Pastoral Visit

PASTORAL VISIT. - It is the direct knowledge that, by means of inspection, the pastor acquires of the conditions of the territory entrusted to him, in order to identify its needs and provide for them with zeal and charity, according to the norms of the CIC, can. 343. The right — or rather the duty — of the pastoral visit to the churches of their respective ecclesiastical circumscriptions belongs to patriarchs, metropolitans and bishops, since it is an absolutely necessary means for the good governance of souls (Council of Trent, sess. XXIV, de ref., chap. 3).

I. HISTORICAL NOTES

For this reason, from the very origins of Christianity the visitation has been regarded as one of the most serious obligations of the pastoral ministry. The Acts attest of St. Peter that he "circuibat civitates ac vicos ut confirmaret fideles" (Acts 9:32), and following this example the bishops have diligently discharged this duty. It suffices to recall, for example, St. Basil of Caesarea, of whom Socrates wrote: "Urbes perlustrans languentes in fide confirmabat" (Hist. eccl., IV, ch. 21). St. Martin of Tours was no less diligent. St. Augustine writes of himself: Quoniam visitandarum ecclesiarum ad meam curam pertinentium necessitate proiectus sum... (Ep., 56: PL 33, col. 223). And being unable to visit in person certain places, because they were distant and infested by the Donatist schism, he preferred to appoint another bishop on the spot rather than keep under his jurisdiction that part of the flock which he found it impossible to inspect (Ep., 209: PL 33, col. 953). But the first written law on the obligation of the sacred visitation dates back to the Council of Tarragona (A.D. 516), can. 8: "ut antiquae consuetudinis ordo servetur et annuis vicibus ab episcopo dioceses viserentur" (cf. Hefele-Leclercq, II, p. 1028, n. 8); a provision later repeated and better defined by other Spanish councils, such as those of Lugo (A.D. 569, though of doubtful existence: cf. ibid., III, p. 193), of Braga (A.D. 572, can. 1; cf. ibid., p. 194), and the Fourth Council of Toledo (A.D. 633, can. 36; cf. ibid., p. 272), and generalized almost everywhere, especially in Italy and France under the pontificate of St. Gregory the Great, until it entered the authentic compilations, where the decretals for the most part limited themselves to repressing abuses on the occasion of the sacred visitation, especially on account of exaggerated exactions. In this regard several councils use fiery words against certain bishops. Subsequently the practice became widespread in many places, especially outside Italy, of entrusting the task of the visitation in full to the archdeacons.

And since not a few persons, both physical and moral, were not subject to the archdeacons by reason of privileges and exemptions obtained, the juridical institution of the pastoral visitation, toward the end of the Middle Ages, almost completely lost its character and usefulness. The Council of Trent extended its reform to this field as well, by making the fulfillment of so grave a duty more expeditious for bishops. It declared that the pastoral visitation was a personal duty of the bishop, not to be entrusted to others except for serious reasons, such as, for example, the prelate's poor health or the vastness of the diocesan territory. In such cases the bishop had to entrust it to his vicar general or to another suitable person. The time allowed for completing the sacred visitation, according to pre-Tridentine law one year (c. 10, C. 10, q. 1), was extended to a biennium, but only if, because of the size of the diocese, the visitation could not be completed within the year (sess. 24, ch. III, de reform.). However, the CIC, taking into account a schema of the Vatican Council (C. Martin, Concil. vatic. docum. collect., Paderborn 1873, p. 138) and the now common practice not disapproved by the Holy See, establishes that the bishop personally, or, if legitimately impeded, through a procurator, visit the diocese at least in part every year and in its entirety once every five years. In order to eliminate inconveniences arising from privileges of exemption, the Council of Trent had granted visitors the right to proceed not only by virtue of their ordinary authority but also as delegates of the Apostolic See. No mention of such delegation is made any longer in the CIC, and on the other hand it is expressly determined therein which persons and which exempt institutes the bishop may visit in certain circumstances; therefore it must be held that this power is ipso iure attached to the office and that consequently the bishop, even when he visits persons and exempt institutes in accordance with the law, acts by ordinary authority, albeit vicarious.

