Section — Prümmer, Manuale Theologiae Moralis
§ 6. On Absolution from Reserved Cases
424. I. At the point, or even in the danger,347 of death, every reservation ceases, so that any priest whatsoever (even when a confessor having the faculty is present348) can absolve for the internal forum from any sin and from any censure whatsoever.
For thus the Council of Trent349 establishes: "Very piously, lest anyone perish on this very occasion, it has always been observed in the same Church of God that there is no reservation at the point of death, and therefore all priests can absolve any penitents whatsoever from any sins and censures whatsoever."
If, however, such a dying person afterward recovers, then, if he was absolved from a censure either imposed by a man or reserved in the most special manner to the Roman Pontiff, after he has recovered he must (within a month), under pain of falling again into the same censure, either personally or through the confessor have recourse to the Sacred Penitentiary and obey its mandates, or seek absolution anew from one having the faculty of absolving from censures of this kind.350 This last manner of acting is certainly preferable if such a confessor can easily be found. A dying person who was absolved from any other case whatsoever (and notably from a sin reserved to the Supreme Pontiff without a censure) is thereafter bound to no recourse.
Note. It is evident of itself that recourse is always necessary:
a) If there is question of a censure imposed by a man, because then definitive absolution cannot be given except by the one who imposed the censure, or by his superior or successor, or by one specially delegated.
b) If there is question of notorious censures, because then the scandal must be repaired according as the legitimate superior shall have determined.
II. Outside the point of death, diverse provisions have been established according as there is question of the absolution of papal or episcopal cases.
347 The danger of death is judged to be any case in which life is probably feared for, even though it afterward becomes known that there was no true foundation for the fear. Such danger of death exists, for example, in grave illness, in a difficult childbirth, in an imminent battle, and in the state of wartime mobilization. To the question of the bishop of Verdun: "Can any soldier whatsoever placed in the state of wartime mobilization, as they call it, be by that very fact equated with those who are in danger of death, so that he can be absolved by any priest he encounters?" the Sacred Penitentiary answered on March 18, 1912, and May 29, 1915: "Affirmatively, according to the rules handed down by approved authors" (Acta Ap. Sed. VII, 282).
348 Cf. Holy Office, July 29, 1891: "Those are not to be disturbed who hold that absolution granted at the point of death by an unapproved priest is valid, even when an approved priest could easily have been summoned or could have been present." From these words it is not obscurely perceived that an absolution of this kind by a simple priest is not only valid, but also licit when a reasonable cause is present (cf. Code of Canon Law, c. 882).
349 Sess. 14, c. 7, On Penance (Denz., n. 903).
350 Code of Canon Law, cc. 882 and 2252. Once recovery has been attained, recourse seems to have to be made within a month, since it is prescribed that it be made according to the norm for recourse in more urgent cases.
425. 1. Absolution of papal cases.
a) Cardinals, by a privilege granted and attached to the cardinalitial dignity itself after the manner of a prerogative, can everywhere in the world absolve any penitents whatsoever from any sins and censures whatsoever, except only alpha) censures reserved in the most special manner to the Apostolic See, and beta) those which are attached to the revelation of the secret of the Holy Office.351
b) Bishops or Ordinaries (for example, Provincials in exempt clerical religious institutes) can, in occult cases, personally or through another delegated by them remit all penalties and censures latae sententiae established by common law, except censures reserved in the most special or special manner to the Apostolic See.352 Recourse afterward to the Holy See is not necessary, as is evident.
How a bishop can absolve from heresy, and so forth, in the external forum will be stated below at n. 507.
c) Any confessor whatsoever, in more urgent cases in which absolution cannot be deferred without grave inconvenience to the penitent, can directly absolve from all cases reserved by law (and not by a man), but under this law: that the person absolved is bound, under pain of falling again, either personally or through the confessor to have recourse within a month (c. 34, § 3) to the Sacred Penitentiary or to a bishop having special faculties, or to seek a new absolution from a confessor having the power of absolving from these cases. If, however, this recourse is morally impossible, the censure is then simply removed without any other obligation of recourse;353 see, however, below under e).
More urgent cases of this kind exist, for example, when everything has been prepared for a wedding which consequently cannot be deferred, and either one of the betrothed confesses a reserved sin; or if a priest absolved his accomplice and cannot abstain from saying Mass without scandal or defamation. It is also judged a sufficient reason and a more urgent case if it is hard for the penitent to remain in the state of mortal sin during the time necessary for the petition and grant of the faculty of absolving from reserved cases,354 for example, for two days or even one day.
For the absolution of the crime committed through the calumnious denunciation of a confessor, special conditions have been attached, as will be stated below at n. 468.
