On Papal Authority

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='JeffCR07' date='Jul 5 2004, 03:51 AM'] I believe the answer is no, though I have no documentation to back it up. The only case of general absolution I have heard is in the case of war, and it is done by a priest who is acting as a chaplain and cannot hear the vast number of confessions that need to be heard. However, even in these extreme cases, the priest is physically present. I do not believe it is possible to give even a general absolution without physical proximity.

- Your Brother in Christ, Jeff [/quote]
During 3 Mile Island, all Catholics in our part of Pennsylvania were given General Absolution. The news reports didn't scare us up to that point, but the GA scared the hell out of everyone. THAT we took seriously.

[Guest JeffCR07]

who issued the general absolution? It may be possible that the Holy See or a local Bishop ordered it, and that it was then preformed by a local priest, which would validate Apotheoun's proximity argument.

[cmotherofpirl]

The bishops of PA and it was announced on the TV stations.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jul 5 2004, 12:56 PM'] The bishops of PA and it was announced on the TV stations. [/quote]
Only the local Ordinary or the Apostolic See can issue a general absolution. In other words, my bishop here in California could not issue a general absolution for the Catholic faithful in Pennsylvania, because he is not their local Ordinary, and is not in any way in proximity to the faithful there, either by physical proximity or by canonical jurisdiction. Therefore, physical proximity and proper jurisdiction are both required for the performance of such an action. Only the Roman Pontiff whose authority over the Catholic Church is both universal and particular, can issue a general absolution without some form of physical proximity.

[IcePrincessKRS]

So a priest can't grant General Absolution, only Bishops or the Pope?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='Jul 5 2004, 01:07 PM'] So a priest can't grant General Absolution, only Bishops or the Pope? [/quote]
Priests do not have the authority to issue a general absolution without the prior approval of their bishop. If a priest does give general absolution without proper approval, it is a grave abuse.

[IcePrincessKRS]

Thanks. I never really understood what exactly is involved in granting general absolution, this helps alot. Though its not quite the original topic I am glad this was brought up, it cleared up any confusion I had.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 5 2004, 12:15 PM'] It does no harm to talk to a priest on the phone in that situation, but he can't give you absolution, so be sure to make a perfect act of contrition.

God bless,
Todd [/quote]
I always wondered what your name was.

[Pope Saint Pius V]

Thanks for the clarification on the confession issue Apotheuon.

Edited July 6, 2004 by Pope Saint Pius V

[Guest JeffCR07]

Yea, I especially appreciate the clarity with regards to the proximate and formal matter.

- Your Brother in Christ, Jeff

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 5 2004, 03:10 PM'] Priests do not have the authority to issue a general absolution without the prior approval of their bishop. If a priest does give general absolution without proper approval, it is a grave abuse. [/quote]
We just had a priest forcibly retired for doing this.

[p0lar_bear]

Priests are allowed to give general absolution in cases of emergency...i.e. you are on a plane that is going down, on the Titanic, etc. Bishops do determine what is a "case of grave necessity," but I think pretty much any bishop would say that situation applies.

[Pope Saint Pius V]

Apotheoun,

Enough of this side track, lets get back to our originial discussion. First, you owe me an explanation of how the quote by Melchior Cano contradicts anything taught in the infallible documents of the First Vatican Council. The Council (Vatican I) never taught that the Holy Father was protected in each and every governing decision. You have offered me a quote from a theologian and yet only a minute ago you were chastising me since I did the same. Vatican I did not enunciate the same teaching at least as explicitly as the quote from Cardinal Newman did. Second, you need to offer justification for your claim that Assisi, etc. were formal acts. After I hear your justification I will respond, but we are going to hack this argument bit by bit, no large or grandiose claims. Please answer those two questions and then I will respond.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Pope Saint Pius V' date='Jul 6 2004, 02:53 PM'] Apotheoun,

Enough of this side track, lets get back to our originial discussion.  First, you owe me an explanation of how the quote by Melchior Cano contradicts anything taught in the infallible documents of the First Vatican Council.  The Council (Vatican I) never taught that the Holy Father was protected in each and every governing decision.  You have offered me a quote from a theologian and yet only a minute ago you were chastising me since I did the same.  Vatican I did not enunciate the same teaching at least as explicitly as the quote from Cardinal Newman did.  Second, you need to offer justification for your claim that Assisi, etc. were formal acts.  After I hear your justification I will respond, but we are going to hack this argument bit by bit, no large or grandiose claims.  Please answer those two questions and then I will respond. [/quote]
My point is simply that both you and I as Catholics [i]must[/i], as a matter of divine and catholic faith, subscribe to the decrees of the First Vatican Council, but neither of us is required to subscribe to Melchior Cano's theological opinions.

