The banns of marriage

551. On the Law of Proclamations. The law of the Church obliging under grave obligation prescribes that matrimony, before it is contracted, be publicly announced three times by the proper parish priest of the contracting parties, on three continuous Sundays and other feasts of precept, in the church during the solemnities of Masses or during other divine offices to which the people come in numbers.¹

a. Public announcements of matrimony are customarily called banns; this word seems to be Germanic and to signify public proclamation, although in this sense it is now no longer used.

b. The law of banns, existing first in Gaul, the Fourth Lateran Council under Innocent III extended to the universal Church; but by the Council of Trent, and now by the new Code, the same law, renewed and more accurately determined by several added prescriptions, has been established.

c. With the obligation of proclaiming the matrimony there belongs to the parish priest the right of making proclamations, which is a proper parochial right. But the faithful seeking a proclamation acquire the right that their matrimony be proclaimed by the parish priest.

1. That this law is grave is gathered: a. from its grave end, for obtaining which proclamations contribute much; b. from the grave penalty established by the Council against transgressors; nevertheless it admits smallness of matter.

a. The end of the law is threefold: that impediments to contracting matrimony, if any perhaps exist, may be detected; that clandestine marriages may be eliminated; that children not contract marriages against the will of parents. But the principal end is the first.

b. Small matter: to omit only one proclamation from the three required, or to make two on the same day, does not exceed light sin;² indeed, in the probable judgment of some, to omit two is not grave if the danger of a hidden impediment is removed, e.g., by waiting several days before the matrimony is made.³ Likewise to fulfill the prescribed circumstances not formally but only equivalently does not exceed venial sin. For a grave cause, to omit those things which oblige only under venial sin is free from all fault.

2. The law of proclamation binds as regards all marriages of Catholics: a. even if the matrimony to be contracted is publicly known; b. even if it is established that no impediment underlies it, because the universal law urges, even if in a particular case the end of the law ceases.

Nevertheless there is excepted a. the matrimony of rulers, which is not customarily proclaimed, because their family is so known that an impediment, if any underlies it, can easily be known; b. a case of urgent necessity, as if in danger of death matrimony had to be contracted for legitimating offspring.

3. Marriages which are celebrated with dispensation from the impediment of disparity of cult or mixed religion are by law not to be published. Nevertheless the ordinary can permit this, these conditions being observed: that scandal be absent, that dispensation in the impediment has preceded, and that mention of the religion of the non-Catholic party be omitted.⁴

¹ Council of Trent, sess. 24, c. 1, De reform. matr. Cn. 1022, 1023, 1024.

² St. Alphonsus, n. 900.

³ D'Annibale III, n. 453; Gasparri I, n. 152.

⁴ Cn. 1026.

552. On the Proclamations Themselves. Proclamations must be made: 1. By the proper parish priest of the contracting parties,¹ or by another with his license.

a. The proper parish priest is he in whose parish those about to marry have domicile or quasi-domicile. If they have domicile or quasi-domicile in two parishes, each parish priest is their proper parish priest. Of those who have only a diocesan domicile, the proper parish priest is he in whose parish they actually live. Of vagi likewise the proper parish priest is he in whose parish they are actually staying.

b. The parish priest can delegate another priest or cleric to make the announcements. But he cannot delegate a layman, unless from legitimate custom, as in Spain.

2. On three continuous Sundays or feasts on which, from the universal precept of the Church or the particular precept of the diocese, the obligation of hearing Mass urges, so that there may be a gathering of the people; but not on abrogated feast days, although the people are accustomed to flow together in numbers. Continuous, that is, succeeding one another in such a way that no feast day is passed over without announcements, lest perhaps the people forget the announcements. If nevertheless a feast day is passed over from any cause, the announcement is to be continued on the following feast day.

a. Announcements can also be made on feast days immediately succeeding one another; but if three feast days immediately succeed one another, it is better that one be passed over without proclamations.

b. The law is not satisfied if proclamations are made on feasts of devotion or on weekdays, although the people come to the church in numbers.

3. In the church, namely the parish church, during the solemnities of Masses or during other divine offices to which the people come in numbers.²

Formerly announcements could be made only during the solemnities of Masses; now it is expressly permitted that they can also be made during other divine offices, e.g., at vespers or on the occasion of a procession or sermon, provided the people are present in numbers.

4. By living voice according to common law; nevertheless the ordinary can for his territory substitute for publications the public affixing at the doors of the parish church or another church of the names of the contracting parties for the space of at least eight days, yet in such a way that during this space two feast days of precept are included.³

a. This exception, which already long ago, S. C. C., March 28, 1908, was granted to the archbishop of Paris for parishes which contain more than 10,000 souls, has now been made universal.

b. If the parish priest had forgotten to make the announcement in Mass, or if the names of the betrothed had in no way been understood by the hearers, the proclamation could either be deferred to the following feast day or be made in the afternoon.

c. If on some feast day in another, filial, church there were a parochial Mass and a numerous gathering of the people, the announcement could be made there, because the end of the law is better obtained there.

5. With the law considered, the following rules indicating whether publications must be made in one or in several parishes are to be established:

a. If the betrothed belong to the same parish, publications must be made in that parish only; if they belong to different parishes, they must be made in each parish.

b. If one or both of the betrothed has domicile or quasi-domicile or two domiciles, publications must be made in all these parishes; for each parish priest is proper.

Minors who outside the domicile of parents or guardians have a quasi-domicile must be proclaimed both in the domicile of fact which they themselves have and in the domicile of parents, which is their domicile of law.

c. If either of the betrothed after the years of puberty has stayed elsewhere for six months, the matter is to be referred to the ordinary of the place, whose office it is to prescribe proclamations to be made elsewhere and other investigations.⁴

d. If there is suspicion of a contracted impediment, the parish priest, even if the person about to marry stayed elsewhere for a shorter time than six months, should consult the ordinary, who should not permit the matrimony unless the suspicion has first been removed.⁵

a. In the parish of origin, if the betrothed do not have domicile there, and in the parish of simple habitation, by strict law publications do not have to be made, unless particular statutes prescribe otherwise, because the parish priest of those places is not the proper parish priest. But ordinarily it is prescribed that publications be made in the parish of origin if the betrothed left it in adult age, and in the parish of habitation if they stayed there for a notable time, namely for six months.

b. If those about to marry change domicile or acquire domicile while the proclamations are taking place, the parish priest of the new domicile, not of the prior one, is their proper parish priest; nevertheless proclamations are not to be made in the new domicile except from civil law.

¹ Cn. 1023.

² Cn. 1024.

³ Cn. 1025.

⁴ Cn. 1023, 2.

⁵ Cn. 1023, 3.

553. On Dispensation from the Law of Proclamations. 1. From the law of proclamations not only the Roman pontiff, but also the bishop, can dispense for a just cause; the new Code determines his power thus:¹

a. The proper ordinary can dispense from publications to be made even in another diocese. Now, therefore, it is certain that the dispensation of one ordinary suffices, namely of the one in whose diocese the matrimony is celebrated.

b. If there are several proper ordinaries, that one has the right of dispensing in whose diocese the matrimony is celebrated. But if the matrimony is entered outside the proper dioceses, any proper ordinary to whom those about to marry have chosen to have recourse can dispense.

The parish priest cannot dispense from proclamations unless he has been delegated for this by the bishop; but if necessity urges, he can declare that the law of the Church does not oblige with such great inconvenience. Afterward, however, the bishop must be warned concerning this matter.

2. A just cause of dispensing does not have to be grave, provided the end of the law is obtained, especially if dispensation is given from only one or two proclamations.

Just causes of dispensing are some gracious, on account of which dispensation can be given; others necessary, on account of which dispensation must be given, because otherwise inconvenience would arise for the betrothed. Causes of this kind are:

a. If there is danger that the matrimony may be maliciously impeded.

b. If there is danger that the bridegroom may abandon a girl violated by him.

c. If from delay of matrimony infamy of the contracting parties would follow.

d. If because of the necessity of a journey the matrimony cannot be deferred.

e. If the betrothed because of age or because of a plainly dissimilar condition would be exposed to ridicule.

f. If, when civil marriage has already been contracted, the husband indeed wishes the ecclesiastical rite to be performed, but does not wish proclamations to be made.

¹ Cn. 1028.

554. On the Obligation of Revealing Impediments. 1. Per se there exists a grave obligation of revealing impediments of matrimony, both diriment and even merely prohibiting, even occult ones, provided truly probable knowledge of them is had, and indeed as soon as possible, lest through delay the difficulty of contracting matrimony be increased.

a. This obligation arises both from the precept of charity, because there is question of preserving one's neighbor from grave sin and other evils which arise from invalid matrimony, and from the precept of the Church, which by the very precept of proclamations implicitly, and in the new Code explicitly, prescribes the manifestation of impediments.¹

b. If the impediment arises from an occult sin, the betrothed should first be warned to desist from matrimony or to procure a dispensation for themselves. But if it is not hoped that the warning will be useful, the matter must immediately be referred to the parish priest, lest enmities arise if the betrothed, warned in vain, are kept away from matrimony.

2. Everyone who has knowledge of them must reveal them, of whatever sex, age, parish, or diocese, even if that person alone knows them and cannot juridically prove them, because the revelation does not tend to this, that some accused person be condemned, but that the evil of one's neighbor and the nullity of the sacrament be guarded against.

3. From the obligation of revealing impediments there is excused: a. one who cannot reveal them without grave harm to himself or others; b. one who judges that revelation will be useless; c. one who knows that dispensation for the internal forum has already been sought.

He who knows an impediment under secret is certainly not excused if he knows the impediment under a natural or promised secret; but if he knows the impediment under an entrusted secret, authors do not have one opinion. More commonly they teach that even in the case of an entrusted secret the impediment must be manifested, unless by reason of office, such as of physician, advocate, midwife, parish priest, etc., it had been entrusted; because the common good, which requires this secret, must be preferred to the good which follows from manifestation, namely the validity of the matrimony. Likewise, unless from the revelation there follows grave infamy of the one entrusting, who is not one of the contracting parties; because the manifestation redounds to the harm of the one entrusting the secret, so that that person personally would not be held to manifest the matter.²

¹ Cn. 1027.

² Ballerini-Palmieri VI, n. 582.

555. What Must Be Done After the Proclamations.¹ 1. If no impediment has been detected, those about to marry must be admitted to the celebration of matrimony.

2. If a certain impediment has been detected:

a. If the impediment is occult, the parish priest should carry out or complete the publications and refer the matter, with names concealed, to the ordinary of the place or to the Sacred Penitentiary.

b. If it is public and is detected before the publications have been begun, no further progress is to be made until the impediment is removed, even if dispensation for the internal forum has been obtained. If it is detected after the first or second publication, the parish priest should complete the publication and refer the matter to the ordinary.

3. If a doubt arises concerning the existence of some impediment:

a. The parish priest should investigate the matter more accurately, by interrogating under oath at least two trustworthy witnesses, provided there is not question of an impediment from whose knowledge infamy would arise for the parties, and, if necessary, the parties themselves also.

b. He should carry out or complete the publications if the doubt arose before the publications were begun or completed.

c. He should not assist at the matrimony without having consulted the ordinary, if he prudently judges that doubt still remains.

Therefore it is not licit for the parish priest, from the known adage, a doubtful impediment is no impediment, to proceed to the celebration of matrimony, but judgment concerning this matter is reserved to the ordinary.

4. Matrimony is not to be contracted before all necessary documents have been received and three days have elapsed from the last proclamation, unless a reasonable cause asks otherwise.²

5. If, after the proclamations have been made, matrimony has not been contracted within six months, the publications must be repeated, unless something else seems good to the local ordinary.³

¹ Cn. 1031.

² Cn. 1030, 1.

³ Cn. 1030, 2.

Before publishing the banns of marriage the priest who has the cure of souls must have at least a general knowledge of those who wish to marry. The Ritual prescribes that he should inquire whether there is between them any impediment of kindred or affinity, or any other; whether they wish to marry freely and of their own accord; whether they be of age, and know the rudiments of the Faith so as to be able to teach it to their children (Can. 1020).

With regard to people with no fixed abode, strangers, the wives of soldiers, sailors, and others, who are said to have died in foreign parts, the Ritual admonishes the priest not to admit them readily to marriage before making all needful inquiries about them, and referring their case to the bishop, so as to have his leave for the marriage. Canon 1021¹ prescribes that the parish priest demand the certificate of baptism of the parties unless they were baptized in his parish, and their reception of Confirmation, as far as possible.

¹ Sess. xxiv, c. 1, de ref. Matr.; can. 1024.

If no impediment has been discovered by examining the parties, the priest publishes the banns in accordance with the decree of the Council of Trent.1 “ It ordains that for the future before a marriage is contracted the proper parish priest of the contracting parties shall three times announce publicly in the Church, during the solemnization of Mass, on three continuous festival days, between whom marriage is to be celebrated; after which publication of banns, if there be no lawful impediment opposed, the marriage shall be proceeded with, in the face of the Church.”

The reasons for this law are: the avoidance of clandestine marriages, so that it being known who are married, there may be less danger of bigamous marriages; the discovery of impediments of marriage; and the protection of the rights of others arising from former betrothal. The banns must be published by the parish priest in the church of the parish or district where the parties have their domicile or quasi-domicile, If they live in different parishes, the banns must be published in both; and if either or both have lived six months in another place after the age of puberty, the parish priest should inform the bishop, who will prescribe what is to be done (Can. 1023). They must be published during the principal Mass on three successive days of obligation; but if the publication has been omitted at Mass, the omission may be made good in the evening if there be a considerable concourse of people at the evening service.

The very form which is commonly made use of in publishing banns shows that by them the Church intends to impose a serious obligation on all who know of any impediment between the parties who wish to marry to communicate their knowledge to the parish priest. This precept of the Church will bind even when the impediment is matter of a natural or promised secret, for such a secret cannot avail against the just commands of a superior. A professional secret binds more strictly, but it does not excuse one who knows it from doing what he can without betraying the secret to procure the removal of the impediment.

The obligation of publishing banns is a serious one, but for good reason the bishop or his Vicar-General may dispense with them either wholly or in part. According to approved theologians, the bishop is even obliged sometimes to dispense with banns, when charity toward his flock requires it. Thus a dispensation should be given when it is probable that otherwise the marriage will be maliciously prevented, when it is a necessary means to preserve the reputation of the parties who. are thought to be man and wife already, and when the parties are obliged to depart at once to foreign countries. For lighter reasons the bishop may dispense, but he is not obliged to do so.

A parish priest has no jurisdiction in the external forum, and so he cannot dispense of his own authority from banns. In some special case, however, it might be necessary to marry the parties without delay, and then if there were no time to have recourse to the bishop, a simple priest might declare that under the circumstances the law with regard to banns ceased to be of obligation.

Sec. 1. According to Canon 1031, when a doubt has arisen about the existence of an impediment between the parties— (1) The parish priest should investigate the matter more carefully, interrogating at least two witnesses under oath, who are worthy of credence, provided that there is no question of an impediment from the knowledge of which the reputation of the parties will suffer, and interrogating also the parties themselves if it be necessary.

(2) Let him proceed with or finish the publication of the banns if the doubt arose before they were begun or before they were finished.

(3) Let him not assist at the marriage without consulting the Ordinary if he prudently judge that the doubt still remains.

Sec. ii. When a certain impediment has been discovered— (1) If the impediment be secret, let the parish priest proceed with and finish the banns, and without mentioning names let him report the matter to the local Ordinary or to the Sacred Penitentiary.

(2) If it is public and is discovered before the publication of the banns is begun, let the parish priest not proceed further until the impediment is removed, although he may know that a dispensation has been obtained only for the forum of conscience; if it is discovered after the first or second publication of banns, let the parish priest finish the banns and report the matter to the Ordinary.

Sec. iii. Finally, if no impediment, doubtful or certain, has been discovered, let the parish priest, after the banns are published, admit the parties to the celebration of marriage.

Canon 1030 lays it down that this should not be done until the parish priest has received all the necessary documents and three days have elapsed after the last publication of the banns, unless there be some good reason to the contrary.

Canon 1026 forbids banns to be published of a marriage which is contracted by dispensation from the impediment of mixed religion or difference of worship, unless the local Ordinary deems it proper to permit them with prudence and the removal of scandal, provided that the apostolic dispensation has been granted and no mention be made of the religion of the non-Catholic party.

The Ritual prescribes that the parties should be diligently instructed how they should live in a pious and Christian way in the state of wedlock. This is done partly in the confessional, partly outside. The parish priest may make a brief discourse to them at the end of the ceremony, or if he prefer he may read to them the instruction which is inserted in the Ritual for the purpose (Can. 1033).

Canon 1034 bids parish priests seriously to warn minors not to contract marriage without the knowledge of their parents or against their reasonable wish. In case of disobedience parish priests should not assist at the marriage without consulting the local Ordinary.

Publications are understood as public announcements by which the faithful are informed of nuptials to be contracted by certain persons, made for this end, that one who knows an impediment of matrimony may disclose it to the pastor. Publications are also called announcements, proclamations, banns.¹ The following are to be considered:

¹ Bannum is a German word which signifies: 1° a place of jurisdiction, for example the bann of Rome; 2° the exercise of jurisdiction by public edict, for example by proclamation of matrimony.

I. Existence of the law. "It is to be publicly announced by the pastor between whom matrimony is to be contracted" (canon 1022).¹ Nevertheless "publications are not to be made for marriages which are contracted with dispensation from the impediment of disparity of cult or mixed religion, unless the local Ordinary, according to his prudence, scandal being removed, has judged it opportune to permit them, provided that apostolic dispensation has preceded and mention of the religion of the non-Catholic party is omitted" (canon 1026).

¹ Roman Ritual, title VII, chapter 1, n. 6.

II. The object of the law is set forth in canons 1023-1025 inclusive, especially canon 1024: "Publications are to be made on three continuous Sundays and other feasts of precept in church during the solemnities of Masses, or during other divine offices to which the people frequently come." The following must be explained:

1. Parish of the publications. The publications must be made in the parish of the betrothed, as is deduced from the fact that they are to be made by the proper pastor (canon 1023, § 1). Now the parish of the betrothed is that in which they have domicile or quasi-domicile (canon 94, § 1), or, if it is a question of vagrants or of those who have only diocesan domicile or quasi-domicile, actual residence (canon 94, §§ 2 and 3). If a party has stayed in another place¹ for six months after having attained puberty,² the pastor is to set forth the matter to the Ordinary, who according to his prudence is either to require publications to be made there, or to prescribe that other proofs or conjectures concerning freedom of status be gathered (canon 1023, § 2).³ If there is some suspicion of a contracted impediment, the pastor is to consult the Ordinary even for a shorter stay; and the Ordinary is not to permit the matrimony unless first the suspicion is removed according to the norm of § 2 (canon 1023, § 3). Finally, particular statutes are to be observed which regard publications and are not opposed to common law; these commonly especially regard marriages of soldiers and vagrants.

a) If the betrothed belong to one and the same parish, the publications are to be made in that parish alone.

b) If the betrothed belong to different parishes, the publications must be made in both.⁴

c) If either party or both belong to several parishes, the publications must be made in each parish.

d) The marriages of minor children are proclaimed both in the quasi-domicile which they perhaps have acquired and in the domicile of those under whose power they are subject; for they necessarily retain this (canon 93, § 1).

e) The marriages of adult children are also to be published in the domicile of the parents, unless they have renounced this. But concerning this renunciation it is often difficult to be certain, so that doubt remains whether or not they are to be announced in the domicile of the parents. In practice, one who follows the current practice is safe.

f) The marriages of vagrants, besides in the parish in which they have actual residence, in some places by force of particular law must also be announced in the parish of origin, or at least in that in which they have stayed longer.⁵

g) The marriages of soldiers, besides in their proper parish, in some places by force of particular law must also be proclaimed in the parish in which they actually stay.

¹ It is not said "elsewhere in a parish," so that the precept does not have force if it is a question of another parish of the same place.

² A minor, if male, is judged pubescent from the completed fourteenth year; if female, from the completed twelfth year (canon 88, § 2).

³ The Pontifical Commission, June 2-3, 1918, to the doubt: If a party, after attaining puberty, has stayed for more than six months in very distant and remote regions, from which, in order that regular attestation of freedom of status may be had, a longer time is required, while nevertheless the celebration of matrimony is urgent, does the oath of the party with the testimony of two, or if two cannot be had, at least of one, who stayed with him or her in those regions, suffice in the case for making freedom of status certain? responded that the matter is remitted to the prudent judgment of the Ordinary, who can prescribe other proofs, not excluding a supplementary oath, according to the norm of canon 1023, § 2 (A.A.S. 1918, p. 345); cf. Instruction of the Sacred Congregation for the Discipline of the Sacraments, June 4, 1921, under 4° (A.A.S. 1921, p. 348).

⁴ Roman Ritual, title VII, chapter 1, n. 7.

⁵ Thus, for example, in the Netherlands (Provincial Council of Utrecht, p. 123).

2. The person publishing. Publications of matrimony must be made by the proper pastor (canon 1023, § 1). He, however, can also satisfy the law through another, for example through a vicar, through any other priest, through a deacon, etc. Nevertheless it is less fitting to use a layman or even a simple cleric.

3. Number of publications. Publications must be made three times, as is clear from what is to be said under 4.

4. Time of the publications. They must be made:

a) On Sundays and other feasts of precept, whether general or particular, and this even if perhaps only the obligation of hearing Mass persists. But it is doubtful whether publications can be made on general feasts in those places where the said feasts do not have force. On suppressed feasts publications cannot of themselves be made; but just as the local Ordinary can dispense from publications for a legitimate cause (canon 1028), so also for a just cause in particular cases he can permit them to be made on abrogated feasts, provided solemn offices must be held as before, and the attendance of the people at church is frequent.¹

b) On continuous Sundays and other feasts of precept, that is, succeeding one another in such a way that no other Sunday or feast is interposed. As to the practice of making publications only on Sundays, while omitting feasts occurring within the week, if it is immemorial, it can be tolerated by the Ordinary if it cannot prudently be removed (canon 5). But if three feast days should immediately succeed one another, the practice seems licit that on those days at most two publications be made. For since otherwise the time for revealing impediments is so brief, the letter of the law is deservedly judged not to have to be urged. If, however, all the announcements are made on three continuous and suitable days, the obligation is satisfied (cf. St. Alphonsus VI, 992).

Note. Publications are not prohibited during the closed time.

c) During the solemnities of Masses, that is, during the parochial or principal Mass, as authors commonly taught, or during other divine offices to which the people frequently come, for example in a private Mass, in Vespers or Lauds, as they are called; but not, as it seems, in offices at which a determined class of the faithful, for example members of some Congregation, rather than "the people," is present. Moreover, it suffices that the publications be made in one of the suitable offices.

¹ Cf. Sacred Congregation of the Council, June 17, 1780; April 19, 1823.

5. Place of the publications. They must be made in church (canon 1024); under this name here comes primarily the parish church, as follows from the fact that they must be performed by the pastor (canon 1023, § 1). Yet it seems that they can also be made in a filial church which has a territory separated from the territory of the mother church, namely for those who belong to the territory of that church.¹ Finally, accidentally they can be made in a church or chapel which for a time holds the place of the parish church, or in which extraordinary divine offices for the parishioners are celebrated.²

¹ Sacred Congregation of the Council, in the Cologne case, in Revue Theologique francaise 1901, p. 117.

² Sacred Congregation of the Council, July 1, 1724; Roman Ritual, title VII, chapter 1, n. 8.

6. Manner of making the publications. The formula is set forth by the Roman Ritual, and it must be observed at least as to substance. Finally, it is clear that the announcements are to be made in the vernacular language, and with a living and clear voice.

