I started a similar thread a while ago. No clear answer emerged from all the responses. This is a question that I consider to be very important. It has been on my mind a great deal. I wrote my bishop about it more than a month ago but have received no response.
This is what I have come up with in my own research:
It was the opinion of St. Thomas Aquinas that the form of the sacrament consisted in the words “I absolve thee” (or more precisely, since he wrote in Latin, either “Absolvo te” or “Ego te absolvo”, of which the approved English translation is “I absolve you”).
From the Summa Theologica, Third Part, Question 84, Article 3 :
Code:
Now since the sacraments of the New Law accomplish what they signify, as stated above (Question [62], Article [1], ad 1), it behooves the sacramental form to signify the sacramental effect in a manner that is in keeping with the matter. Hence the form of Baptism is: "I baptize thee," and the form of Confirmation is: "I sign thee with the sign of the cross, and I confirm thee with the chrism of salvation," because these sacraments are perfected in the use of their matter: while in the sacrament of the Eucharist, which consists in the very consecration of the matter, the reality of the consecration is expressed in the words: "This is My Body."
Now this sacrament, namely the sacrament of Penance, consists not in the consecration of a matter, nor in the use of a hallowed matter, but rather in the removal of a certain matter, viz. sin, in so far as sins are said to be the matter of Penance, as explained above (Article [2]). This removal is expressed by the priest saying: “I absolve thee”: because sins are fetters, according to Prov. 5:22. “His own iniquities catch the wicked, and he is fast bound with the ropes of his own sins.” Wherefore it is evident that this is the most fitting form of this sacrament: “I absolve thee.”
and from the same part of the Summa, Aquinas makes it clear that anything beyond “I absolve thee” is not essential:
Nevertheless, since the priest absolves ministerially, something is suitably added in reference to the supreme authority of God, by the priest saying: “I absolve thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,” or by the power of Christ’s Passion, or by the authority of God. However, as this is not defined by the words of Christ, as it is for Baptism, this addition is left to the discretion of the priest.
Now, at the Council of Trent, the Church infallibly adopted many of St. Thomas Aquinas’s articulations of Catholic dogmas/doctrines. This appears to have been the case in regard to St. Thomas Aquinas’s views on the formula for absolution.
From the Council of Trent, Session XIV, The Most Holy Sacraments of Penance and Extreme Unction, Chapter III :
The holy council teaches furthermore, that the form of the sacrament of penance, in which its efficacy chiefly consists, are those words of the minister: I absolve thee, etc., to which are indeed laudably added certain prayers according to the custom of holy Church, which, however, do not by any means belong to the essence of the form nor are they necessary for the administration of the sacrament.
I am not aware of any official examination of the form of absolution by the Church since the time of Trent. If it exists I would love to read it.
Assuming that Trent is all that we have, it would appear to back up what St. Thomas Aquinas said in his Summa…
…except for that darn “etc.” I have no idea what it means and it adds another level of uncertainty to the picture. I actually very recently posted a thread looking for help in finding the documents of Trent online in their original Latin. This was the reason I was looking for them. I want to know if the Latin says “et cetera” as well.
So that’s all I’ve got. I don’t know if anyone would find it helpful.