Local superiors and religious confessors by common law now have no special faculty in the absolution of cases reserved to the Supreme Pontiff with respect to penitents, even those belonging to their own order.355 What their power may be by particular law or by special indult depends upon the privilege obtained. Major superiors, however, for example Provincials, in exempt clerical religious institutes, inasmuch as they are true Ordinaries, can in occult cases absolve their subjects from censures reserved simply to the Holy See.
351 Cf. below, n. 494.
352 Code of Canon Law, c. 2237, § 2.
353 Thus the Holy Office, June 23, 1886; August 19, 1891; November 9, 1898; September 5, 1900; September 6, 1909; Code of Canon Law, c. 2254. Here papal cases are understood to mean: all sins and censures reserved to the Supreme Pontiff, and those irregularities which follow upon the violation of these censures.
354 Holy Office, June 16, 1897.
355 Sacred Penitentiary, December 5, 1873.
426. Things to be noted concerning recourse. a) Recourse to the Sacred Penitentiary or to a bishop having special faculties can be made either by the penitent himself or by some confessor whom the penitent has chosen.
b) If recourse is made to the bishop or his vicar general, care must be taken above all that the sacramental seal not be violated.
c) Recourse to a privileged confessor who has the faculty of absolving from papal cases does not suffice.356 Nevertheless, nothing prevents the penitent from approaching such a confessor, confessing the reserved sin, and receiving absolution from him. Once this has been obtained, the penitent is no longer bound afterward to comply with other mandates subsequently coming from the superior to whom recourse had perhaps already been made.357
d) Recourse essentially comprises two things, namely: submitting the case to the competent superior and complying with his mandates. If the penitent through grave negligence omitted either one, he falls again into the same censure. Hence, for example, if through grave negligence the penitent does not return to the confessor who wrote to the Sacred Penitentiary in his name, he seems to incur the same censure again; cf. below, n. 430.
e) If recourse is morally impossible, which is accustomed to occur in Missions, Retreats, and other cases when a lay penitent cannot return to the same confessor without grave inconvenience, absolution can be given without the obligation of recourse. The confessor, however, must then observe two things: 1. he must enjoin those things which are to be enjoined by law, for example, the reparation of damage or scandal which may have arisen, the avoidance of the proximate occasion of sinning, and so forth; 2. for the censure incurred he must impose a special penance and satisfaction, to be performed within a fitting time determined by the confessor under pain of falling again into the censure.358 Nevertheless, if the penitent without grave fault does not perform this satisfaction and penance within the determined time, for example because of illness, he does not seem to fall again into the censure, since it is not inflicted except on account of grave fault. But a penitent who is a priest and who absolved his accomplice in a shameful sin is not excused from recourse, at least if he can write to Rome and seek a response under a fictitious name without truly grave inconvenience.359
f) Although it is not altogether necessary, it is nevertheless much better to write letters to the Sacred Penitentiary in the Latin language, of this or a similar tenor:
Most Eminent Prince,
Titius incurred a censure reserved in the most special manner to the Apostolic See on account of the attempted absolution of an accomplice, which he did three times. He likewise incurred an irregularity, because he violated the censure by exercising sacred orders. But he has now been absolved from this offense and the attached censure for the first (or now the third) time. For, since absolution could not be deferred because infamy was to be avoided, and Titius was otherwise rightly disposed, he received absolution. Now, however, he presents himself to obey the mandates of the Church. May Your Eminence be pleased to send the rescript to the confessor written below.
Fribourg (Switzerland) N. N., pastor Rue de Romont 10 March 1, 1928.
The outer inscription of the letter: "To the Most Eminent Cardinal Major Penitentiary. Palace of the Holy Office. Rome." It is better, although it is not necessary, to enclose in the letter the postal expenses which are necessary for the dispatch of the rescript. The rescript itself, however, is always granted gratis by the Sacred Penitentiary, which sometimes sends it to the confessor indeed named below, but with a double envelope. The inner envelope, secured with a seal, is inscribed: "To the discreet man, a confessor from among those approved by the Ordinary of the place." Then the confessor cannot himself open this inner envelope without the explicit or implicit permission of the penitent, to whom he must deliver it and whose part it will be to choose for its execution whichever confessor he prefers from among those approved. In practice, however, the penitent is accustomed to choose the first confessor for this execution.
356 Holy Office, December 19, 1900.
357 Code of Canon Law, c. 2254, § 2.
358 Code of Canon Law, l.c.
359 Holy Office, June 3, 1899; Code of Canon Law, c. 2254, § 3; cf. Cappello, De censuris3, n. 131.
427. 2. Absolution of episcopal cases.
First of all, the cases which are reserved to bishops by law (namely, the nine set forth below at n. 522) must be distinguished from cases which a bishop reserves to himself by his own authority. Among these latter, cases which are reserved with a censure must again be distinguished from those which are reserved as sins.
a) Cases which by law are reserved to a bishop with a censure can be absolved in the same manner as papal cases. This opinion, according to the prescription of the Code of Canon Law, is today certain and safe in practice.
