Is general absolution allowed?

[Glo342]

On a recent visit to San Diego over Easter, the priest saying Mass said that he knew people were busy and probably couldn’t all get to confession… so he had “permission” to give everyone general absolution. My pastor says this is not permitted unless under dire circumstances which this was not. Who is correct?

 

[Phemie]

On a recent visit to San Diego over Easter, the priest saying Mass said that he knew people were busy and probably couldn’t all get to confession… so he had “permission” to give everyone general absolution. My pastor says this is not permitted unless under dire circumstances which this was not. Who is correct?

Your pastor is correct. General Absolution may be justified in times of war and natural disaster (the plane is crashing) but “people are busy and won’t get to confession” doesn’t qualify.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

On a recent visit to San Diego over Easter, the priest saying Mass said that he knew people were busy and probably couldn’t all get to confession… so he had “permission” to give everyone general absolution. My pastor says this is not permitted unless under dire circumstances which this was not. Who is correct?

It is permitted only under certain specific and narrow circumstances, Extreme and emergency are useful words. If those people will have the opportunity to go to Confession and receive Holy Communion sometime in the next few weeks, the conditions are most likely not there.

 

[CreatioNova]

So does that mean the absolution given to the congregation by that priest on that occasion is not vaild??

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

So does that mean the absolution given to the congregation by that priest on that occasion is not vaild??

No, it would have been illicit, but not necessarly invalid and he should have made sure that everyone knew that Sacramental Confession at their earilest possible opportunity was still required.

He takes the blame since most of the people didn’t know any better.

 

[benedictgal]

Why some priests have not taken the time to read the 2000 Circular Letter Concerning the Intergrity of the Sacrament of Confession is beyond me.

This is what the document says regarding the matter of General Absolution:

8 In accord with the law and practice of the Church, the faithful must orally confess their sins (auricular confession)9, except in cases of true physical or moral impossibility (e.g., extreme illness or physical condition inhibiting speech, speech impediment, etc.) This disposition would exclude communal celebrations of the sacrament in which penitents are invited to present a written list of sins to the priest confessor. It should be noted that such innovations also risk compromising the inviolable seal of sacramental confession.

1. In giving consideration to the authenitic discipline of the Church concerning “general absolution”, the recent interdicasterial meeting of the Roman Curia with a representation of Bishops of the Episcopal Conference of Australia noted that:

. . . communal celebrations have not infrequently occasioned an illegitimate use of general absolution. This illegitimate use, like other abuses in the administration of the Sacrament of Penance, is to be eliminated.

The teaching of the Church is reflected in precise terms in the requirements of the Code of Canon Law (cf. esp. canons 959-964). In particular it is clear that “A sufficient necessity is not … considered to exist when confessors cannot be available merely because of a great gathering of penitents, such as can occur on some major feastday or pilgrimage” (canon 961, § 1, 2°).

The bishops will exercise renewed vigilance on these matters for the future, aware that departures from the authentic tradition do great wrong to the Church and to individual Catholics.10

1. With respect to the administration of “general absolution”, the exclusive authority enjoyed by diocesan bishops to determine whether a grave necessity is truly present in a given case in their diocese 11 does not permit them "to change the required conditions, to substitute other conditions for those given, or to determine grave necessity according to their personal criteria however worthy."12 Indeed, the Diocesan Bishop makes "this judgment graviter onerata conscientia, and with full respect for the law and the practice of the Church."13

While the pastor is right in that only grave and dire needs (let’s say that it’s 2012 and the big asteroid is going to hit the Earth and we don’t have much longer to live, then, go for General Absolution–or, we are under threat of fatal persecution), what the OP described is not such an occasion.

Now, inasmuch as this letter addressed an abuse that the Austrialian Bishops Conference was allowing to slide (penance services with general absolution), it also covers what the OP described. The Aussies were effectively taken to the sacramental woodshed by Pope John Paul II for allowing this abuse to fester. Unfortunately, some people will never learn.