Note. The local Ordinary can, for his territory, substitute for publications the public affixing, at the doors of the parish church or another church, of the names of the contracting parties for a space of at least eight days, yet in such a way that, in this space, two feast days of precept are included (canon 1025).

III. Gravity of the law. The precept obliges even if the pastor is certain about the free status of those about to marry. For it is founded on the presumption of common danger, so that it does not cease even if in a particular case the absence of danger is established. The obligation, however, is grave from its genus. Therefore it is a grave sin: 1° to omit all announcements; 2° to omit two, or to neglect the greater part of the precept. It is light to omit one (St. Alphonsus VI, 990), likewise, for example, to make two announcements outside the church, etc., provided nevertheless that there is a sufficiently large concourse of people.

IV. Dispensation. 1. The person competent to dispense, besides the Supreme Pontiff, is the proper local Ordinary, who can dispense from publications even to be made in another diocese (canon 1028, § 1). Furthermore, in many dioceses, by delegation of the Bishop, the faculty of dispensing at least from one or even two publications has been granted to Deans. If there are several proper Ordinaries, for example if those about to marry belong to different dioceses, the one in whose diocese the matrimony is celebrated has the right of dispensing; but if the matrimony is entered outside their proper dioceses, any proper Ordinary can dispense (canon 1028, § 2).

2. A cause for dispensing is certainly required, and indeed, if the one dispensing is inferior to the Holy See, it is required for validity (canon 84, § 1). Since the law is grave, a grave and urgent cause also is required; but it is more easily licit to dispense from one or two publications than from all. For dispensation from all, a most grave cause is required.¹

The causes are customarily distinguished into necessary, that is, such as those in which dispensation ought to be granted, and gracious, that is, such as those in which it can be granted but ought not be granted.

a) Necessary causes are enumerated by St. Alphonsus (VI, 1005): 1° "If there is probable fear lest the matrimony be maliciously impeded; ... 2° if the matrimony is necessary for avoiding damage or infamy of the contracting parties or offspring; namely, if defloration has preceded, and there is fear lest the man change his will. Likewise, if one of the betrothed were at the point of death and there were offspring to be legitimated; ... 3° if danger of soul, body, or fortune is imminent; ... 4° if the bridegroom is immediately about to set out far away, and the necessity of contracting is urgent on account of one of the causes described above; 5° if the parents or guardian intend that the virgin marry an unworthy man"; 6° if the closed time is near at hand, and on the one hand nuptials then cannot be entered without scandal, while on the other hand the matrimony cannot conveniently be deferred, etc.

b) A gracious cause is present if the dispensation seems useful or reasonable, as if it is a question of the marriage of great princes; if dispensation is sought by a man of great merit, for whom to deny it would be grave; if those about to marry are old or of very disparate condition; indeed, in the case, embarrassment can be so great that it is a necessary cause for dispensing (St. Alphonsus VI, 1006). Moreover, Bishops are generally warned not to dispense easily.²

3. Things to be observed in the petition for dispensation. It is sought by the pastor who assists at the matrimony; but by the confessor if the matrimony must be contracted or convalidated secretly. The petition is made in the name of those about to marry. In the supplication there are to be expressed: 1° the names, surnames, parish, and commonly also diocese of the petitioners; with regard to widows or widowers, it is expedient that the name and surname of the deceased spouse be added; 2° what is sought, namely whether dispensation from one, two, or all announcements; 3° the cause why dispensation is sought; 4° the Ordinary is to be made certain of the truth of the cause, into which namely the very person who petitions for dispensation is bound to inquire.³

¹ Cf. Constitution of Benedict XIV, Nimiam licentiam.

² Constitution of Benedict XIV, Satis vobis, November 17, 1741.

³ Let the formula of supplication be: Most Excellent and Most Reverend Lord, Peter N. and Anna N. humbly seek from Your Excellency dispensation from one, or from two, or from all announcements. The cause is... After diligent examination, I have found and testify that the things set forth are true, Your Excellency's most humble servant, N.N., pastor at N.

V. A cause excusing from announcements is had when on the one hand there is a true necessity of entering matrimony, and on the other hand dispensation cannot be obtained in time or cannot be sought without danger of violating the sacramental seal. Now the necessity of entering matrimony is commonly present if one of the necessary causes for dispensing enumerated above is had. Nevertheless, let the matter be treated cautiously and prudently, and if dispensation can be obtained in time, it is to be sought (St. Alphonsus VI, 1003 under 7, 1007 dub. 2).

VI. Things to be noted. Once the investigations and publications have been completed, the following things are to be attended to:

1. The pastor is not to assist at matrimony before he has received all necessary documents (canon 1030, § 1), namely testimony of baptism perhaps conferred elsewhere (p. 518), testimony of investigations and publications perhaps instituted elsewhere (n. 686), testimony of the license of the Ordinary or his delegate if it is a question of a vagrant (p. 524), and, according to the circumstances, testimony of the death of the previous consort, etc. A document of Confirmation is not required, although Catholics, before they are admitted to matrimony, must receive that sacrament if they can do this without grave inconvenience (canon 1021, § 2).

If, with the nuptial day pressing and unable conveniently to be deferred, the testimonial letters have not yet been received, the pastor, insofar as can be done, is to take care that they are received. If time is lacking, recourse is to be made, if it can be done, to the Ordinary; otherwise the pastor proceeds by epikeia, provided he is certain about free status.

2. Furthermore, the pastor is not to assist, unless a reasonable cause requires otherwise, before three days have elapsed from the last publication (canon 1030). According to canon 34, § 3, 3°, the day of the last publication is not computed in these three. If matrimony has not been contracted within six months, the publications are to be repeated, unless it seems otherwise to the local Ordinary (canon 1030, § 2).

3. When doubt has arisen about the existence of some impediment: 1° the pastor is to investigate the matter more accurately, by questioning under oath at least two trustworthy witnesses, provided it is not a question of an impediment from knowledge of which infamy would arise for the parties, and, if it is necessary, the parties themselves also; 2° he is to perform or complete the publications, if the doubt arose before the publications had been begun or completed; 3° he is not to assist at matrimony without consulting the Ordinary, if he has prudently judged that the doubt still remains (canon 1031, § 1).

4. When a certain impediment has been detected, one must proceed thus:

a) If the impediment is occult, the pastor is to perform or finish the publications, and is to bring the matter, while suppressing the names, to the local Ordinary or to the Sacred Penitentiary (canon 1031, § 2, 1°). But if everything is already prepared for the nuptials and the matrimony cannot be deferred without probable danger of grave evil until a dispensation is obtained from the Holy See, and not even the local Ordinary can be approached, or cannot be approached except with danger of violation of secrecy, the pastor is to proceed according to the norm of canon 1045, as will be explained later.

b) If the impediment is public and is detected before the publications have been begun, the pastor is not to proceed further until the impediment is removed, even if he knows that dispensation has been obtained only for the forum of conscience; if it is detected after the first or second publication, the pastor is to complete the publications and bring the matter to the Ordinary (canon 1031, § 2, 2°).

5. Finally, if no impediment has been detected, neither doubtful nor certain, the pastor, after the publications have been completed, is to admit the parties to the celebration of matrimony (canon 1031, § 2, 3°).

Question. What if the pastor or the Ordinary alone knows an impediment, and matrimony is publicly sought?

Response 1. The pastor cannot assist at the matrimony, lest he concur in an invalid matrimony and in the grave inconveniences perhaps to follow from it; these are to be prevented even more by the pastor than by others (St. Alphonsus VI, 1002).

Response 2. The Ordinary, for the same reason, cannot give a sentence in favor of the matrimony. Nor does it stand in the way that by preventing the matrimony he acts as judge and witness; "because someone can well be judge and witness when it is a question of impeding sin" (St. Alphonsus VI, 1002).

Question. What if the impediment is detected in sacramental confession?

Response 1. If the impediment is public, the confessor is to warn the penitent about the necessity of dispensation and send him or her to the pastor; or, if the confessor is the pastor, he is to warn the penitent to manifest the impediment to him outside confession.

Response 2. If the impediment is occult, the confessor likewise generally is to warn the penitent about the necessity of dispensation, and he himself can obtain it for the forum of conscience. I said generally, because the penitent can sometimes be left in good faith, according to what was said in n. 396.

6. In order that the validity of matrimony to be contracted by vagrants may be consulted the more, canon 1032 establishes: "Except in a case of necessity, the pastor is never to assist at the marriage of vagrants of whom in canon 91 unless, after the matter has been brought to the local Ordinary or to a priest delegated by him, he has obtained license to assist." Now:

a) Under the name of vagrants there certainly come those who, having uncertain seats, lack domicile, quasi-domicile, and monthly residence.

It is disputed whether those too are comprehended who are destitute of domicile and quasi-domicile, but not of monthly residence. Now they seem to be comprehended, because canon 1032 expressly speaks of "the matrimony of vagrants of whom in canon 91." Now, with canon 91 considered, those of whom we speak are vagrants.

Objection. Canon 1097, § 1, 2° distinguishes those who enjoy monthly residence from vagrants.

Response. With canons 1032 and 1097, § 1, 2° considered, it seems that one must concede and say that the word vagrants in canon 1032 is used in a broader sense, and in canon 1097, § 1, 2° in a more restricted sense.

b) The Ordinary whose license is required is the Ordinary of the place in which the matrimony is contracted.

c) The aforesaid license is required even if only one party is a vagrant. This is deduced from the end of the law, namely of preventing invalid marriages; and this end is urgent whether both parties or only one is a vagrant.

d) License is not required in a case of necessity, for example if there is danger that the parties, if license is awaited, would contract merely civilly; if there is necessity of undertaking a long journey, which is so urgent that time for obtaining license does not remain, etc.

You will resolve: Betrothed persons are not exempted from the proclamation of banns, even if they certainly know that no impediment underlies the marriage. For the law is founded on the danger of universal nullity of marriage from omitted proclamations. Hence also someone cannot read prohibited books if he fears no danger to himself from them. And although that danger also truly ceases in a particular case, nevertheless the end of the prohibition does not wholly cease, since that end is not only that the danger of perversion be avoided, but also that occasion not be given to depraved writers to commit harmful things to print. Likewise he is still bound by the law of abstinence and fast who abhors meats and delights in fish, and he who can sustain for his stomach only one eating in the day. - L. 199.

Must banns be sent before marriage? - Marriage cannot be contracted licitly, although validly, without previous proclamations of the same, and the obligation is grave. Trent, sess. 24, C. 1, 5, de R. M.; C. Cum inhibitio 3, section 1, de Clandest. desp. - All who are to contract are subject to the law of proclamation. From usage, however, Princes are excepted, because their lineage is sufficiently known, and ordinarily their marriages are sufficiently public. The case of urgent necessity is also excepted, for example, if someone near death should wish to marry a concubine to legitimate offspring, and there would be danger in delay. - A parish priest omitting the denunciations, even if he knows that no impediment is present, sins gravely.

For the law obliges, although in the particular case its reason may cease; and a very grave danger is always present if this matter is left to the judgment of parish priests. But does a parish priest sin gravely if he omits only one proclamation without dispensation? It is controverted. Some affirm, because one proclamation out of three must be held a grave part of the whole precept. Others probably deny, because of the opposite reason. But to omit two denunciations is more probably grave. L. 991. - From a just cause the Bishop and his vicar general can dispense from the law of banns, more easily from one or another denunciation than from all. Trent, sess. 24, C. 1, de R. M. But dispensation must be obtained from both Bishops if the spouses belong to different dioceses.

For if impediments are not detected on one side and in one place, it does not follow that they cannot be detected on the other side and in another place. Yet there are not lacking authors who say that the Ordinary of either side can dispense with both, because of the unity of the act of both, and St. Alphonsus 1006 seems to approve. - The doctors commonly teach that the Bishop not only can, but also sometimes is bound to dispense, namely to avoid grave common or private damage, spiritual or temporal; indeed even because of a notable spiritual or temporal good of the community or of another private person. - L. 389-391, 1005-1007; C. I. 70 ff.; C. B. 1316; E. M.

Note: If for a grave cause the denunciations were omitted before marriage, lest, for example, it be maliciously impeded, "then before its consummation let denunciations be made in the Church, so that if any impediments underlie it they may more easily be detected." Trent, sess. 24, C. 1, de R. M. Therefore, if it is clear that there is no impediment, the spouses will not sin gravely against the Decree by consummating. Indeed Trent immediately adds that the denunciations can be remitted by the prudence and judgment of the Bishop. The parish priest cannot undertake to make the proclamations unless it is first clear to him concerning the free consent of both contracting parties. He must also inquire whether they are affected by any impediment, and whether they know the rudiments of faith, which they must afterward teach their children. Roman Ritual, de Sacr. matr.

Free state: It must be clear before the reception of Orders and before entering marriage. It can be proved by the sworn testimony of two persons. A process is of itself to be instituted, and the norms handed down in the Instruction of the Holy Office, August 21, 1670, with the attached declarations, August 29, 1890 and 1868, are to be observed as regards proving the death of a spouse. But if the aforesaid free state cannot be legitimately proved, then recourse must be made, after the faculty has first been obtained, to a supplementary oath. Holy Office, February 1, 1865.

In what place must denunciations be made? - "It is certain that they must be made in the parish of each contracting party..., because custom so bears. Laymann, etc., except, unless the parishes are very near.... If one of the spouses stays in some place briefly, Pontas thinks it suffices if they are made in the place where he actually lives. But far more probably Sanchez, etc., from the declaration of the S. C., say that they must altogether be made in the parish from which he departed, because denunciations are made for this, that impediments may be manifested, and therefore they must be made where the spouses have lived for a longer time. And here it must be noted that if one of the spouses is external, the parish priest must not make the denunciations unless after he has proved the free state before the Ordinary by an authentic document, as is had from the Instruction of the S. C. of the Holy Office.... But as regards vagi, Trent, sess. 24, C. 7, de R. M., commands parish priests not to assist at their marriages unless after diligent inquiry has been applied, and unless first they have obtained from the Ordinary license to assist. Hence Roncaglia rightly says that a parish priest would sin gravely if he did not observe such a precept." L. 991. - They are to be made in the parish church of the domicile or quasi-domicile of the spouses, or of simple residence and the immediately previous domicile, unless the spouses have left it for six months.

Nevertheless, monthly residence is now to be attended to only for marriage, and not also quasi-domicile. Hence if the spouses, where they now are, have come there for six months or at least for a month, there the denunciations are to be made; otherwise also in the place from which they departed. "For generally satisfaction is made to the Tridentine Decree if marriages are denounced where those intending to contract marriage are parishioners at the time of the denunciations." Schmalzgrueber, l. 4, t. 3, n. 14. But as regards place of origin and previous domicile, or where they lived longer, it is enough to seek testimony of free state through the documents of their Ordinaries, and through examination of witnesses, according to the cited Instruction of the Holy Office, August 21, 1620, confirmed by Clement X, or at least, by special indult, through the supplementary oath of those wishing to contract. But if one or both spouses have equal domicile in two places, or domicile in one place and quasi-domicile or monthly habitation in another, the banns must be proclaimed in both. - Many doctors say, moreover, that proclamations can be made outside the church in a place of great gathering, because thus the end of the Council is obtained. - L. 991; E. M.

It has been granted to the Archdiocese of Paris that written notices exhibiting future marriages be affixed in a conspicuous place of the church for three continuous Sundays or feast days, and that they remain affixed throughout the whole day from the first morning Mass to the last evening liturgical office. S. C. C., March 28, 1908.

At Rome, "from those who have stayed for six continuous months after attaining puberty in another diocese, a Document of free state is required, given by the Ordinary of the place. Those from outside the diocese shall exhibit a Document of origin, baptism, confirmation, and free state.... Once the publications have been carried out in the parishes of the contracting parties, and also in the parishes where the contracting parties have equal domicile or quasi-domicile..., the parish priest will be able to proceed to the celebration of marriage." Instruction of His Eminence the Cardinal Vicar of the City, April 5, 1902, A. S. S., v. 37, p. 223 ff. Cf. the more recent Instruction in M. E., v. 23, p. 28-34.

For proving free state, witnesses are to be duly examined according to the Instruction of the Holy Office, August 21, 1670, Collect. S. C. de P. F., v. 1, n. 192; Decree of the Holy Office, February 24, 1847, Collect. cit. n. 1011. Cf. also Decree of the Holy Office, January 13, 1869, Collect. cit., ed. 2, 1907, n. 1342.

When certain documents concerning the death of a spouse are not had, the response given by the Holy Office on July 20, 1898 concerning men who were present at the battle of Adua is to be applied to other similar cases. S. C. of Sacraments, December 16, 1910. Cf. Enchiridion, num. 996.

When must proclamations be made? - They must be made on feast days of precept, continuously, during the solemnities of Masses. Trent, sess. 24, C. 1, de R. M. On feast days of precept, at least in the place of the proclamations. On feast days. Several teach that they can also be made on a weekday if for some cause there is a great gathering of people at the church. Schmalzgrueber, l. 4, t. 1, n. 24. Continuously, i.e. with no feast day omitted from the first proclamation to the third. St. Alphonsus 992 thinks it probable that there is no grave sin if the feast days are not continuous, one or another having intervened, especially if the question concerns feasts other than Sunday. For there is slight danger that the people will forget. But can proclamations be made on feast days immediately succeeding each other, if they occur? It is controverted, and there is a twofold probable opinion. During the solemnities of Masses, i.e. in the parochial or conventual Mass. The doctors add probably that, from a just cause, they can be made in a sermon, or on the occasion of a procession, when the people are gathered. They cannot be made in private Masses, nor at Vespers. If, however, the parish priest has forgotten to make the last proclamation at Mass, and the nuptials are urgent, he can supply it at Vespers. Once the proclamations have been made, it is licit to contract at once even on the same day. But if, once the proclamations have been made, marriage does not follow within two months, more probably the proclamations must be repeated, unless it seems otherwise to the Bishop. Roman Ritual. And after three months have elapsed, there is also need of a new testimony of free state, unless again it seems otherwise to the Bishop. S. I. C., February 24, 1847, ad 4. - L. 991, 992, 993; E. M.

The S. C. C. in Pineroli, April 7, 1862, rescripted that "denunciations can be made on the aforesaid suppressed feast days, i.e. according to the Decree of Pius IX to the Subalpines; care is nevertheless to be taken that these be fulfilled at the time of the divine office when the greater number of the faithful is usually present in the church." But the authors add: with the permission of the Ordinary.

Must known impediments of marriage be revealed? - There is of itself a grave obligation of revealing impediments of marriage. The reason is drawn from the motive of religion and charity, and from the very precept of banns. - This obligation pertains to all, of whatever sex, age, parish, diocese, even friends and blood relatives; and it must be fulfilled as soon as morally possible, lest perhaps, once dispensation has been obtained from one or another proclamation, marriage immediately follow. But once marriage has followed, the positive law indeed ceases; but the natural law, according to circumstances, can require revelation. - The aforesaid obligation is present however hidden the impediments are, and even if someone knows them under a natural secret, even one simply committed or promised, even sworn. For a secret of this sort does not oblige when grave damage threatens the community or a particular person. But more probably there is no obligation of revelation if it is a secret committed for the sake of seeking counsel, for example to an advocate, physician, parish priest, etc. The common good seems to require this. But those who know impediments of marriage in this way must at least admonish the spouses to desist from the marriage. C. Praeterea 12, de Spons.

One is bound to reveal impediments, although he alone knows them and cannot prove them, since here the testimony of one suffices. One can, absolutely speaking, reveal an impediment if damage threatens an innocent person, or public damage would follow. Cf. V. 1, n. 1542. And the contracting parties themselves are bound to reveal it, since the question is not of undergoing a penalty, but of avoiding sin and scandal. - But one is not bound to reveal it with grave damage to himself, if grave scandal of others would follow from it, if the revelation would be useless or rather would harm those contracting in good faith, if dispensation had already been obtained, etc. - L. 994-1002.

Can a parish priest sometimes dispense in denunciations? - R. In the negative, because he has no jurisdiction in the external forum. "Nevertheless Sanchez, Laymann, etc., say very probably that in cases in which the Bishop is bound to dispense, and cannot be approached, and there is danger in delay, he can declare that the precept of proclamations does not oblige, provided he is certain that no impediment is present. Indeed in cases of this sort Busembaum, Pontas, etc., judge that the spouses themselves, if they are certain that they are not impeded, can enter nuptials without denunciations." L. 1007.

What is the parish priest to do if the spouses are already in the Church to contract marriage, and he detects that a hidden impediment is present? - If the nuptials cannot be delayed without danger of infamy or other very grave inconveniences, and the penitent is in invincible ignorance of the impediment, the admonition is to be omitted, and the celebration of marriage is to be permitted until dispensation is obtained. If the penitent is in vincible ignorance, or if he openly knows the impediment, and the marriage cannot be delayed without infamy or scandal, not even to obtain dispensation from the Bishop, then the difficulty is very great. According to St. Liguori and others, the confessor could declare the law of the Church concerning impediments not to oblige in such straits of infamy and scandal, and proceed to the celebration of marriage. Certainly every power has been given unto edification, not unto destruction. Nevertheless, as soon as possible, at least for caution, he ought to request dispensation. According to others, simulation of the contract of marriage could be permitted with the purpose of seeking dispensation from the impediment as soon as possible. But, they say, an impediment cannot cease naturally; for an invalidating law never ceases on account of a particular inconvenience, whatever it may be. But whenever the Bishop can be approached, he must be approached, because, according to the common opinion, in that case he can dispense from ecclesiastical impediments.

C. Ubi 2, de Desp. impub.; L. 613, 1122; Monit. Eccles., v. 12, p. 16 ff.

Nor are there lacking those who likewise hold that, at the article of death, when grave danger would be present for the eternal salvation of the sick person, the ecclesiastical law of impediments ceases by force of the more urgent natural law, namely of charity, and that at least then there is room for legitimate epikeia. M. E., v. 20, p. 177, 474.

But in the present matter almost every difficulty vanishes. For Bishops, in the aforesaid case, have among the quinquennial faculties the faculty "of dispensing over the impediments of adultery and affinity from illicit intercourse, even in marriages to be contracted, and of subdelegating, as regards the aforesaid impediment of affinity, the faculty of dispensing, even habitually, to parish priests of their own diocese." Form of Faculties, May 5, 1896. To parish priests, and also to rectors, so called, who exercise the care of souls in some district, although they are not parish priests in the strict sense; and also to those priests who, during the vacancy of a parish, or on the occasion of sickness or absence of the parish priest, are deputed as administrators of the parish. S. Poenitentiaria, July 17, 1901. Cf. 1044; E. M. de Leg., n. 264, and here 955.

Who can dispense in impedient impediments? - No one can dispense, except the Supreme Pontiff and from a just cause, from an impediment arising from valid betrothals, since in this matter there is question of a strict debt of justice, which no one besides the supreme Prince can take away. The same must be said concerning the necessity of the consent of parents, which is to be referred back to natural law; nevertheless this naturally ceases if the parents dissent unjustly. - Bishops, or Ordinaries, Pastors of souls, enjoying full jurisdiction in the external forum, can dispense 1. in the obligation of banns; 2. as regards the contract during forbidden time, where custom also interdicts this; 3. in a vow of temporary chastity, and of virginity or of not marrying. - But they cannot dispense 1. as regards a vow of perpetual chastity; 2. as regards a vow of entering Religion; 3. as regards the impediment of disparity of worship between Catholics and heretics; 4. as regards clandestinity, or marriage to be contracted in the face of the Church; 5. as regards the solemnities of nuptials, S. R. C., August 14, 1858, Mont. Alb., ad 2; 6. as regards proof of free state. For these impediments are reserved to the Pope. - Regulars by their privileges are able to dispense merely for the internal forum in a vow of virginity, or of not marrying; for they have the same power of dispensing from vows in the internal forum which belongs to Bishops by ordinary right, according to the common opinion of the doctors. L. 987, 1119, 1128; Benedict XIV, Instr. 80, n. 15; Sanchez, l. 1, d. 61.

