EXCOMMUNICATION
689
EXCOMMUNICATION
article maintains the faculties possessed by bishops
and others, such as we have heretofore indicated.
(3) "Those who fight duels, those who challenge or accept challenge thereunto, all accomplices, all who help or countenance such combats, all who designedly assist thereat, finally all who permit duelhng or who do not prevent it in so far as hes in their power, no matter what tlieir rank or dignity, be it royal or im- perial." This severe discipline against duelling dates from the Council of Trent (Sess. XXV, c. xix, De ref.); here, however, only the excommunication in question is considered. It aims at duelling, properly so called, by challenge and on accepted conditions, not at other single combats or altercations. University duels, so common in Germany, are included (S. Cong, of the Council, 29 Aug., 1890)". The malice of the duel lies in the fact that it makes right depend upon the fate of arms; this penalty is extended to all who take any part whatever in these detestable combats. The excommunication is incurred, first, by the duellists themselves, not only when they actually fight, but as soon as they have proposed or accepted a challenge; next, by the official witnesses or seconds, also by physi- cians expressly brought upon the scene (Holy Office, 28 May, 1884), and by all spectators not accidentally present; likewise by those who permit these affairs, when such permission is necessary, e. g. in the army, and by those who, although able to prevent duelling, refrain from so doing.
(4) " Those who become members of the Masonic sect, of the Carbonari, or of other similar sects that plot either openly or secretly against the Church or legitimate authorities; all who countenance these sects in any way whatever, and finally, all who do not in- form against the occult chiefs or leaders, i. e. until they have made such denunciations." Certain associa- tions are prohibited because of their evil or dangerous object ; this article deals only with those to which it is forbidden to belong under pain of excommunication latse sententia?. These are known by their aim, which is to plot against the Church or legitimate authorities, obviously by illicit or criminal means; this excludes at once purely pohtical groups. It matters little whether or not these societies exact secrecy from their members, though the element of secrecy consti- tutes an unfavourable presumption. The article names two of these sects, the Freemasons and the Carbonari; to these we must add the Fenians (Holy Office, 12 Jan., 1870). There are four prohibited American societies: the Independent Order of Good Templars (Holy Office, 9 Aug., 1893), the Odd Fel- lows, the Sons of Temperance, and the ICnights of Pythias (Holy Office, 20 June, 1894), but not under pain of excommunication. In regard to the sects of which our article treats, three distinct acts incur ex- communication: the inscribing of one's name as a member, the positive favouring of the sect as such, and failure to denounce the occult leaders. For this last act censure is not incurred if the leaders be not oc- cult, or if they be not known with sufficient certainty. The denunciation, if imperative, must be made withm a month; once it is made the excommunication is no longer reserved, and one is in a condition to receive absolution from any confessor without further formality.
(5) "Those who command the violation of or who themselves rashly violate the immunity of ecclesias- tical asylum." Immunity, or right of sanctuary, pro- tected criminals who took refuge near the altar or within .sacred edifices; it was forbidden to remove them from such places of refuge either by public or private force. This immunity, although formerly beneficial, has disappeared from modern life; the ex- communication here retained has hardly more than the value of a principle; it may be noted that the articlt! is cautiously worded. By its terms excom- munication would be incurred only by those who
v.— 44
rashly, and without being constrained thereto, violate
the right of sanctuary as such (Holy Office, 1 Feb.,
1871; 22 Dec, ISSO).
(6) " Persons of any kind, condition, sex, or age who violate the clausura [i. e. canonical enclosure] of nuna by penetrating into their monasteries, those intro- ducing or admitting them, also mms who leave their clausura, except in the cases and in the manner pro- \'ided for by the Constitution ' Decori ' of St. Pius V." The reader will find in the article Cloister further de- tails; here it suffices to add that the enclosure in ques- tion is that of the papal enclosure (clausura papalis), or that of religious women with solemn vows. The Constitution "Decori" (24 Jan., 1570) limits the rea- sons of egress to fire, leprosy, or an epidemic; even in the two latter cases it is necessary for such nuns to have the ■nTitten authorization of the bishop.
(7) " Women who violate the enclosure [clausura] of male religious and the superiors and others who admit them." Here also it is question of religious with solemn vows; moreover, it has not seemed necessary to provide for exceptional cases nor for permission.
(S) "Those who are guilty of real simony [simonia realis] for the obtaining of any benefices whatever, and their accomplices." (For this article and the two that follow see Simony.)
(9) "Those who are guilty of confidential simony [simonia confidentialis] apropos of any benefice or any dignity whatever."
(10) "Those who are guilty of real simony for the purpose of entering a religious order."
(11) "All who traffic in Indulgences or other spirit- ual favours are excommunicatetl by the Constitution of St. Pius V, 'Quam plenum' (2 Jan., 1569)." This Constitution enumerates the abuses that the pope wished to remedy. Certain Spanish bishops were ac- customed to issue public grants of Indulgences or various other spiritual favom-s, but in a manner for which they were unauthorized; the abuse consisted mainly in the pecuniary conditions they imposed for obtaining these favours (Indulgences, choice of a con- fessor for the absolution of reserved cases. Mass and burial in time of interdict, dispensation from absti- nence, the right to present several sponsors at baptism, etc.). To overcome these abuses St. Pius V inflicted two kinds of penalties: bishops were punished by being forbidden entrance into church and by suspension of the "fruits", or revenues, of their benefices; culprits of inferior rank were excommunicated. The penalties against bishops have been suppressed ; excommunica- tion, however, is retained to punish those who would reap unlawful profit from the publication or granting of Indulgences or of the other spiritual favours enumerated.
(12) "Those who collect stipends for Masses and make profits out of them by having the Masses cele- brated in places where the stipends are not so high." Tlio olijcct of the penalty is to remedy all shameful traffic in Mass-stipends; to incur it two things are necessary: not only must the stipends for JIasses (called missa: manuales) be collected, but a portion of them must be withheld when remitting them to the priests who are to fulfil the obligation of saj-ing the Masses. Despite the wording of the article, it is not necessary that both conditions, the quest of stipends and the celebration of the Masses, occur in different places (Holy Office, 19 Aug., 1891, ad 4).
(13) "All those excommunicated by the Constitu- tions of St. Pius V, '.\dmonet nos' (29 March, 1567); Innocent IX, 'Qua- ab hac Sede' (4 Nov., 1591); Clement VIII, ' .Vd liomani Pontificis curam' (26 June, 1.592); and Alcxanilor VIII, 'Inter cieteras' (24 Oct., 1660), couccniiiig the alienation and enfeoff- ment of cities and phiccs belonging to the Holy Roman Church." This article deals with the temporal do- mains of the Church and calls here for no special comment.
