What suspension is and its effects

SUSPENSION is a censure by which a cleric is deprived of the use of some ecclesiastical power which he has by reason of his orders, office, or benefice, or, in the words of the Code, it is a censure by which a cleric is debarred from office, or benefice, or both.

This censure, then, differs from the rest in that it is inflicted only on clerics, whom it deprives of the lawful exercise of some portion or of the whole of the ecclesiastical power which they possess. A suspended priest may hear Mass and receive the sacraments, and he retains the order or office from which he is suspended, but he cannot lawfully exercise that order or office as long as he is under censure.

Suspension may be partial, as when it deprives the delinquent of the exercise of some sacred order, or office, or of the administration and fruits of his benefice; or it may be total and embrace all those ecclesiastical powers. When a cleric is simply suspended without any special limitation he is understood to be totally suspended from all sacred orders, the exercise of his office, and the fruits of his benefice.

Suspension ab homine, inflicted for the perpetration of a crime, should ordinarily be imposed after the crime has been proved judicially. However, the Council of Trent¹ permitted prelates to suspend their clerics on account of a secret crime and without judicial process, If they use this right, they are said to suspend the delinquent ex informata conscientia; if it is inflicted as a censure they are bound to make known the grounds of their action to the delinquent himself, and they should be prepared to submit them to the Sacred Congregation if he have recourse to Rome, as he has a right to do, though he has no right to a strict appeal.²

Suspension inflicted for life, or for a crime which is altogether past and done with, or at the will and good pleasure of the superior, is not a censure in the strict sense, but a mere penalty inflicted in punishment for crime.

¹ Sess. xiv, c. 1, de Ref.; can. 2186 ff.

² Instruct. S.C. de P.F., October 20, 1884.

A suspended person who exercises an act prohibited him by the censure commits grave sin, and if he solemnly exercises sacred orders after being suspended from them he incurs the penalty of irregularity in addition (Can. 985). An act of jurisdiction on the part of one who is publicly suspended after a condemnatory or declaratory sentence, or if the jurisdiction were expressly revoked by the superior, would be invalid; otherwise it would always be valid, and even lawful if it were exercised at the request of the faithful who have the right to ask it of him.

I. Notion. Suspension is a censure by which a cleric is prohibited from office or benefice, or from both (canon 2278, § 1). It is said:

1. Censure; but it can be inflicted as a vindicative penalty (canon 2255, § 2).

2. Cleric, because he alone is the subject of suspension; and indeed suspension can be issued against a community and members at the same time.

3. Office; this is understood strictly so called (canon 145, § 2), and is defined: a function constituted stably by divine or ecclesiastical ordination, to be conferred according to the norm of the sacred canons, carrying with it at least some participation in ecclesiastical power, whether of order or of jurisdiction (canon 145, § 1). But because the effects of suspension are maximally divisible (canon 2278), a cleric can by suspension be prohibited even from only part of the power either of order or of jurisdiction, as will be explained.

4. Benefice; moreover, an ecclesiastical benefice is defined as a juridic entity constituted or erected in perpetuity by competent ecclesiastical authority, consisting of a sacred office and the right of receiving revenues from the endowment annexed to the office (canon 1409). But in the penalty of suspension from benefice only the right of receiving revenues is considered, insofar as it is distinguished from the annexed office, as will also be clear below.

II. Division. Suspension can be distinguished into total and partial, according as it comprehends all or not all the effects of suspension. Partial suspension is chiefly divided into suspension from office alone and from benefice alone. Suspension from office is either from office simply or from some part of the office, for instance from jurisdiction, from divine things, etc.; these things will be clearer from what will be said concerning the effects of suspension.

III. Effects. The effects of suspension can be separated, but unless something else is established, suspension generally issued comprehends all the effects which are enumerated in the article on suspension; otherwise one must speak of suspension from office or from benefice, which comprehends only the effects of one or the other species. Regarding the effects in species, these things are established:

1. Suspension from office simply,¹ no limitation having been added, forbids every act both of the power of order and of jurisdiction, and also of mere administration belonging by office, except the administration of the goods of one's own benefice (canon 2279, § 1). For the administration of the goods of a benefice can be taken away only by an express clause, as is noted in canon 2280.

By force of canon 1095, a pastor or local Ordinary suspended from office, after sentence, assists at marriage invalidly, whether by himself or through another; before sentence he certainly assists validly, but perhaps illicitly by himself, because it seems to be an act of administration belonging by office. For the same reason other acts seem to be prohibited, such as the administration of Viaticum, solemn Baptism, etc. Preaching is not an act of jurisdiction strictly so called, nor, as it seems, of administration; but perhaps it is prohibited to one suspended from office as the exercise of the magisterium which belongs to him from granted jurisdiction.

