The Novitiate

As, therefore, the observance of the counsels is not only lawful but a more perfect state of life, anyone may enter into religion who is not prevented by some obstacle. Those who have not possession of their faculties, and children who have not arrived at the age of puberty, and are still subject to their parents, cannot enter into religion. In former times parents used occasionally to present their children to be brought up in monasteries with the intention of their becoming religious when they reached the proper age. This custom, however, has long been abandoned.

Besides safeguarding what the constitutions of each institute prescribe on the point, the Code declares that the following cannot be validly admitted to the novitiate: Those who have formally belonged to a non-Catholic sect.

Those who have not the age required for the novitiate.

Those who enter religion induced thereto by violence, grave fear, or deceit, or whom the superior receives from the same motives. A spouse while the marriage lasts.

Those who are bound or who have been bound by the bond of religious profession.

Those over whom hangs a penalty on account of committing some grave crime of which they have been or can be accused.

A Bishop, whether residential or titular, although only designated by the Roman Pontiff.

Clerics who, by an arrangement of the Holy See, are bound by an oath to work for the benefit of their diocese or mission, for the time during which the obligation of the oath lasts.

The following are admitted unlawfully but validly: Clerics in sacred orders without the local Ordinary being consulted, or against his will, because their departure would be to the great loss of souls, and this loss cannot otherwise be avoided.

Those in debt who are not solvent.

Those who are liable to render accounts or who are implicated in other secular business from which religion may have to fear lawsuits and troubles.

Children who ought to assist parents—that is, father, mother, grandfather, or grandmother—placed in grave necessity, and parents whose care is necessary for the support and education of children.

Those destined for the priesthood in religion, but who are debarred from it by irregularity or other canonical impediment (Can. 542).

I. Requisites for someone to be admitted to the novitiate. From can. 542, 1st:

1. The following are invalidly admitted to the novitiate:

a) Those who have adhered to a non-Catholic sect. It suffices that they have adhered, even if they do not actually adhere. It is not sufficient that someone was born in heresy or has heretical blood-relations,¹ or that he was baptized outside the Catholic Church; but it is required that after the seventh year he was publicly enrolled in a non-Catholic sect, and - so some say - that he was not converted to the Catholic Church before the fourteenth year.² The impediment does not regard one who has been an apostate.

b) Those who do not have the age required for the novitiate. The completed fifteenth year of age is required (can. 555, § 1, 1st). At the beginning of the novitiate, the last day of the fifteenth year should have been completed (can. 34, § 3, 3rd).

c) Those who enter religion induced by force, grave fear, or fraud, or whom the Superior, induced in the same way, receives. Fear merely concomitant is not sufficient; but, considering the word induced, such fear is required as was the cause of entrance; likewise grave fear is required, although relatively grave fear suffices, so that reverential fear, at least if importunate prayers, etc., are added, would constitute an impediment.

d) A spouse, while the marriage lasts.

e) Those who are bound or have been bound by the bond of religious profession. It suffices that one be bound or have been bound by temporary profession.

f) Those over whom a penalty is impending because of a grave delict committed, concerning which they have been accused or can be accused.

g) A Bishop, whether residential or titular, even if he has only been designated by the Roman Pontiff.

h) Clerics who, from an institute of the Holy See,³ are held by oath to devote their work to the good of their diocese or of the missions, for the time during which the obligation of the oath endures.

2. From can. 542, 2nd, the following are illicitly admitted:

a) Clerics constituted in sacred orders, without consultation with the local Ordinary, or with the same Ordinary contradicting it because their departure would result in grave detriment to souls which could in no other way be avoided.

b) Those burdened with debt, who are not able to pay. The debt should not have arisen from a mere promise which obliges from fidelity alone. If someone, with debts not paid, has emitted profession, he is bound to pay, for example when an inheritance has been received, etc.; but he can accept the inheritance even if he has emitted solemn profession, because the ecclesiastical law standing in the way of acceptance seems not to be in force to the harm of a third party having a right.

c) Those liable to render an account or implicated in other secular business, from which the religion could fear lawsuits and troubles.

d) Children who must assist parents, that is, father or mother, grandfather or grandmother, constituted in grave necessity, and parents whose work is necessary for feeding or educating children. Grief to be caused to parents by entrance into religion does not suffice. Some except grief that is very grave because of special circumstances; this, however, is altogether doubtful to me. If there is question of a brother or sister, grave necessity does not constitute an impediment; but extreme necessity, from natural law, requires that entrance at least be deferred (St. Alphonsus IV, 70).

Question. Whether a son ought to leave in order to help parents constituted in grave necessity after his entrance.

Response 1. He should not leave if he can help by remaining in religion; nor should he leave definitively if departure for a time or exclaustration according to the norm of can. 638 suffices.

Response 2. If he cannot help unless he leaves, it must be said thus: 1st, if there is question of a novice, he ought to leave. 2nd, If there is question of a professed religious, he should not leave in order to help a brother or sister even constituted in extreme necessity; in order to help parents, grandfather, or grandmother he is bound to leave if the necessity is extreme; likewise if grave necessity already existed before profession (St. Alphonsus IV, 67).

e) Those destined for the priesthood in religion, from which nevertheless they are removed by irregularity or another canonical impediment.

f) An Oriental in Latin religions without permission given in writing by the Sacred Congregation for the Oriental Church.

3. Things to be noted:

a) The right of admitting to the novitiate and to subsequent religious profession, both temporary and perpetual, pertains to major Superiors with the vote of the Council or Chapter, according to the particular constitutions of each religion (can. 543).

b) With regard to testimonials to be brought, these things have been established:

a) In any religion, all aspirants, before they are admitted, must present a testimonial of baptism and confirmation received (can. 544, § 1).

b) Male aspirants must besides present testimonial letters of the Ordinary of origin and of each place in which, after the completed fourteenth year of age, they have stayed beyond a morally continuous year, every contrary privilege being removed (can. 544, § 2).

c) If there is question of admitting those who have been in a Seminary, college,⁴ or in the postulancy or novitiate of another religion, there are required besides testimonial letters, given for the diverse cases by the rector of the Seminary or college, after the local Ordinary has been heard, or by the major Superior of the religion (can. 544, § 3).

d) For clerics to be admitted, besides the testimonial of ordination, testimonial letters of the Ordinaries in whose dioceses after ordination they have stayed beyond a morally continuous year are sufficient, with the prescription of § 3 preserved (can. 544, § 4).

e) For a professed religious passing to another religion by apostolic indult, the testimonial of the major Superior of the prior religion is sufficient (can. 544, § 5).

f) Finally, women should not be received unless accurate investigations concerning their character and morals have first been made, with the prescription of § 3 remaining firm (can. 544, § 7).

c) With regard to things to be observed by the one giving a testimonial, these have force:

a) Those who must give testimonial letters from the prescription of law should give them gratuitously, within the space of three months from their request, not to the aspirants themselves, but to the religious Superiors, closed with a seal and, if there is question of those who have been in a Seminary, college, or in the postulancy or novitiate of another religion, confirmed by the oath of the Superior (can. 545, § 1).

b) If for reasons they have judged that they cannot respond to them, they should set out the causes to the Apostolic See within the same time (can. 545, § 2).

c) If they have replied that the aspirant is not sufficiently known, the religious Superior should supply this by another accurate investigation and a trustworthy report; but if they have replied nothing, the Superior making the request should inform the Holy See concerning the response not received (can. 545, § 3).

d) In their testimonial letters, after they have instituted a diligent investigation, even through secret information, they must report, their conscience being gravely burdened concerning the truth of the things set forth, about the aspirant's birth, morals, talent, life, reputation, condition, knowledge; whether he has been investigated, entangled by some censure, irregularity, or other canonical impediment; whether his own family needs his help; and finally, if there is question of those who have been in a Seminary, college, or in the postulancy or novitiate of another religion, for what cause they were dismissed or departed of their own accord (can. 545, § 4). His own family, that is, parents, grandfather, and grandmother (cf. can. 552, 2nd), likewise brothers and sisters according to the norm of the things said on p. 816.

All who have received the aforesaid information are held by a strict obligation of preserving secrecy concerning the information had and the persons who gave it (can. 546).

d) In monasteries of nuns, the postulant should bring the dowry established in the constitutions or determined by legitimate custom (can. 547, § 1); wherefore the statutes of canons 547-551 should be observed. In religions of simple vows, as regards the dowry of religious women, the constitutions must be followed (can. 547, § 3).

e) The Abbess or Superior of religious women, even exempt, must inform the local Ordinary at least two months before the next admission to the novitiate and to profession, whether temporary or perpetual, solemn or simple. The local Ordinary, or, if he is absent or impeded, the priest deputed by him, should diligently and gratuitously investigate the will of the aspirant at least thirty days before the novitiate and before profession, as above, but not entering the enclosure, as to whether she has been forced or seduced, and whether she knows what she is doing; and if it is plainly established concerning her pious and free will, then the aspirant can be admitted to the novitiate or the novice to profession (can. 552).

¹ Holy Office, 3 February 1898, ad I (Collectanea, n. 1990).

² Cf. Holy Office, 8 March 1882 (Collectanea, n. 1566).

³ These things do not seem to regard those who have been ordained by title of mission according to the norm of can. 981, because common law is not customarily called an institute of the Holy See.

⁴ More probably it is required that the alumnus or girl was in a religious institute, that is, in such an institute in which students are instructed for the priesthood or for religious life or at least also for these; for can. 544, § 3 corresponds to the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of Religious, 5 April 1910 and 4 January 1910, where there is discussion only of institutes of this kind. Hence if someone has been both in a Seminary or college and in the postulancy or novitiate of another religion, testimonials are required both from the Rector of the Seminary or college and from the major Superior of the religion.

II. Formation of novices.

1. Beginning of the novitiate. The novitiate begins with reception of the habit, or in another manner prescribed in the constitutions (can. 553).

2. House of the novitiate; cf. can. 554.

3. Requisites for the validity of the novitiate. Besides those things which can. 542, 1st (n. 1224) and can. 543 (p. 816) enumerate for the validity of the novitiate, the novitiate, in order to be valid, must be completed: 1st, after at least the completed fifteenth year of age; 2nd, through an entire and continuous year; 3rd, in the house of the novitiate (can. 555, § 1). If a longer time is prescribed in the constitutions for the novitiate, that is not required for the validity of profession, unless something else is expressly said in those constitutions (can. 555, § 2).¹

Note 1. One who begins the novitiate on 29 September cannot emit profession except on 30 September of the following year, because the beginning of the novitiate does not fall, or at least is not considered to fall, at the beginning of the day, that is, at midnight of the day 29 September (can. 34, § 3, 3rd).² Nevertheless one who in a leap year begins the novitiate on 29 February can emit profession on 1 March of the following year (can. 34, § 3, 4th).

