This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non- commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at http : / /books . qooqle . com/
Theory and practice of the confessional
Caspar Erich Schieler, Herman Joseph Heuser, ..
■of r h *•
Digitized by Google
Digitized by
THEORY 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 OVEKBROOK SEMINARY INTRODUCTION BY THE
MOST REV. S. G. MESSMER, D.D., D.C.L..
ARCHBISHOP OF MILWAUKEE
NEW YORK, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO BENZIGER BROTHERS
PRINTERS TO THI I PUBLISHERS OP
HOLY APOSTOLIC SEE | BENZIGER'S MAGAZINP
Digitized by Google
STACK
Ntijtl obgtat
REMIGIUS LAFORT,
Censor Librorum
Imprimatur*
^ JOHN M. FARLEY,
Archbishop of New York
New York, Aug. 31, 1905
Copyright, 1905, by Benzigbr Brothers.
Digitized by Google
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 lost. Weak knees are confirmed (Is. xxxv. 3) ; that is, men weak and idle in mind receiye 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.
"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 render 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 Paral. 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
iv. 8).
V
984
vi
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.
" Therefore 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. Bait. PI. II. nn. 278, 279, 280).
Hie 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-
INTRODUCTION
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 demands 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 and 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 and the firmness, impartiality, and discretion of the spiritual judge; the watchful care and patient search of
viii
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 all. 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 confessorv 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 hahds 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 foun tains 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).
lit 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. It 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 helpful 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,
5
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 the 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 had 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 Bruehl, 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 and 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 quite 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 and 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, and certain precedents by way of illustration, in order to render him familiar with actual and 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 and
8
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, oversevere or overindulgent, as his temper dictates. He 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 wliich, 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 sonls 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
PREFACE
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 may be; satisfac- tion, its acceptance or commutation.
Hie 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, his 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 be 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
I'AOK
1. The Virtue of Penance 17
2. The Sacrament of Penance 20
3. Necessity of the Sacrament of Penance ...... 22
4. Forgiveness of Y'enial Sin 29
5. The Constituent Parts of the Sacrament of Penance in General . 37
6. The Remote Matter of the Sacrament of Penance in Particular . 30
7. The Form of the Sacrament 50
8. Conditional Absolution 59
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 7 1
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 n The Purpose of Amendment
16. Necessity and Nature of the Purpose of Amendment . . . 121
17. Properties of the Purpose of Amendment 126
18. The Purpose of Amendment with regard to Venial Sin . . 133
11
Digitized by Google
12
CONTENTS
CHAPTER III Confession
Article I. Essence, Necessity, and Properties of Confession pAOK
19. Essence and Necessity of Confession 137
20. Properties of Confession . . . 138
Article II. The Integrity of the Confession
21. Necessity of the Integrity of Confession 153
22. Extent of the Integrity of Confession . . . . . . 157
23. The Number of Sins in Confession 163
24. The Confession of the Circumstances of Sins 166
25. The Confession of Doubtful Sins 180
26. Sins omitted through Forgetfulness or Other Causes not Blame-
worthy . .193
27. Reasons Excusing from Complete Accusation .... 198
A rticle III. The Means to be employed in Order to make a Perfect
Confession
28. The Examination of Conscience 215
29. Invalid Confessions 222
30. General Confession 228
31. The Manner of Hearing General Confession 238
32. 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 . . 284
38. The Minister of the Sacrament with Delegated Jurisdiction or
Approbation 288
Digitized by Google
CONTENTS 13
PAOK
39. JurisfJictio Delegata 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
41. Jurisdiction and Approbation for the Confessions of Nuns . . 311
CHAPTER II Limitation of Jurisdiction or Reserved Cases
42. Reserved Cases in General 316
43. The Papal Reserved Cases 326
44. Absolution of Reserved Sins 340
CHAPTER III Abuse of Power by the Minister* of the Sacrament
45. Inquiring after the Name of the Accomplice in Sin . . . 351
46. The Absolution of the Complex in Peccato Turpi .... 354
47. SoUicitaUo Proprii Pcenitenlis ad Turpia 364
Section II. The Office of the Confessor
CHAPTER I
The Essential Duties of the Confessor in the Exercise of his Office; or, The Confessor considered in his Office of Judge
48. The Knowledge of the Sins 379
49. The Nature of the Questions to be put to the Penitent . . . 382
50. The Examination of the Dispositions of the Penitent . . . 398
51. The Confessor's Duty in Disposing his Penitents .... 402
52. The Duty of the Confessor to administer, to defer, or to refuse
Absolution 407
CHAPTER II The Accessory Duties of the Confessor
Article I. The Preparation
53. The Virtues which the Confessor must Possess . . . .416
54. The Scientific Equipment of the Confessor 424
55. The Prudence of the Confessor 434
Digitized by Google
14
CONTENTS
Article II. Duties of the Confessor during Confession 56. The Duty of instructing and exhorting the Penitent (Munus
Doctoris) 438
57. The Duty of suggesting Remedies against Relapse (the Confessor
as Physician) 448
CHAPTER III The Duties of the Confessor after the Confession
58. The Duty of correcting Errors occurring in the Confession . . 460
59. The Duty of preserving the Seal of Confession .... 466
60. The Subject of the Seal of Confession 471
61. The Object or Matter of the Seal of Confession .... 473
62. Violations 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
Proximo, 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. Habitual and Relapsing Sinners
67. Definition and Treatment of Habitual Sinners .... 518
68. Relapse, and the Treatment of Relapsing Sinners • 521
69. Relapsing Sinners requiring Special Care 530
70. Penitents aiming at Perfection 536
71. Hypocritical Penitents 543
7*2. Scrupulous Penitents 545
73. Converts 555
CHAPTER n
The Treatment of Penitents in Different External Circumstances
74. The Confession of Children 561
75. The Confession of Young Unmarried People 575
Digitized by Google
CONTENTS 15
PAGE
7G. The Confessor as Adviser in the Choice of a State of Life . . 583
77. Betrothal and Marriage 592
78. The Confessor's Attitude toward Mixed Marriages . . . 600
79. How to deal with Penitents joined in "Civil " Marriage only . 607
80. The Confessor's Conduct toward Women 608
81. The Confessions of Men 614
82. The Confession of Nuns 618
83. The Confession of Priests 624
CHAPTER ni Penitents in Extreme Danger
84. The Importance of the Priest's Ministry at the Bedside of the Sick
and the Dying 630
85. The Confessions of the Sick 632
86. Absolution of the Dying 645
Topical Index 655
Digitized by Google
Digitized by GoogI
THEOliY 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 salutem) 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 widest sense, penance may be defined as a regret for some past action. Such a regret is not necessarily virtuous,
i S. Th. S. Theol. III. Q. 84, art. 7 ad 7. 17
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 the per- ception of anything we look upon as an evil. Now sin may be 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.2 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.8 Furthermore, Lehmkuhl 4 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
