Dispensation from Abstinence and Fasting

688. Who can dispense: a. The supreme pontiff for the whole Church. His dispensation, from the known principles, is always valid and, when a just cause exists, also licit.

b. The bishop with his subjects from a just cause in particular cases, but without an indult not with an entire community; therefore neither with an entire diocese, nor with some parish, nor with some family.¹

In recent times there has been granted to bishops the faculty, for most grave causes, of dispensing in the law of abstinence if some solemn feast falls on Friday or Saturday, except in the times of Lent and Advent, on Ember days, and on vigils consecrated to fasting. This power is extended also to days on which extraordinary fairs are held with a great concourse of the people.²

c. The pastor, from custom, with his subjects in a particular case, that is, individual persons, but not with the whole parish nor with an entire family, not even for one day.

d. A regular superior with his subjects taken individually, but not with the whole community.

e. Confessors, unless they have been expressly delegated, have no faculty of dispensing, but can only declare whether an excusing cause is present; which, moreover, physicians also can do, and superiors of nuns.

In declaring inability to fast, especially if the excusing cause is not plainly certain, superiors and confessors should attend to what Sanchez wisely warns, that they provide for necessity with the least loss of the law: thus where it suffices to take the morning breakfast or the evening collation more indulgently, they should grant this, but by no means relax the fast entirely.³

¹ Constitution of Benedict XIV, Libentissime (June 24, 1745); nevertheless authors grant to the bishop the faculty of dispensing with some particular college or institute from an urgent cause, for example in an epidemic disease.

² This faculty was granted by Leo XIII through a decree of the Holy Office, Dec. 5, 1894, and Dec. 15, 1897. Cf. Acta S. Sedis XXVII, 512.

³ Consil. l. 5, c. 1, dub. 4, n. 3 s.

689. On the dispensation itself. 1. Universal dispensation by pontifical indult, whether immediately by the supreme pontiff or mediately through the bishop, ordinarily is granted only from the law of abstinence, but not from the law of one eating, because in this matter legitimate excuse suffices. But particular dispensation is customarily granted either from both laws or from either one.

a. An example is not lacking of a faculty generally granted of dispensing in both laws and of the dispensation itself: on Jan. 14, 1892, the supreme pontiff Leo XIII, because of diseases raging in that year, granted to all bishops of the world that they release the faithful from the law by which they are bound to observe abstinence and fasting. The same supreme pontiff, through the Lent of the year 1898, because of diseases raging at Rome, dispensed both from abstinence and from fasting.

b. From the will of Benedict XIV, particular dispensation is to be granted only on the advice of both physicians.¹ Therefore to the petition must be joined the testimony both of the pastor or confessor and of the physician; but in some regions this precept has fallen into desuetude.

c. Superiors inferior to the Roman pontiff cannot dispense from the law of not mixing foods without special delegation. Although this dispensation is granted very rarely, nevertheless some examples of it are not lacking.

2. If sometimes for many indeterminately a general dispensation from the law of abstinence is sought or granted, the cause of the dispensation must affect in some way all those for whom it is sought or granted; thus in places of baths, by reason of infirmity, a dispensation could be granted for all who live in an inn destined for bathers.

3. He to whom an indult is granted of eating flesh meats on days forbidden by the Church, with the law of fasting nevertheless preserved, can use this dispensation not only on days of abstinence, but also on days of fasting; but on days of fasting only for the meal, and by no means for the evening collation. But if he is not bound to observe fasting, he can eat flesh meats in all eatings.

¹ Constitution Non ambigimus, May 30, 1741.