Note 2. The novitiate is interrupted, so that it must be begun and completed anew, if the novice, dismissed by the Superior, has gone out from the house; or has deserted the house without his permission, not intending to return; or has remained outside the house, even intending to return, beyond thirty days, whether continuous or not continuous, for any cause whatsoever, even with the permission of the Superiors (can. 556, § 1). If the novice has remained outside the enclosure of the house beyond fifteen but not beyond thirty days, even non-continuous, by permission of the Superior or compelled by force, under the obedience of the Superior, for the validity of the novitiate it is necessary and sufficient to supply the days passed in this way; if not beyond fifteen days, the supplement can be prescribed by the Superiors, but is not necessary for validity (can. 556, § 2). Superiors should not grant permission of remaining outside the enclosure of the novitiate except for a just and grave cause (can. 556, § 3). If a novice is transferred by the Superiors into another house of novitiate of the same religion, the novitiate is not interrupted (can. 556, § 4). But if by the transfer it is brought about that the novice remains beyond thirty days, whether continuous or not continuous, outside the house of novitiate, the novitiate is interrupted.

4. The master of novices and his associate; let canons 559-565 be compared.

5. Confessors of novices; cf. the tract on Penance.

¹ Cf. Sacred Congregation of Religious, 3 November 1921 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1921, p. 539), where there is discussion of works to be performed in the second year of novitiate.

² Cf. Pontifical Commission, 12 November 1922, under 2nd (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1922, p. 661).

III. Obligations of novices.

1. They are held to observe the rules established for them; likewise to obey the Master and the Superior (can. 561, § 2).

2. In monasteries of nuns they are held by the law of enclosure. For if this has force for postulants (can. 540, § 3), a fortiori it has force for novices.

3. In the course of the novitiate, if a novice has renounced his benefices or goods in any way, or has obligated the same, the renunciation or obligation is not only illicit, but null by the law itself (can. 568). Except compensation for the expenses of postulancy and novitiate (can. 570, § 1). The law does not regard postulants, as it seems, concerning whom there is no discussion.

4. At the end of the novitiate, before first profession, a novice must: 1st, cede the administration of his goods to whomever he wishes; 2nd, freely dispose concerning the use and usufruct of his goods, unless nevertheless the constitutions provide otherwise (can. 569, § 1). Now "Constitutions approved before the promulgation of the Code are to be observed whether they take away from novices the right of disposing concerning the use and usufruct of their goods, or whether they limit or predetermine this right."¹ If the said cession and disposition has been omitted because of lack of goods and these later supervene, or if it has been made and afterwards other goods by any title come to him, it should be made or repeated according to the norms established in § 1, notwithstanding simple profession already emitted (can. 569, § 2). Now:

a) The prescribed cession and disposition also regard novices of Orders.

b) The cession, and likewise, unless the constitutions provide otherwise, the disposition regarding use and usufruct, must regard the whole time during which the novice will be bound by simple vows (can. 569, § 1); hence it persists until death if he never emits solemn vows. With regard to those who will emit solemn vows, the disposition made ceases after the renunciation of goods prescribed by can. 581, § 1, and the solemn profession following it.

c) It is not required that the disposition have force before the law;² nevertheless it is expedient that it be made in writing, with the date and signature of the novice and of the major Superior added.

5. A novice in a religious Congregation before profession of temporary vows should freely make a testament concerning present goods or goods perhaps to come (can. 569, § 3). Now the canon regards only religious Congregations, not Orders. The reason is that members of an Order renounce goods before solemn profession (can. 581, § 1). It is disputed whether it regards members of an Order who never emit solemn vows.

¹ Pontifical Commission, 13 July 1930, ad I (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1930, p. 365).

² Pontifical Commission, 16 October 1919 (Acta Apostolicae Sedis 1919, p. 478); cf. Norms of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, n. 118 (28 June 1901).

IV. End of the novitiate. When the novitiate has been completed, if the novice is judged suitable, he should be admitted to profession; otherwise he should be dismissed. If doubt remains whether he is suitable, the time of probation can be extended by the major Superiors, but not beyond six months (can. 571, § 2).

Can others also besides the Supreme Pontiff and Bishops establish laws? - A Cardinal can, by reason of his dignity, make laws in the Church of his Title. C. His quae de Mai. et obed., C. Querel. de Elect., C. of Innocent XII Romanus Pontifex, Sept. 17, 1692. But the College of Cardinals, when the Roman See is vacant, if necessity does not urge, cannot make laws; rather it must immediately apply itself to the nomination of another Pontiff. Clem. 2 de Elect., C. 3 de Elect. in 6; Pius X, C. Vacante Sede, Dec. 25, 1904, t. 1. c. 1-4.

Abbots and exempt Prelates can make laws for their territory, where they exercise quasi-episcopal jurisdiction; for legislative power is joined to jurisdiction. The cathedral chapter, when the See is vacant, can establish laws which would be necessary for various circumstances. For by right it succeeds to the jurisdiction of the Bishop. C. His quae 11, C. Cum olim 14 de Mai. et obed.; L. 104; Lugo Resp. Mor. l. 1. d. 21. n. 5. Chapters or General Congregations and Regular Prelates are able to establish true laws within the limits of their jurisdiction, according to the proper Constitutions of the Order. For they have statutes approved by the Supreme Pontiff, which grant them this faculty. Jurisdiction, namely granted by the Pope, but not by force of the vow, which, since it is personal, gives only the power of imposing precepts, but by no means of establishing law. Elbel 278-280.

Abbesses or Superiors of nuns cannot make laws properly so called, since they are not capable of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Nevertheless they can exact obedience in conscience concerning things commanded, or concerning those things which conduce to the advancement of nuns according to the rules. For they have the right of commanding both from the vow of obedience emitted by the subjects and from the necessity of discipline which must be preserved in the community. Hence novices, although they are not bound to obedience strictly by force of a vow, which they have not emitted, are nevertheless in some way bound to obey by reason of regular discipline. For this reason "abbesses can make precepts for the right governance of the house, and even oblige under grave fault." L. 104. Cf. Schmalz. l. 1. t. 31. n. 38. 39; Elbel 281-284.

Pastors cannot establish laws. The reason is that they do not have jurisdiction in the external forum. Colleges can establish statutes for themselves, which bind their members as agreed compacts. Nevertheless the statutes of chapters in cathedral churches, etc., acquire the force of law from the approval of the Bishop. Bened. XIV De Syn. l. 13. c. 5. n. 1. If Chapters neglect to make their own Statutes, the S. C. C. commands Bishops that they themselves make Constitutions and enjoin them on the Chapter to be observed. Lucidi De Visit. SS. LL. V. 1. C. 3. § 4. n. 146. - E. M.

Who can enter religion? - From the preceding Law, still in force, but to which several other things have been added: all those and only those can enter religion who 1. are their own masters; 2. are not bound to others by some graver obligation; and 3. are not criminals. Those who are not their own masters, but depend on others, cannot validly enter and profess without their consent. But the others validly enter and profess, although illicitly. L. 65; St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 189, a. 5, 6; E. M.; Lugo, Resp. Mor. l. 3, d. 1, d. 21; l. 4, d. 47.

261 bis. You will resolve: From the first head, the following cannot enter religion: those before puberty, because they are subject to parents or guardians as regards the disposition of life; spouses after consummated marriage, unless the other party is guilty of a delict on account of which he or she can licitly be dismissed. Religious profession entered into by a spouse, the other spouse being unwilling, is resolved into a simple vow of chastity from presumption of law, C. 3, 12 de Conv. coniug.

A Bishop already consecrated and even only confirmed cannot enter religion without the license of the Supreme Pontiff, because of the spiritual marriage by which the Bishop is bound to his church. C. Licet de Regular.; C. Inter de Transl. Episcop. - From the second head the following cannot enter: those liable to intricate and litigious accounts, those burdened with debt; those who have seduced a virgin with marriage promised; those who would leave brothers in extreme necessity, parents or unemancipated children in grave necessity. - From the third head those cannot enter whom from public acts it is established have been accused or investigated for crime. C. Cum de omnibus and C. Ad Romanum of Sixtus V; C. In suprema of Clement VIII. - Illegitimates from the same law are admitted validly and licitly. Sixtus V, C. Cum de omnibus, November 26, 1587; Gregory XIV, C. Circumscripta, March 15, 1591; Clement VIII, C. In suprema, April 2, 1862. From Clement VIII, C. Cum ad singularem, March 19, 1603: "If someone exceeding the twenty-fifth year has asked for the regular habit and is without learning, let him be counted only among the number of Conversi." - Lugo, Resp. Mor. l. 3, d. 1; L. 65, 71, 76, 969, 971; St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 185, a. 4; q. 189, a. 5, 7; E. M.

From the Norms of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars, June 23, 1901, art. 61, "without dispensation of the Holy See there cannot be admitted: 1. illegitimates not duly legitimated; 2. those bound by marriage; 3. those more than thirty years old; 4. those less than fifteen years of age; 5. those who in another Institute have emitted perpetual vows, or even temporary vows, while these endure; 6. those burdened with debt which they are not able to pay; 7. those liable to rendering an account, or involved in other secular business, from which the Institute could fear lawsuits and troubles; 8. for Institutes of women, widows." "Furthermore.... The following things, gravely burdening the conscience of Superiors, are to be faithfully observed hereafter by all religious Families of men: "In no way, without special leave of the Apostolic See and under penalty of nullity of profession, are postulants to be received, either to the novitiate or to the emission of vows:

1. those who have been expelled from colleges, even lay ones, because of dishonest morals or because of other crimes;

2. those who have been dismissed for any reason from seminaries and ecclesiastical or religious colleges;

3. those who, whether as professed or as novices, have been dismissed from another Order or religious congregation; or, if professed, have obtained dispensation from vows;

4. those who, already admitted, whether as professed or as novices, into one province of some Order or congregation and dismissed from it, attempt to be received into the same or into another province of the same Order or congregation.

Anything contrary, even things worthy of special mention, notwithstanding." Decree Ecclesia Christi of the S. C. of Religious, September 7, 1909.

The Decree Ecclesia Christi, September 7, 1909, concerning certain postulants not to be admitted into religious families, by another Decree of the S. C. of Religious, January 4, 1910, was extended also to religious families of women, as follows: "And therefore without special leave of the Apostolic See and under penalty of nullity of profession, postulants are not to be received, either to the Novitiate or to the emission of vows:

1. those who, by their own fault, have been expelled from colleges, even lay ones, for a grave cause;

2. those who have been dismissed for any reason from domestic schools in which girls are educated with special care in hope of embracing religious life; or, if professed, have obtained dispensation from vows;

3. those who, already admitted, whether as professed or as novices, into one province of some Order or Congregation and dismissed from it, attempt to be received into the same or another province of the same Order or Congregation. - Anything contrary notwithstanding."

A strict obligation is not had that lyceal studies precede the novitiate, otherwise than primary and gymnasial studies. Yet, for just causes, among clerics pupils who have exceeded the fifteenth year of age will be able to be admitted to the novitiate after the fourth gymnasial year, but on this condition, that after the novitiate they duly complete gymnasial studies before they are admitted to lyceal studies and undergo the final examination. Before the fourth gymnasial year has been completed, it is not lawful to enter the novitiate except by leave of the Apostolic See. S. Congregation of Religious, September 7, 1909; May 31, 1910.

