diff options
| author | pgww <pgww@lists.pglaf.org> | 2026-02-01 08:28:26 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | pgww <pgww@lists.pglaf.org> | 2026-02-01 08:28:26 -0800 |
| commit | 23a6e874de6d1713955f183fd1d1502a17d0e0b8 (patch) | |
| tree | 6394b4dce7fefecf7b7fe1f1c39504661189068c | |
| parent | d8d729d13cec16e2b5c7a0071e0119ebb09f8279 (diff) | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 7 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | confessional-utf8.txt | 25290 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | images/cover.jpg | bin | 315017 -> 0 bytes |
5 files changed, 7 insertions, 25296 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes index 6833f05..d7b82bc 100644 --- a/.gitattributes +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@ -* text=auto -*.txt text -*.md text +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt index 6c72794..b5dba15 100644 --- a/LICENSE.txt +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -7,5 +7,5 @@ the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize -this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +this book outside of the United States should confirm copyright status under the laws that apply to them. @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ -Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for eBook #77819 -(https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/77819) +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +book #77819 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/77819) diff --git a/confessional-utf8.txt b/confessional-utf8.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 9df82c2..0000000 --- a/confessional-utf8.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,25290 +0,0 @@ -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 77819 *** - - - - -THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE CONFESSIONAL - - - - - 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 OVERBROOK SEMINARY - - INTRODUCTION BY THE - MOST REV. S. G. MESSMER, D.D., D.C.L. - ARCHBISHOP OF MILWAUKEE - - SECOND EDITION - - NEW YORK, CINCINNATI, CHICAGO - BENZIGER BROTHERS - - PRINTERS TO THE - HOLY APOSTOLIC SEE - - PUBLISHERS OF - BENZIGER’S MAGAZINE - - - - - Nihil obstat. - - REMIGIUS LAFORT, - _Censor Librorum_ - - Imprimatur. - - ✠ JOHN M. FARLEY, - _Archbishop of New York_ - - NEW YORK, AUG. 31, 1905 - - COPYRIGHT, 1905, BY BENZIGER BROTHERS. - - - - -INTRODUCTION - - -“There is nothing more excellent or more useful for the Church of God and -the welfare of souls than the office of Confessor. 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 receive new vigor, and lastly the just are aroused -and enkindled to persevere in goodness and to reach with freshly spurred -zeal for the crown of justice laid up for them (2 Tim. iv. 8). - -“How great and arduous is the office of Confessor appears clearly from -the fact that by it he is made a judge in the place of Christ and that -of his judgment he must some day 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 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” (Conc. Balt. Pl. II. -nn. 278, 279, 280). - -The present volume is a practical commentary upon these weighty words -of the Fathers of the Baltimore Council. The tremendous responsibility -of the Catholic priest exercising the ministry of the Sacrament of -Penance must appear in a truly dazzling light to the mind of every one -who but glances over the following pages. Human intelligence can never -fully grasp the true significance of this divine sacrament, which works -at the same time forgiveness of sin and sanctification by grace; which -is for poor fallen man at once the judgment of God’s infinite hatred -of sin and the manifestation of His infinite mercy for the repentant -sinner; which brings humiliation and punishment while it fills the soul -returning to God with unspeakable 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 number of souls snatched from the brink of perdition -by the strong hand of God extended to them through His minister in the -confessional? the number of souls buried in spiritual death by grievous -sin who were brought out from their tombs to supernatural 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 Christian 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 -coöperation 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 disposition 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 moments; it must so -strengthen his will and direct his heart that he will avoid the coming -danger and resist the future temptation. 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 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 temptation; but it is also to help the -just and holy man to rise continually 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 -confession. St. Charles Borromeo went to confession every day. Hence -the tender care of the flowers and fruits of Christian virtue in the -heart of his penitent is another important duty of the father confessor. -How is he to fulfill it in a manner profitable to the penitent and to -himself, unless he is well acquainted with the principles and facts of -the spiritual life by a thorough study of Christian ascetics and the -earnest practice of Christian perfection? What a responsibility when a -soul called by God to the higher walks of Christian life, and willing to -follow the call, be it in the world or in the cloister, falls into the -hands of an ignorant, neglectful, or heedless confessor! But what glory -to God, what happiness of soul, what merit for heaven, when by holy zeal -and skillful effort the minister of God in holy confession leads the -Christian soul, panting after God as the hart panteth after the fountains -of water (Ps. xlii. 2), into the sanctuary of God’s love, grace, and -mercy! What a glorious ministry! - -We can only hope and pray that Catholic priests will carefully read the -beautiful and instructive lessons that Dr. Schieler’s book offers, and -ponder over them day and night. There is no greater blessing for Church -and State, society and individual, than an army of priests who are -confessors according to the spirit of Christ; for they are in a fuller -sense than others “good stewards of the manifold grace of God” (1 Petr. -iv. 10). - - ✠ S. G. MESSMER. - - - - -EDITOR’S PREFACE - - -An English translation of Dr. Schieler’s exhaustive work on “The -Sacrament of Penance,” for the use of theological students 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 dealing 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 countries, 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 certain minds that see no difficulty in using the -sources of information 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 countries, 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, or one hostile to the Catholic Church who might -pervert its doctrine 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 translator 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 actually 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 possible, with -the coöperation 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 quotations in matters of detail. Whatever we -think of the author’s personal views, his citations of the masters in -the science of morals 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 -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 Penance depends -in the first place all that we can look for of satisfaction and peace -upon earth. But the administration of the Sacrament of Penance is solely -in the hands of the priest or confessor. 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 knowledge of the -law, exercise of discretion and prudence in the application 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 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 incumbency, 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 which, if not more strange and difficult than during -his Seminary course, seems more distant and uninviting. The priest, even -the young priest, would rather review his Moral Theology in the familiar -language in which he is now to express his judgments to his penitents. - -This fact alone suggests the pertinent use of the book before us. There -the confessor, the director of the conscience, finds all that he was -taught in his Moral Theology. He finds much more; for the author has -made the subject a specialty of treatment which leads him to light up -every phase of the confessor’s task. He has himself studied all the -great masters in the direction of souls from the Fathers of the Church -down to the Scholastics of the thirteenth century; and more especially -those that follow, who have entered into the theory and art of psychical -anatomy—Guilelmus Paris, Cardinal Segusio, St. Thomas, St. Bonaventure, -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 confessor in the light of modern necessities and special -canon law. - -It is hardly necessary to explain to the priest who has passed 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. Penance 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 -accusation of faults in the tribunal—requisites which are dealt with by -Professor Schieler in the traditional manner, but with clearness and -attention to detail. - -Of special importance are the suggestions in the third chapter, touching -the integrity of the Confession: the number, circumstances certain -and doubtful, of the sins, and the reasons which excuse the penitent -from making a complete confession; likewise the treatment of invalid -confessions, of general confessions, their purpose, necessity, or danger -as the case may be; satisfaction, its acceptance or commutation. - -The main object of the treatise lies, however, as might be supposed, in -the exposition of the confessor’s powers and jurisdiction, and of the -reservation and abuse of faculties. These matters are in the first place -discussed from the theoretical standpoint. 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 protect 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 himself too weak to resist -temptation, the penitent who aims at extraordinary sanctity, the -scrupulous, the convert, form separate 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 principles -advocated, because our author presents the same application 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 convictions of individual authors, to whose authority the -student is taught to swear allegiance. In the present volume principles -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 applicable 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 - - - PAGE - - PART I - _PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT_ - - 1. The Virtue of Penance 17 - - 2. The Sacrament of Penance 20 - - 3. Necessity of the Sacrament of Penance 22 - - 4. Forgiveness of Venial 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 39 - - 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 71 - - 11. The Essential Features of Perfect Contrition 76 - - 12. The Effects of Perfect Contrition and the Obligation of - Procuring it 81 - - 13. Imperfect Contrition 88 - - 14. The Necessary Qualities of Contrition 98 - - 15. The Relation of Contrition to the Sacrament 111 - - CHAPTER II - 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 - - CHAPTER III - CONFESSION - - _Article I. Essence, Necessity, and Properties of Confession_ - - 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 - Blameworthy 193 - - 27. Reasons Excusing from Complete Accusation 198 - - _Article 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 - - 39. _Jurisdictio 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. _Sollicitatio Proprii Pœnitentis 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 - - _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 Proxima Voluntaria_ 493 - - 65. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in - _Occasione Necessaria_ 496 - - 66. Some Commonly Occurring Occasions of Sin 501 - - _Article II. 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 - - 72. Scrupulous Penitents 545 - - 73. Converts 555 - - CHAPTER II - THE TREATMENT OF PENITENTS IN DIFFERENT EXTERNAL - CIRCUMSTANCES - - 74. The Confession of Children 561 - - 75. The Confession of Young Unmarried People 575 - - 76. 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 III - 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 - - - - -THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE CONFESSIONAL - - - - -PART I - -_PENANCE AS A VIRTUE AND AS A SACRAMENT_ - - -1. The Virtue of Penance. - -At all times penance has been the necessary means (_necessitate 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 kingdom 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). Accordingly, 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 ordinance, 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 committed; 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, for a morally -indifferent or even a good action may be to us a source of displeasure -and grief. But even in its restricted meaning, denoting grief, on account -of some bad action, penance does not yet include the idea of virtue. -Grief is caused by the perception 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 -implies an acknowledgment of His sovereign goodness and majesty. This -submission to God is an act of the virtue of religion.[3] 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] - -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 satisfaction in expiation of our misdeeds. -The bad deed is compensated 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 sacramental dignity acquires the power -of conferring sanctifying grace.[6] - - -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 committed 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 concerning the Sacrament of Penance. - -3. The exercise of this judicial power constitutes a Sacrament, the -object of which is to reconcile the sinner to his God. - -4. The outward sign of the Sacrament is the exercise of the judicial -functions; this comprises, on the one hand, the acts of the -penitent,—contrition, confession, and satisfaction; and on the other, the -priestly absolution, being the sentence delivered by the representative -of God. - -5. The grace conferred by the Sacrament is the remission of all sins, -embracing the effacement of the guilt, the obliteration of the eternal -punishment, and the condonation of, at least, a portion of the temporal -punishment. This remission of sin is accomplished by the infusion of -sanctifying grace, which, moreover, 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 consolation. - -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 individual 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 intermediate, -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] - - -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 necessary 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 saltem 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 reception 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 forgiving 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, without -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 unfavorable to the sinner; but which the sinner -could elude if the Sacrament 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 he were -not persuaded of Christ’s precept, imposing the Sacrament 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 obligation 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 confinement, 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 obligation 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 instituted 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. Consequently, 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 temptation or avoiding grievous sin; -(3) when any one feels himself incapable of making an act of perfect -contrition, and yet is by his duties required to be in a state of grace; -for instance, if one has to administer a Sacrament, or simply because one -realizes that it is wrong to remain in a state of enmity with God for any -considerable period.[11] - -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 mortal sin, proves sufficiently that divine law does not -enforce confession immediately after committing mortal sin. - -The precept of the Church concerning the Sacrament of Penance 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 question 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 the confession was valid, the -mortal sin omitted by sheer forgetfulness is forgiven; and there only -remains the obligation of submitting the forgotten sin to the power of -the keys in the next confession.[13] - -For the same reason alleged above, the law of the Church extends -only to those who have reached the age of discernment, and whose -minds are sufficiently developed to render them capable 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 accomplishments 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 discretion which enables them to -understand the malice of mortal sin. - -Hence it becomes a duty to instruct the children for confession 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 committed. - -It is not a good practice, therefore, to defer the instruction of -children on this Sacrament to their ninth year or later; since it does -an injustice to the more intelligent children. Moreover, in the case of -those children who are sick, this lack of early preparation is apt to -deprive them of both the Sacrament of Penance and Extreme Unction, which -is a serious matter, if they have been capable of committing mortal -sin.[16] - -The precept of the Church imposes annual confession, _saltem semel in -anno_. Beyond this, time and season are not specified. Theologians -interpret the law in general as follows: all who 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 Communion, -certainly does confess within the limits of a civil year, though the -earlier or later date of Easter may make the interval 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 ecclesiastical 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 obligation imposed by the Church, since some distinguished -theologians maintain the contrary.[18] - -He who one year, whether by his own fault or not, fails to make his -confession, but during the next confesses all his sins, satisfies thereby -the obligations with respect to both years, in the case, at least, when, -during the current year, he has committed a mortal sin which he includes -in his confession; for he has fulfilled 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.[19] - -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 fulfilling 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 pressing. - -The precept of the Church prescribes, moreover, that the faithful confess -their sins sincerely (_fideliter_). By a bad confession we cannot -discharge our duty. This was distinctly confirmed by Alexander VII, -condemning a proposition to the contrary. (Prop. 14.) - -A further provision of the Lateran decree, to confess _proprio -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 precept of annual -confession, as of Paschal Communion, is not a _pœna latæ_, but a _pœna -ferendæ sententiæ_. - -The ardent wish of the Church is that her children should confess -frequently during the year. This is apparent from the wording of the -law. Frequent confession is of the greatest usefulness 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 efficacious means than -frequent confession. It leads us to greater watchfulness over ourselves, -constitutes an act of humility, 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 Sacrament, the more fully does he partake of its -peculiar graces.[22] - - -4. Forgiveness of Venial Sin. - -By divine and ecclesiastical precept we are bound only to confess -mortal sins; there is no obligation to confess venial sins; these may -be forgiven without receiving the Sacrament of Penance. “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 motives 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 contrition 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 combat this guilty affection for -creatures by a contrary act of the will. A work done to please God, or a -mere act of love without 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 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 the doctrine of St. Thomas, just as mortal sin is -forgiven by the influx of sanctifying grace, so the remission of venial -sin is dependent 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 amendment. - -2. “By many other means,”[26] 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 sanctification 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, illustrates 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 probable and reasonable to -suppose that there is granted also a remission 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 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[31] declares 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 Sacraments, immediately, _ex opere -operato_, or only mediately, _ex opere operantis_. The champions of both -views appeal to St. 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 Sacrament 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 Eucharist effects -the remission of venial sins _ex opere operato_, and this interpretation -would seem to have the preference over that of theologians who, with St. -Alphonsus, insisting on the words just quoted, hold that the Sacrament of -the Eucharist works _ex opere operantis_.[33] - -The three remaining Sacraments, of Confirmation, Orders, and Marriage, do -not so directly imply forgiveness of venial sin; still they pour into the -soul of the recipient a new grace, and so they, too, must be considered -as remitting venial sins when no obstacle is put in the way.[34] The -range of this power varies according as the grace conferred in the -Sacrament is more or less opposed to some particular sin or kind of sins. -The most efficacious 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.[36] Finally, Matrimony remits venial sins because -it confers the grace by which concupiscence is curbed and restrained, -and by which the recipients are enabled to fulfil their duties of mutual -sanctification. - -(_b_) Venial sins are likewise removed by the holy sacrifice of the Mass, -which of its own nature is a sacrifice of atonement, a _sacrificium vere -propitiatorium_.[37] It works this forgiveness, as theologians teach, -_per modum impetrationis_, therefore mediately, by obtaining for the -sinner from God the grace of contrition or other virtues, excluding -affection for sin.[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 sinlessness, 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: _Misereatur vestri_, etc., and -_Indulgentiam, absolutionem_, 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 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 distinguished -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 reverence due to God.[44] By _attritio_ the -affection toward sin is entirely 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.[45] - -(_e_) Moreover, the “love of God above all things” remits venial sins if -it is actual and formally or virtually opposed to venial sin.[46] - -(_f_) Lastly, venial sins are forgiven by good works done from a -motive of penance (_ex affectu pœnitentiæ_), especially those to which -Holy Scripture assigns the virtue of destroying venial sin. Such are: -prayer[47] (John xiv. 13 s.; xvi. 23), almsgiving and fasting, especially -the works of mercy and mortification (Ecclus. iii. 33; iv. 1-11; Tob. -iv. 11; Dan. iv. 24; Matt. v. 7; John iii. 5-10; 1 Reg. vii. 5, etc.; 1 -Esdras viii. 21, etc.). Cf. S. Thom. II. II. Q. 147, art. 1 _et_ 3.[48] - - -5. The Constituent Parts of the Sacrament of Penance in General. - -As in the other Sacraments a distinction is made between the _matter_ -and the _form_, so too in the Sacrament of Penance; but with a certain -difference, which appears from the fact that the Council of Trent speaks -of the matter of this Sacrament as a _quasi-materia_. The _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 -Sacrament that the Holy Council calls them _quasi-materia_ (“as it were -the matter”), but because they are not materially or externally 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 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 consider 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 Sacrament. 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 accusation, which is an -outward manifestation of the contrition; for contrition is not _per se_ -subject to the senses, but must be outwardly shown in some way in order -to become manifest.[53] “The contrite accusation, therefore, realizes all -the conditions of the matter in the Sacraments.”[54] - -Theologians draw a further distinction in this Sacrament between the -proximate and the remote matter (_materia proxima et remota_). _Proxima -materia_ consists of the acts which the penitent 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 before Baptism are forgiven -entirely in Baptism, wherefore they are not, properly speaking, subject -to the Sacrament of Penance. 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 matter is -divided into:— - -1. _Necessary_ and _free_ matter (_necessaria et libera_), _i.e._ -necessary _as a consequence of the divine command_, by which definite -sins (a definite _materia remota_) must be submitted to the sacramental -tribunal and the power of the keys, so that the penitent who wilfully -neglects this course cannot receive the Sacrament validly. By free matter -we understand those sins which the penitent voluntarily confesses whilst -not bound to do so by divine law. - -2. _Certain_ and _doubtful_ (_certa et dubia_), _i.e._ matter which -in the judgment of the confessor is a certain and valid object of -absolution; or matter regarding which absolution cannot be pronounced -without misgiving. - -3. Finally, _sufficient_ and _insufficient_ (_sufficiens et -insufficiens_), _i.e._ such matter as suffices for the administering -of the Sacrament 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 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 remitted in conjunction -with other sins, and not _per se_. This happens 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 respect to his other -sins; moreover, the inpouring grace, through the remission of the sins -that have been confessed, is not compatible 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 representative, Christ made him the judge -before whom all mortal sins must be brought, that, in virtue of the power -of the keys, he might pass sentence of loosing or binding.[57] Over sins -which have not yet been directly remitted the confessor has pronounced -no judgment, for they were unknown to him; hence, in accordance with -Christ’s command, even sins indirectly forgiven must be submitted by -confession to the power of the keys in order that they may obtain direct -forgiveness.[58] - -The following classes of sins are _sufficient_ and _free_ matter for -confession:— - -(_a_) The _venial sins_ committed after Baptism. These are matter -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 general 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 previously forgiven sin, it is quite evident that he does -not intend to exclude the great benefits which the absolution pronounced -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 forgiven -sins and the absolution again pronounced over them cause an increase of -sanctifying grace and a remission of temporal 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, -remains 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 compact with man to pardon past sins, and this repeated -renunciation 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 properly 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 instance, a -man who knows that on one occasion he sinned gravely 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.[63] - -We have viewed our subject with respect to the validity of the Sacrament. -Let us see how in practice a general accusation 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 confessor has no other -knowledge of these sins, such an accusation is general in the widest -sense; to this class belongs also an accusation 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 (_infima species_) of the sin. - -4. Finally, the penitent may declare the ultimate species (_infima -species_) of the sin without determining the precise act and without the -specific circumstances and their number; _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. - -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 valorem_ 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 absolution 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 conditional. - -(_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 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 absolution for an accusation -which is quite vague, for such an accusation 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 presented, it must be done if absolution is to be given. - -This is clear, too, on the merits of the case itself. One may always -presume that the desire which a dying man expresses for absolution is at -least a hesitating, if not definite, acknowledgement of having committed -mortal sin by the fact that he considers 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 general is -altogether vague; hence the _causa judicialis_ in this case is quite -unknown, and no sentence can be passed where the charge is unknown and -undetermined. - -Finally, it is quite foreign to the practice of the Church to make a -confession by the formula, “I have no mortal sins; I am sorry for my -venial sins, and I ask absolution.” He who evades, therefore, a fuller -accusation of his venial sins, when he could make one, is unworthy of -absolution, which is intended to be given by the Church only to those -who make a definite accusation.[65] Though, adds Laymann,[66] 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_.[67] 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 sufficient.”[68] - -“Since, then,” concludes Lehmkuhl, “outside the cases of necessity or -impossibility a vague confession of only venial sins does not supply -definite matter, it is not sufficient to add it to the particular -confession in order to have a more secure ground for a valid absolution -than by the accusation of the smaller sins committed since the last -confession, unless the confessor from previous knowledge of the penitent -can decide whether sufficiently definite matter is presented to him in -this vague general assertion.”[69] - -In consequence the following rules are recommended in practice:— - -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 confession 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 ignorance 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 recklessness with regard to his salvation. If the -penitent accuses himself of no sin in particular because he is really -quite unconscious of grave trespass, the confessor might suggest to -him a 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 affirmative 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 committed -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 confessional, for fear that he should neglect -approaching the Sacraments—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 absolution be deferred, and to fulfill his resolutions -of making an earnest amendment.[71] - - -7. The Form of the Sacrament. - -The form of the Sacrament, “in which its power principally lies,”[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 Sacrament.”[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 formæ_, because, -as St. Thomas says,[74] 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 absolvo_.” 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 instituting -the Sacrament used the words, “Whose sins you shall forgive,” 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 Sacraments the safer opinion should be -followed.[75] - -If the words _absolvo a peccatis tuis_ were used, omitting the word -_te_, the form would still be probably valid, since _te_ is sufficiently -implied in the word _tuis_; in practice, however, this view ought not -to be taken, but the safer opinion followed.[76] 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 instituting the -Sacrament made no reference to the Blessed Trinity; they are, however, -most appropriately added to express that the priest absolves from sin by -the authority and power of God.[78] - -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 omnipotens Deus et dimissis -peccatis tuis perducat te ad vitam æternam. Amen._ Then he raises his -right hand over the penitent and says: _Indulgentiam, absolutionem et -remissionem peccatorum tuorum tribuat tibi omnipotens et misericors -Dominus. Amen._ - -“_Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat, et ego auctoritate ipsius -te absolvo ab omni vinculo excommunicationis_ (_suspensionis_) _et -interdicti in quantum possum et tu indiges. Deinde 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: “_Passio Domini nostri Jesu Christi, merita -beatæ Mariæ Virginis et omnium Sanctorum, quidquid boni feceris et mali -sustinueris, sint tibi in remissionem peccatorum, augmentum gratiæ et -præmium vitæ æternæ. Amen._” - -If there are many penitents to be heard and in urgent confessions, the -_Misereatur_ and _Indulgentiam_ may be omitted and simply the _Dominus -noster_, etc., said. The prayer _Passio Domini_, etc., may also be left -out.[80] It is recommended, however, 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 may -simply say: _Ego te absolvo ab omnibus censuris et peccatis in nomine -Patris ✠ et Filii et Spiritus Sancti. Amen._” - -Such is the form of absolution according to the prescription of the -Roman Ritual. The confessor is at liberty to make use of the above -abbreviations under the circumstances mentioned. It would be very wrong -to attempt to put in all the prayers, if there were danger of a man -dying without receiving absolution; in this case the priest must use the -shorter form given by the Ritual.[82] - -The priest will be more eager to carry out the directions of the Church -if he reflects on the meaning of the prayers which precede and follow -the absolution; the former constitute an admirable 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_) _confitearis 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 _Indulgentiam_ contains the same petition for “grace, absolution, -and remission,” of sins confessed and of all others; 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 _reliquiæ peccatorum_, are so intimately connected with -the sin itself that in early Christian times they were briefly included -under the category of _peccata_, and the Church, in the so-called general -absolution given on the occasion of a plenary indulgence of temporal -punishment, still uses the formula _indulgentiam plenariam et remissionem -omnium peccatorum tibi concedo_. - -Then the priest goes on to reconcile the penitent to the Church by -the removal of all censures which close the door to the Sacraments -and other means of grace. This absolution from censure should always -precede that of the sins as a measure of precaution even when no sins -involving censure have been confessed. 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 et peccatis 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_.[84] -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 Sacraments; not, -however, in the case of suspension or interdict. 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 of the absolution from censures on account of the -intimate connection between the two.[85] Such an absolution, therefore, -would be valid though given in defiance of the Church’s prescription, 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 abundantly clear from the -divine institution of the Sacrament, from the practice of the Church, and -from a decree of the Head of the Church. Hence the absolution cannot be -given in writing nor by signs. According to the teaching of the Councils -of Florence and Trent the form of this Sacrament, as of all the others -(except that of matrimony, where a mere sign of consent is sufficient), -is in the words which the priest must pronounce and articulate over the -penitent. The Sacraments owe their institution to Christ; for, though -matrimony existed as a divine institution before His coming, it was -sanctified by Him and raised to the dignity of a means of grace in His -Church. The essential rites of the Sacraments were defined by Christ, -and we learn them from Scripture or tradition. We know from a uniform -tradition that the form of all the Sacraments except matrimony 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 Armenians. - -It is not, however, necessary that the words of absolution should be -heard by the penitent or others; in fact it is recommended to say them in -a low voice, so that, in case absolution is for some reason withheld from -a penitent, others may not know of it. - -The fact that the absolution should be pronounced in words requires as -its complement that the penitent should be present, for the words _Ego 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 immediate presence of the -penitent before the confessor or evidently suppose it; nor do we find in -the whole of antiquity any clear instance of a sacramental absolution -pronounced over an absent person. - -A confession, therefore, made to a priest by writing or by messenger -is invalid if the absolution is given to the penitent in his absence. -Moreover, the absolution is illicit and invalid if given to an absent -penitent even though the confession has been made by him in person to -the priest. Further, too, the absolution is illicit and invalid which -is given to a present penitent 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 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 _præsentia moralis_ of the penitent is sufficient for absolution. -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 Tamburini 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. - -(_b_) If, through fear of infection or for other reasons, the priest -cannot enter a sick-room, he may validly absolve the penitent from the -window or the door.[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 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 (_conditione_). - - -8. Conditional Absolution. - -It is the unanimous teaching of all theologians that in certain cases, -for weighty reasons, the Sacraments may be administered conditionally, -and, what is more, must be so administered. With regard to Baptism and -Extreme Unction this is prescribed 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 Sacrament 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 particular would not -admit a _condition with regard to law_ (_conditio juris_), on which the -confessor was bound to pronounce judgment (_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 absolution -or not, according to the effect it will have on the penitent. 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 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 certain date,’ or -to grant a hearing to a plaintiff ‘provided that such or such document -be found among his papers,’ which document, 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 -sentence 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, however, 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, reverence 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 Sacraments 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 -necessity. An instance in point would be the case of a dying man whose -dispositions are doubtful. To let him die without absolution would surely -expose him to the certain danger of damnation. Supposing he were in good -dispositions, whatever misgivings I might have on the subject, should I -not be responsible 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 dilemma 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.[96] - -Hence theologians teach that absolution given _sub conditione_ is valid -if the condition be fulfilled; the condition, however, must be _de -præsenti_ or _de præterito_; absolution given under a _conditio de -futuro_ would be invalid, for in a _conditio de futuro_ the minister -of the Sacrament has no intention of conferring the Sacrament _hic et -nunc_; his intention would rather be to confer the Sacrament when the -condition will have been fulfilled; by that time, however, the matter is -no longer present which for the validity of the Sacrament must be joined -to the form. On the other hand, the Sacrament may be validly given under -a condition _de præsenti_ or _de præterito_, because the intention is -absolute if the condition is fulfilled; if not fulfilled, the intention -of administering the Sacrament is wanting, so that the Sacrament is not -exposed to irreverence. In this case the conditional intention passes -into an unconditional one, _i.e._ becomes absolute. But the conditional -intention is efficacious for validity only if the condition is completed -or satisfied at the moment when the matter and form of the Sacrament are -brought together. 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 absolution -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 conditione_ when there is -just reason for so doing; and in case of necessity the priest is bound -under mortal sin to give conditional absolution.[98] - -The view of some theologians is to be condemned who hold that one may -impart conditional absolution for _any insignificant reason_, or without -urgent need, or in _any doubt of the requisite dispositions_ even in a -penitent burdened with mortal sin. This is a doctrine which bears too -openly the stamp of laxity, and it is pernicious to souls. What a number -of sacrileges would follow 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 penitents.[99] - -On the other hand, we cannot admit the teaching of those theologians[100] -who hold that absolution _sub conditione_ is permitted 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 expose the Sacrament to -danger of nullity on account of a reasonable 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 jurisdiction, and -the confession must be made; in such a case the confessor must tell the -penitent that he has given absolution only _sub conditione_, so that if -proof be forthcoming later on that jurisdiction was wanting, the penitent -will know that he has not been absolved and must accuse himself again of -the mortal sins mentioned in that confession. If the doubt turn on the -question of law (_dubium juris_), _i.e._ on a point where theologians do -not agree whether absolution can be given in such a case, the absolution -may be pronounced without any condition.[101] - -5. In doubt whether the matter be sufficient: this may happen (_a_) when -an adult is baptized _sub conditione_ and is to be absolved at the same -time; and (_b_) 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 certain 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 certain 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 absolution, 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 reasons 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 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 danger 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 delayed, since hopes -may be entertained that they will return better 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 intervals of two or three months, when they -confess only venial sins, that they may not go for any considerable time -without the grace of the Sacrament. The confessor is, however, obliged -to instruct children and feeble-minded persons and to dispose them for -absolution.[103] - -We answer some objections urged against the doctrine that in the cases -mentioned absolution may be given conditionally. - -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 will -approach the altar and make a sacrilegious communion, a risk not to be -incurred lightly. - -The confession of such a penitent is not sacrilegious, hence the -communion is not; for, by supposition, the penitent is in good faith. At -the worst the communion would be without fruit or profit; nor can we say -that the communion is quite useless, for its reception is an occasion -for eliciting different acts of virtue. Indeed, according to the common -teaching on this subject, the communicant who receives in mortal sin and -with imperfect contrition, yet in good faith, is placed thereby in a -state of grace. To make an act of imperfect contrition should not be a -great difficulty, since holy communion usually arouses pious emotions of -love and sorrow in those who approach in good faith. - -3. It is likewise objected that a conditionally absolved penitent 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; (_b_) -indirectly in the following confession along with the other sins which -he confesses, even if he were never again to submit them to the keys. If -it be urged here that the penitent might never come to confession again, -we should reply that such a case is extremely rare and to be treated -as quite improbable. 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 propositions -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 -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 Sacrament. In our case the matter is presented -by the penitent and is outside the control of the minister. Otherwise, -indeed, penitents 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 seeming -certainly disposed; for he can be quite prepared without the confessor -knowing about it; again, as long as he is not certainly unprepared, he -may be actually in the proper dispositions. - -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 Sacrament?... -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 Sacrament; 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] - - - - -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 fruitful 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 essential and necessary dispositions for receiving -the Sacrament, but—and this is a peculiar feature of the Sacrament of -Penance—they are also the _materia proxima_. The 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.[107] - -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 _contritio cordis_, a grinding 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 instance, 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 thoughtless 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 have contrition only for the -_sins which we have ourselves committed_—_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. - -(_b_) Or the feeling of guilt or the remorse of conscience (_terrores -conscientiæ_) 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 conscience 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.[108] - -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’ -dictum[109] 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 disposition 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 foundations 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 incurs. This knowledge is -necessary in order to acquire contrition, 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 committed; 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 chastise and punish himself, -and to repair God’s honor.[110] - -Contrition is either _perfect_ or _imperfect_[111] according as the -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 benevolentiæ_, by which -we love God above all things for His own sake, _i.e._ on account of His -infinite perfections, we may define perfect contrition (_contritio_) 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.[112] -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.[113] - - -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 benevolentiæ_ (_amicitiæ_), and selfish or -_interested_ love (_amor concupiscentiæ_). 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 because He -is _for us_ the highest good (_prout nobis est summum bonum_), we have -the second kind of love. The pure love of God is called perfect love, -the other imperfect. If now we consider more closely the imperfect love -of God, we find two degrees. 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 -punishment. 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 misfortunes. 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 castæ concupiscentiæ_. To this love corresponds that fear of -eternal punishment, which does not exclude the thought of God, which -fears the punishment of hell because it is the loss of the vision of -God, _i.e._ the _pœna damni_. This love is called also the _amor 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 benefactor, 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 -with pure love or _caritas_. It is a perfect love (1) because God is -loved for His own sake, on account of His infinite goodness and love -and generosity, which are identical with God Himself; (2) because it is -a benevolent love. All love in respect of its object is either selfish -or benevolent; _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.[114] - -A great number of distinguished theologians assert that the love of -gratitude is perfect love, and the contrition based on it perfect -contrition.[115] 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 hatefulness 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 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?”[116] - -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.[117] - -This love is most intimately connected with the love of gratitude, since -“for our sins was He wounded and for our iniquities was He stricken.” -Indeed nothing is so calculated to fill us with gratitude towards God -as the thought of all that the Son of God has done and suffered for us. -The crib, the cross, and the Sacraments are the three great monuments of -His enduring love towards us, and at the same time they are the three -inexhaustible 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 devotions, 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.”[118] - -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 -complacentiæ_); 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 benevolentiæ_), 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[119] and may be more or less perfect; no special degree of -intensity, however, is required, and the lowest is sufficient. 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 the tools of sin become again instruments -of love.[120] 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, _contritio_, -is the hatred of sin proceeding from a pure love of God with a firm -resolution of amendment, a disposition which includes filial fear, and, -so far from excluding the hope of salvation and fear of punishment, tends -rather to develop them.[121] - - -12. The Effects of Perfect Contrition and the Obligation of Procuring it. - -Perfect contrition restores the sinner to grace at once, even before he -has approached the Sacrament of Penance, though the desire of receiving -the Sacrament is necessary; it removes the eternal punishment and in part -the temporal punishment. - -The first part of this statement is _fidei proxima_, for the Council of -Trent teaches[122] that perfect contrition reconciles man to God before -the Sacrament is received, but that this reconciliation by perfect -contrition is not effected without the desire, which is included in -the act of contrition, of receiving the Sacrament. 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 exceptional -circumstances, _e.g._ in martyrdom, at the hour of death, when there is -no possibility of confessing, or when it is _summe intensa_. - -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 theology.[123] 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 perfect love unites us to God, so that we live in Him and He in -us.[124] 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 producing this effect. Such, too, is the unanimous -teaching of St. Thomas,[125] St. Alphonsus,[126] 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 Sacrament 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.[127] Perfect contrition is an act -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.”[128] -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.[129] - -The resolution to confess the sin does not include the resolution to -confess it _as soon as possible_ (_quam primum_). It is enough to confess -when a precept of God or of the Church urges.[130] - -The other effect of perfect contrition, the remission of eternal -punishment, follows from what we have been already considering; -moreover the condemnation of Baius’ seventieth proposition makes this -doctrine _proxima fidei_. This, too, is the teaching of all Catholic -theologians.[131] The guilt is removed by sanctifying 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[132] and the common doctrine -of theologians[133] 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 words, till he -has done penance. This is a truth of faith.[134] 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 legislation. As a matter of fact -God does not make any such demand; 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 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 contrition be made at once.[135] - -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 reconciliation 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 withstand the violence of his -passions, and since, as St. Gregory the Great[136] 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;[137] the sinner might, if he wished, -have 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 coöperate with them, so He withdraws them from those who -neglect and resist them. Hence we may adopt the well-founded teaching of -St. Alphonsus,[138] who states that the sinner ought not to put off for -longer than a month his reconciliation with God; in other words, that the -act of perfect contrition 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 according 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 directions to -confessors says:[139] “The duty of making an act of contrition is urgent -when one is obliged to make an act of love.”[140] - -Since the faithful for the most part are ignorant of any obligation 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 himself 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 confession. Sad -experience shows that one fall into mortal sin is very soon followed by -others.[141] - -Finally, there is an obligation (_per accidens_) to awaken perfect -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 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.[142] 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 Penance. Children particularly should -be taught on this subject, and a good form of the act given to them. -They may have need of it themselves in order to be saved from eternal -damnation, and they may come to the assistance of their elders at the -hour of death; indeed experience teaches that well-instructed children -more than once have reminded people in such straits of the act of perfect -contrition, and have persuaded those persons to make it with them; -finally, what has been learned in childhood will turn out useful to many -in their old age. - - -13. Imperfect Contrition. - -The effects of imperfect contrition (_attrition_) are not so great as -those of perfect contrition. Imperfect contrition, which excludes 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.[143] - -Passages almost innumerable of the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers, -decrees of Councils and theologians, present this doctrine as revealed by -God.[144] - -Consequently it is the common and certain teaching of theologians 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 Penance 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 disposition which, in union with the Sacrament, suffices for -the remission 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 disposes 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. - -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 -disposition. 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 remitted by the power of the keys, but -by the dispositions of the penitent. Therefore imperfect contrition is -sufficient for justification in the Sacrament of Penance.[145] - -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 _attritio_ -became _contritio_. - -Imperfect contrition, as we have already seen, arises from the thought of -the hideousness of sin and from the _fear_ of the punishment which God in -His justice inflicts on the sinner. The following are the classes into -which, according to St. Thomas,[146] 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 misfortunes. - -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 punishments which -God inflicts on sin, and on that account really avoids and detests sin: -_qui non solum manum sed etiam voluntatem 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 disposition -of a man who fears sin because it offends God and also because 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, -however, 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.[147] - -The sorrow proceeding from servile fear is _attritio_, that imperfect -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 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 _latæ -sententiæ_, that any of the disputants in this matter should accuse their -opponents of heresy. Four distinct 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 obtaining -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 contrition based on fear, a position which seems -impossible both psychologically and in view of the action of grace; as -was evidently 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 pœnitentiæ impetrandam disponit_, another had been presented -to them: _ad constitutionem sacramenti sufficit, ac donum Dei esse ac -Spiritus S. impulsum verissimum non adhuc quidem inhabitantis sed tantum -moventis quo pœnitens adjutus_ (_cum sine aliquo dilectionis in Deum motu -esse vix queat_) _viam sibi ad justitiam munit et per eam ad Dei gratiam -facilius impetrandum disponitur_. Since it was urged that men of eminent -learning made a distinction between such sorrow and love, the present -form of the clause was chosen in order to avoid defining a scholastic -question on which the Doctors were not of one mind; by using the word -_disponit_ the Council did not wish to mean a sufficient disposition, -and to indicate this more clearly it purposely avoided the use of the -word _sufficit_.[148] - -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 preparation 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.[149] - -Hence as preparation for the first justification of adults a beginning -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 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.[150] - -In the place where the Council treats of the sorrow required as a -preparation for the Sacrament of Penance, it speaks of it plainly as the -beginning of a new life;[151] 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.[152] - -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 contrition in -order to make it a sufficient disposition for obtaining grace in the -Sacrament, is not the beginning of the _amor benevolentiæ_ 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 reception of the Sacrament; similarly -the beginning of perfect love, joined with imperfect contrition, would -justify the sinner without the Sacrament.[153] Penance would thus be -a meaningless institution. It is rather the beginning of the _amor -concupiscentiæ_ or of the _caritas imperfecta_, in which we love God -because He is good to us. This beginning of love is included in imperfect -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 -initialis_.[154] - -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 servile fear. Such -sorrow, however, would be no longer _attritio_, 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.[155] - -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 contrition 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 penitent’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 difficulty 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 superfluous; for if we hope for good from any one, we -have already at least a beginning of love for him. - -Moreover, the confessor will observe that since the view requiring 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 Sacraments an explicit papal -decision enjoins the adoption of the safer view, it is not only of -counsel but of precept, strongly binding, 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 -concupiscentiæ_, yet _caritas_ is in no way excluded from it, and cannot -be excluded 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 perfect 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 procures 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.[156] - -We add one more practical observation: The imperfect contrition 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 Penance; yet we ought to take pains -that we have, as far as possible, perfect contrition, not only because -this is more pleasing 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. Indeed 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.[157] - - -14. The Necessary Qualities of Contrition. - -If the Sacrament of Penance is to be received validly and with fruit, the -contrition must be real, formal, supernatural, universal, supreme, and -sacramental.[158] - -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 certainly save him from the guilt of a sacrilege, could not -possibly supply for the want of a necessary and essential part of the -Sacrament.[159] 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 its origin, namely, in the heart; for -from the heart, as the Scripture tells us, come forth evil thoughts, -murders, adulteries, etc.[160] - -The contrition must be formal, _i.e._ explicit; a virtual or implicit -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 confessing his sins, be -justified in virtue of the act of perfect love, though he would not -validly receive absolution if he confined himself to the act of love. The -contrition must be quite explicit, for it is the essential matter of the -Sacrament, and virtual matter here would be about as practical as virtual -bread and wine in the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Hence it is not enough -to say: “I love thee, O my God, above all things, because thou art the -sovereign good; forgive me my sins.” Such words are only an act of love -and a prayer for pardon, not a formal act of sorrow. The words must be -explicit: “I am sorry for my sins.”[161] - -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 resolution 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 believes 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 distinct it might be from the sorrow of perfect -contrition. - -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.[162] - -There were also some theologians who maintained as a probable opinion -that the virtual sorrow included in a formal act of love or in a -resolution of amendment was sufficient. This view is stigmatized by -Suarez as rash, by Vasquez as false. Other theologians, however, consider -that this condemnation is too severe. - -On this question Reuter[163] remarks that a penitent need not be worried -about the formal act of sorrow if he has elicited an act of perfect love -while reflecting on his sins (_memor peccatorum_), for it is morally -impossible for any one with his sins before his eyes to elicit an act -of perfect love of God without detesting his sins. The same may be said -with regard to the purpose of amendment, for it is morally impossible -to form it without having formal sorrow. This is made clear from the -consideration of any practical resolution which is based on supernatural -motives; for if the hatred of sin is not yet a formal detestation and -sorrow of past sin, it becomes so in any one who reflects that he has -been guilty of sin.[164] - -2. The sorrow which disposes for the worthy reception of the Sacrament -must on the one hand be prompted by divine supernatural grace which -begins, accompanies, and perfects the whole work of salvation, and on the -other must proceed from some supernatural motive based on faith; for the -dispositions required for a supernatural gift must be supernatural. The -second condition is more important, for God will certainly give grace to -a man to do that which he is obliged to do. Merely natural or worldly -love or fear will give rise to natural sorrow; supernatural sorrow -springs from a supernatural fear or love of God. The distinction between -the two is not merely quantitative but qualitative; they have nothing in -common, and no amount of natural sorrow will ever rise to the dignity -of supernatural sorrow. Natural sorrow is of no efficacy in the work of -conversion. When the prophets exhort to repentance they do not confine -themselves to exhort the sinner, “Be converted,” but, “Be ye converted -to the Lord your God.” A true penitent was, in their eyes, not one who -turned from his sins; they required that he should also turn to God. -Sorrow, then, must have a religious character, must be prompted by divine -grace, must spring either from fear or love of God. - -If sorrow is to have this supernatural character, it must be based on -supernatural motives suggested by faith. Faith is the first condition -for justification which the Council of Trent demands of the sinner; in -addition to this other conditions are laid down, especially the act of -hope. These acts need not be formally elicited, but it is required that -the motive of sorrow for sin should proceed from faith if it is to be of -use for salvation. - -We may thus approach the question which, as Lehmkuhl says, many -moralists treat with a certain scrupulosity—whether before the Sacrament -is received explicit acts of faith and hope must be made, or whether -implicit acts are sufficient. Lehmkuhl himself answers the question as -follows:[165] To require that the penitent should elicit an act of faith -with its formal object explicitly and with deliberation before or apart -from the act of contrition is unreasonable; there would be reason for it -only in the case of a penitent who had lost his faith by sinning against -it. But an act of faith meaning the assent to a proposition of faith -which springs from the habit of faith (_assensum in aliquam veritatem -ut fide notam ab habitu fidei oriundum_), is rightly demanded since -it is otherwise impossible to derive contrition from a supernatural -motive. Thus there is no doubt that a formal and explicit act of faith is -necessary; but this is certainly present if the necessary contrition be -there. - -Accordingly St. Alphonsus is quite justified in believing that he can -reconcile the divergent views of the theologians by teaching that formal -faith is certainly necessary, but not reflex faith: that is a separate -and distinct consideration of the grounds of faith. It is just the same -with regard to hope; for if a man receive the Sacrament in a genuine -spirit of penance in order to get forgiveness of his sins, he is making -an act of hope _explicite_ (though not yet _reflexe_, still _exercite_) -that God will grant him pardon in the Sacrament through the merits of -Christ.[166] All this, however, holds good only for the faithful who are -instructed in the things necessary for salvation. - -Our faith presents to our consideration many motives for contrition, -which, as has been shown above, are reduced to two by the Council of -Trent: fear of punishment and hatefulness of sin. This hatefulness may -have many forms: the general malice which belongs to every sin (in so far -as it is an injury to God our highest good, and rebellion against Him, or -ingratitude to God our Father and Benefactor, or infamous unfaithfulness -to Jesus our loving Redeemer), or the particular malice which is proper -to each sin, since every sin has its own peculiar wickedness and is -the opposite to some special virtue. A further motive is found in the -sufferings and death of Christ, which may be considered a motive -of _caritas_, and the loathsome state of the soul when deprived of -sanctifying grace. - -Among the punishments which excite us to salutary contrition are first of -all the fire of hell, and then purgatory. - -All these motives may be called eternal; the pains of purgatory may be -numbered among the eternal motives because they begin only when a man has -passed from this life into eternity. - -It is to be observed that any one of these motives is sufficient to -awaken in us true contrition; nor is it necessary that we should choose -a motive with which we made acquaintance first by revelation; we know -many of these motives as well by reason as by faith; we must only take -care that the motive which impels us to sorrow appeals to us not merely -from the point of view of reason, but as proposed by faith. If, however, -one is moved to contrition by a particular motive, namely, the peculiar -malice of some sin even when this malice is made known to us by faith, -it is better to add a universal motive either of fear or of the malice -residing in all sin, so that the sorrow may not be insufficient or -doubtful for any sin which, having escaped observation, was not repented -of. - -The sorrow which comes from the thought of the temporal sufferings of -this life may be regarded as supernatural if these sufferings are looked -upon as inflicted by God, as being signs of His anger, and as a sort of -foretaste of His eternal punishments if we do not amend. Hence the sorrow -which comes from the thought of earthly pains cannot be set down at once -and absolutely as supernatural sorrow; the supernatural aspect must be -kept in view, and then the sorrow may be regarded as supernatural and -sufficient for approaching the Sacrament. Not only reason, but faith -also, teaches us that in God’s providence sin has many evil consequences, -and that on account of sin God strikes mankind with pains and calamities -both private and public. Moreover, the Council of Trent enumerates among -the motives of attrition “the fear of hell and of punishment,” and in the -punishment we are to understand the pains of this life, for the Council -mentions as an example the Ninivites who repented of their sins, moved -by fear of the destruction of their city, which had been prophesied by -Jonas, unless they did penance; nor are the Ninivites the only instance -where God has threatened temporal punishment in order to frighten sinners -and move them to penance. Not all theologians, however, admit temporal -punishments as motives of supernatural sorrow (among them Vasquez and -Toletus); they try to weaken the argument drawn from the Council of -Trent by asserting that the Council does not speak of two motives, which -apart from one another can give rise to sufficient contrition, but that -the words are to be taken conjunctively, so that the fear of earthly -punishments must be joined to fear of the pains of hell, since the latter -only are made known to us by faith. Our proof is in no way invalidated -by this argument; besides, many theologians, and those the most famous, -stand by the first view, so that it may be considered as the _sententia -communis_. The words of one of them, the eminent Suarez, may be quoted -here. He writes:[167] “Hence I infer that such sorrow [as is required -for the valid reception of the Sacrament of Penance] must proceed from -a divine and supernatural motive. That a temporal and human sorrow is -not sufficient is plain from the words of the Council of Trent, and the -reason is not to be misunderstood, for such a motive does not deprive -the will of the affection towards sin.” And in another place he writes: -“Vega (l. 13 in Trid. c. 14) concedes that sorrow based on the fear of -other punishment apart from hell-fire is sufficient for attrition. This -view is correct if we suppose that the fear is not merely human and -natural. Granted that the pains be only temporal, if they are considered -as inflicted by God, as proclaiming God’s anger, as being a foretaste in -some way of the divine punishments in the next life if we do not reform, -they can move us to a supernatural sorrow which may fairly be classed -with the sorrow which is based on the fear of hell; thus we exercise the -virtue of Christian hope when we look to God for temporal benefits in so -far as they affect in any way our eternal life or fall under the special -and supernatural providence of God.” - -Since, however, the negative proposition denying the efficacy of sorrow -springing from fear of earthly punishments for reception of the Sacrament -is the safer one and is not altogether improbable, it is the view which -must be adopted in practice; so a penitent should not confine himself -to the thought of the temporal penalties, but use it to proceed to the -consideration of the divine justice as revealed in eternal penalties, -“for,” as Lugo expresses it, “this consideration will create the fear -of God, who can inflict both one and the other penalty.” This last -reflection will certainly move him to a determined resolution to avoid -sin as the greatest of evils, and to avoid it even if that involves other -suffering. If, however, a man dwell on the thought of the suffering -which his sins have drawn upon him, or on the suffering which usually -follows in the train of sin, he will not necessarily be induced thereby -to resolve steadfastly to shun sin more than any other evil; for it is -possible that the avoiding of sin may involve him in greater misfortunes -in this life than those which would come from committing the sin; and -it is impossible that the fear of a less evil will effectually nerve a -man to endure the worse evil. Nevertheless the sorrow and purpose of -amendment, if they are to be of any use for justification, must be such -as to determine the man _implicite_ to endure all the evils of this -life rather than commit sin; and though the penitent is not obliged to -reflect _explicite_ on the matter, yet the motive of his sorrow and -amendment must be so powerful that, as long as this motive is present, -it would compel him to choose any suffering rather than sin. Finally, it -may be mentioned that the consideration of the temporal suffering is a -powerful weapon in the hands of the confessor to move an obstinate and -unrepentant sinner to contrition, and thence to lead him to higher and -safer motives.[168] - -3. The sorrow must be universal (_universalis_), _i.e._ it must extend to -all past sins, at least to those which are mortal. No single mortal sin -can be forgiven unless it is repented of, nor without other mortal sins -of which one has been guilty being forgiven, for none can be forgiven -without sanctifying grace; but sanctifying grace is incompatible with -mortal sin, for it is impossible that any one should be at the same time -a child of God and the slave of the devil, worthy of everlasting reward -and deserving eternal punishment; because “there is no condemnation to -them that are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. viii. 1). Hence it is promised in -Holy Scripture: “If the wicked do penance for all the sins which he hath -committed, and keep all My commandments, ... living he shall live”;[169] -and the second Lateran Council says, that a repentance would evidently be -useless in which a man left out several sins and repented only of one; -for it is written: “Whosoever shall keep the whole law, but offend in one -point, is become guilty of all.” He who is attached to one sin shall no -more cross the threshold of eternal life than one who is addicted to all -possible sins.[170] - -There are only two ways of attaining universal contrition; one way is to -apply special motives of sorrow to each particular sin, the other is to -repent of all sins, both the known and the unknown, through a universal -motive. This universality does not require that one should reflect on -all his sins so as to elicit an act of contrition for each particular -sin; this is necessary only if a man confines himself to those motives -which of their own nature do not apply to all mortal sins. In practice, -however, it is strongly recommended to base the sorrow on universal -motives. If, then, a man is sorry for his sins, his mortal sins at -least, from a universal motive, and afterwards recalls other sins, he -may confess them along with the rest and receive absolution for them -without having to make a new act of contrition; this fresh act would be -required if his repentance had proceeded from motives peculiar to each -sin. Besides there arises at the fresh recollections of his other sins in -a repentant sinner a renewal of his sorrow; this renewal is useful, for -it insures a more perfect preparation, but it is not necessary. - -We must distinguish between the universality of the sorrow and the -universality of the purpose of amendment. The sorrow is general when it -extends to all sins committed, at least to those which are mortal; the -resolution, however, must be to avoid all mortal sins whether they have -been committed or not. - -If a penitent has only venial sins to confess, the sorrow need not be -universal; it must have, however, the other properties.[171] Since venial -sin may coexist in the soul along with sanctifying grace, the love of God -is not lost, and since one venial sin may be forgiven apart from others, -it is enough in preparing for confession to make an act of sorrow for one -or other of the venial sins. Of course in such a case only those sins are -forgiven which are repented of; nor is it incompatible with the essence -of venial sin that a man should be really sorry for one, especially if it -be peculiarly vile, without being sorry for the rest. - -Still, the penitent should exert himself to be sorry for all the venial -sins of which he accuses himself. It is no sin to confess venial sins for -which one is not sorry, so long as _materia sufficiens_ for which there -is actual sorrow is offered to the power of the keys. It may be assumed -that the penitent, confessing venial sins for which he is not sorry, -does not care to be absolved from them; from these the confessor does -not intend to absolve. Reasons may exist for confessing venial sins for -which there is no real sorrow, _e.g._ in order to practice humility, to -be better known and guided by one’s confessor, etc.[172] - -4. The sorrow must be a sorrow surpassing all other sorrow (_sovereign_, -_supreme_) which shrinks from past sin as a greater evil than any in -the world, so that a man is prepared to forego every good and suffer -any evil rather than fall into sin again. This sorrow must be supreme -_appretiative_. Yet it is not required that the sensible feeling of pain -should be infinitely great or surpassing all other pain; nor is it -necessary that the heart should feel more keenly, or be more disturbed, -or be more cast down than it would be by some earthly suffering or loss -which should appeal more immediately to the sensitive faculties. Thus a -man may experience a more intense and lively sorrow for temporal losses, -such as the death of a dear friend or relation, and yet his contrition -may be appreciatively much greater. Of this he would give ample proof -if he were disposed to avoid sin, even though the sin could make good -his losses. Hence it is not by the acuteness of the sensible suffering -that sorrow for sin must surpass other pain, but by the displeasure -at past sin and the determination of the will to endure all kinds of -suffering and every temporal calamity and evil rather than consent to a -single mortal sin. The sorrow for sin must therefore be appreciatively -sovereign, not necessarily intensively so. The intensity makes no change -whatever in the substance of an act. Though contrition is usually the -more perfect the more intense it is, yet the intensity ought not to be -aimed at, for it would only prepare the way for scruples; moreover, there -is no proof that such intensity is necessary.[173] - -Though the penitent must have a greater horror of sin than of any other -evil, it is not necessary that he should make a deliberate comparison -of it with other evils, and make a vivid picture of each particular -misfortune, putting to himself the question whether he is ready to endure -it in preference to committing sin. Indeed such a course would be highly -imprudent and dangerous and likely to destroy the real contrition and -purpose of amendment which he had, as well as to excite an inclination -for the sin which he detested. Hence when such comparisons obtrude -themselves on the mind of the penitent, he should positively reject them -and cling to the absolute and unconditional general resolution of never -sinning again, helping himself by the reflection that God’s grace will -never be wanting at the right moment, and resolving with the help of that -grace never more to sin.[174] - -The question whether the sorrow can ever be excessive is already answered -from the foregoing. The sorrow which is of the essence of contrition, -_i.e._ displeasure at our past sins in so far as they are an injury to -God, can never be excessive; the greater our love, the greater must -be our displeasure, and love cannot be too great. As to the sensible -feeling of sorrow which is not at all necessary for true contrition, -this should never be carried so far as to interfere with the duty of -self-preservation, though as a matter of course there is little occasion -to fear that sensible sorrow will go so far. For the sensible sorrow over -a spiritual evil is always somewhat remote and cannot easily be so acute -as direct physical suffering or as the pain which comes from a misfortune -appealing directly to the senses.[175] - -As in contrition there is no definite intensity required, neither is any -certain duration; for a man may in one moment elicit an act of perfect or -imperfect contrition; it may be quite suddenly aroused by divine grace, -as in the case of David when he exclaimed in his sorrow, “I have sinned -against the Lord,” or as in the case of St. Peter, who at one glance of -Jesus was melted into bitter tears. The moment contrition becomes actual -it is sufficient for absolution. In practice, however, the faithful -should be urged to spend some time before confession in rousing a genuine -sorrow that will answer all demands, by reflecting with the help of God’s -grace on the nature of sin and its consequences; moreover, they should -be cautioned not to be satisfied with a mechanical repetition of an act -of contrition, otherwise the sorrow may be wanting, or at its best be -very weak. Yet sorrow is of the highest importance because it is the most -essential of the _actus pœnitentis_, the very soul of confession.[176] - - -15. The Relation of Contrition to the Sacrament. - -Finally, the sorrow must be sacramental, _i.e._ in connection with the -Sacrament of Penance. For instance, in order that attrition along with -the Sacrament may be able to restore a man to sanctifying grace, it -must be joined with at least the implicit intention of receiving the -Sacrament, and coexist virtually with the absolution. - -A man who in preparing for confession bewails the sins which he has -discovered in examining his conscience, makes an act of contrition _ex -intentione implicita_ of receiving the Sacrament. If, however, his sorrow -is expressed without any intention of receiving the Sacrament or without -any thought of confession, he must renew his act of sorrow in order to be -sure of receiving absolution validly, unless he afterwards decides to go -to confession in consequence of the still virtually enduring contrition, -so that his confession proceeds from his sorrow. Hence the following -conclusions are drawn:— - -I. An act of contrition made without reference to the receiving of -absolution makes the validity of the absolution doubtful. - -II. It is not necessary, however, that the penitent should make the act -of contrition in consequence of his resolution to go to confession. This -is the usual practice, it is true, and certainly a very good one, but -it is enough if by his contrition he be moved to make his confession, -and if he thus unite his sorrow, still persevering, with the sacramental -act. It is also sufficient if the penitent makes an act of sorrow in -the interval between the confession of his sins and the giving of the -absolution.[177] - -The reason for making these demands upon the penitent is that the acts -of the penitent are not only an interior preparation for, but they are -the _materia ex qua_ of, the Sacrament. The sorrow, therefore, must -be brought into relation to the Sacrament; and since this doctrine is -probable and is the common teaching, this relation must be established in -practice at least _ante factum_, _i.e._ the confessor must before giving -absolution take care that the penitent makes his act of sorrow with a -view to the Sacrament. - -Hence the question amounts really to this: What relation is demanded -between the act of sorrow and the Sacrament? not whether such a relation -be necessary; for, on the one hand, it cannot be defended with any -probability that such relation is unnecessary, and, on the other hand, -it is not in accordance with either truth or prudence that the penitent, -before making the act of contrition, should establish its relation to the -confession or be obliged to have the intention of receiving the Sacrament. - -Some sort of bond, however, must exist between the contrition and the -Sacrament. It is false to infer from the Catholic teaching of the Council -of Trent that the eliciting of the act of sorrow or _dolor in fieri_, as -it is called, is the _materia proxima_ of the Sacrament; it is rather -the sorrow already elicited or the _dolor in facto esse_, which is the -matter of the Sacrament; it is not in or by itself _proxima materia_: it -becomes so by means of the confession and in union with the confession. -That sorrow is sufficient which coexists in any way with the will of -receiving the Sacrament. In other words, the sorrow must _inform_ -the confession, _i.e._ make the accusation a penitent or sorrowful -confession, and apt to effect a reconciliation with God. If then the -sorrow coexists in any way with the confession and is referred to it, -that sorrow constitutes _proxime_ the matter of the Sacrament and there -is no necessity for the penitent to have the intention of confessing -before making the act of contrition. In a similar way water is the matter -of Baptism; it is not necessary that the water should be procured with -the intention of conferring the Sacrament; it is quite enough to take the -water which comes to hand and to apply it to the sacramental use. Now -there can be no doubt that the sorrow also, though not elicited with a -view to the Sacrament, can remain present in some way in the soul, and -while so present may later on be brought into contact with and applied -to the Sacrament. A man, for instance, who under the influence of his -contrition seeks an opportunity of going to confession, or makes use of -the opportunity of going which presents itself, has certainly not lost -his contrition; he has it rather in greater abundance, though he reflects -no more on his sorrow, nor even retains any certain recollection of it -afterwards. - -Lacroix has no sufficient reason for demanding that sorrow must be -aroused with the view of going to confession, saying that otherwise the -sorrow would not be a sacramental act, just as the pouring of water -made without the intention of baptizing, though referred immediately -afterwards to the baptismal act and the form added, is not a sacramental -function. The comparison, we answer, is not to the point, for the sorrow -is not _in et per se materia proxima_ as is the pouring of the water -in Baptism. If, however, a man poured out the water with some other -intention, and then still in the act of pouring formed the intention -of baptizing, the Baptism would be valid. The same argument holds for -penance; hence that sorrow is sufficient which coexists in any way with -the wish to receive the Sacrament. - -In the case quoted above where the penitent first confesses his sins and -then makes his act of sorrow before receiving the Sacrament, or when he -is moved to contrition by the words of his confessor, a difficulty may -arise, since the confession must be a sorrowful one. Such an enumeration -of the sins cannot, of course, be considered as informed by sorrow; the -humble demand for absolution, however, takes up the accusation again and -perfects it; and makes it _materia proxima_ of the Sacrament. - -If, on the contrary, the sorrow has been elicited with no idea at all -of confessing the sin, there is reason for doubting whether an act so -completely independent of the confession will become _materia_ of the -Sacrament. Absolution cannot be demanded in face of the probability of -such an essential defect; yet one can hardly acquire sufficient certainty -of the existence of such defect to make the repetition of the confession -obligatory.[178] - -III. The sorrow must coexist at least virtually with the absolution if it -is to be sacramental. This virtual coexistence is secured if the sorrow -is excited immediately before the accusation or the absolution, or even -one, two, or four hours before confession; and St. Alphonsus admits -that real sorrow may last one or two days and still be sufficient for -absolution, when it comes from the desire of being reconciled with God, -or when it urges a man to go to confession in order to avoid the sins -along with the occasion of them. On the other hand, a sorrow removed by -so long an interval would not be sufficient for valid absolution if the -confession were made out of mere devotion, or in fulfilment of a vow, -or for some similar reason. In these latter instances one or two hours -is the widest limit which could be assigned for the virtual duration of -the contrition. Hence we must condemn the teaching of some moralists -that the act of sorrow endures over an unlimited time, and that it is -quite sufficient if it is not retracted in the interval. Of course the -act of contrition loses completely all its value for absolution by any -retraction; and sorrow is retracted expressly by any new complacency in -the sin or by any fresh mortal sin. - -The reasons for the doctrine just given have already been laid down -in the preceding paragraphs on the relation between contrition and -absolution. The theologians fall back in particular on the analogy -between the civil and sacramental tribunals. As in a civil process some -time may elapse between the hearing of the case and the passing of the -sentence without invalidating the sentence, so some interval may elapse -between the sorrow and the absolution by which sentence is pronounced; -this delay, however, must not be too long.[179] - -In practice the priest must teach the faithful and insist on their -renewing the act of sorrow immediately before confession, if it is some -time since they made it, and also on a due amount of time being given to -eliciting contrition, since the fruit of the Sacrament is more abundant -in proportion to the care taken in preparing for it. - -In the case, however, where confession has been made with genuine sorrow -but without the necessary reference to the Sacrament, the penitent -should not be obliged to repeat the confession, for the other view with -regard to the sorrow, that it is not _materia sacramenti_, but only -a disposition on the part of the penitent, is not altogether without -probability; besides it is scarcely probable that the former act of -contrition has not been renewed when the man intended to confess, and -that it has no sufficient coexistence with the confession, or at least -with the intention to confess. Only when there is danger of death or any -risk of the penitent dying before receiving absolution again, the safer -course, as far as possible, should be adopted; for on such important -occasions prudence counsels us to guard against even slight doubts, so as -not to jeopardize our eternal salvation. - -It is certain, as we remarked above, that the act of contrition is -retracted by a fresh mortal sin, and its effect, in consequence, no -longer endures. It is not so easy to settle the question, with regard to -venial sins, as to whether the sorrow for venial sin based on a universal -motive is revoked by a fresh venial sin, or whether the sorrow continues. -If it is conceded that the sorrow is revoked, scruples may easily arise -if the sorrow has not been renewed immediately before confession. This -practice is very good; but not necessary, if the fresh venial sin is less -grievous than those which the penitent intended to confess when he made -his act of sorrow.[180] - -There is still another question to consider. An act of contrition is -made, extending to all past sins, those which are forgotten as well -as those which are remembered; must this be renewed if the penitent -afterwards confesses the forgotten sins and desires a second absolution? - -A renewal of the sorrow in this case does not seem necessary, provided -that the sorrow in the first confession extended to all past sins, -even those which by chance had escaped the memory; for in this case -the process was not objectively complete. The sorrow and the implicit -intention of receiving absolution were applied to all sins, even those -inculpably forgotten; and as the renewal of the sorrow would not be at -all necessary if the penitent, after making an act of contrition on -universal grounds, recalls just before the absolution some sins forgotten -and confesses them before the absolution is pronounced, so it is not -necessary in the case mentioned, since it is much the same whether one -receives many particular absolutions or a general one embracing all the -sins. Such is the view of the greater number of the moralists. Lugo, St. -Alphonsus, and Reuter may be mentioned particularly as favoring it; St. -Alphonsus calls this teaching _communis_, Roncaglia _moraliter certa_, -Sporer, Elbel, and many others _probabilissima_; it has been declared -even _indubitata apud omnes_; _pro ea stat_, says Lugo, _communis -praxis_. If in this case one or two confessors perhaps insist on the -renewal of the sorrow, the greater number agree in acting differently or -in suggesting it merely as a piece of advice. - -The champions of the other view urge that the case is closed by the first -absolution; if then absolution is to be given again, a new _materia -proxima_ is required, and even if the sorrow continue, it has no relation -to the second absolution. It is easily seen that this is not a strong -reason.[181] Yet though the renewal of the sorrow be not necessary for -the validity of the absolution, it is advisable to make again the act -of sorrow, which is easy to do and certainly increases the grace. The -confessor deals prudently with a penitent under such circumstances when -he requires him to make a short renewal of his act of contrition.[182] - -The doctrine just developed is not only adopted _ex communi sententia_ -in the case more or less frequent, where a mortal sin which had been -forgotten is confessed immediately after or very soon after absolution, -but also in two other cases. For instance, a penitent in immediate danger -of death must be absolved after one or two sins have been confessed; -after this, if he be still alive, the confession is continued and -completed. The other example is when a penitent (a very rare case) -is absolved by his superior from the reserved sins only, and from the -remaining sins by another confessor.[183] - -The result of this doctrine ought not to be, however, that confessors -and penitents become less solicitous about contrition for sins already -remitted by the Sacrament. It may, however, as Ballerini remarks, be very -useful in quieting scruples, especially of those who accuse themselves of -venial sins and in addition tell some mortal sin already confessed and -absolved; for if there is little ground for doubting the sorrow for past -mortal sins in a penitent who has usually only venial sins to confess, -and shows by his constant victories over temptation his aversion to -mortal sin, yet certain anxious penitents are frequently troubled with -scruples about their want of contrition, especially if they happen to -hear a preacher who, with a zeal sometimes devoid of prudence, condemns -the repeated confession of past sins made without true contrition. Such -scruples may be overcome by various means, but especially by the doctrine -just given.[184] - -To conclude with a few practical questions:— - -1. How must the confessor deal with a penitent who thinks he has only -very slight contrition? He must first of all not be too hasty in deciding -that this penitent is indisposed and without the necessary contrition; -there are men whose hearts are so hard and inaccessible to sensible -impressions that it is only with difficulty and at rare intervals that -they are moved to a sensible sorrow, and such are easily inclined to -think that they have not the proper dispositions. The confessor must -remember that the feeling of sorrow is not at all required, but that -a real grief over the past life and an earnest desire to amend are -sufficient; he must satisfy himself that these dispositions are present -and cannot demand more. He may, moreover, reasonably assume the presence -of these dispositions in the penitent if the latter be willing to listen -to warning and instruction, if he has at any time really endeavored to -amend, if he is ready to perform the penance imposed, and to carry out -other prescriptions of a like nature.[185] - -2. When with regard to former confessions the priest wishes to ascertain -whether the penitent has had real sorrow, the following points may serve -as indications:— - -(_a_) If the penitent has made use of the means suggested to him for -overcoming the sin. - -(_b_) If he has avoided at least the proximate occasions of sin. - -(_c_) If the number of sins has become less. - -(_d_) If the penitent is convinced that he had real sorrow and purpose of -amendment; for it is a first principle in the Sacrament of Penance that -the penitent’s word is to be taken, since he is there his own accuser and -witness.[186] - -The priest must act here with great prudence so as not to frighten away -the penitent, and at the same time not to indulge in an indiscreet -leniency by which he would himself commit sin and involve both the -penitent and himself in ruin. - -3. It is not easy for the confessor to discover when the penitent has not -real contrition; the following directions, which Cardinal Denoff in his -pastoral brought to the notice of all the confessors of his diocese, may -be of use:— - -(_a_) If the penitent approaches with a proud bearing as though despising -the minister of Christ. - -(_b_) If he answers with impatience and anger the questions which the -confessor is bound to put. - -(_c_) If in the course of his confession he constantly makes excuses and -accuses others more than himself. - -(_d_) If he mentions the gravest sins as though they were ordinary -occurrences. - -(_e_) If it is evident that he is trying to conceal a mortal sin which -the confessor in the course of his examination has detected. - -(_f_) If he refuses to accept a penance proportioned to the number -and gravity of his sins, and given with all consideration for his -circumstances. - -(_g_) If he is unwilling to employ the necessary means to reform. - -(_h_) If, finally, he belongs to the number of those unhappy sinners who -seek ignorant or easy-going confessors, with a view of getting absolution -only, without any intention of reforming.[187] - -4. If the priest has to deal with an obstinate sinner, he must discreetly -unite mildness and severity, but above all pray to God for him, since -every good gift comes from the Father of light. He may picture to him -God’s great mercy and the love of Jesus to give him courage; or he may -try to soften the hardness of his heart by reminding him of God’s justice -(cf. S. Alph. Praxis Confessar. cp. I). - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT - - -16. Necessity and Nature of the Purpose of Amendment. - -According to the decision of the Council of Trent, as we have seen -above, the resolution to amend as well as contrition is required for the -valid reception of the Sacrament. With a true sorrow for sin is always -conjoined the resolution to avoid it, so that we may say with regard to -past sins sorrow means grief and horror, with regard to the future it -means the resolution to amend. For instance, a man who hates the sin -he has committed, because it is sin and in so far as it is sin, _i.e._ -because it is an offense against God and the greatest misfortune which -can befall a mortal, naturally extends that sorrow to everything which -involves sin, and so to the sins of the future, since they offer the same -grounds for hatred as the rest. - -Now amendment is effected by the deliberate intention never to sin again -for the future. A distinction is drawn between the express or formal -resolve (_propositum explicitum seu formale_), as when, for example, a -man thinks upon his future life and resolves to sin no more, and the -implicit resolve contained in the sorrow (_propositum implicitum seu -virtuale_); the latter is present when a man, without thinking upon his -future life, repents of his sin in such wise that, if asked whether he -intends for the future to avoid sin, he would most certainly answer in -the affirmative. - -It is a disputed point among theologians whether for the validity of -confession an express (formal) resolve is necessary or one included in -the act of contrition (a virtual resolve) is sufficient. Some teach -absolutely (very few, however) that an express resolve is necessary, and -appeal to the Council of Trent as requiring this condition, since, after -defining the act of contrition, it adds the words: _Cum proposito non -peccandi de cætero_.[188] - -This argument is successfully invalidated by Cardinal Lugo,[189] who, in -addition, brings convincing testimony that the very opposite conclusion -may be drawn from the teaching of the Council. Since, moreover, as -Ballerini shows in his notes on Gury’s text, only a very few theologians -adopt that view, it can hardly lay any claim to probability.[190] - -Other theologians teach absolutely that an express purpose of amendment -is not necessary if the contrition proceed from a universal motive;[191] -an implicit resolution is sufficient, and Lugo calls this opinion -_communis inter recentiores_. Indeed most of the theologians endorse it. -Ballerini cites seventy-three by name, with the passages in which they -express their views.[192] It is also founded on solid intrinsic grounds, -for, according to the doctrine of the Council (_loco citato_), attrition -which excludes the desire of sinning is sufficient for the valid -reception of the Sacrament; but, as we have seen, attrition excludes the -desire of sinning, even when there is no formal purpose of amendment, for -it detaches the heart of man from sin, and not only from past sin but -from all sin.[193] - -Finally, there are theologians who distinguish and say: If a penitent -advert to the future, he must make a formal resolution to amend; if, -however, as in the case of the dying, no thought of the future occurs to -him, a formal resolution is not necessary; for it is hardly possible that -a penitent who is really sorry for his sins and thinks upon the future -should fail to make an express and formal resolve to amend. Yet this may -very well happen, as Ballerini observes, to pious people, especially to -such as are careful to avoid even slight deliberate venial sins, and are -accustomed to make acts of sorrow for defects and to start afresh on the -right way; for in them the resolution to avoid sin is not made just for -the time when they prepare for confession, but it is rather an enduring -habit of mind. Hence it is not matter of surprise that they should not -think of renewing and confirming their resolution. Suarez makes this -clear when, in speaking of perfect contrition, he asks whether an act of -perfect love suffices for justification, or whether also an act of sorrow -for sin be necessary; he replies that _per se_ both are required, but -that _per accidens_ the act of perfect love suffices, for whoever makes -an act of perfect love is undoubtedly restored to grace; but that if a -man be conscious of sin, he is in duty bound to reëstablish his right -relation to God and to make a formal and explicit act of displeasure and -hatred with regard to the sin; to neglect this duty would prove that he -had no real love. In a similar way the sinner who mourns for his past -sins is naturally prompted to make a resolution of avoiding sin; hence -the voluntary neglect of the purpose of amendment renders the act of -contrition very suspicious.