2. Suspension from office partially carries these things with it:

a) Suspension from jurisdiction generally forbids every act of the power of jurisdiction for both forums, ordinary as well as delegated (canon 2279, § 2, 1°).² Jurisdiction is to be taken in the strict sense, so that it does not comprehend acts which require only mission or permission (canons 1328, 848, 748); likewise assistance at the contracting of marriage is not an act of true jurisdiction.

b) Suspension from divine things forbids every act of the power of order which someone obtains either through sacred ordination or through privilege (canon 2279, § 2, 2°). It is said through privilege, for instance the privilege of ministering Confirmation (canon 782, § 3).³

c) Suspension from orders forbids every act of the power of order received through ordination (cited canon, 3°), whether major or minor. "One thus suspended can exercise all acts of jurisdiction which do not require the actual use of order; therefore a Bishop suspended from orders only can approve Confessors, although he himself cannot absolve from sins";⁴ namely, he acts illicitly or invalidly according to canon 2284.

d) Suspension from sacred orders forbids every act of the power of order received through ordination in sacred orders (cited canon, 4°); the same applies as under c).

e) Suspension from exercising a certain and definite order forbids every act of the designated order; moreover the suspended person is also prohibited from conferring the same order and from receiving a higher order and exercising it after it has been received after suspension (cited canon, 5°).

f) Suspension from conferring a certain and definite order forbids conferring that order, but not an inferior or higher one (cited canon, 6°).

g) Suspension from a certain and definite ministry, for example hearing confessions, or office, for example one with care of souls, forbids every act of that same ministry or office (cited canon, 7°).

h) Suspension from pontifical order forbids every act of the power of episcopal order (cited canon, 8°), for example the blessing of holy oils, conferral of Orders, even Tonsure, consecration of a church, Confirmation, etc.; but a Pontifical Mass is permitted.

i) Suspension from pontificals forbids the exercise of pontifical acts (cited canon, 9°), namely of those sacred functions which by liturgical laws require the pontifical insignia, that is, the staff and miter (canon 337, § 2). One suspended in such a way is indirectly prohibited from exercising acts of order which cannot be exercised without pontificals. Therefore this suspension directly or indirectly prohibits: Pontifical Mass and Vespers, solemn assistance at Mass, conferral of Orders, Tonsure excepted, which probably can be conferred without staff and miter, consecration of a Bishop, blessing of an Abbot, solemn blessing and consecration of virgins, blessing and coronation of kings, blessing or consecration of a church bell, consecration of a church, altar, sacred vessels, solemn blessing of the cornerstone and cemetery, solemn reconciliation of a church and cemetery, solemn Confirmation.⁵

3. Suspension from benefice deprives one of the fruits of the benefice, except habitation in the benefice buildings, but not of the right of administering the benefice goods, unless the decree or sentence of suspension expressly takes away from the suspended person the power itself of administering and assigns it to another (canon 2280, § 1). Fruits are understood as all temporal revenues which remain after the necessary expenses of the benefice have been deducted, namely for Mass obligations, taxes, etc. What things are comprehended in the fruits of the benefice depends on its very erection, according to canon 1410; therefore the question cannot generally be solved, as several authors today have retained from the old law, whether, for example, daily distributions are comprehended in the fruits; rather, what the law is will have to be gathered from the custom of places and from the express will of the one issuing the penalty.⁶ See also canon 1412.

One suspended in such a way retains the right of administering the benefice goods, unless the decree or sentence of suspension expressly takes away the administration itself from the suspended person and assigns it to another (canon 2280, § 1). But if the suspended person truly needs it, he can retain those things which are necessary for his sustenance, if his penalty is vindicative; for this seems to be the benign mind of the Superior (cf. the parallel case, canon 2303, § 2); but not if the penalty is a censure, because its duration depends on the conversion of the delinquent (cf. St. Alphonsus VII, 316, doubt 1).

The suspended person must restore fruits illicitly received (cf. canon 2232, §§ 1 and 2); and, if need be, he can also be compelled to this restitution by canonical sanctions (canon 2280, § 2).

4. Suspension generally issued, or suspension from office or from benefice:

a) If it has been issued by the local Ordinary, it affects all offices or benefices which the cleric has in the diocese of the suspending Superior, unless something else appears (canon 2281); but the local Ordinary cannot suspend a cleric from a determinate office or benefice which is found in another diocese (canon 2282). It is expressly said: from a determinate office or benefice, because special suspensions, for example from orders, bind the guilty person everywhere (canon 2226, § 4); but if there is question of suspension from jurisdiction, only insofar as this depends on the Superior who inflicted the penalty.

b) If it is latae sententiae, imposed by common law, it affects all offices or benefices in whatever diocese they are possessed (canon 2282).

Note. The things which canon 2265 establishes concerning excommunication are also applicable to suspension (canon 2283). Hence to anyone suspended there are to be applied the things said on p. 735, n. 8, a) and b), alpha-delta.

5. If the censure of suspension which forbids administration of Sacraments and Sacramentals has been incurred, this prohibition does not press when, before sentence, he has been requested by the faithful, who may seek this for a just cause, especially if other ministers are lacking; or when, after sentence, he is requested in danger of death, either to absolve the faithful sacramentally, although another priest is present, or to give the other Sacraments and Sacramentals if other ministers are lacking. Besides, the things said on p. 734, 4, are to be applied, except the last clause, which is added from canon 2263 (canon 2284).

If the censure of suspension which prohibits an act of jurisdiction in the internal or external forum has been incurred, the things said under 6 are valid; nevertheless an act of jurisdiction is sometimes also invalid, namely if a declaratory or condemnatory sentence has been issued, or if the Superior declares that he revokes the jurisdiction itself; and when this last has taken place, even in danger of death only the faithful can seek from the suspended person an act of jurisdiction, which then is valid and licit, always saving canon 884 on absolution of an accomplice (canon 2284).