2 S. Th. S. Theol. III. Q. 85, art. 3 ad 3.
8 Cf. Miiller, Theol. Mor. Lib. III. Tit. II. § 106.
4 Theol. Mor. Tom. II. § 1, De Poenit. n. 251; cf. Palmieri, Tract.de Poenit. (Rome, 1879), p. 18 et seq.
6 While theologians are united in admitting a virtus generalia pwnitcnliw
T&e ViRTtTE 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 perform 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.8
having its own material and formal object, they fail to agree on the definition of the formal object. Cf. Suarez, Lugo, and more especially Palmieri, 1. c.
aCf. S. Th. III. Q. 85 et seq. de pcenitentia secundum quod est virtus. Suarez, De Sacramento Poenitentiae Disp. per 2 Sectiones, de pvenitentia in com- muni ; Lugo, De Sacramento Poenitentia?, P. T. pp. 1-44 (Roma?, 1879) ; Miiller, Theol. Mor. Lib. IN. Sect. 106; Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. Tom. II. Tract. V. De Sacr. Poenit Sect. 1 ; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. V. De Poenit. Para I.
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. This 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
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, and great spiritual con- solation.
God.
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 criminal, 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.7
*Cf. S. Th. Quodl. T. a. 12; S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 600 s.; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 255; Miiller, 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 this Sacrament is for any reason impossible, will be cleansed from their sins by the desire of receiving it. This desire is always included in perfect contrition.9
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
s Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 2.
9 Cf. S. Th. Quodl. I. a. 12; S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VII. n. 600 Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 255; Miiller, 1. c. Sect. 107, in fine.
NECES8ITY OF THE SACRAMENT 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 (per se) 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 Temain in a state of enmity with God for any considerable period."
10 See Sect. 4, p. 29.
" S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 602, 665; Gury-Ball. TT. n. 466; Ballerini. Ant.
24 PENANCE A8 A VIRTUE AND A8 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? 12
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. Pcen. cp. III. n. 1025 ss. ; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 229.
12 Such is the teaching of nearly all the moralists; cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 667 ; Gury, I. n. 478 ; Scavini, De Sacram. Pcenit. n. 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 and 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 large number of eminent theologians, — St. Antoninus, Billuart, 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 tletenninativum divini pracepti.
Digitized by Google
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 potfer of the keys in the next confession.13
For the same reason alleged above, the law of the Church 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 and 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.15 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 it
19 Suarez and Laymann teach the opposite. Cf . Scavini, L c. n. 35, nota 1.
14 Cf Decretum Lateran. Concilii IV. cp. 21. u See Sect 74, Children's Confessions.
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 deprivfe them of both the Sacrament of Penance and Extreme Unction, which is a serious matter, if they have been capable of committing mortal sin.16
The precept of the Church imposes annual confession, saltern semel in anno. Beyond this, time and season are not specified. Theologians interpret the law in general as follows: all who are 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
16 Lehmkuhl, I. Tract VI. n. 1202, 3.
" S. Alph. 1. c. n. 669 ; Gury, 1. c. n. 479 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1204.
18 S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 8, art. 5 ad 4, and St. Bonaventure, Compend. Theol. Lib. VI. cp 25, Confess, necessitas, support this view saltern 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 alf 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.1*
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 we cannot discharge our duty. This was distinctly con- firmed by Alexander VII, condemning a proposition to the contrary. (Prop. 14.)
19 Cf. Scavini, De Sacram. Poenit. n. 36, who follows Suarez, Laymann, Lugo, Salmanticenses, etc. Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1202.
20 Lacroix, De praecepto Confess, n. 2003 ; S. Alph. 1. c. n. 668 ; Scavini, I. c. n. 30, (j, 4; Gury, 1. c. n. 478, nota 3; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1206.
Digitized by Google
28 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
A further provision of the Lateran decree, to confess pro- pria 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 poena lata, but a poena ferendce sentential.
The ardent wish of the Church is tLat 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. When 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. Muller, 1. c. Sect. 118, n. 6-4; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 1205.
FORGIVENESS OF VENIAL SIN
29
efficacious means than frequent confession. It leads us to greater watchfulness over ourselves, cojistitutes 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 God 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 and weakness are granted to him. The oftener the just man approaches this holy Sacra- ment, the more fully does he partake of its peculiar graces."
By divine and ecclesiastical precept we are bound only to con- fess mortal sins; there is no obligation to confess venial sins; these may be forgiven without receiving the Sacrament of Penance.
n Pauli Segneri, S. J., Instructio Poenitent. cp. XV : Fructus percepti ex frtquentx confessione.
4. Forgiveness of Venial Sin.
30 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND A3 A SACRAMENT
" Venial sins, by which we 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 the 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.23
Before enumerating the methods by which venial sins can be 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
a Sess. XIV. cp. 5.
