Jus novum (c. 1140-1563) Jus novissimum (c. 1563-1918) Jus codicis (1918-present) Other Sacraments Sacramentals Sacred places Sacred times Supra-diocesan/eparchal structures Particular churches Juridic persons Philosophy, theology, and fundamental theory of Catholic canon law Clerics Office Juridic and physical persons Associations of the faithful Pars dynamica (trial procedure) Canonization Election of the Roman Pontiff Academic degrees Journals and Professional Societies Faculties of canon law Canonists Institute of consecrated life Society of apostolic life "Appeal as from an abuse" (French: appel comme d'abus) is a legal term applied in the canon law of the Catholic Church, meaning originally a legal appeal as recourse to the civil forum (court) against the usurpation by the ecclesiastical forum of the rights of civil jurisdiction.
It is in France that we find the most flagrant series of encroachments upon Church jurisdiction, through pretence of appeals as from an abuse, gradually tending to the elimination of the ecclesiastical forum.
[1] During the seventeenth century the French Catholic clergy presented frequent memorials against the encroachments made by their kings and parliaments through constant recourse to these "appeals as from an abuse", which resulted in submitting to civil tribunals questions of definitions of faith, the proper administration of the sacraments, and the like.
The lay tribunals undertook to adjudicate whether the ministers of the sacraments had a right to refuse them to those deemed unworthy, or the right to Christian burial of Catholics dying impenitent or under Church censures; whether interdicts or suspensions were valid; whether monastic professions should be annulled; whether the bishop's permission was necessary for preaching; whether a specified marriage was contrary or not to the Gospel; and also to decide the justice of canonical privations of benefices.
Many other subjects intimately connected with the teaching of the Church were brought before lay tribunals, and unappealable decisions rendered in open contradiction to the canons, as can easily be surmised both from the absence of theological knowledge, and from the visible animus shown in decisions that undertook to subject the spiritual power of the Church to the dictates of transient politics.
[1] Interference was mostly owing to courtier-canonists who flattered the secular rulers by dwelling upon the right of protection over the Church conceded in early days to the Christian Roman Emperors.
[1] The Congregation of Propaganda in its comment explained that, in mixed cases, where the persons may be ecclesiastical, but the things about which there is question may be temporal or of one's household, this rule cannot be enforced, especially in countries in which the civil government is not in the hands of Catholics, and where, unless recourse is had to the civil courts, there is not the means or the power of enforcing an ecclesiastical decision for the protection or recovery of one's own.