from the laws, etc., of a deceased Supreme Pontiff sufficient.

3. To a Universal Council, whether present or future; but an appeal to a Provincial Council or to a future Pontiff is not sufficient.

Note. Those about whom the discussion is under V are also suspected of heresy. But Universities, Colleges, Chapters, or other moral persons, by whatever name they are called, incur an interdict likewise reserved to the Apostolic See in a special manner (canon 2332).

VI. Those having recourse to lay power in order to impede letters or any acts proceeding from the Apostolic See or from its Legates, or directly or indirectly prohibiting their promulgation or execution, or on account of them injuring or terrifying either those to whom the letters or acts pertain or others (canon 2333). Under the name of the Apostolic See also come the Congregations, Tribunals, and Offices through which the Roman Pontiff is accustomed to transact the business of the universal Church (canon 7). Under the name of Legates of the Holy See are included Legates a latere (cf. canon 266), Nuncios and Internuncios (cf. canon 267), and Apostolic Delegates (cf. canon 267). Moreover, the following are excommunicated:

1. Those having recourse to lay power in order to impede any letters or acts proceeding from the aforesaid. It is all the same whether someone has recourse by himself or through another, in writing or by living voice. As to the lay power to which recourse is had, certainly those who enjoy power of jurisdiction are understood, such as the Government, magistrates, and judges. The same seems to be said of those having recourse to persons who possess only administrative power, such as prefects of cities; for the law does not distinguish. Finally, it is required that it concern letters or acts already issued, so that one is not excommunicated who impedes them from being issued.

2. Those directly or indirectly prohibiting the promulgation or execution of the said letters or acts. Those prohibiting are understood to be those who enjoy public authority.¹ Promulgation, however, is taken in the proper sense; hence it is carefully to be distinguished from dissemination. Execution regards all things necessary for the letters or acts to have effect, such as the preparation of instruments by notaries and their notification to the parties.

3. Those injuring or terrifying, on account of the said letters or acts, either those to whom they are directed or others, that is, those to whom their promulgation or execution pertains. It is said injuring, namely gravely, and indeed in the goods of the body. It is disputed whether those injuring in goods of fortune or of the soul, or in honor or reputation, are included. Those denying this rely on the fact that injury properly taken regards the body. Given the controversy, we follow the negative part. Those are called terrifying who inflict very grave fear on someone.

It is more commonly taught that those terrifying are not excommunicated unless the effect has followed, that is, unless the letters or acts have in fact been impeded. It is disputed concerning those injuring; but without reason is a distinction admitted between those injuring and those terrifying.

VII. Those who issue laws, mandates, or decrees against the liberty or rights of the Church (canon 2334, § 1).

1. Those issuing laws, etc.; by this expression are included those who effectively concur in making laws, etc., such as ministers who propose laws, deputies who vote for them, the prince who confirms or promulgates them; likewise rulers of provinces or cities who issue a decree, and counselors who assent to it. The censure is contracted when the law has been promulgated, the decree issued, the mandate intimated. Neither notaries who enter laws, etc., into the acts, nor judges who see that they are observed, incur the excommunication.

2. Against the liberty or rights of the Church; these words must be taken in the broadest sense. Therefore those are excommunicated who issue laws, etc., against the right, for example, of teaching evangelical doctrine (canon 1322, § 2), of educating those who desire to devote themselves to ecclesiastical ministries (canon 1352), of founding schools of any discipline whatever, not only elementary, but also middle and higher schools (canon 1375), of requiring that the faithful not publish books which it has not beforehand reviewed by its own judgment, and of prohibiting, for a just cause, books published by anyone whatever (canon 1384, § 1), of freely and independently of civil power acquiring, retaining, and administering temporal goods for pursuing its own proper ends (canon 1495, § 1), which right also belongs to individual churches and other moral persons which have been erected as juridical persons by ecclesiastical authority (canon 1495, § 2), of requiring from the faithful those things which are necessary for divine worship, for the fitting support of clerics and other ministers, and for its remaining proper ends (canon 1496), of possessing its own cemeteries (canon 1206, § 1), of coercing delinquent subjects with penalties both spiritual and temporal (canon 2214, § 1), etc.