[194] - -After exposing the three views which have divided theologians on this -point, St. Alphonsus concludes: The last two views are certainly the more -probable; but since the first has also a certain probability, it must -in practice be followed _ante factum_. He holds that a penitent would -be obliged to repeat his confession if he had confessed in good faith -without an express purpose of amendment, though with real contrition -such as would include a virtual purpose; his argument being that, since -the first opinion is sufficiently probable, a penitent who had certainly -incurred mortal sin is bound to avow the same in a confession that was -certainly and not merely probably valid.[195] Now, as we have shown -above, the first opinion can hardly lay claim to any probability, though -the holy Doctor concedes it as such mainly because he was misled by -Lacroix into believing that he had distinguished authorities on his side. -Besides, St. Alphonsus teaches in another part of his Moral Theology -(l. c. n. 505) that the penitent should not be obliged to repeat his -confession unless there be a moral certainty of its invalidity—a doctrine -quite in accordance with the _sententia communis_ and with excellent -reason maintained by Lacroix, Gobat, etc., in opposition to Antoine, one -of the most conspicuous rigorists of his time. - -In the case under consideration it may be decided with moral certainty -that a confession made with a virtual purpose of amendment is rather -valid than invalid, especially since, according to St. Alphonsus himself, -the champions of all these opinions unite in declaring that a confession -made without an express resolution of amendment need not be repeated, -for they would certainly have decided for the repetition if they had -thought such a confession invalid. Hence theologians deny _communissima -sententia_ that a formal purpose of amendment (if the contrition is based -on a universal motive) is necessary _necessitate sacramenti_; they admit -that confessions are valid without the express purpose of amendment. -Add to this that St. Alphonsus in his _Homo Apostolicus_ taught that -confessions made with only a virtual purpose of amendment need not be -repeated.[196] - -We conclude with the following principles:— - -1. In order to receive the Sacrament validly and to share in its -essential effects, a virtual or implicit purpose of amendment is -sufficient if the sorrow proceed from a universal motive. - -2. If confession has been made without a formal and express purpose of -amendment, there is no obligation to repeat the confession as though it -had been invalid. - -3. The faithful should be taught and urged to make a formal resolution of -amendment in the course of their preparation for confession. - -The reason of this last prescription is not so much to be found in any -doubt with regard to confessions made without the express purpose of -amendment, but to secure a more abundant fruit from the Sacrament. We -shall certainly with the grace of God make more earnest endeavors to -avoid sin and to reform if we expressly, deliberately, and with all our -heart resolve to avoid sin. Indeed, as Lehmkuhl justly observes, apart -from the grace of the Sacrament and the instruction and advice of our -confessor, the frequent reception of this Sacrament serves to secure us -against relapse, for our wills need a frequent stimulus to remain firm in -the hatred of sin. Not infrequently one cause of our relapses is a weak -purpose of amendment.[197] - - -17. Properties of the Purpose of Amendment. - -The purpose of amendment must have the three following properties: it -must be absolute or firm, efficacious, and universal. We shall consider -these properties in detail. - -The purpose of amendment must, first of all, be _firm_, answering to the -contrition which detests sin above all other evils; so that a man under -no circumstances, neither through fear of any evil or love of any good -will think of swerving from his resolve. Thus the purpose of amendment -is not a velleity, not a mere wish or a vague desire; it must be an -absolute, fixed determination never to sin again; otherwise the penitent -would not really detest sin nor really and thoroughly turn to God. - -The resolution must then be so fixed that the penitent is resolved -to overcome all the difficulties which may oppose its execution. The -confessor will prudently refrain from placing before the penitent all -the difficulties which will have to be faced in keeping the resolution -or from revealing to the penitent all his obligations, if the latter be -_bona fide_ ignorant of them; “for,” says Suarez, “he might expose the -penitent to the obvious danger of making no resolution, but rather of -sinning again.” It is enough, continues the great theologian, if the -confessor pictures to the penitent in general terms the hatefulness of -sin, the goodness of God, the danger of eternal damnation, etc., and that -the penitent in consequence of the exhortation forms a general resolution -never to fall again into mortal sin.[198] The advice which Cardinal -Cajetan gives to confessors is in much the same strain: They should not, -he says, lead their penitents into temptation by their excessive and -imprudent zeal in asking whether they are resolved to avoid sin even at -the risk of suffering the greatest misfortunes, loss of goods, of health, -or even of life itself; for questions of this kind would prove a snare to -many penitents. His office should be rather to persuade them to love God -above all things, and in consequence of this love to repent of their sins -and avoid them for the future. In this way he will inflame the hearts of -his penitents, without leading them into danger.[199] - -The celebrated Lugo reminds us of the weakness of the human heart; -the confessor is to take this weakness into account in dealing with -the penitent, and not put before him singly and explicitly enormous -difficulties which he should be ready to overcome rather than commit -sin. In another place, treating of penitents given to ambition and -sensuality, who have renounced their sins in confession though without -great sorrow, but, conquered by the strength of their passion which -they have only resisted feebly, have relapsed easily when occasion -offered, he says: “Indeed we do not dare to represent clearly in detail -the temptations or occasions of sinning which may occur, in order that -the penitent may make his resolutions on each point, for there is good -reason to fear that he will fail to retract his former sins even _in -confuso_.”[200] - -It is then sufficient _per se_ that the penitent resolve _in confuso_ to -sin no more; a resolution of this kind, however, may be easily defeated -by the contemplation of a peculiar difficulty. For this reason the -penitent should renew frequently and earnestly his resolution never to -sin again; if he do this and also pray, there is reason to hope that he -will be victorious in the actual moment of trial. Men of strong will and -steadfast heart may put before themselves and contemplate with their eyes -open the difficulties in the way of avoiding sin and reforming their -lives, and such conduct is helpful in the spiritual struggle, unless the -subject be one in which the heart is vehemently carried away or where -victory consists in flight. To conjure up difficulties and to review -temptations which might disturb weak minds and lead them into danger[201] -serves no good purpose and is not to be recommended. - -From the foregoing it is abundantly evident:— - -1. That the Jansenists and rigorists are wrong in maintaining that -relapse into sin is a sign of a want of purpose. The resolution depends -on the present frame of mind which, however strong it is, may easily -waver. “The fact of a man sinning again does not prevent his former -sorrow from having been real; as a man may be now seated who has been -running, so a man may fall into sin who has been truly repentant; the -nature of a former act is not changed by a subsequent act.”[202] And the -Rituale Romanum[203] directs, as of great utility, to advise those who -easily relapse into sin to confess often, once a month, or on certain -feasts, and also to communicate; it presumes that such people in spite -of their relapses have made good confessions; otherwise the penitent -would be obliged to repeat his confessions as being invalid every time -that he relapsed, which would certainly be opposed to the practice and -universal belief of the faithful. If, however, a penitent relapse without -any effort to overcome himself, it may be taken as a sign that he had no -fixed determination, or there is ground for a suspicion, at least, of its -absence; any one who is really determined to avoid sin will not easily -forget his purpose; he will resist for some time at least, and will fall -less easily and less often.[204] - -2. Even if a penitent is conscious of his own weakness and knows that he -will relapse in spite of his resolution and in spite of earnest effort, -he cannot be considered as giving undoubted signs of weakness of purpose. -It is only the rigorists who demand a firm conviction of not falling -again. - -If, however, a penitent is so afraid that he will fall again, or so -convinced that he will repeat his sin as to despair of reforming, he -cannot be absolved; not only does he fail in resolution—there is a fair -suspicion at least that he has no fixed determination—but he distrusts -God’s grace which is ever at hand, and, as experience proves, is always -efficacious in helping men of good will to overcome difficulties and -obstacles. Before giving such a penitent absolution he must be taught -the fatal error of his ways, moved to sorrow for his despair, for such -despair is sinful, and exhorted to great confidence in God’s grace. This -is the doctrine of St. Alphonsus,[205] in which, as he himself confesses, -he follows Busenbaum,[206] Concina, and Lacroix.[207] - -If, finally, the penitent has misgivings from his previous experience -of relapses, but not so strong as to deprive him of all confidence, he -is not to be classed at once as indisposed; the confessor must persuade -him to make a firm resolution against sin and encourage him to have -confidence in God’s grace. If he succeed in arousing hope in him, and the -penitent promise to have recourse to prayer in temptation, it is better -to give absolution at once than to put it off. This class of penitents -should be encouraged to confess frequently, for there is reason to hope -that they have a fixed determination to improve; there is no presumption -for the opposite view, since a strong resolution to avoid sin is quite -compatible with the fear of a possible relapse.[208] - -Still less would it be a sign of want of the requisite dispositions if -the confessor were persuaded that the penitent could hardly be saved -from a relapse; this conclusion may be drawn with moral certainty, or, -at least, on strong presumption, from the ordinary occurrences of life; -hence the necessary disposition on the part of the penitent can always be -secured. - -In practice it is not of infrequent occurrence that a penitent, otherwise -of good will, alarmed by the difficulties of some undertaking, declares -that he cannot avoid a certain sin, or refuses to make a promise for fear -of breaking his word, or says he cannot trust himself. This happens in -the case of those who are given to some evil habit, as, for instance, -taking the name of God in vain, swearing, flying into a rage, etc. Such -a penitent must not only be encouraged to trust to the help of divine -grace, but be taught that all required of him is to have at the present -moment (_hic et nunc_) the determination not to relapse, that he should -not look too far ahead but make his resolution day by day. The confessor -must take particular care that the penitent understands that that only is -demanded of him which he freely acknowledges to be within his power. This -end is obtained by suggesting methods to the penitent to be used when he -is free from temptation as well as when he is attacked, and by impressing -upon him that all demanded of him is to guard against committing sins -knowingly and with full advertence.[209] - -The resolution must, moreover, be _efficacious_, _i.e._ the penitent must -be ready not only to avoid sin, but also to take the necessary means for -avoiding it, especially by avoiding the proximate occasions; for whoever -effectually desires some end must, of necessity, as far as lies in him, -remove all impediments to it, and employ all the means which will lead -to it. Hence theologians teach that the resolution must be _efficax -affectu_; in the case, however, where it is not _executione efficax_, -_i.e._ where the penitent fails to accomplish his purpose, it is not -reasonable to conclude at once that a real and sufficient resolve was -absent, though some presumption against the fixity of the purpose may be -entertained. What has been said with respect to the steadfastness of -the purpose of amendment may be applied to its efficaciousness, seeing -that the two subjects are so intimately connected. Though it is undoubted -that for valid confession the purpose of amendment must be fixed and -efficacious, yet we are not to understand thereby that a man may never -fail in his resolution. It is quite certain that men are so fickle that -they will fall away frequently from determined and fixed resolutions, -as we see, for instance, in the case of St. Peter, who, as we know, was -sincerely pledged not to betray his Lord, and, yet, denied Him soon -after, at the mere word of a maid servant. - -The purpose of amendment, then, is fixed and efficacious when a man -is determined really to carry out what he has proposed, though he -may afterwards fail through fear of an obstacle or in the stress of -temptation; this happens often enough even in the case of those who -are aiming at Christian perfection. Hence, for valid reception of the -Sacrament, the purpose of amendment is sufficiently efficacious if it -keep a man from sin during the time that his resolution lasts.[210] - -In order to be reasonably free from misgivings with regard to his -resolution, the penitent should be morally certain that he desires to -avoid sin at any cost for the rest of his life, despite all grounds he -may have for believing that his resolution may become weak in course of -time. - -Finally, the resolution must be _universal_, _i.e._ it must extend to -all mortal sins at least, not only those which have been committed, but -also those which are possible. Here lies the distinction between the -universality of the contrition and that of the purpose of amendment; -for while the sorrow is universal which includes all the sins that have -been committed, the resolution, in order to be valid, must embrace all -possible mortal sins. If there remained but a single mortal sin which the -penitent was unwilling to shun, his resolution would be vain and useless -even with regard to his other sins, because it could not be founded on -a universal motive, such as hatred of sin considered in the light of an -offense against God. A resolution which is based on this motive extends -to all mortal sins without reserve, because they are all an offense -against God; and if but one be excepted, such a motive could not have -influenced the purpose of amendment, which in consequence cannot be real -and genuine.[211] - - -18. The Purpose of Amendment with regard to Venial Sin. - -The purpose of amendment, as we have said, must extend at least to -all mortal sins. With regard to venial sins it must be constant and -efficacious, but not necessarily universal; for, since venial sin is -consistent with the friendship and grace of God in the soul, one is not -obliged to resolve on avoiding all of them: indeed no one _sine speciali -privilegio gratiæ_ can avoid all venial sins, and no one is called upon -to resolve to accomplish the impossible; still there is an obligation to -resolve to avoid them as much as possible, or at least to diminish their -number. The following points will present the matter in detail:— - -1. It is sufficient with respect to any venial sin to make an act of -contrition and a purpose of amendment, even though these acts do not -extend to all lighter venial sins of the same species; for the greater -the sin the greater is the offense against God and the punishment due -to it; and a man may well shrink from displeasing God beyond a certain -point, though below that point he may be careless. - -2. It is sufficient to make an act of sorrow and purpose of amendment -with regard to some particular species of sin, or some vice, or some sins -opposed to a particular virtue, especially if the penitent keeps before -his mind those particular sins which have been committed with greater -malice and deliberation.[212] - -3. With much more reason may it be considered sufficient to make acts of -sorrow and purpose of amendment for all perfectly deliberate venial sins -on account of their greater guilt; such a universal sorrow must, however, -include a fixed and efficacious resolution of amendment. With respect -to venial sins which are not quite deliberate, the resolution to take -more pains to avoid them is a sufficient purpose of amendment. In order -that such a universal resolve may be of avail, a particular species of -sin should be singled out and made the special object of contrition and -amendment. - -4. Moreover, it is the general teaching of moralists that it is enough to -make acts of sorrow and amendment with regard to the frequency of venial -sin if the penitent really resolve to reduce the number; it is necessary -here, however, to guard against a very lax practice. Though such doctrine -is possible in theory and such a purpose of amendment may be defended -as sufficient for the Sacrament, yet it is not free from risk; hence -St. Alphonsus in his book _Praxis Confessarii_ distinctly states that a -resolution founded only on the great number of venial sins without any -sorrow for any particular venial sin is not sufficient for receiving the -Sacrament, while in his Moral Theology he grants that such a resolution -is permissible, and founds it on the doctrine of St. Thomas; for it is -impossible, he says, to be sorry on account of the number of the venial -sins without repenting at least of those that have been last incurred and -which have raised the number.[213] - -The above doctrine may be useful to the priest in appeasing scruples -about past confessions, if the penitent is not in the habit of falling -into grave sin, and fears that he may have confessed without sufficient -sorrow and purpose of amendment. _Ante factum_, _i.e._ before confession -or, at least, before absolution is given, this doctrine should be -confined _in praxi_ to the sorrow and amendment of sins not quite -deliberate and incurred through carelessness; for the guilt of such sins -lies chiefly in the carelessness by which a man fails to watch himself -and his evil inclinations, so far as possible to repress and overcome -them. - -It is impossible for a man to preserve himself entirely from all these -sins, hence it is enough to be resolved to use great vigilance in -reducing the number. - -Moreover, it may be observed that a man who keeps his conscience so pure -that he has only indeliberate venial sins to confess will easily make a -sufficient act of sorrow for past sins; but if a man always falls into -the same sin, it is a fairly clear sign that he has no true contrition -and no firm purpose of amendment; hence it is a useful practice to make -more careful acts of sorrow and amendment with regard to some particular -sin, or to add some grave sin of the past life with respect to which real -sorrow and a firm purpose of amendment can be aroused. - - - - -CHAPTER III - -CONFESSION - - -ARTICLE I - -ESSENCE, NECESSITY, AND PROPERTIES OF CONFESSION - - -19. Essence and Necessity of Confession. - -Though contrition is the most important of the dispositions which a -penitent must bring to the Sacrament, the confessing of the sins is -the most prominent feature to ordinary observers; hence the Sacrament -is often simply called confession, as in the very earliest ages of the -Church it was known simply as _confessio_ (in Greek _exomologesis_). - -Sacramental confession is the self-accusation of sins committed after -Baptism and not yet remitted in the Sacrament, and it is made by the -penitent to a priest having the necessary faculties and with the object -of obtaining absolution. - -Hence it is not a sacramental confession when the sins are told -_enarratione mere historica_; such a recital would not be an accusation, -nor would it be done with the view of acknowledging one’s self a sinner -or of obtaining absolution. Moreover, it is not a sacramental confession -if sins are revealed to a priest to obtain counsel or help from him, -or if they are told to the priest merely in derision, for there would -be no accusation in this, at least it would not be done with a view of -obtaining absolution. On the contrary, a confession invalid through any -defect whatever would be sacramental if it was made in order to obtain -absolution. - -If, however, a man began by simply relating his sins to an authorized -priest without any idea of making a sacramental confession, and then in -order to obtain absolution accuses himself in general terms to the same -priest of those same sins, the confession would be sacramental, for then -a formal accusation would be made of those sins to the priest as judge, -in order that absolution might be given. - -The necessity of this confession for all mortal sins committed after -Baptism is a dogma of the Church, and rests on the divine institution of -the Sacrament. The proof is to be sought in dogmatic treatises. In the -divine institution of this Sacrament, as a necessary means for obtaining -forgiveness of sin by confession to a priest, is included the divine -command of confessing sin, which binds all who have committed mortal sin -after Baptism. We have already spoken of this in treating of the duty of -approaching the Sacrament, since confession is one of the acts required -of the penitent on receiving this Sacrament.[214] - -There remains yet another point which shows the necessity of confession. -Perfect contrition, as we have seen above, remits sin apart even from the -Sacrament, but it does not remove the obligation of mentioning the sins -so remitted to a duly authorized priest. The obligation remains, because -by Christ’s command every mortal sin committed after Baptism must be -submitted by confession to the power of the keys. This follows from the -words of Our Lord (John xx. 23); hence the Council of Trent teaches that -for those who have fallen into mortal sin after Baptism confession is as -necessary as Baptism is to those who have not been baptized.[215] - - -20. The Properties of Confession. - -The necessary properties of confession have their origin in its nature -and object. The primary object of the confession is to put the confessor, -who is bound to act in his office as a judge, not as a despot, in a -position to form a judicial sentence, so that he may be able to decide -whether the sinner be worthy or unworthy of absolution, and also that -he may be able to impose a suitable penance. To succeed in this the -confession must be such as to allow the confessor a view of the whole -moral state of the penitent, hence it must be complete. This property, -however, being of very great importance, will be treated in a separate -division. The other necessary feature, the contrition, has been already -dealt with. The remaining properties are of secondary importance and not -essential; they turn partly on the integrity and partly on the contrition -and have been summarized in the following verses:— - - Sit simplex, humilis confessio, pura, fidelis - Atque frequens, nuda et discreta, libens, verecunda, - Integra, secreta et lacrimabilis, accelerata, - Fortis et accusans et sit parere parata. - -Though these properties are not so essential that the want of any one of -them nullifies the confession, they are all useful in their several ways -to instruct a penitent how to make a good confession. For this reason we -will treat of them:— - -1. _Simplex._ The confession should be simple, straightforward, short, -and clear; the penitent will therefore avoid all unnecessary, superfluous -words, all prolix narrations and remarks which have no connection with -the matter; at the same time he will avoid the use of all unintelligible -expressions or such as are misleading and ambiguous; let his accusation -be so worded that he may take it for granted that the priest will -understand both the number and species of the sins. Thus, too, he must -not accuse himself in a vague and general manner, as, “I have had bad -thoughts”; for the confessor cannot judge from this whether a mortal or -a venial sin, or indeed any sin at all, has been incurred; let him use -such words as describe clearly the sins he has committed, making use -of the proper and specific terms. Finally, he should avoid unnecessary -repetitions of sins which differ only in number, not recounting them -separately because they were committed at different times or on -different occasions; all the sins should be grouped under their specific -names and the number given. It is the duty of the priest, in the case of -penitents who fail in this respect, to instruct them, at the same time -taking into account the peculiarities of the penitent and showing great -patience. St. Antoninus gives a very useful piece of advice on this -subject. Penitents, says he, who need consolation in their trials or -advice in their doubts should defer their difficulties till after they -have confessed and received absolution; otherwise, if they dilate on -these subjects during the confession of their sins, there is danger of -their contrition being weakened. - -2. _Humilis._ Let the confession be humble, for a man approaches the -tribunal as a penitent, as one guilty of crime, as one accusing himself -to his judge and seeking grace and mercy; of such a one humility and -lowliness are to be expected. Surely the knowledge of one’s sins and -sinfulness revealed by an honest examination of the conscience, the -remembrance of repeated unfaithfulness and ingratitude to God, are reason -enough for being humble. Let this humility fill the heart, pervade the -accusation, be manifested in the whole exterior; then let the penitent go -into the confessional, kneeling, with head uncovered, like the publican -in the Gospel, who remained by the door of the Temple and dared not to -raise his eyes to heaven, but struck his breast and prayed: “God, be -merciful to me a sinner.” The words used by some are very appropriate -as an introduction to the confession: “I, a poor sinner, confess and -acknowledge to God, and to you, reverend father, in God’s place, that I -have sinned often and grievously by thought, word, deed, and omission,” -etc. Others, again, use the words of the Confiteor: “I confess to -almighty God, to Blessed Mary, ever a virgin, ... that I have sinned -exceedingly in thought, word, and deed,” etc. - -3. _Pura._ The confession should be made with the object of gaining -pardon of sin and the grace of the Sacrament. If it were made with any -wicked and gravely sinful intention, it would be a sacrilegious and -invalid confession; if the penitent had any venially sinful object in -view, _e.g._ to gain esteem, the confession would be valid though the -penitent would incur the guilt of venial sin by it. If the penitent’s -principal intention is to be reconciled to God, though at the same time -there be present other motives not altogether forbidden, the confession -is unimpaired; the same may easily happen in other good works, and -secondary motives do not exclude the principal one. - -4. _Fidelis (seu verax)._ The confession should be truthful and candid, -without lies and deceit. Hence the penitent must not conceal the sins -he has committed, nor confess those which he has not committed; neither -may he confess as certain what is doubtful, nor what is doubtful as -certain. It is disputed whether every lie in confession is a mortal -sin and renders the confession null. There are indeed theologians who -maintain that every lie told in confession is a mortal sin, because of -the sin being committed in the very act of receiving a Sacrament. This -view, however, is wrong. It is true that any lie told in confession is -more sinful than the same lie told under other circumstances would be, -on account of the irreverence to the Sacrament; but mortal sin would be -incurred only by a lie in confession when the lie concerns the _materia -necessaria_ of confession; in such a case the confession is invalid, for -the judge is deceived about the case, and that is gravely wrong. If the -penitent lies to the confessor in a matter which does not pertain to the -Sacrament, there is no mortal sin, for such a lie does not mislead the -judge nor imply a grave irreverence to the Sacrament, since still there -is real matter for the Sacrament and a sufficient disposition to obtain -the grace of the Sacrament. Accordingly, if the lie told in confession -has nothing to do with the confession itself, it is mortal or venial on -its own merits quite apart from the circumstances of its being told in -confession. - -From what has been said it follows that a penitent incurs venial sin by a -lie told in confession when (1) he accuses himself falsely of a venial -sin or denies having committed a venial sin; except where this venial -sin forms the sole matter of confession, for then he would sin mortally, -not on account of the lie, but on account of the grave irreverence done -to the Sacrament in offering to the priest insufficient matter, for sins -falsely stated can never be matter for absolution. - -(2) Moreover, it is only a venial sin if the penitent denies having -committed a mortal sin which he is not bound _hic et nunc_ to disclose, -either because he has already revealed it in a valid confession or -because he has pressing reasons for not disclosing it _hic et nunc_. -Indeed it is possible that there is no sin at all when a penitent makes -use of mental reservation. The confessor has no right to put questions -which have no connection with the _materia necessaria_, and the penitent -is not bound to answer such questions; to avoid a lie he may use a mental -reservation by choosing an ambiguous expression which contains the truth, -leaving the confessor to judge for himself. If, on the contrary, the -priest has a right to inquire of the penitent whether he has committed -some grave sin which has been already confessed, and the penitent denies -the charge, he would sin mortally.[216] - -(3) If the penitent is questioned by the priest as to his home, his -condition, or his relatives or friends, and answers not according to the -truth, knowing that these questions have no bearing on the nature of his -sins, such untruths are only venial; for if a lie told in confession -with respect to venial sins, although these may be matter of confession, -be only a venial sin, a lie with respect to other things which have no -connection with the accusation of the sins is still less likely to be -mortal. - -On the other hand, a mortal sin is incurred (1) when a penitent accuses -himself of having committed a mortal sin which he has never committed, -or denies having fallen into a mortal sin which he has incurred and -which has never been validly confessed, and which besides he has no valid -reason for concealing, or if he conceals a mortal sin which he is bound -to mention. - -(2) When he gives the number of his mortal sins as greater than is -really the case. Here, however, ignorant and untaught penitents may be -excused, because they honestly think it better to give a large number in -preference to a small one. Besides,— - -(3) A penitent sins mortally who confesses mortal sin as doubtful which -he is certain of having committed, or confesses as certain mortal sins of -which he has doubts. In such cases the penitent would be unsettling the -judgment of the confessor in a very grave matter. - -(4) Moreover, it would be a mortal sin if the penitent confesses a -recent mortal sin, either explicitly or equivalently, as an old one -already confessed, for the priest is thus prevented from giving a correct -sentence and imposing the proper penance. It is another case when the -accusation leaves it doubtful whether the sin is an old or recent one, or -whether it has been already confessed or not, even if the penitent intend -that the confessor be persuaded that the sin is an old one. - -(5) Finally, the penitent incurs a mortal sin if he denies the existence -of a habit of sin, or of a relapse or the existence of an occasion of -sin, or if he avoids any avowal on the subject so as to mislead the -confessor. It would accordingly be a mortal sin for a penitent to accuse -himself of a recent mortal sin at the end of his confession by using -a formula of this kind: “I accuse myself of the sins of my past life, -in particular of this sin ...”; for this formula by universal consent -implies only past sins already confessed. On the other hand, it would -not be a mortal sin in a general confession to mingle old with recent -sins, as long as the confessor knows that not all the mortal sins have -been already confessed; if the priest is persuaded that he ought to -gain a clearer knowledge, he may ask; if he believe that he may let the -matter rest there, it is his affair (and perhaps in many cases this -may be the prudent course). Still less is it a mortal sin, indeed it -may be counselled or obligatory in certain cases, for a penitent to say -that such or such sin has not yet been confessed, making the accusation -in such a way that the confessor does not suspect that the sin has -been recent. Such an expedient may be necessary when a priest himself -confesses sins committed in hearing confessions, not wishing to violate -the seal of confession.[217] - -In addition, the confessor must remember that the faithful in general are -persuaded that a lie in confession is a very grave sin, so that he must -judge of its gravity according to the conscience of the penitent.[218] - -5. _Frequens._ Confession ought to be frequently made (see above, § 3). -This includes also the repeated confession of sins already confessed and -absolved (see above, § 6). - -6. _Nuda._ The penitent ought not to hide his sins by ambiguous words -or expressions which veil the hatefulness of the sin, in order to make -them appear less in the eyes of the confessor. A penitent who thus veils -his sins cannot have real contrition; there still remains in his heart -that false shame which confuses the intellect, and his soul is not -yet released from sin. Such conduct is in reality no less sinful than -concealing the sin entirely, for what is the difference between total -silence and answering so obscurely that the questioner is left in doubt? -Just as a penitent makes a bad confession who conceals what he ought to -tell, so does he who answers his confessor in such obscure terms that the -latter does not understand or is led to take a view which the penitent -knows to be wrong. - -The conditional accusation is no better, as when, for example, a penitent -says: “If I have given way to impure thoughts, I accuse myself of them,” -etc. Such a confession is not an accusation of sins, nor is it a sign of -absolute aversion from them. - -7. _Discreta._ The confession should be prudent, _i.e._ so worded that -the reputations of others do not suffer; hence the sins of others ought -not to be revealed except in so far as is necessary for the declaration -of one’s own sins. Not a few penitents prefer to tell the sins of others -rather than their own: wives, for instance, tell the sins of their -husbands, servants the sins of their masters. Such penitents must be -seriously admonished by their confessor for the future not to reveal the -sins of others lest they incur the guilt of detraction and God’s anger in -the very tribunal of His mercy. The question as to the partner in sin, -whether and under what circumstances he is to be revealed in confession, -is relegated to a later portion of the treatise. - -The penitent’s own good sense will tell him to be as discreet and -decorous as possible in confessing his sins, especially those against -purity, without detracting from the completeness of the confession, -without being gross, and at the same time without failing in the -reverence due to the Sacrament; hence he should tell only what is -necessary for the integrity of the confession, and that as cautiously -and becomingly as is possible, quite briefly, in clear and intelligible -language; the confession must be perfect and at the same time chaste. -The confessor also must exercise great discretion and prudence in this -dangerous matter.[219] - -Finally, a prudent penitent will choose a suitable and virtuous confessor -who unites real piety and prudent zeal to solid knowledge and a wide -experience. - -Not only is it advisable and wholesome to have a regular confessor, -but it is absolutely necessary. Of course as far as the absolution is -concerned it is always valid, provided that the priest who gives it -has the requisite faculties; but as for the spiritual direction of the -penitent, it is by no means an indifferent matter who the confessor is; -if ever there is an occasion in which there is need of a trusty, reliable -friend, guide, and adviser, it is in making a confession. On this point -St. Francis of Sales writes: “When Tobias was about to send his son to -Rages, and the latter explained that he did not know the way, ‘Go, then,’ -said his father, ‘and seek a man who knows the way, that he may guide -you.’ This is my advice to you, Philothea; if you really desire to tread -the way of perfection, seek out above all things a man of experience to -guide you and show you the way: this is the most important lesson of -all.”[220] And after treating the subject in his usual way, he quotes -the remarkable words which the great St. Louis shortly before his death -addressed to his son: “Confess often, and choose for your confessor a -man of experience, who has not only wisdom and science, but also zeal -for souls, and learn from him what you ought to do.” The priest as -God’s vicar is not a judge only, he is a physician, and it is not hard -to understand how one physician can differ from another. For a soul -which is anxious to get rid of sin, to be established in virtue, and -to make progress in Christian perfection, as all Christians are bound -to do, there is required not only the application of the Sacrament, -but guidance as well. The direction of souls goes much farther than -a mere dispensing of the Sacrament. There are many things in which a -soul eager for salvation must be anxious for further instruction; the -methods of combating with success different evil inclinations, the -methods of prayer, the performance of certain good works, the way of -carrying out the duties of one’s state of life with more zeal and merit, -and the attainment of perfection. An approved confessor and director is -undoubtedly very useful, nay, necessary, and the penitent should pick -out such a one. In a choice of this kind he should have no other object -but his salvation and spiritual progress, and hence he should choose a -well-instructed, experienced, and holy man to lead him in the way of God -in the interior life, one who knows the penitent’s condition, one whose -heart is full of love, one who is as far removed from a feeble indulgence -as from a repelling strictness. Firmness and gentleness should be united -in him, a firmness which does not crush and a gentleness which will not -allow presumption; he should inspire confidence so that the penitent -has no difficulty in unfolding his heart to him. To seek an ignorant -and inexperienced confessor is, as theologians express it, to choose a -sure guide to hell; and, according to the teaching of Suarez, etc., it -is a mortal sin when done with the intention of obtaining absolution by -fraud.[221] But a good confessor is a “faithful friend, a strong defense; -and he that hath found him hath found a treasure; ... and they that fear -the Lord shall find him.”[222] St. Francis of Sales directs Philothea to -make choice of a confessor after constant prayer, and assures her that -God will grant her this most important of petitions and send her a man -after his own heart. - -When the penitent has made choice of his confessor in accordance with -those rules of common sense which great spiritual writers enjoin, his -duty is then to love him as his spiritual father, to fear him as the -judge of his conscience, to follow him as his guide in the path of -virtue, to take his advice as his physician in the maladies, affections, -and sufferings of his soul. He should follow him, as though he were an -angel leading the way to heaven; give him his whole confidence; deal -with him in all openness and frankness; disclose to him all the good -and evil in his soul without dissembling or reserve, and at the same -time entertain a respect for him which does not weaken his confidence in -him.[223] - -Having once chosen a good confessor, the penitent should cling to him and -not change about from one to another; nothing is more harmful or more -foolish than such conduct; unstable and wandering penitents of this kind -give sufficient proof that all they want is to be absolved and not to be -helped and guided, and there is reason to suspect that their purpose of -amendment is by no means sincere. Should a penitent, however, be in such -a condition that to confess to his regular confessor would be too great a -difficulty and involve risk of making sacrilegious confession, it would -be better to look out for some other priest and confess to him. - -The penitent ought not at the same time be so dependent on his confessor -as to be quite bewildered when a change becomes necessary. Discouragement -or sadness on this account, or a less frequent use of the Sacraments -would be a sign that this dependence was due to some undesirable cause -and could not be any longer regarded as confidence in the director. - -What is to be thought of those penitents who have two confessors, one to -whom they are well known and whose good opinion they enjoy, and another -to whom they are not well known, using the former to tell him their more -frequent and smaller sins, and the latter for the confession of graver -faults, in order that they may thereby keep up their good reputation with -the first? Such conduct is certainly not _per se_ forbidden when there is -good reason for it, as may happen when any one is unwilling or does not -dare to reveal to his ordinary confessor some very shameful fall. - -Still the practice is not without danger and so cannot be unconditionally -recommended, for it is a sign that a penitent is more anxious about his -good name than his progress in the spiritual life; indeed he might incur -grievous sin if such conduct exposed him to the danger of falling into -mortal sin, as would be the case if in pursuing this course he never -intended seriously to give up his sin. Such is the predicament of those -penitents who seek out inexperienced or easy-going confessors, or of -those who habitually fall into mortal sins, confessing them only to a -priest who, they know, will take the matter very quietly, while they -reveal their less grievous sins to some pious and strict confessor. On -the other hand, the case above quoted presents quite another aspect when -a penitent has on rare occasions fallen into a grave and shameful sin and -shrinks from revealing it to his ordinary confessor.[224] - -8. _Libens._ The confession ought to be voluntary; the penitent should -approach the sacred tribunal spontaneously, not prompted by prayers or -threats, nor prevailed upon by promises, nor driven by fear of temporal -losses; he should willingly acknowledge his sins to the priest as the -minister of Christ Our Lord appointed to forgive sin and distribute -His graces. A man might of course be influenced by those exterior -motives to receive the Sacrament; and if he made an earnest act of -contrition and carried out the other requisites, he would make a valid -confession. There is, however, as Laymann observes, a real danger for -a man who goes to the Sacrament under compulsion that he will make his -confession invalid through want of contrition or through a deficient -accusation of his sins. It frequently happens that such penitents, -giving way to external pressure, perform their Easter confession, doing -it only to keep up appearances; they make no act of contrition, they -are unwilling to tell all that lies on their conscience, they are ready -to make a bad confession and communion. A prudent confessor may detect -their insincerity and sometimes will prevail upon them to make a good -confession. - -9. _Verecunda._ The penitent should make his confession with confusion -at the number and greatness of his sins, his ingratitude and infidelity -to God his Lord and Father; this confusion should fill his soul and -reveal itself even in the self-accusation and in the whole bearing of -the penitent. Between this real shame of every good penitent and the -false shame which arises from pride and self-love is a great gulf; the -latter, unless overcome, will cause the penitent to be dishonest in his -accusation and to make a sacrilegious confession. The confessor should -be very considerate of the weakness of such penitents and encourage -them, helping them to make a candid avowal if he suspects false shame, -and he should be careful not to frighten and shock them by hard words or -untimely threats. - -10. The other property of the confession, its integrity, will, on account -of its great importance, be reserved for a thorough discussion in another -paragraph. - -11. _Secreta._ The accusation should be in secret. It should be made -so as to be heard only by the priest and not by others. Christ did not -institute public confession; and if in the early Church those who had -committed grave public sin and given public scandal were compelled -after private confession to make a public avowal of their offenses, -this was only part of the then existing discipline. As a matter of fact -the practice was productive of as much harm as good, and so the Church -put an end to it.[225] Confession by an interpreter would, however, be -valid, as well as a confession which had been overheard by others. There -is no obligation to confess through an interpreter if one happens to be -in a country of which he does not know the language, supposing there -is no priest to whom one can make himself understood, for the Lateran -Council[226] prescribes _confessio secreta_ made to a priest only (_soli -sacerdoti facienda_), and to employ an interpreter for confession would -be very onerous.[227] Such an obligation would exist only if a dying -man had doubts as to the perfection of his contrition, for the wish to -save our souls obliges us to avoid all risk. Then, however, it would be -sufficient to name one or two sins and make a general accusation of the -rest.[228] - -Moreover, a sufficiently perfect confession may be made even through an -interpreter without the latter acquiring any knowledge of the sins. The -confessor, for example, in the case of the sick, may arrange through -the interpreter a system of signs, such as pressure of the hand, motion -of the head or eyes, by which the invalid may answer the questions put -by the priest through the interpreter, who may be placed with his back -to the priest and penitent; by a method of this kind even the number of -sins may be ascertained. Of course in a case like this the confessor must -be careful not to betray the penitent’s replies by the nature of his -questions. If a male penitent express a wish to confess in this manner, -he may be allowed to do so.[229] - -A confession made in writing is _per se_ valid; on the other hand, as we -have already seen, absolution conveyed _per literas_ is null. The custom, -however, of making the confession by word of mouth must be strictly -adhered to (hence many theologians add to the other properties of a good -confession that it should be _vocalis_), and unless there are pressing -reasons for the contrary practice the confession should not be made by -writing or by any other system of signs; a sufficiently good reason for -allowing it would be great shame in mentioning certain sins or a defect -in speech. In such cases the priest would read the writing and the -penitent make some acknowledgment by word of mouth, such as, “I accuse -myself of all contained in the paper.” If the whole confession without -any good reason were made by writing or by signs, it would be invalid, -for the penitent would have sinned gravely by such an action unless he -had acted _bona fide_.[230] - -A dumb penitent who can write and has no other way of making his -confession is, according to the _sententia communis et probabilior_, -obliged to make his confession in writing, for this would not be -burdensome to him. The opponents of this view insist on the danger of -the confession being revealed and, in consequence, deny the obligation -of making the confession in writing. Such a risk, as experience shows, -is not usually to be feared and may easily be avoided. There are indeed -not a few penitents who to secure their own peace of mind always write -their confessions and read them off to the priest. If, however, in a -particular case there is danger of revelation or any other serious -inconvenience to the penitent in consequence of his writing, there is no -obligation. So teaches St. Thomas, and with him are Suarez, Lugo, Sporer, -Salmanticenses, etc.[231] - -12. _Lacrimabilis._ The confession should be made with real sorrow. It is -not necessary that it be accompanied by tears or sighs and other external -signs of the kind, but it is required that there be a real sorrow and -horror of sin. The internal sorrow should become _sensibilis_ or evident -by the confession so as to form _materia sacramenti_. The sentiment of -contrition can always be roused by grace, while tears are not in our -power. - -13. _Accelerata._ The confession should be prompt; there should be no -delay in making it after mortal sin has been committed. This is not of -precept, but it is a counsel which should be readily followed by any one -who realizes the horror of sin and its consequences. - -14. _Fortis._ The confession should be made with great courage, all -hindrances to a candid avowal of one’s sins being put aside, especially -false shame and the fear of losing the good esteem of the priest. It is -the delight of the devil, not before, but after entrapping a soul into -sin, to work upon the feeling of shame so vehemently that the penitent -is tempted to conceal sins which are particularly shameful. In this case -the penitent must use all his courage, and by reflecting on God’s command -and the awful consequences of a bad confession get the victory over this -false shame. He must put into practice Tertullian’s maxim, _Pereat pudor, -ne pereat anima_. - -15. _Accusans._ The confession should be an accusation and not a series -of excuses. Thus the penitent ought to impute the sins to himself and -not to other causes, temptations of the devil, the passions, natural -weakness, etc., nor to the companions by whose advice or orders he has -gone astray. There may be of course occasions where what is objectively -a mortal sin may become only venial or perhaps no sin at all, through -inculpable forgetfulness or absent-mindedness or inadvertence. - -16. _Parere paratus._ The penitent should be disposed to obey the -priest’s advice and commands; hence he should be ready to adopt the means -suggested for his improvement, to follow out the advice given, to avoid -the occasions of sin which are pointed out to him, and to accept the -penance which is imposed on him. - - -ARTICLE II - -THE INTEGRITY OF THE CONFESSION - - -21. Necessity of the Integrity of Confession. - -The confession is complete when the penitent reveals all the sins -which he is bound to tell. A distinction is drawn between material and -formal integrity. A confession is materially complete when a penitent -discloses all the mortal sins committed since Baptism which have not yet -been submitted to the keys, together with their number and species. On -the other hand, the confession is formally complete when he confesses -all the mortal sins which he is morally able and bound to reveal _hic -et nunc_.[232] From this definition it is clear that where there is -material integrity there is also formal integrity; a confession, however, -which is formally complete need not on this account be materially so. - -With respect to the obligation of the integrity of confession we may lay -down the following propositions:— - -I. It is of divine precept to confess all mortal sins committed after -Baptism. 1. This follows from the words by which Christ instituted the -Sacrament; by them He gave the Sacrament a judicial character. So teaches -the Council of Trent.[233] From the institution of the Sacrament of -Penance “the universal Church has always recognized that the complete -confession of sins was also instituted by Our Lord, and is necessary -_jure divino_ for all who have sinned after Baptism. For Our Lord Jesus -Christ when about to ascend into heaven left the priests as His vicars -and judges, by whom all mortal sins into which the faithful had fallen -were to be judged, that in virtue of the power of the keys they might -pronounce sentence of forgiveness or retention.” The priest is therefore -a judge, and as judge should pronounce the absolution. But the sentence -of a judge is valid only when it turns on the facts of the case; hence -a knowledge of the latter is required on the part of the judge. In -consequence the confessor, in order to pronounce a valid sentence, must -know intimately the facts of the case, the state of the sinner. Now -the facts of the case are the mortal sins of the penitent; hence the -confessor must be made acquainted with these; and as he can only learn -them from the penitent himself, the latter is bound to make a complete -statement of them. - -2. The essential object of this Sacrament is the forgiveness of sins that -have been confessed. But one mortal sin cannot be forgiven apart from the -rest, since forgiveness is the result of the influx of sanctifying grace, -which does not remove sin as stains might be rubbed from a metal surface, -but at once raises man from a state of sin to a state of grace, from -being an enemy of God to being His friend. Moreover, sanctifying grace -and mortal sin cannot exist together in the soul. From this it follows -that all sins must be told without exception, in order that they may all -be remitted. - -3. Add to this the essential connection between the judicial power of -the priest in the Sacrament and his power of punishing sin or imposing -a penance for it; but since the penance must be proportioned to the -misdeeds, the priest cannot exercise his powers properly unless, at -least, the mortal sins have been fully confessed. If, as must happen -at times, it is inopportune or, in fact, quite impossible to assign a -penance bearing any proportion to the number and magnitude of the sins, -that is quite _per accidens_ and the decision of the question is the -affair of the judge, not of the penitent. That Christ gave His Church the -power of punishing sin is abundantly proved by the practice of so many -centuries during which definite penances were assigned to certain sins. -Since, therefore, the Church of divine right can mete out just punishment -for sin, the penitent is bound by divine precept to submit himself to the -Church by an entire confession of all mortal sins. From the fact that -the confessor must pronounce sentence and impose a suitable penance, the -Council of Trent concludes “that all mortal sins of which the penitent -is conscious after diligent search must be confessed, even though they -be quite secret sins and only against the last two commandments of the -decalogue.” - -4. Finally, the Sacrament of Penance has of its very nature another end -in view, that of preventing relapse. Thus the confessor is at the same -time the physician of the soul, empowered and obliged to prescribe the -means of reform. This duty can be effectually carried out only when he -knows intimately the penitent’s state of soul, so that the latter is -obliged to submit to his healing art all the mortal wounds of the soul. - -Hence the Council of Trent anathematizes all who teach “that for -remission of sins in the Sacrament of Penance it is not necessary _jure -divino_ that all and every mortal sin be confessed of which a man is -conscious after faithful and diligent search.”[234] - -II. The material integrity, however, is not always necessary for the -validity of confession and for obtaining its benefits. At times it -is morally and even physically impossible, either through inculpable -forgetfulness or for other reasons. Now God does not command -impossibilities. Hence the Council of Trent teaches: “The remaining sins -which escape the diligent inquiry of the penitent are considered as -included in the same accusation,” and so are forgiven, as though they had -been confessed. Hence it is abundantly clear that the material integrity -of the confession is not always necessary. - -III. The formal integrity is, on the other hand, always necessary for -the validity of the Sacrament, and belongs to its essence. A penitent, -for instance, who out of shame conceals a mortal sin, transgresses -Christ’s command which obliges us to submit all mortal sins by a sincere -confession to the power of the keys, incurring at the same time a mortal -sin by his bad confession; such a confession cannot be valid nor have -any good effect. This is also taught by the Council of Trent[235] in the -following words: “While the faithful earnestly endeavor to confess all -the sins of which they are conscious, they present them to the Divine -Mercy that they may all be forgiven; those, however, who do otherwise and -knowingly conceal sins, present nothing to God’s goodness to be forgiven -through the priest. If the sick man is ashamed to show his wounds to the -physician, the latter cannot cure what is unknown to him.”[236] - -To have a perfect understanding of the preceding, we must distinguish -between what is of the essence of the Sacrament and that which flows as -a consequence of the divine command. When anything is wanting to the -essence of the Sacrament, though the defect may be due to no fault on -the part of the person, the Sacrament is invalid; if, on the contrary, -there be wanting some requirement of divine precept, making the defect -culpable, the Sacrament is indirectly invalid because contrition is -wanting, since contrition cannot exist in any one who is in the very -act of sin; if, however, the defect be inculpable, the result of -forgetfulness or ignorance, the Sacrament is valid; the sins which were -omitted through no fault of the penitent are indirectly forgiven by the -infusion of sanctifying grace. There remains, however, the obligation of -making good the defect afterwards, as we shall see later. - - -22. Extent of the Integrity of Confession. - -For a complete confession it is necessary to state clearly and precisely -not only all mortal sins, but their number and species and the -circumstances which change the species. This is the doctrine of the -Council of Trent when it enjoins the confession of each and every sin; -to do this a man must give the number of the mortal sins committed. -One who has missed Mass ten times and merely confesses, “I have missed -Mass,” has not confessed each and every sin, for an indeterminate number, -by the very fact of being undetermined, does not necessarily mean the -number ten; it may mean ten, but that possibility does not indicate -the number. With regard to the confession of the species and of the -circumstances changing the species, the Council teaches expressly that -the circumstances which change the kind (_species_) of sin ought to be -confessed. Since those circumstances are to be expressed which change the -kind of sin, nothing can be clearer than that, in accordance with the -decision of the Council, the sins are to be confessed according to their -species.[237] - -The reasons which the Council[238] gives for insisting on the duty of -confessing the species of sin are that otherwise the sins would not -be perfectly revealed by the penitent or understood by the judge, and -that without a knowledge of the species of the sin the judge would be -unable to pronounce on the gravity of the sin and to inflict a suitable -punishment for it. - -Thus the reasons which hold for the completeness of the confession -require also the species and number of the sins; without them the -confession has not the completeness which is demanded for it. The -confessor is a judge who must have the most accurate knowledge of -his penitent in order to pronounce sentence and inflict the necessary -penalty. Now he cannot know the state of his penitent unless he is -acquainted with the number and species of his sins, for it is the -species which determines the nature or essence of the sin. Besides, -the sins ought to be confessed according to their malice, but this can -be estimated only from the kind of sin and the number of times it has -been committed. Not all sins against the sixth commandment have the -same malice or belong to the same species, for to the special malice -of impurity may be added that of sacrilege or adultery if the sinner -be consecrated by vow to God or in the married state. And there is no -doubt that one who has committed a crime ten times is more deserving of -punishment than he who has fallen only once. - -The penitent must confess the _species infima_, the ultimate species of -his sin, for this is what is ordinarily understood by the species, and -the Council of Trent insists upon this obligation. Hence it is not enough -to say, “I have sinned in thought, word, and deed,” or, “I have broken -the commandments of the Church”; the penitent must add the species, the -particular commandment broken, the observance of Sunday, fasting, yearly -confession, etc., and in addition the penitent must give the _species -infima_, whether he has missed Mass or broken his fast or abstinence. Nor -is the following accusation sufficient: “I have sinned against the sixth -commandment,” “I have been wanting in purity,” or the like; the species -must be given, defining whether the sin be incest or adultery, etc., -or whether by thoughts, words, etc. So, too, when a penitent accuses -himself of sin against faith, it is not sufficient; he should state the -particular act by which he has sinned, whether by heresy, by unbelief, by -indifference, etc. - -Supposing the penitent cannot remember the _species infima_ of a sin -which he has committed, he must state against what virtue he has sinned; -or if he cannot remember this, but has only a recollection of having -sinned mortally, he must confess this. This is the opinion of all -theologians (_communis et certa doctrina_). - -To indicate fully the species of the sin, one must also tell whether -the sinful acts were external and whether the evil effects have been -retracted. - -Since the sins themselves are the particular matter of the sacramental -tribunal, they must, as Lehmkuhl shows, be confessed _secundum specificam -distinctionem_, _i.e._ according to their specific differences. This is -not at all the same thing as the obligation of confessing the specific -malice (_specifica malitia_). Sins are human acts (_actus humanus_), and -so they may be classed _in specie actus_ as well as _in specie malitiæ_; -to desire to steal and to steal are acts having the same specific malice, -but they are not specifically the same act. Indeed no one would maintain -that one might confound the two sins in confession by merely confessing -the specific malice.[239] Hence the _actus externus_ which completes the -internal act[240] as a sin and on that account is _in se_ opposed to -right order and morality must be mentioned expressly in confession. The -_actus externus_ is either _commissio_ or _omissio_ (sin of commission -or omission). Thus, for example, the absence from Mass on a Sunday or -a holyday of obligation must be confessed, whether it happen through -indifference or love of study or idleness, because the absence from Mass -is what is objectively opposed to the law and what has been voluntarily -incurred. The wounding and killing of a man are external actions which -_in ratione peccati_ complete the sinful act of the will, and so it is -not enough to confess, “I had the desire to wound.” If he has inflicted -a wound, it is enough to say, “I have dealt a wound,” for he has -sufficiently indicated by that avowal the internal act. If, again, a man -wounded another intending to kill, it is not enough to say, “I intended -to kill,” but he must add, “and I wounded the man.”[241] - -With regard to the obligation of confessing the effect[242] of a mortal -sin theologians are not of one mind, since it is not always clear whether -the evil effect flowing from a cause voluntarily chosen is _in sese_ a -sin or not. It is certain that the _malus effectus_ of a sinful action -must be confessed if such effect fall under a reservation, or under a -censure, or if the question of restitution is to be settled. However, it -is certain that if such effects were not at all foreseen, there is no -obligation to confess them. Thus a murder committed under the influence -of drink need not be confessed, supposing that such a consequence had -been altogether unforeseen. - -As to the other cases, those theologians who deny that the _malus -effectus voluntarius in causa_ is a sin, because the effect is no longer -_in se_ voluntary or, being beyond the control of the will, is desired -only in its cause (_voluntarius in causa est_), maintain that such an -effect need not be confessed. Other theologians, as St. Thomas, Suarez, -Soto, Sanchez, etc., make a distinction, teaching that the _malus -effectus_ is no sin, when the evil will has been retracted by contrition -and repentance before the act has taken place whose effect cannot be -hindered; if, however, the evil will lasts, the effect is a sin. Hence a -priest who, to escape saying his office, would throw his breviary into -the sea, but repent of his act immediately after, is not obliged to -confess the omission of his office, since the omission was not a sin, but -only the evil effect of a sin already repented of. So, too, a man who -has given another poison and, before death takes place, confesses his -crime with sorrow is not obliged, after death has taken place, to accuse -himself again of murder. On the other hand, the evil effects which take -place when the will did not retract must be confessed, since they are -at least the completion of the external sin and share in the malice of -the cause. Mazzotta makes a distinction here which is very apt. He says: -if an effect follows from a sinful act, and though it may be prevented, -is not so prevented, the penitent must confess the effect because it -completes his neglect in so far as this is an external sin; if the -effect cannot be hindered, there is no obligation _per se loquendo_ to -confess the _malus effectus_, for it is neither a sin _in se_ nor does it -externally complete the sin.[243] - -To the preceding we add two observations:— - -1. Since the duty of making a complete confession rests on a command, -we are not obliged _per se_ to confess what is _probabiliter_ not -enjoined by the precept, for, in accordance with sound principles of -probabilism, a doubtful law has no binding force. To this we may add, -that a confession is valid in which the penitent omits nothing through -any grievous fault of his own, that is, knowingly or through culpable -ignorance and carelessness. Now the principles of probability furnish a -practically safe conscience with regard to the limits of a command; hence -in this case the confession is entire, at least formally entire, and that -is sufficient for the validity and grace of the Sacrament. - -2. If the penitent, through forgetfulness or for some lawful reason, -without any blame attaching to him, omits to mention something which is -necessary for the integrity of the confession, he is bound to disclose -it on the next occasion; for, by the decision of the Council of Trent, -each and every mortal sin of which one is conscious must be mentioned, -that it may be directly remitted; hence if sins occur to the mind which -have not yet been confessed, they must be submitted to the power of the -keys. Thus Alexander VII condemned the proposition: Sins which have been -forgotten or omitted in confession on account of instant danger to life -or for any other reason, need not be mentioned in the next confession -(cf. Prop. 11 damn.). - - -23. The Number of Sins in Confession. - -The declaration of the number of sins is another feature completing the -Sacrament. The penitent must give the number of his mortal sins so far as -he can; if he knows exactly how often he has fallen into a mortal sin, he -must state that number of times, neither increasing nor diminishing; if, -despite careful examination and reflection he cannot arrive at the real -number, he must give it as near as possible, adding the words “about” -or “at least”; in so doing he fulfills his obligation, for he has done -what he could, which is sufficient to enable a judgment to be pronounced -_humano modo_. Should the penitent, after having thus confessed in all -good faith, discover later on a more accurate number than that confessed, -he is not obliged to make another confession to supply this number; nor -should he disquiet himself, for the round numbers given in the first -confession included everything; it is only when the newly discovered -number is considerably greater than the vague estimate of his first -confession that he is obliged to confess again, because the number, and, -in consequence, the sin, was not perfectly confessed, since a far greater -number cannot be considered as included in his former round estimate.[244] - -The question naturally arises what the confessor is to understand by a -numeral qualified by “about” or “at least.” As a general rule the greater -the number expressed, the greater is the number that may be understood -as implied; for instance, “about three times” would mean from two to -four times; “about five times,” from four to six times; “about ten -times,” from eight to twelve times; “about one hundred times,” at most -from ninety to one hundred and ten times. It is clear from this general -appreciation of theologians that the numbers implied by the term “about” -increase in proportion to the actual number mentioned. If the penitent -discovers that he has mentioned a number considerably less than the -truth, he must remedy the defect; if he has erred by giving too large -a number, he need not correct the mistake, because the larger number -includes the less. Moreover, it is advisable, instead of using high -numbers, to state how often the sin has been committed in the course of -a week or a month, etc., especially with regard to frequent or interior -sins. Indeed with habitual sinners it suffices to state how long they -have indulged the evil habit, and that they have given willful consent -more or less daily whenever occasion offered; this is enough, when the -actual number of sins is so doubtful that there would always be a grave -risk of a mistake in trying to determine it. “The confessor, when he -knows the period over which the accusation extends, may easily and safely -form his opinion in the case of a penitent whose will is habitually -inclined to sin, that the penitent has sinned as often as there were -necessary interruptions to his sin.”[245] This method in determining -the number of sins is as well founded as the other, for in this case, -too, all is done that is morally possible. Hence the confessor should -never force his penitent to give a determinate number, for this is in -most cases impossible. On the other hand, the confessor should help the -penitent to state the number in the way we have indicated.[246] - -Hence a prostitute makes a sufficient statement in confessing how often -she has been accustomed to sin each day or week, at the same time telling -the species, or at least the more general species, of the sins so far -as possible; she would make a perfect confession by an accusation such -as follows: “I have spent so many years in this state of sin, and as -occasion offered I sinned with all who came, married and unmarried, and -also with those who were bound by vow.” Penitents must always give at -least the more general specific characters of their sins, and the number -of times per day or week they have sinned.[247] - -A similar difficulty is presented in the case of those who have a -deeply rooted habit of sin—those, for example, who constantly entertain -impure desires with regard to women whom they chance to meet; it is -very difficult in such a case to give any number. Such people make a -perfect confession by stating that they are given to this habit, adding -whether they indulge frequently in the day or week; besides this they -should mention at least the more general specific characters, whether -they indulge these desires with regard to married people or relations or -persons consecrated to God.[248] - -The same difficulty arises with regard to uneducated and ignorant people -who have to accuse themselves of impure conversations carried on at their -work during the whole day, on all sorts of subjects and before all kinds -of companions. They, too, may confess the number and species of their -sins as we have indicated above.[249] - -Lugo and Sporer would also admit the confession as valid and give -absolution to a thief who accuses himself as follows: “Since I was ten -years old I have been so addicted to stealing that whenever a chance was -offered—and that happened very frequently—I stole what I could; besides I -have stolen sacred objects of considerable value on five occasions or, if -I mistake not, six.”[250] - -Though the accusation of the species in confession usually offers more -difficulty than that of the number, yet Lugo advises the more learned -confessors in particular to refrain from being too exacting in demanding -the classification from their penitents. As the less-trained confessor -may fail in this respect by defect, the more learned confessor is exposed -to the danger of excess. The penitent must give the species of the sin, -and the confessor is bound to inquire with due regard to the penitent’s -ability and the knowledge which he had at the time of sinning; for a man -cannot do evil of which he is ignorant; moreover, it is sufficient to -have a general consciousness of grave malice. - - -24. The Confession of the Circumstances of Sins. - -The circumstances under which sins are committed (_conditiones quæ -actus substantiam circumstant atque in ejus moralitatem influunt_) are -of different kinds: 1. Some change the species of the sin (_speciem -mutantes_); for example, the circumstance of a vow or of marriage adds -to the sin of impurity that of sacrilege or that of adultery. 2. Other -circumstances are aggravating (_aggravantes_) in greater or less degree -and _gradum moralitatis mutantes_ or _moralitatem augentes_—such, for -instance, as increase the malice within the limits of the same species; -they are the duration of the act, its intensity, its degree, the manner -of carrying it out, the particular occasion, etc. 3. Other circumstances -are mitigating (_minuentes_, _moralitatem minuentes_), because they -palliate the malice of the act; as, for example, want of advertence, etc. - -The circumstances must be confessed:— - -I. If they change the species of the sin. This is the express teaching -of the Council of Trent. Hence it is not enough to confess to stealing -if the property of the Church has been taken; for the stealing of a _res -sacra_ is not merely a sin of injustice but a theft from God and so a new -sin. If a child curses its parents, it is not enough to mention that it -cursed, for, since special reverence is due to parents, the violation of -that special reverence is a new sin. - -The following circumstances call for particular mention:— - -1. The circumstance of the person _who commits the sin_, when with regard -to the matter of the sin he is consecrated to God or bound by vow, as in -sins against purity, or when he sins against the chastity of the married -state, or when he stands in special spiritual relations towards those -with whom he sins. - -If a man is consecrated to God by Holy Orders or the religious state and -has to confess a sin against purity, he must mention the circumstance of -his state of life, since he has committed a double sin, one of impurity -and another of sacrilege. Now those who are consecrated to God by Holy -Orders or the religious state incur the special sin of sacrilege when -they fall into impurity; the mere circumstance of the vow being simple -or solemn does not constitute a new species, nor the fact of being -bound to chastity by vows of religion as well as by Orders; these added -details need not be confessed. Many moralists teach also that those incur -sacrilege who are bound by a private vow of chastity, and St. Alphonsus -admits this opinion as probable. Hence all those who have sinned against -purity make a full confession when they confess the circumstance of the -vow by which they are bound, without distinguishing whether the vow -be private, solemn, simple, or that of Orders (_votum solemne ordinis -sacri_). - -This is the doctrine of Lugo[251] and Lacroix;[252] Sanchez,[253] too, -defends this view on the ground that the solemn vow is in substance or -_in se_ not distinct from the simple vow. His authority seems to have won -over many theologians to the same opinion. Gury also holds this view; but -the Ratisbon[254] and Roman[255] editions of his valuable manual reject -it in the notes. Lehmkuhl,[256] moreover, opposes it and teaches that to -incur a personal sacrilege (and this is the question under discussion) -the person sinning (or with whom the sin has been committed) must be -consecrated to God _publica auctoritate_, _i.e._ by Holy Orders or by -vows of religion. Hence by the violation of a private vow of chastity -a sacrilege in its strict and proper sense is not incurred, though a -sin is committed against religion by the breach of fidelity to God. -Sacrilege is incurred by the abuse of a sacred object. Now that cannot -be called a sacred object which is privately consecrated to God without -any recognition on the part of the properly constituted authorities. A -private vow cannot produce this effect, for the common teaching of all -theologians, a few excepted, maintains that the breach of such a vow is a -violation of fidelity, not of the reverence due to God, at least not in -such a degree as to constitute a sacrilege strictly so called.[257] Thus -the more correct view is that of those who hold that, in confessing sins -against purity, the circumstance of Holy Orders and of the religious vow -is to be given; for whoever confesses as doubtful a circumstance which -certainly changes the species of the sin does not fulfill the precept of -confession. Such may be the case, for instance, where a priest conceals -the circumstance of Holy Orders and mentions only the violation of the -vow of chastity; for the violation of this vow is certainly a sacrilege -for those in whom it has been solemnized by the reception of “Holy -Orders,” while that of the simple vow is only doubtfully so.[258] - -Parish priests by scandalizing their flock, parents their children, -teachers the scholars under their instruction, incur a special sin -against charity. Such persons have in virtue of their office the -strictest obligation to edify those intrusted to them and to keep them -away from harm. The case of a confessor who gives scandal to a person who -happens to be his penitent is different; but he is obliged to mention the -circumstance of this relationship when he has given scandal in connection -with the administration of the Sacrament; his office as confessor only -imposes on him the strict duty of guiding the penitent safely in the -Sacrament of Penance, and is only transitory, ending _per se_ with each -confession, while that of the parish priest and of the others mentioned -above demands a constant spiritual care of those intrusted to them. Other -offices involving authority do not change the species of the scandal -given to subjects, though they may increase its malice, if, for example, -a master leads his servant into sin. The dignity of a person does not of -itself change the species of the sin of scandal given to his subjects, -though it increases the gravity of a sin. If, however, a master has -taken upon himself the duties of a parent, for instance, towards his -servant-girl, he most certainly incurs a new and distinct sin by scandal -given to her, and must mention his special relation to the girl. - -2. The circumstance of the person _with whom the sin has been committed_, -if God’s honor has suffered in any way, or if the rights of a third -person or the particular respect or love which is due to the said person -have been violated. - -If the person with whom sin has been committed or who has been led -into sin is consecrated to God or bound by a vow referring to the -matter of the sin, a new and special sin is incurred against the -virtue of religion (_i.e._ a sin either of sacrilege or at least of -a violation of the vow). If any one commit a sin of impurity with a -relation, it is no longer merely a sin against purity, it is incest. It -is a probable opinion that the penitent is not obliged to mention the -exact degree of relationship whether by blood or marriage, since that -does not change the species _ratione incestus_, except in the first -degree either of blood-relationship or marriage connection; thus sin -committed between father and daughter, mother and son, father-in-law and -daughter-in-law, mother-in-law and son-in-law, must be mentioned along -with the relationship; yet there is no doubt that _ratione superioritatis -vel pietatis_ sin incurred by a father with his own daughter or his -daughter-in-law, bears a different character from the sin of a son with -his mother or mother-in-law. - -The sin of hatred acquires a new species of sinfulness when the hatred is -directed against those more closely connected, _e.g._ parents, children, -grandparents, grandchildren, and against those connected by marriage -in the first degree of the direct line, such as wife, godparents, and -brothers. Hatred of those most nearly related may much more easily become -a grievous sin than hatred of other people.[259] - -3. The circumstance of _place_, if a sacrilege is thereby committed; -thus (_a_) if a sacred object or something belonging to the property -of the Church is stolen and taken out from a sacred building, a double -sacrilege, real and local, is committed. The circumstance of the local -sacrilege, that is, the fact that sin has been committed in the Church is -not of itself gravely sinful; hence when a profane object which is merely -accidentally in the Church is stolen, a sacrilege, though not a gravely -sinful one, is added to the sin of theft.[260] (_b_) If the immunity of -a church is violated; (_c_) if anything is done in a church by which it -is polluted in the sense of the canon law; (_d_) if profane occupations -gravely at variance with the holiness of the place are carried on in the -church, whether those occupations be in themselves sinful or not. - -4. The circumstance of _time_; if, for instance, the time at which -the sin took place was the reason why the action in question has been -forbidden, and if by the action done at some particular time a special -offence is given to God. This circumstance might involve grave sin -(_a_) if Good Friday were chosen for the performance of an obscene -play; (_b_) if during the forbidden time a marriage were celebrated -with great pomp; (_c_) if during the celebration of Mass or immediately -after holy communion, before the sacred species had time to be altered, -the communicant were to commit some outrage greatly dishonoring to the -Blessed Sacrament. These are circumstances which moralists generally -enumerate as constituting a new species of sinfulness. On the other -hand, a sin committed on a Sunday or feast-day or on a communion-day -is not _per se_ invested with the particular malice of a sacrilege; -nevertheless the fact that a man relapses into his old sins on a -confession or communion day gives ground for the suspicion that his last -confession was devoid of real contrition and in consequence invalid and -sacrilegious.[261] - -5. Finally, the circumstance of _the end_ in view is to be confessed if -it is _in se_ mortally sinful; for instance, a man who steals with the -object of getting drunk is guilty of drunkenness as well as theft, and on -that account must confess the purpose for which he stole.[262] - -Now there are many penitents who cannot judge of the circumstances -which change the nature of the sin; such must be taught to mention in -confession whatever increases or diminishes the malice of the sin; the -rest will be supplied by the confessor, for he has the duty of asking the -penitent not only about the circumstances which affect the species of -sin, but everything which he considers necessary to aid him in forming -a correct judgment on the spiritual state of the penitent. This right -implies a duty on the part of the penitent to answer the questions -put to him; these questions turn for the most part on habits of sin, -relapses, and proximate occasions of sinning. Hence Innocent XI condemned -the proposition[263] which denies the obligation of answering when the -confessor makes inquiries about habits of sin. The knowledge of a habit -of sin, or of relapses, or of proximate occasions is very important in -settling whether absolution should be given or deferred;[264] besides -it is of supreme importance to the confessor in his office as physician -that he be in a position to suggest the necessary and proper means for -amendment. The penitent must, therefore, if asked, mention former sins -though already confessed. No one need take offense because he is thus -obliged _per accidens_ to repeat sins which have already been duly -forgiven; the purpose is not to pronounce a new sentence upon them, but -to enable the priest to form a correct judgment with regard to the sins -just confessed by noting their relation to former sins, and thus to -prescribe suitable means of correction and provide as much as possible -against relapses.[265] - -II. Those circumstances are also to be mentioned by which sins of their -own nature venial become mortal (_C. aggravantes_). Intemperance is not -always a mortal sin, but it becomes so when it deprives a man of the use -of reason; to steal a cheap tool might of itself be only a venial sin, -but if the loss of it deprives a poor artisan of the means of doing a -day’s work, it becomes mortal. In the same way one ought to mention the -mitigating circumstances which make a mortal sin only venial or even no -sin at all. - -Moralists give seven cases in which circumstances may change a venial -into a mortal sin:— - -1. _Ratione conscientiæ erroneæ_, when a man through ignorance thinks a -venial sin to be mortal. 2. _Ratione scandali vel gravis damni_, when -grave scandal is given to one’s neighbor, doing spiritual or temporal -harm; as, for instance, if a priest were to speak lightly of sacred -things—thus St. Bernard[266] says: _Nugæ inter sæculares nugæ, in ore -sacerdotis blasphemiæ sunt_; or, again, if a priest behaved lightly with -a woman or were seen the worse for drink; or if one were to address a -person rather insultingly, foreseeing that he would break out into a -great rage and blasphemy; or if a woman dress vainly and foresee that -some young man at the sight of her will sin mortally by impious desires. -3. _Ratione pravi finis graviter mali_, when, for example, a small lie is -told to lead a girl into sin. The evil intention may not only increase -the guilt of a sinful action, but it will make an otherwise innocent -action sinful. 4. _Ratione formalis contemptus legis vel superioris_, -when a venial sin is committed out of formal contempt for the law or -lawgiver, or superior, as when a Catholic on an abstinence day, and -quite aware of the duty of abstaining, eats ostentatiously a little -flesh-meat to show the slight regard in which he holds the law.[267] -5. _Ratione pravi affectus in rem alioqui leviter malam_, when a man -is so attached to a venial sin that he would commit it even if it were -mortal, or in consequence of this attachment would be ready to commit -other mortal sins,[268] as, for instance, if a man chose rather to steal -than to overcome his vanity or intemperance. 6. _Ratione periculi seu -occasionis proximæ in peccatum mortale labendi_, when the venial sin is -known, or can be known, as a proximate occasion of mortal sin; a man, for -example, looks at a person of the other sex or entertains rather familiar -relations with her though he knows that such conduct in his case is a -proximate occasion of gravely sinful desires or actions. Even actions -otherwise neutral or indifferent may for this reason become gravely -sinful. 7. _Ratione cujuscunque circumstantiæ quæ mortalem in se malitiam -contineat_; thus insults, proceeding from envy and desire of revenge, may -be mortal sins.[269] Hence these circumstances must be confessed. - -The following circumstances may make sins venial which are of their own -nature mortal: 1. Smallness of matter; 2. Want of full advertence; 3. -Want of consent; 4. A false conscience.[270] - -These circumstances must be told in confession not in order to secure its -integrity, but that the confessor may be able to form a correct judgment. - -III. Circumstances which make but little difference in the gravity of the -sin need not be confessed. - -IV. Circumstances which aggravate a mortal sin within its own species to -a notable degree (_circumstantiæ notabiliter aggravantes intra eamdem -speciem_) need not _per se loquendo_ be confessed; this is the common and -most approved teaching of theologians; other reasons may exist which make -it expedient to mention these circumstances. - -At the same time theologians are not unanimous on this subject. Three -opinions are current, and each one of them has its own probability -and its champions of no mean repute. We may as well observe that the -probability of the negative proposition (that there is no obligation) is -conceded even by its opponents; hence all grant (_ex omnium sententia_) -as probable that no one is bound to confess these circumstances, so that -a penitent cannot be forced to disclose them unless some exceptional case -should call for their mention.[271] - -Those who maintain the affirmative proposition (_i.e._ the duty of -confessing the _circumstantiæ notabiliter aggravantes_) fall back on -the reasons to which the Council of Trent appeals for the necessity of -confessing _circumstantias speciem mutantes_, viz. in order that the -confessor may make a correct judgment, impose a suitable penance, and -suggest the proper means of help; for, they add, the _circumstantiæ -notabiliter aggravantes_ exercise a great influence on the view of the -case taken by the confessor, and on that account ought to be confessed. -The fact of the Council defining that only the _circumstantiæ speciem -mutantes_ need be disclosed might be easily explained by supposing -that the Council defined only what was certain, and left theological -views where they were, neither approving nor condemning them. The last -conclusion, however, is not justified, for the Council prescribes that -_circumstantiæ speciem mutantes_ should be confessed without determining -any precept for the _aggravantes_, and if equally cogent reason had -existed for confessing both classes of circumstances, there could have -been no reason for restricting the doctrine to those which change the -species; for, says Lugo,[272] it ought to have made the decree to embrace -both classes without imposing any limiting clause. - -Further demonstration is taken from the Rituale Romanum, which directs: -“If a penitent has not confessed the number, species, and circumstances -which ought to be given, the confessor must ask him.” By the word species -should be understood the _circumstantiæ speciem mutantes_, and by the -rest the _circumstantiæ notabiliter aggravantes_. This distinction, -however, is unfounded, for by species is meant _species ex parte -objecti_, such as stealing, impurity, etc., and under _circumstantiæ -necessariæ_ the _circumstantiæ speciem mutantes_ or the _species ex parte -circumstantiarum_, as when theft becomes a sacrilege, etc.[273] - -Appeal is made also to the Catechismus Romanus, which directs that those -circumstances should be confessed “which greatly increase or diminish -the malice.”[274] It may be objected to this, however, that the context -makes it clear that there is no necessity to interpret the passage as -referring to circumstances which merely increase the degree, not the -kind, of the guilt; for the Catechism continues thus: Many circumstances -are so serious that in them alone lies the whole gravity of the sin, so -that they ought to be confessed; but the only circumstances which can -make a sin grave are those that change the moral or theological species. -This is confirmed by the fact that the Ritual prescribes also that -circumstances very notably diminishing the gravity of the sin should be -revealed; for even the opponents grant that this has force only when the -mitigating circumstances change the species.[275] Moreover, the Catechism -illustrates its doctrine by declaring the necessity of mentioning the -circumstance of “a person consecrated to God” in a case of murder, -and the circumstance of “marriage” in the case of impurity; and these -belong to the circumstances which change the moral species. Finally, -if the Catechism adduces the example of a theft, it is no proof that -the question is not of circumstances which change the species, and when -it declares that one who has stolen one gold piece is less guilty than -another who has stolen a hundred pieces this may easily be understood of -a circumstance which (with regard to the absolute quantity) constitutes -a venial guilt and so introduces a distinct theological species.[276] - -This view is held, among others, by Suarez, Sanchez, Gonet, Lacroix. - -Other theologians teach that there is no necessity of confessing -_circumstantias notabiliter aggravantes_, but they make an exception -with regard to the circumstance of quantity in cases of theft. St. -Alphonsus, along with other theologians, however, is of opinion that -this exception ought not to be granted if the quantity is described as -being large; for from that the confessor can _per se_ make a sufficiently -accurate judgment. Ballerini remarks very justly that the exception -should be worded thus: Except when some additional reason exists, _e.g._ -a reservation directed against a certain kind of incest or against the -theft of some given amount. - -The third opinion denies absolutely the necessity of confessing -_circumstantias notabiliter aggravantes_, and this is the more common and -probable view, for which there are many and weighty reasons. - -(_a_) The Council of Trent by positively limiting its decision to those -circumstances which change the species seems to exclude positively the -obligation of confessing others. It teaches that circumstances must be -mentioned because without them the sins would not be properly confessed -by the penitents nor properly understood by the judge, so that he would -be incapable of estimating correctly the gravity of the sins and of -imposing a becoming penance. From these words of the Council it is fair -to conclude that the penitent has done all that is necessary when he -confesses those circumstances. - -(_b_) Moreover, we are bound only to declare mortal sin; now the -_circumstantiæ notabiliter aggravantes_ within the same species evidently -add no new species of a mortal sin, hence they need not be confessed. -To confess them is an act of perfection, good, of course, and wholesome, -just as is the practice of confessing venial sins. - -(_c_) Moreover, many consequences of no small importance follow from -the opposite doctrine. While the present opinion is calculated to set -at rest the minds of both penitent and confessor, the other has quite -the opposite tendency, for who could even approximately gauge how far -circumstances have a notable effect upon the sin? Imagine the difficult -and often fruitless inquiries a confessor would have to make with -many of his penitents in order to come to a satisfactory decision. -It follows, besides, from the opposite view that the _circumstantiæ -notabiliter minuentes_ would have to be confessed or else the confessor -would consider some sin more serious than it actually was, and even our -opponents grant that this is not necessary. - -(_d_) Finally, the Church could not in the General Council deduce this -obligation from the words of Christ, otherwise she would not have -given that definite limit to the obligation; the law of confessing -_circumstantiæ notabiliter aggravantes_ is, therefore, at least doubtful, -and a doubtful law has no binding force. Hence this opinion may be -adopted _in praxi_ with a safe conscience even though its opposite be -probable, and whoever follows it does not expose the Sacrament to any -danger of nullity, for to secure validity a formally entire confession is -sufficient, and of that there is no doubt. - -This view is taught by St. Thomas (in 4 Sentent. d. 16, Q. 3, art. 2 -et Opusc. 7, Q. 6), St. Antoninus, St. Bonaventura, St. Bernardine, -Lugo, Vasquez, Bonacina, Salmanticenses, and the greater number of -the older theologians. Among the more recent it is quite the common -doctrine; compare Gury and the different editors of his text-book, among -whom Ballerini is strongly in favor of this opinion, Müller, Lehmkuhl, -Aertnys, Mark, Konings, Simar, Kenrick, Gousset, Pruner, Ninzatti, etc. - -It is, however, advisable to mention these circumstances, and it is -necessary:— - -(_a_) When they affect the jurisdiction of the confessor, as in the case -of a censure or reservation. If one has struck a cleric, for instance, -it should be mentioned whether the assault was notorious or not; in -the former case it would be reserved to the Pope, in the latter to the -bishop; also if the person struck were a cardinal, a bishop, apostolic -nuncio, or other cleric, since the excommunication is reserved in a -special manner to the Pope. - -(_b_) When they affect the character, in law or justice, of important -acts, as espousals, various contracts, restitution, etc., in order that -the penitent may receive proper instruction; this is most important in -cases of theft. - -(_c_) When, finally, the confessor without a knowledge of these -circumstances is unable to direct his penitent as required for his -salvation. - -Since these circumstances must be confessed, not because they are -_circumstantiæ notabiliter aggravantes_, but on the grounds alleged, the -confessor has a right to question about them and the penitent is obliged -to answer as we have already observed. - -Moreover, the faithful usually add these circumstances in confession -because it gives greater peace of heart and more abundant fruit; besides, -a better and safer guidance is thus secured and an opportunity of -practicing humility. - -As to the utility and advisability of confessing circumstances all -theologians agree in making an exception with regard to sins against the -sixth commandment; for beyond what is necessary to determine the species -of the sin the confessor ought not to ask the penitent any further -question nor allow him to make any further statement. Even with regard to -the species theologians all teach with one accord that in so dangerous a -matter where scandal may so easily be given one may at times refrain from -inquiring into the species.[277] - -Cedreno gives useful advice for the confession of the circumstances -attending sin: “If the person with whom you have sinned, the place where -the sin was committed, or the manner of its accomplishment, or any other -detail, gives you special remorse, then mention that point, for it will -then be the confessor’s duty to decide from these indications how far -they affect the species of the sin or only increase its gravity.” - - -25. The Confession of Doubtful Sins. - -There are three points of view from which a sin may be regarded as -doubtful:— - -1. With regard to the existence of the sinful action, as when a man -doubts whether he really committed the action. - -2. With regard to the quality of the sin, as when a man knows he has -sinned, but doubts whether it is a mortal or a venial sin. - -3. With regard to the confession of a sin, as when a man knows he sinned -grievously but doubts whether he ever confessed his sin. - -The doubt may be positive or negative. A negative doubt exists when no -solid reason can be given either _pro_ or _con_, but only insignificant -arguments for both sides, so that no decision can be arrived at. A -positive doubt exists where two contradictory propositions have each -solid reasons in their support. - -Armed with these premises we are now in a position to set forth the -doctrine with regard to the confession of doubtful sins. - -I. A sin need not be confessed when there is no positive reason to -suspect its existence or gravity, or when there is positive ground -against believing its existence or gravity, even where there is a solid -reason on the other side. In other words, a sin negatively doubtful from -both points of view, or positively doubtful from both points of view, or -negatively doubtful on the side affirming guilt is not necessary matter -of confession; but a sin positively doubtful on the side affirming guilt -and only negatively doubtful on the side denying guilt, must be confessed. - -With the exception of a few rigorists, theologians are unanimous in -teaching that a sin positively doubtful from both sides need not be -confessed; for if there is a _dubium facti_ which establishes the -obligation of a law, liberty is in possession, _i.e._ there is no -obligation. But in our case the fact of the sin is doubtful, thus we -are not obliged to confess it. Moreover, when the existence of a law is -doubtful we are not bound by it; but the law of confessing doubtful sins -is uncertain; hence we are not bound by it. - -If, however, a man in danger of death doubted whether he had committed -a grievous sin, knowing that he had never been to confession since -that doubtful act, he would be obliged, in order to avoid the risk of -damnation, not indeed to confess that sin, but either to receive the -Sacrament of Penance, in which he confesses other sins, that thus he -might receive at least indirect absolution if his doubtful sins were -really mortal, or he should at least make an act of perfect contrition. -In such a case the act of perfect contrition _sine voto confitendi_ would -be sufficient, since no obligation binds him to confess the _peccata -dubia_.[278] So much for sins which are positively doubtful on both sides. - -If, however, a very strong argument affirms our guilt with only very -slight reason to deny it, we are obliged, according to the unanimous -teaching of theologians, to confess those doubtful sins, for in such a -case the conviction of our innocence does not rest on solid grounds. Of -course our guilt is not conclusively proved; but in these things where -evidence is often wanting we must be led by principles of sound moral -certainty, even when they are unfavorable to us, since confession is -not only a burden, but a Sacrament, and as such a means for greater -sanctification.[279] In this case one cannot argue that _in dubio -facti_ (and this undoubtedly exists) the opposing arguments cancel one -another, as might two opposing witnesses; for this only takes place when -the two arguments are of the same kind and quite similar, as in the case -of two opposing eye-witnesses, when it is certain that one of the two -is mistaken and neither can be believed since it is not known where the -mistake lies. It is quite different, however, when the opposing reasons -are of distinct classes and unlike, as in the case of two witnesses -who do not recount what they themselves have seen, but bear witness to -various conjectures _pro_ and _con_; then they both deserve reasonable -attention, since the conjectures on either side rest on different motives. - -If a penitent doubts positively whether he has sinned in some action, and -it is probable that advertence or consent, etc., was wanting, or that -full deliberation or consent was absent, he is not obliged to accuse -himself of this action in confession. - -On the other hand, theologians are not so clear as to the obligation of -confessing sins which are doubtful _dubio negativo pro utraque parte_. -The older theologians, among whom St. Thomas and other eminent doctors -are to be found (Sanchez enumerates forty), insist on the duty of -confessing this class of doubtful sins. This opinion is founded on the -decree of the Council of Trent declaring that all grave sins _quorum -conscientiam habent_ (_sc._ _pœnitentes_) must be confessed; thus the -penitent must confess the sins as they are in themselves, those which are -certain as certain and those which are doubtful as doubtful. This is the -general and constant practice of the faithful, and by that fact we may -consider it as proceeding from Christ’s institution.