Full text of "Religious congregations in their external relations"

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http: //books .google .com/I

RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

IN THEIR

EXTERNAL RELATIONS

<:r

RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

IN THEIR

EXTERNAL RELATIONS

'RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS ^

IN THEIR

EXTERNAL RELATIONS

DISSERTATION

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THEOLOGY OF
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE

DOCTOR OF CANON LAW

Catholic University of America $f/

1916

By Celkstine: A. Fre:riks, C.PP.S., J.C.L.

RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

IN THEIR

EXTERNAL RELATIONS

10 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

history as the first "Congregations" of Religious.* Later, the
Monastic system found greater protection for itself by uniting
the independent Monasteries into "Congregations" under a more
or less general direction and government.® But the severe life
of the ancient Orders was not adapted to the new conditions of
society in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although these
Institutes have always been the glory of the Church, yet their
rules prevented them from participating in many works of re-
ligion and charity which the changed conditions of society de-
manded. Hence arose organizations, clerical and laical, which
devoted their united eflForts to the welfare of the Church and
its members, under a rule of life suitable to their aim but greatly
unlike the established Institutes. These organizations the
Church incorporated. While they could not be' classed among
the Religious of Solemn vows and of Cloistered life, they re-
ceived the canonical title of "Congregations" pure and simple,
in contradistinction to the ancient Orders. So, the ecclesiastical
approval of one of the first of these Institutes specifices it, "con-
gregatio de corpore cleri saeculari." "^

A Religious Congregation, therefore, may be defined : A society,
instituted and approved by ecclesiastical authority, in which the
members profess to tend towards perfection by the practice of
the three Simple and perpetual vows of poverty, chastity and
obedience.® In such associations the true nature of the Religious
state is preserved. They are, therefore, called in the language

"Clem, of Alex., Paedagog., 17, in P. G. VIII, 320; Butler, *Xives of
Saints" ; Cassian, Coll. 2a Praef atio ; St. Benedict's Rule, c. 77, 2 ; Gasquet,
Monastic! sm.

• Heimbucher, Orden und Kongr. vol. I; Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et
Personis, vol. I; Le Canoniste Contemp., vol. 25; Casquet, o. c. ; Inno-
cent III, Const. "In singularis" ; C. of Trent, Sess. 26, c. 6 and 8.

'Const. "Ex commissa," Sept. 22, 1655.

*Ojetti, Synopsis Rerum Mor. et Juris Pont., N. 1512; Bastien, Direc-
toire Canonique, n. 1.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS H

of the Church and of Canonists, "Religious Congregations" in
the strictest sense, and are "distinguished from the Religious
Orders chiefly by the absence of the Solemn vows, by their less
rigid mode of personal allegiance (vota simplicia), by their
simpler organization and constitution, and by their freer inter-
course with the world." ^

There are, nevertheless, many Religious Institutes in which
the vows are not perpetual but temporary ; others in which only
one vow, or more, is made, be it temporary or perpetual. These
Institutes naturally lack the essentials of the Religious state,
in the strict and traditional sense, and are only improperly called
"Religious Congregations." ^®

When, furthermore. Religious Institutes are composed prin-
cipally of clerics, law and commentators on law generally style
them "Ecclesiastical Congregations." ^^ Although they are placed
in the category of Religious Congregations, yet, in virtue of
Sacred Orders which their members receive, the Holy See fre-
quently makes many exceptions and special legislation in their
favor.^^ The status of all these Religious Congregations has
been defined by Leo XIII, in his Decree "Conditae a Christo"
(Dec. 8, 1900), and their place in Common law definitely deter-
mined. Notwithstanding the common element in all these Insti-
tutes, multiple diverging relations augment the difficulty in
ascertaining the due application of ecclesiastical laws to these
Religious Congregations. Hence petitions ever recur to the
Holy See.

Still greater difficulties arise in regard to those numerous Con-
gregations in which are professed no vows, but a mere oath of
perseverance or a promise pure and simple. These organizations
may consist of clerics or of laics. Upon ecclesiastical authorization

" Hilling, Procedure of the Roman Curia, p. 219.
"Ojetti, 1. c; Bastien, 1. c. ; Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., p. 42.
" Vermeersch, o. c; Sebastianelli, Praelectiones Jur. Can., vol. II, p. 353.
"Const. "Conditae a Christo" (Dec. 8, 1900) C. II, n. 9, 10, 11.

12 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

they become true Religious Associations and are, therefore,
classed among the Congregations, but only in a very broad and
improper sense.**

To these must be added another species of associations insti-
tuted by the Church for carrying on works of piety or of charity
in the world without leading a common life under the direction
of an authorized Superior. These, in official documents, are
sometimes called Congregations but more frequently Confra-
ternities.'^ This class of Congregations so-called is outside of our
scope.

The basis of this treatise shall be the Religious Congregations
of Simple vows, because they possess the common element which
permits of generalization, viz., the Simple vows. Those com-
munities, however, which have not the vows as a bond of per-
severance, but receive ecclesiastical approval, strive for perfec-
tion under a common rule and live after the manner of true
Religious, cannot be excluded from our investigation. In virtue

of these common principles, ecclesiastical law, in most regula-
tions, considers them on an equal basis. Where limitations or
extensions are necessary, explicit reference is made to the excep-
tion. This procedure, we think, has become Rome's mode of
action more and more in these latter years as will be evidenced
throughout the dissertation.

May we then class the members of all the foregoing Congre-
gations as Religious ? Benedict XIV in his Constitution, "Quam-
vis justo" (1749), drew attention to the fact that the Sisters of
the Anglican Congregation could not be called Religious because
they made no profession of Solemn vows and retained no Cloister.
By this act he simply declared the traditional practice of the
Roman Curia and of Canonists. Gregory XIII made an exception

Vermeersch, 1. c. ; Ojetti, 1. c.
"Ojetti, 1. c, n. 1495; Vermeersch, 1. c.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 13

in favor of the Scholastics of the Jesuit Society.^* But later
legislation has at times ignored the distinction and designated as
Religious all those who strive for perfection under a common
rule of life, authorized and directed by the Church.^* Expressions
similar to the following are frequently found: "Religiosi votis
temporaneis vel iuramento perseverantiae vel supra dictis promis-
sionibus ligati, etc." ^^ Here is but another instance in which
technicalities yielded to custom, for common parlance never
adopted any other appellation.

In regard to women Religious, in particular, the names "Nun"
and "Sister" are frequently used promiscuously. Etymologically
and canonically the word "monialis" (Nun), in the strict sense,
is predicable only of persons in Solemn vows and the "Normae"
of 1901 forbade its use except for such ; but this, too, is applied
to women in Institutes of Simple vows in which the papal Cloister
is observed, and sometimes even to others.** However, late de-
crees draw a distinction between Nuns and Sisters in favor of the
original classification, i, e,, Nuns are such as have the Solemn
vows, or at least Simple vows which prepare them for the Solemn
vows. All others are classed as Sisters.**

No strict distinction, on the contrary, is made of the term

"Profession" of Religious life. Authors forbid the use of the

term "Religious Profession" save in the case of Religious Orders

Const. "Ascendente Domino," 1584.

'*'Decr. **Dei providentis" ; July 16, 1906; Const. "Sapienti consilio,"
June 28, 1908; Deer. S. C. de Rel., Apr. 5, 1910; aliud eiusdem, Nov. 21,
1908; Vermeersch, Periodisa, Vol. II, p. 101; Ojetti, De Rom. Curia; Deer.
S. C. de Rel., Feb. 3, 1913.

" In the Response of S. C. de Rel., of Apr. 5, 1910.

*• Vermeersch, De Rel, Inst., et Pers., p. 43; Periodica, Vol. VI, p. 60.

*• Deer. "Cum singulae," May 16, 1911 ; Deer. "Cum de sacramentalibus,"
Feb. 3, 1913; Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., p. 443; Periodica, Vol.
VI. p. 50.

14 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

to which it can be properly applied,*® but Pius X does not hesitate
to speak of Religious associations, "quae professionem Religiosae
vitae retinendo, ingravescentibus Christiani populi necessitatibus
multipliciter deserviunt." -^ And rightly so, for also in Congre-
gations a public and solemn declaration confirmed by vow, oath,
or promise is made by persons to devote themselves to God and
His exclusive service according to the direction of the rules of
the Institute.

Rules, finally, are norms, standards or guides of life. Canon
law has standardized four rules, or better, four sets of rules, viz.,
that of St. Basil, that of St. Augustine, that of St. Benedict and
that of St. Francis of Assissi. Along with these existed the
rules of St. Pachomius, of St. Columbanus, of St. Anthony and
of Cassian.*^ The first four norms became the general "Regu-
lae" for Religious. Others were strictly forbidden as will be
seen later. But Leo X broke away from the canonical prohibi-
tion by giving the Franciscan Tertiary Congregation a new rule
of life. This, in 1877, was assigned by Pius IX to a new Re-
ligious Congregation in India. The "Canonical Regulae," there-
fore, possess great antiquity, and enjoy special ecclesiastical ap-
proval and the most extensive use.^*

However, at various times and for different reasons other
regulations, which emanated from the general Chapters and Su-
periors of particular Orders, were called "Constitutions," because
they did not enjoy papal approval and were, moreover, intended
only for special ends and purposes of particular Orders. This
distinction between Rules and Constitutions is observed by authors
when speaking of Orders or of Institutes possessing one of the
ancient Regulae. But in other Religious Institutes the distinc-
tion is arbitrary. In fact, the S. C. EE. et RR. has repeatedly

■" Bastien, 1. c, p. 3 ; Battandier, "Guide Canonique," p. 109.

Deer. "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906.
~ Gasquet, o. c. ; Butler, o. c.

Bouix, De Jure Reg., Vol. II, p. 544 ; Sebastianelli, De Personis, p. 351.

IN THEIR EXTERNAl, RELATIONS 15

declared that it is unwarranted ;^* and, moreover, has repeatedly
permitted and approved the statutes of Congregations when
termed "Regulae." '-^^ The terms, "Rules," "Statutes," and "Con-
stitutions," consequently, when applied to Religious Congrega-
tions are used synonomously, but the "Normae" of 1901 also
demanded that the term "Constitutiones," and not "Regulae," be
used in Congregations. If any distinction, then, is made be-
tween them, the reasons must be sought in the particular Insti-
tute rather than in Common law.

=* Bizzarri, *' Collectanea," 782 ; VIII, 2, 789 ; XIV, 10—791 ; XV, 6.
■" Bastien, o. c, p. 3.

16 RRUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

CHAPTER 11.

An Historical Survey of Ecclesiastical Approval.^

The history of the Regular Orders has been written by different
authors. Not the same can be said of Religious Congregations.
And, indeed, it is not an inviting task to undertake, for many
of the Institutes have disappeared entirely, leaving little more
than a mere name to history. Others, while they have weathered
the storm of ecclesiastical opposition, often lack the necessary
and precise data from which their early struggles may be gleaned.
Then the large number of these Institutes and the almost insuper-
able difficulties involved in obtaining the available facts, have
kept many scholars from applying their talents and time to this
work. It is not the purpose of this treatise to supply the defi-
ciency. But the scope of our subject at least calls for a brief
sketch of the origin, growth and approval of Religious Congre-
gations in the light of ecclesiastical legislation.

Some strong arguments have been produced by several Canon-
ists and Moralists to prove that the vows of the early Religious
were all Simple.* One could therefore, with some show of au-
thority class them among Religious Congregations in our sense.
But it is a useless undertaking. One thing, though, seems certain,
viz., that at the end of the twelfth century the Church acknowl-
edged only the strict Religious Orders with Solemn vows. The
basis for this is found in the Decretals which invariably speak
of "Religiones" and *'Religiosi Ordines." ^ Authors admit that

' Vermeersch, Dc Rel. Inst et Pers., vols. I et II ; Periodica, vols. 1 — 7 ;
cfr. Heimbucher, **Die Orden und Kongr," vols. I et II; H. Hohn, "Voca-
tions," 2 vols,; Elinor Dchcy, '^Religious Orders of Women in the United
States."

' Cfr, Ballay*s article in Arck., f. k, k., torn. 17.

* C, 9, tit. 36, X. lib. III : c 3, tit. 17, in 6**.

IN THieiR ^XTERNAI, RELATIONS 17

no explicit and absolute proof to the effect that these terms were
used in the twelfth century exclusively in connection with Orders
of Solemn vows is obtainable.* But the very fact that the Orders
of that time have continued throughout the centuries, substan-
tially unaltered, creates a very great presumption that at that
time they were as we find them today, and, therefore, the above
mentioned terms invariably signified only Orders with Solemn
vows. Gratian draws a strict distinction between the Simple
vows and the vow professed in Religion : "Hie distinguendum est
quod voventium alii sunt simpliciter voventes . . . alii sunt,
quibus post votum, benedictio accedit consecrationi, vel propo-
situm religionis." ^ Bernardus of Pavia adds his authority to
the same distinction.** Boniface VIII, however, definitely lays
down the principle that vows taken in approved Societies are
Solemn: "Illud solum votum debere dici solemne . . . quod
solemnizatum fuerit per suceptionem S. Ordinis aut per pro-
fessionem expressam vel tacitam factam alicui de religionibus
per Sedem Apostolicam approbatis." ® From these statements
the conclusion is warranted that no Religious Congregations as
such, i. e., with only Simple vows, were acknowledged by the
Holy See at the time of Boniface VIII in the thirteenth century.
The argument increases in weight when viewed in connection
with the prohibition of joining any unapproved Order. Innocent
III forbade not only the formation of new Orders, but also strictly
prohibited persons from affiliating themselves to any unapproved
Order : "Ne nimis religionum diver sitas jg^ravem in Ecclesiam Dei
confusionem inducat, firmiter, prohibemus, ne quis de caetero
novam Religionem inveniat sed quicumque ad Religionem con-
verti voluerit, unam de approbatis assumat." ' Notwithstanding

* Sebastianelli, Praelectiones, de Pars., p. 357.
*Decretum Gratiani, c. Presbyt. 8, D. 27.

•Apud Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., Pars. I.

• C. unic. de voto, tit. 15, lib. Ill in 6^
' C. 9, tit. 36, X. lib. III.

1 8 REI.IGIOUS CONGREGATION S

the peremptory decree of the Sovereign Pontiff and the IV Lateran
Council, new Institutes did spring up and the Council of Lyons
(1274) under Gregory X not only reiterated the law of Innocent
III, but also decreed the disbandment of all Institutes founded
since the Decree: "Ne aliquis de caetero novum Ordinem aut
Religionem adveniat, vel habitum novae Religionis assumat.
Cunctae affatim Religiones et Ordines mendicantes post dicttun
Concilium adinventos, qui nulla confirmatione sedis apostolicae
meruerunt, perpetuae prohibitioni subjicimus et quatenus pro-
cesserant revocamus." ^

Among the condemned Societies are enumerated especially the
Humiliati, The Poor of Lyons and the Beghards. But appar-
ently some others persevered in spite of the regulations. Hence
Clement V issued another proclamation condemning them.' The
reason for this apparent severity of the Popes was not so much
the great multiplication of new Religious Orders or Institutes
(for good reasons justified new foundations) as the heretical doc-
trines and immoral practices prevalent in certain Institutes. This
fact was known to Bishops and people alike. Hence John XXII
was called upon to interpret the mind of the Holy See in the
above mentioned condemnations, especially since many Institutes
had arisen which deserved well of the Church. His declara-
tion proclaims the "tolerari potest" of certain Institutes under
the surveyance and jurisdiction of local Bishops: "Ceterum
statum Beghinarum huiusmodi quos esse permittimus (nisi de
his per sedem apostolicam aliter ordiriandis existent) nullatenus
ex praemissis intendimus approbare." ^^ The Institute as such
is not to be approved, the Pope continues, but under the condi-
tions their mode of life may be permitted by the Bishops.

Congregations of this sort were, seemingly, the Dames of St.
Andrew, the Beghines, Magdalenes, and Soeurs de la Misercorde

' C. 3, tit. 17, in e**.
• C. I, tit. 11, lib. Ill, In Clem.
C. Unica, tit. 7, ex Extrav.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 19

de Jesu. This latter Society stnigjj^led on against all opposition
from the thirteenth century until the year 1627 wlien ^jie Ifoj}^
See finally granted it pontifical recognition.*^ Moreover many
Associations of Tertiaries had arisen which were affiliated to one
or anothier of the strict Orders and at times sought Papal ap-
proval. But it was reserved to Leo X to establish them on a
solid basis of community life.*^ He acknowledged not only their
^ppd work, but wrote also a special rule for them* which has be-
come the norm for many Religious Institutes of women. As
we saw in the last chapter, Pius IX assigned this same rule to
a new Community of Sisters in India no later than 1877.

Prior to the sixteenth century, however, comparatively few
instances are found where Community life was professed with-
out the Solemn vows. But between the twelfth and sixteenth
centuries many new Orders were authorized by the Holy See.
Authors generally classify them as Friars, Canons Regular,
Clerks Regular, and the so-called Second Orders of St. Francis,
of St. Dominic, of the ; Carmelites, and of the Augustinians.
These, however, espoused the mode of life sanctioned by the
Church for many centuries in the form of strict Orders with
Solemn vows.**

But the revolutionary spirit of the fifteenth and sixteenth cen-
turies had a baneful influence upon all Religious life. Discipline
had become lax in many Institutes and scandals not a few aroused
the indignation of those in high places. The Tridentine reforms
sought a renovation of Religious life and a return to ancient
principles and traditions. Wherefore the Council of Trent de-
creed in session XXV, c. 1 : "Hoc decreto praecipit ut omnes
regulares, tam viri quam mulieres, ad regulae, quam professi
sunt, praescriptam vitam instituant et componant, atque in primis
quae ad suae professionis perfectionem, ut oboedientiae, pauper-

" H. Hohn, "Vocations."

" Const. "Inter Cetera," 1521.

'• Heimbucher, o. c. ; Boudinhon, Le Canoniste, vol. 25 sq.

20 sm«IGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

tatis et castitatis ac si quae alia sunt alicuius regulae et ordinis
peculiaria vota et praecepta, ad eorum respective essentiam nee
non ad communem vitam, victum et vestitum conservanda perti-
nentia fideliter observent." It is superflous to adduce the his-
torical foundation for these specifications. Let it suffice that the
Bishops were commissioned as the special delegates of the Holy
See to see that the reforms were inaugurated and maintained,
not only in Institutes which made no Solemn profession, but also
in Monasteries and Orders: ''Commendata monasteria etiam
abbatiae, prioratus et praepositurae nuncupatae, in quibus non
viget regularis observantia . . . ab episcopis, etiam, tam-
quam apostolicae sedis delegatis annis singulis visitentur ; curent-
que iidem episcopi congruentibus remediis . . . ut quae
renovatione indigent aut restauratione, reficiantur." ^*

The Council of Trent heralds in a new era for Religious Orders
and Institutes. Since its immediate effects were different on In-
stitutes of men and of women, a clearer view will be obtained by
taking each separately.

Institutes of Men.

Pius V responded to the Council of Trent by issuing regulations
which would eradicate the abuses and innovations of Religious
Institutes. But his means were radical and drastic. They per-
mitted no temporizing. By the Bull "Lubricum vitae genus"
(1568), Religious and Tertiaries were compelled to change their
mode of life and the nature of their Institute. The determinate
stand of the Holy See remained inflexible. The gist of the Bull
is given in the following words : "Statuimus ut omnes et singuli
. . . in communi et sub oboedientia voluntari et extra votum
solemne Religionis viventes ... professionem regularem
solemnem emittere . . . et intra viginti quattuor horarum
spatium palam et sponte deliberent et declarent." This mandate
extended not only to the profession of Solemn vows, but also to

Sess. 21, c. 8.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS Bl

the choice of one of the four approved "Regulae" as decreed by
Innocent III and Gregory X.

It is difficult in our day to measure the influence this legislation
had upon the Religious life of the Institutes of Men, but tangible
results were apparent at once. Not only were reforms effected
but Institutes, organized contrary to the mind of the Church,
were affiliated to the Orders of the Regular observance. Thus
Pius V united a Franciscan Tertiary Conununity to the Regular
Order.^ In the wake of the Religious revival new Institutes
arose and old ones sought pontifical approval. The Clerks Regu-
lar of the Mother of God were approved in 1574, an independent
Discalced Carmelite Order in 1580, the Camillians in 1582, the
Clerks Minor in 1588, the Clerks Regular of Pious Schools in
1621, the Marian Clerks Regulars in 1673, the Order of Penance
in 1784, and the latest Order seems to be that of the Canons
Regular of the Immaculate Conception in 1866.^* The most
checkered career of all these new Orders seems to have been
that of the Clerks Regular of Pious Schools. Founded in 1597
at Rome, they united with the Clerks Regular of the Mother
of God in 1614. This union was severed in 1617 and the Holy
See gave them a separate approval in 1621. Dissensions within
their own ranks induced Rome to dissolve them in 1646. Ten
years later, however, a new and more flourishing Institute arose
upon the ruins of the old. At present they number no less than
two thousand members.

During these three centuries of Religious advancement, the
Oriental Church has not manifested the same growth of the
Religious life as the Western Church. It has added but little
worthy of mentioning. In the year 1701 we find the Order of
Mechitarians, or the Armenian Benedictines (founded at Con-
stantinople) which is perhaps the only new Order since the Coun-

"Cfr. Heimbucher, o. c; Thcol. Pract Quartalschrift, vol. 65, p. 365;
Zak, "Oesterreichisches Klosterbuch" ; Holn, "Vocations."

*• Ibidem.

22 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

cil of Trent. It received ecclesiastical recognition soon after-
wards, but its Constitutions were approved as late as 1909. The
ancient Order of Antonians, too, received new life and strength
by having its Constitutions revised and approved by the Holy
See in 1740."

Did, then, the Religious Congregations of men disappear with
the advent of reform? No. The conditions of the times, and
the needs of the Church together with the aspirations of apostolic
men to meet both, produced, with God's grace, organizations of
men which the Holy See gladly received and guided. They were
accepted, not indeed on an equal basis with the ancient Orders,
but as divinely inspired Institutes destined to meet exigencies that
the austere rules of the existing Orders could not welt provide for.
Their humble beginnings were naturally diocesan and therefore
furthered by Bishops only. When their field of labor extended
oeyond the diocesan borders, a conflict, or at least an occasion for
conflict, of Episcopal authority too often arose. This naturally
led them to seek Roman approval and Roman jurisdiction. If
the Institute's field of labor promised permanence, the Holy See
hesitated not to receive it under her protecting mantle and, if
necessary, modify or grant it an organization, rule and privileges
suitable to its scope and purpose.

Thus hardly had the echoes of the Council of Trent and the
Bull "Lubricuin vitae genus" subsided, when the Congregations
of the Oratorians (1687) and the Doctrinarians (1593) budded
forth into a vigorous life under Episcopal authorization and which
readily succeeded in winning recognition and approval from the
Pontiffs of their times. The seventeenth century added the Con-
gregations of the Pious Works (1601), the Lazarists (1626), the
Eudists (1643), the Sulpicians (1658), and the Congregation of
Missions (1668). With the advent of the eighteenth century the
Religious attitude of the age and the Holy See favored a stricter
discipline. Perhaps the Congregation of the Fathers of the

*' Ibidem ; et Deer. S. C. de Prop. Fide, Aug. 6, 1909.

IN THEIR EXTKRNAI. REI^ATIONS 23

Holy Ghost (1703) must be exciepted, but the other Religious
Congregations of this century approached more and more the
istrict Orders. Such were especially the Passionists (1725) and
the Redemptorists (1732). In consequence of their strict dis-
cipline and of their perpetual Simple vows, they obtained nearly
the same rights and privileges as these Orders. Heretofore the
Holy See had left intact the Episcopal jurisdiction in Congrega-
tions, but upon these strict Institutes She conferred full ex-
emption, and in subsequent legislation ordinarily considered them
as belonging in the same category with the strict Order.

In nearly all these Congregations the Simple vows were made.
They were generally considered essential to community life. The
nineteenth century, however, felt no repugnance in deviating even
from this mode of Religious life. No doubt the turbulent status
of civil society was the chief factor responsible. But be the cause
whdt it may, no less than forty Religious Societies and Congre-
gations sprang into existence, some at the instigation of Bishops,
others upon the wish and suggestions of the Roman Pontiffs.
Still others owe their origin to heroic souls who saw in them the
best means of meeting the needs of the times.

