SACRAMENTORUM SANCTITATIS
TUTELA
POPE
JOHN PAUL II APOSTOLIC
LETTER GIVEN MOTU PROPRIO by which are promulgated Norms concerning the more grave delicts reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
The
Safeguarding of the Sanctity of the
Sacraments, especially the Most Holy
Eucharist and Penance, and the keeping of the faithful,
called to communion with the Lord, in their observance of the
sixth commandment of the Decalogue, demand that the
Church itself, in her pastoral solicitude,
intervene to avert dangers of violation, so as to
provide for the salvation of souls “which must always
be the supreme law in the Church” (Codex
Iuris Canonici, can. 1752).
Indeed, Our Predecessors already provided
for the sanctity of the sacraments, especially
penance, through appropriate Apostolic
Constitutions such as the Constitution Sacramentum
Poenitentiae, of Pope Benedict XIV, issued
June 1, 1741;[1] the same goal
was likewise pursued by a number of canons of the
Codex Iuris Canonici,
promulgated in 1917 with their fontes
by which canonical sanctions had been established
against delicts of this kind.[2]
In
more recent times, in order to avert these and
connected delicts, the Supreme Sacred Congregation
of the Holy Office, through the Instruction Crimen
sollicitationis, addressed to all Patriarchs, Archbishops,
Bishops, and other local Ordinaries “even of an Oriental
Rite” on March 16, 1962, established a manner of
proceeding in such cases, inasmuch as judicial
competence had been attributed exclusively to it,
which competence could be exercised either administratively
or through a judicial process.
It is to be kept in mind that an
Instruction of this kind had the force of law
since the Supreme Pontiff, according to the norm
of can. 247, § 1 of the Codex Iuris Canonici
promulgated in 1917, presided over the Congregation
of the Holy Office, and the Instruction proceeded from his own
authority, with the Cardinal at the time only
performing the function of Secretary.
The Supreme Pontiff, Pope Paul VI, of happy
memory, by the Apostolic Constitution on the Roman
Curia, Regimini
Ecclesiae Universae, issued on August 15, 1967,[3] confirmed the
Congregation’s judicial and administrative competence
in proceeding “according to its amended and approved
norms”.
Finally, by the authority with which we are
invested, in the Apostolic Constitution, Pastor
Bonus, promulgated on June 28, 1988, we expressly established,
“[The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith]
examines delicts against the faith and more grave
delicts whether against morals or committed in the
celebration of the sacraments, which have been
referred to it and, whenever necessary, proceeds to declare
or impose canonical sanctions according to the norm of both
common and proper law,”[4] thereby further
confirming and determining the judicial competence
of the same Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as an
Apostolic Tribunal.
After we had approved the Agendi
ratio in doctrinarum examine,[5] it was
necessary to define more precisely both “the more grave
delicts whether against morals or committed in the celebration
of the sacraments” for which the competence of the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith remains
exclusive, and also the special procedural norms
“for declaring or imposing canonical
sanctions.”
With this apostolic letter, issued motu
proprio, we have completed this work and we hereby
promulgate the Norms
concerning the more grave delicts reserved to the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
which Norms are divided in two distinct parts, of
which the first contains Substantive Norms, and the
second Procedural Norms
. We therefore enjoin all those concerned to observe
them diligently and faithfully. These
Norms take effect on the very day when they are
promulgated.
All things to the contrary, even those
worthy of special mention,
notwithstanding.
Give in Rome at St. Peter’s on April 30,
2001, the memorial of Pope St. Pius V, in the
twenty-third year of Our Pontificate. Pope
John Paul II AAS 93 (2001)
737-739 [Decisions of
the Supreme Pontiff
made on
February 7 and 14, 2003, are indicated in bold
type.] Part One SUBSTANTIVE
NORMS Art.
1
§ 1.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, according to
the norm of art. 52 of the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus,[6] judges more grave
delicts whether against morals or committed in the
celebration of the sacraments, and, whenever necessary,
proceeds to declare or impose canonical sanctions according to
the norm of both common and proper law, without
prejudice to the competence of the Apostolic
Penitentiary[7] and with Agendi ratio in
doctrinarum examine[8] remaining in
force.
§ 2.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith judges the
delicts mentioned in § 1 according to the norms
which follow. Art.
2
§ 1.
The delicts against the sanctity of the Most Holy Sacrifice
and Sacrament of the Eucharist, reserved to the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for
judgement are:
1º the taking or retaining for a sacrilegious
purpose, or the throwing away of the consecrated
species[9] mentioned in can.