6. If a community or college of clerics has committed a delict, suspension can be issued either against the individual delinquent persons, or against the community as such, or against the delinquent persons and the community (canon 2285, § 1). Moreover:

a) If the first, the canons of this article are to be observed (canon 2285, § 2), that is, the canons explained in this chapter.

b) If the second, the community is prohibited from the exercise of the spiritual rights which belong to it as a community (canon 2285, § 3). One who ceases to be a member of the suspended community is freed from suspension by the fact itself, and does not need absolution.

c) If the third, the effects are cumulated (canon 2285, § 4).

¹ Sometimes the prohibition does not press, namely when the suspended person is requested according to canon 2284, concerning which see below pp. 768-769, note 3.

² What happens if the suspended person is requested by the faithful will be said below; in the same place there will be discussion of the validity of prohibited acts (canon 2284).

³ See again the limits of canon 2284.

⁴ Aertnys-Damen, op. cit., II, 1023.

⁵ Solemn is rather often added, because a simple priest can sometimes be delegated to perform several functions in a simpler manner without pontificals (canons 1156; 1163; 1170, § 2; 1205, § 1; 1207). Cf. also canon 294, § 2, as to which functions it is not licit for a Bishop to perform without pontificals, except Confirmation and Tonsure.

⁶ Chelodi, op. cit., p. 51.

IV. Violation of suspension is a grave or light sin according as the suspended person places an act excluded by suspension of grave or light importance. In addition, a suspended person prohibited from the exercise of Sacred Order, who places an act of Order reserved to clerics constituted in Sacred Order, is irregular (canon 985, 7°).

995. Resolutions. - 1. One simply suspended from Order is not understood to be suspended from jurisdiction, and vice versa. One suspended from a higher Order is not thereby suspended from a lower one. Likewise, one suspended from a benefice is not considered suspended from office, nor vice versa.

2. Irregularity is not incurred by violation of a suspension imposed on account of an offense which is merely past, or imposed perpetually. St. Alphonsus, no. 314 and following. The reason is that such a suspension has the character of a mere penalty and not of a censure, as was said above, no. 941; therefore, there is not then a violation of censure. A fortiori, this is so if the suspension was imposed on account of an inculpable defect of mind or body. Nor is irregularity incurred through the exercise of any act from which someone was suspended, except the solemn exercise of sacred Order. Thus commonly.

3. A Bishop suspended from pontificals, if he celebrated Mass, even with pontificals, would not incur irregularity, because he would not exercise a substantial act of episcopal Order. St. Alphonsus, no. 314, etc.

4. Acts of Order of a suspended Cleric which do not depend upon jurisdiction are valid, because the Church cannot take away the power of Order, but can only prohibit its exercise. But acts of jurisdiction are invalid if the suspended person has been denounced by name, because he is deprived of actual jurisdiction; they are valid, however, unless he has been denounced, because the Church, by the very fact that it tolerates the suspended person, does not take away his jurisdiction, for the good of the faithful. St. Alphonsus, no. 314, etc.

Concerning these it is treated in the Code in can. 2255-2285. Three species are had in can. 2255 § 1. - 1290 The definition of excommunication is had in can. 2237 § 1. The effects cannot be separated; therefore the distinction between greater and lesser excommunication is altogether taken away; 2º is confirmed by can. 2258 § 1. Today from § 2 of the same canon only those are to be avoided who are excommunicated by name by the Holy See; besides, the excommunication must be publicly denounced, and in the decree or sentence it must be expressly said that he must be avoided. - 1291 1º is confirmed by can. 985 n. 7; 2º can. 2340 § 1. - 1292 1º can. 2260 § 1. Note can. 2250 § 1; 2º can. 2261 §§ 1, 2, 3. The Note which pertains to 1º, can. 2260 § 1; 3º can. 2259 §§ 1 and 2, cf. also can. 2256 n. 1; 4º can. 2262 § 1, but it is extended to all excommunicates. As regards private suffrages, it is confirmed by the same canon § 2; 5º can. 2264. As regards assistance at marriage, can. 1095 § 1, 1º (it is extended to the interdicted); 6º can. 2265 § 1 nn. 1 and 2; in § 2 of the same canon the nullity of acts is restricted to the case in which there is had a declaratory sentence of excommunication. As regards rescripts, cf. there and can. 36 § 2. As regards privation of benefice, it is confirmed by can. 2340 § 1, 2315, 2314 § 1 n. 2 taken together. As regards fruits, can. 2266; 7º can. 2263, 2256 n. 2, 1654; 8º can. 2267; 9º can. 2260 § 2 and 2240 § 1 n. 2, where it is limited only to excommunicates after a condemnatory or declaratory sentence. As regards extracting corpses, the obligation from can. 1242 is limited to those alone who are to be avoided, and if indeed it can be done without grave inconvenience. An excommunicate, although he has not been condemned or declared, sometimes must be deprived of ecclesiastical burial from another head, can. 1241 § 1, e.g., from n. 6. - 1294 and 1295 are confirmed by can. 2267. Private prayer is licit from can. 2262 § 2 n. 1; 4º one communicating in a criminal crime is confirmed by can. 2338 § 2. - 1298. A doubt concerning one to be avoided, after can. 2258 § 2, can scarcely be had any longer.