Note. Clerics who commit the delict just described are punished with the penalty of suspension or privation of the benefice, office, dignity, pension, or function itself, if perhaps they have any in the Church; religious, however, are punished with privation of office and of active and passive voice and with other penalties according to the norm of the constitutions (canon 2336, § 1).

VIII. Those who directly or indirectly impede the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, whether of the internal or external forum, by having recourse for this to any lay power (canon 2334, § 2). For this excommunication to be incurred, it is required:

1. That the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction be impeded. It is not enough to impede the exercise either of the power of order alone, or of merely administrative power, or of natural right. But it is all the same whether the exercise of jurisdiction of the internal forum or the external forum is impeded, whether it is impeded directly, say by acting, for example, against the Bishop, or indirectly, say by vexing officials.

2. That the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction be impeded by means of recourse to any lay power. Therefore this excommunication does not affect a private person who impedes without recourse, nor a Superior or judge who executes or applies the law; but it does affect a Superior who impedes by means of recourse to a higher lay power. For the rest, it does not matter whether recourse is had to legislative power or only to judicial or executive power.

3. That the effect has followed; this is indicated by the very word "impeding."²

Note. Clerics who commit the delict discussed are punished with the penalty of suspension or privation of the benefice, office, dignity, or pension itself according to the norm of the constitutions (canon 2336, § 1).

¹ Formerly it was disputed whether those incurred excommunication who, by private authority, prohibited promulgation or execution. But since the legislator, aware of the controversy, did not change the wording of the law, the more benign, that is, the negative opinion, seems to be followed.

² Pontifical Commission, July 25, 1926 (A.A.S. 1926, p. 394).

IX. Whoever against the prescription of canon 120 has dared to drag before a lay judge any one of the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church or Legates of the Apostolic See, or major Officials of the Roman Curia for affairs pertaining to their function, or his own Ordinary (canon 2341). The prescription of canon 120, insofar as it must here be kept before the eyes, establishes that Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, Bishops, even titular ones, Legates of the Apostolic See, and major Officials of the Roman Curia cannot be summoned before a lay judge for affairs pertaining to their function without the permission of the Apostolic See, unless in some place by special concession there has been derogation at least in part from the privilege of forum (cf. volume I, n. 1153). For the rest, observe:

1. What the words "has dared" signify, see n. 858.

2. Under the name of those dragging do not come judges and other subordinate officials, but private persons who cause the persons mentioned to appear before a lay judge. Moreover, it is required that they be summoned as defendants, or that they be convened; it is not enough that they be summoned as witnesses. Finally, the major Officials of the Roman Curia, not others, must be summoned for affairs pertaining to their function.

3. Legates of the Apostolic See are Nuncios, Internuncios, and Apostolic Delegates. The major Officials of the Roman Curia are: a) the Assessor and Commissary of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office; b) the Assessor and Substitute of the Sacred Consistorial Congregation; c) the Prelate Secretary and Substitute of the Sacred Congregation of Rites; d) the Prelate Secretary and Substitute of the Sacred Congregation of Seminaries and Universities; e) the Regent of the Sacred Penitentiary; f) the Prelate Secretary of the Apostolic Signatura or Auditor of the Most Holy One; g) the Prelate Auditors of the Sacred Roman Rota; h) the Regent and Substitute of the Apostolic Chancery; i) the Vice-Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church and the Auditor General of the Reverend Apostolic Camera; k) the Substitute of the Secretariat of State; l) the Chancellor of Apostolic Briefs; m) all Prelate Secretaries and Undersecretaries of the other Congregations.

4. Under the name of Ordinary, since it is not said "local Ordinary," there also seems to be included the major Superior of an exempt clerical religious institute (canon 198, § 1).