690. Some documents concerning fasting, which are gathered from various decrees of the Holy Office and especially of the Sacred Penitentiary.¹

a. Those who, by reason of age or labor or infirmity, are excused from fasting (but not those who have been dispensed from a just cause), can, on days of fasting on which by the general indult of the bishop the eating of flesh meat is permitted, eat flesh meat as often as they take food,² unless the bishop dispensing by force of an apostolic indult restricts this faculty.³

Those who are excused from fasting from a just cause, by the will of the Holy See, unless from the same cause they are also excused from abstinence, are plainly dispensed from abstinence, unless the bishop establishes otherwise. But the Holy See does not extend this dispensation to those who are not bound to fast only by reason of dispensation. Therefore these need a special dispensation in order that they may eat flesh meat more often than is lawful through the Lenten indult.

b. A dispensation granted to the father of a family of itself is not extended to the whole family; wherefore, if it is permitted to children that in a case of this kind they eat flesh meat, this is not done because of the father's dispensation, but because of the impossibility in which they are placed of observing abstinence.⁴

c. Bishops dispensing in the eating of flesh meats from a pontifical indult are accustomed to enjoin on the faithful who use the dispensation some pious work (either certain prayers or alms). This precept obliges under light obligation and is affixed to the day; wherefore when the day has passed it ceases.

¹ Compare the decrees themselves in Lehmkuhl I, n. 1219 ss.

² Sacred Penitentiary, Feb. 24, 1819.

³ Sacred Penitentiary, May 27, 1863.

⁴ Sacred Penitentiary, Jan. 16, 1834; Dec. 19, 1862; Apr. 20, 1865.

691. On the Bull of the Crusade. 1. The Bull of the Crusade was first granted to the Spaniards by Julius II in 1509 and was enlarged by Gregory XIII. The same afterwards was granted also to the Neapolitans by Pius V in 1569.

2. The Bull of the Crusade contains various and great indults and privileges, the chief of which are reduced to these four:

a. Of eating flesh meats, eggs, and milk foods in the time of fasts of the whole year (with a few days excepted).¹

b. Of commuting simple vows into other pious works and some alms, except vows of chastity and religion and of pilgrimage overseas.

c. Of absolving from sins and censures reserved to any ordinary and even to the Apostolic See, except the crime of heresy and, as regards ecclesiastics, except the censure which is contained in the Bull Sacramentum poenitentiae.

d. Several indulgences, both partial and plenary.

3. In order that someone enjoy the graces and privileges of the Bull, he must receive the summary of the Bull, pay the assessed stipend, and guard the received summary with prudent diligence. The Bull received is valid for a year; hence each year, after the tax has been paid, it must be taken anew. The summary of the Bull can also be taken twice in any year, the assessed stipend being given for each; he who does this can enjoy the graces of the Bull twice in a year.

4. The Bull is granted "to all the Christian faithful who dwell in the whole Spanish territory, or who come into it within the year from the publication of the Bull, give alms for pious ends, and receive the summary of the same Bull."

5. It must be noted: a. The Bull is called of the Crusade because, in likeness to those bulls which once had been granted on the occasion of the "crusade" for recovering the Holy Land, it was granted to the king of the Spains for the conquest of unbelievers.

b. Although the reason because of which it was originally granted is no longer in force, the Bull itself nevertheless still has force, since it has been prolonged several times by the supreme pontiffs. The alms which are collected in this way are spent on other pious causes.

c. The Bull of the Crusade is not a personal privilege, but a local one; therefore outside Spain or the kingdom of Naples it is not lawful to use it.² The privileges of the Bull are to be interpreted broadly.

¹ This privilege is not properly contained in the Bull of the Crusade, but in an added apostolic indult for the use of flesh meats.

² Holy Office, June 2, 1897.

All excusing causes can be reduced to two general causes, namely: a) dispensation, and b) inability (whether physical or moral).

664. a) Dispensation. The following can dispense from the ecclesiastical law of abstinence and fasting:

1. The Pope for the whole Church. Indeed, the Pope can abolish ecclesiastical fasting for some time for a reasonable cause, as he has already sometimes done for certain regions when an epidemic was raging there.

2. Bishops and other local Ordinaries, for the particular cause of a great concourse of the people or of public health, can dispense the whole diocese or some place, even only one parish, from fasting and abstinence for some time. Thus by common law.¹²⁶¹ By special delegation still greater faculties are customarily granted to them.

3. Pastors (and a fortiori local Ordinaries), in individual cases and for a just cause, can dispense individual subjects of theirs or individual families from the law of abstinence and fasting (or even from each law).