1299. The definition of suspension is had in can. 2278 § 1. The division is somewhat other: suspension is total or partial, and this is either from office or from benefice from can. 2278 § 2; partial suspension from office is again total or partial from can. 2279 § 1; from benefice it is had in can. 2280 § 1. - 1300 1º is confirmed by can. 2298 n. 2; 2º can. 2222 § 2 and by the last words of the same: "they do not have the nature of a penalty." - 1301 is confirmed by can. 2186-2194 and can. 2222 § 1. - 1302 can. 2278 § 2. - 1303 can. 2279 § 2. In this canon the species of partial suspension from office are clearly indicated with their effects; 4º is confirmed from can. 2280 §§ 1, 2; 5º from can. 2285. - 1304 I is confirmed by can. 986; II can. 985 n. 7. The question concerning violation of suspension as a vindictive penalty is solved through this canon, so that then an irregularity is also incurred; III is confirmed by can. 2284. - 1305 1º and 2º can. 2236 § 1, 2248 § 1 and 2289.

1306. The definition of interdict is in can. 2268 § 1. As regards the division, 1º mixed is to be omitted, can. 2268 § 2. The rest is confirmed by can. 2269 § 1. Concerning interdict from entrance of the church, it is treated in can. 2277. - 1307 I is confirmed by can. 2273, but as regards the note, the cemetery is not interdicted when the church has been interdicted. Those who did not give the cause from can. 2276 can receive the sacraments. Concerning the faculty of the Bishop, confer can. 2269 § 1; II is confirmed in some measure by can. 2269 § 2; III Bishops are exempt from can. 2227 § 2; innocents from can. 2276; externs from can. 2269 § 2; infants from can. 2230 and the insane from can. 2201 § 1 and 2218 § 2, who are not even

deprived of ecclesiastical burial from can. 1240 § 1 n. 2. - 1308 must be changed in some measure, although it is substantially confirmed. 1º The effect of a local interdict (whether general or partial) is the prohibition of any divine office or sacred rite in the interdicted place from can. 2269 § 1. What is understood by divine offices, see can. 2256 n. 1. The limits as regards the dying are in can. 2270 § 1; as regards clerics they are confirmed by can. 2271, 1º; as regards days, can. 2270 § 2; as regards sacraments, if the church is the only one or is parochial, can. 2271 n. 2. Ecclesiastical burial is prohibited only for those who are personally interdicted from can. 1240 § 1 n. 2, and only after sentence. For the rest in a local interdict only solemnities in funerals are prohibited from can. 2271 n. 2; b) if it is a particular local one; cf. besides can. 2272. - 1309. 1º a) is confirmed by can. 985, 7º; b) can. 2372; c) can. 2338 § 3; 2º is confirmed by can. 2338 § 3 and can. 2275. - 1310. 1º is confirmed by can. 2353 n. 1; as regards reserved ones confer can. 2237 § 1; 2º is confirmed by can. 2253 n. 2 and can. 2247 § 2; 3º can. 2253 n. 1.

531. Notion. "Suspension is a censure by which a cleric is prohibited from office or benefice or both" (can. 2278, § 1).

Explanation. It is said, first: suspension is a censure by which a cleric is deprived. For suspension is not imposed upon laymen, but upon clerics alone.

It is said, second: from office or benefice or both, to signify the threefold object of suspension.

It is said, third: is prohibited, because suspension does not deprive one of office and so forth, but prohibits only its use.

Note. Not rarely suspension is not a censure properly so called, that is, a medicinal penalty, but a vindicatory penalty, some penance, or a mere prohibition against exercising an office. In doubt whether in some case it is a censure or another penalty, it is presumed to be a censure.²¹³ Irregularity arises only from the violation of a censure properly so called, but not from the mere prohibition against exercising an ecclesiastical office. The celebrated suspension "from an informed conscience" is sometimes a true censure and sometimes is not.²¹⁴

Divisions. 1. Suspension is either general or special, according as a cleric is deprived of every use both of order and of office and of benefice, or only of the use of one of the three. This special suspension is subdivided into total and partial. A total suspension deprives a cleric of the use of all power of some species, namely, totally either: a) of the use of order; b) of the use of office; or c) of the use of benefice. A partial suspension deprives a cleric of the use not of all but of a part of the power of some species; for example, a cleric is punished with a partial suspension if hearing confessions, preaching, and so forth are forbidden to him. Partial suspensions also include suspension a divinis, that is, from every act of the power of order which someone obtains either through sacred ordination or through privilege; suspension from pontifical order, that is, from every exercise of episcopal order; suspension from pontificals, that is, from the use of pontifical insignia, the miter, crozier, and so forth (c. 2279, § 2).

2. Suspension is by law and by a man, according as it is imposed by the law itself or by a man.

The other divisions, such as reserved, non-reserved, latae and ferendae sententiae, and so forth, are readily understood from what was said above concerning the division of censures in general.

²¹³ Code of Canon Law, c. 2255, § 2.

²¹⁴ Cf. our Man. iur. can., q. 556.

532. Effects of suspension.

1. A suspended person sins gravely if he exercises an act forbidden to him (although parvity of matter is admitted), unless there are excusing causes, which are the same as those related above in n. 489 for censures in general.

2. One suspended from sacred order (but not likewise one suspended from a benefice), culpably violating the suspension by the exercise of sacred order, becomes irregular.²¹⁵

3. A tolerated suspended person validly exercises jurisdiction; but if a condemnatory or declaratory sentence of the superior has intervened, he exercises it invalidly.²¹⁶

4. One suspended from office (absolutely and simply) is deprived not only of the use of office but also of order and jurisdiction; or, in other words: suspension from office includes suspension from order. The administration of the goods of his own benefice, however, is permitted (can. 2279, § 1).

