The Superior Having Non-Judicial Jurisdiction

I. Superiors enjoying non-judicial jurisdiction are all and only those who possess the power of issuing laws or imposing precepts (canon 2220, § 1). Of this kind is, for example, the Ordinary of the place; but not the Vicar General without a special mandate. Whether or not a religious Superior also enjoys non-judicial jurisdiction depends on the question whether or not he can impose precepts by power of jurisdiction;¹ concerning this compare vol. I, n. 108.

II. Scope of non-judicial jurisdiction. 1. A Superior enjoying non-judicial jurisdiction can attach penalties to a law or precept issued by himself or by his predecessors (canon 2220, § 1). Besides, those who enjoy legislative power can furthermore, within the limits of their jurisdiction and on account of peculiar circumstances, fortify with a fitting penalty both divine law and ecclesiastical law issued by a higher power and in force in the territory, or aggravate the penalty established by law (canon 2221).

2. Even if no penalty has been annexed to a law, nevertheless a legitimate Superior enjoying non-judicial jurisdiction can, even without previous threat of a penalty, punish transgressions of the law with some just penalty if scandal perhaps given or the special gravity of the transgression bears this; otherwise the guilty person cannot be punished unless he has first been warned with the threat of a penalty latae or ferendae sententiae in the case of transgression and nevertheless, with grave fault according to canon 2218, § 2, has violated the law (canon 2222, § 1). The same must be said concerning inflicting a penalty graver than that indicated by statute or threat; namely, it cannot be inflicted except in a case of scandal or special gravity.

3. Even if it is only probable that a delict has been committed, or if the penal action for a certainly committed delict is prescribed (cf. canon 1703), nevertheless the same legitimate Superior has not only the right but also the office of not promoting a cleric concerning whose suitability there is no certainty, and, for avoiding scandal, of prohibiting the cleric the exercise of the sacred ministry or even of removing the same from office according to the norm of law. All these things in the case do not have the character of penalty (canon 2222, § 2). Otherwise, in the case of a merely probable delict (canon 2233, § 1) or of a prescribed penal action (canon 1703), he cannot inflict a penalty.

4. Finally, the same legitimate Superior can apply a penalty: either 1° outside trial by precept according to these words of canon 1933, § 4: Penance, penal remedy, excommunication, suspension, and interdict, provided the delict is certain, can also be inflicted in the manner of a precept outside trial; or 2° in trial by judicial sentence. Moreover, in order that a delict fall under criminal trial, it must be public (canon 1933, § 1); but when one must proceed against clerics according to canons 2168-2194, this is to be done outside trial, although the delicts are public (canon 2225).

Note. If a penalty latae or ferendae sententiae has been inflicted in the manner of a particular precept, it should ordinarily be declared or imposed in writing or before two witnesses, with the causes of the penalty indicated, preserving the prescription of canon 2193 (canon 2225), that is, unless "suspension from informed conscience" is inflicted (cf. n. 888).

¹ He can do this without doubt by dominative power; to this power also belongs coercive or punitive power. But this power of punishing is not touched upon in ecclesiastical Penal Law.