Exequatur and Placet

EXEQUATUR AND PLACET. - A form of control exercised by jurisdictionalist States over the acts of the Church, which consisted in the necessity of prior examination and authorization by the civil authority for any provision of ecclesiastical authority, especially pontifical, in order for it to have publicity and executory force within the territory of the State. This institution — which is encountered, according to place or the material scope of application, under the most diverse names: e., p., vidimus, parensis (from the literal meaning of the words themselves: esquisca, piace, etc.), placitum regium, praemunire, droit d'annexe, de vérification, lettre d'attache, regio pass, and which is commonly designated in publicist terminology as the right of placitation — constituted one of the most notable and discussed juridical-political prerogatives arrogated to themselves in the past by governments with respect to the Church, understood as an affirmation of supremacy over it, as well as a precautionary measure, deriving as a corollary from the so-called ius cavendi, or right to be on one's guard with regard to it.

When this institution — which always provoked, naturally, the most energetic protests of the Church — had its beginning cannot be said to be certainly established. The first traces seem to be seen, albeit as simple measures of an occasional nature and not as an affirmation of a right of the State to control the entire ecclesiastical legislation, in England, in the provisions of William the Conqueror (1066-1087) forbidding that papal legates be received or pontifical bulls published, and that synods and councils be assembled without his consent. Later, still in England, it took more precise form with the institution of praemunire, established in the 13th century, and which under Richard II was above all directed at prohibiting the importation of bulls and excommunications without royal consent and the acceptance of benefices directly from the pope.

Some have also wished to see the most remote precedent of the institution, still in the 14th century, in the faculty granted during the Western Schism by Urban VI to the prelates of certain places, of not permitting the execution of pontifical acts unless they were first presented to them and approved, in order to avoid the inconveniences that could derive from the execution of bulls of different popes. In any case the institution became generalized in Europe, assuming a juridical character only in the 16th century, and despite the most vigorous protests of the Church (constitution Quondam antidota of Martin V, 30 April 1418; bull In coena domini of Julius II of April 1511; etc.) it was introduced ever more widely in the various States. Placitation was thus extended to ecclesiastical acts of provision of major and minor benefices, to pontifical bulls, to citations and decisions of the Roman tribunals and congregations, to episcopal pastorals, instructions and circulars, to the deliberations of Chapters and synods, as well as to the dispositions of ecclesiastical authorities residing only transiently in the State, such as nuncios, delegates and apostolic visitors. It even came to subject to the prior assent of the government the convocation of synods and councils and even, in that 18th century which was for the Church the period of greatest humiliation before the affirmations of supremacy of the States, to prohibit the communication of the clergy and the faithful with the Holy See, except through the official channel of the State. Some went so far as to affirm the necessity of prior examination by the government for the promulgation not only of provisions concerning so-called causes of a mixed nature (on this ground, for example, the disciplinary decrees of Trent were not received in France), but also of purely dogmatic documents, that is, concerning solely the Faith and doctrine, albeit with the justification of having to ascertain that prescriptions of another nature were not mixed in, which in practice made even the admission of purely dogmatic bulls depend on the good pleasure of the government.

It is not surprising therefore if, while the regalists, such as Van Espen, defined the p. — a right of guarantee against the encroachments of the Church inherent by nature in political government — it was the object, in the various pontifical acts, of the most vehement reprobations, and if orthodox authors said it came «so close to heresy, as not to founder in the abyss of anathema only for lack of a canon that with formal expression condemns it as such» (D'Avino).

In substance placitation permitted a most minute interference of the State in ecclesiastical matters, which the jurisdictionalists justified with a threefold purpose of police (especially by forbidding the dissemination of acts of ecclesiastical authorities and by controlling correspondence between citizens and the Holy See); political-economic (especially by interference in the conferral of benefices and dignities); statutory or juridical (aiming to control the changes and additions to the body of the laws and statutes of the Church, so that they might not conflict with the laws of the State).

It is clear how this whole construction was not only clearly contrary to Catholic doctrine on the relations between Church and State (v.), but also incompatible with the most common conception of the functions and competence of the modern State and with an exact delimitation of its sphere of activity, which does not allow for overstepping and intrusions into relations extraneous to its order. Such are those of a religious nature, of mere competence of the Church, a perfect society or original order, and therefore autonomous and sovereign in its own order; whence, if there are mixed relations, which in some way may interest both orders or spheres of competence, their regulation cannot be resolved except on the basis of understandings between the two powers, and not by a simple unilateral activity of control of a more or less police-like type, such as placitation.

In Italy the exercise of placitation, which in various forms was still in force in almost all the former States, was first reduced to uniform regulation by Royal Decree no. 1169 of 5 March 1863, and by Royal Decree no. 1374 of 26 July 1863 and other subsequent norms. With art. 16 of the Law of Guarantees (v.) there were declared «abolished the exequatur and royal placet and every other form of governmental assent for the publication and execution of the acts of ecclesiastical authorities», except for acts concerning the destination of ecclesiastical property and the provision of major and minor benefices except those of Rome and the suburbicarian sees. A subsequent Royal Decree no. 326 of 25 June 1871 specified that the exequatur was required for the acts and provisional measures of the Holy See, and the Royal placet for those of the diocesan ordinaries. The exequatur was granted or denied by royal decree, while the granting of the placet was delegated to the Procurator General at the Court of Appeal of the place where the benefices were situated. But then with the Consolidated Text no. 640 of 6 May 1920 it was instead established that the acts of the Holy See concerning the provision of major benefices and the destination of the related property be subject to the exequatur, and to the placet the acts of the Holy See and of the diocesan Ordinaries concerning dignities, canonries, parishes and other minor benefices.

Exequatur and placet were abolished by the Concordat of 11 February 1929 (art. 24), where however special procedures were fixed so that appointments to ecclesiastical offices and benefices be made in agreement with the Italian Government.

dei benefici vocanti in Lombardia, Milan 1894; H. Saegmüller, Lerbbuch des katholischen Kirchenrechts, 4th ed., Freiburg im Br. 1925, p. 93 f.; P. Gismondi, Exequatur e placet, in Nuovo Digesto Italiano, V, pp. 740-44.

Arnaldo Bertola