FORGIVENESS 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.24
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. IIT. Q. 87, art. 1. St. Thomas demands for the forgiveness of mortal sin a perfectior pceni- tentia, that is, that a man actually detest his mortal sins so far as he can ; sed non hoc requiritur ad remimotiem venialium peccatorum ; non tamen sufficit habitualis displicentia quae habetur per habitum caritatis, vel poenitentia: virtutis, quia, sic caritas non compateretur peccatum veniale, quod patet esse falsum. . . . Hence follows, continues the holy Doctor, that there is required a virtualis displicentia, puta cum aliquis hoc modo ferlur secundum affectum in Deum et res divinas, ut, quidquid sibi occurreret, quod eum ab hoc motu retardaret, dis- pliceret ei et doleret se commississe, etiamsi actu de illo non cogitaret, quod tamen non sufficit ad remissionem peccati mortalis nm quantum ad peccata oblita post diligentem inquisitionem. HI. Q. 87, art. 1. Scavini, 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 Suarez distinguishes a twofold perfection in this love, an objective secundum exten- sionem ad venialia peccata, and an intensive ex conatu potential. 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 culpam 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 virtualis displicentia; in other words, contri- tion.
32 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND A8 A SACBAMENT
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.25 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," 28 such as : —
(a) 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." 27
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
96 Cf. TTI. Q. 87, art. 4 et 2. On the diverging views of Scotus and Durandus, compare Suarez, De Sacram. Pcenit. Disp. II. Sect. 2, n. 2. 86 Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 5. 27 Disp. IX. Sect. 3, n. 53.
FORGIVENESS OF VENIAL SIN
33
sins, and is consequently a virtual horror and retraction of the same.28
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.29
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.30
With respect to the Holy Eucharist the same Council 81 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.
* Cf. S. Th. ITT. Q. 87, art 1 et 3.
" Cf. Trid. Sess. V. Deer, de peccatoorig. n. 5; Sess. XIV. de poen. cp. 3; S. Th. III. Q. 86, art. 2 ad 1.
» Sess. XIV. de Extr. Unct. cp. 2, can. 2. « Sess. XIII. can. 5 et cp. 2.
34 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
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 caritas, and that not only quantum ad habitum sed etiam quantum ad actum; in other words charity is elicited in this Sacrament, and through its operation venial sins are forgiven.32
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.*3
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 be considered as remitting venial sins when no obsta- cle is put in the way.34 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.35 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.86 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.
82 III. Q. 79, art. 4.
w Suarez, Comment, ad III. Thomae, Q. 79, art. 4. Cf. Disputatio 63, Sect. 10, n. 1.
* Cf. S. Thorn. Q. 87, art. 2 et 3.
» Cf. S. Thorn. Q. 72, art. 7 ad 2.
M Cf. S. Thorn. Suppl. Q. 26, art. 1 et 3.
FORGIVENESS OF VENIAL SIN
35
(6) Venial sins are likewise removed by the holy sacrifice of the Mass, which of its own nature is a sacrifice of atonement, a scurificium vere proptiiatorium.*7 It works this forgiveness, as theologians teach, per modum impetrationisy therefore mediately, by obtaining for the sinner from God the grace of contrition or other virtues, excluding affection for sin.38
(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." 39 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, absolidionem, etc.40 To these we may add the use of holy water, which, in accordance with the intention and 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, and harm.41 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
w Trid. Seas. XXII. de Sacrif. Missae, cp. 2.
«Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 311.
59 Tappehorn, Die lassliche SUnde, p. 55.
40 Some theologians attribute to these two prayers an effect ex opere operate Suarez, Disp. 12, Sect. 2, n. 6. « Cf. S. Thorn. III. Q. 87, art. 3.
36 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
the cleansing from sin, so much the more effectual are they in this respect.42
(d) 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.43
According to the teaching of the more numerous and distin- guished theologians, even imperfect contrition remits venial sins ; this imperfect contrition (attritio) 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.44 By attritio 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.46
(e) Moreover, the "love of God above all things" remits venial sins if it is actual and formally or virtually opposed to vepial sin.46
(/) Lastly, venial sins are forgiven by good works done from * Cf. MUUer, 1. c. Sect 110, II. n. 4.
48 Cf. S. Thorn. III. Q. 87, a. 2; S. Bonaventure, In IV. Sent. Dist. 20, P. 1, a. 1, Q. 2 ad 3.
44 Cf . Lugo, De Sacram. Pcenit. Disp. IX. Sect. 2, n. 29 et seq. ; Suarez, Disp. XI. Sect. 3 ; Ripalda, De Ente Supernaturali, Tom. II. Lib. IV. Disp. 97, Sect. 4 (Ed. nova, Parisiis, 1870).
46 For the arguments of those who oppose this teaching, see Suarez, Disp. XI. Sect. 3, n. 5 ; Gury, I. n. 457 ; Scavini, 1. c. n. 11 ss.
46 Cf. Suarez, Disp. 11, Sect. 3, nn. 8-10.
CONSTITUENT PARTS OF SACRAMENT OF PENANCE 37
a motive of penance (ex affectu pamitentiw), especially those to which Holy Scripture assigns the virtue of destroying venial sin. Such are: prayer47 (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. Thorn. II. II. Q. 147, art. 1 et 3."
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 Saprament 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 qiuiai^mcUeria. The Catechismus Romanus 49 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-materia ("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
** 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. Thorn. III. Q. 87, art. 8 ; I. II. Q. 74, art. 8 ad 6.
48 On the remission of venial sins, defiling the faithful who die in grace see S. Thorn. De Malo, Q. 7, a. 11 ; Suarez, Disp. 11, Sect. 4 ; Disp. 47, Sect. 1 ; Palmieri, Tract, de Poenitentia, p. 190 ss. ; Oswald, Eschatologie, p. 84 ss. ; Tappehorn, Die lassliche Siinde, Sect. 11, p. 61 ss.
* Cat. Rom. P. II. Cap. V. Q. XII.
38 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND A8 A SACRAMENT
as they are required by God's ordinance in the penitent 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 ;
60 Cat. Rom. 1. c.
61 Cf. Trid. Seas. XIV. cp. 2, 3 et 4, can. 4; S. Thorn. III. Q. 86, art. 6; Balleriiii, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. 1. n. 2 ss.