1367 of the Code of Canon Law[10] and in can. 1442
of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches;[11]
2º the attempting of the liturgical offering
of the Eucharistic Sacrifice mentioned in can. 1378,
§ 2, n. 1, of the Code of Canon Law,[12] or the simulation
of the same, mentioned in can. 1379 of the Code of
Canon Law[13] and in can. 1443
of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches;[14]
3º the concelebration of the Eucharistic
Sacrifice prohibited in can. 908 of the Code of
Canon Law[15] and in can. 702
of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches,[16] mentioned in can.
1365 of the Code of Canon Law[17] and in can. 1440
of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches,[18] with ministers of
ecclesial communities, which do not have apostolic
succession and do not acknowledge the sacramental dignity of
priestly ordination.
§ 2.
Also reserved to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith is the delict which consists in the
consecration for a sacrilegious purpose of one
matter without the other in a Eucharistic celebration,
or even of both outside of the Eucharistic celebration.[19] One who has
perpetrated this delict is to be punished according
to the gravity of the crime, not excluding dismissal or
deposition. Art.
3
The delicts against the sanctity of the
sacrament of Penance reserved to the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith for judgement
are:
1º the absolution of an accomplice in a sin
against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue,
mentioned in can. 1378, § 1, of the Code of Canon
Law[20] and in can. 1457
of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches;[21]
2º the solicitation to a sin against the
sixth commandment of the Decalogue in the act, on the occasion, or under
the pretext of confession, mentioned in can. 1387 of
the Code of Canon Law[22] and in can. 1458
of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches,[23] if it is directed
to sinning with the confessor himself.
3º the direct and
indirect violation of the sacramental seal, mentioned in can.
1388, § 1, of the Code of Canon Law[24] and in can. 1456,
§ 1, of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.[25]
4º
the recording by any technical instrument and the
broadcast/transmission by means of instruments of
social communication of that which is said in
sacramental confession by the confessor or the penitent
(Decree of the CDF of 23 September 1988; AAS 70 [1988]
1367). Art.
4
§ 1.
Reservation to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
is also extended to a delict against the sixth
commandment of the Decalogue committed by a cleric
with a minor below the age of eighteen
years.
§ 2.
One who has perpetrated the delict mentioned in § 1 is to be
punished according to the gravity of the offense, not
excluding dismissal or deposition. Art.
5
§ 1.
Criminal action for delicts reserved to the Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith is extinguished by
prescription after ten years.[26]
§ 2.
Prescription runs according to the norm of can. 1362, § 2,
of the Code of Canon Law[27] and can. 1152, §
3, of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.[28] However, in the
delict mentioned in art. 4, § 1, prescription begins
to run from the day on which the minor completes the eighteenth
year of age. Part
two PROCEDURAL
NORMS Title I The Constitution and Competence of
the Tribunal
Art.
6
§ 1.
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is the Supreme
Apostolic Tribunal for the Latin Church and for the
Eastern Catholic Churches for the judgement of the
delicts defined in the preceding
articles.
§ 2. This Supreme Tribunal also judges other
delicts of which a defendant is accused by the
Promoter of Justice by reason of connection of
person and complicity.
§ 3.
The sentences of this Supreme Tribunal, rendered within the
limits of its proper competence, do not need to be
submitted for the approval of the Supreme
Pontiff. Art.
7
§ 1.
The Members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
are by the law itself judges of this Supreme
Tribunal.
§ 2.
The Prefect of the Congregation presides as first among
equals over the college of the Members, and if the
office of Prefect is vacant or if the Prefect
himself is impeded, the Secretary of the
Congregation carries out those duties of the Prefect.
§ 3.
It pertains to the Prefect of the Congregation to appoint
[other] judges, whether permanent (stabiles)
or delegated (deputatos). Art.
8
It is necessary that such appointed judges be
priests, of mature age, possessing a doctorate in
canon law, outstanding in good morals, prudence and
expertise in the law.
Such priests may at the same time exercise a judicial
or consultative function before another Dicastery of
the Roman Curia. Art.
9
To present or sustain an accusation a
Promoter of Justice is to be appointed, who is to be
a priest, possessing a doctorate in canon law,
outstanding in good morals, prudence and expertise
in the law. He is
to carry out his office in all grades of
judgment. Art.
10
For the functions of Notary and Chancellor,
priests are appointed, whether or not they are
Officials of this Congregation. Art.
11
The role of Advocate and Procurator is
carried out by a priest, possessing a doctorate in
canon law.
