Irregularities arising from Crime

130. Irregularities are numbered eleven in all, of which four are contracted from delict, but seven from defect. Irregularities from delict arise: a. from repetition of baptism; b. from violation of censure; c. from usurpation of order; d. from unjust mutilation or from unjust homicide, all of which are comprehended in this little verse:

Fonte reus, sacris, censuris, crimine, leto.

Fonte reus - sacrilegious repetition of baptism.

Sacris reus - illicit usurpation of orders.

Censura reus - violation of censure through the exercise of sacred order.

Crimine reus - crimes which by the law itself induce irregularity.¹

Leto reus - homicide and mutilation.

¹ By these words is signified irregularity from defect of reputation.

133. A cleric who knowingly and solemnly exercises a sacred order which he does not have becomes irregular.¹

1. Cleric: for since the title in the body of law has: "concerning a cleric not ordained who ministers," this irregularity is restricted to clerics alone. Therefore a layman does not become irregular who exercises sacred order, e.g. celebrates Mass, acts as subdeacon or deacon in solemn Mass, although he sins most gravely.

Some canonists² contend that laymen also contract this irregularity who solemnly exercise sacred order; nevertheless several canonists, and especially moralists, teach that clerics alone contract it. Therefore, since with regard to laymen this irregularity is doubtful by a doubt of law, in practice it is not to be established.³

2. Knowingly, i.e. knowing both that he lacks the order which he exercises and that a cleric exercising an order which he lacks becomes irregular: otherwise he would not sin gravely.

3. Solemnly, i.e. as from office and with the ceremonies and ornaments proper to the order which he exercises.

To discern whether an order is exercised solemnly, attention must be paid to this: if the act can be exercised only by those who have such an order, it is always exercised solemnly; thus absolution, extreme unction, which is administered by a priest alone, and confirmation, which is administered by a bishop alone, are always said to be administered solemnly. But if the action can also be exercised by others who do not have the order, it is said to be performed solemnly when it is performed in that form in which the same act is customarily exercised by ordained persons alone. Thus if an inferior cleric acts as subdeacon without maniple, or at the washing of feet on the Lord's Supper chants the gospel without stole, he does not become irregular, because he does not minister solemnly.⁴

4. Sacred order: for since from today's custom minor orders are commonly exercised solemnly even by laymen, a cleric solemnly exercising some order from the minor orders which he does not have does not become irregular.

Therefore a priest becomes irregular who solemnly exercises a pontifical function, e.g. consecrates a church or chalice, confers minor orders or tonsure; a deacon who sacramentally absolves; a subdeacon who solemnly baptizes, solemnly chants the gospel with stole, supplies the ceremonies of baptism, acts as hebdomadary in choir by saying the prayer with Dominus vobiscum; a cleric who solemnly chants the epistle with maniple, because all these solemnly exercise an order which they do not have. But a simple priest is not irregular who sacramentally absolves; a deacon who without commission of the pastor solemnly baptizes or distributes holy communion; a subdeacon who chants the gospel without stole; a cleric who chants the epistle without maniple, because they do not exercise, or at least do not solemnly exercise, the order which they lack.⁵

Note. The older theologians, relying on C. Veniens 1. De eo, qui furtive ordin. suscipit (V. 30), nearly all had taught that those illicitly promoted to orders are irregular. Thus, according to the testimony of St. Alphonsus (n. 361), one bound by censure who receives order, one having a wife and being ordained in sacred orders while she is unwilling, one who receives order from a bishop excommunicated, suspended, or interdicted by name, not his own, one who is ordained by leap or before the age or in another's diocese, one who receives major orders without title or on one and the same day, or one who is ordained outside the times, contracts irregularity. But more recent authors, following Suarez, show that these penalties established in law are not irregularities, but suspensions, or at least doubtful irregularities, and therefore none.

¹ C. Si quis 1 De clerico non ordin. ministrante (V. 28).

² Wernz II. n. 137. Scherer. Their reason is that c. Si quis 1 De clerico non ordin. ministrante (V. 28) does not restrict it to clerics alone, and that restriction from the rubric is not to be admitted.

³ Gasparri I. n. 334.

⁴ Ballerini-Palmieri VII. n. 426.

⁵ S. C. R., December 18, 1784 (n. 2525), responded: "Outside the case of absolute and precise necessity it cannot be permitted by superiors that a cleric in minor orders supply for a subdeacon in solemn Masses, vested without maniple," and that the bishop must take care that contrary custom be cut off. The same S. C. R., July 17, 1894 (n. 3832), resolved that a cleric can act as subdeacon in solemn Mass, provided he has been initiated with at least clerical tonsure, does not wear the maniple, and true necessity presses.

135. Voluntary homicide. Unjust homicide directly, or at least indirectly, voluntary and gravely sinful, once the effect has followed, induces irregularity.¹

1. Homicide is the killing of a human being done by a human being.

For homicide in this question it makes no difference whether he whose life is taken away has been born or has not yet been born; therefore also the procuring of abortion of an animated fetus is homicide.² Likewise it makes no difference by what means life is taken away: by fire, iron, poison, hunger, etc. He also contracts irregularity on account of homicide who is only the cause because of which death follows or is inflicted more quickly.

a. Homicide is voluntary when homicide itself is intended, and it is casual when it happens beyond the intention.

b. Casual homicide is either entirely involuntary and inculpable, or it is indirectly voluntary and culpable, namely if due diligence is not employed to guard against foreseen homicide.

2. Real homicide. a. To contract irregularity from homicide it is required that death in fact follow: for where there is question of a penalty to be incurred, the words of law are to be taken strictly and properly.

C. Pro humani 1. De homicidio in 6. (V. 4), where one mandating killing through assassins is declared irregular even if perchance death does not follow, seems opposed to this doctrine. But it is a special case in which the supreme pontiff on account of an enormous crime established that irregularity be incurred even if death has not followed. But an exception does not weaken, but confirms, the rule.

b. Not only he who is the physical cause of homicide, but also he who is its moral cause, by mandate, counsel, or consent, provided he is an efficacious cause, incurs irregularity.³

a. Those who excite themselves to homicide are all irregular, even if only one is killed, because they are to be regarded after the manner of those counseling. Therefore if in an unjust war even one of the adversaries is killed, supposing grave sin, all become irregular who cooperated proximately in the killing by mutually exciting themselves; those nearer to the one killing are judged such. A soldier who is certain that he killed no one, because he either did not discharge or discharged into the air, is not irregular.

b. There are those who say that he also becomes irregular who does not impede a homicide which from justice he is bound to impede, even if he does not positively influence the homicide. Therefore they judge irregular a hired physician, a guard of roads, an advocate, who does not impede the death of a sick person, a traveler, or a client, which he could impede and from justice ought to impede. But since irregularity which is contracted from negative cooperation is nowhere read as expressed in law, it is rather to be denied.

c. Homicide induces irregularity even if it remains occult. Likewise, from a special disposition of law, doubtful homicide also constitutes a priest irregular, as was explained above (127); but irregularity is not incurred where it is doubtful whether the moral cause, mandate or counsel, was the efficacious cause of the homicide.

3. Unjust, i.e. joined with sin against justice: for homicide which is not against justice is not strictly and rigorously homicide.

Therefore he who kills another in defense of himself and with the moderation of blameless defense having been observed, or he who kills another from legitimate power, as soldiers in a just war or executioners, do not become irregular from this title, because they do not commit the sin of homicide.

¹ C. Si quis 1 De homicidio (V. 12).

² Constitution Effraenatam of Sixtus V, October 29, 1588.

³ C. Is qui 3 De homicidio in 6. (V. 4).

136. Casual homicide. Not only voluntary homicide, but also casual homicide, provided it is gravely culpable, induces irregularity.

1. If casual homicide is entirely involuntary, no irregularity is incurred: for there is no irregularity from delict where no fault intervenes.

2. If the omission of diligence in guarding against homicide is gravely culpable, irregularity is contracted, whether someone applies his work to a licit or illicit thing, provided he foresaw the homicide: for the omission of diligence, not the prohibition of the action which someone exercises, effects that homicide is indirectly voluntary and therefore culpable and inducing irregularity. The case is to be excepted in which the thing is illicit on account of the danger of homicide.

a. He who discharges a gun where the people are customarily numerous; he who throws a tile from a roof and does not warn passersby by voice or sign, becomes irregular if a human being is killed for that reason.

b. Therefore he does not become irregular who in good faith gives food or drink to a sick person, or moves him, or transfers him to another place, or does something else about him, from which death follows beyond intention, because there is no irregularity from delict where there is no fault; but in the case supposed, due diligence is not omitted.

c. An unskilled physician or surgeon who exercises the medical or surgical art becomes irregular if the death of the sick person follows, even if he employed every diligence to guard against it; but a skilled physician or surgeon does not, even if, with necessary diligence supposed, the death of the sick person follows from the remedy which he employs. Benedict XIV reports that physicians wishing to be promoted to orders are customarily granted dispensation for caution, because perhaps in the exercise of their art they did not always employ due diligence concerning those who died during their care.¹

d. A cleric constituted in major orders and a religious who exercises the medical or surgical art joined with cutting or cauterizing becomes irregular, even if without his fault the death of the sick person follows. The reason for this irregularity is that he applies his work to an action prohibited to clerics for this reason, that it easily induces homicide or mutilation.² But he does not become irregular if he exercises, short of cutting or cauterizing, an art which he knows well, although the sick person whose care he conducts dies.

¹ De synodo l. 13. c. 10. n. 4.

² C. Dilectus 13 De homicidio (V. 12).

137. Procuring abortion. Those procuring abortion, and those cooperating for it, once the effect has followed, also contract irregularity.

a. Those procuring abortion do not contract irregularity unless the fetus is animated. Since there is question of an odious thing, concerning the animation of the fetus judgment can be made from the ancient and thus far unchanged canonical laws, which establish that the male fetus is informed by a rational soul after 40 days from conception, but the female fetus after 80 days. In doubt whether the fetus was animated or not, and in doubt whether the fetus was male or female, one must stand for the minimum; therefore that it was not animated, or was female.

b. In antiquity those procuring abortion and those cooperating in it incurred excommunication and irregularity; excommunication through the constitution Apostolicae sedis was restricted to those alone procuring abortion. But because concerning irregularity the ancient law was not changed through the said constitution, those cooperating also contract this irregularity.

138. Notion of mutilation. Mutilation is the cutting off of a member. By the name of member is understood a part of the body having a proper and distinct office, such as eye, arm, foot, hand, tongue, ear, etc.