[280] - -Other theologians, of no small weight both by their number and authority, -do not impose the obligation of confessing these doubtful sins. St. -Alphonsus also defended this view in a very convincing manner on -internal grounds. The Council of Trent binds penitents only to reveal -those sins _quorum conscientiam habent_; it says nothing about _uti -sunt in conscientia_, or telling undoubted sins as certain and doubtful -as doubtful, but only _quorum conscientiam habent_, which means those -of which they have certain knowledge; for, according to St. Bernard, -_conscientia_ is nothing more than _cordis scientia_ and _judicium -practicum_ on the sins incurred. Now doubtful knowledge is neither -knowledge (_scientia_) nor a judgment (_judicium_), but a _suspensio -judicii_; hence no one can have a _conscientia peccati_ who has no proof -that he has incurred sin. This is the answer to the arguments of the -first opinion. Weight is added to this answer by the very words of the -same Council: “It is well known that in the Church of God nothing more is -demanded of the penitents but that each one after diligent examination -... confess those sins by which he is conscious to himself of having -grievously offended his Lord and God; the remaining sins, however, -which do not occur to him after diligent examination are considered as -included generally in the same confession.” Since, therefore, concludes -the holy Doctor, the penitent is not bound to confess his venial sins, -he is not bound to confess the doubtful ones, for the Council says -he is not obliged to confess any but the mortal sins of which he has -knowledge; but to doubt is not “to have knowledge,” it is rather “to -be wanting in knowledge.” Moreover, an _onus certum_ ought not to be -inflicted for a _delictum dubium_, and in the doubt whether the law -exists there is no obligation to observe the law. Finally, he who doubts -without good foundation should not heed the doubt. The faithful, it is -true, do confess these doubtful sins in order to gain peace and ease of -conscience, but not because they are bound to do so; it is also customary -and general for them to confess those which are positively dubious, and -no one holds that this is of obligation, not even our opponents. - -The grounds for this opinion, and the objections to the opposite view, -are so convincing that it may be regarded as the more probable and be -followed _tuta conscientia_.[281] The following objection has no weight. -Since confession is a necessary means for salvation, and since in such -a case a man must take the safer means rather than trust to a probable -opinion, he is thus obliged to confess _peccata dubia_. A distinction -must be made. The Sacrament of Penance, and particularly the absolution -in which its efficacy for the most part consists, may certainly be called -a necessary means for salvation _in re vel in voto_ with regard to those -who have committed mortal sin after Baptism; besides, if a man doubt -whether he has sinned grievously, either perfect contrition or absolution -are necessary, and for that reason confession also in so far as this is -required to obtain valid absolution or sanctifying grace through the -absolution; but the integrity of confession can be regarded as necessary -only in so far as it is proved to be the prescribed means of obtaining -absolution _licite et valide_. The proof, however, for the necessity of -confessing doubtful sins is so little substantiated that, as we have -shown, the very opposite is proved from the words of the Council and the -explanation of St. Alphonsus.[282] - -When one considers the teaching of those older theologians who maintained -the necessity of confessing _mortalia negative dubia_, it is not -difficult to see that, while their mode of expression comprises more, -yet, they really meant to say that a penitent is not to consider himself -free from all obligation of confessing his sin for some paltry reason -which is in his favor, though knowing at the same time that there are -weighty reasons to be urged against him and his freedom from mortal -sin.[283] - -From this teaching it follows that he who has a negative doubt as to -whether he sinned is not _stricte loquendo_ obliged to confess before -communicating; but in order to make sure of the required dispositions he -ought either to make an act of perfect contrition or receive sacramental -absolution after confessing something which is included under _materia -certa_.[284] - -For the rest it is in practice generally recommended to the faithful, -in order to secure peace of soul, to mention even their doubtful mortal -sins, though there is no obligation to do so, and the confession without -the accusation of these sins is complete; they must, however, be -instructed to confess these sins as doubtful and not as certain. If a -penitent have only sins of this sort to accuse himself of, he has a right -to conditional absolution on the first accusation of them. It is better, -however, to add other certain matter as the sins of one’s past life; this -is required if the absolution is to be unconditional. - -In practice the following rules might be profitably observed:— - -1. If there be a doubt as to whether the matter of a sin be grave, -ill-instructed penitents (_pœnitentes rudes_) should confess their doubts -because (_a_) they cannot guide their own consciences, or they do so -with great difficulty, and because (_b_) for the most part they do not -know how to distinguish between mortal and venial sin. Exception, of -course, is made for the scrupulous who are not in the habit of frequently -committing mortal sin. Well-instructed penitents are certainly not -obliged to confess doubtful mortal sins, since they are in a position -to guide their own consciences; yet they are advised to do so, for then -their confessor is informed of the dangers to which his penitent is -exposed and can warn, instruct, and free him from them. - -2. If the doubt turns on the free consent of the will or full advertence, -(_a_) penitents of timorous consciences, who do not ordinarily sin -mortally, are in no way obliged to confess doubtful sins, for the -presumption is in their favor: _ex communiter contingentibus fit prudens -præsumptio_. Since they are not in the habit of sinning mortally, it is -fair to presume that their doubtful sins are not mortal; indeed they -ought not infrequently to be deterred from confessing them if they are -inclined to scrupulosity. “A man of approved virtue who is worried as to -whether he has consented to an impure temptation may be morally certain -that he has not consented; for it is morally impossible that a will so -constant in good resolutions should change without giving unmistakable -signs.”[285] (_b_) Penitents who, though not timorous, are not lax are -certainly not obliged to confess a doubtful consent, though they may be -advised to do so to secure peace of conscience and the other benefits -which follow from the practice. (_c_) If, however, the penitent has a -lax conscience, he is obliged to confess his doubtful sins, for the -presumption is against him.[286] - -If, then, a pious person who often renews his resolution never to sin -mortally is not certain that he has ever revoked that resolution; if -he is startled when he perceives the evil and promptly repels the -temptation, and doubts whether he has given way; if he remembers that he -was in an excited state of mind; if he cannot tell whether the thought or -action took place in sleep or in waking moments, the presumption is that -there was no full consent. - -The presumption, however, is against those who are accustomed to fall -easily into grave sin; had they withstood the temptation they would -remember what effort they made to overcome it. Hence Lacroix[287] very -justly concludes that such people never have a real negative doubt, since -the presumption determines the probability of consent or resistance to -the temptation. - -Now comes the question as to what the penitent ought to do who has -confessed a mortal sin as doubtful and afterwards discovers that he has -certainly committed it; is he obliged to confess the sin anew or may he -consider the case closed? The sin has undoubtedly been remitted directly -by the power of the keys, since the conditional sentence “if thou hast -really sinned” becomes absolute where the condition has been verified. -St. Alphonsus[288] teaches that sins confessed as doubtful should be -mentioned again as certain if it turns out that they are certain; and -this doctrine he affirms to be the common opinion. The defenders of this -view maintain as their great argument that the sin was not confessed -as it was in the conscience at the moment when it was committed; then -it was a _peccatum certum_; moreover, they argue, the sentence passed -on a doubtful sin is quite different from that passed on a sin which -is certain. Yet in the case of sins which have been confessed in round -numbers St. Alphonsus himself teaches that even when the penitent -afterwards recalls the exact number, he is not obliged to confess -again; why, then, should this obligation be imposed on the penitent who -has confessed his sin as doubtful when he discovers later that it was -certain? A man who has confessed that he has committed a mortal sin about -ten times and later discovers that the number was twelve must either -confess as certain the two or more sins which were previously confessed -as doubtful, or, if this obligation is denied, he cannot be obliged to -confess a sin again which he has discovered to be certain after having -already confessed it as doubtful. That in the first instance the -penitent is free of all obligation to confess again, is the _sententia -communissima_, and it is borne out by the practice of the faithful; hence -in the other case the same freedom must be granted, for both decisions -rest on the same grounds. Nor can it be objected that the number of the -sins is merely a circumstance, while the sin itself is a substantial -fact, for the number belongs to the very substance, since it indicates so -many substantial acts.[289] - -It is true that St. Alphonsus calls the affirmative opinion _communis_; -but since Lugo (though even he gave his adhesion practically to the view -of St. Alphonsus in consideration of the great number of theologians -who favored it) has combated the view with strong arguments, later -theologians adopted his side, so that the affirmative proposition -maintaining the duty of confessing again can no longer be considered as -_communis_. At present, as Ballerini aptly shows, the other view is the -_communior sententia_ and is established on good external and internal -probability, and may be unhesitatingly considered as _probabilior et -communior_.[290] - -II. If a man is certain that he has committed a grave sin but doubts upon -slight grounds whether he has confessed it, he must accuse himself of it; -but if he has a sufficient probability that it has been confessed, he is -under no obligation. - -In this case some positive reason is required to show that he has -complied with the obligation of confessing the sin, for an undoubted -command is not satisfied by a doubtful fulfilment; but where there is -really good reason to suppose that the sin has been confessed, that is, -a reason which, though open to some doubts, offers some probability, -the obligation may, in accordance with the principles of probability, be -regarded as not binding. “For if we are to avoid making laws and duties -odious, we ought to concede something to human probability taken in a -broad sense; thus presumption in a case of this kind often presents proof -of sufficient probability and security.”[291] - -Hence a man who is accustomed to make his confessions with care, and -later on is unable to remember whether he has confessed this or that sin, -may presume that he has confessed it, and he is not obliged to confess it -again. This is the teaching of many eminent theologians.[292] Although -St. Alphonsus affirms that a man is obliged to mention again a sin which -has probably been already confessed, he does not condemn the contrary -opinion. If, again, a man who has been converted from a habit of sin, and -for a long period has been leading a good life, begins to doubt whether, -in the confessions either general or particular which have been made with -suitable care, some sin or circumstance has been withheld, he may be -forbidden to mention that sin or circumstance, or even to think of the -past at all. Finally, scrupulous people ought only to confess their past -sins when they are quite certain that they have never confessed them; -this is the _sententia communissima_.[293] - -On the whole it is recommended in practice to mention doubtfully -confessed sins, because their confession helps much to peace of soul and -allays all anxieties. - -Quite distinct from the preceding question is the case in which a man -fully confesses as certain some sin which he has committed, but which -neither he nor the confessor considered at the time as a mortal sin; if -afterwards, in consequence of better instruction or advice, he discovers -that the sin was mortal _ex genere suo_, he is not obliged to repeat it, -for it was already perfectly confessed and it is not necessary for the -validity of confession that the penitent or confessor should know that -the matter of a sin is grave, and it is the matter only that is involved -in this case.[294] - -III. The sins which have been incurred after a doubtfully valid Baptism -must be confessed when Baptism is given conditionally. Lehmkuhl treats -very fully of this question and remarks that on this point there can be -no doubt after the late decisions of the Apostolic See. Many theologians -were inclined to free converts from the obligation of making a confession -of their sins on the ground that, their Baptism by a heretical minister -being doubtful, the sins committed after Baptism were doubtful matter for -confession; hence they thought that to such converts, if they confessed -matter sufficient in any way for receiving validly the Sacrament or the -grace of sanctification through the Sacrament, absolution might be given -conditionally; this, they maintained, was the practice to be recommended -in order that converts might not be obliged in the beginning of their -conversion to undergo this often very severe ordeal of a confession of a -lifetime. - -In answer to repeated questions the Apostolic See (in the years 1715 and -1868) explicitly declared that converts who receive conditional Baptism -must after receiving this conditional Baptism confess the sins of their -past life and be absolved from them _sub conditione_. This decision -was given of course as an answer to a particular case laid before the -tribunal; but the intention of the Holy Office, as is quite clear, was -to pass a sentence and give a universal decision which might apply to -all cases falling under this head and which might be regarded in future -as the law on the matter, for this decree can be regarded only as an -authentic interpretation of the divine law by the Head of the Church, -and not as a local law of the Church or a part of her discipline. Nor -need any one be surprised that a decree, though particular in form, -has a universal application; for a command of the Church will never -prescribe anything as necessary matter of confession which is not in -accordance with the divine law.[295] In order, then, to recognize the -possibility that such a precept is contained in the decree of 1715 it -must be granted that, in accordance with divine right, the sins incurred -after doubtfully valid Baptism must be submitted to the keys. Such is -what we learn from that positive declaration; moreover, reason confirms -it, for, though one who is doubtfully baptized has not a certainty but -only a probability of receiving sacramental absolution of his sins, it in -no way follows that the obligation to confess them is only probable and -practically to be disregarded; for the duty of confessing and performing -the assigned penance is for all more certain than that probability of -receiving the effects of the Sacrament. This does not go beyond a moral -certainty taken in the wider sense, since it rests ultimately on the -validity of the Baptism and other conditions, so that doubts can always -be entertained about it. But the duty of confessing and performing the -assigned penance permits no such doubt, since every obligation though -it be based on grounds only morally certain is sufficiently evident; -otherwise there would be an end of anything like obligation in human -affairs. - -Now with regard to confession and absolution of sins in the tribunal -of penance Christ has handed over all power to the jurisdiction of the -Church, and it is by Baptism that men come under this jurisdiction; this -is the external rite by which men are admitted as members. But no one -doubts that a man remains subject to the jurisdiction of a social body -into which he has been admitted by the acknowledged external rites till -that reception is proved to be invalid. All, therefore, who have in any -way received Baptism (which they were desirous of receiving validly, -though its validity admits of doubt) are as a general rule undeniably -and certainly subject to the Church’s jurisdiction and laws and are -bound to comply with the divine precept which ordains that their sins -should be told in confession and sentence passed upon them. In other -words, the doubt with regard to Baptism has this effect, that the Baptism -can be regarded as invalid in the sense that it can and ought to be -repeated conditionally lest the man should risk his eternal salvation, -but nowise in the sense that one who is doubtfully baptized may consider -himself free from the observance of these precepts and obligations which -are binding on the baptized by the ordinance of God or the Church; -among these duties the precept of confessing sins holds the principal -place.[296] - -As to the ceremonies to be observed in receiving a convert into the -Church, there is nothing to prevent the confession being made first, -followed by the conditional Baptism, then a summary repetition of -the accusation along with an act of contrition and the conditional -absolution. This order is allowed by the Holy Office in a Rescript -of November, 1875. The American Ritual, on the other hand, gives the -following order: 1. Renunciation of heresy and profession of faith; 2. -Conditional Baptism; 3. Confession with conditional absolution. This -order was prescribed by the instruction of the Holy Office for North -America.[297] - - -26. Sins Omitted through Forgetfulness or other Causes not Blameworthy. - -In order that the principles to be applied here may be understood, it -must first be observed that all grievous sins committed after Baptism -must be confessed; hence what has been said of the material and formal -integrity of confession as well as upon the distinction between sins -directly and indirectly remitted must be carefully borne in mind. - -Since the formal or subjective integrity of confession consists in this, -that all mortal sins are mentioned which the penitent can recall after -a diligent examination of conscience, and of which the enumeration is -possible _hic et nunc_, it does not suffer by inculpable forgetfulness -on the part of the penitent; and the same holds true of all other -legitimate reasons which at any time excuse the penitent from objective -integrity.[298] - -Sins which are required for objective though not for subjective integrity -are considered as included in the confession and are really remitted by -the absolution, not directly, however, but only indirectly. - -Hence are derived the following principles:— - -I. Mortal sins omitted without fault are and remain _materia necessaria_ -of confession, or the objective duty of confessing them remains binding -as before. - -These sins are, of course, really forgiven, but, as we have already -observed, only indirectly or _per concomitantiam_ through their -connection with the other mortal sins which have been confessed and -directly remitted. In the Sacrament of Penance the remission of sins -is effected by the absolution; but sins which have not been mentioned -do not directly fall under the absolution since, properly speaking, -they are unaffected by the sentence pronounced by a judge who knew -nothing about them. Nevertheless the absolution pronounced _rite et -valide_ over certain sins is effectual because it is sacramental and -because in God’s providence no remission of sin takes place without an -influx of sanctifying grace into the soul which presents no _obex_. Now -sanctifying grace removes the whole _reatus culpæ mortalis_ and restores -a man to perfect friendship with God and to his claim in the heavenly -kingdom. Thus valid absolution produces sanctifying grace in the soul and -consequently the remission of all mortal sins staining the soul, even -those inculpably forgotten. - -There remains now the precept of Our Lord to submit all mortal sins to -the power of the keys in the Sacrament of Penance; these forgotten sins -have not been confessed as yet, nor has the priest pronounced any direct -sentence upon them. Though these sins have been remitted indirectly, -there still remains the obligation _ex jure divino_ of confessing them -directly to the judge in the tribunal of penance when they occur to -the mind again, not because these sins have been revived, but because -the neglect of God’s command in the matter would involve a new sin. -This holds of all mortal sins inculpably omitted, of their species, -of all circumstances changing the species, as well as of mortal sins, -confessed indeed, but to a priest without jurisdiction who either _bona -fide_ or for reasonable motives gave direct absolution of the sins for -which he had faculties, thereby remitting the others indirectly. Hence -Alexander VII condemned the proposition: “Sins which have been omitted in -confession either from an imminent danger to life or for any other motive -need not be mentioned in the following confession.” (Prop. XI. damn.) It -is different, however, in the case of reservation or censure for a sin -remitted indirectly if confession be made to a priest equipped with the -necessary faculties; for in general absolution is given from reservation -and censure, and the penitent is probably freed from the reservation -or censure attached to the sin forgotten; so that if the sin occur -again to his mind, he may be directly absolved by any confessor, even a -_confessarius simplex_.[299] - -II. The obligation of confessing these forgotten sins does not urge -_ratione sui_ “as soon as possible” (_quam primum_), not even before -receiving holy communion. - -Of course many distinguished theologians[300] teach that whoever -remembers a grave sin, even though not committed since the last -confession but forgotten, must confess that sin and receive absolution -before going to communion. The only reason urged is that he is conscious -of this sin; and, according to the Council of Trent, no one who is -conscious of grave sin may receive communion before having confessed -where there is an opportunity of making the confession. The defenders of -this view maintain that the Tridentine decree[301] is so expounded and -understood by the whole Church; they make an exception, however, for the -case where confession cannot be made without risk of scandal or infamy, -as, for example, when a priest is already celebrating Mass or a layman -has approached the communion-rail and cannot retire without exciting -remark. - -It is permissible, however, with St. Alphonsus and other theologians (in -less number) to follow the other “very probable opinion” which denies -the obligation of confessing; for in reality confession has preceded -communion and the penitent has confessed all the sins of which he was -conscious, so that neither the Council of Trent nor the divine law seems -to demand more; moreover, the forgotten sin has been remitted indirectly, -the penitent is in the state of grace, not merely by an act of contrition -but in virtue of the valid confession. The practice of the faithful which -is appealed to for the opposite side is not to be regarded as of binding -force, but rather a pious and praiseworthy custom. - -Though one may follow _tuta conscientia_ the opinion which denies the -obligation, it is good to recommend to the faithful to confess before -communion the sins which have been forgotten, unless the extremely -sensitive conscience of the penitent should require another course to be -adopted; the practice should not, however, be imposed as binding.[302] - -The view held by some, though a very few, modern theologians, that it is -quite sufficient to mention these sins without receiving absolution, is -not at all in harmony with the divine institution of the Sacrament, for -confession is not made with the view of acquainting the priest with the -sins committed, but in order that they may be remitted by his judicial -sentence. Hence a serious argument for the necessity of confession can be -drawn only from the supposition that absolution is necessary. Accordingly -a penitent who confesses a new mortal sin immediately after absolution -must be absolved again. Of course this absolution may be put off to the -next confession if the penitent comes again to the same confessor to whom -he told the sin. Such delay, however, would hardly be recommended, since -it would involve the penitent in the following dilemma: Either he is not -free to choose his confessor on the next occasion on which he approaches -the Sacrament, or if he goes to some other priest he must confess the -same sin again. - -III. The duty of confessing sins inculpably omitted must be fulfilled -either when there is danger of death or at the next confession, whether -it be a confession of duty or of choice. - -Hence these omitted sins must be confessed, even if no new mortal sin has -been incurred, _ratione sui_ when there is grave danger of death and at -the time which the Church prescribes for the yearly confession; for the -annual confession is prescribed not only in order to obtain sanctifying -grace, but also to fulfill the divine law, more clearly defined by the -law of the Church. In this case the precept would be binding under grave -sin because of the presence of _materia necessaria_, for a mortal sin -omitted even without fault is _materia necessaria_. - -If, however, a confession be made before that time, either of _materia -necessaria_ or _materia libera_, the confession must include the -previously omitted sin. This is so evident that no theologian ever -dreamt of disputing or doubting it. Every confession must be complete -subjectively or formally, and by the declaration of the Council of Trent -this confession is not complete unless it includes the sins previously -omitted. For this subjective integrity it is required that all mortal -sins not yet subjected to the keys which occur to the penitent should -be confessed unless some legitimate obstacle stands in the way. If -these omitted sins are kept back in the next confession following, that -confession is incomplete and sacrilegious. It cannot be argued that these -sins had been already indirectly forgiven, for, to speak of no other -objection, the same might be urged of sins already condoned by an act of -perfect contrition.[303] - - -27. Reasons Excusing from Complete Accusation. - -In the preceding paragraph we said that sins may be omitted by the -penitent without the confession becoming sacrilegious. As there are -reasons which can justify such silence, and release the penitent from the -obligation of confessing the sins of which he is conscious, we devote -this paragraph to the consideration of these reasons. - -I. No difficulty in the confession itself or internally connected with it -ever excuses from making a complete accusation; for when Christ gave the -precept that all grievous sins should be confessed to His representatives -in the tribunal of penance, He intended that we should submit to the -difficulties inherent in such an accusation and bear them as a penance -for our sins, and this discipline is very wholesome for the penitent. - -A difficulty of this kind would be, for instance, the great shame felt -in confessing a sin, even if it came only from the fact of mentioning -it to this or that particular priest; the course then to be adopted -is to put off the confession, or to go to another confessor, or to be -brave and overcome the shame. This difficulty was recognized in the -Council of Trent, and hence it was declared that the difficulty of such -a (perfect and candid) confession and the shame of declaring one’s sins -might well seem great obstacles, but that they were counterbalanced by -the consolation and profit accruing to those who received the Sacrament -worthily.[304] The same may be said of the other difficulties, such -as the fear of losing the esteem of one’s confessor or of receiving a -rebuke from him. If such reasons as these could be held to justify a want -of integrity in the accusation, the faithful for the most part would -consider themselves at liberty to make incomplete confessions, and the -great object for which this Sacrament had been instituted would to a -great extent be frustrated.[305] - -Likewise, a large gathering of penitents (_concursus magnus pœnitentium_) -on the occasion of a great feast or indulgence is never a reason for want -of integrity in confession, for this is not a case of necessity and it -would expose the priest to the risk of giving absolution to ill-disposed -subjects. Nor can exception be made to the rule of integrity because -people might conjecture from the time taken in the confessional that the -penitent had committed very many sins.[306] - -II. Besides the case of physical impossibility, however, there are others -which justify an incomplete avowal of sin; they are in general such -external or accidental difficulties in connection with the confession -which render a complete accusation morally impossible, or involve grave -harm to the penitent or the confessor. When the impediment no longer -exists the law of God comes again into force; the moral impossibility -of making a complete confession does not altogether cancel the duty of -making it, but only suspends it, since the precept of confession is -not one that is confined to any fixed time or state, but extends over -one’s lifetime; hence mortal sins which have not been confessed must be -mentioned later when opportunity offers. - -III. In order that the excuse of moral impossibility may be pleaded it -is necessary, 1, that there should be a real or probable risk of great -harm; 2, that it is impossible to find another confessor to whom a full -disclosure may be made without fear of this particular harm; 3, that only -those sins or circumstances be kept back of which the avowal would cause -harm; and finally, 4, that the confession cannot be put off. - -IV. Physical impossibility might result from, 1, inculpable forgetfulness -or inculpable ignorance, or only venially culpable ignorance and -forgetfulness. A man who is ignorant _invincibiliter et inculpabiliter_ -that the particular act which he calls to mind is sinful, or does -not know that his sin must be confessed with its number and species -and circumstances changing the species, is not bound to integrity -in confession; there is still less obligation on an uneducated and -weak-minded penitent. - -If, again, a man in examining his conscience cannot recall a past sin, -or, having recalled it, forgets about it in the confessional, he is -physically incapable of making a complete confession. (On this point -see the preceding paragraph.) It is to be noticed, however, that in the -case of gravely culpable negligence or carelessness in examining the -conscience an imperfect confession is invalid; if, for example, a man -through his own fault is ignorant how confession ought to be made, or -was unwilling to make a careful examination of his conscience. On the -other hand, one is not obliged to go to confession sooner in order not to -forget past sins, though frequent confession is much to be recommended; -for we are bound only to accuse ourselves of the sins of which we are -conscious at the time of confession after making a diligent examination -of conscience. - -2. There is, moreover, physical inability when there is imminent danger -of death (_a_) on account of the penitent’s condition being such that if -he should try to make a complete confession he may die before receiving -absolution; (_b_) in a common danger, such as shipwreck, before a battle, -during a violent epidemic or a swift conflagration. If in such a case -there is no time to hear the confession of each individual, it is enough -for all to make a general confession of their sins in order to receive -absolution, and the priest may give it, using for all the one formula: -_Ego vos absolvo_.... Finally, (_c_) when the confessor himself is near -death and no other priest is at hand. - -The following instructions may be observed by confessors in actual -practice:— - -(_a_) In case of extreme necessity the accusation of some specific sin -must be made so far as it is possible, but in the case of a dying man -who is still conscious the confessor should be more solicitous about -exciting contrition than about securing a complete confession; in the -case, however, of a penitent deprived of consciousness, especially if he -gave no previous sign of repentance, the confessor may give absolution -conditionally and then devote his care to the administration of Extreme -Unction, which in such a case is more certainly valid and efficacious -than the absolution itself; meanwhile, however, there would be no reason -for not giving the absolution beforehand. - -(_b_) If only one confession has to be heard and there is imminent -danger, say, from an attack by an enemy, the confessor should get the -penitent to mention some one sin, to make an act of contrition, and he -should then absolve him, when under the circumstances the absolution is -a matter of necessity. If there are several who wish to make their peace -with God, as before a battle or in a shipwreck, the following points are -to be observed:— - -([Greek: a]) If the danger is very pressing, the confessor must exhort -all to make acts of contrition and purpose of amendment, or, still -better, himself make along with them acts of contrition and amendment, -and get them to give some sign of their sorrow and their self-accusation, -as by raising their hands or striking their breasts; then he may give -them absolution in a body.[307] - -([Greek: b]) If there is time enough for each one to approach the -confessor, though not for making a complete confession, they should be -admitted singly in order the better to secure the salvation of each one, -in such numbers as the time will permit; and in order that as many as -possible, if not all, may be heard, the accusation may be as short as -possible; thus contrition will be more genuine. Of course the penitents -will be told that in the event of their lives being spared they must make -up what was wanting to the integrity of the confession.[308] - -3. Physical inability may also arise from the _defectus loquelæ_ of the -dumb who cannot make a complete confession either by writing or by signs. -For them it is sufficient if they confess one or other sin by signs. -If the defect be only a stutter, the penitent must confess as best he -can.[309] - -4. The _defectus auditus_ of the deaf who cannot express themselves -nor hear the questions which the confessor must put in order that the -confession may be complete, can be reckoned as a physical inability. -They are obliged to make a perfect confession _ex sua parte_, _i.e._ -to mention all that so far as they know is required for a perfect -confession, and thus they may not keep back anything. Those who are -merely hard of hearing are not on the same footing with the deaf; their -confession should be made in a place where the voice may be raised -without others overhearing what is said. If, however, the confessor -should find out only in the course of the confession that the penitent is -hard of hearing, and he cannot take him to a more retired place without -fear of causing the bystanders to suspect that some grave sin has been -confessed and so violating the seal, he may resign himself to permitting -an imperfect confession and may refrain from putting questions. With -women the confessor must be particularly on his guard not to give grounds -for evil interpretation, since many people are quick to suspect wrong. -Thus it would be imprudent for him to admit women penitents to confession -at times when the church is less frequented; since absolute security for -the seal of confession would even then not be attainable, and suspicion -would in all likelihood be easily aroused. - -If the confessor is obliged to hear the confessions of deaf people in the -church and he has doubts as to the integrity of the accusation, he must -be more solicitous for the seal than for the integrity of the confession; -hence he must refrain from questions as to the number or circumstances -of the sins and must give a very slight and ordinary penance, so that -those who overhear his words may not be led to conclude that the penitent -has been confessing mortal sins.[310] - -5. Finally, ignorance of the language constitutes a physical -impossibility for those unable to find a confessor understanding them; -for such people it is sufficient if they manifest their contrition and -their sins as far as they can by signs. The confessor, in default of any -other priest knowing the language, must admit them to confession and -_aliquoties_ absolve them even if he can barely make out the most general -accusation. - -V. A moral impossibility exists, as before remarked, when great harm -ensuing to the penitent or to the confessor or to some third person is to -be feared from the completeness of the confession; the harm to be feared -must preponderate over the material integrity of the confession. - -Therefore exception is made to the demand of integrity (completeness) in -confession:— - -1. When there is risk of infamy (_periculum infamiæ_), if the penitent -is exposed to lose the esteem he is held in not only by the confessor -but also by others. This may happen in various ways, particularly if the -penitent is so placed that a perfect confession would be overheard by -others, or if the time required for a complete confession were so long -that it would give rise to unfavorable suspicions. Such a case is most -likely to happen when others know that the penitent has been in the habit -of confessing, and the latter, on account of those confessions being -invalid, is obliged to repeat them, while the time for a communion which -he cannot postpone without exciting comment, is quite close. - -A sick man, for instance, has confessed and is about to receive the -viaticum; he reveals to the priest that he has made several sacrilegious -confessions. To repeat these in full would excite suspicions on the -part of the bystanders who thought that he was prepared to receive holy -communion. - -Or, to use another illustration, on the occasion of some solemn and -public communion in common one of the communicants goes to the priest a -short time before communion and reveals that he has made a sacrilegious -confession; since there is no time to repeat it, it is enough if he makes -an act of sorrow, mentions the sacrilegious confession and perhaps one -or two of his other sins; he must then be absolved and later, of course, -make a full confession. - -Or, a priest is already at the altar, about to offer the holy sacrifice, -but remembers that he has mortal sins on his soul not yet confessed; he -makes a short act of contrition and confesses his sins to an assisting -priest who is standing close by him; the latter will then give absolution -secretly. Outside the case of necessity where a priest must celebrate -Mass or a person is to receive communion, the penitent is in nowise -excused from making a full confession on the ground that others, noticing -the length of time spent in the confessional, should suspect him of being -guilty of many grave sins.[311] - -2. When there is danger of breach of the seal of confession (_periculum -læsionis sigilli_), as when, which is a very rare case, it should be -foreseen that the confessor would break the seal, or in the case where -a confessor could not reveal his own sins without at the same time -revealing the sins of his penitent and so breaking the seal. - -The first case, _i.e._ where the confessor breaks the seal—without, of -course, intending to do so—might happen when the priest speaks so loud -that he can be overheard by those in the neighborhood, and in spite of -representations still fails to subdue his voice, either because he is -deaf, or because his zeal runs away with him, or because he is afflicted -with some defect of voice which prevents him talking in a lower tone. -This would be only an indirect breach of the seal, certainly not to be -sanctioned but rather to be severely blamed as wrong and sinful. If, -then, the confessor speaks too loud, and continues to do so even after -the penitent has reminded him of the fault, the latter is justified in -keeping back part of his confession so that the confessor may not in the -course of his questions reveal to the bystanders the sins confessed. - -If, however, the penitent has an exaggerated dread that his confessor may -break the seal by making revelations outside the confessional, he is not -justified in withholding his confession in full, for he imagines a sin so -horrible that the suspicion of it could only be entertained in the case -of heretics. This holds true at least as far as a direct breach of the -seal is concerned. A penitent could hardly ever be dispensed from a full -confession on account of such a fear, and if he were to reveal to another -confessor that such a motive had prompted him to keep back some of his -sins, the confessor could not receive this as an excuse without further -inquiry. - -On the other hand, the danger of a breach of the seal on the part of a -priest who confesses the sins he has incurred in hearing confessions is -not beyond the bounds of possibility; in this case he must pass over in -silence those sins which would involve such a risk.[312] - -3. When danger of scandal (_periculum scandali_) is to be feared either -with respect to the priest or the penitent. Such a case might occur where -the penitent is afraid of sinning by taking pleasure in thoughts against -charity and especially against purity when examining his conscience; his -duty then would be to avoid dwelling upon the number and circumstances -even at the risk of making an incomplete confession, for the natural -law of avoiding the danger of grave sin prevails over the positive law -of making a complete confession. The same reason may be a motive to the -confessor to be very prudent in questioning such penitents so as not to -expose them to commit new offenses against God in the very Sacrament of -reconciliation. - -If a penitent have well-grounded fears of the confessor’s weakness and -that the latter will, if he hear a _peccatum turpe_, give way to bad -thoughts or cause him to sin, he is bound to avoid such a confessor; if, -however, in a case of necessity, he requires his help and cannot find -another confessor _hic et nunc_, he may omit those sins of which the -avowal would be dangerous. - -A priest who knows that his weakness exposes him to great risks in -hearing confessions must withdraw from the confessional if it be at -all possible, unless there be good reasons to suppose that the fear -arises from some unforeseen and exceptional incident; in such a case the -confessor must omit the questions which ordinarily would have to be put -to secure the completeness of the accusation. - -“Dangers of this kind are not to be lightly and unreasonably supposed, -but only on solid grounds; and if it be a question of danger to the -confessor, only after very unmistakable indications.”[313] - -4. When a scrupulous penitent is always tortured with the thought that -his previous confessions have not been valid and believes that his -sins have never been properly confessed.[314] Such penitents are to -be forbidden to make detailed examination of conscience even though -in consequence their confessions should fall short of the necessary -completeness. - -5. When there is danger of bodily harm (_damnum corporale_ or _periculum -vitæ_). If, for instance, a long confession exposed the priest to danger -of infection, even though by other precautions he might lessen the danger -or perhaps quite reduce it, in order to avoid the risk he may allow the -penitent to state quite briefly a few sins, thus contenting himself -with an imperfect confession, and may then give absolution; moreover, -if the penitent is so weak and exhausted by the illness as to be unable -without grave harm, or great increase of suffering and weakening of -his condition, to examine his conscience carefully and so make a -perfect confession, the priest ought not to annoy him by questions, but -rather try to awaken contrition and then give absolution even after an -incomplete confession.[315] - -It was observed above (n. 4) that moral inability to make a complete -confession can only be admitted when the confession cannot be put off and -is urgent _hic et nunc_. - -The confession may be regarded as urgent, 1, when the penitent is in -danger of death; 2, when the precept of annual confession and communion -is instant; 3, if the reception of holy communion or the celebration of -Mass cannot be put off without confusion or scandal; and, 4, if otherwise -the penitent could not again approach confession for a long period. -Reuter[316] and Lugo consider a delay of more than three days long enough -for a man in mortal sin to regard the case as urgent; indeed one may -consider the _impotentia moralis_ as justified if a man were compelled to -remain in mortal sin one or two days. - -There is a special difficulty in solving the question whether a sin can -or ought to be confessed which cannot be disclosed without damaging -the reputation of the partner of the sin in the eyes of the confessor. -Theologians do not agree in their opinions, but are all unanimous in -teaching, 1, that a penitent is obliged to seek, if possible, another -confessor to whom he can make a complete confession and to whom the -accomplice is unknown, and in this way save his neighbor’s reputation; -and, 2, that if the sin which cannot be confessed without injury to the -character of the accomplice is not necessary matter of confession, it -ought not to be revealed unless the sin of the accomplice be only slight -and the confession of that particular sin be of peculiar benefit to the -penitent. - -If, nevertheless, the accomplice be revealed to the confessor, such -revelation, in accordance with a very probable opinion, is not to be -regarded as a grave sin; for according to the teaching of a number of -theologians, whom St. Alphonsus approves and with whom St. Thomas seems -to agree, it is not a gravely sinful defamation to reveal the sins -of another to one or other trustworthy and upright man. Though many -theologians declare this to be gravely sinful if done without reason, the -opposite opinion is so well founded that it may be followed in practice -as quite probable.[317] But if it is at all probable, it is much more -so when the sin of another is revealed to a priest who is bound to the -most inviolable secrecy by the highest and holiest ties. Hence it follows -that the revelation of the accomplice is certainly no sin when there is -reasonable ground for it; such would be, for instance, if the confession -made to a priest who knows the accomplice were useful or necessary to the -penitent, supposing that no other confessor, to whom the accomplice is -unknown, were available; furthermore, the penitent is not bound to seek -another confessor unacquainted with the accomplice if the search involves -great trouble or loss. - -With these premises we approach the question: May a penitent, or ought -he, confess a mortal sin which cannot be revealed without at the -same time revealing the accomplice to the confessor, or may he omit -the mention of that sin and so detract from the completeness of his -confession? - -The greater number of theologians and those of most weight teach -that the revelation of the _complex_ is not a reason excusing from an -entire accusation, since it is no violation of the _jus naturale_ which -safeguards the reputation of another to reveal the secret sins of one’s -neighbor for good reasons to a prudent and upright man, and the law of -charity only forbids defamation of one’s neighbor without reason; in this -case, however, there is a _causa justa_, and a very urgent reason, viz., -the making of a perfect confession and the guidance of the conscience. -The precept of making a sincere accusation is _potioris juris_ than -the precept of not defaming the neighbor, so that such defamation in -face of the need of making a complete confession is to be regarded as -of no account. Lugo rejects, as involving a _petitio principii_, the -other argument advanced by the defenders of this view, namely, that the -penitent is simply making use of his right to confess his sin, and that -the accomplice by participating in the sin has surrendered his claim to -his reputation so far as it is affected by the confession of the sins; -he adduces another argument: that since the benefits resulting from -confession are so immense that Christ has bound the penitent to endure -the shame of revealing his own sins, it is a natural consequence that to -obtain such benefits one may be allowed to reveal another’s sin.[318] The -same is taught by St. Thomas,[319] St. Bonaventure, St. Antoninus, St. -Bernard, Gerson, Cajetan, Henriquez, Suarez,[320] Lugo,[321] Laymann, -Vasquez,[322] Toletus, Reginald Lessius, Tamburini, Salmanticenses,[323] -Reuter.[324] St. Alphonsus[325] also holds this view. At the same time -they teach that the penitent is bound, if he can manage it _commode_, to -spare the reputation of his accomplice by going to a confessor to whom -the accomplice is unknown; and St. Alphonsus expressly condemns the view -that this is matter of counsel and not of precept. Thus the penitent is -freed from the obligation of seeking out another confessor only (_a_) -when there is danger of death or when the annual confession can no longer -be put off; (_b_) when the penitent by refraining from communion or from -the celebration of Mass would be exposed to misinterpretation and shame; -(_c_) when a penitent is in a state of mortal sin, and would be obliged -to remain in that condition one or two days (_per biduum imo etiam per -diem_) till he could find another confessor; (_d_) when the _complex_ -may be presumed to have given up his claim to his good reputation, as -in the case of a brother who having sinned with his sister knows that -she will not go to another confessor without her mother; (_e_) when a -priest being accustomed to celebrate every day, and a lay person being -accustomed to communicate daily, would find much difficulty in omitting -these pious acts; (_f_) when a person finds great repugnance in revealing -his or her state of soul to another confessor; (_g_) when otherwise -the penitent would be deprived of a jubilee or other indulgence; (_h_) -mothers or husbands may be excused when through a wish to have counsel -or sympathy they reveal the sins of their children, etc., to a confessor -who knows the latter, especially when they find it hard to approach -another confessor; (_i_) when the seeking of another confessor involves -a privation of consolation and peace for the penitent accustomed to a -wise and helpful spiritual director. Hence it is evident that a penitent -is rarely, if ever, obliged to seek another confessor under the given -circumstances.[326] - -The other opinion, that it is not allowed to reveal the accomplice, and -in consequence that one is not bound to mention a mortal sin which cannot -be confessed without revealing the accomplice, is taught, among others, -by Canus, Petrus Soto, Ledesma, Navarrus, Valentia, Banez, etc. Busenbaum -and Mazzotta deemed the opinion probable.[327] These theologians urge -that it is a violation of the natural law to injure the good name of -another, and hence that the obligation of not inflicting such injury is -_potioris juris_ than the duty of making a complete confession, since -this is founded on a positive law. - -It need not be imagined, however, that this opinion is the _benignior_, -because it releases from the duty of making a perfect confession; -considered closely the case takes on quite another aspect, for:— - -1. It requires the penitent to seek out another confessor to whom the -accomplice is unknown even when this involves great trouble to the -penitent, for as all will concede, the integrity of the confession must -be preserved so far as it is possible, and only the damage and hardship -to the penitent which makes the confession morally impossible excuse from -making a complete confession. Hence this _incommodum_ must be grave and -much greater than that which in the other view allows the defamation of -the accomplice. - -2. If, however, a man cannot confess to another confessor and is -resolved to conceal the sin or its circumstances in order to save his -neighbor’s reputation, there arises a greater difficulty, the obligation -of confessing the same sin again; for in order to save his neighbor’s -good name a man may only conceal that circumstance which affects the -reputation of his neighbor, and this is the unanimous teaching of all -theologians; for example, if a man has committed incest, and has no -other means of confessing it, he must mention in his first confession -that he has fallen into a sin of impurity, passing over in silence the -circumstances which make it incest. He must, however, when opportunity is -presented of going to another confessor, mention the circumstance of the -incest, and this cannot be done without repeating his former accusation -of having fallen into a sin against purity. - -3. It is also to be observed that if defamation of one’s neighbor excuses -from a complete confession, and if in consequence a particular sin _may_ -not be revealed (for such is the foundation of this opinion), the -confessor is not allowed to put questions which may cause an indirect -revelation of the accomplice, especially to ill-instructed penitents who -would have no idea of how to parry the questions. Now if these questions -are to be avoided by the confessor, he may not inquire into the occasions -of sin, or he must leave to the judgment and discretion of the penitent -how far the latter is bound to answer the questions put to him. The -consequences, as any one may see, implicate the direction of penitents in -great difficulties, and on that account no one can admit either of these -methods of action. - -Now the confessor, in order to be faithful to his important duty of -withdrawing his penitents from the occasions of sin, and in order not -to be deceived by a penitent who, left to his own judgment, will not -realize the danger of the occasions, must question his penitent with -perfect liberty and undeterred by the fear of obtaining any knowledge -of the accomplice in sin, if it is probable though not certain that -such defamation of the accomplice is not a reason dispensing from the -integrity of the confession. This opinion is certainly probable. - -The champions of this view are far from denying that the natural law -forbids the injuring of another’s good name, but, they maintain, such -injury is forbidden only when there are no reasonable grounds for -inflicting it; it must be proved that the precept of making a complete -confession is a sufficient reason, since such defamation to a confessor -is certainly not objectively grave. That this ground is a reasonable one -is evident from many weighty considerations:— - -1. Good reasons have been already offered in the difficulties which are -presented when perfect liberty is not allowed in confessing or asking the -circumstances and occasions of sins. - -2. Further examples may be easily imagined in which the defamation of -another resulting from the penitent’s confession is not to be considered; -for no one would dream, for example, of releasing a son from the -obligation of making a perfect confession because it might be concluded -from the gravity and nature of his sins that his parents had brought him -up very badly; nor would a religious be excused for fear his confessor -should entertain the suspicion that his superiors were neglecting their -duty towards him. For such defamation may well be considered as of little -moment, since the confessor is bound to the most stringent silence and -can make absolutely no use of what he hears in confession. - -3. Moreover, the precept of making a complete confession is so severe -that the penitent may never transgress it in order to safeguard his -own good name, and is obliged to overcome the fear of losing it. But, -according to the universal teaching, a man is justified in self-defense -to do a lawful act even if thereby he injure the character of his -neighbor if there is no other way of shielding his own or regaining it -when lost; hence it must be allowable to injure the reputation of another -if the end in view is to make a perfect confession; or the same cause -(the integrity of the confession) which binds me to injure my own good -name gives me the right of disregarding any infamy that may accrue to -others in discharging this duty.[328] - -4. Finally, since it was in early days the practice of confessing to -one’s parish priest, and he was generally acquainted with all his -subjects, the precept of making a complete confession would have had no -meaning if the other opinion were tenable in respect to sins which were -difficult to confess. Is it possible that Christ should give a command -which in practice turned out so nugatory?[329] - -From what has been already said on this subject it follows that the -confessor, if he thinks fit, is quite at liberty to put questions on the -circumstances or occasions of sin; moreover, that penitents ought not to -be instructed to conceal circumstances which may injure the reputation of -the accomplice with the confessor; they ought rather to be encouraged to -make a complete confession to their regular confessor if they are unable -to find another. - -If, however, some one acting upon the undoubted authority of theologians -who teach the other view wishes to make his confession accordingly, he -cannot be blamed if he has formed a _dictamen conscientiæ_, and he cannot -be forced to renounce his opinion. - -Again, if a confessor remarks that a penitent is familiar with his -theology and makes his accusation in accordance with the other opinion, -and if he is satisfied that said penitent is capable of forming a -judgment about his obligations, he may more easily omit certain questions -and leave the penitent free to follow his own opinion. - -What has been said with respect to the accomplice’s reputation applies -equally to those who have been in any way an occasion of sin to the -penitent. There are cases in which the penitent cannot give the specific -character of his sin without at the same time disclosing the sin of -another which has been the object or occasion of his own sin. A man, -for instance, discovers his unmarried sister to be in confinement and -maltreats her so that _abortus_ follows; he cannot explain the nature -of his crime fully in the confessional without revealing his sister’s -sin and so destroying her reputation in the mind of the priest. Although -some even of those who teach that the integrity of the confession may -take precedence of the accomplice’s character are unwilling to grant it -in this particular case, yet there is at least a probability that the -obligation of integrity prevails in any case.[330] - - -ARTICLE III - -THE MEANS TO BE EMPLOYED IN ORDER TO MAKE A PERFECT CONFESSION - - -28. The Examination of Conscience. - -Since the penitent is obliged to make a complete confession of his mortal -sins, as far as lies in his power, there naturally devolves upon him the -duty of examining his conscience. Regarding the examination of conscience -the following points are to be noted:— - -I. The penitent is bound under pain of mortal sin to prepare for -confession by a serious and careful examination of conscience, and he -must devote to this examination such diligence as a prudent man would -ordinarily devote to any important business; hence in order that the -omission of mortal sins in the accusation may not be attributed to sinful -neglect, _diligentia mediocris_, as it is called, or _diligentia moralis_ -is required, not such as would make the practice of confession hateful or -unduly burdensome. - -The proof for this is supplied by the Council of Trent,[331] and it is -clear that if mortal sins are to be confessed they must be recalled to -the mind. Theologians observe, however, that when a man has examined -his conscience with moral diligence, but still believes that further -examination would reveal more sins, he is not obliged to spend more time -in examining his conscience; otherwise a penitent who had neglected -confession for many years would have to examine his conscience for days -and still fail to do his duty; such a conclusion is obviously wrong.[332] - -Sporer[333] even goes so far as to teach that a man who has used moral -diligence in examining his conscience and has made his confession, and -afterwards cannot recall whether he mentioned or not some particular -sin, is not bound to confess it, because the presumption is that he has -confessed it along with the other sins. If, however, he have strong -misgivings on other grounds and cannot settle his doubt as to whether he -has confessed the sin or not, he is always obliged to mention that sin, -if there is no doubt of its having been committed, in the next confession. - -II. The care which ought to be employed in this examination is not -the same for all classes of penitents; it varies according to the -circumstances of the penitents: more especially according to—(1) the -state of conscience and the habitual purity of life; (2) the time elapsed -since the last valid confession; (3) the education, the knowledge (in -religious matters especially), the intelligence of the penitent; (4) the -state of health.[334] - -1. One who seldom falls into mortal sin may satisfy himself with a less -strict examination of conscience, especially if he be in the habit of -making a daily examination of conscience; for if a penitent of this kind -falls into mortal sin, he will immediately recall it; and one who is -morally certain that he has not sinned mortally is, strictly speaking, -not bound to any examination of conscience, but he must be careful to -offer sufficient matter for confession. Though this is quite correct in -theory, in practice the penitent is strongly advised to make a careful -examination of conscience in order to rid himself of his smaller faults -and to reap greater fruit from the Sacrament. - -2. The longer the period over which the examination is to extend the more -time and care must be expended in this preparation, but it is not to be -laid down as a principle that a man who has not confessed for a year is -bound to be twelve times as long in his preparation as the man whose last -confession was a month before. - -3. Less instructed or quite uneducated people are not obliged to so -careful and searching an examination as the better instructed; they are -quite incapable of examining their conscience, _ad impossibilia nemo -tenetur_. If an educated penitent comes to the Sacrament unprepared, -the confessor should with all proper consideration send him away again -to prepare himself by a careful examination of conscience, unless there -should be solid grounds for supposing such a step inopportune; but only -grave reasons justify such toleration, for, though the sins committed -might be ascertained by questions, there is no moral certainty that such -a confession is a perfect one. A penitent who has not been to confession -for a long time and is leading a worldly life cannot without preparation -answer at once and correctly whether he has committed such or such sins. -If the penitent is uneducated, or, although educated, yet ignorant in -religion, and has taken absolutely no pains to acquire a knowledge of his -sins, he must be treated in the same way; if, however, he has taken some -pains in the matter, the confessor may supply the defect by questions; -for an uneducated man left to himself will, even after a long examination -of conscience, never succeed so well as when guided by the prudent -questioning of an experienced and skillful confessor who will do the work -in a much shorter time. If, then, the confessor sees that he can procure -by questioning a perfect confession such as the penitent left to his -own resources could hardly make after long examination, he should help -him, all the more if there is reason to fear that the penitent would be -frightened by the postponement of his confession, and might be deterred -from confession, at least for a time, by the difficulties attending a -careful examination of conscience. This method, the result of great -experience, is confirmed by the Catechismus Romanus:[335] “If a priest -remarks that such penitents are quite unprepared, he should dismiss them -with very gentle words and advise them to come again after spending -some time in thinking over their sins. If they maintain that they have -already exercised all diligence in examining their conscience, he should -hear them, since there is reason to fear that if sent away they might -not return, and he may with more reason hear their confessions if they -show any signs of wishing to reform their life; then they may be urged -to accuse themselves of their carelessness and promise for the future to -make up for their faults by a careful examination.” - -Reuter[336] observes on this subject: “Besides, experience teaches, -as is well remarked by Vasquez and Lugo, that a prudent confessor can -accomplish more with most penitents and uneducated people by a few -questions than they can themselves after a long examination. Hence such -penitents when they give any signs of fervor ought not to be easily -dismissed, in order to examine themselves again, even when defects are -noticed.” Sporer[337] writes: “Uneducated and inexperienced penitents -are unable to make such an exact examination as the more educated; hence -they should be helped by the confessor.” Segneri,[338] too, warns the -priest not to send away ignorant penitents to make a fresh examination -of conscience, unless for the most urgent reasons, since, on the one -hand, they may be frightened away and never come to confession again, -and, on the other hand, the confessor himself can easily supply for their -deficiency by his zeal. - -Although a penitent knows that he will be questioned by his confessor, -he is none the less bound to examine his conscience, since otherwise he -would be exposed to the danger of giving wrong and insufficient answers -or of omitting a great deal; he may, however, permit himself a little -less care, especially with regard to the sins common to people in his -state of life.[339] - -No one is bound to write his sins even if he should be afraid of -forgetting them; nor, if sin has been committed with another, is there -any obligation to consult with the accomplice in sin to determine -the number of sins; so, too, one who has missed Mass the whole year -is not bound to count up the feasts in the calendar, for this would -be _diligentia extraordinaria_ such as the Council of Trent does not -demand.[340] - -4. Those who are prostrated by illness and through weakness or pain -cannot review their past life are not obliged to make an exact -examination of conscience; indeed the confessor should only put to them -a few questions according to their condition. If, however, they regain -their health, they must supply what was wanting in their accusation; -if, after receiving absolution, other mortal sins occur to their mind, -they should confess them and get absolution. In general the sick are not -required to make so careful an examination as others; hence the priest -should not yield when they wish to put off confession from one day to -another on the plea of examining their conscience better; usually this -is only a pretext for putting off the confession, and does not arise -from anxiety or eagerness to prepare well, but from fear; such persons -must be prepared by the priest himself for absolution and the other -Sacraments.[341] - -III. A penitent who is guilty of gross neglect in the examination of -conscience makes _per se_ an invalid and sacrilegious confession; he -must, of course, be sufficiently conscious of such neglect in order -to incur this sin. The malice of the offense consists in the risk of -omitting some mortal sin, and so, though none may have been actually left -out, the penitent has sinned gravely by consciously exposing himself to -the danger. - -IV. In order to make a good examination of conscience the penitent -should adopt some system; the simplest and easiest method is to go -through the commandments of God and of the Church, the various kinds -of sins (especially the Seven Capital Sins), and the nine ways of -participating in sin; it is also recommended to call to mind particular -hours and days. Theologians give many other methods besides for this -examination. Reuter recommends the penitent to recall where he was each -day, what was done, and what sins were committed by thoughts, wishes, -and desires, words, and works; how he has conducted himself at home, -in church, with his neighbors; the author considers that by this means -repetition will be avoided. To examine the conscience according to this -method would be to exercise not only _diligentia sufficiens but magna -omnino diligentia_.[342] Sporer, approving the method recommended by -Gobat, offers a compendious system for penitents who lead a fairly -uniform existence and for whom the examination of conscience extends -over a longer time, some months or half a year. The penitent should -consider three periods: (1) an ordinary working-day; (2) a Sunday; (3) an -exceptional day in which he has traveled, done some particular business, -been present at a wedding or a dinner, etc.[343] One who has only to -examine a short interval may call to mind how he has sinned against God, -his neighbor, and himself, by thoughts, words, and deeds. - -V. The following directions are given by approved moralists to determine -whether any carelessness in the examination of conscience is a mortal or -venial sin and whether in consequence the confession has been valid or -not. - -1. Those may rest in perfect security who, being neither too strict nor -too lax, experience no misgiving or anxiety on the care which they have -devoted to the examination of their conscience. - -2. If a man doubts whether he has been guilty of more or less -carelessness and discovers after confession that he has omitted more -sins than he has confessed, he must acknowledge himself guilty of -gravely sinful neglect; if, however, he has confessed more sins than -he has omitted, it may be assumed that he has not been guilty of great -carelessness. - -3. If a penitent’s last confession was made one or two weeks before and -he accuses himself of mortal sins, giving the number of times in quite a -vague and doubtful fashion, _e.g._, I have committed sins against holy -purity three or four times, there is a strong suspicion that he has been -gravely careless in the examination of his conscience.[344] - -It should be noticed that if a penitent, from experience of his own -weakness, is afraid that by a prolonged examination of his sins he will -again consent to them, he may confine himself to a rapid glance at -them, though he knows that for want of further examination many will be -omitted, since in any case the risk of committing sin must be avoided. A -confessor must observe the same guardedness in putting questions on sins -against the angelic virtue, as we shall see later. - -If the penitent is troubled with scruples, it is better for him not to go -so thoroughly into his examination of conscience, otherwise confession -would become too burdensome, and experience shows that such penitents -become only more confused, the more they examine themselves; indeed they -should be forbidden any long and anxious attention to themselves. - -Let the confessor impress upon worrying souls that the great thing -for them is to have the wish to confess all, that God recognizes the -good will, and that this is shown by praying for grace to make a good -examination of conscience, and that even if a sin be forgotten without -any fault it is remitted, and that the time between confession and -communion should not be occupied with the recalling of one’s past sins, -but that the mind should be fixed on the future.[345] - - -29. Invalid Confessions. - -Confessions may be either invalid or merely defective. If only defective -but not invalid, the defect should be supplied, but there is no need -to repeat the confession; if, however, they are invalid, they must be -repeated. This repetition need not always be made in the same manner. - -A confession may be invalid through the fault of the penitent or through -that of the confessor. - -A confession may be invalid through the penitent’s fault:— - -1. By a gravely sinful defect in the examination of conscience. - -2. By culpable and deliberate concealment of anything which ought to be -confessed, or by a gravely sinful lie in confession. - -3. By the want of contrition and purpose of amendment; and this defect is -to be found among _recidivi_ as well as those who refuse restitution or -reconciliation with their enemies. - -4. By want of good will to carry out the penance imposed, and to -undertake other duties which bind under pain of grievous sin, if the good -will is wanting at the time of receiving absolution. - -5. By ignorance of those truths which must be known _necessitate medii_ -in order to gain salvation. - -6. By receiving absolution while still under a sentence of -excommunication. Among the principal effects of such a sentence must -be counted _privatio sacramentorum_, so that any one receiving the -Sacraments in this condition incurs a mortal sin by breaking the law of -the Church. One may be saved, however, from grievous sin in this matter -by inculpable ignorance, fear of death or mutilation, great disgrace or -serious loss of fortune, etc., as well as by the necessity of obeying -the law of yearly confession and communion when there is no priest with -faculties for absolving from censures, for the law of the Church is not -so severe as to bind its subjects to suffer grievous damage. - -It is illicit and even sacrilegious for an excommunicated person to -receive the Sacraments, though the reception is valid except in the -case of the Sacrament of Penance. But when the excommunicated person -is in good faith and thinks he may receive absolution, such absolution -is valid, it being presumed of course that he goes to confession with -the necessary dispositions. Such a case might occur when, through -invincible ignorance or forgetfulness, he omits to mention the censure of -excommunication, or when the priest does not know of it or forgets for -the moment that such a censure is attached to certain sins, or, again, -even where the priest knowingly absolves the penitent, though unprovided -with faculties for the case, because the penitent is in one of the cases -of necessity mentioned above and the priest feels it his duty to give -absolution, or even if _ex malitia_ he absolves a penitent who believes -him to have faculties.[346] - -On the part of the confessor the confession may be made invalid if -he has not the necessary jurisdiction or intention, or if he omits -something essential in the formula of absolution, or if through deafness -or inattention or the indistinctness of the penitent’s utterance he has -not understood any sin. If, however, through no fault of the penitent -the priest missed some sins, even mortal sins, the confession would, -according to the probable opinion, be valid if he heard part of the -accusation; those sins, however, which had not been understood ought to -be repeated. If in the course of confession the penitent observes that -the confessor does not understand because he is asleep or distracted, the -penitent must repeat what the priest has failed to hear; if, in spite -of this, the penitent were to continue the confession (_mala fide_), it -would be sinful and invalid and ought to be repeated. If at the end of -the confession the penitent sees that the confessor has been sleepy or -distracted and so has missed some of the sins, though he does not know -which have been missed, he must begin again unless the accusation has -been a long one, in which case it is enough if the penitent repeat what -he thinks the confessor may have missed, for it may be presumed that -Christ never intended to prescribe perfect confession when attended with -such inconvenience.[347] - -With respect to repeating confessions the following principles are -accepted:— - -I. If a confession is invalid, the sins mentioned in it must be repeated; -otherwise, the ensuing confession is invalid, for those sins were never -remitted by the power of the keys, and in consequence they must be again -submitted to the tribunal. - -II. The duty of repeating a confession urges as soon as there is a moral -certainty that said confession was null; if, however, the confession -has certainly been made and there is doubt only as to its validity, the -presumption is in favor of its validity. It is, however, advisable to -repeat a doubtfully valid confession. - -There is no difficulty where the penitent has willfully concealed or -never intended to give up a mortal sin or never avoided a voluntary -occasion of sin, and in other such cases, for the confession was -unquestionably invalid and sacrilegious. It is more difficult, however, -to determine at times on the validity of a confession when the penitent -has frequently relapsed without being voluntarily and continually in -the occasion of sin. If a penitent shortly after confession falls -frequently into sin on the first occasion that offers, without making any -resistance, the presumption is that the confession was deficient in the -required contrition and purpose of amendment, and that in consequence it -was invalid. If, however, after confession he usually makes some effort, -the nullity of the confession is not certain, and the confessor may not -force him to repeat the confession, but he will do well to counsel him to -do so when his dispositions improve and he is earnest in his contrition -and in his efforts to make a permanent reform.[348] - -III. Invalid confessions must be repeated in their entirety when new -confession is made to another priest who has no knowledge of the sins -contained in the preceding invalid confessions, for this knowledge is -necessary in order to pronounce judgment; hence it is not enough for a -penitent to accuse himself merely of having made one or more invalid -confessions. - -IV. If the confession is made to a priest who has heard the invalid -confessions, and in consequence has already passed sentence on the -individual sins and has at least a knowledge _in confuso_ of the -penitent’s state, it is sufficient to summarize the accusation of -previously confessed sins in the form, “I accuse myself of the sins -already mentioned in ... confession,” mentioning if the previous -confessions were invalid through want of integrity, and supplying -this want by a distinct and separate accusation of the sin or sins -omitted.[349] The previous confessions were sacramental, since they -were made with a view to obtain absolution, though deprived of their -sacramental efficacy through the fault of the penitent; hence a general -repetition of them in connection with the knowledge which the confessor -had of the individual sins may be considered as sufficient to form -a judgment. If a penitent wishes to make a general confession, the -distinction between the usual confessor and any other is not of so great -moment, except where the confessor or the penitent is intent upon the -_minimum necessarium_; the usual confessor of the penitent may, however, -be satisfied with less care, since he knows already the previous sins -of his penitent. In this case, however, he must have _notitiam saltem -confusam status pœnitentis_; for this it is not necessary that he should -be able to recall the number and circumstances of the sins in question: -a remembrance of the different species and their number in general -suffices. - -The confessor will have acquired this _notitia confusa_ from previous -confessions and from the questions which he puts to the penitent. Such -knowledge is sufficient in so far as it is connected with a knowledge of -previous sins, and that will be the case where the general confession is -made to the same priest. - -If, however, the priest can only vaguely call to mind his past treatment -of the penitent, he should put some questions to him in order to form -an idea of the state of his conscience; but he may absolve without this -precaution, if from the penances which he has been in the habit of giving -to his penitent he can form a judgment as to the state of his soul.[350] - -The same plan may be adopted in the case in which a man after making his -confession is sent away without absolution, and afterwards returns to -receive it, the confessor in the meantime retaining no recollection of -the sins. Undoubtedly in such a case a _notitia confusa_ is sufficient, -and on the strength of it absolution may be given. Nay, more: if the -penitent’s absolution had been delayed for some reason not connected with -want of necessary dispositions, the confessor might be satisfied with the -remembrance that the penitent was in right dispositions for absolution -and had received a penance in proportion to the sin. Of course it is -always understood that no fresh mortal sin has been committed in the -interval between the confessions; otherwise it must be confessed and a -new act of sorrow and resolution of amendment must be made.[351] - -On the same principles we may answer the question already discussed as -to whether a man who recounts his sins (_mere historice_) to a priest -(_qua amico_)—to obtain advice, for instance—is bound to retail them -explicitly if in consequence of the priest’s advice he desires to -receive absolution; or the question might be put thus: What knowledge or -recollection of the sins must the priest have so that on the strength of -a perfunctory accusation couched in general terms he may give absolution? -Many theologians, among them Lacroix and St. Alphonsus, require a -_distincta memoria_ of all the sins, because the preceding confession -was not made to the priest as a judge in the Sacrament, and so cannot -be a sacramental confession; but a sacramental confession is made only -when the confessor has a _distincta memoria_ of the sins narrated at the -time when the summary of the accusation is made; if the priest remembers -them only _in confuso_ or _ex parte_, the penitent must once more make a -distinct accusation of his sins _in ordine ad absolutionem_. The opposite -view is taught by Lugo, who maintains that it is _communis_, for almost -all theologians teach that the _memoria confusa_ is sufficient whatever -may have caused the defect in the previous confession. He grants that the -mere narration of the sins is in no way sacramental, that no judicial -accusation has been made, that it is merely a friendly confidence; this -previous, though not sacramental, narration which still remains _memoria -non omnino distincta_, may become in a certain manner sacramental by the -ensuing (_summarized_) accusation, sufficient for the purposes of the -Sacrament; not because the previous narration was sacramental in itself, -for it was not so, but in so far as the later accusation, joined with the -recollection which the confessor has of the sins previously mentioned, -supplies the priest with the knowledge necessary for the Sacrament.[352] -Thus Lugo combats successfully the objections and reasons of his -opponents. - -Still in Lugo’s proof and that of his supporters the difficulty must -not be overlooked that the narration has no sort of relation to the -Sacrament of Penance, either in the mind of the narrator or that of -the priest, and that in consequence the reasons brought forward in the -case above mentioned are not quite convincing. Aertnys consents to -Lugo’s decision—that is, he considers the repetition of the accusation -as unnecessary only when the confessor at the time when the summary of -the sins is made has a _distincta memoria eorum_, since the general -accusation of the penitent along with the _notitia distincta_ of -the confessor is equivalent to a _distincta confessio_.[353] And -Lehmkuhl regards Lugo’s view as quite probable only when the priest is -entertaining hopes as he listens to the narration of getting the man to -make a sacramental confession, though such a thought may be very far from -the man’s mind at the time. The accusation of the penitent may not be -intentionally sacramental, while the attention of the priest has already -begun to assume a judicial and sacramental form and is _inchoative_, at -least, a distinctly judicial investigation such as would seem sufficient -when the penitent on his part gives his consent to carry out the distinct -judicial act. If, however, the penitent in the course of his narration -never hinted at the idea of a sacramental accusation and the priest never -adverted to it, the teaching of St. Alphonsus would seem to prevail, for -in such a case a _distincta notitia judicialis_ never existed, unless -a _distincta memoria_ were retained by the priest; but the sacramental -sentence which has to be pronounced over every mortal sin is based solely -on a judicial knowledge of them.[354] - - -30. General Confession. - -The repetition of former confessions, whether of all the confessions of -a lifetime or of those last made, is called a general confession. It is -necessary for many penitents, useful to others; to a few only it may be -said to be harmful. - -1. General confession is necessary for all who have made invalid -confessions. St. Alphonsus remarks on this subject that it is a frequent -experience in missions that bad confessions have to be set right; hence -he advises missioners that since the good of missions consists mainly in -setting right bad confessions, they should in all their discourses be -urgent in explaining the heinousness of sacrilege and how many souls are -lost by concealing mortal sins in confession. Experience teaches that -many people are overcome by false shame so as to conceal their sins even -in the confessions which they make to the fathers giving the mission. If -at so solemn a time as a mission such people fail to set right their bad -confessions, what hope is there of their salvation? If in the confession -which they make to the missioner they cannot overcome their shame, how -will they do it when they confess to the local priest? There is indeed -good reason for ever and again insisting on the general confession.[355] -Hence it is very desirable that the local priests at the time of a -mission should refrain from hearing confessions, and surrender their -confessionals to the fathers who give the mission (or to some strange -priests called in for the special work of hearing the confessions), for -some of the faithful, if they see their usual confessor in attendance, -may be deterred from going to a strange priest and continue to make -sacrilegious confessions. It not unfrequently happens that people whom we -would never suspect have most need of freedom in this respect.[356] - -It frequently happens that a confessor thinks a general confession -necessary when the penitent is not at all convinced of its necessity. -Whether the penitent is to be advised in such a case to make a general -confession will be determined by the rules which are given as to the duty -of instructing the penitent or leaving him to himself (§ 55); for if the -penitent suspects nothing of the nullity of his previous confessions, -the confession which he now makes in good faith and proper dispositions -is valid, and by virtue of it the sins mentioned in former invalid -confessions are indirectly remitted and need only be repeated when the -conscience awakes to the fact. Moreover, a prudent confessor, if he fails -to persuade a penitent of the necessity of a general confession, may -succeed by a few questions in making the confession practically a general -one. Indeed, unless the penitent takes it in bad part the priest may by -a little adroitness elicit a general confession; then he must, before -giving absolution, let the penitent know that he has made a general -confession. The case may also occur where the penitent has made one or -more sacrilegious confessions and, quite forgetful of this circumstance, -has begun to make valid confessions without ever setting right the bad -ones; this not unfrequently happens to children. In this case the general -confession need only extend over the sacrilegious confessions.[357] - -2. Of the great usefulness of general confession, popes, saintly bishops, -founders of orders, and the great doctors of the Church all speak in most -unmistakable terms. The learned Benedict XIV, in his instructions on the -preparation of the faithful for a fruitful celebration of the Jubilee, -directs priests who give the missions to impress on the people again -and again the great profit of general confession. They are to urge them -to penance, and to instruct them how to receive the Sacrament validly -and profitably; they are to proclaim that it is absolutely necessary to -repeat former bad confessions, and they should take all possible pains to -excite to a general confession even those who do not feel any necessity -for repeating their sins again. “For if it is not necessary to mention -again our former sins, we regard such repetition as very profitable -on account of the confusion connected with such avowal, which is an -important part of penance, as our predecessor, Benedict XI, teaches in -this Decretal _Inter Cunctas_.” He also appeals to St. Charles Borromeo, -who in his _Monita ad Confessarios_ proclaims the usefulness of general -confession and recommends it. “Confessors,” says the saint, “ought, with -due regard to persons, times, and places, urge their penitents to make a -general confession, that thus by a thorough examination of their lives -they may turn to God with greater peace of mind and repair all faults -which have been committed in former confessions.” As another witness -for the usefulness of this practice, Benedict XIV adduces St. Francis -of Sales who, in many places in his works, insists strongly on the -practice. Thus he writes to a widow concerning her father: The counsels -which I give him I reduce to two points: the first one is that he should -institute a careful examination of his whole life with a view to making -a general confession and performing a corresponding penance,—this is a -means which no sensible man will despise in presence of death; the other -is that he should continually endeavor to wean his mind from the vanities -of the world.[358] Benedict then refers to the rules which St. Vincent de -Paul gave to his mission-priests, in which he exhorts them to encourage -general confessions. In the life of the holy founder it is recorded what -great fruits were reaped from the general confessions which were made -during the missions held by those priests.[359] - -The advantages of general confession are thus briefly enumerated -by St. Ignatius in his Book of the Exercises: (1) We gain greater -fruit and merit on account of the deeper contrition with which we -approach the Sacrament; (2) we are better able to realize the malice -of sins committed; (3) we are in better dispositions for receiving -holy communion, and we are more disposed to shun sin. Moreover, the -Directorium of the Exercises, a work composed by a member of the Society -of Jesus and edited by the General Claudius Aquaviva, adds the following -observation: If the general confession offered no other advantage, the -following fact would sufficiently recommend it; experience proves that -men for the most part go to confession either without proper examination, -or without the required contrition, or with but a weak purpose of -amendment; the general confession comes in most opportunely to give peace -of mind, to remove scruples, which sooner or later, or at least at the -hour of death, come to torture the soul and expose it to the danger of -losing eternal salvation. - -Segneri also very earnestly recommends general confession. It is a very -safe and useful plan to examine one’s life thoroughly at least once, and -to set it right by a general confession, and to keep up the practice -at fixed intervals of a year, or even oftener, of making a general -confession beginning from the last. The advantage of this practice is -that, seeing all our faults and sins at a glance, we are filled with -greater confusion and sorrow and are impelled to be more humble; besides -the fear of God’s justice will grow in us when we see our sins, past and -present, hanging like a great mountain over us, so that we are compelled -to cry out with Esdras—“Our sins are grown up even unto heaven.” -(Esdr. ix. 6.) And who does not see how difficult it is without such a -confession to obtain that most priceless of blessings, peace of mind, at -least if the frequent relapses into sin are due to a want of preparation? -Oh, how many confessions are thought to be valid and are not so in -reality![360] - -Finally, the words of St. Alphonsus deserve a place here: “I advise -every one who has not yet done so to confess all the sins which he has -ever committed in his life, and I advise not only those who have made -sacrilegious confessions by concealing mortal sins, or whose confessions -have been invalid through want of previous examination of conscience or -of true contrition, but those also who are anxious to begin a new life; -for this purpose a general confession is very useful.”[361] - -Hence, general confession is useful: (1) for adults who have not already -made one; (2) especially for such as have reasonable misgivings about the -validity of past confessions; (3) for those who wish to start a new and -better life; (4) before entering on a new state of life, hence before -marriage, before receiving Orders or making the profession in a religious -community; (5) at the time of a jubilee or mission, or of the spiritual -exercises, for these are special occasions of grace and penance; (6) for -persons who are in danger of death, while their strength permits, and for -those who have to expose their lives to any danger. - -Those who have once made a good general confession, especially if they -are of mature age, may set their minds at ease on that portion of their -existence, and such people should not be easily allowed to repeat their -general confession unless for very weighty and exceptional reasons. These -frequent repetitions do more harm than good. The desire of repeating -the general confession is usually a sign of a certain want of trust in -God and of scrupulosity. If a penitent of this kind, after his general -confession, is uneasy about some important point in his former life, -because he thinks he has not confessed something or failed to confess -it properly, he may be allowed to mention it in one of his ordinary -confessions. - -A repetition of the confession of his whole life may be allowed to a -penitent who is free from scruples and is full of zeal to enter on -a perfect life. On the other hand, it is well to advise and even to -urge as a very useful means the practice of general confession at -fixed intervals, say of a year, or a half year, or when the occasions -mentioned above afford an opportunity. If the confessor has to deal with -a penitent who has already once or oftener made a general confession, -he should ask when the last confession was made and why the penitent -is anxious to make it again. The answer will suggest the course to be -pursued by the confessor: (_a_) If the penitent can give no definite -reason, but speaks of a general feeling of unrest, the confessor may ask -what the cause of this unrest is, and whether in the preceding general -confession the penitent has honestly said all he knew and as he knew it, -whether he answered the questions put by the priest in all truth, whether -he was sorry for his sins, and whether there was a real improvement in -his way of living, or, on the other hand, whether he fell again into sin, -and when. If a defect is discovered in the preceding general confession -it must be repeated; otherwise the penitent must be shown how groundless -his fears are and encouraged to trust in God. The repetition of the -general confession must be strictly forbidden, especially in the case of -those troubled with scruples. At the most, the accusation of one or other -sin which gives most uneasiness may be permitted, and the penitent must -be engaged to think no more about the matter, but only to make acts of -sorrow when these sins occur to his mind. (_b_) If, however, the penitent -wishes to make a general confession because the last one was made a long -time ago, and many mortal sins have been committed in the interval, -he should be permitted to make it. The period which has been already -comprised in a general confession may be treated with less detail, or -quite omitted. A short repetition is, however, as a rule, recommended -since the earlier life of the penitent throws light on his present -condition, and he is always more content if the confessor has, at least, -some general perception of the former state of his soul. (_c_) If the -penitent wishes to make a general confession for ascetic reasons, _e.g._ -for the sake of humility, of greater purity of heart, etc., the question -is to be settled as follows: If the penitent is a stranger, he must be -referred to his usual confessor; if he has none, he must be recommended -to choose one. If the penitent asks the confessor to undertake his -direction, and on the strength of this to receive his general confession, -the request is not to be granted at once. A simple confession may be made -so that the priest may decide whether a general confession be necessary -to gain the knowledge required for guiding the penitent, or at least -useful, or on the contrary harmful where there exists a tendency to -scruple. With one’s ordinary penitents, this procedure is not required in -order to find out whether a general confession is or is not advantageous; -the ascetical object may be obtained by mentioning some of the more -humiliating sins or by well-prepared annual general confessions. - -In the special case of penitents who have been living in impurity the -confessor should allow them only one general confession on that period -of their lives lest by reflecting on those sins in their examination -of conscience sinful promptings should arise in their imagination, the -conscience thus incurring fresh stains where the object was to purify it; -after one perfect confession of these sins the penitent should not be -allowed, or rather he should be forbidden, to make any further accusation -of them; a general accusation may, however, be made in subsequent -confessions in these or other words of similar form: “I accuse myself of -all sins committed against the sixth commandment.” Moreover, it is not -recommended to advise such penitents to make a general confession till -they have combated that vice with success, unless some other pressing -need exist for making a general confession.[362] - -On the other hand, the confessor should not omit to advise those who are -dangerously ill to make a general confession, or at least a summary of -one; he may do this by asking whether anything in their past life gives -uneasiness, whether they have always made good confessions and made good -acts of contrition, whether they have been living in proximate occasions -of sin, etc.; he will thus have many opportunities of righting at the -last moment sacrilegious confessions and communions and rescuing souls -from hell. - -Since general confession is so profitable, the confessor may, according -to the advice of St. Alphonsus,[363] with the exception of the above -case, receive penitents who wish to make a general confession of their -whole life or of part of it and that at once if they are prepared; he -should be most willing to help them in it unless some obstacle, as, for -instance, the number of penitents still waiting, or shortness of time, -should prevent him from devoting more time to one penitent. He will -sometimes find that a general confession which seemed to be only useful -turns out to have been necessary. On the other hand, the confessor should -refrain from forcing on a penitent a general confession which is not -dictated by necessity.[364] - -3. General confession is harmful to scrupulous and even to overanxious -people; to such it brings not peace of mind but only more scruples; hence -they should be dissuaded from making a general confession; it can only -be allowed when there is complete certainty of the invalidity of past -confessions. “Scrupulous penitents,” says St. Alphonsus, “would go on -making and repeating general confessions forever in the hope of laying -aside their anxiety, but the evil only grows, for after every general -confession they fall again into new anxieties and scruples, thinking they -have omitted some sin or failed to confess it properly, so that their -uneasiness increases the oftener they repeat their confessions.”[365] -The confessor, in consequence, must be on his guard against such people -and not allow himself to be deceived by them; he may permit them only -to mention some sin which causes them very great trouble, and he -must instruct them to atone for their defects by an act of sorrow. -If, however, the priest is convinced of the invalidity of the former -confessions of such people, he should help them through their general -confession and after that forbid any further examination. Moreover, only -an experienced, prudent, and skillful confessor should undertake the -direction of such persons, and a young confessor should recommend them -to some holy man of greater age. Moreover, the general confession, as -we have already mentioned, is a danger to all those for whom reflection -on their past sins is a source of new temptations. It is dangerous for -those who live in the voluntary and unnecessary occasion of sin and are -always relapsing, who are not really in good dispositions, and who make a -general confession merely with a view of getting absolution more easily; -they may be recognized by the sins committed since their last confession, -and they may be admitted to a general confession after being exhorted -to give up the occasions of sin and to combat their sinful habits.[366] -St. Leonard of Port Maurice says on this subject: “If the penitent is -living in the proximate occasion of sin without making a firm resolution -to reform, or without giving signs of contrition, you must give him no -encouragement to make a general confession, for the proximate occasion -must first be removed and the habit overcome at least for a time. It -would else be but labor lost, for general confession is not merely an -institution for setting right past confessions, but also for reforming -one’s life. If no purpose of the sort is in the mind of the penitent, -there cannot even be a reasonable certainty that he will persevere in -his reform, and there is no foundation upon which to build up virtue. -Exhort him, and suggest means for avoiding the occasions of evil and -for overcoming sin; show him the utter impossibility of reform unless -the occasions are given up, or, if this cannot be, unless they are made -remote; urge him to pray and put off the general confession to another -time. Only on quite special occasions, _e.g._ missions, or where there -are extraordinary signs of penitence may any fruit be expected from the -general confessions of those who live in occasions of sin and show no -signs of improvement.”[367] - -The practice of many confessors is to be deprecated, who, after hearing -one or two confessions of a penitent, urge him to make a general -confession, moved by imprudent zeal or in order to obtain better -knowledge for the guidance of the penitent. Equally reprehensible is the -conduct of many priests who give way to their penitents, allowing them -to make often a general confession, or, at least, whenever they choose a -new confessor. Such general confessions are quite useless and are a mere -waste of time.