Orientals to be admitted into religious families. "Through the Apostolic Letters Orientalium dignitas Ecclesiarum, given on the day before the Kalends of December of the year 1894, Leo XIII of happy memory commanded as regards the entrance of Orientals into Latin religious Sodalities: 'It will be lawful for no Order or religious Institute of the Latin rite, of either sex, to receive any Oriental among its members who has not first exhibited testimonial letters of his own Ordinary.' "But by the aforesaid prescription there was no derogation from dispositions already long ago established, and especially in the general Convention of this Sacred Congregation held on the day June 1 of the year 1885, by which in individual cases recourse is prescribed to the Apostolic See, or to the S. Congregation de Propaganda Fide for Affairs of the Oriental Rite, to which also belongs the faculty of granting a change of rite either for a time or in perpetuity. "Now, since in these most recent times it has been discovered that not once only Orientals have been received into religious Institutes of the Latin rite with testimonial letters indeed of the Oriental Ordinary, but with the Apostolic See altogether not consulted, this Sacred Congregation judges it opportune to recall to the mind of all Superiors placed over religious Institutes of the Latin rite, of whatever form and of either sex, the obligation by which they are held, namely of consulting this Sacred Congregation in writing before any Oriental is enrolled among their members. "Moreover in the petition the case is to be proposed clearly with all its circumstances; and there must be expressed not only the name, surname, age, rite, and diocese of the postulant, but, if it is a question of a man, it must especially be explained whether he asks to be admitted into an Institute of solemn or simple vows, and whether for the clerical or lay state; for the Pontifical Rescript, if it is favorable, is granted differently according to the diversity of cases." S. C. de Prop. Fid., June 15, 1911, Acta Apostolicae Sedis v. 4, p. 534 f.

262 bis. Note: No one can licitly be admitted to the habit, or to beginning the novitiate, and then to profession, whether in an Institute of men of solemn vows, or in an Institute of men and women of simple vows, but by no means in an Institute of women of solemn vows, without testimonial letters of the Ordinary of origin and of the place in which the postulant has stayed beyond a year after the completed fifteenth year of his age. S. C. on the State of Regulars, January 25, 1848; May 1, 1851; February 25, 1863. The Decree Romani Pontifices, January 25, 1848, is to be read publicly each year on January 1. The Decree Regulari Disciplinae, January 25, 1848, is to be read publicly on January 1 and the first Sunday of July. The Decree Romani Pontifices cannot be derogated except expressly and by name. A dispensation granted to some Institute is not communicable to others.

According to the Norms of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars, art. 57, for Institutes of simple vows, there is required testimony of baptism, confirmation, free status, good morals, Postulancy before the Novitiate, and examination before reception of the habit for Sisters. Besides the examination, from a more recent Decree Postulancy is also required for nuns. Cf. 267, 273. - E. M.

Can children after puberty licitly enter religion against the will of their parents? - R. In the affirmative. The reason is that there is no obligation of obeying parents as regards the election of a state, especially a religious one, because they not only do not have experience, but because of their own interest or worldly affection they are often changed into enemies. The election of the state of children is a matter which already surpasses their education and domestic discipline, in which the authority of parents is contained. The contrary are art. C. I. 221, C. G. 372, 374, and are to be attended to in practice, to avoid grave inconveniences. - "Sanchez, etc., with Suarez, etc., and commonly, say that a son cannot enter religion leaving parents in necessity, whether extreme or grave, even if the son has emitted a vow of religion. But otherwise if the necessity is common, or if they would suffer only some diminution of status." L. 66.

But is a son already professed held to go out in order to help parents pressed by want? In extreme necessity it is certain that he is held. But if the necessity is grave, there is a threefold opinion. The first says he is held by reason of a natural obligation, which is not extinguished by the vow. The second, very probably, says he is held if the necessity precedes profession, otherwise if it follows. For the natural obligation persists in the first case, but in the other cannot arise. The third, more probable, teaches that in such a case the son is not held, nor can he go out without license, whether the necessity of the parents precedes profession or not. The reason is that "he who is already professed in religion is regarded as already almost dead to the world. Hence he ought not, on the occasion of the support of his parents, to go out of the cloister." St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 101, a. 4 ad 4; q. 104, a. 5; q. 189, a. 6. - It is not lawful to desert brothers or sisters in extreme necessity; but it is lawful in grave necessity. There is a much lesser obligation toward brothers than toward parents. Yet someone could, by reason of charity, defer or even omit the religious state in order to help brothers gravely in need. - St. Thomas Quodl. 3, a. 16; Quodl. 10, a. 9; L. 67, 68, 70; l. 2, n. 50; l. 3, n. 335.

Can one burdened with debts enter religion? - R. In the affirmative, if the debts by which someone is burdened are uncertain as regards the person, so that restitution must be made to the poor; for even if it is granted that uncertain debts are owed to the poor or to pious causes by natural law, the matter obtains equivalently according to the mind of the owners if they are remitted so that someone may enter religion, since they are always given to pious causes: indeed nothing is so pious as to dedicate oneself and all one's things to God perpetually. This is commonly still conceded, at least for the internal forum, if the debts are from a purely liberal contract, because in this there is always understood the condition: unless I shall choose a better state.

If it is a question of debts from delict or from an onerous contract, there are three opinions, all probable to St. Alphonsus 71, but the third more probable. The first absolutely denies it, because it is against natural justice to seek a spiritual good with the temporal harm of creditors. The second absolutely affirms it, because "because of money the person of a free man according to Civil Laws is not bound, but only things; because the person of a free man exceeds every estimation of money. Hence he can licitly, his goods having been presented, enter religion, nor is he held to remain in the world so that he may procure means by which to pay the debt." St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 189, a. 6 ad 3. The third affirms that the debtor can enter in the case in which otherwise he must remain in the world for a long time; for then payment would be had as morally impossible. But otherwise if, remaining in the world for a brief time, for example within a year or two years, with danger to the soul excluded, by his industry and labor he would easily pay his debts or a great part of them.

These things are from Natural Law. For Sixtus V, Bull Cum de omnibus, November 26, 1587, rendered those debtors incapable of religion who had squandered their goods, or who must render accounts before they have paid the debts or rendered the accounts themselves. But Clement VIII, C. In suprema, April 2, 1602, did indeed remove that incapacity, but left the prohibition. Yet these things are to be understood: 1. Of those who, remaining in the world, can satisfy creditors; otherwise they would delay uselessly. 2. Of those who are burdened with great debts from their own fault, because the Bull speaks of those burdened by an immense debt, who have squandered their goods. 3. Benedict XIV established that Decrees for religious men also comprehend women, where the cause would be the same. Cf. C. Si datam hominibus. Yet in the present matter the aforesaid Bull is not to be extended to nuns, nor to those burdened with uncertain debts, since in odious matters strict interpretation is always to be applied, and they testify that Sixtus V declared thus by another Decree. 4. Finally the precept is to be understood of accounts to be rendered which are very litigious, intricate, fraudulent, and about to furnish cause for lawsuits; for the Pontiff speaks only of these. - L. 71; Lugo d. 21, n. 61 ff.

From the Norms of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars for modern Institutes of simple vows, those burdened with debt which they are not able to pay cannot be admitted without dispensation of the Holy See, art. 61.

Can a pastor licitly enter religion, the Bishop contradicting? - "It must altogether be affirmed," says St. Alphonsus 74, and the matter is certain from C. Duae sunt leges, caus. 19, q. 5, from the Constitution Ex quo dilectus of Benedict XIV, January 14, 1747, and from St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 189, a. 7. Yet he is held first to warn the Bishop of his purpose, lest the flock be deserted without a guardian. But the Bishop can still legitimately contradict, and even recall a pastor from religion, if the parish would suffer grave detriment. As regards clerics and other beneficiaries, it is likewise certain that Bishops cannot impede their clerics from entering religion, as is contained in C. Clerici, caus. 19, q. 1. Yet a Bishop could well recall his cleric from religion if his entrance would be to the grave detriment of the church to which he had been assigned. Benedict XIV, C. cited; L. 75; l. 6, n. 828. - St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 185, a. 4.

Can a religious pass from his own order to another stricter one? - A religious can well pass from his own order to another stricter one, after license has been sought from his prelate, although denied, from C. Licet 18 de Regular., if nevertheless according to the precept of Urban VIII it has been established that that religion is prepared to receive him. Hence they commonly hand down that the prelate would sin gravely if without just cause he denied the license, because he would inflict grave injustice on the subject by drawing him back from a more perfect state. But in this matter the particular law of each religion is to be attended to. - Trent s. 24, c. 19 de Reg.; L. 73; St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 189, a. 8; Pignatelli, Cons. Can. a. 1, cons. 39; Lugo, Resp. Mor. l. 4, d. 41.

A transfer of this kind by license of Superiors is not opposed to the Decree of the S. C. of Religious, September 7, 1909. Cf. above n. 262. Yet the practice now and the style of the Curia is that license be sought from the S. C. of Religious.

What age is required for beginning the novitiate? - A completed age of fifteen years is required for clerics and of twenty years for lay brothers, from the Decree of Clement VIII and of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars, May 16, 1675. From Trent s. 25, c. 17 de Reg., "a girl who wishes to receive the regular habit is to be more than twelve years old; she is not to receive it before then, nor afterwards is she or another to emit profession, until the Bishop, or, if he is absent or impeded, his vicar, or someone deputed by them at their expense, has diligently examined the will of the virgin, whether she has been forced, whether seduced, whether she knows what she is doing." This twofold examination is grave; nevertheless the omission of only one or the other is not judged grave, nor indeed does the omission of both render the profession invalid. But from the Decree of the S. C. of Religious, January 19, 1909, the examination of the will of individual nuns is to be repeated before the pronouncing of solemn vows, although it had already been made before profession of simple vows. A. A. S. v. 1, p. 233. - But from the Decree of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars, May 23, 1659, nuns ought not to be admitted to the habit before the fifteenth year has been completed. In the Norms n. 61, it is established for modern Institutes that without dispensation of the Holy See those born more than thirty years and those less than fifteen years of age cannot be admitted. - From the Decree of the S. C. of Religious, September 7, 1909, and January 1, 1911, it is established that no youth be admitted to the Novitiate as a Cleric unless he has exceeded the fifteenth year of age; as a Conversus, to Postulancy unless he has exceeded the seventeenth year. Cf. above n. 262 and the following number. - St. Thomas 2. 2, q. 189, a. 5; Quodl. 4, a. 23; Ferraris v. Moniales, a. 1, n. 72; E. M. n. 294.

267 bis. What specifically has been established at present for lay Brothers? - The S. C. of Religious, Decree Sacrosancta Dei Ecclesia, January 1, 1911, established these things, most carefully to be observed by all Religious Families among whom solemn vows are pronounced also by Conversi, namely:

1. To Moderators General there is given the faculty of permitting Provincial Superiors, as often as needed, that they may be able to receive also those youths destined to the duties of Laymen who have scarcely completed the seventeenth year of age, all things to be observed having been observed.

2. No one is to be admitted to the Novitiate who has not completed postulancy for at least two years, or for more if the Constitutions of the Order prescribe a longer experiment, under penalty of invalid profession afterwards.

3. The Novitiate is not to have its beginning before the twenty-first year of age, according to the path of current law; and it is to last one or even two years, according to the Constitutions of the proper Order.

4. When the Novitiate has been completed, and those things which must be observed have been observed, Laymen can be admitted to simple profession of vows, which indeed, perpetual on the part of the one vowing, is to be for the time of six years on the part of the Order.

5. When the six-year period of simple vows has been completed and the thirtieth year of age has been completed, and not before, likewise under penalty of invalidity, and with the things to be observed likewise having been observed, Laymen will be able to pronounce solemn vows.