Besides, as jmjtina pointed out, the context in which Melchior Cano spoke those words is quite specific. Here is a link to jmjtina's post:

[url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=14956&view=findpost&p=248071"]Historical Context[/url]

But as the Fathers of the First Vatican Council infallibly defined, ". . . by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate. [i]Both clergy and faithful[/i], of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, [i]are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, [b]and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals[/b], but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world[/i]. In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith , the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one supreme shepherd. This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation." [Vatican 1, Session 4, Dogmatic Constitution [u]Pastor Aeternus[/u], chap. 3, nos. 2-4] Thus, you must accept the governing acts of the Pope, whether you like those acts or not. There is no right to dissent from matters of ecclesiastical governance.

By the way, I've been waiting for you to respond to my July 3rd post for several days now. To see that post click the link below:

[url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=14956&view=findpost&p=247725"]Formal Deeds of the Pope[/url]

Without knowing what deeds you disagree with, how can I or anyone else determine if you are giving hierarchical obedience or not.

The only reason I quoted Cardinal Newman, other than the fact that I like the man's writings, is because his quote coordinates perfectly with the Dogmatic Constitution [u]Pastor Aeternus[/u], in which the Fathers of Vatican 1 defined the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff. There is no appeal from the decisions of the Roman Pontiff, whether those decisions concern matters of faith and morals, or simply the government of the Church throughout the world.

Rather than debate the opinions of theologians, opnions that one is free to either accept or reject, why don't you supply me with a dogmatic text from the Magisterium itself, in which you are given the right to dissent from the decisions and norms issued by the Pope.

Most governing acts of the Sovereign Pontiff would be covered under the [i]third concluding proposition[/i] of the [u]Professio Fidei[/u], and are thus acts of the Authentic Magisterium, to which one must give a religious submission of intellect and will. Although, it is important to note that some acts of governance by the Pope and the College of Bishops are acts of the infallible Ordinary or Extraordinary Magisterium. Regardless of the level of authority engaged, one has a duty to give true obedience and hierarchical subordination. For more information on the degrees of Magisterial authority, you can click the link below:

[url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=14974&view=findpost&p=247152"]The Profession of Faith[/url]

Finally, are you really arguing that the Assisi Events are not official acts of the Pope. The Holy See organized these events, and the Pope sponsored the events as head of the Catholic Church. To doubt that the Assisi Events are official acts of the Pope would be the same as saying that the Pope went to World Youth Day as a private person, and not as the Supreme Pontiff. This kind of reasoning defies logic.

Edited July 6, 2004 by Apotheoun

[jmjtina]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 6 2004, 04:04 PM'] By the way, I've been waiting for you to respond to my July 3rd post for several days now.  To see that post click the link below:

[url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=14956&view=findpost&p=247725"]Formal Deeds of the Pope[/url]

[/quote]
I too am waiting to see that response please, it'll help us clear some things up. As you stated before, we who love Pope John Paul II are "blind and indiscrimate." Did I misinterpret you?

[quote]Enough of this side track, lets get back to our originial discussion. First, you owe me an explanation of how the quote by Melchior Cano contradicts anything taught in the infallible documents of the First Vatican Council. [/quote]

No one "owes" anyone an explaination. The burden of proof is on you. Makes me wonder of the intent of "you owe me".

Again, what context was the quote taken? Can you post where it's from and to who the audience was? Apotheoun said something very important:

[quote]My point is simply that both you and I as Catholics must, as a matter of divine and catholic faith, subscribe to the decrees of the First Vatican Council, but neither of us is required to subscribe to Melchior Cano's theological opinions. [/quote]

Peace and God Bless.

Edited July 6, 2004 by jmjtina