In view of the word "dragging" and canons 2228 and 2242, § 1, it seems to be required that the summoned person actually appear before the judge.

X. Whoever has laid violent hands on the person of a Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church or Legate of the Roman Pontiff, Patriarch, Archbishop, Bishop, even only a titular one (canon 2343, § 2, 1° and § 3). Violent laying on of hands imports an external injury, contained in deed and gravely sinful, whether against the body, or against liberty, say by imprisoning, or against dignity, say by tearing garments (St. Alphonsus, VII, 273). Moreover, it is required that one know the person on whom he inflicts injury to be a Cardinal, etc.

Note. Whoever has laid violent hands on the person of a Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church or Legate of the Roman Pontiff is moreover ipso facto infamous and is deprived of benefices, offices, dignities, pensions, and any function whatever, if he has one in the Church (canon 2343, § 2, 2° and 3°).

XI. Those usurping or detaining, by themselves or through others, goods or rights pertaining to the Roman Church (canon 2345). Usurpers are those who occupy another's thing as due to themselves. Hence thieves and robbers are not included.¹ Those detaining are those who unjustly retain a thing usurped, or received from a usurper. This excommunication, however, does not affect those who usurp or detain goods or rights pertaining to churches other than the Roman Church.

Note. If the delinquents are clerics, they are moreover to be deprived of dignities, benefices, offices, and pensions, and declared incapable of them (canon 2345).

XII. All fabricators or falsifiers of letters, decrees, or rescripts of the Apostolic See, or those knowingly using the same letters, decrees, or rescripts (canon 2360, § 1). The following are excommunicated: 1° fabricators, that is, those who compose false letters, decrees, or rescripts; 2° falsifiers, that is, those who so adulterate letters, decrees, or rescripts of the Holy See that the sense is substantially changed; 3° those using such fabricated or adulterated letters, etc., even if they do not obtain the intended effect.

Note. Clerics committing the delict mentioned under XII are moreover to be coerced by other penalties, which can extend even to privation of benefice, office, dignity, and ecclesiastical pension; religious, however, are to be deprived of all offices which they have in religion and of active and passive voice, besides the other penalties established in the proper constitutions of each (canon 2360, § 2).

XIII. Whoever by himself or through others falsely denounces a confessor for the crime of solicitation before Superiors (canon 2363). It is said:

1. By himself or through others, namely "by wickedly procuring that this be done by others."²

2. For the crime of solicitation; concerning this see n. 416 sq.

3. Before Superiors, that is, before those to whom the denunciation must be made, namely before the local Ordinary or the Congregation of the Holy Office (n. 427).

Note 1. The delinquent cannot in any case be absolved from the contracted censure unless he has formally retracted the false denunciation and, as far as he can, repaired the damages, if any followed from it, with a grave and long-lasting penance moreover imposed (canon 2363). Thus before absolution there is required both formal retraction before those to whom the denunciation was made, and reparation of damages, insofar as this can be provided here and now; damages, I say, which followed, for example, from the confessor's suspension. In danger of death a retraction suffices, even one drawn up by the confessor, signed by the delinquent, and afterward to be handed over to the local Ordinary or the Congregation of the Holy Office; or, if necessity does not permit that, an oral retraction before two witnesses, for example, the confessor and another person, who can afterward communicate it to the judge. Finally, in a case in which absolution cannot be deferred without danger of infamy, a written retraction left with the confessor suffices; or, if even that cannot be provided, a serious promise of satisfying the obligation as soon as possible.

Note 2. Canon 2363 cited in note 1 is closed with these words: with the prescription of canon 894 remaining firm. Moreover, in view of the cited canon, the sin of false denunciation is the single sin reserved by reason of itself; therefore it is reserved and remains reserved, even if the censure has not been contracted, say because of ignorance, or has been remitted.

¹ Holy Office, March 9, 1870.

² Constitution Sacramentum Poenitentiae.