He is to be approved by the Presiding Judge of the
college. Art.
12
Indeed, in the other Tribunals dealing with
cases under these Norms, only priests can validly
carry out the functions of Judge, Promoter of
Justice, Notary, and Patron [Procurator and
Advocate]. Faculty to
dispense The CDF may
dispense from the requirement of priesthood and the requirement
of a doctorate in canon law mentioned in artt. 8
(judges), 9 (Promoter of Justice, 10 (Notaries and
Chancellors), 11 (Advocates and Procurators), 12
(Judges, Promoters of Justice, Notaries, Patrons in other
Tribunals) $
In the case of dispensation from the
doctorate in canon law, this dispensation will only
be granted to persons who hold a licentiate in canon
law and who have worked in ecclesiastical tribunals
for a reasonable time. $
Concerning judges (artt. 8 and 12) the
provisions of can. 1421 shall apply. Art.
13
Whenever the Ordinary or Hierarch receives a
report of a reserved delict which has at least a
semblance of truth [notitiam
saltem verisimilem], once the preliminary
investigation has been completed, he is to
communicate the matter to the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith which, unless it calls the case
to itself due to particular circumstances, will direct the Ordinary
or Hierarch [how] to proceed further, with due
regard, however, for the right to appeal against a
sentence of the first instance only to the Supreme
Tribunal of the same Congregation.
Extraordinary Faculty
to sanate acts The faculty, in cases legitimately brought to the Congregation of the Doctrine for the Faith, to sanate acts, if procedural laws have been violated by inferior tribunals acting on the mandate of the same Congregation or under art. 13 of the Motu Proprio Sacramentorum sanctitatis tutela. Special
Procedure in case of recourse against administrative acts of the
CDF concerning delicta graviora
cases In
delicta graviora cases, the request for
revocation of administrative acts of the CDF and all
other recourse against the said acts made in
accordance to art. 135 of the Regolomento
Generale della Curia Romana, shall be referred
to the Feria IV [of the
CDF] which will decide on the merits and on questions
of lawfulness. Any
other recourse under art. 123 of the Apostolic
Constitution Pastor
Bonus is excluded. Art.
14
If a case is referred directly to the
Congregation without a preliminary investigation
having been undertaken, the steps preliminary to the
process, which fall by common law to the Ordinary or
Hierarch, are carried out by the Congregation itself. Art.
15
With due regard for the right of the Ordinary
to impose those measures which are established in
can. 1722 of the Code of Canon Law[29]
or in can. 1473 of the Code of Canons of the Eastern
Churches,[30]
the respective Presiding Judge, may, at the request of the
Promoter of Justice, exercise the same power under
the same conditions determined in the canons
themselves. Art.
16
The Supreme Tribunal of the Congregation for
the Doctrine of the Faith judges in second
instance:
1º cases adjudicated in first instance by
lower tribunals;
2º cases decided by the same Supreme
Apostolic Tribunal in first instance. Title
II The Procedure to be followed in the Judicial Trial Art.
17
The more grave delicts reserved to the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith may only
be tried in a judicial process.
Faculty to dispense The faculty is
granted to the CDF to dispense from art. 17 in those
grave and clear cases which, according to the Particular Congress
of the CDF: a) may be
referred directly to the Holy Father for an ex
officio dismissal from the clerical
state, or b) may be
treated under the summary process of can. 1720 by the Ordinary
who, in case he is of the opinion that the accused should
be dismissed from the clerical state, will ask the
CDF to impose dismissal by decree. Art.
18
The Prefect is to constitute a Turnus of
three or five judges to try the case. Art.
19 If in the appellate stage the Promoter of Justice brings forward a specifically different accusation, this Supreme Tribunal can admit it and judge it as if at first instance. Art.
20
§ 1.
In cases concerning the delicts mentioned in art. 3, the
Tribunal cannot indicate the name of the accuser to
either the accused or his Patron unless the accuser
has expressly consented.
§ 2.
The same Tribunal must consider the particular importance of
the question concerning the credibility of the
accuser.
§ 3.
Nevertheless, it is to be observed that any danger of
violating the sacramental seal must be completely
avoided. Art.
21
If an incidental question arises, the College
is to decide the matter by decree as promptly as
possible [expeditissime
- cf. cann. 1629, n. 5º CIC; 1310, n. 5°
CCEO]. Art.
22
§ 1.
With due regard for the right to appeal to this Supreme
Tribunal, once an instance has finished in any
manner before another Tribunal, all of the acts of
the case are to be transmitted ex
officio as soon as possible to the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith.
