RISERVA and CASI RISERVATI. — R., from the Latin verb reservare, evokes the idea of separation in order to arrange something subsequently when the need arises, as well as the idea of restriction or exception. In canon law, it is the reservation to a superior, and especially to the Roman pontiff or the Holy See, of a power, a right, or the exercise of a right.
I. VARIOUS TYPES OF R
The Roman Pontiff, successor in the primacy of St Peter, possesses supreme and full power of jurisdiction with regard to the discipline and governance of the Church, over the whole world, over individual Churches, and over individual pastors and faithful, independently of any human authority (can. 218; Vatican Council, constitution Pastor aeternus, sess. IV, chs. 1 and 3; Denz-U. 1824–26). Of these supreme powers, some, such as infallibility, are by their nature intransmissible; with regard to the others, the pontiff, in exercising them, makes use of collaborators, as in the case of bishops, while reserving by positive law to his direct jurisdiction the handling of certain more important matters, namely, the causes maiores (can. 220). These may extend to the doctrinal sphere (cann. 1323 § 2, 1350 § 2, 1999, etc.), the legislative sphere (cann. 380, etc.), the administrative sphere (cann. 215, 329, 492 ff., etc.), the judicial sphere (cann. 1537, 1962, etc.), and the penal sphere (can. 2245 §§ 2–3). Cf. the entries: BEATIFICAZIONE; BENEFICIO; BENI ECCLESIASTICI; CANONIZZAZIONE; IMPEDIMENTI; IRREGOLARITÀ; MATRIMONIO. IV. Diritto e teologia; MISSIONI CATTOLICHE; PROVISTA CANONICA; VESCOVI; as well as PRIMATO (del Romano Pontefice); CONGREGAZIONI ROMANE.Bishops are not merely vicars of the pope, since they are invested with ordinary power, even though, for the sake of the common good, it may be restricted. They themselves, moreover, have the power to limit the jurisdiction of their subordinates. The reasons for these various r. are manifold: putting an end to abuses, making it easier to evade extraneous influences, especially those of laypersons, strengthening the sense of authority, and so forth; but they all come down to one thing: the requirement of the common good.
Of particular importance, especially for practical purposes, are the r. in penitential matters, and more precisely those known as reserved cases (cf. nevertheless can. 983).
II. R. OF CASES. —
1. Notion and historical notes
Reservation in penitential matters is, in general, a restriction of jurisdiction, even when the latter is ordinary.In the 5th century, as priests became the ordinary ministers of the sacrament of Penance, public penance remained reserved to the bishops, though it gradually fell into disuse (v. PENITENZA). They then continued to reserve to themselves absolution from sins of particular gravity, especially when public and a cause of scandal.
The desire, and almost the necessity, for bishops to have recourse to the Head of Christendom in more complex cases gave rise, around the 9th century, according to Benedict XIV (De synodo dioec., l. V, ch. 4, no. 3), to papal reservations, and subsequently to a special office (v. Penitenzieria apostolica). Penitents themselves often went to Rome to obtain forgiveness for their sins. Traces of this custom are found in conciliar provisions (cf. Council of Seligenstadt, can. 18 [p. 1023]; Council of Limoges of 1031). But the first properly papal reservation dates from the 12th century, with the celebrated can. 10 of the Council of Clermont (a. 1130), which reserved to the pope absolution from the sin of striking a cleric; this norm passed into can. 15 of the Second Lateran Council (a. 1139) and into the Decretum of Gratian (c. 28, C. 18, q. 4). A Council of London in 1143 reserved to the pope absolution from those who used violence against churches, cemeteries, and clerics (Hefele-Leclercq, V, p. 795: V. PRIVILEGI DEI CHIERICI). A series of papal reservations is found Bulla in Coena Domini (v.). Papal cases, but especially episcopal ones, began to increase, and religious Superiors followed the example of the bishops. The Holy See had to intervene several times to limit the number of reservations, while maintaining the principle. The Protestants were the first to attack this right of the Holy See and of the bishops to claim for themselves absolution in certain cases (cf. Leo X, bull Exurge Domine, 12–13; Denz-U 752–53).
The Council of Trent consequently reaffirmed this right of the Roman Pontiff and of the bishops (sess. XIV, can. 11; Denz-U, 921; sess. XIV, ch. 7: ibid. 903), a right included in the broad potestas clavium, ligandi et solvendi (Mt. 16:18–19; 18:18; Io. 20:19). Sixtus V, by the bull Sanctum et salutare of 5 January 1589, reserved to himself the sin of simony committed in promotion to Sacred Orders, without attaching a censure to it; this reservation was confirmed by Clement VIII (Romanum Pontificem, 28 February 1596). Benedict XIV subsequently reserved (bull Sacramentum Poenitentiae, 1 June 1741) the sin of falsely denouncing solicitation in confession.