6. Those things which in the preceding articles regard the profession of simple and solemn vows are also to be observed as regards Laymen now living in Monasteries, who have not yet pronounced solemn profession.

It is to be hoped that this rather long space of nine years will give both Superiors and candidates the opportunity of examining, on the one hand, the will, and on the other, the institute of life, for afterwards embracing it solemnly; strengthened in virtue, a man can bring a more mature judgment.

But these things would give some hope of perseverance, though not altogether firm, unless they are accompanied by the following and other cautions and efforts of that kind, which the Apostolic See over the course of the centuries has proclaimed or advised to be used, and which the more observant Religious Families have experienced by praiseworthy custom and happy result.

And first, as regards the reception of Conversi, many equally careful cautions are to be used and inquiries to be made beforehand.... Let a Father be placed over the Postulants whom both age and life have approved.... Let the superior and the Master be wholly with the postulants and novices for spiritual instruction.... Let them explain to them the whole of Christian doctrine ... the obligations of the vows ... of the Rule, of the Constitutions.... Let there be gatherings or discourses to the laymen on stated days ... for which gatherings or discourses the subject is to be not only the catechism, warnings of the spiritual life, the Rule, and explanation of the Constitutions, but also practical norms and examples of modest and moderate courtesy.... Anything contrary notwithstanding, even things worthy of special mention.

What form of admission is to be observed? - Those who are to be admitted to the religious habit must be approved by a twofold scrutiny. They must first be examined and approved by the Provincial and at least three provincial Examiners. The report of this examination and scrutiny and the authentic documents are to be transmitted to the Superior General, who, with the Procurator General and at least two General Examiners, confirms or revokes the approval in the first scrutiny. In both scrutinies secret votes are given. Decree Regulari disciplinae of the S. C. on the State of Regulars, January 25, 1848. "But in order that the Candidate be definitively received to the habit, besides the prescribed law and form, to which absolutely all must conform themselves, those things also will have to be observed which are further prescribed by the Constitutions and Statutes of the respective Order concerning reception to the habit, yet only in that part which is not opposed to this Decree." Decree cited.

But as regards modern Institutes the form is determined in the Norms of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars for Institutes of this kind and in their proper Constitutions. And as regards nuns of solemn vows, their own approved Constitutions also are to be attended to.

268 bis. For how much time must the novitiate last? - Privilege excluded, the novitiate must last for one whole year; otherwise profession is null. Trent s. 25, c. 15 de Reg. As regards a longer duration, the particular constitutions of the various orders and congregations are to be attended to.

From ancient law, the year of novitiate is to be computed from the moment of receiving the habit, or, if reception of the habit is not required in some religion, from the moment of entrance into the novitiate with the intention of remaining there. - The year must, for validity, be complete, so that in a leap year the passage of the day which is to be added must be awaited. Thus the S. C. C. expressly declared. - It must likewise, for validity, be continuous, from a Decree of the S. C. C., which established that a novice who had gone away from the monastery in order to enter another Religion, and after only two hours spent in another convent, repentant of the act, had returned, was held to begin a new year of probation. Ferraris v. Annus prob. n. 25 ff.; E. M.

From ancient law; for at present: "1. The whole year of novitiate, which alone is required for the validity of profession, must hereafter be understood not strictly from hour to hour, but from day to day. The same is to be said of the three whole years of simple vows which must precede the emission of solemn vows. "2. The novitiate is interrupted so that it must be begun again and completed: a) if the novice, dismissed by the Superior, has left the house; b) if without the Superior's license he has deserted the house; c) if for more than thirty days, even with the Superior's license, he has remained outside the enclosure of the novitiate. "3. If the novice, within thirty days, even not continuous, with the license of Superiors, has remained outside the enclosure of the house, although under the obedience of the Superior, it is required for validity, and it is sufficient, to supply the days spent in this way; but Superiors are not to impart this license except for a just and grave cause." S. C. of Religious, May 3, 1914, A. A. S. v. 6, p. 229.

Is the year of probation judged interrupted or suspended on the occasion of military service? - R. "1. Whether the Novitiate of those who are compelled to leave the house of probation because of military service, or called again to the same military service, is to be judged interrupted, so that it must be repeated from the beginning, with no account taken of the time of novitiate already completed; or whether it is to be considered only suspended, so that it must only be completed? "2. Whether military service can be computed as time of novitiate, when it is completed in a place where there exists a house of probation, if the novices remain under the discipline and vigilance of the moderators, and in spare hours stay in the same house of probation and perform all those things which can be reconciled with military service? "R. To the first: In the affirmative to the first part; in the negative to the second, if the novice has actually been assigned to military service beyond thirty complete days.

If within thirty days, these will have to be supplied. And in any case, he cannot be admitted to profession of vows unless he is tested for at least thirty days. - To the second: In the negative." S. C. of Religious, May 3, 1914, A. A. S. v. 6, p. 230. - Lugo, Resp. Mor. l. 3, d. 2; l. 4, d. 2; Sanchez in dec. l. 5, c. 4, nn. 30-35; Lezana, Works t. 4, Cons. 8; Suarez, de Relig. t. 3, l. 5, c. 14, 15; La Croix l. 4, n. 13 ff.; Schmalz. de Reg. 68 ff.; Ferraris l. c. n. 10-34.

Can the time of novitiate be prorogued? - R. In the affirmative, if a legitimate cause is present; otherwise if it is not present. A prorogation of this kind is restricted to a brief time. Thus from Trent s. 25, c. 16 de Reg. and from the Decree and practice of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars, Decree Perpensis temporum, May 3, 1902. - According to the Norms of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars, n. 65, 75, the time of Postulancy and Novitiate cannot be prorogued beyond three months. Ferraris l. c. n. 29 ff.; E. M.

If a novice, after completing the whole year of novitiate, is not admitted to profession, but is dismissed, or himself departs spontaneously, and after a brief delay returns and is admitted, can he profess at once without another new year of novitiate? - R. In the negative in the case of dismissal, from the Decree of the S. C. of Religious, September 7, 1909. - In the case of spontaneous departure, R. In the affirmative, provided the condition of the person and of the religion has not been changed. S. C. C., February 27, 1597, and February 12, 1598. The first reason is that here he has already been tested for a whole year, which alone is required by Trent. The second reason is that since judgment for profession must be taken from probation, if after probation a change is made, the preceding probation will serve little or nothing for making that judgment. - And from the Decree of the S. C. of Religious, April 5, 1910, it is necessary that accurate and secret information under faith of oath be had by the Moderators of the religious Institute, if such a Novice who spontaneously departed will enter another Institute. - Ferraris l. c. n. 20 ff.; v. Professio religiosa n. 64; Lugo, Resp. Mor. l. 4, d. 1.

Does one who is dismissed after profession and afterwards is received again need a new novitiate? - R. In the affirmative. The reason is that the first novitiate has already obtained its whole effect through profession, to which it was ordered. Lugo, Resp. Mor. l. 4, d. 1, n. 3. - But at present after the Decree of the S. C. of Religious, September 7, 1909, he cannot be admitted.

In what place and in what habit is the novitiate to be carried out? - The novitiate cannot be done outside the monastery; indeed it must be carried out in the monastery destined for it. Thus from the Decree of Clement VIII, June 20, 1599, and several other Decrees and the practice of the S. C. Ferraris v. Annus prob. n. 36 ff. - By common law, the novitiate must be carried out in the habit of the religion which the novice intends to profess. Trent s. 25, c. 15 de Reg. And this is required even under penalty of nullity, according to the S. C. Bishops and Regulars. Ferraris v. Habitus n. 2, 3; v. Moniales a. 1, n. 76 ff.; v. Novitiatus n. 4. - C. Is qui de Regul. in 6; Clement VIII, Decree Regularis disciplinae, March 12, 1596; Benedict XIV, C. Si datam § 6; Lucidi c. 4, n. 146; Bizzarri p. 279 ff., ed. 1885; Kenrick tr. 8, n. 50; Bouix, de Iure Regular. p. 4, s. 1, c. 5, par. II, 5; Benedict XIV, Quaest. Can. et Mor. Quaest. 220; Norms cited 76.

Clerics regular are not comprehended in the Decrees of Clement VIII concerning novices to be admitted only in certain monasteries designated by the Apostolic See. Urban VIII, C. Decet Romanum, November 17, 1634. E. M.

During the time of Novitiate, Novices must give attention to spiritual exercises. Norms cited, art. 74. - The religious instruction of Novices can be taken from the Constitution Quum ad Regularem of Clement VIII, March 19, 1603.

At present literary studies are not altogether to be omitted. Novices privately will dedicate one hour on individual days, feast days only excepted, to studies. The Master of Novices or Vice-Master, or one of the professors of humane letters who lives in the house or nearby, will be in charge of studies. It will be theirs to instruct three times in the week for one hour. They will also be able to have written or extemporaneous exercises, and, conversing among themselves, can sometimes use the Latin language. He who is in charge of this school is to note in writing the diligence and progress of each Novice and send this writing to the Superior General or Provincial. Decree Ad explorandum of the S. C. of Religious, August 27, 1910. - From the Norms art. 72, in the second year of Novitiate, "under the direction and vigilance of the mistress, the novices will be able moderately to devote themselves to studies or other works of the Institute; but in the house itself of the novitiate, and not outside, unless grave reasons persuade otherwise."

From the cited Norms, Postulancy precedes the Novitiate, art. 63 ff. Postulancy for lay Brothers is prescribed by the Decree reported above n. 267 bis. Likewise Postulancy is prescribed by the following Decree in monasteries of solemn vows for nuns. "Any Postulant in Monasteries of solemn vows and papal enclosure can be admitted without previous leave of the Holy See, yet with the other things to be observed by law being observed. "2. Any Postulant, before she enters the Novitiate, will have to be tested for the time and according to the manner prescribed in the proper Constitutions of each Monastery. "3. If nothing is established in these concerning these matters, then the probation is to be made at least for six months, yet in such a way that Postulants, admitted within the enclosure of the Monastery for the sake of probation, use a garment of modest color, different from the habit of the Order, which they are not to put on unless when they are about to begin the Novitiate properly so called." S. C. of Religious, August 2, 1912.

Whether, when, and how must a novice or novice-woman dispose of his or her goods? - A novice or novice-woman, excepting the Society of Jesus, must renounce his or her goods within the two months immediately before profession of solemn vows, not before, and with the license of the Bishop or his vicar. Trent s. 25, c. 16 de Reg.; S. C. Regular Discipline, August 1, 1862; S. C. Bishops and Regulars, May 3, 1902. - But before profession of simple vows they must cede, for the time in which they remain in the same profession of simple vows, the administration, usufruct, and use to whomever they please, and also to their order or monastery, if they so wish. S. C. Regulars, June 12, 1858; S. C. Bishops and Regulars, May 3, 1902.

Lugo, Resp. Mor. l. 4, d. 44, 45.