62 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 satis- faction 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 be 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 P(en. Disp. 12, n. 40.
REMOTE MATTER OF THE SACRAMENT 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.68 "The contrite accusation, therefore, realizes all the conditions of the matter in the Sacraments/ ' 54
Theologians draw a further distinction in this Sacrament be- tween the proximate and the remote matter (materia proxima el remota). Proximo, 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.
w 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 cannot be sacramental ; hence they have no hesitation in considering these acts essential. The Thomists, 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. 256. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor, 1. c. cp. 1, n. 14.
40 PENANCE A8 A VIRTUE AND A8 A SACRAMENT
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.56 This remote mat- ter is divided into : —
1. Necessary and free matter (necessaria et libera), i.e. neces- sary as 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 dovbtfvl (certa et dvbia), 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 (mfficiens et insufficient), 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
66 Cf. Aertnys, 1. c. Cap. III. n. 171.
REMOTE MATTER OF THE SACRAMENT 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 se 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.67 Over sins which have not yet been directly remitted the confessor has pronounced no judgment, for they v/cre 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.68
•T Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 5.
M Lacroix, Theol. Moral Lib. VI. P. 11. n. 695 88. ; Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Tr. VI. Disp. 1, q. 4, cp. 5. Hence Alexander VII condemned the proposition (Prop. II. daranata) that sins omitted in confession, whether
Digitized by Google
42 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
The following classes of sins are sufficient and free matter for confession : —
(a) The venial sins committed after Baptism. These 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.
(b) Sins already directly forgiven are 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.59
Moreover the highest authority in the Church favors this view; for Benedict XI teaches 60 : "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.
w S. Alph. 1. c. n. 427, dub. 2; Gury (Ed. Rom.), n. 418; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 17 ; Muller, 1. c. Sect. Ill ; Aertnys, 1. c. n. 172. Q. I.
60 Extravag. com. 1. 5. tit. 7 (de privileg.), c. I. Const. "Inter cunctas."
REMOTE 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.61
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." 62
Since venial sins and 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
61 Cf . Ballerini, 1. c. ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 263.
62 Lugo, De Pcenit. d. 13, n. 73.
44 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND A3 A SACRAMENT
against the sixth commandment but has forgotten the exact specific nature of the sin, or that he has sinned gravely but has quite forgotten what the sin was, is obliged, as all 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.68
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 are 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- firm species) of the sin.
4. Finally, the penitent may declare the ultimate species (infirm species) of the sin without determining the precise act and without the specific circumstances and their number ; e.g. I 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. Letimkuhl, 1. c. n. 263.
REMOTE MATTER OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE 45
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 wished to 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 : —
(a) 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.
(b) 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 VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
account, at least absolution may at times be given to such a penitent if he has not had it for a long period.64
3. When it is a question of venial sins only (on the 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 Clement 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 fof 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 jvdicialis 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
MReuter, Neoconfessarius, P. II. Cap. III. Art. IV. n. 117.
REMOTE MATTER OF THE SACHAMENT OF PENANCE 47
given by the Church only to those who make a definite accusa- tion.88 Though, adds Laymann,88 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.91 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." 88
"Since, then," concludes Lehmkuhl, "outside the cases of oecessity 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." 89
In consequence the following rules are recommended in practice : —
68 At accusare se de venialibus in genere dicendo v. g. Accuso me de multis wnialibus, nihil aliud exprimendo, probabilius non videtur licere extra casum necessitatis ; turn quia est contra praxim Ecclesiat, turn quia hoc Sacramentum est institutum per modum accusationis et judicii, quod per se loquendo fieri debet circa mater iam saltern in specie certam et determinatam. Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. c. II. Cf. Suarez, Disp. 23, Sect. I. n. 10; Reuter, Xeoconfessarius, P. II. C. III. Art. 4, n. 117.
w De Sacr. Poenit. c. 5, n. 14.
87 Cf. Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. c. II. M Suarez, Disp. 23, Sect. I. n. 10. » Lehmkuhl, L c. n. 266.
48 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
1. If, in order to secure unquestionably definite 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 defend 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 and 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
70 Cf. Gury-Ballerini, Corapend. Theol. Moral. IT. n. 421.
REMOTE MATTER OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE 49
few lesser 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, and in every possible way prepare him with true apostolic zeal to receive worthily the sacrament, either immediately or later, if the
50 PENANCE A8 A VIRTUE AND Ab A SACRAMENT
absolution be deferred, and to fulfill his resolutions of making an earnest amendment.71
The form of the Sacrament, "in which its power principally lies," 72 consists of the words which the priest utters over the penitent : Ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris 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." 73
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 formce, because, as St. Thomas says,7* they signify the virtus clavium et totum Sacramenti effectum.
According to most theologians the words a peccatis tuis 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 afe- 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
71 On this matter see the eminently practical hints of Reuter in hit Neoconfessarius, 1. c. n. 117. Cf. Lehmkuhl, 1. c. nn. 266, 267.
72 Trident. Sess. XIV. cp. 3.
» Trident. 1. c. *« III. Q. 84, a. 3.
»• S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 430, Dub. 2 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 32.
7. The Form of the Sacrament
TEE FORM OF THE SACRAMENT
51
If the words absolvo a peccatis tuis were used, omitting the word te, the form would still be probably valid, since te is suffi- ciently implied in the word tuis; ii\ practice, however, this view ought not to be taken, but the safer opinion followed.78 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.77
The words In nomine Patris et Filii et 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
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 Sacraments are conferred as there are persons absolved, if they give any token of sorrow and in some way confess their sinfulness.79
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 tui omnipo-
»• S. Thorn. III. Q. 84, n. 1 ad 3. Cf. Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Tract 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 baptisma, ideoque iterandum. The same holds for the Sacrament of Penance.
n S. Thorn. III. Q. 84, n. 1 ad 3. Cf. Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Tract. VI. Disp. II. Q. IV. c. 1.