[368] - - -31. The Manner of Hearing General Confession. - -As to the method of hearing general confessions, the following rules, the -outcome of the long experience of learned confessors, should be observed:— - -1. In order to be fit for this office a confessor should be well -instructed and already experienced in hearing confessions; he must have -great patience and zeal for souls, and during the whole course of the -confession be very sympathetic and encouraging towards the penitent. - -2. If a penitent expresses his desire to make a general confession, the -priest should first inquire whether it be necessary or useful. In order -to discover this it is not recommended to ask the penitent bluntly if -he has ever concealed a sin in his former confessions, or any question -of the kind, for it is quite possible that the penitent, though guilty -of the sin, may in his bewilderment deny it and never again dare to -confess it; it is much better if the confessor ask the penitent why he -wishes to make a general confession, whether he feels uneasy, etc. By -such questions or the like he may try to discover if there have been -sacrilegious confessions. He will often receive one or other of the -following answers: (_a_) “Because I have kept sins back;” he will then -encourage his penitent, showing himself very kind towards him and urging -him to be perfectly sincere. (_b_) “I have never yet made a general -confession;” he may then find out if it be necessary or only useful. -(_c_) “I have made a general confession before, but it was not a good -one.” He may then ask why the last general confession was not a good one; -if the penitent can give no other reason, except his own fears, there is -a fair presumption that he has to deal with an overanxious or scrupulous -penitent. (_d_) “I heard in a sermon that my confessions were bad;” here -again the reason must be asked. (_e_) The following reason may also be -given especially during a mission: “I want to begin a better life;” in -such a case the general confession will be at least very useful. - -3. If the general confession is necessary in consequence of former -confessions having been sacrilegious or invalid, it must be made with -great accuracy and the number and species must be given, so far as -possible, just as though the sins had never been confessed before. It -may easily happen, however, that the confessor, though convinced of the -necessity of a general confession, cannot at once hear it for want of -time or on account of the great number of penitents kept waiting; while -the penitent frequently cannot return again and is quite uninstructed or -of weak intellect, or is really anxious to receive absolution or must -receive it in order to fulfill the obligation of going to communion. -In such a case, and especially when the penitent discloses at once to -his confessor that his previous confessions have been bad by reason of -not giving the number of the sins, and when the confessor can, from the -account of sins committed in the past year, form a fair estimate of the -past life of the sinner, St. Alphonsus recommends that absolution should -be given without any repetition of previous confessions. He assumes that -the confessor is able to form a gross estimate as to the whole life from -what he hears concerning one year, and that he further inquires whether -the penitent, besides his ordinary sins, is conscious of any special -ones in the course of his life. The detailed general confession may be -put off to some more opportune occasion which can be arranged at once -with the penitent. The holy Doctor adds another instance to those just -mentioned—when the confessor after hearing the confession discovers -that the penitent has failed in former confessions to give the number -of his sins and when, at the same time, he has a _distincta notitia_ -of the sins and can form upon them a _distinctum judicium_ on the past -career of the penitent; if, however, he have only a _notitia confusa_ of -the sins confessed, he is obliged to form a _notitia distincta_ of the -former mortal sins imperfectly confessed. With only a _notitia confusa_ -of the penitent’s previous condition he may not give absolution, for the -penitent is obliged to confess each single sin once, and the confessor -is obliged to pronounce once a distinct judgment on the sins.[369] In -the case, however, where the general confession is not of necessity, -these precautions in putting questions need not be adopted; if the -concourse of penitents is very large, and if, as frequently occurs, in -missions or on similar occasions the general confession cannot be put -off to a more convenient time, the confessor may at least make a summary -examination, asking only for the species of the sins and the time of -duration of the habits of sin without laying stress on the exact number -and circumstances of each particular sin. The priest must, of course, -give the penitent sufficient time to unburden his conscience and to say -all he wants to accuse himself of, even though such accusation be not -necessary in this voluntary general confession, so that the penitent may -leave the confessional with his mind quite at ease; thus he may ask him -in general: “Do you accuse yourself of all sinful thoughts, words, etc.?” -On this account it is recommended to impress upon the penitent that in a -voluntary general confession he is not bound to accuse himself of each -particular sin; indeed this instruction is very useful, for a penitent -may, in the course of his confession, incur sacrilege through false shame -and an erroneous conscience by keeping back a sin which he imagines he is -obliged to tell in general confession. It is an invariable rule to avoid -too great haste or abruptness, otherwise the penitent is not put at his -ease; hence it not infrequently happens that a penitent accuses himself -of not having said all he wanted to say because the priest had been too -quick. - -“The greatest difficulty in general confessions,” says Blessed Leonard of -Port Maurice, “is the accusation of the number of sins.” To meet this the -following rules will be of service:— - -(_a_) If the confessor can get at the precise number of sins, he is -obliged to do so. - -(_b_) If the penitent cannot give the exact number, he must be asked to -give about the number, as near as possible. For this purpose the priest -will suggest numbers, and if the penitent choose the largest number, a -still larger one may be suggested to see if the penitent will accuse -himself also of that. - -(_c_) In the case of frequently recurring sins or habits of sin it is -necessary to find out whether they have been of daily, weekly, or monthly -occurrence. As to which of these periods will apply to the penitent -depends on his state as learnt from his last confession, and on the -nature of the sin itself. In mentioning the period the confessor should -always add a number, _e.g._ how often each week, three, four, or five -times? and as we said under (_b_), the whole time during which the sin or -habit of sin lasted must be found out. Finally it is useful in order to -ascertain the state of the penitent’s soul to find out whether there has -at any time been improvement and how long it lasted. - -(_d_) It is the _sententia communis_ and the teaching of St. Alphonsus -that by one and the same internal and external act a number of sins -may be committed, when, for instance, the object aimed at in the sin -includes several ends. A man, for instance, spreads a calumny about a -community,—by so doing he incurs as many sins as there are persons in the -community; this occurs usually in cases of enmity, scandal, etc. When, -therefore, there is a _diversitas objectorum totalium_, questions must be -put concerning the number of these objects. - -(_e_) In putting questions as to the number and species of the sin, care -must be taken not to bewilder the penitent with questions; if two or -three questions do not effect the desired result, no more need be put; -for St. Alphonsus teaches: The priest, who, after two or three questions, -fails to obtain any definite result, need not worry even if he cannot -come to any clear decision, _nam ex conscientiis implicatis et confusis -moraliter impossibile est majorem claritatem sperare_.[370] - -In conclusion, St. Leonard[371] remarks: If the confessor cannot get at -the exact or probable number, or even the more frequent repetitions, it -is in my opinion sufficient to find out the evil habit and the time of -its duration. By this means the confessor, so far as is possible, will -gain an idea of the state of his penitent and be able to form a judgment -about him. The greater or less frequency of repetition must not, however, -involve other consequences, as in the case of stealing. Here great care -must be used to find out the number of the sins and, in particular, the -value of the sum stolen. - -4. If the general confession is a voluntary one and the penitent -unprepared, it is not advisable to receive it, but to give the penitent -some days to prepare by examining his conscience, making acts of -contrition, and praying with more than usual fervor,—a method which will -insure greater fruit in the general confession. At the same time the -confessor might show the penitent that a general confession is not such -a difficult matter once it is undertaken courageously. If, however, the -penitent will be prevented from returning to the priest to whom he wishes -to make his general confession, the confession may be made at once. If -the general confession is one of necessity, there is all the more reason -for a good preparation. If, however, as frequently happens, there is -reason to fear that the penitent will not return, the confessor should -not send him away to make his preparation, but receive the confession at -once. - -As to the preparation required on the part of the penitent, especially -with regard to the examination of conscience, the confessor will be -careful not to exact a written accusation; such a process, as a rule, -only causes confusion and adds to the burdens of the confessor. If the -penitent is afraid of not being able to retain in his memory the results -of his examination of conscience, he may confine himself to a quiet -examination according to his powers, and the confessor will help him. -It may be permitted to the penitent to make notes of the more necessary -points. If the confession is voluntary, the confessor may take the notes -and read them for himself; if it be a general confession of necessity, -the penitent himself should read them. - -5. It is not _per se_ required that a penitent declare first the -sins committed since the last confession before repeating his former -confessions, nor is he obliged to make a distinction between the sins -committed since the last confession and those told in former confessions, -since the sin is the same whether confessed or not, and it makes no -difference that the former sins have been remitted because the sin is not -the object of confession in so far as it is habitual or leaves enduring -stain, but in so far as it has been actually committed.[372] Still it -is recommended to make the general confession precede the particular -confession of the sins committed since the last time, in order that the -priest may better ascertain the state of his penitent and assure himself -that there is no obstacle to his giving absolution. - -6. If the penitent is a well-instructed person and prepared, and is -really desirous of confessing, the priest may allow him first to make -his confession, and then he can put any questions that may be necessary, -for many persons feel the need to reveal what is on their mind and have -no peace until they do it. If, however, the penitent is persuaded that -confession consists in the priest putting questions and the penitent -answering, or if he wishes to make his confession in this manner, the -confessor may adopt this mode. With ignorant penitents it is recommended -and is indeed preferable. The confessor must then give the penitent time -and opportunity to mention anything that disturbs his peace of mind. - -7. If the confessor receives a general confession by way of question and -answer, he must adopt some method, going through the Ten Commandments, -the Commandments of the Church, the Seven Capital Sins, and the duties of -the state of life. - -For the sake of greater clearness and to avoid repetitions he might -indeed bring all sins under the Ten Commandments, those even which are -against the Commandments of the Church, the Seven Capital Sins, and other -varieties of sins, for the Decalogue, as the Roman Catechism teaches, is -the sum of all the Commandments. - -It is not, however, recommended to divide the confession into parts -answering to the different periods of one’s life, for such a practice -protracts the confession and involves many burdensome repetitions; still -in the case of the sixth Commandment it has its advantages, and questions -might be put as to sins committed before marriage, during the married -state, and after the death of the other party. Finally penitents who can -be questioned as to the _actus consummati_ should be asked according to -the different species of the act as well as on the _actus imperfecti_, -internal and external, with regard to the species. - -8. The priest should not omit to exhort the penitent to acknowledge -honestly his sins, and not to conceal from false shame anything which -he is obliged to tell.[373] The confessor should never give any sign of -astonishment or anger, no matter how numerous or atrocious the sins may -be. Let him show rather that he would not be surprised at hearing even -worse sins; let him come to the help of the penitent and even praise -him for having succeeded in confessing some one or other of the more -difficult sins. He may congratulate the penitent on winning a victory -over himself and the devil, and encourage him again to complete candor -and to make the confession as perfect as though it were to be the last of -his life. - - -32. Plan for making a General Confession. - -In this paragraph we present a plan of questions suitable for a -general confession and offer it especially for the guidance of younger -confessors. A few preliminary remarks, however, are necessary to secure -clearness. - -This plan need not contain all the sins which are treated of in moral -theology, but only such as may or do actually occur. Nevertheless, if -a confessor adhere to this schedule in his questions he may be quite -satisfied as to the integrity of the confession. - -Such a schedule should be as short as possible so that the confessor may -easily retain it in his head; hence the subdivisions, which he should -know from his moral theology, may be omitted. - -Since in a general confession venial sins ought not to be lost sight -of on account of their close connection with mortal sins and because -they are of great moment in determining the state of the penitent’s -soul, some of the more serious venial sins will find a place in the -catalogue. The confessor should know, in addition, how a sin in itself -and objectively venial may become mortal _per accidens_, and, on the -other hand, how a sin _grave ex genere suo_ may _per accidens_ become -venial.[374] - -Moreover, the priest should be careful not to examine all penitents on -every sin; a single question to which a negative answer is given will -show that a whole series of other questions may be omitted, and thus -he will only inquire after those sins which are likely to have been -committed. In putting his questions he should pay due regard both to the -physical and the spiritual condition of the penitent. From sins already -confessed an indication may easily be drawn as to the further inquiries -to be made, and while he omits many questions in the catalogue he may -deem it advisable to add others. If he discovers in the penitent a habit -of sin, he must inquire how long it lasted, when it began, and when it -was broken off. - -In all his questions he will observe the rules which hold on this -subject in every confession;[375] in particular he should bear in mind -the words of St. Leonard of Port Maurice: “Treat your penitent,” he -says, “as you would like to be treated yourself if you were in the same -painful situation; receive him in a friendly manner and with affectionate -kindness; encourage him to have confidence in you and to open his heart -to you. Refrain from harsh and blunt forms of address which serve rather -to irritate and embitter the penitent than to make him docile, obedient, -and pliant; and even when he is gross and ignorant, rebellious to all -advice and unwilling to fulfill his duties, do not, on that account, -treat him harshly or frighten him by a display of overbearing rigor. -Remember that in the confessional you must be a martyr of patience, -seeking always to win the penitent by the gentleness of your manners, -and that your duty is to incline rather to mildness than strictness. If -your words are to have the power of gentle persuasiveness, you must deal -with him in the spirit of our holy faith, and he will become humble and -convinced of the truth of your words.”[376] - -If the penitent is not already well known to the confessor, the latter -must by a few questions at the beginning of the confession inform himself -as to the age, position, calling, and other circumstances of his penitent -since such knowledge is necessary for the choice and arrangement of the -questions to be put. - -If in the course of the confession some question must be asked on some -rarely occurring and horrible sin, it should be pleaded by way of excuse -that a special advantage of a general confession is to secure a thorough -examination of conscience; and that this explains the unusual questions. - -If during the confession the discovery is made that the penitent lies -under some special obligation to avoid occasions of sin, to make -restitution or some such burden, he should be told of it and disposed -for it at once without waiting for the end of the confession for fear -of forgetting it or of giving a wrong judgment. All other directions, -however, in the way of advice or instruction should only be given at the -end for fear of annoying and repelling the penitent, and also in order to -avoid prolixity and repetition. If on general principles the absolution -ought to be put off and the penitent fails to show necessary dispositions -by signs of extraordinary sorrow and penitence, the confession should -be interrupted and not resumed till a decided improvement is seen. If -the penitent is judged to be in good dispositions, the confession may go -on after the promise of performing the necessary obligations has been -exacted, and the penitent should be reminded that if he is not sincerely -determined to stand by his promises, his trouble is all in vain and his -confession invalid, and that he is putting a seal on his condemnation by -a new offense against God. In longer confessions it is a good practice -even during the accusation (especially if some particularly grave sin -be mentioned) to remind the penitent of the greatness of his crimes, of -God’s goodness and grace by which he has been freed from all these great -sins, and then to encourage him to make a thoroughly good confession. -The penitent should also be reminded of all his bad confessions and -communions, of his neglect of his Easter duties, etc. - -If it be observed that the penitent is unusually disturbed, the cause -of it should be found out; if it be the avowal of some one sin, the -confessor should seek to obtain some hint about it and then push the -questions so that the penitent has only to answer yes or no; thus a -penitent may be consoled who is troubled because he has not sufficiently -examined himself, or cannot express his meaning correctly or has -forgotten what he wished to say. If no definite cause can be assigned, -the confessor should encourage him in a general way, telling him that the -confession is made to God, reminding him of the sacredness of the seal, -recalling to him that the priest is also but a man, subject to faults -and weaknesses; impressing upon him that the priest is ordained in order -to sympathize with others, to help them by his kindness and patience, -etc. Furthermore the way of beginning a general confession depends on -the circumstances of the penitent, and these must be inquired into at -once.[377] - -Having laid down these principles we enter into details:— - -I. _Preliminary Questions._ - -1. The penitent should be asked his age, his condition of life, and his -calling. - -2. Then he may be asked if his previous confessions have been valid -(the uninstructed should be assisted to form a correct judgment in the -matter), whether he has ever intentionally concealed a grave sin or a -notable circumstance in confession—given intentionally the wrong number -of his sins—examined his conscience carefully—tried to be really contrite -at least for all graver sins. Then he may be asked if he has always -faithfully performed the penance imposed. If the confessor discovers -any sacrilegious confessions, he must at once ascertain their number as -closely as possible, asking when the first bad confession was made, how -long the habit lasted, whether any of them were set right, how often the -penitent in this condition was accustomed to confess or communicate, -whether the Easter duties were neglected by reason of such confessions -and communions, whether in making such confessions and communions the -penitent was conscious of committing sacrilege; whether during that -period other Sacraments were received such as Confirmation, Matrimony, -Extreme Unction. If the penitent is persuaded that his confessions were -not sacrilegious, but some grounds of suspicion remain, the confessor -might on occasion of some accusation against the sixth Commandment, -make inquiry if the sin has been confessed before; or he might even ask -plainly, “You have never yet confessed this sin?” or, “You have never had -the courage to confess this sin?” - -II. _Sins against the Sixth and Ninth and the Other Commandments._[378] - -The confessor may next, in order to learn the general state of the -penitent, ask quite generally: “Were you ever led astray when young? at -what age? Did you indulge in any impure habits?” If the priest discovers -that the penitent is quite innocent of such sins, he should go on at -once to the other Commandments. He might perhaps ask further: “Were you -troubled with temptations against holy purity? Had you to listen to bad -conversation? Has any one ever taken liberties with you?” - -Sins of _luxuria consummata_ may be reduced to four species, _pollutio_, -_fornicatio_, _sodomia_, and _bestialitas_. These species have their -_actus imperfectos_, external, for instance _tactus_, and internal, -namely, _delectatio morosa_ and _desideria_, and in addition may have -three circumstances which change the nature of the sin, _adulterium_, -_incestus_, _sacrilegium_. The questions may be modeled on these four -species, and in the case of each sin the circumstances inquired into -which affect the species of the sin. Any compendium of Moral Theology -will suggest the necessary detail.[379] - -He may add: “Have you confessed all the sins you have committed against -holy purity? Does anything else disturb your mind with regard to -the sixth Commandment? Perhaps you can manage now to make a general -confession and to set in order your past life.” - - -_Against the First Commandment._ - -1. _Against Faith._ The confessor may ask whether the penitent has been -troubled by doubts against faith, or really doubted of the truths of -faith and suggested such doubts to others; whether he has denied any -truth of faith; whether he has acted or spoken against faith and before -how many persons; whether he has induced others to jeer or mock at faith; -has he spoken against religion and priests? has he listened to speeches -of others directed against faith and applauded or encouraged them? has -he read, sold, given or recommended to others the reading of books and -articles against faith? has he himself written for such publications? -has he frequented the society of men who mocked at religion or were -enemies of the faith? has he taken part in the religious services of -non-Catholics? has he joined any society which is hostile to religion? - -2. _Against Hope._ Has he doubted of his salvation or of God’s mercy? or -of the possibility of reforming? has he presumed on God’s mercy and put -off his conversion? - -3. _Against Charity._ Has he under stress of suffering hated God? -indulged feelings of indifference or resentment against God and holy -things? has he murmured against God in his sufferings and crosses? has he -banished God from his mind for long periods, neglected prayer? - -4. _Against the Reverence due to God._ Has he believed in superstitious -practices and employed them? has he used sacred objects without reverence -or for wrong purposes? has he received any of the Sacraments (Penance, -Holy Communion, Confirmation, Matrimony, Extreme Unction) unworthily? has -he desecrated holy places? has he injured persons consecrated to God? - - -_Against the Second Commandment._ - -Has he blasphemed? before children? Has he a habit of swearing? Has he -ever sworn to what was false, or to anything of which he was doubtful? in -a court of justice? to the injury of others? Has he been accustomed to -use rash oaths? - - -_Against the Third Commandment and the Commandments of the Church._ - -Has he by his own fault missed Mass on Sundays and holidays of -obligation? has he absented himself by his own fault from a considerable -portion of the services? Has his behavior during the services been -irreverent and scandalous? Has he done servile work without necessity -on Sundays or holidays of obligation? for how long? before others? or -has he required such work from others? Has he broken the law of fasting -without cause, or eaten meat on forbidden days without a dispensation? -Has he neglected his Easter duties? - - -_Against the Fourth Commandment._ - -Are the parents still living? Has he deliberately offended them by -frequent disobedience in matters of moment (_e.g._ frequenting certain -company against their will, staying late in public houses, by not giving -up bad companions, by neglecting religious duties or important business -at home)? Has he despised them in his heart? treated them with contempt -or given them great trouble? used harsh and contemptuous language to -them? wished them harm seriously? in the presence of others? Has he been -ashamed of them? neglected them in their necessities, treated them badly, -not carried out their last wishes? - -Servants, etc., should be asked whether they are faithful to their -master’s services: have they offended him by contempt or rudeness? -damaged his reputation with his neighbors? obeyed him in things -forbidden? Have they given scandal to others in the house, particularly -children? - -Masters, etc., should be asked whether they take due care of those under -them. Have they treated them unjustly? permitted evil practices? have -they kept their servants to the practice of their religious duties and -given them time for it? have they given their servants bad example or led -them into sin? - -Parents and Superiors should be asked if they take proper care of their -charges, or have squandered the family property. Do they correct and -punish the children with prudence and without anger? have they ever -wished evil to befall them? Do they watch over their children, keeping -them from bad companions, from sinful connections? Have they instructed -the children in their religious duties? have they sent their children -to irreligious schools? Have they given their children bad example? Have -they said or done anything sinful in presence of the children? - -Married people should be asked if they live together in peace? have their -quarrels given scandal to the children? - - -_Against the Fifth Commandment._ - -Has the penitent let himself be carried away by anger? broken out into -curses or wished grave damage to betide his neighbor? Has he rejoiced -in his neighbor’s misfortunes, entertained hatred, and inflicted harm -or intended to inflict it? Has he fostered enmities or refused to make -satisfaction to those whom he has injured? Has he lived in enmity with -others, with how many and for how long? Has he promised to make peace and -kept his promise? Has he ever seriously damaged his health or attempted -his life, or seriously thought of doing so? Has he been in the habit of -drinking, and been quite overcome by drink? Has this been the occasion -of quarrels or other sins? Is it a habit? Has he neglected his duties to -his wife and children in consequence, or ill treated them and destroyed -the peace of the family? (The confessor must not forget his studies on -_occasio_ and _consuetudo_ when dealing with cases of this sort.) - -It might also be well to ask if the penitent has been hard in dealing -with the poor in their grave needs and refused assistance. - - -_Against the Seventh and Tenth Commandments._ - -Has he entertained desires of stealing or of cheating his neighbor? Has -he actually committed theft, or cheated his neighbor in doing business? -Has he inflicted losses on any one? Has he paid his debts or put off for -a long time the paying of them? Has he made restitution and repaired the -losses inflicted? Is he at least willing to make reparation? If not, why -not? - - -_Against the Eighth Commandment._ - -Has he told lies to the grave injury of his neighbor? Has he ever given -false witness in a court of justice? Has he ever betrayed an important -secret? Has he ever injured the reputation of his neighbor by revealing -his faults without sufficient reason? to how many people was this -communication made? Has he ever falsely accused his neighbor of a fault? -to how many people? Did he restore the good name of the injured person? -and did he make good to him the losses resulting from the calumny? Has he -made rash judgments in things of great moment, and has he communicated -them to others? - -With respect to the Seven Capital Sins the confessor may ask:— - -Has the penitent behaved in a proud, overbearing manner towards others? -Has he devoted himself to inordinate amassing of wealth and coveted the -same? Has he omitted to give the alms which he ought? Has he helped -his neighbor when he ought? Has he indulged in envy of his neighbor on -account of his fortune, his wealth, his graces, his virtues, etc.? Has -he rejoiced in his neighbor’s misfortune, caused it or wished it? Has he -neglected his work and duties through idleness, and injured his neighbor -thereby? - -With regard to the nine ways of participating in the sin of another the -confessor might ask: Has he boasted of his sins? which? Has he advised -others to commit sin, or praised the sin of others, or commanded others -to sin? Has he failed to prevent the sins of others when he could do so -easily? - -After the priest has put all the questions which he thinks necessary he -should proceed to advise the penitent to reflect if there is anything -else disturbing his conscience about which no questions have been put; -and he should also remind him that this confession may be his last. He -may then try to move the penitent to contrition and to a firm purpose of -amendment by the consideration of some effectual motives presented in -a kind and fatherly manner. He might conclude with some words to this -purpose:— - -“Now thank God with all your heart for the great mercy He has shown you; -if death had overtaken you while you were burdened with so many grave -sins, you would certainly be at the present moment in hell, but now make -your mind quite easy and don’t worry any more about these sins; I am now -going to absolve you in God’s name from them all and your soul will be as -pure as when it came from the baptismal font; but beware of sinning again -and do not return God’s mercy with ingratitude.” The confessor will then -give the penitent some directions how to reform his life; he must point -out one or other of his sins that should be especially combated; and if -at the same time he shows an interest in the penitent and promises to -pray for him, the latter will go away consoled and encouraged to begin a -new life in the Lord.[380] - - - - -CHAPTER IV - -SATISFACTION - - -33. The Imposition of Penance by the Confessor. - -There is no question here of satisfaction in the wider sense which -includes the restitution to be made for the infliction of spiritual or -temporal loss. The subject which we propose to treat of is satisfaction -in its restricted meaning (_satisfactio_). It consists in the performance -of those works of penance which according to the Council of Trent[381] -are designed to preserve the new life acquired in the Sacrament, to -repair the languor which remains as a relic of past sin, and at the same -time to serve as a punishment for sin. As after the recovery from a -severe illness the body is weakened, so after a spiritual cure the soul -retains a weakness and an inclination to fall back into sin; moreover, as -the Church teaches, the remission of guilt and eternal punishment does -not always include the remission of all temporal punishment. The penance -is imposed with a view of removing the last traces of weakness and of -paying the debt of temporal punishment; under its first aspect it is -called _pœna medicinalis_, under the second, _pœna vindicativa_. - -This satisfaction is partly sacramental, partly extra-sacramental. The -sacramental portion consists in the works which the confessor imposes -in virtue of the power of the keys; the extra-sacramental in the works -freely undertaken by the penitent, as well as in the patient submission -to the sufferings and crosses of this life. We are dealing at present -with sacramental satisfaction, which is an integral part of the -Sacrament, as it is immediately connected with the power of the keys, and -which is more efficacious as atonement in consequence of the application -of the merits of Jesus Christ.[382] - -Both confessor and penitent have obligations with respect to this -satisfaction. We will first consider the duty of the confessor in the -matter. - -I. The confessor is bound to impose some penance on every penitent who -receives absolution and who is capable of doing penance. - -The tradition of the Fathers, the constant practice of the Church, and -the express declaration of the Council of Trent agree in maintaining -that the penance is an integral part of the Sacrament. The text of the -Council[383] runs as follows: “It is therefore the duty of priests to -impose, as reason and prudence may suggest, wholesome and appropriate -penances with due regard for the nature of the sin and the strength of -the penitent, lest, by being indulgent towards sin and treating the -penitent too tenderly in giving the very lightest penance for grave sins -they become themselves participators in the sins of others. Let them -keep in view that the satisfaction which they impose is designed not -only to preserve the new life and to heal infirmity but also to punish -and destroy past sin; for the power of the keys was given not only to -loose but also to bind.” The confessor must impose a penance not only -when mortal sins, but also when venial sins, or mortal sins already -absolved, are confessed. As often as absolution is given a penance must -be imposed—(_a_) because the penance belongs to the integrity of the -Sacrament, (_b_) that the penitent may not be deprived of the sacramental -fruits of satisfaction, (_c_) that justice and right may be done. - -II. This duty of imposing a penance urges _per se sub peccato mortali_ -when there is question of mortal sins not yet remitted by the power of -the keys; where the matter is only venial sin or _materia libera_, the -obligation is binding only _sub levi_. - -Hence a priest sins mortally by failing to give a penance to a penitent -who confesses sins not yet directly forgiven; in the case of a penitent -who presents only _materia libera_, the confessor sins venially -(_probabiliter_) _ob parvitatem materiæ_. - -III. At times there may be no sin in failing to give a penance. This can -happen:— - -(_a_) When absolution is given to a penitent _in articulo mortis_, -especially if he be unconscious. St. Alphonsus, however, recommends, -and laudably, that even a dying penitent should receive some light and -easy penance, if there be time to do it and the penitent can perform it, -_e.g._ to kiss the crucifix, to pronounce the names of Jesus and Mary, -or to make at least an internal act of love in order that the Sacrament -may have its due complement and the dying person gain some fruit from the -sacramental satisfaction. The confessor might himself help the penitent -by reciting the prayers for him, holding the crucifix to him; this will -also be a means of comforting and consoling the dying man.[384] - -(_b_) If a perplexed or scrupulous penitent returns frequently to confess -sins that he had forgotten, and if nearly every time there is reason -for giving absolution, the confessor satisfies his obligations by again -imposing the previous penance without adding another or by prescribing it -as sufficient for _all_ the sins mentioned in confession.[385] - -IV. The confessor is bound to give a suitable and wholesome penance, -punitive as well as medicinal, proportioned to the number and gravity -of the sins and adapted to the individual penitent. This is the express -teaching of the Council of Trent.[386] - -The choice of the penance is not left to the caprice of the confessor. -Special directions are laid down for him by the Church, and these he -must follow _sub gravi_. The Council draws a distinction between _pœnæ -vindicativæ_ and _medicinales_, and the confessor has to inflict these in -his capacity of judge and healer of souls. But to avoid misunderstanding -it must be borne in mind that the whole power and authority of inflicting -penances or of binding the faithful is vested in the confessor as judge. - -As physician the great object of the confessor must be to heal the wounds -of the soul and to provide against relapses, but here he can only insist -on the necessary means, and that simply because he expresses what the -penitent is bound to do already by natural and divine law. - -The case is quite different when we regard the confessor as judge; in -this capacity he has power to punish and bind the penitent. In the choice -of the works of penance which he imposes in his quality of judge, he may -use his knowledge as physician, and it is a course to be commended if -he imposes such penances as will help to salvation, heal the spiritual -maladies and safeguard the penitent against relapses.[387] In this way -the confessor falls in with the prescriptions of the Council by giving -penances which are in part punitive, in part medicinal; they are punitive -if in any way they oppose our sensuality or our pride; and they are -medicinal when they are of a kind to cut away the causes and roots of -sin, to mortify our irregular inclinations, to strengthen the will, to -remove occasions of sin, to save us from relapses and to confirm us in -virtue. In accordance with the maxim “_contraria contrariis curantur_” -those good works are generally prescribed which are directly contrary -to the sins committed, hence the prescription of the Roman ritual to -impose as penances almsgiving upon the avaricious, fasting or other -bodily mortifications upon the sensual, humiliating works upon the proud, -exercises of devotion for the tepid.[388] - -All works of satisfaction or penance may be reduced to the three heads of -Prayer, Fasting, Almsdeeds. Under prayer, for instance, may be grouped -all works of piety and devotion, particularly everything that may be -understood as related to the knowledge of God; more frequent prayer, -daily examination of conscience, daily Mass, meditation (especially on -the sufferings and death of Jesus Christ and the four last things), -spiritual reading, more frequent confession, frequent repetition of acts -of the theological virtues, thought of the presence of God, devotion to -our Blessed Lady—all of which are irksome and contrary to our corrupt -nature and partake in consequence of the nature of a penance. Under -the head of fasting may be included not only abstention from meat and -drink, but every kind of mortification, hence the denial of even lawful -pleasures, early rising in the morning, the cutting down of little -comforts, kneeling at prayer, etc. And under almsgiving we may comprise -all works of corporal and spiritual mercy. - -These three classes of good works correspond to the three roots of -sin,—the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes and -the pride of life; for fasting is directed against the concupiscence of -the flesh, almsgiving against the concupiscence of the eyes, and prayer -against the pride of life.[389] - -Even purely interior acts (_opera mere interiora_) may be imposed: some -theologians contradict this statement on the plea that human authority -is not empowered to enjoin such acts, but here the question is not about -human authority but of divine power given to men.[390] - -The confessor may also give as a penance works to be done for the souls -in purgatory, for though this satisfaction _in se_ is directed to the -benefit of the holy souls it is a good work, and by its union with the -Sacrament has power _ex opere operato_ to lessen the temporal debt of the -penitent.[391] - -Indeed the confessor may impose as penance some good work which has -already been started, not precisely as a good work but so far as it -expresses under the new circumstances obedience, humility, and the denial -of one’s own will. It may be observed, however, what St. Alphonsus -remarks, that it is rarely advisable to impose such a penance even with -another good work attached. - -A work which one is already bound to do may be imposed as a penance -since it may be _ex natura sua_ satisfactory and is capable of acquiring -a greater satisfactory effect; but such work can be considered as a -sacramental penance only when the confessor has expressly declared so, -nor is it advisable that such works should be so imposed, unless indeed -there exist some urgent reason for it on the part of the penitent,—his -weakness, for example. If such work (_aliunde debitum_) be imposed, its -omission is a double sin.[392] - -A penance may be given to be performed in case of a relapse, according -to the opinion of eminent theologians such as Suarez, Laymann, and -St. Alphonsus Liguori; so that if the condition be fulfilled, _i.e._ -if the sinner relapse, the penance must be carried out. A confessor -giving only a penance of that kind would be very far from satisfying his -obligations.[393] - -A public penance, _i.e._, a penance to be done before others, of such -a nature that bystanders could infer that the penitent had incurred -grave sin, cannot be imposed by a confessor for secret sins, for such -an infliction would be an indirect violation of the seal, and besides -it is expressly forbidden by the Roman Ritual. For public sins a public -penance may be inflicted, and the Council of Trent insists upon it as a -way of repairing scandal. Here there is no breach of the seal, for it is -question of notorious sin. The confessor should only insist, however, on -a public penance when he is convinced of the necessity of that step for -repairing scandal. If the confessor feels called upon to impose such a -penance, and the penitent declines to do it, absolution cannot be given. -In general, any scandal given may be set right by an evident reform in -the life of the penitent, if, for instance, he approach the Sacraments -more frequently, visit the Church, hear Mass, join a sodality, etc.[394] -Moreover, not everything done in the presence of others, which the -penitent could easily undertake of his own free will, need be regarded -as a public penance. It need be no matter of anxiety to the confessor if -the penitent reveals to others that such or such a practice is a penance -imposed by the priest. - -Finally the confessor must carefully avoid enjoining any practices which -are needlessly repugnant to the penitent and which there is reason to -fear he will shirk. For instance, telling the children to beg pardon -of their parents, or the penitent to pray in the Church with the arms -stretched out in the form of a cross. Lehmkuhl justly remarks that such -penances are a clear sign of a confessor’s want of prudence and may give -occasion to many sacrileges.[395] - -There is left a large choice for the confessor in the matter of penances. -He is bound, however, by the prescriptions of the Council of Trent to -impose works of penance _quantum spiritus et prudentia suggesserit_, but -also to consider the _qualitas criminum_ and the _facultas pœnitentium_. -Thus he must bear in mind the gravity of the sin and the condition of -the penitent; in this way a prudent mean may be kept between too great -mildness and excessive strictness. The priest should avoid being too -easy, for fear, as the Council says, of participating in the guilt of -others and sacrificing God’s cause to an indulgence which may be easily -attributed to human respect or other unworthy causes. To avoid this -danger the Roman Catechism recommends the study of the old penitential -canons where each sin has its own fixed punishment. It is true that the -discipline has been altered since then but its spirit remains, and the -zeal of the priest for the cause of his Lord should be no less fervent -than that of the first ages of the Church. On the other hand, however, -undue rigor is to be avoided. The strictness should not be founded on -self-love, prejudice, ostentation, nor on a naturally stern temperament, -nor on want of common sense, etc., otherwise the penitent may be driven -to despair, and souls lost instead of being won. The tribunal of penance -should resemble as closely as possible God’s own tribunal, and as God is -not only just but merciful, so the priest should never separate these two -attributes. It is often a good thing to let the penitent know that he -has deserved a severer penance, but that the ever gentle spirit of the -Church imposes only a light one, leaving the penitent free to undertake -other works of satisfaction if his zeal prompt him thereto. It is matter -of experience that penances extended over too long a period do not always -succeed in their object, for since they are frequently not performed they -may easily prove a snare to the penitent instead of being a help. If the -priest is in doubt whether to adopt a strict or a mild line of conduct -in any particular case, he may recall the beautiful words of St. John -Chrysostom:[396] “Is it not easier to render an account of excessive -mercy than of excessive severity? Can the steward be close-handed where -the master is so liberal? If, then, God is so good why should His -minister be severe? If your object is to pose as a saint, be austere -towards yourself and mild towards others.”[397] - -V. For mortal sin a _pœnitentia simpliciter gravis_ should be given, for -venial sin a _pœnitentia levis_; and a confessor would sin gravely if -without sufficient reason he should impose for mortal sin a _pœnitentia -in se levis_, for he would neither punish the sin nor give his penitent -the means of salvation. In the case of sins doubtfully mortal, whether -considered subjectively or objectively, he is not obliged to impose a -severe penance.[398] - -Whatever in the present discipline of the Church is imposed _sub gravi_ -is considered as _materia gravis_ for a penance. The following, for -instance: five decades of the Rosary, the Litany of the Saints with the -accompanying prayers; while as _materia levis_ are reckoned: one psalm -(of moderate length), the Litany of Loretto, five Our Fathers and five -Hail Mary’s, etc. Any prayer corresponding in length to a little hour -of the Breviary counts for _materia levis_, for though the omission of -one of these little hours is a mortal sin, this is not in virtue of the -prayer itself, but because the recitation of the Breviary is a public and -official act and done in the name of the whole Church. - -If the penitent has committed many mortal sins, the penance can hardly -be increased in a strict proportion. In this case the imposition of a -penance corresponding to one mortal sin is not sufficient unless special -reasons exist for not giving a heavier penalty. - -VI. There are many reasons for which a confessor may be justified in -giving a smaller penance than is due to the number and gravity of the -sins, and this diminution may be absolute as well as relative. For -instance:— - -1. A penitent is prostrated by a severe illness and unable to perform a -longer penance. The priest should exhort him to offer up his sufferings -as satisfaction for his sins, and if the sins have been very grave the -priest ought to be willing to take upon himself part of the penance.[399] - -2. When there is extraordinary sorrow. This _in se_ is sufficient reason -for diminishing the penance, for the greater such sorrow the greater is -the remission of temporal punishment. On the other hand, such a penitent -is willing to accept a very severe penance; and if we read of certain -holy men imposing only a slight penance, we must remember that they -either made up for it in their own person or induced the penitent to -practice of his own free will some austerity. - -3. A confessor may see that his penitent is very weak spiritually and not -willing to carry out a severe penance, although he may have no doubt as -to his contrition and resolution of amendment. Such a case may call for -the expedient of adding to a small penance some other practices which the -penitent must fulfill on other accounts, _e.g._ to hear Mass on Sunday, -etc., and the confessor would do well to choose such practices as the -penitent has been in the habit of neglecting.[400] - -We will now mention the occasions in which a confessor may impose a -penance in accordance, indeed, with the Church’s precepts as to _materia -gravis_, but less than what seems proportioned to the number and gravity -of the sins:— - -1. When there is great, though not quite extraordinary, contrition. - -2. On the occasion of a jubilee or some other plenary indulgence; but to -refrain for such a reason from giving any penance at all would be quite -wrong and against the distinct declaration of Benedict XIV, Constit. -“_Inter præteritos._” - -3. When there is fear that the penitent, through spiritual weakness, may -fail to perform the penance which would correspond to his sins. - -4. When there is hope that a smaller penance will induce the penitent -to receive the Sacraments oftener and with greater spiritual benefit; -indeed, this seems to be the chief reason why the Church has tempered in -our days the severity of her penitential discipline. - -5. When the confessor intends to do the penance which he believes he -dare not lay upon his penitent, as, for instance, when St. Francis -Xavier disciplined himself to satisfy for the sins of his penitents. The -sufficiency of this vicarious penance rests on the Catholic doctrine -of the Communion of Saints. On the other hand, the proposition that a -penitent can, of his own authority, appoint another to do the penance for -him has been condemned by Alexander VII. - -6. When there is hope of inducing the penitent by means of a smaller -penance to do other good works on his own account. - -7. When the penitent has already done penance and is in the habit of -practicing good works. - -It is, however, always recommended to tell the penitent that the penance -is very much less than he deserves.[401] - -VII. For venial sins or _materia libera_ the confessor may impose a heavy -or a light penance but not _sub gravi_; but if he imposes a light penance -for mortal sin such penance may bind only _sub levi_, but the very fact -of imposing a heavy penance for mortal sin means that the obligation -is _sub gravi_, unless he expressly declares his intention of not so -binding.[402] - -In treating the question of the obligation on the penitent of carrying -out the penance and the intention of the confessor in the matter, we -must keep in mind the parallel instances of the binding force of laws. -The legislator cannot bind the conscience _sub gravi_ in a matter which, -regarded objectively, is of small moment; while grave matter when -prescribed _ex gravi causa_ induces a strict obligation _per se_, though -the legislator may have the power only to enforce it under pain of venial -sin. This is the teaching of St. Alphonsus with the _sententia communior -et valde probabilis_ as regards the obligation of laws and the lawgiver. -When, then, the confessor imposes a penance, he is at the same time -passing a law which must be obeyed. - -Many theologians deny that the confessor can impose for mortal sin a -heavy penance only _sub levi_ because he is simply God’s minister, -and in consequence must act in accordance with the institution of the -Sacrament without attempting to diminish its rigor.[403] On the other -hand, the _sententia communior et valde probabilis_ gives the confessor -the right because, though he is the vicar of God, he is appointed by -Christ as actual judge and legislator who, in virtue of his powers, -looses by forgiving sin and binds by imposing penance; so that the -obligation of the penance is not a consequence of the Sacrament but of -the precept of the confessor.[404] Still the confessor would not be -justified in practically disregarding the first opinion, for, as St. -Alphonsus teaches, he must obey the Council of Trent in its decision -that ordinarily a _grave opus_ is to be imposed _sub gravi_ even though -the penance be slight in comparison to the number and heinousness of the -sins. The opinion may, however, be used in this way. The confessor, after -giving a severe penance _sub gravi_, may add a still more severe penance -_sub levi_; if this latter be fulfilled by the penitent, he makes full -sacramental satisfaction; if he neglect it, there is at least no great -responsibility. St. Alphonsus notices that this is a very good way of -dealing with weak penitents, for all good works have a satisfactory power -and a weak penitent is thus not exposed to occasion of grave sin; at the -same time what Aertnys observes is also to be borne in mind, namely, that -in our days, owing to the decay of fervor, such a method is seldom to be -recommended.[405] - -The confessor may give the penance immediately after the absolution, -but it is more correct to give it beforehand, as that is the custom in -the Church, and the proper order of justice requires that the penitent -should show himself disposed to undertake his penance before absolution -is given.[406] - -In concluding this article we give a list of penances which may be -imposed according to the principles already given:— - -Attendance at holy Mass, the Rosary or the Stations of the Cross (these -should not be given to people who are not accustomed to the devotions, -and in regard to the Stations of the Cross, the embarrassment that many -experience in performing public devotions should be taken into account), -the Seven Penitential Psalms, the Litany of the Saints, the Litany of -Loretto or some other litany, the Prayer to the Five Wounds, to commend -one’s self to the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary morning and evening -while reciting one Our Father and one Hail Mary, to say every day a -certain number (not too many) of short prayers—_e.g._ to say the Hail -Mary three times morning and evening (St. Alphonsus used to give his -penitents this penance, adding the invocation “My Mother, preserve me -from offending God this day,” and when the penitents were not accustomed -to this form of devotion he used at least to recommend it), to examine -the conscience daily and to excite acts of contrition, to read some -short extracts from a pious book approved by the confessor, such as the -Imitation of Christ, to make a meditation, or after reading carefully -some subject such as the Four Last Things or the Sufferings of Christ to -reflect upon it for a short while, to devote a short time every day to -eliciting acts of Faith, Hope, and Charity, to hear sermons, to receive -the Sacraments on certain fixed days, to renew the resolutions made at -the last confession, not thoughtlessly but with all earnestness, and to -hold to them steadfastly now in honor of the Sacred Heart, at another -time in honor of the Blessed Virgin, and again in honor of some one -among the saints with a petition for their help, to make some fervent -ejaculation every time the clock strikes (when the confessor gives this -or similar practices as a penance he might remind the penitents to make -up the number of times missed if by chance they forget it). - -Fasting (though this should be very seldom given and then only with great -caution) or an occasional mortification at meal time; to refrain from -some particular dish, or from wine or other intoxicating liquor, either -for a fixed period or a certain number of times; still more prudence -is to be exercised in imposing other bodily mortifications—indeed they -should be permitted only with great reserve—praying with arms extended -(unseen, of course, by others), to pray on bended knees, to rise at a -fixed hour in the morning, to avoid unprofitable conversation, etc., to -give alms, to visit the poor and the sick, to help them, and to do lowly -offices for them, etc.[407] - -Which of these penances should be imposed is a matter depending on the -sins and disposition of the penitent. The choice of penance is an affair -of considerable moment with regard to the well-being and reformation of -the penitent, and it is a neglect of duty to impose on every occasion -without distinction the recital of a prayer. - -In addition, the confessor should observe the wholesome advice which has -been given by men distinguished alike for sanctity and learning. - -St. Antoninus writes:[408] “The priest should give such a penance as he -thinks the penitent will perform. If a man, after accusing himself of -grave sin, declares that he cannot do a severe penance, the confessor -must reason with him, pointing out the gravity of his offenses and the -severe punishments he has deserved, and after that give him some penance -such as he can be persuaded to undertake; and if the priest does not -obtain perfect success, he may rejoice, at least, that he has rescued -a soul from hell if not from purgatory; hence, on no account, should he -send a penitent away in despair or discouragement. It is better to give -him a _Pater Noster_ or some other slight penance and make the good works -which he does or his sufferings supply for the rest. A man who shows real -sorrow and is ready to do all that he ought, but declares that a heavy -penance is beyond him should never, no matter how he may have sinned, be -sent away without absolution lest he fall into despair.” - -St. Charles Borromeo recommends the confessor to impose such penance as -he thinks the man will do; hence he may occasionally ask the penitent -if he can perform the penance given; and if the latter expresses his -doubts about fulfilling it, the confessor may change the penance or make -it easier.[409] The saint also appeals to St. Thomas Aquinas, who warns -the confessor not to burden his penitents with heavy penances,[410] for -as a smouldering fire may be put out by heaping too much fuel upon it, -so the feeble contrition which has only just been excited in the heart -of the penitent may be crushed out by a severe penance, and despair may -be the consequence. Hence it is better to point out to the penitent what -a big penance he deserves and to give him a smaller one such as he will -be ready to fulfill, by which he will accustom himself to the bigger one -which the confessor would not have ventured to impose. - -Finally St. Alphonsus[411] may be heard on this subject: “How imprudent -is the conduct of those priests who give penances which they foresee -will never be done. Oh, how many ignorant confessors there are who -thoughtlessly absolve penitents living in the proximate occasion of sin -or in bad dispositions; and yet such confessors are persuaded for some -incomprehensible reason that they are ministering to the health of souls -by imposing heavy penances. The result is that the penitents, having -agreed to the penance for fear of being refused absolution, relapse -again, after a short time, because they were never taught to adopt any -safeguards against sin, omit the penance, and, terrified by its severity, -keep away from the Sacrament so as to spend a great portion of their -lives in sin.” - - -34. The Acceptance and Performance of the Penance by the Penitent. - -I. The penitent is obliged to accept willingly the penance imposed and to -perform it exactly; for as the duty devolves on the priest of securing -the integrity of the Sacrament by giving the penance, the penitent is, in -turn, bound to accept it and carry it out. - -The duty is of strict obligation _ex genere suo_, so that the penitent -would sin gravely by omitting a grave penance imposed _sub gravi_, or a -considerable portion of it. We have already seen what is to be considered -grave in this matter.[412] - -II. The penitent is obliged to perform the penance enjoined by the -confessor, but no limit of time is determined within which it must be -done. An unreasonably long delay, however, might easily become a grave -matter. - -To determine how far delay may involve grave sin we must take into -consideration whether time is a substantial element in the penance. For -example: (1) whether the confessor has fixed a day and of set purpose, -for the appointing of a day does not always imply a fixed intention on -the confessor’s part; indeed, generally speaking, it is not a mortal sin -to postpone a fast appointed for Friday to the following Saturday.[413] -(2) If some work has been prescribed to be done within a given time after -the confession, and it is the intention of the confessor that there -should be no interruption, its omission, even for one day if it amount -to a _materia gravis_, may be a mortal sin, unless the confessor has -given leave to substitute one day for another or where his consent to -a change may be fairly presumed. (3) If the postponement of the work -imposed reduced the penance to little or nothing, as, for example, if the -confessor enjoined on the penitent to approach the Sacraments in a week -and the penitent put it off for a month; to delay the weekly communion -for a day or two or the monthly communion to a period not longer than -a week would, apart from other considerations, amount only to a venial -sin.[414] - -There is no mortal sin in putting off the penance even for a considerable -time as long as the time fixed for its performance is not a substantial -part of the work imposed. A delay of six months would, according to -St. Alphonsus, certainly constitute a mortal sin; the great factor in -determining the gravity of the offense will be the danger of forgetting -the penance or of being unable to carry it out.[415] - -If a penance is enjoined which has to be performed daily for a -considerable period, and which is also a work prescribed by the -commandments of the Church, it may be presumed that the confessor never -intended a double performance of the work unless he expressly declared -such an intention. On the other hand, if it is enjoined once or twice -or even oftener without indicating any special day, the penitent cannot -satisfy the double obligation by the one act; for example, a man who -is told to hear Mass three times cannot satisfy by making one of the -Masses the Sunday Mass of obligation, unless this be expressly granted -by his confessor, nor would he fulfill his duty by hearing three Masses -simultaneously, because such would never be the intention of the -confessor. If, however, a man is enjoined to hear Mass daily, he is not -obliged to hear two Masses on Sundays.[416] If the penitent has certain -prayers to say for his penance, they may be recited during a Mass of -obligation, for the two duties may be fulfilled at the same time unless -the confessor rule it otherwise. It is a useful and excellent practice to -remind the penitent that he may say his penance during the time of Mass, -especially if his circumstances be such that he can hardly command other -available time.[417] - -If the penitent fails to perform his penance within the prescribed time, -he is not on that account freed from the obligation of accomplishing it; -for the confessor intends first the penance, then the time-limit, and the -latter is fixed _non ad finiendam sed ad urgendam obligationem_. - -Even when the penitent has fallen into mortal sin, he may still perform -his penance and so satisfy his obligation in that matter, but he does -not obtain the fruits of satisfaction. When the penitent does what he -has been told he fulfills substantially his duty; the manner or mode of -fulfilling it (namely, in the state of grace) does not come under the -command. By the fact, however, of not being in the state of grace his -works cannot be _de condigno_ satisfactory, and so cannot merit for him -the release from temporal punishment. It is certain that no new mortal -sin is contracted by a penitent who performs his penance in a state of -mortal sin, though, according to a probable opinion supported by St. -Alphonsus,[418] there is a venial sin in consequence of the hindrance -offered to the effects of the Sacrament. Some theologians[419] also teach -that when such a penitent regains the state of grace (_obice remoto_) the -penance effects satisfaction and remission of temporal punishment _ex -opere operato_, and this doctrine is _valde probabilis_. - -In addition to the sacramental satisfaction the penitent should -undertake some penance on his own initiative, especially where that -enjoined by the priest is small with regard to the gravity of the sin. -This extra-sacramental satisfaction will be supplemented by the prayer -in which the Church, in virtue of the merits of Christ and His saints, -confers on extra-sacramental works the power of reducing the debt of -temporal punishment. - - -35. The Commutation of the Penance. - -If, for some good reason, the penitent discovers that the penance is too -severe, he should mention the circumstance to his confessor that he may -change it; and if the penitent has undertaken a penance which later on -presents great difficulties in its fulfilment, he should consult some -priest equipped with the necessary powers for a commutation. - -But there should be a good reason, and not mere weakness, sensuality, -or laziness, which usually counsel avoidance of all severity and -self-conquest or sacrifice for God and the good of one’s soul. Self-love -and self-indulgence easily persuade us that what is difficult is -impossible, and we have seen that the very aim of penance is to punish -in the strict sense of the word; it ought to be both a chastisement and -a means of salvation. If the penitent shrinks from the penance and asks -for a mitigation, the confessor should in all kindness consider the -motive and act accordingly. If he can find no sufficient reason but only -a pretext of self-love and self-indulgence, he must tell the penitent -so and endeavor to persuade him to undertake the penance, otherwise -absolution cannot be given. When the petition is reasonable the penance -may be changed. - -A reasonable penance cannot be declined by the penitent without his -incurring thereby grave sin, for when once he has submitted his case to -the confessor he ought to abide by the latter’s decision, since the law -of God requires that the confessor should inflict a suitable penance and -that the penitent should accept it.[420] There is, however, a great -difference between refusing a penance and asking for its mitigation. -Under no circumstances may the penitent himself change the penance, even -for a work objectively more perfect, for the sacramental satisfaction -must be imposed by the minister of the Sacrament, and the penitent has no -right to annul or commute on his own authority the sentence pronounced by -the judge. - -If, now, the penitent is convinced on sufficient grounds that the penance -is exorbitant and he cannot persuade the confessor to make it easier, -he is at liberty to go away without absolution and present his case to -another priest, repeating, of course, his confession.[421] If, however, -his grounds are defective, he may easily incur a venial sin by such -procedure.[422] A really well-disposed penitent, therefore, will hardly -incur grave sin if, conscious of his weakness, he objects to a penance as -too hard and seeks absolution from another confessor, so long, of course, -as he does not seek out one who is known for his criminal laxity. - -If a man after absolution finds the penance too difficult of performance, -he may get it changed either by the same priest or by another. - -This commutation can be made only in confession, in virtue of the -absolution which has been already given or is to be given, for it is only -the absolution by which an effect _ex opere operato_ can be produced -in the penitent, and it is the absolution which gives the satisfactory -efficacy _ex opere operato_ to the penance which has been or is to be -imposed.[423] - -Hence the confessor immediately after the absolution can certainly change -the penance because, morally speaking, the judicial action is still in -progress. Though some theologians extend this power (of changing the -penance in virtue of the absolution imparted) over two or three days, -the preference is to be given to the opinion of St. Alphonsus,[424] who -restricts the period to the time immediately after the absolution, for, -as a matter of fact, the _judicium sacramentale_ is then completed. If, -however, the penitent and confessor are of the other opinion, which is -not devoid of extrinsic probability, they may act upon it, since it is -not a question of an essential part of the Sacrament; if there were -question of the essence of the Sacrament, an injury would be done both to -the Sacrament and its recipient by following a doubtful opinion.[425] - -Any other priest can commute the penance only in virtue of a new -absolution which he himself gives. - -The question now arises whether the penitent ought to repeat his -confession with a view to obtain another penance. If he applies to the -same confessor, he is certainly not obliged if the latter retain some -notion _in confuso_ of the penitent’s conscience; if the penitent goes -to another priest, according to an opinion considered as probable by -Laymann, Lugo, Sporer, he is exempt from the obligation of repeating -his confession, because it is not upon the sins that judgment is to be -passed, but upon the reasons for changing the penance, whether, for -instance, the penitent is unable to perform it or whether the penance -itself is too severe. Moreover, the confessor may follow this method -with a safe conscience, though it is more advisable for him to adopt the -practice advocated by other theologians, notably Suarez, Lugo, Laymann, -Sporer, and Lacroix, of getting the penitent to give at least an outline -of the previous confession in order to have an approximate knowledge of -the state of his soul.[426] - -The view held by many theologians is also probable, that when a confessor -sees that a penance has not been performed by a penitent, and that no -likelihood exists of its performance, he may commute it for something -else, though unasked by the penitent. - -When, however, a penance has been inflicted for some reserved sin by -a constitutional Superior, no inferior may commute it, for authority -in such cases is withdrawn from the inferior tribunal. Exception is -made where the penitent would have great difficulty in approaching -the Superior and when urgent reasons call for a commutation. This is -the teaching of St. Alphonsus and some other theologians against the -supporters of the stricter doctrine.[427] - -There still remains the question what the penitent is to do when he -has forgotten the penance. According to the common, and perhaps also -the more probable, opinion, he is not obliged to repeat the confession -of even the graver sins, and the duty of performing the penance simply -lapses (_ad impossibile enim nemo tenetur_); nor is there any obligation -to confess again sins already directly remitted with a view of securing -the integrity of the Sacrament, for that would be a grievous burden. -If, however, the penitent thinks that the confessor remembers the -penance, and he can reach him without difficulty, he is, as theologians -rightly affirm, obliged to ask his confessor to give him his penance, -for there is no grave impediment in this case to the performance of the -penance.[428] - -In this connection we must note that: 1. When a man forgets the penance -enjoined, and has a conviction that the penance was a certain work, he -is bound to do that work, for whoever is certain about his obligation is -obliged to do what is probably of obligation if he cannot fulfill what is -certainly of obligation.[429] - -2. When a penitent confesses that he has not performed the penance but -has said the prayers prescribed out of devotion without thinking of the -penance, he has satisfied his obligation, and the confessor cannot insist -on the performance of another penance; for a man is supposed to do first -that to which he is bound.[430] - - - - -PART III - -_THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT_ - - -In the preceding chapters which dealt with the _actus pœnitentis_, we -have already had occasion to consider the office of the minister of the -Sacrament. The functions of the confessor consist mainly in absolving -according to the intention of Christ. In treating of this important -and difficult subject, we shall follow the most approved theologians, -distinguished alike for learning and sanctity, so as to avoid on the -one hand an extensive mildness and on the other a severity fatal to the -salvation of souls. - - - - -SECTION I - -THE POWERS OF THE CONFESSOR - - -36. Orders, Jurisdiction, Approbation. - -1. The proper minister of the Sacrament of Penance is the priest. Penance -being a Sacrament, it is self-evident on Catholic principles that -its minister must have the sacerdotal character, the power of Orders -(_potestas ordinis_). This power springs from the priestly character -and consists in the capacity of _valide_ performing the sacred rites -instituted by Christ, so that they are an efficacious means of grace.[431] - -The Sacrament of Penance is, moreover, in its dispensation essentially -judicial. The minister of the Sacrament is judge over the soul; hence he -must have in addition to Holy Orders the power of spiritual jurisdiction -(_potestas jurisdictionis_). - -Thus for a valid absolution there are required both _potestas ordinis_ -and _potestas jurisdictionis_. - -Jurisdiction in general is public authority in its completest sense, and -thus includes the power of directing subjects. In its more restricted -sense it is the power of judging right and wrong and of pronouncing -sentence. It answers perfectly to the power exercised in the Sacrament of -Penance (_in foro interno_). Hence jurisdiction _in foro sacramentali_ is -the power by which a priest can pronounce sentence on those subject to -him by remitting or retaining sins. - -What, then, is the relation existing between the _potestas ordinis_ -and the _potestas jurisdictionis_? The priestly character conveys no -jurisdiction with it; it may exist without any jurisdiction.[432] - -2. It is a peculiarity of this _potestas ordinis_ that the exercise of -it without the Church’s commission is not illicit only, but invalid. -Hence, while in the other Sacraments jurisdiction is extrinsic to the -exercise of power and only regulates it, in the Sacrament of Penance -the jurisdiction is an intrinsic condition, because the exercise of the -power of this Sacrament is essentially a judicial act and involving -jurisdiction. - -3. Jurisdiction, though not conveyed by Orders, is derived from God, but -through the hands of the Church, _i.e._ by delegation from those who are -invested with that jurisdiction. Hence all priests besides the Pope, who -receives it immediately from God, owe their jurisdiction to the Church; -thus priests receive their jurisdiction from the bishops, the bishops -from the Pope. - -4. We may, therefore, say that the _potestas ordinis_ renders its -subject capable of jurisdiction _in foro interno_, and of conferring -the Sacrament after jurisdiction has been given, so that the _potestas -ordinis_ is the disposition for administering the Sacrament of -Penance.[433] Thus it is not so much that the power of remitting sins -judicially is given to the priest in his ordination as rather this, that -the ordained person, when he is appointed judge by proper authority to -take cognizance of sins, is enabled to remit these sins _sacramentally_; -in other words, he receives power to remit sins by a special grace. - -From the preceding it follows: (1) that the doctrine which teaches that -jurisdiction is conveyed by ordination merely is false; (2) that it is -also false to teach that ordination confers _ipso facto_ jurisdiction, -but that the Church can restrain its exercise and that in granting -jurisdiction she does no more than remove her own prohibition; (3) that -it is the same thing to say: the Church confers jurisdiction to a priest, -as to say, the Church assigns _in foro interno_ certain subjects to the -priest; (4) that one may say, the _potestas ordinis_ which is acquired by -the character of the priesthood is the _potestas inchoata_ to absolve, -while it is incorrect to say that the _potestas ordinis_ is the _potestas -jurisdictionis inchoata_ or _habitualis_; (5) that jurisdiction differs -from the powers of Orders both in its essence and in the mode by which it -is acquired; in its essence, since jurisdiction is the power of judging -and binding subjects, while ordination only confers the power _ex jure -divino_ of acquiring jurisdiction and is the necessary condition that the -absolution be sacramental; in its mode, since jurisdiction is imparted by -the concession of the Church, while the power of Orders comes from the -consecration to the priesthood.[434] - -Jurisdiction is either ordinary or delegated (_ordinaria vel delegata_). -Christ appointed judges to preside over visible tribunals in His place -and in His name, with authority, vicarious, it is true, but ordinary -(_auctoritate quidem vicaria at ordinaria_), that is, an authority -emanating from the office to which they were appointed by Christ. These -judges are the Apostles and their successors, the Pope, therefore, and -the bishops, and these can appoint others to help them. - -Thus whoever in virtue of a public, ecclesiastical office existing of -divine right has subjects over whom he rules and is judge, exercises -jurisdiction in the Sacrament of Penance _potestate ordinaria_; others -exercise this function _potestate delegata vel a proprie dictis -Superioribus communicata_; hence the latter are dependent on their -Superiors in the exercise of their powers _quoad liceitatem et quoad -valorem_. - -Although any one with _potestas ordinaria_ can impart it to another, -the Supreme Authority of the Church on which depends all valid exercise -of jurisdiction has so ordered it that no one may exercise delegated -jurisdiction in the tribunal of penance—at least with regard to lay -people—without having previously received episcopal approbation; hence -the delegation by those who are subject to the bishop and have powers -of delegation is as a rule quite useless. Indeed, it is now the custom -generally to give approbation and jurisdiction at the same time; -nevertheless, cases might occur in which the distinction must be observed. - -Approbation _in se_ is nothing more than a formal declaration that -a priest is a suitable person (_aptus_) to exercise sacramental -jurisdiction; his fitness or capacity for the work is judged by his -science and morals. Approbation cannot be given licitly unless the -fitness of the subject is ascertained or reasonably presumed, though -its validity is not affected by the want of this fitness; but the -Superior ought to withdraw his approbation when the subject is unfit. The -Council of Trent interprets the phrase Public Approbation not only as a -_testimonium auctoritativum_ that the priest is a fit subject to exercise -jurisdiction, but also as the _facultas audiendi confessiones_ which the -bishop grants to a priest who is considered fit for the office;[435] for -the Council declares that he only can hear confessions who has been given -charge of a parish or who has received approbation. Beyond that nothing -else is demanded for the exercise of jurisdiction, hence approbation or -the appointment to a parish is the only condition required for hearing -confessions. Moreover, in papal constitutions the approbation is called -_licentia_ or _facultas audiendi confessiones_, and in common speech an -approved priest is one who has jurisdiction.[436] All this is in perfect -agreement with the practice of bishops, who usually grant jurisdiction -along with approbation.[437] - - - - -CHAPTER I - -JURISDICTION - - -37. The Minister of the Sacrament with Ordinary Jurisdiction. - -I. The Pope has _jurisdictio ordinaria_ over the whole Church. This -requires no proof. The Vatican Council decreed that the jurisdiction of -the Pope is a real episcopal jurisdiction, immediate and extending to -all the faithful. Theologians discuss at length—and it is a question not -to be omitted here—how it is that the Pope can give power to another to -absolve himself (the Pope). Lugo discusses at length that there is no -contradiction in the Pope delegating to another such jurisdiction over -himself, and still less contradiction appears when we reflect that that -jurisdiction _in foro sacramentali_, though exercised and delegated by -the pastor of the Church, is always exercised in the name of Christ; nor -is there anything absurd in the fact of the Pope as a private individual -being subject to his own jurisdiction in his capacity as a public person. -Though he cannot bind and punish himself, he may subject himself to -another and share in the graces and privileges of the Church, otherwise -he could not obtain absolution at all.[438] - -II. By divine right, the bishops exercise _potestas ordinaria_ in -their own dioceses, even _in foro interno_, subject, of course, to the -authority of the Pope. Although every bishop receives his jurisdiction -from the Holy See, the episcopal office is one of divine right and -confers a definite jurisdiction, a very important section of which is -the jurisdiction _in foro sacramentali_. As long as a bishop remains in -office and in the exercise of it, he cannot be deprived of the power of -absolving his subjects, though this power may be limited by reservations -imposed by the Pope. A bishop may also, for grave reasons, be deprived of -his office, or the exercise of it may be forbidden, or his jurisdiction -taken away; and such is the effect of certain ecclesiastical censures. - -III. By ecclesiastical law, all vicars-general, and _sede vacante_ -vicars-capitular, have the same jurisdiction as the bishop over -his diocese _in foro interno_. The jurisdiction, however, of the -vicar-general is wholly dependent on that of the bishop, hence the -saying: _Episcopi morte moritur Vicarius generalis_; and he has no other -faculties than those which the bishop has attached to his office. If, -for instance, a bishop by a special privilege of the Holy See has more -extended faculties, these do not pass to the vicar-general unless the -bishop transfers them to him with leave from the Holy See. During the -vacancy of the episcopal see, the whole of the bishop’s faculties, with a -few exceptions, are transferred to the vicar-capitular or administrator. - -IV. By the law of the Church, parish priests have _jurisdictio ordinaria_ -over their parishioners, and their power is measured by what the -Church imparts to them as the constituted assistants of the bishop. In -relation to their own parish they are _pastores proprii_, having only -administrative power _in foro externo_, but _in foro interno plena -jurisdictio subject_, of course, to such limitations as may be imposed -by the Pope or their bishop. By his appointment (_collatione_) to a -parish a priest acquires the right of hearing the confessions of his -subjects. Nevertheless, the bishop has the right of examining his clergy -periodically to make sure of their fitness to hear confessions.[439] - -V. The Cathedral Penitentiary has also _ordinaria jurisdictio_ for the -whole diocese in places where the office is established, and he may -absolve all belonging to the diocese, even outside the boundaries of the -diocese;[440] and this power is secured to him, not by any concession -from the bishop, but by a law passed by the Council of Trent.[441] - -VI. Others may, also, in virtue of the Church’s law, acquire _jurisdictio -ordinaria_, and as a matter of fact it is enjoyed by _Prelati regulares_ -with respect to their subjects, by Legates over their province. That of -Cardinals over their churches is confined to very narrow limits. Those -are regarded as subjects who have domicile or quasi-domicile within the -parish or diocese; hence the jurisdiction of bishops and parish priests -is primarily local and secondarily personal; that is, it extends to those -who have their dwelling in a definite place. On the other hand, the -jurisdiction of Regular Prelates is chiefly personal, and is confined to -definite local limits only secondarily. - -Since the Council of Trent excepts from the further approbation of the -bishops only those priests who are in charge of a parish, a difficulty -may occur as to the jurisdiction of priests who have no parish, but who -exercise a definite _cura spiritualis_ over certain subjects. We must -inquire first of all into the faculties which the Holy See has annexed -to such offices, for since the Council emanated from the Holy See the -latter is empowered to make exceptions. The question is of peculiar -interest with regard to military chaplains, as to whether they can hear -the confessions of soldiers in garrison without the approbation of the -bishop of the diocese. No general rule can be laid down for all cases. -Wherever a regularly appointed army-bishop or even a _Capellanus major_ -exists, he generally receives the fullest faculties, not only for hearing -the confessions of the soldiers himself, but also for appointing other -priests or chaplains to that duty without consulting the bishop of the -diocese;[442] otherwise no military chaplain may hear the confessions -of soldiers in garrison without special powers from the Pope or the -permission and approbation of the Ordinary.[443] Thus their faculties are -confined to the soldiers when on the march or in camp. - -All who have _jurisdictio ordinaria_ can receive the confessions of -their subjects and absolve them wherever they happen to be, for such -jurisdiction belongs to their office and accompanies them everywhere. -Thus a parish priest can always hear the confessions of his parishioners -whether he be within or beyond the bounds of his parish and diocese -or not. A curate, chaplain, or other assistant priest cannot receive -confessions outside the diocese, even if he have faculties for the whole -diocese; to do so he would have to apply to the bishop of the diocese in -which the penitent happens to be. - -_De jure_ a parish priest is approved only for the territory of his -benefice “_pro suo tantum oppido ubi sita sit parochialis ecclesia_,” -according to the decrees of the S. C. C.[444] He may not, therefore, -when in another diocese, hear the confessions of strangers (who are not -his own subjects) without leave of the bishop of that diocese. Indeed, -_per se_, he may not hear the confessions of strangers in another parish -even of his own diocese. At the present day, however, it is the practice -sanctioned either by law or by custom that parish priests and their -curates may hear confessions anywhere within the diocese.[445] - -In his own parish a parish priest may hear the confessions of any one who -approaches him, even strangers, since he is the approved confessor in his -own parish. - -_Jurisdictio ordinaria_ is lost: (_a_) by loss of the office or benefice -to which it is attached; (_b_) by excommunication or suspension if the -censure carries the stigma “_vitandus_.” Other excommunications or -suspensions impede only the licit exercise (_licitus usus_) of the powers. - - -38. The Minister of the Sacrament with Delegated Jurisdiction or -Approbation. - -I. All priests who have not _jurisdictio ordinaria_, but act only _ex -jurisdictione delegata_, require for the licit and valid exercise of -their office the approbation of the bishop of the place where they hear -confessions, unless they enjoy some special privilege from the Holy See. -The Constitution of Innocent XII, 9 Apr., 1700, “Cum Sicut,” is very -explicit in this matter, as is also that of Innocent XIII, 23 Sept., -1723, “Apostolici muneris,” which was confirmed by Benedict XIV in his -Constitution, 5 Aug., 1744, “Apostolica indulta,” in the following words: -“No priest, whether secular or regular, may hear confessions without the -approbation of the Ordinary of the diocese where the penitent dwells or -sojourns, and it is expressly decreed that all privileges to choose a -confessor from the clergy approved by the bishop are to be understood -only as giving powers to choose any one approved by the bishop of the -place where the confession is made.”[446] - -Since the conferring of approbation is not an act of the _Ordo -episcopalis_ but of episcopal jurisdiction, all who have ordinary -episcopal jurisdiction can grant approbation, thus: (1) the bishop elect -and confirmed, though not yet ordained; (2) the vicar-general since he -exercises the jurisdiction of the bishop; (3) the vicar-capitular _sede -vacante_, since he succeeds to the jurisdiction of the bishop; (4) -vicars-apostolic who are appointed by the Pope in place of bishops; and -(5) abbots who are not affiliated to a diocese. - -The bishop may insist on an examination before granting approbation, -though he may dispense with it since there are other means of -ascertaining the fitness of a priest for hearing confessions.[447] Any -priest whether secular or regular may be called on again for examination -by the bishop, if the latter has not approved the candidate himself, -although a former bishop may have done so. A confessor even approved by -his own Ordinary may be examined if he has received approbation without -undergoing examination. Those, however, whom the bishop has approved -after an examination may not be reëxamined without a _justa causa_.[448] -A bishop sins by refusing approbation to a competent priest, for all -priests have a claim to approbation in virtue of their sacerdotal -character, so that to deny it to a suitable candidate would be an -infringement of his rights. - -The approbation which is necessary for a valid absolution may not be -presumed; it must be actually conferred and made known to the priest; for -since there is question of the _validity_ of an act, only the faculties -which the bishop has really conferred, not those which he will grant, -can be considered. Hence when a priest applies for faculties he cannot -hear confessions till he has received them, even when from his knowledge -of the bishop he feels confident of receiving the faculties and knows -that they are already on the way. The faculties may be acted upon when -conveyed verbally by any trustworthy person.[449] - -Approbation is required even before absolving from venial sins already -confessed; after the decree of Innocent XI, 1679, we cannot any longer -assume that the Church here supplies jurisdiction to the priest.[450] - -A bishop in traveling may take with him any of his priests to accompany -him as confessor; but if the priest is not a subject of said bishop -(whether by domicile or quasi-domicile), he may not receive the -confession of the bishop unless he be approved, as St. Alphonsus adds, -by the bishop of the priest’s domicile (Fagnani and Lugo) or, as Scavini -remarks, by the bishop of the place; the Congregation S. C. C. decreed so -early as 1609 that a bishop outside his own diocese might confess only to -a priest approved _ab ordinario loci_ (except, of course, when the priest -is a subject of the bishop), so that Scavini’s decision is the norm to be -observed in practice.[451] - -Cardinals, papal domestic prelates, and royalty may choose any approved -confessor and be absolved by him anywhere. Even in Rome itself Cardinals -and bishops may choose for themselves and for their household any -suitable priest as confessor and retain him with them for that purpose -also when they leave the city.[452] - -A bishop can give faculties for hearing confessions in his own diocese to -a priest belonging to another diocese, for the latter _in ordine ad hoc -opus_ is subject to the bishop of the diocese where the confessions are -heard. This is the universal practice in the Church. - -A parish priest cannot of his own authority give faculties to a priest of -another diocese to hear the confessions of his own parishioners because -the _jurisdictio ordinaria_ which goes along with the benefice extends -only to the parish in his own charge. There is a custom, however, in -many places among parish priests in outlying districts of the diocese to -authorize the priest of a neighboring diocese to assist them in hearing -confessions. This custom, which is recognized by the bishops, confers -jurisdiction _ex tacita episcoporum approbatione_.[453] Thus many bishops -have an explicit agreement by which approved priests of neighboring -dioceses may assist one another in the confessional. Those who supply in -another diocese, however, must pay attention to the cases reserved to the -bishop in that diocese, since for the time being they are subject to him -_in ordine ad hoc munus_. - -II. Approbation may be granted without any limitations; the bishop may, -if he wish, limit the approbation according to time, place, and persons, -most certainly if the approbation include jurisdiction, for the whole -subject is one of delegation and all delegation is regulated by the -intention of the Superior. Even when approbation in the strict sense only -is conferred the bishop may _ex rationabili causa_ confine it within a -given time, a fixed place, or over a certain class of persons (children, -men). The grounds for such a limitation might be, for instance, defects -of ability, care, or study. - -III. The bishop may not only impose limits in his approbation, but he -may also recall it entirely, for all delegated authority exists only at -the pleasure of the Superior; reasonable grounds must exist for such -withdrawal if it is to be licit. It is a debated point among theologians -whether withdrawal without any grounds is valid or not. The view that -such withdrawal is invalid because it is an unjust deprivation of rights -conferred, is certainly probable and maintained, among others, by Suarez, -Lugo, and St. Alphonsus; but since it is not easy to establish the -want of just grounds the view is of but little practical application; -the bishop may be acting upon reasons which are unknown to his clergy, -and while doubts remain, the presumption is always in favor of the -bishop.[454] - -IV. When the approbation is granted for a fixed length of time it ceases -after that period; otherwise only by withdrawal; when given without any -limitations it does not cease with the death of the giver, nor even when -the recipient changes his domicile. This may be considered quite certain -with regard to Regulars who have once received unlimited approbation.[455] - -Regulars, on account of their privileges and dependence on the Holy See, -are distinguished in many details from the secular priesthood with regard -to jurisdiction. - -V. The secular clergy receive jurisdiction and approbation either from -their own bishop or from the bishop in whose diocese they are hearing -confessions. Regulars receive jurisdiction from the Sovereign Pontiff -through their Superiors, who must confer the jurisdiction as from the -Pope, not like the bishops granting it on their own authority, but only -as representatives of the Apostolic See. Besides this jurisdiction they -must also have the approbation of the _Episcopus loci_; then as far as -jurisdiction is considered they may absolve any one.[456] - -Though all Regulars have jurisdiction from the Pope they cannot hear -confessions without the approbation of the bishop, which may not be -refused without just and reasonable motives; of these, however, the -Regular is not the judge, and if he be refused approbation, he is -effectually debarred from hearing confessions.[457] - -Clement X imposed certain limitations on bishops with regard to -the granting or refusing of approbation to the Regular clergy. He -decreed:[458]— - -1. That Religious who were proved capable of hearing confessions, should -be permitted by the bishop to hear confessions anywhere in the diocese -without restriction of time, place, or person; with regard, however, to -those who were not so well prepared the bishop should be left to his own -judgment in the matter of imposing restrictions. - -2. Those who had once received approbation might hear the confessions -of any of the faithful, even of the sick, without leave of the parish -priest or even of the bishop, at any time of the year, including even -Easter, within the diocese of the bishop who conferred the approbation; -in cases where they had heard the confessions of the sick they should -inform the parish priest, at least by a letter left with the sick person; -the penalty for neglect in this matter being suspension from the right of -hearing confessions. (The latter obligation is not enforced in missionary -countries, where by general consent any approved priest may hear the -confessions of the sick.) - -3. Any Regular who has been approved by the bishop after examination -and without any restriction cannot be called again for examination by -his bishop (this does not hold when the faculties have been obtained -from the vicar-general or the predecessor of the bishop), nor can he be -suspended from hearing confessions; moreover he cannot even be deprived -of his faculties unless for reasons connected with the Sacrament itself; -the reasons for such objection need not be judicially proved, nor is the -bishop obliged to communicate them himself to the Regular in question, -but he must reveal them to the Pope if the latter insists on being -informed of them. Hence in the whole process the Regular must act in -submission to the bishop, and if he be convinced that he is treated -unjustly, he may have recourse to the Holy See; in the meantime, however, -his attitude must be one of submission. - -4. Though a blameless life and unspotted morals are of the greatest -moment in the ministers of this Sacrament ... no bishop can deprive a -whole community of faculties on the ground of general unfitness, without -consulting the Holy See. - -Hence we conclude:— - -1. Approbation is justly limited in the case of Religious who have not -passed an examination. - -2. Approved Regulars may be recalled for examination: (_a_) when -they have received approbation without examination, (_b_) when after -examination they have received only limited approbation; (_c_) when this -approbation has been received from the vicar-general or the bishop’s -predecessor, and this though the examination has been passed and -unlimited approbation conferred; (_d_) when any reason is presented -connected with the Sacrament itself; and this holds for those who after -examination even have received the fullest approbation from the bishop -himself.[459] - -Except in the case of special legislation to the contrary on the part of -the Holy See any Religious may receive both jurisdiction and approbation -_ab Episcopo loci_, and at the present day that is the way in which -bishops understand the conferring of approbation. This view solves the -question of the validity of absolution given by a Religious without the -knowledge or even against the will of his Superior.[460] - -Moreover, Religious Superiors may receive from the bishop the power -of imparting faculties to their subjects; the extent of the faculties -must, of course, be ascertained. When, for example, the bishop gives -general faculties, reserved cases are not included even when they are not -expressly excepted.[461] When the bishop gives more extended faculties, -as, for instance, on the occasion of a mission, and a Religious Superior -imparts to his subjects these faculties for the mission, he is supposed -to give _all the faculties_ which he has received from the bishop, -because he is then acting only as the bishop’s mouthpiece unless, of -course, he states the contrary. When, again, the bishop gives faculties -for a special object they are not to be used for anything beyond that -object; it is another question when some special work is seized upon only -as an occasion for asking and giving faculties.[462] - -VI. Strangers (_peregrini_), _i.e._ those who are not in the diocese -of their domicile or quasi-domicile, may be absolved by a Religious -without any difficulty as subjects of the Pope (from whom the Religious -presumably receives _jurisdictio delegata_); they may also in virtue -of an old and approved custom in the Church be absolved by any other -confessor. This is the unanimous verdict of all theologians, though there -is diversity of opinion as to the theory which justifies the practice -of secular priests in this matter, nor is the manner of solving the -question an indifferent matter; if, for instance, a stranger is absolved -in virtue of the jurisdiction which _his own_ bishop confers on the -priest, the bishop can absolutely forbid him to seek absolution from a -strange priest by declaring such absolution invalid; (this, of course, -applies to secular priests; with regard to Religious confessors there -is no difficulty).[463] Thus on the solution of this question depends -the power over cases reserved in another diocese. Some theologians now -maintain that the jurisdiction of a priest over a stranger is based on -the tacit consent[464] of all the bishops, while others hold that it is a -universal custom of the Church having the force of law.[465] But neither -the _consensus Episcoporum_, nor _consuetudo_, even when the latter -has the force of law, can convey jurisdiction if we are to follow the -teaching of the Church; we must suppose, then, that the propounders of -such a view meant to state it thus: the Church, _i.e._ the Pope, either -makes the _Episcopus loci_ an _Episcopus peregrinorum_, or he delegates -_his own_ jurisdiction to all confessors. Since the first view is hardly -possible, they are forced to the conclusion that the Pope, either by -express or legal consent to the universal custom, grants to all approved -confessors a delegated jurisdiction to absolve strangers. It is beyond -all doubt that this view is probable especially when we add the weight of -St. Alphonsus’ authority. The case, however, is not quite certain, for -the existence of the custom seems to prove no more than that the _bishops -themselves_ as a rule give a tacit consent to the arrangement, and it -does not prove that the bishops are obliged to agree _in every case_ to -this arrangement, or that their power over a subject is withdrawn by the -fact of his occasionally leaving the diocese; and it still remains to be -proved that the Pope so entirely approves of the practice as to consent -to break through the natural order of things by which all authority -is communicated through immediate Superiors, not directly from the -fountainhead; at the same time it is beyond all question that the Pope -can if he so wishes empower any secular priest to hear the confessions of -_peregrini_; and if a bishop were without any pressing reason to forbid -his subjects to confess outside their own diocese, the Holy See could -always be petitioned to apply a suitable remedy for such a prohibition, -since under the present condition of things there must always be many -people living outside of their own diocese.[466] - -Other theologians teach that _peregrini_ by the very fact of presenting -themselves at the tribunal of penance in another diocese become subjects -of the _Episcopus loci_ or of the priest who derives his faculties -from him, and this _ex universali consensu quem P. M. Eugenius IV -approbavit_.[467] But does the wish to receive the Sacrament make the -_peregrinus_ a subject of the bishop or the bishop his superior? Whoever -maintains this and grants that the _Episcopus loci_ is not the bishop -of the _peregrinus_, states in other words that one who is not actually -a superior may be judge _in foro interno_. But is such a statement in -accordance with divine right? In any case the _peregrinus_ remains -the subject of the bishop of the diocese in which he has domicile or -quasi-domicile, and no proof can be adduced that the bishop of the place -in which the _peregrinus_ makes his confession has, by virtue of his -office, power to absolve him; he can do that only when he is superior -in right of his office, and he can be superior only when he is the -bishop of the _peregrinus_, since human and divine law recognize no -other ecclesiastical superior than Pope, bishop, parish priest, or their -substitutes. But no one would maintain that the _Episcopus loci_ is the -true bishop of the _peregrinus_. - -Finally, other theologians explain the jurisdiction of the secular priest -over _peregrini_ in this manner: that the bishop of the _peregrinus_ -grants tacitly the faculties to every approved priest and is generally -obliged to do so.