§ 2.
The right of the Promoter of Justice of the Congregation to
challenge a sentence runs from the day on which the
sentence of first instance is made known to this
same Promoter. Art.
23
A res
iudicata occurs:
1º if a sentence has been rendered in second
instance;
2º if an appeal against a sentence has not
been proposed within a month;
3º if, in the appellate stage, the instance
is abated or is renounced; 4º if the sentence has been rendered in accord with the norm of art. 16. Art.
24
§ 1.
Judicial expenses are to be paid as the sentence has
determined.
§ 2.
If the defendant is not able to pay the expenses, they are
to be paid by the Ordinary or Hierarch of the
case. Art.
25
§ 1.
Cases of this nature are subject to the pontifical secret.[31]
§ 2.
Whoever has violated the secret, whether deliberately (ex dolo)
or through grave negligence, and has caused some harm
to the accused or to the witnesses, is to be punished with an
appropriate penalty by the higher Turnus at the request of
the injured party or even ex
officio. Art.
26
In these cases, together with the prescripts
of these Norms, by which all Tribunals of the Latin
Church and Eastern Catholic Churches are bound, also
the canons concerning delicts and penalties as well
as the canons concerning the penal process of each Code
must be applied. This unofficial translation is based on a translation of the Motu Proprio by the USCCB and a translation of the Norms by Gregory Ingels, both revised by Joseph R. Punderson and Charles J. Scicluna. The translations of the canons of the CIC and the CCEO are from the translations published by the Canon Law Society of America in 1999 and 2001 respectively.
[1]Benedict XIV. Constitution Sacramentum Poenitentiae, June 1, 1741, in Codex Iuris Canonici, prepared at the order of Pius X, Supreme Pontiff, promulgated by the authority of Pope Benedict XV, Documenta, Document V in AAS 9 (1917), Part II, 505-508. [3]Cf. Pope Paul VI, Apostolic Constitution Regimini Ecclesiae Universae, On the Roman Curia, August 15, 1967, n. 36, AAS 59 (1967) 898. [4]Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Pastor bonus, On the Roman Curia, June 28, 1988, art. 52, in AAS 89 (1988) 874. [5]Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Agendi ratio in doctrinarum examine, June 29, 1997, in AAS 89 (1997) 830-835. [6]Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, On the Roman Curia, June 28, 1988, art. 52, in AAS 80 (1988) 874: “[The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith] examines delicts against the faith and more grave delicts whether against morals or committed in the celebration of the sacraments, which have been referred to it and, whenever necessary, proceeds to declare or impose canonical sanctions according to the norm of both common and proper law.” [7]Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus, On the Roman Curia, June 28, 1988, art. 118, in AAS 80 (1988) 890: “For the internal forum, whether sacramental or non-sacramental, it grants absolutions, dispensations, commutations, sanations, condonations and other favors.” [8]Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Agendi ratio in doctrinarum examine, June 29, 1997, in AAS 89 (1997) 830-835.
[9]Pontifical
Council for the Interpretation of Legislative Texts,
Response to a proposed doubt, June 4, 1999, in AAS
91 (1999) 918: D. Whether or not the
word “abicere”
in canons 1367 CIC
and 1442 CCEO should be
understood only as the act of throwing
away. R. Negative
and ad mentem. The “mens” is that the word “abicere” should be considered to include any voluntarily and gravely contemptuous action towards the Sacred Species. [10]Code of Canon Law, can. 1367 – A person who throws away the consecrated species or takes or retains them for a sacrilegious purpose incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; moreover, a cleric can be punished with another penalty, not excluding dismissal from the clerical state. [11]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can.1442 – A person who has thrown away the Divine Eucharist or has taken or retained it for a sacrilegious purpose is to be punished with a major excommunication and, if a cleric, also with other penalties not excluding deposition.
