POSTULATION and POSTULATOR (IN CAUSES OF BEATIFICATION AND CANONIZATION). — By postulation is understood the function of one who legitimately promotes a cause before the competent ecclesiastical authority (pontifical or diocesan); and, consequently, also any individual act, especially if solemn, entailed by the exercise of such a function. For a specific form of petitions which, at two particular stages of the cause—the introductory and the summative stages—ecclesiastical and lay persons who have no part in the cause customarily submit to the Holy Father, there exists in canonical terminology (can. 2077) and in practice the proper designation Litterae postulatoriae. One who legitimately exercises the function of postulizing, or postulation, is called a postulator in law and practice.
I. DEFINITION
It may be said that the p., in a more or less broad sense, by virtue of its character as an element original and intrinsic to the proceedings, arose together with the proceedings themselves. The name postulatore, however, although it very aptly denotes the task of one who requests from the competent tribunal that the case be taken up (can. 2007, n. 1) and respectfully asks the faithful for offerings to cover its expenses (can. 2007, n. 2), entered the practice and official acts only at a late date, probably with the famous decrees of Urban VIII and the related instructions (1642). Even after that period, however, although in the acts and decrees of the S. Congr. of Rites the term postulatore occurs frequently, in doctrine and practice it appears interchanged or used alternately with procuratore, attore, patrocinatore, and so forth. Even in the CIC it is not always used with juridical precision.II. THE POSTULATOR
The CIC defines him as the person who conducts a cause of beatification and canonization before the competent tribunal (can. 2004 § 2). According to the same CIC—which here confirms the preceding law and practice—the competent tribunal for such causes (not simultaneously, but successively) is twofold: there is the tribunal of the Ordinary of the place (cann. 1999 § 3; 2003 § 3) for the brief ordinary or pre-introductory stage (cann. 2039; 2044 § 1; 2126); and the S. Congr. of Rites for the lengthy apostolic stage, or formal conduct of the cause (cann. 253 § 3; 1999 § 2). In ancient practice, the competence of the Ordinary of the place derived from three circumstances: the death of the servant of God, the occurrence of some miracle, and the presence of witnesses in the territory. The CIC, however, derives it only from the first two. The Pont. Commission for the interpretation of the CIC confirmed this omission (AAS, 23 [1931], p. 388, n. 10). A cause—whether it proceeds by the ordinary route of non cultus, or by the extraordinary route of cultus seu casus excepti (can. 2000), in which case, by virtue of centenary cultus (can. 2021), the procedure is relieved of the investigations and the related congregations or discussions concerning miracles for beatification (can. 2134); whether it concerns a confessor or a martyr (also in this case, if the martyrdom is evident, dispensation may be obtained from the investigations and discussions concerning miracles for beatification: can. 2116 § 2)—cannot be settled (cumulatio is expressly forbidden, cann. 2001 and 2120) by a single process and a single congregation; rather, it develops progressively through many processes, acts, congregations, and discussions, closely 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 tribunals mentioned above and to the lengthy series of processes, acts, and discussions.The actor, 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 in fact conduct it; the function of conducting the cause, assigned precisely to the postulator, legally coincides not with the right to promote the cause itself, but with the exercise or use of that right.
III. NECESSITY OF THE ACTOR AND THE POSTULATOR
Ordinarily, a cause of beatification and canonization is not instituted unless there is someone to request it (the actor) and someone to promote it (the postulator). This is for two reasons: one practical and the other procedural. The practical reason is not difficult to understand if one considers the necessity of someone assuming responsibility for the expenses. As for the procedural reason, it must be noted that a cause of beatification and canonization, although not strictly speaking a contentious trial (can. 1552), nevertheless bears all the characteristics of a long and complicated judicial dispute (Blat, Vermeersch). In view of this and of the most exalted end that it pursues, some canonists have described its procedure as ultraprocessual (Noval). Because of its evident judicial character, almost the same persons are found in it as take part in other trials: the promoter of the faith, who safeguards the law, and the cardinal ponent or relator, who reports on the duly prepared cause before the tribunal (cann. 2009-12), the notary, the registrar, the procurator, and the advocate (cann. 2013-18). It is natural, therefore, that the actor and the postulator should also be present, resembling the parties in a trial. It is consequently held that the postulator is necessary even when the Ordinary of the place proceeds ex officio (cann. 1999 § 3 and 1618-1619): and this not only because of the practice and the function of a party, but also because of the necessary distinction between the one who judges and the one 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 therefore be two clearly distinct kinds 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 (Benedetto XIV, lib. I, cap. 46, n. 13). If, nevertheless, this hypothesis occurs, despite the extreme laconicism of the CIC on the matter, it may be stated that the actor who, in this case, must not lack the necessary (can. 2004 § 3) and suitable qualifications, assumes the title, established in law and practice (can. 2004 § 2), of postulator, thereby fitting him for the function of conducting the cause; and, with the title and function, also the powers inherent in them. It is obvious, moreover, that the actor’s persistence in the postulator means that all his activity remains influenced by it and that he acts nomine proprio.