The Synod of Pistoia had revived the Protestant doctrine against reservation; but this was followed by its condemnation by Pius VI (Auctorem fidei, 28 August 1791, propp. 44–46; Denz-U, 1544–1546). Pius IX reorganized the discipline of reservations by drawing up an authoritative list of reserved censures (const. Apostolicae Sedis, 12 October 1869). Wise norms were subsequently issued, shortly before the publication of the CIC, which later made use of them, by the S. Congregation of the Holy Office in the instruction of 16 July 1916 (AAS, 8 [1916], pp. 313 ff.). Reservation is therefore an act of a superior who claims a particular case for himself, removing it from the judgment of his inferiors. Reservation thus entails the transfer of a case from a lower tribunal to a higher one. Accordingly, through reservation all inferiors are deprived of a particular competence, even if they possess ordinary power; the deprivation of jurisdiction is therefore not a reservation, for example, in the case of a priest who was an accomplice, with regard to the sin of complicity.
2. Various kinds of reservation of cases
a) According to the object. In ecclesiastical law, the object of the reservation of cases may be the sin as such or the censure attached to the sin. In the first case, the inferior confessor is incompetent to absolve from that sin. In the case of a censure, absolution from it is reserved to the superior, but not necessarily absolution from the sin itself; consequently, if for any reason the censure were removed or had not been incurred, the sin would not be reserved and any confessor could absolve from II. The reserved cases listed in Book V of the CIC are all reserved ratione censurae. b) According to the author. There are cases reserved to the pope, to the bishop, or to the religious superior. Cases reserved to the bishop do not bind outside his territory. Cases established by the Superior of an exempt clerical religious institute or by the abbot of a sui iuris monastery affect only their subjects.3. Purpose of reservation. — a) The purpose of reservation is not penal with regard to the confessor, nor with regard to the penitent who is reached by the reservation only through the confessor. b) The purpose of reservation is not principally medicinal, since it is not directed to the private good of the penitent (although this is not excluded), but to the common good of society, which requires that judgment in a very grave case be brought before the higher tribunal. c) The purpose of reservation is instead directly disciplinary. The two purposes, disciplinary and medicinal, are frequently recalled by the instruction of the S. Office (13 July 1916) and by the CIC (can. 879).
In Book V of the CIC, reservation is also considered a penalty, since it is established in order to aggravate censures; but this does not alter the nature of reservation, because whatever penal element it possesses derives from the censure attached to II.
Since reservation is not in itself penal, ignorance of reservations does not in itself excuse; this applies at least to sins reserved ratione sui. The legislator may, however, provide otherwise in a particular case, as the CIC has done with regard to censures (can. 2247 § 3).
III. THE RESERVATION OF SINS. 1. Author of the reservation. — He is the one who possesses ordinary power to grant the faculty of hearing confessions (v. PENITENZA) or to impose censures (v.), excluding the capitular and general vicars without a special mandate (can. 893 § 1). First of all comes the Roman Pontiff.
The Ordinary may proceed to reserve a sin only after having discussed it in the diocesan Synod or, outside the Synod, after having heard the cathedral Chapter and some of the more prudent priests engaged in the care of souls (can. 895).
Among exempt clerical religious institutes, the only competent authority is the Superior general, and in sui iuris monasteries, the abbot (can. 986). This faculty is not unlimited; indeed, the CIC shows a certain reluctance to grant it, given the clauses with which it surrounds II. The Superior general and the sui iuris abbot must consult their council (can. 896).
2. Conditions for reservation. — a) Only mortal sins may be reserved: external sins, even if occult, specifically determined, certain, and free from any doubt of law or fact, materially committed by someone who has reached puberty. Cases involving the reservation of sins made by the Ordinary must number no more than three or four, and the reservation itself must not remain in force beyond the time necessary to eradicate some unusual public vice or to restore Christian discipline (can. 897). b) Ordinaries must refrain from reserving sins that are already reserved ratione censurae to the Holy See (can. 898; cf. also can. 2247 § 1). Once a reservation has been imposed, Ordinaries must endeavor to make it known, in the best possible manner, to their subjects and ensure that the faculty of absolving from the reservation is not granted indiscriminately (can. 899 § 1).