79 Lugo, 1. c. Dist. 13, Sect. 7 ; Lacroix, 1. c. Lib. VI. P. 2, n. 645, etc.
God.78
52 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
tens Deus et dimissis peccatis tuis perducat te ad vitam cetemam. Amen. Then he raises his right hand over the penitent and says: Indidgentiam, absolutionem et remissionem peccatorum tuorum tribuat tibi omnipotens et misericors Dominus. Amen.
" Dominus noster Jesus Christus te dbsolvat, et ego auctoritate ipsius te absolvo ab omni vinculo excommunicationis (suspen- sionis) et interdicti in quantum possum et tu indiges. Delude ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris * et Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.
"If the penitent is not a cleric, the word suspensionis is omitted." Then follows the prayer: uPassio Domini nostri Jesu Christi, merita beatce Marice Virginis et omnium Sanctorum, quidquid boni feceris et mali sustinueris, sint tibi in remissionem peccatorum, augmentum gratice et proemium vitce cetemce. Amen."
If there are many penitents to be heard and in urgent con- fessions, the Misereatur and Indidgentiam may be omitted and simply the Dominus noster, etc., said. The prayer Passio Do- mini, etc., may also be left out.80 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.81
"In cases of pressing necessity, in danger of death, the priest
80 Cf. Deer. S. R. C. Feb. 27, 1847.
81 Cf. Stotz, Tribunal Poenitentiae, L. IT. Q. HI. art. 1, § 1 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 268 : etiam in frequentioribus confessionibus expedit non omittere. Though Tappehorn in his Anleitung zur Verwaltung des heiligen Buss- Sacramentes, third edition, p. 67, 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 confessionibus frequentioribus) the prayers Misereatur and Indulgentiam (the plural vestri, vestris, etc., being used) may be said over all who are present, we must observe that the Roman Ritual mentions nothing about this practice. Holzmann recommends that the Passio Domini nostri, etc., 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 Patris * et Filii et Spiritus Saneti. 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.83
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 et in labiis tuis ut digne et competenter (or rite) con- fitearis peccata tua. In nomine Patris * 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 Indvlgenliam contains the same petition for " grace, absolution, and remission," of sins confessed and of all others;
M It is not de 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. Universa, Tom. IV. n. 76.
54 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
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 reliquiae 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 indidgentiam 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.83 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.
88 Rt. Rom. De Sac ram. Poenit.
M Sess. XIV. cp. 3. Cf . S. Alph. n. 430, Dub. 4.
Digitized by Google
THE FORM OF THE SACRAMENT
55
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 tuis can be understood if 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.86
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 *or 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
w 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. III. art. 1, § 1, n. 215; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. Sect. I. cp. III. § 3, n. 270.
86 The word Deinde which connects the absolution from censures with that from sins appears, from the latest edition of the Roman Ritual as 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 the word was printed in red and regarded as a rubric (cf. Edit. Romae 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. 4 ; Morinus, De Pcenitent. ; Binterim, Denkwiirdigkeiten, Bd. 5, Teil 1, K. 6, § 3 ; S. Thorn. III. Q. 84, a. 3 ; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 269, nota 2. *
56 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
consists essentially in words articulated by the lips; as for the Sacrament of Penance, the evidence is clear as well from the actual use prescribed in all penitentials and from the teaching of the Fathers, 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
The fact that the absolution should be pronounced in words requires as its complement that the penitent should be present, for the words Ego te absolvo are not such as we would address to a person when absent, but thus we speak to one who is nigh. The form must 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
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
of it.
person.
THE FORM OF THE SACRAMENT
57
about which he has informed the confessor by letter, if the latter at the time of the confession retains a knowledge of the sins in particular.87
The prcesentia moralis of the penitent is sufficient for absolu- tion. This condition is satisfied if the priest and the penitent are 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.88 In general greater proximity is required for valid absolution than is demanded for hearing a preacher or for satisfying the obligation of hearing Mass.89
St. Alphonsus declares with respect to this subject that Tam-
87 With regard to this matter Clement VIII in Const, 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 Pcenit. pp. 141-143 (Rom. 1879). Cf. Reuter, Neoconfessar. P. 1. 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. 429.
89 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.
Digitized by Google
58 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
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*90 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.
(6) 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.91
(c) If at a distance a priest sees 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. 429.
91 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 ABSOLUTION
59
under the ruins of a building, etc., he should give absolution conditionally.92
Absolution must, under ordinary circumstances, be given absolutely ; for weighty reasons it may and ought to be given conditionally (amditione).
8. Conditional Absolution.
It is the unanimous teaching of all theologians that in certain
cases, for weighty reasons, the Sacraments may be administered
92 Cf . Reuter, Neoconfess. 1. c. n. 31 ; Scavini, Theologia Moralis uni- versa, Tom IV. n. 77 ; Muller, 1. c. § 132 ; Aertnys, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tom. V. cp. IV. n. 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, 1884 ; Alphons. Eschbach e Cong. S. Spiritus et Imm. Cord. M. Rectoris Sein. Gall. Romae, La Confession par telephone ; Melata, Manuale Theol. Moralis, De Poenit. 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 been 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 casu extreme* necessita- tis dari possit absolutio per telephoniumf the Poenitentiaria replied, July 1, 1884: Nihil esse respondendum. — Bucceroni, Enchiridion Morale (Romte, 1887), p. 110.
Digitized by Google
60 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
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 to 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.93
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 the 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.94 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 God, so that the priest's sentence is always conditional even when it is pronounced in an absolute form. A conditional sentence is in
98 Scavini, Theologia Moralis Universa, Tom. IIL n. 479 (Ed. Par. 1867). * Cf . Gury, II. 1. c. n. 432, 2 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. I. n. 27.
CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION
61
no way inconsistent with the nature of a judicial judgment either in general or in the Sacrament of Penance.
Lehmkuhl enlarges on this point:95 "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 and 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, rever-
« Lehmkuhl, P. IT. L. I. Tr. V. Sect. I. n. 272.