In applying this definition, difficulty arises where it must be determined what part of the body has its own function and therefore is signified by the name of member. For since almost all members of the body are duplicated, it is asked whether one part, such as an eye, ear, leg, can be judged a member having its own office. But now, with common estimation considered, it seems to be said that those parts which are distinct and separate from each other, such as the eyes, have their own function; but those which are not distinct and separate from each other, such as nostrils, do not have their own function and therefore are not members. And indeed, where an eye is torn out, we say a member is cut off; where a nostril is cut off, we say part of a member, the nose, is cut off.¹

a. Therefore he who injures some member or renders it useless, e.g. does not dig out the eye but blinds it, does not become irregular, because he does not cut off the member: for mutilation is cutting off or separation from the body.

b. He who knocks out a tooth, cuts off the outer ear, the cartilage of the ear, or a finger, and a fortiori he who tears out nails, beard, or hair, does not become irregular, because he does not cut off a member: for these do not have their own function in the human body. According to the mind of St. Alphonsus (n. 379), not even the knocking out of all the teeth is judged mutilation; but the cutting off of fingers certainly is mutilation.

¹ Ballerini-Palmieri VII. n. 444 ss.

139. Unjust mutilation induces irregularity. He who unjustly mutilates himself or another by a physical or moral action, or cooperates in it, becomes irregular.

1. What has been said above concerning homicide holds also concerning mutilation, with this case excepted: in doubt of fact whether a priest was the efficacious cause of mutilation or not, he does not become irregular; on the contrary, if the same doubt concerns homicide, irregularity is contracted.

2. He who freely mutilates or castrates himself, from a special disposition of law, becomes irregular,¹ even if he has not cut off for himself a member having its own office, but only a finger or joint of a finger.²

¹ C. Ex parte 3 De corpore vitiatis (I. 20).

² C. Qui partem 6. dist. 55.

140. Note. To these must be added the irregularity which is established by the decree Vigilanti of S. C. C., May 25, 1893, and renewed by the decree Ut debita of the same sacred congregation, May 11, 1904. Besides the penalty of suspension (n. 113), clerics not yet initiated to the priesthood contract it who exercise shameful commerce concerning Mass stipends, so that they are incapable of receiving higher orders unless they have received dispensation from the Roman pontiff or from S. C. C.

The actions by which shameful commerce concerning Mass stipends is exercised are these:

a. Knowingly handing over the intention of Masses received from the faithful or from pious places to those who request them not in order that they may satisfy them, but for any other end whatever; likewise knowingly accepting them.

b. Separating stipends of manual Masses from their celebration, commuting them into other things, or diminishing them, namely by not handing them over wholly and in their own kind.

c. Selling or buying books or other things and entering into associations with newspapers and periodicals by means of Masses to be celebrated or celebrated, if this latter thing is done habitually and turns into the support of some commerce.

d. Subtracting something from the stipends of Masses which the faithful are accustomed to hand over to more celebrated sanctuaries, so that provision may be made for their dignity and ornament.

490. Conditions. In order that irregularity from delict be contracted, these conditions are required:

a. That the delicts be grave and external sins.

Therefore everything which excuses from mortal sin also excuses from incurring irregularity from delict, such as inadvertence, good faith, grave fear, smallness of matter; ignorance is excepted.

b. Irregularities arise not only from public delicts but also from hidden delicts.

c. That the delicts were committed after baptism; sentence is excepted.¹

¹ Cn. 986.

491. Because of Defection from Faith these are irregular: apostates from the faith, heretics, and schismatics.¹

a. For making a just judgment about this irregularity, attention must be paid to the notions as they are determined in the Code: if someone after receiving baptism: alpha. totally recedes from the Christian faith, he is an apostate; beta. while retaining the Christian name, pertinaciously denies or doubts some truth to be believed by divine and Catholic faith, he is a heretic; gamma. if he refuses to be subject to the supreme pontiff or refuses to communicate with members of the Church subject to him, he is a schismatic.²

b. From these definitions it is gathered that to contract this irregularity it is not necessary that someone give his name to an acatholic sect, provided that he denies the Catholic faith either wholly or in part, even if he does not outwardly break communion with the Catholic Church.

A Catholic Christian who denies or calls into doubt the infallibility of the Roman pontiff is irregular, provided he outwardly manifests heresy.

c. He who lives in a heretical or schismatic sect in good faith, whether he is a material heretic or schismatic only, does not contract irregularity, because his delict is not a grave sin.

¹ Cn. 985, 1.

² Cn. 1325, 2.

492. Because of Baptism Received from an Acatholic these are irregular: those who, except in a case of extreme necessity, allowed baptism to be conferred on themselves in any way by acatholics.¹

a. Acatholics here are understood as heretics and schismatics, whether they exist outside the Catholic Church in good or bad faith.

b. One receiving baptism from an acatholic does not contract irregularity unless by receiving it he commits a grave sin. Therefore those are not irregular who, before the use of reason, receive baptism from an acatholic; nor those who in danger of death have no one else who can baptize them except an acatholic.

¹ Cn. 985, 2.

493. Because of Attempted Marriage these are irregular: those who have dared to attempt marriage, or to place only a civil act, while they themselves are bound either by a matrimonial bond, or by sacred order, or by religious vows even simple and temporary; or those who have attempted marriage with a woman bound by the same vows or joined in valid marriage.¹

a. It does not matter whether the diriment impediment existed on the part of the man or of the woman; whether they attempted marriage before the Church or placed only a civil act.

b. In all cases which the cited canon enumerates, the marriage is invalid because the same marriage is opposed by either a marriage still existing, or sacred order, or solemn vow. Yet in that case in which a man bound by simple vows, or an entirely free man, contracts marriage with a woman bound by simple vows, the marriage is indeed valid, but irregularity is nevertheless contracted, even if the simple religious vows are temporary only.

¹ Cn. 985, 3.

494. Because of Homicide or Procurement of Abortion these are irregular: those who have perpetrated voluntary homicide or procured the abortion of a human fetus, the effect having followed, and all cooperators.¹

a. Every and only voluntary homicide gravely sinful, but not also homicide from an indirect cause, induces irregularity; for in an odious matter homicide must be restricted to directly voluntary homicide.

b. Cooperators are understood as all who by command, counsel, or consent effectively influence the homicide. But those are not irregular who only do not impede homicide, although they could impede it, indeed are bound to impede it either from charity or even from justice. In either case, cooperators in homicide and in procurement of abortion also become irregular.

Concerning abortion and its procurement, see the declaration of the terms in the volume on the Precepts.

¹ Cn. 985, 4.

495. Because of Mutilation or Attempt of Suicide these are irregular: those who mutilated themselves or others, or attempted to take life from themselves.¹

1. Mutilation is the cutting off of a member. By the name of member is understood a part of the body having a proper and distinct office, such as eye, arm, foot, hand, tongue, ear, etc.

In applying this definition difficulty arises when it must be determined what part of the body has a proper function and therefore is signified by the name of member. For although almost all parts of the body are paired, it may be asked whether one part, an eye, ear, leg, can be considered as having a proper office. Now, with regard had to common estimation, it seems it must be said that those parts which are distinct and separated as the eyes are, have a proper function, but those which are not distinct and separated, as the nostrils, do not have a proper function and therefore are not members. And certainly where the eye is torn out, a member is cut off; where the nostril is cut, a part of a member, the nose, is cut off.²

a. Therefore he who harms some member or renders it useless, e.g., does not tear out an eye but blinds it, does not become irregular, because he did not cut off the member; for mutilation is cutting off or separation from the body.

b. He who knocks out a tooth, cuts off the ear, the cartilage of the ear, or cuts off a finger, is not made irregular, because he has not cut off a member; for these do not have a proper function in the human body.

2. Attempt to take life from oneself must be gravely sinful in order to induce irregularity. It can happen that with this irregularity a twofold other irregularity is joined, one from the delict of mutilation, another from deformity of body.

¹ Cn. 985, 5.

² Ballerini-Palmieri VII, n. 444 ss.

496. Because of the Exercise of Medical or Surgical Art these are irregular: clerics who exercise the medical or surgical art forbidden to them, if death follows from it.¹

a. This irregularity affects only clerics who exercise the medical or surgical art forbidden to them. Those to whom by apostolic indult it is licit to exercise medicine or surgery, as not rarely happens in regions of missions, do not become irregular even if death follows from their care.

b. A cleric contracts irregularity whatever kind of medicine or surgery he exercises; for all are forbidden to clerics in an equal way.²

c. In order that irregularity be induced, it is necessary that the very exercise of his art be the cause, not only the occasion, of death, if death follows from it.

¹ Cn. 985, 6.

² Cn. 139, 2.

497. Because of Abuse of Order these are irregular: those who place an act of order reserved to clerics constituted in sacred order, either while lacking that order or while prohibited from its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindicative, or local.¹ Therefore this irregularity can arise from a twofold head: from usurpation of order and from violation of censure.

1. Through usurpation of order he becomes irregular who exercises an order which he does not have. It must be noted:

a. Not only clerics but also laymen contract irregularity if they exercise a sacred order, e.g., celebrate Mass, act as deacon or subdeacon in solemn Mass.

A seminarian, although not yet a cleric, who acts as subdeacon in solemn Mass does not become irregular, because this exercise of sacred order is not prohibited to clerics constituted in minor orders, at least those marked with tonsure, in a case of necessity and without maniple.²

b. It is required that they exercise a sacred order; therefore those who exercise a minor order which they do not have, e.g., bless fruits and breads or perform the office of exorcist, although they can sin gravely by doing this, do not contract irregularity.

c. It is required that they exercise the order solemnly with the ceremonies and ornaments proper to that order. "Solemnly," says Laurentius, "is understood as that exercise which either from the nature of the thing supposes a certain order, as the consecration of the Eucharist, absolution, or sacramental anointing, or if the act according to its substance can be validly done by laymen, is done with a certain apparatus." Therefore a deacon singing the Gospel in Mass with a dalmatic indeed, but without stole, or a subdeacon singing the epistle with a tunicle but without maniple, does not exercise a solemn or proper act of the order.

Therefore a priest becomes irregular who solemnly exercises a pontifical function, e.g., consecrates a church or chalice, confers minor orders or tonsure; a deacon who sacramentally absolves; a subdeacon who solemnly baptizes, solemnly sings the Gospel with stole, supplies the ceremonies of baptism, acts as hebdomadary in choir by saying the prayer with The Lord be with you; a cleric who solemnly sings the epistle with maniple, because all these solemnly exercise an order which they do not have. But a simple priest is not irregular who sacramentally absolves, nor a deacon who solemnly baptizes without commission or distributes holy communion; nor a subdeacon who sings the Gospel without stole; nor a cleric who sings the epistle without maniple, because they either do not exercise an order which they lack, or at least do not solemnly exercise it.