II. CURRENT LAW

Persons, things and places are subject to the bishop's visitation. As regards persons, the visitation can be general or special. It is special if it has as its object a particular office or a specific person guilty of some fault. It is general if it has as its object offices or persons in general. The particular visitation takes place only when a just cause makes it necessary (can. 1939 CIC). Furthermore, everything that serves the public exercise of divine worship is subject to episcopal visitation, such as vestments and sacred vessels; benefices, pious foundations; pious legacies; ecclesiastical property; pious causes in general; moreover all sacred places, such as churches and oratories, public and semi-public, and pious places, such as hospitals, orphanages, almshouses and similar other institutions.

As regards private oratories, the bishop must visit them the first time only for the purpose of granting the nulla osta for the celebration of Holy Mass in accordance with can. 1195 CIC. It is not excluded, however, that the bishop may subsequently ascertain also de visu whether in such oratories the norms of decency and the conditions laid down in the apostolic indult are respected; this at least when his intervention were prompted by accusations and denunciations or by public report of non-compliance in any manner. Pious places are subject to episcopal visitation even if exempt and entrusted to laypersons, provided they were erected by ecclesiastical authority or at least depend on it in such a way that by law or by foundation they are subject to the jurisdiction or inspection of the ecclesiastical superior (cans. 344, 1489, 1491, CIC). Excluded from visitation are only those places and institutions erected by private persons or by civil authority with a profane or purely philanthropic purpose. No one can claim immunity against the bishop's right unless there exists a particular and specific exemption with regard to visitation, such as the law of foundation, prescription and apostolic indult, such as can be demonstrated with certainty. And even in this case the Ordinary always retains the right to demand an accounting, notwithstanding contrary customs (can. 1492, § 1 CIC). However, in accordance with can. 1509, no. 7 CIC, prescription is a legitimate title of exemption from visitation, if it is understood against one prelate in favor of another, not against any superior so as to withdraw from vigilance and inspection in totum; for this would indeed break the nerve of ecclesiastical discipline. By general provision of the CIC, regular religious are exempt from episcopal visitation, except for the cases expressly listed in can. 344 § 2 (cf. can. 615). Thus can. 296 subjects regular missionaries to the visitation of the vicar apostolic or the prefect apostolic for everything concerning the governance of the mission, the care of souls, the administration of the Sacraments, the direction of schools, the offerings for the mission and the fulfillment of pious bequests in favor of the same mission. Thus can. 631 § 1 declares subject to the immediate visitation of the local Ordinary the religious vicar who exercises the care of souls in a regular parochial church, even if the general seat of the Order were there, in the same manner as a secular parish priest, with the faculty of issuing decrees against him and applying penalties in case of negligence of office. Can. 617 § 2 then places under the special vigilance of the local Ordinary any house of regular religious not formed in the sense indicated in can. 488, 5° and confers on him the right to take measures by administrative means in the case of abuses or scandals. According to can. 1261 § 2, religious, including exempt ones, are bound to observe the prescriptions of worship that the Ordinary may issue for his territory, and for this purpose the bishop may visit their churches and their public oratories. And further, can. 1279 § 1 prohibits that in churches, including those of exempt religious, or in any other sacred place, unusual images be exposed unless they have first been approved by the local Ordinary. Finally, schools run by regulars are also subject to episcopal visitation, with the exception of those internal for exempt professed religious (can. 1382 CIC). In general, exempt religious of whatever kind are under the jurisdiction and therefore subject to the visitation of the local Ordinary for everything regarding the care of souls, that is, the pastoral duty toward the Christian people. Female Orders, on the other hand, are less exempt from episcopal authority than male regular Orders. Nuns are either immediately subject to the Holy See, or are directly under the jurisdiction of the local Ordinary, or are subject to a regular prelate. In relation to episcopal visitation, can. 512 § 1, no. 1 recognizes in the local Ordinary the right and inculcates in him the duty of visiting every five years approximately omnia (persons, things and places) the monasteries immediately subject to the Apostolic See or to the diocesan Ordinary, and he as visitor can and must question the nuns whom he deems it opportune to hear and has the right to know everything that falls within the purposes of the sacred visitation: to preserve and increase the religious spirit and to remove abuses and irregularities. Consequently all the nuns questioned are bound to answer according to the truth, since the visitor is a true superior and not a mere inspector or reporter (can. 513 § 1). Furthermore the bishop may inquire concerning regular discipline, the administration of property, etc.