Their bond of perseverance and obligations of leading a Re-
ligious life according to the counsels of the Master, consisted noW
in Simple vows, now in an oath, and quite often in a mere promise
of fidelity.

The Holy See no longer manifested any hesitancy in sanction-
ing these Institutes when they had proved themselves profitable
in the eyes of the Bishops and their work could be furthered by
Her approval. Repeatedly the highest praises, special privileges,
and extensive powers, where sufficient reasons warranted them,
were bestowed without reluctance."

These privileges, rights and limited exemptions followed not
from Common law, but were granted in the particular Indults of

Meimbucher, o. c. ; Boudinhon, "Lc Canoniste/* vol. 25 sq. ; Bizzarri,
CoUectonea" ; Hilling, "Proceedings of the Roman Curia" ; The respective
Decrees" of praise and approval.

S4 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

approval. They varied according to the nature and scope of
the individual Institute. But this very frequently caused consid-
erable inconvenience, and at times occasioned no little confusion
for both Bishops and Superiors. Hence Leo XIII sought to
remedy the difficulties by laying down general principles and laws
which must govern all Religious Congr^;ations, Diocesan and
Pontifical respectively. This legislation is incorporated in the
Constitution "Conditae a Christo," dated and promulgated De-
cember 8th, 1900. To this "Corpus Juris" for Religious, ntuner-
ous regulations have been added in subsequent years, so that the
Congregations today find themselves on a full canonical basis
nearly as well defined as that of the Regular Orders.

Under the benign guidance and favorable legislation of the
Holy See, these Congregations of men have grown and developed
to such an extent that they compare well, at least in numbers,
with the strict Orders. To take cognizance of the Diocesan
Institutes in such a comparison is hardly possible. But, accord-
ing to statistics for 1913, there exist today some thirty-three Regu-
lar Orders of Knights, Monks, Mendicants, Canons Regular and
Clerks Regular with a total membership of about fifty-eight thou-
sand Religious. On the other hand, the Holy See has approved
in these latter centuries some sixty-six Congregations with an
aggregate membership of about fifty-nine thousand Religious.**
This vast array of Clerics and Brothers lend their service to
nearly every work of Charity and Religion within the Catholic
Church which has for its domain the kingdom of the earth and
for its inheritance the peoples of every tribe and nation and
tongue.

Institutes of Women.

The lax Religious spirit of the fifteenth and sixteenth cen-
turies had also invaded the Cloisters of women. The Council of
Trent (Sess. 25, c. 5) renewed the strict legislation of Boniface

"Annuario Pontificio," 1915; Theol. Pracktische Quartalschrift, 1. c;
H. Hohn, "Vocations for Men."

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 25

VHP® and commissioned the Ordinaries to enforce the strict
observance of the Solemn vows and the papal Cloister.

But here, too, it was the great Pius V who was to inaugurate
the actual reform. By his decree "Circa Pastoralis" (May 26,
1566), he sought to renovate Cloister life and force all Religious,
even the Tertiaries, into Congregations to take the Solemn vows
and observe the Cloister. Should any refuse and continue a
life of scandal, the Bishops were empowered to mete out the
severest punishment to compel submission. But let the Pontiff's
own words show us the mind of the Holy See in introducing
measures that gave new life and vigor to Religious Institutes and
Orders: "Mulieres quoque quae Tertiariae seu de Paenitentia
dicuntur, cuiuscumque fuerit Ordinis in congregatione viventes,
si et ipsae professae fuerint, ita ut solemne votum emiserint, ad
clausuram praecise, ut praemittitur, et ipsae teneantur; quod si
votum solemne non emiserint, Ordinarii una cum superioribus
earum hortentur et persuadere studeant, ut illud emittant et
profiteantur ac post emissionem et professionem eidem clausurae
se subiciant ; quod si recusaverint et aliquae ex iis inventae fuerint
scandalose vivere, severissime puniantur.

"Ceteris autem in omnibus sic absque emissione professionis
et clausura vivere omnino volentibus interdicimus et perpetuo
prohibemus, ne in f uturum ullam aliam prorsus in suum Ordinem,
Religionem Congregationemque recipiant. Quod si contra huius-
modi banc nostram prohibitionem et decretum aliquas receperint,
eas ad sic vivendum omnino inhabiles reddimus, ac illarum,
quaslibet professiones et receptiones irritas facimus et annula-
mus."

The fruits of this legislation were soon manifest. Many of
the Institutes returned to the ancient discipline or at least sub-
mitted to the letter of the law. The Society of the Jesuitissae was
abolished by Urban VIII on account of the many intolerable

Const. ''Periculoso"; c. un. de statu reguL, tit 16, lib. Ill in 6"*.

2(i RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

abuses that had crept into the Institute. The Carmelite Ter-
tiaries, at least some of them, affiliated themselves to the strict
Order of Carmelites.'^ The Ursuline Sisters had oi^ganized
prior to Trent (1537) and had, moreover, also secured pontifical
recognition as a Congregation. But the stringent demands of
ecclesiastical authority induced them to adopt the Solemn vows
and the papal Cloister during the pontificate of Gregory XIII in
1572. The Soeurs de la Misericorde de Jesu, as mentioned above,
had struggled against the tide of ecclesiastical opposition and
prohibition for centuries, but achieved papal approval as a Con-
gregation in 1627. But in spite of this recognition they, too,
were destined to yield to the importunities of authority and
adopt the stricter mode of life. Wherefore they were raised to
the rank of a regular Order in 1665.^^

New Institutes arose in various parts of the Christian world
which ever and anon sought the approval of the Holy See. The
Society of "Notre Dame," the first teaching Community of
women approved by the Holy See, was founded in 1606. Though
they received pontifical recognition as a Congregation in the
following year, they, apparently, like the Soeurs de la Miseri-
corde de Jesu, were hampered in many ways on account of their
unfavorable ecclesiastical status. At any rate, in 1608, we find
them affiliating themselves to the strict Order of Benedictines.^'^

Prominent in the history of the seventeenth century stands the
Order of the Visitation founded by St. Francis de Sales and
St. Jane de Chantal. The amiable disposition of St. Francis
sought to introduce into Religious life a spirit of greater gentility
and attractiveness. He aimed to "secure the benefits of Religious
life for persons who had neither the physical strength nor the
attraction for corporal austerities at the time general in the Re-
ligious Orders." Conseiquently it was their wish to found a

* H. Hohn, "Vocations."

* Ibidem; Elinor Dehey, "Religious Orders of Women."
"•Hohn, Ibidem.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 27

Congregation without the external vows or the obligation of the
strict Cloister. But in spite of their laudable purpose they were
compelled to yield to the persuasions of ecclesiastical authority.
The rule of St. Augustine, together with the Cloister prescribed
by Trent and Pius V, were imposed upon them in 1616.

In the following centuries but few new Orders arose. Accord-
ing to Dr. Hohn, however, the Sisters of St. Joseph (1650),
the Sisters of the Blessed . Sacrament (1639) and the Nuns of
the Presentation must be mentioned. The Sisters of the Blessed
Sacrament existed for about thirty years as a Congregation of
Simple vows, but in 1669 were raised to an Order with Solemn
vows and papal Cloister. Similar was the development of the
Nuns of the Presentation. Founded in 1777 as a mere Congre-
gation, Pius VII elevated them in 1805 to the rank of an Order.**
Apparently this closed the period of new Orders of women.

These new Orders, however, were not the only Institutes of
that time. The spirit of St. Francis de Sales commenced to
permeate other saintly men and women. The conviction grew
that the Master's counsels could be lived in Institutes of less
severity than the rigid Orders. This would open the door to
many chosen souls who were, for one reason or another, now
barred from embracing the Religious life. Bishops in general
did not check it. True, they realized that such Institutes would
require careful guidance and strict supervision, but was this not
their duty in regard to the entire flock entrusted to them ? Hence
Diocesan Institutes of Simple vows were multiplied, which,
When their field of labor extended beyond the diocesan border,
sought the protection and the approval of the Holy See.

Among these the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries produced
the following :*° the Sisters of St. Catharine (1571), the Anglican
Sisters, famous in the Constitutions of Clement XI and Benedict
XIV, the Company of St. Ursula (1606), the Sisters of Our

- Ibid.

"Ibidem et Bizzarri, "Analectanca" et Battandier, **Guidc Canonique."

2S RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIOKS

Lady of Calvary (1614), the Institute of Mary (1626), the
Sisters of Martha (1634), the Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo
(1651), the Soeurs de la Croix (1625), the Daughters of Calvary
(1619), the Institute of Our Lady of Charity and Refuge (1641),
the Daughters of the Immaculate Conception (1680), the Notre
Dames of Montreal (1657), the Sisters of the Holy Child Jesus
(1666), the Visitation Sisters of Ghent (1660), and the Sisters
of Charity (1631). All but two of these received a certain recog-
nition from the Holy See within the seventeenth century. Fer-
rari and Vermeersch, however, insist that the first formal appro-
bation of Constitutions of Religious Congregations of Simple
vows given by the Holy See, was that of Clement XI in the Brief,
"Inscrutabili" (July 13, 1703), to the Constitutions of Anglican
Sisters (Vermeersch, De Rel. Inst, et Pers., vol. I, p. 45). Prob-
ably the greatest difficulty was experienced by the Institute of
St. Vincent de Paul. The Holy See was most insistent on mak-
ing this Institute a strict Order and for many years refused to
stamp it with ecclesiastical approval. St. Vincent, however,
persevered in his efforts and finally his arguments prevailed with
the Holy See. Time has proved the wisdom of his counsels,
for the Sisters of Charity today outnumber any single Religious
Order or Community within the Church. No less than seventy-
five thousand heroic women, true to the principles and spirit of
St. Vincent de Paul, devote their lives to the assistance of the
poor and afflicted in almost every comer of the world.

The eighteenth century added about nine approved Institutes
to the catalogue of Religious Congregations of women. But in
the nineteenth century they multiply even more rapidly. Dr.
H. Hohn in his work "Vocations" enumerates at least one hundred
and fifty.

In all these Institutes the distinctive feature differentiating them
from the strict Orders, is the change from the Solemn to the
Simple vows and in many cases the absence of the Cloister.
Vows, however, remained. They formed their very essence and
generally their number was three or more. But in the seventeenth
century we find an instance of a Society of Religious with only

IN THEIR EXTERNAL REI^TIONS 29

one vow, viz., that of stability. This Institute was that of the
Daughters of Calvary founded in 1619. In the following century
the Holy See even approved the Sisters of Christian Retreat
(1787) who made no vows — surely a mode of procedure hardly
explainable when viewed in the light of former legislation.

Here it must be noticed that Rome's approval of Religious
Congr^^tions for women was for many centuries only a qualified
one. John XXII, as seen above, permitted certain Institutes to
exist under Episcopal jurisdiction, but expressly added that he
nowise meant to approve their Institutes. This attitude of
the Holy See continued throughout many centuries. In the
famous Constitution, "Quamvis justo," Benedict XIV repeats
the position of the Holy See in the following words: ''Earum
conservatoria tolerari quidem ab hac apostolica Sede, sed Insti-
tutum ipsum nee approbatum nee coniirmatum est (esse) ; ob-
sistentibus Sacris Canonibus et generali Constitutione Sancti Pii
V, ne religiosae mulierum Domus Apostolica confirmatione stabi-
liantur, quae se perfectae clausurae legibus non obstrinxerint."
In 1816 the Sisters of Charity of Jesus and Mary petitioned the
Holy See to approve their Rules and Solemn profession. This
would have been equivalent to an approval of the Institute.
Hence the Holy See still refused such a request and simply an-
swered that the Rules "Plane commendandae . . . et lauda-
bili fini plurimum.accomodatae" (Sept. 24, 1816).

Roman approval of an Institute's Constitutions up to the 19th
century invariably added the explicit words : "Citra tamen appro-
bationem conservatorii." But in the beginning of the ninteenth
century the traditional phrase began to be omitted, though no
formal approval was yet given. The first formal approval of
an Institute does not appear before 1821. According to Biz-
zarri this was bestowed upon the Institute of the Daughters of
the Blessed Virgin Mary (Collectanea, p. 861).

Furthermore Roman approval has more and more eliminated
the multiplication of independent Religious houses, and placed
a general and supreme power in a Superior General. In the
Constitution "Quamvis justo," which opens the new era for Re-

30 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

Itgious Congregations, Benedict XIV expressly en^phasizes tbH
he is not speaking of Institutes under a general direction (of
which he mentions but four as existing at his time) but of dio-
cesan Societies: '^Nec agitur de tali superiorissa generali, quae
amplam quandam jurisdictionam in subditas exercere, ipsaque
ab ordinari^ Bpiscopi auctoritate exempta esse debeat." What
is here referred to as an exception, has become in the last century
a fairly general rule and the former rule a very rare exception.
New Religious Congregations are placed under the immediate
care and direction of the Holy See to increase efficiency and to
provide better government. Therefore general laws are laid
down to facilitate Roman recognition. Therefore, too, the time-
worn phrase "citra taipen approbationem conservatorii" has dis-
appeared and independent houses of Religious are diminished
more and more. Leo XIII exerted the greatest influence in this
direction. Prom particular and tried precepts he has formed
general laws. His successor, Pius X, has added to this general
legislation so that almost every phase of Religious life, at least
the external relations, has been generalized and harmonized as
will appear more explicitly as these pages increase.

What percentage of the actually existing Religious bodies is
thus minutely ruled and directed by the Holy See, is difficult to
say. The number, status and personnel of all the Diocesan Insti-
tutes within the twelve hundred Dioceses of the Catholic world,
is yet unwritten history.^® But one can hazard a comparison
when considering the many Institutes and their inmates within
our country.

The first Religious Community of women in what is now the
United States seems to have come from France. The Governor
of New Orleans urged the Ursuline Nuns of Rouen in 1726 to
•accept the appeal of the American French to institute a Mon-
astery in the New World. According to the authoress of "The
Religious Orders in the United States," these Ursuline Nuns

29 «

Annuario Pontificio/' 1915.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 31

were the pioneers of the virginal soil in the United States. They
opened the first educational institution for young women, the first
orphanage and the first hospital in the United States in that
same year. In the Colonies of the Eastern shores, several younjr
maidens had crossed the Ocean and joined the exiled English
Carmelites at Antwerp. With the declaration of religious free-
dom in our country, the Rev. Ig. Mathews of Washingjton wrote
to the Mother Bernardina of the Carmelites of Antwerp (his
sister) : "Now is the time to found in this country, for peace is
declared and religion is free." The result was the ests^blishing
of a Carmelite Community near Port Tobacco, Md., 179(](. Tavq
years later some Jf^oor Clares were driven from France and
sought a home on our shores. They founded a convent at
Georgetown, but for some reason or other their venture proved
a failure and the good Nuns were recalled to their European honie
in 1800.^^ However, the abandoned convent became the home
of the first American Religious Congregation. A certain Miss
Labor, of Philadelphia, under the guidance of Father Neale,
later Bishop Neale, was its foundress. With the advice of
Father Neale the young Community of teachers chose the Visi-
tation Rule of St. Francis de Sales. Bishop Carroll in 1808 ad-
vised Bishop Neale to prescribe the Simple vows for the new
Congregation. Yielding to the wishes of Bishop Carroll, the
Sisters took their first Simple vows. But it was the desire of
Bishop Neale to introduce the entire regime of the Visitations.
Consequently he obtained from the Holy See in 1816 the privi-
lege of changing the Community into the Order of the Visitation
with Solemn vows and Cloister. ' The new foundations of the
Visitations Nuns in Mobile, St. Louis and Kaskaskia likewise
inherited the privileges of their Mother house.^* But outside of
these the strict Orders of women have never been permitted to
perpetuate their Institutes with Solemn vows in the United States.

" E. T. Dehey, o. c. ; H. Hohn, o. c.

*E. T. Dehey, o. c; C. of Baltimore II, 1866; Sabetti-Barrett, Theol.
Mar. p. 417.

32 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

With the founding of the Sisters of Charity by Mother Seton
in 1809 at Emmittsburg, Md., and the Sisters of Loretto by
Father Nernickx, in 1812 at Harden's Creeks, Ky., that flourish-
ing Religious life of the Church in the United States began.**
Its growth has developed so wonderfully that today more than
one hundred and fifty Religious Communities with a total mem-
bership of more than seventy thousand Sisters — ^besidfes the
many novices and postulants— devote all their efforts to the fur-
therance of Catholic life and progress in every part of the
country.*** The Church as a kind Mother appreciates their work
and in the person of the Sovereign Pontiff praises them and bids
them prosper: 'Trofecto sodalitatum istiusmodi tam bene de
Ecclesia deque ipsa civili societate merentium, sperandum est,
numquam defuturam copiam: hodieque libet agnoscere, usque
adeo eos increbuisse, ut nullum videatur esse ministrandae cari-
tatis christianae genus, quod illae reliquum f ecerint." '^

* E. T. Dehcy, o. c.

•"Catholic Directory for 1915.

**Motu proprio: "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906.

IN THEIR EXTCRNAI< RELATIONS 33

CHAPTER III.

The Founding and Approval of Religious Congregations.

The law of Innocent III, laid down in the Lateran Council,
has never been abrogated and therefore constitutes the norm
of present ecclesiastical discipline: "Firmiter prohibemus nequis
de caetero novam Religionem inveniat." * The same was repeated
by Gregory X in the Council of Lyons: "Ne aliquis de caetero
novam Ordinem aut Religionem adinveniat." ^ The founding,
consequently, of a new Order with Solemn vows certainly re-
quires the explicit consent of the Holy See. The greater number
of Canonists interpret these canons as extending also to Religious
Congregations.^ But, notwithstanding the prohibition, new In-
stitutes arose even under the tutelage and the approbation of
Bishops. Upon this custom the Holy See looked silently for
many centuries, thus permitting it to grow into a definite law
which Leo XIII formally acknowledges in the Const. "Conditae
a Christo." He says: "Some Congregations have obtained the
approval of Bishops . . . and others have besides this a
decree of the Roman Pontiff issued in their favor; the former
have been established and exist by the sole will of the Bishop
. . . It is therefore the Bishop's privilege not to receive into
his diocese any newly founded Congregation before he knows
and has approved its rules and constitutions."

In 1906 Pius X qualified the rights of Bishops in regard to
founding or permitting the foundation of a new Institute.* In

' C. 9, tit. 36, X, lib. III.

« C. 3. tit. XVII, lib. Ill, in 6^

* Sebastianelli, De Personis, p. 358; Suarez, de Relig. T. Ill, 1.

*Motu proprio, "Dei providentis," July 16, 1906.

34 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

the first article of the ''Motu proprio/' he lays down the principle :
''Ntillus Episcopus aut cuius loci Ordinarius, nisi habita Apos-
tolicae Sedis per litteras licentia, novam alterutrius sexus sodali-
tatem condat aut in sua dioecesi condi permittat." Bishops,
Abbots NuUius, Vicars Apostolic and Prefects Apostolic are there-
fore denied exercise of their right of founding a new Religious
Institute without the consent of the Holy See.

No doubt exists in the minds of Canonists that by the terms,
"Sodality," "Family," and "Religious Institutes," the decree em-
braces all Religious Organizations that lead a life after the man-
ner of Religious. Whether or not the vows, oath, or mere prom-
ise form the bond of union and perseverance, matters nothing
in the present legislation. The Holy See simply prescribes that,
in the foundation of every Religious Institute, she must be con-
sulted through the proper Congregation.

The Roman Congregation competent, according to the deer.
"Dei providentis," to receive and deliberate upon the application
of the Bishop, was the S. Congr. EE et RR. But with the re-
organization of the Roman Curia in 1908, this Congregation has
been abolished and its work divided among several Congregations.
Under the present arrangement the S. Congr. de Religiosis dis-
charges the affairs of Religious and therefore ordinarily examines
and approves the application for new Institutes.*^ The modifica-
tions and exceptions to this general law will be treated later, when
we speak of pontifical approval.

What the Congregation wishes to examine (and therefore also
demands the corresponding information in the application) is
especially the name, the character and purpose of the proposed In-
stitute and of its founder. Then, in regard to the members of
the prospective society, the habit for the Novices and the Pro-
fessed respectively must be specified. Finally, the principles and
rules which form the basis for this approbation must be drawn
from the Const. "Conditae a Christo," and the "Normae" of
1901.

•Const. "Sapienti consilio," June 28, 1908.

IN THEIR EXTERNAI. RELATIONS 35

The deer. "Dei providentis" admonishes Bishops to keep these
same prescriptions in mind, when they approve the rules and con-
stitutions of new Institutes. This admonition hardly means that
the "Normae" must form the sole rule for every Conununity,
because the purpose and scope of an Institute may not permit
this. Then, too, posterior legislation has frequently laid down
general laws in contradiction to them. But it seems that the
Holy See intends that the statutes of future Congr^;ations shall
harmonize with the "Normae" wherever possible.

It is self-evident that neither the Ordinary nor the Institute
itself may change anything that the Holy See has passed upon.
For such a change requires the consent of the Holy See.* How-
ever^ this quasi-approbation does not withdraw the Institute
from the jurisdiction of the Bishop. It remains entirely subject
to the Bishop in accordance with the principles of the "'Conditae
a Christo/^ except only in matters already determined by the
Holy See.

What then is pontifical approbation proper? According to
Leo XIII, it is the favorable recognition and approval of the
rules and constitutions of an Institute by the Holy See.' The
approbation of only the Institute, exclusive of the rules and con-
stitution, constitutes a truly papal approval, but an imperfect
one. In virtue of this action of the Holy See, "it is necessary
that the Bishop's authority should be regulated and restricted
within certain limits. What these limits should be may be gath-
ered from the manner in which the Holy See approves similar
associations, and which consists in approving a Congregation as
a Religious Society with Simple vows under the authority of a
Superior General, without prejudice to the jurisdiction of the
Ordinaries, according to the sacred canons and the Apostolic
Constitutions/' ® The Const, of Leo XIII calls this intervention

*Decr. 'Dei providentis,'' July 16, 1006.
* Const ''Conditae a Christo."
•Ibid.

36 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

of the Holy See "comprobatio," as it were, acknowledging the
approbation of the Bishop.

It is well here to draw attention to some necessary distinctions.
We saw above that the Holy See has approved and adopted four
"Rules," and forbidden the introduction of new ones, at least for
Orders. Now, many Congregations have chosen one of these
"Regulae" for their norm of life. This chosen and approved
Rule must not be confounded with the approval spoken of by
Leo Xni. The IH Plenary Council of Baltimore declares that
the adoption of an approved Rule does not withdraw an Institute
from the jurisdiction of the Ordinary: "Instituta dioecesana
. . . licet Regulam a S. Sede approbatam sequantur, depend-
ent ab Ordinario." • The same must be said of Institutes which
adopt the "Normae" of 1901 for their exclusive rule. Although
the Holy See has framed the aforesaid "Normae" and commanded
that they should be the models for future Institutes, yet such
adoption does not constitute an approved Congregation.

Furthermore, as the preliminary examination and permission
required by the deer. "Deo providentis" does not constitute ap-
proval in the sense that the Institute becomes pontifical, so also
Rome's formal praise of the founder's intention or of the Insti-
tute's work, cannot be understood as pontifical approbation. The
"Normae" (Art. 1) say such an Institute "manet in statu pri-
vati et omnino dioecesani sodalicii." Now, the process of ap-
proval will appear clearer.

