Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 5.djvu/786

 EXERCISES

708

EXETER

III. The Regium Placet really dates from the great Western Schism, which lasted from the pontificate of Urban VI to the Council of Constance and the election of Martin V (1378-1417). In order to guard against spurious papal letters issued by antipopes during the schism, Urban VI granted to some ecclesiastical su- periors the faculty of examining papal Constitutions and ascertaining their authenticity before promulga- tion and execution. Civil authorities felt bound to adopt the same precautionary measure, though they did not attribute such a power to themselves as a right attached to their office; apparently its use was discon- tinued when, after the schism, Martin V condemned the Regium Placet in his Constitution "Quod anti- dota" (1418). In the fifteenth century, however, it was revived in Portugal by Iving John II and claimed by him as a right inherent in the crown. In the si-x- teenth century the Viceroy of Naples, the Duke of Alcala, made it obligatory by law, and in the seven- teenth century it was introduced into France in order to preserve the so-called Gallican Liberties, and after- wards into Spain, Belgium, Sicily, Naples, and other countries.

In theory this supposed right of the State was first propounded and defended as a true doctrine by Lu- ther, Pasquier Quesnel, and other heretics who denied the supreme jurisdiction of the pope; later on it was advocated by Galileans and Jansenists, e. g. Van Espen, Febronius, De Marca, and Stockmans, who attributed this power to the State as a necessary means of self-defence against possible attempts of the Church to injure the rights of civil society. More recently it has been defended with particular \-igour by Italian jurists and statesmen, e. g. Cavallari, ILan- cini, Piola, apropos particularly of the "Law of Guar- antees" passed in 1871 by the Italian Government in favour of the Holy See. However, not only is it his- torically erroneous, as shown above, that such a right has been exercised from time immemorial, but it is also juridically false that such power naturally be- longs to the State, particularly as a necessary means of self-defence. The injustice of that claim and the consequent usurpation of authority by the State appear manifest in the light of Catholic faith. If the binding force of church laws depended on the ap- proval and consent of the State, it would no longer be true that the Church received legislative power directly from her Divine Founder, and that whatever is bound or loosed by the Church on earth, will be bound or loosed in heaven (Matt., xvi, 19). Again, the Church would, in that case, immediately cease to be a supreme, self-sufficient, and perfect society, and would be deprived of her characteristics of unity, sanctity, catholicity, and apostolicity. Moreover, the use of the Exequatur to prevent possible usurpation of rights is contrary not only to Divine law but also to natural social law and is, therefore, an abuse of power, even if exercised by a State not professing the Catholic religion. A possible conflict of rights of two societies and the fear of a consequent injury to their respective jurisdiction do not entitle one of them to impede the free exercise of its ordinary jurisdiction by the other. Differences, if they arise, may be settled by private mutual understanding or arbitration. It is needless to say that the fear of any usurpation or conflict on the part of the Church is unfounded, as appears from her doctrine and history.

The Church, as a matter of fact, never claimed the power of revising and approving civil laws before pro- mulgation, although, indeed, past experience would justify her in fearing on the part of the State usurpa- tion of her powers. She contents herself with con- demning civil laws after promulg.ation, if they are injurious to Catholic interests. We need not wonder, then, that the Church has always condciiincd the doctrine and u.se of the Regium Placet. Ronifacc IX first condemned it in his Constitution " Intenta Sal-

utis" and after him a great number of pontiffs, down to Pius IX in Propositions 28 and 29 of the Syllabus " Quanta Cura" and in the Allocution " Luctuosis Exag- itati" (12 March, 1877), also the Vatican Council in the Constitution "De Ecclesia Christi". To avert ani- mosities and persecution, the Church has made minor concessions in favour of the State as to the exercise of the Regium Placet. In some other instances she has tolerated its acknowledgment by ecclesiastics, particu- larly to enable them to take possession of benefices and other temporalities. At present the Exequatur, or Regium Placet, is seldom, if ever, used, at least in its fullness, by modern civil rulers. In the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies it was abolished by the Concordat of 1818, and in Austria by that of 1S55. It must likewise be regarded as abolished in Spain, France, Portugal, and Hungary. According to Aichner, it exists still, but in a mitigated form, in Saxony, Bavaria, and some parts of Switzerland. In Italy the strict Exequatur, i. e. previous to promulgation of papal Constitutions, is not in use, but it is retained in a mild form for the possession of ecclesiastical benefices. According to the "Law of Guarantees" (1.3 July, 1871), eccle.sia.stics who have been proviiled with benefices must present the Bull of their appointment to the State authorities; after approval the latter concede the Exequatur and put the incumbents of benefices in possession of the temporalities hitherto controlled by the government. In this form the Exequatur is at present tolerated by the Church, though it is not devoid of inconven- iences, as Leo XIII complained in a letter written to his Secretary of Sl.ifr Cardinal Nina (27 August, 1878), Van Espt-^ /' ::1t>-inr. legum eccl. (Louvain, 1729);

Bonix. De /n i Paris, 178S); Zacc.4RI.\, Comandi

chi pubobbol:.-.: ' ' - - i aenza, 1788); Cavagnis, Jut. Puhl. Eccl. Instil. (Rome, lOOtii; Barba. [l DirilloPtibl. Ecd. (Naples, 19(D0); Tarqoini, Dissert, de Rrnio Placet (Rome, 1862); De DoMiNias, /( Regio Exequatur (Naples, 1869).

S. Luzio.

Exercises, Spiritual. See Spiritual Exercises OP Saint Ignatius.

Exeter (Exonia, Isca Damnoniorum, Caer Wise, Ex.\nceaster), Ancient Dioce.se of (Exoniensis), in England, chosen by Leofric, Bishop of Crediton, as his cathedral city in 1050. Originally Devonshire formed part of the Diocese of Wessex. About 703 Devonshire and Cornwall became the separate Bish- opric of Sherborne and in 900 this was divided into two, the Devonshire bishop having his cathedral at Crediton. The two dioceses were again united when Leofric became first Bishop of Exeter. The present cathedral was begun by Bishop ^^'illiam de Warel- hurst in 1112; the abbey church of St. Mary and St. Peter, founded by Athelstan in 932 and rebuilt in 1019, serving till then as the cathedral church. The transept towers buUt by Warelhurst still remain, be- ing the only part of the Norman cathedral existing. This Norman building was completed by Bishop Mar- shall at the close of the twelfth century. The cathe- dral as it now stands is in the ilecorated stj'le, being begun by Bishop Quivil (1280-1291), continued by Bytton and Stapeldon, and completed by the great Bishop Grandisson during his long pontificate of forty-two years, who left it much as it now stands. In many respects it resembles the French cathedrals rather than those of England. The special features of the cathedral are the transeptal towers and the choir. The latter contains much early stained-glass and a magnificent episcopal throne, and is separated from the nave by a choir-screen of singular beauty (1.324). The absence of a central tower and a general lack of elevation prevent the building from ranking among the greatest English cathedrals, though the stately west front is alone sufficient to render it remarkable.

The bishops of Exeter always enjoyed considerable independence and the see was one of the largest and richest in England. "The Bishop of E.xeter, " writes