Therefore, in danger of death they can be absolved without any further obligation; but in more urgent cases, under pain of falling again, unless recourse is made to the bishop within a month. The reason for this solution is the response of the Holy Office of June 23, 1886, which entirely changed the old practice concerning the absolution of reserved cases, and which was confirmed in the Code of Canon Law, c. 2254. For there all censures without distinction are indicated as to be absolved.
The more probable opinion, and one safe in practice, teaches that mendicant religious confessors and all those who participate in the privileges of mendicants can absolve from cases reserved to a bishop by law;360 but religious cannot, without a special faculty having been obtained, absolve from cases which the bishop has reserved to himself by his own authority.361
b) Cases which the bishop by his proper law reserves to himself by reason of sin,362 can be directly absolved:
by a simple confessor: alpha) whenever the faculty cannot be sought from the legitimate superior without grave inconvenience to the penitent or without danger of violation of the sacramental seal; beta) when such cases are accused by the sick who are unable to leave the house; or gamma) by betrothed persons confessing for the sake of contracting marriage; delta) when the legitimate superior has denied the faculty of absolving requested for some determined case; epsilon) outside the territory of the one reserving, even if the penitent departed from it merely to obtain absolution;363
by Missionaries during the time when sacred Missions happen to be held among some people. The same seems to hold for the time of spiritual retreats, which are equated with Missions;
by the pastor and others who in law are reckoned as pastors, during the entire time useful for fulfilling the Easter precept;
by the canon penitentiary and vicars forane (commonly rural deans). For the faculty of absolving belongs to the canon penitentiary himself by law; but it must be committed to the vicars forane by the bishop, who should also grant them permission to subdelegate this faculty within their own district for a particular case.364
360 Cf. our Man. iur. can.6, q. 245 (c); Noldin, De poenis eccl.12, n. 95.
361 Constitution of Clement X Superna, June 21, 1670.
362 They are sometimes called cases "reserved by Us."
363 Code of Canon Law, c. 900.
364 Thus the Instruction of the Holy Office cited above, July 13, 1916, n. 7, and Code of Canon Law, c. 899, § 2.
428. Note. 1. If a confessor (even with crass ignorance), ignorant of or not adverting to the reservation, absolves a penitent from the censure and the sin, the absolution from the censure is valid, provided that it is not a censure imposed by a man or a censure reserved in the most special manner to the Holy See.365 Indeed, even the absolution from the sin is valid; for if someone has been absolved from the censure, the reservation of the sin entirely ceases.366 The same is believed (although some contradict it) if an ignorant confessor absolves from a reserved sin without a censure.366a
2. A penitent who through inculpable forgetfulness omitted a reserved sin in a confession made to a privileged confessor is validly absolved. Nevertheless, he is afterward bound to manifest in confession the omitted sin, which, however, is no longer reserved. The reason is that the privileged confessor is judged to absolve a penitent rightly disposed. But a penitent inculpably forgetting a reserved sin was rightly disposed. Therefore he has been absolved from every sin, even the reserved one. The same seems to have to be said if a confession was made in this manner to a simple confessor, unless, however, there is question of a censure reserved in the most special manner to the Holy See.367 The matter stands otherwise if the penitent confessed sacrilegiously. For if he sacrilegiously concealed the reserved sin, it has not been remitted;368 but if he candidly manifested the reserved sin and committed the sacrilege for another cause, the reservation itself seems to have been removed, since one having the faculty of absolving judged concerning it properly and imposed a fitting satisfaction. Therefore, in the following confession the penitent must repeat the entire accusation and confess the sacrilege committed, but he can now be absolved by a simple confessor. On this matter St. Alphonsus says most excellently:369 "The end of confession is one thing, the end of reservation another. The end of confession is that the sin be remitted; but the principal and direct end of reservation is that those committing reserved sins of this kind be subjected to the judgment of the superior. Therefore, when a subject reports his sin to the superior and accepts the penance imposed by him, even if he confesses sacrilegiously, the end of reservation is already obtained, although the sin is not remitted. But that the sinner derives an advantage from such wickedness occurs accidentally. For although the superior according to his interpretative will would not wish to remove the reservation if he knew the sacrilege, nevertheless according to his actual will he then already wishes to remove it." An exception is made if someone in the time of a jubilee sacrilegiously confessed a reserved sin to a simple confessor; for in the time of a jubilee only those penitents enjoy the privilege of receiving absolution from any confessor whatsoever who wish to fulfill all the things which are prescribed for gaining the jubilee. But, first of all, a good confession is prescribed. Therefore, on account of the sacrilegious confession, the penitent loses all the graces and all the privileges of the jubilee.
