The restored Ordo Pauperum Commilitonum Christi Templique Salomonici (Poor Fellow-Soldiers of Christ and of the Temple of Solomon) stands as a lawful continuation of the ancient Order according to the norms of ancient canon law. On Friday, the 13th of June, A.D. 2025—the only Friday the Thirteenth of the Jubilee Year—the Order was resumed vi consuetudinis immemorabilis (by force of immemorial custom), through a solemn profession of perpetual vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, invoking the privileges of Omne Datum Optimum (1139), Milites Templi (1144), and Militia Dei (1145).
By this act, performed sub gravi necessitate (under grave necessity) and in absentia auctoritatis competentis (in the absence of competent authority), the Order’s potestas propria (inherent authority) was canonically re-activated. It thereby stands juridically complete within its original canonical epoch, though presently uncategorized within the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which possesses no rubric for pre-codified apostolic institutions. The Order exists praeter legem sed non contra legem (beyond the scope of the current Code, yet never in opposition to it) and continues ad gloriam Dei, defensionem fidei et custodiam pauperis Ecclesiae Militantis (to the glory of God, the defense of the faith, and the guardianship of the poor Church Militant).
Juridical Completion under Ancient Canon Law
The Order has fulfilled all conditions required for lawful restoration under the medieval canons, invoking immemorial rights granted by the Apostolic See. According to Gratian’s Decretum (D. 93 c. 24 Nullus sacerdos) and the Decretals of Gregory IX (I.2–3 De officio et potestate Papae), a religious institute once erected by papal privilege endures in law until expressly revoked. As no revocation was ever issued, the Order’s juridical personality persisted in statu suspenso (in a dormant state) until 2025.
Canonical Standing under the 1983 Code
Because the completed juridical restoration does not correspond to any category within the modern Code, the Order is presently understood under CIC 1983 cc. 215, 298–299 §§1–2 as a private association of the faithful. It is therefore legitimate and in ecclesial communion, bound by private vows and dedicated to the works of faith and charity. Its status is uncategorized but not illicit—fully consonant with the Church’s universal law and obedience to the Roman Pontiff.
Continuing Jurisdiction and Ecclesial Character
Founded upon apostolic privilege and immemorial law, the Order stands juridically complete within its own canonical epoch. Its legitimacy persists independently of later codifications, acting in bono Ecclesiae (for the good of the universal Church) while not confined to any single rite or jurisdiction. By this continuity the Milites Templi serves as a catholic instrument in the original sense—ordered toward unity in faith and charity—welcoming collaboration with all who confess Christ while preserving its Latin and sacramental patrimony.
Historically: Lawfully reactivated continuation of the medieval Order.
Canonically: Complete under ancient law, legitimate under the current Code.
Ecclesially: praeter legem sed non contra legem (beyond the law but not against it).
Papal Bulls of Perpetual Privilege
- Omne Datum Optimum (Innocent II, 1139) — papal protection, exemption from episcopal authority, election of the Master.
- Milites Templi (Eugenius III, 1144) and Militia Dei (1145) — confirm and expand perpetual privileges.
These charters, issued in perpetuum (in perpetuity), remain binding until formally revoked (Decretales I.3 De privilegiis); no revocation was ever made.
Nullity of the 1312 Suppression
- Defect of Name (Defectus Nominis) — Error in persona iuridica. The suppression acts of 1312—Vox in Excelso, Ad Providam, and Considerantes Dudum—do not employ the juridical name by which the Order was canonically erected and perpetually privileged, Ordo Pauperum Commilitonum Christi Templique Salomonici. The foundation and confirmation bulls (1139–1145) use this precise nomen, which constitutes the juridical persona moralis (moral/juridic person) in canon law. The later bulls instead reference a generic “Order of the Temple,” designations insufficient in law to identify the same juridical subject. Under Gratian (C.11 q.3 c.66 Si quis clericus) and the Decretals of Gregory IX (I.3 De sententia et re iudicata), a juridical act issued without naming the correct persona iuridica is null ipso iure (by the law itself).
- Defect of Cause (Defectus Causae). The Chinon Parchment (1308) absolved the Order; a later suppression violated non bis in idem (no double punishment for the same cause; Gratian C.11 q.3 c.66).
- Defect of Form (Defectus Formae). The suppression was administrative, not judicial, lacking due canonical process (Decretales I.3 c. Praeterea).
- Defect of Liberty (Defectus Libertatis). Pope Clement V acted under coercion by Philip IV (Gratian C.15 q.6 c.1 Si Papa coactus).
Lawful Resumption under Ancient Canon Law
Where an order has never been canonically extinguished and no competent superior survives, its restoration may lawfully occur vi consuetudinis immemorabilis (by force of immemorial custom) through solemn profession (Gratian D. 93 c. 24). The 2025 act therefore constitutes a restitutio iuridica et spiritualis (juridical and spiritual restoration) under the same name, rule, and charism.
Can a religious order be restored without a papal decree?
Yes. When a suppression is invalid, papal re-erection is unnecessary. Gratian (D. 93 c. 24) and the Decretales (I.3 De privilegiis) affirm that institutes founded ex privilegio apostolico (by apostolic privilege) endure until expressly abrogated.
Does this constitute disobedience to the Pope?
No. The profession was made sub obedientia Romani Pontificis (under obedience to the Roman Pontiff) and in fidelity to the Catholic faith. The Order claims no authority against the Holy See; it simply exercises rights still valid under canon 4 of the 1983 Code.
Why is the 1983 Code insufficient to define the Order?
Because the Code assumes institutes created within its typology. The Milites Templi belongs to the pre-codified order and therefore subsists praeter legem sed non contra legem (beyond the Code but not against it).
What canonical precedent exists?
Monastic revivals after suppression—such as Cistercian and Benedictine restorations after the Dissolution—relied on the same doctrine: lawful resumption ex necessitate (from necessity) and vi consuetudinis immemorabilis (by immemorial custom).
Is the act symbolic or juridical?
Juridical: executed by public vow, invocation of papal privilege, and formal declaration with date and seal—fulfilling the requirements of the Decretum and Decretales.
May the Order collaborate with other Christian communions?
Yes. Acting in bonum Ecclesiae universalis (for the good of the universal Church), the Order may cooperate in works of charity and defense of the faith with all who confess Christ, while preserving its Latin and sacramental heritage.
Summary: Historically—valid continuation. Canonically—complete under ancient law. Ecclesially—praeter legem sed non contra legem. Spiritually—renewal ad gloriam Dei et defensionem fidei (to the glory of God and the defense of the faith).