POSTULATION and POSTULATOR (IN CAUSE OF BEATIFICATION AND CANONIZATION). — By "postulation" is meant the function of one who legitimately promotes a cause before the competent ecclesiastical authority (pontifical and diocesan); and, consequently, also any single act, especially if solemn, which the exercise of such a function entails. For a specific form of petitions which, in two particular phases of the cause—the introductory and the resumptive—ecclesiastical personalities who are not parties to the cause address the Church, humbly petitioning the Supreme Pontiff, there exists in canonical terminology (can. 2077) and in practice the proper denomination of *Litterae postulatoriae*. He who legitimately exercises the function of postulating or the postulation, in law and in practice, is called a postulator.
I. NOTION
It may be said that postulation, in a more or less broad sense, by reason of its character as an original and intrinsic element of the procedure, was born with the procedure itself. The name of the postulator, however, although it very well conveys the task of one who requests *iure* before the competent tribunal the treatment of the cause (can. 2007, n. 1) and requests *honeste* from the faithful offerings to defray its expenses (can. 2007, n. 2), entered late into practice and official acts, probably with the famous decrees of Urban VIII and related instructions (1642). Even after that time, however, although in the acts and decrees of the S. Congr. of Rites the term "postulator" recurs frequently, in doctrine and practice it appears interchangeable or alternated with those of procurator, actor, patron, etc. Even in the same CIC it is not always used with juridical precision.II. THE POSTULATOR
The CIC defines him as "he who conducts a cause of beatification and canonization before the competent tribunal" (can. 2004 § 2). The competent tribunal (not simultaneously, but successively) for such causes, according to the same CIC (which, in this, confirms previous law and practice), is twofold: there is the tribunal of the local Ordinary (can. 1999 § 3; 2003 § 3) for the brief ordinary or pre-introductory stage (can. 2039; 2044 § 1; 2126); and the S. Congr. of Rites for the long apostolic stage or formal treatment of the cause (can. 253 § 3; 1999 § 2). The competence of the local Ordinary, in ancient practice, rested on three circumstances: the death of the Servant of God, the occurrence of some miracle, and the presence of witnesses in the territory. The CIC, instead, makes it rest only on the first two. The Pontifical Commission for the Interpretation of the CIC has confirmed this omission (AAS, 23 [1931], p. 388, n. 10). A cause, whether it proceeds by the ordinary path of non-cultus or by the extraordinary path of excluded cultus, once executed (can. 2000), in which case, by virtue of centenary cult (can. 2021), the procedure is lightened of the investigations and related congregations or discussions on miracles for beatification (can. 2134); whether it concerns a confessor or a martyr (even in this case, if the martyrdom is evident, a dispensation from the investigations and discussions on miracles for beatification may be obtained; can. 2116 § 2), cannot be resolved (the *cumulatio* is expressly forbidden, can. 2001 and 2120) with a single process and a single congregation; but it evolves progressively through many processes, acts, congregations, strictly connected with one another and ordered to the same end. The postulator, therefore, since he conducts not a single process but the entire cause, extends his activity both to the two aforementioned tribunals and to the long series of processes, acts, and discussions.The person who has the right to promote a cause, after his petition has been admitted by the competent authority (can. 2003 § 1 and 2), does not conduct it in fact; the function of conducting the cause, attributed precisely to the postulator, juridically coincides not with the right to promote the cause itself, but with the exercise or use of that right.