5. One suspended from a benefice who nevertheless usurps the beneficial revenues is bound to restitution, and that even before the sentence of a judge; he can, however, dwell in the buildings of the benefice and administer the beneficial goods, unless it has been expressly established otherwise concerning this administration.²¹⁷

Note. A suspended person is not prohibited from receiving the sacraments, for example, the Eucharist and penance, provided that he sincerely sorrows for the sins committed. Likewise, he is not excluded from the common suffrages of the Church or from gaining indulgences.

²¹⁵ Code of Canon Law, c. 985, n. 7; Hollweck, Die kirchl. Strafgesetze, § 66.

²¹⁶ Code of Canon Law, c. 2284.

²¹⁷ Ibid., c. 2280.

533. Cessation of suspension.

1. A suspension imposed in vindication is taken away by dispensation of the legitimate superior or by lapse of time, if it was inflicted for a time.

2. A suspension imposed as a censure is not removed except by legitimate absolution.

3. A suspension from an informed conscience no longer ceases with the death of the prelate who imposed it. There is no occasion to speak at greater length concerning suspension from an informed conscience. See the canonists.²¹⁸

²¹⁸ Cf. our Man. iur. can., q. 556.

§ 1. Suspension is a censure by which a cleric is prohibited from office or benefice, or from both.

§ 2. The effects also of suspension can be separated; but, unless something else is established, in a suspension brought generally there are comprehended all the effects which are enumerated in the canons of this article; on the contrary, in suspension from office or from benefice, only all the effects of either species (Can. 2278).

Suspension is brought only against a cleric, since it prohibits the use of his ecclesiastical power and ecclesiastical functions. Now the activities of a cleric are, as it were, embraced by two things: office, that is, order and jurisdiction, and benefice. Hence suspensions can be partial and total. A suspension brought absolutely and without restriction suspends both from office and from benefice. By canon law the effects of suspension can be separated, as will be clear from its various kinds.

Suspension from office does not take away office, but prohibits the use of order, jurisdiction, and administration: therefore the use of the power of jurisdiction for both forums, of the power of order which one receives by force of ordination or by privilege, and of all administration competent from office, except the administration of one's own benefice. Suspension can be partial, for example suspension from jurisdiction, from divine things, etc., or from some function, say, of order.

I say 1°. § 1. Suspension from benefice deprives one of the fruits of the benefice, except habitation in beneficial buildings, but not of the right of administering beneficial goods, unless the decree or sentence of suspension expressly takes away from the suspended person the very power of administering and assigns it to another.

§ 2. If, although the censure stands in the way, the beneficiary receives the fruits, he must restore the fruits and can be compelled to this restitution also by canonical sanctions, if need be (Can. 2280).

Such a suspension does not effect that he is not a beneficiary, but that he cannot accept the fruits of the benefice; it leaves the right of administration, unless it expressly takes that away. But if the suspended person receives the fruits, he does not have any right to retain them; they are not his and he is held to restitution.

§ 1. Suspension from office simply, with no limitation added, forbids every act both of the power of order and of jurisdiction, and also of mere administration competent from office, except administration of the goods of one's own benefice.

§ 2. Suspension:

1°. From jurisdiction generally, forbids every act of the power of jurisdiction for both forums, both ordinary and delegated;

2°. From divine things, every act of the power of order which someone obtains either by sacred ordination or by privilege;

3°. From orders, every act of the power of order received through ordination;

4°. From sacred orders, every act of the power of order received through ordination in sacred orders;

5°. From exercising a certain and definite order, every act of the designated order; but the suspended person is prohibited besides from conferring the same order and from receiving a higher one, and from exercising one received after suspension;

6°. From conferring a certain and definite order, from conferring that order itself, but not an inferior or higher one;

7°. From a certain and definite ministry, for example, of hearing confessions, or office, for example, with care of souls, every act of the same ministry or office;

8°. From episcopal order, every act of the power of episcopal order;

9°. From pontificals, the exercise of pontifical acts, according to the norm of can. 337, § 2 (Can. 2279).

I say 2°. Suspension brought generally, or suspension from office or from benefice, affects all offices or benefices which the cleric has in the diocese of the suspending Superior, unless something else appears (Can. 2281).

I say 3°. The local Ordinary cannot suspend a cleric from a determinate office or benefice which is found in another diocese; but a suspension latae sententiae, imposed by common law, affects all offices or benefices in whatever diocese they are possessed (Can. 2282).

Because the right of a cleric having an office or benefice in another diocese is his right insofar as he is a subject of the superior of that other diocese, hence he cannot be deprived of that right by another superior; besides, such a suspension would easily disturb the course of the government of dioceses. Nevertheless, since common law reigns everywhere, a suspension brought by common law affects offices and benefices which the suspended person may have also in other dioceses.

I say 4°. The things which are established concerning excommunication in can. 2265 are also to be applied to suspension (Can. 2283).

And therefore any suspended person is prohibited from various rights; he cannot obtain dignities and offices or be promoted to orders, just as was said concerning an excommunicated person in can. 2265, § 1, nn. 1, 2, 3; see also § 2.

I say 5°. If a censure of suspension has been incurred which forbids the administration of Sacraments and Sacramentals, let the prescription of can. 2261 be observed; if a censure of suspension which prohibits an act of jurisdiction in either the internal or external forum, the act is invalid, for example, sacramental absolution, if a condemnatory or declaratory sentence has been brought, or if the Superior expressly declares that he revokes the very power of jurisdiction; otherwise it is illicit only, unless it has been asked by the faithful according to the norm of the mentioned can. 2261, § 2 (Can. 2284).