“The burden has likewise been enjoined upon the proper parish priest that, before the announcements of a Matrimony to be entered into are made publicly in the church during the solemnities of Masses, he should take care cautiously to examine both the bridegroom and the bride separately and, as it is said, in the ear, whether by their will, spontaneously and freely, and truly with the consent of the soul, they are mutually joined in Matrimony.” Apostolic Letter of Benedict XIV, 28 May 1743.

“Can the Ordinary, for a cause, dispense so that the banns may be made while Vespers are being sung, provided that it is on feast days?—Response. He can so dispense for a cause.” Sacred Congregation of the Council, 25 October 1586.

“Can the banns of Marriages be made, in the case, on abrogated feast days?—Response. Negative, unless with the permission of the bishop, with the conditions according to the form of the decision of Brno, 5 July 1780, after consultation with His Holiness.” In the case of Todi, Banns of Matrimony, 19 April 1823. Moreover, the form of the decision of Brno, in addition to a grave cause, requires that “on those days which are not feast days, a frequent concourse of the people to the Church still continues.”

“Whether and at what time must the banns and the explanation of the Gospel be made in the case?—Response. Affirmative; as regards the explanation of the Gospel, in the parish Mass; and as regards the banns, in the same Mass or at another hour more frequented by the people.” Sacred Congregation of the Council, 20 September 1828.

Bannum is a German word which signifies the same thing as a public proclamation. Banns, therefore, are public notifications by which the faithful are admonished concerning matrimony to be contracted between certain persons.

We must treat: first, of the necessity of banns; second, of their circumstances; third, of dispensation from them; fourth, of the revelation of impediments.

734. Principles. - I. From the precept of the Church there is a grave obligation of proclaiming the banns. The existence of the precept is established: first, from the Fourth Lateran Council, and from the Council of Trent, session 24, chapter 1. The existence of a grave obligation is established, secondly, because a general discipline prescribed by two General Councils and resting upon grave motives produces a grave obligation ¹.

¹ The gravity of the precept is also argued from the gravity of the penalties. For the Tridentine Synod (session 24, chapter 5, On the Reformation of Matrimony) decrees that, if an impediment is afterward discovered, the spouses are to be separated with every hope of obtaining a dispensation removed; whence you conclude that those who by privilege can grant dispensations, for example, by a rescript of the Sacred Penitentiary, cannot dispense with these persons. Furthermore (chapter Cum inhibitio 3, section 1, On Clandestine Betrothals), if any offspring has been conceived, it is held illegitimate, even if the spouses were so ignorant of the impediment that they could be considered in good faith. See Schmalzgrueber (book 4, title 3, nos. 73-74).

II. The proclamation of the banns is not required by necessity of the Sacrament. The reason is that neither the Council of Trent nor the Lateran Council, which had previously prescribed the same thing, adds any invalidating clause. Nor can any other law be cited from which it is established that the proclamation is required for the validity of matrimony.

735. Questions. - QUESTION 1. Are all who are to contract subject to the law of proclamation?

Reply. Yes, because the law is altogether general. Nevertheless, Princes are excepted by usage because their family is sufficiently known and their marriages are ordinarily sufficiently public. Except also a case of necessity; for example, if one near death wished to marry his concubine in order to legitimate offspring and there were danger in delay. - See Ferraris, Library, under the entry Denunciations of Matrimony.

QUESTION 2. Does a Pastor sin gravely by omitting the denunciation if he knows that no impediment is present?

Reply. Yes. The reason is: first, because the Pastor can with difficulty be altogether certain that no impediment to matrimony is present; second, because even if no impediment appears before the proclamation of the banns, it can happen that some impediment supervenes after they have been proclaimed. - St. Ligorius, no. 990 ².

² Apply the principle that a law obliges even if its reason ceases in a particular case, especially since a most grave danger would be imminent if this matter were left to the judgment of Pastors, as is evident from the things said in the preceding note. Therefore, when the matter is urgent and, after diligent inquiry, it is established that no impediment is present, a dispensation must be sought; the denunciation must not be omitted at the discretion of the Pastor.

QUESTION 3. Does a Pastor sin gravely if, without a dispensation, he omits only one proclamation?

Reply. It is disputed. Some affirm it because one proclamation out of three must be regarded as a grave part of the whole precept. Others, however, deny it; St. Ligorius, no. 991, calls their opinion probable. It is more probable, however, that the omission of two denunciations is a mortal sin. - St. Ligorius, ibid. - See Cases, no. 873.

A threefold circumstance is to be considered here, namely: first, of time; second, of place; third, of persons.

736. • The proclamations must be made on consecutive feast days of precept during the solemnities of Mass. - Council of Trent, session 24, chapter 1, On Reformation.

It is said: first, on feast days, that is, on feast days of precept ¹, at least in the place of the proclamations; second, consecutive, that is, with no feast day omitted from the first proclamation to the last ². Whether the proclamations can be made on feast days immediately succeeding one another, if these occur, is disputed; there are two probable opinions ³. Third, during the solemnities of Mass, that is, in the parochial or conventual Mass, from a Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council. - St. Ligorius, no. 991 ⁴. The proclamations cannot be made at private Masses or at Vespers. - Roman Ritual.

¹ Several teach with Schmalzgrueber (book 4, title 1, no. 24) and St. Alphonsus (book 6, no. 992) that the denunciation can be made even on a weekday if, for some cause, a great concourse of people comes to the church, because in this way also the end of the Council is sufficiently attained.

² St. Alphonsus (no. 992) considers it probable, and several others hold (in Schmalzgrueber, book 4, title 1, no. 23), that there is no grave sin if the feast days are not consecutive, one or another intervening, especially if feast days other than Sunday are in question. The reason is that there is slight danger that the people will forget, and the transgression is considered light matter.

³ In order that the affirmative opinion be probable, it appears necessary that every suspicion of an impediment truly be absent, because in so brief an interval neither can a report easily be spread sufficiently nor can doubts be dispelled.

⁴ The Doctors probably add, as St. Alphonsus says (no. 991), that the proclamations can be made at a sermon or on the occasion of a procession when the people are assembled.

If, however, the Pastor has forgotten to make the final proclamation at Mass, and the nuptials are urgent, he can supply it at Vespers. This is permitted by a Decision of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, October 25, 1586. - Ferraris.

If, after the proclamations have been made, the matrimony is not celebrated within two months, the proclamations must more probably be repeated, unless it seems otherwise to the Bishop ⁵.

⁵ From the Council of Ravenna it was approved and decreed in the Congregation that if any persons do not contract within four months after the denunciations have been completed, they cannot contract unless the denunciations have again been completed. Gallemart (note 3 on chapter 1, On the Reformation of Matrimony, session 24, Council of Trent). The same Declaration is reported by Rebellus (at the end of book 4, part 2, section 8, no. 8) and Busembaum (book 6, treatise 6, chapter 3, doubt 1, resolution 1). But what the Author says concerning the elapse of two months agrees with the Roman Ritual.

Although the form of the Tridentine precept does not appear to be violated if matrimony is contracted on the same day immediately after the final proclamation, nevertheless, if there should perhaps be insufficient time for reporting impediments, the law appears to be evaded. Hence Croix (book 6, part 3, no. 480) records that the Council of Cologne requires an interval of at least one day, so that, namely, if some impediment is present, it can be reported before the matrimony.

737. • From the Council of Trent, the proclamations of the banns must be made in a church, that is, in the parochial church of the contracting parties; but not in chapels, whether public or private ⁶, unless they hold the place of a parish and the parochial Mass is celebrated there. By parish, however, there is not to be understood the parish in which someone was born, or the parish of origin, but the parish of actual domicile, if the one to be proclaimed has remained there for a notable time.

⁶ Denunciations in chapels would not attain, as is evident, the end of the Council. Moreover, if the Pastor makes the denunciations in another church of the same parish in which perhaps solemnities are celebrated, the law of the Council appears to have been sufficiently fulfilled. Indeed, several Doctors in St. Alphonsus (book 6, no. 991) say that they can be made outside the church in a place of great concourse because thus the end of the Council is attained.

Hence: first, if the betrothed persons live in different parishes, the proclamation must be made in each. Second, if one or both have a roughly equal domicile in two places, the banns must also be proclaimed in each. But if one of the two domiciles is the principal or properly so called, a double proclamation is not thereby required. If someone, however, besides a domicile has a quasi-domicile elsewhere, the proclamations must also be made in the quasi-domicile. Third, if the contracting parties have recently fixed their domicile in the present parish, the banns must also be published in the parish where they previously lived; six months, however, is a sufficient time, says St. Ligorius, no. 991 ⁷.

⁷ St. Alphonsus by no means determines a period of six months in the cited place, but writes thus: A doubt arises concerning where the denunciations must be made if one of the betrothed persons stays for a short time in some place. Pontius thinks it sufficient if they are made in the place where that person actually resides. But Sanchez, etc., far more probably say from a Declaration of the Sacred Congregation that they must altogether be made in the parish from which the person departed; because the denunciations are therefore made that impediments may be manifested, and consequently they must be made where the betrothed persons have remained for a longer time.

Moreover, Father Gury perhaps indicates a period of six months as a sufficient cause why the denunciations must also be made in the present parish. For otherwise, as Schmalzgrueber has it (book 4, title 3, no. 14), it is not necessary that they be made in the place where the matrimony is contracted if, for example, after the denunciations have been made in the city, with permission for a just cause they wish to celebrate in the country, or migrate to another place. For, in general, the Tridentine Decree is satisfied if marriages are announced where those who are to contract matrimony are parishioners at the time of the denunciations.

But what Gury adds after St. Alphonsus, that the banns must also be published in the parish where they previously lived, must be understood unless they departed from there a long time previously, for example, ten, eight, or even five years, as is sufficiently gathered from Declarations of the Sacred Congregation. See Thesaurus of Resolutions of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, volume 6, pp. 272, 274. For in this case it would have been sufficient to seek testimony concerning free status.

738. • 1. Minors. The banns of minors must not be proclaimed except with the express consent of their parents or tutors ⁸. The proclamation must be made both in the domicile of fact and in the domicile of law, that is, both in the place where the minors live here and now and in the place where their parents or tutors reside. Males are held to be minors until the age of twenty-five years, and females until the twenty-first year. A male deprived of ascendants, however, becomes a major as soon as he has completed his twenty-first year.

⁸ No ecclesiastical law requires this consent of parents or tutors as regards minors, but the Author admonishes these things according to the prescriptions of the civil laws in France.

2. Soldiers. The banns of soldiers must be proclaimed: first, in the place where they are in garrison; second, in addition, in the domicile of their parents if they are minors ⁹; but if they are majors, in the place where they resided before entering military service, because they have not acquired another domicile of law. - Thus commonly.

⁹ See the preceding note.

3. Wanderers and foreigners. According to the common opinion, their banns must be published in their domicile of fact and in their place of origin if they have not obtained a true domicile elsewhere, or at least in the place in which they remained for a longer time. Furthermore, an authentic testimony concerning their free status must be obtained, and they must not be joined in matrimony without the permission of the Ordinary, as the Council of Trent has it, session 24, chapter 7, On the Reformation of Matrimony.

854. 1° Notion. Matrimonial banns (from the German word bann, public promulgation) are public promulgations which are sent before a future marriage, especially for this end, that impediments, if there are any, may be detected.

Already in antiquity the practice prevailed of approaching the pastor before the nuptials, so that he could inquire whether there was any impediment or not. Thus Charlemagne, in the year 802, ordered that nuptials not be celebrated before the priests, with the elders of the people, had diligently inquired into the consanguinity of those being joined. Likewise in many places espousals were contracted publicly, so that the future marriage might become known to all: which was equivalent to banns.

But the manner of publicly announcing marriage in churches took its beginning in Gaul,¹ then in England; afterwards it was extended to the whole Church by the decree of the Fourth Lateran Council (1216), which the Council of Trent confirmed and enlarged. According to the Lateran Council, it suffices that the publications be made once; but three are required according to Trent. Therefore where Trent has not been promulgated as to the part which regards the banns, one publication strictly speaking suffices, although a threefold one often is more prudent.

¹ Thus Odo de Subiaco, Bishop of Paris, at the beginning of the thirteenth century, ordered that marriages be published in church, so that all the faithful could denounce to the episcopal court impediments which they knew.

855. 2° Obligation of banns. (A) Principle: The law of the proclamation of banns regularly obliges under grave sin both the pastor and those about to marry. For there is question of a law of grave importance, as is established: (a) from the very end of the law, which is manifold: that impediments, if there are any, may be more easily detected, and clandestine marriages avoided; - that children may not marry without the knowledge of their parents; - that the prayers of friends may be offered for the betrothed.

(b) From the Code (c. 1022-1030), which, although it does not renew the penalties previously enacted against violators of the law, nevertheless sets forth the matter so that from the context it is clearly established that the obligation of proclaiming the banns is grave.

856. (B) The principle is declared. This law obliges under grave sin even if the pastor knows otherwise that those about to marry are detained by no impediment; because the law is founded on the presumption of danger, and therefore does not cease in a particular case where in fact such danger is absent; for great inconveniences generally would follow if the application of the law were permitted to the judgment of pastors.

Certainly it is mortal to omit three publications, without dispensation; to omit only one would more probably be only a venial sin; indeed some think that the omission of two does not exceed venial sin, provided that the danger of a hidden impediment is removed by waiting several days before the nuptials are permitted, so that thus the faithful have time for denouncing impediments, if there are any. Nevertheless St. Alphonsus (n. 990) more probably teaches that the omission of two is a mortal sin.

It was said that regularly the banns are to be promulgated, because certain exceptions are given: -

(a) If the marriage cannot be deferred without great inconvenience, and a dispensation from the banns cannot be obtained from elsewhere, for example if a dying man wishes to marry his concubine: in this case, the sworn affirmation of the contracting parties suffices (can. 1019, § 2); (b) in marriages of princes, by universal custom, because they are so well known that an impediment, if there is any, can easily be detected; (c) in mixed marriages between Catholics and heretics, or between the faithful and infidels, announcements regularly are not made, lest marriages of this kind seem thus to be approved; nevertheless recently the Holy See declared that proclamations can be made in mixed nuptials which are contracted after dispensation has been obtained, with mention of the religion of the contracting parties nevertheless suppressed, if the Ordinary shall have judged them necessary for detecting impediments;¹ (d) in marriages of conscience (below, n. 871).

¹ Code, c. 1026. - Thus the Holy Office responded, July 4, 1874, "that proclamations can be made in the marriages of which there is question, insofar as they are contracted with apostolic dispensation, the religion of the contracting parties nevertheless being suppressed." Yet the S. Congregation adds that it is more expedient to dispense from the banns, if the freedom of state of the contracting parties has been made more certain from elsewhere, in order to avoid danger of astonishment or scandal. (Collect. P. F., n. 1223; Gasparri, n. 621.) - According to the Statutes of the diocese of Baltimore, n. 55, proclamations should not be made except when, because of civil laws, they cannot be omitted; in which case they are to be made after Mass. Now the civil law requires them when those about to marry do not wish to pay money to obtain a license.

II. On the Circumstances of Banns

857. The manner in which banns must be promulgated is described by the Code in these words:² "The publications of marriages must be made by the proper pastor." "The publications are to be made on three continuous Sundays and other feasts of precept, in church during the solemnities of Masses, or during other divine offices to which the people come in numbers." Four things are declared there: 1° the person promulgating; 2° the place where the banns must be promulgated; 3° the time; 4° the form of promulgation.

² Can. 1023, § 1, 1024.

858. 1° On the person promulgating. Banns must be promulgated by the proper pastor of the contracting parties, who can perform this either by himself or through another priest or cleric; but not through a layman, except in a case of necessity, for example when, the pastor being absent, the only priest who is present to celebrate the sacred rite can in no way understand or speak the language of the parishioners (which sometimes happens in the United States of America, because of the multiplicity of languages which are used in various churches). Now the proper pastor is the pastor of the domicile or quasi-domicile;¹ but for wanderers, who lack domicile, the pastor of the place where they contract.

¹ Code, c. 94.

859. 2° On the place. The place where banns must be promulgated is the parochial church, or another taking the place of the parochial church, as is a vicarial or annexed chapel to which a territory is assigned; but not a small chapel, whether public or private, unless nevertheless in this particular case it takes the place of the church, and there is a great concourse of people there: for then the end of the law is obtained. - For the same reason, if on the occasion of a sermon, procession, or pious pilgrimage the people were gathered in a place distinct from the parochial church, the announcements could be made there, with the license of the Bishop acceding.

860. Here, however, it is asked whether banns must be promulgated in several parishes.

(A) General rules. (a) If each betrothed person has domicile or quasi-domicile in the same parish, and in that parish only, the publications must be made there only.

(b) But if the betrothed have domicile or quasi-domicile in different parishes, banns must be promulgated in each.

(c) If one or each betrothed has several domiciles, or domicile in one parish and quasi-domicile in another, announcements must be made in all these parishes, unless nevertheless the Bishop dispenses, or one domicile is principal and the other wholly secondary.

(d) "If a party has dwelt in another place for six months after attaining puberty, the pastor is to set forth the matter to the Ordinary, who according to his own prudence either shall require publications to be made there, or shall prescribe that other proofs or conjectures concerning freedom of state be gathered. If there is some suspicion concerning an impediment contracted, the pastor even for a shorter stay shall consult the Ordinary, who is not to permit the marriage unless first the suspicion is removed."¹

¹ Code, c. 1023.

(e) If the contracting parties, after the proclamations have been begun, leave their prior domicile and acquire a new one (which can happen especially as regards servants), it seems more consonant with the end of the law not to interrupt the announcements begun in the former place where the betrothed are known; nor will they have to be made in the new domicile, where they are scarcely known at all. Nevertheless the pastor of the new domicile has the right of assisting at the nuptials, as is said below.

861. (B) Special rules. From the Code: (a) the banns of minors² must be proclaimed both in the place of quasi-domicile, if they have one, and in the place where the parents or guardians reside;³ but prudence requires that they not be announced without the consent of the parents or guardians,⁴ especially where civil law requires this consent.

² From the Code, both males and females are minors before the twenty-first year has been completed. (Can. 88, § 1).

³ Code, c. 93, § 1, § 2.

⁴ Code, c. 1034.

(b) The banns of soldiers are to be promulgated in the garrisons or places where they reside; and, in addition, in the domicile of the parents or guardians if they are minors, or, if they have become of age, in the parish where they resided before undertaking military service.⁵

⁵ In Gaul, soldiers cannot marry without the consent of the minister of war, or of the President of the corps to which they belong. Cf. Baudry-Lac., n. 528 and 540.

(c) The marriages of wanderers cannot be celebrated unless the pastor has obtained the license of the Bishop and has diligently inquired concerning their free state;⁶ yet this is not to be understood of those who wander about in the same city. The Bishop can also establish in what place the announcements must be made: generally they are made in the parish where the wanderers contract; but sometimes also in the place of origin, or where they have resided for a longer time, especially if there is doubt concerning their free state.

⁶ Code, c. 1032.

N. B. If doubts arise concerning all these things, the Bishop should be approached, who, since he is able to dispense from the banns, a fortiori can establish where the proclamations must be made.

862. 3° On the time. Banns must be promulgated (a) on three Sundays and other feasts of precept; but not on suppressed feast days, unless by license of the Ordinary, which can be given if on these days there is a great concourse of people.¹

¹ Which rule can be inferred from various decisions of the S. C. of the Council.

(b) On three continuous feast days, that is, with no feast day omitted; yet this does not oblige under grave sin, since it is not necessary for obtaining the end of the law, and it is free from every fault if a reasonable cause accedes. But if three feast days immediately follow one another (for example, Easter day and Monday and Tuesday after Easter), it is better to interrupt the announcements, so that the faithful can think about impediments for a longer time. Yet the pastor who promulgates the banns on three successive days cannot be blamed, provided that after the last one he waits a longer time, so that impediments can be manifested.

(c) During the solemnities of Masses, that is, during the parochial or conventual Mass. If nevertheless the pastor had omitted the last announcement at Mass because of forgetfulness, and the nuptials were urgent, he could proclaim the banns at vespers, or in another solemn act of religion, if there is a great concourse of people.²

² Thus from the Code, c. 1024.

Once the proclamations have been made, one is not immediately to proceed to the celebration of the marriage; but three days must be awaited "unless a reasonable cause demands otherwise,"³ so that time may be given to the faithful for revealing impediments, if any exist.

³ Code, c. 1030.

If the marriage is not celebrated within six months after the announcements have been made, according to the Code⁴ these must be repeated, unless it seems otherwise to the Bishop. Concerning this matter it is necessary to read the diocesan Statutes, which are varied for various regions.

⁴ Code, c. 1030, § 2.

863. 4° On the form of Banns. No special form was prescribed by Trent; therefore that form is to be observed which is found in the Ritual⁵ or in the diocesan Statutes. There must be expressed in the vernacular tongue the name and surname of the betrothed, and also of their parents, their native place and place of domicile. If there is question of widows or widowers, the name, day, and year of the death of the prior spouse are to be expressed; if a previous marriage has been declared null, or dissolved by the authority of the Holy See, this likewise must be made known; the same must be said if dispensation from some publicly known impediment has been obtained. Finally, the faithful are to be admonished concerning the grave obligation of manifesting impediments to the pastor, if they know any;¹ if a dispensation from some publication has been granted, this is to be manifested, lest perhaps the faithful, expecting another publication, not reveal an impediment at the opportune time.

⁵ "The announcements are to be made in this manner. During the solemnities of Masses let the pastor admonish the people in the vernacular tongue to this effect: Let it be known to all here present that N. man, and N. woman, of such or such family, and parish, God helping, intend to contract marriage with one another. Therefore we admonish each and all, that if anyone has known that there is some impediment of consanguinity, or affinity, or spiritual relationship, or any other impediment between them, which would mutually impede the marriage to be contracted, he ought to denounce it to us as soon as possible; and this we admonish the first time, if it shall have been the first; or the second, if it shall have been the second; or the third, if it shall have been the third announcement." Commonly a shorter form is found in the Statutes.

¹ Code, c. 1027.

But circumstances which can defame the contracting parties are to be carefully omitted; for example, if one is illegitimate, the parents are not to be named; if a woman had been a concubine, although commonly held as a wife, let her be designated under the name by which she is usually called.

Let the promulgation be made in a loud and intelligible voice; otherwise the end of the law is in no way obtained.

"The local Ordinary can for his own territory substitute for the publications the public affixing, at the doors of the parochial church or of another church, of the names of the contracting parties for the space of at least eight days, yet in such a way that, in this space, two feast days of precept are included." (Code, c. 1025.)

III. On Dispensation from the Banns

864. 1° Principle: Not only the Supreme Pontiff, but also the local Ordinary has the power of dispensing from the banns for a just cause. For Trent openly declares this (l. c.): "Unless the Ordinary himself shall have judged it expedient that the aforesaid announcements be remitted; which the Holy Synod leaves to his prudence and judgment." More explicitly the Code: "The proper local Ordinary, according to his own prudent judgment, can for a legitimate cause dispense from publications, even those to be made in another diocese. If there are several proper Ordinaries, he has the right of dispensing in whose diocese the marriage is celebrated; but if the marriage is entered outside the proper dioceses, any proper Ordinary can dispense."¹

¹ Code, c. 1028.