This faculty of bishops and pastors to dispense extends also to travelers staying in their territory.¹²⁶²

4. Superiors in an exempt clerical religious institute (but not other superiors), in the same manner as pastors for parishioners, can dispense not only their individual professed religious and novices, but also individual so-called familiars and continual table companions.¹²⁶³

Note. A confessor cannot indeed by his own authority dispense from the law of fasting; nevertheless, when a case occurs, he can declare that sufficient reasons for not fasting are present. Superioresses of nuns have the same right of declaring with respect to their subjects. But when the bishop has given the faculty of dispensing to all confessors, then a confessor can also dispense himself; this, however, is not expedient in practice, since no one ought to be judge in his own cause. Unless it is expressly stated in the faculty of dispensing that the confessor enjoys such a faculty in sacramental confession or in the tribunal of penance, the confessor can lawfully dispense from the law of fasting even outside the confessional. If the excusing cause is evident and certain, anyone can exempt himself from fasting, especially if otherwise some notable inconvenience would occur.

¹²⁶¹ Code of Canon Law, canon 1245, § 2. Cf. Pontifical Commission, March 12, 1929 (Act. Ap. Sed. XXI, 170).

¹²⁶² Code of Canon Law, canon 1245, §§ 1 and 2.

¹²⁶³ Ib., § 3.

665. b) Inability. Since the ecclesiastical law of abstinence and fasting is a positive law, it does not bind with great inconvenience, but any serious inability (even moral) excuses. Hence the following are excused:

1. All the sick and convalescent, and all who would have notable pain of the head or stomach from fasting. Sexagenarians also are exempted from fasting, for old age is itself a disease. There are certain authors who exempt all women fifty years of age from fasting, but several others deservedly contradict them; for there is no reason why women should be treated more leniently on this point, at least if they do not labor under a special infirmity. For experience establishes that women can sustain fasting more easily than men. For both men and women, however, the sixtieth year begun suffices, as was said above, n. 660. Pregnant or nursing women are likewise excused, since by fasting they would harm the child.

2. The poor, who do not have sufficient food, or whose food is not sufficiently nutritive. Hence not only those who are compelled to beg are excused, but also very many other persons of lower condition, who are nourished by little food and nevertheless are compelled to perform sufficiently heavy labors. In our days and in our regions, for this reason a great part of Catholics is excused from the strict observance of ecclesiastical fasting.

3. All who must perform heavy bodily labors. In order that a labor be called heavy, absolute heaviness is not required (for the same labor can be heavy for one and light for another), but it must be joined with great weariness of the laborer. Such wearying labors are exercised, for example, by blacksmiths, carpenters, masons, diggers, shoemakers, many farmers, bakers, and very many others who work in factories where machines moved by steam or electricity greatly excite and weary the nerves. It pertains to a prudent man or confessor to determine which labors are heavy, after all the circumstances of persons and things have been considered. Travelers also are often excused from fasting; and not only those who must make a journey of four or five leagues on foot (as the older moralists hold), but also those who make a journey throughout the whole day by railroad or ship; for experience establishes that journeys of this kind also cause much weariness, and, moreover, that a sufficient complete meal is then often not available because of a lack either of sufficient time or of sufficient hunger on account of the excitation of the nerves.

4. All who perform very wearying spiritual labors, for example, students who study much; professors who give lectures after laborious preparation, or who must give instruction daily for several hours, such as schoolmasters; confessors who hear confessions for many hours, for example, for six to eight hours in one day; preachers who, with great bodily movement and preparation of mind, preach several times each week (for about an hour).

666. Note. 1. Let a confessor furnished with a legitimate faculty not show himself too difficult in granting a dispensation from fasting, since in our days there are not so many lay faithful who can observe ecclesiastical fasting perfectly; for they are either burdened with very wearying labors, or enjoy weak health, or live in such circumstances that there is a sufficient cause for dispensing from ecclesiastical fasting. Nevertheless, let the confessor endeavor, as far as he can, that during the time of fasting the dispensed faithful perform other works of mortification or religion according to their capacity and good will. For it is of the greatest importance that the faithful be inwardly convinced of the necessity of practicing mortification and of the obligation of obeying the commands of the Church. Hence let the confessor counsel, or even enjoin, that the faithful who are unable to fast at least abstain from more delicate foods not necessary for health; or that they voluntarily deprive themselves of certain pleasures otherwise lawful; or that they restrain interior concupiscences more efficaciously; that they assist more frequently at Mass and the liturgical offices; in a word, that during the times of fasting they lead a fervent Christian life. Since abstinence from meat is customarily observed more easily than fasting, let the confessor dispense from this abstinence with greater difficulty than from fasting.