The same can. 512 § 2, n. 1 further assigns to the local Ordinary the right and the duty of visiting every five years the monasteries of nuns that depend on regulars, and this cumulatively with the regular superior, and in the act of a sacred visitation with limited power, because he can inquire only into matters concerning the law of enclosure, with the faculty of questioning the religious and of learning what is necessary in the matter according to can. 513 § 1 (Pontif. Commiss. interpr. CIC, 24 Nov. 1920; AAS, 12 [1920], p. 575). If, however, the regular superior should neglect the quinquennial visitation, the local Ordinary can visit the monastery of the nuns as if it were immediately subject to him, that is, in regard to omnia. On the contrary, all religious who do not come under the name of regulars in the sense fixed by can. 488, n. 7 CIC, even if exempt, must obtain an apostolic privilege in order to enjoy exemption from episcopal visitation (cf. cann. 512; 618-19; 690 § 2; 1261 § 2; 1491, CIC). The bishop can moreover also visit institutes that are no longer erected as moral persons and are entrusted to a religious house, though not in an absolute and universal manner if the religious house is of pontifical right, but only as regards religious instruction, honesty of morals, practices of piety and the administration of the Sacraments (can. 1491 § 2). In carrying out the sacred visitation the bishop may have himself assisted by co-visitors, of his free choice, who may not be more than two, notwithstanding privileges or customs to the contrary (can. 343 § 2 CIC). In making the visitation the bishop must proceed de plano, in forma paterna et sine strepitu iudicii, as regards the object of the visitation itself; and against the measures taken by the visitor there is no appeal, but only recourse in devolutive form; therefore they have particular force and juridical efficacy if contained within the scope of the object and purpose of the visitation. Other causes are more suitably postponed to another time, but if the bishop should have to decide them on the occasion of the visitation (for example, a jurisdictional or boundary dispute) he would have to instruct and judge them with the forms of ritual (can. 345 CIC): and in that case there would be recourse or appeal in suspensive form according to the nature of the matters and of the measures. This would occur especially when the visitor inflicted penalties that are more vindictive than corrective, or even a very grave medicinal penalty such as excommunication; for then he would be acting, more than as a father, as a judge: ad vindictam, more than ad correctionem.

Custom regulates the provisions of food and the monetary indemnities for travel and maintenance expenses for the bishop and his retinue. Besides custom, however, diocesan, provincial or regional law has force in the matter, where it exists. In any case such provisions are due only once in the event that the visitation is made several times in the year. Can. 346 CIC provides that the visitation be carried out indeed with diligence but without useless delays and without superfluous expenses charged to those who have the obligation of bearing them; and it is absolutely forbidden to the visitor to ask for and receive gifts both for himself and for his own. Finally the CIC (can. 274, n. 5) contemplates the case of grave negligence on the part of the bishop in carrying out this duty; and then the metropolitan takes over, who, only after having given notice of the omitted visitation to the Holy See and after having received permission from it, can visit the suffragan diocese in place of the bishop and on that occasion can do what is required to attain the purpose of the sacred visitation and can moreover absolve cases reserved to the diocesan bishop and punish even with censures notorious crimes and manifest offenses that had perchance been brought against him or his own.

Luigi Fini