62 PENANCE^ AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
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 either 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.86
Hence theologians teach that absolution given svb conditione is valid if the condition be fulfilled; the condition, however, must be de prccsenti or de prceterito; absolution given under a
*» Cf. Gury, II. n. 434.
CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION
63
conditio de juturo would be invalid, for in a conditio de futuro the minister of the Sacrament has no intention of conferring the Sacrament hie 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 be validly given under a condition de prcesenti or de prceterito, 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.97
It is also allowed to give absolution sub conditions when there is just reason for so doing; and in case of necessity the priest is bound under mortal sin to give conditional absolution.98
The view of some theologians is to be condemned who hold that one may impart conditional absolution for any insignificant reasonf 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
w Cf. S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 25; Stotz, 1. c. L. IT. Q. TIT. art. T. § 4 98 Cf. Declar. S. Inquis. 17 Juui 1716, 17 Dec. 1868, 20 Jul. 1859
64 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
is pernicious to souls. What a number of sacrileges would fol- low from such a practice ! The confessor would be 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-
On the other hand, we cannot admit- the teaching of those theologians 100 who hold that absolution sub conditione is per- mitted only in extreme necessity or in great danger.
A 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 .
tents."
•» S. Alph. 1. c. n. 432, etc.
100 Colletus, " acerrimus probabilismi impugnator"
CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION
65
agree whether absolution can be given in such a case, the absolu- tion may be pronounced without any condition.101
5. In doubt whether the matter be sufficient : this may hap- pen (a) 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, and 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.102 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 : —
(a) To those who are in danger of death, from whatever cause.
(b) When the penitent honestly thinks he is well disposed, and when the confessor fears that if absolution be refused or put
101 Aertnys, 1. c. art. IT. n. 217; Concilia, according to the testimony of St. Alphonsus, in severas sententias generatim deflectens. 103 Lehmkuhl, 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 bet- 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.108
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. It is further objected that a penitent conditionally absolved
108 S. Alph. 1. c. n. 432; Lacroix, L. VT. p. 2, n. 1797; Mazzotta, Theol. Moralis, Tract. IV. Disp. IT. Q. IV. cp. II. ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Moral. I. c. cp. I. n. 27; Aertnys, 1. c. art. II. n. 217 ; Lehmkulil, 1. c. n. 2~'-\ ; Gurv,
i. c. ir. n. n:>.
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
3. It is likewise objected that a conditionally absolved peni- tent will never confess his sins again, and if he is not rightly disposed will die in his sins.
It may be replied that doubtfully absolved sins are remitted (a) by the reception of holy communion, as we have already shown ; (6) 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
faith.
68 PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT
Sacrament and the welfare of the individual are endangered by such administration of the Sacrament; if, however, necessity or solid reasons demand such practice, it is allowed.104 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.105
This 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
104 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: "haec est sen- tentia certa, licere in necassitate administrare sacrainenta sub conditioned'
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 possession of his faculties, has only himself to blame if he cannot 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 be absolved. There remain, then, only the cases in which the dying man cannot express his sentiments even by signs, and then the principle holds : sacramenta propter homines,"
CONDITIONAL ABSOLUTION
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, he 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."106
,0« Gousset, Lettres a M. le Curd . . . Lettre 8. Cf . Gury, 1. c. II. Tract, de Sacram. Poenit. P. I. n. 436-439 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Moral. 1. c. cp. I. nn. 27 et 26, where he signalizes these objections as inanes objectiones nonnul- lorum, etiam recentiorum in Gallia, qui antiqua prctjudicia janseniana incaute
ebiltcrurU.
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 th^ Sacrament of Penance — they are also the materia proxima. Hie 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. Contrition 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 coniritio 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
i Sess. XIV. cp. 4. 71
72
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
have contrition only for the sins which we have ourselves commit- ted — de peccato commisso, as the Council of Trent expresses it.
This being the case, sorrow as understood in this connection is not to be confused with : —
(a) 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.
(6) Or the feeling of guilt or the remorse of conscience (ter- rores conscientice) 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 so.
(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.2
2 Compare on this subject the lengthy discussions of Suarez, De Pceni- tentia, Disp. 3, Sect. 2 ; Lugo, De Poenitentia, 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 : —
(a) 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* dictum8 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. How can 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 faithful 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. IV. n. 243; and particularly the very lucid exposition of Palmieri, Tract de Poenit. (Roma, 1879) cap. IV. De act pcenit art. I. § 1, p. 214 sq.
»L.c.L VI. n. 435. Cf . Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. de Contritione, n. 14.
74
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
incurs. This 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 imperfect* according as the
4 Stotz, Tribunal Poeuitent. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I. art. II.
6 This is 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 attrilio. The figure is taken from solid bodies which, when pounded 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 benevolentioe, 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 (conlritio) as a sorrow and 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.8 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. Sakramenten, II. Bd. Fiinft. Teil, Zweit. Abschnitt, Erst. Hauptst. § 7, S. 82.)
8 Lugo, De Poenit. Disput. V. Sect. 9, n. 132; Palmieri, Tract, de Poenit. 1. c. th. 21, p. 223.
7 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 1725 under Benedict XIII offers a form of contrition which was composed for
76
TUB RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
11. The Essential Features of Perfect Contrition.
According to the unanimous teaching of theologians, which is based on the Council of Trent, perfect contrition proceeds from perfect love. The Council declares that contrition 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 are two kinds of this love: pure or disinterested love, amor bene- volentice (amicitice), and selfish or interested love (amor concupis- centice). 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. I detest them above all other evils. I humbly beg Thy forgiveness, and I 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 I love Thee I 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 1 am sorry for all my sins and detest them above all things, because by them I have offended Thee and incurred Thy anger. I am firmly resolved never more to offend Thee." (Mulier, Theol. Moral. 1. c. § 112.)
ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF PERFECT CONTRITION 77
bonum), we have the second kind of love. The pure love 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. Both 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? con- cupiscentice. 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 pcena damni. This love is called also the amor
78
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
spei, because in it the hope of possessing God in heaven, the highest reward of all 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 regards 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 writh 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.9 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
8 Cf . S. Thomas, IT. IT. Q. 106, a. 5.
9 Compare Deharbe, Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes, § 6, pp. 139-179.
ESSENTIAL FEATURES OF PERFECT CONTRITION 79
many cases salvation depends on an act of perfect contrition, and that even where 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? " 10
We should be 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.11
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 Ms, 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." 13
10 See Perfect Contrition by Von den Driesch, translated by Father J. Slater, S.J.
* Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. P. I. Lib. I. Tract. I. cp. III. § 1. 12 Deharbe. Die vollkoinmene Liebe Gottes, p* 158.
80
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
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 complaceniice) ; 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 benevolentta*), 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.
This stage of love answers to filial fear (timor filialis) 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, penetrating soul and body, so that the whole man may repent of his faults and
Cf. S. Thomas, Supplem. Q. 5. a. 3 ; S. Alphons. Lib. VI. n. 441 ; Gury, II. n. 4.33 , Palmieri, Tract, de Poenitentia, Thes. XXIV. p. 202 sq.
EFFECTS OF PERFECT CONTRITION
81
the tools of sin become again instruments of love.14 This, however, is not always in our power, and, being a grace, we must ask for it.
We may now sum up our conclusions: Perfect contrition, conlritiOy 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.15
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 proximo,, for the Coun- cil of Trent teaches 18 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 twenty- first and thirty-second of the propositions of Baius. Baius and 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 summe intensa.
u Cat. Roman. P. II. cp. 5, n. 27.
15 Compare Oswald, Die dogmat. Lehre von den heil. Sakramenten, Fiinfter Teil, Zweiter Abschnitt, § 7, III. Aufl. S. 71 ff. ; Deharbe, Die voll- kommene Liebe Gottes, §§ 2, 3, 6, 8 ; Suarez, De Poen. Disp. II. Sect. 3 et Disp. IV. Sect. 2 ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. n. 35-42 ; Palmieri, Tract, de Pcen. Thes. IV, V ; Lehmknhl, Theol. Mor. P. I. L. I. Tr. I. n. 318.
" Seas. XIV. cp. 4.
Digitized by Google
82
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
Finally, this doctrine of the efficacy of perfect contrition is clearly expressed in Holy Scripture and in the monuments of tradition; the proofs belong to the domain of dogmatic the- ology.17 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.18 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,19 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
17 The proof is well developed by P. Palmieri, S.J., Tract, de Poenitent. Theses XXII et XXIII, p. 224 (Ronue, 1879). Cf. S. Thomas, II. II. QQ. 23-27.
18 I. John iv. 16.
19 Supplem. Q. 5, a. 3. Quantumcvnque parvus sit dolo?', dummodo ad con- tritionis rationem sufficiat, omnem culpam delct.
30 Lib. VI. n. 441.
21 S. Thorn. Supplem. Q. 5. a. 2 ad 1. Contritio vera mm fuit, nisi propo-
EFFECTS 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." 22 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.23
The resolution to confess the sin does not include the resolu- tion to confess it as soon as possible (qnam primum). It is enough to confess when a precept of God or of the Church urges.24
The other effect of perfect contrition, the remission of eternal punishment, follows from what we have been already consider- ing; moreover the condemnation of Barns' 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 Trent 26 and 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 praceptum quod est de confessione datum. 41 John xiv. 23.
« S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 437, Dub. 4.
M Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 275; Muller, 1. c. § 113, 2.
* S. Thorn. TIT. Q. 89, a. 4 ; Suarez, De Poenit. Disp. X. Sect. 2.
* Sess. VT. c. 14; Sess. XIV. c. 8 et can. 12.
» S. Bonavent. Theol. verit. L. VI. c. 24. S. Thomas, Suppl. Q. 5, a. 2. Ballerini, De Poenit. L. VI. c. 6.
Digitized by Google
84
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
words, till he has done penance. This is a truth of faith.28 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 Sacrament 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 we 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 the 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. Sess. XIV. 1. c, from which we infer that penance is neces- sary for salvation necessitate medii.
OBLIGATION OF PERFECT 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.29
The possibility of dying 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, and 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 Great 30 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;31 the sinner might, if he wished, have
9 Ballerini deals excellently with this point in his Op. Theol. Mor. in cp. III. De praec. et oblig. confession, n. 138 ss. Cf. Suarez, De Poenit. Disp. 15, Sect 6, n. 7 ; Sporer, De Poen. n. 186.
» In Ezechiel, Lib. I. Horn. 11, n. 24.
* I. n. 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:38 "The duty of making an act of con- trition is urgent when one is obliged to make an act of love." 34
«* Lib. VI. n. 437.
88 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 be 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 (cf . Ecclus. v. 8, 9, 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 and is called upon to administer one of the Sacraments, or one of the
prceceptum caritatis which we ought to obey scepius 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 ohliga- tione per accident, 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. 168. St. Alphon- sus expressly condemns the view of Concilia and Roncaglia that a delay of a week is a considerable period; and similarly he rejects the opinion of Laymann, Lugo, the Salman ticenses, Elbel, 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 fall under the precept. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. III. n. 10.35 ss.
85 Miiller, 1. c. Lib. III. I. II. § 115, I; Lehmkuhl, 1. c. n. 278; Aertnys, I.e. a 168,Q.L
88
THE RECIPIENT 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.M 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.
The effects of imperfect contrition (attrition) are not so great as those of perfect contrition. Imperfect contrition, which ex-
88 H. A. 1. c. n. 11, Lib. VI. n. 437, Dub. 2 ; Suarez, Diap. 15, Sect. 4, n. 19 ; Lacroix, Lib. II. n. 142, etc.
13. Imperfect Contrition.
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.87
Passages almost innumerable of the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers, decrees of Councils and theologians, present this doc- trine as revealed by God.88
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.