The practice of the Roman Curia permits of four stages in the
process of approving an Institute. The decrees expressing the
nature and extent of this pontifical approbation are termed re-
spectively "Decretum laudis," "Decretum approbationis instituti,"
"Decretum approbationis constitutionum ad experimentum" and
finally "Decretum approbationis definitivae." ^^ The significance
of the different decrees is quite evident. The "Decretum laudis^*

• III. C. Bait. n. 93 ; Sebastianelli, 1. c, p. 358.
'• Normae, Art. 2-4.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 37

embodies a general praise and reconunendation of the Institute,
and places it under the direct jurisdiction of the Holy See, at
least for the time being, until a more thorough investigation of
the Institute and its G^nstitution has been made.^^ This transi-
tory stage is terminated by the "Decretum approbationis instituti*'
Frequently the two pronouncements are combined in the one
decree of praise and approbation.^^ At any rate its import is to
assign a definite and canonical status to the Institute with the
authoritative declaration that the Institute contains nothing contrary
to good morals or propriety, and that, per se, it is calculated to
lead its members to perfection.^'

By the "Decretum approbationis constitutionum ad expert-
mentum" a certain number of years are prescribed for testing the
practicability of the rules, — generally from five to ten. After
the lapse of this period, and when due corrections have been
made, the "Decretum approbationis definitivae^' will be given.^*
This decree renders the rules "canon law and a public and sol-
emnly recognized way of perfection."^ The word "law" must
here be taken in its directive, and not preceptive, sense, for even
after this approval the rules do not "per se" bind under sin:
"Ipsas per se sub nuUo culpae reatu obligare ; non tamen excusare
a culpa eum qui easdem transgrederetur ex contemptu vel in ma-
teria contraria votis Dei Ecclesiaeve praeceptis." ^*

Note that this ordinary procedure is not always followed.
Some times the Holy See omits all preliminaries and includes in
a single decree the various approbations.*^

18
14 «1

" Ibid., Art. 2.

Ibid., Art. 6.

Suarez, de Rel, VII, 11, XVII, n. 17.

'Normae," aa. 21, 22; Vermeersch, de Rel. Inst, er Pers., Vol. II, c.
2, n. 13.

'* Vermeersch, Cath. Encyd. under "Religious."

'• "Normae," Art. 320.

*' Ibid., Art 23 ; Vermeersch, o. c, VoL II, c S.

38 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

The conditions and formalities required on the part of the
applicant for obtaining the pontifical approbation are not clearly
and definitely laid down in the Canon law. But ordinarily Uie
Holy See will readily approve an Institute, ''positis ponendis/'
the activity of which extends to two or more dioceses. For in
this case an occasion for a conflict of authority arises which gen-
erally hampers effectiveness. This principle is certainly deducible
from the Const. ''Conditae a Christo." Furthermore, the Latin-
American Council (1899) gives the same reason for inducing such
Institutes to seek pontifical approbation.

But the nearest approach to positive formalities, are the norms
laid down by the Holy See to guide the ''Commission" in approv-
ing new Institutes and their constitutions.^' They are, there-
fore, indirectly imposed upon every Institute seeking approbation.

The first requisite djonanded by the ''Normae peculiares"
(March 4, 1914) comprises a full account of the personal, moral,
and economic status of the Institute. No specific directions are
given. Bvidently a complete answer to the ninety-eight questions
of the ''Instructio" (July 16, 1906), which refers to the tri-
ennial account of the Religious Congregations to the Holy See,
would very probably meet all the demands of the S. Congrq;a-
tion. Since, moreover, Institutes founded after 1906 are ex-
pected to be conformable to the ''Normae" of 1901, the Holy
See can well demand a report on the actual agreement or dis-
agreement with these norms.

Next in importance are the testimonials from the various
Bishops in whose dioceses the Institute is located. The Holy
See insists on those for the reason that pontifical sanction entails
a diminution of episcopal authority and jurisdiction. Prudence,
therefore, requires that the Ordinary's viewpoint and report be
presented and considered.

The chief work of the Apostolic See is necessarily centered on
the constitutions of the' Institute. For this reason the Holy See

Utt

Nomiae pecuUarcs/' March 24, 1914.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 39

deems it necessary that ten copies of the same accompany the
application so that the various examiners may be accommodated.
jt goes without saying that this work involves considerable ex-
pense. Hence sufficient funds must be deposited to cover the
possible outlay.

In case the information forwarded to the Holy See is insuffi-
cient, the moderator of the Community must supply the deficiency
by obeying a summons to appear personally before the board of
examiners.

According to the present discipline the S. Congr. de Religiosis
possesses the right and duty to approve New Institutes and
their Constitutions.^^ The "Normae peculiares" supplementing
the Const. "Sapienti consilio" say : "Decretum quo laudatur proba-
turque institutum aliquod, et decretum approbationis constitu-
tionum, itemque substantialis mutatio quaevis in iam probatis
institutis inducenda, ad plenam congregationem semper pertinent/'
i. e., Congregationem de Religiosis. This was modified by a later
decree of the Holy See which created a special Commission for
the sole object of approving Religious Institutes and their consti-
tutions.^

The personnel of this Conunission is composed of the Cardinal
Prefect of the S. Congregation for Religious and a board of con-
suitors chosen by him from among the regular consultors of
the same Congregation. According to the "Annuario Pontificio''
for 1915, six consultors serve on this Commission.

Its competency is defined by the decree as embracing ''omnia
quae ad novi cuiuslibet Instituti votorum simplicium, euisdemque
constitutionem examen et approbationem attinent, nisi speciali
ex causa, vel exortis inter commissionis consultores gravibus
opinionum discrepantiis, Cardinalis Praefectus opportunius iudi-
caverit ad E'morum Patrum coetum rem deferre." A literal
interpretation does not show this faculty to be coextensive with

"* Const "Sapienti consifio,'' June 28, 1906.
*Decr. ''Pccoliari curae," March 24, 1914.

40 RJeLIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

the powers of the S. Congr. de Religiosis on the same subject-
matter as defined in the "Normae peculiares," c. VIII, a. V, n. 6, of
1908 (q. V. supra). For no mention is made of the ''substantialis
mutatio quaevis in iam probatis institutis inducenda." Besides
explicit reference is made only to "Instituta Votorum Simplicium."
Apparently, however, the purpose of the law embraces also In-
stitutes without vows, as well as deliberation on notable changes
proposed on constitutions already approved. For the express
intention of the legislator is to relieve the Congregation of this
subject-matter except in extraordinary cases of disagreement
when the affair must be submitted to the entire Congregation.
There seems little doubt that when such cases arise, the new
Commission will have little difHculty in disposing of them.

Here another doubt suggests itself in regSLvd to the quasi-
approval required for the formation of diocesan Institutes. It
seems reasonable to infer that the Commission will likewise fall
heir to this duty. For it would be rather strange if the entire
Congregation were to examine and direct the initiative steps of
an Institute, but afterwards assign the complete approval to the
Commission.

The Commission, in the entire mode of procedure, is in the
hands of the Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation.^^ He ap-
|X)ints the Secretary of the Commission, and directs all docu-
ments and testimonials to be delivered to him. He designates
one of the consultors to make a thorough study of the documents
and the constitutions. The result of his investigation, together
with a printed copy of the constitutions, are transmitted to each
of the associate consultors. These, in turn, are given ten days
consideration. Thereupon the entire Commission meets to dis-
cuss in detail the merits and demerits of the Institute and its
Constitution. The principals to guide them in their deliberation
are those laid down in Common law. Pontifical Constitutions and
especially the **Normae" of 1901. Of prime importance, how-

^ "Normae peculiares c."

IN THKIR EXTERNAI, RELATIONS 41

ever^ are the constitutions "Conditae a Christo," "Dei provi-
dentis," "Sapienti consilio," and "Romanus Pontifex." After
the matter has been thoroughly considered, each consultor is
obliged to set forth his opinion in the general assembly. Should
it be impossible to agree in essential matters the case is to be
referred to the entire Congregation. Finally, the result is com-
municated to the Religious Institute, after the approval of the
Holy Father has been granted.

It is well known that prior to the Const. "Sapienti consilio,"
Religious Institutes whose mother house was situated in the
territory of the S. Congr. de Prop. Fide, as well as those Insti-
tutes whose special aim was the mission-field proper, were sub-
ject to the S. Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith.
It therefore also approved new Institutes and their Constitutions.
But with the Introduction of the new discipline this Congregation's
competency with regard to Religious was limited even within its
own territory: "Quod vero spectat ad sodales religiosos, eadem
Congr^;atio sibi vindicet quidquid religiosos qua missionarios,
sive uti singulos, sive simul sumptos tangit. Quidquid vero re-
ligiosos qua tales, sive uti singulos, sive simul sumptos attingit,
ad Congregationem religiosorum negotiis praepositam remittat
aut relinquat." ^^ From this it seems that the approval of Re-
ligious Institutes, other than purely missionary Communities and
those of the Oriental Rite, is no longer proper to the S. Congr.
de Prop. Fide. These two exceptions are verified by the S.
Congr. de Prop. Fide approving the Constitutions of the Ar-
menian Mechitharists in 1909, and the Missonary Society of
Maryknoll in the United States in 1915.^^

In concluding this chapter it may be expedient to refer briefly
to Institutes whose status is doubtful. The Const. "Conditae a

** "Sapienti consilio," P. I, c. 9, art. 6; cfr. Ojetti, o. c, p. 100; Capello,
o. c, p. 230.

" Deer. S. C. de Prop. Fide, Aug. 6, 1909, and the "Deer, laudis et appro-
bationis," July 15, 1915.

42 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

•

Christo" makes no infringement on existing customs and privi-
leges : "Nihil penitus derogari volumus de facultatibus vel privi-
legiis . . . immemorabli aut seculari consuetudine confirma-
tis." If, therefore, an Institute possesses no positive proof of
pontifical approbation, it must be considered a diocesan Institute,
for the Bishop's ordinary rights cede only to positive proof to
the contrary. Again, what of approved Institutes over which
the Bishop has exercised full jurisdiction since the Const. "Con-
ditae a Christo" ? It is a principle of Canon law that jurisdiction
can be acquired by custom; and probably ten years suffice for
this. If, therefore, a Bishop has exercised jurisdiction over an
approved Institute for ten years, it follows that notwithstanding
the "Decretum laudis et approbationis," the Institute is truly dio-

cesan.**

Vcrmeersch, Periodica, Vol. VIII, p. (28).

IN THItIR ItXTERNAI, DELATIONS 43

CHAPTER IV.

Entrance Into a Rei^igious Congregation.

Entrance into a Religious Congregation is the admission of a
candidate in due form by competent authority. This may also
be called external vocation to the Religious state. No one has
a strict right to be admitted into a Religious Society, no matter
how holy his intention or how urgent his desires. Pius
X has sanctioned this truth in regard to the sacerdotal state:
''Neminem habere unquam ius ullum ad ordinationem antecedenter
ad liberam electionem Episcopi." ^ What is here affirmed of
the ecclesiastical state holds also for the Religious state.^ Su-
periors, consequently, violate no principle of justice by refusing
admittance to any candidate. But may this not be an infringe-
ment on the right of a divine vocation? Vermeersch says, in
commenting on the decision of the Roman commission in regard
to vocations: "Ipsis (superioribus) integrum est ex utilitate
. Instituti . . . de admissione sententiam f erre quae
nullum ius violat, et quae vocationem periicit quatenus sola effecit
ut quisquam re vera sit . . . religiosus. Et fit ut quis sancte
moveatur ad statum petendum . . . religiosum, qui tamen
iuste repellatur. Deus ipse interdum desideria inspirat quae c^re
compleri non permittit. Quare theologi voluntatem signi a vol-
untate beneplaciti divini distinguunt." '

Anyone, however, who is not hindered by an ecclesiastical im-
pediment may be admitted to Religious life. On the part of the
postulant, no more than a good intention and a firm resolution of

' Litterae ex Secretaria Status, July 2, 1912.
"Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VI, p. 262, sq.
• Ibid., p. 264.

44 R£UGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

serving God in that state together with the necessary moral, mental
and physical qualities, is required. This is clearly stated by the
decision of the same Roman Commission: "Nihil plus in ordi-
nando, ut rite vocetur ab Episcopo, requiri quam rectam inten-
tionetn simul cum idoneitate in iis gratiae et naturae dotibus re-
posita, et per eam vitae probitatem ac doctrinae sufficientiam
comprobata, quae spem fundatam f aciant fore et sacerdotii munera
recte obire eiusdemque obligationes sancte servare queat; esse
egregie laudandum." Certainly no more is demanded for the
Religious state. Fr. Vermeersch says of these conditions:
"Haec qui habeat ingressum ... in religionem postulare
potest, immo et eo laudabilius postulabit quo in dicto statu con-
silia Christi magis presse sequatur." ^ Aside, therefore, from
God's grace which begins, accompanies and perfects every good
act, internal vocation proper is more the "result of deliberation
according to the principles of reason and faith" than the effect
of individual aspiration or the internal movements of the Holy
Ghost. In extraordinary cases, however, "supernatural light may
be so abundantly shed upon the soul as to render deliberation
unnecessary." As to the Priesthood the contrary is expressly
denied by the Holy See : "Conditionem quae ex parte Ordinandi
debet attendi, quaeque Vocatio Sacerdotalis appellatur, nequaquam
consistere, saltem necessario et de lege ordinaria, in interna
quadam aspiratione subiecti seu invitamentis Spiritus Sancti, ad
sacerdotium ineundum." '^

The mental, physical and moral qualities, or as the above men-
tioned Letter expresses it, the "idoneitas in iis gratiae et naturae
dotibus reposita, et per eam vitae probitatem ac doctrinae suffi-
cientiam comprobata," are provided for by natural and ecclesiasti-
cal law in the form of impediments which render the Religious
profession invalid or illicit respectively.

* Ibid.

" Lit. cit., supra.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 46

Formerly the Religious profession in an .Institute other than
the approved Orders was both illicit and invalid in virtue of
ecclesiastical law.* But this prohibition has long since passed into
desuetude as was seen in the last chapter. It, therefore, need no
longer be reckoned with as an impediment. All Religious Insti-
tutes approved by Bishop or by Pope are "per se" open to the
aspirant to the Religious life.

The perfect use of reason, however, is so essential for the
Religious profession that its absence constitutes a natural im-
pediment which in no wise can be dispensed with. It matters
little whether its cause be immaturity or a physical defect. The
weighty obligations assumed in Religion require full deliberation,
the lack of which, by the natural law, bars a person from becom-
ing a Religious. It is hardly necessary to refer to the antiquated
custom of parents offering children to Religion in fulfillment of
a vow. These "Oblates" never became Religious except by their
own free act upon attaining the use of reason. This ancient cus-
tom has no practical value today, since it is merely a question of
history and opposed to all ecclesiastical practice and legislation.'^

On the contrary the Church requires in the candidate for Re-
ligion an age and a development which, under normal circum-
stances, insure not only full use of reason, but also stability of
character. The Council of Trent demands that the Solemn pro-
fession of Religion be not made before the completion of the
sixteenth year (Sess. XXV, c. 16). Pius X forbids lay
Brothers to make the perpetual profession before their thirtieth
year ("Sacrosancta," Jan. 7, 1911). Truly, neither of these
laws directly include Congregations. But they are at least di-
rective for all Religious Institutes (Wernz, o. c. vol. Ill, n. 628
and in note 222). Moreover, in the absence of a general law
for Religious Institutes in this matter, the Holy See is accus-
tomed to insert the law of Regulars in the special indults of ap-

• Supra, c. II, pp. i7, i8.

'Wernz, "lus Decretalium," vol. Ill, n. 638 and in note (188)

46 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

proval (Wernz, o. c. ; Battandier, o. c. n. 57). In Institutes of
clerics, however, .the Holy See requires to be observed not only
the age limit of Trent but also the completion of the gymnasium
course of studies (Deer. S. C. de Rel. super "Auctis admodum''
art. 6, Sept. 7, 1909). In countries which have not the Italian
system of education and grading, this would be equivalent to the
completion of those studies which precede the philosophical course
according to the particular systems (Vermeersch, Periodica, vol.
V,p.44).

But not all persons capable of choosing the Religious state,
have access to it. One cannot become a participant of the
spiritual favors of the Church unless he be in communion with
Her. Hence, since infidels, heretics, schismatics and excommuni-
cated are incapable of receiving the graces of Religion, while they
remain so, they are by ecclesiastical law forbidden to be incor-
porated into a Religious Institute.*

There are other persons whose duties in life prevent them from
entering Religious Orders and Institutes. Among these, persons
in wedlock may be considered as taking the first place. Common
law, however, makes some exceptions especially in favor of the
strict Orders. Thus "per se" a married person could enter Re-
ligion with the consent of the other party. Again, if one had
forfeited the rights of Marriage by adultery or by apostasy, the
other party, "positis ponendis," is free to choose the Religious
state.® Some Canonists are not at all certain that this regulation
in Common law may be vindicated in favor of Religious Congre-
gations.^® The same uncertainty prevails in extending the privi-
leges of Common law which grants persons in wedlock two months
within which they may choose the Religious state provided the

•Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., Nov. 26, 1898, in Anal. eccl. T. VII, p. 884;
Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, p. 295.

*Wernz. 1. c, n. 628; Sebastianelli, de Pers, p. 370.

Wernz. 1. c; Bastien, o. c, p. 45; Battandier, o. c, p. 58.

IN THBIR BXTBRNAL RELATIONS 47

inarriage is not consummated.^^ But it is certain that a ratified
(ratum) marriage is not dissolved by the profession of Simple
vows.**.

Closely related to the matrimonial bond is the contract of
betrothment. It is generally admitted that the sponsalitial con-
tract does not bind in prejudice to Religious life, even in Insti-
tutes where the Religious state exists only imperfectly.*'

When the state of Matrimony is blessed with children, there
arises such an intimate bond between parents and children, and
also between brothers and sisters, that at least their extreme needs
must be provided for even at the sacrifice of joining, or at the
expense of deserting, the Religious life. This has always been
the teaching of the Church and Moralists. In the case of brothers
and sisters, however, the voice of nature is not so urgent as in
the case of parents, at least not when there arises only a grave
necessity which could be provided for otherwise. But even then
Theologians without hesitation maintain that one should, or at
least may, postpone entrance into a Religious Institute.*^

A union similar to that of wedlock exists between the spiritual
pastor and his flock. Wherefore the sacred Canons prohibit the
Bishop, even a Titular, from entering Religion without the special
permission of the Holy See.*" As to priests and clerics the
privil^[e renewed by Benedict XIV obtains: "Clericus potest
transire ad Religionem, non petita licentia, etiamsi contradica-

"c. 7, Tit. 32, X, lib. Ill; Gasparri, de Matr. n. 437. Noldin, Theol.
Mor., vol. III. n. 522; and De Sexto, n. 84.

**C. of Trent, scss. XXIV, can. 6, de rcf.; Wernz, 1, c; Bargilliat,
Praelectiones J. C. n. 1106; Sebastianelli. I. c, p. 369.

"Gasparri, o. c. voL I. n. 145, 146; De Smet. "Betrothment and Mar-
riage," vol. I, p. 30; Wernz. o. c, vol. Ill, n. 628.

** St Thomas, "Summa," II, II. q. 169 ; St. Alphonsus. Theol MoraL, lib.
VI, 66; Wernz. L c; Bastien, o. c, n. 86.

" C. 18, Tit 31, X, Ub. Ill ; C. 2, Tit 7, X. Ub. Ill ; C. 10, Tit. 10, X, lib.
I ; Benedict XIV, Const. *'Ex quo," Jan. 14, 1747.

48 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

tur." ^' Since this privilege refers to the perfect Religious state,
Institutes, in which the three perpetual vows of poverty, chastity
and obedience are not made, are excluded: "Nous ne pensons
pas," says Bastien, "que Ton puisse 6tendre ce privilege aux
associations des pretres qui n'emettent pas les trois voetix. p. ex.
les Lazarists, les pretres de St. Sulpice, etc., le mobile de la dispense
faisant d6faut." ^^ The Holy See excepts from the general privi-
lege students of some Pontifical Colleges and priests ordained
"sub titulo missionis." As to the students of such Pontifical
Colleges the following oath must be taken: "Spondeo et iuro,
me, quandiu hoc in collegio commorabor, et postquam, sive studiis
expletis, sive, secus, quavis de causa, inde discessero, nuUi re-
ligiosae familiae aut societati vel congregationi regulari nomen
daturum, nee in earum uUa professionem emissurum, sine spe-
ciali Apostolicae Sedis licentia." *' A similar oath is generally
taken by candidates for the priesthood "sub titulo missionis." ^*
Wherefore the Holy See has declared: "Eis, qui hoc titulo (Mis-
sionis) sunt ordinati, vi praestiti iuramenti interdicitur in Re-
ligionem ingredi absque venia S. Sedis." ^^ Consequently the
oath is licit and binding even in prejudice of a higher state.
But from the S. Congregation's response it is evident that clerics
ordained under the mission-title must be considered as making
a voluntary renunciation of the privilege granted by Common
law rather than as not participating in the same.

Ordinarily civic duties do not take precedence of the Religious
life. It is unbecoming, to say the least, that, in times of peace.

"Eadem Const, "Ex quo."

" O. c. p. 51 in note ; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, p. 296 and note (212) ; Bouix,
o. c. p. 459. Responsio S. C. RR. et EE. Jan. 28, 1837.

'•Const. "Quum Rom. Pontifices," June 38, 1863; Instr. S. C. de prop.
Fide, April 27, 1871; Bastien, o. c, p. 53 in note 2. The oath is taken
from the "Relatio Annualis Vicesima Septima" of the Josephinum Ponti-
fical College, Columbus, Ohio.

'• Instr. S. C. de Prop. Fide, April 27, 1871 ; C. of Bait III, p. 204.

*Eadem Instr. n. 10.

IN THKIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 4^

aspirants for the Priesthood or for Religion should be compelled
to render military service to the State and thereby to postpone
or to desert a higher state. But when governments no longer re-
gard the rights of the Church (Privilegium exemptionis, cfr.
Sebastianelli, de Pers., n. 17), prudence suggests that these rights
be not asserted as long as no direct violation of Divine rights is
involved. This policy seems to have inspired the new legislation
of the Church forbidding persons, subject to military service*
to make the perpetual profession in Religious Orders and Insti-
tutes, or to receive Holy Orders before this service has been
rendered.^^ Even when the military demands cover but a few
months, the Religious profession must be delayed.^- There is
one exception to the law, viz., Religious candidates for Orders,
whose course of studies is within one year of completion, may
make the perpetual profession, provided they take an oath
of serving on the foreign Missions until such time that their lia-
bility to military service has elapsed.^'

In this category of personal obligations which prevent one
from embracing the Religious life, conjmutative justice also must
be mentioned. Thus the Canons of the Church prohibit the re-
ception of insolvent debtors and of persons involved in litiga-
tions.^* Cases, however, may occur which exclude absolutely
any possibility of satisfying justice. Such would certainly re-
ceive the benign consideration of the Church, for She looks more
to the moral than to the social conditions and necessities of man,
especially when these do not include personal turpitude.

Yet the social attitude cannot be altogether ignored, not even
by Religious Institutes. Nor does the Church ignore it. This
is evinced especially in the case of illegitimacy.^" Generally

" "Inter Reliquas," Jan. 1, 1911.

*"Responsio" S. C. de Rel. Feb. 1, 1912.

" Ibid., n. 6.

•*Sixtus V, Const. "Cum de omnibus," Nov. 26, 1586; Clement VIII,
Const "In suprema," April 2, 1602; Wernz, 1. c, n. 628, 629.

*C. 1, tit. 18, X. de fil. presbyt.; Const. "Cum de omnibus," Nov. 26,
li87.

50 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

ill^timacy, and even widowhood by the particular decrees of
approval are made impediments to Religious Congregations.^*
Since no general law exists to this effect, Religious Institutes are
governed solely by their constitutions, except Institutes of priests.
Illegitimacy is an impediment to Sacred Orders, and therefore it
necessarily effects Congregations of clerics.

Quite different is the attitude of the Church towards personal
and public crime. The Sacred Canons explicitly forbid the re-
ception of applicants publicly stained.*^ The Papal Constitutiqns
refer directly to Religious Orders. Yet there can be no doubt
that the honor of other Institutes demands this same prohibition
as will appear from the following regulations.

Pius X laid down the rigid law for all Religious Institutes of
men that they may not receive any applicant who has been guilty
of any offense which entailed dismissal from an Institute of
ieaniing; "NuUimode, absque speciali venia S. Apostolicae, et
sub poena nuUitatis professionis, excipiantur . . . postu-
lantes, qui e collegiis etiam laicis ob inhonestos mores vel ob alia
crimina expulsi fuerint." ^* Under a separate decree the same
law has been extended to Congregations of women.^* Evidently
the term "Collegium" cannot be applied to elementary schools, for
in ecclesiastical language "Collegium" is generally predicated of a
society of persons acting as a moral unit and connected with some
sort of common life.*^ It would appear, then, that in the present
law "Collegium" refers properly to institutes of higher education.
The law, however, speaks in general terms, and therefore col-
leges, and universities, whether conducted by clerics or laics,
by Catholics or non-Catholics, are comprised in the late decrees.