3. A confessor who knowingly or with affected ignorance, without necessity, absolves from reserved cases from which he does not have the faculty of absolving sins gravely, both because he violates a grave law of the Church and because he exposes the sacrament of penance to nullity; moreover, he is ipso facto suspended from hearing confessions.370 Indeed, if he should presume unlawfully to absolve from cases reserved in the most special or special manner to the Supreme Pontiff, he would incur an excommunication reserved simply to the Pope, as will be stated below at n. 520 in the tract on censures.
365 Code of Canon Law, c. 2247, § 3.
366 Ibid., c. 2246, § 3.
366a Cf. Cappello, l.c., n. 593.
367 Code of Canon Law, c. 2249, § 2.
368 Ibid.
369 Theol. mor. l. 6, n. 598.
370 Code of Canon Law, c. 2366.
429. There was a special difficulty concerning the absolution of travelers from reserved cases. Today, however, this alone is the true general rule: Travelers are absolved in altogether the same manner as natives.
Thus especially the Vindiciae Alphonsianae, p. 552, rightly taught against the Ballerinian attacks. If there is question of papal cases, all theologians admit this rule, since then the jurisdiction is delegated by the Supreme Pontiff himself, who is equally the superior of natives and travelers. But if there is question of episcopal cases, there was formerly great disagreement among authors. The more common and true opinion, however, which is also observed in practice, teaches that the jurisdiction is then delegated by law and limited according to the faculties granted by the bishop of the place where the confession is made. Accordingly, confessors are no longer accustomed to ask penitents whether they are natives or travelers, but treat each one as a native. Hence, for example, Peter, a traveler from diocese A, where the sin of sodomy is reserved, confessing this sin in diocese B, where this sin is not reserved, is always validly and licitly absolved by a simple confessor.371 On the contrary, if the same sin is not reserved in diocese A but is reserved in diocese B, Peter confessing in this diocese B cannot be absolved by a simple confessor, since his jurisdiction has been limited by the diocesan bishop with regard to the sin of sodomy. The reason is that the penitent is regarded as an accused person. But an accused person appearing in a tribunal is judged not according to the laws of his homeland, but according to the laws of the tribunal where he appears. Therefore, a traveler is bound by the reservations of the place where he confesses,372 unless, however, he confesses to his own pastor or Ordinary traveling in the same place.
371 This doctrine has today been defined by the Holy Office, which establishes: "They can be absolved from sins reserved in some diocese in another diocese where they are not reserved, by any confessor, whether secular or regular, even if they went there precisely to obtain absolution." Instruction of July 13, 1916, cited above. Therefore penitents can validly and licitly be absolved from reserved sins, even though, in fraud of the law, they migrated to another diocese for the sake of confessing (Code of Canon Law, c. 900, n. 3).
372 Pontifical Commission, November 24, 1920 (Acta Ap. Sed. XII, 575).
430. Things to be noted in practice. 1. A confessor hearing a case reserved by law to the Holy See or to the Ordinary should first investigate whether all the conditions required for reservation are present, namely: knowledge of the censure, and that the sin is grave, external, consummated, and certain. But if some founded doubt remains, the case is not reserved. If, however, all the required conditions are present, it must then be investigated whether or not it is a more urgent case. If it is not a more urgent case, the penitent cannot be absolved, but must either be sent to another privileged confessor or the faculty of absolving must first be sought. But if it is a more urgent case, the penitent must then be admonished concerning the reservation and the obligation of having recourse within a month to the Sacred Penitentiary or to the bishop. If he promises that he will render obedience, he can be absolved; otherwise not. The penitent can, however, also present himself to another confessor having special faculties and seek absolution. When the penitent does not fulfill those things which were enjoined by the Sacred Penitentiary, he indeed sins, but he does not incur the censure again unless a) there was grave negligence, or b) the Sacred Penitentiary gave its mandates under pain of falling again into the censure. But what is to be said if the penitent, notwithstanding his firm promise, does not return to hear the mandates of the Sacred Penitentiary or of the bishop? If he does this through culpable negligence, he seems to incur the censure again, because he makes little of the gravely prescribed recourse, which is not completed until the penitent has accepted the mandates.373 If, however, he could not return to the confessor without great inconvenience, the recourse seems to have become morally impossible and consequently no longer to bind, and the censure to have been absolutely removed.
2. A confessor hearing some sin which a bishop has reserved to himself by his proper law can almost always grant absolution to a penitent rightly disposed, since grave inconvenience almost always arises for him from the delay of absolution. Moreover, often there are other causes related above on account of which the episcopal reservation ceases.
373 Cf. De Smet, De casibus reserv., n. 56, and Holy Office, March 30, 1892, ad 3.