2. When a dispensation is granted on days of fasting or abstinence through episcopal mandates, certain prayers to be said or alms to be distributed are customarily imposed in place of fasting and abstinence. Certainly, he who uses a dispensation of this kind is bound either to say the prescribed prayer or to give the alms; nevertheless, this obligation is not grave, since the dispensation is granted absolutely and not only conditionally. Moreover, a grave obligation is never to be presumed, but it must be established with certainty; furthermore, bishops granting a dispensation of this kind do not speak of a grave obligation concerning these prayers and alms. If alms are prescribed for a determined end, then the bishop is to be obeyed also on this point, but likewise under a light and not a grave obligation.

1240. I. They can dispense in fast: 1. The Supreme Pontiff in the whole Church, for example through indults conceded to Bishops, and indeed validly even without cause; although in this case he would sin, at least venially, "because this would be against the common good, to which laws are ordered" (III, 1032). 2. Bishops, and their vicars expressly delegated. Yet of themselves they cannot dispense with the whole diocese, nor with some parish, nor with a whole community or family, except in an urgent case. Thus from the Constitution of Benedict XIV: Libentissime. 3. Prelates and their vicars, but with their subjects taken individually. 4. Parish priests, where custom has force, and their vicars, provided they exercise parochial acts, and the parish priest is not opposed. But all these can dispense only with their own subjects, and indeed in a particular case, with private persons taken individually and from a just cause; otherwise the dispensation would be void (cf. the things already said n. 237).

Confessors cannot dispense, unless they are expressly delegated. Yet they can DECLARE whether someone is legitimately exempted or not. Physicians can do the same, as also Superioresses of nuns (III, 1032; H. Ap., XII, 22).

1. Dispensation concerning abstinence and fast has generally been conceded by the Supreme Pontiff for feast days recently established; likewise for feast days which, in some region, at the petition of Bishops, have been observed; finally for feasts of Patrons, if they are celebrated with the concurrence of the people. Indeed, dispensation can be conceded by a Bishop if some expunged feast day (on which abstinence or fast would have to be observed) is accustomed to be celebrated with the concurrence of the people (A. A. S., III, p. 351; IV, p. 341). Always firm remains the prohibition of not mixing dishes (cf. n. 1242, Rule 2).

2. Moreover, from the Decree of S. Off., 5 Dec. 1894 (A. S. S., 27, p. 512), and its authentic interpretation of 11 Dec. 1909 (A. A. S., p. 58), Bishops and other local Ordinaries have the faculty of anticipating to a day pleasing to themselves (which assigning the Ordinary can commit to parish priests from a reasonable cause) and for very grave causes even of dispensing concerning the law of abstinence, when, on Friday or Saturday through the year, with a great concurrence of peoples, either any Catholic solemnity whatever is celebrated, for example of centenaries, of pilgrimages, or extraordinary fairs are held. Further, among the very grave causes of dispensing, there can be assigned grave general danger that the abstinence to be anticipated will not be observed. From these faculties are excepted the time of Lent, the Four Times, vigils through the year consecrated to fast, or the time of Advent where (as in Spain) the fast of vigils has been transferred to each Friday and Saturday of Advent. In Italy only the time of Lent and Advent is excepted (S. Off., 7 Sept. 1909, n. 5). Wherefore on these days Bishops can neither dispense nor anticipate.

As regards indults which have lately been conceded to diverse peoples and regions, see below n. 1247, 1248.

1241. Let it be noted: a) Dispensation through pontifical indult is not accustomed to be given concerning the law of one eating (for in this an excuse from right suffices); but it is given concerning abstinence, which it always restricts by certain limits (cf. n. 243 and 1223).

b) Dispensation which, on account of peculiar reasons, is conceded to private persons, can comprehend either one or the other, or both parts of the law.

