Part III THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT
Richard F. (Richard Frederick) Clarke translation
In the preceding chapters which dealt with the actus pœnitentis, we have already had occasion to consider the office of the minister of the Sacrament. The functions of the confessor consist mainly in absolving according to the intention of Christ. In treating of this important and difficult subject, we shall follow the most approved theologians, distinguished alike for learning and sanctity, so as to avoid on the one hand an extensive mildness and on the other a severity fatal to the salvation of souls.
Section I THE POWERS OF THE CONFESSOR
36. Orders, Jurisdiction, Approbation.
1. The proper minister of the Sacrament of Penance is the priest. Penance being a Sacrament, it is self-evident on Catholic principles that its minister must have the sacerdotal character, the power of Orders (potestas ordinis). This power springs from the priestly character and consists in the capacity of valide performing the sacred rites instituted by Christ, so that they are an efficacious means of grace.[431]
The Sacrament of Penance is, moreover, in its dispensation essentially judicial. The minister of the Sacrament is judge over the soul; hence he must have in addition to Holy Orders the power of spiritual jurisdiction (potestas jurisdictionis).
Thus for a valid absolution there are required both potestas ordinis and potestas jurisdictionis.
Jurisdiction in general is public authority in its completest sense, and thus includes the power of directing subjects. In its more restricted sense it is the power of judging right and wrong and of pronouncing sentence. It answers perfectly to the power exercised in the Sacrament of Penance (in foro interno). Hence jurisdiction in foro sacramentali is the power by which a priest can pronounce sentence on those subject to him by remitting or retaining sins.
What, then, is the relation existing between the potestas ordinis and the potestas jurisdictionis? The priestly character conveys no jurisdiction with it; it may exist without any jurisdiction.[432]
2. It is a peculiarity of this potestas ordinis that the exercise of it without the Church’s commission is not illicit only, but invalid. Hence, while in the other Sacraments jurisdiction is extrinsic to the exercise of power and only regulates it, in the Sacrament of Penance the jurisdiction is an intrinsic condition, because the exercise of the power of this Sacrament is essentially a judicial act and involving jurisdiction.
3. Jurisdiction, though not conveyed by Orders, is derived from God, but through the hands of the Church, i.e. by delegation from those who are invested with that jurisdiction. Hence all priests besides the Pope, who receives it immediately from God, owe their jurisdiction to the Church; thus priests receive their jurisdiction from the bishops, the bishops from the Pope.
4. We may, therefore, say that the potestas ordinis renders its subject capable of jurisdiction in foro interno, and of conferring the Sacrament after jurisdiction has been given, so that the potestas ordinis is the disposition for administering the Sacrament of Penance.[433] Thus it is not so much that the power of remitting sins judicially is given to the priest in his ordination as rather this, that the ordained person, when he is appointed judge by proper authority to take cognizance of sins, is enabled to remit these sins sacramentally; in other words, he receives power to remit sins by a special grace.
From the preceding it follows: (1) that the doctrine which teaches that jurisdiction is conveyed by ordination merely is false; (2) that it is also false to teach that ordination confers ipso facto jurisdiction, but that the Church can restrain its exercise and that in granting jurisdiction she does no more than remove her own prohibition; (3) that it is the same thing to say: the Church confers jurisdiction to a priest, as to say, the Church assigns in foro interno certain subjects to the priest; (4) that one may say, the potestas ordinis which is acquired by the character of the priesthood is the potestas inchoata to absolve, while it is incorrect to say that the potestas ordinis is the potestas jurisdictionis inchoata or habitualis; (5) that jurisdiction differs from the powers of Orders both in its essence and in the mode by which it is acquired; in its essence, since jurisdiction is the power of judging and binding subjects, while ordination only confers the power ex jure divino of acquiring jurisdiction and is the necessary condition that the absolution be sacramental; in its mode, since jurisdiction is imparted by the concession of the Church, while the power of Orders comes from the consecration to the priesthood.[434]
Jurisdiction is either ordinary or delegated (ordinaria vel delegata). Christ appointed judges to preside over visible tribunals in His place and in His name, with authority, vicarious, it is true, but ordinary (auctoritate quidem vicaria at ordinaria), that is, an authority emanating from the office to which they were appointed by Christ. These judges are the Apostles and their successors, the Pope, therefore, and the bishops, and these can appoint others to help them.
Thus whoever in virtue of a public, ecclesiastical office existing of divine right has subjects over whom he rules and is judge, exercises jurisdiction in the Sacrament of Penance potestate ordinaria; others exercise this function potestate delegata vel a proprie dictis Superioribus communicata; hence the latter are dependent on their Superiors in the exercise of their powers quoad liceitatem et quoad valorem.
Although any one with potestas ordinaria can impart it to another, the Supreme Authority of the Church on which depends all valid exercise of jurisdiction has so ordered it that no one may exercise delegated jurisdiction in the tribunal of penance—at least with regard to lay people—without having previously received episcopal approbation; hence the delegation by those who are subject to the bishop and have powers of delegation is as a rule quite useless. Indeed, it is now the custom generally to give approbation and jurisdiction at the same time; nevertheless, cases might occur in which the distinction must be observed.
Approbation in se is nothing more than a formal declaration that a priest is a suitable person (aptus) to exercise sacramental jurisdiction; his fitness or capacity for the work is judged by his science and morals. Approbation cannot be given licitly unless the fitness of the subject is ascertained or reasonably presumed, though its validity is not affected by the want of this fitness; but the Superior ought to withdraw his approbation when the subject is unfit. The Council of Trent interprets the phrase Public Approbation not only as a testimonium auctoritativum that the priest is a fit subject to exercise jurisdiction, but also as the facultas audiendi confessiones which the bishop grants to a priest who is considered fit for the office;[435] for the Council declares that he only can hear confessions who has been given charge of a parish or who has received approbation. Beyond that nothing else is demanded for the exercise of jurisdiction, hence approbation or the appointment to a parish is the only condition required for hearing confessions. Moreover, in papal constitutions the approbation is called licentia or facultas audiendi confessiones, and in common speech an approved priest is one who has jurisdiction.[436] All this is in perfect agreement with the practice of bishops, who usually grant jurisdiction along with approbation.[437]