2. Through violation of censure he becomes irregular who, bound by censure, exercises an order whose exercise the censure prohibits, whether the censure is excommunication, or suspension from order, or a personal or local interdict, as by celebrating in an interdicted place.

a. Only through the exercise of sacred order does one censured become irregular.

b. Since grave fault is required for contracting irregularity, neither the man ignorant of censure nor the censured man who exercises order to avoid grave inconvenience becomes irregular.

c. It is required that the censured man place an act of sacred order, not of jurisdiction.

Therefore a censured bishop who approves confessors or dispenses in vows, or a parish priest who while under censure assists at matrimony without nuptial blessing, is not made irregular, because these are not acts of order but of jurisdiction or simple power, whose exercise the censure does not violate.

¹ Cn. 985, 7.

² S. C. R., July 17, 1894, n. 3832.

ACCORDING to Canon 985, the following are irregular from crime. These crimes, however, do not cause irregularity unless they were grave, external sins, whether public or occult, and committed after Baptism, except in the case of receiving Baptism from non-Catholics (Can. 986).

(1) Apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics.

(2) Those who have allowed themselves to be baptized by non-Catholics in any way except in case of extreme necessity.

(3) Those who have dared to attempt marriage or to go through the form of a civil marriage, when either they themselves are bound by the bond of marriage or of a sacred Order or religious vows though only simple and temporary, or with a woman bound by the same vows or united in a valid marriage.

(4) Those who have committed voluntary homicide, or procured with effect the abortion of a human foetus, and all who co-operate in these crimes.

(5) Those who have mutilated themselves or others or have attempted to take away their own life, (6) Clerics who practise medicine or surgery forbidden to them, if death follows therefrom.

(7) Those who exercise an act of Orders reserved to clerics constituted in a sacred Order, when either they do not possess that Order, or have been forbidden its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal or local, medicinal or vindictive.

Preliminary points. In order that a delict may produce irregularity, it is required that it be a grave sin, perpetrated after baptism, except the case of which under II, and external (canon 986). It is said sin:

1. Grave; hence whatever excuses from mortal sin also excuses from irregularity. Of this kind is ignorance of the very law prohibiting the act. Grave fear, even only relatively such, necessity, indeed even grave inconvenience, generally excuse from observing a merely ecclesiastical law, and therefore bring it about that one is immune from irregularity who, from grave fear, necessity, or by reason of grave inconvenience, places an act forbidden by ecclesiastical law alone (cf. canon 2205, § 2).

2. Perpetrated after baptism; since it is not fitting that account be taken of a sin which is judged to have been entirely destroyed by baptism.

Now by force of canon 985, the following are irregular from delict:

I. Apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics (canon 985, 1°); concerning whom there was discussion in t. I, n. 492. One who is a heretic in good faith does not contract irregularity; but since good faith is judged to be absent for the external forum, a dispensation is needed.

II. Those who, except in a case of extreme necessity, have allowed baptism to be conferred on them by non-Catholics in any way (canon 985, 2°). It is said:

1. By non-Catholics; under this name come heretics, schismatics, and, according to some, even unbelievers, since they, equally with heretics and schismatics, are truly non-Catholics. Others, and indeed most, exclude unbelievers.

2. In any way, that is, whether some rite, heretical or Catholic, was employed, or was not employed.

3. Have allowed, that is, those who asked, or at least permitted, that baptism be conferred on them by a non-Catholic.

III. Those who have dared to attempt marriage or to place only the civil act, either themselves being bound by the matrimonial bond, or by sacred Order, or by religious vows even simple and temporary; or with a woman bound by the same vows or joined in valid marriage (canon 985, 3°). Those attempt marriage who, conscious of a diriment impediment, approach the minister of the Church; those place the civil act who enter into civil marriage, as it is called. It is said have dared; hence, since the words of the law are judged to contain nothing useless, any diminution of imputability seems to exempt from irregularity (cf. canon 2229, § 2); except, however, diminution of imputability which flows from ignorance of the irregularity (canon 988). Therefore the following are irregular:

1. Those who, themselves bound by the matrimonial bond or by sacred Order or by religious vows, even simple and temporary, have dared to attempt marriage or place only the civil act.

2. Those who, although not bound by the matrimonial bond or by sacred Order or by religious vows, have dared to attempt marriage or place only the civil act with a woman bound by religious vows, even simple and temporary, or joined in valid marriage.

IV. Those who have perpetrated voluntary homicide or procured the abortion of a human fetus, the effect following, and all cooperating (canon 985, 4°).

1. Homicide is understood as committed positively and with grave fault; not, however, as merely permitted, although without sufficient cause.

2. What is understood by procurement of abortion, see in the treatise on ecclesiastical penalties.

3. The words the effect following and cooperators are referred both to homicide and to procurement of abortion. With respect to the effect, it is required that this follow from the force inflicted, not from care perhaps omitted. As regards cooperators, just as the old law, so also the new law is judged to regard only positive cooperators, or those who by command, counsel, consent, or help cooperate in homicide or procurement of abortion; likewise those who by false testimony or unjust sentence cooperate in homicide; finally those who voluntarily fight in an unjust war. This last point is said theoretically, since scarcely ever is there sufficient certainty about the injustice of a war. Negative cooperators are immune from irregularity, even if from justice they are bound to impede homicide or procurement of abortion (St. Alphonsus, VII, 367-376).

V. Those who have mutilated themselves or others, or have attempted to take their own life (canon 985, 5°). Mutilation is understood as the cutting off of a member, but not merely its weakening or wounding. But a cutting off of a member objectively and subjectively gravely culpable is required; when this is had, we explained in t. I, n. 526.

VI. Clerics exercising the medical or surgical art forbidden to them, if death follows therefrom (canon 985, 6°). It is required that the cleric gravely offend against the law which prohibits him the medical or surgical art, and that death follow from the art exercised as from its cause; hence irregularity is absent if death, for example, is to be attributed to the bad treatment of another physician who had been called in.

VII. Those who place an act of Order reserved to clerics constituted in sacred Order, either lacking that Order, or prohibited from its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindicative, or local (canon 985, 7°). The matter concerns an act of Order - not of mere jurisdiction - and of the greater or sacred Order. Considering the tenor of the canon, it seems to make no difference whether the act is placed solemnly or not, that is, with or without the insignia proper to the Order. Yet if it is placed solemnly, grave matter will more easily be had, which in the case, as in every irregularity from delict, is required. Now the following contract irregularity:

1. All, both clerics and laymen, who place an act of sacred Order while lacking the Order whose act they place; as if a simple priest were to ordain a cleric.

2. All, both clerics and laymen, who place an act of sacred Order from whose exercise they are prohibited by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindicative, or local; as if a priest were to celebrate in an interdicted place. But it is required that someone be impeded from the exercise of Order by force of a contracted penalty, not by a mere prohibition. Hence one who, for example, was ordained by a non-Catholic in good faith and exercises the Order without dispensation, is not irregular, although, until he has received dispensation, he is prohibited from the exercise of the Order so received.

Corollary I. The following are irregular: a priest who ministers Confirmation or performs consecrations, etc.; likewise a deacon who celebrates Mass, sacramentally absolves, or ministers Extreme Unction; likewise a subdeacon who solemnly baptizes or in solemn Mass, although without stole, acts as deacon or with stole sings the Gospel; likewise a minor cleric who in solemn Mass acts as subdeacon, that is, does all those things which are proper to the subdeacon, or with maniple sings the Epistle. But if he sings the Epistle without maniple, although he assists clothed in a tunicle, yet not doing those things which are proper to the subdeacon, he does not contract irregularity, because such assistance was declared licit by the Sacred Congregation of Rites.¹ Three things are proper to the subdeacon: to pour water into the chalice before the offertory; to touch the chalice or remove and replace the pall; to wipe the chalice after the ablution.

Corollary II. The following are not irregular: a priest who hears confessions without jurisdiction, because he does not place an act of Order which he lacks; nor a priest who, lacking the required faculty, grants a dispensation, because he places an act of mere jurisdiction; nor a deacon who solemnly baptizes or distributes the Holy Eucharist without the required commission, because, since the Order of Diaconate is ordered in some way to the said acts, he does not place an act of Order which he lacks; nor a minor cleric who without the insignia proper to the Order exercises a higher minor Order, apart from the Exorcistate; nor, as is clear, an inferior cleric who in solemn Mass without maniple fulfills several parts of the subdeacon which, namely, are permitted to him; nor finally, as is likewise clear, a layman who exercises the Acolytate or Lectorate according to today's approved practice.

Note. The Sacred Consistorial Congregation, by the decree Magni semper,² established certain laws for priests emigrating from Europe or from the shores of the Mediterranean to America or the Philippine Islands. If they rashly violate these, according to n. 16 of the same decree they remain suspended from divine things by the fact itself; and by violating this censure they fall into irregularity, absolution from which is reserved to the same Sacred Congregation, that is, to the Holy See.³

¹ March 19, 1906 (A.S.S. XXXIX, p. 119).

² December 30, 1918.

³ Vermeersch-Creusen, Epitome, II, n. 258.

1. Seius, a priest, conversing with Tiburtius, the enemy of Aurelius, willingly receives and even praises the plan of Tiburtius to kill Aurelius. Tiburtius in reality kills Aurelius. Hence Seius greatly doubts whether he himself by his manner of speaking commanded the homicide, and whether at least he counseled it. Wherefore he consequently doubts whether he is irregular.

R. Seius is not irregular. For although someone incurs irregularity on account of doubtful homicide, namely if it is established that a man was killed and it is only doubted whether he himself or another killed him, nevertheless irregularity is not had if it is doubted only whether someone was the cause of the homicide by his mandate or counsel. St. Alph., l. 7, n. 347, dub. 3, n. 371; D'Annib., ed. 3, p. 1, n. 424, 428; I. M. 1318, 1330.

2. Fulgentius, seized by hatred against his aged father, made him perish by hunger, daily diminishing food to him in order to kill him, and finally denying it. Doing sincere penance for the gravest sin, he entered a strict religious institute, in which he lived most observantly for several years; and since he is endowed with no common knowledge, his superiors desire that he ascend to the priesthood. Is Fulgentius irregular?

