rtlEORY AND PRACTICE OF
THE CONFESSIONAL
A GUIDE IN THE ADMINISTRATION

OF THE SACRAMENT OF
PENANCE

BY

PROF. CASPAR E. SCHIELER, D.D.
EDITED BY

REV. H. J. HEUSER, D.D.
PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT OVERBROOK SEMINARY

INTRODUCTION BY THE

MOST REV. S. G. MESSMER, D.D., D.C.L.
ARCHBISHOP OF MILWAUKEE

SECOND

EDITION

NEW YORK, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO

BENZIGER BROTHERS
PRINTERS TO THE HOLY APOSTOLIC SEE

1906

Ktijil obstat.

remioius lafort,
Censor Librorum

Wimawr.

j( fArleY.

*

Archbishop of New York
New York, Aug. 31, 1905

copyright,

1905, by Besziger Brothers.

INTRODUCTION
“There is nothing more excellent or more useful for the
Church of God and the welfare of souls than the office of Con­
fessor. By his sacred ministry the sinner is lightened of the
burden of sin, freed from the yoke of Satan and concupiscence,
and clothed again with the robe of innocence previously last.
Weak knees are confirmed (Is. xxxv. 3) ; that is, men weak and
idle in mind receive new vigor, and lastly the just are aroused
and enkindled to persevere in goodness and to reach with freshly
spurred zeal for the crown of justice laid up for them (2 Tim.
iv. 8).
“How great and arduous is the office of Confessor appears
clearly from the fact that by it he is made a judge in the place
of Christ and that of his judgment he must some day rentier
a strict account to the Supreme Judge. To him, therefore,
apply the words with which the pious king of Israel charged the
judges appointed by him, ‘Take heed what you do: for you
exercise not the judgment of man, but of the Lord God; and
whatever you judge, it shall redound to you’ (2 Parai, xix. 6).
In this tribunal, however, the priest may not consider himself
to be only a Judge to hear the culprit's confession, to correct
him, and then, having imposed sentence, to send him away. He
must also act the part of the Shepherd and, following the example
of the Good Shepherd, must know his sheep, bring back to the
fold those that strayed away and fell among thorns, and finally
lead them unto wholesome pastures and the waters of eternal
refreshment. He must be a Physician giving suitable remedies
to the sick, and treating and healing with anxious and skillful

INTRODUCTION
hand the wounds of the soul. Lastly he must be a Father, and
like the father in the Gospel cheerfully receive with the kiss
of peace the prodigal son returning from exile, where he had
been lost and consumed by hunger and filth ; he must vest the
son found again with the first robe, refresh him with the fatted
calf and delicious dishes, and restore him to the former place and
dignity of heir and son.
“Tli ere fore let the priest who goes to hear confession seriously
ponder over these offices of judge, shepherd, physician, and
father, and endeavor, as far as in him lies, to fulfill them in deed
and work. Above all let him remember that he acts in the
place of Christ and as an ambassador for God, as the Apostle
often tells us” (Cone. Balt. Pl. II. nn. 278, 279, 280).
The present volume is a practical commentary upon these
weighty words of the Fathers of the Baltimore Council. The
tremendous responsibility of the Catholic priest exercising the
ministry of the Sacrament of Penance must appear in a truly
dazzling light to the mind of every one who but glances over
the following pages. Human intelligence can never fully
grasp the true significance of this divine sacrament, which
works at the same time forgiveness of sin and sanctification by
grace; which is for poor fallen man at once the judgment of
God’s infinite hatred of sin and the manifestation of His infinite
mercy for the repentant sinner; which brings humiliation and
punishment while it fills the soul returning to God with un­
speakable joy and comfort. Who can tell the number of souls
troubled by sin and sinful temptations who have found peace
and consolation, strength and holy courage in this sacrament?
the number of souls kept not only for days, but for years in
the bondage of evil passion and Satan who were, by the words
of absolution, freed from that ignominious slavery and led
again to enjoy the freedom of the children of God? the num­
ber of souls snatched from the brink of perdition by the strong
hand of God extended to them through His minister in the con­

INTHODUCnON

vii

fessional ? the number of souls buried in spiritual death by
grievous sin who were brought out from their tombs to super­
natural life and the sunshine of heavenly grace by the power of
sacramental confession? Only the book of life reveals them all.
To be the minister of such a sacrament is, indeed, a glorious
calling. Most excellent in itself and most useful for the Chris­
tian people is the office of Confessor. But the Fathers of the
Council tell us it is also a most- arduous office. In very truth,
the faithful administration of the Sacrament of Penance demand·
a great deal more of the personal cooperation of the minister
with the recipient than any other sacrament. Not to mention
the fact that in the other sacraments, marriage alone excepted,
the acts of the recipient desirous to receive the sacrament
have nothing directly to do with the substance and validity
of the sacrament, while in confession these acts are not a mere
condition, but form the materia ex qua the sacrament arises,
there is not the slightest doubt whatever of the most serious
and grave duty of the confessor to assist the penitent as far
as possible towards a worthy and profitable confession. He
is not only bound, as in all other sacraments, to insure the validity
of the sacrament and to assure himself of the required disposi­
tion of the recipient, but here more than elsewhere he must
himself effect and bring forth, as well as he can, the worthy and
right disposition of the penitent. Nor is this all. Confession
is not merely to free the sinner from sin for a few passing mo­
ments; it must so strengthen his will and direct his heart that
he will avoid the coming danger and resist the future tempta­
tion. Herein lies the difficult and arduous task of the confessor.
It is in the discharge of this duty that the priest needs all
the love ami charity, patience and meekness, of the spiritual
father: all the prudence and close attention, the knowledge
and experience of the spiritual physician; all the understanding
of the holy law ami the firmness, impartiality, and discretion
of the spiritual judge; the watchful care and patient search of

INTRODUCTION

the spiritual shepherd; the holy knowledge and wisdom of the
spiritual teacher; the fervid prayer, saintly life, and burning
zeal for souls necessary to him who is to be the minister of
Jesus Christ unto sinful man redeemed by His precious blood.
Even this is not al). Confession is not only a means of
cleansing the sinner from the stain of sin and vice, and of
giving him strength and courage in the battle against tempta­
tion ; but it is also to help the just and holy man to rise continu­
ally higher on the ladder of Christian perfection. It is the
sacrament for saint and sinner. The greatest saints of God in
holy Church had the greatest reverence and desire for holy con­
fession. St. Charles Borromeo went to confession every day.
Hence the tender care of the flowers and fruits of Christian
virtue in the heart of his penitent is another important duty of
the father confessor. How is he to fulfill it in a manner profit­
able to the penitent, and to himself, unless he is well acquainted
with the principles and facts of the spiritual life by a thorough
study of Christian ascetics and the earnest practice of Christian
perfection ? What a responsibility when a soul called by God to
the higher walks of Christian life, and willing to follow the call,
be it in the world or in the cloister, falls into the hands of an
ignorant, neglectful, or heedless confessor! But what glory to
God, what happiness of soul, what merit for heaven, when by
holy zeal and skillful effort the minister of God in holy confes­
sion leads the Christian soul, panting after God as the hart
panteth after the fountains of water (Ps. xlii. 2), into the sanctu­
ary of God’s love, grace, and mercy ! What a glorious ministry !
We can only hope and pray that Catholic priests will care­
fully read the beautiful and instructive lessons that Dr. Schieler’s
book offers, and ponder over them day and night. There is
no greater blessing for Church and State, society and individual,
than an army of priests who are confessors according to the
spirit of Christ; for they are in a fuller sense than others “ good
stewards of the manifold grace of God ” (1 Petr. iv. 10).
* S. G. MESSMER.

EDITOR’S PREFACE
An English translation of Dr. Schieler’s exhaustive work on
"The Sacrament of Penance," for the use of theological stu­
dents and missionary priests, had been advised by some of our
bishops and professors of theology. Tt was felt that, under
present conditions, a work in the vernacular on a subject which
involved to a very large extent the practical direction of souls
was an actual necessity for many to whom the Latin texts deal­
ing with the important questions of the Confessional were for
one reason or another insufficient.
There was one serious objection to the publication of a work
in English, which, since it deals with most delicate subjects,
might for this reason cause an unqualified or prejudiced reader
to misunderstand or pervert its statements, so as to effect the
very opposite of what is intended by the Church in her teaching
of Moral and Pastoral Theology. Between the two dangers of
a lack of sufficiently practical means to inform and direct the
confessor and pastoral guide of souls in so difficult and broad a
field as is presented by the missions in English-speaking coun­
tries, and the fear that a manual from which the priest derives
his helpfid material of direction may fall into the hand of the
ill-advised, for whom it was not intended, the latter seems the
lesser evil, albeit it may leave its deeper impression upon cer­
tain minds that see no difficulty in using the sources of informa­
tion in which the Latin libraries abound.
One proof of both the necessity and the superior advantage
of having a vernacular expression of this branch of theological
literature, for the use of students and priests in non-Latin coun­
tries, is readily found in the fact that authorized scholarship and
pastoral industry in Germany have long ago seen fit to supply this
need for students in its theological faculties, and for priests on
the mission, and that the benefit of such a course has shown
itself far to overlap the accidental danger of an unprofessional
use of the source of Moral Theology in the hands of a lay-reader,

6

PREFACE

or one hostile to the Catholic Church who might pervert its doc­
trine and arouse the zeal of the prudish.
The work was, therefore, not undertaken without serious
weighing of the reasons for and against its expediency from the
prudential as well as moral point of view. As a competent trans­
lator of it, the name of (he Rev. Richard F. Clarke, S.J., of the
English Province, whose editions of Spirago’s catechetical volumes
had given him the advantage of special experience in kindred
work, suggested itself to the publishers. Father Clarke actu­
ally undertook the translation, and hail fairly completed it when
death overtook him. The manuscript was placed in my hands
with a request to prepare it for publication. After much delay,
due to a multiplicity of other professional duties, I found it pos­
sible, with the cooperation of the Rev. Dr. Charles Bruchl, who
kindly consented to undertake the principal work of revision, to
complete the volume which is now placed at the disposal of our
clergy. There, is probably room for some criticism in parts
wherein I have undertaken to alter the expressions of the author
and of the original translator, with a view of accommodating
the matter to the temperament of the English reader. In this
I may have sinned at times both by excess anti by deficiency ;
but these blemishes can, I trust, be eliminated in future, editions
of a work which, for the rest, contains so much of instructive
material as to prove itself permanently useful to the theologian
and pastor.
In some cases I would not wish to be understood as sharing
the author’s views, nor should I have deemed an insistence upon
the often-cited opinions of casuists quit e so essential in a work of
this kind as it seemed to the learned author. But in this I did
not feel authorized to depart from his text, even if I had not fully
appreciated the advantage of his ample references and quota­
tions in matters of detail. Whatever we think of the author’s
personal views, his citations of the masters in the science of mor­
als give to his book certain advantages entitled to recognition.
With these restrictions borne in mind, it would be difficult to
exaggerate the usefulness of a work such as this, which directs
the priest in the sacramental ministry of Penance as indicated
by the laws and practice of the Church.
The aim of every pastor must in the first place be to rouse the

PREFACE

7

consciences of the individual members of his flock to motives of
pure and right living. The Gospel of Christ furnishes the model
of such living, and the Church is the practical operator under
whose direction and authority the principles of the Gospel are
actively carried into society, from the lowest to the highest
strata.
The sacramental discipline of the Confessional is the
directest and most powerful instrument by which the maxims
ami precepts of the Gospel are made operative and fruitful
in the individual conscience. A prominent non-Catholic writer
of our day has characterized the Catholic Church as the Empire
of the Confessional. So she is, and her empire is the strongest,
the most penetrating, permanent, and effective rule for the good
conduct of the individual and the peace and prosperity of the
community that can be conceived.
On the proper operation, therefore, of the Sacrament of Pen­
ance depends in the first place all that we can look for of satis­
faction and peace upon earth. But the administration of the
Sacrament of Penance is solely in the hands of the priest or con­
fessor. If he knows what to do, if he is wisely diligent in doing
what the discipline of the Confessional instructs him to do,
he will rule his people with order and ease, he will gain their
gratitude and their love, he will reap all the fruits of a happy
ministry, and his name will be in benediction among men of
good will within and without the fold.
The Confessional is a tribunal. It demands a certain knowl­
edge of the law, exercise of discretion and prudence in the appli­
cation of the law, and the wisdom of kindly counsel to greater
perfection. As the lawyer, the judge, the physician, learn their
rules of diagnosis and prescription in the first instance from
books and then from practice, so the future confessor, for three
or four years a student of theology, deems it his first and
most important duty to study Moral Theology, and this with
the single and almost exclusive purpose of making use of it
in the Confessional. Moral Theology gives him the principles
of law and right, the rules to apply them to concrete cases,
anti certain precedents by way of illustration, in order to rentier
him familiar with actual anti practical conditions. But the
young priest learns much more during the first few months and
years of his actual ministry by sitting in the Confessional ami

PREFACE

dealing with the consciences of those who individually seek his
direction.
There is some danger that the practical aspect, with all the
distracting circumstances of sin’s work in the soul, may in time
obscure the clear view of principles and make the confessor what
the criminal judge is apt to become during long years of incum­
bency, ovcrsevere or overindulgent, as his temper dictates, lie
may thus lose that fine sense of discrimination, that balanced use
of fatherly indulgence and needful correction, which the position
of the representative of eternal justice and mercy demands.
To obviate this result, which renders the Confessional a mere
work of routine and absolution, instead of being, as it should be,
a means of correction and reform, the priest, like the judge, needs
to read his books of law and to refurbish his knowledge of theory
and practice and his sense of discernment. But the theological
texts with which he was familiar under the Seminary discipline,
where nothing distracted him from the attentive use of them,
are not now so readily at hand. Their Latin forms are a speech
which, if not more strange and difficult than during his Seminary
course, seems more distant and uninviting. The priest, even
the young priest, would rather review his Moral Theology in
the familiar language in which he is now to express his judgments
to his penitents.
This fact alone suggests the pertinent use of the book before
us. There the confessor, the director of the conscience, finds all
that he was taught in his Moral Theology. He finds much more ;
for the author has made the subject a specialty of treatment
which leads him to light up every phase of the confessor’s task.
He has himself studied all the great masters in the direction of
souls from the Fathers of the Church down to the Scholastics of
the thirteenth century; and more especially those that follow,
who have entered into the theory and art of psychical anatomy
— Guilelmus Paris, Cardinal Segusio, St. Thomas, St. Bona­
venture, Gerson, St. Charles Borromeo, Toletus, De Ponte,
St. Francis of Sales, Lugo, Lacroix, Concina, Cajetan, and
Bergamo, St. Alphonsus, Reuter, and finally those many doctors
of the last century who have written upon the duties of the con­
fessor in the light of modern necessities and special canon law.
It is hardly necessary to explain to the priest who has passed

PREFA f'E

9

over the ground of the. sacramental discipline as found in his
theological text-books, how the subject is here presented in the
detail of analysis and application to concrete conditions. Pen­
ance is a Virtue and it is a Sacrament. To understand the full
value of the latter we must examine its constituent elements,
the matter, form, conditions, the dispositions and acts of the
penitent, sorrow for sin, purpose of amendment, actual accusa­
tion of faults in the tribunal—· requisites which are dealt with
by Professor Schieler in the traditional manner, but with clear­
ness and attention to detail.
Of special importance are the suggestions in the third chapter,
touching the integrity of the Confession: the number, circum­
stances certain and doubtful, of the sins, and the reasons which
excuse the penitent from making a complete confession; like­
wise the treatment of invalid confessions, of general confessions,
their purpose, necessity, or danger as the case maybe; satisfac­
tion. its acceptance or commutation.
The main object of the treatise lies, however, as might be sup­
posed, in the exposition of the confessor’s powers and jurisdic­
tion, and of the reservation and abuse of faculties. These
matters are in the first place discussed from the theoretical stand­
point. Then follows the application, which takes up the second
principal part of the work. Here we have the confessor in the
act of administering the Sacrament. He is told how he is to
diagnose the sinner's condition by the proposal of questions and
by ascertaining his motives — how far and to what end this
probing is lawful and wise. Next the qualities of the confessor,
liis duties and responsibilities, are set forth in so far as they must
lead him to benefit his penitent both in and out of the tribunal of
penance. The obligation, of absolute secrecy or the sigillum is
the subject of an extended chapter.
From the general viewpoint which the confessor must take of
his penitent’s condition and the safeguards by which he is to pro­
tect the penitent both as accused and accuser, our author leads
us into the various aspects of the judge’s duties toward penitents
in particular conditions. Thus the sinner who is in the constant
occasion of relapse into his former sin, the sinner who finds him­
self too weak to resist temptation, the penitent who aims at
extraordinary sanctity, the scrupulous, the convert, form sepa­

10

PREFACE

rate topics of detailed discussion. The last part of the volume
deals with the subjects of confessions of children, of young men
and young women, of those who are engaged to he married, of
persons living in mixed marriage, of men, religious women, of
priests, and of the sick and dying.
Some of our readers may recall that we have protested against
too implicit a reliance on an artificial code of weights and measures
in the matter of sin; and to them it may seem that in seconding
the translation of such a work as this we go contrary to the prin­
ciples advocated, because our author presents the same applica­
tion of canon law and judicial decision which has been sanctioned
by the great moralists and canonists of the schools. But let the
reader remember that in the text-books of the Seminary, we have
as a rule the principles and precepts presented in their skeleton
form so as to leave the impression of fixed maxims, which cannot
be altered, although they are in many cases only the coined con­
victions of individual authors, to whose authority the student
is taught to swear allegiance. In the present volume princi­
ples and precepts are so discussed that they admit of an all-sided
view, and as a result do not hinder that freedom of judgment
which is so essential a requisite in a good judge and, therefore,
in a confessor. For the rest we felt it, of course, to be our duty
toward the author to preserve his train of thought and reasoning,
and if anything is needed to make his exposition especially appli­
cable to our missionary conditions of time and place, it will be
easily supplied by any one who shall have read and studied the
present work.
H. J. Heuser.

CONTENTS
PART I

PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
nu
The Virtue of Penance............................................................................... 17
The Sacrament of Penance......................................................................20
Necessity of the Sacrament of Penance.................................................... 22
Forgiveness of Venial Sin......................................................................20
The Constituent Parts of the Sacrament of Penance in General . 37
The Remote Matter of the Sacrament of Penance in Particular . 30
The Form of the Sacrament .
Conditional Absolution .

gg

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
(J.
7.
8.

PART II
THE RECIPIENT OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE,
OR THE ACTS OF THE PENITENT
9. Who can Receive the Sacrament of Penance.......................................... 70

CHAPTER I
Contrition

10. Extent and Efficacy of Contrition............................................................. 71
11. The Essential Features of Perfect Contrition.......................................... 76
12. The Effects of Perfect Contrition and the Obligation of Pro­
curing it.................................................................................................. 81
13. Imperfect Contrition............................................................................... 88
14. The Necessary Qualities of Contrition.................................................... 98
15. The Relation of Contrition to the Sacrament......................................... Ill

CHAPTER Π
The Purpose

of

Amendment

16. Necessity and Nature of the Purpose of Amendment .
17. Properties of the Purpose of Amendment
18. The Purpose of Amendment with regard to Venial Sin
11

·

■

121

.

■

13»

CHAPTER III
Confession

Article I. Essence, Necessity, ami Properties of Confession
ηχηκ
10.
Essence and Necessity of Confession.................................................. 137
20. Properties of Confession.................................................................................. 138
Article II.

The Integrity of the Confession

Necessity of the Integrity of Confession...................................................... 153
Extent of the Integrity of Confession...................................................... 157
The Number of Sins in Confession................................................................ 163
The Confession of the Circumstances of Sins............................................. 166
The Confession of Doubtful Sins................................................................ 180
Sins omitted through Forgetfulness or Other Causes not Blame­
worthy
...................................................................................................... 193
27. Reasons Excusing from Complete Accusation
.... 198
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.

Article III. The Means to be employed in Order to make a Perfect
Confession

28.
29.
30.
31.
32.

The Examination of Conscience................................................................ 215
Invalid Confessions............................................................................................. 222
General Confession............................................................................................. 228
The Manner of Hearing GeneralConfession.............................................. 238
Plan for making a General Confession...................................................... 245

CHAPTER IV
Satisfaction

33. The Imposition of Penance by the Confessor............................................ 256
34. The Acceptance and Performance of the Penance by the Penitent 271
35. The Commutation of the Penance................................................................ 274

PART III
THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Section I.

The Powers of the Confessor

36. Orders, Jurisdiction, Approbation ....... 279

CHAPTER I
Jurisdiction
37. The Minister of the Sacrament with Ordinary Jurisdiction .
■ 281
88. The Minister of the Sacrament with Delegated Jurisdiction or
Approbation........................................................................... 288

13

CONTENTS

30. .lurixiliriio Drli i/ntii Extraordinaria, or. the Supplying of Deficient
Jurisdiction by the Church........................................ 300
40. The Administration of the Sacrament of Penance to Members of
Religious Orders
......... 307
11.
Jurisdiction and Approbation for the Confessions of Nuns . . 311

CHAPTER II
Limitation

of

Jurisdiction on Reserved Cases

42. Reserved Cases in General...................................................................318
43. The Papal Reserved Cases.................................................................. 328
44. Absolution of Reserved Sins .
....... 340

CHAPTER HI
Abuse

of

Power

bv the

Minister

of the

Sacrament

45. Inquiring after the Name of the Accomplice in Sin
4G. The Absolution of the Complex in Peccato Turpi .
47. Sollicitatio Proprii Pœnitentix ad Turpia .

. 351
. 354
. 3G4

The Office of the Confessor

Section II.

CHAPTER I
The Essential Duties of the Confessor in the Exercise
of his Office; or, The Confessor considered in his
Office of Judge

48.
49.
50.
51.
52.

The
The
The
The
The

Knowledge of the Sins................................................................... 379
Nature of the Questions to be put to the Penitent .
.
. 382
Examination of the Dispositions of the Penitent .
.
. 398
Confessor's Duty in Disposing his Penitents .... 402
Duty of the Confessor to administer, to defer, or to refuse
Absolution...................................................................................... 107
CHAPTER II

The Accessory Duties of the Confessor
Article I.

The Preparation

53. The Virtues which the Confessor must Possess
.... 418
54. The Scientific Equipment of the Confessor........................................424
55. The Prudence of the Confessor.......................................................... 434

Article II. Dutii» of the Confessor during Confession
56. The Duty of instructing and exhorting the Penitent (Munus
Unctoris)........................................................
438
57. The Duty of suggesting Remedies against Relapse (the Confessor
as Physician)........................................................................................... 448

CHAPTER ΙΠ
The Duties
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.

of the

Confessor after the Confession

The Duty of correcting Errors occurring in the Confession .
. 460
The Duty of preserving the Seal of Confession
.... 466
The Subject of the Seal of Confession......................................................471
The Object or Matter of the Seal of Confession
.... 473
\riolations of the Seal.................................................................................. 476

Section III. The Duties of the Confessor toward Different
Classes of Penitents
CHAPTER I
The Treatment of Penitents in Different Spiritual
Conditions
Article I.

The Occasionarii

63. Sinful Occasions and the Duty of avoiding them .... 487
64. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in Occasione
Proxima Voluntaria.................................................................................. 493
65. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in Occasione
Necessaria........................................................
496
66. Some Commonly Occurring Occasions of Sin.................................... 501

Article II.

67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.

Habitual and Relapsing Sinners

Definition and Treatment of Habitual Sinners....
518
Relapse, and the Treatment of Relapsing Sinners .
.
. .521
Relapsing Sinners requiring Special Care................................... 530
Penitents aiming at Perfection...................................................... 536
Hypocritical Penitents......................................................................... 543
Scrupulous Penitents......................................................................... 545
Converts..................................................................................................... 555

CHAPTER II
The Treatment of Penitents in Different External
Circumstances
74. The Confession of Children........................................................................ 561
75. The Confession of Young Unmarried People............................................575

Ί
CONTENTS
76.
77.
78.
70.
80.
81.
82.
83.

The Confessor a» Adviser in the Choice of a State of Life
Betrothal and Marriage.......................................................
Th'· Confessor’s Attitude toward Mixed Marriages
How I" deal with Penitents joined in “Civil " Marriage only
The Confessor's Conduct toward Women
....
The Confessions of Men......................................................
.
The Confession of Nuns.............................................................................618
The Confession of Priests....................................................................624

CHAPTER HI
Penitents in Extreme Danger

84. The Importance of the Priest's Ministry at the Bedside of the Sick
and the Dying...................................................................................... 030
85. The Confessions of the Sick.................................................................... 682
80. Absolution of the Dying............................................................................. 645
Topical Index

055

THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE CONFESSIONAL
Part

I

PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
1.

The Virtue of Penance.

At all times penance has been the necessary means (necessi­
tate medii ad salulemj of obtaining pardon for those who had
committed mortal sin. “If we do not do penance, we shall fall
into the hands of the Lord,” is the warning of the Old Testament
(Ecclus. ii. 22). And when God sent His prophets, it was to
arouse men to repentance by the announcement of His wrath,
and threatening punishments. The forerunner of Our Lord
solemnly exhorts the assembled crowds, “Do penance; the king­
dom of heaven is at hand.” Our Lord Himself insists on the
same point with awful determination, “ Unless you do penance
you shall all likewise perish ” (Luke xiii. 3). He proclaims as the
task of His own public ministry and the great mission of His
Church, “to call sinners to repentance” (Luke v. 32). Accord­
ingly, the burden of the Apostles’ preaching was, “Do penance”
(Acts ii. 38), for “God hath also to the gentiles given repentance
unto life” (Acts xi. 18).
Thus penance is indispensable to the sinner by divine ordi­
nance, as the Council of Trent expressly teaches (Sess. xiv. c. 1).
It is not less clearly dictated by natural law. “For reason
prompts man to do penance for the sins which he has com­
mitted; but divine command determines the manner according
to which it is to be performed.” 1
Taken in its wiliest sense, penance may be defined as a regret
for some past action. Such a regret is not necessarily virtuous,
> S. Th. S. Theo). HI. Q. 84. art. 7 ad 7.

18 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT

for a morally indifferent or even a good action may be to us a
source of displeasure and grief. But. even in its restricted mean­
ing, denoting grief, on account of some bad action, penance does
not yet include the idea of virtue. Grief is caused by tin1 per­
ception of anything we look upon as an evil. Now sin maybe
regarded as an evil in more than one way. Then only does our
penance rise to the height of a virtue, if we feel sorry for our sins,
not by reason of some temporal disadvantage we have incurred,
but for God’s sake, whose holy law we have transgressed and
whose majesty we have outraged. In other words, the virtue
of penance requires that we detest sin as an evil of a higher,
supernatural order.
Penance is not a virtue of its own and specifically distinct
from other virtues. St. Thomas considers it as belonging to
the virtue of justice, because by it we perform an act of justice
toward God, since we restore to Him the honor of which sin
has deprived Him, and make reparation for our wrongdoings?
Apparently, it springs from the virtue of religion, as an effect
thereof; for to detest one’s sin as an injustice done to God im­
plies an acknowledgment of His sovereign goodness and majesty.
This submission to God is an act of the virtue of religion.3
Furthermore, Lehmkuhl* is right in attaching the act of penance
to virtues of different species. For sin, being in many ways an
evil and opposed to holiness and duty, may be deplored from
different reasons; and so our penance belongs to that virtue
which supplies the motive of sorrow. Thus, a sinner may loathe
his impurity from a love of purity, his intemperance from a love
of temperance, his pride from a love of humility ; he may also
abhor sins because they are repugnant to more general virtues,
such as the love of God and gratitude toward God.5
* S. Th. S. Theol. IIT. Q. 83, art. 3 ad 3.
• Cf. Muller, Theol. Mor. Lib. 111. Tit. II. § 100.
4 Theol. Mor. Tom. II. § 1, De Pœnit. u. 251; cf. Palmieri, Tract.de
I'o-iiit. (Home, 1879), p. 18 et eeq.
‘ While theologians are united in admitting a virtus generali» pusnitentiœ

THE VIRTUE OF PENANCE

19

The virtue of penance, thus being a complete destruction of
all affection to sin, has an intimate bearing on the Sacrament
of Penance. It is the disposition required on the part of the
sinner, not only for the worthy, but also for the valid reception
of the Sacrament. It represents, so to speak, the matter of the
Sacrament, so that without it the Sacrament is null and void.
Consequently, it enters as a constituent part into the very
essence of the Sacrament.
The most important act of the virtue of penance is an act of
the will and is called contrition. It is contrition that gives
birth to penance, vivifies and animates it. Without contrition,
there is no remission of sin ; for it alone leads to a sincere avowal
of our guilt and a meritorious satisfaction.
The second act of penance is the confession of sin : it is
penance exercised by speech. Justice exacts that the guilty
should acknowledge their wickedness, and also make amends for
the sins committed by words. The third act of penance is sat­
isfaction in expiation of our misdeeds. The bad deed is com­
pensated by some good action, which we are not bound to do,
but which we perforin in order to supply for our past deficiencies.
This is penance in deed.
These three acts of penance are most intimately connected
with the Sacrament, and this union imparts to them a special
efficacy and strength; for the imperfect virtue, which of itself
is unable to effect justification, by its elevation to sacra­
mental dignity acquires the power of conferring sanctifying
grace."
having its own material and formal object, they fail to agree on the definition
of the forma) object. Cf. Suarez, Lugo, and more especially Palmieri, 1. c.
"Cf. S. Th. III. Q. 85 et ueq. <te panitentia ucumlum quoti
cirlu»,
Suarez, De Sacramento Pœnitenti» Disp, per 2 Sectiones. <lt panitentia m <■<>»<·
muni : Lugo, De Sacramento Pomitentia'. 1*. I. pp. 1-14 (llomæ. 1879); Muller.
TheoL Mor. Lib. HI. Sect. 10«; Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. Tum. II. Tract.
V. De Sacr. Pœnit. Sect. 1 ; Aertnys, Theo). Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. V. De Pœnit.

20 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
2.

The Sacrament of Penance.

The arguments for the existence of the Sacrament of Penance
do not form part of our task ; they come within the scope of
dogmatic theology. We shall only point out some theological
propositions on which our subsequent dissertations are based.
1. Jesus Christ gave to His apostles and their successors in
the holy ministry the power of forgiving and retaining sins com­
mitted after Baptism.
2. Tliis power is judicial and is exercised in the form of a
judicial process. On this evident deduction from the words of
the institution is based the entire Catholic teaching concern­
ing the Sacrament of Penance.
3. The exercise of this judicial power constitutes a Sacra­
ment, the object of which is to reconcile the sinner to his
God.
4. The outward sign of the Sacrament is the exercise of the
judicial functions; this comprises, on the one hand, the acts of
the penitent,—contrition, confession, and satisfaction; and on
the other, the priestly absolution, being the sentence delivered
by the representative of God.
5. The grace conferred by the Sacrament is the remission of
all sins, embracing the effacement of the guilt, the obliteration
of the eternal punishment, and the condonation of, at least, a
portion of the temporal punishment. This remission of sin is
accomplished by the infusion of sanctifying grace, which, more­
over, constitutes a title to certain actual graces, helping the
penitent to bring forth worthy fruits of penance, to overcome
temptation, to avoid relapse, and to amend his life.
At the same time the infused virtues are restored and the
merits of former good works lost by sin are regained.
On zealous penitents, besides, special gifts are bestowed, such
as peace of heart, cheerfulness of mind, anti great spiritual con­
solation.

THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

21

Though the Sacrament of Penance is administered after the
fashion of a judicial trial, still its administration deviates in
many points from the customs of forensic practice. The chief
points of divergence are the following: —
1. The aim which the secular judge has in view is to convict
the diminal, and by the infliction of a penalty, proportioned to
the nature and the greatness of the crime, to restore the order
of justice violated by the offense; the acquittal of the innocent
is only a secondary consideration. The sacramental judge, on
the contrary, reestablishes the relations between God and man,
destroyed by sin, not so much by imposing a punishment, as by
effecting a reconciliation. His chief preoccupation is the indi­
vidual welfare of the penitent: the verdict, therefore, is a sentence
of absolution and release from guilt; however, the sinner must
perform a certain penance, to be determined by the confessor.
2. It follows from this that the final sentence in the tribunal of
penance, by which the case is decided, is always one of acquittal.
Any other sentence passed in the sacramental court is only inter­
mediate, amounting to a temporary postponement of absolution.
3. In the ordinary session of justice, besides the judge and
the accused, we find a prosecutor, witnesses, and pleaders. In
the sacramental court there are only the judge and the sinner,
who is his own prosecutor, pleading guilty. The proceedings
are shrouded in perfect secrecy. The bench cites the criminal
against his will, and holds him by force; at the confessional,
the sinner presents himself of his own free will. The spiritual
judge must credit the account of the penitent, be it in his favor
or disfavor, since he alone can bear witness to the state of his
conscience. Only when there is moral certainty of the opposite,
may the priest distrust the statements of the sinner. On the
contrary, the ordinary judge has the right to reject any plea
advanced by the criminal.’
’Cf. S. Th. Quodl. I. a. 12; S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 600 s.;
Lehnikuhl, 1. c. n. 255; Müller, 1. c. Sect. 107, in fine.

•22 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE: AND AS A SACRAMENT
3.

Necessity of the Sacrament of Penance

The Council of Trent declared in its fourteenth session, with
regard to this point: "The Sacrament of Penance is as neces­
sary to those who have incurred mortal sin after baptism, as
baptism itself is to those who are not yet regenerated.”8 It
follows from this teaching of the Council that, since Baptism is
indispensable to eternal salvation, penance is equally necessary.
To use the exact language of theologians, it is necessary in re
vel saltern in voto. Which means that those who can actually
receive the Sacrament are bound to have recourse to it in order
to be freed from their sins; but that those for whom the recep­
tion of tliis Sacrament is for any reason impossible, will be
cleansed from their sins by the desire of receiving it. Tliis
desire is always included in perfect contrition.®
For when Our Lord granted to His apostles the power of for­
giving or retaining sins, and thereby instituted the Sacrament
of Penance for the remission of grievous sin, committed after
Baptism, He evidently asserted it to be His will that the sinner
should be subjected to the power of the keys by the reception
of this Sacrament, the latter thus becoming a necessary means
of obtaining pardon for grievous sin committed after baptismal
regeneration. The power of the keys vested in the apostles
and their successors would be a useless gift if the faithful, with­
out submitting to that power, could be released from their sins
and gain the heavenly kingdom. The more so, as the priest
possesses also the power of retaining sins; a power unfavora­
ble to the sinner; but which the sinner could elude if the Sac­
rament of Penance had not been made a necessary means of
forgiveness. Nor would the sinner undergo the inconveniences
connected with the reception of the Sacrament of Penance, if
• Trid. Sees. XIV. cp. 2.
•Cf. S. Th. Quodl. I. a. 12; S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VII. n. 600 s.;
l.ehiukiiii), I. o. n. 255; Müller, 1. c. Sect. 107, in fine.

NECESSITY OF THE 8ACHAMENT OF PENANCE

23

he were not persuaded of Christ’s precept, imposing the Sacra­
ment of Penance as a means of reconciliation. Venial sins,
however, are forgiven without reference to the Sacrament of
Penance, as we shall show in another place.10
Thus, by divine precept, all who have incurred mortal sin
after Baptism are bound to receive this Sacrament. The obli­
gation is absolute (perse) in danger of death; for, in this case,
the reception is necessary. Hence those are bound who are
suffering of a dangerous disease ; a mother before her first con­
finement, or before any subsequent birth, if her travails are of
an especially alarming nature; a criminal sentenced to death,
before his execution ; and any one foreseeing the lack of another
opportunity for his whole life of making a confession.
There are other times in the course of our life when the obli­
gation of confession becomes actual and pressing; the Church,
acting according to the intentions of Christ, has specified these
occasions more particularly. For the Sacrament was not insti­
tuted merely to dispose man for his passage from this life, but
also to heal his spiritual infirmities, to shield him against relapse
into sin, and to strengthen him to lead a virtuous life. Conse­
quently, we would frustrate the object of the Sacrament if we
were to postpone its reception to the hour of death.
Per accidens it is obligatory to receive this Sacrament: (1) for
a person who desires or is bound to receive holy Communion,
and who happens to be in a state of mortal sin; (2) when the
Sacrament of Penance is the only means for overcoming a temp­
tation or avoiding grievous sin; (3) when any one feels him­
self incapable of making an act of perfect contrition, and yet is
by his duties required to be in a state of grace; for instance,
if one has to administer a Sacrament, or simply because one
realizes that it is wrong to remain in a state of enmity with
God for any considerable period."
10 See Sect. 4. p. 29.
11 S. Alph. Lib. VI. mi. 662, 605; Gury-Ball. II. n. 406; Ballerina, Aut>

24 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
The divine precept of approaching the Sacrament of Penance
does not urge immediately that a mortal sin has been committed,
for it is an affirmative command, and affirmative precepts do
not press of their own accord, but only at certain times and
under given circumstances. Besides, the Church's precept of an
annual confession for all the faithful, who have fallen into mor­
tal sin, proves sufficiently that divine law does not enforce con­
fession immediately after committing mortal sin.
The precept of the Church concerning the Sacrament of Pen­
ance binds only those who have sinned mortally. For the
Church’s intention is merely to define more clearly the extent
of the divine command; so the ecclesiastical precept does not
exceed the limits of the divine precept, and Christ commanded
only that mortal sin should be confessed. Hence one who has
committed no mortal sin is not subject to the law of the Church
prescribing yearly confession. In practice, however, the ques­
tion has no import ; for which of the faithful, guilty only of
venial sin, would omit to go to confession at least once a year,
or would think of receiving holy Communion without previously
having confessed ?11
He who has committed a mortal sin, but, forgetting all about
it, confesses only venial sins, and some days later remembers
again the mortal sin, is, according to a probable opinion, no
longer subject to the precept of yearly confession; for, since
S. J. Opus Theol. Mor. Vol. V.; Tract. X. Sect. V. De Sacram. Pœn. cp.
III. n. 1025 ss.; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 229.
,s Such is the teaching of nearly all the moralists; cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI.
u. 607 ; Gury, I. n. 478; Scavini, De Sacram. Pœnit. η. 35. St. Thomas
(Suppl. Q. 6. a. 3) teaches that he who has only venial sins to confess,
satisfies the precept of the Church if he presents himself to the priest ami
declares that his conscience is free from mortal sin ; this will be counted as
a confession. This opinion of St. Thomas is, however, contradicted by a
huge number of eminent theologians, — St. Antoninus, Bilhiart, Laymann,
Lugo. Suarez, etc., — who appeal to the Tridentine decree (Sess. 13. cp. 5).
which says in respect to the Lateran decree that it is determinatieum divini
pracepti-

NECESSITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

25

the confession was valid, the mortal sin omitted by sheer for­
getfulness is forgiven; and there only remains the obligation of
submitting the forgotten sin to the power of the keys in the
next confession.13
For the same reason alleged above, the law of the (!hurch
extends only to those who have reached the age of discernment,
and whose minds are sufficiently developed to render them capa­
ble of sin. It is impossible 14 to fix any definite limit of age in
this matter. Much depends on the child’s personal gifts, its
training and education. In each individual case the moral
maturity of the child must be gauged by its general accomplish­
ments ami its ways of acting. During the ordinary course of
religious instruction, the pastor will find ample material on
which to base a decision; in case of doubt, the testimony of
the parents and the teachers may be taken into account.13 Seven
years is usually assigned as the age at which children of average
ability and proper training have arrived at the period of discre­
tion which enables them to understand the malice of mortal sin.
Hence it becomes a duty to instruct the children for confes­
sion when they have reached about the seventh or eighth year,
or, according to circumstances, even earlier. But even children
of an inferior age, if they seem to have sufficient understanding,
should not be allowed to die without absolution, though it be
pronounced only conditionally. Of course, the priest will help
them to elicit the necessary acts of contrition and purpose of
amendment. This should be done though it be doubtful that
the child has committed a sin or if it has forgotten the sin com­
mitted.
It is not a good practice, therefore, to defer the instruction of
children on this Sacrament to their ninth year or later; since it18
18 Suarez and Laymann teach the opposite.
nota 1.
14 Cf Decretum Lateran. Concilii IV. cp. 21.
16 See Sect. 74, Children's Confessions.

Cf. Scavini, 1. c. n. 35,

26 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT

does an injustice to the more intelligent children. Moreover, in
the case of those children who are sick, this lack of early prepa­
ration is apt to deprive them of both the Sacrament of Penance
and Extreme Unction, which is a serious matter, if they have
been capable of committing mortal sin.1"
The precept of the Church imposes annual confession, saltem
semel in anno. Beyond this, time and season are not specified.
Theologians interpret the law in general as follows : all who arc
conscious of mortal sin are bound to confess within the period
between January 1 and December 31, or, what practically
amounts to the same, within the time comprised between the
Easter of one year and the Easter of the following year. For,
whoever makes his confession with a view to his Easter Com­
munion, certainly does confess within the limits of a civil year,
though the earlier or later date of Easter may make the inter­
val elapsing between the confessions more than a year.
Since the precept of yearly confession refers only to mortal
sins, the common teaching of theologians is that, whosoever has
accused himself at Easter time of venial sin only, but falls into
mortal sin before the year has expired, must go to confession
again before the end of the year, in order to fulfill the ecclesi­
astical precept.17
The faithful, however, adds Lehmkuhl, should be exhorted
never to put off the reception of the Sacrament, or at least the
eliciting of an act of perfect contrition, when they have had the
misfortune of offending God grievously ; for a soul in the state
of mortal sin is in a most deplorable and dangerous condition.
Still we are not authorized to insist on this as being an obliga­
tion imposed by the Church, since some distinguished theolo­
gians maintain the contrary.18
111 lehmkuhl, I. Tract VI. n. 1202, 3.
17 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 609 ; Gury, 1. c. n. 479 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1204.
118. Thom. Suppl. Q. 8, art. 5 ad 4, and St. Bonaventure, Compend.
Theol. Lib. VI. cp. 25, Confess, necessitas, support this view saltem tacite.
Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1204.

NECESSITY OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

27

He who one year, whether by his own fault or not, fails to
make his confession, but during the next confesses all his sins,
satisfies thereby the obligations with respect to both years, in the
case, at least, when, during the current year, he has committed
a mortal sin which he includes in his confession; for he has ful­
filled the precept which enjoins reconciliation with God. If, on
the contrary, the penitent has committed only venial sins in the
current year, and confessed them along with the mortal sins of
the previous year, and later on falls into grievous sin, he is
obliged to make another confession in order to comply with the
law of the Church.”
He who has not confessed for a whole year, must, according
to the more common and probable opinion, confess as soon as
possible; because the Church has defined the period for fulfill­
ing the precept, not for the purpose of limiting the obligation
to a determinate date, but to incite men to perform their duty
in proper time (non ad finiendam sed ad urgendam obligationem).
Hence, a man would sin against the precept as often as he
shirked an opportunity of making the neglected confession,
thereby renewing the intention not to obey the law.20
He who has sinned grievously, and foresees that in the course
of the year he shall be prevented from going to confession,
must avail himself of the presently occurring opportunity, for
in these circumstances the duty of confessing is actually press­
ing.
The precept of the Church prescribes, moreover, that the
faithful confess their sins sincerely (fideliter). By a bad confes­
sion wc cannot discharge our duty. This was distinctly con­
firmed by Alexander VII, condemning a proposition to the
contrary. (Prop. 14.)
10 Cf. Scavini. De Sacram. Prenit. n. 36, who follows Suarez. Laymann,
Lugo, Salmanticenees, etc. Cf. Lehmkuhl. I. c. n. 1202.
Lacroix, De præcepto Confess, n. 2003; S. Alph. 1. c. n. 668; Scavini,
1. c. η. 36, Q. I ; Gary, 1. c. n. 478, nota 3; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1206.

28 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND As ,| SACRAMENT

A further provision of the Lateran decree, to confess pro­
prio sacerdoti, which formerly obliged the faithful to make
their annual confession to their own parish priest, bishop, vicar­
general, or the Pope, has long been abrogated by a recognized
universal contrary practice. Confession may, therefore, be
made to any priest duly authorized by the bishop.21
The excommunication for the violation of the Church’s pre­
cept of annual confession, as of Paschal Communion, is not a
pœna latœ, but a pœna jerendœ senlentiœ.
The ardent wish of the Church is that her children should
confess frequently during the year. This is apparent from the
wording of the law. Frequent confession is of the greatest use­
fulness to all without exception, to the sinner as well as the just.
It destroys the evil inclinations born by sin and averts its terrible
consequences.
1. Although, absolutely considered, a single confession made
worthily and with due preparation is able to arrest us in the
downward career of vice, to extinguish the long-nourished flame
of passion, to correct our evil inclinations and habits, to confirm
us in grace, and to insure us against relapse ; yet this is not the
ordinary course of things. Wien we are cleansed from our sins
by the Sacrament, we have yet to face a long struggle with the
remains of sin; for the wounds inflicted by sin, though closed
by the grace of absolution, leave us in a weakened condition,
and may easily reopen. To effect a perfect cure of the soul,
and to purify its inclinations and habits, there exists no more
21 Cf. Bened. XIV. De Syn. dioec. 1. II. cp. 14, 1-5. Hence a parish
priest, who would make his parishioners confess to him, is guilty of sin,
since such indiscreet zeal, or unworthy jealousy, might give occasion to
sacrilegious confessions. Compare what St. Thomas (1. c. art. 4 et 5)
wrote even before it was allowed to confess indifferently to any priest
having faculties; that a priest would sin, if he were not ready to give
leave to any individual to make his confession to another priest. It was
distinctly understood before that time that one might confess to any priest
who had been authorized by the proprius sacerdos to hear the confession.
Cf. Midler, 1. c. Sect. 118, n. 6-4; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1205.

FOKfllVENEHS OF VENIAL HIN

29

efficacious means than frequent confession. It leads us to
greater watchfulness over ourselves, constitutes an act of hu­
mility, forces us to renew our good resolutions; it equips us
with many special graces, intended to assist us in our spiritual
warfare, and to enable us to persevere in the paths of virtue in
spite of the manifold difficulties which we encounter.
2. Frequent confession is also the most powerful means to
counteract the disastrous consequences of sin. The most fatal
of these are: blindness of the soul, hardening of the heart and
final impenitence. As often as we go to confession, the great
salutary truths of our religion are recalled to our mind. We
reflect on Gori and our last end, on Jesus Christ and His love
and mercy, on the wickedness and the dreadful punishments of
sin, on our august duties, and on God’s holy law. Frequent
confession is an antidote against the hardening of the heart,
since it arouses in us a profound hatred of sin, love for God,
fear of His wrath, and the desire of accomplishing His will.
Finally, as at every confession we again banish sin from our
hearts, frequent confession is the best preparation for a penitent
life and a happy death.
Also the just derives great benefits from frequent confession;
he. is more and more cleansed from the lesser faults, committed
daily ; the grace and love of God are increased in his heart, and
special helps to overcome his failings anil weakness are granted
to him. The of tener the just man approaches this holy Sacra­
ment, the more fully does he partake of its peculiar graces.”

4. Forgiveness of Venial Sin.

By divine and ecclesiastical precept we are bound only to con­
fess mortal sins ; there is no obligation to confess venial sins ; t hese
may be forgiven without receiving the Sacrament of Penance.
ïa Pauli Segneri, S. J., Instructio Pœnitent. cp. XV: Fructu* percepti ex
frequenti confessione.

30

I'JWAXCK AS A VIRTUE AND As

i

■ I ' /?. I .v/,;jVr

"Venial sins, by which wo are not shut out from the grace of
God and into which we fall more frequently, though they be
rightly and profitably declared in confession, as th<· practice of
pious people demonstrates, may be omitted without guilt, and
be expiated by many other methods.” Such is the teaching of
the Council of Trent.”
Before enumerating the methods by which venial sins can lie
remitted we wish to observe : —
1. The most necessary condition for the remission of any sin,
and therefore also of venial sin, is contrition. So long as a man
is attached to sin and does not detest it, God cannot forgive it,
for He is infinitely holy and just. It is not, however, absolutely
necessary to specify the sins and make a formal act of sorrow
for them, otherwise David’s prayer Ab occultis meis munda me
(Ps. xviii. 13) would be useless and the remission of forgotten
sins impossible. Virtual contrition is sufficient, i.e. the sinner
must be actually contrite for all his sins, and from universal mo­
tives which apply even to those sins of which he is unconscious
or which he has forgotten. He must also have, the intention of
including in that contrition all the sins by which he has offended
God. Although venial sin is more easily forgiven than mortal,
yet this forgiveness is impossible without at least a virtual con­
trition for it. For when a man falls into venial sin he turns
inordinately to creatures, not, however, as in mortal sin, by
entirely abandoning God, his last end, and unreservedly giving
himself up to creatures. This attachment to creatures, however,
makes it necessary that he should, if not formally and explicitly,
at least virtually and implicitly, turn away from them and com­
bat this guilty affection for creatures by a contrary act of the
will. A work done to please God, or a mere act of love with­
out abhorrence of sin, does not remit that sin. As venial sin
may coexist with the general habit of the love of God, so it may
coexist with a particular act of that love ·, for a man can make
23 Sees. XIV. op. 5.

FOItGIVENESH OF VENIAL SIN

31

an act of perfect love or even an act of perfect contrition and
still retain a leaning toward some particular venial sin.*4
2. Since the presence of venial sin is compatible with that of
sanctifying grace, and since a man can be sorry for one venial
sin without being necessarily sorry for another, it follows that
one venial sin may be forgiven and others left unforgiven.
3. A penitent who is burdened with both mortal and venial
sins may by perfect contrition or the Sacrament of Penance be
freed from his mortal sins and yet be left with his venial sins
still upon him because he is not sorry for these.
4. Hence, if a man is in the state of mortal sin, his venial
sins cannot be remitted without the mortal sin being at the
same time forgiven ; for God cannot forgive one. who will not
acknowledge and love Him as Lord and God; and, according to
24 Cf. S. Th. De Malo, Q. 7, art. 12 ad 4, and Summa Theol. III. Q. 87, art.
1. St. Thomas demands for the forgiveness of mortal sin a perfectior perni­
tentia, that is, that a man actually deteat his mortal sins so far as he can ;
sed non hoc requiritur ad remissionem venialium peccatorum ; non tamen sufficit
habitualis displicentia quae habetur per habitum caritatis, vel panilentia virtutis,
quia, sic caritas non compateretur peccatum veniale, quod patet esse falsum. . . .
Hence follows, continues the holy Doctor, that there is required a virtual!»
displicentia, puta cum aliquis hoc modo fertur secundum affectum in Deum et
res divinas, ut, quidquid sibi occurreret, quod earn ah hoc motu retardaret, dis­
pliceret ei et dolcret se commississe, etiamsi actu de illo non cogitaret, quod tamen
non sufficit ad remissionem peccati mortalis nisi quantum ad peccata oblita post
diligentem inquisitionem. III. Q. 87, art. 1. Seavini. 1. c. n. 13. There is
an apparent opposition, but it is only apparent, between this teaching of St
Thomas and that of Suarez (Disp. II. Sect. 3. n. 8 sq. in Sum. III. Q. 87.
art. 2) and other theologians, who hold that venial sins can be forgiven
without formal contrition by an act of supreme love of God. For Sunrex
distinguishes a twofold perfection in this love, an objective secundum exten­
sionem ad venialia peccata, and an intensive ex conatu potentia. Only the
objective love which extends to venial sin is, according to this learned theo­
logian, able to atone for venial sin. because it implies an aversion of the will
from sin in consequence of that love. Hence, it will effect the remission of
all venial sins quoad cutpum if it extends virtually to all. or of some only, in
so far as these are affected by the act of love. This aversion of the will
from sin is nothing else than a virtual!» displicentia; in other words, contri­
tion.

82 PENANCE AS Λ VIRTUE ANU As A SACRAMENT
the doctrine of St. Thomas, just as mortal sin is forgiven by the
influx of sanctifying grace, so the remission of venial sin is de­
pendent on a movement of grace or love, which therefore must
be actually present.’5
Venial sins are forgiven : —
1. By the Sacrament of Penance, and that directly and ex
opere operato, when they are submitted in confession to the
power of the keys with formal contrition and purpose of amend­
ment,
2. " By many other means," such as : —
(fl) All the Sacraments; they remit sins ex opere operato, and
especially those sins which are opposed to the particular end of
the Sacrament. For the object of every Sacrament is the sanc­
tification of souls, and hence the removal of all that hinders
this sanctification. Now venial sins in particular, by hindering
the conferring of richer graces, are an obstacle in the way of
attaining sanctity. Cardinal Lugo, in treating this subject, illus­
trates it by the attitude of two friends: “Even where, in the
strict nature of things, we cannot expect that the influx of grace
should cause the remission of sins, yet it is in accordance with
good feeling that where fresh and closer ties of friendship have
been formed, little offences should be condoned. If, then, the
influx or increase of grace is a new bond of friendship between
God and the just man, uniting him more intimately with God,
an embrace of love, so to speak, and a kiss of peace, it is prob­
able and reasonable to suppose that there is granted also a re­
mission of the smaller sins which have been retracted." 37
It is always, however, necessary and sufficient to elicit at
least a virtual or implicit contrition, contained in a pious and
supernatural affection toward God, which is opposed to venial
“Cf. III. Q. 87. art. 4 et 2. On the diverging viewe of Scotus and
Durandus, compare Suarez, De Sacrani. Pœnit. Dis]». II. Sect. 2. η. 2.
* Trid. Sene. XIV. cp. δ.
v Diep. IX· Sect. 8, n. 58.

FORGIVENESS OF VENIAL SIN

sins, and is consequently a virtual horror and retraction of the
same.’*
Not all the Sacraments, however, effect this forgiveness in the
same manner. Next to the Sacrament of Penance, Baptism
and Extreme Unction have a peculiar power, because they were
instituted by Christ for the very purpose of forgiving sins. If
an adult who had been purified of original sin and of his mortal
sins by perfect love and contrition (the Baptism of desire), but,
on account of his attachment to venial sins, was not yet freed
of these, were to receive Baptism, all his venial sins for which
he had at least virtual contrition would be forgiven through
this Sacrament. For, according to the teaching of the Council
of Trent, Baptism effects a new birth, and in consequence the
remission of sins, with the exception, of course, of those venial
sins which the newly baptized person has not yet renounced.”
Of Extreme Unction the Council of Trent, referring to James
v. 15, teaches that it forgives the sins which defile the soul, and
removes the remains of sin.28
*30
With respect to the Holy Eucharist the same Council31 de­
clares that although the forgiveness of sin is certainly not the
principal fruit of this Sacrament, yet, in accordance with our
Lord’s commands, we should receive it in order thereby to be
freed from our daily trespasses and strengthened against mortal
sin.
Hence there is no doubt that the Holy Eucharist removes
venial sins. But theologians do not agree how it produces this
effect — whether, as in the case of the three preceding Sacra­
ments, immediately, ex opere, operato, or only mediately, ex
opere operantis. The champions of both views appeal to St.
28 Cf. S. Th. III. Q. 87, art. 1 et 3.
28 Cf. Tri<l. Sess. V. Deer, de peccato orig. n. 5 ; Sess. XIV. de pœn. cp.
3; S. Th. III. Q. 80, art. 2 ad 1.
80 Sess. XIV. de Extr. Unct. cp. 2, can. 2.
81 Sess. XIII. can. 5 et cp. 2.

84

PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND As A

l< -RAMENT

Thomas, who on the one hand teaches that the Holy Eucharist
acts after the manner of bodily food, repairing what in the heat
of concupiscence we have lost by venial sin, and on the other
hand declares the peculiar grace (res sacramenti) of this Sacra­
ment to be carilas, and that not only quantum ad habitum sed
etiam quantum ad actum ; in other words charity is elicited in tliis
Sacrament, and through its operation venial sins are forgiven.”
Suarez interprets St. Thomas as teaching that the Holy Eu­
charist effects the remission of venial sins ex opere operato, and
this interpretation would seem to have the preference over that
of theologians who, with St. Alphonsus, insisting on the words
just quoted, hold that the Sacrament of the Eucharist works ex
opere operantis.33
The three remaining Sacraments, of Confirmation, Orders, and
Marriage, do not so directly imply forgiveness of venial sin ; still
they pour into the soul of the recipient a new grace, and so they,
too, must lie considered as remitting venial sins when no obsta­
cle is put in the way.*4 The range of this power varies accord­
ing as the grace conferred in the Sacrament is more or less
opposed to some particular sin or kind of sins. The most effi­
cacious of the last-named Sacraments in eliminating venial sin
is that of Confirmation, because its influence extends to the
whole life of faith and grace, strengthening and bringing it to
perfection.51 Holy Orders give grace to the recipient, so that
he may attain the holiness and perfection that befit his state,
and in consequence they also purify from sin.30 Finally, Mat­
rimony remits venial sins because it confers the grace by which
concupiscence is curbed and restrained, and by which the recipi­
ents are enabled to fulfil their duties of mutual sanctification.
« III. Q. 79, art. 4.
» Suarez, Comment, ad III. Thomæ, Q. 79, art. 4.
Sect 10, n. 1.
μ Cf. 8. Thom. Q. 87, art. 2 et 3.
» Cf. S. Thom. Q. 72. art 7 ad 2.
*> Cf. S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 26, art. 1 et 3.

fc

Cf. Disputatio 63,

FORGIVENESS OF VENIAL SIN

35

(b) Venial sins are likewise removed by the holy sacrifice of
the Mass, which of its own nature is a sacrifice of atonement, a
sacrificium vere propitialorium.37 It works this forgiveness, as
theologians teach, per modum impetrationis, therefore mediately,
by obtaining for the sinner from God the grace of contrition or
other virtues, excluding affection for sin.”
(c) The sacramentals also destroy venial sins. “By the use
of the sacramentals the faithful confess and awaken their faith,
hope, reverence for God, a longing for interior holiness and sin­
lessness, or a horror of sin, and sorrow for past offences. The
symbols blessed or used by the Church confer a grace which
produces or strengthens desires and acts of different virtues,
which in turn destroy venial sin and atone for it.” ” Hence a
sacramental possesses power of remitting sin in proportion as
its character and the blessing of the Church cause it to excite
or strengthen acts of virtue in the faithful. The Church has a
sacramental especially designed for the remission of venial sins,
and makes use of it on those occasions when the faithful need
greatest purity of heart. It consists of the two prayers: Mis­
ereatur vestri, etc., and indulgentiam, absolutionem, etc.40 To
these we may add the use of holy water, which, in accordance
with the intention anti prayers of the Church when she blesses
it, is designed to ward off the devil’s influence from animate
and inanimate creatures and to protect them from impurity,
sickness, anil harm.4’ The effect of the other sacramentals in
procuring remission of venial sins is not so direct. The more
they are of their own nature suited to awaken contrition, and
the more directly the intention in the use of them is directed to
87 Trid. Sees. XXII. de Sacrif. Missie, op. 2.
« Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 311.
m Tappehorn, Die lassliche Siinde, p. 55.
*° Some theologians attribute to these two prayers an effect ex opere
operato. Suarez, Disp. 12, Sect. 2, n. 6.
« Cf. S. Thom. III. Q. 87, art. 3

36

PKNANCK AS A VIHTUK AND AS A SACK IIfHNT

the cleansing from sin, so much the more effectual arc they in
this respect.”
(rf) Contrition by itself also procures the remission of venial
sins, and more especially when it is perfect (contritio), since, then,
it destroys mortal sin and is, therefore, still more efficacious in
the case of venial. Perfect contrition removes all venial sins if
it is universal, that is to say if it extends to all venial sins, or if
a man is disposed never more to commit venial sin and would
be sorry for all his past sins, if they were present, to his mind.
On the other hand, an act of perfect contrition does not remit
all venial sins, if it extends only to this or that particular venial
sin, or if a person is disposed to avoid only one or other of his
venial sins.”
According to the teaching of the more numerous and distin­
guished theologians, even imperfect contrition remits venial
sins; this imperfect contrition (allritio) must spring from some
supernatural motive referring to God —such for instance as the
thought that venial sin is a violation of the obedience or rever­
ence due to God.” By allritio the affection toward sin is en­
tirely uprooted and the will is withdrawn from the sin, man
turns again to God as his last end, and expiates his fault by his
sorrow.”
(e) Moreover, the “love of God above all things” remits
vernal sins if it is actual and formally or virtually opposed to
venial sin.”
(/) Lastly, venial sins are forgiven by good works done from
42 Ct. Müller, 1. c. Sect. 110, II. n. 4.
411 Cf. S. Thom. 111. Q. 87, a. 2·, S. Bonaventure, In IV. Sent. Dist. 20,
P. 1. a. 1. Q. 2 ad 3.
44 Ci. Lugo, De Sacram. Pœnit. Disp. IX. Sect. 2, η. 20 et seq. ; Suarez,
Disp. XI. Sect. 3; Ripalda, De Ente. Supernatural!, Tom. II. Lib. IV. Disp.
07. Sect. 1 (Ed. nova, Parisiis, 1870).
»■’ For the arguments of those who oppose this teaching, see Suarez, Disp.
XI. Sect. 3, η. ό ; Gury. I. n. 457 ; Seavini, I. c. n. 11 ss.
« Cf. Suarez, Disp.’ll, Sect. 3, un. 8-10.

CONSTITUENT PARTS OF SACRAMENT OF PENANCE 37
a motive of penance (ex affectu pœnitenlüe), especially those to
which Holy Scripture assigns the virtue of destroying venial
sin. Such are: prayer” (John xiv. 13s.; xvi. 23), almsgiving
and fasting, especially the, works of mercy and mortification
(Ecclus. iii. 33; iv. 1-11; Tob. iv. 11; Dan. iv. 24; Matt,
v. 7; John iii. 5-10; 1 Reg. vii. 5, etc.; 1 Esdras viii. 21, etc.).
Cf. S. Thom. IT. II. Q. 147, art. 1 el 3.4*
5.

The Constituent Parts of the Sacrament of Penance in General.

As in the other Sacraments a distinction is made between the
matter and the form, so too in the Sacrament of Penance; but
with a certain difference, which 'appears from the fact that the
Council of Trent speaks of the matter of this Sacrament as a
quasi-materia. The Calechismus Romanus40 states this more
fully when it says: This Sacrament is distinguished from the
other Sacraments especially in this, that the matter of the other
Sacraments is a substance produced by nature or art, while in the
Sacrament of Penance it is the acts of the penitent, especially
the contrition, confession, and satisfaction ; yet it is not because
these acts are not to be considered as truly matter of the Sac­
rament that the Holy Council calls them quasi-πlateria (“as it
were the matter”), but because they are not materially or exter­
nally applied, like water in Baptism and chrism in Confirmation.
These three acts of the penitent are styled by the Council of
Trent the parts (partes) of the Sacrament of Penance “in so far
47 There are three prayers which have quite a special efficacy in this mat­
ter : one has come to us from the Holy Ghost through David, the other from
Our Lord, and the third from the Church; they are the seven penitential
psalms, the Our Father, and the Confiteor. Cf. S. Thom. III. Q. 87, art. :J;
I. II. Q. 74, art. 8 ad 6.
48 On the remission of venial sins, defiling the faithful who die in grace
see S. Thom. De Malo, Q. 7, a. 11 : Suarez, Disp. 11, Sect. 4 ; Disp. 47, Sect. 1 ;
Palmieri, Tract, de Prenitentia. p. 190 ss. ; Oswald, Eschatologie, p. 84 ss. ;
Tappehorn, Die liissliche Siinde, Sect. 11, p. til ss.
40 Cat. Rom. P. II. Cap. V. Q. XII.

88 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SA< u.l.MENT

as they are required by God's ordinance in the penitm! for the
completeness of the Sacrament and for the entire and perfect
remission of sin."50 To these must be added the absolution of
the priest, which constitutes the form. Hence we have to con­
sider as parts of the Sacrament : (1) contrition, (2) confession,
(3) satisfaction, and (4) absolution.51
The three acts of the penitent have not all, however, the same
importance. The satisfaction belongs to the Sacrament only in
so far as its integrity and its complete efficacy are concerned;
hence it is not an essential, but only an integral part of the Sac­
rament. It is true that the power of imposing on the penitent
a suitable satisfaction belongs essentially to the administration
of this Sacrament ; hence also the penitent is obliged to accept
this penance and to declare himself willing to perform it. The
actual performance of the penance, however, is not necessary in
order that the Sacrament should produce its effect.52
The confession or self-accusation of the penitent in presence
of the priest is the principal matter of this Sacrament, for this
is necessary in se and per se, in order that the confessor may
form a judgment and administer the Sacrament.
Contrition is a necessary constituent of the Sacrament but
merely in se not per se ipsum, and only as contained in the ac­
cusation, which is an outward manifestation of the contrition ;
M Cat. Rom. 1. c.
“ Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 2, 3 ct 4, can. 4 ; S. Thoin. III. Q. 8G, ai t. G ;
Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. 1. n. 2 ss.
M Suarez, Disp. 20, Sect. 3, n. 8, and Disp. 58, Sect. 1, n. 3 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c.
Cap. III. Sect. 1, n. 258; Aertnys, 1. c. Cap. III. art. 1, n. 174. Without satisfaction the Sacrament is there in its essence, but it is not quite perfect, as a
man without legs is, indeed, a man essentially, but not a complete and per­
fect one. For this Sacrament was instituted for the complete removal of sin,
both guilt and punishment; thus it produces not only remission of the guilt
and of the eternal punishment (in which may lie included a portion of the
temporal punishment), in consequence of the absolution, but also remission
of the temporal punishment by the performance of the penance imposed ;
hence the satisfaction is a part of the Sacrament which produces these effects.
Cf. Lugo. De Pœn. Disp. 12, u. 40.

ΚΕΜΟΤΕ ΜΛΤΤΕΗ OF THE HACKAMENT OF PENANCE 39

for contrition is not per se subject to the senses, but must be
outwardly shown in some way in order to become manifest."
“The contrite accusation, therefore, realizes all the conditions of
the matter in the Sacraments." M
Theologians draw a further distinction in this Sacrament be­
tween the proximate and the remote matter (materia proxima
el remota). Proxima materia consists of the acts which the peni­
tent has to perform, and remota materia of the sins committed
after Baptism which the penitent has repented of and confessed
and for which he must do satisfaction.55
6.

Of the Remote Matter of the Sacrament of Penance in
Particular.

The remote matter of this Sacrament are, as we have already
seen, the sins committed after Baptism. Those committed be­
fore Baptism are forgiven entirely in Baptism, wherefore they
M Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 258.
M Aertnys, 1. c. Cap. III. art. 1, n. 174.
M Theologians do not agree as to whether the acts of the penitent are in
truth matter belonging to the inner constitution of the Sacrament — in the
same way, for instance, as the washing with water is an intimate element
of Baptism—or whether they belong to the Sacrament only in a wider
sense ; in other words, whether the acts of the penitent are materia ex qua
or only materia circa quam of the Sacrament. The Scotists place the whole
essence of the Sacrament in the absolution, and teach that the acts of the
penitent are only materia circa quam and conditio sine qua non, in such a
manner, however, that without these the absolution canuot be sacramental ;
hence they have no hesitation in considering these acts essential. The
Thomiste, and by far the greater number of theologians, consider the acts
of the penitent as materia ex qua, because they do in fact belong essentially
to the constitution of the external act which produces the interior grace.
This doctrine unquestionably carries the day, “ unless,” as Lehmkuhl says,
“ one chooses to call the acts of the penitent materia ex qua, not as having
their origin in the penitent, but as matter presented judicially to the con­
fessor, a question about which I do not wish to argue, for that acts of the
penitent — sorrow and accusation — are necessary, and should be elicited, is
beyond all doubt.” Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 250. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor.
1. c. cp. 1, n. 14.

40

PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A sAi l.-.l Μί;.\'Τ

are not, properly speaking, subject to the Sacrament of Pen­
ance. Again, a man is not under the Church's jurisdiction till
he is baptized, and this Sacrament of Penance is administered
by virtue of the jurisdiction which the Church exercises over
her members. The sins which are confessed are not, however,
materia ex qua, as is water in the Sacrament of Baptism, by
means of which the Sacrament is conferred, but materia circa
quam, with regard to which the penitent performs the necessary
acts and receives absolution. As, for example, in a lawsuit
the matter proposed for decision and the sentence are called the
matter of the case, so here the sins which form the object of
the sacramental process instituted for the remission, of sins are
regarded as the remote matter of penance.“ This remote mat­
ter is divided into : —
1. Necessary and free matter {necessaria et libera), i.e. neces­
sary ns a consequence of the divine command, by which definite
sins (a definite materia remota) must be submitted to the sacra­
mental tribunal and the power of the keys, so that the penitent
who wilfully neglects this course cannot receive the Sacrament
validly. By free matter we understand those sins which the
penitent voluntarily confesses whilst not bound to do so by
divine law.
2. Certain and doubtful {certa el dubia), i.e. matter which in
the judgment of the confessor is a certain and valid object of
absolution; or matter regarding which absolution cannot be
pronounced without misgiving.
3. Finally, sufficient and insufficient {sufficiens et insufficiens),
i.e. such matter as suffices for the administering of the Sacra­
ment and the granting of absolution, whether the matter be
necessary or free, and such over which sacramental absolution
cannot be pronounced.
Necessary matter comprises all grievous sins committed after
Baptism and not at any former time submitted directly to the
M Cf. Aertuys, I. c. Cap. III. n. 171.

HEMOTE ΜΛΤΤΕΗ OF THE HACHA MENT OF PENANCE

41

power of the keys; of all and each of them the penitent is
obliged to accuse himself.
Sins are remitted directly when they have been remitted per
sc quite independently of other sins. This is the case when they
have been explicitly confessed to a priest having the required
jurisdiction. Sins are forgiven indirectly when they are re­
mitted in conjunction with other sins, and not per se. This hap­
pens when a penitent omits a sin through invincible, ignorance
or forgetfulness or inability; or if a confessor without proper
jurisdiction, for serious reasons, gives absolution. In both cases
such sins are remitted in conjunction with the other sins which
have been explicitly confessed and over which the priest had
jurisdiction. This must be so, for a penitent cannot at the same
time experience God's mercy by the remission of the sins which
he has confessed and also be an object of God's wrath with re­
spect to his other sins ; moreover, the inpouring grace, through
the remission of the sins that have been confessed, is not com­
patible with the presence of mortal sin remaining in the soul.
It is in consequence of Christ's institution that all the sins
committed after Baptism and not yet directly forgiven, and also
the sins only indirectly forgiven, must of necessity be revealed
to the priest ; for in appointing the priest to be His representa­
tive, Christ made him the judge before whom all mortal sins
must be brought, that, in virtue of the power of the keys, he
might pass sentence of loosing or binding.57 Over sins which
have not yet been directly remitted the confessor has pronounced
no judgment, for they were unknown to him; hence, in accord­
ance with Christ’s command, even sins indirectly forgiven must
be submitted by confession to the power of the keys in order
that they may obtain direct forgiveness.58
67 Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 5.
68 Lacroix, Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. P. II. n. 595 ss. ; Mazzotta, Theol.
Moral. Tr. VI. Disp. 1, q. 4, cp. 5. Hence Alexander λ’II condemned the
proposition (Prop. II. damnata) that sins omitted in confession, whether

42 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS Λ .s'. It7,·. | I//..V7’
The following classes of sins are sufficient and free matter for
confession : —
(a) The venial sins committed after Baptism. Those are mat­
ter sufficient because Christ gave His priests power to forgive
all sins, therefore also venial sin; and the Council of Trent
teaches that it is good and wholesome to confess venial sins.
Since, however, the recommendation of the Council imposes no
obligation to confess them, as they may be remitted by other
means, they are free matter.
(&) Sins already directly forgiven arc also free matter. Since
they have already been remitted by sacramental absolution
they may be said to exist no longer. Nevertheless, though they
have been forgiven, one may renew his sorrow for them,
and on that account the absolution may be given again validly,
even if no other sins be presented. This is proved by the gen­
eral practice of the faithful and the unanimous teaching of
theologians, who declare that contrite confession of a past sin
is always materia proxima of the Sacrament ; a sin which
has received forgiveness remains always a sin of the past
and so can be made the object of sorrow and of sacramental
accusation.
Moreover the highest authority in the Church favors this
view; for Benedict XI teaches0" : “Though it be not necessary,
yet we consider it very wholesome to repeat the confession of
special sins on account of the humiliation which they cause.”
Although, in these words, the Holy Father speaks of humiliation
only as the advantage to be drawn from the confession of pre­
viously forgiven sin, it is quite evident that he does not intend
to exclude the great benefits which the absolution pronounced
they have been forgotten, or not confessed on account of danger of death,
or for any other reason, need not be mentioned again in confession.
« S. Alph. 1. c. n. 427. dub. 2 ; Gury (Ed. Rom.), n. 418; Ballerini, Op.
Theol. Mor. 1. c. u. 17 ; Muller, 1. c. Sect. Ill ; Aertnye, 1. c. n. 172. Q. 1.
«» Extrevag. coin. 1. 5. tit. 7 (de privileg.), c. I. Const. “ Inter cunctas.”

HEMOTE MATTER OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE 43

over these sins must bring, for the confessions of which the
Pope speaks are made only in order to obtain absolution.”
Thus, besides this salutary humiliation, the confession of for­
given sins and the. absolution again pronounced over them
cause an increase of sanctifying grace and a remission of tem­
poral punishment, augment the hatred for sin, and dispose the
penitent, who has only human shortcomings or venial sins of less
moment to disclose, better toward a sincere contrition. How
in this case the true notion of “absolution,” which is in fact
identical with the influx of sanctifying grace, is preserved, re­
mains for the dogmatic theologian to settle; for our purpose it
is enough to indicate briefly Lugo's explanation. “As,” says
the learned Cardinal, “after making a vow I can bind myself
afresh to its observance by renewing the vow in a manner which
binds me independently of the former promise, so God may
again waive His right of punishing sin, by a renewal of the com­
pact with man to pardon past sins, and this repeated renuncia­
tion of the divine right is as efficacious as the first, and is made
by a new infusion of sanctifying grace.” “
Since venial sins ami mortal sins already directly remitted are
free matter, it is not necessary to accuse one’s self of them with
such accuracy and perfection regarding number and species as
in the case of necessary matter, even if there be nothing else to
confess. In this case we cannot urge the two reasons for which
the accusation of mortal sins not yet confessed must include the
details of species and number, for neither has God ordered it,
nor is it required in order that the judicial power may be prop­
erly exercised with regard to them. Hence it suffices to accuse
one’s self in such a way as to enable the priest to form some sort
of judgment. That this is possible if the sin is confessed at
least generically (generice) is seen from other cases. For in­
stance, a man who knows that on one occasion he sinned gravely
81 Cf. Ballerini, 1. c. ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 263.
62 Lugo, De Pœnit. <1. 13, u. 73.

44 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND .IS .1 s |< /.AMENT

against, flic sixth commandment but lias forgot fen the (.xact
specific nature of the sin, or that he has sinned gravely but has
quite forgotten what the sin was, is obliged, as nil theologians
teach, to confess that he has sinned gravely against purity, or,
in the latter instance, that he had committed a mortal sin.
Many extend this obligation to a sin which is only doubtfully
mortal, of which the penitent cannot any longer remember the
species, and which moreover is the only sin weighing upon his
conscience."
We have viewed our subject with respect to the validity of
the Sacrament. Let us see how in practice a general accusa­
tion may be made, and how far such general accusations arc
valid and permissible matter for absolution.
1. A penitent may accuse himself thus: “I have sinned and
I accuse myself of the sins of my whole life," and if the con­
fessor has no other knowledge of these sins, such an accusation
is general in the widest sense; to this class belongs also an accu­
sation conveyed by an expression of sorrow without any explicit
avowal of sin.
2. A more particular but still general accusation is: "I
accuse myself of all the mortal sins which I have committed."
3. Yet more precise is the accusation: “I accuse myself of
all the lies I have told, or of all the sins I have committed
against purity, or justice, or this or that particular virtue," thus
pointing out the virtue or the command against which he has
sinned, but without giving the ultimate specific character (in­
fima species') of the sin.
4. Finally, the penitent may declare the ultimate species
(infima species) of the sin without determining the precise act
and without the specific circumstances and their number ; c.g.
1 accuse myself of all profanations of the name of God, of all
sinful looks dangerous to purity, of all deception in my dealings
with my neighbor, etc.
“ Cf. Lelimkuhl, 1. c. n. 263.

Il EMOTE MA TTEH OF TH E

When there is question in the confession of materia libera: —
1. The last two methods of general accusation are sufficient
for the valid and licit administration of the Sacrament, whether
the whole confession consist of such a general accusation or
whether this general accusation be added to a confession of
venial sins to make sure of contrition. The second method
of accusation might perhaps be allowed; but if any one washed
Io make the whole confession by this second method of general
accusation, embracing in this manner sins already confessed
without some sort of a special mention of venial sins lately
committed, the confessor might well object and could not easily
give absolution unless in case of some pressing necessity. If,
however, sins not yet explicitly confessed are declared, and a
general accusation is added of the second kind for the sake of
security, this may be considered as sufficient both quoad valo­
rem and quoad liceitatem. For the accusation, “I have sinned
mortally,” is not quite vague, as it expresses a certain degree
of sinfulness which may very well be (and at times is all that
can be obtained) the object of a judicial sentence.
2. An entirely vague accusation, although there be necessary
matter, may be accepted as being sufficient in cases of extreme
necessity — when a detailed accusation is impossible and abso­
lution must be given. For instance: —
(«) At the time of death, when the dying man can no longer
speak or is unconscious, and has already shown signs of a desire
for absolution; for, according to the Roman Ritual, such a man
is to be absolved (absolvendus est), and this official book of the
Church suggests nothing about making the absolution condi­
tional.
(/>) In other cases of impending death, when the desire for
absolution is expressed by any sort of sign ; e.g. in a shipwreck
where there is not time to make a full accusation.
(c) If a penitent is too ignorant or too weak-headed even
with the help of the confessor’s questions, to render an accurate

46 PENANCE AS A VIETCE AND .Is .1 5.1- /;|.vE.vr

account, at least absolution may at times be given to such a
penitent if he has not had it for a long period.
3. When it is a question of venial sins only (on tie supposition
that these either alone or in conjunction with other doubtful
matter have been confessed), the confessor may not give absolu­
tion for an accusation which is quite, vague, for .such an accusa­
tion offers no entirely certain matter for absolution, and from
what is allowed in danger of death we may not conclude that
the same will suffice for the validity of absolution in cases where
there is no urgency. A confession, for instance, delivered by a
messenger is permissible, only in the case of imminent death
where no other means can be devised ; this is clear from the
propositions condemned by Clément VIII and Paul V. In
any other case, the unanimous voice of theologians declares
such a confession invalid. Hence if valid matter can be pre­
sented, it must be done if absolution is to be given.
This is clear, too, on the merits of the case itself. One may
always presume that the desire, which a dying man expresses for
absolution is at least a hesitating, if not definite, acknowledg­
ment of having committed mortal sin by the fact that he con­
siders absolution necessary and desirable; but if a man, though
able, accuses himself of no definite, sins to his confessor,, it is
tantamount to a declaration that he has committed only venial
sins. Now the confession of mortal sin in general contains
something definite; whereas an accusation of venial sin in gen­
eral is altogether vague; hence the causa judicialis in this case
is quite unknown, and no sentence can be passed where the
charge is unknown and undetermined.
Finally, it is quite foreign to the practice of the Church to
make a confession by the formula, "I have no mortal sins; I am
sorry for my venial sins, and I ask absolution.” He who evades,
therefore, a fuller accusation of his venial sins, when he could
make one, is unworthy of absolution, which is intended to be
« Reuter. Neoconfessarius, P. II. Cap. ΠΙ. Art. IV. n. 117.

REMOTE MATTER O E THE HACHA MENT OF PENANCE

Π

given by the Church only to those who make a definite accusa­
tion.” Though, adds Laymann,” no one is bound by any law
to confess venial sins, yet whoever wishes to receive sacramental
absolution must accuse himself at least of some venial sin, in
specie.*1 Suarez says, and rightly, that the validity of such an
accusation may be defended speculatively, but that practically
it is to be condemned on account of the uncertainty of the matter.
“ I declare, then,” he continues, “that, though we are not strictly
bound to confess the species of the venial sins, yet, supposing
that we wish absolution, we are bound to offer certain and definite
matter. But in case of necessity or where it is impossible to
make a more definite accusation (as might happen in the case
of a man who is dying) such matter would doubtlessly be suf­
ficient.”
"Since, then,” concludes Lehmkuhl, "outside the cases of
necessity or impossibility a vague confession of only venial sins
does not supply definite matter, it is not sufficient to add it to
the particular confession in order to have a more secure ground
for a valid absolution than by the accusation of the smaller sins
committed since the last confession, unless the confessor from
previous knowledge of the penitent can decide whether suffi­
ciently definite matter is presented to him in this vague general
assertion.”ne
In consequence the following rules are recommended in
practice : —
M At accusare se de venialibus in genere dicendo υ. g. .tccuso me de multis
venialibus, nihil aliud exprimendo, probabilius non videtur licere extra rasum
necessitatis; tum quia est contra praxim Ecclesite, tum quia hoc Sacramentum
est institutum per modum accusationis et judicii, quod per se loquendo Jieri debet
circa materiam saltem in specie certam et determinatam. Mazzotta, ). c. Tract.
VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. c. II. Cf. Suarez, Disp. 23, Sect. I. η. 10; Reuter.
Neoconfessarius, P. If. C. III. Art. 4, n. 117.
“ De Sacr. Pœnit. c. 5, n. 14.
Cf. Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Diep. I. Q. IV. c. II.
w Suarez, Disp. 23, Sect. I. u. 10.
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 206.

48 PKNANCE. AS A VIRTUE AND As ,·ί .s.lf'/i.I.I/fcWT

1. If, in order to secure unquestionably definii.· matter from
the past life of the penitent, some sin or other is confessed in
addition to those committed since the last confession, it ought
to be done by mentioning the virtue or the commandment
which was violated.
2. Some really grave sin ought to be mentioned.
3. It should not be mentioned out of mere routine, but with
real sorrow of heart.
4. Since of late a number of writers fiefend the mere vague
accusation on this free matter as valid and permissible 70 even
outside cases of necessity, the confessor when unable to get more
definite matter may acquiesce and grant absolution.
5. If one desires to derive real spiritual profit from the con­
fession of venial sins, too great minuteness as well as too great
vagueness must be avoided; some particular venial sin which
causes more uneasiness than the rest might be made a subject
of more especial sorrow and more careful accusation, otherwise
in many cases the sorrow as well as the accusation and purpose
of amendment are likely to be too vague, if not completely
absent. It has been pointed out previously that gross igno­
rance on the part of the penitent is a reason for taking a very
general accusation as valid for absolution.
In practice the confessor should attend to the following
rules: —
In the case of a penitent who accuses himself of no sin in
particular, let the priest inquire whether this be due to the fact
that the penitent has really not committed any mortal sin, or
to invincible ignorance, or to a rooted habit of sin which has
produced in the penitent a darkening of the intellect anil a reck­
lessness with regard to his salvation. If the penitent accuses
himself of no sin in particular because he is really quite uncon­
scious of grave trespass, the confessor might suggest to him a
10 Cf. Gury-Ballerini, Compend. Theol. Moral. II. n. 421.

HEMOTE MATTEH OF THE HACHAMENT OF PENANCE 49

few lessor sins such as are usually committed by people in the
same station of life, and ask if, since the last confession or in his
past life, he has ever given way to such sins —if, for instance,
he has offended his neighbor, or been violent, angry, disobedient,
careless in prayer, etc. If the penitent answers in the affirma­
tive to one or other of these questions, the confessor should
excite him to repentance and purpose of amendment, so far as
he sees it necessary, and then absolve him. If, however, the
penitent answers all questions with a No, and cannot be induced
to acknowledge any sin of his past life, further questioning
should be avoided, and the penitent urged to make an act of
sorrow for all the sins of his whole life, especially those com­
mitted against his neighbor, or against obedience, etc. If the
penitent accede to this, as often happens, in spite of his former
declaration that he is not conscious of any sin even in his past
life, the priest should arouse him to sorrow and a firm resolution,
and absolve him conditionally if the penitent has not received
absolution for a long time.
With such penitents there will be reason to suspect that their
disposition comes from want of knowledge of the most necessary
truths of salvation. If the priest discover this to be the case —
as he may by a few judicious questions —he may not absolve
him till after instruction in these necessary truths. Ordinarily it
will be well to instruct him at once before leaving the confes­
sional, for fear that he should neglect approaching the Sacra­
ments —a consequence much to be apprehended — or take no
pains to get instructed. If, however, the priest finds out that the
cause of the ignorance is a rooted habit of sin, or the insensibility
following on certain sins which have so fatal an effect in this
matter—as, for instance, impurity or drunkenness — he must
exercise great patience, putting before the penitent earnestly the
awful consequences of his sinful life, instruct him, ami in every
possible way prepare him with true apostolic zeal to receive
worthily the sacrament, either immediately or later, if the

50 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A 8AcHAMENT
absolution lie deferred, and to fulfill his resolutions· of making
an earnest amendment.71
7. The Form of the Sacrament.
The form of the Sacrament, "in which its power principally
lies,”” consists of the words which the priest, utters over the
penitent: Ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine 1‘atris et Filii
et Spiritus Sancti, Amen. To these words the custom of the
Church has added others which have become fixed in the ritual
and are prescribed, though “they do not belong to the essence
of the form and are not necessary for the conferring of the Sac­
rament.” ”
There is no doubt that the words Ego te absolvo, or te absolvo
simply (since the pronoun Ego is contained in the verb absolvo),
belong to the essence of the form. These words are de essentia
forma1, because, as St. Thomas says,74 they signify the virtus
clavium et totum Sacramenti effectum.
According to most theologians the words fl peccatis luis do
not belong to the essence and the validity of the Sacrament;
for this view we may quote St. Thomas and the authority of
the Roman catechism, which says: "The form is: Ego te ab­
solvo.” The words a peccatis tuis are sufficiently indicated by
the accusation of the penitent and the act of the priest who
gives absolution. Other theologians, however, maintain that
these words are essential, arguing that since Christ in institut­
ing the Sacrament used the words, "Whose sins you shall for­
give,” the remission of sins ought to be expressly mentioned.
Though the first view is the more probable, the words ought not
to be omitted in practice, since in the conferring of the Sacra­
ments the safer opinion should be followed.75
11 On this matter see the eminently practical hints of Reuter in hi»
Neoconfessarius. 1. c. n. 117. Cf. tahmkuhl, 1. c. nn. 260, 2G7.
71 Trident. Sees. XIV. cp. 3.
« Trident. 1. c.
74 III. Q. 84, a. 3.
« g, Alph. Lib. VI. n. 430, Dub. 2; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. u. 32.

THE FORM OF THE SACRAMENT

51

If the words absolvo a peccatis luis were used, omitting the
word te, the form would still be probably valid, since te is suffi­
ciently implied in the word luis; in practice, however, this view
ought not to be taken, but the safer opinion followed/· The
absolution would certainly be invalid if the priest said only
absolvo, because the object of the absolution is not indicated
and the sense is indefinite.”
The words In nomine Patris el Filii el Spiritus Sancti. Amen,
are certainly not of the essence of the form, since Christ in insti­
tuting the Sacrament made no reference to the Blessed Trinity ;
they are, however, most appropriately added to express that
the priest absolves from sin by the authority and power of
God.’·
In cases of necessity absolution may be given by the same
priest to many persons at the same time, while he says, Ego vos
absolvo a peccatis vestris; thus, for instance, soldiers may be
absolved at the beginning of a battle. As many Sacramenta
are conferred as there are persons absolved, if they give any
token of sorrow and in some way confess their sinfulness.”
The Rituale Romanum prescribes how a priest should give
absolution, and, as it is the official book of the Church, he is
bound to follow its directions. Any unauthorized change
would be a sin because it is a breach of the commands of the
Church ; indeed the confessor would sin grievously if he wished
to introduce any change into the form of absolution.
“When the priest is about to give absolution,” is the direction
of the Ritual, “after imposing a penance on the penitent and the
latter having accepted it, let him say : Misereatur lui omnipo’« S. Thom. III. Q. 84, n. 1 ad 3. Cf.Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Track VI.
77 The S. C. de Propag. Fid., being asked if a baptism is valid in which
te is omitted from the form, replied (July 5, 1841) : Non valere bapti'inu.
ideoque iterantium. The same holds for the Sacrament of Penance.
”S. Thom. III. Q. 84, n. 1 ad 3. Cf. Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Tract. VI
Disp. II. Q. IV. c. 1.
” Lugo, 1. c. Diet. 13, Sect. 7 ; Lacroix, 1. c. Lib. VI. P. 2, n. <>45, etc.

52

PKXANCK AS A VIRTUE AND As A

s.lt i; i .1//,XT

lens Deus et dimissis peccatis tuis perducat te ad ritam aternam.
Amen. Then he raises his right hand over the p< nitent and
says: Indulgentiam, absolutionem cl remissionem peccatorum
tuorum tribuat tibi omnipotens et misericors Dominus. Arnen.
"Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat, et ego auctoritate
ipsius te absolvo ab omni vinculo excommunication i (suspen­
sionis) et interdicti in quantum possum et tu indiges. Deinde ego
te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris Φ et Filii et Spiritus
Sancti. Arnen.
"If the penitent is not a cleric, the word suspensionis is
omitted." Then follows the prayer: "Passio Domini nostri
Jesu Christi, merita beattv Maria·. Virginis el omnium Sanctorum,
quidquid boni feceris et mali sustinueris, sint tibi in remissionem
peccatorum, augmentum gratia· et prœmium vitee œtemœ. Amen."
If there are many penitents to be heard and in urgent con­
fessions, the Misereatur and Indulgentiam may be omitted and
simply the Dominus noster, etc., said. The prayer Passio Do­
mini, etc., may also be left out.’0 It is recommended, how­
ever, not to omit this last prayer, because by virtue of it (so
teaches St. Thomas) the good works of the penitent acquire
the character of sacramental satisfaction, and a share in the
merits of Christ as well as those of our blessed Lady and of
the saints.'1
"In cases of pressing necessity, in danger of death, the priest
* Cf. Deer. S. R. C. Feb. 27, 1847.
« Cf. Statz, Tribunal Poenitentia·,’L. 11. Q. III. art. 1. § 1 ; Lehmknhl,
I. c. 11. 208: etinm in frequintioribus confessionibus expedit non omittere.
Though Tappehorn in hie Anleitung zur Verwaltung des heiligen BussSacramentes. third edition, p. 07, suggests that when, in accordance with
the permission of the Roman Ritual, the prayer is omitted, it may be said
after the last confession over all those who have confessed, as at the first
absolution (in con/eMionifcus /reçuenfionTau) the prayers Misereatur and
Indulgenliam (the plural vestri, vestris, etc., being used) may be said over all
who aie present, we must observe that the Roman Ritual mentions nothing
ulsmt this practice. Holzmann recommends that the Passio Domini nostri,
et,·., should be said as the penitent leaves the box.

THE FORM OF THE SACRAMENT

53

may simply say : Ego te absolvo ab omnibus censuris et peccatis
in nomine Pain's ■? ct Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Amen."
Such is the form of absolution according to the prescription
of the Roman Ritual. The confessor is at liberty to make use
of the above abbreviations under the circumstances mentioned.
It would be very wrong to attempt to put in all the prayers, if
there were danger of a man dying without receiving absolution ;
in this case the priest must use the shorter form given by the
Ritual.”
The priest will be more eager to carry out the directions of the
Church if he reflects on the meaning of the prayers which pre­
cede and follow the absolution ; the former constitute an admi­
rable preparation for that great act of mercy, the latter a most
appropriate crowning of the same; all secure a special help for
the penitent. Even the blessing which, according to some
rituals, the priest is enjoined to give with the words: Dominus sit
in corde tuo el in labiis tuis ut digne et competenter (or rite) con­
fitearis peccata tua. In nomine Patris •l· et Filii et Spiritus
Sancti. Amen, is important. The accusation of so many sins
is a heavy burden to the penitent; false shame and the devil
will unite to deter him from a sincere accusation; and so the
priest prays that the Lord with His grace may so act on the
heart of the penitent that with sincerity and contrition he accuses
himself of what burdens his conscience. In the Misereatur the
priest prays that God may grant in His mercy remission of the
sins which the penitent confesses, and give him eternal life
(anticipando by sanctifying grace, and perfectly in the next
world). The Indulgentiam, contains the same petition for “grace,
absolution, and remission,” of sins confessed and of all others;
M It is not ile necessitate to raise the hand at the indulgentiam, to make
the sign of the cross at the in nomine Patris, etc., or to uncover the head in
giving the absolution; and distinguished authors maintain that it is not
sinful to omit these ceremonies; it is advisable, however, in this matter to
conform to custom. Scavini, Theol. Moral. I'niversa, Tom. IV. n. 70.

54

PKNA.VCE AS A VIRTUE AND As A s.i<AMENT

it is not meant as a mere repetition, as a sort of compliance
with Our Lord's counsel of insisting on the first petition; but
in the repetition of the synonyms the priest is no doubt intended
to plead for God’s mercy and power that the penitent may have
complete forgiveness of sin.’ This perfect forgiveness includes
also the remission of the temporal penalties, since these, as the
reliquia· peccatorum, are so intimately connected with the sin
itself that in early Christian times they were briefly included
under the category of peccata, and the Church, in the so-called
general absolution given on the occasion of a plenary indulgence
of temporal punishment, still uses the formula indulgentiam
plenariam et remissionem omnium peccatorum tibi concedo.
Then the priest goes on to reconcile the penitent to the Church
by the removal of all censures which close the door to the Sac­
raments and other means of grace. This absolution from cen­
sure should always precede that of the sins as a measure of
precaution even when no sins involving censure have been con­
fessed. The Church insists on this, and many moralists teach
that the confessor by omitting this absolutio a censuris would
commit a venial sin by his disobedience to the command of the
Church. Even in cases of the most pressing urgency the priest
should use the form: Ego te absolvo ab omnibus censuris el pec­
catis in nomine Patris, etc.*3 St. Alphonsus does not regard
this omission as a sin if the priest uses the formula of absolution
with the intention of absolving from censure as well as sin, and
he argues from the words of the Council of Trent, which says
only that this clause is added laudabiliter.** If, however, a
penitent has incurred a censure and the priest first absolves
from the sin and afterwards from the censure, such inversion
of the order would be matter of grievous sin when the censure
is excommunication debarring from the reception of the Sacra­
ments; not, however, in the case of suspension or interdict.
“ Rt. Roni. De Sacram. Pœnit.
»« Sees. XIV. cp. 3. Cf. S. Alph. n. 430, Dub. 4.

Tir E FO IIM OF THE SACRAMENT

ÜÜ

This inversion would also be a grievous sin even if the priest
intended to absolve from both sins and censures, although
in this case the words absolvo te a peccatis luis can be understood
of the absolution from censures on account of the intimate con­
nection between the two.85 Such an absolution, therefore,
would be valid though given in defiance of the Church's pre­
scription, for the censure does not affect the validity but only
the lawfulness of the absolution."*
The penitent must be present and the absolution pronounced
over him by the confessor if it is to be valid. This is abun­
dantly clear from the divine institution of the Sacrament, from
the practice of the Church, and from a decree of the Head of
the Church. Hence the absolution cannot be given in writing
nor by signs. According to the teaching of the Councils of
Florence and Trent the form of this Sacrament, as of all the
others (except that of matrimony, where a mere sign of consent
is sufficient), is in the words which the priest must pronounce
and articulate over the penitent. The Sacraments owe their
institution to Christ ; for, though matrimony existed as a divine
institution before His coming, it was sanctified by Him and raised
to the dignity of a means of grace in His Church. The essential
rites of the Sacraments were defined by Christ, and we learn
them from Scripture or tradition. We know from a uniform
tradition that the form of all the Sacraments except matrimony
M Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. cp. IV. art. 1 : Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Tract. VI.
Disp. II. Q. IV. cp. I ; Stotz, 1. c. L. II. Q. ΙΠ. art. 1, § 1, n.215; Lehmkuhl.
I. c. Sect. I. cp. III. § 3, n. 270.
80 The word Deinde which connects the absolution from censures with
that from sins appears, from the latest edition of the Roman Ritual ns
revised and approved by the S. R. C., to belong to the form (cf. Edit. I.
post typicam Ratisbon, 1888, specialiter a S. R. C. recognita) ; formerly tho
word was printed in red and regarded as a rubric (cf. Edit. Ronue ex
typogr. Prop. 1876). As to the forma deprecatoria which, according to Frank
(Bussdisciplin), was in use till the twelfth century, see Frank, B. 5, K. I ;
Morines, De Pœnitent. ; Binterim, Denkwiirdigkeiten, Bd. 5, Teil 1, K. 6,
§ 3 ; S. Thom. III. Q. 8-1, a. 3 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 261», nota 2.

56 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND As .1 s.H /,-.ι.l//<V2'

consists essentially in words articulated by the lips; ns for
Sacrament of Penance, the evidence is clear as well from the
actual use prescribed in all penitentials and from the teaching
of the Fathem, as from the decree of Eugenius IV to the Arme­
nians.
It is not, however, necessary that the words of absolution
should be heard by the penitent or others; in fact it is recom­
mended to say them in a low voice, so that, in case absolution is
for some reason withheld from a penitent, others may not know
of it.
The fact that the absolution should be pronounced in words
requires as its complement that the penitent should be present,
for the words Ego le absolvo are not such as we would address
to a person when absent, but thus we speak to one who is nigh.
The form mast certainly be applied to the matter actually
present; moreover, according to the Council of Trent the sinner
should present himself before the tribunal as the accused. This
is quite clear, too, from the constant tradition of the Church,
in which all penitentials contain a form which is pronounced
over one who is present, and either explicitly require the imme­
diate presence of the penitent before the confessor or evidently
suppose it; nor do we find in the whole of antiquity any clear
instance of a sacramental absolution pronounced over an absent
person.
A confession, therefore, made to a priest by writing or by
messenger is invalid if the absolution is given to the penitent
in his absence. Moreover, the absolution is illicit and invalid
if given to an absent penitent even though the confession has
been made by him in person to the priest. Further, too, the
absolution is illicit and invalid which is given to a present peni­
tent who has not confessed in person to the priest — if, for
instance, the confession has been by letter; exception is made
for the case where the penitent presents himself to the priest
and for some good reason accuses himself only in general of sins

Tin: i ohm of the hacha ment

57

about which he has informed the confessor by letter, if the
latter at the limo of the confession retains a knowledge of the
sins in particular."7
The prtEsenlia moralis of the penitent is sufficient for absolu­
tion. This condition is satisfied if the priest and the penitent
arc sufficiently near to hear one another when they speak in an
ordinary tone of voice, though cases may occur where the voice
must be exerted a little more than is usual.” In general greater
proximity is required for valid absolution than is demanded
for hearing a preacher or for satisfying the obligation of hearing
Maes.”
St. Alphonsus declares with respect to this subject that Tam67 With regard to this matter Clement VIII in Coast, data d. 20 Jun.
1602 condemned the following proposition : It is permitted to confess one’s
sins to an absent confessor by means of a letter or a messenger, and to
receive absolution from the same confessor though still absent. Moreover,
he forbade under pain of excommunication any one to teach this doctrine
or to make use of it as a probable opinion. The condemnation of this
proposition by the Pope involves evidently an absolute command, and the
conclusion is fairly drawn that the confession made to an absentee, as well
as the absolution given to an absentee, are both illicit and invalid ; otherwise
one might in a case of extreme necessity allow the practice. The Clemen­
tine decree is to be taken not only collectively, that is, as legislating for the
case where both confession and absolution are conveyed by absentees, but
also disjunctively, that is, as legislating for the case where confession has
been made to an absentee, the absolution being given when the penitent
presents himself, and vice versa. This was decreed by Paul V, July 14,
1605. More information may be found in Palmieri, Tract, de Pœnit. pp.
141-143 (Korn. 1870). Cf. Reuter, Neoconfessar. P. I. n. 31 ; Miiller, 1. c.
L. III. T. II. § 132; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. I. n. 32 s. Absolu­
tion from censure, apart from the absolution from sin, may be conveyed by
writing and the presence of the penitent is not required; similarly censures
may be inflicted on one who is absent. Without grave necessity, however,
the absolution from censures ought not to be given in the absence of the
penitent. S. Alph. L. VII. n. 117.
88 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 420.
80 Though all theologians agree in requiring the moral presence of the
penitent for valid absolution, they vary in assigning the limits of that pres­
ence. Many theologians suppose that a penitent stationed at twenty paces
from the priest may be regarded as morally present; this distance is thought
by St. Alphonsus to be too great.

58 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACKAMENT

burini is justified in rejecting the view of Leander, who holds
that the moral presence is secured if the priest sees the penitent
or is sensibly aware of his presence.’" A man may be seen at a
distance at which it would be impossible to hold speech with
him in the usual manner or even by raising the voice. If in
case of necessity absolution must be given at a distance, it
should be given sub conditione.
Hence to secure the validity of the absolution it is required
(1) that the confessor and the penitent should not be in rooms
which are in no way connected; and if (2) they are in the
same room, they should not be too far apart, certainly not
more than twenty paces; if the distance is notably less, there
need be no misgiving about the validity of the absolution;
finally (3) the required proximity is secured if the priest
knows that the penitent is present.
(a) If the penitent has already left the confessional but is
still close by the confessor, he may and ought to be absolved,
even, according to Lugo, Tamburini, and others, if he be so
merged in the crowd that he cannot be seen; the confessor
must, however, be certain that he is not or cannot be far off ;
for the penitent is still morally present and has the desire of
receiving absolution. The penitent ought, however, to be
recalled if this can be done without causing disturbance or
remark.
(b) If, through fear of infection or for other reasons, the
priest cannot enter a sick-room, he may validly absolve the
penitent from the window or the door.”
(c) If at a distance a priest secs some one falling from a
height or into the water, or if he knows that some one is buried
*> S. Alph. 1. c. VI. n. 420.
»i The priest is, however, strongly advised not to be too nervous in exer­
cising his office for a penitent struck down by an infectious disease; confi­
dence in God joined to a little prudent foresight and courage will be more
useful to him than a cowardly nervousness.

CONDITIONAL· A BHOLUTlOlf
under the ruins of a building, etc., he should give absolution
conditionally."2
Absolution must, under ordinary circumstances, be given
absolutely ; for weighty reasons it may and ought to be given
conditionally {condfdone).
8. Conditional Absolution.

It is the unanimous teaching of all theologians that in certain
cases, for weighty..reasons, the Sacraments may be administered
M Cf. Reuter, Neoconfess. ). c. n. 31 ; Scavini, Theologia Moralis uni­
versa, Tom IV. η. 77; Mülltir, 1. c. § 132; Aertnys, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tom. V.
cp. IV. h. 215, Q. 6. In .accordance with this teaching we must solve the
question raised whether absolution given by telephone is valid. (Aloys.
Sabetti, S.J., in Collegio SS. Cordis ad Woodstock, Th. Mor. Prof., Compend.
Theol. Moral. Gury ... ad breviorem formam redactum, etc. Benziger,
1881; Alphons. Eschbach e Cong. S. Spiritus et Irnm. Cord. M. Rectoris
Sein. Gall. Rotme, La Confession par téléphone; Melata, Manuale Theol.
Moralis, De Pœnit. cp. II. art. I.) It is certain that the use of the telephone
for giving absolution is extra casum necessitatis a grave sin because it intro­
duces into the administration of the Sacraments a practice which is novel
and liable to misuse. The case is limited to the question whether in
urgent need the use of such a method can be tolerated — if, for instance, a
member of a secret society, seized with a dangerous illness and anxious to
be reconciled with the Church, but debarred by his associates from the sight
of a priest, could make use of the telephone placed in his room to call up a
friendly priest and make his confession to him and receive absolution
through the telephone. Eschbach, in his work mentioned above, teaches
that such an absolution is quite invalid. Sabetti acknowledges that the
solution of the question involves many difficulties, and that it ought to be
submitted to the decision of the Holy See; he appears, however, to incline
to an affirmative answer. He says : Though it is true that moral presence
and a connection between matter and form are necessary in every Sacrament,
yet this exigency varies. Since Penance has lieen instituted on the lines of
an earthly tribunal, in which judge and accused must be so far present to
one another as to be able to speak together, the absolution in the given case
cannot be said for certain to be invalid, since one might always argue that
the priest and the penitent could speak together. Against this, it may be
objected that the illustration of an earthly tribunal is not quite applicable,
since here the presence of the accused is not necessary, for he may be con­
demned in contumaciam. To the question whether in ca.su extrema necessita­
tis dari possit absolutio per telephonium * the Pœnitentiaria replied, .July 1.
1881 : Nihil esse respondendum.—Bucceroni, Enchiridion Morale (Kouiæ,
1887), p. 110.

fiO PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS .1 >,| « /, i ιΖΛ·Λ-Γ
conditionally, and, what is more, must be so administered.
With regard to Baptism and Extreme Unction this is pre­
scribed by the Roman Ritual, with regard Io Confirmation
by Benedict XIV, with regard to the Holy Eucharist, where
a doubt exists as to the validity of the consecration, by the
Rubrics of the Mass, and with regard to Orders by the
S. Congregatio Concilii.”
The question now under consideration is whether the Sacra­
ment of Penance given conditionally is valid.
Many theologians were of opinion that a conditional absolution
was opposed to the judicial character of this Sacrament. They
argued that the conditional form was not judicial, and in partic­
ular would not admit a condition with regard to law (conditio
juris), on which the confessor was bound to pronounce judg­
ment (e.g. if thou art prepared, disposed, etc.), whereas they
permitted a condition with regard to the fact (conditio facti) (e.g.
if thou art alive). This distinction is, however, irrelevant ; for
even though the question of the penitent’s disposition be left
undecided, still the priest judges (1) of the sins which have been
confessed, and (2) gives his sentence on the apparent worthiness
and preparation of the penitent and the penance to be. imposed;
and (3) judges on the advisability of conferring conditional ab­
solution or not, according to the effect it will have on (he peni­
tent. In any case, the argument from the difference which a
conditional sentence would create between a human court and
the sacramental tribunal proves nothing, since the two courts
differ in many points.” It is to be particularly noted that
the sentence of an earthly court is always carried out; while the
effect of the sentence which the priest pronounces in the divine
tribunal always depends on conditions known only to Clod, so
that the priest’s sentence is always conditional even when it is
pronounced in an absolute form. A conditional sentence is in
« Scavini, Theologia Moralis Universa, Tom. 111. n. 479 (Ed. Par. 1807).
’■ Cf. Gurv, II. 1. c. n. 432, 2; Ballerini, Op.Theol. Mor. 1. o. op. I. n. 27.

' O.V/H77O.V J /,

ABSOLUTION

«1

no way inconsistent with the nature of a judicia) judgment either
in general or in the Sacrament of Penance.
Lehrnkuhl enlarges on this point:"11 "It is not repugnant in
a civil tribunal for a judge to give sentence with a condition like
the following, for instance: ‘If payment be not made by a cer­
tain date,' or to grant a hearing to a plaintiff ‘provided that
such or such document be found among his papers,' which docu­
ment, of course, he will order to be searched for by trustworthy
men. Indeed, every sentence of a human tribunal, whether in
civil or in criminal causes, is seldom pronounced without the
implicit condition ‘if the evidence of the witnesses be true’; for
unless it rested upon this supposition and condition, the sen­
tence would be unjust and consequently null, more especially if
pronounced by any but the supreme authority.”
Thus the sacramental sentence always presupposes that the
penitent is telling the truth and has real sorrow; under such
circumstances the confessor may be mistaking even when he
thinks he is certain, all the more so as the sacramental sentence
is pronounced always ministerially, and, in order to be efficacious,
must be in accordance with the sentence of God. This, how­
ever, is no impediment to the absolution being for the most part
pronounced absolutely both as to form anti intention. This the
confessor must observe as long as he has no solid ground for
thinking that his judgment is not in accordance with God’s: for
a condition which rests only on a possibility or on a groundless
suspicion is practically not worth considering and ought not to
be acted upon ; in reality it is quite sufficiently implied in the
nature of the case.
If, however, for some good reason it is to be feared that the
judgment of the confessor is different from that of God, while
the pressing necessity of the case, or the good of the penitent
requires that absolution be given even though doubtful, rever85 Lehrnkuhl, P. II. L. I. Tr. V. Sect. I. n. 272.

62

l'EXANVE AS Λ VIRTUE AM) ,4.S .1 > Η/ΜΛ/β,ν?'

ence for the Sacrament demands that the condition be added
explicitly in word, or at least in the mind, so that it amounts to
a protest on the part of the priest that where the condition is in
default he withdraws his intention of pronouncing the sacred
words of absolution in the person of Christ.
The opponents of conditional absolution urge in favor of their
view the proposition that in doubt about the validity of the Sac­
raments the safer opinion must be followed. With regard to the
validity of conditional absolution there is no doubt, since the
views of its opponents have, no probability cither intrinsic or
extrinsic. Moreover, it is not true that the safer opinion with
regard to the validity of the Sacraments is always to be followed;
for, since the Sacraments were instituted for man’s benefit, cases
occur in which the Sacraments must be exposed to the danger
of nullity, in order to help one who is in extreme spiritual neces­
sity. An instance in point would be the case of a dying man
whose dispositions are doubtful. To let him die without abso­
lution would surely expose him to the certain danger of dam­
nation. Supposing he were in good dispositions, whatever
misgivings I might have on the subject, should I not be re­
sponsible, for his damnation? I might have opened the gates of
heaven to him and I have not done it ! Am I then to absolve
him without any condition? But supposing he is not disposed;
even if the Sacrament were not nullified, I should be guilty of
having exposed it to the danger of invalidity. From such a di­
lemma the only escape is the use of conditional absolution ; by
it I can help the dying man if he is in good dispositions, and I
insure the Sacrament against nullity when I have the intention
of not conferring it unless the man be disposed.08
Hence theologians teach that absolution given sub conditione
is valid if the condition be fulfilled; the condition, however,
must be de pressenti or de prœterito; absolution given under a
»6 Cf. Gury, II. n. 434.

CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION

63

conditio de futuro would be invalid, for in a conditio de luturo the
minister of the Sacrament has no intention of conferring the
Sacrament hic et nunc; his intention would rather be to confer
the Sacrament when the condition will have been fulfilled; by
that time, however, the matter is no longer present which for
the validity of the Sacrament must be joined to the form. On
the other hand, the Sacrament may bi· validly given under a
condition de prœsenti or de pmterito, because the intention is
absolute if the condition is fulfilled; if not fulfilled, the inten­
tion of administering the Sacrament is wanting, so that the
Sacrament is not exposed to irreverence. In this case the con­
ditional intention passes into an unconditional one, i.e. becomes
absolute. But the conditional intention is efficacious for valid­
ity only if the condition is completed or satisfied at the moment
when the matter and form of the Sacrament are brought to­
gether. The absolution would also be valid if it were given with
the condition: “if you are alive, if you are baptized, if you are
present, if you really intend to make restitution ” ; while an ab­
solution would be invalid if given under conditions such as, “if
you are predestined, if it be in the mind of God that you will
make restitution this year,” since such knowledge is withheld
from men. Finally, an absolution given with the condition, “if
you are going to improve,” would also be invalid.®’
It is also allowed to give absolution sub conditione when there
is just reason for so doing; and in case of necessity the priest is
bound under mortal sin to give conditional absolution.®*
The view of some theologians is to be condemned who hold
that one may impart conditional absolution for any insignificant
reason, or without urgent need, or in any doubt of the requisite
dispositions even in a penitent burdened with mortal sin. This
is a doctrine which bears too openly the stamp of laxity, and it
·» Cf. S. Alph. I. c. Lib. VI. n. 25; Stotz. 1. c. L. Π. Q. TIT. art. I. § 4.
” Cf. Declar. S. Inquis. 17 Juni 1715,17 Dec. 1808, 20 Jul. 1859.

64

PEXANCK A8 .1

VIRTUE AXD AS .1

s'.f<7;.| .i/^'.VT

is pernicious to souls. What a number of sacrileges would f0|.
low from such a practice! The confessor would I»· no longer a
faithful and prudent minister of the .Sacrament, he would be
casting pearls before swine, and by his too easy compliance
in giving absolution he would imperil the souls of his peni­
tents.”
On the other hand, wo cannot admit the teaching of those
theologians10'’ who hold that absolution sub conditione is per­
mitted only in extreme necessity or in great danger.
Λ sufficient reason for imparting absolution under condition
would be in the case where unconditional absolution would ex­
pose the Sacrament to danger of nullity on account of a reason­
able doubt of the existence of some one or other of the requisites
for the validity of the Sacrament, and where at the same time
by putting off the absolution the penitent would be exposed to
danger of real spiritual harm.
From what has been said we gather that in the following cases
absolution may be given sub conditione : —
1. If the priest doubt whether he has absolved a penitent who
has confessed a mortal sin.
2. In doubt whether the penitent in question is morally
present.
3. In doubt whether the penitent is alive or already dead.
4. If the priest doubt (dubio facti) whether he has jurisdic­
tion, and the confession must be made ; in such a case the con­
fessor must tell the penitent that he has given absolution only
sub conditione, so that if proof be forthcoming later on that juris­
diction was wanting, the penitent will know that he has not been
absolved and must accuse himself again of the mortal sins men­
tioned in that confession. If the doubt turn on the question of
law (dubium juris), i.e. on a point where theologians do not
w 8. Alph. 1. c. n. 432, etc.
100 Colletue, “ acerrimus probabilismi impugnator.”

CON O1T1OfiAL A HHOLTTION

65

agree whether absolution can be given in such a case, the absolu­
tion may be pronounced without, any condition.1”
5. In doubt whether the matter lx> sufficient : this may hap­
pen (o) when an adult is baptized sub conditione and is to be
absolved at the same time; and (6) when a penitent declares
only some imperfections, and there is doubt whether they are
really venial sins, ami when the same penitent can offer no cer­
tain sins of his past life. To such a penitent absolution may,
according to a probable view, be given at intervals, so that he
may not be deprived for long of the benefits of the Sacrament
of Penance ; absolution in such cases ought not to be given more
than once a month. For the same reason absolution can be
given sub conditione when the penitent, unable to present cer­
tain matter from his past life, has only sins of less moment to
confess and there is doubt as to the existence of sorrow for such
sins.103 Moreover, if the penitent offer no certain matter, the
confessor is not bound to inquire for it in order to give abso­
lution, and after making vain inquiry he is not obliged to give
absolution sub conditione, since the penitent in such case has no
sure claim to it.
If, however, any doubt exists as to the presence of necessary
matter, or whether a sin confessed along with the imperfections
be mortal or not, for which, however, the penitent is certainly
contrite, then absolution under condition must be given.
6. In doubt whether the necessary dispositions with regard
to mortal sin are present conditional absolution may sometimes,
though not always, be given ; it must be given when urgent rea­
sons counsel such a step. For instance : —
(а) To those who are in danger of death, from whatever cause.
(б) When the penitent honestly thinks he is well disposed,
anil when the confessor fears that if absolution be refused or put
101 Aertnys, 1. c. art. II. n. 217; Concilia, according to the testimony of
St. Alphonsus, in srveras nentenlias generatim deflectent.
101 Lehinkuhl, 1. c. n. 273.

66 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT

off, the penitent may fall into worse ways or be frightened away
from the Sacraments, or that he will certainly receive some other
Sacrament, as, for instance, Marriage or Confirmation, in an
unworthy state.
Finally, conditional absolution may be given to children and
others of whom it is doubtful whether they possess sufficient use
of reason or the necessary knowledge of the truths of faith.
These may receive conditional absolution not only when in dan­
ger of death, but also when they have to fulfill the law of the
Church, and especially if they have confessed a sin which is
doubtfully or probably mortal ; they must be so absolved even
if they are relapsing sinners, for while in doubtfully disposed
penitents who have the full use of reason absolution must be de­
layed, since hopes may be entertained that they will return bel·
ter disposed later, in the case of children or feeble minded no such
hope can be well entertained. Indeed, according to a probable
view such penitents may receive conditional absolution at inter­
vals of two or three months, when they confess only venial sins,
that, they may not go for any considerable time without the
grace of the Sacrament. The confessor is, however, obliged to
instruct children and feeble-minded persons and to dispose them
for absolution.103
We answer some objections urged against the doctrine
that in the cases mentioned absolution may be given condi­
tionally.
1. This practice is full of danger and is the cause of many sins.
The practice is full of danger, it is true, if absolution is given
indiscriminately without necessity or some special reason: if,
however, the rules given above are observed, it is no longer
dangerous or harmful.
2. Il is further objected that a penitent conditionally absolved
S. Alph. 1. c. ii. 432 ; Lacroix. L. VI. p. 2. n. 1707 ; Mazzotta, Theol.
Morali», Tract. IV. piep. IL Q. IV. cp. II.: Ballcriiii, Op. Theol. Moral.
I.
I. a. 27; Aertnya, I. c. art. II. 11.217 ; Lehiukulil, 1. c. ti. 273 -, Guiy,
I. c. II. a. 435.

CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION

67

will approach the altar and make a sacrilegious communion, a
risk not to be incurred lightly.
The confession of such a penitent is not sacrilegious, hence the
communion is not ; for, by supposition, the penitent is in good
faith. At the worst the communion would be without fruit or
profit; nor can we say that the communion is quite useless, for
its reception is an occasion for eliciting different acts of virtue.
Indeed, according to the common teaching on this subject, the
communicant who receives in mortal sin and with imperfect
contrition, yet in good faith, is placed thereby in a state of
grace. To make an act of imperfect contrition should not be
a great difficulty, since holy communion usually arouses pious
emotions of love and sorrow in those who approach in good
faith.
3. It is likewise objected that a conditionally absolved peni­
tent will never confess his sins again, anil if he is not rightly
disposed will die in his sins.
It may be replied that doubtfully absolved sins arc remitted
(a) by the reception of holy communion, as we have already
shown; (b) indirectly in the following confession along with the
other sins which he confesses, even if he were never again to
submit them to the keys. If it be urged here that the penitent
might never come to confession again, we should reply that
such a case is extremely rare and to be treated as quite improb­
able. On the contrary, the penitent would be exposed to much
graver risk of his salvation if, in a situation of such necessity as
we postulate for the giving of conditional absolution, he were to
be dismissed without it.
4. Another objection is drawn from the first of the proposi­
tions condemned by Innocent XI, whence it appears that no
one may presume to follow a probable opinion in dispensing the
Sacraments. The conclusion drawn is that no one may give an
absolution which is doubtfully valid.
This practice is absolutely forbidden where the validity of the

68

PREAECE AS A WHITE AM) .15 .1

·■ Η /,· | vZf.VT

Sacrament and the welfare of the individual arc endangered by
such administration of the Sacrament ; if, liowcvci. necessity or
solid reasons demand such practice, it is allowed.' " Moreover,
the proposition condemned by Innocent is concerned only with
the essential portions of the Sacrament, the validity of matter
and form in so far as these depend on the minister of the Sacra­
ment. In our case the matter is presented by the penitent and
is outside the control of the minister. Otherwise, indeed, peni­
tents might often enough be dismissed without absolution, for
frequently no certainty can be had as to their dispositions, but
at most a greater or lesser probability.
5. Finally some would limit the use of conditional absolution
to cases of the greatest rarity and of most pressing necessity —
when, for instance, a dying man is quite unconscious or already
in his agony; for in any other case it is entirely his own fault if
he be doubtfully disposed. This is the view of the anonymous
author of the Letters against the distinguished work of Cardinal
Gousset : Justification de la doctrine de Saint Liguori.'0*
Tliis objection is based on several false premises : —
1. It is untrue that one who is doubtfully disposed is certainly
indisposed ; it is at least per se untrue, for it is a contradiction in
terms.
2. It is untrue that the penitent is always responsible for not
,M Compare S. Alph. De Sacram. in genere, n. 28, 29, 57, and De Consci­
entia, n. 49; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Moral. 1. c. cp. I. n. 27 : “ liæc est sen­
tentia certa, licere in necessitate administrare sacramenta sub conditione. ”
106 He says : “ Necessity is but very seldom a ground for giving absolution
to one who is doubtfully disposed; for a dying man, with only an instant to
spare, and in the jtossession of his faculties, has only himself to blame if he
caunot produce an act of perfect contrition; it is an article of faith that
God never refuses the means of salvation if they are asked with confidence,
and for such a soul perfect contrition is a most necessary condition for sal­
vation. If, therefore, he. has only doubtful contrition, it is his own fault,
and in such case he is not merely doubtfully, but certainly, unworthy, and
cannot in consequence lie absolved. There remain, then, only the cases in
which the dying man caunot express his sentiments even by signs, and
then the principle holds: sacramenta jiropter homines."

CONDITIONAL A II SOLUTION

69

seeming certainly disposed; for he can be quite prepared with­
out the confessor knowing about it; again, as long as he is not
certainly unprepared, ho may be actually in the proper disposi­
tions.
3. Many considerations respecting the penitent’s salvation
may, as we have seen, urge the confessor to decide on giving
rather than refusing absolution. At times the priest would be
guilty of the gravest imprudence by putting off the absolution
till extreme need should arise, when the penitent might be unable
to avail himself of the Sacrament. “ Do you wish to put off the
reconciliation of the dying man to his God till the moment when
he can no longer express his wishes? Will you, in order to
make the absolution certain, wait till the penitent is at the last
gasp, so that it is doubtful if he is capable of receiving the Sac­
rament? ... I repeat, the Sacraments are made for men, not
men for the Sacraments. By pursuing such a course you would
act in opposition to Him who out of His mercy gave us the Sac­
rament; you would depart from the spirit of the Church which,
like a tender mother, administers the Sacraments, when you
maintain that we can only apply the principle of sacramenta
propter homines in cases where the dying sinner cannot even by
signs express what is going on in the recesses of his soul.”10·
100 Gousset. Lettres à M. le Curé . .. Lettre 8. Cf. Gury, 1. c. IL Tract, de
Sacrani. Pœnit. P. I. n. 430-439; Ballerini. Op. Theol. Moral. 1. c. cp. I. nn.
27 et 20, where he signalizes these objections as inanes objectiones nonnul­
lorum. etiam recentiorum in Gallia, qui antiqua prajudicia janseniana incaute
ebiberunt.

Part II
THE RECIPIENT OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE,
OR THE ACTS OF THE PENITENT
9. Who can Receive the Sacrament of Penance.

Every man who has fallen into formal sin after Baptism is
capable of receiving the Sacrament of Penance. Whoever,
therefore, has not yet been baptized, or, having been baptized,
has committed no sin since Baptism, is incapable of sacramental
absolution. All children who have not attained to the use of
reason are unable to receive this Sacrament; to these we may
add such adults as cannot make that use of their reason which
is necessary for disposing them to receive this Sacrament.
In order that a baptized person may make a valid and fruit­
ful use of this Sacrament, he must elicit those acts which we
have mentioned before ; he must be genuinely sorry for his sins,
be ready to do penance, and submit his sins to the power of the
keys vested in the Church. These acts form not only the essen­
tial and necessary dispositions for receiving the Sacrament , but
— and this is a peculiar feature of the Sacrament of Penance they are also the materia proxima. Tire following sections will
be devoted to the consideration of these acts in their double
aspect.

CHAPTER I
CONTRITION

10. Extent and Efficacy of Contrition.

The most prominent position among the acts of the penitent
belongs to contrition.
According to the teaching of the Council of Trent contrition
is a hearty sorrow and detestation for past sin together with a
firm resolution to sin no more.1
We must investigate more closely the essence of this contrition.
Condition is a hearty sorrow; this sorrow is interior; hence the
prophet speaks of a rending of the heart (.scindite corda vestra!
— Joel ii. 13), and so contrition is called contritio cordis, a grind­
ing of the heart. A merely external show of sorrow, the mere
recital of an act of contrition, is therefore not a true sorrow.
Moreover, since sorrow is a moral act and all moral acts proceed
from the will, sorrow must have its roots in the will.
Many very different things may cause us great grief; for in­
stance, the death of a dear relation, the loss of earthly goods,
the failure of our plans and undertakings, the suffering of wrongs
and affronts, experience of ingratitude and unkindness, a thought­
less word which one has uttered, a mere breach of etiquette that
one has committed. Contrition, however, is grief of the soul for
past sin.
The sins of others may cause us real and deep feelings of pain.
What fervent Christian is unconcerned at the many sins which
are daily committed and the many affronts offered to God? We
are pained by them, but we cannot be contrite for them. We can
1 SeH.s. XIV. cp. 4.

72

THE RECIPIENT OF PEXAM 'E

have contrition only for the sins which we hare onrselres commit­
ted—de peccato commisso, as the Council of Trent expresses it.
This being the case, sorrow as understood in thconnection
is not to be confused with : —
(fl) Merely speculative sorrow (dolor intellectivus), i.e., the
mere knowledge of the hatefulness and horror of sin. Reason
when not blinded can recognize and must recognize clearly the
hatefulness and wickedness of sin; yet in spite of this knowledge
the will may cling to it and love it; indeed such cases are of
frequent occurrence.
(ft) Or the feeling of guilt or the remorse of conscience (ter­
rores conscientia) which Luther taught to be of the essence of
true sorrow. The feeling of guilt may be present without the
help of our will, and even against our will. Remorse of con­
science may be roused in us without our wishing it, and it may
happen that we cannot allay it even when we wish to do soa
(c) Finally, the resolve to amend, the resipiscentia, and even
the giving up of the sin is not of itself true sorrow; a man may
forsake his sin merely because he has indulged in it to excess,
because it has no longer any attraction for him, or because he
has become tired of it.
True sorrow is not merely a pain and bitterness of heart;
it is also a real hatred and horror of sin; but hatred and horror
are acts of the will, for it is the will which hates and loves,
shrinks from an object or embraces it. The will may shrink
from sin at the same time that sensuality makes us crave for the
sin; the will, however, must not give way to the craving.
Sorrow and detestation of sin are in themselves distinct, yet
they are so bound up in man’s nature, that, where there is
detestation there is necessarily also sorrow, so that true and
efficacious sorrow for sin, as sin, cannot exist without detestation
of the same.*
» Compare on this subject the lengthy discussions of Suarez.. He Poeni­
tentia, Disp. 3. Sect. 2; Lugo, De Pœuiteutiu, Disp. 4, Sect. 1; Reuter,

EXTENT AND EFFICACY OF CONTRITION

73

As to the question whether contrition lies more in sorrow for
sin or in detestation of it
in other words, in dislike, hatred,
and aversion
theologians answer that contrition is founded
principally on detestation for sin, and with reason, for: —
(o) By this detestation the sinner retracts his evil will and
turns towards God; this detestation is, moreover, the cause of
sorrow. When, therefore, it is asserted that the sinner should
above all have sorrow for his sins, and when by this is understood
a sorrowful hatred of sin, this is correct, for in this case horror
of sin is there with its complement. Moreover, we must not
lose sight of St. Alphonsus’ dictum3 that there is no reason to
doubt that one sentiment includes the other; he who has a
horror of his sins is sorry for them, and whoever is supernaturally
sorry for them detests them.
Since contrition is the most important element in the dispo­
sition of the sinner, it is proper to give in detail the acts which
belong to contrition, and to show how the sinner may attain to
perfect contrition.
First and foremost, a preliminary act of faith and hope of
obtaining pardon by the merits of Christ should be made. Howcan he repent of his sins who does not believe that there is a God
and that God is offended by sin, who does not believe that God
is fait hful to His promises and merciful to sinners, and who does
not hope that God will pardon him? These acts of faith and
hope, though they need not be made explicitly, are the founda­
tions of contrition; on them are built up the remaining elements
which go to form the perfect act. These are : —
1. The knowledge of the hatefulness of sin as an offense
against God, and of the awful punishments which the sinner
Theol. Moral. P. TV. n. 243; and particularly the very lucid exposition
of Palmieri, Tract, de Pœnit. (Roma, 1879) cap. IV. De act. pœnit. art. I.
§ 1, p. 214 sq.
3 L. o. L. VI· n. 435. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theo). Mor. 1. c. de Contritione,
n. 14.

74

THK RKCll'JENT ΟΕ PEXAM /.

incurs. Ulis knowledge is necessary in order to acquire contri­
tion, for the law of man's nature makes him love and strive for
what his reason proposes to him under the appearance of good,
and hate and avoid what it presents as evil.
2. An act of the will, which desires to avoid the evil now
known as such ; on this follows : —
3. The hatred of past sins which have caused that evil, and
the desire of undoing the sin committed. This desire, in the
abstract, is only a velleity and quite inefficacious, for that which
is done cannot be undone; but it is of efficacy in so far as it
means a wish to undo, if it were possible, the sin by which God
has been offended and punishment incurred.
4. From this hatred there arises in the rational appetite or in
the will a sorrow and real distress that the sins have been com­
mitted ; hence also follows : —
5. In the sensitive appetite, by picturing to ourselves the
horror and evil consequences of sin, a certain hatred and sorrow,
which may become so keen as to produce sighs and tears.
6. The resolve and firm determination never more to sin
and offend God, or, what comes to the same thing, a resolution
to observe faithfully and perfectly God’s commands.
7. Finally, there appears in the truly repentant sinner a
willingness to render satisfaction to God for past sins, to chas­
tise and punish himself, and to repair God’s honor.4
Contrition is either perfect or imperfect6 according as the
4 Stotz, Tribunal Pœnitent. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I. art. II.
4 This in the distinction given by the Council of Trent in Sess. 14, cp. 4 :
Perfect contrition is very aptly and simply called contritio in its restricted
meaning, while imperfect contrition is called attritio. The figure is taken
from solid bodies which, when )>ounded to dust., are contrita, but when
broken into fragments are attrita. “The heart of man may be compared
to wood for kindling. By contrition (contritio and attritio) the heart is
rubbed; as the rubbing is increased, the heart, like wood, becomes drier
and warmer, till there bursts forth a flame : this flame is sanctifying grace ;
and just as fire consumes wood, so charity consumes the crushed heart (cor
contritum) and burns out its sin." (Oswald, Die dogmat. Lehre von den

EXTENT AND EFFICACY OF CONTRITION

75

sorrow and hatred arise from a motive of perfect love or of some
supernatural motive which is inferior to perfect love. Since we
understand here by love (caritas) the amor benevolentia, by
which we love God above all things for His own sake, i.e. on
account of His infinite perfections, we may define perfect con­
trition (contritio) as a sorrow ami hatred for past sins together
with a firm purpose never more to sin, because sin is an injury
to God, who is loved above all things for His own sake.
Imperfect contrition (attritio) may be founded on many other
supernatural motives : these are usually, as the Council of Trent
declares, the fear of hell or punishment and the hatefulness of
sin.0 Thus imperfect contrition may be defined: sorrow and
detestation of past sin with the determination never more to
sin, because sin is an offense against God, who utterly abhors
it on account of its hatefulness and avenges it with punishment.
The thought of God, the supreme Lord of all, infinitely holy, to
whom sin is detestable by its shamefulness, fills the sinner with
confusion ; the thought of God, who punishes sin with infinite
justice, fills him with fear of the punishments of sin, and,
impelled by this fear, he repents of having offended God by
his sin.
Perfect and imperfect contrition coincide in this respect, that
they are both a supernatural sorrow and hatred for sin regarded
as an injury to God; they differ, however, specifically in this,
that perfect contrition proceeds from perfect love of God, and
imperfect contrition from a variety of other less noble motives;
they also differ in their efficacy.7
heilig. Sakrauienten, II. Bd. Fiinft. Teil, Zweit. Abschnitt, Erst. Hauptet.
§ 7, S. 82.)
• Lugo. De Pœuit. Disput. V. Sect. 0. n. 132; Palmieri, Tract, de Pœnit.
I. c. th. 21, p. 223.
’ Since perfect contrition arises from perfect love, it is of great impor­
tance. after considering the infinite goodness and dignity of God. to make
an act of love and then an act of sorrow. The synod assembled in 1726
under Benedict XIII offers a form of contrition which was composed for

76

THE Ιί El I PIEE T OF PEXAE' /

11. The Essential Features of Perfect Contrition
According to the unanimous tenchjig of
which
is based on the Council of Trent, perfect contiii on proceeds
from perfect, love. The Council declares that conimion founded
on caritas is perfect ; that, in consequence, its perfection depends
on caritas; hence in order to acquire a complete grasp of the
nature of perfect contrition we must investigate the nature of
love, its degrees and kinds.
The love of God, of which only there is question here, has
for its object God alone, and the motive of this love is similarly
always God Himself. There are many aspects under which God
may be presented to us as an object of love, and these aspects
determine the different degrees of love. First of all there arc
two kinds of this love: pure or disinterested love, amor bene­
volentia (amicitia), and selfish or interested love (amor concupis­
centia). God can be loved because He is most worthy of love,
because He is good, because He is the highest good. If we love
God for His own sake because He is most lovable in Himself
(prout est in se summum bonum), we have the first kind of love,
the pure love of God; if we love Him on our own account be­
cause He is for us the highest good (prout nobis est summum
the use of children: “My Lord and my God, who art infinitely good and
holy, I love Thee above all things and repent with my whole heart of
having offended Thee so often by my sins. 1 detest them above all other
evils. 1 humbly beg Thy forgiveness, and 1 promise with the help of Thy
grace never more to offend Thee." (Collect. Lacensis Cone., Tom. I. p.
458, Fribourg. 1870.) Another form is given by St. Alphonsus: ·· My God,
Thou art infinitely good; therefore I love Thee above all things; and
because 1 love Thee 1 am sorry for all the sins which I have committed
against Thee, O infinite Goodness. My God, I will never more sin against
Thee: I will rather die than offend Thee again." Perfect contrition might
be aroused also in the following manner: ·· O Heart of Jesus, most worthy
of all love. I love Thee above all things, and therefore I am sorry for all mv
sins and detest them above all things, because by them 1 have offended
Thee and incurred Thy anger. I am firmly resolved never more to offend
Thee.” (Muller, Theol. Moral. 1. c. § 11-2.)

i-

ESSENTIAL ΡΕΑΊ THES OF PERFECT CONTRITION

77

bonum), we have the second kind of love. The pure Jove of
God is called perfect love, the other imperfect. If now we con­
sider more closely the imperfect love of God, we find two de­
grees. God is here the object of love in as much as He is good
to man, i.e. on the one hand God confers His benefits on man
on earth and His everlasting possession in heaven completes
the happiness of man hereafter, and on the other hand the
loss of God means to man on earth unhappiness and suffering
and in the next life the eternal punishment of hell. If a man
disregards totally the idea of God as a person to be loved and
keeps in view only his own selfish interests, he evidently loves
only himself, thinking merely of his own present and future
well-being, his own joys and sufferings, his own reward and pun­
ishment. Such a love, which hardly deserves the name, is
downright selfishness and is rightly called a mercenary love
(amor mercenarius). This love corresponds to the fear which
is called purely servile, timor serviliter servilis, that fear which
hates only the punishment and not the sin, which cherishes
the inclination to sin, so that a man would sin if he did not fear
punishment. Roth love and fear of this kind belong to
the lowest degree and destroy all supernatural merit and
reward.
But there is an imperfect love of God in which man’s heart
really turns to God simply because God is good to him, it is true,
yet so that he loves Him efficaciously and really and regards
the loss of God as the loss of all good and the greatest of misfor­
tunes. Since in such a love of God there is mingled a great deal
of the love of self, so that one love is not present without the
other, it cannot yet be called the pure love of God, but receives
a special name, the love of chaste concupiscence, amor casta· concupiscentia·. To this love corresponds that fear of eternal pun­
ishment, which does not exclude the thought of God, which
fears the punishment of hell because it is the loss of the vision
of God, i.e. the pœna damni. This love is called also the amor

78

thκ eecip/knt

or penance

spei, because in it the hope of possessing God in heaven, the
highest reward of nil pure souls, is an essential element.
A higher grade of love, midway between this perfect and
imperfect love, is called the love of gratitude, amor gratitudinis,
in which we love God for the benefits which He has conferred.
When this love is prompted more by the thought of the gifts
than the giver, more by the benefit than by the love of the bene­
factor, it approaches in quality to the love of hope (amor spei) ;
one reflects on the past, the other on the future. If, however,
the motive of this love of gratitude directly reganis the giver
and his good will towards mankind, then God is loved with a
pure love, for God's benevolence and love towards men are
intimately united with His perfections. This kind of love of
gratitude may well be classed with pure love or caritas. It is
a perfect love (1) because God is loved for His own sake, on
account of His infinite goodness and love and generosity, which
are identical with God Himself ; (2) because it is a benevolent
love. All love in respect of its object is either selfish or benevo­
lent; now this love of gratitude is not selfish, because it does not
regard its own profit, nor does it strive, to gain anything for itself :
(3) because it is a love of friendship, for it is a love which wishes
well to Him who loves us and makes a return of love for love.8
A great number of distinguished theologians assert that the
love of gratitude is perfect love, and the contrition based on it
perfect contrition.’ The Council of Trent might be adduced in
favor of this view, since in Sess. 14, cp. 5, can. 4, it enumerates
among the motives of imperfect contrition merely the hateful­
ness of sin and its punishment without the least reference to
the motive of gratitude. It is of considerable moment to settle
this point exactly, for, as Deharbe says, “a man might never
know how to elicit an act of perfect contrition if he were to
form a false notion of perfect love. Who can deny that in
« Cf. S. Thomas, II. II. Q. 106, a. 5.
o Compare Deharbe, Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes, § 6, pp. 130-179.

ESSENTIAL· FEATUEES OF PEUFECt CONTRITION

many cases salvat ion depends on an act of perfect, contrition,
anti that even whore it is possible to receive the Sacrament of
Penance it is always advisable to make at least an effort to
arouse not only imperfect but also perfect contrition?'”0
We should bo loath to omit the remark that the love of
Christ crucified is an eminent incentive to perfect love, and
that the sorrow for sin which is founded on the thought that
sin was the cause of the awful sufferings and shameful death of
Our Saviour, belongs to perfect contrition. A man who is well
disposed towards Christ, believing Him to be God, has all that
is required to arouse perfect love; and if, influenced by this
love, he detests and determines to avoid all that brought such
great suffering on Christ, he is exercising an act of perfect love
and contrition."
This love is most intimately connected with the love of grati­
tude, since “for our sins was He wounded and for our iniquities
was He stricken.” Indeed nothing is so calculated to fill us
with gratitude towards God as the thought of all that the Son
of God has done and suffered for us. The crib, the cross, and
the Sacraments are the three great monuments of His enduring
love towards us, and at the same time they are the three inex­
haustible founts of motives of our love for Him. Hence it is
that the Church recalls to us so frequently these benefits of
Christ. “ When we meditate upon her ceremonies and practices,
the spirit of her feasts and solemnities, her altars and temples,
her prayers, the sense of the liturgies and the object of her devo­
tions, our thoughts are compelled to consider the marvelous
love of God and what Our Saviour has done and suffered for us,
and we are reminded to be thankful to the Lord and to requite
His love with our love.” “
” See Perfect Contrition by Von den Driesch, translated by Father J.

Slater, S.J.
u Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. P. I. Lib. I. Tract. I. ep. HI. § 1.
u Deharbe. Die vollkommene Liebe flottes, p. 158.

80

THE RECIPIENT OF ΡΕΝΛΜ'Κ

From this love of gratitude, as the first stage on the way to
pure love, we may ascend yet higher and attain to that entirely
pure love by which we seek God as the highest good in Himself,
as infinite beauty, as complete perfection, as the source of all
goodness, beauty, and perfection, without reference, so far as
that is possible, to our own profit. This love is shown by joy
in God’s perfections (amor complacentia) ·, the soul which has
this love forgets itself and is lost in the object of its love for
which alone it lives; its sole desire is God's happiness (amor
benevolentia·), and it would willingly add to it (amor desiderii) ;
but since such increase is impossible it rejoices in things as they
are (amor gaudii).
It cannot be disputed that such a disinterested love is possible
on earth, since many pious souls have had it in an eminent
degree; still it must be observed that although the higher stages
of love surpass and in surpassing absorb the lower, they do not
eliminate them entirely; on the contrary, this pure love does
not and cannot exclude the love of hope. It is the explicit
teaching of the Church that love for God on earth cannot be
so disinterested as to exclude all thought of ourselves and our
eternal welfare.
Tliis stage of love answers to filial fear (timor filialia) when
one thinks no longer about punishment nor fears it, but dreads
to give displeasure or offense to the beloved one and carefully
avoids all that arouses the anger of God.
The sorrow arising from perfect love is therefore perfect
sorrow, contritio. This, like unselfish love, may have varying
stages of intensity 13 and may be more or less perfect; no special
degree of intensity, however, is required, and the lowest is suffi­
cient. It is only right and desirable, however, that we should
have the greatest sorrow possible for our sins, penet rating soul
and body, so that the whole man may repent of his faults and
” Cf. S. Thoinus. Süpplem. Q. 5. n. 3 ; S. Alphone. bib. VI. n. 441 ; (Jury,
II. ii. 453 ; Palmieri, Tract, de Pœiiitentia, Thés. XXIV. p. 2U2 sq.

EFFECTS OF PERFECT CONTRITION

81

the tools of sin become again instruments of love.1· This,
however, is not always in our power, and, hieing a grace, we must
ask for it.
We may now sum up our conclusions: Perfect contrition,
contritio, is the hatred of sin proceeding from a pure love of God
with a firm resolution of amendment, a disposition which in­
cludes filial fear, and, so far from excluding the hope of salva­
tion and fear of punishment, tends rather to develop them.1"

12. The Effects of Perfect Contrition and the Obligation of
Procuring it.
Perfect contrition restores the sinner to grace at once, even
before he has approached the Sacrament of Penance, though
the desire of receiving the Sacrament is necessary; it removes
the eternal punishment and in part the temporal punishment.
The first part of this statement is fidei proxima, for the Coun­
cil of Trent teaches 10 that perfect contrition reconciles man
to God before the Sacrament is received, but that this reconcilia­
tion by perfect contrition is not effected without the desire,
which is included in the act of contrition, of receiving the Sacra­
ment. This doctrine was confirmed by the condemnation
pronounced by Gregory XIII and Urban VIII on the twentyfirst and thirty-second of the propositions of Baius. Baius ami
Jansenius taught among other things that perfect contrition
without the Sacrament cannot restore to grace unless in excep­
tional circumstances, e.g. in martyrdom, at the hour of death,
when there is no possibility of confessing, or when it is «umme
intensa.
*· Cat Roman. P. II. cp. 5, n. 27.
14 Compare Oswald, Die dogmat. Lehre von den heil. Sakrameiiten,
Fiinfter Teil, Zweiter Absclmitt. § 7, III. Auli. S. 71 IT.; Deharl*. Die voll·
konunene Liebe Gottes, §§ 2, 3, (I, 8; Suarez., De Peu. Disp. II. Sect. 3 et
Disp. IV. Sect. 2: Ballerini, Op. Theo). Mor. 1. c. n. 35-42; Palmieri. I rai t,
de l’œii. Thés. IV, V ; Lehrnkuhl, Theol. Mor. P. I. L. I. Tr. I. u. 318.
111 Sens. XIV. cp. 4.

82

THE RECIPIENT Ob' PENANCE

Finally, this doctrine of the efficacy of perfect contrition is
clear!}' expressed in Holy Scripture and in the monuments of
tradition; the proofs belong to the domain of dogmatic the­
ology.” We add only a single consideration which springs
from a well-known principle: Perfect contrition arises from
love and is in its essence nothing but an act of love. Now per­
fect love unites us to God, so that we live in Him and He in us.”
This perfect union with God overcomes all separation from
Him which arose through sin.
Such, then, is the effect of perfect contrition, however poor
and weak it may be, for in spite of this it is a sorrow which is
inspired and informed by perfect love. Nor does a greater
or less degree change the species; the Council of Trent is positive
in its declaration that perfect contrition reconciles us to God,
and assigns no limit which must be attained before pro­
ducing this effect. Such, too, is the unanimous teaching of
St. Thomas,” St. Alphonsus,20 and the other great theologians.
The sinner is restored to grace by perfect contrition without
the Sacrament only when he has the intention of receiving it,
for the actual, or at least intentional, reception of the Sacra­
ment is the one single means ordained by Christ for the removal
of mortal sin. This intention is included in the act of perfect
contrition, as the Council of Trent goes on to teach ; hence all
theologians hold that the implicit desire (votum implicitum') is
sufficient, for whoever has true contrition has the wish to fulfill
all the commands of God, and hence the command of Christ
enjoining the confession of sin.21 Perfect contrition is an act
” The proof is well developed by P. Palmieri. S.J., Tract, de Poenitent.
Theses XXII et XXIII, p. 224 (Romæ, 187»). Cf. S. Thomas, Π. II.
QQ. 23-27.
» I. John iv. 16.
” Supplein. Q. 5, a. 3. Quantumcunque parvus tit dolor, dummodo ad con­
tritionis rationem sufficiat, omnem culpam delet.
» Lib. VI. ii. 441.
« S. Thom. Supplein. Q. 5. a. 2 ad 1. Contritio vera non fuit, nisi propu-

EFFECTU OF PERFECT CONTRITION

83

of perfect love, and this urges man to fulfill the commands of
God in accordance with Christ's words: “He who loves Me
will keep My word.” n Hence it may happen that a sinner is
justified by an act of perfect contrition without any actual
confession ; it is sufficient that he does not exclude the purpose
of confessing his sin.'·'3
The resolution to confess the sin does not include the resolu­
tion to confess it as soon as possible (quam primum). It is
enough to confess when a precept of God or of the Church
urges.21
The other effect of perfect contrition, the remission of eternal
punishment, follows from what we have been already consider­
ing; moreover the condemnation of Baius’ seventieth proposi­
tion makes this doctrine proxima fidei. This, too, is the teaching
of all Catholic theologians.25 The guilt is removed by sancti­
fying grace; but one who has sanctifying grace is a child of
God, and has as his heritage a claim to heaven.
Finally, we gather from the Council of Trentand the com­
mon doctrine of theologians 27 that a part also of the temporal
punishment of sin, in proportion to the intensity of contrition,
is remitted, so that a very great and perfect contrition may
blot out all the temporal punishment.
Two very practical remarks, applicable both to confessor and
to penitent, may find their place here.
Mortal sin is not forgiven, and the sinner is not reconciled to
God, till he has made good the injury done to God; in other
situm confitendi habuerit annexum ; quod debet ad effectum reduci etiam propter
praceplum quod est de confessione datum.
*» John xiv. 23.
» 8. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 137, Dub. 4.
2« Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 275; Muller, 1. c. § 113, 2.
26 S. Thom. III. Q. 8f>, a. 4; Suarez, De P<euit. Disp. X. Sect. 2.
M Seu. VI. c. 14; Seas. XIV. c. S et can. 12.
» S. Bouaveut. Theol. verit. L. VI. c. 24. S. Thomas, Suppl. Q. 5, a. 2.
Ballerini, De l’œnit. L. VI. c. 0.

R4

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

words, till he has done penance. This is a truth of faith.” It
follows, then, that he who has the misfortune to fall into sin is
obliged to repent of it, and in such wise as to obtain forgiveness;
to adopt any other course is to frustrate the whole end of his
existence. He must therefore make an act of perfect contrition,
or supplement the imperfect contrition by the Saerament of
Penance.
This obligation is certainly pressing when there is danger of
death, because it is the necessary means for salvation, and every
man is bound by love of God and of himself to take precautions
against being forever an enemy of God and of being involved in
eternal damnation.
The question now arises whether on other grounds there is a
strict obligation of making an act of perfect contrition, for
instance, from the consideration of God who has been offended,
or for our own interests, since wc may die at any moment, and
because one who is in a state of mortal sin is but little capable
of avoiding other mortal sins.
The following answer may be given : —
1. God might have insisted that the sinner should make good
at once after his sin the evil committed, and the injury done to
God by mortal sin would be quite motive enough for such legis­
lation. As a matter of fact God does not make any such de­
mand; instead of insisting on His rights, He is long-suffering
and permits the sinner to heap offense on offense.
On the other hand, a man cannot remain long in mortal sin
without offending God again and once more incurring sin ; for
it is an insult to the love we owe to God to remain long a slave
of the devil and an enemy of God, and such behavior on tin* part
of the sinner makes him guilty of contempt of God’s friendship
and rights. To incur, however, grievous sin in this way, the
neglect to make an act of perfect contrition must have extended
“ Cf. Trid. Sens. XIV. I. c., from which we infer that penance is necessary for salvation necemtute medii.

OBLIGATION or I’EHFECT CONTRITION

85

over a considerable time. As to what constitutes a considerable
time, it is not easy to define a hard-and-fast limit; a period of
several years would certainly be considerable, and it would be
a grave sin to remain so long a time in the state of mortal sin;
but a man who reconciles himself to God within the limits of
the time prescribed by the Church for confession would certainly
not incur a new sin per se, special circumstances, of course,
being excluded which might demand that an act of perfect con­
trition be made at once.2"
The possibility of flying before being reconciled to God is
certainly a very strong motive to induce a man to consult the
safety of his soul and to free it as soon as possible from the state
of mortal sin; for at any moment death may surprise a man
without warning. If, however, there be no pressing danger of
death, that possibility is not sufficient to make delay of recon­
ciliation a new sin ; hence one who dies a sudden death may
be plunged into hell by sins for which he had not atoned,
but he would not be guilty of a new sin by having put off his
repentance.
But there is an obligation to avoid putting off for a long
time one’s conversion, anil hence an act of perfect contrition
after mortal sin, because a man in the state of mortal sin is in
the greatest danger of falling into other mortal sins, since he has
not strength enough to vanquish severe temptations and to with­
stand the violence of his passions, and since, as St. Gregory the
Greatso says, the unrepented mortal sins which burden his soul
draw him by their weight into other worse sins. “Without
sanctifying grace it is not possible to refrain long from mortal
sin,” says St. Thomas;’1 the sinner might, if he wished, have
» Ballerini deals excellently with this point in his Op. Theol. Mor. in cp.
III. De præc. et oblig. confession, n. 138 ss. Cf. Suarez, De Pœnit Disp.
15, Sect. 0, n. 7 ; Sporer, De Pœn. n. 186.
“ In Ezechiel, Lib. I. Hom. 11, n. 24.
« I. II. Q. 109, a. 8.

86

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

the necessary moral strength to overcome temptation and to
resist his passions; he might curb them by the divine power of
grace; but there is the law of the distribution of God's graces,
that God gives only to those who love Him efficacious grace,
and while a man persists of his own free will in the state of sin
and enmity with God, he equivalently expresses his contempt of
grace and so makes himself unworthy of it. As God is ever
pouring richer and richer graces on those who make good use
of them and cooperate with them, so He withdraws them from
those who neglect and resist them. Hence we may adopt the
well-founded teaching of St. Alphonsus,32 who states that the
sinner ought not to put off for longer than a month his reconcil­
iation with God ; in other words, that the act of perfect contri­
tion should not be delayed beyond that time. By such delay
he would incur a new sin. This subject, moreover, is intimately
connected with the duty of eliciting the act of love ; for accord­
ing to a very probable opinion of many theologians, of whom
the authority is recognized and approved by St. Alphonsus, we
are bound to elicit at least once a month an act of love, because
we should keep God’s commands either not at all or at least with
great difficulty if we failed for so long a time to elicit such an
act, and if we were so little solicitous about our duty of loving
God. It is impossible to make an act of perfect love without
bewailing one’s sins by which a God so infinitely worthy of love
has been offended. Hence St. Alphonsus in his practical direc­
tions to confessors says;33 "The duty of making an act of con­
trition is urgent when one is obliged to make an act of love.” 34
52 Lib. VI. n. 437.
M Tract. 16, cp. 2, n. 10.
84 The question raised by theologians as to whether it is a distinct sin to
put off eliciting the act of perfect contrition and reconciliation with God,
must lie answered in the affirmative, for Holy Scripture enjoins us not to
delay our conversion or to put off penance from day to day, because the
anger of God may come upon us when we are so unprepared (of. Ecclus. v.
S, (I, where, however, no express command is laid down), and because the

OBLIGATION OF PERFECT CONTRITION

87

Since the faithful for the most part are ignorant of any obli­
gation of making an act of perfect contrition within a given
time after falling into mortal sin, and, therefore, incur no sin
by the non-fulfillment of it, the confessor need not trouble him­
self to make inquiries about it in the past life of his penitents;
indeed he may abstain from instructing them on the existence
of such obligation. But he should not fail — without, however,
mentioning that neglect means a new sin — to urge his penitents
by other motives to return to a state of grace, for the future, as
quickly as possible after falling into mortal sin, at least by an
act of perfect contrition, and, if occasion offer, by going to con­
fession. Sad experience shows that one fall into mortal sin is
very soon followed by others.35
Finally, there is an obligation (per accidens) to awaken per­
fect contrition when one has to exercise some act for which a
state of grace is required and the Sacrament of Penance is not
accessible. A priest, for instance, is in a state of mortal sin ami
is called upon to administer one of the Sacraments, or one of the
praceptum curitatis which we ought to obey sœpius in vita calls for an act of
contrition.
Aertnys reconciles this affirmative opinion of Lugo, Suarez, St. Alphon­
sus, etc., with the opposite view of Navarro, Vasquez, Soto, etc., declaring
the latter to be probable per se loquendo, while the former is true de obliga­
tione per accidens, so that the sinner who fails to elicit an act of perfect
contrition within a reasonable period is not to be acquitted of incurring a
new mortal sin. Aertnys, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. cp. 3, n. 108. St. Alphon­
sus expressly condemns the view of Concina and Roncaglia that a delay of
a week is a considerable period ; and similarly he rejects the opinion of
Laymann, Lugo, the Salmanticenses, Elbe!, etc., who maintain that sin has
been incurred only by the neglect of contrition for a whole year. This
latter view he cannot accept, even if there were no other reason than the
duty of eliciting an act of love once in the month. Finally, he rejects the
opinion of some theologians that a sinner must elicit acts of contrition on
feast-days in order to fulfill the object of sanctifying the festival ; the gen­
eral answer is made that the object of any given precept does not fail under
the precept. Ballerini, Op. Theol. .Mor. 1. c. cp. III. n. 1035 ss.
34 Miiller, 1. o. Lib. III. I. II. § 115, I; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 278; Aertnys,
1. c. ii. 108, Q. I.