In the Bull Non ambigimus of Benedict XIV, it is prescribed that dispensation with a particular person, in eating meats, eggs, and milk-foods, be made from the counsel of both physicians, that is, both the spiritual, namely the confessor or parish priest, and the physical, or physician of bodies. Thus indeed practice bears in the dear City; elsewhere however it has gone into disuse.

c) Bishops, when they dispense from pontifical indult, generally enjoin upon the faithful some prayers or alms.

But whether under grave matter is controverted. Some affirm, because it is judged to be a commutation; but others deny with Gury: because it is more probable that Bishops intend principally to dispense, and accessorily to impose some pious work as a certain light satisfaction. Except if the Bishop by express words wishes to oblige strictly.

1242. II. The rules for those dispensed from INDULT are the following:

RULE 1. Those dispensed for meats are by that very fact dispensed for milk-foods; but those dispensed for milk-foods are judged by that very fact to be dispensed for eggs, unless the contrary is expressed.

To those dispensed for meats, pork is not prohibited, nor in general unhealthful meat, unless a special prohibition has been made (such as was made by Clement XI, through Edict of 24 February 1702 for the Roman State). Cf. H. Ap., XII, 8.

RULE 2. Those dispensed for meats are obligated under grave matter to abstain from fishes in the same meal. This precept embraces the whole of Lent, even Sundays, and moreover each and every day of fast through the year. It is established from three Constitutions of Benedict XIV, Non ambigimus (1741), In suprema (1741), Libentissime (1745); and from several decisions of the S. Penitentiary. Not even a Bishop can dispense in this law. Cf. A. A. S., II, p. 953; there the Benedictine prohibition is very well illustrated.

Under the name of fishes come also little fishes dried with salt, likewise caviar, or marine shellfish, as crabs (ecrevisses), oysters (huitres), and other things similar to these, as is established from Responses of S. Poenit., on 10 and 16 Jan. 1834.

Therefore all, even children after the seventh year (S. Poenit., 15 Mar. 1837), who, FROM INDULT, eat meats, although they are not held to fast, nevertheless are obligated not to mix dishes, as S. Off. responded, 23 Jun. 1875. Yet broth of meat together with fishes can be used by them, from a declaration of S. C. C., on 7 Aug. 1910 (A. A. S., II, p. 959).

But those who, not by force of indult, but FROM RIGHT, say by reason of grave sickness, become immune from the law of abstinence, can use meats and fishes together, from the opinion which S. Poenit., 9 Jan. 1899, declared could safely be followed (Nouv. Rev. Theol., 32, p. 64). Likewise, the faithful dispensed from the law of abstinence on Fridays and Saturdays, during the year, when the obligation of fast does not urge, can eat fishes together with meats (S. Poenit., 15 Feb. 1834).

RULE 3. To those dispensed for meats and milk-foods, it is licit to eat milk-foods together with fishes. And to the same it is similarly licit to eat fishes together with soup cooked with meat juice.

The first is established from the Constitution Libentissime; the other from a Response of the Holy See. For to the QUESTION: "Whether one dispensed for eating meats on days of fast can in the same eating eat, for consulting his health, soup cooked with meat juice, and for the rest eat fishes, so that as much as he can, he may preserve the observance of fast?" S. Poenit., on 23 Feb. 1826, responded: "Affirmatively."

Nor is it prohibited to those dispensed to eat, together with meat, other foods seasoned with fish juice. S. Poenit., 14 Jun. 1880 (Coll. S. C. de P. F., n. 2077).

RULE 4. Those dispensed for meats, but constrained by the law of fast, are obligated, just as other fasting persons, to one meal at the fixed time; and these, in the evening collation, must use the same food which other fasting persons use, and in the same restricted measure. It is established from the Constitution Libentissime of Benedict XIV. But see n. 1228.

RULE 5. Those who by reason of age, or labor, or infirmity, are not held to fast, on days of fast, when the eating of meat and milk-foods is permitted to all for one meal, can licitly eat meat and milk-foods several times in the day, or as often as they eat through the day; unless the Bishop, dispensing by apostolic authority, has added a restriction. It is established from decisions of S. Poenit., on 24 Feb. 1819, 27 May 1863, 16 Mar. 1882.

