Władza rozgrzeszania

Abstract

The definition formulated by the Council of Trent, saying that for dispensing the sacrament of penance, busides the power of the holy orders, jurisdiction is necessary, caused lasting discussions of canonic lawyers over the nature of the power to absolve. In particular, the mutual relations between the power of the holy orders and jurisdiction became the object of research and controversies, as well as their role in dispensing the sacramental absolution and the nature of jurisdiction to hearing confessions. Despite numerous attempts these problems have not yet found a generally accepted explanation. The author of the present paper begins with presenting the history of the controversy by discussing the basic opinions and standpoints with respect to the above mentioned issues. However, the main task of the paper is to show the significance which „Ordo paenitentiae” and the outline (project) of the canonic law on sacraments have for explaining the problem of the power to absolve. This latter document, worked out by the Commission for Revision of the Code of Canonic Law, introduces a more precise definition of requirements for dispensing absolution, substituting the word „faculty” (facultas) for the controversial with respect to the sacrament of penance term „jurisdiction”, and makes a distinction between the power of the holy orders and the faculty to exercise it. The definitions proposed in the project practically put an end to the controversies about the nature of the power to absolve. The project of new regulations about the sacrament of penance not only contributes to the explanation of theoretical questions. The most important thing is that it removes the limitations of the priests’ power to a definite territory and at the same time it makes dispensing the sacrament of penance and receiving it easier.