87 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. Bellarmiu, De P<en. Lib. N. cp. 2; Mohler, Sym- bolism, § 33. Luther's error was in part adopted by Baius, Jansenius, and Quesnel. Cf. Prop. 60, 61, 62 et 67 Quesnellii a P. M. Clem. XI in Bulla " Uuigenitus," proscript; Prop. 15 et 16 damn, ab Alexandro VIII, in which some of QuesnePs errors are again condemned.
w Cf. Bellarmin, 1. c. Lib. II. cp. 17; Perrone, De Poenitent. n. 46 s.; Ri- palda, De Ente supernaturali, Tom. IV. Disp. 22, Sect. 4-11, et Lib. VI. Disp. ult n. 458-460; Palraieri, Tract, de Poenitentia, pp. 280-353 (Rom. 1879) ; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. I. De sufficientia attritionis, n. 42-50.
90
THE RECIPIENT 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, and this would be the case if perfect contrition were 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.3*
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 ex attrito contritus; this expression is not to be understood of the act, as though atiritio 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,40 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.
89 S. Alph. 1. c. Lib. VI. n. 440; Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. in. cp. III. § 2; Stotz, 1. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I. a. VI; Aertnys, 1. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. n. 176 ; Palmieri, Tract, de Pcenit. Thes. XXV. p. 286 88.
« II. II. Q. 19, a. 2-9.
IMPERFECT CONTRITION
91
3. Slavish fear, timor serviliter 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 a 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 mixtus seu initialis, which 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 and 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 desire 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
« II. II. Q. 19, a. 2 ; Stotz, 1. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I.
Digitized by Google
92
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
to dispose the sinner proxime for the receiving of grace, some sort of love, at least initial, or whether this love be 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 terms and under pain of excommunication lata; sententice, that any of the disputants in this matter should accuse their opponents of heresy. Four 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 iear, 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 : attritio eum ad gratiam in sacramento pornitenticE impetrandam disponit} another had been presented to them : ad constitutionem saeramenti sufjidt, ac donum Dei esse ac Spiritus S . impulsum verissimum non adhuc quideni inhabitantis sed tantum moveniis quo pomitens adjutus (cum sine aliquo dilectionis in Deum motu esse viz queat) viam sibi ad justiiiam munii et per earn ad Dei gratiam facilius impetrandum disponitur. Since it was urged that men of. eminent learning made a distinction between such sorrow and 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
Digitized by Google
IMPERFECT CONTRITION
93
sufficient disposition, and to indicate this more clearly it pur- posely avoided the use of the word sufficit.42
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.43
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
42 Pallavicini, Hist. Concil. Trid. L. XIII. c. 10. Palmieri tries to weaken the force of this argument ; see Tract, de Poenit. Thesis XXX. p. 331 ss.
48 " 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. 6; cf. can. 3: " 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. 8."
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.44
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; 45 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.46
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-
44 Cf . Proozmium to the Fourth Session de s. Pcenitent. sacram. : " Although the oecumenical . . . synod in its decisions on justification (Sess. 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.
« Sess. XIV. cp. IV.
46 The words at the beginning of the fourth chapter : " non solum cessa- tionem a peccato et vitce novce 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.
Digitized by Google
IMPERFECT CONTRITION
95
(entice 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.47 Penance would thus be a meaningless institution. It is rather the beginning of the amor concupiscen- tiw or of the caritas imperfecta, in which we love God because He 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 we 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 initialise
3. A third opinion demands, 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 Compare § 12.
49 S. Alph. Lib. VT. n. 442. Objic. Ill; Scavini, Theol. Moralis Universa, T. IV. Tract. X. Disp. I. cp, II. art. I. n. 23; Mazzotta, 1. c. Tract. VI. Disp. 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. Bd. Fiinfter Teil, Zweiter Abschn. Erst. Hauptst. § 7, p. 86 ff. III. Aufl. ; Miiller, 1. c. Lib. III. Tr. II. § 114; Martin, Lehrbuch der kath. Moral. § 243; Tappehorn, Anleitung zur Verwalt. 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, 1657, that this view hodie inter scholasticos communis videtur.
96
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
vile fear. Such sorrow, however, would be no longer aliritio, but contritio, which in any degree by itself justifies the sinner apart from the Sacrament.
4. The fourth opinion goes yet further and requires that along with attritio there should be 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 nature contritio, whence the defenders of this last opinion are called contritionists.49
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 comes 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.
49 Scavini, 1. c. Tract. X. Adnotat. n. 188 et 189.
IMPERFECT CONTRITION
97
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 concupiscentice, 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.50
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 pardon, is quite sufficient to secure the fruit of the Sacrament of Pen-
60 S. Thorn. De Spe, a. 3 ; and St. Francis de Sales writes : " La penitence nait dedans l'amour et plusieurs fois la pdnitence venant en nos esprits ramour vient en la penitence." Theot. L. II. c. 20.
98
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANOE
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 his 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
If the Sacrament of Penance is to be received validly and with fruit, the contrition must be real, formal, supernatural, univer- sal, supreme, and sacramental.62
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 and essential part of the Sacrament.63 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
« Reuter, S.J., Theol. Moral. P. IV. n. 2, § 3; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 44:2
Compare Trident. Sess. XIV. cp. 4 et can. 5. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. cp. I. I)e attritione existimata, n. 51 ss
14. The Necessary dualities of Contrition.
in fine.
62 Cm
THE NECESSARY QUALITIES OF CONTRITION 99
its origin, namely, in the heart ; for from the heart, as the Scrip- ture tells us, come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, etc.54
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 love 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, 0 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." 55
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.
w S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 449 ; Scavini, 1. c. Tract. X. Disp. I. cap. II. art. I. n. 12; Lacroix, Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. p. 2, n. (566; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. 1. c. De attritions, n. 77 ss. Cf. Suarez, De. Veen. Disp. 9, Sect. 1 ; Lugo. I)h P(pn. Disp. 4, n. 93.
100
THE RECIPIENT OF PENANCE
Both views 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.58
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