III. NECESSITY OF THE ACT AND OF THE POSTULATOR
Ordinarily a cause of beatification and canonization is not undertaken unless there is someone who requests it (actor) and who promotes it (postulator). This is for two reasons: one of a practical nature and the other of a procedural nature. The first reason is not difficult to understand if one considers the necessity of someone assuming responsibility for the expenses. Regarding the procedural reason, it must be noted that a cause of beatification and canonization, although not strictly a contentious judgment (can. 1552), nonetheless has all the characteristics of a long and complicated judicial dispute (Blat, Vermeersch). In view of this and of the lofty end it pursues, some canonists have even described its procedure as ultra-procedural (Noval). Because of its evident judicial character, one encounters in it almost the same persons who take part in other judgments: the Promoter of the Faith, who safeguards the right, and the Cardinal Ponens or relator, who reports on the cause, once duly prepared, before the tribunal (can. 2009-12), the notary, the chancellor, the procurator, the advocate (can. 2013-18). It is natural, therefore, that there should also be the actor and the postulator, who resemble the parties in a trial. It is held, therefore, that the postulator is necessary even if the local Ordinary proceeds *ex officio* (can. 1999 § 3 and 1618-1619): and this, not only for the practice and the role of a party, but also for the necessary distinction between who judges and who acts (Wernz-Vidal). According to the CIC the right to conduct the cause may be exercised either by the actor himself or by his procurator (can. 2004 § 1). There may thus be two distinct figures of postulator: the postulator-actor and the postulator-procurator. In truth, the first figure is rather rare for various reasons; but above all because *in more positum est, ut aliquis eligatur* (Benedict XIV, lib. I, cap. 46, n. 13). If, however, this hypothesis occurs, despite the extreme laconicism of the CIC on this point, it may be affirmed that the actor, who in this case must not lack the necessary and appropriate requirements (can. 2004 § 3), assumes the title, which is mandatory in law and practice (can. 2004 § 2), of postulator, suited to fitting him into the function of conducting the cause; and, with the title and the function, also the powers inherent to II. It is obvious, then, that the survival of the actor in the postulator means that all his activity remains influenced by it and he acts *nomine proprio*. On the contrary, the figure of the postulator-procurator is the usual and common one in procedure. This occurs when the actor, not wishing or being unable to exercise his right personally, entrusts the task to a representative duly constituted for this purpose, who, acting *nomine alieno*, but with full and direct responsibility, ensures its complete execution within the scope of the common and peculiar powers granted to him by law, practice, and mandate. The appointment of a postulator-procurator, which is free for any other actor, is, on the contrary, absolutely necessary when a cause is promoted by women (natural or juridical persons: can. 2004 § 1). Such a postulator-procurator must be appointed *ad hoc* (can. 2004 § 1) and, therefore, by a written mandate, not in general form (such as that of the procurators general of religious institutes), but special, with particular reference to the cause and bearing the place, day, month, and year, as well as the signature of the actor (can. 2006 § 2; 1659 § 1). For women actors, some consider it opportunethat the mandate must also be signed by the notary or episcopal chancellor (Vermeerch). The mandate, moreover, is not considered effective until it has been admitted and entered in the records of the competent tribunal (can. 2006 § 2). The mandate must be presented to the tribunal before the postulator is admitted to exercise his office (can. 2006 § 1). It ceases in the same way as that of other procurators (can. 2008, 1663-64). Although the CIC does not mention it, the Clementine prohibition against consultors of the Sacred Congregation of Rites serving as postulators may still be considered in force.