[468] The ecumenical synods of Florence, Trent, and -the Lateran declare that the absolution granted by any other than one’s -own Ordinary is invalid unless leave be obtained from him. Now such a -permission is either a direct or indirect imparting of jurisdiction; -hence every absolution is invalid which is given without jurisdiction -from the bishop of the penitent. It is on this ground that theologians -and canonists alike, whether of the older or more recent school, -insist upon the necessity of a consent on the part of the Superior or -bishop of the penitent in the case of confessions made outside his own -diocese. Ballerini (l. c. Dissert. n. 33 ss) concludes his learned -investigation of this question in answer to the objections of the -_Vindiciæ Alphonsianæ_ with the following propositions, which are not -mere speculative conclusions, but are in fact the teaching of the Church, -resting as they do on the very essence and nature of the Sacrament as -solemnly explained and defined by the Holy See and ecumenical councils: -(1) in order to absolve a _peregrinus_, faculties must be granted by one -who has ordinary jurisdiction over the penitent; (2) the existence of the -custom of absolving _peregrini_ outside their diocese neither conveys -nor can convey the necessary jurisdiction; (3) jurisdiction is given by -approbation or consent (express or tacit) or leave (implicit or explicit) -of the Ordinary or of the particular pastor of the _peregrinus_; (4) -this approbation or consent includes the imparting of jurisdiction to -the confessor chosen by the _peregrinus_; (5) a sufficient indication of -this consent exists in the tolerance of a custom with the knowledge of -the bishop and without any remonstrance on his part; (6) the delegation -of jurisdiction depends on this consent in such wise that the pastor of -souls may, at his own option, retract his consent, thus abolishing the -custom and withdrawing entirely the power to absolve his subjects. All -these statements are incontrovertible. - -Hence since a penitent can be absolved by his own bishop or by the -delegate of the latter, since the bishop of the _peregrinus_ remains his -superior in spite of the penitent being in another diocese transitorily, -the latter can be absolved only in virtue of power granted tacitly by his -own bishop.[469] - -VII. As _Vagi_ have no fixed domicile, their spiritual superior is the -Pope, and by virtue of his express or tacit delegation they may be -absolved by any approved confessor wherever they happen to be; but they -cannot be absolved by any but those approved for the place where the -confession is made. - -It will be asked: Who is to give approbation for absolving travelers on -the sea? This point has been settled in a very simple manner by a recent -decree of the Congregation of the Inquisition. Any priest, approved by -his Ordinary, may hear the confession of his fellow-travelers while the -voyage is in process, though they pass through or stop off for a time in -the territory of another bishop.[470] - - -39. Jurisdictio Delegata Extraordinaria, or, the Supplying of Deficient -Jurisdiction by the Church. - -There is another kind of jurisdiction, viz.: when the Church makes good -the deficiency of delegation; here jurisdiction is conveyed “_supplente -Ecclesia_.” - -Let it be remarked at the outset that it is by no means permissible to -perform any act for which jurisdiction is necessary—therefore to give -absolution—when the absence of jurisdiction is certain, even if the -Church should supply to insure validity of the act. When jurisdiction -is doubtful, it may be allowable to perform the act, especially if the -Church really does supply. Before discussing the matter itself we must -explain what is meant by the axiom: “The Church makes good deficient -jurisdiction.” The meaning of it is this: the Church, or the highest -judicial authority of the Church, confers, in an exceptional manner, -jurisdiction for individual acts, and the Church does this for the -general welfare _in ipso actu_, that is, in the performance of the act -itself.[471] There is, accordingly, a great difference between the -jurisdiction which a man actually possesses, and that which he exercises -“_supplente Ecclesia_.” In the first case I possess the jurisdiction -before I begin the act, before I hear the confession, or perform any -other act for which jurisdiction is required; indeed, I possess it in -most cases _habitualiter_. I possess it also when the act is completed. -But he who absolves or performs any other function _supplente Ecclesia_ -receives the jurisdiction only when the action has already begun—in this -case when he is about to pronounce absolution—in order that he may carry -to its end the confession which has begun; the action once completed,—in -this case the absolution being pronounced,—he has no further -jurisdiction. When, therefore, previous to an action, a priest already -_probabiliter_ possesses jurisdiction, the Church, if she supplies, must -do so only conditionally, upon the presumption that he possessed no -jurisdiction; that is, when that jurisdiction which he was believed to -have was as a matter of fact not existing. - -The Church supplies deficiency of jurisdiction:— - -1. When one who exercises a power possesses a _titulus coloratus_ for -this power, and when, at the same time, the error is general amongst the -faithful, in such sort that the absence of real power is mostly unknown. -A _titulus coloratus_ (apparent title) is one that is in itself false, -but yet really exists; that is, one which has been conferred by lawful -authority and, therefore, bears the appearance and outward form of a true -title, even when, for some cause or other, it is void by an essential -defect.[472] The supplying action of the Church in this case is based -upon the right itself which she has conferred and ratified; this is the -teaching of all theologians.[473] The Church, they say, supplies as a -good mother in the interest of the welfare of souls.[474] - -2. When there is no _titulus coloratus_ but only _error communis_,[475] -many theologians are of opinion that the Church supplies in this case -also for the general welfare. - -St. Alphonsus adopts this opinion as probable, because the Church -supplies for defective jurisdiction more with a view to the common -good than out of consideration for the title.[476] It will scarcely, -however, be possible to assign to this opinion a real and substantial -probability; a number of theologians are indeed in favor of it, but not -a few of considerable repute are opposed to it (Lugo, Sanchez, Lessius, -and others). It is, therefore, canon law which must decide the question, -the more so, as we have not to do directly with what may be allowed -or not, but with the positive conferring of, possibly, non-existent -jurisdiction. Now what is to be gathered from the canon law on this point -seems plainly opposed to the more lenient view given in a decision of -the S. C. Conc. of 11 December, 1683, which Benedict XIV[477] cites to -settle the question. The matter remains, therefore, doubtful. The harm, -however, which can result from the negative opinion is not very great, as -a confessor cannot long exercise his office without title, and such harm -is made good by subsequent communion or confession. Several theologians, -moreover, rightly maintain that the faithful are not bound in this case -to repeat those confessions which they have, _bona fide_, made to a -priest, who, _ex communi errore_, passed for a confessor. - -3. But when there is question not of _error communis_ but only of _error -privatus_ in a few persons, the Church certainly does not supply the -defective jurisdiction, because here the _bonum commune_ is not at -stake.[478] - -From this it follows:— - -1. That it is not allowed knowingly to make use of a power arising only -from an “apparent” title, although the Church should positively supply; -but he who is not aware of the defect of his title—this title being in -reality only an apparent title—has nothing to rectify subsequently, as -his actions were valid (_supplente Ecclesia_). - -2. Still less is it allowable for one who knows that he possesses neither -power nor title to act on the ground of general error; in the first -place, because he assumes a power which he does not possess, and because, -moreover, he exposes to danger those who are most interested in the -validity of his actions. - -Connected with the above is the question: does _jurisdictio probabilis_ -or _dubia_ suffice for the valid and lawful administration of absolution. -The question turns only on _probabilitas juris_, a solidly probable, -though not necessarily certain, interpretation of the law declaring that -jurisdiction is possessed. This may occur with regard to the questions: -whether the jurisdiction possessed extends to this or that case, to this -or that person? or, whether the jurisdiction once possessed has been -revoked? - -But a jurisdiction is doubtful when the uncertainty of it rests upon -a doubt or a probable _fact_. Upon this distinction between probable -and doubtful jurisdiction we must insist. St. Alphonsus[479] does -so, and that chiefly in order to show that, in the case of a _dubium -facti_,—thus, doubtful jurisdiction,—the faculty for the exercise and the -validity of the act (here of absolution) _always_ remains _doubtful_, -whereas, in the case of _probabilitas juris_, the validity of the action -after it has been performed is morally certain. When such probable -jurisdiction (_probabilitas juris_) is in question, it is, as St. -Alphonsus teaches, morally certain that the Church confers jurisdiction, -if it has previously (_antecedenter_) been wanting. The saint calls this -teaching _communissima_, and demonstrates it by the fact that the Church, -in the person of her chief pastor, tacitly tolerates the old custom of -absolving with such jurisdiction, and thus sufficiently expresses her -consent. - -With regard to the _jurisdictio dubia_, however, the contentions of many -authors are not of this nature.[480] If many are of opinion that the -Church supplies in this case also, and base their opinion upon the fact -that the Church supplies when there is only _error communis_ and not -_titulus coloratus_, we need but refer to what has been previously said -upon this head.[481] - -According to this it is morally certain that the Church, in the case -of previous _juris probabilitas_, supplies _jurisdiction_. But if the -jurisdiction is doubtful on account of a _dubium facti_, the Church does -not supply if the error exists only with a few; as the error is usually -general, it remains doubtful whether the Church supplies. It is not -always wrong to use doubtful jurisdiction in administering the Sacrament -of Penance, particularly when the reason for it is pressing, when -absolution is urgently necessary, and when it would be better to absolve -with doubtful validity than not to absolve at all. But in this case it -would always be necessary to instruct the penitent as to the value of the -absolution administered. - -According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus, absolution may be -administered with a doubtful jurisdiction in the following cases: (1) -When the obligation of yearly confession must be fulfilled exactly at -that time; (2) when the penitent must say Mass or communicate, and this -cannot be omitted without bringing upon himself disgrace; (3) when the -priest must say Mass in fulfilment of his duty. In these cases a priest -possessing only doubtful jurisdiction may absolve conditionally when no -other confessor is at hand.[482] But the saintly Doctor[483] remarks -that, in this case, the confessor would be bound to inform the penitent -who had accused himself of mortal sin that he had been only conditionally -absolved, so that if afterwards it should become manifest that the -confessor really possessed no jurisdiction, the penitent might fulfill -his duty of confessing his sins again.[484] - -In order to absolve with probable jurisdiction, a legitimate reason is -necessary and this exists: (1) When the penitent stands in special need -of the help of this particular priest; (2) when the accomplice of the -penitent is known to the confessor who possesses certain jurisdiction, -but unknown to him who possesses only probable jurisdiction; (3) if the -penitent were under an urgent obligation of confessing, if a particular -indulgence were to be gained, if the penitent would not be able to -confess for a long time, and a priest with certain jurisdiction were not -at hand.[485] - -A special case in which the Church supplies deficient jurisdiction is _in -articulo mortis_. - -The necessary jurisdiction for the absolution of dying persons is -conferred by the Church upon any priest, when no approved confessor is at -hand, so that any priest may absolve dying persons from all sins.[486] - -An approved priest is considered not to be present, not only when he -is bodily but also morally out of reach; that is, in the following -cases: (1) When the approved priest who is present does not wish to -hear the confession of the dying person or cannot hear it, for in such -a case he would be practically absent; (2) when he is excommunicated -or suspended;[487] (3) if an approved priest should arrive when the -confession to the unapproved priest has already begun; (4) if an approved -priest were _complex_ of the dying person _in peccato turpi_;[488] (5) if -this priest is so displeasing to the sick person that the latter would be -in danger of sacrilegious confession; there would then be danger of the -soul of the sick person being lost, a risk which it was the intention of -the Council of Trent to obviate.[489] - -What has been said above concerning the administration of absolution _in -articulo mortis_ stands good also for its administration _in quolibet -gravi periculo mortis_.[490] For the two situations are generally -considered as identical; moreover, the Ritual says: “When danger of death -threatens;” besides there is a divine precept to confess when there is -danger of death also, and thus there arises a case of necessity. - -A grave _periculum mortis_ is considered to exist: (1) In a dangerous -illness; (2) in times of plague; (3) at a difficult birth; (4) before a -very difficult surgical operation; (5) in battle, or shortly before it; -(6) before a very dangerous sea voyage, etc.[491] - - -40. The Administration of the Sacrament of Penance to Members of -Religious Orders. - -Hitherto we have treated of the powers necessary to the ministers of the -Sacrament of Penance—secular and regular priests—in order that they may -validly and lawfully hear the confessions of lay people (_seculares_). It -remains now to discuss the regulations laid down by the Church concerning -the jurisdiction over men and women belonging to Religious Orders -emitting _vota solemnia_. - -I. The Superiors of Religious Orders, or the local Superiors, although -they possess full jurisdiction over their subjects _in foro interno_, -are bound to appoint others as confessors, so that the subjects may not -be obliged to confess to their own Superiors; it is only in certain -definite cases that a subject is bound to go to confession to his -Superior. The inmates of a religious house may indeed confess to their -Superiors, and the latter must hear their confessions; but this must -be left to the option of the subordinates. One or more confessors may, -however, be nominated in the individual houses, so that no religious -can validly confess to any other but these; unless a confessor has -received special powers for this purpose from the Holy See or from the -Roman Penitentiary.[492] Only when a Jubilee occurs and usually once -may Regulars choose as confessor a priest out of those approved by the -_Ordinarius_, in order to gain the Jubilee indulgence. Several confessors -are generally nominated so that the subjects may have a choice from among -them.[493] - -II. Confessors for Regulars receive their jurisdiction from the Superiors -of the latter. Not only priests belonging to Religious Orders, but also -secular priests (even those who have not been approved by their bishops), -may be empowered by Superiors to act as confessors to their subjects, -unless this be forbidden by the constitutions of the Order.[494] - -This faculty belongs to Superiors of Religious Orders by common law, -since, by virtue of their exemption from episcopal jurisdiction, they -possess _quasi-episcopalem jurisdictionem_ over their subordinates. The -Council of Trent has altered nothing in this matter, as it speaks only -of the jurisdiction or approbation necessary for the confessions of -lay people; moreover, Clement VIII has expressly granted this faculty -to Superiors of Orders. The confessor of Regulars can absolve those -for whom he is appointed confessor, even outside the monastery, as -this jurisdiction is not limited to a definite place, and no further -approbation of the bishop is necessary. - -Regulars who are on a journey or staying outside their monastery must -confess to a member of their Order who is near them, even when the latter -is not otherwise appointed for confessions; if, however, they have no -opportunity of confessing to one of their Order, they may do so to any -other regular or secular priest. This priest (according to the _sententia -communissima_, which St. Alphonsus considers the more probable) need not -even be approved by the _Episcopus loci_,[495] as it is presumed that -the Order, or its Superior, confers in such a case delegated jurisdiction -upon any priest whom the religious has chosen for his confessor.[496] - -III. Those who can be validly absolved only by a priest authorized by a -Superior of an Order are: not only the religious and their novices, but -also lay persons, who, as really belonging to the monastic community, -live in the monastery or college; servants, for example, and others who -regularly live and take their meals in the monastery.[497] - -IV. As regards the question whether priests of an Order, by virtue of -the authorization of the Superiors of their Order, may also hear the -confessions of the inmates of their monasteries intrusted to them for -education, theologians do not agree. Some, amongst whom are Gury (n. -564), Lehmkuhl (n. 394), Marc (n. 1763, Q. 2), and Aertnys (n. 232), -admit it, pointing out certain Orders to which this has been expressly -permitted, and in this privilege (these authorities maintain) the -other Orders participate. St. Alphonsus is also of this opinion (583), -appealing to Bordone; also Mazzotta (l. c.), Lugo, Schmalzgrueber, and -others. Lehmkuhl calls this opinion probable and says: We may, therefore, -act according to the principles discussed above concerning probable -jurisdiction. However, this does not seem to be generally admissible. -For no law accords to Regular priests a general privilege of this kind. -The extension to all other Orders of a privilege granted to some is -not allowable here, for this privilege derogates from the rights of a -third party, in this instance the bishop and the parish priests; and it -is clear from the decisions of the sacred congregations that unlimited -jurisdiction over their students does not belong to Regulars.[498] - -On the other hand, Regulars possess jurisdiction over their students: -(1) When this jurisdiction is explicitly conferred upon an Order or -educational establishment; (2) when the religious have acquired it by -legitimate custom; (3) when there is question of religious in the sense -that, according to the ordinances of the Council of Trent, the students -can be designated as belonging to the household. This latter, however, -is not the case when the house in which the educational establishment is -situated is not actually the monastic building, or when the members of -the Order and the students do not form an association of the nature of a -family. Nor can those pupils be regarded as belonging to the household -who pay for their board, and are yearly received into the educational -establishment or seminary. But as the matter is a difficult one and -difference of opinion prevails amongst theologians, Bouix suggests as -a practical solution the removal of such boys or girls from parochial -control.[499] - - -41. Jurisdiction and Approbation for the Confessions of Nuns. - -What we are about to say concerning nuns refers to nuns in the strict -sense of the word, namely, to such as have taken solemn vows and are -bound by the regulations of the inclosure, but not to the religious -congregations which have no inclosure, nor, in general to such nuns as, -with permission of their Superiors, are living outside the convent.[500] - -The bishop can except from the general approbation any religious female -congregation, and if he has done so, the confessors must act conformably. -In most dioceses the regulations of the Church concerning confessors -of nuns—both ordinary and extraordinary confessors—are extended to the -female congregations also which take only simple vows, and are not bound -to strict inclosure. This discipline is, in fact, very good, and quite in -conformity with the intention of the Holy See.[501] - -The following regulations are in force with regard to the confessors of -nuns:— - -I. Not every priest approved by a bishop can hear the confessions of -nuns, but only one who has received special approbation and jurisdiction -for the purpose from the _Episcopus loci_. Indeed, the priest approved -for one convent cannot _valide_ hear the confessions of the nuns of -another convent, unless he be generally appointed for the confessions of -nuns.[502] - -II. The confessors of exempted nuns also require the approbation of the -bishop, but they are chosen and appointed by the Superiors of the Orders -to whom they (the exempted nuns) are subject; and if these Superiors -themselves wish to hear the confessions of the nuns who are subject to -them, they must likewise obtain the approbation of the bishop. It is only -when the nuns obey Superiors with _quasi episcopal_ jurisdiction that -their confessor does not require the approbation of the bishop.[503] - -III. According to the declaration of Clement XI the confessors of nuns -should not only be learned, prudent, and pious, but also of mature -years.[504] The bishop must, therefore, take care that a confessor be -chosen in whom the nuns may have confidence. - -Without Papal authorization vicars-general, canons, and others who are -bound to observe choir in virtue of a benefice, also parish priests (when -the care of souls would materially suffer thereby), cannot discharge -the office of an ordinary confessor. This applies also to priests of a -Religious Order with regard to nuns who are immediately subject to the -bishop. The former may, however, exercise the office of extraordinary -confessors. The ordinary confessor must hear the confessions of nuns as -often as it is reasonably demanded of him. Moreover, he must not conduct -himself as a Superior of the convent, since, according to the decree of -the S. C. Ep. et Reg. 7 Sept., 1797, such authority does not belong to -him.[505] - -The confessor appointed for nuns shall not discharge his office longer -than three years, and cannot, at the expiration of this period, hear -confessions in the same convent without permission of the S. C. Ep. et -Reg.[506] Several authorities, however (St. Alphonsus, Bouvier, Gury, -Scavini), remark that the bishop may allow the confessor to exercise his -office longer than three years when other suitable priests are wanting. - -At the time of a Jubilee, nuns, like Regulars, may, in order to gain -the Jubilee indulgence, _once_ choose for themselves any confessor -from amongst priests approved by the _Episcopus loci_ for hearing the -confessions of nuns either in general or for a particular convent.[507] - -IV. The bishops, or Superiors of Orders, who are authorized to -appoint and choose the ordinary confessor, are bound to appoint an -_extraordinary_ confessor for the nuns subject to them two or three times -a year. - -Although the nuns are not bound to confess to this extraordinary -confessor, they must, nevertheless, all repair to him, be it either -to make a sacramental confession or to receive from him wholesome -exhortation.[508] - -The following is to be observed regarding the _Confessarius -extraordinarius_:— - -1. Although the Tridentine Session here speaks of inclosed nuns only -(_moniales claustrales_), Benedict XIV wishes the appointment of the -extraordinary confessor to be extended to all communities of nuns who -have only an ordinary confessor appointed by the Superiors. - -2. The choice of the extraordinary confessor belongs to the _Ordinarius -loci_ for those convents which are under him, and to the Superior of the -Order for those for which the latter appoints the ordinary confessor; -every extraordinary confessor must have special approbation as such from -the bishop. The Superiors of Regulars, however, cannot always appoint -a priest of their own Order, but must at least, once a year, choose a -secular priest or one of another Order. If the Superior of the Order -neglects to choose an extraordinary confessor, the bishop must do so; -should the bishop neglect this duty, the Cardinal Grand Penitentiary must -act. - -3. During the time when the extraordinary confessor is exercising his -office in a community, the ordinary confessor may not remain in the -community to hear confessions. - -4. The extraordinary confessor may not be refused to individual nuns in -case of serious illness or invincible reluctance towards the ordinary -confessor. The case of a nun in danger of death being refused an -extraordinary confessor is provided for in the decree of the Tridentine -Session, XIV. cp. 7: _in articulo mortis omnes sacerdotes quoslibet -pœnitentes ... absolvere posse_. But should a nun wish to confess -occasionally to a particular confessor, not out of fickleness, or -imprudent preference, but truly on account of her spiritual advancement, -it is advisable that the Superiors should not oppose such wish.[509] - -Extraordinary confessors, nominated by the bishop for _a single -occasion_, can only discharge this office once. They must be approved by -the bishop as often as they have to discharge the office of extraordinary -confessor,[510] unless they have a general approbation for the confession -of nuns. - - - - -CHAPTER II - -LIMITATION OF JURISDICTION OR RESERVED CASES - - -42. Reserved Cases in General. - -The Church has received from Christ the power to remit or to retain all -sins without exception. No sin is withheld from the cognizance of its -judicial authority or the power of its keys. This unlimited power of -chief justice and plenipotentiary resides in the hands of the Supreme -Head of the Church; it is in the possession of the Vicegerent of Him -who has said of Himself: “To Me is given all power in heaven and on -earth.” In the exercise of the judicial power _in foro interno_, the -pastors of the Church are dependent upon and subject to him. This -relation between the Pope and the pastors of the Church is expressed -in the reservations;[511] that is, by the ecclesiastical discipline in -virtue of which the Pope reserves certain sins in order to absolve from -them himself, and places a limit upon the jurisdiction of the bishops -by withholding from them the power to absolve from certain sins. And as -the Pope proceeds with regard to the bishops, so can the bishop, and the -Superiors of Orders, and those possessing quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, -proceed with regard to their respective subordinates. - -This competence to declare certain sins reserved, which existed in the -earliest times of the Church as is proved by numberless memorials, is -promulgated by the Council of Trent,[512] which also emphasizes the -_reason_ of this practice: “It has seemed conducive to the morality of -the Christian people that certain particularly horrible and grave sins -should not be absolved by every priest, but only by those of the highest -authority. It is, therefore, reasonable that the Popes, by virtue of the -power invested in them over the whole Church, should reserve certain -grave sins for their own tribunal.” Having then assigned this power to -the bishops also, the Council declares that this reservation of sins has -validity not only in the outward administration of the Church, but also -before God. - -From this it follows that:— - -I. The motives for the reservations, apart from the maintenance of -authority, are: (_a_) the necessity of deterring the faithful from the -commission of these great sins by thus making it more difficult to obtain -absolution; (_b_) the necessity of applying a special remedy, so that -those who have been guilty of such crimes may be the more efficaciously -preserved from relapse. In order that the former object may be the more -perfectly attained, it is necessary in an appropriate manner to make -known to the people what sins are reserved. - -II. We distinguish: (1) Reservation by the Pope, by a bishop, and by -the Superior of an Order; (2) reserved sins, when the sin itself is -directly reserved, and reserved censures, when the censure attached to a -sin is reserved, and the sin itself is reserved only in consequence of -the censure. If the reserved censure is only the means by which the sin -is reserved, upon removal of the censure the sin is no longer reserved. -In the papal reserved cases the censure only is directly reserved; in -episcopal and other reserved cases generally the sin only is reserved, -not the censure. Two Papal cases, in which the sin without the censure -is reserved, form exceptions to this rule, namely: (_a_) Falsely -accusing an innocent confessor of solicitation, either by denouncing -the confessor to the ecclesiastical judge one’s self, or by effecting -such denunciation through another person;[513] (_b_) the receiving of -considerable presents exceeding the value of ten francs on the part of -members of Religious Orders (emitting solemn vows) of both sexes, till -restitution has taken place (_munera prorsus liberalia_ are meant; hence -presents of medicaments and devotional objects, as also those presents -which were given out of gratitude and benevolence or for the purpose of -securing the good-will of a person, are excepted).[514] If the presents -amount to a higher sum, and if the penitent can make restitution, he -is not to be absolved till he has done so. If, however, he cannot make -restitution at the time, but promises faithfully to do so as soon as -possible, the confessor can absolve him. - -III. The power to reserve is possessed by the Pope in the whole Church; -by the bishops in their dioceses; by the heads of Orders who possess -quasi-episcopal jurisdiction in their Orders—the General of the Order -for the whole Order, the Provincial in his province, the local head in -his house—but apart from specified sins mentioned by Clement VIII, these -religious Superiors may not reserve any others without consent of the -general chapter.[515] - -IV. There must be valid ground for making the reservation, otherwise its -effect would tend to ruin rather than to edification. Hence the undue -multiplication of reserved cases is not allowed; for many people, on -account of the difficulty of getting absolution, are likely to remain for -a long time in a state of mortal sin, and are deterred from receiving the -Sacraments. Clement VIII, therefore, exhorted the bishops to reserve only -a few sins, and only those of which the reservation would be conducive to -the maintenance of Christian morality amongst the faithful.[516] - -V. As reservation is a limitation of jurisdiction, it concerns the -confessor directly, and the penitent indirectly. - -From this it follows that:— - -1. In the matter of reservation, strangers are not to be treated -according to the reservation of the place where they confess, but -according to that in force at their place of residence, exactly in -accordance with the principles concerning the jurisdiction of the -confessors of strangers which we have stated above. It is, therefore, -more correct to say that they are absolved by virtue of the jurisdiction -which the bishop of the penitent gives, and it is reasonable to assume -that the latter does not wish to limit the jurisdiction of confessors -outside his diocese to whom members of his own diocese confess, unless -he has reserved a sin in his own diocese. If, therefore, the stranger -confesses a sin which is reserved in the diocese in which he confesses,—a -diocese which is not his own,—the confessor can absolve him, _quia -absolvit vi jurisdictionis delegatæ ab Episcopo, qui peccatum illud non -reservat_.[517] - -In practice the rule can be laid down that it is always allowed to -absolve a stranger from reserved sins, except when: (1) the sin is -reserved in both the dioceses, that of the confessor and that of the -stranger, or (2) when the stranger leaves his diocese in order to -confess “_in fraudem legis_,” that is, to evade the judgment of his -Superior,[518] which may be assumed to be the case when the sin is of -such a nature that it may easily be brought before the _forum externum_, -or may already, in some form, be before it, so that absolution could not -be administered even _in foro interno_ without the permission of the -bishop.[519] - -2. Although Regulars do not necessarily receive delegated jurisdiction -from the bishop but from the Pope, they cannot absolve penitents from -sins reserved in the respective dioceses, without having received special -faculties from the bishop; the Popes have distinctly so decreed.[520] The -episcopal reservation is binding also for non-exempted nuns; whether it -is so for the exempted, is a matter of controversy. St. Alphonsus[521] -declares both opinions, affirmative and negative, probable. But should a -bishop refuse to the confessor of nuns jurisdiction over reserved cases, -the absolution of the latter for such sins would undoubtedly be invalid; -for the bishop gives jurisdiction for the exempted nuns also, as is plain -from the words of Gregory XV.[522] - -Whether the _familiares_ of Regulars may be absolved without faculties -from the bishop depends in general upon the fact whether they are -absolved by virtue of episcopal or of Regular jurisdiction. When they are -absolved by confessors appointed by the Superior of the Order, they are -not subject to episcopal reservation; but if they are absolved by other -confessors (secular priests), it seems that they are subject to episcopal -reservation. If, however, it is a question of sins to which the bishop -has attached censure, they do not, as a rule, incur this censure, since -they must be treated as strangers.[523] - -VI. In order that the objects of the reservation may be attained, and -this is only possible by a moderate use of the power of reservation, -grave sins only are as a rule reserved. Such is the decision of the -Council of Trent.[524] The following conditions are necessary for the -valid reservation of a sin:[525] (1) It must be (and that _ex natura -rei_, in order that it be reserved _pleno sensu_) a mortal sin, both as -regards the internal and the external act; (2) it must have been carried -out completely, not merely attempted, wished, begun; and (3) it must be -reserved in definite terms. These conditions are by common custom deemed -necessary. A Superior who reserves is, therefore, supposed to be guided -by them unless he has expressly declared himself to the contrary. But -Superiors generally attach particular conditions and exceptions to their -reservations, which must be gathered from their instructions. - -The following remarks may serve for more explicit explanation: (1) As -venial sins are not _materia necessaria_ of absolution, they cannot -be reserved in the strict and full sense. Even if it be _per se_ -possible that the Superior can withdraw from a priest the power to -absolve sacramentally with regard to a venial sin, he cannot oblige -the penitent to procure sacramental absolution from this venial sin. -This applies also (2) to really and positively doubtful sins. Indeed, -as St. Alphonsus teaches,[526] a sin which is in any respect doubtful -is, according to ecclesiastical custom and the concurrent teaching of -the authorities, regarded as not reserved. For, even if any sin which -is _materia necessaria_ of confession might from the very nature of the -case be reserved, yet this is not so in practice, and as reservation is -a _lex odiosa_, it must be interpreted _stricte_. A sin is, therefore, -regarded as not reserved: (_a_) when there is doubt as to its subjective -gravity, and (_b_) when there is doubt as to its objective gravity -(unless the Superior, for particular motives, has declared as _gravis a -materia_ which, _ex se_, is not positively _gravis_, in which case it -would be necessary to stand by his decision); moreover (_c_), there is -no reservation when doubt exists as to whether a positively reserved sin -has been committed, or whether it has been committed with the necessary -conditions, nor is there reservation when doubt exists as to whether -a sin really committed is a reserved sin. But in this case (_in dubio -juris_) the sin would be reserved if the confessor merely _privato -errore_ doubted the reservation, or if he did not know the sin was -actually reserved. But in some dioceses the bishops have declared that -the confession in such a case is valid, and that they do not regard a sin -as reserved if the confessor _privato errore_ or _ex ignorantia_ does not -believe a sin to be reserved.[527] - -If, therefore, the confessor supposes a sin to be reserved, he must -carefully examine if the sin be _interne grave_, if it has been committed -with full advertence, and with full consent of the will _in materia -gravi_, and if it is also _grave quoad actum externum_; for if the -external act were not of a grave nature, it would not be reserved -although it might be inwardly a great sin. For instance, should a person -in a heretical frame of mind have said something which neither contained -heresy _in se_, nor, on account of the circumstances, showed an heretical -tendency, his sin would not be reserved.[528] The Church is, in fact, -accustomed to reserve only _peccata externa_, although it cannot be -doubted that she can also reserve _peccata mere interna_, as this class -of grave sins is, by divine law, subject to the absolving power of the -Church _in foro interno_.[529] - -3. That a sin should be reserved it must be _completum_, completed; that -is, completed in the manner implied by the reservation. When, therefore, -in the words of the (reserving) law, an external, completed action is -specified,—murder, for instance,—and the outward completion is wanting -(in this case, the death of the victim), there is no reservation. If, on -the other hand, attempting crime, or advising it, are _per se_ reserved, -it suffices to have done these acts to make the sin reserved, though the -project has not been executed or the sinful advice failed to produce any -effect. Frequently such incomplete actions are, however, reserved as -accessory only to the principal action. If this latter has been certainly -completed, then these accessory actions are reserved. - -VII. The question: “Must the penitent be aware that his sin is a reserved -one in order that it should be reserved?” is a subject of animated -controversy among the theologians.[530] It is beyond all doubt that -bishops can so reserve the sins of their subjects that the reservation -holds even when the penitent knows nothing about it. Whether they do -reserve in this manner without a formal declaration to that effect, is -a debatable question. St. Alphonsus and not a few other theologians -teach that a sin is reserved even when the penitent did not know of -the reservation, assigning as sole, or at least chief, reason that the -reservation restricts the power of the confessor.[531] The fear that -Christian and religious discipline might thereby be relaxed is alleged -as a second reason.[532] On the other hand, a very great number of -theologians[533] teach that a sin is not to be regarded as reserved -if the penitent did not know that it was so, when the reservation is -_pœnalis_, that is, when it is of a punitive character; but that it _is_ -to be regarded as reserved when the reservation is _medicinalis_, imposed -as a deterrent; that is, when it is not a _pœna medicinalis_, which, -like the censure, is intended to break the stubbornness of the sinner -and deter him from sin, but a _lex disciplinaris_, by which the Superior -himself, or through a specially delegated confessor, wishes to provide a -remedy for sin committed. When, therefore, Lugo denies that reservation -is chiefly of a punitive character, and, therefore, holds good even if -the sinner did not know of the reservation when he was sinning, we agree -with him and with Lehmkuhl.[534] - -If, however, it is a question of reserved censures, the censure -is considered not reserved when the penitent did not know of the -reservation, as only he incurs a censure who knew of it and yet committed -the act to which it is attached. Concerning the Papal reservations, at -least, unanimity upon this point prevails among the theologians, as these -reservations exist chiefly on account of the censure. With regard to -episcopal cases no unanimity exists. Here, as Suarez rightly teaches, we -must have regard for the circumstances; that is, for the terms of the -reservation, for custom, and for the power of the person who reserves, -etc.[535] But if the penitent knew of the censure and did not know of the -reservation, the theory of some few theologians that, in this case, also -the censure is not reserved, is rightly regarded as lax and altogether -improbable. - - -43. The Papal Reserved Cases. - -In the year 1869 Pius IX issued his celebrated Bull “_Apostolicæ Sedis -moderationi_,” the object of which was _to reduce_ the number of censures -imposed at different times, _to explain_ them, and to bring their wording -to such form that uncertainty and doubt on the part of the faithful and -of confessors might cease. By virtue of his apostolical power he therein -decreed that of all the censures ever imposed, whether excommunication -or suspension or interdict, only those should henceforth legally -remain in force which were explicitly introduced into or quoted in his -constitution; that they should derive their validity not only from the -authority of the ancient canons, but also from this constitution itself, -just as though they were there for the first time imposed. This Bull -possesses force and validity for the whole Church from the moment when it -was promulgated _ad valvas Ecclesiæ S. Salvatoris_.[536] The Bull deals -with censures[537] only, and these are either Excommunications,[538] -Suspensions, or Interdicts.[539] - -_I. Excommunicationes speciali modo Romano Pontifici reservatæ._ The -excommunication _spec. modo_ reserved to the Pope is incurred by:[540] - -1. All who have fallen from the Christian faith (apostates) and all -heretics, of whatever name and sect they may be, as well as their -adherents, supporters, and all their defenders in general. - -As the expression “_Omnes a christiana fide apostatas_” is of general -application, not only are all those Christians who have embraced Judaism -or heathenism comprised in it, but also the so-called freethinkers who -wholly give themselves up to unbelief, and have openly renounced all -religion; also rationalists, spiritualists, materialists, pantheists, -deists, atheists, illuminati, those who profess indifferentism in -religion or a merely natural religion, and other unbelievers of similar -character, who belong to the order of Freemasons or adopt the principles -of that order, even when, here and there, some of its members surround -themselves with a halo of religion.[541] - -In order that the confessor may know who incurs excommunication under -the expression _Omnes et singulos hæreticos_ he must form an accurate -conception of heresy, which demands: (_a_) _error formalis_, a conscious -and voluntary denial joined to _pertinacia_, (_b_) the denial of an -article of faith promulgated by the Church, (_c_) the external expression -of such denial, (_d_) a knowledge of the penalty incurred.[542] If any -one of these marks is absent, there is no excommunication. In connection -with this, Renninger remarks:[543] “At a time when, in our social life, -the waves of unbelief run so high, prudence, deliberation, and knowledge -are in an especial manner necessary to him who has the care of souls, -that hasty judgment may be avoided. However mindful he may be of his -office as teacher, he must never forget the demands of Christian charity; -he should never let himself be drawn into disputes which lead to nothing, -still less should he provoke them; he should never be carried away by -violence. Positive assent to a dogma he should only demand when his -office forces him to do so. He should, especially in the confessional, -take for granted that he who believes in the Church, believes also in -her dogmas. He should not put tempting questions. He should remember -that many howl with the wolves without really knowing what the howling -is about, being merely anxious not to lose the nimbus of liberalism. He -should make the way of those who are returning as smooth as is possible -without violating the laws of the Church. The retractation _extra -confessionale_, which cannot be dispensed with, may often be clothed in a -form which is not wounding to self-respect, and is yet valid. Intimations -to this effect have been forwarded in a confidential manner to their -clergy by different Ordinaries, who were moved by a judicious zeal for -the salvation of souls.” To this class belong also the “_Credentes_,” -that is, those who give credence and who—without formally professing -heretical doctrine, without _pertinacia_, or without sufficient -knowledge, pose as heretics—openly profess assent to a heretical doctrine -by word, sign, or action explicitly or implicitly, in a general way. To -these also belong the “_Receptores_,” those who afford to apostates or -heretics, but only as apostates and heretics (_quatenus hæretici et non -ex. gr. qua fures sunt_) shelter and receive or conceal them in order -to protect them from punishment for heresy; to these also belong the -_fautores_, those who in any way render assistance (_per omissionem_ or -_per commissionem_) to apostates or heretics. Finally, we may mention the -_defensores_, those who, in any way, by force or by cunning, by word or -by writing, protect heretics as such, or their doctrines or their books. - -2. All those who, without permission of the Holy See, knowingly read, -print, keep, or in any way defend the books of the above-mentioned -apostates and heretics, if the defense of heresy is the subject-matter of -these books; as, also, the readers, printers, possessors, or defenders of -those books which, by a Papal document (Encyclical, Brief, or Bull) are, -by name (that is, by statement of the title of the book), forbidden. - -(_a_) The Readers. Reading here must be understood as a moral not merely -a physical act, when, for example, the reader understands nothing of -the language;[544] in this kind of reading must be included causing -a book to be read to one (not merely listening, however sinful the -latter may be) since, where there is _eadem ratio_ also _eadem est -juris dispositio_.[545] Moreover, in order to incur the censure, it -is necessary that a part sufficient to constitute a mortal sin, about -a page, be read;[546] that the reading should take place _scienter_, -that is, with knowledge that the book has been written by an apostate -or heretic; finally, it is requisite that it should defend heresy and -that the reading or keeping should take place without authorization from -the Holy See. (_b_) The readers of _books_ in the proper sense of the -word, be they written[547] or printed, not of merely printed matter, -as brochures, pamphlets, newspapers, periodical sheets, etc., although -the reading of such products of the day may often be, and very often -is, more dangerous to faith and morals than the reading of a bad book, -and there is no doubt that the reading and keeping of such literature -is always a great sin, being an offense against the natural law.[548] -(_c_) The _Retinentes_, that is, all those who knowingly retain in their -possession for some time, either in their own homes or in that of a -stranger, in their own name or in that of another, a book forbidden in -the manner above specified. (_d_) _The Imprimentes_, that is, all those -who directly coöperate or assist, as _causæ morales_ or _physicæ_, in -printing: authors, publishers, printers. (_e_) The _Defendentes_, that -is, those who defend books which are forbidden in the sense specified -above.[549] Accordingly he does not incur this excommunication: (1) who -only reads or keeps a few separate leaves of such a book or periodicals, -etc.; (2) who reads perfunctorily; (3) who reads from necessity, to be -able to refute a heretic, and was not able previously to procure the -necessary permission; (4) if his reading is only a physical act, without -his being able to understand anything; (5) if he keeps a book for a short -time only, for example, a day or two, or only till he has obtained the -permission requested, or if he has no opportunity of giving the book to -the Superior.[550] - -3. Schismatics and all who obstinately refuse obedience to the reigning -Pope. - -4. All those who, whatever their position may be, or the dignity they may -hold, appeal from the injunctions or orders of the reigning Popes to a -future general Council; moreover the aiders, advisers, and favorers of -such. - -5. All those who kill, maim, strike, take prisoner, or keep prisoner, or -persecute in hostile manner cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, -Papal legates, or nuncios; those who expel them from their dioceses, or -lands belonging to them, or estates in their possession; as those also -who order or sanction such acts, or give help, advice, or encouragement -in their execution. - -6. Those who directly or indirectly hinder the execution of -ecclesiastical jurisdiction and who, for this purpose (_ad hoc_),[551] -apply to the secular power, as well as those who cause or publish -the commands of such persons, or afford help, advice, or countenance -in such proceeding. The ecclesiastical juridical power is the lawful -competence of the Church to govern her subjects in respect to everything -that belongs to their eternal welfare. This power is exercised _in -foro externo_ and _interno_. The _Exercitium ordinis_ (_consecrare_, -_benedicere_, etc.) is to be distinguished from the _Exercitium -jurisdictionis_. - -7. Those who directly or indirectly compel secular judges to cite -ecclesiastical persons before their tribunal contrary to canonical -regulations (unless it should be the case that ecclesiastical -regulations, either general or particular (Concordats) allow this), as -well as those who issue laws or regulations against the freedom or rights -of the Church. This canon refers to conditions which, though still extant -in certain parts of Europe, have hardly any force in the United States -and other missionary countries; it protects the _privilegium fori_ of -clerics, and in a general way the freedom and rights of the Church.[552] - -8. Those who apply to the secular power to prevent the execution of -decrees or of any acts proceeding from the Holy See or its legates or -delegates, as also those who directly or indirectly actually prevent the -promulgation or execution of such, or who, on account of these decrees or -acts, injure or threaten others (agents, mandatories). - -9. The forgers of Papal documents, the promulgators or subscribers of -such forged Papal documents (_litterarum Apostolicarum etiam in forma -Brevis ac supplicationum gratiam vel justitiam concernentium_). - -10. _Absolventes complices in peccato turpi_, etc.; see § 46. - -11. Those who usurp or sequestrate (_jurisdictionem_) rights of -jurisdiction (secular rights appertaining to the Church by virtue of any -legal titles, for instance, fiscal rights, etc.), the goods or revenues -of ecclesiastics, which belong to them _ratione suarum ecclesiarum aut -beneficiorum_ (that is by virtue of their ecclesiastical position). - -Mere thieves and even robbers of Church property, accordingly, do not -come under the censure here pronounced, as they cannot be classed under -the definition either of _usurpantes_ or _sequestrantes_ (cf. S. C. Inq. -9 March, 1870), nor does the purchasing by contract of such goods from -usurpers come under it. But the latter is subject to the Tridentine -censure, the censure reserved simply to the Pope (cf. S. C. Off. 8 July, -1874). Whether the property of monasteries is included, is a matter -of controversy; the property of pious foundations is not included. The -estates of monasteries fall under the Tridentine censure. - -12. All those who, themselves or through others, attack towns, -territories, or villages, belonging to the Roman Church, destroy -or occupy them; as also those who arrogate to themselves supreme -administrative power in these places, disturb or stop the execution of -such power, and those who afford help, advice, and countenance in such -work. - -13. Accordingly, the canons and dignitaries of vacant cathedral churches, -and, in the absence of a Chapter, all those who are competent to appoint -a vicar-capitular, or to govern the bereaved diocese themselves, incur -the excommunication specially reserved to the Pope, as well as suspension -of the revenues of their benefices, if they presume to admit a bishop -elected by the Chapter, or one presented by the secular power, for the -government and administration of the vacant church before these persons -have accredited themselves by submitting the Papal documents bearing -upon their appointments,—and that for so long as the Apostolic See may -think proper to keep this suspension in force; moreover, those chosen -or nominated and presented for vacant churches who presume to undertake -the government and administration of these churches _ex concessione -et translatione, de qua supra_ (that is, before this submitting of -credentials), as well as all those who have obeyed, or given help, -advice, or countenance to such acts, _cujuscumque status, conditionis, -præ-eminentiæ et dignitatis fuerint_. To this is added: When any one of -the above-named persons is invested with the dignity of a bishop, he -incurs the penalty of suspension _ab exercitio Pontificalium_ and of the -Interdict _ab ingressu Ecclesiæ_, which overtakes him _ipso facto absque -ulla declaratione_, and is reserved to the Apostolic See.[553] - -14. The so-called “civil government pastors,” appointed by the State, -_qui suffragante populo ad parochi sive vicarii officium electi -audeant sive ecclesiæ sive jurium ac bonorum prætensam possessionem -arripere atque obire munia ecclesiastici ministerii_, incur the same -excommunication, in accordance with a solemn decree of the Sacred -Congregation of the Council (13 May, 1874).[554] - -_II. Excommunicationes latæ sententiæ Romano Pontifici simpliciter -reservatæ._ - -There are eighteen of these, to which are added one of the Council of -Trent, and another _ex declaratione S. C. Inq._:— - -1. All who publicly or privately teach or defend tenets which are -condemned by the Holy See under pain of _excommunicatio latæ sententiæ_, -as also those who teach and uphold that the practice of asking the -penitent the name of the accomplice is allowed. - -To the propositions, the teaching and defending of which involves the -above censure, do not belong such tenets as are simply condemned by -the Pope, as those included in the Syllabus, for example, or which are -interdicted under other censures and penalties. - -2. Those who, incited by the devil (_suadente diabolo_), lay violent -hands on clerics, or religious, unless the power of absolution is -accorded to the bishops or others, either _jure_ or _privilegio_. The -words _suadente diabolo_ imply that there is question of a grave sin. -This censure is, accordingly, not incurred if the _percussio_ take -place either _ob legitimam sui defensionem, vel ob justam subditi -Clerici correptionem, vel ex joco aut casu fortuito vel ex subita ira, -vel ex ignorantia_ that the person struck is a cleric. On the other -hand, the censure extends also to _impuberes_ and the _efficaciter -cooperantes_.[555] - -3. Duellists, even when they only challenge to a duel, or accept the -challenge, and all accomplices and abettors. The censures attached to the -duel are, therefore, incurred by:— - -(1) the duellists themselves, whether the duel takes place with or -without witnesses, whether wounding follows or not; (2) the challengers -to a duel, even when the challenge is not accepted; (3) he who accepts -the challenge, even when no duel takes place, and when the parties to -the proposed duel do not meet; (4) the seconds, those who accompany the -duellists, and in fact all those who afford countenance and assistance -to them, and who, by advice, or in any other way, make themselves -accomplices; (5) the spectators who to that end, and of set purpose, -repair to the scene of the encounter, as such onlooking is a further -incitement to the encounter; (6) the persons in authority who permit -this, and, as far as in them lies, do not forbid it. - -4. Those who belong to the sect of the Freemasons or Carbonari or to -other sects of the kind (Fenians in America and Ireland)[556] who agitate -either openly or in secret against the Church or the lawful government, -as well as all who in any way countenance these sects, or do not denounce -their secret heads and leaders (to the local ecclesiastical superiors) -when they clearly realize their duty of denouncing. Political partisans, -so long as they employ only the means which modern public law places at -their disposal in their endeavors to realize their ideal of the future -social state, do not incur this censure. - -5. The violators of the rights of the sanctuary. - -6 and 7. The violators of the inclosure in monasteries and convents. Only -the violation of the so-called Papal inclosure, that is, the inclosure -prescribed by general ecclesiastical law to the Orders with solemn vows, -brings with it the excommunication here mentioned; not the violation of -that inclosure which is observed in the more recent Congregations of men -or women either on account of their rules, or of a particular vow, or -also in consequence of a regulation of the local bishop. Not only do the -violators of the inclosure incur the excommunication, but all, Superiors -or others, who, without lawful reasons, permit entrance. - -8, 9, and 10 refer to simony: real (8); confidential (9); in the bestowal -of benefices, and real on entering a Religious Order (10). - -11 and 12 are directed against the abuse of spiritual favors for the -purpose of unworthy gain, which may take place by procuring for one’s -self: (11) material profit in the dispensing of indulgences and other -spiritual graces, or (12) by collecting Mass stipends at a higher price, -and having these Masses said in places where a lower fee is customary. -While number 11 concerns only the “_inferiores Episcopis_,” number -12 applies to all collectors (_colligentes_) who procure profit to -themselves by the above-mentioned proceedings. - -13. Those who alienate and mortgage lands belonging to the Roman Church. - -14. Members of Religious Orders who, without permission of the local -parish priest, presume to administer to clerics or laymen the Sacrament -of Extreme Unction, or the Eucharist as viaticum; except in case of -necessity. - -15. Those who, without lawful permission, remove from the holy cemeteries -and catacombs of the city of Rome and its territories, relics (therefore, -only remains of saints, _corpora vel partes corporis, etiam in minima -particula, quibus indubia martyrii signa adjuncta sunt_; cf. S. R. C. 10 -Dec., 1863), and those who help and countenance them. - -16. Those who are associated in _crimine criminoso_ with a person whom -the Pope has, by name, excommunicated, that is, who, by helping or -countenancing, take part in the crime on account of which the originator -was, by mention of name, excommunicated by the Pope. - -17. Clerics who knowingly and without compulsion associate _in divinis_ -(that is, in the Church’s offices) with one by name excommunicated by the -Pope, and permit such to participate in divine service. - -In order, therefore, that this excommunication be incurred, the -_communicatio_ must be: (_a_) with a person by name excommunicated by the -Pope; (_b_) knowingly and (_c_) voluntarily. According to the general -and unanimous explanation the _et_ is not to be taken as disjunctive but -conjunctive, so that the “_communicantes in divinis_,” with a person by -name excommunicated, and the “_ipsos in officiis recipientes_” are to be -interpreted as members of a sentence which necessarily belong to each -other.[557] “_Divina_” and “_officia_” are merely synonymous terms. - -18. Those who presume, without proper permission, _etiam quovis -prætextu_, to absolve from the excommunications reserved _speciali modo_ -to the Pope—that is, _extra casum legitimi impedimenti eundi Romam_. - -19. Missionaries who _quocunque modo sive per se sive per alios_ engage -in commerce in _Indiis Orientalibus et America_, and those Superiors who -have not censured their subordinates offending on this head. _Ex authent. -Declarat._ S. C. Inq. 4 Dec., 1872, a Pio IX _approbata_. - -20. Refers to clerics and laymen _quacunque dignitate etiam imperiali -aut regali_ who unlawfully appropriate jurisdictions, interests, rights, -also fiefs and hereditary tenures, incomes, usufruct, or revenues from -any church or benefice, from the _montes pietatis_ and other _pia loca_. -(This is an extension of the number 11 above, in section I of the -Censures.)[558] - -_III. Excommunicationes Ordinariis Reservatæ._[559] - -1. Clerics in major Orders, monks, and nuns, who, after having taken the -solemn vow of chastity (not the simple) dare to contract marriage, as -also all who attempt to perform the marriage rite over the above-named -persons—such marriage being of itself invalid. - -2. All who cause abortion.[560] - -3. Those who knowingly make use of forged Papal documents, or lend -assistance in this crime. - -_IV. Excommunicationes non Reservatæ._ - -1. Those who order or insist with force that notorious heretics or those -by name excommunicated, or by name interdicted, should be buried with the -rites of the Church. - -2. All those who injure or threaten the inquisitors, accusers, witnesses, -or other servants of the Holy Office in the performance of their duty, or -who steal or destroy the official documents of this Office, or who afford -help, advice, or countenance in any one of these actions. - -3. This excommunication falls upon the vendors (_alienantes_) or -receivers (_recipere præsumentes_) of Church property who have not -obtained permission of the Pope in the prescribed form. - -4. Those who omit to denounce a soliciting confessor (§ 45). False -denunciation constitutes a Papal reservation without censure. - -To these excommunications are added Suspensions and Interdicts:— - -The Suspensions _latæ sententiæ_ simply reserved to the Pope, refer to -Ordination which takes place by infraction of definite ecclesiastical -regulations, and to religious who are expelled from their Orders. - -The Interdicts _latæ sententiæ_ affect universities, colleges, and -chapters, whatever name they may bear, who appeal to a future general -Council from the regulations or orders of the ruling Pope of the time, or -who knowingly cause religious service to be held in interdicted places, -as also those who admit persons excommunicated by name to religious -service, to the holy Sacraments, or to burial with Church service, and -that till the ecclesiastical Superior whose orders have been disregarded -has received satisfaction. - - -44. Absolution of Reserved Sins. - -I. All those who can reserve sins may, of their ordinary power -(_ordinaria potestate_), also absolve from them; therefore: (1) those who -have reserved, (2) their successors in the same office, and (3) their -Superiors. - -With delegated authority (_potestate delegata_) those can absolve who -have received a special faculty from the person reserving, or his -successor or Superior, and that only within the limits comprised in the -power conferred. - -II. The bishops and their delegates can, according to common law, absolve -(1) all penitents from the _secret_ Papal reserves, with the exception -of those which are, _speciali modo_, reserved to the Pope;[561] and (2) -according to the general teaching of theologians, which is based upon the -ecclesiastical law itself, those penitents who are prevented from going -to the Pope, from _all_ Papal reserves, secret or public.[562] - -According to the general interpretation of the Council of Trent, and -general custom, the bishop can transfer to another, by free choice -(_vicarius ad id specialiter deputandus_), his powers of absolving -from the Papal reserves under the specified conditions. Some bishops, -especially those in distant parts, not infrequently receive, through the -quinquennial or triennial faculties, greater powers over cases which are, -_speciali modo_, reserved to the Pope. But whether they can also transfer -these powers and how,—whether generally or only in separate cases,—must -be gathered from the document by which these privileges are conferred. - -Formerly Regulars could, by virtue of a perpetual privilege, absolve from -all cases reserved, _ordinario modo_, to the Pope; this privilege has -been withdrawn by the constitution “_Apostolicæ Sedis_.”[563] - -III. If a priest who is not empowered to absolve from reserved cases -hears a reserved sin in the confessional, he must, as a rule, refer the -penitent to the Superior, or to another priest delegated by him. But -if the confession must of necessity be made just at that time, and if -there is any obstacle in the way of going to another, the unauthorized -confessor can absolve directly from the non-reserved, and, consequently, -indirectly from the reserved sins. But the penitent must confess, in -addition to reserved sins, others which are not reserved, or confess -again a sin already confessed, in order that the _materia Sacramenti_ may -not be wanting. It is, however, afterwards the duty of the penitent—if it -is possible to him—to confess the reserved sin to the Superior, or to a -priest designated by him, or, as the case may be, to the same confessor -after the latter has received power to absolve from the sin in question, -in order that he may be directly absolved from the reserved sins.[564] - -But the confessor can also apply to the Superior and from him obtain -powers for this special case to absolve the penitent from the reserved -sin; this must, of course, be done with the most careful and strict -observance of the secrecy of the confessional. Indeed, it is highly -to be recommended in our days that the confessor should not refer the -penitent to the Superior or to another priest with the requisite powers, -but should rather himself procure from the Superior the necessary powers -to absolve the penitent, even when the latter has no long or difficult -journey to make in order to reach the Superior. For, if the penitent -goes himself, the duty of confessing his sins again is incumbent upon -him, and to confess such a sin again requires from most penitents great -self-command: and there would be fear of his changing his mind and not -going to the Superior at all. Let the confessor, therefore, regard it -as a duty of charity,[565] which in most cases he must undertake for -his penitent, to obtain from the lawful Superior the necessary power -to absolve from the sin or censure confessed to him. But if it is a -question of Papal reserves, and if the confessor, in a case of really -urgent necessity, has given absolution, he must, in the name of the -person absolved, apply by letter to Rome, in order that the matter may -be finally set in order. If the Superior refuses “unjustly” to grant the -faculties for a reserved sin, such refusal is unlawful; indeed, he sins -if, without any valid reason, he makes difficulties about imparting the -faculty, and when great detriment to the subject is to be feared from -the refusal, he sins against charity and justice. But if the penitent -could without difficulty confess to a delegated priest, and if there were -lawful ground[566] for obliging the subject to confess to the Superior, -the Superior could without doing wrong refuse the faculty. As a general -rule it is to be observed: that the confessor who seeks faculties for the -absolution of reserved cases, and the Superior who imparts them, should -be guided only by consideration for the greater welfare of the soul of -the penitent; all vain, unworthy motives should be out of question.[567] -In case of refusal of faculties for absolving, another confessor cannot -directly absolve from the reserved sin.[568] - -In requesting power to absolve from reserved sins, the name of the -penitent, his character, position, or parentage must not be mentioned, -and everything must be avoided that might betray him. Without naming the -person the reserved sin is indicated, or else the number only which the -sin in question bears on the official list of reserved cases, followed -by the request for faculties to absolve. Instead of this, one can, for -the special case, request the power to absolve from all the reserved sins -among which the one in question is contained. The instructions given by -the Superior upon application are to be accurately followed; the document -containing them is to be carefully sealed and afterwards burnt. The -priest who dispatches it, of course, gives his name and address, writing -on the envelope the superscription “_Pro foro interno_.” The envelope, -with the request thus sealed, is inclosed in a second envelope, which -must likewise be sealed, and this one is addressed to the Ordinary or -vicar-general.[569] - -In order that the object of the reservations may be attained, the -Superior and his delegate must admonish the penitent with greater -earnestness, impose a more severe penance than ordinary upon him, and -prescribe special remedies, in order that he may be preserved from -relapse. - -To the above we add:— - -1. The difference between direct and simply indirect absolution is the -following: he who is only indirectly absolved cannot as he pleases -receive holy communion or say Mass (at least not when he remains under -the censure), but only when, in individual cases, there is urgent -necessity for the reception of communion or for saying Mass. - -2. The duty of appearing before the Superior is undoubtedly binding under -grave sin; and when it is a question of a censure from which one has been -absolved with the obligation of presenting himself before the Superior -the duty remains in force, under pain of falling again under the same -censure. - -3. When there is question of the duty of applying to the Pope, the Sacred -Penitentiary, or the Cardinal Grand Penitentiary is understood, as this -tribunal acts instead of the Pope in matters of conscience, after the -manner of a _munus perpetuum_, the Pope being neither accustomed to, nor -able personally to, receive all petitions. - -4. “_Casus urgentiores, in quibus absolutio differri nequit absque -periculo gravis scandali vel infamiæ_,” are the following: (_a_) when -the penitent cannot stay away from holy communion or, as the case may -be, omit the celebration of holy Mass, without causing scandal, or -without giving rise to grave suspicion against himself; (_b_) when the -duty of yearly confession is to be fulfilled, or when the penitent would -otherwise remain a long time in grave sin.[570] - -5. According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus,[571] the following -persons are considered as prevented, or, as the case may be, exempted -forever, from going to Rome: (_a_) those who are not able of their own -right to undertake a journey to Rome; (_b_) those who are too poor to -provide the requisites for such a journey; and (_c_) those who are in -weak health, and unequal to the exertions of the journey. It is true -traveling conditions are different now, and the obstacles which St. -Alphonsus considered valid in his day can no longer be allowed to hold -altogether good, but it is easy to gather from what the holy Doctor[572] -says upon the point when an obstacle may still be regarded as legitimate. -Accordingly, the following are to be considered as laboring under a -perpetual impediment of appearing before this Superior for absolution, -always with the understanding that their circumstances remain unchanged -for a period of five years or more: (_a_) children who are still under -paternal authority; (_b_) members of Religious Orders (except when they -have been guilty of some extraordinarily grave crime); (_c_) old people -of more than sixty years; (_d_) those who are in the position of servants -or in similar situations; (_e_) poor persons, who are not accustomed to -gain their maintenance by begging; (_f_) prisoners; (_g_) sick persons -and weak persons; (_h_) those who hold a public office, or provide for -a family, and cannot be replaced by a substitute; (_i_) women, except -those who, in a special case, have incurred a reserved censure, as, for -instance, the violation of the inclosure, in which case application by -letter must always be made to the Pope; (_k_) those not of age; and, -finally, (_l_) all those who cannot undertake this journey without great -moral or bodily harm, either to themselves or to those belonging to them. -The questions as to whether one who has committed reserved sins must, in -the absence of an authorized confessor, confess to a simple one, in the -case of his having to say Mass or communicate, or whether it suffices -to elicit contrition,—and whether the penitent who has committed both -reserved and unreserved sins must accuse himself in the confessional -of the reserved sins as well,—formerly discussed by theologians, are -solved by present usage. As the penitent under existing legislation can -be directly absolved from censures and sins (though with the duty of -applying to the Roman tribunal), the rule now is that the penitent must -immediately confess all his sins.[573] - -IV. In the hour of death every reservation ceases, and any confessor -may then administer absolution. And a simple, that is, unauthorized, -confessor, can absolve a penitent in _articulo mortis_ from reserved sins -even when the Superior is present or is easily accessible, since the -Council of Trent has expressly declared that _in articulo mortis_ there -is no reservation. Moreover, no obligation must be imposed upon the dying -person in case of his restoration to health, unless perhaps he should owe -to some other person a debt of satisfaction or restitution. If, however, -it is a question of reserved censures, the confessor who possesses no -power to absolve from these must impose the duty, in case of recovery, -of appearing before the Superior; in this case it would, of course, be -advisable to set the matter in order at once with the Superior if he be -present or easily accessible. - -With regard to the absolution of reserved cases the following questions -remain to be discussed:— - -1. Is the reservation of sins removed by an invalid absolution which the -Superior, or a priest authorized by him, has administered? In answering -this question theologians set up the following distinctions: (_a_) If -the absolution was invalid without fault on the part of the penitent, -and if the latter confessed all his reserved sins, the reservation is -removed according to the usual, and intrinsically well-founded, opinion -of theologians: in this case the penitent has fulfilled the object of -the reservation if not that of the Sacrament, by submitting the reserved -sins to the judgment of the Superior, or, as the case may be, of the -authorized priest. (_b_) And even if the confession were sacrilegious, -the reservation is, according to the not improbable teaching of many -theologians, removed, and that on the ground just alleged. This teaching, -however, cannot be extended to the confessor who absolves from reserved -sins _virtute jubilæi_, as, at the time of a Jubilee indulgence, the -confessor does not possess the faculty to absolve all penitents from -reserved cases, but only the _vere pœnitentes_, who wish to gain -the Jubilee indulgence; but those who, of their own fault, make the -confession invalid, are certainly not of that class. - -2. When the penitent through forgetfulness has omitted to confess a -reserved sin, the reservation is removed, according to an opinion which -St. Alphonsus, following Lugo, characterized as the most common among -theologians and as probable, so that _any_ confessor could, afterwards, -directly absolve from these reserved sins, and this is presumed to be -the intention of the Superior as regards the properly disposed penitent. -On the other hand, not a few theologians, among them Suarez,[574] -teach that in the above case the reservation is not removed, and St. -Alphonsus designates this opinion as the more probable, and for the very -strong reason that (as he says) a reservation is only removed by being -submitted to the judgment of the Superior, in order that the object of -the reservation may be attained. This latter opinion certainly deserves -the preference in view of the argument alleged; but the following cases -are excepted: (1) when one may assume from any positive sign that the -Superior wished to remove the reservation; (2) when the penitent went to -the Superior or to an authorized priest for the purpose of being absolved -from all reserved sins, and declared this wish to the confessor; (3) -when a privilege was granted in favor of the penitent, such as either -expires with an official act, or is limited to a definite period, as, for -example, at Jubilee time. To these Suarez adds a fourth exception—when -(4) the reservation refers only to the censure, “because in order to -absolve from a censure, it is not necessary _per se et directe_, to know -the matter in question accurately in detail, but the general intention -of absolving from all sins, reserved included, to the extent of the -confessor’s power and the penitent’s necessity is sufficient for the -purpose.”[575] But if the penitent has, through his own fault, failed to -confess the reserved sin, the reservation is certainly not removed, as -one cannot here assume that the Superior annuls it.[576] - -3. It is not allowed to absolve a penitent only from the reserved sins -and for the rest to send him to another confessor. Nothing can justify -such a proceeding.[577] - -4. If a penitent has confessed a sin as to the reservation of which -a doubt exists, the latter is directly absolved by the absolution -administered by a simple confessor. This need not be afterwards -confessed if it should prove that the sin was undoubtedly reserved.[578] - -5. A confessor has applied for powers to absolve the penitent from -reserved sins; in the meantime, however, after these powers have been -granted, and before they have been exercised, the penitent has again -committed the reserved sin or committed it several times, or committed -other reserved sins—do the powers applied for suffice in order to be able -to absolve? If the powers are conferred in a general way, say in the -following or a similar manner: “_Facultatem tibi concedimus pœnitentem -hac vice absolvendi a reservatis_,” the confessor can, according to a -very probable and general opinion, absolve the penitent from all reserved -sins committed before and after; only the interval between the powers -conferred and the new reserved sins incurred must be no longer than -one month, and the powers must not have been conferred on account of a -festival which is already past. If, however, the faculties have been -conferred for a definite class of reserved sins only without specifying -the number, these faculties suffice to absolve the penitent (but only to -absolve him once) from all cases of this kind.[579] - - - - -CHAPTER III - -ABUSE OF POWER BY THE MINISTER OF THE SACRAMENT - - -An exalted, indeed a divine, power has God conferred upon priests, in -authorizing them, as judges of souls in His stead, to remit or to retain -sins. This power has been conferred upon them for the salvation and -welfare of souls. It is, therefore, greatly to be regretted that we must -here speak of an abuse of this power. The Church has, alas! found herself -obliged to adopt severe measures against this abuse, in order to prevent -it, but in her severity she shows her zeal for the faithful, and proves -herself the faithful dispenser of the Mysteries of Christ. There are -three ways in which the priest may abuse his power in the Sacrament of -Penance. - - -45. Inquiring after the Name of the Accomplice in Sin. - -In a former paragraph (§ 27) we have laid down that it may be permissible -to reveal indirectly the accomplice of the sin (_complex peccati_) in so -far as the complete confession of one’s own sin may render this avowal -necessary, and that, accordingly, the confessor is also allowed, in order -to make the penitent’s confession entire, to ask the circumstances which -alter the nature of the sin, or to put questions which are necessary -in order to provide the better for the penitent’s spiritual welfare, -questions through which the _complex peccati_ might also become known -to the confessor. Here we treat of a totally different case, viz. the -illicit attempt of detecting the name of the _complex peccati_ without -necessity, and of demanding its revelation under threat of refusing -absolution. - -On this point Benedict XIV issued several constitutions[580] which Pius -IX confirmed in his Constitution “_Apostolicæ Sedis_” (see § 43, p. 326). -The motives of the legislation are stated thus: many confessors, led -astray by false zeal, have introduced a perverse and pernicious practice -in hearing the confessions of the faithful ... that when penitents come -to them who had an accomplice in their sin, they ask these penitents -indiscriminately for the name of the accomplice. Nor do they do this in -a kindly manner, by advice; but they force and compel them to reveal the -name by threats of refusing absolution; indeed, not content with this, -they even go so far as to demand from their penitents that they should -mention the dwelling-place of the accomplice. This absolutely intolerable -imprudence they justify by the pretext of care for the amendment of -the accomplice, and do not hesitate to defend it by certain opinions -borrowed from theologians, whereas they only falsely apply true and -sound teachings to their own and their penitent’s ruin, and, moreover, -are guilty before God, the eternal Judge, of many and great evils which -follow from their work, as they should easily have apprehended. Nor could -malicious talk and scandal fail to arise from this conduct, nor any other -result be expected than that not only the dispensers of the Sacrament, -but the sacred Ministry itself, become odious, and the faithful perplexed. - -In the second constitution the Pope decrees:— - -1. The excommunication _latæ sententiæ_, which is reserved to the Pope, -against all who in future presume to teach that this practice is allowed, -and against all who orally or in writing dare to defend it, or attack, or -presumptuously expound otherwise, or distort, what was said against this -practice in the first Brief. - -2. The suspension from hearing confessions _ferendæ sententiæ_, and -other heavy penalties against those who, after the manner of the -above-described and condemned practice, dare to ask penitents the name -of the _complex peccati_, or the dwelling-place, or other circumstances -imparting a closer or more individual designation of this _complex_, -threatening at the same time the refusal of the sacramental absolution to -the penitent who refuses to give information on these points. - -3. The Sacred Office was advised rigorously to proceed against those -who taught that this practice was allowed, defended it, etc. (as above -indicated), and against the confessors who applied this pernicious -teaching, when their conduct excited suspicion that they adhered to -the false doctrine. The Pope, therefore, laid upon all (except the -penitents _in propria causa_) who knew that a confessor was guilty of -this teaching, or of practices which excited suspicion—an obligation of -bringing the matter before the notice of the Sacred Office within a month -(under pain of excommunication, which is now, however, removed).[581] - -The Constitutions of Benedict XIV, however, as is clear from the -foregoing, are leveled against the practice of asking penitents, -_passim_, indiscriminately, who have an accomplice in their sin, for the -name of the accomplice. The prohibition is, therefore, not an absolute -one, for there may be circumstances in which it is allowed to demand from -the penitent even under threat of withholding absolution, the naming of -the partner in sin. This is the case when the confessor holds at the -same time another office, such as that of a Superior, by virtue of which -he can oblige the penitent to reveal to him the authors and accomplices -of the sin, in order to punish them as pernicious to the general weal. -If this is the case, the confessor does not ask for the name of the -accomplice as confessor but as Superior, and as Superior he rightfully -demands to know who the accomplice is. - -When, again, the confessor sees that by the concealment of the partner -in guilt there would arise grave evil which the penitent is bound -to prevent, the latter must, out of regard for the general welfare, -make known the accomplice in his sin to the proper person; but if -the confessor is at once convinced that the penitent cannot himself -communicate it directly to the Superior, and also that he has no other -more suitable person through whom he could do so than the confessor -himself, the penitent is bound to accept this sole remaining expedient, -and inform the confessor of the accomplice, and the confessor may force -him to do so under pain of withholding absolution; for, if the penitent -were not willing to obey, he would not be worthy to receive absolution. -“However,” Lugo warns us, “the confessor must proceed in this matter with -great caution, that scandal may not arise in making use of information -obtained in the confessional. It is, therefore, better to request the -penitent to speak to him upon the subject outside the confessional.” -Indeed, it is necessary to require that the information should not be -given him under the seal of the confessional.[582] - - -46. The Absolution of the Complex in Peccato Turpi. - -To preserve the sanctity of the institution of Penance, to protect the -Sacraments from contempt, and save souls from ruin, the Church has laid -down the following very salutary regulations:[583] - -I. No priest, whether secular or regular, possesses jurisdiction over his -_complex in peccato turpi_ against the sixth commandment, till another -confessor has absolved the _complex_ from this sin. - -According to this, jurisdiction is withdrawn from the confessor only -in respect to the sin against the sixth commandment which he himself -has committed with the penitent.[584] Nevertheless, this withdrawal of -jurisdiction has also the effect that he cannot validly absolve from -other mortal sins which the penitent (_complex_) confessed at the same -time with that sin. For the Pope has declared absolutely invalid and void -the absolution administered by a priest who possesses no jurisdiction -over such a sin and such a penitent.[585] But after the sin of the -_complex_ has been remitted by another priest, the jurisdiction of -the unhappy priest over this penitent revives, even with respect to -this directly remitted sin. The _Sacerdos complex_ could, therefore, -afterwards absolve his _complex_ from sins which the latter had -subsequently committed—not with him. Such a proceeding is, however, to be -discouraged, for the sense of shame is thereby lost, the reverence due -to the Sacrament dies away, and the danger of relapse, or, at least, of -great temptation, is imminent. Such unhappy penitents must, therefore, -be admonished never more to confess to the _confessarius complex_.[586] -But what is the _confessarius complex_ to do if the penitent again -confesses that sin in which the confessor has been _complex_, although -it has already been remitted by another confessor? If he only confessed -this sin, the case would be just as if a penitent confessed a reserved -sin only to a priest not empowered for reserved sins; the latter could -not absolve, because there would be (for him) no proper _materia -sacramenti_.[587] But if the penitent (_complex_) confessed other sins -(in addition to that in which the confessor had been his _complex_) -absolution could be given,[588] since a priest who is not authorized for -reserved sins can administer absolution when reserved and unreserved -sins have been confessed. But then the absolution is, both by the nature -of the case and the intention of the person absolving, applied to the -unreserved sins only. There is, moreover, a great difference between -the two cases,—the confession of the sin in which the confessor was an -accomplice, and the confession of reserved and unreserved sins,—namely, -that to absolve a penitent who has confessed reserved and unreserved -sins, a _causa ab integritate confessionis excusans_ must be present, -whereas no such reason is here necessary in order to submit again to the -power of the keys a sin already remitted.[589] - -In some dioceses it was _de jure particulari_ forbidden that a priest -should ever hear the confession of a _complex, saltem copula consummata_. -This prohibition, however, the S. Congr. Concil. repeatedly rejected, -and when the resolutions of a synod containing such a prohibition were -submitted to it the Congregation returned the answer: _Tale decretum -deleatur_, although the defenders of the decree adduced much in its -justification, and emphatically denied the danger of scandal which many -maintained would easily arise in little places. Thus, most wisely did the -Congregation curb undue zeal.[590] - -But here another and much more difficult question forces itself upon -us: What is to be done, _si alicubi mulier, quæ misere in ejusmodi -peccatum cum sacerdote lapsa fuerit, nullum alium, quocum peccatum -illud sacramentaliter confiteatur, sacerdotem ibi habeat_, but the -circumstances of the person and of the place, etc., are such that she -cannot go elsewhere to confess to another confessor, and there is no -hope of her being able to confess to another priest at the place in -question (at a mission, for example). Ballerini declares that it was not -the intention of Benedict XIV, when he gave his Constitution, that such -persons, in the above circumstances, should be deprived of the Sacraments -of the Church their whole life, till in the hour of their death they -could at last be absolved _a sacerdote peccati complice_. And might not -such a person die suddenly without illness preceding? What then is she to -do when the time for the yearly confession and Easter communion has come? -May we say that she can always receive holy communion with _contritio_ -alone, indeed, that she must receive it? And what if scandal arises among -the people, and the woman loses her good reputation by its becoming -known that she has not received holy communion for several years? If any -one objects that, in this extremity, such a penitent might be proceeded -with exactly as if she had a reserved sin to confess, and, therefore, -omitting that sin (over which the confessor has no jurisdiction), the -other sins could be submitted to absolution, by which that sin also -would be indirectly remitted, we ask: How and when will this sin be -finally submitted to the power of the keys? Great difficulties beset -this question, and we dare not make a decision supported only by our own -judgment. - -Two things are, however, clear enough: one is that when Benedict XIV -withdrew from the _confessario criminis complici_ the jurisdiction to -administer absolution to the _complex ab eodem crimine_, he certainly -removed the occasion of very great scandal, but he by no means wished to -close to the sinner the way of reconciliation opened by Christ to him -and to all the faithful; indeed, it was precisely in order that this -reconciliation might be the more certainly and better accomplished by -the agency of another priest, that he wished to make the _confessarius -criminis complex_ incapable of accomplishing it. He, therefore, -presupposed, what generally is the case, that other priests would not -be wanting, from whom the penitent, by confession and sacramental -absolution, might obtain remission of her sin. It has never been the -intention and practice of the Church, by restricting jurisdiction for the -remission of certain sins and reserving absolution for them, to set aside -the ordinary means of forgiveness, the sacramental confession of sin, and -to supply for this by perfect contrition or indirect remission. However -ample these extraordinary means for obtaining eternal salvation may be, -yet the Church does not allow that the ordinary dispensation set up by -Christ for our welfare should be disregarded. The Church, therefore, -removed all restrictions upon absolution for the hour of death, so that -all priests can absolve every penitent from all sins and censures. We are -not, however, to suppose that the Church has made this provision solely -for the moment and the danger of death; she makes other exceptions.[591] -It is, therefore, very far from the intention and the custom of the -Church so to limit the jurisdiction necessary to the administration -of the Sacrament of Confession that it remains restricted even when a -sinner, during a long time, and still less if during his whole lifetime, -is unable to have access to a priest whose power is not limited. And -who, out of fear of an abuse, would forbid a priest the dispensing of a -Sacrament, or one of the faithful the reception of a Sacrament, when the -reception of such Sacrament appears necessary? When, therefore, necessity -demands the reception of the Sacrament, it is not to be refused by the -priest nor to be neglected by the faithful. If abuse takes place, let the -blame fall upon those who would not make good use of the benefit.[592] - -_A pari_ Ballerini teaches that the _confessarius complex_ may administer -absolution from the _crimen, in quo ipse complex fuit_, to the penitent -who has no other confessor, and who, if he were not absolved by the -_confessarius complex_, would be obliged to abstain for a long time from -holy communion with possible scandal to others, and this teaching is in -the Commentaries of the _Acta S. Sedis_ extended to other extraordinary -cases, when, _during a long time_, no opportunity presents itself to the -_persona complex_ of confessing _without evident danger of sacrilege_, -and when, at the same time, evident danger of disgrace or even of -suspicion arises from the long abstention from the holy Sacraments.[593] - -II. To incur this penalty it is necessary:— - -1. That the sin in which the confessor was an accomplice should be a -mortal sin, both internally and in the external act. Purely internal -mortal sins, and those not completed externally, are, therefore, excluded; - -2. That _both_ confessor and penitent should have sinned and have been -guilty of the _peccatum turpe_; - -3. That the two preceding conditions should be certainly fulfilled; hence -the sin must certainly have been mortal internally and externally, and on -the part of both the confessor and the penitent, on the principle that -_odia restringenda sunt_.[594] - -Accordingly, it is indifferent if the _complex_ be a person of the male -or female sex. Benedict XIV expressly says: “_Qualemcumque personam_”; -moreover, it is not necessary that the sin should be completed, as the -Constitution says generally and indefinitely: “a sin against the sixth -commandment,” and the object of the law is—_occasiones non tantum copulæ -sed omnis turpitudinis a sanctitate tribunali pœnitentiæ removere. -Casum complicis ergo constituunt: tactus impudicus, osculum, amplexus, -colloquium uti et aspectus, dummodo complicitatem important ac tam -interne, tum externe sint graviter mali._[595] - -But when one party has either not gravely sinned or only by an internal -act, there is no _casus complicis_ in question. - -III. The _confessarius_ can absolve his _complex_, when the latter is -_in articulo mortis_ and when another priest, who may also be without -faculties, cannot be called in without greater danger of defamation or -of scandal, or when another priest is, indeed, present, but declines to -hear the confession of the dying person. In the latter case this priest -is regarded as absent. The _sacerdos complex_ is, however, bound to -take all care that no suspicion or scandal arises from the presence of -another priest; he may, for example, upon some pretext or another, absent -himself, having previously induced the dying person to send for another -confessor. If he fail to do this, and so is under the necessity of -administering absolution to the dying person, he sins gravely and incurs -the penalty decreed; but the absolution administered by him, “_etiam -directa hujus peccati_” would be valid, that the dying person might not -be lost.[596] - -All authors teach that a priest can also absolve his _complex_ who is -_in articulo mortis_, when the latter, without fault on the part of -the _confessarius complex_, refuses to confess to another priest. This -penitent, however, must be _in bona fide_ as regards the commandment -of the Church. Here the eternal salvation of the poor penitent is in -question, and frequently scandal would result if the priest should refuse -to hear the confession of the dying person.[597] - -IV. The confessor who, apart from the specified cases of necessity, -absolves his _complex in peccato turpi_ from this _peccatum turpe_ -incurs, _ipso facto_, the excommunication specially reserved to -the Pope.[598] If a priest absolves his _complex ex ignorantia_ or -_inadvertentia_, and thus remains free from grave sin, he does not incur -the censure. But it is doubtful whether the absolution administered -is valid. The _sententia communis_ rejects the absolution as invalid, -since the Pope has only excepted the absolution administered in the -hour of death; but several later theologians hold the absolution to be -valid, because the Pope, as they point out, speaks only of the _sacerdos -sacrilegus_, who knowingly and intentionally absolves his _complex_.[599] - -Further, a priest does not incur the excommunication who hears the -confession of his _complex_, but does not absolve him, seeing that, -according to the Constitution of Pius IX, only the _sacerdotes -absolventes_ fall under the excommunication. If, however, the confessor -pretends to absolve his _complex_ (_fingere absolutionem_) while, in -reality, he does not absolve him,—for instance, saying some prayer in -place of the usual form of absolution,—he incurs excommunication. So the -S. C. Inq. declared on December 10, 1883, with the approbation of Leo -XIII.[600] - -If the penitent confesses to the _sacerdos complex_ and conceals the -sin against the sixth commandment, which the confessor has committed -with him, and the confessor absolves him, the latter does not incur the -excommunication, according to a declaration of the S. Pœnitent. on May -16, 1887. “For this penalty falls only on the priest who absolves his -_complex_ from that _peccatum turpe_ in which the priest has been the -_complex_ of the penitent.” Nevertheless, according to the declaration -of the Penitentiary, the confessor of the priest who has absolved -his _complex_ (even when he has not absolved him from the _peccatum -complicitatis_) is bound to remind him with the greatest zeal that he has -been guilty of a very grave sin, and an abominable abuse of the Sacrament -of Confession, and he may only absolve this priest after exhorting him -in the most forcible manner to relinquish his office as confessor, and -after imposing on him the obligation of refraining from hearing the -confessions of his _complex_ in the future; and that if the _persona -complex_ appears in the confessional again, he should exhort this person -to accuse himself to another confessor in a valid confession both of -the _peccatum complicitatis_ and of the sins invalidly confessed. The -concession of the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIV. cap. 6, “Liceat”) does -not empower a bishop to absolve a priest who has absolved his _complex_. -The Sacred Penitentiary has expressly declared this on July 18, 1860, and -it results from the Constitution “_Apostolicæ Sedis_,” in which all the -_casus papales_ reserved _speciali modo_ to the Pope are excepted from -the powers granted to bishops in the cap. “Liceat.”[601] - -But if, “_in casibus urgentioribus_,” absolution cannot be deferred -without danger of great scandal and disgrace, a bishop, or another -priest, can administer absolution _injunctis de jure injungendis_ on the -confessor who has unlawfully absolved his _complex in peccato turpi_, -but under penalty of “reincidence” if within the space of a month, the -absolved priest has not recourse by letter, and through the confessor, to -the Holy See.[602] - -If a confessor in such a case is obliged to apply to the Holy See, he -must address his petition to the Sacred Penitentiary. In this petition he -must adopt a fictitious name, set forth the case concisely and clearly, -with all the circumstances appertaining to the matter, as: _quot personas -complices et quoties Sacerdos absolvere attentaverit; an unam vel plures -irregularitates contraxerit ex violatione censuræ per celebrationem missæ -vel exercitium solemne Ordinis Sacri; an alias jam acceperit Rescriptum -gratiæ pro absolutione ab hujusmodi crimine_.[603] - - -47. Sollicitatio Proprii Pœnitentis ad Turpia. - -The minister of the Sacrament of Penance is a man, and remains a man; -even when he is administering this Sacrament he is subject to the -weaknesses of human nature, and hence he bears within him the inclination -to evil and is exposed to the temptations of the devil; and it is there -where he destroys the work of Satan that he must experience the hostility -of the evil one more, perhaps, than elsewhere. In addition to this, the -confessor holds such intimate intercourse with the penitent, and must, -alas! so often deal with dangerous matter; he must listen to certain -sins, investigate them and give them his attention in order to discharge -his duty rightly. Thus may be explained the dreadful abuse of the -Sacrament of Confession of which we now treat,—an abuse, however, which -is very rare,—the _Sollicitatio proprii pœnitentis ad turpia_.[604] - -There is question only of an _abusus Sacramenti Pœnitentiæ ad turpia_, -but not of an _abusus aliorum Sacramentorum ad turpia_, and also not -of an _abusus ejusdem Pœnitentiæ Sacramenti ad alia peccata, quamvis -gravissima_. - -_Jam quæritur_:— - -I. _Quid intelligatur per turpia vel inhonesta, ad quæ fit sollicitatio?_ - -II. _Quo actu sollicitatio perficiatur?_ - -III. _Qualis nexus inter sollicitationem et Sacramentum Pœnitentiæ -intervenire oporteat, ut revera et ex mente legislatoris sollicitatio -abusus Sacramenti sit?_ - -Ad I. _Per peccata turpia, ad quæ fit sollicitatio, intelliguntur omnes -actus externi libidinosi seu actus luxuriæ, quo spectant etiam actus -vel ex sua natura vel ex particulari dispositione complicis vel ex -intentione operantis aliunde satis manifestata_ (_v.g._ _signo_, _verbo_) -_inductivi ad vehementem commotionem spirituum genitalium; intelligantur -ergo: quilibet tractatus turpis, sermo obscænus vel actio obscæna. -Sollicitatio ex mente legislatoris non perpetratur actibus tantum -venialiter inhonestis adeoque non veneriis (nam in his non est parvitas -materiæ). Excipe, si ex circumstantiis certe conjiceretur, sacerdotem -actu de se leviter malo (v.g. verbo blandiori) animum habuisse procedendi -ad gravia.[605] Confessarius consentiens tantum mulieri sollicitanti -in confessione nullo modo eximitur a peccato sollicitationis_, i.e. -_inhonesti tractatus in confessionali, idque licet statim desierit -de illa turpi materia loqui, differendo illius complementum ad aliud -tempus et non præbendo absolutionem pœnitenti; item licet inductus metu -consenserit sollicitationi[606] et a fortiori, quando confessarius et -pœnitens invicem se sollicitarunt, puta quando confessarius ad unam -turpitudinis speciem sollicitatus ad aliam sollicitavit pœnitentem. Juxta -Decreta sollicitaret etiam confessarius, qui diceret pœnitenti: “Si -sæcularis essem, te uxorem ducerem”; vel “Expecta me hodie domi tuæ, quia -tecum loqui cupio” et postea domi sollicitaret; vel “Hisce peccatis tuis -pollutionem passus sum”; item, si feminæ petenti confessionem responderet -in confessionali: “Nolo tuam audire confessionem, ne quid mihi contingat; -quia amore tui captus sum”; item “Totum me commoveri sentio ex affectu, -quo te prosequor”; vel “Domum tuam veniam et promitte mihi, te facturum -esse quod voluero.”_[607] - -Ad II. _Crimen sollicitationis ad turpia adest, si confessarius, -qualiscunque sit, tam sæcularis quant regularis (vel etiam sacerdos -carens jurisdictione at hic in confessione)[608] sollicitat pœnitentem -sive marem sive feminam ad peccandum sive secum sive cum alio; nec -refert, utrum ipsum pœnitentem sollicitet, an mediante pœnitente aliam -quampiam personam. Præterea sollicitatio hujusmodi ex parte confessarii -fieri potest vel_ immediate _(v.g. verbis obscænis) vel_ mediate, -_puta per chartam postmodum a pœnitente legendam;[609] et habenda -est_ completa, _sive pœnitens reapse ad peccatum pertrahatur, sive -resistat, dummodo ponatur medium aptum alliciendi ad actus inhonestos; -nec refert, medium adhibitum in se malum sit an indifferens, dummodo ex -circumstantiis postea cognoscatur, id ad sollicitandum adhibitum esse, -puta, si confessarius mulieri hoc animo intimet, ut expectet eum domi, -vel eam eodem animo interroget, ubi habitet_. - -Ad III. _Ut vero sollicitatio ejusmodi sit abusus Sacramenti oportet, -ut, modo a lege determinato, relatio aliqua intercedat inter ipsam et -confessionem vel inter ipsam et locum ubi confessiones excipiuntur._[610] - -(_a_) _Relatio requisita ad confessionem adest, si sollicitatio fit_: (1) -_in actu sacramentalis confessionis incæptæ, licet non perfectæ; vel_ (2) -_immediate ante confessionem; vel_ (3) _immediate post confessionem_, -i.e. _quando inter sollicitationem et confessionem nihil mediat, ita ut -nec confessarius nec pœnitens ad aliud negotium serio se divertant_.