R. It is certain among all that if someone is bound only from charity to prevent a homicide, and does not prevent it, although from hatred, he does not incur irregularity. "The doubt is raised," says St. Alph., l. 7, n. 376, "whether he incurs it who is bound to prevent it from justice by reason of pact or office, namely if he is a physician hired by stipend, an advocate who is bound to defend the accused, a guardian of roads, a father, tutor, master, or husband who is bound to furnish support to a wife. The first opinion denies that he incurs it.... The reason is that he who positively flows into a homicide must be judged differently from him who does not prevent a homicide. But the second opinion affirms it.... The reason is that one omitting to defend, when he can, him whom by justice he is bound to defend, is judged a true murderer, since he himself, if not physically, nevertheless morally flows into the homicide. This opinion is indeed more common and probable, but the first seems to me no less probable; for since irregularity ought to be expressed in Law, Ronc. rightly says that from the sacred canons it is not sufficiently clear that those not preventing in this way, furnishing only a moral cause, incur irregularity, but only those killing, commanding, counseling, and all those positively flowing into homicide." From these things it could seem that Fulgentius, according to St. Alphonsus himself, did not incur irregularity. Nevertheless it must altogether be said that Fulgentius incurred irregularity by studiously procuring the death of his father, diminishing and denying food to him. And this is clear from the very opinion of St. Alphonsus, for he immediately adds: "But the same Cont., Tourn., and Escob. excuse from irregularity those who omit to prevent, not now studiously so that a man may be killed, but only from fear or negligence; and they rightly infer this from C. Quaesitum de Poen. et rem., where parents by whose fault children perish in the cradle are judged irregular if they studiously neglected to prevent suffocation, but not however if the children died from their carelessness." Cf. Reiffenst., l. 5, t. 12, n. 42 seqq.; I. M. 1329, 1330.

1. Caius, a priest, opened a vein for a pregnant woman so that abortion would follow; and since it was not established that there had been an abortion, he gave her counsel of immersing her feet in hot water for half an hour; nor nevertheless, even this time, could it be established that there had been an abortion. Is Caius irregular?

R. "Diana says with Nav. etc. that if a physician opened a vein for a pregnant woman so that abortion would follow, but afterward it is not established that an abortion followed, he is not to be judged irregular... because proceedings are not taken against someone for penalties unless the body of the crime is established. But otherwise it must be said if the means applied for abortion were so efficacious that from them the effect commonly follows, because then presumption is made from things commonly occurring." St. Alph., l. 7, n. 347, dub. 3. But since even that washing of the feet is not a remedy altogether efficacious for procuring abortion, it does not seem that Caius incurred irregularity. But a fortiori he is to be excused from irregularity if it is not established that the fetus was animated, and still much more if the pregnancy itself is not established. St. Alph., l. 3, n. 395, 396; I. M. 1330.

2. Sempronius, a priest, doubts whether by his counsel he procured an abortion that in fact followed. Is Sempronius irregular?

R. Negatively. St. Alph., l. 3, n. 396, says: "What must be said if there were doubt whether someone by his counsel or work cooperated in the certain death of a fetus now certainly animated? See what is to be said, l. 7, n. 371." Now in that place the Holy Doctor raises the general question whether one commanding or counseling homicide is irregular in doubt whether the mandate or counsel was or was not the efficacious cause of the homicide. And then he brings forward two opinions, one more common, affirming, the other, which does not seem to have to be called improbable, denying. Wherefore Sempronius, in the Case, can probably be excused from irregularity. I. M. 1318.

3. Fuscus, a priest, so that he might sin more freely with a certain woman without danger of infamy, persuaded her to procure for herself the perfect excision of each ovary by a surgical operation, so that she would thus be made sterile or impotent with no danger of generation. That woman did this, and thus both continued in sin for several years. On the occasion of the Holy Year Fuscus is converted to good fruit, and asks whether he ought to be dispensed from irregularity.

R. Irregularity here would be first by reason of mutilation. St. Alph., l. 7, n. 380, raises the question: "Whether he is irregular who cuts off the testicles of another." And he responds: "Bon. etc. deny it, because, as they say, those are not a member, but part of a member. But Roncaglia etc. more probably affirm it, because the testicles now have their proper operation." Now the same seems to have to be said concerning the ovaries. Moreover, not only he who mutilates another incurs irregularity, but also he who proximately cooperates in that mutilation, as in homicide, because mutilation is equated to homicide. "Hence," says Reiffenst., l. 5, t. 12, n. 57, "by the same reason the doctors commonly hold that in those cases in which he contracts irregularity who counsels, commands, cooperates toward an unjust homicide, or does not prevent it, or ratifies it, in the same cases one counseling, commanding, etc. mutilation also contracts the same irregularity." Therefore Fuscus, as one commanding or at least counseling mutilation, contracts irregularity in the Case.

But Fuscus would have to be punished with still graver penalties. For "Sixtus V in the year 1588 issued a Bull which begins Effraenatam, in which he subjected all knowingly procuring abortion of a fetus, whether animated or inanimate, and in any way consenting in this or furnishing to women poisons of sterility, to all penalties which are owed to homicides by civil and canon law, such as privation of every clerical privilege, dignity, or ecclesiastical benefice, and also inability to obtain them in the future, etc." St. Alph., l. 3, n. 395. Fuscus indeed did not procure abortion, nor did he furnish poisons of sterility for killing a fetus. But did he not furnish more than poisons of sterility, by commanding or counseling that excision for impeding generation?

1031. • Irregularity from delict is incurred on five grounds, namely: 1. from the improper reception of Baptism and from its repetition; 2. from the improper reception and usurpation of Orders; 3. from violation of a censure; 4. from the perpetration of certain enormous crimes; 5. from homicide and mutilation.

These are presented in the following little verse:

Guilty at the font, in sacred things, by censure, by crime, by death.

1032. • Hence the following are irregular:

1. One who at an adult age received Baptism from a declared heretic outside a case of necessity, because he appears to communicate in his error.

2. One who publicly and solemnly rebaptizes; likewise one who knowingly is rebaptized; likewise a Cleric assisting at Baptism conferred a second time. Thus from several passages of Law. See St. Alphonsus, no. 356.

According to Benedict XIV, On the Diocesan Synod, book 7, chapter 6, one who culpably, or without just cause, rebaptizes even conditionally becomes irregular. But he himself held this as a private Doctor, against many others, and when he was in minor Orders. Now, certainty is required for contracting irregularity.

Questions. QUESTION 1. Does one who secretly rebaptizes become irregular?

Reply. It seems more probably to be denied, because in Canon Law the matter appears to concern only one who publicly rebaptizes. Thus Laymann, Sylvius, etc.

QUESTION 2. Is one who rebaptizes or is rebaptized because of fear irregular?

Reply. Negatively, at least probably, although fear does not remove voluntariness nor excuse from sin. Thus St. Alphonsus, no. 356, etc.

1033. • 1. Usurpation. Those who solemnly exercise an act of sacred Order which they do not possess are irregular. Probably, however, only Clerics are subject to this irregularity.

2. Illicit reception. Thus those incur irregularity who are ordained furtively, that is, who, not examined nor admitted, by deceit and without the Bishop's knowledge mingle themselves among those being ordained; those who arrange to be promoted by another Bishop without dimissorial letters; those who receive several sacred Orders on the same day; probably also those who are ordained per saltum; and finally, those who are ordained by a suspended, heretical, schismatic, or simoniacal Bishop. St. Alphonsus, no. 357 and following.

1034. • Those who, bound by the bond of some censure, solemnly exercise a sacred Order are irregular, as was already said above. Hence:

1. Not only would a Priest who celebrated Mass while under censure be irregular, but also a Deacon who chanted the Gospel with a stole, etc., and a Priest who compelled one under censure to celebrate.

2. One who, bound by two censures, exercises a sacred Order, incurs two irregularities; and these must be expressed in the petition for dispensation. The same must be said of one who celebrates several times while under the same censure. But it suffices that the petition be expressed in the plural number.

3. A Priest who, suspended from Order, absolves sacramentally is irregular, because absolving also is an act of the power of Order, and not an act of jurisdiction alone, such as would be, for example, an act of excommunicating, approving Confessors, assisting at matrimony, dispensing from vows, etc.

1035. • By this appellation are understood heresy and apostasy from the Faith. The supporters, receivers, and defenders of heretics and apostates, and even their sons, also incur this irregularity, chapter Statutum, On Heretics, in the Sixth. But these crimes, in order to induce irregularity, must be public; hence this irregularity falls back into irregularity from defect of reputation, as St. Alphonsus says, no. 362.

1036. Principle. - Irregularity is incurred from voluntary and gravely culpable homicide, even occult, whether willed directly or indirectly, and perpetrated by an action either physical or moral. The same must be said concerning mutilation.

Mutilation is understood to occur when some principal member is separated from the body, or a part of the body which has an office distinct of itself, for example, a foot, hand, eye, etc.

1037. Resolutions. - 1. Those who are the immediate cause of someone's death are irregular, even if they repent before the injured person dies. The reason is that a physical cause operates necessarily. Likewise those who mutilate others or themselves. If someone mortally wounds a man and another kills him, each is truly a homicide.

2. Those giving a command and those giving counsel are irregular if the effect followed from the counsel or command. Except if they revoked the command before its execution and the revocation became known to the mandatary. St. Alphonsus, no. 371.

3. Likewise those cooperating so that a homicide is committed more quickly, boldly, or securely. Thus the following become irregular: 1. those who mutually incite one another, although only one kills; 2. all fighting in an unjust war, if anyone perishes there; 3. those who furnish arms or money for a homicide; 4. all unjust accusers, judges, and witnesses.

4. Likewise those consenting, if the consent effectively influenced the homicide. Hence one who approves a homicide, even one committed in his name or gratuitously, is not irregular, because he did not influence it.

5. Those who apply themselves to a licit matter, sufficient diligence having been employed lest homicide occur, do not become irregular. Hence the following are not irregular: 1. those who commit accidental homicide, unless gravely culpable negligence intervenes; 2. those who in good faith furnish a sick person with some harmful food or drink, or who, by moving or turning him, are the cause of his death; 3. physicians who have given a deadly medicine to the sick, provided they are skilled or act in good faith. Except, however, Clerics in sacred Orders who perform an incision or cauterization outside a case of necessity. See St. Alphonsus, no. 384.

1038. Questions. - QUESTION 1. Does one incur irregularity who, while applying himself to an illicit matter, kills someone, for example, if a Cleric while hunting accidentally kills a man?

Reply. More probably, negatively. The reason is that the homicide is voluntary neither in itself nor in its cause; for the work undertaken, although illicit of itself, is not of itself death-dealing. It would be otherwise if, by reason of the circumstances, a proximate danger of death were brought upon someone, for example, if someone set fire to a cannon where there was a crowd of people. St. Alphonsus, no. 387, etc.

QUESTION 2. Does one become irregular who kills another in defense of his own life or that of an innocent person?

Reply to the first. Negatively, unless he exceeds the moderation of blameless defense. The reason is that he is guilty of no fault. This is further confirmed from Canon Law. Consult St. Alphonsus, no. 388.