RULE 6. When permission of using a condiment of fat has been conceded through an apostolic indult, it is licit to use both the fat of any animal (S. Off., 1 May 1889) and butter (S. Off., 15 May 1896), but by no means meat broth (S. Poenit., 15 Apr. 1836 and 20 Mar. 1847), unless custom is present, in which case the Bishop should be silent (S. Off., 20 Jan. 1885).

As often as it is licit to use butter, it is also licit to use margarine (S. Off., 6 Sept. 1899). But when butter has been conceded, condiment of fat is not by that very fact conceded. Further, condiment conceded through indult can be used even in the evening refreshment, provided no restriction has been placed in the indult. Moreover, when condiment of lard fat is permitted, he who uses the lard itself for seasoning foods can without scruple eat the fragments of lard which, the fat having been extracted, remain, provided they continue to be part of the condiment (S. Poenit., 17 Nov. 1897).

1243. Questions. QUAER. 1. Whether Religious can use dispensations which are conceded universally to the faithful as regards fast? From the Decree of 1 Sept. 1912 (A. A. S., IV, p. 627), one must respond: Affirmatively, if it is a question of dispensation concerning the general law of the Church and Religious are not excluded in the apostolic indult. But negatively if abstinence or fast are prescribed by the rule, unless in the indult account is had of this dispensation. Those not observing abstinence or fast of this kind do not transgress the law of the Church, but only the rule. Religious dwelling in Latin America must stand by the Response from the Secretary of State, 1 Jan. 1910 (cf. n. 1247).

QUAER. 2. Whether fathers of families, when in the family there is found some person dispensed concerning the use of meats, can indiscriminately extend the dispensation to all persons of the same family. S. Poenit. (19 Jan. 1834) judged that it must be responded: "Infirmity and any other impediment whatever, from the counsel of both physicians, but not gluttony, avarice, or generally saving of expenses, can exempt from the precept of abstinence on esurial days."

QUAER. 3. Whether in Lent, when a father of a family has the faculty of eating meats, and the same either cannot or will not prepare two meals, one of meats and the other of esurial foods, the children of the family and the others addicted to his service can eat meats? S. Poenit. (19 Jan. 1834), responded: "Persons who are in the power of the father of the family, to whom legitimate faculty of eating meats has been granted, can be permitted to use foods granted by indult to the father of the family; with the condition added of not mixing permitted and forbidden dishes, and of one eating in the day for those who are held to fast." Further, "the reason of the permission about which in the question is not the indult of the father of the family; but the impotence in which the children of the family find themselves of observing the precept." Therefore it is a mere direction for confessors. It is established from various Responses of S. Poenit., edited 27 May 1863 and 20 Apr. 1865 (A. S. S., I, 424 ff.).

970. Exempting cause removes the obligation of the law. Besides the causes which remove the law for all, dispensation is an act of the ecclesiastical superior relaxing the law in a particular case. Generally the same one can dispense from fasting and abstinence; yet someone delegated for a particular matter could dispense from one and not from the other.

971. Who can dispense. - They can dispense:

1. The Pope, by ordinary power, for the whole Church.

2. Local Ordinaries and pastors, by quasi-ordinary power from custom confirmed by law, in singular cases and for a just cause, their subjects, individual faithful or families, even outside the territory, and in their own territory also pilgrims, from the observance of the common law of abstinence and fasting (can. 1245, § 1).

3. Ordinaries, for a special cause and on account of a great crowd of people or public health, the whole diocese or some place (ibid., § 2).

4. Superiors of exempt clerical religious, who have the same power as a pastor toward those subject to their jurisdiction (ibid., § 3).

5. Others, if they have been delegated.

Confessors per se have no power of dispensing. Yet in Belgium a yearly faculty is often granted to confessors, for individual persons, not for families, only on the occasion of confession, and for the year from Lent to Lent. Bishops also receive broader delegated faculties.

972. Observations. - 1. The Pope dispenses validly even without cause; others do not. For validity there is required a grave reason, not merely a light one, although a reason less grave than that which would excuse suffices. If the cause ceases, the dispensation ceases.