[611] - -(4) _Occasione confessionis_ (_veræ_) _vid. quando fit invitatio -ad confessionem hic et nunc excipiendam ex parte pœnitentis, aut -quando confessarius invitat pœnitentem ad confessionem hic et nunc -faciendam, et hac occasione data, divertit pœnitentem a proposito et -ad turpia provocat; aut si in confessione, sive immediate ante sive -post, initium sollicitationis fit, quæ postea completur v.g. si dantur -litteræ sollicitantes vel si fit interrogatio de habitatione et postea -sequitur sollicitatio domi, vel si ob fragilitatem mulieris ex ejus -confessione cognitam postea eam domi sollicitaverit, dummodo ex indiciis -sufficienter constat, eum ex ilia scientia non aliis ex causis ad id -motum fuisse.[612] Ejusmodi indicia aderunt si v.g. confessarius auditis -peccatis mulierem interrogaverit, ubi habitet, an sola domi manere soleat -vel alia hisce similia interrogaverit, vel, dum ad peccandum accessit, -verbis aut factis aliqua commemoravit ex iis, quæ ex confessione -accepit._[613] - -(5) _Prætextu confessionis_ (_fictæ_), _si confessarius ex pravo fine -invitat mulierem ad confessionem et deinde sollicitat, vel feminæ suadet, -ut fingens se ægrotam eum, confessarium suum, tanquam ad confessionem -faciendam, revera ad peccandum accersat. Secus probabilius dicendum, -si prætextus confessionis non est ordinatus ad sollicitationem sed ad -peccati jam conventi executionem, puta ad avertendum Superiorem vel -familiares domus a scandalo et suspicione mali._[614] - -(_b_) _Relatio requisita ad locum, ubi confessiones excipiuntur, aderit, -si actus prohibiti exerceantur_:— - -(1) _In confessionali proprie dicto_; (2) _in loco quocunque, ubi -confessiones excipi solent, licet confessionale ibi non inveniatur_; (3) -_in loco quocunque, quem confessarius ad confessiones audiendas pro suo -arbitrio elegit_. - -_Ut autem crimen sollicitationis ex mente legislatoris adsit ac -propterea pœna sollicitantibus confessariis inflicta contrahatur, ob -circumstantias sub_ (_b_) _enarratas enascatur simulatio confessionis -accedat necesse est_, i.e. _confessarius et pœnitens ita se gerant -oportet, ut confessionem ille audire_ (_v.g._ _aures applicando_), _hic -peragere videatur. Hæc tamen simulatio non requiritur, si sollicitat -in confessionali personam, quæ pariter in eo invenitur; sufficit enim, -ut sacerdos in confessionali de rebus turpibus agat, quin simulet -confessionem audire._[615] - -The _sollicitatio_ described in the foregoing is a very grave mortal sin -of impurity, of sacrilege, and of scandal. For it is a dreadful abuse -of the Sacrament of Penance, when, as Gregory XV expresses himself, the -confessor thus offers the penitent poison instead of a remedy, instead of -bread a scorpion, from a spiritual father becoming a wretched betrayer of -souls. - -IV. All penitents are bound under pain of mortal sin to denounce to -the _Ordinarius loci_, or to the Holy See through the Penitentiary or -Inquisition, the confessors who have been guilty of solicitation.[616] - -The object of this denunciation is the following:— - -1. If the person who denounces is known as honorable and truthful, if -no evil intention, such as revenge, enmity, or calumny is to be imputed -to him, whilst on the other hand, the denounced priest is already -known to be not very conscientious, the denunciation effects that the -_suspected_ confessor will be _watched_ by the _Ordinarius_.[617] And -if stronger grounds of suspicion against the denounced priest accumulate -from other quarters (for example, suspicious intercourse), this supplies -the _Ordinarius_ with a motive for administering to him, in the first -place, a fatherly warning, in doing which, the _Ordinarius_ does not -yet impute to him the _crimen sollicitationis_, but rather exhorts -him to be conscientious; in this, however, the _Ordinarius_ must so -proceed as not to excite the suspicion of the denounced against the -denouncer. “_Ut plurimum enim nonnisi a tertia denuntiatione ad judicium -procedi debet._”[618] The precise object of the law is to safeguard -the Church and to inspire confessors with a just dread of the enormity -of the crime which abuses the sacred tribunal of penance; or, as Amort -expresses it: _finis non est emendatio personæ particularis sed securitas -publica Sacramenti et animarum ex castigatione certa tam abominandi -sceleris, et ex metu indeclinabili omnium confessariorum incurrendi -gravissima supplicia etiam actu unico aut, semel tantum iterato; imo -etiam indemnitas Ecclesiæ ne scil. ejusmodi pestes ad officia publica -subrepant, quo nihil est nocentius communi Ecclesiæ bono_.[619] Every -solicited person is, therefore, strictly bound to denounce, and is not -released from this duty because another has denounced; this duty never -ceases to bind, though it is sometimes suspended for a time; in case -of repetition a confessor must be again denounced, even if he has been -already punished on account of the first transgression, or has not been -fully convicted of solicitation;[620] again, the penitent is bound to -denounce, even when, in consequence of _correctio fraterna_, he believes -that he may confidently hope for amendment, indeed, as St. Alphonsus -teaches, even when the fault has been atoned for;[621] denunciation must -be made if the fact is certain though it cannot be judicially proved, or -when the crime is secret, or was committed a long time before. It must -not be supposed that belated information of this kind can be of no use; -it may perhaps serve to complete previous information respecting the same -confessor, or, in conjunction with other grounds of suspicion to close to -a hypocrite the road to ecclesiastical dignities, or at least, to inspire -the confessor with lasting fear of filling up the measure of iniquity -by repeated solicitation, seeing that even solicitations committed a -long time before may be brought into court. If, however, the person who -solicited is dead, the denunciation need not take place, because then the -full object of the law can no longer be realized.[622] - -2. The duty of denouncing is not incumbent upon the person who solicits, -nor is he bound to admonish the penitent solicited by him to make the -denunciation. All solicited penitents, however, without exception, male -and female, seculars and regulars, high and low, to whatever class -they may belong, are bound to denounce. Denunciation is also incumbent -(but now no longer _sub excommunicatione_)[623] upon all witnesses of -this crime, eye-witnesses or ear-witnesses, and whoever has received -information of the solicitation outside confession, directly or -indirectly, from words of the person soliciting himself, or the solicited -person, if the latter be trustworthy.[624] The penitent must denounce -in any case whether he has consented to, or rejected, the solicitation, -but he need not make known his consent; he must also denounce when the -solicitation has been mutual between confessor and penitent, or when the -penitent has solicited, and the confessor has consented.[625] - -A young girl, who, at the time of being solicited, was ignorant of any -evil design, must, according to a decree of the Sacred Inquisition (May -11, 1707) denounce the confessor as soon as she has attained to an -understanding of the solicitation which took place. - -The solicited person, or whoever has certain knowledge of the -solicitation, is not released from the obligation to denounce on account -of the general difficulties attaching to the denunciation itself, as, for -example, shame at having been solicited; fear that the judge might become -suspicious of her; the danger of harm or detriment to the denouncing -person; any such damage must be considered as trifling compared with the -possibility of scandal to the Church and to souls; the use of _Epikeia_ -(_i.e._, a benign interpretation of the law) is not justifiable in this -case. - -3. Every priest who has been guilty of the crime of solicitation, -including him who possesses no jurisdiction, is liable to denunciation, -be he secular or regular, or in any way exempted, whatever dignity he may -hold; whether he has himself solicited, or consented to the solicitation -of the penitent, and even when he has already amended.[626] - -V. The confessor’s dealing with solicited persons is regulated in -accordance with the following ordinances of the Papal Constitutions and -Instructions of the Sacred Congregation. - -1. All confessors are bound _sub gravi_ to instruct those of their -penitents whom they know to have been solicited in the specified manner, -that it is their duty to denounce the persons soliciting. This duty of -instructing remains imperative even when the solicited penitents are _in -bona fide_. - -The confessors who do not instruct their solicited penitents must be -punished.[627] - -They must instruct their penitents concerning: (_a_) the strict duty of -denouncing; (_b_) the time within which the denunciation must be made; -(_c_) the penalty attached to the neglect of this duty; and (_d_) the -manner of making the denunciation. - -2. Let the confessor proceed in the following manner:— - -(_a_) If he is in doubt as to whether the act or the word of the person -in question really constituted a true solicitation, he must not oblige -the penitent to denounce, except when strong grounds for suspecting -solicitation are superadded, or when the words, _de se_, are soliciting, -and doubt exists only as to whether the confessor uttered them with a bad -intention.[628] - -(_b_) Before the confessor binds the solicited person to denounce (and -only on condition that she denounce may absolution be administered) he -must seriously consider whether this person be deserving of credit, or if -there is weighty, just, and very probable suspicion, supported by other -indications, that she is influenced by revenge and wishes to calumniate -the priest. In this latter case the confessor must remind her that she -commits a very great sin, and one reserved to the Pope, in falsely -denouncing a priest for solicitation. - -(_c_) The confessor must not seek to know the name of the person -soliciting, though he must question the penitent as to the necessary -circumstances. - -(_d_) And when the confessor knows positively that the penitent has been -solicited, he must seriously impress upon her (even when she is in good -faith) the duty of denouncing the person who solicited, and the confessor -is bound to do so, even when he foresees that the penitent will not -denounce.[629] After which he must indicate an appropriate method of -making the denunciation. In this the following rules are to be observed:— - -(_a_) In order that the object of the denunciation may be obtained, -the Ordinary must be informed of the crime and all its circumstances; -the name of the confessor who solicited is to be given, that he may -be summoned before the Ordinary, and, if found guilty, be punished; -if the denouncer does not know the baptismal and family name of the -confessor, she must describe him as accurately as she can, so that he -may be recognized; finally, the name and dwelling-place of the denouncer -must be given, that the Ordinary may make inquiries concerning her -trustworthiness, and, if it should be necessary, summon her as a witness. - -(_b_) The denunciation may be effected in one of the following ways: If -the bishop or the vicar-general (_loci in quo moratur pœnitens_)[630] -is near at hand, so that the solicited person can easily have access -to him, the latter is bound to make the denunciation in person, and to -declare that N. N., priest, parish priest, religious, etc., has solicited -her _ad turpia_ in the holy Sacrament of Confession. If, on account of -distance, the solicited person cannot easily reach the Ordinary, she must -make the denunciation in writing; that is, she informs the Ordinary by -this document that she has to make a denunciation to him, which should -come before the ecclesiastical tribunal, and she begs the Ordinary, at -the same time, to authorize a priest to receive this denunciation.[631] -The denunciation itself may be effected by letter, or through any other -person—_hoc tantum valet quoad præceptum denuntiationis naturale et -quatenus tale præceptum obligat in casu particulari. Nam si sermo sit -de præcepto denuntiationis positivo, in ipsa Instr. cit. dicitur, quod -onus personale est._[632] The denunciatory document must, however, be -dispatched with such precaution that no reasonable fear of its loss need -be entertained. And if the solicited person cannot make the denunciation -by writing, she should repair to the dean, or to some other prudent and -experienced man, who then writes in her name to the Ordinary, or to the -Sacred Penitentiary, or to the Holy Office.[633] As a rule it is not -advisable that the confessor should take upon himself the burden of -making the denunciation for the penitent. But it is not to be denied that -there are cases when the confessor is bound by the precept of charity to -do this, namely, when the well-being of the community is threatened, and -no other way appears of meeting the emergency.[634] The denunciation must -never be made anonymously, and is always to be addressed to the bishop or -to the vicar-general in person, not to the office of the Ordinary.[635] - -3. Confessors cannot absolve penitents who know that they have been -solicited till they have denounced the delinquent, or, at least, till -they have promised that they will do so as soon as they can. This is laid -down in the Constitutions of Benedict XIV and in the Instruction of the -S. C. Inquis. - -From this it follows that:— - -(_a_) The confessor cannot absolve penitents who refuse to denounce. If -a solicited person refuses, the confessor must investigate the cause -of the refusal, and endeavor to remove it. If he finds the cause to -be fear of disgrace, he may, in order to remove it, tell her that she -stands before the ecclesiastical judge not as _persona complex_, but as -a _testis_, that she is not bound to make known her consent; indeed, -that she cannot even be questioned concerning her consent, and that if -she has, _ex simplicitate_, declared her consent, it cannot be taken -down in the official deeds.[636] Nor is any danger whatever of disgrace -to be feared. If the penitent says that in gratitude for benefits -received, or to be received, for presents, etc., she is unable to make -the denunciation, or alleges other insufficient grounds for the refusal, -the confessor must explain to the penitent the sacrilege, and her duty -to obey the laws of the Church, which have been made for the purpose of -warding off great scandal and detriment, and remind her of the penalty of -excommunication which the solicited person _ipso facto_ incurs, by not -denouncing the soliciting priest within a month. Moreover, the confessor -must not lightly admit what such persons are accustomed to bring forward -in order to escape from the burden of denunciation. If the solicited -person refuses to perform her duty out of false shame or irreligious -pity, absolution is to be refused her as not being properly disposed. The -confessor must, however, out of a true zeal for souls, exert himself by -all means to induce such an unhappy penitent to make the denunciation; he -should prevail upon her to come again at another convenient time, and, -meanwhile, inform the Ordinary or the Holy See through the Penitentiary, -or the Inquisition, of the matter without mentioning the name of the -penitent. - -(_b_) If, however, the confessor perceives that a solicited person -otherwise well-disposed for the Sacrament of Penance has a lawful ground -for refusing the denunciation, as, for example, a probable, well-founded -danger of suffering appreciable injury in honor, property, or -person,[637] or that, on account of fear or excessive timidity, she can -by no means be brought to denounce the soliciting person at that time, -either personally or through the confessor, but yet promises faithfully -to make the denunciation later on, as soon as she can, he may absolve -her, and that at once _stante nempe gravi difficultate denuntiationis -faciendæ, si necessitas urgeat_, that is, when the penitent has to -receive holy communion, in order to avoid scandal, or to gain a Jubilee -indulgence. If there is no _necessitas urgens_, the confessor must defer -the absolution, and appoint another time for the penitent to come to -him; meanwhile, he must address himself to the bishop, and lay the whole -case before him, concealing the name of the penitent, adding also the -grounds which make it advisable to dispense the penitent from the duty -of denouncing. The bishop then may himself decide what is to be done or -apply to the Sacred Penitentiary;[638] for the Holy See occasionally -confers upon the confessor authority to dispense the penitent _pro ea -vice_ from the duty of denouncing, especially when the soliciting person -has amended, and done penance. Solicited persons can also be absolved -who “_in partibus schismaticorum, hæreticorum et mahometanorum degunt_,” -although these regions are subject to the Constitutions leveled against -those who solicit; such a case may occur when the circumstances indicate -that no hope of punishing the soliciting person can be entertained and -the _mulieres sollicitatæ_ cannot denounce without danger and disgrace, -while those denounced can easily escape punishment by having recourse -either to schismatic bishops or to unbelieving lay judges.[639] - -VI. Solicited penitents who neglect, or, through their own fault, omit, -to denounce the _Confessarios, sive Sacerdotes, a quibus sollicitati -fuerint_, within a month, incur, _ipso facto_, the excommunication which -is not reserved.[640] They incur this penalty, therefore, _infra mensem_, -that is, reckoning from the day on which they were warned of their -duty. If they give information later on, they can be absolved from the -excommunication by any priest.[641] - -In conclusion, we enumerate the penalties which are to be imposed upon -priests soliciting, according to the nature of the offense, and according -to the circumstances:— - -(1) Suspension from the exercise of the sacerdotal powers; (2) -deprivation of benefices, dignities, and offices, with perpetual -disability to acquire such again; (3) deprivation of active and passive -vote, when Regulars are in question; and, (4) continual disability to -celebrate Mass. But all these penalties are _pœnæferendæ sententiæ_; -degradation, and delivering the delinquent to the _brachium sæculare_, -are not resorted to nowadays. Gregory XV appointed this punishment, but, -as the Instruction says, we must regard it more as imposed _ad terrorem_ -than for the purpose of being actually carried out.[642] - - - - -SECTION II - -THE OFFICE OF THE CONFESSOR - - -When the priest who is _rite_ authorized to administer the Sacrament -of Penance makes use of the power intrusted to him and exercises the -office of a confessor, he performs a threefold office: that of Judge, -that of Physician of the Soul, and that of Teacher. The most important -of these is the first, the office of Judge; this is his essential office -by the institution of the Sacrament; while the other two are only of an -accessory character, not because they are of inferior significance,—they -are, indeed, very important offices, upon the faithful discharge of which -much depends,—but because they “dispose to the right exercise of the -judicial office” and their faithful and zealous execution is necessary to -the better, more fruitful, and more salutary discharge of the former. If, -in the administration of this Sacrament, the priest officiated merely as -judge, without, at the same time, proving himself to be a physician and -teacher also, he would discharge his office unfruitfully, and weaken the -efficacy of the Sacrament to which Christ has attached great effects. - - - - -CHAPTER I - -THE ESSENTIAL DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR IN THE EXERCISE OF HIS OFFICE; OR, -THE CONFESSOR CONSIDERED IN HIS OFFICE OF JUDGE - - -As a judge, it is the priest’s duty rightly to understand the matter—that -is the sin—upon which he has to pass a sentence, to investigate the -dispositions of the penitent, and to pronounce judgment. These three -duties are the essential duties of the confessor in his office as judge. - - -48. The Knowledge of the Sins. - -Christ has declared that we should confess to His ministers, _i.e._, we -shall make declaration of all grave sins, with their number and kind. -By means of this self-accusation, the minister of the Sacrament of -Confession is informed of the sins of the penitent upon which he must -pass judgment. As the priest is mediator between God and the penitent, -and is thus bound, on the one hand, to protect the rights of God and -preserve the order of divine Justice, and, on the other hand, to support -the penitent and lead him to reconciliation with God, he must take care -that all that belongs to a complete confession is performed by the -penitent and where it falls short of completeness to supply the defect by -questions. - -The following principles are to be observed with regard to the duty of -questioning:— - -I. The confessor is not bound to question the penitent, however -uneducated the latter may be, if he seems to be sufficiently -instructed in his Christian duties, and has, according to his power -of understanding, carefully confessed his sins. The questioning would -otherwise become troublesome and useless. Still less is he, as a rule, -bound to question those who often confess, and seldom sin gravely, such -as pious persons, members of Religious Orders, priests, etc., unless -it is clear from their accusation, or suspicion arises, that they have -failed to confess something which it is necessary to confess. If this is -the case, questioning is the more necessary with Regulars and priests, -because there is danger that they might adopt, when hearing confessions -themselves, the example of the superficial practice tolerated by their -own confessors. - -II. The confessor is bound to put questions to the penitent if he clearly -recognizes or conjectures that the penitent has not declared all that -appertains to the completeness of the confession, and what the confessor -ought to know in order to perform his duty as judge and physician. As -minister of the Sacrament, he must take care that the confession is a -complete one, and, as it belongs to his office as judge, to investigate -thoroughly the matter on which he has to pronounce judgment, and, as -it is the duty of the physician to probe the wounds of the patient, so -must the confessor sound the conscience of the penitent, by questioning -about the sins which he supposes the penitent to have committed, and to -have kept back out of ignorance, or forgetfulness, or false shame; by -determining more exactly the specified number of the sins, when it has -been stated too inexactly or indefinitely, or by asking it, if it has not -been mentioned at all, and by investigating the necessary circumstances -of the sins. Moreover, the confessor must find out the condition of the -sinner himself, by which he may learn what advice is to be given, and -what remedies employed to bring about the cure of the penitent.[643] - -The duty of the confessor in this regard is undoubted, and _ex genere -suo gravis_. Therefore Benedict XIV did not hesitate to teach in his -Constitution “_Apostolica_” (26 June, 1749): “Above all, confessors -should bear in mind that they do not discharge the duties of the office -which they have undertaken—indeed, that all those are guilty of a great -sin, who, while exercising the office of judge in the sacred tribunal -of penance, unconcernedly listen to the penitents, do not exhort them, -do not question them, but, when they have heard their sins, forthwith -pronounce the words of absolution. This is certainly not the conduct of -the zealous physician who pours oil and wine into the wound. And yet -every one who administers the Sacrament of Penance holds the office of -a physician; he must, therefore, carefully investigate not only the -circumstances of the sins, but the moral condition of the person who has -fallen into them, in order that he may provide for him suitable remedies, -by the use of which the cure of his soul may be effected.”[644] - -Although this duty is one _in se gravis_, yet _parvitas materiæ_ may be -more easily admitted in it than in the duty of the penitent to examine -himself, even in those things which he must _per se_ confess under the -head of grave sin, or in _materia necessaria confessionis_. As the -confessor must give account to God of the confessions which he has -heard, there rests upon him, because of the great number of confessions -which he hears, a much greater burden with respect to their integrity -than upon the individual penitent. Billuart, however, rightly teaches: -If the confessor, through slight negligence, inattention, weakness of -memory, absence of mind, weariness of spirit, etc., has forgotten to put -a question, even on necessary matter, such omission would be no sin, or -only a venial one; for no one is bound, in such great difficulty and -moral impossibility, to remedy the defects of others. What Gury says -seems also to be quite reasonable, viz. that the omission of one or other -_per se_ necessary question, in a great number of confessions which a -priest has heard, is, _ex ipsa materiæ parvitate_, no grave sin.[645] - -III. As regards the completeness of the confession, the confessor is -not bound to question the penitent with scrupulous exactitude; on the -contrary, he must act with moderation and prudence according to the -position, age, and power of comprehension of the penitent. The confessor -need not, therefore, employ greater care in questioning than the penitent -himself must employ in the examination of his conscience; but the -latter is only bound to a _mediocris diligentia_ in the examination of -conscience. Moreover, the penitent is bound, in the first place, to know -his sins; in order to make a complete confession, the confessor is only -bound to assist him. The duty of the latter to push inquiry is merely a -secondary one; that is, it must come into operation _defectu pœnitentis_. -The extent of the confessor’s obligation in this matter is, therefore, -regarded strictly in accordance with the situation, station, and -intelligence of the penitent, so that the confessor is not bound to ask -more than the penitent (by virtue of his situation, station, and power of -apprehension) is bound to confess. When, therefore, it is certain that -the penitent does not know, or has not noticed that certain circumstances -add a new sinfulness to an act, the confessor is not bound to ask about -them.[646] - - -49. The Nature of the Questions to be put to the Penitent. - -If the confessor is obliged to address questions to penitents, they must -always be moderate, discreet, modest, and proper. - -(_a_) The questions must be moderate; that is, he should not question -the penitents concerning sins which, having regard to their station, -their age, their circumstances in life and their moral condition, they -have probably not committed. He must not put questions about all possible -sins; he should rather ask first if the penitent has committed the -sins which are generally committed by people of such age, education, -and position. If the answers of the penitent give occasion for further -questioning, he must proceed in his inquiry; if they do not give such -occasion, the confessor should ask, quite in a general way, if there is -anything else which troubles his conscience, and when, after a short -reflection (for which the necessary time must always be allowed him) -he answers that he has nothing more to say, there is no reason for -further questioning. As for the rest, it would seem useful to drop, at -a seasonable moment, an appropriately tactful exhortation concerning -sincere confessions.[647] - -The questions of the confessor must be (_b_) discreet; that is, he must -use the necessary discrimination in his questions; he must question -with great prudence and caution. He must bear in mind the rule of the -Roman Ritual: “The confessor should detain no one with inquisitive and -profitless questions, and, above all, let him not ask young people of -what they are ignorant, lest they be scandalized, and made familiar -with new sins.”[648] Let him, therefore, never address to penitents -a question by which a sin of which they were ignorant might be made -known to them. Especially should he be discreet in his questioning of -children and young people, and in questions concerning sins of impurity -(here special caution is necessary with regard to women), lest he awaken -their curiosity and cause them to investigate further, lest he teach the -penitent sins, and lest he expose himself and the penitent to the danger -of sin. When harm of this kind is to be feared, it is preferable that -there should be some lack of material completeness in the confession, -in conformity with the rule: _melius est in multis deficere_ (_sc._ -_relate ad integritatem_) _quam in uno abundare_ (i.e. _in probabilem -ruinam pœnitentis_). Two probable dangers here confront each other, a -detriment to the soul of the penitent, and (material) incompleteness of -the confession. Of the two the welfare of the soul is certainly to be -preferred. - -The questions of the confessor must, moreover, be (_c_) modest. If the -confessor is obliged to put to the penitent a question concerning _res -inhonestæ_, let him do this as modestly and prudently as he possibly -can, and quite shortly. Of course he will often be obliged to put -questions concerning the sins against purity, because penitents accuse -themselves of these unwillingly, and very many do not properly confess -their sins unless the confessor helps them. The confessor has, therefore, -need of great prudence, in order, on the one hand, to elicit from the -penitents what they conceal, and, on the other hand, not to teach them -(especially the young) what they did not know before. He must here -observe the following rules: (1) Let him avoid all curiosity, even the -appearance of it, and all superfluous questions. When he fears that, -out of anxiety of conscience, the penitent thinks that he has not fully -confessed something, because he has not told all the circumstances, -it is advisable to say to him at the end of the confession: “I have -perfectly well understood your sins; do not, therefore, be anxious about -not having fully declared the manner in which you sinned.” And if the -penitent himself, out of ignorance or anxiety, wishes to describe the -manner in which the sins were committed, the confessor must admonish -him that this is not necessary. On the other hand, if the confessor has -to question the penitent, he can inform him that these questions are -necessary in order to learn the species of the sin. (2) In putting these -questions let him make use of only perfectly modest expressions; when -he speaks of the virtue of purity, let him always call it the angelic -virtue, holy purity, in order to preserve the esteem and love of this -virtue in himself, and inspire the penitent with it. And if the penitent -should make use of improper, coarse expressions in confessing these -sins, the confessor should gently admonish him, and teach him to express -himself more becomingly. As long as it is doubtful whether the penitent -has sinned against purity, the confessor should make use of general terms -only, so that if the penitent has sinned, he may know it, and if he has -not, may learn nothing new and dangerous. The confessor should generally -begin with the lesser sins, and gradually proceed to the greater ones. -He should begin with impure thoughts, wishes, listening to, or uttering, -impure words, and ask if he has had temptations against holy purity, -etc., and proceed thus to questions about acts. If the penitent denies -having willingly entertained impure thoughts, he must not ask if he has -sinned by impure actions; if the penitent confesses interior sins of -impurity, let the confessor ask if he has listened to impure talk, or -uttered such himself, if he has been guilty of immodesty by looking or -touching. If he answers this also in the affirmative, he should ask (if -the penitent is an adult) if he has committed any immodest act, or wished -to do so; for there are penitents who, if they are not asked, conceal -such sins, believing that they satisfy their duty if, by some remark, -they give the confessor opportunity to question them. The confessor must -sometimes deviate from this order, when, for instance, the penitent has -already, of himself, confessed that he has committed grave sins against -purity, or when he is ill informed. For the common people often do not -consider the _delectationes morosas_ and the _desideria_ as sins, at -least when they did not wish to proceed to acts; it is the same with -immodest talk, which they call joking. Such penitents must, as a rule, be -questioned, and, in the first place, if they have done anything immodest, -then if they have carried on talk of this kind, and lastly concerning -the interior sins. The confessor will sometimes observe that those who -accuse themselves of sins of thought only, have also sinned by impure -talk and actions, either because they scarcely distinguish the thoughts -from the actions, and believe that they confessed the actions also by -accusing themselves of the sinful thoughts, or that they wish to give the -confessor an opportunity of questioning them about the actions of which -they do not venture to accuse themselves, unless they are helped by the -confessor.[649] - -But with all these questions let the confessor be prudent and cautious. -An imprudent confessor who neglects the necessary measures of precaution, -may easily draw upon himself a denunciation, _ac si sollicitationis reus -sit_. - -On this account he must not ask married people bluntly and without -preliminary question if they have rendered to each other the _debitum -conjugale_, unless a valid reason or grounded suspicion justifies such -question. He can, perhaps, in quite a general way, ask a wife if she -has been obedient to her husband in all her duties, or if they have -lived their married lives in a truly Christian manner. If anything _in -conjugali debito_ that troubles the conscience has really taken place, -opportunity is given to the penitent of saying so himself, and then it is -for the confessor either to investigate further, or to instruct, which -should, however, be generally done in only a few words.[650] Finally, -the questions must be asked at (_d_) the right time. Some questions are, -as a rule, to be put before the accusation begins, for example (if the -penitent does not say it of himself), when he last confessed; for this -question contributes much towards a better knowledge of the number of -the sins, and as to whether the penitent seldom or often receives the -holy Sacraments, and whether greater or less care is necessary with -him; this is, too, the almost general practice of confessors. Questions -concerning the position, age, etc., of the penitent are more expediently -asked in the course of the confession, when, on account of some sin, -occasion offers itself, or, which seems to be preferable, at the end of -the accusation. Other questions which appear necessary for the completion -of the confession or for better understanding the state of the penitent’s -soul, the confessor would best put when the accusation is finished. -Penitents are often confused by being interrupted with questions, and -cannot properly complete their confession. Let the confessor, therefore, -keep in his mind the individual sins concerning which he must ask -questions for the purpose of completeness. Let it be, therefore, the -rule, not to interrupt the penitent in his confession, unless a question -should be immediately necessary.[651] - -After the confession the confessor should ask the penitent if anything -still weighs upon his conscience; especially let him ask illiterate -people who seldom confess, if they are heartily sorry for their sins, and -if they purpose firmly to avoid sin. - -On all occasions let the confessor avoid putting many questions, and -confine himself to necessary ones. In an especial manner let him avoid -all that does not appertain to the confession. He must remember that -there are many penitents, especially men of some position, to whom much -questioning by the confessor is irritating. - -Moreover, let the confessor ask clearly, according to the intelligence -of the penitents, so that these may perfectly understand and be able -to answer correctly and shortly; the questions should, therefore, as -a rule, not be of a general nature, but concrete, brief, and simple. -Sometimes, when the penitents are of very limited mental capacity, the -questions must be repeated in different words. He must ask in good order, -proceeding from the beginnings of sin to the completed acts, from the -lighter to the more grievous; from the usual to the extraordinary; before -asking about the species and the number, he must satisfy himself as to -whether there was consent. The confessor must ask kindly and gently, so -that the penitent may feel that the confessor is treating him with truly -paternal love. His special pattern must be the love and gentleness of -Jesus towards sinners of which the Gospel furnishes so many examples; -in this way the confessor wins for himself that confidence which is so -necessary, and induces the penitent to confess all his sins sincerely, -whereas harshness intimidates the penitent and seals his mouth. The -insincerity of the penitent, and consequently the incompleteness of the -confession, would thus be the fault of the confessor, who has to see -that there is integrity. Let the confessor, therefore, refrain from -every harsh word, make the penitent no reproach before the confession is -complete, show no sign of displeasure or surprise. Illiterate penitents, -those who have not confessed for a long time, and find confession hard, -should be encouraged in a kindly manner to accuse themselves sincerely of -all their known sins, before the confession begins.[652] - -As to questions in particular, some refer to the object, others to the -circumstances, and others to the number of the sins. With regard to the -object, it is advisable that the confessor, keeping in view the different -classes in life, should arrange questions for himself in the order of -the Commandments, and impress them upon his memory, so that he may make -a right use of them when necessary. But whether the penitent is likely -to have committed other sins besides those which he has confessed, -touching which the confessor may be bound to put questions to him, must -be inferred from the penitent’s occupation and manner of life, as also -from the circumstances by which certain sins become the motives, or -concomitants, of other sins (for example, drunkenness is generally the -cause of quarreling, blasphemy, impure thoughts, words, etc.). Moreover, -it may happen that the penitent has a false conscience, a thing from -which illiterate penitents not seldom suffer, and, in consequence, -confesses as grave sins, what, upon questioning, prove to be only venial -sins. On the other hand, in order to form a sure judgment as to the -gravity of the sins, the confessor should not ask uneducated people -whether they regarded the sins as venial or mortal, for such people say -just what comes into their heads, as St. Alphonsus testifies (“_ut ego -millies observavi_”), and if the confessor repeats the same question in a -different way afterwards, they will answer the exact opposite.[653] - -As to the circumstances the confessor must see that the accusation of -the penitent and his own questions are confined to those which ought of -necessity to be mentioned; nor should he ask about such circumstances as -are unlikely to occur in the case of his penitents.[654] - -As to the number of the sins, the confessor must inquire if the penitent -does not mention it when confessing mortal sins, and it is beneficial -to admonish him to give in future the number, when he believes the sins -to be mortal.[655] If interior sins, such as hatred, impurity, etc., -have become habitual, the confessor has, in most cases, performed his -duty when he has found out the greater or less frequency in the day -or the week, because a more exact enumeration of these sins is hardly -possible. And if some one confesses _multa desideria erga quaslibet -feminas obvias_, the number is sufficiently indicated by the penitent -confessing, _se modo nuptas modo innuptas concupivisse_. Moreover, when, -with habitual sinners, the confessor himself suggests a number, in order -to obtain an estimate of the real number, let him choose a number higher -than he expects to hear, so that the penitent may be able to reduce it, -or to add only slightly to it, according to circumstances; if he merely -assent to the number, the confessor can then propose a higher one. In -addition, the confessor must, where it is necessary, inquire into the -dispositions of the penitent—as a necessary preparation for absolution; -if he is willing, for instance, to make restitution, to remove the -immediate occasion of sin, if he is willing to forgive, etc. He must ask -a relapsing sinner, during what length of time, from the last confession, -he refrained from sin, how long he resisted temptation, employed the -remedies, etc., for the guilt is not the same if the penitent overcame -himself for a considerable time, or if he did not sin because the -occasion was wanting, or he was not assailed by great temptation.[656] - -For younger and inexperienced confessors we would suggest that penitents -not seldom[657] conceal sins. This generally happens: (1) from false -shame in confessing certain sins of impurity, sacrilegious confessions -and communions, and acts of injustice; this shame is greatly increased by -a certain natural shyness, especially in young women; (2) from fear of -losing the respect of the confessor, and (3) from fear of reproof or of -refusal of absolution. - -The confessor must devote special care to these unhappy penitents. “It -cannot be described how much the zeal of an experienced confessor can -effect with them,” says the venerable Paul Segneri, and entering into -the practical treatment of these penitents, he writes: “Through a little -opening, that is, after the penitent has confessed some lesser fault, -let the confessor procure for himself further access to his heart, and, -having gained entrance, seek what hidden sins there are to be found.” -And, giving an example, he proceeds: “When a youth comes to you to -confess, and accuses himself of carrying on love affairs, indulging in -frivolous talk, allowing his eyes too much liberty, and adds nothing -more to this, let the confessor proceed skillfully from the talk and the -looks, and examine into the impure thoughts, and the consent given to -them; from these to the immodest acts which the penitent has committed -with himself or with others. But prudence is necessary that mistakes may -not be made. For here a wound is to be cleansed, there care to be taken -that the healthy, uncontaminated part be not infected, that evil still -unknown may not be learnt. Doubt not that light from heaven, which you -must invoke, and experience constantly increasing with practice, will -show you the safe way between these two rocks.... It is scarcely to be -believed how useful it is to so formulate the questions yourself that -the penitent has nothing to say but, ‘Yes,’ or ‘No.’ What a comfort it -was to the Samaritan woman to be able to declare: ‘I have found some -one who has told me all that I have done.’ If she had been called upon -to confess her sins herself, who knows if she could ever have been -brought to do so? But when she saw herself with such gentleness probed -and fathomed by Christ, it was no longer difficult for her to confess.” -... “But in such confessions,” adds Segneri, “refrain from every sign by -which the penitent could infer that the sins confessed to you seem very -grave. Remind him of the joy in heaven over the conversion of a single -sinner, and of the peace of mind with which he can go home, blessing a -thousand times the day on which he delivered his conscience from such a -burden.”[658] - -Whilst the confessor cannot always prevent the concealment of sins; -yet in many cases he will by prudent inquiry succeed in procuring -sincere confessions. To this end, he must receive penitents with -cordial friendliness, benevolence, and gentleness, reminding them that -a confession which is not made with full sincerity is invalid and -sacrilegious; and that Satan, crafty and envious, awakens false shame in -penitents, in order to rob them of the effects of grace in this Sacrament. - -Let the confessor also observe the following special remedies: 1. In -order to remove false shame, let the penitent understand that a priest -often hears much more shameful and serious sins; that the penitent -is not known to him; let the priest encourage the penitent and defer -reproof till the end of the confession; remind him of the seal of the -confessional to which the confessor is most strictly bound, but also of -the certain disclosing of the concealed sins before the whole world at -the Last Judgment. 2. In order to remove fear of losing the esteem of the -confessor, the confessor should avoid familiarity with his penitents, not -visit them at their homes without urgent necessity, and not permit them -to come to his house to speak about matters of conscience, as such things -are to be treated in the confessional. Moreover, he must not object to -his usual penitents occasionally confessing to another confessor; and -if they have done so, he should commend them for it; an exception is to -be made here in the case of scrupulous persons, who, by so doing, might -only become the more confused, because another confessor would not know -them as scrupulous persons.—“_Caveat Confessarius, ne motiva naturalia -et humana adhibeat ad fiduciam pœnitentium, mulierum præcipue, sibi -conciliandam; id quippe periculosum est._”[659] - -It follows from the above, that the confessor, at the end of the -confession, may, and should, kindly ask unknown penitents (whose -sincerity he justly doubts) if anything in their past lives still -troubles their conscience, and encourage them to confess everything. By -such questions not a few persons, especially of the uneducated class, and -women, and children, are saved from sacrilege,—that is to say, they are -induced to confess sins hitherto concealed; or the confessor may take -occasion, from the silence or a confused answer, prudently to investigate -the matter further. If, however, he discovers some defect in former -confessions, he must admonish the penitent to repeat these invalid -confessions by a general confession and assist him in doing so.[660] - -If the penitent declares that he has nothing more of which to accuse -himself, absolution must be given him—if he is, in other respects, worthy -of it; for in cases of doubt as to the honesty of a penitent, there is -no other means of arriving at the truth than by the testimony of the -penitent himself, as he, himself, is defendant and witness.[661] - -But what is the confessor to do if he knows _positively_ that the -penitent has concealed or denied a sin? - -1. If he has obtained this knowledge outside of the confessional, and -that (_a_) by his own observation (_ex propria experientia_), having -himself seen or heard the sin of the penitent, he cannot absolve him as -long as, on the one hand, the latter, when questioned, obstinately denies -having committed the sin, and while, on the other hand, the confessor -knows positively that the sin in question has not in the meantime been -confessed to another priest. For then defect in formal integrity has -been demonstrated. If the confessor has obtained his knowledge (_b_) -on the statement of another, he must, as a rule, absolve the penitent, -even if he when carefully questioned denies, for here the declaration -of the penitent himself is to be preferred to the testimony of others; -these latter may have been in error. Moreover, the confessor can assume -that the penitent, if he really committed the sin, has forgotten it, or -confessed it to another priest, or has some lawful ground for concealing -it now. But if the witnesses were so trustworthy that no doubt could be -entertained as to their statements, and if the confessor knew positively -that since committing the sin the penitent had not confessed to another -priest, and also that he could not have forgotten it, he cannot, as long -as the penitent denies the sin, absolve him, because, in this case, a -lie on the part of the penitent, quite inconsistent with the integrity of -the confession, has been demonstrated; this case, however, will seldom -occur. - -2. If the confessor has obtained his knowledge from the confession of -the accomplice (_complex_) he is not allowed specially to question the -penitent concerning this sin, if he has not received from the accomplice -express permission to do so, or if this sin does not generally occur with -people in that station, or in those circumstances; otherwise he may only -ask the penitent in a general way, as he would in any case have done, or -should have done,—for example, if anything more troubles his conscience; -and he can, in a general way, without letting his knowledge be suspected, -exhort him to confess his sins sincerely; but the danger of breaking the -seal of the confessional—by, perhaps, asking the penitent the same thing -several times—must be carefully avoided. As to whether he can absolve -such a penitent is a controverted point. After quoting the opinion of -others on the subject, St. Alphonsus teaches: “In my judgment the opinion -of Lacroix is to be preferred, that is, the confessor should not absolve, -not even _sub conditione_, but should say a prayer, to conceal the fact -that absolution is refused, because, in this manner, he, on the one hand, -saves the seal—revealing nothing and inconveniencing no one—and, on the -other hand, he has regard for the reverence due to the Sacrament by -preventing its frustration.”[662] - -Other theologians teach with Suarez that absolution may only be -refused when it is quite evident that the penitent is telling a lie to -the prejudice of the integrity of the confession. Indeed, not a few -teach that absolution must, in every case, be given to the penitent -who denies his sin, when the knowledge of this sin was obtained only -from the confession of another, as this knowledge is to be regarded -as not existing. This opinion is sufficiently probable, and deserves -the preference, especially as it safeguards the _sigillum_. We must, -moreover, consider that we can scarcely have a certainty that the -penitent is confessing sacrilegiously, quite apart from the consideration -that it is not lawful to make use of knowledge gained in the confessional -for the spiritual guidance of another. Absolution _sub conditione_ can -also be given in this case, as this course preserves the reverence due to -the Sacrament.[663] - -But it is the confessor’s duty not only to understand the sins and to -supplement the confession; he must also form for himself a judgment -concerning the gravity of sins which he has heard. Although he must -hear and understand all the sins of the penitent, and would sin if he -absolved, and had failed through his own fault to take cognizance of a -mortal sin, it is not necessary for him to pass judgment on everything -he hears from the penitent. It is sufficient if he is able to do this in -regard to the sins which usually occur; for the rest let him hear, take -note, and then absolve. Thus St. Alphonsus,[664] and other theologians. -Lehmkuhl remarks, that this necessary judgment is formed as soon as the -confessor hears the sins, provided that he has an habitual knowledge -which enables him to distinguish objectively grave and venial sins, and -to apprehend their specific sinfulness. Whether the subjective malice -has any proportion to the sin considered objectively cannot always be -ascertained, though it may generally be presumed; nor is it always -possible to discover it. Such questions, therefore, should not be asked -(unless, perhaps, in the case of well-instructed penitents), for they -are quite useless. It is a different matter with questions regarding the -advertence and the consent of the will, and the objective gravity of the -sins, in so far as it depends upon the circumstances. Such questions -the confessor must ask _per se_, when the confession of the penitent -leaves it doubtful if the _materia_ has been _gravis_ or _levis_, and -no penitent, be he who he may, can be offended by such questions; -nevertheless, it is not always necessary to put these questions, as, -sometimes, a confessor may content himself with a presumption based -upon the conscience of the penitent well known to him, or other -indications.[665] The priest must pronounce judgment, as we have said, -on the gravity of the sins, and have in his memory the sins confessed by -the penitent, not as Suarez states, in order to absolve, but in order to -form a correct judgment of the moral state of the penitent, and of his -dispositions for the reception of absolution, and in order to impose a -suitable penance.[666] - - -50. The Examination of the Dispositions of the Penitent. - -The dispositions of the penitent consist in true sorrow and firm purpose -of amendment. They are at the same time the _quasi materia_ of this -Sacrament, so that if they are wanting the absolution is invalid. The -minister of the Sacrament of Penance must, therefore, make it a point -to determine whether the penitent is properly disposed. But as this -disposition is an interior matter, there arises for the confessor the -great difficulty of knowing by what sign he may recognize it. - -Hence the following principles:— - -I. It is the duty of the confessor diligently to examine whether the -penitent is properly disposed. This is evident from our introductory -remarks, also from the fact that the confessor is a judge, and it is the -duty of a judge to form an opinion of the worthiness or unworthiness of -the accused. Finally, it results from the fact that he has to discharge -his important office as a _dispensator fidelis_, and, as such, may -not give _Sanctum canibus_.[667] Therefore, Suarez says: “Before the -confessor absolves he must _prudenter et probabiliter judicare_, if -the penitent is disposed, because he would otherwise expose himself -to the danger of making mistakes, and would act without sufficient -knowledge.”[668] - -II. The confessor must arrive at a _certitudo moralis_, that is, a -reasonable and probable judgment, that the penitent is disposed. This -_judicium prudens et probabile_ is necessary, as it is not allowed -(except in case of necessity) to administer the Sacrament _cum prudenti -dubio_ as to its validity; but, on the other hand, it is also sufficient -because the disposition of the soul is an interior matter, the exterior -signs and indications of which produce, generally, only a moral -certainty, a probability. The proper disposition of the penitent must, -therefore, be presumed, unless circumstances directly suggest suspicion -of the contrary.[669] - -III. The confessor may regard as indicating proper dispositions the -fact that the penitent comes to confession of his own accord, and -not on account of the law of the Church, or with a view to receiving -some other Sacrament, or under compulsion from parents or others; -voluntary confession (_confessio libera_) alone, or in connection with -a protestation of sorrow and a purpose of amendment, is the usual -sign (_signum ordinarium_) of good dispositions, except when this -protestation is rendered suspicious by some other circumstance. The -confession itself affords ground for the presumption that the penitent is -disposed, sorrow being made manifest by the confession and the principle -holding good: _nemo malus præsumendus est_. We may not, therefore, -presume that a penitent comes to confession indisposed; there must -first be ground for such presumption. Therefore, the Roman Catechism -teaches:[670] _Si audita confessione, judicaverit_ (_Sacerdos_) _neque -in enumerandis peccatis diligentiam nec in detestandis dolorem omnino -defuisse_, which means that the penitent can be absolved when _dolor tam -contritionis quam attritionis_ is not wanting in him, for if neither -is present there is no sorrow at all.[671] When the priest has heard -the confession, and assured himself that the penitent has carefully -examined his conscience and confessed his sins, and that he is sorry -for them, he must absolve him.[672] When, therefore, the penitent -shows by the manner of his self-accusation that he has contrition, and -when his demeanor is worthy of the Sacrament and becoming a penitent, -and his confession is sincere, the confessor must not doubt as to his -dispositions, unless, as before said, there is positive presumption -for the contrary. The presumption in favor of his dispositions derived -from the confession will be neutralized by the opposite presumption -which well-founded indications of indisposition produce. That in the -case of contrary presumption the confessor may again decide in favor -of the penitent and credit his assertion, “certain other, more or less -weighty, arguments must be superadded” which tend to weaken the first -suspicion or to destroy it totally. These arguments are called “_signa -doloris extraordinaria_.”[673] But the confessor must not attach too -much importance to these extraordinary signs, and must bear in mind that -no one of those usually given by the theologians supplies, under all -circumstances, complete proof of the penitent’s disposition. As such -signs (which, when necessary, may furnish a stronger and special proof -of the penitent’s sorrow and purpose of amendment) St. Alphonsus,[674] -Reuter,[675] and other authors enumerate the following: (1) any -striving after amendment which the penitent has shown; (2) any special -manifestation of sorrow on the part of the penitent himself, or due -to the exhortation of the confessor (for instance, tears, sighs, etc., -although tears and sighs are not always to be trusted); (3) that the -penitent was induced to confess by some special, extraordinary motive; -(4) that, upon the exhortation of the confessor, he has attained to a -better apprehension of sin, and an abhorrence of it; (5) that he has -now ultimately confessed to the confessor long concealed sins; (6) -that the number of the sins has become considerably less, although the -circumstances remained the same (for if the penitent had been prevented -from sinning by illness, or a similar circumstance, this would be no -_signum extraordinarium_); (7) that restitution has been really made, the -habit overcome, or some other difficult duty fulfilled; (8) that, in view -of the confession which he wishes to make, he has increased prayer, given -alms, undertaken fasting or other good works; (9) that he has voluntarily -sought the means of amendment at the hands of the confessor, gladly -adopted those proposed to him, or sincerely promised to adopt them; -(10) that he willingly undertakes a severe penance, and offers to make -satisfaction to God; (11) voluntary, spontaneous confession may often be -a sufficient sign. - -IV. The question for us now is: in what cases a serious “_præjudicium_” -against the disposition of the penitent arises. According to the teaching -of St. Leonard of Port Maurice, they are the following: (1) when the -penitent always relapses in the same sins, and there is no visible trace -or hope of amendment; (2) when the penitent answers coldly that he is -sorry, especially when he has often relapsed; (3) when he has not applied -the remedies given by the confessor; (4) when the penitent has made -constant and unusual efforts for the gratification of his passions; (5) -when the penitent receives the holy Sacraments only if commanded to do -so by parents or teachers, or out of mere custom on feast-days, or out -of human considerations; (6) when the penitent presumptuously excuses -his sins, or enters into dispute with his confessor, _a fortiori_ if he -should even boast of his sins; (7) when the penitent refuses to accept -a reasonable penance, for punishment or for amendment; (8) when the -penitent shows a great inclination to sin, or covets the profit or great -pleasure obtained from the sin.[676] - -V. A penitent is to be regarded as _completely indisposed_ who positively -has no supernatural sorrow, and no real purpose of amendment, especially -one who refuses to undertake a difficult obligation; one, for example: -(l) who does not remove the immediate and willful occasion of sin;[677] -(2) who will not lay aside enmity and hatred, and will not be reconciled; -(3) who will not make restitution and repair injury; (4) who will not -give up sinful occupations; (5) who will not promise to exert himself to -lay aside a bad habit; (6) who does not employ the necessary means of -amendment; (7) who is not willing to remove scandal that he has given or -still gives to others. - -VI. That penitent is _doubtfully disposed_ against whom there -is a well-founded “_præjudicium_,”—one arising from positive -indications,—which _præjudicium_ he has not wholly removed, so that -there is still valid ground for considering him as not yet sufficiently -disposed. - - -51. The Confessor’s Duty in Disposing his Penitents. - -The confessor must, with fatherly love and care, to the best of his -ability, dispose those penitents whom, after instruction and exhortation, -he sees to be insufficiently disposed; and he is bound to this _ex -rigoroso religionis et charitatis officio_. Magnificent is the discourse -on this subject which Leo XII in his Encyclical letter of Dec. 25, 1825, -extending the Jubilee to the whole Church, addressed to all the bishops. -In § 5 the Pope writes: “You know well how necessary and salutary the -labor of those priests is to whom the faithful must confess their sins, -in order that they may be able to perform with fruit what they have -been taught. Therefore it must be your zealous care that those priests -appointed by you to hear confessions do not forget what our predecessor -Innocent III prescribed with regard to the minister of the Sacrament of -Penance; namely, that he should be _discretus et cautus_, in order to -pour wine and oil, like the experienced physician, into the wounds of the -stricken one, to give him good advice, and to prescribe what means of -improvement he must employ.” And, after remarking (with a reference to -the words of the Roman Ritual) that the priest must exercise great care -as to whom he administers absolution, to whom he refuses it, and when -he postpones it, especially emphasizing to whom it may not be given, he -goes on to say that every one can easily see how totally different from -this the procedure of those priests is, “who, as soon as they perceive -that a person is burdened with many sins, at once declare that they -cannot give him absolution, thus refusing to heal those for whose healing -they were in a special manner appointed by Him who said: ‘Those who are -whole need not the physician, but those who are sick,’ or to whom the -least effort in eliciting sorrow and good purpose seems sufficient, and -only then believe that they have taken a safe decision when they send -the penitent away, to absolve him at some other time. For if ever the -golden mean is to be observed, it is eminently in this case, so that -too great ease of obtaining absolution may not engender carelessness in -committing sin, and that too great difficulty may not estrange souls -from the confessional and plunge them into despair of salvation. For -many present themselves before the ministers of the Sacrament of Penance -who are quite unprepared, but are in such dispositions that they might -become prepared if only the priest, equipped with the compassion of -Jesus Christ, who came to call not the just but sinners, understood how -to treat them with zeal, patience, and gentleness. Those are not to be -regarded as unprepared who have committed very grave offenses, or who -have not confessed for very many years—for the mercy of the Lord knows -no bounds, and inexhaustible is the treasure of His goodness—or who, -ignorant, of humble condition, and slow of perception, have not duly -examined themselves, for without the help of the priest they are unable -to do this; but only those who, after being questioned by the confessor -concerning their sins with necessary care (but not with a minuteness -immoderately troublesome to them), and after the confessor has exhausted -all the zeal which love can inspire, accompanied with fervent prayer, to -move them to sorrow for their sins, are found to be wholly and entirely -devoid of that sorrow by which they should at least become disposed to -obtain grace in the Sacrament. In whatever dispositions those may be who -approach the minister of the Sacrament of Penance, they should not be -allowed to despair on account of their guilt, and to go away estranged -from the goodness of God or the Sacrament of reconciliation.... St. -Raymond of Pennafort, whom the Church calls the eminent minister of -the Sacrament of Penance, may serve as a fitting example of this love. -‘After the confessor has heard the sins,’ he says, ‘let him comfort -the sinner and bear his burden with him, let him be tender of heart, -forbearing towards the penitent in his sins, let him distinguish with -prudence, assist the person confessing with his prayers, give alms, and -perform other good works for him, ever aid him with gentle exhortation, -suggesting grounds for consolation, encouraging him to hope and also -remonstrating with him when necessary.’” With these golden words, born -of love for sinners and burning zeal for souls, the Pope admonishes -confessors to take most benevolent interest in their penitents in order -to dispose them. This is, indeed, a strict duty of love; love of God and -of the poor sinner must move the confessor to use every exertion in his -power to rescue him from his unhappy situation, and reconcile him with -God. The confessor must thus act as the attorney of God and the father -of the penitent; and as physician of the soul he is bound, after the -example of the good Samaritan, to apply promptly for the sick soul of -the penitent a suitable remedy, and the only suitable remedy here is the -valid reception of absolution.[678] - -It is true, as Segneri[679] says, that the heart of the sinner not seldom -becomes as hard as stone (Job xli. 15); nevertheless, we must try to -soften it, and to arouse in these wretched men—the more unhappy as their -wretched state is of their own choice—sorrow for past sin, and a sincere -determination never more to return to it. But in order to move them to -sorrow and penance, powerful motives for sorrow must be proposed, and -it is well to support these by one or more passages from Scripture, or -utterances of a saint. These generally refer to the nature, the effects, -and the consequences of sin—sin as the most terrible wrong done to the -majesty of God (Jer. ii. 2); as the blackest ingratitude towards God, our -best Father, and most generous benefactor (Deut. xxxii. 5, 18; Is. i. 3; -v. 4; 2 Kings xii. 7); as the most execrable faithlessness towards Jesus, -our most loving Redeemer (Heb. vi. 6; John x. 22); as an evil which -brings with it the loss of grace and of the happiness of heaven (Wis. -vii. 14; 2 Cor. ii. 9); leading to hell (Is. xxxiii. 14; Matt. xxvi. -26); and preparing a terrible death (Prov. vi. 34; Heb. x. 31); which is -most hateful and disgraceful in itself; making the sinner an abomination -before God and a slave of the devil (Ps. v. 6; Wis. xiv. 9). The peculiar -hatefulness, the evil consequences, and danger of special sins may be -described, as, for example, impurity, robbing man of innocence, ruining -him in body and soul, surrendering him to disgrace and shame, making -him the object of God’s especial abhorrence, and exposing him to severe -punishment. But, in a particular manner, let the confessor seek to deter -the penitent from relapse, impressing upon him the great truth that the -difficulty of effecting his salvation increases in the same proportion -as the number of his sins; that bad habits always become stronger, the -mind more darkened, the will weaker, also that he is always becoming -more unworthy of divine grace, that the evil one obtains more power over -a man as the sinner’s resistance grows less. It is, however, neither -necessary nor useful to set forth these motives indiscriminately; they -must be chosen with a view to suit the penitent,[680] and not only stored -in the memory, but, by meditation, deeply imprinted on the heart of the -confessor, that he may bring them home to the penitent with the warmth of -conviction and a persuasive unction. - -The confessor must not be concerned at the fact that other penitents have -to wait a long time and end by going away; for, in this case, he must not -look to the welfare of others, but solely to that of the penitent with -whom he is dealing at the moment. It is of his welfare and not that of -the rest that he has to render account, and, as St. Francis Xavier used -to say, it is better to hear the confessions of a few penitents well, -than those of many hastily and without fruit. The confessor must very -often dispose illiterate penitents (_pœn. rudes_) and children[681] by -moving them to sorrow and purpose of amendment, because these latter do -not sufficiently consider the necessity of these acts, and therefore -neglect them. He must also frequently dispose penitents who have relapsed -into sinful habits without endeavoring to amend, as with such people -there is ground for the presumption that they are not truly disposed. -“How many penitents have come to me not disposed, and I have endeavored, -with the help of divine grace to dispose them, and I have certainly done -so, and, to my very great comfort, dismissed them with absolution,” -cries out St. Alphonsus.[682] Justly, therefore, does this sainted doctor -and zealous guide of souls, blame those “indolent confessors” who send -away a penitent without having shown any zeal in preparing him.[683] - -If the confessor judges that the penitent is well disposed, he has no -obligation with regard to his dispositions. For the rest, he will do -well to exhort penitents who are unknown to him again to elicit sorrow -and purpose of amendment aroused by his words, or at least to ask them -if they heartily detest their sins. If they answer in the affirmative, -the confessor can set his mind at rest, unless circumstances suggest -otherwise.[684] - - -52. The Duty of the Confessor to administer, to defer, or to refuse -Absolution. - -After examining the dispositions of the penitent, and after endeavoring -to make sure of them, the confessor, as we have seen in the last section, -will find three classes of penitents: those who are certainly disposed, -those who are doubtfully disposed, those who are not disposed. - -His duty with regard to these different classes will form the -subject-matter of this section. - -I. Absolution must, in justice, be given to the penitent who is certainly -disposed, so that the confessor would, generally speaking, _sin gravely_ -and against justice if he should refuse to absolve such a penitent. -After hearing a case (_causa_), the judge must pronounce sentence on -the accused, and in the tribunal of penance (the worthiness of the -penitent being presupposed) the sentence can only be one of acquittal. -Accordingly, if the penitent is worthy of acquittal, in other words, -certainly disposed, absolution must be given him. This results also from -the character of the confessor as representative of God; but God acquits -the sinner who does worthy penance, therefore God’s representative must -do likewise. This follows, further, from the aim of the institution -of the Sacrament. It was instituted for the faithful and for their -spiritual benefit; now, if the faithful are well disposed, they have a -right to this Sacrament, and it would be injustice to withhold it from -them. Finally, the confessor binds himself by admitting a penitent to -confession, _ex quasi-contractu_, to pronounce judgment in accordance -with the injunctions of Christ.[685] Absolution must also be given to a -certainly disposed penitent when he has accused himself of venial sins -only. In the latter case, however, it is, _ex se_, no great injustice -not always to give absolution, but only the blessing, and if there is -reasonable ground for this proceeding it is no sin at all. - -II. Absolution must always be _refused_ to penitents who are _certainly -not disposed_. The confessor would be guilty of sacrilege if he -administered absolution to penitents whose indisposition was certain, -in whatever state of need the penitent might be; for, in this case, the -confessor would utter the sacramental formula in vain, and such abuse -is sinful. What penitents are certainly not disposed we have learnt -above.[686] The strict duty of the confessor to dispose those penitents -whom he has recognized as not disposed has also been treated of (§ 51). -Not till all his pains and zeal have proved vain may he dismiss them as -indisposed; and even then the confessor must not treat them harshly and -reject and repel them, but clearly and eloquently lay before them their -sad state, and the very great danger of incurring eternal damnation, and -assure them that it would always afford him the greatest joy if they -should at last do real penance, and that he would be ready at all times -to receive them in the confessional as soon as they should be willing to -obey the divine precepts.[687] - -III. Absolution must, as a rule, be deferred in the case of those -penitents who are altogether doubtfully disposed (_plane dubie -dispositi_). For the confessor must take care that he does not -presumptuously expose the Sacrament to the danger of nullity and commit -a great sacrilege. Penitents are to be regarded as doubtfully disposed -who, having a duty to fulfill _sub gravi_, such, for example, as removing -an immediate occasion of sin, laying aside a vicious habit, making -restitution, giving up an enmity, have promised to do their duty and -failed to keep the promise. Failure to comply with the obligation does -not point infallibly to a lack of proper dispositions, but it necessarily -gives rise to well-founded doubts. - -As a rule, absolution must be deferred in the case of such penitents, but -if there is a _causa gravis_, it _may_ be given to them _sub conditione_, -or, according to circumstances, it _must_ be so given to them. - -For the Sacraments were instituted for men. When, therefore, more evil -than good results from postponement of absolution, the welfare of the -penitent demands that the Sacrament should be administered to him, even -with the danger of nullity; regard for the Sacrament being preserved by -the subjoined condition. - -If dying persons are doubtfully disposed, they must be absolved _sub -conditione_; on this point there can be no controversy. - -It is universally admitted and also approved by St. Alphonsus that a -doubtfully disposed penitent can be absolved, _sub conditione_, of -course, when he himself, _bona fide_, believes that he is sufficiently -disposed, and when there is a _causa gravis_ for believing that the -refusal or postponement of absolution would cause him to fall into a -worse state; for example, commit another sacrilege, or become totally -estranged from the Sacraments. In this case the confessor must use every -means in prudence, and with holy, enlightened zeal, to dispose the -penitent fittingly, and then—mindful of the mercy of Him whose place he -fills, and who does not break the bruised reed nor quench the smoking -flax (Is. xlii. 3)—administer the absolution. - -But in other cases where such evils are not to be feared, the confessor -must defer absolution for doubtfully disposed penitents till they have -shown themselves to be better disposed. This applies especially to -relapsing sinners and to _occasionarii_. “Do not refuse absolution to the -penitent, but postpone it,” is the exhortation of Segneri to confessors. -“He must come again within a fixed time. In the meanwhile he may make -himself more worthy and then give more trustworthy signs of sorrow.” Let -it not be objected that the penitents would not return. “If they do not -come to you, they will go to others, and will be better prepared and -absolved with greater profit. If they neither come back to you nor go -to another, you need not be concerned about it, for it is a clear sign -that they are quite obdurate in sin, that they were not disposed, and had -not the will to render themselves disposed. And yet, even in such cases -the deferring of absolution is not without benefit; since a germ of holy -fear remains in their hearts, which in time will bring forth fruits of -penance. For, as the learned Aversa assures us, a wise postponement is of -the greatest profit to the sinner, and experience itself proves that this -postponement is mostly beneficial.”[688] - -IV. Even in the case of a well-disposed penitent, absolution can, -and sometimes must be, deferred, when this appears necessary to, or -profitable for, his improvement. Although the well-disposed penitent -has a right to absolution, yet the confessor, as a physician, must have -regard for the cure of the penitent, nor has the penitent always a right -to _immediate_ absolution. The deferring of absolution is a grave duty -when postponement is a necessary measure; it is not so imperative when it -serves only as a measure of utility. - -1. Postponement of absolution is _necessary_:— - -(_a_) With penitents who have to remove a _public scandal_. This duty -must be done before they are admitted to holy communion, and generally -also before absolution. (_b_) With penitents who have been, in any -respect, public sinners,—till they have publicly shown themselves to have -amended; except, perhaps, when it is advisable to give absolution at once -for their greater comfort and spiritual profit; yet with postponement of -holy communion. (_c_) With penitents who are under some great obligation, -who have to make considerable restitution, to be reconciled to an enemy, -or to remove an occasion of sin, and of whom it is to be feared that they -may not be true to their resolution on account of its great difficulties. -(_d_) With a penitent who has not confessed for a long time, has often -fallen back into the old sins, and has not so far employed any diligence -in the examination of his conscience; for, in this case, he runs great -risk (as, by his own fault, the declaration of his sins is incomplete) -of being invalidly absolved. But if such a penitent does not know how to -examine his conscience better, the confessor must aid him, and absolve -him if he considers him otherwise capable and worthy of it. - -For the cases cited Lehmkuhl and Reuter give this good rule: If it is -more difficult for the penitent to come to the confessor again than to -fulfill his heavy obligation, let him be at once absolved, unless he has -already promised to fulfill his obligation and has not kept his promise; -but if it is more difficult for him to fulfill the obligation than to -come again, let the absolution be deferred. Here, however, the confessor -must have regard for the relative or subjective difficulty which his -penitent finds in removing the occasion of sin, on account of rooted -habit, or the strength of a violent passion. That he may overcome this, -the penitent must be stimulated by postponement of absolution; otherwise -he will easily forget his purpose and his promise.[689] - -2. Postponement of absolution, even when it is not necessary, may -sometimes be profitable to the penitent. Between the _certa_ and the -_plane dubia dispositio_ there are degrees, and the case may thus occur -that the disposition of the penitent is not so certain that absolution -must be given at once; on the other hand, it may not be so doubtful -that absolution ought to be refused or postponed.[690] This applies to -penitents to whom, in view of their dispositions and other circumstances, -absolution, strictly speaking, may be given, but to whom postponement -is useful in helping them to recognize more clearly the enormity of -sin and the necessity of improvement. Thus they are more effectually -strengthened against relapse, their sorrow for sin becomes deeper, -their purpose of amendment firmer. Here the confessor, as physician -before God, must consider whether it is more profitable for the penitent -to give him absolution or to defer it. In determining this, he must -consider the character of the penitent, and the circumstances of time and -place in which we live. “When faith has become cold, and the penitent -can scarcely be moved to make a confession, it is dangerous to defer -absolution; this itself, indeed, may be a ground for giving absolution -to a doubtfully disposed penitent. Thus it is that the confessor in -our times must be more inclined to give absolution than in former times -when faith was lively.”[691] The confessor must not postpone absolution -when postponement is hurtful to the penitent, and this is the case -when holy communion cannot be omitted without exciting remark; or when -an indulgence can be gained at that time; when the danger is foreseen -that the penitent would be obliged to confess the same sins to another -confessor, which would be an unfair burden; or when the penitent, by this -proceeding, would be exposed to the risk of dying without absolution; or -if he could not come again for a long time. - -But absolution should be deferred only for a short time—three, five, or -eight days. For a sufficiently disposed penitent the postponement should -never be long, especially when it is uncertain whether he has perfect -contrition, or whether he would gain real profit from it.[692] St. -Alphonsus is of this opinion also in the case when relapse is interior, -for instance, a bad habit. But if it be exterior, for example, an -immediate occasion of sin, whether voluntary, or necessary, absolution -is always to be deferred till the immediate voluntary occasion has -been removed or the necessary occasion become remote. For the exterior -cause has greater influence on the will than the evil habit or interior -weakness.[693] Moreover, the interior cause is not so easily removed, -simply because it is interior, and clings to a man.[694] Hence St. -Alphonsus also gives this advice: “One should not, I think, deviate from -the usual view, according to which absolution is not to be deferred in -the case of a penitent who relapses from interior weakness, because for -him more profit is to be hoped from the sacramental grace than from -postponement of absolution.” - -Finally the postponement _must not be very irksome_ to the penitent. For, -on the one hand, the penitent, as sufficiently disposed, has a right to -absolution, and, on the other, the postponement, if very displeasing -to him, would, _per se loquendo_, not help him, or certainly not help -him more than the absolution given to him at once. If, therefore, the -penitent has a desire to receive absolution, he will be offended by -the postponement. This desire manifests a very good will, which, when -supported by the grace of the Sacrament, allows better things to be -hoped for than would be the case if he were deprived of the sacramental -grace. But that, _absolute_, absolution may be deferred in the case -of a sufficiently disposed penitent, _even without his consent_, is -demonstrated by the unanimous teaching of theologians[695] as also by the -recommendations and practice of the saints.[696] - -Moreover, the frequent awakening of love and sorrow is to be earnestly -recommended to the penitent if absolution has been deferred, that he may -thus be strengthened against temptation, and later, when better prepared, -acquire more abundant graces. A penance is also to be imposed upon the -penitent, and he must be reminded that it is not necessary for him to -confess again the sins already confessed when he comes back to the same -confessor. The latter can absolve, though not remembering the sins, if -he has imposed a suitable penance previously and adds a new one.[697] - -In conclusion, we may remark that the postponement of absolution depends -entirely upon the judgment of the confessor, that neither general nor -special rules can be laid down concerning it. Everything should be left -to the discretion of the confessor, who is to be guided neither by the -suggestions of his own private judgment nor by the example of others, but -only by the unction of the Holy Ghost, imparted to the priest by study -and prayer.[698] - -Concerning postponement of absolution, Segneri remarks: “This remedy, -when employed at the right time, produces great effects; like a burning -coal it rouses the soul from that lethargy which threatened to become -the sleep of death. Shamed and startled, the penitent recognizes the -greatness of his misfortune, is placed upon his guard, and reflects upon -his condition; if it finds him repentant, it increases his repentance in -an indescribable manner, so that his sorrow, which before was transient -and weak, and might easily have yielded to the simple allurements of some -present object, now becomes strong and powerful and is able to withstand -violent assault. And so this wholesome remedy is generally prescribed by -the masters of asceticism,[699] and employed by circumspect confessors -with much benefit, especially in those cases in which other remedies have -proved ineffectual.”[700] - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE ACCESSORY DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR - - -The essential office of the confessor is the judicial office. It is of -the highest significance. Connected with it are other supplementary -duties of equal importance. They refer to the preparation of the -confessor for his responsible office, the exercise of the office itself, -and his conduct after its completion. - - -ARTICLE I - -THE PREPARATION - - -53. The Virtues which the Confessor must possess. - -1. As in the administration of other Sacraments, the confessor must -first of all be in a state of grace. If he hears confessions in a -state of mortal sin, he commits as many sacrileges as he administers -absolutions.[701] And what a dishonor to God, what a calamity for the -priest is one single sacrilege! St. Alphonsus admonishes confessors, -who have been so unhappy as to commit a grave sin, to cleanse their -own consciences by confession before administering the Sacrament, or, -if they cannot confess, but must hear confessions, to elicit perfect -contrition. Whoever absolves in mortal sin dishonors the holy Sacrament -intrusted to him by God, and while he delivers others from the chains -of sin, reconciles them to God, and opens the gates of heaven to them, -his own soul becomes more and more entangled in sin, displeasing to -God and exposed to perdition, and will he be able to discharge his -holy office in a proper manner? Will he who is himself given to sin -effectively destroy the kingdom of sin by his admonition, instruction, -and exhortation? The right administration of the Sacrament of Penance -demands of the priest a deep hatred and personal abhorrence of sin. - -2. The minister of the Sacrament of Penance must, therefore, _be -confirmed in virtue_. He who will lead others to virtue (and that is -surely also a duty of the confessor) must first be virtuous himself. _Qui -sibi nequam est, cui alii bonus erit_, exclaims the wise man in the Old -Testament (Eccli. xiv. 5). Nothing exercises such great power over the -minds of the people as the good example of a priest, and only then do -they believe firmly when they see him practice what he teaches. “That -voice penetrates deeper into the heart which the life of the speaker -confirms,” says Gregory the Great (Reg. Past.). St. Antoninus recalls the -words of St. Augustine: “The priest to whom every malady is to be exposed -must not fail in any one of the points which he is to judge in others; -else he condemns himself while sitting in judgment over others. When the -adulterous woman was taken before the Lord, He said to the Pharisees, -‘Let him amongst you who is without sin cast the first stone upon her.’ -But as none seemed free from sin, they all withdrew, and did not care to -condemn the woman.” “Therefore,” adds St. Augustine, “priests are more -culpable than the Pharisees if they, though guilty themselves, dare to -condemn others.”[702] It is an irrefutable maxim of the Angelic Doctor -that, in the administration of this divine Sacrament, the Confessor -coöperates in a personal way with God. It is not sufficient for him to -live in a state of grace in order to be a useful servant in the work -of saving sinners; he must be solicitous about the practice of all the -virtues, for a lukewarm confessor, without interest in his work, who does -not exercise himself in prayer and mortification, can only discharge -this divine office carelessly. His words will not be inflamed by love, -nor his warnings animated by zeal, nor his counsels beget confidence.[703] - -3. Amongst the virtues which the confessor must possess, charity occupies -the first place. As St. Alphonsus says emphatically, _the confessor must -have a heart full of love_, in order to discharge his office properly. -This love of the confessor, as Louis de Ponte says, must have all the -dimensions which the Apostle in his letter to the Ephesians demands; -the love of the confessor must be _so broad_ that he embraces in his -heart all the sinners of the whole world, excluding no one that will do -penance, and, like the father in the Gospel, hastening with open arms to -meet and receive every prodigal son who returns home; _so long-suffering_ -that he does not grow weary if he has to wait a long time for the sinner, -and has often (seventy times seven) to deplore his relapse if only he -will return repentant; _so highly spiritual_ that he readily incites -sinners to a greater perfection; _so humble_ that he stoops to the most -abandoned criminal to lend him a helping hand, however low he may have -fallen by repeated indulgence in the most shameful sins. “Remember,” -writes St. Francis of Sales, “that penitents address you all as ‘father.’ -You must, therefore, have a fatherly heart for them; receive them with -love, listen to them with patience; do not grow tired of their unmannerly -behavior, their ignorance, their fickleness; do not cease helping them, -that you may at any cost save their souls. Defiled though they be, they -are not on that account less precious; like pearls, they lose nothing by -the dirt into which they have fallen. Only try to cleanse them in the -Precious Blood of the innocent Lamb, and unite them to God, that they -may become heirs of eternal glory, and may one day eclipse the stars -by their splendor.”[704] And St. Alphonsus teaches: “When an unhappy -sinner comes, good confessors receive him with cordial love, and rejoice -like a conqueror who has made booty, reflecting that it has been given -to them to snatch a soul from the hands of Satan. They know that this -Sacrament was really instituted not for the just, but for sinners ... -that Jesus Christ said: ‘I am not come to call the just, but sinners’ -(Mark ii. 17). Therefore are they filled with love, and the deeper they -see the soul sunk in the filth of sin, the greater love do they show -in order to win it for God.”[705] The good confessor exercises in his -office all the works of mercy by which charity manifests itself, as -Louis de Ponte so beautifully says: “Hearing confessions and absolving -penitents is a _truly heroic act_, and unspeakably well pleasing to -the divine Majesty; because in a special manner he exercises here the -corporal and spiritual works of mercy. He teaches the ignorant, guides -the erring, repairs injuries, comforts the sorrowful and the downcast, -imparts salutary counsel to the doubting, makes effectual intercession -with God for those whose salvation is endangered. He breaks the cruel -chains of the captive and liberates him from shameful slavery, clothes -the clean with the garment of grace, offers to the needy and to the -weary spiritual food and drink. Therefore I am convinced that God -shows mercy to the good and zealous confessor: since ‘Blessed are the -merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.’”[706] Therefore, the office of -the confessor is very _meritorious_. But in order that he may gain from -it undiminished merit, let him administer it out of love, pure love for -God and for souls. And that he may always do so Lehmkuhl recommends him -frequently to consider: (1) who He is whose office he discharges; (2) who -he is who discharges it; and (3) who he is for whom he discharges it. -For the priest represents in this holy tribunal the person of Christ as -Redeemer, who gave Himself as ransom for souls, who had this individual -soul before His eyes when He suffered, when He instituted the Sacrament -of Penance, who as God from all eternity, as Man, from the first moment -of His incarnation, chose this hour of His special love, in which, by -the influence of grace, the sinner would be brought to the feet of the -priest, by whose help and endeavor he might be sanctified and saved. -But the confessor who discharges this divine office and coöperates with -Christ in the divine work of the salvation of sinners, must recognize -that it is without any merit on his part that he has been raised to such -an exalted dignity. The confessor has, perhaps, himself grievously failed -and in no way can he better atone for his faults than by zeal in blotting -out and preventing the sins of others; and if he should have no sins of -his own to expiate, he should not forget that he owes this singular favor -to Christ and His grace. - -The confessor must see in the penitent a brother of Christ, sprinkled -with the Blood of Christ, who now, to the shame of Christ, has fallen -into the most wretched captivity and slavery of the devil; who, -nevertheless, is dearly loved by God and Christ, and is called to eternal -and blissful union with Him; who will, perhaps, one day be a great -saint in heaven, and, if he dies before the confessor, will there be an -intercessor for him; or will certainly, out of gratitude, pray for him -here on earth.[707] The confessor should often read what St. Alphonsus -writes in his _Homo apostolicus_ about the love of the confessor:[708] -“This love must be chiefly exercised in receiving all, especially the -poor, the ignorant, and sinners in a friendly manner.... A still greater -love must the confessor exercise in hearing the confession itself.... And -at the end of the confession the confessor should, with much zeal, show -to the sinner the heinousness of his sins. This is the way by which you -may gain sinners if you employ the very greatest love in dealing with -them.” This love of the confessor produces in him that zeal for souls -which should especially animate him. When the confessor discharges his -office with zeal, souls (as experience shows) are not less effectually -led to God than by preaching. “Be certain,” exclaims St. Leonard of Port -Maurice, “that in a single morning which you have dedicated to God in the -confessional for the purpose of helping poor sinners, you acquire more -merit than if you were to perform other good and holy works for a whole -year. Indeed, I venture to say that it is sometimes better to interrupt -meditation, reading, the Breviary, or any other pious exercise in order -to hear confessions.... We should be content to sacrifice for a time even -the contemplation of God in order to comfort poor sinners. St. Ignatius -declared that he would very gladly submit to a postponement of the bliss -of heaven in order to be able to work for the salvation of a poor soul. -Does not that passage in the Gospel terrify you where the servant is -damned because he had not used the talent which he had received? And -you, who have received from the Lord not _one_, but three and four, and -perhaps ten talents, you will let them lie unused!”[709] - -The most beautiful, the most efficacious pattern of true, wise, -indefatigable zeal for souls is He whose place the confessor occupies, -who in His boundless love shunned no trouble, effort, persecution, or -suffering, in seeking sinners, teaching them, moving them to sorrow and -penance, and pardoning them, and who for them gave up His life in shame -and agony. - -Under the influence of this love, the confessor will also avoid certain -mistakes which are very injurious to his ministry, and by no means -becoming in a representative of Christ. - -(_a_) He will not prefer the rich and the high-placed to the poor and the -unfortunate, but, after the example of our Saviour, will embrace the poor -and the unfortunate with special love.[710] - -(_b_) He will not, in this love for penitents, be influenced by any -natural inclination, still less by any sinful affection; hence he will -not regard himself as fortunate if his confessional is besieged by -a great number _devotarum mulierum_, nor will he detain them in the -confessional longer than is necessary, nor treat them with too great -familiarity, but rather with a paternal severity, so that, in this holy -service, he may not incur temptation and ruin. - -(_c_) He will not allow himself to be influenced by the rank of the -penitent, but rather remind high and low, rich and poor, of their duties -and obligations, and thus be all to all.[711] - -(_d_) He will employ special diligence with those who are stained with -many sins, who have long lived in evil habit, and have often relapsed, -that they may be lifted out of the slough of sin, and led to God and a -new life. He will ponder the celebrated words of St. John Chrysostom: -“When you see one whose soul needs cure, do not say to yourself: why did -not this one or that one cure him? Cure him of his illness, and ask not -why others have been negligent. If you see gold lying on the ground, do -you say to yourself: why did not this one or that one pick it up? Do you -not hasten to pick it up before others? Even so, think of your fallen -brothers, that you have found a treasure in them.”[712] - -(_e_) In hearing confessions he will increase his love and show it by -kindness and gentleness; he will manifest no sign of impatience or -wonder, even when the penitent confesses very great sins, or shows a -hardened unrepentant heart, or is uncouth and tires the confessor by -wrong answers and confused statements. - -(_f_) And if the penitent is poorly prepared and badly disposed, -the confessor must use every endeavor, especially at the end of the -confession, to render him perfectly disposed by instructing him, -admonishing him, and (as the penitent’s condition may suggest) by blaming -or reproving, by recalling the thought of God’s justice, yet so as -rather to inspire confidence and to open the door of love and mercy.[713] - -(_g_) Nor let the priest be sad, despondent, and dejected if he perceives -no progress, or only a little, and very slow progress in those on whom he -has expended so much trouble. Zeal for souls will guard him against this -dangerous rock.[714] - -4. The confessor must, moreover, be eminently pure. He hears so many sins -of impurity; the saddest lapses from virtue are disclosed to him; he -must put questions in order to draw out and complete the confession of -these sins; some penitents express themselves very awkwardly, and, alas! -by most lamentable abuse of the holy Sacrament, snares are laid to the -chastity of the confessor. In order to escape these dangers and that he -may not be defiled while cleansing and healing others, the confessor must -have a great love for holy purity, and be confirmed in this virtue so as -to suppress resolutely and at once all rising temptations and sensual -emotions. Let him arm himself with a pure and holy intention, seeking -only the honor of God and the salvation of souls; let him avoid all -familiarity with female penitents, ever having as witnesses of his words -and actions God and his own and his penitent’s guardian angels; finally, -let him shield himself by frequent prayer, especially to Mary, the purest -of Virgins. - -5. Lastly, the confessor must be equipped with _inexhaustible patience_. -Intrusive, scrupulous, melancholy, distrustful, rough, obstinate -penitents, will easily rouse to impatience and anger a confessor who is -vehement and excitable. Great patience is, therefore, necessary that, -while correcting the faults of others and giving peace to souls, he may -not fall into faults himself, become perplexed in heart, and lose his -peace of mind. He who will take away the sins of the world must be as -_meek_ as a lamb. - - -54. The Scientific Equipment of the Confessor. - -St. Alphonsus teaches[715] that the confessor who hears confessions -without sufficient knowledge is in danger of eternal reprobation. And -justly does the sainted teacher express himself so seriously. If the -Lord demanded from the priests of the Old Testament that their lips -should keep knowledge, and that the law should be sought at their mouths -(Malach. ii. 17), and if He threatens the priest of the Old Testament -by the mouth of the prophet: (Os. iv. 6) “Because thou hast rejected -knowledge, I will reject thee, that thou shalt not do the office of -priesthood to me,” this applies in a much higher degree to the priest -of the New Law, who, as representative of God, discharges the office of -judge of souls, and holds in his power their eternal welfare or their -eternal ruin. An ignorant priest, one not equipped with the knowledge -necessary for so responsible and important a Sacrament, exposes himself -to the danger of pernicious error, the Sacrament to the danger of -dishonor, and the penitent to the danger of damnation. _An ignorant -confessor works much ruin._ - -How great the knowledge of the confessor must be is shown by the -consideration that he discharges the office of teacher, physician, and -judge, to people in the most diverse positions and circumstances of -life and the most unequal conditions of soul and mind. He is appointed -for them all; they all, without exception, come to him, and he must -instruct them upon the most important matters; he must know all diseases -and wounds, must examine and cure them; upon all sins he must pronounce -judgment, a just judgment, and one as much as possible in accordance with -the judgment of God! Truly, if any one who undertakes an office ought to -be provided with the knowledge requisite for its fitting discharge, it -is the priest, for upon the fitting discharge of his office depends, -not some temporary good or evil, but eternal salvation—his own and that -of his penitent! St. Teresa was moved to the following utterance in -her biography (chap. 5): “Half-instructed confessors have done my soul -great harm; for I could not always have such learned ones as I would -have desired. They certainly did not wish to deceive me, but the fact -was that they knew no better. Of something which was a venial sin, they -said it was no sin, and out of a very grave mortal sin they made a venial -sin. This has done me such harm, that my speaking here of so great an -evil, as a warning to others, will be readily understood.” The following -principles are to be laid down respecting the scientific outfit of the -confessor:— - -I. The confessor is bound _sub gravi_, to possess all the knowledge which -is necessary to discharge his office without committing serious errors. - -(1) Generally speaking, the confessor must, therefore, know his moral -theology thoroughly. He must know particularly what he has to do in order -to administer the Sacrament rightly; he must know upon what subject he -has to instruct the penitents, what he may permit, and what he must -forbid; he must especially understand how to dispose penitents who are -not disposed; how, and through what motives, acts of faith, of hope, -of love, and contrition (both _attritio_ and _contritio_) are to be -awakened; for he must very often rouse the penitents to such acts, and -even in many cases recite them for his penitents. - -(2) Moreover, he must know accurately which of the sins that usually -occur are mortal, and which venial, at least _ex genere suo_; “he must -understand how to distinguish them _secundum principia communia_, though -not _in causis difficillimis_,” or, as Lugo says: “This knowledge need -not be of such a kind that in all cases he is able to distinguish -between mortal or venial sins, but only in those of frequent occurrence; -as for the rest, let him hear and understand, and then absolve with -the necessary intention.”