Reply to the second. Negatively likewise. The reason is that irregularity from private homicide is not incurred except with mortal sin, as is gathered from chapter Ex litteris, On Homicide. Thus St. Alphonsus, no. 388, etc.

1039. • QUESTION 3. Does one become irregular who kills another in defense of liberty, honor, or temporal goods, with the moderation of blameless defense?

Reply. Negatively, according to the more common opinion. This appears to be proved from Canon Law. Moreover, since no sin is present there, irregularity cannot be incurred except from defect of lenity; but irregularity from defect of lenity is not incurred except in cases expressed in law, and the present case is not found in law. Therefore, etc. St. Alphonsus, no. 389.

QUESTION 4. Is one to be regarded as irregular who doubts whether he committed a homicide or not?

Reply 1. Negatively, when it is not established that the homicide was committed, or if there is doubt concerning the homicide itself, whether it followed or not. The reason is that a penalty is not to be inflicted unless the delict itself is established. Thus commonly. St. Alphonsus, no. 347.

Reply 2. Affirmatively, however, if it is established that a homicide was committed and the only doubt is whether you were its cause by your action. The reason is that, although irregularity generally ought not to be incurred in doubt, nevertheless in the present case it is to be incurred by the provision of Canon Law, because of the special odium which homicide merits. This is evident from chapter Significasti and chapter Ad audientiam, etc. St. Alphonsus, no. 347.

1040. • QUESTION 5. Is one irregular who doubts whether he influenced the mutilation of another, the fact of the mutilation being established?

Reply. Negatively. The reason is that the law imposed irregularity for doubt concerning homicide alone. St. Alphonsus, no. 347.

QUESTION 6. Is one to be regarded as irregular who procured an abortion while doubting whether the fetus was animated or not?

Reply. Negatively. The reason is that then homicide is not properly established ¹. St. Alphonsus, ibid. See what was said in the Treatise on the Fifth Precept of the Decalogue, nos. 402 and 403.

¹ It was observed elsewhere, volume 1, no. 402, Note, page 382, that the hypothesis of an inanimate fetus is now scarcely, if indeed scarcely at all, admitted. Hence this question, as resting upon a hypothesis now already antiquated, becomes useless.

End of the Treatise on Irregularities.

1189. Delicts which beget irregularity must be grave, perpetrated after baptism (except the delict of baptism illicitly received from non-Catholics outside the case of extreme necessity), and external, whether public or occult.

1190. But the following are irregular from delict⁸: "1° Apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics." Under the name of heretics come not only those who were baptized in heresy, but Catholics who have fallen away from the true faith, even after their conversion.

⁸ Codex, c. 985.

"2° Those who, except in the case of extreme necessity, have permitted baptism to be conferred upon themselves in any way by non-Catholics"; therefore even illicit repetition of baptism no longer constitutes an irregularity.

1191. "3° Those who have dared to attempt marriage or to place only the civil act, either themselves bound by the matrimonial bond or by sacred order or by religious vows, even simple and temporary, or with a woman bound by the same vows or joined in a valid marriage";

"4° Those who have perpetrated voluntary homicide or procured the abortion of a human fetus, the effect having followed, and all cooperators"; therefore today a distinction is no longer made between an animated and an inanimate fetus.

1192. "5° Those who have mutilated themselves or others or have attempted to take their own life."

But mutilation is properly called the cutting off of some member which has its own office distinct from the others. Thus the hand, arm, foot, eye, tongue, both testicles in a man, the virile member, etc., are so many members; but not one or two fingers, a part of the tongue, etc., because, when these have been removed, the faculty of grasping things or speaking is not taken away. But the Church is stricter as regards those who mutilate themselves than as regards those who mutilate others, - so that even the cutting off of a joint of a finger renders one irregular.

1193. "6° Clerics exercising the medical or surgical art forbidden to them (without apostolic indult), if death follows from it"; there is question of clerics already from first tonsure.

1194. "7° Those who place an act of order reserved to clerics in sacred order, either lacking that order, or prohibited from its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindicative, or local." Thus irregular are, e.g., subdeacons singing the Gospel at Mass with a stole, priests consecrating the chalice without special delegation.

IV. On Simple Impediments.

From the Codex the following are simply impeded¹:

¹ Codex, c. 987.

1195. "1° Sons of non-Catholics, as long as the parents remain in their error²;

² This must be understood also of him whose father or mother only is non-Catholic, even if the mixed marriage was celebrated with dispensation (A. A. S., XI, 478).

2° Men having a wife;

3° Those who hold an office or administration forbidden to clerics, of which they must render accounts, until, the office and administration having been laid down and the accounts rendered, they have become free;

4° Slaves in servitude properly so called before liberty has been received;

5° Those who are bound by civil law to ordinary military service, before they have completed it¹;

¹ They are called impeded, even as regards tonsure, from the Commission for interpreting the Code, June 3, 1918, who perhaps will be called to military service, but in fact have not been called, either because they are unequal in age, or because, the examination having been duly performed, they are declared incapable for a time. Wherefore, in regions in which it has been found by experience that adolescents are greatly helped to persevere in their vocation by the reception of tonsure and minor orders, indults are to be earnestly sought from the Holy See.

6° Neophytes (i.e., newly converted persons) until, in the judgment of the Ordinary, they have been sufficiently proved;

7° Those who labor under infamy of fact, while it endures, in the judgment of the Ordinary."

V. On The Cessation Of Irregularities And Impediments.

Preliminary note. What St. Paul says of a bishop, "It is necessary that a bishop be without crime,"¹³⁸ holds likewise for all clerics, or even those who wish to embrace the clerical state. Therefore criminals are rightly and deservedly barred from receiving and exercising orders. And so the Church has established certain irregularities which arise from seven crimes.

For the following are irregular from delict:

¹³⁸ Titus 1:7.

620. 1. apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics, and those who are or have been enrolled in an atheistic sect (Pontifical Commission, July 30, 1934: A. A. S. XXVI, 494);

2. those who, except in a case of extreme necessity, have permitted baptism to be conferred upon themselves by non-Catholics in any manner. Thus the irregularity from abuse of baptism is limited and can occur most rarely;

3. those who have dared to attempt marriage or to place merely a civil act, whether they themselves are bound by the bond of marriage, sacred order, or religious vows, even simple and temporary, or with a woman bound by the same vows or joined in a valid marriage. This irregularity is nothing other than an extension of that which was called by the ancient authors similitudinary bigamy. Concerning the other penalties against bigamists who attempt another marriage while the prior marriage remains, and against clerics and religious who attempt marriage, see above in the treatise on ecclesiastical penalties, n. 515.

621. 4. those who have perpetrated voluntary homicide or procured the abortion of a human fetus, the effect having followed, and all who cooperate;

5. those who have mutilated themselves or others, or have attempted to take their own lives.

To understand these two irregularities correctly, it must be kept before the eyes that no delict causes irregularity unless it is a grave and external sin. Consequently, he does not incur these irregularities who kills or mutilates another either with the moderation of blameless defense, or from ignorance, or accidentally beyond intention and grave fault. Likewise these irregularities are not incurred if the death of the other person did not actually follow. Hence he who administers poison to kill a man indeed sins immediately, but does not incur irregularity if the poison does not cause death; likewise he who administers a drug to procure an abortion sins gravely, but is not irregular unless the abortion actually followed. But if someone attempts to take his own life, he is immediately irregular, although suicide does not follow.

In order that mutilation induce irregularity, it is required that there be a gravely illicit cutting off or separation of some member from the body, for example, the cutting off of a hand, foot, or genital member, but not of one finger, an ear, etc. Hence a eunuch who has been castrated through his own grave fault incurs irregularity, but not otherwise.

622. 6. clerics practicing the medical or surgical art forbidden to them, if death follows from it.

Two things appear to be necessary: a) the gravely prohibited practice of the medical or surgical art; b) death actually following from it.

7. those who place an act of order reserved to clerics constituted in sacred order, either lacking that order, or prohibited from its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindicative, or local.

This irregularity was already contained in the ancient law, but was not expressed clearly enough. According to the new law, every person (whether cleric or layman) incurs this irregularity who exercises an act of sacred order (that is, of the subdiaconate, diaconate, priesthood, or episcopate), although a) he has not yet been initiated into that order, or b) he is gravely prohibited from exercising this order because of canonical penalties. Therefore this irregularity can arise from a twofold head: 1. from the usurpation of an order not possessed; 2. from the exercise of an order indeed possessed, but gravely prohibited because of certain ecclesiastical penalties. Such penalties are: local interdict, censures, vindicative penalties. According to the present discipline, when necessity exists, it is permitted that a tonsured cleric perform the office of subdeacon in a solemn Mass, provided that he does not wear the maniple (Sacred Congregation of Rites, July 17, 1894; Decr. auth., n. 3832, ad VII). In such a case the cleric cannot touch or wipe the chalice. A subdeacon (and, a fortiori, a minor cleric or layman) does not appear able to sing the Gospel in a solemn Mass, even when not vested with the stole, because such chanting is truly an act of the order of diaconate, which he lacks. Some teach the contrary, such as Noldin, Laurentius, and others. In the chanting of the Passion of the Lord, however, it is tolerated that, when a deacon is lacking, the third chanter (acting the part of the synagogue) not be a deacon.

623. Scholion 1. On impediments to ordination. In the new Code of Canon Law, c. 987, besides irregularities from defect and from delict, temporary impediments to ordination are assigned. These impediments are enumerated as seven. For the following are declared simply impeded:

1. "children of non-Catholics, as long as their parents remain in their error." Among non-Catholics are included also those cited in n. 620, 1. But grandsons in the paternal line are no longer irregular, as they were previously.¹³⁹ If non-Catholic parents have died, their children appear able to be licitly ordained, since the infamy of law formerly inflicted upon these children is no longer transferred to blood relatives and relatives by affinity.¹⁴⁰ On the contrary, an impediment is present if not both parents, but only one or the other, has remained in error.¹⁴¹

2. "men having a wife." Therefore, although the wife grants permission and vows continence, nevertheless the husband cannot receive orders without the previous permission of the Holy See, which is customarily granted with difficulty.

3. "those who hold an office or administration forbidden to clerics, of which they must render accounts, until, having laid down the office and administration and rendered the accounts, they have become free."

4. "slaves in slavery properly so called, before receiving liberty."

5. "those who are bound by civil law to ordinary military service, before they have completed it." All who are indicated under these last four numbers labor under defect of liberty, which in the ancient law was considered an irregularity.