In the more recent Norms of the Sacred Congregation for more recent Institutes it is said, the ancient formula unchanged: "Before the first emission of vows they must dispose of the use and usufruct of the revenues or fruits of their goods, in whatever way they please, and also, if they judge it so according to their own choice, in favor of their Institute. They must also before first vows cede the administration of their goods to the person or persons well-liked by them; and, if they freely wish, also to their own Institute, having been forewarned and accepting. - A change of the aforesaid disposition and cession can be made with the license of the Moderatrix General. In order that perpetually professed Sisters may licitly divest themselves of the radical dominion of their goods by acts inter vivos, the license of the Apostolic See is required. - It is fitting that, before they first emit temporary vows, they dispose entirely freely by testament of their present and future goods. - Professed Sisters, both for making and for changing a testament, need leave of the Apostolic See, or in an urgent case of the Ordinary, or of the Superiorissa General and even local, if it cannot be done otherwise." Norms 115, 117, 120-122.

But in order that a renunciation of this kind be valid in conscience, there is no need of the solemnities of civil law. L. l. 3, n. 935; Ferraris v. Annus probat. n. 53; v. Novitius n. 30 ff.; v. Moniales n. 98 ff.; E. M.

The dowry of a deceased nun, the three-year period of simple vows not yet completed, according to the norm of the Decree of the S. C. Bishops and Regulars, May 3, 1902, passes

Is a novice held to regular discipline? - The Rules and precepts of the order do not of themselves oblige novices. For Novices have not yet professed the Rule, and are only in the way of probation. C. Ad Apostolicam 16 de Regular. But although the prelate cannot command a novice by reason of vows, as is clear, nevertheless he can command by reason of the power which any superior naturally has in any community, and by reason of ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the novice. C. Recolentes de statu monachor. Hence several infer that he can bind novices by precepts under sin and under censures, and reserve cases with respect to them. But several other grave theologians teach the contrary as regards this last point, namely that novices, without license of the prelates of the order, can validly confess to any Confessor approved by the Ordinary of the place for seculars, and be absolved by him, even from cases reserved in the religion. But generally novices enjoy all privileges, indulgences, protection of the canon, etc., which the professed of the order which they intend to embrace enjoy; for from R. I. 55 in 6: "He who feels the burden ought also to feel the advantage." Schmalz. tit. de Regular. n. 85 ff.; Ferraris v. Novitiatus n. 13-16, 20, 21.

Only the Master of Novices hears the Confessions of these. Yet it is lawful for the Superior, even the local one, to hear them once or twice in the year. Thus from the Constitution Quum ad Regularem of Clement VIII, March 19, 1603, apud Bizzarri, Collection, at the end. But at present Novices, as all other Religious, can freely confess to any Confessor approved by the Ordinary of the place. S. C. of Religious, May 3, 1914, A. A. S. v. 6, p. 232.

What of Regulars? - The things which precede, with special indult excluded, have place also in pious Congregations in which only simple vows are pronounced. S. C. EE. et RR., May 6, 1864; A. S. S., vol. 1, p. 366. Yet they are to be proposed by their own moderators. Leo XIII, Bull Conditae, § VI.

But Regulars of solemn vows from C. Cum nullus 3, § fin., de Temp. ord. in 6, must receive orders from the Bishop in whose diocese the monastery is where they are then staying. The Sacred Congregation by mandate of Clement VIII decreed that if that Bishop does not have an ordination, then the superior can give dimissorials to his subjects to any other Bishop whatever; nevertheless it is there prescribed to Regulars that they not deliberately defer the ordinations of their subjects to that time when the diocesan Bishop is not going to have an ordination or is going to be absent. And Benedict XIV established that if the diocesan Bishop is absent or is not going to have an ordination at the next legitimate established time, a religious cannot be ordained by another unless he shows an attestation of the vicar general, chancellor, or secretary of the same Bishop; otherwise both the one ordaining and the one thus ordained incur the censures and penalties which they incur who are ordained by some Bishop without dimissorials. Likewise he established that such a Regular must be examined by the ordaining Bishop; and that privileges of some Order, e.g., of the Society of Jesus, Gregory XIII, Sept. 22, 1582, that its religious be ordained by any Bishop, must be by name, not by communication. When the See is vacant, "within a year the Chapter can well grant permission to Regulars bringing dimissorials of their superiors, that they be ordained by some Bishop." L. 788. Yet a Bishop can ordain religious without formal examination by acquiescing in the testimony of their prelates, but he can also well examine them if he wishes, unless they have a special privilege. Benedict XIV, Constitution Impositi nobis, Feb. 27, 1747; Kenrick, tr. 20, n. 26. "Whoever in the City, whether from the secular clergy or from the regular, will be initiated in sacred orders, all without anyone excepted, every contrary privilege having been extinguished, shall undergo the test of doctrine in the Curia of Our Cardinal Vicar." Pius X, Motu Proprio Sacros. Trid. Syn., July 16, 1905.

From the aforesaid Motu Proprio of Pius X Sacros. Trid. Syn., July 16, 1905, "whoever from the number of ordinands shall have obtained a degree in Theology in some Pontifical University is decreed exempt from undergoing the test about theological matter." "By Motu Proprio we will and command that in Italy and the Islands subject to Italian dominion, all Religious, whether belonging to Institutes of simple vows or to those of solemn vows, are not to be promoted to sacred Orders before they have been proved suitable by the Bishop of the place through a diligent examination of doctrine; with any contrary privilege removed for this effect alone, even one worthy of most special and individual mention, and with any contrary custom abrogated, even centenary and immemorial, which we also prohibit from being introduced in the future." Pius X, March 19, 1906. This privilege of receiving orders without previous examination, exclusively proper to the Society of Jesus, therefore was revoked for Italy. - Constitution Pium of Gregory XIII; Constitution Quantum of Paul V.

Regulars of religious orders in which solemn vows are emitted, during the triennium of simple vows, can be ordained by the Ordinary of the place; yet during that triennium after the novitiate and before solemn profession, it is not lawful to grant them dimissorials except for first tonsure and minor orders. S. C. super Stat. Regul., June 12, 1858; S. C. EE. et RR., Jan. 20, 1860; A. S. S., vol. 1, p. 358 ff.

Whether novices are to be ordained by the Bishop of the place of novitiate, or by the Bishop of origin or domicile? - Suarez and Henriquez hold that they are to be ordained by the Bishop of origin or domicile. Sanchez and Delbene judge that they can well be ordained by the Bishop of the place where the novitiate is. "Each opinion is probable..., provided the novice has already remained in the novitiate for a notable time; and takes an oath there of remaining perpetually, insofar as it is in him." L. 765. - Benedict XIII, Constitution In suprema, Sept. 23, 1724; Benedict XIV, Constitution Impositi nobis, 1747, Inst. 23, n. 8; L. 768, 788, 792; A. S. S., vol. 23, p. 629 ff.; E. M.

“The mind of the Sacred Congregation is that henceforth the year of probation or novitiate and solemn profession be made in monasteries designated for the novitiate according to the form of the Constitution of Clement VIII Regularis disciplinae restitutioni…in such a way that, according to the prescription of the Council of Trent, Session 25, ch. 16, De Regularibus, when the time of the novitiate has been completed, Superiors shall admit to profession the novices whom they have found suitable, or shall eject them from the monastery.” Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, 12 July 1793. On 19 September 1686, moreover, the Sacred Congregation had declared null any vestition and profession made in a convent not designated for the novitiate, adding that “the year of probation is to be computed from the day of arrival at the lawful place of novitiate.” Bizzarri, Collect., pp. 279 ff.

1. Caius, a novice, having obtained dismissal, put off the habit and the intention of remaining in religion. But at night, while still sleeping in the monastery, led by repentance, he asked again to be admitted into religion, which he immediately obtained.

Question. Was the novitiate interrupted in the case?

R. Many deny this because of the brevity of the time and the smallness of the matter; others more probably affirm it, because the continuity of the annual time according to the Council of Trent is no longer had. La Croix, bk. 4, n. 18. “But if Caius was not dismissed, although, having put off the habit and the intention of remaining, he hid in the monastery while awaiting an opportunity of going out, Suarez and Castropalaus rightly say against Diana that no interruption was made; as also not then, if the superior had wished first to dismiss him clothed in secular dress. For in these cases he is judged still to have remained in the order, since he was not dismissed by the will of the superiors; and at least by this there is not judged to be a full interruption, unless it was at the same time completed by actual departure.” Thus La Croix, loc. cit., n. 20.

And Ferraris, v. Annus probationis, n. 10 ff.: “The year of probation or novitiate ought to be continuous, so that a novice interrupting the year of probation with the intention of deserting the religion, and going out, although for only two hours, is bound to begin the year of novitiate anew from the Decree of S. C. C. ... If, however, says Fagnanus, the novice had not gone out from the monastery, but with the intention of fleeing had hidden for a little while within the cloister, the year of probation would not on that account be judged interrupted. ... Indeed the year of novitiate is not interrupted even if the novice, retaining the habit, goes out secretly for the sake of hiding himself, provided that he has the intention of returning. And concerning one who remained for the space of twenty hours outside the monastery without the habit, S. C. EE. et RR., 11 August 1626, declared that it could be tolerated concerning departure with the habit and with the intention of returning.” — I. M. 268, 269.

2. A certain novice, after nine months of novitiate, from the error of a physician thinking that he was laboring under a grave infirmity which rendered him unfit for the ministries and discipline of religion, was dismissed by the superiors. Nevertheless, a more accurate examination being applied, the error of the former physician appeared, and the young man was free from suspicion of such a disease; and therefore after six days he was again admitted to the novitiate.

Question. Was the novitiate interrupted in the case?

R. In the affirmative. For there is no doubt that interruption of the novitiate for six days interrupts the required continuation of the novitiate. It is added that, in the case, although from a false cause, that is, from the physician’s error, the novice was truly dismissed by the superiors, and the dismissal was accepted by the novice, and therefore the novice went out from the religion. Wherefore, the dismissal given and accepted in the case, and the departure of the novice standing, the novitiate was altogether interrupted. Hence the aforesaid novice, having again entered religion, will not be able to be admitted to profession after three months; but it is necessary that he again begin the novitiate and complete an entire year of novitiate. Lugo, Resp. Mor., bk. 4, d. 3; I. M. 269.

3. Benedictus, after six months of novitiate, is compelled to depart from religion because of military service. Three years having been spent in the military in a very praiseworthy manner, the master of novices judges that Benedictus can be admitted to vows after another six months have elapsed, since, he says, with that necessity standing of a wholly involuntary departure, the year of novitiate has not been morally interrupted.

Question. What is to be said in the case?

R. It does not seem that the master of novices judges rightly. For although the departure of Benedictus was altogether necessary and compelled, and Benedictus conducted himself well and laudably during the whole three years of military service, nevertheless the year of novitiate is truly interrupted, and the novitiate is at present to be continued for an entire year. The reason is first, because that new condition of Benedictus in military service renders him altogether secular, and therefore the novitiate is altogether interrupted. For as surely in that new condition of a soldier the novitiate does not endure, nor is it continued, so neither consequently, with this new condition and notable change of state standing, can the novitiate afterwards be continued; rather it must be begun anew. Moreover, the space of three years is altogether notable, and morally speaking it truly cannot be said that the former six months of novitiate are continued with the later six months, that notable intervening space of time having elapsed. And each reason holds even if the military service had lasted for only one year. Likewise each reason remains wholly intact, although the departure in the case was not voluntary, and although Benedictus conducted himself very praiseworthily.

