Article II: On the Power of Jurisdiction

S. Th., Suppl., q. 8, a. 4; q. 19, a. 5-6; q. 20.

576. Opinions to be avoided. - Some older theologians, such as Durandus, held that jurisdiction is given by ordination itself, although they acknowledged that its use is bound by the prohibition of the Church; this opinion is commonly rejected. - Certain Jansenists, in the Synod of Pistoia, going further, asserted that it is fitting, but not necessary for the validity of absolution, that the confessor be endowed with jurisdiction. This was condemned by Pius VI in the bull Auctorem fidei, a. 37, as false, rash, pernicious, erroneous.

577. Thesis. For valid absolution, besides the power of order, by divine right there is required the power of jurisdiction over the penitent, which is not received by force of ordination alone but by the concession of ecclesiastical superiors. - This is certain from the Council of Trent explicitly declaring it, sess. 14, c. 7; which manifestly teaches three things: a) that a priest, who has the power of order, can lack jurisdiction over some faithful; b) that in such a case absolution imparted to them is invalid; c) that jurisdiction over penitents is twofold: ordinary and subdelegated, by which it is confirmed that it is diverse from the power of order, which is the same in all, conferred through the sacrament of order.

It is proved: 1) From the very nature of the sacrament of Penance, which was instituted to be exercised by way of judgment. For a judgment cannot be validly exercised except over a subject, who has been subjected to the authority or jurisdiction of the judge by a legitimate superior; otherwise the judge could neither oblige nor urge the execution of the judgment. But a priest does not have subjects except through legitimately conferred jurisdiction. Therefore from the very nature of the sacrament, and therefore by divine right, the power of jurisdiction is required.

Thus juridical knowledge and aptitude for judging do not suffice in a human judge, but for use there is required jurisdiction or deputation to determinate matter, determinate subjects, determinate persons; indeed any judge cannot take cognizance of any cause whatever, but each one takes cognizance of those causes which are explicitly or implicitly assigned to him by a legitimate superior, and only for determinate subjects, namely, of his own jurisdiction.

2. From the practice of the Church, by which the power of the keys is exercised in a judicial manner, and from the beginning bishops absolved their own subjects, but afterward, with the number of penitents increasing, priests also did so, but those designated by the bishop. This is confirmed from Lateran Council IV; Florence, decree for the Armenians; Trent, sess. 14, c. 3 and 7; and from the bull Auctorem Fidei, n. 37.

3. By reason, from St. Thomas, q. 8, a. 4: The minister of Penance imposes conditions for obtaining remission; hence he must impose on the penitent something to be done, and he does not absolve except by binding the penitent to doing something. But command does not belong to someone over another unless he has power over him, namely authority and jurisdiction. Therefore a priest cannot absolve unless he has jurisdiction over the penitent.

They object that the complete power of absolving, and therefore jurisdiction, was conferred by Christ upon the Apostles in these words: Receive the Holy Spirit; whose sins you shall remit, etc.; but the same words are repeated to newly ordained priests; therefore they too receive the same power of absolving by force of ordination.

Resp.: The Apostles did not receive jurisdiction through the aforesaid words, but by force of the intention of Christ, which is manifested through the words: As the Father has sent me, I also send you. Hence although the words: Receive... are said to newly ordained priests, they do not from this receive the power of jurisdiction, which otherwise the Church does not intend to grant by these words.

578. Corollaries. - 1. Jurisdiction, while in other sacraments it is required only for licit administration, is required for valid absolution: for the other sacraments are not conferred by way of judgment, nor are they judicial acts upon subjects, whence they do not of themselves demand jurisdiction (q. 8, a. 4).

2. Jurisdiction, since it is conferred by the mission of a superior, can be limited in various ways as to time, place, persons, or causes or sins, as is clear from the whole history and practice of the Church, and as the Council of Trent sanctioned, sess. 14, can. 11. Thence comes the use of reserving sins, which has existed in the Church from ancient times.

3. Jurisdiction is also required for absolving from venial sins, whatever some once said. This is now altogether certain from can. 872 together with can. 874.

4. A superior, e.g., the Supreme Pontiff, can be absolved, because as a sinner he is inferior before God; hence although someone cannot have jurisdiction over him as superior, nevertheless he can have it over him as a private person, by the authority of God, in whose name judgment and absolution are given, and who alone is the principal cause of remission. And yet the Pontiff cannot absolve himself, because for judgment two distinct persons are required: the subject accused, and the judge; but someone cannot be subject to himself. But the Pontiff can designate someone in the name of God to be his superior and judge as of a private person sinning. This indeed is impossible in the external forum, because there all things are done in the name of the superior, who is the principal judge and legislator; and therefore a superior cannot designate someone so that in his name and by his authority he would act upon the superior himself, just as neither can he excommunicate or judge himself (q. 20, a. 3).

It can also be added that absolution belongs principally to the power of order and only consequently regards jurisdiction; but as to the power of order all priests are equal, not as to jurisdiction.