DISPENSATION
42
DISPENSATION
tained by some authors, viz. that the bishop can
grant all dispensations which the pope has not re-
served to himself, cannot be admitted. But by de-
rived right (either ordinary or delegated according to
the terms of the grant) the bishop can dispense from
those laws that expressly permit him to do so or
from those for which he has received an indult to
that effect. Moreover, by ordinarj' right, based on
custom or the tacit consent of the Holy See, he may
dispense: (a) in a case where recourse to the Holy See
is difficult and where delay would entail serious dan-
ger; (b) in doubtful cases, especially when the doubt
affects the necessity of the dispensation or the suffi-
ciency of the motives; (c) in eases of frequent occur-
rence but requiring dispensation, also in frequently
occurring matters of minor importance; (d) in de-
crees of national and provincial councils, although he
may not pronounce a general decree to the contrarj^;
(e) in pontifical laws specially passed for his diocese.
It should be always remembered that to fix the exact
limit of these various powers legitimate custom and
the interpretation of reputable authors must serve as
guides. Superiors of exempt religious orders (see Ex-
emption) can grant to their subjects, individually,
those dispensations from ecclesiastical laws which the
bishop grants by his ordinary power. When there is
question of the rules of their order they are bound to
follow what is laid dowTi in their constitutions (see
Religious Order.s).
(C) The Vicar-General. — He enjoys by virtue of his appointment the ordinary dispensing power of the bishop, also the delegated powers of the latter, i. e. those granted him not personally but as ordinary (according to present discipline, the pontifical facul- ties kno\\Ti as oi'dinari/) ; exception is made, however, for those powers which require a special mandate like those of tlie chapter Liceat. for dealing with irregu- larities and secret cases. The vicar capitular like- wise has all the dispensing power which the bishop has of his own right, or which has been delegated to him as ordinary.
(D) Parish Priest. — By his own ordinary right, founded on custom, he may dispense (but only in particular cases, and for individuals separately, not for a community or congregation) from the observ- ance of fasting, alstinence, and Holy Days. He can also dispense, within his own territory, from the ob- servance of diocesan statutes when the latter pennit him to do so; the terms of these statutes usually de- clare the extent of such power, also whether it be ordinary or delegated. Dispensation being an act of jurisdiction, a superior can exercise it only over his own subjects, though as a general rule he can do so in their favour even outside his own territory. The bishop and the parish priest, except in circmnstances governed by special enactments, acquire jurisdiction over a member of the faithful by reason of the domi- cile or quasi-domicile he or she has in a diocese or parish (see Domicile). Moreover, in their own terri- tory they can use their dispensing power in respect of persons without fixed residence (vagi), probably also in respect of travellers temporarily resident in such territory. As a general rule he who has power to dispense others from certain obligations can also dis- pense himscif.
(3) Causes for Granting Dispensations. — A sufficient cause is always required in order that a dispensation may be both valid and licit when an inferior dispenses from a superior's law, tut only for the liceity of the act when a superior dispenses from his own law. Nevertheless, in this latter c:ise a dispensation grant(!d without a motive would not (in se), except for some special rea-son, e. g. scandal, constitute a serious fault. One may be satisfied with a prohahhi sufficient cause, or with a cause less than one that, of itself and without any dispensation, would excuse from the law. It is always understood that a superior
intends to grant only a licit dispensation. Therefore
a dispensation is null when in the motives set forth for
obtaining it a false statement is made which has in-
fluenced not only the causa impulsiva, i. e. the reason
inclining the superior more easily to grant it, but also
the causa motiva, i. e. the really determining reason
for the grant in question. For this, and in general for
the information which should accompany the petition,
in order that a dispensation be valid, see below apro-
pos of obreption and subreption in rescripts of dis-
pensation. Consequently a false statement or the
fraudulent withholding of information, i. e. done with
positive intention of deceiving the superior, totally
annuls the dispensation, unless such statement bear on
a point foreign to the matter in hand. But if made
with no fraudulent intent, a false statement does not
affect the grant unless the object of the statement be
some circimistance which ought to have been ex-
pressed under pain of nullity, or unless it affects di-
rectly the motive cause as above described. Even
then false statements do not always nullify the grant ;
for (a) when the dispensation is composed of several dis-
tinct and separable parts, that part or element alone is
nullified on which falls the obreption or subreption,
as the case may be; (b) when several adequately
distinguished motive causes are set forth, the dispen-
sation is null and void only when the obreption or
subreption in question affects them all. It is enough,
moreover, that the accuracy of the facts be verified at
the moment when the dispensation is granted. There-
fore, in the case of dispensations ex gratid (or in formd
gratiosd), i. e. granting favours, the facts must be true
when the dispensation is expedited; on the other
hand, in the case of dispensations in formd cornmissd
(and according to the more general opinion, in those in
formd cotnmixsd mi.rtii), the causes alleged must be
verified only when the dispensation is actually executed.
(4) Form and Inttrprelation. — It is proper, gener- ally speaking, that dispensations be asked for and granted in writing. Moreover, the Roman Congrega- tions are forbidden, as a rule, to receive petitions for dispensations or to answer them by telegram. The execution of a dispensation made on receipt of tele- graphic information that such dispensation had been granted would be null, unless such means of communi- cation had been officially used by special authoriza- tion from the pope. Except when the interest of a third party is at stake, or the superior has expressed himself to the contrarj', the general dispensing power, whether ordinary or delegated, ought to be broadly interpreted, since its object is the common good. But the actual dispensation (and the same holds true of dispensing power given for a particular case) ought to be strictly interpreted unless it is a question of a dis- pensation authorized by the common law, or one granted motu propria (by the superior spontaneously) to a whole community, or with a view to the public good. Again, that interpretation is lawful without which the dispensation would prove hurtful or useless to the beneficiary, also that which extends the bene- fits of the dispensation to whatever is juridically con- nected with it.
(5) Cessation of Dispensations. — (a) A dispensation ceases when it is renounced by the person in whose favour it was granted. However, when the object of the dispensation is an obligation exclusively resulting from one's own will, e. g. a vow, such renunciation is not valid until accepted by tlie competent superior. Moreover, neither the non-use of a dispensation nor the fact of having obtained another dispensation in- compatible with the former is, in itself, equivalent to a renunciation. Thus, if a girl had received a dispensa- tion to marry Peter and another to marry Paul, she would remain free to marry either of them, (b) A dispensation ceases when it is revoked after due no- tice to the recipient. The legislator can validly revoke a dispensation, even without cause, though in