Therefore, if a condemnatory or declaratory sentence has preceded, or that declaration of the superior asserted in the canon has been pronounced, the act is invalid outside the article of death; but in the article of death it is not invalid or illicit to concede absolution to the faithful asking. If the aforesaid sentences have not preceded, the act is valid and licit if the faithful ask.

Question 1. Can a suspended priest be absolved from sins by a simple confessor before he is loosed from the censure by the superior?

Resp. Affirmatively, and the reason is that the effect of suspension is not to deprive one of reception of the sacraments. Therefore it suffices if he is disposed for the sacrament of Penance, namely if he is at least attrite for his sins, and promises that he will procure, as soon as possible, as much as will be in him, absolution from the censure, and meanwhile that he will not use the prohibited power or rights. - Cf. Can. 2250, § 1.

Question 2. In what way is suspension removed?

Resp. If suspension has the character of a censure, it is removed like excommunication, namely by absolution alone and indeed by that of the superior, if it is reserved; nevertheless if it has been brought for a certain determinate time or under a condition, it ceases by itself when the time has passed or the established condition has been fulfilled. But if it has been imposed perpetually on account of fault wholly past, it is removed, as a mere penalty, by dispensation alone of the Prelate or his delegate, because then it is not a censure.

Question 3. What form is to be employed for removing suspension?

Resp. If the suspension is occult, it is removed by absolution under the general form: I absolve you from every bond, etc. If it is public, in the internal forum it is removed by the same form; but in the external forum the solemn form determined in the Ritual is to be employed. But no one can absolve solemnly from suspension except the superior or another specially delegated for this.

Question 4. Can a simple priest absolve from censure one suspended in the article of death, whether the superior or delegate is absent or present?

Resp. Certainly he can; but according to the norm of Can. 2252. Wherefore if it is a case in which recourse is required, as if the suspension was ab homine, he must recur after he has recovered to the legitimate superior. - Cf. Can. 882.

Question 5. Can suspension be brought against a community of clerics?

Resp. Affirmatively, as is clear from the following canon:

§ 1. If a community or college of clerics has committed a delict, suspension can be brought either against the individual delinquent persons, or against the community as such, or against the delinquent persons and the community.

§ 2. If the first, let the canons of this article be observed.

§ 3. If the second, the community is prohibited from the exercise of the spiritual rights which belong to it as a community.

§ 4. If the third, the effects are cumulated (Can. 2285).

A community as such cannot be excommunicated; but because all the members make one moral body which has its own proper goods, it can be punished by suspension. But the mode by which it strikes the members can be diverse in diverse cases: if the individual persons are suspended, those things which have been said up to this point will have to be observed; if the college is struck, the suspension is brought against acts of jurisdiction and others which belong to it as such; but if the persons and the college are suspended, the persons are held by the preceding canons and the chapter is deprived of the exercise of the spiritual rights which are proper to it, for example, certain collations of benefices, or elections.

III. QUESTION II. Whether one suspended from an office be suspended from a benefice, or conversely? ANSWER. One suspended from a benefice is not by that very fact suspended from the office. Wherefore he can and is bound to celebrate and to recite the other divine offices, because the penalty does not exempt from the burden. And although the office be on account of the benefice, yet in punishment of the delict the guilty party can be deprived of the fruits of the benefice, the burden of serving the Church remaining. One suspended from an office, even a most grave one, is not by that very fact suspended from the benefice, as the more probable opinion teaches.

IV. QUESTION III. What are the effects of suspension from an office, from jurisdiction, from a benefice? ANSWER. One suspended absolutely from an office remains deprived of all use of Order and of jurisdiction, and of any ministry whatsoever which can be exercised by a cleric alone. Wherefore he cannot administer the sacraments, celebrate, excommunicate, absolve, impart indulgences, approve for confessions, exercise pontifical functions, nor perform the other ministries which depend upon Order. It is nevertheless certain that if he be suspended from Order only, he is not suspended from jurisdiction.

Caius, a priest of the province of England, began to indulge in drunkenness and other vices and, neglecting clerical obligations also, visited a public theater where stage performances were being given. Shortly afterwards, having been deprived of his faculties by the Bishop, he withdrew to Scotland, where under another Bishop he again began to exercise priestly functions. When Titius, Caius’s confessor, had learned all these things, he consequently doubted what was to be done, for Caius had never sought absolution from any censure imposed upon priests in England for attendance at the theater. Hence it is asked:

1. What penalty is imposed upon English priests for attendance at the theater?

2. What are the effects of suspension?

3. How does a censure cease?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. What penalty is imposed on English priests for frequenting the theater?

The Fourth Council of Westminster decreed as follows: “ We strictly prohibit ecclesiastics who have received sacred Orders from being present at stage representations in public theaters, or in places temporarily made use of as public theaters, under the penalty to transgressors of suspension to be incurred ipso facto such as has hitherto been the rule in all parts of England with reservation to the respective ordinaries.”¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. i, 614.