Indeed, from the common opinion, even a much shorter time in the present matter is held to be notable and sufficient for interruption of the novitiate. And thus Cardinal Lugo, Resp. Mor., bk. 3, d. 2, n. 3, says: “although some judge that a brief interruption does no harm, nevertheless Suarez and Sanchez reject this, and in our case the matter is beyond controversy, since the interruption was for seven days, which is judged a small interruption by no one.” And the same Cardinal Lugo, loc. cit., bk. 4, d. 2, n. 1, speaking of an interruption of six days, says, “there seems no doubt that in every opinion it interrupts the required continuation.” The resolution of the case set forth can be confirmed from the resolution to the fifth doubt of the following case proposed by the praised Cardinal Lugo, loc. cit., bk. 3, d. 2.

4. “A certain novice, after 21 days from his entrance, having left the habit, departed with the intention of not returning; but when seven days had elapsed he returned, and, having again obtained the habit, pursued the novitiate. And when eleven months and ten days had elapsed, which with those 21 days made a whole year, in good faith he emitted profession, and afterwards remained in the order for fifteen other years. ... It was asked: 1. Whether the profession was valid? — 2. Whether at least afterwards tacit profession intervened? — 3. Since he doubts that the convent will not now easily give new consent, whether, without new consent being required, he can now ratify the first profession at least before the prelate and witnesses? — 4. What finally shall he do, so that he may profess validly? — 5. Whether for this it is necessary to put forward again an entire year of probation, or whether without a new year of novitiate the prior profession can be ratified immediately?

To the first. The response was that that profession without doubt was invalid ... since the interruption of the novitiate was for seven days, which is judged a small interruption by no one.

To the second. It also seems certain that that profession was not yet healed and made valid, because for the value of profession the positive consent of the one professing is required; for this it is necessary either that the one professing know the defect of the profession and will to bind himself anew, or at least that he have a conditioned will, by which he says: if perhaps I am not truly professed, from now I will to bind myself anew. However, mere perseverance in religion, and the exercise of acts which professed do, does not suffice; for one who thinks that he is professed, by persevering in religion, does not will to profess, but to fulfill the profession which he thinks he has emitted.

To the third. Although Suarez says that in this case new consent is required on the part of the religion, knowing that the prior acceptance was invalid, which also Sanchez followed and confesses to be more probable, nevertheless the same Sanchez says that it is safe and probable that new knowledge and consent are not required on the part of the prelate or convent, as long as its prior consent was not revoked. ... And it seems to be gathered from the Council of Trent, sess. 25, c. 19, de Reg., where after five years a protest against profession is not admitted, because at that time it is supposed to have been ratified, and therefore by the consent of the one professing alone, even without any new acceptance standing on the part of the religion. Therefore the religious in our case could embrace this opinion; this indeed would proceed well insofar as only the revalidation of profession is considered. Yet it can with difficulty be sustained in order to the novitiate, or to supplying a part of it, as will be clear from what is to be said.

To the fourth. It is clear from what has been said that this religious, by embracing this last opinion, can ratify the profession either alone or before the prelate or some witness; which ratification, as Suarez notes, ought to be made by some external sign, explicitly, or at least implicitly, signifying the will to bind himself, such as remaining in the habit and obedience with the intention of binding himself, which permanence endures for the time required for inducing tacit profession. ... Or, if according to the other opinion he wishes to have new consent of the prelate and convent, he may secretly disclose the whole matter to the prelate, and the prelate, the name of the petitioner being kept silent, may propose it to the convent; or he may seek a dispensation from the Pontiff for ratifying the profession. ... These things, however, proceed insofar as the discussion is about the revalidation of profession. But in our case there is a peculiar difficulty concerning the time of probation, as will be able to be clear from the response to the fifth point.

To the fifth. Therefore concerning repeating the novitiate it must be known that some think that the entire year of novitiate ought to be repeated, because the prior novitiate was morally interrupted by the invalid profession. Once it had been made, that religious already thought himself professed, and therefore he was not in probation; for probation requires the liberty of remaining or departing, which liberty he did not have while thinking himself professed. And although afterwards, when the defect of profession has become known, he begins now to have liberty and is constituted again in the state of novice, nevertheless this time is not continued with the prior novitiate, which was interrupted by the profession thought valid. Since therefore the year of probation ought to be continuous, the consequence is that an entire continuous year of probation ought to be made anew. Thus Suarez. He thinks it probable, however, that the preceding time can be counted, the days which are lacking to the year being afterwards added, because a moral interruption does not seem to occur, since the state and religious habit were always continued. ... He warns, however, that it is necessary that the defect of the past profession be known to the prelate himself and to others to whom it pertains to admit to profession, and this before the time of novitiate begins to be continued. ... For the same knowledge is required on the part of each, so that the novice may prove the religion, and so that the religion itself may be able to prove the novice.

Yet it does not easily appear how consistently this was said by Father Suarez, who, as a reason of doubting against the obligation of manifesting it to the religion, objects the Tridentine Decree (sess. 25, c. 19, de Reg., in which it is established that those are not to be heard who after five years allege the nullity of their profession because of force or fear, or because of defect of age, or something similar), in which, without a preceding manifestation of this kind, the profession is supposed to have been validly ratified in the subsequent five years. Yet to this objection he confesses that in that Decree the discussion is about alleged nullity of profession made through force and fear, or before due age, or something similar, that is, such causes that afterwards the profession could be tacitly ratified by the will of the religious himself, without new consent of the religion. And therefore our case is not comprehended, in which knowledge and will on the part of the religion itself were necessary, except only with a certain accommodation, so that even in these cases the religious is not heard after five years, except when the presumption of ratified profession ceases on the part of the religious and also on the part of the religion; or certainly he is not heard unless he wishes to prove that the profession could not have been ratified during that time, from whatever source this impossibility proceeded. And thus it seems to me that one must consistently speak.” Lugo, loc. cit.

It must be noted here: 1. that Suarez, tom. 3, de Relig., bk. 7, c. 1, n. 20, requires on the part of the monastery new knowledge and consent for accepting the ratification of invalid profession, precisely because he is speaking of profession invalid from a defect holding on the part of the religious professing and of the religion itself, namely when the year of probation was lacking. But when the defect holds only on the part of the one professing, and especially when the defect was because of fear, he expressly admits, nn. 6 ff., that new consent is not required on the part of the religion, because the prior consent always remains as long as it is not revoked. Cf. Lugo, Resp. Mor., bk. 3, d. 16, n. 21.

2. Although some essential thing is lacking for the validity of profession, nevertheless if during the whole immediately following five years the professed, knowingly and willingly, did not protest, from Trent, sess. 25, c. 19, de Reg., he is presumed to have had the profession ratified. He is presumed, namely by a presumption of law and concerning law, Benedict XIV, Constitution Si datam. But in the internal forum the truth is to be inspected. Suarez, de Relig., tom. 3, bk. 7, c. 4, n. 6. For the Church cannot supply consent. Fagnanus on c. Si quis, n. 32, de Regul.

3. At present, for validly emitting solemn vows after simple vows, express profession is required; and therefore tacit profession has been altogether abrogated.

4. As regards the consent of the monastery at present, from the Decree of Pius IX, Regulari disciplinae, 25 January 1848, the conventual Chapter of the Convent or House must be convoked, “so that the capitulars may declare by secret votes whether the novice can be admitted to profession.” Then an examination must be made by the Provincial and by at least three Provincial examiners, that “they may define whether the novice is furnished with the necessary qualities so that he can safely be admitted to profession.” And the Superior General “can never permit the profession of a novice who has been rejected by the Provincial examiners.” Moreover, from the Decree of the same Pius IX, 7 February 1862, where there is question of admission to solemn profession, in the aforesaid Chapter those professed of simple vows do not have a voice. And “for admission to solemn vows after the completion of the three years of simple vows, the conventual Chapter indeed must be heard for the instruction of the mind of the superiors; but the Superior General, or his subdelegate, by no means will have to stand by the resolution of that Chapter.” I. M. 268, 269, 277, 278.

5. Norbertus committed an occult homicide. Sincerely converted to God, he enters religion, remaining silent about the homicide committed. Hence, after simple vows have been completed, he then solemnly professes.

Question. Did Norbertus emit profession licitly and validly?

R. Norbertus indeed emitted simple and solemn vows illicitly and invalidly, if he entered a religion in which a homicide previously committed is a substantial impediment according to the Constitutions approved by the Apostolic See, as in fact it is in the Society of Jesus. Exam., c. 2, § 2, 6; Const., pt. 6, c. 3, § 4, and C.

But if he entered another religion in which an impediment of this kind is not had, he professed validly. For Sixtus V, by the Bulls of the year 1587 and of the following year, rendered homicides and others guilty of certain crimes incapable of religious profession. But Clement VIII in the year 1602 moderated the aforesaid Constitutions of Sixtus and restored the value of profession. Wherefore there is no doubt that the profession of Norbertus was valid.

But did Norbertus act illicitly by saying nothing about the occult homicide? He indeed acted illicitly, generally speaking, if some grave detriment could come to the religion from it. He also acted illicitly if, when interrogated by the prelates about impediments of this kind, he said nothing. For then fraud and deceit intervened in a grave matter. For it cannot be denied that homicide according to itself, even if it was not brought into judgment, even if it is altogether occult, is a matter of such moment that the religion could prudently be wholly unwilling to accept one who labors under such a defect. If finally Norbertus was incautiously not interrogated about this matter, perhaps he can be excused, because the aforesaid homicide is not of itself an invalidating impediment impeding entrance into religion and profession in it; and since it is altogether occult, Norbertus is not bound to defame himself, nor does grave damage seem thence to threaten the religion. Nevertheless it must not be denied that, although the homicide is occult, there always remains the danger that sometime it may be manifested with grave disgrace to the religion itself. Wherefore Norbertus will be able to be excused only when the circumstances are such that a danger of this kind is wholly improbable. — Lugo, Resp. Mor., bk. 1, d. 1.

6. Euphemia, from grave fear of her father, well known to her relatives, entered religion and emitted solemn profession. But after some years Euphemia’s father died. Then her relatives, in order that they might obtain the inheritance through her, protested against the validity of the profession. The Ordinary of the place, in order to take cognizance of the litigation that had been moved, sent to Euphemia his Vicar General with two witnesses, so that they might examine her. But Euphemia, lest she stir up scandals, told the Vicar General to abstain from any examination whatever, because she herself of her own accord yielded to any litigation, and “if before,” she said, “I was not a nun, today I wish to be a nun.”

Question. Is the aforesaid ratification of Euphemia’s profession valid?

R. The ratification of Euphemia’s profession could seem invalid, because profession, in order to be made validly, ought to be made into the hands of the abbess or of a prelate able to accept profession. But that ratification of Euphemia was not made into the hand of anyone able to accept it, but before a certain delegated judge, to whom it did not pertain to grant or accept profession. But in the case the ratification of profession did not need for its value some new acceptance, but only the consent of the same nun, wishing validly to profess. The reason is that for the value of the preceding profession, invalid because of fear, only the free consent of the nun herself professing was lacking; when that accedes at any time whatever, the profession becomes valid, even if the ratification is not made with a new solemnity into the hands of the abbess or prelate. Nor does this seem able to be denied, given the doctrine of the Council of Trent, sess. 25, c. 19, de Reg., where, after five years have elapsed from the day of the profession made, a regular alleging the nullity of his profession because of fear is denied a hearing, because, namely, tacit ratification is presumed, and one sufficient for the value of profession, even without new solemnity or acceptance of the prelate or Chapter, whose acceptance had already preceded and was not revoked. How much more, therefore, in the case, will express ratification before a delegated judge and witnesses suffice?