88

THE HKCIPIENT OF PENANCE

faithful has to receive one of the .Sacraments of the living and
cannot get absolution beforehand. This also holds true if an
act of perfect love has to be made; in this case every one is
obliged, when there occurs to his mind a mortal sin not yet
repented of, to detest the same and to be sorry for it from the
motive of the love of God. According to the general opinion
of theologians an act of love should be made in the hour of
death, whence St. Alphonsus teaches that a dying man who has
confessed with only imperfect sorrow should be recommended
to elicit an act of perfect contrition, for it is impossible to make
an act of love without bewailing the sins from the same motive
of love.” Finally, this duty is pressing when one is exposed to
severe temptations which cannot be overcome while one is in a
state of enmity with God.
We would add another observation : .Since perfect contrition
is so pleasing to God and so helpful to those sinners especially
who have fallen seriously, the pastor of souls should seize every
opportunity of instructing the faithful and urging them to elicit
such acts frequently, especially when they are in danger of death
and have no opportunity of approaching the Sacrament of Pen­
ance. Children particularly should be taught on this subject, and
a good form of the act given to them. They may have need of
it themselves in order to be saved from eternal damnation, and
they may come to the assistance of their elders at the hour of
death; indeed experience teaches that well-instructed children
more than once have reminded people in such straits of the act
of perfect contrition, and have persuaded those persons to make
it with them ; finally, what has been learned in childhood will
turn out useful to many in their old age.
13. Imperfect Contrition.

The effects of imperfect contrition (attrition) are not so great
as those of perfect contrition. Imperfect contrition, which exw 11. A. 1. c. n. 11, Lib. VI. n. 437, Dub. 2 ; Suarez, Disp. 15, Sect. 4, n.
19; Lacroix. Lib. 11. u. 142, etc.

IMPERFECT CONTRITION

89

eludes the desire of sinning and includes the hope of pardon (this
belongs to the sorrow necessary for the Sacrament of Penance),
is the proximate disposition which the sinner must have if he is
to be justified in the Sacrament of Penance. This is of faith.”
Passages almost innumerable of the Holy Scriptures and the
Fathers, decrees of Councils and theologians, present this doc­
trine as revealed by God.”*
Consequently it is the common and certain teaching of theo­
logians that to receive the grace of the Sacrament of Penance
imperfect contrition is sufficient, and that perfect contrition is
not of necessity. The Council of Trent declares expressly :
"Although imperfect contrition without the Sacrament of Pen­
ance is not able per se to restore the sinner to justifying grace,
yet it disposes him for the reception of grace in this Sacrament."
The Council is speaking here of the ultimate or proximate dispo­
sition which, in union with the Sacrament, suffices for the remis­
sion of sin ; for it opposes the efficacy of imperfect contrition
with the Sacrament to its inefficacy without the Sacrament.
Without the Sacrament it cannot produce justification, but dis­
poses towards its reception in the Sacrament; it must therefore
produce in the Sacrament this justification, and the disposition
of which the Council speaks must be understood of the
proximate disposition which is immediately followed by grace:
otherwise the contrast drawn between the two would have no
meaning.
” Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 4 et can. 5, which is directed against Luther’s
doctrine that all fear of punishment is wicked, and that imperfect contri­
tion, founded on the fear of hell, by making a man a hypocrite, makes him
a greater sinner. Cf. Bellarmin, De Pien. Lib. II. cp. 2; Mohler. Sym­
bolism. § 33. Luther’s error was in part adopted by Baius, Jansenius, and
Quesnel. Cf. Prop. GO, 61, 62 et 67 Quesnellii a I*. M. Clem. XI in Bulla
“ Unigenitus," proscript; Prop. 15 et 16 damn, ab Alexandro VIII, in which
some of Quesnel’s errors are again condemned.
M Cf. Bellarmin, 1. c. Lib. II. cp. 17; Perrone, De Pœnitent. n. 46 a.; Ripalda, De Ente supernatural!, Tom. IV. Disp. 22, Sect. 4-11. et Lib. VI. Diep,
ult. n. 458-400; Palmieri, Tract, de Prenitentia. pp. 280-353 (Rom. 1870);
Ballerini, Op. Theo!. Mor. 1. c. cp. I. De sufficientia attritionis, η. 12-50.

00

TUE DECIPIENT OF PENANCE

This conclusion is confirmed when we consider the institution
of the Sacrament. Christ's object in instituting this Sacrament
was to restore the baptized to the life of grace; if it did not
really confer the grace of justification, it would have been a
means frustrated of its end, and would not have the power which
it was intended to have; it could not be expected to call for
dispositions which of themselves would atone for sin. ami this
would be the case if perfect contrition wore the required dispo­
sition. A remedy for a disease would be a poor gift if it could
not cure the disease until the latter was already removed.
Finally, the Church received the power of the keys in order
that it might loose or retain sins; if perfect contrition were
required as the necessary condition, the sins would not be re­
mitted by the power of the keys, but by the dispositions of the
penitent. Therefore imperfect contrition is sufficient for justifi­
cation in the Sacrament of Penance.”
Since imperfect contrition in union with the Sacrament has
the same effects as perfect contrition without the Sacrament,
theologians say that the penitent becomes in the Sacrament er
attrito contritus; this expression is not to be understood of the
act, as though attritio became contritio.
Imperfect contrition, as we have, already seen, arises from the
thought of the hideousness of sin and from the fear of the pun­
ishment which God in His justice inflicts on the sinner. The
following are the classes into which, according to St. Thomas/0
fear is divided: —
1. Worldly fear, timor mundanus, when man is feared more
than God, or when one offends God in order to avoid suffering.
2. Natural fear, timor naturalis, the fear of temporal mis­
fortunes.
” S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 440 ; Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract VI. Disp. I. Q.
ΙΠ. cp. ΙΠ. § 2; Stolz, 1. c. Lib. I. 1*. II. Q. I. a. VI; Acrtnys, 1. c.
Lib. VI. Tract. V. n. 176; Palmieri, Tract, de Pœnit. Thea. XXV. p.
286 aa.
« II. IL Q. 19, a. 2-9.

IΜI ’ I·: H l·’ Aï · T CONTHJ TIO N

91

3. Slavish fear, limor nrvililer servilis, when one shrinks from
sin merely from fear of punishment, and when one is ready to
sin again if there were no punishment. Theologians say of such
a man : solum manum cohibet, voluntatem autem non retrahit η
peccato.
Quite distinct from this fear is: —
4. Servile fear, timor servilis, when a man fears the punish­
ments which God inflicts on sin, and on that account really
avoids and detests sin : qui non solum manum sed etiam volun­
tatem cohibet a peccato, as the schoolmen express it.
5. Filial fear, timor filialis seu castus, is the fear of a man
who honors and loves God as his Lord and Father, and from
that motive avoids sin and loves the law of God. The last two
kinds of fear conjoined form : —
6. Mixed fear, timor mirius seu initialis, w'hich is the disposi­
tion of a man who fears sin because it offends God and also be­
cause it is punished. Hence St. Thomas gives a clear and short
account of these last three kinds of fear: Sometimes man turns
to God and clings to Him because he is afraid of evil. This evil
may be twofold, the evil of punishment ami the evil of guilt. If
a man turn and cling to God from fear of punishment, this is
servile fear; and when it is done from fear of guilt it is filial
fear, for children are afraid of offending their father; if, how­
ever, it is done from the fear of the punishment and of the guilt,
it is then timor initialis, which is intermediate between servile
and filial fear.41
The sorrow proceeding from servile fear is attritio, that im­
perfect sorrow which, when it excludes the deffire of sinning and
is joined to the hope of pardon, disposes the sinner to receive the
grace of justification in the Sacrament of Penance. It may now
be asked whether, along with this imperfect sorrow based on fear
as its only motive, there may not be required besides, in order
«1 IL II. Q. 10.

— î Stote, I. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I.

92

THK RECIPIENT OF PENASCE

to dispose the sinner proxime for the receiving of grace, some
sort of love, at least initial, or whether this love ho included in
that sorrow. On this subject the Council has given no direct
answer. In the seventeenth century this question was debated
with such heat that Alexander VII (June, 1667), in order to
establish peace, forbade, in the strongest ternis and tinder pain
of excommunication lala; sententia, that any of the disputants in
this matter should accuse their opponents of heresy, l our dis­
tinct views were proposed and defended on this subject :
1. The first view teaches that sorrow from the motive of fear,
as long as it is true sorrow, is quite sufficient of itself for obtain­
ing sanctifying grace in the Sacrament. This sorrow produces
hatred and detestation of sin and a return to God's law, and is
inseparable from the hope of pardon. Hence the sinner becomes
capable of receiving the grace of the Sacrament. Melchior Canus
is the most famous of the defenders of this view, who are called
Attritionists because they hold that mere attrition from the fear
of the punishments inflicted on sin is a sufficient disposition.
They thought that every sort of love was excluded from this con­
trition based on fear, a position which seems impossible both
psychologically and in view of the action of grace ; as was evi­
dently the general opinion of the Fathers at the Council of Trent.
Instead of the present clause in cap. 4: allritio eum ad gratiam
in sacramento pernitentia· impetrandam disponit, another had
been presented to them: ad constitutionem sacramenti sufficit, ac
donum Dei esse ac Spiritus S. impulsum verissimum non adhuc
quidem inhabitantis sed tantum moventis quo pernitens adjutus
(cum sine aliquo aueetionis in Deum motu esse vix queat} viam sibi
ad justitiam munit et per eam ad Dei gratiam facilius impetrandum
disponitur. Since it was urged that men of eminent learning
made a distinction between such sorrow anti love, the present
form of the clause was chosen in order to avoid defining a scho­
lastic question on which the Doctors were not of one mind; by
using the word disponit the Council did not wish to mean a

ΙΜΙΈII Ι··/:< "Γ CONTRITION

93

sufficient disposition, and to indicate this more clearly it pur­
posely avoided the use of the word sufficit.
**
2. The second opinion holds that the sorrow based on fear is
sufficient only when there is joined with it some beginning of
the love of God, as our highest good. This view supported by
the most eminent theologians rests on solid foundations, and is
now the more usual opinion among theologians. That there is
nothing in this view opposed to the Council of Trent is clear
from what has been said above on this point. In another place
in the Sixth Session (cap. 6) there is indirect authority for it,
where the Council, in describing the progress towards prepara­
tion for the first grace, teaches that the sinner who is disposing
his soul for justification must begin to love God as the source of
all justice/3
Hence as preparation for the first justification of adults a be­
ginning at least of love is required. Now what is required for
their first justification in Baptism, that, at the very least, is
demanded for the second justification by Penance, since, as the
Fathers express it, Penance is a toilsome Baptism, baptismus
laboriosus; consequently if a distinction is to be made in terms
of greater or less, greater dispositions are required for Penance
** Pallavicini, Hist. Concil. Trid. L. XIII. c. 10. Palmieri tries to
weaken tlie force of this argument ; see Tract, de Pœnit. Thesis XXX.
p. 381 es.
♦* “ They [adults] dispose themselves for justification when, being urged
and supported by God’s grace, receiving faith by hearing, they approach
God of their own free will, believing that to be true which is revealed and
promised by God, and especially this, that the sinner is justified by God
through His grace, through the redemption in Jesus Christ; and while
they acknowledge their sins, they are led by fear of the divine justice, of
which they have a wholesome dread, to the consideration of God's mercy,
and thence are encouraged to hope, so that they trust that God will be
gracious to them for Christ's sake, and they will begin to love Him as the
source of all justice." Sess. VI. cp. β ; cf. can. .1 : “ If any one say that a
man without previous inspiration of the Holy Ghost and without His help
can believe, hope, love, and do penance as is required in order to attain the
grace of justification, a. s.”

94

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

than for Baptism. Moreover, the Council is unmistakably clear
in its declaration that what it teaches with regard to the first
justification applies equally to the justification by penance.0
In the place where the Council treats of the sorrow re­
quired as a preparation for the Sacrament of Penance, it speaks
of it plainly as the beginning of a new life ;46 such it could not
be if it did not include love, or at least the beginnings of love:
for since the new life consists in the love of God, the beginning
of the new life must of necessity include the beginning of the
love of God.4"
A third reason may be found in the very nature of the
subject. According to the Church’s teaching, the justification
of an adult means a real conversion, and this of itself includes a
beginning of love. By mortal sin man turns from God to the
creature; if the conversion is to be real, he must not only turn
away from the creature, but also return to God, and that cannot
happen without some initial love. Moreover, it is in the very
nature of man ever to desire and love something as his highest
good, be it the creature, as happens in mortal sin, or the Creator;
since by his conversion he ceases to make the creature his sole
object and aim, he must direct his desires to God the uncreated
good, and so must love God at least as his highest good.
But this love which is required to accompany imperfect con­
trition in order to make it a sufficient disposition for obtaining
grace in the Sacrament, is not the beginning of the amor benevo** Cf. Proamium to the Fourth Session de ». Pernitent. incram. : “ Although
the (ecumenical . . . synod in its decisions on justification (Sees. VI.) has
repeatedly spoken in the same urgent manner of the Sacrament of Penance
on account of its intimate connection with the matter in hand, yet none the
less," etc.
« Sees. XIV. cp. IV.
44 The words at the beginning of the fourth chapter : “ non solum cessa­
tionem a peccato et rite» nova propositum et inchoationem et . . ." need not of
necessity be understood of perfect contrition, which is discussed later. In
this place it is more likely that the question of contrition in general is
under discussion.

IMPERFECT CONTRITION

95

lenlin· or the caritas perfecta or perfect love; for, as has been
seen above, any act of contrition proceeding from perfect love
in any degree at once restores a man to grace without the recep­
tion of the Sacrament; similarly the beginning of perfect love,
joined with imperfect contrition, would justify the sinner with­
out the Sacrament.'7 Penance would thus be a meaningless
institution. It is rather the beginning of the amor concupiscen­
tia: or of the caritas imperfecta, in which we love God because
lie is good to us. This beginning of love is included in imper­
fect contrition, which arises chiefly from the fear of God's
punishments; for Holy Scripture (Ecclus. xxv. 16) calls the
fear of God the beginning of love. Hope of eternal happiness
is another motive, for, as St. Thomas of Aquin says, when we
hope to obtain a benefit from any one wc are drawn towards
him and begin to love him. Whoever, then, has imperfect
contrition and receives the Sacrament in the hope of pardon,
already begins to love God as his liberator, his champion, his
Lord. No special intensity is required in this love; it need
only be the beginning of love, as long as the love is real — and
this is called amor initialis.**
3. A third opinion demanils, not a beginning of imperfect love,
but perfect love in its first stages, that is, caritas initialis. It
need not, however, be so strong as to suffice to remove sin of
itself, nor need it be independent of other motives, such as ser-47
47 Compare § 12.
4S S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 412. Objic. ΙΠ ; Scavini. Theol. Moralis Universa.
T. IV. Tract. X. Disp. I. cp. II. art. I. n. 23; Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI.
Diep. I. Q. III. cp. III. § 2; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 177; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. P. II.
Lib. I. Tract. V. Sect. II. cp. I. § 2, n. 288 et 289: Oswald. Die dogmat.
Lehre von den heil. Sakrament. II. Rd. Fiinfter Teil, Zweiter Abschn.
Erst. Hauptst. § 7. p. 86 ff. III. Anil.: Muller, I. c. Lib. III. Tr. II. §
114; Martin. Lehrbuch der kath. Moral. § 243: Tappehoru. Auleitung znr
Verwait, des Buss-Sakramentes. § 11, p. 89 ff. This doctrine was adopted
by all the schools after the Council of Trent, as Benedict XIV affirms,
De Syn., etc.. Lib. VII. c. 13; and Alexander VII published in a decree
of May 5, 1057, that this view hottie inter scholasticos communis cidetur.

96

THE RECIPIENT OF P EN ANCE

vile fear. Such sorrow, however, would bo no longer attritio,
but contritio, which in any degree by itself justifies (ho sinner
apart from the Sacrament.
4. The fourth opinion goes yet further and requires that along
with attritio there should he not only pure love, but in such
measure that of itself it should move the sinner to bewail his
sins and give them up. This is of its naturo contritio, whence
the defenders of (his last opinion arc called contritionists.*"
This question is not one of mere theoretical interest, but is of
highly practical application; for if the acts of the penitent are
the materia proxima of the Sacrament, and if it is the confessor's
duty to make certain of the presence of these acts before giving
absolution, he must do so also with respect to contrition; for
this reason he must study the nature and properties of contri­
tion in order to secure the integrity of the Sacrament.
From this it is at once apparent that the contritionist must
proceed differently from the attritionist. The former will, if he
is true to his principles, not only investigate whether the peni­
tent’s sorrow for sin be joined with belief and hope of pardon,
but also whether that sorrow proceed from the love of God, or at
least the beginning of it, which love must be a love of God above
all things. This investigation, however, is very difficult, and
wearisome to confessor and penitent, at least if the latter be
uninstructed. The attritionist, on the contrary, merely inquires
whether his penitent has sorrow springing from a motive of
faith and the hope of forgiveness this inquiry offers no diffi­
culty to either confessor or penitent. Once it is established
that the sorrow conies from a motive of faith and is joined to
the hope of pardon, one may fairly presume and conclude that
there is amor initialis, so that further investigation is superflu­
ous ; for if we hope for good from any one, we have already at
least a beginning of love for him.
« Scavini, 1. c. Tract. X. Adnotat. n. 188 et 189.

IMPERFECT CONTRITION
Moreover, the confessor will observe that since the view re­
quiring a beginning of love with imperfect contrition is more
probable than the opposite, probabilitate externa et interna, it is
also the safer; since, however, in giving and receiving the Sac­
raments an explicit papal decision enjoins the adoption of the
safer view, it is not only of counsel but of precept, strongly bind­
ing, to elicit before receiving the Sacrament of Penance together
with contrition an act of love, if only initial love. Though the
initial love which is comprised in the imperfect contrition is not
the love of benevolence or caritas, but the amor concupiscenlui,
yet caritas is in no way excluded from it, and cannot be ex­
cluded without grievous sin on the part of the penitent. Would
it not be the sign of a bad disposition if a man were expressly
unwilling to avoid sin if it did not deprive him of heaven or
lead him to hell? “I do not say,” says St. Francis de Sales
on this subject, “that this sorrow excludes the perfect love of
God; I say only that it does not of its own nature include it;
it neither rejects it nor embraces it; it is not opposed to love,
but it can exist without it.”
Thus imperfect contrition disposes the penitent towards per­
fect love. Any one who desires and hopes to attain so great a
boon as the grace of God, all unmerited as it is, will certainly be
unable to refrain from meditating on the infinite love which pro­
cures him this great grace, and from that he will rise to the love
of God for His own sake as infinitely good and lovable. Hence
St. Thomas says that whenever a man hopes to get a benefit
from God he is led to love God for His own sake only.M
We add one more practical observation : The imperfect con­
trition arising from fear of hell, which excludes the desire of sin,
and in which is contained at least virtually the hope of panion,
is quite sufficient to secure the fruit of the Sacrament of Penw S. Thorn. De Spe, a. ■· : and St. Francis tie Sales writes: ·· La pénitence
nail dedans Γιιηιυιιι· et plusieurs fois la pénitence venant en nos esprits
l’amour vient en la pénitence." Tlieot. L. II. c. 20.

98

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

ance: yet we ought to take pains that we have, as far as
possible, perfect contrition, not only because this is more pleas­
ing to God, but also because in this way the grace is made
more certain and more grace is obtained and a greater measure
of the temporal punishment remitted; because we are thus
more sure of attaining true and necessary attrition, and finally,
because we fulfill in this manner the precept which binds us to
make, from time to time during our lives, an act of love. In­
deed if a penitent chose to dwell only on the lowest motives of
contrition, it would be a sign that liis heart was not sufficiently
fixed upon God, and there would be occasion for suspecting that
there still lurked in his soul an undue affection for sin, curbed
only by fear of punishment.51

14. The Necessary Qualities of Contrition.
If the Sacrament of Penance, is to be received validly and with
fruit, the contrition must be real, formal, supernatural, univer­
sal, supreme, aud sacramental.52
1. First of all, the contrition must be real or genuine. Now
contrition is, according to the Council of Trent, a grief of the
soul and a horror of sin. A sorrow expressed only in words
would be a sham sorrow ; that would not do : a real sorrow is
required. A sorrow merely imaginary, even without guilt on
the part of the penitent, in which case his good faith would cer­
tainly save him from the guilt of a sacrilege, could not possibly
supply for the want of a necessary anti essential part of the
Sacrament.53 Hence God’s command by the prophet Joel :
.Scindite corda vestra et non vestimenta vestra — Rend your hearts
and not your garments (the sign of mourning; Joel ii. 3). And
truly it is meet that sorrow should begin there where sin had

THE NECESSARY QUALITIES OF CONTRITION

99

its origin, namely, in the heart; for from the heart, as the Scrip­
tlire tells ns, come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, ete.M
The contrition must be formal, i.e. explicit; a virtual or im­
plicit contrition, such as is contained in another act, say in an
act of love or the resolution to confess and receive absolution,
is not enough even though it excludes the affection towards sin.
Thus a penitent might conceivably elicit an act of perfect
Jove without making any act of contrition, and then, after con­
fessing his sins, be justified in virtue of the act of perfect love,
though he would not validly receive absolution if he confined
himself to the act of love. The contrition must be quite explicit,
for it is the essential matter of the Sacrament, and virtual matter
here would be about as practical as virtual bread and wine in
the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Hence it is not enough to say:
"I love thee, O my God, above all things, because thou art the
sovereign good; forgive me my sins.” Such words are only an
act of love and a prayer for pardon, not a formal act of sorrow.
The words must be explicit: "I am sorry for my sins.” ”
Hence we see the error in the opinion held by several of the
older theologians, who called attrition any kind of sorrow which
did not come up to the standard of perfect contrition by want
of an adequate motive of sorrow, or through deficiency of reso­
lution of amendment, or because sin was not shunned as the
greatest of evils.
Others besides have conjectured that it was necessary and
sufficient for absolution in the Sacrament that the penitent be­
lieves he had contrition, i.e. that he ought to make efforts to be
contrite and to believe that he has perfect contrition; such a
putative sorrow, according to them, was sufficient, however dis­
tinct it might be from the sorrow of perfect contrition.
M Matt. xv. 19.
is S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 119; Scavini, 1. c. Tract. X. Disp. I cap. II. art. I.
ii. 12; Lacroix, Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. p. 2, n. tj«fJ ; Ballerini. Op. Theo).
Mor. 1. e. De attritione, n. 77 as. Cf. Suarez, De l’œn. Disp. ». Sect. 1 ;
Lugo, De Pœn. Disp. 4, η. 93.

100

ΤΠΕ RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

Both news are false. If imperfect contrition were only a
velleity, instead of being a real horror of sin, it would not be
sufficient for the Sacrament, and such sorrow could never be
called genuine attrition. On the contrary, any sorrow which
has the properties enumerated above is sufficient even if the
penitent knowingly confine his efforts to imperfect contrition
without aspiring to perfect it.“
There were also some theologians who maintained as a prob­
able opinion that the virtual sorrow included in a formal act of
love or in a resolution of amendment was sufficient. This view
is stigmatized by Suarez as rash, by Vasquez as false. Other
theologians, however, consider that this condemnation is too
severe.
On this question Reuter87 remarks that a penitent need not
be worried about the formal act of sorrow if he has elicited an
act of perfect love while reflecting on his sins (memor peccato­
rum), for it is morally impossible for any one with his sins before
his eyes to elicit an act of perfect love of God without detesting
his sins. The same may be said with regard to the purpose of
amendment, for it is morally impossible to form it without hav­
ing formal sorrow. This is made clear from the consideration
of any practical resolution which is based on supernatural mo­
tives; for if the hatred of sin is not yet a formal detestation and
sorrow of past sin, it becomes so in any one who reflects that he
has been guilty of sin.58
2. The sorrow which disposes for the worthy reception of the
Sacrament must on the one hand be prompted by divine super­
natural grace which begins, accompanies, and perfects the whole
work of salvation, and on the other must proceed from some

» Ct. Busenbatim. Theol. Moral. Tract. IV. (de Stioram. pœnit.) e. 1. <1.
11. resolv. 1 et 2; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. P. II. Lib. I. Tract. V. Sect. II. § 2, n.
2S4 ; Ballerini, Op. Theo). Mor. 1. 0,
w Theol. Mor. p. IV. n. 247.
“Cf. Vasquez. De Pœnit. Q. 80. Dub. 4, de proposito; Lehmkuhl, 1. <·.
Tract. V. De Sacram. Pœn. Sect. II. § 2, n. 284.

THE NE<E<<ARY QUALITIES OF CONTRITION

101

supernatural motive based on faith; for the dispositions required
for a supernatural gift must be supernatural. The second con­
dition is more important, for God will certainly give grace to a
man to do that which he. is obliged to do. Merely natural or
worldly love or fear will give rise to natural sorrow ; supernatu­
ral sorrow springs from a supernatural fear or love of God. The
distinction between the two is not merely quantitative but quali­
tative; they have nothing in common, and no amount of natu­
ral sorrow will ever rise to the dignity of supernatural sorrow.
Natural sorrow is of no efficacy in the work of conversion.
When the prophets exhort to repentance they do not confine
themselves to exhort the sinner, “Be converted,” but, “Be ye
converted to the Lord your God.” A true penitent was, in
their eyes, not one who turned from his sins; they required
that he should also turn to God. Sorrow, then, must have a
religious character, must be prompted by divine grace, must
spring either from fear or love of God.
If sorrow is to have this supernatural character, it must be
based on supernatural motives suggested by faith. Faith is the
first condition for justification which the Council of Trent de­
mands of the sinner; in addition to this other conditions are
laid down, especially the act of hope. These acts need not be
formally elicited, but it is required that the motive of sorrow
for sin should proceed from faith if it is to be of use for salva­
tion.
We may thus approach the question which, as Lehmkuhl says,
many moralists treat with a certain scrupulosity—whether
before the Sacrament is received explicit acts of faith and hope
must be made, or whether implicit acts are sufficient. Lehm­
kuhl himself answers the question as follows:59 To require that
the penitent should elicit an act of faith with its formal object
m Theol. Moral. 1. <·■ ■>· 28(>; similarly Aertnye. 1. <·. Cf. Ballerini, Op.
Theol. Mor- cp. I- ”· 1 H : Smirez. I)·· Pren. Disp. 4, Sect. 2, n. 7.

102

THE RECIPIENT OF PENA.XT E

explicitly and with deliberation before or apart from the net of
contrition is unreasonable; there would be reason for it only in
the case of a penitent who had lost his faith by sinning against
it. But an act of faith meaning the assent to a proposition of
faith which springs from the habit of faith (aseensum in aliquam
venialem ut fide notam ab habitu fidei oriundum), is rightly de­
manded since it is otherwise impossible to derive contrition
from a supernatural motive. Thus there is no doubt that a
formal and explicit act of faith is necessary; but this is certainly
present if the necessary contrition be there.
Accordingly St. Alphonsus is quite justified in believing that
he can reconcile the divergent views of the theologians by teach­
ing that· formal faith is certainly necessary, but not reflex faith :
that is a separate and distinct consideration of the grounds of
faith. It is just the same with regard to hope; for if a man
receive the Sacrament in a genuine spirit of penance in order to
get forgiveness of his sins, he is making an act of hope explicite
(though not yet reflexe, still exercite) that God will grant him
pardon in the Sacrament through the merits of Christ.®0 All
this, however, holds good only for the faithful who are instructed
in the things necessary for salvation.
Our faith presents to our consideration many motives for
contrition, which, as has been shown above, are reduced to two
by the Council of Tient : fear of punishment and hatefulness of
sin. This hatefulness may have many forms: the general mal­
ice which belongs to every sin (in so far as it is an injury to God
our highest good, and rebellion against Him, or ingratitude to
God our Father and Benefactor, or infamous unfaithfulness to
Jesus our loving Redeemer), or the particular malice which is
proper to each sin, since every sin has its own peculiar wicked­
ness and is the opposite to some special virtue. Λ further mo­
tive is found in the sufferings and death of Christ, which may

THE NECEKHAKY QVALITIES OF CONTRITION

103

be considered a motive of oirita/t, and the loathsome state of
the soul when deprived of sanctifying grace.
Among the punishments which excite us to salutary contri­
tion are first of all the fire of hell, and then purgatory.
All these motives may be called eternal: the pains of purga­
tory may be numbered among the eternal motives because they
begin only when a man has passed from this life into eternity.
It is to be observed that any one of these motives is sufficient
to awaken in us true contrition: nor is it necessary that we
should choose a motive with which we made acquaintance first
by revelation ; we know many of these motives as well by rea­
son as by faith ; we must only take care that the motive which
impels us to sorrow appeals to us not merely from the point of
view of reason, but as proposed by faith. If, however, one is
moved to contrition by a particular motive, namely, the pecul­
iar malice of some sin even when this malice is made known to
us by faith, it is better to add a universal motive either of fear
or of the malice residing in all sin, so that the sorrow may not
be insufficient or doubtful for any sin which, having escaped
observation, was not repented of.
The sorrow which comes from the thought of the temporal
sufferings of this life may be regarded as supernatural if these
sufferings are looked upon as inflicted by God, as being signs of
His anger, and as a sort of foretaste of His eternal punishments
if we do not amend. Hence the sorrow which comes from the
thought of earthly pains cannot be set down at once and abso­
lutely as supernatural sorrow; the supernatural aspect must be
kept in view, and then the sorrow may be regarded as super­
natural and sufficient for approaching the Sacrament. Not only
reason, but faith also, teaches us that in God’s providence sin has
many evil consequences, and that on account of sin God strikes
mankind with pains and calamities both private and public.
Moreover, the Council of Trent enumerates among the motives
of attrition “the fear of hell and of punishment,” and in the

104

THS RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

punishment we are to understand the pains of this life, for the
Council mentions as an example the Ninivites who repented of
their sins, moved by fear of the destruction of their city, which
had been prophesied by Jonas, unless they did penance; nor are
the Ninivites the only instance where God has threatened tem­
poral punishment in order to frighten sinners and move them to
penance. Not all theologians, however, admit temporal punish­
ments as motives of supernatural sorrow (among them Vasques
and Toletus); they try to weaken the argument drawn from the
Council of Trent by asserting that the Council does not speak of
two motives, which apart from one another can give rise to suffi­
cient contrition, but that the words are to be taken conjunc­
tively, so that the fear of earthly punishments must be joined
to fear of the pains of hell, since the latter only are made known
to us by faith. Our proof is in no way invalidated by this argu­
ment; besides, many theologians, anil those the most famous,
stand by the first view, so that it may be considered as the senten­
tia communis. The words of one of them, the eminent Suarez,
may be quoted here. He writes:M “Hence I infer that such
sorrow [as is required for the valid reception of the Sacrament
of Penance] must proceed from a divine and supernatural mo­
tive. That a temporal and human sorrow is not sufficient is
plain from the words of the Council of Trent, and the reason is
not to be misunderstood, for such a motive does not deprive
the will of the affection towards sin.” And in another place he
writes: “Vega (1. 13 in Trid. c. 14) concedes that sorrow based
on the fear of other punishment apart from hell-fire is sufficient
for attrition. This view is correct if we suppose that the fear
is not merely human and natural. Granted that the pains be
only temporal, if they are considered as inflicted by God, as pro­
claiming God’s anger, as being a foretaste in some way of the
« De Pœnit. Disp. 20, Sect. 2, n. 10. Cf. Lugo, De Pœnit. Diep. 5, n.
137; S. Alpli. L. VI. n. 443; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. I. n. 105110.

THE NECESSARY QI Λ I.IT1ES OF CONTRITION

105

divine punishments in the next, life if we do not reform, they
can move us to a supernatural sorrow which may fairly be classed
with the sorrow which is based on the fear of hell; thus we ex­
ercise the virtue of Christian hope when we look to God for
temporal benefits in so far as they affect in any way our eternal
life or fall under the special and supernatural providence of
God.”
Since, however, the negative proposition denying the efficacy
of sorrow springing from fear of earthly punishments for recep­
tion of the Sacrament is the safer one and is not altogether im­
probable, it is the view which must be adopted in practice; so a
penitent should not confine himself to the thought of the tem­
poral penalties, but use it to proceed to the consideration of the
divine justice as revealed in eternal penalties, "for," as Lugo
expresses it, "this consideration will create the fear of God, who
can inflict both one and the other penalty.” This last reflection
will certainly move him to a determined resolution to avoid sin
as the greatest of evils, ami to avoid it even if that involves other
suffering. If, however, a man dwell on the thought of the suffer­
ing which his sins have drawn upon him, or on the suffering
which usually follows in the train of sin, he will not necessarily
be induced thereby to resolve steadfastly to shun sin more than
any other evil; for it is possible that the avoiding of sin may
involve him in greater misfortunes in this life than those which
would come from committing the sin; anil it is impossible that
the fear of a less evil will effectually nerve a man to endure the
worse evil. Nevertheless the sorrow and purpose of amend­
ment, if they are to be of any use for justification, must be such
as to determine the man implicite to endure all the evils of this
life rather than commit sin; and though the penitent is not
obliged to reflect explicite on the matter, yet the motive of his
sorrow and amendment must be so powerful that, as long as
this motive is present, it would compel him to choose any suffer­
ing rather than sin. Finally, it may be mentioned that the con-

106

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

sideration of the temporal suffering is a powerful weapon in the
hands of the confessor to move an obstinate and unrepentant
sinner to contrition, and thence to lead him to higher and safer
motives."’
3. The sorrow must be universal (universalis), i.e. it must
extend to all past sins, at least to those which are mortal. No
single mortal sin can be forgiven unless it is repented of, nor
without, other mortal sins of which one has been guilty being
forgiven, for none can be forgiven without sanctifying grace;
but sanctifying grace is incompatible with mortal sin, for it is
impossible that any one should be at the same time a child of
God and the slave of the devil, worthy of everlasting reward and
deserving eternal punishment ; because “ there is no condemna­
tion to them that are. in Christ Jesus" (Rom. viii. 1). Hence it
is promised in Holy Scripture : "If the wicked do penance for all
the sins which he hath committed, and keep all My command­
ments, . . . living he shall live”;*1 and the second Lateral)
Council says, that a repentance would evidently be useless in
which a man left out several sins and repented only of one ; for
it is written: "Whosoever shall keep the whole law, but offend
in one point, is become guilty of all.” He who is attached to
one sin shall no more cross the threshold of eternal life than one
who is addicted to all possible sins.“‘
There are only two ways of attaining universal contrition ; one
way is to apply special motives of sorrow to each particular sin,
the other is to repent of all sins, both the known and the un­
known, through a universal motive. This universality does not
require that one should reflect on all his sins so as to elicit an
62 Lehmkuhl, 1. c. Tract. V. (Sacr. Poenit.) Sect. II. § 2, n. 287 ; Aertnya,
1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. cp. III. art. 2, n. 170; Scavini, 1. c. Tract. X. Disp.
T. cp. II. art. 1; Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. Tract. De Sacram. Pœnit. η. 452, Q.
VU : Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. 3, cp. 3, § 1, n. 2.
“ Ezechiel xviii. 21.
·» C. 22.

TUE NECE^sAHY QUALITIES OF CONTRITION

10T

act, of contrition for each particular sin; this is necessary only
if a man confines himself lo those motives which of their own
nature do not apply to all mortal sins. In practice, however,
it is strongly recommended to base the sorrow on universal
motives. If, then, a man is sorry for his sins, his mortal sins at
least, from a universal motive, and afterwards recalls other sins,
he may confess them along with the rest and receive absolution
for them without having to make a new act of contrition : this
fresh act would be required if his repentance had proceeded from
motives pecidiar to each sin. Besides there arises at the fresh
recollections of his other sins in a repentant sinner a renewal of
his sorrow ; this renewal is useful, for it insures a more perfect
preparation, but it is not necessary.
We must distinguish between the universality of the sorrow
and the universality of the purpose of amendment. The sorrow
is general when it extends to all sins committed, at least to those
which are mortal ; the resolution, however, must be to avoid all
mortal sins whether they have been committed or not.
If a penitent has only venial sins to confess, the sorrow need
not be universal ; it must have, however, the other properties.“
Since venial sin may coexist in the soul along with sanctifying
grace, the love of God is not lost, and since one venial sin may be
forgiven apart from others, it is enough in preparing for con­
fession to make an act of sorrow for one or other of the venial
sins. Of course in such a case only those sins are forgiven which
are repented of ; nor is it incompatible with the essence of venial
sin that a man should be really sorry for one, especially if it be
peculiarly vile, without being sorry for the rest.
Still, the penitent should exert himself to be sorry for all the
venial sins of which he accuses himself. It is no sin to confess
venial sins for which one is not sorry, so long as materia suffi« S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 419. Dub. 2; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. I. c. cp. I.
De dolore venialiam, n. 96-105.

108

THE HEt.'II'IENT OF l’EX.Ixti:

ciens for which there is actual sorrow is offered t<> tin· power of
the keys. It may be assumed that the penitent, coni· - in·' venial
sins for which he is not sorry, docs not care to be absob ·■.I from
them; from these the confessor does not intend to absolve.
Reasons may exist for confessing venial sins for which there is
no real sorrow, e.g. in order to practice humility, to be better
known and guided by one’s confessor, etc.""
4. The sorrow must be a sorrow surpassing all other sorrow
(sovereign, supreme) which shrinks from past sin as a greater evil
than any in the world, so that a man is prepared to forego every
good and suffer any evil rather than fall into sin again. This
sorrow must be supreme apprelialive. Yet it is not required
that the sensible feeling of pain should be infinitely great or sur“ Suarez (De Pœnit. Diep. 20, Sect. 6, n. 7) and Lugo (Disp. 11. n. IK)
teach clearly that a penitent who confesses (venial) sins for which there
is no sorrow, along with others without indicating the known defect of
sorrow, would sin venially by mixing up proper and improper matter.
Their view, however, is singular and is combated by other theologians.
In particular Mazzotta (1. c. Tract. VI. Disp. 1. Q. Ill. § 2, v. f.) gives the
correct solution to the objection that to confess venial sins for which there
is no sorrow, is a lie and a nullifying of the Sacrament, because the act of
confessing these sins is exercite a declaration of sorrow for them, lie
replies that, even granting the objection, it is in any case a lie in a matter
of less moment, and so at the most a venial sin, whence there can be no
nullifying of the Sacrament. He denies also that such confession is a lie,
for, in accordance with the feeling and practice of the faithful, the penitent
by such confession of venial sins states exercite that he is sorry for some of
them and wishes to be absolved ; with regard to the rest he reveals them
for his greater humiliation and shame, or in order to disclose the state of
his sonl, just as he may also reveal his evil inclinations and irregular desires,
though they are not sins. Even when a penitent is sorry only for the greater
sins, and yet says at the end of his confession, “ For these and all my other
sins I am sorry,” he tells no lie, for these words have no other meaning in
their ordinary acceptance than this, that he is sorry for all the sins from
which he can and wants to be absolved. It is just the same when a man
confesses many venial sins and is sorry only on account of their great numl>er. for he can easily see a peculiar malice in the habit of committing such
venial sins, and on that account can more easily excite himself to sorrow
forthem. Mazzotta, 1. c. ; Lugo and Suarez, 1. c. ; Stotz, Trib. Prenit. Lib.
1. Pars IL Q. I. art. 4, n. 20; Lelnnkuhl, 1. c. n. 290, 291.

THE IfECESSAIE ψΑΕΠΊΕΗ OE COETEITIOE

109

passing all other pain , nor is it necessary that the heart should
feel more keenly, or be more disturbed, or be more cast down
than it would be by some earthly suffering or loss which should
appeal more immediately to the sensitive faculties. Thus a man
may experience a more intense and lively sorrow for temporal
losses, such as the death of a dear friend or relation, and yet his
contrition may be appreciatively much greater. Of this he
would give ample proof if he were disposed to avoid sin, even
though the sin could make good his losses. Hence it is not hy
the acuteness of the sensible suffering that sorrow for sin mu«t
surpass other pain, but by the displeasure at past sin and the
determination of the will to endure all kinds of suffering and
every temporal calamity and evil rather than consent to a single
mortal sin. The sorrow for sin must therefore be appreciatively
sovereign, not necessarily intensively so. The intensity makes
no change whatever in the substance of an act. Though con­
trition is usually the more perfect the more intense it is, yet the
intensity ought not to be aimed at, for it would only prepare the
way for scruples; moreover, there is no proof that such intensity
is necessary.8’
Though the penitent must have a greater horror of sin than
of any other evil, it is not necessary that he should make a
deliberate comparison of it with other evils, and make a vivid
picture of each particular misfortune, putting to himself the
question whether he is ready to endure it in preference to com­
mitting sin. Indeed such a course would be highly imprudent
and dangerous and likely to destroy the real contrition and
purpose of amendment which he had, as well as to excite an
inclination for the sin which he detested. Hence when such
comparisons obtrude themselves on the mind of the penitent,
he should positively reject them and cling to the absolute and
unconditional general resolution of never sinning again, helping
6’ Cf. S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 3, art 1 ; Stotz, Tribunal l'œnit. 1. c. art. IV. n.
10, 17; Ballerini, Op· Theol. Mor. J. o. n. 110.

110

TUE RECIPIENT ΟΓ PEN.I NCE

himself by the reflection that God's grace will never be wanting
at the right moment, and resolving with the help of that grace
never more to sin.”
The question whether the sorrow can over be excessive is
already answered from the foregoing. The sorrow which is of
the essence of contrition, i.e. displeasure at our past sins in so
far as they are an injury to God, can never be excessive ; the
greater our love, the greater must be our displeasure, and love
cannot be too great. As to the sensible feeling of sorrow which
is not at all necessary for true contrition, this should never be
carried so far as to interfere with the duty of self-preservation,
though as a matter of course there is little occasion to fear that
sensible sorrow will go so far. For the sensible sorrow over a
spiritual evil is always somewhat remote and cannot easily be
so acute as direct physical suffering or as the pain which comes
from a misfortune appealing directly to the senses."0
As in contrition there is no definite intensity required, nei­
ther is any certain duration ; for a man may in one moment elicit
an act of perfect or imperfect contrition ; it may be quite sud­
denly aroused by divine grace, as in the case of David when he
exclaimed in his·sorrow, “I have sinned against the Lord,” or
as in the case of St. Peter, who at one glance of Jesus was melted
into bitter tears. The moment contrition becomes actual it is
sufficient for absolution. In practice, however, the faithful
should be urged to spend some time before confession in
rousing a genuine sorrow that will answer all demands, by re­
flecting with the help of God’s grace on the nature of sin and
its consequences; moreover, they should be cautioned not to
be satisfied with a mechanical repetition of an act of contrition,
ω S. Thom. Quodlib. 1, art. 9 (non modo imprudentia sed stultitia eum
morem arguit) ; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 433; Stotz, 1. c.; Ballerini, Op. Theol.
Mor. I. c. n. 116 s.
® Cf. S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 3, art. 2; Martin, Lehrbuch der kath. Moral.

RELATION OF CONTRITION TO THE SACRAMENT 111

otherwise the sorrow may be wanting, or at its best be very
weak. Yet sorrow is of the. highest importance because it is
the most essential of the actus pœnitenlis, the very soul of con­
fession.70
15. The Relation of Contrition to the Sacrament.

Finally, the sorrow must be sacramental, i.e. in connection
with the Sacrament of Penance. For instance, in order that
attrition along with the Sacrament may be able to restore a man
to sanctifying grace, it must be joined with at least the implicit
intention of receiving the Sacrament, and coexist- virtually with
the absolution.
A man who in preparing for confession bewails the sins which
he has discovered in examining his conscience, makes an act of
contrition ex intentione implicita of receiving the Sacrament. If,
however, his sorrow is expressed without any intention of receiv­
ing the Sacrament or without any thought of confession, he
must renew his act of sorrow in order to be sure of receiving
absolution validly, unless he afterwards decides to go to con­
fession in consequence of the still virtually enduring contrition,
so that his confession proceeds from his sorrow. Hence the fol­
lowing conclusions are drawn : —
I. An act of contrition made without reference to the
receiving of absolution makes the validity of the absolution
doubtful.
II. It is not necessary, however, that the penitent should
make the act of contrition in consequence of his resolution to go
to confession. This is the usual practice, it is true, and certainly
a very good one, but it is enough if by his contrition he be moved
to make his confession, and if he thus unite his sorrow, still per­
severing, with the sacramental act. It is also sufficient if the
” Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. I. c. cp. I. n. Ill ; Lehrnkuhl, 1. c. Tnu-t. V.
Sacr. Peon. Sect. II. cp. I. § 2. n. 285, 3. Ou the subject of the dolor φιο
non (loleae see Ballerini, 1. c. n. 114 s.

112

THE RECIPIENT ON PENANCE

penitent makes an act of sorrow in the interval between the
confession of his sins and the giving of the absolution.71
The reason for making these demands upon the penitent is
that the acts of the penitent are not only an interior preparation
for, but they are the materia ex qua of, the Sacrament. The
sorrow, therefore, must be brought into relation to the Sacra­
ment; and since this doctrine is probable and is the common
teaching, this relation must be established in practice at least
ante/actum, i.e. the confessor must before giving absolution take
care that the penitent makes his act of sorrow with a view to
the Sacrament.
Hence the question amounts really to this: What relation is
demanded between the act of sorrow and the Sacrament ? not
whether such a relation be necessary; for, on the one hand, it
cannot be defended with any probability that such relation is
unnecessary, and, on the other hand, it is not in accordance with
either truth or prudence that the penitent, before making the
act of contrition, should establish its relation to the confession
or be obliged to have the intention of receiving the Sacrament.
Some sort of bond, however, must exist between the contrition
and the Sacrament. It is false to infer from the Catholic teach­
ing of the Council of Trent that the eliciting of the act of sorrow
or dolor in fieri, as it is called, is the materia proxima of the Sac­
rament; it is rather the sorrow already elicited or the dolor in
jacto esse, which is the matter of the Sacrament; it is not in or
by itself proxima materia: it becomes so by means of the con­
fession and in union with the confession. That sorrow is suffi­
cient which coexists in any way with the will of receiving the
Sacrament. In other words, the sorrow must inform the con­
fession, i.e. make the accusation a penitent or sorrowful con” This is in accordance with the Roman Ritual, which, Tit. III. cp. I
(Ordo ministrandi Sacr. Pœnit. n. 17), says : “ After the confessor has heard
the confession ... he should try by earnest exhortation to move the peni­
tent to contrition.”

.

RELATION of CONTRITION TO THE SACRAMENT 113
fession, and apt to effect a reconciliation with God. If then the
sorrow coexists in any way with the confession and is referred
to it, that sorrow constitutes proxime the matter of the Sacra­
ment and there is no necessity for the penitent to have the in­
tention of confessing before making the act of contrition. In a
similar way water is tin· matter of Baptism; it is not necessary
that the water should be procured with the intention of con­
ferring the Sacrament; it is quite enough to take the water
which comes to hand and to apply it to the sacramental use.
Now there can be no doubt that the sorrow also, though not
elicited with a view to the Sacrament, can remain present in
some way in the soul, and while so present may later on be
brought into contact with ami applied to the Sacrament. A
man, for instance, who under the influence of his contrition seeks
an opportunity of going to confession, or makes use of the
opportunity of going which presents itself, has certainly not lost
his contrition; he has it rather in greater abundance, though
he reflects no more on his sorrow, nor even retains any certain
recollection of it afterwards.
Lacroix has no sufficient reason for demanding that sorrow
must be aroused with the view of going to confession, saying
that otherwise the sorrow would not be a sacramental act,
just as the pouring of water made without the intention of
baptizing, though referred immediately afterwards to the bap­
tismal act and the form added, is not a sacramental function.
The comparison, we answer, is not to the point, for the sorrow
is not in et per se materia proxima as is the pouring of the water
in Baptism. If, however, a man poured out the water with some
other intention, and then still in the act of pouring formed the in­
tention of baptizing, the Baptism would be valid. The same
argument holds for penance; hence that sorrow is sufficient
which coexists in any way with the wish to receive the Sacra­

ment.
In the case quoted above where the penitent first confesses his

114

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

sins and then makes his act of sorrow before receiving the Sac­
rament, or when he is moved to contrition by the words of his
confessor, a difficulty may arise, since the confession must be a
sorrowful one. Such an enumeration of the sins cannot, of
course, be considered as informed by sorrow; the humble de­
mand for absolution, however, takes up the accusation again
and perfects it; and makes it materia proxima of the Sacrament.
If, on the contrary, the sorrow has been elicited with no idea
at all of confessing the sin, there is reason for doubting whether
an act so completely independent of the confession will become
materia of the Sacrament. Absolution cannot be demanded in
face of the probability of such an essential defect; yet one can
hardly acquire sufficient certainty of the existence of such de­
fect to make the repetition of the confession obligatory.”
III. The sorrow must coexist at least virtually with the air­
solution if it is to be sacramental. This virtual coexistence is
secured if the sorrow is excited immediately before the accusa­
tion or the absolution, or even one, two, or four hours before
confession; and St. Alphonsus admits that real sorrow may
last one or two days and still be sufficient for absolution, when
it comes from the desire of being reconciled with God, or when
it urges a man to go to confession in order to avoid the sins along
with the occasion of them. On the other hand, a sorrow re­
moved by so long an interval would not be sufficient for valid
absolution if the confession were made out of mere devotion, or
in fulfilment of a vow, or for some similar reason. In these
latter instances one or two hours is the widest limit which could
be assigned for the virtual duration of the contrition. Hence
we must condemn the teaching of some moralists that the act
7tS. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 447 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. ! : <m
ilnlor ordinandu» ud «aeramentum, n. 120-129 ; Lelnnkuhl, 1. c. Sect. II. cp. I.
§ 1, n.280; G ury-Ballerini, Compend. Theol. Mor. Tract, de Sacr. Pu n.
art. 1. § 1, a. 417· Q. 7; Suarez. De Pcenit. Disp. 20, Sect. 4, n. 29; Lugo,
D<· Pœnit. Diep. 14. n. 87-40; Vindic. Alph. p. 930, n. 108 et pp. 411-118 ;
Aertuys, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. cp. 111. art. II. n. 179, Q. 4.

RELATION OF CONTRITION TO THE SACRAMENT

115

of sorrow endures over an unlimited time, and that it is quite
sufficient if it is not retracted in the interval. Of course the act
of contrition loses completely all its value for absolution by any
retraction ; and sorrow is retracted expressly by any new com­
placency in the sin or by any fresh mortal sin.
The reasons for the doctrine just given have already been laid
down in the preceding paragraphs on the relation between con­
trition and absolution. The theologians fall back in particular
on the analogy between the civil and sacramental tribunals. As
in a civil process some time may elapse between the hearing of
the case and the passing of the sentence without invalidating
the sentence, so some interval may elapse between the sorrow
and the absolution by which sentence is pronounced; this delay,
however, must not be too long.”
In practice the priest must teach the faithful and insist on
their renewing the act of sorrow immediately before confession,
if it is some time since they made it, and also on a due amount of
time being given to eliciting contrition, since the fruit of the
Sacrament is more abundant in proportion to the care taken in
preparing for it.
In the case, however, where confession has been made with
genuine sorrow but without the necessary reference to the Sac­
rament, the penitent should not be obliged to repeat the confes­
sion, for the other view with regard to the sorrow, that it is not
materia sacramenti, but only a disposition on the part of the
penitent, is not altogether without probability; besides it is
scarcely probable that the former act of contrition has not been
renewed when the man intended to confess, and that it has no
sufficient coexistence with the confession, or at least with the
intention to confess. Only when there is danger of death or
any risk of the penitent dying before receiving absolution
again, the safer course, as far as possible, should be adopted:
« S. Alph. Lib. VI. η. ·14β; II. Ap. Traci. 16, n. 20.

116

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

for on such important occasions prudence counsels us to guard
against even slight doubts, so as not to jeopardize our eternal
salvation.
It is certain, as we remarked above, that the act of contrition
is retracted by a fresh mortal sin, and its effect, in consequence,
no longer endures. It is not so easy to settle the question, with
regard to venial sins, as to whether t he sorrow for venial sin based
on a universal motive is revoked by a fresh venial sin, or whether
the sorrow continues. If it is conceded that the sorrow is re­
voked, scruples may easily arise if the sorrow has not been
renewed immediately before confession. This practice is very
good; but not necessary, if the fresh venial sin is less grievous
than those which the penitent intended to confess when he made
his act of sorrow.’*
There is still another question to consider. An act of contri­
tion is made, extending to all past sins, those which are forgotten
as well as those which are remembered; must this be renewed
if the penitent afterwards confesses the forgotten sins and de­
sires a second absolution ?
A renewal of the sorrow in this case does not seem necessary,
provided that the sorrow in the first confession extended to all
past sins, even those which by chance had escaped the memory;
for in this case the process was not objectivelj' complete. The
sorrow and the implicit intention of receiving absolution were
applied to all sins, even those inculpably forgotten; and as the
renewal of the sorrow would not be at all necessary if the peni­
tent, after making an act of contrition on universal grounds,
recalls just before the absolution some sins forgotten and con­
fesses them before the absolution is pronounced, so it is not
necessary in the case mentioned, since it is much the same
whether one receives many particular absolutions or a general
one embracing all the sins. Such is the view of the greater number
’· Cf. Tamburini. Method, conf. Lib. I. cp. 3, § 4 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. o. Sect.
II. ep. I. § 1. n. 281.

RtLATlON OF CONTTIITIO.V TO ΤΠΕ SACRAMENT

117

of the moralists. Lugo, St. Alphonsus, and Reuter may Ije men­
tioned particularly as favoring it; St. Alphonsus calls this teach­
ing communis, Roncaglia nwraliter certa, Sporer, Elbel, and many
others probabilissima ; it has been declared even indubitata apud
omnes; pro ea slat, says Lugo, communis praxis. If in this case
one or two confessors perhaps insist on the renewal of the sor­
row, the greater number agree in acting differently or in suggest­
ing it merely as a piece of advice.
The champions of the other view urge that the case is closed
by the first absolution ; if then absolution is to be given again, a
new materia proxima is required, and even if the sorrow continue,
it has no relation to the second absolution. It is easily seen that
this is not a strong reason.75 Yet though the renewal of the sor­
row be not necessary for the validity of the absolution, it is ad­
visable to make again the act of sorrow, which is easy to do and
certainly increases the grace. The confessor deals prudently
with a penitent under such circumstances when he requires him
to make a short renewal of his act of contrition.78
The doctrine just developed is not only adopted ex communi
sententia in the case more or less frequent, where a mortal
sin which had been forgotten is confessed immediately after or
very soon after absolution, but also in two other cases. For
instance, a penitent in immediate danger of death must be
absolved after one or two sins have been confessed; after this, if
he be still alive, the confession is continued and completed. The
’· Cf. Gury-Ballerini, II. 1. c. n. 148; Baller. Op. Theo). Mor. 1. c. cp. I.
η. 129 es.; Aertnys, I. c.; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 282; Mazzotta. 1. c. Tract. VI.
Disp. I. Q. III. q. I. § 3.
Müller (1. c. Lib. III. Tract. II. § 110) founds his advice as to renew­
ing the net of sorrow on the rule in praxi tutius est sequendum, since it is a
case of securing the validity of a Sacrament. He is in error, however, for
the other (affirmative) opinion hardly deserves to be considered probable on
account of the very weak grounds on which it rests. We must at the same
time remember that the penitent in this case is certainly justified, and that
he has fulfilled the divine precept of demanding direct absolution for all his
sins when he confesses his sins in accordance with the first opinion.

118

THK RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

other example is when a penitent (a very rare case) is absolved by
his superior from the reserved sins only, and from the remain­
ing sins by another confessor.”
The result of this doctrine ought not to be, however, that con­
fessors and penitents become less solicitous about contrition for
sins already remitted by the Sacrament. It may, however, as
Ballerini remarks, be very useful in quieting scruples, especially
of those who accuse themselves of venial sins and in addition
tell some mortal sin already confessed and absolved : for if there
is little ground for doubting the sorrow for past mortal sins in a
penitent who has usually only venial sins to confess, and shows
by his constant victories over temptation hrs aversion to mortal
sin, yet certain anxious penitents are frequently troubled with
scruples about their want of contrition, especially if they happen
to hear a preacher who, with a zeal sometimes devoid of pru­
dence, condemns the repeated confession of past sins made
without true contrition. Such scruples may be overcome by
various means, but especially by the doctrine just given.”
To conclude with a few practical questions : —
1. How must the confessor deal with a penitent who thinks
he has only very slight contrition? He must first of all not be
too hasty in deciding that this penitent is indisposed and with­
out the necessary contrition ; there are men whose hearts are so
n Compare § 42 ; Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. This doctrine is pushed still
farther, and it is taught that a man may be absolved several times from
sins, even though he has confessed them or other sins two or three times
without renewing his contrition, so long as he has not revoked the contri
tion, and so long as it remains habitual and virtual. This is not to be
understood as though the absolution may be given after the lapse of weeks
and months on the strength of a single act of contrition: this would be a
very doubtful proceeding, since the virtual continuance of the sorrow which
is required is not to be understood of the mere habitual disposition of the
heart, but only of the virtual existence which may still intentionally unite
the sorrow with the absolution. Cf. Tamburini, 1. c. Lib. I. cp. 2, § 5;
Lehmkuhl. 1. e. n. 282.
’· Gury-Ballerini, I. c. n. 447, Nota a.

RELATION OF CONTRITION TO THE HACRAMENT

119

hard and inaccessible to sensible impressions that it is only with
difficulty and at rare intervals that they are moved to a sensible
sorrow, and such are easily inclined to think that they have not
the proper dispositions. The confessor must remember that the
feeling of sorrow is not at all required, but that a real grief over
the past life and an earnest desire to amend are sufficient; he
must satisfy himself that these dispositions are present and can­
not demand more. He may, moreover, reasonably assume the
presence of these dispositions in the penitent if the latter be will­
ing to listen to warning and instruction, if he has at any time
really endeavored to amend, if he is ready to perform the pen­
ance imposed, and to carry out other prescriptions of a like
nature.70
2. When with regard to former confessions the priest wishes
to ascertain whether the penitent has had real sorrow, the fol­
lowing points may serve as indications: —
(a) If the penitent has made use of the means suggested to
him for overcoming the sin.
(b) If he has avoided at least the proximate occasions of sin.
(c) If the number of sins has become less.
(d) If the penitent is convinced that he had real sorrow and
purpose of amendment; for it is a first principle in the Sacra­
ment of Penance that the penitent's word is to be taken, since
he is there his own accuser and witness.’0
The priest must act here with great prudence so as not to
frighten away the penitent, and at the same time not to indulge
in an indiscreet leniency by which he would himself commit sin
and involve both the penitent and himself in ruin.
3. It is not easy for the confessor to discover when the peni­
tent has not real contrition; the following directions, which
Cardinal Denoff in his pastoral brought to the notice of all the
confessors of his diocese, may be of use : —

120

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

(a) If the penitent approaches with a proud bearing as though
despising the minister of Christ.
(b) If he answers with impatience and anger the questions
which the confessor is bound to put.
(c) If in the course of his confession he constantly makes
excuses and accuses others more than himself.
(d) If he mentions the gravest sins as though they were
ordinary occurrences.
(e) If it is evident that he is trying to conceal a mortal sin
which the confessor in the course of his examination has de­
tected.
(/) If he refuses to accept a penance proportioned to the
number and gravity of his sins, and given with all consideration
for his circumstances.
(g) If he is unwilling to employ the necessary means to
reform.
(A) If, finally, he belongs to the number of those unhappy
sinners who seek ignorant or easy-going confessors, with a view
of getting absolution only, without any intention of reforming.81
4. If the priest has to deal with an obstinate sinner, he must
discreetly unite mildness and severity, but above all pray to
God for him, since every good gift comes from the Father of
light. He may picture to him God’s great mercy and the love
of Jesus to give him courage; or he may try to soften the hard­
ness of his heart by reminding him of God’s justice (cf. S. Alph.
Praxis Confessar. cp. I).
11 Cf. Scavini, 1. c. Adnotat. n. 191, and Trucchi, Metodo practicu per la
facile e eicura umministiat. del Sacr. della Penit.

CHAPTER II
THE PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT

16. Necessity and Nature of the Purpose of Amendment.

Accordinc to the decision of the Council of Trent, as we have
seen above, the resolution to amend as well as contrition is re­
quired for the valid reception of the Sacrament. With a true
sorrow for sin is always conjoined the resolution to avoid it,
so that we may say with regard to past sins sorrow means grief
and horror, with regard to the future it means the resolution
to amend. For instance, a man who hates the sin he has com­
mitted, because it is sin and in so far as it is sin, i.e. because it
is an offense against God and the greatest misfortune which
can befall a mortal, naturally extends that sorrow to everything
which involves sin, and so to the sins of the future, since they
offer the same grounds for hatred as the rest.
Now amendment is effected by the deliberate intention
never to sin again for the future. A distinction is drawn be­
tween the express or formal resolve {propositum explicitum sett
formale), as when, for example, a man thinks upon his future
life and resolves to sin no more, and the implicit resolve con­
tained in the sorrow {propositum implicitum seu virtuale); the
latter is present when a man, without thinking upon his future
life, repents of his sin in such wise that, if asked whether he in­
tends for the future to avoid sin, he would most certainly answer
in the affirmative.
It is a disputed point among theologians whether for the
validity of confession an express (formal) resolve is necessary
or one included in the act of contrition (a virtual resolve) is
121

122

TUE U ECI Pl ENT OF PENANCE

sufficient. Some teach absolutely (very few, however) that
an express resolve is necessary, and appeal to the Council of
Trent as requiring this condition, since, after defining the act
of contrition, it adds the words: Cum proposito non peccandi
de artcro.1
This argument is successfully invalidated by Cardinal Lugo,’
who, in addition, brings convincing testimony that the very
opposite conclusion may be drawn from the teaching of the
Council. Since, moreover, as Ballerini shows in his notes on
Gury's text, only a very few theologians adopt that view, it can
hardly lay any claim to probability.’
Other theologians teach absolutely that an express purpose of
amendment is not necessary if the contrition proceed from a
universal motive;4 an implicit resolution is sufficient, and Lugo
1 Sess. XIV. op. TV.
3 De Prenit. Disp. 14, n. 52 s.
’ Ballerini points out particularly that the older theologians, as Petrus
Loinbardus, St. Thomas, Blessed Albert, Scotus, Durandus, were quoted
without reason as upholders of this view, for, though they insisted on the
necessity of some sort of purpose of amendment, they made no distinction
between a formal anil a virtual purpose. Cf. Bellarmin, De Pœnit. Lib.
II. cp. 0. Moreover, Suarez, Cajetan, Bonucina, Henriquez, and Gregory
of Valentia are wrongly quoted in favor of this view; they taught the very
opposit»·. Cf. Ballerini, Nota·, 1. c. ad n. 4C2.
* The purpose of amendment must be universal, and, as we shall show
later, with a universality distinct from that of the contrition. If the sorrow
proceeded from a particular motive which nec actu nec virlute extended to
the other sins, it is clear that the resolution to amend implied in such sorrow
could hardly be universal. If, for example, a man conceived sorrow for the
sin of impurity only on account of the peculiar ugliness of that vice, the
purpose of amendment contained in such a sorrow would suffice indeed so
far as it applied to impurity, but not for other sins, because the motive is a
particular one not extending to other sins. If, then, the sorrow is based on
some particular motive, an explicit purpose of amendment must be made
extending to all sins.
If the sorrow proceed from a general motive applicable to all sins (if a
man, for example, is sorry for having committed a serious theft because it
is a grave offense against God), it is impossible that he should be willing to
offend God again by any other grave sin, for in consequence of his act of
contrition he hates and detests whatever offends God. Whoever heartily

NATUHE or·' Till·: POIIP08E OF AMENDMENT

123

calls this opinion communis inter recentiores. Indeed most of
the theologians endorse it. Ballerini cites seventy-three by
name, with the passages in which they express their views.*
It is also founded on solid intrinsic grounds, for, according to
the doctrine of the Council {loco citato), attrition which excludes
the desire of sinning is sufficient for the valid reception of the
Sacrament; but, as we have seen, attrition excludes the desire
of sinning, even when there is no formal purpose of amendment,
for it detaches the heart of man from sin, and not only from
past sin but from all sin.”
Finally, there are theologians who distinguish and say: If a
penitent advert to the future, he must make a formal resolution
to amend; if, however, as in the case of the dying, no thought
of the future occurs to him, a formal resolution is not necessary;
for it is hardly possible that a penitent who is really sorry for
his sins and thinks upon the future should fail to make an
express and formal resolve to amend. Yet this may very well
happen, as Ballerini observes, to pious people, especially to such
as are careful to avoid even slight deliberate venial sins, and
arc accustomed to make acts of sorrow for defects and to start
afresh on the right way ; for in them the resolution to avoid
sin is not made just for the time when they prepare for confesdetests his sins from a universal motive will be slow ever to fall into them
again; for no man will do that which he hates as an offense against God.
11 But when the Council of Trent speaks of the purpose of amendment, it
speaks of it in the same way as of the resolution to go to confession and
make satisfaction, and this need not be explicit. ’As it is sufficient that
this resolution be virtual, it is also enough to make a virtual resolution of
reforming one’s life and sinning no more: it is always a real resolution,
though it be only a ‘virtual one.’ And since eminent authorities interpret
the Council of Trent in this manner, we may without misgiving follow their
decision.” Stotz, 1. c. Lib. Γ. P. II. Q. II. art. III. n. 88 ss.
6 Ballerini, Notre ad n. -162, pp. 348-356 (Ed. Romana. 1887), and Opus
Theolog. Morale, 1. c. (.In sufficiat propositum virtuale), n. 113-155.
» This is also the doctrine of the Council held at Rome in 1725 under
Benedict XIII in the Laterau Basilica.

124

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

sion, but it is rather an enduring habit of mind. Hence it is
not matter of surprise that they should not think of renewing
and confirming their resolution. Suarez makes this clear
when, in speaking of perfect contrition, he asks whether an
act of perfect love suffices for justification, or whether also an
act of sorrow for sin be necessary; he replies that per sc both
arc required, but that per accidens the act of perfect love suffices,
for whoever makes an act of perfect love is undoubtedly restored
to grace; but that if a man be conscious of sin, he is in duty
bound to reëstablish his right relation to God and to make a
formal and explicit act of displeasure and hatred with regard
to the sin; to neglect this duty would prove that he had no real
love. In a similar way the sinner who mourns for his past sins
is naturally prompted to make a resolution of avoiding sin;
hence the voluntary neglect of the purpose of amendment renders
the act of contrition very suspicious.’
After exposing the three views which have divided theo­
logians on this point, St. Alphonsus concludes: The hist two
views are certainly the more probable; but since the first has
also a certain probability, it must in practice be followed ante
lactum. He holds that a penitent would be obliged to repeat
his confession if he had confessed in good faith without an ex­
press purpose of amendment, though with real contrition such
as would include a virtual purpose; his argument being that,
since the first opinion is sufficiently probable, a penitent who
had certainly incurred mortal sin is bound to avow the same
in a confession that was certainly and not merely probably
valid.8 Now, as we have shown above, the first opinion can
hardly lay claim to any probability, though the holy Doctor
concedes it as such mainly because he was misled by Lacroix
into believing that he had distinguished authorities on his side.
’ Suarez, De Pœn. Disp. 20, Sect. 4, n. 33.
* S. Alph. Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. n. 450.

HATUHE <>!'' THE PURPOSE OF AXEEDMEXT

125

Besides, St. Alphonsus teaches in another part of his Moral
Theology (1. c. n. 505) that the penitent should not he obliged
to repeat his confession unless there be a moral certainty of its
invalidity — a doctrine quite in accordance with the wntenlia
communis and with excellent reason maintained by Lacroix,
Gobat, etc., in opposition to Antoine, one of the most conspicu­
ous rigoriste of his time.
In the case under consideration it may be decided with moral
certainty that a confession made with a virtual purpose of
amendment is rather valid than invalid, especially since, ac­
cording to St. Alphonsus himself, the champions of all these
opinions unite in declaring that a confession made without an
express resolution of amendment need not be repeated, for they
would certainly have decided for the repetition if they had
thought such a confession invalid. Hence theologians deny
communissima sententia that a formal purpose of amendment
(if the contrition is based on a universal motive) is necessary
necessitate sacramenti; they admit that confessions are valid
without the express purpose of amendment. Add to this that
St. Alphonsus in his Homo Apostolicus taught that confessions
matle with only a virtual purpose of amendment need not be
repeated.’
We conclude with the following principles : —
1. In order to receive the Sacrament validly and to share in
9 The Turin edition of his Moral Theology defends the doctrine held in
the present work, and shows that the holy Doctor was always expending
labor on the text of the Moral Theology and correcting it up to the end of
his life. Aertnys, moreover, declares (appealing to S. Alph. Theol. Moral.
Lib. Ί. n. 53, Lib. III. n. 700, and Lib. VI. n. 505) that there is no obliga­
tion of repeating the confession ; and Marcus (Institut. Moral. Alphons. I’.
ΙΠ. Tract. V. Diss. IT. cp. I. art. II. n. 1680) adopts Bcavini’s view : In
praxi no one need be disturbed in this matter, since it can hardly happen
that a really contrite penitent will omit the formal purpose of amendment.
Müller (1. c. § 117) requires for the validity of the confession a formal reso­
lution to amend, and maintains that confessions made without the formal
resolution are to be repeated.

126

THE H «CIPIEN T OF PENANCE

its essential effects, a virtual or implicit purpose of amendment is
sufficient if the sorrow proceed from a universal motive.
2. If confession has been marie without a formal and express
purpose of amendment, there is no obligation to repeat the con­
fession as though it had been invalid.
3. The faithful should bo taught and urged to make a formal
resolution of amendment in the course of their preparation for
confession.
The reason of this last prescription is not so much to be found
in any doubt with regard to confessions made without the ex­
press purpose of amendment, but to secure a more abundant
fruit from the Sacrament. We shall certainly with the grace
of God make more earnest endeavors to avoid sin and to reform
if we expressly, deliberately, and with all our heart resolve to
avoid sin. Indeed, as Lehmkuhl justly observes, apart from
the grace of the Sacrament and the instruction and advice of
our confessor, the frequent reception of this Sacrament serves to
secure us against relapse, for our wills need a frequent stimulus
to remain firm in the hatred of sin. Not infrequently one cause
of our relapses is a weak purpose of amendment.10

17. Properties of the Purpose of Amendment.

The purpose of amendment must have the three following
properties: it must be absolute or firm, efficacious, and uni­
versal. We shall consider these properties in detail.
The purpose of amendment must, first of all, be firm,
answering to the contrition which detests sin above all other
evils; so that a man under no circumstances, neither through
fear of any evil or love of any good will think of swerving from
his resolve. Thus the purpose of amendment is not a velleity,
not a mere wish or a vague desire; it must be an absolute,
fixed determination never to sin again; otherwise the penitent
>° Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 298.

Cf. Stotz, 1. c. n. 92.

PROPERTIES OF THE PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT 127

would not really detest sin nor really and thoroughly turn
to God.
The resolution must then be so fixed that the penitent is re­
solved to overcome all the difficulties which may oppose its
execution. The confessor will prudently refrain from placing
before the penitent all the difficulties which will have to be
faced in keeping the resolution or from revealing to the penitent
all his obligations, if the latter be bona fide ignorant of them;
“for,” says Suarez, “ he might expose the penitent to the obvious
danger of making no resolution, but rather of sinning again.”
It is enough, continues the great theologian, if the confessor
pictures to the penitent in general terms the hatefulness of sin,
the goodness of God, the danger of eternal damnation, etc., and
that the penitent in consequence of the exhortation forms a
general resolution never to fall again into mortal sin.” The
advice which Cardinal Cajetan gives to confessors is in much
the same strain : They should not, he says, lead their peni­
tents into temptation by their excessive and imprudent zeal
in asking whether they are resolved to avoid sin even at the
risk of suffering the greatest misfortunes, loss of goods, nf
health, or even of life itself; for questions of this kind would
prove a snare to many penitents. His office should be rather
to persuade them to love God above all things, and in conse­
quence of this love to repent of their sins and avoid them for
the future. In this way he will inflame the hearts of his peni­
tents, without leading them into danger.13
The celebrated Lugo reminds us of the weakness of the human
heart; the confessor is to take this weakness into account in
dealing with the penitent, and not put before him singly and
explicitly enormous difficulties which he should be ready to
overcome rather than commit sin. In another place, treating
n Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. 32, Sect. 2, n. 2.
12 Cajetan, Card. Sum. V. Confess, ad 12 qualit.

128

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

of penitents given to ambition and sensuality, who have re­
nounced their sins in confession though without great sorrow,
but, conquered by the strength of their passion which they have
only resisted feebly, have relapsed easily when occasion offered,
he says: “Indeed we do not dare to represent clearly in detail
the temptations or occasions of sinning which may occur, in
order that the penitent may make his resolutions on each point,
for there is good reason to fear that he will fail to retract his
former sins even in confuso.'"*
It is then sufficient per ne that the penitent resolve in confuso
to sin no more; a resolution of this kind, however, may be easily
defeated by the contemplation of a peculiar difficulty. For
this reason the penitent should renew frequently and earnestly
his resolution never to sin again; if he do this and also pray,
there is reason to hope that he will be victorious in the actual
moment of trial. Men of strong will and steadfast heart may
put before themselves and contemplate with their eyes open
the difficulties in the way of avoiding sin and reforming their
lives, and such conduct is helpful in the spiritual struggle, unless
the subject be one in which the heart is vehemently carried
away or where victory consists in flight. To conjure up diffi­
culties and to review temptations which might disturb weak
minds and lead them into danger 14 serves no good purpose and
is not to be recommended.
From the foregoing it is abundantly evident : —
1. That the Jansenists and rigorists are wrong in maintain­
ing that relapse into sin is a sign of a want of purpose. The
resolution depends on the present frame of mind which, how­
ever strong it is, may easily waver. “The fact of a man
sinning again does not prevent, his former sorrow from having
been real; as a man may be now seated who has been running,
>· Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 7, η. 238.
’· Compare Lehinkuhl, 1. c. Tract. V. Sacr. Pœnit. Sect. II. cp. I. § 3, n.
205.

PROPERTIES OF Tin: PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT 129

so a man may fall into sin who has been truly repentant;
the nature of a former act is not changed by a subsequent act.”“
And the Rituale Romanum ” directs, as of great utility, toadvise
those who easily relapse into sin to confess often, once a month,
or on certain feasts, and also to communicate; it presumes that
such people in spite of their relapses have made good confes­
sions; otherwise the penitent would be obliged to repeat his
confessions as being invalid every time that he relapsed, which
would certainly be opposed to the practice and universal belief
of the faithful. If, however, a penitent relapse without any
effort to overcome himself, it may be taken as a sign that he
had no fixed determination, or there is ground for a suspicion,
at least, of its absence; any one who is really determined to
avoid sin will not easily forget his purpose; he will resist for
some time at least, and will fall less easily and less often.16
17
2. Even if a penitent is conscious of his own weakness and
knows that he will relapse in spite of his resolution and in spite
of earnest effort, he cannot be considered as giving undoubted
signs of weakness of purpose. It is only the rigorists who
demand a firm conviction of not falling again.
If, however, a penitent is so afraid that he will fall again,
or so convinced that he will repeat his sin as to despair of reform­
ing, he cannot be absolved; not only does he fail in resolution
— there is a fair suspicion at least that he hits no fixed deter­
mination — but he distrusts God’s grace which is ever at hand,
and, as experience proves, is always efficacious in helping men
of good will to overcome difficulties and obstacles. Before
giving such a penitent absolution he must be taught the fatal
error of his ways, moved to sorrow for his despair, for such
16 S. Thomas, ΙΠ. Q. 84, a. 10 ail 4. Compare S. Bonaventure in IV.
Sent. Dist.14. p. 1, <1. 4; S. Alph. Praxis Confess, cp. 1, n. 20; Tlieol. Moi
Lib. VI. n. 451.
>° Tit. HI. cp. I. De Sacr. Pæn· η. 19.
it Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 459

180

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

despair is sinful, and exhorted to great confidence in God's
grace. This is the doctrine of St. Alphonsus,'" in which, as
he himself confesses, he follows Busenbaum,1* Concilia, and
Lacroix.”
If, finally, the penitent has misgivings from his previous
experience of relapses, but not so strong as to deprive him of
all confidence, he is not to be classed at once as indisposed; the
confessor must persuade him to make a firm resolut ion against
sin and encourage him to have confidence in God’s grace. If
he succeed in arousing hope in him, and the penitent, promise
to have recourse to prayer in temptation, it is better to give
absolution at once than to put it off. This class of penitents
should be encouraged to confess frequently, for there is reason
to hope that they have a fixed determination to improve; there
is no presumption for the opposite view, since a strong resolu­
tion to avoid sin is quite compatible with the fear of a possible
relapse.”
Still less would it be a sign of want of the requisite dispositions
if the confessor were persuaded that the penitent could hardly
be saved from a relapse; this conclusion may be drawn with
moral certainty, or, at least, on strong presumption, from the
'· Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. Do l’œn. n. 451. Cf. Ballerini, Op.
Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 162.
w Medulla Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. De Sacr. Pœn. cp. 1.
Lib. VI. p. 2, n. 1822.
81 This may be regarded as the communis theologorum doctrina; indeed
many theologians (St. Alphonsus mentions among others loco citato Lay·
manti, Sporer, Suarez. Henriquez) hold that a penitent who believes (credat)
that he will fall again can always and absolutely be considered as being in
good disposition. They do not mean by this a despair of reform, but rather
a grave fear which may be consistent with a firm hope in the aids of grace
and a fixed determination of never sinning. Besides, as Lacroix explains,
the phrase si credat must be taken in a mitigated sense and be understood
of the misgiving natural to a careful person It is the duty of the penitent
to take courage and free himself from this misgiving. Compare Lacroix,
1. c., and Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. Tract, de l’œn. P. II. cp. I. art. II. n. 461,
Nota a, and Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 159 as.

properties of ihi: purpose of amendment

131

ordinary occurrences of life; hence the necessary disposition
on the part of the penitent can always be secured.
In practice it is not of infrequent occurrence that a penitent,
otherwise of good will, alarmed by the difficulties of some under­
taking, declares that he cannot avoid a certain sin, or refuses to
make a promise for fear of breaking his word, or says he cannot
trust himself. This happens in the case of those who are given
to some. evil habit, as, for instance, taking the name of God in
vain, swearing, flying into a rage, etc. Such a penitent must
not only be encouraged to trust to the help of divine grace, but
be taught that all required of him is to have at the present
moment (hic et nunc) the determination not to relapse, that he
should not look too far ahead but make his resolution day by
day. The confessor must take particular care that the peni­
tent understands that that only is demanded of him which he
freely acknowledges to be within his power. This end is ob­
tained by suggesting methods to the penitent to be used when
he is free from temptation as well as when he is attacked, and
by impressing upon him that all demanded of him is to guard
against committing sins knowingly and with full advertence.”
The resolution must, moreover, be efficacious, i.e. the penitent
must be ready not only to avoid sin, but also to take the neces­
sary means for avoiding it, especially by avoiding the proximate
occasions; for whoever effectually desires some end must, of ne­
cessity, as far as lies in him, remove all impediments to it, and
employ all the means which will lead to it. Hence theologians
teach that the resolution must be efficax affectu: in the case,
however, where it is not executione efficax, i.e. where the peni­
tent fails to accomplish his purpose, it is not reasonable to con­
clude at once that a real and sufficient resolve was absent,
though some presumption against the fixity of the purpose
may be entertained. What has been said with respect to the
“ Cf. Gury-Ballerini, 1. c.

132

THE RECIPIENT ΟΡ penance

steadfastness of the purpose of amendment may be applied to
its efficaciousness, seeing that the two subjects are so intimately
connected. Though it is undoubted that for valid confession
the purpose of amendment must be fixed ami efficacious, yet we
are not to understand thereby that a m in may never fail in his
resolution. It is quite certain that men are so fickle that they
will fall away frequently from determined and fixed resolutions,
as we see, for instance, in the case of St. Peter, who, as we know,
was sincerely pledged not to betray his Lord, anil, yet, denied
Him soon after, at the mere word of a maid servant.
The purpose of amendment, then, is fixed and efficacious when
a man is determined really to carry out what he has proposed,
though he may afterwards fail through fear of an obstacle or
in the stress of temptation; this happens often enough even in
the case of those who are aiming at Christian perfection. 1 lence,
for valid reception of the Sacrament, the purpose of amendment
is sufficiently efficacious if it keep a man from sin during the
time that his resolution lasts.”
In order to be reasonably free from misgivings with regard
to his resolution, the penitent should be morally certain that
he desires to avoid sin at any cost for the rest of his life, despite
all grounds he may have for believing that his resolution may
become weak in course of time.
Finally, the resolution must be universal, i.e. it must extend
to all mortal sins at least, not only those which have been com­
mitted, but also those which are possible. Here lies the dis­
tinction between the universality of the contrition and that of
the purpose of amendment; for while, the sorrow is universal
which includes all the sins that have been committed, the reso­
lution, in order to be valid, must embrace all possible mortal
sins. If there remained but a single mortal sin which the peni­
tent was unwilling to shun, his resolution would be vain and
“Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 451; Stolz, 1. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. II
art. V. a. 102 8.

amendment with regard to venial hin

133

useless even with regard to his other sins, because it could not
be founded on a universal motive, such as hatred of sin consid­
ered in the light of an offense against God. A resolution which
is based on this motive extends to all mortal sins without re­
serve, because they are all an offense against God; and if but
one be excepted, such a motive could not have influenced the
purpose of amendment, which in consequence cannot be real
and genuine.21
18. The Purpose of Amendment with regard to Venial Sin.
The purpose of amendment, as we have said, must extend at
least to all mortal sins. With regard to venial sins it must be
constant and efficacious, but not necessarily universal; for,
since venial sin is consistent with the friendship and grace of
God in the soul, one is not obliged to resolve on avoiding all of
them : indeed no one sine speciali privilegio gratin can avoid all
venial sins, and no one is called upon to resolve to accomplish
the impossible; still there is an obligation to resolve to avoid
them as much as possible, or at least to diminish their number.
The following points will present the matter in detail: —
1. It is sufficient with respect to any venial sin to make an
act of contrition and a purpose of amendment, even though
these acts do not extend to all lighter venial sins of the same
species; for the greater the sin the greater is the offense against
God anil the punishment due to it ; and a man may well shrink
from displeasing God beyond a certain point, though below
that point he may be careless.
2. It is sufficient to make an act of sorrow and purpose of
amendment with regard to some particular species of sin, or
some vice, or some sins opposed to a particular virtue, especially
if the penitent keeps before his mind those particular sins which
have been committed with greater malice and deliberation.”
Cf. Trid. St-Ηβ. XIV. cp. 4; S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 451.
«The reason for this doctrine is very clearly put in Lugo's Retpoiua
m

184

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

With much more reason may it bp considered sufficient to
make acts of sorrow and purpose of amendment for all perfectly
deliberate venial sins on account of their greater guilt ; such a
universal sorrow must, however, include a fixed and efficacious
resolution of amendment. With respect to venial sins which
3.

Momlia, Lib. I. dub. 20, where he answers the difficulty how a man may
make an efficacious and sufficient act of contrition with respect to one
species of sin, excluding other species. The learned author remarks : —
1. That if a man rejient of his sins from a universal and general motive,
he embraces of necessity all his sins in this act of contrition. If, then, such
a motive excite a man to repentance, he is of necessity moved to shun all sin.
2. Such motives, however,— and this is a point well worth noticing,—
may excite contrition in a more restricted manner; for instance, the graver
the sins, the mon· they displease and offend God ; hence a man may be led to
hate this excess of wickedness. In this case “the motive of the contrition
is not the offense of God as such, but that gravity of the offense which is
not found in other venial sins."
3. All this being now assumed, the difficulty remains whether a peni­
tent, for instance, who is contrite for slight lies, must at least virtually
repent of other venial sins of another species, which are graver than, or at
least as grave as, that class of lies, or whether he can have contrition suffi­
cient for sacramental absolution for those lies without repenting virtually of
venial sins of another species as great or greater. This may be the case if
the formal motive of sorrow is a particular one ; for instance here the hatred
which God, the Eternal Truth, must have for lies. It does not hold if the
sorrow proceed from the motive of penance, for we could not bate anything
as offensive to God and at the same time be ready to offend Him in other
matters. The same holds true if we are really sorry for sin through fear of
hell-fire. “ There are occasions, however, when the motive of sorrow may be
particular—when, for instance, a man is sorry for the irreverence done to
God because it is an injury to His divine Majesty (such a motive is called a
motive of religion) ; he is not obliged even virtually to repent of graver or
equally grave venial sins of another species, except they involve an irrever­
ence equally incompatible with the virtue of religion."
Lugo also shows that a similar case happens when a man repents of
some particular species of sin, c.y. of lying, not on account of the disobedi­
ence to God which every sin includes, but on account of the disobedience
involved in transgressing a special command of God, or rather on account
of the opposition of these sins to the special law of God which forbids us to
violate the truth.
Moreover, he adds that the same holds true in regard of the special
teuqtoral sufferings which God inflicts for particular species of sins, e.y.
disrespect to parents.

AMENDMENT WITH n EG A Tl D TO VENIAL 81N

135

are not quite deliberate, the resolution to take more pains to
avoid them is a sufficient purpose of amendment. In order
that such a universal resolve may he of avail, a particular spe­
cies of sin should be singled out and made the special object of
contrition and amendment.
4. Moreover, it is the general teaching of moralists that it is
enough to make acts of sorrow and amendment with regard to
the frequency of venial sin if the penitent really resolve to
reduce the number; it is necessary here, however, to guard
against a very lax practice. Though such doctrine is possible in
theory and such a purpose of amendment may be defended as
sufficient for the Sacrament, yet it is not free from risk; hence
St. Alphonsus in his book Praxis Confetsarii distinctly states
that a resolution founded only on the great number of venial
sins without any sorrow for any particular venial sin is not suf­
ficient for receiving the Sacrament, while in his Moral Theology
he grants that such a resolution is permissible, and founds it
on the doctrine of St. Thomas; for it is impossible, he says, to
be sorry on account of the number of the venial sins without
repenting at least of those that have been last incurred anil
which have raised the number.2*
The above doctrine may be useful to the priest in appeasing
scruples about past confessions, if the penitent is not in the
habit of falling into grave sin, and fears that he may have con­
fessed without sufficient sorrow and purpose of amendment.
Ante factum, i.e. before confession or, at least, before absolution
is given, this doctrine should be confined in praxi to the sorrow
and amendment of sins not quite deliberate and incurred through
carelessness; for the guilt of such sins lies chiefly in the care­
lessness by which a man fails to watch himself and his evil
inclinations, so far as possible to repress and overcome them.
It is impossible for a man to preserve himself entirely from
“ S. Alph. Praxis Confessarii, u. 71 ; Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 449. Cf.
S. Thom. ΙΠ. Q. 87, a. 1.

186

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

all these sins, hence it is enough to be resolved to use great
vigilance in reducing the number.
Moreover, it may be observed that a man who keeps his con­
science so pure that he has only indeliberate venial sins to con­
fess will easily make a sufficient act of sorrow for past sins ; but
if a man always falls into the same sin, it is a fairly clear sign
that he has no true contrition and no firm purpose of amendment ;
hence it is a useful practice to make more careful acts of sorrow
and amendment with regard to some particular sin, or to add
some grave sin of the past life with respect to which real sorrow
and a firm purpose of amendment can be aroused.

CHAPTER III
CONFESSION

Article I
ESSENCE,

NECESSITY,

19.

AND

PROPERTIES OF CONFESSION

Essence and Necessity of Confession.

Though contrition is the most important of the dispositions
which a penitent must bring to the Sacrament, the confessing of
the sins is the most prominent feature to ordinary observers;
hence the Sacrament is often simply called confession, as in the
very earliest ages of the Church it was known simply as confessio
(in Greek exomologesis).
Sacramental confession is the self-accusation of sins com­
mitted after Baptism and not yet remitted in the Sacrament,
and it is made by the penitent to a priest having the necessary
faculties and with the object of obtaining absolution.
Hence it is not a sacramental confession when the sins are
told enarratione mere historica; such a recital would not be an
accusation, nor would it be done with the view of acknowledg­
ing one’s self a sinner or of obtaining absolution. Moreover, it
is not a sacramental confession if sins are revealed to a priest to
obtain counsel or help from him, or if they are told to the priest
merely in derision, for there would be no accusation in this,
at least it would not be done with a view of obtaining absolution.
On the contrary, a confession invalid through any defect what­
ever would be sacramental if it was made in order to obtain
absolution.
If, however, a man began by simply relating his sins to an
authorized priest without any idea of making a sacramental con­

138

THK HBWPIBHT Of l'EX.l.Xi E

fession, and then in order to obtain absolution arcuses himself
in general terms to the same priest of those same sins, the con­
fession would be sacramental, for then a formal accusation
would be made of those sins to the priest as judge, in order that
absolution might be given.
The necessity of this confession for all mortal sins committed
after Baptism is a dogma of the Church, and rests on the divine
institution of the Sacrament. The proof is to besought in dog­
matic treatises. In the divine institution of this Sacrament, as
a necessary means for obtaining forgiveness of sin by confes­
sion to a priest, is included the divine command of confessing
sin, which binds all who have committed mortal sin after Bap­
tism. We have already spoken of this in treating of the duty
of approaching the Sacrament, since confession is one of the
acts required of the penitent on receiving this Sacrament.1
There remains yet another point which shows the necessity
of confession. Perfect contrition, as we have seen above, re­
mits sin apart even from the Sacrament,· but it does not remove
the obligation of mentioning the sins so remitted to a duly
authorized priest. The obligation remains, because by Christ’s
command every mortal sin committed after Baptism must be
submitted by confession to the power of the keys. This follows
from the words of Our Lord (.John xx. 23) ; hence the Council
of Trent teaches that for those who have fallen into mortal sin
after Baptism confession is as necessary as Baptism is to those
who have not been baptized.2
20.

The Properties of Confession.

The necessary properties of confession have their origin in
its nature and object. The primary object of the confession is
to put the confessor, who is bound to act in his office as a judge,
not as a despot, in a position to form a judicial sentence, so
1 Compare above, § 3.

2 Sees. XIV. cp. 2.

Tin·: ΙΉΟ1ΈΙΙΤ1Ε8 of coirnesioif

139

that he may be able to decide whether the «inner be worthy or
unworthy of absolution, and also that he may be able to impose
a suitable penance. To succeed in this the confession must be
such as to allow the confessor a view of the whole moral state of
the penitent, hence it must, be complete. This property, how­
ever, being of very great importance, will be treated in a separate
division. The other necessary feature, the contrition, has been
already dealt with. The remaining properties are of secondary
importance and not essential; they turn partly on the integrity
and partly on the contrition and have, been summarized in the
following verses : —
Sit simplex, humilis confessio, pura, fidelis
Atque frequens, nuda et discreta, libens, verecunda,
Integra, secreta et lacrimabilis, accelerata,
Fortis et accusans et sit parere parata.

Though these properties are not so essential that the want of
any one of them nullifies the confession, they are all useful in
their several ways to instruct a penitent how to make a good
confession. For this reason we will treat of them: —
1. Simplex. The confession should be simple, straightforward,
short, and clear; the penitent will therefore avoid all unneces­
sary, superfluous words, all prolix narrations and remarks which
have no connection with the matter; at the same time he will
avoid the use of all unintelligible expressions or such as are mis­
leading and ambiguous ; let his accusation be so worded that he
may take it for granted that the priest will understand both the
number and species of the sins. Thus, too, he must not accuse
himself in a vague and general manner, as, “J have had bad
thoughts”; for the confessor cannot judge from this whether a
mortal or a venial sin, or indeed any sin at all, has been incurred ;
let him use such words as describe clearly the sins he has com­
mitted, making use of the proper and specific terms. Finally,
he should avoid unnecessary repetitions of sins which differ only
in number, not recounting them separately because they were

110

ΤΙΙΚ ΙΙΚΓΙΙΊΕΝΤ OF PENANCE

committed at different times or on different occasions; all the
sins should be grouped under their specific names and the num­
ber given. It is the duty of the priest, in the case of penitents
who fail in this respect, to instruct them, at the same time tak­
ing into account the peculiarities of the penitent, and showing
great patience. St. Antoninus gives a very useful piece of ad­
vice on this subject. Penitents, says he, who need consolation
in their trials or advice in their doubts should defer their diffi­
culties till after they have confessed and received absolution;
otherwise, if they dilate on these subjects during the confession
of their sins, there is danger of their contrition being weakened.
2. Humilis. Let the confession be humble, for a man ap­
proaches the tribunal as a penitent, as one guilty of crime, as
one accusing himself to his judge and seeking grace and mercy;
of such a one humility and lowliness are to be expected. Surely
the knowledge of one’s sins and sinfulness revealed by an honest
examination of the conscience, the remembrance of repeated
unfaithfulness and ingratitude to God, are reason enough for
being humble. Let this humility fill the heart, pervade the
accusation, be manifested in the whole exterior; then let the
penitent go into the confessional, kneeling, with head uncov­
ered, like the publican in the Gospel, who remained by the door
of the Temple and dared not to raise his eyes to heaven, but
struck his breast and prayed : “ God, be merciful to me a sinner.”
The words used by some are very appropriate as an introduction
to the confession: “I, a poor sinner, confess and acknowledge
to God, and to you, reverend father, in God’s place, that I
have sinned often and grievously by thought, word, deed, and
omission,” etc. Others, again, use the words of the Confiteor:
“ I confess to almighty God, to Blessed Mary, ever a virgin, . . .
that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word, and deed,” etc.
3. Pura. The confession should be made with the object of
gaining pardon of sin and the grace of the Sacrament. If it were
made with any wicked and gravely sinful intention, it would be

the

PHOPEnrrEs

of confession

141

a sacrilegious and invalid confession; if the penitent had any
venially sinful object in view, e.g. to gain esteem, the con­
fession would be valid though the penitent would incur the guilt
of venial sin by it. If the penitent's principal intention is to be
reconciled to God, though at the same time there be present
other motives not altogether forbidden, the confession is unim­
paired ; the same may easily happen in other good works, and
secondary motives do not exclude the principal one.
4. Fidelis (seu verax). The confession should be truthful and
candid, without lies and deceit. Hence the penitent must not
conceal the sins he has committed, nor confess those which he
has not committed ; neither may he confess as certain what is
doubtful, nor what is doubtful as certain. It is disputed whether
every lie in confession is a mortal sin and renders the confession
null. There are indeed theologians who maintain that every lie
told in confession is a mortal sin, because of the sin being com­
mitted in the very act of receiving a Sacrament. This view,
however, is wrong. It is true that any lie told in confession is
more sinful than the same lie told under other circumstances
would be, on account of the irreverence to the Sacrament; but
mortal sin would be incurred only by a lie in confession when the
lie concerns the materia necessaria of confession ; in such a case
the confession is invalid, for the judge is deceived about the case,
and that is gravely wrong. If the penitent lies to the confessor
in a matter which does not pertain to the Sacrament, there is no
mortal sin, for such a lie does not mislead the judge nor imply
a grave irreverence to the Sacrament, since still there is real mat­
ter for the Sacrament and a sufficient disposition to obtain the
grace of the Sacrament. Accordingly, if the lie told in confession
has nothing to do with the confession itself, it is mortal or venial
on its own merits quite apart from the circumstances of its being
told in confession.
From what has been said it follows that a penitent incurs
venial sin by' a lie told in confession when (1) he accuses him-

142

THE RECIPIENT OE PENANCE

self falsely of a venial sin or denies having committed a venial
sin ; except where this venial sin forms the sole matter of con­
fession, for then he would sin mortally, not on account of the lie,
hut on account of the grave irreverence done to the Sacrament
in offering to the priest insufficient matter, for sins falsely stated
can never be matter for absolution.
(2) Moreover, it is only a venial sin if the penitent denies
having committed a mortal sin which he is not bound, hie el
nunc to disclose, either because he has already revealed it in a
valid confession or because he has pressing reasons for not dis­
closing it hic et nunc. Indeed it is possible that there is no sin
at all when a penitent makes use of mental reservation. The
confessor has no right to put questions which have no connec­
tion with the materia necessaria, and the penitent is not bound
to answer such questions; to avoid a lie he may use a mental
reservation by choosing an ambiguous expression which con­
tains the truth, leaving the confessor to judge for himself. If,
on tile contrary, the priest has a right to inquire of the penitent
whether he has committed some grave sin which has been al­
ready confessed, and the penitent denies the charge, he would
sin mortally.3
(3) If the penitent is questioned by the priest as to his
home, his condition, or his relatives or friends, and answers not
according to the truth, knowing that these questions have no
bearing on the nature of his sins, such untruths are only venial ;
for if a lie told in confession with respect to venial sins, although
these may be matter of confession, be only a venial sin, a lie
with respect to other things which have no connection with the
accusation of the sins is still less likely to be mortal.
On the other hand, a mortal sin is incurred (1) when a peni­
tent accuses himself of having committed a mortal sin which he
has never committed, or denies having fallen into a mortal sin
8 Compare § 40.

Till·: PROPERTIES OF COE FESSION

143

which he has incurred and which has never been validly con­
fessed, and which besides he has no valid reason for concealing,
or if he conceals a mortal sin which he is bound to mention.
(2) When he gives the number of his mortal sins as greater
than is really the case. Here, however, ignorant and untaught
penitents may be excused, because they honestly think it better
to give a large number in preference to a small one. Besides,—
(3) A penitent sins mortally who confesses mortal sin as
doubtful which he is certain of having committed, or confesses
as certain mortal sins of which he has doubts. In such cases
the penitent would he unsettling the judgment of the confessor
in a very grave matter.
(4) Moreover, it would be a mortal sin if the penitent con­
fesses a recent, mortal sin, either explicitly or equivalently, as an
old one already confessed, for the. priest is thus prevented from
giving a correct sentence and imposing the proper penance. It
is another case when the accusation leaves it doubtful whether
the sin is an old or recent one, or whether it has been already
confessed or not, even if the penitent intend that the confessor
be persuaded that the sin is an old one.
(5) Finally, the penitent incurs a mortal sin if he denies the
existence of a habit of sin, or of a relapse or the existence of an
occasion of sin, or if he avoids any avowal on the subject so as to
mislead the confessor. It would accordingly be a mortal sin for
a penitent to accuse himself of a recent mortal sin at the end of
his confession by using a formula of this kind : “ I accuse myself
of the sins of my past life, in particular of this sin . .
for this
formula by universal consent implied only past sins already con­
fessed. On the other hand, it would not be a mortal sin in a
general confession to mingle old with recent sins, as long as the
confessor knows that not all the mortal sins have been already
confessed; if the priest is persuaded that he ought to gain a
clearer knowledge, he may ask ; if he believe that he may let the
matter rest there, it is his affair (and perhaps in many cases this

144

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

may be the prudent course). Still less is it a mortal sin, indeed
it may be counselled or obligatory in certain cases, for a peni­
tent to say that such or such sin has not yet been confessed,
making the accusation in such a way that the confessor does not
suspect that the sin has been recent. Such an expedient may
he necessary when a priest himself confesses sins committed in
hearing confessions, not wishing to violate the seal of confession.*
In addition, the confessor must remember that the faithful in
general are persuaded that a lie in confession is a very grave sin,
so that he must judge of its gravity according to the conscience
of the penitent.5
5. Frequens. Confession ought to be frequently made (see
above, § 3). This includes also the repeated confession of sins
already confessed and absolved (sec above, § 6).
6. Nuda. The penitent ought not to hide his sins by ambigu­
ous words or expressions which veil the hatefulness of the sin,
in order to make them appear less in the eyes of the confessor.
A penitent who thus veils his sins cannot have real contrition ;
there still remains in his heart that false shame which confuses
the intellect, and his soul is not yet released from sin. Such
conduct is in reality no less sinful than concealing the sin en­
tirely, for what is the difference between total silence and answer­
ing so obscurely that the questioner is left in doubt? Just as
a penitent makes a bad confession who conceals what he ought
to tell, so does he who answers his confessor in such obscure
terms that the latter does not understand or is led to take a view
which the penitent knows to be wrong.
The conditional accusation is no better, as when, for example,
a penitent says: “If I have given way to impure thoughts, I
accuse myself of them,” etc. Such a confession is not an accusa­
tion of sins, nor is it a sign of absolute aversion from them.
4 Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. P. II. ep. II. Confessio, art. I. § 2, n. 313,314 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. I. art. 3, n. 457.
» S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 495-497 ; II. Apost. Tr. 18, n. 28.

τιιι·: phopehties of confession

145

7. Discreta. The confession should be prudent, i.e. so worded
that the reputations of others do not suffer; hence the sins of
others ought not to be revealed except in so far as is necessary
for the declaration of one’s own sins. Not a few penitents prefer
to tell the sins of others rather than their own : wives, for in­
stance, tell the sins of their husbands, servants the sins of their
masters. Such penitents must be seriously admonished by
their confessor for the future not to reveal the sins of others lest
they incur the guilt of detraction and God’s anger in the very
tribunal of His mercy. The question as to the partner in sin,
whether and under what circumstances he is to be revealed in
confession, is relegated to a later portion of the treatise.
The penitent’s own good sense will tell him to be as discreet
and decorous as possible in confessing his sins, especially those
against purity, without detracting from the completeness of the
confession, without being gross, and at the same time without
failing in the reverence due to the Sacrament; hence he should
tell only what is necessary for the integrity of the confession,
and that as cautiously and becomingly as is possible, quite briefly,
in clear and intelligible language; the confession must be per­
fect and at the same time chaste. The confessor also must exer­
cise great discretion and prudence in this dangerous matter."
Finally, a prudent penitent will choose a suitable and virtuous
confessor who unites real piety and prudent zeal to solid knowl­
edge and a wide experience.
Not only is it advisable and wholesome to have a regular
confessor, but it is absolutely necessary. Of course as far as
the absolution is concerned it is always valid, provided that the
priest who gives it has the requisite faculties; but as for the
spiritual direction of the penitent, it is by no means an indiffer­
ent matter who the confessor is; if ever there is an occasion in
which there is need of a trusty, reliable friend, guide, and adviser,
• See §§ 47, 54.

146

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

it is in making a confession. On this point St. Francis of Sales
writes: “When Tobias was about to send his son to Rages, anil
the latter explained that he did not know the way, ‘(io, then,'
said his father, ‘and seek a man who knows the way, that he
may guide you.’ This is my advice to you, Philothea; if you
really desire to tread the way of perfection, seek out above all
things a man of experience to guide you and show you the way :
this is the most important lesson of all."’ And after treating
the subject in his usual way, he quotes the remarkable words
which the great St. Louis shortly before his death addressed to
his son: “Confess often, and choose for your confessor a man
of experience, who has not only wisdom and science, but also
zeal for souls, and learn from him what you ought to do.” The
priest as God’s vicar is not a judge only, he is a physician, and it
is not hard to understand how one physician can differ from
another. For a soul which is anxious to get rid of sin, to be
established in virtue, and to make progress in Christian per­
fection, as all Christians are bound to do, there is required not
only the application of the Sacrament, but guidance as well.
The direction of souls goes much farther than a mere dispensing
of the Sacrament. There are many things in which a soul eager
for salvation must be anxious for further instruction; the
methods of combating with success different evil inclinations,
the methods of prayer, the performance of certain good works,
the way of carrying out the duties of one’s state of life with
more zeal and merit, and the attainment of perfection. An
approved confessor and director is undoubtedly very useful,
nay, necessary, and the penitent should pick out such a one.
In a choice of this kind he should have no other object but his
salvation and spiritual progress, and hence he should choose a
well-instructed, experienced, and holy man to lead him in the
way of God in the interior life, one who knows the penitent's
1 Philothea, Part I. Chap. 4.

Till·: PROPERTIES OF CONFESSION

147

condition, one whose heart is full of love, one who is as far re­
moved from a feeble indulgence as from a repelling strictness.
Firmness and gentleness should be united in him, a finîmes»
which does not crush and a gentleness which will not allow
presumption : he should inspire confidence so that the penitent
has no difficulty in unfolding his heart to him. To seek an
ignorant and inexperienced confessor is, as theologians express
it, to choose a sure guide to hell ; and, according to the teaching
of Suarez, etc., it is a mortal sin when done with the intention
of obtaining absolution by fraud.* But a good confessor is a
“faithful friend, a strong defense; and he that hath found him
hath found a treasure;. . . and they that fear the Lord shall find
him.”’ St. Francis of Sales directs Philothea to make choice
of a confessor after constant prayer, and assures her that God
will grant her this most important of petitions and send her a
man after his own heart.
When the penitent has made choice of his confessor in accord­
ance with those rules of common sense which great spiritual
writers enjoin, his duty is then to love him as his spiritual father,
to fear him as the judge of his conscience, to follow him as his
guide in the path of virtue, to take his advice as his physician
in the maladies, affections, and sufferings of his soul. He should
follow him, as though he were an angel leading the way to heaven ;
give him his whole confidence; deal with him in all openness
and frankness; disclose to him all the good and evil in his soul
without dissembling or reserve, and at the same time entertain
a respect for him which does not weaken his confidence in him.”
Having once chosen a good confessor, the penitent should
cling to him and not change about from one to another ; noth­
ing is more harmful or more foolish than such conduct ; unstable
and wandering penitents of this kind give sufficient proof that all
8 Suarez, Disp. 28; Stotz, 1. c. Lib. I; P. I. Q. II. art. II.
• Ecchis. vi. 14 ss.
10 Compare Pliilotbea, ibid.

148

THF. nECΙΓIE-VT OF PENANCE

they want is to be absolved and not to be helped and guided,
and there is reason to suspect that their purpose of amendment
is by no means sincere. Should a penitent, however, be in such
a condition that to confess to his regular confessor would be too
great a difficulty and involve risk of making sacrilegious con­
fession, it would be better to look out for some other priest and
confess to him.
The penitent ought not at the same time be so dependent on
his confessor as to be quite bewildered when a change becomes
necessary. Discouragement or sadness on this account, or a less
frequent use of the Sacraments would be a sign that this depend­
ence was due to some undesirable cause and could not be any
longer regarded as confidence in the director.
What is to be thought of those penitents who have two con­
fessors, one to whom they are well known and whose good opin­
ion they enjoy, and another to whom they are not well known,
using the former to tell him their more frequent and smaller
sins, and the latter for the confession of graver faults, in order
that they may thereby keep up their good reputation with the
first ? Such conduct is certainly not per se forbidden when there
is good reason for it, as may happen when any one is unwilling
or does not dare to reveal to his ordinary confessor some very
shameful fall.
Still the practice is not without danger and so cannot be un­
conditionally recommended, for it is a sign that a penitent is
more anxious about his good name than his progress in the
spiritual life; indeed he might incur grievous sin if such conduct
exposed him to the danger of falling into mortal sin, as would be
the case if in pursuing this course he never intended seriously to
give up his sin. Such is the predicament of those penitents who
seek out inexperienced or easy-going confessors, or of those who
habitually fall into mortal sins, confessing them only to a priest
who, they know, will take the matter very quietly, while they
reveal their less grievous sins to some pious and strict confessor.

THE PROPERTIED OF CONFESSION

149

On the other hand, the case above quoted presents quite another
aspect when a penitent has on rare occasions fallen into a grave
and shameful sin and shrinks from revealing it to his ordinary
confessor.'1
8. Libens. The confession ought to be voluntary; the peni­
tent should approach the sacred tribunal spontaneously, not
prompted by prayers or threats, nor prevailed upon by promises,
nor driven by fear of temporal losses; he should willingly ac­
knowledge his sins to the priest as the minister of Christ Our
Lord appointed to forgive sin and distribute His graces. A man
might of course be influenced by those exterior motives to re­
ceive the Sacrament ; anil if he made an earnest act of contri­
tion and carried out the other requisites, he would make a valid
confession. There is, however, as Laymans observes, a real
danger for a man who goes to the Sacrament under compulsion
that he will make his confession invalid through want of contri­
tion or through a deficient accusation of his sins. It frequently
happens that such penitents, giving way to external pressure,
perform their Easter confession, doing it only to keep up appear­
ances; they make no act of contrition, they are unwilling to tell
all that lies on their conscience, they arc ready to make a bad
confession and communion. A prudent confessor may detect
their insincerity and sometimes will prevail upon them to make
a good confession.
9. Verecunda. The penitent should make his confession with
confusion at the number and greatness of his sins, his ingrati­
tude and infidelity to God his Lord and Father; this confusion
should fill his soul and reveal itself even in the self-accusation
and in the whole bearing of the penitent. Between this real
shame of every good penitent and the false shame which arises
from pride and self-love is a great gulf ; the latter, unless over­
come, will cause the penitent to be dishonest in his accusation
“ Cf. Stotz, 1. c. Lib. I. P. I. Q. H. art II. n. 118-124.

150

ΤΠΕ RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

end to make a sacrilegious confession. The confessor should be
very considerate of the weakness of such penitents and encour­
age them, helping them to make a candid avowal if he suspects
false shame, and he should be careful not to frighten and shock
them by hard words or untimely threats.
10. The other property of the confession, its integrity, will,
on account of its great importance, be reserved for a thorough
discussion in another paragraph.
11. Secreta. The accusation should be in secret. It should
be made so as to be heard only by the priest and not by others.
Christ did not institute public confession; and if in the early
Church those who had committed grave public sin and given
public scandal were compelled after private confession to make
a public avowal of their offenses, this was only part of the then
existing discipline. As a matter of fact the practice was pro­
ductive of as much harm as good, and so the Church put an enil
to it.” Confession by an interpreter would, however, be valid,
as well as a confession which had been overheard by others.
There is no obligation to confess through an interpreter if one
happens to be in a country of which he does not know the lan­
guage, supposing there is no priest to whom one can make him­
self understood, for the Lateran Council13 prescribes confessio
secreta made to a priest only (soli sacerdoti facienda), and to
employ an interpreter for confession would be very onerous.14
Such an obligation would exist only if a dying man had doubts
as to the perfection of his contrition, for the wish to save our
souls obliges us to avoid all risk. Then, however, it would be
sufficient to name one or two sins and make a general accusation
of the rest.’6
« Cf. Trid. Sees. XIV. cp. 5.
*· Cap. Omnis utriusque sexus.
» Cf. Declar. S. C. S. Ort'. 28 Feb. 1033 et 10 Feb. 1008; item S. C. Prop.
Fid. 1033 in Collectai!. 8. Sedis, η. 470-478.
14 S. Alph. Lib. VI. η. 470 ; Lugo, De Pœn. Disp. XV. Sect. V; Aertnys,
I. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. n. 100.

ΤΠΕ PROPERTIES OF CONFESSION

151

Moreover, a sufficiently perfect confession may be made even
through an interpreter without the latter acquiring any knowl­
edge of the sins. The confessor, for example, in the case of the
sick, may arrange through the interpreter a system of signs, such
as pressure of t he hand, motion of the head or eyes, by which the
invalid may answer the questions put by the priest through the
interpreter, who may be placed with his back to the priest and
penitent; by a method of this kind even the number of sins may
be ascertained. Of course in a case like this the confessor must
be careful not to betray the penitent's replies by the nature of
his questions. If a male penitent express a wish to confess in
this manner, he may be allowed to do so.1’
A confession made in writing is per se valid; on the other
hand, as we have already seen, absolution conveyed per lileras
is null. The custom, however, of making the confession by word
of mouth must be strictly adhered to (hence many theologians
add to the other properties of a good confession that it should
be vocalis), and unless there are pressing reasons for the con­
trary practice the confession should not be made by writing or
by any other system of signs; a sufficiently good reason for
allowing it would be great shame in mentioning certain sins or
a defect in speech. In such cases the priest would read the
writing and the penitent make some acknowledgment by word
of mouth, such as, “I accuse myself of all contained in the paper.”
If the whole confession without any good reason were made by
writing or by signs, it would be invalid, for the penitent would
have sinned gravely by such an action unless he had acted bona
fide.11
Λ dumb penitent who can write and has no other way of mak­
ing his confession is, according to the sententia communis et pro­
babilior, obliged to make his confession in writing, for this would
>* Lebmkuhl, 1. c. n, 328.
‘7 S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 429, 493; Suarez, Opusc.. Lugo, Coninck, etc.,
Konings, Theol. Mor. T. II. Tract. De Sacram, l’œn. cp. IL art. II. n. 1308.

152

THK RECIPIENT ΟΓ PEXA NCR

not be burdensome to him. The opponents of this view insist
on the danger of the confession being revealed and, in conse­
quence, deny the obligation of making the confession in writing.
Such a risk, as experience shows, is not usually to be feared and
may easily be avoided. There are indeed not a few penitents
who to secure their own peace of mind always write their con­
fessions and read them off to the priest. If, however, in a par­
ticular case there is danger of revelation or any other serious
inconvenience to the penitent in consequence of his writing,
there is no obligation. So teaches St. Thomas, and with him
are Suarez, Lugo, Sporer, Salmanticenses, etc.'"
12. Lacrimabilis. The confession should be made with real
sorrow. It is not necessary that it be accompanied by tears or
sighs and other external signs of the kind, but it is required that
there be a real sorrow and horror of sin. The internal sorrow
should become sensibilis or evident by the confession so as to
form materia sacramenti. The sentiment of contrition can always
be roused by grace, while tears are not in our power.
13. Accelerata. The confession should be prompt; there
should be no delay in making it after mortal sin has been com­
mitted. This is not of precept, but it is a counsel which should
be readily followed by any one who realizes the horror of sin and
its consequences.
14. Fortis. The confession should be made with great cour­
age, all hindrances to a candid avowal of one’s sins being put
aside, especially false shame and the fear of losing the good
esteem of the priest. It is the delight of the devil, not before,
but after entrapping a soul into sin, to work upon the feeling of
1,1 Cf. 8. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 479; II. A. n. 35; Gury-Ballerini
503) and Lehmkuhl (1. C. n. 328) object to binding the dumb
confession ; a fortiori the confessor may refrain from putting
writing with a view of making the confession more complete.
a dumb person desire to confess in writing, the confessor is
comply with his wish.

(1. c. II. n.
to a written
questions in
If, however,
at liberty to

NECESSITY OF THE INTEGRITY OF CONFESSION 158

shame so vehemently that the penitent is tempted to conceal
sins which are particularly shameful. In this case the penitent
must use all his courage, and by reflecting on God’s command
and the awful consequences of a bad confession get the victory
over this false shame. He must put into practice Tertullian's
maxim, Pereat pudor, ne pereal anima.
15. Accusans. The confession should be an accusation and
not a series of excuses. Thus the penitent ought to impute the
sins to himself and not to other causes, temptations of the devil,
the passions, natural weakness, etc., nor to the companions by
whose advice or orders he has gone astray. There may be of
course occasions where what is objectively a mortal sin may
become only venial or perhaps no sin at all, through inculpable
forgetfulness or absent-mindedness or inadvertence.
16. Parere paratus. The penitent should be disposed to obey
the priest’s advice and commands; hence he should be ready to
adopt the means suggested for his improvement, to follow out
the advice given, to avoid the occasions of sin which are pointed
out to him, and to accept the penance which is imposed on him.
Article II
THE INTEGRITY OF THE CONFESSION

21.

Necessity of the Integrity of Confession.

The confession is complete when the penitent reveals all the
sins which he is bound to tell. A distinction is drawn between
material and formal integrity. A confession is materially com­
plete when a penitent discloses all the mortal sins committed
since Baptism which have not yet been submitted to the keys,
together with their number and species. On the other hand, the
confession is formally complete when he confesses all the mortal
sins which he is morally able and bound to reveal hie el nunc.'*

154

TUE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

From this definition it is clear that where there is material
integrity there is also formal integrity ; a confession, however,
which is formally complete need not on this account be
materially so.
With respect to the obligation of the integrity of confession
we may lay down the following propositions : —
I. It is of divine precept to confess all mortal sins committed
after Baptism. 1. This follows from the words by which Christ
instituted the Sacrament; by them He gave the Sacrament a
judicial character. So teaches the Council of Trent.20 From
the institution of the Sacrament of Penance “the universal
Church has always recognized that the complete confession of
sins was also instituted by Our Lord, and is necessary jure divino
for all who have sinned after Baptism. For Our Lord Jesus
Christ when about to ascend into heaven left the priests as His
vicars and judges, by whom all mortal sins into which the faithsion is materially entire in which nothing is wanting which per se loipiendn
ought to be confessed, i.e. when nothing is wanting which de se forms the
necessary matter of confession ; the confession is formally entire when
nothing is wanting in the accusation through the fault of the penitent. Cf.
Konings, 1. c. n. 1359.
Moralists are not of one mind on the definition of formal and material
integrity; some understand by material integrity the avowal of all mortal
sins not yet confessed which occur to the mind (after a careful examination
of conscience, as Miiller expressly adds, 1. c. 120), since they form the ma­
teria necessaria sacramenti et confessionis : formal integrity, on the other hand,
consists in the avowal of all mortal sins which here and now (Aie et nunc),
taking all the circumstances into consideration, can and ought to be con­
fessed. Thus Gury, 1. c. Edit. Romana (Ballerini) et Edit. Lugd. (Dumas),
n. 468 (where, however, the author is not quite consistent, cf. n. 470) ; while
on the other hand the Edit. Ratisb. as also Laymann, De Pœnitent. cp. 8,
n. 5, and Stotz, 1. c. Lib. I. P. 111. Q. IT. art. IV; Scavini, 1. c. Tom. IV.
Tract. X. Disp. I. cp. II. art. II. n. 38. have the above definition. We give
the preference to it on grounds which will appear in the course of the
treatise; moreover, it is more common and is in harmony with the teaching
of the Council of Trent. The words which St. Alphonsus employs in the
definition of material integrity seem to favor the latter view. Cf. Lib. VI.
n. 465.
” Sees. XIV. cp. 5, De Confessione.

NECESSITY OF THE INTEGRITY OF CONFESSION 155

ful had fallen were tn be judged, that in virtue of the power of
the keys they might pronounce sentence of forgiveness or reten­
tion.” The priest is therefore a. judge, and as judge should pro­
nounce the absolution. But the sentence of a judge is valid only
when it turns on the facts of the case; hence a knowledge of the
latter is required on the part of the judge. In consequence the
confessor, in order to pronounce a valid sentence, must know
intimately the facts of the case, the state of the sinner. Now
the facts of the case are the mortal sins of the penitent; hence
the confessor must be made acquainted with these; and as he
can only learn them from the penitent himself, the latter is bound
to make a complete statement of them.
2. The essential object of this Sacrament is the forgiveness of
sins that have been confessed. But one mortal sin cannot be
forgiven apart from the rest, since forgiveness is the result of the
influx of sanctifying grace, which does not remove sin as stains
might be rubbed from a metal surface, but at once raises man
from a state of sin to a state of grace, from being an enemy of
God to being His friend. Moreover, sanctifying grace and mor­
tal sin cannot exist together in the soul. From this it. follows
that all sins must be told without exception, in order that they
may all be remitted.
3. Add to this the essential connection between the judicial
power of the priest in the Sacrament and his power of punishing
sin or imposing a penance for it; but since the penance must be
proportioned to the misdeeds, the priest cannot exercise his
powers properly unless, at least, the mortal sins have been fully
confessed. If, as must happen at times, it is inopportune or,
in fact, quite impossible to assign a penance bearing any propor­
tion to the number and magnitude of the sins, that is quite per
accidens and the decision of the question is the affair of the judge,
not of the penitent. That Christ gave His Church the power
of punishing sin is abundantly proved by the practice of so
many centuries during wh eh definite penances were assigned to

156

TUK UEC1FIENT OF TENANTE

certain sins. Since, therefore, the Church of divine right can
mete out just punishment for sin, the penitent is bound by divine
precept to submit himself to the Church by an entire confession
of all mortal sins. From the fact that the confessor must pro­
nounce sentence and impose a suitable penance, the Council of
TYcnt concludes “ that all mortal sins of which the penitent is
conscious after diligent search must be confessed, even though
they be quite secret sins and only against the last two command­
ments of the decalogue.”
4. Finally, the Sacrament of Penance has of its very nature
another end in view, that of preventing relapse. Thus the con­
fessor is at the same time the physician of the soul, empowered
and obliged to prescribe the means of reform. This duty can
be effectually carried out only when he knows intimately the
penitent's state of soul, so that the latter is obliged to submit
to his healing art all the mortal wounds of the soul.
Hence the Council of Trent anathematizes all who teach “ that
for remission of sins in the Sacrament of Penance it is not neces­
sary jure divino that all and every mortal sin be confessed of
which a man is conscious after faithful and diligent search.’”1
II. The material integrity, however, is not always necessary
for the validity of confession and for obtaining its benefits. At
times it is morally and even physically impossible, either through
inculpable forgetfulness or for other reasons. Now God does not
command impossibilities. Hence the Council of Trent teaches :
“The remaining sins which escape the diligent inquiry of the
penitent are considered as included in the same accusation,” and
so are forgiven, as though they had been confessed. Hence it is
abundantly clear that the material integrity of the confession is
not always necessary.
III. The formal integrity is, on the other hand, always neces­
sary for the validity of the Sacrament, and belongs to its essence.
w Sess. XIV. can. 7.

EA'THNT ΟΙ' TUI·: INTKORITY OF CONFESMO.V

157

A penitent, for instance, who out of shame conceals a mortal sin,
transgresses Christ 's command which obligee us to submit all
mortal sins by a sincere confession to the power of the keys,
incurring at the same time a mortal sin by his bad confession;
such a confession cannot be valid nor have any good effect. This
is also taught by the Council of Trent” in the following wonk :
“While the faithful earnestly endeavor to confess all the sins of
which they are conscious, they present them to the Divine Mercy
that they may all be forgiven; those, however, who do other­
wise and knowingly conceal sins, present nothing to God’s good­
ness to be forgiven through the priest. If the sick man is
ashamed to show his wounds to the physician, the latter cannot
cure what is unknown to him." 23
To have a perfect understanding of the preceding, we must
distinguish between what is of the’essence of the Sacrament and
that, which flows as a consequence of the divine command.
When anything is wanting to the essence of the Sacrament,
though the defect may be due to no fault on the part of the per­
son, the Sacrament is invalid; if, on the contrary, there be want­
ing some requirement of divine precept, making the defect
culpable, the Sacrament is indirectly invalid because contrition
is wanting, since contrition cannot exist in any one who is in the
very act of sin ; if, however, the defect be inculpable, the result
of forgetfulness or ignorance, the Sacrament is valid; the sins
which were omitted through no fault of the penitent are in­
directly forgiven by the infusion of sanctifying grace. There
remains, however, the obligation of making good the defect
afterwards, as we shall see later.
22.

Extent of the Integrity of Confession.

For a complete confession it is necessary to state clearly and
precisely not only all mortal sins, but their number and species
a L. c. cp. 5.
“ Trid. I. c. op. 5.

Compare Palmieri, 1. c. Thes. XXXIII; Gury, I. o.

1.58

TUK HECIP1ENT OF PENANCE

and the circumstances which change the species. This is flic
doctrine of the Council of Trent when it enjoins the confession
of each and every sin; to do this a man must give the number
of the mortal sins committed. One who has missed Mass ten
timesand merely confesses, "I have missed Mass,” has not con­
fessed each and every sin, for an indeterminate number, by the
very fact of being undetermined, docs not necessarily mean the
number ten; it may mean ten, but that possibility does not
indicate the number. With regard to the confession of the spe­
cies and of the circumstances changing the species, the Council
teaches expressly that the circumstances which change the kind
(speciet:') of sin ought to be confessed. Since those circum­
stances are to be expressed which change the kind of sin, noth­
ing can be clearer than that, in accordance with the decision of
the Council, the sins are to be confessed according to their spe­
cies.’4
The reasons which the Council25 gives for insisting on the
duty of confessing the species of sin are that otherwise the sins
would not be perfectly revealed by the penitent or understood
by the judge, and that without a knowledge of the species of the
sin the judge would be unable to pronounce on the gravity of
the sin and to inflict a suitable punishment for it.
Thus the reasons which hold for the completeness of the con­
fession require also the species and number of the sins; without
them the confession has not the completeness which is demanded
for it. The confessor is a judge who must have the most accuII. n. 409 ; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 185; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. cp. II. (Confessio) art. I. n.
302.
w It is to be noted that in speaking of the classification of sins we
abstract from the physical, we confine ourselves to the moral species which
indicates the peculiar malice of the sin ; for instance, the ordeal by fire is
physically distinct from the ordeal by water, but morally they are in the
same species, because the malice is the same in both sins. Cf. Suarez, De
Pœnit. Disp. 22, Sect. 2, n. 3.
“ Sess. XIV. cp. 5.

EXTENT OF THE INTEGRITY OF CONFEH8ION

159

rate knowledge of his penitent in order to pronounce sentence
and inflict the necessary penalty. Now he cannot know the
state of his penitent unless he is acquainted with the number
and species of his sins, for it is the species which determines the
nature or essence of the sin. Besides, the sins ought to be con­
fessed according to their malice, but this can be estimated only
from the kind of sin and the number of times it has been com­
mitted. Not all sins against the sixth commandment have the
same malice or belong to the same species, for to the special mal­
ice of impurity may be added that of sacrilege or adultery if the
sinner be consecrated by vow to God or in the married state.
And there is no doubt that one who has committed a crime ten
times is more deserving of punishment than he who has fallen
only once.
The penitent must confess the species infima, the ultimate
species of his sin, for this is what is ordinarily understood by the
species, and the Council of Trent insists upon this obligation.
Hence it is not enough to say, “I have sinned in thought, word,
and deed,” or, “I have broken the commandments of the
Church”; the penitent must add the species, the particular
commandment broken, the observance of Sunday, fasting, yearly
confession, etc., and in addition the penitent must give the
species infima, whether he has missed Mass or broken his fast
or abstinence. Nor is the following accusation sufficient: “I
have sinned against the sixth commandment," “I have been
wanting in purity,” or the like; the species must be given, de­
fining whether the sin be incest or adultery, etc., or whether by
thoughts, words, etc. So, too, when a penitent accuses himself
of sin against faith, it is not sufficient ; he should state the par­
ticular act by which he has sinned, whether by heresy, by
unbelief, by indifference, etc.
Supposing the penitent cannot remember the species infima
of a sin which he has committed, he must state against what
virtue he has sinned; or if he cannot remember this, but has

1ί»0

THE KKCIP/KXT OF l'KNANCB

only n recollection of having sinned mortally, he must confess
this. This is the opinion of all theologians (communis et certa
doctrina).
To indicate fully the species of the sin, one must also tell
whether the sinful acts were external and whether the evil
effects have been retracted.
Since the sins themselves are the particular matter of the
sacramental tribunal, they must, as Lehmkuhl shows, be con­
fessed secundum specificam distinctionem, i.e. according to their
specific differences. This is not at all the same thing as the
obligation of confessing the specific malice (specifica malitia).
Sins arc human acts (actus humanus), and so they may be classed
in specie actus as well as in specie malitia·; to desire to steal and
to steal are acts having the same specific malice, but they are
not specifically the same act. Indeed no one would maintain
that one might confound the two sins in confession by merely
confessing the specific malice.” Hence the actus externus which
completes the internal act” as a sin and on that account is in
se opposed to .right order and morality must be mentioned ex­
pressly in confession. The actus externus is either commissio or
omissio (sin of commission or omission). Thus, for example,
the absence from Mass on a Sunday or a holyday of obligation
must be confessed, whether it happen through indifference or
love of study or idleness, because the absence from Mass is what
is objectively opposed to the law and what has been voluntarily
incurred. The wounding and killing of a man are external
actions which in ratione peccati, complete the sinful act of the
will, and so it is not enough to confess, “I had the desire to
wound.” If he has inflicted a wound, it is enough to say, “ I
* Lehmkuhl, 1. c. P. IT. Lib. I. Tract. V. Sacr. Poenit. Sect. II. cp. II.
art. 1. § 2, n. 307.
10 Cum actu interno a guo procedit facit unum complete indiriduum in genere
mori», actu» enim erternu» ee habet rcluti materia, internus reluti forma unius
operationi» humana. Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. V I. Disp. I. Q. IV. cp. III.

EXTENT OF THE INTEGRITY OF CONFESSION

161

have dealt a wound," for he has sufficiently indicated by that
avowal the internal act. If, again, a man wounded another
intending to kill, it is not enough to say, ‘‘I intended to kill,”
but he must add, ‘and I wounded the man.'”’
With regard to the obligation of confessing the effect” of a
mortal sin theologians are not of one mind, since it is not always
clear whether the evil effect flowing from a cause voluntarily
chosen is in .se.se a sin or not. It is certain that the malus effer­
ius of a sinful action must be confessed if such effect fall under
a reservation, or under a censure, or if the question of restitution
is to be settled. However, it is certain that if such effects were
not at all foreseen, there is no obligation to confess them. Thus
a murder committed under the influence of drink need not be
confessed, supposing that such a consequence had been alto­
gether unforeseen.
As to the other cases, those theologians who deny that the
malus effectus voluntarius in causa is a sin, because the effect is
no longer in se voluntary or, being beyond the control of the will,
is desired only in its cause (voluntarius in causa est), maintain
that such an effect need not be confessed. Other theologians,
as St. Thomas, Suarez, Soto, Sanchez, etc., make a distinction,
teaching that the malus effectus is no sin, when the evil will has
been retracted by contrition and repentance before the act has
taken place whose effect cannot be hindered; if, however, the
evil will lasts, the effect is a sin. Hence a priest who, to escape
saying liis office, would throw his breviary into the sea, but
repent of his act immediately after, is not- obliged to confess
the omission of his office, since the omission was not a sin, but
only the evil effect of a sin already repented of. So, too, a man
2S Reuter, Theol. Mor. P. IV. Tract. V. De Confess. Q. VI. n. 317; Max·
z.ol.ta, I. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. cp. III.
'■» The effect of a mortal sin is omne id quod coiwequitur ad totum /meatum
completum in individuo; e.g. the wish to kill is externally completed in me
peccati by the giving of poison ; the death which ensues is called the e
peccati.

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

who has given another poison and, before death takes place, con­
fesses his crime with sorrow is not. obliged, after death has taken
place, to accuse himself again of murder. On the other hand,
the evil effects which take place when the will did not retract
must be confessed, since they are at least the completion of the
external sin and share in the malice of the cause. Mazzotta
makes a distinction here which is very apt. He says: if an
effect follows from a sinful act, and though it may be prevented,
is not so prevented, the penitent must confess the effect because
it completes his neglect in so far as this is an external sin; if
the effect cannot be hindered, there is no obligation per se lo­
quendo to confess the malus effectus, for it is neither a sin in se
nor does it externally complete the sin.30
To the preceding we add two observations : —
1. Since the duty of making a complete confession rests on a
command, we are not obliged perse to confess what is probabiliter
not enjoined by the precept, for, in accordance with sound prin­
ciples of probabilism, a doubtful law has no binding force. To
this we may add, that a confession is valid in which the penitent
omits nothing through any grievous fault of his own, that is,
knowingly or through culpable ignorance and carelessness. Now
the principles of probability furnish a practically safe conscience
with regard to the limits of a command ; hence in this case the
confession is entire, at least formally entire, and that is sufficient
for the validity and grace of the Sacrament.
2. If the penitent, through forgetfulness or for some lawful
reason, without any blame attaching to him, omits to mention
something which is necessary for the integrity of the confession,
he is bound to disclose it on the next occasion; for, by the
decision of the Council of Trent, each and every mortal sin of
which one is conscious must be mentioned, that it may be directly
remitted; hence if sins occur to the mind which have not yet
Mazzotta, 1. c. cp. ΠΙ. with Lugo, Salin., Tamb., etc. Cf. Marc, P. Cl.,
Institut. Moral. Alphoua* Tom. II. P. Ill- Tract. V. De l’œuit. u. 1092.

THE NUMBER OF SINS IN CONFESSION

163

been confessed, they must be submitted to the power of the keys.
Thus Alexander VII condemned the proposition: Sins which
have been forgotten or omitted in confession on account of in­
stant danger to life or for any other reason, need not be mentioned
in the next confession (cf. Prop. 11 damn.).
23.

The Number of Sins in Confession.

The. declaration of the number of sins is another feature com­
pleting the Sacrament. The penitent must give the number of
his mortal sins so far as he can ; if he knows exactly how often
he has fallen into a mortal sin, he must state that number of
times, neither increasing nor diminishing; if, despite careful ex­
amination and reflection he cannot arrive at the real number, he
must give it as near as possible, adding the words “about” or
“at least” ; in so doing he fulfills his obligation, for he has done
what he could, which is sufficient to enable a judgment to be
pronounced humano modo. Should the penitent, after having
thus confessed in all good faith, discover later on a more accu­
rate number than that confessed, he is not obliged to make an­
other confession to supply this number ; nor should he disquiet
himself, for the round numbers given in the first confession in­
cluded everything; it is only when the newly discovered num­
ber is considerably greater than the vague estimate of his first
confession that he is obliged to confess again, because the num­
ber, and, in consequence, the sin, was not perfectly confessed,
since a far greater number cannot be considered as included in
his former round estimate.31
The question naturally arises what the confessor is to under­
stand by a numeral qualified by "about” or "at least.” As a
general rule the greater the number expressed, the greater is the
number that may be understood as implied ; for instance, “about
81 Tliis is communis theologorum doctrina. Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n.
Reuter, 1. c. Tract. V. De Confess, u. 312; Lugo, Disp. 10, Sect. 2.

164

TTJE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

three times" would mean from two to four times; “about five
times." from four to six times; "about ten times," from eight
to twelve times; "about, one hundred times," at most from
ninety to one hundred and ten times. It is clear from this
general appreciation of theologians that the numbers implied
by the term "about" increase in proportion to the actual num­
ber mentioned. If the penitent discovers that he has mentioned
a number considerably less than the truth, he must remedy the
defect; if he has erred by giving too large a number, ho need
not correct the mistake, because the larger number includes the
less. Moreover, it is advisable, instead of using high numbers,
to state how often the sin has been committed in the course of
a week or a month, etc., especially with regard to frequent or inte­
rior sins. Indeed with habitual sinners it suffices to state how
long they have indulged the evil habit, and that they have given
willful consent more or less daily whenever occasion offered ;
this is enough, when the actual number of sins is so doubtful
that .there would always be a grave risk of a mistake in trying
to determine it. "The confessor, when he knows the period
over which the accusation extends, may easily and safely form
his opinion in the case of a penitent whose will is habitually
inclined to sin, that the penitent has sinned as often as there
were necessary interruptions to his sin.” 32 This method in
determining the number of sins is as well founded as the other,
for in this case, too, all is done that is morally possible. Hence
the confessor should never force his penitent to give a deter­
minate number, for this is in most cases impossible. On the
other hand, the confessor should help the penitent to state
the number in the way we have indicated.33
K lælimk. !. c. cp. II. Confessio, art. I. § 1, n. 305.
“ S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 20. Compare Casus Bened. XIV, pro anno
1744, mens. Jun. cas. 3. A man confesses that for a month he has been
harboring evil thoughts against his friend, and during the same time enter­
taining inquire thoughts about a woman; the question is put whether such
a confession is sufficiently complete. The answer is given dislinguendo :

ΠΙΕ NUMBER OF HINfi IN CONFEUftlON

165

Hence a prostitute makes a sufficient statement in confessing
how often she has been accustomed to sin each day or week, at
the same time telling the species, or at least the more general
species, of the sins so far as possible ; she would make a perfect
confession by an accusation such as follows : “ I have spent so
many years in this state of sin, and as occasion offered I sinned
with all who came, married and unmarried, and also with those
who were bound by vow.” Penitents must always give at least
the more general specific characters of their sins, and the num­
ber of times per day or week they have sinned.*4
A similar difficulty is presented in the case of those who have
a deeply rooted habit of sin — those, for example, who con­
stantly entertain impure desires with regard to women whom
they chance to meet ; it is very difficult in such a case to give
any number. Such people make a perfect confession by stat­
ing that they are given to this habit, adding whether they in­
dulge frequently in the day or week; besides this they should
mention at least the more general specific characters, whether
they indulge these desires with regard to married people or
relations or persons consecrated to God.54
The same difficulty arises with regard to uneducated and
ignorant people who have to accuse themselves of impure con­
versations carried on at their work during the whole day, on all
sorts of subjects and before all kinds of companions. They,
too, may confess the number and species of their sins as we
have indicated above.”
Lugo and Sporer would also admit the confession as valid and
1. If the penitent has occasionally recalled his unfriendly wishes or impure
desires, and has not fallen into them very often, the confession is not suffi­
cient 2. If he has never retracted in either case and has fallen frequently
into those sins every day, the statement will suffice as it stands.
M Cf. Lugo, 1. c. Disp. 16, n. 573; Sporer, Theolog. Moral. Sacram. P. Ill
cp. HL Q. IV. n. 452.
“ Lugo, 1. c. n. 574; Sporer. 1. c. n. 453; Reuter, 1. c. n. 313.
»· Lugo, 1. e. n. 575; Sporer, 1. c. n. 453.

166

THΚ RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

give absolution to a thief who accuses himself as follows:
"Since I was ten years old I have been so addicted to stealing
that whenever a chance was offered — and that happened very
frequently— I stole What I could; besides I have stolen sacred
objects of considerable value on five occasions or, if I mistake
not, six." ”
Though the accusation of the species in confession usually
offers more difficulty than that of the number, yet Lugo advises
the more learned confessors in particular to refrain from being
too exacting in demanding the classification from their penitents.
As the less-trained confessor may fail in this respect by defect,
the more learned confessor is exposed to the flanger of excess.
The penitent must give the species of the sin, and the confessor
is bound to inquire with due regard to the penitent’s ability
and the knowledge which he had at the time of sinning; for
a man cannot do evil of which he is ignorant ; moreover, it is
sufficient to have a general consciousness of grave malice.
24. The Confession of the Circumstances of Sins.

The circumstances under which sins are committed (condi­
tiones qua’ actus substantiam circumstant atque in ejus moralitatem
influunt) are of different kinds: 1. Some change the species of
the sin (speciem mutantes) ; for example, the circumstance of a
vow or of marriage adds to the sin of impurity that of sacrilege
or that of adultery. 2. Other circumstances are aggravating
(aggravantes) in greater or less degree and gradum moralilalis
mutantes or moralitatem augentes — such, for instance, as increase
the malice within the limits of the same species; they are the
duration of the act, its intensity, its degree, the manner of
carrying it out, the particular occasion, etc. 3. Other circum­
stances are mitigating (minuentes, moralitatem minuentes), be­
cause they palliate the malice of the act ; as, for example, want
of advertence, etc.
m Cf. Lugo, I. c., and Sporer, 1. c.

CONFESXIOV OF THE CIECUMSTAHOES OF SZ.VS 167

The circumstances must lie confessed: —
I. If they change the species of the sin. This is the express
teaching of the Council of Trent. Hence it is not enough to
confess to stealing if the property of the Church has been taken ;
for the stealing of a res sacra is not merely a sin of injustice but
a theft from God and so a new sin. If a child curses its parents,
it is not enough to mention that it cursed, for, since special rev­
erence is due to parents, the violation of that special reverence
is a new sin.
The following circumstances cal] for particular mention : —
1. The circumstance of the person who commits the sin, when
with regard to the matter of the sin he is consecrated to God or
bound by vow, as in sins against purity, or when he sins against
the chastity’ of the married state, or when he stands in special
spiritual relations towards those with whom he sins.
If a man is consecrated to God by Holy Orders or the reli­
gious state and has to confess a sin against purity, he must men­
tion the circumstance of his state of life, since he has committed
a double sin, one of impurity and another of sacrilege. Now
those who are consecrated to God by Holy Orders or the reli­
gious state incur the special sin of sacrilege when they fall into
impurity; the mere circumstance of the vow being simple or
solemn does not constitute a new species, nor the fact of being
bound to chastity by vows of religion as well as by Orders; these
added details need not be confessed. Many moralists teach also
that those incur sacrilege who are bound by a private vow of
chastity, and St. Alphonsus admits this opinion as probable.
Hence all those who have sinned against purity make a full con­
fession when they confess the circumstance of the vow by which
they are bound, without distinguishing whether the vow be private,
solemn, simple, or that of Orders (votum solemne ordinis sacri).
This is the doctrine of Lugo ” and Lacroix ; ” Sanchez,40 too,
“ Disp. 16, n. 146 et seq.
» L. c. 1060, cto.
*° De inatrimon. L. 7. Disp. 27 et seq.

168

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

defends this new on the ground that the solemn vow is in sub­
stance or in se not distinct from the simple vow. His authority
seems to have won over many theologians to the same opinion.
Gury also holds this view; but the Ratisbon 41 and Roman 42*
editions of his valuable manual reject it in the notes. Lelunkuhl," moreover, opposes it and teaches that to incur a personal
sacrilege (and this is the question under discussion) the person
sinning (or with whom the sin has been committed) must be
consecrated to God publica auctoritate, i.e. by Holy Orders or
by vows of religion. Hence by the violation of a private vow
of chastity a sacrilege in its strict and proper sense is not in­
curred, though a sin is committed against religion by the breach
of fidelity to God. Sacrilege is incurred by the abuse of a sacred
object. Now that cannot be called a sacred object which is
privately consecrated to God without any recognition on the
part of the properly constituted authorities. A private vow
cannot produce this effect, for the common teaching of all theo­
logians, a few excepted, maintains that the breach of such a
vow is a violation of fidelity, not of the reverence due to God,
at least not in such a degree as to constitute a sacrilege strictly
so called.44 Thus the more correct view is that of those who
hold that, in confessing sins against purity, the circumstance of
Holy Orders and of the religious vow is to be given ; for who­
ever confesses as doubtful a circumstance which certainly
changes the species of the sin does not fulfill the precept of con­
fession. Such may be the case, for instance, where a priest con­
ceals the circumstance of Holy Orders and mentions only the
41 Editio in Germania V (Ratisb. 1874), P. II. Tract, de Confess, n. 492.
4! Gury-Ballerini, Ed. IX (Romæ, 1887), P. II. Tract, de Confess, n. 492,
Q. 12 et P. I. n. 280.
4’ L. c. Tract. V. De Sacram. Pœnit. Sect. IL cp. II. Confess, art. I. Sect.
2, ii. 310, and P. I. L. I. Tract. IL cp. II. art. II. n. 385, and cp. Ill, art. II.
n. 455.
44 Cf. S. Thomas. II. II. Q. 88, art. 3 ; Suarez, 1. c. n. 1 et seq., Tract. VI.
1. 5, c. 3, n. 2 et seq.

CONFESSION OF THE CHICUM9TANCES OF H1N8 169

violation of the vow of chastity; for the violation of this vow
is certainly a sacrilege for those in whom it has been solemnized
by the reception of “Holy Orders,” while that of the simple
vow is only doubtfully so.45
Parish priests by scandalizing their Hock, parents their chil­
dren, teachers the scholars under their instruction, incur a spe­
cial sin against charity. Such persons have in virtue of their
office the strictest obligation to edify those intrusted to them
and to keep them away from harm. The case of a confessor
who gives scandal to a person who happens to be his penitent is
different; but he is obliged to mention the circumstance of this
relationship when he has given scandal in connection with the
administration of the Sacrament; his office as confessor only
imposes on him the strict duty of guiding the penitent safely in
the Sacrament of Penance, and is only transitory, ending per se
with each confession, while that of the parish priest and of the
others mentioned above demands a constant spiritual care of
those intrusted to them. Other offices involving authority do
not change the species of the scandal given to subjects, though
they may increase its malice, if, for example, a master leads his
servant into sin. The dignity of a person does not of itself
change the species of the sin of scandal given to his subjects,
though it increases the gravity of a sin. If, however, a master
has taken upon himself the duties of a parent, for instance,
towards his servant-girl, he most certainly incurs a new and
distinct sin by scandal given to her, and must mention his
special relation to the girl.
2. The circumstance of the person with whom the sin has been
committed, if God's honor has suffered in any way, or if the
rights of a third person or the particular respect or love which is
due to the said person have been violated.
If the person with whom sin has been committed or who has41
41 Cf. Gury, ed. Katisbou, 1. o.

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

been led into sin is consecrated to God or bound by a vow re­
ferring to the matter of the sin, a new and special sin is incurred
against the virtue of religion (i.e. a sin either of sacrilege or at
least of a violation of the vow). If any one commit a. sin of
impurity with a relation, it is no longer merely a sin against
purity, it is incest. It is a probable opinion that the penitent
is not obliged to mention the exact degree of relationship whether
by blood or marriage, since that does not change the species
ratione incestus, except in the first degree either of blood-rela­
tionship or marriage connection; thus sin committed between
father and daughter, mother and son, father-in-law and daugh­
ter-in-law, mother-in-law and son-in-law, must be mentioned
along with the relationship; yet there is no doubt that ratione
superioritatis vel pietatis sin incurred by a father with his own
daughter or his daughter-in-law, hears a different character from
the sin of a son with his mother or mother-in-law.
The sin of hatred acquires a new species of sinfulness when
the hatred is directed against those more closely connected, e.g.
parents, children, grandparents, grandchildren, and against those
connected by marriage in the first degree of the direct line, such
as wife, godparents, and brothers. Hatred of those most nearly
related may much more easily become a grievous sin than
hatred of other people.48
3. The circumstance of place, if a sacrilege is thereby com­
mitted; thus (a) if a sacred object or something belonging to
the property of the Church is stolen and taken out from a sacred
building, a double sacrilege, real and local, is committed. The
circumstance of the local sacrilege, that is, the fact that sin has
been committed in the Church is not of itself gravely sinful;
hence when a profane object which is merely accidentally in
the Church is stolen, a sacrilege, though not a gravely sinful one,
is added to the sin of theft.47 (b) If the immunity of a church
« Lugo, Diep. 16, n. 298.
« Gury-Ballerini, I. n. 286, and Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 16, η. 466 sqq.

CO.V/7','SS/O.V OF THE CIHCUMSTANC'ES OF 8IN3 171
is violated; (c) if anything is done in a church by which it
is polluted in the sense of the canon law; (d) if profane occupa­
tions gravely at variance with the holiness of the place are carried
on in the church, whether those occupations be in themselves
sinful or not.
4. The circumstance of time; if, for instance, the time at
which the sin took place was the reason why the action in ques­
tion has been forbidden, and if by the action done at some par­
ticular time a special offence is given to God. This circumstance
might involve grave sin (a) if Good Friday were chosen for the
performance of an obscene play; (b) if during the forbidden
time a marriage were celebrated with great pomp; (c) if dur­
ing the celebration of Mass or immediately after holy com­
munion, before the sacred species had time to be altered, the
communicant were to commit some outrage greatly dishonoring
to the Blessed Sacrament. These are circumstances which
moralists generally enumerate as constituting a new species of
sinfulness. On the other hand, a sin committed on a Sunday
or feast-day or on a cominunion-day is not per se invested with
the particular malice of a sacrilege; nevertheless the fact that a
man relapses into his old sins on a confession or communion day
gives ground for the suspicion that his last confession was de­
void of real contrition and in consequence invalid and sacri­
legious.48
5. Finally, the circumstance of the end in view is to be con­
fessed if it is in se mortally sinful; for instance, a man who
steaks with the object of getting (hunk is guilty of drunkenness
as well as theft, and on that account must confess the purpose
for which he stole.4’
Now there are many penitents who cannot judge of the cir­
cumstances which change the nature of the sin ; such must be
48 Cf. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. IS. n. 213 sqq.
49 Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. Tract. V. Sacr. Pœn. Sect. IT. cp. II. Conf. art. I.
§ 2, n. 308, and Th. M. Gen. Tract. I. cp. III. § 2, u. 31.

172

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

taught to mention in confession whatever increases or diminishes
the malice of the sin; the rest will he supplied by the confessor,
for he has the duty of asking the penitent not only about the
circumstances which affect the species of sin, but everything
which he considers necessary to aid him in forming a correct
judgment on the spiritual state of the penitent. This right im­
plies a duty on the part of the penitent to answer the questions
put to him; these questions turn for the most part on habits of
sin, relapses, and proximate occasions of sinning. Hence Inno­
cent XI condemned the proposition10 which denies the obliga­
tion of answering when the confessor makes inquiries about
habits of sin. The knowledge of a habit of sin, or of relapses,
or of proximate occasions is very important in settling whether
absolution should be given or deferred ;11 besides it is of su­
preme importance to the confessor in his office as physician that
he be in a position to suggest the necessary and proper means
for amendment. The penitent must, therefore, if asked, men­
tion former sins though already confessed. No one need take
offense because he is thus obliged per accidens to repeat sins which
have already been duly forgiven; the purpose is not to pro­
nounce a new sentence upon them, but to enable the priest to
form a correct judgment with regard to the sins just confessed
by noting their relation to former sins, and thus to prescribe
suitable means of correction and provide as much as possible
against relapses.62
II. Those circumstances are also to be mentioned by which
sins of their own nature venial become mortal (C. aggravantes).
Intemperance is not always a mortal sin, but it becomes so
when it deprives a man of the use of reason; to steal a cheap
*® Propos. 58 damn.
·· See § 48. The Duty of the Confessor with regard to asking Questions.
Compare §§ 64, 65.
M Cf. Mazzotta, 1. C. Tract. VI. Disp. 1. Q. IV. De Confess, cp. 3; GuryBalleriui, 1. c. n. 485.

I
C(>.\ l· ESNION OF THE CIHCVMKTANCEK OF Λ/.V.M 173

tool might of itself he only a venial sin, but if the loss of it
deprives a poor artisan of the means of doing a day's work, it
becomes mortal. In the same way one ought to mention the
mitigating circumstances which make, a mortal sin only venial
or even no sin at all.
Moralists give seven cases in which circumstances may change
a venial into a mortal sin: —
1. Ralione conscientia: erronea, when a man through ignorance
thinks a venial sin to be mortal. 2. Ralione scandali vel gravis
damni, when grave scandal is given to one’s neighbor, doing
spiritual or temporal harm ; as, for instance, if a priest were to
speak lightly of sacred things — thus St. Bernard” says: Nuga
inter soeculares nugm, in ore sacerdotis blasphemin' sunt; or, again,
if a priest behaved lightly with a woman or were seen the worse
for drink ; or if one were to address a person rather insultingly,
foreseeing that he would break out into a great rage and blas­
phemy ; or if a woman dress vainly and foresee that some young
man at the sight of her will sin mortally by impious desires.
3. Ratione pravi finis graviter mali, when, for example, a small
lie is told to lead a girl into sin. The evil intention may not only
increase the guilt of a sinful action, but it will make an other
wise innocent action sinful. 4. Ralione formalis contemptus
legis vel superioris, when a venial sin is committed out of formal
contempt for the law or lawgiver^ or superior, as when a Catho­
lic on an abstinence day, and quite aware of the duty of abstain­
ing, eats ostentatiously a little flesh-meat to show the slight
regard in which he holds the law.” 5. Ratione pravi affectus
in rem alioqui leviter malam, when a man is so attached to a
venial sin that he would commit it even if it were mortal, or in
consequence of this attachment would be ready to commit other
mortal sins,55 as, for instance, if a man chose rather to steal than
63 De considerat. II. 13.
M Cf. S. Thomas, II. II. Q. 186, art. 9 ad 3.
“ Cf. S. Thomas, I. II. Q. 88, art. 2.

174

THE EXCIPIENT OF PENANCE

to overcome his vanity or intemperance. 6. Ratione periculi
seu occasionis proxima· in peccatum mortale labendi, when the
venial sin is known, or can be known, as a proximate occasion
of mortal sin; a man, for example, looks at a person of the
other sex or entertains rather familiar relations with her though
he knows that such conduct in his case is a proximate occasion
of gravely sinful desires or actions. Even actions otherwise
neutral or indifferent may for this reason become gravely sin­
ful. 7. Ratione cujuscunque circumstantia· qua· mortalem in se
malitiam contineat; thus insults, proceeding from envy and de­
sire of revenge, may be mortal sins.“ Hence these circum­
stances must be confessed.
The following circumstances may make sins venial which are
of their own nature mortal : 1. Smallness of matter; 2. Want
of full advertence ; 3. Want of consent; 4. A false conscience/’7
These circumstances must be told in confession not in order
to secure its integrity, but that the confessor may be able to
form a correct judgment.
III. Circumstances which make but little difference in the
gravity of the sin need not be confesser!.
IV. Circumstances which aggravate a mortal sin within its
own species to a notable degree (circumstantia· notabiliter aggra­
vantes intra eamdem speciem') need not per se loquendo be con­
fessed; this is the common and most approved teaching of
theologians; other reasons may exist which make it expedient
to mention these circumstances.
At the same time theologians are not unanimous on this sub­
ject. Three opinions are current, and each one of them has its
own probability and its champions of no mean repute. We
may as well observe that the probability of the negative propo·* Cf. S. Thomas, I. II. Q. 88, art. 5; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 59-6.3; GuryDumas, I. n. 153; Scavini, I. n. 734.
” Cf. S. Thomas, I. JI· Q- 88, art. 1 et 2; S. Alph. 1. c. n. 54 ; GuryDumas, 1. c.