6. "neophytes, until, in the judgment of the Ordinary, they have been sufficiently proved." The ancient authors called this defect of confirmed faith.

7. "those who labor under infamy of fact, as long as it endures in the judgment of the Ordinary."

¹³⁹ Pontifical Commission, July 14, 1922.

¹⁴⁰ Code of Canon Law, c. 2293, § 4.

¹⁴¹ Pontifical Commission, October 16, 1919.

624. Scholion 2. On the notation and testimony of a completed ordination. When the ordination has been completed, the names of each one ordained and of the ordaining minister, and the place and day of ordination, are to be noted in a special book to be carefully preserved in the Curia of the place of ordination, and all the documents of the individual ordinations (for example, dimissorial letters, testimonial letters, etc.) are to be accurately preserved.¹⁴²

An authentic testimony of the ordination received is to be given to each one ordained. Those ordained, if they were promoted by a foreign bishop with dimissorial letters, are to exhibit it to their own Ordinary for the notation of the ordination in a special book to be preserved in the archive.

Furthermore, the local Ordinary for secular clerics, and the major religious superior for his ordained religious, is to transmit notice of the ordination celebrated for each subdeacon to the pastor of baptism, who is to note it in his register of the baptized.¹⁴³

¹⁴² Code of Canon Law, c. 1010, § 1.

¹⁴³ Ibid., cc. 1010 and 1011.

These Irregularities are contracted: 1. on account of Baptism badly received or repeated; 2. on account of violation of censure; 3. on account of usurpation of sacred Order; 4. on account of bad reception of Orders; 5. on account of the crime of heresy or apostasy; 6. on account of homicide and unjust mutilation.

1941. I. On account of BAD RECEPTION, or ITERATION OF BAPTISM, the following is irregular: 1. He who, in adult age, knowingly receives Baptism from a declared heretic, outside the case of necessity; for he seems to communicate in his error; - 2. He who defers it until the danger of death; for such delay is a sign of weak faith; - 3. An adult who knowingly and solemnly is rebaptized; - 4. He who publicly and solemnly rebaptizes; likewise a cleric who assists at rebaptization.⁶

"One rebaptizing or rebaptized from fear, without intention, or under condition (although it is done rashly and culpably), probably does not become irregular. - Nevertheless, culpable ignorance does not excuse these."⁷

1942. II. On account of VIOLATION OF CENSURE, every cleric in Sacred Orders is irregular, who, bound by a censure properly so called and valid before God, knowingly, rashly, and solemnly exercises sacred Order.⁸

We said 1. bound by a censure properly so called, i.e., excommunication, suspension, or interdict, insofar as they are medicinal penalties, as is commonly taught; and valid before God, as is established from the decision of the S. C. of the Council, July 19, 1704, and September 11, 1717⁹ (cf. n. 1272, fin.). Nevertheless, cases are not lacking in which the S. C. C. declared that someone had become irregular from violation of a merely penal suspension,¹⁰ or one inflicted from informed conscience (cf. nn. 1301 and 1304, fin.).

We said 2. exercises KNOWINGLY, namely as if he contemned the censure; RASHLY, i.e., without being excused by reason of grave evil, scandal, infamy, etc.; for human laws do not oblige with grave inconvenience;... and SOLEMNLY, i.e., with the insignia of his proper Order: for example if a deacon sings the Gospel with stole, a subdeacon the Epistle with maniple, or if a Canon, discharging the office of hebdomadary, sings Dominus vobiscum in choir.

We said 3. sacred Order; for otherwise, if he exercises a minor Order, although solemnly and from office.

Hence, he is IRREGULAR: 1. A Priest who, entangled by censure, celebrates Mass, absolves penitents, or administers other Sacraments; likewise, he who celebrates in an interdicted place, because he violates the interdict; 2. A censured Bishop or priest who compels another to celebrate before him, as is established from cap. Illud, de cler. excomm.

He does not become irregular who exercises acts of jurisdiction; e.g., who excommunicates, approves confessors, confers benefices, assists at marriage without solemn blessing, dispenses from vows, preaches, etc.; nor he who celebrates only in a polluted church, and not an interdicted one.¹¹

1943. III. On account of USURPATION OF AN ACT OF SACRED ORDER a cleric is irregular, as to receiving higher Orders, who seriously and knowingly exercises a sacred Order which he does not have.¹² Whether a layman also incurs this irregularity is indeed disputed, but the more probable opinion denies.¹³

Hence the following is IRREGULAR: 1. A Presbyter who presumes solemnly to exercise Pontificals, namely sacred functions and blessings exclusively reserved to the Bishop, e.g., consecration of a Church, of a chalice, etc. 2. A Deacon who absolves sacramentally, or who confers solemn Baptism, even in a case of necessity, short of delegation (cf. n. 1462). - 3. A Subdeacon who solemnly carries the pyx containing the Most Holy Eucharist, or who sings the Gospel with stole, etc.¹⁴

But a simple priest, in hearing confessions, does not incur irregularity because he exercises an act of the Order which he has, although he lacks jurisdiction. Whence he sins and absolves invalidly, but he does not become irregular.¹⁵

1944. IV. On account of ILLICIT RECEPTION OF ORDERS, the following becomes irregular: 1. he who is ordained in a furtive manner, without the approval of the Bishop, e.g., by falsely assuming the name of another who was examined; 2. he who, without dispensation of the Bishop, receives on the same day several Orders, of which one is sacred (unless a contrary custom should be in force somewhere); 3. he who receives sacred Order after ratified marriage, the wife resisting.¹⁶

But he who is ordained by an excommunicated, suspended, interdicted, heretical, schismatic, or simoniacal Bishop does not indeed incur irregularity from delict; nevertheless he must be dispensed by the Bishop, that he may be able to exercise the Order thus received (cf. n. 1366). - Nor does he become irregular who uses fraud to dissemble the defects which he has, or who, with dimissorial Letters fabricated deliberately, deceives the Bishop; because he is not judged furtively ordained.¹⁷ Nevertheless he sins gravely.¹⁸ - Nor finally is he irregular who, being excommunicated or suspended, or by leap, or before age, or by a Bishop not his own, receives Orders; provided that one so ordained does not exercise the Order¹⁹ (cf. n. 1372, Qu.).

1945. V. On account of the notorious crime of HERESY, or APOSTASY FROM THE FAITH, not only heretics themselves or apostates are irregular, but also their notorious receivers, defenders, and favorers (cf. n. 442, q. 2). But whether, on account of OCCULT heresy, irregularity is incurred, the matter is doubtful. In this case the Bishop dispenses, at least for caution.²⁰ - Besides, from the declaration of the S. PENITENTIARY of April 1, 1829, if it is a question of a schismatic or heretic of a region where heresies rage, one converted to the Catholic faith needs no dispensation.²¹

1946. VI. On account of the crime of HOMICIDE or MUTILATION, whether public or occult, whether committed on one's own or another's body, anyone gravely culpable as author of the aforesaid crime contracts irregularity, the effect having followed.²² But if his crime is notorious, he will also be irregular from defect of fame (cf. n. 1938, Quaer.). - HOMICIDE (in which is comprehended the abortion of a certainly animated fetus²³) can be VOLUNTARY either DIRECTLY, or INDIRECTLY through a physical or moral action, or even through an imputable accident in the cause.

1. Therefore by reason of VOLUNTARY homicide through a physical action the following are irregular: 1) All who by their own action kill a man, even if they repent before the injured one dies, as the truer opinion holds.²⁴ - 2) All who by common counsel attack a man, although only one strikes. Likewise, if several have lethally wounded someone without mutual conspiracy, and it is not discerned who brought death, all are to be held irregular.²⁵

2. By reason of VOLUNTARY homicide through moral action all are irregular who efficaciously concur in homicide, cooperating so that it may be perpetrated more quickly, more boldly, or more safely.²⁶ In their number are: 1) One commanding, unless he has revoked the mandate, and the revocation has become known to the mandatary before the killing. 2) One counseling, who efficaciously influences the crime by counsel (cf. nn. 978, 980, 981). - 3) All who efficaciously and proximately cooperate in the killing, by carrying a vote, furnishing arms, money; by unjustly accusing, testifying, judging, so that the man may be killed; likewise, he who by his presence renders the killer more bold, or the one to be killed more timid. For all these are judged to be one moral cause, and therefore all incur irregularity.

But he who approves homicide done for his sake is not judged irregular, as the common opinion holds; nor probably, he who does not impede homicide, even if he can impede it, indeed even if he ought from justice to impede it. The reason for each is that neither positively influences the crime.²⁷

3. By reason of ACCIDENTAL homicide, he alone incurs irregularity who, knowing or doubting that a danger of killing a man is present in some action of his, neglects to guard against it with grave fault. We say with grave fault; for if the homicide is merely accidental, so that it happens without any fault, it does not induce irregularity.²⁸

Hence, he is subject to irregularity: 1. He who applies himself to a thing illicit and at the same time so dangerous that death frequently follows from it (as would be to set fire to a cannon where there is a crowd of people, or to fight in war), although he applies every diligence, for this truly does not remove the danger of homicide.²⁹ 2. He who commands an unjust beating, if the mandatary accidentally kills; because such a one is expressly declared irregular in Law.³⁰

But indeed he is not subject to irregularity: 1) He who applies himself to a licit thing, e.g., a skilled physician caring for a sick person, a teacher moderately striking a disciple, a worker repairing a roof, if he kills someone by an unexpected and altogether involuntary event; (otherwise in the case in which, the circumstances being weighed, he could be reproached for grave and lethal negligence).³¹ - 2) He who applies himself to a thing indeed illicit, but of itself not proximately dangerous, from which the death of a neighbor follows as from a simple occasion. And hence it is why the S. C. of the Council judged that a cleric was not irregular, on account of whose adultery the husband had killed his adulterous wife.

4. By reason of MUTILATION he becomes irregular who culpably cuts off from himself or another some principal member, i.e., some part of the body which has its proper office divided from others, whether an amputation of this sort is made by physical action, or by moral action, namely by mandate, or counsel, or any unjust, yet certain and efficacious cooperation. - Therefore he is irregular who castrates himself; likewise, he who, outside the case of infirmity or necessity, from a depraved will, as is had expressly in law,³² amputates a finger or part of a finger; likewise he who castrates another, by cutting off both testicles; likewise, he who cuts off one breast from a woman.

Nor indeed does he become irregular who cuts off one or two fingers from another; nor who amputates one testicle only: nor who blinds a man by depriving him of sight alone, without extracting the eyes: nor who only weakens a member. - The reason is because amputation is not properly mutilation.³³

1947. IT IS ASKED. Whether he incurs irregularity who, in DEFENSE of himself, or of an innocent person, or of his own goods, kills another?