By contrast, the figure of the postulator-procurator is usual and common in the procedure. This occurs when the actor, unwilling or unable to exercise his right personally, entrusts the task to a representative of his, lawfully constituted for this purpose, who, nomine alieno, but with full and direct responsibility, ensures its complete implementation within the scope of the common and particular powers granted to him by law, practice, and the mandate. The constitution of a postulator-procurator, optional for any other actor, is, on the contrary, absolutely necessary when a cause is promoted by women (whether a natural or juridical person: can. 2004 § 1). Such a postulator-procurator must be constituted ad hoc (can. 2004 § 1) and therefore by a written mandate, drawn up not in general form (such as that of the general procurators of religious Institutes), but in a special form, with particular reference to the cause, and bearing the place, day, month, and year, as well as the actor’s signature (cann. 2006 § 2; 1659 § 1). In the case of female actors, some consider it advisable that the mandate also be signed by the notary or episcopal chancellor (Vermeersch). The mandate, moreover, is not considered effective until it has been admitted and entered in the registers 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 manner as the mandate of other procurators is terminated (cann. 2008, 1663-64). Although the CIC does not mention it, the Clementine prohibition forbidding consultors of the S. Congr. dei Riti to act as postulators may still be regarded as in force.
IV. THE FIGURE OF THE POSTULATOR IN THE CIC
It is to the credit of the CIC that it has more precisely defined the figure of the postulator, which had previously appeared somewhat uncertain and confused, assigning to it more specific and elevated qualities and duties that clarify its juridical capacity and raise its standing in relation to the petitioner. It is perhaps not, however, to the credit of the CIC that it concentrated 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-introduction or ordinary stage, regarding whose function some uncertainty may consequently arise; nor is it to its credit that, in treating of the postulator and vice-postulators, it allowed certain ambiguities of various kinds to remain (cann. 2006 § 1, 2008, etc.).V. QUALITÀ DEL POSTULATORE
The postulator (whether actor or procurator) must be a priest (presbyter or bishop), whether secular or regular, and must reside in Rome (can. 2004 § 3). In this norm as well, in which, moreover, earlier pontifical prescriptions are wholly or partly revived (S. Congr. dei Riti, decr. 21 dec. 1893; Benedetto XIV, lib. I, cap. 19, n. 24), the legislator had in mind only the postulator of apostolic processes, and not, therefore, that of ordinary processes.VI. NUMBER OF POSTULATORS
The CIC does not explicitly declare that there must be one postulatore; it seems, however, to admit this when it states that for each individual cause there may be a single postulatore (can. 2005). It is obvious, however, that the prescribed singularity is to be understood in the sense that there cannot be several postulatori simultaneously, that is, during the same stage (ordinary or apostolic) of the cause, but not successively. An argument in favor of two successive postulatori might also be found in the CIC, where, speaking of the calumniae oath that the postulatore must take in both processes, ordinary and apostolic, it uses, contrary to its usual practice, the plural form, which in that context can refer only to two successive postulatori (can. 2037 § 4). In practice, however, two different procedures are followed for the appointment of the postulatore. Sometimes there are two successive postulatori, one for the ordinary processes and another for the apostolic ones; at other times, instead, from the beginning of the proceedings, the postulatore of the cause is appointed in Rome, and he, in turn, appoints one or more vice-postulatori for the ordinary processes first, and for the apostolic ones thereafter.VII. APPOINTMENT OF THE VICE-POSTULATORS
The most important prerogative of the postulator, which places him, in a certain sense, above the petitioner, consists in the exclusive right to appoint the vice-postulators. The appointment of vice-postulators takes place by means of a legitimate mandate (can. 2005), drawn up in judicial form, which has no validity until it has been recognized and admitted by the apostolic or ordinary tribunal before which the cause is being conducted (can. 2006 § 2); it must likewise be presented to that tribunal before any action is taken (can. 2006 § 1). The powers of the vice-postulators, more or less extensive, depend on the wording of the mandate, as well as on the common norms and practice. It is obvious that they cannot possess qualifications different from those of the person whom they are to replace (can. 2005): some require, in particular, that they possess the qualifications of a judicial procurator, as does the procurator-postulator (Muniz). It is equally obvious, moreover, that the substitution cannot take place in Rome, where the postulator has his permanent residence.VIII. GENERAL POSTULATOR