CONFESSION OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF SINS 175
sition (that there is no obligation) is conceded even by its
opponents; hence all grant (ex omnium sententia) as probable
that no one is bound to confess these circumstances, so that
a penitent cannot be forced to disclose them unless some
exceptional case should call for their mention.8·
Those who maintain the affirmative proposition (i.e. the duty
of confessing the circumstantia: notabiliter aggravantes) fall back
on the reasons to which the Council of Trent appeals for the
necessity of confessing circwmslanlias speciem ifmlantes, viz. in
order that the confessor may make a correct judgment, impose
a suitable penance, and suggest the proper means of help; for,
they add, the circumstantia notabiliter aggravantes exercise a
great influence on the view of the case taken by the confessor,
and on that account ought to be confessed. The fact of the
Council defining that only the circumstantia speciem mutantes
need be disclosed might be easily explained by supposing that
the Council defined only what was certain, and left theological
views where they were, neither approving nor condemning them.
The last conclusion, however, is not justified, for the Council
prescribes that circumstantia speciem mutantes should be con­
fessed without determining any precept for the aggravantes, anil
if equally cogent reason had existed for confessing both classes
of circumstances, there could have been no reason for restricting
the doctrine to those which change the species; for, says Lugo,80
it ought to have made the decree to embrace both classes without
imposing any limiting clause.
Further demonstration is taken from the Rituale Romanum,
which directs: "If a penitent has not confessed the number,
species, and circumstances which ought to be given, the con­
fessor must ask him.” By the word species should be undert9 On this controversy see, in addition to S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 468-471
and Lngo, 1. c. Disp. 16, Sect. 3, Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. I (de
integr. mat.), n. 352-366.
w De Pœnit. Disp. 10, η. 115.

176

THE EXCIPIENT OF PENANCE

stood the arrwmstonfwr speciem mutantes, and by the rest the
circumstantia notabiliter aggravantes. This distinction, however,
is unfounded, for by species is meant species ex parte objecti, such
as stealing, impurity, etc., and under circumstantia necessaria
the circumstantia speciem mutantes or the species ex parte cir­
cumstantiarum, as when theft becomes a sacrilege, etc."0
Appeal is made also to the Catcchismus Romanus, which
directs that those circumstances should be confessed “which
greatly increase or diminish the malice.”01 It may be ob­
jected to this, however, that the context makes it clear that
there is no necessity to interpret the passage as referring to cir­
cumstances which merely increase the degree, not the kind, of
the guilt; for the Catechism continues thus: Many circum­
stances are so serious that in them alone lies the whole gravity
of the sin, so that they ought to be confessed; but the only cir­
cumstances which can make a sin grave are those that, change
the moral or theological species. This is confirmed by the fact
that the Ritual prescribes also that circumstances very notably
diminishing the gravity of the sin should be revealed ; for even
the opponents grant that .this has force only when the mitigat­
ing circumstances change the species.” Moreover, the Catechism
illustrates its doctrine by declaring the necessity of mention­
ing the circumstance of “a person consecrated to God ” in a
case of murder, and the circumstance of “marriage” in the case
of impurity; and these belong to the circumstances which
change the moral species. Finally, if the Catechism adduces
the example of a theft, it is no proof that the question is not of
circumstances which change the species, and when it declares
that one who has stolen one gold piece is less guilty than another
who has stolen a hundred pieces this may easily be understood
of a circumstance which (with regard to the absolute quantity)
“ Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. De Pœnit. P. IT. cp. III. art. 3, n. 192.
** P. IT. De Pœnit. cp. 5, n. 47.
M S. Alph. 1. c. n. 408 ad prob. 3 ex ratione.

CONFESSION OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF SINS 177
constitutes a venial guilt and so introduces a distinct theologi­
cal species.”
This view is held, among others, by Suarez, Sanchez, Gonet,
Lacroix.
Other theologians teach that there is no necessity of confess­
ing circumstantias notabiliter aggravantes, but they make an
exception with regard to the circumstance of quantity in cases
of theft. St. Alphonsus, along with other theologians, how­
ever, is of opinion that this exception ought not to he granted
if the quantity is described as being large; for from that the con­
fessor can per se make a sufficiently accurate judgment. Bal­
lerini remarks very justly that the exception should be worded
thus : Except when some additional reason exists, e.g. a reserva­
tion directed against a certain kind of incest or against the theft
of some given amount.
The third opinion denies absolutely the necessity of confess­
ing circumstantias notabiliter aggravantes, and this is the more
common and probable view, for which there are many and
weighty reasons.
(n) The Council of Trent by positively limiting its decision
to those circumstances which change the species seems to exclude
positively the obligation of confessing others. It teaches that
circumstances must be mentioned because without them the sins
would not be properly confessed by the penitents nor properly
understood by the judge, so that he would be incapable of esti­
mating correctly the gravity of the sins and of imposing a be­
coming penance. From these words of the Council it is fair to
conclude that the penitent has done all that is necessary when
he confesses those circumstances.
(t>) Moreover, we are bound only to declare mortal sin ; now
the circumstantia notabiliter aggravantes within the same species
evidently add no new species of a mortal sin, hence they need
ω Gury-Ballerini, ). c. I*. Π. cp. 2, art. II. n. 484; Aertnyn, I. e.

178

TUS RECIPIENT OF penance

not be confessed. To confess them is an act of perfection,
good, of course, and wholesome, just as is the practice of con­
fessing venial sins.
(c) Moreover, many consequences of no small importance
follow from the opposite doctrine. While the present opinion
is calculated to set at rest the minds of both penitent ami con­
fessor, the other has quite the opposite tendency, for who could
even approximately gauge how far circumstances have a notable
effect upon the sin? Imagine the difficult and often fruitless
inquiries a confessor would have to make with many of his peni­
tents in order to come to a satisfactory decision. It follows,
besides, from the opposite view that· the circumstantûe notabiliter
minuentes would have to be confessed or else the confessor would
consider some sin more serious than it actually was, and even
our opponents grant that this is not necessary.
(d) Finally, the Church could not in the General Council
deduce this obligation from the words of Christ, otherwise she
would not have given that definite limit to the obligation; the
law of confessing circumstantia: notabiliter aggravantes is, there­
fore, at least doubtful, and a doubt ful law lias no binding force.
Hence this opinion may be adopted in praxi with a safe con­
science even though its opposite be probable, and whoever fol­
lows it does not expose the Sacrament to any danger of nullity,
for to secure validity a formally entire confession is sufficient,
and of that there is no doubt.
Tliis view is taught by St. Thomas (in 4 Sentent, d. 1G, Q. 3,
art. 2 et Opusc. 7, Q. 6), St. Antoninus, St. Bonaventura, St.
Bernardine, Lugo, Vasque», Bonacina, Salmanticenses, and the
greater number of the older theologians. Among the more
recent it is quite the common doctrine; compare Gury and the
different editors of his text-book, among whom Ballerini is
strongly in favor of this opinion, Müller, Lehmkuhl, Aertnys,
Mark, Konings, Simar, Kenrick, Gousset, Primer, Ninzatti, etc.
It is, however, advisable to mention these circumstances, and
it is necessary : —

CONFESSION OF THE CIRVUMUTANCSS OF SINS 179
(а) When they affect the jurisdiction of the confessor, 88 in
the case of a censure or reservation. If one has struck a cleric,
for instance, it should be mentioned whether the assault was
notorious or not ; in the former case it would be reserved to the
Pope, in the latter to the bishop ; also if the person struck were
a cardinal, a bishop, apostolic nuncio, or other cleric, since the
excommunication is reserved in a special manner to the Pope.
(б) When they affect the character, in law or justice, of im­
portant acts, as espousals, various contracts, restitution, etc.,
in order that the penitent may receive proper instruction; this
is most important in cases of theft.
(c) When, finally, the confessor without a knowledge of these
circumstances is unable to direct his penitent as required for his
salvation.
Since these circumstances must be confessed, not because they
are circumstantia; notabiliter aggravantes, but on the grounds
alleged, the confessor has a right to question about them and
the penitent is obliged to answer as we have already observed.
Moreover, the faithful usually add these circumstances in
confession because it gives greater peace of heart and more
abundant fruit; besides, a better and safer guidance is thus
secured and an opportunity of practicing humility.
As to the utility and advisability of confessing circumstances
all theologians agree in making an exception with regard to sins
against the sixth commandment ; for beyond what is necessary
to determine the species of the sin the confessor ought not to
ask the penitent any further question nor allow him to make
any further statement. Even with regard to the species theo­
logians all teach with one accord that in so dangerous a matter
where scandal may so easily be given one may at times refrain
from inquiring into the species.’*
Cedreno gives useful advice for the confession of the circurnM Gury-Bullerini, I. c. n. 184, uotac.

180

THE EECIPIENT OF PENANCE

stances attending sin: "If the person with whom you have
sinned, the place where the sin was committed, or the manner
of its accomplishment, or any other detail, gives you special
remorse, then mention that point, for it will then be the con­
fessor's duty to decide from these indications how far they ailed
the species of the sin or only increase its gravity.”
25

The Confession of Doubtful Sins.

There are three points of view from which a sin may be re­
garded as doubtful : —
1. With regard to the existence of the sinful action, as
when a man doubts whether he really committed the action.
2. With regard to the quality of the sin, as when a man knows
he has sinned, but doubts whether it is a mortal or a venial sin.
3. With regard to the confession of a sin, as when a man
knows he sinned grievously but doubts whether he ever con­
fessed his sin.
The doubt may be positive or negative. A negative doubt
exists when no solid reason can be given either pro or con, but
only insignificant arguments for both sides, so that no decision
can be arrived at. A positive doubt exists where two contra­
dictory propositions have each solid reasons in their support.
Armed with these premises we are now in a position to set
forth the doctrine with regard to the confession of doubtful sins.
I. A sin need not be confessed when there is no positive reason
to suspect its existence or gravity, or when there is positive
ground against believing its existence or gravity, even where
there is a solid reason on the other side. In other words, a sin
negatively doubtful from both points of view, or positively
doubtful from both points of view, or negatively doubtful on
the side affirming guilt is not necessary matter of confession;
but a sin positively doubtful on the side affirming guilt and only
negatively doubtful on the side denying guilt, must be con­
fessed.

THE CONFESSION OF DOUBTFUL SINS

181

With the exception of a few rigoriste, theologians are unani­
mous in teaching that, a sin positively doubtful from both sides
need not be confessed; for if there is a dubium /acti which estab­
lishes the obligation of a law, liberty is in possession, i.e. there
is no obligation. But in our case the fact of the sin is doubtful,
thus we are not obliged to confess it. Moreover, when the
existence of a law is doubtful we are not bound by it; but the
law of confessing doubtful sins is uncertain ; hence we are not
bound by it.
If, however, a man in danger of death doubted whether he
had committed a grievous sin, knowing that he had never been
to confession since that doubtful act, he would be obliged, in
order to avoid the, risk of damnation, not indeed to confess that
sin, but either to receive the Sacrament of Penance, in which he
confesses other sins, that thus he might receive at least indirect
absolution if his doubtful sins were really mortal, or he should
at least make an act of perfect contrition. In such a case the
act of perfect contrition sine voto confitendi would be sufficient,
since no obligation binds him to confess the peccata dubia.*1 So
much for sins which are positively doubtful on both sides.
If, however, a very strong argument affirms our guilt with
only very slight reason to deny it, we are obliged, according
to the unanimous teaching of theologians, to confess those
doubtful sins, for in such a case the conviction of our inno­
cence does not rest on solid grounds. Of course our guilt is not
conclusively proved; but in these things where evidence is
often wanting we must be led by principles of sound moral
certainty, even when they are unfavorable to us, since confes­
sion is not only a burden, but a Sacrament, and as such a
means for greater sanctification.” In this case one cannot
« S. Alph. 1. c. n. 473 and Π. A. n. 30; Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Disp. 1.
Q. IV. de Conf. cp. 4. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. I. c. (de peccati»
dubiis) η. 374.
“ Cf. Lugo, Disp. 10, η. 58.

182

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

argue that in dubio facti (and this undoubtedly exists) the oppos­
ing arguments cancel one another, as might two opposing wit­
nesses; for this only takes place when the two arguments are
of the same kind and quite similar, as in the case of two opposing
eye-witnesses, when it is certain that one of the two is mistaken
and neither can be believed since it is not known where the mis­
take lies. It is quite different, however, when the opposing
reasons are of distinct classes and unlike, as in the case of two
witnesses who do not recount what they themselves have seen,
but bear witness to various conjectures pro and con ; then they
both deserve reasonable attention, since the conjectures on either
side rest on different motives.
If a penitent doubts positively whether he has sinned in some
action, and it is probable that advertence or consent, etc., was
wanting, or that full deliberation or consent was absent, he is
not obliged to accuse himself of this action in confession.
On the other hand, theologians are not so clear as to the obli­
gation of confessing sins which are doubtful dubio negativo pro
utraque parte. The older theologians, among whom St. Thomas
and other eminent doctors are to be found (Sanchez enumerates
forty), insist on the duty of confessing this class of doubtful
sins. Tins opinion is founded on the decree of the Council of
Trent declaring that all grave sins quorum conscientiam habent
(sc. pœnitentes) must be confessed ; thus the penitent must con­
fess the sins as they are in themselves, those which are certain
as certain and those which are doubtful as doubtful. This is
the genera) and constant practice of the faithful, and by that
fact we may consider it as proceeding from Christ’s institution.1”
Other theologians, of no small weight both by their number
and authority, do not impose the obligation of confessing these
doubtful sins. St. Alphonsus also defended this view in a very
convincing manner on internal grounds. The Council of Trent
” Compare in particular Sanchez, Suarez. Lugo, Laymann, Sporer, etc.

THE CONFESSION OF DOUBTFUL SINS

183

binds penitents only to reveal those sins quorum conscientiam
habent: it says nothing about uli sunt in conscientia, or telling
undoubted sins as certain and doubtful as doubtful, but only
quorum conscientiam habent, which means those of which they
have certain knowledge; for, according to St. Bernard, con­
scientia is nothing more than cordis scientia and judicium practicum on the sins incurred. Now doubtful knowledge is neither
knowledge (scientia) nor a judgment (judicium), but a suspensio
judicii; hence no one can have a conscientia peccati who has no
proof that he has incurred sin. This is the answer to the argu­
ments of the first opinion. Weight is added to this answer by
the very words of the same Council: "It is well known that in
the Church of God nothing more is demanded of the penitents
but that each one after diligent examination . . . confess those
sins by which he is conscious to himself of having grievously
offended his Lord and God; the remaining sins, however, which
do not occur to him after diligent examination are considered
as included generally in the same confession.” Since, therefore,
concludes the holy Doctor, the penitent is not bound to confess
his venial sins, he is not bound to confess the doubtful ones,
for the Council says he is not obliged to confess any but the
mortal sins of which he has knowledge; but to doubt is not
“ to have knowledge,” it is rather " to be wanting in knowledge.”
Moreover, an onus cerium ought not to be inflicted for a delictum
dubium, and in the doubt whether the law exists there is no obli­
gation to observe the law. Finally, he who doubts without
good foundation should not heed the doubt. The faithful, it
is true, do confess these doubtful sins in order to gain peace and
ease of conscience, but not because they are bound to do so: it
is also customary and general for them to confess those which
are positively dubious, and no one holds that this is of obliga­
tion, not even our opponents.
The grounds for this opinion, and the objections to the oppo­
site view, are so convincing that it may be regarded as the more

184

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

probable and be followed hila conscientia.1* The following objec­
tion has no weight. Since confession is a necessary means for
salvation, and since in such a case a man must take the safer
means rather than trust to a probable opinion, he is thus obliged
to confess peccata dubia. A distinction must be made. The
Sacrament of Penance, and particularly the absolution in which
its efficacy for the most part consists, may certainly be called
a necessary means for salvation in re vel in vote with regard to
those who have committed mortal sin after Baptism; besides,
if a man doubt whether he has sinned grievously, either perfect
contrition or absolution are necessary, and for that reason con­
fession also in so far as this is required to obtain valid abso­
lution or sanctifying grace through the absolution; but the
integrity of confession can be regarded as necessary only in so
far as it is proved to be the prescribed means of obtaining
absolution licite et valide. The proof, however, for the necessity
of confessing doubtful sins is so little substantiated that, as
we have shown, the very opposite is proved from the words of
the Council and the explanation of St. Alphonsus.·’
When one considers the teaching of those older theologians
who maintained the necessity of confessing mortalia negative
dubia, it is not difficult to see that, while their mode of expression
comprises more, yet, they really meant to say that a penitent is
not to consider himself free from all obligation of confessing his
sin for some paltry reason which is in his favor, though knowing
at the same time that there are weighty reasons to be urged
against him and his freedom from mortal sin.”
“ Nearly all the later theologians hold this doctrine. Ballerini (Not. ad
Gury et Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 377) calls the opinion that one is obliged to
confess peccata dubia downright false. Cf. Müller, 1. c. Sect. 121 ; Lehmkuhl,
I. c. n. 317; Gury, 1. c. n. 477; Marc, 1. c. Tract. V. De Pœnit. Dies. II. cp.
II. art. II. Sect. 1, n. 1095, etc.
• Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 317.
’· Cf. lehmkuhl, 1. c. ; Mawotta, 1. c. De oris confessione, cp. 4. St. Al­
phonsus declares very precisely that St. Thomas’ doctrine on this matter is

THE CONFESSION OF DOUBTFUL

M/.VA

185

From this teaching it follows that he who has a negative
doubt as to whether he sinned is not stride loquendo obliged to
confess before communicating; but in order to make sure of
the required dispositions he ought cither to make an act of per­
fect contrition or receive sacramental absolution after confessing
something which is included under materia certa.11
For the rest it is in practice generally recommended to the.
faithful, in order to secure peace of soul, to mention even their
doubtful mortal sins, though there is no obligation to do so, and
the confession without the accusation of these sins is complete ;
they must, however, be instructed to confess these sins as doubt­
ful and not as certain. If a penitent have only sins of this sort
to accuse himself of, he has a right to conditional absolution
on the first accusation of them. It is better, however, to add
other certain matter as the sins of one's past life ; this is required
if the absolution is to be unconditional.
In practice the following rules might be profitably observed : —
1. If there be a doubt as to whether the matter of a sin be
grave, ill-instructed penitents (pœnitentes rudes) should confess
their doubts because (a) they cannot guide their own consciences,
or they do so with great difficulty, and because (b) for the most
part they do not know how to distinguish between mortal and
venial sin. Exception, of course, is made for the scrupulous who
are not in the habit of frequently committing mortal sin. Wellinstructed penitents arc certainly not obliged to confess doubtnot against us: “ He does not speak of a penitent who after diligent exam­
ination of conscience comes to the conclusion that his sin is doubtfully
mortal and then lays aside his doubt in accordance with the rule that there
is no certain obligation where it is question of a doubtful transgression: he
is rather considering the case of the penitent who is certain that he has per­
formed a sinful act but cannot decide whether it was gravely sinful or not;
such a penitent is, of course, obliged to take pains to remove the doubt, ami
if he cannot settle he must submit it to the judgment of his confessor, whoso
office it is to distinguish between sin and sin.” S. Alph. 1. c. n. 17I (fin.).
’> 8. Alph. 1. o. n. 175.

186

TUE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

fui mortal sins, since they are in a position to guide their own
consciences; yet they arc advised to do so, for then their con­
fessor is informed of the dangers to which his penitent is exposed
and can warn, instruct, and free him from them.
2. If the doubt turns on the free consent of the will or full
advertence, (a) penitents of timorous consciences, who do not
ordinarily sin mortally, are in no way obliged to confess doubtful
sins, for the presumption is in their favor: ex communiter con­
tingentibus fit prudens prœsumptw. Since they arc not in the
habit of sinning mortally, it is fair to presume that their doubt­
ful sins are not mortal; indeed they ought not infrequently to
be deterred from confessing them if they are inclined to scrupu­
losity. “A man of approved virtue who is worried as to whether
he has consented to an impure temptation may be morally cer­
tain that he has not consented; for it is morally impossible that
a will so constant in good resolutions should change without
giving unmistakable signs.” ” (ft) Penitents who, though not
timorous, are not lax are certainly not obliged to confess a doubt­
ful consent, though they may be advised to do so to secure peace
of conscience and the other benefits which follow from the prac­
tice. (c) If, however, the penitent has a lax conscience, he is
obliged to confess his doubtful sins, for the presumption is
against him.”
If, then, a pious person who often renews his resolution never
to sin mortally is not certain that he has ever revoked that
resolution; if ho is startled when he perceives the evil and
promptly repels the temptation, and doubts whether he has
given way; if he remembers that he was in an excited state of
mind; if he cannot tell whether the thought or action took
place in sleep or in waking moments, the presumption is that
there was no full consent.
The presumption, however, is against those who are accus” Habert, t. 3 de consc. Cf. 8. Alph. 1. c. n. 476.
” Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. n. 476 ; Reuter, 1. c. P. IV. n. 306 as.

THE CONFESSION OF DOUBTFUL SINS

187

tomed to fall easily into grave sin; had they withstood the
temptation they would remember what effort they marie to
overcome it. Hence Lacroix ’* very justly concludes that such
people never have a real negative doubt, since the presumption
determines the probability of consent or resistance to the temp­
tation.
Now comes the question as to what the penitent ought to do
who has confessed a mortal sin as doubtful and afterwards
discovers that he has certainly committed it; is he obliged to
confess the sin anew or may he consider the case closed? The
sin has undoubtedly been remitted directly by the power of the
keys, since the conditional sentence "if thou hast really sinned”
becomes absolute where the condition has been verified. St.
Alphonsus 75 teaches that sins confessed as doubtful should be
mentioned again as certain if it turns out that they are certain;
and this doctrine he affirms to be the common opinion. The
defenders of this view maintain as their great argument that the
sin was not confessed as it was in the conscience at the moment
when it was committed; then it was a peccatum certum,; more­
over, they argue, the sentence passed on a doubtful sin is
quite different from that passed on a sin which is certain. Yet
in the case of sins which have been confessed in round numbers
St. Alphonsus himself teaches that even when the penitent
afterwards recalls the exact number, he is not obliged to confess
again; why, then, should this obligation be imposed on the
penitent who has confessed his sin as doubtful when he discovers
later that it was certain? A man who has confessed that he
has committed a mortal sin about ten times and later discovers
that the number was twelve must either confess as certain the
two or more sins which were previously confessed as doubtful,
or, if this obligation is denied, he cannot be obliged to confess
a sin again which he has discovered to be certain after having
74 Cf. Lacroix, 1. c. Lib. VI. P. 2, n. 619; S. Alph. 1. c. n. 476.
76 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 178. Cf. IL A. De Sacr. Pœnit. cp. 3, n. 34.

188

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

already confessed it as doubtful. That in the first instance the
penitent is free of all obligation to confess again, is the sententia
communissima, and it is borne out by the practice of the faith­
ful; hence in the other case the same freedom must be granted,
for both decisions rest on the same grounds. Nor can it be
objected that the number of the sins is merely a circumstance,
while the sin itself is a substantial fact, for the number belongs
to the very substance, since it indicates so many substantial
acts."
It is true that St. Alphonsus calls the affirmative opinion
communis; but since Lugo (though even he gave his adhesion
practically to the view of St. Alphonsus in consideration of the
great number of theologians who favored it) has combated the
view with strong arguments, later theologians adopted his side,
so that the affirmative proposition maintaining the duty of
confessing again can no longer be considered as communis. At
present, as Ballerini aptly shows, the other view is the com­
munior sententia and is established on good external and internal
probability, and may be unhesitatingly considered as probabilior
et communior.11
II. If a man is certain that he has committed a grave sin but
doubts upon slight grounds whether he has confessed it, he must
accuse himself of it; but if he has a sufficient probability that
it has been confessed, he is under no obligation.
In this case some positive reason is required to show that he
has complied with the obligation of confessing the sin, for an
undoubted command is not satisfied by a doubtful fulfilmentbut where there is really good reason to suppose that the sin
has been confessed, that is, a reason which, though open to
’· Lugo. 1. c. Disput. 16, n. 52, n. 87, n. 78.
w Cf. Ballerini, Nota? ad Gury, l.c. n. 480, and Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n.
380«*·; Lehtnkuhl, 1. c. n. 318; Aertnye, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. 1’. II. cp.
3, urt. 3, n. 198, Q. 4 ; Muller, 1. c. Lib. III. T. II. Sect. 121, i* wrong in call­
ing the affirmative opinion cownnmmwiina et vera.

THE CONFEH8ION OF DOUBTFUL 91M

189

some doubts, offers some probability, the obligation may, in
accordance with the principles of probability, be regarded as
not binding. “For if we are to avoid making laws and duties
odious, we ought to concede something to human probability
taken in a broad sense; thus presumption in a case of this kind
often presents proof of sufficient probability and security.”’·
Hence a man who is accustomed to make his confessions with
care, and later on is unable to remember whether he has con­
fessed this or that sin, may presume that he has confessed it,
and he is not obliged to confess it again. This is the teaching
of many eminent theologians.” Although St. Alphonsus af­
firms that a num is obliged to mention again a sin which has
probably been already confessed, he does not condemn the
contrary opinion. If, again, a man who has been converted
from a habit of sin, and for a long period has been leading a
good life, begins to doubt whether, in the confessions either
general or particular which have been made with suitable care,
some sin or circumstance has been withheld, he may be forbidden
to mention that sin or circumstance, or even to think of the past
at all. Finally, scrupulous people ought only to confess their
past sins when they are quite certain that they have never con­
fessed them; this is the sententia communissima.,0
” Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 319. Cf. Aertnye: In praxi,prtuumptioamoiet dubi­
tationem ; Ballerini. Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 378.
” Suarez, Bonacina, Lugo, Salmanticenses. Lacroix, etc.
•° S. Alph. 1. c. n. 477. Thus the holy Doctor does not express a general
obligation of confessing the sins in this case. In the Quest. rec. reform, n.
10 he appeals from Suarez, Lugo, etc., to Concina, who. along with others,
teaches the obligation of confession cum dubia sit confessio el ceria sit con­
fessionis obligatio (see Vindicia Alphonsiona). Meanwhile, as Ballerini
allows. St. Alphonsus in the Roman edition of his Moral Theology of the
year 1757. which is dedicated to Benedict XIV. releases the penit
the obligation of repeating the confession ut etiam communiter dicunt Suarez,
Sanches, Lugo, etc., etc. And Lugo writes (De PieniL Dbp. Ιβ. n. 53);
Communiter docent, omnes non teneri (quempiam) ad confitendum 'Imi (pecca­
tum) quod probabiliter judicat se ■ . ■ confessum jam fuisse. Cf. n. 59, where
the same subject is treated of: nihil frequentius apud theologos, etc. Hence

190

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

On the whole it is recommended in practice to mention doubtfull.v confessed sins, because their confession helps much to peace
of soul and allays all anxieties.
Quite distinct from the preceding question is the case in which
a man fully confesses as certain some sin which he has com­
mitted, but which neither he nor the confessor considered at
the time as a mortal sin; if afterwards, in consequence of better
instruction or advice, he discovers that the sin was mortal c.r
gencre suo, he is not obliged to repeat it, for it was already per­
fectly confessed and it is not necessary for the validity of con­
fession that the penitent or confessor should know that the
matter of a sin is grave, and it is the matter only that is involved
in this case.”
III. The sins which have been incurred after a doubtfully
valid Baptism must be confessed when Baptism is given con­
ditionally. Lehmkuhl treats very fully of this question and
remarks that on this point there can be no doubt after the late
decisions of the Apostolic See. Many theologians were inclined
to free, converts from the obligation of making a confession of
their sins on the ground that, their Baptism by a heretical min­
ister being doubtful, the sins committed after Baptism were
doubtful matter for confession; hence they thought that to
such converts, if they confessed matter sufficient in any way
for receiving validly the Sacrament or the grace of sanctification
through the Sacrament, absolution might be given conditionally;
the sententia communis of theologians is that within the given limits there is
no obligation, so that Ballerini justly exclaims: "Who would not rather
abide by St. Alphonsus when he follows those great theological luminaries
than when he clings to Concilia! ” “ And has Concilia thereby taught any­
thing new ? Indeed, since the whole question rests on a general principle,
are we to rate so low the common teaching of such great theologians as to
grant the privilege of clearer intuition to the judgment of the rigorist Con­
cilia?" Ballerini, Not® ad Gury, 1. e. n. 479. Cf. Op. Theol. Mor. I. c. n.
382 ss.
81 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 478: Sanchez, 1. c. Lib. I. c. 10, n. 69; Suarez, 1. c., etc.
Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 193, Q. 4.

ΤΠΒ CONFESSION OF DOUBTFUL BINS

191

this, they maintained, was the practice to be recommended in
order that converts might not be obliged in the beginning
of their conversion to undergo this often very severe ordeal of
a confession of a lifetime.
In answer to repeated questions the Apostolic See (in the
years 1715 and 1868) explicitly declared that converts who
receive conditional Baptism must after receiving this conditional
Baptism confess the sins of their past life and be absolved from
them nub conditione. This decision was given of course as an
answer to a particular case laid before the tribunal; but the
intention of the Holy Office, as is quite clear, was to pass a sen­
tence and give a universal decision which might apply to all
cases falling under this head ami which might be regarded in
future as the law on the matter, for this decree can be regarded
only as an authentic interpretation of the divine law by the
Head of the Church, and not as a local law of the Church or a
part of her discipline. Nor need any one be surprised that a
decree, though particular in form, has a universal application;
for a command of the Church will never prescribe anything as
necessary matter of confession which is not in accordance with
the divine law.*2 In order, then, to recognize the possibility
that such a precept is contained in the decree of 1715 it must
be granted that, in accordance with divine right, the sins incurred
after doubtfully valid Baptism must be submitted to the keys.
Such is what we learn from that positive declaration ; moreover,
reason confirms it, for, though one who is doubtfully baptized
has not a certainty but only a probability of receiving sacra­
mental absolution of his sins, it in no way follows that the
obligation to confess them is only probable and practically to
be disregarded; for the duty of confessing and performing the
assigned penance is for all more certain than that probability
of receiving the effects of the Sacrament. This does not go
82 Cf. S. Antonin. Summa, P. HI. Tit 14, c. 19, § 14.

192

THE RECIPIENT ON PENANCE

beyond a moral certainty taken in the wider sense, since it rests
ultimately on the validity of the Baptism and other conditions,
so that double can always be entertained about it. But the
duty of confessing and performing the assigned penance permits
no such doubt, since every obligation though it be based on
grounds only morally certain is sufficiently evident; otherwise
there would be an end of anything like obligation in human
affairs.
Now with regard to confession and absolution of sins in the
tribunal of penance Christ has handed over all power to the
jurisdiction of the Church, and it is by Baptism that men come
under this jurisdiction ; this is the external rite by which men
are admitted as members. But no one doubts that a man
remains subject to the jurisdiction of a social body into which
he has been admitted by the acknowledged external rites till
that reception is proved to be invalid. All, therefore, who have
in any way received Baptism (which they were desirous of re­
ceiving validly, though its validity admits of doubt) are as a
general rule undeniably and certainly subject to the Church's
jurisdiction and laws and are bound to comply with the divine
precept which ordains that their sins should be told in confession
and sentence passed upon them. In other words, the doubt
with regard to Baptism has this effect, that the Baptism can be
regarded as invalid in the sense that it can and ought to be
repeated conditionally lest the man should risk his eternal sal­
vation, but nowise in the sense that one who is doubtfully bap­
tized may consider himself free from the observance of these
precepts and obligations which are binding on the baptized by
the ordinance of God or the. Church; among these duties the
precept of confessing sins holds the principal place.”
“ Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 321 88.; Aertnys, 1. c. De Pœnitent. Art. III.
Confessio, n. 187, Q. I, and Acta S. Sedis. Vol. 4, p. 320. Cf. the note of
1'r. Ilaringer, C.SS.R., to St. Alphonsus’ Moral Theology, Lib. VI. Tract.
IV. De l’œnil. η. 488; Wilmers, Lehrbuch der Religion, Fourth Edition,
1880, Vol. IV. § 74, p. 074.

HI NS OMITTED WITHOUT 9AUI.T

193

As to the ceremonies to he observed in receiving a convert
into the Church, there is nothing to prevent the confession being
made first , followed by the conditional Baptism, then a summary
repetition of the accusation along with an act of contrition and
the conditional absolution. This order is allowed by the Holy
Office in a Rescript of November, 1875. The American Ritual,
on the other hand, gives the following order: 1. Renunciation
of heresy and profession of faith; 2. Conditional Baptism;
3. Confession with conditional absolution. This order was pre­
scribed by the instruction of the Holy Office for North America.”
26.

Sins Omitted through Forgetfulness or other Causes not

Blameworthy.

In order that the principles to be applied here may be under­
stood, it must first be observed that all grievous sins committed
after Baptism must be confessed; hence what has been said of
the material and formal integrity of confession as well as upon
the distinction between sins directly and indirectly remitted
must be carefully borne in mind.
Since the formal or subjective integrity of confession consists
in this, that al) mortal sins are mentioned which the penitent
can recall after a diligent examination of conscience, and of
which the enumeration is possible hie el nunc, it does not suffer
by inculpable forgetfulness on the part of the penitent : and the
same holds true of all other legitimate reasons which at any
time excuse the penitent from objective integrity.10
Sins which are required for objective though not for subjec­
tive integrity are considered as included in the confession and
are really remitted by the absolution, not directly, however,
but only indirectly.
Hence are derived the following principles : —
I. Mortal sins omitted without fault are and remain materia
“ Cf. Appendix nd Concit, plen. Baltim. II. in Colleel. Lac. T. IIJ. col. 55«.

194

ΤΠΕ RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

necessaria of confession, or the objective duty of confessing them
remains binding as before.
These sins are, of course, really forgiven, but, as we have
already observed, only indirectly or per concomitanliam through
their connection with the other mortal sins which have been
confessed and directly remitted. In the Sacrament of Penance
the remission of sins is effected by the absolution; but sins
which have not been mentioned do not directly fall under the
absolution since, properly speaking, they are unaffected by the
sentence pronounced by a judge who knew nothing about them.
Nevertheless the absolution pronounced rite et valide over cer­
tain sins is effectual because it is sacramental and because in
God’s providence no remission of sin takes place without an
influx of sanctifying grace into the soul which presents no obex.
Now sanctifying grace removes the whole reatus culpœ mortalis
and restores a man to perfect friendship with God and to his
claim in the heavenly kingdom. Thus valid absolution pro­
duces sanctifying grace in the soul and consequently the remis­
sion of all mortal sins staining the soul, even those inculpably
forgotten.
There remains now the precept of Our Lord to submit all
mortal sins to the power of the keys in the Sacrament of Pen­
ance; these forgotten sins have not been confessed as yet,
nor has the priest pronounced any direct sentence upon them.
Though these sins have been remitted indirectly, there still
remains the obligation ex jure divino of confessing them directly
to the judge in the tribunal of penance when they occur to the
mind again, not because these sins have been revived, but be­
cause the neglect of God's command in the matter would involve
a new sin. Tliis holds of all mortal sins inculpably omitted,
of their species, of all circumstances changing the species, as
well as of mortal sins, confessed indeed, but to a priest without
jurisdiction who either bona fide or for reasonable motives gave
direct absolution of the sins for which he had faculties, thereby

H1N8 OMITTED WITHOUT FAULT

195

remitting the others indirectly. Hence Alexander VII con­
demned the proposition : "Sins which have been omitted in
confession either from an imminent danger to life or for any
other motive need not be mentioned in the following confes­
sion." (Prop. XI. damn.) It is different, however, in the case
of reservation or censure for a sin remitted indirectly if confes­
sion be made to a priest equipped with the necessary faculties;
for in general absolution is given from reservation and censure,
and the penitent is probably freed from the reservation or cen­
sure attached to the sin forgotten; so that if the sin occur again
to his mind, he may be directly absolved by any confessor, even
a confessorius simplex.**
II. The obligation of confessing these forgotten sins does not
urge ralione sui “as soon as possible” (quam primum), not even
before receiving holy communion.
Of course many distinguished theologians” teach that who­
ever remembers a grave sin, even though not committed since
the last confession but forgotten, must confess that sin and
receive absolution before going to communion. The only reason
urged is that he is conscious of this sin ; and, according to the
Council of Trent, no one who is conscious of grave sin may
receive communion before having confessed where there is an
opportunity of making the confession. The defenders of this
view maintain that the Tridentine decree ° is so expounded and
understood by the whole Church ; they make an exception, how­
ever, for the case where confession cannot be made without risk
of scandal or infamy, as, for example, when a priest is already
celebrating Mass or a layman has approached the communion­
rail and cannot retire without exciting remark.
“Cf. Mazzotta, 1. c. De Oris Confess, cp. 5; Lehmkuhl. 1. c. n. 323 s.·,
Gury-Baller. II. De Pnen. n. 4M s.
*» Lugo, De Euchar. n. 128; Suarez. Disputat. 88«. 3; Lacroix, u. VII»;
Salman licenses, De Euch. c. 7, p. 3, n. 30, etc.
” Sess. XIII. cp. 7.

li»G

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

It is permissible, however, with St. Alphonsus and other
theologians (in less number) to follow the other “very probable
opinion ” which denies the obligation of confessing; for in reality
confession has preceded communion and the penitent has con­
fessed all the sins of which he was conscious, so that neither the
Council of Trent nor the divine law seems to demand more;
moreover, the forgotten sin has been remitted indirectly, the
penitent is in the state of grace, not merely by an act of contri­
tion but in virtue of the valid confession. The practice of the
faithful which is appealed to for the opposite side is not to be
regarded as of binding force, but rather a pious and praiseworthy
custom.
Though one may follow tuta conscientia the opinion which
denies the obligation, it is good to recommend to the faithfid to
confess before communion the sins which have been forgotten,
unless the extremely sensitive conscience of the penitent should
require another course to be adopted; the practice should not,
however, be imposed as binding.”
The new held by some, though a very few, modern theo­
logians, that it is quite sufficient to mention these sins without
receiving absolution, is not at all in harmony with the divine
institution of the Sacrament, for confession is not made with
the view of acquainting the priest with the sins committed, but
in order that they may be remitted by his judicial sentence.
Hence a serious argument for the necessity of confession can be
drawn only from the supposition that absolution is necessary.
Accordingly a penitent who confesses a new mortal sin immedi­
ately after absolution must be absolved again. Of course this
absolution may be put off to the next confession if the penitent
comes again to the same confessor to whom he told the sin.
Such delay, however, would hardly be recommended, since it
" S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. III. De Euchar. cp. II. Dub. II. n. 257;
Lehrnkuhl, 1. c. n. 325; Aertuys, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. De Euchar. Art.
III. n. ns. Q. II.

SINS OMITTED WITHOUT FAULT

197

would involve the penitent in the following dilemma: Either
he is not free to choose his confessor on the next occasion on
which lie approaches tile Sacrament, or if he goes to some other
priest he must confess the same sin again.
III. The duty of confessing sins inculpably omitted must
be fulfilled either when there is danger of death or at the
next confession, whether it be a confession of duty or of
choice.
Hence these omitted sins must be confessed, even if no new
mortal sin has been incurred, ratione sui when there is grave
danger of death and at the time which the Church prescribes
for the yearly confession ; for the annual confession is prescribed
not only in order to obtain sanctifying grace, but also to fulfill
the divine law', more clearly defined by the law of the Church.
In this case the precept would be binding under grave sin
because of the presence of materia necessaria, for a mortal sin
omitted even without fault is materia necessaria.
If, however, a confession be made before that time, either of
materia necessaria or materia libera, the confession must include
the previously omitted sin. This is so evident that no theolo­
gian ever dreamt of disputing or doubting it. Every confession
must be complete subjectively or formally, and by the declara­
tion of the Council of Trent this confession is not complete unless
it includes the sins previously omitted. For this subjective
integrity it is required that all mortal sins not yet subjected to
the keys which occur to the penitent should be confessed unless
some legitimate obstacle stands in the way. If these omitted
sins are kept back in the next confession following, that con­
fession is incomplete and sacrilegious. It cannot be argued that
these sins had been already indirectly forgiven, for, to speak
of no other objection, the same might be urged of sins already
condoned by an act of perfect contrition.’0
w Gury-Bnllerini, 1. o. n. ΙΙΙ.Ί; L<*hnikuhl, 1. c. n. 320.

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

198
27.

Reasons Excusing from Complete Accusation.

In the preceding paragraph we said that sins may be omitted
by the penitent without the confession becoming sacrilegious.
As there are reasons which can justify such silence, and release
the penitent from the obligation of confessing the sins of which
he is conscious, we devote this paragraph to the consideration
of these reasons.
I. No difficulty in the confession itself or internally connected
with it ever excuses from making a complete accusation; for
when Christ gave the precept that all grievous sins should be
confessed to His representatives in the tribunal of penance, He
intended that we should submit to the difficulties inherent in
such an accusation and bear them as a penance for our sins,
and this discipline is very wholesome for the penitent.
A difficulty of this kind would be, for instance, the great
shame felt in confessing a sin, even if it came only from the fact
of mentioning it to tliis or that particular priest ; the course then
to be adopted is to put off the confession, or to go to another
confessor, or to be brave and overcome the shame. This dif­
ficulty was recognized in the Council of Trent, and hence it was
declared that the difficulty of such a (perfect and candid) con­
fession and the shame of declaring one’s sins might well seem
great obstacles, but that they were counterbalanced by the
consolation and profit accruing to those who received the Sac­
rament worthily.81 The same may be said of the other diffi­
culties, such as the fear of losing the esteem of one’s confessor
or of receiving a rebuke from him. If such reasons as these
could be held to justify a want of integrity in the accusation,
the faithful for the most part would consider themselves at
liberty to make incomplete confessions, and the great object
for which this Sacrament had been instituted would to a great
extent be frustrated.82
** Ses». XIII. cp. 5.
«· Cf. <>ury, 1. c. n. 497; Aertnys, I. c. n. 101; and Lelimkulil, 1. c. art.
III. 11.327.

H ICA HON N EX· OSINO FROM COMPLETE ACCVSATION 199

Likewise, a large gathering of penitents (concursu? mnqnux
pa-nilenliuni) on the occasion of a great feast or indulgence is
never a reason for want of integrity in confession, for this is
not a case of necessity and it would expose the priest to the risk
of giving absolution to ill-disposed subjects. Nor can excep­
tion be made to the rule of integrity because people might con­
jecture from the time taken in the confessional that the penitent
had committed very many sins.“
II. Besides the case of physical impossibility, however, there
are others which justify an incomplete avowal of sin; they are
in general such external or accidental difficulties in connection
with the confession which render a complete accusation mor­
ally impossible, or involve grave harm to the penitent or the
confessor. When the impediment no longer exists the law of
(rod comes again into force; the moral impossibility of mak­
ing a complete confession does not altogether cancel the duty
of making it, but only suspends it, since the precept of confes­
sion is not one that is confined to any fixed time or state, but
extends over one's lifetime; hence mortal sins which have not
been confessed must be mentioned later when opportunity
offers.
III. In order that the excuse of moral impossibility rnay be
pleaded it is necessary, 1, that there should be a real or probable
risk of great harm ; 2, that it is impossible to find another con­
fessor to whom a full disclosure may be made without fear of
this particular harm; 3, that only those sins or circumstances
be kept back of which the avowal would cause harm; and
finally, 4, that the confession cannot be put off.
IV. Physical impossibility might result from, 1, inculpable
forgetfulness or inculpable ignorance, or only venially culpable
ignorance and forgetfulness. A man who is ignorant invinci­
biliter et inculpabiliter that the particular act which he calls to
S. Alph. I. c. L. VI. n. 185.

200

TUE RECIPIENT ΟΓ PENANCE

mind is sinful, or does not know that his sin must be confessed
with its number and species anil circumstances changing the
species, is not, bound to integrity in confession; there is still
less obligation on an uneducated and weak-minded penitent.
If, again, a man in examining his conscience cannot recall a
past sin, or, having recalled it, forgets about it in the confessional,
he is physically incapable of making a complete confession. (( )n
this point see the preceding paragraph.) It is to be noticed,
however, that in the case of gravely culpable negligence or care­
lessness in examining the conscience an imperfect confession is
invalid; if, for example, a man through his own fault is ignorant
how confession ought to be made, or was unwilling to make a
careful examination of his conscience. On the other hand, one
is not obliged to go to confession sooner in order not to forget
past sins, though frequent confession is much to be recommended ;
for we are bound only to accuse ourselves of the sins of which
we are conscious at the time of confession after making a dili­
gent examination of conscience.
2. There is, moreover, physical inability when there is immi­
nent danger of death (a) on account of the penitent’s condition
being such that if he should try to make a complete confession
he may die before receiving absolution ; (ύ) in a common danger,
such as shipwreck, before a battle, during a violent epidemic or
a swift conflagration. If in such a case there is no time to
hear the confession of each individual, it is enough for all to
make a general confession of their sins in order to receive absolu­
tion, and the priest may give it, using for all the one formula :
Ego vos absolvo. . . . Finally, (c) when the confessor himself is
near death and no other priest is at hand.
The following instructions may be observed by confessors in
actual practice: —
(a) In case of extreme necessity the accusation of some spe­
cific sin must be made so far as it is possible, but in the case of
a dying man who is still conscious the confessor should be more

R ISA RO N H ΒΧΟΙΤΒΙΧΟ FROM COMPLETE ACCPHATlOJf '201
solicitous about exciting contrition than about securing a com­
plete confession ; in the case, however, of a penitent deprived of
consciousness, especially if he gave no previous sign of repent­
ance, the confessor may give absolution conditionally and then
devote his care to the administration of Extreme Unction, which
in such a case is more certainly valid and efficacious than the
absolution itself ; meanwhile, however, there would be no reason
for not giving the absolution beforehand.
(ft) If only one confession has to be heard and there is immi­
nent danger, say, from an attack by an enemy, the confessor
should get the penitent to mention some one sin, to make an
act of contrition, and he should then absolve him, when under
the circumstances the absolution is a matter of necessity. If
there are several who wish to make their peace with God, as
before a battle or in a shipwreck, the following points are to
be observed: —
(a) If the danger is very pressing, the confessor must exhort
all to make acts of contrition and purpose of amendment, or,
still better, himself make along with them acts of contrition and
amendment, and get them to give some sign of their sorrow
and their self-accusation, as by raising their hands or striking
their breasts; then he may give them absolution in a body.”
(β) If there is time enough for each one to approach the con­
fessor, though not for making a complete confession, they
should be admitted singly in order the better to secure the
salvation of each one, in such numbers as the time will permit;
and in order that as many as possible, if not all, may be heard,
the accusation may be as short as possible; thus contrition
will be more genuine. Of course the penitents will be told
that in the event of their lives being spared they must make
up what was wanting to the integrity of the confession.”
M Reuter, Theol. Moral. Quadripartita, Tom. IV. Trac*. V. Q. IX. n. 331,
exempl.
06 Reuter, 1. c. n. 331, exempl. 5; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. η. 329.

202

TOE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

3. Physical inability may also arise from t he defectus loquelaof the dumb who cannot make a complete confession either by
writing or by signs. For them it is sufficient if they confess one
or other sin by signs. If the defect be only a stutter, the peni­
tent must confess as best he can.00
4. The defectus auditus of the deaf who cannot express them­
selves tior hear the questions which the confessor must put in
order that the confession may be complete, can be reckoned as
a physical inability. They are obliged to make a perfect con­
fession ex sua parte, i.e. to mention all that so far as they know
is required for a perfect confession, and thus they may not keep
back anything. Those who are merely hard of hearing are not
on the same footing with the deaf; their confession should be
made in a place where the voice may be raised without others
overhearing what is said. If, however, the confessor should
find out only in the course of the confession that the penitent
is hard of hearing, and he cannot take him to a more retired
place without fear of causing the bystanders to suspect that
some grave sin lias been confessed and so violating the seal, he
may resign himself to permitting an imperfect confession and
may refrain from putting questions. With women the confessor
must be particularly on his guard not to give grounds for evil
interpretation, since many people are quick to suspect wrong.
Thus it would be imprudent for him to admit women penitents
to confession at times when the church is less frequented ; since
absolute security for the seal of confession would even then not
be attainable, and suspicion would in al) likelihood be easily
aroused.
If the confessor is obliged to hear the confessions of deaf people
in the church and he has doubts as to the integrity of the accu­
sation, he must be more solicitous for the seal than for the in­
tegrity of the confession; hence he must refrain from questions
Compare § 20, Confessions of the Dumb who are Able to Write.

REASONS EXCUSING FHOM COMPLETE ACCUSATION 203
as to the number or circumstances of the sins and must give a
very slight and ordinary penance, so that those who overhear
his words may not be led to conclude that the penitent has been
confessing mortal sins."
5. Finally, ignorance of the language constitutes a physical
impossibility for those unable to find a confessor understanding
them ; for such people it is sufficient if they manifest their con­
trition and their sins as far as they can by signs. The con­
fessor, in default of any other priest knowing the language,
must admit them to confession and aliquoties absolve them even
if he can barely make out the most general accusation.
V. Λ moral impossibility exists, as before remarked, when
great harm ensuing to the penitent or to the confessor or to some
third person is to be feared from the completeness of the con­
fession ; the harm to be feared must preponderate over the mate­
rial integrity of the confession.
Therefore exception is made to the demand of integrity (com­
pleteness) in confession : —
1. When there is risk of infamy (periculum infamia), if the
penitent is exposed to lose the esteem he is held in not only by
the confessor but also by others. This may happen in various
ways, particularly if the penitent is so placed that a perfect con­
fession would be overheard by others, or if the time required for
a complete confession were so long that it would give rise to
unfavorable suspicions. Such a case is most likely to happen
when others know that the penitent has been in the habit of
confessing, and the latter, on account of those confessions being
invalid, is obliged to repeat them, while the time for a communion
which he cannot postpone without exciting comment, is quite
close.
A sick man, for instance, has confessed and is about to receive
»’S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 04-1 ; Prax. Conf. n. IM; II. Ap. u. 155;
Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. Π. n. 503, Not. ; Aertnye, 1. c. n. 297, Q. 1Π.

204

thκ

MMiiwwT or

penaxcb

the viaticum; he reveals to the priest that he has made several
sacrilegious confessions. To repeat these in full would excite
suspicions on the part of the bystanders who thought that he
was prepared to receive holy communion.
Or, to use another illustration, on the occasion of some solemn
and public communion in common one of the communicants
goes to the priest a short time before communion and reveals
that he has made a sacrilegious confession; since there is no
time to repeat it, it is enough if he makes an act of sorrow, men­
tions the sacrilegious confession and perhaps one or two of his
other sins; he must then be absolved and later, of course, make
a full confession.
Or, a priest is already at the altar, about to offer the holy
sacrifice, but remembers that he has mortal sins on his soul not
yet confessed; he makes a short act of contrition and confesses
his sins to an assisting priest who is standing close by him ; the
latter will then give absolution secretly. Outside the case of
necessity where a priest must celebrate Mass or a person is to
receive communion, the penitent is in nowise excused from mak­
ing a full confession on the ground that others, noticing the length
of time spent in the confessional, should suspect him of being
guilty of many grave sins.”
2. When there is danger of breach of the seal of confession
(periculum Iasionis sigilli), as when, which is a very rare case,
it should be foreseen that the confessor would break the seal,
or in the case where a confessor could not reveal his own sins
without at the same time revealing the sins of his penitent and
so breaking the seal.
The first case, i.e. where the confessor breaks the seal — with­
out, of course, intending to do so — might happen when the
priest speaks so loud that he can be overheard by those in the
neighborhood, and in spite of representations still fails to subdue
M Aertnys, 1. c. n. 105, Q. 1 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 330.

RE'/ls'OV.S EXCVSIJtO FROM COMPLETE ACCt'MTION 205

his voice, either because he is deaf, or because his zeal runs away
with him, or because he is afflicted with some defect of voice
which prevents him talking in a lower tone. This would be
only an indirect breach of the seal, certainly not to be sanctioned
but rather to be severely blamed as wrong and sinful. If, then,
the confessor speaks too loud, and continues to do so even after
the penitent has reminded him of the fault, the latter is justified
in keeping back part of his confession so that the confessor may
not. in the course of his questions reveal to the bystanders the
sins confessed.
If, however, the penitent has an exaggerated dread that his
confessor may break the seal by making revelations outside the
confessional, he is not justified in withholding his confession in
full, for he imagines a sin so horrible that the suspicion of it
could only be entertained in the case of heretics. This holds
true at least as far as a direct breach of the seal is concerned.
Λ penitent could hardly ever be dispensed from a full confes­
sion on account of such a fear, and if he were to reveal to
another confessor that such a motive had prompted him to
keep back some of his sins, the confessor could not receive this
as an excuse without further inquiry.
On the other hand, the danger of a breach of the seal on the
part of a priest who confesses the sins he has incurred in hearing
confessions is not beyond the bounds of possibility; in this case
he must pass over in silence those sins which would involve
such a risk.”
3. When danger of scandal (periculum scandali) is to be feared
either with respect to the priest or the penitent. Such a case
might occur where the penitent is afraid of sinning by taking
pleasure in thoughts against charity and especially against purity
when examining his conscience; his duty then would be
upon the number and circumstances even at
” Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 195, and Lehmkuhl, I. c. n. 332.

206

THE HECIPIENT OF PENANCE

of making an incomplete confession, for the natural law of avoid­
ing the danger of grave sin prevails over the positive law of mak­
ing a complete confession. The same reason may be a motive
to the confessor to be very prudent in questioning such peni­
tents so as not to expose them to commit new offenses against,
God in the very Sacrament of reconciliation.
If a penitent have well-grounded fears of the confessor's weak­
ness and that the latter will, if he hear a peccatum turpe, give
way to bad thoughts or cause him to sin, he is bound to avoid
such a confessor; if, however, in a case of necessity, he requires
his help and cannot find another confessor hic et mine, he may
omit those sins of which the avowal would be dangerous.
A priest who knows that his weakness exposes him to great
risks in hearing confessions must withdraw from the confessional
if it be at all possible, unless there be good reasons to suppose
that the fear arises from some unforeseen and exceptional inci­
dent ; in,such a case the confessor must omit the questions which
ordinarily would have to be put to secure the completeness of
the accusation.
“Dangers of this kind are not to be lightly and unreasonably
supposed, but only on solid grounds; and if it be a question of
danger to the confessor, only after very unmistakable indi­
cations.” 100
4. When a scrupulous penitent is always tortured with the
thought that his previous confessions have not been valid and
believes that his sins have never been properly confessed.101
Such penitents are to be forbidden to make detailed examina­
tion of conscience even though in consequence their confessions
should fall short of the necessary completeness.
5. When there is danger of bodily harm (damnum corporale
v* Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 331 ; Stolz, 1. c. Lib. I. 1’. TIL Q. II. nn. (18 ut (!!).
101 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 4S8; Aertnys, 1. c.; Elbel, Theol. Moral. Vol. III. P.
IX. De Pœnit. n. 150. See § 72, Treatment of the Scrupulous in Con­
fession.

HEASONS EXCUSING EHOM COMPLETE ACCUSATION 207

nr periculum vitœ). If, for instance, a long confession exposed
the priest to danger of infection, even though by other precau­
tions he might lessen the danger or perhaps quite reduce it, in
order to avoid the risk he may allow the penitent to state quite
briefly a few sins, thus contenting himself with an imperfect
confession, and may then give absolution; moreover, if the peni­
tent is so weak and exhausted by the illness as to be unable
without grave harm, or great increase of suffering and weaken­
ing of his condition, to examine his conscience carefully and so
make a perfect confession, the priest ought not to annoy him
by questions, but rather try to awaken contrition and then give
absolution even after an incomplete confession.'”
It was observed above (n. 4) that moral inability to make a
complete confession can only be admitted when the confession
cannot be put off and is urgent hie el nunc.
The confession may be regarded as urgent, 1, when the peni­
tent is in danger of death ; 2, when the precept of annual confes­
sion and communion is instant; 3, if the reception of holy
communion or the celebration of Mass cannot be put off without
confusion or scandal ; and, 4, if otherwise the penitent could not
again approach confession for a long period. Reuter
and
Lugo consider a delay of more than three days long enough for
a man in mortal sin to regard the case as urgent; indeed one
may consider the impotentia moralis as justified if a man were
compelled to remain in mortal sin one or two days.
There is a special difficulty in solving the question whether a
sin can or ought to be confessed which cannot be disclosed with­
out damaging the reputation of the partner of the sin in the eyes
of the confessor. Theologians do not agree in their opinions,
but are all unanimous in teaching, 1, that a penitent is obliged
to seek, if possible, another confessor to whom he can make a
complete confession and to whom the accomplice is unknown,
101 8. Alph. 1. c. ; Stotz and Avrtnye, I. c.
L. c. ii. 381. Cf. St. Alph. 1. c. n. 487.

208

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

end in this way save his neighbor's reputation; and, 2, that, if
the sin which cannot be confessed without injury to the char­
acter of the accomplice is not necessary matter of confession,
it ought not to be revealed unless the sin of the accomplice be
only slight and the confession of that particular sin be of pecul­
iar benefit to the penitent.
If, nevertheless, the accomplice be revealed to the confessor,
such revelation, in accordance with a very probable opinion, is
not to be regarded as a grave sin; for according to the teach­
ing of a number of theologians, whom St. Alphonsus approves
anti with whom St. Thomas seems to agree, it is not a gravely
sinful defamation to reveal the sins of another to one or other
trustworthy and upright man. Though many theologians de­
clare this to Im* gravely sinful if done without reason, the oppo­
site opinion is so well founded that it may be followed in practice
as quite probable.10· But if it is at all probable, it is much more
so when the sin of another is revealed to a priest who is bound
to the most inviolable secrecy by the highest and holiest ties.
Hence it follows that the revelation of the accomplice is cer­
tainly no sin when there is reasonable ground for it ; such would
be, for instance, if the confession made to a priest who knows
the accomplice were useful or necessary to the penitent, sup­
posing that no other confessor, to whom the accomplice is un­
known, were available; furthermore, the penitent is not bound
to seek another confessor unacquainted with the accomplice if
the search involves great trouble or loss.
With these premises we approach the question : May a peni­
tent, or ought he, confess a mortal sin which cannot be revealed
without at the same time revealing the accomplice to the con­
fessor, or may he omit the mention of that sin and so detract
from the completeness of his confession?
The greater number of theologians and those of most weight
,M Cf. Aertnys, Lib. III. Tract. VIII. De octavo l’ræcepto Decalogi, η.
534, Q. 2.

REASONS EXCUSING FROM COMPLETE ACCUSATION 209

teach that the revelation of the complex is not a reason excusing
from an entire accusation, since it is no violation of the jus nalurale which safeguards the reputation of another to reveal the
secret sins of one’s neighbor for good reasons to a prudent and
upright man, and the law of charity only forbids defamation of
one's neighbor without reason; in this case, however, there is a
causa jusla, and a very urgent reason, viz., the making of a per­
fect confession and the guidance of the conscience. The precept
of making a sincere accusation is potioris juris than the precept
of not defaming the neighbor, so that such defamation in face of
the need of making a complete confession is to be regarded as
of no account. Lugo rejects, as involving a pelitio principii,
the other argument advanced by the defenders of this view,
namely, that the penitent is simply making use of his right to
confess his sin, and that the accomplice by participating in the
sin has surrendered his claim to his reputation so far as it is
affected by the confession of the sins; he adduces another argu­
ment : that since the benefits resulting from confession are so
immense that. Christ has bound the penitent to endure the shame
of revealing his own sins, it is a natural consequence that to
obtain such benefits one may be allowed to reveal another’s
sin.105 The same is taught by St. Thomas,1" St. Bonaventure,
St. Antoninus, St. Bernard, Gerson, Cajetan, Henriquez,Suarez,107
Lugo,10’ Laymann, Vasquez,100 Toletus, Reginald Lessius, Tamburini, Salmanticenses,"0 Reuter."' St. Alphonsus 111 also holds
this view. At the same time they teach that the penitent is
bound, if he can manage it commode, to spare the reputation of
his accomplice by going to a confessor to whom the accomplice
is unknown; and St. Alphonsus expressly condemns the view
that this is matter of counsel and not of precept. Thus the
Lugo. 1. o. n. 308.
108 In IV. dist. 10, Q. 3, a. 2.
’o’ Diep. 34, Sect. 2.
104 Disp. 10, n. 308 sq.

100 Q- 9L <lub. 3, a. 2.
>» C. 8, n.J28.
*« P. IV. ii. 321.
»’ L. c. ii. 489.

210

TilK RECIPIENT or PENANCE

penitent, is freed from the obligation of seeking out another con­
fessor only (o) when there is danger of death or when the annual
confession can no longer be put off ; (b) when the penitent by
refraining from communion or from the celebration of Mass
would be exposed to misinterpretation and shame ; (c) when a
penitent is in a state of mortal sin, and would be obliged to re­
main in that condition one or two days (per biduum imo diam
per diem) till he could find another confessor ; (d) when the com­
plex may be presumed to have given up his claim to his good
reputation, as in the case of a brother who having sinned with his
sister knows that she will not go to another confessor without her
mother; (e) when a priest being accustomed to celebrate every
day, and a lay person being accustomed to communicate daily,
would find much difficulty in omitting these, pious acts; (/) when
a person finds great repugnance in revealing his or her state of
soul to another confessor; (g) when otherwise the penitent
would lie deprived of a jubilee or other indulgence; (A) mothers
or husbands may be excused when through a wish to have coun­
sel or sympathy they reveal the sins of their children, etc., to a
confessor who knows the latter, especially when they find it
hard to approach another confessor;, (i) when the seeking of
another confeasor involves a privation of consolation and peace
for the penitent accustomed to a wise and helpful spiritual di­
rector. Hence it is evident that a penitent is rarely, if ever,
obliged to seek another confessor under the given circumstances.1”
The other opinion, that it is not allowed to reveal the accom­
plice, and in consequence that one is not bound to mention a
mortal sin which cannot be confessed without revealing the
accomplice, is taught, among others, by Canus, Petrus Soto,
Ledesma, Navarrus, Valentia, Banez, etc. Busenbaum and
Mazzotta deemed the opinion probable.1” These theologians
urge that it is a violation of the natural law to injure the good
m S. Alph. 1. c. 490 ; Gury-Baller. II. 500, Q. II.
IM De Pœnit. Diep. I. Q. IV. cp. 7, § 1 abinitio.

REASONS EXCUSING FROM COMPLETE ACCUSATION 211

name of another, and hence that the obligation of not inflict­
ing such injury is poliaris juris than the duty of making a com
plete confession, since this is founded on a positive law.
It need not be imagined, however, that this opinion is the
benignior, because it releases from the duty of making a perfect
confession ; considered closely the case takes on quite another
aspect, for:—
1. It requires the penitent to seek out another confessor to
whom the accomplice is unknown even when this involves great
trouble, to the penitent, for as all will concede, the integrity of
the confession must he preserved so far as it. is possible, and only
the damage and hardship to the penitent which makes the con­
fession morally impossible excuse from making a complete con­
fession. Hence this incommodum must be grave and much
greater than that which in the other view allows the defamation
of the accomplice.
2. If, however, a man cannot confess to another confessor
and is resolved to conceal the sin or its circumstances in order
to save his neighbor’s reputation, there arises a greater diffi­
culty, the obligation of confessing the same sin again; for in
order to save his neighbor's good name a man may only conceal
that circumstance which affects the reputation of his neighbor,
and this is the unanimous teaching of all theologians; for ex­
ample, if a man has committed incest, and has no other means
of confessing it, he must mention in his first confession that he
has fallen into a sin of impurity, passing over in silence the cir­
cumstances which make it incest. He must, however, when
opportunity is presented of going to another confessor, mention
the circumstance of the incest, and this cannot be done without
repeating his former accusation of having fallen into a sin against
purity.
3. It is also to be observed that if defamation of one’s neighbor
excuses from a complete confession, and if in consequence a
particular sin may not be revealed (for such is the foundation of

212

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

this opinion), the confessor is not allowed to put questions which
may cause an indirect revelation of the accomplice, especially to
ill-instructed penitents who would have no idea of how to parry
the questions. Now if these questions are to be avoided by the
confessor, he may not inquire into the occasions of sin, or he
must leave to the judgment and discretion of the penitent how
far the latter is bound to answer the questions put to him. The
consequences, as any one may see, implicate the direction of
penitents in great difficulties, and on that account no one can
admit either of these methods of action.
Now the confessor, in order to be faithful to his important duty
of withdrawing his penitents from the occasions of sin, and in
order not to be deceived by a penitent who, left to his own judg­
ment, will not realize the danger of the occasions, must question
his penitent with perfect liberty and undeterred by the fear of ob­
taining any knowledge of the accomplice in sin, if it is probable
though not certain that such defamation of the accomplice is
not a reason dispensing from the integrity of the confession.
This opinion is certainly probable.
The champions of this view are far from denying that the
natural law forbids the injuring of another's good name, but,
they maintain, such injury is' forbidden only when there are no
reasonable grounds for inflicting it ; it must be proved that the
precept of making a complete confession is a sufficient reason,
since such defamation to a confessor is certainly not objectively
grave. That this ground is a reasonable one is evident from
many weighty considerations : —
1. Good reasons have been already offered in the difficulties
wliich are presented when perfect liberty is not allowed in con­
fessing or asking the circumstances and occasions of sins.
2. Further examples may be easily imagined in which the
defamation of another resulting from the penitent’s confession
is not to be considered; for no one would dream, for example,
of releasing a son from the obligation of making a perfect con­

REASONS EXCUSING FROM COMPLETE ACCUSATION 213

fession because it might be concluded from the gravity and
nature of his sins that his parents had brought him up very
badly ; nor would a religious be excused for fear his confessor
should entertain the suspicion that his superiors were neglecting
their duty towards him. For such defamation may well he
considered as of little moment, since the confessor is hound to
the most stringent silence and can make absolutely no use of
what he hears in confession.
3. Moreover, the precept of making a complete confession is
so severe that the penitent may never transgress it in order to
safeguard his own good name, and is obliged to overcome the
fear of losing it. But, according to the universal teaching, a
man is justified in self-defense to do a lawful act even if thereby
he injure the character of his neighbor if there is no other way
of shielding his own or regaining it when lost; hence it must be
allowable to injure the reputation of another if the end in view
is to make a perfect confession ; or the same cause (the integrity
of the confession) which binds me to injure my own good name
gives me the right of disregarding any infamy that may accrue
to others in discharging tills duty.115
4. Finally, since it was in early days the practice of confessing
to one’s parish priest, and he was generally acquainted with all
his subjects, the precept of making a complete confession would
have had no meaning if the other opinion were tenable in respect
to sins which were difficult to confess. Is it possible that Christ
should give a command which in practice turned out so nuga­
tory?"·
From what has been already said on this subject it follows
1,6 Cf. Lugo, Disp. 10,1. c. ; Tamburini, Meth. conf. 1. 2, c. 9, J 2.
**' Thus Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 334 ss.; cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 190, Q. 10; Lugo.
1. c. Ballerini, however, 1. c. n. 499. Q. I, concludes thus in his notes : Ergo.
MM-lusis alus incommodi·, integra manere ridetur obligatio cirruinstantiam
illam tacendi quando ex ejusdem confessione alterius infamia consequatur.
Cf. Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. (</e Complicis manifestat.·) u. 439-450.

214

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

that the confessor, if ho thinks fit, is quite nt liberty to put ques­
tions on the circumstances or occasions of sin; moreover, that
penitents ought not to be instructed to conceal circumstances
which may injure the reputation of the accomplice with the
confessor; they ought rather to be encouraged to make a com­
plete confession to their regular confessor if they are unable to
find another.
If, however, some one acting upon the undoubted authority
of theologians who teach the other view wishes to make his
confession accordingly, he cannot be blamed if he has formed a
didamen conscientia;, and he cannot be forced to renounce his
opinion.
Again, if a confessor remarks that a penitent is familiar with
his theology and makes his accusation in accordance with the
other opinion, and if he is satisfied that said penitent is capable
of forming a judgment about his obligations, he may more easily
omit certain questions and leave the penitent free to follow his
own opinion.
What has been said with respect to the accomplice’s reputa­
tion applies equally to those who have been in any way an occa­
sion of sin to the penitent. There are cases in which the penitent
cannot give the specific character of his sin without at the same
time disclosing the sin of another which has been the object or
occasion of his own sin. A man, for instance, discovers his un­
married sister to be in confinement and maltreats her so that
abortus follows; he cannot explain the nature of liis crime fully
in the confessional without revealing his sister's sin and so de­
stroying her reputation in the mind of the priest. Although
some even of those who teach that the integrity of the confession
may take precedence of the accomplice’s character arc unwilling
to grant it in this particular case, yet there is at least a proba­
bility that the obligation of integrity prevails in any case.11’
“’Cf. Lugo, Diep· 16. n. 420; Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. n. 502; Lcliinkuhl
L c. n. 338.

TUE EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE

215

Article III
THE MEANS TO BE EMPLOYED IN ORDER TO MAKE A PERFECT

CONFESSION

28.

The Examination of Conscience.

Since the penitent is obliged to make a complete confession
of his mortal sins, as far as lies in his power, there naturally
devolves upon him the duty of examining his conscience. Re­
garding the examination of conscience the following points are
to be noted : —
I. The penitent is bound under pain of mortal sin to prepare
for confession by a serious and careful examination of con­
science, and he must devote to this examination such diligence
as a prudent man would ordinarily devote to any important
business ; hence in order that the omission of mortal sins in the
accusation may not be attributed to sinful neglect, diligentia
mediocris, as it is called, or diligentia moralis is required, not
such as would make the practice of confession hateful or unduly
burdensome.
The proof for this is supplied by the Council of Trent,11’ and
it is clear that if mortal sins are to be confessed they must be
recalled to the mind. Theologians observe, however, that when a
man has examined his conscience with moral diligence, but still
believes that further examination would reveal more sins, he
is not obliged to spend more time in examining his conscience;
otherwise a penitent who had neglected confession for many
years would have to examine his conscience for days and still
fail to do his duty; such a conclusion is obviously wrong.11’
Sporer 120 even goes so far as to teach that a man who has
n> Sess. XIV. cp. 5 et can. 7 (examen diligens).
"» Lugo, I. c. Disp. 16, nn. 590-59-1; cf. Laym. Lib. V. Tr. 6. 8.
L. c. n. 366.

216

THK RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

used moral diligence in examining his conscience and has made
his confession, ami afterwards cannot recall whether he men­
tioned or not some particular sin, is not bound to confess it,
because the presumption is that he has confessed it along with the
other sins. If, however, he have strong misgivings on other
grounds and cannot settle his doubt as to whether he has con­
fessed the sin or not, he is always obliged to mention that sin,
if there is no doubt of its having been committed, in the next
confession.
II. The care which ought to be employed in this examination
is not the same for all classes of penitents; it varies according
to the circumstances of the penitents: more especially accord­
ing to — (1) the state of conscience and the habitual purity of
life; (2) the time elapsed since the last valid confession ; (3) the
education, the knowledge (in religious matters especially), the
intelligence of the penitent; (4) the state of health.121
1. One who seldom falls into mortal sin may satisfy himself
with a less strict examination of conscience, especially if he be
in the habit of making a daily examination of conscience; for
if a penitent of this kind falls into mortal sin, he will immedi­
ately recall it; and one who is morally certain that he has not
sinned mortally is, strictly speaking, not bound to any examina­
tion of conscience, but he must be careful to offer sufficient
matter for confession. Though this is quite correct in theory,
in practice the penitent is strongly advised to make a careful
examination of conscience in order to rid himself of his smaller
faults and to reap greater fruit from the Sacrament.
2. The longer the period over which the examination is to ex­
tend the more time and care must be expended in this prepa­
ration, but it is not to be laid down as a principle that a man
who lias not confessed for a year is bound to be twelve times
as long in his preparation as the man whose last confession was
a month before.
M> Mazzotta, 1. c. Disput. I. Q. II. cp. I.

THE EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE

217

3. Leas instructed or quite uneducated people are not obliged
to so careful and searching an examination as the better in­
structed ; they are quite incapable of examining their conscience,
ad impossibilia nemo tenelur. If an educated penitent comes to
the Sacrament unprepared, the confessor should with all proper
consideration send him away again to prepare himself by a care­
ful examination of conscience, unless there should be solid
grounds for supposing such a step inopportune; but only grave
reasons justify such toleration, for, though the sins committed
might be ascertained by questions, there is no moral certainty
that such a confession is a perfect one. A penitent who has
not been to confession for a long time and is leading a worldly
life cannot without preparation answer at once and correctly
whether he has committed such or such sins. If the penitent is
uneducated, or, although educated, yet ignorant in religion, and
has taken absolutely no pains to acquire a knowledge of his sins,
he must be treated in the same way; if, however, he has taken
some pains in the matter, the confessor may supply the defect
by questions ; for an uneducated man left to himself will, even
after a long examination of conscience, never succeed so well
as when guided by the prudent questioning of an experienced
and skillful confessor who will do the work in a much shorter
time. If, then, the confessor sees that he can procure by ques­
tioning a perfect confession such as the penitent left to his own
resources could hardly make after long examination, he should
help him, all the more if there is reason to fear that the peni­
tent would be frightened by the postponement of his confession,
ami might be deterred from confession, at least for a time, by
the difficulties attending a careful examination of conscience.
This method, the result of great experience, is confirmed by the
Catechismus Romanus:
“If a priest remarks that such peni­
tents are quite unprepared, he should dismiss them with very
153 l’art II. cp. 5, n. 60.

218

TUE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

gentle words and advise them to come again after spending some
time in thinking over their sins. If they maintain that they
have already exercised all diligence in examining their con­
science, he should hear them, since there is reason to fear that
if sent away they might not return, and he may with more rea­
son hear their confessions if they show any signs of wishing to
reform their life; then they may be urged to accuse themselves
of their carelessness and promise for the future to make up for
their faults by a careful examination.”
Reuterobserves on this subject: “Besides, experience
teaches, as is well remarked by Vasquez and Lugo, that a pru­
dent confessor can accomplish more with most penitents and
uneducated people by a few questions than they can themselves
after a long examination. Hence such penitents when they give
any signs of fervor ought not to be easily dismissed in order to
examine themselves again, even when defects are noticed.”
Sporer,M writes: “Uneducated and inexperienced penitents arc
unable to make such an exact examination as the more edu­
cated; hence they should be helped by the confessor.” Segneri,,M too, warns the priest not to send away ignorant penitents
to make a fresh examination of conscience, unless for the mast
urgent reasons, since, on the one hand, they may be frightened
away and never come to confession again, and, on the other
hand, the confessor himself can easily supply for their deficiency
by his zeal.
Although a penitent knows that he will be questioned by his
confessor, he is none the less bound to examine his conscience,
since otherwise he would be exposed to the danger of giving
wrong and insufficient answers or of omitting a great deal ; he
may, however, permit himself a little less care, especially with
regard to the sins common to people in his state of life.12·
L. c. n. 311.
Theol. Sacram. Tom. III. De Pœnit. n. 365.
’» Instructio Pœnit. cp. II.
Mazzotta, 1. c. ; cf. Suarez, Diep. 22.

ΊΊΙΓ. EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE
No one is bound to write hit» sins even if he should he afraid
of forgetting them; nor, if sin has been committed with an­
other, is there any obligation to consult with the accomplice in
sin to determine the number of sins; so, too, one who has missed
Mass the whole year is not bound to count up the feasts in the
calendar, for this would be diligentia extraordinaria such as the
Council of Trent does not demand.'”
4. Those who are prostrated by illness and through weakness
or pain cannot review their past life are not obliged to make an
exact examination of conscience; indeed the confessor should
only put to them a few questions according to their condition.
If, however, they regain their health, they must supply what
was wanting in their accusation; if, after receiving absolution,
other mortal sins occur to their mind, they should confess them
and get absolution. In general the sick are not required to
make so careful an examination as others; hence the priest
should not yield when they wish to put off confession from one
day to another on the plea of examining their conscience better;
usually this is only a pretext for putting off the confession, and
does not arise from anxiety or eagerness to prepare well, but
from fear; such persons must be prepared by the priest himself
for absolution and the other Sacraments.'”
III. A penitent who is guilty of gross neglect in the examina­
tion of conscience makes per se an invalid and sacrilegious con­
fession; he must, of course, be sufficiently conscious of such
neglect in order to incur this sin. The malice of the offense
consists in the risk of omitting some mortal sin, and so, though
none may have been actually left out, the penitent has sinned
gravely by consciously exposing himself to the danger.
IV. In order to make a good examination of conscience the
penitent should adopt some system; the simplest and easiest
method is to go through the commandments of God and of the
127 Mazzotta I. c.; Aertnys, 1. c. De Pœnit. ep. III. § 3, n. 180.
Aertnye, l.c. De Pœnit. cp. III. art. III. § 2, η.18β.

220

TUE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

Church, the various kinds of sins (especially the Seven Capital
Sins), and (he nine ways of participating in sin ; it is also recom­
mended to call to mind particular hours and days. Theologians
give many other methods besides for this examination. Router
recommends the penitent to recall where he was each day, what
was done, and what sins were committed by thoughts, wishes,
and desires, words, and works; how he has conducted himself at
home, in church, with his neighbors; the author considers (hat
by this means repetition will be avoided. To examine the con­
science according to this method would be to exercise not only
diligentia sufficiens but magna omnino diligentia.™1 Sporer, approv­
ing the method recommended by Gobat, offers a compendious
system for penitents who lead a fairly uniform existence and for
whom the examination of conscience extends over a longer time,
some months or half a year. The penitent should consider
three periods : (1) an ordinary working-day ; (2) a Sunday; (3) an
exceptional day in which he has traveled, done some particular
business, been present at a wedding or a dinner, etc.'30 One who
has only to examine a short interval may call to mind how he
has sinned against God, his neighbor, and himself, by thoughts,
words, and deeds.
V. The following directions are given by approved moralists
to determine whether any carelessness in the examination of
conscience is a mortal or venial sin and whether in consequence
the confession has been valid or not.
1. Those may rest in perfect security who, being neither too
strict nor too lax, experience no misgiving or anxiety on the care
which they have devoted to the examination of their conscience.
2. If a man doubts whether he has been guilty of more or
less carelessness and discovers after confession that he has
omitted more sins than he has confessed, he must acknowledge
,w I^hinkuhl. 1. c. n. 344.
,M Cf. State, Tribunal Panitentia, Lib. I. P. I. Q. I. art. 9, Praxis examinis
pro Confessione, and Lib. I. P. III. Q· HI· art. 1 ss. Syllabus peccatorum.

THK EXAMINATION OF CONSCIENCE

221

himself guilty of gravely sinful neglect; if, however, he him con­
fessed more sins than he has omitted, it may be assumed that
he has not been guilty of great carelessness.
3. If a penitent's last confession was made one or two weeks
before and he accuses himself of mortal sins, giving the number
of times in quite a vague and doubtful fashion, e.g., I have com­
mitted sins against holy purity three or four times, there is a
strong suspicion that he has been gravely careless in the exami­
nation of his conscience.”1
It should be noticed that if a penitent, from experience of
his own weakness, is afraid that by a prolonged examination of
his sins he will again consent to them, he may confine himself
to a rapid glance at them, though he knows that for want of
further examination many will be omitted, since in any case the
risk of committing sin must be avoided. A confessor must ob­
serve the same guardedness in putting questions on sins against
the angelic virtue, as we shall see later.
If the penitent is troubled with scruples, it is better for him
not to go so thoroughly into his examination of conscience,
otherwise confession would become too burdensome, and experi­
ence shows that such penitents become only more confused, the
more they examine themselves; indeed they should be forbidden
any long and anxious attention to themselves.
Let the confessor impress upon worrying souls that the great
thing for them is to have the wish to confess all, that God
recognizes the good will, and that this is shown by praying for
grace to make a good examination of conscience, and that even
if a sin be forgotten without any fault it is remitted, and that
the time between confession and communion should not be
occupied with the recalling of one's past sins, but that the mind
should be fixed on the future.'”
'»» Mazzotta, 1. c. Disp. I. Q. II. cp. I (Lacroix); Reuter, Theol. Mor. P.
IV. n. 311 ; Sporer, 1. c. ». 307.
,M Compare Renninger-Gopfert, Paatoraltheologie, I Bd. I Tl. § 06.

222

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

29. Invalid Confessions.

Confessions may be either invalid or merely defective. Π
only defective but not invalid, the defect should be supplied,
but there is no need to repeat the confession ; if, however, they
are invalid, they must be repeated. This repetition need not
always be made in the same manner.
A confession may be invalid through the fault of the penitent
or through that of the confessor.
A confession may be invalid through the penitent's fault : —
1. By a gravely sinful defect in the examination of con­
science.
2. By culpable and deliberate concealment of anything which
ought to be confessed, or by a gravely sinful lie in confession.
3. By the want of contrition and purpose of amendment;
and this defect is to be found among recidivi as well as those
who refuse restitution or reconciliation with their enemies.
4. By want of good will to carry out the penance imposed,
and to undertake other duties which bind under pain of griev­
ous sin, if the good will is wanting at the time of receiving abso­
lution.
5. By ignorance of those truths which must be known neces­
sitate medii in order to gain salvation.
6. By receiving absolution while still under a sentence of
excommunication. Among the principal effects of such a sen­
tence must be counted privatio sacramentorum, so that any one
receiving the Sacraments in this condition incurs a mortal sin
by breaking the law of the Church. One may be saved, how­
ever, from grievous sin in this matter by inculpable ignorance,
fear of death or mutilation, great disgrace or serious loss of for­
tune, etc., as well as by the necessity of obeying the law of
yearly confession and communion when there is no priest with
faculties for absolving from censures, for the law of the Church
is not so severe as to bind its subjects to suffer grievous damage.

INVALID CONFESSION»

223

It is illicit and even sacrilegious for an excommunicated
person to receive the Sacraments, though the reception is valid
except in the case of the Sacrament of Penance. But when
the excommunicated person is in good faith and thinks he may
receive absolution, such absolution is valid, it being presumed
of course that he goes to confession with the necessary dis­
positions. Such a case might occur when, through invincible
ignorance or forgetfulness, he omits to mention the censure of
excommunication, or when the priest does not know of it or
forgets for the moment that such a censure is attached to cer­
tain sins, or, again, even where the priest knowingly absolves
the penitent, though unprovided with faculties for the case,
because the penitent is in one of the cases of necessity men­
tioned above and the priest feels it his duty to give absolution,
or even if ex malitia he absolves a penitent who believes him
to have faculties.1”
On the part of the confessor the confession may be made in­
valid if he has not the necessary jurisdiction or intention, or if
he omits something essential in the formula of absolution, or if
through deafness or inattention or the indistinctness of the
penitent’s utterance he has not understood any sin. If, how­
ever, through no fault of the penitent the priest missed some
sins, even mortal sins, the confession would, according to the
probable opinion, be valid if he heard part of the accusation;
those sins, however, which had not been understood ought to
be repeated. If in the course of confession the penitent ob­
serves that the confessor does not understand because he is
asleep or distracted, the penitent must repeat what the priest
has failed to hear; if, in spite of this, the penitent were to con­
tinue the confession (mala fide), it would be sinful and invalid
and ought to be repeated. If at- the end of the confession the
penitent sees that the confessor has been sleepy or distracted
133 Cf. Gury-Ballerini. II. De Censuris, n. AGO, Not. 1-4, also n. 480, Q. 7;
S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 430, in fine ; Aertnys, I. c. De Censuris, n. 39.

224

THE IIECIPIENT OF PENANCE

and so has missed some of the sins, though he does not know
which have been missed, he must begin again unless the ac­
cusation has been a long one, in which case it is enough if the
penitent repeat what he thinks the confessor may have missed,
for it may be presumed that Christ never intended to prescribe
perfect confession when attended with such inconvenience.'”
With respect to repeating confessions the following principles
are accepted : —
I. If a confession is invalid, the sins mentioned in it must be
repeated; otherwise, the ensuing confession is invalid, for those
sins were never remitted by the power of the keys, and in con­
sequence they must be again submitted to the tribunal.
II. The duty of repeating a confession urges as soon as there
is a moral certainty that said confession was null ; if, how­
ever, the confession has certainly been made and there is doubt
only as to its validity, the presumption is in favor of its validity.
It is, however, advisable to repeat a doubtfully valid confession.
There is no difficulty where the penitent has willfully con­
cealed or never intended to give up a mortal .sin or never
avoided a voluntary occasion of sin, and in other such cases,
for the confession was unquestionably invalid and sacrilegious.
It is more difficult, however, to determine at times on the
validity of a confession when the penitent has frequently re­
lapsed without being voluntarily and continually in the occasion
of sin. If a penitent shortly after confession falls frequently
into sin on the first occasion that offers, without making any
resistance, the presumption is that the confession was deficient
in the required contrition and purpose of amendment, and that
in consequence it was invalid. If, however, after confession
he usually makes some effort, the nullity of the confession is
not certain, and the confessor may not force him to repeat the
confession, but he will do well to counsel him to do so when his
,M 8. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 498, 499 ; Lugo, Disp. 16, n. 607 ; Suarez, Disp.
28, 8. 2, u. 12 (eententia communis).

INVALID CONFESSIONS

225

dispositions improve and he is earnest in his contrition and in
his efforts to make a permanent reform.”5
III. Invalid confessions must be repeated in their entirety
when new confession is made to another priest who has no knowl­
edge of the sins contained in the preceding invalid confessions,
for this knowledge is necessary in order to pronounce judgment ;
hence it is not enough for a penitent to accuse himself merely
of having made one or more invalid confessions.
IV. If the confession is made to a priest who has heard the
invalid confessions, and in consequence has already passed sen­
tence on the individual sins and has at least a knowledge in
confuso of the penitent's state, it is sufficient to summarize the
accusation of previously confessed sins in the form, "I accuse
myself of the sins already mentioned in . . . confession,” men­
tioning if the previous confessions were invalid through want
of integrity, and supplying this want by a distinct and separate
accusation of the sin or sins omitted.15* The previous confes­
sions were sacramental, since they were made with a view to
obtain absolution, though deprived of their sacramental efficacy
through the fault of the penitent; hence a general repetition of
them in connection with the knowledge which the confessor had
of the individual sins may be considered as sufficient to form
a judgment. If a penitent wishes to make a general confession,
the distinction between the usual confessor and any other is
not of so great moment, except where the confessor or the peni­
tent is intent upon the minimum necessarium ; the usual confessor
of the penitent may, however, be satisfied with less care, since
he knows already the previous sins of his penitent. In this
case, however, he must have notitiam saltem confusam status
pœnilentis; for this it is not necessary that he should be able to
18i Cf. §§ 63. 64, where the recidivi are treated of. and Lehmkuhl, I. ·'. Sacr.
Pœnit. Sect. II. cp. II. Confessio, art. III. § 2, n. 347.
180 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 502 ; II. A. n. 44; Lacroix, 1. c. n. 216; Lugo. Disp. 16,
u. 638 : Elbe), n. 253, etc.

226

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

recall the number and circumstances of the sins in question: a
remembrance of the different species and their number in gen­
eral suffices.
The confessor will have acquired this notitia confusa from
previous confessions and from the questions which he puts to
the penitent. Such knowledge is sufficient in so far as it is
connected with a knowledge of previous sins, and that will be
the case where the general confession is made to the same priest.
If, however, the priest can only vaguely call to mind his past
treatment of the penitent, he should put some questions to him
in order to form an idea of the state of his conscience ; but he
may absolve without this precaution, if from the penances which
he has been in the habit of giving to his penitent he can form
a judgment as to the state of his soul.”’
The same plan may be adopted in the case In which a man
after making his confession is sent away without absolution,
and afterwards returns to receive it, the confessor in the mean­
time retaining no recollection of the sins. Undoubtedly in such
a case a notitia confusa is sufficient, and on the strength of it ab­
solution may be given. Nay, more: if the penitent’s absolution
had been delayed for some reason not connected with want of
necessary dispositions, the confessor might be satisfied with the
remembrance that the penitent was in right dispositions for
absolution and had received a penance in proportion to the sin.
Of course it is always understood that no fresh mortal sin has
been committed in the interval between the confessions ; other­
wise it must be confessed and a new act of sorrow and resolution
of amendment must be made.”’
On the same principles we may answer the question already
discussed as to whether a man who recounts his sins (mere his­
torice) to a priest (qua amico) — to obtain advice, for instance
ir Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. n. 502, dub. 2 ; also Suarez, Lugo, Vasquez, Layinann,
aud other theologians.
1U Suarez, Disp. 22, Sect. 0, aud Lugo, Disp. 10, Sect. 15, n. 030.

INVALID CONFESSIONS

227

— is bound to retail them explicitly if in consequence of the
priest’s advice he desires to receive absolution; or the question
might be put thus: What knowledge or recollection of the sins
must the priest, have so that on the strength of a perfunctory
accusation couched in general terms he may give absolution?
Many theologians, among them Lacroix and St. Alphonsus,
require a distincta memoria of all the sins, because the preceding
confession was not made to the priest as a judge in the Sacra­
ment, and so cannot be a sacramental confession; but a sac­
ramental confession is made only when the. confessor has a
distincta memoria of the sins narrated at the time when the sum­
mary of the accusation is made ; if the priest remembers them
only in confuso or ex parte, the penitent must once more make a
distinct accusation of his sins in ordine ad absolutionem. The
opposite view is taught by Lugo, who maintains that it is com­
munis, for almost all theologians teach that the memoria confusa
is sufficient whatever may have caused the defect in the previous
confession. He grants that the mere narration of the sins is in
no way sacramental, that no judicial accusation has been made,
that it is merely a friendly confidence; this previous, though not
sacramental, narration which still remains memoria non omnino
distincta, may become in a certain manner sacramental by the
ensuing (summarized) accusation, sufficient for the purposes of
the Sacrament; not because the previous narration was sac­
ramental in itself, for it was not so, but in so far as the later
accusation, joined with the recollection which the confessor has
of the sins previously mentioned, supplies the priest with the
knowledge necessary for the Sacrament.,3e Thus Lugo combats
successfully the objections and reasons of his opponents.
Still in Lugo's proof and that of his supporters the difficulty
must not be overlooked that the narration has no sort of relat ion
,m Lugo, 1. c. Disp. 16. nn. 637. 638. Cf. Suarez, De Prenit Disp. 22,
Sect. 6, ii. 5; Coninck, Disp. 4, n. 45; Illsung. De 1’ceuit. Disp. 6, n. W®»
etc.

228

THE RECIPIENT OF

penance

to the Sacrament of Penance, either in the mind of th·· narrator
or that of the priest, and that in consequence the reasons brought
forward in the case above mentioned are not quite convincing.
Aertnys consents to Lugo’s decision — that is, lie considers the
repetition of the accusation as unnecessary only when the con­
fessor at the time when the summary of the sins is made has
a distincta memoria eorum, since the general accusation of the
penitent along with the notitia distincta of the confessor is
equivalent to a distincta confessio.'*0 And Lehmkuhl regards
Lugo’s view as quite probable only when the priest is enter­
taining hopes as he listens to the narration of getting the man
to make a sacramental confession, though such a thought may
be very far from the man’s mind at the time. The accusation
of the penitent may not be intentionally sacramental, while the
attention of the priest has already begun to assume a judicial
and sacramental form and is inchoative, at least, a distinctly
judicial investigation such as would seem sufficient when the
penitent on his part gives his consent to carry out the distinct
judicial act. If, however, the penitent in the course of his
narration never hinted at the idea of a sacramental accusation
and the priest never adverted to it, the teaching of St. Alphon­
sus would seem to prevail, for in such a case a distincta notitia
judicialis never existed, unless a distincta memoria were retained
by the priest; but the sacramental sentence which has to be
pronounced over every mortal sin is based solely on a judicial
knowledge of them.141
30. General Confession.

The repetition of former confessions, whether of all the con­
fessions of a lifetime or of those last made, is called a general
confession. It is necessary for many penitents, useful to others;
to a few only it may be said to be harmful.
>“ Aertnys, 1. c. art. III. Confessio, § 4, n. 203, Q. 2.
141 Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 348.

O EN EH AL CONFESSION

229

1. General confession is necessary for all who have made in­
valid confessions. St. Alphonsus remarks on this subject that
it is a frequent experience in missions that bad confessions have
to be set right ; hence he advises missioners that since the good
of missions consists mainly in setting right bad confessions,
they should in all their discourses be urgent in explaining the
heinousness of sacrilege and how many souls are lost by conceal­
ing mortal sins in confession. Experience teaches that many
people are overcome by false shame so as to conceal their sins
even in the confessions which they make to the fathers giving
the mission. If at so solemn a time as a mission such people
fail to set right their bad confessions, what hope is there of their
salvation ? I f in the confession which they make to the missioner
they cannot overcome their shame, how will they do it when
they confess to the local priest? There is indeed good reason
for ever and again insisting on the general confession.10 Hence
it is very desirable that the local priests at the time of a mission
should refrain from hearing confessions, ami surrender their con­
fessionals to the fathers who give the mission (or to some strange
priests called in for the special work of hearing the confessions),
for some of the faithful, if they see their usual confessor in attend­
ance, may be deterred from going to a strange priest and con­
tinue to make sacrilegious confessions. It not unfrequently
happens that people whom we would never suspect have most
need of freedom in this respect.14’
It frequently happens that a confessor thinks a general con­
fession necessary when the penitent is not at all convinced of
its necessity. Whether the penitent is to be advised in such a
112 Silva, part 8, cp. 0.
143 Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. cp. 9. If the confessor is morally certain that the
former confessions were bad, he must unquestionably insist on their repetition ; if he has only doubts, he cannot impose on the penitent an absolute
obligation, /n dubio itandum est pro calore actus. Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf.
n. 20; Segneri, Instr, pœn. cp.15; Carol. Borom. Act. Med. p. 877; Henger, Pastoraltheologie, Bd. II. § 70. S. 470, 2. Auflage.

230

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

case to make a general confession will be determined by the rules
which are given as to the duty of instructing the penitent or
leaving him to himself (§ 55); for if the penitent suspects noth­
ing of the nullity of his previous confessions, the confession
which he now makes in good faith and proper dispositions is
valid, and by virtue of it the sins mentioned in former invalid
confessions are indirectly remitted and need only be repeated
when the conscience awakes to the fact. Moreover, a prudent
confessor, if he fails to persuade a penitent of the necessity of
a general confession, may succeed by a few questions in making
the confession practically a general one. Indeed, unless the
penitent takes it in bad part the priest may by a little adroitness
elicit a general confession; then he must, before giving abso­
lution, let the penitent know that he has made a general confes­
sion. The case may also occur where the penitent has made
one or more sacrilegious confessions and, quite forgetful of this
circumstance, has begun to make valid confessions without ever
setting right the bad ones; this not unfrequently happens to
children. In this case the general confession need only extend
over the sacrilegious confessions.’"
2. Of the great usefulness of general confession, popes, saintly
bishops, founders of orders, and the great doctors of the Church
all speak in most unmistakable terms. The learned Benedict
XIV, in his instructions on the preparation of the faithful for
a fruitful celebration of the Jubilee, directs priests who give the
missions to impress on the people again and again the great
profit of general confession. They are to urge them to penance,
and to instruct them how to receive the Sacrament validly and
profitably; they are to proclaim that it is absolutely necessary
to repeat former bad confessions, and they should take all pos­
sible pains to excite to a general confession even those who do
not feel any necessity for repeating their sins again. “ For if
,M 8. Alph. Praxis Confess, n. 22 ; cf. Aurtnys, Theol. Pastor, complectens
Practical·! Institut. Confessarii, P. III. cp. VIII. art. II. n. 245.

GENERAL CONFESSION

231

it is not necessary to mention again our former sins, we regard
such repetition as very profitable on account of the confusion
connected with such avowal, which is an important part of pen­
ance, as our predecessor, Benedict XI, teaches in this Decretal
Inter Cunctas." He also appeals to St. Charles Borromeo, who
in his Monita ad Con/essarios proclaims the usefulness of general
confession and recommends it. "Confessors/' says the saint,
"ought, with due regard to persons, times, and places, urge their
penitents to make a general confession, that thus by a thorough
examination of their lives they may turn to God with greater
peace of mind and repair all faults which have been committed
in former confessions.” As another witness for the usefulness
of this practice, Benedict XIV adduces St. Francis of Sales
who, in many places in his works, insists strongly on the prac­
tice. Thus he writes to a widow concerning her father: The
counsels which I give him I reduce to two points : the first one
is that he should institute a careful examination of his whole
life with a view to making a general confession and performing
a corresponding penance, — this is a means which no sensible
man will despise in presence of death; the other is that he
should continually endeavor to wean his mind from the vanities
of the world.145 Benedict then refers to the rules which St. Vin­
cent de Paul gave to his mission-priests, in which he exhorts
them to encourage general confessions. In the life of the holy
founder it is recorded what great fruits were reaped from the
general confessions which were made during the missions held
by those priests.'45
The advantages of general confession are thus briefly enumer­
ated by St. Ignatius in his Book of the Exercises: (1) We gain
greater fruit and merit on account of the deeper contrition with
which we approach the Sacrament ; (2) we are better able to
realize the malice of sins committed ; (3) we are in better dispo,,s S. Franc. Sal. Oper. Ed. Paris 1009. Tom I. p. 914, n. 0.
HU Benedict XIV. Const. Apostolica, 20 Jun. 1749, nu. 10, 17.

282

TH E H ECIPIENT ΟΓ PENANCE

sitions for receiving holy communion, and we are more dis­
posed to shun sin. Moreover, the Directorium of the Exercises,
a work composed by a member of the Society of Jesus and edited
by the General Claudius Aquaviva, adds the following observa­
tion: If the general confession offered no other advantage, the
following fact would sufficiently recommend it ; experience
proves that men for the most part go to confession either with­
out proper examination, or without the required contrition, or
with but a weak purpose of amendment; the general confession
comes in most opportunely to give peace of mind, to remove
scruples, which sooner or later, or at least at the hour of death,
come to torture the soul and expose it to the danger of losing
eternal salvation.
Segneri also very earnestly recommends general confession.
It is a very safe and useful plan to examine one’s life thoroughly
at least once, and to set it right by a general confession, and to
keep up the practice at fixed intervals of a year, or even oftener,
of making a general confession beginning from the last. The
advantage of this practice is that, seeing all our faults and sins
at a glance, we are filled with greater confusion and sorrow and are
impelled to be more humble; besides the fear of God’s justice
will grow in us when we see our sins, past and present, hanging
like a great mountain over us, so that we are compelled to cry
out with Esdras — ‘‘Our sins are grown up even unto heaven.”
(Esdr. ix. 6.) And who does not see how difficult it is without
such a confession to obtain that most priceless of blessings,
peace of mind, at least if the frequent relapses into sin are due
to a want of preparation? Oh, how many confessions are
thought to be valid and are not so in reality !147
Finally, the words of St. Alphonsus deserve a place here:
“I advise every one who has not yet done so to confess all the
sins which he has ever committed in his life, and I advise not
M’ Instruct pœ,nit cp. 1β.

GENERAL CONFESSION

233

only those who have made sacrilegious confessions by conceal­
ing mortal sins, or whose confessions have been invalid through
want of previous examination of conscience or of true contri­
tion, but those also who are anxious to begin a new life; for this
purpose a general confession is very useful."
Hence, general confession is useful: (1) for adults who have
not already made one; (2) especially for such as have reason­
able misgivings about the validity of past confessions; (3) for
those who wish to start a new and better life; (4) before enter­
ing on a new state of life, hence before marriage, before receiving
Orders or making the profession in a religious community; (5) at
the. time of a jubilee or mission, or of the spiritual exercises, for
these arc special occasions of grace and penance ; (6) for persons
who are in danger of death, while their strength permits, and
for those who have to expose their lives to any danger.
Those who have once made a good general confession, espe­
cially if they are of mature age, may set their minds at ease on
that portion of their existence, and such people should not be
easily allowed to repeat their general confession unless for very
weighty and exceptional reasons. Those frequent repetitions do
more harm than good. The desire of repeating the general con­
fession is usually a sign of a certain want of trust in God and of
scrupulosity. If a penitent of this kind, after his general con­
fession, is uneasy about some important point in his former life,
because he thinks he has not confessed something or failed to
confess it properly, he may be allowed to mention it in one of
his ordinary confessions.
Λ repetition of the confession of his whole life may be allowed
to a penitent who is free from scruples and is full of zeal to enter
on a perfect life. On the other hand, it is well to advise and even
to urge as a very useful means the practice of general confession
at fixed intervals, say of a year, or a half year, or when the occa,w Instit. catech. P. LI. cp. 5, n. 11.

234

THE n ECU'I ENT OF PENANCE

eions mentioned above afford an opportunity. If the confessor
lias to deal with a penitent who has already once or oftcner made
a general confession, he should ask when the last confession was
made and why the penitent is anxious to make it again. The
answer will suggest the course to be pursued by the confessor:
(o) If the penitent can give no definite reason, but. speaks of a
general feeling of unrest, the confessor may ask what the cause
of tliis unrest is, and whether in the preceding general confes­
sion the penitent has honestly said all he knew and as he knew it,
whether he answered the questions put by the priest, in all truth,
whether he was sorry for his sins, and whether there was a real
improvement in his way of living, or, on the other hand, whether
he fell again into sin, and when. If a defect is discovered in
the preceding general confession it must be repeated; otherwise
the penitent must be shown how groundless his fears are and en­
couraged to trust in God. The repetition of the genera) confession
must be strictly forbidden, especially in the case of those troubled
with scruples. At the most, the accusation of one or other sin
which gives most uneasiness may be permitted, and the penitent
must be engaged to think no more about the matter, but only
to make acts of sorrow when these sins occur to his mind.
(6) If, however, the penitent wishes to make a general confes­
sion because the last one was made a long time ago, and many
mortal sins have been committed in the interval, he should be
permitted to make it. The period which has been already com­
prised in a general confession may be treated with less detail,
or quite omitted. A short repetition is, however, as a rule, rec­
ommended since the earlier life of the penitent throws light on
his present condition, and he is always more content if the con­
fessor has, at least, some general perception of the former state
of Ids soul, (c) If the penitent wishes to make a general confes­
sion for ascetic reasons, e.g. for the sake of humility, of greater
purity of heart, etc., the question is to be settled as follows: If
the penitent is a stranger, he must be referred to his usual con­

GΕΝΕΚΑ Λ < 'ONFE88ION

235

fessor ; if he has none, he must be recommended to choose one.
If the penitent asks the confessor to undertake his direction,
and on the strength of this to receive his general confession, the
request is not to be granted at once. A simple confession may
be made so that the priest may decide whether a general confes­
sion be necessary to gain the knowledge required for guiding
the penitent, or at least useful, or on the contrary harmful where
there exists a tendency to scruple. With one's ordinary peni­
tents, this procedure is not required in order to find out whether
a general confession is or is not advantageous; the ascetical
object may be obtained by mentioning some of the more humili­
ating sins or by well-prepared annual general confessions.
In the special case of penitents who have been living in im­
purity the confessor should allow them only one general confes­
sion on that period of their lives lest by reflecting on those sins
in their examination of conscience sinful promptings should
arise in their imagination, the conscience thus incurring fresh
stains where the object was to purify it; after one perfect con­
fession of these sins the penitent should not be allowed, or rather
he should be forbidden, to make any further accusation of them :
a general accusation may, however, be made in subsequent
confessions in these or other words of similar form: “I accuse
myself of all sins committed against the sixth commandment."
Moreover, it is not recommended to advise such penitents to
make a general confession till they have combated that vice
with success, unless some other pressing need exist for making
a general confession.149
On the other hand, the confessor should not omit to advise
those who are dangerously ill to make a general confession, or
at least a summary of one ; he may do this by asking whether
anything in their past life gives uneasiness, whether they have
always made good confessions and made good acts of contrition,
o* Cf. Reuter, Neo-confessariin, P. III. cp. 2, n. 191; Müller, Theol.
moral. Lib. III. T. II. § 124.

23f>

THJC RECIPIENT OE PEN Λ NVE

whether they have been living in proximate occasions of sin,
etc.; he will thus have many opportunities of righting at the
last moment sacrilegious confessions and communions and res­
cuing souls from hell.
Since general confession is so profitable, the confessor may,
according to the advice of St. Alphonsus,“° with the exception
of the above case, receive penitents who wish to make a general
confession of their whole life or of part of it and that at once if
they are prepared; he should be most willing to help them in
it unless some obstacle, as, for instance, the number of penitents
still waiting, or shortness of time, should prevent him from
devoting more time to one penitent. He will sometimes find
that a general confession which seemed to be only useful turns
out to have been necessary. On the other hand, the confessor
should refrain from forcing on a penitent a general confession
which is not dictated by necessity.161
3. General confession is harmful to scrupulous and even to
overanxious people; to such it brings not peace of mind but
only more scruples ; hence they should be dissuaded from mak­
ing a general confession ; it can only be allowed when there is
complete certainty of the invalidity of past confessions. “ Scru­
pulous penitents,” says St. Alphonsus, “would go on making
and repeating general confessions forever in the hope of laying
aside their anxiety, but the evil only grows, for after every
general confession they fall again into new anxieties and scruples,
thinking they have omitted some sin or failed to confess it prop­
erly, so that their uneasiness increases the oftener they repeat
their confessions.” 162 The confessor, in consequence, must be
on his guard against such people and not allow himself to be
deceived by them; he may permit them only to mention some
sin which causes them very great trouble, and he must instruct
>“ H. A. app. IV. § 1, n. 15.
,H S. Alph. I’rax. Conf. n. 20.
16> 8. Alph. Vera Sponsa, cp. 18, § 2.

GEN EII AL CONFESSION

237

them to atone for their defects by an act of sorrow. If, however,
the priest is convinced of the invalidity of the former confes­
sions of such people, he should help them through their general
confession and after that forbid any further examination.
Moreover, only an experienced, prudent, and skillful confessor
should undertake the direction of such persons, and a young
confessor should recommend them to some holy man of greater
age. Moreover, the general confession, as we have already
mentioned, is a danger to all those for whom reflection on their
past sins is a source of new temptations. It is dangerous for
those who live in the voluntary and unnecessary occasion of
sin and are always relapsing, who are not really in good disposi­
tions, and who make a general confession merely with a view of
getting absolution more easily; they may be recognized by the
sins committed since their last confession, and they may be
admitted to a general confession after being exhorted to give
up the occasions of sin and to combat their sinful habits.1"
•St. Leonard of Port Maurice says on this subject : “If the peni­
tent is living in the proximate occasion of sin without making
a firm resolution to reform, or without giving signs of contrition,
you must give him no encouragement to make a general confes­
sion, for the proximate occasion must first be removed and the
habit overcome at least for a time. It would else be but labor
lost, for general confession is not merely an institution for set­
ting right past confessions, but also for reforming one's life.
If no purpose of the sort is in the mind of the penitent, there
cannot even be a reasonable certainty that he will persevere in
his reform, and there is no foundation upon which to build up
virtue. Exhort him, and suggest means for avoiding the occa­
sions of evil and for overcoming sin ; show him the utter impossibility of reform unless the occasions are given up, or, if
this cannot be, unless they are made remote; urge him to pray
>** Marc, Instit. Morales, II. T. Π. P. III. Tract. V. Diss. II. n. 1712.

238

Tll K RECIPIENT OF PENA ME

and put off the general confession to another time. Only on
quite special occasions, e.g. missions, or where there are extraor­
dinary signs of penitence may any fruit be expected from the
general confessions of those who live in occasions of sin and
show no signs of improvement.” 154
The practice of many confessors is to be deprecated, who,
after hearing one or two confessions of a penitent, urge him to
make a general confession, moved by imprudent zeal or in order
to obtain better knowledge for the guidance of the penitent.
Equally reprehensible is the conduct of many priests who give
way to their penitents, allowing them to make often a general
confession, or, at least, whenever they choose a now confessor.
Such general confessions are quite useless and are a mere waste
of time.’55

31. The Manner of Hearing General Confession.
As to the method of hearing general confessions, the following
rules, the outcome of the long experience of learned confessors,
should be observed : —
1. In order to be fit for this office a confessor shoidd be well
instructed and already experienced in hearing confessions; he
must have great patience and zeal for souls, and during the
whole course of the confession be very sympathetic and encour­
aging towards the penitent.
2. If a penitent expresses his desire to make a general confes­
sion, the priest should first inquire whether it be necessary or
useful. In order to discover this it is not recommended to ask
the penitent bluntly if he has ever concealed a sin in his former
confessions, or any question of the kind, for it is quite possible
that the penitent, though guilty of the sin, may in his bewilder­
ment deny it and never again dare to confess it; it is much
1M Anleitung zur Generalbeichte, S. 90-92.
>“ Cf. Aertnys, I’ract. Instit. Confess. 1. c. art. II. n. 247.

MANNER OF HEARING GENERAL CONFESSION

239

better if the confessor ask the penitent why he wishes to make
a general confession, whether he feels uneasy, etc. By such
questions or the like he may try to discover if there have been
sacrilegious confessions. He will often receive one or other of
the following answers : (a) "Because I have kept sins back ; "
he will then encourage his penitent, showing himself very kind
towards him and urging him to be perfectly sincere, (b) "I
have never yet made a general confession ; " he may then find
out if it be necessary or only useful, (c) “I have made a general
confession before, but it was not a good one." He may then
ask why the last general confession was not a good one; if the
penitent can give no other reason, except his own fears, there
is a fair presumption that he has to deal with an overanxious
or scrupulous penitent, (d) “ I heard in a sermon that my con­
fessions were bad;” here again the reason must be asked,
(c) The following reason may also be given especially during
a mission : “I want to begin a better life;” in such a case the
general confession will be at least very useful.
3. If the general confession is necessary in consequence of
former confessions having been sacrilegious or invalid, it must
be made with great accuracy and the number and species must
be given, so far as possible, just as though the sins had never
been confessed before. It may easily happen, however, that
the confessor, though convinced of the necessity of a general
confession, cannot at once hear it for want of time or on account
of the great number of penitents kept waiting; while the peni­
tent frequently cannot return again and is quite uninstructed
or of weak intellect, or is really anxious to receive absolution
or must receive it in order to fulfill the obligation of going to
communion. In such a case, and especially when the penitent
discloses at once to his confessor that his previous confessions
have been bad by reason of not giving the number of the sins,
and when the confessor can, from the account of sins committed
in the past year, form a fair estimate of the past life of the sin­

240

THK RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

ner, St. Alphonsus recommends that absolution should he given
without any repetition of previous confessions. He assumes
that the confessor is able to form a gross estimate as to the
whole life from what he hears concerning one year, and that he
further inquires whether the penitent, besides his ordinary sins,
is conscious of any special ones in the course of his life. The
detailed general confession may be put off to some more oppor­
tune occasion which can be arranged at once with the penitent.
The holy Doctor adds another instance to those just mentioned —
when the confessor after hearing the confession discovers that
the penitent has failed in former confessions to give the number
of his sins and when, at the same time, he lias a distincta notitia
of the sins and can form upon them a distinctum judicium on
the past career of the penitent; if, however, he have only a
notitia confusa of the sins confessed, he is obliged to form a notitia
distincta of the former mortal sins imperfectly confessed. With
only a notitia confusa of the penitent’s previous condition he
may not give absolution, for the penitent is obliged to confess
each single sin once, and the confessor is obliged to pronounce
once a distinct judgment on the sins.’5* In the case, however,
where the general confession is not of necessity, these precautions
in putting questions need not be adopted; if the concourse of
penitents is very large, and if, as frequently occurs, in missions
or on similar occasions the general confession cannot be put
off to a more convenient time, the confessor may at least make
a summary examination, asking only for the species of the sins
and the time of duration of the habits of sin without laying
stress on the exact number and circumstances of each particular
sin. The priest must, of course, give the penitent sufficient
time to unburden his conscience and to say all he wants to accuse
himself of, even though such accusation be not necessary in
this voluntary general confession, so that the penitent may
*“ 8. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 504; cf. Lugo 1. c. Disput. 16, nn. 600, 640; Benger, Pasloraltlieologie, II. Bd. § 171, S. 479 (2. Aufl.).

MANNER OF HEARING GENERAL CONFESSION

241

leave the confessional with his mind quite at ease; thus he may
ask him in general : “ Do you accuse yourself of all sinful
thoughts, words, etc.?" On this account it is recommended
to impress upon the penitent that in a voluntary general confes­
sion he is not bound to accuse himself of each particular sin;
indeed this instruction is very useful, for a penitent may, in the
course of his confession, incur sacrilege through false shame
and an erroneous conscience by keeping back a sin which he
imagines he is obliged to tell in general confession. It is an
invariable rule to avoid too great haste or abruptness, otherwise
the penitent is not put at his ease; hence it not infrequently
happens that a penitent accuses himself of not having said all
he wanted to say because the priest had been too quick.
‘‘The greatest difficulty in general confessions,” says Blessed
Leonard of Port Maurice, “is the accusation of the number of
sins.” To meet this the following rules will be of service: —
(а) If the confessor can get at the precise number of sins, he
is obliged to do so.
(б) If the penitent cannot give the exact number, he must
be asked to give about the number, as near as possible. For
this purpose the priest will suggest numbers, and if the peni­
tent choose the largest number, a still larger one may be sug­
gested to see if the penitent will accuse himself also of that.
(c) In the case of frequently recurring sins or habits of sin it
is necessary to find out whether they have been of daily, weekly,
or monthly occurrence. As to which of these periods will apply
to the penitent depends on his state as learnt from his last con­
fession, and on the nature of the sin itself. In mentioning the
period the confessor should always adil a number, e.g. how
often each week, three, four, or five times? and as we said
under (&), the whole time during which the sin or habit of sin
lasted must be found out. Finally it is useful in order to ascer­
tain the state of the penitent’s soul to find out whether there
has at any time been improvement and how long it lasted.

242

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

(rf) It is the sententia communis and the teaching of St. Aiphonsus that by one and the same internal anil external act a
number of sins may be committed, when, for instance, the object
aimed at in the sin includes several ends. A man, for instance,
spreads a calumny about a community, — by so doing he in­
curs as many sins as there are persons in the community; this
occurs usually in cases of enmity, scandal, etc. When, there­
fore, there is a diversitas objectorum totalium, questions must
be put concerning the number of these objects.
(e) In putting questions as to the number and species of the
sin, care must be taken not to bewilder the penitent with ques­
tions; if two or three questions do not effect the desired result,
no more need be put; for St. Alphonsus teaches: The priest,
who, after two or three questions, fails to obtain any definite
result, need not worry even if he cannot come to any clear deci­
sion, nam ex conscientiis implicatis et confusis moraliter impos­
sibile est majorem claritatem sperare.'51
In conclusion, St. Leonard168 remarks : If the confessor
cannot get at the exact or probable number, or even the more
frequent, repetitions, it is in my opinion sufficient to find out the
evil habit and the time of its duration. By this means the
confessor, so far as is possible, will gain an idea of the state of
liis penitent and be able to form a judgment about him. The
greater or less frequency of repetition must not, however, in­
volve other consequences; as in the case of stealing. Here
great care must be used to find out the number of the sins and,
in particular, the value of the sum stolen.
4. If the general confession is a voluntary one and the peni­
tent unprepared, it is not advisable to receive it, but to give
the penitent some days to prepare by examining his conscience,
making acts of contrition, and praying with more than usual
fervor,—a method which will insure greater fruit in the general
Praxis Confess, cp. I. n. 20, 4.
168 Auleituug zur Generalbeichte, S. 64-70.

MANNER OF NEARING GENERAL CONFESSION

243

confession. At the same time the confessor might show the
penitent that a general confession is not such a difficult matter
once it is undertaken courageously. If, however, the penitent
will be prevented from returning to the priest to whom he wishes
to make his general confession, the confession may be made at
once. If the general confession is one of necessity, there is all
the more reason for a good preparation. If, however, as fre­
quently happens, there is reason to fear that the penitent will
not return, the confessor should not send him away to make
his preparation, but receive the confession at once.
As to the preparation required on the part of the penitent,
especially with regard to the examination of conscience, the
confessor will be careful not to exact a written accusation;
such a process, as a rule, only causes confusion and adds to the
burdens of the confessor. If the penitent is afraid of not being
able to retain in his memory the results of his examination of
conscience, he may confine himself to a quiet examination accord­
ing to his powers, and the confessor will help him. It may be
permitted to the penitent to make notes of the more necessary
points. If the confession is voluntary, the confessor may take
the notes and read them for himself ; if it be a general confes­
sion of necessity, the penitent himself should read them.
5. It is not per se required that a penitent declare first the
sins committed since the last confession before repeating his
former confessions, nor is he obliged to make a distinction
between the sins committed since the last confession and those
told in former confessions, since the sin is the same whether
confessed or not, and it makes no difference that the former sins
have been remitted because the sin is not the object of confes­
sion in so far as it is habitual or leaves enduring stain, but in so
far as it has been actually committed.,s’ Still it is recommended
to make the general confession precede the particular confession
169 S. Alph. I. c. Lib. VI. n. 425, II. A. u. 4; Lugo, I. c. l>isp. It).
49 ; Aertuys, 1. c. n. 200, Q. 2.

244

THE HECIPIE.VT OF PENANCE

of the sins committed since the last time, in on 1er that the priest
may better ascertain the state of his penitent and assure himself
that there is no obstacle to his giving absolution.
6. If the penitent is a well-instructed person and prepared,
and is really desirous of confessing, the priest may allow him first
to make his confession, and then he can put any questions that
may be necessary, for many persons feel the need to reveal
what is on their mind and have no peace until they do it. If,
however, the penitent is persuaded that confession consists in
the priest putting questions and the penitent answering, or if
he wishes to make his confession in this manner, the confessor
may adopt this mode. With ignorant penitents it is recom­
mended and is indeed preferable. The confessor must then
give the penitent time and opportunity to mention anything
that disturbs his peace of mind.
7. If the confessor receives a general confession by way of
question and answer, he must adopt some method, going
through the Ten Commandments, the Commandments of the
Church, the Seven Capital Sins, and the duties of the state of
life.
For the sake of greater clearness and to avoid repetitions he
might indeed bring all sins under the Ten Commandments,
those even which are against the Commandments of the Church,
the Seven Capital Sins, and other varieties of sins, for the Deca­
logue, as the Roman Catechism teaches, is the sum of all the
Commandments.
It is not, however, recommended to divide the confession into
parts answering to the different periods of one's life, for such a
practice protracts the confession and involves many burdensome
repetitions; still in the case of the sixth Commandment it has
its advantages, and questions might be put as to sins committed
before marriage, during the married state, and after the death
of the other party. Finally penitents who can be questioned
as to the actus cnnsummali should be asked according to the

PLAN FOB MAKING A GENERAL CONFESSION

245

different species of the act as well as on the actus imperfecti,
internal ami external, with regard to the species.
8. The priest should not omit to exhort the penitent to ac­
knowledge honestly his sins, and not to conceal from false shame
anything which he is obliged to tell.1"0 The confessor should
never give any sign of astonishment or anger, no matter how
numerous or atrocious the sins may be. Let him show rather
that he would not be surprised at hearing even worse sins; let
him come to the help of the penitent and even praise him for
having succeeded in confessing some one or other of the more
difficult sins. He may congratulate the penitent on winning a
victory over himself and the devil, and encourage him again to
complete candor and to make the confession as perfect as though
it were to be the last of his life.
32. Plan for making a General Confession.
In this paragraph we present a plan of questions suitable for
a general confession and offer it especially for the guidance of
younger confessors. A few preliminary remarks, however, are
necessary to secure clearness.
This plan need not contain all the sins which are treated of
in moral theology, but only such as may or do actually occur.
Nevertheless, if a confessor adhere to this schedule in his ques­
tions he may be quite satisfied as to the integrity of the con­
fession.
Such a schedule should be as short as possible so that the con­
fessor may easily retain it in his head; hence the subdivisions,
which he should know from liis moral theology, may be omitted.
Since in a general confession venial sins ought not to be lost
sight of on account of their close connection with mortal sins and
because they are of great moment in determining the state of
leo P. Ileilig, Methodus Confess, generates . . . excipiendi; Gury-Baller.
1. ο. IT. Tract, de Sacr. Pœnit. n. 519; I.ehmkuh), 1. c. Sect. TI. art. III.
nn. 340, 349; Aertnys, PracU Instit Confessor. P. III. cp. VIII. art. III.

246

THS RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

the penitent’s soul, some of the more serious venial sins will
find a place in the catalogue. The confessor should know, in
addition, how a sin in itself and objectively venial may become
mortal per accidens, and, on the other hand, how a sin grave ex
genere suo may per accidens become venial.11’1
Moreover, the priest should be careful not. to examine all
penitents on every sin; a single question to which a negative
answer is given will show that a whole series of other questions
may be omitted, and thus he will only inquire after those sins
which are likely to have been committed. In putting his ques­
tions he should pay due regard both to the physical and the
spiritual condition of the penitent. From sins already confessed
an indication may easily be drawn as to the further inquiries
to be made, and while he omits many questions in the catalogue
he may deem it advisable to add others. If he discovers in the
penitent a habit of sin, he must inquire how long it lasted, when
it began, and when it was broken off.
In all his questions he will observe the rules which hold on
this subject in every confession ;
in particular he should bear
in mind the words of St. Leonard of Port Maurice: “Treat your
penitent,” he says, “as you would like to be treated yourself
if you were in the same painful situation ; receive him in a
friendly manner and with affectionate kindness ; encourage him
to have confidence in you and to open his heart to you. Re­
frain from harsh and blunt forms of address which serve rather
to irritate and embitter the penitent than to make him docile,
obedient, and pliant ; and even when he is gross and ignorant,
rebellious to all advice and unwilling to fulfill his duties, do
not, on that account, treat him harshly or frighten him by a dis­
play of overbearing rigor. Remember that in the confessional
you must be a martyr of patience, seeking always to win the
penitent by the gentleness of your manners, and that your duty
>«> See § 24.

»“ See § 49.

PLAN FOR MAKING A GENERAL f'ONFESHIOlf

247

is to incline rather to mildness than strictness. If your words
are to have the power of gentle persuasiveness, you must deal
with him in the spirit of our holy faith, and he will become
humble and convinced of the truth of your words.” ,e
If the penitent is not already well known to the confessor,
the latter must by a few questions at the beginning of the con­
fession inform himself as to the age, position, calling, and other
circumstances of his penitent since such knowledge is necessary
for the choice and arrangement of the questions to be put.
If in the course of the confession some question must be asked
on some rarely occurring and horrible sin, it should be pleaded
by way of excuse that a special advantage of a general confes­
sion is to secure a thorough examination of conscience: and
that this explains the unusual questions.
If during the confession the discovery is made that the peni­
tent lies under some special obligation to avoid occasions of sin,
to make restitution or some such burden, he should be told of
it and disposed for it at once without waiting for the end of
the confession for fear of forgetting it or of giving a wrong judg­
ment. All other directions, however, in the way of advice or
instruction should only be given at the end for fear of annoying
and repelling the penitent, and also in order to avoid prolixity
and repetition. If on general principles the absolution ought
to be put off and the penitent fails to show' necessary disposi­
tions by signs of extraordinary sorrow and penitence, the con­
fession should be interrupted and not resumed till a decided
improvement’ is seen. If the penitent is judged to be in good
dispositions, the confession may go on after the promise of per­
forming the necessary obligations has been exacted, and the
penitent should be reminded that if he is not sincerely deter­
mined to stand by his promises, his trouble is all in vain and
his confession invalid, and that he is putting a seal on his con>·· Anleitung zur Generalbeichte, S. 83-90.

248

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

denination by a new offense against God. In longer confessions
it is a good practice even during the accusation (especially if
some particularly grave sin be mentioned) to remind the peni­
tent of the greatness of his crimes, of God’s goodness and grace
by which he has been freed from all these great sins, and then
to encourage him to make a thoroughly good confession. The
penitent should also be reminded of all his bad confessions and
communions, of his neglect of his Easter duties, etc.
If it be observed that the penitent is unusually disturbed, the
cause of it should be found out; if it be the avowal of some one
sin, the confessor should seek to obtain some hint about it and
then push the questions so that the penitent has only to answer
os or no; thus a penitent may be consoled who is troubled
because he has not sufficiently examined himself, or cannot ex­
press his meaning correctly or has forgotten what he wished to
say. If no definite cause can be assigned, the confessor should
encourage him in a general way, telling him that the confession
is made to God, reminding him of the sacredness of the seal,
recalling to him that the priest is also but a man, subject to
faults and weaknesses; impressing upon him that the priest is
ordained in order to sympathize with others, to help them by
his kindness and patience, etc. Furthermore the way of begin­
ning a general confession depends on the circumstances of the
penitent, and these must be inquired into at once.1"*
Having laid down these principles we enter into details : —

I.

Preliminary Questions.

1. The penitent should be asked his age, his condition of life,
and his calling.
2. Then he may be asked if his previous confessions have
been valid (the uninstructed should be assisted to form a correct
1M Leonard von Port Maur., Anleitung zur Gencralbeichte ; Benger,
Paaloraltheologie, Bd. III. S. 607-619 (1. Aufl.), Bd. II. S. 475—186
(2. Aufl.) ; Scliiich, Paatoraltlieologie, § 320.

PLAN ΡΟΗ MAKING A GENERAL CONFESSION

249

judgment in the matter), whether he has ever intentionally con­
cealed a grave sin or a notable circumstance in confession —
given intentionally the wrong number of his sins — examined
his conscience carefully — tried to be really contrite at least for
all graver sins. Then he may be asked if he has always faith­
fully performed the penance imposed. If the confessor discovers
any sacrilegious confessions, he must at once ascertain their num­
ber as closely as possible, asking when the first bad confession
was made, how long the habit lasted, whether any of them were
set right, how often the penitent in this condition was accus­
tomed to confess or communicate, whether the Easter duties
were neglected by reason of such confessions anti communions,
whether in making such confessions and communions the peni­
tent was conscious of committing sacrilege; whether during
that period other Sacraments were received such as Confirmation,
Matrimony, Extreme Unction. If the penitent is persuaded
that his confessions were not sacrilegious, but some grounds of
suspicion remain, the confessor might on occasion of some
accusation against the sixth Commandment, make inquiry if
the sin has been confessed before; or he might even ask
plainly, "You have never yet confessed this sin?” or, “You
have never had the courage to confess this sin?”
II. Sins against the Sixth and Ninth and the Other
Commandments.
The confessor may next, in order to learn the general state of
the penitent, ask quite generally: “Were you ever led astray
when young? at what age? Did you indulge in any impure
habits? ” If the priest discovers that the penitent is quite inno­
cent of such sins, he should go on at once to the other CommandSome experienced confessors advise to begin with these commandments,
because sins against holy purity are frequently the cause of invalid confes­
sions. Many penitents, however, would be shocked and disgusted at such
a proceeding.

250

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

mente. He might peihaps nek further: "Were you troubled
with temptations against holy purity? Had you to listen to
bad conversation ? Has any one ever taken liberties with you ?”
Sins of luxuria consummata may be reduced to four species,
pollutio, fornicatio, sodomia, and bestialitas. Those species have
their actus imperfectos, external, for instance tactus, and internal,
namely, delectatio morosa and desideria, and in addition may
have three circumstances which change the nature of the sin,
adulterium, incestus, sacrilegium. The questions may be mod­
eled on these four species, and in the case of each sin the cir­
cumstances inquired into which affect the species of the sin.
Any compendium of Moral Theology will suggest the necessary
detail.”·
He may add: “Have you confessed all the sins you have
committed against holy purity? Does anything else disturb
your mind with regard to the sixth Commandment? Perhaps
you can manage now to make a general confession and to set
in order your past life.”

Against the First Commandment.
1. Against Faith. The confessor may ask whether the peni­
tent has been troubled by doubts against faith, or really
doubted of the truths of faith and suggested such doubts to
others; whether he has denied any truth of faith; whether he
has acted or spoken against faith and before how many persons ;
whether he has induced others to jeer or mock at fait h ; has he
spoken against religion and priests? has he listened to speeches
of others directed against faith and applauded or encouraged
1M The greatest prudence should be employed in putting these question*
for fear of teaching evil or giving «caudal. In this matter it is better that
the completeness of the accusation should suffer. For instance, Balleriui
disapproves of asking directly whether the accomplice is bound by vows,
since such cases are rare, and when they occur the penitent would be cer­
tain to mention the circumstance spontaneously, while to put such a ques­
tion would frequently cause astonishment and give scandal.

PLAN FOR MAKING A GENERAL CONFESSION

251

them? has ho read, sold, given or recommended to others the
reading of books and articles against faith? has he himself
written for such publications? has he frequented the society of
men who mocked at religion or were enemies of the faith? has
he taken part in the religious services of non-Catholics? has he
joined any society which is hostile to religion?
2. Against Hope. Has he doubted of his salvation or of
God’s mercy? or of the possibility of reforming? has he pre­
sumed on God’s mercy and put off his conversion?
3. Against Charity. Has he under stress of suffering hated
God? indulged feelings of indifference or resentment against
God and holy things? has he murmured against God in his
sufferings and crosses? has he banished God from his mind for
long periods, neglected prayer?
4. Against the Reverence due to God. Has he believed in su­
perstitious practices and employed them? Las he used sacred
objects without reverence or for wrong purposes? has he re­
ceived any of the Sacraments (Penance, Holy Communion, Con­
firmation, Matrimony, Extreme Unction) unworthily? has he
desecrated holy places? has he injured persons consecrated to
God?
Against the Second Commandment.
Has he blasphemed? before children? Has he a habit of
swearing? Has he ever sworn to what was false, or to any­
thing of which he was doubtful? in a court of justice? to the
injury of others? Has he been accustomed to use rash oaths?

Against the Third Commandment and the Commandments of the
Church.
Has he by his own fault missed Mass on Sundays and holi­
days of obligation? has he absented himself by his own fault
from a considerable portion of the services ? Has his behavior
during the services been irreverent and scandalous? Has he
done servile work without necessity on Sundays or holidays of

252

THE EXCIPIENT OF PENANCE

obligation? for how long? before others? or has he required
such work from others? Has he broken the law of fasting
without cause, or eaten meat on forbidden days without a dis­
pensation? Has he neglected his Easter duties?
Against the Fourth Commandment.

Are the parents still living? Has he deliberately offended them
by frequent disobedience in matters of moment (e.g. frequent­
ing certain company against their will, staying late in public
houses, by not giving up bad companions, by neglecting reli­
gious duties or important business at home) ? Has he despised
them in his heart? treated them with contempt or given them
great trouble? used harsh and contemptuous language to them?
wished them harm seriously? in the presence of others? Has
he been ashamed of them? neglected them in their necessities,
treated them badly, not carried out their last wishes ?
Servants, etc., should be' asked whether they are faithful to
their master's sendees: have they offended him by contempt
or rudeness? damaged his reputation with his neighbors?
obeyed him in things forbidden ? Have they given scandal to
others in the house, particularly children ?
Masters, etc., should be asked whether they take due care of
those under them. Have they treated them unjustly? per­
mitted evil practices? have they kept their servants to the
practice of their religious duties and given them time for it?
have they given their servants bad example or led them into
sin?
Parents and Superiors should be asked if they take proper
care of their charges, or have squandered the family property.
Do they correct and punish the children with prudence and
without anger? have they ever wished evil to befall them? Do
they watch over their children, keeping them from bad com­
panions, from sinful connections? Have they instructed the

PLAN FOU MAKING A GENERAL CONFESSION

25»

children in their religious duties? have they sent their children
to irreligious schools? Have they given their children bad ex­
ample? Have they said or done anything sinful in presence of
the children ?
Married people should be asked if they live together in peace?
have their quarrels given scandal to the children?

Against the Fifth Commandment.
Has the penitent let himself be carried away by anger?
broken out into curses or wished grave flamage to betide his
neighbor? Has he rejoiced in his neighbor’s misfortunes, enter­
tained hatred, and inflicted harm or intended to inflict it? Has
he fostered enmities or refused to make satisfaction to those
whom he has injured? Has he lived in enmity with others,
■with how many and for how long? Has he promised to make
peace and kept, his promise? Has he ever seriously damaged
his health or attempted his life, or seriously thought of doing so?
Has he been in the habit of drinking, and been quite overcome
by drink ? Has this been the occasion of quarrels or other sins?
Is it a habit ? Has he neglected his duties to his wife and chil­
dren in consequence, or ill treated them and destroyed the peace
of the family? (The confessor must not forget his studies on
occasio and consuetudo when dealing with cases of this sort.)
It might also be well to ask if the penitent has been hard in
dealing with the poor in their grave needs and refused assist­
ance.
Against the Seventh and Tenth Commandments.
Has he entertained desires of stealing or of cheating his neigh­
bor? Has he actually committed theft, or cheated his neighbor
in doing business? Has he inflicted losses on any one? Has
he paid his debts or put off for a long time the paying of them?
Has he made restitution and repaired the losses inflicted? Is
he at least willing to make reparation ? If not, why not ?

254

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
Against the Eighth Commandment.

Has he told lies to the grave injury of his neighbor? lias he
ever given false witness in a court of justice? Has he ever be­
trayed an important secret? Has he ever injured the reputa­
tion of his neighbor by revealing his faults without sufficient
reason? to how many people was this communication made?
Has he ever falsely accused his neighbor of a fault ? to how
many people? Did he restore the good name of the injured
person? and did he make good to him the losses resulting from
the calumny? Has he made rash judgments in things of great
moment , and has he communicated them to others ?
With respect to the Seven Capital Sins the confessor may
ask : —
Has the penitent behaved in a proud, overbearing manner
towards others? Has he devoted himself to inordinate amassing
of wealth and coveted the same? Has he omitted to give
the alms which he ought? Has he helped his neighbor when
he ought? Has he indulged in envy of his neighbor on account
of his fortune, his wealth, his graces, his virtues, etc. ? Has he
rejoiced in his neighbor's misfortune, caused it or wished it?
Has he neglected his work and duties through idleness, and
injured his neighbor thereby?
With regard to the nine ways of participating in the sin of
another the confessor might ask: Has he boasted of his sins?
which? Has he advised others to commit sin, or praised the
sin of others, or commanded others to sin? Has he failed to
prevent the sins of others when he could do so easily ?
After the priest has put all the questions which he. thinks
necessary he should proceed to advise the penitent to reflect if
there is anything else disturbing his conscience about which no
questions have been put; and he should also remind him that
this confession may be his last. He may then try to move the
penitent to contrition and to a firm purpose of amendment by

PLAN FOR ΛΓ.Ι/Γ/ΛΎ,’ A GENERAL CONFEMION

25»

the consideration of some effectual motives presented in a kind
and fatherly manner. He might conclude with some words to
this purpose : —
" Now thank God with all your heart for the great mercy He
has shown you; if death had overtaken you while you were bur­
dened with so many grave sins, you would certainly be at the
present moment in hell, but now make your mind quite easy
and don’t worry any more about these sins; I am now going
to absolve you in God’s name from them all and your soul will
he as pure as when it came from the baptismal font; but beware
of sinning again and do not return God's mercy with ingratitude.”
The confessor will then give the penitent some directions how to
reform his life; he must point out one or other of his sins that
should be especially combated; and if at the same time he
shows an interest in the penitent and promises to pray for him,
the latter will go away consoled and encouraged to begin a
new life in the Lord.”7
Aertnye, 1. c. cp. 8, art. 4, nn. 251, 252; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 351;
Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. n. 520; Heilig, Methodus Conf. gen. n. 40 ss.

CHAPTER IV
SATISFACTION

33. The Imposition of Penance by the Confessor.

There is no question here of satisfaction in the wider sense
which includes the restitution to be made for the infliction of
spiritual or temporal loss. The subject which we propose to
treat of is satisfaction in its restricted meaning (salixfact io). It
consists in the performance of those works of penance which
according to the Council of Trent are designed to preserve the
new life acquired in the Sacrament, to repair the languor which
remains as a relic of past sin, and at the same time to serve as
a punishment for sin. As after the. recovery from a severe ill­
ness the body is weakened, so after a spiritual cure the soul
retains a weakness and an inclination to fall back into sin; more­
over, as the Church teaches, the remission of guilt and eternal
punishment does not always include the remission of all tempo­
ral punishment. The penance is imposed with a view of remov­
ing the last traces of weakness and of paying the debt of temporal
punishment; under its first aspect it is called pœna medicinalis,
under the second, pœna vindicative.
This satisfaction is partly sacramental, partly extra-sacra­
mental. The sacramental portion consists in the works which
the confessor imposes in virtue of the power of the keys; the
extra-sacramental in the works freely undertaken by the peni­
tent, as well as in the patient submission to the sufferings and
crosses of this life. We are dealing at present with sacramental
i»· Seas. XIV. De Pœnit. cp. 8.
256

IMPOSITION OP PENANCE BY THE CONFESSOR

207

satisfaction, which is an integral part of the Sacrament, as it is
immediately connected with the power of the keys, and which
is more efficacious as atonement in consequence of the applica­
tion of the merits of Jesus Christ.1’®
Both confessor and penitent have obligations with respect to
this satisfaction. We will first consider the duty of the con­
fessor in the matter.
I. The confessor is bound to impose some penance on every
penitent who receives absolution and who is capable of doing
penance.
The tradition of the Fathers, the constant practice of the
Church, and the express declaration of the Council of Trent
agree in maintaining that the penance is an integral part of the
Sacrament. The text of the Council1” runs as follows: “It is
therefore the duty of priests to impose, as reason and pru­
dence may suggest, wholesome and appropriate penances with
due regard for the nature of the sin and the strength of the
penitent, lest, by being indulgent towards sin and treating the
penitent too tenderly in giving the very lightest penance for
grave sins they become themselves participators in the sins of
others. Let them keep in view that the satisfaction which
they impose is designed not only to preserve the new life and
to heal infirmity but also to punish and destroy past sin ; for
the power of the keys was given not only to loose but also to
bind.” The confessor must impose a penance not only when
mortal sins, but also when venial sins, or mortal sins already
absolved, are confessed. As often as absolution is given a penlw S. Thom. Ampliue valet art expiantium peccatum quum ei proprio arbitrio
homo Jaceret irtem opue. Quodl. Lib. 3. Q. 14. Summa Theol. Supplem. Q.
12-10; Suarez, De Sacr. Pœnit. Disp. 37 per 10 Sectiones. Disp. 38, Sect.
1 and 2; Lugo, Do Sacr. Pœnit. Disp. 24 per 5 Sectiones; Billunrt.
Compend. Theol. Tom. VI. De Sacr. Pœnit. Diss. VIII. a. I. tJ-8; cf.
Hallerini, Op. Theol. Mor. Vol. V. Tract. X. Sect V. cp. I. n. 478 ss. ;
Schanz, Die Lehre von den hl. Sakrainenten, II. Tl. § 42, Die Genugthuung,

258

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

ance must be imposed — (a) because the penance belongs to
the integrity of the Sacrament, (b) that the penitent may not
Im· deprived of the sacramental fruits of satisfaction, (c) that
justice and right may be done.
II. This duty of imposing a penance urges per se sub peccato
mortali when there is question of mortal sins not yet remitted
by the power of the keys; where the matter is only venial sin
or materia libera, the obligation is binding only sub levi.
Hence a priest sins mortally by failing to give a penance to
a penitent who confesses sins not yet directly forgiven ; in the
case of a penitent who presents only materia libera, the confessor
sins venially (probabiliter) ob parvitatem materia.
III. At times there may be no sin in failing to give a penance.
This can happen : —
(a) When absolution is given to a penitent in articulo mortis,
especially if he be unconscious. St. Alphonsus, however, recom­
mends, and laudably, that even a dying penitent should receive
some light and easy penance, if there be time to do it and the
penitent can perforin it, e.g. to kiss the crucifix, to pronounce
the names of Jesus and Mary, or to make at least an internal act
of love in order that the Sacrament may have its due comple­
ment and the dying person gain some fruit from the sacramental
satisfaction. The confessor might himself help the penitent by
reciting the prayers for him, holding the crucifix to him ; this
will also be a means of comforting and consoling the «lying man.171
(b) If a perplexed or scrupulous penitent returns frequently
to confess sins that he had forgotten, and if nearly every time
there is reason for giving absolution, the confessor satisfies his
obligations by again imposing the previous penance without
adding another or by prescribing it as sufficient for all the sins
mentioned in confession.1”
it· S. Alph. Theo). Mor. Lib. VI. nn. 50«. 507; II. Ap. n. 47.
m Busenbaum, Medulla, Lib. VI. Tract. IV. cp. I. De Satisfact. Art. I;
S. Alph. Lib. VI. u. 513; Lugo, Disp. 25, n. 50.

IMPOSITION OF PENANCE RY THE CONFESSOR 259

IV. The confessor is bound to give a suitable and wholesome
penance, punitive as well as medicinal, proportioned to the num­
ber and gravity of the sins and adapted to the individual peni­
tent. This is the express teaching of the Council of Trent.'”
The choice of the penance is not left to the caprice of the con­
fessor. Special directions are laid down for him by the Church,
and these he must follow sub yravi. The Council draws a dis­
tinction between pœnœ vindicative and medicinales, and the
confessor has to inflict these in his capacity of judge and healer
of souls. But to avoid misunderstanding it must be borne in
mind that the whole power and authority of inflicting penances
or of binding the faithful is vested in the confessor as judge.
As physician the great object of the confessor must be to
heal the wounds of the soul and to provide against relapses,
but here he can only insist on the necessary means, and that
simply because he expresses what the penitent is bound to do
already by natural and divine law.
The case is quite different when we regard the confessor as
judge; in this capacity he has power to punish and bind the
penitent. In the choice of the works of penance which he im­
poses in his quality of judge, he may use his knowledge as physi­
cian, and it is a course to be commended if he imposes such
penances as will help to salvation, heal the spiritual maladies
and safeguard the penitent against relapses.1’* In this way the
confessor falls in with the prescriptions of the Council by giv­
ing penances which are in part punitive, in part medicinal ; they
are punitive if in any way they oppose our sensuality or our
pride ; and they are medicinal when they are of a kind to cut
away the causes and roots of sin, to mortify our irregular incli­
nations, to strengthen the will, to remove occasions of sin, to
save us from relapses and to confirm us in virtue. In accord­
ance with the maxim “contraria contrariis curantur" those good
»’» Sees. XIV. cp. 8.
*” Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. Sect. II. cp. ΠΙ. Satisfactio, n. 355.

2(10

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

works are generally prescribed which are directly contrary to
the sins committed, hence the prescription of the Roman ritual
to impose as penances almsgiving upon the avaricious, fasting or
other Ixxiily mortifications upon the sensual, humiliating works
upon the proud, exercises of devotion for the tepid.1”
All works of satisfaction or penance may be reduced to the
three heads of Prayer, Fasting, AJmsdeeds. Under prayer, for
instance, may be grouped all works of piety and devotion, par­
ticulari)' everything that may be understood as related to the
knowledge of God; more frequent prayer, daily examination of
conscience, daily Mass, meditation (especially on the sufferings
and death of Jesus Christ and the four last things), spiritual
reading, more frequent confession, frequent repetition of acts of
the theological virtues, thought of the presence of God, devo­
tion to our Blessed Lady — all of which arc irksome and con­
trary to our corrupt nature and partake in consequence of the
nature of a penance. Under the head of fasting may be in­
cluded not only abstention from meat and drink, but every kind
of mortification, hence the denial of even lawful pleasures, early
rising in the morning, the cutting down of little comforts, kneel­
ing at prayer, etc. And under almsgiving we may comprise all
works of corporal and spiritual mercy.
These three classes of good works correspond to the three
roots of sin, — the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupiscence
of the eyes and the pride of life; for fasting is directed against
the concupiscence of the flesh, almsgiving against the concu­
piscence of the eyes, and prayer against the pride of life.”"
Even purely interior acts (opera mere interiora) may be im­
posed: some theologians contradict this statement on the plea
that human authority is not empowered to enjoin such acts,
but here the question is not about human authority but of divine
power given to men.1”
111 Rituale Rom. De Sacram. Pœnit. ”· S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 15, a. 3.
S. Alph. cum communi unientia. Lib. VI. 1. c.

IJUPOBITtOX OF PF.V/fiVCÎ BY THE CONFEHWR 261

The confessor may also give as a penance works to be done
for the souls in purgatory, for though this satisfaction in .«e is
directed to the benefit of the holy souls it is a good work, and by
its union with the Sacrament has power ex opere operato to les­
sen the temporal debt of the penitent.1”
Indeed the confessor may impose as penance some good work
which has already been started, not precisely as a good work
but so far as it expresses under the new circumstances obedi­
ence, humility, and the denial of one’s own will. It may be
observed, however, what St. Alphonsus remarks, that it is rarely
advisable to impose such a penance even with another good
work attached.
A work which one is already bound to do may be imposed as
a penance since it may be ex natura sua satisfactory and is capa­
ble of acquiring a greater satisfactory effect; but such work can
be considered as a sacramental penance only when the confessor
has expressly declared so, nor is it advisable that such works
should be so imposed, unless indeed there exist some urgent
reason for it on the part of the penitent, — his weakness, for ex­
ample. If such work (aliunde debitum) be imposed, its omission
is a double sin.1”
A penance may be given to be performed in case of a relapse,
according to the opinion of eminent theologians such as Suarez,
Laymann, and St. Alphonsus Liguori; so that if the condition
be fulfilled, i.e. if the sinner relapse, the penance must be carried
out. A confessor giving only a penance of that kind would be
very far from satisfying his obligations.1*0
A public penance, i.e., a penance to be done before others, of
such a nature that bystanders could infer that the penitent had
incurred grave sin, cannot be imposed by a confessor for secret
sins, for such an infliction would be an indirect violation of the
«” S. Alph. ibid. ; Scavini. 1. c. n. 383; S. Thom. QuodJ. 3, a. 28.
This is the teaching of St. Alphonsus cum innumeris teriptoribue contra
pauco, (n. Ô13).
S. Alph. 1. c. n. 524.

262

TH K RKCIPIEKT OF I'KNANCE

seal, and besides it is expressly forbidden by the Roman Ritual.
For publie sins a public penance may bo inflicted, ami (he Coun­
cil of Trent insists upon it as a way of repairing scam lai. Here
there is no broach of the seal, for it is question of notorious sin.
The confessor should only insist, however, on a public penance
when he is convinced of the necessity of that step for repairing
scandal. If the confessor feels called upon to impose such a
penance, and the penitent declines to do it, absolution cannot
be given. In general, any scandal given may be set right by
an evident reform in the life of the penitent, if, for instance,
he approach the Sacraments more frequently, visit the Church,
hear Mass, join a sodality, etc.1” Moreover, not everything
done in the presence of others, which the penitent could easily
undertake of his own free will, need be regarded as a public
penance. It need be no matter of anxiety to the confessor if
the penitent reveals to others that such or such a practice is a
penance imposed by the priest.
Finally the confessor must carefully avoid enjoining any
practices which are needlessly repugnant to the penitent and
which there is reason to fear he will shirk. For instance, tell­
ing the children to beg pardon of their parents, or the penitent
to pray in the Church with the arms stretched out in the form
of a cross. Lehmkuhl justly remarks that such penances are a
clear sign of a confessor’s want of prudence and may give occa­
sion to many sacrileges.1”
There is left a large choice for the confessor in the matter of
penances. He is bound, however, by the prescriptions of the
Council of Trent to impose works of penance quantum spiritus
et prudentia suggesserit, but also to consider the qualitas crimin um
and the facultas pœnitentium. Thus he must bear in mind the
gravity of the sin and the condition of the penitent; in this
way a prudent mean may be kept between too great mildness
in Cf. 8. Alpb. 1. o. n. 512.

182 Lebnikuhl, 1. c. n. 350 (8).

ΪΜΡΟΗΙΤΙΟΝ OF PENANCE ΠΥ THE CON FEMOR 283
and excessive strictness. The priest should avoid being too
easy, for fear, as the Council says, of participating in the guilt
of others and sacrificing God's cause to an indulgence which
may be easily attributed to human respect or other unworthy
causes. To avoid this danger the Roman Catechism recom­
mends the study of the old penitential canons where each sin
has its own fixed punishment. It is true that the discipline has
been altered since then but its spirit remains, and the zeal of the
priest for the cause of his Lord should be no less fervent than
that of the first ages of the Church. On the other hand, how­
ever, undue rigor is to be avoided. The strictness should not
be founded on self-love, prejudice, ostentation, nor on a natu­
rally stern temperament, nor on want of common sense, etc.,
otherwise the penitent may be driven to despair, and souls lost
instead of being won. The tribunal of penance should resemble
as closely as possible God’s own tribunal, and as God is not only
just but merciful, so the priest should never separate these two
attributes. It is often a good thing to let the penitent know
that he has deserved a severer penance, but that the ever gentle
spirit of the Church imposes only a light one, leaving the peni­
tent free to undertake other works of satisfaction if his zeal
prompt him thereto. It is matter of experience that penances
extended over too long a period do not always succeed in their
object, for since they are frequently not performed they may
easily prove a snare to the penitent instead of being a help. If
the priest is in doubt whether to adopt a strict or a mild line of
conduct in any particular case, he may recall the beautiful words
of St. John Chrysostom :183 “ Is it not easier to render an account
of excessive mercy than of excessive severity? Can the steward
be close-handed where the master is so liberal ? If, then, God
is so good why should His minister be severe? If your object
is to pose as a saint, be austere towards yourself and mild towards
others.” ,M
>« Hoinil. 43 ill Matth. c. 23.

Cf. Martin, Morat. S. 581.

2G4

THE RECIPIENT OP PENANCE

V. For mortal sin n pamitentia simpliciter gran's should be
given, for venial sin a pernitentia levis; and a confessor would
sin gravely if without sufficient reason ho should impose for
mortal sin a pernitentia in se levis, for he would neither punish
the sin nor give his penitent the means of salvation. In the
case of sins doubtfully mortal, whether considered subjectively
or objectively, he is not obliged to impose a severe penance."3
Whatever in the present discipline of the Church is imposed
sub gravi is considered as materia gravis for a penance. The
following, for instance: five decades of the Rosary, the Litany
of the Saints with the accompanying prayers; while, as materia
levis are reckoned: one psalm (of moderate length), the Litany
of Loretto, five Our Fathers and five Hail Mary’s, etc. Any
prayer corresponding in length to a little hour of the Breviary
counts for materia levis, for though the omission of one of these
little hours is a mortal sin, this is not in virtue of the prayer
itself, but because the recitation of the Breviary is a public and
official act and done in the name of the whole Church.
If the penitent has committed many mortal sins, the penance
can hardly be increased in a strict proportion. In this case the
imposition of a penance corresponding to one mortal sin is not
sufficient unless special reasons exist for not giving a heavier
penalty.
VI. There are many reasons for which a confessor may be
justified in giving a smaller penance than is due to the number
and gravity of the sins, and this diminution may be absolute
as well as relative. For instance : —
1. A penitent is-prostrated by a severe illness and unable to
perform a longer penance. The priest should exhort him to
offer up his sufferings as satisfaction for his sins, and if the sins
have been very grave the priest ought to be willing to take upon
himself part of the penance.’"'
’·» S. Alph. 1. c. n. 510, H. A. n. 55; Sporer, 1. c. n. 588.
Cf. Rit. Roman, tit. III. cp. I. n. 25.

IMPOSITION OP PENANCE UY THE CONPESSOK 2f>5
2. When there is extraordinary sorrow. This in xe is suffi­
cient reason for diminishing the penance, for the greater such
sorrow the greater is the remission of temporal punishment.
On the other hand, such a penitent is willing to accept a very
severe penance; and if we read of certain holy men imposing
only a slight, penance, we must remember that they either made
up for it in their own person or induced the penitent to practice
of his own free will some austerity.
3. A confessor may see that his penitent is very weak spiritu­
ally and not willing to carry out a severe penance, although he
may have no doubt as to his contrition and resolution of amend­
ment. Such a case may call for the expedient of adding to a
small penance some other practices which the penitent must
fulfill on other accounts, e.g. to hear Mass on Sunday, etc.,
and the confessor would do well to choose such practices as the
penitent, has been in the habit of neglecting.'·7
We will now mention the occasions in which a confessor may
impose a penance in accordance, indeed, with the Church's
precepts as to materia gravis, but less than what seems propor­
tioned to the number and gravity of the sins: —
1. When there is great, though not quite extraordinary, con­
trition.
2. On the occasion of a jubilee or some other plenary indul­
gence; but to refrain for such a reason from giving any penance
at all would be quite wrong and against the distinct declaration
of Benedict XIV, Constit. "Inter prateriios."
3. When there is fear that, the penitent, through spiritual
weakness, may fail to perform the penance which would cor­
respond to his sins.
4. When there is hope that a smaller penance will induce the
penitent to receive the Sacraments oftener and with greater
spiritual benefit; indeed, this seems to be the chief reason why
S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 513.

see

THE RECIPIENT OF PENAN'/:

the Church has tempered in our days the severity of her peni­
tential discipline.
5. When the confessor intends to do the penance which he
believes he dare not lay upon his penitent, as, for instance,
when St. Francis Xavier disciplined himself to satisfy for the
sins of his penitents. The sufficiency of this vicarious penance
rests on the Catholic doctrine of the Communion of Saints.
On the other hand, the proposition that a penitent can, of his
own authority, appoint another to do the penance for him has
been condemned by Alexander VII.
6. When there is hope of inducing the penitent by means of a
smaller penance to do other good works on his own account.
7. When the penitent has already done penance and is in the
habit of practicing good works.
It is, however, always recommended to tell the penitent that
the penance is very much less than he deserves.1”
VII. For venial sins or materia libera the confessor may im­
pose a heavy or a light penance but not sub gravi; but if he
imposes a light penance for mortal sin such penance may bind
only sub levi, but the very fact of imposing a heavy penance for
mortal sin means that the obligation is sub gravi, unless he ex­
pressly declares his intention of not so binding.1”
In treating the question of the obligation on the penitent of
carrying out the penance and the intention of the confessor in
the matter, we must keep in mind the parallel instances of the
binding force of laws. The legislator cannot bind the conscience
sub gravi in a matter which, regarded objectively, is of small
moment; while grave matter when prescribed ex gravi causa
induces a strict obligation per se, though the legislator may have
the power only to enforce it under pain of venial sin. This
is the teaching of St. Alphonsus with the sententia communior
S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 509, 510, 526; H. Ap. nn. 49, 50; Lugo, 1. c. Disp.
25. n. 60; Reuter, 1. c. p. 4, nn. 591, 404; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c.
nn. 489, 493.
,B S. Alph. Lib. VI. un. 517, 518.