A further and more stringent precept obtains in case of dismis-

* Wernz, 1. c. ; Battandier, o. c, n. 55 ; Bastien, o. c, ti. 80 ; Lanslot, n. 75.
"Const. "Cum de omnibus," Nov. 26, 1587; *'Ad Romanum," Oct. 21,

1588.

* Deer. S. C. de Religiosis, "Ecclesia Christi," Sept. 7, 1909.
•Deer. "Sanctissimus," Jan. 4, 1910.

*• Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, p. (21).

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 51

sal from vocational schools. The same decrees just quoted
forbid the reception of postulants who have been expelled
"(juacumque ratione" from Ecclesiastical and Religious seminaries,
colleges, and domestic school for girls. Ecclesiastical and Re-
ligious seminaries and colleges are determined not by the status
of the teaching faculty, but by the aim of the students attending
these schools. If the students of an Institute are preparing im-
mediately for the Ecclesiastical or Religious state, the present law
would certainly find its full application. If, however, the student
body were preparing for various avocations in life, such Insti-
tutes Vermeersch thinks could hardly be considered ecclesiastical
or Religious colleges.^^ But this impediment refers not only to
iporal guilt, but also to mental inability of any cause justifying
expulsion."*

The same ecclesiastical impediment accompanies compulsory
dismissal from Religious Congregations or Orders. Henceforth
no Novice or Religious of either sex who has been expelled from
a Religious Institute or has obtained a dispensation from the
vows, can enter another Institute or another province of the
same Institute without the special permission of the Holy See.**

It is necessary to make a few observations on these new regu-
lations of the S. C. de Religiosis, since they entail sudi severe
consequences. There is question of dismissal or expulsion in
the various impediments. Now a virtual (aequivalenter) dis-
missal or expulsion, i. e,, advice to leave on one's own accord in
order to avoid formal expulsion, is tantamount to an explicit
dismissal, and, therefore, such a postulant may not be licitly re-
ceived into any Religous Institute. Since, however, such pro-
cedure would not be a direct violation of the law, but as Canonists
say, an evasion "in fraudem legis," the Religious profession would
be valid, but not licit. If, then, one were advised to discontinue

"Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. V, p. 54.

• Ibid, and "Responsio S. C. de Rcl.," April 5, 1910.

"Deer. "Ecclesia Christi" ct "Sanctissimus" cit

52 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

his or her studies or leave a Religious Institute for other reasons
than to avoid dismissal, such a one would not be effected by the
law; for voluntary egress from a school or Religious Institute
is no impediment to joining a Religious Society. Nevertheless
a sworn testimony is required to show that such a one has not
been "formaliter vel aequivalenter" dismissed.'* Nor are postu-
lants included in the decree, but Novices in the strict sense and
Religious who have made the Religious profession. Again there
is reference only to mental or moral causes which effect the
dismissal. Consequently, merely physical causes such as ill
health, etc., form no legitimate basis for incurring the penalty
of the law. Finally the oft-quoted principle of Canonists that
Rome's legislation for Religious must be restricted exclusively
to Institutes directly under her authority unless the contrary is
explicitly stated, finds application here. Hence we may safely
say, then, that the above precepts of Pius X do not extend to
diocesan Institutes. This does not, however, exclude them from
being at least directive norms which Bishops would do well to
impose on Societies under their jurisdiction.'*^

A final impediment to entering a Religious Institute of the
Western Church is the Oriental Rite. No person of the Oriental
Rite can be admitted into a Community of the Occidental Rite
without the special permisson of the Holy See'* and the written
testimony of the postulant's proper Bishop.'^ In case of lay
Brothers and Sisters, however, recourse to the Holy See is re-
quired only for a "formal" transfer to the Latin Rite.'' If, there-
fore, a candidate does not formally surrender the Oriental Rite,
he or she would be obliged to follow the same Rite in case dis-
missal or voluntary egress from the Institute were ever effected.

»* "Declaratio" S. C. de Rel. April 5, 1910.
"Ibidem; Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, pp. 54, d9, 124.
"• Deer. S. C. de Prop. Fide, June 1, 1885.

"Lit. Apost. "Orientalium dignitas Ecclesiarum," Nov. 30, 1894; Litterae
Praefecti S. C. de Prop. Fide, June 15, 1912.
"•Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. VI, pp. 245, 246.

IN THEIR 6XTERNAI, RELATIONS 53

This procedure, however, could not be followed by candidates
for Sacred Orders. No Order or Institute, irrespective of its
canonical status, may ordain a subject of the Oriental Rite with-
out the special permission of the Holy See.

The question now arises in regard to all these impediments, —
how an Institute may know of their existence or non-existence.
For this purpose the Holy See has imposed the obligation on all
Religious Congregations of demanding testimonial letters from
the postulant's Bishop or Bishops. The decree "Romani Ponti-
fices" says on this matter :•• *'In quocumque Ordine, Congr^;a-
tione, Societate, Instituto, Monasterio, domo, sive in iis emit-
tantur vota SoUemnia, sive simplicia . . . nemo ad habitum
admittatur absque testimonialibus litteris turn Ordinarii originis
turn etiam Ordinarii loci, in quo postulans post expletum decimum
quintum annum aetatis suae ultra annum moratus f uerit, Ordinarii
in praefatis litteris testimonialibus exquisivennt, etiam per
secretas informationes de postulantis qualitatibus, referre debeant
de ejus natalibus, aetate, moribus, vita, fama, conditione, edu-
catione, scientia, etc. . . . Et sciant Ordinarii eorum con-
scientiam super veritate expositorum oneratam remanere, nee
ipsis unquam liberum esse huiusmodi testimoniales litteras de-
negare." Here we notice that the testimonials must contain the
necessary information pertaining to all the impediments touched
upon in this chapter. Nor can it be said that this law has passed
into desuetude, for the "Elenchus quaestionum," issued in 1906
and outlining a certain number of questions which must be re-
ported upon every third year, states in the tenth question "de
admissis" : "Institutis Religionum, num litterae testimoniales per
Decretum Romani Pontifices praescriptae in singulis casibus
expeditae fuerint." This said decree, ''Romani Pontifices," does
not seem to refer to diocesan Institutes, nor to approved Insti-
tutes of women.*^ Nor does the Const. "Conditae a Christo"

*Decr. S. C. de Regularibus, Jan. 25, 1848.
^ Sebastianelli, o. c, de Pars., n. 334.

54 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

expfidtly speak of these except in reference to testimonial let-
ters for Institutes of Priests.*^ In r^;ard to diocesan Institutes,
however, the Const. "Conditae a Christo" says : "be puellis habitum
religiosum petenibus, item de iis quae probatione expleta, emis-
surae sint vota, Episcopus singulatim certior fit ; eiusdem erit illas et
de more explorare et si nihil obstat admittere." *^ Practically this
obligation includes the information required by the testimonials ;
for how else could a Bishop judge whether an3rthing objectionable
as to the candidate exists? As to approved Institutes, the
"Elenchus" manifests the will of the Holy See, and makes no
distinction between Institutes of women and men. Therefore
it would seem to follow that these, too, must demand testimonials
before receiving postulants. No doubt the Roman approval of
the individual Communities makes ample provisions for the
same. At any rate testimonials are demanded of each postulant
who has left a vocational school, college, seminary, or Religious
Institute according to the decrees quoted above.**

Ordinarily testimonials of Baptism and Confirmation are also
required of postulants. The "Normae" of 1901 make special
mention of them.** But there does not seem to be a special law
to this effect, yet the approved constitutions generally demand
them.*'

Many, no doubt, find these various prescriptions of the Holy
See irksome and inconvenient, not to say severe at times. But
all must admit that they redound to the greater security and glory
of that state which has produced so many Saints in the Church
l:hrougfaout the different centuries. The history of Religious
Orders and Congregations but too plainly shows that as an Insti-

•* C. H n. 6.
" C. I, n. 7.

^Decrs. ''Ecdesia Christi" and '^Sancdssimus.'*

•*Normae, Art 57.

* Wernz, I c., in note (204) ; Bastiei^ o. b., p. 45 ; Batbui'dier, b. t, p.
61; Lanslot, o. c, p. 44.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 55

tute neglected the regulations of the Holy See, it deteriorated pro-
portionately and not seldom reached that irremediable stage
where dissolution was inevitable; while strict obedience to
the precepts of the Holy See has ever seemed to merit the special
blessing of Providence, by bringing to its doors numerous can-
didates, a more vigorous spiritual life, aiid greater fruit of
sanctity. And little should we wonder that so it should be, in
order that an Institute may merit benediction from God and in-
spiratibn from man. An Institute whose comer stone is obed-
itace, niust first give an example to those whom it calls to join
lis ranks, of readiness to obey in all things, that iti it may be
verified the words of Him who said, "He that foUoweth Me walk-
eih itbt in darkness."

56 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

CHAPTER V.

The Bond op Religious Lipe.

The Religious State may be defined "as the mode of life, ir-
revocable in its nature, of men (hominum) who profess to aim
at the perfection of Christian Charity in the bosom of the Church
by the three perpetual vows of poverty, chastity and obedience." ^
In this precise form the Religious State is the invention of the
Church. Christ, the Author of perfection, proposed the counsels
but left the mode of their observance to the individual and the
Church. If they are to form the foundation of a special state
of life, some device must be resorted to in order to insure sta-
bility in their observance. Stability or permanency is the first
requisite of any state. The very word "state" suggests it. Se-
bastianelli says: "Status a 'stare,' est quidem vivendi modus cum
permanentia ex causa non facile mutabili sed perenni" (o. c, vol.
II, p. 346). How can this be procured?

Christ has left the way of Christian perfection optional, and
consequently no authority can make it obligatory. A firm reso-
lution or a promise may ensure some sort of stability, but hardly
an irrevocable state. There remains, however, the possibility of
invoking God in confirmation of a promise or directing the
promise immediately to Him. Thus a fourfold method of ob-
serving the counsels or striving after perfection is presented to
man : the state of perfection may be inaugurated first by a mere
resolution sustained only by the bond of charity; secondly, by
a promise to a legitimate superior, which would add at least the
obligation of fidelity; thirdly, by an oath or lastly by a vow,

' Vermeersch, Catholic Encyclopedia, ''Religiotts."

IN THKIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 57

either of which would strengthen the promise by the bond of
Religion. Each of these has been chosen as the bond of Re-
ligious life in Societies approved by the Church.

In Religious Institutes which are based on the mere bond of
charity, no more can be required of postulants than the firm
promise of perseverance. Billuart defines a "propositum" as an
"actus voluntatis deliberatae, quo quis vult quidem facere id de
quo deliberate sed numquam obligat se ad illud faciendum."'
If at any time one should for sufficient reason desist from con-
tinuing in this state of mind, it could not "per se" be imputed
to him as sin, for "omissio propositi per se non est peccatum." *
The "per se" is essential when applying this principle to Religious
Institutes as will be seen below. Entering such an Institute
signifies something more than an intention to do something, it
involves a tacit bilateral contract of not inflicting any injury.
Therefore, such Institutes have much in common with that class
which binds its members by a promise of perseverance. But the
comparative instability of the Religious life in such Institutes
prevents it from being a true state in the strict meaning of that
term.

Those Institutes which exact a formal promise of perseverance,
oblige themselves to provide for all the spiritual and temporal
necessities of their members as also not to dismiss members with-
out a just and grave reason. The postulant in turn pledges per-
severance and a mode of life in harmony with the principles of
the Institute, so as not to give just cause for dismissal.* In virtue
of this mutual and onerous contract a strict obligation in justice
arises: "Promissionem perseverantiae acceptando, ipsa vicissim
sese obligavit ad gerendam de membro suo convenientem curam ;

S ((

Sumtna TheoL," vol. IV, dist. IV, a. 1. de Rel.
• Noldin, "Summa Theol," vol. II, n. 209.
^Bouix, de Regularibus, vol. II, p. II, p 465 sq.

58 RELIGIOUS CONGRtGATIONS

ita ut venis existat congregationcm inter et ipsius membra onero-
stls coritracttts." •

If this promise is confirmed by an oath, another obligation of
pfer^etrerance is added to the contract, viz., the obligation of
religion. By an oath, God is invoked as a witness to the truth
of the present promise and as a bait and surety of its execution ;
hot indeed in the sense that He assumes the obligation of ful-
iilling the contract, but that He considers its non-fulfillment as a
direct offense against Himself. By an oath, furthermore, God is
implicitly asked to manifest, either in this life or in the next, the
truth of what is said. The violation, then, of this promise, to
tvhich God has added His authority, is not only an infringement
of justice, but also of reverence due to God. The oath, there-
fore, must give greater stability to the Religious life.*

But neither the onerous contract nor the oath can give irre-
vocability to the Religious profession. The promise is entirely
subject to the contracting parties, for "nihil tam naturale, quam
ebdem genere quodque dissolvere, quo colligatum." ^ Atid the
oath necessarily follows the tiature of the contract : "Accessorium
naturam sequi congruit principalis." ® For this reason the true
foundation of the Religious state cannot be had in the promise
or the oath; but must be sought in the vow.

The Scholastics detine the vow as a "promissio Deo facta de
bono meliori";' but for our purpose the "de bono mdiori" is
circumscribed by the evangelical counsels of perpetual jxiverty,
chastity and obedience, as the definition of the Religious state
indicates.^® While Christ gave many counsels, yet the observ-

• BbUix, I. c. ; Suarez, o. c. Tom. 2, Tract. 6, lib. 6, c. 15 ; St. Alphonsus,
o. c, lib. Ill, Tract 2, c 4.

*Noldin, o. c, vol. II, p. 248 sq.

• Reg. juris civilis, 35.

• Reg. Jur., 42 in 6**.

•St. Thomas, "Summa," II, II, qu. 88. a. 1-12.

'• Suarcz, Dc Religione, Tract Vtl, lib. ii, C. 2 ; Scbastianelli, De Regu-
laribus, n. 319.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL REtATlONS 59

arice of all of ihem is not necessiry for the state of perfection.
The great obstacles to perfection are the csire of things temporal,
the pleasures of the flesh and the free exercise of personal liberty.
The freie and permanent renunciation of these is necessary, but
also sufficient for acquirihg Christian perf ectioh.^^ The prbinises
made in a Religious Institute insure pentianency, for God de-
itiands the fulfillment of vows : "Si quid Deo vovisti, ne moreris
rieddere, displicet enim ei infidelis et stulta promissio." ^^ And
St. Thomas says: "Votum quandam obligationem importat
. . . et voto quis Deo obligatur ex justitia eo modo, quo
iiistitia ad Deum esse potest." ^^ Therefore the double obligation
of justice and fidelity towards God binds one to adhere to such
a promise of perseverance in Religion.

We might ask why a greater stability is achieved through the
vbw than the oath. Authors dispute whether "per se" the vow
or oath jthposes the greater obligation. Both are acts of Re-
ligion. The vow creates an obligation of fidelity, and the oath,
that bi reverence towards God. The one i)rohiises somiething
to God, the other invokes ttis authority to cbtifirm a plx)mise to
hian. But when the vow and oath appertain to the Religious life,
there is no doubt that the vow induces the greater stability, for
it is the promise itself while the oath is only iaccessory. And
then the Church has always laid greater Stress upon the Vow and
a dispensation from it requires grkver reasons.**

As a promise made to God, the vow is a purely internal act.
But the natural law dictates that if it is to be adjudicatied in the
external forum, it must be made public; and if it is to become
the foundation of a state in life, it is very becoming that some
solemnity be attached to it.^*^ Thus vows have fever been divided

" Suarez, 1. c. ; Sebastianelli, 1. c. Verrrteersch, be Rel. Inst, et Pcrsonis,
Tom. I, c. 1, a. 11.
" Eccl. C. 6.

" "Summa," 11. II., qu. 88, a. 1.

"Suarez, de Jur. lib. II, 6, 12; Ojetti, o. c, ii. 2547; NoMin, 1. c.
**St. Thomas, 1. c, qu. 88, a 7.

60 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

into priyate and public. But in regard to Religious life, vows
have received the appellation of Solemn and Simple according
to the special specification of the Church. Boniface VIII says :
"Illud solum votum debere dici sollemne . . . quod solem-
nizatum fuerit per susceptionem SS. Ordinis aut per professionem
expressam vel tacitam factam alicui de religionibus per Sedem
Apostolicam approbatam . . . Nos attendentes, quod voti
sollemnitas ex sola institutione ecclesiae est inventa." ^* With
the introduction of Religious Congregations the Simple vows be-
came the foundation and bond of these Institutes.^'' The Society
of Jesus prescribed both Solemn and Simple vows.^* Pius IX
prescribed that the Religious Orders of men make the Simple
vows for three years after the Novitiate and then the Solemn.^*
Leo XIII extended the same to Orders of women.***

The obligation, however, of the Solemn and Simple vow is
the same. Celestine III maintained that "votum simplex non
minus obligat apud Deum quam sollemne." ** And Fr. Ver-
meersch says, "vota sollemnia et privata inter se differunt non
tam intrinseca quam accidentali et extrinseca accessione auctori-
tatis." ** But the Church has attached an additional power to
the Solemn vow in the form of an invalidating impediment to
the acts opposed to the Solemn vow.*' Since this incapacitating
effect of the Solemn vow emanates simply from the Church's
authority, it follows that She can also affix it to the Simple vow.
This has been done by Her for instance in the case of Simple
vows made by the Scholastics in the Society of Jesus.**

*• C. Unic. de voto in (5*.

"Const. "Inter cetera," Jan. 20, 1521; **Quamvis justa," June 28, 1748;
Conditae a Christo," Dec 8, 1900.
*• Const. "Ascendente Domino," 1584.
" Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., March 19, 1867.
=• Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., May 3, 1902.
^ C. 6, X. qui clerici.
^De rel. Instit. et Pers., Tom. I, c. I.
=* Cf r. "Corpus Juris," 1. c.
'* Const. "Ascendente Domino," cit.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 61

In order that the Simple vows may form a permanent bond in
Religious Congregations, it is necessary that they be perpetuaL
Many Institutes exact only temporary vows. Consequently, in
these the true nature of the Religious state is sacrificed. This,
however, in no wise affects the Religious life according to the
evangelical counsels. Wherefore the Holy See has approved
such Institutes and given them a place in her Common law.

A still greater departure from the Religious state is made by
those Institutes which have not the "three" substantial vows of
Religion, but make only one or the other, be it temporary or
perpetual. Leo XIII acknowledged these Institutes in the gen-
eral "Charter" for Religious Congregations, but in the following
year recommends the three substantial vows ; this is evidenced by
the "Normae" which are destined to constitute the guiding prin-
ciples for all Congregations. In Art. 102 we read, "Tria tantum
substantialia (vota) excluso quarto, sint admittenda." The ex-
ception to the fourth vow is evidently to preclude the multiplica-
tion of obligations. Many Institutes, as for example the Jesuits,
Friars Minor, Clerks Regular, Passionists, Nuns of St. Clare and
others, make a fourth vow. The Council of Trent approved of
this custom.^^ But for Congregations the Holy See has evidently
found a fourth vow inexpedient.

The vows of Religion entail severe obligations which generally
bind for life. Wherefore the Church takes the greatest care that
sufficient time and opportunity are afforded the candidates to con-
sider well the responsibilities. The Council of Trent prescribes
at least one year of probation for Regulars,^* and the same law is
generally extended to Congregations approved by Rome. The
"Normae" (Art. 72) permit the time of probation to be pro-
tracted to at least two years if deemed expedient. After this
period of deliberation there can remain little room for ignorance
or error in the mind of the Novice. Nevertheless should a sub-

"Sess. 25, c. I.
"Sess. 26.

62 REUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

stantial error m regard ^o t^ie object pf the vow exist, it wquld
vitiate the same : "Vota quae ... in aliq^a relig^one ^pprq-
bata emittuntur, irrita non esse, nisi intercesserit error substan-
tialis." ^ So in like manner would the yows ordinarily be nu^l
and void if one were forced to make them. Billuart says, in
speaking of the yow : " Votum sive simplex sive soUemne emissum
ex metu grayi injuste ab homine incussu ad extorquendum illud,
iure positivQ est nullum." *^

No general principles are adducible for interpreting the scop^
of the vows of the different ^nstitu^s. The rules, constitutions
and customs of every Society are the natural guides, except of
course in matters regarding the vow of chastity. Here no di-
vergence of opinion or practice is possible. Sometimes the Holy
See, or the Institute with the permission of the Holy See, insists
upon a stricter observance of the vows. It is generally held th^t
such innovations, if they are really contrary to the established
practice, do not ordinarily bind the members who have been living
under the old rules and customs, but affect only those who make
their vows after these changes.^*

\V^hile the rules and constitution interpret the scope of the
vows, yet they themselves are not included in the obligations as-
sumed by the vows, unless this should be clearly stated. Bouix
says : "Regula npn obligat vi voti oboedientiae, nisi id in ea clare
exprimitur . . . et ideo propria obligatio regulae, ut sic,
non ex voto oboedientiae, sed ex propria ratione legis et prin-
cipiis ejus, est coUigenda." ^ It was shown above that
the rules ordinarily do not bind under sin. Must we then
conclude, since neither the vow of obedience nor any precept
make the rules of an Institute obligatory in conscience, they are
only a counsel and, therefore, their observance or violation op-

"Ojetd, o. c, n. 4135; De Lugo, de Jure et Justida, Disp. XXII, n. 88.
**!. c, Dissert IV, art I, c 18; cfr. Sebastianelli, vol. I, p. 385, for
exceptions to this general law.
"* Vcrmeersch, Periodica, vol. VII, p. (18).
••De Regularibus, vol. II, p. 646.

IN THEIR gXT^ilNAL RELATJONS 63

tional? Suarez thinks not: "Regula religiosa non est merum
consilium; quia praeter illam sunt multa alia quae ex consilio
possunt religiosa . . . et nihilominus religiosus omittens alia
consilia supra suam regulam, non censetur deesse suo muneri et
statui: si autem suam regulam praetermittat, deficere censetur
a sua obligatione. Ergo talis regula respectu illius plus est quam
consilium. Ergo necessitatem aliquam imponitJii potest, ergo,
infractionem punire; et injunctam poenam explere tenetur vio-
lator etiam in consci^ntia. Unde etiam tunc ratiopem legis
aliquatenus retinet regula." '^

Summing up, then, we s^e th^t the vows of perpetual poverty,
chastity and obedience constitute the natural t^ond of the H^-
ligjpus state. Sometimes this bond is replaced by an qath or a
m^re proniise which destroys the true notion of a pern^iq^fit
state, bt|( which the Church has accepted as sufficient for a quasi-
Religious life in well-organized Con^munities. In every case an
obligation of justice is contracted which in two instances is iq-
creased by an obligation of religion. The extent of the obligation
is measured by the rules of the Institute, which in turn have the
sanction of at least penal laws.

" Suarez, Dc Relig., Tom. 4, Tract 8, lib. I, c 2 ; B^jui^, 1. c, p. 54<B^ sq.

64 REUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

CHAPTER VI.

Egress From a Religious Institute.

The bond of Religion differs essentially from that of Sacred
Orders and Matrimony. In the present economy of Divine
Providence, the bond of Sacred Orders and Matrimony is in-
dissohible, while that of Religion is "per se" perpetual, but for
just and proportionately grave reasons may be dissolved and its
obligation dispensed with or commuted. The present chapter,
therefore, purposes to investigate the general obligation of per-
severance, and the canonical regulations regarding dispensation
and dismissal.