Resp. Negatively, unless with grave fault he exceeds the moderation of inculpable defense. It is established from what was said in the Fifth Precept, n. 734 and following. - But very probably he incurs irregularity who, for defense of himself, kills an aggressor whom he had before provoked by words, or by deed, foreseeing that he would very easily be attacked. - And the same must be said of the adulterer who, foreseeing proximate danger of assault on the part of the husband, kills him in order to defend himself when caught in adultery; because adultery, no otherwise than provocation, is reputed an act including in itself the proximate danger of homicide.³⁴

Note. Bishops, and Regular confessors, can dispense in irregularities from mutilation, from accidental homicide, or from exceeding the moderation of inculpable defense, when the crime is occult.³⁵

1768. - Irregularity from delict is incurred under a fivefold head, namely: 1° from bad reception of Baptism, and from its repetition; 2° from bad reception and usurpation of Orders; 3° from violation of censure; 4° from the perpetration of certain enormous crimes; 5° from homicide and mutilation.

These are exhibited in the following verse:

Guilty at the font, in sacred things, by censure, by crime, by death.

1769. - Hence the following is irregular:

1° He who in adult age knowingly received Baptism from a declared heretic outside a case of necessity, because he seems to communicate in his error.

2° He who knowingly and solemnly rebaptizes; likewise he who is rebaptized in that manner; likewise a Cleric assisting at Baptism conferred a second time.²

According to Benedict XIV, one becomes irregular who rebaptizes even conditionally culpably, or without a just cause. But he holds this as a private Doctor, against St. Alph.⁴ and many others. Moreover, certainty is required for contracting irregularity.

Questions. - Quaer. 1° Whether one becomes irregular who rebaptizes occultly and not solemnly?

Resp. It seems more probably to be denied; because in Canon Law there seems to be question only of one who rebaptizes publicly.⁵

Quaer. 2° Whether the one rebaptizing or rebaptized from grave fear, without intention, is irregular?

Resp. No, probably, although fear does not remove voluntariness, nor excuse from sin.¹

1770. - 1° Usurpation. Those are irregular who seriously, knowingly, and solemnly exercise an act of Sacred Order which they do not have, e.g., if one who is not a deacon sings the Gospel with a stole, or one who is not a subdeacon sings the Epistle with a maniple. More probably, however, Clerics alone are subject to this irregularity.

2° Illicit reception. Thus those incur irregularity who are ordained furtively, i.e., the Bishop not approving (as regards ascent to a higher Order); or those who receive several Orders, one of which is Sacred (but see n. 1523. q. 4°. § But gravely), on the same day. - Likewise those who are ordained by an excommunicated, suspended, interdicted, heretical, schismatic, or simoniacal Bishop.² Similar matters to these, see n. 1747.

1771. - Those are irregular who, bound by the bond of some censure, knowingly, without sufficient cause, and solemnly exercise Sacred Order, insofar as they are prohibited from exercising it through the censure, and that censure valid before God.

I said: 1° knowingly; for this irregularity is decreed by Law only on account of contempt of the censure.

I said: 2° without sufficient cause, i.e., unless he is excused by reason of grave evil, scandal, infamy, etc.; for human laws do not oblige with grave inconvenience; or, if there is question of one tolerated, unless he was requested by others (n. 1673. Notandum 3°).

I said: 3° solemnly. See n. 1770. 1°.

I said: 4° insofar as he is prohibited from exercising it by censure, namely properly so called, not by suspension, whether orally (n. 1686), or for a time and by a particular sentence laid down on account of a delict altogether past. Thus the opinion absolutely more probable to St. Alphonsus. Except if a suspension laid down from informed conscience is violated, as S. C. C. decided. St. Alphonsus is silent concerning this exception.

I said: 5° and that valid before God. From the decrees of S. C. C., July 19, 1704, and September 11, 1717. Cf. n. 1664. q. 1°. § fin.

1772. Resolves. - 1° He who, bound by a twofold censure, exercises Sacred Order incurs a twofold irregularity; and these must be expressed in the petition for dispensation.

2° A priest who, suspended from Order, sacramentally absolves is irregular; because absolving also is an act of the power of Order, but not an act of jurisdiction alone, such as would be, e.g., the act of excommunicating, approving confessors, assisting at Matrimony (not blessing it), preaching, dispensing from vows, etc.¹

1773. - Under this appellation are understood heresy and apostasy from the Faith. This irregularity (in which, if it is occult, the Bishop dispenses²) is incurred also by the favorers, receivers, defenders of heretics and apostates, indeed even by their children. But if these crimes are public, this irregularity falls back into irregularity from defect of reputation, as St. Alph. says.³ Nevertheless in regions where heresies range about with impunity, heretics, and a fortiori their children, according to many, are not held irregular. But by our Bishops, by reason of the faculty alleged at p. LXX. n. 2, they can easily be dispensed for precaution.

1774. Principle. - Irregularity is incurred from voluntary and gravely culpable homicide, even occult, whether directly or indirectly willed, perpetrated by an action either physical or moral. The same must be said as regards mutilation.

Mutilation is understood when some principal member is separated from the body, or a part of the body which has an office distinct per se, e.g., foot, hand, eye, etc.⁴

1775. Resolves. - 1° Those are irregular who are the immediate cause of someone's death, even if they repent before the injured person dies. The reason is that a physical cause necessarily works. Likewise those who mutilate others or themselves. If someone lethally struck a man, and another killed him, both are truly homicides.

2° Those commanding, and those giving counsel, are irregular, the effect having followed from the counsel or command. Except if before execution they retracted the command or counsel, and the retraction became known to the mandatory.

3° Likewise those cooperating, so that homicide is done more quickly, more boldly, or more safely. Thus the following become irregular: 1) those who mutually stir each other up, although only one kills; 2) all those fighting in an unjust war, if someone perishes there; 3) those who furnish arms or monies for homicide; 4) all unjust accusers, judges, and witnesses.

4° Likewise those consenting, if consent has efficaciously influenced the homicide. Hence he is not irregular who approves a homicide, even one done in his name or for his sake, because he has not influenced it.

5° Those who apply themselves to a licit thing, sufficient diligence having been used lest homicide happen, do not become irregular. Hence the following are not irregular: 1) those who commit accidental homicide, unless gravely culpable negligence intervenes; 2) nor those who in good faith furnish to a sick person some harmful food or drink, or, if moving or turning him, are the cause why he dies; 3) nor physicians who gave to the sick a death-dealing drug, provided they are skilled, or act in good faith. Except, however, Clerics in Sacred Orders operating with cutting or burning outside a case of necessity.¹

1776. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Whether he incurs irregularity who, applying himself to an illicit thing, kills someone, e.g., if a Cleric by chance kills a man in illicit hunting?

Resp. No, more probably. The reason is that the homicide is voluntary neither in itself nor in its cause: for the work posited, although illicit of itself, is not death-dealing per se; but otherwise if, by reason of the circumstances, it induced a proximate danger of death to someone, as, e.g., if someone applied fire to a war cannon where there is a crowd of people.²

Quaer. 2° Whether he becomes irregular who kills another for defense of his own life or that of an innocent?

Resp. to the first. No, unless he exceeds the moderation of blameless defense. The reason is that he is guilty of no fault. Consult St. Alph.¹ Cf. n. 467. II.

Resp. to the second. No likewise. The reason is that irregularity from private homicide is not incurred except with mortal sin, as is elicited from Canon Law.² - Thus St. Alph.³

Quaer. 3° Whether he becomes irregular who kills another for defense of liberty, honor, or temporal goods, with the moderation of blameless defense?

Resp. No, according to the more common and more probable opinion. This seems to be proved from Canon Law, the places of which can be observed in St. Alph.⁴ Moreover, since there no sin is present, irregularity cannot be incurred except on account of defect of lenity: but irregularity from defect of lenity is not incurred except in cases expressed in Law; but the present case is not found in Law. Therefore.

Quaer. 4° Whether he is to be held as irregular who doubts whether he has perpetrated homicide or not?

Resp. See n. 1757. q. 3°. R. 2°.

Quaer. 5° Whether he is irregular who doubts whether he influenced the mutilation of another, the fact of mutilation being posited?

Resp. No. The reason is that the law imposed irregularity for doubt of homicide alone.⁵

Quaer. 6° Whether he is to be held as irregular who procured an abortion, doubting whether the fetus was animated or not?

Resp. No. The reason is that then there is no certainty properly concerning homicide. - Hence irregularity is not incurred unless the abortion was procured after the eightieth day from conception; for in her penal practice the Church, so long as the contrary is not established, must be judged to follow the opinion according to which males are animated on the fortieth day, females on the eightieth day from conception, and in the case the sex of the fetus will always be doubtful.⁶

744. Irregular from delict are, according to can. 985, provided the delict was grave, - external, whether public or occult, - and perpetrated after Baptism, or the very illegitimate reception of Baptism from non-Catholics (can. 986):

1. From delict against the faith and unity of the Church, "apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics."

Those who in good faith are enrolled in heresy or schism are not irregular; nevertheless in the external forum they are presumed such, and therefore dispensation is to be sought for caution.

2. From abuse of Baptism, "those who, except in a case of extreme necessity, have allowed Baptism to be conferred upon themselves by non-Catholics in any manner."

Non-Catholics in this case are to be understood in the strict sense, namely, heretics and schismatics, but probably not unbelievers, who besides do not have Baptism; but it suffices in whatever way Baptism is received, whether with the rites of the sect employed, or with the Catholic rite, or with no special rite, whether from free request or from free permission, or from opposition not having been made.

3. From attempted Marriage, "those who have dared to attempt marriage, or to place only the civil act, either being themselves bound by a matrimonial bond, or by sacred order, or by religious vows even simple and temporary, or with a woman bound by the same vows or joined by a valid marriage."

It makes no difference whether the impediment exists on the part of the man or of the woman; but full knowledge and deliberation are required, as the words "have dared" indicate; nevertheless ignorance of irregularity does not excuse.

4. From voluntary homicide or abortion, "those who have perpetrated voluntary homicide or have procured the abortion of a human fetus with the effect following, and all cooperating."

Homicide is committed when, apart from the case of legitimate defense, death is inflicted on another by an action directly voluntary either in itself, as if death itself is intended, or in the cause, as if from gravely culpable negligence it is the cause of death inflicted; but not if it follows casually from light negligence or from mere omission. It is required for homicide, as for abortion, that it happen with the effect following; but irregularity is contracted even if someone repents before the effect follows. Cooperators are understood as those who positively, whether physically or morally, influence efficaciously, as in a capital trial those who unjustly testify against the guilty man, or condemn him, and in an unjust war all who fight; - but not negative cooperators, who do not impede, although they should have.