3. Reserved sins. — Under the present discipline, the only sin reserved ratione sui to the Holy See is the false solicitation (v.), made to the competent ecclesiastical Superiors against an innocent priest (can. 894). For sins reserved ratione censurae, V. below.
IV. RESERVATION OF CENSURES IN PARTICULAR
1. Power to reserve. – The power to reserve follows the power to impose censures and to establish the norms for absolution from them (v. CENSURA).A reservation established previously by the Ordinary ceases by law when a reservation made by the Supreme Pontiff supervenes. The CIC admonishes Ordinaries not to make reservations with censures except in cases of special gravity and necessity for
the maintenance of the discipline of the Church and for the good of the faithful (can. 2246 § 1).
2. Reserved censures. – Censures, as is well known, are distinguished into latae and ferendae sententiae. In common law, latae sententiae censures are not reserved unless this is expressly stated (can. 2245 § 1). Among those expressly reserved, some are reserved to the Holy See and others to the Ordinary. Censures reserved to the Apostolic See are either reserved simpliciter, or speciali modo, or specialissimo modo. The principal difference among the three degrees of reservation lies in the fact that, respectively, an ordinary, special, or most special faculty is required for absolution. In the CIC, four excommunications are reserved to the Holy See specialissimo modo, eleven speciali modo, and eleven simpliciter. Six excommunications are reserved to the Ordinary (v. SCOMUNICA). In the latter case, the reservation ceases in places where no Ordinary has authority, as in the middle of the Ocean, etc. In particular law also, as in common law, latae sententiae censures are reserved only if this is expressly declared in the law (can. 2245 § 4).
According to certain authors (Roberti, Michiels, Cabreros), they are not reserved if this is not expressly declared in the precept, as can. 2245 § 4 teaches.
Ferendae sententiae censures, whether established by common or particular law or even by precept, after they have been applied become ab homine and are reserved to the person who inflicted them, whether by declaratory sentence or by way of precept (can. 2245 § 2).
3. Effects of reservation. – A person under censure cannot be absolved from sins unless he has first been absolved from the censure (can. 2250 § 2). The reservation of a censure that does not prohibit the reception of the Sacraments (non-reserved suspension and local interdict) does not prevent the censured person, if properly disposed, from receiving the Sacraments; he may therefore be absolved from sins while the censure remains in force (can. 2250 § 1). It may happen that both the sin and the censure are simultaneously subject to reservation. In that case, the effects of the two reservations are cumulative. In common law there is only one example in the false denunciation of the delict of solicitation, with reservation of the sin ratione sui (can. 894) and ratione censurae (can. 2363, that is, an excommunication speciali modo reserved to the Apostolic See).
V. L'ASSOLUZIONE DAI PECCATI E DALLE CENSURE RISERVATE
In pericolo di morte, ogni sacerdote può assolvere qualsiasi peccato riservato (v. ARTICOLO di MORTE); fuori del pericolo di morte, si richiede una facoltà speciale. 1) Nell'unico peccato riservato alla S. Sede tale facoltà compete al sommo pontefice, al cardinale penitenziere e agli altri cardinali (can. 239 § 1, n. 1). 2) Nei casi di peccato riservato all'Ordinario: a) tale facoltà di assolvere compete, per diritto, al canonico penitenziere (can. 401 § 1); e deve essere concessa abitualmente almeno ai vicari foranei, con facoltà di subdelegare ai confessori del proprio distretto, specialmente nei luoghi più remoti dalla sede vescovile, se e quando ad essi ricorrano i confessori in qualche caso urgente (can. 899 § 2). b) Possono ancora assolvere i parroci e quelli che vengono considerati come parroci, in tutto il tempo utile ad adempiere il precetto pasquale, ed i singoli missionari nel tempo in cui tengono le missioni al popolo o corsi di esercizio (can. 899 § 3). Infine qualunque r. cessa (anche le r. fatte ratione peccati alla S. Sede: Commissione per l'interpretazione del CIC, 10 nov. 1925: AAS [1925], p. 583) per gli ammalati che non