Doesn't matter, just curious -- about validity of general absolution

[BartholomewB]

The Church has spoken on what this means. I don’t have the time at the moment to quote the clarification, but the gist of the clarification is “you can’t say “I’m only here for an hour, so ya’ll get general absolution” …”

Maybe the priest has done something he ought not to have done. But what about the people in the pews? Now that the priest has (rightly or wrongly) given them absolution, I think they are allowed to receive the Body and Blood, provided only that they comply with the requirement that they “have the intention of individually confessing their sins in the time required” (CCC #1483).
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P4H.HTM

 

[Gorgias]

Maybe the priest has done something he ought not to have done. But what about the people in the pews? Now that the priest has (rightly or wrongly) given them absolution, I think they are allowed to receive the Body and Blood

Now, there’s a good question for a canonist! Namely, is a general absolution, improperly given, invalid or merely illicit?

(And… that was the OP’s original question, wasn’t it?)

 

[BartholomewB]

Now, there’s a good question for a canonist! Namely, is a general absolution, improperly given, invalid or merely illicit?

How are the people to know whether the absolution was improperly given or not? If the bishop should later rule that it was, they will then know that it was improperly given at the time and that they ought not to have received the Body and Blood. But how are they to know in real time? How are they to decide whether to join the Communion line or to remain seated in their pews?

 

[Gorgias]

How are the people to know whether the absolution was improperly given or not?

Canon 960 gives the answer.

If the bishop should later rule that it was, they will then know that it was improperly given

Actually, in canon 961 §2, we see that the bishop gets to decide. However, to your point, it seems unlikely that this is a subsequent decision. It would make more sense that a bishop should decide, in advance, whether general absolution should be permitted, and make that decision known.

So, unless there’s the “danger of death”, or alternately, a grave necessity that the bishop has acknowledged… it seems that a simple situation of a large number of penitents doesn’t become an instance that should confuse the faithful. They should, quite reasonably, recognize the need for individual confession.