Article IV: On Absolution from Censures

Things to Be Noted Beforehand. - Someone can be absolved from censure in a multiple way:

1) As regards all effects, or as regards some effect only; 2) absolutely or conditionally; 3) to reincidentia; 4) for caution.

Now therefore: 1° Absolution is ordinarily given as regards all effects, but sometimes it is given for a partial effect, e.g. for taking away privation of active voice in canonical election; this absolution, however, is improperly so called, and bears the species of a dispensation.³ Another for an effect, see n. 1403. q. 1°.

2° Absolution can be given under a condition either concerning the past: e.g. if you have already satisfied, I absolve you; or concerning the present: if I can absolve; or concerning the future: if you will satisfy hereafter, now for then I absolve you. This last, however, is illicit unless it is made honorable by some grave cause, say if afterward there would be lacking someone who could absolve the censured person.⁴

3° A species of conditional absolution is that which is given to reincidentia; in such a way, namely, that the one absolved, unless within a certain time he furnishes something, e.g. unless within a month he restores, or approaches the excommunicator, relapses by the very fact into the same censure. - Moreover, reincidentia is by man or by law: a) it is by man whenever it is added by the will of the Superior himself absolving; b) it is by law when it is incurred by force of law: this has place in only two cases, namely when someone either, detained by a lasting impediment [n. 1402. II. 2)], or in danger of death, is absolved by him who has no jurisdiction over the censure reserved to the Bishop or specially to the Pope.⁵ He, namely, although truly absolved and amended, when the impediment or sickness ceases, ought, as soon as he conveniently can, by himself or through another, to present himself to the excommunicator (or his delegate), not indeed to be absolved again, but humbly to receive a mandate² from him, as the Canons say; otherwise he relapses by the law itself into the same censure (because of his new contumacy).

4° Absolution for caution is that which is given, e.g., before absolution from sins, to take away a censure perhaps unknown.

1670. Principles. - I. Censures which the guilty person has already incurred are not loosed by the delinquent's penitence alone or obedience toward the mandates of the Church, nor, if you except suspensions from informed conscience (see n. 1686. 1° at the end), by the death of him who brought the censure; but absolution imparted by a judge, or legitimate Superior, is necessary. It is manifest from Canon Law,³ and from the 44th proposition condemned by Alexander VII, p. XIV. But if a similar penalty has been brought not as a censure but as a pure penalty, it is taken away by relaxation or dispensation.⁴

II. From a censure brought by man through a particular sentence, only these can absolve: 1° he who brought the censure; 2° his Superior as such. Therefore not the Metropolitan, except in the case of appeal or visitation of the diocese of the suffragan; 3° his successor; 4° another delegated by one of these. The reason is because it belongs to him to absolve to whom it belongs to bind. Therefore this holds even if the guilty person changes domicile. Hence St. Alphonsus⁵ warns that, if someone in another territory has offended in such a way that he was specially excommunicated by the Bishop of that place, he cannot be absolved by his own Bishop, unless with the license of the excommunicating Bishop.

But note that this is said concerning a censure by man brought through a particular sentence; for censures by man indeed, but brought through a general sentence, according to the more probable opinion, are equated to those brought by law which are not reserved; and therefore whoever has jurisdiction over the guilty person can absolve him.⁶

What has been said concerning absolution from a censure brought by man through a particular sentence, the same must be said concerning censures reserved by law. See also n. 1403. q. 7°.

But if a censure is specially reserved to the Pope, for absolution from it to be imparted a general concession of absolving from cases and censures reserved to the Roman Pontiff in no way suffices, but a special one is required. But those presuming to absolve without due faculty, even under whatever pretext, incur by the very fact an excommunication simply reserved to the Pope, provided there is not question of the article of death; in this, however, the obligation of standing to the mandates of the Church remains firm for those absolved, if they recover. - Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, dated October 12, 1869, § A quibus.

III. Any confessor can absolve from censures not reserved to the Pope or Bishop,¹ except however censures brought by law against some place or against a community; for a place and a community are not subject to the penitential forum.²

But absolution of this kind can be given by confessors both outside and within Confession, and also holds for the external forum.³ But if the penalty is notorious, because of scandal it will be necessary that the absolution also be publicly clear; for this, however, it suffices that it be known that the censured person has confessed,⁴ and that satisfaction, if any was necessary, has been exhibited by him. Wherefore absolution would be given imprudently, even only in the internal forum, from a case already brought to the contentious forum, or soon to be brought there.

Note. - 1° In what cases Bishops, or their delegates, can absolve from censures reserved to the Pope, see n. 1402. II.

2° When, and in what manner, someone can absolve from censures reserved either to the Pope or to the Bishop, whether every priest or a simple confessor, see n. 1402. IV and n. 1403. q. 1°. q. 2°. q. 4°. q. 5°. q. 7°.

1671. Resolves. - 1° An ecclesiastical Superior or delegate can absolve from censures, even if he is not a priest. The reason is because jurisdiction, which is required for absolving from censures, can reside in a Cleric even initiated only by tonsure.

2° A faculty granted by the Bishop for reserved sins is not understood for sins reserved with censure; otherwise if the concession has been made by the Pope, because papal cases are all reserved with censure, except those two which are indicated in n. 1400. IV.

3° Absolution for caution does not seem necessary to me in a doubt (even of fact) whether a censure has been contracted. Sanchez has one exception.¹ But absolution from excommunication, at least for caution, is always given (and, if some probable suspicion is present that it has been contracted, it must be given under venial sin) to any penitent, before he is absolved from sins, so that an impediment to receiving the Sacrament, if any perhaps exists, may be removed. Yet absolution from sins is valid although absolution from excommunication was not premised, provided the penitent is in good faith and otherwise rightly disposed.² - From the Roman Ritual.

