SACRED PLACE. -
I. CONCEPT
A place is called sacred when, by virtue of consecration or liturgical blessing, it is destined for the immediate and exclusive exercise of divine worship or for the burial of the faithful.For the purpose of sacredness, a simple invocative blessing (such as is customarily imparted, for example, to houses or fields) is not sufficient; rather, a constitutive blessing is required, so called precisely because it constitutes the thing in a state of permanent withdrawal from profane use. The liturgical rite prescribed for both consecration and blessing is required *ad validitatem* (cc. 1150, 1154, 1457 § 2).
II. LEGAL STATUS
The legal status of a sacred thing, to which the place is elevated by virtue of its special destination, has the effect of withdrawing it from every profane use or use otherwise unsuitable to the purpose for which it is destined; it does not, however, determine the status of a thing absolutely *extra commercium*. Canon law considers only the sacred character—that is, the specific destination—as incommerciable; in all other respects, the sacred place, considered as a material entity, is held to be the object of ownership (c. 1510) and can therefore be the object of contracts (donation, alienation, mortgage, etc.) and of prescription, subject to the stipulation that the character of a consecrated or blessed thing cannot be included in any agreement (cc. 730, 1539 § 1, 1510).The minister of consecration, *ad validitatem*, is only one who is invested with the episcopal character or, in extraordinary cases, a priest who enjoys for this purpose a special indult or privilege; the minister of blessing, on the other hand, may also be a simple priest.
The consecration of a place, even if belonging to exempt religious, is the exclusive competence of the local Ordinary, who may perform it personally if he is an bishop, or through others, provided they are furnished with his license. The blessing of places belonging to secular clergy or to a non-exempt or lay religious institute also falls to the local Ordinary; if the place belongs instead to an exempt clerical religious institute, the blessing is the competence of the major superior of the respective institute. In every case, no one may validly consecrate or bless a place for the purpose of the destination mentioned above without the consent of the Ordinary to whom such functions rightfully pertain (cc. 1155–57).
III. CLASSIFICATION OF SACRED PLACES
Sacred places are distinguished: by destination, into places of worship (churches, oratories) and places of burial (cemeteries); by the manner, that is, by the rite through which they acquire their destination, into consecrated places and simply blessed places.Sacred places destined for worship are classified as churches, oratories, and altars. A church is a sacred building dedicated to the public exercise of worship for the universal use of all the faithful (cf. CHURCH). The notes of the publicity of worship and the universality of sacred use are the characteristics that distinguish churches from oratories, which are sacred buildings deputed to divine worship not with the aim of serving the public use of all the faithful, but for the direct or at least principal benefit of particular categories or communities or even of private individuals, and are further subdivided into public, semi-public, and private, according to whether access to them is legally free to all, at least during divine services, or is not legally free to all, though it may be so in fact, or is not such either legally or in fact (cc. 1188; cf. ORATORY).
The altar (cf. ALTAR), which is the place destined exclusively for divine offices and especially for the celebration of the Eucharistic Sacrifice, must always be consecrated, in its entirety if it is a fixed altar, or at least in the portable area (sacred stone) if it is a movable altar (cc. 1197, 1199, 1202).
Sacred places destined for the burial of the faithful are cemeteries (cf. CEMETERY). By virtue of this destination, cemeteries must always be treated as sacred things in their entirety, even if, because of the indiscriminate burial of those whose interment would imply a violation of the sacred place, the liturgical blessing is in practice limited to the individual graves or loculi of the faithful (cc. 1206, 1207, 1172).
IV. EFFECTS OF DESTINATION TO SACRED USE
The specific destination, which through consecration or blessing impresses upon the place the character of sacredness, confers upon it the right of immunity (improperly called a privilege), which, in a positive sense, ensures the free and independent exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction over sacred places and, in a negative sense, excludes every profane and indecorous use or any use alien to their sacred character (cc. 1160, 1178; cf. ECCLESIASTICAL IMMUNITY).The sacred character, as a legal condition, may undergo modification through violation or desecration. Violation does not remove from the place its sacred character and its destination, but suspends its specific use until the ceremony of reconciliation has been performed. Desecration, on the other hand, results in the loss not only of its use but also of its character of sacred destination, with the consequent reduction to a profane state. Violations of a sacred place include the crimes of homicide and serious or violent injuries committed within its perimeter, provided they are certain and notorious; likewise, impious or sordid use to which the place has been subjected, or the burial in it of an unbeliever or of someone excommunicated *a sententia* (cc. 1172, 1207).
Desecration (*exsecratio*) of a place occurs either through a natural or violent event that has so altered its form as to render it unfit for its purpose, or through the legitimate act of reducing it to profane use by decree (*decretum de profanando*) of the competent ecclesiastical authority (cc. 1170). Those responsible for the violation of a church or cemetery incur *ipso facto* the penalty of being barred from entering the church and may be punished with other penalties at the discretion of the local Ordinary (c. 2329).
V. STATUS OF SACRED PLACES IN ITALIAN LAW
The legal status of sacred places in Italian law, especially with regard to their commerciability, was formerly the subject of controversy. The question concerns churches in particular, since the situation of cemeteries is different, as they are recognized as capable of being owned by municipalities, by juridical persons, or even by private individuals.Between the two opposing theses of absolute incommerciability as *res sacrae* in the Roman sense and full commerciability under common law (Mortara, Chironi, Scaduto), various intermediate solutions were proposed. Some held that canon law remained in force in this matter as the law of the State (Gabbà). Others maintained the incommerciability of churches, not as *res sacrae*, but as things destined for public use (Giorgi, Giannurco, Filomusi-Guelfi). Others considered them withdrawn from commerce not in themselves but in their destination, that is, not because public use rendered them incommerciable, but because the existence upon them of a servitude of public use in favor of the faithful prevented subsequent owners from changing their destination (N. Coviello). While some, on the basis of these solutions, classified them directly as part of the public domain, others, considering in them not only public use but also the sacred character and destination for worship, regarded them as constituting a special ecclesiastical domain for the religious needs of the faithful, analogous to the domain of provinces and municipalities for the civil needs of citizens (Ruffini, Calisse, Galante, Ferrara).
The Concordat, while leaving the question still open, altered its terms in favor of the aforementioned final opinion by recognizing in articles 9 and 10 a special public-law status for sacred buildings, which cannot be modified except through the intervention of ecclesiastical authority, and by establishing in article 30 a special management for the property of ecclesiastical institutions under Church control. On the basis of this premise, after the Concordat, the prevailing thesis considers churches as property of ecclesiastical institutions (dioceses, parishes, entities, confraternities, etc.) and attributes to them the same legal status as that conferred by canon law, deemed to have been received into Italian law through a formal process of referral from the latter to the former (Del Giudice and, with minor differences, Falco). The inalienability of churches (inalienable, imprescriptible, unseizable, and not subject to confiscation) is thus understood as a legal impossibility of diverting them from their sacred purpose—that is, their public use and service for worship—while remaining, in themselves, objects capable of private-law relations within the limits permitted by canon law.
In the Concordat, sacred buildings open to worship are declared exempt from requisition and occupation and may not be subjected to demolition except by prior agreement with the competent ecclesiastical authority (articles 9, 10). The right of asylum is recognized for them, “except in cases of urgent necessity” (article 9). Offenses against the same religion, as well as violations of asylum, are punishable by imprisonment from one to three years (Italian Penal Code, article 404).