[716] He must know: (3) the _species_ and -_circumstantiæ_ and how the number is expressed; (4) what is usually -necessary for the validity of documents, for valid contracts, for a valid -marriage, and what circumstances invalidate contracts and marriages, -etc.; (5) when restitution in matters of property and of honor must take -place; the duties of individuals according to their different stations, -occupations, and obligations; (6) what powers belong to him, what limits -there are to these powers, the _casus reservati_, and ecclesiastical -censures; (7) how the disposition of the penitent may be recognized, what -means of amendment he should and must prescribe, what penance he can or -must impose.[717] - -II. The confessor, however, is not obliged to possess a _scientia -eminens_ (or _exquisita_) so as to be able to pronounce the right -decision at once in every question which occurs. What the theologians -call a _scientia mediocris_ suffices; that is, he must know, but know -thoroughly and well, cases of more usual occurrence, and in more -difficult things _saltem prudenter dubitare_; that is, he must know, -in a given case, that a difficulty exists and what the difficulty is, -and that he should obtain information before he decides. He must also -be acquainted with good books which he may consult, and, finally, he -must, when necessary, seek guidance from well-informed men. What Lacroix -writes (l. c.) upon this point is worthy of attention: “However well -informed a confessor may seem to be, it is not well to solve intricate -questions at once, especially in cases of obstacles to marriage, simony, -or restitution; in such cases you must rather tell the penitent that you -do not dare to decide the matter at once, in view of its difficulty, -and request him to wait a little while. By doing so, the confessor will -not lose the esteem of the penitent; on the contrary, the latter will -understand that he takes the matter conscientiously and seriously, -and will place all the more confidence in the confessor’s decision, -whereas scruples frequently remain when a decision is given quickly -and without specifying the grounds for it. In this way errors will be -avoided. This exhortation applies especially to confessors who are not -very well instructed, but who absolve and give dispensations in all -possible directions, the more confidently the less their ignorance -permits them to entertain a doubt.” And to this the learned author adds -the following remark: “Moreover, a _mediocris_, but _solida doctrina_, -is more useful than a _summa et exquisita cognitio_ when the latter -is not united to prudence and discretion. For those who have no sober -judgment treat everything with such theological subtlety that they often -involve themselves and others in scruples and other difficulties; it is, -therefore, better to adapt one’s self in such questions to the usage of -the Church and of prudent confessors.” - -The confessor must obtain this knowledge and conserve it (_a_) by serious -study of moral theology. _Continuous_ study is necessary; for as moral -theology embraces such various matters, they would in time be forgotten -unless recalled to memory by repeated study.[718] The Roman Ritual -admonishes confessors to acquire the greatest possible knowledge and -wisdom, by zealous prayer to God, as well as by the study of approved -authors and the prudent counsel of experienced men.[719] And Benedict XIV -says in his Constitution “Apostolica” (26 June, 1749), n. 21: “It were, -indeed, to be desired that every confessor should possess that degree -of knowledge which is called _eminens_, but as this is the gift of a -few only, it is absolutely necessary that each one should be furnished -with at least competent knowledge.” St. Alphonsus gives the reason for -this when he says:[720] “We know well that the sacramental confessions -will not produce the fruit which we expect and desire, if they are not -heard by blameless, learned priests, and priests well instructed in the -salutary doctrines of the Church.” - -(_b_) The confessor would err if, as confessor, he should wish to -dispense with the study of dogmatic theology. For the confessional is -the place in which he who is wavering in faith must be instructed and -confirmed; it is precisely in the guidance of souls that the Christian -moral law is shown to be the outcome of the doctrine of faith; the dogmas -of the Church supply the strongest motives for amendment and a holy life; -it is in the minds that have grasped with full and enthusiastic hold the -Church’s doctrines in whom we find that masterly authority and certainty -to which the soul gladly submits; and, without this, a ministry is -exposed to thousands and thousands of errors in the decision of questions -of conscience. “Give me a soul thoroughly firm in faith, and in that -faith the soul finds, as if spontaneously, its rule of life: _Justus ex -fide vivit_. A priest imbued with his Church’s teaching is as a bright -star leading others on the right road.”[721] - -(_c_) In addition to dogma and moral the confessor needs a third -science—and this we may call the science of the saints, the doctrine of -Christian virtues or perfection. It is not foreign to moral theology; -it properly belongs to it as a part to the whole. At the Synod of -Westminster, in the year 1873, Bishop Ullathorne of Birmingham spoke of -this science as follows: “Moral theology has two branches: the first -is occupied with the right _judgment of sins_; the second aims at the -_practice of virtue_. As a science, the former is much more developed -than the latter; the former enables the priest to become a judge; it -deals with the Commandments of God, the duties of individual classes; it -draws the boundary line between what is sin and what is not sin, what is -of obligation and what is not of obligation. This is moral theology; -if its rules are applied to individual cases, we have casuistry. The -second science is called the science of the saints, asceticism, and it -makes the priest a guide of souls on _the road to perfection_. While -the first is more cultivated in the schools, the latter is left more to -the individual’s zeal and devotion. Yet the science of perfection is -necessary; for that which is known in scientific form makes a deeper -impression. There is great danger in cultivating the former without the -latter. If, in the discharge of his office as judge, a man does not cast -his eyes upward, he judges of sin and duty according to the standards of -lawfulness and not according to the light of perfection which must guide -us.” - -III. An extensive knowledge is not necessary to all confessors; the -necessary knowledge must rather be _relative_; that is, adapted to the -condition of the penitents who come to confess. He, therefore, who -hears confessions at a place to which penitents of various stations, -professions, and circumstances, with various degrees of education resort, -must possess much greater, more comprehensive, knowledge, than another -priest who only hears the confessions of illiterate, simple people. -Although a priest who is conscious of his ignorance, or of his defective -knowledge of moral theology, and yet hears confessions, is, as St. -Alphonsus says, _in statu damnationis_, there may be cases in which an -ignorant confessor can and must hear confessions, namely, in cases of -extreme necessity, and when no other priest is present, thus:— - -(_a_) In _the hour of death_, when a better-informed confessor is -wanting; (_b_) in any similar case of necessity, for instance, when -Christians are the captives of infidels and can only obtain an ignorant, -unlearned confessor—this situation being rightly regarded as “_necessitas -moraliter extrema_.”[722] “On these grounds Superiors may frequently be -excused who appoint priests not well instructed to little parishes in the -country; this they generally do because they have none better instructed -to send to these parishes. As provision cannot be otherwise made for -such places, it is better that they should have a confessor who is not -well instructed than none at all. The bishop, however, must remind such -a priest of his lack of knowledge, and admonish him to acquire, as his -duty strictly requires him to do, better knowledge, in order that he may -well discharge his office as confessor. _This duty is always incumbent -on the parish priest_, even when, in view of the necessitous state of a -flock, a bishop may be forced to intrust a parish to a priest who is not -sufficiently instructed. The same applies to other priests in charge of -souls.”[723] Nevertheless, it must be the most serious concern of every -bishop to procure well-trained and educated priests. - -IV. If a priest is in doubt as to whether he possesses the requisite -knowledge for discharging the office of confessor, he can rest content -with the judgment of his Superior, if the latter is sufficiently -informed of his education and capacity by means of the examination -for approbation, or some other theological test, or in consequence of -long intercourse with him, or has been informed concerning it by some -other prudent man. Of itself, _the approbation which he has received -cannot satisfy a priest, nor excuse the confessor who is conscious of -his defective knowledge_; for the approbation presupposes the necessary -knowledge but does not impart it. St. Alphonsus teaches—in agreement with -all authors: “A confessor who is not conscious of being quite incapable -of hearing confessions, is justified in contenting himself with the -judgment of his Superior, and, indeed, must be so; to rely upon the -approbation of the bishop, and then believe that one is freed from study, -is presumption.”[724] Moreover, the Church has never tired of admonishing -confessors in the strongest terms, of their strict duty to acquire and -maintain the knowledge requisite for the administration of the Sacrament -of Penance; for an ignorant confessor causes terrible ruin and burdens -himself with a dreadful responsibility. - -V. The knowledge of the confessor must be _practical_ in order to further -the salvation of souls and solve the _casus conscientiæ_ which occur. On -this point St. Alphonsus expresses himself in the following manner: “Many -who pride themselves on being instructed and distinguished theologians -disdain to read the moralists; they call them casuists, an opprobrious -name in their estimation. They say that, in order to hear confessions -properly, it is sufficient to know the general moral principles by which -all individual cases can be solved. Who denies that all cases must be -solved by principles? The difficulty lies in applying the principles to -individual cases complicated with so many circumstances. This cannot -be done without carefully weighing the grounds on both sides. Here the -moralists step in to solve the difficulty; they seek to explain by what -principles the many particular cases must be solved. Moreover, there are -in our days so many positive laws, Bulls, and decrees, with which we -can only become acquainted through the study of the casuists who have -collected and classified them, as the different subjects require. The -more recent the moralists are, therefore, the more useful are they in -comparison with the earlier ones (in this respect, of course). The author -of the work _Instructio pro novis Confessariis_ (p. 1, n. 18) rightly -says that with regard to many theologians the more deeply versed they are -in the speculative science, the more ignorant they are of moral, which, -as Gerson writes, is the most difficult of all; and however familiar any -one may be with it, he will always be obliged to add to his information. -The learned Sperelli[725] likewise says, that those confessors who wholly -give themselves up to the study of scholastic theology, in the belief -that time devoted to the study of moral is wasted, are in great error, -for they can no longer distinguish sin from sin; and this, he says, is -an error which involves confessors and penitents in eternal ruin.”[726] - -With these words, the sainted teacher demonstrates the necessity of the -study of theological casuistry. At the same time he shows also (and that -_a fortiori_) the necessity of practical instruction concerning the -administration of the Sacrament of Penance, as in this the confessor -learns the method of hearing confessions rightly and with fruit. - -VI. Nothing can supply the defect of learning in the confessor. 1. It -is true that tact and a natural sagacity greatly assist the confessor, -but without solid knowledge this natural capacity profits him nothing, -but rather often exposes him to the danger of lightly deciding a -matter against all principles of sound doctrine. But he who does not -possess this innate sagacity must the more study how casuists decide -cases, in order to sharpen his judgment and learn the application of -principles.[727] - -2. Nor can experience or long years of practice in the confessional -supply the place of learning. By experience alone one cannot learn what -is allowed and what is not allowed, still less how consciences are to -be guided; “for experience which is not based upon knowledge is nothing -else than a long custom of erring,”[728] and worse than the condition -of a still inexperienced but well-instructed confessor is that of a -gray-haired, unlearned one, who, trusting in his experience, errs in -his own judgment. Solid knowledge and experience must, therefore, be -united in an able confessor. A long practice without erudition in the -confessional is rather a danger than a help. - -As an excuse for not studying moral theology, many confessors contend -that: Practice and theory are different things. If by this is meant -that it is far more difficult to put in practice the rules for the -administration of the Sacrament of Penance than to learn them, this -contention is right and just, and the deduction is that even a very -well-informed confessor must not trust to his own insight, but must -unceasingly implore light from on high. But if the above argument is to -be understood (as ignorant confessors use it) to mean that something -which is true in theory is in practice not always true, and that it is -impossible always to observe the rules taught by theology, this would -be a very pernicious error. If this were true, souls would be no longer -led by the doctrine approved in the Church, but by the intelligence or -the arbitrary will of the individual confessors. Practice is nothing -else than the application of certain rules. How could a confessor -understand the practical art of hearing confessions without possessing -the theoretical science which consists in a knowledge of the rules? Right -practice in the administration of the Sacrament of Penance is nothing -else than right application of rules.[729] - -St. Alphonsus puts the question: Must a simple priest qualify himself -for hearing confessions by the study of moral theology, if he sees that -(in his diocese) there is a great want of confessors? And he answers in -the affirmative, “as Christ appointed priests expressly for the purpose -of saving souls, and the salvation of souls is chiefly effected by the -holy Sacrament of Penance. Accordingly, how can a priest be pronounced -free from sin who, out of negligence, does not hear confessions, or does -not qualify himself to do so when he sees great need for it—how will -such a one avoid the reproaches of the Lord, or escape the punishments -with which He threatens the idle servant? Such priests must not say that -they did their duty if they helped souls in another way, by instruction, -by prayer, by exhortation; that, I say, is not enough, because they -must help their neighbor in that which is necessary to his salvation. -Nor must it be said that hearing confessions is a duty of charity, and -that charity does not bind under such great difficulty as is involved in -undertaking the labor which the acquirement of the knowledge necessary -for the administration of the Sacrament of Penance entails. For it may be -answered that even if hearing confessions is a duty of charity, it is of -the essence of the sacerdotal office, and incumbent on every priest when -necessity requires it.”[730] - - -55. The Prudence of the Confessor. - -In addition to knowledge the confessor must possess great prudence, as -his office is beset with difficulties and dangers. - -The necessity for prudence in the confessor is shown in the very meaning -of the word; for prudence is nothing else than the good use and the right -application of principles and rules in any business, or, according to -the Angelic Doctor, the right application of general principles to the -individual case.[731] It is, therefore, called the right way of acting. -It is not, of course, the prudence of the world and the flesh which we -have here in view, that prudence which, before God, is folly (1 Cor. iii. -19), which sacrifices higher things for earthly profit; nor is it human -respect, which in weakness and fear, abandons principles for a momentary -success (_prudentia diabolica_, Jac. iii. 15), but the _supernatural -virtue_ of prudence,[732] which springs like a flower from sanctifying -grace and the love of God; which, in Confirmation, the Holy Ghost -bestows for individual use, and which is renewed for the public good in -the ordination of the priest: this is that prudence which our divine -Saviour recommended to His disciples, when He said to them: “_Estote -prudentes sicut serpentes._”[733] Now the office of the confessor is of -a thoroughly practical nature, difficult, and of the highest importance, -as, in the exercise of it, he may benefit or injure both himself and -others, according as his conduct is prudent or imprudent. Prudence, -therefore, not less than knowledge, is necessary to the confessor. -Prudence is the queen of the virtues, which counsels well, judges -rightly, and effectually conducts to the goal proposed.[734] - -The confessor must be prudent both towards the _penitent_ and towards -_himself_, that he may injure neither the penitent nor himself, nor -administer his office to the detriment of religion and the scandal of -others. - -According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus,[735] the confessor must -conduct himself prudently towards the penitent, especially in the -following points:— - -(1) _In the questions_ which he puts to the penitent, so as only to ask -what is suited to the station, age, and condition of the penitent, and so -as not to teach him sins which he did not know; as already remarked, very -special care is necessary in questions concerning the sixth commandment; -(2) _in the instructions_ which he gives the penitent; instructing him -or preserving a discreet silence and leaving him in his good faith, -as the welfare of the penitent may demand (Praxis, n. 8, 9); (3) _in -prescribing the means of amendment_, so that these latter may be adapted -to the state of the penitent’s soul and to his circumstances (Praxis, n. -15); (4) _in imposing sacramental penance_, so that, as above stated, -it may correspond with the penitent’s sins and his station (Praxis, n. -11, 12); (5) _in giving, deferring, or refusing absolution_ (Praxis, n. -10, 63-77); (6) _in the choice of opinions_, in case of the existence of -probable opinions for and against a point, whether he must choose the -severer or the milder decision for the penitent in question[736] (Praxis, -n. 114); (7) _in preserving the seal of the confessional_, so as to -avoid every danger of breaking it either directly or indirectly (Praxis, -n. 117); (8) _in the treatment of very difficult and complicated -questions_, carefully weighing all the circumstances, and, when -necessary, asking the penitent for time, in order to seek advice from -books or learned men (Praxis, n. 194). - -The confessor must be prudent with regard to himself, that: (1) He may -not prepare for himself temptation against holy purity in questioning -and investigating the circumstances of sins, that he may not injure his -good name, may not bring the office of the confessor into disrepute, may -not render the institution of the confessional odious; (2) _in vitando -aspectu fœminarum, juniorum præcipue et, nisi crates interfecta sit, -manus certe cum sudario intercedat_ (Praxis, n. 119); and (3), by being -_especially careful with regard to women_, being particular to avoid all -superfluous talk, all familiarity, accepting no presents from them, not -visiting them without necessity at their homes, treating younger ones -with severity rather than leniency. These measures of precaution the -confessor must adopt in the case of pious persons especially, _quibuscum -est periculum majoris adhæsionis_ (Praxis, n. 119-120).[737] But how -shall he obtain this prudence from which so many of the good effects of -the Sacrament depend? By study, by circumspection, by experience, by -docility, and purity of intention, the confessor can acquire for himself -the necessary prudence, assisted, of course, by divine grace. 1. By -study, for prudence derives its decisions and its opportune remedies from -science. 2. By circumspection, by considering the different circumstances -of the person and the case. This circumspection will enable the confessor -to reveal the deceptive motives of passion and vice, to suggest means -for the removal of obstacles in the way of amendment, to foresee and -provide against the detriment which may ensue. The gift of right judgment -is conferred upon us by God; maturity of judgment is acquired with age; -but those who have not been richly endowed by nature can sharpen their -judgment by the study of moral and pastoral theology and by taking -counsel of wiser men. 3. By experience, which teaches the confessor what -commonly occurs in practice, shows him how he must question, when he -must instruct the penitent or leave him _in bona fide_, how he finds his -way to the heart of the penitent, when he must show special indulgence, -how to judge rightly of the penitent’s disposition and to find the -proper remedies. Practical experience is thus an excellent school. 4. By -docility, which is especially necessary for young confessors; it teaches -them to mistrust themselves and to apply often to learned and experienced -confessors for advice, thus profiting by the experience of others. Hence -Benedict XIV advises confessors to beware of answering _divinando_ when -a more difficult or a new case is brought before them. On the contrary, -they should not decide the matter till after mature consideration; -moreover, they should consult the theologians whose teaching is solid and -sound.[738] 5. Purity of intention, that is the sole desire to please -God, and to lead men to salvation. “It is certain that the Christian -prudence of a confessor will be the greater, the greater is his love, -and that, in general, the mind is stimulated by the intention or the -desire to attain the end. The more a man is inflamed with the desire -of a certain good, the more zealous is he in his search for the means -of obtaining it, the more careful will he be in choosing the more -suitable means, the more cautious will he be to omit anything that may -be useful for his purpose, the more determined will he be in overcoming -all difficulties, so as to gain that on which he has set his mind. A -confessor who, with pure intention, seeks only God and the salvation of -souls, will labor with fruit.”[739] - - -ARTICLE II - -DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR DURING CONFESSION - - -56. The Duty of instructing and exhorting the Penitent—Munus Doctoris. - -The confessor will find many penitents either ignorant or under the -influence of error. This ignorance may refer to some point connected -with the reception of the Sacrament of Penance, the general duties of -a Christian life, or some particular duty. The duty of the confessor -to instruct the ignorant penitent varies with the subject on which -the ignorance exists. Hence: I. The confessor is _always_ obliged at -once to instruct the penitent who is ignorant of something which he -must _hic et nunc_ know in order to receive validly the Sacrament of -Penance, or to receive _licite_ the Holy Eucharist. 1. The confessor -must therefore instruct penitents who are ignorant of the truths which -they, _necessitate medii sive certo sive probabiliter_, ought to know and -believe, and this instruction must be given before the administration of -absolution.[740] - -Moreover, the confessor must, before giving absolution, instruct the -penitent if he does not know how to make an act of contrition and purpose -of amendment. These instructions must also, of course, be imparted when -the penitent is not responsible for his ignorance; therefore, in every -case, because the penitent is incapable of receiving the Sacrament -in such a state of ignorance.[741] The confessor might send away a -penitent ignorant of these truths, imposing upon him the duty of first -obtaining instruction from some competent person or the parish priest; -but if there is no good reason to hope that he would fulfill this duty, -the instruction must be given concisely in the confessional, and this -should nowadays be done in most cases of the kind. 2. If the penitent is -ignorant concerning the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, the confessor must -certainly instruct him upon this point before allowing him to receive -holy communion. - -It is, however, not necessary to the valid reception of absolution -that the penitent should retain all these truths in his memory; it -is sufficient that he substantially understands them and makes an -act of faith which the confessor recites to him. The confessor must -impose upon such penitents the duty of subsequently obtaining fuller -instruction.[742] It is also the duty of the confessor to ascertain -whether they know these truths. Whenever he thinks it probable that -a penitent does not know them, he must ask. He need not, as a rule, -ask those who were brought up as children in a pious and Christian -fashion. But others, who received Christian instruction in their -youth, and have subsequently neglected sermons and instructions, must -certainly be questioned, and this especially applies to our times, -when so many Christians, particularly men (but also not a few women), -absent themselves for a long time from sermons and neglect every other -kind of Christian instruction; such people, even when well educated -and instructed in worldly matters, are ignorant, _admodum rudes_, in -religion, having forgotten nearly all they had formerly learnt. In the -cares, labors, and pleasures of life, and frequently under the influence -of pernicious and irreligious literature, they have perhaps become -strongly infected with irreligion or heresy. If the penitents are such -that one could not ask if they are ignorant of these truths without -causing them confusion, the confessor might of his own accord explain -what is most essential, and, in some way, move the penitents to an act of -faith.[743] - -II. If the penitent is ignorant of the truths of Christian doctrine and -the precepts of Christian life, especially of those truths which the -Christian must know and believe _necessitate præcepti_, the confessor -must first of all inquire if the penitent is responsible for this -ignorance or not. If he is, he can be absolved, but he must be sorry -for, and confess, his neglect, and make a firm resolution to learn these -truths; and if he does not keep his promise, absolution must, as a rule, -be refused to him till he has performed his duty. If he is ignorant by -no fault of his own, he can be absolved, but he must promise to obtain -instruction.[744] If the confessor is, at the same time, the pastor of -such penitents, he is bound, _ex officio_, or in justice, to provide them -with opportunities for acquiring better instruction; if he is not their -parish priest, he is not strictly bound in duty to do so, though he may -be bound _ex charitate_, but he is always bound to inform the penitent -as to his duty of becoming better instructed, and as to the sin of -negligence of which he is guilty if the ignorance is culpable, and which -he must confess. - -III. If the penitent is ignorant of particular duties, the confessor must -primarily consider the spiritual welfare of the penitent in deciding -whether he shall instruct him or not; but this spiritual welfare must be -taken in its full sense as comprising, therefore, the individual welfare -of the penitent himself, and also the general welfare for which he has to -provide. This instruction must, however, be given with prudence, for fear -of causing more harm than good to the penitent. The following obligations -of the penitent are here chiefly in question: the duties of his station -in life, the duty of making restitution (honor, good name, property), of -avoiding dangerous occasions, of reconciliation, of removing scandal, -and of practicing almsgiving.[745] When he considers it necessary and -appropriate, the confessor must, with special prudence, instruct persons -engaged to be married concerning their conduct in that state. It may also -be opportune to inform a penitent that he is not bound to fast or to -abstain, so that he may not, from ignorance, believe that he commits sin -where there is no sin at all. This duty of instructing the penitent must -now be somewhat more clearly considered and particularized. - -The confessor must instruct or exhort:— - -1. When the ignorance of the penitent is not invincible, or when he is -responsible for it (_vincibilis seu culpabilis_); when the penitent is -in such a state of doubt concerning some duty that there can no longer -be a question of _bona fides_. When a person is in such ignorance, he is -already in a state of sin, or in immediate danger of formal sin, because -he acts under reasonable doubt or culpable ignorance. The exhortation, -therefore, so far from doing harm, can only result in good, as it will -afterwards produce the desired fruit. When, therefore, the penitent, -not out of mere scrupulosity, but in consequence of a serious doubt, -questions the confessor about some duty, the latter must instruct him. -In this case where the penitent has a substantial doubt and he is bound -to remove it, the confessor’s duty is to tell him the truth; moreover, -it is plain that the penitent is disposed to act in accordance with the -confessor’s answer. If, however, the confessor thinks, in an exceptional -case, that the penitent should not know the whole truth, he need say -nothing more in reply to the penitent than what is necessary.[746] If, -for instance, a person bound by a vow of chastity asks if the marriage -which he has contracted without a dispensation is invalid on account of -the vow, let him answer in the negative, but be silent about the _debitum -conjugale_; if he asks whether he may render the _debitum_, let the -confessor answer in the affirmative, and be silent about demanding the -_debitum_. - -2. When the penitent is ignorant of things which cannot long escape his -knowledge, and when his ignorance, still _invincibilis et inculpabilis_, -will soon cease to be so and become _culpabilis_, especially where a -vice is growing with the lapse of time and its extirpation becomes more -difficult—in such case the confessor must, _as a rule_, instruct and -exhort the penitent at once; for instance, when young people who have -not yet attained to puberty, begin to contract a _habitus pollutionis_, -they must be seriously warned to desist from their dangerous and sinful -practice, even when they are perhaps in _bona fide_. But in this the -confessor must weigh well the circumstances, considering whether, -perhaps, for the time being, a very heavy burden is not being imposed -upon the penitent, which he will scarcely be able to bear, but which will -very soon cease. In this case silence would be preferable. - -3. If the ignorance is _invincibilis_, but a good result may be hoped -from the exhortation, in this case the confessor must exhort even when in -consequence a difficulty arises for the penitent, or when it is foreseen -that the exhortation will certainly not do harm. For a material violation -of a law must also be avoided, when this can be done without danger of -a greater evil. The confessor must not fail, therefore, to admonish, -although he foresees that the penitent will not immediately obey, if he -has hopes that he will soon do so. For it may happen that a penitent, -when he has learnt the truth, does not at first obey, but when he has -become calmer, after serious reflection, amends his life.[747] If the -confessor sees that the penitent does not receive the exhortation well -at the time, but that he will receive it better at some more seasonable -moment, he must defer it to a later occasion. If there is no likelihood -of good resulting from the exhortation, the confessor, according to the -general and approved teaching of theologians, is bound, _per se loquendo_ -(that is, unless there is some other motive, such as regard for the -_bonum publicum_), to omit the exhortation, and to leave the penitent in -his _bona fide_. - -When, therefore, the confessor learns in the course of the confession -that the penitent has contracted an invalid marriage through some secret -impediment, and danger of disgrace, scandal, or incontinence is to be -feared from disclosing to him the nullity of the marriage, he must be -silent on the subject of the invalidity, and leave the penitent _in -bona fide_ until he has obtained a dispensation. And in the case where -he could not disclose the nullity of the marriage at all without being -obliged to face these difficulties, he should ask for a _sanatio in -radice_, and conceal everything from the penitent. In such a case the -confessor can even bind in duty the putative husband (or wife) who -refuses the _debitum conjugale_, to render it; for if the husband (or -wife) is convinced that he (or she) is living in lawful matrimony, he (or -she) is bound in conscience to render the _debitum_. But the confessor -will act more safely by telling the penitent quite in a general way that -married people are bound to render the _debitum_, and that they cannot be -absolved if they do not perform their duty.[748] - -The confessor must not admonish the penitent to make restitution when -he foresees that the penitent (who believes, _bona fide_, that he is -not bound to make restitution) will not obey; for such admonition would -injure the penitent, and not benefit the person to whom he is bound to -make the restitution; indeed, the confessor must be more concerned to -avert spiritual injury from the penitent than temporal injury from -another. Nevertheless, the confessor must not lightly presume that his -admonition will not be obeyed.[749] - -Instruction or admonition must also be omitted if there is reasonable -fear that scandal, disgrace, quarrels, and other serious inconvenience -will arise; for it is better to provide against formal sins in others -than material sins in the penitent. For instance, if a marriage is -invalid, and the parties are not aware of the fact, the confessor could -inform the wife of it without danger, whereas serious difficulties might -be caused by disclosing it to the husband. - -If a marriage is to be contracted, and, through the confession of the -penitent, the confessor discovers an _impedimentum dirimens_, but of -which the penitent is _invincibiliter_ ignorant, the confessor is, as -a rule, bound to instruct the penitent concerning it, and to admonish -him either to refrain from contracting the marriage, or to obtain a -dispensation before contracting it. Great inconveniences frequently arise -from an invalid marriage, for the invalidity is often disclosed later -on, and in such a case the penitent is exposed to no small danger of -committing actual sin. If, however, no good result can be expected from -revealing the defect, the confessor would be obliged to abstain from -admonishing till he himself has obtained a dispensation, for it is better -to permit a material sin than to furnish occasion for formal sin.[750] -If, on the day before the marriage, or on the day itself, when everything -is prepared, and the wedding could not be stopped without scandal and -disgrace, the bride or bridegroom reveals to the confessor a secret -impediment, a dispensation must be obtained from the bishop, if there -is time to do so, and the bishop can, according to the _communissima -et probabilissima sententia_, dispense in such a case, as from other -laws, when recourse to the Pope is impossible, and there is danger in -delay. Indeed, according to the probable opinion of many theologians, -the bishop can also delegate this power universally as a _potestas -ordinaria_, to others, for all cases that occur. But if the confessor -cannot apply to the bishop, the parish priest or the confessor may, as -some teach (and St. Alphonsus adds: “not without ground”), declare _ex -Epikeia_, that the law of the impediment in question does not bind in the -particular case, because it is detrimental; but, in order to be safe, -and to preserve the reverence due to the commandment of the Church, -application to the Sacred Penitentiary, or to the Ordinary, must be made -as soon as possible to obtain a dispensation.[751] - -In cases of doubt as to whether the admonition will do good or harm, it -should be omitted, because it is better to guard against formal sins than -material. But if it is more probable that the admonition will benefit, -it must be given, and Viva and Roncaglia rightly remark that we must not -easily conclude that the penitent would not obey after having learnt the -truth.[752] - -The objection might be raised that the penitent who should refuse to -obey the exhortation of his confessor would not be in good disposition, -and, therefore, could not receive absolution. St. Alphonsus disposes -of this objection by pointing out that the confessor must consider the -disposition in which the penitent actually is while he is still ignorant -of his obligation, and not the state of mind in which it is presumed -that he would be after he had been admonished about it. As it is not -allowable to expose one’s neighbor to a danger to which it is anticipated -that he will succumb, so the confessor must not expose a penitent to the -danger of refusing to fulfill a duty by instructing him about it; he must -rather leave the penitent in material sin, because a _peccatum formale_ -outweighs all _peccata materialia_.[753] - -4. The confessor must speak when the ignorance of the penitent concerns -the _prima principia moralia_ or the _proximas conclusiones_ deduced from -them; for such ignorance is either not actually existent, or will not -be for long _invincibilis_, and is generally hurtful to the penitent. -Especially urgent is the duty of admonishing the penitent when omitting -to do so would confirm him in a sinful habit which he would probably find -great difficulty in overcoming later. - -5. Moreover, admonition must be given when the ignorance touches the duty -of giving up a gravely sinful immediate occasion, as such ignorance tends -to the ruin of the penitent, by rendering easier the fall into formal sin. - -6. The penitent must be admonished even when he is not disposed, if the -confessor’s silence were to bring harm to the community, by scandal, for -instance, to the faithful. For if the confessor is bound to be chiefly -concerned about the salvation of the penitent, he is also bound, as -a member of Christian society and its servant, to prefer the _bonum -commune_ to the _bonum privatum_ of the penitent.[754] The fact that -the admonition is _hic et nunc_ fruitless or that the penitent takes -offense at it is not a valid objection, for such a penitent will amend -the more easily when he sees that no other priest will absolve him, -and in the meantime the scandal will cease, for the faithful will see -that the penitent in question is not admitted to the Sacraments. Hence -princes, officials, bishops, prelates, parish priests, employers, who -neglect their duties towards their subordinates, must be instructed -and exhorted. For we may not lightly presume that their ignorance is -_invincibilis_, since everybody ought to know the duties of his office, -and ignorance of them, even when _invincibilis_, always tends to the -injury of the community, as others may easily think they are justified -in imitating what they see their superiors doing. Therefore, as Benedict -XIV teaches,[755] those are to be instructed concerning their duties who -frequently receive the holy Sacraments, in order that others may not be -led to believe that wrongdoing is allowable, because they see it done by -these and done with impunity. And Lugo adds that when the confessor has -reasonable doubts as to whether such penitents perform their duties, he -is bound to ask them if they are faithful to them.[756] - -7. The confessor must admonish when, on account of special circumstances, -his silence would be equivalent to a positively false answer. - -8. A penitent must always be admonished when, in consequence of a false -conscience, he believes something to be a sin which is none, or believes -it to be a greater sin than is really the case. Moreover, instruction -ought not to be withheld even though it afford an occasion to the -penitent of sinning more frequently, as might happen when he learns -that a sin which he believed _conscientia erronea_ to be mortal is only -venial. Nevertheless, the confessor must consider whether something -which _per se_ is a venial sin, may not, in view of the circumstances of -scandal, danger, etc., become a grave sin. - -In conclusion we will add a remark of St. Alphonsus, namely, that -confessors act imprudently by instructing _uneducated_ penitents -concerning the special and greater sinfulness imparted by circumstances -to wicked acts; for instance, that adultery is a greater sin than -impurity among unmarried persons, that incest is committed when relatives -are guilty of impurity with each other. But this instruction must be -given when there is reason for believing that the knowledge of the -greater sinfulness will effectually prevent the sin.[757] - -Sometimes the confessor is asked by his penitents for instruction and -advice in matters affecting the welfare of the soul. Although the -confessor must be careful not to advise and help in all possible worldly -matters, he must not refuse to be the adviser and helper of his penitent -in matters pertaining to the salvation of souls. This is a part of his -duty. And to whom should a penitent turn in such circumstances if not -to the confessor who knows the state of his soul and his entire life? -But if the confessor has to give advice and instruction, let him judge -the matter in the light of faith, and in accordance with the principles -of Christian morality, not according to a certain empirical wisdom -and worldly prudence, and not according to his subjective opinion. In -important matters let him, therefore, deliberate thoroughly, ask help of -God through the Mother of Good Counsel, and, when necessary, seek advice -at the hands of experienced and prudent men. Then let him pronounce his -decision clearly and definitely. - - -57. The Duty of suggesting Remedies against Relapse (the Confessor as -Physician). - -Sins are justly described as wounds of the soul, the cure of which is -to be sought in the Sacrament of Penance. It is certainly the first -and highest function of the minister of the Sacrament to reconcile the -sinner to God by canceling his sins; but there remains another task of -great significance, viz. to keep the penitent—the sinner now reconciled -to God—faithful to his duty and to his promises, and to preserve him -from new sins. For the confessor is also the spiritual physician of the -penitent. And as it is the duty of the bodily physician to study the -malady and its causes, and then to prescribe remedies, so the physician -of the soul must first know the sins of the penitent, their causes and -gravity, and then provide the remedies, by the conscientious application -of which relapse into sin may be prevented. In order to discharge his -duty as physician of the soul, the confessor must, therefore, first -ascertain if the penitent has a habit of sinning, if he lives in -immediate occasion of sin, he must question him as to the time and the -place of the sin, the persons with whom he has sinned, and under what -circumstances he has usually been led into sin. “Herein many confessors -fail,” says St. Alphonsus, “and the ruin of many souls results from it; -for by omitting such questions, the confessor is unable to find out if -the penitent is a relapsing sinner, and, therefore, cannot prescribe -suitable means for eradicating the sinful habit and avoiding the -occasion.”[758] - -Those confessors are gravely wanting in their duty who content themselves -with remitting the sins confessed, but do not trouble about the -preservation of the converted sinner, the new life and the cure of the -penitent’s sickness; hence it happens that persons who are enslaved by -a sinful habit very soon fall from the new life of grace, and, in the -words of Our Saviour, the state of the relapsing sinner is worse than his -former state, and the confessor thus shares in his guilt.[759] - -The confessor’s work as a judge of the sins and disposition of the -penitent places him in a position of peculiar advantage for discharging -his duty as physician. But in order to effect a thorough cure of these -wounds of the soul, he must, as we have seen above, be acquainted with -the whole moral state of the penitent; hence he must not confine himself -to know if the sin was mortal or venial, a sin of some special occasion, -an habitual sin, or one of relapse; he must also ascertain if his -penitent, in matters of religion, is instructed or ignorant, if he is on -the way of improvement, if his good will has become strengthened by the -grace of God and by resistance to evil, or is still weak and vacillating. - -The confessor must make it his special business to learn the penitent’s -predominant passion, and the prevailing vices connected with it. The -predominant passion is an habitual tendency, more or less violent, to -some sin, which exercises a certain mastery over the soul, and has other -evil inclinations in its service. Such predominant passions are: the lust -of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and pride; also the seven capital -sins. They have their root partly in original sin, partly in perverse -education, partly in repeated sinning, partly in exterior influences. -Now it will not avail much to combat the individual sins; their root—the -sinful passion—must be torn out. It is like a poisonous growth which is -always striking deeper roots into the human soul, and ever putting forth -fresh shoots in the individual sins. This baneful root must be removed, -and with it its noxious growth of sin will also be removed. - -To this end the predominant passion must first be diagnosed, and this -is generally a very difficult matter. There are passions, such as -avarice, covetousness, pride, intemperance, sloth, which are seldom -recognized as sins by the penitent, and even take the appearance of -virtue. In acquiring this knowledge, which is as necessary as it is -difficult, the confessor must help his penitent by suggesting _careful, -serious examination of conscience_, especially the use of the particular -examination of conscience; _the observation of the causes, the motives, -and the occasions of sin_. Finally, he should point out the necessity -of _illuminating grace_, which the penitent obtains by earnest prayer. -The confessor himself must try to discover this predominant passion by -suitable questions, by examining the sins which have been confessed, and -the moral condition of the penitent. The difficulty of his task must -not deter him, for its successful accomplishment will greatly effect -the amendment and cure of the penitent. Earnest prayer for light, the -intention only of advancing the glory of God and the salvation of the -penitent, joined to true zeal for souls, will assuredly lead the man of -prayer and of interior life to the desired knowledge. Having learnt the -state of the penitent’s disease, let the confessor proceed to the cure -of it; this will primarily be effected by the abundant graces obtained -in the worthy reception of the Sacrament of Penance. It must be the -confessor’s next care to dispose the penitent well, or to perfect his -dispositions, by endeavoring to move him to greater sorrow for his sins, -and to a firmer purpose of amendment. The deeper the sorrow and the more -earnest the purpose of amendment, the more lasting will be the effect of -the Sacrament for the improvement of the sinner. - -The confessor must then reprove (_reprehendere_) the sinner; that is, -he must in strong and forcible language emphasize the shamefulness and -perniciousness of his sin. And St. Alphonsus teaches that the confessor -must discharge this duty of reprehension even when the penitent is one in -high position; the confessor, he says, must reflect that his words are -more efficacious than sermons.[760] This reprehension is particularly -necessary for those who seldom confess, who come burdened with many sins, -or who, from weakness of faith or attachment to creatures, manifest -little sorrow. It is _very salutary_, because the words of the confessor, -specially adapted to the penitent, are much more efficacious than those -of the preacher.[761] But let the confessor administer it with _much -prudence_, that it may really prove an effective medicine for the sick -soul—not with indignation, violence, and anger, but in sympathy and love, -in the spirit of meekness, with due regard for the penitent’s condition -and the gravity of his sins. Despondent and scrupulous penitents must be -encouraged and not cast into despair. Those who are crushed by sorrow -should be treated as Christ treated the penitent Magdalen, and as the -father treated the prodigal son.[762] - -Finally, the confessor must provide the penitent with remedies against -relapse. Of such there are _general_ ones, useful against all sins, and -for all penitents; and _special_ ones applicable to special sins. The -following are general means:— - -1. The most excellent general means of eradicating vice and implanting -virtue is _regular, devout, and humble prayer_. The confessor should, -therefore, earnestly admonish the penitent regularly to recite the daily -prayers of a Christian, to implore the divine grace in temptation, and if -possible, hear Mass daily. Pious penitents, who seriously aim at virtue, -should be recommended to add special devotions to the usual prayers; -such as visits to the Blessed Sacrament, a portion of the Rosary, etc.; -especially spiritual reading every day, at a fixed hour, from a suitable -book, which the confessor may specify, short ejaculatory prayers, -frequent renewal of good intention, and recollection of the presence of -God, as also a short meditation in the morning, when possible. - -2. _Frequent renewal of purpose and regular examination of conscience_ -are very beneficial. Therefore, the penitent should renew his good -resolutions every morning at his prayers and also during the day; to his -night prayers he should add an examination of conscience, at the same -time awakening true sorrow for all sins of the past. The confessor should -also instruct the penitent in the exercise of the special resolution, and -the _examen particulare_, and induce him to adopt these exercises, as -they are so well calculated to root out particular faults, to bring about -general improvement, and to confirm him in his striving after virtue. - -3. _Frequent confession_, and the confessor should fix the time for the -penitent’s next confession; or he should determine how often he must -confess in the future, not, however, making too great demands upon him, -but requiring only what he will probably be able to perform. Let him -particularly recommend the penitent to confess as soon as possible after -relapse into mortal sin. Frequent confession must be imposed as a duty -on those who, from interior weakness, are always relapsing into the same -sins, in proportion as this proves itself to be the only efficient means -of insuring perseverance in virtue. This applies to those who have become -addicted to the _peccatum pollutionis_. - -4. _Frequent reception of the holy communion_, with due preparation and -thanksgiving. True, it is not necessary to receive holy communion as -often as one confesses in order to rid one’s self of habitual sin; but -frequent, even weekly communion, is permitted for the cure of a soul much -weakened by sin, if the penitent desires it, receives it with an earnest -wish to amend, and is really, although but slowly, being converted by -this means from a life of sin. For holy communion is not only a help to -virtue, but also a remedy against sin. By increasing sanctifying grace -and holy love, by the intimate union with God which it effects, by the -wealth of grace which it brings to the soul, it effectually preserves -men from mortal sin, destroys evil inclinations, excites the desire for -virtue, and gives the strength to practice it. For penitents who already -walk in the paths of virtue, frequent communion is an aid to progress -in perfection, and assuredly _communio frequens_ eminently conduces to -perseverance and advancement in good; the confessor should, therefore, -most earnestly recommend this remedy to his penitents. - -But he must not demand too much. The reception of holy communion every -three months is generally regarded as the _minimum_; but the confessor -will often be obliged to content himself with longer intervals, -especially when youths and men (and in many cases, even women also) are -concerned. When received _every month_, or at least every six or eight -weeks, holy communion is a means of keeping alive zeal for eternal -salvation and of remaining firm in a Christian life. - -More frequent reception of holy communion, every fortnight, every week, -or several times during the week, is to be allowed or recommended when -the following conditions exist:— - -(_a_) For weekly communion, and, if a feast occur, two communions in -the week, it is necessary that mortal sin should generally be avoided; -but if such penitents are in the habit of committing venial sins with -deliberation, and if no improvement or serious endeavor to improve -manifests itself, it is well occasionally to forbid communion to such -persons, in order to inspire them with greater fear of venial sin, and to -show them with what reverence this Sacrament must be received. - -(_b_) More frequent communion in the week may be permitted and -recommended to those who are free from affection to venial sins, who do -not generally commit deliberate venial sins, who practice meditation, -mortify their senses and passions,—who, in other words, are striving -after perfection. - -(_c_) Daily communion may be allowed to those who not only do not -entertain voluntary attachment to any venial sin, but who steadfastly -endeavor to advance in virtue, who gladly and diligently devote -themselves to interior prayer, who have, to a great extent, suppressed -their evil passions, and who are filled with a great longing for holy -communion. The confessor must not be too indulgent, nor, on the other -hand, too rigorous. Before permitting frequent communion to any one, -it is necessary to consider if the person is so situated as to be able -to prepare properly and to make suitable thanksgiving. It is also -recommended (1) on one day in every week, as a rule, not to receive -communion, in accordance with the practice of experienced confessors, and -(2) sometimes to forbid communion on some particular day, for some just -motive—as a trial, a mortification, or a punishment. If, later on, the -confessor perceives that, in spite of frequent communion, the penitent -makes no progress in the way of perfection, and that he cherishes in his -heart a voluntary attachment to sin, the confessor must reduce the number -of his communions.[763] - -5. _Avoiding bad company and associating with good, religious men._ The -confessor must, of course, most earnestly exhort the penitent to avoid -_every_ occasion and danger of sin, especially every immediate, and more -serious, danger of sin even when it is a remote one, in so far as it is -morally possible to avoid it. The special occasions and dangers which -exist in some particular place, the confessor will learn from his own -observation, from the advice of experienced men, or the counsel of his -superiors. - -6. _The reading of good books, the lives of the saints._ - -7. _Reflection on the eternal truths, the Life and Passion of Jesus._ - -8. _Frequent thought of the presence of God._ - -9. _Voluntary works of penance_ in punishment of relapse, which the -penitent should determine in advance. This remedy is much to be -recommended, not only against grave sins, but also against slight -defects, when one is aiming at perfection. - -10. _Special devotion to the divine Heart of Jesus, to Mary, and to the -Guardian Angel._ It is better to do a little regularly, than much without -perseverance and order, according to the humor and mood of the moment. - -11. _Confidence and perseverance_, even when a relapse occurs; for -nothing is more harmful than to lose courage and regard amendment as -too difficult and impossible on account of frequent relapses. This mood -generally arises from wrong application of remedies, and from a certain -secret pride. Therefore, wholly distrusting his own powers, the penitent -must put all his confidence in God.[764] - -The confessor should not content himself with indicating remedies for the -penitent; he must choose and impose them with reference to the latter’s -moral sickness, his temptations and occasions of sinning, and his station -in life; if necessary he must also instruct him as to their application. - -Moreover, there are special remedies for different vices. - -1. _Against pride_, the confessor should recommend:— - -(_a_) The following considerations—what man is of himself, that he has -received all from God, that he has already committed so many sins; his -poverty and weakness, his inconstancy, his ingratitude and infidelity -towards God. - -(_b_) The example of Christ, who so deeply humbled Himself for love of -us, who expressly and earnestly invites us to imitate His humility; on -the other hand, that pride is the sin of Satan. - -(_c_) The promises held out to humility, and the punishment of the proud. -“God resists the proud, and gives His grace to the humble.” (St. James -iv. 6.) “The prayer of the humble man pierceth the clouds.” (Eccl. xxxv. -21.) - -(_d_) Finally, he should remind him that, to obtain humility, he must -humble himself, hence he must avoid rather than seek the praise of men, -and, so far as his position allows, forego outward marks of distinction, -etc. - -2. _Against avarice_ (_covetousness_):— - -(_a_) The utterances of Holy Writ against the avaricious and the -covetous. (Eccl. x. 9.) “There is not a more wicked thing than to love -money, for such a one setteth even his own soul for sale.” The parable -of the rich man. (St. Luke xviii. 25.) “It is easier for a camel to pass -through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of -heaven.” - -(_b_) Earthly goods can never fully satisfy a man, nor make him really -happy. - -(_c_) All our earthly possessions we must leave behind to heirs, who, -perhaps, will soon forget us, and neither thank us nor pray for us. -Better it is, therefore, with our earthly goods to procure for ourselves -heavenly treasures, of which we cannot be robbed. (See St. Matthew vi. -19, 20; St. Luke xvi. 9.) - -(_d_) The menace of the Apostle: “They that will become rich, fall into -the snare of the devil.” (1 Tim. vi. 9.) - -(_e_) The example of Jesus, of Mary, of St. Joseph, and of so many saints. - -3. _Against impurity_:— - -(_a_) Serious consideration of the disgrace into which this vice throws -a man; a vice in which he makes himself the tool and slave of the vilest -desires and passions. - -(_b_) Flight from those persons and things, the sight of whom, or -intercourse with whom, excites to sinful thoughts and desires; avoidance -of every dangerous intimacy. - -(_c_) Avoidance of idleness; constant useful occupation. - -(_d_) Watchfulness over the senses. - -(_e_) Energetic suppression of temptation in its first beginnings, as -soon as one is conscious of it. _Principiis obsta, sero medicina paratur._ - -(_f_) Humble prayer is here preëminently necessary—especially devotion to -the most blessed Virgin in her Immaculate Conception. Instant appeal to -her in temptation; the prayer: “_O Domina mea, O mater mea_,” etc., every -morning and evening has always proved very efficacious. - -(_g_) Mortification of the flesh; at least avoidance of all luxuriousness -and effeminacy. - -4. _Against intemperance_:— - -(_a_) Consideration of the disgrace peculiar to this vice. - -(_b_) Avoidance of everything which excites to it, especially convivial -occasions and gatherings. - -(_c_) Slight mortifications. - -(_d_) Determining a fixed measure, with the firm resolve never to exceed -it without due reason. - -5. _Against envy_:— - -(_a_) The envious man tortures himself; this is the most foolish of vices. - -(_b_) Envying others is copying the devil, rejoicing at the happiness of -others is imitating the angels. - -(_c_) Through God and Christ all men stand in close relationship to each -other, are all brothers. - -(_d_) Consequences of envy. Cain, the Pharisees. - -(_e_) When feelings of envy rise in the heart, the penitent should -endeavor to be well disposed towards the particular person, should meet -him in a friendly manner, should be ready to help him if necessary, -should at least pray for him there and then. - -6. _Against anger_:— - -(_a_) Our duty to strive after meekness and patience, in imitation of -Jesus. - -(_b_) The ruinous effects of anger—robbing a man—either partially or -wholly—of the use of reason, hurrying him into unconsidered, shameful, -and most sinful actions; destroying peace, stirring up enmities. - -(_c_) Prevention of the outward inducements to anger: certain games, -drinking—and if they cannot be prevented, the penitent should lessen them -by prudent precautionary measures. - -(_d_) God has every reason for being angry with us, and for taking -vengeance upon us, on account of the many insults which we offer to Him. -But He forgives us, and it is, therefore, but just that we should harbor -no anger towards our neighbor. - -(_e_) If we do not forgive, we have no right to hope for forgiveness at -the hands of God, and there is a dreadful significance in the mouth of -the Christian who prays in the “Our Father” “forgive us our trespasses as -we forgive them who trespass against us.” - -(_f_) When anger is aroused, a man must refrain from every word and act -until he has mastered it. - -7. _Against sloth_:— - -(_a_) God’s abhorrence of spiritual sloth: “I would that thou wert cold -or hot,” etc. (Apoc. iii. 15, 16.) - -(_b_) Consideration of the shortness and importance of human life; and, -on the other hand, the tireless zeal of the man of the world in his -pursuit of earthly things. - -(_c_) The great injustice done to God by neglect of the service due to -Him—for man is the servant of God! - -(_d_) Regular order in life: establishing an order of the day; in -the morning renewal of the determination to avoid all idleness; in -the evening, rendering account to one’s self of how the day has been -spent.[765] - -In his efforts on behalf of the penitent let the confessor keep in mind -that the conversion of a sinner is more the operation of divine grace -than the fruit of any human activity. Let him, therefore, pray often for -his penitents; and let him not despair and despond if the conversion of -a sinner inured to vice does not immediately follow. For such conversion -does not usually take place suddenly; generally not for a long time, nor -till after a hard struggle and earnest prayer. Moreover, God rewards his -laborers according to their work, and not according to their success. - - - - -CHAPTER III - -THE DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR AFTER THE CONFESSION - - -The confessor has certain duties to perform after the confession. These -are principally two, one of which is always and _per se_ incumbent upon -him, viz.: the _preservation of the seal of the confessional_; while -the other, the _correcting of errors which may have occurred in the -confession_, may arise _per accidens_. - - -58. The Duty of correcting Errors occurring in the Confession. - -The confessor more easily and more seriously errs in the administration -of the Sacrament of Penance (by reason of the variety of the duties -which this office imposes upon him) than in the other Sacraments. The -errors here committed may, moreover, have grave consequences. It is, -therefore, necessary to treat of them in detail and to show how they may -be corrected. - -The errors which the confessor (even the instructed and conscientious -confessor) may commit in the confessional are classified under three -heads: (1) _Those which affect the validity of the Sacrament_: when the -confessor has forgotten to give absolution, or has given it without -due jurisdiction, or to a penitent insufficiently prepared; (2) _those -which refer to the integrity of the confession_: when the confessor -has not asked concerning the number or circumstances when he was bound -to ask; and (3) _those relating to the duties of the penitent_: when -the confessor has not admonished the penitent to avoid some immediate -occasion of sin, or to make restitution, or where he has obliged him to -restore when there was no obligation.[766] - -Now an error may entail great injury to the penitent, or to a third -person, or again no great harm may result. Moreover, the error may have -been committed through great culpability on the part of the confessor, or -without such culpability, at least without great culpability. Finally, -the error may be _positive_, the confessor _doing_ something wrong; or it -may be _negative_, the confessor neglecting something he should have done. - -As regards the duty of rectifying these errors, the following principles -are to be observed:— - -I. An error touching the validity of the Sacrament, resulting from _grave -fault_ on the part of the confessor, and causing great harm to the -penitent, must, _ex justitia_, be made good by the confessor, even when -such reparation involves serious trouble. - -Even if the confessor is not bound in justice to hear confessions, as -soon as he does so, he enters into a kind of agreement with the penitent -to administer the Sacrament properly; if he administers it invalidly, -he is a _damnificator injustus_, and must, _ex justitia_, and _secundum -justitiæ regulas_, make good the injury he has caused. But if the fault -of the confessor was only a slight one, he is, as regards the correction -of the error, in the position of one who has, _inculpabiliter_, caused -some temporal harm. In this case, he would be bound to make good the -error only when he could do so without relatively great inconvenience to -himself. And if the confessor sinned gravely in committing the error, he -would also be excused from remedying it, if his own _incommodum_ much -exceeded the detriment and danger resulting from it to his penitent. -But if, in consequence of the confessor’s error, the penitent’s eternal -salvation has been seriously endangered—for instance, if he has invalidly -absolved a dying person, or one who will probably not confess again -before his death, he must remedy this injury under all circumstances, -even _cum suo damno relative gravi_, or _gravissimo_; for this is also -a duty of charity. Likewise when the confessor is the pastor of the -penitent, and, therefore, _ratione stipendii_, the more strictly bound to -avert from those committed to him great spiritual injury, he must _cum -gravi incommodo_ make good an error committed _cum levi culpa_. If the -penitent has subsequently confessed to another priest, or received holy -communion or Extreme Unction, the injury done to the penitent is thereby -already made good, and the confessor has no further obligations.[767] - -II. If the error touches the integrity of the confession, the confessor -is not bound to remedy it outside the confessional, if his action in the -matter has been of a _negative_ character; this error he must make good -_ex charitate_, and _secundum regulas charitatis_, whether the error was -culpable on his part or not. But if his action was _positive cum gravi -sua culpa_, he must remedy the error even outside the confessional, -for he is bound to do so _ex justitia_ and, in consequence, even with -grave inconvenience to himself. Only when this could not be done -without causing scandal and much embarrassment to the penitent would -the confessor be justified in not doing it. But it should be carefully -observed that an intentional silence must, under circumstances, be -regarded as a _positive_ influence upon the penitent. - -That in the case of an omission the confessor is bound only _ex -charitate_ to remedy the defect is explained by the fact that he failed -in his accessory duties, not doing that which he ought to have done—the -obligation here arises, as the theologians say, not so much _ex officio_, -as _occasione officii_, or not on account of a duty which he owes to God, -but rather on account of a duty which he, _titulo justitiæ et muneris_, -always owes to men. For these accessory duties towards our fellow-men, in -so far as they are duties of office or of _quasi-justitia_, do not extend -beyond the act of confession itself.[768] - -It follows from this that such defects or errors are hardly ever to -be corrected outside the Sacrament of Penance, for the penitent will, -presumably, receive this Sacrament again. But if, by not being informed -of the error, so great injury, especially spiritual injury, should -result to the penitent that charity demanded reparation of even this -negative defect, the confessor must make the reparation even outside the -confessional. For any other person—not a confessor—would, under like -circumstances, be similarly bound towards his neighbor. - -That a confessor should be bound _ex justitia_ to make good an error -committed through a _positive_ action and _cum gravi sua culpa_, is based -upon the fact that he has caused the penitent to infringe an important -commandment (the integrity of the confession). Even if this infringement -had been for the penitent only a material one,—therefore, not sinful,—the -confessor would be obliged to prevent such material infringement for the -future by correcting the error caused by himself. But if the fault of -the confessor in committing the error was only a slight one, a lesser -ground would release him from the duty of correcting the fault; and -if he acted _bona fide_, he is entirely released from it, seeing that -subsequent instruction concerning the fault committed can never take -place without embarrassment and difficulty.[769] - -III. A defect having reference to a duty of the penitent, which causes -the latter, or a third person injury, must be made good by the confessor -_cum gravi suo incommodo_, if _cum gravi sua culpa_ he has instructed the -penitent falsely; if he committed the error without great fault on his -part, he is not bound to correct it _cum gravi_, although he is bound -_cum aliquo incommodo_. The confessor is, in this case, _causa injusta -damni_, and has, therefore, the obligations of a _damnificator injustus_. - -The injury caused by the confessor may be spiritual, in consequence of -wrong instruction, or temporal, by imposing restitution, or some similar -burden to which the penitent was not bound. With reference to others than -the penitent, the question will generally be one of temporal loss in -consequence of the penitent having been released from his duties to them. -The question of injury to the community at large should be remembered in -this connection. - -If, therefore, the confessor committed the error _cum gravi culpa_, for -instance, caused some great temporal harm, he must repair it himself -if it cannot be otherwise repaired, and prevent injury which has not -yet ensued, but which may ensue. If the error took place without his -fault, he is not bound to repair any harm which ensues before he knew -of the error, and which could not be repaired without great detriment -to himself. He must, however, avert injury which is still threatening, -and repair that which already exists if it can be done without -relatively great detriment to himself. If he neglects this _ex gravi -negligentia_, he is guilty of a great injustice, and is responsible -for all harm which he did not prevent. So, if he has wrongly bound any -one to make restitution, he must advise the penitent (after obtaining -from him permission to speak about matters of confession) not to make -the restitution, or if he has already made it, to indemnify himself -_compensatione occulta_, if this be possible. If he omits, _ex gravi -negligentia_, so to instruct the penitent, he is bound to make good the -injury out of his own means, in case his warning, or the retractation -of his error, is no longer effectual in preventing the injury, or -compensating for it. But if, after becoming aware of his error, the -confessor can no longer warn the penitent, or if the warning or -retractation must be regarded as useless, he is free from all obligation. -If from the first the confessor’s error was fraught with great guilt, he -is bound, if it is any way possible, to see that justice is done to the -injured person.[770] The same principles hold good if a third person has -suffered injury, or been exposed to the risk of it by the fault of the -confessor. If the evil consequences are sufficiently remote and the case -admits of delay, the error may be set right in the next confession of -the penitent; for generally it is no easy matter to speak about anything -connected with a confession outside the confessional. In cases of -necessity, however, the confessor must brave this difficulty and do his -duty. - -Gobat[771] gives confessors (especially young ones) the following -excellent rules which they should always keep in view in order to acquire -the necessary prudence and dexterity in their office:— - -1. After he has heard a confession, the confessor should always reflect -if, and in what, he has erred, so that he may avoid these faults in -future. - -2. In giving or refusing absolution, in imposing a penance, the -confessor’s first consideration should always be the welfare of the -penitent and his greater spiritual advantage. - -3. Let him be careful not to pronounce a sin mortal without being certain -that it is so. - -4. In doubt as to whether restitution or a similar duty is to be imposed, -let him adopt the more lenient opinion of the theologians if this is -really probable. - -5. The confessor of a penitent must presume that the former confessor -discharged his duty properly, unless he sees plainly the contrary. - -6. The confessor must know the different opinions of theologians upon -one and the same matter when such exist and are practically probable, -in order to make use of one or the other, according to the different -dispositions of the penitents and their requirements. - - -59. The Duty of preserving the Seal of Confession. - -By the seal of confession, or _sigillum confessionis sive sacramentale_, -we understand the duty of preserving silence concerning everything which -has been learnt in sacramental confession. - -I. The duty of preserving the seal of the confessional is based upon -natural and divine law and upon the strict precept of the Church. -It is true, God has not laid down any formal and express demand to -preserve the seal of confession, but that this is His will results -(_naturaliter_) from the divine institution of confession, and especially -from the _commandment_ which _obliges_ all the faithful to confess all -their mortal sins, but which binds them only to confess their sins _in -secret_ (_secreto_). Now this general law to confess all, even the -gravest and most secret sins, would assuredly be too burdensome to the -faithful; indeed, its observance would become simply morally impossible -if confessors were not bound by the strictest obligation to preserve -the seal of the confessional. Danger to human life and the social -order, would, in fact, be inevitable if this duty did not exist. Thus -the seal of the confessional seems to be an indispensable condition -of the observance of the commandment to make full confession of sins. -But he who prescribes an end must also prescribe the means necessary -to that end. And if every man is bound to preserve a secret confided -to him, a confessor is still more bound, under all circumstances, to -maintain silence concerning sins which have been confessed to him as -_secretum_, seeing that so much depends upon his fidelity in this -respect,—the sanctity, the usefulness, and the blessings of the holy -Sacrament of Penance.[772] Moreover, the duty of preserving the seal of -the confessional is imposed by an express law of the Church, which has -existed in constant tradition, and is thus expressed by the IV. Council -of the Lateran:[773] Let the confessor beware of betraying the sinner in -any way, by a word, or a sign, or by any other means; but if he should -stand in need of wiser counsel let him ask for it without, in any way, -indicating the person. - -II. It results also from the above that the obligation of the seal -belongs _to the virtue of religion_. Breaking it is an abuse of a -Sacrament, therefore, rightly regarded as a kind of sacrilege; however, -it must not be confessed under the general designation of a sacrilege, -but as a breach of the seal of confession, in order that the ultimate and -full species of the sin may be recognized. - -Inasmuch as the confessor, _ex officio_, listens to the confession of the -penitent, he is bound, _ex fidelitate_, to silence concerning everything -which the interest of the penitent demands that he should keep secret. -Finally, breaking the seal of confession would, in many cases, be a -defamation of the penitent, and would, therefore, be an _injustice_. It -is thus of its nature a very grave sin, a sacrilege, which is generally -accompanied by injury to reputation and breach of faith.[774] - -III. The obligation of the seal is a very strict one, admitting neither -_parvitas materia per se_, nor any exception: only when the penitent -has expressly and voluntarily given permission would it be allowable -to disclose anything heard in confession, and even then prudence will -generally dissuade the confessor from making use of the permission.[775] - -St. Alphonsus teaches,[776] as _sententia certissima_, that never, and in -no case, is the slightest disclosure of the secrets of the confessional -permitted, not even to save one’s life, to save the state, or to remedy -the greatest spiritual necessity. The reason for this most stringent -obligation is clear. If there were only one exception made, people would -always be in a state of fear that this or that sin might be sufficient -ground for lawfully breaking the seal, and the Sacrament would thereby -become odious.[777] - -When, therefore, the confessor is asked concerning anything which he has -learnt in the confessional, he must, _per se_, reprimand the questioner, -reminding him that such questions are quite inadmissible. If, however, -he can see no other effectual way of evading the question or of averting -suspicion from the penitent, he can and must declare, even upon oath, -that the penitent has not confessed to him what is in question, that -he knows nothing at all about it. Such a statement is not a lie nor is -it, in consequence, a perjury if made upon oath, for it is a case of -lawful use of the implicit reservation that the confessor, as a private -individual,—the only capacity in which he can be expected to answer,—has -no knowledge of a subject revealed to him as a representative of God.[778] - -And should the confessor be asked if he has given absolution to a -penitent, let him answer, “I did what it was my duty to do,” or, still -better, dismiss the questioner with the answer, “Such questions are not -allowed.” If he had not given the absolution and was asked by a priest -or other cleric if the penitent might receive holy communion, he must -answer, “Ask him yourself.”[779] - -Concerning the penitent’s permission to speak about the confession, St. -Alphonsus teaches as follows: 1. This permission must be given in words, -or by facts which convey it, as, for instance, when the penitent himself -begins to talk to the confessor about something said in the confessional. -This permission may not be presumed even if it were for the penitent’s -own welfare.[780] - -2. Permission obtained by threats or _metus reverentialis_ does not -suffice; for instance, if the confessor has obtained it through repeated -requests, the penitent having at first refused it.[781] 3. The penitent -can recall the permission which he has given at his pleasure.[782] 4. -When the confessor has obtained the permission let him be very careful -not to overstep the limits laid down by the penitent.[783] - -IV. The duty of preserving the seal of the confessional thus differs from -that of preserving any other secret in the following points: (_a_) It -does not admit _parvitas materiæ_; (_b_) it exists even with regard to -the person who has confessed, or whom the secret concerns; (_c_) it never -admits of any exception.[784] - -V. The duty of secrecy attaches to _every_ really sacramental confession; -that is, confession made with the intention of accusing one’s self and -of obtaining absolution. Therefore, (_a_) confession _knowingly_ made -to a cleric or a priest without jurisdiction does not impose the duty -of silence, but only the obligation of the natural secret, excepting, -however, the case where the penitent intended that the priest should -obtain jurisdiction, and afterwards give him absolution. The duty of -the seal would also come into effect if the penitent believed that the -priest to whom he confessed had jurisdiction. (_b_) If a person informs -a confessor of the state of his conscience not with the intention -of receiving absolution, but for the purpose of obtaining advice or -instruction for his spiritual life, or for some other object, there -is no obligation of the seal, but only of the _secretum naturale_ and -_commissum_; though of this class of secrets it is unquestionably the -most binding. The same principles would apply if a person said that he -made the disclosures concerning himself only _sub sigillo_. But there -is always this difference between the case mentioned and the seal of -the confessional, that here _parvitas materiæ_ is admissible, and that -the secret is, of itself, not violated by any reference to the person -concerned.[785] (_c_) A pretended confession, made for the purpose of -deceiving, or seducing, or ridiculing the priest, does not impose the -duty of the seal and the priest might, at the call of circumstances, -make use of knowledge thus obtained, in his defense. On the other hand, -a confession begun with the honest intention of receiving the Sacrament, -but during which the penitent allowed himself to be carried away and -influenced by some sinful purpose, would impose the duty of the seal, -since such confession was, at least in part, sacramental.[786] (_d_) -Finally, a confession, or relation of sins made for some other purpose -would not impose it, though, under circumstances, the duty of the -strictest _secretum naturale et commissum_ may ensue. The confessor is -also forbidden to make use of a probable opinion in matters which come -under the seal, whether the _probabilitas_ be _facti_ or _juris_. The -_probabilitas facti_ would turn on the question whether it is probable -that the confession made was sacramental or not; in neither case have I -any right to say or do anything which might possibly amount to a breach -of the seal. The _probabilitas juris_ exists when authors disagree as to -what constitutes an infraction of the seal; here I may not adopt any form -of action or speech which on solid probable grounds would mean a breach -of the seal, or tend to make the Sacrament odious to the faithful. On -the contrary, it must be morally certain that the utterance or action -in question excludes all danger of disclosure and of aversion to the -Sacrament.[787] - - -60. The Subject of the Seal of Confession. - -The duty of preserving the seal of confession binds, in the first place, -the confessor who hears the confession. It devolves also upon all who, -by lawful or unlawful means, have acquired knowledge of that which -falls under the seal; otherwise the penitent would not be sufficiently -protected, and might be deterred from approaching the Sacrament. This -extension of the duty of the seal was certainly in the intention of Our -Saviour.[788] - -In addition to the confessor, therefore, the following are bound by the -seal of the confessional: (_a_) the Superior to whom the penitent or the -confessor (with permission of the penitent) had recourse either verbally -or by writing, in a reserved case, or a similar matter; (_b_) any one -employed as an interpreter in a confession; (_c_) the theologian whom the -confessor consulted, either verbally or by writing, in a difficult case, -and especially any person to whom the confessor in any way communicated -matter learnt in the confessional—whether that communication was made -_sacrilege vel imprudentur_, or in a lawful manner—excepting when the -penitent has, perhaps, widened the limits of his permission.[789] If, -therefore (for example), the confessor, in behalf of the penitent, should -ask for a remission of debts, and, in doing so, with the penitent’s -permission, discloses to the injured person the sin of theft, etc., -the latter possesses the knowledge of this theft under the seal of the -confessional; for it is in the penitent’s power to give permission to -propagate information received by the confessor in the confessional, -either under the same seal, that is, in the same manner as the confessor -possesses it, or in some less stringent manner.[790] (_d_) He who, -either accidentally or purposely, has heard the confession of another, -and those who, through him, have obtained knowledge of a sin so heard. -Deliberately to overhear the confession of another is, of itself, a -breach of the seal. (_e_) Whoever reads a piece of paper upon which the -penitent has written his sins may be bound either under the seal, or to -the natural secret only. He is bound under the seal: (1) if he should -read the written confession _in actu confessionis_, especially, if it is -already handed to the confessor for the purpose of confession; (2) if he -found it in the confessional, having been left there by the confessor, -“for this knowledge is none other than that of the confessor”; (3) if -he snatched it from the hand of the confessor to whom the penitent had -handed it; (4) if it had been snatched from the hands of the penitent -while he was confessing, or had fallen from his hands; (5) if writing the -confession is, for the penitent, the necessary means of making a complete -confession, reading this writing before the confession also imposes the -obligation of the seal; (6) this holds good _in every case_ after the -confession, _before_ the document has so far returned to the penitent’s -possession that he has voluntarily preserved it when he might have -destroyed it; (7) whosoever reads the letter in which permission is asked -of a Superior to absolve from a reserved case, as this belongs to the -confession. - -On the other hand, whoever reads the written enumeration of the sins of -others is bound to the natural secret only: (1) if the penitent, after -completing his confession, had voluntarily left the document behind, had -thrown it away, had not destroyed it; and (2) if the penitent, without -exactly intending to make his confession, had written down his sins, -and this document is read prior to the confession. Though in this case -the obligation of the natural secret only comes into force, it is the -strictest of its kind.[791] The penitent is not bound by the seal to -be silent about what the confessor has said to him; but he is bound to -natural secrecy concerning everything the revelation of which might -injure the confessor or the Sacrament; indeed the penitent is more -strictly bound to silence, because the confessor, unlike other men, does -not impart advice and instruction spontaneously but in virtue of his -office.[792] - - -61. The Object or Matter of the Seal of Confession. - -The object of the seal of confession is, in general, everything the -revealing of which would make confession odious. This is a natural -deduction from the end of the law and from a decision of the S. C. -Inquis. given under the authority of Innocent XI, Nov. 18, 1682, by which -a proposition was rejected permitting the use of all information obtained -in the confessional, as long as no direct or indirect revelation takes -place.[793] - -Objects of the seal are:— - -1. _All sins_; mortal and venial sins both of the penitent and of his -accomplice (_complex_);[794] indeed, notoriously public sins, also, in so -far as they are known through the medium of confession. Not only mortal -and venial sins _in individuo_, but also _omnino in genere_. It would be -no breach of the seal to say, in a general way, that the penitent had -committed venial sins or only venial sins, especially as the penitent -himself, by going to confession, practically tells every one that he -has committed _some sin_, at least a venial sin; and it is, moreover, a -matter of faith that no man can remain free from all venial sin, unless -he has received a special privilege from God, and the Blessed Virgin -alone is known positively to have possessed such a privilege. - -2. _The objects and circumstances of the sins_, and not only that which -it is of precept to confess, but also that which the penitent believed -necessary for the better explanation of his sins. For example, if a son -confesses that he hates his father because the latter has committed -adultery, the adultery of the father, although not a necessary part of -the confession of the son, is, nevertheless, an object of the seal; or -when the penitent confesses a murder at which he has rejoiced, a duel -which he has witnessed, etc.[795] - -3. _The penance imposed_, except when this is a small one such as is -generally imposed for the slightest sins; for a more severe penance -indicates that graver sins have been committed. - -4. _Temptations_, because they stand in relation to sins, in so far as -the penitent doubts if he has consented to them, or asks advice of the -confessor in order not to yield to them. - -5. _Defects_, which are confessed in explanation of a sin; for example, -illegitimacy, where a penitent has received Orders, in opposition to the -law of the Church. _Natural_ defects of the penitent also, in so far as -they are known through the confessional, and tend to his disgrace (for -instance, defective education, stupidity, etc.), are objects of the seal. -But if these do not stand in any relation to the confession, or if the -penitent would not resent their being made known, and if they are matter -of general knowledge already, they are not objects of the seal.[796] - -6. _The penitent’s position in life_ may be, _ex se_, an object of the -seal, in so far as information about it is necessary in order to explain -the sins according to their ultimate species. Nevertheless, it may be -assumed that this information, even when thus necessary, is not given to -the confessor _sub sigillo_, but rather _prævie_. If it is a question of -a position known to every one (though perhaps not known to the confessor) -the penitent does not intend to include this knowledge under the seal. -But it is a different matter when, on account of certain circumstances, -the penitent attaches importance to his incognito. It is certainly not -allowed so to speak of the position and circumstances of the penitent so -as to indicate thereby that he had sinned against individual duties of -his position.[797] - -7. _Scruples_, or the scrupulosity of the penitent, may be an object -either of the seal, or of the natural secret. (_a_) The scruples -themselves which the penitent confesses are, of course, _direct_ objects -of the seal, in so far as they are considered by him to be sins. (_b_) -The scrupulosity which the penitent confesses as a circumstance of his -sins—or in order to give a better idea of his spiritual state—is likewise -an object of the seal. (_c_) To say in a general way that the penitent -has confessed many scruples, violates the seal in the same way as to -disclose that he has confessed _several_ venial sins, real or supposed. -(_d_) On the other hand, the scrupulosity which is only perceived in the -manner of expression is not matter of the seal, but, _per se_, of the -natural secret which obliges the more strictly as the knowledge obtained -is more intimately connected with the confession itself.[798] - -8. _Sins committed in the confession itself_, for example, impatience, -not showing the confessor due reverence, etc., are, _per se_, not -objects of the _sigillum_, because the penitent does not confess them; -nevertheless, making them known might easily, and generally will, involve -danger to the seal; for these sins suggest a severe reprehension or a -refusal of absolution.[799] - -9. _Virtues or supernatural gifts_ which the penitent discloses in order -that the confessor may learn the state of his soul, are not, _per se_, -objects of the seal; but if they are disclosed inasmuch as they have -reference to a sin, they are matter of the _sigillum_.[800] - - -62. Violations of the Seal. - -The seal of confession is, in the first place, violated by every -communication of those things which are matter of the seal if the -penitent is recognized, or if there is a danger of his being recognized. -Moreover, every _use_ of things falling under the seal which is -calculated to make confession odious, or to cause the penitent annoyance -and detriment, is also a breach of the seal. - -A distinction is, accordingly, to be made between _direct_ and _indirect_ -violation of the seal; it is _directly_ violated when any matter of -the seal itself is directly disclosed and the person of the penitent -indicated; it is _indirectly_ violated when revelation of matter of the -seal involves only risk of discovery of the penitent or danger of harm to -him. In the indirect violation there may be _parvitas materiæ_; that is, -when, through the _communication_ or the _use_ of that which was learnt -under the seal only very slight danger of recognition would be incurred, -as when the confessor speaks of the sins prevalent in some particular -town or place without the inhabitants of the place becoming, thereby, -appreciably prejudiced against the institution of the confessional, or -any particular defamation resulting. But if there is doubt as to whether -the consequences are really so slight, such a proceeding must be regarded -as a great sin. - -For a violation of the seal, it is not necessary that the person with -whom the confessor speaks knows that he is making use of knowledge gained -in the confessional; it is enough that the confessor should speak from -this knowledge. Nor is it necessary that the person of the penitent -should actually be recognized by him with whom the confessor speaks; it -suffices that the circumstances should be such that the identity of the -penitent emerges sufficiently distinct from what the confessor says, -or that the person of the penitent may possibly be recognized, or that -well-founded suspicion _could_ arise. As the faithful preservation of -the seal is of the highest importance, the confessor must always be -very careful that penitents do not become averse or disinclined to the -confessional. Nevertheless he is not bound to avoid every trivial danger, -and to anticipate every idle conjecture of malicious people.[801] In view -of their supreme importance, we here subjoin a few cases of violation of -the seal, as discussed by eminent theologians. - -1. A priest indirectly violates the seal: (_a_) if he says or intimates -that he refused or deferred absolution to a certain penitent, because he, -thereby, implies that the penitent had confessed a grave sin, or had not -been disposed; or if he says that a certain penitent’s confession had -not been finished—unless it were generally known that this confession -was a general one, or one concerning a long space of time, so that there -can be no embarrassment on the part of the penitent. Indeed, Lugo adds -that even if the penitent himself were to say that he had not been -absolved, the confessor must not take the liberty of repeating it.[802] -(_b_) If he said of a notorious thief that the latter had confessed -his thefts to him with great sorrow. The case would be different if -without entering into detail he were to remark that the same thief had -made his confession to him.[803] (_c_) If he praises excessively some -penitent in comparison with others whom he heard at the same time, or -says that he committed venial sins only, suspicion being thus easily -excited that the others had confessed grave sins. An exception would be -if there were some particular ground for so speaking, without offense -to the other penitents, and without danger of injurious suspicion.[804] -(_d_) If two confessors, to whom the same penitent had confessed, talk -together concerning his sins. (_e_) If he reproves the penitent aloud, -questions him concerning circumstances of the sins, so that bystanders -can hear it. (_f_) If, after having heard the confessions of some few -penitents, he should say that he had heard a particular sin—for the -individual penitents fall under suspicion of having committed this sin. -(_g_) If he speaks of sins which he has heard in the confessional in such -a way that those who hear him can infer or conjecture the identity of -those who committed them. (_h_) If he speaks of sins learnt outside the -confessional, but adds a circumstance learnt only in the confessional, -or makes use of knowledge gathered in the confessional for the purpose -of specifying or corroborating some statement. (_i_) If, without the -penitent’s permission, he speaks to him outside the confessional about -his sins heard in the confessional. Where the penitent himself begins, -the confessor may only speak about the particular subject to which -the penitent confines himself. Likewise if, after the confession, the -priest’s demeanor shows that he remembers his sins and esteems him less -highly than before. (_k_) If he should intimate that the penitent had -_not_ confessed a particular sin, because, thereby, suspicion might -easily arise that he had actually concealed a sin.[805] - -2. As a general rule it is allowed to speak vaguely of sins heard in the -confessional in such a manner that there is no danger of recognizing -the person, and no suspicion is aroused against any persons. In this, -however, scandal to lay people is to be carefully avoided, for they -readily believe that speech of this kind is a violation of the seal, and -may, thereby, be deterred from approaching the confessional; nor should -one be too easily persuaded that there is no fear of any danger in the -matter. Confessors, therefore, should not be too ready to talk much about -what they have heard in the confessional; for such talk, when often -indulged in, is not quite free from the danger of a slip beyond what is -permissible and of awakening suspicions in the hearers. Indeed, before -laymen such talk must be altogether avoided.[806] - -No violation of the seal is, therefore, in question: (_a_) when the -confessor says that “Titus confessed to him”; only Titus must not -then have come to him secretly, for from this circumstance it might -be inferred that he had a bad conscience; (_b_) when he praises the -conscience of a penitent; but he must not, on account of possible -circumstances, awaken thereby the suspicion that others, who confessed -to him at the same time, have bad consciences; for it might be that if -he were questioned concerning another penitent, he could not maintain -the same tone of praise.[807] (_c_) If, immediately after absolution, -before the penitent leaves the confessional, he speaks to him of what he -has then and there heard, for though the Sacrament has been administered, -the judicial act still morally continues.[808] (_d_) If he speaks to -the penitent during confession of his sins of another confession, for, -_in actu confessionis_, the penitent has no right to the preservation -of the seal; but even this the confessor should not do without reason, -for it is troublesome to many penitents. (_e_) When he prays for a -penitent, even if he only knows him through the confessional, or treats -him more leniently (or otherwise) on account of the state of his soul -learnt in the confessional; when he makes use of knowledge acquired in -the confessional in order to ask learned and experienced confessors for -advice,[809] or to perfect his own work in the confessional, to be able -to question better, to instruct better, and more efficaciously to watch -over those committed to his charge. - -The confessor does not violate the seal by saying that a certain vice is -prevalent in some place, town, or parish when this place or parish is of -considerable size (St. Alphonsus assumes three thousand Catholics as the -population) and when it is a question of vices which are public, and no -new defamation arises. On the other hand, it would be a violation of the -seal if (_a_) by this statement concerning the sins, or by the manner of -it, the parish, etc., were defamed, and (_b_), in any case, if the place -were small. Hard and fast limits cannot be laid down to determine when a -serious breach of the seal takes place, and when such revelations would -be quite permissible; each case must be carefully considered and weighed, -in order to learn if any, or a grave, or only a slight, violation is -in question. A preacher, therefore, has a right to speak against vices -which are secretly very prevalent in a parish, and if he has obtained his -knowledge of them outside the confessional, he can speak of them with -still greater freedom; but he should always employ a wise caution, so as -not to awaken suspicions injurious to those who confess to him.[810] - -In deciding whether violation of the seal of the confession is committed -when a confessor says that he has heard a grave sin in the confessional -from a religious of some particular Order, without designating the -individual, the following circumstances must be considered: (_a_) -whether, from the nature of the sin referred to, defamation of the Order -results or not; (_b_) before what persons the statement was made, as this -circumstance usually determines the quality of the defamation; (_c_) -whether, from the statement itself, or from the circumstances, suspicion -falls upon the occupants of a few houses. From this it can be inferred -if a grave violation of the seal, or a slight one, or none at all, has -taken place; but it is very unlikely that no violation of the seal at all -has been committed by such a communication. The confessor of a convent -would, accordingly, break the seal, if, while preaching in the convent, -he should signalize a particular sin of a nun, or of that convent, which -he knew only through the confessional. On the other hand, he would not -break it if he were to speak generally of defects which usually occur, -or may occur, in all convents; otherwise a priest who heard confessions -in a convent could never preach there, and such a prohibition would be -contrary to the general usage.[811] If the confessor knows through the -confessional that snares are being prepared for him, he may, under some -pretext, go away, or provide for his safety, if by so doing the sin -confessed does not become known, nor any detriment ensues to the penitent -by which the confessional would be rendered odious; if, however, he -cannot, without breaking the seal, escape or evade the snares prepared -for him, nor avoid an objective sacrilege, he must rather endure or -permit his death and the sacrilege than break the seal. Nevertheless, he -can, and must, exhort and bind the penitent in the confessional to give -him permission to make use of this knowledge.[812] - -It is not allowed to Superiors to make use of knowledge gained in the -confessional in the external government of those under them, or to adopt -any course of action which is in any way odious to the penitent, or -which would make the confessional odious. Hence it is not allowed to a -Superior, in consequence of knowledge obtained through the confessional, -to alter an arrangement which he has once made, or which he had -determined upon only in his mind; but the case may occur in which he may -inform the penitent in the confessional that he had intended to make -certain arrangements, but that he now begs his permission to recede from -this intention.[813] - -Accordingly, it is never allowed to a confessor to remove from his -office a subordinate whom he knows through the confessional to be unfit -for it, to deprive him of his vote at an election, to forbid him the -Sacraments, to withdraw from him any tokens of good-will formerly shown, -to look at him askance, to take from him keys which he formerly held or -to hide those which he was in the habit of leaving about, etc. But if the -confessor obtained this information otherwise than in the confessional, -he may make use of the knowledge otherwise obtained; but then this -information must really move him to his course of action just as if he -had had no knowledge of the unworthiness of the subordinate through the -confessional.