Let it be noted: a) In the old law irregularity from defect of mildness arose in those who in war were the cause of killing or themselves cooperated; hence the S. C. Consist., Oct. 25, 1918, conceded to Ordinaries the faculty of "dispensing, at least for caution, with their subjects returning from war whenever priests, clerics, and students of Seminaries have incurred it not from their own act, but from necessity, namely, compelled to take up arms and perhaps to inflict death or mutilation." Moreover it says: "but whenever it is a question of clerics in sacred orders who, not compelled by necessity of laws, have spontaneously offered themselves to take up arms, or have taken them up, recourse must be had to the Holy See for dispensation," which it said must also be understood of those who, from another service, for example, of the sick, spontaneously passed over to fighting service, even if they have inflicted death or mutilation on no one (March 28, 1919).

b) Likewise from the old law, when a priest certain of homicide doubted whether the homicide was caused by his own action or by the action of another, it was declared that in this doubt of fact he contracted irregularity in relation to the celebration of Mass. But now it is generally declared that in doubt of fact the Ordinary can dispense, provided that in a similar case the Supreme Pontiff is accustomed to dispense (can. 15). Therefore in the case a dispensation will regularly have to be awaited; but we doubt whether the Ordinary himself or rather the Holy See must be approached, since the case of homicide perhaps is not among those in which the Supreme Pontiff easily dispenses or is accustomed to dispense.

5. From mutilation or attempted suicide, "those who have mutilated themselves or others or have attempted to take their own life."

Attempted suicide and mutilation must be voluntary and gravely culpable; but mutilation is here understood in the restricted sense, as the cutting off of a member or part of the body which has its own office distinct from the others, such as a hand, arm, foot, eye, tongue, testicle, female breast, etc.; but not a tooth, hair, finger, nor a part of a member such as the ear; nor is it present if a member is injured or deformed or weakened, even if from this it should become useless. If twin members are truly distinct, the cutting off of one suffices; but not if they are united, as the nostrils.

6. From the illegitimate exercise of the medical art, "clerics exercising the medical or surgical art forbidden to them, if death follows from this."

In order that someone incur irregularity, he must be a cleric, must sin gravely against the law which forbids exercising medicine without apostolic indult, and death must follow from this as from a cause, even if the death is not gravely imputable to him: for in this case irregularity from the delict of homicide would be added.

7. From abuse of Order, "those who place an act of Order reserved to clerics constituted in sacred Order, while lacking that Order, or while prohibited from its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindictive, or local."

It is required a) that a layman or inferior cleric who does not have the Order, or one who has the Order but is canonically prohibited from its exercise by penalty, whether medicinal or censure, or vindictive, b) exercise an Order, not an act of mere jurisdiction, c) not a minor but a sacred Order, d) and indeed one reserved either by reason of itself, namely, which can in no way be exercised by those lacking that Order, or by reason of solemnity, which in that manner cannot be exercised except by those having the Order.

In particular the following become irregular: a priest exercising an act of order reserved to the bishop, such as to confirm, ordain, consecrate a church or chalice; a deacon who sacramentally absolves or celebrates Mass; a subdeacon who solemnly baptizes or, vested with a stole, performs the office of deacon in Mass and solemnly chants the Gospel; a cleric who with maniple performs the office of subdeacon in solemn Mass and thus chants the Epistle; a priest who, suspended or in an interdicted place, rashly celebrates; a cleric in sacred orders who, bound by censure, chants the Epistle with maniple in solemn Mass, or the Gospel with stole; - but not a priest who absolves without jurisdiction; nor a deacon who solemnly baptizes without commission; nor a cleric or layman exercising the office of subdeacon in Mass without maniple, or chanting the Gospel without stole; or blessing fruits or breads or uttering an exorcism; nor one who exercises an order while censured but requested by another or to avoid grave inconvenience, or prohibited from order but not by canonical penalty.

Let it be noted that from a reasonable cause it is permitted that a cleric at least marked with tonsure be substituted for a subdeacon, who serves at solemn Mass, but vested without maniple: thus S. C. R., March 14, 1906.

They are irregular from delict:

1°. Apostates from the faith, heretics, schismatics;

2°. Those who, except in a case of extreme necessity, have allowed baptism to be conferred upon themselves in any way by acatholics;

3°. Those who have dared to attempt marriage or to place only a civil act, either themselves bound by a matrimonial bond or sacred order or religious vows, even simple and temporary, or with a woman bound by the same vows or joined by a valid marriage;

4°. Those who have perpetrated voluntary homicide or procured the abortion of a human fetus, the effect having followed, and all cooperating;

5°. Those who have mutilated themselves or others, or have attempted to take life from themselves;

6°. Clerics exercising the medical or surgical art forbidden to them, if death follows from it;

7°. Those who place an act of order reserved to clerics constituted in sacred order, either lacking that order, or being prohibited from its exercise by a canonical penalty, whether personal, medicinal or vindicative, or local (Can. 985).

These delicts do not beget irregularity unless they have been grave sins, perpetrated after baptism, with the prescription of can. 985, n. 2 saved, and likewise external, whether public or occult (Can. 986).

1°. Apostasy from the faith is total defection from the Christian faith; heresy is the voluntary error of some Christian against some truth of faith; schism is voluntary withdrawal from the unity of the Church and from obedience to the Head, the Roman Pontiff.

2°. Irregularity from bad reception of Baptism arises. Voluntary acceptance of Baptism from an apostate, heretic, schismatic, or infidel outside a case of necessity is understood; it is said: if he knew, that is, if knowingly he permitted himself to be baptized by any one of these outside a case of extreme necessity, then he is irregular.

3°. They contract irregularity:

Paul, married, attempting marriage with Martha, unmarried, or with Bertha, married, or with Titina, bound even by temporary vows.

Paul, a religious from solemn vows, attempting marriage with Martha, unmarried, or with Margaret, a religious bound by vows;

Paul, a subdeacon or deacon or priest, attempting marriage with Martha, unmarried, or Marthina, a religious;

Paul, unmarried, attempting marriage with a nun bound by solemn vow;

Paul, professed from temporary vows, attempting marriage with Martha, a nun bound by solemn vow;

John, a professed member of the Society of Jesus from perpetual simple vows, attempting marriage with Bertha, unmarried, or professed from vows whether solemn or simple temporary.

By like reason those who have dared to place only a civil act contract irregularity according to the adjuncts of this canon n. 3.

4°. It arises from homicide and procurement of abortion:

In this irregularity there seem altogether to be included all homicides properly and strictly so called, all procuring abortion, all cooperators who truly incur the guilt of homicide. Therefore those killing by physical act; those procuring abortion by a physical act, the effect having followed; those incurring by a moral act the guilt of homicide or of abortion, the effect having followed; those cooperating efficaciously.

Nor are they irregular who kill someone in the just defense of themselves or of another person, the moderation of blameless defense having been observed.

5°. To mutilate is to cut off a member of the body which has a proper and distinct office: foot, hand, eye, tongue, the breast of a woman. To perpetrate suicide, that is, to attempt to take life from oneself. Therefore those who have mutilated either themselves or others, or have attempted to take life from themselves, become irregular.

Vasectomy is certainly grave damaging of a man, for it deprives him of an immense good; and therefore it is a grave lesion. According to many it is grave mutilation in the technical sense, for it is a cutting-off of a member, although not an excision; it renders the vessels useless for their end. But others say that it is not certainly established concerning irregularity, because the member is not cut out, which is required for irregularity.

One emasculated is not irregular if this has happened to him on account of necessity, or an injury exercised upon him, or on account of defect of nature in birth; otherwise if without necessity he asked this to be done in himself.

6°. Clerics are gravely prohibited from exercising medicine or surgery without apostolic indult; these, although not indecorous, are certainly alien from the clerical state. If death follows from this exercise, they become irregular. This irregularity strikes the clerics themselves exercising this medical or surgical art.

7°. Those who place some act of order reserved to clerics constituted in sacred order, not having that order - for example, a deacon celebrating Mass, a cleric in minors solemnly baptizing - become irregular; or if they have the order whose exercise, however, is prohibited to them by canonical penalty, and nevertheless they exercise it. And laymen also incur irregularity when exercising an act of order reserved to a cleric constituted in major orders, but not when exercising an act proper to minor orders.

IV. Irregularity from delict is eightfold: 1. From voluntary and unjust homicide; 2. From unjust and voluntary mutilation; 3. From casual homicide or mutilation; 4. From the iteration of Baptism; 5. From the violation of censures; 6. From the unworthy reception or administration of Orders; 7. From apostasy from the faith, or from external heresy; 8. From a delict to which infamy is annexed. It is divided also into total and partial. The former deprives one of every Order to be received and of the exercise of an Order received, as is that which is contracted from homicide. The latter deprives one of some exercise of an Order only, as if a priest's thumb be cut off, he cannot celebrate, but he can hear confessions. Similarly a deacon deprived of a thumb is unfit for the priesthood, but fit for the office of deacon.

V. A delict inducing irregularity must be an external mortal sin, since a most grave penalty cannot be contracted save for a grave delict. Nor does it matter that it be occult. There are excepted nevertheless delicts to which infamy and notoriety are annexed, which if they were occult do not induce irregularity. But other delicts — as voluntary homicide, heresy, the iteration of Baptism, the violation of a censure by the exercise of an Order — beget irregularity even when occult. Concerning occult homicide there is no dispute.

XIII. QUESTION VI. When is irregularity contracted from casual homicide or mutilation? ANSWER. That homicide is casual which happens beyond the intention of the slayer, both direct and indirect; and then, just as the slayer is immune from fault, so he is from irregularity: and the same is of mutilation. But he who posits a cause whence he foresees, or is bound to foresee, homicide or mutilation, becomes irregular. He who does a lawful work, and employs all diligence lest homicide or mutilation follow, would not then become irregular, even if homicide or mutilation happen. But if that action in some way flowed into the homicide or mutilation, it would not now be good and lawful; and if the actor were negligent in guarding against the effect, he would become irregular, unless the negligence were light. Hence if a master should strike a disciple, or a father a son, only lightly, he would not become irregular, even if death or mutilation supervened beyond his intention. The same is to be said of him who should ride a fierce horse, if the killing of a boy should happen; or of one ringing bells, if the clapper should fall and kill a man; or of a keeper of a wild beast breaking its bonds and killing a man. Nor does a physician become irregular if a sick man die without his grave negligence.

XX. Irregularity is also contracted from a delict to which infamy is annexed, as are in clerics perjury with false testimony in judgment, sodomy, and simony: which crimes, if they be notorious, induce irregularity.