EXCOMMUNICATION
681
EXCOMMUNICATION
then one had to avoid communion with all the excom-
municated, once they were known as such. " To avoid
scandal and numerous dangers", says Martin V, "and
to relieve timorous consciences, we hereby mercifully
grant to all the faithful that henceforth no one need
refrain from communicating with another in the recep-
tion or administration of the sacraments, or in other
matters Divine or profane, under pretext of any eccle-
siastical sentence or censure, whether promulgated in
general form by law or by a judge, nor avoid anyone
whomsoever, nor observe an ecclesiastical interdict,
except when this sentence or censure shall have been
published or made known by the judge in special and
express form, against some certain, specified person,
college, university, church, community, or place."
But while notoriously excommunicated persons are no
longer vitandi, the pope makes an exception of those
who have " incurred the penalty of excommunication
by reason of sacrilegious violence against a cleric, and
so notoriously that the fact can in no way be dissimu-
lated or excused". He declares, moreover, that he
has not made this concession in favour of the excom-
municated, whose condition remains unchanged, but
solely for the benefit of the faithful. Hence, in virtue
of ecclesiastical law, the latter need no longer deprive
themselves of intercourse with those of the excom-
municated who are "tolerated". As to the vitandi,
now reduced to the two aforementioned categories,
they must be shunned by the faithful as formerly. It
is to be noted now that the minor excommunication
incurred formerly by these forbidden relations has
been suppressed; also, that of the major excommuni-
cations inflicted on certain definite acts of communion
with the vitandi, only two are retained in the Constitu-
tion " Apostolic;e Sedis" (H, 16, 17): that inflicted on
any of the faithful for participation in a crime that has
merited nominative excommunication by the pope,
and that pronounced againsv clerics alone for spon-
taneous and conscious communion in sacris with per-
sons whom the pope has excommunicated by name.
Moreover, those whom bishops excommunicate by
name are as much vitandi as are those similarly ex-
communicated by the pope.
((i) Reserved and N on- Reserved. — Finally, excom- munication is either reserved or non-reserved. This division affects the absolution from censure. In the forum internum any confessor can absolve from non- reserved excommunications; but those that are re- served can only be remitted, except through indult or delegation, by those to whom the law reserves the ab- solution. There is a distinction between excommu- nications reserved to the pope (these being divided into two classes, according to which they are either specially or simply reserved to him) and those re- served to bishops or ordinaries. As to excommuni- cations ab homme, absolution from them is reserved Ijy law to the judge who has inflicted them. In a cer- tain sense excommunications may also be reserved in view of the persons who incur them ; tlius absolution from excommunications in foro externo incurred by bishops is reserved to the pope; again, custom reserves to him the excommunication of sovereigns.
III. Who Ca.v Excom.municate? — Excommunica- tion is an act of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, the rules of which it follows. Hence the general principle: who- ever has jurisdiction in the forum externum, properly so called, can excommunicate, but only his own sub- jects. Therefore, whether excommunications be a jure (by the law) or ab homine (under form of sentence or precept), they may come from the pope alone or a general council for the entire Church; from the pro- vincial council for an ecclesiastical province; from the bishop for his dioces(!; from the prelate nnlliwi for quasi-diocesan territories; and from regular prelates for religious orders. Moreover, anyone can excom- municate who, by virtue of his office, even when dele- gated, has contentious jurisdiction in the forum exter-
num; for instance, papal legates, vicars capitular, and
vicars-general. But a parish priest cannot inflict this
penalty nor even declare that it is incurred, i. e. he
cannot do so in an oSicial and judicial manner. The
subjects of these various authorities are those who
come under their jurisdiction chiefly on account of
domicile or quasi-domicile in their territory; then by
reason of the offence committed while on such terri-
tory; and finally by reason of personal right, as in the
case of regulars.
IV. Who Can Be Excommunicated? — Since ex- communication is the forfeiture of the spiritual privi- leges of ecclesiastical society, all those, but those only, can be excommunicated who, by any right whatso- ever, belong to this society. Consequently excom- munication can be inflicted only on baptized and living persons. Although the Church recites against the devil exorcisms in which the word anathema occurs, he cannot be excommunicated, for he in no way belongs to the Church. Among living persons, those who have not been baptized have never been members of the Christian society and therefore cannot be deprived of spiritual benefits to which they have never had a right; in this way, infidels, pagans, Mohammedans, and Jews, though outside of the Church, are not ex- communicated. As the baptized cease, at death, to belong to the Church Militant, the dead cannot be ex- communicated. Of course, strictly speaking, after the demise of a Christian person, it may be officially de- clared that such person incurred excommunication during his lifetime. Quite in the same sense he may be ab.solved after liis death ; indeed, the Roman Ritual contains the rite for absolving an excommunicated person already dead (Tit. Ill, cap. iv: Ritus absol- vendi excommunicatum jam mortuum). However, these sentences or absolutions concern only the effects of excommunication, notably ecclesiastical burial. With the foregoing exceptions, all who have been bap- tized are liable to excommunication, even those who have never belonged to the true Church, since by their baptism they are really her subjects, though of course rebellious ones. Moreover, the Church excommuni- cates not only those who abandon the true faith to embrace schism or heresy, but likewise the members of heretical and schismatic communities who have been born therein. As to the latter, however, it is not question of personal excommunication; the censure overtakes them in their corporate capacity, as mem- bers of a community in revolt against the true Church of Jesus Christ.
Catholics, on the contrary, cannot be excommuni- cated unless for some personal, grievously offensive act. Here, therefore, it is necessary to state with pre- cision the conditions under which this penalty is in- curred. Just as exile presupposes a crime, excom- munication presupposes a grievous external fault. Not only would it be wTong for a Christian to be pun- ished without having committed a punishable act, but justice demands a proportion between the offence and the penalty; hence the most serious of spiritual chas- tisements, i. e. forfeiture of all the privileges common to Christians, is inconceivable unless for a grave fault. Moreover, in order to fall within the jurisdiction of the forum externum, which alone can inflict excommuni- cation, this fault must be external. Internal failings, e. g. doubts entertained against the Catholic Faith, cannot incur excommunication. Note, however, that by external fault is not necessarily meant a public one; an occult external fault calls forth occult excom- nuinication, but in foro interno, as already seen. Most authors add that the offence must be consummated, i. e. complete and perfected in its kind {in genere .suo), unless the legislator have ordained otherwise. This, however, is a rule of interpretation rather than a real condition for the incurring of censure, and ia tantamount to saying that attempt at a crime does not entail the penalty meted out to the crime itself,