[12]Code of
Canon Law, can. 1378 – § 2. The following incur a latae
sententiae penalty of interdict or, if a
cleric, a latae
sententiae penalty of suspension: 1E a person who attempts the liturgical action of the Eucharistic sacrifice though not promoted to the sacerdotal order. [13]Code of Canon Law, can. 1379 – In addition to the cases mentioned in can. 1378, a person who simulates the administration of a sacrament is to be punished with a just penalty. [14]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1443 – A person who has simulated the celebration of the Divine Liturgy or other sacraments is to be punished with an appropriate penalty, not excluding a major excommunication. [15]Code of Canon Law, can. 908 – Catholic priests are forbidden to concelebrate the Eucharist with priests or ministers of Churches or ecclesial communities which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church. [16]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 702 – Catholic priests are forbidden to concelebrate the Divine Liturgy with non-Catholic priests or ministers. [17]Code of Canon Law, can. 1365 – A person guilty of prohibited participation in sacred rites (communicatio in sacris) is to be punished with a just penalty. [18]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1440 – A person who violates the norms of law concerning participation in sacred rites (communicatio in sacris) can be punished with an appropriate penalty. [19]Code of Canon Law, can. 927 – It is absolutely forbidden, even in extreme urgent necessity, to consecrate one matter without the other or even both outside the eucharistic celebration. [20]Code of Canon Law, can. 1378 – § 1. A priest who acts against the prescript of can. 977 incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See. [21]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1457 – A priest who has absolved an accomplice in a sin against chastity is to be punished with a major excommunication, with due regard for canon 728, § 1, n. 2. [22]Code of Canon Law, can. 1387 – A priest who in the act, on the occasion, or under the pretext of confession solicits a penitent to sin against the sixth commandment of the Decalogue is to be punished, according to the gravity of the delict, by suspension, prohibitions, and privations; in graver cases he is to be dismissed from the clerical state. [23]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1458 – A priest who in the act, on the occasion, or under the pretext of confession, has solicited a penitent to sin against chastity, is to be punished with an appropriate penalty, not excluding deposition. [24]Code of Canon Law, canon 1388 – § 1. A confessor who directly violates the sacramental seal incurs a latae sententiae excommunication reserved to the Apostolic See; one who does so only indirectly is to be punished according to the gravity of the delict. [25]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1456 – § 1. A confessor who has directly violated the sacramental seal is to be punished with a major excommunication, with due regard for canon 728, § 1, n. 1; however, if he broke this seal in another manner, he is to be punished with an appropriate penalty.
[26]Code of
Canon Law, can 1362 – § 1. Prescription extinguishes
a criminal action after three years unless it
concerns:
1E delicts reserved to the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith ...
Cf. Code
of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1152
– § 2. A penal action is extinguished by
prescription after three years, unless it is a
question of: 1E delicts reserved to the Apostolic See ... [27]Code of Canon Law, can. 1362 – § 2. Prescription runs from the day on which the delict was committed or, if the delict is continuous or habitual, from the day on which it ceased. [28]Cf. Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1152 – § 3. Prescription runs from the day on which the delict was committed or, if the delict is continuous or habitual, from the day on which it ceased. [29]Code of Canon Law, can. 1722 – To prevent scandals, to protect the freedom of witnesses, and to guard the course of justice, the ordinary, after having heard the promoter of justice and cited the accused, at any stage of the process can exclude (arcere) the accused from the sacred ministry or from some office and ecclesiastical function, can impose or forbid residence in some place or territory, or even can prohibit public participation in the Most Holy Eucharist. Once the cause ceases, all these measures must be revoked; they also end by the law itself when the penal process ceases. [30]Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches, can. 1473 – To prevent scandals, to protect the freedom of witnesses, and to guard the course of justice, the hierarch, after having heard the promoter of justice and cited the accused, at any stage and grade of the penal trial can exclude (arcere) the accused from the exercise of sacred orders, an office, a ministry, or another function, can impose or forbid residence in some place or territory, or even can prohibit public reception of the Divine Eucharist. Once the cause ceases, all these measures must be revoked and they will end by the law itself when the penal trial ceases.
[31]Secretariat of
State, Rescript from an Audience of the Holy Father
Il 4
febbraio, by which the Regolamento
Generale della Curia Romana is made public,
April 30, 1999, Regolamento
Generale della Curia Romana, April 30, 1999, art. 36 §
2, in AAS 91
(1999) 646: “With particular care, the
pontifical secret will be observed, according
the norm of the Instruction Secreta
continere of February 4, 1974.”
The Secretariat
of State or Papal Secretariat, Rescript from an Audience,
the Instruction Secreta
continere, Concerning the Pontifical Secret,
February 4, 1974, in AAS
66 (1974) 89-92:
“Art. 1. Included
under the pontifical secret are:...
4. Extrajudicial denunciations received
regarding delicts against faith and against
morals, and regarding delicts perpetrated
against the sacrament of Penance; likewise the trial and decision
which pertain to those denunciations, with due
regard for the right of the one who has been
reported to the authorities to know of the
denunciation, if such knowledge is necessary for
his own defense.
However, it will be permissible to make known the name
of the denouncer only when it seems opportune to
the authorities that the denounced person and
the denouncer appear together in the trial; ...”
(p. 90). |