But again the ratification in the case could seem invalid from those words of the nun: “if before I was not a nun, today I wish to be a nun.” For those words do not seem to signify present profession, but the will and intention of ratifying the profession afterwards. But first, those words, in those circumstances in which there was question of examining the nullity of the profession, and in which they were uttered to impede this examination, cannot be understood in another sense except of profession to be revalidated in the present. Besides, those words, “today I wish to be a nun,” signify the intention of ratifying the religious profession in the present. For the word “I wish,” with another verb of the infinitive tense, e.g., “I wish to sell,” “I wish to buy,” can indeed signify only an intention disposed toward doing, but it can also signify the intention of doing in the present; and thus by the aforesaid words, “I wish to sell,” “I wish to buy,” the contract of sale and purchase can well be perfected in the present. Indeed, if to the verb “I wish” there is joined a verb signifying the very exercise and execution of the thing, then it signifies the intention of doing in the present, as, e.g., “I wish to have you as wife,” because for having as wife marriage is necessarily presupposed. But that nun did not say, “I wish to make profession,” but “I wish to be a nun,” for which profession is necessarily presupposed. Nor could it be understood of a novice nun, since the doubt to be examined was not this, but whether she was a professed nun. Accordingly those words, “if before I was not a nun, today I wish to be a nun,” signified nothing else than, “if up to now I have not been professed, now from this moment I wish to be professed.” And that word “today” must also be weighed, opposed to the past time, “if before,” by which the present ratification of the profession is openly manifested, as if she were saying: if up to this day I was not a nun, from this same day henceforth I wish to be a nun; by which locution a present will and consent is certainly signified. — Lugo, Resp. Mor., bk. 3, d. 16; I. M. 277, 278.

7. Brother N., a cleric religious, petitioned for dispensation from the simple vows emitted on 6 March 1887, asserting that, because of weak health, he could not remain in the order. On 4 September 1888, the Sacred Congregation on Regular Discipline benignly granted the Father Minister General for the effect concerning which in the prayers; and he, on 8 September 1888, by these words, “We dispense, and from every bond and obligation of the said vows we restore him free to secular life,” committed the Rescript to execution. Meanwhile, however, on 4 September, Brother N. had written to the Minister General that, deceived by the devil, he had set forth a false cause in the petition, and that therefore he wished to die in the order, and he begged that the dispensation from simple vows not be intimated to him. The Provincial Minister heard his prayers, informed the Minister General of his repentance, and on 6 April 1890, the three years having elapsed, admitted him to solemn vows.

Question. Whether Brother N., notwithstanding his petition of 4 September, really was dispensed from simple vows by the Rescript of 4 September, or by its execution on 8 September 1888, and whether his solemn profession must be judged invalid?

R. In the negative as to each part. S. C. EE. et RR., 15 March 1892; M. E., vol. 7, pt. 2, p. 75.

8. Benedictus, his religious profession having been pronounced invalid, asks doubtfully whether at least now he is still bound by the vow of chastity. For the confessor told him so, namely that the solemn vow of chastity passed into a simple vow of chastity. But Benedictus, not greatly trusting that confessor, goes to another and sets forth his doubt to him, asking its solution.

R. When religious profession has been pronounced invalid, regulars return to their former state, as if profession had never been issued. Wherefore the solemn vow of chastity does not remain, nor does it pass into a simple vow of chastity. How indeed can a vow pass into a simple vow when it never existed? And, if there is question of profession of simple vows, not solemn vows, the vow of chastity simply is not, because it was not, whence that which never began cannot continue. The reason is that the acts of agents do not operate beyond their intention. But a restrictive clause is not accustomed to be added, nor can it be, when religious profession is declared null, e.g., from defect of consent or from defect of prior novitiate; for then no vow was truly present. That clause is accustomed to be added only as regards the vow of chastity, the vow of chastity remaining, when those vows are dispensed; for then the vow was present and consequently can remain. That confessor perhaps made a confusion between dispensation and declaration of invalid profession. I. M. 262.

9. A religious Provincial granted dispensation from simple vows emitted by a certain nun in a community under the rule which that religious himself professed. Hence the Bishop asked whether the said Provincial could validly dispense from the simple vows of the nuns of whom there is question.

R. The preceding case was proposed to the Sacred Congregation, and, a report on it having been made to the Supreme Pontiff, “His Holiness ordered that it be rescribed that the Father Provincial could not dispense from the aforesaid vows, although simple, emitted in the said monastery, according to the things handed down by Benedict XIV in the Bull Convocatis, 27 November 1749, § 32.” Bizzarri, Collectan., ed. 1885, p. 133.

Now Benedict XIV, loc. cit., has these things: “As regards vows, let them know that they [the Penitentiaries] must abstain from their commutation in those cases in which there is question of prejudice to a third party. Wherefore in that which pertains to vows, although simple, whether of perseverance, or others customarily emitted in some Congregation or Community and into vows obligatory accepted by a third party, let them not involve themselves.”

Hence it appears that simple vows which are emitted in some Institute or Congregation or House approved by the Holy See are reserved to the same Holy See, because those vows are received by the Institute or by the Congregation or by the House, and they assume the nature of a contract and reciprocal obligation. Whence dispensation of those vows introduces prejudice to a third party, and therefore is to be granted only by the Supreme Pontiff.

1156. • Novitiate is a mutual experiment, by which Religion, on the one side, tries the morals and qualities of the novice, so that it may see whether it is expedient to admit or reject him; and the novice, on the other side, tries the austerities and Statutes of Religion, and his own disposition, so that he may see whether it is expedient for him to profess it. - Thus Billuart.²

1157. Questions. - Query 1° Who are not to be admitted into the Novitiate?

Resp. 1° On account of defect of mind, those who are not masters of themselves, as is clear of itself.

2° On account of defect of liberty.

a) Slaves, on account of the injury which would be done to masters.

b) Those joined in Matrimony, concerning whom it will be treated in the Treatise on Matrimony.

c) Bishops, even only confirmed, unless with the permission of the Supreme Pontiff, on account of the bond by which they are bound to their Church in perpetuity.³

d) Those professed in some Religion, unless either they are previously dispensed from the vows emitted in it, or they pass to a stricter Religion, that is, such that its actual observance, not merely its primary institution, is stricter. Yet this transition must not be made rashly or from levity, or with grave damage to the Religion to be left. Besides, the permission of the Superior or of the Pope is to be sought, and, in the case of a privilege granted to the Order which is being left for this, it must also be obtained. But transition to a laxer Religion cannot be made except with permission of the Supreme Pontiff; but to an equal one by the same permission, or also, but with just cause, by permission of the Superior.⁴

3° Those whose parents are in grave or extreme necessity would be admitted illicitly, though not invalidly, if they can assist that necessity without being exposed in the world to proximate and grave danger of falling into mortal sin. Only grave necessity of brothers or sisters does not impede admission; indeed dispensation from the vow of entering is also necessary for someone to be able to defer entrance for a long time on account of it. But parents would illicitly enter Religion if they had unemancipated children constituted in grave necessity or destitute of sufficient education.¹

4° By natural law (concerning the dispositions of positive law, see n. 801. q. 4°), those burdened with debts would be admitted illicitly, if they were able to pay them in a notable part at least, and in a short time (say within two years), and without great difficulty or probable danger of sin or of losing vocation. - Thus St. Alphonsus² as more probable, although the opinion which denies absolutely and the opinion which affirms absolutely are also probable to him.

5° Those also would be admitted illicitly and most imprudently whom public acts show to have been accused or investigated before the secular court concerning some graver crime, unless they have been dismissed by the judge as innocent.³

6° Those are not to be admitted whose infirmity is such that they are not equal to bearing the burdens of common life and fulfilling the obligations of the Order.

7° Those would be admitted illicitly to the habit who had not sought and waited for a suitable time (three months) for testimonial letters both from the Ordinary of origin and from the Ordinary of the place in which, after the completion of the fifteenth year of their age, they stayed beyond a year, unless nevertheless the Institute which admits them has been dispensed by a special and non-communicable privilege from the Decree of Jan. 25, 1848,⁴ in which this disposition is contained.

8° The prepubescent (n. 911), against the will of parents or guardians.

1158. • Query 2° Whether clerics, especially those having care of souls, can be admitted to Religion without the permission of their own Ordinary?

Resp. Affirmatively, as is clear both from the unanimous opinion of the Doctors, and especially from the authority of Benedict XIV, Brief Ex quo, Jan. 14, 1747. Yet a priest exercising care of souls must make the Bishop more certain concerning his plan, lest the flock be left without guardianship. Besides, in the case in which the Church which the priest serves would suffer grave damage from his transition to Religion, the Bishop could recall him, even after profession, as is clear from the Brief just cited. - Which of our clerics are not absolutely able to enter Religion, see n. 374. 8°.

2143. • The NOVITIATE is the probation of religious life, or the mutual experiment, by which Religion examines the qualities and disposition of the Novice, and the Novice examines the austerity or observance of the Order. - Hence there are diverse obligations, looking on the one side to the Superiors of the Order who admit novices, but on the other side to the novices themselves who ask to be admitted. Concerning these obligations only a few things are to be said. For it suffices here briefly to explain the common principles of the Law of Regulars, which can be modified by particular Statutes or Indults.¹¹

I. The RIGHT OF ADMITTING novices belongs to the ORDER which one desires to enter, in such a way namely that it is to be exercised not by the Prelate alone, but by the Convent, or capitularly. Now then,

1. As regards MEN, it is of common law that Religions approved by the Holy See, even those not exempt, do not depend on the Bishop in admitting novices; for the faculty of admitting them is contained in the approbation itself.¹²

But in the decree of the Sacred Congregation SUPER STATU REGULARIUM (25 Jan. 1848, Romani Pontifices)¹³ Pius IX established, and indeed under penalty of privation of offices, though not under penalty of nullity of profession, that: "In any Order, Congregation ... whether solemn vows or simple vows are emitted in them, no one be admitted to the habit without testimonial letters both of the Ordinary of origin and also of the Ordinary of the place in which the postulant, after the completion of the fifteenth year of his age, has stayed beyond a year; after they have diligently inquired concerning the qualities of the postulant, the Ordinaries must report concerning his birth, age, morals, life, reputation, condition, education, knowledge." And it is added: "Let the Ordinaries know that their conscience remains burdened concerning the truth of the things set forth, nor is it free to them to deny letters of this kind."

If the Ordinary refuses to testify concerning the qualities of the postulant, either because he does not know him, or because he is impeded by the civil authority, etc., it must be supplied by another accurate information, and the postulants, before they are admitted to the habit, are to remain at least for three months in the Convent, and there they are to be diligently proved. Thus the Sacred Congregation super Statu Relig., on 1 May 1851.¹⁴

But in another Decree of the same day (Regulari disciplinae), the same Supreme Pontiff enacted a twofold law concerning things to be observed: 1. in proving those who ask to be admitted to the Religious habit; 2. in admitting Novices to Profession. - The reason for the decree is that "it seemed necessary that in the admission of Novices to the habit and profession the parts to be conceded should belong not only to inferior Prelates and Superiors general, but also to certain other Religious men ... outstanding in counsel and gravity, so that they might accurately examine the disposition, talent, morals, and other necessary gifts of those who are about to give their name to the religious family," etc.