Now under the name of Ordinaries of places come the Bishop, the Vicar General, the Vicar Capitular or Administrator for his own diocese; the Abbot and Prelate nullius for his own territory; Apostolic Vicars and Prefects, and those who, when the aforesaid are lacking, meanwhile succeed in governance² from the prescription of law or from approved constitutions. But pastors do not enjoy this power, unless they have been expressly delegated to it;³ and therefore if the Bishop denies dispensation, they cannot go against his decision. Nevertheless, "in dangers of death, if other proofs cannot be had, the sworn affirmation of the contracting parties, that they have been baptized and are detained by no impediment, suffices, unless contrary indications are present."⁴

² Code, c. 198.

³ In many dioceses of the United States of America, for example in Baltimore (Statut. n. 55), pastors can dispense from one proclamation, for a just cause, except in the case of wanderers; from two, where Mass is not celebrated every Sunday; from all, in those counties in which there is no church.

⁴ Code, c. 1019, § 2.

865. 2° For granting a dispensation, a legitimate cause is required, according to the prudent judgment of the Ordinary, as is established from can. 1028 already cited, - a greater one if there is dispensation from all, but a lighter one if there is dispensation only from one or two. According to St. Alphonsus (n. 1005), some are causes on account of which the Bishop is bound, but others on account of which he can dispense.

(A) He is bound to dispense as often as this is necessary for avoiding grave damage, common or private, spiritual or temporal; namely (a) if there is a founded fear lest the marriage be maliciously impeded, for example by a guardian or stepmother contemplating other nuptials; (b) if it is feared lest one party withdraw, especially in the case of defloration or espousals; (c) if either of the betrothed is at the point of death and wishes to legitimate offspring; (d) if one party is immediately about to depart into a distant region, and the marriage cannot be deferred; (e) if from the proclamations infamy would arise, or some other damage of soul or body, for example if those about to marry are already held by the community as true spouses, or if infamy threatens on the part of the deflowered betrothed woman.

(B) He can dispense: (a) if those about to marry would be exposed to the mockery of men, because, for example, they are very old, or very unequal in condition; (b) if it is morally certain that no impediment is present; wherefore dispensation is often granted to magnates, because, since they are known, impediments are more easily detected.

IV. On the Obligation of Revealing Impediments

866. 1° Principle: Whoever, certainly knowing that there is some diriment or prohibiting impediment between those about to marry, is held under grave obligation to reveal it, unless a legitimate cause excuses. This is certain.

This obligation arises: (a) from the very precept of charity, by which we ought to impede a grave evil of our neighbor insofar as it can be done; for from an illicit marriage a grave evil is born, namely the profanation of the sacrament; but from an invalid one graver evils proceed, namely concubinage, illegitimacy of children, etc.; (b) from the virtue of religion, which commands that we take precautions against irreverence toward the sacrament; (c) from the positive law of the Church, which, while it orders marriages to be announced, implicitly commands the faithful to manifest impediments known to them; which moreover is explicitly enjoined in the form of announcement such as is found in the Ritual (l. c.)¹ and in the Code, c. 1027.

¹ Besides, in some dioceses penalties are established against those not denouncing, for example in Baltimore an excommunication of ferendae sententiae. (Statutes, n. 57.)

867. 2° The principle is declared. It is said (A) whoever, whether he is from the parish, or from elsewhere, of whatever sex or age. Hence the contracting parties themselves are held to this: but if there is question of an occult impediment from which dispensation can be obtained, there is no obligation of manifesting it in the external forum; it suffices that it be declared to the confessor, so that he may seek dispensation.

(B) Certainly knowing; for if there is a mere suspicion arising from an uncertain rumor or from testimony which does not deserve faith, there is no obligation of manifesting the matter. Yet juridical proof is not required, but a well-founded persuasion suffices.

868. (C) Unless a legitimate cause excuses, namely: (a) grave damage or danger of grave damage either to the one revealing, or to a third person; for law does not oblige with so great an inconvenience.

Hence those are not held to denounce who prudently fear that, from the revelation of the impediment, grave dishonor or bodily damages threaten themselves or their own, or grave scandal would be caused, or the infamy of a third person; but one excused from denouncing ought, if he can, to impede the marriage from being contracted without dispensation. - But temporal damage or dishonor coming to the betrothed themselves from the revelation of the impediment does not excuse, because it is less than the spiritual damage which otherwise they would incur. Moreover, that their reputation may be spared, the betrothed themselves ought first to be warned privately; but if they spurn the warning, they ought to impute the defamation to themselves.

(b) The uselessness of denunciation, namely when no fruit is hoped from it, or when it is known that dispensation has already been sought. Some say that he also is excused who knows the impediment only from hearing, and does not remember from whom he heard it; but it is more advisable in this case to reveal the impediment, since this manifestation can be corroborated by other indications or furnish occasion for a serious investigation.

869. (c) The sacramental secret, or that which is committed to someone by reason of public office, for example to a pastor, physician, midwife, advocate, etc.; for the public good, which is preferred to the private good, demands that such a secret be altogether observed.

But if these persons have known the impediment from elsewhere - not by exercise of their office - they are held to reveal it, unless by acting thus they would come under suspicion of violating the secret committed to them. Besides, all these ought privately to admonish those about to marry themselves concerning the existence of the impediment, and exhort them to manifest it; indeed the pastor can, without violation of the seal, and generally ought, secretly seek a dispensation.

But the confessor, who from the confession of a penitent detects a public impediment, ought to urge him to manifest the same to the pastor, or to grant permission to himself to seek dispensation; but if the impediment is occult, with the license of the penitent, he himself should secretly ask for dispensation.

But the natural secret, promised or committed (not however by office, as above), does not dispense from the obligation of denouncing; for from the secret being kept there would follow damage to an innocent third party, insofar as injury is brought upon one of the betrothed, and also damage to public right, insofar as injury is brought upon the sacrament; now a natural secret does not oblige with so great an inconvenience.

Moreover, the denunciation must be made at the opportune time, that is, before the marriage; indeed it is expedient that it be made as soon as possible, morally speaking, after the first promulgation of banns, so that either the nuptials may immediately be prohibited, or a dispensation obtained.

870. 3° On the manner of acting of the pastor in receiving revelations. The pastor, receiving a denunciation, (A) must weigh the value of the testimony: (a) by inquiring what sort of person the denouncer is, what authority he enjoys, whether he is moved by envy or only by love of the truth; (b) what sort of proofs he brings, whether full or half-full; (c) by questioning other witnesses, if it can be done; by approaching those about to marry themselves and their parents, so that he may see whether they are conscious of the impediment or not.

(B) When these things have been completed:

(a) In the case of a certain and indispensable impediment, he ought to admonish the betrothed concerning the impossibility of celebrating the nuptials; in the case of a certain and dispensable impediment, "if the impediment is occult, he shall carry out or complete the publications, and shall report the matter, withholding the names, to the local Ordinary or to the Sacred Penitentiary; if it is public and is detected before the publications have been begun, the pastor is not to proceed further, until the impediment is removed..., if it is detected after the first or second publication, the pastor shall complete the publications, and refer the matter to the Ordinary." (Code, c. 1031, § 2.)

(b) If there is doubt concerning the existence of some impediment, the pastor should accurately investigate the matter, by questioning under oath at least two witnesses worthy of faith, provided that there is not question of an impediment from the knowledge of which infamy would arise for the parties, and, if it shall have been necessary, the parties themselves also; if the doubt remains, he is not to assist at the marriage without consulting the Ordinary.¹

¹ Code, c. 1031.

(C) If only the pastor or Ordinary knows an impediment, without being able to prove it, it is disputed whether he can and ought to stand in the way of the marriage; the more common and safer opinion affirms this, unless a dispensation can be obtained; for here there is question not of a penalty to be inflicted, but of the gravest evils to be averted.

Scholion: On Marriages of Conscience and Morganatic Marriages.²

² Benedict XIV, Constit. Satis Vobis, November 17, 1741; Quaest. Canon. 397; De Syn. dioeces., l. XIII, c. 23, n. 12 sq.; F. Mazzei, de Matrimonio conscientiae, Rome, 1768; Bangen, II, p. 50-52; Carrière, n. 440-442; Feije, n. 343-346; Rosset, II, n. 1193-1204.

871. 1° On marriages of conscience. (A) They can be defined as those marriages which, with the announcements omitted, are celebrated secretly before the proper pastor, or another delegated priest, and two witnesses, under this law, that they remain secret.

(B) The conditions that they be contracted licitly are recounted by Benedict XIV and the Code: (a) Let them not be celebrated without the license of the Ordinary,¹ nor permitted by the Ordinary except from a most urgent and most grave cause,² for example, for impeding the danger of concubinage; (b) let a diligent inquiry be made by the Bishop, so that it may be established that no impediment stands in the way, especially a prior ligamen; (c) for assisting at the marriage let the pastor of one or the other contracting party be deputed; or, if he is lacking, a priest endowed with doctrine and prudence; (d) when the marriage has been celebrated, let a written document be shown to the Bishop, in which the celebration is described with note of the place, time, and witnesses who were present; let the same be transcribed in a secret book secured with seals; (e) let the spouses be admonished that, if offspring shall have been born, they immediately write to the Bishop, who will describe the name of the infant and of the parents in the secret book, so that the legitimacy of the offspring may be established;³ (f) if they have not given notice concerning born offspring, the marriage must be divulged.⁴

¹ They cannot be permitted by the Vicar General without a special mandate. (Code, c. 1104).

² Code, c. 1104.

³ Code, c. 1107.

⁴ Code, c. 1106.

These things are besides to be noted from the Code: "The permission of the celebration of a marriage of conscience carries with it the promise and grave obligation of preserving the secret on the part of the assisting priest, the witnesses, the Ordinary and his successors, and also of the other spouse, when the other does not consent to divulgation."⁵

⁵ Code, c. 1105.

"The obligation of this promise, however, on the part of the Ordinary does not extend to the case in which either some scandal or grave injury toward the sanctity of marriage threatens from observance of the secret, or the parents do not take care that children received from such a marriage be baptized, or take care that they be baptized with false names expressed, without meanwhile providing to the Ordinary within thirty days notice of the offspring received and baptized, with sincere indication of the parents, or they neglect the Christian education of the children."⁶

⁶ Code, c. 1106.

872. 2° Morganatic marriages, or marriages ad morganaticam,⁷ consist in this: that a noble man, after the death of a wife likewise noble, marries another from a humbler order, with the condition added that both the woman and the children thence to be born can acquire nothing from that marriage besides those things which are necessary for honorable support. Hence the wife and children are not fully admitted into the family of the man, nor do they obtain his nobility or inheritance; and under this respect marriage of this kind differs from marriage of conscience, by force of which the children have a right to the paternal inheritance.¹

⁷ Morganaticum arises from two Germanic words (morgen, gabe, morning gift), because the wife and children must be content with that gift which they receive from the beginning, as it were on the morning day of the nuptials; by some it is also called marriage of the left hand.

¹ St. Thomas, Opusc. XXXVII, De Erudit. Principum, l. V, c. 26-29; St. Alphonsus, n. 882-884; Rosset, t. V, n. 3546-3548.

— One must proceed from this principle: "Before matrimony is celebrated, it must be established that nothing stands in the way of its valid and licit celebration" (c. 1019, §1).

Exception. In danger of death, however, when other proofs are lacking, "unless contrary indications are present, the sworn affirmation of the contracting parties suffices, that they have been baptized and are detained by no impediment" (c. 1019, §2).

— Obligations of the pastor. The pastor, therefore, and not the betrothed, insofar as the obligation is merely canonical, since the betrothed in certain adjuncts can marry without the pastor; and indeed the pastor who has the right of assisting at the marriage, therefore, for the most part, the pastor of the bride, must, at an opportune time:

1. diligently, in a general manner, investigate whether anything stands in the way of the marriage to be contracted (c. 1020, §1).

The investigation concerning free status and concerning free consent is to be made even by a pastor to whom these things are morally established (Vlaming, Pract. iur. matr., I, 139).

Relying, however, on c. 1020, §3, which declares that it pertains to the Ordinary to prescribe prudent norms for the investigation by pastors, the Ordinary seems able to recall that investigation to his Curia, at least if, because of the adjuncts, that seems prudently to be counseled. We are confirmed by the response of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, February 1, 1908, by which, after the decree Ne temere, the law or custom was declared to be preserved by which the acts by which the free status of the contracting parties is established had to be performed by the episcopal Curia, and then permission was given to pastors of assisting at marriages (cf. Ojetti, In ius antepianum et pianum ex decr. Ne temere, n. 93, or our De forma Sponsalium et matrimonii, ed. 5, n. 55). This is done with admirable order in the Neapolitan Curia.

2. to interrogate the betrothed, even separately and cautiously, concerning impediments, concerning free consent, especially of the woman, concerning instruction in Christian doctrine, "unless because of the quality of the persons, this last interrogation appears useless" (c. 1020, §2).

It can appear useless either from the manifest instruction of the betrothed, or even from a mind hostile to religion. Yet let this latter not easily be presumed where there is the custom of an examination in catechism. For those who admit religious nuptials are accustomed then also to assent to the customary conditions; and one must beware lest, by excessive timidity, usages perish which certainly are to be approved. "Let him carefully teach ignorant betrothed persons," answered the Commission of the Code, June 2-3, 1918, "at least the first elements of Christian doctrine: but if they refuse, there is no place for rejecting them from marriage, according to the norm of c. 1066" (Periodica, IX, 150). According to the norm of c. 1066, that is, after the Ordinary has been consulted, who will settle the matter;

3. to observe the prescriptions by the Ordinary. For he can command several things here (c. 1020, §3), even when the investigation remains committed to the pastor;

4. to request testimony of baptism, even from a Protestant (c. 1021, §1);

5. since c. 1021, §2 warns that Catholics not yet confirmed should receive the sacrament of Confirmation before they are admitted to matrimony, if they can do so without grave inconvenience, the pastor will care for this also according to his powers;

6. to teach the betrothed their duties (c. 1033). How much it will help that here he have prepared a little book of pleasing form and easy reading, where the things which are permitted and not permitted in matrimony are proposed distinctly and at the same time prudently, with the duties concerning the instruction of children and also hygienic counsels concerning contagions and children added!

7. to warn minors by birth, insofar as there is need, lest they enter nuptials without the knowledge or with the reasonable unwillingness of parents; "but if they refuse, let him not assist at their marriage, unless the local Ordinary has first been consulted" (c. 1034);

8. to exhort those about to marry vehemently "that before the celebration of matrimony they diligently confess their sins and piously receive the Most Holy Eucharist" (c. 1033).

From the common law itself, the pastor can deny his assistance to a spouse who has refused to confess, if he is a public sinner (for example because of notorious omission of the Easter precept), or if he refuses confession in contempt of the Church, or if the omission will have been scandalous (cf. S. C. C. in Moguntina, August 28, 1852).

Confession prescribed by particular law cannot be converted into an impediment. Wherefore occult sinners who have refused to confess their sins are not to be excluded from matrimony.

A difficulty foreseen in a particular case is to be exposed to the Ordinary in good time. When a difficulty urges, assistance at matrimony cannot be refused, if he has been an occult sinner. Vlaming, I, p. 182; Linneborn, p. 83;

9. to make proclamations of the banns.

— On banns. 1. Banns, from a word which in the Middle Ages designated both jurisdiction and the territory of jurisdiction, and an edict and its proclamation, are public denunciations of a future marriage between definite persons, made authoritatively, with a tacit command made to the faithful of revealing impediments if any seem to stand in the way of the marriage.

2. These publications are to be made by the pastor whom domicile or quasi-domicile, or, if it is a question of a transient or of someone who has only diocesan domicile or quasi-domicile, at least present stay has made proper (cc. 94 and 1023). If there are several proper pastors, they are to be made by all.

Besides, if, after puberty, a party has stayed in another place (it is not said in another parish) for six months, the matter is to be proposed to the Ordinary, who will see what it is expedient to do.

The words of canon 1023, §2, "in another place" are understood by Vlaming, op. cit. I, 171, note 2, as "in another parish," because in §1 the banns are said to be made by the proper pastor. But the very difficulty of executing this canon, on account of which many, and Vlaming himself, think that one can depart from literal observance and stand by particular law, persuades us of the broader sense of the word, which in other respects is its proper sense.

If a positive suspicion of an impediment has arisen, the Ordinary will have to be warned; he also, for a briefer time of stay, will command proclamations, or in another way will take care that the suspicion be removed: before the suspicion has been removed, the marriage is illicit.

If, because of the plurality of journeys and the distance of regions, it will have been too difficult to gather the customary proofs by proclamations, it will be permitted to the Ordinary to provide otherwise and to admit other proofs, not excluding a supplementary oath (Response, June 2-3, 1918, Periodica, IX, p. 150, 4).

3. A twofold mode of banns is admitted today. Either by oral publications, on three continuous Sundays and other feasts of precept, in church, during the solemnities of Masses or during other divine offices to which the people frequently come (c. 1024); or, if the Ordinary has preferred it, by public affixing at the doors of the parochial church or another church, of the names of the contracting parties, for the space of at least eight days, so that in this space two feast days of precept are included (c. 1025).

With the permission of the Ordinary, feast days even abrogated can be understood.

4. Banns are to be made for marriages between Catholics alone. Yet the Ordinary can permit that future mixed marriages be proclaimed (between a non-Catholic or infidel party and a Catholic party), scandal having been removed, after ecclesiastical dispensations have been obtained, and with the religion of the non-Catholic party kept silent (c. 1026).

5. Banns produce the effect of positively obliging the faithful, not excluding the betrothed, of revealing or reporting impediments before marriage, either to the pastor or to the Ordinary. Impediments are to be denounced even if occult and unable to be proved. After the marriage has been celebrated, only the natural obligation remains. From making the denunciation there excuse: a) a secret entrusted by reason of office, for the sake of seeking counsel; b) harm proportioned to the very gravity of the impediment and to the consequences of silence.

It can happen that, in silence, marriage between natural brother and sister or between father and his own daughter can be permitted, if the woman, conscious of this matter, cannot reveal it without the greatest disgrace of her own (cf. De Smet, De sponsalibus et matrimonio, n. 69).

Other pastors must immediately make the pastor who must assist at the marriage more certain concerning the outcome of the investigations or proclamations (c. 1029).

6. Not the pastor indeed, but the proper Ordinary of those about to marry, can dispense from banns. And if there are several proper Ordinaries, dispensation pertains to that proper Ordinary in whose diocese the marriage will be celebrated; but if the marriage is going to be outside the proper dioceses, any proper Ordinary can dispense (c. 1028).

That dispensation must be given if it is necessary for avoiding grave harm, for example, malicious hindering of the marriage, a delay that is scandalous, defamatory, or dangerous to the constancy of the party (cf. Ferreres, II, 946); it can be given, if there is no suspicion of an impediment, or if it is removed in another way, and the celebration of the marriage is urgent. And it is clear that a lesser cause suffices for partial dispensation than for complete. Princes generally are held as dispensed; magnates can more easily be dispensed.

— After the investigation and banns have been completed: 1. the marriage is not to be celebrated immediately, but of itself, from the last proclamation, three days must run. Yet a reasonable cause, which excuses from that delay, is permitted to the prudent judgment of the pastor himself;

2. but before he has received all documents, the pastor cannot assist at the marriage;

3. after six months from the publications made, unless marriage has intervened, the banns are to be repeated, unless something else seems good to the local Ordinary;

4. if no impediment has been detected, neither doubtful nor certain, the pastor, after the publications have been completed, is to admit the parties to the celebration of marriage (c. 1031, §1);

5. when a certain impediment has been detected, if the impediment is occult, the pastor is to carry out or complete the publications, and, withholding names, refer the matter to the Ordinary or to the Sacred Penitentiary. If it is public and is detected before the proclamations have begun, the pastor will proceed no further until the impediment is removed, even if he knows that dispensation for the forum of conscience alone has been obtained; if it is detected after some publication has been made, the pastor is to complete the publications and refer the matter to the Ordinary (c. 1030, §2).

— In special cases provision is made in this way: that the pastor, after applying his own diligences, should approach the Ordinary for advice and obey his commands. Thus it is prescribed that he do this:

1. if, the matter having been accurately investigated, he has prudently judged that a doubt concerning the existence of an impediment survives (c. 1031, §1);

2. except in a case of necessity, if one of those about to marry is a transient, that is, has nowhere domicile or quasi-domicile (c. 1032). We think that this must be done even if the wholly transient person has a monthly stay in the parish;

3. if it is a question of mixed marriage, "where he certainly knows" that the spouses have approached or will approach, whether by themselves or through a proxy, a non-Catholic minister, as one devoted to sacred things, for furnishing or renewing matrimonial consent. For they are always prohibited under grave obligation from doing this. For the sake of civil effects, a non-Catholic minister who functions only in the office of a civil official is not forbidden to be approached (c. 1063);

4. if one of those about to marry has notoriously either cast off the Catholic faith... or is ascribed to societies condemned by the Church (c. 1065);

5. "if a public sinner or one notoriously bound by censure refuses before marriage to approach sacramental confession or to be reconciled with the Church" (c. 1066);

6. if the marriage is to be contracted by proxy and time is available (c. 1091).

— I. What sponsals are. A promise of marriage can be unilateral, obliging from fidelity or justice, and bilateral. Sponsals are a voluntary, deliberate, mutual promise of future marriage between persons able by law. For each forum the condition of validity is that it be made by writing signed by the parties and by the pastor or local Ordinary or by two witnesses. If either or both parties do not know how to write or cannot, this must be noted for validity; and another witness must sign the act. From sponsals there arises only an action concerning damages.

II. What matrimony is. 1. In becoming, it is the contract itself and, among the baptized, the sacrament by which man and woman legitimately hand over to each other their bodies, primarily for the end of procreating and educating offspring, secondarily for mutual help and a remedy of concupiscence.

The remote matter of the sacrament is the bodies of the contracting parties, but the proximate matter is the handing over which is expressed by consent. This consent, insofar as it expresses acceptance, is at the same time the form. The ministers are the contracting parties themselves. The res et sacramentum is the sacred bond of mutual obligation.

In fact being, it is the very bond induced by the contract. The properties of matrimony, thus properly so called, are unity and indissolubility, which by reason of the sacrament have greater firmness.

2. Of how many kinds matrimony is. It is ratified when, confirmed by the sacramental character, it has not yet been completed by consummation; ratified and consummated if among Christians it has been perfected by the conjugal act. Legitimate, properly today, is a valid marriage of non-baptized persons; sometimes it is said of every valid marriage; civil, which, whether true or fictitious, satisfies the conditions of civil law. Public marriage is contracted openly in the face of the Church; occult or of conscience is celebrated secretly before the pastor and two secret witnesses; clandestine is contracted even openly without pastor and witnesses canonically required.

In doubt, matrimony is presumed valid; in favor of the faith, one can stand for the nullity of matrimony in doubt.

III. Things to be premised to matrimony. Excepting danger of death, in which, unless there are contrary indications, the sworn affirmation of the contracting parties concerning their baptism and free state suffices, before marriage it must be juridically established that nothing stands in the way of the celebration. Therefore the pastor to whom assistance belongs must diligently investigate whether something stands in the way, interrogate the spouses, and dispose them. Banns are to be proclaimed by every proper pastor on three continuous Sundays or feasts, if the marriage is made between two Catholics. In place of public denunciations, the Ordinary can permit public affixing at the doors of the church of the names of the contracting parties for at least eight days, so that two feast days of precept are included. The Ordinary can dispense from banns; and in every difficulty and doubt, the pastor must approach him for advice.

724. Notion. Proclamations (banns, matrimonial edict, announcement) are public announcements which must precede the celebration of matrimony for this purpose, that impediments perhaps standing in the way of matrimony may be detected more securely and easily. Already from ancient times the custom prevailed of publicly announcing the celebration of matrimony in church. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215)⁴⁸⁵ prescribed one proclamation. But the Council of Trent⁴⁸⁶ established that three proclamations be made at determined places and times. The Code of Canon Law, can. 1024, establishes the same. - In several regions civil proclamations are also prescribed.

