VETITUM ECCLESIAE. — This expression, according to the proper meaning of the words, would indicate any prohibition made by the Church to the faithful; but in canonical language it has been used principally in matters concerning marriage.
Before the CIC, the *vetitum Ecclesiae* was one of the impediments to marriage, along with closed time, betrothal, and vows. It could have a general character, and in that case was established by the Holy See; for example, it was forbidden for all to contract marriage without the banns having first been published, children of the family were forbidden to marry without the consent or advice of their parents, and mixed marriages were forbidden. In particular cases, a prohibition could be imposed on specific individuals, either by the Pope, a Sacred Congregation, or the bishop, for serious and reasonable motives; for instance, to prevent scandals or public harm or serious enmities, or because there was suspicion of the existence of some diriment impediment or harm to third parties. In all these cases, if the marriage was celebrated despite the impedient prohibition, whether general or particular, the marriage itself was valid but illicit.
In the new matrimonial legislation introduced by the decree *Ne temere* and retained by the CIC, the *vetitum Ecclesiae* is no longer an impediment, not even an impedient one, but is preserved in the form of advice, a grave warning, a command, or a practical norm, which does not obstruct the validity of the marriage. The Holy See, however, and only the Holy See, could attach an irritating clause to the prohibition.
Even today, there are prohibitions established generally for all and particular prohibitions. The former are contemplated by the CIC, while the latter can be imposed in individual cases either by the Holy See—that is, by the Pope or by the Sacred Congregations that handle matrimonial cases—or by the Ordinaries. All these prohibitions, however, are temporary, so that when the circumstances, motives, or will that caused them change, the prohibition loses all efficacy.
General prohibitions are those indicated in cann. 1065 and 1066. The first warns the faithful not to contract marriage with those who have strayed from the Catholic faith, even if they have not adhered to any schismatic sect or are enrolled in societies condemned by the Church. These are not properly speaking mixed marriages, but they present dangers almost equal to them. Therefore, the prohibition ceases either with the return of the person to the faith or with the provision of the guarantees required in cases of mixed marriages. The second canon orders the parish priest not to assist at the marriage of a public sinner or of a person notoriously incurring a censure, who has not first approached Confession or refused to be reconciled with the Church. Once the scandal is repaired, the prohibition ceases. As can be seen, in both cases the cessation of the prohibition depends on the will of the contracting parties. Other general prohibitions concern the marriages of the young: these are those that forbid the parish priest to assist at the marriage of those who have not yet reached the reasonable age determined by the customs of the region (can. 1069 § 2) or of minors who wish to marry at the beginning of their age or against the reasonable will of their parents (can. 1034).
A particular or personal prohibition established by the Holy See is, for example, the clause that is sometimes added to the dispensation from a ratified but non-consummated marriage with the words *et vetitum transire ad aliam* *mutatis inconsulta S. Congregatione vel S. Sede*, when there remains a doubt of impotence or another cause of nullity. This prohibition is placed in the rescript of grace issued by the S. Congr. of Sacraments for dispensations obtained from the Holy Father, or in a sentence of the tribunal of the S. R. Rota, following a papal audience, when the process reveals proof of non-consummation rather than the nullity of the marriage, or by the S. Congr. for the Eastern Church, for the faithful of the Eastern rite, when the two above-mentioned cases occur; such a prohibition can be removed when the doubt that provoked it is dispelled.
The CIC (can. 1039 § 1) grants to Ordinaries the faculty to establish prohibitions for their own subjects, wherever they may be, but in particular and temporary cases—that is, as long as the just cause that provoked them persists. Therefore, Ordinaries sometimes forbid a marriage to prevent a scandal, forbid its celebration in the afternoon hours or in a private home, or defer the granting of the nulla osta to better ascertain that there are no causes of nullity or other dangers or difficulties.
The parish priest, lacking jurisdiction in the external forum, cannot properly establish prohibitions, but in practice he can refuse his assistance to a marriage when he judges that there is a grave cause to prevent or defer it; in certain cases, however, he must have recourse to the Ordinary.