2. What are the effects of suspension?

Total suspension deprives the cleric of the use of all sacred Orders, the exercise of his office, and the fruits of his benefice.²

2 Ibid., vol. ii, 380.

3. How does a censure cease?

As a general rule a censure which has been incurred only ceases when absolution has been obtained by the delinquent from one who is competent to give it. Sometimes, however, a censure is imposed to last as long as certain conditions last, and then on the termination of those conditions the censure ceases.³

3 Ibid., 373.

4. The case. Caius incurred suspension reserved to his bishop by going to the theater. He had never been absolved from this censure. His confessor Titius, or else Caius himself, should wi-ite to his former bishop and ask him for powers to put Caius straight. On the receipt of those powers Titius may deal with the case. In the meantime Caius should abstain from the exercise of his office as a priest under pain of grave sin. If since his suspension he has exercised sacred Orders solemnly, he has incurred irregularity from which he must be dispensed before again exercising his functions.

Titius, a priest, exercising the functions of the sacred ministry in a certain diocese, is "reported" to his bishop for indulging too freely in intoxicating drink—in fact, for being well under its influence on several occasions. Without being granted the benefit of a canonical trial, or even a thorough investigation of the charges preferred against him, the accused Titius is suspended by his bishop and ordered to repair to a monastery and remain there till he (the bishop) sees fit to recall him. Under protest Titius submits, complies with the bishop's command, and spends a considerable time in a monastery, where he is obliged to defray his own expenses.

Now it is asked:

1. Had the bishop a right to suspend Titius without a previous canonical trial or thorough investigation of the charges brought against him?

2. Had the bishop a right to order Titius to a monastery without previous trial or canonical procedure?

3. Had the bishop a right to compel Titius to defray his own expenses while in the monastery?

Solution.—1. Had the bishop a right to suspend Titius without canonical trial or other legal formality?

Prior to the Council of Trent no ecclesiastic could be punished by his bishop, v. g., suspended from the exercise of his orders, except upon a regular or formal criminal trial as prescribed by the sacred canons. This was the general law of the Catholic Church up to the time of the Council of Trent, and admitted of no exception whatever, save only in the case of murder, heresy, and in the case of regulars, who for secret crimes might be restrained by their superiors from receiving higher orders even without trial. Stremler (Eccl. Punish. p. 310) says: Before the Council of Trent, a bishop could not restrain any unworthy candidate from holy orders, nor punish a delinquent ecclesiastic, except upon a formal or an ordinary criminal trial, as established by the law of the Church and contained in the decretals. No crime could be punished, except when the delinquent had been judicially convicted, in a canonical trial conducted with the formalities established by canon law for proceedings in criminal causes."

The Council of Trent, in its 14th session, chapter I, de Reform., introduced in this respect, a complete and radical change in the existing discipline of the Church. For in its 14th session the Council enacted that in certain cases bishops could inflict punishment upon their delinquent ecclesiastics without previous trial or judicial formality of any kind whatever. By virtue of this power the bishops may in certain cases condemn an ecclesiastic, without giving him an opportunity to defend himself, for reasons proved in no trial, but weighed in his (the bishop’s) conscience.... For imposing this suspension neither judicial forms nor canonical admonitions are required (Instr. Congr. de Prop. Fide, 1884). This power of the bishop to suspend his priest without canonical trial or legal procedure, but simply for reasons known to him extrajudicially, and sufficient for his own conscience, is known in Canon Law as the power to suspend a priest, or other cleric in major orders, ex informata conscientia. It was conferred on the bishops by the Council of Trent, to safeguard the dignity of the priesthood as well as the spiritual interests of the faithful, and to eradicate evils that could not be reached in any other way.

The bishop is not required to give any reasons to the priest whom he suspends, but he is required to give reasons to Rome, if appeal is taken to Rome. There lies no appeal from the suspension ex informata conscientia. That is, if the suspended priest takes an appeal to Rome, he does not thereby cause a suspension of the censure until a final decision is given by Rome. The only recourse for a priest in these circumstances is to observe the articles of his suspension, and appeal extrajudicially to the Holy See. A decreto suspensions ex informata conscientia non datur appellatio, sed semper patet recursus extrajudicialis ad S. Sedem, suspensione interim in vigore permanente (Instr. Congr. de Prop. Fide, n. v. II and 12).

There may exist among some persons a persuasion that this power of the bishops to suspend ecclesiastics without due process of law, or ex informata conscientia, was somehow abrogated for the United States by the III. PI. Council of Baltimore. Such persuasion is altogether unfounded. The power of a bishop to suspend his priest ex informata conscientia, in the United States, is reaffirmed by the Council of Baltimore and by the instruction issued by the S. C. de Prop. Fide, to the American bishops, October 20, 1884.

Thus the S. C. de Prop. Fide expressly says:

But as regards repressive remedies or penalties, let Ordinaries note that the extrajudicial remedy based on informed conscience, established by the Holy Council of Trent for hidden offenses, session 14, chapter 1, On Reform, remains in its full force.

(Appendix, III. PI. Coun. Bait.)

Titius was guilty of crimen occultum. He was well under the influence of strong drink on several occasions. He is liable to give, if he has not already given, grave scandal. He is already sacrificing the dignity of the priesthood and jeopardizing the spiritual interests of the faithful. The bishop is perfectly within his rights when he suspends Titius ex informata conscientia, without previous warning or canonical trial or other legal formality. Justam ac legitimam causam suspensioni ex informata conscientia, praebet crimen seu culpa a suspenso commissa. (Instr. Cum Magnopere, Oct. 20, 1884.)

The suspension may not be inflicted, ex informata conscientia, in perpetuum, but only for a certain period of time, or until the delinquent manifests sufficient signs of amendment.