This second decree was issued only "for Italy and the adjacent islands"; but it furnishes an excellent norm also for other regions.

2. As regards NUNS, the Tridentine law (Sess. 25, de Regul.) continues to have force. - Therefore the Bishop, either by himself or through another, is bound, both before the reception of the habit and before profession, even in exempt monasteries, to examine the will of the virgin: "whether she has been forced, whether she has been seduced, whether she knows what she is doing, whether she is suitable for the monastery, whether this monastery is suitable for her."¹⁵ - This EXAMINATION is indeed commanded under grave obligation, at least before profession. Nevertheless, profession, if the examination has been omitted, is valid.

And here it must be NOTED that the aforesaid examination binds only nuns of solemn vows; but it is expedient that it also be instituted with nuns who pronounce only simple vows, although, at least from positive law, it is not commanded under grave obligation.

Furthermore it must be noted that nuns, although not exempt and professing only simple vows, can never be compelled by the Ordinary to admit some novice; nor can they be compelled to manifest the cause why they have not admitted someone.¹⁶ But they themselves sin, and indeed gravely, if they admit someone evidently not suitable; or if they exclude someone who "has had the conditions required according to the rule of the monastery and Order."

Note. From Trent, loc. cit., novices could be admitted to the habit when the twelfth year had been completed. - But today, from the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars issued on 23 May 1659, it is required that the fifteenth year be completed. Then indeed a name of a saint, not of a gentile woman, must be imposed on a nun ...; likewise, she is to be called by the title of sister, and not lady.¹⁷

2144. • II. NOVICES, before they are admitted to profession, must stand in probation for at least ONE YEAR, and this whole and continuous, and indeed in the religious habit and in houses destined for this, under penalty of nullity of profession. - Thus from Trent.¹⁸

A novice must observe the rule of Religion during the time of probation, at least from decency; he enjoys the privileges of Religion; nor can he be dismissed without a just cause, although he himself always enjoys full liberty of abandoning the proposal begun and returning to the world.¹⁹

Indeed, to provide for his liberty, the Council of Trent, under penalty of anathema, PROHIBITS that he himself, and his parents and relatives, give anything to the monastery, except food and clothing; and at the same time it commands that, to him when he departs, all things which were his be restored. - It further forbids, under penalty of nullity, that after vestition he make any irrevocable renunciation or contract an obligation, even in favor of whatever pious cause and even if an oath has been added, unless with the license of the Bishop, within the two months immediately before profession, and provided that profession follows. - And these things were most wisely established, lest on account of the said renunciations and obligations he be despoiled of his goods, and so be compelled against his will to dwell in the monastery, when, despoiled, only begging would remain for him in the world.²⁰ See more among the Canonists.

2145. • IT IS ASKED. When is the year of probation judged to be INTERRUPTED?

Resp. 1. It is judged to be interrupted chiefly when the novice goes out from the monastery without license, with the intention of not returning, even if he immediately returns, as is clear from a decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Council;²¹ when he is dismissed absolutely by the Superiors and afterward is again admitted; when he departs by private authority so that he may enter another house, or another province, although of the same Order.

Resp. 2. But it is not judged to be interrupted if the novice is sick in the monastery, even for a notable time, although he can by no means take part in the exercises of novices; - if he departs from the monastery compelled by violence; - if, license having been received, he goes aside to parents or others for a brief time for the sake of recovering health or conducting business; - if he is dismissed on account of a false accusation, and afterward, the truth having been known, is again admitted; - if he makes a journey ordered by his Superiors, because then he remains under their dependence.²²

I. Before young men profess a Religion with solemn rite, they ought for an entire year to wear the habit of Religion openly. But this reception of the religious garment must needs be free and not forced. Those who compel girls to this reception sin mortally, and contract excommunication, as Trent, session 25, chapter 18, established. But those who compel male youths by threats sin mortally, but do not incur excommunication. Youths who having been compelled had performed their noviceship, if they freely emitted profession, the noviceship would have been valid. The year of this noviceship ought to be entire, as Trent, session 25, chapter 15, prescribes, continuous and not interrupted. He who for a day should lay aside the habit, or go out of the cloister with the mind of not returning, although after a day he returned, would be said to have interrupted the noviceship; otherwise if for some hours he laid it aside without going out of the monastery.

II. Unfit for this noviceship by the right of nature are the decrepit, the demented, those habitually infirm with a grave disease, slaves truly such with their master resisting, spouses after matrimony consummated without mutual consent, and the professed of another Order without the licence of superiors. By positive right there cannot be received bishops and archbishops, who without the express faculty of the Supreme Pontiff cannot profess a regular Religion. But the rest of ecclesiastics are altogether free, even those assigned to the care of souls, to profess the regular life.

III. The Supreme Pontiffs have published several constitutions in which they determine the conditions of those to be received into the regular Orders. Sixtus V by his constitution Cum de omnibus forbade that men who had passed the sixteenth year be received unless a severe inquisition were sent before concerning their birth, past life, and the quality of their parents. And if it were found that they had perpetrated robberies or other like crimes, or that they were suspected of the same, or condemned, or that it be prudently feared that they will be condemned; if they be burdened with debt above their strength, or bound to render accounts, whence suits and troubles are foreseen — he forbids that they be received, and declares null the profession emitted by them. But Prelates who shall have knowingly received such men he deprives of active and passive voice, of grades and prefectures, and constitutes them unfit for future dignities and grades. This constitution he tempered by another constitution whose beginning is Ad Romanum Pontificem, not as regards the penalties, but as regards the crimes. Gregory XIV by another constitution called Circumspecta partly took away, partly increased the moderations of the Sixtine constitution. And at last Clement VIII reduced profession to the terms of common law: so that unless some impediment of common law stand in the way, the profession is valid. But he left the penalties against transgressors in their force. Now nevertheless by force of the constitution of the same Clement VIII Regulars can receive youths even beyond the nineteenth year, an oath being exacted that they are neither criminal, nor obnoxious to the rendering of accounts, nor guilty of theft or homicide, nor bound by the other impediments recounted in the Sixtine constitution. Prelates who neglect scrutiny of this kind gravely offend and are subject to the penalties of the Sixtine Bull. The profession nevertheless will be valid, provided nothing repugn against common law.

IV. Novices are partakers of all the privileges of Regulars, since they are under the power of the Religion and sustain its burdens. Wherefore they are immune from the jurisdiction of the bishop and enjoy the privilege of the forum. The superiors of the Religion can dispense with them upon the precepts of the Church and upon their vows, which nevertheless they ought to fulfil if they lay aside the habit of Religion. On the contrary if they be absolved from censures, irregularity, or reservation, if they go out of the Religion which they had in good faith embraced, they remain absolved.

V. If in the year of noviceship a novice die, the heir ab intestato succeeds to his goods. Free donations between the living, lucrative contracts, and renunciations of temporal goods, offices, and dignities are void and null, unless they be made with the licence of the bishop or of his Vicar within two months before profession, as Trent determined. Goods which a novice hopes will come to him he can renounce to the Religion which he is about to profess, even while his father lives; otherwise to another determinate person. To the goods which come to a novice by right of blood, unless he himself dispose according to the prescript of Trent before profession, the Order which he has professed succeeds, if it be capable of immovable goods.

D. Bonaventure appends a third mirror, in which his Novices fashion their conduct exactly to it, and the Fathers destined to admit candidates to profession anatomically examine the life of the novices. A work indeed heavenly.

He appends another similar work. On the Institution of Novices; a work truly golden. But he gathers all things more fully discussed in the Rule of Novices.

Again, he appends another little work for nuns, on the perfection of life.

The holy Council of Trent decrees session 25. chapter 15. that the profession is not valid if the novice has not completed 16 years, and has not completed a full year of probation; and this our Rule observes, as S. Bonav. on chapter 2.

The year must be completed in the civil manner, so that if it be a bissextile year, two days count as one.

If a dying novice is admitted to profession by privilege, the parents succeed ab intestato, whatever Diana says with others part. 3. de dub. reg. resol. 17. and part. 5. tract. 5. resol. 139. The reason is, because it is granted only for spiritual solace, therefore it cannot in the external forum prejudice the legitimate heirs, and devolve the inheritance upon the monastery, where there is no right; and equally no debt.

The year must be whole and continuous, not interrupted; Rodriquez tomo 2. cap. 8. et tomo 3. qq. quaest. 15. art. 8. Sa V. Religio n. 9. Azor tract. 1. lib. XII. cap. 2. quaestio 8. Bonacina de claus. quaest. 2. puncto 10. diff. 2. Nauar. de reg. consil. 32. et 33. Henriquez lib. XIII. de excomm. cap. 40. Syluester V. religio 5. q. 4. D. Anton. 3. part. tit. 16. cap. 3. §. 2. Faust. in th. f. lib. V. quaest. 163. et 164. Sanchez lib. 5. cap. 4. Bassaeus V. Religio 3. num. 5.

If a novice runs away for two hours with the habit, and returns, the year is interrupted, according to the decision of the Cardinals in Barbosa de iur. can. lib. 1. c. 42. n. 139. Vecch. disp. 11. dub. 3. num. 6. et 15.

The year must be completed with the habit of Religion, as Sylvester teaches V. Religio 5. quaest. 5. Angel. V. novitius, Vecchius disp. 11. dub. 7. and others in Bassaeus num. 7.

If the novitiate was null, it must be repeated, because there is no cause, and there is no potency toward the past. Thus Nauar. and Rodriquez in Bassaeus num. 9.

Those receiving candidates to profession among the Mendicants, before the year is complete, are excommunicated, and suspended ipso facto from the faculty of admitting to profession chapter Non solum de reg. in 6. the same censure binds those who throughout that whole year impede the novice from freely passing to another order, unless he has made profession being over 16 years of age. In other Orders, however, they sin gravely against the precept of the Council of Trent session 25. de regul. cap. 15.

Superiors can for a cause prolong the profession, by the old law, from which the Tridentine Synod in this does not derogate. It is conceded indeed by Pius V, in Rodriquez in the place cited, and Bassaeus num. 10. provided that within six months he may be hoped to become fit.

NOVICES are not bound by the statutes of Religion, since they are not yet members. See Bassaeus n. 11. and 13.

They enjoy the privilege of Canon and Forum, Sanchez lib. IV. cap. 39. num. 17. et lib. VI. cap. 10. Layman lib. IV. tract. 5. cap. 4. Diana de dub. regular. Resol. 73.

ONE RETURNING to the world does not fall back into the censures or irregularities from which he was absolved in Religion by force of the privileges which Vecch. disp. 9. dub. 25. brings forward. See Suarez tract. 5. in 3. part. disp. 7. sect. 5. num. 35. Diana cit. resol. 44. Bonacina de leg. disp. IV. quaest. 2. puncto 7. §. 4. num. 28. This is the more probable opinion, says Bassaeus num. 16.