Can you help me find


#1

Hi,

Is there a list of INDULTS granted from 1965 end of Vataican II to the present time?

God Bless,
Pat


#2

thanks for strating this I didn’t know there was such thing.
I don’t know if this could help you?
forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=373335

:slight_smile:


#3

No.

Anyway, indults for anything? When the Pope appoints a non-bishop Cardinal, for instance, that constitutes an indult.


#4

Actually, that’s no an indult. An indult is a dispensation from the norm. The Latin Church has a long tradition of cardinals who are not bishops. They have never been in the majority, but they have been part of the tradition. It was only in the code of 1983 that Pope Paul VI inserted that cardinals be selected from among the bishops and that they must have a doctorate degree or its equivalent. However, Pope Benedict does not follow this rule. He recently named two cardinals who are not bishops. No one is really sure by Bl. John Paul left it the new rule in the code, since he disregarded it on a number of occasions.

The answer to the original question is that there is no such book that has a comprehensive list of indults, because indults can be granted at any time and rescinded at any time. Any such book would be outdated within a year.

Take for example, the Jesuits, they have an indult for almost every canon that speaks about religious life, because the canons are newer than the Jesuit tradition and they were written to speak to religious congregations. The Jesuits are not a religious congregation. They are a religious order. Most of the canons don’t apply to the orders. The few canons that apply to religious orders, do not apply to the Jesuits. St. Ignatius set them up with all of the rights and privileges of religious orders, but very few of the obligations that are common to the religious orders. These were not considered indults in the 16the century, because there was no law that spoke to these things. If Ignatius were starting his order today, his statutes would require an indult.

After Vatican II, some Franciscans wanted to use Gregorian chant. But St. Francis banned it. They had to get permission from the Holy See. This may be considered an indult, but it has never been written up as such. There are just letters from the Holy See to the individual superiors who asked for permission. You would never find these in a book.

Canon law says that religious must wear a habit. However, the Holy See has approved the use of secular clothing by many religious congregations who have asked. The popes themselves have signed off on the permissions and on the constitutions that state that there is no mandatory dress code for congregation X. These could be considered indults, but they are not recorded in books. They are found in the constitutions of the respective religious institutes. Cardinal Ratzinger himself signed off on over 300 of these requests.

Like these there are many individual requests for special permissions. I can’t imagine anyone being able to keep up with all of them.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF :slight_smile:


#5

Um, right. That’s what makes it an indult. :confused: The law states that when people are made cardinal, “those who are not yet bishops must receive episcopal consecration,” but permission to deviate from that requirement is occasionally given.


#6

This is precisely why it’s not an indult. Because no permission is necessary since only the pope can name the cardinals and the pope cannot give himself permission nor does he need to ask for permission to ignore Canon Law. An indult would be if there was an actual permission. Indult comes from the word “indulgence”, which in Latin means, to indulge. Popes cannot indulge themselves, since they are above the law.

That’s why I gave the examples of religious communities, because those are actual indulgences granted by the Church. In the case of the creation of cardinals, the Church is doing the creating. She does not indulge herself.

It sounds bizarre, but that’s the way Canon Law works. Popes are above indults. They can act contrary to the law and it’s not contrary, nor is it an exception granted to the pope. Popes don’t need exceptions granted to them, because there is no law on earth that can bind a pope. They’re only bound by divine law and natural law.

I remember my Canon Law professor saying that no one really understands why this law was left in the books, because the only person who can create a cardinal is the pope and the pope is not regulated by human law.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF :slight_smile:


#7

Whether that is right depends, I suppose, on whether one views the situation from the point of view of the cardinal (who is dispensed from the obligation of being consecrated a bishop) or that of the Holy Father (who “dispenses himself” from the prohibition on appointing non-episcopal cardinals). I suspect that the parties involved view it in the first way (for it is the cardinal-designate who initiates a request for an exemption, which the pope could choose to deny), but perhaps you are right to think that the canonical reality is otherwise.


#8

The way that the law is written speaks about the requirement for the title of cardinal. It does not speak to the person receiving the office. Therefore, according to canonical tradition, the law can only be applied to the person who has the power to create cardinals. That would be the pope. The cardinal designate, need not request an exemption, because the pope knows that he’s not a bishop.

The pope cannot command anyone to accept ordination to any of the three orders. To be ordained a bishop, the individual must freely consent. The pope can certainly ask the cardinal elect to accept an episcopal ordination, but the cardinal elect can decline the ordination.

The pope can make the red hat contingent on the acceptance of the ordination, but those package deals are rarely offered. The last person whom we know was offered such a package was Fr. Avery Dulles, who declined the order of bishop. The pope went around it and gave him the red hat anyway. That’s how he became Cardinal Dulles.

Since then, Pope Benedict has elevated other priests to the office of cardinal, but we don’t know if they were asked to become bishops and declined. No one has said that this was the case. In the case of Cardinal Dulles the Jesuits made the information public, once it was lawful to do so.

The Holy Father cannot dispense himself. The person who is above the law cannot be dispensed from something that does not bind him. Dispensation always implies one party in authority and another who is subordinate. There is no human law that can bind a pope.

It’s a very strange law to say the least. Any law the involves the pope is always going to be contingent on his willingness to follow it.

Popes Gregory IX and John Paul II hold the record for bypassing Church law. Someday, when I have time, I’ll have to take a count who did more bypassing. :smiley:

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF :slight_smile:


#9

The way that the law is written speaks about the requirement for the title of cardinal. It does not speak to the person receiving the office. Therefore, according to canonical tradition, the law can only be applied to the person who has the power to create cardinals. That would be the pope. The cardinal designate, need not request an exemption, because the pope knows that he’s not a bishop.

The pope cannot command anyone to accept ordination to any of the three orders. To be ordained a bishop, the individual must freely consent. The pope can certainly ask the cardinal elect to accept an episcopal ordination, but the cardinal elect can decline the ordination.

The pope can make the red hat contingent on the acceptance of the ordination, but those package deals are rarely offered. The last person whom we know was offered such a package was Fr. Avery Dulles, who declined the order of bishop. The pope went around it and gave him the red hat anyway. That’s how he became Cardinal Dulles.

Since then, Pope Benedict has elevated other priests to the office of cardinal, but we don’t know if they were asked to become bishops and declined. No one has said that this was the case. In the case of Cardinal Dulles the Jesuits made the information public, once it was lawful to do so.

The Holy Father cannot dispense himself. The person who is above the law cannot be dispensed from something that does not bind him. Dispensation always implies one party in authority and another who is subordinate. There is no human law that can bind a pope.

It’s a very strange law to say the least. Any law the involves the pope is always going to be contingent on his willingness to follow it.

Popes Gregory IX and John Paul II hold the record for bypassing Church law. Someday, when I have time, I’ll have to take a count who did more bypassing.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF



DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.