⁴⁸⁵ It is found in c. 3, X 4, 3.

⁴⁸⁶ Sess. 24, c. 1, de reform. matrim.

725. Obligation. The ecclesiastical law of proclamations binds under grave obligation.

Such is the common opinion. The gravity of this obligation may be perceived: a) from the grave end of this law; for the end of the proclamations is: to avoid clandestine marriages, to detect impediments of matrimony, and to foster the spirit of unity in parishes; b) from the gravity of the penalties that were inflicted upon transgressors in the old law, namely, a parish priest rashly omitting the proclamations incurred suspension from office for three years. The spouses themselves who entered matrimony without preceding proclamations obtained dispensation much more difficultly from an impediment that perhaps stood in the way of their matrimony. Moreover, their matrimony, which was null because of an occult impediment, was not considered as a putative matrimony, and therefore the children born were held to be illegitimate.^486a - From these things it is evident that the law concerning the making of proclamations binds per se under grave obligation. Therefore all teach that the omission of three proclamations made without grave necessity is a mortal sin.⁴⁸⁷ St. Alphonsus,⁴⁸⁸ and with him several other theologians, teaches that the omission of two proclamations is likewise a grave sin. But the common opinion teaches that the omission of one proclamation is a venial sin.⁴⁸⁹ For mixed marriages proclamations ought not, indeed cannot, be made,⁴⁹⁰ unless by particular law they are sometimes tolerated or prescribed.⁴⁹¹ Mention of the religion of the contracting parties is then to be omitted.⁴⁹²

If, after the proclamations have been completed, the matrimony is deferred beyond six months, the proclamations are to be repeated, unless it seems otherwise to the local Ordinary.⁴⁹³

^486a Council of Trent, sess. 24, c. 5, de reform. matrim., and c. 3, X 4, 3.

⁴⁸⁷ Lehmkuhl, Theol. mor. II, n. 861.

⁴⁸⁸ Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 990.

⁴⁸⁹ Tanquerey, De sacr., n. 856.

⁴⁹⁰ Rescript of Pius VI to the Archbishop of Mechelen, May 31, 1783.

⁴⁹¹ For example, in the Archdiocese of Cologne; cf. Vogt, Das kirchl. Eherecht, § 13.

⁴⁹² Code of Canon Law, can. 1026.

⁴⁹³ Ibid., can. 1030.

726. The time of the proclamations. The Code of Canon Law, can. 1024, prescribes: "The proclamations are to be made on three successive Sundays and other holy days of obligation in church during the solemnities of the Masses, or during other divine offices which the people attend in large numbers." It is therefore required that the proclamations be made:

1. on three Sundays or feast days on which, by universal or particular precept, the obligation of hearing Mass is imposed upon the faithful.

Moreover, in almost every diocese there are special statutes concerning the days on which it is lawful to make the proclamations. Without a special faculty it is not lawful to make the proclamations on suppressed feast days. Nevertheless, the bishop can, at least in a particular case, grant this permission for a reasonable cause.

2. successively, that is, with no feast day omitted between them.

Authors commonly teach with St. Alphonsus that it would not be a grave sin if the parish priest omitted one intervening day; indeed, it would be no sin if a sufficient reason existed. In several dioceses it is forbidden that the proclamations be made on three immediately successive days, for example, on Easter Sunday and the second and third days after Easter.

3. in church during the solemnities of the Masses or during other offices. The proclamations can therefore be made not only at the principal Mass, but also at Vespers, at the Evening Salutation, and at other divine offices, provided that the people are accustomed to attend in large numbers.

When the proclamations have been completed, three days are to be awaited before the matrimony is celebrated (unless a reasonable cause calls for otherwise).⁴⁹⁴ Wherefore, if the final proclamation was made on Sunday, the matrimony cannot be entered until Thursday. The reason for this law is easily perceived; for sufficient time is thus granted so that those who perhaps heard the proclamations for the first time on this occasion can reveal the impediments standing in the way.

⁴⁹⁴ Ibid., can. 1030, § 1.

727. The form of the proclamations is given as follows in the Roman Ritual:⁴⁹⁵ "Let it be known to all here present that N., son of N., of the family N., of the parish N., and N., daughter of the family N., of the parish N., intend to contract matrimony with one another. Therefore we admonish each and all that, if anyone knows there to be between them any impediment of consanguinity or affinity or spiritual relationship, or any other impediment whatsoever which prevents them from contracting matrimony with one another, he ought to reveal it as soon as possible to the parish priest or the local Ordinary; and we admonish this for the first time (if it is the first), or for the second time (if it is the second), or for the third time (if it is the third proclamation)."

In some dioceses a shorter formula is accustomed to be prescribed; for the formula of the Ritual does not have preceptive but directive force. Care must always be taken that nothing injurious to reputation is published in the proclamations; for example, if the bride is an illegitimate daughter or has already been corrupted, this must in no way be announced in the proclamations. The proclamation is to be made in a loud and intelligible voice, since otherwise the end of the law is not obtained. But because in large parishes numerous proclamations must be made, which are accustomed to be without any fruit, with weariness to hearers who by no means know the persons about to marry, with great expenditure of time, and with deprivation of religious instruction, hence "the local Ordinary can, for his territory, substitute for the proclamations the public posting of the names of the contracting parties upon the doors of the parish church or another church for a space of at least eight days, yet in such a way that within this space two holy days of obligation are included."⁴⁹⁶

⁴⁹⁵ Tit. 7, c. 1, n. 8.

⁴⁹⁶ Code of Canon Law, can. 1025.

728. The place where the proclamations are to be made is regularly the parish church, or another church designated for this purpose by the bishop, in the place of the domicile or quasi-domicile of those about to marry.

Gasparri⁴⁹⁷ rightly writes: "But if the parish priest were to publish the matrimony in another church of the parish, with a large number of the faithful present, it does not seem that he should be disturbed, because on the one hand the end of the law is preserved and on the other the letter does not stand in the way, since the Council of Trent does not expressly say that the matrimony is to be published in the parish church. Indeed, if in the parish church there were no gathering of the faithful on that day and in another church there were a large one, it would be more expedient that the proclamations be made in the latter than in the former.... Indeed, several Doctors cited by St. Alphonsus⁴⁹⁸ teach that the proclamations can be made even outside a church at the time of a great sacred gathering, for example, on account of a procession, a sermon, ... because the end of the law is obtained. And this is probable, at least without mortal sin, and, if some cause is present, without any fault. But the parish priest, if there is time, is to consult the Ordinary, who, if he can dispense from the banns, can a fortiori permit this."

The matrimonial proclamations must be made both in the parish of the bridegroom and in the parish of the bride. Therefore, if the bridegroom and bride are of the same parish, it suffices that the proclamations be made in this parish alone; but if they have a domicile or even a quasi-domicile in different parishes, the proclamations must be made in all these parishes. If a party has resided in another place for six months after attaining puberty, the parish priest is to explain the matter to the Ordinary, who according to his prudence either requires that the proclamations be made there, or prescribes that other proofs or conjectures concerning free status be gathered.⁴⁹⁹ But because this not rarely causes excessive difficulties, for example, if a maidservant about to marry has had such residence in ten different places, bishops are accustomed to give easier general norms according to which the place of the proclamations is determined.

The marriages of vagrants, that is, of those who nowhere have a proper parish priest or Ordinary by reason of domicile or one month's residence,⁵⁰⁰ are proclaimed (with the bishop's permission previously obtained) in the place where they now reside or intend to contract matrimony.⁵⁰¹ Moreover, an oath of canonical freedom concerning their free status is required from them. By particular law proclamations are sometimes also prescribed in the place of their origin.⁵⁰²

Diocesan statutes are also accustomed to determine, according to can. 1507, the fee, if any, to be paid for conducting the proclamations.⁵⁰³

⁴⁹⁷ De matrim. I, n. 169.

⁴⁹⁸ Theol. mor., l. 6, n. 991.

⁴⁹⁹ Code of Canon Law, can. 1023, § 2.

⁵⁰⁰ Thus the Sacred Congregation of the Sacraments, March 12, 1910, ad 5 (Acta Ap. Sed. II, 195).

⁵⁰¹ Vogt, Das kirchl. Eherecht, § 14.

⁵⁰² Gasparri, De matrim. I, n. 133.

⁵⁰³ Vogt, loc. cit., § 13.

729. A dispensation from the banns can be granted not only by the Supreme Pontiff, but also by a bishop, a vicar general, and (when the see is vacant) a capitular vicar, and by a prelate "Nullius" for his subjects. If there are several proper Ordinaries, the one in whose diocese the matrimony is celebrated has the right of dispensing; but if the matrimony is entered outside the proper dioceses, any proper Ordinary can dispense.⁵⁰⁴ The dispensation is to be granted gratuitously, except for a modest payment under the title of chancery expenses.⁵⁰⁵

The bishop cannot dispense from the banns unless a legitimate cause exists. But what cause is legitimate is not otherwise determined in the law, except for a malicious obstruction of the matrimony. Theologians and canonists assign as sufficient causes: the defamation of spouses who live in occult concubinage having before men the appearance of matrimony; a matrimony to be contracted at the point of death; a founded suspicion that the betrothed, in contempt of Christian matrimony, may contract only a civil matrimony; and so forth.

By common law a parish priest cannot dispense from the banns; nevertheless, by delegation of the bishop he not rarely has the faculty of remitting one proclamation when a just cause is present.⁵⁰⁶ In a case of necessity, namely, if the celebration of the matrimony is urgent, the parish priest can omit the banns, since no ecclesiastical law binds with grave inconvenience. - In the matrimony of supreme princes the banns are customarily omitted, as authors commonly teach.

⁵⁰⁴ Code of Canon Law, can. 1028, § 2.

⁵⁰⁵ Ibid., can. 1056.

⁵⁰⁶ Parish priests in North America have such a faculty. Cf. Tanquerey, De sacr., n. 864.

730. The obligation of revealing known impediments. The principal end of the proclamations is that impediments of matrimony, if there are any, be detected. Hence it follows that all who know that some prohibitory or diriment impediment stands in the way are bound (per se under grave obligation) to reveal this impediment.⁵⁰⁷ For the proclamations would be vain unless on the part of those hearing them there arose an obligation to reveal those things which the Church desires to know. Moreover, if there is question of the existence of some diriment impediment, its concealment would render the matrimony invalid, so that the betrothed would live in concubinage (at least material) and would lack many graces. Therefore fraternal charity itself also demands that diriment impediments be denounced. The manner of denouncing impediments is not determined by ecclesiastical law; but the order of charity demands that those about to marry themselves first be admonished, if the revelation of the impediment would bring some infamy. But if the admonition is useless, the matter is to be disclosed to the parish priest, who with great discretion will provide for the reputation of the betrothed.

The causes excusing from this denunciation are principally the following:

a) grave harm to oneself or another.

b) the uselessness of the denunciation.

For example, if the impediment has already been denounced by another or by those about to marry themselves.

c) a sacramental or professional secret.

Hence a confessor, physician, midwife, and so forth, cannot reveal those things which they know by reason of their office; but they are bound (insofar as is possible) to admonish those about to marry to reveal the impediment themselves. A natural or promised secret alone does not excuse from the obligation of revealing impediments, because such a secret must be violated in order to prevent grave harm, as happens in the case.

The denunciation of an impediment is to be made as soon as possible; and if the parish priest has proved it worthy of belief, he must as quickly as possible seek a dispensation from the detected impediment, provided, however, that dispensation is possible. Otherwise he cannot assist at the matrimony. When a doubt has arisen concerning the existence of some impediment, the parish priest is to investigate the matter more accurately by questioning: a) under oath at least two trustworthy witnesses, provided that there is not question of an impediment from knowledge of which infamy would arise for the parties; and b) if necessary, the parties themselves as well. But he is not to assist at the matrimony without consulting the Ordinary if the doubt still remains. Thus the Code of Canon Law, can. 1031, § 1.

⁵⁰⁷ Code of Canon Law, can. 1027.

731. Scholion. On the perplexing case. Theologians call a case perplexing when some impediment is detected immediately before the celebration of the matrimony, and the matrimony cannot be deferred without most grave inconvenience, nor is there time to obtain a dispensation (even by telegraph or telephone). The following norms can be employed for resolving a perplexing case:

a) If the detected impediment is truly public, such that it can be proved in the external forum and has in fact already come to the knowledge of others (for example, consanguinity or affinity), then, outside an urgent danger of death, the matrimony is to be suspended until the dispensation has been obtained. The reason is that in this case no infamy arises; but other harms that may arise are to be esteemed as less than a conditional or null matrimony. Nothing, however, prevents the celebration of the matrimony from being feigned before those present if grave causes are present. But the true matrimony must then be celebrated afterward, once the dispensation has been obtained. Moreover, this case is scarcely possible, since the dispensation can be sought (by telegraph or telephone) from the local Ordinary, who according to the new law can dispense in these straits from all impediments of ecclesiastical law except two: those arising from the sacred order of priesthood and from affinity in the direct line.⁵⁰⁸ But in urgent danger of death a dispensation can be made in another and easier manner even from public impediments, except for the two just enumerated.⁵⁰⁹

b) If the impediment is occult (whether by law or in fact), a distinction is to be made. For it is either: a) an impediment in which the Pope is not accustomed to dispense, for example, the impediment of crime committed by both parties. Then ordinarily one must desist from the celebration of the matrimony, because it is not expedient to exhort the contracting parties to live as brother and sister, nor to leave them in good faith, in which perhaps they still are; for this good faith can easily cease afterward, upon which the greatest inconveniences could arise. Or it is: b) an impediment in which the Pope is accustomed to grant a dispensation. Then, if the bishop cannot be approached, or not without danger of violating the secret, any confessor can dispense, but for the internal forum in the act of sacramental confession alone.⁵¹⁰ If knowledge of such an occult impediment is had outside confession, the parish priest also, or a priest delegated to assist at the matrimony, can dispense, and indeed outside confession; but he must inform the Ordinary of the granted dispensation, and the granted dispensation is to be recorded in the marriage register.⁵¹¹

From what has been said it is evident that according to modern law a perplexing case is no longer truly perplexing, or does not cause grave difficulties.

⁵⁰⁸ Code of Canon Law, can. 1045, § 1.

⁵⁰⁹ Ibid., can. 1044.

⁵¹⁰ Ibid., can. 1045, § 3.

⁵¹¹ Ibid., can. 1046.

We shall treat 1. of the precept and form of proclamations; 2. of dispensation from making them; 3. of the revelation of impediments.

PROCLAMATIONS, which are also called banns, are public denunciations by which the faithful are warned concerning a matrimony to be contracted between certain persons, to the end that, if anyone knows some diriment or prohibiting impediment to exist between those wishing to contract, he may manifest it at an opportune time. - These, however, ought to be preceded by the private INVESTIGATION of the parish priest, and an opportune ADMONITION of the nupturients concerning those things which are required for contracting matrimony validly and licitly. - That these may become known better, let the following be given.

2057. Principles. I. The parish priest, before he comes to proclamations, is bound to institute a diligent EXAMINATION, by which he may know whether nothing obstructs the valid and licit celebration of matrimony. - For he ought, by reason of his office, to watch that subjects receive the Sacraments worthily. And this is greatly commended both by the Roman Ritual,⁸ and by Benedict XIV's Constitution Nimiam licentiam.⁹ - Congruently with these prescriptions:

1. "The parish priest, having been warned concerning some matrimony to be contracted in his parish, first should know from those to whom it pertains, for example from the parents or other cognates, and especially from the betrothed themselves, who and of what sort are those who wish to contract matrimony. Whether between them there is some canonical impediment, impedient or diriment; whether they wish to contract spontaneously, freely, and according to the honesty of the Sacrament." Thus the RITUAL.

2. If one party is a foreigner, according to the Instruction of the S. Inquisition approved by Clement X on 21 August 1670,¹⁰ a testimony or mandate concerning free state is altogether required; in which matter, diocesan Statutes also must be attended to.

3. Let him inquire whether sons and daughters of families contract with the consent of parents. For matrimonies reasonably against the will of parents the holy Church of God has always detested and prohibited for most just causes (cf. n. 1973, q. 6).¹¹ - But if the children are unwilling to desist from matrimony, and greater evils are to be feared, let the parish priest not deny his ministry; but, if he can, let him set forth the whole matter to the Bishop.

4. Let him not neglect the prescriptions of the civil law, if they can be observed with a safe conscience. For although the civil law can establish nothing concerning Sacraments, nevertheless the parish priest acting against it would involve himself in many entanglements, which always, insofar as divine and ecclesiastical laws permit, he ought prudently to decline according to his strength.¹²

5. The RITUAL warns "that each spouse know the rudiments of the Faith, since afterward he ought to teach these to his children." The betrothed therefore are to be examined concerning these, yet prudently and discreetly, according as the condition of persons and various circumstances will persuade.

6. Let the parish priest explore whether they live separately, by day as well as by night; or, if previously they have lived under the same roof, whether from the time of the betrothals or of the proclamations they have been separated.¹³

7. "Moreover let the spouses be admonished that, before they contract, they diligently confess their sins, and devoutly approach the Most Holy Eucharist and the Sacrament of Matrimony to be received; and how they ought to conduct themselves rightly and Christianly in it, let them be diligently instructed from divine Scripture, by the example of Tobias and Sarah, and by the words of the Angel Raphael teaching them how holily spouses ought to live together."¹⁴

Concerning this we OBSERVE: 1. The state of grace is altogether required for receiving the Sacrament of matrimony worthily, as is plain. But Confession and Communion are strictly prescribed by no law: wherefore the PARISH PRIEST indeed ought urgently and paternally to exhort the betrothed to dispose themselves for matrimony by the reception of these Sacraments; but he cannot strictly command it, unless perhaps diocesan Statutes require it. 2. In setting forth the duties of spouses, and in inquiring concerning impediments from illicit intercourse, the PARISH PRIEST should use such a manner of speech as bears before it a certain singular gravity and integrity of mind; yet those things which pertain to the use of matrimony will scarcely not have to be remitted to the time immediately preceding matrimony, and ordinarily it is better to hand them on in the very act of confession¹⁵ (cf. n. 2119).

2058. II. Proclamations are NECESSARILY TO BE PREMISED before matrimony: and this from an ecclesiastical precept obliging UNDER GRAVE obligation.

They are to be premised; for the holy Tridentine Synod,¹⁶ "adhering to the footsteps of the sacred Lateran Council celebrated under Innocent III, commands that for the future, before matrimony is contracted, it be publicly denounced three times by the proper parish priest, on three continuous feast days, in church, during the solemnities of Masses, between whom matrimony is to be contracted." - Yet matrimony would not be invalid if, proclamations having been omitted, it were contracted, provided no other impediment obstructs.

But that the law obliges under grave obligation is evinced both from its end, which is that impediments be known and that clandestine matrimonies be avoided; and from the penalties laid on violators, which similarly are grave, namely: a PARISH PRIEST presuming to assist at a matrimony which legitimate denunciations have not preceded is commanded to be punished by suspension from office, to last three years, or even by a graver penalty.¹⁷ WITNESSES also, if they act knowingly, are to be affected with a fitting penalty. - But as regards the CONTRACTING PARTIES, if the matrimony was invalid from a hidden impediment, the children born from putative matrimony will be illegitimate, about to have no help from the ignorance of the parents.¹⁸ Dispensation concerning an impediment afterward detected is also granted with more difficulty, and besides a penance to be defined at the judgment of the Bishop is to be enjoined (cf. n. 2061).¹⁹

2059. III. Proclamations OUGHT to be made on three continuous feast days, in church, during the solemnities of Masses, by the proper parish priest of the contracting parties. Thus the decree of Trent.

Therefore they ought to be made: 1. On feast days, i.e. feasts of precept, among which suppressed feasts can be numbered if functions and solemnities are still customarily performed, as before the suppression, and there is a concourse of people.²⁰ - Indeed, on account of a just motive, which is approved as such by the Bishop, they can be made on ferial days themselves, if from some cause there would be a great concourse in the church.²¹

2. On three continuous feast days, i.e. with no feast day omitted from the first proclamation to the last. - To make proclamations on three non-continuous feast days, provided several feast days do not intervene, according to the truer opinion, is not mortal, because it does not seem a grave transgression; but it is not excused from venial fault, because now the precept of the Council is transgressed. But if three immediate feast days should occur, practice bears that one or another be passed over, because in so brief a time the end of the Council would not be sufficiently obtained.²²

3. In church during the solemnities of Masses, i.e. in the parochial or conventual Mass, at the judgment of the parish priest. - According to the decree of S. C. C. dated 20 Sept. 1828,²³ the same thing can be done at another time, at which the concourse of the people would be more frequent. - Indeed, it is probable that they can be made outside the church, on the occasion of some sacred function, in a place of great concourse, "at least without mortal fault, and if some cause is present, without any fault."²⁴

4. By the proper parish priest of the contracting parties, i.e. by him to whose parish the betrothed pertain by title of domicile or quasi-domicile (concerning domicile see below n. 2074).

Hence: 1) If they are of diverse parishes, proclamations are to be made in each. 2) Likewise in each, if someone has a double domicile, i.e. domicile in one parish and quasi-domicile in another. And this is clearly gathered from the Statute of the City (11 Jan. 1762), prescribing that denunciations be made both in the parish of domicile and of the college, monastery, conservatory, where the betrothed are staying.²⁵ - 3) If someone recently has arrived in some parish, proclamations ought to be made both in that parish and in the parish of his prior habitation, if he stayed there for at least six months. But what space of time from changed domicile is required, so that proclamations are to be made only in the actual parish, is not defined by law: the matter therefore must be recognized from custom and from diocesan statutes. 4) They are to be made besides in the place of origin, unless it has already been deserted for several years. - 5) If the nupturients are wanderers, they are to be made in the parishes both of actual habitation and of origin, or even of preceding habitation, if either betrothed stayed there for a longer time. 6) Soldiers are to be proclaimed in the place where they are in garrisons and besides in the parish of their parents if they are minors; and if they are adults, in the place where they resided before undertaking military service.²⁶

Note. When proclamations are to be made in two parishes, neither parish priest will be able to assist at the matrimony unless he has received the ATTESTATION of the other parish priest, that three proclamations were duly made in his parish, and that no impediment was detected from them.

2060. IV. In making proclamations, that FORM ought to be held which corresponds to their end. - The reason is that aptitude for the end, i.e. the manifestation of impediments, is principally intended by the legislator. - Wherefore 1) the denunciations are to be made in the vernacular speech, with a high and intelligible voice, and the persons intending to contract and their parish are to be indicated accurately, so that there is room for no error. 2) In the individual denunciations it must be commemorated whether it is the first, or second, or last; indeed if only one, or two, were to be made by dispensation of the Ordinary, this ought to be notified to the people standing by. 3) It is also better to warn the people concerning the grave obligation incumbent upon each faithful person of manifesting impediments known to him, as is had in the formula of the Roman Ritual. 4) It is advised, and in various provinces is held as prescribed, that matrimony be celebrated only after an entire day has elapsed after the last proclamation. - 5) But if within two months after the denunciations have been made, matrimony has not been contracted, the denunciations are to be repeated, unless it seems otherwise to the Bishop (ROMAN RITUAL).

2061. IT IS ASKED. Whether it is a grave sin to omit denunciations, if, diligence having been made, it is altogether ESTABLISHED that no impediment underlies?