IMPOSITION <>!■- !· EN ANCE Bi" THE CONFESSOR 267

cl valde probabilis as regards the obligation of laws and the law­
giver. When, then, the confessor imposes a penance, he is at
the same time passing a law which must be obeyed.
Many theologians deny that the confessor can impose for
mortal sin a heavy penance only sub levi because he is simply
God's minister, and in consequence must act in accordance with
the institution of the Sacrament without attempting to diminish
its rigor.1’0 On the other hand, the sententia, communior et raide
probabilis gives the confessor the right because, though he is
the vicar of God, he is appointed by Christ as actual judge and
legislator who, in virtue of his powers, looses by forgiving sip
and binds by imposing penance; so that the obligation of the
penance is not a consequence of the Sacrament but of the pre­
cept of the confessor.1” Still the confessor would not be justi­
fied in practically disregarding the first opinion, for, as St.
Alphonsus teaches, he must obey the Council of Trent in its
decision that ordinarily a grave opus is to be imposed sub gravi
even though the penance be slight in comparison to the number
and heinousness of the sins. The opinion may, however, be
used in this way. The confessor, after giving a severe penance
sub grain, may add a still more severe penance sub levi; if this
latter be fulfilled by the penitent, he makes full sacramental
satisfaction ; if he neglect it, there is at least no great respon­
sibility. St. Alphonsus notices that this is a very good way
of dealing with weak penitents, for all good works have a satis­
factory power anil a weak penitent is thus not exposed to occa­
sion of grave sin; at the same time what Aertnys observes is
also to be borne in mind, namely, that in our days, owing to the
decay of fervor, such a method is seldom to be recommended.'”
The confessor may give the penance immediately after the
’*> Thus, among others, Lugo.
101 Thus, among others, Suarez, Fillince, Segneri, St. Alphon. 1. c. n. 518.
,M Aertnys, Theo). Moral. Lib. VI. Tract. V. De Pœnit. op. III. art. IV

268

THE DECIPIENT O E PENANCE

absolution, but it is more correct to give it beforehand, as that
is the custom in the Church, and the proper order <>f justice
requires that the penitent should show himself disposed to under­
take his penance before absolution is given.1’3
In concluding this article we give a list of penances which
may be imposed according to the principles already given :
Attendance at holy Maas, the Rosary or the Stations of the
Cross (these should not be given to people who are not accus­
tomed to the devotions, and in regard to the Stations of the
Cross, the embarrassment that many experience in performing
public devotions should be taken into account), the Seven Peni­
tential Psalms, the Litany of the Saints, the Litany of Loretto
or some other litany, the Prayer to the Five Wounds, to com­
mend one’s self to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary morning
and evening while reciting one Our Father and one Hail Mary,
to say every day a certain number (not too many) of short
prayers — e.g. to say the Hail Mary three times morning and
evening (St. Alphonsus used to give his penitents this penance,
adding the invocation “My Mother, preserve me from offending
God this day,” and when the penitents were not accustomed to
this form of devotion he used at least to recommend it), to ex­
amine the conscience daily and to excite acts of contrition, to
read some short extracts from a pious book approved by the
confessor, such as the Imitation of Christ, to make a meditation,
or after reading carefully some subject such as the Four Last
Things or the Sufferings of Christ to reflect upon it for a short
while, to devote a short time every day to eliciting acts of
Faith, Hope, and Charity, to hear sermons, to receive the Sac­
raments on certain fixed days, to renew the resolutions made
at the last confession, not thoughtlessly but with all earnest­
ness, and to hold to them steadfastly now in honor of the Sacred
Heart, at another time in honor of the Blessed Virgin, and againS.
S. Alph. 1. c. II. 511 (in fine).

IMPOSITION OF PEN ANCft RY THE CONFESSOR 2«9

in honor of some one among the saints with a petition for their
help, to make some fervent ejaculation every time the clock
strikes (when the confessor gives this or similar practices as a
penance he might remind the penitents to make up the number
of times missed if by chance they forget it).
Fasting (though this should be very seldom given and then
only with great caution) or an occasional mortification at meal
time; to refrain from some particular dish, or from wine or other
intoxicating liquor, either for a fixed period or a certain number
of times; still more prudence is to be exercised in imposing
other bodily mortifications — indeed they should be permitted
only with great reserve — praying with arms extended (unseen,
of course, by others), to pray on bended knees, to rise at a fixed
hour in the morning, to avoid unprofitable conversation, etc.,
to give alms, to visit the poor anti the sick, to help them, and to
do lowly offices for them, etc.10*
Which of these penances should be imposed is a matter de­
pending on the sins and disposition of the penitent. The choice
of penance is an affair of considerable moment with regard to
the well-being and reformation of the penitent, and it is a neg­
lect of duty to impose on every occasion without distinction the
recital of a prayer.
In addition, the confessor should observe the wholesome
advice which has been given by men distinguished alike for
sanctity and learning.
St. Antoninus writes: *“ “The priest should give such a pen­
ance as ho thinks the penitent will perform. If a man, after
accusing himself of grave sin, declares that he cannot do a severe
penance, the confessor must reason with him, pointing out the
gravity of his offenses and the severe punishments he has de­
served, and after that give him some penance such as he can be
persuaded to undertake; and if the priest does not obtain perlw Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. Appendix, n. 535. Cf. Aertnyn. 1. <·. n. 200;
Lehrnkuhl, 1. o. n. 308.
,M Summa Theo). P. III. tit. 17. e. 20.

270

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

fed success, he may rejoice, at least, that he has rescued a soul
from hell if not from purgatory; hence, on no account, should
he send a penitent away in despair or discouragement. It is
better to give him a Paler Nosier or some other slight penance
and make the good works which he does or his sufferings supply
for the rest. A man who shows real sorrow and is ready to do
all that he ought, but declares that a heavy penance is beyond
him should never, no matter how he may have sinned, be sent
away without absolution lest he fall into despair.”
St. Charles Borromeo recommends the confessor to impose
such penance as he thinks the man will do ; hence he may occa­
sionally ask the penitent if he can perforin the penance given;
and if the latter expresses his doubts about fulfilling it, the con­
fessor may change the penance or make it easier.”" The saint
also appeals to St. Thomas Aquinas, who warns the confessor
not to burden his penitents with heavy penances,”7 for as a
smouldering fire may be put out by heaping too much fuel upon
it, so the feeble contrition which has only just been excited in
the heart of the penitent may be crushed out by a severe penance,
and despair may be the consequence. Hence it is better to
point out to the penitent what a big penance he deserves and to
give him a smaller one such as he will be ready to fulfill, by which
he will accustom himself to the bigger one which the confessor
would not have ventured to impose.
Finally St. Alphonsus may be heard on this subject : “ How
imprudent is the conduct of those priests who give penances
which they foresee will never be done. Oh, how many ignorant
confessors there are who thoughtlessly absolve penitents living
in the proximate occasion of sin or in bad dispositions ; and yet
such confessors are persuaded for some incomprehensible reason
that they are ministering to the health of souls by imposing
heavy penances. The result is that the penitents, having agreed
m Instruct. Confess, cp. 20.
Quodl. 3, a. 28; of. Opuuc. 05, § 4.
>’· Lib. VI. n. 510.

acceptance of penance by the penitent

271

to the penance for fear of being refused absolution, relapse again,
after a short time, because they were never taught to adopt any
safeguards against sin, omit the penance, and, terrified by its
severity, keep away from the Sacrament so as to spend a great
portion of their lives in sin.”

34.

The Acceptance and Performance of the Penance by the
Penitent.

I. The penitent is obliged to accept willingly the penance
imposed and to perform it exactly ; for as the duty devolves on
the priest of securing the integrity of the Sacrament by giving
the penance, the penitent is, in turn, bound to accept it and
carry it out.
The duty is of strict obligation ex genere suo, so that the peni­
tent would sin gravely by omitting a grave penance imposed
sub gravi, or a considerable portion of it. We have already
seen what is to be considered grave in this matter.1’"
II. The penitent is obliged to perform the penance enjoined
by the confessor, but no limit of time is determined within which
it must be done. An unreasonably long delay, however, might
easily become a grave matter.
To determine how far delay may involve grave sin we must
take into consideration whether time is a substantial element
in the penance. For example : (1) whether the confessor has
fixed a rlay and of set purpose, for the appointing of a day does
not always imply a fixed intention on the confessor's part ;
indeed, generally speaking, it is not a mortal sin to postpone a
fast appointed for Friday to the following Saturday.”® (2) If
some work has been prescribed to be done within a given time
after the confession, anti it is the intention of the confessor that
there should be no interruption, its omission, even for one day
if it amount to a materia grains, may be a mortal sin, unless
i» S. Alph. 1. o. n. 517.

300 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 521.

272

THK RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

the confessor has given leave to substitute one day for another
or where his consent to a change may be fairly presumed. (3) If
the postponement of the work imposed reduced the penance to
little or nothing, as, for example, if the confessor enjoined on
the penitent to approach the Sacraments in a week and the
penitent put it off for a month; to delay the weekly communion
for a day or two or the monthly communion to a period not
longer than a week would, apart from other considerations,
amount only to a venial sin.”1
There is no mortal sin in putting off the penance even for a
considerable time as long as the time fixed for its performance
is not a substantial part of the work imposed. Λ delay of six
months would, according to St. Alphonsus, certainly constitute a
mortal sin; the great factor in determining the gravity of the
offense will be the danger of forgetting the penance or of being
unable to carry it out.’*”
If a penance is enjoined which has to be performed daily for
a considerable period, and which is also a work prescribed by
the commandments of the Church, it may be presumed that the
confessor never intended a double performance of the work un­
less he expressly declared such an intention. On the other hand,
if it is enjoined once or twice or even oftener without indicating
any special day, the penitent cannot satisfy the double obliga­
tion by the one act ; for example, a man who is told to hear Mass
three times cannot satisfy by making one of the Masses the
Sunday Mass of obligation, unless this be expressly granted by
his confessor, nor would he fulfill his duty by hearing three
Masses simultaneously, because such would never be the inten­
tion of the confessor. If, however, a man is enjoined to hear
Mass daily, he is not obliged to hear two Masses on Sundays.20’
S. Alph. 1. c. n. 521; II. A. n. 57; Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Diep. I.
Q. V. cp. 2.
Lugo, 1- C. Disp. 25, Sect. 5, n. 92 ; Sanchez in decalog. 1.4, c. 10, n. 21 ;
Elbel, de Pœnit. n. 229.
*>· Mazzotta, 1. c.; Gury II. n. 535; S. Alph. H. A. n. 57.

ACCEPTA N (.'E OF P ES ANCE BY THE PENITENT 273
If the penitent has certain prayers to say for his penance, they
may be recited during a Mass of obligation, for the two duties
may be fulfilled at the same time unless the confessor rule it
otherwise. It is a useful and excellent practice to remind the
penitent that he may say his penance during the time of Mass,
especially if his circumstances be such that he can hardly com­
mand other available time.”'
If the penitent fails to perform his penance within the pre­
scribed time, he is not on that account freed from the obligation
of accomplishing it; for the confessor intends first the penance,
then the time-limit, and the latter is fixed non ad finiendam sed
ad urgendam obligationem.
Even when the penitent has fallen into mortal sin, he may
still perform his penance and so satisfy his obligation in that
matter, but he does not obtain the fruits of satisfaction. When
the penitent does what he has been told he fulfills substantially
his duty; the manner or mode of fulfilling it (namely, in the
state of grace) does not come under the command. By the fact,
however, of not being in the state of grace his works cannot be
de condigno satisfactory, and so cannot merit for him the release
from temporal punishment. It is certain that no new mortal
sin is contracted by a penitent who performs his penance in a
state of mortal sin, though, according to a probable opinion sup­
ported by St. Alphonsus,”5 there is a venial sin in consequence
of the hindrance offered to the effects of the Sacrament. Some
theologians20e also teach that when such a penitent regains the
state of grace (obice remoto) the penance effects satisfaction and
remission of temporal punishment ex opere operato, and this doc­
trine is calde probabilis.
In addition to the sacramental satisfaction the penitent should
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 384.
Lib. VI. n. 523.
Λβ Suarez. De Pœn. Disp. 38. a 8. n. 5; Lugo, 1. c. Disp. 25, s. 3, u. 39;
Lnymann, Theol. Mor. Lib. V. Tract. VI. cp. 15, d. 15; Lacroix. Theol.
Mor. Lib. VI. P. II. n. 1245, and many others.

ΤΠΕ RECIPIENT OF

274

penance

undertake some penance on his own initiative, especially where
that enjoined by the priest is small with regard to the gravity
of the sin. This extra-sacramental satisfaction will be supple­
mented by the prayer in which the Church, in virtue of the merits
of Christ ami His saints, confers on extra-sacramental works the
power of reducing the debt of temporal punishment.
35.

The Commutation of the Penance.

If, for some good reason, the penitent discovers that the pen­
ance is too severe, he should mention the circumstance to his
confessor that he may change it; and if the penitent has under­
taken a penance which later on presents great difficulties in its
fulfilment, he should consult some priest equipped with the neces­
sary powers for a commutation.
But there should be a good reason, and not mere weakness,
sensuality, or laziness, which usually counsel avoidance of all
severity and self-conquest or sacrifice for God and the good of
one's soul. Self-love ami self-indulgence easily persuade us that
what is difficult is impossible, and we have seen that the very aim
of penance is to punish in the strict sense of the word ; it ought
to be both a chastisement and a means of salvation. If the
penitent shrinks from the penance and asks for a mitigation,
the confessor should in all kindness consider the motive and act
accordingly. If he can find no sufficient reason but only a pre­
text of self-love and self-indulgence, he must tell the penitent
so and endeavor to persuade him to undertake the penance,
otherwise absolution cannot lie given. When the petition is
reasonable the penance may be changed.
A reasonable penance cannot be declined by the penitent
without his incurring thereby grave sin, for when once he
has submitted his case to the confessor he ought to abide by
the latter's decision, since the law of God requires that the con­
fessor should inflict a suitable penance and that the penitent

THE COMMUTATION OF THE PENANCE

275

should accept it.’"’ There is, however, a great difference between
refusing a penance and asking for its mitigation. Under no
circumstances may the penitent himself change the penance,
even for a work objectively more perfect, for the sacramental
satisfaction must, be imposed by the minister of the Sacrament,
and the penitent has no right to annul or commute on his own
authority the sentence pronounced by the judge.
If, now, the penitent is convinced on sufficient grounds that
the penance is exorbitant and he cannot persuade the confessor
to make it easier, he is at liberty to go away without absolution
and present Ids case to another priest, repeating, of course, his
confession.20' If, however, his grounds are defective, he may
easily incur a venial sin by such procedure.200 A really well-dis­
posed penitent, therefore, will hardly incur grave sin if, conscious
of his weakness, he objects to a penance as too hard and seeks
absolution from another confessor, so long, of course, as he does
not seek out one who is known for his criminal laxity.
If a man after absolution finds the penance too difficult of
performance, he may get it changed either by the same priest
or by another.
This commutation can be made only in confession, in virtue
of the absolution which has been already given or is to be given,
for it is only the absolution by which an effect ex opere operato
can be produced in the penitent, and it is the absolution which
gives the satisfactory efficacy ex opere operato to the penance
which has been or is to be imposed.’10
Hence the confessor immediately after the absolution can
certainly change the penance because, morally speaking, the
307 llazzotta, I. é. Q. 5 ; cf. 2 Suarez, 1. c. Disp. 38, a. 7. Lugo, 1. c. Disp.
25, n. 68, says that this doctrine is rerum et certum, and is a direct conse­
quence of the teaching of the Council of Trent (Seas. XIV. cp. 8); cf.
Elbel, 1. c. n. 227.
m S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 515, 516; Mazzotta, I. c.
Lugo, 1. o. n. 77.
a» Lugo, Du I’cenit. Disp. 25, nn. 107-110. Cf. Disp. 15, u. 107.

276

THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE

judicial action is still in progress. Though sonic theologians
extend this power (of changing the penance in virtue of the ab­
solution imparted) over two or three days, the preference is to be
given to the opinion of St. Alphonsus,1" who restricts the period
to the time immediately after the absolution, for, as a matter of
fact, the judicium sacra mentale is then completed. If, however,
the penitent and confessor are of the other opinion, which is not
devoid of extrinsic probability, they may act upon it, since it is
not a question of an essential part of the Sacrament ; if there
were question of the essence of the Sacrament, an injury would
be done both to the Sacrament and its recipient by following a
doubtful opinion.*1*
Any other priest can commute the penance only in virtue of
a new absolution which he himself gives.
The question now arises whether the penitent ought to repeat
his confession with a view to obtain another penance. If he
applies to the same confessor, he is certainly not obliged if the
latter retain some notion in canjuso of the penitent’s conscience ;
if the penitent goes to another priest, according to an opinion
considered as probable by Laymann, Lugo, Sporer, he is ex­
empt from the obligation of repeating his confession, because
it is not upon the sins that judgment is to be passed,
but upon the reasons for changing the penance, whether, for
instance, the penitent is unable to perform it or whether the
penance itself is too severe. Moreover, the confessor may follow
this method with a safe conscience, though it is more advisable
for him to adopt the practice advocated by other theologians,
notably Suarez, Lugo, Laymann, Sporer, and Lacroix, of get­
ting the penitent to give at least an outline of the previous con­
fession in order to have an approximate knowledge of the state
of Ids soul.’1’
»' L. c. n. 529, dub. III.
n* Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 300.
»» S. Alph. 1. c. n. 529, dub. I; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 213, Q. I; Müller, 1. c.

THE COMMUTATION OF THE PENANCE

277

The view held by many theologians is also probable, that
when a confessor sees that a penance has not been performed
by a penitent, and that no likelihood exists of its performance,
he may commute it for something else, though unasked by the
penitent.
When, however, a penance has been inflicted for some reserved
sin by a constitutional Superior, no inferior may commute it,
for authority in such cases is withdrawn from the inferior tri­
bunal. Exception is made where the penitent would have great
difficulty in approaching the Superior and when urgent reasons
call for a commutation. This is the teaching of St. Alphonsus
and some other theologians against the supporters of the stricter
doctrine.214
There still remains the question what the penitent is to do
when he has forgotten the penance. According to the common,
and perhaps also the more probable, opinion, he is not obliged to
repeat the confession of even the graver sins, and the duty of
performing the penance simply lapses (ad impossibile enim nemo
tenetur) ; nor is there any obligation to confess again sins already
directly remitted with a view of securing the integrity of the
Sacrament, for that would be a grievous burden. If, however,
the penitent thinks that the confessor remembers the penance,
and he can reach him without difficulty, he is, as theologians
rightly affirm, obliged to ask his confessor to give him his pen­
ance, for there is no grave impediment in this case to the per­
formance of the penance.215
In this connection we must note that: 1. When a man for­
gets the penance enjoined, and has a conviction that the penance
was a certain work, he is bound to do that work, for whoever is
certain about his obligation is obliged to do what is probably
of obligation if he cannot fulfill what is certainly of obligation.”’
»>« S. Alph. 1. c. n. 529, dub. Π; H. A. n. 81.
2IS S. Alph. 1. c. n. 520; H. A. n. 5».
«· H. A. Tr. 8, n. 33, in fine.

278

THE JIECIPIEXT OF PENANCE

2. When a penitent confesses that he has not performed the
penance but has said the prayers prescribed out of devotion
without thinking of the penance, he has satisfied his obligation,
and the confessor cannot insist on the performance of another
penance; for a man is supposed to do first that to which he is
bound.’1’
®’ S. Alph. H. A. n. 58 ; Theol. Mor. Lib. III. n. 7(M), Q. 2.

Part III
THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

In the preceding chapters which dealt with the actus pœnitentis, we have already had occasion to consider the office of the
minister of the Sacrament. The functions of the confessor con­
sist mainly in absolving according to the intention of Christ.
In treating of this important and difficult subject, we shall fol­
low the most approved theologians, distinguished alike for
learning and sanctity, so as to avoid on the one hand an exten­
sive mildness and on the other a severity fatal to the salvation
of souls.

Section I
THE POWERS OF THE CONFESSOR

36.

Orders, Jurisdiction, Approbation.

1. The proper minister of the Sacrament of Penance is the
priest. Penance being a Sacrament, it is self-evident on Catholic
principles that its minister must have the sacerdotal character,
the power of Orders (potestas ordinis). This power springs from
the priestly character and consists in the capacity of valide per­
forming the sacred rites instituted by Christ, so that they are
an efficacious means of grace?
The Sacrament of Penance is, moreover, in its dispensation
essentially judicial. The minister of the Sacrament is judge
over the soul ; hence he must have in addition to Holy Orders
the power of spiritual jurisdiction (potestas jurisdictionis).
* Lehmkuhl, I. c. Sect. III. cp. I. art. I. n. 300.
270

280

THE MINISTER OF THK SACRAMENT

Thus for a valid absolution there are required both polenta»
ordinis and potestas jurisdictionis.
Jurisdiction in general is public authority in its completest
sense, and thus includes the power of directing subjects. In its
more restricted sense it is the power of judging right and wrong
and of pronouncing sentence. It answers perfectly to the power
exercised in the Sacrament of Penance (in /oro interno). Hence
jurisdiction in joro sacramentali is the power by which a priest
cun pronounce sentence on those subject to him by remitting or
retaining sins.
What, then, is the relation existing between the potestas ordinis
and the potestas jurisdictionis ? The priestly character conveys
no jurisdiction with it; it may exist without any jurisdiction.’
2. It is a peculiarity of this potestas ordinis that the exercise of
it without the Church’s commission is not illicit only, but invalid.
Hence, while in the other Sacraments jurisdiction is extrinsic to
the exercise of power and only regulates it, in the Sacrament
of Penance the jurisdiction is an intrinsic condition, because the
exercise of the power of this Sacrament is essentially a judicial
act and involving jurisdiction.
3. Jurisdiction, though not conveyed by Orders, is derived
from God, but through the hands of the Church, i.e. by delega­
tion from those who are invested with that jurisdiction. Hence
all priests besides the Pope, who receives it immediately from
God, owe their jurisdiction to the Church ; thus priests receive
their jurisdiction from the bishops, the bishops from the Pope.
4. We may, therefore, say that the potestas ordinis renders
its subject capable of jurisdiction in foro interno, and of confer­
ring the Sacrament after jurisdiction has been given, so that
the potestas ordinis is the disposition for administering the Sac­
rament of Penance.’ Thus it is not so much that the power of
remitting sins judicially is given to the priest in his ordination
« Trid. Sees. XIV. cp. 7.

• Suarez, Disp. 16, s. 3.

ORDERS, JURISDICTION, APPROBATION

281

as rather this, that the ordained person, when he is appointed
judge by proper authority to take cognizance of sins, is enabled
to remit these sins sacramentally ; in other words, he receives
power to remit sins by a special grace.
From the preceding it follows: (1) that the doctrine which
teaches that jurisdiction is conveyed by ordination merely is
false; (2) that it is also false to teach that ordination confers
ipso lacto jurisdiction, but that the Church can restrain its ex­
ercise and that in granting jurisdiction she does no more than
remove her own prohibition ; (3) that it is the same thing to say :
the Church confers jurisdiction to a priest, as to say, the Church
assigns in foro interno certain subjects to the priest; (4) that
one may say, the potestas ordinis which is acquired by the char­
acter of the priesthood is the potestas inchoata to absolve, while
it is incorrect to say that the potestas ordinis is the potestas juris­
dictionis inchoata or habitualis; (5) that jurisdiction differs
from the powers of Orders both in its essence and in the mode
by which it is acquired; in its essence, since jurisdiction is the
power of judging and binding subjects, while ordination only
confers the power ex jure divino of acquiring jurisdiction and is
the necessary condition that the absolution be sacramental;
in its mode, since jurisdiction is imparted by the concession
of the Church, while the power of Orders comes from the con­
secration to the priesthood.4
Jurisdiction is either ordinary or delegated (ordinaria vel
delegata). Christ appointed judges to preside over visible tri­
bunals in His place and in His name, with authority, vicarious,
it is true, but ordinary (auctoritate quidem vicaria al ordinaria),
that is, an authority emanating from the office to which they
were appointed by Christ. These judges are the Apostles and
their successors, the Pope, therefore, and the bishops, and these
can appoint others to help them.
• Palmieri, Tract, de Prenitentia, cp. Π. Thea. XVI. p. 172 sa.

282

THE MINISTER OF ΤΠΕ SACRAMENT

Thus whoever in virtue of a public, ecclesiastical office exist­
ing of divine right has subjects over whom he rules and is judge,
exercises jurisdiction in the Sacrament of Penance potestate
ordinaria; others exercise this function potestate delegata vel a
proprie dictis Superioribus communicata; hence the latter are
dependent on their Superiors in the exercise of their powers
quoad liceitatem ct quoad valorem.
Although any one with potestas ordinaria can impart it to
another, the Supreme Authority of the Church on which de­
pends all valid exercise of jurisdiction has so ordered it that no
one may exercise delegated jurisdiction in the tribunal of pen­
ance — at least with regard to lay people — without having
previously received episcopal approbation ; hence the delega­
tion by those who are subject to the bishop and have powers
of delegation is as a rule quite useless. Indeed, it is now the
custom generally to give approbation and jurisdiction at the
same time; nevertheless, cases might occur in which the dis­
tinction must be observed.
Approbation in se is nothing more than a formal declaration
that a priest is a suitable person (aptus) to exercise sacramental
jurisdiction; his fitness or capacity for the work is judged by
his science and morals. Approbation cannot be given licitly
unless the fitness of the subject is ascertained or reasonably
presumed, though its validity is not affected by the want of this
fitness; but the Superior ought to withdraw his approbation
when the subject is unfit. The Council of Trent interprets the
phrase Public Approbation not only as a testimonium auctoritativum that the priest is a fit subject to exercise jurisdiction,
but also as the facultas audiendi confessiones which the bishop
grants to a priest who is considered fit for the office ;5 for the
Council declares that he only can hear confessions who has been
given charge of a parish or who has received approbation. BeTrid. Ses». ΧΧΠΙ. cp. 15, reform.

orders,

.hrisoktion, approbation

283

yond that nothing else is demanded for the exercise of juris­
diction, hence approbation or the appointment to a parish is the
only condition required for hearing confessions. Moreover, in
papal constitutions the approbation is called licentia or facultas
audiendi confessiones, and in common speech an approved priest
is one who has jurisdiction.· All this is in perfect agreement
with the practice of bishops, who usually grant jurisdiction along
with approbation.’
•Hen. XIV. De Syn. Lil·. 0, cp. 16, n. 7; Instil. n. 14 m. et Instit 86;
S. Carol. Borrom. Cone. I'rovinc. I. part 2 et VI. part 3, etc.
’ Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. L c. cp. II. n. 546 m.

CHAPTER I
JURISDICTION

37.

The Minister of the Sacrament with Ordinary Jurisdiction.

I. The Pope has jurisdictio ordinaria over the whole Church.
This requires no proof. The Vatican Council decreed that the
jurisdiction of the Pope is a real episcopal jurisdiction, imme­
diate and extending to all the faithful. Theologians discuss
at length — and it is a question not to be omitted here - how
it is that the Pope can give power to another to absolve him­
self (the Pope). Lugo discusses at length that there is no con­
tradiction in the Pope delegating to another such jurisdiction
over himself, and still less contradiction appears when we reflect
that that jurisdiction in joro sacramentali, though exercised and
delegated by the pastor of the Church, is always exercised in
the name of Christ ; nor is there anything absurd in the fact of
the Pope as a private individual being subject to his own juris­
diction in his capacity as a public person. Though he cannot
bind and punish himself, he may subject himself to another and
share in the graces and privileges of the Church, otherwise he
could not obtain absolution at all."
II. By divine right, the bishops exercise potestas ordinaria in
their own dioceses, even in joro interno, subject, of course, to
the authority of the Pope. Although every bishop receives his
jurisdiction from the Holy See, the episcopal office is one of
divine right and confers a definite jurisdiction, a very important
• Cf. Palmieri, 1. c. Thea. XVI; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. Sect. III. cp. I. art. II.
n. 374.
284

on bl y Λ It Y JURISDICTION

285

section of which is the jurisdiction in jaro sacramentali. As long
as a bishop remains in office and in the exercise of it, he cannot
be deprived of the power of absolving his subjects, though this
power may be limited by reservations imposed by the Pope. A
bishop may also, for grave reasons, be deprived of his office, or
the exercise of it may be forbidden, or his jurisdiction taken
away ; and such is the effect of certain ecclesiastical censures.
III. By ecclesiastical law, all vicars-general, and sede vacante
vicars-capitular, have the same jurisdiction as the bishop over
his diocese in joro interno. The jurisdiction, however, of the
vicar-general is wholly dependent on that of the bishop, hence
the saying: Episcopi morte moritur Vicarius generalis; and he
has no other faculties than those which the bishop has attached
to his office. If, for instance, a bishop by a special privilege of
the Holy See has more extended faculties, these do not pass to
the vicar-general unless the bishop transfers them to him with
leave from the Holy See. During the vacancy of the episcopal
see, the whole of the bishop’s faculties, with a few exceptions,
are transferred to the vicar-capitular or administrator.
IV. By the law of the Church, parish priests have jurisdictio
ordinaria over their parishioners, and their power is measured
by what the Church imparts to them as the constituted assist­
ants of the bishop. In relation to their own parish they are
pastores proprii, having only administrative power in joro externo,
but in foro interno plena jurisdictio subject, of course, to such
limitations as may be imposed by the Pope or their bishop. By
his appointment (collatione) to a parish a priest acquires the
right of hearing the confessions of his subjects. Nevertheless,
the bishop has the right of examining his clergy periodically to
make sure of their fitness to hear confessions.®
0 Benedict XIV, Notificatione 0, n. IB; Scnvini, 1. c. Tract. X. Disp. Γ. cp.
4, n. 00. nota 220. Cf. Deer. S.
Concil. quoted by Scnvini. Th·· same
author goes on to observe that by a decision of the Kota a cou.xr tujficient
for * new examination may 1«· libitum rt tola i/uirt tfiitro/tt «hen there ■·

I

286

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

V. The Cathedral Penitentiary has also ordinaria jurisdictio for
the whole diocese in places where the office is established, and
he may absolve all belonging to the diocese, even outside the
boundaries of the diocese ;1011
and this power is secured to him,
not by any concession from the bishop, but by a law passed by
the Council of Trent.'1
VI. Others may, also, in virtue of the Church's law, acquire
jurisdictio ordinaria, and as a matter of fact it is enjoyed by Pro­
lati regulares with respect to their subjects, by Legates over their
province. That of Cardinals over their churches is confined to
very narrow limits. Those are regarded as subjects who have
domicile or quasi-domicilc within the parish or diocese; hence
the jurisdiction of bishops and parish priests is primarily local
and secondarily personal ; that is, it extends to those who have
their dwelling in a definite place. On the other hand, the juris­
diction of Regular Prelates is chiefly personal, and is confined
to definite local limits only secondarily.
Since the Council of Trent excepts from the further appro­
bation of the bishops only those priests who are in charge of a
parish, a difficulty may occur as to the jurisdiction of priests
who have no parish, but who exercise a definite cura spiritualis
over certain subjects. We must inquire first of all into the
faculties which the Holy See has annexed to such offices, for
since the Council emanated from the Holy See the latter is em­
powered to make exceptions. The question is of peculiar inter­
est with regard to military chaplains, as to whether they can
hear the confessions of soldiers in garrison without the approquestion of priests who have been examined by his predecessors; as for
those whom he lias himself examined, he is justified in calling them to
account again quando adest vehemens suspicio de illorum imperitia, nor is it
necessary that judicial proof of this imperitia be forthcoming. Deer. 15
Jan., 160" et 22 Sept., 1068. Cf. Bened. XIV, De Synod, dicee. 1. 18, cp. 9,
10 Scuvini. I. c. n. 98, nota 230 ; S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 555-558 ; II. A. n. 81.
11 Sess. XXIV. cp. 8 de reform.

ORDINARY JURISDICTION

2ΛΊ

bation of the bishop of the diocese. No general rule can be laid
down for all cases. Wherever a regularly appointed army-bishop
or even a Capellanus major exists, he generally receives the fullest
faculties, not only for hearing the confessions of the soldiers
himself, but also for appointing other priests or chaplains to
that duty without consulting the bishop of the diocese;13 other­
wise no military chaplain may hear the confessions of soldiers
in garrison without special powers from the Pope or the per­
mission and approbation of the Ordinary.” Thus their faculties
are confined to the soldiers when on the march or in camp.
All who have jurisdictio ordinaria can receive the confessions
of their subjects and absolve them wherever they happen to be,
for such jurisdiction belongs to their office anil accompanies
them everywhere. Thus a parish priest can always hear the
confessions of his parishioners whether he be within or beyond
the bounds of his parish and diocese or not. A curate, chaplain,
or other assistant priest cannot receive confessions outside the
diocese, even if he have faculties for the whole diocese ; to do so
he would have to apply to the bishop of the diocese in which
the penitent happens to be.
De jure a parish priest is approved only for the territory of
his benefice “pro suo tantum oppido ubi sila sit parochialis eccle­
sia" according to the decrees of the S. C. C.“ He may not,
therefore, when in another diocese, hear the confessions of
strangers (who are not his own subjects) without leave of the
bishop of that diocese. Indeed, per se, he may not hear the
confessions of strangers in another parish even of his own diocese.
At the present day, however, it is the practice sanctioned either
by law or by custom that parish priests and their curates may
hear confessions anywhere within the diocese.”
n Scavini, 1. c. n. 231 ; Benedict XIV, Quoniam, 28 Maj.. 1716.
'· Acta S. Sed. Vol. I. p. 081, Reap. « .Mart., 161)4, _'H Jan.. 170". in Frising.
n Houix, De Parocho, p. iv. ep. 11.
16 Gobat, 1. c. Tract. ", n. 45; Gary, Ed. Ratisb. not ad n. 552.

288

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

In his own parish a parish priest may hear the confessions of
any one who approaches him, even strangers, since he is the
approved confessor in his own parish.
Jurisdictio ordinaria is lost : (o) by loss of the office or bene­
fice to which it is attached ; (ft) by excommunication or suspension
if the censure carries the stigma “ vitandus." Other excommu­
nications or suspensions impede only the licit exercise (licitus
usus) of the powers.
38.

The Minister of the Sacrament with Delegated Jurisdiction or

Approbation.

1. All priests who have not jurisdictio ordinaria, but act ordy
ex jurisdictione delegala, require for the licit and valid exercise of
their office the approbation of the bishop of the place where they
hear confessions, unless they enjoy some special privilege from
the Holy See. The Constitution of Innocent XII, 9 Apr., 1700,
‘‘Cum Sicut,” is very explicit in this matter, as is also that of
Innocent XIII, 23 Sept., 1723, “Apostolici muneris,” which
was confirmed by Benedict XIV in his Constitution, 5 Aug.,
1744, “Apostolica indulta,” in the following words: ‘‘No priest,
whether secular or regular, may hear confessions without the
approbation of the Ordinary of the diocese where the penitent
dwells or sojourns, and it is expressly decreed that all privileges
to choose a confessor from the clergy approved by the bishop
are to be understood only as giving powers to choose any one
approved by the bishop of the place where the confession is
made.””
16 After the Council of Trent, a lengthy controversy arose among the
theologians as to which bishop ought to give the approbation to the con­
fessor; many thought it was the confessor's bishop, others the penitent's;
with regard to exempted Regulars, it seemed probable that a single appro­
bation, without restrictions from any bishop at all, was sufficient, since they
are not the subjects of the bishops; this had been granted by Clement VII
and Sixtus V; moreover, Gregory ΧΠ1 gave Religions, when on a jour­
ney, the power of hearing confessions, provided they had the sanction
of their Superior and approbation from any bishop; this privilege, how-

DELEGATED JUBISDICTIOIT

289

Since the conferring of approbation is not an act of the Ordo
episcopalis but of episcopal jurisdiction, all who have ordinary
episcopal jurisdiction can grant approbation, thus: (1) the bishop
elect and continued, though not yet ordained; (2) the vicar­
general since he exercises the jurisdiction of the bishop; (3) the
vicar-capitular sede vacante, since he succeeds to the jurisdiction
of the bishop; (4) vicars-apostolic who are appointed by the
Pope in place of bishops; and (5) abbots who are not affiliated
to a diocese.
The bishop may insist on an examination before granting
approbation, though he may dispense with it since there are
other means of ascertaining the fitness of a priest for hearing
Confessions.17 Any priest whether secular or regular may be
called on again for examination by the bishop, if the latter has
not approved the candidate himself, although a former bishop
may have done so. A confessor even approved by his own
Ordinary may be examined if he has received approbation with­
out undergoing examination. Those, however, whom the bishop
has approved after an examination may not be reexamined
without a justa causa.1* A bishop sins by refusing approba­
tion to a competent priest, for all priests have a claim to
approbation in virtue of their sacerdotal character, so that to
deny it to a suitable candidate would be an infringement of his
rights.
The approbation which is necessary for a valid absolution
may not be presumed; it must be actually conferred and made
known to the priest; for since there is question of the validity of
an act, only the faculties which the bishop has really conferred,
not those which he will grant, can be considered. Hence when
a priest applies for faculties he cannot hear confessions till he
ever, was not to be made use of in the towns or places where the bishop
was actually residing, without the letter’s permission. Innocent XII. how­
ever, withdrew all privileges contrary to his bull. S. Alph. I. c. n. 458.

290

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

has received them, even when from his knowledge of the bishop
he feels confident of receiving the faculties and knows that they
are already on the way. The faculties may be acted upon when
conveyed verbally by any trustworthy person.”
Approbation is required even before absolving from venial
sins already confessed; after the decree of Innocent XI, 1679,
we cannot any longer assume that the Church here supplies
jurisdiction to the priest.”
A bishop in traveling may take with him any of his priests
to accompany him as confessor; but if the priest is not a sub­
ject of said bishop (whether by domicile or quasi-domicile), he
may not receive the confession of the bishop unless he be ap­
proved, as St. Alphonsus adds, by the bishop of the priest's
domicile (Fagnani and Lugo) or, as Scavini remarks, by the
bishop of the place ; the Congregation 8. C. C. decreed so early
as 1609 that a bishop outside his own diocese might confess
only to a priest approved ab ordinario loci (except, of course,
when the priest is a subject of the bishop), so that Scavini’s
decision is the norm to be observed in practice.”
Cardinals, papal domestic prelates, and royalty may choose
any approved confessor and be absolved by him anywhere.
Even in Rome itself Cardinals and bishops may choose for
themselves and for their household any suitable priest as con­
fessor and retain him with them for that purpose also when
they leave the city.”
M 8. Alph. 1. c. n. 570; II. A. n. 83. Lehmkuhl is of opinion that a
priest who is convinced of the bishop's consent to his demand for approba­
tion, may give absolution validly, but not licitly, when the paper granting
the faculties has been signed and sent off, so that it cannot lie reclaimed or
changed except by a message directed to the priest himself, or when the
bishop has given the paper containing the approbation to the priest's mes­
senger, who has not yet delivered it. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 380, nota.
·» S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 543, 582 ; H. A. 70, 132.
” Confirmed by Greg. XIII, 1 Dec., 1582.
“ Cf. S. Alph. and the other authors quoted above. Balleriui, Op.
Theol Mor. 1. C., Quid sit approbatio et a φκι petemla, n. 540 ss.

DELEOA TED JUaiUDlCTIOff

291

A bishop can give faculties for hearing confessions in his own
diocese to a priest belonging to another diocese, for the latter
in online, ad hoc opus is subject tn the bishop of the diocese
where the confessions are heard. This is the universal practice
in the Church.
A parish priest cannot of his own authority give faculties to
a priest of another diocese to hear the confessions of his own
parishioners because the jurisdictio ordinaria which goes along
with the benefice extends only to the parish in his own charge.
There is a custom, however, in many places among parish priests
in outlying districts of the diocese to authorize the priest of a
neighboring diocese to assist them in hearing confessions. This
custom, which is recognized by the bishops, confers jurisdiction
ex tacita episcoporum approbatione.13 Thus many bishops have
an explicit agreement by which approved priests of neighboring
dioceses may assist one another in the confessional. Those who
supply in another diocese, however, must pay attention to the
cases reserved to the bishop in that diocese, since for the time
being they are subject to him in ordine ad hoc munus.
II. Approbation may be granted without any limitations; the
bishop may, if he wish, limit the approbation according to time,
place, and persons, most certainly if the approbation include
jurisdiction, for the whole subject is one of delegation and ail
delegation is regulated by the intention of the Superior. Even
when approbation in the strict sense only is conferred the bishop
may ex rationabili causa confine it within a given time, a fixed
place, or over a certain class of persons (children, men). The
grounds for such a limitation might be, for instance, defects of
ability, care, or study.
III. The bishop may not only impose limits in his approba­
tion, but he may also recall it entirely, for all delegated author­
ity exists only at the pleasure of the Superior; reasonable
» Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. n. 544 ; H. A. n. 77.

292

TUF. MINISTER OF ΠΙΕ SACRAMENT

grounds must exist for such withdrawal if it is to be licit. It is
a debated point among theologians whether withdrawal without
any grounds is valid or not. The view that such withdrawal is
invalid because it is an unjust deprivation of rights conferred,
is certainly probable and maintained, among others, by Suarez,
Lugo, and St. Alphonsus; but since it is not easy to establish
the want of just grounds the view is of but little practical appli­
cation; the bishop may be acting upon reasons which arc un­
known to his clergy, and while doubts remain, the presumption
is always in favor of the bishop.’*
IV. When the approbation is granted for a fixed length of
time it ceases after that period; otherwise only by withdrawal;
when given without any limitations it does not cease with the
death of the giver, nor even when the recipient changes his
domicile. This may be considered quite certain with regard to
Regulars who have once received unlimited approbation.35
Regulars, on account of their privileges and dependence on
the Holy See, are distinguished in many details from the secular
priesthood with regard to jurisdiction.
V. The secular clergy receive jurisdiction and approbation
either from their own bishop or from the bishop in whose dio­
cese they are hearing confessions. Regulars receive jurisdic­
tion from the Sovereign Pontiff through their Superiors, who
must confer the jurisdiction as from the Pope, not like the bish­
ops granting it on their own authority, but only as represent a« S. Alph. n. 551 ; 11. A. n. 75.
44 Whenever both jurisdiction mid approbation are granted on account
of the office which the priest exercises as a subject of the bishop, they lapse
on the office being surrendered. Hence a secular priest who has had fac­
ulties to hear confessions in some diocese in virtue of a chaplaincy or other
appointment, is deprived of these faculties on being changed to another
diocese unless the bishop is distinctly understood to wish to continue them.
The same holds true for a Religious who has received faculties from his
local Superior : his faculties lapse when he is removed to another diocese
ind do not revive merely by his return to the scene of his former labors.
Leliinkuhl, 1. c. n. 381, nota 1.

DELEGA TED JEltlSDICTIOW

293

tives of the Apostolic See,. Besides this jurisdiction they must
also have the approbation of the HpùcopuJt loci; then as far as
jurisdiction is considered they may absolve any one.”
Though all Regulars have jurisdiction from the Pope they
cannot hear confessions without the approbation of the bishop,
which may not be refused without just and reasonable motives;
of these, however, the Regular is not the judge, and if he be
refused approbation, he is effectually debarred from hearing con­
fessions.”
Clement X imposed certain limitations on bishops with regard
to the granting or refusing of approbation to the Regular clergy.
He decreed —
1. That Religious who were proved capable of hearing con­
fessions, should be permitted by the bishop to hear confes­
sions anywhere in the diocese without restriction of time,
place, or person; with regard, however, to those who were
not so well prepared the bishop should be left to his own judg­
ment in the matter of imposing restrictions.
2. Those who had once received approbation might hear the
confessions of any of the faithful, even of the sick, without leave
of the parish priest or even of the bishop, at any time of the
year, including even Easter, within the diocese of the bishop
“ Lehmkuhl, I. c. Scot. I. art. III. n. 379. Gary, Il De Sacrera. Pœnit. P.
III. Cp. I. art. II. Append, n.557. Scavini, Tract. III. Disp. I.cp. 3.art. 3.519.
Aertnys on Approbation says : in .«en.<« quo Concilium Tridenlinum usurpat,
approbatio dicenda ridetur facultas audiendi confessiones ab Episcopo facta
Sacerdoti qui idoneus judicatus est—and he supposes that Regulars do not.
IM many maintain, receive jurisdiction from the Pope. He appeals to the S.
C. Ep. et Reg. 2 Mar.. 1800. also Extrao. comm. cp. 2 de sepnlt ex clement., cp.
2 de sepult. and Extrao. comm. cap. mi. de jildic., w here th.· Pope gives juris­
diction to a Regular only when it lias been refused by the bishop, whence it
would seem that jurisdiction proceeds from the bishop except in the cases
where he refuses to give it. Still it remains to he proved that Regulars .Io
not receive jurisdiction from the Pope through their Superiors and approba­
tion from the bishop. Cf. Gury, Edit. Ratisb. V. in Germania. Nota Editoris
nd n. 557.
ar Cf. Thesis 13 nb Alexand, VII. proscript.
Λ Const.Superna.

294

THE MINISTER OF THE SACHAMEA'T

who conferred the approbation; in cases where they had heard
the confessions of the sick they should inform the parish priest,
at least by a letter left with the sick person; the penalty for
neglect in this matter being suspension from the right of hearing
confessions. (The latter obligation is not enforced in missionary
countries, where by general consent any approved priest may
hear the confessions of the sick.)
3. Any Regular who has been approved by the bishop after
examination and without any restriction cannot be called again
for examination by his bishop (this does not hold when the fac­
ulties have been obtained from the vicar-general or the prede­
cessor of the bishop), nor can he be suspended from hearing
confessions; moreover he cannot even be deprived of his facul­
ties unless for reasons connected with the Sacrament itself; the
reasons for such objection need not be judicially proved, nor is
the bishop obliged to communicate them himself to the Regular
in question, but he must reveal them to the Pope if the latter
insists on being informed of them. Hence in the whole process
the Regular must act in submission to the bishop, and if he be
convinced that he is treated unjustly, he may have reoourse to
the Holy See; in the meantime, however, his attitude must be
one of submission.
4. Though a blameless life and unspotted morals are of the
greatest moment in the ministers of this Sacrament ... no
bishop can deprive a whole community of faculties on the ground
of general unfitness, without consulting the Holy See.
Hence we conclude : —
1. Approbation is justly limited in the case of Religious who
have not passed an examination.
2. Approved Regulars may be recalled for examination:
(a) when they have received approbation without examination;
(b) when after examination they have received only limited
approbation; (c) when this approbation has been received
from the vicar-general or the bishop’s predecessor, and this

DELEGATED JURISDICTION

295

though the examination has been passed and unlimited approba­
tion conferred; (d) when any reason is presented connected
with the Sacrament itself ; and this holds for those who after
examination even have received the fullest approbation from
the bishop himself.”
Except in the case of special legislation to the contrary on
the part of the Holy See any Religious may receive both juris­
diction and approbation ab Episcopo loci, and at the present day
that is the way in which bishops understand the conferring of
approbation. This view solves the question of the validity of
absolution given by a Religious without the knowledge or even
against the will of his Superior.10
Moreover, Religious Superiors may receive from the bishop the
power of imparting faculties to their subjects; the extent of the
faculties must, of course, be ascertained. When, for example,
the bishop gives general faculties, reserved cases are not included
even when they are not expressly excepted.” When the bishop
gives more extended faculties, as, for instance, on the occasion
of a mission, and a Religious Superior imparts to his subjects
these faculties for the mission, he is supposed to give all the
faculties which he has received from the bishop, because he is
then acting only as the bishop’s mouthpiece unless, of course,
he states the contrary. When, again, the bishop gives faculties
for a special object they are not to be used for anything beyond
that object; it is another question when some special work is
seized upon only as an occasion for asking and giving faculties.”
29 Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 382 ; cf. Gury, 1. c. ; cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol Mor.
1. c. cp. Π. n. 583 ss.
” The case is solved by Aertnys, who quotes a decree S. C. Ep. et Reg. 2
Mar., i860 (Acta S. Sedis, vol. I. p. 683) : “An religiosus non approbatus juxta
leges proprii Ordinis a suo Superiore vel ipso invito cum sola facultate ordinarii
valide excipiat confessiones saecularium." R. “ Affirmative." It is needless to
say, of course, that such conduct is illicit.
11 In accordance with the Rule of Boniface VJL11,1. 5, tit. 10, cp. 2 in 6°.
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 383.

296

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

VI. Strangers (peregrini), i.e. those who are not in the dio­
cese of their domicile or quasi-domicile, may be absolved by a
Religious without any difficulty as subjects of the Pope (from
whom the Religious presumably receives jurisdictio delegata) ;
they may also in virtue of an old and approved custom in
the Church be absolved by any other confessor. This is the
unanimous verdict of all theologians, though there is diversity
of opinion as to the theory which justifies the practice of secular
priests in this matter, nor is the manner of solving the question
an indifferent matter; if, for instance, a stranger is absolved in
virtue of the jurisdiction which his own bishop confers on the
priest, the bishop can absolutely forbid him to seek absolution
from a strange priest by declaring such absolution invalid ; (this,
of course, applies to secular priests; with regard to Religious
confessors there is no difficulty).1’ Thus on the solution of this
question depends the power over cases reserved in another dio­
cese. Some theologians now maintain that the jurisdiction of a
priest over a stranger is based on the tacit consent” of all the
bishops, while others hold that it is a universal custom of the
Church having the force of law* But neither the consensus
Episcoporum, nor consuetudo, even when the latter has the force
of law, can convey jurisdiction if we are to follow the teaching
of the Church; we must suppose, then, that the propounders of
such a view meant to state it thus: the Church, i.e. the Pope,
either makes the Episcopus loci an Episcopus peregrinorum, or
he delegates his own jurisdiction to all confessors. Since the
first view is hardly possible, they are forced to the conclusion
that the Pope, either by express or legal consent to the universal
custom, grants to all approved confessors a delegated jurisdic" Cf. Gury, 1. c. n. 555. Q. 13, Edit. Roman. Whether a bishop can forbid
his diocesans to make their confessions outside his diocese under pain of
invalidity.
»· Gury, cf. I. c. Edit. Ratisb. ad nn. 554, 555, also Nota Edit.
» Cf. S. Alph. I. c. n. 509: spectato consensu Episcoporum et consuetudine.

JJELEGA TED JUIUHDICTlOlf

297

tion to absolve strangers. It is beyond all doubt that this view
is probable especially when we add the weight of St. Alphonsus’
authority. The case, however, is not quite certain, for the exist­
ence of the custom seems to prove no more than that the bishop*
themselves as a rule give a tacit consent to the arrangement, and
it does not prove that the bishops are obliged to agree in every
case to this arrangement, or that their power over a subject is
withdrawn by the fact of his occasionally leaving the diocese;
and it still remains to be proved that the Pope so entirely
approves of the practice as to consent to break through the
natural order of things by which all authority is communicated
through immediate Superiors, not directly from the fountain­
head; at the same time it is beyond all question that the Pope
can if he so wishes empower any secular priest to hear the con­
fessions of peregrini; and if a bishop were without any pressing
reason to forbid his subjects to confess outside their own diocese,
the Holy See could always be petitioned to apply a suitable
remedy for such a prohibition, since under the present condition
of things there must always be many people living outside of
their own diocese.”
Other theologians teach that peregrini by the very fact of
presenting themselves at the tribunal of penance in another
diocese become subjects of the Episcopus loci or of the priest
who derives his faculties from him, and this ex universali con­
sensu quem 1‘. M. Eugenius IV approbavit?1 But does the wish
to receive the Sacrament make the peregrinus a subject of the
bishop or the bishop his superior? Whoever maintains this
and grants that the Episcopiis loci is not the bishop of the pere­
grinus, states in other words that one who is not actually a
superior may be judge in foro interno. But is such a statement
80 Zeitschrift fiir knthol. Theol., Innsbruck, 1881 ; Lelimkub), 1. c. n. 385.
«’ See .Müller, 1. c. § 135, n. 5. Millier also appeals to St. Alphonsus;
Lugo. Disp. 20, Sect. 5, nn. 70, 72; Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. 30, Sect. 1, n. 4;
and many others.

29*

TBK MINISTER OF THE 8ACKAMENT

in accordance with divine right ? In any case the peregrinus
remains the subject of the bishop of the diocese in which he has
domicile or quasi-domicile, and no proof can be adduced that
the bishop of the place in which the peregrinus makes his con­
fession has, by virtue of his office, power to absolve him ; he can
do that only when he is superior in right of his oflice, and he can
be superior only when he is the bishop of the peregrinus, since
human and divine law recognize no other ecclesiastical supe­
rior than Pope, bishop, parish priest, or their substitutes. But
no one would maintain that the Episcopus loci is the true
bishop of the peregrinus.
Finally, other theologians explain the jurisdiction of the sec­
ular priest over peregrini in this manner: that the bishop of the
peregrin as grants tacitly the faculties to every approved priest and
is generally obliged to do so.” The ecumenical synods of Flor­
ence, Trent, and the Lateran declare that the absolution granted
by any other than one’s own Ordinary is invalid unless leave be
obtained from him. Now such a permission is either a direct or
indirect imparting of jurisdiction; hence every absolution is in­
valid which is given without jurisdiction from the bishop of the
penitent. It is on this ground that theologians and canonists
alike, whether of the older or more recent school, insist upon
the necessity of a consent on the part of the Superior or bishop
of the penitent in the case of confessions made outside his own
diocese. Ballerini (1. c. Dissert, n. 33 ss) concludes his learned
investigation of this question in answer to the objections of the
Vindicia· Alphonsianœ with the following propositions, which
are not mere speculative conclusions, but are in fact the teach­
ing of the Church, resting as they do on the very essence and
nature of the Sacrament as solemnly explained and defined by
the Holy See and ecumenical councils: (1) in order to absolve
“ Cf. Ballerini. Notæ ad Gury. 1. c. ad u. 555, Q. 14 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol.
Mor. vol. V. I. e. cp. IT. nil. 818-627, Appernlit-Du*ertalio : De absolutione
peregrinorum, pp. 709-855, and Lehmkuhl, 1. c. nn. 379 et 381.

DELEGATED JURISDICTION

299

a peregrinus, faculties must be granted by one who has ordinary
jurisdiction over the penitent ; (2) the existence of the custom
of absolving peregrini outside their diocese neither conveys nor
can convey the necessary jurisdiction ; (3) jurisdiction is given
by approbation or consent (express or tacit) or leave (implicit
or explicit) of the Ordinary or of the particular pastor of the
peregrinus; (4) this approbation or consent includes the im­
parting of jurisdiction to the confessor chosen by the peregrinus;
(5) a sufficient indication of this consent exists in the tolerance
of a custom with the knowledge of the bishop and without any
remonstrance on his part; (6) the delegation of jurisdiction
depends on this consent in such wise that the pastor of souls
may, at his own option, retract his consent, thus abolishing the
custom and withdrawing entirely the power to absolve his sub­
jects. All these statements are incontrovertible.
Hence since a penitent can be absolved by his own bishop or
by the delegate of the latter, since the bishop of the peregrinus
remains his superior in spite of the penitent being in another
diocese transitorily, the latter can be absolved only in virtue of
power granted tacitly by his owm bishop.""
VII. As Vagi have no fixed domicile, their spiritual superior
is the Pope, and by virtue of his express or tacit delegation they
may be absolved by any approved confessor wherever they hap­
pen to be; but they cannot be absolved by any but those
approved for the place where the confession is made.
It will be asked: Who is to give approbation for absolving
travelers on the sea? This point has been settled in a very
simple manner by a recent decree of the Congregation of the
Inquisition. Any priest, approved by his Ordinary, may hear
the confession of his fellow-travelers while the voyage is in pro­
cess, though they pass through or stop off for a time in the terri­
tory of another bishop/0
39 Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Moral. 1. c. cp. If. De jurisdict. Conf. nn.
613-027.

40 Decr· 4 Apr., 1000.

300
39.

THE MIXISTEH OK THE HAVE.1.1/EXT
Jurisdictio Delegata Extraordinaria, or. the Supplying of
Deficient Jurisdiction by the Church.

There is another kind of jurisdiction, viz.: when the Church
makes good the deficiency of delegation; here jurisdiction is
conveyed “supplente Ecclesia.'’
Let it be remarked at the outset that it is by no means per­
missible to perform any act for which jurisdiction is necessary
— therefore to give absolution - when the absence of jurisdic­
tion is certain, even if the Church should supply to insure
validity of the act. When jurisdiction is doubtful, it may be
allowable to perform the act, especially if the Church really does
supply. Before discussing the matter itself we must explain
what is meant by the axiom : “The Church makes good deficient
jurisdiction.” The meaning of it is this: the Church, or the
highest judicial authority of the Church, confers, in an exceptional
manner, jurisdiction for individual acts, and the Church does
this for the general welfare in ipso aclu, that is, in the perform­
ance of the act itself." There is, accordingly, a great difference
between the jurisdiction which a man actually possesses, and
that which he exercises “supplente Ecclesia." In the first case
I possess the jurisdiction before I begin the act, before I hear
the confession, or perform any other act for which jurisdiction
is required ; indeed, I possess it in most cases habitual iter. I pos­
sess it also when the act is completed. But he who absolves or
performs any other function supplente Ecclesia receives the
jurisdiction only when the action has already begun — in this
case when he is about to pronounce absolution — in order that
he may carry to its end the confession which has begun ; the
action once completed, in this case the absolution being pro­
nounced,— he has no further jurisdiction. When, therefore,
previous to an action, a priest already probabiliter possesses
jurisdiction, the Church, if she supplies, must do so only condi** Less i us, De justifia et jure, 1. 2, cp. 29, nn. 65 and 68.

JURISDICTIO DELEGATA

EXTRAORDl.ltA HIA

301

tionally, upon the presumption that he possessed no jurisdic­
tion; that is, when that, jurisdiction which he was believed to
have was as a matter of fact not existing.
The Church supplies deficiency of jurisdiction: —
1. When one who exercises a power possesses a titulus colora­
tus for this power, and when, at the same time, the error is gen­
eral amongst the faithful, in such sort that the absence of real
power is mostly unknown. A tilulus coloratus (apparent title)
is one that is in itself false, but yet really exists; that is, one
which has been conferred by lawful authority and, therefore,
bears the appearance and outward form of a true title, even
when, for some cause or other, it is void by an essential de­
fect.*1 The supplying action of the Church in this case is based
upon the right itself which she has conferred and ratified ; this
is the teaching of all theologians.” The Church, they say, sup­
plies as a good mother in the interest of the welfare of souls.**
2. When there is no titulus coloratus but only error communis,11
many theologians are of opinion that the Church supplies in this
case also for the general welfare.
St. Alphonsus adopts tliis opinion as probable, because the
Church supplies for defective jurisdiction more with a view to
the common good than out of consideration for the title.” It will
scarcely, however, be possible to assign to this opinion a real
and substantial probability; a number of theologians are in­
deed in favor of it, but not a few of considerable repute are
opposed to it (Lugo, Sanchez, Lessius, and others). It is,
42 A priest, for example, who has obtained a parish by simony, has, accord­
ing to canon law, an invalid title. But if he was appointed to the pariah by
a lawful bishop, he has an “apparent title.”
48 Cap. “infamis,” cans. 3, Q. 7 (c. 1).
44 S. Alph. 1. o. n. 572.
46 In forming a judgment as to whether error communis or error paucorum
is in question, we must not consider if many or few seek administration of
the Sacrament of Penance from one possessing no lawful power, but if
many or few have been aware of the absence of power.
44 S. Alph. n. 572.

302

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

therefore, canon law which must decide the question, the more
so, as we have not to do directly with what may be allowed or
not, but with the positive conferring of, possibly, non-existent
jurisdiction. Now what is to be gathered from the canon law
on this point seems plainly opposed to the more lenient view
given in a decision of the S. C. Cone, of 11 December, 1683,
which Benedict XIV ” cites to settle the question. The mat­
ter remains, therefore, doubtful. The harm, however, which can
result from the negative opinion is not very great, as a confessor
cannot long exercise his office without title, and such harm is
made good by subsequent communion or confession. Several
theologians, moreover, rightly maintain that the faithful are not
bound in this case to repeat those confessions which they have,
bona fide, made to a priest, who, ex communi errore, passed for a
confessor.
3. But when there is question not of error communis but only
of error privatus in a few persons, the Church certainly does not
supply the defective jurisdiction, because here the bonum com­
mune is not at stake/8
From this it follows : —
1. That it is not allowed knowingly to make use of a power
arising only from an "apparent” title, although the Church
should positively supply ; but he who is not aware of the defect
of his title — this title being in reality only an apparent title —
has nothing to rectify subsequently, as his actions were valid
(supplente Ecclesia).
2. Still less is it allowable for one who knows that he pos­
sesses neither power nor title to act on the ground of general
error ; in the first place, because he assumes a power which he
does not possess, and because, moreover, he exposes to danger
those who are most interested in the validity of his actions.
Instit 84, n. 22.
M S. Alph. I. c. ; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. V. ad n. 548, Q. II; Aertnys, 1. c. n.228.
Q. Ill ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. nn. «38-839.

JUniHDICTIO DELEGATA EXTRAORDINARIA

303

Connected with the above is the question: does jurisdictio
probabilis or dubia suffice for the valid and lawful administra­
tion of absolution. The question turns only on probabilitas
juris, a solidly probable, though not necessarily certain, interpre­
tation of the law declaring that jurisdiction is possessed. This
may occur with regard to the questions: whether the jurisdic­
tion possessed extends to this or that case, to this or that person ?
or, whether the jurisdiction once possessed has been revoked?
But a jurisdiction is doubtful when the uncertainty of it
rests upon a doubt or a probable fad. Upon this distinction
between probable and doubtful jurisdiction we must insist.
St. Alphonsus 10 does so, and that chiefly in order to show that,
in the case of a dubium fadi, — thus, doubtful jurisdiction, —
the faculty for the exercise and the validity of the act (here of
absolution) always remains doubtful, whereas, in the case of pro­
babilitas juris, the validity of the action after it has been per­
formed is morally certain. When such probable jurisdiction
(probabilitas juris) is in question, it is, as St. Alphonsus teaches,
morally certain that the Church confers jurisdiction, if it has
previously (anlecedenter) been wanting. The saint calls this
teaching communissima, and demonstrates it by the fact that
the Church, in the person of her chief pastor, tacitly tolerates
the old custom of absolving with such jurisdiction, and thus
sufficiently expresses her consent.
With regard to the jurisdictio dubia, however, the contentions
of many authors are not of this nature.10 If many are of opinion
that the Church supplies in this case also, and base their opinion
upon the fact that the Church supplies when there is only error
communis and not titulus coloratus, we need but refer to what
has been previously said upon this head."
10 Lib. VI. nn. 571, 573.
to S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 432 ; Lacroix, I. c. L. VL P. I. n. 11·· ; Lessiue,
]. c. L. II- cp. 28, nn. 67 et 68; Reuter. Theol. Mor. P. IV. u. 53.
41 Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. n. 572; Gury-Ballerini, I. c. η. -'·Ι8, Edit. Ratisb. I. c. ;
Ballerini. Op· Theol. Mor. l.c. cp. IL De Jurisdict un. 628-636.

304

THE MINISTER OF TUE SACRAMENT

According to this it is morally certain that the Church, in
the case of previous juris probabilitas, supplies jurisdiction.
But if the jurisdiction is doubtful on account of a dubium /acti,
the Church does not supply if the error exists only with a few;
as the error is usually general, it remains doubtful whether the
Church supplies. It is not always wrong to use doubtful juris­
diction in administering the Sacrament of Penance, particularly
when the reason for it is pressing, when absolution is urgently
necessary, and when it would be better to absolve with doubtful
validity than not to absolve at all. But in this case it would
always be necessary to instruct the penitent as to the value of
the absolution administered.
According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus, absolution may
be administered with a doubtful jurisdiction in the following
cases: (1) When the obligation of yearly confession must be
fulfilled exactly at that time; (2) when the penitent must say
Mass or communicate, and this cannot be omitted without
bringing upon himself disgrace; (3) when the priest must say
Mass in fulfilment of his duty. In these cases a priest possessing
only doubtful jurisdiction may absolve conditionally when no
other confessor is at hand.52 But the saintly Doctor " remarks
that, in this case, the confessor would be bound to inform the
penitent who had accused himself of mortal sin that he had been
only conditionally absolved, so that if afterwards it should become
manifest that the confessor really possessed no jurisdiction, the
penitent might fulfill his duty of confessing his sins again.54
M Lehmkuhl adds the following case : when a priest has, bona fide, begun
to hear a confession, and a doubt has arisen in his mind as to whether the
period of his approbation has expired, there being no possibility of satis­
fying himself upon the point, this confession, begun and considerably
advanced, may be concluded if great inconvenience would otherwise result
to confessor and penitent; the confessor must, however, inform the peni­
tent that the absolution administered was of doubtful validity ; but if he
could, without great inconvenience to either party, break off the confession,
he must do so. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 300, nota 1.
“ L. c. n. 432.
M Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. nn. 300 and 301.

JURISDICTIO DELEOATA EXTRAORDINARIA

305

In order to absolve with probable jurisdiction, a legitimate
reason is necessary and this exists: (1) When the penitent stands
in special need of the help of this particular priest; C2) when
the accomplice of the penitent is known to the confessor who
possesses certain jurisdiction, but unknown to him who possesses
only probable jurisdiction; (3) if the penitent were under an
urgent obligation of confessing, if a particular indulgence were
to be gained, if the penitent would not be able to confess for a
long time, and a priest with certain jurisdiction were not at
hand.“
A special case in which the Church supplies deficient juris­
diction is in articulo mortis.
The necessary jurisdiction for the absolution of dying persons
is conferred by the Church upon any priest, when no approved
confessor is at hand, so that any priest may absolve dying per­
sons from all sins.110
« S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 573, 800; H. A. n. 91, with Suarez, Gobat, Elbe),
Sporer, etc.
M Cf. Trid. Sens. XIV. c. 7, where reserved cases are spoken of, and the
following is decreed : “ That no one may perish, it has always been the
usage of the Church that there should be no reservation at the hour of
death, and, therefore, that all priests may absolve any penitent from any
sins and censures whatever." These words of the Council are variously
interpreted, some believing that all priests, without exception, receive juris­
diction from the Church, others believing that it is necessary to affix a limi­
tation : when no other approved priest is at hand to whom the dying person
could easily and without danger confess; these latter, therefore, limit the
words “ omnes sacerdotes " on account of the intention expressed in the pre­
ceding words : “ ne quis pereat," and the other ones : ·· ut nulla sit resereatio,"
maintaining that these words indicate that there is question of priests who
otherwise possessed jurisdiction, namely, “ when no otherwise approved
priest is at hand." According to the first interpretation, and the opinion
based upon it, a sacerdos simplex (therefore non approbatus) could rulide
administer absolution to a dying person in presence of approved priests.
A great number of theologians defend this opinion (Ballerini mentions
twenty-five in his notes to Gury, I. c. ail n. 551, Q. 8. and in his Opus. Theol.
Mor. 1. c. cp. II. De jurisdict. Conf. n. 581), and St. Alphonsus does not
venture to reject it, though, in spite of the reasons advanced by these
authorities, he maintains that a simplex sacerdos can only absolve a dying

806

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

An approved priest is considered not to be present, not
only when he is bodily but also morally out of reach; that
is, in the following cases: (1) When the approved priest who
is present does not wish to hear the confession of the dying
person or cannot hear it, for in such a case he would be
practically absent; (2) when he is excommunicated or sus­
pended,” (3) if an approved priest should arrive when the
confession to the unapproved priest has already begun; (4) if
an approved priest were complex of the dying person in peccato
turpi;u (5) if this priest is so displeasing to the sick person
that the latter would be in danger of sacrilegious confession;
there would then be danger of the soul of the sick person
being lost, a risk which it was the intention of the Council of
Trent to obviate.*’
What has been said above concerning the administration of
absolution in articulo mortis stands good also for its administraperson when no other approved priest is at hand, and he is supported in
this opinion by the authority of the Roman Ritual, which (De Sacram.
Pœnit. sub init.) teaches that: when danger of death threatens, and an
approved priest is not present, any priest can absolve from all sins and
censures. This opinion of St. Alphonsus is the most general, though,
according to Ballerini ami Lehmkuhl, probability is not to be denied to
the other opinion, in view of the authority of so many theologians, and in
accordance with the rules of interpretation.
tT Such a priest may valide absolve a dying person if no other priest lie
present, for the Tridentine says : quilibet sacerdos may absolve in articulo
mortis. Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. n. 500 circa fin.; Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. n. 550. But
it is not difficult to see why dejiciente alio sacerdote is added here; for the
communicatio in sacris with heretics and with excommunicated persons who
are to be avoided (excommunicat! vitandi) is a grave sin, unless when excused
by necessity; a penitent, therefore, would himself commit a grave sin if he
should solicit absolution from a heretical priest, or one to be avoided (a
riairidus), uidess no other priest should be al hand. To ask the Sacra­
ment of Penance from such an unhappy priest, and to receive it, even when
it is allowed, appears, however, to be in any case a dangerous proceeding;
evil influence at the most important moment of human life, and also scan­
dal to others, are to be feared.
“ See § 40.
“ S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 502, 563.

THE CONFESSIONS OF UELIG1OUS

307

lion in quolibet gravi periculo mortis.1'9 For the two situations
are generally considered as identical ; moreover, the Ritual says :
"When danger of death threatens;” besides there is a divine
precept to confess when there, is danger of death also, and thus
there arises a case of necessity.
A grave periculum mortis is considered to exist: (1) In a dan­
gerous illness; (2) in times of plague; (3) at a difficult birth;
(4) before a very difficult surgical operation; (5) in battle, or
shortly before it ; (6) before a very dangerous sea voyage, etc.”
40.

The Administration of the Sacrament of Penance to

Members of Religious Orders.

Hitherto we have treated of the powers necessary to the
ministers of the Sacrament of Penance — secular and regular
priests — in order that they may validly and lawfully hear
the confessions of lay people (seculares). It remains now to
discuss the regulations laid down by the Church concerning the
jurisdiction over men and women belonging to Religious Orders
emitting vota solemnia.
I. The Superiors of Religious Orders, or the local Superiors,
although they possess full jurisdiction over their subjects in
joro interno, are bound to appoint others as confessors, so that
the subjects may not be obliged to confess to their own Superiors ;
it is only in certain definite cases that a subject is bound to go
to confession to his Superior. The inmates of a religious house
may indeed confess to their Superiors, and the latter must hear
their confessions; but this must be left to the option of the
subordinates. One or more confessors may, however, be nomi­
nated in the individual houses, so that no religious can validly
confess to any other but these; unless a confessor has received
® There is periculum mortis when the illness is such as may. according to
the judgment of the physicians, and experience, result in death, »ί« id ulxilute, ideal generatim pro omnibus cerificetur, sire respective propter circumstantias
hujus infirmi. Ballerini, 1. c.
41 S. Alph. 1. c. u. Ô61.

SOS

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

special powers for this purpose from the Holy See or from the
Roman Penitentiary." Only when a Jubilee occurs and usually
once may Regulars choose as confessor a priest out of those
approved by the Ordinarius, in order to gain the Jubilee indul­
gence. Several confessors are generally nominated so that the
subjects may have a choice from among them."
II. Confessors for Regulars receive their jurisdiction from
the Superiors of the latter. Not only priests belonging to Reli­
gious Orders, but also secular priests (even those who have not
been approved by their bishops), may be empowered by Supe­
riors to act as confessors to their subjects, unless this be for­
bidden by the constitutions of the Order.111
This faculty belongs to Superiors of Religious Orders by com­
mon law, since, by virtue of their exemption from episcopal
jurisdiction, they possess quasi-episcopalem jurisdictionem over
their subordinates. The Council of Trent has altered nothing
in this matter, as it speaks only of the jurisdiction or approba­
tion necessary for the confessions of lay people; moreover,
Clement VIII has expressly granted this faculty to Superiors
of Orders. The confessor of Regulars can absolve those for
whom he is appointed confessor, even outside the monastery,
as this jurisdiction is not limited to a definite place, and no
further approbation of the bishop is necessary.
Regulars who are on a journey or staying outside their
monastery must confess to a member of their Order who
is near them, even when the latter is not otherwise appointed
for confessions; if, however, they have no opportunity of
confessing to one of their Order, they may do so to any
other regular or secular priest. This priest (according to the
sententia communissima, which St. Alphonsus considers the
more probable) need not even be approved by the Episcopus
« Const. Clem. VIII, Rom. I’ontif. 1599.
M Decret Clem. VIII, Sanctissimus.
M Cf. Mazzotta, 1. c. de Pœnit. Disp. 2, Q. 1, cp. 3, § 2.

THE COXFEHXIONB OF RELIGIOUS

309

loci? as it is presumed that the Order, or its Superior, confers
in such a case delegated jurisdiction upon any priest whom the
religious has chosen for his confessor.”
III. Those who can be validly absolved only by a priest
authorized by a Superior of an Order are: not only the religious
and their novices, but also lay persons, who, as really belonging
to the monastic community, live in the monastery or college;
servants, for example, and others who regularly live and take
their meals in the monastery.”
IV. As regards the question whether priests of an Order, by
virtue of the authorization of the Superiors of their Order, may
M S. Alph. 1. c. n. 575; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 232, II. Q.; Lehmkuhl, 1. c.
n. 395. ad II. 2 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 640.
“ This freedom, as Lehmkuhl remarks, exists for the members of the
Society of Jesus, so that they are not obliged, when on a journey, to seek a
priest of their own Order. Certain theologians, however, are unwilling to
concede this to all Orders. Benedict XIV, in the Brief “Quod communi,"
30 March, 1742, allowed the Capuchins to confess to others not of their
Order, attaching the conditions, however, that the priest to whom they
confessed must be approved ; the same condition was laid down for mem·
bers of the Augustinian Order on June 3, 1863 (Acta S. Sedis, vol. 1,
p. 677), and the S. Pœnitent., 18 April, 1867, the S. C. Ep. et Regul., 3 July,
1862 and 27 Aug.. 1852 (see Biicceroni, Enchirid. pp. 127 et 128), demand the
sume condition for the dispersed Regulars. From which it is to lie con­
cluded that the Sacerdoles idonei, of whom the privileges of Sixt. IV and Innoc. VIII speak, must be approved priests. Cf. Aertnys, I. c. This seems
also to hold for the congregations under cola simplicia, who possess the privi­
lege of exemption from episcopal jurisdiction, as this regulation is based
not upon the solemnity of the vows, but upon the said exemption.
67 This follows from the Bull Clem. X. Superna, 21 July, 1670, already
mentioned, partly printed in Gory, Ed. Katisb. II. ad n. 559. Accordingto
the Council of Trent, all those lay persons are free from episcopal jurisdic­
tion who belong to the household of (real and exempted) Religious Orders.
But in order that the servants of a monastery may enjoy this privilege, the
following conditions must concur: (1) they must really serve the religious
of the monastery; (2) they must live within the inclosure at the expense
of the monastery; (3) they must lie under obedience to the religious of the
Order; this obedience need not lie the obedience of the religious;
however, be such as servants owe to their masters. Cf. Trid. s.·,.

810

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

also hear the confessions of the inmates of their monasteries
intrusted to them for education, theologians do not agree.
Some, amongst whom are Gury (n. 564), Lehmkuhl (n. 394),
Marc (n. 1763, Q. 2), and Aertnys (n. 232), admit it, pointing out
certain Orders to which this has been expressly permitted, and
in this privilege (these authorities maintain) the other Orders
participate. St. Alphonsus is also of this opinion (583),
appealing to Bordone; also Mazzotta (1. c.), Lugo, Schmalzgrueber, and others. Lehmkuhl calls this opinion probable
and says: We may, therefore, act according to the principles
discusser! above concerning probable jurisdiction. However,
this does not seem to be generally admissible. For no law
accords to Regular priests a general privilege of this kind. The
extension to all other Orders of a privilege granted to some is
not allowable here, for this privilege derogates from the rights
of a third party, in this instance the bishop and the parish
priests; and it is clear from the decisions of the sacred congre­
gations that unlimited jurisdiction over their students does not
belong to Regulars.”
On the other hand, Regulars possess jurisdiction over their
students: (1) When this jurisdiction is explicitly conferred
upon an Order or educational establishment; (2) when the
religious have acquired it by legitimate custom; (3) when
there is question of religious in the sense that, according to
the ordinances of the Council of Trent, the students can be
designated as belonging to the household. This latter, however,
is not the case when the house in which the educational estab­
lishment is situated is not actually the monastic building, or
when the members of the Order and the students do not form
an association of the nature of a family. Nor can those pupils
be regarded as belonging to the household who pay for their
board, and are yearly received into the educational establishM Cf. BouiXjde Regal. T. II. p. 5, Sect. 8, c. 2.

I

JURISDICTION FOR THE CONFESSIONS OF NUNS 311

ment or seminary. But as the matter is a difficult one and
difference of opinion prevails amongst theologians, Bouix sug­
gests as a practical solution the removal of such boys or girls
from parochial control.”
41. Jurisdiction and Approbation for the Confessions of Huns

What we are about to say concerning nuns refers to nuns in
the strict sense of the word, namely, to such as have taken solemn
vows and are bound by the regulations of the inclosure, but not
to the religious congregations which have no inclosure, nor, in
general to such nuns as, with permission of their Superiors, are
living outside the convent.’®
The bishop can except from the general approbation any
religious female congregation, and if he has done so, the con­
fessors must act conformably. In most dioceses the regulations
of the C'hurch concerning confessors of nuns — both ordinary
and extraordinary confessors — are extended to the female
congregations also which take only simple vows, and are not
bound to strict inclosure. This discipline is, in fact, very good,
and quite in conformity with the intention of the Holy See."
" Cf. Bouix, 1. c. ; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. ad n. 504. nota.
70 Although, according to the rules of interpretation, by the word
Moniale» in the Papal Bulls, only Moniale» in the strict sense are to be
understood, that is, the members of a Religious Order approved by the
Holy See, who observe the Papal inclosure; yet Benedict XIV has expressly
declared, in his Bull “ Pastoralis cune," that the ordinances of the 1 rid.
Sens. XXV. cp. 10 de Regul. et Mon. which contain a part of the present
discipline, only apply clauitralibu» monialibus.
n This is clear from a note of the S. C. Ep. et Reg. to the constitutione
of the Sisters of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin (23 July, I860) : "As
regards the confessors, the Conetit Belied. XIV, Pastoralis cura· is to be
observed, in accordance with which the confessors are to be appointed by
the respective bishops.” In the constitutions of the Sisters of Nazareth,
who have no inclosure, the same congregation decreed on 27 Sept, 1861 :
·· As regards the Confeteor. extraordin., the ordinances of the Council of
Trent are to be observed, as also the Constit. Benedict XIV, Pastoralis
cure." Cf. Muller, 1. c. S. 140.

312

THE MINISTER Of THE SACRAMENT

The following regulations are in force with regard to the con­
fessors of nuns : —·
I. Not every priest approved by a bishop can hear the con­
fessions of nuns, but only one who has received special appro­
bation and jurisdiction for the purpose from the Episcopus
loci. Indeed, the priest approved for one convent cannot valide
hear the confessions of the nuns of another convent, unless he
be general])· appointed for the confessions of nuns.”
II. The confessors of exempted nuns also require the appro­
bation of the bishop, but they are chosen and appointed by the
Superiors of the Orders to whom they (the exempted nuns)
are subject; and if these Superiors themselves wish to hear the
confessions of the nuns who are subject to them, they must
likewise obtain the approbation of the bishop. It is only when
the nuns obey Superiors with quasi episcopal jurisdiction that
their confessor does not require the approbation of the bishop.”
III. According to the declaration of Clement XI the confess­
ors of nuns should not only be learned, prudent, and pious, but
also of mature years.” The bishop must, therefore, take care
that a confessor be chosen in whom the nuns may have con­
fidence.
Without Papal authorization vicars-general, canons, and
others who are bound to observe choir in virtue of a benefice,
also parish priests (when the care of souls would materially
suffer thereby), cannot discharge the office of an ordinary con­
fessor. This applies also to priests of a Religious Order with
regard to nuns who are immediately subject to the bishop.
The former may, however, exercise the office of extraordinary
confessors. The ordinary confessor must hear the confessions
’•Cf. Const. Inscrutabili, Gregor. XV; Const. Superna, Clem. X (21
June, 1070); Const. Pastoralis Officii et Pastoralia cur®, Bened. XIV.
’· Cf. Declarat. 8. C. C. ad dub. 7 et 8, post Const. Inscrutabili, in Bullario posita.
’· Scavini, Tract. X. Disp. I. cp. 4, art. 2, n. 123. Ferraris ad v. Moni­
ales, art. 5, n. 49.

JURISDICTION FOR TUE CONFESSIONS OF NUNS 313
of nuns as often as it is reasonably demanded of him. More­
over, he must not conduct himself as a .Superior of the convent,
since, according to the decree of the S. 0. Ep. et Reg. 7 Sept.,
1797, such authority does not belong to him.”
The confessor appointed for nuns shall not discharge his
office longer than three years, and cannot, at the expiration of
this period, hear confessions in the same convent without per­
mission of the S. C. Ep. et Reg.” Several authorities, however
(St. Alphonsus, Bouvier, Gury, Scavini), remark that the bishop
may allow the confessor to exercise his office longer than three
years when other suitable priests are wanting.
At the time of a Jubilee, nuns, like Regulars, may, in order
to gain the Jubilee indulgence, once choose for themselves any
confessor from amongst priests approved by the Episcopus loci
for hearing the confessions of nuns either in general or for a
particular convent.”
IV. The bishops, or Superiors of Orders, who are authorized
to appoint and choose the ordinary confessor, are bound to
appoint an extraordinary confessor for the nuns subject to them
two or three times a year.
Although the nuns are not bound to confess to this extraor­
dinary confessor, they must, nevertheless, all repair to him, be
it either to make a sacramental confession or to receive from
him wholesome exhortation.”
The following is to be observed regarding the Confessorius
extraordinarius: —
1. Although the Tridentine Session here speaks of inclosed
nuns only (moniales claustrales), Benedict XIV wishes the
appointment of the extraordinary confessor to be extended to
76 Gury, Ed. Ratisbon. T. II. 1. c. ad n. 565.
’· Ci- Decret. S. C. Ep. et Reg., 20 Sept., 1642.
” Const. Bened. XIV, Benedictus Deus, 25 Dec., 1750.
’· Cf. Trident. Sees. XXV’. cp. 10 de Regul. et Mon. and Coast- Bened.
XIV, Pastoralis curte, 5 Aug., 1718.

814

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

all communities of nuns who have only an ordinary confessor
appointed by the Superiors.
2. The choice of the extraordinary confessor belongs to the
Ordinarius loci for those convents which are under him, and to
the Superior of the Order for those for which the latter appoints
the ordinary confessor; every extraordinary confessor must
have special approbation as such from the bishop. The Supe­
riors of Regulars, however, cannot always appoint a priest of
their own Order, but must at least, once a year, choose a secular
priest or one of another Order. If the Superior of the Order
neglects to choose an extraordinary confessor, the bishop must
do so; should the bishop neglect this duty, the Cardinal Grand
Penitentiary must act.
3. During the time when the extraordinary confessor is exer­
cising his office in a community, the ordinary confessor may not
remain in the community to hear confessions.
4. The extraordinary confessor may not be refused to indi­
vidual nuns in case of serious illness or invincible reluctance
towards the ordinary confessor. The case of a nun in danger
of death being refused an extraordinary confessor is provided
for in the decree of the Tridentine Session, XIV. cp. 7 : in articulo
mortis omnes sacerdotes quoslibet pernitentes . . . absolvere posse.
But should a nun wish to confess occasionally to a particular
confessor, not out of fickleness, or imprudent preference, but
truly on account of her spiritual advancement, it is advisable
that the Superiors should not oppose such wish.”
” All these precepts are contained in the Trid. Sees. XXV. cp. 10 de
Regul. et Mon. and the Conetit. Benedict XIV, Pastoralis curte. Pope Leo
XIΠ, quoted above, has renewed the same quoad confessorios ordinarios et
extraordinarios by a Decretum S. Congregat. Ep. et Regul. de conscientiæ
ratione Confessariis extraordinariis, etc., d. 17 Dec., 1890, and exhorts Prasuits and Superiores, “ne extraordinarium denegent subditis Confessorium
quoties ut propria conscientia consulant ad id subditi adigantur, quin Udem
Superiores ullo modo petitionis rationem inquirant aut agre id ferre demonstrent.
Ac ne evanida tam provida dispositio fat, Ordinarios exhortatur (sc. Sanctitas
sua}, ut in locis propria Dioeceseos Sacerdotes facultatibus instructos designent,

JURI8I>I<TIO.\ FOR THE CONFESSIONS OF

Sift

Extraordinary confessors, nominated by the bishop for a
single occaaion, can only discharge this office once. They must
be approved by the bishop as often as they have to discharge
the office of extraordinary confessor,unless they have a general
approbation for the confession of nuns.
ml
pro Sacrainenln I’aaiitentia recurrere ere facile queant." Thin decree
was occasioned by precepts in the constitutions “plurium Congregationum,
Societatum aul Inelilutioniim tire mulierum, qua· mta oinipliria aul oolemma
nuncupuul, sire rimrum profeeeiane ac regimine peniluo lairorum."
n Cf. Declar. S. C. C. ad dub. I. poss. Const. Inscrutabili et Conrtit.
Clem. X, Superna.

CHAPTER ΤΙ
LIMITATION OF JURISDICTION OR RESERVED CASES

42 Reserved Cases in General.

The Church has received from Christ the power to remit or
to retain all sins without exception. No sin is withheld from
the cognizance of its judicial authority or the power of its keys.
This unlimited power of chief justice and plenipotentiary re­
sides in the hands of the Supreme Hoad of the Church ; it is in
the possession of the Vicegerent of Him who has said of Him­
self: “To Me is given all power in heaven and on earth.’’ In
the exercise of the judicial power in /oro interno, the pastors
of the Church are dependent upon and subject to him. This
relation between the Pope and the pastors of the Church is ex­
pressed in the reservations;’" that is, by the ecclesiastical disci­
pline in virtue of which the Pope reserves certain sins in on 1er to
absolve from them himself, and places a limit upon the juris­
diction of the bishops by withholding from them the power to
absolve from certain sins. And as the Pope proceeds with
regard to the bishops, so can the bishop, and the Superiors of
Orders, and those possessing quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, pro­
ceed with regard to their respective subordinates.
This competence to declare certain sins reserved, which ex­
isted in the earliest times of the Church as is proved by number·’ “ Reservatio est : ablatio seu nonconcessio jurisdictionis ad absolvendum
ab aliquo jieccnto, quamvis circa alia concedatur." ballerini, Opus Theol.
Mor. 1. c. cp. II. n. 657.
316

ιιι·:> ι:uved

cases

in

general

317

less memorials, is promulgated by the Council of Trent,” which
also emphasizes the reason of this practice: “It has seemed con­
ducive to the morality of the Christian people that certain
particularly horrible and grave sins should not be absolved by
every priest, but only by those of the highest authority. It is,
therefore, reasonable that the Popes, by virtue of the power
invested in them over the whole Church, should reserve certain
grave sins for their own tribunal.” Having then assigned this
power to the bishops also, the Council declares that this reser­
vation of sins has validity not only in the outward administra­
tion of the Church, but also before God.
From this it follows that : —
I. The motives for the reservations, apart from the mainte­
nance of authority, are : (a) the necessity of deterring the faith­
ful from the commission of these great sins by thus making it
more difficult to obtain absolution: (b) the necessity of applying
a special remedy, so that those who have been guilty of such
crimes may be the more efficaciously preserved from relapse.
In order that the former object may be the more perfectly at­
tained, it is necessary in an appropriate manner to make known
to the people what sins are reserved.
II We distinguish : (1) Reservation by the Pope, by a bishop,
and by the Superior of an Order; (2) reserved sins, when the
sin itself is directly reserved, and reserved censures, when the
censure attached to a sin is reserved, and the sin itself is reserved
only in consequence of the censure. If the reserved censure is
only the means by which the sin is reserved, upon removal of
the censure the sin is no longer reserved. In the papal reserved
cases the censure only is directly reserved ; in episcopal and other
reserved cases generally the sin only is reserved, not the censure.
Two Papal cases, in which the sin without the censure is re­
served, form exceptions to this rule, namely : (a) Falsely accusing
" Sess. XIV. cp. 7, can. Π. Cf. Perrone. De Pœn. cp. 5 ; Zenner. Instruct
pracl. P. I. cp. II. § 11; Palmieri, Tract. De Pœn. Thee. XVII. p. 178 se.

SIS

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

an innocent confessor of solicitation, either by denouncing the
confessor to the ecclesiastical judge one's self, or by effecting
such denunciation through another person;*3 (6) the receiving of
considerable presents exceeding the value of ten francs on the
part of members of Religious Orders (emitting solemn vows) of
both sexes, till restitution has taken place (munera prorsus libe­
ralia are meant ; hence presents of medicaments and devotional
objects, as also those presents which were given out of gratitude
and benevolence or for the purpose of securing the good-will of a
person, are excepted)."4 If the presents amount to a higher sum,
and if the penitent can make restitution, he is not to be ab­
solved till he has done so. If, however, he cannot make restitu­
tion at the time, but promises faithfully to do so as soon as
possible, the confessor can absolve him.
III. The power to reserve is possessed by the Pope in the whole
Church ; by the bishops in their dioceses ; by the heads of Orders
who possess quasi-episcopal jurisdiction in their Orders — the
General of the Order for the whole Order, the Provincial in his
province, the local head in his house — but apart from specified
sins mentioned by'Clement VIII, these religious Superiors may
not reserve any others without consent of the general chapter."”
M Const. Beiicd. XIV, Sacramentum Pœnitentiae, 1 June, 1741.
H Const. Clem. VIII, Religioso* Congregationes, 1!) June, 1594, et Urban
VIII, Nuper a Congregat. 16 Oct., 164(1. Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. nn. .580,693;
H. A. Tr. 13, un. 8, 9; Ferrflr, ad v. Regular, art. I. nn. 67-69.
M S. Alph. 1. c. n. 583; II. A. n. 130. These specified cases are the follow­
ing: 1. Apostasy from the Order, even when the habit of the Order is still
retained. 2. Secretly absenting one's self from the monastery at night.
3. Three forms of superstition : Venejicia, incantationes, sortilegia. 4. Pos­
session of property against the vow of poverty, which constitutes a mortal
sip· 5. Theft (to the extent of mortal sin) of goods belonging to the
monastery. 6. Lapsus carnis voluntarius opere consummatus. 7. Perjury
before a lawful judge. 8. Procuratio, consilium vel auxilium ad abortum fastus
animali. 9. Killing or wounding or severely beating any one. 10. Forging
tin· handwriting or the seal of the officials of the monastery. 11. Mali­
ciously obstructing, delaying, or opening written communications from
Superiors to subordinates, or subordinates to Superiors. The confessors of

RESERVED CASES IN GENERAL·

319

TV. There must be valid ground for making the reservation,
otherwise its effect would tend to ruin rather than to edification.
Hence the undue multiplication of reserved cases is not allowed;
for many people, on account of the difficulty of getting abso­
lution, are likely to remain for a long time in a state of mortal
sin, and are deterred from receiving the Sacraments. Clement
VIII, therefore, exhorted the bishops to reserve only a few sins,
and only those of which the reservation would be conducive to
the maintenance of Christian morality amongst the faithful.**
Regulars must know these cases, so that, should one of them occur, they
may send the penitent to the Superior or to a confessor possessing the neces­
sary faculties for absolution ; or that they may, according to circumstances,
procure for themselves the necessary faculties for this case. But if a Reg­
ular priest confesses to a secular priest or to a priest of another Order (for
example, on a journey — see above), it is disputed whether this confessor
possesses the power to absolve from the reserved cases of the monastery. For
Capuchins sojourning out of their monastery the power has been given by
Benedict XIV (30 March, 1742) and confirmed by Pius IX (1852), with the
understanding, however, that the penitent appears before his Superior or the
confessor appointed by him as soon as possible and receives absolution anew.
S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 575-383.
8‘ S. Alph. n. 579 ; Bened. XIV, De Synodo, Lib. V. cp. 5. The Pope says :
“Although in this matter no absolute and universal standard can be estab­
lished, the general exhortations and decrees which the Sacred Congregatione
at Rome have issued upon the subject may serve as a guide : —
“On January 0, 1601, the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars
issued the following exhortation to the bishops : In order that the bishops
who are empowered to reserve may not unduly burden their subjects and
confessors with reserved cases, they are all exhorted to reserve only a few
cases, and those only which they believe themselves bound to reserve in the
interests of Christian morality, and for the welfare of the souls committed
to them, according to the condition and character of each diocese. This
exhortation was repented on Nov. 26. Oil the same day. the same Congre­
gation issued a circular letter to the bishops, in which the following exhor­
tations are addressed to them : The bishops should take care that they do
not indiscriminately reserve those cases to which the greater excommunica­
tion is by law attached, absolution for which is reserved to no one. except
when the special reservation of such cases appears necessary on account of
frequent scandal, or some other urgent ground; nor those, cases in which
absolution is granted only when restitution hnsheen made, or that performed
which the penitents are bound to perform; nor should they reserve those

820

TUR MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

V. As reservation is a limitation of jurisdiction, it concerns
the confessor directly, and the penitent indirectly.
From this it follows that. : —
1. In the matter of reservation, strangers are not to be treated
according to the reservation of the place where they confess, but
according to that in force at their place of residence, exactly
in accordance with the principles concerning the jurisdiction of
the confessors of strangers which we have stated above. It is,
therefore, more correct to say that they are absolved by virtue of
the jurisdiction which the bishop of the penitent gives, and it
is reasonable to assume that the latter does not wish to limit the
jurisdiction of confessors outside his diocese to whom members
of his own diocese confess, unless he has reserved a sin in his
own diocese. If, therefore, the stranger confesses a sin which is
reserved in the diocese in which he confesses, — a diocese which is
not his own, — the confessor can absolve him, quia absolvit vi ju­
risdictionis dclegatœ ab Episcopo, qui peccatum illud non reservat. ”
cases which, although great sins, are yet matters of lesser importance, and
of frequent occurrence amongst uneducated people ; such ns cases of damni/icatio injusta, etc. In reserving sins of the flesh they must proceed with
great circumspection on account of the danger of scandal, especially when
suspicion might fall upon persons either from their going to extraordinary
confessors, or frequently recurring to the bishop. Finally the bishops are
admonished to adopt and adhere to that course of action, which, after mature
consideration of the customs, natural disposition and tendency of the neigh­
borhood and people appears to them to be the best before the Lord. The
decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Council are couched in a similar
strain. This Council ordered a bishop who had accumulated too many
reserved cases to choose ten or at most twelve of the more considerable
offenses, as he thought proper, and to strike out the rest."
87 Reuter, Theol. Mor. De Pœnitent. n. 371. Cf. Stotz, Trib. Pœnit. Lib.
II. Q. 2, § 5, n. 64. Schmalzgrueber, 1. c. Lib. I. Tit. 20, n. 31, and
many others. This is, in fact, the doctrine which is generally received as
valid amongst the older moralists. Many of the later ones, it is true, teach
that a stranger cannot be absolved from a sin which is reserved in the dio­
cese in which he confesses, falsely assuming that the priest who hears the
confession of a penitent coming from a strange diocese is restrained by his
own bishop from absolving. See Ballerini, Notie ad Gury, II. n. 573, and
Opus Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. De Reservat. Casuum, η. 709 ss.

RESERVED CASES IN GENERAL

321

In practice the rule can be laid down that it is always allowed
to absolve a stranger from reserved sins, except when: fl) the
sin is reserved in both the dioceses, that of the confessor and
that of the stranger, or (2) when the stranger leaves his diocese
in order to confess "in fraudem legis,” that is, to evade the judg­
ment of his Superior,” which may be assumed to be the case when
the sin is of such a nature that it may easily be brought before
the forum externum, or may already, in some form, be before it,
so that absolution could not be administered even in foro interno
without the permission of the bishop.”
2. Although Regulars do not necessarily receive delegated
jurisdiction from the bishop but from the Pope, they cannot
absolve penitents from sins reserved in the respective dioceses,
without having received special faculties from the bishop; the
Popes have distinctly so decreed.’0 The episcopal reservation
is binding also for non-exempted nuns ; whether it is so for the
exempted, is a matter of controversy. St. Alphonsus ” declares
both opinions, affirmative and negative, probable. But should
a bishop refuse to the confessor of nuns jurisdiction over reserved
cases, the absolution of the latter for such sins would undoubt” If the strange penitent confesses a sin which is reserved in his own dio­
cese but not in that in which he confesses, he can undoubtedly be absolved
by ii priest of a Religious Order, in virtue of the privilege granted by the
Pope to Regulars, Const. “Superlia," Clem. X. As regards secular priests,
the older theologians maintain that they could not absolve the stranger in
this case (they appeal to the Caput Si Episcop. 2 de Pœnit. in 6°). while the
later theologians unreservedly allow secular priests to participate in the priv­
ileges of the priests of Religious Orders; for there exists, they say. a general
custom that strangers, in this case also, are absolved by secular priests, and
as the bishops approve of this proceeding, the strangers would be valide et
licite absolved. Cf. Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. n. 573, not» : Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 403 ;
Aertnys, 1. c. n. 239, in both cases decides otherwise Prine. Ill ; and Marc,
1. c. n. 1771, Quæsit. III.
w Cf. Mazzotta, 1. c. Diep. 2, Q. 3, cp. 3, Sect. 2 in fine; Lehmkuhl, I. o.
n. lol : Ballerini adds, "si Episcopus expresse inoitus sit." Notre ad Gary, II.
n. 573, Q. 5, nota II in fine. Cf. S. Alph. n. 589.
” Lehmkuhl, I. c. n. 403. Aertnys teaches otherwise, I. c. u. 239.
“ L. c. n. U02.

822

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

edly be invalid ; for the bishop gives jurisdiction for the exempted
nuns also, as is plain from the words of Gregory XV.02
Whether the familiares of Regulars may be absolved without
faculties from the bishop depends in general upon the fact
whether they are absolved by virtue of episcopal or of Regular
jurisdiction. When they are absolved by confessors appointed
by the Superior of the Order, they are not subject to episcopal
reservation; but if they are absolved by other confessors (secu­
lar priests), it seems that they are subject to episcopal reserva­
tion. If, however, it is a question of sins to which the bishop
has attached censure, they do not, as a rule, incur this censure,
since they must be treated as strangers.03
VI. In order that the objects of the reservation may be at­
tained, and this is only possible by a moderate use of the power
of reservation, grave sins only arc as a rule reserved. Such is
the decision of the Council of Trent.’* The following conditions
are necessary for the valid reservation of a sin:05 (1) It must
be (and that ex natura rei, in order that it be reserved pleno sensu)
a mortal sin, both as regards the internal and the externa) act;
(2) it must have been carried out completely, not merely at­
tempted, wished, begun ; and (3) it must be reserved in definite
terms. These conditions are by common custom deemed nec­
essary. A Superior who reserves is, therefore, supposed to be
guided by them unless he has expressly declared himself to the
contrary. But Superiors generally attach particular conditions
and exceptions to their reservations, which must be gathered
from their instructions.
The following remarks may serve for more explicit explana­
tion : (1) As venial sins are not materia necessaria of absolution,
” Gury, Ed. Ratisb. ad n. 570.
” S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 583; Lehmkuhl, L c. n. 403; Aertnys, 1. c. III. 2,
n. 239.
M Sees. XIV. cp. 7. Cf. Deer. S. C. Cone. 26 Nov., 1602.
·* Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. 11. De Reservatioue Casuum,
n. 661 se.

JiEHEU V Ef) CASES IN (JENERAL

323

they cannot be reserved in the strict and full sense. Even if
it be per sc possible that the Superior can withdraw from a priest
the power to absolve sacramentally with regard to a venial sin,
he cannot oblige the penitent to procure sacramental absolution
from this venial sin. This applies also (2) to really and posi­
tively doubtful sins. Indeed, as St. Alphonsus teaches,0· a sin
which is in any respect doubtful is, according to ecclesiastical
custom and the concurrent teaching of the authorities, regarded
as not reserved. For, even if any sin which is materia neces­
saria of confession might from the very nature of the case be
reserved, yet this is not so in practice, and as reservation is a
lex odiosa, it must be interpreted stricte. A sin is, therefore,
regarded as not reserved : (a) when there is doubt as to its sub­
jective gravity, and (δ) when there is doubt as to its objective
gravity (unless the Superior, for particular motives, has declared
as gravis a materia which, ex se, is not positively (/ravis, in which
case it would be necessary to stand by his decision) ; moreover
(c), there is no reservation when doubt exists as to whether a
positively reserved sin has been committed, or whether it. has
been committed with the necessary conditions, nor is there res­
ervation when doubt exists as to whether a sin really committed
is a reserved sin. But in this case (in dubia juris) the sin would
be reserved if the confessor merely privato errore doubted the
reservation, or if he did not know the sin was actually reserved.
But in some dioceses the bishops have declared that the con­
fession in such a case is valid, and that they do not regard a
sin as reserved if the confessor privato errore or ex ignorantia
does not believe a sin to be reserved.”
If, therefore, the confessor supposes a sin to be reserved, he
must carefully examine if the sin be interne grave, if it has been
committed with full advertence, and with full consent of the will
in materia gravi, and if it is also grave quoad actum externum ; for
»» L. c. η. GOO.
*’ S. Alph. 1. c. n. 000; Lehmkuhl, J. c. n. 405; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 212.

824

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

if the external act were not of a grave nature, it would not be
reserved although it might be inwardly a great sin. Tor in­
stance, should a person in a heretical frame of mind have said
something which neither contained heresy in se, nor, on account
of the circumstances, showed an heretical tendency, his sin
would not be reserved.” The Church is, in fact, accustomed to
reserve only peccata çxlerna, although it cannot be doubted that
she can also reserve peccata mere interna, as this class of grave
sins is, by divine law, subject to the absolving power of the
Church in foro inlcmo.,e
3. That a sin should be reserved it must be completum, com­
pleted; that is, completed in the manner implied by the reserva­
tion. When, therefore, in the words of the (reserving) law, an
external, completed action is specified, — murder, for instance, —
and the outward completion is wanting (in this case, the death
of the victim), there is no reservation. If, on the other hand,
attempting crime, or advising it, are per se reserved, it suffices
to have done these acts to make the sin reserved, though the
project has not been executed or the sinful advice failed to pro­
duce any effect. Frequently such incomplete actions are, how­
ever, reserved as accessory only to the principal action. If
this latter has been certainly completed, then these accessory
actions are reserved.
VII. The question: “Must the penitent be aware that his
sin is a reserved one in order that it should be reserved?” is a
subject of animated controversy among the theologians.100 It
is beyond all doubt that bishops can so reserve the sins of their
subjects that the reservation holds even when the penitent
knows nothing about it. Whether they do reserve in this man­
ner without a formal declaration to that effect, is a debatable
81 S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 582, with Suarez, Lugo, Tainburini, and others.
“Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 582.
1W Cf. Gury-Ballerini, Notai ad n. 571, Q. 1, Opus Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp II.
nn. 724-735.

RESERVED CASES IN GENERAL

325

question. St. Alphonsus and not a few other theologians
teach that a sin is reserved even when the penitent did not know
of the reservation, assigning as sole, or at least chief, reason
that the reservation restricts the power of the confessor.101
The fear that Christian and religious discipline might thereby
be relaxed is alleged as a second reason.1” On the other hand,
a very great number of theologians103 teach that a sin is not to
be regarded as reserved if the penitent did not know that it
was so, when the reservation is pœnalis, that is, when it is of a
punitive character; but that it is to be regarded as reserved
when the reservation is medicinalis, imposed as a deterrent;
that is, when it is not a pœna medicinalis, which, like the
censure, is intended to break the stubbornness of the sinner
and deter him from sin, but a lex disciplinaris, by which the
Superior himself, or through a specially delegated confessor,
wishes to provide a remedy for sin committed. When, there­
fore, Lugo denies that reservation is chiefly of a punitive char­
acter, and, therefore, holds good even if the sinner did not know
of the reservation when he was sinning, we agree with him and
with Lehmkuhl.10·
101 This reason is plainly not a valid one, since all theologians, including
the opponents of this view, admit that reservation directly limite jurisdiction ;
these latter, however, declare that certain circumstances are required to make
a sin reserved, and that it is questionable if the knowledge of the reserva­
tion is such a circumstance or not.
102 This is not convincing ; for ns soon ns the penitent confesses a reserved
sin, the confessor will tell him of the reservation, and thus a check will be
put upon the relaxation of morality for the future; for the sins that have
been already committed, neither one opinion nor the other can offer any
preventive remedy.
The Theol. of Salamanca, Tr. 18, cp. 6, n. 12 ; Lugo, De Pœn. Disp. 20,
n. 11; Sanchez, De Matrim. 1. 0, Disp. 32, nn. 17, 18; Sporer, De Pœnit.
n. 735; Mazzotta, Tract. 6, Disp. 2, Q. 3, cp. 2, § 2, and many others; see
Gury-Ballerini, 1. c.
IM L. c. n. 407. Cf. Gury-Ballerini, 1. c. This may at least constitute a
rule for most dioceses. We must, in fact, assume that the bishop has
reserved sins in the manner in which they are generally understood by the
confessor to be reserved, unless it is shown by positive evidence that the

826

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

If, however, it is a question of reserved censures, the censure
is considered not reserved when the penitent did not know of
the reservation, as only he incurs a censure who knew of it and
yet committed the act to which it is attached. Concerning the
Papal reservations, at least, unanimity upon this point prevails
among the theologians, as these reservations exist chiefly on
account of the censure. With regard to episcopal cases no
unanimity exists. Here, as Suarez rightly teaches, we must
have regard for the circumstances ; that is, for the terms of the
reservation, for custom, and for the power of the person who
reserves, etc.104 But if the penitent knew of the censure and
did not know of the reservation, the theory of some few theolo­
gians that, in this case, also the censure is not reserved, is rightly
regarded as lax and altogether improbable.
43. The Papal Reserved Cases.

In the year 1869 Pius IX issued his celebrated Bull "Apos­
tolic Sedis moderationi,” the object of which was to reduce the
number of censures imposed at different times, to explain them,
and to bring their wording to such form that uncertainty and
doubt on the part of the faithful and of confessors might
cease. By virtue of his apostolical power he therein decreed
that of all the censures ever imposed, whether excommunication
bishop adopts the opinion of those theologians who teach that a reservation
is not incurred by one who is not aware of its existence. Till the later con­
troversy, however, it was always the general conviction that reservation was
understood to be incurred by one who did not know of it ; this is testified
by many authors. We must, therefore, assume that the legislator so under­
stood his law. But if, with the knowledge of the bishop and without pro­
test on his part, it be anywhere taught that a sin is not to be regarded as
reserved for one who does not know of the reservation, this may be consid­
ered a sufficiently valid indication that the bishop does not wish to bind
those who are ignorant of the reservation. Lehmkuhl, 1. c.; Gury, Ed.
Ratisb. ad n. 571.
S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 580, 581, dub. 2; Lacroix 1. c. n. Kill ; Gury, Ed.
Katisb. V. n. 571.

THE PAPAL RESERVED CASES

327

or suspension or interdict, only those should henceforth legally
remain in force which were explicitly introduced into or quoted
in his constitution ; that they should derive their validity not
only from the authority of the ancient canons, but also from this
constitution itself, just as though they were there for the first
time imposed. This Bull possesses force and validity for the
whole Church from the moment when it was promulgated ad
valvas Ecclesia S. Salvatoris.'9* The Bull deals with censures1”
only, and these are either Excommunications,"” Suspensions, or
Interdicts.*0’
/. Excommunicationes speciali modo Romano Pontifici reser­
vatu. The excommunication spec, modo reserved to the Pope is
incurred by :1,0
108 Cf. Archive fiir Kirchenrecht (1871). XXV. 148. The other sources
of the Papal reserved cases are the Council of Trent, of which the censures
still remain in force which were directly imposed by this Council and are
not touched by the Bull “ Apost. Sed.," and those Papal decrees which have
been issued for the imposition of censures since the appearance of the Bull
“ Apost. Sed.," that is, after the year 1869.
><” The two Papal cases spoken of above in which the sin is reserved, are,
therefore, not quoted in it, but are in force.
10i They are (1) those which, in an especial manner (speciali modo) are
reserved to the Pope, (2) those which are simply reserved to the Pope,
(3) those which are reserved to the bishops, aud (4) those which are reserved
to no one. The two first classes are to be kept apart from each other, for a
person possessing the faculty to absolve from the Papal cases does not nec­
essarily possess the faculty to absolve from the cases which are speciali modo
reserved, if this addition is not expressly made. By virtue of the jus com­
mune (Cone. Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. 6) it belongs to the bishop to absolve
from the second class if the cases are secret.
109 Jan. Bucceroni (S. J.), Commentar, de Constitut. Ap. Sed. (Rome,
1888); Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VII. Tract. I. II. III.; Lehmkuhl,
Theol. Mor. P. II. Lib. II. Tract. I. n. 920 ss.; Avanzini, De Conetit.
Ap. Sed. Commentarii (Rom., 1872) ; Heiner, Die Kirchlichen Censuren.
Paderb. 1884, S. 52 ff. ; Kirchenlexikon (2. Aufl.) Apost. Sed. Vol. I. 1.
1125 ff.
110 There are twelve of them in the Bull “ Ap. Sed." which were all. with
the exception of the tenth, contained in the Bull “Camas," but not all eodem
moilο : to these is added the thirteenth ex Constit. Pii IX, Romanus Ponti­
fex, 28 Aug., 1873.

328

TUE MINISTEH OP THE SACHA MENT

1. All who have fallen from the Christian faith (apostates) and
all heretics, of whatever name and sect they may be, as well as
their adherents, supporters, and all their defenders in general.
As the expression “Omnes a Christiana fide apostatas” is of
general application, not only arc all those Christians who have
embraced Judaism or heathenism comprised in it, but also the
so-called freethinkers who wholly give themselves up to unbelief,
and have openly renounced all religion; also rationalists, spiritu­
alists, materialists, pantheists, deists, atheists, illuminati, those
who profess indifferentism in religion or a merely natural reli­
gion, and other unbelievers of similar character, who belong to
the order of Freemasons or adopt the principles of that, order,
even when, here and there, some of its members surround them­
selves with a halo of religion.111
In order that the confessor may know who incurs excommuni­
cation under the expression Omnes el singulos hœreticos he must
form an accurate conception of heresy, which demands :
(a) error formalis, a conscious and voluntary denial joined to per­
tinacia, (b) the demal of an article of faith promulgated by the
Church, (c) the external expression of such denial, (d) a knowl­
edge of the penalty incurred.112 If any one of these marks is
absent, there is no excommunication. In connection with this,
Renninger remarks:113 “At a time when, in our social life, the
waves of unbelief run so high, prudence, deliberation, and
knowledge are in an especial manner’ necessary to him who has
the care of souls, that hasty judgment may be avoided. How­
ever mindful he may be of his office as teacher, he must never
forget the demands of Christian charity; he should never let
himself be drawn into disputes which lead to nothing, still
less should he provoke them; he should never be carried away
111 Cf. Pruner, Moraltheol. p. 121; Heiner, a. a. O. § 53, p. 53.
’“Cf. S. Thom. II. IL Q. 11, art. 1 ; Suarez, De virt. Theol. Disp. 19,
Sects. 1 and 5.
’·· Pastoral Theology, a. a. 0. § 57, p. 158.

THE PAPAL RESERVED CASES

329

by violence. Positive assent to a dogma be should only demand
when his office forces him to do so. He should, especially in
the confessional, take for granted that he who believes in the
Church, believes also in her dogmas. He should not put tempt­
ing questions. He should remember that many howl with the
wolves without really knowing what the howling is about,
being merely anxious not to lose the nimbus of liberalism. He
should make the way of those who are returning as smooth as
is possible without violating the. laws of the Church. The
retractation extra confessionals, which cannot be dispensed
with, may often be clothed in a form which is not wounding to
self-respect, and is yet valid. Intimations to this effect have
been forwarded in a confidential manner to their clergy by dif­
ferent Ordinaries, who were moved by a judicious zeal for the
salvation of souls.” To this class belong also the "Credentes,”
that is, those who give credence and who — without formally
professing heretical doctrine, without pertinacia, or without
sufficient knowledge, pose as heretics — openly profess assent
to a heretical doctrine by word, sign, or action explicitly or
implicitly, in a general way. To these also belong the "Re­
ceptores,” those who afford to apostates or heretics, but only as
apostates and heretics (quatenus hœrelici et non ex. gr. qua fures
sunt) shelter anil receive or conceal them in order to protect
them from punishment for heresy; to these also belong the
fautores, those who in any way render assistance (per omissionem
or pei· commissionem) to apostates or heretics. Finally, we may
mention the defensores, those who, in any way, by force or by
cunning, by word or by writing, protect heretics as such, or
their doctrines or their books.
2. All those who, without permission of the Holy See, know­
ingly read, print, keep, or in any way defend the books of the
above-mentioned apostates and heretics, if the defense of heresy
is the subject-matter of these books; as, also, the readers,
printers, possessors, or defenders of those books which, by a

330

THE MIA'IUTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Papal document (Encyclical, Brief, or Bull) arc, by name (that
is, by statement of the title of the book), forbidden.
(a) The Readers. Reading here must be understood as a
moral not merely a physical act, when, for example, the reader
understands nothing of the language;
in this kind of reading
must be included causing a book to be read to one (not merely
listening, however sinful the latter may be) since, where there is
eadem ratio also eadem est juris dispositio."6 Moreover, in order
to incur the censure, it is necessary that a part sufficient to con
stitute a mortal sin, about a page, be read ;
that the reading
should take place scienter, that is, with knowledge that the book
has been written by an apostate or heretic ; finally, it is requisite
that itshould defend heresy and that the reading or keeping should
take place without authorization from the Holy See. (b) The
readers of books in the proper sense of the word, be they written"’
or printed, not of merely printed matter, as brochures, pam­
phlets, newspapers, periodical sheets, etc., although the reading
of such products of the day may often be, and very often is,
more dangerous to faith and morals than the reading of a bad
book, and there is no doubt that the reading and keeping of such
literature is always a great sin, being an offense against the
natural law."’ (c) The Retinentes, that is, all those who know­
ingly retain in their possession for some time, either in their
1,4 Cf. Suarez. De Fide, 20, 2, 18.
*■* Regula juris in VI.
1,8 The grai'ilat materia is here to be estimated both ex re qurt trartatur
and ex quantitate ; if the exposition or defense of a heretical doctrine is
read, the half, or the third, of a page suffices.
117 Some authors, as d'Anuibale and Melata, restrict the censures to printed
books.
,l* But if these lesser publications are parts of a book of the same con­
tents. they are (subject to the above-mentioned conditions) in the category
of forbidden books, especially if they are bound together in one volume.
Periodical publications, therefore, of which every separate number is regarded
a* a part of the whole yearly issue, fall under the reserved censure; but not
newspapers, as with these there is no question of parts belonging to each
other, each separate number being regarded as complete in itself. (Act. S.
Bed. Vol. VI. fasc. 5, p. 9, Append. 3, p. 133.)

TUE PAPAL ItESERVEb CAHEH

331

own homea or in that of a stranger, in their own name or in that
of another, a book forbidden in the manner above specified,
(d) The Imprimentes, that is, all those who directly cooperate
or assist, as causœ morales or physica, in printing: authors,
publishers, printers, (e) The Delendentes, that is, those who
defend books which are forbidden in the sense specified above."*
Accordingly he does not incur this excommunication : (1) who only
reads or keeps a few separate leaves of such a book or periodicals,
etc. ; (2) Who reads perfunctorily ; (3) who reads from necessity,
to be able to refute a heretic, and was not able previously to
procure the necessary permission ; (4) if his reading is only a phys­
ical act, without his being able to understand anything; (5) if
he keeps a book for a short time only, for example, a day or two,
or only till he has obtained the permission requested, or if he
has no opportunity of giving the book to the Superior.”0
It remains to be remarked that the ten rules of ihe Index itself are
not touched by this ordinance of the Bull, but that the Ejtrnnnn.lat.Mnt.
at inched at the end of the regni. X falls away, as it· was not directly attached
by the Council of Trent itself, but by Pius TV. Consequently the reading
and keeping of heretical books, or of such as are condemned by a decree of
the Congregation of the Index remains, indeed, still forbidden in the future,
but the punishment of tho now specially reserved excommunication is
incurred only in two cases: («) when the author of the book is an apostate
or a heretic, and the book, moreover, not only contains heresy, but er. profeuo defends it. and (ft) when the latter, be the author who he may, is, with
exact specification of the title, forbidden by a Papal Brief, or a Bull, or an
Encyclical Letter. Although the Constitution Officiorum ac Munerum of
Leo XIII (25 Jan., 1807) has considerably mitigated the prohibitions of
Clement VIII, Alexander VII, and Benedict XIV. in regard to the reading
and propagating of noxious literature, nevertheless the warnings against
the intellectual and moral dangers of had books, which the Index Congre­
gation addresses to Catholics, retain their full force. The confessor should
of course remember that the censures attached to the rending of forbidden
books are applicable only where there is a conscious violation of the prohi­
bition ; furthermore, that not only ignorance, but also a general conruetudn
lessoning the danger to faith or morals, constitute a mitigating circumstance
which demands wise discrimination on the part of confessors who apply the
laws of the Index. Few Catholics in English-speaking countries know what
books are on the Index, and that fact itself is a renso i for moderate judg­
ment.
laj Ci. 8. Alph. Lib. VII. nn. 205. 281, 292.

882

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

3. Schismatics and all who obstinately refuse obedience to
the reigning Pope.
4. All those who, whatever their position may be, or the
dignity they may hold, appeal from the injunctions or orders
of the reigning Popes to a future general Council ; moreover the
aiders, advisers, and favorers of such.
5. All those who kill, maim, strike, take prisoner, or keep
prisoner, or persecute in hostile manner cardinals, patriarchs,
archbishops, bishops, Papal legates, or nuncios; those who
expel them from their dioceses, or lands belonging to them,
or estates in their possession; as those also who order or sanc­
tion such acts, or give help, advice, or encouragement in their
execution.
6. Those who directly or indirectly hinder the execution of
ecclesiastical jurisdiction and who, for this purpose (ad hoc),121
apply to the secular power, as well as those who cause or publish
the commands of such persons, or afford help, advice, or coun­
tenance in such proceeding. The ecclesiastical juridical power
is the lawful competence of the Church to govern her subjects
in respect to everything that belongs to their eternal welfare.
This power is exercised in joro externo and interno. The Exer­
citium ordinis (consecrare, benedicere, etc.) is to be distinguished
from the Exercitium jurisdictionis.
7. Those who directly or indirectly compel secular judges to
cite ecclesiastical persons before their tribunal contrary to ca­
nonical regulations (unless it should be the case that ecclesiasti­
cal regulations, either general or particular (Concordats) allow
this), as well as those who issue laws or regulations against the
freedom or rights of the Church. This canon refers to condi­
tions which, though still extant in certain parts of Europe, have
hardly any force in the United States and other missionary
1,1 This does not add a new condition for incurring the censure leveled
against the impedientes ezercitium jurisdictionis, but only introduces another
class of the same offenders (as Avanzini and Heiner, p. 87, assume).

THE VA VAL HEU KH VET) CASKS

countries; it protects the privilegium fori of clerics, and in a
general way th·· freedom and rights of the Church.'”
8. Those who apply to the secular power to prevent the execu­
tion of decrees or of any acts proceeding from the Holy See or
its legates or delegates, as also those who directly or indirectly
actually prevent the promulgation or execution of such, or who,
on account of these decrees or acts, injure or threaten others
(agents, mandatories).
9. The forgers of Papal documents, the promulgators or
subscribers of such forged Papal documents (litterarum Apostdicarum etiam in forma Brevis ac supplicationum gratiam vel
justitiam concernentium,).
10. Absolventes complices in peccato turpi, etc.; see § 46.
11. Those who usurp or sequestrate (jurisdictionem) rights of
jurisdiction (secular rights appertaining to the Church by virtue
of any legal titles, for instance, fiscal rights, etc.), the goods or
revenues of ecclesiastics, which belong to them ratione suarum
ecclesiarum aut beneficiorum (that is by virtue of their ecclesias­
tical position).
Mere thieves and even robbers of Church property, accord­
ingly, do not come under the censure here pronounced, as they
cannot be classed under the definition either of usurpantes or
sequestrantes (cf. S. C. Inq. 9 March, 1870), nor does the pur­
chasing by contract of such goods from usurpers come under it.
But the latter is subject to the Tridentine censure, the censure
reserved simply to the Pope (cf. S. C. Off. 8 July, 1874). Whether
I» As to the disputed question whether one is included amongst the
engentes who denounces and prosecutes a cleric before the civil court, -o that
the judge, in consequence of this denunciation, is officially compelled to
sntnmon the accused cleric, and pronounce sentence upon him according to
the provisions of existing law, we refer the reader to Heiner, who discusses
this point. According to him, the ttntrnlia communior el fire communis
teaches that such a one falls under the censure, while the negative opinion
is not improbable. Moreover, a declaration of the S. C. Inq. 23 Jan.. 1886,
favors this latter opinion. Cf. Aertnye, 1. c. Lib. VII. Tract. 1, n. 82;
d’Annibale (Melata) Manuale Theol. Mor. p. 260.

834

THE MINISTER Of THE SACRAMENT

the properly of monasteries is included, is a matter of contro­
versy; the property of pious foundations is not, included. The
estates of monasteries fall under the Tridentine censure.
12. All those who, themselves or through others, attack towns,
territories, or villages, belonging to the Roman Church, destroy
or occupy them; as also those who arrogate to themselves
supreme administrative power in these places, disturb or stop
the execution of such power, and those who afford help, advice,
and countenance in such work.
13. Accordingly, the canons and dignitaries of vacant cathe­
dral churches, and, in the absence of a Chapter, all those who
are competent to appoint a vicar-capitular, or to govern the
bereaved diocese themselves, incur the excommunication spe­
cially reserved to the Pope, as well as suspension of the revenues
of their benefices, if they presume to admit a bishop elected by
the Chapter, or one presented by the secular power, for the
government and administration of the vacant church before
these persons have accredited themselves by submitting the
Papal documents bearing upon their appointments, — and that
for so long a.s the Apostolic See may think proper to keep this
suspension in force; moreover, those chosen or nominated and
presented for vacant churches who presume to undertake the
government and administration of these churches ex concessione
et translatione, de qua supra (that is, before this submitting of
credentials), as well as all those who have obeyed, or given help,
advice, or countenance to such acts, cujuscumque status, con­
ditionis, prœ-eminentiœ et dignitatis fuerint. To this is added:
When any one of the above-named persons is invested with the
dignity of a bishop, he incurs the penalty of suspension ab exer­
citio Pontificalium and of the Interdict ab ingressu Ecclesiœ,
which overtakes him ipso facto absque ulla declaratione, and is
reserved to the Apostolic See.1”
144 Cf. Heiner, a. a. 0. 8.124 ff. ; Gury-Ballerini, II. n. 073. Aertnys, 1. c.
n. 38.

THE PAPAL RESERVED CASES

335

14. The so-called "civil government pastors,'' appointed by
the State, qui suffragante populo ad parochi «w vicarii officium
electi audeant sive ecclesia: sive jurium ac honorum protensam pos­
sessionem arripere atque obire munia ecclesiastici ministerii, incur
the same excommunication, in accordance with a solemn decree
of the Sacred Congregation of the Council (13 May, 1874).”*
II. Excommunicationes latœ sententia Romano Pontifici sim­
pliciter reservata.
There are eighteen of these, to which are added one of the
Council of Trent, and another ex declaratione 8. C. Inq.:—
1. All who publicly or privately teach or defend tenets which
are condemned by the Holy See under pain of excommunicatio
lata sententia, as also those who teach and uphold that the prac­
tice of asking the penitent the name of the accomplice is allowed.
To the propositions, the teaching and defending of which
involves the above censure, do not belong such tenets as are
simply condemned by the Pope, as those included in the Sylla­
bus, for example, or which are interdicted under other censures
and penalties.
2. Those who, incited by the devil (suadente diabolo), lay
violent hands on clerics, or religious, unless the power of abso­
lution is accorded to the bishops or others, either jure or
privilegio. The words suadente diabolo imply that there is
question of a grave sin. This censure is, accordingly, not in­
curred if the percussio take place either oh legitimam sui defen­
sionem, vel ob justam subditi Clerici correptionem, vel ex joco aut
casu fortuito vel ex subita ira, vel ex ignorantia that the person
struck is a cleric. On the other hand, the censure extends also
to impuberes and the efficaciter coopérantes.'13
,2‘ Heiner, a. a. O. S. 127 ff.
1,5 Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 045. The bishop can jure absolve, if the percurrin
was levis, etiam publico (thus the vicara-general also can absolve), and when
the percussio, no matter whether enormis, gravis, or levis. is a delictum occul­
tum. The Pralati regulares can, ex privilegio, absolve their subordinates
from this censure.

886

'

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

3. Duelliste, even when (hey only challenge to a duel, or
accept the challenge, and all accomplices and abettors. The
censures attached to the duel are, therefore, incurred by: —
(1) the duellists themselves, whether the duel takes place
with or without witnesses, whether wounding follows or not;
(2) the challengers to a duel, oven when the challenge is not
accepted ; (3) he who accepts the challenge, even when no duel
takes place, and when the parties to the proposed duel do not
meet; (4) the seconds, those who accompany the duellists,
and in fact all those who afford countenance and assistance to
them, and who, by advice, or in any other way, make them­
selves accomplices; (5) the spectators who to that end, and
of set purpose, repair to the scene of the encounter, as such
onlooking is a further incitement to the encounter; (6) the
persons in authority who permit this, and, as far as in them
lies, do not forbid it.
4. Those who belong to the sect of the Freemasons or Car­
bonari or to other sects of the kind (Fenians in America and
Ireland),M who agitate either openly or in secret against the
Church or the lawful government, as well as all who in any
way countenance these sects, or do not denounce their secret
heads and leaders (to the local ecclesiastical superiors) when they
clearly realize their duty of denouncing. Political partisans,
so long as they employ only the means which modern public
law places at their disposal in their endeavors to realize their
ideal of the future social state, do not incur this censure.
5. The violators of the rights of the sanctuary.
6 and 7. The violators of the inclosure in monasteries and
convents. Only the violation of the so-called Papal inclosure,
that is, the inclosure prescribed by general ecclesiastical law to
By a decree of the S. O. 20 Aug., 1894, the American societies of Odd
Fellows, Good Templars, and Knights of Pythias were condemned ; v.
Bucoeroni, Supplementum bibliotheca·; Ferraris, s. v. Sectarii; S. C. fuq.
12 Jan., 1870. Cf. Gen. Index Eccleidaetical Review.

THE PAPAL RESERVED CARES

33T

the Orders with solemn vows, brings with it the excommunica­
tion here mentioned ; not the violation of that inclosure which is
observed in the more recent Congregations of men or women
either on account of their rules, or of a particular vow, or also
in consequence of a regulation of the local bishop. Not only
do the violators of the inclosure incur the excommunication,
but all, Superiors or others, who, without lawful reasons,
permit entrance.
8, 9, and 10 refer to simony: real (8); confidential (9); in
the bestowal of benefices, and real on entering a Religious Order
(10).
11 and 12 are directed against the abuse of spiritual favors
for the purpose of unworthy gain, which may take place by
procuring for one’s self: (11) material profit in the dispensing
of indulgences and other spiritual graces, or (12) by collecting
Mass stipends at a higher price, and having these Masses said
in places where a lower fee is customary. While number 11
concerns only the “inferiores Episcopis,” number 12 applies to
all collectors (colligentes) who procure profit to themselves by
the above-mentioned proceedings.
13. Those who alienate and mortgage lands belonging to the
Roman Church.
14. Members of Religious Orders who, without permission of
the local parish priest, presume to administer to clerics or lay­
men the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, or the Eucharist as
viaticum ; except in case of necessity.
15. Those who, without lawful permission, remove from the
holy cemeteries and catacombs of the city of Rome and its
territories, relics (therefore, only remains of saints, corpora vel
partes corporis, etiam in minima particula, quibus indubia mar­
tyrii signa adjuncta sunt; cf. S. R. C. 10 Dec., 1863), and those
who help and countenance them.
16. Those who are associated in crimine criminoso with a per­
son whom the Pope has, by name, excommunicated, that is,

338

TUE MINISTER OF TUE SACRAMENT

who, by helping or countenancing, take part in the crime on
account of which the originator was, by mention of name, ex­
communicated by the Pope.
17. Clerics who knowingly and without compulsion associate
in divinis (that is, in the Church’s offices) with one by name
excommunicated by the Pope, and permit such to participate
in divine service.
In order, therefore, that this excommunication be incurred,
the communicatio must be : (a) with a person by name excom­
municated by the Pope; (6) knowingly and (c) voluntarily.
According to the general and unanimous explanation the el is
not to be taken as disjunctive but conjunctive, so that the
"communicantes in divinis," with a person by name excommuni­
cated, and the “ipsos in officiis recipientes” are to be interpreted
as members of a sentence which necessarily belong to each
other.1” “Divina” and “officia” are merely synonymous
terms.
18. Those who presume, without proper permission, etiam
quovis prcelextu, to absolve from the excommunications reserved
speciali modo to the Pope — that is, extra casum legitimi im­
pedimenti eundi Romam.
19. Missionaries who quocunque modo sive per se sive per
alios engage in commerce in Indiis Orientalibus et America, and
those Superiora who have not censured their subordinates
offending on this head. Ex authent. Declarat. S. C. Inq. 4 Dec.,
1872, a Pio IX approbata.
20. Refers to clerics and laymen quacunque dignitate etiam
imperiali aut regali who unlawfully appropriate jurisdictions,
interests, rights, also fiefs and hereditary tenures, incomes,
usufruct, or revenues from any church or benefice, from the
montes pietatis and other pia loca. (This is an extension of the
number 11 above, in section I of the Censures.)128
Heiner, a. a. O. S. 226 ; Aertnys, 1. c. 103.
Ci. Trid. Sess. XXII. cp. 11 de ref.

THE PAPAL RESERVED CASES

339

///. Excommunicationes Ordinariis Reservata.”·
1. Clerics in major Orders, monks, and nuns, who, after hav­
ing taken the solemn vow of chastity (not the simple) dare to
contract marriage, as also all who attempt to perform the mar­
riage rite over the above-named persons — such marriage being
of itself invalid.
2. All who cause abortion.1”
3. Those who knowingly make use of forged Papal docu­
ments, or lend assistance in this crime.
IV. Excommunicationes non Reservatœ.
1. Those who order or insist with force that notorious here­
tics or those by name excommunicated, or by name interdicted,
should be buried with the rites of the Church.
2. All those who injure or threaten the inquisitors, accusers,
witnesses, or other servants of the Holy Office in the perform­
ance of their duty, or who steal or destroy the official documents
of this Office, or who afford help, advice, or countenance in
any one of these actions.
3. This excommunication falls upon the vendors (alienantes)
or receivers (recipere pnesumentes) of Church property who
129 By the name “ Ordinarii" are to be understood not only the bishop*
and capitular-vicars, but also vicars-general, Pralali regulares ami others
who possess episcopal jurisdiction. The confessorii regulares also can absolve
from this class of excommunication in/oro conscientiis. Pius IX bin only
revoked the privileges to absolve a rasibus R. Pontifici reservatis : ex sententia
probabiliori. Regulars can, vi complurium privilegiorum a S. Sede conceswrum.
absolve from the censures reserved by the common law to the bishops. Cf.
S. Alph. 1. c. a. 00, and De Privil. n. 100. Those censures are excepted which
the Ordinaries have reserved to themselves.
>*> It is verus abortus which is here punished, that is./rOw immaturi ejectio
adeo ut mors ipsius inde secula sii, therefore, not the partus prtematurus tir.tus
vitalis, when procured for just motives. Pius IX abolished the old distinction
between foetus animatus el inanimatus. It is the proruratio abortus. moreover,
that is punished, that is, per se sice per alias interpositas personas — studiose or
ex industria. The censure is, therefore, not incurred by one who emplnjed
the means without the effect resulting. Compare Heiner, a. a. O. S. 213 if.;
Aertnys, 1. c. u. 100; Theol. Mor. Lib. III. n. 102; Lehmkuhl. Thiol Mor.
I'. I. Lib. II. Tract. II. n. 840 ss.; P. II. Lib. II. Tract. I. n. !»7O.

340

TUE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

have not obtained permission of the Pope in the prescribed
form.
4. Those who omit to denounce a soliciting confessor (§ 45).
False denunciation constitutes a Papal reservation without
censure.
To those excommunications are added Suspensions and Inter­
dicts : —
The Suspensions Zota sententia simply reserved to the Pope,
refer to Ordination which takes place by infraction of definite
ecclesiastical regulations, and to religious who are expelled from
their Orders.
The Interdicts lata sententia affect universities, colleges, and.
chapters, whatever name they may bear, who appeal to a
future general Council from the regulations or orders of the
ruling Pope of the time, or who knowingly cause religious
service to be held in interdicted places, as also those who
admit persons excommunicated by name to religious service,
to the holy Sacraments, or to burial with Church service, anil
that till the ecclesiastical Superior whose orders have been
disregarded has received satisfaction.
44.

Absolution of Reserved Sins.

I. All those who can reserve sins may, of their ordinary power
(ordinaria potestate), also absolve from them ; therefore : (1) those
who have reserved, (2) their successors in the same office, and
(3) then· Superiors.
With delegated authority (potestate delegata) those can absolve
who have received a special faculty from the person reserving,
or his successor or Superior, and that only within the limits com­
prised in the power conferred.
II. The bishops and their delegates can, according to common
law, absolve (1) all penitents from the secret Papal reserves,
with the exception of those which are, speciali modo, reserved

ABSOLUTION OF RESERVED SINS

341

to the Pope ;,SI and (2) according to the general teaching of
theologians, which is based upon the ecclesiastical law itself,
those penitents who are prevented from going to the Pope, from
all Papal reserves, secret or public.'"1
According to the general interpretation of the Council of
Trent, and general custom, the bishop can transfer to another,
by free choice (vicarius ad id specialiter deputandus), his powers
of absolving from the Papal reserves under the specified condi­
tions. Some bishops, especially those in distant parts, not
infrequently receive, through the quinquennial or triennial fac­
ulties, greater powers over cases which are, speciali modo, re­
served to the Pope. But whether they can also transfer these
powers and how, — whether generally or only in separate cases,
— must be gathered from the document by which these privi­
leges are conferred.
Formerly Regulars could, by virtue of a perpetual privilege,
absolve from all cases reserved, ordinario modo, to· the Pope;
this privilege has been withdrawn by the constitution "Apos­
tolical Sedis."
III. If a priest who is not empowered to absolve from reserved
cases hears a reserved sin in the confessional, he must, as a rule,
refer the penitent to the Superior, or to another priest delegated
by him. But if the confession must of necessity be made just
at that time, and if there is any obstacle in the way of going to
another, the unauthorized confessor can absolve directly from
the non-reserved, and, consequently, indirectly from the reserved
181 Cf. Trid. Sees. XXIV. de ref. op. 0, “Liceat” and the Constit. Apostolicæ Sedis Pii IX.
132 Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VII. n. 81. Corpus jur. can. cp. “ Eos qui " de sent.
excomm. in GO. Whether bishops and others possess still greater powers, is
to be gathered from the special faculties which the Apostolic See muy have
granted them.
183 CL Ballerini. Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. De Reservat cas. η. 772 Μ. :
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. Ill, ad Π. Concerning the privilege of the Mendicants
as regards the absolution from the Carut Epitcopal., and from the Catu* qui
Episcopit tantum a jure retercalur, see Ballerini, 1. c.

342

THE M/XISTEIl OF THE SACHA M EXT

sins. But the penitent must confess, in addition to reserved
sins, others which arc not reserved, or confess again a sin al­
ready confessed, in order that the materia Sacramenti may not
be wanting. It is, however, afterwards the duty of the penitent
— if it is possible to him — to confess the reserved sin to the
Superior, or to a priest designated by him, or, as the case may
be, to the same confessor after the latter has received power to
absolve from the sin in question, in order that he may be
directly absolved from the reserved sins.'“
Formerly, in accordance with the prescription of the canon law, the
teaching universally held was that (a) one who is prevented during a very
long time, or always (five years or longer) from going to the Superior or his
delegate, is absolved by a subordinate priest without any further obligation,
and (A) one who is prevented for a long time (from six months to five
years) is absolved, with the duty of presenting himself before the Supe­
rior when the obstacle is removed, while one who is prevented only for
a short time may not be absolved from reserved sins ; but if necessity
urges hic et nunc, absolution for the non-reserved sins can be given him,
so that the reserved sins may be indirectly blotted out, the obligation of ob­
taining absolution from the reservation or censure from the Superior or dele­
gated priest remaining in force. This theory was based upon the assumption
that he who was not able to appear before the Pope was not bound to employ
any other means of communication (a letter, for example) unless this were
expressly prescribed by the legislator. Moreover, on July 8, 1860, in an­
swer to the question : Are jienitents who are prevented from going to Rome
in person bound to seek absolution from reserved cases at least by letter or
through the agency of another? the S. C. Officii replied that the decision of
approved authorities, especially of St. Alphonsus of Liguori, should be ad­
hered to. Now the latter teaches (Lib. VII. n. 80) us sententia prababilinr et
communi·, that one is not bound to this. On Juno 23, 1886, another line
of conduct in this matter was prescrilied by the S. Officium. The questions
there put were: 1. May one positively adopt and act upon the teaching
that the absolution from reserved sins and censures, also from those speciali
muilo reserved to the Pope, devolves upon the bishop, or upon any approved
priest, when the penitent finds himself unable to go to the Pope? 2. If the
answer to this question be in the negative, is one obliged to communicate by
letter with the Prefect of the Penitentiary with regard to all cases reserved
to the Pope, if the bishop has nota special Induit (the hour of death ex­
cepted), in order to receive the faculty to absolve? To these questions the
above-named Congregation returned the following answer sanctioned ami
confirmed by the Pope (30 June, 1886) : Ad I. With regard to the practice

ABSOLITION OF RESERVED SINE

343

But the confessor can also apply to the Superior and from him
obtain powers for this special case to absolve the penitent from
the reserved sin ; this must, of course, be done with the most
careful and strict observance of the secrecy of the confessional.
Indeed, it is highly to be recommended in our days that the
confessor should not refer the penitent to the Superior or to
another priest with the requisite powers, but should rather him­
self procure from the Superior the necessary powers to absolve
the penitent, even when the latter has no long or difficult
journey to make in order to reach the Superior. For, if the peni­
tent goes himself, the duty of confessing his sins again is incum­
bent upon him, and to confess such a sin again requires from most
penitents great self-command: and there would be fear of his
of the Sacred Penitentiary, especially since the appearance of the apostolical
constitution of Pius IX which begins with the words “Apostolical Serti ,"
Negative. Ad II. Affirmative; but in the really more urgent cases in which
the absolution cannot be deferred without danger of great scandal or dis­
grace, as to which the confessor is answerable to his own conscience, the
alisolution can be administered, injuncti) de jure jungendis, also from the
censure speciali modo reserved to the Pope; under pain, however, of “reiucidence " in the same censures (that is, under pain of again incurring the cen­
sures) if the person absolved does not, at least within a month, amt through
the confessor, apply to the Holy See. (Linzer Theolog. prakt. Quartalschrift,
1887, S. 3S0. See Lehmkuhl, 1. c. η. 410; Muller, I. c. § 145; Bucceroni,
Enchirid. Morale et Supplementum. Compendio Theol. Mor.; Gury-Ballerini,
Commentar. IV. p. 224 ss.; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. I. e. cp. II. η. (1114,
Nota p. 350; Aertnys, I. c. De Censuris, n. 27.) Ou this Lehmkuhl
remarks : ·■ The ride laid down by the Apostolic See is clear. Tt does not
distinguish between reserved cases with censure and without censure, and to
follow it is now everywhere allowed, without waiting for a further promul­
gation, in all Papal reserved cases; indeed it seems to be becoming a general
rule.” (L. c. n. 413.) Ballerini adds the remark : Ergo (1) urgente ratio­
nabili causa, quilibet confessorius absolvit a censura, censura autem absolutio non
est nisi directa : cessante aulein censura cessat reservatio peccati, a quo proinde
Confessorius directe absolvit. Absolutio proinde, qua in casibus urgentibus diferri non posse dicitur, est absolutio directa. Jam vero vides (2) Aeic de absolu­
tione indirecta a peccatis reservatis, quia in casibus urgenlioribus succurri potest
necessitatipcenitentis ne verbumquidemferi: Nimirum cum necessitati panilentis
succurrendum est, absolutionem directam a reservatis dandam esse et bunc esse
Ecclesice sensum supposuerunt Patres.

344

TBE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

changing his mind and not going to the Superior nt all. Let the
confessor, therefore, regard it as a duty of charity,”4 which in
most cases he must undertake for his penitent, to obtain from
the lawful Superior the necessary power to absolve from the sin
or censure confessed to him. But if it is a question of Papal
reserves, and if the confessor, in a case of really urgent necessity,
has given absolution, he must, in the name of the person ab­
solved, apply by letter to Rome, in order that the matter may
be finally set in order. If the Superior refuses "unjustly" to
grant the faculties for a reserved sin, such refusal is unlawful;
indeed, he sins if, without any valid reason, he makes difficulties
about imparting the faculty, and when great detriment to the
subject is to be feared from the refusal, he sins against charity
and justice. But if the penitent could without difficulty con­
fess to a delegated priest, and if there were lawful ground130 for
obliging the subject to confess to the Superior, the Superior
could without doing wrong refuse the faculty. As a general rule
it is to be observed : that the confessor who seeks faculties for
the absolution of reserved cases, and the Superior who imparts
them, should be guided only by consideration for the greater
welfare of the soul of the penitent ; all vain, unworthy motives
should be out of question.1” In case of refusal of faculties for
absolving, another confessor cannot directly absolve from the
reserved sin.1”
In requesting power to absolve from reserved sins, the name
of the penitent, his character, position, or parentage must not
be mentioned, and everything must be avoided that might be­
tray him. Without naming the person the reserved sin is indi1K Ct. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 584, Praxis Confess, n. 80. But see Ballerini
ou this [joint. Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. n. 004.
ns Lugo, 1. c. ; Ballerini, 1. c. n. 094.
i" Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 580 ; H. A. n. 134.
Layinann,L. V.Tr.O.c. 13; Lugo, Disp. 29, nn. 188 et 20, n. 141 ; Suarez,
IK l’œn. Disp. 30, s. 4, η. 8; Busenbuuni, 1. e. η. 105; Ballerini, Op. Theol.
Mor. I. c. cp. IL nn. 088, 089.

ABSOLUTION OF RESERVED SINS

345

cated, or pise the number only which the sin in question bears
on the official list of reserved cases, followed by the request for
faculties to absolve. Instead of this, one can, for the special case,
request the power to absolve from all the reserved sins among
which the one in question is contained. The instructions given
by the Superior upon application are to be accurately followed ;
the document containing them is to be carefully sealed and after­
wards burnt. The priest who dispatches it, of course, gives his
name and address, writing on the envelope the superscription
“Pro foro interno.” The envelope, with the request thus sealed,
is inclosed in a second envelope, which must likewise he sealed,
and this one is addressed to the Ordinary or vicar-general.1”
In order that the object of the reservations may be attained,
the Superior and his delegate must admonish the penitent with
greater earnestness, impose a more severe penance than ordi­
nary upon him, and prescribe special remedies, in order that he
may be preserved from relapse.
To the above we add : —
1. The difference between direct and simply indirect absolu­
tion is the following : he who is only indirectly absolved cannot
as he pleases receive holy communion or say Mass (at least not
when he remains under the censure), but only when, in individ­
ual cases, there is urgent necessity for the reception of commun­
ion or for saying Mass.
2. The duty of appearing before the Superior is undoubtedlybinding under grave sin ; and when it is a question of a censure
from which one has been absolved with the obligation of pre­
senting himself before the Superior the duty remains in force,
under pain of falling again under the same censure.
3. When there is question of the duty of applying to the Pope,
the Sacred Penitentiary, or the Cardinal Grand Penitentiary is
understood, as this tribunal acts instead of the Pope in matters
i® Schneider, Manuale Sacerdotum contains formularies for the request

846

THE MLN1STEE OF THE SACHA MENT

of conscience, after the manner of a mwnws perpetuum, the Pope
being neither accustomed to, nor able personally to, receive all
petitions.
4. "Casus urgentiores, in quibus absolutio differri nequii absque
periculo gravis scandali vel infamia·,” are the following: (a) when
the penitent cannot stay away from holy communion or, as the
case may be, omit the celebration of holy Mass, without causing
scandal, or without giving rise to grave suspicion against him­
self; (ft) when the duty of yearly confession is to be fulfilled, or
when the penitent would otherwise remain a long time in grave
sin.11’
5. According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus,the follow­
ing persons are considered as prevented, or, as the case may be,
exempted forever, from going to Rome : (a) those who are not
able of their own right to undertake a journey to Rome;
(ft) those who are too poor to provide the requisites for such
a journey; and (c) those who are in weak health, and unequal
to the exertions of the journey. It is true traveling conditions
are different now, and the obstacles which St. Alphonsus con­
sidered valid in his day can no longer be allowed to hold alto­
gether good, but it is easy to gather from what the holy Doctor
says upon the point when an obstacle may still be regarded as
legitimate. Accordingly, the following are to be considered as
laboring under a perpetual impediment of appearing before this
Superior for absolution, always with the understanding that
their circumstances remain unchanged for a period of five years
or more: (a) cliildren who are still under paternal authority;
(ft) members of Religious Orders (except when they have been
guilty of some extraordinarily grave crime) ; (c) old people of
more than sixty years; (d) those who are in the position of
servants or in similar situations ; (e) poor persons, who are not
accustomed to gain their maintenance by begging; (/) pris>*° 8. Alph. I. c. n. 584.
’« Lib. VII. n. 88.
“* CI. Mazzotta, De Pœnit. Q. 3, c. 3, § 1.

ABSOLUTION OF RESERVED SINS

Ml

oners; (fl) sick persons and weak persons; (A) those who hold
a public office, or provide for a family, and cannot be replaced
by a substitute; (i) women, except those who, in a special case,
have incurred a reserved censure, as, for instance, the violation
of the inclosure, in which case application by letter must always
be made to the Pope; (Ic) those not of age; and, finally, (/) all
those who cannot undertake this journey without great moral
or bodily harm, either to themselves or to those belonging to
them. The questions as to whether one who has committed
reserved sins must, in the absence of an authorized confessor,
confess to a simple one, in the case of his having to say Mass or
communicate, or whether it suffices to elicit contrition, — and
whether the penitent who has committed both reserved and un­
reserved sins must accuse himself in the confessional of the re­
served sins as well, — formerly discussed by theologians, are
solved by present usage. As the penitent under existing legis­
lation can be directly absolved from censures and sins (though
with the duty of applying to the Roman tribunal), the rule
now is that the penitent must immediately confess all his
sins.14’
IV. In the hour of death every reservation ceases, and any
confessor may then administer absolution. And a simple, that
is, unauthorized, confessor, can absolve a penitent in articulo
mortis from reserved sins even when the Superior is present or
is easily accessible, since the Council of Trent has expressly de­
clared that in articulo mortis there is no reservation. Moreover,
no obligation must be imposed upon the dying person in case of
his restoration to health, unless perhaps he should owe to some
other person a debt of satisfaction or restitution. If, however,
it is a question of reserved censures, the confessor who possesses
no power to absolve from these must impose the duty, in case
of recovery, of appearing before the Superior; in this case it
See Ballerini, Opus Theo). Mor. I. c. cp. II. u. 667 ss.; S. Alph. Lib.

348

THE MINISTRE ON THE SACHA MENT

would, of course, be advisable to set the matter in order at once
with the Superior if he be present or easily accessible.
With regard to the absolution of reserved cases the following
questions remain to be discussed : —
1. Is the reservation of sins removed by an invalid absolu­
tion which the Superior, or a priest authorized by him, has
administered? In answering this question theologians set up
the following distinctions: (a) If the absolution was invalid
without fault on the part of the penitent, and if the latter con­
fessed all liis reserved sins, the reservation is removed according
to the usual, and intrinsically well-founded, opinion of theolo­
gians: in this case the penitent has fulfilled the object of the
reservation if not that of the Sacrament, by submitting the re­
served sins to the judgment of the Superior, or, as the case may
be, of the authorized priest, (b) And even if the confession
were sacrilegious, the reservation is, according to the not im­
probable teaching of many theologians, removed, and that on
the ground just alleged. This teaching, however, cannot be
extended to the confessor who absolves from reserved sins vir­
tute jubilœi, as, at the time of a Jubilee indulgence, the confessor
does not possess the faculty to absolve all penitents from
reserved cases, but only the vere pienitentes, who wish to gain
the Jubilee indulgence; but those who, of their own fault, make
the confession invalid, are certainly not of that class.
2. When the penitent through forgetfulness has omitted to
confess a reserved sin, the reservation is removed, according to
an opinion which St. Alphonsus, following Lugo, characterized
as the most common among theologians and as probable, so that
any confessor could, afterwards, directly absolve from these re­
served sins, and this is presumed to be the intention of the Supe­
rior as regards the properly disposed penitent. On the other
hand, not a few theologians, among them Suarez,teach that
1« Disp. 31, Sect. 4, n. 14, et seq. and n. 16.

AHHOI.UTION OF RESERVED SINH

349

in the above case the reservation is not removed, and St.
Alphonsus designates this opinion as the more probable, and for
the very strong reason that (as he says) a reservation is only
removed by being submitted to the judgment of the Superior,
in order that the object of the reservation may be attained.
This latter opinion certainly deserves the preference in view of
the argument alleged; but the following cases are excepted:
(1) when one may assume from any positive sign that the Supe­
rior wished to remove the reservation; (2) when the penitent
went to the Superior or to an authorized priest for the purpose
of being absolved from all reserved sins, and declared this wish
to the confessor; (3) when a privilege was granted in favor of
the penitent, such as either expires with an official act, or is
limited to a definite period, as, for example, at Jubilee time.
To these Suarez adds a fourth exception — when (4) the reser­
vation refers only to the censure, " because in order to absolve
from a censure, it is not necessary per se et directe, to know the
matter in question accurately in detail, but the general inten­
tion of absolving from all sins, reserved included, to the extent
of the confessor’s power and the penitent's necessity is sufficient
for the purpose.1*5 But if the penitent has, through his own
fault, failed to confess the reserved sin, the reservation is cer­
tainly not removed, as one cannot here assume that the Superior
annuls it.1*’
3. It is not allowed to absolve a penitent only from the
reserved sins and for the rest to send him to another con­
fessor. Nothing can justify such a proceeding.1*7
4. If a penitent has confessed a sin as to the reservation of
which a doubt exists, the latter is directly absolved by the abso­
ni Suarez, 1. o. j Gury, Ed. Ratinb. II. n. 581, Not®; Aertnys, I. c. n. 214,
Q- II.
>«’ Cf. Opus Theol. Mor. ). c. n. 753 es. ; Gury-Ballerini, II. n. 581, Q. 10,
et Vindici® Alphone. pp. 572-578.
i« Cf. Prop. 59 damn, ab Innoc. XI ; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 505; Ballerini,
Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. ii. 713.

350

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

lut ion administered by a simple confessor. This need not. be
afterwards confessed if it should prove that the sin was undoubt­
edly reserved.1*"
5. A confessor has applied for powers to absolve the penitent
from reserved sins; in the meantime, however, after these pow­
ers have been granted, and before they have been exercised, the
penitent has again committed the reserved sin or committed it
several times, or committed other reserved sins — do the powers
applied for suffice in order to be able to absolve? If the powers
are conferred in a general way, say in the following or a similar
manner: “Facultatem tibi concedimus pernitentem hac vice absol­
vendi a reservatis," the confessor can, according to a very prob­
able and general opinion, absolve the penitent from all reserved
sins committed before and after; only the interval between the
powers conferred and the new reserved sins incurred must be
no longer than one month, and the powers must not have been
conferred on account of a festival which is already past. If,
however, the faculties have been conferred for a definite class
of reserved sins only without specifying the number, these fac­
ulties suffice to absolve the penitent (but only to absolve him
once) from all cases of this kind.1*9
'« S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 000, Q. 2; Gury, II. n. 581, Q. ΙΓ.
1,9 S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. G01 ; Scavini, Tract. X. Ailnotationes, 230. Cf.
Bucceroui, Jan. Commentarii De Casibus reservatis, Romæ, 1889.