2. According to canons 50 and 85, universal dispensations from abstinence, insofar as they are given for a private benefit, are of strict interpretation, since they are odious. Therefore faculties granted in Belgium and elsewhere, except on Good Friday, to certain classes of persons in the Lenten Mandate must be interpreted strictly. Thus military men, or those similar to them, are understood as those actually serving; workers of railway vehicles are not station or administrative workers.¹

¹ Genicot thinks that, with a general dispensation, soldiers can eat meat when they are allowed to be at home briefly, or when they habitually take food outside the barracks, because the indult is granted to all who are actually enrolled.

3. Non-ecclesiastical superiors cannot dispense. Hence a father cannot extend his own dispensation to his family because of expense. Yet if there is an excusing reason, for example, if preparing two meals would cause grave inconvenience, or if the father cannot or will not prepare other food, a simple confessor can permit meats, provided hatred of religion is absent and fasting is observed if possible; for then the reason is the impotence of the children, not the indult of the father.

4. One dispensed from fasting is not on that account dispensed from abstinence, and conversely. Hence if he is fasting, he can eat meat once in the day, and only at the meal, not at the collation; but if he is also not bound to fast, he can eat meat more often.

5. Bishops sometimes impose prayers or alms for the dispensation. Usually the dispensation is principal and absolute, with a slight commutation added. If there is a true precept, it binds only those who are exempted by a dispensation delegated by the bishop, not those who are excused or dispensed by their own superior. Prayers are light and bind lightly; multiple omissions do not coalesce into grave matter. Alms, likewise, are not grave.

I say. By these canons nothing is changed concerning particular indults, concerning vows of any physical or moral person, concerning the constitutions and rules of any approved religion or institute, whether of men or of women living in common, even without vows (Can. 1253).

Therefore those various indults which have been conceded to our region remain in their full force. If some person is bound by vow to abstain on certain days, notwithstanding the present canons the vow continues to oblige; the rules and constitutions also remain of any religion or approved institute living in common, whether with or without vows. In Apostolic Indults by which mitigations or dispensations are conceded from abstinence and fasting in regions within and outside Europe, religious families are comprehended as regards the general law of the Church, unless religious are excluded from the Indult; but they are not comprehended as regards abstinence and fasting established by their own Rules, unless express mention is made in the indult concerning this dispensation. If they do not observe this law of abstinence and fasting of the Order, they violate the rule and contract the guilt of the violated rule, but not the guilt of the violated universal law of the Church.

You Will Ask. Is the abrogation of Indults concerning fasting and abstinence under the title of the Bull of the Crusade and of the Summaries, declared by the Apostolic letters of January 1, 1910, to be extended to those regions which once belonged to New Spain and afterward were annexed to the Federated States of America?

Response. Negatively. P. Card. Gaspari - Jan. 1918.

In a lenten regulation is found the customary provision: “In special cases we hereby give the priests and confessors of our diocese the power to dispense individual persons for important reasons.” In this same diocese Caius comes to Father Titius, to whom he usually goes to Confession, and requests for good reasons dispensation from fasting. Titius grants it. Then Caius, for similar reasons, asks also the dispensation of his wife, who is not a penitent of Titius. May Titius also dispense her?

Answer.—Yes. First of all the fact that the wife of Caius does not appear personally is no obstacle. There is no requirement that the dispensation must take place in the confessional, it may take place in writing, or by messenger, provided inquiries can be made as to whether sufficient grounds for the dispensation prevail. Thus the answer depends entirely upon the fact how the word confessor must be understood. If it is to be taken in the restricted meaning, i. e., if the power is granted to confessors only for their own penitent, then, of course, Titius cannot dispense the wife. If, on the contrary, the expression has a wider meaning, for instance, that all who have jurisdiction to hear Confession, have also the jurisdiction to grant this dispensation, then Titius can dispense the wife: at least if he has jurisdiction to hear her Confession, in case, therefore, that she does not live outside his diocese. The latter view, it seems to us, should be held in preference. Of themselves both definitions of the term confessor have a perfectly reasonable meaning. Then, however, the rule governs: Beneficia sunt amplianda. It is true that, as a rule, an individual dispensation must be strictly interpreted; not, however, the faculty to dispense. This is regarded as a beneficium, and hence the principle Beneficia sunt amplianda applies,