IV. THE FIGURE OF THE POSTULATOR IN THE CIC
It is to the credit of the CIC that it has better defined the figure of the postulator, which previously appeared rather uncertain and confused, assigning to it more definite and elevated qualities and tasks that specify its juridical capacity and elevate it in relation to the petitioner. But is it perhaps not a merit of the CIC that it focused its attention on the postulator of the apostolic stage of the cause (also called the Roman or principal postulator) and neglected that of the pre-introductory or ordinary stage, on whose function, therefore, some uncertainty may arise; as well as having allowed, in treating of the postulator and vice-postulators, certain ambiguities of various kinds to pass (can. 2006 § 1, 2008, etc.).V. QUALITIES OF THE POSTULATOR
The postulator (whether actor or procurator) must be a priest (secular or religious), and must reside in Rome (can. 2004 § 3). Even in this norm, which, moreover, revives in whole or in part previous pontifical prescriptions (S. Congr. of Rites, decr. 21 Dec. 1893; Benedict XIV, lib. I, cap. 19, n. 24), the legislator had in mind only the postulator of apostolic processes, not therefore that of ordinary processes.VI. NUMBER OF POSTULATORS
The CIC does not explicitly declare that the postulator must be a single individual; it seems, however, to admit this when it states that for each individual cause there may be a single postulator (can. 2005). It is obvious, however, that the prescribed uniqueness is to be understood in the sense that there cannot be more than one postulator at the same time, i.e., during the same stage (ordinary or apostolic) of the cause; not, of course, successively. An argument in favor of two successive postulators may also be found in the CIC, where, in speaking of the calumny oath that the postulator must take in both the ordinary and apostolic processes, it uses, contrary to custom, the plural form, which in that context cannot but refer to two successive postulators (can. 2037 § 4). In practice, however, two different methods are followed in the appointment of the postulator. Sometimes there are two successive postulators, one for the ordinary processes and another for the apostolic ones; at other times, instead, from the very beginning of the procedure a postulator for the cause is appointed in Rome, and he, in turn, appoints one or more vice-postulators for the ordinary processes first, and for the apostolic ones later.VII. APPOINTMENT OF VICE-POSTULATORS
The most important prerogative of the postulator, which in a certain way places him above the petitioner, consists in the exclusive right to appoint vice-postulators. The appointment of vice-postulators takes place by means of a legitimate mandate (can. 2005), drawn up in judicial form, which is not valid until it has been recognized and admitted by the tribunal, whether apostolic or ordinary, where the cause is being handled (can. 2006 § 2); this mandate must also be presented to the tribunal before acting (can. 2006 § 1). The powers of the vice-postulators, whether more or less extensive, depend on the tenor of the mandate as well as on common norms and practice. It is obvious that they cannot have qualities different from those of the person they are to replace (can. 2005): some require for them, in particular, the qualities of a judicial procurator, as for the postulator who is a procurator (Muniz). It is also obvious, moreover, that substitution cannot take place in Rome, where the postulator has his fixed seat.VIII. GENERAL POSTULATOR
Although the CIC neither approved nor disapproved of this institution (can. 2005), there is no religious Order or Congregation of any importance that does not have a general postulator (appointed by procuratorial mandate from the Superior General or the General Chapter, according to the constitutions, and residing at the General Curia), whose task consists in handling and promoting all the causes of his own Institute, of dependent or affiliated Institutes, and even of causes not directly connected with II. This task, formerly, fell within the office of the procurator general (v.), who, however, in carrying it out, made wide use of the work of one or more religious (one even for several causes), reserving for himself only the administrative or economic part of the cause; but, with the multiplication of causes for each Institute, this task gradually separated from the office of the procurator and became a separate office. The first idea of a procurator for canonizations in the Society of Jesus dates from the beginning of the pontificate of Clement X (1670-76); it was, however, only much later that it was put into effect, namely in 1854, the year in which the office of general postulator came into being, distinct from that of the procurator general. In this the Jesuit Fathers were preceded by the Capuchin Fathers, who, as is evident from reliable documents, already had their general postulator in 1678. The general postulature of the Friars Minor, whose origin dates back to 1688, produced the Codex pro postulatoribus (Lauri-Fornari-Santarelli, 4th ed., Rome 1929), a kind of theoretical-practical manual of the entire procedure. An eminent figure of a general postulator among the Passionist Fathers in the last century was Fr. Vincent Mary Strambi (v.), later bishop and saint: he is today the private patron of Roman postulators.IX. DUAL FUNCTION OF THE POSTULATOR
In addition to the procedural task, the office (not the canonical office, can. 145 § 18, as the Code of Canon Law, can. 2007, incorrectly states) of the postulator also entails an economic-administrative duty. The most important obligations pertaining to these two tasks during the conduct of the cause, based on the Code of Canon Law and established practice, can be summarized as follows:
### a) Procedural Task
As a general rule, the postulator (whether acting as plaintiff or procurator) must act, that is, fulfill the role of plaintiff before the competent judges for the various and successive processes, whoever they may be and whatever their authority (can. 2007, n. 1).