CHAPTER III
ABUSE OF POWER BY THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

An exalted, indeed a divine, power has God conferred upon
priests, in authorizing them, as judges of souls in His stead, to
remit or to retain sins. This power has been conferred upon
them for the salvation and welfare of souls. It is, therefore,
greatly to he regretted that we must here speak of an abuse of
this power. The Church has, alas! found herself obliged to
adopt severe measures against this abuse, in order to prevent it,
but. in her severity she shows her zeal for the faithful, and proves
herself the faithful dispenser of the Mysteries of Christ. There
are three ways in which the priest may abuse his power in the
Sacrament of Penance.
45.

Inquiring after the Name of the Accomplice in Sin.

In a former paragraph (§ 27) we have laid down that it may
be permissible to reveal indirectly the accomplice of the sin
{complex peccati) in so far as the complete confession of one’s
own sin may render this avowal necessary, and that, accord­
ingly, the confessor is also allowed, in order to make the peni­
tent’s confession entire, to ask the circumstances which alter
the nature of the sin, or to put questions which are necessary
in order to provide the better for the penitent’s spiritual wel­
fare, questions through which the complex peccati might also
become known to the confessor. Here we treat of a totally
different case, viz. the illicit attempt of detecting the name of
the complex peccati without necessity, and of demanding its
revelation under threat of refusing absolution.
351

352

the nlvistkh of the sacha.vent

On this point Benedict XIV issued several constitutions
which Pius IX confirmed in his Constitution “ Apostolicœ Sedis"
(see § 43, p. 326). The motives of the legislation are stated
thus: many confessors, led astray by false zeal, have intro­
duced a perverse and pernicious practice in hearing the confes­
sions of the faithful . . . that when penitents come to them
who had an accomplice in (heir sin, they ask these penitents
indiscriminately for the name of the accomplice. Nor do they
do this in a kindly manner, by advice; but they force and com­
pel them to reveal the name by threats of refusing absolution ;
indeed, not content with this, they even go so far as to
demand from their penitents that they should mention the dwell­
ing-place of the accomplice. This absolutely intolerable impru­
dence they justify by the pretext of care for the amendment of
the accomplice, and do not hesitate to defend it by certain
opinions borrowed from theologians, whereas they only falsely
apply true and sound teachings to their own and their penitent’s
ruin, and, moreover, are guilty before God, the eternal Judge,
of many and great evils which follow from their work, as they
should easily have apprehended. Nor could malicious talk and
scandal fail to arise from this conduct, nor any other result be
expected than that not only the dispensers of the Sacrament,
but the sacred Ministry itself, become odious, and the faithful
perplexed.
In the second constitution the Pope decrees : —
1. The excommunication la tœ sententia, which is reserved to
the Pope, against all who in future presume to teach that this
practice is allowed, and against all who orally or in writing dare
to defend it, or attack, or presumptuously expound otherwise,
1,0 In the
constitution addressed ail Episcopos Lusitania, the Pope de­
scribes and condemns the crime of inquiring after the name of the complet :
in the second, addressed to the same bishops, he decrees the punishment for
the transgressors of the command, and prescribes the Ordo procedendi against
them; in the third constitution he extends the two former decrees to the
whole Church.

INQUIRING AFTER NAME OF ACCOMPLICE IN SIN 353

or distort, what was said against this practice in the first
Brief.
2. The suspension from hearing confessions ferendrr wnterUvr.
and other heavy penalties against those who, after the manner of
the above-described and condemned practice, dare to ask peni­
tents the name of the complex peccati, or the dwelling-place, or
other circumstances imparting a closer or more individual des­
ignation of this complex, threatening at the same time the refusal
of the sacramental absolution to the penitent who refuses to
give information on these points.
3. The Sacred Office was advised rigorously to proceed
against those who taught that this practice was allowed, de­
fended it, etc. (as above indicated), and against the confessors
who applied this pernicious teaching, when their conduct excited
suspicion that they adhered to the false doctrine. The Pope,
therefore, laid upon all (except the penitents in propria causa)
who knew that a confessor was guilty of this teaching, or of prac­
tices which excited suspicion—an obligation of bringing the mat­
ter before the notice of the Sacred Office within a month (under
pain of excommunication, which is now. however, removed).1**
The Constitutions of Benedict XIV, however, as is clear from
the foregoing, are leveled against the practice of asking peni­
tents, passim, indiscriminately, who have an accomplice in their
sin, for the name of the accomplice. The prohibition is, there­
fore, not an absolute one, for there may be circumstances in
which it is allowed to demand from the penitent even under
threat of withholding absolution, the naming of the partner in
sin. This is the case when the confessor holds at the same time
another office, such as that of a Superior, by virtue of which he
can oblige the penitent to reveal to him the authors and accom­
plices of the sin, in order to punish them as pernicious to the
general weal. If this is the case, the confessor does not ask for
>“ Cf. Gury-Ballerini, II. n. 500, Note.

354

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

the name of the accomplice ns confessor but as Superior, and as
Superior he rightfully demands to know who the accomplice is.
Wien, again, the confessor sees that by the concealment of
the partner in guilt there would arise grave evil which the peni­
tent is bound to prevent, the latter must, out of regard for the
general welfare, make known the accomplice in his sin to the
proper person; but if the confessor is at once convinced that
the penitent cannot himself communicate it directly to the Su­
perior, and also that he has no other more suitable person through
whom he could do so than the confessor himself, the penitent is
bound to accept this sole remaining expedient, and inform the
confessor of the accomplice, and the confessor may force him to
do so under pain of withholding absolution; for, if the peni­
tent were not willing to obey, he would not be worthy to receive
absolution. "However,” Lugo warns us, “the confessor must
proceed in this matter with great caution, that scandal may not
arise in making use of information obtained in the confessional.
It is, therefore, better to request the penitent to speak to him
upon the subject outside the confessional.” Indeed, it is neces­
sary to require that the information should not be given liim
under the seal of the confessional.14’
46.

The Absolution of the Complex in Peccato Turpi.

To preserve the sanctity of the institution of Penance, to pro­
tect the Sacraments from contempt, and save souls from ruin, the
Church has laid down the following very salutary regulations:”3
Lugo, Disput. 10, nn. 432 sq. ; Ballerini, Not. ad Gury, II. n. 502 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 310; Aertnye, 1. c. 248, Q. I and II. Although St. Alphonsus
(Lib. VI. n. 492) admits that the penitent is sometimes obliged to make
known the comptez in order to avert a great evil, yet he dares not maintain,
in view of the strict prohibition of the Pope, that the confessor is ever
allowed to ask the name of the complex. He has not sufficiently considered
the word passim— and the other words, doctrinas veras et sanas mate appli­
cando— in the constitution of Benedict.
>“ Constit. Benedicti XIV, “ Sacramentum Pœnit.,” 1 June, 17 11, et Const.
·· Apostolici muneris,” 8 Feb., 1745 ; Constit. Pii IX, “ Apostolical Sedis,” 12

AHSOI.I HON OF THE COMPLEX IM PECCATO TURPI
I. No priest, whether secular or regular, possesses jurisdiction
over his complex in peccato turpi against the sixth commandment,
till another confessor has absolved the complex from this sin.
According to this, jurisdiction is withdrawn from the confessor
only in respect to the sin against the sixth commandment which
he himself has committed with the penitent.Nevertheless,
this withdrawal of jurisdiction has also the effect that he cannot
validly absolve from other mortal sins which the penitent
(complex) confessed at the same time with that sin. For the
Pope has declarer! absolutely invalid and void the absolution
administered by a priest who possesses no jurisdiction over
such a sin and such a penitent.1" But after the sin of the
complex has been remitted by another priest, the jurisdiction
of the unhappy priest over this penitent revives, even with re­
spect to this directly remitted sin. The Sacerdos complex could,
therefore, afterwards absolve his complex from sins which the
latter had subsequently committed — not with him. Such a
proceeding is, however, to be discouraged, for the sense of shame
is thereby lost, the reverence due to the Sacrament dies away,
and the danger of relapse, or, at least, of great temptation, is
imminent. Such unhappy penitents must, therefore, be ad­
monished never more to confess to the confessorius complex.™
But what is the confessorius complex to do if the penitent again
confesses that sin in which the confessor has been complex,
although it has already been remitted by another confessor?
If he only confessed this sin, the case would be just as if a peni­
tent confessed a reserved sin only to a priest not empowered
for reserved sins; the latter could not absolve, because there
Oct, I860. Cf. Bucceroni. Jan. Commentarius in Constitutionem Benedicti
XIV, “Sacram. Pœnit.," Rom®, 1888; Pars altera, pp. 106-141.
IM Cf. Declar. S. Pœnitent. 16 May, 1877.
Cf. Constit. “Sacramentum Pœnitentiæ," 1 June, 1741, Benedicti XIV.
1« St. Thomas, Suppleni. Q. 20, Art 2, ad 1 ; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. *>55. Cf.
Gury-Ballerini, Note ad 587 ; Gury, Edit. Ratisb. Not® ad u. 587 ; Acrtnya,
1. c. n. 249.

856

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

would be (for him) no proper materia sacramenti.'*1 But if the
penitent (complex) confessed other sins (in addition to that in
which the confessor had been his complex) absolution could lie
given,since a priest who is not authorized for reserved sins can
administer absolution when reserved and unreserved sins have
been confessed. But then the absolution is, both by the nature
of the case and the intention of the person absolving, applied to
the unreserved sins only. There is, moreover, a great difference
between the two cases,— the confession of the sin in which the
confessor was an accomplice, and the confeasion of reserved and
unreserved sins, — namely, that to absolve a penitent who has
confessed reserved and unreserved sins, a causa ab integritate
confessionis excusans must be present, whereas no such reason
is here necessary in order to submit again to the power of the
keys a sin already remitted.'5’
In some dioceses it was de jure particulari forbidden that a
priest should ever hear the confession of a complex, saltern copula
consummata. This prohibition, however, the S. Congr. Concil.
repeatedly rejected, and when the resolutions of a synod con­
taining such a prohibition were submitted to it the Congrega­
tion returned the answer: Tale decretum deleatur, although the
defenders of the decree adduced much in its justification, and
emphatically denied the danger of scandal which many main­
tained would easily arise in little places. Thus, most wisely did
the Congregation curb undue zeal.100
But here another and much more difficult question forces itself
upon us: What is to be done, si alicubi mulier, qua- misere in
ejusmodi peccatum cum sacerdote lapsa fuerit, nullum alium, quo161 Cum jurisdictionem in illud crimen nullam sacerdos complex habeat. Bidierini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c.
,M Non habita ratione peccati illius (in quo complex fuit) cujus confessio ut
quid impertinent consideranda erit. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. De
absolut, complicis, n. 048.
Ballerini, Notai ad Gary, 1. c.
»·> Cf. Ballerini. Opus Theo). Mor. 1. c. cp. II. De absol. conipl. n. 051.

ABSOLUTION OF THE COMPLEX IN PECCATO TURPI Ml
cum peccatum illud sacramenlaliter confiteatur, sacerdotem ibi
habeat, but the circumstances of the person and of the place, etc.,
are such that she cannot go elsewhere to confess to another con­
fessor, and there is no hope of her being able to confess to another
priest at the place in question (at a mission, for example). Bal­
lerini declares that it was not the intention of Benedict XIV,
when he gave his Constitution, that such persons, in the above
circumstances, should be deprived of the Sacraments of the
Church their whole life, till in the hour of their death they could
at last be absolved a sacerdote peccati complice. And might not
such a person die suddenly without illness preceding? What
then is she to do when the time for the yearly confession and
Easter communion has come? May we say that she can always
receive holy communion with contritio alone, indeed, that she
must receive it? And what if scandal arises among the people,
and the woman loses her good reputation by its becoming
khown that she has not received holy communion for several
years? If any one objects that, in this extremity, such a peni­
tent might be proceeded with exactly as if she had a reserved
sin to confess, and, therefore, omitting that sin (over which the
confessor has no jurisdiction), the other sins could be submitted
to absolution, by which that sin also would be indirectly re­
mitted, we ask : How and when will this sin be finally submitted
to the power of the keys? Great difficulties beset this question,
and we dare not make a decision supported only by our own
judgment.
Two things are, however, clear enough: one is that when
Benedict XIV withdrew from the confessario criminis complici
the jurisdiction to administer absolution to the complex ab eodem
crimine, he certainly removed the occasion of very great scandal,
but he by no means wisher! to close to the sinner the way of
reconciliation opened by Christ to him and to all the faithful ,
indeed, it was precisely in order that this reconciliation might
be the more certainly am,l better accomplished by the agency

358

THE ΜΙΝΙΕΤεη OF THE SACHAMENT

of another priest, that he wished to make the confessnriim crimi­
nis compter incapable of accomplishing it. He, therefore, pre­
supposed, what generally is the case, that other priests would
not be wanting, from whom the penitent, by confession and
sacramental absolution, might obtain remission of her sin. Il has
never been the intention and practice of the Church, by restrict­
ing jurisdiction for the remission of certain sins and reserving
absolution for them, to set aside the ordinary means of forgive­
ness, the sacramental confession of sin, and to supply for this
by perfect contrition or indirect remission. However ample
these extraordinary means for obtaining eternal salvation may
be, yet the Church does not allow that the ordinary dispensation
set up by Christ for our welfare should be disregarded. The
Church, therefore, removed all restrictions upon absolution for
the hour of death, so that all priests can absolve every penitent
from all sins and censures. We are not, however, to suppose
that the Church has made this provision solely for the moment
and the danger of death; she makes other exceptions.101 It is,
therefore, very far from the intention and the custom of the
Church so to limit the jurisdiction necessary to the adminis­
tration of the Sacrament of Confession that it remains restricted
even when a sinner, during a long time, and still less if during
his whole lifetime, is unable, to have access to a priest whose
power is not limited. And who, out of fear of an abuse, would
forbid a priest the dispensing of a Sacrament, or one of the faith­
ful the reception of a Sacrament, when the reception of such
Sacrament appears necessary? When, therefore, necessity de­
mands the reception of the Sacrament, it is not to be refused
by the priest nor to be neglected by the faithful. If abuse takes
place, let the blame fall upon those who would not make good
use of the benefit.1”
161 Cf. C. Eos qui 22. De Sentent. Excoinm. in VI; C. Ea noscitur 13,
De Sent. Excomin., et C. Quamvis 58, eod. tit.
Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 655.

ABSOLUTION OF THE COMPLEX IN PECCATO TURPI 359

A pari Ballerini teaches that the confessorius complex may
administer absolution from the crimen, in quo ipse complex fuit,
to the penitent who has no other confessor, and who, if he were
not absolved by the confessorius complex, would be obliged to
abstain for a long time from holy communion with possible
scandal to others, and this teaching is in the Commentaries of
the Ada .S'. Sedis extended to other extraordinary cases, when,
during a long lime, no opportunity presents itself to the persona
complex of confessing without evident danger of sacrilege, and
when, at the same time, evident danger of disgrace or even of
suspicion arises from the long abstention from the holy Sacra­
ments.*"
II. To incur this penalty it is necessary : —
1. That the sin in which the confessor was an accomplice
should be a mortal sin, both internally and in the external act.
Purely internal mortal sins, and those not completed externally,
are, therefore, excluded;
2. That both confessor and penitent should have sinned and
have been guilty of the peccatum turpe;
3. That the two preceding conditions should be certainly
fulfilled; hence the sin must certainly have been mortal inter­
nally and externally, and on the part of both the confessor
and the penitent, on the principle that odia restringenda
sunt.'"
Accordingly, it is indifferent if the complex be a person of the
male or female sex. Benedict XIV expressly says: “Qualem-,
cumque personam”; moreover, it is not necessary that the sin
should be completed, as the Constitution says generally and
indefinitely: “a sin against the sixth commandment,” and the
object of the law is — occasiones non tantum copula sed omnis
turpitudinis a sanctitate tribunali pernitentia removere. Casum
complicis ergo constituunt: tactus impudicus, osculum, amplexus,
ιω Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. P. II. Lib. II. Tr. I. De Ceusuris, Sect Π. n. 937.
>« S. Alph. Lib. VI. u. 554.

860

THE MINISTER nF THE SACRAMENT

colloquium uti et aspectus, dummodo complicitatem important ac
tarn interne, tum extente sint graviter mali.'**
But when one party has either not gravely sinned or only by
an internal act, there is no casus complins in question.
HI. The confessorius can absolve his complex, when the latter
is in articulo mortis and when another priest, who may also be
without faculties, cannot be called in without greater danger of
defamation or of scandal, or when another priest is, indeed,
present, but declines to hear the confession of the dying person.
In the latter case this priest is regarded as absent. The sacerdos
complex is, however, bound to take all care that no suspicion or
scandal arises from the presence of another priest; he may, for
example, upon some pretext or another, absent himself, having
previously induced the dying person to send for another confessor.
If he fail to do this, and so is under the necessity of administer­
ing absolution to the dying person, he sins gravely and incurs
the penalty decreed ; but the absolution administered by him,
“etiam directa hujus peccati” would be valid, that the dying
person might not be lost.1"
All authors teach that a priest can also absolve his complex who
is in articulo mortis, when the latter, without fault on the part
of the confessorius complex, refuses to confess to another priest.
This penitent, however, must be in bona fide as regards the com­
mandment of the Church. Here the eternal salvation of the poor
>“ S. Alph. 1. c. Cf. Declar. 8. C. Inq. 28 May, 1873, in Acta S. Sed.
Vol. 10, append, p. 345. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 249. Some wrongly exclude the
termones impudici; the most that can be urged for such a view is that there
might be a doubt, num fuerit peccatum mortale ex utraque parte, and, on
account of such a doubt, the causa coinplicitatis which the law requires may
the more easily be absent. Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 935.
1M This results from the tenor of the Bulls “ Sacrament. Pœnitent.” of
Benedict XIV and ·· Apostolicæ Sedis” of Pius IX. A simple, non-approved priest is, per se, to be preferred to the sacerdos complex (if no defama­
tion arises), but a sacerdos publice suspensus, excommunicatus, is not to be
preferred, as it is not becoming to call such a one to the dying person, and
iu this case it will scarcely be possible to avoid suspicion.

AIIHOLUT1ON <>l·' THE COMPLEX Z.V PECCATO TUHPl 361

penitent is in question, and frequently scandal would result if the
priest should refuse to hear the confession of the dying person.1·’
IV. The confessor who, apart from the specified cases of ne­
cessity, absolves his complex in peccato turpi from this peccatum
turpe incurs, ipso facto, the excommunication specially reserved
to the Pope.'"" If a priest absolves his complex, ex ignorantia or
inadverlenlia, and thus remains free from grave sin, he does not
incur the censure. But it is doubtful whether the absolution
administered is valid. The sententia communis rejects the abso­
lution as invalid, since the Pope has only excepted the absolu­
tion administered in the hour of death; but several later
theologians hold the absolution to be valid, because the Pope, as
they point out, speaks only of the sacerdos sacrilegus, who know­
ingly and intentionally absolves his complex.'*9
Further, a priest does not incur the excommunication who
hears the confession of his complex, but does not absolve him,
seeing that, according to the Constitution of Pius IX, only the
sacerdotes absolventes fall under the excommunication. If, how­
ever, the confessor pretends to absolve his complex (fingere
absolutionem) while, in reality, he does not absolve him, — for
instance, saying some prayer in place of the usual form of abso­
lution, — he incurs excommunication. So the S. C. Inq. declared
on December 10, 1883, with the approbation of Leo XIII.,M
lr Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. De absolut, compl. n. 652 ss.
1,8 Cf. Constitutio Benedicti XIV, “Sacrament. Pœnit." and Pii IX,
“Apostolicæ Sedis" (see § 43, p. 326).
le Cf. Berardi, Praxis conf. n. 1076.
1,0 This question was before decided in the same sense by the S. Pcenit.
9 Jul., 1751, et Mart.. 1878. Cf. Linzer Theol. Quartalschrift, 1882. p. 389.
Revue theol. 1884, p. 303. St. Alphonsus had already (Lib. VI. n. 556)
maintained, eum, qui Jinqat absolutionem, non incurrere censuram, deducing
this from the words of the Constitution of Benedict XIV, and this inter­
pretation of the Pope's wools was probable; this opinion of the sainted
teacher seems still to coincide with the words of the Bull of'Pius IX, which
reads Absolventes. But the Sacred Penitentiary has declared otherwise.
The latter evidently here takes the word absolventes in the wider sense.
Cf. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. I. c. n. 056. Lehmkuhl. 1. c. n. 936, Nota.

862

THE lUlNISTEIl OK THE SACHAMENT

If the penitent confesses to the sacerdos complex and conceals
the sin against the sixth commandment, which the confessor
has committed with him, and the confessor absolves him, the
latter docs not incur the excommunication, according to a dec­
laration of the S. Pcenitent. on May 16, 1887. " For t his penalty
falls only on the priest who absolves his complex from that
peccatum turpe in which the priest has been the complex of the
penitent.” Nevertheless, according to the declaration of the
Penitentiary, the confessor of the priest who has absolved his
complex (even when he has not, absolved him from the peccatum
complicilalis) is bound to remind him with the greatest zeal that
he has been guilty of a very grave sin, and an abominable abuse
of the Sacrament of Confession, and he may only absolve this
priest after exhorting him in the most forcible manner to relin­
quish his office as confessor, and after imposing on him the obli­
gation of refraining from hearing the confessions of his complex
in the future; and that if the persona complex appears in the
confessional again, he should exhort this person to accuse him­
self to another confessor in a valid confession both of the peccatum
complicilalis and of the sins invalidly confessed. The conces­
sion of the Council of Trent (Scss. XXIV. cap. 6, “ Liceat”) does
not empower a bishop to absolve a priest who has absolved his
complex. The Sacred Penitentiary has expressly declared this
on July 18,1860, and it results from the Constitution “ Aposlolicœ
Sedis,” in which all the casus papales reserved speciali modo to
the Pope are excepted from the powers granted to bishops in
the cap. “Liceat.” 1,1
But if, “ in casibus urgentioribus,” absolut ion cannot be deferred
without danger of great scandal and disgrace, a bishop, or an­
other priest, can administer absolution injunctis de jure injun­
gendis on the confessor who has unlawfully absolved his complex
lnCf. Decret. S. C. Inq. 27 June, 1806. and the Instructio S. C. Inq.
20 Feb., 1807. (Gury, Cas. Conscient. T. 2. n. 647.) Revue des sciences
ecclès. Vol. 18, p. 359.

ARHOLITION OF TUE COMPLEX IN PECCATO TURPI 363

in peccato turpi, but under penalty of " reincidence" if within
the space of a month, the absolved priest has not recourse by
letter, and through the confessor, to the Holy See.1”
If a confessor in such a case is obliged to apply to the Holy
See, he must address his petition to the Sacred Penitentiary.
In this petition he must adopt a fictitious name, set forth the
case concisely and clearly, with all the circumstances appertain­
ing to the matter, as : quoi personas complices et quoties Sacerdos
absolvere attentaverit; an unam vel plures irregularitates con­
traxerit ex violatione censura per celebrationem, missa vel exer­
citium solemne Ordinis Sacri; an alias jam acceperit Rescriptum
gratia pro absolutione ab hujusmodi crimine.™
1,2 S. C. Inquis. 30 June, 1880, the decision which Leo XIII approved and
confirmed. Cf. Revue theolog. 1880, p. 378.
U3 The Sacred Penitentiary is accustomed to add a few clauses to its
Rescript, and it will lie useful to explain them briefly:
1. Before the confessorius delegatus can carry out the Rescript, the occa­
sion of again sinning against the sixth commandment cum persona vel per­
sonis complicibus .must be removed. Hence the voluntary occasion (and
there is generally such in this case) must be physically removed, and a nec­
essary occasion morally removed. See § 03.
2. The Confessorius complex must inform his complex, when he again
comes to him to confess, of the invalidity of the former confessions and refer
him to another confessor.
3. The duty of not again hearing the confessions of the persona complex
in the future will be imposed upon the Confessorius complex, when this can
be done without great scandal, and he would, therefore, sin gravely if he
should disobey this command. According to the number and gravity of
the cases the Penitentiary subjoins still severer clauses: (a) those who duns
personas complices only once, or unam bis a peccato in re turpi absolrere atten­
taverint the Sacred Penitentiary orders to give up their office as confessors.
(A) But those qui duns ant plures personas site unam ter aut pluries absolrere
ausi fuerint, it commands to relinquish as soon as possible the office which
they have so misused, and that within the time which is to be determined
by the priest who administers the absolution, and which must not be pro­
longed beyond three months, if they are simple priests; if they are parish
priests, the period may be longer, but not beyond six months. And if
within this time the priest is unable, for weighty reason, to give up his
office, the delegated confessor must again address himself to the Sacred
Penitentiary, and lay the whole matter before him ; in the mean» hile. how-

864

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT
47 Sollicitatio Proprii Poenitentia ad Turpia.

The minister of the Sacrament of Penance is a man, and
remains a man; even when he is administering this Sacrament
he is subject to the weaknesses of human nature, and hence lie
bears within him the inclination to evil and is exposed to the
temptations of the devil; and it is there where he destroys the
work of Satan that he must experience the hostility of the evil
one more, perhaps, than elsewhere. In addition to this, the
confessor holds such intimate intercourse with the penitent, and
must, alas! so often deal with dangerous matter; he must lis­
ten to certain sins, investigate them and give them his attention
in order to discharge his duty rightly. Thus may be explained
th'· dreadful abuse of the Sacrament of Confession of which we
now treat,— an abuse, however, which is very rare, — the Sol­
licitatio proprii pernitentis ad turpia.'1*
There is question only of an abusus Sacramenti Pa-nilenliw
ad turpia, but not of an abusus aliorum Sacramentorum ad turpia,
and also not of an abusus ejusdem Pœnitentiœ Sacramenti ad alia
peccata, quamvis gravissima.
Jam quaritur: —
I. Quid inlelligalur per turpia vel inhonesta, ad qua fit sollici­
tatio?
II. Quo actu sollicitatio perficiatur?
ever, the tacuAoi rompiez may not hear the confeasiona cujuscunque persona·
compluis. The Sacred Penitentiary will, for weighty reasons, extend the
]>eriud, and when, after a time, the unhappy priest aeema to have amended,
will allow him to continue to exercise the duties of a confessor.
4. The censures must be removed firat, then the ains remitted, and finally
the dispensation from the irregularity is given. Cf. Aertnys, 1. 0. n. 250.
i” The. Conati tut ions, “Cum sicut nuper," of Pius IV, “ Dilecte fill," of
Paul V, “Universi Dominici gregis." of Gregory XV. and in an especial
manner. "Sacramentum pœnitentiæ," and “ Apostolici muneris," of Bene­
dict XIV, cover this matter. Cf. Bucceroni, Jan. Commentar. Conatit.
Benedicti XIV, "Sacrameut. Pœnit." P. I. pp. 1-150. Kumæ, 188«. Ed.
altera.

HOLLIf'ITATIO PROPRII P0F.NITF.NTI8 AD TURPIA

865

III. Qualis nexus inter sollicitationem et Sacramentum Pimitentiir intervenire nporteal, ut revera et ex mente legislatoris sollici­
tatio abusus Sacramenti sit ?
Ad I. Per peccata turpia, ad qua; fit sollicitatio, inteUiguntur
omnes actus externi libidinosi seu actus luxuria, quo spectant
etiam artus vel ex sua natura vel ex particulari dispositione com­
plicis vel ex intentione operantis aliunde satis manifestata (v.g.
signo, verbo) inductivi ad vehementem, commotionem spirituum
genitalium : intelligantur ergo: quilibet tractatus turpis, sermo nbscanus vel actio obscama. Sollicitatio ex mente legislatoris non
perpetratur actibus tantum venialiler inhonestis adeoque non veneriis (num in his non est parvitas materia·). Excipe, si ex cir­
cumstantiis certe conjiceretur, sacerdotem actu de se leviter malo
(v.g. verbo blandiori) animum habuisse procedendi ad gravia.*1*
Confessorius consentiens tantum mulieri sollicitanti in confessione
nullo modo eximitur a peccato sollicitationis, i.e. inhonesti tracta­
tus in confessionali, idque licet stalim desierit de illa turpi materia
loqui, differendo illius complementum ad aliud tempus et non pnrbendo absolutionem pernitenti; item licet inductus metu consense­
rit sollicitationi"* et a fortiori, quando confessorius et panitens
invicem se sollicitarunt, puta quando confessorius ad unam turpi­
tudinis speciem sollicitatus ad aliam sollicitavit pernitentem. Juxta
Decreta sollicitaret etiam confessorius, qui diceret panitenti: “Si
saccularis essem, te uxorem ducerem"; vel “Expecta me hodie
domi tua·, quia tecum loqui cupio" et postea domi sollicitaret; vel
“Hisce peccatis tuis pollutionem passus sum”: item, si femina
petenti confessionem responderet in confessionali: “Nolo tuam
audire confessionem, ne quid mihi contingat; quia amore tui cap­
tus sum" ; item “Totum me commoveri sentio ex affectu, quo te
prosequor”; vel “Domum tuam veniam et promitte mihi, te factu­
rum esse quod voluero." *”
·’» Cf. S. Alph. Lib. IV. n. 664, eub 3.
”· Cf. Deci. S. C. Inq. 11 Febr., 1061, dub. 2 et 9, et Instruct. 20 Febr.,
180", n. 2.
,n S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 704.

THK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Ad II. Crimen sollicitationis ad turpia adest, si confessorius,
qualiscunque sit, tam savularis quam regularis (vel etiam sacerdos
carens jurisdictione at hic in confessione)ll* sollicitat pernitentem
sive marem sive feminam ad peccandum sive secum sive cum alio;
nec refert, utrum ipsum pernitentem sollicitet, an mediante perni­
tente aliam quampiam personam. Pmterea sollicitatio hujus­
modi er parte confessorii fieri potest vel immediate (v.g. verbis
dbscamis) vel mediate, puta per chartam postmodum a pernitente
legendam ;et habenda est completa, sive picnitens reapse ad
peccatum pertrahatur, sive resistat, dummodo ponatur medium ap­
tum alliciendi ad actus inhonestos; nec refert, medium adhibitum
in se malum sit an indifferens, dummodo ex circumstantiis postea
cognoscatur, id ad sollicitandum adhibitum esse, puta, si confessor
rius mulieri hoc animo intimet, ut experte! eum domi, vel eam
eodem animo interroget, ubi habitet.
Ad III. Ul vero sollicitatio ejusmodi sit abusus Sacramenti
oportet, ut, modo a lege determinato, relatio aliqua intercedat inter
ipsam et confessionem vel inter ipsam et locum ubi confessiones
excipiuntur.
(a) Relatio requisita, ad confessionem adest, si sollicitatio fit:
(1) in actu sacramentalis confessionis inaepfrr, licet non perfec­
ta:; vel (2) immediate ante confessionem ; vel (3) immediate post
confessionem, i.e. quando inter sollicitationem et confessionem nihil
mediat, ita ut nec confessorius nec pernitens ad aliud negotium
serio se divertant.'*1
Cf. Resp. S. C. Inq. a. 10G1 ad dub. 5, Instruet, a. 1867, sub 2.
Cf. Propos. 6 ab Alex. VII damn.
*" S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 676-680.
1,1 Illud immediate (ante vel post) aliqui moraliter intelligi volunt, ita ut,
si physice tantum aliquid intermedia!, seu intervallum adeo breve sit, ut pro
nihilo debeat computari, confessarius adhuc vi harum clausularum sollici­
tans dicendus, ergo denuntiandus sit. Communis sententia, quam sequitur
St. Alph. (ti. 677) illud stricte, i.e. physice accipit. Ex praxi tribunalis S.
Officii non censetur confessarius sollicitasse immediate post confessionem,
si sollicitatio post transactum integrum diem accidet, dummodo nullo modo
pravum animum suum in confessione indicaverit. Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury,
II. n. 590. Opus Theol. Mor. 1. c. Appendix De Sollicitatione, n. 1091 es.

SOLLICITATU) P HOPIUI POENITE.VTIS AD TURPIA 367

Ocrasione confessionis (vera) vid. quando fit invitatio ad
confessionem hic el nunc excipiendam ex parte pandentis, aut
quando confessorius invitat panitentem ad confessionem hic et
nunc faciendam, et hac occasione data, divertii pandentem a pro­
posito et ad turpia provocat ; aut si in confessione, sive immediate
ante sive post, initium sollicitationis fit, qua postea completur v.g.
si dantur littera sollicitantes vel si fit interrogatio de habitatione
et postea sequitur sollicitatio domi, vel si ob fragilitatem mulieris ex
ejus confessione cognitam postea eam domi sollicitaverit, dummodo
ex indiciis sufficienter constat, eum ex illa scientia non aliis ex
causis ad id motum fuisse.1" Ejusmodi indicia aderunt si v.g.
confessorius auditis peccatis mulierem interrogaverit, ubi habitet,
an sola domi manere soleat vel alia hisce similia interrogaverit,
vel, dum ad peccandum accessit, verbis aut factis aliqua commemo­
ravit ex iis, qua ex confessione accepit.'"
(.5) Pralextu confessionis (ficta), si confessorius ex pravo fine
invitat mulierem ad confessionem et deinde sollicitat, vel femina
suadet, ut fingens se agrotam eum, confessorium suum, tanquam
ad confessionem faciendam, revera ad peccandum accersal. Secus
probabilius dicendum, si pratextus confessionis non est ordinatus
ad sollicitationem sed ad peccati jam conventi execulionem, puta
ad avertendum Superiorem vel familiares domus a scandalo et sus­
picione mali.'*'
(4)

1,1 Illud: “occasione" duplici hic significatione sumitur: altera opportu­
nitatis, altera motivi.
*“ Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 078; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 1008.
Ballerini, Not. ad Gury, II. n. 590; Nouv. Rev. Theolog. Toro. 12, p. 31 ss.
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 976.
,M S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 678 and 679. Hinc sollicitans dicendus est Confessarius, si mulier, nulla conventione præmissa prætextu confessionis vocet
ipsum in domum suam, qui cum accesserit, a muliere sollicitatus turpiter
peccat eum illa; nam juxta decreta S. C. Inq. sollicitatio etiam a prenitente
emanare potest. Etiam sollicitans dicendus est Confessarius. qui extra con­
fessionem sollicitat feminam huicque renuenti ob timorem diffamationis,
suadet, ut fingens se ægrotam eum ad peccandum accerseret. S. Alph. n.
679; vide Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 1102.

868

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

(h) Relatio requisita ad locum, ubi confessiones excipiuntur,
aderit, si actus prohibiti exerceantur: —
(1) In confcssionali proprie dicto; (2) in loco quacunque, ubi,
confessiones excipi solent, licet confessionale ibi non inveniatur;
(3) in loco quocunque, quem confessorius ad confessiones audien­
das pro suo arbitrio elegit.
Ut autem crimen sollicitationis ex mente legislatoris adsit ac
propterea perna sollicitantibus confessoriis inflicta contrahatur, ob
circumstantias sub (6) enarratas enascatur simulatio confessionis
accedat necesse est, i.e, confessorius et pernitens ita se gerant opor­
tet, ut confessionem ille audire (v.g. aures applicando), hic pera­
gere rideatur. Hcec tamen simulatio non requiritur, si sollicitat
in confessionali personam, qua: pariter in eo invenitur; sufficit
enim, ut sacerdos in confessionali de rebus turpibus agat, quin
simulet confessionem audire.,K
The sollicitatio described in the foregoing is a very grave mortal
sin of impurity, of sacrilege, and of scandal. For it is a dreadful
abuse of the Sacrament of Penance, when, as Gregory XV ex­
presses himself, the confessor thus offers the penitent poison
instead of a remedy, instead of bread a scorpion, from a spiritual
father becoming a wretched betrayer of souls.
IV. All penitents are bound under pain of mortal sin to de­
nounce to the Ordinarius loci, or to the Holy See through the
Penitentiary or Inquisition, the confessors who have been guilty
of solicitation.1”
The object of this denunciation is the following : —
1. If the person who denounces is known as honorable and
truthful, if no evil intention, such as revenge, enmity, or cal­
umny is to be imputed to him, whilst on the other hand, the
denounced priest is already known to be not very conscientious,
the denunciation effects that the suspected confessor will be
S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 680. Ballerini, Opus. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 1107.
,M Compare the above-cited Constitutions of the Popes, and the Instruc­
tion of the S. C. Inquis. 20 Feb., 1867.

■

SOLLICITATIO PROPRII POBXITKNTIS AD TURPIA 369

watched by the Ordinarius.'*' And if stronger grounds of
suspicion against the denounced priest accumulate from other
quarters (for example, suspicious intercourse), this supplies the
Ordinarius with a motive for administering to him, in the first
place, a fatherly warning, in doing which, the Ordinarius does
not yet impute to him the crimen sollicitationis, but rather ex­
horts him to be conscientious; in this, however, the Ordinarius
must so proceed as not to excite the suspicion of the denounced
against the denouncer. “Ut plurimum enim nonnisi a tertia
denuntiatione ad judicium procedi debet."
The precise object
of the law is to safeguard the Church and to inspire confessors
with a just dread of the enormity of the crime which abuses the
sacred tribunal of penance; or, as Amort expresses it: finis non
est emendatio persona particularis sed securitas publica Sacra­
menti et animarum ex castigatione certa tam abominandi sceleris,
et ex metu indeclinabili omnium confessoriarum incurrendi gra­
vissima supplicia etiam actu unico aut, semel tantum iterato;
imo etiam indemnitas Ecclesia ne scii, ejusmodi pestes ad officia
publica subrepant, quo nihil est nocentius communi Ecclesia
bono.'*9 Every solicited person is, therefore, strictly bound to
denounce, and is not released from this duty because another
has denounced; this duty never ceases to bind, though it is
sometimes suspended for a time; in case of repetition a confessor
must be again denounced, even if he has been already punished
on account of the first transgression, or has not been fully con­
victed of solicitation ;,u0 again, the penitent is bound to denounce,
even when, in consequence of correctio fraterna, he believes that
he may confidently hope for amendment, indeed, as St. Alphon­
sus teaches, even when the fault has been atoned for;1’1 denunCf. Instr. S. C. Inq. 1867, sub 11.
181 Cf. Instruct, cit.
189 Amort. Theol. Mor. De Pœn. Q. 19.
i*> S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 687. Cf. Reap. S. C. Inq. a. 1661, ad dub. 13.
181 Lib. VI. n. 701. II. A. Tr. 16, n. 175. Bucceroni, Commentar, in Constit. Bened. XIV, 11 Sacrament. Pœnit.” art. II. Sect. 2, p. 66.

870

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

dation must be made if the fact is certain though it cannot be
judicially proved, or when the crime is secret, or was committed
a long time before. It must not be supposed that belated in­
formation of tliis kind can be of no use ; it may perhaps serve
to complete previous information respecting the same confessor,
or, in conjunction with other grounds of suspicion to close to a
hypocrite the road to ecclesiastical dignities, or at least, to inspire
the confessor with lasting fear of filling up the measure of iniquity
by repeated solicitation, seeing that even solicitations committed
a long time before may be brought into court. If, however, the
person who solicited is dead, the denunciation need not take
place, because then the full object of the law can no longer be
realized.'”
2. The duty of denouncing is not incumbent upon the person
who solicits, nor is he bound to admonish the penitent solicited
by him to make the denunciation. All solicited penitents,
however, without exception, male and female, seculars and regu­
lars, high and low, to whatever class they may belong, are bound
to denounce. Denunciation is also incumbent (but now no longer
nub excommunicatione) upon all witnesses of this crime, eye­
witnesses or ear-witnesses, and whoever has received informa­
tion of the solicitation outside confession, directly or indirectly,
from words of the person soliciting himself, or the solicited per­
son, if the latter be trustworthy.1’4 The penitent must denounce
in any case whether he has consented to, or rejected, the solicitalM Cf. Bucceroni, 1. c. p. 66.
1M Not, be it remarked, virtute Constitutionum Pontificiarum contra eollicilantet, but virtute preeeepti denuntiandi intra mensem hareticos et suspectos de
harui. Ct. Bucceroni, 1. c. art. II. § 1, p. 56.
1MS. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 698. They are not bound to denounce: (a)
when the solicited person has already given the information; (/<) when
they would suffer great detriment by so doing, except in the case of n priest
of great influence who had already solicited many persons; (c) when the
jierson soliciting is related to them within the fourth degree. Cf. Mazzotta,
I. c. Tr. 2, Disp. 1, Q. 1, cp. 2, Sect 1 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n.
1136 ss.

SOLLICITATIO PROPRII POF..VITRNTIS AD TURPIA 371
tion, but he need not make known his consent; he must also
denounce when the solicitation has been mutual between con­
fessor and penitent, or when the penitent has solicited, and the
confessor has consented.**
A young girl, who, at the time of being solicited, was ignorant of
any evil design, must, according to a decree of the Sacred Inqui­
sition (May 11, 1707) denounce the confessor as soon as she has
attained to an understanding of the solicitation which took place.
The solicited person, or whoever has certain knowledge of the
solicitation, is not released from the obligation to denounce on
account of the general difficulties attaching to the denuncia­
tion itself, as, for example, shame at having been solicited ; fear
that the judge might become suspicious of her; the flanger of
harm or detriment to the denouncing person; any such damage
must be considered as trifling compared with the possibility of
scandal to the Church and to souls; the use of Epikeia (i.e., a
benign interpretation of the law) is not justifiable in this case.
3. Every priest who has been guilty of the crime of soliciter
tion, including him who possesses no jurisdiction, is liable to
denunciation, be he secular or regular, or in any way exempted,
whatever dignity he may hold ; whether he has himself solicited,
or consented to the solicitation of the penitent, and even when
he has already amended.1’’
V. The confessor’s dealing with solicited persons is regulated
in accordance with the following ordinances of the Papal Consti­
tutions and Instructions of the Sacred Congregation.
1. All confessors are bound sub gravi to instruct those of their
penitents whom they know to have been solicited in the specified
maimer, that it is their duty to denounce the persons soliciting.
This duty of instructing remains imperative even when the
solicited penitents are in bona fide.
1,s Cf. 8. Alph. nn. 700, 097, 095. Bucceroni, 1. c. p. 05.
Compare the Constitutions of the Popes ami th·· ahove-cited Instr.
Inq. S. Alph. nn. 080. 088.

872

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

The confessors who do not instruct their solicited penitents
must be punished.”’
H)ey must instruct their penitents concerning: (a) the strict
duty of denouncing; (b) the time within which the denuncia­
tion must be made; (c) the penalty attached to the neglect, of
this duty; and (d) the manner of making the denunciation.
2. Let the confessor proceed in the following manner :
(a) If he is in doubt as to whether the act or the word of the
person in question really constituted a true solicitation, he must
not oblige the penitent to denounce, except when strong grounds
for suspecting solicitation are superadded, or when the words,
de se, are soliciting, and doubt exists oidy as to whether the con­
fessor uttered them with a bad intention.”’
(b) Before the confessor binds the solicited person to denounce
(and only on condition that she denounce may absolution be
administered) he must seriously consider whether this person be
deserving of credit, or if there is weighty, just, and very prob­
able suspicion, supported by other indications, that she is influ­
enced by revenge and wishes to calumniate the priest. In this
latter case the confessor must remind her that she commits a
very great sin, and one reserved to the Pope, in falsely denounc­
ing a priest for solicitation.
(c) The confessor must not seek to know the name of the
person soliciting, though he must question the penitent as to
the necessary circumstances.
(d) And when the confessor knows positively that the peni­
tent has been solicited, he must seriously impress upon her
(even when she is in good faith) the duty of denouncing the per­
son who solicited, and the confessor is bound to do so, even
when he foresees that the penitent will not denounce.”" After
,n Cf. Instruct, nn. 3 and 4.
>* Cf. Instruct. S. C. Inq. a. 1661, ad dub. 12, 16.
*" Constitutiones cit. et Instruct. Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 615-694, ratio :
ot> t'ifandum damnum commune.

SOLLICITATIO PROPRII P0ENITENTI8 AD TURPIA 373

which he must indicate an appropriate method of making the
denunciation. In this the following rules are to be observed : —
(«) In order that the object of the denunciation may be ob­
tained, the Ordinary must be informed of the crime and all
its circumstances; the name of the confessor who solicited is to
be given, that he may be summoned before the Ordinary, and,
if found guilty, be punished; if the denouncer does not know
the baptismal and family name of the confessor, she must de­
scribe him as accurately as she can, so that he may be recog­
nized; finally, the name and dwelling-place of the denouncer
must be given, that the Ordinary may make inquiries con­
cerning her trustworthiness, and, if it should be necessary,
summon her as a witness.
(δ) The denunciation may be effected in one of the following
ways: If the bishop or the vicar-general (loci in quo moratur
pienitens)200 is near at hand, so that the solicited person can
easily have access to him, the latter is bound to make the
denunciation in person, and to declare that N. N., priest, parish
priest, religious, etc., has solicited her ad turpia in the holy Sac­
rament of Confession. If, on account of distance, the solicited
person cannot easily reach the Ordinary, she must make the
denunciation in writing ; that is, she informs the Ordinary by
this document that she has to make a denunciation to him,
which should come before the ecclesiastical tribunal, and she
begs the Ordinary, at the same time, to authorize a priest to
receive this denunciation. 201 The denunciation itself may be
effected by letter, or through any other person — hoc tantum
valet quoad pruxeplum denuntiationis naturale et quatenus talc
prteceplum obligat in casu particulari. Nam si sermo sil de pneνΛ The denunciation must be made to the Epùcopu» loci, where the peni­
tent is staying, even when the Confmarius tollicilani belongs to another
diocese ; it is tnet: the duty of this bishop to receive the sworn denunciation,
and to forward it to the bishop of the confessor. Cf. Gury, Cas. Cons.
Toni. II. n. (152; Kenrick, Theol. Moral. Tract. 18, 245.
301 Cf. Instruct. 1807, n. 7 ; Marc, Institut. Alph. Tom. Π. n. 1800.

374

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

ccpto denuntiationis positivo, in ipsa Instr, ait. dicitur, t/uod onus
personale est.1" The denunciatory document must, however, be
dispatched with such precaution that no reasonable fear of its
loss need be entertained. And if the solicited person cannot
make the denunciation by writing, she should repair to the dean,
or to some other prudent and experienced man, who then writes
in her name to the Ordinary, or to the Sacred Penitentiary, or
to the Holy Office?” As a rule it is not advisable that the con­
fessor should take upon himself the burden of making the de­
nunciation for the penitent. But it is not to be denied that
there are cases when the confessor is bound by the precept of
charity to do this, namely, when the well-being of the community
is threatened, and no other way appears of meeting the emer­
gency.’0' The denunciation must never be made anonymously,
and is always to be addressed to the bishop or to the vicar­
general in person, not to the office of the Ordinary.205
3. Confessors cannot absolve penitents who know that they
have been solicited till they have denounced the delinquent, or,
at least, till they have promised that they will do so as soon as
they can. This is laid down in the Constitutions of Benedict
XIV and in the Instruction of the S. C. Inquis.
From this it follows that : —
(o) The confessor cannot absolve penitents who refuse to
denounce. If a solicited person refuses, the confessor must in­
vestigate the cause of the refusal, and endeavor to remove it.
If he finds the cause to be fear of disgrace, he may, in order to
remove it, tell her that she stands before the ecclesiastical judge
not as persona complex, but as a testis, that she is not bound to
make known her consent; indeed, that she cannot even be ques­
tioned concerning her consent, and that if she has, ex simplici­
ty Cf. Bucceroni, Commentar, in Constit. Bened. XIV, “ Sacram. Pœnit’
Bonite, 1888, art. II. § 3, p. 74.
* Cf. Instruct. 1887. n. 7.
,JW Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 609.
205 Cf. Instruct. 1867, n. 6.

SOLLICITATIO PHOP HII POaNtTKNTIS AI) TURPIA 375
talc, declared her consent, it cannot be taken down in the
official deeds.3” Nor is any danger whatever of disgrace to be
feared. If the penitent says that in gratitude for benefits
received, or to be received, for presents, etc., she is unable to
make the denunciation, or alleges other insufficient grounds for
the refusal, the confessor must explain to the penitent the sac­
rilege, anti her duty to obey the laws of the Church, which
have been made for the purpose of warding off great scandal
and detriment, and remind her of the penalty of excommuni­
cation which the solicited person ipso facto incurs, by not
denouncing the soliciting priest within a month. Moreover,
the confessor must not lightly admit what such persons are
accustomed to bring forward in order to escape from the burden
of denunciation. If the solicited person refuses to perform her
duty out of false shame or irreligious pity, absolution is to be
refused her as not being properly disposed. The confessor must,
however, out of a true zeal for souls, exert himself by all means
to induce such an unhappy penitent to make the denunciation ;
he should prevail upon her to come again at another convenient
time, and, meanwhile, inform the Ordinary or the Holy See
through the Penitentiary, or the Inquisition, of the matter with­
out mentioning the name of the penitent.
(6) If, however, the confessor perceives that a solicited person
otherwise well-disposed for the Sacrament of Penance has a law­
ful ground for refusing the denunciation, as, for example, a prob­
able, well-founded danger of suffering appreciable injury in
honor, property, or person,20’ or that, on account of fear or exces­
sive timidity, she can by no means be brought to denounce the
soliciting person at that time, either personally or through the
confessor, but yet promises faithfully to make the denunciation
later on, as soon as she can, he may absolve her, and that at once

1.

»· Cf. Instr. 1867, n. 6.
201 Cf. Bucceroni, 1. c. art. II. § 2, p. 02 ss. ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor.
c. n. 1111.

876

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

stante nempe gravi difficultate denuntiationis facienda·, si necessitas
urgeat, that is, when the penitent lins to receive holy com­
munion, in order to avoid scandal, or to gain a Jubilee indul­
gence. If there is no necessitas urgens, the confessor must defer
the absolution, and appoint another time for the penitent to
come to him ; meanwhile, he must address himself to the bishop,
and lay the whole case be ore him, concealing the name of the
penitent, adding also the grounds which make it advisable to
dispense the penitent from the duty of denouncing. The bishop
then may himself decide what is to be done or apply to the
Sacred Penitentiary;’0’ for the Holy See occasionally confers
upon the confessor authority to dispense the penitent pro ea
idee from the duty of denouncing, especially when the soliciting
person has amended, and done penance. Solicited persons can
also be absolved who "in partibus schismaticorum, hareticorum
el mdhomelanorum degunt," although these regions are subject
to the Constitutions leveled against those who solicit; such a
case may occur when the circumstances indicate that no hope
of punishing the soliciting person can be entertained and the
mulieres sollicitata? cannot denounce without danger and dis­
grace, while those denounced can easily escape punishment by
having recourse either to schismatic bishops or to unbelieving
lay judges.”’
VI. Solicited penitents who neglect, or, through their own
fault, omit, to denounce the Confessorios, sive Sacerdotes, a
quibus sollicitati fuerint, within a month, incur, ipso facto, the
excommunication which is not reserved.510 They incur this pen­
alty, therefore, infra mensem, that is, reckoning from the day on
which they were warned of their duty. If they give information
*· Cf. Instruct. 1887, nn. 5 et 7 ; S. Alph. 1. c. n. 893 ; Bucceroni, 1. c. art.
§ 1. ii. 35.
“Cf. Bucceroni, 1. c. art. II. §2, n. 38; Deer. 8. C. S. Off. 21 Febr.,
1030, etc.
*10 Const. Pii IX, “ Apostolicæ Sedis."

11.

SOLI.U ΙΤΛΊΊΟ PROPRII PORNITERTIH AD TURPIA

377

later on, they can be absolved from the excommunication by
any priest.211
In conclusion, we enumerate the penalties which are to be
imposed upon priests soliciting, according to the nature of the
offense, and according to the circumstances: —
(1) Suspension from the exercise of the sacerdotal powers;
(2) deprivation of benefices, dignities, and offices, with perpetual
disability to acquire such again; (3) deprivation of active and
passive vote, when Regulars are in question; and, (4) continual
disability to celebrate Mass. But all these penalties are pana
ferenda nenlenlia; degradation, and delivering the delinquent
to the brachium saculare, are not resorted to nowadays. Greg­
ory XV appointed this punishment, but, as the Instruction
says, we must regard it more as imposed ad terrorem than for
the purpose of being actually carried out.”’
9,1 Cf. Bucceroni, I. c. art. II. Sect. 1, n. 36, p. 61 s. For the Modus re­
cipiendi denuntiationem, see Instruct, ciL 1867, n. 6 ss. Acta 8. Sedis. Vol.
III. pp. 505 seq. The Instr, cit. nn. 9-16 describes the Modus procedendi con­
tra Sollicitantes : cf. Bucceroni, I. c. art. II. § 1, pp. 86-100. In this place
the learned Roman professor also treats the question : can the bishop make
a '.aw denuntiandi sollicitantes extra confessionem — or a law denuntiandi sollici­
tantes in confessione ad alia peccata quam ad turpia f p. 99, etc.
9,9 Instruct. 1867, n. 12.

Section II
THE OFFICE OF THE CONFESSOR

When the priest who is rite authorized to administer the Sac­
rament of Penance makes use of the power intrusted to him
and exercises the office of a confessor, he performs a threefold
office: that of Judge, that of Physician of the Soul, and that of
Teacher. The most important of these is the first, the office of
Judge ; this is his essential office by the institution of the Sacra­
ment ; while the other two are only of an accessory character,
not because they are of inferior significance, — they are, indeed,
very important offices, upon the faithful discharge of which
much depends,— but because they “dispose to the right exer­
cise of the judicial office ” and their faithful and zealous exe­
cution is necessarj’ to the better, more fruitful, and’ more
salutary discharge of the former. If, in the administration of
this Sacrament, the priest officiated merely as judge, without,
at the same time, proving himself to be a physician and teacher
also, he would discharge his office unfruitfully, and weaken the
efficacy of the Sacrament to which Christ has attached great
effects.

378

CHAPTER I
THE ESSENTIAL DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR IN THE EXERCISE OF
HIS OFFICE; OR, THE CONFESSOR CONSIDERED IN HIS OFFICE
OF JUDGE

As a judge, it is the priest’s duty rightly to understand the
matter — that is the sin — upon which he has to pass a sen­
tence, to investigate the dispositions of the penitent, and to pro­
nounce judgment. These three duties are the essential duties
of the confessor in his office as judge.
48. The Knowledge of the Sins.

Christ has declared that we should confess to His ministers,
i.e., we shall make declaration of all grave sins, with their num­
ber and kind. By means of this self-accusation, the minister of
the Sacrament of Confession is informed of the sins of the peni­
tent upon which he must pass judgment. As the priest is medi­
ator between God and the penitent, and is thus bound, on the
one hand, to protect the rights of God and preserve the order
of divine Justice, and, on the other hand, to support the penitent
and lead him to reconciliation with God, he must take care that
all that belongs to a complete confession is performed by the
penitent and where it falls short of completeness to supply the
defect by questions.
The following principles are to be observed with regard to the
duty of questioning : —
I. The confessor is not bound to question the penitent, how­
ever uneducated the latter may be, if he seems to be sufficiently

880

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

instructed in his Christian duties, and has, according to his
power of understanding, carefully confessed his sins. The ques­
tioning would otherwise become troublesome and useless. Still
less is he, as a rule, bound to question those who often confess,
and seldom sin gravely, such as pious persons, members of
Religious Orders, priests, etc., unless it is clear from their
accusation, or suspicion arises, that they have failed to confess
something which it is necessary to confess. If this is the case,
questioning is the more necessary with Rcgidars and priests,
because there is danger that they might adopt, when hearing
confessions themselves, the example of the superficial practice
tolerated by their own confessors.
Π. The confessor is bound to put questions to the penitent
if he clearly recognizes or conjectures that the penitent has not
declared all that appertains to the completeness of the confes­
sion, and what the confessor ought to know in order to perform
his duty as judge and physician. As minister of the Sacrament,
he must take care that the confession is a complete one, and,
as it belongs to his office as judge, to investigate thoroughly the
matter on which he has to pronounce judgment, and, as it is
the duty of the physician to probe the wounds of the patient,
so must the confessor sound the conscience of the penitent, by
questioning about the sins which he supposes the penitent to
have committed, and to have kept back out of ignorance, or
forgetfulness, or false shame; by determining more exactly
the specified number of the sins, when it has been stated too
inexactly or indefinitely, or by asking it, if it has not been men­
tioned at all, and by investigating the necessary circumstances
of the sins. Moreover, the confessor must find out the condition
of the sinner himself, by which he may learn what advice is to be
given, and what remedies employed to bring about the cure of
the penitent.2”
«· Cf. Rituale Roman. Sacram. Pœnit. tit. 3, cp. 1, n. 15. Concil. I.ater.
IV. ep. 21, in Cap. 12 de Pœnit. 8. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 607, 621». Π. Ap. n. 102.

THK KlfOfVLKDOJt OF THF MM

381

The duty of the confessor in this regard is undoubted, and
er genere suo gravis. Therefore Benedict XIV did not hesitate
to teach in his Constitution "Apostolica" (26 June, 1749):
"Above all, confessors should hear in mind that they do not
discharge the duties of the office which they have undertaken —
indeed, that all those are guilty of a great sin, who, while exer­
cising the office of judge in the sacred tribunal of penance,
unconcernedly listen to the penitents, do not exhort them, do
not question them, but, when they have heard their sins,
forthwith pronounce the words of absolution. This is certainly
not the conduct of the zealous physician who pours oil and
wine into the wound. And yet every one who administers the
Sacrament of Penance holds the office of a physician : he must,
therefore, carefully investigate not only the circumstances of
the sins, but the moral condition of the person who has fallen
into them, in order that he may provide for him suitable reme­
dies, by the use of which the cure of his soul may be effected."
Although this duty is one in se gravis, yet parvitas materiir
may be more easily admitted in it than in the duty of the peni­
tent to examine himself, even in those things which he must per
se confess under the head of grave sin, or in materia necessaria
confessionis. As the confessor must give account to God of the
confessions which he has heard, there rests upon him, because
of the great number of confessions which he hears, a much
greater burden with respect to their integrity than upon the in­
dividual penitent. Billuart, however, rightly teaches: If the
confessor, through slight negligence, inattention, weakness of
memory, absence of mind, weariness of spirit, etc., has forgotten
to put a question, even on necessary matter, such omission would
be no sin, or only a venial one; for no one is bound, in such
great difficulty and moral impossibility, to remedy the defects of
others. What Gury says seems also to be quite reasonable, viz.
that the omission of one or other per se necessary question, in a
Cf. n. 19.

382

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

great number of confessions which a priest has heard, is, ex ipsa
materw parvitate, no grave sin.’”
III. As regards the completeness of the confession, the con­
fessor is not bound to question the penitent with scrupulous
exactitude; on the contrary, he must act with moderation and
prudence according to the position, age, and power of compre­
hension of the penitent. The confessor need not, therefore,
employ greater care in questioning than the penitent himself
must employ in the examination of his conscience; but the
latter is only bound to a mediocris diligentia in the examination
of conscience. Moreover, the penitent is bound, in the first
place, to know his sins; in order to make a complete confession,
the confessor is only bound to assist him. The duty of the
latter to push inquiry is merely a secondary one; that is, it must
come into operation dejectu pernitentis. The extent of the con­
fessor’s obligation in this matter is, therefore, regarded strictly
in accordance with the situation, station, and intelligence of
the penitent, so that the confessor is not bound to ask more than
the penitent (by virtue of his situation, station, and power of
apprehension) is bound to confess. When, therefore, it is cer­
tain that the penitent does not know, or has not noticed that
certain circumstances add a new sinfulness to an act, the con­
fessor is not bound to ask about them.’”
49. The Nature of the Questions to be put to the Penitent.

If the confessor is obliged to address questions to penitents,
they must always be moderate, discreet, modest, and proper.
(a) The questions must be moderate; that is, he should not
Gun, Casus Conscient. II. n. (169. Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. Sacram. Pœnit.
Sect. HI. n. «9.
ne Moreover, the confessor must not only take care that the confession be
complete ; he must also have regard for human weakness, lest through much
questioning the confession become troublesome and odious. Cf. Lacroix,
1. c. η. 1748; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 270; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 419, ad 1, 3.

NATURE OF QUESTIONS TO

re put to penitent

383

question the penitents concerning sins which, having regard to
their station, their age, their circumstances in life and their
moral condition, they have probably not committed. He must
not put questions about all possible sins; he should rather ask
first if the penitent has committed the sins which are generally
committed by people of such age, education, and position. If
the answers of the penitent give occasion for further questioning,
he must proceed in his inquiry ; if they do not give such occa­
sion, the confessor should ask, quite in a general way, if there is
anything else which troubles his conscience, and when, after a
short reflection (for which the necessary time must always he
allowed him) he answers that he has nothing more to say, there
is no reason for further questioning. As for the rest, it would
seem useful to drop, at a seasonable moment, an appropriately
tactful exhortation concerning sincere confessions.”7
The questions of the confessor must be (6) discreet; that is,
he must use the necessary discrimination in his questions; he
must question with great prudence and caution. He must bear
in mind the rule of the Roman Ritual: “The confessor should
detain no one with inquisitive and profitless questions, and,
above all, let him not ask young people of what they are ignorant,
St. Alphonsus teaches : “ The confessor should not be too solicitons in
questioning; let him ask the penitent about that which, having regard to
his position, probably concerns him." And in another place his advice is:
“ Let him ask only about the sins which the penitents might easily commit,
considering their station and intelligence." And Bilhiart says: “The con­
fessor must make his investigations in a humane and temperate way, but
not in every imaginable way. For the priest is not bound to examine the
penitent more than the latter is bound to examine himself. . . . Nor is it
to the point to say that the priest would perhaps find more if he sought
more, for we have not only to consider the material completeness of the
confession, but also that the Sacrament of Penance must not be made irk­
some and odious to penitents by overgreat und exaggerated anxiety in
questioning; it, therefore, suffices if the confessor can lie prudently con­
vinced that the penitent is omitting nothing that he ought to confess." Cf.
S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 607 ; II. Ap. Tract. 10, n. 102; Gury, Ed. Katisb. Not.
ad n. 615.

884

l'UE MIXI8TKR OF THE SACRAMENT

lest they be scandalised, and made familiar with new sins.'””
Ect him, therefore, never address to penitents a question by
which a sin of which they were ignorant might be made known to
them. Especially should he be discreet in his questioning of
children and young people, and in questions concerning sins
of impurity (here special caution is necessary with regard to
women), lest he awaken their curiosity and cause them to inves­
tigate further, lest he teach the penitent sins, and lest he expose
himself and the penitent to the danger of sin. When harm of
this kind is to Im· feared, it is preferable that there should be
some lack of material completeness in the confession, in con­
formity with the rule: melius est in mullis deficere (sc. relate ad
integritatem) quam in uno abundare (i.e. in probabilem ruinam
pemitentis). Two probable dangers here confront each other,
a detriment to the soul of the penitent, and (material) incom­
pleteness of the confession. Of the two the welfare of the soul
is certainly to be preferred.
The questions of the confessor must, moreover, bo (c) modest.
If the confessor is obliged to put to the penitent a question
concerning res inhonesta·, let him do this as modestly and pru­
dently as he possibly ran, and quite shortly. Of course he will
often be obliged to put questions concerning the sins against
purity, because penitents accuse themselves of these unwill­
ingly, and vety many do not properly confess their sins unless
the confessor helps them. The confessor has, therefore, need of
great prudence, in order, on the one hand, to elicit from the peni­
tents what they conceal, and, on the other hand, not to teach
them (especially the young) what they did not know before.
He must here observe the following rules: (1) Let him avoid
all curiosity, even the appearance of it, and all superfluous
questions. When he fears that, out of anxiety of conscience,
the penitent thinks that he has not fully confessed something,
218 Tit. 1Π. cp. 1, De Sacram. Pœn. η. 16.

NATURE OF QUESTION» TO HE PUT TO PENITENT

38Ô

because he has not told all the circumstances, it is advisable to
say to him at the end of the confession : " I have perfectly well
understood your sins ; do not, therefore, be anxious about not
having fully declared the manner in which you sinned.” And
if the penitent himself, out of ignorance or anxiety, wishes to
describe the manner in which the sins were committed, the con­
fessor must admonish him that this is not necessary. On the
other hand, if the confessor has to question the penitent, he can
inform him that these questions are necessary in order to leam
the species of the sin. (2) In putting these questions let him
make use of only perfectly modest expressions; when he speaks
of the virtue of purity, let him always call it the angelic virtue,
holy purity, in order to preserve the esteem and love of this
virtue in himself, and inspire the penitent with it. And if the
penitent should make use of improper, coarse expressions in
confessing these sins, the confessor should gently admonish him,
and teach him to express himself more becomingly. As long
as it is doubtful whether the penitent has sinned against purity,
the confessor should make use of general terms only, so that if
the penitent has sinned, he may know it, and if he has not,
may learn nothing new and dangerous. The confessor should
generally begin with the lesser sins, and gradually proceed to the
greater ones. He should begin with impure thoughts, wishes,
listening to, or uttering, impure words, and ask if he has had
temptations against holy purity, etc., and proceed thus to ques­
tions about acts. If the penitent denies having willingly enter­
tained impure thoughts, he must not ask if he has sinned by
impure actions ; if the penitent confesses interior sins of impurity,
let the confessor ask if he has listened to impure talk, or uttered
such himself, if he has been guilty of immodesty by looking or
touching. If he answers this also in the affirmative, he should
ask (if the penitent is an adult) if he has committed any im­
modest act, or wished to do so; for there are penitents who,
if they are not asked, conceal such sins, believing that they

S86

ΤΠΕ MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

satisfy their duty if, by some remark, they give the confessor
opportunity to question them. The confessor must sometimes
donate from this order, when, for instance, the penitent has
already, of himself, confessed that he has committed grave sins
against purity, or when he is ill informed. For the common
people often do not consider the delectationes morosas and the
desideria as sins, at least when they did not wish to proceed to
acts; it is the same with immodest talk, which they call joking.
Such penitents must, as a rule, be questioned, and, in the first
place, if they have done anything immodest, then if they have
carried on talk of this kind, and lastly concerning the interior
sins. The confessor will sometimes observe that those who
accuse themselves of sins of thought only, have also sinned by
impure talk and actions, either because they scarcely distinguish
the thoughts from the actions, and believe that they confessed
the actions also by accusing themselves of the sinful thoughts,
or that they wish to give the confessor an opportunity of ques­
tioning them about the actions of which they do not venture to
accuse themselves, unless they are helped by the confessor.’10
n· Cf. Ærtnys, Practic. Inet Confesser. P. II. Cap. II. art. 1. § 1, p. 27,
n. 30; Theol. Moral. Lun. 270; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 420; Gury, 1. c. II. n.
010; Renter, Neo-Con fewer. P. 1, cp. 3. Cf. P. II. cp. II. art. 1, 2, 8, cp. 3,
art. 1 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. η. 895 (where also some ex­
amples are given); Benger, Pastoraltheologie, II. Vol. 4 Book, § 162,
p. 412 ff. (2 e«l.); Zenner, 1. c. P. II. Sect. 1, cp. 1, art. II. § 83-90. Segneri's
most appropriate instruction deserves to be taken to heart by the confessor :
Cupio magnopere, te parcum, gravemque esse interrogando circa materiam luzurite, ne tibi accidat, quod pictori, qui cum Helenam exquisita diligentia depingeret,
ejusdem cupiditate exardescere capit et accendi. Utere proinde verborum mo­
destia, et quamvis subinde circumstantia maneret tecta, qua alioquin ad integrita­
tem materialem spectaret, nihil interest: aliud enim majus bonum pravalet.
Adeo fiztet palus ista, ut consultum non sit, vel a Panitente vel a Confessorio ubi
opus non sit, moveri: sufficit requirere speciem patrati sceleris, non vero modum:
et si ipsi vel ex irrererecundia vel ez ignorantia hunc vellent declarare, suaviter
mum. necessarium non esse. Expediret hac in re imitari Philosophum illum, qui
veritus, ne loquendo os conspurcaret, carbone descripsit. Instruet. Confessar.
cap. II. Cf. I.ugo, 1. c. Disp. 16, Sect. 14, n. 095; Coninck, lie Sacram.
Bisp. 8. dub. 17, n. 121.

ΝΑΤΓΗΕ OF QUESTIONS TO BE PUT TO PENITENT 38"

But with all these questions let the confessor be prudent and
cautious. An imprudent confessor who neglects the necessary
measures of precaution, may easily draw upon himself a denun­
ciation, ac si sollicitationis reus sit.
On this account he must not ask married people bluntly and
without preliminary question if they have rendered to each other
the debitum conjugale, unless a valid reason or grounded suspi­
cion justifies such question. He can, perhaps, in quite a general
way, ask a wife if she has been obedient to her husband in all
her duties, or if they have lived their married lives in a truly
Christian manner. If anything in conjugali debito that troubles
the conscience has really taken place, opportunity is given to
the penitent of saying so himself, and then it is for the confessor
either to investigate further, or to instruct, which should, how­
ever, be generally done in only a few words.”® Finally, the
questions must be asked at (d) the right time. Some questions
are, as a rule, to be put before the accusation begins, for exam­
ple (if the penitent does not say it of himself), when he last con­
fessed; for this question contributes much towards a hotter
knowledge of the number of the sins, and as to whether the peni­
tent seldom or often receives the holy Sacraments, and whether
greater or less care is necessary with him ; this is, too, the almost
general practice of confessors. Questions concerning the posi­
tion, age, etc., of the penitent are more expediently asked in
the course of the confession, when, on account of some sin,
occasion offers itself, or, which seems to be preferable, at the end
of the accusation. Other questions which appear necessary
for the completion of the confession or for better understanding
the state of the penitent’s soul, the confessor would best put
when the accusation is finished. Penitents are often confused by
being interrupted with questions, and cannot properly complete
their confession. Let the confessor, therefore, keep in his mind
«° Cf. S. Pœnit 8 .lune, 1842; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 420.

888

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

the individual sins concerning which he must ask questions for
the purpose of completeness. Let it be, therefore, the rule, not
to interrupt the penitent in liis confession, unless a question
should Im* immediately necessary.”1
After the confession the confessor should ask the penitent if
anything still weighs upon liis conscience ; especially let him ask
illiterate people who seldom confess, if they are heartily sorry
for their sins, and if they purpose firmly to avoid sin.
On all occasions let the confessor avoid putting many ques­
tions, and confine himself to necessary ones. In an especial
manner let him avoid all that does not appertain to the confes­
sion. He must remember that there arc many penitents, espe­
cially men of some position, to whom much questioning by the
confessor is irritating.
Moreover, let the confessor ask clearly, according to the intel­
ligence of the penitents, so that these may perfectly understand
and be able to answer correctly and shortly; the questions
should, therefore, as a rule, not be of a general nature, but con­
crete, brief, and simple. Sometimes, when the penitents are
of very limited mental capacity, the questions must be repeated
in different words. He must ask in good order, proceeding from
the beginnings of sin to the completed acts, from the lighter to
the more grievous; from the usual to the extraordinary; before
asking about the species and the number, he must satisfy himAn exception can 1« made when the penitent has written his sins, and
reads them, moreover, when the penitent ia not able to make known his
sins, and the confessor ia obliged from the beginning of the confession to
help by means of questions, he should not in that case proceed to another
point till he is quite clear as to the one in question. When the penitent
wishes to explain something to the confessor, the latter should not prevent
him (unless it is concerning things which are useless, not to the point, or
mere excuses, or which incriminate others), he should rather allow him
time to reveal his misery and his scruples; this psjiecially applies when the
penitent seldom confesses, or has come from a distance, or is making a gen­
eral confession ; the confessor must then receive him with all love and kind­
ness. and must see that his conscience is quite set at rest.

NATURE OF QUESTIONS TO RE PUT TO PENITENT

389

self as to whether there was consent. The. confessor must ask
kindly and gently, so that the penitent may feel that the con­
fessor is treating him with truly paternal love. His special
pattern must be the love and gentleness of Jesus towards sinners
of which the Gospel furnishes so many examples; in this way
the confessor wins for himself that confidence which is so neces­
sary, and induces the penitent to confess all his sins sincerely,
whereas harshness intimidates the penitent and seals his mouth.
The insincerity of the penitent, and consequently the incomplete­
ness of the confession, would thus be the fault of the confessor,
who has to see that there is integrity. Let the confessor, there­
fore, refrain from every harsh word, make the penitent no
reproach before the confession is complete, show no sign of dis­
pleasure or surprise. Illiterate penitents, those who have not
confessed for a long time, anti find confession hard, should be
encouraged in a kindly manner to accuse themselves sincerely
of all their known sins, before the confession begins."3
As to questions in particular, some refer to the object, others
to the circumstances, and others to the number of the sins.
With regard to the object, it is advisable that the confessor,
keeping in view the different classes in life, should arrange ques­
tions for himself in the order of the Commandments, and impress
them upon his memory, so that he may make a right use of them
when necessary. But whether the penitent is likely to have
committed other sins besides those which he has confessed,
touching which the confessor may be bound to put questions
to him, must be inferred from the penitent's occupation and
manner of life, as also from the circumstances by which certain
sins become the motives, or concomitants, of other sins (for ex­
ample, drunkenness is generally the cause of quarreling, blas­
phemy, impure thoughts, words, etc.). Moreover, it may
happen that the penitent has a false conscience, a thing from

890

THE MINISTER OF THE BACH AM EXT

which illiterate penitents not seldom suffer, and, in consequence,
confesses as grave sins, what, upon questioning, prove to be only
venial sins. On the other hand, in order to form a sure judg­
ment as to the gravity of the sins, the confessor should not ask
uneducated people whether they regarded the sins as venial or
mortal, for such people say just what comes into their heads,
as St. Alphonsus testifies ("«/ ego millies observavi"), and if the
confessor repeats the same question in a different way after­
wards, they will answer the exact opposite.’23
As to the circumstances the confessor must see that the accu­
sation of the penitent and his own questions are confined to
those which ought of necessity to be mentioned; nor should he
ask about such circumstances as are unlikely to occur in the
case of his penitents.224
As to the number of the sins, the confessor must inquire if
the penitent does not mention it when confessing mortal sins,
and it is beneficial to admonish him to give in future the. num­
ber, when he believes the sins to be mortal.225 If interior sins,
such as hatred, impurity, etc., have become habitual, the con­
fessor has, in most cases, performed his duty when he has found
out the greater or less frequency in the day or the week, because
a more exact enumeration of these sins is hardly possible. And
if some one confesses mulla desideria erga quaslibet feminas
obvias, the number is sufficiently indicated by the penitent
confessing, se modo nuptas modo innuptas concupivisse. More­
over, when, with habitual sinners, the confessor himself suggests
a number, in order to obtain an estimate of the real number,
let him choose a number higher than he expects to hear, so that
the penitent may be able to reduce it, or to add only slightly
to it, according to circumstances; if he merely assent to the
number, the confessor can then propose a higher one. In addi­
tion, the confessor must, where it is necessary, inquire into the
*“ Praxis Confess, n. 20.
'«* Stang, Pastoral Theology, Book II. c. 4, § 25.

-a5 Thid. § 33, n. 3.

JI ATUBE

OF QUEHTIOlfS TO BE PUT TO PENITENT 391

dispositions of the penitent — as a necessary preparation for
absolution; if he is willing, for instance, to make restitution,
to remove the immediate occasion of sin, if he is willing to for­
give, etc. He must ask a relapsing sinner, during what length
of time, from the last confession, he refrained from sin, how long
he resisted temptation, employed the remedies, etc., for the guilt
is not the same if the penitent overcame himself for a consider­
able time, or if he did not sin because the occasion was wanting,
or he was not assailed by great temptation.”"
For younger and inexperienced confessors we would suggest
that penitents not seldom 337 conceal sins. This generally hap­
pens : (1) from false shame in confessing certain sins of impurity,
sacrilegious confessions and communions, and acts of injustice;
this shame is greatly increased by a certain natural shyness,
especially in young women; (2) from fear of losing the respect
of the confessor, and (3) from fear of reproof or of refusal of
absolution.
The confessor must devote special care to these unhappy
penitents. "It cannot be described how much the zeal of an
experienced confessor can effect with them,” says the venerable
Paul Segneri, and entering into the practical treatment of these
penitents, he writes: "Through a little opening, that is, after
the penitent has confessed some lesser fault, let the confessor
procure for himself further access to his heart, and, having
gained entrance, seek what hidden sins there are to be found."
And, giving an example, he proceeds: "When a youth comes
to you to confess, and accuses himself of carrying on love affairs,
indulging in frivolous talk, allowing his eyes too much liberty,
and adds nothing more to this, let the confessor proceed skill­
fully from the talk and the looks, and examine into the impure
thoughts, and the consent given to them; from these to the
224 Cf. Aertnys, Institut, pract. 1. c. n. 30.
222 Cf. S. Alph. Silva, part 3, cp. 10 ; Segneri, Instructio Pœnitent op.
1β et seq.

392

TUB MINISTKU OF THE SACRAMENT

immodest acta which the penitent has committed with himself
or with others. But prudence is necessary that mistakes may
not be made. For here a wound is to be cleansed, there care
to be taken that the healthy, uncontaminated part be not in­
fected, that evil still unknown may not be learnt. Doubt not
that light from heaven, which you must invoke, and experi­
ence constantly increasing with practice, will show you the safe
way between these two rocks. ... It is scarcely to be
believed how useful it is to so formulate the questions yourself
that the penitent has nothing to say but, ‘Yes,’ or ‘No.’
What a comfort it was to the Samaritan woman to be able to
declare: 'I have found some one who has told me all that I
have done.' If she had been called upon to confess her sins
herself, who knows if she could ever have been brought to do
so? But when she saw herself with such gentleness probed
and fathomed by Christ, it was no longer difficult for her to con­
fess." . . . "But in such confessions,” adds Segneri, “refrain
from every sign by which the penitent could infer that the sins
confessed to you seem very grave. Remind him of the joy in
heaven over the conversion of a single sinner, and of the peace
of mind with which he can go home, blessing a thousand times
the day on which he delivered his conscience from such a bur­
den."
Whilst the confessor cannot always prevent the concealment
of sins; yet in many cases he will by prudent inquiry succeed
in procuring sincere confessions. To this end, he must receive
penitents with cordial friendliness, benevolence, and gentleness,
reminding them that a confession which is not made with full
sincerity is invalid and sacrilegious ; and that Satan, crafty and
envious, awakens false shame in penitents, in order to rob them
of the effects of grace in this Sacrament.
Let the confessor also observe the following special remedies:
Instructio Confennar. cp. 2.

NΑΤΓHE OF QUESTIOHH TO HE PUT TO ΡΕΙΠΤΕΧΤ 393

1. In order to remove false shame, let. the penitent understand
that a priest often hears much more shameful and serious sins;
that the penitent is not known to him ; let the priest encourage
the penitent and defer reproof till the end of the confession;
remind him of the seal of the confessional to which the con­
fessor is most strictly bound, but also of the certain disclos­
ing of the concealed sins before the whole world at the Last
Judgment. 2. In order to remove fear of losing the esteem
of the confessor, the confessor should avoid familiarity with his
penitents, not visit them at their homes without urgent neces­
sity, and not permit them to come to his house to speak about
matters of conscience, as such things are to be treated in the
confessional. Moreover, he must not object to his usual peni­
tents occasionally confessing to another confessor; and if they
have done so, he should commend them for it; an exception is
to be made here in the case of scrupulous persons, who, by so
doing, might only become the more confused, because another
confessor would not know them as scrupulous persons.—
“Caveat Confessorius, ne motiva naturalia et humana adhibeat
ad fiduciam pœnitentium, mulierum pracipue, sibi conciliandam;
id quippe periculosum est."
It follows from the above, that the confessor, at the end of the
confession, may, and should, kindly ask unknown penitents
(whose sincerity he justly doubts) if anything in their past
lives still troubles their conscience, and encourage them to con­
fess everything. By such questions not a few persons, espe­
cially of the uneducated class, and women, and children, are
saved from sacrilege, — that is to say, they are induced to confess
sins hitherto concealed; or the confessor may take occasion,
from the silence or a confused answer, prudently to investigate
the matter further. If, however, he discovers some defect in
former confessions, he must admonish the penitent to repeat
Cf. Aertnys, Instr, pract 1. c. § 1, p. 32 s. Cf. 8. Alph. Praxis Confess,
n. 19 ss.

θ!»4

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

these invalid confessions by a general confession and assist, him
in doing so.”0
If the penitent declares that he has nothing more of which to
accuse himself, absolution must be given him — if he is, in other
respects, worthy of it; for in cases of doubt as to the honesty
of a penitent, there is no other means of arriving at the truth
than by the testimony of the penitent himself, as he, himself,
is defendant and witness.”1
But what is the confessor to do if he knows positively that the
penitent has concealed or denied a sin ?
1. If he has obtained this knowledge outside of the confes­
sional, and that (a) by his own observation (e.r propria experi­
entia), having himself seen or heard the sin of the penitent, ho
cannot absolve him as long as, on the one hand, the latter,
when questioned, obstinately denies having committed the sin,
and while, on the other hand, the confessor knows positively
that the sin in question has not in the meantime been confessed
to another priest. For then defect in formal integrity has been
demonstrated. If the confessor has obtained his knowledge
(6) on the statement of another, he must, as a rule, absolve the
penitent, even if he when carefully questioned denies, for here
the declaration of the penitent himself is to be preferred to the
testimony of others; these latter may have been in error. More­
over, the confessor can assume that the penitent, if he really
committed the sin, has forgotten it, or confessed it to another
priest, or has some lawful ground for concealing it now. But
if the witnesses were so trustworthy that no doubt could be enter­
tained as to their statements, and if the confessor knew positively
that since committing the sin the penitent had not confessed to
another priest, and also that he could not have forgotten it,
he cannot, as long as the penitent denies the sin, absolve him,
** See Stang, Pastoral Theol. 1. c. on general confession.
ei S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 631 ; S. Thom. Opusc. 12, Q. 6, and Quodlib. 1, a.
12 et 17. Cf. Gury, II. u. 618. Ed. Katisb.

NATURE

OF tfUEHTIONS TO RE PUT TO PENITENT 395

because, in this case, a lie on the part of the penitent, quite
inconsistent with the integrity of the confession, has been
demonstrated; this case, however, will seldom occur.
2. If the confessor has obtained his knowledge from the con­
fession of the accomplice (complex) he is not allowed specially
to question the penitent concerning this sin, if he has not received
from the accomplice express permission to do so, or if this sin
docs not generally occur with people in that station, or in those
circumstances; otherwise he may only ask the penitent in a
general way, as he would in any case have done, or should have
done, for example, if anything more troubles his conscience;
and he can, in a general way, without letting his knowledge be
suspected, exhort him to confess his sins sincerely; but the
danger of breaking the seal of the confessional — by, perhaps,
asking the penitent the same thing several times — must be
carefully avoided. As to whether he can absolve such a peni­
tent is a controverted point. After quoting the opinion of
others on the subject, St. Alphonsus teaches: "In my judg­
ment the opinion of Lacroix is to be preferred, that is, the con­
fessor should not absolve, not even xub conditione, but should
say a prayer, to conceal the fact that absolution is refused,
because, in this manner, he, on the one hand, saves the seal —
revealing nothing and inconveniencing no one — and, on the
other hand, he has regard for the reverence due to the Sacra­
ment by preventing its frustration.” 233
Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 631 ; II. Ap. n. 120 ; Lacroix, Lib. VI. P. Π.
n. 1061); Müller, 1. c. Lib. III. Tr. II. § 152; Scavini, Lib. III. n. 381;
Kenrick, Tract. 18, n. 216; Schneider. Manuale Sacerd. Ed. VI. pp. 428-420 ;
Konings, etc. This opinion and practice was first introduced by Illsung (a
German Jesuit, who died in 1695), Theol. prnctica univers. Tract. 6, Disp. 6,
Q. 4, art. 7, § 4, n. 128, erroneously appealing to the testimony of Suarez,
who (De Pœn. Disp. 32, Sect. 3, n. 9), however, teaches the exact opposite:
Respondetur, regulariter flandum esse confessioni et dicto pamitentis: unde
quantumcunque confessor sciat peccatum purnilentis ex aliorum relatione (there­
fore, in confessione also) tenetur, in hoc judicio magis credere ipsi pernitenti,
propter rationem factam. Lacroix took this opinion from Illsung with the

396

THK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Other theologians leach with Suarez that absolution may
only be refused when it is quite evident that the penitent is
telling a lie to the prejudice of the integrity of the confession.
Indeed, not a few teach that absolution must, in every case,
be given to the penitent who denies his sin, when the knowledge
of this sin was obtained only from the confession of another, as
this knowledge is to be regarded as not existing. This opinion
is sufficiently probable, and deserves the preference, especially
as it safeguards the sigillum. We must, moreover, consider
that we can scarcely have a certainty that the penitent is con­
fessing sacrilegiously, quite apart from the consideration that it
is not lawful to make use of knowledge gained in the confeasional for the spiritual guidance of another. Absolution sub
conditione can also be given in this case, as this course preserves
the reverence due to the Sacrament.2"
But it is the confessor's duty not only to understand the sins
and to supplement the confession; he must also form for himself
a judgment concerning the gravity of sins which he has heard.
Although he must hear and understand all the sins of the peni­
tent, and would sin if he absolved, and had failed through his
alleged testimony of Suarez, adding, ex inadvertentiu, Dicastillo as a further
witness, whom lllsung had quoted for another purpose. St. Alphonsus
reckons Viva also among these, who, however, does not adhere to this
opinion. Cf. Ballerini, Nota? ad Gary. II. n. 619, who finally remarks:
Ifta opinio igitur lota debetur hallucinationi, i/ua perperam Suaresii, Dicaetilli
el Five auctoritatem adduxit. Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. II. nu. 890-895.
Cf. I.ugo, Disp. 22, n. 22 ; Elbe], De Sacrum, in gen. confer. 2, n. 11 et
de Pcenit. n. 453; Layman», Lib. V. Tract, 6, cp. 14, η. 24 ; Mazzotta. Tr. «,
Disp. 2. Q. 2, cp. 2. § 3 ; Billuart, Diss. 6, art. 10. § 2 ; Gary, 1. c. ; Aertnys, I. c.
n. 278. Lehmkuhl (1. c. n. 429) says that, considered by iteelf, the confessor
may but is not obliged to adopt the opinion of St. Alphonsus ; that there is
only this point in its favor, that without inconveniencing the penitent, or
without revealing the other confession, sacrilege can be avoided. But the
penitent commits a sacrilege whether the confessor gives him absolution or
not. Ou the other hand, the administration of the absolution by the con­
fessor is only a material cooperation, and one cannot oblige him. in order to
avoid this, to make use of knowledge gained from the confession of another.
Cf. Gobut, 1. c. Tract. 7, n. 875.

NATURE OF qUEATlONH TO HE PUT TO PENITENT

S9T

own fault to take cognizance of a mortal sin, it is not necessary
for him to pass judgment on everything he hears from the peni­
tent. It is sufficient if he is able to do this in regard to the sins
which usually occur; for the rest let him hear, take note, and
then absolve. Thus St. Alphonsus,and other theologians.
Lehmkuhl remarks, that this necessary judgment is formed as
soon as the confessor hears the sins, provided that he has an
habitual knowledge which enables him to distinguish objectively
grave and venial sins, and to apprehend their specific sinfulness.
Whether the subjective malice has any proportion to the sin
considered objectively cannot always be ascertained, though it
may generally be presumed ; nor is it always possible to discover
it. Such questions, therefore, should not be asked (unless,
perhaps, in the case of well-instructed penitents), for they are
quite useless. It’ is a different matter with questions regarding
the advertence and the consent of the will, and the objective
gravity of the sins, in so far as it depends upon the circumstances.
Such questions the confessor must ask per se, when the confession
of the penitent leaves it doubtful if the materia has been gravis
or levis, and no penitent, be he who he may, can be offended
by such questions; nevertheless, it is not always necessary to
put these questions, as, sometimes, a confessor may content him­
self with a presumption based upon the conscience of the peni­
tent well known to him, or other indications.5” The priest
L. c. n. 627 ; II. Ap. n. 104.
ίν· Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 121. He also cites some examples from other
authors, for instance, Gobat (Tract. 7. n. 338) : “ St religiosus, a castitate mihi
notus, diceret, se semel turpia locutum esse, prtesumerein, hac esse scurrilia, non
contra castitatem." Attamen hac potius per exceptionem dicuntur: nam genera·
peccato solcere possit, hanc instituere tiebeat. Mazzotta furnishes a further
example (1. c. Q. II. cp. 2, § 2) : ■· A confessor who (involuntarily or acci­
dentally) is distracted, and, because knowing the state of the conscience of
his penitent, can presume that what he missed was something unimportant,
may remain silent about it and absolve, if questions would be regarded as
troublesome." Indeed. Gobat adds: If the confessor knew from experience

898

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

must pronounce judgment, as we have said, on the gravity of the
sins, and have in his memory the sins confessed by the penitent,
not. as Suarez states, in order to absolve, but in order to form a
correct judgment of the moral state of the penitent, and of his
dispositions for the reception of absolution, and in order to
impose a suitable penance.*”
50. The Examination of the Dispositions of the Penitent.

The dispositions of the penitent consist in true sorrow and
firm purpose of amendment. They are at the same, time the
quasi materia of this Sacrament, so that if they are wanting the
absolution is invalid. The minister of the Sacrament of Pen­
ance must, therefore, make it a point to determine whether
the penitent is properly disposed. But as this disposition is
an interior matter, there arises for the confessor the great diffi­
culty of knowing by what sign he may recognize it.
Hence the following principles : —
I. It is the duty of the confessor diligently to examine whether
• the penitent is properly disposed. This is evident from our
introductory remarks, also from the fact that the confessor is
a judge, and it is the duty of a judge to form an opinion of the
worthiness or unworthiness of the accused. Finally, it results
from the fact that ho has to discharge his important office as a
dispensator fidelis, and, as such, may not. give Sanctum canibus.232
Therefore, .Suarez says: “ Before the confessor absolves he must
prudenter et probabiliter judicare, if the penitent is disposed,
that bis penitent generally committed no mortal sins, but (e.g.) only accused
himself of little falsehoods, he can absolve him even if, on account of dis­
traction, he does not know a single sin of which the penitent accused him­
self; but it is advisable in practice to make the penitent repeat at least a
venial sin, perhaps the last, and then absolve. Lehmkuhl*» caution, how­
ever, is to be observed, namely, not to apply in a more general way that
which is prescribed for an extraordinary case. Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 421.
Cf. Suarez, De PieniL Diep. 22, a. 0, n. 7 ; Mazzotta, 1. c.
™ Cf. S. Alph. H. Ap. n. 117.

EXAMINATION OF THE DISPOSITION8 OF PENITENT 399

because he would otherwise expose himself to the danger of
making mistakes, and would act without sufficient knowledge.”"·
II. The confessor must arrive at a certitudo moralis, that is,
a reasonable and probable judgment, that the penitent is dis­
posed. This judicium prudens et probabile is necessary, as it is
not allowed (except in case of necessity) to administer the Sac­
rament cum prudent i dubio as to its validity; but, on the other
hand, it is also sufficient because the disposition of the soul is an
interior matter, the exterior signs and indications of which pro­
duce, generally, only a moral certainty, a probability. The proper
disposition of the penitent must, therefore, be presumed, unless
circumstances directly suggest suspicion of the contrary.2”
III. The confessor may regard as indicating proper disposi­
tions the fact that the penitent comes to confession of his own
accord, and not on account of the law of the Church, or with a
view to receiving some other Sacrament, or under compulsion
from parents or others; voluntary confession (confessio libera)
alone, or in connection with a protestation of sorrow and a pur­
pose of amendment, is the usual sign (signum ordinarium) of
good dispositions, except when this protestation is rendered
suspicious by some other circumstance. The confession itself
affords ground for the presumption that the penitent is disposed,
sorrow being made manifest by the confession and the princi­
ple holding good : nemo malus prœsumendus est. We may not,
therefore, presume that a penitent comes to confession indis­
posed ; there must first be ground for such presumption. There­
fore, the Roman Catechism teaches:240 St audita confessione,
judicaverit (Sacerdos) neque in enumerandis peccatis diligentiam
nec in detestandis dolorem omnino defuisse, which means that the
penitent can be absolved when dolor tam contritionis quam attri­
tionis is not wanting in him, for if neither is present there is no
588 De Pœnit. Disp. 32, s. 2.
”•8. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 461; Bucceroni, Commentar. III. De abaohit.
danda, etc. Edit, alt Roinæ, 1880, § 1, n. 3.
140 De Pœnit. n. 82.

400

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

sorrow at all.*1 When the priest has heard the confession, and
assured himself that the penitent has carefully examined his con­
science and confessed his sins, and that he is sorry for them, he
must absolve him.343 When, therefore, the penitent shows by the
manner of his self-accusation that he has contrition, and when his
demeanor is worthy of the Sacrament and becoming a penitent,
and his confession is sincere, the confessor must not doubt as
to his dispositions, unless, as before said, there is positive pre­
sumption for the contrary. The presumption in favor of his
dispositions derived from the confession will be neutralized by
the opposite presumption which well-founded indications of
indisposition produce. That in the case of contrary presump­
tion the confessor may again decide in favor of the penitent
and credit his assertion, “certain other, more or less weighty,
arguments must be superadded” which tend to weaken the first
suspicion or to destroy it totally. These arguments are called
“signa doloris extraordinaria.” 243 But the confessor must not
attach too much importance to these extraordinary signs, and
must bear in mind that no one of those usually given by the
theologians supplies, under all circumstances, complete proof
of the penitent’s disposition. As such signs (which, when neces­
sary, may furnish a stronger and special proof of the penitent's
sorrow and purpose of amendment) St. Alphonsus,344 Reuter,343
and other authors enumerate the following: (1) any striving
after amendment which the penitent has shown ; (2) any spe­
cial manifestation of sorrow on the part of the penitent himself,
2,1 Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 279, III. Note 1.
243 Cf. 8. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 459, Prax. Conf. n. 71 ; Bucceroni, I. c. n. 4 ;
8. Thom, in 4, Dist. 17, Q. 5, a. 3.
2,1 Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 279 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 424, who remarks on this :
Attamen in re aliqua “extraordinaria" insistentium nun est. Neque quodlibet
borum signorum in quibuslibet adjunctis certam probationem facit.
244 Cf. Lib. VI. n. 460.
2,1 Neo-Confessar. n. 177. Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 279 and Append, de recidi­
vis. n. 314. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 427.

EXAMINATION OF THE IHSPOHITIONH OF PKNITENT

401

or due to the exhortation of the confessor (for instance, tears,
sighs, etc., although tears and sighs are not always to Im* trusted) ;
(3) that the penitent was induced to confess by some special,
extraordinary motive; (4) that, upon the exhortation of the
confessor, he has attained to a better apprehension of sin, and
an abhorrence of it; (5) that he has now ultimately confessed
to the confessor long concealed sins; (6) that the number of
the sins has become considerably less, although the circumstances
remained the same (for if the penitent had been prevented from
sinning by illness, or a similar circumstance, this would be no
signum extraordinarium); (7) that restitution has been really
made, the habit overcome, or some other difficult duty fulfilled ;
(8) that, in view of the confession which he wishes to make, he
has increased prayer, given alms, undertaken fasting or other
good works ; (9) that he has voluntarily sought the means of
amendment at the hands of the confessor, gladly adopted those
proposed to him, or sincerely promised to adopt them; (10) that
he willingly undertakes a severe penance, and offers to make
satisfaction to God; (11) voluntary, spontaneous confession
may often be a sufficient sign.
IV. The question for us now is : in what cases a serious "prae­
judicium” against the disposition of the penitent arises. Accord­
ing to the teaching of St. Leonard of Port Maurice, they are the
following: (1) when the penitent always relapses in the same
sins, and there is no visible trace or hope of amendment; (2) when
the penitent answers coldly that he is sorry, especially when he
has often relapsed; (3) when he has not applied the remedies
given by the confessor; (4) when the penitent has made con­
stant and unusual efforts for the gratification of his passions;
(5) when the penitent receives the holy Sacraments only if
commanded to do so by parents or teachers, or out of mere cus­
tom on feast-days, or out of human considerations; (6) when
the penitent presumptuously excuses his sins, or enters into dis­
pute with his confessor, a fortiori if he should even boast of his

402

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

sins; (7) when the penitent refuses to accept a reasonable pen­
ance, for punishment or for amendment ; (8) when the penitent
shows a groat inclination to sin, or covets the profit or great
pleasure obtained from the sin.”"
V. A penitent is to be regarded as completely indisposed who
positively has no supernatural sorrow, and no real purpose of
amendment, especially one who refuses to undertake a difficult
obligation; one, for example: (1) who does not remove the im­
mediate and willful occasion of sin ; (2) who will not lay aside
enmity and hatred, and will not be reconciled; (3) who will not
make restitution and repair injury; (4) who will not give up
sinful occupations; (5) who will not promise to exert himself
to lay aside a bad habit ; (6) who does not employ the necessary
means of amendment ; (7) who is not willing to remove scandal
that he has given or still gives to others.
VI. That penitent is doubtfully disposed against whom there
is a well-founded "pratjudicium,” — one arising from positive
indications, — wliich prœjudicium he has not wholly removed,
so that there is still valid ground for considering him as not
yet sufficiently disposed.

51. The Confessor's Duty in Disposing his Penitents.
The confessor must, with fatherly love and care, to the best
of his ability, dispose those penitents whom, after instruction
and exhortation, he sees to be insufficiently disposed; and he
is bound to this ex rigoroso religionis et charitatis officio. Mag­
nificent is the discourse on this subject which Leo XII in his
Encyclical letter of Dec. 25, 1825, extending the Jubilee to the
whole Church, addressed to all the bishops. In § 5 the Pope
writes: “You know well how necessary and salutary the labor
of those priests is to whom the faithful must confess their sins,
in order that they may be able to perform with fruit what they
** See in Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 624.

See § 63.

CONFESSOR'S duty

in

DISPOSING PENITENTS

403

have been taught. Therefore it must be your zealous care that
those priests appointed by you to hear confessions do not forget
what our predecessor Innocent III prescribed with regard to
the minister of the Sacrament of Penance ; namely, that he should
bfe discretus et cautus, in order to pour wine and oil, like the ex­
perienced physician, into the wounds of the stricken one, to give
liirn good advice, and to prescribe what means of improvement
he must employ.” And, after remarking (with a reference to
the words of the Roman Ritual) that the priest must exercise
great care as to whom he administers absolution, to whom he
refuses it, and when he postpones it, especially emphasizing to
whom it may not be given, he goes on to say that every one can
easily see how totally different from this the procedure of those
priests is, “ who, as soon as they perceive that a person is bur­
dened with many sins, at once declare that they cannot give him
absolution, thus refusing to heal those for whose healing they
were in a special manner appointed by Him who said: ‘Those
who are whole need not the physician, but those who are sick,'
or to whom the least effort in eliciting sorrow and good purpose
seems sufficient, and only then believe that they have taken a
safe decision when they send the penitent away, to absolve him
at some other time. For if ever the golden mean is to be ob­
served, it is eminently in this case, so that too great ease of
obtaining absolution may not engender carelessness in commit­
ting sin, and that too great difficulty may not estrange souls
from the confessional and plunge them into despair of salvation.
For many present themselves before the ministers of the Sacra­
ment of Penance who are quite unprepared, but are in such
dispositions that they might become prepared if only the priest,
equipped with the compassion of Jesus Christ, who came to call
not the just but sinners, understood how to treat them with zeal,
patience, ami gentleness. Those are not to be regarded as un­
prepared who have committed very grave offenses, or who have
not confessed for very many years — for the mercy of the Lord

404

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

knows no bounds, and inexhaustible is the treasure of His good­
ness—or who, ignorant, of humble condition, and slow"of percep­
tio®, have not duly examined themselves, for without the help
of the priest they are unable to do this ; but only those who, after
being questioned by the confessor concerning their sins with
necessary care (but not with a minuteness immoderately trouble­
some to them), and after the confessor has exhausted all the zeal
which love can inspire, accompanied with fervent prayer, to
move them to sorrow for their sins, are found to be wholly and
entirely devoid of that sorrow by which they should at least
become disposed to obtain grace in the Sacrament. In what­
ever dispositions those may be who approach the minister of
the Sacrament of Penance, they should not be allowed to de­
spair on account of their guilt, and to go away estranged from
the goodness of God or the Sacrament of reconciliation. . . .
St. Raymond of Pennafort, whom the Church calls the eminent
minister of the Sacrament of Penance, may serve as a fitting
example of this love. ‘After the confessor has heard the sins,’
he says, ‘let him comfort the sinner and bear his burden with
him, let him be tender of heart, forbearing towards the penitent
in his sins, let him distinguish with prudence, assist the person
confessing with his prayers, give alms, and perform other good
works for him, ever aid him with gentle exhortation, suggesting
grounds for consolation, encouraging him to hope and also
remonstrating with him when necessary.’ ” With these golden
words, born of love for sinners anil burning zeal for souls, the
Pope admonishes confessors to take most benevolent interest in
their penitents in order to dispose them. This is, indeed, a
strict duty of love; love of God and of the. poor sinner must
move the confessor to use every exertion in his power to rescue
him from his unhappy situation, and reconcile him with God.
The confessor must thus act as the attorney of God and the
father of the penitent; and as physician of the soul he is bound,
after the example of the good Samaritan, to apply promptly

CONFESSOR'E DUTY IN DISPOSING PENITENT»

405

for the sick soul of the penitent a suitable remedy, and the only
suitable remedy here is the valid reception of absolution.1**
It is true, as Segneri“’ says, that the heart of the sinner not
seldom becomes as hard as stone (Job xli. 15) ; nevertheless,
we must try to soften it, and to arouse in these wretched men —
the more unhappy as their wretched state is of their own choice —
sorrow for past sin, and a sincere determination never more to
return to it. But in order to move them to sorrow and penance,
powerful motives for sorrow must be proposed, and it is well to
support these by one or more passages from Scripture, or utter­
ances of a saint. These generally refer to the nature, the effects,
and the consequences of sin — sin as the most terrible wrong done
to the majesty of God (Jer. ii. 2) ; as the blackest ingratitude
towards God, our best Father, and most generous benefactor
(Dcut. xxxii. 5, 18; Is. i. 3; v. 4; 2 Kings xii. 7); as the most
execrable faithlessness towards Jesus, our most loving Redeemer
(Heb. vi. 6 ; John x. 22) ; as an evil which brings with it the loss
of grace and of the happiness of heaven (Wis. vii. 14; 2 Cor. ii.
9) ; leading to hell (Is. xxxiii. 14; Matt. xxvi. 26) ; and preparing
a terrible death (Prov. vi. 34; Heb. x. 31) ; which is most hateful
and disgraceful in itself; making the sinner an abomination
before God and a slave of the devil (Ps. v. 6; Wis. xiv. 9). The
peculiar hatefulness, the evil consequences, and danger of spe­
cial sins may be described, as, for example, impurity, robbing
man of innocence, ruining him in body and soul, surrendering
him to disgrace and shame, making him the object of God's espe­
cial abhorrence, and exposing him to severe punishment. But,
in a particular manner, let the confessor seek to deter the peni149 It is not enough to say to indisposed penitents something of this kind :
“ Well, beg pardon of God for all your sins ” (this is no true act of sorrow),
or, “Are you heartily sorry for all your sins?” Effort must, above all
things, be directed towards awakening in penitents (who have committed
grave sins) a real abhorrence of sin ; to this end they must first be prepared
by an act of imperfect contrition, and then we must seek to bring them to
perfect contrition.
249 Instruct. Confess, cp. 8.

40fi

THE MINISTER OF THF SACRAMENT

tent from relapse, impressing upon him fhe great truth Huit the
difficulty of effecting his salvation increases in the same pro­
portion as the number of his sins; that bad habits always
become stronger, the mind more darkened, the will weaker, also
that he is always becoming more unworthy of divine grace, that
the evil one obtains more power over a man as the sinner's re­
sistance grows less. It is, however, neither necessary nor useful
to set forth these motives indiscriminately; they must be chosen
with a view to suit the penitent,200 and not only stored in the
memory, but, by meditation, deeply imprinted on the heart of
the confessor, that he may bring them home to the penitent
with the warmth of conviction and a persuasive unction.
The confessor must not be concerned at the fact that other
penitents have to wait a long time and end by going away; for,
in this case, he must not look to the welfare of others, but solely
to that of the penitent with whom he is dealing at the moment.
It is of his welfare and not that of the rest that he has to render
account, and, as St. Francis Xavier used to say, it is better to
hear the confessions of a few penitents well, than those of many
hastily and without fruit. The confessor must very often dis­
pose illiterate penitents (pan. rudes) and children by moving
them to sorrow and purpose of amendment, because these latter
do not sufficiently consider the necessity of these acts, and there­
fore neglect them. He must also frequently dispose penitents
who have relapsed into sinful habits without endeavoring to
amend, as with such people there is ground for the presumption
that they are not truly disposed. “How many penitents have
come to me not disposed, and I have endeavored, with the help
of divine grace to dispose them, and I have certainly done so,
Cf. Polancus, Directorium Confessorii, cp. 2.
461 S. Alph. Praxis conf. cp. 1, nn. 7 et 10. He says, very aptly : Perpauci
sunt panitentes. prasertim rudes el magni peccatores, qui dolore et proposito prius
elicito ad confessionem accedunt, Hos igitur quoad potest confessorius disponere
fortiter et suariter adlaboret.

DUTY OF GIVING OH REFUSING ABSOLUTION

407

and; to my very great comfort, dismissed them with absolution,”
cries out St. Alphonsus."’ Justly, therefore, does this sainted
doctor and zealous guide of souls, blame those “indolent confess­
ors” who send away a penitent without having shown any zeal
in preparing him."3
If the confessor judges that the penitent is well disposed,
he has no obligation with regard to his dispositions. For the
rest, he will do well to exhort penitents who are unknown to him
again to elicit sorrow and purpose of amendment aroused by
his words, or at least to ask them if they heartily detest their
sins. If they answer in the affirmative, the confessor can set
his mind at rest, unless circumstances suggest otherwise."4
52. The Duty of the Confessor to administer, to defer, or to
refuse Absolution.

After examining the dispositions of the penitent, and after
endeavoring to make sure of them, the confessor, as we have
seen in the last section, will find three classes of penitents: those
who are certainly disposed, those who are doubtfully disposed,
those who are not disposed.
His duty with regard to these different classes will form the
subject-matter of this section.
I. Absolution must, in justice, be given to the penitent who
is certainly disposed, so that t he confessor would, generally speak­
ing, sin gravely and against justice if he should refuse to absolve
such a penitent. After hearing a case (causa), the judge must
pronounce sentence on the accused, and in the tribunal of pen­
ance (the worthiness of the penitent being presupposed) the
sentence can only be one of acquittal. Accordingly, if the peni­
tent is worthy of acquittal, in other words, certainly disposed,
H. Ap. Tr. 16, n. 105.
aM Prax. Conf. cp. 1, n. 7; Lib. VI. n. 608. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol.
Mor. 1. c. cp. 1, nn. 313-323.
Cf. Reuter, Neo-conf. P. 1. cp. V. n. 11.

408

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

absolution must be given him. This results also from the char­
acter of the confessor as representative of God ; but God acquits
the sinner who does worthy penance, therefore God’s represen­
tative must do likewise. This follows, further, from the aim
of the institution of the Sacrament. It was instituted for the
faithful and for their spiritual benefit; now, if the faithful are
well disposed, they have a right to this Sacrament, and it would
be injustice to withhold it from them. Finally, the confessor
binds himself by admitting a penitent to confession, er quasicontraclu, to pronounce judgment in accordance with the in­
junctions of Christ.”5 Absolution must also be given to a
certainly disposed penitent when he has accused himself of
venial sins only. In the latter case, however, it is, er se, no
great injustice not always to give absolution, but only the
blessing, and if there is reasonable ground for this proceeding
it is no sin at all.
II. Absolution must always be refused to penitents who are
certainly not disposed. The confessor would be guilty of sacri­
lege if he administered absolution to penitents whose indisposi­
tion was certain, in whatever state of need the penitent might
be; for, in this case, the confessor would utter the sacramental
formula in vain, and such abuse is sinful. What penitents
are certainly not disposed we have learnt above.25’ The strict
duty of the confessor to dispose those penitents whom he has
recognized as not disposed has also been treated of (§ 51). Not
till all his pains and zeal have proved vain may he dismiss them
»Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 003; II. Ap. n. 117; Suarez, De Pren. 1). 32,
S. 5, n. 2; cf. Lugo, Disp. 11. n. 100 ; Marc. Instit. Alph. 1*. 111. Tr. V. Diss.
III. cp. 3. art. 1, n. 1813; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 428; Bucceroni, Commentar.
III. De Absolut, dauda, etc. § 1, n. 2, § 3, n. 13.
See § 50, V. The confessor, therefore, must not absolve a penitent
Who will not fulfill an important duty incumbent upon him, who does not
heartily repent of his past sins, and has not a firm purpose to sin no more in
future. Cf. Bucceroni, 1. c § 4, n. 15; Leo XII, Eucycl. Charitate Christi,
Kai. Jan. 1820.

DUTY OF GIVING OR REFUSING ABSOLUTION

409

as indisposed ; and even then the confessor must not treat them
harshly and reject and repel them, but clearly and eloquently
lay before, them their sad state, and the very great danger of
incurring eternal flamnation, and assure them that it would
always afford him the greatest joy if they should at last do real
penance, and that he would be ready at all times to receive them
in the confessional as soon as they should be willing to obey the
divine precepts.267
III. Absolution must, as a rule, be deferred in the case of
those penitents who are altogether doubtfully disposed (plane
dubie dispositi). For the confessor must take care that he does
not presumptuously expose the Sacrament to the danger of
nullity and commit a great sacrilege. Penitents are to be re­
garded as doubtfully disposed who, having a duty to fulfill siib
gravi, such, for example, as removing an immediate occasion of
sin, laying aside a vicious habit, making restitution, giving up
an enmity, have promised to do their fluty anti failed to keep
the promise. Failure to comply with the obligation does not
point infallibly to a lack of proper dispositions, but it neces­
sarily gives rise to well-founded doubts.
As a rule, absolution must be deferred in the ease of such peni­
tents, but if there is a causa gravis, it may be given to them sub
conditione, or, according to circumstances, it must be so given to
them.
For the Sacraments were institutefl for men. When, there­
fore, more evil than good results from postponement of absolu­
tion, the welfare of the penitent demands that the Sacrament
should be administered to him, even with the danger of nullity;
regard for the Sacrament being preserved by the subjoined
condition.
If dying persons are doubtfully disposed, they must be absolved
suft conditione; on this point there can be no controversy.
Cf. B. Humbertus, General. Mag. l’rædicatorum, Instructio, el Biirtholomieus Medina ex Ord. Præd. Instruct. Confesser. Lib. I. cp. 3.

J10

THE MLN 1STKH OF THE SACRAMENT

It is universally admitted and also approved by St. Alphonsus
that a doubtful!)’ disposed penitent can be absolved, sub con­
ditione, of course, when he himself, bona fide, believes that he is
sufficiently disposed, and when there is a causa gravis for be­
lieving that the refusal or postponement of absolution would
cause him to fall into a worse state ; for example, commit anot her
sacrilege, or become totally estranged from the Sacraments.
In this case the confessor must use every means in prudence,
and with holy, enlightened zeal, to dispose the penitent, fit­
tingly, and then — mindful of the mercy of Him whose place
he fills, and who does not break the bruised reed nor quench
the smoking flax (Is. xlii. 3) — administer the absolution.
But in other cases where such evils are not to be feared, the
confessor must defer absolution for doubtfully disposed peni­
tents till they have shown themselves to be better disposed.
This applies especially to relapsing sinners and to occasionarii.
“Do not refuse absolution to the penitent, but postpone it,”
is the exhortation of Segneri to confessors. “He must come
again within a fixed time. In the meanwhile he may make him­
self more worthy and then give more trustworthy signs of sor­
row." Let it not be objected that the penitents would not
return. “If they do not come to you, they will go to others,
and will be better prepared and absolved with greater profit.
If they neither come back to you nor go to another, you need not
be concerned about it, for it is a clear sign that they are quite
obdurate in sin, that they were not disposed, and had not the
will to render themselves disposed. And yet, even in such cases
the deferring of absolution is not without benefit; since a germ
of holy fear remains in their hearts, which in time will bring forth
fruits of penance. For, as the learned Aversa assures us, a wise
postponement is of the greatest profit to the sinner, and experi­
ence itself proves that this postponement is mostly beneficial.”25’
*“ Leonard of P. M., Instructions for Confessors (Regensburg, 1878),
p. 87, etc.

DUTY OK GIVING OR REFUSING ABSOLUTION

411

IV. Even in the case of a well-disposed penitent, absolution
can, anil sometimes must be, deferred, when this appears neces­
sary to, or profitable for, his improvement. Although the welldisposed penitent has a right to absolution, yet the confessor,
as a physician, must have regard for the cure of the penitent,
nor has the penitent always a right to immediate absolution.
The deferring of absolution is a grave duty when postpone­
ment is a necessary measure; it is not so imperative when it
serves only as a measure of utility.
1. Postponement of absolution is necessary: —
(a) With penitents who have to remove a public scandal.
This duty must be done before they are admitted to holy com­
munion, and generally also before absolution. (&) With peni­
tents who have been, in any respect, public sinners, — till they
have publicly shown themselves to have amended : except, per­
haps, when it is advisable to give absolution at once for their
greater comfort and spiritual profit; yet with postponement of
holy communion, (c) With penitents who are under some great
obligation, who have to make considerable restitution, to be
reconciled to an enemy, or to remove an occasion of sin, and
of whom it is to be feared that they may not be true to their
resolution on account of its great difficulties, (d) With a peni­
tent who has not confessed for a long time, has often fallen back
into the old sins, and has not so far employed any diligence in
the examination of his conscience; for, in this case, he runs
great risk (as, by his own fault, the declaration of his sins is
incomplete) of being invalidly absolved. But if such a penitent
does not know how to examine his conscience better, the con­
fessor must aid him, and absolve him if he considers him other­
wise capable and worthy of it.
For the cases cited Lehmkuhl and Reuter give this good rule:
If it is more difficult for the penitent to come to the confessor
again than to fulfill his heavy obligation, let him be at once
absolved, unless he has already promised to fulfill his obligation

•112

ΤΠΕ MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

and has not kept his promise ; but if it is inorc difficult for him to
fulfill the obligation than to come again, let the absolution be
deferred. Here, however, the confessor must have regard for
the relative or subjective difficulty which his penitent finds in
removing the occasion of sin, on account of rooted habit, or the
strength of a violent passion. That he may overcome this, the
penitent must be stimulated by postponement of absolution;
otherwise he will easily forget his purpose and his promise.2’’0
2. Postponement of absolution, even when it is not necessary,
may sometimes be profitable to the penitent. Between the
ceria and the plane dubia dispositio there are degrees, and the
case may thus occur that the disposition of the penitent is not so
certain that absolution must be given at once; on the other hand,
it may not be so doubtful that absolution ought to be refused
or postponed.”0 Tliis applies to penitents to whom, in view of
their dispositions and other circumstances, absolution, strictly
speaking, may be given, but to whom postponement is useful
in helping them to recognize more clearly the enormity of sin
and the necessity of improvement. Thus they are more effec­
tually strengthened against relapse, their sorrow for sin becomes
deeper, their purpose of amendment firmer. Here the confessor,
as physician before God, must consider whether it is more profit­
able for the penitent to give him absolution or to defer it. In
determining this, he must consider the character of the penitent,
and the circumstances of time and place in which we live.
"When faith has become cold, and the penitent can scarcely
be moved to make a confession, it is dangerous to defer absolu­
tion; this itself, indeed, may be a ground for giving absolution
m Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 430. Cf. Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 34.
*· Upon the origin of this practice, of which no trace is found in the
works of the older theologians, Ballerini enlarges in his notes on Gury, II.
n. 621. He does not discover it in the practice mid teaching of the Jansen­
ists, but rather in the endeavor of the younger theologians to find means by
which the faithful may be better assisted in laying aside a bad habit, roused
from indolence and negligence, and moved to holy leal.

POSTPONEMENT OF ABSOLUTION

413

to a doubtfully disposed penitent. Thus it is that the confessor
in our times must be more inclined to give absolution than in
former times when faith was lively.”1” The confessor must
not postpone absolution when postponement is hurtful to the
penitent, and this is the case when holy communion cannot be
omitted without exciting remark; or when an indulgence can be
gained at that time ; when the danger is foreseen that the peni­
tent, would be obliged to confess the same sins to another con­
fessor, which would be an unfair burden ; or when the penitent,
by this proceeding, would be exposed to the risk of dying without
absolution ; or if he could not come again for a long time.
But absolution should be deferred only for a short time —
three, five, or eight days. For a sufficiently disposed penitent
the postponement should never be long, especially when it is un­
certain whether he has perfect contrition, or whether he would
gain real profit from it.2” St. Alphonsus is of this opinion also
in the case when relapse is interior, for instance, a bail habit.
But if it be exterior, for example, an immediate occasion of sin,
whether voluntary, or necessary, absolution is always to be
deferred till the immediate voluntary occasion has been re­
moved or the necessary occasion become remote. For the
exterior cause has greater influence on the will than the evil
habit, or interior weakness.2” Moreover, the interior cause is
Ml Lehmkuhl, I. c. n. 431. Cf. Marc, 1. c. n. 1816; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 280.
The benefit which the confessor expects from the postponement of absolu­
tion, must, however, always be greater than that which the disposed penitent
receives from actual reception of the holy Sacrament.
262 Cf. Bucceroni, 1. c. n. 10, ad brevissimum tempus. Nam per se loquendo
magisprodest absolutio stalim data quam ejus dilatio. ‘‘For," so he continue!·,
“ it is burdensome to remain in a state of mortal sin even me or two days :
( 1 ) on account of the danger of death, against which we are never safe, etc.,
and (2) on account of the priceless blessings of which we are deprived.—
grace and merit. Moreover, the penitent is better prepared by absolution
for again receiving the Sacrament, than by postponement of absolution, etc."
Gury (II. n. 622) remarks that, where it can be easily done, absolution may
be deferred for one day or for a few hours.
=*» S. Alph. Lib. VL nn. 463 and 464.

414

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

not so easily removed, amply because it is interior, and clings
to a man.”· Hence St. Alphonsus also gives this advice : “One
should not, I think, deviate from the usual view, according to
which absolution is not to be deferred in the case of a penitent
who relapses from interior weakness, because for him more profit
is to be hoped from the sacramental grace than from postpone­
ment of absolution.”
Finally the postponement must not be very irksome to the
penitent. For, on the one hand, the penitent, as sufficiently
disposed, has a right to absolution, and, on the other, the post­
ponement, if very displeasing to him, would, per se loquendo,
not help him, or certainly not help him more than the absolution
given to him at once. If, therefore, the penitent has a desire
to receive absolution, he will be offended by the postponement.
This desire manifests a very good will, which, when supported by
the grace of the Sacrament, allows better things to be hoped
for than would be the case if he were deprived of the sacra­
mental grace. But that, absolute, absolution may be deferred
in the case of a sufficiently disposed penitent, even without his
consent, is demonstrated by the unanimous teaching of theo­
logians 205 as also by the recommendations and practice of the
saints.200
Moreover, the frequent awakening of love and sorrow is to
be earnestly recommended to the penitent if absolution has
been deferred, that he may thus be strengthened against temp­
tation, and later, when better prepared, acquire more abundant
graces. A penance is also to be imposed upon the penitent,
and he must be reminded that it is not necessary for him to
confess again the sins already confessed when he comes back to
the same confessor. The latter can absolve, though not rememCf. Satinant. Tract. 20, cp. 2, p. 2, § 1, n. 37.
M Cf. Bucceroni, 1. c. § 2, n. 8 ; Suarez, Lugo. Sanchez, Filliucius, Falaus,
Toletus, Gury, II. n. 621.
·* Cf. Epistol. S. Fraucisci Xaver. Lib. IV. Epist. IV.

POSTPONEMENT OF ABSOLUTION

415

Bering the sins, if he has imposed a suitable penance previously
and adds a new one.”’
In conclusion, we may remark that the postponement of abso­
lution depends entirely upon the judgment of the confessor,
that neither general nor special rules can be laid down concern­
ing it. Everything should be left to the discretion of the con­
fessor, who is to be guided neither by the suggestions of his own
private judgment nor by the example of others, but only by the
unction of the Holy Ghost, imparted to the priest by study and
prayer.2"*
Concerning postponement of absolution, Segneri remarks:
"This remedy, when employed at the right time, produces
great effects; like a burning coal it rouses the soul from that
lethargy which threatened to become the sleep of death.
Shamed ami startled, the penitent recognizes the greatness of
his misfortune, is placed upon his guard, and reflects upon his
condition ; if it finds him repentant, it increases his repentance
in an indescribable manner, so that his sorrow, which before
was transient and weak, and might easily have yielded to the
simple allurements of some present object, now becomes strong
and powerful and is able to withstand violent assault. And
so this wholesome remedy is generally prescribed by the masters
of asceticism,*“ and employed by circumspect confessors with
much benefit, especially in those cases in which other remedies
have proved ineffectual."2’0
x’ Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. P. 1, cp. 8, n. 34.
S. Leonard a P. M., Discorso mietico e morale. § 11.
*· Cf. Lugo, L c. Disp. TV. Sect. 10, n. 100; Suarez, 1. c. Disp. 32, Sect. 5,
n. 2, who adds : quorl prudentijudicio confessori» relinquendum est, qui hoc tine
gravi causa et magna considerationefacere non debet; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 642.
ro Segneri, 1. c. cp. IV (in fine).

CHAPTER II
THE ACCESSORY DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR

The essential office of the confessor is the judicial office. It
is of the highest significance. Connected with it are other
supplementary duties of equal importance. They refer to the
preparation of the confessor for his responsible office, the exer­
cise of the office itself, and his conduct after its completion.

Article I
THE PREPARATION

83. The Virtues which the Confessor must possess.
1. As in the administration of other Sacraments, the confessor
must first of all he in a state of grace. If he hears confessions
in a state of mortal sin, he commits as many sacrileges as he
administers absolutions.”1 Ami what a dishonor to God, what a
calamity for the priest is one single sacrilegi*! St. Alphonsus
admonishes confessors, who have been so unhappy as to commit
a grave sin, to cleanse their own consciences by confession before
administering the Sacrament, or, if they cannot confess, but
must hear confessions, to elicit perfect contrition. Whoever
absolves in mortal sin dishonors the holy Sacrament intrusted
to him by God, and while he delivers others from the chains of
sin, reconciles them to God, and opens the gates of heaven to
them, his own soul becomes more and more entangled in sin,
displeasing to God and exposed to perdition, and will he be able
1,1 Cf. S. Alph. De Sacrament, n. 36.

416

VIRTUER WHICH THE CONFE88OR MUST P08SE88

H7

to discharge his holy office in a proper manner? Will he who
is himself given to sin effectively destroy the kingdom of sin
by his admonition, instruction, and exhortation? The right
administration of the Sacrament of Penance demands of the
priest a deep hatred and personal abhorrence of sin.
2. The minister of the Sacrament of Penance must, there­
fore, be confirmed in virtue. He who will lead others to virtue
(and that is surely also a duty of the confessor) must first be
virtuous himself. Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii bonus erit, ex­
claims the wise man in the Old Testament (Eccii. xiv. 5). Noth­
ing exercises such great power over the minds of the people as
the good example of a priest, and only then do they believe
firmly when they see him practice what he teaches. “That
voice penetrates deeper into the heart which the life of the
speaker confirms," says Gregory the Great (Reg. Past.). St.
Antoninus recalls the words of St. Augustine: “The priest to
whom every malady is to be exposed must not fail in any one
of the points which he is to judge in others; else he'condemns
himself while sitting in judgment over others. When the adul­
terous woman was taken before the Lord, He said to the Phari­
sees, ‘ Let him amongst you who is without sin cast the first
stone upon her.’ But as none seemed free from sin, they all
withdrew, and did not care to condemn the woman.” “There­
fore,” adds St. Augustine, “priests are more culpable than the
Pharisees if they, though guilty themselves, dare to condemn
others.”2” It is an irrefutable maxim of the Angelic Doctor
that, in the administration of this divine Sacrament, the Con­
fessor cooperates in a personal way with God. It is not suffi­
cient for him to live in a state of grace in order to be a useful
servant in the work of saving sinners; he must be solicitous
about the practice of all the virtues, for a lukewarm confessor,
without interest in his work, who does not exercise himself in
so Ci. S. Leonard a Port-Maur., Instruction, etc., pp. 15-16.

418

THE MINISTEIl OF THE SACRAMENT

prayer and mortification, can only discharge this divine office
carelessly. His words will not be inflamed by love, nor his
warnings animated by zeal, nor his counsels beget confidence.”*
3. Amongst the virtues which the confessor must possess,
charity occupies the first place. As St. Alphonsus says em­
phatically, the confessor must have a heart full of love, in order to
discharge his office properly. This love of the confessor, as Louis
de Ponte says, must have all the dimensions which the Apostle
in his letter to the Ephesians demands ; the love of the confessor
must be so broad that he embraces in his heart all the sinners
of the whole world, excluding no one that will do penance,
and, like the father in the Gospel, hastening with open arms to
meet and receive every prodigal son who returns home ; so longsuffering that he does not grow weary if he has to wait a long time
for the sinner, and has often (seventy times seven) to deplore
his relapse if only he will return repentant; so highly spiritual
that he readily incites sinners to a greater perfection ; so humble
that he stoops to the most abandoned criminal to lend him a
helping hand, however low he may have fallen by repeated
indulgence in the most shameful sins. “Remember,” writes
St. Francis of Sales, “that penitents address you all as ‘father.’
You must, therefore, have a fatherly heart for them; receive
them with love, listen to them with patience ; do not grow tired
of their unmannerly behavior, their ignorance, their fickleness;
do not cease helping them, that you may at any cost save their
souls. Defiled though they be, they are not on that account less
precious; like pearls, they lose nothing by the dirt into which
they have fallen. Only try to cleanse them in the Precious
Blood of the innocent Lamb, and unite them to God, that they
may become heirs of eternal glory, and may one day eclipse
the stars by their splendor.”And St. Alphonsus teaches:
“When an unhappy sinner comes, good confessors receive him
« Instructions for Confessors, n. 3, p. 21 ff.
Monita ad Confessarios, cp. 1, art . 1.

VIRTUES WHICH THE CONFESSOR MUST POSSESS 419
with cordial love, and rejoice like a conqueror who has made
booty, reflecting that it has been given to them to snatch a soul
from the hands of Satan. They know that this Sacrament was
really instituted not for the just, but for sinners . . . that
.Jesus Christ said : ‘I am not come to call the just, but sinners’
(Mark ii. 17). Therefore are they filled with love, and the
deeper they see the soul sunk in the filth of sin, the greater love
do they show in order to win it for God.’’ ”* The good confessor
exercises in his office all the works of mercy by which charity
manifests itself, as Louis de Ponte, so beautifully says: "Flear­
ing confessions and absolving penitents is a truly heroic act,
and unspeakably well pleasing to the divine Majesty; because
in a special manner he exercises here the corporal and spiritual
works of mercy. He teaches the ignorant, guides the erring,
repairs injuries, comforts the sorrowful and the downcast, im­
parts salutary counsel to the doubting, makes effectual inter­
cession with God for those whose salvation is endangered. He
breaks the cruel chains of the captive and liberates him from
shameful slavery, clothes the clean with the garment of grace,
offers to the needy and to the weary spiritual food and drink.
Therefore I am convinced that God shows mercy to the good
and zealous confessor : since ‘ Blessed are the merciful, for they
shall obtain mercy.’ ” ”* Therefore, the office of the confessor is
very meritorious. But in order that he may gain from it un­
diminished merit, let him administer it out of love, pure love for
God and for souls. And that he may always do so Lehmkuhl
recommends him frequently to consider: (1) who He is whose
office he discharges ; (2) who he is who discharges it ; and (3) who
he is for whom he discharges it. For the priest represents in
this holy tribunal the person of Christ as Redeemer, who gave
Himself as ransom for souls, who had this individual soul be­
fore His eyes when He suffered, when He instituted the SacraPraxis Conf. n. 3.
™ Sensa pretiosa, I’. 6, η. 17, sqq.

420

THE MINISTER OF THE SACHA MENT

mont of Penance, who as God from all eternity, as .Man, from the
first moment of His incarnation, chose this hour of His special
love, in which, by the influence of grace, (he sinner would be
brought to the feet of the priest, by whose help anil endeavor
he might be sanctified and saved. But the confessor who dis­
charges this divine office and cooperates with Christ in the divine
work of the salvation of sinners, must recognize that it is without
any merit on his part that he has been raised to such an exalted
dignity. The confessor has, perhaps, himself grievously failed
and in no way can he better atone for his faults than by zeal in
blotting out and preventing the sins of others; and if he should
have no sins of his own to expiate, he should not forget that he
owes this singular favor to Christ and His grace.
The confessor must see in the penitent a brother of Christ,
sprinkled with the Blood of Christ, who now, to the shame of
Christ, has fallen into the most wretched captivity and slavery
of the devil; who, nevertheless, is dearly loved by God and
Christ, and is called to eternal and blissful union with Him;
who will, perhaps, one day be a great saint in heaven, and, if
he dies before the confessor, will there be an intercessor for him ;
or will certainly, out of gratitude, pray for him here on earth.’”
The confessor should often read what St. Alphonsus writes
in his Homo aposlolicus about the love of the confessor : “ This
love must be chiefly exercised in receiving all, especially the poor,
the ignorant, and sinners in a friendly manner. ... Λ still
greater love must the confessor exercise in hearing the confes­
sion itself. . . . And at the end of the confession the confessor
should, with much zeal, show to the sinner the heinousness of
his sins. This is the way by which you may gain sinners if
you employ the very greatest love in dealing with them.” This
love of the confessor produces in him that zeal for souls which
should especially animate him. When the confessor discharges
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 432.
2,8 Tract. 21, nn. 1, 2, 3.

VIRTUES WHICH THE CONFESSOR MUST POSSESS 421

his office with zeal, souls (ns experience shows) are not less
effectually led to God than by preaching. "Be certain," ex­
claims St. Leonard of Port Maurice, “ that in a single morning
which you have dedicated to God in the confessional for the
purpose of helping poor sinners, you acquire more merit than if
you were to perforin other good anti holy works for a whole
year. Indeed, I venture to say that it is sometimes better to
interrupt meditation, reading, the Breviary, or any other pious
exercise in order to hear confessions. . . . We should be con­
tent to sacrifice for a time even the contemplation of God in
order to comfort poor sinners. St. Ignatius declared that he
would very gladly submit to a postponement of the bliss of
heaven in order to be able to work for the salvation of a poor soul.
Docs not that passage in the Gospel terrify you where the ser­
vant is damned because he had not used the talent which he
had received? And you, who have received from the Lord not
one, but three and four, and perhaps ten talents, you will let
them lie unused!”’”
The most beautiful, the most efficacious pattern of true, wise,
indefatigable zeal for souls is He whose place the confessor
occupies, who in His boundless love shunned no trouble, effort,
persecution, or suffering, in seeking sinners, teaching them,
moving them to sorrow and penance, and pardoning them,
and who for them gave up His life in shame and agony.
Under the influence of this love, the confessor will also avoid
certain mistakes which are very injurious to his ministry, and
by no means becoming in a representative of Christ.
(a) He will not prefer the rich anil the high-placed to the poor
and the unfortunate, but, after the example of our Saviour, will
embrace the poor and the unfortunate with special love.”0
(b) He will not, in this love for penitents, be influenced by any
natural inclination, still less by any sinful affection; hence he
1,9 Instruction, pp. 121-123.
Praxis Conf. n. 3.

422

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

will not regard himself as fortunate if his confessional is besieged
by a groat number devotarum mulierum, nor will he detain them
in the confessional longer than is necessary, nor treat them with
too great familiarity, but rather with a paternal severity, so
that, in this holy service, he may not incur temptation and min.
(c) He will not allow himself to be influenced by the rank of
the penitent, but rather remind high and low, rich ami poor, of
their duties and obligations, and thus be all to all.2"1
(d) He will employ special diligence with those who are stained
with many sins, who have long lived in evil habit, and have often
relapsed, that they may be lifted out of the slough of sin, and
led to God and a new life. He will ponder the celebrated words
of St. John Chrysostom: “When you see one whose soul needs
cure, do not say to yourself : why did not this one or that one
cure him ? Cure him of his illness, and ask not why others have
been negligent. If you see gold lying on the ground, do you say
to yourself : why did not this one or that one pick it up ? Do
you not hasten to pick it up before others? Even so, think
of your fallen brothers, that you have found a treasure in
them.”2M
(e) In hearing confessions he will increase his love and show
it by kindness and gentleness; he will manifest no sign of im­
patience or wonder, even when the penitent confesses very
great sins, or shows a hardened unrepentant heart, or is un­
couth and tires the confessor by wrong answers and confused
statements.
(/) And if the penitent is poorly prepared and badly disposed,
the confessor must use every endeavor, especially at the end of
the confession, to render him perfectly disposed by instructing
him, admonishing him, and (as the penitent’s condition may
suggest) by blaming or reproving, by recalling the thought of
“> Cf. Lugo in Benedict. XIV, Const. “ Apostolic·,” 20 June, 1749, n. 20;
8. Alph. Homo A]>. Tr. 21, n. 4.
s»s Oral. 8, ad vers. Juda:os in Migne Ser. græca, 'I'. 48, col. 932.

VIRTUES WHICH THE CONFESSOR MUST POSSESS 4'28
God's justice, yet so as rather to inspire confidence and to open
the door of love and mercy.’”
(</) Nor let the priest be sad, despondent, and dejected if he
perceives no progress, or only a little, and very slow progress in
those on whom he has expended so much trouble. Zeal for
souls will guard him against this dangerous rock.’M
4. The confessor must, moreover, be eminently pure. He
hears so many sins of impurity ; the saddest lapses from virtue
are disclosed to him ; he must put questions in order to draw
out and complete the confession of these sins; some penitents
express themselves very awkwardly, and, alas! by most lament­
able abuse of the holy Sacrament, snares are laid to the chastity
of the confessor. In order to escape these dangers anti that he
may not be defiled while cleansing and healing others, the con­
fessor must have a great love for holy purity, and be confirmed
in this virtue so as to suppress resolutely and at once all rising
temptations and sensual emotions. Let him arm himself with
a pure and holy intention, seeking only the honor of God and the
salvation of souls; let him avoid all familiarity with female
penitents, ever having as witnesses of his words and actions
God and his own and his penitent’s guardian angels; finally,
let him shield himself by frequent prayer, especially to Mary,
the purest of Virgins.
5. Lastly, the confessor must be equipped with inexhaustible
patiente. Intrusive, scrupulous, melancholy, distrustful, rough,
obstinate penitents, will easily rouse to impatience and anger
a confessor who is vehement and excitable. Great patience is,
therefore, necessary that, while correcting the faults of others
and giving peace to souls, he may not fall into faults himself,
become perplexed in heart, and lose his peace of mind. He who
will take away the sins of the world must be as meek as a lamb.
2“ S. Alph. Praxis, n. 77. Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 434; Aertnys, Instruct
prnct. P. I. cp. IV. nn. 18-25.
-■< Cf. S. Bernard. De Considerat. IV ; S. Bunavent. De sex alia, cp. 5.

424

THK MIXISTER OF THE BACHA MEX T

54. The Scientific Equipment of the Confessor

St. Alphonsus teaches1*5 that the confessor who hears confes­
sions without sufficient knowledge is in danger of eternal repro­
bation. And justly does the sainted teacher express himself
so seriously. If the Lord demanded from the priests of the Old
Testament that their lips should keep knowledge, ami that the
law should be sought at their mouths (Malach. ii. 17), ami if He
threatens the priest of the Old Testament by the mouth of the
prophet: (Os. iv. 6) “Because thou hast rejected knowledge,
I will reject thee, that thou shalt not do the office of priesthood
to me,” this applies in a much higher degree to the priest of
the New Law, who, as representative of God, discharges the
office of judge of souls, and holds in his power their eternal
welfare or their eternal ruin. An ignorant priest, one not
equipped with the knowledge necessary for so responsible and
important a Sacrament, exposes himself to the danger of per­
nicious error, the Sacrament to the danger of dishonor, and the
penitent to the danger of damnation. An ignorant confessor
works much ruin.
How great the knowledge of the confessor must be is shown
by the consideration that he discharges the office of teacher,
physician, and judge, to people in the most diverse positions
and circumstances of life and the most unequal conditions of
soul and mind. He is appointed for them all ; they all, without
exception, come to him, and he must instruct them upon the
most important matters; he must know all diseases and wounds,
must examine and cure them ; upon all sins he must pronounce
judgment, a just judgment, and one as much as possible in accord­
ance with the judgment of God ’. Truly, if any one who under­
takes an office ought to be provided with the knowledge
requisite for its fitting discharge, it is the priest, for upon the fitPraxis Confess. n. 18. Cf. Rituale Rom. Tit. III. cp. 1, De Sacram.
Pœnit.

SCIENTIFIC E<IV1PMF.NT OF THE C0NFE880R

425

ting discharge of his office depends, not some temporary good or
evil, but eternal salvation his own and that of his penitent!
St. Teresa was moved to the following utterance in her biog­
raphy (chap. 5) : “ Half-instructed confessors have done my soul
great harm ; for I could not always have such learned ones as
1 would have desired. They certainly did not wish to deceive
me, but the fact was that they knew no better. Of something
which was a venial sin, they said it was no sin, and out of a very
grave mortal sin they made a venial sin. This has done me
such harm, that my speaking here of so great an evil, as a warn­
ing to others, will be readily understood." The following prin­
ciples are to be laid down respecting the scientific outfit of the
confessor : —
I. The confessor is bound sub gravi, to possess all the knowl­
edge which is necessary to discharge his office without com­
mitting serious errors.
(1) Generally speaking, the confessor must, therefore, know
his moral theology thoroughly. He must know particularly
what he has to do in order to administer the Sacrament rightly;
he must know upon what subject he has to instruct the peni­
tents, what he may permit, and what he must forbid; he must
especially understand how to dispose penitents who are not
disposed ; how, and through what motives, acts of faith, of hope,
of love, and contrition (both allrilio and contritio) are to be
awakened ; for he must very often rouse the penitents to such
acts, and even in many cases recite them for his penitents.
(2) Moreover, he must know accurately which of the sins that
usually occur are mortal, and which venial, at least ex genere
suo; “he must understand how to distinguish them secundum
principia communia, though not in causis difficillimis," or, as
Lugo says : “ This knowledge need not be of such a kind that
in all cases he is able to distinguish between mortal or venial sins,
but only in those of frequent occurrence; as for the rest, let
him hear and understand, and then absolve with the necessary

426

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

intention."’" He must know: (3) the species ami circumstantia!,
and how the number is expressed; (4) what is usually necessary
for the validity of documents, for valid contracts, for a valid
marriage, and what circumstances invalidate contracts and
marriages, etc.; (5) when restitution in matters of property and
of honor must take place; the duties of individuals according to
their different stations, occupations, and obligations; (6) what
powers belong to him, what limits there arc to these powers,
the casus reservati, and ecclesiastical censures; (7) how the dis­
position of the penitent may be recognized, what means of
amendment he should and must prescribe, what penance he can
or must impose.”’
II. The confessor, however, is not obliged to possess a scientia
eminens (or exquisita) so as to be able to pronounce the right
decision at once in every question which occurs. What the
theologians call a scientia mediocris suffices; that is, he must
know, but know thoroughly and well, cases of more usual occur­
rence, and in inore difficult things saltem prudenter dubitare;
that is, he must know, in a given case, that a difficulty exists and
what the difficulty is, and that he should obtain information
before he decides. He must also be acquainted with good books
which he may consult, and, finally, he must, when necessary,
seek guidance from well-informed men. What Lacroix writes
(1. c.) upon this point is worthy of attention : “ However well
informed a confessor may seem to be, it is not well to solve
intricate questions at once, especially in cases of obstacles to
marriage, simony, or restitution ; in such cases you must rather
tell the penitent that you do not dare to decide the matter at
once, in view of its difficulty, and request him to wait a little
while. By doing so, the confessor will not lose the esteem of
the penitent ; on the contrary, the latter will understand that he
*· De Pœnit. Diep. 21, n. 70.
™ Cf. Lacroix, Lib. VI. P. 11. n. 1780: S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 627 ; Marc.
1. c. n. 1787; Aertuye, 1. c. n. 266 ; Lehrnkuhl, 1. c. n. 430.

SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT OF TUE CONFESSOR

427

takes the matter conscientiously and seriously, and will place all
the more confidence in the confessor’s decision, whereas scruples
frequently remain when a decision is given quickly ami without
specifying the grounds for it. In this way errors will be avoided.
This exhortation applies especially to confessors who are not
very well instructed, but who absolve and give dispensations in
all possible directions, the more confidently the less their igno­
rance permits them to entertain a doubt." And to this the
learned author adds the following remark: “Moreover, a medi­
ocris, but solida doctrina, is more useful than a summa et exquisita
cognitio when the latter is not united to prudence and discretion.
For those who have no sober judgment treat everything with
such theological subtlety that they often involve themselves
and ot hers in scruples and other difficulties ; it is, therefore,
better to adapt one’s self in such questions to the usage of the
Church and of prudent confessors.”
The confessor must obtain this knowledge and conserve it
(a) by serious study of moral theology. Continuous study is
necessary ; for as moral theology embraces such various matters,
they would in time be forgotten unless recalled to memory by
repeated study.588 The Roman Ritual admonishes confessors to
acquire the greatest possible knowledge and wisdom, by zealous
prayer to God, as well as by the study of approved authors
and the prudent counsel of experienced men.58’ And Benedict
XIV says in his Constitution “Apostolica” (26 June, 1749),
n. 21: "It were, indeed, to be desired that every confessor
should possess that degree of knowledge which is called eminens,
but as this is the gift of a few only, it is absolutely necessary
that each one should be furnished with at least competent knowl­
edge.” St. Alphonsus gives the reason for this when he says:5’0
" We know well that the sacramental confessions will not produce

428

THE MIEISTEH OF THE SAlHAMENT

the fruit which we expect and desire, if they are not heard by
blameless, learned priests, and priests well instructed in the
salutary doctrines of the Church."
(6) The confessor would err if, as confessor, he should wish
to dispense with the study of dogmatic theology. For the con­
fessional is the place in which he who is wavering in faith must
|>e instructed and confirmed; it is precisely in the guidance
of souls that the Christian moral law is shown to be the outcome
of the doctrine of faith; the dogmas of the Church supply the
strongest motives for amendment and a holy life; it is in the
minds that have grasped with full and enthusiastic hold the
Church's doctrines in whom we find that masterly authority
and certainty to which the soul gladly submits; and, without
this, a ministry is exposed to thousands and thousands of errors
in the decision of questions of conscience. “Give me a soul
thoroughly firm in faith, and in that faith the soul finds, as if
spontaneously, its rule of life: Justus ex fide vivit. Λ priest
imbued with his Church’s teaching is as a bright star leading
others on the right road.” ”*
(c) In addition to dogma and moral the confessor needs a
third science — and this we may call the science of the saints,
the doctrine of Christian virtues or perfection. It is not foreign
to moral theology ; it properly belongs to it as a part to the
whole. At the Synod of Westminster, in the year 1873, Bishop
Ullathorne of Birmingham spoke of this science as follows:
“Moral theology has two branches: the first is occupied with
th? right judgment oj sins; the second aims at the practice of
virtue. As a science, the former is much more developed than
the latter; the former enables the priest to become a judge;
it deals with the Commandments of God, the duties of individual
classes; it draws the boundary line between what is sin and
what is not sin, what is of obligation and what is not of obliga**1 Benninger-Gopfert,PaetoralUieolugic, I. Buch, 1. Th § sj, s. 225 f.

S' Ii: \ TIFIC EQIIFMENT OF THE CONFKHBOR

129

tion. This is moral theology; if its rules are applied to indi­
vidual cases, we have casuistry. The second science is called
the science of the saints, asceticism, and it makes the priest a
guide of souls on the road to perfection. While the first is more
cultivated in the schools, the latter is left more to the individual’s
zeal and devotion. Yet the science of perfection is necessary;
for that which is known in scientific form makes a deeper im­
pression. There is great danger in cultivating the former with­
out the latter. If, in the discharge of his office as judge, a man
does not cast his eyes upward, he judges of sin and duty accord­
ing to the standards of lawfulness and not according to the
light of perfection which must guide us."
III. An extensive knowledge is not necessary to all confessors;
the necessary knowledge must rather be relative; that is, adapted
to the condition of the penitents who come to confess. He,
therefore, who hears confessions at a .place to which penitents
of various stations, professions, and circumstances, with various
degrees of education resort, must possess much greater, more
comprehensive, knowledge, than another priest who only hears
the confessions of illiterate, simple people. Although a priest
who is conscious of his ignorance, or of his defective knowledge
of moral theology, and yet hears confessions, is, as St. Alphonsus
says, in statu damnationis, there may be cases in which an igno­
rant confessor can and must hear confessions, namely, in cases
of extreme necessity, and when no other priest is present, thus : —
(a) In the hour of death, when a better-informed confessor is
wanting; (b) in any similar case of necessity, for instance,
when Christians are the captives of infidels and can only obtain
an ignorant, unlearned confessor — this situation being rightly
regarded as “ necessitas moraliter extrema.”
“ On these grounds
Superiors may frequently be excused who appoint priests not
well instructed to little parishes in the country; this they
293 Cf. Lugo, ). c. Disp. 21, n. 70.

480

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

generally do because they have none better instructed to send
to these parishes. As provision cannot be otherwise made for
such places, it is better that they should have a confessor who
is not well instructed than none at all. The bishop, however,
must remind such a priest of his lack of knowledge, and admonish
him to acquire, as his duty strictly requires him to do, better
knowledge, in order that he may well discharge his oilice as con­
fessor. 77tis duly is always incumbent on the parish priest, even
when, in view of the necessitous state of a flock, a bishop may
be forced to intrust a parish to a priest who is not sufficiently
instructed. The same applies to other priests in charge of
souls.”
Nevertheless, it must be the most serious concern of
every bishop to procure well-trained and educated priests.
IV. If a priest is in doubt as to whether he possesses the requi­
site knowledge for discharging the office of confessor, he can
rest content with the judgment of his Superior, if the latter
is sufficiently informed of his education and capacity by means
of the examination for approbation, or some other theological
test, or in consequence of long intercourse with him, or has
been informed concerning it by some other prudent man. Of
itself, the approbation which he has received cannot satisfy a priest,
nor excuse the confessor who is conscious of his defective knowledge;
for the approbation presupposes the necessary knowledge but
does not impart it. St. Alphonsus teaches — in agreement with
all authors: “A confessor who is not conscious of being quite
incapable of hearing confessions, is justified in contenting him­
self with the judgment of his Superior, and, indeed, must be
so ; to rely upon the approbation of the bishop, and then believe
that one is freed from study, is presumption.” 2I“ Moreover, the
Church has never tired of admonishing confessors in the strongest
terms, of their strict duty to acquire and maintain the knowl­
edge requisite for the administration of the Sacrament of Pen·» Lugo, 1. c.

281 Praxis Conf. n. 18.

SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT OF THE CONFESSOR

481

ance; for an ignorant confessor causes terrible min and burdens
himself with a dreadful responsibility.
V. The knowledge of the confessor must be practical in order
to further the salvation of souls and solve the casus conscientia
which occur. On this point St. Alphonsus expresses himself
in the following manner: “ Many who pride themselves on being
instructed and distinguished theologians disdain to read the
moralists; they call them casuists, an opprobrious name in their
estimation. They say that, in order to hear confessions prop­
erly, it is sufficient to know the general moral principles by which
all individual cases can be solved. Who denies that all cases
must be solved by principles? The difficulty lies in applying
the principles to individual cases complicated with so many cir­
cumstances. This cannot be done without carefully weighing
the grounds on both sides. Here the moralists step in to solve
the difficulty; they seek to explain by what principles the many
particular cases must be solved. Moreover, there are in our days
so many positive laws, Bulls, and decrees, with which we can only
become acquainted through the study of the casuists who have
collected and classified them, as the different subjects require.
The more recent the moralists are, therefore, the more useful
are they in comparison with the earlier ones (in this respect, of
course). The author of the work Instructio pro novis Confesso­
riis (p. 1, n. IS) rightly says that with regard to many theologians
the more deeply versed they are in the speculative science, the
more ignorant they are of moral, which, as Gerson writes, is the
most difficult of all; and however familiar any one may be with
it, he will always be obliged to add to his information. The
learned Sperelli”5 likewise says, that those confessors who wholly
give themselves up to the study of scholastic theology, in the
belief that time devoted to the study of moral is wasted, are in
great error, for they can no longer distinguish sin from sin; and

432

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

this, he says, is an error which involves confessors and penitents
in eternal ruin.””'
With these words, the sainted teacher demonstrates the ne­
cessity of the study of theological casuistry. At the same time
he shows also (and that a fortiori) the necessity of practical
instruction concerning the administration of the .Sacrament of
Penance, as in this the confessor learns the method of hearing
confessions rightly and with fruit.
VI. Nothing can supply the defect of learning in the confessor.
1. It is true that tact and a natural sagacity greatly assist the
confessor, but without solid knowledge this natural capacity
profits him nothing, but rather often exposes him to the danger
of lightly deciding a matter against all principles of sound doc­
trine. But he who does not possess this innate sagacity must
the more study how casuists decide cases, in order to sharpen
his judgment and learn the application of principles.
2. Nor can experience or long years of practice in the confes­
sional supply the place of learning. By experience alone one
cannot learn what is allowed and what is not allowed, still less
how consciences are to be guided ; “ for experience which is not
based upon knowledge is nothing else than a long custom of
erring,””8 and worse than the condition of a still inexperienced
but well-instructed confessor is that of a gray-haired, unlearned
one, who, trusting in his experience, errs in his own judgment.
Solid knowledge and experience must, therefore, be united in
an able confessor. A long practice without erudition in the con­
fessional is rather a danger than a help.
As an excuse for not studying moral theology, many confessors
contend that: Practice anti theory are different things. If by
this is meant that it is far more difficult to put in practice the
Praxis Conf. n. 17.
m lehmkuhl. 1. c. n. 438.
®s Hobei't, Praxis Sacra. Pœnit. Tract. 1, cp. 4. Cf. Aertnys, Instr,
pract. P. 1, cp. 1, n. 7.

SCIENTIFIC EQUIPMENT OF THE CONFESSOR

133

rules for the administration of the Sacrament of Penance than
to learn them, this contention is right and just, and the deduc­
tion is that even a very well-informed confessor must not trust
to his own insight, but must unceasingly implore light from on
high. But if the above argument is to be understood (as igno­
rant confessors use it) to mean that something which is true in
theory is in practice not always true, and that it is impossible
always to observe the rules taught by theology, this would be
a very pernicious error. If this were true, souls would be no
longer led by the doctrine approved in the Church, but by the
intelligence or the arbitrary will of the individual confessors.
Practice is nothing else than the application of certain rules.
How could a confessor understand the practical art of hearing
confessions without possessing the theoretical science which
consists in a knowledge of the rules? Right practice in the
administration of the Sacrament of Penance is nothing else
than right application of rules.2ββ
St. Alphonsus puts the question : Must a simple priest qualify
himself for hearing confessions by the study of moral theology,
if he sees that (in his diocese) there is a great want of confessors?
And he answers in the affirmative, " as Christ appointed priests
expressly for the purpose of saving souls, and the salvation of
souls is chiefly effected by the holy Sacrament of Penance. Ac­
cordingly, how can a priest be pronounced free from sin who,
out of negligence, does not hear confessions, or does not qualify
himself to do so when he sees great need for it — how will such
a one avoid the reproaches of the Lord, or escape the punish­
ments with which He threatens the idle servant? Such priests
must not say that they did their duty if they helped souls in
another way, by instruction, by prayer, by exhortation; that,
I say, is not enough, because they must help their neighbor in
that which is necessary to his salvation. Nor must it be said
Cf. Aertnys, Instit. pract. 1. c. n. 8>

434

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

that hearing confessions is a duty of charity, and (hat charity
does not bind under such great difficulty as is involved in under­
taking the labor which the acquirement of the knowledge neces­
sary for the administration of the Sacrament of Penance entails.
For it may be answered that even if hearing confessions is a
duty of charity, it is of the essence of the sacerdotal office, and
incumbent on every priest when necessity requires it.” 300
55. The Prudence of the Confessor.