Resp. 1. Affirmatively, if the three denunciations are omitted. "The reason is both because, although through diligence the parish priest fulfills the end of Trent, nevertheless he transgresses the form of diligence which the Council prescribes: which, since it is in a most grave matter, is not excused from mortal sin unless urgent necessity which does not allow delay is present; and because otherwise the end of the precept of denunciations is not adequately satisfied; for the diligence of the parish priest does not sufficiently supply the effect of denunciations for impeding evils which otherwise can happen" (cf. n. 2058).²⁷

Resp. 2. To omit two denunciations, more probably, is mortal; but omission of only one, probably, is only venial fault, because with respect to the whole precept it does not seem grave matter.²⁸

Note. What the Tridentine Synod says concerning denunciations, if they have been omitted, to be supplied before consummation of matrimony, has now everywhere passed into desuetude. - Besides, the Synod itself had remitted the matter to the prudence and judgment of Ordinaries.

Dispensation in matrimonial proclamations, which formerly could be obtained with more difficulty and very rarely, is now obtained with an easier business, as the following will set forth.

2062. Principles. I. The faculty of DISPENSING, from a just cause, in PROCLAMATIONS, belongs to Ordinaries of places. It is established from Trent (sess. 24, cap. 1, de ref. matr.). Concerning this it must be NOTED:

1. By the name Ordinary are understood the Bishop, and, the See being vacant, the capitular Vicar; a Prelate having quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, and more probably also the vicar general, as is very commonly taught (cf. n. 2259).²⁹

2. For dispensing there is required a just cause, i.e. proportioned to the amplitude of the dispensation. - Hence a less grave cause is required for dispensing from only one denunciation; a graver for dispensing from two; but for licitly dispensing from all, "not any obvious and ordinary cause is enough," says Benedict XIV,³⁰ "but a grave, urgent, and most urgent one is required." And it must be noted besides, "that the Bishop, in dispensing in denunciations, is always bound diligently to inquire elsewhere concerning impediments, unless it were commonly established that they are not present."³¹

2063. II. According to the variety of causes, the Ordinary sometimes CAN and sometimes IS BOUND to dispense from proclamations. - It is established from those things which have been said concerning dispensation in the Treatise on Laws (cf. n. 234, 2). - Hence:

1. He can dispense, if the cause is sufficient, and no grave inconvenience from denial is to be feared: for example "if nuptials are to be contracted among magnates; if the betrothed are very old, or very disparate in condition, age, riches, or quality."³²

2. He is bound to dispense, if the cause is urgent, namely if grave common or private damage, spiritual or temporal, is to be avoided; or if the dispensation will conduce to a notable spiritual or temporal good of the community or of some private person. CAUSES of this kind are: 1) Probable fear lest the matrimony be impeded maliciously. 2) Necessity of matrimony for avoiding damage or infamy of the contracting parties or of offspring: for example if concubinarians were reputed spouses; or if defloration preceded, and the bridegroom were now about to die, or about to depart to a distant region, or a change of will in him were feared. 3) The bad will of a bridegroom refusing, after civil matrimony has already been contracted, that three proclamations be made; and similar things.³³

2064. Questions. IT IS ASKED 1. Whether dispensation, when the betrothed are from diverse dioceses, must be obtained from EACH BISHOP?

Resp. The more common opinion today is affirmative, and, the intrinsic reasons being considered, also seems more probable. Yet where contrary custom is in force, it can be observed; but the mandate of free state is altogether required (cf. n. 2048, 1).

IT IS ASKED 2. Whether the PARISH PRIEST can sometimes dispense in denunciations?

Resp. Negatively, "because the parish priest has no jurisdiction in the external forum."³⁴ - Yet very probably authors say that, although the parish priest cannot dispense, nevertheless in cases in which the Bishop is bound to dispense and cannot be approached, he will be able to declare that the precept of proclamations does not oblige, provided he is certain that no impediment is present.³⁵

Just as it is the office of the parish priest publicly to denounce matrimonies to be contracted, so also it is the office of the faithful to manifest the impediments which they know obstruct their celebration. - The following will declare the things which pertain to this obligation.

2065. Principles. I. Every Christian faithful person who KNOWS that there is some impediment between the betrothed which obstructs the celebration of matrimony, IS BOUND, and indeed under grave obligation, to DENOUNCE it. The obligation proceeds from the law of charity, by which we are commanded to avert damage which threatens either a private person or the community (cf. n. 479 and 483): certainly damage of this sort would threaten each from impediments not manifested.³⁶ Besides this, there is the positive precept of the Church.³⁷

It is said 1. Every; because no one, unless legitimately excused, is exempt from this law; but first of all the contracting parties themselves are bound to confess an occult impediment, and to obtain dispensation.³⁸

2. Who knows, i.e. who has had at least probable notice concerning the impediment, even if he cannot prove it; both because such denunciation conduces to further investigations, and because on account of denunciation alone matrimony can sometimes be impeded, namely if the one denouncing is a witness greater than every exception.³⁹ But "if you know the impediment by hearing, but do not remember from whom, or if you received it from a person not worthy of faith, you are not bound to denounce."⁴⁰

3. Some impediment, "whether it is diriment or impedient, even though it is occult and defamatory, namely one which had origin from sin. For anyone is bound to manifest another's occult sin, when the prelate legitimately has commanded it," as in this case (cf. n. 1186).⁴¹

4. Which obstructs, i.e. in which there has not been dispensation. Whence "if the impediment is occult, and dispensation for it has already been obtained as to the internal forum, the one knowing it is not bound to denounce it."⁴²

5. He is bound to denounce it under grave obligation; for there is question of a most grave matter, in which the Church intends to oblige strictly. Yet he is excused from this obligation who cannot denounce without grave damage to himself, or scandal of others.⁴³ Hence no one is bound to manifest his own illicit intercourse, except the nupturients themselves, who ought either to abstain from matrimony, or to procure dispensation for themselves. But one excused ought, if he can, to impede the matrimony.

You ask whether he is excused from denunciation who knew the impediment UNDER SECRET? Resp. Negatively, even if the secret was committed, and an oath of not revealing was added. - The reason is that a promise, even sworn, does not oblige when grave damage threatens the community or a third person⁴⁴ (cf. n. 616). - More probably except the case if someone knew the impediment under the secret of counsel, by reason of a public office which he exercises, for example a parish priest, physician, advocate, etc. For thus the public good seems to demand.⁴⁵ - Nevertheless they are bound, if they can, to warn the nupturients.

2066. II. Revelation, AS SOON AS morally it can be made, is to be made TO THE PARISH PRIEST of the betrothed, or to the BISHOP, yet the order of charity being observed. - Hence, if the impediment is defamatory, and admonition is probably going to be profitable, first the betrothed are to be warned, so that they may provide for themselves. Otherwise, the parish priest or Bishop is to be approached at once, because in circumstances of this kind there is ordinarily danger in delay.⁴⁶

2067. Questions. IT IS ASKED 1. What the PARISH PRIEST, when an impediment is known, ought to do?

Resp. "If the impediment is denounced by others, it is certain from cap. fin. de cland. desp. that the parish priest is bound to interdict the nuptials, and to refer the matter to the Ordinary, that he may take cognizance." And the same must be affirmed, if he alone knows the impediment, outside confession. "The reason is that, if anyone is bound to reveal an impediment, even if he alone knows it, a fortiori the parish priest is bound, upon whom by office it is incumbent to take counsel for the salvation of his sheep. Nor does it obstruct that the Sacrament is not to be denied to an occult sinner publicly seeking it; for it is answered that this proceeds when the impediment merely renders reception of the Sacrament illicit; but otherwise, if the impediment, besides reception, furnishes occasion of other damages and faults."⁴⁷

IT IS ASKED 2. Whether and when the denunciation of ONE WITNESS suffices for impeding matrimony?

Resp. 1. The very common and truer opinion affirms that one witness suffices, even if he is not greater than every exception, provided he has the QUALITIES to be explained below. It is proved from cap. Super eo 22, de test. et attest., and also from cap. Praeterea 12, de sponsal. "The reason is that, although when there is question of prejudice of a third party, full proof is required, nevertheless since here there is question of avoiding danger of the soul, namely if perhaps matrimony were contracted with an impediment, the law is content with a lesser proof."⁴⁸

Resp. 2. The QUALITIES REQUIRED so that one witness can impede matrimony are these: - 1) that he not only denounce, but also depose; unless such a witness by denouncing proved concerning the fame of the impediment, because then it suffices that he denounce; - 2) that he depose or denounce with an oath, because in those things which are to the prejudice of a third person, he is not believed unless he is a sworn witness; - 3) that he depose from certain knowledge, not from hearing: unless it is an impediment of consanguinity or affinity; because then it suffices that he depose that he knew it from certain and trustworthy persons; - 4) that the witness not be a base person; provided the fact is not so occult that it cannot be proved otherwise; for where the faculty of proving is lacking, even proof not sufficient of itself is admitted. Thus commonly.⁴⁹

And here it must be noted that the fame of an impediment is sufficient for impeding matrimony, unless the consanguines of the betrothed, or the betrothed themselves, should swear that the impediment is not present.⁵⁰

A bann is a German word which signifies the same as public proclamation. Therefore banns are public announcements by which the faithful are admonished concerning Matrimony to be contracted between certain persons.

We must treat 1° of the necessity of banns; 2° of their circumstances; 3° of their dispensation; 4° of the revelation of impediments.

1533. Principles. - I. From the precept of the Church there is a grave obligation of proclaiming banns. This is clear 1° as to the precept from the Fourth Lateran Council and from Trent.⁴ - It is clear 2° as to grave obligation, because a general discipline prescribed by two General Councils, and supported by grave motives, begets grave obligation. - Nevertheless the decrees of the Lateran and Tridentine Councils differ in this: that from the Lateran at least one announcement had to be made; from Trent, three, and these in the way which the Tridentine law, which also had to be introduced among us after the Easter feasts in the year 1853,¹ prescribed. As regards the number of proclamations in places where Mass is not celebrated on single Sundays, consult the diocesan statutes.

II. The proclamation of banns is not required from the necessity of the Sacrament. For no law can be cited from which it is clear that the proclamation is required for the validity of Matrimony.

1534. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Does the Pastor sin gravely by omitting the announcement, if he knows that no impediment is present?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is 1° because with difficulty can a Pastor be altogether certain that no impediment of Matrimony is present; 2° because, even if no impediment appears before the proclamation of banns, it can happen that, when they have been proclaimed, some impediment supervenes; 3° because, even if these reasons did not subsist, there always subsists the reason that the end of the law in the case ceases only privatively, as was said n. 165. 2°. I say: 2).²

Quaer. 2° Does the Pastor sin gravely if he omits only one proclamation without dispensation?

Resp. It is controverted. Some affirm, because one proclamation out of the three is to be held as a grave part of the whole precept. But others deny, whose opinion St. Alphonsus calls probable.³ It is more probable, however, that the omission of two announcements is a mortal sin.⁴

Notes near nn. 1533-1534, necessity of banns and omitted proclamations (printed pp. 224-225).

1 Conc. Pl. Balt. II. a. 331-333. | 2 L. VI. 990. | 3 Ib. | 4 Ib. | 5 Sess. 24. c. 1. de Ref. Matr.

A threefold circumstance must be considered here, namely 1° of time; 2° of place; 3° of persons.

1535. - Proclamations must be made on feast days of precept - continuously - during the solemnities of Masses. - Trent.⁵

It is said: 1° on feast days, i.e. on feast days of precept, at least in the place of the proclamations. Among feasts of precept can be numbered those suppressed feasts on which the functions and solemnities still have to be performed as before the suppression, and the people still come frequently to the churches. Thus from various resolutions of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, which the illustrious Feije reports and explains.¹ - Indeed, St. Alphonsus² teaches that probably this can be done also on a ferial day, at least without mortal sin, if for some reason a great concourse of people is made to the Church, because thus also the end of the Council is sufficiently obtained.

It is said: 2° continuously, i.e. with no feast day omitted from the first proclamation to the last. Nevertheless St. Alphonsus judges probable, and several others hold, that there is no grave sin if the feast days, with one or another interposed, are not continuous. The reason is because the danger that the people forget is slight, and the matter of transgression is judged light. But whether proclamations can be made on feast days immediately succeeding one another, if they occur, is controverted: there is a twofold probable opinion.⁴

It is said: 3° during the solemnities of Masses, i.e. in the parochial or conventual Mass, from the Decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council. - Proclamations cannot be made in private Masses, nor at Vespers. - Roman Ritual. If nevertheless the Pastor had forgotten to make the last proclamation at Mass, and the nuptials press, he could supply it at Vespers. This is permitted from the Decision of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, October 25, 1586. - Ferraris. St. Alphonsus admits that probably proclamations can also be made in a sermon or on the occasion of a procession, when the people have been gathered.⁵

If, the proclamations having been made, Matrimony is not celebrated within two months, the proclamations are to be repeated, unless it seem otherwise to the Bishop. - Roman Ritual. - It is also advisable not to contract Matrimony immediately after the last proclamation, or on the same day on which this was made.

Notes near nn. 1535-1536, time and place of banns (printed pp. 225-226).

1 De Imp. n. 241-245. | 2 L. VI. 992. | 3 L. VI. 992. | 4 Ib. | 5 Ib. 991.

1536. - From the Council of Trent, the proclamations of banns must be made in the Church, i.e. in the parochial Church of the contracting parties; but not in chapels, whether public or private, unless they hold the place of a parish, and parochial Mass is celebrated there. - The Pastor can make them either by himself or through another; nevertheless care must be taken lest they be made by a layman. - The opinion of several Doctors seems probable to St. Alphonsus, who say that proclamations can be made (at least without mortal sin, and, with cause, even without venial sin) outside the Church in a place of great concourse, because thus the end of the Council is already obtained.¹ But by parish is not understood the parish in which someone was born, or the parish of origin, but the parish of actual domicile, if the one to be proclaimed has lived there for a notable time.

Hence: 1° If the betrothed persons dwell in different parishes, the proclamation must be made in each. 2° If one or both have approximately equal domicile in two places, the banns also must be proclaimed in both. But if one of the two domiciles is principal, or properly so called, a double proclamation is not for that reason required. If someone, however, besides domicile, has quasi-domicile elsewhere, proclamations must be made also in the quasi-domicile.² 3° If the contracting parties have recently fixed domicile in the actual parish, the banns, much more probably,³ must also be published in the parish where they previously lived. But what domicile in this matter is to be called recent must be known from the diocesan statutes, or, these failing, from usage, Feije teaches.³

1537. - 1° Minors. The banns of minors (n. 836), for the sake of prudence, ought not to be proclaimed except with the express consent of parents or tutors. I say: for the sake of prudence; but not from the necessity of any ecclesiastical law. Proclamation is to be made both in the domicile of fact and in the domicile of law, that is, both in the place where the minors here and now dwell, and in the place where the parents or their tutors live. But minors, by Canon Law, are males who have not yet completed the twenty-fifth year of age, and females who have not yet completed the twenty-first. Nevertheless a male orphaned of ascendants becomes a major as soon as he has completed the twenty-first year.

2° Soldiers. The banns of soldiers are to be proclaimed 1° in the place where they are in garrisons; 2° besides in the domicile of the parents, if they are minors; but if they are majors, in the place where they were residing before they took up military service; because they have not acquired another domicile of law. - Thus commonly.

3° Wanderers and foreigners. Their banns, according to the common opinion, are to be published in the domicile of fact and in the place of origin, if they have not obtained true domicile elsewhere, or at least in the place in which they dwelt for a longer time. Besides, authentic testimony concerning their free state is to be had, nor are wanderers to be joined in Matrimony without the license of the Ordinary, as Trent has.¹

Note. - I. Around those things which we have said in this and the preceding Number, the illustrious Heiss² remarks the following: "Since in these regions it is too difficult to observe this law strictly, it seems to us that this at least must be insisted on in diocesan statutes: 1) that announcements must always be made in each parish, if the betrothed persons are from different parishes; 2) that, if the betrothed persons besides true domicile also have quasi-domicile in some place, and it is not too distant, the nuptials should be announced in each place; 3) that, if because of too great a distance or a similar cause the announcements cannot be made in the way said, the defect should be supplied by some precaution, whether through witnesses or through oath."³

II. The form of the announcements ought to be such that with intelligible voice and accurately the persons and their parish are indicated, and which announcement it is, and this especially when dispensation has been made in some one, so that then it is expressed, e.g. that the one which is now made is the first and second. It is also preferable to make mention of the end of the announcements, namely, that those who know an impediment disclose it; but if this is done, let it be done uniformly for all, lest, if only sometimes, the Pastor seem to suspect an impediment, as "Past.-Blatt für Nordamerika" rightly admonishes.⁴

Notes near nn. 1537-1538, persons and dispensation of banns (printed p. 226).

1 L. VI. 991. | 2 Ib. | 3 De Imp. n. 251. 3°. | 4 Sess. 24. c. 7. de Ref. Matr. Collect. p. 437. n. 968. | 5 De Matr. § 21. V. p. 64. 4). | 6 Feije, de Imp. n. 252. | 7 7 Jahrg. S. 68.

1538. Principles. - I. For a just cause dispensation can be made from the law of banns - Trent.¹ - But dispensation is made more easily from one or another proclamation than from all. But Benedict XIV² forbade Bishops to dispense from all, "unless a legitimate, most grave, and inescapable cause presses, as is clear from the Tridentine." But such a cause, since it is relative, will exist much more easily among us than elsewhere.

II. Dispensation of banns pertains to the Bishop as Ordinary. - It is likewise drawn from the Tridentine,³ where it is said that the faculty of dispensing is left to the prudence and judgment of the Ordinary.

III. But the legitimate causes of dispensation are some on account of which the Bishop ought to dispense, and others on account of which he can. Of the former kind are: 1° lest Matrimony be maliciously impeded; 2° grave damage, infamy, or scandal imminent from delay of Matrimony; 3° fear lest the man abandon a girl violated by him; 4° if, Matrimony already having been contracted civilly, the betrothed man does not wish to consent to three proclamations, and other similar things.⁴ - Of the latter kind are: 1° if nuptials are to be contracted among the great; 2° if the betrothed persons are very old, or very disparate in condition, age, wealth, or quality; 3° if it is morally certain that no impediment is present.⁵

Notes near n. 1539, delegation and epikeia for dispensation of banns (printed p. 227).

1 Sess. 24. c. 1. de Ref. Matr. | 2 Bulla, Nimiam licentiam. 18 Maii 1743. Item C. Satis vobis. 17 Nov. 1741. | 3 Sess. 24. c. 1. de Ref. Matr. | 4 L. VI. 1005. | 5 Ib. 1006. | 6 Ib. Vide Feije, n. 266.

1539. Questions. - Quaer. 1° When the betrothed persons are from different dioceses, must dispensation be obtained from each Bishop?

Resp. Affirmatively, as it seems. The reason is because there is no connection between the dispensation of one and that of the other. From another source, only the Ordinary of the place can know concerning the cause of dispensation: for there can be reasons for dispensing for one party, without their being present for the other; and, if impediments are not detected from one side, it does not follow that they cannot be detected from the other. - Nevertheless St. Alphonsus⁶ does not correct those teaching the contrary.

Quaer. 2° Can the Vicar General, and likewise the Capitular Vicar (or among us the Administrator of the diocese), dispense from the proclamations of banns?

Resp. to the 1st. Affirmatively, more probably, according to the most common opinion, provided the Bishop has not reserved this to himself, or does not contradict. The reason is because the Synod concedes this faculty to the Ordinary; but under the name of Ordinary, if the matter belongs to his office and he himself is not expressly excluded, comes also the Vicar General, since he constitutes one tribunal with the Bishop.¹

Resp. to the 2nd. Affirmatively, and this is certain from the decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council, March 2, 1624.

Quaer. 3° Whether and by whom can this faculty be delegated?

Resp. Affirmatively, by those who have it by ordinary right; therefore by the Bishop, by the Vicar General and Capitular Vicar, and, since his jurisdiction is quasi-ordinary or to the universality of causes, also by the Administrator of the diocese. Cf. n. 149, 150. - In very many dioceses this faculty is delegated, at least as regards one or another announcement, to all priests. Let each consult the letters of his Jurisdiction or the diocesan statutes.

Quaer. 4° Whether and when can proclamations be omitted through epikeia, without a preceding dispensation of the Ordinary?

Resp. Affirmatively, VERY probably, provided the following conditions concur: 1st that there be present a cause on account of which the Bishop ought to dispense (n. 1538. III.); 2nd that he (or, if he unjustly refuses dispensation, his Superior) cannot be approached; 3rd that there be danger in delay; 4th that it be clear that no impediment is present.² - Nevertheless Reiffenstuel³ rightly warns that omission is almost not to be advised when the Ordinary (outside the case of a concubinary dying, Feije⁴ aptly adds) has denied dispensation; for it belongs to the Ordinary to judge whether the alleged cause is of such a kind that dispensation is owed. - I add that it is also to be dissuaded in States in which proclamations are prescribed by civil law.

Here again I admonish that the aforesaid conditions occur more easily among us. Wherefore I adhere to the resolutions which Smith hands down on this matter.⁵

Note. - The Tridentine sometimes posits that dispensation be made in such a way that the announcements have place after Matrimony has been contracted, but before it has been consummated. Nevertheless it leaves to the judgment of the Ordinary that, if he prefers, he dispense simply. But today generally only this latter mode is used.

Notes near Article IV, revelation of impediments before Matrimony (printed p. 228).

1 L. VI. 1007. H. A. Tr. XVIII. 59. | 2 L. VI. 1007. | 3 L. IV. T. III. n. 46. | 4 De Imped. n. 268. | 5 Notes on the Sec. Plen. Counc. n. 302-304.

Notes near nn. 1540-1541, obligation and limits of revealing impediments (printed p. 228).

1 L. VI. 994. | 2 c. 3. | 3 c. 4. art. 4. | 4 n. 409. | 5 L. VI. 995. | 6 Ib. 994. | 7 De Imped. n. 269. | 8 Ib. | 9 L. VI. 995.

1540. Principles. - I. There is in itself a grave obligation of revealing impediments of Matrimony, however occult. The reason is drawn from the motive of Religion and charity, and also from the precept itself of banns.¹

II. The obligation generally regards all the faithful of whatever sex, age, parish or diocese, etc., and also blood relatives and friends. The reason is because that law is borne in the name of the Church, to which all Christians are subject, and it rests upon the natural precept of Religion and charity, which regards all. Indeed, although, once Matrimony has been celebrated, the positive law of announcing ceases, nevertheless the law of charity can, according to the circumstances, demand the said revelation.

III. That obligation is to be fulfilled as soon as morally possible; because, if the betrothed persons perhaps obtain dispensation from one or another proclamation and contract sooner, time for making the revelation will not remain, etc.

1541. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Must impediments known under even a committed secret be revealed?

Resp. Affirmatively, even if an oath not to reveal them has been added. The reason is because a natural secret, even committed and sworn, does not oblige when grave damage threatens the community or a third person. - If nevertheless the impediment is infamous, those about to marry themselves must first be admonished, unless either the admonition is probably not going to be profitable, or there is danger in delay.¹ Cf. n. 541. q. 1°.

Except, more probably, the secret of counsel, or a secret committed to a man exercising a public office for the sake of seeking counsel, e.g. to a physician, advocate, Pastor, etc., provided this is done by reason of their profession. For thus the common good seems to demand. - Collet,² Bouvier,³ Carriere,⁴ and others, against others. But even those who under a secret of this kind know the impediment ought at least to admonish the betrothed persons that they desist from Matrimony, unless the admonition probably is not going to be profitable.

Quaer. 2° Are you held to reveal an impediment with your grave inconvenience or detriment?

