EXCOMMUNICATION
685
EXCOMMUNICATION
both kinds of delegation may be "cumulated", i. e.
may be held and exercised in favour of thesameperson.
These principles admitted, we must remember that
with reference to reservation or the right to absolve,
excommunications are divided into four classes: ex-
communications specially reserved to the pope;
excommunications simply reserved to the pope; ex-
communications reserved to the bishop (ordinary);
and, finally, excommunications that are not reserved
(nemini reservata;). According to this classification,
as a general rule, only the pope can absolve from the
first two kinds of excommunication, although his
power extends to the others; bLshops (ordinaries), but
not other priests, can remove excommunications of
the third class ; finally, those of the fourth class, and
those only, can be revoked by any approved priest,
without further special delegation. At this point,
however, must be considered certain concessions of
the law that may be grouped in three categories: the
permanent faculties of bishops; concessions for urgent
cases; and concessions for the point of death.
(1) The Faculties of Bishops. — The Council of Trent (rfess. XXIV, c. vi, De ref.) authorizes bishops to absolve their own subjects in their own dioceses from all excommunications, consequently from those reserved to the Holy See, when occult or, rather, not pertaining to the forum externum. They can exer- cise this power either in person or through a special delegate of their choice, but in the tribunal of con- science only. However, the Constitution "Aposto- lica Sedis" restricted this provision of the council to excommunications simply reserved to the pope, so that, without special indult, bishops can no longer ab- solve from specially reserved cases, even in foro in- terno. On the other hand, the indults they receive are more or less liberal and widely communicable.
(2) Urgent Cases. — In the chapter "Nuper" (xxix, de sent, excomm., lib. V, tit. xx.xix), innocent III sets forth the principle that governs such cases: "When it is difficult for the excommunicated person to go to him who excommunicated hiifl, he may be absolved by his bishop or even by his own priest, on promising to obey the orders of him by whom excommunication was pro- nounced." This is the principle that moralists and canonists formulated as an axiom: Impeclito casus papalis fit episcopalis: in case of one who is prevented from presenting himself to the pope, the excommuni- cation reserved to the pope may be removed by the bishop. But most authors carried the analogy still further: for him who is prevented from presenting himself to the bishop, the excommunication may be removed by any confessor. In regard to the obliga- tion of submitting to the orders of the pope or the bishop, the raoralbts and canonists generally taught as follows: First, no one was obliged to apply in writ- ing (correct as to the removal of excommunication, though Innocent III says nothing of this kind concern- ing a request for information). Then they distin- guished between obstacles that were more or less pro- longed: perpetual obstacles were such as exceed five years; obstacles of long duration were those lasting over six months; and obstacles of short duration, those continuing for less than six months. When the obstacle was perpetual the bishop or, if he coiild not be reached, any priest might ab.solve without appealing to the superior; this could also be done, but not with- out obligation of recourse to the superior on the cessa- tion of the obstacle, when the latter was of long dura- tion, provided there were urgency. Finally, the au- thors drew up a long list of tno.se who were supposed to be unatile to present themselves in person to the pope; and this list included almo.st every one (Oury, Theol. Moralis, II, nn. 9.52 and :J7.5). This practice, far more lenient than was intended by Innocent III, has been recently profoundly modified by a decree of the Congregation of the Inquisition (Holy Office) dated 2:5 June, 1886. Henceforth "in urgent cases
when absolution cannot be deferred without danger
of grave scandal or infamy, which is left to the con-
scientious appreciation of the confessor, the latter,
after having imposed the necessary satisfaction, can
absolve, without other faculties, from all censures,
even those specially reserved to the Holy See, but
under pain of reincidence under the same censure if,
within a month, the penitent thus absolved does not
recur to the Holy See by letters and through the me-
dium of the confessor." This new method has been
more precisely explained and even rendered easier by
subsequent papal decisions. The absolution thus
given is direct (Holy Office, 19 Aug., 1891), and
although recourse to the Penitentiaria is obligatory,
its object is not to ask a new absolution, but only to
solicit the order of the Church, the penitent, as stated
above, having had to make a serious promise to con-
form to them {standi mandatis Ecclesice). The power
thus granted in urgent cases is valid for all cases,
without exception, reserved by law to the pope or the
ordinary, even for the absolution of an accomplice
(Holy Office, 7 June, 1899).
As to what constitutes a state of urgency, the reply of 16 June, 1897, is very reassuring, since it permits absolution from censures "as soon as it becomes too distressing to the penitent to remain in the state of sin during the time necessary for soliciting and receiving from Rome the power to absolve". Now, according to the moralists it is too much to remain even a day or two in the state of sin, especially for priests. The ap- peal, though usually made through the medium of the confessor, can be made by the penitent himself if he be capable ; indeed he should write himself if he cannot easily return to the same confessor (Sacra Peni- tentiaria, 7 Nov., 1SS8). Finally, if both confessor and penitent find it impossible to appeal by letters, these mav be dispensed with (Holy Office, 18 Aug., 1898). The letters should be addressed to the Cardinal Penitentiarius and should contain infor- mation concerning all necessary circumstances, but under a false name (Sacr. Pen., t^ov., 1888). If the interested party, though able to appeal to the Holy See, fails to do so within a month from the time of re- ceiving absolution, he or she incurs the former cen- sures, which remain effective until there Is a new abso- lution followed by recour.se to Rome. There would, however, be no reincidence if the interval of a month were to expire through the confessor's fault. It is to be noted that this sanction of reincidence applies to all censures reserved to the pope, but not to those reserved by law to the ordinaries. Finally, this method is not obligatory for censures reserved to ordinaries by diocesan law. Bishops, however, could profitably apply it to such censures, and some have already done so.
(.'5) In Danger of Death. — It is a principle repeatedly set forth in canon law that at the point of death all reservations cease and all necessary jurisdiction is supplied by the Church. "At the point of death", says the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, c. vii), "in dan- ger of death", says the Ritual (tit. Ill, cap. i, n. 2;j), any priest can absolve from all sins and censures, even if he be without the ordinary faculties of confessors, or if he himself be excommunicated; he may do so even in presence of another priest profwrly authorized (Holy Office, 29 July, 1891). The Constitution " Apostolica; Sedls " expressly maintains this merciful concession, merely adding, for the case in which the moribund Is restored to health, the obligation of hav- ing recourse to the Holy See, if he has been ab.solved from excommunication specially reserved to the pope, unless lie prefers to ask ab.solution of a confessor pro- vided with special faculties. This recourse, although identical with that of which we have just spoken for urgent cases, nevertheless differs from it on two points: it is not imposed for the absolution from ex- communications simnly reserved, and the short delay