In addition to knowledge the confessor must possess great
prudence, as his office is beset with difficulties and dangers.
The necessity for prudence in the confessor is shown in the
very meaning of the word; for prudence is nothing else than
the good use and the right application of principles and rules
in any business, or, according to the Angelic Doctor, the right
application of general principles to the individual case.301 It is,
therefore, called the right way of acting. It is not, of course,
the prudence of the world and the flesh which we have here in
view, that prudence which, before God, is folly (1 Cor. iii. 19),
which sacrifices higher things for earthly profit; nor is it human
respect, which in weakness and fear, abandons principles for
a momentary success {prudentia diabolica, Jac. iii. 15), but the
supernatural virtue of prudence,which springs like a flower
from sanctifying grace and the love of God; which, in Confirma­
tion, the Holy Ghost bestows for individual use, and which is
renewed for the public good in the ordination of the priest :
this is that prudence which our divine Saviour recommended
to His disciples, when He said to them: “Estote prudentes sicut
serpentes." 303 Now the office of the confessor is of a thoroughly
practical nature, difficult, and of the highest importance, as, in
Homo Apost. Tr. 16, cp. 6, n. 127.
*> Π. II. Q. 14, art. 3.
·» S. Thom. II. II· Q· 47. art. 4.
·» Stang, Paxtoral Theol. 1. 0. TV. 28.

THE PHUDEXCE OF THE CONFESSOR

435

the exercise of it, he may benefit or injure both himself and others,
according as his conduct is prudent or imprudent. Prudence,
therefore, not less than knowledge, is necessary to the confessor.
Prudence is the queen of the virtues, which counsels well, judges
rightly, and effectually conducts to the goal proposed.1*4
The confessor must be prudent both towards the penitent and
towards himself, that he may injure neither the penitent nor him­
self, nor administer his office to the detriment of religion and the
scandal of others.
According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus,3” the confessor
must conduct himself prudently towards the penitent, espe­
cially in the following points : —
(1) In the questions which he puts to the penitent, so as only
to ask what is suited to the station, age, and condition of the
penitent, and so as not to teach him sins which he did not know ;
as already remarked, very special care Is necessary in questions
concerning the sixth commandment; (2) in the instructions
which he gives the penitent; instructing him or preserving a
discreet silence and leaving him in his good faith, as the welfare
of the penitent may demand (Praxis, n. 8, 9) ; (3) in prescribing
the means of amendment, so that these latter may be adapted to
the state of the penitent's soul and to his circumstances (Praxis,
n. 15) ; (4) in imposing sacramental penance, so that, as above
stated, it may correspond with the penitent's sins and his station
(Praxis, n. 11, 12) ; (5) in giving, deferring, or refusing absolution
(Praxis, n. 10, 63-77) ; (6) in the choice of opinions, in case of
the existence of probable opinions for and against a point,
whether he must choose the severer or the milder decision for
the penitent in question 300 (Praxis, n. 114); (7) in preserving
the seal of the confessional, so as to avoid every danger of break­
ing it either directly or indirectly (Praxis, n. 117); (8) in the
304 Cf. Aertnys, Instit. pract. P. 1. cp. II. n. 0.
805 Praxis Confessai*. Cf. Marc, Instit. Moral. I. o', n. 1788.
»« S. Alph. Lib. VI. u. (105; Marc, Inst. Mor. 1. c. n. 178».

436

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

treatment of very difficult and complicated questions, carefully
weighing all the circumstances, and, when necessary, a-king the
penitent for time, in order to seek advice from books or learned
men (Praxis, n. 194).
The confessor must be prudent with regard to himself, that:
(1) He may not prepare for himself temptation against holy
purity in questioning and investigating the circumstances of
sins, that he may not injure his good name, may not bring the
office of the confessor into disrepute, may not render the insti­
tution of the confessional odious; (2) in vitando aspectu fœminarum, juniorum pracipue et, nisi crates interjecta sit, manus
certe cum sudario intercedat (Praxis, n. 119) ; and (3), by being
especially careful with regard to women, being particular to avoid
all superfluous talk, all familiarity, accepting no presents from
them, not visiting them without necessity at their homes, treating
younger ones with severity rather than leniency. These measures
of precaution the confessor must adopt in the case of pious
persons especially, quibuscum est periculum majoris adhœsionis
(Praxis, n. 119-120).’°’ But how shall he obtain this prudence
from which so many of the good effects of the Sacrament depend ?
By study, by circumspection, by experience, by docility, and
purity of intention, the confessor can acquire for himself the
necessary prudence, assisted, of course, by divine grace. 1. By
study, for prudence derives its decisions and its opportune reme­
dies from science. 2. By circumspection, by considering the
different circumstances of the person and the case. This cir­
cumspection will enable the confessor to reveal the deceptive
motives of passion and vice, to suggest means for the removal
of obstacles in the way of amendment, to foresee and provide
against the detriment which may ensue. The gift of right judg­
ment is conferred upon us by God; maturity of judgment is
acquired with age ; but those who have not been richly endowed
·” Marc, Inst. mor. 1. c. n. 1791.

THE PHUDENCB OF THE COlfFBMOR

48T

by naturo can sharpen their judgment by the study of moral
and pastoral theology and by taking counsel of wiser rnen.
3. By experience, which teaches the confessor what commonly
occurs in practice, shows him how he must question, when ho
must instruct the penitent or leave him in bona fide, how he finds
his way to the heart of the penitent, when he must show special
indulgence, how to judge rightly of the penitent’s disposition
anil to find the proper remedies. Practical experience is thus
an excellent school. 4. By docility, which is especially neces­
sary for young confessors ; it teaches them to mistrust them­
selves and to apply often to learned and experienced confessors
for advice, thus profiting by the experience of others. Hence
Benedict XIV advises confessors to beware of answering divi­
nando when a more difficult or a new case is brought before them.
On the contrary, they should not decide the matter till after
mature consideration ; moreover, they should consult the theo­
logians whose teaching is solid and sound.308 5. Purity of in­
tention, that is the sole desire to please God, and to lead men to
salvation. “It is certain that the Christian prudence of a con­
fessor will be the greater, the greater is his love, and that, in
general, the mind is stimulated by the intention or the desire
to attain the end. The more a man is inflamed with the desire
of a certain good, the more zealous is he in his search for the
means of obtaining it, the more careful will he be in choosing
the more suitable means, the more cautious will he be to omit
anything that may be useful for his purpose, the more deter­
mined will he be in overcoming all difficulties, so as to gain that
on which he has set his mind. A confessor who, with pure in­
tention, seeks only God and the salvation of souls, will labor
with fruit.”300
·>· Conetit. ■· Apostolica," 26 June, 1749, n. 21.
Aertnys, Instruct pract. 1. c. u. 10.

438

THE MIN1STER OF THE SACRAMENT
Article II
DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR DURING CONFESSION

56. The Duty of instructing and exhorting the Penitent —
Munus Doctoris.

The confessor will find many penitents either ignorant or
under the influence of error. This ignorance may refer to some
point connected with the reception of the Sacrament of Pen­
ance, the genera) duties of a Christian life, or some particu­
lar duty. The duty of the confessor to instruct the ignorant
penitent varies with the subject on which the ignorance exists.
Hence: I. The confessor is always obliged at once to instruct
the penitent who is ignorant of something which he must hic et
nunc know in order to receive validly the Sacrament of Penance,
or to receive licite the Holy Eucharist. 1. The confessor must
therefore instruct penitents who are ignorant of the truths which
they, necessitate medii sive certo sive probabiliter, ought to know
and believe, and this instruction must be given before the
administration of absolution.310
Moreover, the confessor must, before giving absolution, in­
struct the penitent if he does not know how to make an act
of contrition and purpose of amendment. These instructions
must also, of course, be imparted when the penitent is not re­
sponsible for his ignorance; therefore, in every case, because
the penitent is incapable of receiving the Sacrament in such a
•w Necessitate medii the Christian must believe those truths without the
knowledge and express belief of which, justification and, in consequence,
the attainment of everlasting salvation, is never possible for any one having
the use of reason. Certainly necessary is the explicit belief : (1) in one
God ; (2) the Rewarder of good and the Avenger of evil. Although it is
quite probable that fides explicita is necessary in these truths only, it is,
nevertheless, not certain that fides explicita is not also necessary (3) in the
mystery of the Blessed Trinity aud (4) in the mystery of the Incarnation
and the Redemption.

THE CONFESSOR AS TEACHER

489

state of ignorance."" The confessor might send away a penitent
ignorant of these truths, imposing upon him the duty of first
obtaining instruction from some competent person or the parish
priest; but if there is no good reason to hope that he would
fulfill this duty, the instruction must be given concisely in the
confessional, and this should nowadays be done in most cases
of the kind. 2. If the penitent is ignorant concerning the Holy
Sacrament of the Altar, the confessor must certainly instruct
him upon this point before allowing him to receive holy com­
munion.
It is, however, not necessary to the valid reception of abso­
lution that the penitent should retain all these truths in his
memory; it is sufficient that he substantially understands them
and makes an act of faith which the confessor recites to him.
The confessor must impose upon such penitents the duty of
subsequently obtaining fuller instruction.312 It is also the duty
of the confessor to ascertain whether they know these truths.
Whenever he thinks it probable that a penitent does not know
them, he must ask. He need not, as a rule, ask those who were
brought up as children in a pious and Christian fashion. But
others, who received Christian instruction in their youth, and
have subsequently neglected sermons and instructions, must
certainly be questioned, anil this especially applies to our times,
when so many Christians, particularly men (but also not a few
women), absent themselves for a long time from sermons and
neglect every other kind of Christian instruction; such people,
even when well educated and instructed in worldly matters, are
ignorant, admodum rudes, in religion, having forgotten nearly
all they had formerly learnt. In the cares, labors, and pleas­
ures of life, and frequently under the influence of pernicious
and irreligious literature, they have perhaps become strongly
«» Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 008-610; Prop, damnat. 64 ab Tnnoc. XI.
813 Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 22; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. II. Tr. 1,
n. 4; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. u. 442.

440

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

infected with irréligion or heresy. If the penitents are such
that one could not. ask if they are ignorant of these truths with­
out causing them confusion, the confessor might of his own
accord explain what is most essential, and, in some way, move
the penitents to an act of faith.31’
II. If the penitent is ignorant of the truths of Christian doc­
trine and the precepts of Christian life, especially of those truths
which the Christian must know and believe necessitate praxepti,
the confessor must first of all inquire if the penitent is respon­
sible for this ignorance or not. If he is, he can be absolved,
but he must be sorry for, and confess, his neglect, and make a
firm resolution to learn these truths; and if he does not keep
his promise, absolution must, as a rule, be refused to him til)
he has performed his duty. If he is ignorant by no fault of his
own, he can be absolved, but he must promise to obtain instruc­
tion.31· If the confessor is, at the same time, the pastor of such
penitents, he is bound, ex officio, or in justice, to provide them
with opportunities for acquiring better instruction ; if he is not
their parish priest, he is not strictly bound in duty to do so,
though he may be bound ex charitate, but he is always bound to
inform the penitent as to his duty of becoming better inst ructed,
and as to the sin of negligence of which he is guilty if the igno­
rance is culpable, and which he must confess.
III. If the penitent is ignorant of particular duties, the con­
fessor must primarily consider the spiritual welfare of the peni­
tent in deciding whether he shall instruct him or not ; but this
spiritual welfare must be taken in its full sense as comprising,
therefore, the individual welfare of the penitent himself, and also
the general welfare for which he has to provide. This instruc­
tion must, however, be given with prudence, for fear of causing
more harm than good to the penitent. The following obliga«“Cf. S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. II. n. 3, Praxis Conf. n. 22; Salm.
Tract. 21, cp. 2, nn. 62, 63; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 4.
·“ Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 22.

THE CONFESSOR AS TEACHER

441

tions oi the penitent are here chiefly in question: the duties of
his station in life, the duty of making restitution (honor, good
name, property), of avoiding dangerous occasions, of recon­
ciliation, of removing scandal, and of practicing almsgiving."1
When he considers it necessary and appropriate, the confessor
must, with special prudence, instruct persons engaged to be
married concerning their conduct in that state. It may also
be opportune to inform a penitent that he is not bound to fast
or to abstain, so that he may not, from ignorance, believe that
he commits sin where there is no sin at all. This duty of in­
structing the penitent must now be somewhat more clearly
considered and particularized.
The confessor must instruct or exhort: —
1. When the ignorance of the penitent is not invincible, or
when he is responsible for it (vincibilis seu culpabilis) ; when
the penitent is in such a state of doubt concerning some duty
that there can no longer be a question of bona fides. When a
person is in such ignorance, he is already in a state of sin, or in
immediate danger of formal sin, because he acts under reason­
able doubt or culpable ignorance. The exhortation, therefore,
so far from doing harm, can only result in good, as it will after­
wards produce the desired fruit. When, therefore, the penitent,
not out of mere scrupulosity, but in consequence of a serious
doubt, questions the confessor about some duty, the latter
must instruct him. In this case where the penitent has a sub­
stantial doubt and he is bound to remove it, the confessor's
duty is to tell him the truth; moreover, it is plain that the
penitent is disposed to act in accordance with the confessor s
answer. If, however, the confessor thinks, in an exceptional
case, that the penitent should not know the whole truth, he need
say nothing more in reply to the penitent than what is neces­
sary.”’ If, for instance, a person bound by a vow of chastity
·>· Cf. 8. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 608, 609.
»>» 8. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 616.

442

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

asks if the marriage which he has contracted without a dispen­
sation is invalid on account of the vow, let him answer in the
negative, but be silent about the debitum conjugate; if he asks
whether he may render the debitum, let the confessor answer
in the affirmative, and be silent about demanding the debitum.
2. When the penitent is ignorant of tilings which cannot long
escape his knowledge, and when his ignorance, still invincibilis
et inculpabilis, will soon cease to be so and become culpabilis,
especially where a vice is growing with the lapse of time and its
extirpation becomes more difficult — in such case the confessor
must, as a rule, instruct and exhort the penitent at once; for
instance, when young people who have not yet attained to pu­
berty, begin to contract a habitus pollutionis, they must be seri­
ously warned to desist from their dangerous and sinful practice,
even when they are perhaps in bona fide. But in this the con­
fessor must weigh well the circumstances, considering whether,
perhaps, for the time being, a very heavy burden is not being
imposed upon the penitent, which he will scarcely be able to
bear, but which will very soon cease. In this case silence would
be preferable.
3. If the ignorance is invincibilis, but a good result may be
hoped from the exhortation, in this case the confessor must,
exhort even when in consequence a difficulty arises for the peni­
tent, or when it is foreseen that the exhortation will certainly
not do harm. For a material violation of a law must also be
avoided, when this can be done without danger of a greater
evil. The confessor must not fail, therefore, to admonish, al­
though he foresees that the penitent will not immediately obey,
if he has hopes that he will soon do so. For it may happen that
a penitent, when he has learnt the truth, does not at first obey,
but when he has become calmer, after serious reflection, amends
his life.’*’ If the confessor sees that the penitent does not re·>’ Cf. 8. Alph. H. Ap. Tr. 16, n. 115.

THE CONFBSHOU A» TEACHER

443

ceive the exhortation well at the time, hut that he will receive
it better at some more seasonable moment, he must defer it to
a later occasion. If there is no likelihood of good resulting
from the exhortation, the confessor, according to the general
and approved teaching of theologians, is bound, per se loquendo
(that is, unless there is some other motive, such as regard for
the bonum publicum), to omit the exhortation, and to leave the
penitent in his bona fide.
When, therefore, the confessor learns in the course of the con­
fession that the penitent has contracted an invalid marriage
through some secret impediment, and danger of disgrace, scandal,
or incontinence is to be feared from disclosing to him the nullity
of the marriage, he must be silent on the subject of the invalid­
ity, and leave the penitent in bona fide until he has obtained a
dispensation. And in the case where he could not disclose the
nullity of the marriage at all without being obliged to face these
difficulties, he should ask for a sanatio in radice, and conceal
everything from the penitent. In such a case the confessor
can even bind in duty the putative husband (or wife) who re­
fuses the debitum conjugale, to render it; for if the husband (or
wife) is convinced that he (or she) is living in lawful matrimony,
he (or she) is bound in conscience to render the debitum. But
the confessor will act more safely by telling the penitent quite
in a general way that married people arc bound to render the
debitum, and that they cannot be absolved if they do not per­
form their duty.’1’
The confessor must not admonish the penitent to make res­
titution when he foresees that the penitent (who believes, bona
fide, that he is not bound to make restitution) will not obey;
for such admonition would injure the penitent, and not benefit
the person to whom he is bound to make the restitution; in­
deed, the confessor must be more concerned to avert spiritual

»>’ Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 611 ; H. Ap. n. 118.

444

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

injury from the penitent than temporal injury from another.
Nevertheless, the confessor must not lightly presume that his
admonition will not be obeyed.’1"
Instruction or admonition must also be omitted if there is
reasonable fear that scandal, disgrace, quarrels, and other seri­
ous inconvenience will arise; for it is better to provide against
formal sins in others than material sins in the penitent. For
instance, if a marriage is invalid, and the parties are not aware
of the fact, the confessor could inform the wife of it without
danger, whereas serious difficulties might be caused by disclos­
ing it to the husband.
If a marriage is to be contracted, and, through the confession
of the penitent, the confessor discovers an impedimentum diri­
mens, but of which the penitent is invincibiliter ignorant, the
confessor is, as a rule, bound to instruct the penitent concern­
ing it, and to admonish him either to refrain from contracting
the marriage, or to obtain a dispensation before contracting it.
Great inconveniences frequently arise from an invalid mar­
riage, for the invalidity is often disclosed later on, and in such
a case the penitent is exposed to no small danger of committing
actual sin. If, however, no good result can be expected from
revealing the defect, the confessor would be obliged to abstain
from admonishing till he himself has obtained a dispensation,
for it is better to permit a material sin than to furnish occasion
for formal sin.820 If, on the day before the marriage, or on the
day itself, when everything is prepared, and the wedding could
not be stopped without scandal and disgrace, the bride or bride­
groom reveals to the confessor a secret impediment, a dispensa­
tion must be obtained from the bishop, if there is time to do so,
and the bishop can, according to the communissima el probabilis­
sima sententia, dispense in such a case, as from other laws, when
recourse to the Pope is impossible, and there is danger in delay.
»»» Cf. S Alph. Lib. VI. n. 014.
S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 012 ; H. Ap. n. 113.

THE ('OXFEHROR AS TEACHER

445

Indeed, according to the probable opinion of many theologians,
the bishop can also delegate this power universally as a patenta»
ordinaria, to others, for all cases that occur. But if the confessor
cannot apply to the bishop, the parish priest or the confessor
may, as some teach (and St. Alphonsus adds: “not without
ground”), declare ex Epikeia, that the law of the impediment
in question does not bind in the particular case, because it is
detrimental ; but, in order to be safe, and to preserve the rev­
erence due to the commandment of the Church, application to
the Sacred Penitentiary, or to the Ordinary, must be made as
soon as possible to obtain a dispensation.3”
In cases of doubt as to whether the admonition will do good
or harm, it should be omitted, because it is better to guard against
formal sins than material. But if it is more probable that the
admonition will benefit, it must be given, and Viva and Roncaglia rightly remark that we must not easily conclude that the
penitent would not obey after having learnt the truth.3”
The objection might be raised that the penitent who should
refuse to obey the exhortation of his confessor would not be in
good disposition, and, therefore, could not receive absolution.
St. Alphonsus disposes of this objection by pointing out that the
confessor must consider the disposition in which the penitent
actually is while he is still ignorant of his obligation, and not
the state of mind in which it is presumed that he would be after
he had been admonished about it. As it is not allowable to
expose one’s neighbor to a danger to which it is anticipated
that he will succumb, so the confessor must not expose a peni­
tent, to the danger of refusing to fulfill a duty by instructing
him about it ; he must rather leave the penitent in material sin,
because a peccatum formale outweighs all peccata materialia.”3
831 Cf.'Benedict XIV, De Syn. Lib. 9, cp. 2, nn. 2, 3; S. Alph. Lib. VI.
n. 613; II. Ap. n. Ill, Prax. Conf. n. 8; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI.
n. 273; Marc, 1. c. n. 1810.
833 S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 616 (fin.). Cf. n. 614.
838 S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 610.

44fi

THE MINISTER Of THE SACHA M EXT

4. The confessor must speak when the ignorance of the peni­
tent concerns the prima principia moralia or the pro.ri.mas con­
clusiones deduced from them; for such ignorance is either not
actually existent, or will not be for long invincibilis, and is gen­
erally hurtful to the penitent. Especially urgent is the duty of
admonishing the penitent when omitting to do so would con­
firm him in a sinful habit which he would probably find great
difficulty in overcoming later.
5. Moreover, admonition must be given when the ignorance
touches the duty of giving up a gravely sinful immediate occa­
sion, as such ignorance tends to the ruin of the penitent, by
rendering easier the fall into formal sin.
6. The penitent must, be admonished even when he is not
disposed, if the confessor’s silence wore to bring harm to the
community, by scandal, for instance, to the faithful. For if
the confessor is bound to be chiefly concerned about the salva­
tion of the penitent, he is also bound, as a member of Christian
society and its servant, to prefer the. bonum commune to the
bonum privatum of the penitent.334 The fact that the admoni­
tion is hic et nunc fruitless or that the penitent takes offense at
it is not. a valid objection, for such a penitent will amend the
more easily when he secs that no other priest will absolve him,
and in the meantime the scandal will cease, for the faithful will
sec that the penitent in question is not admitted to the Sacra­
ments. Hence princes, officials, bishops, prelates, parish priests,
employers, who neglect their duties towards their subordinates,
must be instructed and exhorted. For we may not lightly
presume that their ignorance is invincibilis, since everybody
ought to know the duties of his office, and ignorance of them,
even when invincibilis, always tends to the injury of the com­
munity, as others may easily think they are justified in imitat­
ing what they see their superiors doing. Therefore, as Benedict
S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 015. Cf. Praxis Conf. n. 9.

THE CONFESSOR AS TEACHER

447

XTV teaches,1” those are to be instructed concerning their duties
who frequently receive the holy Sacraments, in order that others
may not be led to believe that wrongdoing is allowable, because
they see it dime by these and done with impunity. And Lugo
adds that when the confessor has reasonable doubts as to whether
such penitents perform their duties, he is bound to ask them if
they are faithful to them.32*
7. The confessor must admonish when, on account of special
circumstances, his silence would be equivalent to a positively
false answer.
8. A penitent must always be admonished when, in conse­
quence of a false conscience, he believes something to be a sin
which is none, or believes it to be a greater sin than is really
the case. Moreover, instruction ought not to be withheld even
though it afford an occasion to the penitent of sinning more
frequently, as might happen when he learns that a sin which
he believed conscientia erronea to be mortal is only venial. Nev­
ertheless, the confessor must consider whether something which
per se is a venial sin, may not, in view of the circumstances of
scandal, danger, etc., become a grave sin.
In conclusion we will add a remark of St. Alphonsus, namely,
that confessors act imprudently by instructing uneducated peni­
tents concerning the special and greater sinfulness imparted by
circumstances to wicked acts; for instance, that adultery is a
greater sin than impurity among unmarried persons, that incest
is committed when relatives are guilty of impurity with each
other. But this instruction must be given when there is rea­
son for believing that the knowledge of the greater sinfulness
will effectually prevent the sin.3”
Sometimes the confessor is asked by his penitents for instruc­
tion and advice in matters affecting the welfare of the soul.
·* Conetit. “ Apostolica,” 26 June, 1749, n. 20.
*“ S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 615, Praxia Conf. n. 9.
™ Ci. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 39.

448

THE MINISTEH OF ΠΙΕ SACHA MENT

Although the confessor must be careful not to advise and help
in all possible worldly matters, he must not refuse to be the ad­
viser and helper of his penitent in matters pertaining to the sal­
vation of souls. This is a part of his duty. And to whom should
a penitent turn in such circumstances if not to the confessor
who knows the state of his soul and his entire life? But if
the confessor has to give advice and instruction, let him judge
the matter in the light of faith, and in accordance with the prin­
ciples of Christian morality, not according to a certain empiri­
cal wisdom and worldly prudence, and not according Io his
subjective opinion. In important matters let him, therefore,
deliberate thoroughly, ask help of God through the Mother of
Good Counsel, and, when necessary, seek advice at the hands
of experienced and prudent itien. Then let him pronounce his
decision clearly and definitely.
57. The Duty of suggesting Remedies against Relapse (the
Confessor as Physician).

Sins are justly described as wounds of the soul, the cure of
which is to be sought in the Sacrament of Penance. It is cer­
tainly the first and highest function of the minister of the Sac­
rament to reconcile the sinner to God by canceling his sins;
but there remains another task of great significance, viz. to
keep the penitent — the sinner now reconciled to God — faith­
ful to his duty and to his promises, and to preserve him from
new sins. For the confessor is also the spiritual physician of
the penitent. And as it is the duty of the bodily physician to
study the malady and its causes, and then to prescribe reme­
dies, so the physician of the soul must first know the sins of the
penitent, their causes and gravity, and then provide the reme­
dies, by the conscientious application of which relapse into sin
may be prevented. In order to discharge his duty as physician
of the soul, the confessor must, therefore, first ascertain if the

duty or suggestino hemedies against relapse

449

penitent has a habit of sinning, if he lives in immediate occasion
of sin, he must question him as to the time and the place of
the sin, the persons with whom he has sinned, and under what
circumstances he has usually been led into sin. “ Herein many
confessors fail,” says St. Alphonsus, “and the ruin of many souls
results from it; for by omitting such questions, the confessor
is unable to find out if the penitent is a relapsing sinner, and,
therefore, cannot prescribe suitable means for eradicating the
sinful habit and avoiding the occasion.” 338
Those confessors are gravely wanting in their duty who con­
tent themselves with remitting the sins confessed, but do not
trouble about the preservation of the converted sinner, the new
life and the cure of the penitent’s sickness; hence it happens
(hat persons who are enslaved by a sinful habit very soon fall
from the new life of grace, and, in the words of Our .Saviour,
the state of the relapsing sinner is worse than his former state,
and the confessor thus shares in his guilt.329
The confessor’s work as a judge of the sins and disposition
of the penitent places him in a position of peculiar advantage
for discharging his duty as physician. But in order to effect
a thorough cure of these wounds of the soul, he must, as we have
seen above, be acquainted with the whole moral state of the
penitent; hence he must not confine himself to know if the sin
was mortal or venial, a sin of some special occasion, an habit­
ual sin, or one of relapse; he must also ascertain if his penitent,
in matters of religion, is instructed or ignorant, if he is on the
way of improvement, if his good will has become strengthened
by the grace of God anti by resistance to evil, or is still weak
and vacillating.
The confessor must make it his special business to learn the
penitent’s predominant passion, and the prevailing vices con­
nected with it. The predominant passion is an habitual ten«’ Praxis Conf. tin. 6, 180.
Cf. Trid. Ses». XIV. cp. 8.

450

ΤΠΕ MINISTRE OF TUE SACRAMENT

dcncy, more or less violent, to some sin, which exercises a
certain mastery over the soul, and has other evil inclinations
in its service. Such predominant passions are: the lust of the
eyes, the lust of the flesh, and pride; also the seven capital sins.
They have their root partly in original sin, partly in perverse
education, partly in repeated sinning, partly in exterior influ­
ences. Now it will not avail much to combat the individual
sins; their root — the sinful passion — must be torn out. It
is like a poisonous growth which is always striking deeper roots
into the human soul, and ever putting forth fresh shoots in the
individual sins. This baneful root must be removed, and with
it its noxious growth of sin will also be removed.
To this end the predominant passion must first be diagnosed,
and this is generally a very difficult matter. There are pas­
sions, such as avarice, covetousness, pride, intemperance, sloth,
which are seldom recognized as sins by the penitent, and even
take the appearance of virtue. In acquiring this knowledge,
which is as necessary as it is difficult, the confessor must help
his penitent by suggesting careful, serious examination of con­
science, especially the use of the particular examination of con­
science ; the observation of the causes, the motives, and the occasions
of sin. Finally, he should point out the necessity of illuminat­
ing grace, which the penitent obtains by earnest prayer. The
confessor himself must try to discover this predominant pas­
sion by suitable questions, by examining the sins which have
been confessed, and the moral condition of the penitent. The
difficulty of his task must not deter him, for its successfid accom­
plishment will greatly effect the amendment and cure of the
penitent. Earnest prayer for light, the intention only of advanc­
ing the glory of God and the salvation of the penitent, joined
to true zeal for souls, will assuredly lead the man of prayer and
of interior life to the desired knowledge. Having learnt the
state of the penitent’s disease, let the confessor proceed to the
cure of it; this will primarily be effected by the abundant graces

DUTY OF 8UOQF.3TITIG REMEDIES AGAINST RELAPSE 451

obtained in the worthy reception of the Sacrament of Penance.
It must be the confessor's next care to dispose the penitent
well, or to perfect his dispositions, by endeavoring to move him
to greater sorrow for his sins, and to a firmer purpose of amend­
ment. The deeper the sorrow and the more earnest the pur­
pose of amendment, the more lasting will be the effect of the
Sacrament for the improvement of the sinner.
The confessor must then reprove (reprehendere) the sinner;
that is, he must in strong and forcible language emphasize the
shamefulness and perniciousness of his sin. And St. Alphon­
sus teaches that the confessor must discharge this duty of rep­
rehension even when the penitent is one in high position ; the
confessor, he says, must reflect that his words are more effica­
cious than sermons.3’0 This reprehension is particularly neces­
sary for those who seldom confess, who come burdened with
many sins, or who, from weakness of faith or attachment to
creatures, manifest little sorrow. It is very salutary, because
the words of the confessor, specially adapted to the penitent,
are much more efficacious than those of the preacher.”1 But
let the confessor administer it with much prudence, that it may
really prove an effective medicine for the sick soul — not with
indignation, violence, and anger, but in sympathy and love, in
the spirit of meekness, with due regard for the penitent's con­
dition and the gravity of his sins. Despondent and scrupulous
penitents must be encouraged and not cast into despair. Those
who are crushed by sorrow should be treated as Christ treated the
penitent Magdalen, and as the father treated the prodigal son.”
Finally, the confessor must provide the penitent with reme­
dies against relapse. Of such there are general ones, useful
against all sins, and for all penitents; and special ones appli­
cable to special sins. The following are general means : —
1. The most excellent general means of eradicating vice and
«“ Praxis Conf. n. 7.
"· Benedict XIV. ·■ Apostolic»,·· $ 22.
Cf. Polanctu, 1. e. ; Segneri, I. c.

452

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRA HEXT

implanting virtue is regular, devout, and humble prayer. The
confessor should, therefore, earnestly admonish flic penitent
regularly to recite the daily prayers of a Christian, to implore
the divine grace in temptation, and if possible, hear Mass daily.
Pious penitents, who seriously aim at virtue, should be recom­
mended to add special devotions to the usual prayers ; such as
visits to the Blessed Sacrament, a portion of the Rosary, etc. ;
especially spiritual reading every day, at a fixed hour, from a
suitable book, which the confessor may specify, short ejacula­
tory prayers, frequent renewal of good intention, and recollec­
tion of the presence of God, as also a short meditation in the
morning, when possible.
2. Frequent renewal of purpose and regxdar examination of
conscience are very beneficial. Therefore, the penitent should
renew his good resolutions every morning at his prayers and
also during the day; to his night prayers he should add an ex­
amination of conscience, at the same time awakening true sor­
row for all sins of the past. The confessor should also instruct
the penitent in the exercise of the special resolution, and the
examen, particulare, and induce him to adopt these exercises,
as they are so well calculated to root out particular faults, to
bring about general improvement, and to confirm him in his
striving after virtue.
3. Frequent confession, and the confessor should fix the time
for the penitent's next confession ; or he should determine how
often he must confess in the future, not, however, making too
great demands upon him, but requiring only what he will prob­
ably be able to perform. Let him particularly recommend the
penitent to confess as soon as possible after relapse into mortal
sin. Frequent confession must be imposed as a duty on those
who, from interior weakness, are always relapsing into the same
sins, in proportion as this proves itself to be the only efficient
means of insuring perseverance in virtue. This applies to those
who have become addicted to the peccatum pollutionis.

DUTY OU SUGGESTING REMEDIES AGAINST RELAPSE 453
4. Frequent reception 0/ the holy communion, with due prepa­
ration and thanksgiving. True, it is not necessary to receive
holy communion as often as one confesses in order to rid one's
self of habitual sin; but frequent, even weekly conununion, is
permit ted for the cure of a soul much weakened by sin, if the
penitent desires it, receives it with an earnest wish to amend,
and is really, although but slowly, being converted by this
means from a life of sin. For holy communion is not only a
help to virtue, but also a remedy against sin. By increasing
sanctifying grace and holy love, by the intimate union with
God which it effects, by the wealth of grace which it brings to
the soul, it effectually preserves men from mortal sin, destroys
evil inclinations, excites the desire for virtue, and gives the
strength to practice it. For penitents who already walk in
the paths of virtue, frequent communion is an aid to progress
in perfection, and assuredly communio frequens eminently con­
duces to perseverance and advancement in good; the confessor
should, therefore, most earnestly recommend this remedy to
his penitents.
But he must not demand too much. The reception of holy
communion every three months is generally regarded as the
minimum; but the confessor will often be obliged to content
himself with longer intervals, especially when youths and men
(and in many cases, even women also) are concerned. When
received every month, or at least every six or eight weeks, holy
communion is a means of keeping alive zeal for eternal salva­
tion anti of remaining firm in a Christian life.
More frequent reception of holy communion, every fortnight,
every week, or several times during the week, is to be allowed
or recommended when the following conditions exist: —
(a) For weekly communion, and, if a feast occur, two com­
munions in the week, it is necessary that mortal sin should
generally be avoided ; but if such penitents are in the habit of
committing venial sins with deliberation, and if no improve-

454

THE MlXlSTEH OF THE SACHA Ml V T

ment or serious endeavor to improve manifests itself, it js well
occasionally to forbid communion to such persons, in order to
inspire them with greater fear of venial sin, and to show them
with what reverence this Sacrament must be received
(6) More frequent communion in the week may be permitted
and recommended to those who are free from affection to venial
sins, who do not generally commit deliberate venial sins, who
practice meditation, mortify their senses and passions,
who,
in other words, are striving after perfection.
(c) Daily communion may be allowed to those who not only
do not entertain voluntary attachment to any venial sin, but
who steadfastly endeavor to advance in virtue, who gladly and
diligently devote themselves to interior prayer, who have, to a
great extent, suppressed their evil passions, and who are fdled
with a great longing for holy communion. The confessor must
not be too indulgent, nor, on the other hand, too rigorous. Be­
fore permitting frequent communion to any one, it is necessary
to consider if the person is so situated ns to be able to prepare
properly and to make suitable thanksgiving. It is also recom­
mended (1) on one day in every week, as a rule, not to receive
communion, in accordance with the practice of experienced
confessors, and (2) sometimes to forbid communion on some
particular day, for some just motive — as a trial, a mortifica­
tion, or a punishment. If, later on, the confessor perceives
that, in spite of frequent communion, the penitent makes no
progress in the way of perfection, and that he cherishes in his
heart a voluntary attachment to sin, the confessor must reduce
the number of his communions.”5
5. Avoiding bad company and associating with good, religious
«Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. nn. 148-1Ô5; Horn. Ap. App. 1. nn. 28-3«;
Vera Sponsa, cp. 18, §3; Aertnys, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. De Eucharist,
nn. 98-95; this author discusses also the difference between the teaching
of St. Alphonsus and that of St. Francis of Sales. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. P. II.
L. 1. Tr. IV. De Euchar. n. 158.

DUTY OF SUGGESTING REMEDIES AGAINST RELAPSE 455
men. The confessor must, of course, most earnestly exhort
the penitent to avoid every occasion and flanger of sin, especially
every immediate, and more serious, danger of sin even when it
is a remote one, in so far as it is morally possible to avoid it.
The special occasions and dangers which exist in some particular
place, the confessor will learn from his own observation, from
the advice of experienced men, or the counsel of his superiors.
6. The reading of good books, the lives of the saints.
7. Reflection on the eternal truths, the Life and Passion of Jesus.
8. Frequent thought of the presence of God.
9. Voluntary works of penance in punishment of relapse,
which the penitent should determine in advance. This remedy
is much to be recommended, not only against grave sins, but also
against slight defects, when one is aiming at perfection.
10. Special devotion to the divine Heart of Jesus, to Mary, and
to the Guardian Angel. It is better to do a little regularly, than
much without perseverance and order, according to the humor
and mood of the moment.
11. Confidence and perseverance, even when a relapse occurs;
for nothing is more harmful than to lose courage and regard
amendment as too difficult and impossible on account of fre­
quent relapses. This mood generally arises from wrong appli­
cation of remedies, and from a certain secret pride. Therefore,
wholly distrusting his own powers, the penitent must put all
his confidence in God.”4
The confessor should not content himself with indicating
remedies for the penitent; he must choose and impose them
with reference to the latter’s moral sickness, his temptations
and occasions of sinning, and his station in life; if necessary
he must also instruct him as to their application.
Moreover, there are special remedies for different vices.

Cf. 8. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 15 (Ed. Le Noir, Par. 1880) ; Lacroix, Lib.
VI. p. 2, n. 1825 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 147 ; Aertnys, Instruct, pract. Pars II.

456

TUE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

1. Against pride, the confessor should recommend
(а) The following considerations — what man is of himself,
that he has received all from God, that he has already committed
so many sins; his poverty and weakness, his inconstancy, his
ingratitude and infidelity towards God.
(б) The example of Christ, who so deeply humbled Himself
for love of us, who expressly and earnestly invites us to imitate
His humility; on the other hand, that pride is the sin of Satan.
(c) The promises held out to humility, and the punishment, of
the proud. "God resists the proud, and gives His grace to the
humble." (St. James iv. 6.) "The prayer of the humble man
pierceth the clouds.” (Eccl. xxxv. 21.)
(d) Finally, he should remind him that, to obtain humility,
he must humble himself, hence he must avoid rather than seek
the praise of men, and, so far as his position allows, forego out­
ward marks of distinction, etc.
2. Against avarice (covetousness) : —
(a) The utterances of Holy Writ against the avaricious and
the covetous. (Eccl. x. 9.) “There is not a more wicked
thing than to love money, for such a one setteth even his own soul
for eale.” The parable of the rich man. (St. Luke xviii. 25.)
“It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle
than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.”
(b) Earthly goods can never fully satisfy a man, nor make
him really happy.
(c) All our earthly possessions we must leave behind to heirs,
who, perhaps, will soon forget us, and neither thank us nor pray
for us. Better it is, therefore, with our earthly goods to procure
for ourselves heavenly treasures, of which we cannot be robbed.
(See St. Matthew vi. 19, 20 ; St. Luke xvi. 9.)
(d) The menace of the Apostle: “They that will become rich,
fall into the snare of the devil.” (1 Tim. vi. 9.)
(e) The example of Jesus, of Mary, of St. Joseph, and of so
many saints.

DUTY OF STG'l EHTINtl KEMEDIEH AGAINST HELA FSE 457

3. /I f/« insl ipurity ■' —
(a) Serious consideration of the disgrace into which this vice
throws a man ; a vice in which he makes himself the tool and
slave of the vilest desires and passions.
(b) Flight from those persons and things, the sight of whom,
or intercourse with whom, excites to sinful thoughts and desires;
avoidance of every dangerous intimacy.
(c) Avoidance of idleness; constant useful occupation.
(</) Watchfulness over the senses.
(e) Energetic suppression of temptation in its first beginnings,
as soon as one is conscious of it. Principiis obsta, sero medicina
paratur.
(/) Humble prayer is here preeminently necessary — especially
devotion to the most blessed Virgin in her Immaculate Concep­
tion. Instant appeal to her in temptation; the prayer: "0
Domina mea, O mater mea," etc., every morning and evening
has always proved very efficacious.
(g) Mortification of the flesh; at least avoidance of all luxuri­
ousness and effeminacy.
4. Against intemperance: —
(a) Consideration of the disgrace peculiar to this vice.
(h) Avoidance of everything which excites to it, especially
convivial occasions and gatherings.
(c) Slight mortifications.
(d) Determining a fixed measure, with the firm resolve never
to exceed it without due reason.
5. Against envy : —
(a) The envious man tortures himself; this is the most foolish
of vices.
(&) Envying others is copying the devil, rejoicing at the hap­
piness of others is imitating the angels.
(c) Through God and Christ all men stand in close relation­
ship to each other, are all brothers.
(d) Consequences of envy. Cain, the Pharisees.

458

THK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

(e) When feelings of envy rise in the heart, the penitent should
endeavor to be well disposed towards the particular person,
should meet him in a friendly manner, should be ready to help
him if necessary, should at least pray for him there and then.
6. Against anger: —
(a) Our duty to strive after meekness and patience, in imita­
tion of Jesus.
(f>) The ruinous effects of anger — robbing a man — either
partially or wholly - of the use of reason, hurrying him into
unconsidered, shameful, anil most sinful actions; destroying
peace, stirring up enmities.
(c) Prevention of the outward inducements to anger: certain
games, drinking —and if they cannot be prevented, the peni­
tent should lessen them by prudent precautionary measures.
(d) God has every reason for being angry with us, and
for taking vengeance upon us, on account of the many insults
which we offer to Him. But He forgives us, and it is, therefore,
but just that we should harbor no anger towards our neighbor.
(e) If we do not forgive, we have no right to hope for forgive­
ness at the hands of God, ami there is a dreadful significance in
the mouth of the Christian who prays in the “Our Father”
“forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them who trespass
against us.”
(/) When anger is aroused, a man must refrain from every
word and act until he has mastered it.
7. Against sloth: —
(а) God’s abhorrence of spiritual sloth : “ I would that thou
wert cold or hot,” etc. (Apoc. iii. 15, 16.)
(б) Consideration of the shortness and importance of human
life; and, on the other hand, the tireless zeal of the man of the
world in his pursuit of earthly things.
(c) The great injustice done to God by neglect of the service
due to Him — for man is the servant of God !
(d) Regular order in life : establishing an order of the day ;

DUTY OF SUGGESTING HEMEDIES AGAINST DELAPSE 459
in the morning renewal of the determination to avoid all idle­
ness ; in the evening, rendering account to one's self of how the
day has been spent.
In his efforts on behalf of the penitent let the confessor keep
in mind that the conversion of a sinner is more the operation of
divine grace than the fruit of any human activity. Let him,
therefore, pray often for his penitents; and let him not despair
and despond if the conversion of a sinner inured to vice does
not immediately follow. For such conversion does not usually
take place suddenly ; generally not for a long time, nor till after
a hard struggle and earnest prayer. Moreover, God rewards
his laborers according to their work, and not according to their
success.
385 Reuter, Neo-Confessar. P. II. cp. 1, art. 1-3, nn. 56-99. Cf. Lehmkuhl,
I. c. nn. 448-455; Aertnys, Instr, pract. 1. c. n. 62; Theol. Mor. Lib. I.
nn. 245-261.

CHAPTER III
THE DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR AFTER THE CONFESSION

The confessor has certain duties to perform after the confes­
sion. These are principally two, one of which is always and per
sc incumbent upon him, viz. : the preservation of the seal of the
confessional ; while the other, the correcting of errors which may
have occurred in the confession, may arise per accidens.

58. The Duty of correcting Errors occurring in the Confession.

The confessor more easily and more seriously errs in the ad­
ministration of the Sacrament of Penance (by reason of the
variety of the duties which this office imposes upon him) than
in the other Sacraments. The errors here committed may,
moreover, have grave consequences. It is, therefore, necessary
to treat of them in detail and to show how they may be cor­
rected.
The errors which the confessor (even the instructed and con­
scientious confessor) may commit in the confessional arc clas­
sified under three heads: (1) Those which affect the validity of
the Sacrament : when the confessor has forgotten to give absolu­
tion, or has given it without due jurisdiction, or to a penitent
insufficiently prepared; (2) those which refer to the integrity of
the confession: when the confessor has not asked concerning
the number or circumstances when he was bound to ask ; and
(3) those relating to the duties of the penitent: when the confessor
has not admonished the penitent to avoid some immediate
460

ERItOliS COMMITTED It Y TUE CONFESSOR

461

occasion of sin, or to make restitution, or where he has obliged
him to restore when there was no obligation.®*
Now an error may entail great injury to the penitent, or to a
third person, or again no great harm may result. Moreover,
the error may have been committed through great culpability
on the. part of the confessor, or without such culpability, at least
without great culpability. Finally, the error may be positive,
the confessor doing something wrong; or it may be negative,
the confessor neglecting something he should have done.
As regards the duty of rectifying these errors, the following
principles are to be observed : —
I. An error touching the validity of the Sacrament, resulting
from grave fault on the part of the confessor, and causing great
harm to the penitent, must, ex justitia, be made good by the
confessor, even when such reparation involves serious trouble.
Even if the confessor’is not bound in justice to hear confes­
sions, as soon as he does so, he enters into a kind of agreement
with the penitent to administer the Sacrament properly; if he
administers it invalidly, he is a damnificator injustus, and must,
ex justitia, and secundum justitia regulas, make good the injury
he has caused. But if the fault of the confessor was only a
slight one, he is, as regards the correction of the error, in the
position of one who has, inculpabiliter, caused some temporal
harm. In this case, he would be bound to make good the error
only when he could do so without relatively great inconvenience
to himself. And if the confessor sinned gravely in committing
the error, he would also be excused from remedying it, if his own
incommodum much exceeded the detriment and danger resulting
from it to his penitent. But if, in consequence of the confessor's
error, the penitent’s eternal salvation has been seriously en­
dangered — for instance, if he has invalidly absolved a dying
w Cf. Lugo. 1. c. Disp. 22. n. 50; S. Alph. Lib. VL n. 61« m.; Ballerini,
Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. 2, De officio et obligat. Confess, nn. s.36-862; Aert­
nys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VL Tract. V. cp. 4, art. 2, nn. 282-285.

462

THh· MINISTEH OF THE «ΑΓΕΛΗ EM

person, or one who will probably not confess ag.iin before his
<lonth. he must remedy this injury under all circumstances, even
cum suo damno relative gravi, or gravissimo ; for this is also a duty
of charity. Likewise when the confessor is the pastor of t he peni­
tent, and, therefore, ratione stipendii, the more strictly bound
to avert from those committed to him great spiritual injury,
he must cum gravi incommodo make good an error committed
cum Icvi culpa. If the penitent lias subsequently confessed to
another priest, or received holy communion or Extreme Unction,
the injury done to the penitent is thereby already made good,
and the confessor has no further obligations.”’
II. If the error touches the integrity of the confession, the
confessor is not bound to remedy it outside the confessional,
if his action in the matter has been of a negative character; this
error he must make good ex charitate, and secundum regulas charitatis, whether the error was culpable on his part or not. But
if his action was positive cum gravi sua culpa, he must remedy
the error even outside the confessional, for he is bound to do so
ex justitia and, in consequence, even with grave inconvenience
Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 619. Lehmkuhl propones the following case ■ If
I had invalidly absolved any one — es|>ecially from grave sins— and met him
shortly afterwards, I should be bound to absolve him without, however, inti­
mating it, if I could presume that he bad not committed any other grave
sin in the meantime. Whether I should be bound to seek this person, cum
gravi meo incommodo, would depend both upon the risk to the penitent's sal­
vation, and also upon the error of which I had been guilty ; I should also be
obliged to avoid endangering the seal of the confessional. If some time
had elapsed since the confession, I could not give the absolution till I had
exhorted the penitent to dispose himself by a new act of contrition. To
give such an exhortation or to make an avowal to the penitent of the error
made in the confession, would not of itself be a breach of the seal ; for every
|M*niteut. whether he has confessed mortal or venial sins, is entitled to abso­
lution. But if, on account of circumstances, it might be considered a dis­
closing of a grave sin heard in the confessional, the confessor would be
obliged previously to ask the penitent’s permission to speak to him concerning
matters of the confessional : in so doing, he should explain that something
very salutary and profitable to the penitent waa iu question. Lehmkuhl,
I. c. n. 471 ; Ballerini. 1. c. n. 840.

ERRORS COMMITTED BY THE CONFEMOR

4«3

to himself. Only when I his could not he clone without causing
scandal and much embarrassment to the penitent would the
confessor be justified in not doing it. But it should be care­
fully observed that an intentional silence must, under circum­
stances, be regarded as a positive influence upon the penitent.
That in the case of an omission the confessor is bound only
ex charitale to remedy the defect is explained by the fact that,
he failed in his accessory duties, not doing that which he ought
to have done — the obligation here arises, as the theologians say,
not so much ex officio, as occasione officii, or not on account of a
duty which he owes to God, but rather on account of a duty
which he, titulo justitiœ et muneris, always owes to men. For
these accessory duties towards our fellow-men, in so far as they
are duties of office or of quasi-juslitia, do not extend beyond
the act of confession itself.338
It follows from this that such defects or errors are hardly ever
to be corrected outside the Sacrament of Penance, for the peni­
tent will, presumably, receive this Sacrament again. But if,
by not being informed of the error, so great injury, especially
spiritual injury, should result to the penitent that charity de­
manded reparation of even this negative defect, the confessor
must make the reparation even outside the confessional. For
any other person — not a confessor — would, under like cir­
cumstances, be similarly bound towards his neighbor.
That a confessor should be bound ex justitia to make good
an error committed through a positive action and cum gravi,
sua culpa, is based upon the fact that he has caused the penitent
to infringe an important commandment (the integrity of the
confession). Even if this infringement had been for the peni­
tent only a material one, — therefore, not sinful, — the confessor
would be obliged to prevent such material infringement for the
3,8 Cf. Gobat, Thoolog. experimental, do VII. Sacram. Tract. VII. n. 208.
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. -173. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 22, n. 65 seq. Suarez, Do
Pœnit. Disp. 32, s. 6.

464

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

future by correcting the error caused by himself. But if the
fault of the confessor in committing the error was only a slight
one, a lesser ground would release him from the duty of cor­
recting the fault; and if he acted bona fide, he is entirely released
from it, seeing that subsequent instruction concerning the fault
committed can never take place without embarrassment and
difficulty.*”
III. A defect having reference to a fluty of the penitent,
which causes the latter, or a third person injury, must be made
good by the confessor cum gravi suo incommodo, if cum gravi
sua culpa he has instructed the penitent falsely; if he committed
the error without great fault on his part, he is not bound to cor­
rect it cum gravi, although he is bound cum aliquo incommodo.
The confessor is, in this case, causa injusta damni, and has,
therefore, the obligations of a damnificator injustus.
The injury caused by the confessor may be spiritual, in con­
sequence of wrong instruction, or temporal, by imposing resti­
tution, or some similar burden to which the penitent was not
bound. With reference to others than the penitent, the question
will generally be one of temporal loss in consequence of the peni­
tent having been released from his duties to them. The ques­
tion of injury to the community at large should be remembered
in this connection.
If, therefore, the confessor committed the error cum gravi
culpa, for instance, caused some great temporal harm, he must
repair it himself if it cannot be otherwise repaired, and
prevent injury which has not yet ensued, but which may ensue.
If the error took place without his fault, he is not bound to
repair any harm which ensues before he knew of the error,
and which could not be repaired without great detriment to
himself. He must, however, avert injury which is still threat­
ening, and repair that which already exists if it can be done
·*> S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 620.

ERRORS COMMITTED BY THE CONFESSOR

4*5»

without relatively great detriment to himself. If he neglects
this ex gram negligenlia, he is guilty of a great injustice, and is
responsible for all harm which he did not prevent. So, if he
has wrongly bound any one to make restitution, he must advise
the penitent (after obtaining from him permission to speak
about matters of confession) not to make the restitution, or if
he has already made it, to indemnify himself compenmtione
occulta, if this be possible. If he omits, ex gravi negligenlia,
so to instruct the penitent, he is bound to make good the injury
out of his own means, in case his warning, or the retractation of
his error, is no longer effectual in preventing the injury, or com­
pensating for it. But if, after becoming aware of his error,
the confessor can no longer warn the penitent, or if the warning
or retractation must be regarded as useless, he is free from al)
obligation. If from the first the confessor's error was fraught
with great guilt, he is bound, if it is any way possible, to see that
justice is done to the injured person.8*0 The same principles
hold good if a third person has suffered injury, or been exposed
to the risk of it by the fault of the confessor. If the evil conse­
quences are sufficiently remote and the case admits of delay,
the error may be set right in the next confession of the penitent ;
for generally it is no easy matter to speak about anything con­
nected with a confession outside the confessional. In cases of
necessity, however, the confessor must brave this difficulty
and do his duty.
Gobat8*' gives confessors (especially young ones) the following
excellent rules which they should always keep in view in order to
acquire the necessary prudence and dexterity in their office. —
1. After he has heard a confession, the confessor should always
reflect if, and in what, he has erred, so that he may avoid these
faults in future.
**° S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 621 ; II. A. n. 122 ; Lehmkuhl, L c. n. 472; Aertuya,
1. c. n. 284.
·“' L. c. n. 290. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l.c. n. 473.

466

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

2. In giving or refusing absolution, in imposing a penance,
the confessor's first consideration should always be the welfare
of the penitent and his greater spiritual advantage.
3. Let him be careful not to pronounce a sin mortal without
being certain that it is so.
4. In doubt as to whether restitution or a similar duty is to
be imposed, let him adopt the more lenient opinion of the theo­
logians if this is really probable.
5. The confessor of a penitent must presume that the former
confessor discharged his duty properly, unless he sees plainly
the contrary.
6. The confessor must know the different opinions of theo­
logians upon one and the same matter when such exist and are
practically probable, in order to make use of one or the other,
according to the different dispositions of the penitents and their
requirements.

59. The Duty of preserving the Seal of Confession.

By the seal of confession, or sigillum confessionis sive sacramenlale, we understand the duty of preserving silence concern­
ing everything which has been learnt in sacramental confession.
I. The duty of preserving the seal of the confessional is based
upon natural and divine law and upon the strict precept of the
Church. It is true, God has not laid down any formal and
express demand to preserve the seal of confession, but that this
is His will results (naturaHier) from the divine institution of
confession, and especially from the commandment which obliges
all the faithful to confess all their mortal sins, but which binds
them only to confess their sins in secret (secreto). Now this
general law to confess all, even the gravest and most secret
sms, would assuredly be too burdensome to the faithful ; indeed,
its observance would become simply morally impossible if con­
fessors were not bound by the strictest obligation to preserve
the seal of the confessional. Danger to human life and the

DUTY OF I’ItESEHVING THE SEAL OF CONFESSION 467
social order, would, in fact, be inevitable if this duty did not
exist. Thus the seal of the confessional seems to be an indis­
pensable condition of the observance of the commandment to
make full confession of sins. But he who prescribes an end must
also prescribe the means necessary to that end. And if every
man is bound to preserve a secret confided to him, a confessor
is still more bound, under all circumstances, to maintain silence
concerning sins which have been confessed to him as secretum,
seeing that so much depends upon his fidelity in this respect,—
the sanctity, the usefulness, and the blessings of the holy Sacra­
ment of Penance.34’ Moreover, the duty of preserving the seal
of the confessional is imposed by an express law of the Church,
which has existed in constant tradition, and is thus expressed
by the IV. Council of the Lateran: 343 Let the confessor beware
of betraying the sinner in any way, by a word, or a sign, or by
any other means; but if he should stand in need of wiser counsel
let him ask for it without, in any way, indicating the person.
II. It results also from the above that the obligation of the
seal belongs to the virtue of religion. Breaking it is an abuse of
a Sacrament, therefore, rightly regarded as a kind of sacrilege;
however, it must not be confessed under the general designation
of a sacrilege, but as a breach of the seal of confession, in order
that the ultimate and full species of the sin may be recognized.
Inasmuch as the confessor, ex officio, listens to the confession
of the penitent, he is bound, ex fidelitate, to silence concerning
everything which the interest of the penitent demands that he
should keep secret. Finally, breaking the seal of confession
would, in many cases, be a defamation of the penitent, and
would, therefore, be an injustice. It is thus of its nature a very
grave sin, a sacrilege, which is generally accompanied by injury
to reputation and breach of faith.344
III. The obligation of the seal is a very strict one, admitting
su s. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 035. Lugo. De Pœnit. Diep. 23, nn. 1-10.
sa Cap. 21.
344 S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 035. Cf. Ballerini, I. c. n.

468

TUB MINtSTEK OF THE 8At HAMi:XT

neither parvitas materia· per ne, nor any exception: only when
the penitent has expressly and voluntarily given permission
would it be allowable to disclose anything hoard in confession,
and even then prudence will generally dissuade the confessor
from making use of the permission.’16
St. Alphonsus teaches,*16 as sententia certissima, (hat never,
and in no case, is the slightest disclosure of the secrets of the
confessional permitted, not even to save one’s life, to save the
state, or to remedy the greatest spiritual necessity. The reason
for this most stringent obligation is clear. If there were only
one exception made, people would always be in a state of fear
that this or that sin might be sufficient ground for lawfully
breaking the seal, and the Sacrament would thereby become
odious.*17
When, therefore, the confessor is asked concerning anything
which he has learnt in the confessional, he must, per se, repri­
mand the questioner, reminding him that such questions are
quite inadmissible. If, however, he can see no other effectual
way of evading the question or of averting suspicion from the
penitent, he can and must declare, even upon oath, that the
penitent has not confessed to him what is in question, that he
knows nothing at all about it. Such a statement is not a lie
nor is it, in consequence, a perjury if made upon oath, for it is
a case of lawful use of the implicit reservation that the confessor,
as a private individual, — the only capacity in which he can be
The duty is here considered in so far as it belongs to virtus relit/ionis :
for the defamation arising from breaking the seal may be very slight, or
wholly absent, and the breach of confidence may easily be of small signifi­
cance. But levitas periculi of breaking the seal is by no means to be con­
founded with parcitas materia ; for there exists no duty to avoid every slight
and improbable danger of breaking it ; this would cause too great anxiety
of conscience. Nevertheless every confessor will be very careful to preserve
this seal intact. Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. uu. 633, 661.
»“L. c. n. 034.
M’ S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 631, 635, 651 ; II. Ap. n. 147.

bi rr OF PRESERVING THE SEAL· OF CONFESSION 409

expected to answer, — has no knowledge of a subject revealed
to him as a representative of God.*4*
And should the confessor be asked if he has given absolution
to a penitent, let him answer, “ I did what it was my duty to
do,” or, still better, dismiss the questioner with the answer,
‘‘Such questions are not allowed.” If he had not given the
absolution and was asked by a priest or other cleric if the peni­
tent might receive holy communion, he must answer, ‘‘Ask
him yourself.” 540
Concerning the penitent’s permission to speak about the con­
fession, St. Alphonsus teaches as follows: 1. This permission
must be given in words, or by facts which convey it, as, for
instance, when the penitent himself begins to talk to the con­
fessor about something said in the confessional. This permis­
sion may not be presumed even if it were for the penitent's
own welfare.550
2. Permission obtained by threats or metus reverentialis does
not suffice ; for instance, if the confessor has obtained it through
repeated requests, the penitent having at first refused it.”'
3. The penitent can recall the permission which he has given
at his pleasure.55’ *4. When the confessor has obtained the per­
mission let him be very careful not to overstep the limits laid
down by the penitent.555
IV. The duty of preserving the seal of the confessional thus
differs from that of preserving any other secret in the following
points: (a) It does not admit parvitas materia·; (6) it exists
even with regard to the person who has confessed, or whom the
secret concerns; (c) it never admits of any exception.554
S. Alph. 1. o. ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 457 ; Aertuye, 1. c. n. 288.
S. Alph. H. Ap. n. 148; Lib. III. n. 153.
·“ S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 651.
Ap. n. 156.

mi S. Alph. 1. c. η. 651 ; IL
m» S. Alph. 1. c. n. 651.
μ» Cf. Bullerini. Op. Theol.

Mor. 1. c. n. 976 as.
»· Cf. Lehmkuhl, I. c. n. 455.

470

THE MINISTRE OF THE SACHA MENT

V. The duty of secrecy attaches to every really sacramental
confession; that is, confession made with the intention of accus­
ing one's self and of obtaining absolution. Therefore, (a) con­
fession knowingly made to a cleric or a priest without jurisdiction
does not impose the duty of silence, but only the obligation of
the natural secret, excepting, however, the case where the peni­
tent intended that the priest should obtain jurisdiction, and
afterwards give him absolution. The fluty of the seal would
also come into effect if the penitent believed that the priest to
whom he confessed had jurisdiction, (b) If a person informs a
confessor of the state of his conscience not with the intention
of receiving absolution, but for the purpose of obtaining advice
or instruction for his spiritual life, or for some· other’object,
there is no obligation of the seal, but only of the secretum natu­
rale and commissum ; though of tliis class of secrets it is unques­
tionably the most binding. The same principles would apply
if a person said that he made the disclosures concerning himself
only sub sigillo. But there is always this difference between
the case mentioned and the seal of the confessional, that here
parvitas materia is admissible, and that the secret is, of itself,
not violated by any reference to the person concerned.355 (c) A
pretended confession, made for the purpose of deceiving, or
seducing, or ridiculing the priest, does not impose the duty of
the seal, and the priest might, at the call of circumstances,
make use of knowledge thus obtained, in his defense. On the
other hand, a confession begun with the honest intention of
receiving the Sacrament, but during which the penitent allowed
himself to be carried away and influenced by some sinful purpose,
would impose the duty of the seal, since such confession was, at
least in part, sacramental.350 (d) Finally, a confession, or rela­
tion of sins made for some other purpose would not impose it,
though, under circumstances, the duty of the strictest secret urn
Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 636 ; II. A. n. 156.

S. Alph. 1. c.

THE SΠEJECT OF THE SEAL OF CONFESSION

471

naturale et commissum may ensue. The confessor is also for­
bidden to make use of a probable opinion in matters which
come under the seal, whether the probabilitas be facti or juris.
The probabilitas facti would turn on the question whether it is
probable that the confession made was sacramental or not;
in neither case have I any right to say or do anything which
might possibly amount to a breach of the seal. The probabili­
tas juris exists when authors disagree as to what constitutes an
infraction of the seal ; here I may not adopt any form of action
or speech which on solid probable grounds would mean a breach
of the seal, or tend to make the Sacrament odious to the faith­
ful. On the contrary, it must be morally certain that the utter­
ance or action in question excludes all danger of disclosure
and of aversion to the Sacrament.35’
60. The Subject of the Seal of Confession.

The duty of preserving the seal of confession binds, in the first
place, the confessor who hears the confession. It devolves also
upon all who, by lawful or unlawful means, have acquired knowl­
edge of that which falls under the seal ; otherwise the penitent
would not be sufficiently protected, and might be deterred from
approaching the Sacrament. This extension of the duty of
the seal was certainly in the intention of Our Saviour.35’
In addition to the confessor, therefore, the following are bound
by the seal of the confessional : (a) the Superior to whom the
penitent or the confessor (with permission of the penitent) hail
recourse either verbally or by writing, in a reserved case, or a
similar matter; (&) any one employed as an interpreter in a
confession; (c) the theologian whom the confessor consulted,
either verbally or by writing, in a difficult case, and especially
S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 633: H. Ap. n. 164 ; Gury-Ballerini. Notætd Gury,
II. n. 650; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 458; Balleriui, Op. Theol. Mor. I. o. u. 801 m.
“9 S. Alph. 1. o. Lib. VI. nn. 645, 648.

472

tue ministre of the sa an am ext

any person to whom the confessor in any way communicated
matter learnt in the confessional —whether that communica­
tion was made sacrilege vel imprudentur, or in a lawful manner
— excepting when the penitent has, perhaps, widened the limits
of his permission.”1’ If, therefore (for example), the confessor,
in behalf of the penitent, should ask for a remission of debts,
and, in doing so, with the penitent’s permission, discloses to
the injured person the sin of theft, etc., the latter possesses the
knowledge of this theft under the seal of the confessional ; for
it is in the penitent's power to give permission to propagate
information received by the confessor in the confessional, either
under the same seal, that is, in the same manner as the confessor
possesses it, or in some less stringent manner.300 (</) He who,
either accidentally or purposely, has heart 1 the confession of
another, and those who, through him, have obtained knowledge
of a sin so heard. Deliberately to overhear the confession of
another is, of itself, a breach of the seal, (e) Whoever reads a
piece of paper upon which the penitent has written his sins
may be bound either under the seal, or to the natural secret
only. He is bound under the seal: (1) if he should read the
written confession in aclu confessionis, especially, if it is already
handed to the confessor for the purpose of confession ; (2) if
he found it in the confessional, having been left there by the con­
fessor, "for this knowledge is none other than that of the con­
fessor"; (3) if he snatched it from the hand of the confessor
to whom the penitent had handed it; (4) if it had been snatched
from the hands of the penitent while he was confessing, or had
fallen from his hands; (5) if writing the confession is, for the
penitent, the necessary means of making a complete confession,
reading this writing before the confession also imposes the obli­
gation of the seal ; (6) this holds good in every case after the con­
fession, before the document has so far returned to the penitent’s
·“ S. Alph. 1. c. n. M7 ; Stotz, 1. c. Lib. II. u. 199.
Cf. Lugo, I. c. Disput. 23, n. 29.

THE OBJECT OF THE SEAL OF CONFESSION

473

possession that he has voluntarily preserved it when he might
have destroyed it; (7) whosoever reads the letter in which per­
mission is asked of a Superior to absolve from a reserved case,
as this belongs to the confession.
On the other hand, whoever reads the. written enumeration
of the sins of others is bound to the natural secret only: (1) if
the penitent, after completing his confession, had voluntarily
left the document behind, had thrown it away, had not destroyed
it; and (2) if the penitent, without exactly intending to make
his confession, had written down his sins, and this document
is read prior to the confession. Though in this case the obliga­
tion of the natural secret only comes into force, it is the strictest
of its kind.”" The penitent is not bound by the seal to be silent,
about what the confessor has said to him; but he is bound to
natural secrecy concerning everything the revelation of which
might injure the confessor or the Sacrament; indeed the peni­
tent is more strictly bound to silence, because the confessor,
unlike other men, does not impart advice and instruction spon­
taneously but in virtue of his office.’”
61. The Object or Matter of the Seal of Confession.

The object of the seal of confession is, in general, everything
the revealing of which would make confession odious. This is
a natural deduction from the end of the law and from a decision
of the S. C. Inquis, given under the authority of Innocent XI,
Nov. 18, 1682, by which a proposition was rejected permitting
the use of all information obtained in the confessional, as long
as no direct or indirect revelation takes place.3”
«i S. Alph. I. c. Lib. VI. n. 050. Cf. Lugo, 1. c. Disp. 23, n. 47 ss. Laymann, De Prenit. cp. 14, n. 19. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. I. c. cp. 3, n.
971 as.
*** S. Alph. 1. c. n. 617. Cf. Suarez, De P<en. Disp. 33, Sect. 4, n. 2; Bal­
lerini, 1. o. n. 975.
S. Alph. I. c. n. 657.

474

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Objects of the seal are : —
1. AU sins; mortal ami venial sins both of the penitent and
of his accomplice (complex) ; indeed, notoriously public sins,
also, in so far as they arc known through the medium of confes­
sion. Not only mortal and venial sins in individuo, but also
omnino in genere. It would be, no breach of the seal to say, in
a general way, that the penitent had committed venial sins or
only venial sins, especially as the penitent himself, by going to
confession, practically tells every one that he has commit ted sonic
sin, at least a venial sin; and it is, moreover, a matter of faith
that no man can remain free from all venial sin, unless he has
received a special privilege from God, and the Blessed Virgin
alone is known positively to have possessed such a privilege.
2. The objects and circumstances of the sins, and not only that
which it is of precept to confess, but also that which the peni­
tent believed necessary for the better explanation of his sins.
For example, if a son confesses that he hates his father because
the latter has committed adultery, the adultery of the father,
although not a necessary part of the confession of the son, is,
nevertheless, an object of the seal; or when the penitent con­
fesses a murder at which he has rejoiced, a duel which he has
witnessed, etc.305
3. The penance imposed, except when this is a small one such
as is generally imposed for the slightest sins ; for a more severe
penance indicates that graver sins have been committed.
4. Temptations, because they stand in relation to sins, in so
far as the penitent doubts if he has consented to them, or asks
advice of the confessor in order not to yield to them.
5. Dejects, which are confessed in explanation of a sin; for
example, illegitimacy, where a penitent has received Orders,
in opposition to the law of the Church. Natural defects of the
»· Cf. Ballerini, 1. c. n. 926 ss. ; Lugo, 1. c. Disp. 23, n. 68.
"» Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. nn. 947-948 ; Lugo, 1. c. n. 54 ; Suarez,
I. c. Disp. 83, Sect. 3, u. 5.

THE OHJECT OF THE SEAL· OF CONFESSION

470

penitent also, in so far as they are known through the confes­
sional, and tend to his disgrace (for instance, defective educa­
tion, stupidity, etc.), are objects of the seal. But if these do not
stand in any relation to the confession, or if the penitent would
not resent their being made known, and if they are matter of
general knowledge already, they are not objects of the seal."*
6. The penitent’s position in life may be, ex sc, an object of the
seal, in so far as information about it is necessary in order to
explain the sins according to their ultimate species. Never­
theless, it may be assumed that this information, even when
thus necessary, is not given to the confessor sub sigillo, but rather
prœvie. If it is a question of a position known to every one
(though perhaps not known to the confessor) the penitent does
not intend to include this knowledge under the seal. But it
is a different matter when, on account of certain circumstances,
the penitent attaches importance to his incognito. It is cer­
tainly not allowed so to speak of the position and circumstances
of the penitent so as to indicate thereby that he had sinned
against individual duties of his position.3*7
7. Scruples, or the scrupulosity of the penitent, may be an
object either of the seal, or of the natural secret, (a) The
scruples themselves which the penitent confesses are, of course,
direct objects of the seal, in so far as they are considered by him
to be sins, (b) The scrupulosity which the penitent confesses
as a circumstance of his sins — or in order to give a better idea
of his spiritual state — is likewise an object of the seal, (c) To
say in a general way that the penitent has confessed many scru­
ples, violates the seal in the same way as to disclose that he
has confessed several venial sins, real or supposed, (d) On
the other hand, the scrupulosity which is only perceived in the
manner of expression is not matter of the seal, but, per se, of the
«» Cf. Ballerini. 1. c. nn. 950-960.
8»’ Cf. Reuter, Theol. Mor. Tom. IV. n. 377; Lugo, 1. c. n. 57; Sporer,
De Pceiiit. n. 833; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 160.

476

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

natural secret which obliges the more strictly as the knowledge
obtained is more intimately connected with the confession itself.’"
8. Sins committed in the confession itself, for example, impa­
tience, not showing the confessor due reverence, etc., arc, per
«?, not objects of the sigillum, because the penitent does not con­
fess them; nevertheless, making them known might easily,
and generally will, involve danger to the seal; for these sins
suggest a severe reprehension or a refusal of absolution.3"’
9. Virtues or supernatural gifts which the penitent discloses
in order that the confessor may learn the state of his soul, are
not, per se, objects of the seal; but if they are disclosed inas­
much as they have reference to a sin, they are matter of the
sigillum.11'1
62. Violations of the Seal.

The seal of confession is, in the first place, violated by every
communication of those things which are matter of the seal if
the penitent is recognized, or if there is a danger of his being rec­
ognized. Moreover, every use of things falling under the seal
which is calculated to make confession odious, or to cause the
penitent annoyance and detriment, is also a breach of the seal.
A distinction is, accordingly, to be made between direct anil
indirect violation of the seal ; it is directly violated when any
matter of the. seal itself is directly disclosed and the person of
the penitent indicated ; it is indirectly violated when revelation
of matter of the seal involves only risk of discovery of the peni­
tent or danger of harm to him. In the indirect violation there
may be parvitas materiœ; that is, when, through the communi­
cation or the use of that which was learnt under the seal only
very slight danger of recognition would be incurred, as when the
“* Cf. S. Alph. 1. o. n. 014 ; Lugo, 1. c. n. 00 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. o. n. 460 ; Aertnye, 1. c. n. 203; Ballerini, 1. c. n. 000.
Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 043, 650 (in fine) ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. I. c.
n. 050.
"0 S. Alph. L c. n. 641.

I'IO L ΑΓΙΟΝ S OF TUE HEAL

confessor speaks of the sins prevalent in some particular town
or place without the inhabitants of the place becoming, thereby,
appreciably prejudiced against the institution of the confes­
sional, or any particular defamation resulting. But if there is
doubt as to whether the consequences are really so slight, such
a proceeding must be regarded as a great sin.
For a violation of the seal, it is not necessary that the person
with whom the confessor speaks knows that he is making use
of knowledge gained in the confessional; it is enough that the
confessor should speak from this knowledge. Nor is it necessary
that the person of the penitent should actually be recognized
by him with whom the confessor speaks; it suffices that the
circumstances should be such that the identity of the penitent
emerges sufficiently distinct from what the confessor says, or
that the person of the penitent may possibly be recognized, or
that well-founded suspicion could arise. As the faithful preser­
vation of the seal is of the highest importance, the confessor
must always be very careful that penitents do not become averse
or disinclined to the confessional. Nevertheless he is not bound
to avoid every trivial danger, and to anticipate every idle con­
jecture of malicious people?” In view of their supreme impor­
tance, we here subjoin a few cases of violation of the seal, as
discussed by eminent theologians.
1. A priest indirectly violates the seal: (a) if he says or
intimates that he refused or deferred absolution to a certain
penitent, because he, thereby, implies that the penitent had
confessed a grave sin, or had not been disposed; or if he says
that a certain penitent’s confession had not been finished —
unless it were generally known that this confession was a general
one, or one concerning a long space of time, so that there can be
no embarrassment on the part of the penitent. Indeed, Lugo
adds that even if the penitent himself were to say that he had
S. Alph. 1. c. n. 001. Cf. State, 1. c. Lib. Π. art. V. β. 1-β.

478

TUE MINISTER OF TUE SACHAMEXT

not been absolved, the confessor must not take I he liberty of
repeating it.’” (δ) If he said of a notorious thief that the latter
had confessed his thefts to him with great sorrow. The case
would be different if without entering into detail he were to
remark that the same thief had made his confession to him.3”
(c) If he praises excessively some penitent in comparison with
others whom he heard at the same time, or says that he com­
mitted venial sins only, suspicion being thus easily excited
that the others had confessed grave sins. An exception would
be if there were some particular ground for so speaking, with­
out offense to the other penitents, and without danger of inju­
rious suspicion.”4 (d) If two confessors, to whom the same
penitent had confessed, talk together concerning his sins, (e) If
he reproves the penitent aloud, questions him concerning cir­
cumstances of the sins, so that bystanders can hear it.
(/) If, after having heard the confessions of some few penitents,
he should say that he had heard a particular sin — for the in­
dividual penitents fall under suspicion of having committed
this sin. (<?) If he speaks of sins which he has heard in the
confessional in such a way that those who hear him can infer
or conjecture the identity of those who committed them. (Λ) If
he speaks of sins learnt outside the confessional, but adds
a circumstance learnt only in the confessional, or makes use of
knowledge gathered in the confessional for the purpose of speci­
fying or corroborating some statement·, (i) If, without the
penitent’s permission, he speaks to him outside the confessional
174 Lugo, 1. c. n. 61 ; Lacroix, Renter, and Stotz, however, explain the
matter thus : The confessor is not ordinarily allowed to say that the penitent
had not been absolved ; but if the penitent were to say casually, in presence
of the confessor and others, that he had not been absolved, permission would
thereby be given to the latter to say it also ; but the confessor is by no means
allowed to disclose the reason for refusing the absolution, if the indisposi­
tion of the penitent has been the motive of it, or if the disclosure is in any
way unpleasant to the penitent.
Cf. Lugo, 1. c. n. 61 ; Reuter, 1. c. n. 378. 871 8. Alph. II. Ap. n. 156.

VIOLATIONS OF THE SEAL

479

about his sins hoard in the confessional. Where the penitent
himself begins, the confessor may only speak about the particular
subject to which the penitent confines himself. Likewise if,
after the confession, the priest’s demeanor shows that he remem­
bers his sins and esteems him less highly than before, (k) If
he should intimate that the penitent had not confessed a par­
ticular sin, because, thereby, suspicion might easily arise that
he had actually concealed a sin.’”
2. As a general rule it is allowed to speak vaguely of sins heard
in the confessional in such a manner that there is no danger of
recognizing the person, and no suspicion is aroused against any
persons. In this, however, scandal to lay people is to be care­
fully avoided, for they readily believe that speech of this kind
is a violation of the seal, and may, thereby, be deterred from
approaching the confessional; nor should one be too easily
persuaded that there is no fear of any danger in the matter.
Confessors, therefore, should not be too ready to talk much
about what they have heard in the confessional; for such talk,
when often indulged in, is not quite free from the danger of a
slip beyond what is permissible and of awakening suspicions
in the hearers. Indeed, before laymen such talk must be alto­
gether avoided.”®
No violation of the seal is, therefore, in question : (a) when
the confessor says that “Titus confessed to him”; only Titus
must not then have come to him secretly, for from this cir­
cumstance it might· be inferred that he had a bad conscience;
(b) when he praises the conscience of a penitent; but he must
not, on account of possible circumstances, awaken thereby the
suspicion that others, who confessed to him at the same time,
have bad consciences; for it might be that if he were questioned
concerning another penitent, he could not maintain the same
S. Alph. 1. o. n. 057 ; Gury, 1. c. nn. 005-066 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor.
1. c. n. »83. Cf. 070 ss.
S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 057, 038.

]

480

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

tone of praise.’” (c) If, immediately after absolution, before
the penitent leaves the confessional, he speaks to him of what
he has then and there heard, for though the Sacrament has been
administered, the judicial act still morally continues.”" (d) If he
speaks to the penitent during confession of his sins of another
confession, for, in actu confessionis, the penitent has no right
to the preservation of the seal; but even this the confessor
should not do without reason, for it is troublesome to many
penitents, (e) Wien he prays for a penitent, even if he only
knows him through the confessional, or treats him more leni­
ently (or otherwise) on account of the state of his soul learnt
in the confessional; when he makes use of knowledge acquired
in the confessional in order to ask learned and experienced con­
fessors for advice,’” or to perfect his own work in the confessional,
to be able to question better, to instruct better, and more effi­
caciously to watch over those committed to his charge.
The confessor does not violate the seal by saying that a cer­
tain vice is prevalent in some place, town, or parish when this
place or parish is of considerable size (St. Alphonsus assumes
S. Alph. H. Ap. n. 150.
™ S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 052.
·” It is not necessary to tell those whom one consults for advice that the
case occurred in the confessional, nor should the matter be discussed pub­
licly before many, but only before those who are capablo of giving suitable
advice. Mazzotta adds another notable limitation (Tract. VI. Disp. 2. Q. 5,
c. 2) : “ Therefore, let confessors ask judicious men everywhere for advice
in cases which have come before them in the confessional, and, in so doing,
conceal the name of the penitent. But they have no right to do so if any
suspicion should fall upon the person in question, or were there even a
danger of this." But what is to be done in the latter case when the con­
fessor requires advice? Let him either present the case as an imaginary
one, or let him request permission of the penitent to make use of the knowl­
edge gained in the confessional, or let him seek a judicious man to whom
the penitent is unknown, or let him send the penitent to another confessor.
If none of these methods can be need without breaking the seal, let him
trust to the divine assistance, employ other suitable means. — such as prayer
and study, — aud then let him solve the difficulty himself in the best way
he can.

VIOLATIONS OF THE SEAL

Ml

three thousand Catholics as the population) and when it is a
question of vices which are public, and no new defamation arises.
On the other hand, it would be a violation of the seal if (a) by
this statement concerning the sins, or by the manner of it, the
parish, etc., were defamed, and (fe), in any case, if the place were
small. Hard and fast limits cannot he laid down to determine
when a serious breach of the seal takes place, and when such
revelations would be quite permissible; each case must be
carefully considered and weighed, in order to learn if any, or
a grave, or only a slight, violation is in question. A preacher,
therefore, has a right to speak against vices which are secretly
very prevalent in a parish, and if he has obtained his knowledge
of them outside the confessional, he can speak of them with
still greater freedom ; but he should always employ a wise cau­
tion, so as not to awaken suspicions injurious to those who
confess to him.’’0
In deciding whether violation of the seal of the confession is
committed when a confessor says that he has heard a grave sin
in the confessional from a religious of some particular Order,
without designating the individual, the following circumstances
must be considered: (a) whether, from the nature of the sin
referred to, defamation of the Order results or not; (i>) before
what persons the statement was made, as this circumstance usu­
ally determines the quality of the defamation; (c) whether,
from the statement itself, or from the circumstances, suspicion
falls upon the occupants of a few houses. From this it can be
inferred if a grave violation of the seal, or a slight one, or none
at all, has taken place; but it is very unlikely that no violation
of the seal at all has been committed by such a communication.
The confessor of a convent would, accordingly, break the seal,
if, while preaching in the convent, he should signalize a particu­
lar sin of a nun, or of that convent, which he knew only through
S. Alph. I. c. n. 651 ; H. Ap. n. 158.

482

THR MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

the confessional. On the other hand, he would not break it if
he were to speak generally of defects which usually occur, or may
occur, in all convents; otherwise a priest who heard confessions
in a convent could never preach there, and such a prohibition
would be-contrary to the general usage.381 If the confessor
knows through the confessional that snares are being prepared
for him, he may, under some pretext, go away, or provide for
his safety, if by so doing the sin confessed does not become
known, nor any detriment ensues to the penitent by which the
confessional would be rendered odious; if, however, he cannot,
without breaking the seal, escape or evade the snares prepared
for him, nor avoid an objective sacrilege, he must rather endure
or permit his death and the sacrilege than break the seal. Nev­
ertheless, he can, and must, exhort and bind the penitent in
the confessional to give him permission to make use of this
knowledge.*”
It is not allowed to Superiors to make use of knowledge gained
in the confessional in the external government of those under
them, or to adopt any course of action which is in any way
odious to the penitent, or which would make the confessional
odious. Hence it is not allowed to a Superior, in consequence
of knowledge obtained through the confessional, to alter an
arrangement which he has once made, or which he had deter­
mined upon only in his mind; but the case may occur in
which he may inform the penitent in the confessional that he
had intended to make certain arrangements, but that he now
begs his permission to recede from this intention.383
Accordingly, it is never allowed to a confessor to remove from
his office a subordinate whom he knows through the confes“l S. Alph. Lib. VI. η. 654; 11. Ap. n. 157. Cf. Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury,
II. n. 666, et Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 987 ss., et Vindiciæ Alplioiis. Par. V.
Q. 24 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 469; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 297, Q. II.
•5Î S. Alph. 1. n. 659 ; H. A. n. 161. Cf. Lugo. 1. c.
a* Ci. Decret. Clementis VIII. 20 May, 1591 et Deer. S. C. Inq. 18 Nov.,
1682 (auctor, liuioe. XI). Cf. Gury, II. Ed. Ratisb. n. 670.

VIOLATIONS OF TUE SEAL

488

sional to be unfit for it, to deprive him of his vote at an election,
to forbid him the Sacraments, to withdraw from him any tokens
of good-will formerly shown, to look at him askance, to take
from him keys which he formerly held or to hide those which
he was in the habit of leaving about, etc. But if the confessor
obtained this information otherwise than in the confessional,
he may make use of the knowledge otherwise obtained; but
then this information must really move him to his course of
action just as if he had had no knowledge of the unworthiness
of the subordinate through the confessional.”4
Where it is customary to give a ticket to testify that confes­
sion has been made, the confessor must confine himself to stat­
ing merely that he has heard the confession, and he must not
state that he has given absolution to the penitent; for if he
invariably attested that the penitent had been absolved, he
would be committing himself to a lie, in cases where he had not
absolved; if, again, he testified to having absolved those whom
he had absolved, and to not having absolved others to whom he
had refused absolution, he would, indirectly, violate the seal of
the confessional.
And if the confessor should refuse the ticket to an ill-disposed
penitent who had made a sacramental confession, he would also
violate the seal in the following cases: (a) where the penitent
asks for this ticket outside the confessional, and (h) when it is
given to all penitents, or when it is demanded by the penitent’s
Superior, as at Easter time, for example. But if the penitent
had no intention at all of making a sacramental confession, but
only made pretense of confession in order to procure his ticket,
for instance, in order to escape punishment from a teacher, or
to contract a marriage, the ticket must be refused to him.88*
884 Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 056-058 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. i. c. n. 1000;
Lugo, 1. c. Disp. 23, n. 93.
S. Alph. 1. o. nn. 039 et 061. Cf. Gury. II. Ed. Ratisb. nn. 060. 661 ;
Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 916; Laytnann, De Pœnit. cp. 14, n. 8;
Sporer, De Pœn. n. 839; Lacroix, Lil·. VI. P. II. n. 1914.

484

THE MINISTRE OF THE SACHAMEXT

If a confessor knows only through the confessional the bad
state of a man’s conscience, he must not on that account refuse
to hear his confession; he would only be allowed to do so if he
had previously, from another motive, resolved never to hear his
confession again, because such a refusal would make the con­
fessional odious both to the penitent and to others who should
come to hear of the confessor’s behavior.’8®
But how is a confessor to behave who learns from the confes­
sion of an unmarried woman who is near death that she is preg­
nant, this fact being quite unknown to others? Here may be
question of the Baptism of the child after the death of the
mother, before it is born. If a month has passed since concep­
tion, the confessor must induce the penitent to make known her
condition, after confession, to some other person, to her mother,
perhaps, or to the doctor (if the latter is a good Catholic, or a
believer) in order that, after her death, the child may be at once
brought into the world and baptized ; for she must prefer the
Baptism of the child, as a higher good, to her own reputation.
If she refuses to disclose the matter, the confessor should induce
her to communicate it to him outside confession, in order that
he may inform her parents and the doctor of it after her death.
But here great caution is necessary, lest others should be led to
believe that, he is breaking the seal. Hence he should persuade
the sick person to make a written statement of the case, if she
is able to do so, or he can do it for her; she should then give it
sealed to a third person who is to open it immediately after her
death.
If she will not consent to this plan, the confessor should ab­
stain from pressing her great responsibility in case she should
be invincibililer ignorant of it, or, perhaps, be persuaded that
the fœtus will not survive her; for otherwise, in his endeavor
to save the soul of the fœtus, he would incur the risk of ruining
·* S. Alph. 1. c. n. 659; 11. A. n. IGO. Cf. Ballerini, 1. c. n. 1012 ss.

VIOLATIONS OF THE SEAL

485

both souls, that of the mother and that of the child. But abso­
lution can be given to the sick person unless she is undoubtedly
ill disposed — which will seldom be the case. Finally, if the
confessor knows the condition of the sick person only through
the confessional and cannot obtain her permission to make it
known, he must maintain perpetual silence, come what may.
For the duty of the seal does not cease with the life of the peni­
tent.3''7
As the binding force of the seal exists only for the benefit of
the penitent, the penitent may cancel or modify this obligation,
but he alone has this power. This permission must, however,
be given quite voluntarily. If the penitent has thus given per­
mission to break the seal in some point, this permission does
not extend to the revelation of his accomplices and others; the
law of universal charity and of justice (for instance, preserva­
tion of a good name) still remains intact, and binds the more
strictly the more probability there is of the Sacrament being
made odious by any suspicion.
W’ Cf. Theol. Mechlin, n. 117, Q. 3; Aertuya, 1. c. n. 297, Q. 9.

Section III
THE DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR TOWARD DIFFERENT CLASSES

OF PENITENTS

Having considered in the foregoing sections the essential and
accidental duties of the confessor in general, it remains to be
shown how these duties are to be performed in concrete cases.
Penitents, not being of one type, require treatment according to
their intellectual development, their moral constitution, and
their natural dispositions, their station and circumstances of
life. On account of the difficulties which beset confessors in
dealing with these different classes of penitents, we propose to
give some practical suggestions. We shall treat of persons
placed in peculiar spiritual conditions, persons in different ex­
ternal circumstances, and persons who on account of the great
danger of their salvation call for special care.

480

CHAPTER I
THE TREATMENT OF PENITENTS IN DIFFERENT SPIRITUAL
CONDITIONS

Sinful habits, and the immediate occasions of sin, are the
nets with which the arch-enemy of mankind ensnares and holds
innumerable souls. Especially in our own times have the occa­
sions of sin become more numerous and dangerous, and careless­
ness with regard to them has increased. Many souls are thus
lost ! The more alarming this condition proves, the more should
the priest be animated by zeal to prevent its fatal consequences.
This requires great prudence and sound knowledge. For this
prudence the priest must continually pray and consult wise and
approved teachers. St. Alphonsus is recognized by all as a
most safe guide amongst these teachers; for this eminent Doc­
tor has been given to the Church by divine Providence in our
days, that he might show us the middle path between opin­
ions which are either too lax or too strict.”·

Article I
63. Sinful Occasions and the Duty of avoiding them.

By “occasion of sin” (occasio peccandi) we mean,in general, a
person, or some external object constituting for any one a dan­
ger of sinning. It comprises two elements: an external object
which incites to sin, and an internal inclination to sin.
Cf. Aertnys, Tract. De praxi servanda cum occasionariis et recidivis
Theol. Mor. II. Appendix, un. 298—350.
487

-ISS

TH K MINISTER OF THE SACHA MEN!

For a right understanding, we must distinguish between the
danger and the occasion of sinning.’"’
Danger is the impulse to sin, and if this impulse proceeds
from a person or an external object, this person, or this external
object, is called an occasion of sin; but if the impulse to sin
comes from within only, namely from the devil or in consequence
of a sinful habit, it is called simply danger.330 There is a danger in
every occasion but not every danger proceeds from an external
occasion of sin.
1. The occasion of sin is either immediate (.proxima) or remote
(remota), according as the danger of sinning is great and prob­
able, or slight. The immediate occasion is “absolutely immedi­
ate," when for the generality, of mankind it presents a serious
and probable danger of sinning; or it is “relatively immediate”
when the danger exists for some individual person on account
of his particular disposition. A per se proxima occasio may,
therefore, lie remota for a very pious and prudent man, whereas
an occasion per se remota may be for a weak person and one
much inclined to sin proxima.
The existence of an occasio proxima may be inferred: (1) a
posteriori from a sad experience that the person did, in fact,
generally, or at least often, fall into sin whenever the occasion
presented itself. If, however, his trespasses were notably loss
numerous than his victories, the occasion cannot be called an im­
mediate one.”' (2) A priori, from the attraction of the object,
“* Cf. Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Append. (ut supra cit.). Ballerini, Opus
Theol. Moral. Tom. V. n. 167 ss.; Note ad Gury, II. n. 628 ss. ; Lehmkuhl,
1. c. u. 485 ss.; Marc. Inst. Mor. Tract. V. Dissert. III. n. 1818 ss.
·*> Some theologians call that which incites to sin from within the “ in­
terior occasion," but, generally, only a person or external object is defined
as occatio.
»' Cf. Ballerini, Note ad Gury, Π. n. 628, et Opus Theol. Moral. Tom. V.
n. 167. Theologians do not agree in defining the occasio proxima. Depart­
ing from the above definition, some teach —and in this they are in accord­
ance with St. Alphonsus—that, “to constitute the occasio proxima, it is not
necessary that a person should, fere temper aut frequentius, sin in that occa-

SINFUL OCCASIONS AND ÜUTY OF AVOIDING THEM

489

from the weakness of the person, from his passion, from a sinful
habit, from the violence of the temptation to which he is ex­
posed in this occasion. Although sin has not yet been com­
mitted, there is always great danger in presumptuously exposing
one's self to violent temptation.3"’
It may be assumed that an occasio proxima has become remota:
(1) when it is known from experience that the sins have become
less, and are no longer frequent; (2) when some circumstance
has supervened which has caused the danger to be no longer a
great one, such as a marriage, a quarrel, etc.
2. Furthermore, the occasion is continua, continual, seu in
esse, or, with interruptions, interrupta, non continua, non in esse.
It is present interruptedly, when one is not always exposed to
it, but only occasionally, for instance in visits to dancing
rooms, inns, etc. ; it is present continuously when one is
always, uninterruptedly exposed to it; for instance, in the
case of a concubine or a servant living in the same house and
sion, but that, it suffices if he often, frequenter, falls, as frequens lapsus in the
past makes a fall in the future probable.” Aertnys, I. c. n. 302, Q. 1; Marc,
1. c. n. 1820; Berardi, De occas, n. 13. The frequentia lapsuum is either rela­
tiva or absoluta. Relative frequency is reckoned according to the number
of cases in which the person has been exposed to the occasion; so it would
be, for instance, an occasio proxima if in twelve visits a person has sinned
five or six times. Similarly, if a man should visit a woman only three or
four times in two years, and generally sinned with her; or when the visit
took place only once a year during three years and each time sin was com­
mitted. On the other hand, the frequency is absolute when the number of
cases is, in itself, considerable; for instance, if two persons meet every Sun­
day, and sin ten or twelve times in the year. However, this stricter defini­
tion does not seem to bo that of St. Alphonsus; at least he defines the occasio
proxima in two passages of his works (Homo Apost. Tr. lilt. n. 1, and Theol.
Mor. Lib. VI. n. 452) as that in qua communiter ut plurimum dejiciunt, while
into one definition he also introduces the frequenter peccare in contrast to
frequentius. According to Ballerini these conflicting passages may be recon­
ciled with each other, and Lugo's definition is, he says, the basis of the
agreement: that constitutes an immediate occasion of which a man never,
or scarcely ever, consideratis circumstantiis makes use without sinning. Lugo,
De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 149. Cf. Vindic. Alph. n. 140, p. 042.
®JCf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 168.

490

TUE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

with whom one is accustomed to sin; an obscene statue in
one’s room.
3. Again, the immediate occasion is voluntary {voluntaria),
which can easily, and without much detriment, be given up;
and necessary (necessaria) which the person cannot, even if he
will, remove or relinquish. The necessary occasion is either
physically or morally necessary; physically, when the person
absolutely cannot remove it; morally, when it cannot be aban­
doned or avoided without sin, or great scandal, or great detri­
ment to honor, or property, or without placing one’s self in a
similar or worse danger of sin.
The following principles are to be laid down respecting the
duty of avoiding the occasions of sin : —
I. The duty of avoiding mortal sin imposes upon us the strict
duty of avoiding also the immediate danger of mortal sin.
He who is bound under grave sin to reach a certain end is also
bound under grave sin to employ the means without which this
end cannot be reached; but flight from the immediate occasion
of sin is the morally necessary means of avoiding sin, conse­
quently this immediate danger must be avoided. Further, as a
man is bound by love for his own person not to expose his bod­
ily life voluntarily to the danger of death, he is, a fortiori, hound
by the law of charity not to expose his supernatural life volun­
tarily to the danger of death, that is, the danger of mortal sin.
It is, therefore, in re morali, a sin of the same kind to place one’s
self in an immediate occasion of sin, or to desire and commit the
sin. It follows from this that a man sins grievously as often as
he exposes himself without necessity to the immediate occasion
of sin, even if he does not actually sin in this occasion. On the
other hand, it is no sin to expose one’s self to a remote danger
of sinning if there is a reason for so doing, or if precautionary
measures are taken. For such danger can be easily overcome.”1’
·»* Cf. S. Alph. Lib. V. n. 63 ; Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 14, η. 157 ; Sanchez.
Decal. Lib. I. cp. 8. n. 4.

SINFl’L O'.'ASIONS AND DUTY OF AVOIDING THEM 491

II. It is allowed, in case of moral necessity, to expose one’s
self to the immediate occasion of sin; only suitable means must
then be employed to protect one’s self against the danger. In
this case one does not love the danger, but incurs it unwillingly,
and if a man strengthens himself by firm resolutions, prayer, etc.,
God will not suffer him to fall into sin, and in this manner the
danger becomes a remote one. From this it results that a man
is always bound to avoid formal danger either by flight or by
precautionary measures.3’'
III. From the duty to avoid the risk of sinning results the
duty to avoid the immediate occasions of sinning as those imply an
immediate danger of sinning. This same conclusion, moreover,
follows from two propositions condemned by Innocent XI:
"The immediate occasion of sinning is not to be avoided when
there is any causa utilis aut honesta for not avoiding it” (Prop.
62). "It is permissible to seek directly an immediate occasion
of sinning pro bono spirituali vel temporali nostro vel proximi"
(Prop. 3).
On the other hand, this obligation is not incumbent in respect
to remote occasions, because they do not present an immediate
danger of sinning, and because it is, for the most part, morally
impossible to avoid all these occasions; we should be obliged
simply to leave the world, as the Apostle says (1 Cor. v. 10), for
they occur in all circumstances.
But it must here be observed that the occasions of sin may
be avoided in two ways, according to the nature of the occasion.
As this consists in an external object and an interior inclination
to sin, occasions can be avoided: (1) physically or materially
by separation from the external object, and (2) morally, or for­
mally, when the danger is neutralized by other means which
weaken the interior inclination without physical separation.
The first method must come into operation in cases of voluntary
*** S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. V. n. 63.

492

TUE MIXISTER OF THE SACHA M EXT

occasion, for he who wishes to remain in immediate occasion of
sin has no real intention of avoiding sin. And when it. is a
question of a real)}’ voluntary immediate occasion, where there
is frequent, sinning, or violent passion, or a sinful habit, or great
incitement to sin, no success is to be hoped without separation,
nor will the use of remedies convert the immediate into a remote
occasion. For a great temptation cannot be overcome without
the help of God’s grace, but God does not assist those who pre­
sumptuously expose themselves to temptation — as experience
often shows. This is especially true of the immediate voluntary
occasions of sin against purity.”5 The second method suffices in
the case of the necessary occasion, for he who through necessity
remains in a danger of sin, may hope for the divine help to
avoid sin.
From this consideration we deduce the following rules: —
1. An occasio proxima libera of grave sin, whether absolute or
relative proxima, must absolutely be avoided; to remain volun­
tarily in such occasion or to seek it is itself a grave sin.
2. It is absolutely necessary to avoid or remove an occasio
proxima necessaria; but for him who finds himself in it there
exists a disjunctive duty, either of employing suitable means of
reducing it to a remote occasion, or of removing it in spite of
all difficulties and obstacles.
3. Not to remove a remote occasion, even when there is no
particular reason for exposing one’s self to it, is, of itself, no
grave sin; but this occasion must remain a remote one, and he
who Antis himself exposed to it must be resolved to avoid the
temptations possibly arising from it. For it is sometimes possi­
ble to foresee that what is now a remote danger will very soon
become a grave and immediate danger; in this case it is the
confessor’s duty to cut off such an occasion and to forbid it to
the penitent lest he fall into formal sin. And when, on the
•“Cf. S.Thomae, Sumra. Theol. II. II. Q. 151, art. 3, ad I.

PENITENTS IN PHOXIMATE OCCASION OF SIN

493

contrary, the danger of a certain sin is very remote and, in addi­
tion, there is a steadfast intention not to sin, the virtue to which
that sin is opposed does not seem to suffer, even when this risk
is incurred without cause. If the danger is in any way consul·
erable, and it is incurred without cause, the virtue suffers; in a
case of immediate danger of sin this is certainly the case.”' But
the venial sin which a man commits who is careless about keep­
ing from a remote occasion increases in gravity in proportion to
the danger. If a man exposes himself to the danger which such
an occasion offers from a more or less weighty motive, he com­
mits no sin at all, provided his resolution not to sin remains firm.
4. If danger of venial sin is to be apprehended, he who pre­
sumptuously exposes himself to it commits a venial sin : but if
the danger of venial sin proceeds from an action inse commend­
able and useful, this character of the action is sufficient ground
for lawfully undertaking it; indeed, we ought to disregard the
danger in a case of this kind, at the same time insuring our­
selves against sin by employing preventive measures. If we did
not adopt this counsel, innumerable actions which are useful
would remain unperformed out of fear of sin, and this would be­
speak timidity rather than prudence and conscientiousness. On
the other hand, it is a mark of wisdom and zeal for perfection
to avoid useless actions which, ex se, cannot be done without
venial sin, and to avoid them the more because they may lead
to other venial sins.’”

64. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in
Occasione Proxima Voluntaria.

Upon the foregoing explanations are based the following rules,
according to which the confessor has to proceed with penitents
in occasione proxima libera: —
·>* Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 180.
■” Cf. Lehmkuhl, n. 180, IV ; Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. Tom. V. Tract.

4ÎU

TH K MINISTER OF TH K SACRAMENT

I. Penitents who arc in occasione continua cannot, as a mie,
k absolved, oven the first time, before they have given tip that
which constitutes the occasion, however much they may promise
to do so. For so long as a penitent remains under the influ­
ence of this occasion, he is in immediate danger of breaking his
resolution to abandon it, as its removal, after an attachment
to it has been formed and its fascination experienced, is very
difficult and demands great self-command; so that there is rea­
son for fearing that the presence of the sinful object will again
enslave the penitent. Hence, the penitent who knows this and
would, nevertheless, expose himself to the danger of breaking his
resolution, must be regarded as not disposed, and the confessor
who indulges him sins against Ids duty as judge by absolving
an ill-disposed penitent, and also against his duty as physician
of the soul by notapplying the necessary means of amendment.”’
To this rule there are, however, some exceptions, though in
every case the penitent must faithfully promise to remove the
occasion as soon as possible : —
1. When the penitent shows signs of extraordinary sorrow
and firmness of purpose, thus giving hope that he will carry out
his resolutions faithfully.
2. When the occasion is such that the penitent can give it up
without doing great violence to himself.
3. When there is a solid reason for administering absolution
at once; for it is allowed, where such reason exists, and if the
necessary cautions are employed, to expose one's self and an­
other to a danger which then becomes a remote one ; and if the
penitent must receive absolution before he can remove the occa­
sion, he is to be regarded as one in occasione necessaria, and he
has a right, therefore, to immediate absolution. The following
arc held to be sufficient reasons : (a) Danger o/ death ; that is,
when the penitent is in danger of death and the occasion cannot
Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 451. Prax. Conf. n. 66.

ΓΕΝ IT ENTS IN PROXIMATE OCCASION OF BIN

495

be removed at once for want of time, or because great disgrace
or scandal is to be feared. (6) Difficulty in going to the same
conjessor again ; if this is the case, or if the penitent could not
return till after a long time, nor repeat the confession to another
confessor except under great difficulties, he may also be absolved
before giving up the occasion. This holds good when the peni­
tent confesses at a place far removed from his own domicile, so
that it would be very difficult for him to go to the confessor
again, (c) Danger 0/ disgrace, if, on the same day or the follow­
ing, he were obliged to contract a marriage, or receive holy com­
munion, and could not withdraw without great disgrace. The
case is similar if one confesses during the time of a mission, and
cannot during this time remove the occasion without incurring
infamy, as is frequently the case. Here the confessor may con­
tent himself with the removal of the occasion some weeks after
the mission, but he must demand that the penitent should take
the preliminary steps towards this at once if it can be done.
((/) Danger of spiritual injury; that is, when the confessor has
grounds for fearing that, on account of the postponement of
absolution, the penitent would be estranged from the confes­
sional and perish in his sins; in this case, postponement of abso­
lution would rather increase the danger of not being faithful to
his resolution.
In the above-named cases the confessor would be obliged to
explain to the penitent that he must not hope to receive abso­
lution in the future if he does not keep his promise.’00
II. Those penitents who are in occasione interrupta can be
absolved aliquoties (two or three times) before they have aban­
doned the occasion if they seriously promise to do so. They do
not live actu in the occasion, and their resolution not to seek the
·” Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 154 : Prax. Conf. nn. 67, 68; Berardi. I. c.
nn. 44, 45, 49, 50; S. Leonard a Port-Maur. Disc. mist. n. 22. Cf. Proposit.
61 damn, ab hinoc. XI et Proposit. 41 damn, ab Alex. VII; Aertnys, I. c.
n. 306, HI.

496

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRA!\lEXT

occasion may, therefore, be regarded as a firm one; but the
confessor must urge them to abandon the occasion.
If the penitent does not subsequently amend, absolution must
Iw deferred till he has really abandoned the occasion. As he
could easily give up the occasion, and does not do so, according
to his promise, doubts as to the firmness of his resolution arise;
extraordinary signs of good dispositions would, however, remove
these doubts.
If the penitent shows some improvement, although he has not
yet completely given up the occasion, and if it is to be feared
that deferring absolution would do more harm than good to the
penitent, he may be absolved, seeing that his improvement in­
dicates a firm resolve and preludes complete amendment.400
III. Penitents who have relapsed into an occasio continua, that
is, those who have not kept their promise to remove the occasion,
cannot be absolved unless they prove their worthiness by some
extraordinary sign. But even in the latter case, that is, when
these penitents give extraordinary signs of their good disposi­
tions, the confessor where it seems feasible and useful may defer
their absolution ex officio medici till they have removed the
occasion.401

65. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are
in Occasione Necessaria.

The following are the rules for the treatment of this very
numerous class of penitents : —
I. Penitents who are in occasione proxima necessaria can be
absolved without giving up the occasion if they are disposed
and are willing to adopt means oj amendment. “For,” as St.
Alphonsus says, "an opportunity of sinning is really, in se, no
sin, and induces no necessity of sinning ; true sorrow and a firm
*» S. Alph. 1. c. n. 454. Prax. Conf. n. 66.
S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 456. 463, 464 ; Prax. Conf. n. 69 ; Berardi, 1. c. nn. 53,
.’>1 ; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 306, IV. V.

PENITENTS IN NECESSARY OCCASION OF SIN

497

purpose not to relapse may, therefore, be quite consistent with
an occasion ; and although it is right that every one should be
bound to remove the immediate occasion of sin, this simply
means that no one may expose himself voluntarily to such risks.
But if the occasion is necessary, the danger becomes, by the
application of remedies, a remote one, and God does not with­
draw the helps of His grace from him who is firmly resolved
not to offend Him.” ‘w
II. If penitents who live in occasione proxima necessaria have
relapsed, that is, have not employed the means prescribed by
the confessor, absolution must be deferred till they have amended,
unless they remove all doubts about their disposition by some
extraordinary sign.403 But how are penitents to be dealt with
who have employed the means prescribed but yet have relapsed
in the same way ?
While many theologians believe that such persons can be
absolved (and that toties quoties) if they seriously promise amend­
ment, St. Alphonsus teaches (maintaining that this is the sen­
tentia verior el communis) that they must give up the occasion
before they can be absolved, even if they suffer thereby great
injury or detriment (etiam, si opus sil, cum jactura vitee), provided
that, after many attempts, there is no improvement and no probable
hope of improvement. For in this case (he says) the danger of
sin remains a formal one and cannot be separated from a sin.
Physical separation from the occasion is, therefore (he contin­
ues), the only means of salvation, and the words of Christ are
binding: “If thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out, and cast it
from thee ; for it is better to enter into life with one eye than
in possession of both eyes, to be cast into hell fire." (Matt, xviii.
9.) “ What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world, but
suffer the loss of his own soul?” (Matt. xvi. 26.) The holy
Doctor excepts the case in which the penitent gives such extraor40S S. Alph. H. Ap. Tr. ult. n. 8.
«<« S. Alph. 1. c. ii. 158.

Ci. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. n. 185.

498

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

dinary signs of repentance that improvement can be reason­
ably hoped for.,e‘ Ballerini, however, urges the possibility of
supposing that in the case of such penitents there is something
more in question than the want of the necessary dispositions,
namely, that the means prescribed and employed were not the
right ones, and, therefore, that others should be prescribed.
This, he says, is not to be understood of the general means sim­
ply, such as prayer and other pious exercises, almsgiving, and
abstinence, and frequent reception of the holy Sacraments, etc.,
but much more of the special means which are adapted to over­
come temptations and dangers, and which are to be determined
according to circumstances ; for if these were faithfully employed,
they would make relapse morally impossible, especially when
external sins were in question ; for instance, avoiding of inter­
course solius cum sola.
Ballerini urges, moreover, that, ex lege naiurce, the penitent
is, indeed, bound to avoid the immediate danger, but this can
be done in two ways, by employing suitable means by which
the danger becomes a remote one, or by removing or avoiding the
occasion ; but the penitent, he says, is bound to only one of the
two ex lege natura·; with what right, therefore, can the confessor
bind the penitent to the one more than to the other? Nor must
wc impose upon the penitent what is too difficult, indeed, in
many cases morally impossible. Moreover, if the confessor
is obliged to choose that course which removes the penitent
from the danger of sinning, he will certainly never choose that
means through which the penitent will certainly sin by refusing
to make use of it. Another way is also open to the. confessor,
without insisting on this indiscreet obligation, namely, to defer
absolution sometimes till the penitent has employed the suit­
able remedies with successful results. But in this case it is to
be observed that complete amendment is not necessary in order
«ο* Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. nn. 450, 457 ; II. Ap. Tr. ult. n. 7 ; 1’rux. Conf. n. «!>.
Cf. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 156 ss.

PENITENTS IN NECESSAIIY OCCASION OF SIN

499

that absolution may be given. It suffices that the number of
sins should indicate that it can be truly said that the occaaon
is no longer immediate.4’5
“To put it in a few words, there is no need to deal with these
penitents otherwise than with those who have contracted sinful
habits. I will only add one remark, that if the confessor is
harsh, strictly demanding the more difficult step, the only result,
will be that the penitent will become more entangled in sin ; on
the other hand, mildness and patience will at least save him
from complete ruin; thus theologians speak of the confessions
of a meretrix, a usurer, or of any other penitent who is not suffi­
ciently disposed, but has a desire to amend.”405
As to the remedies for penitents in occasione necessaria, the
confessor must endeavor : —
1. To lessen lhe power of the sinful occasion. A few resolute
and boldly spoken words, a serious threat, or rebuke, a cry for
help, a complaint at the proper place, will often suffice to dis­
courage an insolent tempter and prevent any further annoy­
ance. The confessor must, moreover, require that the penitent
should no longer associate solus cum. sola, that he should shun
all intimacy, and, as far as is possible, avoid even the sight of
the complex and give up speaking and thinking of her, etc.
2. To lessen lhe power of lhe passion, — by work, fasting, and
exercises of penance.
3. To increase spiritual strength, — by prayer, frequent recep­
tion of the Sacraments, meditation upon the eternal truths.'”
It is, however, to be carefully observed that the penitent is
bound to employ the means which he is able to employ; other­
wise, though the occasion would be necessary, the < langer would
be voluntary. Let the confessor instruct the penitent as to this
ws Cf. S. Alph. Lib· VI. n. 456; Prax. Conf. n. 60.
Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. I. c. nn. 196, 197. Cf. Ballerini, Nota» nd
Gury, Π- “■ ,i31·1,1 Vindicia, Alph. pp. 603-620.
«7 Cf. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 08; Berardi, I. c. nn. 79-33.

.500

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

duty, select the means corresponding to the danger, the char­
acter, and the circumstances of the penitent, and also show him
how to apply them,*""
In the treatment of the occasionarius the confessor must be
very prudent. P. Segneri calls attention to a double trick by
which penitents try to deceive themselves and the confessor,
(a) They are wont generally so to represent the occasion that
it seems to be only a remote one, or they pretend that shunning
it would cause them great difficulties, whereas there is frequently
no other difficulty than that their passion finds it hard to break
chains that have become dear to them. When, therefore, peni­
tents speak of the scandal or the great injury which removing
or avoiding the occasion would cause, the confessor must not be
too ready to believe them, but must carefully weigh the matter,
for it is one of great importance, (ft) The second, not less dan­
gerous, deception, is that they declare themselves ready to leave
the occasio in esse; but in reality this is only in words; when
the confession is over they do not perform what they have prom­
ised to perform. “I know well that many teach that the peni­
tent can be absolved the first time, if he has made the promise
to discharge liis duty as soon as possible. But I repeat what I
have said: as a rule do not do so, for . . . experience shows
that penitents who have obtained absolution in this manner
do not subsequently endeavor to break through the net of sin ;
they find a hundred evasions, and before the occasion has been
removed the sins have been multiplied, till, at the expiration
of the year, Easter approaches, when they proceed to another
confessor, who is equally imprudent. If a penitent has already
deceived you or other confessors, I declare to you that on no
account may you or can you give him absolution. For he is
not disposed. If you, nevertheless, should believe that the pres­
ent words of the penitent ought to be esteemed as of more value
*· 8. Alph. 1. c. Lib. V. u. 03 ; Segneri, Instr. Conf. cap. 5 ; Berardi, 1. c. ;
Aertnys, 1. c. n. 308, Q. 1.

SOME COMMONLY OCCURRING OCCAfHOIfti OF S/.V 501
than his former deeds, and if, without just grounds, you hold
him sufficiently disposed and worthy of absolution, listen, at
least, to what 1 say to you : you do not act like a good confessor,
and even if you fulfill the duties of the judge, you neglect the
duties of the physician which are also incumbent upon you.
Even if the penitent is contrite, as he seems to you to be, it is
not fair to leave him in the jaws of the dragon when you can
snatch him from the terrible danger of relapse by means of that
remedy which is the only one against this evil, namely, by forc­
ing him first to do that which he is bound to do, and by defer­
ring absolution till he has done it. This just severity is still more
necessary in the case of public sinners, for with these scandal is
added to the sin of occasion.” *oe
66.' Some Commonly Occurring Occasions of Sin.

The application of the principles developed in the foregoing
to many occasions of sin — such as concubinage, dancing, the
theater, bad reading, and intimacies—presents to the young con­
fessor at times no small difficulty. These occasions are, more­
over, so numerous nowadays that they form a large part of
the confessor’s work. We will, therefore, devote a short discus­
sion to them.
I. Concubinage. That is, frequentatus concubitus cum eadem
femina, quam quis instar uxoris in propria vel aliena domo retinet.
It generally occurs with unmarried people, but also in any other
species of unchastity. The confessor must devote a very special
attention to this occasion, for public scandal usually accom­
panies it. Those who practice it are exposed to immediate dan­
ger of eternal damnation and are with great difficulty brought
to amend and separate/10
As remedy, the confessor may (1) sometimes recommend mar40e Segneri, Conf. Instr, cp. C.
«io (jf Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. 8, ref. matrim.

502

THE MISISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

riage when this is practicable. Marriage is often t he only remedy
for such unhappy people, as the occasion of sin is, in this way,
removed. The confessor should especially encourage it in the
following cases: (a) when the concubine lives in the house of
her accomplice, is supported by him, and cannot otherwise pro­
cure her livelihood; (b) when the two parties love each other
very much, and especially (c) when the concubinage has lasted
a long time, is legalized, as regards the state, by a so-called civil
marriage, when children have resulted from this sinful connec­
tion; and, finally (d), when one of the parties is in danger of
death. On the other hand, separation will lx* preferable to
marriage when the concubine lives in another house, and when
not love but sensual passion is the motive of their sinful life.
But if marriage cannot lie at once contracted, the confessor
must urge separation if tliis is any way feasible, so that the
occasion of sin may, in the meanwhile, be removed ; if separa­
tion is impracticable, the confessor must prescribe suitable meas­
ures for diminishing the danger of sin.’11
On the other hand, confessors and parish priests should not
have recourse to a matrimonium secretum or conscientia,"2 unless
one of the two living in a state of concubinage is in danger of
death, or when they are publicly regarded as married ; for in
other cases, divortium is to be feared, and if the concubinage is
secret, scandal will arise as soon as children are born, or there
will be danger of a continued state of onanistic cohabitation in
order that no scandal may arise.
2. If marriage is either morally impossible, or if an unhappy
marriage is to lie feared, the confessor must impose separation
upon the parties, where separation can take place, as it is the
necessary means of removing the occasion of sin. If immediate
411 Compare §65, Penitents in occasione necessaria, tor the same prin­
ciples apply to this case.
41J See Benger, Pastoraltheologie, Vol. II. Book 4, § 191, n. 28, p. 665
(2ed.).

HOME COMMONLY OCCURRlNO OCCASIONS OF BIN 503
separation is impossible, let him prescribe the remedies given
above for penitents in occasione necessaria. If, for instance,
the concubine lives with the accomplice as a servant or in any
other capacity, she must, in order to avoid sin in the meantime,
tell the man plainly that she does not wish to live such a life
any longer, and resist him in every possible way, lock the door
of her bedroom at night, and apply the other remedies referred
to above. If she is dismissed from her service on this account
and left houseless and without sustenance, let the confessor
(preserving his own honor and avoiding scandal) procure her
admission into a house of refuge for women, or in some other
way make provision for her need. If the parties live in sepa­
rate houses, let the confessor forbid the man to visit his accom­
plice and have further intercourse with her. The woman must,
in addition to the remedies already prescribed, employ the fol­
lowing : (a) never again to admit the accomplice to her dwell­
ing; (ô) to take rooms with some respectable woman, so as not
to be found alone; and (c) to change her place of residence.
3. But if very weighty and insurmountable reasons prevent
both marriage and separation, the confessor must have re­
course to such measures as will remove the formal danger of
sin ; for in this case the occasion is a necessary one, and he must
act accordingly.
4. If one of the parties living in concubinage is seriously ill
or in danger of death, marriage must take place at once. If
they cannot marry, and if the concubinage is public, the man
must dismiss his accomplice and engage another respectable
servant to wait upon him. If the woman is dangerously ill,
she must, her illness and circumstances permitting, take steps
to obtain admission into a public hospital if one is accessible.
Whore the concubinage is not publicly known, a separation
will present difficulties on account of the danger of disgrace.
If it is not practicable, the confessor must take care that the
danger of sin be removed as much as possible, and to this end

5Ο4

THE MINISTER OF TUE SACRAMENT

prescribe the aforesaid remedies. The following measures are
also to Ije recommended: removal of the portrait of the accom­
plice from the room; if such removal is not possible. the sick
person should, either personally or through the confessor, beg par­
don of the accomplice for the scandal given, and advise the latter
to provide for his (or her) soul’s salvation by true repentance/13
5. As to the absolution of those living in concubinage, the
following rules will be serviceable to the confessor : if a public
concubinage and a voluntary occasion are in question, the par­
ties cannot be absolved till they have really separated. To the
reasons already given above is to be added the fact that it would
cause scandal if the man who kept a concubine in his house or
who often visited her at her house, or the woman who still lived
with her accomplice or received him at her house, were scon
approacliing holy communion. A peccator publicus also can­
not be absolved till he has publice done penance and atoned
for his scandal.41*
If it is a question of a necessary occasion with a public con­
cubinage, absolution must be deferred till the penitent has
refrained from sin for some considerable time and has repaired
the scandal given.416 The confessor, however, must not readily
believe that the occasion is a necessary one, for the attachment
to sin of these unhappy people causes them to exaggerate the
difficulties of separation, or, indeed, to suppose difficulties
where they do not exist.41" An occasion is oidy to be regarded
as necessary when the penitent would suffer great injury by
leaving it, when it might mean the surrender of the social posi­
tion which he held at the time.4” The public scandal might be
4,1 Cf. Berardi. De occas, n. 117 ss. ; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. II. Lib. VI.
Traci. V. Append. Part III. n. 315 ss.
4,4 Segneri. Instruct. Conf. cp. 5; S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 430.
4,4 Cf. S. Alph. Lib. 111. n. 430.
414 Cf. Segneri, Instruct. Conf. cp. 5 et 0.
4” Cf. Gobat, 1. c. Tract. VII. cos. 16. n. 530; Sporer, Theol. suer. P. III.
u. 828; S. Alph. Lib. III. tin. 437, 441, Lib. II. u. 31, Lib. VI. n. 455.

SO.WE COMMONLY OCCURRING OCCASIONS OF SIN

505

regarded as atoned for if the parties caused it to be made known
(if it were not already known) that they could not separate;
furthermore, if they publicly gave signs of their conversion by
attending divine service, receiving the Sacraments, etc., and,
finally, if they marry, in case this were possible. An exception
to the above rule could only be made in the following cases,
certainly very rare ones : if the sinful intercourse had long ceased
but was still a subject of talk and the scandal could not at once
be removed, but the penitent were willing to atone for it as soon
as possible, he might then be absolved before the scandal was
made good if he promises not to go to holy communion, at
least not in the place where his former sinful career was a matter
of notoriety.1”
When a man living publicly in concubinage falls seriously
ill, or is in danger of death, he must be absolved sub conditione,
if he is already unconscious, and Extreme Unction must also
be given to him ; for it cannot be maintained that he persists
in manifest mortal sin, unless he had expressly refused the holy
Sacraments before unconsciousness set in. If he is still con­
scious, but dying, and there is no time either for a marriage or
for arranging a separation, he must be helped to make an act
of contrition and absolved, and the other Sacraments should
then be administered to him. But care must be taken that
the accomplice does not come near him, and that, if it is still
possible, the dying person asks pardon before witnesses in atone­
ment for the scandal, either personally, or through the priest.
If this form of atonement is not practicable, the priest should
provide for it in some other way.*” But if there is still suffi­
cient time to atone for the scandal, and to remove the occasion
of relapse (exterior and interior), either by marriage or sepa­
ration, absolution must not be given till the scandal is atoned
for and the occasion removed. If neither expedient is practi41" Segneri, I. c. cp. 5; Berardi, 1. c. n. 151.
4,8 Cf. Bit. Rom. Tit. IV’. cp. 4, n. 1.

506

THE MINI'8TEH OF THE SACRAMENT

cable, this impossibility must be declared before witnesses, so
that it may become known, and the sick person must promise
to bring about the separation as soon as he recovers/’0
If the concubinage is not publicly known and the occasion
is voluntary, the parties may not as a rule lx· absolved till they
have actually separated, even if they give signs of great sorrow.
An exception might be made to this rule when a prompt dis­
missal would lx
* impossible, and the penitent woidd be under
an urgent necessity of receiving holy communion in order to
avoid great infamy or some equivalent injury, supposing also
that the penitent were in very contrite dispositions in conse­
quence of some external occurrence — the death of a friend,
deliverance from death, etc., or if he and the accomplice did not
live in the same house, or if there were well-grounded fear that,
on account of the postponement of absolution, the penitent
might become estranged from the confessional and perish in
his sins.4’1
If, with secret concubinage, the occasion is a necessary one,
the properly disposed penitent may be absolved, but absolution
could be postponed in accordance with the rules here applica­
ble (§ 52).4” Let it be added that if the penitent maintains
that the occasion is necessary to avoid scandal or disgrace, he
should not, as a rule, be believed.
II. *Dancing. 0
*3' Cf. Berardi, 1. c. n. 118; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 319, Q.
481 Cf. 8. Alph. Lib. III. n. 436; Segneri, Instr. Conf. cp. 5.
Cf. 8. Alph. Lib. III. nn. 437, 441.
484 “ If, considering the present corruption of our society and the manner
in which dancing entertainments are conducted, a priest publicly protests
against them, he may be perfectly justified. But the place in which he
can exercise his influence against thia evil in the confessional. Here he can
positively forbid dancing to the young man or girl for whom it is an occasio
prozima of sin. whether the sin consists in bad thoughts and desires, or in
externa) acts, or he will proceed in accordance with the principles laid down
above (concerning the occasio necessaria)." Renninger-Gôpfert, Pastoral
Theology, Vol. I. Part I. § 80, p. 265.

.so.v/·;

< O.M.MO.VLY OCCURRING 0CCA8I0N8 Of SLV 507

Dancing with persons of different sex, when there is no ques­
tion of sinful circumstances, is, of itself, not forbidden, as it
is not er se actus libidinis.*14 But it may become very sinful:
(«) through sinful intention ; (b) through the danger of sinning;
(c) by the scandal given, and (d) by the prohibition of parents
or of an ecclesiastical law.4’5
Dancing is very sinful when those engaged in it have the in­
tention of exciting venereas delectationes, of employing tactus
malitiosos, or of indulging in turpes sermones. In this respect
the so-called masked balls {choreic larvatic, bals masqués) are a
source of great danger.4”1
Dancing may give rise to the following sins: (a) malitiosa
manuum constrictiones affectu nempe impudico, differing from
the simple, and, of itself, not dangerous manuum apprehensio; 421
(b) amplexus pressi; (c) tactus obscœni (especially, extra actum
saltandi) before or after; (d) amatorii et turpes sermones; aspec­
tus malitiosi (in the obscœnœ chorea) ; (e) delectationes morosa
et desideria turpia. The confessor will, however, observe that
the external sins referred to occur less frequently in respectable
dancing assemblies.
If dancing is a periculum proximum to those engaging in it,
and if there is no causa gravis for doing so, it must be avoided
under grave sin; if it constitutes only a periculum remotum or
is excused by some causa gravis, it would be a venial sin only,
or none at all. The confessor must, therefore, take into con­
sideration the danger and its nature, as also the existence of
a causa gravis.
He can judge if such danger is in question: (1) from experi­
ence,— that is, when the penitent has taken part in dancing, and
has often {frequenter) sinned in consequence of it, and when the
4M Cf. S. Alph.
«» Cf. S. Alph.
Cf. Berardi,
42T Cf. S. Alph.

Lib. TIL n. 429.
Lib. Hl. n. 429; Berardi, 1. c. n. 165.
I. c. n. 156.
Lib. III. n. 429 ; certe reniait non excedit.

fi08

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

circumstances are the same in some given case; (2) from
other circumstances, — especially the nature of the dance,
too great frequency, the time of night, the moral character
of the other persons present at the dance, indecens /eminarum
pectoris nudatio. General rules, applicable for all places and
persons, cannot be given here. Public dances to which all
have access are, generally speaking, more dangerous than
private ones.
If there is only periculum remotum in question, any causa
rationabilis excuses from sin, certainly from grievous sin; for
instance, to recreate one’s self, to have a little amusement (once
and again in the year), to find more easily an opportunity of
marrying, to show courtesy towards those who give invitations
to the dance, to avoid the talk and ridicule of others, etc. If,
however, there is question of periculum proximum, the causa
must be a gravis to constitute an excuse ; for instance, to avoid
giving serious offense to wife, husband, parents, brothers and
sisters, or to avoid family quarrels. But then there must be
no other way of escaping these quarrels, and the penitent who
exposes himself to these dangers must protect himself by suit­
able means.4”
With reference to the confessor’s conduct in this matter, we
may add the following remarks: (1) Let him equally avoid ex­
cess and deficiency of zeal; (2) let him estimate the danger to
which dancing exposes his penitent, by asking him if he has
committed sin at other dances, or been subjected to great temp­
tation. If it results from this examination that the penitent is
strictly bound to avoid these pleasures, let the confessor forbid
them to him even under threat of refusing absolution ; if no
such obligation is evident, let him not show himself too ready
in permitting indulgence in this dangerous and doubtful pleas4M Cf. Konings. Theol. Mor. Compend. n. 1441 ; S. Francise. Sales. Instit.
vit. dévot. I*. III. cp. 34; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 323, Q. II ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. I’. I.
Lib. 11. cp. 3, ii. G43.

SOM K COMMONLY OCCCKItlNG OCCASIONS OF SIN

509

ure, and let him tell the penitent how he should conduct
himself.'38
III. Freq uenling theaters.
Theatrical performances (in the wider sense of the term) are,
according to the teaching of St. Thomas,”n secundum se, not sin­
ful, but may become gravely so, by offending against religion
and good morals, in the matter represented or in the manner of
representing it. Very many modern dramas are of the latter
kind, and full of dangers, treating as they do of anti-religious
subjects or of such as are hostile to faith, or lascivious; degrad­
ing the Catholic faith, distorting historical facts to its detri­
ment, extolling the enemies of the Church, holding up holy
rites and even the Sacraments of the Church to mockery and
contempt, calumniating priests, making vices, such as adul­
tery, revenge, suicide, and sins of the flesh, appear lawful or
even glorifying them ; characterizing religion in general as ridicu­
lous, superstitious, etc., treating not only of obscene and dan­
gerous subjects, but also offending decency in the manner of
representation.
If. therefore, the dramas in question are Religioni notabiliter
contraria, or if the subject-matter or the manner of represent­
ing it are nimis turpia, attendance is certainly a grave sin. For
what may not be seen, or heard, or read, extra theatrum, without
great sin, cannot be, as the Angelic Master expresses himself,
ratione theatri leviora.*3'
If they are notabiliter, but not nimis turpia, they may Ire occa­
sio relativa, and frequenting them out of curiosity or for amuse­
ment (if there is no danger of consenting in turpem delectationem)
may be free from grave sin. But this danger will, in the case of
young people, be absent only when they have very tender con­
sciences, conduct themselves very prudently, and when, after
428 Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 112; Franc. Sale». Inst. vit. dévot. I. e. cp.
33 : Berardi, I. <:. nn. 107-100 ; Aertnys, 1. c. art. II. n. 324, Q. 1.
'»> II. II. Q. 168, art. 3.
4»' S. Thom. 4 Sent. dist. 16, Q. 1. art. 2.

510

THE MIXISTER OF THE EACHAM EXT

being repeatedly present at such performances, they arc able
to say that they have not committed mortal sin.’” Perform­
ances, however, which are non notabiliter turpia, may be an
occasio proximo for those who know by experience their own
weakness, the more so as nowadays doubtful attractions are
introduced even into otherwise good or harmless plays.
Tho so-called chorea1 sceniccc (ballet), qua· inter actus miscen­
tur, utpotc in quibus ob vestitum saltatricum, obscaium saltandi
modos aut lascivas gesticulationes, maxima apparere solet turpi­
tudo, will probably be for many theatergoers an occasio proxima.
When, therefore, one goes to a theater without exercising any
discrimination as to the choice of the play or the manner of its
performance, he exposes himself to a probable danger of sin,
ex communiter contingentibus fit prudens prœsumptio. Some,
however, maintain that they attend chiefly to the music, not to
the plot and its representation; this, of course, would mate­
rially reduce the danger, but not wholly remove it.
Frequenting the theater may also become sinful on account
of the sinful intention connected with it, and by the scandal
thereby given. Besides the actors and actresses in a bad play,
those also give scandal who cooperate in spectacula notabiliter
turpia aut Religioni graviter adversa, positively, by money or
applause, and, negatively, by not preventing them when ex
officio they were bound to do so, or at least could have prevented
them by some other means; for example, by refusing to co­
operate, etc.4” Moreover, parents and other superiors give scan­
dal who do not effectually prevent their children and those under
their care from being present at improper representations, or
when they give permission to go there, without having previ­
ously ascertained the character of the play. Finally, those give
scandal who encourage others (especially young people) by
their example to attend theaters, also clerics and religious who,
«* Cf. S. Alph. Lib. ΙΠ. n. 427.

Ibid.

SOME COMMONLY OCCURRING OCCASIONS OF SIN 511
contrary to ecclesiastical regulations, are present at secular
performances.4*4
If, therefore, by going to the theater, a person exposes him­
self to only slight danger, and only gives slight scandal, he is free
from grave sin if he takes the necessary precautions.
But if he suffers great danger, or gives great scandal, only
a causa gravis would excuse him from grave sin if he takes the
necessary precautions, and tries to the best of his power to
make good the scandal. Such causa gravis would be, for instance,
a well-founded fear of great detriment, continued irritation of
parents, of husband or wife, etc.; the loss of the subscrip­
tion fee would not he a causa sufficiens. But even when there
is a causa, and, in spite of precautions, faith is endangered, or if
the person often succumbs to temptation, he is absolutely bound
to avoid the occasion. Hence no causa will excuse fréquentation
of a very immoral or godless performance, because it will not be
possible to avoid the formal danger which accompanies it.
In cases where it is necessary, the penitent must be strictly
bound to avoid the theater or certain plays; even where this
obligation is not strictly binding, he must still be persuaded to
avoid the theater, and if this is not possible or opportune, the
priest must at least instruct the penitent cautiously to conduct
himself.
The actors in immoral and godless plays cannot, of course,
be admitted to the Sacraments till they have either given up
their profession, or no longer take part in such performances,
for they are peccatores publici, publicum scandalum prabentes.œ
IV. Bad reading.
The reading of bad books is a source of great danger, and this
occasion of sin is very common, unceasingly estranging countless
numbers from faith and robbing them of innocence.
Benedict XIV, De Synod. Lib. Π. cp. 10, η. 11.

Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III.

**Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 327 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. P. I. L. II. cp. 3, n. 944.

512

THE MINISTER ON THE SACRAMENT

We must distinguish between: (1) books which, ex professo,
are written against religion and faith (defending the errors of
heretics and infidels) and those which are not, ex professo,
directed against it (only here and there attacking religion);
(2) books which, ex professo, arc obscene (which, if not wholly,
yet to a great extent, treat of obscene things) and such as
are subobscami (in which a good deal of obscenity is to be
found).
Books ex professo impii arc very dangerous and pernicious.
Few persons who are not learned and pious theologians can
read them without injury to their faith. Hence the Church (in
the second rule of the Index) has strictly prohibited the reading
of such books, and if they hœresim propugnant, reading them
consciously entails censure of excommunication reserved to the
Pope.*” Books which arc hostile to religion, but not so ex
professo, are also a source of danger, and, therefore, reading
them is permitted to no one without necessity. The degree of
the danger depends upon the object which the reader has in
view, upon his age, his religious sentiments, ami knowledge.
Books ex professo obscene are certainly dangerous, for they
excite violent temptations, and they arc still worse when, as
is often the case, they are illustrated with obscene pictures.
Reading such is strictly forbidden by the seventh rule of the
Index.
The libri erotici (de amoribus agentes), for instance many come­
dies, tragedies, dramas, novels, and romances, are sources of
relative danger; the reading of them is, in many respects, inju­
rious, especially to young people.
Bad newspapers and periodicals must be classified in the same
way as books, and what has been said above concerning the
reading of bad books holds good as to newspapers and periodi«“ Compare § 43; S. Alph. App. de proliib. libr. cp. 1 ; cf. Benger. Pa»to
ralthcologio (2 Ed.). Vol. II. § 129, n. 7, p. 53 ff.; Clement XIII, Encycl.
1700; Pius IX, "Qui Pluribus,” 20 Nov., 1316; many pastoral» of bishops.

I

ΛΟ.Ιίβ CO.V.WO.V7,r OCCUttHlNQ OCCASIONS OF HIN 513

cals. If they an- written ex professo against faith and morals,
they are even more dangerous than such books.
Accordingly, the confessor is bound: (1) when there is ground
for suspicion that the penitent has sinned by such reading and
has been silent about it, to ask him on the matter; omitting to
do so would bo very injurious to the penitent, as it would be
leaving him in great danger, and if he had purposely concealed
it, he would have confessed sacrilegiously.
The confessor is bound (2) to admonish penitents who have
read bad books, etc., to refrain entirely from such reading, to
buy no· more books, etc., of the kind, not to borrow them, nor
in future to have them in their possession. He must especially
instruct parents and superiors on this head, and incite them to
watchfulness. lie is bound (3) to refuse absolution to those who
will not refrain from such reading.4” (4) To prescribe for the
penitent who reads infidel writings ex necessitate suitable safe­
guards in order that the poison may not injure him, such reme­
dies as reading good books and newspapers, praying for the
preservation of faith, frequent reception of the Sacraments,
etc. (5) To do his best to keep young people from novel rea< 1ing.438
The confessor must, to the best of his ability, endeavor to
prevent the reading of so-called "liberal" books, newspapers,
and periodicals, which are, indeed, bad, though not, ex professo,
godless or obscene; especially (a) when the penitent is conscious
of liis duty to refrain from such reading, or is in doubt about it ;
(/>) when, although not aware of this duty, good results are to be
expected from exhortation; and (c) when the confessor perceives
that such reading is beginning to harm the penitent. On the
other hand, the confessor must be silent- concerning the duty of
avoiding such reading («) when the penitent is invincibiliter
ignorant of this duty; (b) when the confessor could not hope
Cf. Propos. G1 damn. ab Iniioo. XI.
«· Cf. S. Alph. Lib. 111. u. 420.

614

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

that liis admonition would bo acted upon, or when, on the con­
trary, he would have to fear still greater evils; but he must then
inspire his penitent with distrust of these newspapers, etc,, and
endeavor by exhortation and request to wean him from such
dangerous reading."* /V man of business might be permitted to
keep and to read bad newspapers on account of the advertise­
ments, when such advertisements are not to be found (or not
so fully) in a good paper, but he must be admonished to sub­
scribe for this end only, and not to leave the newspaper about
for others, especially children, to read. It is not allowed to
inn-keepers to have bad newspapers in their establishments in
order to attract customers by such reading, for that would be
an actio ex se ordinata ad malum. Under the heading of “bad
newspapers” are not included those producing here and there
incorrect judgments upon religion/'0
V. Intimacies (procationes).*"
1. If this intimacy is begun with a view to matrimony it is
not, de sc, forbidden, for none is bound to marry a person who
is unknown to him; he may, during a certain time, study the
character and morals of the person by means of lawful intimacy."’
But such intimacies, in praxi, very easily become an occasio
proxima of grave sin amongst young people and those who have
not much conscience, especially when greater familiarity and
freedom of intercourse, sets in, and the time of marriage ap­
proaches."’ That an intimacy may not degenerate into an
occasio proxima, or, having become such, may cease to be so,
4S Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 331, Q. II.
4ω Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 830, Q. II ; Gury, Tom. I. n. 250; Varceno, Theol.
Mor. Tract. 8, cp. 2, art. 3; Berardi, Praxis Conf. nn. 66 et 240; Muller,
Theol. Mor. Lib. II. § 30, n. 0.
4,1 By "intimacies” is here understood friendly intercourse established
between two persons of different sex.
·” 8. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 65. Cf. Roncaglia, in S. Alph. ibid. ; Gousset,
Moraltheologie, II. n. 566.
4,4 Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 65; S. Leonard a Port-Maur. Disc. mist.

KOUi: COMMONLY OCCURRING OCCASIONS OF SIN

‘>15

the following rules must he observed: Only such as wish, and
are able, to contract marriage within a reasonable time (tempus
rationabile) should be allowed this kind of intimacy. They
must, therefore, be of proper age, so that the intimacy may
not be too much prolonged; there must be no impediment in
the way of their marriage, that is, they must possem the neces­
sary liberty, being free from bondage of any kind; the parents
must not (from just motives) be opposed to their child's mar­
riage, or to marriage with the particular person in question.
Moreover, there must be a firm intention of marrying. This
intention may be presumed to be wanting in the case of a rich
young man who enters into quch relationship with a poor girl,
or one who, at the very outset of the acquaintance, induces
her to sin, or neglects the necessary precautions, or who, at
the expiration of a suitable time, shows no disposition what­
ever to contract marriage, etc. How long such intimacy may
last (rationabile tempus) cannot Ire determined by hard and
fast rules applicable to all cases; it must be left to the intel­
ligent discretion of the persons in question; half a year, or a
whole year, may generally be regarded as not too long. Let
the confessor, therefore, take care that the intimacy is not
prolonged for years with danger of sin, and if it has already
lasted too long, let him provide that it should either be broken
off, or interrupted for a time, or that marriage should take place
as soon as possible.
2. In order that the intimacy may proceed honorably, the
persons must adopt suitable measures of precaution. Those
therefore, between whom such intimacy exists, must not live in
the same house; they must, as soon as possible, obtain the con­
sent of the parents or their representatives, for if they frequently
meet without the knowledge, or against the will of their parents,
they will do it secretly, and in this lies a great danger. If the
parents are opposed to the marriage without just reason, the
confessor must suggest some other means for their honorable

616

THE MINISTER or THE SACRAMENT

intercourse. They must not associate solus cum sola, espe­
cially secretly in retired places at night, time — "id quippe, si
non fortuito sed consulto fiat, nonnisi ex. fine libidinis mit cum
summo periculo libidinis fiet," remarks Aertnys,4" and Ballerini "5
says: "Those especially who have care of the persons in question
must pay attention to this. Parents, and particularly moth­
ers, must be very earnestly appealed to, and their strict duty
of watchfulness and care most forcibly insisted upon. And in
this they must be influenced not only by conscience, but by the
fear that the daughters ‘semel corrupta· in paterna domo deho­
nestata consenescant.' ” Moreover, their visits must not be too
frequent nor too long; and if they should be alone, they must
not offend against the rules of morality, but conduct themselves
honorably in every respect; and, lastly, they must procure for
themselves the necessary graces in this dangerous time by
prayer and the reception of the Sacraments."11
3. Still greater prudence is necessary after engagement, as the
danger of sin becomes greater, cum sponsus respiciat sponsam
tanquam suam, magna familiaritas sit quasi inevitabilis, imagi­
natio copula· conjugalis brevi secutura libidinem commoveat et
timor pragnationis evanescat, etc.44’ Therefore, let the confessor,
to the best of his ability, bring about that the time of betrothal
may not be deferred too long.44’
4. If they have fallen into sin ob causam amoris, the intimacy
assumes the character of an occasio proxima, ami it must be
dealt with according to the principles applicable to it."® They
must, therefore, break off the intimacy if they can, without great
··· Theol. Mor. 1. c. Append. P. III. n. 310.
Nota· ad Gury, Tom. I. n. 413.
‘“Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 05; S. Leonard, Disc. mist. n. 23 s. ; Ber­
ardi, I. c. nn. 233-238; Rollings, 1. c. n. 1453; Aertnys, 1. ··.
Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 204; IL Ap. Append. IV. n. 0 ; Benedict
XIV, Inrt. 46, nn. 17, 21 ; Sporer. De Matrim. n. 429.
«· S. Alph. II. Ap. Tr. 7. n. 32; Praxis Conf. n. 52.
“· S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 05; S. Leon. Disc. mist. n. 24.

SO.WE coW.WO.VEF OCCURRtffG OCCASION* OF Sf.V

517

detriment, forego the intended marriage, and wait for the occa­
sion of contracting another, or they must set their relations with
each other on a belter looting if they cannot forego the marriage
wihout sin and without great detriment.
It results from the foregoing that all ‘‘intimacies” areto be
regarded as sinful and as tocaimones proxima, which : (1) are
entered upon without any intention of marriage, but only for
the sake of pleasure, sensuality, and sin; (2) which are begun
wi hout hope of speedy marriage,“· or (3) in spite of the justi­
fiable opposition of parents, (4) which are secretly carried on,451
and (5) which exist between persons who live in the same
house. Persons who maintain such relations, and will not break
them off, or refuse to amend, may not be absolved. Even if it
happens that they do not at first sin grievously, they will not,
later on, remain free from sin. And if they maintain that they
have done nothing wrong, the confessor must not at once trust
their assurances, but instruct them in their duty with the neces­
sary circumspection and prudence.452 “ We admonish all confess­
ors,” writes Gaume, “not to absolve those who are carrying
on love affairs, when such things are for them gravely sinful,
Therefore, quando fiunt inter eo», qui sunt disparis conditionis propter
scandalum et periculum mortaliter peccandi ; si Jiant eum illis, cum quibus im­
possible est contrahi matrimonium, ut sunt uxorati, claustrales et in sacris ordini­
bus constituti . . . si Jiat in ecclesia, tum propter irreverentiam, tum propter
periculum audiendi sacrum sine debita attentione, tum etiam propter scandalum : si

411 (piando clam Jiunt et occulte, tempore nocturno, si eo modo Jiat, ut ex se in­
volvat periculum proximum osculorum, tactuum, etc., etiam si aliunde ille amor esset
licite exercitus, quia est inter solutos et causa matrimonii . . . si amator animad­
vertat, complicem amoris esse graviter lentatum vel alterum urgere rerbis turpibus
vel «lio modo ad inhonesta etc., etiamsi alter complex nihil tentetur et nullam sen­
tiat inclinationem ad peccandum ; denique universaliter loquendo, quotiescunque
ob causam amoris amator ve! ornatrix frequenter laliitur in aliquam gravem noxam ;
time amor induit rationem occasionis proximis mali et est omnino illicitus__
From the decree of Cardinal Pico de Mirandola. Cf. (Jaunie. I. c.
4W Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. t>5 : Aertnys, I. c. ; Gousset, Moral théologie,
II. n. 507.

618

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

when after three warnings from their own or other confessors
(concerning which penitents are always to be questioned) they
have not really amended. They must be given plainly to under­
stand that, until they have really amended, they cannot expect
absolution from their own confessors, nor claim it from others.”4M

Article II
HABITUAL ANO RELAPSING SINNERS

67. Definition and Treatment of Habitual Sinners.
An habitual sinner is one who, in consequence of a disposition
or tendency which he has acquired by oft-repeated sinful acts
of a definite kind, — sucinas blasphemy, cursing, perjury, im­
purity, — frequently falls into that sin.454
How many acts suffice to constitute a sinful habit (habitus
seu consuetudo) depends upon the nature of the sin which has
been often committed and upon the manner in which it is com­
mitted, for instance, by thought, word, or action ; also upon
the difficulty or ease with which the sin is committed — so that
the more easily a sin is committed the more acts are required to
constitute a habit. Sins of thought and speech are more easily
committed than sins of act, those which are incomplete than
those which are completed; and in completed acts, those which
are committed alone are more easily committed than those which
have an accomplice. Moreover, we must take into considera­
tion the length of time which elapses between the separate sinful
acts of the same kind, as also the disposition and temperament
of the person, and the greater or less intentness of the will in
committing the sin.
4M Handbook for Confessors, chap. III. art. 5, n. 328.
See Ballerini’e Discussion of the definition of St. Alphonsus (Lib. VI.
453) and Gury's (I. c. n. 632) in his Op. Theol. Mor. I. c. cp. 1, n. 211 ;
on ||ik other hand. Aertnys. 1- c. Append. 1’. II. cp. 1, n. 310.
ii.

TREATMENT OF HABITUAL SINNER»

519

Thus, according to the words of St. Alphonsus, the repetition
of an external sin five times in a month, if between the separate
acts there is any interval, may produce a habit. In sins of
luxuria consummata, with a complex, for instance, fornicatio,
sodomia, a much smaller number of repetitions of the same sin
are enough to constitute a habit of this sin. A much greater
number is necessary in sins of speech and thought. He must
undoubtedly be regarded as an habitual sinner, who, during a
considerable time, has not resisted but yielded to temptation
of a definite kind. “However, when the administration or
postponement of absolution is in question," remarks Lehmkuhl,
"it does not so very much depend upon the more or less accu­
rate definition of a habit," seeing that there is no reason for
excluding a penitent from absolution on account of a sinful habit
if he has a real wish to resist it or lay it aside.154 Nevertheless,
this habit — like the occasion of sin — often excites a suspi­
cion that the penitent is not disposed and inspires apprehensions
of relapse. The confessor must, therefore, be cautious in ad­
ministering absolution.
As a rule, the habitual sinner who is not in immediate occa­
sion of sin, must receive absolution if there is reason to believe
that he has the necessary dispositions. In this case absolution
is to be given when there has been no previous improvement,
but the penitent must faithfully promise to adopt the measures
prescribed for his amendment.
In the case of such a penitent we must not presume at once
that he intends to receive the holy Sacrament in bad disposi­
tions ; we may infer from the fact of his confessing his sins that
he is disposed, as spontaneous confession is a sign of repentance,
unless there is positive ground to presume the contrary. Nor
may we say that the sinful habit is a sign of indisposition, for
although the sinful habitus may make the sinner more inclined
464 Lehmkuhl, 1. o. u. 490.

5-20

TU K MINISTER or the sacrament

to sin, it does not justify the supposition that he has no firm
wish to amend.*5'
But if (1) the habit is already deeply rooted (as it generally is
with those who are habitual sinners er mala voluntate, and always
with those who have been addicted to any vice — especially that
of lust - for a long time), the confessor could defer absolution
for a short time, in accordance with the principles guiding such
postponement, unless some other circumstance demands the
immediate administration of absolution; this he could do, both
in order to learn how the penitent applies the prescribed means
of amendment, as also that the penitent himself may conceive
a greater horror of sin.*57
(2) If the habitual sinner (in peccato mortali habituates) is a
cleric who will soon receive Holy Orders, absolution must also
be postponed ; for positive goodness is necessary in such a peni­
tent. An habitual sinner who refuses to confess several times
in the year, cannot, per se, be refused absolution on that account ;
for, on the one hand, there is no command to confess several
times in the year, and, on the other hand, there are other means
which could be prescribed for uprooting the habit and which
are very suitable and efficacious for that purpose. A different
course, however, would have to be taken .if the other remedies
were inefficacious; for many penitents can only find a suitable
remedy in frequent confession. Hence Toletus says very justly
(in speaking of those who habitually practice pollution), “1
believe that there Is scarcely any other efficacious remedy for
these than frequent confession, as this Sacrament is the strong
est curb.”*5’ And still more clearly and decisively does St.
Alphonsus express himself,*5’ saying, “He to whom a grave
sin, especially pollution, has become a habit, and who does
not frequently confess, may expect amendment only through
a miracle.”
S. Alph-1- c. Lib. VI. n. 450.
«’ S. Alph. II. Ap. Tr. ult. u. 8.

,s* Instr, sacerd. Lib. V. c. 13, n. 0.
Lib. VI. n. 464.

TREATMENT OF RELAPSING SINNERS

521

68. Relapse, and the Treatment of Relapsing Sinners.

Relapse into sin signifies literally the repeated commission of
a sin already confessed. In the theological sense, those are
called relapsing sinners, who, after several confessions, fall into
the same sins again. From this it results that a relapsing sinner
is also an habitual sinner, but not every habitual sinner is a
relapsing sinner.’"0
In order that a confessor may arrive at a correct judgment
concerning a penitent who seems to be a relapsing sinner, he
must investigate: (1) if the sinful habit already exists; (2) if
the penitent has already been admonished by another confessor,
and if he has known the means of amendment; (3) if he has
applied them and how ; (4) how often, and under what circum­
stances he has relapsed, if as often, or more often, or less often,
than before; if immediately, or almost immediately, after the
confession, if in severe temptation, or after long resistance,
and when he sinned last. From the answers he receives to
these questions he will recognize if he has to deal with a relaps­
ing sinner, and, at the same time, if the relapse is a sign of want
St. Alphonsus distinguishes between formal relapsing sinners and mate­
rial. Λ formal relapsing sinner is one who, having been instructed and hav­
ing promised amendment, has returned to his former sin in the same, or
nearly the same way, and with the same ease; that is, without having
endeavored to amend, and without having adopted any one of the pre­
scribed remedies. A material relapsing sinner is one who was never seri­
ously admonished, or who. in spite of efforts towanl improvement, and in
consequence of inconstancy of will, has again fallen into the sins already
confessed. II. Ap. Tr. ult. n. 9 (cf. Vind. Alph. I’. VI. cp. 1, Tom. II. p.
276). In a word, a relapsing sinner is one who has contracted a sinful
habit, and, after confession, has fallen into the same sin. S. Alph. Lib. VI.
n. 457. Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 310: Ballerini, Nota» ad Gury. II. n. 632: Op.
Theol. Mor. 1. c. ; Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 166; Sulmaut. Tr. 17, ep. II.
n. 167. According to the concurrent teaching of theologians, the follow­
ing elements are included in the idea of relapse in the theological sense :
(1) frequens relapsus post plures confessiones : (2) relapsus in eadem (specie)
peccata: (3) defectus omnis, etiam inchuatee, emendationis. (Suarez, Tr. V.
Lib. III. c. 8, n. 7.)

522

TUK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

of proper dispositions. The relapsing sinner in the specified
theological sense is not to be confounded with one who relapses
into a single sin without habit, or into an occasio peccati, that
is, one who has not kept a promise to give up an occasion of
sin, has not removed the occasion, or has again sought it (§ 64,
III), whether he now has a habit of sinning or not. Here we
arc only considering the recidivi consuetudinarii; those, there­
fore, who have relapsed into the habit of sin, either from internal
weakness, or in consequence of external occasion.
Another distinction between relapsing sinners is not to be
overlooked: those who sin only in consequence of the force of
passion, or of weakness, in such sort that their will is generally
opposed to sin, and, therefore, when the storm of passion is
over, immediately regret having committed the sin, as it gen­
erally happens with blasphemies, curses, and often with pollu­
tion,—these are incontinentes seu habituali in peccato tantum ;
whilst those who sin in consequence of an habitual attachment
to sin, or from malice, and therefore without the preceding vio­
lent impulse of passion, —these arc the intemperati seu habilitati
in voluntate peccandi who are not so easily led to contrition.
The following principles arc to be observed in absolving
relapsing sinners : —
I. The confessor must carefully examine the actual disposi­
tions of a relapsing sinner who has already been instructed
and admonished sufficiently, and who again returns, burdened
with the same sinful habit, without having made any attempt
at amendment, or applied any of the remedies prescribed for
him by the confessor. Relapse under the specified circum­
stances is, of course, no direct argument against the actual dis­
position of the sinner, though it is a direct argument against
the sorrow an<l purpose of amendment of preceding confessions.
He who is truly sorry, and firmly purposes to avoid a sin,
will refrain from it at least for a time, and will not allow
himself to be overcome in the very first struggle with the

TREATMENT OF RELAPHINO R1NNERH

523

enemy. It is, as Lehmkuhl rightly says, legitimate to draw
an indirect conclusion against the actual disposition if the
penitent gives only the same signs of sorrow as before.’*' His
disposition is, therefore, doubtful, and he must give better
proofs of it, although no definite rule can be laid down as to
how, and to what extent, this proof must be forthcoming.’"
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 401.
Cf. Aertnye, 1. c. n. 313 ; Lehmkuhl, I. c.n. 493. St. Alphonsus teaches
that such penitents can only be absolved when, by extraordinary signs, they
have removed the prejudice against their actual disposition (as we have
learnt above, § 50) 5 and the holy Doctor, whom many later theologians
follow, represents this teaching as sententia communis. Lib. VI. nn. 459 and
505 ; Prax. Conf. n. 20 in line. But- Ballerini questions this, remarking that,
even of the authors cited by St. Alphonsus not all held this opinion. Cf.
Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. I. c. nn. 232-313; Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 336.
Only the theologians of Salamanca teach, indeed, that these extraordinary
signs are a help in forming a judgment as to the penitent's preparation, or
that, when they are present, postponement is not to be resorted to, while
they recommend this remedy as occasionally profitable and beneficial in
uprooting the evil habit. Moreover, they always teach that to the habitual
sinner the general rule of the Roman Catechism may be applied: ‘‘When
(the priest), after hearing the confession, judges that neither diligence
in the confession of the sins nor sorrow in their detestation has been
wholly wanting in the penitent, he can absolve him." without limiting (ne
does St. Alphonsus, n. 159) these and similar expressions to the habitual
sinner who confesses the sinful habit for the first time. The confessor need
not be convinced, they add, that the penitent will keep his resolution, if
only he believes that the latter is, at the time, really and firmly resolved
to amend. But if they sometimes maintain that habitual sinners cannot
be absolved, it is clear from the context (Ballerini continues) either that
only those are meant who are quite certainly unworthy and not disposed,
or that they prescribe this in order to avoid scandal. Ballerini remarks
further that relapse does not show positively that the purpose of amend­
ment in former confessions was not sufficiently efficacious; the human will
is liable to alteration : still less can want of sorrow and purpose of amend­
ment in the actual confession be inferred (at least directly). Cf. Gury.
Edit. Ratisb. V. 1874. According to Ballerini. the controversy turns upon
the question, When has the confessor obtained a Judicium prudens seu probabile concerning the disposition of the relapsing penitent? and declares (after
emphatically rejecting the teaching of St. Alphonsus, who finds this judicium
in the sir/nis extraordinarii»), that there are two things indicating the actual
disposition of the penitent: modus confessionis et confessio seu testimonium

524

THE MIXISTKH OF THE EACH.I MEET

If, however, the confessor can form a probabile el prudens
judicium concerning the actual disposition of the relapsing peni­
tent, he may absolve him even if he has often relapsed, unless
perhaps the duty of giving up an occasion or making a restitu­
tion has to be previously fulfilled. For even if the contrition
of the penitent is only momentary, not persistent, it is yet true
contrition. Because this contrition is not persistent, it is not
sufficient with respect to its final operation, —namely, the attain­
ment of eternal salvation; but because it is true sorrow it is
sufficient with respect to its immediate effect, namely, that of
procuring for the penitent absolution. As absolution conveys
sacramental grace, it increases the strength of the penitent,
enabling him to persevere; moreover, it remits mortal sin, so
that if the penitent died before he relapsed, he would be saved,
pandentis. As to the signa extraordinaria — after having characterized most
of (hem as deceptive and untrustworthy, ami only admitting a few as partly
or wholly conducive to a better knowledge of the disposition of the penitent,
Ballerini observes : “Hisce indiciis utique utendum esse at neque iis insisten­
dum adeo esse, ut aha, quae insita sunt ipsius sacramenti natura:, negligantur
neque propter eorum defectum debere Confessorium desperare de cognoscenda
pandentis dispositione ac mullo minus certum de defectu dispositionis inde judi­
cium ferre” Cf. n. 310. It is not to be denied that the relapsing habitual
sinner cun be truly repentant and firmly resolved in the actual confession ;
the confessor must also believe the penitent, whether he speaks in his own
favor or against himself. But, on the other hand, it is not to be denied
that the penitent has shaken belief in his declaration as to his repentance
and resolution, by not amending at all and by not adopt ing remedies ; that
he is, therefore, to be regarded as a dubie dispositus. Finally, the confessor
must provide for the reverence due to the Sacrament and for the salvation
of the penitent, and therefore must not straightway content himself with
the latter’s assertion that he is sorry, etc. According to Gury (Ratisb.
edit.) the teaching of St. Alphonsus may, without difficulty, be reconciled
with the general view of the older theologians. For the signs which he
calls extraordinary are not supposed to be different from those which others
call regular and usual. From all this it is plainly evident that St. Alphonsiis and the later theologians do not demand anything more than what the
older theologians demanded ; name\y, sufficient signs of true re/ i ta e suf­
ficient, also, making allowance for the circumstances. Gury, II. Edit.
Ratisb. n. 640. Appendix. Lie dilatione absolut., etc.