Religious, properly and improperly so-called, are obliged to
persevere in virtue of the mutual promise made in the Religious
profession. This supposes some sort of a promise. If a Con-
gregation were to allow egress at will, there could be no question
of a strict obligation to persevere, unless ecclesiastical law in gen-
eral or some external right of justice would be violated thereby.
By the Religious profession the candidate surrenders himself to
the Society which in turn accepts his promise and obliges itself
to provide for all the necessaries of soul and body: "Intervenit
proinde contractus utrinque onerosus, religiosum erga congrega-
tionem obligans; ita ut, abstrahendo etiam a votis, laedatur ius
congregationi acquisitum, si religiosus, ipsa invita, eam derelin-
quat. Quia hoc modo ligant ex natura sua contractus onerosi
quilibet." ^ This doctrine applies equally, "quoad congregationes
status religiosi essentiam non habentes, sed in quibus intervenit
votum, juramentumve aut promissio perseverantiae." ^ We find

^ Bouix, De Reg., vol II, p. 168.
' Bouix, 1. c, p. 464.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 65

here a true application of the rule laid down in the Sacred Canons :
"Mutare quis consilium non potest in alterius praejudicium." *
This, however, supposes that the promise or vows are valid
and no higher duty intervenes. But what if the invalidity of the
profession be invoked? According to the Council of Trent an
ecclesiastical trial may be instituted contesting the validity of the
Religious profession within five years from the day of the pro-
fession. The nature and procedure of this judicial trial were
clearly defined by Benedict XIV.^ All this, however, refers only
to Regulars. In diocesan Institutes the Bishop would in-
vestigate and decide the case "sola facti veritate inspecta." '
But in approved Congregations, if the nullity of the profes-
sion were sought, the solution would remain with the Holy
See, unless the constitutions of the said Congregation
made special provision for such cases. Bastien says in
this regard: "En tous cas, si un proces doit etre entame,
faudrait recourir au Saint-Siege, s'il s'agit des congregations ap-
prouvees par lui." ^ Wemz thinks, however, that if the nullity
of the profession were desired by either the Religious or Institute,
it would be more expedient to resort to dismissal and dispensa-
tion of vows: "Utplurimum huiusmodi causae, quibus persona
religiosa vel institutum religiosum praetendunt nullitatem sim-
plicis professionis et postulant solutionem vinculi contracti cum
instituto religioso et liberationem a votis, potius expediuntur per
viam dismissionis et dispensationis saltem ad cautelam datae
servatis legibus proprii instituti et decretis pontificiis." " Such
a dismissal according to the present discipline renders entrance
into another institute very difficult, if not impossible. For this
reason we prefer the solution of Bastien and deem it more ex-

' Regula Jur. 42 in 6.

• Scss. XXV, c. 19, De Regularibus ; Const. "Si datam," Mar. 4, 1748.

• Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., June 12, 1868 ; Bargilliat, o. c, n. 1148.

• O. c, p. 98.

' O. c, vol III, n. 673.

66 RKI^ICIOUS CONGREGATIONS

pedient to refer the case to the Holy See, unless the constitutions
offer an alternative.

But there are instances in which even the valid profession can-
not prevent one from leaving a Religious Congregation. In a
previous chapter it was said that the duty of providing for one's
nearest of kin takes precedence of the obligation in Religion.
The same holds in cases of extreme necessity when egress from
the Religious Congregation is the only means of providing ade-
quately for the preservation of one's health or other similar duties.
In such instances the Community is generally able and willing
to come to the assistance of its members, even with extraordinary
means ; but were it not, there would be no violation of any rights
in leaving an Institute.®

Furthermore the Sacred Canons formerly permitted Religious
in the strict sense to enter a stricter Order at will.* This, how-
ever, is contrary to present practice: "Nunc in praxi," says Ojetti,
"semper requiritur venia a Sancta Sede." ^® As to Religious
Congregations, Bastien says: "il faut done ici s'en referer aux
constitutions de I'institut et voir ce qu'elles exigent. D'apres
la pratique en vigueur a la S. congregation des 6v. et Reg., telle
que la montrent les 'Normae' a 61, le recours au Saint-Siege est
de rigueur." ^^

Under ordinary circumstances, then, the general principles hold
that egress from a Religious Congregation without the consent of
the Institute or the dispensation of the Holy See is illicit. This
is the common teaching of all Theologians and Canonists. Bouix
says and demonstrates: "Quoties intervenit promissio persever-
antiae a Congregatione acceptata, nisi congregatio ipsa consentiat,
nemo praeter summum Pontificem potest ullum congregationis
membrum liberum facere, sive a dicta promissione, sive a jura-

* Bastien, o. c, n. 86; St. Thomas, II, II, qu. 189; St. Alphonsus, o. c,
n. 67-70.
•C. 18, tit. 31, X. lib. III.

'•O. c, n. 3989; De Angelis in Tit. 31, lib. Ill of Decretals.
"O. c. 190.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 67

mento aut votis earn firmantibus." ^* This refers to diocesan as
well as approved Institutes.^* When the Const. "Conditae a
Christo" says, ''Episcopo alumnas sodalitatum dioecesanarum
professas dimittendi potestas/' it immediately adds, ''cavendum
tamen ne istiusmodi remissione ius alienum laedatur; laedatur
autem, si insciis moderatoribus id fiat iusteque dissentientibus." ^^
The powers of a Bishop, and, "a fortiori," of an inferior cleric,
over vows, oaths and promises extends only ''dtra prae judicium
tertii.'* The Sovereign Pontiff, however, is the supreme admin-
istrator over all the possessions and rights of Religious Congre-
gations, and, therefore, can dispense a Religious from his obliga-
tion toward the Community, notwithstanding the dissent of its
superiors.

This, then, gives the key-note to thei dispensing powers of the
Bishops, priests and the various superiors in the respective Con-
gregations. The Bishop, "ceteris paribus," can dispense from
all vows (except that of perpetual chastity) in diocesan Insti-
tutes.^" When diocesan Institutes are spread throughout several
dioceses, the Bishop of the motherhouse cannot reserve this right
to himself in prejudice to the Bishops in whose diocese a branch
of the Community resides and labors : "Dispensatio votorum pro
monialibus domorum filialium in dioecesi existentium diversa ab
ilia, in qua degit domus princeps, competit Ordinario domus
filialis." ** But the vows of approved Congregations are re-
served to the Holy See.^'' One general exception, however, must
be mentioned, viz., the vows of Religious who have performed
military service: "Quod si ipsi iuvenes a votorum vinculo se re-
laxari desiderent, aut sponte petant, facultas fit superioribus prae-

O. c, vol. II, p. 466 ; St. Alph., o. c, lib. 3, Tract 2, c 4 ; Suarez, o. c,
Tom. 2, Tract. 6, lib. 6, c. 15.
*• Bouix, 1. c, p. 463.

"Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. 1. a. 8.
'• Ibid.

'*Responsio S. C. E£. et RR. April 21; 1903 (Anual Eccl. 1903, p. 254).
" Const. "Conditae a Christo," C. II. a. 2.

68 REI,IGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

dictis (i. e., Superioribus generalibus) tamquam Apostolicae Sedis
delegatis, vota solvendi, si agatur de Institutis clericalibus : si
vero res sit dc Institutis laicorum, vota soluta censeantur per
litteras Superiorum quibus licentia eis fit ad saeculum redeundi." ^*

Outside of this instance the Religious superior can ordinarily
neither dispense from the vows nor grant permission to the Re-
ligious to re-enter the world, for the obligation of the vow can
be fulfilled only in the Congregation. It was said "ordinarily,"
for no cognizance is here taken of the powers conferred by par-
ticular constitutions, nor of the right to dismiss a Religious for
just reasons. This latter exception will be treated presently.
Of course in Institutes whose members make no profession of
vows, the question is quite different. Unless their constitutions
reserve the right of permitting a Religious to leave the Society
to the Holy See, the superior could confer the necessary permis-
sion. In diocesan Institutes the regulations of the Ordinary
must be consulted.

But with the dispensation from vows or with the permission
of superiors to leave the Institute neither unconditional liberty
nor all previous rights are restored to the Religious. We have
seen that the dispensation from vows constitutes an impediment
to entering another Congregation or Order, unless a special per-
mission of the Holy See is obtained. In addition to this the
Council of Baltimore closes the door of the priesthood to teach-
ing Brothers of the United States: "Neminem qui in hac Con-
gregatione (Brothers of Christian Schools) prima vota emiserit,
et deinde quacumque de causa congregationi valedixerit, in provin-
ciarum nostrarum seminaria tamquam sacrorum ordinum candi-
datum sine dispensatione S. Congregationis admitti posse. Idem
statuunt (Patres huius Concilii) de Fratribus Xaverianis, Fran-
ciscalibus aliisque quibus lege sua sacerdotium ambire vetitum
est." ^^ Furthermore Leo XIII forbids clerics who have re-

'• Deer. S. C. de Rel, Jan. 1, 1911.
'* III C. of Baltimore, ik 99.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 69

ceived a dispensation from their vows to leave the Congregation
before they have found a Bishop to receive them, and a canonical
title to insure the means of support: "Ex claustro non exeant,
donee Episcopum benevolum receptorem invenerint et de eccle-
siastico patrimonio sibi providerint, secus suspensi maneant ab
exercito susceptorum ordinum. Quod porrigitur quoque ad
altminos votorum simplicium temporalium, qui quovis professionis
vinculo iam fuerint soluti, ob elapsum tempus, quo vota ab ipsis
fuerunt nuncupata." *^ This regulation seems to affect directly
only clerics of approved Congregations of Simple vows: "Qui
in Sacris Ordinibus constituti et votis simplicibus obstricti." The
Holy See, however, is wont to extend the Deer. "Auctis ad-
modum" to other Communities of clerics. When, therefore, ap-
proved or diocesan Societies have received from the Holy See a
y privileged title of ordination, their obligations or laws in regard
to dismissing clerics must be sought in the special indult rather
than in the Common law:

To discourage clerics still more from deserting the Religious
life, Pius X has barred their way to any secular benefice, office
of dignity or responsibility within the diocese; viz., from any
office or benefice, especially in Basilica and Cathedral Churches,
from any teaching or administrative office in ecclesiastical sem-
inaries, and also in universities which enjoy the Apostolic isLOilty
of conferring degrees, from any office in the Episcopal Curia,
and finally from the office of visitator or moderator of any Re-
ligious Society. And that their example may not influence or
scandalize their quondam co-religious, they may not fix their
domicile in places where the deserted Community conducts Con-
vents or houses.'^ These prohibitions extend primarily to Re-
ligious Orders and Congregations of perpetual vows, but now
also to all other Institutes, "Si Religiosi votis temporaneis, vel
iuramento perseverantiae vel supradictis promissionibus per sex

"•Deer. "Auctis admodum/' Nov. 4, 1892.

" Deer. S. C. de Rel., "Cum minoris," June 15, 1909.

70 REUGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

integros annos ligati fuerunt.*'*' Diocesan Institutes are not
included in this declaration of the Sacred Congregation. They
are absolutely and exclusively under the Bishop's jurisdiction
except when the contrary is expressly stated and therefore he
could promote ex-members to the respective positions. The
fact that the Deer. "Cum minoris" refers only to vcduntary egress,
does not place a premium on expulsion and dismissal as would
seem at first sight. Severer laws affect such.**

Like the individual, every society possesses the right of self-
defense and self-preservation. Therefore it may repel and punish
an unjust aggressor. If then a Religious commits crimes which
are grievously detrimental to the moral or material welfare of
the Institute, the Congregation must have the right not only to
punish the criminal, but also to expel him, if no other means has
served to effect amendment. In the case, of diocesan Institutes,
this right, by positive l^slation, is vested in the Ordinary:
"Episcopo alumnas sodalitatum dioecesanarum professas dimit-
tendi potestas est." ** No explicit reference is made to Insti-
tutes of men nor to Societies which have no vows. But evidently
as long as an Institute is diocesan, the Bishop is the natural
superior, and therefore also the competent judge to inflict neces-
sary punishment on delinquents. With the approval of a Con-
gregation, however, this right devolves upon the Religious su-
perior: "Praesidum est . . . tirones ac professos dimittere,
iis tamen servatis quaecumque ex instituti legibus pontificiisque
decretis servari oportet." ^^ The sentence of dismissal in Insti-
tutes of women becoipes effective only on the confirmation of the
Holy See.** Furthermore the Holy See does not wish that the

Declaratio et Extensio decreti "Cum Minoris," April 5, 1910.

" Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, pp. 41 sq. and 126 ; Capello, o. c, p. 212,
575.

^ Const. "Conditae a Christo,"/c. 1. a. 8.

" Ibidem, c. 2, a. 1.

" Deer. S. C. EE, et RR. Aug. 24, 1887 ; May 22, 1895 ; Bastien, o. c, p.
124; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, p. 379.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 71

superior be the sole judge in cases of dismissal. Wherefore the
"Normae" of 1901 (Art. 301) prescribe that the board of con-
suitors shall have a voice in deciding matters of such importance.
While these "Normae" are not "per se" preceptive, yet they
express the mind of the Holy See and constitute at least a directive
norm for all Religious Institutes which have not an explicit norm
laid down in their constitutions.. The constitutions of each
Society, therefore, form the law for each Community.

But neither the Bishops nor Religious superiors may act arbi-
trarily in actions of dismissal. They are bound in justice and by pre-
cept not to expel a member except for a just and proportionately
grave cause.^^ In Institutes which have not the true Religious
state, f. e,y the three perpetual vows, the reason justifying dismis-
sal need not be so grave, but must always be a just cause: "Si
interveniat votum, vel iuramentum, vel promissio perseverandi in
congregatione et congregatio acceptet, ejectio sine justa causa
fieri non potest." ^* Ordinarily the constitutions designate the
causes which entail dismissal. Extraordinary cases must be left
to the prudent judgment of the superior.

For Congregations of perpetual vows and those of clerics with
temporary vows, a reform in the judicial procedure of expulsion
and dismissal has been made.^® We say "expulsion" and "dis-
missal," for the terms are often used promiscuously,^^ but in the
present decree, "Cum singulae," the former signifies ejection from
a strict Order, while the latter is restricted to Congregations of
Simple vows.^^

According to the tenor of the new decree one may be dismissed
(or expelled, respectively) "ipso facto" by committing certain

" Const. "Emanavit," Jan. 21, 1758 ; Deer. S. C. EE, et RR. Nov. 4, 1892 ;
et Jan. 10, 1896 ; et July 4, 1898 ; Wernz, 1. c. ; Bastien, o. c, p. 119 ; Bouix,
o. c, vol. II, p. 486 and sq.

" Bouix, 1. c, p. 489.

* Deer. S. C. de Rel., "Cum singulae," May 16, 1911.

••Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, n. 676 in note.

" Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VI, p. 47 sq.

72 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

crimes or by the condemnatory sentence of a legitimately con-
stituted tribunal. The offenses entailing "ipso jure" dismissal
arc: apostasy from Faith, apostasy from the Institute (effective
only after three months), elopement, and finally marriage or at-
tempt at marriage. But even in these offenses a declaratory
sentence is required by the law. In other crimes gravity of mat-
ter and malice of will must be demonstrated by a judicial process
before ejection from the Institute can be inflicted. The gravity
of matter must be adjudged according to the importance of the
law and the penalty sanctioning it together with the amount of
actual injury, whether moral or material, inflicted on the Com-
munity.

The court which sits in judgment, must consist of the superior
general and a board of four members. In case some Congrega-
tion's organization does not provide an advisory board for the
general direction, each case must be referred to the Holy See.
The decision of this court is definitive, yet appeal to the Holy
See, according to the regular Canons, is always admissible, i, e.,
ten days under ordinary circumstances are allotted to have re-
course to the Roman Congregations for Religious.

That the rights of the Institute and the accused be adequately
defended, a "promotor justitiae" and a "defensor rei" must be
appointed. The former is designated by the Congregation, while
the accused may choose his own advocate ; but should he fail to
do so, it devolves upon the Institute to assign one.

The mode of procedure begins with the local superior-provin-
cial, or quasi-provincial. Three admonitions and corrections
must have proven futile, before a preliminary trial is instituted.
In this trial the offense — or better offenses, for three specifically
different crimes or their equivalents must be imputable — ^and
malice must be demonstrated. The means of demonstration are
the ordinary ones of Canon Law, viz., voluntary confession, two
reliable and sworn witnesses, documents and other available aids.

After the charges have been duly authenticated and proven, the
acts of the preliminary process are communicated to the general
direction which will prepare the case and notify the accused to

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 73

prepare a defense on the charges of the "promotor justitiae."
On the day designated the cause will be adjudicated and decided
according to the merits of the proof, after both the "promotor
justitiae" and "defensor rei" have been given ample time and
opportunity to defend their causes.

Evidently the Religious cannot be ostracized from the Society
before a decision has been handed down. In extraordinary cases,
however, which do not suffer delay on account of imminent
scandal or grave loss to the Institute, the provincial may proceed
single-handed in applying measures which will ward off the
threatened evil and only subsequently submit the case to the
ordinary judicial process.

The effects accompanying judicial dismissal consist in perpetual
suspension for clerics and the prohibition to receive any other
Orders without the permission of the Holy See. All the dis-
missed and expelled members are not only prohibited from affiliat-
ing themselves to another Community, but are rendered incapable
of making a valid profession, and consequently of participating
in the spiritual favors of any Religious Community approved by
the Holy See. Apparently the censures inflicted by Common
law upon the Regulars for the commission of the above crimes
which entail "ipso jure" dismissal, are not by the new law ex-
tended to Religious Congregations. The decree mentions spe-
cifically only the suspension and impediment to enter another In-
stitute,'^^ and therefore neither abrogates nor extends the censures
of Common law.

In case those dismissed are clerics, the "Ordinarius originis et
Ordinarius loci" of the suspended clerics must be notified. The
Bishop, however, cannot by his ordinary power dispense from
the censure, but recourse to the Holy See is necessary.'*

These new regulations do not appertain to Institutes of laics
with "temporary vows," nor to Institutes in which an oath or a

'*Cfr. Wernz, o. c, vol. VI, p. 284 sq. ; Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VI,
p. 47 sq.
"Wernz, o. c, vol. VI, p. 221; Vermeersch, o. c, vol. VI, p. 50.

74 RFXIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

mere promise of perseverance is made. These are still governed by
the genel*al princples stated above or by their special constitutions
approved by the Holy See. The Deer. "Cum singulae" evidently
places Institutes of laics with perpetual vows on the same basis
with Institutes of clerics in regard to dismissing members — one
of the very rare instances in Canon law in which the power of
true jurisdiction is conferred upon laics.'*

For Institutes of Sisters with perpetual Simple vows the laws
governing dismissal have received some modification by the same
decree, but are not identified with those of Institutes of men.
The four offenses entailing "ipso jure" dismissal are not extended
to Nuns and Sisters. Certainly these crimes together with any
grave, external, and public offenses which have rendered the
person incorrigible, warrant dismissal, but the local Ordinary
must verify the malice and gravity of the crime and the Holy
See must confirm the sentence, before a Nun or Sister in perpetual
vows may be ejected from the Institute. Only in cases of im-
mediate danger of grave scandal or loss to the Community may
the Ordinary supply the Holy See's confirmation. But, subse-
quently, the entire case must still be presented to the^S. Congrega-
tion for Religious.

The power of dismissal in Institutes of women is naturally
vested in the superior and presumably in the superior general,
although tiie law makes no special distinction. As in Institutes
of men, the advisory board of the Congregation has a definitive
voice which must be expressed by a secret ballot, before ejection
from the Institute becomes legal.

Legitimate dismissal does not in itself dispense from the vows.
The Const. "Conditae a Christo" reserves the vows of approved
Institutes to the Holy See. But one may safely presume that the
Holy See will grant the necessary dispensation in conjunction with
the confirmation of the sentence of dismissal. If not, the Re-
ligious would owe obedience to the Ordinary.

Vermeersch, 1. c

IN THEIR EXTERNAL REl*ATIONS 75

These same regulations extend likewise to Nuns with Solemn
vows, but not to Sisters with only "temporary" Simple vows.
The latter are still governed by the old discipline explained above
which, after all, differs little from the new. The same, a fortiori,
must be said of Institutes without vows and all diocesan Insti-
tutes whether they make perpetual or temporary vows.

The entire affair of both voluntary and compulsory surrender
of the Religious life is of such supreme importance for the indi-
vidual that ordinarily it should be considered only as a last resort
and as the only means to avoid a greater evil. The Church
realizes this more clearly than any Theologian or Canonist has
ever been able to point out. Wherefore She safeguards the
Religious life with the greatest supervision and strives to remove,
or at least render remote, every danger that threatens it from the
world without. She destroys the hopes and allurements of
ecclesiastical rights, privileges, and honors which too often blind
the intellect and weaken the will in their native prerogatives of
rectitude and stability. She, moreover, circumscribes the au-
thority of superiors that it may not be exercised unto destruction,
but edification of souls destined to Life Everlasting. Thus in
all things She shows Herself the kind Mother in bearing with
the weaknesses of Her children, and the mighty defender of
justice, right, and authority.

76 RELIGIOUS CX)NGREGATIONS

CHAPTER VII.

The Relation of Congregations to the Holy See.

The supreme authority over the Religious life and Religious
Institutes is vested by divine commission in the Roman Pontiff.
To him is entrusted the direction of the faithful not only in the
way of precepts, but also in the path of counsels. He can, there-
fore, prescribe by general and particular laws whatever is neces-
sary or useful for the conservation and development of the
Religious life. But since the Religious life is only of counsel and
obligatory only in virtue of and according to the terms of the
contract, the papal authority is limited to the obligation assumed
by the Religious profession: **Le pouvoir du Soverain Pontife
est done limite par les termes memes du contrat de profession
qui varie selon les instituts; mais ce pouvoir peut s'exercer sur
tout ce que le religieux a promis, sur tout ce qui est necessaire
pour le maintien de la discipline et le lien de Tetat religieux, sur
tout ce qui a rapport a la nature ou a la fin particuliere d'un
institut." 1

The Institutes themselves, on the other hand, are purely ec-
clesiastical corporations, and for that very reason the inalienable
right of supreme administrative power resides in the Roman
Pontiff. Hence his absolute control over them is limited only
by natural justice and equity. The Pope, therefore, may not only
impose new obligations on an Institute, but may also alter or dis-
solve a Community.

In our rapid historical survey of Religious Congregations
above, we have seen that the number of such Institutes is legion.

' Bastien, o. c, p. 1T2.

IN THKIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 77

There can be no question, then, that the Roman Pontiff would as-
sume personal and immediate direction and government of them.
It is well known that the Church has varied Her mode of gov-
ernment throughout the ages according to Her development and
the constantly changing conditions of society. Hence we nat-
urally expect to find that the Holy See has also exercised her
supervision and authority over Religious Institutes in diverse ways
at different times.

For many centuries the Holy See appointed Cardinal Protectors
for each Institute and bestowed on them full jurisdiction in all
matters concerning the individual Religious as also the Institute.
Thus the Rule of St. Francis of Assisi prescribes : "Per oboedi-
entiam ad haec injungo ministris, ut petant a Domino Papa
unum de sanctae Ecclesiae Cardinalibus qui sit gubemator, pro-
tector et corrector istius fratemitatis." Manifestly this includes
true jurisdiction and even a superior jurisdiction to that of the
Order's prelates. So also do the words of Sixtus IV confer a
real power of jurisdiction on the Cardinal Protector of the Car-
melites: "In quibuscumque causis per eos (nempe Carmelitas)
movendis quacumque ratione vel causa quae excogitari posset, eis
ministrent justitiae complementum." ^ Other Orders made simi-
lar provisions.

Gradually, however, the Holy See diminished the powers of
the Cardinal Protector imtil his office has become, according to
Common law, a mere honorary one.* The Const, of Innocent
Xir "Christi fidelium" (Feb. 17, 1694), deprived him of all
jurisdiction and administrative power and left him only the empty
honor of some formalities when visiting the Community and of
having his coat of arms over the portals of the Institute. But
the office of mediation between the Society and the Holy See
constitutes today the chief prerogative of the Cardinal Protector.
Ordinarily an Order or Congregation seeks favors or justice

* Cf r. Pellizario, Manuale reg., Tract 8, c. 8, n. 161.

• Bouix, o. c, vol. II, p. 167 et sq.

78 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

from the Holy See through the Cardinal Protector. Still even
this is frequently unnecessary on account of the superior general
residing near the Roman Curia. So in turn the Holy See gen-
erally entrusts to the Cardinal Protector the execution of all
rescripts: ''Cardinalibus Protectoribus Ordinum committuntur
rescripta, quae universum Ordinem respiciunt: alia vero eis re-
mitti vetitum est." * Furthermore in regard to the members of
the Community Bouix aptly remarks : "Ex eo vero quod Cardinalis
Protector jurisdictionaliter religiosorum causis et negotiis sese
ingerere nequeat, non sequitur non posse eum in iis sese im-
miscere quatenus protector, id est, adjutor, amicus et advocatus.
Immo hoc ipsius officium est, praesertim ubi tutandi sunt religiosi
ab injuriis et oppressionibus. Agit autem ut protector qui re-
quisitus juvamen praestat. Quod si Cardinalis Protector, ncm
requirentibus aut invitis religionis praelatis, dirimenda negotta
sibi arroget, eas inducit perturbationes, quas i^ublat)ais voluit

Innocentius XII."