Stremler (p. 329) says that no general rule can be laid down regarding the duration of the suspension; but he thinks that two or three months are a long time and that the suspension should rarely last longer. Only very exceptional circumstances would justify a suspension to last six months. The suspension ceases without other formality at the death of the bishop who inflicts it, but whether it also ceases in the case of the transfer or resignation or removal of the bishop imposing it, Fr. Smith says, is not so certain.

2. We proceed now to the discussion of the second question, namely: Had the bishop a right to order Titius to a monastery to do penance without giving him the benefit of a canonical trial?

In the Instruction Cum Magnopere of the Propaganda to the bishops of the United States, October 20, 1884, concerning the manner of proceeding in criminal and disciplinary causes of ecclesiastics, we read:

I. The Ordinary is bound, by virtue of his pastoral office, diligently to look after the discipline and correction of ecclesiastics. Hence he should watch assiduously over their conduct, and make wise use of the remedies established by the canons, either for the purpose of preventing or doing away with abuses which sometimes creep in among the clergy.

II. These remedies are of two kinds: some are preventive, others repressive. The former have for their object the prevention of evils, the removing of causes of scandal, and the avoiding of voluntary proximate occasions of sin. The latter are established for the purpose of recalling the delinquent to the path of duty, etc.

III. The application of these remedies is left to the conscientious discretion of the Ordinary, provided, etc.

IV. The following are the chief preventive remedies: spiritual exercises, etc.

V. Before they are imposed upon any one, the facts calling for them must be verified in a summary manner, etc.

Now in the case of Titius, the bishop acted within the provisions of this Instruction in applying a preventive remedy, namely, in commanding Titius to make a retreat in a monastery.

"A bishop, therefore, has the right to impose a special spiritual retreat upon an ecclesiastic who is the occasion of scandal, or who remains voluntarily in the proximate occasion of sin, and who consequently, though not yet guilty of crime, follows a slippery road leading to spiritual ruin." (Smith, Eccl. Law, n. 1746.)

As space will not allow us to treat of this more fully, we refer our readers to Smith, Elements of Eccl. Law, and New Procedure, and Zitelli, Apparatus Jur. Eccl., etc.

3. Did the bishop act within his power when he obliged Titius to defray his expenses while in the monastery?

We take for granted that Titius was ordained ad titulum missionis.

Some readers may be under the impression that the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore changed the status of priests ordained ad titulum missionis, with regard to removal, etc. The council did not change the status of the ordinary missionary priest. It did create irremovable rectors and made special laws governing their removal, but it reaffirmed the laws of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, regarding all other priests ordained ad titulum missionis. In the Instruction of the Propaganda to the American bishops issued in 1884, the title of which is: "De modo servando in cognoscendis et definiendis causis criminalibus et disciplinaribus clericorum in Foederatis Statibus Americae Septentrionalis," the laws of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, concerning missionary priests, with the exception of the newly created irremovable rectors, are expressly stated to be still in force.

The decrees of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore, no. 125 concerning the nature of missions and nos. 77 and 108 concerning the juridical effects of removing missionaries from office, are understood to have been in no way changed or weakened, without prejudice to what has more recently been established concerning pastors or irremovable rectors (cf. Appendix, III. PI. Con. Bait., p. 292, XLV).

If we refer now to the II. PI. Con. Bait., n. 125, we read:

By using the terms parochial right, parish, and pastor, we in no way intend to confer upon the rector of any church the right, as they say, of irremovability, or to take away or in any way diminish that power which, according to the discipline received in these provinces, a bishop has to deprive any priest of office or transfer him elsewhere.

And n. 77 of the same Council we are told that, as was decreed in the Provincial Council of St. Louis, in the year 1855, and confirmed by the Holy See: Priests to whom exercise of the priesthood has been forbidden by the Ordinary’s sentence have no right to demand support from him, since by their own fault they have rendered themselves incapable of working in the missions.

The American bishops proposed the following Dubium to the Congr. of the Propaganda:

Whether and how it is to be declared that priests ordained under the title of the mission, who have rendered themselves unworthy of exercising sacred ministry, are deprived of this title; and that the Ordinary is not bound to provide support to them.

The Sacred Congr. answered on Feb. 4, 1873:

In the case as presented, after a prior declaration of this kind is to be made to the priest by the bishop, and so long as the aforesaid priest perseveres in his depraved manner of life, displaying no sign of sincere repentance, the bishop is not bound to provide him support. (Zitelli, Apparatus Jur. Eccl. de tit. Ord., p. 352.)

Strictly speaking, therefore, the bishop had a right to require of Titius that he defray his own expenses while in the monastery, since Titius, by his own fault, forfeited his living, his missionary title ad honestam sustentationem. If, however, Titius have no means to defray his own expenses, the bishop will provide means ad NECES- SARIAM sustentationem, that is, the bishop will provide what is necessary for life, but not what would make life comfortable and pleasant.

If the bishop knows that Titius has means of his own to procure the necessaries of life, then the bishop is not obliged to defray any of Titius' expenses while Titius is accomplishing his penance. Stremler says:

"For the rest, dismissal from benefice always leaves to the ecclesiastic who is dismissed the right to the means of subsistence. The ecclesiastical judge should assign to the cleric who is deprived of his benefice, and who has no other means of subsistence, an alimentary pension, or keep him in a monastery, according to the gravity of his offense, and not allow him to tramp about, deprived of all means of living. For, say the Sacred Canons: Paupertas cogit ad turpia.