As specific norms, the postulator (whose legitimate person is presumed to have been duly recognized [can. 2006 § 1 and 2]) must:
a) submit to the judge the *libellus supplex* for the initiation of the process: for the ordinary process (can. 2038 § 2); for apostolic processes (can. 2037 § 1 and 2091 § 1);
b) take the calumny oath in the first session (can. 2037 § 4);
c) present to the tribunal (ordinary and apostolic) the list or *notula* of witnesses (can. 2007, n. 3);
d) compile and present to the Promoter of the Faith (diocesan and general) the articles on which the witnesses are to be examined in the individual processes (can. 2007, n. 4), following the interrogations derived from these articles;
e) exhibit to the tribunal (ordinary and apostolic) the documents to be included in the acts (can. 2007, n. 3).
Naturally, the list of witnesses, the articles, and the documents must correspond to the particular object of each process: regarding non-cult, reputation for holiness or martyrdom, heroic virtues, martyrdom and its cause, miracles; and must also be in accordance with the norms specifically established by the Code of Canon Law. Therefore, for example, regarding witnesses in the various processes, the canons that govern their number and qualifications must be carefully observed, namely: can. 2020 § 1 and 2057 (regarding non-cult); can. 2050, 2020 § 2, 2024, 2030 (regarding reputation for holiness and martyrdom); can. 2020 § 3, 2024, 2033 § 1 (regarding virtues and martyrdom); can. 2020 § 7, 2028 (regarding miracles). Similarly for the articles (can. 2030 § 3) and for the documents (can. 2036 § 1); the latter being of fundamental importance in historical causes, the preparation of which is reserved to the homonymous section of the Sacred Congregation of Rites.
From the entirety of these duties, which he fulfills even through the attorney and procurator, it is clear that, although he does not hold a directive role in the cause (as has been erroneously stated), he nonetheless occupies a central position throughout the entire procedure. Furthermore, since a cause cannot be treated either honestly or procedurally (by presenting the articles, witnesses, etc.) without a thorough knowledge of the evidence at its disposal, it is the opinion of this writer, contrary to the view of some canonists (Blat), that the prohibition of Urban VIII regarding *informationes extrajudiciales* should be considered as abrogated; all the more so because the Code of Canon Law makes no mention of II.
### b) Economic-Administrative Task
Throughout the entire course of the cause, whether before the local Ordinary or before the Sacred Congregation of Rites, the postulator must defray the expenses incurred; and must administer the funds collected for this purpose according to the instructions of the Holy See (can. 2007, n. 2). The Code of Canon Law does not specify these instructions, as they vary according to the needs of the causes. The most recent provisions issued in this regard are those published by decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites on September 17, 1885; provisions which the same Congregation updated on December 28, 1932, and most recently on October 2, 1935, in the *Norme da seguirsi ecc.* (pp. 15-16).
X. COMPLEMENTARY FUNCTION OF THE POSTULATOR
After the decree of “tuto,” which for formal beatification (for that equivalent: can. 2134-35) marks the end of the debate in one phase of the cause (can. 2144), and for canonization, the end of the cause (can. 2140), according to the practice recognized even by the Code of Canon Law (can. 2141), the postulator must extend his activity to the imposing cycle of rites and celebrations (religious ceremony in the basilica of St. Peter, *reducio* and novena in other churches, etc.) that fittingly frame in an apotheosis the proclamation of a new blessed or saint. What he does regarding lessons in the breviary, the Mass, the eulogy in the Martyrology, etc., falls outside the procedural sphere and pertains to the liturgical domain.