Although the CIC neither approves nor disapproves 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 affiliated and dependent Institutes, as well as causes that are even unrelated to them. In ancient times, this task fell within procurator general (v.), who, however, in carrying it out, made extensive use of the work of one or more religious (one of them also for several causes), reserving for himself only the administrative or financial aspect of the cause; but, as the number of causes of each Institute increased, this same task gradually became detached from the office of the procurator and formed a position in its own right. The first idea of a procurator of canonizations in the Society of Jesus arose at the beginning of the pontificate of Clement X (1670–76); it was implemented, however, only much later, precisely in 1854, the year in which the office of general postulator, distinct from that of general procurator, came into being. In this, the Jesuit Fathers were preceded by the Capuchin Fathers, who, as reliable documents show, already had their general postulator in 1678. The general postulation of the Friars Minor, whose origin dates back to 1688, gave rise to the Codex pro postulatoribus (Lauri-Fornari-Santarelli, 4th ed., Rome 1929), a kind of theoretical-practical manual of the entire procedure. The Passionist Fathers had an outstanding figure as general postulator in the last century in Fr. Vincenzo Maria Strambi (v.), later bishop and saint: he is today the private patron of the Roman postulators.IX. THE DUAL FUNCTION OF THE POSTULATOR
In addition to the procedural task, the position (not the office, can. 145 § 18, as the CIC improperly writes, can. 2007) of the postulator also entails an economic-administrative task. The most important duties pertaining to both tasks during the conduct of the cause, on the basis of the CIC and practice, may be summarized as follows: a) Procedural task. — As a general rule: the postulator (whether actor or procurator) must act—that is, fulfill the role of actor before the competent judges—for the various successive processes, whoever they may be and whatever their authority (can. 2007 n. 1). As particular rules, the postulator (whose legitimate status is presumed already to have been duly recognized [can. 2006 §§ 1 and 2]) must: a) address the judge with the libellus supplex for the initiation of the process: for the ordinary process (can. 2038 § 2); for the apostolic processes (cann. 2087 § 1 and 2091 § 1); b) take the calumniae oath at the first session (can. 2037 § 4); c) submit to the tribunal (ordinary and apostolic) the list or notula of witnesses (can. 2007, n. 3); d) draw up and submit to the promoter of the faith (diocesan and general) the articles on which the witnesses are to be questioned in the individual processes (can. 2007, n. 4), after the interrogations, derived from the articles themselves; e) produce for the tribunal (ordinary and apostolic) the documents to be incorporated into the acts (can. 2007, n. 3). Naturally, the list of witnesses, the articles, and the documents must correspond to the particular subject of each process: de non cultu, fame of sanctity or martyrdom, heroic virtues, martyrdom and its cause, miracles; and must, moreover, be in harmony with the norms established for this purpose by the CIC. Thus, for example, with regard to witnesses in the various processes, particular attention must be paid to the canons that prescribe their number and qualifications, namely: cann. 2020 § 1 and 2057 (de non cultu); cann. 2050, 2020 § 2, 2024, 2030 (fame of sanctity and martyrdom); cann. 2020 § 3, 2024, 2033 § 1 (virtues and martyrdom); cann. 2020 § 7, 2028 (miracles). The same applies to the articles (can. 2050 § 3) and the documents (can. 2036 § 1); the latter are of fundamental importance in historical causes, whose preparation is reserved to the eponymous section of the S. Congr. of Rites. From the totality of these duties, which he also fulfills through the advocate and the procurator, it is clear that, although he does not hold a directive role in the cause (as has erroneously been written), he nevertheless occupies a central position throughout the procedure. Since, moreover, a cause cannot be handled either honestly or procedurally (by presenting the articles, witnesses, etc.) without a thorough knowledge of the evidence at its disposal, it is held, against the opinion of certain canonists (Blat), that the prohibition of Urban VIIIconcerning informationes extrajudiciales should be regarded as abrogated; all the more so because the CIC does not mention