TREATMENT Ol·' RELAPSING SINNERS

525

and if ho died after relapse, in statu impénitent™·, he would be
at least, less guilty in God’s sight, as his former sins would have
been effaced by absolution. Moreover, a sinner of this kind —
accustomed to the reception of the Sacraments, frequently in­
structed by his confessor, and admonished concerning the danger
of dying in mortal sin, the punishments of hell and their eternal
duration, the divine mercy and goodness, and the frequent
eliciting of sorrow and firm purpose — will, in the hour of death,
if no priest can help him, be more easily able to save himself
from eternal damnation by an act of perfect contrition. Hence
the confessor must be careful to exercise, with relapsing sinners,
that great prudence spoken of in the Roman Catechism, lest,
having been accustomed to receive the Sacraments, they be
debarred from them by refusal of absolution, or by imprudent
postponement, to the great danger of their eternal salvation?”
But if, as remarked above, the duty of abandoning some
occasion of sin or of making restitution, etc., be incumbent on
the penitent, it may be made a rule, for the first time, to put
off absolution till he has performed this duty, if it is easier for
him to come to confession again than to perform it; and this
procedure will be still more in place if the penitent had already
once failed to keep his promise; indeed, in this latter case, the
penitent should only rarely be trusted before he has really ac­
complished his duty. He may occasionally and by the way of
exception be trusted if, for instance, he shows special signs of
a firmer resolution, and if, on the other hand, it would be very
difficult for him to come again — having, perhaps, made a long
journey, or for some other similar reason.
II. Relapsing sinners whom the confessor sees to be insuffi­
ciently disposed must, to the best of his ability, be helped to a
4M Cf. Bucceroni, Comment. III. De absolut, danda, etc.. § 5, De absol.
consuetnd. ct recidiv. This author points out, in his excellent treatise, that
this is the teaching of the great theologians, Lugo and Suarez, and the prac­
tice of the saints.

526

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

proper state of mind by his fatherly and zealous admonitions.
He should not, therefore, dismiss such penitents by at once
postponing absolution, still less by a prompt refusal of it. lie
should rather put before them the hideousness of sin, the value
of divine grace, and the danger of eternal damnation/1" Such
admonition will, if imparted in the proper manner, have the
desired effect, at least if the sinner is not too much addicted
to sin.*"*
If the penitent should respond to these exhortations of the
confessor with some unusual utterance, such as: “Now I sec
the greatness of my misfortune," “Give me a severe penance,"
“This time I am very sorry for my sins,” the confessor may hope
that success has attended them. On the other hand, he would
have to fear that he had labored in vain if the penitent should
answer nothing more than that he is sorry, that he wished to
avoid sin, or if to the confessor’s questions he only gave cold
and indifferent answers. But here also the character and edu­
cation of the penitent are to be considered, and there is room for
deception.*”
III. If, in spite of the exhortation, the penitent remains indis­
posed, the confessor must postpone absolution till he has received
satisfactory proof of amendment. This he must do as judge in
order to preserve the Sacrament from nullity, and also as phy­
sician in order to move the penitent to an effectual amendment.
If the confessor finds himself obliged to postpone absolution,
he must inform the penitent of it in the gentlest manner, for
the good physician endeavors to make bitter medicine taste
pleasant.*” If, however, there is a solid reason, absolution may
4M Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. n. 608; Const. Leonis XII, “Charitate Christi,” 25
Dec., 1825.
Cf. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 311.
«· Berardi, 1. c. n. 110. Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. n. 460.
,iT 8. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 459; Praxis Conf. n. 5; Leo XII, Const, citat.;
Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. n. 313 ss. Compare § 52, Postponement of altsolution.

TREATMENT OF RELAPSING SINNERS

527

be given to a doubtfully disposed relapsing sinner tub condiHone. For if more harm than benefit is to be anticipated from
the postponement, the salvation of the penitent demands, as
St. Alphonsus says,'” that the Sacrament be exposed even to
the risk of nullity.
The confessor may act in accordance with the above prin­
ciples in the following cases: —
1. In danger of death, that the penitent may not be lost.
2. On account of imperfect use of reason, when the penitent
is weak in mind, or is a child not yet arrived at an adequate use
of reason, and has relapsed into doubtfully grave sins; for such
penitents require absolution in order not to remain in a state
of mortal sin, and on the other hand postponement would have
no effect with them.
3. When the confessor fears that the penitent will not
return. This is much to be dreaded by reason of the weak
faith of many people and their scanty zeal for the welfare of
their souls.
4. On account of the urgency of contracting a marriage on
the same or the following day, or of receiving holy communion,
in order to avoid great scandal; and even if a doubtfully dis­
posed person ought not to communicate, prudence will often
suggest to the confessor not to inform him of this.
5. On account of the difficulty of going to confession again,
that is, if the penitent would not be able to confess again for a
long time, as a prolonged postponement of absolution would re­
main without fruit, and leave the penitent during that time in
a state of mortal sin. This reason, however, does not suffice in
the case of relapsing sinners who have neglected to make resti­
tution, to terminate an enmity, or to give up some occasion of
sin.'”
IV. Relapsing sinners, as to whose dispositions the confessor
<·’ L. c. nn. 131, 28.
S. Alph. 1. c. n. 432.

Cf. Borordi, De recidivis, ete., n. IIP ss.

528

TBS MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

has satisfied himself, may be, toties quoties, absolved, inasmuch
as he is judge.
It is to be remarked, however, that (a) a relapsing sinner
who returns for the first time can be more easily absolved than
if he comes a second and a third time to confession after having
relapsed. The more numerous the relapses after confession,
the stronger is the presumption against dispositions, (5) If
some external occasion is the cause of this relapse, the confessor
must the more seriously consider if it would not be better to
postpone absolution, in order to test the sincerity of one who has
so often broken his promise to remove or abandon this occasion ;
and he must not give credit to mere promises, or even to tears.
For the obligation is rather to remove an external occasion
of sin than to reduce it to a remote occasion, because experience
proves abundantly that this latter course is very difficult, and
it is in many cases easier to abandon the occasion.‘70
If, however, the relapse is the result of internal weakness,
and the penitent does not seem sufficiently disposed for the
reception of absolution, the confessor should employ all his
zeal and charity in preparing him for absolution. For the grace
of the holy Sacraments is very necessary to such penitents,
and postponement of absolution would not be helpful in their
case. These are the penitents who yield to violent temptat ions,
or the stress of passion, in consequence of internal weakness
(we have designated them above recidivi incontinentes). Never­
theless, there may be cases in this class of penitents also, in
which severity is to be used, or in which holy communion at
least must be forbidden, when it is evident, or to be presumed,
from the frequent relapses accompanying the frequent re­
ception of the Sacraments, that detestation of sin and firm
resolution have been or are wanting. But if it is to be presumed
that the relapse takes place rather in consequence of the Sacra«« Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 494.

TREATMENT OF RELAPSING HINNBRH

529

monts being seldom received, the penitent must be encouraged
to more frequent reception.”'
V. Even if the relapsing sinner could absolutely be absolved,
the confessor may sometimes postpone absolution for a short
time as a remedy, if he believes that such postponement is
necessary, or will be useful. For, of two suitable remedies, the
physician must choose that one from which the better effect
may be expected. Now it is universally admitted and proved
by experience that an occasional postponement of absolution
for a short time contributes much to the improvement of the
habitual sinner by increasing his detestation of sin and exciting
his zeal in the work of amendment. But great prudence is
demanded in venturing upon this experiment, especially in our
times, when difficulty of any kind induces weak people to absent
themselves from the holy Sacraments.*”
The postponement of absolution in the case of a sufficiently
disposed relapsing sinner without his consent is certainly not
allowable, if it either failed to benefit his soul, or if it were
to bring disgrace, or even the danger of it, to his reputation.
Except in these two cases, postponement of absolution ’is left
to the discretion of the confessor. St. Alphonsus*” distin­
guishes here between those who relapse in consequence of in­
ternal weakness, and those who relapse on account of an occasion,*1*
and teaches that postponement is seldom beneficial with the
first class ; for here a better result is to be anticipated from the
graces of the Sacrament than from postponement. For those
especially who relapse into the sin of pollution there is no more
efficacious means of amendment than frequent confession;
indeed, without this, improvement is scarcely to be hoped for.
But an opportune threat of deferring absolution will always
prove beneficial. With sinners of the second class postponement
is useful because the external occasion is a stronger incitement
«> Cf. § 52, IV.
«· Cf. S. Alph. n. 459; cf. 432.
”· L. c. nu. 4U3, 434 ; Praxis Conf. nn. 76, 77.
n* See above, IV.

530

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

to sin, and a more powerful remedy must be opposed fo a more
powerful agency of seduction; moreover, the removal of the
occasion is more under the control of the will than the uprooting
of a sinful habit. With relapsing sinners of the. first, class a
postponement of from eight to ten days generally suffices;
from two to three weeks would be the longest, period during
which absolution should be deferred. With those of the second
class a postponement of ten to fifteen days will generally not
suffice, but the experience obtained within the space of a month
will always be sufficient. The postponement should not extend
over a month, if the penitent cannot come under the influence
of the occasion during the course of this time, because delay
under the circumstances would be useless.

69 Relapsing Sinners requiring Special Care.

There are two classes of relapsing sinners to whom the con­
fessor must devote special care: those who are despondent,
and those who are always relapsing into the sin of pollution.
I. .As to the first, he must endeavor to find out the cause of
their despondency. If this proceeds (1) from the strength of
the sinful habit, the confessor must take care not to excite fear
in one whose will is good but who makes little progress ; on the
contrary, he must praise him even if he sees only a slight improve­
ment, and inspire him with hope of finally achieving complete
amendment with the help of divine grace. Courage, hope of
victory, and perseverance are necessary to such a penitent.
If he falls a hundred times, he must rise a hundred times and
renew the struggle; victory will not fail him who perseveres.
But if (2) an effem'mate disposition accompanies these relapses,
the confessor must stimulate the penitent. He must teach him
that everything is possible to us with the help of divine grace,
if we earnestly mil and wish to succeed; for so St. Augustine
encouraged himself in his struggle against the flesh. “When,”

RELAPSING SINNERS REQUIRING SPECIAL CARE

531

he writes,475 “the rooted habit said; Do you think you can live
without these things? Hope spoke encouragingly: Can you
not do what these young men and women do? And are they
able to do it of their own strength, and not in the Lord, their
God?” The confessor should urge the penitent, not in tempta­
tion only, but in all his doings, to act bravely and manfully ;
he should seek to divert him from everything that enervates
the mind. If the despondency has its origin in carelessness,
let the confessor point to the terrible punishments of sin and
endeavor thus to arouse salutary fear.4”
II. Pollution is a truly murderous vice, and, according to
the testimony of all confessors and physicians, appallingly
pi evalent. Its consequences are as ruinous as its cure is
difficult.
If the confessor purposes to terrify unhappy penitents by
depicting the dreadful consequences of this vice, let him pro­
ceed with caution, for not all who are addicted to it experience
them in full measure, and those who do not would give him
the lie. Some of these consequences are : nervous prostration,
consumption, epilepsy, spinal diseases; excess saps physical
vigor, dulls the understanding, impairs the memory, and
hastens death.
Depression of spirits is also a characteristic
of such people, a result partly of nervous exhaustion and partly
of remorse. Rarely, indeed, is the conversion of such a man
effected without the higher motives of religion. That he must
be treated with extreme prudence is evident. Earnest but
loving admonition instilling moral strength will soonest attain
to the desired end. The origin of the evil and the causes
which form the occasions of the individual sins (which must
be investigated) will suggest appropriate precautions.4”
4,6 Confess. Lib. VIII. cp. 11.
4,0 Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 181 : cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 311. Q. 8.
4” Compare Capellmann, Pastoral Medicine, B. The sixth command­
ment I.

582

ΤΠΚ ΝΙΝΜΤΕΚ OF THE SACKA MEN T

Hen* are some rules for the confessor of such penitents: —
1. Let him excite in them a great longing to be freed from
the vice, and inspire them with courage for the struggle and hope
of ultimate victory; otherwise his remedies will be fruitless.
To this end, let him point out the danger of eternal damnation ;
for the more the sins accumulate the more difficult salvation
becomes, and the stronger the habit the weaker the will. To
inspire courage let the priest reawaken in him a feeling and sense
of his dignity as a man and a Christian, which is outraged by
this vice.
2. The penitent must shun all dangerous occasions, avoid
idleness and solitude; take no part in improper amusements,
theaters, and dancing, as they excite impure fancies and en­
feeble the mind.
3. Further remedies are: frequent prayer — especially the
“Hail Mary” in honor of the most pure Virgin, each time re­
newing before her picture the resolution to sin no more. Medi­
tation on the eternal truths will always prove very efficacious.
4. When temptation arises the penitent should turn away
his mind from it at once; and if it persists, confidently pray,
pronouncing the names of .Jesus and Mary. He may also reflect
upon the sufferings of Our Savior, on the eternal flames of hell,
the presence of God. Very useful also is a fervent act of love,
accompanied by a resolution rather to die than to sin.
5. One of the surest remedies is, undoubtedly, marriage —
as the Apostle also teaches (1 Cor. vii. 2, 9). Add to these
other natural remedies in support of the supernatural ones,
such as: moderation in eating and drinking — especially absti­
nence from wine and stimulating food in the evening ; modera­
tion in sleep; physical exercise; early rising; at night, prayer
till sleep sets in.
But in order that the confessor may select suitable remedies,
he must know the physical constitution of the penitent and the
circumstances of his sins; namely, when, where, and under

n elapsi ng sinners reqciring special cake

533

what conditions he generally sins. The confessor should not
omit to prescribe or recommend such of the above-mentioned
remedies as are adapted to the penitent.4”
III. From the rule given above, according to which relapsing
habitual sinners can be absolved when they are sufficiently
disposed, clerics, who wish to receive Holy Orders immediately
after absolution, form an exception. They may not, as a rule,
be absolved till satisfactory proof be. given of their self-restraint.
Such a penitent must first have laid aside his bad habit during
a considerable time, at least during several months. For a
sacred minister would be unworthy to assist at the altar if he
did not possess the virtue of confirmed purity, seeing that the
higher Orders demand perfection in those who enter them,
both on account of the sacredness of the duties connected with
the Orders, as also on account of the good example which they
are bound to give to the faithful. "As those,” says St. Thomas,
“ who receive Orders, are, by virtue of their dignity, placed above
the people, so must they be conspicuous also by the merit of
holiness.” 470 And in another place he enforces this still more,
saying: “As the minister is by his ordination set apart for the
highest office, in which he serves Christ Himself in the Sacrament
of the Altar, a greater interior holiness is demanded for this
than even the religious state requires.” 480 Therefore, it by no
means suffices for the worthy reception of Holy Orders to be in
a state of grace ; positive and habitual holiness is required. St.
Alphonsus establishes this abundantly from Holy Writ, from
the definitions of the Church, and from the teaching of the
holy Fathers.
If, therefore, a cleric sincerely promises that he will not re­
ceive Holy Orders while addicted to such bad habit, he may be
«« Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 200, Lib. V. n. 8, Lib. VI. nn. 464. 75; Prax.
Conf. n. 0, nn. 10,121 ; Segneri. Instr. Conf. cp. 12 ; S. Leonard a Port.-Mnnr.
Discors, mist. n. 19 ; Aertnys. 1. c. n. 314. Q. 7.
Suppl. Q. 35, a. 1, ad 3.
II. U. Q. 184. a. 8.

534

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

absolved; still it would be preferable, if no obstacle presented
itself, to postpone absolution fora time. If, however, he should
persist in his purpose of receiving Holy Orders, he would thereby
make himself unworthy of both Sacraments. An exception
is to be made in the case of a person favored by God with such
extraordinary compunction that he is quite transformed by it
and delivered from the old weakness, — such a one the confessor
ran absolve and admit without any further probation to Holy
Orders. But in this case also the confessor should endeavor
by every means to induce the penitent to postpone the recep­
tion of Holy Orders, so that he may bettor purify himself from
the bad habit and carry out the resolutions he has made. In­
deed, if the penitent will not postpone the reception of Holy
Orders, the confessor, as physician, may, for this purpose and
for his spiritual profit, delay absolution so as to force the former
to put off his ordination. This applies when no danger of
disgrace arises from such postponement, for, otherwise, the
penitent who gives signs of extraordinary sorrow is entitled
to immediate absolution. “Ceterum Confessorii debent esse
difficiles, quantum fieri potest, in absolvendis hujusmodi ordinan­
dis, qui postmodum ordinarie pessimi evadunt presbyteri et sic
populis et Ecclesia· perniciem magnam afferunt.”
The above holds good not only with respect to the vilium
luxuria, but also with regard to any other vice.
A confessor administering absolution according to the above
principles provides for the interests of the Church, as well as
for those of the faithful and for those of the persons to be or­
dained.4*' If it is objected that the person to be ordained
would be brought into evil repute by such proceeding, it may be
answered, in denial of this, that ordination may be postponed
for many reasons and that pious youths not infrequently desire
such postponement. And if the consequences stated in the
4,1 S. Alph. II- Ap. Tr. tilt. nn. 16, 17, Lib. VI. nn. 03-77 ; Benedict XIV,
De Synod. Lib. XL c. 2, u. 17.

RELAPSING SINNERS REQUIRING SPECIAL CARE 535
objection were really to supervene, the evils resulting from
hasty ordination are by far more fatal. Nor is the want of
priests, which prevails nearly everywhere in our days, reason
for rejecting the above teaching, which is entirely based upon the
principles of the saints and of the Church. It would be a dan­
gerous remedy to apply to the evil of scarcity of priests. More­
over, experience of centuries proves that the number of priests
increases when and where the discipline of the Church is strictly
enforced. St. Thomas remarks, "God never so abandons His
Church that worthy servants of the altar in sufficient numbers
are not to be found, if only the worthy are ordained and the
unworthy debarred from ordination.”
To conclude this very important section, we will call the
attention of the confessor to two Instructions given by the
Congregation de Propag. Fide. In these the practice of “ indiscriminalim" absolving relapsing sinners, adopted by some
confessors, is strongly rebuked and condemned. One Instruc­
tion (Aug. 1827) appeals first to the twofold power of absolv­
ing and remitting sin to which this practice is entirely opposed,
and then to the teaching of the Rituale Roman. (Tit. De Sacram.
Pœnit.) : “ But let the priest take heed when and to whom abso­
lution is to be administered or refused.” Now this would not
be prescribed if absolution were to be given to all without dis­
tinction, including relapsing sinners and penitents living in a
habit of sin. The penitents being divided (as above specified)
into three classes, to whom absolution is to be given, or post­
poned, or refused, respectively, the Instruction concludes:
“Thus teach prudent theologians, the Instructions given to
confessors by St. Charles Borromeo, and by St. Francis of Sales.
Confessors must reflect that, from too great ease in obtaining
absolution, there results a great ease in sinning.” In the other
Instruction (April, 1784) the confessor is reminded of his duty
4,2 Suppl. Q. 30, art. 4, ad 1. Cf. Innoc. HI. in cap. 14, de act. et quai.

636

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

to examine into the gravity of the sins, the obstinacy of the
malady, and the dispositions of the penitent. He must, there­
fore, carefully inquire if the penitent has true sorrow : if he has
entered upon a new life, detesting the former; if he promises
amendment with the heart, and not with the mouth alone;
if he has abandoned the occasions of sin; if he has applied the
remedies previously recommended to him; if he has laid aside
the habit of sinning; if, having previously received absolution,
he has relapsed into the same sins in consequence of his de­
pravity; if he is ready to repair injury inflicted. These, and
many other things, the confessor must examine before he con­
fers upon the penitent the blessing of absolution.4"3

70. Penitents aiming at Perfection.
As we have seen in previous sections, the confessor must
treat with great care and zeal those penitents who are stained
with grave sins and vices; but he must not, on that account,
neglect those who are striving after virtue and perfection. Λ
penitent· who has preserved himself free from grave sin and is
capable of perfection claims, as St. Alphonsus teaches, all the
confessor’s care as guide along the path to perfection and divine
love.4»4
But as this is no light and easy matter, and as it involves
responsibility on the part of the confessor, he must pray to
God for light and endeavor to learn the natural disposition of
the penitent and the operation of the Holy Ghost in his sold,
/•'or all are not to be led in the same manner. The phlegmatic,
the choleric, the melancholy, and the sanguine must all be
differently treated. While the phlegmatic must be spurred on
that they may not become lukewarm, the choleric must be
Cf. Collectanea 8. Sedis, nn. 497, 404.
Praxis Conf. cp. 0. n. 121. Compare the excellent treatise in Benger’s
Pastoral Theology. Book 4, § 172. Perfection·.

/■ ENITENTE AIMING AT PERFECTION

537

restrained that they may not go too far, whilst they are guided
to the nobler and more exalted works and exercises in the ser­
vice of God. With the melancholy, care must be exercised
that they do not give way to sadness, do not isolate themselves,
and imagine everything more difficult than it is in reality ; the
sanguine must be prevented from allowing themselves to be
hurried by natural impulse into what exceeds their strength;
the confessor must insist upon their weighing everything
well, and then acting with firmness.”5 The guide of souls
seeks to recognize the operation of the Holy Ghost in his
penitents, and he will carefully follow up this operation. For
the Holy Ghost dwells in the soul of the just man ; He is the
teacher of the interior life and the invisible guide to perfection.
The confessor’s duty is to cooperate with the Holy Ghost. St.
Ignatius remarks wisely: “To wish to lead all to perfection
by the same road is full of danger; such a one does not under­
stand how manifold and abundant the gifts of the Holy Ghost
are.”
Nevertheless, there arc certain general principles and rules
which are useful to all in obtaining Christian perfection. As
the saints, approved theologians, and masters of the spiritual
life have laid them down, we reproduce them here in brief: —
1. Perfection consists for each one in performing well his
ordinary work; and he does it well who does it because, and
when, and as God wishes — His most holy Will being the source
and rule of all perfection.
2. Penitents must be led gradually and regularly (non per
saltum") to perfection; for example, they must first act with
the right purpose and intention and learn to imitate the actions
of Christ before they contemplate higher things; they should
first learn to bear easier trials patiently before demanding more
difficult ones.
486 Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 245.
§ 174, n. 5, I.

Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 490; Bengor,

538

TUE MIN/STEH OF THE SACHA MENT

3. The confessor should admonish them constantly to cherish
the desire for greater perfection, even if in certain instances
they never seem to attain to it; for such a desire will have this
effect, that they will at least reach that perfection of which they
are capable and they will acquire greater merit.
4. He must instruct them to confess every week, and induce
them to avoid even venial sins which are voluntary and deliber­
ate, also to give up any attachment to these sins. Those who
confess venial sins which they have not committed with delibera­
tion, but from human weakness, must always be absolved; those
who have committed venial sins with deliberation, but not from
habitual attachment to them, must be absolved, but, at the
same time, helped and incited earnestly and zealously to en­
deavor, by employing the means recommended by the confessor,
to avoid them; those who are accustomed to confess venial
sins which they have committed without any resistance, from
habitual attachment or custom, give rise to the suspicion that
they are not properly disposed; the confessor, therefore, must
dispose them to true sorrow for at least one venial sin, and to a
firm purpose of amendment, in order that they may be absolved
without sacrilege. Occasionally, however, as in the case of
other relapsing sinners, absolution may be postponed. The
confessor should not easily forbid them to confess their imper­
fections, — for example, that they have not consecrated their
actions of the day to God, nor said the prayers of a confrater­
nity, etc.,—because such self-accusationscontribute to a better
knowledge of the penitent’s spiritual state, exercise humility,
and produce tenderness of conscience; besides those imperfec­
tions often go along with some venial sin.4"" The same applies
to the transgression of those rules in a Religious Order which do
not bind under sin. And if the penitent confesses only imper­
fections which do not positively amount to venial sins, or other
«· Cf. Lugo, De Pœn. Diep. 16, Sect. 2, n. 103.

PΕΝΠΕΝΤ3 AIMING AT PERFECTION

539

doubtful Hins, let the confessor observe what we have said above
(§6)· Let him see that they always go to holy communion
well prepared and not from mere custom; for a single com­
munion after good preparation is worth more than many com­
munions received in a state of tepidity. The confessor, however,
must distinguish carefully true zeal and fervor from sensible
devotion.
5. The confessor should teach them to mauler their passions;
especially their predominant ones, for which purpose the par­
ticular examination is eminently adapted. He should induce
them to practice virtues, and that in the right order, namely:
(a) first the virtues demanded by their position and profession ;
he should not, therefore, permit young women to hurry from
one Church to another, or to remain there longer than is right
and necessary, thus neglecting important duties, their families,
etc. He should exhort them rather to perform their household
work faithfully and zealously; (δ) they should be instructed
to practice more zealously those virtues against which they are
tempted; finally (c), he should exhort them not to prefer those
virtues which are more conspicuous and more esteemed by men,
but to strive after those which are in themselves more excellent
and useful and more pleasing to God, such as humility, obe­
dience, meekness, patience/” (d) He should also urge them
to be faithful in small things; for God does not generally ask
great things from us/"'
6. He should not impose upon them extraordinary exercises;
indeed, he should not even permit them easily. At the same
time he must not prevent mortifications and practices of penance,
even exterior ones; but they must be proportioned to the
corporal and spiritual powers of the penitent. What saints
have sometimes done, or allowed others to do, cannot serve as
a rule, but is more to be admired than imitated.
187 Cf. S. Franc. Sales. Philoth. P. 111. cp. 1 et 2.
498 Franc. Sal. ibid., cp. 35.

fi40

TUE MINISTER OF THE SACKAMENT

The confessor must also have regard for the special flangers
and temptations which may attend those who are striving after
perfection : —
1. Those who at first were, by God’s grace, cheered with
spiritual consolation easily lose courage and relax in their zeal
when He, for their trial, and to lead them to higher things,
withdraws from them sensible devotion. If the confessor
observes this, he must instruct them in what true progress ami
true virtue consist; but penitents must be warned in advance
of this state of the soul.
2. The devil seeks to make those who are progressing in virtue
believe that they have advanced far enough, and endeavors to
produce within them the beginnings of lukewarmness. They
become negligent in their accustomed pious exercises, lay aside
first one and then another mortification, and begin to disregard
slight faults. In this there is a great danger lest, gradually
relaxing in zeal, they at length fall into grave sin at the first
temptation, which the devil prepares for them when they have
become sufficiently tepid. It is difficult to perceive the begin­
ning of lukewarmness, but not its progress, and when the evil
shows itself, the confessor must endeavor with zeal and prudence
to check it and prevent it from becoming worse. To this end
the penitent may be ordered to resume all the pious exercises
which he has neglected; he should be reminded of the loss
of grace, of its value, the dangers of lukewarmness. If the
penitent, before his relapse, had made considerable progress in
virtue, he should be admonished to make a retreat. The con­
fessor should not abandon hope even if the penitent has seriously
failed. He must receive him in a friendly manner and show
compassion, for in this case severity would be poison. He
should remind him of Peter and Magdalen, who obtained so
many graces by their tears of sorrow and rendered themselves
worthy of the special love of Our Savior. On the other hand,
the confessor must urge the penitent to love God more, to de­

/’E.VITENTH AIMING AT PERFECTION

541

velop greater zeal in His service, and to repair his shortcomings
by redoubled obedience, to adore the divine Justice, to humble
himself deeply, anil to live more carefully in the future.
If the penitent informs the priest that he has had extraor­
dinary consolations, and that his methods of prayer are unusual,
the latter should not show himself altogether incredulous in
these matters ; but should calmly and carefully examine if any
signs of hallucination are present.489
Whilst there would be «langer in promoting the deceptions
of Satan by imprudent credulity, very great injury might be
done, on the other hand, by incredulity and contempt. That
he may not be taken unawares, the confessor should familiarize
himself with treatises on spiritual life; for even in the humblest
station of life God may manifest His special graces.490
We give a few general rules : —
1. We must be more careful when the sense of spiritual con­
solation in a penitent has been preceded by some external cause,
or when some object which, in the natural course of things
might produce such consolation, has been presented to the senses,
than in the case of consolation by which suddenly, and without
any previously existing cause, the higher powers of the soul
seem filled with great light. The cause of the latter can only be
God (St. Ignatius). For only God can directly influence the
higher faculties of the soul — the understanding and the will.
The devil can only do so indirectly ; he can cause sensible devo­
tion, excite tears and other effects which depend upon the
bodily powers (Reuter).
189 Heater says : “ It is indeed true, as the Apostle remarks in the First
Epistle to the Corinthians, that the Spirit of God is wont to instruct ns Him­
self and through the ministry of His good angels. Not seldom, however,
Satan transforms himself into an angel of light, deceiving men with the
intention of ruining their souls. Those become easily entangled in these
snares who are presumptuous in spiritual matters." Neo-Conf. η.217.
,w Scaramelli, Directorium mysticum; S. Alph. Praxis Confess, nn. 247251; St. Ignatius of Loyola. Hook of Exercises; Comp. Zenner. Instr, pruct.
Confess. P. II. Sect. II. cp. 1. j 261 ; the Monita S. Philippi Nerii.

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

2. The good Spirit suggests nothing which is opposed to truth,
to Holy Writ, the doctrines of the Church, the practices of the
saints, the life of Christ; nor anything frivolous, idle, inap­
propriate.
3. The good Spirit incites to self-denial, to mortification,
endurance of adversity, imitation of Christ, resignation to the
will of God, submission of private judgment, perfect obedience,
humility.
4. The good Spirit is modest, and, therefore, proceeds to all
its work in an orderly manner; it incites, as a rule, only to what
is usual and ordinary and adapted to each one's powers, without
the intervention of miracles. For the ordinary road to heaven
is God’s own design: and if, nevertheless, He sometimes in­
spires extraordinary things, it is almost exclusively in the case
of souls who are already rooted in humility and do not strive
after empty honors.
5. It is a sign of the operations of the Holy Spirit when the
penitent is humble of heart, not desiring extraordinary things,
not aspiring to astonishing exercises, making his holiness con­
sist in the faithful performance of the ordinary duties of life,
holding himself unworthy of the gifts of God, not exalting him­
self above others on account of these gifts, rejoicing to be
despised if the confessor treats his lights as pure illusions, main­
taining secrecy about his gifts.
6. But even when an emotion docs come from God, a tempta­
tion from the devil or some inordinate natural affection may
intrude itself, so that one might conclude that the consolation
or the light which the penitent has received is not from God;
as, for instance, would be the case where signs of pride were
visible.
But whatever be the origin of these interior emotions and
illuminations, the individual must always employ them for the
purpose of increasing his contempt of self, both in his own eyes
and those of others, in intensifying his longing to imitate Christ

HYPOCRITICAL PENITENTS

543

in His poverty, humility, and suffering; and if he zealously
pursues this object, the purposes of the devil will be defeated
if the inspirations emanated from him.
7. Obedience, even against the proper judgment, is a good
sign, and absolutely necessary. Gladly and readily revealing
what seems to redound to one’s credit, seeking praise by means
of extraordinary gifts, displeasure if the confessor hesitates, are
bad signs.
The confessor should not wish to have as penitents persons
who lay claim to extraordinary gifts, nor, prompted by vanity,
should he take pleasure in the flatteries which such persons
offer to him. If he is so foolish and vain, he can only ascribe it
to a just judgment of God if he at last discovers that, in pun­
ishment of his vanity and imprudence, persons who suffered
from illusions have deluded him also.*”
71. Hypocritical Penitents.

The confessor must be able to distinguish penitents who seri­
ously strive after perfection, truly pious penitents, from those
whose piety is merely a cloak. The piety of these latter consists
entirely in outward practices ; they visit churches a great deal,
say many prayers, go to confession often, and receive holy com­
munion several times in the week. And yet they neither know
anything of true and solid virtue, nor strive after it, but, on
the contrary, are full of faults. They remain longer in church
than is necessary, with the result that parents, husband, or wife
are inconvenienced, and household duties are neglected. They
receive the. Sacraments often — to be seen and praised by men;
and if the confessor does not allow them to approach holy com­
munion as often as they wish, they are angry with him. In
the confessional they wish to talk much to the confessor when
4,1 Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 505. Compare Benger, Pastoraltheologie, (1 Ed.)
Vol. 111. § 174, (2 Ed.) Vol. II. Book 4, § 174.

544

TUE M1XISTEH OF THE SACHA ΛΙEXT

there is neither use nor necessity for it. The spirit of mortifi­
cation is utterly wanting in them; they are, therefore, attached
to the pleasures of the table, dislike work, and are loquacious.
They arc neither humble nor obedient; they do not submit to
the guidance of their confessor, but act as though he should
rather obey them; they deceive him by confessing trivial sins
and concealing grave ones. They seek praise and honor, are
impatient under correction, despise others, and blame them arro­
gantly. They are wanting in charity, and, consequently, cause
trouble among their familiars; they envy others, are given to
anger, have no care for the honor and good name of others, etc.
With these hypocritical persons must be classed those, par­
ticularly women, who wish to unite piety to a worldly life.
But there is another class of women who adorn themselves
with a show of piety; namely, those quae sunt capta: amore Con­
fessorii. Malum profecto, quo non ipsa· tantum in perniciem
ruunt, sed etiam Confessorium, nisi eos dimittat, ruina· participem
reddunt. Persona talis nullam habet requiem; torquet eam desi­
derium colloquendi cum Confessorio unde, quoties facultas ipsi est,
ad Confessorium redit; torquet eam sollicitudo, qua illi placere
gestit, diffidentia et metus ne ab ipso deseratur, zelotypia ne alia
apud illum gratia magis polleant. The confessor must repri­
mand them in season or out of season, that they may enter into
themselves, and strive after true and solid piety. If he is not
successful, he must endeavor to rid himself of them, or dispatch
their confessions quickly. There are, moreover, extraordinary
possibilities of hypocrisy in some women. “ All malice is short
compared to the malice of a woman," according to Jesus Sirach
(25, 26). Inde contigit, ut femina falso devota finxerint se infir­
mas, postea miraculo sanatas atque publicas gratiarum actiones
impetrarinl pro valetudine sic recuperata; alia finxerunt vexa­
tiones ct verbera a damone ipsis illata ; alia ementita· sunt visiones
et revelationes, nccnon extases simularunt aliaque portenta fabricata
sunt. By such cunning contrivances these persons wish to draw

BCnUPULOüe PENITENTS

δ4δ

the attention of others toward» themselves, and to be honored
and admired, or to excite the pity of priests, ref, quod pejus at,
cantitati alicujus Sacerdotis insidiae struere volunt. The best
remedy against all this is not to believe such things, and to ignore
the persons in question.4"

72. Scrupulous Penitents.
No little trouble is caused to confessors by scrupulous per­
sons. The word “scruple,” in its real and primary sense, means
a little stone which inconveniences the wayfarer. Similarly,
in its transferred sense, it means some little spiritual obstacle
which prevents a man from performing an action because, for
some vain and worthless reason, he fears that he will commit
sin. A scruple is, therefore, fear of sinning, where no ground
for fear exists. The confessor must know the signs of scruples,
their causes, and their remedies.
I. Marks of scrupulosity : —
We will premise that: (1) a person is not scrupulous because
he has a scruple occasionally, but only when he is habitually
subject to them; (2) frequently a man himself cannot tell if
he is scrupulous or only of an anxious conscience; he must, there­
fore, rely upon the judgment of a prudent confessor; (3) the
confessor himself cannot always positively decide when he first
treats a penitent if he is scrupulous or not; he must, therefore,
abide and observe till he knows the penitent better, for as it is
dangerous to treat a scrupulous person according to general
rules, it is injurious to guide others by the rules applicable only
to the scrupulous; (4) the confessor must use very great dis­
cretion and prudence in dealing with penitents who are scru­
pulous on one point but lax as regards other things.
«*Cf. Aertnys. Instr, pract. P. HI. cp. 6. art. 2, n. 213; Benger. I. c. ;
Slolir, Pastoral Medicine, 2 Ed. p. 331; Kemclibaumer. Paterfamilias. Part
IV. chap. 7, 8.

546

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Hie characteristic signs of a scrupulous perso» show them­
selves in this: (fl) that, upon slight grounds, or none at all, he
changes his judgment, holding the same thing to be allowable
one moment, and forbidden the next; (b) that he fears to
commit sin by doing something which a competent confessor
has already told him to be allowed, and which he sees other
conscientious men do and which he himself would, in his own
judgment, consider to be allowed if he were not obliged or did
not wish to do it at that time; (c) that he is agitated for fear
he should sin, and cannot account to himself for this anxiety;
(d) that he clings obstinately to his own judgment, placing no con­
fidence in the decisions of learned men, or the confessor; (e) that
he repeatedly asks whether a thing is allowed, although he has
several times received an answer on the point; (/) that he pon­
ders over circumstances connected with an act which exercise no
influence at al) upon the moral value of the action, and which
other men generally disregard altogether ; (</) that he holds for a
sin that which the most conscientious men commonly do without
thinking of sin ; (A) that he is perpetually anxious about his con­
fessions, lest they should be invalid, although the confessor has
declared them to be valid, even after a careful repetition of the
confessions has already taken place.4”
From these indications the confessor, is able to judge if his
penitent is scrupulous. We must not mistake them, however,
for the following circumstances, which would be of little assist­
ance in recognizing the malady, as they are found not only with
the scrupulous, but also with those who have tender consciences.
1. If the penitent is concerned, and reasonably anxious, not
to offend God even in the slightest degree or to atone immedi­
ately for a sin committed, he is not on this account a scrupulous
person.
♦*· S. Alph. Lib. I. n. 11 ; Aertnys, 1. c. Lib. I. 1 ract. II. u. 49 ; Lelnnkuhl, Theol. Mor. Gener. Tract. II. u. 57; Stolz, Trib. Pœnit. I. P. V. Q.
111. n. 17«.

sen up ulous p en i t en τη

547

2. If some one after living a long time in grave sin is con­
verted, makes a good confession to the best of his ability, and,
within a moderate period, say half a year, for example, still
thinks he cannot do enough anti wishes two or three times to
reconfess his sins, he must not be at once set down as scrupu­
lous. After that time, however, the penitent must he forbidden
to say anything about former sins, or even to investigate whether
he has confessed everything correctly. Only if the penitent
was accustomed to conceal sins in the confessional might he he
allowed to continue «hiring a longer time to confess sins which
might occur to his mind after the general confession.4**
3. If a person doubts whether he has sinned in some particu­
lar instance we are not to conclude that he is scrupulous; for
a doubt may be absolutely, or relatively, reasonable.***
If the confessor tells the penitent that he is scrupulous, the
latter must certainly believe him ; but it is often very difficult
to convince the penitent. He is rather disposed to consider
others thoughtless and less conscientious, not excluding the
confessor, or to think that the latter does not properly know
him or has misunderstood him. Here the cunning of the devil
is seen, who is wont to instill into perplexed souls a peculiar
presumption and obstinacy of judgment. This error is very per­
nicious; it springs from pride and makes the penitent scorn
the remedies which are offered to him.
11. The causes of scruples : —
Scruples may proceed from God, from the devil, and from a
natural disposition.
1. God sometimes permits scruples (permi^ire), withdraw­
ing from just motives His supernatural light. If the trials
thus proceed from God, they are, per se, useful, produce a pro­
founder contrition, humility, and detachment from the world.
«*·« Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 200.
«“Cf. Lacroix, 1. c. Lib. I. u. 510 an.; Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. Gener. ΙΊ.
11. u. 58.

548

τπε minister of the sacra hex t

2. Scruples proceed from the devil also (effeciire), who has a
peculiar skill in producing them by confusing the imagination
with false shows and suggestions. He does not plague great
sinners with scruples, because he is content to leave them in
their state of presumption, and so cast them ever deeper and
deeper into ruin. Nor are great saints troubled by him, because
in them fear has been conquered by perfect love. 11 is only
those who have begun to give themselves to God, and chiefly
those who have abandoned great sins and entered upon the
right road. His object is to perplex and hamper them in their
spiritual progress, to plunge them into despair, or, at least, to
disturb their interior peace. Scruples emanating from Satan
must, therefore, be combated with all energy, for they tend to
evil.
3. Scruples may also be traced to natural causes (dispositive),
the individual having a keener and more sensitive perception of
evil, or a wavering, unsettled judgment.
These natural causes are partly physical and partly moral :
(a) Bodily constitution: a melancholy temperament may in­
cline an otherwise sagacious man to suspicion, obstinacy and
scrupulosity. Others who in consequence of a physical dispo­
sition are low-spirited, despondent, and timid, readily conceive
an unreasonable fear of sin, and if they do not quickly banish this
fear, they frequently fall a prey to scruples, (b) Nervousness
and disease of the brain: the imagination becomes excited and
perplexed, so that vivid conceptions of the imagination are not
sufficiently distinguished from the judgments of reason. This
affection may be hereditary, or it may arise from overwork,
late hours, or immoderate fasting, (c) Dullness of mind, which
cannot adequately distinguish real from seeming motives; but
acuteness of intellect, if the judgment is not well balanced,
may produce the same result, (d) Hidden pride and obstinacy
of private judgment: a man subject to these moral defects be­
comes easily entangled in doubts and scruples, (e) Too great

srnupULOfrs penitents

549

anxiety to avoid everything
I will not say in any way evil,
for that we must avoid, but which has even the appearance of
evil ; thus is formed the habit of adopting the stricter and the
speculatively more certain view, a proceeding which in practice
does not by any means tend to the safer course.4*' (/) Inter­
course with scrupulous people, reading books in which only the
stricter opinions arc advanced, confessing to a scrupulous con­
fessor.4”
III. The following considerations will show when the scruples
proceed from God: (1) when they excite sincere detestation
of sin ; (2) when they do not last long and end in great calm
of mind : (3) when they arc called forth by hatred of sin.
Scruples may be recognized as proceeding from the evil one:
(1) when they produce lukewarmness and despair of salvation;
(2) when the scruples occur in connection with the holiest actions,
especially where a man is otherwise not accustomed to be much
troubled with them; (3) when a man detests only this or that
kind of sin — others not so much; God detests all sin; (4) when
a man yields to grave temptations while at the same time he is
anxious about trifles.4”
But when, without apparent reason, the heart becomes uneasy
anti the head affected, when a sudden tremor takes possession
of the limbs and the mind is filled with scruples, we may justly
assume that the latter proceed from natural causes, and this
sign is the more certain if in all places and in all actions the
penitent is molested by them.
IV. Scruples arc very pernicious, causing perplexity and de­
jection of spirit, placing obstacles in the way of the soul's prog498 S. Alph. De Mor. Syet.
497 Cf. Reuter, Neo-Con fees. 1. c. Lib. III. § 159 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. η. 55;
Aertnye, 1. c. n. 50; Miiller, I. c. II. § 159; Beuger, Pastoral théologie, a. a.
O. § 174, n. 5 ; Scarainelli, Direct, ascet. Tom. III. nn. 43.1—MO; Zenner,
Instr, pract. Conf. P. II. Sect. II. cp. 1, § 256.
499 Cf. Reuter. Neo-Confeee. 1. c. n. 260; S. Ignat. I. c. Regula ·’> ; llenger,
1. c. ; Scarainelli. I. c. ; Zenner. In-tr. pract. Conf. P. II. Sect. II. <·ρ. I. i 250.

550

TUR MINISTER OF TUE SACRAMENT

ress towards virtue, closing the heart, to the consolation of the
Holy Ghost, producing dryness of spirit, aversion to prayer,
and neglect of the ordinary duties. Scruples frequently under­
mine health, not seldom exposing the subject of them to the
danger either of becoming insane or of falling into great sins of
impurity, despair, blasphemy, or suicide.40"
St. Alphonsus distinguishes three kinds of scruples, and theo­
logians universally follow him in tins division: (a) scruples
concerning former confessions, the person being always uneasy
about them, although they have been made properly ami com­
pletely; this kind of scruple is not so difficult to overcome;
(6) scruples concerning the consent to sinful thoughts about dif­
ferent matters ; here the scruple as a rule comes after the action —
these scruples may be a heavy burden ; (c) scruples concerning
all actions, or at least innumerable tilings about which other
men do not at all trouble themselves. These are the worst scru­
ples. The remedies which the confessor has to employ for the
cure of scruples are the following : (1) He must find out if the
penitent is scrupulous about everything, or only some things,
and what is the cause of the scruples. (2) He must convince
the penitent that , where sin is not evident, the safest course for
him is obedience to his confessor; and that, on the other hand,
it is very dangerous not to obey his confessor. (3) He must,
therefore, ask the penitent if he has confidence in him, and if
he will obey him even against his own judgment; the confessor
must undertake to guide the penitent only after these questions
have been answered in the affirmative, otherwise he must tell
him plainly to apply to another confessor in whom he has con­
fidence and whom he is willing to obey. If this is not done,
the confessor’s pains would be simply thrown away. (4) The
confessor in most cases ought to be kind to the scrupulous peni­
tent, though severity is sometimes necessary, especially where
8. Alph. 1. o. n. 13; Reuter, Neo-Conf. 1. c. n. 261 ; Aertnys, 1. c. n. Bl.

SCRUPULOUS PENITENTS

551

obstinacy in private judgment is manifested, or when the peni­
tent presses for repetition of a confession against the advice of
the confessor. Under no pretext whatever, not even when tears
are added, should the confessor allow this. This extreme sever­
ity is a kindness; but it should be tempered with gentleness.
(5) To doubts, let the confessor answer without hesitation and
without much questioning, and interpret everything according
to the more lenient view. He should, in most cases, give no
reasons for his answers, lest the penitent might think that after
all his scruples were not to be despised, and because the latter
will weigh these reasons, and make them doubtful by opposing
to them his futile objections. Nor should he listen to new doubts
and scruples, but when he is morally certain that a scruple is
in question, he should sometimes without listening to the peni­
tent order him to lay aside all anxiety anil quickly to receive
holy communion. (6) He should give the penitent some gen­
eral rules to follow; the more general and the easier the appli­
cation of these rules and the more comprehensive of individual
circumstances, the better they are.500 Such general rules to
be given to the penitent are the following : (1) He must be con­
vinced that he really is scrupulous—but that scruples by no
means lead to holiness; he should, therefore, firmly resolve to
combat them. (2) He should pray with great humility, con­
fidence, and resignation to the divine Will for light and peace
of conscience. (3) He should cling to one and the same confessor
in whose learning and goodness he trusts, and whom he must
obey most strictly, as the representative of God. The con­
fessor’s decisions must be regarded as final by the penitent.
Never should the penitent seek a solution of his doubts else­
where than from his confessor. He should abide with this deci­
sion even if doubts again arise. (4) He must accustom
himself to consider God as infinitely good, and occupy himself
600
S. Alph. Lib. T.n. 13; Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 202; Lehmkuhl, I. c. n.
Cl ; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 53.

1)52

TBK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

with thoughts which awaken confidence in God, avoiding any
which have the opposite effect. (5) lie should flee idleness, so
that the deni may always find him busy. He should avoid
intercourse with scrupulous people, as also reading about things
which excite scruples. (6) As soon as a scruple arises, he should
banish it, and think of something else, as if it were a temptation
to evil. He should not allow his mind to dwell upon his scru­
ples by opposing reasons to them, but energetically lay aside
all doubt. (7) He must not give way to a scruple by obeying
its suggestions; on the contrary, he must act boldly in opposi­
tion to the scruple, and not fear that he will sin, even when his
conscience does not seem to him to be very clear about the mat­
ter. For a scrupulous person it should suffice to know that he
must despise his scruples, and that in spite of them, he may do
any act of which he cannot say positively at first sight that it is
a sin ; and that, in order to commit a mortal sin, it is necessary
for him to be able to say at once, without hesitation and with­
out examination, that the thing in question is forbidden under
mortal sin. (8) Let him be assured that he is by no means
obliged to confess his doubts; indeed, that this is not even use­
ful and must be forbidden. Doubtful sins a scrupulous person
is certainly not bound to confess. Speculative doubts the scru­
pulous person is not bound to regard ; for what for others is a
reasonable motive for investigation, is not so for the scrupu­
lous. From this results : —
(1) For a scrupulous person an act which he does not recog­
nize at once as a sin is not a sin ; (2) he may do that which
he sees other conscientious people do without scruple, even
when it is contrary to Ms own judgment or his own opinion ;
(3) scruples are, for him, no reasonable ground for doing or for
not doing an action, or for hesitating; and this applies to the
doubt as to whether a scruple or a valid reason is in question.501
601 Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 203 as. ; Stotz, 1. c. n. 185; Lehmkuhl,
I.e. 11.03; Aertnys, 1. c.; Zenner, Instructio piact. Confess. I*. Il, Seel. II.
cp. 1. § 257.

SCRUPULOUS PENJTEST8

558

With regard to different kinds of scruples Reuter gives the
following good rules: —
1. He who is troublefl with doubts as to whether he hoe con­
sented to interior temptations, and is otherwise conscientious,
may regulate his conduct according to the following principles:
(a) He is never to believe that he has consented to a mortal
sin if he does not positively know that he fully recognized the
gravity of the sin, and fully consented to it. (&) If the person
tempted is seized with fear, abhors the object of the tempta­
tion as he considers it more closely and remains determined not
to offend God, he has not completely consented. This applies
to non-scrupulous persons also; and theologians maintain that
he who has a God-fearing conscience, and is not accustomed to
consent to sin with full attention, may believe, in a case of doubt,
that consent has not been complete, for ex communiter contin­
gentibus fit prudens priesamplio, (c) Nor may we conclude
that he luis fully consented because the temptation lasted a
long time, or because the sensual excitement was violent, for
this is material and involuntary, and sometimes appears more
considerable than it really was.
2. If the penitent is tempted against faith, or against hope,
let him ignore the temptation, turn his mind to other things,
especially to God, but let him not be perplexed by trying to
awaken a positive act of these virtues. And if he thinks that
he has had blasphemous thoughts, let him proceed in the same
manner, despising them, and disbelieving that he has consented
to them, although he may have felt a certain pleasure in these
thoughts and emotions; indeed, the devil can create in the
imagination a certain semblance of consent, while the individ­
ual himself and his will are far removed from the criminal act.
When the soul has been calmed it is always useful to make an
act of the love of God.
3. If the temptation refers to conditional events in the future,
for instance, “ what would you do if you were obliged either to

554

THF MINISTER OF THK SACRAMENT

sinor to enduro this or that evil?" lot him turn away energeti­
cally from snoh thoughts, not answering directly or positively
hut rather indirectly, “I will not offend God now; and should
I ever be so situated, the grace of God will help me to do His
will.” With this answer let him calm himself, and not rashly
entangle himself in difficulties, lest he suffer the punishment of
presumption, like the Apostle Peter.
4. If, when looking al perfectly innocent things, impure images
and emotions arise, let him look at them boldly if they are ob­
jects and pictures (for example, holy pictures), modestly and
transiently if human beings: let him act as other conscientious
men do in these things and despise the emotions or thoughts.
He should proceed in the same manner if these things happen
when he is saying certain prayers; let him not omit the prayers
on this account, but devoutly proceed with them.
5. The Divine Office may be a source of scruples. The peni­
tent may doubt whether he had the intention of reciting it ; this
scruple is ridiculous, for the very fact of his saying it shows that
the intention is there. He may doubt that he has recited it
properly, having mutilated words, or been voluntarily dis­
tracted; in this case he should not repeat anything at all, for
since he honestly wished to perform his duty, it is to be pre­
sumed that he did it properly. While he is saying his Office he
must not stop, but proceed according to previous intention
without hesitation, without straining the mind, without hurry,
without anxiety. As the requisite attention is not prevented
by any action which, of its nature, is consistent with interior
attention, the person should not be troubled if he has done such
an action, unless it were of a kind which conscientious men
would, during prayer, be careful to avoid. After the comple­
tion of the Office, an anxious person should repeat nothing, even
if he fears that he has said it badly. If he is very scrupulous,
and requires too much time for saying his Office, his Superior
or confessor can fix a certain time in which conscientious clerics

CONVERTS

555

are accustomed to say it conveniently, and if, after devoting
this time to it, he has not quite finished it, he shall omit the
part still remaining. Indeed, according to the same author,
and Gobat, whom St. Alphonsus quotes (in approval of his opin­
ion), the Office could even be absolutely forbidden to such a
person till it could be assumed that he was able to recite it
without such worry; for grave inconvenience releases from
obedience to the commandments of the Church?”

73. Converts.

As it is not every belief that saves, but only the true faith
taught by Christ, the zealous priest will be anxious to contrib­
ute, as much as he is able, to the conversion of heretics. He
will, therefore, in continued prayer, implore for them the light
of grace, that they may recognize their error and seek the truth ;
he will, when occasion presents itself, exhort them to avoid sin,
“ because error does not produce sins, but sins produce error,”
and “darkness does not comprehend the light.” He will also,
in a judicious manner, encourage them to attend our religious
services, to hear sermons, to read books in which the Catholic
doctrine is exposed and explained; he will not object to friendly
intercourse with them, in order to lead them gradually to a
recognition of their errors, as they begin to doubt of the truth
of their teachings, and salutary scruples arise in them. When a
heretic wishes to accept the Catholic faith and be instructed, he
should : I. Be received with great love and kiijdness and be
asked discreetly why he wishes to change his religion and em­
brace the Catholic faith. Whatever motive he assigns, caution
is necessary, — because there are designing people who, under
the cloak of piety, seek, not the salvation of their souls, nor the
truth, but temporal advantages, such as marriage, sustenance,
602
n. 64.

S. Alph. Lib. IV. n. 177; Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 268; Lehmkuhl, 1. o.

556

THE MINISTER OF THE ·-.1

| M/ \ /

etc., and, having obtained these, live bad lives, and return to
their old vices, as examples both amongst Jews and heretics
teach us. He has, therefore, to be taught that, in returning to
the true Church, he must seek simply ami solely the kingdom
of God, and the salvation of his soul. If, however, he should
say that he is poor ami deprived of the means of sustenance, he
should not be promised assistance till there is proof of his good
intentions. But, in order that the priest may not be deceived,
he should, if he does not already know the man sufficiently,
examine him by various questions at different times, and only
when he finds him sincere, recommend him to others. The
priest should not show familiarity, nor do or say anything in
private intercourse, which he would regret if the catechumen
should, perchance, return to heresy.
Moreover, he should endeavor to acquire the confidence of the
convert, so that the latter may gladly unfold to him all his
errors, doubts, and wounds.
The convert must be admonished to attach great importance
to the business of his conversion, as upon it depends his eternal
salvation; he should, therefore, often and fervently pray for its
happy issue, and perform good works; the priest himself should
also most zealously pray and induce others to pray for him.
II. Having convinced himself of the good dispositions and
steadfastness of the convert, the priest should readily offer to
supply him with the necessary instruction, or, if he is really pre­
vented from doing so, provide for his instruction at the hands
of some other reliable person.
In the matter of the instruction the following points must
l>e observed : —
1. First of all it must be ascertained if the convert is a mate­
rial or a formal heretic. He is a formal heretic if he has know­
ingly and voluntarily adhered to any error against the truth of
the Catholic faith, after that truth had been adequately exposed
to him, and he had recognized it as truth. Λ material heretic

CON VENTO

!>F>1

is one who professes error through ignorance, or in consequence
of perverse instruction or education. Perhaps most of the non­
Catholics of the lower classes belong to the latter kind ; seeing
that, from childhood, they have been reared in every prejudice
and calumny against our religion. But when reasonable doubts
arise in them, they are bound to investigate, to pray for divine
light, to search for the truth, and as soon as they recognize it
to adopt it. Otherwise they become formal heretics, because
they adhere with obstinacy to error.
2. Then wo must investigate to what extent the convert
has been instructed in the tenets of his sect, and what doubts
(rouble him with regard to the Catholic doctrine. For there
arc mainly two classes of heretics who become converts; the
first consists of simple uneducated people, who require sound
instruction in Christian truth, but who should be informed of
points of controversy with great caution, in order that they
may not learn new errors and hence new doubts. The other
class is formed of educated people whom one must instruct
especially on all points of divergence, so that their doubts are
dispelled.
3. But as faith must be the rational and invincible assent to
all revealed truths, the credibility of our dogmas must first
be demonstrated to the heretic; and these are to be accepted
if the Catholic Church alone is the true Church of Christ.
He should, therefore, be taught that· the true faith is neces­
sary to salvation, and that there is only one true religion,
and only one Church of Christ, as the true religion must come
from God, and God who is truth itself cannot reveal what is
self-contradictory. He should then be shown that the true
Church of Christ must have definite marks which distinguish
her from every false sect, and that these marks of the true Church
of Christ arc only possessed by the Catholic Church
we may expose particular doctrines, especially tho*
which Catholics differ from heretics, namely: the

65B

THE MINISTER 01·· THE

Γ

the Kcal Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, purgatory
veneration of the saints, the infallibility of the Pope.
ΙΙΓ. When the convert has been (according to his intelli­
gence) fully instructed, he must be prepared for the reception of
Baptism, if he be not baptized, of the Sacrament of Penance,
and holy communion, and for a profession of faith. As converts
generally dread confession, the priest must endeavor to remove
their fear by reminding them of the seal of confession, the peace
of mind following upon a good confession, and by lessening the
difficulties of the examination of conscience. The. manner of
making a good preparation and thanksgiving for holy commun­
ion should be well explained. Finally, give him a formula of
confession of faith in his native language, ami explain it to him.
IV. Not till the priest is satisfied as to the convert's knowl­
edge and constancy should he receive him into the. communion
of the Church. The reception itself may take place in three dif­
ferent ways, according to the circumstances of the convert : —
1. If he has not been baptized, or if the nullity of his Bap­
tism is certain, Baptism is administered to him absolutely; but
then no abjuration of heresy on the part of the convert takes
place, nor is absolution given to him, because the Sacrament of
Regeneration cleanses from all sins.
2. If Baptism has to be repeated sub conditione, the abjuratio
harcsis, or the professio fidei takes place in the vernacular, then
Baptism is administered sub conditione, after which the convert
confesses and receives absolution sub conditione.
3. If the Baptism which the convert formerly received is
regarded as valid, he abjurcs.his heresy by pronouncing the pro­
fession of faith, and is then absolved from the ecclesiastical
censures?”
An dbjuratio haresis is not to be demanded from children who
have not arrived at the age of puberty, i.e. about their fourCf. S. Congreg. S. Ollie. 20 Jul., 1859 (Coll. Lacens. Cone il. Tom. III.
p. 550).

CON VF. UTS

559

teenth year ; nor is absolution from the censures to be adminis­
tered, as they have not incurred any; they need only make the
professio fidei catholic® before they are admitted to the Sacra­
ments. For these young converts the Symbol of the Apostles
seems to suffice. But from such as have passed this age, a
formal abjuration of the sect to which they have hitherto be­
longed is to be demanded.”1 Although a material heretic can
be absolved by every confessor pro foro interno, it is more advis­
able. and safer to procure from the bishop the facultas absolvendi
ab hœresi, as there are difficulties in the matter, and the confessor
may easily be deceived in his judgment. This faculty is always
to be requested pro foro externo. If, at his conversion, a heretic
must be baptized, his admission to the Church belongs to the
right of the parochus loci. The bishop must be consulted as to
the repetition of Baptism sub conditions.
\r. After his reception into the bosom of the Church the con­
vert, if his former Baptism was valid, or if he was rebaptized
sub conditione, must make a complete confession of the sins of his
former life. Let the confessor treat him with all charity, assist
him with questions, being careful, however, not to institute a
rigid examination. The confessor may ask him if he has uttered
blasphemies or insults against the Catholic Church, or induced
others to do so ; if he has entertained doubts concerning his reli­
gion and how long he despised or neglected the truth. If the
penitent has committed many grave sins, the confessor must be
careful not to reprove him severely or harshly, rather praise his
good disposition in confessing them, exhort him kindly but ear­
nestly, henceforth to lead a truly Christian and good life. No
great penance should be imposed at first, so as not to dispirit
604 Cf. Instr. S. C. Inq. 20 Jul., 1859 et 20 Nov., 1878 ; Bucceroni, Enchirfd.
p. 84. There is nn (abridged) profesmowhich the S.
S. Officii. 20
July, 1859 gave for America; the wording of the Instruction clearly indi­
cates that it may be used in all places where the diocesan law does not
decide to the contrary.

560

THK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

flic penitent. Finally, the confessor administers absolution,
absolute or sub conditione, according as Baptism was cither not
repeated or was again administered sub conditione.
If a non-Catholic in the hour of death wishes to embrace the
Catholic faith, he must make the professio fidei before two wit­
nesses, at least with regard to the doctrines which must be
believed necessitate medii et prœccpti. To avoid difficulties later
this act should be taken down in writing, and the document
signed. After which the dying person may be prepared by acts
of faith, hope, and charity, contrition, and purpose of amend­
ment; he should then confess; absolution from excommunica­
tion and from sin should be given him; after this the viaticum
and Extreme Unction.
But if the dying person shows no disposition to accept the
Catholic faith, the priest should seek to gain his confidence, and
then gradually approach the question of his salvation. Let the
priest endeavor first to awaken in the dying man an act of faith
in all that God has revealed, especially in all that must be be­
lieved necessitate medii, then an act of hope, of perfect contri­
tion, and resignation. In such a case it is not prudent to ask
the man bluntly to join the true Church, for fear of exposing
him to a great temptation. In order, however, to be able to
administer to him the conditional absolution, he should be in­
duced to acknowledge himself a sinner before God, and, having
elicited contrition, to declare also that he wished to be assisted
as much as possible by the services of the priest the better to
obtain eternal life.505 Absolution sub conditione can then be
administered to the dying man, by secretly pronouncing the
form of words, without making the sign of the cross.
606 Thus Lehrnkuhl. Aertnys, however, does not assent to this teaching,
quin voluntas conditionalis confitendi non est reapse confessio, atque adeo prorsus
deesse videtur materia. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 196, Q, 4, 5. Lehrnkuhl re­
jects the opinion that a dying person in this state must be asked whether he
would confess and receive absolution; for here the question is not what the
man would wish, hut what he wishes ; at most it might be said of this velleity
that it includes a certain will and actual accusation. Lehrnkuhl, 1. c. n. 515.

CHAPTER II
THE TREATMENT OF PENITENTS IN DIFFERENT EXTERNAL

CIRCUMSTANCES

74. The Confession of Children.

The confessor must devote special care to the confessions of
children, for this is a matter of much importance.5" As with
adults, so with children, confession exercises a great influence
upon the spiritual life, and forms a factor in their education
which cannot be estimated too highly. For even a child can
commit sins with full advertence or malice, and hence requires
the Sacrament of Penance in order to recover the lost life of
grace, and to obtain the necessary assistance in preserving itself
from future sin. The child also has its temptations; evil incli­
nations and passions awaken in the child's soul. Who does not
know that many a child is entangled in a net of evil habits and
occasions of the worst kind? In truth, the child stands much
in need of supernatural strength in order to preserve its most
precious treasure of innocence. This strength conferred by
grace is more necessary to the child than all exhortations and
instructions. A good confession will eradicate obstinate faults
and evil habits which have long defied all the arts anil wisdom
of educational systems. Confession is in many cases the sole
606 Zenner. Instr, pract. Confess. 1. c. cp. 2, §203: Summi momenti munue
nubit confessariue, 'Ium puerorum eonfensionibu» ne offert excipienilie. Dubois,
“The Practical Pastor,” Pt. 2. chap. 18, η. 381; Frassinetti. ·· Practical In­
struction for Young Pastors," Pt. 2, Chap. 3, n. 411 (in the Italian); Ken·
niuger-tiopfert, Pastoraltheologie, Book 1. Pt. I. §84. p. 240.

Û01

ββ2

THE MINISTER OF THE SACHA ME.X T

means of discovering in the child hidden and ruinons habits and
of correcting them, thus safeguarding its innocence and purity.
Even when parents and the other agencies of education, home
influence and the school, fail in their duty, attaching importance
only to the cultivation of the intelligence and to outward moral­
ity and propriety, the confessional can still be the child’s
salvation by shielding its heart from evil. This great and
fundamental significance of the confessional for the child and
its education must be realized by the confessor. He will then
readily undergo the labor involved in the preparation of chil­
dren for confession, and the confessions themselves. Here, pre­
eminently, he will scatter the good seed from which he may
expect an abundant harvest. Here he is the true representa­
tive of the divine Friend of children, of Him who suffered the
little children to come unto Him, of Him who uttered the mo­
mentous words: “He that shall receive one such little child in
My name, receiveth Me ” (Matt, xviii. 5 ; xix. 13-15).
I. The first consideration is the admission and the preparation
of the children for confession.
In the admission to confession, age must certainly be consid­
ered, but not chiefly; the mental capacities and development
must be taken into account. The declaration of the IV. Council
of the Lateran that a child is bound to receive the Sacrament
of Penance as soon as it has reached the years of discretion
(anni discretionis) is based on the nature of the case. But when
this period arrives cannot be precisely stated in years and days :
it depends much on individual circumstances. The seventh
year is generally regarded by theologians as the limit, and they
teach that a child who has completed the seventh year is boum I
to receive the Sacrament of Penance. And if a child has aver­
age mental capacity, has received religious training at home,
and from the sixth year regular religious instruction at school, it
con, and generally should, go to confession when it is seven years
old, or even before this, as would be desirable if such a child were

THE CONFESSION OF CHILDREN

563

seriously ill. or if there were reasons for supposing that it had
committed grave sin. In the latter event the child would be
bound, in order to comply with the precept of the Church, to
confess within a year.50’ But as it happens that very many chil­
dren arc not sufficiently developed and instructed so early, it
follows that the regular admission is left to the judgment of the
priest. St. Charles Borromeo gave his clergy the following
precept on this head: (Jui ad septem aut octo annos pervenerint,
pro modulo de necessitate et virtute sacramenti illudque frequen­
tandi instruentur;so’ And the Cologne Provincial Council of
the year 1860 decrees that the first confession of children shall
not be put off longer than lhe ninth year. The priest should
certainly not delay the preparation of a child for his first con­
fession any longer, unless its incapacity is demonstrated. With
the seventh or eighth year the children should be admitted
to instruction for confession, and if a child shows in the course
of this instruction that it has arrived at a sufficient understand­
ing of the Sacrament of Penance, it should be immediately pre­
pared for it. But those children who are not qualified should
take part in the preparation for the next (second) confession of
the course, in order that they may be admitted then, or later,
in any case as soon as possible, to this holy Sacrament. For
the zealous priest will not only instruct the children concerning
the Sacrament at the beginning of every school year, as is the
regulation in many dioceses, but each reception (at least in the
children’s first years) will be preceded by a solid preparation
consisting in a general repetition of the essential truths. If the
less gifted children are present at these instructions and prepa­
rations, and if special attention is given to them, they will soon
be in a condition to make a good confession. The final deci­
sion concerning the capacity or incapacity of a child to receive
S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 432, βββ ; Gury, l.c. I. n. 478; Stang, Piwtoral
Theol. Bk. II. 4, §31. Schulze, Pastoral Theol. Sect. I. 4, n. 3.
J
Cf. Statut. Leod. n. 314.

564

THE MINISTEII OF THE SACHA MENT

absolution, or, in other words, concerning its dispositions, must
be left to the confessor, who will and must arrive at some settled
judgment on this point, and give absolution conditionally or
■ unconditionally, or postpone it, as he shall find necessary.
The special instruction which precedes the children's confes­
sion must be given according to a definite and practical plan,
and with great care and prudence.800 At the outset the children
must be solemnly admonished that they are shortly to be ad­
mitted to their first confession, and that for this purpose they
are to receive a special instruction. The importance of this in­
struction must be impressed upon them as an initiatory prepa­
ration for the reception of the Sacrament, thus encouraging
them to diligent application and attention. There is probably
no religious instruction which more attracts little ones and
more wins their interest, than the instruction for confession, on
account of the exceedingly beautiful truths which are here dis­
cussed. It must be emphasized and brought home to the chil­
dren that it is a great happiness, an unmerited favor to be
cleansed from sin in the holy Sacrament of Penance; it would
be ill timed to represent confession as something hard or diffi­
cult or as a kind of punishment. One must rather awaken
enthusiasm within them, so that they may take pleasure in pre­
paring themselves for it carefully, and they must be assured
that the confessor will make easy everything which they think
will be difficult in the confessional if only they show good will.
Admission to confession must also be represented to them in the
light of a distinction, and as a reward of diligence and attention.
As to the matter of the instruction, — the doctrine of the
Sacrament of Penance must be treated thoroughly, clearly, at­
tractively, and in a manner adapted to a child’s intelligence.
Then the most important doctrines of the catechism with refer­
ence to confession must be repeated, especially the doctrine of

■

«°» Stang, Pastoral Theol. Bk. Π. 4, §31.

THE CONFESSION OF CHILDREN

565

God and Hie attributes; furthermore, the doctrine of sin and
the Redemption. These truths are to be set forth in a manner
at once easily intelligible to the mind and stimulating to the
feelings. Particular care must be taken that the children learn
to say correctly and with understanding the usual prayers before
and after confession. It is very useful at the end of this instruc­
tion (of the remote preparation) and shortly before the confes­
sion, to make with the children an examination of conscience.
In this manner as complete a confession as possible will result,
and many abuses be prevented; especially will children not
accuse themselves of things which they do not in the least under­
stand and which they have not committed ; while, at the same
time, the suitable, intelligible, and l>ecoming expressions for the
different sins will be put into their mouths.510 Furthermore, it
is much to be recommended that the children should, in com­
mon, be incited to contrition and purpose of amendment (say
in the Church, immediately before confession) by laying before
them the motives for contrition, and this slowly, intelligibly,
and in a manner adapted to children; afterwards repeating to
them a short and forcible formula of contrition and purpose of
amendment, concluding with another short exhortation to sin­
cerity in confession and to gratitude to God after the confession?”
610 The question whether a formula of an Examination of Conscience
should be placed in the hands of children, is treated by Dubois. 1. c.
Certainly not in the hands of the younger children; and Examinations,
such as are contained in prayer-books for grown-up people, should not be
given to older ones. Nor are all Examinations for Children to be recom­
mended. The instruction is the most important thing; an Examination
is a poor substitute for good instruction. Certain it is that these Exami­
nations are very often misused by children.
611 Aertnys says in his Institut, practice, cp. 2, art. 1, n. 122, that the
confessor must ask the children if they know the articles of faith which
every Christian is bound to know, and if they do not, he must, if time allows,
patiently instruct them concerning these articles, at least concerning the
doctrines necessary to salvation, etc., but this can only happen in excep­
tional cases, scarcely when there has been given a good course of previous
instruction.

566

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

II. Treatment of children in the confessional.
If the children have been well prepared, the confessor's work
is much facilitated. But he must, nevertheless, always bear in
mind the words of St. Alphonsus de Liguori : “ The confessor
most expend all his love on the children, and treat them in the gen­
tlest manner possible.” “*
But even when there has been careful preparation the confessor
must: (I) see that the confession is a complete one, and supply
any possible defects in it; (2) instruct the child, and, if neces­
sary, dispose it for absolution; (3) judge of his disposition, and,
according to this judgment, give absolution conditionally or
unconditionally or defer it.
In addition to the rules already laid down and discussed, the
following special remarks will be serviceable : —
1. If the confession of the child is incomplete or vague, the
confessor can easily discover the principal sins or at least suffi­
cient matter by means of questions if the child has some little
intelligence. He may ask the child if it has neglected daily
prayers, if it has through his own fault missed Mass on Sundays
or holidays (especially during vacation time) ; if it has behaved
disrespectfully in Church, by laughing, talking, looking about,
and disturbing others; if it has been disobedient and naughty
towards his parents and superiors; if it has quarreled with his
brothers and sisters and other children; if it has been angry
or cursed in anger ; if it has taken dainties by stealth or stolen ;
if it has lied and said untrue things of other children.8” Where
there are grave sins, he must, of course, ask the number, if it was
not stated; and he must insist upon the child's examining itself
concerning the number, and stating it as precisely as possible.
Everything connected with children’s confessions must claim
the confessor's attention, but he must be especially careful that
they learn to confess well. Children will have great difficulty in
6,1 Prax. Coni. cp. B, n. 90.
»»· S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 90.

TTTE CONFESSION OF CHILDREN

567

giving account of their thoughts, desires, and the intentions by
which they have been influenced, and the confessor may thus
find himself obliged to put questions on these matters.
2. If the child has made a definite confession, but the con­
fessor still believes that there has been insincerity, — from false
shame or fear, or. perhaps, from inability to make the sin known,
it often requires great prudence to detect the sin omitted.*" It
is mostly sins against the sixth and seventh commandments
which, for the above reasons, children conceal. If the confessor,
therefore, suspects that a sin against the sixth commandment
has been omitted, he must exercise prudence in two ways: first,
that he does not, by unsuitable questions, make the child ac­
quainted with sins of which it knows nothing, and that he does
not put the questions in such a general way that they fail to dis­
close the sin. If the child confesses that it spoke immodest
words, or did something immodest, or permitted it, the con­
fessor must not at once conclude that he has to do with real
sins against the sixth commandment; for sometimes children
take unbecoming words, which are no sin against holy purity,
for immodest words and confess them as sins; they also regard
certain things as immodest actions wliich are by no means sin­
ful,5,5 but on the contrary necessary. There is ground for this
supposition especially when an otherwise good child accuses
5,4 Cf. Catech. Roman. P. III. cp. 7 ; Henninger, I. c.
H· Aertnys writes upon this point (Instr, pract. cp. 2, art. 1. n. 127):
Actione» inhonesta puerorum, qui huuria adhuc ignari sunt, plerumque non sunt
habenda ut peccata mortalia ; quia rei commotionem veneream non habuerunt rel
hujus malitiam nondum apprehendunt. And St. Alphonsus teaches (lera
Sponsa, cp. 18, § 1, n. 14) : Sunt quadam actiones naturales, quas manifestare
puderet, attamen declarare proptereu non tenemur. Sic. e. c. si quis commiserit
in pueritia levitates aut jocos indecentes, quorum malitiam ignorabat, non tenetur
ea confiteri. Neque er eo, quod actio secreto facta fuerit, concludere licet conscium
quem fuisse ejusdem malitia : quasdam namque faciunt pueri actiones naturales
secreto, quamvis non sint peccata. But there are children, and in towns espe­
cially not a few of them, who are early corrupted, and in whom wickedness
and impure knowledge are in advance of their age, with reference to whom
it must, alas ! be said : Tantillus puer et tantus peccator.' Cf. Aertnya, I. u.

568

THΚ ΜEVISTEH OF THE SACHA MEXT

itself of having very frequently committed such sins . . . The
confessor may also ask the child if it knows what impurity is.
As he must not investigate the matter further he must, form his
judgment in accordance with the whole confession or suspend
a definite judgment ; and he should not forget that it is better
to leave a confession doubtfully complete than to expose inno­
cence to danger by asking questions. But if he discovers that
the case is really so, and that the child suffers from conscientia
erronea on this point, he must suitably instruct it. if, however,
it is clear the child has accused itself of sins against holy
purity, and the confessor believes that real sins are in question,5"1
let him not fail to investigate what led up to them — a sinful,
necessary, or voluntary occasion, or a vicious habit. Not in­
frequently the confessor will discover the distressing fact that
home and school, instead of being nurseries of that flower of
the virtues, the child’s innocence, are the cause of its destruc­
tion, either with or without the fault of parents or superiors;
and this through sleeping together, the bad example or open
seduction of corrupted brothers and sisters, some imprudence
on the part of parents, or the talk, buffoonery, and doings of
some tainted child at school. Such circumstances will not only
awaken deep and painful regret in the confessor, but also his
endeavors as physician of the soul, to help and heal, and save
the poor child from complete ruin. He must here apply with
special care and prudence the rules concerning occasions and
sinful habits. If the confessor perceives that a child suffers
from /alse shame, or that it is immoderately timid, he must seek
to induce it to candor and confidence by kind persuasion, affec­
tionate encouragement, or also by serious exhortation.
61t Whether immodest acts and jukes which children have practiced be
sins or not, let the confessor admonish them, in accordance with the prin­
ciple principiis obsta, to avoid carefully for the future these things and
everything impure. But let him du so with fatherly love, in order that,
should they du these things again, the children may not be afraid to confess
them.

I

THIS CONFESSION OF CHILDREN

569

In the preparatory instruction the confessor must specially
accentuate the seal of the confession, and not fail to represent
the confessor to the child as the substitute of Christ, who, like
our divine Savior, receives children (and children who have
sinned also) as a loving father, and as the Good Shepherd
rejoices over the return of the child by a sincere confession.
3. If a child has concealed a sin against the seventh command­
ment, it is easier for the confessor to discover the insincerity.
He must ask what was stolen, where and from whom it was
stolen, if other things than eatables were stolen, what was
done with them, etc. Stealing and eating dainties by stealth gen­
erally go together, as the longing for these dainties often makes
the child a thief. Another form of theft is keeping back money
when parents or others have sent the child to make purchases.
Study and experience, especially in the cure of souls, and light
from above, for which the confessor must always pray before
confessions and during them in more difficult cases, will enable
him to discover other points which cannot be here discussed.
The next task of the confessor is to instruct the child, to fire­
scribe remedies, and to dispose it for the absolution. The sins
which have been confessed will furnish the occasion for the
instruction ; but instruction concerning the necessary truths of
faith may also be required, especially when absolution cannot
be deferred. The confessor must particularly inform the child
concerning the malice and hatefulness and evil consequences of
its sins ; then also concerning the beauty and rewards of virtue
and the duties of its station. Nor should he fail to remind the
children of their sublime pattern, the divine Child Jesus. ’ The
confessor should inspire them with love and confidence in the
Blessed Virgin, their heavenly Mother, and teach them devo­
tional practices in her honor and service. Finally, he should
recommend to them, as a means of obtaining virtue, zealous and
regular prayer, recollection of the presence of God, and avoid­
ance of bad companions; and let him not tire of telling the chil­

570

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

dren nil this over and over again, and implanting it in their
hearts. It will remain there, and in due time bring forth good
fruit. Though ho has imparted these precepts and exhortations
during the religious instruction, he should repeat them at the
confession in suitable form; they will be more effective there;
but they must he adapted to the intelligence of the child and
be short and forcible.
With the performance of this duty he must combine another,
the healing of the wounds of the child's soul. This healing
begins with the acknowledgment of the evil in the examination
of conscience and confession, is carried on by the sorrow, and
completed by the absolution, through which grace is poured into
the soul. By means of the instruction which the confessor gives
the child, he will seek to move it to real sorrow and firm purpose
of amendment. This is a principal task of the confessor in chil­
dren's confessions. How often anil how easily the latter become
invalid, or doubtfully valid, from the child’s having been too
superficial and thoughtless in awakening sorrow and firm pur­
pose, not having been properly attentive during the preparation,
and having repeated an act of contrition and purpose of amend­
ment more with the mouth than with the heart. The confessor
must have due regard for this, and employ the necessary care
for warding off such evil. If the immediate preparation for con­
fession was a good one, he may set his mind at rest as regards
most of the children ; nevertheless he will here, once more, seek
to move the child to sorrow and renewal of purpose in a few
forcible words. But if the immediate preparation above de­
scribed was entirely left to the individual children, and if the
confessor has misgivings about it, he must supply what is want­
ing by short but earnest admonitions.
Let the confessor be persuaded that his endeavors are not in
vain, and even if it should be his experience that the child has
turned to no advantage these preparations for confession, let
him not be disheartened. The child will recognize the represen-

THE CONFESSION OF CHILDREN

571

talive of Christ in him better in thé confessional than at the
instruction, and if he speaks as such, inspired by a pure inten­
tion and a holy zeal for the love of Jesus, he may confidently
expect that his words, aided by the grace of God, will make their
way to the child's heart, and there find fruitful soil. The child's
heart, though fickle and thoughtless, is not so insensible to con­
trition; the feeling of gratitude and love is there, and the love
of God is more easily excited in it. Still easier will it be for the
confessor to move the child to a firm purpose of amendment. In
this work of healing he,must pay special attention to certain
sins, which often occur with children, and are particularly ruin­
ous in them — lying, stealing, and impurity.
(a) If the child shows a tendency to lying, the confessor must
first of all emphasize the sinfulness of lying, as it is often scarcely
regarded as a sin and confessed as a matter of custom, in many
cases, it must be feared, without due sorrow and purpose of
amendment. He should point out to the child the particular
hatefulness of lying, as expressed by the Holy Ghost in Holy
Writ: “Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord” (Proverbs
xii. 22), and that “a lie is a foul blot in a man” (Eccles, xx. 26);
that God, as the eternal truth, especially hates, detests, and
punishes lying (Eccles, vii. 14) ; that men also detest a liar, for one
who has once lied is not trusted again ; that lying brings a child
no good, as everything comes to light sooner or later.
(5) If the child has stolen something, the confessor must
inquire concerning the cause of the theft. Causes of theft may
be: JKan/, in the case of very poor children, who do not receive
sufficient food, or who cannot procure the necessary articles for
school use. This cause will be discovered without much diffi­
culty by the question: “What did you steal?” “What did
you do with the stolen money?” Of course such children must
be treated leniently, but forbidden to steal again: at the same
time they should be told that if they are again in need of any­
thing, to come to him, the confessor (or the parish priest), and

f>72

THE MINi.STEK OF THE 8A< HAMEXT

make known their trouble, and they will be helped. Sensuality
may be another cause; inducing them to pilfer sweets, or buy
them with stolen money. These children should be earnestly
admonished, often to think that God sees them. Finally, a cause
of stealing may be an innate or acquired tendency. In these
cases the amendment of the child is very difficult, but the con­
fessor should not give up hope, even when the tendency is
deeply rooted. In the first, place, he should point out to the
child the sinfulness of stealing, and suggest the. necessary meas­
ures (according to the circumstances) for overcoming and
eradicating the evil — daily renewal of purpose and prayer
for grace, recollection of the presence of God. If the children
are induced by their parents to steal, the confessor can only
command them not to obey their parents in future, and to
declare that they must obey God who has forbidden stealing;
the rest he must leave to the grace of God. If the child is led
into stealing by others, it must, of course, give up all intercourse
with them at once, and (according to the circumstances) inform
parents and teachers of the fact. The duty of restitution is not
to be imposed upon children, as they are generally incapable of
making restitution,8” excepting the case where the child still
possessed the stolen object; it should then be admonished to
restore the object, in order effectually to deter it from stealing.818
(c) The most dangerous and worst sin with children is that
of impurity. If a child accuses itself of this, and if the priest
611 The reason which Aertnys (Instr, pract. 1. c.) adds to this : quin, hanc
obligationem non inlclligunt, can certainly not be allowed to hold in the case
of older and more educated children.
818 Tappehorn, 1. c., says that in nil coses the confessor must insist that
the thing stolen should, if possible, in some way or other, even with the
help of the confessor, be restored; but, surely, this is too severe, even with
the limitation ·' if possible,” and the addition that absolution might rather be
deferred till the restitution had been made, must be limited to the case of a
more considerable theft, when the stolen object is still in the possession of
the penitent, and, perhaps, to the case of a child who had repeatedly com
mitted thefts.

THE CONFESHION OF CfllLEHEff

578

believes that real sins of impurity are in question, he must
investigate if the child has fallen into them through his own
desire, or through the seduction of others. If the former is the
case, the confessor should point out clearly and in a manner
adapted to its comprehension, the heinousness of this sin, which
ruins body and soul, and makes us, as does no other sin, an
object of horror to an infinitely pure God. He should remind
the child of our divine Redeemer at the pillar, where, by the
dreadful pain and shame which He suffered, He atoned for this
sin. All this he should set before the child in eloquent, impres­
sive words, so that it may recognize how much his confessor
detests these sins and loves the virtue of purity. Let the con­
fessor take occasion to glorify this holy virtue, pointing out how
much it is loved by God and man, how much praised by the
Holy Ghost, how it ennobles a man, making him like the angels.
This recommendation of holy purity will be especially fruitful
if accompanied by a special devotion to holy and chaste young
saints, especially to the Virgin of virgins, to St. Agnes, St. Alo­
ysius, St. Stanislaus, and St. John Berchmanns. In this manner
let him bring the child to a detestation of its sins, and to a firm
and determined purpose of resisting wicked desires and all temp­
tations of Satan, and to adopt the necessary means for this. As
means of amendment he can prescribe according to circum­
stances: daily renewal of the good resolutions, daily prayer to
the Blessed Virgin, frequent and regular reception of the holy
Sacrament s ; especially confessions each time the sin is committed
(this latter remedy is particularly to be recommended if the sin
has already become habitual, or has led to pollution). Other
devotional exercises are the honoring of St. Aloysius, especially
by the six Sundays of Aloysius (the celebration of which may
very well be recommended to older children); little mortifica­
tions for the purpose of overcoming sensuality are also very
appropriate. If seduction, by others was the cause of the fall,
the confessor must direct the child to avoid intercourse with

574

THE MIKISTKH OF THE ΜΊΐ.Μχτ

the evil companion: but if this is morally impossible (for instance, when older brothers and sisters, or children of the same
school, are the seducers), he must give suitable rules by means
of which the immediate occasion may become a remote one.
Whether the child may be commanded to denounce the seducer
to parents or superiors depends upon circumstances, and the
priest must examine into these; a denunciation is a very effica­
cious means by which the sins of others also may be checked.
He must then tell the child how it can do this.
The third task devolving upon the confessor is Io judc/e of the
child’s disposition, and according to his decision to give absolu­
tion or to defer it. If the child has made a sincere confession,
answered candidly the confessor's questions, listened attentively
to his exhortations, said the act of contrition devoutly and ear­
nestly, if its behavior has been generally good (before confession
also, in the church, at the preparation), or if in answer to the
confessor's question it has declared that it was sorry for its sins,
and that it wished to amend, the confessor may be satisfied as
to its dispositions. If he still doubts as to the child's disposi­
tions (even after he has taken pains to dispose it, for, ip doubt,
the confessor must, as shown above, seek to dispose the peni­
tent), or if he doubts as to the necessary usus rationis, and if
the child will not come again for two or three months (as is
mostly the case) or if it is in danger of death, he should give
conditional absolution. This also is allowed (in a case of doubt­
ful disposition) when the child has confessed venial sins only,
and it is not likely that, it will soon come to confession again.
Concerning the postponement of absolution, see. the principles
laid down above, which apply here also.519
As to the penance, let the confessor observe the teaching dis­
cussed above (§ 33). Let him be careful not to impose any
severe penance upon the child, though it should be easier at one
»w Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. u. 432; Prax. Conf. n. 01 ; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 120.

CONFE88ION OF YOUNG UNMARRIED PEOPLE

575

time, and severer at another, corresponding to the sins. More­
over the penance should not he extended over any long period,
on account of the forgetfulness of children; nor he such as the
child must perform before others, and thus be exposed to confu­
sion.
In conclusion, we briefly refer to the question: How often
should children confess? If there are diocesan regulations on
this point, — and there are in most dioceses, — they must, of
course, he observed. Where no such direction exists, the zeal­
ous and conscientious priest will — as confession is of such great
importance for children, and as it is one of the most powerful
means of preservation from sin and the practice of virtue, espe­
cially with those who have not yet made their first communion
— assuredly be glad to follow the precept which St. Charles Borromeo gave to his clergy, namely, to induce children to confess
frequently. Let confession four times a year be the rule, anti
if he considers it necessary, on account of particular circum­
stances, he will readily grant the children more frequent oppor­
tunities; those who are preparing for their first communion,
especially, he will admit to confession frequently during the last
year before the reception; say, every month, as is the regulation
in some dioceses.520
75. The Confession of Young Unmarried People.

Youth, the springtime of life, is the most beautiful, but at
the same time the most dangerous, period of existence. The
young man and the young woman, more or less removed from
parental care and observation, come into closer contact with
the world ; many young people are obliged to leave the parental
roof to learn a business or trade, or to earn money for their own
630 Tappehorn, Anleitung zur Verwaltung des Buss-Sakramentes, § 18 ;
Aertnys, Instr, pract. ep. 2, art. 1, nn. 120-128. Dubois, The I’raetiuui
Confessor ; Frassinetti, The Confession of Children.

576

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

support or for that of their relations, in factories, workshops, or
in strange houses as servants. And the dangers which, cither
temporarily or constantly threaten them in these places, are not
slight. Others, more happily situated, can remain at home, but
even here they are not sheltered from all the dangers which the
world, and contact with it, prepare for them. And youth is so
trustful, so easily beguiled, dazzled, and misled; (ho youthful
heart is so susceptible, the youthful ear so open, evil often finds
its way to the guileless heart in the guise of what is good or
harmless or indifferent; it is excused, or represented as neces­
sary, whereas virtue is despised as weakness or reviled as folly,
or denied as impossible. In the heart the passions and the
sensual impulses awaken, while the enemy of all good constantly
watches to achieve the ruin of the soul. The greatest dangers
are pleasure, bad company, bad books, and human respect. There­
fore is it so very important that the young should have an expe­
rienced, wise, circumspect confessor who knows youth well, the youthful heart with its inclinations, the youthful mind with
its aspirations and the dangers that beset its path ; a confessor
who can admonish, instruct, and guide it, incite it, and awaken
its enthusiasm, restrain and warn it; who will hold fast to right
principles, but enforce them with wise moderation ; who will
lead his young penitents into the ways of goodness and virtue
without exciting their resistance — a confessor who has a
warm heart for youth. Let him, therefore, gladly take upon
himself the difficult but noble and blessed task of being a
father and guide to youth. Of this labor St. John Chrysostom521
says truly: “What is equal to the art of guiding the souls of
the young, of forming their minds and hearts? He who is
equipped with the capacity for it must exercise more care than
a painter or a sculptor upon his work.” That the confessor of
young people may work with success it is necessary that he
Hom. 59 in Matt, xviii, n. 7.

I

CONFESSION OF YOUNG UNMARRIED PEOPLE

577

should win their hearts by the absolute confidence with which his
truly fatherly love inspires them. Let him not repel these young
people by cold, harsh treatment, but make due allowance for
their weakness, their inexperience, their inconstancy; they will
then follow his instructions, admonitions, and counsels with
docility and with the enthusiasm which is peculiar to youth.
Moreover, let him make the work of confessing easy to them so
far as may be, in order that they may gladly and often confess
and communicate. If it is possible, let him induce and accus­
tom them to the constant habit of confessing every month, or
at least every two or three months; for frequent confession and
communion is of especial benefit to young people, in order —
(1) to preserve them from sinful habits, for they will rise the
quicker from sin the oftener they approach the Sacrament of
Penance, and sin cannot settle into a habit if the heart is quickly
cleansed from it. In any case the beginnings will be easily over­
come. If, however, a sinful habit has already taken root, fre­
quent confession and communion is the most certain, often the
only, remedy. (2) By it they accustom themselves to pious exer­
cises, which are learnt and performed more easily in youth than
later on, and by continuer! practice they will be confirmed in
piety, which is itself a firm support of weak and vacillating
youth, a safe and protecting bulwark against danger.
(3) They will then also receive the holy Sacraments frequently in
later life, and ivill be preserved from that pernicious fear of the con­
fessional, from which so many men and women suffer in our days.
For, as the Holy Ghost teaches, and experience proves, a youth
will not forsake easily in old age the path which he trod in early
years. But those who in youth seldom receive the holy Sacra­
ments will, as experience also proves, shun confession more and
more as age advances.522
ms It in good to invite them at stated times to monthly communions in
regular turns and if a number of the young people of the parish approach
holv communion every Sunday, it will edify, and will induce older per-

578

ths mixihtkh os the sacramext

When the confessor has a suspicion that his young peni­
tents have not confessed sincerely, he may (as it shall seem to
him advisable, and having regard always to the rules applicable
to questioning) ask if they have been much troubled by tempta­
tions against holy purity, if they have had intercourse with cor­
rupt people, if they have read bad books? He may also ask,
especially where the preceding questions were answered in the
affirmative, if they have done anything immodest or permitted
it? But in all these questions let the confessor be modest and
careful in his expressions, lest he wound by awkward questions
and teach the penitent some sin before unknown to him, or ex­
cite his curiosity. He will more easily attain to his end with
young men, as these are. generally more open than persons of
the other sex. Sometimes young people of both sexes do not
know what a sin of impurity is, although they accuse themselves
of impure thoughts.
The faults peculiar to youth are : —
(a) Disobedience to parents and superiors, which results in
much evil. The confessor must find out in what they have
been disobedient — neglecting divine service, religious instruc­
tions and the holy Sacraments, attending forbidden entertain­
ments, frequenting bad company, keeping up dangerous and
sinful connections with persons of the other sex (familiarities,
flirtations). Then let him point out the evil consequences of
(heir disobedience, the obligation of obeying which still remains
in force when they have become older, are earning money, or
supporting their parents, in fact as long as they remain under
parental control. He should remind them of the promises of
the fourth commandment, and the threats of God against
those children who disobey this commandment. At the same
time let him instill in their hearts reverence and love for their
Mins to frequent reception of the holy Sacraments. Attendance at the
regular communion should be urged again and again; the latter should also
lx· celebrated with some exterior solemnity.

CONFESSION OF YOUNG UNMARRIED PEOPLE

579

parents and superiors. Then let hirn lay special stress upon
sincerity toward parents, superiors, and the confessor; and in­
culcate a deep abhorrence of dissimulation and lying, which
make the education, protection, and guidance of inexperienced
youth impossible, and expose it to great dangers.
(b) Love of pleasure. It excites the young man (and also the
young woman) to a craving for enjoyment, withdraws him more
or less from useful pursuits. It leads the young man into danger­
ous society, the young woman into ruinous and sinful intimacies,
which are secretly and prematurely carried on, and are fruitful
in sins and excesses ; it ultimately leads both of them into dis­
obedience toward their parents, to lying, to extravagance, to
deception and theft practiced on parents, and to still worse
things. Moreover, it takes from them all devotion and fear of
God.
(c) If love of pleasure appears more in young men, desire of
pleasing is characteristic of young women; it induces vanity,
levity, distraction, and sins against chastity. The confessor
should combat these passions with all liis zeal and show how
they may be. suppressed.
He should recommend to young people as excellent means of
acquiring and cultivating the fear of the Lord and true virtue: —
1. Regular daily prayer, and attendance at divine service, Mass,
sermons, and Christian instruction. As long as a young man or
a young woman say their daily prayers and attend Mass, it is
well with them ; but as soon as they begin to grow negligent in
these practices, it is a certain sign that they are no longer in the
path of virtue, and if they have not yet reached the broad high­
way of vice, they are certainly on the road which very soon
leads into it. Experience teaches that a man does not become
all at once corrupt and wicked : he usually falls imperceptibly
and by degrees. He no longer confesses and communicates
regularly every four weeks, — first five elapse, then six or seven ;
morning and night prayers are no longer said punctually and

580

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

kneeling, — they are sometimes omitted, shortened, said in bed
now and then the religious instruction ami the afternoon devo­
tion are missed, and excuses arc forthcoming; at the same time
there is no longer the earnest endeavor to resist temptation,
there is no longer the same fear of sin. Upon the lesser negli­
gences supervene greater ones, and upon the smaller faults
greater sins. This is the usual progress. Let the confessor,
therefore, urge punctual prayer and regular attendance at divine
service.
Many young men anil women cannot attend at Mass on week­
days; if they are absent from it on Sundays also, they are not
only robbed of many necessary graces, but they neglect the first
duty of man, the service of God, become more and more es­
tranged from God and holy things, and in the same measure
attached to the world and worldly things, with the result that
sin and passion are more easily and more deeply rooted in them.
If young people come with the excuse that they were obliged
to work on Sunday, and therefore were not able to be present
at Mass, the confessor must investigate the validity of this
excuse and give the necessary directions and instructions. He
should not be overready to admit its validity; in towns espe­
cially, by a little good will and zeal, though at cost of some
effort, Mass may be heard before work begins. These same peo­
ple will often deprive themselves of necessary rest when it is a
question of pleasure! Work on Sundays is not always inevi­
table and absolutely necessary, and other situations are to be
found in which it is not demanded. The confessor must inquire
into all this.
2. Great esteem for holy purity and a great horror of im­
purity. For this purpose the confessor should encourage (a) the
reading of good books, warn his penitents against idleness, and
instill in them a love of virtue (§ 66, IV). He should also (5) cau­
tion them against sinful talk and familiar intercourse with persons
of the opposite sex, and against bad company; this warning

COlfFEMinjf OF YOUNG UNMARRIETf PEOPLE

581

should be especially addressed to young women, who should
also be admonished to be decent and modest, as becomes virtu­
ous women, at all times and in all places — at work, at recrear
lion, in the house, out of the house, in dress, and in manners;
(c) he should endeavor, to the best of his ability, to keep them
from dangerous pleasures, especially from theaters, dances,
shows (§ 66, 11. Ill), and certain pleasure trips, which, unfor­
tunately, in our days are so general, and for which so many
opportunities are afforded; indeed, he will be obliged to forbid
many of them to certain penitents as they are for these penitents
occasio proxima relativa; (d) he should also seek to hinder
young men from joining certain societies, the principal object
of which is pleasure, and which so often give occasion for profa­
nation of Sundays and holidays and for other scandals, and in
which the ruling spirit is not one favorable to religion and vir­
tue. On the other hand, he should recommend them, and
young women also, to join a well-conducted religious society or
sodality; (e) he should induce them confidently to unfold to
their confessors all their temptations, struggles, and difficulties ;
(/) finally, he should recommend and urge frequent reception
of the holy Sacraments after careful preparation and an earnest
endeavor to sanctify the day of communion.
But only the regular confessor can, in this prescribed manner,
produce permanent effect upon young men and women. Only
he who has known anti guided his penitent a long time can effec­
tively warn him against threatening dangers; and when the
latter has gone astray, a confessor can easily lead him back,
and preserve him from future dangers and relapse. It is, there­
fore, of the greatest importance that young people should not
change their confessors without a good reason. They should be
advised to choose a regular confessor and to give him their con­
fidence, ready to submit with docility to his admonitions and
precepts. But if his penitents confess once or twice to another
priest, the permanent confessor must by no means express dis-

.582

TH K Ml MUTER OF TUK SACRAME XT

pleasure or irritation; under certain circumstances he must even
express satisfaction at it, for it is better that they should confess
sincerely to another priest than sacrilegiously to him. When
they return to him he should show éVen greater love and con­
cern for them, and resume their guidance with the accustomed
conscientiousness. The priest to whom these penitents come
without (he knowledge of their former confessor must receive
them kindly, dispose them, if necessary, and induce them to be
sincere after they return to the former confessor.
Tlie confessor must devote special attention to a vice with
which so many young people are infected — the vitium pollu­
tionis — in order to preserve those who are still untainted by
this pest, and to deliver and cure those who arc its victims. In
a former section (§ 69, II) we have said what was necessary on
this point, and enumerated the remedies which the confessor
must apply to these unfortunate penitents.”’ If the young
5e Here we will only insert the Notanda from the Instr, pract. P. III. ai t.
II. § 1. n. 131, by Aertnys: (1) Animadvertat confessorius, quod docuit experi­
entia, nempe nullum cttlibem, qui ad provectam atalem usque in habitu hujus vitii
vixerit, adfrugem redire posse nisi extraordinaria Dei gratia prteuenialur ; prin­
cipiis ergo (Altet, ne malum per multas invaleat moras et sero medicina paretur.
(2) Interdum inveniuntur juvenes utriusque sexus, qui habitu pollutionis antehac
irretiti, valde cupiunt hac miseria soluti esse, sed vehementer lentantur, et, quam­
vis resistant et orent,pollutio nihilominus sa/te evenit. Idem aliquando contingit
Λ corporis complexionem nervosam aut sanguinosam, qua vehementes tentationes
causal. Qui doceantur pollutionem omnino involuntariam non esse peccatum.
Nevertheless, the confessor must bn careful, ami not readily believe that the
(lenitent ha<l sufficiently resisted, but duly investigate if this has been the case.
(3) Others resist at the beginning, but lose courage if the temptation does
not cease, wrongly imagining that resistance is in vain. Such must be
encouraged to further resistance ; si tamen pollutio sequitur sua sponte, invol­
untaria censenda est utpote prater voluntatem secuta, and, therefore, there is no
sin. (I) Alii demum timorata conscientia, sed nervosa complexionis,in lecto vehe­
mentes commotiones carnis identidem patiuntur : si positivam resistentiam oppo­
nere pergant, obdormiscere nequeunt, et, si tandem sopiantur, pollutio in somno
evenit. These should be admonished to pray for divine help, to make a firm
act of disapproval, and then, with a quiet conscience, to assume a passive
attitude, in accordance with the teaching of St. Alphonsus, Lib. V. de pec­
cato, n. 0.

ADVICE REGARDING VOCATION

583

penitents (male or female) are inmates of an educational estab­
lishment, the confessor must not overlook the possibility of
particular friendshipa, as these prove to be very injurious. At
first they are merely matters of fanciful Reference, without
harm. But later on such friends like to separate themselves
from others when they are able to do so, and by degrees the
relationship between them tends toward sensuality and to sins
against purity. This evil the confessor must judiciously en­
deavor to avert ; if he observes such friendships, he must demand
that they be broken off, if necessary, under threat of refusing
absolution. And if one of the parties continues to be a cause
of temptation, he must be denounced to the Superior if this is
possible. The confessor may be assured that only by legitimate
severity will anything be accomplished in this matter.5’4

76. The Confessor as Adviser in the Choice of a State of Life.
It will often happen that the confessor is in a position to help
young people in the choice of a state of life ; we will, therefore,
lay down a few rules on the point.
1. The confessor is by his calling an adviser to his penitents
in this matter; for he knows the souls of his penitents, their
inclinations, faults, and weaknesses, ami the duties of the dif­
ferent states of life. He is likewise apt to receive a special illu­
mination of divine grace in the exercise of his office, and he is
probably always the most impartial of those concerned in the
decision of this question. Hence the penitent usually lays this
question of his future before his confessor with the greatest
confidence.
2. The right choice of a vocation is of supreme importance
for a young man or young woman; upon it depend not only
the temporal and eternal welfare of the party in question, but
6M Aertnys, 1. c. art. ΤΓ. S 1. nn. 12S-133; Tappeliorn, Anleitung xur Ver·
waltung <les Buss-Sakramentrs. I Abschn. § 85.

584

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

also the happiness and unhappiness of many others. The con­
fessor ought, therefore, to expend very much care upon this
question; he must consider, investigate, pray, and admonish
the penitent to do* the same. The decision of such a weighty
matter should never be hasty. Noli pracipitanter agere: diu
considera, magnum est, quod proponis, writes St. Bernard.625 The
confessor must inquire into the abilities of the young man or
woman, the moral condition, and also the exterior circumstances
of the person; he must consider the question of means and
foresee difficulties which may arise. He must then investigate
if the intentions of the person in entering upon this state are
pure and acceptable to God. Finally, he must have recourse
to God in earnest prayer, that he may be able to give his peni­
tent the right advice in so important a matter. Tria sunt
difficilia mihi et quartum penitus ignoro, namely: viam viri in
adolescentia (Prov. xxx. 18, 19). St. Philip Neri, the paternal
friend and guide of youth, recommends in the choice of a vo­
cation, time, prayer, and counsel.
3. The confessor should not seek to persuade young people
to embrace some particular calling: “Circa statum ab aliquo
adolescente eligendum non audeat Confessorius illum ei determi­
nare, sed tantum ex indiciis curet suadere statum illum, ad quem
prudenter judicare potest ipsum a Deo vocari," is the admonition
of St. Alphonsus to confessors.526 The confessor should, there­
fore, direct the young man to submit the matter to Almighty
God, who determines the station in life of every individual, and
teach him that each one must seek to know the will of God, and
be ready to follow the divine call, whatever it may be, for a
man can be permanently and truly happy only in that state
which God has allotted him. He should admonish him to im­
plore with perseverance light from on high, and to this end
perform some special devotion — a novena to Our Lady of
Serin. super Kcce nos.
624 Praxis Confess, n. 92.

ADVICB R KGA R 1)1 W G VOCATION

585

Good Counsel, or to St. .Aloysius, the patron of youth, or to
St. Joseph; to receive the holy Sacraments, and preserve him­
self from all grave sin, so as to place no obstacle in the way of
the divine light of grace.
All this being done, the confessor can, trusting to the grace
of God, give an answer which shall be, if possible, decisive.
God is wont to make known to a man the station destined for
him in a threefold manner : (a) by miracles, as He difl in the case
of St. John the Baptist, St. Paul, and many other saints; (5) by
interior illumination and suggestion, by means of which the
individual is enabled to recognize the will of God clearly, as we
sec illustrated in the lives of very many saints in quite a remark­
able manner; (c) and generally, by means of outward circum­
stances, by pronounced inclination and special capacity for
some state of life ; among these circumstances may be reckoned
the exterior providential guidance of men, which the world calls
chance, but which the Christian enlightened by faith recognizes
as the providence of God.
Respecting individual callings, the confessor should observe
the following : —
I. Religious Orders.
If a young man or woman shows an inclination to enter a
Religious Order and consults the confessor about the matter, the
latter should first investigate if the penitent has the ordinary
abilities for such a life, if he has sound judgment and a good
character, if he is disposed to obedience, if he possesses relatively
sufficient talent and knowledge, ami if he is healthy. For one
who is not of sound judgment is subject to many hallucinations,
and St. Teresa used to say, very wisely, that she did not wish
to have either scrupulous or melancholy persons in her Order,
that is, such as were subject to these faults in a considerable
degree, because such persons are a cause of much trouble both
to themselves and the community. Those who have not good
health will not be able to observe the general regulations of the

586

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

establishment, and, therefore, will be more of a burden than a
benefit to the community, and will not be able to set a good ex­
ample. The priest should then test the penitent's intention in
entering the Order, to see if it is the right one, namely, to unite
himself more intimately and closely to God, to atone for the
errors and sins of his former life, and to avoid the dangers of
the world. If the confessor should discover that the intention
has been influenced by some such motive as the exportai ion of
leading a life free from cares, or of escaping from the tutelage
of harsh relations, or by desire of complying with the wishes of
parents, he should proceed cautiously, for under the circum­
stances it may be suspected that there is no vocation.527 I f, how­
ever, the intention is right, and there is no obstacle in the way,
the confessor may not, and cannot, under grave sin,528 prevent or
dissuade the person from following his vocation ; nor may any
one else do so. The confessor must also investigate if the pur­
pose of the individual in question is firm and steadfast; in order
to make sure of this, it is sometimes advisable to defer for a
time the execution of the intention, especially if the confessor
knows the young person to be rather fickle, or when the resolution
to enter the Order was taken during a Mission, or under the in­
fluence of a Retreat, because resolutions are sometimes made
on such occasions, which, when the first zeal has cooled down,
are not kept.52’ The confessor must be especially careful with
penitents who, on account of frequent relapses into sins of
impurity, give rise to the suspicion that they do not lead chaste
To deny absolutely the existence of a vocation under such circum­
stances is too severe a doctrine; higher and purer motives may exist along
with those of a distinctly lower order, and the aim of the confessor should
then be to foster the higher motives while eliminating the lower ones.
Great caution, unquestionably, should be used where inferior motives are
detected, but we should never lose sight of the possibility of God’s grace
being granted to those whose ideals are not at first of the very highest
order.
** Cf. S. Thomas. Quodlib. III. art. 14.
** Ci. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 92; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 134.

ADVICE REGARDING VOCATION

58T

lives; and also with those who have reached middle age, be­
cause it is to be presumed that, being settled in their habits
and views, they would find obedience too difficult: finally, he
should also be extremely careful with those who have already
belonged to an Order, because these do not generally persevere,
or are. not adapted to a life in community.
When the confessor has satisfied himself, as far as possible,
concerning the vocation for a Religious Order, he will have no
difficulty in discovering to what Order the young person is
called. Here he must pay special attention to the inclinations
and dispositions of the candidate, and whether regular observ­
ance prevails in the Order under consideration. But as long as
the question of the calling is not quite decided, he must insist :
(1) that the person maintain silence with every one, even his
parents, concerning it, till it is recognized as his vocation, and
is to be carried out; (2) that he should persevere in prayer for
guidance, anil frequently receive the holy Sacraments; (3) that
he should shun the distractions, pleasures, and vanities of the
world, otherwise he will run the risk of losing his vocation.
II. The priesthood.”0
Holy Writ, both in the Old and New Testament, teaches that
a vocation from God (vocatio divina) is necessary for receiving
Orders (status clericalis). Our Savior Himself expressed this
truth very clearly when He said to the first priests of the New
Law: “Non vos me elegistis, sed ego elegi vos,” anil His Apostle
also, who writes: “Nec quisquam sumit sibi honorem, sed qui
vocatur a Deo tanquam Aaron ” (Heb. v. 4). The confessor
must, therefore, carefully examine the candidate's vocation to
the priesthood; indeed, this investigation is even of greater
importance than in the case of the candidature for a Religious
Order. For if the religious takes upon himself greater burdens
680 Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 03; Aertnys, I. c. n. 135; Tappehorn,
Anleituug, etc., § 85; Lehrnkuhl, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. VII. nn. 308,
408.

588

THE NlNDiTEH Of THE SACHA MENT

with regard to obedience and voluntary poverty, and if (he love
of community life and a submissive spirit is not to such a high
degree necessary in the secular priest, yet greater dangers
threaten the latter, and fewer safeguards are at his disposal
than are possessed by the religious, who, in the ride of his Order
and the regular life of a monastery, finds a powerful help.4”
The chief signs, by means of which the confessor may recognize
a vocation for the priesthood, are: (1) right intention
not
seeking a comfortable life, a future free from care, and honor
in the eyes of the world, but only the honor of God, and the sal­
vation of souls; (2) a persistent inclination to the spiritual
state, joy in the spiritual life, and in the offices of the priesthood ;
(3) confirmed virtue (“virtus probata,” or probitas riltr, positiva
nempe, iis virtutibus subnixa, qutc dignum efficiant altaris minis­
trum); especially purity of heart, temperance, piety, modesty,
and zeal;4” (4) ability to perform the duties of this station.
As, in our days, nearly all who enter the clerical state wish to
become priests also, and by far the greater number of priests
have cura animarum, this ability consists in an average mental
endowment and the necessary knowledge, joined to a love of
ecclesiastical science, in prudent judgment and right conscience
(very scrupulous youths are unsuitable). According to the
teaching of St. Alphonsus, one who intrudes himself into the
M1 “ Unde concludes, gravissimi momenti esse munus tum Seminarii directoris,
tum alumnorum confessorii, ut mature alumnos dirigant, eorum animos effiirment,
defectum aptitudinis aperiant, imo nisi de confessorio confessionisque sigillo vel
simili secreto agitur, ineptos etiam relegendos curent.”— Lehmkuhl, 1. c.
“’Concerning purity of heart, compare § 69. “De divina vocatione hic
imprimis nola, debere positiva probatione constare de vitee probitate lum Superiori,
ut ad Ordines, mazime sacros, admittere possit, tum ipsi candidato, ut sacrum
ordinem suscipere sibi liceat.” — Lehmkuhl, 1. c. And very justly Aertnys
writes (Instr, pract. 1. c. n. 135 fin.) : Nisi juvenes innocentiam servent, dum
in Seminario ad sacerdotales virtutes efformuntur, vix spes est fore, ut illam ser­
rent iu Sacerdotio constituti. Unde turpiter seipsos illi decipiunt, qui arbitran­
tur. se in Sacerdotii gradu positos emendaturos esse vitia, in quibus laid vel clerici
sorduerunt.

ADVICE n EG A RD! Nfl VOCATION

f.gg

priestly office without a vocation cannot be acquitted of great
presumption, as he exposes himself to the great danger of losing
his own soul and of giving scandal to the faithful. He will,
therefore, not be free from grave sin.4” But it sometimes haj>pens that those who were certain of their vocation become
doubtful and vacillate; temptations of the evil one arise and
cause confusion; friendsand relatives exert their influences in
order to turn them from the spiritual state, joy in worldly
pleasures and diversions makes itself felt; they fear and shrink
from the duties of the office, thinking they will not be able to
perform them, or they believe themselves unworthy to enter
such a holy state. If a confessor finds a penitent tempted in
this manner, he must try to inspire him with courage and con­
fidence, make him understand that every state in life has its
burdens, but that in none is the yoke lighter than in the one
assigned by God. He should point out to him the deceits with
which the enemy of all good and the "father of lies” so often
confuses souls; remind him of the teaching of Jesus, that the
kingdom of heaven suffereth violence ami that only the violent
carry it away, that he who will follow Jesus must take up his
cross and carry it daily. At the same time he must recommend
prayer anil absolute submission to the will of God.
III. The state of virginity (status virginitatis in sceculo).
If a woman living in the world has a serious wish to preserve
virginal purity, the confessor must confirm and support her in
so good and salutary a resolution, for it is very pleasing to Jesus,
the lover of pure souls. It offers a safer and easier way to holi­
ness, and the state of virginity by far exceeds in merit and dig­
nity that of matrimony. The confessor should, however, only
allow those to take the vow of perpetual virginity whom he
knows to be truly steadfast in piety and virtue, and of firm and
decided will. As a rule, he should allow younger persons to take
683 S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 802-801; Examen Orel. n. 15.

590

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

this vow for a short time only at first,—say for six months,—
and afterwards, when they have proved themselves steadfast,
and he sees that it is beneficial to them, he can extend I ho period
Io one or two years, and only later permit them to bind them­
selves by vow to perpetual virginity; or he should permit the
perpetual vow under a conditional resolution, such as: “nisi
Confessorius pro tempore judicaverit expedire, ut votum desinat. "551
The confessor should give special attention to those penitents
who have really taken the vow of virginity, instructing them
not only to be faithful to their vow, but to lead a perfect life
according to their station and capacity.
IV. The state of matrimony.
Although the state of virginity possesses a very exalted
dignity, the state of matrimony has divine sanction. The
Church has always esteemed it highly, faithfully following in
this respect the example of her divine Founder, and has always
defended the dignity of Christian marriage wherever it was
called for. God has ordained marriage for most men as their
state of life; and, since upon the faithful performance of the
duties of married people depend, not only their own temporal
and eternal welfare, but also that of the family and of society,
let. the confessor, when occasion -is offered : (1) direct his en­
deavors to prevent young people from entering into the state
of matrimony too soon, without preparation, without knowledge,
of its duties, or capacity to perform them, and with an impure
“·” S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 93. Cf. Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. III. Tract.
II. n. 112. We may suggest that the following distinctions are to bo made :
(1) totum non nubendi seu calibalus ; (2) votum virginitatis; (3) votum
(perpetua) castitatis. The first prohibits marriage (ergo non formaliter sed
camter/uenter tantum inducit obligationem perfecta castitatis) ; the second, any
peccatum consummatum, by which virginity is violated, i.e. voluntariam seminis
effusionem, si de viro agitur, sive per copulam, sive per pollutionem Jit; si de
muliere agitur, copidum aut innaturalem corporalis integritatis Iasionem culpa­
biliter factam ; the third forbids (formaliter et per se) every interior or exte­
rior act which is contrary to chastity ex molivo religionis. Cf. Lehmkuhl
Theol. Mor. P. II. Lib. I. Tract. VIII. n. 719.

ADVICE HKOARDJHO VOCATION

591

motive; (2) oppose most energetically those forbidden and per­
nicious intimacies which are the worst imaginable preparation
for marriage, and generally the occasion of grave sins, and toler­
ate only the acknowledged and necessary intimacies a short
time before the marriage, with due observance of the necessary
measures of precaution ; (3) instruct those penitents who have
a vocation for marriage, and wish to enter that state, concerning
its duties;535 (4) admonish them to inform their parents of their
intention to marry, in order to obtain their advice and assistance.
For, as on the. one hand, parents would sin who deterred their
children, sine jusla causa, from contracting an honorable mar­
riage, so, on the other hand, children would sin who wished,
against the will of their parents, to contract a marriage calcu­
lated to bring shame and dishonor upon a family, without some
valid ground which would constitute an excuse for so doing.53*
636 See the following section. But he must by no means meddle with
engagements ; every pastor, every priest, should be on his guard against
this, “ for the zeal of relations in this matter is already great enough,"
remarks Frassinetti, who continues: “In matrimonial matters the world
wishes to act independently ; and it is well that it does. Priests who do not
interfere in these matters act well in the eyes of God, and meet with the
approbation of men ” (Frassinetti, 1. c. VI. chap. On the Sacrament of
Matrimony, § 1, n. 458). On the other hand, it would be no dangerous
interference, and would not be taken ill by any one, if the confessor en­
deavored to induce a man who had dishonored a young woman to marry
her as soon as possible. However, one cannot speak of an absolute duty to
marry the woman under these circumstances, nor may one always adopt this
remedy. For if the woman were so immoral that infidelity toward her hus­
band might be safely presupposed, or if the seducer were such a dissolute
man that he would hear nothing about the bond of marriage, and it was to
be presumed that he would abandon or illtreat his wife if he were forced
into marriage, it would be highly imprudent to bring about such a mar­
riage. The same applies to all other cases in which it could be foreseen that
the marriage would result in misery. This would be trying to remedy one
misfortune, as seduction certainly is, by a lasting evil, namely, a wretched
marriage. The confessor must, therefore, first investigate the circumstances.
636 Theologians teach that, per se loquendo, children are not bound to obey
their parents in the matter of their vocation (they might, per aceidens, he
sometimes bound to this, non ei pracepti, sed ex charitate), that children who

592

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT
77. Betrothal and Marriage.

"Maxima prudentia ac zelo hie opus hahet Confessorius,"
justly remarks Scavini, and continues (quoting the "Méthode
pour la direction des âmes”), “Les personnes, qui vont se marier
ont besoin de plusieurs avis pour ne rien omettre de leurs de­
voirs, ne rien faire contre la sainteté du mariage." The confessor
should particularly observe the following points: I. Betrothed
persons should not, as a rule, live in the same house/” Let the
confessor insist with unrelenting severity in this matter/’’8
2. The time of betrothal should be one of preparation for
contracting a marriage well pleasing to God ; but it would be a
very bad preparation on the part of the betrothed persons to
burden their souls with grave sins against holy purity. Let
the confessor, therefore, admonish them to preserve themselves
free from all sins during this time, especially from those of im­
purity; and he has the more reason for giving this advice
because very great dangers threaten their virtue on account of
the intimacy of their relationship, the frequency of their inter­
course, and their mutual inclination ; moreover, this time of be­
trothal is, often enough, a career of continued sin, and an almost
wish to join a Religious Order are not always bound to obtain the advice and
assent of their parents, etc. Children should, however, take into considera­
tion the objections raised by their parents against their choice of a partner
in life. This duty of children to ask their parents' advice and consent
is one which ordinarily binds under grave sin, quia gravis contemptus est
ac signum diffidentiit, tantam rem sine eorum consensu aggredi ac nurum aut
generum ipsis insciis adducere. Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 849; Lib. VII. n.
335; Lib. IV. η. 118; S. Thom. II. Q. 104, art. 5, Suppl. Q. 47, art. 6. Cf.
Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. III. Tract. IV. n. 153.
w Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. 1 de ref. Compare the Ordinances of many pro­
vincial and diocesan synods, many diocesan regulations, and even civil legis­
lation.
*·· Compare the doctrine of the occasio proxima, prtesens libera. S. Alph.
H A. Tract. VII. n. 32 ; Scavini, Theol. Mor. Univ. Tract. X. n. 262. This
is especially necessary when a dispensation for the intended marriage is
sought, as this dispensation generally contains the clause, dummodo separate
vivant. Cf. Bangen, Instr, pract. de spousal, et matrim. I. p. 27 ss.

BETROTHAL AND MARRIAGE

593

uninterrupted round of distractions, pleasures, and worldly cares.
It often happens that young women, who before their betrothal
led a zealous, religious, and pure life, become during this time
lukewarm and indifferent in the exercises of piety, in the recep­
tion of the holy Sacraments, and even in attendance at Mass.
With this comes carelessness in combating temptation; and
moral perversion, alas! often of the worst kind is the result.
Therefore let the confessor watch, warn, and admonish.
(а) He should explain to them that whatever is forbidden by
God in the sixth and ninth commandments is no more allowed
to them than to unmarried people in general ; on the contrary,
the prospect of a speedy union, their mutual love and weakness
may lead them into greater temptations and dangers, and that
they should, therefore, be more watchful and careful now,
should pray more than before for the necessary grace and
strength to remain pure, and to be able to approach the altar
for the nuptial ceremony with hearts undefiled. He should
also call their attention to the misfortunes in married life with
which God, even here on earth, is wont to punish sins committed
against the sanctity of the Sacrament by the betrothed.
(б) He should forbid them any too familiar intercourse with
each other, especially solius cum sola, in retired places at night
or in the evening. He must not allow them to meet without
some attendance and supervision. How many have been ex­
posed to the greatest dangers by merely going to the door in
the evening, and tainted a virtue which had been preserved
spotless for years. Frequent visiting of engaged persons with­
out supervision of parents or relations is, in general, to be re­
garded anil treated as an immediate occasion of sin, and that,
not per accidens, but per se.M" St. Alphonsus inveighs severely
684 Cf. Benedict XIV, Inst, pastor. Sponsor eorumque parente» (pnmehi)
admoneant, ne unquam sponsi sine testibus ac prasertiiu consanguineis, collo­
quium simul ineant, si illud aliquando permittendum ridetur: indecorum esse
vetitumque ens simul habitare, graviter puniendos, si de hae re certiores Jiivli
Juerimus.

594

THS MINISTER OF THS SACRAMENT

against engaged persons and the parents who permit these
visits and familiarities, and defends his severity by appealing
to experience.*40 Moralists teach (and experience confirms
their teaching) that too much familiarity on the part of per­
sons engaged constitutes the very greatest danger to chastity.*41
Frassinetti’s words are to the point: “Let parents see that their
sons do not meet with too great familiarity, and, above all,
not alone and without witnesses, the young women whom they
think of marrying. I say 'with too great familiarity,’ for it
would be useless to preach that betrothed persons should never
visit one another. Such visits are partly necessary, in order
that there may be mutual knowledge of one another, before
they are joined by the indissoluble bond of matrimony. More­
over, they would, in any case, wish to visit one another, on
account of their mutual attachment, which, in view of their
future marriage, is not reprehensible. . . . But the priest must
earnestly impress upon parents the necessity of exercising great
watchfulness over these visits. Great watchfulness, in order that
the young people may observe the strictest propriety in their
intercourse with each other. The parents should, therefore,
always have them under their observation. Such visiting should
not be prolonged nor bo too frequent. For, in these cases,
it cannot be presumed that divine grace will assist the young
people, as such conduct is neither necessary nor becoming;
and, on this account, there will unfailingly be many dangers.”
(c) He should urge speedy marriages, as this will obviate
640 Cf. IL A. Tract. 7, n. 32 ; Tract, ult. n. 3 ; Theol. Mor. Lib. V1. n. 452 ;
Praxis Confess, n. 204. Cf. n. 65.
M1 Cf. Sanchez, De Matrimon. Lib. IX. Disp. 40, n. 52; Salmant. Tr. 26.
cp. 3, n. 59; Sporer, De Matrim. n. 429 ; 8. Leonard, Disc. mist. nn. 23, 21 ;
Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Append. De prax. «n>. cum occa», et recidivis, P. Ill.
cp. VII. η. 340 es. The question whether sponsis amplexu» et oscula honesta
in signum amoris are allowed is answered by theologians affirmative ciimmuniter, si Jiant honesto modo juxta morem patrice sicut solutis permittantur: sunt enim
connaturalia signa amoris. Non licent vero oscula pressa sapiusque repetita,
neque diuturna manuum constrictiones. Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 854.

BETROTHAL AND MARRIAGE

595

many temptations and dangers «>f sin. Protracti-d engagements
are. seldom good; circumstances may supervene which make
speedy marriage difficult or impossible; but if it can take place
soon, the confessor must not easily consent to postponement
from slight motives.51’ The cause of the postponement should
be inquired into, and all possible efforts be made to remove it.
Every betrothed person can demand the fulfilment of the prom­
ise of marriage (even in /oro externo) and the other party is,
sub gravi, bound to accede to this demand if he has no valid
reason for refusal or postponement. As postponement of
marriage generally means great moral dangers for the betrothed,
it can only be justified by weighty motives.5" If one of the
parties intends to dissolve the engagement, the confessor should
explain its binding nature. To break off an engagement out
of levity, in momentary anger or on account of some sudden
passion, is wrong, and dishonorable, even if the dissolution be
valid.511 To make engagements lightly and as lightly to break
them is contrary to the sanctity of matrimony.
(d) He should enjoin zealous prayer, frequent reception of
the Sacraments,515 and especially a general confession (which
will be useful for all and necessary for many)5"* and good works,
that they may receive the Sacrament of Matrimony worthily,
thus laying a solid foundation for a happy life. But it is not
well to defer the confession till the last hours or minutes before
the wedding, and the confessor should energetically dissuade
wi Hence, engagements which are entered into without prospect of speedy
marriage are much to be disapproved. See § t>6. V.
M8 Cf. Bened. XIV, Instr. 40; S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VT. n. W6.
H‘ Concerning dissolution of betrothal, see S. Alph. I. c. Lib. VI. Tract.
VI. De matrim. Dub. III. quomodo dissolvantur spousalia, n. 855
Aert­
nys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. VIIL De Matrim. n. 433 ss.
546 Cf. Trid. Seas. XXIV. cp. 1, de ref. mat. Rit. Rom. Tit. VIL cp. 1.
*>*> .· Optimum et ut plurimum etiam necessarium erit cmifessionis generalis eonlilium, ut sponsi labes suas plenius abluant et sanioribus instituantur principiis
atque impedimenta occulta et defectus, quibus non raro laborant. quosque alteri
parti aperire tenentur, sincere deteguntur." — Instr. Eyst. p. 352.

Λ96

τηκ minister of

the sacrament

from this practice, which may cause him and those about to
be married difficulties and embarrassment. In order to avoid
this, and also to contribute to a better preparation, he should
recommend confession (general confession) before or offer the
first publication of the banns, and then confession again imme­
diately before the wedding.
For if the confession is not made till shortly before the wed­
ding, the following difficulties may arise: 1. The penitent may
not be disposed or cannot be rendered disposed. The confessor
will certainly do everything which zeal for souls and the light
of grace suggest, in order to dispose the penitent for the worthy
reception of absolution. But if the disposition remains doubt­
ful, despite all his endeavors, he may absolve the penitent sub
conditione, as the reception of the Sacrament of Matrimony is
a sufficient reason for administering conditional absolution.5'7
If his efforts to dispose the penitent remain fruitless, the
bridegroom, perhaps, being bad and wishing only to make a show
of receiving the holy Sacraments, influenced by his better dis­
posed bride, or by relations; or because he will not satisfy
some necessary condition, such as avoiding some immediate
occasion, making restitution, giving up an enmity, — the con­
fessor must refuse absolution. Of course, such a person may not
receive holy communion, and the confessor must tell him so.
As to the reception of the Sacrament of Matrimony, there are
two possible cases to consider: either he does not know that
a state of grace is necessary for the lawful reception of this
Sacrament, or he does know it. If he does not know it, and if
the confessor is obliged to presume (knowing the penitent’s
frame of mind) that he would not respect his admonition con­
cerning the unlawful reception of the Sacrament of Matrimony
in a state of mortal sin, he must leave him in his state of igno­
rance and bona fides, in order that he may not formally sin. If
M’ Compare § 8; Gury, Casus Conscienti», II. nn. 733, 394.

bbtrotiial and marriage

wt

the penitent does know that it is not allowed to receive the
Sacrament of Matrimony in mortal sin, the confessor should lay
before him in forcible terms the enormity of the sacrilege of
which he will bo guilty, in order, if possible, to bring him to a
better disposition. And if this is of no avail, he should ad­
monish him with suitable prudence, to make an act of perfect
contrition before the marriage, and to come to confession as
soon as possible after it.s”
2. Another difficulty arises when the penitent confesses a
reserved sin from which the confessor cannot absolve. As here
gravis causa confitendi urget, we are face to face with a case
which was discussed earlier in this work and solved by St.
Alphonsus, namely, that any priest can indirectly absolve from
sins reserved to the bishop, and also from those reserved to the
Pope, si episcopus non possit adiri; even when the sin is reserved
cum excommunicatione.™
3. Finally, another difficulty may arise: the confessor may
discover in the confessional an impedimentum matrim. occultum
ex causa infamante exortum ; the marriage for which all the prepa­
rations have been made cannot be postponed without disgrace
and great detriment to the parties, and dispensation from the
impediment cannot be obtained. Here the following circum­
stances have to be taken into consideration : (a) If both parties
know the impediment, and have concealed it from a bad motive,
they must, if possible, postpone their marriage till the dispensa­
tion has been obtained. If they are not willing to do this, the
confessor must refuse them absolution. But if they are not
able to postpone the marriage on account of the great disgrace
or scandal which would result, and if they are otherwise in good
dispositions, he can give them absolution; but he must instruct
M9 Scavini, 1. c. de Matrim. Disp. 4, Q. 3; Gury, Theol. Mor. II. 640.
Compare above, § 41. Absolution from reserved sins. S. Alph. 1. c. Lib.
VI. nn. 584, 585 ; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. V. De Pœnit. n. 245 ;
Gury, 1. c. II. n. 575.

.598

ΤΠΕ MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

them that they have to be married before the priest, on the
supposition that the Pope will dispense, then to live merely
as brother and sister till the dispensation has been obtained;880
after that they must repeat before him their consent to marry.
He must tell them how this has to be done, make it as easy
for them as possible, so as not to deter them. (6) If both par­
ties are ignorant of the impediment, and are quite bona fuie and
if the confessor cannot assume that they will live continently
till the dispensation is procured, he should leave them in their
ignorance, bona fide, and request a dispensation pro joro intemo,
then proceeding according to the rules for rendering valid an
invalid marriage in joro inferno; for it is better to let them com­
mit material sins, than to furnish them with occasion for formal
sins, (c) If only one of the two parties is aware of the obstacle,
and, on account of the disgrace attaching to it, cannot reveal
it to the other, a “communissima et probabilissima sententia’’
of the theologians teaches that the bishop can grant a dispensa­
tion in this case,881 and recourse must, therefore, be had to him.
If the latter is not possible, the confessor (or parish priest) can,
according to what St. Alphonsus calls the “not unfounded"
teaching of many theologians, declare “ex Epikeia” that the
lex impedimenti does not bind in this case, because it would be
injurious. But the confessor must pro securitate et ad salvandam
reverentiam legibus Ecclesia: debitam, quantocius apply to the
Roman Penitentiary, or to the Ordinary who possesses the quin­
quennial faculties, in order to obtain a dispensation. But it
is to be carefully observed that only a secret impediment,
arising from a sin, is here in question ; for in the case of a public
660 Or, as is the common custom in many places, not at once to set up house
together, but to wait till the dispensation han been granted.
“l Prouti in aliis Legibus, quando aditus ad Papam est impossibilis et periculum
in mora (cf. Bened. XIV, De. Syn. Lib. IV. cp. 2, nn. 2,3) ; indeed according
to the probable opinion of some theologians, the bishop can delegate this
jiower, as a potestas ordinaria, to others, etiam generaliter pro omnibus casibus
occurrentibus. S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. u. 613 ; Prax. Conf. u. B.

■

BETROTHAL AND MARR1AOB

599

impediment arising from no dishonorable cause, there is neither
scandal nor disgrace, but only the inconvenience of postponing
the marriage.
***
It depends entirely upon circumstances, since
it is the duty of the pastor to instruct those about to marry,
whether the confessor should give special suggestions and
admonition in this last confession on the usun matrimonii,^
explaining what is allowed to married people, and what is
forbidden.56* He may speak to them of the intention which, as
643 Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. and II. A. n. 114; Scavini, 1. c.; Gury. 1- c. II. 771 :
Cas. Conse. II. n. 1045; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 273.
Benger holds that confession affords the most suitable occasion for giv­
ing the necessary instruction concerning the sacredness of the matrimonial
duties. Dubois (I. c.) urges that persons about to be married should be well
instructed in what concerns that state, in order that they may never do any­
thing which is against their conscience, or concerning which they are in doubt,
and that they should obtain advice from pious and judicious people, or from
their confessor; Aertnys (Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 515) speaks of an officium
parochi et confessorii, to instruct married people concerning licita et illicita in
matrimonio. The confessions of married people and the questions which
they put to the confessor, may afford reason and occasion for instructing
them concerning the debitum conjugate. The confessor must, therefore, be
prepared for this ; he should also be able to impart necessary information in
a lieconiiug manner; and it requires judgment and skill so to instruct in this
difficult matter as to convey the information without giving offense or say­
ing more than is necessary. We append the wise remark of Cardinal
Gousset (Moral Theology. II. n. 897). . . . Sacerdos, qui, ut ait Apostolus,
debet exemplum esse Jidelium in castitate, tacebit, etiam in sacro tribunali, de modo
utendi matrimonio, seu de circumstantiis ad actum conjugalem spectantibus, nisi
forte fuerit interrogatus. Explicare fusius, ipiae licita sunt conjugibus aut illicita,
ipsis aeque ac confessoriis periculosum foret. Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. η. II.
Everything is allowed which is necessary, or conducive, to the further­
ance ai d attainment of the object of matrimony. The chief object of mat­
rimony is the procreatio prolis ; the secondary object remedium concupiscentia,
and mutuum adjutorium et solatium in cita societate. All that is necessary,
and conducive, to the attainment of the principal object, or which serves
these secondary objects, having regard for the first, is allowed ; whatever
frustrates the principal object is mortally sinful, whatever goes beyond this
principal object, without counteracting it, is venial sin. For further partic­
ulars upon this subject, the confessor should consult the compendiums of
moral theology; for example, Aertnys, De Matrim. P. IV. cp. 2, n. 479 siu;
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. De Matriui. Sect. IV. n. 834 ss.

GOO

ΤΠΚ MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Christians, they should have in this state; of matrimonial
harmony and mutual love and fidelity. If the confessor deems
it necessary, or advisable and beneficial, he will not fail in his
»eal for souls to instruct his penitents concerning this matter,
and to admonish them to lead a truly Christian family life,
where sin and vice are carefully avoided, whilst God is being
faithfully served. If matrimony is based upon this founda­
tion, the husband and wife may confidently expect God’s abun­
dant graces: if they depart from these principles, they will
deprive themselves of this blessing.555
78. The Confessor's Attitude toward Mixed Marriages

The confessor will often have occasion to speak to penitents
concerning mixed marriages, because they either wish to con­
tract such a marriage, or have already done so. The following
principles will serve him in this equally important and difficult
matter.
I. Even if the essence of marriage is not destroyed by the
obstacle of mixed religion, as in disparitas cullus, it falls short
of the ideal. For marriage should not only represent the unity
of the Church; it should, as much as is possible, produce this
unity; now the Church is, in a special manner, one through its
faith. Conscious of this, and in view of the many great disad­
vantages which accrue from mixed marriages, the Church has
always energetically protested against them. She has always
taught that such a marriage is a reprehensible communicatio
in sacris, that there is danger to the Catholic party of falling
away from religion or of becoming indifferent to it, and that a
proper education in the Catholic faith of children born from
such marriage, if not exactly impossible, is certainly rendered
very difficult, as the necessary cooperation is wanting, and
Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 91; Aertnys, Instr, pract. 1. c. n. 137;
Frassinetti, Practical Instruction for Young Confessors (Lucerne, 1871). 2.
Pt. t> Chap. §§ 4, 5» Dubois, The Practical Confessor, 2 Pl. 19 chap. n. 492, etc.

ATTITUDE TOWARD MIXED MARRIAGE»

«01

opposition easily made by word and example."* In 1858 the
Apostolic See anew admonished the bishops to deter the faithful
from such mixed marriages.
Only by three conditions will the dangers of mixed marriages
be, if not removed, at least reduced ; and only under these three
conditions does the Church, praeerlim ob privatas causa», permit
mixed marriages. These conditions are: (1) Both parties,
especially the non-Catholic, must promise, ordinarily in writing
and before witnesses, to bring up all their children in the
Catholic religion (without distinction of sex). (2) The non­
Catholic party must promise solemnly not to hinder in any way
the Catholic party in the practice of his (or her) religion.
(3) The Catholic must use every lawful means to effect the con­
version of the heretical partner."1’
From these three conditions the Church cannot recede,"1* for,
as not only the ecclesiastical, but also the natural and the
divine law, absolutely forbid that anybody expose himself or
his offspring to the danger of perversion, it naturally results
that these sureties should be prescribed and demanded, in order
that together with the canonical precepts, the natural and divine
™ Benedict XIV, Decl. 4 Nov., 1711 ; Pius VII. Bull27 Feb.. 1800; Greg­
ory XVI, Encycl. 27 May, 1832, to the archbishops and bishops of Bavaria.
Finally, Leo XIII, Circular 10 Feb., 1880 declares: “A warning voice must
also be raised against marriage lightly contracted with a person of another
faith; for where the souls are disunited in religion, union in other matters is
scarcely to be expected. It is clear that such marriages must he particularly
shunned, for the reason that they give occasion for unlawful communication
and participation in religious exercises, that they are a source of danger for
the religion of the Catholic party, an obstacle to the good education of the
children and not infrequently a temptation to hold all religions equally
justified, denying all difference between true and false.” Even Protestant
divines and authorities have frequently expressed themselves decidedly
against mixed marriages, and earnestly warned people against them.
Ex facultat. a Pio. IX. datis. See Bangen, De Sponsalibus et de Mat­
rimonio, II. p. 161.
Brief of Pius VIII, 25 March, 1830. Instruction of Pius IX, 15 Nov.,
1858.

602

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

law may not he criminally transgressed. “® When these condi­
tions are satisfied, and officially guaranteed
by a contract,
dispensation from the impedimentum mixta religionis may then
be requested from the bishop, and given by him in virtue of the
usual faculties conferred upon him.
II. By these regulations of the Church, his modus procedendi
in the matter of a mixed marriage is mapped out for the priest
or the confessor.
1. If the confessor receives information of an intended mixed
marriage, he should emphatically dissuade from it, but with
pastoral prudence, and without offensive words.
2. If his endeavors are of no avail, and if he cannot prevent
the marriage, he must persuade the penitent to fulfill the stipu­
lated conditions.
3. If the penitent agrees to this, the confessor will do well not
to administer absolution at once unless there is some special
reason for so doing (for example, the fulfilment of a command­
ment of the Church, necessity of communicating, to prevent
gossip, etc.), but let him urge that the consent of the non-Catholic
party to the three conditions should first be obtained.
4. When this consent is obtained, there is no obstacle to the
absolution of the penitent.
Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 715, justifies the dispensation of the Church, under
the conditions laid down, upon the following grounds: 1. Propter magnum
bonum publicum, such mixed marriages may be allowed even when there is
some risk, only the Catholic party must have the firm intention not to yield
to this danger (cf. Lugo, De sacr. in gen. Disp. 8, sect, ult., et De Eide Disp.
32, n. 33). 2. But when on account of circumstances those dangers disa|>pear, or become slight, a magnum bonum privatum, such as the hope of leading
the non-Catholic party to the true faith, can also make such a marriage per­
missible. 3. When they cannot be entirely removed, but yet are not really
grav«· ; or, on the other hand, when a bonuin, though no very great bonum, is
to be hoped for from the mixed marriage, it may happen that contracting
such a marriage is not a grave sin against the natural law, but a venial sin.
680 The Roman Congregation demands pacta notoria, de guibux spes est ser­
rari, that is, a documentary declaration made before the parish priest, or a
legal contract at the hand of a notary.

ATTITl'DE TOWARD MIXED MARRIAGE*

»503

5. But if the penitent will not consent to the fulfilment of
the three conditions, but still intends to contract the mixed
marriage, he purposes to commit a grave sin, and cannot be
absolved. For he who, without obtaining a dispensation from
the impediment m mixte reliyionû, contracts a mixed marriage
before a non-Catholic minister, is guilty of three grave sins:
he disobeys the Church ; he endangers the salvation of the
children which God may give him; he is hirresens fautor, guilty
of a communicatio in sacris, and incurs ecclesiastical censure.*1
III. Concerning the reconciliation of those persons who, in
disobedience to their Church, have contracted a mixed mar­
riage before a non-Catholic minister, the confessor must be
guided by the following principles: —
1. It is certain that a Catholic having contracted marriage
before a Protestant clergyman cannot be absolved as long as
he remains unwilling to make good the above-mentioned con­
ditions. Even if the refusal of absolution does not produce its
immediate effect (the fire of passion obscuring the light of
conscience), it, nevertheless, instills salutary fear. But it would
be very wrong on the part of the confessor to wound such a
penitent by harshness and reproaches. The confessor (parish
priest) must, take all pains to bring such penitents to a con­
sciousness of their error.4”
2. But if the penitent truly repents of his error, and if he is
ready to make good the scandal given, and to take immediate
steps towards bringing up his children as Catholics, he is worthy
of absolution and it may not be refused to him.
461 Cf. Instructio. S. Congregat. Inquisit. 17 Febr., 1864 ; Decret. S. Congr.
Inq. 29 Aug., 1888.
602 Si quando connubium sine cautionibus necessariis initum fuerit, non /impterea
(parochi) conjugem catholicam negligant, sibique ao suo peccato relinquant, sed
studeant eam ad poenitentiam adducere, ut sute obligationi quoad catholicam edu­
cationem prolis, quantum potest, satisfaciat : quod quamdiu non prostiterit aut
saltem sincere promiserit, sacramentis suscipiendis utique imparatus censeri debet.
(S. Congreg. Officii 39 Jul., 1880 ad Cardin. Primatum et Archiep. Strigon.)

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

604

3. It is, above all, necessary to find out if the 'marriage was
valid according to the Decree Tametsi. If the marriage has
been invalidly contracted, a dispensation from the im pedimentum mixta religionis and from the banns is to be sought ; and
when this is obtained, according to the regulations of the
Church, the consent is to be renewed. If this renewal of con­
sent cannot be effected, sanatio in radice must be rcquested.r’n3
If the marriage is valid, dispensation is not necessary.
4. Moreover, the facultas absolvendi a censuris propter ha resim
must be obtained. For the censure, reserved speciali modo to
the Pope is, according to an explicit decision of Rome, incurred
in all cases by those qui matrimonium coram ministro ka-relieo
ineunt; even when the existence of censure was not known to
the parties, because it is a question of the forum externum, and
the contract of marriage is, of its nature, an external act. By
virtue, however, of the quinquennial faculties, the bishop can
absolve from this censure, or confer this power subdelegando
upon others. The confessor must, therefore, refer the penitent
to the parish priest, in order that the latter may procure from
the bishop the facultas absolvendi a censuris pro foro externo.
Not till then can the confessor give sacramental absolution.
Only when, from special reasons, determined by the circum­
stances, an absolutio in faro externo would not be advisable,
may the confessor apply for the facultas absolvendi a censuris
pro foro interno, and administer this absolution after he has
obtained the faculty. We add that absolution from the censure
in foro extemo can take place without witnesses, and that it is
not necessary to make use of definite words at the absolution
in utroque foro, but it is always necessary to declare that the
absolution is administered by virtue of special powers from the
Holy See, subdelegated by the bishop.
Married people who were allowed to receive the Sacraments
μ»

Cf. Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. nn. 637, 654, 664.

ATTHIDE TOWARD MIXED MARRIAOEH
before the promulgat inn of the answer of the Holy Office, 18
May, 1892, requiring the abnolulio a censuri* pro forn ertemo,
are not to be disturbed.
5. The confessor should also help a penitent of this kind to
keep his resolution of bringing up his children as Catholics, by
showing him what steps he must take. He should encourage
him to overcome possible difficulties which may occur. This
will be easier for the Catholic father than the mother. If the
children have reached an age when they are removeri from
parental authority, the Catholic party must at least promise
to exert its influence by prayer, exhortation and good example,
to gain the children for the Catholic Church."*
Of course the confessor must demand that the penitent should
inform his parish priest of his resolution to bring up the chil­
dren in the Catholic faith. Only very weighty grounds should
induce the confessor to refrain from exacting this, anti then he
would be obliged to apply to his Ordinary for advice.
6. It may also be the case that a woman repents of the step
which she took, but which she cannot now retrace, not being
able, in spite of her good will, to induce her husband to consent
to the Catholic education of the children. It would he hard,
in such a case, to leave her unassisted. The repentance which
she has evidenced, the willingness which she has shown (and
which will continue) to repair as far as possible the harm done;
the efforts which she may have already made; the promise to
SM Cf. Bangpn, Instructio practice, Tit. 4, p. 20. “Si pater est catholicus,
sane liberorum educatio in ipsius potestate est: Ergo quod potest facere dehet;
promittens coram testibus cel jurato vel juramenti loco, se prnlern educaturum in
catholica religione : sed id de facto etiam prastare tenetur. Excipe tamen, si
prides jam in ea atate sit. ut a patre jam non dependeat ; tunc enim sufficit. ut
vere sit attritus atque in hujus doloris signum id quod pro ciribus efficere possit,
peragere sit paratus. Si muter est catholica, distinguendum videtur. .1 ut ad­
ducere potest rirum, ut in catholicam prmiurn educationem consentiat; et tunc
ambo conjuges formaliter expositas cautiones emittant coram parocho; aut rirum
ad hoc morere nequit; tum attendatur, an indubitata ediderit contritionis signa
idque prasture p-o liberorum educatione sit parata, quod in ipsius viribus est."

60fi

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

influence husband and children by the means at her disposal
— prayer, a good life, words of advice — suffice for her to be
admitted to the Sacraments. This satisfies the demam Is which
the Holy Office in Rome makes in such cases.5"5
7. If the confessor believes that there is reason for doubting
the sincere and earnest will of penitents who are joined by an
illicit mixed marriage, he is free to make inquiry, and, accord­
ing to the nature of the case, to postpone absolution for a time.
It is always well not to admit such penitents to the holy Sac­
raments shortly after contracting the illicit marriage, unless
they have guaranteed the Catholic education of their children
in a manner which satisfies the ecclesiastical regulations ; unless,
moreover, they show sorrow for their lapse from fluty, and by
faithful performance of their religious obligations, effectually
prove that they wish to be obedient to the Catholic Church in
future. Persons who are dangerously ill, emigrants, etc., of
course, constitute exceptions to this rule.
8. An illicit marriage contracted by a Catholic before a nonCatholie minister is a public act and causes public scandal ;
the satisfaction must, therefore, as a rule, be made publicly.
The confessor must not overlook this, lest he make himself an
accomplice in the scandal, and lest this dreadful evil of our days
(for such mixed marriages are in reality, especially when con­
tracted without dispense) be rendered more numerous, by want
of due severity in the conditions of reconciliation. As public acts
of reparation may be regarded: an oral or written declaration
of sorrow before the parish priest ; the promise of bringing up
their children as Catholics made to the pastor. The confessor
should follow the directions which may have been given by his
bishop in this matter, and if there are none, he must proceed
with pastoral prudence and charity. It may happen that, in
the place where the Sacraments are to be received, the scandal
w® See above, p. 603, Remark 2.

PENITENTS JOINED IN CIVIL MARRIAGE

607

given is not known, the parties having changed their place of
residence. In this case the reconciliation may take place in all
privacy. The confessor should not forget in such cases that
the salvation of souls is the highest law.
79. How to deal with Penitents joined in “Civil" Marriage
only.

The confessor’s treatment of penitents living in “civil" mat­
rimony must he essentially different from the above.
Here the chief question is whether there is a real consensus
maritalis; that is, whether the persons in question had the
consciousness and intention of entering upon a true matrimo­
nial relationship by the declaration which they made before the
public official, or if they believed they were concluding an ex­
ternal agreement only and one not permanently binding upon
the conscience. In the second place, the confessor must inves­
tigate if there are any — and what — impediments to mar­
riage. If there are no diriment impediments, and if there was
a true consensus maritalis in those places where the Tridentine
Decree “Tametsi" is not in force (therefore, where the impedi­
mentum clandestinitatis does not apply), such informal contract
of marriage must be regarded as valid. On the other hand,
these informal marriages are ecclesiastically invalid in all places
where the Tridentine Decree is in force, on account of the “ im­
pedimentum clandestinitatis.” The confessor must, however, in
every individual case have recourse to the Ordinary.
Apart from this question of validity, all persons living in mere
“civil” matrimony must be exhorted (if no obstacle from which
there is no dispensation be in the way) to be married in forma
Tridentina, and to receive the blessing of the Church. If diffi­
culties arise in connection with this, the confessor should apply
to the bishop, in order to obtain sanatio in radice, according to
the circumstances.
A penitent living in “civil” marriage is not to be absolved

608

THK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

till he has promised to be married in the Church and has actually
made preparation for this marriage. Under particular circum­
stances—if the persons live apart — absolution can be given,
even if the ceremony is postponed. Admission to holy com­
munion must be deferred till immediately before the marriage.
80. The Confessor s Conduct towards Women.

Occasion has already several times5” presented itself for re­
marks concerning the confessor’s conduct when hearing the
confessions of women. The importance of the subject demands
for it special treatment. Amongst penitents women probably
form nearly always the majority. However regrettable it, may
be that men so seldom, and often reluctantly, approach the tri­
bunal of confession, it is a source of joy that women should be
zealous in the reception of the holy Sacraments, for this justifies
the hope that their influence upon their husbands and upon those
around them will be the more salutary. The influence which a
truly Christian woman exercises upon her husband, a mother upon
her children, the mistress of a house upon her subordinates, is
very great. Truly Christian, pious, and chaste young women
are a real blessing in a family and a household. Moreover,
woman is generally more inclined to the exercise of Christian
piety, and can thus, if properly treated and guided, attain to
great perfection.
Nevertheless, it is not to be overlooked that, owing to cer­
tain weaknesses and faults which are peculiar to their sex, the
hopes of the confessor are not infrequently disappointed and his
endeavors rendered fruitless. “Their piety may easily become
a matter of feeling, without solidity and worth ; they are much
inclined to form an inordinate attachment for the confessor,
which is perhaps not free from a sensual element. The practice
666 Compare chiefly § 71 and § 49.