possono uscire e per gli sposi che si confessano in preparazione al Matrimonio. Cessa ancora tutte le volte che o il legittimo Superiore richiesto abbia negato la facoltà di assolvere, oppure, secondo il prudente giudizio del confessore, la facoltà di assolvere non possa essere richiesta senza grave danno del penitente o senza pericolo di violazione del sigillo sacramentale. Cessa fuori del territorio del riservante, anche se il penitente sia uscito proprio per ottenere l'assoluzione (can. 900). Il pellegrino è tenuto alle r. del luogo in cui sta (Commissione per l'interpretazione del CIC, 24 nov. 1920: AAS, 12 [1920], p. 575).Il confessore che agisce in buona fede (o ignorando anche con ignoranza crassa o non avvertendo la r.) as-
solve validamente il penitente dalla censura e dal peccato, fatta eccezione delle censure ab homine o specialissimo modo riservate (cann. 2247 § 3 e 2246 § 3); lo stesso principio applica anche quando il confessore, ignorando, assolve dal peccato riservato senza censura. Se invece il confessore apisce in mala fede o consapevole dell'illecita assoluzione, l'assoluzione dal peccato riservato ratione sui per sé è invalida, l'assoluzione dal peccato riservato, per ragione della censura, si può ritenere valida data la controversia teorica che esiste circa la validità della medesima. Il sacerdote però che presume, senza la necessaria giurisdizione, di assolvere da peccati riservati, ipso facto, è sospeso dal confessare (can. 2338 § 1). E se consapevolmente o con ignoranza affettata assolve senza necessità da peccati riservati, pecca gravemente perché viola una grave legge della Chiesa, e poiché espone il sacramento della Penitenza al pericolo di nullità. Il penitente che, per involontaria dimenticanza, omette di dire il peccato riservato nella confessione fatta presso un confessore privilegiato, è assolto validamente. Tuttavia è tenuto a confessare il peccato omesso, il quale ormai non è più riservato nella prossima confessione. Lo stesso si deve dire, se simile confessione è fatta presso un semplice confessore, a meno che non si tratti di censura specialissimo modo riservata alla S. Sede (can. 2249 § 2). Se uno sacrilegamente tace un peccato riservato, questo certo non è rimesso; se confessò candidamente il peccato riservato ma commise il sacrilegio per altro motivo, sembra che la stessa r. venga tolta, avendo giudicato di essa un confessore che aveva la facoltà ed avendo imposto una congrua soddisfazione. Nella confessione successiva, pertanto, il penitente deve ripetere tutta l'accusa e confessare il sacrilegio fatto, ma ormai può essere assolto anche da un semplice confessore.
BIBL. oltre ai trattati di morale e di diritto de poenitentiae, de censuris, de poenus; cf. A. De Smet, Tractatus de casibus reservatis, Bruges 1914; F. Fuster, Los reservados episcopales segon el nuevo Codigo, in Razón y fe, 52 (1918), p. 510 sgg.; 53 (1919), pp. 103 sgg., 216 sgg., 310 sgg.; N. Farrugia, De casuum conscientiae reservatione, 2ª ed., Torino 1922; E. V. Dagan, Reserved Cases, Washington 1924; E. Ranwez, De peccatis reservatis, in Coll. Namurcenses, 21 (1927), pp. 120-43; V. Coucke, De absolutione a peccatis reservatis, in Coll. Brugenses, 58 (1928), pp. 233-36; I. Bryx, De absolutione a censuris in periculo mortis, ibid., pp. 289-93; A. M. Darmanin, De reservatione peccatorum iure Codicis Piano-Benedictim, in Angelicum, 5 (1928), pp. 38-70, 213-41, 539-54; F. Claeys Boëdaert, Quinam a censuris absolvere possunt, in Coll. Gandavenses, 16 (1929), pp. 11-18; 53-57; I. Vitali, De reservationibus pontificis a iure reservatis Ordinario deque Regularium privilegio ab iisdem absolventi, in Comm. pro Relig., 14 (1933), pp. 287 sgg., 363 sgg., 436 sgg.; 16 (1935), p. 164 sgg.; S. Alfonso, La reservation de pecados, in La ciencia tomista, 48 (1933), pp. 5-23, 163-77; G. Moschetti, Bibl. iuris canonici, in Apollinaris, 14 (1942), pp. 244 sgg., 344 sgg. E inoltre: A. Gougnard, De notione peccati reservati, in Collectanea Mechliniensia, 10 (1936), pp. 149-56; id., De absolutione a peccatis reservatis, ibid., pp. 276-82; A. Bride, Réserve, in DThC, XIII, coll. 2247-61; I. Bruno, De causis maioribus..., Roma 1941; A. Mancini, Sulla facoltà di assolvere i riservati, in Palestra del clero, 22 (1942), pp. 9-10; F. Roberti, De delictis et poenus, I, 2ª ed., Roma 1944, n. 291 sgg., p. 333 sgg.