Resp. Negatively, generally speaking, because the law of the Church and charity do not oblige with so great an inconvenience. - Thus commonly.¹ The Doctors commonly excuse also in these other cases, namely: 1° when someone has only heard of the impediment, but does not know from whom, or has heard of it from a person not worthy of faith; - 2° if he probably judges that revelation is going to beget grave scandal among others; - 3° if he knows that the contracting parties have obtained an occult dispensation for the forum of conscience in an impediment whose report is not public,² and (Feije adds)³ which probably cannot be brought to the external forum; 4° if in another way he can impede the Matrimony and truly does impede it, or efficaciously sees to obtaining dispensation.⁴

Quaer. 3° Are you held to reveal an impediment if you alone know it and cannot prove it?

Resp. Affirmatively, because in the present matter the testimony of one person can suffice, at least for further investigation. - Thus the most common and truer opinion.⁵

Quaer. 4° Are the contracting parties themselves held to reveal an impediment?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is because here there is no question of a penalty to be inflicted, but of sin to be avoided; wherefore it is necessary either that they abstain from Matrimony, or disclose the impediments.

Quaer. 5° What must the Pastor do if he has knowledge of an impediment which is known or probably feared to be present, whether by himself or through others?

Resp. 1° If he acquired the knowledge outside Confession, he cannot pass on to the celebration of Matrimony, but must communicate the affair suitably to the betrothed persons, and, if doubt remains, refer it to the Ordinary.

Resp. 2° If it is clear to the Pastor concerning an occult impediment outside Confession, but the one who is bound by the impediment denies it, he will not be able to assist, whether Matrimony is sought secretly before witnesses, or (more truly according to St. Alphonsus) publicly. Cf. what was said n. 1229. Rule III. Except 2°.

Resp. 3° If he knows an impediment outside Confession, and at the same time knows that dispensation has been obtained for the forum of conscience, he can assist if the impediment is of such a kind that it cannot be brought to the external forum, or at least no probable reason for fearing this is present; otherwise, before he assisted, dispensation would have to be obtained for the external forum.

Resp. 4° Whether he ought immediately to cease from continuing the proclamations depends on the certitude or likelihood of the impediment. See Bangen.

Resp. 5° If he acquires the knowledge in Confession, see what is to be said n. 1556. q. 3°.

I. On the Inquiry into Impediments to be Premitted. - II. On the Necessary Instruction of the Contracting Parties in Christian Doctrine. - III. On the Confession to be Premitted to Nuptials.

Notes near the appendix to banns, inquiry and preparatory duties (printed p. 229).

1 L. VI. 1002. Dub. 1°. | 2 p. 71 sq. | 3 Bulla: Nimiam licentiam, 18 Maii 1743. § 10.

Notes near n. 1542, inquiry into impediments before proclamations (printed p. 229).

1 L. VI. 54. | 2 Heiss. de Matr. § 68. I. | 3 De Syn. L. VIII. c. XIV. n. 5. 6. | 4 Tr. VIII. 48.

Notes near n. 1542, Tridentine admonition and impediment inquiry (printed p. 229).

1 Sess. 24. c. 1. Ref. Matr. De hujus Tridentini moniti fine agit Nouvelle Revue Theol. T. V. p. 301 sv. | 2 Cf. Conc. Pl. Balt. II. n. 329. 330.

1542. I. - 1. The obligation of inquiring into impediments is clear both from the very nature of the matter, or of the Sacrament (n. 1228. II. I said: 1°), and from the Roman Ritual.¹

2. The time, from the Roman Ritual, is that very time at which the Pastor is admonished concerning some Matrimony to be contracted in his parish. Therefore at least before he proceeds to the proclamations.²

3. The following mode, or one similar, is to be used, Benedict XIV³ admonishing. Witnesses having been removed, let the priest strive to explore carefully, and, as it is said, at the ear, both the betrothed man and the betrothed woman separately concerning the impediments which perhaps can be present; and let him especially press those things which, according to his own knowledge of the betrothed persons, he can prudently suspect to be present. First, let him inquire whether those about to marry have already given faith to another; whether thence an impediment of public honesty has not occurred; whether some impediment of cognation or affinity does not intervene? Likewise with due prudence and modest words let him advert to the impediment of affinity from illicit copula (but concerning this rather in the preparatory Confession), and, if one party has already been married, to the impediment of bond, crime, etc. - Then, if it can conveniently be done, let him also call witnesses, or relatives, or others well known to the betrothed persons, and similarly ask of them whether they have knowledge of some impediment intervening between the betrothed persons.

Note. - Prudence also demands that the Pastor inquire whether those things have been observed which are established by the civil law of the State in which Matrimony is contracted.

Notes near n. 1543, instruction of the contracting parties (printed p. 230).

1 Feije, de Imp. n. 276, 277. | 2 L. VI. 54. Cf. Vind. Ed. 2a. T. II. 607. CLVII. | 3 Feije, de Imp. n. 277. | 4 De Matr. § 69. III. p. 264. 2).

1543. II. - 1. The obligation of instructing those about to marry before the proclamations in Christian doctrine: a) does not press in the case in which those about to marry are sufficiently instructed; b) as regards the rest, it presses, even by divine law, concerning those things which must necessarily be known by necessity either of means or of precept. For Matrimony is a Sacrament of the living; therefore no one can, without grave sacrilege, celebrate it in the state of mortal sin, nor can a Pastor licitly assist at the same Matrimony; but he who is ignorant of those necessary things, so long as he does not learn them when he can, remains in the state of mortal sin.¹ - I said: when he can; for, as Benedict XIV² remarks, those who are of dull mind, so that they do not admit of fuller Catechesis, should be taught at least the principal heads of faith. - But as regards those who lack knowledge of those things which are necessary by necessity of precept, the things which we said n. 261 can sometimes be used, especially among us. For, as Kenrick³ rightly observes, "since there is so great an ease of entering Matrimony before a heretical minister or magistrate, it is generally not expedient to repel them, although every effort must be applied that they be instructed as much as possible." I add that it is necessary that for the present they know, or be taught, those things which they ought to know in order that they may validly and licitly receive the Sacraments which they are to receive here and now. Cf. n. 260. 4).⁴

2. In the instruction of those about to marry, especially in these Provinces, the things on which one must especially insist are nearly the following.

The indissolubility of the matrimonial bond, - the right mode of baptizing offspring or a fetus in necessity, - the calling of a truly Catholic midwife, if she can be had, in childbirth, - the timely Baptism of offspring, - a nurse, if one is to be used, endowed with good morals, - the timely instruction of offspring in those things which must be known by necessity either of means or of precept, - the dangers of public schools, and how much it matters that, when they change residences, they prefer those places where a Catholic school can be approached, - the evils which are accustomed to follow from intemperance and frequenting taverns, - the horror with which secret societies are to be fled, - the obligation of contributing according to one's means to the support of Religion.

Besides these things, which are more proper to our regions, these things must be inculcated: - due preparation for the Sacrament through sincere Confession, and, if it can be obtained, a general one, the betrothed persons having been taught that those things which perhaps have been committed by them against chastity are equally sinful as if they had been perpetrated among persons not betrothed, and they having been admonished concerning avoiding suspected or solitary conversation both between themselves and with others, and cohabitation before Matrimony having been most severely interdicted, - the use of Matrimony commanded and licit, - concerning what things one must beware in time of pregnancy, - the danger of suffocation of offspring if, before the first year of age has been completed, it sleeps in the same bed with the mother, - the danger of perversion of children in the case in which they are not corrected when they transgress against modesty, even lightly, - the danger of the same perversion when those seven years old, or often even six years old, sleep in the same bed with parents or with children of the other sex, - caution to be applied when necessity compels that they sleep in the same room with the parents, - the obligation of going before one another and the offspring with good example, - mutual love and fidelity of the spouses, and the things contrary to these.

Nevertheless not all are to be taught all things, nor all in the same way; for the uneducated are to be instructed one way, but the cultivated another; the more honorable one way, the common people another.

Nor all things at the same time. For although instruction is not to be deferred to the day which immediately precedes Matrimony, nevertheless those things which pertain to the commanded and licit use of Matrimony must almost necessarily be remitted to that Confession which immediately precedes Matrimony. But the things which regard the choice of a truly Catholic midwife and of a good nurse, and also the danger of suffocating offspring, generally, and unless there is fear lest the occasion otherwise slip away, are more prudently deferred to the last months of pregnancy. Finally the dangers which threaten the offspring from modesty not very well observed, or from the same bed or room with parents or with children of diverse sex, generally can be relegated to that age of the children at which the danger is accustomed to arise.

The mode by which they are to be taught the commanded and licit use of Matrimony ought to be various according to the various condition of those about to marry. For if they have been of a freer life, that instruction can be somewhat more open, but always honorable, in words of this kind, e.g.: "In those things which pertain to receiving offspring, the consort is to be obeyed, and all things which conduce to this are lawful. If any doubts afterwards arise for you, disclose them candidly to the confessor; but meanwhile" (if there is question of instructing the betrothed woman) "obey your husband, as Superior, unless you clearly understand that something evil is being prescribed to you or demanded of you." - To betrothed persons who were not of a freer life, the same things can be said; but in place of the words: to receiving offspring, these are rather to be used: to the end of Matrimony; and in place of: to this, let it be said: to this end.

Notes near n. 1544, premitted Confession and Communion before Matrimony (printed p. 231).

1 Apud Heiss. de Matr. § 73. | 2 Heiss, de Matr. § 69. V. | 3 Past.-Bl. für N. Amer. 12th Jahrg. S. 140.

1544. III. "It must also be striven for, and the Council of Trent earnestly exhorts, that those about to marry, before the celebration of Matrimony, and that not immediately but at least three days before" (its consummation) "approach the Sacraments of Penance and Eucharist. In many diocesan statutes there is also found either a counsel or a precept concerning this matter. That also is an excellent means of opportunely detecting an impediment, especially an occult one" (see above n. 1542 under 3), "or a circumstance to be expressed in the petition for obtaining dispensation, and of preventing grave inconveniences otherwise going to arise."

"If either party refuses to approach the Sacrament of Penance, the pastor will labor that he change his mind; but if he profits nothing, he will exhort that party at least to elicit contrition for sins before the celebration of Matrimony. But if each party refuses to approach the Sacrament of Penance, and the pastor does not profit by his admonitions, the judgment of the Ordinary must be invoked in places where Confession is prescribed; but outside this case the pastor will assist."¹

But if there is question of public sinners, the Pastor will be able to assist at their Matrimony "to avoid death, or other graver evils of the community, or of the contracting parties themselves, for example lest they themselves persevere in sin."² Therefore generally in this case assistance is to be denied, and it "will always be denied ... if each party openly refuses to confess in contempt of Religion or the Church, or if the very celebration of Matrimony of this kind is going to be a true scandal."³ Kenrick also excuses the assistance of the Pastor if there is reason to fear that those about to marry approach magistrates or heretical ministers; which opinion seems deservedly less probable to the illustrious Heiss,⁴ at least (I add) if there is question of places where the impediment of clandestinity does not have force.

In the case in which there were question of those who have notoriously incurred ecclesiastical censures, apply what was said n. 1231. q. 4°. But if there is speech concerning these, the celebration of Mass must always be excluded, as the Sacred Penitentiary adds in the Response which is related in the cited n. 1231; and, on account of parity of reason, it seems to me that the same must be applied also to the case of public sinners, although they have not notoriously incurred censures.

I said: that Confession be made advisedly at least three days before Matrimony, etc.; and this not only that impediments, especially occult ones, may be opportunely detected, but also that the contracting parties, who up to this point were living in the state of sin, not rarely as in quasi-concubinage, may more securely be disposed to receive the Sacraments worthily and fruitfully. Hence several advise that already before the first promulgation of the banns the contracting parties be induced (for the first time) to Confession, and indeed, if it can be done, to a general Confession, to be made either in the place of the contract, or elsewhere; and then again on the day before the celebration of Matrimony, on which occasion the altogether necessary instruction concerning the licit and due use of Matrimony can suitably be handed down. Holy Communion, if it is received, according to the Rubrics of the Missal (in the Mass for spouses, where it is read, "after the priest has received the Blood, let him communicate the spouses") ought to be received on the nuptial day itself, and this, if the nuptials are solemnly blessed, within the Mass, and indeed, as is inferred from the Response of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, June 23, 1853, in the case of Limburg,¹ by way of the Sacrifice, namely in this way, that two small hosts be consecrated in this Mass itself for the betrothed man and the betrothed woman.² - Nevertheless Mass can be celebrated and within it the blessing given, although the spouses do not communicate within this Mass. S. C. R. March 21, 1874.³

67. • I. Notion.

Banns are public denunciations which must be sent before the matrimony to be celebrated, for this end: that canonical impediments perhaps existing may more easily be detected. Lateran Council IV (1215) had prescribed one proclamation. The Council of Trent¹ established that three proclamations were to be made by the proper pastor of the contracting parties on three continuous feast days during the solemnities of Masses. The Code prescribes the same, with a few changes. (C. C. 1022-1030.)

¹ Sess. 24, c. 1, de ref. matrim.

68. • II. Obligation of banns.

1. All agree that that law obliges under grave sin. For grave is the end of that law, which is to detect impediments and to avoid secret marriages.

To omit three proclamations, necessity or dispensation excepted, would be a mortal sin. According to several, it would also be grave to omit two. To omit one is a light fault.

2. Proclamation of banns is prohibited in marriages of mixed religion or of disparity of cult, unless by license of the Bishop and with scandal removed. But then no mention is made of the religion of the non-Catholic party. (Can. 1026.)

69. • III. Time of the proclamations.

a) "Publications are to be made on three continuous Sundays and other feasts of precept in church, during the solemnities of Masses or during other divine offices, to which the people come in number." (Can. 1024.)

Therefore the publications must be made:

1. On three Sundays or feasts of precept, i.e., on which the obligation of assisting at Mass is imposed upon the faithful.

2. Continuously: namely with no feast day omitted.

It is only venial, or even, when a reasonable cause exists, no sin, to omit one intermediate feast day.

3. In church during the solemnities of Masses or during other offices.

Therefore publications can be made not only at solemn Mass, but at any office whatsoever, provided that a numerous people is accustomed to be present.

b) 1) Unless a reasonable cause demands otherwise, the pastor should not assist at the matrimony before three days have passed from the last publication. (Can. 1030 § 1.)

2. "If within six months the matrimony has not been contracted, the publications are to be repeated, unless it seems otherwise to the Ordinary of the place." (Can. 1030 § 2.)

70. • IV. Form of the publications.

a. It varies in different dioceses. They must be made in the vernacular tongue and in a loud and intelligible voice.

b. But "the Ordinary of the place can, for his own territory, substitute for the publications a public posting at the doors of the parish church or of another church of the names of the contracting parties for the space of at least eight days, yet in such a way that, in this space, two feast days of precept are comprehended." (Can. 1025.)

71. • V. The place in which the publications are to be made.

a. They are to be made in the parish both of the groom and of the bride. And if they have several domiciles or quasi-domiciles in several parishes, let the banns be published in all of them, saving the dispensation of the Ordinary.

b. "If a party has stayed in another place for six months after having attained puberty, the pastor should expose the matter to the Ordinary, who, according to his prudence, should either require publications to be made there, or prescribe that other proofs or conjectures concerning the freedom of state be gathered." (Can. 1023 § 2.)

c. "If there is some suspicion concerning an impediment contracted, the pastor should consult the Ordinary even for a shorter stay, who should not permit the matrimony unless the suspicion has first been removed according to the norm of § 2." (Can. 1023 § 3.)²

² In Belgium the Council of Mechelen, 1920, moderates that prescription thus: when it is clear to him "through public documents, through private testimonies or trustworthy documents together with the sworn affirmation of the contracting parties, that nothing stands in the way of the matrimony and especially that the persons about to marry are free, the pastor is not bound to expose the matter to the Ordinary, nor are publications to be made in another parish."

72. • VI. Dispensation from banns.

a. "The proper Ordinary of the place, according to his prudent judgment, can from a legitimate cause dispense from publications to be made even in another diocese." (Can. 1028 § 1.)

"If there are several proper Ordinaries, that one has the right of dispensing in whose diocese the matrimony is celebrated; but if the matrimony is entered outside the proper dioceses, any proper Ordinary can dispense." (Can. 1028 § 2.)

b. A Bishop cannot dispense except from a legitimate cause. Otherwise the dispensation is invalid, because in this case the Ordinary dispenses in a common law, i.e., in the law of his Superior.

c. For estimating what cause must be held sufficient, it is necessary not only to weigh the cause itself, but also to inspect whether there is present moral certitude, or only a greater or lesser probability, concerning the absence of any impediment whatsoever.

If it is morally established that there is no impediment, any reasonable cause, indeed the petition of the spouses itself, is a sufficient cause for dispensing even from all publications.

But if a positive doubt is present concerning some impediment, the Ordinary cannot in any way, not even from a most grave cause, dispense from all publications.

Finally, if neither moral certitude concerning absence nor positive doubt concerning the existence of an impediment is had, the Ordinary can dispense for various causes.³

³ Capello, op. cit., n. 168.

73. • VII. Obligation of revealing impediments.

a) 1. "All the faithful are bound to reveal impediments, if they know any, to the pastor or to the Ordinary of the place before the celebration of matrimony." (Can. 1027.)

This obligation is grave, because the end of the law is of great moment, namely to impede illicit and invalid marriages. Nor does it proceed from positive law alone, but also from natural law.

2. If the revelation would bring some infamy upon the spouses, they themselves must first be warned, if this is possible; but if the warning is of no benefit, then the impediment is to be revealed to the pastor.

b) Nevertheless there are causes which excuse from revelation:

1. Uselessness of denunciation: for instance if the pastor already knows the impediment, or if there has been a dispensation from the impediment in the forum of conscience, etc.

2. Grave damage, one's own or another's.

But then even the one who knows the impediment is bound to impede the matrimony insofar as he can.

3. A sacramental or professional secret, but not a natural secret or a promised one, even with an oath.

838. The law concerning publications of banns. - Banna, which word in German signified an edict of jurisdiction and consequently a public proclamation, are understood here as the public announcements of future matrimony between persons, which must be premised to its celebration so that impediments perhaps standing in the way may be detected more securely and more easily.

The law was introduced by custom, which the Fourth Lateran Council, c. 51, extended to the universal Church, prescribing one proclamation; but the Council of Trent, sess. 24, c. 1 de ref., n. 7, established that three proclamations be made, which the code of law confirmed, can. 1024. It obliges under grave matter, because it greatly conduces to an end of great moment: namely, of avoiding clandestine marriages, detecting occult impediments, and preventing children from contracting marriages against the will of parents. Whence to omit three proclamations without urgent necessity is a grave sin, indeed even to omit two, unless perhaps the danger of a latent impediment is absent; to omit one is light by reason of smallness of matter.

The law obliges all Catholics, even if the matrimony to be contracted is publicly known and it is established that no impediment is present, because the law is passed for forestalling a common danger (can. 21). There are excepted marriages of princes, which are not usually published, and cases of urgent necessity, as if in danger of death matrimony had to be contracted for legitimating offspring. Mixed marriages, however, to be celebrated with dispensation from the impediment of disparity of worship or of mixed religion, by law are not to be published, unless the Ordinary according to his prudence, scandal having been removed, has judged it opportune to permit this, or unless by particular law this is tolerated somewhere; in which case mention of the religion of the non-Catholic party should be omitted (can. 1026).

839. Circumstances of banns. - A. Time. "Publications are to be made on three continuous Sundays and other days of precept in the church during the solemnities of Masses, or during other divine offices to which the people come in numbers" (can. 1024).

Therefore publications must be made:

1° on three Sundays or feasts of precept, on which the obligation of assisting at Mass is imposed on the faithful;

2° continuous, namely, with no feast day omitted: it would be only venial, or, if a reasonable cause exists, no sin, to omit one intermediate feast day;

3° in church, which of itself is to be understood as parochial, during the solemnities of Masses or during other offices, provided that the people are usually present in numbers.

Hence: a) Announcements of themselves cannot be made on feast days suppressed in the place where they are made, even if they are celebrated with a great attendance of people; unless perhaps somewhere there is a centenary custom tolerated by the Ordinary, or unless in a particular case he dispenses.

b) Nor a fortiori on a non-festal day or outside church, on the occasion of some religious solemnity, unless in an urgent case, or from a dispensation of the Ordinary conceded for a particular case, provided the concourse of people is great, so that the end of the law is attained.

c) A pastor who in Mass forgot to make the announcement to be made, or proclaimed the names of the spouses in such a way that they were not understood by the hearers, can make the due proclamation at vespers or defer it to the following feast day.

B. Form. Publications of themselves must be made by living voice and in the vernacular speech; per accidens "the local Ordinary can, for his territory, substitute for the publications a public affixing, at the doors of the parochial church or another church, of the names of the contracting parties for a space of at least eight days, yet so that, in this space, two feast days of precept are included" (can. 1025).

The form is varied in various dioceses according to the diverse customs or statutes of places. For affixing, a place well conspicuous is to be chosen. 1

C. Place. Proclamations are to be made:

1° Of themselves, in the parish of the proper pastor (can. 1023, § 1), and indeed of both the groom and the bride. But the proper pastor is he in whose parish they have domicile or quasi-domicile; or, if there is question of wanderers or of those who have only diocesan domicile or quasi-domicile, actual residence.

Hence: a) If the future spouses belong to the same parish and in it alone have domicile or quasi-domicile, in it alone must the proclamations be made; - unless sometimes per accidens, if before this one of the two stayed in another place for six months, as will be said under 2°.

b) If they are of diverse parishes, then proclamations must be made in the church of each.

c) If one or each has several domiciles, or domicile with quasi-domicile, or several quasi-domiciles, in all these places also must the proclamations be made; as can easily happen for minors living outside the paternal home, for soldiers, students, servants, etc.

d) Proclamations are no longer to be made in the place of origin or of actual residence, if they are not the place of domicile or quasi-domicile; - unless per accidens if it is prescribed by particular statutes or by the Ordinary.

2° Per accidens, also outside the parish, if the party has stayed in another place for six months after having attained puberty: then the pastor should set forth the matter to the Ordinary, who according to his prudence either requires that publications be made there, or prescribes that other proofs or conjectures concerning liberty of state be gathered (can. 1023, § 2).

Notice: a) If there is some suspicion concerning a contracted impediment, the pastor should consult the Ordinary even for a shorter residence, who should not permit the matrimony unless first the suspicion is removed according to the norm of § 2 (can. 1023, § 3).

b) In these cases, the number of proclamations is to be determined by the Ordinary.

c) If the party has stayed in very far and distant regions, from which, so that regular attestation of liberty of state may be had, a longer time is required, and yet the celebration of matrimony is urgent, the Ordinary according to his prudent judgment can prescribe a supplementary oath (whether by the party or by witnesses), as we know from the response of the com. int., June 2, 1918, and from the instruction of the Congregation of the Sacraments, June 4, 1921.

Moreover, in this matter the ordinances of the particular Statutes are also to be considered. 1

Let it be noted that the pastor can make the proclamations by himself or through another.

1. Thus in the Council of Mechlin, n. 206, for Belgium it is established concerning the case in which someone has stayed outside the parish for six months: "It belongs to the pastor, in individual cases, diligently to investigate whether anything stands in the way of the celebration of matrimony. But if, after inquiry has been made, it is established to him, by public ecclesiastical or civil documents, by private testimonies or documents worthy of faith, together with the sworn affirmation of the contracting parties themselves, that nothing stands in the way of the matrimony and especially that the future spouses are free, the pastor is not bound to set forth the matter to the Ordinary, nor are publications to be made in another parish.

"But if, after diligent investigation, there is doubt or suspicion concerning the existence of an impediment, let him consult the Ordinary and follow his precepts."

