SACRED PLACE. - I. CONCEPT
A place is called sacred which, by virtue of consecration or liturgical blessing, is destined to the immediate and exclusive exercise of divine worship or to the burial of the faithful.
For purposes of sacredness, a simple invocative blessing (such as is usually imparted, for example, to houses or fields) is not sufficient; rather, a constitutive blessing is required, so called precisely because it establishes the res in a state of permanent removal from profane use. The liturgical rite prescribed both for consecration and for blessing is required ad validitatem (cann. 1150, 1154, 1457 § 2).
II. LEGAL STATUS
The legal status of res sacra, to which the place is elevated by virtue of its special destination, has the effect of removing it from every profane use or from any use otherwise less suitable to the purpose for which it is intended; it does not, however, establish the status of a thing absolutely extra commercium. Canon law regards as non-transferable only its sacred character, that is, its specific destination; in other respects, the s. p., considered as a material entity, just as it is regarded as an object of ownership (can. 1510), may likewise be the object of a contract (donation, alienation, mortgage, etc.) and of prescription, subject to the impossibility of stipulating away the character of a consecrated or blessed thing (cann. 730, 1539 § 1, 1510).
The minister of consecration is, ad validitatem, only one who is invested with episcopal character or, in extraordinary cases, a priest who enjoys a special indult or privilege for this purpose; the minister of blessing, on the other hand, may also be an ordinary priest.
The consecration of a place, even if it belongs to exempt religious, falls exclusively within the competence of the Ordinary of the place, who may perform it personally if he possesses episcopal character, or through others furnished with his permission. The blessing of places belonging to the secular clergy or to a non-exempt or lay religious institute also belongs to the Ordinary; if, however, the place belongs to an exempt clerical religious institute, the blessing falls within the competence of the major superior of the respective institute. In every case, no one may validly consecrate or bless a place, for purposes of the destination described above, without the con-
consent of the Ordinary to whom such functions belong by right (cann. 1155-57).
III. CLASSIFICATION OF S. P. - Sacred places are distinguished: according to their destination, into places of worship (churches, oratories) and places of burial (cemeteries); according to the manner, that is, the rite by which they acquire their destination, into consecrated places and simply blessed places.
Sacred places destined for worship are classified into 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 (v. CHIESA). The public character of worship and the universality of sacred use are the features that distinguish churches from oratories, which are sacred buildings assigned to divine worship, not for the purpose of serving the public use of all the faithful, but for the direct or at least principal benefit of particular categories and communities, or even of private persons; they are further divided into public, semi-public, and private, according as access to them is legally open to everyone, at least during divine services, or is not legally open to everyone, although it may in fact be so, or is open neither legally nor in fact (can. 1188; V. ORATORIO).
altar (v.), which is the place exclusively destined for divine services 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 ara portatilis (sacred stone) if it is a movable altar (cann. 1197, 1199, 1202).
Sacred places destined for the burial of the faithful are cemeteries (v. CIMITERO). By virtue of this destination, cemeteries must always be treated as sacred things in their entirety, even if, because of the indiscriminate burial of persons whose interment would entail violation of the sacred place, the liturgical blessing is in fact limited to the individual graves or burial niches of the faithful (cann. 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, entails 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 otherwise foreign to their sacred character (cann. 1160, 1178; V. IMMUNITÀ ECCLESIASTICA).
The sacred character, as a legal status, may undergo modification as a result of violation and desecration. Violation does not deprive the place of its sacred character or its destination, but suspends its specific use until the ceremony of reconciliation has been performed. Desecration, on the other hand, entails with respect to it the loss not only of use but also of character and destination, with its consequent reduction to a profane condition. The crimes of homicide and serious or violent wounding committed within its perimeter constitute violation of a sacred place, provided that they are certain and notorious; so too does the impious or sordid use to which the place has been subjected, or the burial therein of an infidel or of a person excommunicated post sententiam (cann. 1172, 1207).
Desecration (exsecratio) of the place, on the other hand, occurs either through a natural or violent event that has altered its form to the point of rendering it unusable for its purpose, or through the legitimate reduction of it to profane use by an act (decretum de profanando) of the competent ecclesiastical authority (can. 1170). Those responsible for the violation of a church or cemetery incur ipso facto an interdict from entering the church and may also be punished with other penalties, at the discretion of the Ordinary of the place (can. 2329).
V. S. P. IN ITALIAN LAW. - The legal status of sacred places in Italian law, especially in relation to their transferability, was formerly the subject of controversy. The question particularly concerns churches, since the situation of cemeteries is different: they are recognized as capable of being owned both by municipalities and by legal persons or even private individuals.
Between the two opposing theses of absolute non-transferability as res sacrae in the Roman sense and full transferability under the strict rules of common law (Mortara, Chironi, Scaduto), various other intermediate solutions were proposed. Some held that canon law continued to be in force in this matter as the law of the State (Gabba). Others maintained that churches were non-transferable, not as res sacrae, but as things destined for public use (Giorgi, Gianturco, Filomusi-Guelfi). Others held that they were removed from commerce not in themselves but in their destination; that is, not because public use rendered them non-transferable, 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). But while, on the basis of these solutions, some assigned them directly to the public domain, others, considering both their public use and their sacred character and destination for worship to be significant, 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 latter opinion, having recognized sacred buildings, in Articles 9 and 10, as possessing a special status of a public-law nature, which could not be altered except through the intervention of the ecclesiastical authority, and having furthermore provided, in Article 30, for special administration of the property of ecclesiastical institutions under the control of the Church. On the basis of this premise, after the Concordat the prevailing view is that which considers churches to be property owned by ecclesiastical institutions (dioceses, parishes, entities, confraternities, etc.) and attributes to them the same legal status accorded to them by canon law, which is regarded as incorporated into Italian law by virtue of a procedure whereby the latter formally refers to the former (Del Giudice and, with minor differences, Falco). The non-commercial character of churches (their inalienability, imprescriptibility, exemption from seizure and from attachment), therefore, is to be understood in the sense and within the limits of a legal impossibility of removing them from their sacred purpose, that is, from public use and public service for worship, while they themselves remain possible objects of private-law relations within the scope permitted by canon law.
Under the Concordat, sacred buildings open for worship are declared exempt from requisition and occupation and may not be subjected to demolition except following agreement with the competent ecclesiastical authority (Articles 9, 10). They are recognized as possessing the right of asylum “except in cases of urgent necessity” (Article 9). Offenses against religion through the contemptuous treatment of sacred objects, committed in places intended for worship, are punished by imprisonment for one to three years (Penal Code, Article 404).