If, therefore, today the Cardinal Protector — for the practice
of the Holy See to appoint Cardinal Protectors for Religious
Institutes still obtains — ^possesses any jurisdiction over Religious
Institutes, he derives it not from Common law, but from a special
grant of the Holy See, or from the constitutions of the respective
Institute.^ Frequently the Holy See is wont to bestow special
faculties on the Cardinal Protector of Communities of women.
We have a very recent incidence of this. Pius X conferred actual
governing powers upon the Cardinal Protector of tlie Order of
St. Clare: "Ad Proto-monasterii gubernationem quod attinet,
decemimus ut posthac habeatur tanquam Vicarius natus Cardi-
nalis Protectoris vel Legati, Minister provincialis seraphicae
provinciae a Santa Clara, incolumi Ministri generalis iure." •
The Holy Father is here conferring actual jurisdiction, or rather

* Bizzari, Collectanea, p. 613.

' Bouix, 1. c. ; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, n. 698 ; Vermeersch, de Rel. Inst, toI.
I, p. 397.

• Brief, "Quamquam," Aug. 9, 1912.

IN THKIR EXTERNAL REI.ATIONS 79

he is confirming the exemption given by Leo XIII to the Monr
astery of St. Clare : "Assissiense monasterium S. Clarae a quavis
jurisdictione eximimus . . . perpetuum in modum Nosti^e
ac successorum Nostrorum immediate jurisdictioni subiicimus»
Huiusmodi autem jurisdictionem venerabili fratri Nostro . . .
uti apud S. Sedem Protectori universae Fratrum Minorum S.
Francisci de Observantia familiae. Biusque hoc in munere Car-
dinalibus successoribus, perpetuis futuris temporibus, delegamus."
But this is exceptional in modem Roman procedure.

From the sixteenth century on, the Holy See has b^en govern-
ing the Religious Institutes through the Roman Congregations.
In 1586 Sixtus V reorganized the Roman Curia and created the
Congregation for the affairs of Religious: ''Congregatio Bpis-
coporum et Aliorum Praelatorum," and confirmed the "Congr^a-
tio super consultationibus Regularium/'^ The two Congrega-
tions frequently overlapped each other in their competency,
wherefore the "Congregatio super consultationibus Regularium"
was united with the one of Bishops and Regulars in 1601.

Innocent X instituted another Congregation exclusively for
the reform of Religious Orders in Italy, and called it "Congre-
gatio super statu Regularium." ® Naturally its work was short-
lived and its competency very limited. This induced Innocent
XII to create the "Congregatio super disciplina regulari," and to
confer upon it not only all the authority of the former Congre-
gation, but also to bestow on it a certain authority over all the
Religious Orders and Congregations within the Church. Ap-
parently the authority of the new Congregation included no true
jurisdiction, but rather an inquisitorial and consultative faculty
which made the new Congregation a sort of commission to sug-
gest reforms of the Religious life to the Holy See.

Instead of endowing this Congregation with the necessary jur-
isdiction to conduct the daily increasing affairs of Religious in

' Const. "Immensa aeterni," Jan. 22, 1587 ; "Romanus Pontifex," May 17,
1586.
•Const. "Instaurandac," Oct., 1652; "Injuncti," April 11, 1668.

80 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

the nineteenth century, Pius IX formed another Congregation:
"Congregatio super statu Regularium Ordinum/'® This third
division in the government of Religious Institutes resulted in still
greater confusion. The competency of each was not clearly
defined, nor their obligations determined.

To this state of affairs were added still more difficulties : First,
by the fact that the "Congregatio Concilii" interpreted the laws
of the Council of Trent; then, the "Congregatio de Prop. Fide"
supplied the other Congregations in mission territories and in
the Oriental Church; and, finally, the "Congregatio pro negotiis
ecclesiasticis extraordinariis" attended to all the affairs for the
Religious in Russia and South America. Little wonder then that
such a practical Pontiff as Pius X saw the necessity of reform
in the methods of conducting the administration of Religious.

By the Const. "S. Congregationi" (May 26, 1906) Pius X
abolished the two above-mentioned Congregations of Innocent
XII and Pius IX, and transferred all matters concerning Religious
to the one Congregation of Bishops and Regulars. But with the
reform of the entire Roman Curia in 1908, this Congregation
disappeared, and the part of its competency appertaining to Re-
ligious became vested in the new "Congregatio de Sodalibus Re-
ligiosis" : "Ipsius enim est moderari, pro recta disciplina, quidquid
Religiosos utriusque sexus attingit." ^^ In the following words the
territorial jurisdiction of this Congregation is outlined still more
expHctly: "Haec S. Congregatio indicium sibi vindicat de iis
tantum, quae ad Sodales religiosos utriusque sexus tum solem-
nibus, tum simplicibus votis adstrictos, et ad eos qui, quamvis sine
votis, in communi tamen vitam agunt more Religiosorum, itemque
ad Tertios Ordines saeculares, in universum pertinent, sive res
agatur inter religiosos ipsos, sive habita eorum ratione cum aliis." ^^

The personnel of this Congregation consists of a Cardinal pre-

• Const. "Ubi primum," June 17, 1847.
*• Const "Sapient! consilio," June 39, 1908.
" Ibidem, Pars I, Art. 5, n. I.

IN THEIR EXTERNAI. RELATIONS 81

feet, secretary, sub-secretary, associate Cardinals, consultors and
some minor officials. In 1916 eighteen Cardinals, twenty-nine
consultors and thirteen minor officials wtre enumerated as con-
stituting the entire Congregation.^^ To facilitate the handling
of the great amount of work that devolves upon this Congregation,
it has been divided into three divisions. Distinct Commissions,
therefore, regulate the affairs of Religious Orders, of Religious
Congregations for men, and of Religious Congregations for
women. Finally a special Commission for the approving of
all New Institutes and their Constitutions, as was mentioned in
Chapter V, has been appointed recently. The first three Com-
mittees, or "Congresses," purpose to prepare the respective mat-
ter for deliberation in the entire Congregation, to carry out the
result of these deliberations according to required formalities,
and, in minor affairs, to decide controversies and grant favors
on their own authority.^*

Not a universal jurisdiction, however, has been entrusted to
this Congregation. Its competency is defined in the terms : "Est
autem tribunal competens in omnibus causis, quae ratione disci-
plinae, seu, ut dici, solet, in linea disciplinari aguntur, religioso
sodali sive convento sive actore; ceterae ad Sacr. Rom. Rotam
erunt deferendae spectantes." ^* As to questions affecting Re-
ligious and Bishops, the Congregation for Religious "ea omnia sibi
moderanda assumit, quae sive inter Episcopos et religiosos
utriusque sexus sodales intercedunt, sive inter ipsos religiosos." ^^
Hence all administrative and discipline matters are subject to the
Congregation for Religious, but judicial affairs to the Sacred
Rota.

In the new papal Constitution and its accompanying "Normae
communes" and "Normae peculiares," no clearly defined dis-

""Annuario Pontificio," 1915.

""Normae peculiares," June 29, 1908.

'* Const. **Sapienti consilio," Pars. I, a. 5, n. 2.

" Ibidem.

82 RICLIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

tinction between disciplinary and judicial procedure is made.^*
Ojetti thinks that all disputes between a member and his Com-
munity are to be decided "in via disciplinaria" ; while contro-
versies arising between different Institutes or between Institutes
and Bishops must be treated "per modum iudicii," and therefore
by the Sacred Rota.^' The latter supposition has been verified
in a case in 1909. ^^ But by the Deer. "Cum singulae" (May 16,
1911), the "Congregation for Religious" has also received a true
judicial jurisdiction, in as far as it has been constituted the com-
petent tribunal for receiving and deciding the appeals in all
cases of expulsion and dismissal of Religious. Then by a late
decision the S. Consistorial Congregation determined that not the
Congregation for Relgious, but the "Congregatio Concilii" pos-
sesses the competency of awarding secular parishes to Religious.^*
Finally a certain jurisdiction over Religious is proper to the new
"Congregatio de Seminariis et de Studiorum Universitatibus" ; in
those cases, viz., where Religious conduct Seminaries or Univer-
sities. In all matters appertaining to these institutes of learning
the new Congregation oversees and directs, "etiamsi regantur a
religiosis Sodalibus." ^^

Reference has already been made to the limitation placed upon
the jurisdiction of the Congregation for Religious in mission
territories. We merely repeat them: "Quod vero spectat ad
Sodales religiosos, eadem Congregatio (i. e,, Congr. de Prop.
Fide) sibi vindicat quidquid Religiosos qua Missionarios, sive ut
singulos, sive simul sumptos tangit." ^^

The principal method employed by the Holy See to insure
prudent administration and legislation for Religious Institutes
by the Sacred Congregation, is the triennial report from each

Ojetti, "De Romano Curia," p. 100 et sq.
" Ibidem, p. 106.

"S. Rota, Decis., in Pharen. lurium et Poenorum," July 89, 1909.
'• Deer. S. C. C, July 5, 1915.
*• "Motu proprio," Nov. 5, 1915.
*^ Const. "Sapient! consilio," part I, art. 6, n. 5.

IN THEIR EXTRRNAI. ^I^ATIONS 83

Inpti^te. Formerly the Holy S^e was accustomed to insist on
this ip the particular indults of approval, but since 1906 it has
become an obligation of Common law. The details of this report
have been completely outlined and prescribed in ninety-eight
qifestiops: "Modus et ratio conficiendi relationem omnibus et
singulis, ad quos spectat, communi lege praescribatur."^^ This
account together with tlie detailed report of Ordinaries exacted
upon theif "ad linjina" visit, ordinarily affords the basis for Pon-
tifical direction of and legislation for Religious Institutes.

Soni^time, however, it may happen that the Roman ordinances
are not brought to the knowledge of some Religious Institutes,
or they may be disregarded at times. Wherefore the Ordinaries
are mad^ responsible for the due promulgation and observance
of Roman decrees for Religious: "Haec igitur S. Congregatio
Negotiis Religiosorum Sodalium praeposita, summopere com-
mendat Reverendissimis locorum Ordinariis eorumqe delegatis seu
deputatis ad Monasteria, praesertim Monialium, quae domjam stji
iuris constituunt, nee generalem Superiorissam habent, ut noti-
tiam decretorum, etiam in posterum edendorum, quae vitam re-
ligiosam respiciunt, efficaciter evulgent inter Religiosas Familias
et Instituta quoque dioecesana, ad abusus, si qui irrepserint, tol-
lendps ad boni;m largius diffundendum et uniformitatem in rerum
canonicarum observantia ubique obtinendam/' '^ The mind of
the Holy See, therefore, is that even diocesan Institutes be di-
rected by the regulations for approved Institutes, not indeed in
the sense that they always constitute strict laws for diocesan
Congregations, but that the Ordinaries at least endeavor to con-
form diocesan Institutes as much as possible to the government
of approved Communities. But above all, the Holy See insists
that the Ordinaries supervise the reception and observance of
pontifical laws by approved Institutes although they be exempted.

What has here been said of general laws and prescriptions,
holds also to a great extent for rescripts. In many instances

Deer. S. C. de RcL, July 16, 1906.
Deer. S. C. de Rel, July 3, 1910.

84 RKLIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

the Holy See is want to transmit and execute also its particular
orders through the Bishop: "S. C. solet in Executores deputare
Episcopos, et Ordinarios NuUius etiam in rescriptis pro Regu-
laribus, si agatur de clausura, de alienationibus, de saeculariza-
tionibus religiosorum, de erectione novorum conventuum ac In-
stitutorum et quoad Moniales in omnibus rescriptis. Si vero
agatur de negotiis, executionem committere Superioribus regu-
laribus, nempe vel Generali, vel provinciali vel abbati monasterii
prout rei adiuncta exigunt." ^* If this is the practice of the Holy
See in regard to Regulars, we can safely suppose that the same
custom prevails in favor of Congregations.

In the following pages it will appear more in detail that the
Ordinaries possess a far greater authority over Religious Con-
gregations than merely that of promulgating and executing Roman
decrees. For Regular Orders this suffices, because they are
entirely exempted from the Ordinary's jurisdiction and are placed
directly under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Holy See. This
is not the case in Congregations. The Holy See, indeed, assumes
the direct and immediate government of approved Institutes
in the manner explained, but at the same time it preserves as
much of the ordinary Episcopal authority as is compatible with
the nature of these Communities. But this will be developed in
the subsequent chapter.

Bizzarri, Collectanea, p. 613.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 85

CHAPTER VIII.

The Relation of Congregations to the Ordinary.

A threefold standard must be considered in determining the
relation of Religious Institutes to the local Ordinary. By "Ordi-
nary" in the present chapter is understood the Bishop, Abbas
NuUius, Vicar Apostolic and Prefect Apostolic ; for the relation
of each to Religious Congregations within their jurisdiction,
"ceteris paribus," is identical.^ The triple standard arises from
the canonical status of an Institute as diocesan, inter-diocesan,
or as an approved Congregation.

The general laws regarding the Ordinary's jurisdiction over
the respective Communities within his diocese are clearly laid
down in Canon law. As to diocesan Institutes, the Const. "Con-
ditae a Christo" states: "Eae una inductae sunt atque vigent
Antistitum sacronun auctoritate." No less clear is the decree
"Dei providentis" in regard to inter-diocesan Congregations:
''Instituta sodalitas, quamvis decursu temporis in plures dioecesas
diffusa, usque tamen, dum pontificiae approbationis aut laudis
testimonio caruerit, Ordinariorum jurisdictioni subjaceat."
With pontifical approval, however, an Institute is placed "sub
regimine Moderatoris generalis, salva Ordinariorum jurisdictione
ad formam S. Canonum et Apostolicarum Constitutionum." •
The limitations this approval puts on the powers of the Ordinaries
must be collected "ex ipsa decemendi ratione Sedi Apostolicae
consueta in eiusmodi consociationibus approbandis." * Hence
the general principle as to all Religious Congregations is this:

*Vcrmeersch, Periodica, vol. VII, pp. 20-43.
'Deer, c, n. 5; III C. Baltimore, n. 93.
■ Const. "Conditae a Christo," in the introduction.
• Ibidem.

86 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

The Ordinary possesses full jurisdiction over them in both the in-
ternal and external forum except in those matters expressly ex-
empted by the Holy See.

No one doubts that the Ordinary may confer jurisdiction on
clerics of Religious Institutes, for, "potest quis per alium, quod
potest facere per seipsum."" We say "clerics," because the
Sacred Canons prescribe, "ut laici ecclesiastica negotia tractare
non praesumant." • But the Ordinary possesses no powers con-
trary to the Common law.

The same jurisdiction, however, may also be conferred by
custom. This is an accepted principle of ecclesiastical law.
Authors dispute as to the length of time required for a legiti-
mate custom to confer jurisdiction, but it is a probable opinion
that ten years suffice.^ Hence some Religious Societies may
readily have acquired a certain exemption from episcopal juris-
diction in virtue of custom.

This power of Ordinaries and custom is invoked especially
when determining Religious Communities' exemption from
parochial obligations. Some authors are reluctant to restrict the
pastor's ordinary rights, but Wernz says: "Non solum indulto
apostolico et legitima consuetudine, sed etiam statuto Episcopo
fieri potest, ut communitas quaedam religiosa vel conservatorium
vel cdnvictus vel similia instituta, licet intra parochiam maneant,
a cura ordinaria parochi eximantur et proprio capellano subii-
ciantur." * Canonists in general hold that Religious Congrega-
tions are exempt by custom from the jurisdiction of the pastor
in whose parish they are situated.*

The Holy See, however, may certainly exempt Institutes from
the jurisdiction of both Bishop and pastor and confer on them
all the necessary powers for an independent government. As to

• Regula Juris, 68 in 6^

"Cap. 2, De judidbus, X, lib. II.

* Vermeersch, o. c, vol. VII, p. (28).
•O. c, vol. II, n. 828.

•Bastien, o. c, n. 353 and 406; Bouix, De Reg., vol. II, p. 349.

IN THEIR EXTERNAI, RElyATIONS 87

Institutes of clerics no difficulty presents itself. But Institutes
of laics may also receive a limited jurisdiction from the Holy
See, notwithstanding the general Canons to the contrary. In
fact, as we saw in the sixth chapter, this is verified in the case of
judicial expulsion and dismissal. Some apparent diffilculties,
however, arise in Institutes of women. Bargilliat says: "Neque
femina capax est jurisdictionis, saltem de jure ecclesiastico." ^^
And St. Thomas declares: "Feminam non posse habere aliquam
jurisdictionem spiritualem." ^ But Benedict XIV, when out-
lining the status of the Anglican Sisters, draws attention to the
fact that "nee agitur de tali superiorissa generali, quae amplam
quandam jurisdictionem in subditas exercere, ipsaque ab ordinaria
Episcopi auctoritate exempta esse debeat." ^^ The Pope, there-
fore, supposes that jurisdiction is vested in some feminine su-
periors. Hence Bouix's conclusion on this point in regard to
Abbesses may also be applied to superiors of Congregations:
"Si quando abbattissa aliqua jurisdictionem habuerit, id non juri
communi tribuendum est, sed pontificio privilegio." ^*

The powers of Ordinaries may be restricted even over diocesan
Congregations. Vermeersch thinks that the pontifical laws of
alienation of ecclesiastical property, prohibit the Bishop from
dissolving a diocesan Institute : "Gravem tantum ob causam potest
extinguere Institutum vel toUere domum. Immo, ob vetitam
alienationem bonorum ecclesiasticorum, vix id fieri poterit sine
S. Sedis interventu." ^* He confirms his opinion by the enact-
ment of the Latin-American Council (n. 322), held in 1899,
which forbids Bishops to dissolve any Religious Community with-
out the consent of the Holy See. This reasoning is strengthened
by the Deer. "Dei providentis" (n. 3) which prohibits Bishops
from changing anything upon which the Holy See has passed

*• Praelectiones J. C, n. 209.

" In Bouix, o. c, p. 425.

*• Const. "Quamvis justo," April 30, 1749.

"L. c, p. 425.

" De Rel. Inst, et Pers., Vol. I, n. 386.

88 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

judgment. But in spite of all this, the Const. "Conditae a Christo"
states: "Scmel approbatae sodalitates (by the Bishop) ne ex-
tinguantur nisi g^vibus de causis, et consentientibus Episcopis,
quorum in ditione fuerint." (c. 1., art. 6.) Apparently, "positis
ponendis," this supposes the right of abolishing an Institute when
spread into different dioceses. Why, then, a Bishop should pos-
sess a lesser power towards purely diocesan Societies is difficult
to see.

A definite limitation, however, is placed upon the powers of
each Ordinary, when an Institute extends over several dioceses.
No Community may establish houses in another diocese without
the consent of the respective Bishops.^*^ But when the Ordinaries
**a quo et ad quem" have given this consent "nihil de ipsius natura
et legibus mutari liceat, nisi singulorum Bpiscoporum consensu,
quorum in dioecesibus aedes habeat." ^* For the Institutes in
the United States, the Council of Baltimore adds : "Hae communi-
tates filiales, ipsius conventionis vi, quoad intemiun regimen et
administrationem maneant sub oboedientia superioris vel superi-
orissae conventus primarii." ^^

Besides limiting the Bishop's power in diocesan Institutes,
the Holy See has enjoined several positive duties towards them.
The one respecting the reception of members has already been
referred to. Then, he is obliged to preside over the election of
superiors in Communities of Sisters^® and promulgate all decrees
regarding Religious Communities as was also stated before.

The partial exemption, however, from Episcopal jurisdiction
which approved Institutes enjoy by a special grant of the Holy
See, is common to all Religious Congregations of Simple vows,
but it refers exclusively to the internal administration and gov-
ernment: "Certam aliquam Congregationem approbari . . .
sub regimine Moderatoris generalis, salva Ordinariorum juris-

" Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. 1, n. 4.

'* Ibidem, n. 5.

" IIL C. Bait., n., 93.

'• Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. 1, n. 9.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 89

dictione ad formam S. Canonum et Apost. Constitutionum." ^*
The main relations, both temporal or spiritual, of an approved
Institute with the outer world are strictly regulated by the Holy
See and in many instances are subject to the local Ordinary.

Thus, in the first place, may be mentioned the right of Ordi-
naries to permit or prohibit the establishment of a new Religious
house, Church, or Oratory.^^ Evidently a permission once granted
and acted upon, begets rights in justice which no Bishop may
violate with impunity. In case the Community wishes to con-
tinue its residence in the diocese, the Bishop would ordinarily
be obliged to appeal to the Holy See before he could expel a
Congregation from his diocese. Strict justice would seem to
dictate this. The same may be deduced from a parallel case in
Bouix (De jure Reg., Vol. II, p. 357 ss.).

Again by the general Canons the Church forbids the alienation
of ecclesiastical property ("res immobles vel mobiles pretiosae")
without the consent of the Holy See.^^ This law affects also
Religious Congregations,^^ and binds them under censure of ex-
communication (latae sententiae).^^ Where Bishops have special
faculties to dispense from this law, they may likewise use them
in favor of Religious Institutes.^ The common opinion, how-
ever, of Canonists maintains that no valid custom can arise in
prejudice to this law of alienation of property.^** The chief rea-
son for this opinion seems to be the clause "non obstantibus con-
suetudinibus etiam immemorabilibus." But the same clause has
been affixed to other laws and also to the various decrees of the
C. of Trent, yet, in spite of it, some of the Tridentine regulations

" Ibidem, Introduction and c. II, n. 1.

=• "Conditae a Christo," c. II, n. 3.

" C. 5, tit. 13, X, lib. Ill ; et eod. 1. in 6** ; Const. "Ambitiosae." 1468.
(c. un. tit. 4, lib. Ill in Extrar. comm.).

**Litterae S. C. de Prop. Fide, to Archp. of Milwaukee, Jan. 15, 1903.

" Const. "Ap. Sedisj" ser. 4, n. 3.

^ In same letter to Archp. of Milwaukee.

*Ojetti, o. c, n. 295 sq.; Bastien, o. c, p. 319; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, n.
160; Dannibale, "Summ. Theol.," vol. Ill, p. 80.

90 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

have passed into desuetude. Hence the great Canonist Bouix
felt constrained to say, "Non video cur consuetudo haec pro
legitima non haberetur." *•

Closely akin to the law of alienation of ecclesiastical property,
and subject to the same penalties, are the late regulations for-
bidding Religious Institutes to contract any debts or assume any
economic obligation which exceeds $2,000.00 (10,000 libellae)
without the special consent of the Holy See.*^ Through the
Apostolic Delegate at Washington, D. C, the Holy See has granted
an extension of this maximum sum to Communities in the United
States provided they obtain this faculty from their respective
Bishop: "I, therefore, (the Apostolic Delegate) in virtue of
the said rescript, hereby authorize, for a period of ten years,
the Ordinaries of the dioceses of the United States, "onerata
tamen eorum conscientia," to permit the Religious Communities
of their respective dioceses to contract debts up to the sum of
50,000 francs ($10,000) without having recourse to the Holy
See. It is, however, to be understood that all other provisions
of the above decree remain in force." ^* We can hardly sup-
pose that the Holy See intends to inconvenience Communities to
such an extent that they must recur to Rome for permission in
order to contract ordinary debts which the Institute's normal in-
come during the year can readily meet. For the decree purposes
to check the growing abuses "aeris alieni inconsulto et intemper-
ate suscipiendi." ^® Then, too, debts may be more than counter-
balanced by an Institute's credits which are at its free disposal.
Thus Vermeersch interprets article III: "Ut non consideranda
dicamus nisi debita quae superent pecunias et titulos semper com-
mutabiles quae in libera sint monasterii possessione (exclusis
proinde "capitalibus" et monialium dotibus). Hac ratione,

De jure Rel., vol. 2, p. 302.
" Instructio S. C. de Rel., "Inter ea," July 30, 1909.
"Ecd. Review, p. 93, Nov., 1915.
* Instructio, "Interea," cit. Periodica, vol. V, p. 15.
'•Periodica, vol. V, p. 15.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 91

monasterium qiiod habeat 10,000 fr. sed liberas habeat pecunias
15,000 f r. ntillo debito oneratum censeatur." *^

Another privilege and custom which is subject to great abuses
among Religious, and, therefore, strictly regulated by ecclesiasti-
cal law, is the collecting of alms. In this matter the Council of
Trent subjects Religious to the authority of Bishops: "Quibus
(Episcopis) etiam eleemosynas atque oblata sibi caritatis subsidia,
nulla prorsus mercede accepta, fideliter coUigendi facultas datur,
ut tandem coelestes hos ecclesiae thesauros non ad quaestum, sed
ad pietatem exerceri omnes vere intelligant." *^ The Tridentine
law for Regulars has been extended to all Religious, and in the
case of approved Societies the further obligation of obtaining
the explicit permission of the Holy See has been added.'^ But
pontifical Institutes as well as diocesan are required to have the
permission of the local Ordinary before they may collect alms
from the faithful even when this is their ordinary means of
sustenance. The mere fact that an approved Institute has re-
ceived permission from the Apostolic See, either in the approved
Constitutions or by a special concession, does not exempt it from
the jurisdiction of the Ordinary in this matter ; "Religiosi . . .
Congregationum juris Pontificii, qui privilegium quaeritandi
eleemosynas neque vi propriarum Constitutionum a S. Sede ap-
probatarum neque vi Apostolicae concessionis guadent, veniam
Apostolicae Sedis impetrare debent, ut quaestuationes instituere
valeant; praeterea licentiam per suos Superiores ab Ordinario
loci obtinere tenentur." '^ The same decrees lay down specific
directions for the proper regulation of all alms-collecting.
These specifications do not include Mendicant Orders.