 

[John_Lilburne]

I suggest reading the 2002 Motu Proprio MISERICORDIA DEI at vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_20020502_misericordia-dei_en.html particularly n. 4.

 

[feargalmac]

Twice a year is all the opportunity we get hear for confession, and even then it’s general absolution.

Our priest told us at Easter that when we went to him we were just to say sorry, he said “I’m not interested in your sins”

I pray he changes.

 

[THurifer2]

Twice a year is all the opportunity we get hear for confession, and even then it’s general absolution.

Our priest told us at Easter that when we went to him we were just to say sorry, he said “I’m not interested in your sins”

I pray he changes.

Is there only one priest in Ireland?. If not then I suggest you find another priest for confession.

 

[feargalmac]

Is there only one priest in Ireland?. If not then I suggest you find another priest for confession.

I do go elsewhere. Just wanted the OP to know it happens in other places too.

 

[puzzleannie]

On a recent visit to San Diego over Easter, the priest saying Mass said that he knew people were busy and probably couldn’t all get to confession… so he had “permission” to give everyone general absolution. My pastor says this is not permitted unless under dire circumstances which this was not. Who is correct?

since we are not in any position to know what he meant by “permission” we are obligated to assume he applied to the local ordinary (bishop) and was in fact given such permission, until definitely proven otherwise. the norm is that general absolution is reserved only for true emergencies, war time, natural disasters etc. and in fact the rule specifically states large number of penitents is not a good reason. It doesn’t say so explicitly, but “did not have time out of their busy schedule to go to confession to save their immortal soul” is also not a good reason.

 

[John_Lilburne]

… the norm is that general absolution is reserved only for true emergencies, war time, natural disasters etc. and in fact the rule specifically states large number of penitents is not a good reason. …

One reason is danger of death. The second is:
“a grave necessity exists, that is, when in light of the number of penitents a supply of confessors is not readily available to hear the confessions of individuals in an appropriate way within an appropriate time, so that the penitents would be deprived of sacramental grace or Holy Communion for a long time through no fault of their own;”
(From the 2002 Motu Proprio MISERICORDIA DEI n. 4 (2) at vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_20020502_misericordia-dei_en.html ).

 

[thistle]

I lived in Hong Kong during the SARS crisis. It was dangerous to congregate in crowds. SARS was passed from person to person and it had a high mortality rate. The Bishop of Hong Kong publicly announced to the faithful their Sunday obligation was dispensed with until the health crisis was over and a General Absolution was given. He made it clear though that as soon as the crisis was over people should get to Confession as soon as possible.

 

[benedictgal]

On a recent visit to San Diego over Easter, the priest saying Mass said that he knew people were busy and probably couldn’t all get to confession… so he had “permission” to give everyone general absolution. My pastor says this is not permitted unless under dire circumstances which this was not. Who is correct?

However, this line of reasoning goes against the Circular Letter I quoted in my first post on this thread, especially this section:

The teaching of the Church is reflected in precise terms in the requirements of the Code of Canon Law (cf. esp. canons 959-964). In particular it is clear that “A sufficient necessity is not … considered to exist when confessors cannot be available merely because of a great gathering of penitents, such as can occur on some major feastday or pilgrimage” (canon 961, § 1, 2°).

The bishops will exercise renewed vigilance on these matters for the future, aware that departures from the authentic tradition do great wrong to the Church and to individual Catholics.10

1. With respect to the administration of “general absolution”, the exclusive authority enjoyed by diocesan bishops to determine whether a grave necessity is truly present in a given case in their diocese 11 does not permit them "to change the required conditions, to substitute other conditions for those given, or to determine grave necessity according to their personal criteria however worthy."12 Indeed, the Diocesan Bishop makes "this judgment graviter onerata conscientia, and with full respect for the law and the practice of the Church."13

If the bishop, in this case, allegedly gave the priest permission to make this kind of judgment call, the fault also lies with the Ordinary. What the OP described is not a grave situation. That people are supposedly too busy to make time for the confessional is not just cause for having general absolution.