A determined form of words is not required per se for valid absolving, but the will of the one absolving, manifested by some sign, suffices and is required. Let the one absolving use, for the internal forum, that form which is already contained in sacramental absolution itself; but for the external forum, that which is described in the Roman Ritual. - "The rite," says Kenrick,³ "of lightly striking the shoulder of the man with a rod," which is prescribed in the form for the external forum, "will be able to be committed to execution with difficulty, on account of the customs of the region being opposed ... Busembaum teaches," according to St. Alphonsus,⁴ "that this striking can be omitted for a just cause."

1672. Questions. - Query 1° Whether an absent person can be absolved?

Resp. Affirmatively, at least validly. The reason is because just as a penalty can be established against an absent person, so also it can be taken away. This is also evidently deduced from Canon Law. Except, if the faculty of absolving has been so granted that the absolution must be given in the act of Sacramental Confession.

Query 2° When is a faculty of absolving judged to have been so granted that it must be exercised in the act of Sacramental Confession?

Resp. There is not one sentence of all concerning this matter. St. Alphonsus teaches that it must be exercised in the act of Sacramental Confession if in the faculty it is said: in the forum of conscience. This is clear from those things which he teaches concerning the faculty of Bishops from the chapter Liceat, or from the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, § Firmam tamen.¹ Cf. n. 1402. II. 1).

Query 3° Whether an absent Bishop can absolve one existing in the diocese?

Resp. Affirmatively, according to all. The reason is because for absolution there is not required knowledge of the cause, nor judicial process; and therefore nothing prevents the Bishop from exercising such an act of jurisdiction in another territory. But it is otherwise if judicial process is sometimes required, or if the faculty given to the Bishop perhaps has been restricted in this.²

Query 4° Whether one unwilling can be absolved?

Resp. Affirmatively, provided he is absolved by the Superior; for just as a penalty can be brought against an absent and unwilling person, so also it can be taken away from him; nevertheless it is not expedient that this be done without a very grave reason, and care must be taken lest, while he does not cease from contumacy, the censure be held in contempt. Hence it is required that the censured person ask absolution, although it is valid even when not asked, provided (if it is given by a delegate) there is question of one amended.³

Query 5° Whether absolution extorted unjustly by force or grave fear is valid?

Resp. Negatively, as is clear of itself, and as the law itself disposes.⁴⁵

Query 6° Whether he who is bound by several censures can be absolved from one, the others remaining?

Resp. Affirmatively. The reason is because among them there is no necessary connection. And mortal sins indeed can in no way be absolved one without the others; but it is otherwise concerning censures, the absolution of which does not confer sanctifying grace on the censured person. Therefore they are had after the manner of chains, of which some can be loosed without others.

Query 7° Whether he can be absolved from censures who has not yet publicly repaired the scandal because of which he was subject to censure?

Resp. Negatively, at least per se, and speaking generally. It is clear from the Declaration of the Sacred Penitentiary on the 5th day of July, 1857.

Query 8° In what way must scandal in the said case be repaired by those to whom such reparation is difficult and exposed to dangers?

Resp. The Sacred Penitentiary, December 10, 1860: "that the reparation of scandal is necessary by divine law, and that it must be made in the better way in which it can be, by the judgment of the Ordinary or confessor."¹

Query 9° In what way is satisfaction to the injured party, if it is necessary for taking away censure, to be exhibited?

Resp. See n. 1402. IV. c). And these things indeed must be observed under penalty of nullity, if absolution from reserved cases is given through a delegate under this condition: but that a condition of this kind is expressed by the clause: the party having been satisfied, is taught by the opinion which seems truer to St. Alphonsus.²

Query 10° Whether and when an oath must be exacted before absolution?

Resp. It must be exacted universally whenever it is prescribed; but specifically: 1° in the case of which in n. 1402. IV. c), if absolution is given by a delegate with this condition, and then more truly³ it is required for validity, unless there is question of a penitent who would be perpetually unable to satisfy;⁴ 2° in the case of which in n. 1402. IV. e);⁵ 3° in the case in which absolution is given by a Bishop because of an impediment of approaching the Holy See, which is not perpetual; before absolution, namely, the censured person in this case ought to swear (or, if there is question of absolution in the internal forum, to promise), that when the impediment ceases he will approach the Holy See.⁶

Note. - From the things said it follows that a great difference intervenes between absolution from sins and absolution from censures. For:

1° The former is given for reconciling us to God; but the latter for restoring those things which are proper to citizens of the Church militant. - 2° The former must be given from all sins; the latter is rightly given even from one censure. - 3° The former can be bestowed only upon the contrite and willing; the latter is validly imparted even to the contumacious and unwilling, at least by the Superior. - 4° The former must be given purely; the latter can be given under condition, from day to day, to reincidentia, for caution, etc. - 5° The former, because it is part of a Sacrament, is given only to those present; the latter is rightly given also to the absent. - 6° The former, extorted by fear, is valid; the latter is not so. - 7° The former can be imparted only by an approved priest; the latter by a simple cleric obtaining external jurisdiction.

Furthermore: 1° Whenever a censure is reserved, the sin also is liable to reservation. But between reservations introduced by the Roman Pontiff and reservations introduced by Ordinaries there is very much distance, as is clear from the things said in n. 1400. IV., 1401. q. 2°. - 2° Sins liable to reservation can be absolved not only directly, but also indirectly, from a just cause (n. 1403. q. 1°. q. 2°); but censures can be absolved only directly.²