If the Church has prescribed so minutely these outer relations
of Congregations in material things, the conclusion lies very

■• Ibidem.

" Sess. 21, c 9.

"Deer. S. C. EE et RR, "Singular! quidcm," March 27, 1896; Deer.
S. C. de Rel., "De eleemosynis," Nov. 21, 1908.
"Deer. De eleenios3mis, e. II, n. I.

92 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

near that She has not been remiss in tracing even with a much
greater solicitude and exactness the relations in things spiritual
or quasi-spiritual on the part of both Bishop and Congrega-
tions. Thus the Bishop is obliged to seek the consent of the
Holy See and observe the formalities of Canon law in order
to transfer the government of a diocesan seminary or give a
parish permanently to a Religious Congregation: "Imo ne re-
ligiosis quidem congregationum votoriun simplicium, nisi ha-
beant speciale privilegium, potest episcopus sine licentia sedis
apostolicae seminaria regenda tradere." '* As to parishes, the
general law of alienation of ecclesiastical property would already
forbid this, even if there were no other regulations. But the
Council of Baltimore states explicitly: "Consultonun item re-
quiretur consilium, quando id agitur, ut missio seu parochia
tradatur alicui familiae religiosae; quo in casu necessaria erit
etiam venia S. Sedis." '^ Bishops, however, possess full power
for sufficient reasons to divide parishes that belong to Religious
and award the new parishes to secular priests.'* Some authors
would impose the duty of seeking the Chapter's consent also for
the division of a parish, but since Bishops possess this power
not only in virtue of their ordinary jurisdiction, but also by a
pontifical grant, it seems that they can proceed without the con-
sent of the Chapter or of the consultors in Mission countries.*^
Canonists generally admit that a legitimate custom contrary to
the law requiring the "Beneplacitum Apostolicum" for these
transfers is quite valid. Bouix justifies such a custom for
France.'® But where the permission of Rome must be sought,
the S. C. Concilii, as mentioned above, has the power to confer it,
while the S. C. de Rel. grants the necessary faculties to the Re-
ligious in case their Constitutions prohibit parochial work.

** Ojetti, o. c, n. 3419; Bargilliat, o. c, n. 267 ; Bouix, o. c, vol. II, p. 357.

• III C. of Bait. n. 20.

* Ojetti, o. c, nn. 3022, 3028.
"Ojetti, o. c, n. 3026.

De jure Rel., Vol. II, p. 357; Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. II, p. 4 sq.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 93

This does not imply that the law forbidding Regulars to as-
sume diocesan offices is extended also to Religious of Congre-
gations. On the contrary, they are free, with the consent of
their superiors, to take charge not only of parishes, but of any
diocesan office provided their Constitutions do not prohibit it.
In this latter case recourse to the Holy See would be necessary.*®

In regard to the office of preaching within diocesan parishes
some special observations are necessary. Not only by divine
command, but also by the explicit Canons of the Church, is the
office of preaching the Word of God committed to the Bishops.
If a Religious or Secular is to announce the Divine Message,
he can do so only with a commission from the local Ordinary.*^
Regulars strictly so called must seek the Bishop's permission to
preach outside of their own Church.*^ How much more then does
this become a duty of the members of Religious Congregations !
For announcing the Word of God in Religious houses of Com-
munities, the papal Constitution says (Conditae a Christo, c. II,
a. 8) ; "Horum (Episcopi) erit sacerdotes ipsos et a sacris desig-
nare et a concionibus probare.*' Evidently this appertains chiefly
and directly to Institutes of women and of lay Brothers, for in
Institutes of clerics, the general faculties granted to their priests
would include also the right and in fact the duty of preaching
the Gospel to the inmates.

But more than a mere permission to preach is demanded by
later legislation. Pius X prescribed that "iusiurandum praestare
debent Religiosi qui . . . sacris concionibus habendis des-
tinantur coram eo a quo approbationem . . . obtinent." *^
This oath refers to Modernism. By a still later decree the Holy
See requires that no Bishop may approve or permit a Religious
to preach within his diocese unless he present testimonials in

•Bouix, 1. c

*• C. 15, tit. 31. X. lib., I ; C. Thcnt, Sess., 5, c. 2.
** C. Trent, 1. c
Const, "S. Antistitum,- Sept 1, 1910; Deer. S. C. C, Dec. 17, 1910.

«9

94 RKI^IGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

regard to his standing and ability from his superior.^' Should
any Bishop ever have forbidden a particular Religious to preach
within his diocese, the superior is obliged to make mention of the
fact in the testimonials.** Furthermore pastors are cauitioneijl not
to invite such a one into their parish.**^

It may be questioned whether the Ordinaries' jurisdiction over
all Religious extends also to the power of compelling tl;iem to
partake in diocesan processions. The Council of Trent and later
decrees from Rome assert this right for Bishops over Regulars,**
but in regard to other associations Ojetti says: ''Compelli non
possunt ad interveniendum processionibus associationes aliae re-
ligiosae; sed haec quoque, si velint, etsi non sint stricte confra-
temitates locum in ipsis habent." *'^ Bastien^ however, claims that
Bishops can compel members of Religious Congregations to par-
take in diocesan processions, even by inflicting ecclesiastical cen-
sure.*^ Perhaps the golden mean lies nearer the truth, viz., in
cases where Religious hold parochial or diocesan offices, they are
at the bidding of Bishops.**

Truly the Ordinary's powers over Religious embraces the right
to inflict censures: "In foro autem extemo, eidem (Episcopo)
subsunt quod spectat ad censuras," but the Apostolic Constitution
immediately adds, "quas Antistites sacrorum fidelibus suis im-
pertire queant." ^^ This faculty hardly proves that Bishops can
force Religious to take part in processions. In fact Rome has
repeatedly answered that Ordinaries overstep their powers when
they attempt to compel even secular clerics who possess no benefice
or Religious Confraternities to participate in processions.'^i

^'Eadem decl., Dec. 17, 1910; et Responsio S. C. C, Sept. 25, 1910.

** Ibid.

* Ibid.

*• Sess. 25, c. 13 ; Deer S. C. EE et RR., Dec. 12, 1902.

**0. c, n. 3298; Mon. Eccl, vol. IX, pp. 2, 116.

"O. c, n. 410 sq.

^ Ibid.

••Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. II, a. 5.

" Ojetti, L c.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL REI.ATIONS 95

Within the Congregation itself, however, the Bishop's authority
is supreme and unrestricted in all things appertaining to Divine
Worship, to conscience and to the administration of the Sacra-
ments. Clearly and emphatically are enumerated the rights of the
Bishop over places of Divine Worship: "Episcoporum sunt iura
in dioecesi cuiusque sua . . . nova ab illis templa excitari,
oratoria seu publica seu semipublica aperiri." ^^ Leo XIII classed
all those oratories as semi-public "quae . . . commodo ali-
cuius communitatis inserviunt." ^^ Some doubts have been pro-
posed as to the Bishop's power of permitting the erection of a
plurality of chapels in a Community.'^* The question becomes
more involved by the two responses of the Holy See, in which
this right was denied to certain Bishops.^*^ But from the Leonine
definitions of semi-public and private chapels one is hardly forced
to consider chapels in Religious Communities as private over
which the Bishop has no power. The late decree on private ora-
tories leaves the question untouched.*^® Vermeersch remarks on
this decree: "Dubium istud manere utrum necne velit si enim
resppnsa ista adhuc urgeantur." ^"^ Gasparri, Many, Bastien, and
others maintain that the above-mentioned decisions were par-
ticular and consequently leave the powers of the Bishops intact.*^®
Hence we can safely say that the Ordinaries can permit the erec-
tion of several chapels in Religious Communities without recur-
ring to the Holy See. This question becomes practical at times ;
for more chapels are often desirable for the convenience of aged,
sick, and infirm members of the Communities. Such chapels
would still be "in cpmmodum communitatis," and hence left to
the discretion of Bishops.

"Const. "Conditae a Christo,** C. II, n. I.
" Deere. S. R. C. Jan. 83, 1899.

"'Bastien, o. c, n. 340; Wernz, o. c, vol. Ill, n. 457; Vermeersch, De
Rel., Inst, et Pars. T. I, n. 511.

•• Responsiones, S. R. C. March 8, 1879; Jan. 23, 1899.
"• Deer. S. C. de Sacr., Feb. 7, 1909.

ST
S8

Periodica, vol. V, p. 111.

Gasparri, De Euch. t. I, n. 214; Many, De locis sacris, n. 100.

96 REI^IGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

The same law that leaves to the Ordinary the erection of
chapels, also reserves the right of celebrating the Sacrifice of
the Mass therein to him : "Episcoporum sunt iura . . . sac-
rum fieri in domesticis sacellis." This, however, does not include
the rubrics that must be followed in celebrating the Holy Sac-
rifice. Until recently very many Communities possessed special
privileges not only in the celebrating of the Mass, but also in
the recitation of the Divine Office. At present the new law,
common to all Congregations in this matter, reads: "Congre-
gationes seu Instituta utriusque sexus a S. Sede approbata et sub
regimine unius praesidis generalis constituta, si ad recitationem
D. Officii teneantur, proprium pariter habeant Kalendarium." ^^
Hence the Bishop cannot exercise any jurisdiction over the Cal-
endar in such approved Institutes.

On the contrary. Institutes which are either not under a general
direction, or are not obliged to recite the Office, have been com-
pelled to surrender all their privileges and conform their rubrics
to those of the respective diocese: "Congregationes et Instituta,
quae sive Ordinaria sive Apostolica auctoritate sint approbata,
non tamen comprehendantur paragrapho praecedenti, uti debent
Kalendario Dioecesano, prouti iacet, additis iuxta Rubricas, Offi-
ciis quae ipsis peculiariter concessa" (Ibidem). In both regula-
tions there is question directly only of the Divine Office, but no
one doubts that they apply equally to the Holy Sacrifice. Some
hesitancy might be felt in regard to parishes entrusted to Re-
ligious. But the same law holds good in the celebration of Mass
in parish Churches permanently or indefinitely assigned to the
Congregations. The Bishop of Seckau asked the S. C. R. upon
this question and received the following reply: "Si parochia sit
monasterio vel domui religiosae incorporata, aut eiusdem mon-
asterii seu domus curae in perpetuum vel indefinitum tempus con-
credita, vel communitas apud ipsam parochialem ecclesiam divina
peragat, in Missis Kalendarium Religiosorum semper adhibeatur ;

Deer. "Rubricae," S. R. c, Feb. 28, 1914.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 97

secus item in Missis Kalendarium Dioecesanum semper sevetur."
The privilege or exception that the first class of Institutes
mentioned enjoy, does not exempt Religious from celebrating
within their Institutes or their parishes the principle diocesan
feasts, such as of the dedication of the Cathedral, of its patron
or titular feast, and of the principal patron feasts of the respec-
tive diocese. These must be celebrated by all Religious*^ and,
therefore, in them the diocesan calendar must be followed. As
to titular or patron feasts of the parishes entrusted to Religious,
Rome has said: "Communitas Religiosorum, quae cuidam pub-
licae ecclesiae fuit addita, tenetur ad officium patroni titularis
huius Ecclesiae et per totam octavam/' *^ Evidently the same
rubrics would obtain in regard to the celebration of the Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass.

On the other hand, Institutes which are now obliged to follow
the diocesan calendar, still enjoy the privilege of celebrating the
special feasts of the Community with the accustomed solemnities
in the same manner as heretofore : "Uti debent Kalendario Dioe-
cesano . . . additis iuxta Rubricas officiis quae ipsis pecu-
liariter concessa" (supra).

A limitation, however, on the Bishop's powers must be men-
tioned in regard to the conservation of the Bl. Sacrament in
these semi-public Oratories. Benedict XIV requires a papal in-
dult for this.*' Canonists hold that this law is still in force,®*
except in places where a contrary custom has obtained the force
of law. Ordinarily the Holy See is wont to grant the permis-
sion of conserving the Bl. Sacrament in the Chapel only upon
the condition that the Holy Sacrifice is celebrated at least once

••Responsum, S. R. C, Apr. 22, 1910.

" "Rubricae," Feb. 28, 1914.

" S. R. C. Apr. 7, 1876.

••Const. "Quamvis justo," April 30, 1749.

••Ojetti, o. c, n. 2059 sq.; Canoniste Cont. 1902, p. 182; Bastien, o. c,
n. 358.

98 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

a week.'*^ If no conditions are stipulated in the indult, Doctors
maintain that the Holy Sacrifice must be celebrated every day.**

Quite the contrary obtains in the right of exposing the Bl.
Sacrament for public adoration. Here Bishops retain their
ordinary jurisdiction: "Episcoporum sunt iura . . . Sacra-
menttun augustum proponi palam venerationi fidelium." •'' From
the phrase "palam venerationi fidelium," authors deduce the right
for Religious to expose the Bl. Sacrament without Episcopal
permission when none but members of the Community are pres^
ent.** In fact this distinction between public and private or
quasi-private religious service is quite constant throughout the
entire Constitution of Leo XIII. Immediately upon stating the
law of public Exposition, the Pontiff adds: "Episcoporum simi-
liter est sollemnia et supplicationes, quae publica sint, ordinare."
Now it is evident from what has already been said that the
Bishop's powers hardly extend to compelling Religious to partake
in public processions and other similar religious functions. But
were a Community to inaugurate a public procession, they would
certainly require the Ordinary's permission according to this regu-
lation. Nor can the rights of Bishops to ordain public prayers
include also the prayers of the Community, for these are gener-
ally provided for in the Rule of the Society which the Holy See
has acknowledged. Therefore it seems that Bastien's opinion
given above in regard to the exposition of the Bl. Sacrament
would follow quite naturally.

Frequently pious souls establish certain foundations or be-
queath certain sums of money in the form of legacies to Re-
ligious Communities for the purpose of providing for divine
worship or for some works of charity. The administration of
these indeed appertains to the Congregations. But they are ac-

•* Deer. S. R. C. May 14, 1889.

•*Ojetti, o. c, n. 2060; Mon. Eccl. vol. XIII, p. 519. Deer. S. C. EE et

RR, Feb. 9, 1904. Deer. S. R. C. May 14, 188a
*" Const. "Conditae a Christo," C. JI, n. 1.
* Bastien, o. c., n. 361.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 99

countable to the Ordinary for them. The Bishop has the right
to inquire intq their preservation and prudent administration.*'
j^ut their alienation is reserved tq the Holy See.''®

This supervision of the Ordinary cannot be extended to ot^i^r
temporal affairs, as was stated in the beginning of this
chapter, for the "Charter" of approved Congregations
explicitly states: "Bionorum . . . administratio, penes Mod-
eratorem supremum maximamve Antistitam eorumque cpnsiliaesse
debet. . . . De iis nullam Episcqpus rationem potest e3^i-
gere."^* The "Bonorum administratio" must here be strictly
interpreted for in things spiritual the Bishop possesses well-de-
fined powers: "Episcopis cuiusque diocesis ius est iqvisendi
templa, sacraria, oratoria publica, s^des ad Sacramentum Poeni-
tentiae, de iisque opportune statuendi iubendi." '^^ We might
ask here whether the Holy See intends to include the Com-
mi;nity's semi-public chapels in this episcopal visitation. Strictly
private chapels are exempt from episcopal visitation, except the
visitation which precedes their approval (Bargilliat, o. c, n.
1269). But since semi-public chapels are subject to the local
Ordinary, one would think that the Bishop possesses full powers
to visit them in the same manner as public chapels. It is certain
that the present decree does not expressly include the Com-
munity oratories. And Ojetti (o. c, n. 2940) quotes Gasparri
on this point as follows: "Ceterum haec oratoria (semi-publica)
non subsunt formali visitationi episcopi, dum dioecesim perlus-
trant et ideo non tenentur ad procurationes, nisi in casibus iure
expressis; nee in eis erigi possunt beneficia" (De Euch., I, 222).
Institutes of women and of laics, moreover, are also subject to the
Bishop's investigation in matters of discipline and morality in gen-
eral: "Episcopi erit inquirere num disciplina ad legum normam

* Const. **Conditac a Christo," aa. 9, 11.
'•Deer S. C. de ReL, "Inter ea," July 30, 1909.
"Const. "Conditae a Christo," c II, n. 9.
" Ibid., n. 11.

100 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

vigeat, num . . . contra clausuram peccatum, num sacra-
menta aequa stataque f requentia suscipiantur." ^*

The "inquiry" here referred to is not intended to convey the
idea that the Ordinary may proceed to enforce correction in case
abuses are discovered; ordinarily he would have to refer the
matter to the Holy See.^* Furthermore, Institutes of clerics are
not included in this episcopal inspection, although they are sub-
ject to Bishops' jurisdiction in most spiritual affairs, for the
following laws are general : "Alumni alumnaeve sodalitatum harum,
ad forum internum quod attinet, Episcopi potestati subsunt."
And again, "In iis quae ad spiritualia pertinent subduntur sodali-
tates Episcopis dioecesium in quibus versantur." ^"

To the internal forum and things spiritual belong pre-eminently
the Sacraments. Since custom, if indeed not special indults,
has exempted Religious Congregations from the jurisdiction of
local pastors, practically only two Sacraments require considera-
tion, viz.. Penance and Holy Orders.

Ordinarily no occasion for the administration of Baptism or
Matrimony in the Chapel of Religious Communities presents
itself. But in case of exception the pastor in whose parish the
chapel is situated, could validly assist or delegate the permission
to assist at Matrimony in the Religious Chapel. (S. Congr. de
Sacramentis, March 10, 1910.) As to the becomingness of ad-
ministering the Sacrament of Matrimony in Religious Chapels,
there can be no question. Canonists generally hold that it is un-
lawful, at least in Institutes of women and in Seminaries. (Fer-
reres, "los Esponsales y el Matrimonio," p. 309.) The Provincial
Council of Valentia explicitly forbids the administration of Mat-
rimony in churches of Regulars, of Congregations, of Colleges and
in all Institutes of women and in Seminaries without the special
permission of the Bishop. (See Ferreres, 1. c.) But it is use-

" Ibid.
" Ibid.
" Ibid., c. II, n. 6 et 8.

. IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 101

less to develop the discipline on Matrimony. The laws regarding
Penance are of greater importance.

No further reference need be made to the fact that Institutes
of clerics possess no jurisdiction "in foro intemo," unless they
receive it from the Ordinary. By way of exception Rome has
conferred special powers on some Congregations, as for example
the Congregations of Passionists and Redemptorists. But this
only confirms the general law. Nor is it necessary to discuss at
length the right of Religious to confess their sins to any duly
authorized priest, when they are outside of their Institute. There
was a time when this was not allowed. These prohibitions, how-
ever, have been revoked and general liberty given to every Re-
ligious, whether male or female, to make his or her confession
to any priest possessing ordinary jurisdiction, when lawfully or
unlawfully they happen to be outside of their own Community
house.^® But the regulations or discipline regarding the Sacra-
ment of Penance within the Religious houses is of prime im-
portance for Bishop and priest.

Leo XIII prescribed, "Si sodalitates muliebres sint, designabit
item Episcopus sacerdotes a confessionibus tum ordinarios turn
extra ordinem, ad normam Constitutionis "Pastoralis curae" a
Benedicto XIV decessore Nostro editae, ac decreti "Quemad-
modum" dati a sacro Consilio Episcopis et Religiosorum ordinibus
praeposito, die 17 decembris anno 1890; quod quidem decretum
ad vivorum etiam consociationes pertinent, qui sacris minime
initiantur." ^"^ From this it follows that the tribunal of Con-
fession in Institutes of priests is administered by the superiors
of the Community: "In presbyterorum sodalitiis, de conscientia
. . . uni praesides cognoscent." ''*

All the laws of Leo XIII and his predecessors which are still
in force in regard to the confessions of Nuns and Sisters have

*• Deer. S. C. O. Aug. 23, 1899 : Deer. S. C. dc Rel, "Cum de Sacramen-
talibus," Feb. 3, 1913; Deer. S. C. Rel., Aug. 5, 1913.

" Const. "Conditae a Christo," c. II, n. 8.
" Ibid., c. II, n. 77.

102 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

been generalized and codified by the Holy See in the decree
"Cum de sacramentalibus" : "visum est iii uniiiii coUigere I>6cl"e-
tum." ''* According to this decree of the Sacred Congregation,
it devolves upon the Ordinary to provide "ordinary," "extraordi-
nary," and some "special" confessors for every Religious house
of Nuns and Sisters within his diocese. We say "house," be-
cause no obligation rests upon the Bishop to assign special con-
fessors to Sisters who confess in the parish Church, though per-
haps it would be advisable, as a rule, to do so. If Bishops made
this provision, then these confessors could hear the Sisters' con-
fessions also in their parochial convent in case of illness or some
other extraordinary circumstances.*^

The ordinary confessor is appointed by the Bishop for the
term of three years. Of course, it is understood that a plurality
of regular confessors may be assigned. In fact it would be
necessary in large Communities. In such event the extent of
each individual confessor's faculties would naturally rest with
the Bishop who would certainly express the limitations, if any,
in the commission. The ordinary confessor, however, may hot
be reappointed unless the scarcity of priests demand it or the
majority of Sisters for good reasons desire it. Certainly this
limitation would not include ordinary confessors designated for
the Confessions of Sisters in the parish Church.'^ These de-
pend solely on the will of the Bishop. But the law provides that
the ordinary confessor may not be made extraordinary within a
year from the expiration of his term.

In virtue of the office oi ordinary confessor no right is con-
ferred to meddle with the internal affairs of the Community.
This would not only be imprudent, but also in direct violation of
the law of the Holy See. The two forums are strictly separated
and no reason will justify their blending. If a priest is the
moderator of a Community or house, he is thereby excluded from

w
•1

Deer. S. C. de Rel., **Cuni de Sacramentalibtis,'^ t^eb. 3, 1913.
Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VII, p. 93 sq.
Responsio S. C. EE. et RR., July 20, 1875.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 103

hearing the confessions of the Sisters who reside in that house,
except in very extraordinary cases.

Nor is this the only disqualification expressed by the decree.
Ordinarily only priests who have passed their fortieth year and
who in their ministry have manifested prudence and integrity of
character, are eligible to the office of Father-confessor for Sis-
ters. While prudence and good morals are essential at all times
to worthily discharge the duties of the confessional, yet the
Holy See considers that they are requisite in a special degree
for the confessions of Religious. Naturally the Bishop may for
just reasons make exception to the age-requirement law. Prud-
ence and virtue are not necessarily the endowments of a certain
age, and therefore the Holy See leaves much to the discretion of
the Bishop.