THE CONFESSOR" CONDUCT TOWARD" WOMEN

009

of piety also easily serves as a means of gratifying vanity.
Many are disposed to dissimulation and hypocrisy." ·*’
Hearing the confessions of women is thus indisputably one
of the greatest and most imminent dangers for the confessor.
He must, therefore, be very circumspect and prurient, reason­
ably fear this danger, for in this fear lies his safety; “he who
fears this rock runs no danger of suffering shipwreck.” M" These
shortcomings ought not to mislead us into condemning the whole
sex, as is sometimes wrongly done. This is unjust. We must
help them to overcome their faults, and if no improvement
results from our endeavors, suitable severity is to be employed.
Bearing in mind the exhortation (Eccl. Ixi. 15): “Curam habe
de bono nomine,'' the circumspect and prudent confessor will
have regard for his good name, and seek to preserve and guard it ;
not only remaining pure of heart, but preserving himself free
from every suspicion of impurity, herein faithfully following
the example of Our Lord, who patiently bore many an accusa­
tion leveled against Him, but never tolerated any on the sub­
ject of purity. For nothing tietracts so much from a priest's
authority and efficiency as the suspicion that he is not abso­
lutely clean of heart. Let the confessor, therefore, place a
guard upon his eyes, let him never look at those who stand be667 “Seil est aliud feminarum ingenium, quoti considerationem nostram mere­
tur, nimirum, cumfactte fuerint propter virum, libenter hujus societate gaudent
et ea animi propensio, qua se in virum ferri sentiunt, et vice versa, laqueus est
non minus sute, quam Confessarii saluti periculosus. Ideo necesse est. ut Con­
fessoriis monita demus et prtecautiones indicemus, quibus pericula evitent in fre­
quentibus et prolij-is mulierum confessionibus latentia, Terum enimvero adhasio
mulieris persona Confessarii tantum est malum, ut morte ipsa diligentius est evi­
tandum." Aertnys, Instruet, practice. P. III. cp. II. art. 3, n. 139. Mulier
sensibili affectu magis succenditur et instinctu cordis magis quam rationis usu
sese dirigit . . . uti debilior astutia finem intentam assequitur . . . si cui passioni
se dedit, magis insanit, . . . tempore menstruorum et pneqnutionis mulieri < ubnotiie
sunt variis motibus passionum, puta morositatis, iracundia, aiirietalis, et.
Horum consideratio juvabit sane Confessorium ia directione mulierum. Aeri·
nys, I. c.
648 Frassinetti, Pract. Instr. 1. c. § 5. p. 2S0.

610

TUE MINISTER OE THE SACRAMENT

fore his confessional, and never glance at the face of the person
whose confession he hears; he should not try to find out who
his female penitents are; it is sufficient for him to know the state
of their souls. He should carefully avoid, as far as it is pos­
sible, all intercourse with them outside the confessional, not
visiting them in their houses, except at times of severe illness;
he should refuse munuscula under whatever name they may be
offered to him; he should confide no secrets to them, and avoid
familiarity.5” His words should be reserved, serious, respectful,
even if the penitent’s station and circumstances do not actually
command respect. When the priest hears the confessions of
young women, and such as are distinguished by station, beauty,
education, etc., he must still more carefully avoid familiarity.
Concerning delicate matters the confessor should put only few
questions, and then only with the greatest prudence, and con­
tent himself with knowing the nature of the sin, or its kind;
he should carefully guard against inquiring after superfluous
details.5”
The confessor must not lose sight of the dictates of prudence
which have been discussed, when he hears the confessions of
“ persona spirituales." Here, as St. Alphonsus warns us,571
prudence is most necessary, on account of the periculum majoris
adhtesionis. His teaching on this point is as follows: “Dicebat
Ven. P. Sertorius Capotus, diabolum ad conjungendas inter se
personas spirituales, ab initio uti pratextu virtutis, ut deinde affec­
tus a virtute transeat ad personam," and justifies this statement
™ Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 119.
610 Even those theologians who teach that the aggravating circumstances
must also be stated in confession, admit, in puncto VI pracepti, especially in
the confessions of women, an exception. ·· Heedless questioners ! have care for
yourselves, have care for weak souls, respect the holy Sacrament,” exclaims
Frassinetti; and the Angel of the Schools says, “Polius estis contaminatores
guam confessores." Cf. Gousset, Moral Theol. for the use of parish priests
and confessors, ΓΙ. n. 424 ; Gury, 1. c. n. 1261.
«> Praxis Confess, n. 119.

THE UONFESHOR'ii CONDUCT TOWARDS WOMEN 611

by a word of St. Augustine, which St. Thomas quotes (Opuse.
64 de Famil. Doni, etc.): "Speech with these persons must be
short and reserved ; it is not because they are more holy that one
must be more on bis guard, but because the holier they are, the
more attractive they become.” And St. Thomas adtls to these
significant words of the holy Bishop of Hippo: “Licet carnalis
affectio sit omnibus periculosa ipsis tamen magis perniciosa, quando
conversantur cum persona, qua spiritualis videtur; nam quamvis
principium videatur purum, tamen frequens familiaritas domes­
ticum est periculum ; qua quidem familiaritas quanto plus crescit,
infirmatur principale motivum et puritas maculatur.'’ He also
adds that such persons do not observe this at once, quoniam
diabolus ab initio non emittit sagittas venenatas, sed illas tantum­
modo, qua aliquantulum feriunt et augent affectum. Sed brevi
hujusmodi persona eo deveniunt, ut non amplius agant secum
tanquam angeli, quemadmodum caperanl, sed tanquam carne
vestiti; vicissim se intuentur mentesque sibi feriunt blandis allo­
cutionibus, qua adhuc a prima devotione videntur procedere: hinc
alter alterius prasenliam incipit appetere; sicque spiritualis de­
votio convertitur in carnalem.. Et quidem oh quot sacerdotes, qui
antea erant innocentes ob similes adhasiones, qua spiritu caperant, Deum simul et spiritum perdiderunt.'"11
In order to act with the necessary prudence, the confessor
will (1) hear the confessions of women, as far as possible, only
in the Church, or in some place which is always accessible for
hearing confessions; (2) he will dispatch matters, especially
with those who often confess; will not tolerate talk about sub­
jects which do not belong to the confession, and will carefully
avoid long exhortations and unnecessary questions.
The confessor must observe all this, and take all precautionary
ms Cf. Gaume, Handbook for Confessors. Third Chapter, nn. 15(i-15H :
Aertnys, Instr, pract. 1. c. n. I ll : Ricardi, Dei doveri et dello spirito degli
eccles. 15 a 15 in Le Noir; S. Alph. Praxis Confess. 1. c. ; Zenner, Instructio
practica Confessor. P. II. Sect. II. cp. 2, §§ 270, 271.

612

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

measures, — if he is young, because it is then particularly neces­
sary, but also in more advanced years, and even in old age, in
order to give others good example, and also because experience
shows that even for those who are mature and old, the danger
exists, though it be leasened. "If the confessor follows these
precepts, he realizes in himself a miracle, which is one of the
most beautiful proofs of the truth of the Catholic religion; the
miracle, namely, that priests who preserve their hearts in
the holy fear of God, hear the confessions of women for years
without ever having to accuse themselves that their holy office
has been for them an occasion of sin, even of one single sin.” 073
If the penitents are married women, let the confessor encour­
age and instruct them in the complete fulfilment of their duties
towards their husbands, above all, their duty of matrimonial
love, giving a good example, bearing faults with patience, and
not ceasing, though then· husbands have gone astray, to use
Frassinetti, 1. c. p. 283. We will not leave unnoticed two special dan­
gers to which Aertnys calls attention: (1) Siquundo Confessorius, junior
prœserlim advertat panitentem aliquam carnali amore sibi adhterere asperis vér­
ins eam retundat, el si hoc non sufficiat ad alium Confessorium remittat, idque tum
prtecipue faciendum est, cum et Confessorius sensualem affectum in se sentit ;
alioquin incautus Confessorius seipsum et pernitentem magno periculo exponet.
(2) He then reminds confessors that the devil especially likes to direct his
efforts against priests, as, at one blow, he ruins not only one, but many
other souls if he succeeds in corrupting a priest. Inde nonnunquam contin­
git. ut procaces feminee consilium ceperint insidias parandi virtuti alicujus Sacer­
dotis, simulando conversionem, infirmitatem, aut quid aliud excogitando, ut
puulatim ad seductionem devenirent. Evenit quoque, ut salax puella prolixum
senem otismeniliitum in Confessione enarret et inverecunde describat, eo animo, ut
turpes commotiones in Confessorio suscitet. Confessorius debere, ejusmodi ser­
pentes «i μ repellere, res ipsa monet. And Berardi (Praxis Confess, η. 1099)
adds : ■· Cavendum quoque est ab illis puellis, qute ex curiositate malitiosa cupiunt
interrogari a Confessoriis, ut addiscant ea qute adhuc ignorant et. in hunc finem
semper affirmative respondent. Sunt etiam alite adhuc magis malitiosa, qute, sive
ex libidine, sire ut postea in conversationibus rideant de Confessorio, non solum
ad quaslibet interrogationes affirmative respondent, sed etiam ruborem fingunt et
enixe petunt, ut interrogentur. Ab his scopulis interdum difficile est cavere; sed
utde erit, quod Cunfesxarii juniores sciant, quousque malitia feminat pertinuere
possit." Cf. Eccle. 25, 2G.

THE CONFESSOR'S CONDUCT TOWARDS WOMEN 613
every endeavor to reform them, especially by praying for them
with indefatigable zeal. How many wives have saved their
husbands by their patience, their loving, prudent exhortations,
and their prayers.
If circumstances appear to call for it, let him admonish them
to preserve matrimonial chastity, and warn against transgres­
sions, pointing out that complete preservation of this matrimo­
nial chastity is the very condition and foundation of lasting
matrimonial happiness, and of eternal salvation.
He should not permit pious women to devote themselves to
the exercises of piety, especially hearing Mass and frequent re­
ception of the holy Sacraments, to such an extent that impor­
tant household duties are thereby neglected, or members of the
family aggrieved and irritated.
Finally, he must not be overready to believe complaints of
wives about their husbands ; but if he finds that the complaints
are justified, he will tell the woman how to act and gravely com­
fort her. If she complains of the severity and bad temper of
her husband, he must advise her to remain patient and obedient
to him, to perform punctually every service which he desires,
to show her love for him by the greatest willingness and kind­
ness; to be silent when her husband is angry or intoxicated;
not to drive him to still greater violence even when she suffers
injustice; and admonish him affectionately when he has become
calm, and sober, and good-humored, but not till then. She
should answer her angry husband with meekness when she is
obliged to answer him, for a gentle answer turns aside wrath,
whereas a harsh one only embitters.
The mother will claim the confessor’s special zeal; he should
expose to her the importance and responsibility of her duties,
the obligation of admonishing and instructing her children in
prayer, in attendance at Mass, reception of the holy Sacraments,
and of correcting their faults; of warning and protecting her
children against the dangers which threaten youth, of daily

614

THK MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

praying for them, of preventing dangerous intercourse with
other persons, of not allowing children of different sex to sleep
together, etc.
As so much depends upon the loyalty of teachers, male and
female, to their duties the confessor will not fail to admonish
them at all times to discharge faithfully these important and
exalted duties, reminding them of their grave responsibility.
Teachers should zealously instruct children in the truths of re­
ligion, always assisting the endeavors of the priest according
to their capacity, and working with him; see that the education
of the children is conducted upon Christian principles; give the
children and the parish good example by conscientious dis­
charge of their religious duties — attendance at Mass, reception
of the holy Sacraments, and by their conduct in general. They
must be encouraged to bear patiently the manifold, and by no
means slight, hardships of their position. The confessor will
also show constant interest in their work in the school.
The mistress of a house must be reminded by the confessor
of the duties of Christian employers — the duty especially of
having a watchful eye on the servants, not allowing them to
go out late in the evening ; of preventing male and female ser­
vants being together at unseasonable, times; of treating servants
in a Christian manner, and of giving them sufficient time to
fulfill their religious obligations.
81. The Confessions of Men.

It is a deplorable fact that mon approach the confessional
more seldom than women, and especially since their position
in life is more influential, and consequently a high degree of
piety is particularly desirable in them, in order that this influ­
ence may be a salutary one. At the same time, they are ex­
posed to greater dangers and temptations.8’4
«« On this account the Provincial Council of Bordeaux (Cone. Burdigal.
1556, Tit. III. c. 5, in Coll. Lacens. Toni. IV. p. 711) declares that, in our

THIS CONFESSIONS OF MEN
1. Men must, therefore, be more welcome to the confessor as
penitents than women. St. Alphonsus bewails the fact that so
many confessors spend a good part of the day in hearing the
confessions of certain pious persons (quas vulgo dicunl Bizocan),
and that when men or married women, who are weighed down
with misery and distress, and who at a great sacrifice leave their
homes and business, approach the confessional, the priest dis­
misses them, saying: “Go to some other confessor, I have too
much to do’’; and thus it comes to pass that such people live
months and years without the Sacraments. This is not hearing
confessions to please God, but rather to serve self-love. I know,
and, in opposition to others who maintain that the time is wasted
which is devoted to the confessions of these pious persons, I
firmly hold that leading souls to perfection is a work very pleas­
ing to God; but I assert also that good confessors who hear
confessions only to please God (like St. Philip Neri, St. John of
the Cross, and St. Peter of Alcantara) do not hesitate to prefer
to these pious souls one whom they perceive to be in need of
their help.575 What St. Alphonsus says in another place is also
undoubtedly true, namely, that a perfect soul is more pleasing
to God than a thousand imperfect.ones; but for them there are
other times and other occasions, and even leading souls to per­
fection does not demand such expenditure of time and care that
times especially, solicitude for men constitutes a principal part of the
priest’s work. “ Sane hoe avi nostri opus pracipuum reputamus, viros videlicet
quam solertissima industria el quovis indefesso :elo provocare, ut ad meliorem
vita Christiana rationem instituendam, ad exequenda integrius cujusque sititus et
conditionis officia, tandem se recipiant. Non saperet sacerdos, qui laboris diffi­
cultatibus solummodo intentus, de divinis promissionibus et virtute gratia diffidens,
hoc opus aggrederetur segniter aut minus strenue prosequeretur." This care for
men the priest will especially exercise in the confessional. "The divine
authority with which the priest is invested, the reverence with which the
penitent appears before him. the candor with which he unbosoms himself,
the obedience which he shows him. give an efficacy to the confessor's work in
the. confessional, such as he is unable to exercise in any other place or occasion."
Gdpfert,
676 Praxis Confess, n. 120.

βίβ

τηκ mwihtkr of tuf hacha ment

others should Iv neglected. Moreover, such a manner of ad­
ministering the Sacrament of Penance may easily give occasion
to malevolent misconstructions and rumors, and thus scandal­
ise the men who see themselves neglected.”" Hence men who
come to confession must not be kept waiting long. The con­
fessor should show himself ready to answer any call, even when
the hour is unseasonable and troublesome to him. If there are
both men and women who wish to confess, Frassinetti 577 recom­
mends hearing the men first; they generally have more impor­
tant business than women, and are also as a rule more impatient.
Women have more leisure and greater patience.
2. The confessor must always treat men courteously, “in­
deed with a certain affability, as if he considered himself par­
ticularly fortunate, and took a special pleasure in hearing their
confessions.” Even if they belong to the lowest classes and are
coarse and repulsive, he should always address them with polite­
ness and kindness. “One can never show them too much love
and friendliness, for it makes the best impression upon their
minds, encourages them to make a good confession, and in course
of time incites them to a more frequent reception of the Sac­
raments.” s’·
3. The confessor must not speak of perfection to those who
have no understanding for it. He must generally be content
»’« Cf. Gôpfert, 1. c. p. 283.
*” L. c. p. 278, n. 397 ; also Dubois, 1. c. n. 368, p. 434, and Gôpfert, 1. c.
p. 284.
v* He should not be repelled if the penitent—as is peculiar to many men,
generally less from malice than from awkwardness or embarrassment —
shows a rough, sullen, insolent disposition ; if his expressions are blunt,
short, and ill chosen ; indeed, the priest should be impressed favorably by
the fact that men generally confess their sins with a certain honest fearless­
ness. Cf. Synod vic. Sutchuensis, 1803 ; Coll. Lac. Tom. VL p. 608; and
Cone. Aqu. 1850, Tit. VH. c. 5. Coll. Lac. Tom. IV. p. 992: Alacri animo
et in multa patientia suscipiat pœnitentes, proesertim viros, qui ad sacrum tribunal
summo studi» mnuique charitatis industria alliciendi sunt. Cone. Bultiui. 1800,
Til. V. c. 5 (Coil. Lae. Tom. 111. p. 40).

Till·: CONWSfMtONS OF MEN

HIT

with instilling into their hearts hatred and detestation of mortal
sin. “ This is necessary, lest they regard him as what they call a
'saint,' and be. afraid to come to him again.” But the con­
fessor must not go too far in his indulgence, nor permit to the
men who are his penitents, anything which might become a
great danger for their souls; he must here be particularly care­
ful concerning circumstances in their lives which arc to them
occasiones prox imte.
4. The confessor must urge them to fulfill their duties as Chris­
tian men faithfully, punctually, and fervently.
5. He should especially warn them against negligence in prayer,
admonish them to observe Sundays and holy days conscien­
tiously, and particularly to be present at sermons, as those who
seldom or never hear a sermon will hardly persevere in a truly
Christian life.
6. Then if it be opportune, he should enjoin moderation in
drinking, in case they have been guilty of drunkenness.
7. If he has reason to doubt the firmness and integrity of
their faith, in which they may be remiss, he must probe into the
matter; perhaps he will have to censure the reading of bad news­
papers, or the frequenting of doubtful society.
8. Upon husbands he should impress the duty of cultivating
a loving and peaceable disposition towards their wives, and, if
there is reason for it, the duty of avoiding all impropriety in
married life. He should, especially, denounce the evil habit of
carrying on improper talk in the presence of servants, compan­
ions, young people, and in the home circle.
9. Fathers should be earnestly admonished to assist their
wives as much as possible in the work of education, and to set
their children a good example in every respect.

618

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT
82. The Confession of Nuns.';n

1. We have already stated that a priest requires special ap­
probation from the bishop to hoar the confession of nuns.*"* But
in order to discharge this office fruitfully, he must bo well in­
structed and experienced in spiritual things, prudent, and pos­
sessed of groat charity and patience. As already pointed out,
proficiency in theology, especially in moral theology, is indis­
pensable to all confessors; "but greater knowledge is necessary
to the confessors of nuns, since the Church exercises greater
care in selecting them.” Without solid knowledge, the unusual
circumstances which may arise are often mismanaged and not
rarely with fatal results. The confessor of nuns must possess
an accurate knowledge of the spiritual and ascetic life, of the
duties of religious in general,5*' and of the particular obligations
of the Order (or Congregation) to which the women committed
to his care belong. First of all, distinction is to be made be­
tween nuns who lead a contemplative and those who lead an
active life. The former are devoted in a special manner to the
love of God, are far removed from the dangers of the world,
and can more easily sanctify themselves; they also contribute
toward the general welfare by their prayers; but they are tried
by temptations and interior struggles. The others are not
wholly withdrawn from the dangers of the world, as they are
inevitably brought into contact with it by the exercise of the
works of charity; society benefits much by their high merits.
Both forms of life are ordained by God, and are of great use in
the Church. Moreover, the separate Orders have their char­
acteristics, corresponding to the particular object for which
·” Zenner. Instructio pract. Conf. 1. c. §§ 273,274 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. Sacram.
Pœn. Sect. III. cp. 4, art. 3, nn. 50G-510 ; Aertnys, Instruct, pract. 1. c. art. II.
n. 148; Gaume, Handbook for Confessors, n. 185.
** See § 41.
M> For this purpose he should make a diligent study of those ascetic books
which treat of these matters; for example, the works of St. Alphonsus,
Rodriguez, Scaramelli.

TUR C'ONFEHMON OF NUNS

619

they were founded. With three, and with the constitutions of
the Order, the confessor must he familiar.
But in rebin- spiritualibus ho must not only possess theoreti­
cal knowledge, he must be well experienced in them, “because
spiritualia cannot be rightly and perfectly understood without
personal experience.” If this experience is not possessed, he
will be a blind man leading the blind?”
Supernatural love and patience are necessary to the confessor,
in order that he may zealously further the spiritual progress of
those committed to him, and bear with equanimity their faults,
weaknesses, and deficiencies. And though only a few souls
may bo confided to his spiritual care, let him not forget that
by the perfection of a few a greater honor is shown to God than
by the imperfect endeavors and virtues of many. Let him also
keep in mind that those who devote themselves to the service
of God have to endure more temptations of every kind than
others, and that he to whom the spiritual care of them is in­
trusted must bear no small portion of this burden with them.
If, therefore, the confessor does not possess the supernatural
love of Goil and his neighbor which enables him to sustain these
trials, he is not suited for his office.
882 Idque, proceeds Lehmkuhl, adeo verum eft, ut in extraordinariis donis di­
vinis, teste Sancta Theresia, Deus, non raro directorem vel con fessorium experi­
entia instruat, ut alios, qui ejusmodi charismatibus dotati sint, recte instruere et
dirigere possit. The more, therefore, the confessor sees himself deprived of
the extraordinary gifts, the more prudent and cautious he must be; if he
should have a penitent who enjoys a special intercourse with God. such
penitent must not be lightly treated. But even in the treatment of ordi­
nary, everyday matters, the confessor of nuns must proceed with great
prudence, in order to give wholesome advice and correct answers; “quo enim
sagacioris et suspicacioris indolis sint feminat et quo majus otium ruminandi et
indagandi monialibus relinquatur, eo cautior et prudentior esse debet illarum con­
fessorius, ne errorum det ansam." Lehmkuhl. It is also a part of prudence
to content himself with what devolves upon him as confessor, and not to in­
terfere in the temporal affairs of the nuns, lest, by more familiar intercourse
with one or other of them, he expose himself or her to danger, or give
occasion for ill feeling 01 petty jealousy.

620

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAM EXT

2. It must be his care that the nuns disclose to him the state
of their consciences with full confidence; they must place great
trust in their confessor, as he is almost their only refuge; and,
like sheep without a shepherd, they will be exposed to many
anxieties and temptations if this support fail them, lie must,
therefore, always show great patience and gentleness towards
all, and if he perceive in a nun a certain shyness in the confes­
sional which hinders her from making known her interior state,
he must lend her special assistance in laying aside this shyness;
but at the same time there is a certain kind of unnecessary ten­
derness which he should avoid in his whole demeanor.
3. It must also be his care that nuns observe their vows
faithfully and perfectly, and adhere to the special rules and
regulations of their institute; moreover, that they perform their
exercises of piety with devotion and zeal, that their daily occu­
pations are executed with a perfect intention, with frequent
recollection of the presence of God. They must, therefore, be
taught a good method of meditation and of the examination of
conscience {examen generate and particulare), the manner of
receiving holy communion, making a good confession, hearing
holy Mass, saying the Office, and other vocal prayers. All these
things are generally provided, however, in the religious rule.
4. He must make it his concern that the nuns should advance
in virtue. The following virtues are especially necessary for
them : (a) the love of God, not a sensual love, but a strong love,
one which urges to the fulfilment of the will of God, in all
things, even the most difficult ; (b) humility and modesty ; (c)
obedience to rules and to superiors; a sacrificing, cheerful, punc­
tual obedience, which does not ask a reason for the command,
but which, when no sin is apparent and certain, blindly sub­
mits itself ; (d) love of the members of the community, which
has for a practical result that they avoid wounding or griev­
ing others, that offenses are gladly forgiven, faults patiently
borne, and mutual assistance rendered, as far as is possible;

TUE CONFESSION OF NUNS

621

(e) chastity, which avoids every dangerous attachment and
familiarity.
5. The confessor should encourage and promote the authority
of the Superioress of the convent, but not to such an extent that, if
she should happen to be in error or to go beyond her powers, he
should render himself inaccessible to the complaints of the subor­
dinates ; he should discourage the spirit of grumbling in the com­
munity, because authority is thereby weakened; but he should
prudently weigh complaints which may be laid before him, to see
if they are justified, and so remedy them ; others he must dismiss.
6. In his capacity of confessor, he must observe the following
points : (a) to associate with the nuns rather too seldom than too
often, and if he is obliged to speak to them, let it be done as
briefly as possible; (6) in answering questions submitted to him,
he should not be too hasty, but in more important matters or
cases of doubt, he should request time for consideration; (c) in
the confessional he should show no weariness, no impatience,
and no haste, for this lessens confidence in him; (d) he must
not be immoderately disturbed, nor take scandal if he should
hear a sin of greater gravity in the confessional, for he must
remember that persons dedicated to God are subject to violent
attacks from the evil one; let him, therefore, rather show pity
than agitation, admonish the erring one with paternal earnest­
ness, encourage her, reawaken her lost fervor, in order that by
greater zeal and mortification she may atone for her error and
avoid sin in the future; (e) he should be very careful to give no
ground for any suspicion that he makes use of knowledge gained
in the confessional, in his actions or words outside the confes­
sional; (/) he must not interfere at all in the management of
the house, nor in any matter which concerns the Ordinary or
the Superioress, nor readily give advice in such things, but re­
main firmly anil strictly within the limits of his office, looking
after the spiritual welfare and the progress of his penitents. For
this reason, he should introduce no innovations, and if, on

■

622

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

weighty grounds some change Appears desirable, if should not,
take place without, the advice and consent of the Superioress
and the greater part of the community; otherwise peace in the
community will be destroyed.
7. The confessor must be especially on his guard against the
following abuses, lost they creep in, and establish themselves:
(a) everything which is detrimental to community life, or de­
rogatory of the vow of poverty in any way, even if only in slight
measure; (ft) disobedience towards the Superioress, murmuring
against her, complaining about her to the other sisters, aversion,
etc. ; (c) offenses against charity, even if these latter are common
and not of grave nature; the confessor must not tolerate the
least offense against charity which is committed with delibera­
tion, and he must firmly insist upon reconciliation and sup­
pression of antipathies; (d) particular friendship, even if there
be no danger connected with it, is to be avoided, for it divides
the heart, hinders familiar intercourse with God, lessens the love
of the community, and gives occasion to complaints anti recrimi­
nations; (c) familiarity with, or voluntary intercourse with,
persons not belonging to the house; this causes great dangers,
and weakens the religious spirit. The confessor must, there­
fore, strictly insist upon the inclosure being observed, and upon
the portress being thoroughly trustworthy. If there are nuns
whose duties oblige them to be in contact with the world, or
who are occupied out of the house attending to the sick, the
confessor must see that danger of sin does not result to any one
of them through this occupation ; (/) lukewarmness and spir­
itual sloth ; the confessor must direct his endeavors to prevent
drooping of the first ardor, and to encourage the practice of
true piety; he should, therefore, insist that the prescribed
recollections take place regularly and are well observed ; also
that there is a Retreat every year, or at least every two years.
8. In order that the Superioress may duly exercise her office,
the confessor should, when occasion offers, admonish her

THE CONFEfMtON OF NUNS

«23

that: (a) she must love all her sisters as her daughters
without making any distinction; and she must, therefore,
gladly lend her ear to any one of them, and help hir to the best
of her ability; (b) she must not at once credit reports made
secretly to her, but carefully investigate them, and if she ha*
to reprimand, it should generally be done privately; (c) she
must take care that the regular Observance is strictly fulfilled,
and she herself must be a model for all; (rf) if she perceives
abuses, she must rectify them in a prudent manner; (e) she
must look to it that members of the Order who are sick are care­
fully tended and often visited by the other sisters; (/) in the
expenses she must avoid both avarice and extravagance; (g) in
admitting and dismissing novices she must exercise great pru­
dence: (Λ) in unusual circumstances she must have timely re­
course to the advice of the Ordinarius; (i) she must be guided
by the Papal Decree in the matter of the account of conscience.
(The constitutions of many Orders permitted the unfolding of
the conscience to the Superior, in order to obtain help and advice,
but “a more intimate investigation of the conscience, such as
is reserved solely to the Sacrament of Penance,” was wrongly
introduced by some. In consequence of which Pope Leo XIII
strictly forbade Superioresses, whatever rank and eminence they
might occupy, to induce persons under them, directly or indi­
rectly, by command, advice, threats, or kind words, to make
such revelation of conscience to them. On the other hand, the
Pope leaves it to subordinates voluntarily and freely to disclose
their interior state to their Superiors, so that, in doubt and
trouble of conscience, they may receive from their wisdom
advice and guidance);8” (i) finally, she must never encroach
on the rights of the regular confessor by determining for indi­
vidual sisters the number of weekly communions.8”
Decretum 17 Dec., 1«ίΚ>.
«’♦ Compare on this point S. R. C.2 Dec., 1885 ; 8. C. Ep. et Reg. I tug..
1888· Ballerini, Xota· a<i Gury, Theo). Mor. IL n. 2-11; moreover, S. Rom.

624

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT
83. The Confession of Priests,

A good confessor is very necessary for a priest. The priest
instructs, warns, and guides others; he himself is seldom ad­
monished and warned, and yet for him, too, reproof, instruc­
tion, and warning are sometimes necessary. And who should
give it. but his confessor? The latter has a solemn duty to do
so. And does not the priest, too, sometimes require encour­
agement and comfort, especially if he finds himself in a difficult
situation, or is troubled with anxiety? And here the confessor
must come to his assistance and comfort him.
Hearing the confessions of priests is a matter of the highest
importance, as priests arc appointed by God shepherds, teach­
ers, and guides of souls; they are the light of the world and the
salt of the earth. A worthy priest effects much good amongst
the faithful by a holy, pious, pure, virtuous, and zealous fife !
But how harmful is the lukewarmness, the neglect of duty,
the levity of one who by his faults and open sins gives scandal
to the people. What a great, and significant task is it for the
confessor to teach, rouse, warn, threaten, and encourage; his
brother in the holy priesthood !
Let the. confessor treat his penitent with reverence; although
the latter kneels before him to accuse himself as a sinner, he is
et Univ. Inquis. 2 July, 1890; Linzer Theol-prakt. Quartalschrift, 1889, S.
630; 1893, S. 138 (both articles by W. E. Hubert). According to these de­
cisions, the right to give permission to nuns to receive holy communion
oftener (than on the days fixed by the constitutions) belongs, not to their
director or their Superioiess, but only to the usual confessor, who, in the ex­
ercise of his right, is free and independent. Only in one case could the
Superioress forbid holy communion, namely, when a nun had publicly com­
mitted a serious fault which had caused scandal to the other sisters (cf. S.
C. Ep. et Reg. 27 June, 1876) ; this prohibition, however, would only hold
good till the next confession. When the Confessor ordinarius has given per­
mission fo.r special occasions, it need not be referred to the Superiors; but. if
the permission is granted once for all, the Superior should be informed ; the
penitent herself ought to do so, but only once. Cf. S. Rom. et Univ. Inq.
2 July, 1890.

THE CONFESSION OF PRIESTS

625

still a priest, clothed with exalted dignity. He must also treat
him with true, fraternal, zealous and courageous love, which
discloses the wounds of the soul, points out dangers and evil
inclinations, blames when blame is necessary, and punishes
when punishment is necessary. It would, indeed, be render­
ing bad service to a fellow-priest simply to listen to him, to give
him a few general exhortations, and then to absolve him.
If the penitent is a conscientious, well-instructed priest
(which may without difficulty be inferred from the manner of
the confession, if he is not already known to the confessor), it is
not necessary to put questions to him; if the confessor has
doubts as to the gravity of a sin confessed, he can ask the peni­
tent if he thought that he was committing a mortal sin. The
exhortation, however, should scarcely ever be omitted; let it
be short and appropriate; it may be given in indirect form,
“we priests,” etc. If the penitent is frivolous and superficial,
questions must be put to him, in order to complete his confes­
sion. These questions may turn on the recitation of the Office,
the celebration of Mass, administration of the Sacraments, and
other priestly and pastoral duties.s“
Toward such penitents the confessor must be fearless, and
administer to them, whoever they may be, regardless of rank,
esteem, and dignity, reproof, and refuse absolution, if necessary;
for example, when they are occasionarii or relapsing sinners.
St. Alphonsus adds: Potissimum hac fartidudine agendum est
cum sacerdotibus, qui in gravia peccata relapsi, quin se unquam
emendaverint, ausi sunt tamen celebrare, aucupando absolutionem
ab aliquo confessoriorum qui hoc funguntur officio et laborant, ut
585 St. Alphonsus wishes that such a priest (conscientia parum metieulusie)
should be asked : 1. Xi distulerit celebrationem missarum per mensem, pratserhm
si sint defunctorum (cf. II. A. Append. III. n. 107). 2. Xi festinanter celebra·
vit (II. A. Tract. Ιό, un. 84 nd SO). 3. ό'ί satisfecit obligationi divini officii,
prtesertim si est bénéficiât™. II. A. Append. IV. § 1. n. »: Prax. Conf. n. 183.
Cf. Aertnys. Instr, pract. P. III. cp. 2, 3, art. 3, n. 154 and P. II. cp. 2, u. 12;
(Jaunie, Handbook, 4. chap. 2. art. §§ 182, 183, 184.

626

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

damnentur. Hi sacerdotes pravis habitibus detenti palam solent
in socristio confiteri, ul absolutionem, (pur eis denegenda esset
extorqueant sub pradextu scandali, quod eveniret (quemadmodum
illi exponunt), si a celebrando desistere deberent. Sil constans
confessorius cum hujusmodi sacrilegis in differenda absolutione,
eos adstringat ad repetendas confessiones lanquam irritas, et ad
confitendum de omnibus Sacrificiis celebratis: et interim ad absti­
nendum a celebratione, usquedum sua’ emendationis perspicua
indicia pra-bebunt. Quod si quis diceret, ob scandalum a cele­
brando abstinere non posse, respondeat quod deesse non possunt
justi pnetextus, si ivllet desistere a celebrando ; ceterum si ipse id
jacere renuit, dicat quod celebrare potest si est certus, se habere con­
tritionem, sed quod ipse pro tunc non potest eum absolvere, dum
certus non est, ul oportet, de ejus dispositione ; imo justum
habet molitum credendi oppositum, cum observet tot lapsus sine
emendatione. Et hoc modo agendi potest sperari, [ore ut recipiscat et salvetur ille miser sacerdos, secus ambo damnabuntur.'M
But the priest (especially a young one) must not be bewil­
dered if an unfortunate brother priest, burdened with grave sins,
approaches him to make his confession. Let him remember
that there was a Judas amongst the apostles; that the chief
of the apostles was guilty of a very grave sin; let him also bear
in mind the words of the Lord : Necesse est, ul veniant scandala
(Matt, xviii. 7).
As to the exhortations which the confessor should give to
priest penitents, they should be chiefly : (1) to remember their
calling, their exalted dignity, their duties, their reward; (2) to
devote themselves wholly to their sublime office, to labor for
the salvation of souls, and for the glory of God by their prayers,
their example, and the exercise of the sacred ministry ; to have
special care for the sick and dying, the poor and the young;
(3) to avoid, especially, four vices, as being, above all, unworthy
of their spiritual calling and presenting particular dangers for
660 II. A. Append. IV. § 1, n. 9.

THE CONFESSION OF PRIESTS

627

priests, — sloth, impurity, drunkenness, and avarice (covetous­
ness). The priest must often renew his purpose of leading a
virtuous life and of striving to obtain perfection. This reso­
lution always revives the priest’s zeal in the performance of his
sacred functions, gives joy in the exercise of virtue, strength to
resist temptations, and perseverarice in his efforts. But that
the priest may be true to this resolution, he must employ vari­
ous means, especially : —
1. Zeal in prayer; the priest must be a man of prayer; he
must practice mental and vocal prayer. Sine oratione mentali
difficillime bonus erit Sacerdos; nam sine ea intellectus carebit
lumine, quo cognoscat veritates alemas et mysteria divini amoris,
atque inde deeril in voluntate calor fervoris, quo novatur ad sancte
vivendum.’'"1 The priest should, therefore, fix a definite time
everyday—at least a quarter of an hour, if at all possible, half
an hour - during which to devote himself to meditation. Morn­
ing is the best time, as one is less exposed to distractions then
than in the midst of the occupations and cares of the day. Those
who answer, however, that they have no time for daily medi­
tation should consider if their lukewarmness and carelessness
are not much more to blame than want of time. If they gave
up superfluous pleasures, visiting, and other unnecessary things,
or at least reduced them, they would certainly be able to spare
a quarter of an hour on most days for meditation?”
687 S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 183.
sss prax. Conf. nn. 122, 127, 219. Contemplatio in ceteris hominibus quaritur
per consilium, in sacerdotibus cero exigitur per praceptum. Rup. Tuit. Lib. II.
in Lev. ep. 10. St. Gregory trembles for those bishops who admit to the
service of the sanctuary men who have neither reverence nor love for prayer.
St. Bernard admonishes Pope Eugenius to impose hands upon those only who
have taste and zeal for meditation. St. Charles Borromeo objects to ordain­
ing any priest without being certain that he possesses the science of medi­
tation. . . . And everything that has been written upon this subi i t since
the days of St. Vincent de Paul, St. Francis of Sales, and Olier. may b«
summed up as follows: “If one becomes a priest only by ordination, one
becomes a good priest only by meditation." Compare Chaiguoii, .Méditai ions.
Introduction, p. x ft’·

fi28

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

Not less necessary for the priest is oral prayer. Clama ad me,
cl ego exaudiam. says the Lord (Jerem. xxxiii. 3) ; for if it is
certain that the priest daily requires new graces, it is also certain
that he must ask for them daily. Besides the priest is the medi­
ator between God and His people, and therefore must supplicate
for them. “Absit a me poc peccatum in Dominum, ut cessem
orare pro vobis” 1 Kings xii. 23 (Samuel) ; “ Et rogante pro eis
Sacerdote, propitius erit eis Dominus” (Lev. iv. 20).
2. Of all the prayers that the priest must say, none is more
excellent, with the exception of the holy Mass, none is more
efficacious than the Officium divinum. Let the priest say it
punctually, faithfully, with recollection and with pleasure.
3. The center of the sacred ministry is the celebration of the
holy sacrifice. For this most holy mystery he should prepare
himself with care, celebrate it with the greatest possible purity
of heart, interior devotion, and exterior reverence, and with
careful observance of the wise precepts of the Church which
bind under grave sin (ex genere suo). The priest must be on
his guard against three chief faults in the celebration of Mass:
celebration in haste, out of custom, and in a state of grave sin.
4. Another means of sanctification is frequent confession.
At least every eight days the priest should make a good con­
fession, and only on account of great distance from a confessor
should he delay it a fortnight. So St. Charles Borromeo deter­
mined in the first provincial council and in his celebrated In­
structions. But the priest should also observe the other advice
of this enlightened Saint (in Decretis visitatoris): Valde utile
esset, ni Sacerdos unusquisque . . . certum ac firmum Confes­
sorium Sacerdotem haberet ex approbatis, a quo nisi in magna
necessitate recederet; si quidem aniniœ solet non minus obesse
Confessoriorum mutatio, quam corpori Medicorum.
5. Tire good priest loves the study of wisdom, and observes
the admonition which St. Paul gave to his pupil, Timothy:
Allende tibi et doctrina; insta in illis. Hoc enim jaciens te ipsum

THE CONFESSION OF PTHESTS

629

salvum facies el eos qui te audiunt (1 Tim. iv. 13, 16). Continual,
zealous study of theology alone enables the priest to do his fluty,
to be a teacher of the people in the science of salvation, and to
administer the holy Sacrament of Confession rightly and success­
fully; at the same time it preserves him from many evils and
dangers, and it is to him a source of exalted pleasure.
6. Another means which contributes much to sanctification
is to be found in the Exercitia spiritualia, which priests should
make every year, at least every two years. Immense is the
blessing which results to the whole Church and to the individual
priests who zealously perform them in the right spirit and in
the right manner?88
689 S. Alph. I’rax. Conf. n. 48 ss.r Aertnys, Instr, pract. 1. c. a. 156 as·;
Zenner, Instr, pract. Conf. §§ 276, 277.

CHAPTER III
PENITENTS IN EXTREME DANGER

84.

The Importance of the Priest's Ministry at the Bedside of
the Sick and the Dying.

As the grace of perseverance and eternal salvation depends
upon a good death, as a bad death can never be remedied, and
as man’s helplessness is never greater than in that terrible last
struggle, in which a thousand things disturb and confuse him,
the bitterest pains afflict and the most violent temptations
beset him, it is a work most pleasing to God, and most conducive
to the salvation of souls, to bring spiritual aid to the sick and
dying. The good, zealous priest is an ardent friend of the sick
and the dying, following in this the example of our divine
Savior (Matt. ix. 35). It was always the glory of Catholic
priests that they were to be found at the bedside of the sick
and the dying, making no distinction, and undeterred by the
worst infectious diseases. And when all flee, the priest re­
mains and is prepared to sacrifice himself in order to save the
sick one. Therefore Dr. Stohr says most truly in his “ Pas­
toral Medicine ” (p. 241): "The chronicles of epidemic disease
record upon each of their pages the most splendid examples
of that joyful self-sacrificing courage with which the whole
secular and Regular clergy have stood faithfully at their posts,
in the hour of the greatest need, in the days when a reign of
terror dissolved all ties of society. For the Catholic pastor of
souls this form of courage is just as much a principle of profes­
sional honor, and, therefore, I venture to say, as much a matter
of course, as in an officer bravery before the enemy.” In the
Ü30

AT THE DEDHIDE OF THE HICK AND DYING

631

moment of greatest need (in articulo mortis) any priest, as already
stated, can administer the consolations of religion; reserved
cases and censures do not exist. And every priest should,
therefore, be solicitous to obtain the necessary knowledge in
order to be able to administer the holy Sacraments to a dying
person in case of necessity. As visiting the sick is, of itself,
forbidden to no one, and, as St. Alphonsus remarks,1*“Every
priest, even he who has no talent for preaching, can engage
upon it, rendering by so doing the greatest service, not only
to the sick man himself, but also to his relations and friends,"
every priest should acquire a facility in comforting the sick
according to their special needs and circumstances.
In order, therefore, that the priest may effectually assist
the sick anti the dying, he should, before he betakes himself to
the sick-room, observe the following: —
1. Reflect that he is about to perform a work of the greatest
importance, and that the errors which he commits in it are of
the worst kind, and cannot, as a rule, be remedied?
2. Remember that in this most important work the help of
God is necessary to him; he should not, therefore, trust in him­
self, but wholly in God.
3. Endeavor to awaken and preserve the purest and most
perfect intention possible, the intention of saving a soul which
Jesus Christ has purchased by His blood.
4. Earnestly pray for the success of his work.
5. Study well what he has to do and to say. He should con­
sider the particular manner in which he has to treat the patient
to whom he is going; for he is undertaking a more important
work than preaching a sermon, ami yet he must prepare for

every sermon.3
6. Learn the character, the habits, the circumstances, and the
i The Priest in Solitude. Div. I. chap. is. n. 30.
a Rit. Roni. Tit. V. op. 4, n. 1 : S. Alph. Pnix. Conf. n. 228.
« Rit. Rom. Tit. V. cp. 4, u. 7.

632

THE MINISTER OF THE SACHA M EXT

situation of the sick person, if he is not already in possession of
this knowledge.4
85.

The Confessions of the Sick.

I. Some preliminary remarks.
1. Hie confessions of the sick and the dying are of the greatest
importance, as, in many cases, they open the gates of heaven
to them, and prepare them for the worthy reception of the other
Sacraments. On this account parish priests, and priests in
general who have the care of souls, are strictly bound to hear
the confessions of those in danger of death, even in face of great
difficulties ami of danger to their own lives. The priest may,
in such a case, even interrupt Mass (even during the (’anon) if
no other priest is at hand.·' Let him, therefore, before he visits
the sick person to hear his confession, earnestly pray for grace ;
let him enter upon this important duty with zeal ami love,
but also with great prudence and judgment, confiding in God,
and where there is danger, let him face it with apostolic courage.
Let him not forget that the eternal salvation of the sick person
is in his hands, that he can save his soul ; but that this soul may
also be lost by his fault if his action is careless, tardy, imprudent,
and faulty.
2. In the presence of the sick person, however the latter may
be circumstanced, and, however he may have lived, the con­
fessor must manifest for him a great love and a sincere sympathy.
* Cf. Polancus, Methodus juvandi moribundos (Dilling, 1578); Scupoli,
The Manner of Comforting the Sick, and Preparing Them for a Good
Death (3. Supplement to the Spiritual Combat) ; Carol. Bottom. Instruc­
tiones de cura et visit, infirm. (Act. Med. pp. 505-008); S. Alph. Prax.
Conf. nn. 227-292 ; 11. A. II. Append.', Hettinger, Herr, den du liebst, er ist
krank. Wurzburg, 1851 ; Aertnys, Instruct, pract. P. 111. cp. 5, art. 2; Zen­
ner, Instruct, etc. P. II. Sect. 11. cp. 2, §§ 301-311 ; SchUch, § 317 ; Frassi­
netti, a. a. O.2.Teil. 2. Cap. 1. anh.
1-7 ; Dubois, The Practical Pastor of
Souls, 2. Part, 12. Chap, pp- 317-330, etc. ; Stang, Pastoral Theology.
'· S. Alph. Lib. VI. u. 354; De Herdt, Sacræ Liturg. praxis, Tom. II.
P. 111. n. 20, IV.

THE CONFESSIONS OF THE BICK

633

3. If he were not called by the sick person to hear his confes­
sion, but by those around him, or if he went unsummoned,*
and if there is no danger of death, he should not mention confes­
sion at once during the first visit, but address the patient in a
friendly manner, ask him sympathetically about his illness,
etc., as sick people like to talk about these things. He should
then admonish him to resign himself to the will of God, to
unite his sufferings to the bitter sufferings of Jesus, and to
bear them patiently in satisfaction for sin.7 In subsequent
visits, he should gradually prepare him for confession; ask
him when he made his last confession; remark that it is
better to confess before the illness increases, because this will
render it more difficult; that the graces of the holy Sacrament
of Penance procure for the soul the peace which it desires; that
they conduce to patience in suffering. Let the priest awaken
in the sick person a hope that God will restore his health, but
at the same time, be careful that he recognizes the gravity of
his illness, and that he does not place undue confidence in
doctors and their skill. In order not to expose the patient
to the danger of dying without the Sacraments by misjudging
the gravity of the case, the priest should ask the doctor whether
the condition of the patient is precarious. The friends may
also be privately asked if the sick person wishes to confess
8 Cf. Rit. Roni. 1. c. Quum primum noverit, Quempiam ex fidelibus curte
sute commissis (egrotare, non expectabit, ut ad eum vocetur: sed ultro ad illum
accedat, idque non semel tantum, ted stepius, quatenus opus fuerit : horteturque
Parochiales suos, ut ipsum admoneant, quum aliquem in parochia sua tegrotare
contigerit, prtecipue si morbus gravior fuerit. The sick person should, there­
fore, be visited early, the visit should be repeated, but with discretion, so that
he may not be in any way inconvenienced. Various circumstances, however,
cause patients or those belonging to them to conceal the illness from the
priest, such ns, fear of troubling him, the erroneous idea that his visit will
entail expense, anxiety lest his appearance might have an injurious effect
upon the patient's condition ; luck of conscientiousness on the part of the
doctor, malice, unbelief. In such cases the priest must endeavor to remove
these objections, and to obtain timely access to the sick person.
’ Cf. Rit. Roman. 1. c.

634

TUK MINISTER OF THF SACRAMENT

to another priest, adding that there would be no objection
whatever to his doing 80.’
4. If the sick person is a peccalor publicus, living, for example,
in concubinage, or in the so-called "civil marriage,” the con­
fession should not, as a rule, be heard before amendment and
due satisfaction have been seriously promised; for if the priest
hears the confession, and the person refuses to fulfill the condi­
tions, the priest will, on account, of the seal of the confessional,
be obliged to allow viaticum and Extreme Unction to be ad­
ministered to one who is unworthy, — indeed, perhaps be obliged
to administer these Sacraments himself.
5. If the sick person begs that the confession may be deferred,
and if danger of death, lethargy, or delirium is not imminent,
this postponement, should be granted, but the. patient must at
once fix a time for the confession, perhaps on the same or the
following day. The priest should not consent to indefinite
postponement. If, however, danger threatens, he should not
consent to postponement at all, but use all his efforts to induce
the patient to confess at once, firmly but kindly, and consider­
ately removing all his objections; especially pointing out to him
the great danger to which he exposes himself by this postpone­
ment; as God has promised pardon to the penitent sinner,
but has not promised to give him the next day." The confessor
s The priest should not forget the exhortation of the Rit. Rom. : “Ær/rotos risitans ea ex qua Sacerdotes Domini decet honestate et gravitate se habeat,
ut non agris solum, sed sibi et domesticis verbo et exemplo prosit ad salutem."
Special care is necessary in visiting persons of the other sex. The sick-room
should not be entered without due notice, the visits should take place ns
much as possible during the day, and not be too frequent nor too long ; the
priest, should avoid being alone ; even when hearing the confession the door
should be left open, so that others can always see from a distance ; certainly
the door should not be locked, and he should never remain in the dark, nor
alone longer than is unavoidably necessary. Everything of the nature of
tenderness or sentimentality should be avoided, and holy decorum and gravity
be observed. Comp. Benger, Pastoraltheologie, a. a. O. ·, Frassinetti,
Practical Instruction, chap. 2, Appendix I. § 3, nn. 353-356.
• S. Aug. Enarrat, in psalm. 144, n. 11.

Till·: t'ONFEHSlONH OF THE HICK

635

must, therefore, investigate the patient’s reasons for wishing
to postpone his confession. The real reason is generally either
(1) because his conscience is burdened with sin, he has not con­
fessed for a long t ime, or confessed badly, and therefore despairs
of unburdening his conscience, the task being above his strength,
as Im thinks; or (2) because he has an obdurate heart, not caring
about his salvation, or he so despairs of his salvation that he
rejects all attempts from outside as useless and troublesome.
The priest, may not give up such a patient, nor leave him till
the last moment; he must pray much, and cause others to pray
for him, endure humiliations cheerfully, and exhaust every
means that love, zeal for souls, and wisdom can possibly suggest.
In the first of the two cases, the priest should offer the sick
person his help, and promise him to make the confession quite
easy for him, telling him that with a little good will, he will
certainly make a good confession, and so obtain pardon, grace,
and salvation. The inexhaustible mercy of God should be
especially and most earnestly impressed upon him; he should
be reminded of the sufferings and death of Jesus for sinners;
of the parables of the prodigal son, the lost sheep, the joy of the
angels over one sinner doing penance, of the great examples
of mercy: Peter, Mary Magdalen, the thief on the cross, etc.
In the other case the difficulty is greater, for it is indeed dif­
ficult to soften an obdurate heart. Here, fervent, continued
prayer is necessary. Those terrible and consoling truths which
our faith supplies so abundantly should, at suitable intervals,
and with eloquence and unction, be laid before him: the misery
of the impenitent sinner, the severity of the divine judgment,
the eternity of punishment, the happiness of the sinner recon­
ciled to God, the peace of the soul adorned with sanctifying
grace, the eternal joys which await him, etc. If all this does
not produce upon the sick person the desired effect, he should
be left to himself for some time, in order that he may reflect
upon what he has heard. In the meantime, pray; then visit

636

THS MINISTEII OF TUS SACHA MENT

him Again, and apeak to him again, and proceed in this manner
till success results, or till an impenitent death closes an impeni­
tent life.'0
II. The confession of the sick person.
I. If the sick person shows himself ready to make his confes­
sion, the confessor must help him in every way to fulfill the con­
ditions necessary for the reception of the Sacrament of Penance;
thus he should help him to examine his conscience, to elicit
contrition, to make a complete confession, and to perform the
penance.
And first, as to the completeness of the confession, the peni­
tent's condition must be taken into consideration. If the
confession can be put off without danger, he should be ad­
monished to examine his conscience according to his ability
and to prepare for a general confession.“ If it cannot be put
off, or if the confessor is under the necessity of supposing that
the patient is not well able to make such an examination of con­
science, he must help him. But he must be careful to avoid
worrying him by asking too many questions.12
The following cases deserve special attention : —
(a) If the sick person has lost the power of speech, and can
thus only indicate a few sins by signs, or in some other way.
In this case the priest will be able to elicit the confession of a
few sins, and that suffices.
(b) If the sick person is so weak that he can only confess a
few sins, or having confessed a few, faints, or seems about to
faint, or when the patient has not confessed for some consider­
able time, or invalidly, and the gravity of the illness or the near­
ness of death does not permit of postponing the absolution.
(c) When the confessions of many dangerously sick or dying
persons are to be heard, and there is no time for a complete
confession.
•0 8. Alph. Prax. Conf. nn. 231,232. 11 See §§ 30,31,32, General Confession.
12 Lugo. 1. c. Disp. 16, sect. 14, n. 598.

THE toNFE»fiI0N8 OF THE HICK

637

(d) When the priest has arrived at the house of the sick person
with the viaticum, ami cannot, without endangering the good
name of the sick person, hear a complete confession.'* In this
case, let the priest visit the sick person as soon as possible after
administering the Sacraments and supply what was wanting.
(e) When a dangerously sick or a wounded person, or mulierat
parturientes, require the assistance of another even during the
confession. In this case, the sick person may confess some sin
of which he is not ashamed to accuse himself before others,
or the confessor may ask him if he accuses himself of all the sins
he has committed, and repents of them, because by them he
has offended God, and ask him, in particular, if he has com­
mitted this or that (slight) sin, such as people of his class are
generally guilty of." Similarly when the priest floes not under­
stand the language of the sick person, and the latter confesses
through an interpreter.'5
(/) When the sick person has a contagious disease, and, in
the opinion of experts, there would be danger of infection to the
priest if the confession lasted long. Nevertheless, the priest
would, in this case, do well to overcome the fear of infection,
trusting in God and making use of the necessary precautions,
and be ready to sacrifice his life in the service of God and his

neighbor.
In all these and similar cases, the patient must duly repent
of all grave sins, and have the will to confess the sins which
has omitted if he is able to make a new confession. Indeed,
there are cases in which a purely general accusation by word or
sign, or a request for absolution, expressed in any way, suffices
for obtaining absolution, that is, when no other means of confes­
sion is available. Even if a wish expressed to others, or the
ia Comp. § 27, S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 260; H. Ap. Tract. 15, n. 24; Tract.
16, ii. 39 ; Gury. 1. c. IL n. 408.
i« S. Alph. Horn. Ap. Tract, ult. n. 46. Prax. Conf. n. 105.
» Compare S 27; S. Λ1ρ9. Lib. VI. „. 479.

688

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

desire for a priest, can be regarded as confession when I he penitent
has become unconscious.'"
2. The confessor should question the patient so that he need
simply answer without being obliged to talk much. If he is not
well acquainted with the state of bis soul, let him ask the pa­
tient if he has always confessed validly (this question may also
be put to all sick penitents), or if, in his past life, he always
wished to confess well, if he ever voluntarily concealed a grave
sin, and has not yet confessed it, if he has anything else upon his
conscience which disturbs him. According to his character,
and the state in which the confessor finds the penitent, he should,
moreover, ask if he still has in his possession anything belonging
to another, or if, for some other reason, he still has restitution
to make of property, or honor and good name; if he harbors
hatred and enmity toward any one; if he has ever lived in a
sinful habit, and if he has expiated these sins in a general con­
fession. If restitution has to be made, and he can make it at
the time, the duty of so doing at once must be imposed upon
him, and he must not be allowed to leave this duty to his heirs ;
unless the latter be thoroughly trustworthy, the dying person
believing this to be sufficient and not easily being induced to
another expedient. If the restitution cannot at once take place,
he must, at least, have an actual intention of making it as soon
as possible, and of taking the necessary steps toward insuring
its being made — either by a will, or by an injunction to those
belonging to him?’
If the sick person is in a state of invincible ignorance con­
cerning the duty of restitution, and if it is anticipated that he
will not be willing to make it, or that great difficulties will
arise, the confessor ought not to call his attention to this duty,
but leave him in his state of ignorance. For, by such exhorta« See § 86.
n Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 682; Prax. Conf. n. 105; Reuter, n. 235.
211,6.

I

Cf.

THE CONFESSIONS OF THE SICK

639

lion, the material sin would become a formal one, and the con­
fessor's duty is rather to guard against injury to the soul of the
penitent than to ward off a temporal injury from a neighbor.
If, however, the confessor is questioned by the sick person con­
cerning such a duty, he must give an answer, but give it with
such caution that neither truth nor justice suffer, and that the
salvation of the sick person be not imperiled.1’ The confessor
should then exhort the sick person to forgive from his whole
heart every one who has ever offended him, and to beg pardon
of those whom he has ever offended, or injured.
3. If the sick person is in a voluntary immediate occasion of
sin, he must remove this at once, or form a firm purpose of doing
so as soon as possible. Without this resolve, even in articulo
mortis, absolution could not be given, for the necessary disposi­
tions would be wanting. If there is no.danger in delay, the con­
fessor must insist, with inexorable severity, upon the removal
of this occasion, if it is a public one, and postpone absolution
till it is removed.18 Such occasions may be dangerous objects,
or persons whom the sick man hates, or a person with whom
he maintains sinfid intercourse. The latter occasion presents
greater difficulty, and it is to be disposed of according to the
rules laid down for those living in concubinage. If the matter
has remained secret, or is only known through confession, and
if public scandal is to be feared from immediate removal of the
person, the penitent must form the firm purpose either of marry­
ing her, if no obstacles which cannot be removed are in the way,
or of dismissing her as soon as possible, and till then, of keeping
her at a distance as much as possible.20
If the person were an occasio necessaria, that is, if the sick
man had no one else to wait upon him, the matter becomes
Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 600. Oil, 616.
10 See § 66, 1. Those living in concubinage.
» S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 454 ; Reuier, n. 211, 6. Cf. 173; Gary, Cas. conec.
II. un. 722-725; Gaume, Handbook, n. 376.

6-10

TUE MIX ISTER OF THE SACRAM EXT

still more difficult. Supposing that the occasio proxima has
really lost its character in this situation, the circumstances
might call for some forbearance; however, if the matter is
notorious, some explanation should be made in order that the
scandal caused may be atoned for: that is, the sick man should
be obliged to declare, perhaps before witnesses, that he would dis­
miss the person when he had recovered health ; but this declara­
tion would not be necessary if the circumstances which make
the dismissal of the concubine impossible are publicly known.
This tolerance is the more justifiable if the immoral relation­
ship had not become generally known, but were only learnt
through the confessional, and difficulties stood in the way of
contracting the marriage in extremis. But here also the sick
man must promise that he will marry, or dismiss the person
who is the occasion of sin to him, etc. However, in all cases
where the concubine cannot be dismissed, the sick man must
take care that she does not sleep near him, that she only goes
to him when it is necessary, in order to avoid dangerous intimacy
and temptation.
4. If the person who is dangerously ill is living in so-called
“civil matrimony,” and there is no canonical impediment, a
promise to marry made before the parish priest and two wit­
nesses suffices, and the marriage must take place as soon as
possible. If there is a canonical impediment, for which a dispen­
sation can be obtained, let the confessor induce the sick man to
submit himself to the laws of the Church. On this condition
he may be absolved; the confessor should then procure the
dispensation if the patient is not already in extremis. If he
is already very near death, the bishop can dispense, in order that
the marriage may proceed, as it may, for many reasons, be
desirable. If the impediment cannot be removed by a dispensa­
tion, it suffices that the sick person promises to submit to the
laws of God and the Church, in case he is restored to health.
If he is not aware of the obstacle, he may be left in his bona

TUF. CONFESSIONS OF THE SICK

/ùfes.

641

If the matter is publicly known, the scandal given must

be repaired.
5. If a <lying woman has separated from her husband on her
own authority, the confessor must demand that the separation
should be revoked as soon as possible; if the person floes not
wish this, and there is canonical ground for separation, she
must be left, in peace. If the reasons are futile, she must
declare that she will resume married life upon the restoration of
health (if occasion requires, she must make this declaration
before witnesses, in order to remedy the scandal given). If
she had been divorced by the civil court in bona fide, she must
not be disturbed. Of course, the conduct of the confessor would
be modified according as he had learnt the matter through
the confessional, or previously, by general report. In the latter

case the explanations and promises in question must be duly
given before the administration of the Sacraments.”
In respect to sick persons who have lived in habitual sin, or
have frequently or generally relapsed into the same grave sin,

see §§67 and 68.
G. As soon as the confession is completed, the confessor should
exhort the sick person in a few forcible words, anil awaken in
him true sorrow and firm purpose of amendment. The thought
of death, vividly suggested by the circumstances, is well calculated
to move a man to a holy fear and repentance. In most cases
it is advisable to make an act of contrition with the sick person.
7. Then, according to the express admonition of the Roman
Ritual, a slight penance should be imposed upon the sick
person, which can be performed at once. The confessor should
help persons who are very ill, and those who are dying, to per­
form the penance before, or after, the absolution has been
administered.”
21 Compare Renuinger-Gopfert, Pastoraltheologie, §100; Müller, Theol.
Mor. Lil'· HL Tract. Π. § 107.
22 See also § 33, ΙΠ.

642

THE MINISTRE OF THE SACRAMENT

8. When the sick person's spiritual condition has been set
in order, attention must be. paid to the regulation of his tem­
poral affairs (Is. xxxviii. 1). If it is considered necessary or
advisable, he should, therefore, be admonished to put his worldly
concerns in good order, if he has not yet done so, that he may
afterwards occupy himself with God in undisturbed peace.
But he must so regulate everything that he may be well pre­
pared for the account which he will be obliged to render to God.
III. The priest very often finds himself with sick persons
who are altogether uneducated and ignorant; or who, though
well informed in affairs of the world, are very ignorant in reli­
gious matters. Whilst he can openly instruct the former class,
he is often obliged to disguise his instruction of the latter
that they hardly observe it, so as not to offend them and jeop­
ardize the salvation of their souls. In this case he can give an
explanation of the truths of faith which are applicable : (a) in
the form of a prayer in which God is invoked; (&) in the form
of a thanksgiving; (c) in the form of a sacrifice, or (d) in the
form of an exhortation. Nevertheless, an explicit act of faith
may be added. The confessor should commit to memory dif­
ferent formula! by means of which he can, when necessary,
instruct ignorant patients in the truths which they must know,
and elicit the acts of the theological virtues with them ; he should
also learn by heart short prayers and verses of Holy Writ which
contain acts of the different virtues necessary to the patient.
9. In order to provide more abundantly for the salvation
of the sick person, the zealous priest should not content himself
with what is necessary for a valid and fruitful reception of the
Sacrament of Penance, but should endeavor, in subsequent
visits “ (which should be repeated oftener as death approaches) :
(1) to remove all obstacles to salvation; (2) to counteract the
28 It would be very wrong to take no further trouble about the sick after
they have received the last Sacraments. Beuger, a. a. O. n. 17 ; Dubois,
n. 204 ; aud others.

ΤΠΕ CONFESSIONS OF THE SICK

643

attack? of the evil one ; (3) to suggest remedies helpful in the
dangerous passage to eternity.
(а) Such obstacles to salvation are, preeminently: attach­
ment of life, love of relatives, and care for earthly things. To
remove these, it is especially necessary to inform the sick per­
son, prudently, and at a suitable time, of the danger of death,
at first by hints, but later on, when death is nearer, openly and
plainly.24 Then the priest must explain to him how pleasing
to God it is, and what great merits he acquires for himself be­
fore God, if he submits to His will and makes the sacrifice of
his life. He should also be reminded of the miseries of the life
which he is leaving behind, and of the joys of heaven to which
he is passing; impressing upon him, moreover, that God who
takes him away from his own will provide for them.
(б) Against the temptations of the devil, which are usually
more violent and numerous in the how of death than in life,
the general remedies — invocation of the names of Jesus and
Mary, the sign of the cross, and short prayers—are to be used.
A crucifix and one or two religious pictures should be placed near
the sick bed. In temptations against faith, the patient may
exclaim, “ Oh, my God ! I believe all that Thou, the eternal
Truth, hast revealed!” or he may thank God for the grace of
the true faith, and protest that he will live and die in this faith ;
or, finally, — and this is an excellent proceeding, — reject these
temptations energetically, and direct his attention to other
things, making other acts — acts of sorrow, of confidence, of
love of God, etc. And should the temptations continue to
molest the sick person more violently, the motiva credibilitatis
may be explained to him.
If the sick person is tormented by temptations to despair, the
«♦ It would be best that the physician should tell the patient of this dan­
ger. But if none else will do it, the priest must perform this service of love,
and that, not only when the patient is in a dangerous condition as to his
soul, but also when he is well prepared.

644

ΤΠΕ MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

priest must not speak to him of the justice of God, nor of the
punishments of the damned, nor of the gravity of sin, but of
the exceedingly great mercy of God, the sufferings of Christ,
the divine promises, the intercession of the most holy \ irgin
and the saints, and thus inspire him with confidence.
If, on account of great pain, the sick person is tempted to
impatience, remind him of the rewards of patiently borne suf­
fering of Our Savior, who bore with patience the greatest
torments; of the example of the saints, especially of the Queen
of martyrs; of the duty of doing penance for our sins; of the
pains of purgatory, which he may partly expiate by patient
endurance of suffering; also of the fact that patience soothes
and lessens pain. As a remedy against temptations to hatred
and feelings of hostility remind him of the precept of Christ
to love all men, and to exclude no one, not even our enemies,
from this love; moreover, of the offenses we commit against
God, who forgives us over and over again; of God's promise
to forgive us if we forgive others; and, finally, place before
his eyes the glorious example of Jesus.24
(c) The confessor must assist the sick person by all the other
means which our holy faith so abundantly possesses, administer
to him in due time the last Sacraments, give him absolution
repeatedly,2’ and (observing the precepts of the Church) fre­
quently holy communion; often suggest fervent ejaculatory
prayers; say with him the acts of faith, hope, and charity,
and of perfect contrition for all past sins, also of perfect resigna­
tion to God’s holy will; make him participate in the indul­
gences of the Church, give him general absolution, let him kiss
the crucifix, sprinkle him with holy water, etc.2’ And as it. is
not certain that a priest will be with the sick person in his last
struggle and equally uncertain that the patient will not again
“ 8. Alph. Prax. Conf. nn. 237-253.
» 8. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 278, n. 11. See § 88.
n 8. Alph. 1. c. nn. 234,235 ; 287,368. Rit. Rom. Tit. V. cp. 4, nn. 6, 13, 14.

ABSOLUTION OF THE DYING

645

commit a sin, especially as the evil one continues his tempta­
tions till the last inornent, the priest should teach him to elicit
acts of love and contrition; he should also request a trustworthy
person among those around the patient to make frequent acts
of perfect love and contrition with him, especially during his
agony.”
86. Absolution of the Dying.

The general principles laid down in the preceding sections
apply also to this particular case. // it is certain that any­
thing essential is wanting to the disposition of the moribund, abso­
lution may not be administered; but if it is in any way, even
tenuiter, probable, that everything essential is present, absolu­
tion not only can but must be given. This, however, is not to
be under-stood as meaning that there may not be cases in which
absolution can be given, but where no obligation exists under
pain of sin of giving it. Most of the cases which occur can be
solved by the rules which follow: —
I. A dying person who, in the presence of the priest, has
given a sign of repentance, and has confessed any sin, or even
only in genere has acknowledged himself to be a sinner, must be
absolved, and that, absolute, not conditionate. In this case the
presence of sorrow is sufficiently ascertained, and besides there
is some sort of confession. This is the express teaching of the
With regard to the Indulgence for the dying we append the following
from the various decrees: The sick person can gain only once the Plenary
Indulgence for the dying in eodem mortis articulo. S. C. Ind. 5 Febr., 1841.
And it is forbidden to give the General Absolution more than once (whether
it be by the same or by different priests) in eodem mortis articulo, or to grant
the Plenary Indulgence for the dying repeatedly on the plea that the patient
has claims to it from various titles, for instance, by membership in the con­
fraternities of the Rosary and of the Scapular. S. C. Ind. 12 Mar., 1855,
22 Mar., 1879. The formula prescribed by Benedict XIV must be used by
all under pain of invalidity, and according to a declaration of Leo XIII,
1882, even by Regulars and Tertiaries, yet with mention of the founder of
their Order in the Confiteor. Compare Schueider-Berhiger, Die Ablatae, 10.
Aufl. S.473f.

6’46

THU MINISTER OF THE FACHA AfENT

Roman Ritual.” The absolution here bears directe on the
sins confessed generice by the signs of repentance and the desire
of absolution, and indirecte, on the special sins, included in that
manifestatio doloris. These sins, however, the penitent must
confess separately and distinctly when he has been restored to
health.”
II. A dying person who is unconscious, and who, by lhe testi­
mony of those present, before he became unconscious, expressed a
wish to confess, and showed signs of repentance, must be ab­
solved. Tliis is the constant practice of the Church, and the
unanimous teaching of theologians. For the desire of receiving
sacramental absolution, whether this is made known to the
priest directly, or indirectly, through witnesses, includes a con­
fessio in genere. Although moralists81 teach that in this case
also absolution may be given absolute, and the Roman Ritual
directs simply: “absolvendus est,” it seems, nevertheless, safer
to follow the opinion of those88 who require that the absolution
be given conditionally, at least when it may be prudently doubted
whether any indication of sorrow was really given, especially if
the dying person is a homo rudis. Absolution must also be given
— but conditionally — if there is aliqua probabilitas doloris et
desiderii confessionis.
III. According to the sententia communis et probabilis, absolu­
tion sub conditione MAY ba and MUST be given to a dying
person who has shown no sign of repentance, and of whom no wit­
ness has reported such sign to the absent priest, and in whom the
priest, moreover, cannot detect any such sign; provided the
® Ordo ministrandi Sacr. Pœn. η. 24.
*’ Cf. Aertnys. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. V. n. 190, Q. 1 ; Lehmkuhl,
Theol. Mor. 1. C. Sect. III. art. IV. n. 510; Müller, Theol. Mor. Lib. III.
T. II. § 106.
,l Lehmkuhl, 1. c., who, however, adds: ·'A ttamen culpandus non est, qui
forte conditionem " si capax es “ adjungat, quum possint occurrere circumstantia,
qua absolutionis valorem dubium reddant."
’·“ Aertnys. I· ‘S· Antoninus, Suarez, Bonacina, etc. Mulier, also, recom­
mends the absul. condit.

ABSOLUTION OF THE DYING

047

dying person is a Catholic. That he should have lived a pious
life is not necessary; it is also applicable to one who has not
lived very piously, and may be extended to all concerning whose
indisposition there is no certainty; for it may be presumed that
in their dangerous condition they would wish to receive the
Sacrament.
The whole difficulty in this and the following cases is — how,
without express manifestation of sorrow, and desire of absolu­
tion, the essential elements of the Sacrament of Penance can be
supposed with some degree of probability to exist. I say, with
some degree of probability, for it is not necessary to prove that
these essential elements are certainly and positively present; it
suffices to show that some probability (slight though it be)
exists for the supposition that the essential elements of the
Sacrament are realized.
In order that absolution may be administered, there is re­
quired: (1) a probable conjecture that the dying person has
interior sorrow; (2) some outward manifestation which, with
some degree of probability, may be regarded as a manifestation
of inward sorrow, and (3) some outward sign, which, with some
probability, can be understood as an accusation, if only a gen­
eral one.
The question now is to what extent can we find these three
things in a dying person deprived of the use of his senses, who
neither gives perceptible signs himself, nor has previously given
them to others?
Many theologians appeal to such signs as anxious breathing,
sighing, winking of the eyes, various movements of the mouth,
by means of which the dying person "perhaps” wishes to mani­
fest his sorrow and his desire of absolution. For, frequently,
those who appear to be unconscious are only deprived of the
exterior use of their senses; they perceive ami understand every­
thing. think, reflect, are also capable of sorrow, etc., as many
declare, who have been in a similar state. As a man is more

«48

THX AfrxrsTxn

of the sachamext

withdrawn from the outer world, the more active is his inner
life. In the case of dying persons who have led Christian Jives,
who are mindful of their sins, and do not easily deceive them­
selves as to their situation, who know that the decision of their
eternity is near at hand, as they will soon stand before their
Judge —it is readily to be understood that they should make
attempts to reveal outwardly their interior sorrow, and, there­
fore (the only conceivable course in a Catholic), their desire for
the absolution of the priest.” Even if such signs are of them­
selves no natural indication of repentance, we may assume that
the dying person wishes to make use of them for said purpose
(which at the time is to him of supreme importance), as he cannot
reveal himself in any other way. This is the teaching of St.
Augustine, of St. Antonin, of St. Alphonsus Liguori, of Sporer,
Elbel, the Salmanticenses, Tamburini, Lacroix, Aertnys, Midler,
Gury, Konings, and others. The specified signs may, therefore,
be regarded as manifestations of sorrow and desire of absolution.
Now, it is allowed, in urgente necessitate, to administer the .Sacra­
ments sub conditione, however doubtful the matter may be, as,
on the one hand, the reverence due to the Sacrament is pre­
served by the appended condition, and on the other hand the
salvation of a soul is also provided for. When, therefore, the
priest can administer the Sacraments, he is bound to administer
them sub gravi peccato.3' He must, however, repeat to the dying
person in a few words and in a loud voice a general accusation
and an earnest act of contrition, as experience shows that the
sense of hearing generally remains till death.
83 “ Moralher Jieri nequit in hoc nostra natura composita, ut dolor et desi­
derium, se subjiciendi clavibus Ecclesia:, <pue interne habentur, nullo actu sensibili
se manifestent, licet ab aliis forte non animadvertatur, vel quia présentes non sunt
vel guia signa non valent distinguere. Hinc sicut in moribundo sensibus destituto
potest prasumi pœnitentia, ita pari omnino jure prasumitur pamitentia manifes­
tata in ordine ad se subjiciendum clavibus.” — Franzelin, De Sacr. in genere.
Roinæ, 1808, p. 39.
MS. Alph. Lib. VI. u. 482; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 196, Q. 3; Millier, 1. c.
§100, 11.

ABSOLUTION OF THE DYING

649

Other theologians thought to solve the difficulty more satis­
factorily by the doctrine that the actus pmnitentis were not mate­
ria sacramentorum ex qua, but materia circa quam. But this, of
itself, does not contribute anything to the solution of the diffi­
culty. For even the theologians who, following the teaching of
Scotus, consider the actus pernitentis as materia circa quam,
demand an outward manifestation as an essential condition of the
validity of the Sacrament.
There may, however, be cases in which an anxia respiratio,
gemitus, etc., is not perceived. Some other probable marks of
sorrow and of accusation must then be sought. Lehmkuhl
proposes the following: —
A. As far as the interior sorrow is concerned, we can and
must presume that it exists; we shall, at least, never have a
certitude that it is wanting. Persons who seemed to be deprived
of their senses, or really were so, and have afterwards recovered
their use, have declared that in their anxiety they elicited sor­
row for their sins, although they could not give outward expres­
sion of it; and there is no reason why this could not also be true
even of those unfortunate ones who have laid violent hands on
themselves, or who in the act of committing any other sin have
lost consciousness. This sorrow must, of course, be awakened
after the last mortal sin, and must extend to all mortal sins not
yet remitted. We must assume that these conditions exist, or
are not certainly wanting, especially as God never refuses suffi­
cient grace to any one, and desires and wills, not the death of
the sinner, but his conversion.
B. We need not insist that the manifestation of sorrow should
necessarily be the expression of that sorrow which is an essential
disposition. It seems to be sufficient that the penitent indicates
that he either has had the necessary sorrow, or will have it
before the absolution, or wishes to have it. But this is implicite
contained in the manifestation of a desire for absolution and, in
reality, always coexists with it. This manifestation of the de­

650

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

sire for absolution also contains, equivalently, the third element,
a virtual accusation. We can, therefore, deal with the two
requisites at the same time.
C. The accusatio aliqualis, which is indispensable, is conveyed
by the fact that the man gives outward evidence of his wish to
be reconciled to God in the last moment by the services of the
priest, for he thereby acknowledges to be a sinner, and that in
view of the priestly functions which arc to be exercised at the
moment of his death.
Moreover, by the fact that the man has lived as a Christian,
he seems to indicate sufficiently his desire of being reconciled
to God in the last hour of his life through the ministry of a
priest. He thus, in truth, makes a general, public confession
before the whole Church and all priests by whom he can be ab­
solved. All the Sacraments which he has received, all the Chris­
tian virtues which he has practiced, could be regarded as
witnesses of his desire for absolution in the hour of death. Nor is
a similar manifestation of this desire altogether wanting in those
whose lives have been considerably below a Christian ideal, or
who were deprived of consciousness in the act of sinning ; for,
by remaining in the Church, they show that they hoped and
desired to be reconciled at the hour of death. But it might be
objected : is not this desire interrupted and revoked by the mor­
tal sin? If this were the case, our action would, of course, be
in vain ; for, whilst absolution in such case would be valid for
him who does not need it, because he has committed no mor­
tal sin, yet for him who does need it, it would have no validity.
However, we may answer: The sorrow, in as far as it is a nec­
essary disposition, is revoked and interrupted, but the man’s
declaration that he wishes to have contrition at this time and
desires absolution, is not repealed. We admit that the case
is hopeless, unless interior and true sorrow is present. The
validity of the absolution remains, therefore, very doubtfid.
Nevertheless, that is not the point. That sorrow is “perhaps”

ABSOLUTION OF THE DYING

651

present, we are justified in assuming, and it is, therefore, allowed
to give absolut ion ; it may possibly impart to the man who has
only imperfect sorrow sanctifying grace and eternal life. That
the sorrow should coexist with the absolution is certainly not
necessary .ηη
IV. Tn accordance with our previous inference, a flying per­
son, who, up to the moment of his coma, refused to receive the
Sacraments and rejected the priest, may not be absolved, as it
cannot be presumed that he had the will to receive absolution.
To be able to absolve such a one, we must discover some sign
which we may construe as indicating (according to Lehmkuhl,
n. 515) a change in his sentiments; for example, pressure of the
hand, a look, sighing, etc. If there is any indication of the
kind, however doubtful, conditional absolution may be given.
V. A dying person who was deprived of his senses in actu pec­
cati, for example, in adultery, a duel, drunkenness, can be ab­
solved sub conditione, if he is a Catholic, and that on the same
grounds as we have specified above (n. III). For of a Catholic
it may be presumed that, in this utmost danger of eternal dam­
nation, and under the influence of divine grace, which never will
be refused — he desires to secure his eternal salvation.
A non-Catholic in this situation may not be absolved, even
though he has given signs of sorrow, unless he has expressly
asked for absolution; for it cannot be reasonably supposed
that he has given these signs in ordine ad confessionem sacram.
as he does not believe in it, and, on this account, the materia
Sacramenti would certainly be wanting. It may thus be main­
tained that to scarcely any dying Catholic MUST absolution be
refused, and that to all dying Catholics it MAY be given, at
least sub conditione.
We arrive at a different decision and must pursue another
course with regard to a Catholic, who, being born and brought
«* Lehmkuhl, 1. c. un. 512-515; Lacroix, Lib. VI. P. II. n. 1182; Ballerini,
Op· Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. 1, De absolutione morientium, nn. 304—120.

652

THE MhVlXTEH OF TUE sAr/ίΛΜΕΧΤ

up in the Catholic religion, has apostatized and embraced
heresy.
VI. A heretic, who is deprived of his senses, but who, while
he was in health, manifested an inclination towards the Catholic
religion, may, in this decisive moment, be absolved sub condi­
tione from censures and sins if he has already been baptizer! in
his sect ; if doubt is entertained as to the validity of his Ba pt ism,
he must, previously, be baptized sub conditione. It may be
presumed of such a one that he wishes to close his life in the
community of the true Church of Christ. Indeed, as Lehrnkuhl
adds, one might also give conditional absolution to a baptized
non-Catholic of whom it might be presumed, upon any probable
ground, that he is in bona fide and would gladly accept the help
of a priest if he knew it was necessary to him.
In such a case it is, of course, more difficult to produce any­
thing out of the past life which can, in any way, be construed
as a confession, and a desire for absolution, because he has not
explicite thought of absolution, unless we are to be content with
the man's bona fides, "quam probabiliter adesse seu adfuisse,
externe sit manifestatum.” For, if to this bona fides, sorrow has
been added,—and it is not certain that it has not been added,—
it seems that there is, implicite, the manifested desire to partici­
pate in those remedies which are necessary, and, therefore, in
the absolution of the priest.” If we have here, with Ballerini,
Lehrnkuhl, and Aertnys, proceeded to the utmost limits, and if
the arguments in favor of this extreme liberality in the admin­
istration of absolution are not always cogent, let us not be
accused of laxity or of any want of reverence for the holy Sac­
rament of Penance. Such liberality seems to have been fully
“ Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. n. 196, Q. IV et V, Muller, 1. c. § 166, TT. b and c,
and his dissertation upon the sacramental absolution of the dying in the
Limer Theol-prakt. Quartalschrift, 1884, pp. 259-264 ; Kenrick, Theol. Mor.
Tract. 18, n. 211; Kouings, Theol. Mor. II. n. 1371. Concerning dying
non-Catholics who are still conscious, see § 73 (Conclusion).

ABSOLUTION OF THE DYING

«53

intended by Him. " Who came to seek and to save that which
was lost,” and who wishes not the death but the life of the
sinner, who opened the gates of paradise even to the thief on
the cross, and who has placed the keys of heaven in our hands.
We safeguard the sanctity of the holy Sacrament by adding the
condition, and the Lord instituted His Sacraments for man; “in
extremis a idem extrema lentanda. sunl."
We may repeatedly, administer absolution to the dying when
the conditions necessary for its validity are fulfilled. The fol­
lowing rules are of service : —
1. If the dying person gives to the priest who is present un­
doubted signs of a contrite disposition, it is advisable tn admin­
ister absolution to him as often as he renews these signs.”
2. If the dying person is unconscious, one may administer
conditional absolution to him two or three times, with an inter­
val of about three or four hours. For, in order that a Sacrament
may be administered conditionally, a causa ijravis is necessary,
which could not exist if the absolution were administered at
shorter intervals and more frequently. If the state of uncon­
sciousness should continue, and there is actual danger of death,
absolution may be frequently repeated; for example, three or
four times in a day.38 This proceeding is justified by the en­
deavor to give more certain and efficacious assistance to the
dying person.
Such efforts in behalf of the dying person demand great zeal,
but, as Elbe! rightly says,3® they are very praiseworthy, anil form
part of our holy office. Our divine Redeemer deposited His
graces in the hands of His priests; faithful to their caUing they
will, with the greatest zeal, dispense these graces to those who
arc worthy anil in need of them.
m S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 480.
88 S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 482; Prax. Conf. n. 276; H. Ap. n. 37; Aertnys,
1. c. n. 196. Q. VI; Müller, 1. c. § 168.
89 De Sacrani. Pœnit. Conf. VIII. n. 219. Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 276.

654

THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT

"Fraires charissimi, munus quod in Ecclesia Dei geritis plane
eximium est; enimvero tanlani vobis Christus ad judicandas ani­
mas auclorilalem elargitus est, ut sententia· a vobis in terris juste
prolata·, rata· habeantur in cadis. Ora vestra canales esse mysticos
dico, per quos vera de calo pax in homines bona· voluntatis descen­
dit, Verba oris vestri tuba· sunt magni Jesu, qua muros iniqui­
tatis seu mystica· Jericho evertunt.”

(Ex monilis S. Francisci Salesii Ep. et Eccl. Doct. ad Con­
fessorios.)

TOPICAL INDEX
A
Articulus mortis, removes reserva­
Abortionists, excommunicated, 339.
tion, 347.
“About” as a numerical qualifica­
Attritio, 74. 88-98.
tion of sin, 163.
Attritioniste, teaching of, 96.
Absence of penitent when absolu­ Avarice, remedies of, 456.
tion is given (note), 57.
B
of contrition, how known, 120.
Absolution, form of, 50-53.
Bad confessions, 391, 394.
from censures, 54.
Banns, dispensation from, 604.
Baptism, sins before, 39.
presence of penitent for, 55.
in writing, 56.
sins after, doubtfully valid, 190.
conditional, 59-69, 645.
of converts, 558.
objections urged against condi­ Betrothals, 592.
tional, 66-69.
Blessing before confession, 53.
given at a distance, 58.
Bona fide penitents, 443.
Books, ex pro/esso bad, 512.
by telephone (note), 59.
on the Index (note), 331.
from reserved sins, 340-350.
direct and indirect, 345.
reading of good, 580.
of complex in peccato turpi, 354C
363.
of those who refuse to denounce Careless examination of conscience,
a sollicitans, 375.
signs of, 220.
Cases reserved. 316, 327.
postponement of, 529.
to the dying, 645-654.
Casuistry, study of, necessary,
repeated in cases of the dying, 653.
432.
Absolventes complicem in peccato Catholics, dying, as a rule to be
turpi, 333.
absolved, 651.
Abuse of the sacrament, 351.
Censures, absolution from, 54.
Apostates, excommunicated, 328.
reserved, 326.
Apostolicce Sedis, bull on censures, Certain and doubtful matter for
326.
absolution, 40.
Appeal to secular judge in eccle­ Change of penance, 275.
siastical cases, 332.
Child, age of, for receiving sacra­
Appreciative sorrow for sin, 108.
ments, 25.
Approbation of confessors, 279-283. Children’s confessions, how to be
for hearing confessions of nuns,
heard, 561.
311.
Choice of state of life, 583.
655

656

TOPICAL INDEX

Circumstances of sins to be con­
fessed. 166-180.
changing venial into mortal, 173.
Circumstantia aggravantes, 174.
speciem mutantes, 175.
Civil government pastors, 335.
marriages, 607, 040.
Clandestine marriages, impediment
of, 007.
Classification of sins (note), 158.
Commerce, missionaries forbidden
to engage in, 338.
Communicatio in sacris, by clerics,
338.
mixed marriages, 600, 603.
Communion, frequent, 453.
Communion, frequent, for young
unmarried people, 577.
Commutation of penance, 274-276.
Company-keeping of young people,
592.
Complete, sin to be reserved must
be. 324.
Completeness of confession, 158,198.
reasons excusing from, 200, 203.
Complex absolvens, excommunicated,
333.
Complex in peccato turpi, absolu­
tion of, 354.
inquiring the name of, unlawful,
351.
Concealing sins, habit of, 391, 394.
Concilia, favors rigorous views
(note), 65.
Concubinage, 501.
Conditio de pressenti et de praterito,
62.
Conditional absolution, 59-69.
Conditions placed in mixed mar­
riages. 601.
Confessio ficta ex pravo fine, 367.
Confession, annual, 24, 26.
necessity of, 137.
in writing, 151.
of children, 561.
of women, 608.
Confessor, regular, 145-148.

of religious, 308, 309.
of nuns, 311.
Confirmation, biota out venial sin,
34.
Conscience, examination of, 215.
erroneous, 568.
Constituent parts of penance, 37.
Contracting marriage before Protes­
tant minister, 603.
Contrition, 19, 36.
extent and efficacy of, 71.
perfect and imperfect, 74, 88-98.
qualities of, 98-111.
motives of, 105.
in children, 570.
Converts, treatment of, 555.
baptism of, 558.
D
Damnificator injustus, confessor as,
464.
Dancing, 506.
Danger to life of confessor, 201.
Dangerous intimacies, 514-518, 592.
Deaf penitents, 202.
Death, danger of, 65, 645.
Debitum conjugale, questions con­
cerning, 387, 599.
Defenders of heretics, 329, 331.
Deferring absolution, duty of, 407,
411,413.
Deficient jurisdiction, 300.
Definite matter for absolution, 48.
Deinde, in the form of absolution
(note), 55.
Delegated jurisdiction not to be
presumed, 288-290.
Denouncing the sollicitans, 372.
Deprecatoria forma, not in use in
Latin Church, 55.
Desire of pleasing in women, 579.
Despair, temptation to, in the dying,
643.
Different spiritual conditions, peni1
tents in, 487.
I Diligentia moralis, required in examI
ining conscience, 215.

TOPICAL INDEX

657

Examination of conscience, 215-221,
Direct and indirect absolution, 345.
452.
remission of sin, 41.
Discretion in penitent, 145.
for children, 565.
in imposing penance, 270.
Excommunication by neglect of
in questioning the penitent, 383.
annual confession, 28.
Disparilas cultus, impediment of, 600.
reserved to the Pope, 327.
Disposition of penitents, 49, 398.
lata sententia, 335.
Distance, absolution given at a, 58.
reserved to the ordinary, 339.
Distracted confessor (note), 397.
Excommunicationes non reservata,
Docloris munus in the sacrament,
339.
438.
Excusing, reasons, from complete
Dogmatic theology, knowledge of,
confession. 198.
428.
Exempted from going to Rome in
Dolor intellectivus, not contrition, 72.
reserved cases, 346.
in fieri el in facto esse, 112.
Exhorting the penitent, duty of,
Doubt of jurisdiction, 64.
438.
Experience not a substitute for
disposition, 49, 65, 402, 412.
science, 432.
Doubtful matter for absolution, 40.
sins to be confessed, 180.
Extraordinary confessors of nuns,
Duellists, 336.
313-315.
jurisdiction, 300.
Duty of denouncing the confes­
sorius sollicitans, 368-371.
F
confessor to dispose penitent, 402.
Facultas absolvendi a censuris, 604.
Dying penitents doubtfully dis­
Faith (implicit) essential for con­
posed, 409.
trition. 73, 102.
ministry of confessor to the, 630632, 645.
Faults peculiar to youth, 578.
Fear as an element of attrition, 90.
penitents, in the act of sin, 651.
of relapse, 130.
E
Fenians excommunicated, 336.
Ficta confessio ex pravo fine, 367.
Effects of perfect contrition, 81.
Forbidden books, 512.
sins, evil, 161.
Forgotten penance, 277.
Efficacious resolution, 131.
sins, 116, 195.
Efficacy of contrition, 71.
reservation, 348.
Efficax affectu, 131.
Form of sacrament, 50.
executions, 131.
essential, 50, 51.
Engaged people, how to treat, 592.
sufficient, 52.
Engagements of marriage, pastors
Formal heresy, 328.
not to meddle in (note), 591.
Freemasons excommunicated, 336.
Envy, remedies of, 457.
Epikeia, 445.
Free matter of confession, 45.
Error communis, about jurisdiction,
Frequent confession, 28.
communion, 453.
302.
privatus, about jurisdiction, 302.
G
Errors committed by confessor, 460.
Essential form of sacrament, 50.
General accusation, 44.
Eucharist removes venial sin, 33.
confession, 228-236.

TOPICAL INDEX

6’58

manner of hearing a, 238.
I Jansenist teaching about amendplan for making a, 245-255.
Good works biot out venial sin, I
merit, 128.
36.
Judge, the confessor as, 379.
Gousset, Cardinal, defends St. Al- Judging of child’s disposition, 574.
phonsus, 68.
of penitent’s disposition, 398.
Judicial power and process 20.
H
Jurisdictio dubia, 303.
in articulo mortis, 305.
Habitual sinners, 518-520.
Hearing words of absolution not Jurisdiction of confessors, 279-283.
delegated, 288.
essential, 56.
directly limited by reservation,
Heretics excommunicated, 328.
325.
Hypocritical penitents, 543-545.
I

Ignorance of reservation, 324
Ignorant penitents, 185, 439, 441,
447, 642.
Impediment, occult, in marriage,
597.
Imperfect contrition, 88-98.
Imposition of penance, 256.
Impurity, remedies against, 457.
habit of, in children, 572.
Index of forbidden books (note), 331.
Indications of true sorrow for sin,
119.
Indirect violation of the sigillum,
477.
Indulgentiam in the form of absolu­
tion, 53.
Inquiring the name of accomplice,
351.
Insincere confessions, 394.
of children, 567.
Institution of penance, 22.
Instruction of children, 25, 569.
penitents, 438.
those about to be married, 591.
Integrity of confession, 153.
Intemperance, remedy against, 457.
Interdict, 340.
Intimacies, dangerous, 514.
Invalid confessions, 222.
absolution in reserved cases, 348.
Invincible ignorance, 442.

K
Knowledge of sins requisite for
absolution, 226, 379.
necessary, of the confessor, 424.
L
Lanio sigilli, danger of, 204, 466-476.
Lex disciplinaris, reservation a, 325.
Libri erotici, 512.
Librorum Index, 331.
Lies told in confession, 141, 143, 571.
Long marriage-engagements, 594.
Love, degrees of, in contrition, 76.
of pleasure in youth, 578.

M
Malus effectus peccati, whether to be
confessed, 162.
Marriage, instruction for, 600.
secret, 502.
vocation to, 590.
mixed, 600.
before Protestant minister, 603.
Married people, confessions of young,
599.
Materia proxima, remota, ex qua,
circa quam, 39, 40, 112.
Matrimonium secretum, 502.
Matrimony, destroys venial sin, 34.
call to, 590.
Matter of sacrament, 37, 40, 112,
197.
Medicinalis pœna, reservation a, 325.

TOPICAL INDEX
Members of religious orders as |
penitents, 307
Men, confessions of, 614.
Mildness in giving penances, 263.
Minister of sacrament, 279, 378.
Protestant, contracting marriage
before, 603.
Misereatur in absolution, 35.
Mistakes of confessor, 421.
Mixed marriage», 600, 602.
Millie religionis, impediment, 603.
Moral theology, study of, 427.
Mortalia negative dubia, 184.
Mothers, confessor’s care of, 613.
Motives of contrition, 103.
Mulieres devota, 422, 610.
parturientes, 637.
Munus docions, 438.
N
Name of accomplice not to be asked,
351.
Natural inclination» to be repressed,
421.
Necessary matter of penance, 40.
qualities of contrition, 98-111.
Nemo malus prasumendus, 399.
Nutilia conjusa of sins, 226.
Number of sins to be expressed, 163,
241, 390.
Nuns, confessors of, 311, 618-623.

659

Occasion of sin, duty of avoiding
the, 487.
“Odd Fellows" condemned, 336.
Office, divine, as a source of scruples,
554.
Omission of sins to be confessed, 41
Omitted, sins, through forgetful­
ness, 193.
Order, vocation to a religious, 585.
Orders, sacred, blot out venial sin,
34.
as a requisite for jurisdiction, 278.
confessors of religious, 307.
Ordinarius, includes vicar-general,
339.
Ordinary, excommunication reserved
to, 339.
jurisdiction, 284.
confessor of nuns, 313.
P

Papal reservations, 326.
Parish priest can hear his subjects
anywhere, 287.
has ordinary jurisdiction, 285.
as confessor, 213.
"Passio Domini," prayer after ab­
solution, 52.
Pastors appointed by civil govern­
ment, 335.
Patience requisite in confessor, 423.
Peccata externa reserved, only, 324.
O
Peccator publicus, 564, 634.
Objections against conditional ab­ Penalties imposed on sallicilans, 377.
Penance, virtue of, 17.
solution, 66.
act of the will, 19.
Obligation to receive the sacrament,
sacrament, 20.
23.
imposition of, 256.
of annual confession, 24. 26.
public, 261.
procuring perfect contrition, 81Penances repugnant to penitent
88.
Occasio proxima peccati, 488.
to be avoided, 262.
for venial sins, 266.
remota, 488, 492.
commutation of, 274.
continua, 489.
immediata, 491.
object of the sigillum, 474.
voluntaria, 493, 639.
Penitents aiming at perfection,
interrupta, 495.
536-543.
necessaria, 496, 499, 639.
Percussores clericorum, 335.

66'0

TOPICAL INDEX

Peregrini may be absolved, 296.
Perfect, contrition, 76.
obligation of, 84.
Periculum scandali, 20.5.
Iasionis sigilli, 204.
Persons prevented from going to
Rome, 346.
Physician, confessor as, 448.
Pollution, the vice of, o31, 582.
Pope has universal jurisdiction, 2i'4
Postponement of absolution, 411,
415, 529.
Potestas jurisdictionis, 280.
ordinis, 279.
Practical knowledge required in
confessor, 431.
Precept of confession, 23.
Predominant passion to be discov­
ered, 450.
Preparation for making confession,
126.
for hearing confession, 416.
Presence, moral, of penitent, 55, 57,
58.
Preserving the seal of confession,
466-470.
Pride, remedy against, 456.
Priesthood, signs of vocation to the,
588.
Priests, confessions of, 624-629.
Profession of faith by converts, 558,
560.
at the hour of death, 560.
Promises required in mixed mar­
riages, 601.
Properties of confession, 139.
Propositum non peccandi, 121.
Proprio sacerdoti, meaning of, 28.
Proxima materia, 39.
Prudence of confessor, 434, 436.
Public sinners, 504.
Purpose of amendment, 126, 639.
Pythias, Knightsof, condemned, 336.
Q
Qualities of contrition, 98.
Quosi-materia, 37.

Questions not to be answered by
penitent, 142.
to be put to penitent, 214, 380,
435.
for general confession, 244, 248.

R
Raising the hand at Indulgentia
(note), 53.
Readers of heretical books, 330.
Reading, bad, 511.
of good books, 580.
Reasons excusing from complete
confession, 198.
Receptores of heretics, excommuni­
cated, 329.
Recipient of penance, 70.
Refusing absolution, 407.
Regular confessor advisable for the
young, 581.
Regulars receive jurisdiction from
the Pope, 292.
may receive it conditionally from
the ordinary, 295.
require approbation from ordi­
nary, 293.
may be deprived of faculties by
ordinary, 294.
confessors of, 308.
Relapsing sinners, 448-459, 521-536.
Relation of contrition to the sacra­
ment, 111.
Religious order, vocation to a, 585.
Remedies against relapse, 448.
scruples, 550.
Remorse of conscience, not contri­
tion, 72.
Repeating confession, when neces­
sary, 224.
Reproving penitent, duty of, 451.
Reservation in ease of strangers, 320.
ceases, when, 347.
forgotten by confessor, 348.
Reserved cases, 316.
not to be multiplied unduly, 319.
I
papal, 326.
I Retinentes libros luereticos, 330.

TOPICAL INDEX

681

State of life, choice of a, 583.
Stealing relics, 337.
habit of, in children, 571.
Striking a cleric suadente diabolo. 335.
Sufficient matter for absolution, 40.
Supplet ecclesia, 300.
8
Supplying deficient jurisdiction, 300.
Suspension, 340.
Sacramental seal, 466-470.
Sacramentels destroy sin, 35.
Suspensionis in the form of abso­
Sanatio in radice, 443, 004.
lution, 52.
Satisfaction, 38.
T
Schismatics, excommunicated, 332. Teacher, the confessor as, 438-448.
Science of perfection, 428.
Telephone, absolution by (note), 59.
required in confessor, 424.
Testifying to confession made, 483.
Scruples asobjectof the sigillum, 475. Theaters, frequenting, 509.
kinds of, 550.
Tickets, certifying to confession
remedies against, 550.
made, 483.
Scrupulosity, causes of, 547.
Timor mundanus, naturalis, servilis,
marks of, 545.
filialis, mixtus seu initialia, 90.
Scrupulous penitents, how to treat Timorous conscience, 186.
them, 545-552.
Titulus coloratus, 300-302.
Seal of confession, 466.
Travelers on sea, who absolves, 299.
Sensible contrition, 118.
Treatment of scrupulous penitents,
Servile fear, 91.
545-555.
Sick, .confessor’s ministry to the, Trial, penance a judicial, 21.
630, 632-045.
Tribunal, difference between civil
Sigillum sacramentale, 466.
and sacramental, 21.
Signs of repentance, 20, 645.
Trusting statements of penitent, 395.
in the dying, 649.
U
proper disposition, 400.
Unconscious penitents, at the hour
vocation to priesthood, 588.
of death, 646.
Simulation of confession, 368.
Uncouth penitents, 447.
Sincerity in confession, 27.
Universality of purpose of amend­
Sinful occasions, 487.
ment, 132.
Sins forgiven may be again confessed,
sorrow for sin, 106.
42.
Unmarried, confessions of young,
Sloth, remedies against the sin of,
people, 575.
458.
Urgent confessions, what to omit in,
Small penances, 264.
52.
Sollicitatio proprii pœnitentis, 364,
Usurpers of ecclesiastical rights. 333.
368.
Usus matrimonii, instruction re­
Sorrow for sin, quality of, 72.
garding the, 599.
supreme (appreciative), 108.
test of, 119.
Special care of relapsing sinners,
Vagrants (vagi) may be absolved
530-536.
anywhere, 299.
Species infima, 159.

Retractation of heresy in /oro ex­
terno, 329.
Revealing the accomplice, 208.
Rules for confessors, 405.
scrupulous penitents, 552.

662

TOPICAL INDEX

Vague accusations in confession, 44,
48.
Valid absolution requires pronounc­
ing of words, 56.
Venial sin, how forgiven, 29, .32.
purpose of amendment in case of,
18.3.
penance for, 266.
Viears-general have jurisdiction, 285.
Violation of the sigillum, 476.
Virginity, state of, in the world, 589.
Virtual contrition, 30.
Virtues required in confessor, 416.
Visits to the sick to be repeated, 642.
Vitium pollutionis, 531, 582.
Vocation, choice of a, 583.
to the priesthood, signs of, 588.
,
Vow of virginity, 589.
Vows of nuns, 620.

W
Wedding, confessions immediately
before, 596.
Women, conduct of confessor toward,
608.
Words required for valid absolution,
56.
Worthy preparation for marriage,
595.
Writing, absolution by, invalid, 55.
absolution by, from censures,
valid (note), 57.

Y
Young men, love of pleasure in, 579.
Young unmarried people, confessions
of, 575.
Youth, faults peculiar to, 578.

Standard Catholic Books
PUBLISHED BY

BENZIGER BROTHERS,
CINCINNATI I

343 Main St.

36

NEW YORK:
38 Barclay St.

and

Chicago:
211-213 Madison St.

DOCTRINE, INSTRUCTION, DEVOTION.
ABANDONMENT; or, Absolute Surrender of Self to Divine Providence. Rev.
J. P. Caussadb, S.J,
«Λ. o 4o
ADORATION OF THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Tbsnibrb. Cloth, net. i >;
ANECDOTES AND EXAMPLES ILLUSTRATING THE CATHOLIC CATE­
CHISM.
Selected and Arranged by Rev. Francis Spirago, Professor of
Theology. Supplemented, Adapted to the Baltimore Catechism, and Edited
by Rev. Jambs J. Baxter, D-D.
”*'· 1 so
APOSTLES' CREED. THE. Rev. M. Miiu.BR, C.SS.R.
i io
ART OF PROFITING BY OUR FAULTS. Rev. J. Tissot.
net, o ,□
BEGINNINGS OF CHRISTIANITY. By Very Rev. Thoma . J. Shahan S.T.D.
J.U.L., Professor of Church History in the Catholic University of Washington.
net, i oo
BIBLE HISTORY.
BIBLE HISTORY. PRACTICAL EXPLANATION AND APPLICATION OP.
Rev. J. J. Nash.
"**· ’ S’
BIBLE, THE HOLY.
* °°
BOOK OF THE PROFESSED.
,
„
Vol. i.
H
Vol. II.
"*»·°
Vol. III.
“'· 0 00
BOYS' AND GIRLS' MISSION BOOK. By the Redemptorist Fathers. o 40
CATECHISM EXPLAINED. THE. Spirago-Clarkb.
«<. » 5°
CATHOLIC BELIEF. Faa di Bruno.
Paper, o as ; too copies.
Cloth, o 50; as copies,
CATHOLIC CEREMONIES and Explanation of the Ecclesiastical Year. Abb·

Paper, o 30; a$ copies.
Cloth, o 6o; as copies,
9 ~~
CATHOLIC PRACTICE AT CHURCH AND AT HOME. Rev. Al«x. L A.
Klaudbr.
Paper, o 30; as copies,
Cloth, o 60; as copies,
CATHOLIC TEACHING FOR CHILDREN. Winipridb Wray.
0 *°
CATHOLIC WORSHIP. Rev. R. BrsnnaN, LL.D
Paper, o r$: 100 copies,
Cloth, o as; 100 copies,
CEREMONIAL FOR ALTAR BOYS. By Rev. Matthbw Britt, O.S.B.. o j$
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRUE DEVOTION. Rev. N. Grou, SJ. net. o 7S
CHARITY THE ORIGIN OF EVERY BLESSING.
■> «

CHILD OF MARY. Prayer-liook for Children.
CHILD S PRAYER-BOOK OF THE SACRED HEART.
CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. SPIRAGO'S METHOD OF.
CHRISTIAN FATHER. Right Rev. W. Crambr.
Paper, o is. » J copies.
Cloth, o 40; »j copies.
CHRISTIAN MOTHER Right Rev W. Crambr.
Paper, o 55, is copies,
Cloth, o 40; »J copies.
CHURCH AND HER ENEMIES. Rev M. Muli.br, C.SS.R.
COMEDY OF ENGLISH PROTESTANTISM. A. F. Marshall.
CONFESSION.
Paper,o 05; Per roo. net. .1 50
CONFIRMATION.
Paper,o 05; per too. net. 3 so
COMMUNION.
Paper,o os; per 100. net. 3 so
COMPLETE OFFICE OF HOLY WEEK.
o 5°
DEVOTION OF THE HOLY ROSARY and the Five Scapulars.
>ir/. o 75
DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART OF JESUS. Intended especially
for Priests and Candidates for the Priesthood. From the German of Rev.
H. Noldin, S.J. Revised by W. H. Kbnt, O.S.C.
»ri, i '5
DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR THE SICK-ROOM. Krbbs, C.SS.R.
Cloth,
net, > 00
DEVOTIONS FOR FIRST FRIDAY. Hugubt
DEVOUT INSTRUCTIONS, GOFFINE'S. 1 00; is copies,
17 50
DIGNITY AND DUTIES OF THE PRIEST, nr, Selva, a Collection of Mate­
rial for Ecclesiastical Retreats. By St. Alphonsus dr Liouori.
·«<·».» is
DIGNITY, AUTHORITY. DUTIES OF PARENTS, ECCLESIASTICAL
AND CIVIL POWERS. By Rev. M. MÜllbr, C.SS.R
net. 1 40
DIVINE GRACE. A Series of Instructions arranged according to the Baltimore
Catechism. Edited by Rev. Edmund J. Wirth. Ph.D., D.D.
net. 1 50
DIVINE OFFICE: Explanations of the Psalms and Canticles. By St. Alphonsus
db Liouori.
net. 1 is
EPISTLES AND GOSPELS.
o 15
EUCHARIST AND PENANCE. Rev. M Mullbr, C SS R.
net. t 10
EUCHARISTIC CHRIST. Reflections and Considerations on the Blessed Sac­
rament. Rev. A. Tbsnibrb.
net. 1 00
EUCHARISTIC GEMS. A Thought About the Most Blessed Sacrament for
Every Day in the Year. By Rev. L. C. Coblbnbier.
o 7s
EXPLANATION OF COMMANDMENTS. ILLUSTRATED.
t oc
EXPLANATION OF THE APOSTLES' CREED, ILLUSTRATED
t oc
EXPLANATION OF THE BALTIMORE CATECHISM OF CHRISTIAN
DOCTRINE. Rev. Th. L. Kinkbad.
net. 1 00
EXPLANATION OF THE COMMANDMENTS, Precepts of the Chunk. Rev.
M. Mullbr, C.SS.R.
net. 1 10
EXPLANATION OF THE GOSPELS and of Catholic Worship. Rev. L. A.
Lambert.
Paper, o 30; », copies,
4 so
Cloth, o 60; »$ copies,
9 00
EXPLANATION OF THE HOLY SACRAMENTS, ILLUSTRATED.
1 00
EXPLANATION OF THE HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. Rev.
M.
v. Cochbm.
i >5
EXPLANATION OF THE OUR FATHER AND THE HAIL MARY
Rev. R Brennan, LL.D.
° 7S
EXPLANATION OF THE PRAYERS AND CEREMONIES OF THE
MASS. ILLUSTRATED. Rev. D. I. Lansiots, O.S.B.
1 »s
EXPLANATION OP THE SALVE REGINA. Liouori.
o 7S
EXTREME UNCTION.
Paper, o 10
too copies,
f> 00
FIRST AND GREATEST COMMANDMENT. By Rev. M. Mullbr. C.SS.R

FIRST COMMUNICANTS MANUAL.
FLOWERS OF THE PASSION Thought» of St Paul of the Cmu By
R- lx>vis Τη m Jbsur-Aoomisswt
, ,,
FOLLOWING OP CHRIST. Thomas À Kbmpis.
With Reflections,
o<o
With u' Reflection·,
·4j
Edition de luxe,
■>j
FOUR LAST THINGS, THE: Death. Judgment. Heaven. Hell. Meditations
Father M. v. Ochbm. Cloth,
ojj
GARLAND OF PRAYER. With Nuptial Mau. Leather.
ov,
GENERAL CONFESSION MADE EASY. Rev. A. Konihds, C.S8.R.
Flexible, o is. loocopies,
to oo
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OP THE RELIGIOUS LIFE. Vbrhbyxm. O S B.

GLORIES OP DIVINE GRACE. Dr. M. J. Schbbbbn.
nd. i jo
GMlRir.s OP MARY. St Alpbovsu· DR Lfouotl. » vota,
a*. » v»
Popular ed. i vol.,
ι >j
GOD THE TEACHER OF MANKIND. Mullbr. pyoh.
Per set. nd, o to
GOFFINE S DEVOUT INSTRUCTIONS, 140 Illustrations.
GOLDEN SANDS. Little Counsels for the Sanctification and Happiness of
Daily Life.
Third Series,
o jo
Fourth Series,
o So
Fifth Series.
o Jo
GRACE AND THE SACRAMENTS. By Rev. M. Mullbr. CSS.R. ttrt. i >J
GREAT MEANS OP SALVATION AND OP PERFECTION. St Λι.ρηπη.
sus db Liouori.
nrt, ' >J
GREAT SUPPER OF GOD. THE. A Treatise on Weekly Communion. By
Rev. S. Coubb, S.J. Edited by Rev. F. X. Brady. S.J.
i oo
GREETINGS TO THE CHRIST-CHILD, a Collection of Poems for the Young
Illustrated.
GUIDE TO CONFESSION AND COMMUNION.
» ho
HANDBOOK OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. By Rev. W. Wilmrrs, S J

HARMONY OF THE RELIGIOUS LIFE. Rev. H. J. Hbusbr.
> >J
HELP FOR THE POOR SOULS IN PURGATORY. Prayers and Devotions in
aid of the Suffering Souls.
HELPS TO A SPIRITUAL LIFE. From the German of Rev. Jos. ScnnBlMB,
S.J. With Additions by Rev. FBRRBOL Girarobv. C.SS.Rn«. ■ »J
HIDDEN TREASURE: The Value and Excellence of the Holy Mass. By
St. Leonard of Port Maurice.
HISTORY OF THE MASS. By Rev. J. O'Bribn.
w». > *S
HOLY EUCHARIST Rv St Airaovsvs or Liouori. The
*a
HOLY MASS. By Rev. M. Miiu.BR, C SS.R.
HOLY MASS. By St. Alphonsus db Liouori.
HOW TO COMFORT THE SICK. Rev. Jos. A. Krbbs, C.SS.R.
HOW TO MAKE THE MISSION. By a Dominican Father.

ILLUSTRATED PRAYER-BOOK FOR CHILDREN.
o »J
IMITATION OP CHRIST. See " Following of Christ."
IMITATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. Translated by .Mr» A.
R. BnS.VBTr-GLADSTONB.
Plain Edition,
Edition do luxe·.
IMITATION OF THE SACRED HEART. By Rev. F. Arnoudt,
new, reset edition.

IMMACULATE CONCEPTION, THE. By Rev. Λ. A. Lambing, LL.D.
o jj
INCARNATION. BIRTH, AND INFANCY OF JESUS CHRIST, nr. the
Mysteries of Faith. By St. Alphonsus ds Liouori.
»<■/, i 35
INDULGENCES, A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO. Rev. P. M. Bbrnao, O.M.I.

IN HEAVEN WE KNOW OUR OWN By Pbrb Blot, S.J.
INSTRUCTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR THE CATHOLIC FATHER.
Right Rev. Dr. A. Ecgbr.
INSTRUCTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR THE CATHOLIC MOTHER.
Right Rev. Dr. A. Eoorr.
INSTRUCTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR CATHOLIC YOUTH.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS. By Rev. Dr. J. Schmitt.
INSTRUCTIONS ON THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD and the Sacraments
of the Church. By St. Alphonsus db Liouori.
INTERIOR OF JESUS AND MARY. Grou. a vols..
net. 3 oo
INTRODUCTION TO A DEVOUT LIFE. By St. Francis dr Sales.
Cloth.
o so
LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS DE LIGUORI. 4 vols., each vol., nd. i as
LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI and General Alphabetical Index
to St. Alphonsus' Works.
nd, i as
LITTLE ALTAR BOY'S MANUAL.
o as
LITTLE BOOK OF SUPERIORS.
nd. o 60
LITTLE CHILD OF MARY. A Small Prayer-book.
o 35
LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY. Lasancb.
o as
LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. JOSEPH. Linos.
o as
LITTLE MONTH OF MAY. By Ella McMahon. Flexible.
ο a5
LITTLE MONTH OF THE SOULS IN PURGATORY.
o as
LITTLE OFFICE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION. 0.05; per 100. a 50
LITTLE PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. New cheap edition.
1 00
LIVES OF THE SAINTS. With Reflections for Every Day of the Year.
Large size.
1 S”
LIVING CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD. Coppbns. o.io; per too.
ft 00
MANUAL OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST. Conferences on the Blessed Sacra­
ment and Eucharistic Devotions. By Rev. F. X. Lasancb.
o 75
MANUAL OF THE HOLY FAMILY.
o 60
MANUAL OF THE HOLY NAME.
o 50
MANUAL OF THE SACRED HEART. NEW.
o so
MANUAL OF THE SODALITY OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN.
o 50
MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY. LITTLE. Lasancb.
o »5
MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY, NEW.
o 60
MANUAL OF ST. JOSEPH, LITTLE. Lings.
o aS
MARIÆ COROLLA. Poems by Father Edmund of the Heart of Mary, C.P.

Cloth,

MASS DEVOTIONS AND READINGS ON THE MASS.

i as

By Rev. F. X. Lasancb.

MAY DEVOTIONS, NEW. Rev. Augustinb Wirth, O.S.B.
net. 1 00
MEANS OF GRACE. By Rev. Richard Brennan, LL.D.
a 50
MEDITATIONS FOR ALL THE DAYS OF THE YEAR. By Rev. M. Hamon,
S.S. s vols..
net, 5 00
MEDITATIONS FOR EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR. Baxter.
net. 1 as
MEDITATIONS FOR EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR. Rev. B. Vbrcruyssb,
SI ; vols.,
net, a 75
MEDITATIONS FOR RETREATS. St. Francis de Sales. Cloth, net, o 75
MEDITATIONS ON THE FOUR LAST THINGS. Father M. v. Cochbm.

MEDITATI' i"SON THE LAST WORDS PROM THE CROSS. P»th«Cw*BLB
I'KRRAVII.
set. O J#
MEDITATIONS ON THE LIFE, THE TEACHINGS. AND THE PASSION
OF JESUS CHRIST. Ilg-Clarkb. j vols..
<ui. J $0
MEDITATIONS ON THE MONTH OP OUR LADY.
»W
MEDITATIONS ON THE PASSION OF OUR IORD.
0 40
ME I IP >D OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. SPIRAGOS. Edited by Right Rev.
S. G. MitssMBR.
"*·, I je
MIDDLE AGES. THE: Sketches and Fragments. By Very Rev, Thomas J.
Shahan, S.T.D., J.U.L.
net, > to
MISCELLANY. Historical Sketch of the Congregation of the Mort Holy Re­
deemer. Rules and Constitutions of the Congregation of the Mort Holv
Redeemer. Instructions on the Religious State. By St. Alrhohsus os
Liguori.
wf. r >s
MISSION BOOK FOR THE MARRIED. Very Rev. F. Girabdbt , CSS.R. 0 50
MISSION BOOK FOR THE SINGLE. Very Rev. F. Gibabdbv. C.SS.R. o jo
MISSION BOOK OF THE REDEMPTORIST FATHERS.. A Manual of In­
structions and Prayers to Preserve the Fruits of the Mission. Drawn chienv
from the Works of St. Alphonsus Liguori.
MOMENTS BEFORE THE TABERNACLE. Rev. Matthbw RussBtt. S.J.
MONTH, NEW, OP THE HOLY ANGELS. St. Francis ds Salbs.
e >s
MONTH, NEW. OP THE SACRED HEART. St. Francis ds Saibs.
o >5
MONTH OP MAY; a Series of Meditations on the Mysteries of the Life of the
Blessed Virgin. By P. Dbbussi, S.J.
MONTH OF THE SOULS IN PURGATORY. The Little "Golden Sands." o >J
MORAL BRIEFS. By the Rev. John H. Starlbton.
» ’3
MOST HOLY SACRAMENT. Rev. Dr. Jos. Kbu.br.
MY FIRST COMMUNION, the Happiest Day of My Life. Bmnnan.
o 75
MY LITTLE PRAYER-BOOK. Illustrated.
NEW MAY DEVOTIONS. Wirth.
"**· 1 00
NEW MONTH OF THE HOLY ANGELS.
NEW MONTH OF THE SACRED HEART
NEW SUNDAY-SCHOOL COMPANION.
NEW TESTAMENT. Cheap Edition.
3amo. flexible cloth.
jamo, lambskin, limp, round comers, gilt edges.
"**· 0 '
NEW TESTAMENT. Illustrated Edition.
limo, printed in two colors, with 100 full-page illustrations
:6mo. American Seal, limp, solid gold edges.
NEW TESTAMENT. India Paper Edition.

Persian Caif, limp, round comers, gilt edges
"J· ' ’’
Morocco, limp, round comers, gold edges, gold roll inside,
<·". · ’5
NEW TESTAMENT. Large Print Edition.
i imo, large,
1 imo, American Seal, bmp, gold edges.
NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES. By Right Rev. Mgr. Thomas J. Conaty, Dp
limo,
0 60
OFFICE. COMPLETE, OF HOLY WEEK.
ON THE ROAD TO ROME. By W. Richards.
”
OUR FAVORITE DEVOTIONS. By Very Rev Dean A. A. Lings.
o „
OUR FAVORITE NOVENAS. Very Rev. Dean A. A. Linos.
OUR LADY OF GOOD COUNSEL IN GENAZZANO. Mgr. Gbo. F. Dittow,

OUR MONTHLY DEVOTIONS. By Very Rev. Dean Λ. A. Linos.
OUR OWN WILL AND HOW TO DETECT IT IN OUR ACTIONS.
PARACLETE, THE. Devotions to the Holy Ghost.
o 60
PARADISE ON EARTH OPENED TO ALL; A Religious Vocation the Surest
Way in Life. By Rev. Antonio Natalb, S.J.
net, o 40
PARISH PRIEST ON DUTY, THE. A Practice/ Manual for Pastors, Curateand Theological Students Preparing for the Mission. (The Sacraments.) B>
Rev. H. J. Heuser, Professor of Theology at Overbrook Seminary.
net, o
PASSION AND DEATH OF JESUS CHRIST. By St. Alphonsus db Licuori.

PASSION FLOWERS. Poems by Father Edmund of the Heart of Mary. C.P
PEARLS FROM FABER. Brunowb.
PEARLS OF PRAYER.
PEOPLE'S MISSION BOOK. THE. Paper, 0.10; per too.
PEPPER AND SALT, SPIRITUAL. Stang.

Cloth,'0 60;’ aj copies,'
PERFECT RELIGIOUS. THE. Db La Mottb. Cloth,
net.
PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. New Edition, with Reflections for

PIOUS PREPARATION FOR FIRST HOLY COMMUNION.
POCKET MANUAL. A Vest-pocket Prayer-book in very large type.
o is
POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON MARRIAGE. Very Rev. F. Girardbv, C.SS.R.

POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON PRAYER. By Very Rev. Ferrbol Girardev,
C.SS.R. Paper o.aj; >s copies,
j is
Cloth, 0.40; >5 copies,
6 00
POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS TO PARENTS on the Bringing up of Children.
By Very Rev. F. Girardbv, C.SS.R. Paper, o.as; as copies,
3 75
PRAYER-BOOK FOR RELIGIOUS. A Complete Manual of Prayers and De­
votions for the Use of the Members of all Religious Communities. By Rev.
PREACHING. Vol. XV. St. Alphonsus db Licuori. The Exercises of the
Missions. Various Counsels. Instructions on the Commandments and
Sacraments.
PREPARATION FOR DEATH. St. Alphonsus de Licuori. Considerations
on the Eternal Truths. Maxims of Eternity. Rule of Life.
PRODIGAL SON; or, the Sinner's Return to God.
REASONABLENESS OP CATHOLIC CEREMONIES AND PRACTICES.
Rev. J. J. Burke.
o 3S
RELIGIOUS STATE, THE. With a Treatise on the Vocation to the Priesthood.
By St. Alphonsus de Licuori.
0 5°
REVELATIONS OF THE SACRED HEART to Blessed Margaret Mary. BouCAUD. Cloth,
«ri. « 5°
ROSARY, THE CROWN OF MARY. By a Dominican Father. *
o 10

ROSARY. THE: Scenes and Thoughts. By Rev. F. P. Garbschb, S.J.
ROSARY. THE MOST HOLY. Meditations. Crambr.
SACRAMENTALS OF THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH. Rev. A. A
1NG, D.D. Paper, 0.30; a; copies,
Cloth, o.ûo; as copies,
net,
SACRAMENTALS—Prayer, etc. By Rev. M. Müller, C.SS.R.
i
SACRED HEART. THE. Rev. Dr. Joseph Keller.
SACRED HEART BOOK, THE. By Rev. F. X. Lasancb.

SACRIFICE <>P THE MASS WORTHILY CELEBRATED. TH8. Ry Rev.
Father < IIAIOMON, S.J.
·“*■ · I®
SECRET <>F SANCTITY. St. Francis db SaLBS.
urt. i oo
SERAPHIC GLIDE, THE. A Manual for the Members Ά the Third Order of
St Fr.uv in By a Franciscan Father.
SHORT CONFERENCES ON THE LITTLE OFFICE OP THE IMMACU­
LATE < (INCEPTION. Very Rev. J Raima
o t®
SHORT STORIES ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. From the French by Maar
McMahon.
**. 0 1*
SHORT VISITS TO THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Lasancb.
·> »1
SICK CALLS; or, Chapters on Pastoral Medicine. By the Rev. Alprbd Mawsino
Mil i.tGAN. Birmingham, England.
«*. 1 ®*
SOCIALISM AND CHRISTIANITY. By the Right Rev. Willum Srtac.
D.D.
*·. * ®®
SOCIALISM: its Theoretical Basis and Practical Application. By Victor
CariiHBiN, S.J. Revised and Enlarged by Victor P. Gbttblmanm. S.J.
tamo, cloth.
,
IW|· 1 I®
SODALISTS' VADE MECUM.
® S®
SONGS AND SONNETS. By Mavricb Francis Egan.
> a®
SPIRAGO'S METHOD OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. Edited by Rt. Rev. S.
G. Mbssmbr.
"**■ ' 5®
SPIRIT OF SACRIFICE. THE, and the Lire of Sacrifice in the Religious State.
From the original of Rev. S. M. GlRAl'D. Revised by Rev. Heasaar Tacav
TON, S.J.
"*· ‘ *
SPIRITUAL CRUMBS FOR HUNGRY LITTLE SOULS. Mart E. Richard­
son.
« 5*
SPIRITUAL DESPONDENCY AND TEMPTATIONS. Br Rev P· J Michbl
S.J. Translated from the French by Rev. P. P. Gabbschb, S.J.
«Λ. ‘ '5
SPIRITUAL EXERCISES FOR A TEN DAYS' RETREAT. Very Rev R
Smetana, C.SS.R.
""· 1 °®
SPIRITUAL PEPPER AND SALT. Stang.
Paper, o jo; as copies.
Cloth, o.6o; as copies,
ST. ANTHONY. LITTLE MANUAL OP.
ST. ANTHONY. Rev. Dr. Jos. Kbli.br.
STATIONS OP THE CROSS. Illustrated.
STORIES FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS. Rev. J. A. Kbllbr. D.D.
STRIVING AFTER PERFECTION. Rev. Joseph Bayma. S.J.
««.
SURE WAY TO A HAPPY MARRIAGE. Rev. Edward I. Taylor.
Paper, o.as; as copies,
Cloth. 0.40; as copies,
.
THOUGHTS AND COUNSELS for the Consideration of Catholic Young
Rev. P. A. Doss, S.J.
THOUGHTS FOR ALL TIMES. Mgr. Vaughan.
TRAVELLER'S DAILY COMPANION.
Per 100.
TRUE POLITENESS. Abbb Francis Dbmorb.
""·
TRUE SPOUSE OF JESUS CHRIST. By St. Alphonsus db Liguori.

The same, one-volume edition,
TWO SPIRITUAL RETREATS FOR SISTERS. By Rev. E. Zollnbr. «λ. i »
VENERATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN. Her Feasts. Prayers. Religious
Orders, and Sodalities. By Rev. B. Rohnbr, O.S.B.
VEST-POCKET GEMS OF DEVOTION.
VICTORIES OF THE MARTYRS, or, the Lives of the Most Celebrated Martyr,
of the Church. Vol. IX. By St. Alphonsus db Liguori.
"*·. > ‘S
VISITS. SHORT. TO THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Lasancs.
e >5
VISITS TO JESUS IN THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. By the Author of
"Avis Spirituels."
o jo

VISITS TO JESUS IN THE TABERNACLE. Hours and Half Hours of Adop­
tion Moro the Blessed Sacrament. With a Novena to the Holy Ghost and
Devotions for Mass, Holy Communion etc. Rev. F. X. Lasancb.
i
VISITS TO THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT and to the Blessed Virgin Mary.
By St. Alphonsus ob Liouori.
o 50
VOCATIONS EXPLAINED Matrimony. Virginity. The Religious State, and the
Priesthood. By a Vincentian Father, o.to; roo copies,
600
WAY OF INTERIOR PEACE. By Rev. Father Db Lbhbn, S.J.
wf, r as
WAY OF SALVATION AND PERFECTION. Meditations, Pious Reflections.
Spiritual Treatises. St. Alphonsus db Liouori.
rial, r as
WAY OF THE CROSS, Paper, 0.05; too copies,
a 50
WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. An Answer to Earnest Inquirers. By
Rev. Edwin Drurv, Missionary Priest. Paper, o.jo, as copies,
4 50
Cloth, 0.60; as copies,
0 00

JUVENILES.
ADVENTURES OF Â CASKET.
e 4s
ADVENTURES OF A FRENCH CAPTAIN.
o 45
AN ADVENTURE WITH THE APACHES. By Gabriel Fbrry.
o 45
ANTHONY. A Talc of the Time of Charles II. of England.
045
ARMORER OF SOLINGEN. By William Hbrchbnbach.
o 40
AS TRUE AS GOLD. Μαννιχ.
o 45
BERKLEYS. THE. Wight.
ο 4s
BERTHA; or, Consequences of a Fault.
o 45
BEST FOOT FORWARD. By Father Finn.
o 8s
BETTER PART.
ο 4$
BISTOURI. By A. Mblandri.
o 45
BLACK LADY AND ROBIN RED BREAST. By Canon Schmid.
o as
BLANCHE DE MARSILLY.
o 45
BLISSYLVANIA POST-OFFICE. By Marion Ames Taggart.
o 45
BOB O'LINK. Waggaman.
o 45
BOYS IN THE BLOCK. By Mauricb F. Egan.
o as
BRIC-A-BRAC DEALER.
o 4S
BUNT AND BILL. Clara Mulholland.
o 4$
BUZZER'S CHRISTMAS. By Mary T. Waggaman.
ο a5
BY BRANSCOME RIVER. By Marion Ambs Taggart.
ο 45
CAKE AND THE EASTER EGGS. By Canon Schmid.
o a5
CANARY' BIRD. By Canon Schmid.
o 40
CAPTAIN ROUGEMONT.
o 45
CARROLL DARE. By Mary T. Waggaman.
1 aS
CASSILDA; or, the Moorish Princess.
o 4s
CATHOLIC HOME LIBRARY, to vols., each.
045
CLAUDE LIGHTFOOT; or. How the Problem was solved. By Father Finn, ο 8s
COLLEGE BOY. A. By Anthony Yorkb. Cloth,
o 85
CONVERSATION ON HOME EDUCATION.
o 45
COPUS. REV., LE-, S.T.:
ARRY kUSSELL.
o8s
IADOWS LIFTED.
«85
ST. CUTHBERT'S.
°8s
DIMPLING'S SUCCESS. By Clara Mulholland.
o45
EPISODES OF THE PARIS COMMUNE. An Account of the Religious Perse­
cution.
045
ETHELRED PRESTON, or the Adventures of a Newcomer. By Father Finn.

S

EVERY-DAY GIRL. AN. By Mary C. Crowlby.
FATAL DIAMONDS. Bv E. C. Donnbllv.

Illustrated.
THAT FOOTBALL GAME.
ETHELRED PRESTON.
CLAUDE LIGHTFOOT.
II '·.!·■ ;· .· I>1.1··.
TOM PLAYFAIR.
PERCY WYNN.
MOSTLY BOYS.
FISHERMAN S DAUGHTER.
FIVE O'CLOCK STORIES; or. The Old Tales Told Again.
FLOWER OF THE FLOCK. THE. and the Badgers nf Belmont.
F. Egan.
FRED'S LITTLE DAUGHTER. By Sara Trainer Smith.
GERTRUDE'S EXPERIENCE.
GODFREY THE HERMIT. By Canon Schmid.
GOLDEN LILY. THE. Hinkson.
GREAT CAPTAIN, THE. By Katharine T. Hinkson.
GREAT-GRANDMOTHER'S SECRET.
HALDEMAN CHILDREN, THE. By Mary E. Mannix.
HARRY DEE; or, Working it Out. By Father Finn.
HEIR OF DREAMS, AN. By Salue Margaret O'Malley.
HER FATHER'S RIGHT HAND.
HIS FIRST AND LAST APPEARANCE. By Father Finn.
HOP BLOSSOMS. By Canon Schmid.
HOSTAGE OF WAR, A. By Mary G. Bonesteel.
HOW THEY WORKED THEIR WAY. By Maurice F. Egan.
INUNDATION. THE. Canon Schmid.
. 0
JACK HILDREDTH AMONG THE INDIANS >vota..»«h.
FACK HILDREDTH ON THE NILE. By Marion Ambs Taggart. Cloth.

JACK O'LANTERN. By Mary T. Waggaman.
° «
FUVENILE ROUND TABLE. First Series. Stories by the Best Writers, i oo
JUVENILE ROUND TABLE. Second Series.
KLONDIKE PICNIC. By Eleanor C. Donnelly.
LAMP OF THE SANCTUARY. By Cardinal Wiseman.
LEGENDS OF THE HOLY CHILD JESUS from Many Lands. By A. Fowler
Lutz.
LITTLE MISSY. By Mary T. Waggaman.
» 43
LOYAL BLUE AND ROYAL SCARLET. By Marion A. Taggart.
o «5
MADCAP SET AT ST. ANNE'S. By Marion J. Brunowb.
o «5
MARCELLE. A True Story.
0 43
MARY TRACY’S FORTUNE. Sadlisr.
® 43
MASTER FRIDOLIN. By Emmy Giehrl.
MILLY AVELING. By Sara Trainer Smith. Cloth.
MOSTLY BOYS. By Father Finn.
MYSTERIOUS DOORWAY. By Anna T. Sadlibr.
o as
MY STRANGE FRIEND. By Father Finn.
NAN NOBODY. By Mary T. Waggaman.
» 43
OLD CHARLMONT'S SEED-BED. By Sara Trainer Smith.
o as
OLD ROBBER'S CASTLE. By Canon Schmid.
OLIVE AND THE LITTLE CAKES.
0 43
OUR BOYS' AND GIRLS' LIBRARY. 14 vols., each.
OUR YOUNG FOLKS' LIBRARY. 10 vols., each,
» 4S
OVERSEER OF MAHLBOURG. By Canon Schmid.
o >3

PANCHO AND PANCHITA. By Mary E. Mannix.
PAULINE ARCHER. By Anna T. Sadlibr.
PERCY WYNN; or, Making n Boy of Him. By Father Finn
PICKLE AND PEPPER. By Ella Lorainb Dorsby.
PLAYWATER PLOT. THE. By Mary T. Waggaman.
PRIEST OF AUVRIGNY.
QUEEN’S PAGE. By Katharine Tynan Hinkson.
RECRUIT TOMMY COLLINS. Bonrstebl.
RICHARD; or. Devotion to the Stuarts.
ROSE BUSH. By Canon Schmid.
SEA-GULLS' ROCK. By J. Sandbau.
SPALDING. S.J..
„„„„
CATO BY THE BEECH FORK.
THE SHERIFF OF THE BEECH FORK.
THE RACE FOR COPPER ISLAND.
STRONG-ARM OF AVALON. By Mary T. Waggaman.
SUMMER AT WOODVILLE. By Anna T. Sadlibr.
TALES AND LEGENDS OF THE MIDDLE AGES. F. De Capella.
TALES AND LEGENDS SERIES, j vols, each,
TALISMAN, THE. By Anna T. Sadlibr.
TAMING OF POLLY. By Ella Lorainb Dorsey.
THAT FOOTBALL GAME; and What Came of It. By Father Finn.
THREE GIRLS AND ESPECIALLY ONE. By Marion A. Taggart.
THREE LITTLE KINGS. By Emmy Gibiihl.
TOM PLAYFAIR; or. Making a Start. By Father Finn.
TOM’S LUCKPOT. By Mary T. Waggaman.
TREASURE OF NUGGET MOUNTAIN. By M. A. Taggart.
TWO LITTLE GIRLS. By Lilian Mack.
VILLAGE STEEPLE. THE.
WAGER OF GERALD O’ROURKE, THE. Finn-Thiele.
n
WINNETOU, THE APACHE KNIGHT. By Marion Ambs Taggart.
WRONGFULLY ACCUSED. By William Herchbnbach.
YOUNG COLOR GUARD, THE. By Mary G. Bonbstbel.

NOVELS AND STORIES.
" BUT THY LOVE AND THY GRACE." Rev. F. J. Finn, S.J.
i o.
CIRCUS RIDER'S DAUGHTER, THE. A Novel. By F. v. Brackel.
i a
CONNOR D ARCY'S STRUGGLES. A Novel. By Mrs. W. M. Bertholds.
CORINNE’S VOW. Waggaman.
» as
DION AND THE SIBYLS. A Classic Novel. By Miles Kbon. Cloth,
i as
FABIOLA-, or, The Church of the Catacombs. By Cardinal Wiseman. Popular
Illustrated Edition.
° 0°
FABIOLA'S SISTERS. A Companion Volume to Cardinal Wiseman’s "Fabiola.'· By A. C. Clarkb.
' ’S
FATAL BEACON. THE. A Novel. By F. v. Brackel.
x as
HEARTS OF GOLD. A Novel. By I. Ediior.
i aS
HEIRESS OF CRONENSTEIN, THE. By the Countess Hahn-Hahn.
r as
HER FATHER'S DAUGHTER. Katharine Tynan Hinkson.
i as
IDOLS; or. The Secrets of the Rue Chaussee d’Antin. Db Navbry.
i a5
IN THE DAYS OF KING HAL. By Marion Ames Taggart.
i aS
"KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS." A Novel. By J. Harrison.
x as
LET NO MAN PUT ASUNDER. A Novel. By Josephine Marib.
x oo
IO

LINKED UVES. A Novel. By Lady Gmtmudi Douotaa.
, Ja
MARCELLA GRACE. A Novel. By Ros* Mulholiand. Illustrated Edition,
MISS ERIN. A Novel. By M. E. Francis.
i >s
MONK S PARDON, THE. A Historical Novel o( the Time of Philip IV. of
Spain. By Raoul db Navbry.
i >f
MR. BILLY BUTTONS. A Novel. By Waltbr Lbcby.
OUTLAW OF CAMARGUE. THE. A Novel. By A di Lamotbb.
i ij
PASSING SHADOWS. A Novel. By Anthony Yorxb.
i ij
PERE MONNIER'S WARD. A Novel. By Waltbr Lbcky.
i jj
PILKINGTON HEIR. THE. A Novel. By Ann* T. Sadlibb.
t rj
PRODIGAL'S DAUGHTER, THE. By Lbli* Hardin Buoo.
t oo
RED INN OF ST. LYPHAR, THE. A Romance of La Vendée. By Ann*
T. Sadlibr.
> >5
ROMANCE OF A PLAYWRIGHT. By Vte. Hbnri db Bornibr.
i «
ROUND TABLE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE AMERICAN CATHOLIC
NOVELISTS. Complete Stories, with Biographies, Portraits, etc.
i 50
ROUND TABLE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE FRENCH CATHOLIC NOV­
ELISTS. Complete Stories, with Biographies, Portraits, etc.
1 50
ROUND TABLE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE GERMAN CATHOLIC NOV­
ELISTS. Illustrated.
« So
ROUND TABLE OF THE REPRESENTATIVE IRISH AND ENGLISH
CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. Complete Stones, Biographies. Portraits, etc.
Cloth.
> 5’
RULER OF THE KINGDOM. THE. And other Phases of Life and Character.
By Grace Kbon.
THAT MAN'S DAUGHTER. By Henry M. Ross.
TRANSPLANTING OF TESSIE, THE. By Mary T. Waggaman.
o 60
TRUE STORY OF MASTER GERARD. THE. By Anna T Sadlibr.
i «
UNRAVELING OF A TANGLE. THE. A Novel. By Marion A. Taccabt. i >5
VOCATION OF EDWARD CONWAY. A Novel. By Maurice F. Egan. 1 »5
WOMAN OF FORTUNE. A. By Christian Rbid.
» >S
WORLD WELL LOST. By Esther Robbrtson.

LIVES AND HISTORIES.
AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF ST. IGNATIUS LOYOLA. Edited by Rev. J. P. X
O'Conor. Cloth,
BIBLE STORIES FOR LITTLE CHILDREN. Paper, 0 to; Cloth.
0 10
CHURCH HISTORY. Businobr.
HISTORIOGRAPHY ECCLESIASTICA quam Histon* «nam Soüdamque
Operam Navantibus, Accommodavit GutL. Stang, D.D.
HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Brubck. » vols.,
art. j »
HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. By John Gilmary Shea, LL.D

HISTORY OF THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION IN ENGLAND AND
IRELAND. By Wm. Cobbbtt. Cloth.
LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI. By Rev. Eugbnb Grimm. C.SS.R.
Centenary Edition. 5 vols-, each,
LIFE AND LIFE-WORK OF MOTHER THEODORE GUERIN, Foundress >
the Sisters of Providence at St.-Mary-of-the-Wuods, Vigo County. Indiana-

LIFE OF CHRIST. Illustrated. By Father M. v. Cochbm.
LIFE OF FR. FRANCIS POILVACHE. C.SS.R. Paper,
«I, o ro
LIFE OF MOST REV. JOHN HUGHES. Brann.
’"<· 0 7’
LIFE OF MOTHER FONTBONNE. Foundress of the Sisters of St. L-a-ph of
Lyons. By Abbs Rivaux. Cloth,
Ml. 1 1·

LIFE OF SISTER ANNE KATHERINE EMMERICH, of the Order of St. Auguatine. By Rev. Thomas Wbobnbr, O.S.A.
net, i 50
LIFE OF ST. ANTHONY. Ward, b.usrrated.
o 7S
LIFE OP ST. CATHARINE OF SIENNA. By Edward L. Avmb. M.D. i 00
LIFE OF ST. CLARE OP MONTEFALCO. Locke, O.S.A.
net. o 7S
LIFE OF MLLE. LE GRAS.
net. 1 aS
LIFE OF ST. CHANTAL. Bouôaud. a vols.
net, 4 00
LIFE OP THE BLESSED VIRGIN. IlluBtintyd. By Rev. B. Rohnbr, O.S.B.
LITTLE LIVES OF SAINTS FOR CHILDREN. Berthold. Ill. Cloth, o 7S
LITTLE PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. New, cheap edition.
: oo
LIVES OF THE SAINTS. With Reflections and Prayers for Every Day.
1 50
OUR LADY OP GOOD COUNSEL IN GENAZZANO. A History of that An­
cient Sanctuary. By Anne R. Bbnnbtt-Gladstonb.
o 7s
OUTLINES OF JEWISH HISTORY, From Abraham to Our Lord. Rev. F. E.
Gigot, S.S.
net, 1 $0
OUTLINES OP NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. Uy Rev. F. E. Gioot, S.S.
Cloth.
net, 1 50
PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. Cloth,
a 50
REMINISCENCES OF RT. REV. EDGAR P. WADHAMS, D.D., First Bishop
of Ogdensburg. By Rev. C. A. Walworth.
net, 1 00
ST. ANTHONY. THE SAINT OF THE WHOLE WORLD. Rev. Thomas F.
Ward. Cloth,
»75
STORY OF JESUS. Illustrated.
° 6°
STORY OF THE DIVINE CHILD. By Very Rev. Dean A. A. Lincs.
o 75
VICTORIES OF THE MARTYRS. By St. Alphonsus db Liguori. net, 1 as
VISIT TO EUROPE AND THE HOLY LAND. By Rev. H. Fairbanks.
1 so

THEOLOGY, LITURGY, SERMONS, SCIENCE, AND
PHILOSOPHY.
ABRIDGED SERMONS, for All Sundays of the Year. By St. Alphonsus dr
Liouori. Centenary Edition. Grimm, C.SS.R.
«et, 1 >S
BLESSED SACRAMENT, SERMONS ON THE. Especially for the Forty
Hours' Adoration. By Rev. J. B. Schburbr. D.D. Edited by Rev. I·. X.
Lasanck.
net, 1 50
BREVE COMPENDIUM THEOLOGIAE DOGMATICAE ET MORALIS una
cum aliquibus Notionibus Theologiae Canonicae Liturgiae, Pastoralis et
Mysticae, ac Philosophiae Christianae. Bbrthibr.
net, 3 50
CHILDREN OF MARY. SERMONS FOR THE. From the Italian of Rev.
F. Callbrio. Edited by Rev. R. F. Clarke, S.J.
net. ' so
CHILDREN'S MASSES, SERMONS FOR. Frassinbtti-Lings.
net, 1 5o
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS: A Defense of the Catholic Faith. By Rev. W.
Dbvivibr, S.J. Edited by the Rt. Rev. S. G. Mbssmbr, D.D., D.C.L., Bishop
of Green Bay.
net, 1 75
CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY. A Treatise on the Human Soul. By Rev. J. T.
Driscoll, S.T.L.
net,
CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY: God. Driscoll.
CHRIST IN TYPE AND PROPHECY. Rev. A. J. Maas, S.J., Professor of
Oriental Languages in Woodstock College, a vols.,
net, 4 00
CHURCH ANNOUNCEMENT BOOK.
net, o a;
CHURCH TREASURER'S PEW. Collection and Receipt Book.
net, 1 00
COMPENDIUM JURIS CANONICI, ad usum Cleri et Seminariorum hujus Re­
gionis accommodatum.
”e' 2 00
COMPENDIUM JURIS REGULARIUM. Edidit P. Augustinus Bachopkn.
O.S.B.
2 5°
12

COMPENDIUM SACRAE LITURGIAE JUXTA RITUM ROMANUM UNA
. uin Appendice de jure Ecclniaitico Particulari in Am-n. a V«ederat· Sept,
vigente «eripuit P. Innocentius Warblhorxt, O.S.P. Editio «rata emen­
datior.
nri, > (o
COMPENDIUM THEOLOGIAE DOGMATICAE ET MORALIS. Barrum».
«ri. > jo
CONFESSIONAL. THE. By the Right Rev. A. RoBCOL, D.D.
«ri. t oo
DE PHILOSOPHIA MORALI PRAELECTIONES qua» in Collegio Ger.rginpolitano Soc. Jesu, Anno 1880-90 Habuit P. Nicolaus Russo. Editio altera.

ECCLESIASTICAL DICTIONARY. By Rev. Jons Thbin.
«ri’. 5 00
ELEMENTS OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAW. By Rev. S. B. Smith D.D.
| J i .l.ESI ASTII AL PERSONS.
n.
1 < > LES1ASTK AL PUNISHMENTS.
«
ECCLESIASTICAL TRIALS.
n
ENCYCLICAL LETTERS OF POPE LEO XIII.. THE GREAT Tranalated
from approved sources. With Preface by Rev. John J. Wvnnb. S.J. tut, > v
FUNERAL SERMONS. By Rev. Aug. Wirth. O.S.B. a vota-,
nrt. > v>
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OP HOLY SCRIPTURES
By Rev. Francis E. Gicot. S.S. Cloth,
«ri. 1 50
GOD KNOWABLE AND KNOWN. By Rev. Maubicb Ronaynb, S.J.

GOOD CHRISTIAN. THE. Rev. J. Allbn. D.D. 1 vols.
nrt. j 00
HISTORY OF THE MASS AND ITS CEREMONIES IN THE EASTERN
AND WESTERN CHURCH. By Rev. John O Bribn.
«ri. t »5
HUNOLTS SERMONS, ta vols..
«ri. >5 00
HUNOLTS SHORT SERMONS. 5 vols.,
«ri, 10 00
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.^Gigot.
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. VoL I.
Gigot.
t*1· 1 S°
JESUS LIVING IN THE PRIEST. Millbt-Bvrnb.
«ri. a 00
LAST THINGS, SERMONS ON THE FOUR. Hunolt. Translated by Rev
John Allbn, D.D. a vol».,
"ri· ' 00
LENTEN SERMONS. Edited by Augustins Wirth, O.S.B.
LIBER STATUS ANIMARUM; or, Parish Census Book. Pockrt Edition.
not. o.aj; half leather,
MORAL PRINCIPLES AND MEDICAL PRACTICE THE BASIS OF MED­
ICAL JURISPRUDENCE. By Rev < harlbs Cobfbns S.J.. Pn.ieajor
of Medical Jurisprudence in the John A. Creighton Medical College. Omaha.
Neb. . Author of Text-books in Metaphysics. Ethics, etc.
nrt. 1 50
NATURAL LAW AND LEGAL PRACTICE. Holaind, S.J.
«ri. > 75
NEW AND OLD SERMONS. A Repertory of Catholic Pulpit Eloquence. Ed­
ited by Rev. Aucustinb Wirth, O.S.B. 8 vols.,
«ri. to 00
OUTLINES OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY. By Rev. Sylvbstbr Jos. Huntbb.
S.J. j vols.,
"»»· « 50
OUTLINES OF JEWISH HISTORY, from Abraham to Our Lord. By Rev.
Francis E. Gigot, S.S.
OUTLINES OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. Gigot. Goth,
«ri. 1 50
PASTORAL THEOLOGY. By Rev. Wa. Stang. D.D.
PENANCE. SERMONS ON. By Rev. Francis Hunolt. S.J. Translated by
Rev. John Allen, a vols.,
PENITENT CHRISTIAN. THE. Sermons. By Rev. F. Hunolt. Translated
by Rev. John Allbn, D.D. a vols.,
«ri. S <»
PEW-RENT RECEIPT BOOK.
"ri. t 00
PHILOSOPHIA, DE, MORALI. Russo.
"ri. « 00
POLITICAL AND MORAL ESSAYS. Rickabv. S.J.
nrt 1 50
PRAXIS SYNODALIS. Manuale Synodi Diocesanae ac Provincialis Cele­
brandae.
° 60

RBGISTRUM BAPTISMORUM.
net. 3 jo
RBGISTRUM MATRIMONIORUM.
net. 3 50
RELATION OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY TO PHILOSOPHY. Mgr.
di Mbrcibr.
net, o ,15
RITUALE COMPENDIOSUM seu Ordo Administrandi quaedam Sacramenta
et alia Officia Ecclesiastica Rite Peragendi ex Rituali Romano, novissime
edito desumptas.
net, o 9 j
XOSARY, SERMONS ON THE MOST HOLY. Frings.
net, 1 os
SACRED HEART, SIX SERMONS ON DEVOTION TO THE. By Rev. Di.
E. BibMaum.
net, o b>
SANCTUARY BOYS' ILLUSTRATED MANUAL. Embracing the Ceremo­
nies of the Inferior Ministers at Low Mass, High Mass, Solemn High Mass,
Vespers, Asperges, Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament and Absolution for
the Dead. By Rev. J. A. McCallin, S.S.
net, o $0
SERMON MANUSCRIPT BOOK.
net, 3 ou
SERMONS, ABRIDGED. FOR SUNDAYS. Liguori.
SERMONS FOR CHILDREN OF MARY. Callbrio.
net. 1 so
SERMONS FOR CHILDREN'S MASSES. Frassinbtti -Lings.
net, 1 so
SERMONS FOR THE SUNDAYS AND CHIEF FESTIVALS OF THE ECCLE­
SIASTICAL YEAR. With Two Courses of Lenten Sermons and a Triduum
for the Forty Hours. By Rev. J. Pottc.bissbr, S.J. > vols. net. 3 $0
SERMONS FROM THE LATINS. Baxter.
net. 1 00
SERMONS. FUNERAL. Wirth. 1 vols.,
net, 3 00
SERMONS, HUNOLT'S. 11 vols.,
«ef. »5 oc
SERMONS, HUNOLTS SHORT, s vols.
net. 10 00
SERMONS, LENTEN. Wirth.
net. 3 00
SERMONS. NEW AND OLD. Wirth. 8 vols.,
net, ib 00
SERMONS ON DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART. Bibrbaum.^

SERMONS ON OUR LORD, THE BLESSED VIRGIN. AND THE SAINTS.
Hunolt. 3 vols..
5 °°
SERMONS ON PENANCE. Hunolt. 3 vols.,
»«·/, 5 οα
SERMONS ON THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Schburbr-Lasancb. net, 1 50
SERMONS ON THE CHRISTIAN VIRTUES. By Rev. F. Hunolt. S.J. Trans­
lated by Rev. John Allbn. 3 vols.,
»*■'. S 00
SERMONS ON THE DIFFERENT STATES OF LIFE. By Rev. F. Hunolt,
S.J. Translated by Rev. John Allen. » vols.
s
SERMONS ON THE FOUR LAST THINGS. Hunolt. 3 vols..
net. 5 00
SERMONS ON THE ROSARY. Frings.
>«■'. > 00
SERMONS ON THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS. By Rev. F. Hunolt, S.J.
vols. Translated by Rev. John Allbn, D.D.
5
SERMONS ON THE STATES OF LIFE. Hunolt. 3 vols.,
net, 5
SHORT SERMONS. By Rev. F. Hunolt, S.J. 5 vols..
>0
SHORT SERMONS FOR LOW MASSES. Schouppb. S.J.
« »5
SOCIALISM EXPOSED AND REFUTED. Cathrbin.
· °°
SPECIAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Part I. The Historical Books. By Rev. Francis E. Gigot, S.S.
net, 1 50
SYNOPSIS THEOLOGIAE DOGMATICAE AD MENTEM S. THOMAE
AQUINATIS hodiernis moribus accommodata, auctore Au. Tanqubrbv. S.S,
3 vols.,
5 ’■*
SYNOPSIS THEOLOGIAE MORALIS ET PASTORALIS. » vois. Tanqub­
rbv.
3 S°
THEOLOGIA DOGMATICA SPECIALIS. Tanqubrbv. a vols.,
net, 3 50
THEOLOGIA FUNDAMENTALIS. Tanqubrbv.
"*'· > 75
VIEWS OF DANTE. By E. L. Rivard, C.S.V.
”“· 1 ’5

MISCELLANEOUS.
A GENTLEMAN. By Μ P. Egan. LL.D.
a „
A LADY. Manners and Social Usages By Lbua Hardin Boon.
o n
BENZIGBR'S MAGAZINE. The Popular Catholic Family M Agarme Sub­
scription per year.
· ®o
BONE RULES, or, Skeleton of English Grammar. By Rev. J. B. Tabb, AM.
CANTATA CATHOLICA. By B. Η. P. Hellebusch.
art, » oo
CATHOLIC HOME ANNUAL. Stories by Best Writers.
CORRECT THINGS FOR CATHOLICS. THE. By Lblia Hardin Bugg. a
ELOCUTION CLASS. A Simplification of the Laws and Principles of Espre*.
sion. By Eleanor O’Grady.
net. o je
EVE OF THE REFORMATION. THE. An Historical Essay on the Religkma.
Literary, and Social Condition of Christendom, with Special Reference to
Germanv and England, from the Beginning of the Latter Hatt of the Fifteenth

GUIDE FOR SACRISTANS and Others Having Charge of the Altar and Sanc­
tuary. By a Member of an Altar Society.
<*·. a tj
HYMN-BOOK OF SUNDAY-SCHOOL COMPANION.
o is
HOW TO GET ON. By Rev. Bernard Pebnbv.
i eo
LITTLE FOLKS- ANNUAL, o.io; per too,
1 jo
READINGS AND RECITATIONS FOR JUNIORS. OGradv.
<w». o $■»
SELECT RECITATIONS FOR CATHOLIC SCHOOLS AND ACADEMIES.
By Eleanor O'Grady.
' oo
STATISTICS CONCERNING EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES. Hedges.
SURSUM CORDA. Hymns. Cloth, o.>$; per too.

SURSUM CORDA. With English and German Test.
PRAYER-BOOKS.
,
. , . ...
Bcnziger Brothers publish the most complete lino of prayer-boolcs tn this
e
country, embracing
Prayer-books for Children.
Prayer-books for First Communicants.
Prayer-books for Special Devotions.
Prayer-books for General Use.
Catalogue will be sent free on application.
SCHOOL BOOKS.
. .
.. . .
Bcnziger Brothers' school text-books are considered to be the finest published.
y emoracc
New Century Catholic Readers. Illustrations in Colors.
Catholic Natural Readers.
History.

Ειογιτιομ.