1. The provincial Council of Mechlin established for all Belgium, decr. 208: "For publications there can be partly substituted a public affixing at the doors of the parochial church of the names of the contracting parties, according namely to this norm:

"1° The names of each of the contracting parties must be proclaimed from the pulpit at least once, on a Sunday or feast of precept.

"2° In place of two publications, there can be made an affixing at the doors of the parochial church for a space of at least eight days, yet so that in this space two Sundays or feasts of precept are included, even if the prescribed publication is made on one of these Sundays or feasts.

"But the affixing is to be made in a place altogether conspicuous."

I say. There exists, by necessity of an ecclesiastical precept, a grave obligation of proclaiming the banns before the celebration of Marriage.

It is established concerning the precept from the Lateran and Tridentine Councils and from the new Code: Let it be publicly announced by the pastor between whom marriage is to be contracted (Can. 1022). But the gravity of the obligation is deduced from this, that a general discipline prescribed by two general Councils and resting upon grave motives produces a grave obligation. It is said 1°. by necessity of precept, because it is certain that banns are not required by necessity of the sacrament, for the aforesaid Councils place no invalidating clause. It is said 2°. ecclesiastical, because although by natural law there exists an obligation of inquiring whether some impediment is present for the future Marriage, nevertheless there is not had an obligation of employing such a means.

Question 1. Whether the aforesaid obligation strictly urges in this region?

Resp. Affirmatively; for it is a universal law, again and again repeated by the Baltimore Fathers both in the First and in the Second Plenary Council and by very many diocesan statutes.

Question 2. Are all who are about to contract subject to the law of proclamation?

Resp. Affirmatively, because the law is altogether general. Nevertheless, by usage Princes are excepted, because their lineage is sufficiently known, and ordinarily their marriages are sufficiently public. Except also the case of necessity, for example, if someone near death should wish to marry a concubine in order to legitimate offspring, and there would be danger in delay. - Cf. Ferraris, under the words Denuntiationes Matrimonii.

Publications are not to be made for marriages which are contracted with dispensation from the impediment of disparity of cult or of mixed religion, unless the Ordinary of the place, according to his prudence, scandal having been removed, has judged it opportune to permit them, provided the apostolic dispensation has preceded and mention of the religion of the non-Catholic party is omitted (Can. 1026).

Question 3. Does a Pastor who omits the banns sin gravely, if he knows that no impediment is present?

Resp. Affirmatively, and the reason is: 1°. because with difficulty can the Pastor be altogether certain that no impediment of Marriage is present; 2°. because, even if no impediment appears before the proclamation of the banns, it can happen that, once they have been proclaimed, some impediment supervenes; 3°. because a law does not cease when its final cause ceases only in a particular case. - But it is probable that it is not a mortal sin if one denunciation, and perhaps even if two, are omitted. Cf. S. Alphonsus, nn. 990 and 991.

Question 4. What formula is to be used in making the proclamations?

Resp. Concerning this matter the Roman Ritual establishes thus: But the publications are to be made in this way. During the solemnities of Masses or during other divine offices, as above, the Pastor is to admonish the people in this sense in the vernacular speech:

"Let it be known to all here present, that N., son of N., of the family N., of the parish of St. N., and N., daughter of N., of the family N., of the parish of St. N., intend to contract Marriage between themselves. Therefore we admonish all and singular persons that if anyone knows that some impediment of consanguinity or affinity or spiritual relationship, or any other impediment whatever, exists between them, which would impede the Marriage to be contracted between them, he ought to reveal it as soon as possible to the Pastor or to the Ordinary of the place; and this we admonish FIRST, if it is the first; or SECOND, if it is the second; or THIRD, if it is the third publication." Tit. VII, c. 1, n. 8.

Publications are to be made on three continuous Sundays and other feast days of precept in the church during the solemnities of Masses, or during other divine offices to which the people come in frequency (Can. 1024).

It is said 1°. on feast days, that is, on days of precept at least in the place of the proclamations, and probably also on ferial days on which, from some cause, there would be a great gathering of the people in the church. - It is said 2°. continuous, that is, with no feast day omitted from the first proclamation to the last. But whether the proclamations can be made on feast days immediately succeeding one another, if they occur, is disputed; and there is a twofold probable opinion. It is also probable that it is not mortal if one or another feast day is interposed. - It is said 3°. during the solemnities of Masses, that is, in the parochial or conventual Mass, from the Decree of the S. C. of the Council. - Nevertheless it is licit to make these proclamations during other divine offices, provided there is a frequent gathering of the people to them.

The Ordinary of the place, for his territory, can substitute for publications a public affixing of the names of the contracting parties at the doors of the parochial church or of another church for the space of at least eight days, yet in such a way that, in this space, two feast days of precept are included (Can. 1025).

§ 1. Publications of marriages must be made by the proper pastor.

§ 2. If a party has stayed in another place for six months after attaining puberty, the pastor is to explain the matter to the Ordinary, who according to his prudence is either to require publications to be made there, or to prescribe that other proofs or conjectures concerning the state of freedom be gathered.

§ 3. If there is some suspicion of a contracted impediment, even for a shorter stay the pastor is to consult the Ordinary, who is not to permit the marriage unless first the suspicion is removed according to the norm of § 2 (Can. 1023).

1°. Minors. Canon law establishes nothing concerning minors. Nevertheless, in some places, according to the norm of civil laws, it is the custom that their banns are not proclaimed unless by the express consent of parents or guardians.

2°. Soldiers. By common law soldiers are regarded as if they were wanderers or foreigners. Their banns are to be proclaimed: 1°. in the place where they are in garrisons; 2°. in the place where they resided before military service was taken up; because they have not acquired another domicile of law.

3°. Wanderers. Their banns, according to the common opinion, are to be published in the domicile of fact and in the place of origin, if they have not obtained a true domicile elsewhere, or at least in the place in which they stayed longer. Besides, authentic testimony concerning their free state is to be had, and they are not to be joined in Marriage without the permission of the Ordinary, as the Tridentine Council has it, sess. 24, cap. 7, de Reform. Matrim. Cf. Can. 1032.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1119, n. 72.

Question 1. What is the obligation of the pastor in this matter concerning the instruction of the people?

Resp. He is bound prudently to instruct his people concerning the sacrament of marriage and its impediments. For if spouses duly fulfill their duties, there is had a most grave bulwark of the Church and of the republic. Discreet and priestly instruction concerning this great sacrament is of the highest importance, so that the betrothed may receive it worthily. Hence Canon 1018 admonishes pastors concerning the duty of their office of not omitting instruction about wedlock.

Besides, it is necessary to exhort minor children under paternal power not to contract marriage without their parents knowing and while they are reasonably unwilling; but if they refuse, he is not to assist at their nuptials unless the Ordinary of the place has first been consulted. - Cf. Can. 1034.

Question 2. What must first be established before marriage is celebrated?

Resp. It must be established that nothing obstructs its valid and licit celebration. But in danger of death, if other proofs cannot be had, it suffices, unless contrary indications are present, that the contracting parties swear an affirmation that they are baptized and entangled in no impediment. - Cf. Can. 1019.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1093, n. 26.

Question 3. What must the pastor furnish concerning the investigation before marriage is contracted?

Resp. § 1. The pastor who has the right of assisting at the marriage, at a suitable time beforehand, is diligently to investigate whether anything obstructs the marriage to be contracted.

§ 2. He is to question both the betrothed man and the betrothed woman, even separately and cautiously, whether they are held by any impediment, whether they give consent freely, especially the woman, and whether they have been sufficiently instructed in Christian doctrine, unless on account of the quality of the persons this last questioning appears useless.

§ 3. It belongs to the Ordinary of the place to give particular norms for an investigation of this kind by the pastor (Can. 1020).

Question 4. What does the law establish concerning testimony of baptism? And what concerning confirmation?

Resp. § 1. Unless baptism was conferred in his own territory, the pastor is to require testimony of baptism from each party, or from the Catholic party alone if it is a question of a marriage to be contracted with dispensation from the impediment of disparity of cult.

§ 2. Catholics who have not yet received the sacrament of confirmation are to receive it before they are admitted to marriage, if they can do this without grave inconvenience (Can. 1021).

Indeed, this prescription is most wise, and, duly observed, will drive away very many difficulties. In a word, baptism must always be established authentically. If it was conferred in one's own territory, it will be known from the proper book of baptisms. If it was conferred in another territory, either it is a question of the marriage of two Catholics, or of a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic, or of a Catholic and an unbaptized person; testimony of baptism from this canon seems to be required from every baptized person: from two Catholics in the first case; from the two, a Catholic and a baptized non-Catholic, in the second case of mixed marriage; from the Catholic in the third case.

Confirmation also ought to be received beforehand. No one fails to see with how many graces one confirmed is heaped up and how fitting a preparation for his conjugal life the reception of confirmation would be.

Question 5. To what is another pastor bound who has carried out the investigation or publications?

Resp. He is bound, by an authentic document concerning their outcome, to render the pastor who must assist at the marriage more certain. - Cf. Can. 1029.

Question 6. When at last can the pastor licitly assist, once the investigations have been completed?

Resp. He ought not to assist before he has received all the documents, and, unless some other reasonable cause requires otherwise, three days have elapsed from the last publication. The reason is that sufficiently ample time may be given for detecting an impediment and making it known to the pastor. - Cf. Can. 1030, § 1.

Question 7. Must the publications ever be repeated?

Resp. Affirmatively, if the nuptials are not contracted within six months, unless the Ordinary of the place has judged otherwise. - Cf. Can. 1030, § 2.

Question 8. When does the pastor licitly assist at the marriage of wanderers, namely of those who nowhere have a domicile or quasi-domicile?

Resp. Except in a case of necessity, he never assists licitly, unless, after the matter has been referred to the Ordinary of the place or to a priest delegated by him, he has obtained permission to assist.

Question 9. What is the special obligation of the pastor in relation to the instruction of the betrothed?

Resp. Let the pastor not omit, according to the diverse condition of persons, to teach the betrothed the sanctity of the sacrament of marriage, the mutual obligations of spouses, and the obligations of parents toward offspring; and let him vehemently exhort the same that before the celebration of marriage they diligently confess their sins and piously receive the most holy Eucharist (Can. 1033).

This obligation seems to us truly grave, at least as to the substantial part. Indeed it is a delicate matter, but no less weighty, to bring it about that the betrothed approach the sacrament fully prepared in heart and mind. It is not required that he descend to the smallest circumstances, but certainly he himself is bound to know that his subjects enter wedlock not ignorant of the character and properties of the matrimonial contract.

Question 10. What are the parts of the pastor when a doubt concerning an impediment has arisen? What when an impediment has been detected? What when none has been detected?

Resp. § 1. When a doubt has arisen concerning the existence of some impediment:

1°. The pastor is to investigate the matter more accurately by questioning under oath at least two witnesses worthy of faith, provided it is not a question of an impediment from knowledge of which infamy would arise for the parties, and, if it is necessary, the parties themselves also;

2°. He is to carry out or complete the publications, if the doubt has arisen before the publications have been begun or completed;

3°. He is not to assist at the Marriage without consulting the Ordinary, if he prudently judges that the doubt still remains.

§ 2. When a certain impediment has been detected:

1°. If the impediment is occult, the pastor is to carry out or complete the publications and refer the matter, withholding the names, to the Ordinary of the place or to the Sacred Penitentiary;

2°. If it is public and is detected before the publications have begun, the pastor is not to proceed further until the impediment is removed, even if he knows that a dispensation has been obtained only for the forum of conscience; if it is detected after the first or second publication, the pastor is to complete the publications and refer the matter to the Ordinary.

§ 3. Finally, if no impediment has been detected, neither doubtful nor certain, the pastor, once the publications have been completed, is to admit the parties to the celebration of marriage (Can. 1031).¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1116, n. 65.

I. QUESTION I. What is clandestine matrimony? ANSWER. It is that which is celebrated without the presence of the parish priest and of witnesses, as is gathered from Trent, session 24, chapter 1. Before Trent clandestine marriages were valid. Trent declared them invalid for most grave causes. For marriages of this kind fight with the fidelity to be preserved between spouses. For those who contract secretly and without witnesses can easily recede from the consent given; one party can with impunity desert the other, since no testimony can be adduced. The offspring also is subject to uncertainty. Lastly the dignity of the sacrament is violated, and its knot and bond.

II. The Church, in declaring clandestine marriages invalid, did not change the essence of the sacrament, but, that the sacrament might be worthily celebrated, appended conditions, which being lacking, she declared the contracting parties unfit for celebrating the sacrament. Clandestine matrimony has not even the force of betrothals, as the common opinion teaches.

III. QUESTION II. Whether in any case after Trent clandestine matrimony be valid? ANSWER. Unbelievers, even subject to the civil power of Catholic Princes, can enter upon matrimony without the solemnity prescribed by Trent. Similarly the clandestine marriages of the faithful, where Trent is not received, are valid. For a law not accepted does not annul a contract. But where Trent is received, there is given no case in which matrimony without the presence of the parish priest and of witnesses is valid. If the parish priest be lacking, although a hundred witnesses were present, the matrimony is null.

IV. Travellers passing through places where Trent has been promulgated are bound to contract before the parish priest and witnesses. Travellers departing from places where Trent has been promulgated, and passing through places where Trent has not been received, very many teach contract validly, yet affirm that these sin mortally. I should not dare to assert such matrimony valid, since it can be contracted before the parish priest and witnesses.

V. Does he opine truly who teaches that Catholics who in fraud go to those places where Trent has not been promulgated can validly celebrate matrimony?

VI. This opinion is to me utterly false and adverse to the Council of Trent. Catholics therefore will be able to pass over to the places of heretics or unbelievers, and there contract secretly, and, returning to their own country, publicly enter upon another matrimony. For this, among other things, is the absurdity which Trent warns follows upon clandestine marriages. He does not commit fraud, says Sánchez, who uses his own right. True. But whence has he it, that Catholics possess a right of circumventing the most grave law of Trent, which declares Catholics unfit for contracting occult marriages of this kind? It is denied that they possess this right.

VII. The faithful dwelling under the tyranny of unbelievers, if they can in no way have the presence of a parish priest, let them at least employ witnesses, that in the way they can they may observe the law. For in this way later adulterous marriages are hindered, which absurdity, among others, Trent intends to avoid.

VIII. Catholics subject to a heretical Prince, after matrimony celebrated according to the laws of Trent, cannot present themselves to a heretical minister assisting as a minister at an ecclesiastical sacred rite; but they can present themselves to him, if he assist as a political and civil minister, as the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office declared on the 18th of November 1671, reported by Benedict XIV, Book 6 On the Synod, chapter 5, no. 4. Which declaration he confirms in constitution 49, § 1, at the end, Vol. I, where he forbids the faithful dwelling in the kingdom of Serbia and the neighbouring regions, after matrimony celebrated with the Catholic rite, to renew it before the Cadi, unless the ceremony of the nuptials to be performed before the Cadi were a merely civil act and contained no Mahometan superstition.

IX. QUESTION III. Who is the parish priest prescribed by Trent? ANSWER. He ought to be the proper parish priest at least of one of the contracting parties, or a priest with his licence. Usage obtains in several places that matrimony be celebrated in the parish of the woman, when the man is of another parish; this man nevertheless ought to have testimonial letters from his own parish priest concerning the accustomed banns. But the proper parish priest is not of origin, but of domicile. Who is the parish priest of domicile has been said elsewhere. Outside his own parish or diocese a parish priest can assist at the matrimony of his own parishioners; but he ought to seek licence from the parish priest of the place, as seems to me the more probable. Who is the parish priest of vagrants has been said elsewhere.

X. QUESTION IV. Who besides the parish priest, or a priest designated by him, can assist at matrimony? ANSWER. There can assist: bishops in their own dioceses; archbishops in the dioceses of suffragans when they are actually visiting; Cardinals in the Church of their own title; papal Legates in the province of their legation; the Chapter, the See being vacant, or its Vicar; Abbots of a Church subject to no bishop; the Vicar general of a bishop.

XI. Licences extorted by force, by grave fear falling upon a constant man, or by fraud, that a priest may assist at a matrimony, are null and make the matrimony null, whatever others say to the contrary. For this licence must needs be free and express.

XII. QUESTION V. Whether for the validity of matrimony two witnesses be required? ANSWER. All affirm it, and that matrimony contracted before the parish priest and one witness is null: because Trent besides the parish priest prescribes two witnesses, who ought to be present with physical and moral presence, and to perceive the consent of each spouse; they ought to be witnesses, and co-witnesses together with the parish priest.

XIII. A parish priest is called by force, guile, or fear to assist at a matrimony: is this matrimony to be called valid? The more recent authors commonly affirm it, and adduce several declarations of the Congregation of Cardinals. To which, if they be authentic, I subscribe. But these being set aside, this matrimony would seem to me invalid, at which a parish priest compelled by guile, fraud, or fear falling upon a constant man should assist. For the wishes of the Council are that this sacrament be freely celebrated. Grave fear struck into the betrothed makes the matrimony null, as has been said above. Why not fear struck into the parish priest? That those sin mortally who contract matrimony before a parish priest held by force, or by guile, or assisting by chance in passing, all teach. What if the parish priest should close his eyes and stop his ears, and protest that he neither sees nor hears what is done? That even then the matrimony is valid the Salmanticenses and Leander affirm, and assert it out of Farinacius from the Declarations of the Cardinals. These declarations being set aside, which I with difficulty believe to be authentic, I should call such a matrimony null. One must nevertheless stand by the decisions, if they be authentic.

XIV. QUESTION VI. What ought a parish priest to perform in the celebration of matrimony? ANSWER. He ought first to question the contracting parties whether they wish mutually to join themselves. Their reciprocal consent being heard, he ought to join them, pronouncing the words prescribed by the Council: I join you together in matrimony, and so forth.

XV. Would a parish priest sin mortally who omitted these words I join you together, and so forth? Sánchez denies it. But the nuptial blessing, and the reported words, or like ones, by which parish priests join the contracting parties, are one of the chief moments of sacred tradition, by which Catholics evince against the heretics that matrimony is a sacrament. On what ground therefore does anyone call the aforesaid formula of words a light matter? Do they not bear a mystery of great signification, since they portend the conjunction of Christ with the Church? Besides, is not that opinion exceedingly probable which defends that those words are the form of the sacrament? Is not the safer opinion to be chosen in the performing of the sacraments?

XVI. QUESTION VII. Whether the banns of a future matrimony be necessary by the necessity of the sacrament, or of precept? ANSWER. That they are not necessary by the necessity of the sacrament all affirm; but that they are necessary by the necessity of precept is certain, as is established from Trent, session 24, chapter 1. If the spouses be of diverse parishes, the banns ought to be made in each parish on three feast days amid the solemnities of the Masses. That this precept obliges under mortal sin the common and true opinion teaches. From this precept supreme Princes are exempt. From this precept the bishop alone can dispense, as Trent decrees. For a just dispensation some cause is required. Bishops nevertheless ought to beware lest they be too easy in granting dispensations of this kind.

XVII. Whosoever knows any impediment which can be proved by witnesses is bound under grave fault to manifest it, as all teach. If it be occult, which cannot be proved by witnesses, some deny that anyone is bound to lay it open; but the affirmative opinion is common. For everyone is bound to obey a superior commanding. But a parish priest promulgating the banns lawfully commands that impediments between the future spouses be manifested. There is added that upon one revealing impediments the proof does not lie.

XVIII. QUESTION VIII. Do spouses sin if they consummate matrimony before the nuptial blessing? ANSWER. Some deny it. But the Council of Trent exhorts, session 24, chapter 1, that they dwell not in the same house before the sacred blessing to be received in the Church. Concerning this blessing Pope Siricius in his epistle to Himerius, chapter 4, writes thus: That blessing which a priest imposes upon those about to marry is among the faithful as it were the seal of a certain sacrilege, if it be violated by any transgression. Like things Pope Hormisdas writes; and the Fourth Council of Carthage, reported part 1, distinction 30, question 5, chapter 1, says: The bridegroom and bride, when they are to be blessed by the priest, are offered by their parents or by the paranymphs; and when they have received the blessing, on that same night, out of reverence for the blessing itself, let them remain in virginity. So speak all the Fathers: and from the tradition of the Fathers we evince against the heretics that matrimony is a sacrament, as has been indicated above.

XIX. That readers may on the occasion given understand how far the manner of opining of very many casuists differs from the doctrine of the holy Fathers, let them hear what after Fr. Sánchez Fr. Viva writes, question 4, article 4, no. 6, where he says: “The blessing of the nuptials does not seem to be a grave matter, nor greatly congruous to the progress of matrimony. For the nuptial blessing is not a sacrament, but a certain sacramental, nor of so great moment as the sacramentals which are sent before Baptism. But although it is not free from venial fault simply to omit it without any cause, against the use and custom of the Church, nevertheless it is probable that there is no fault, from a just cause — namely by reason of a forbidden season, in Advent or Lent — to consummate matrimony before the blessing of the Church; since it seems to be a counsel, not a precept, to send it before.”

XX. These things cannot be read and compared with the doctrine of the holy Fathers and of the Councils without the mind being kindled with zeal for Christian discipline. The sacred blessing of pastors does not seem to be a grave matter, nor greatly congruous to the progress of matrimony? The matrimony of Catholics is a sacrament, and the blessing of priests is not greatly congruous? Whether anything of offence to pious ears is contained in these words, let the wise judge. Those therefore sin, and indeed mortally, who consummate matrimony before the blessing.

After the banns had been proclaimed in a certain church, Paul, a physician, went to the parish priest and disclosed that, as the family physician, he knew with certainty that the bridegroom suffered from syphilis and consumption and therefore ought not enter marriage. The parish priest, however, doubted whether or not he ought for that reason to forbid the marriage. Hence it is asked:

1. What obligation do the banns impose upon those who know an obstacle to marriage?

2. What is a committed secret, and when does it cease to oblige?

3. What is a prohibition of the Church?

4. What is to be said of the physician and the parish priest in the case?

1. What obligation do banns impose on those who know of an impediment to a proposed marriage?

Banns impose a grave precept to make known to the parish priest any secret impediment to a marriage that any one may know of. This precept binds not only in cases of a natural secret, but also in cases of a promised secret, but not of a professional secret except when this ceases to bind.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, 205.

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. i, 471 ff.

2. What is a professional secret and when does it cease to bind?

Professional secrets are those which are communicated to another under an express or implied obligation of secrecy. Such secrets should be made known if this is necessary to avert a public calamity. They may also be made known to avert serious harm which would be done to an innocent party by him whose secret is in question unless the secret were made known.¹

3. What is the prohibition of the Church?

The prohibition of the Church is one of the prohibitory impediments of marriage, which prevent a marriage being lawfully contracted but do not make it null and void if it is contracted in spite of the prohibition. It is particular if a particular marriage for just cause is forbidden by the parish priest, the bishop, or the Pope. It is general if it constitutes a law of the Church.²

2 Ibid., vol. ii, 288.

4. What about the doctor and the parish priest in the case?

The doctor was under the obligation of professional secrecy with regard to the diseases of the bridegroom. It would have been better if in the first instance he had tried to induce the bridegroom to put off the marriage until the syphilis at least was cured. If the bridegroom refused to put off the marriage and refused to acquaint the bride or her father with his state of health, the doctor would be at liberty to tell the secret to any one who could apply a remedy. He would be justified in telling the parish priest if he thought that the parish priest could do this. The priest should try his best to induce the bridegroom put off the marriage, and if he does not succeed he will be at liberty to communicate what he knows to the bride’s family. The priest can not refuse to assist at the marriage especially if the bride knows of the objection to it, and nevertheless consents to be married. But they should not use their marital rights till the syphilis at least is cured.¹

1 Antonelli, Medicina Pastoralis, vol. ii, 416 ff.