No general law determines the frequency with which the ordi-
nary confessor must afford the Sisters an occasion to receive the
Sacrament of Penance. The Council of Trent admonishes
Bishops and superiors to see to it that Nuns approach the Sacra-
ments of Confession and Communion at least once a month
(Sess. XXV, c. X, de Rel.). But this regulation establishes only
the extreme limit and leaves the rest to the proper au-
thorities. Moreover, no one doubts that Religious should
be given every opportunity of gaining the many indulgences
granted by the Church. By a decree of the S. C. Indulgentiae
(Dec. 9, 1763) confession at least once a week is necessary for
obtaining the customary plenary indulgences during the week.
In some countries an extension to two weeks has been granted.
But Pius X declared that these prescriptions are not obliga-
tory for daily communicants.^^ Hence it can hardly be alleged
that the reason of gaining Indulgences would urge weekly con-
fessions and therefore oblige the ordinary confessor to visit the
convents weekly. Custom, however, has established a rather
general and correct norm in favor of weekly confessions for
Religious. If, therefore, the Bishop would not specify the days

Deer. S. C. Indulg., Feb. 14, 1906.

104 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

for confession, the custom of the convent could not be disregarded
without good reason.

The prescriptions for the extraordinary confessor are very
similar to those for the ordinary. The Holy See demands that
the Bishop assign extraordinary confessors for every Com-
munity "pluries in anno." This would certainly mean at least
twice a year. The Council of Baltimore says : "Extraordinarius
saltem bis vel ter in anno ad confessiones omnium excipiendas
se praesentabit." *' The Plenary Council of Quebec prescribes the
same: "Bis vel ter in anno confessarius extraordinarius concedi
debet monialibus etiam votorum simplicium." ** No specified time
for the duration of the term of office is given by the Holy See
or particular Councils so far as could be determined from works
consulted. The Bishop is at full liberty in all regulations con-
cerning the extraordinary, except that the qualities required for
the ordinary, should also be insisted on for the extraordinary con-
fessor. Again, the Bishop may not appoint an ordinary con-
fessor within a year to the same Institute, nor may he delegate
a Religious without the consent of his superior.

Finally a certain number of special confessors must be desig-
nated whom the Sisters may call to hear their confessions, when
for any reason they prefer not to confess to the ordinary con-
fessor. Since this privilege may easily be abused, it rests with
the individual confessor to exercise the greatest prudence in
treating such souls in order that what is granted for the greater
liberty of conscience, may not revert to the detriment of Religious
or of their Community.

For very special reasons approved by the Ordinary, a Nun
or Sister could obtain a particular father confessor; but since
this must necessarily be of very rare occurrence it suffices to
know that the Holy See provides even for such extreme cases,
but leaves it to the Bishop to judge of the individual case.

83
M

III, C. Bait., n. 97; C. of Trent, Sess. XXV, c. 10, de Reg.
I PI. C. of Quebec, n. 270; Cfr. also Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. VII
p. 89.

IN THEIR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 105

These regulations are intended as the ordinary norms for G>m-
munities of women. But in cases of serious sickness, even though
there exists no danger of death, a Sister may summon any priest
having faculties within the diocese as often as she sees fit. The
Church's mission on earth is the salvation of souls. Therefore
she puts no limits on her children in questions of conscience,
and especially not when afflictions, the natural harbingers of the
Life to come, bear them down.

The new decree nowhere explicitly states that the validity of
the confessions within the convent depends upon this episcopal
approval. Seemingly, however, the regulations suppose it.^'
Barrett says on this point : "Specialis deputatio ab ipso Ordinario
exigitur, et quidem ad validitatem, pro confessario domus ordi-
nario, pro confessario domus extraordinario, pro istis sacerdoti-
bus unicuique domui religiosae assignatis quos singulae vocent,
pro uno isto speciali confessario ob peculiarem causam in con-
fessarium habitualem petito." *®

Some authors, indeed, thought that the decree "In audientia"
(Aug. 3, 1913) which gives to any approved confessor the faculty
of validly hearing the confessions of Religious even within the
Religious house, included also Religious Institutes of women.
But the general opinion of Canonists denies this.^*^

In speaking of the new laws regarding confession in convents,
Vermeersch draws attention to the fact that special approbation
or jurisdiction is necessary only when the Nun or Sister wishes
to confess within her own Convent. If, then, a Religious were
visiting another Convent, an approved confessor could validly
and licitly absolve her in the Convent Chapel.®* Such a case
might become practical, especially where the chaplain would be
called on to hear the confessions of visiting Sisters. Having,
therefore, the ordinary approval from the Bishop, he could exer-

" Vermeersch, o. c- p. 92.

•• Sabetti-Barrett, "Comp. Theol. Mor.," Edit 23, p. 712.

•' Ibid., p. 704.

" O. c, vol. VII, p. 92.

106 R1CI.IGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

cise his faculty in regard to visitors, but not in regard to the
resideht Sisters of the Convent.

The regulations or the Sacrament of Penance are not altogether
dissimilar to those of the Sacrament of Holy Orders. The Holy
See prescHbes certain conditions which the Bishop must carry
out before he may licitly ordain a Religious. These conditions
are the ordinary ones of Canon law. Religious Congregations
possess no general privileges of Ordination like the strict Orders.
Hence the Ordinary may not ordain a Religious unless the latter
present the required testimonials, dimissorials, and canonical title
of Ordination, or proof that the Congregation has received a
special privilege which exempts it from this requirement.®* If,
however, an Institute possess a special privilege of Ordination,
then, "Les superieurs des Instituts qui ont obtenu un indult
special de faire ordonner leurs subjets pour leur propre compte,
peuvent donner les lettres dimissoriales a Tfiveque du diocese ou
se trouve le monastere." "^

By the decree "Aiictis admodum" (Nov. 4, 1892), the Holy
See forbids the conferring of Sacred Orders on Religious before
they have made their perpetual profession. Vermeersch thinks
that this is obligatory only when the candidate is promoted to
Holy Orders "sub titulo privilegiato." Therefore, he concludes,
a Religious could be ordained prior to the perpetual profession
under a regular title, as for instance under the title of patrimony.®^

In addition to the ordinary testimonials which are demanded
for Holy Orders, the Holy See has seen fit to exact testimonials
also from the pastors in whose territory a Religious has been
located for three months or more of military service.®^ This was
referred to more fully in the fourth chapter.

Ordination, moreover, may not be conferred on Religious,
"nisi, praeter alia a jure statuta, . . . professi . . .testi-

" Const. "Conditae a Christo," c II, a. 6.
••Bastien, o. c, p. 237.
"Vermeersch, Periodica, Vol. V, p. (15).

"Deer. S. C. de Rel., "Inter Reliquas," Jan. 1, 1911; Responsios P. dc
RcL, Feb. 1, 1912.

IN TtteiR EXTERNAL RELATIONS 107

itibhiiales litteras 6xhibeant, quod saltern per annum sacrae theol-
ojjiae operaih dederint si agattir de subdiaconatu, ad ihiiius per
biietinium, si de diaconatu, et quoad presbyteratum, isaltem per
trienniiim, praemisso tamen regulari aliorum studiotum curri-
culo."** The Sacred Congregation for Religious has declared
that the terms of this paragraph of the said decree must be inter-
preted literally, or rather it has interpreted them literally. The
Holy See, moreover, has added another year of Theology to
the regular course.®* No express mention is made that this addi-
tional year must also precede Ordination. Hence it is inter-
preted that the law regarding the conferring of Holy Orders
is not changed, provided a complete course of Theology is ob-
tained in the prescribed three years. This additional year
of regular studies could then be fulfilled subsequently.**

A more thorough study of Theology is especially necessary in
our times when the air is filled with hyper-critical, irreligious,
and heretical tendencies. Pius X strove to counteract these by
timely regulations demanding a more complete course of studies
for ecclesiastical students.®* Furthermore, as an aid to their
intellectual development and as a protection for the true doc-
trine of Christ, the Sovereign Pontiff imposed the obligation of
taking an oath against Modernism before receiving Major Orders.
This does not necessarily mean before each Major Order, but
at least before the Subdiaconate.*^ In the case of Religious
taking this oath, the law was not clear in designating before whom
they must make the oath. This doubt has been solved by the
decision : "Alumni Religiosi majoribus ordinibus initiandi tenentur
dare iusiurandum a Moto proprio S. Antistitum praescriptum
coram Episcopo Ordines conf erente." ®*

•■Deer. S. C. EE. et RR., "Auctis admodum," Nov. 4, 1892.

•• Declaratio S. C. de Rel., Sept. 7, 1909.

" Vermeersch, Periodica, vol. V, p. 47.

••Deer. "Sacrorum Antistitum," Sept. 1, 1910.

" Responsio S. C. C. March 24, 1911.

" Responsio S. C. C. Dec. 17, 1911.

108 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

When all the prerequisites for the reception of the Sacrament
of Holy Orders have, been complied with, the superior of the
Congregation must formally present the candidate to the Bishop
for ordination.'* The fact that one is a Religious does not exempt
him in ordination from the obligation of promising obedience to
the Bishop, nor of making the Solemn vow of chastity, even
though the Religious may have already bound himself by the
perpetual vow of chastity.^^^ This is due chiefly to the canoni-
cal status of Religious Congregations. They are subject to the
ordinary jurisdiction of the Bishop in all things spiritual.

In conclusion it is necessary to draw attention to certain dele-
gated powers which Ordinaries receive from the Holy See. It
is impossible for the Holy See to exercise direct jurisdiction over
the entire government of Religious Societies. The very nature
of some, especially of Institutes of women, requires a closer
supervision. The Council of Trent commanded Ordinaries to
supervise the reception of their candidates and the observance of
the Cloister. Papal laws, as has been noticed, ever and anon
repeat the Tridentine admonitions and add many other provi-
sions. The Ordinary is responsible for the due and effective pro-
mulgation of these decrees. But as a special delegate of the
Holy See, he is obliged to safeguard freedom of conscience and
the unrestricted access to the Sacrament of Penance according to
the decree "Cum de sacramentalibus." The fact that an Insti-
tute of women is under the jurisdiction of an exempted Order,
makes no infringement on this right of Bishops. Where his
ordinary jurisdiction fails to supply the necessary power, a dele-
gated right comes to his assistance. An equally important duty
rests upon Ordinaries to preside as a Papal Delegate over Con-
vents or Chapters when the various offices are assigned in Com-
munities of Sisters.^®^ To these, particular delegations are fre-
quently added according to the peculiar nature of some Institutes

•• Const. "Conditac a Christo," C. II, a. 6.

'" Bastien, o. c., pp. 24, 239.

'•^ Const. "Conditae a Christo/' C. I, n. 1.

IN THEIR EXTERNAI, RELATIONS 109

and the varying circumstances of different countries. These
special faculties can be learned only from the respective indults.
This, then, finishes the purpose of the present treatise. An
effort has been made to outline the Religious Congregations' , ex-
ternal relations, both canonically and historically. This led to
the investigation of their nature, origin and development; of
their foundation and ecclesiastical approval; of the reception,
bond, and expulsion of members; and finally of their pontifical
and episcopal government. Considering the limitations and
frailties of human nature, the writer can hardly hope that his
sincere and laborious efforts have detected every truth or escaped
every mistake. Hence the kind indulgence of the reader is
solicited, if errors or shortcomings have crept into this short
treatise.

A.M.D.G. ET B.V.M.

.li

110

RSI.I0IOUS CONGREGATIONS

IN THBIR iiXTERNAI. RELATIONS 111

SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Sources.

The Conitii^ Jufia Canonki e^t. Rkhler, l«epsia« 1839.

Canones et Decreta C* Tcid^ntiai, Ratisboi;ta«» edttio stercot]^^ IfilQ.

Bullarium Romanum.

Bullarium Benedicti XIV.

Analecta ecclesiastica.

Acta Sanctae Sedis.

Acta Apostolicae Sedis.

Co^ecl^iMBa i^ u^u|a S. C. E£ fk KH.

Decreta C. PI. Baltimorensis Tertii, Baltimorae, Murphy.

Acta et Decreta C. PL Am^«qMB LaUaa^ 18190^ f^W^ l^OQ*

Acta et Decreta C. Fl QuebieG^sis Primi, ldQ9» Queb^ 1912.

Bibliography.

Ang£i,us a SS. Corde, Manuak Jaris Commuiiis ReL

Arkdt^ S. J., Die Kirchlichen Rechtsbestimmtingen fucr Frauen Congre-

gationen.
Arndt, Aug., Die Rechtsverhaeltnisse der Oratorien (in Arkiv, F.K.K.

vol 72).
Arndt^ Die Ordensschwestern und die taegltche Kommmiion.
Arndt^ Das Dekret ''Qucmadinodttm (17 dec, 1890) luer Ordensfrauen

u. Laiengenosscsiscfaalteii.
Adigard^ Decret apostolique du 17 dec. 1890 sur le compte de conscience,

la confession et la communion dans les communaut^s relig.
Arkiv. f.K.K. Tom XVII, p. S4; XXIII, p, 386, LXVI, p. 159.
Anai,bcta, J. P., Vol. V, Traite des Congr^ations secuHeres;

Vol. XXVII, XXVIII, Institutes seculiercs;
Vol. XXVII, Institutes Modernes ;
Vol. XI, Les Communantes.
Also Vols. XXIV, XXVI.
BitDtBAACK, 3. J. De jure Reg.
Bouix, De Jure Regidanum, 2 Vol.
Barguuat, Pradectienes J. C, Vol. II (Edit tricesima).

112 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

BuTLEs, Lives of Saints.

Baiasbini, Gory. Comp. TheoL Vol. II» de voto.

Bastdsn^ Directoire Canonique.

Brentano, Die barmherr. Schwestern i. Bezug auf Armen und Kranken-

pflacge.
Beixizauus, Manuaie Regularium.
Bizzari, Analecta Vol IV, V, VI. VII, IX.
BoucHE, Du droit d'exister de congregations rel. non reconnues.
BiiAUART, Summa, S. Thos. De Religiosis et de voto.
BouQuii.U)N, Theol. Mor. Fundamentalis.
Battandier» Guide Canonique, 2nd edit
BouDiNHON, Les Congregations Religieuses, Articles in Le Canoniste

Contemporain, Vol. 25, 26, 27.
BuGDAije, Monasticon Anglicanum.
Capfello, De Curia Romana.
Caruer, L'Incapadte de recevoir des congregation religieuses et de leurs

membres.
Craisson^ Des Communautes a voeux simples.
Daris^ Quaestiones canonico — civiles de statu religioso.
DeBuck> De exemptione.

DECHAMPSy Instructions aux communautes relig. des lemmes.
Dehey, Religious Orders of Women in the United States.
De Luca, Relatio Curiae Romanae.
DeBuck^ De I'etat religieux en Belgique au XIX siecle.
D'Annibale, Summub Theol. Mor. 5th edit.
£cci;esiASTicAL Review, Vol 51, 1914.
Gasparri, Tract. Can. de S. Ordinatione.
Gasparri, Tract Can. de SS. £uch.
Gasquet, English Monastic Life.
Gennari, Consultazioni Mor. Can. lit.
Franco-Huber, Das PaepstL Decret "Quemadmodum."
Herve-Bazin, Les grand Ordres et Congregations rel. de femmes, Paris

1889.
Heuser, Congregation, Art. In Kirch-Lex.
Heimbucher, Orden und Kongr. Vols. I and II.
Hulling, Procedure at the Roman Courts.
HoHM, "Vocations," 2 vols.

HoLN, Die barmherz, Schwestern von heilig. Karl Borromaeus.
JoDER, Das Beichtvateramt in Frauenkloestern.
JoDER^ Das Sammeln von Almosen durch Ordensfrauen.
Keiter, Bedingungen f. d. Eintritt in saemtl. relig. Maennerorden und

Genossenschaften Deutsch. Oesterr. u. d. Schweiz.
KoHER, De monialium et recent, Congregationum mulierum confessario.

IN THEIR EXTERN AI, RELATIONS 113

Lansi^ots^ Hand Book for Religious Congregations of Women.

LSNORMANT, De Associations rel. dans le Catholidsme.

LejBvne, La Confession et la Communion des religieux.

Lessius, Disputatio de statu vitae deligendo et religioso ingressu.

LuciDi, De Visitatione, C. V. de M. (3rd edit.).

Many, Prael. Can. de Missa. ^

Many, Prael. Can. de locis sacris.

Many, PraeL Can de S. Ordinatione.

Mem)T, De Ordinibus et Congr. Relig.

Meynaro, O. p. Responses Canonique et pratiques sur le gouvernement

et devoirs des religieuses a voeux simples 2 vol.

M1CHE1.ETT1, Jus Pianum.

NardElu, Le Congregazioni religiose di voti semplici nei rapporti con i

vescovi secondo la bolla "Conditae" di Leone XIII.
NervEGNa, De jure Practico Reg.

Nervegna, De Institutis votorura simplicium.

Nii«LES, De libertate clericorum religionem ingrediendi.

Noi4)iN, Summa Theol. Moralis, 3 vols.

OjETTi, Synopsis Rerum Mor. et Juris Pontificii.

OjEm, De Romana Curia.

Passerini, de Sextula, De hominum statibus et ofiiciis.

Peixizarius, Manuale Reg.

Peyrinis, De privilegiis Regularium.

PiAT, Praelectiones juris regularis.

PrEuschen, Moenchtum und Sarariskult.

RoDERicus, Quaestiones regulares et canonicae.

RoTARius, Theol. Mor. Regularium.

Sabetti-Barrett, Compendium, Theol. Mor. (23rd edit).

Santi-Leitner, Praelectiones, L. 3, t 36.

Sauvestre, Le Congregations rel.

ScHEi<s, De neuren religioesen Frauengenossenschaften.

ScHMAi^zGRUEBER, Jus Cauouicum universum, edit. Rom. 1843. Lib. III.

ScHUPPE, Die neuer. rel. Frauengenossenschaften und ihr. Beziehungen 2.
Ortspfarren.

ScHUPFE, Die Selbstvervaltung , d. neuer. relig. Frauengenossenschaften

und ihr Verhaelniss Z. Dioezesan Bishof.

ScHUPFE, Studien ueb. d. relig. neuer. Frauengenossenschaften.

Sebastianei«u, Praelectiones J. C. 2d edit. Vol. I. Pars. II. De Regularibus.

ScHUPPE, Das Wesen und Rechtsverhaeltnisse der neueren Frauengenos-
senschaften.

Sherer, Handbuch d. Kirchenrechtes Vol. II, p. 698-880. Graz and Liepzig,

1898.

SprEitzenhoper, Die Entwicklung des Alten Moenchtum.

114 RELIGIOUS CONGREGATIONS

St. Thomas, II, II, q. 88.

SuAUtz, De virtute et statu retigionis (Pars. 2a).

SuAisz, Tom. 14. Tract 7, de ReL et de Voto.

ToucBVr, La secnlarisation des congreganistes devant le droit canon.

Tyck, Notices histonqoe snr les congregations et comnranantes.reL

Van Esvsm, Jus. ecd. P. I, Tit 33.

VtKBQtnxs, De regularium et saecularium dericorum juritus et offidis.

VmmascH, de ReL et Inst 2 vols.

VEaMtBiscH, Rdigiotts; Cathofic Ency.

VtBMttMSCM, Periodica, 7 vols.

VmcAU, Les lois de I'Eglise sur la confession et la cooununion dc» re-

Hgienses.
Wekhz, Jus Decretaliun, Tom. III.

IV THUR EXTERNAL RB[«ATIONS ^

Universitas Cathouca Americae ^

Washingtonii, D, C.

S. Facultas Theologica

1916-1916

TITULI

HORA IX A. M. DIE V JUNII A. D. MCMXVI

I. De Potestate Legislativa Ecclesiae Catholicae.
II. De Legislatoribus Ecclesiasticis.

III. De Objecto Legum Ecclesiasticarum.

IV. De Interpretatione Legum Ecclesiasticarum.
V. De Corpore Juris.

VI. De Regulis Juris in Genere.

VII. De Decretis Romanorum Pontificum.

VIII. De Decretis SS. Congregationum.

IX. De Electione Romani .Pontificis.

X. De Civili Veto seu Exclusiva.

XI. De Romanae Curiae Dicasteriis in Genere.

XII. De Congregatione Negotiis Religiosarum Sodalium
Praeposita.

XIII. De Congregatione de Propaganda Fide.

XIV. De Vicariis Apostolicis.

XV. De Cardinali Protectorc super Ordines et Congrega-
tiones.

XVI. De Juribus Episcoporum Ordinandi Religiosos.

XVII. De Episcoporum Jurisdictione in Religiosis Institutis.

XVIII. De Coadjutoribus Episcoporum.

XIX. De Parocho quoad Sacramentum Baptismi.

XX. De Parocho quoad Sacramentum Matrimonii.

XXI. De Parocho quoad Religiosas Congregationes.

XXII. De Potestate Parochi quoad Audiendas Religiosorum
et Religiosarum Confessiones.

XXIII. De Privilegio Clericorum Ingrediendi Religionem.

XXIV. De Transitu Religiosorum et Religiosarum ad Aliud

Institutum.

XXV. De Exemptione Religiosorum Ordinum et Institu-
torum.

XXVI. De Usu Kalendarii in Religiosis Institutis.

XXVII. De Saecularizatione Religiosonun Clericorum.

XXVIII. De Tcrtiis Ordinibus Laicis.

XXIX. De Conf ratemitatibus.

XXX. DeOratoriis.

XXXI. De Alienatione Bonorum Ecclesiasticorum.

XXXII. De Lege Contrahendi Debita in Religiosis Institutis.

XXXIII. DeSepultura Ecclesiastica.

XXXIV. De lis Quae Praemitti Debent Celebrationi Matri-

monii.

XXXV. De Impedimento Disparitatis Cultus.

XXXVI. De Impedimento Vis et Metus.

XXXVII. De Impedimento Clandestinitatis juxta "Ne Temere.''

XXXVIII. De Impedimento Aetatis.

XXXIX. De Impedimento Publicae Honestatis.

XL. De Impedimento Cognationis Spiritualis.

XLI. De Transactione.

XLII. De Foro Competenti.

XLIII. DeArbitris.

XLIV. DeAdvocatis.

XLV. DeTestibus.

XLVI. De Judiciis in Causis Expulsionis et Dimissionis Re-
ligiosorum.

XLVn. DeDolo.

XL VIII. De Contumnacia.

XLIX. De Delicto Ecclesiastico Biusque Constitutivis in
Genere.

L. De Concursu Plurium Personarum in Idem Delictum.

LL De Applicatione Legis Poenalis Ad Delicta Ecde-
siastica.

LII. De Poenis Vindicativis in Genere.

LIII. De Irregularitate in Genere.

LI V. De Poenis Inhabilitantibus Ad OfScia Ecdesiastica.

LV. De Privatione OfSciorum et Beneficioruin Ecdesiasti-
coram.

LVI. De Depositione Clericoram.

LVII. De Degradatione Clericoram.

LVIII. De Conditionibus, Modo, Formis Requisitis Ad In-
fligendas Censuras Ecclesiasticas.

LIX. De Effectibus Censuraram Ecclesiasticarmn.

LX. De Cessatione et Absolutione Censurarwn Ecclesias-
ticarum.

Vidit Sacra Facultas :

Daniel I. Kenkdy^ O. P., S. T. M., p. t Decanus.
Franciscus I. CoELN^ Ph. D., p. t. a Secretis.
Vidit Rector Universitatis,
Si Thomas I. Shahan, S. T. D.

VITA.

Celestine A. Freriks was bom of Dutch parents at Essen, Ger-
many, March 9th, 1876. When he was four years of age his
parents emigrated to the United States and established their per-
manent domicile at Corning, Ohio. Here he received his early
education in the State school, but completed the primary grades
in the Parocial school of St. Bernard's parish under the guidance
of the Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, Kentucky. Upon the
successful completion of the six-year academic and collegiate
course with the Fathers of the Most Precious Blood of CoUege-
ville, Indiana, St. Joseph's College conferred on him the degree
of Bachelor of Arts in 1906. In the same year he entered St.
Charles Seminary of the Society of the Most Precious Blood.
December 21st, 1911, the Society presented him to His Grace,
the Most Reverend Henry Moeller, Archbishop of Cincinnati,
for ordination to the Priesthood. The following year he entered
the Catholic University of America for a post-graduate course,
choosing for his major study Canon Law under the direction of
Dr. Creagh, and subsequently of Dr. Bemardini; and for his
minors. Moral and Sacramental Theology under Dr. Melody and
Dr. Kennedy, O. P. He attended, moreover, the course in In-
dustrial Ethics of Dr. Ryan. Gladly, therefore, does he avail
himself of this occasion of publicly thankh)g the various teachers
for their valuable assistance and never-failing kindness.

DDD

DDDD

DDD