[814] - -Where it is customary to give a ticket to testify that confession has -been made, the confessor must confine himself to stating merely that -he has heard the confession, and he must not state that he has given -absolution to the penitent; for if he invariably attested that the -penitent had been absolved, he would be committing himself to a lie, -in cases where he had not absolved; if, again, he testified to having -absolved those whom he had absolved, and to not having absolved others to -whom he had refused absolution, he would, indirectly, violate the seal of -the confessional. - -And if the confessor should refuse the ticket to an ill-disposed penitent -who had made a sacramental confession, he would also violate the seal -in the following cases: (_a_) where the penitent asks for this ticket -outside the confessional, and (_b_) when it is given to all penitents, -or when it is demanded by the penitent’s Superior, as at Easter time, -for example. But if the penitent had no intention at all of making a -sacramental confession, but only made pretense of confession in order -to procure his ticket, for instance, in order to escape punishment from -a teacher, or to contract a marriage, the ticket must be refused to -him.[815] - -If a confessor knows only through the confessional the bad state of -a man’s conscience, he must not on that account refuse to hear his -confession; he would only be allowed to do so if he had previously, from -another motive, resolved never to hear his confession again, because such -a refusal would make the confessional odious both to the penitent and to -others who should come to hear of the confessor’s behavior.[816] - -But how is a confessor to behave who learns from the confession of an -unmarried woman who is near death that she is pregnant, this fact being -quite unknown to others? Here may be question of the Baptism of the -child after the death of the mother, before it is born. If a month has -passed since conception, the confessor must induce the penitent to make -known her condition, after confession, to some other person, to her -mother, perhaps, or to the doctor (if the latter is a good Catholic, or -a believer) in order that, after her death, the child may be at once -brought into the world and baptized; for she must prefer the Baptism of -the child, as a higher good, to her own reputation. If she refuses to -disclose the matter, the confessor should induce her to communicate it to -him outside confession, in order that he may inform her parents and the -doctor of it after her death. But here great caution is necessary, lest -others should be led to believe that he is breaking the seal. Hence he -should persuade the sick person to make a written statement of the case, -if she is able to do so, or he can do it for her; she should then give it -sealed to a third person who is to open it immediately after her death. - -If she will not consent to this plan, the confessor should abstain from -pressing her great responsibility in case she should be _invincibiliter_ -ignorant of it, or, perhaps, be persuaded that the fœtus will not survive -her; for otherwise, in his endeavor to save the soul of the fœtus, he -would incur the risk of ruining both souls, that of the mother and that -of the child. But absolution can be given to the sick person unless she -is undoubtedly ill disposed—which will seldom be the case. Finally, if -the confessor knows the condition of the sick person only through the -confessional and cannot obtain her permission to make it known, he must -maintain perpetual silence, come what may. For the duty of the seal does -not cease with the life of the penitent.[817] - -As the binding force of the seal exists only for the benefit of the -penitent, the penitent may cancel or modify this obligation, but he -alone has this power. This permission must, however, be given quite -voluntarily. If the penitent has thus given permission to break the seal -in some point, this permission does not extend to the revelation of his -accomplices and others; the law of universal charity and of justice (for -instance, preservation of a good name) still remains intact, and binds -the more strictly the more probability there is of the Sacrament being -made odious by any suspicion. - - - - -SECTION III - -THE DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR TOWARD DIFFERENT CLASSES OF PENITENTS - - -Having considered in the foregoing sections the essential and accidental -duties of the confessor in general, it remains to be shown how these -duties are to be performed in concrete cases. Penitents, not being of -one type, require treatment according to their intellectual development, -their moral constitution, and their natural dispositions, their station -and circumstances of life. On account of the difficulties which beset -confessors in dealing with these different classes of penitents, we -propose to give some practical suggestions. We shall treat of persons -placed in peculiar spiritual conditions, persons in different external -circumstances, and persons who on account of the great danger of their -salvation call for special care. - - - - -CHAPTER I - -THE TREATMENT OF PENITENTS IN DIFFERENT SPIRITUAL CONDITIONS - - -Sinful habits, and the immediate occasions of sin, are the nets with -which the arch-enemy of mankind ensnares and holds innumerable souls. -Especially in our own times have the occasions of sin become more -numerous and dangerous, and carelessness with regard to them has -increased. Many souls are thus lost! The more alarming this condition -proves, the more should the priest be animated by zeal to prevent its -fatal consequences. This requires great prudence and sound knowledge. -For this prudence the priest must continually pray and consult wise and -approved teachers. St. Alphonsus is recognized by all as a most safe -guide amongst these teachers; for this eminent Doctor has been given to -the Church by divine Providence in our days, that he might show us the -middle path between opinions which are either too lax or too strict.[818] - - -ARTICLE I - - -63. Sinful Occasions and the Duty of avoiding them. - -By “occasion of sin” (_occasio peccandi_) we mean, in general, a person, -or some external object constituting for any one a danger of sinning. It -comprises two elements: an external object which incites to sin, and an -internal inclination to sin. - -For a right understanding, we must distinguish between the _danger_ and -the _occasion_ of sinning.[819] - -Danger is the impulse to sin, and if this impulse proceeds from a person -or an external object, this person, or this external object, is called -an _occasion_ of sin; but if the impulse to sin comes from within only, -namely from the devil or in consequence of a sinful habit, it is called -simply _danger_.[820] There is a danger in every occasion but not every -danger proceeds from an external occasion of sin. - -1. The occasion of sin is either _immediate_ (_proxima_) or _remote_ -(_remota_), according as the danger of sinning is great and probable, -or slight. The immediate occasion is “absolutely immediate,” when for -the generality of mankind it presents a serious and probable danger of -sinning; or it is “relatively immediate” when the danger exists for some -individual person on account of his particular disposition. A _per se -proxima occasio_ may, therefore, be _remota_ for a very pious and prudent -man, whereas an occasion _per se remota_ may be for a weak person and one -much inclined to sin _proxima_. - -The existence of an _occasio proxima_ may be inferred: (1) _a posteriori_ -from a sad experience that the person did, in fact, generally, or at -least often, fall into sin whenever the occasion presented itself. If, -however, his trespasses were notably less numerous than his victories, -the occasion cannot be called an _immediate_ one.[821] (2) _A priori_, -from the attraction of the object, from the weakness of the person, from -his passion, from a sinful habit, from the violence of the temptation -to which he is exposed in this occasion. Although sin has not yet been -committed, there is always great danger in _presumptuously_ exposing -one’s self to violent temptation.[822] - -It may be assumed that an _occasio proximo_ has become _remota_: (1) -when it is known from experience that the sins have become less, and are -no longer frequent; (2) when some circumstance has supervened which has -caused the danger to be no longer a great one, such as a marriage, a -quarrel, etc. - -2. Furthermore, the occasion is _continua_, continual, _seu in esse_, -or, with interruptions, _interrupta_, _non continua_, _non in esse_. It -is present interruptedly, when one is not always exposed to it, but only -occasionally, for instance in visits to dancing rooms, inns, etc.; it is -present continuously when one is always, uninterruptedly exposed to it; -for instance, in the case of a concubine or a servant living in the same -house and with whom one is accustomed to sin; an obscene statue in one’s -room. - -3. Again, the immediate occasion is _voluntary_ (_voluntaria_), which -can easily, and without much detriment, be given up; and necessary -(_necessaria_) which the person cannot, even if he will, remove or -relinquish. The necessary occasion is either physically or morally -necessary; physically, when the person absolutely cannot remove it; -morally, when it cannot be abandoned or avoided without sin, or great -scandal, or great detriment to honor, or property, or without placing -one’s self in a similar or worse danger of sin. - -The following principles are to be laid down respecting the duty of -avoiding the occasions of sin:— - -I. The duty of avoiding mortal sin imposes upon us the strict duty of -avoiding also the immediate danger of mortal sin. - -He who is bound under grave sin to reach a certain end is also bound -under grave sin to employ the means without which this end cannot be -reached; but flight from the immediate occasion of sin is the morally -necessary means of avoiding sin, consequently this immediate danger must -be avoided. Further, as a man is bound by love for his own person not -to expose his bodily life voluntarily to the danger of death, he is, _a -fortiori_, bound by the law of charity not to expose his supernatural -life voluntarily to the danger of death, that is, the danger of mortal -sin. It is, therefore, _in re morali_, a sin of the same kind to place -one’s self in an immediate occasion of sin, or to desire and commit the -sin. It follows from this that a man sins grievously as often as he -exposes himself without necessity to the immediate occasion of sin, even -if he does not actually sin in this occasion. On the other hand, it is -no sin to expose one’s self to a remote danger of sinning if there is a -reason for so doing, or if precautionary measures are taken. For such -danger can be easily overcome.[823] - -II. It is allowed, in case of moral necessity, to expose one’s self to -the immediate occasion of sin; only suitable means must then be employed -to protect one’s self against the danger. In this case one does not love -the danger, but incurs it unwillingly, and if a man strengthens himself -by firm resolutions, prayer, etc., God will not suffer him to fall into -sin, and in this manner the danger becomes a remote one. From this it -results that a man is always bound to avoid _formal_ danger either by -flight or by precautionary measures.[824] - -III. From the duty to avoid the risk of sinning results _the duty to -avoid the immediate occasions of sinning_ as these imply an immediate -danger of sinning. This same conclusion, moreover, follows from two -propositions condemned by Innocent XI: “The immediate occasion of sinning -is not to be avoided when there is any _causa utilis aut honesta_ for -not avoiding it” (Prop. 62). “It is permissible to seek directly an -immediate occasion of sinning _pro bono spirituali vel temporali nostro -vel proximi_” (Prop. 3). - -On the other hand, this obligation is not incumbent in respect to -_remote_ occasions, because they do not present an immediate danger -of sinning, and because it is, for the most part, morally impossible -to avoid all these occasions; we should be obliged simply to leave -the world, as the Apostle says (1 Cor. v. 10), for they occur in all -circumstances. - -But it must here be observed that the occasions of sin may be avoided -in two ways, according to the nature of the occasion. As this consists -in an external object and an interior inclination to sin, occasions can -be avoided: (1) _physically_ or _materially_ by separation from the -external object, and (2) _morally_, or _formally_, when the danger is -neutralized by other means which weaken the interior inclination without -physical separation. The first method must come into operation in cases -of _voluntary_ occasion, for he who _wishes_ to remain in immediate -occasion of sin has no real intention of avoiding sin. And when it -is a question of a really voluntary immediate occasion, where there -is frequent sinning, or violent passion, or a sinful habit, or great -incitement to sin, no success is to be hoped without separation, nor will -the use of remedies convert the immediate into a remote occasion. For -a great temptation cannot be overcome without the help of God’s grace, -but God does not assist those who presumptuously expose themselves to -temptation—as experience often shows. This is especially true of the -immediate voluntary occasions of sin against purity.[825] The second -method suffices in the case of the necessary occasion, for he who through -_necessity_ remains in a danger of sin, may hope for the divine help to -avoid sin. - -From this consideration we deduce the following rules:— - -1. An _occasio proxima libera_ of grave sin, whether _absolute_ or -_relative proxima_, must absolutely be avoided; to remain voluntarily in -such occasion or to seek it is itself a grave sin. - -2. It is absolutely necessary to avoid or remove an _occasio proxima -necessaria_; but for him who finds himself in it there exists a -disjunctive duty, either of employing suitable means of reducing it to -a remote occasion, or of removing it in spite of all difficulties and -obstacles. - -3. Not to remove a _remote occasion_, even when there is no particular -reason for exposing one’s self to it, is, of itself, no grave sin; but -this occasion must remain a _remote_ one, and he who finds himself -exposed to it must be resolved to avoid the temptations possibly arising -from it. For it is sometimes possible to foresee that what is now a -remote danger will very soon become a grave and immediate danger; in -this case it is the confessor’s duty to cut off such an occasion and to -forbid it to the penitent lest he fall into formal sin. And when, on the -contrary, the danger of a certain sin is _very remote_ and, in addition, -there is a steadfast intention not to sin, the virtue to which that sin -is opposed does not seem to suffer, even when this risk is incurred -without cause. If the danger is in any way considerable, and it is -incurred without cause, the virtue suffers; in a case of immediate danger -of sin this is certainly the case.[826] But the venial sin which a man -commits who is careless about keeping from a remote occasion increases -in gravity in proportion to the danger. If a man exposes himself to the -danger which such an occasion offers from a more or less weighty motive, -he commits no sin at all, provided his resolution not to sin remains firm. - -4. If danger of venial sin is to be apprehended, he who presumptuously -exposes himself to it commits a venial sin; but if the danger of venial -sin proceeds from an action _in se_ commendable and useful, this -character of the action is sufficient ground for lawfully undertaking -it; indeed, we ought to disregard the danger in a case of this kind, at -the same time insuring ourselves against sin by employing preventive -measures. If we did not adopt this counsel, innumerable actions which -are useful would remain unperformed out of fear of sin, and this would -bespeak timidity rather than prudence and conscientiousness. On the other -hand, it is a mark of wisdom and zeal for perfection to avoid useless -actions which, _ex se_, cannot be done without venial sin, and to avoid -them the more because they may lead to other venial sins.[827] - - -64. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in Occasione -Proxima Voluntaria. - -Upon the foregoing explanations are based the following rules, according -to which the confessor has to proceed with penitents _in occasione -proxima libera_:— - -I. Penitents who are _in occasione continua_ cannot, as a rule, be -absolved, even the first time, before they have given up that which -constitutes the occasion, however much they may promise to do so. For -so long as a penitent remains under the influence of this occasion, he -is in immediate danger of breaking his resolution to abandon it, as its -removal, after an attachment to it has been formed and its fascination -experienced, is very difficult and demands great self-command; so that -there is reason for fearing that the presence of the sinful object will -again enslave the penitent. Hence, the penitent who knows this and would, -nevertheless, expose himself to the danger of breaking his resolution, -must be regarded as not disposed, and the confessor who indulges him sins -against his duty as judge by absolving an ill-disposed penitent, and also -against his duty as physician of the soul by not applying the necessary -means of amendment.[828] - -To this rule there are, however, some exceptions, though in every case -the penitent must faithfully promise to remove the occasion as soon as -possible:— - -1. When the penitent shows signs of extraordinary sorrow and firmness -of purpose, thus giving hope that he will carry out his resolutions -faithfully. - -2. When the occasion is such that the penitent can give it up without -doing great violence to himself. - -3. When there is a solid reason for administering absolution at once; for -it is allowed, where such reason exists, and if the necessary cautions -are employed, to expose one’s self and another to a danger which then -becomes a remote one; and if the penitent must receive absolution before -he can remove the occasion, he is to be regarded as one _in occasione -necessaria_, and he has a right, therefore, to immediate absolution. The -following are held to be sufficient reasons: (_a_) _Danger of death_; -that is, when the penitent is in danger of death and the occasion cannot -be removed at once for want of time, or because great disgrace or -scandal is to be feared. (_b_) _Difficulty in going to the same confessor -again_; if this is the case, or if the penitent could not return till -after a long time, nor repeat the confession to another confessor except -under great difficulties, he may also be absolved before giving up the -occasion. This holds good when the penitent confesses at a place far -removed from his own domicile, so that it would be very difficult for -him to go to the confessor again. (_c_) _Danger of disgrace_, if, on the -same day or the following, he were obliged to contract a marriage, or -receive holy communion, and could not withdraw without great disgrace. -The case is similar if one confesses during the time of a mission, and -cannot during this time remove the occasion without incurring infamy, as -is frequently the case. Here the confessor may content himself with the -removal of the occasion some weeks after the mission, but he must demand -that the penitent should take the preliminary steps towards this at once -if it can be done. (_d_) _Danger of spiritual injury_; that is, when the -confessor has grounds for fearing that, on account of the postponement -of absolution, the penitent would be estranged from the confessional and -perish in his sins; in this case, postponement of absolution would rather -increase the danger of not being faithful to his resolution. - -In the above-named cases the confessor would be obliged to explain to the -penitent that he must not hope to receive absolution in the future if he -does not keep his promise.[829] - -II. Those penitents who are _in occasione interrupta_ can be absolved -_aliquoties_ (two or three times) before they have abandoned the occasion -if they seriously promise to do so. They do not live _actu_ in the -occasion, and their resolution not to seek the occasion may, therefore, -be regarded as a firm one; but the confessor must urge them to abandon -the occasion. - -If the penitent does not subsequently amend, absolution must be deferred -till he has really abandoned the occasion. As he could easily give up -the occasion, and does not do so, according to his promise, doubts as -to the firmness of his resolution arise; extraordinary signs of good -dispositions would, however, remove these doubts. - -If the penitent shows some improvement, although he has not yet -completely given up the occasion, and if it is to be feared that -deferring absolution would do more harm than good to the penitent, he may -be absolved, seeing that his improvement indicates a firm resolve and -preludes complete amendment.[830] - -III. Penitents who have relapsed into an _occasio continua_, that is, -those who have not kept their promise to remove the occasion, cannot -be absolved unless they prove their worthiness by some extraordinary -sign. But even in the latter case, that is, when these penitents give -extraordinary signs of their good dispositions, the confessor where it -seems feasible and useful may defer their absolution _ex officio medici_ -till they have removed the occasion.[831] - - -65. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in Occasione -Necessaria. - -The following are the rules for the treatment of this very numerous class -of penitents:— - -I. Penitents who are _in occasione proximo necessaria_ can be absolved -without giving up the occasion if they are disposed and _are willing_ to -adopt _means of amendment_. “For,” as St. Alphonsus says, “an opportunity -of sinning is really, _in se_, no sin, and induces no necessity of -sinning; true sorrow and a firm purpose not to relapse may, therefore, -be quite consistent with an occasion; and although it is right that every -one should be bound to remove the immediate occasion of sin, this simply -means that no one may expose himself voluntarily to such risks. But if -the occasion is necessary, the danger becomes, by the application of -remedies, a remote one, and God does not withdraw the helps of His grace -from him who is firmly resolved not to offend Him.”[832] - -II. If penitents who live _in occasione proxima necessaria_ have -relapsed, that is, have not employed the means prescribed by the -confessor, absolution must be deferred till they have amended, unless -they remove all doubts about their disposition by some extraordinary -sign.[833] But how are penitents to be dealt with who have employed the -means prescribed but yet have relapsed in the same way? - -While many theologians believe that such persons can be absolved (and -that _toties quoties_) if they seriously promise amendment, St. Alphonsus -teaches (maintaining that this is the _sententia verior et communis_) -that they must give up the occasion before they can be absolved, even -if they suffer thereby great injury or detriment (_etiam, si opus sit, -cum jactura vitæ_), provided that, _after many attempts, there is no -improvement and no probable hope of improvement_. For in this case (he -says) the danger of sin remains a formal one and cannot be separated -from a sin. Physical separation from the occasion is, therefore (he -continues), the only means of salvation, and the words of Christ are -binding: “If thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out, and cast it from -thee; for it is better to enter into life with one eye than in possession -of both eyes, to be cast into hell fire.” (Matt, xviii. 9.) “What doth -it profit a man if he gain the whole world, but suffer the loss of -his own soul?” (Matt. xvi. 26.) The holy Doctor excepts the case in -which the penitent gives such extraordinary signs of repentance that -improvement can be reasonably hoped for.[834] Ballerini, however, urges -the possibility of supposing that in the case of such penitents there is -something more in question than the want of the necessary dispositions, -namely, that the means prescribed and employed were not the right ones, -and, therefore, that others should be prescribed. This, he says, is not -to be understood of the general means simply, such as prayer and other -pious exercises, almsgiving, and abstinence, and frequent reception of -the holy Sacraments, etc., but much more of the special means which -are adapted to overcome temptations and dangers, and which are to be -determined according to circumstances; for if these were faithfully -employed, they would make relapse morally impossible, especially when -external sins were in question; for instance, avoiding of intercourse -_solius cum sola_. - -Ballerini urges, moreover, that, _ex lege naturæ_, the penitent is, -indeed, bound to avoid the immediate danger, but this can be done in two -ways, by employing suitable means by which the danger becomes a remote -one, or by removing or avoiding the occasion; but the penitent, he says, -is bound to only one of the two _ex lege naturæ_; with what right, -therefore, can the confessor bind the penitent to the one more than to -the other? Nor must we impose upon the penitent what is too difficult, -indeed, in many cases morally impossible. Moreover, if the confessor is -obliged to choose that course which removes the penitent from the danger -of sinning, he will certainly never choose that means through which the -penitent will certainly sin by refusing to make use of it. Another way -is also open to the confessor, without insisting on this indiscreet -obligation, namely, to defer absolution sometimes till the penitent has -employed the suitable remedies with successful results. But in this -case it is to be observed that complete amendment is not necessary in -order that absolution may be given. It suffices that the number of sins -should indicate that it can be truly said that the occasion is no longer -immediate.[835] - -“To put it in a few words, there is no need to deal with these penitents -otherwise than with those who have contracted sinful habits. I will -only add one remark, that if the confessor is harsh, strictly demanding -the more difficult step, the only result will be that the penitent will -become more entangled in sin; on the other hand, mildness and patience -will at least save him from complete ruin; thus theologians speak of the -confessions of a _meretrix_, a usurer, or of any other penitent who is -not sufficiently disposed, but has a desire to amend.”[836] - -As to the remedies for penitents _in occasione necessaria_, the confessor -must endeavor:— - -1. _To lessen the power of the sinful occasion._ A few resolute and -boldly spoken words, a serious threat, or rebuke, a cry for help, a -complaint at the proper place, will often suffice to discourage an -insolent tempter and prevent any further annoyance. The confessor must, -moreover, require that the penitent should no longer associate _solus -cum sola_, that he should shun all intimacy, and, as far as is possible, -avoid even the sight of the _complex_ and give up speaking and thinking -of her, etc. - -2. _To lessen the power of the passion_,—by work, fasting, and exercises -of penance. - -3. _To increase spiritual strength_,—by prayer, frequent reception of the -Sacraments, meditation upon the eternal truths.[837] - -It is, however, to be carefully observed that the penitent is bound -to employ the means which he is able to employ; otherwise, though the -occasion would be necessary, the danger would be voluntary. Let the -confessor instruct the penitent as to this duty, select the means -corresponding to the danger, the character, and the circumstances of the -penitent, and also show him how to apply them.[838] - -In the treatment of the _occasionarius_ the confessor must be very -prudent. P. Segneri calls attention to a double trick by which -penitents try to deceive themselves and the confessor. (_a_) They are -wont generally so to represent the occasion that it seems to be only -a remote one, or they pretend that shunning it would cause them great -difficulties, whereas there is frequently no other difficulty than that -their passion finds it hard to break chains that have become dear to -them. When, therefore, penitents speak of the scandal or the great injury -which removing or avoiding the occasion would cause, the confessor must -not be too ready to believe them, but must carefully weigh the matter, -for it is one of great importance. (_b_) The second, not less dangerous, -deception, is that they declare themselves ready to leave the _occasio in -esse_; but in reality this is only in words; when the confession is over -they do not perform what they have promised to perform. “I know well that -many teach that the penitent can be absolved the first time, if he has -made the promise to discharge his duty as soon as possible. But I repeat -what I have said: as a rule do not do so, for ... experience shows that -penitents who have obtained absolution in this manner do not subsequently -endeavor to break through the net of sin; they find a hundred evasions, -and before the occasion has been removed the sins have been multiplied, -till, at the expiration of the year, Easter approaches, when they proceed -to another confessor, who is equally imprudent. If a penitent has already -deceived you or other confessors, I declare to you that on no account -may you or can you give him absolution. For he is not disposed. If you, -nevertheless, should believe that the present words of the penitent -ought to be esteemed as of more value than his former deeds, and if, -without just grounds, you hold him sufficiently disposed and worthy of -absolution, listen, at least, to what I say to you: you do not act like -a good confessor, and even if you fulfill the duties of the judge, you -neglect the duties of the physician which are also incumbent upon you. -Even if the penitent is contrite, as he seems to you to be, it is not -fair to leave him in the jaws of the dragon when you can snatch him from -the terrible danger of relapse by means of that remedy which is the only -one against this evil, namely, by forcing him first to do that which he -is bound to do, and by deferring absolution till he has done it. This -just severity is still more necessary in the case of public sinners, for -with these scandal is added to the sin of occasion.”[839] - - -66. Some Commonly Occurring Occasions of Sin. - -The application of the principles developed in the foregoing to many -occasions of sin—such as concubinage, dancing, the theater, bad reading, -and intimacies—presents to the young confessor at times no small -difficulty. These occasions are, moreover, so numerous nowadays that they -form a large part of the confessor’s work. We will, therefore, devote a -short discussion to them. - -I. _Concubinage._ That is, _frequentatus concubitus cum eadem femina, -quam quis instar uxoris in propria vel aliena domo retinet_. It -generally occurs with unmarried people, but also in any other species of -unchastity. The confessor must devote a very special attention to this -occasion, for public scandal usually accompanies it. Those who practice -it are exposed to immediate danger of eternal damnation and are with -great difficulty brought to amend and separate.[840] - -As _remedy_, the confessor may (1) sometimes _recommend marriage_ when -this is practicable. Marriage is often the only remedy for such unhappy -people, as the occasion of sin is, in this way, removed. The confessor -should especially encourage it in the following cases: (_a_) when the -concubine lives in the house of her accomplice, is supported by him, -and cannot otherwise procure her livelihood; (_b_) when the two parties -love each other very much, and especially (_c_) when the concubinage has -lasted a long time, is legalized, as regards the state, by a so-called -civil marriage, when children have resulted from this sinful connection; -and, finally (_d_), when one of the parties is in danger of death. On the -other hand, separation will be preferable to marriage when the concubine -lives in another house, and when not love but sensual passion is the -motive of their sinful life. - -But if marriage cannot be at once contracted, the confessor must urge -separation if this is any way feasible, so that the occasion of sin -may, in the meanwhile, be removed; if separation is impracticable, the -confessor must prescribe suitable measures for diminishing the danger of -sin.[841] - -On the other hand, confessors and parish priests should not have recourse -to a _matrimonium secretum_ or _conscientiæ_,[842] unless one of the two -living in a state of concubinage is in danger of death, or when they are -publicly regarded as married; for in other cases, _divortium_ is to be -feared, and if the concubinage _is secret_, scandal will arise as soon -as children are born, or there will be danger of a continued state of -onanistic cohabitation in order that no scandal may arise. - -2. If marriage is either morally impossible, or if an unhappy marriage -is to be feared, the confessor must impose separation upon the parties, -where separation can take place, as it is the necessary means of -removing the occasion of sin. If immediate separation is impossible, -let him prescribe the remedies given above for penitents _in occasione -necessaria_. If, for instance, the concubine lives with the accomplice as -a servant or in any other capacity, she must, in order to avoid sin in -the meantime, tell the man plainly that she does not wish to live such -a life any longer, and resist him in every possible way, lock the door -of her bedroom at night, and apply the other remedies referred to above. -If she is dismissed from her service on this account and left houseless -and without sustenance, let the confessor (preserving his own honor and -avoiding scandal) procure her admission into a house of refuge for women, -or in some other way make provision for her need. If the parties live in -separate houses, let the confessor forbid the man to visit his accomplice -and have further intercourse with her. The woman must, in addition to -the remedies already prescribed, employ the following: (_a_) never again -to admit the accomplice to her dwelling; (_b_) to take rooms with some -respectable woman, so as not to be found alone; and (_c_) to change her -place of residence. - -3. But if very weighty and insurmountable reasons prevent both marriage -and separation, the confessor must have recourse to such measures as -will remove the formal danger of sin; for in this case the occasion is a -necessary one, and he must act accordingly. - -4. If one of the parties living in concubinage is seriously ill or in -danger of death, marriage must take place at once. If they cannot marry, -and if the concubinage is _public_, the man must dismiss his accomplice -and engage another respectable servant to wait upon him. If the woman -is dangerously ill, she must, her illness and circumstances permitting, -take steps to obtain admission into a public hospital if one is -accessible. Where the concubinage is _not publicly_ known, a separation -will present difficulties on account of the danger of disgrace. If it -is not practicable, the confessor must take care that the danger of -sin be removed as much as possible, and to this end prescribe the -aforesaid remedies. The following measures are also to be recommended: -removal of the portrait of the accomplice from the room; if such removal -is not possible, the sick person should, either personally or through -the confessor, beg pardon of the accomplice for the scandal given, and -advise the latter to provide for his (or her) soul’s salvation by true -repentance.[843] - -5. As to the absolution of those living in concubinage, the following -rules will be serviceable to the confessor: if a _public_ concubinage and -a _voluntary occasion_ are in question, the parties cannot be absolved -till they have really separated. To the reasons already given above is -to be added the fact that it would cause scandal if the man who kept -a concubine in his house or who often visited her at her house, or -the woman who still lived with her accomplice or received him at her -house, were seen approaching holy communion. A _peccator publicus_ also -cannot be absolved till he has _publice_ done penance and atoned for his -scandal.[844] - -If it is a question of a _necessary_ occasion with a _public -concubinage_, absolution must be deferred till the penitent has refrained -from sin for some considerable time and has repaired the scandal -given.[845] The confessor, however, must not readily believe that the -occasion is a necessary one, for the attachment to sin of these unhappy -people causes them to exaggerate the difficulties of separation, or, -indeed, to suppose difficulties where they do not exist.[846] An occasion -is only to be regarded as necessary when the penitent would suffer great -injury by leaving it, when it might mean the surrender of the social -position which he held at the time.[847] The public scandal might be -regarded as atoned for if the parties caused it to be made known (if it -were not already known) that they could not separate; furthermore, if -they publicly gave signs of their conversion by attending divine service, -receiving the Sacraments, etc., and, finally, if they marry, in case this -were possible. An exception to the above rule could only be made in the -following cases, certainly very rare ones: if the sinful intercourse had -long ceased but was still a subject of talk and the scandal could not at -once be removed, but the penitent were willing to atone for it as soon as -possible, he might then be absolved before the scandal was made good if -he promises not to go to holy communion, at least not in the place where -his former sinful career was a matter of notoriety.[848] - -When a man living publicly in concubinage falls seriously ill, or is in -danger of death, he must be absolved _sub conditione_, if he is already -unconscious, and Extreme Unction must also be given to him; for it cannot -be maintained that he persists in manifest mortal sin, unless he had -expressly refused the holy Sacraments before unconsciousness set in. -If he is still conscious, but dying, and there is no time either for a -marriage or for arranging a separation, he must be helped to make an -act of contrition and absolved, and the other Sacraments should then be -administered to him. But care must be taken that the accomplice does not -come near him, and that, if it is still possible, the dying person asks -pardon before witnesses in atonement for the scandal, either personally, -or through the priest. If this form of atonement is not practicable, -the priest should provide for it in some other way.[849] But if there -is still sufficient time to atone for the scandal, and to remove the -occasion of relapse (exterior and interior), either by marriage or -separation, absolution must not be given till the scandal is atoned for -and the occasion removed. If neither expedient is practicable, this -impossibility must be declared before witnesses, so that it may become -known, and the sick person must promise to bring about the separation as -soon as he recovers.[850] - -If the concubinage is not publicly known and the occasion is voluntary, -the parties may not as a rule be absolved till they have actually -separated, even if they give signs of great sorrow. An exception might be -made to this rule when a prompt dismissal would be impossible, and the -penitent would be under an urgent necessity of receiving holy communion -in order to avoid great infamy or some equivalent injury, supposing also -that the penitent were in very contrite dispositions in consequence of -some external occurrence—the death of a friend, deliverance from death, -etc., or if he and the accomplice did not live in the same house, or if -there were well-grounded fear that, on account of the postponement of -absolution, the penitent might become estranged from the confessional and -perish in his sins.[851] - -If, with secret concubinage, the occasion is a necessary one, the -properly disposed penitent may be absolved, but absolution could be -postponed in accordance with the rules here applicable (§ 52).[852] Let -it be added that if the penitent maintains that the occasion is necessary -to avoid scandal or disgrace, he should not, as a rule, be believed. - -II. _Dancing._[853] - -Dancing with persons of different sex, when there is no question of -sinful circumstances, is, of itself, not forbidden, as it is not -_ex se actus libidinis_.[854] But it may become very sinful: (_a_) -through sinful intention; (_b_) through the danger of sinning; (_c_) -by the scandal given, and (_d_) by the prohibition of parents or of an -ecclesiastical law.[855] - -Dancing is very sinful when those engaged in it have the intention of -exciting _venereas delectationes_, of employing _tactus malitiosos_, -or of indulging in _turpes sermones_. In this respect the so-called -masked balls (_choreæ larvatæ_, _bals masqués_) are a source of great -danger.[856] - -Dancing may give rise to the following sins: (_a_) _malitiosæ manuum -constrictiones affectu nempe impudico_, differing from the simple, and, -of itself, not dangerous _manuum apprehensio_;[857] (_b_) _amplexus -pressi_; (_c_) _tactus obscæni_ (especially, _extra actum saltandi_) -before or after; (_d_) _amatorii et turpes sermones_; _aspectus -malitiosi_ (in the _obscænæ choreæ_); (_e_) _delectationes morosæ et -desideria turpia_. The confessor will, however, observe that the external -sins referred to occur less frequently in respectable dancing assemblies. - -If dancing is a _periculum proximum_ to those engaging in it, and if -there is no _causa gravis_ for doing so, it must be avoided under grave -sin; if it constitutes only a _periculum remotum_ or is excused by some -_causa gravis_, it would be a venial sin only, or none at all. The -confessor must, therefore, take into consideration the danger and its -nature, as also the existence of a _causa gravis_. - -He can judge if such danger is in question: (1) _from experience_,—that -is, when the penitent has taken part in dancing, and has often -(_frequenter_) sinned in consequence of it, and when the circumstances -are the same in some given case; (2) from other circumstances,—especially -the nature of the dance, too great frequency, the time of night, the -moral character of the other persons present at the dance, _indecens -feminarum pectoris nudatio_. General rules, applicable for all places and -persons, cannot be given here. _Public_ dances to which all have access -are, generally speaking, more dangerous than private ones. - -If there is only _periculum remotum_ in question, any _causa -rationabilis_ excuses from sin, certainly from grievous sin; for -instance, to recreate one’s self, to have a little amusement (once and -again in the year), to find more easily an opportunity of marrying, to -show courtesy towards those who give invitations to the dance, to avoid -the talk and ridicule of others, etc. If, however, there is question of -_periculum proximum_, the _causa_ must be a _gravis_ to constitute an -excuse; for instance, to avoid giving serious offense to wife, husband, -parents, brothers and sisters, or to avoid family quarrels. But then -there must be no other way of escaping these quarrels, and the penitent -who exposes himself to these dangers must protect himself by suitable -means.[858] - -With reference to the confessor’s conduct in this matter, we may add -the following remarks: (1) Let him equally avoid excess and deficiency -of zeal; (2) let him estimate the danger to which dancing exposes his -penitent, by asking him if he has committed sin at other dances, or -been subjected to great temptation. If it results from this examination -that the penitent is strictly bound to avoid these pleasures, let the -confessor forbid them to him even under threat of refusing absolution; -if no such obligation is evident, let him not show himself too ready in -permitting indulgence in this dangerous and doubtful pleasure, and let -him tell the penitent how he should conduct himself.[859] - -III. _Frequenting theaters._ - -Theatrical performances (in the wider sense of the term) are, according -to the teaching of St. Thomas,[860] _secundum se_, not sinful, but may -become gravely so, by offending against religion and good morals, in -the matter represented or in the manner of representing it. Very many -modern dramas are of the latter kind, and full of dangers, treating as -they do of anti-religious subjects or of such as are hostile to faith, -or lascivious; degrading the Catholic faith, distorting historical -facts to its detriment, extolling the enemies of the Church, holding -up holy rites and even the Sacraments of the Church to mockery and -contempt, calumniating priests, making vices, such as adultery, revenge, -suicide, and sins of the flesh, appear lawful or even glorifying them; -characterizing religion in general as ridiculous, superstitious, etc., -treating not only of obscene and dangerous subjects, but also offending -decency in the manner of representation. - -If, therefore, the dramas in question are _Religioni notabiliter -contraria_, or if the subject-matter or the manner of representing it are -_nimis turpia_, attendance is certainly a grave sin. For what may not be -seen, or heard, or read, _extra theatrum_, without great sin, cannot be, -as the Angelic Master expresses himself, _ratione theatri leviora_.[861] - -If they are _notabiliter_, but not _nimis turpia_, they may be _occasio -relativa_, and frequenting them out of curiosity or for amusement (if -there is no danger of consenting _in turpem delectationem_) may be free -from grave sin. But this danger will, in the case of young people, be -absent only when they have very tender consciences, conduct themselves -very prudently, and when, after being repeatedly present at such -performances, they are able to say that they have not committed mortal -sin.[862] Performances, however, which are _non notabiliter turpia_, -may be an _occasio proxima_ for those who know by experience their own -weakness, the more so as nowadays doubtful attractions are introduced -even into otherwise good or harmless plays. - -The so-called _choreæ scenicæ_ (ballet), _quæ inter actus miscentur, -utpote in quibus ob vestitum saltatricum, obscænos saltandi modos aut -lascivas gesticulationes, maxima apparere solet turpitudo_, will probably -be for many theatergoers an _occasio proximo_. - -When, therefore, one goes to a theater without exercising any -discrimination as to the choice of the play or the manner of its -performance, he exposes himself to a probable danger of sin, _ex -communiter contingentibus fit prudens præsumptio_. Some, however, -maintain that they attend chiefly to the music, not to the plot and its -representation; this, of course, would materially reduce the danger, but -not wholly remove it. - -Frequenting the theater may also become sinful on account of the _sinful -intention_ connected with it, and by the scandal thereby given. Besides -the actors and actresses in a bad play, those also give scandal who -coöperate _in spectacula notabiliter turpia aut Religioni graviter -adversa_, positively, by money or applause, and, negatively, by not -preventing them when _ex officio_ they were bound to do so, or at least -could have prevented them by some other means; for example, by refusing -to coöperate, etc.[863] Moreover, parents and other superiors give -scandal who do not effectually prevent their children and those under -their care from being present at improper representations, or when they -give permission to go there, without having previously ascertained the -character of the play. Finally, those give scandal who encourage others -(especially young people) by their example to attend theaters, also -clerics and religious who, contrary to ecclesiastical regulations, are -present at secular performances.[864] - -If, therefore, by going to the theater, a person exposes himself to only -_slight danger_, and only gives _slight scandal_, he is free from grave -sin if he takes the necessary precautions. - -But if he suffers great danger, or gives great scandal, only a _causa -gravis_ would excuse him from grave sin if he takes the necessary -precautions, and tries to the best of his power to make good the scandal. -Such _causa gravis_ would be, for instance, a well-founded fear of great -detriment, continued irritation of parents, of husband or wife, etc.; -the loss of the subscription fee would not be a _causa sufficiens_. -But even when there is a _causa_, and, in spite of precautions, faith -is endangered, or if the person often succumbs to temptation, he is -absolutely bound to avoid the occasion. Hence no _causa_ will excuse -frequentation of a very immoral or godless performance, because it will -not be possible to avoid the formal danger which accompanies it. - -In cases where it is necessary, the penitent must be strictly bound to -avoid the theater or certain plays; even where this obligation is not -strictly binding, he must still be persuaded to avoid the theater, and if -this is not possible or opportune, the priest must at least instruct the -penitent cautiously to conduct himself. - -The actors in immoral and godless plays cannot, of course, be admitted -to the Sacraments till they have either given up their profession, or no -longer take part in such performances, for they are _peccatores publici, -publicum scandalum præbentes_.[865] - -IV. _Bad reading._ - -The reading of bad books is a source of great danger, and this occasion -of sin is very common, unceasingly estranging countless numbers from -faith and robbing them of innocence. - -We must distinguish between: (1) books which, _ex professo_, are written -against religion and faith (defending the errors of heretics and -infidels) and those which are not, _ex professo_, directed against it -(only here and there attacking religion); (2) books which, _ex professo_, -are obscene (which, if not wholly, yet to a great extent, treat of -obscene things) and such as are _subobscæni_ (in which a good deal of -obscenity is to be found). - -Books _ex professo impii_ are very dangerous and pernicious. - -Few persons who are not learned and pious theologians can read them -without injury to their faith. Hence the Church (in the second rule of -the Index) has strictly prohibited the reading of such books, and if -they _hæresim propugnant_, reading them consciously entails censure of -excommunication reserved to the Pope.[866] Books which are hostile to -religion, but not so _ex professo_, are also a source of danger, and, -therefore, reading them is permitted to no one without necessity. The -degree of the danger depends upon the object which the reader has in -view, upon his age, his religious sentiments, and knowledge. - -Books _ex professo_ obscene are certainly dangerous, for they excite -violent temptations, and they are still worse when, as is often the case, -they are illustrated with obscene pictures. Reading such is strictly -forbidden by the seventh rule of the Index. - -The _libri erotici_ (_de amoribus agentes_), for instance many comedies, -tragedies, dramas, novels, and romances, are sources of relative danger; -the reading of them is, in many respects, injurious, especially to young -people. - -_Bad newspapers and periodicals_ must be classified in the same way as -books, and what has been said above concerning the reading of bad books -holds good as to newspapers and periodicals. If they are written _ex -professo_ against faith and morals, they are even more dangerous than -such books. - -Accordingly, the confessor is bound: (1) when there is ground for -suspicion that the penitent has sinned by such reading and has been -silent about it, to ask him on the matter; omitting to do so would be -very injurious to the penitent, as it would be leaving him in great -danger, and if he had purposely concealed it, he would have confessed -sacrilegiously. - -The confessor is bound (2) to admonish penitents who have read bad books, -etc., to refrain entirely from such reading, to buy no more books, -etc., of the kind, not to borrow them, nor in future to have them in -their possession. He must especially instruct parents and superiors on -this head, and incite them to watchfulness. He is bound (3) to refuse -absolution to those who will not refrain from such reading.[867] (4) To -prescribe for the penitent who reads infidel writings _ex necessitate_ -suitable safeguards in order that the poison may not injure him, -such remedies as reading good books and newspapers, praying for the -preservation of faith, frequent reception of the Sacraments, etc. (5) To -do his best to keep young people from novel reading.[868] - -The confessor must, to the best of his ability, endeavor to prevent -the reading of so-called “liberal” books, newspapers, and periodicals, -which are, indeed, bad, though not, _ex professo_, godless or obscene; -especially (_a_) when the penitent is conscious of his duty to refrain -from such reading, or is in doubt about it; (_b_) when, although not -aware of this duty, good results are to be expected from exhortation; -and (_c_) when the confessor perceives that such reading is beginning -to harm the penitent. On the other hand, the confessor must be silent -concerning the duty of avoiding such reading (_a_) when the penitent -is _invincibiliter_ ignorant of this duty; (_b_) when the confessor -could not hope that his admonition would be acted upon, or when, on -the contrary, he would have to fear still greater evils; but he must -then inspire his penitent with distrust of these newspapers, etc., and -endeavor by exhortation and request to wean him from such dangerous -reading.[869] A man of business might be permitted to keep and to read -bad newspapers on account of the advertisements, when such advertisements -are not to be found (or not so fully) in a good paper, but he must -be admonished to subscribe for this end only, and not to leave the -newspaper about for others, especially children, to read. It is not -allowed to inn-keepers to have bad newspapers in their establishments -in order to attract customers by such reading, for that would be an -_actio ex se ordinata ad malum_. Under the heading of “bad newspapers” -are not included those producing here and there incorrect judgments upon -religion.[870] - -V. _Intimacies_ (_procationes_).[871] - -1. If this intimacy is begun with a view to matrimony it is not, _de se_, -forbidden, for none is bound to marry a person who is unknown to him; he -may, during a certain time, study the character and morals of the person -by means of lawful intimacy.[872] - -But such intimacies, _in praxi_, very easily become an _occasio proxima_ -of grave sin amongst young people and those who have not much conscience, -especially when greater familiarity and freedom of intercourse sets -in, and the time of marriage approaches.[873] That an intimacy may not -degenerate into an _occasio proxima_, or, having become such, may cease -to be so, the following rules must be observed: Only such as wish, -and are able, to contract marriage within a reasonable time (_tempus -rationabile_) should be allowed this kind of intimacy. They must, -therefore, be of proper age, so that the intimacy may not be too much -prolonged; there must be no impediment in the way of their marriage, that -is, they must possess the necessary liberty, being free from bondage of -any kind; the parents must not (from just motives) be opposed to their -child’s marriage, or to marriage with the particular person in question. -Moreover, there must be a firm intention of marrying. This intention may -be presumed to be wanting in the case of a rich young man who enters into -such relationship with a poor girl, or one who, at the very outset of the -acquaintance, induces her to sin, or neglects the necessary precautions, -or who, at the expiration of a suitable time, shows no disposition -whatever to contract marriage, etc. How long such intimacy may last -(_rationabile tempus_) cannot be determined by hard and fast rules -applicable to all cases; it must be left to the intelligent discretion of -the persons in question; half a year, or a whole year, may generally be -regarded as not too long. Let the confessor, therefore, take care that -the intimacy is not prolonged for years with danger of sin, and if it has -already lasted too long, let him provide that it should either be broken -off, or interrupted for a time, or that marriage should take place as -soon as possible. - -2. In order that the intimacy may proceed honorably, the persons must -adopt suitable measures of precaution. Those therefore, between whom such -intimacy exists, _must not live in the same house_; they must, as soon -as possible, obtain the consent of the parents or their representatives, -for if they frequently meet without the knowledge, or against the will of -their parents, they will do it secretly, and in this lies a great danger. -If the parents are opposed to the marriage without just reason, the -confessor must suggest some other means for their honorable intercourse. -They must not associate solus cum sola, especially secretly in retired -places at night time—“_id quippe, si non fortuito sed consulto fiat, -nonnisi ex fine libidinis aut cum summo periculo libidinis fiet_,” -remarks Aertnys,[874] and Ballerini[875] says: “Those especially who have -care of the persons in question must pay attention to this. Parents, -and particularly mothers, must be very earnestly appealed to, and their -strict duty of watchfulness and care most forcibly insisted upon. And -in this they must be influenced not only by conscience, but by the -fear that the daughters ‘_semel corruptæ in paterna domo dehonestatæ -consenescant_.’” Moreover, their visits must not be too frequent nor too -long; and if they should be alone, they must not offend against the rules -of morality, but conduct themselves honorably in every respect; and, -lastly, they must procure for themselves the necessary graces in this -dangerous time by prayer and the reception of the Sacraments.[876] - -3. Still greater prudence is necessary after engagement, as the danger of -sin becomes greater, _cum sponsus respiciat sponsam tanquam suam, magna -familiaritas sit quasi inevitabilis, imaginatio copulæ conjugalis brevi -secuturæ libidinem commoveat et timor prægnationis evanescat_, etc.[877] -Therefore, let the confessor, to the best of his ability, bring about -that the time of betrothal may not be deferred too long.[878] - -4. If they have fallen into sin _ob causam amoris_, the intimacy assumes -the character of an _occasio proxima_, and it must be dealt with -according to the principles applicable to it.[879] They must, therefore, -_break off_ the intimacy if they can, without great detriment, forego -the intended marriage, and wait for the occasion of contracting another, -or they must set their relations with each other on a _better footing_ if -they cannot forego the marriage without sin and without great detriment. - -It results from the foregoing that all “intimacies” are to be regarded as -sinful and as _occasiones proximæ_, which: (1) are entered upon without -any intention of marriage, but only for the sake of pleasure, sensuality, -and sin; (2) which are begun without hope of speedy marriage,[880] or -(3) in spite of the justifiable opposition of parents, (4) which are -secretly carried on,[881] and (5) which exist between persons who live in -the same house. Persons who maintain such relations, and will not break -them off, or refuse to amend, may not be absolved. Even if it happens -that they do not at first sin grievously, they will not, later on, remain -free from sin. And if they maintain that they have done nothing wrong, -the confessor must not at once trust their assurances, but instruct them -in their duty with the necessary circumspection and prudence.[882] “We -admonish all confessors,” writes Gaume, “not to absolve those who are -carrying on love affairs, when such things are for them gravely sinful, -when after three warnings from their own or other confessors (concerning -which penitents are always to be questioned) they have not really -amended. They must be given plainly to understand that, until they have -really amended, they cannot expect absolution from their own confessors, -nor claim it from others.”[883] - - -ARTICLE II - -HABITUAL AND RELAPSING SINNERS - - -67. Definition and Treatment of Habitual Sinners. - -An habitual sinner is one who, in consequence of a disposition or -tendency which he has acquired by oft-repeated sinful acts of a definite -kind,—such as blasphemy, cursing, perjury, impurity,—frequently falls -into that sin.[884] - -How many acts suffice to constitute a sinful habit (_habitus seu -consuetudo_) depends upon the nature of the sin which has been often -committed and upon the manner in which it is committed, for instance, by -thought, word, or action; also upon the difficulty or ease with which -the sin is committed—so that the more easily a sin is committed the more -acts are required to constitute a habit. Sins of thought and speech -are more easily committed than sins of act, those which are incomplete -than those which are completed; and in completed acts, those which are -committed alone are more easily committed than those which have an -accomplice. Moreover, we must take into consideration the length of time -which elapses between the separate sinful acts of the same kind, as also -the disposition and temperament of the person, and the greater or less -intentness of the will in committing the sin. - -Thus, according to the words of St. Alphonsus, the repetition of an -external sin five times in a month, if between the separate acts there -is any interval, may produce a habit. In sins of _luxuria consummata_, -with a _complex_, for instance, _fornicatio_, _sodomia_, a much smaller -number of repetitions of the same sin are enough to constitute a habit -of this sin. A much greater number is necessary in sins of speech and -thought. He must undoubtedly be regarded as an habitual sinner, who, -during a considerable time, has not resisted but yielded to temptation -of a definite kind. “However, when the administration or postponement of -absolution is in question,” remarks Lehmkuhl, “it does not so very much -depend upon the more or less accurate definition of a habit,” seeing that -there is no reason for excluding a penitent from absolution on account of -a sinful habit if he has a real wish to resist it or lay it aside.[885] -Nevertheless, this habit—like the occasion of sin—often excites a -_suspicion that the penitent is not disposed_ and inspires apprehensions -of relapse. The confessor must, therefore, be cautious in administering -absolution. - -As a rule, the habitual sinner who is not in immediate occasion of sin, -must receive absolution if there is reason to believe that he has the -necessary dispositions. In this case absolution is to be given when -there has been no previous improvement, but the penitent must faithfully -promise to adopt the measures prescribed for his amendment. - -In the case of such a penitent we must not presume at once that he -intends to receive the holy Sacrament in bad dispositions; we may -infer from the fact of his confessing his sins that he is disposed, as -spontaneous confession is a sign of repentance, unless there is positive -ground to presume the contrary. Nor may we say that the sinful habit is -a sign of indisposition, for although the sinful _habitus_ may make the -sinner more inclined to sin, it does not justify the supposition that he -has no firm wish to amend.[886] - -But if (1) the habit is already _deeply rooted_ (as it generally is with -those who are habitual sinners _ex mala voluntate_, and always with -those who have been addicted to any vice—especially that of lust—for a -long time), the confessor could defer absolution for a short time, in -accordance with the principles guiding such postponement, unless some -other circumstance demands the immediate administration of absolution; -this he could do, both in order to learn how the penitent applies the -prescribed means of amendment, as also that the penitent himself may -conceive a greater horror of sin.[887] - -(2) If the habitual sinner (_in peccato mortali habituatus_) is a cleric -who will soon receive Holy Orders, absolution must also be postponed; -for _positive_ goodness is necessary in such a penitent. An habitual -sinner who _refuses_ to confess _several_ times in the year, cannot, _per -se_, be refused absolution on that account; for, on the one hand, there -is no command to confess several times in the year, and, on the other -hand, there are other means which could be prescribed for uprooting the -habit and which are very suitable and efficacious for that purpose. A -different course, however, would have to be taken if the other remedies -were inefficacious; for many penitents can only find a suitable remedy in -frequent confession. Hence Toletus says very justly (in speaking of those -who habitually practice pollution), “I believe that there is scarcely -any other efficacious remedy for these than frequent confession, as -this Sacrament is the strongest curb.”[888] And still more clearly and -decisively does St. Alphonsus express himself,[889] saying, “He to whom -a grave sin, especially pollution, has become a habit, and who does not -frequently confess, may expect amendment only through a miracle.” - - -68. Relapse, and the Treatment of Relapsing Sinners. - -Relapse into sin signifies literally the repeated commission of a sin -already confessed. In the theological sense, those are called relapsing -sinners, who, after several confessions, fall into the same sins again. -From this it results that a relapsing sinner is also an habitual sinner, -but not every habitual sinner is a relapsing sinner.[890] - -In order that a confessor may arrive at a correct judgment concerning a -penitent who seems to be a relapsing sinner, he must investigate: (1) -if the sinful habit already exists; (2) if the penitent has already -been admonished by another confessor, and if he has known the means of -amendment; (3) if he has applied them and how; (4) how often, and under -what circumstances he has relapsed, if as often, or more often, or -less often, than before; if immediately, or almost immediately, after -the confession, if in severe temptation, or after long resistance, and -when he sinned last. From the answers he receives to these questions he -will recognize if he has to deal with a relapsing sinner, and, at the -same time, if the relapse is a sign of want of proper dispositions. -The relapsing sinner in the specified theological sense is not to be -confounded with one who relapses into a _single sin_ without habit, or -into an _occasio peccati_, that is, one who has not kept a promise to -give up an occasion of sin, has not removed the occasion, or has again -sought it (§ 64, III), whether he now has a habit of sinning or not. Here -we are only considering the _recidivi consuetudinarii_; those, therefore, -who have relapsed into the habit of sin, either from internal weakness, -or in consequence of external occasion. - -Another distinction between relapsing sinners is not to be overlooked: -those who sin only in consequence of the force of passion, or of -weakness, in such sort that their will is generally opposed to sin, and, -therefore, when the storm of passion is over, immediately regret having -committed the sin, as it generally happens with blasphemies, curses, and -often with pollution,—these are _incontinentes seu habituati in peccato -tantum_; whilst those who sin in consequence of an habitual attachment -to sin, or from malice, and therefore without the preceding violent -impulse of passion,—these are the _intemperati seu habituati in voluntate -peccandi_ who are not so easily led to contrition. - -The following principles are to be observed in absolving relapsing -sinners:— - -I. The confessor must carefully examine the actual dispositions of -a relapsing sinner who has already been instructed and admonished -sufficiently, and who again returns, burdened with the same sinful -habit, without having made any attempt at amendment, or applied any of -the remedies prescribed for him by the confessor. Relapse under the -specified circumstances is, of course, no _direct_ argument against the -actual disposition of the sinner, though it is a direct argument against -the sorrow and purpose of amendment of preceding confessions. He who is -_truly_ sorry, and firmly purposes to avoid a sin, will refrain from it -at least for a time, and will not allow himself to be overcome in the -very first struggle with the enemy. It is, as Lehmkuhl rightly says, -legitimate to draw an indirect conclusion against the actual disposition -if the penitent gives only the same signs of sorrow as before.[891] His -disposition is, therefore, doubtful, and he must give better proofs of -it, although no definite rule can be laid down as to how, and to what -extent, this proof must be forthcoming.[892] - -If, however, the confessor can form a _probabile et prudens judicium_ -concerning the actual disposition of the relapsing penitent, he may -absolve him even if he has often relapsed, unless perhaps the duty of -giving up an occasion or making a restitution has to be previously -fulfilled. For even if the contrition of the penitent is only -_momentary_, not _persistent_, it is yet _true_ contrition. Because this -contrition is not persistent, it is not sufficient with respect to its -final operation,—namely, the attainment of eternal salvation; but because -it is true sorrow it is sufficient with respect to its immediate effect, -namely, that of procuring for the penitent absolution. As absolution -conveys sacramental grace, it increases the strength of the penitent, -enabling him to persevere; moreover, it remits mortal sin, so that if -the penitent died before he relapsed, he would be saved, and if he -died after relapse, _in statu impœnitentiæ_, he would be at least less -guilty in God’s sight, as his former sins would have been effaced by -absolution. Moreover, a sinner of this kind—accustomed to the reception -of the Sacraments, frequently instructed by his confessor, and admonished -concerning the danger of dying in mortal sin, the punishments of hell and -their eternal duration, the divine mercy and goodness, and the frequent -eliciting of sorrow and firm purpose—will, in the hour of death, if no -priest can help him, be more easily able to save himself from eternal -damnation by an act of perfect contrition. Hence the confessor must be -careful to exercise, with relapsing sinners, that great prudence spoken -of in the Roman Catechism, lest, having been accustomed to receive -the Sacraments, they be debarred from them by refusal of absolution, -or by imprudent postponement, to the great danger of their eternal -salvation.[893] - -But if, as remarked above, the duty of abandoning some occasion of sin -or of making restitution, etc., be incumbent on the penitent, it may -be made a rule, for the first time, to put off absolution till he has -performed this duty, if it is easier for him to come to confession again -than to perform it; and this procedure will be still more in place if -the penitent had already once failed to keep his promise; indeed, in -this latter case, the penitent should only rarely be trusted before he -has really accomplished his duty. He may occasionally and by the way of -exception be trusted if, for instance, he shows special signs of a firmer -resolution, and if, on the other hand, it would be very difficult for him -to come again—having, perhaps, made a long journey, or for some other -similar reason. - -II. Relapsing sinners whom the confessor sees to be insufficiently -disposed must, to the best of his ability, be helped to a proper -state of mind by his fatherly and zealous admonitions. He should not, -therefore, dismiss such penitents by at once postponing absolution, still -less by a prompt refusal of it. He should rather put before them the -hideousness of sin, the value of divine grace, and the danger of eternal -damnation.[894] Such admonition will, if imparted in the proper manner, -have the desired effect, at least if the sinner is not too much addicted -to sin.[895] - -If the penitent should respond to these exhortations of the confessor -with some _unusual_ utterance, such as: “Now I see the greatness of my -misfortune,” “Give me a severe penance,” “This time I am very sorry for -my sins,” the confessor may hope that success has attended them. On the -other hand, he would have to fear that he had labored in vain if the -penitent should answer nothing more than that he is sorry, that he wished -to avoid sin, or if to the confessor’s questions he only gave cold and -indifferent answers. But here also the character and education of the -penitent are to be considered, and there is room for deception.[896] - -III. If, in spite of the exhortation, the penitent remains indisposed, -the confessor must postpone absolution till he has received satisfactory -proof of amendment. This he must do as judge in order to preserve the -Sacrament from nullity, and also as physician in order to move the -penitent to an effectual amendment. - -If the confessor finds himself obliged to postpone absolution, he must -inform the penitent of it in the gentlest manner, for the good physician -endeavors to make bitter medicine taste pleasant.[897] If, however, there -is a solid reason, absolution may be given to a doubtfully disposed -relapsing sinner _sub conditione_. For if more harm than benefit is to be -anticipated from the postponement, the salvation of the penitent demands, -as St. Alphonsus says,[898] that the Sacrament be exposed even to the -risk of nullity. - -The confessor may act in accordance with the above principles in the -following cases:— - -1. In danger of death, that the penitent may not be lost. - -2. On account of imperfect use of reason, when the penitent is weak in -mind, or is a child not yet arrived at an adequate use of reason, and -has relapsed into doubtfully grave sins; for such penitents require -absolution in order not to remain in a state of mortal sin, and on the -other hand postponement would have no effect with them. - -3. When the confessor fears that the penitent will not return. This is -much to be dreaded by reason of the weak faith of many people and their -scanty zeal for the welfare of their souls. - -4. On account of the urgency of contracting a marriage on the same or -the following day, or of receiving holy communion, in order to avoid -great scandal; and even if a doubtfully disposed person ought not to -communicate, prudence will often suggest to the confessor not to inform -him of this. - -5. On account of the difficulty of going to confession again, that is, -if the penitent would not be able to confess again for a long time, -as a prolonged postponement of absolution would remain without fruit, -and leave the penitent during that time in a state of mortal sin. This -reason, however, does not suffice in the case of relapsing sinners who -have neglected to make restitution, to terminate an enmity, or to give up -some occasion of sin.[899] - -IV. Relapsing sinners, as to whose dispositions the confessor has -satisfied himself, may be, _toties quoties_, absolved, inasmuch as he is -judge. - -It is to be remarked, however, that (_a_) a relapsing sinner who returns -for the first time can be more easily absolved than if he comes a second -and a third time to confession after having relapsed. The more numerous -the relapses after confession, the stronger is the presumption against -dispositions. (_b_) If some external occasion is the cause of this -relapse, the confessor must the more seriously consider if it would not -be better to postpone absolution, in order to test the sincerity of one -who has so often broken his promise to remove or abandon this occasion; -and he must not give credit to mere promises, or even to tears. For -the obligation is rather to remove an external occasion of sin than to -reduce it to a remote occasion, because experience proves abundantly that -this latter course is very difficult, and it is in many cases easier to -abandon the occasion.[900] - -If, however, the relapse is the result of internal weakness, and the -penitent does not seem sufficiently disposed for the reception of -absolution, the confessor should employ all his zeal and charity in -preparing him for absolution. For the grace of the holy Sacraments is -very necessary to such penitents, and postponement of absolution would -not be helpful in their case. These are the penitents who yield to -violent temptations, or the stress of passion, in consequence of internal -weakness (we have designated them above _recidivi incontinentes_). -Nevertheless, there may be cases in this class of penitents also, in -which severity is to be used, or in which holy communion at least must -be forbidden, when it is evident, or to be presumed, from the frequent -relapses accompanying the frequent reception of the Sacraments, that -detestation of sin and firm resolution have been or are wanting. But if -it is to be presumed that the relapse takes place rather in consequence -of the Sacraments being seldom received, the penitent must be encouraged -to more frequent reception.[901] - -V. Even if the relapsing sinner could absolutely be absolved, the -confessor may sometimes postpone absolution for a short time as a remedy, -if he believes that such postponement is necessary, or will be useful. -For, of two suitable remedies, the physician must choose that one from -which the better effect may be expected. Now it is universally admitted -and proved by experience that an occasional postponement of absolution -for a short time contributes much to the improvement of the habitual -sinner by increasing his detestation of sin and exciting his zeal in the -work of amendment. But great prudence is demanded in venturing upon this -experiment, especially in our times, when difficulty of any kind induces -weak people to absent themselves from the holy Sacraments.[902] - -The postponement of absolution in the case of a sufficiently disposed -relapsing sinner without his consent is certainly not allowable, if it -either failed to benefit his soul, or if it were to bring disgrace, or -even the danger of it, to his reputation. Except in these two cases, -postponement of absolution is left to the discretion of the confessor. -St. Alphonsus[903] distinguishes here between those who relapse in -consequence of _internal weakness_, and those who relapse on account of -an _occasion_,[904] and teaches that postponement is seldom beneficial -with the first class; for here a better result is to be anticipated from -the graces of the Sacrament than from postponement. For those especially -who relapse into the sin of pollution there is no more efficacious means -of amendment than frequent confession; indeed, without this, improvement -is scarcely to be hoped for. But an opportune threat of deferring -absolution will always prove beneficial. With sinners of the second -class postponement is useful because the external occasion is a stronger -incitement to sin, and a more powerful remedy must be opposed to a more -powerful agency of seduction; moreover, the removal of the occasion is -more under the control of the will than the uprooting of a sinful habit. -With relapsing sinners of the first class a postponement of from eight -to ten days generally suffices; from two to three weeks would be the -longest period during which absolution should be deferred. With those of -the second class a postponement of ten to fifteen days will generally not -suffice, but the experience obtained within the space of a month will -always be sufficient. The postponement should not extend over a month, -if the penitent cannot come under the influence of the occasion during -the course of this time, because delay under the circumstances would be -useless. - - -69. Relapsing Sinners requiring Special Care. - -There are two classes of relapsing sinners to whom the confessor must -devote special care: those who are _despondent_, and those who are always -relapsing into the sin of pollution. - -I. As to the first, he must endeavor to find out the cause of their -despondency. If this proceeds (1) from the strength of the sinful habit, -the confessor must take care not to excite fear in one whose will is -good but who makes little progress; on the contrary, he must praise him -even if he sees only a slight improvement, and inspire him with hope -of finally achieving complete amendment with the help of divine grace. -Courage, hope of victory, and perseverance are necessary to such a -penitent. If he falls a hundred times, he must rise a hundred times and -renew the struggle; victory will not fail him who perseveres. But if (2) -an effeminate disposition accompanies these relapses, the confessor must -stimulate the penitent. He must teach him that everything is possible -to us with the help of divine grace, if we earnestly _will and wish_ to -succeed; for so St. Augustine encouraged himself in his struggle against -the flesh. “When,” he writes,[905] “the rooted habit said: Do you think -you can live without these things? Hope spoke encouragingly: Can you -not do what these young men and women do? And are they able to do it of -their own strength, and not in the Lord, their God?” The confessor should -urge the penitent, not in temptation only, but in all his doings, to act -bravely and manfully; he should seek to divert him from everything that -enervates the mind. If the despondency has its origin in carelessness, -let the confessor point to the terrible punishments of sin and endeavor -thus to arouse salutary fear.[906] - -II. Pollution is a truly murderous vice, and, according to the testimony -of all confessors and physicians, appallingly prevalent. Its consequences -are as ruinous as its cure is difficult. - -If the confessor purposes to terrify unhappy penitents by depicting the -dreadful consequences of this vice, let him proceed with caution, for not -all who are addicted to it experience them in full measure, and those who -do not would give him the lie. Some of these consequences are: nervous -prostration, consumption, epilepsy, spinal diseases; excess saps physical -vigor, dulls the understanding, impairs the memory, and hastens death. -Depression of spirits is also a characteristic of such people, a result -partly of nervous exhaustion and partly of remorse. Rarely, indeed, is -the conversion of such a man effected without the higher motives of -religion. That he must be treated with extreme prudence is evident. -Earnest but loving admonition instilling moral strength will soonest -attain to the desired end. The origin of the evil and the causes which -form the occasions of the individual sins (which must be investigated) -will suggest appropriate precautions.[907] - -Here are some rules for the confessor of such penitents:— - -1. Let him excite in them a great longing to be freed from the vice, and -inspire them with courage for the struggle and hope of ultimate victory; -otherwise his remedies will be fruitless. To this end, let him point out -the danger of eternal damnation; for the more the sins accumulate the -more difficult salvation becomes, and the stronger the habit the weaker -the will. To inspire courage let the priest reawaken in him a feeling and -sense of his dignity as a man and a Christian, which is outraged by this -vice. - -2. The penitent must shun all dangerous occasions, avoid idleness and -solitude; take no part in improper amusements, theaters, and dancing, as -they excite impure fancies and enfeeble the mind. - -3. Further remedies are: frequent prayer—especially the “Hail Mary” in -honor of the most pure Virgin, each time renewing before her picture the -resolution to sin no more. Meditation on the eternal truths will always -prove very efficacious. - -4. When temptation arises the penitent should turn away his mind from it -at once; and if it persists, confidently pray, pronouncing the names of -Jesus and Mary. He may also reflect upon the sufferings of Our Savior, -on the eternal flames of hell, the presence of God. Very useful also is -a fervent act of love, accompanied by a resolution rather to die than to -sin. - -5. One of the surest remedies is, undoubtedly, marriage—as the Apostle -also teaches (1 Cor. vii. 2, 9). Add to these other natural remedies -in support of the supernatural ones, such as: moderation in eating and -drinking—especially abstinence from wine and stimulating food in the -evening; moderation in sleep; physical exercise; early rising; at night, -prayer till sleep sets in. - -But in order that the confessor may select suitable remedies, he must -know the physical constitution of the penitent and the circumstances of -his sins; namely, when, where, and under what conditions he generally -sins. The confessor should not omit to prescribe or recommend such of the -above-mentioned remedies as are adapted to the penitent.[908] - -III. From the rule given above, according to which relapsing habitual -sinners can be absolved when they are sufficiently disposed, clerics, -who wish to receive Holy Orders immediately after absolution, form an -exception. They may not, as a rule, be absolved till satisfactory proof -be given of their self-restraint. Such a penitent must first have laid -aside his bad habit during a considerable time, at least during several -months. For a sacred minister would be unworthy to assist at the altar if -he did not possess the virtue of confirmed purity, seeing that the higher -Orders demand perfection in those who enter them, both on account of the -sacredness of the duties connected with the Orders, as also on account -of the good example which they are bound to give to the faithful. “As -those,” says St. Thomas, “who receive Orders, are, by virtue of their -dignity, placed above the people, so must they be conspicuous also by -the merit of holiness.”[909] And in another place he enforces this still -more, saying: “As the minister is by his ordination set apart for the -highest office, in which he serves Christ Himself in the Sacrament of the -Altar, a greater interior holiness is demanded for this than even the -religious state requires.”[910] Therefore, it by no means suffices for -the worthy reception of Holy Orders to be in a state of grace; _positive_ -and _habitual_ holiness is required. St. Alphonsus establishes this -abundantly from Holy Writ, from the definitions of the Church, and from -the teaching of the holy Fathers. - -If, therefore, a cleric sincerely promises that he will not receive Holy -Orders while addicted to such bad habit, he may be absolved; still -it would be preferable, if no obstacle presented itself, to postpone -absolution for a time. If, however, he should persist in his purpose of -receiving Holy Orders, he would thereby make himself unworthy of both -Sacraments. An exception is to be made in the case of a person favored by -God with such extraordinary compunction that he is quite transformed by -it and delivered from the old weakness,—such a one the confessor _can_ -absolve and admit without any further probation to Holy Orders. But in -this case also the confessor should endeavor by every means to induce -the penitent to postpone the reception of Holy Orders, so that he may -better purify himself from the bad habit and carry out the resolutions -he has made. Indeed, if the penitent will not postpone the reception -of Holy Orders, the confessor, as physician, may, for this purpose and -for his spiritual profit, delay absolution so as to force the former to -put off his ordination. This applies when no danger of disgrace arises -from such postponement, for, otherwise, the penitent who gives signs of -_extraordinary_ sorrow is entitled to immediate absolution. “_Ceterum -Confessarii debent esse difficiles, quantum fieri potest, in absolvendis -hujusmodi ordinandis, qui postmodum ordinarie pessimi evadunt presbyteri -et sic populis et Ecclesiæ perniciem magnam afferunt._” - -The above holds good not only with respect to the _vitium luxuriæ_, but -also with regard to any other vice. - -A confessor administering absolution according to the above principles -provides for the interests of the Church, as well as for those of the -faithful and for those of the persons to be ordained.[911] If it is -objected that the person to be ordained would be brought into evil -repute by such proceeding, it may be answered, in denial of this, that -ordination may be postponed for many reasons and that pious youths not -infrequently desire such postponement. And if the consequences stated in -the objection were really to supervene, the evils resulting from hasty -ordination are by far more fatal. Nor is the want of priests, which -prevails nearly everywhere in our days, reason for rejecting the above -teaching, which is entirely based upon the principles of the saints and -of the Church. It would be a dangerous remedy to apply to the evil of -scarcity of priests. Moreover, experience of centuries proves that the -number of priests increases when and where the discipline of the Church -is strictly enforced. St. Thomas remarks, “God never so abandons His -Church that worthy servants of the altar in sufficient numbers are not to -be found, if only the worthy are ordained and the unworthy debarred from -ordination.”[912] - -To conclude this very important section, we will call the attention of -the confessor to two Instructions given by the Congregation de Propag. -Fide. In these the practice of “_indiscriminatim_” absolving relapsing -sinners, adopted by some confessors, is strongly rebuked and condemned. -One Instruction (Aug. 1827) appeals first to the twofold power of -absolving and remitting sin to which this practice is entirely opposed, -and then to the teaching of the Rituale Roman. (Tit. De Sacram. Pœnit.): -“But let the priest take heed when and to whom absolution is to be -administered or refused.” Now this would not be prescribed if absolution -were to be given to all without distinction, including relapsing sinners -and penitents living in a habit of sin. The penitents being divided (as -above specified) into three classes, to whom absolution is to be given, -or postponed, or refused, respectively, the Instruction concludes: “Thus -teach prudent theologians, the Instructions given to confessors by St. -Charles Borromeo, and by St. Francis of Sales. Confessors must reflect -that, from too great ease in obtaining absolution, there results a great -ease in sinning.” In the other Instruction (April, 1784) the confessor -is reminded of his duty to examine into the gravity of the sins, the -obstinacy of the malady, and the dispositions of the penitent. He must, -therefore, carefully inquire if the penitent has true sorrow; if he has -entered upon a new life, detesting the former; if he promises amendment -with the heart, and not with the mouth alone; if he has abandoned the -occasions of sin; if he has applied the remedies previously recommended -to him; if he has laid aside the habit of sinning; if, having previously -received absolution, he has relapsed into the same sins in consequence -of his depravity; if he is ready to repair injury inflicted. These, and -many other things, the confessor must examine before he confers upon the -penitent the blessing of absolution.[913] - - -70. Penitents aiming at Perfection. - -As we have seen in previous sections, the confessor must treat with great -care and zeal those penitents who are stained with grave sins and vices; -but he must not, on that account, neglect those who are striving after -virtue and perfection. A penitent who has preserved himself free from -grave sin and is capable of perfection claims, as St. Alphonsus teaches, -all the confessor’s care as guide along the path to perfection and divine -love.[914] - -But as this is no light and easy matter, and as it involves -responsibility on the part of the confessor, he must pray to God for -light and endeavor to learn the natural disposition of the penitent and -the operation of the Holy Ghost in his soul. _For all are not to be led -in the same manner._ The phlegmatic, the choleric, the melancholy, and -the sanguine must all be differently treated. While the phlegmatic must -be spurred on that they may not become lukewarm, the choleric must be -restrained that they may not go too far, whilst they are guided to the -nobler and more exalted works and exercises in the service of God. With -the melancholy, care must be exercised that they do not give way to -sadness, do not isolate themselves, and imagine everything more difficult -than it is in reality; the sanguine must be prevented from allowing -themselves to be hurried by natural impulse into what exceeds their -strength; the confessor must insist upon their weighing everything well, -and then acting with firmness.[915] The guide of souls seeks to recognize -the operation of the Holy Ghost in his penitents, and he will carefully -follow up this operation. For the Holy Ghost dwells in the soul of the -just man; He is the teacher of the interior life and the invisible guide -to perfection. The confessor’s duty is to coöperate with the Holy Ghost. -St. Ignatius remarks wisely: “To wish to lead all to perfection by the -same road is full of danger; such a one does not understand how manifold -and abundant the gifts of the Holy Ghost are.” - -Nevertheless, there are certain general principles and rules which are -useful to all in obtaining Christian perfection. As the saints, approved -theologians, and masters of the spiritual life have laid them down, we -reproduce them here in brief:— - -1. Perfection consists for each one in performing well his ordinary work; -and he does it well who does it because, and when, and as God wishes—His -most holy Will being the source and rule of all perfection. - -2. Penitents must be led gradually and regularly (_non per saltum_) to -perfection; for example, they must first act with the right purpose -and intention and learn to imitate the actions of Christ before they -contemplate higher things; they should first learn to bear easier trials -patiently before demanding more difficult ones. - -3. The confessor should admonish them constantly to cherish the desire -for greater perfection, even if in certain instances they never seem to -attain to it; for such a desire will have this effect, that they will -at least reach that perfection of which they are capable and they will -acquire greater merit. - -4. He must instruct them to confess every week, and induce them to avoid -even venial sins which are voluntary and deliberate, also to give up any -attachment to these sins. Those who confess venial sins which they have -_not committed with deliberation, but from human weakness_, must always -be absolved; those who have committed _venial sins with deliberation_, -but not from habitual attachment to them, must be absolved, but, at the -same time, helped and incited earnestly and zealously to endeavor, by -employing the means recommended by the confessor, to avoid them; those -who are accustomed to confess venial sins which they have committed -without any resistance, from _habitual attachment or custom_, give rise -to the suspicion that they are not properly disposed; the confessor, -therefore, must dispose them to true sorrow for at least _one_ venial -sin, and to a firm purpose of amendment, in order that they may be -absolved without sacrilege. Occasionally, however, as in the case of -other relapsing sinners, absolution may be postponed. The confessor -should not easily forbid them to confess their imperfections,—for -example, that they have not consecrated their actions of the day to -God, nor said the prayers of a confraternity, etc.,—because such -self-accusations contribute to a better knowledge of the penitent’s -spiritual state, exercise humility, and produce tenderness of conscience; -besides these imperfections often go along with some venial sin.[916] -The same applies to the transgression of those rules in a Religious -Order which do not bind under sin. And if the penitent confesses only -imperfections which do not positively amount to venial sins, or other -doubtful sins, let the confessor observe what we have said above (§ 6). -Let him see that they always go to holy communion well prepared and not -from mere custom; for a single communion after good preparation is worth -more than many communions received in a state of tepidity. The confessor, -however, must distinguish carefully true zeal and fervor from sensible -devotion. - -5. The confessor should teach them _to master their passions_; especially -their predominant ones, for which purpose the particular examination is -eminently adapted. He should induce them to _practice virtues_, and that -in the right order, namely: (_a_) first the virtues demanded by their -position and profession; he should not, therefore, permit young women to -hurry from one Church to another, or to remain there longer than is right -and necessary, thus neglecting important duties, their families, etc. He -should exhort them rather to perform their household work faithfully and -zealously; (_b_) they should be instructed to practice more zealously -_those virtues against which they are tempted_; finally (_c_), he should -exhort them not to prefer those virtues which are more conspicuous and -more esteemed by men, but to strive after those which are in themselves -more excellent and useful and more pleasing to God, such as humility, -obedience, meekness, patience.[917] (_d_) He should also urge them to be -_faithful in small things_; for God does not generally ask great things -from us.[918] - -6. He should not impose upon them extraordinary exercises; indeed, -he should not even permit them easily. At the same time he must not -prevent mortifications and practices of penance, even exterior ones; -but they must be proportioned to the corporal and spiritual powers of -the penitent. What saints have sometimes done, or allowed others to do, -cannot serve as a rule, but is more to be admired than imitated. - -The confessor must also have regard for the special dangers and -temptations which may attend those who are striving after perfection:— - -1. Those who at first were, by God’s grace, cheered with spiritual -consolation easily lose courage and relax in their zeal when He, for -their trial, and to lead them to higher things, withdraws from them -sensible devotion. If the confessor observes this, he must instruct them -in what true progress and true virtue consist; but penitents must be -warned in advance of this state of the soul. - -2. The devil seeks to make those who are progressing in virtue believe -that they have advanced far enough, and endeavors to produce within them -the beginnings of lukewarmness. They become negligent in their accustomed -pious exercises, lay aside first one and then another mortification, -and begin to disregard slight faults. In this there is a great danger -lest, gradually relaxing in zeal, they at length fall into grave sin at -the first temptation, which the devil prepares for them when they have -become sufficiently tepid. It is difficult to perceive the beginning of -lukewarmness, but not its progress, and when the evil shows itself, the -confessor must endeavor with zeal and prudence to check it and prevent it -from becoming worse. To this end the penitent may be ordered to resume -all the pious exercises which he has neglected; he should be reminded -of the loss of grace, of its value, the dangers of lukewarmness. If the -penitent, before his relapse, had made considerable progress in virtue, -he should be admonished to make a retreat. The confessor should not -abandon hope even if the penitent has seriously failed. He must receive -him in a friendly manner and show compassion, for in this case severity -would be poison. He should remind him of Peter and Magdalen, who obtained -so many graces by their tears of sorrow and rendered themselves worthy -of the special love of Our Savior. On the other hand, the confessor must -urge the penitent to love God more, to develop greater zeal in His -service, and to repair his shortcomings by redoubled obedience, to adore -the divine Justice, to humble himself deeply, and to live more carefully -in the future. - -If the penitent informs the priest that he has had extraordinary -consolations, and that his methods of prayer are unusual, the latter -should not show himself altogether incredulous in these matters; but -should calmly and carefully examine if any signs of hallucination are -present.[919] - -Whilst there would be danger in promoting the deceptions of Satan by -imprudent credulity, very great injury might be done, on the other hand, -by incredulity and contempt. That he may not be taken unawares, the -confessor should familiarize himself with treatises on spiritual life; -for even in the humblest station of life God may manifest His special -graces.[920] - -We give a few general rules:— - -1. We must be more careful when the sense of spiritual consolation in a -penitent has been preceded by some external cause, or when some object -which, in the natural course of things might produce such consolation, -has been presented to the senses, than in the case of consolation by -which suddenly, and without any previously existing cause, the higher -powers of the soul seem filled with great light. The cause of the latter -can only be God (St. Ignatius). For only God can directly influence the -higher faculties of the soul—the understanding and the will. The devil -can only do so indirectly; he can cause sensible devotion, excite tears -and other effects which depend upon the bodily powers (Reuter). - -2. The good Spirit suggests nothing which is opposed to truth, to Holy -Writ, the doctrines of the Church, the practices of the saints, the life -of Christ; nor anything frivolous, idle, inappropriate. - -3. The good Spirit incites to self-denial, to mortification, endurance -of adversity, imitation of Christ, resignation to the will of God, -submission of private judgment, perfect obedience, humility. - -4. The good Spirit is modest, and, therefore, proceeds to all its work -in an orderly manner; it incites, as a rule, only to what is usual and -ordinary and adapted to each one’s powers, without the intervention of -miracles. For the ordinary road to heaven is God’s own design; and if, -nevertheless, He sometimes inspires extraordinary things, it is almost -exclusively in the case of souls who are already rooted in humility and -do not strive after empty honors. - -5. It is a sign of the operations of the Holy Spirit when the penitent -is humble of heart, not desiring extraordinary things, not aspiring -to astonishing exercises, making his holiness consist in the faithful -performance of the ordinary duties of life, holding himself unworthy of -the gifts of God, not exalting himself above others on account of these -gifts, rejoicing to be despised if the confessor treats his lights as -pure illusions, maintaining secrecy about his gifts. - -6. But even when an emotion does come from God, a temptation from the -devil or some inordinate natural affection may intrude itself, so that -one might conclude that the consolation or the light which the penitent -has received is not from God; as, for instance, would be the case where -signs of pride were visible. - -But whatever be the origin of these interior emotions and illuminations, -the individual must always employ them for the purpose of increasing -his contempt of self, both in his own eyes and those of others, in -intensifying his longing to imitate Christ in His poverty, humility, and -suffering; and if he zealously pursues this object, the purposes of the -devil will be defeated if the inspirations emanated from him. - -7. Obedience, even against the proper judgment, is a good sign, and -absolutely necessary. Gladly and readily revealing what seems to redound -to one’s credit, seeking praise by means of extraordinary gifts, -displeasure if the confessor hesitates, are bad signs. - -The confessor should not wish to have as penitents persons who lay claim -to extraordinary gifts, nor, prompted by vanity, should he take pleasure -in the flatteries which such persons offer to him. If he is so foolish -and vain, he can only ascribe it to a just judgment of God if he at last -discovers that, in punishment of his vanity and imprudence, persons who -suffered from illusions have deluded him also.[921] - - -71. Hypocritical Penitents. - -The confessor must be able to distinguish penitents who seriously strive -after perfection, truly pious penitents, from those whose piety is -merely a cloak. The piety of these latter consists entirely in outward -practices; they visit churches a great deal, say many prayers, go to -confession often, and receive holy communion several times in the week. -And yet they neither know anything of true and solid virtue, nor strive -after it, but, on the contrary, are full of faults. They remain longer in -church than is necessary, with the result that parents, husband, or wife -are inconvenienced, and household duties are neglected. They receive the -Sacraments often—to be seen and praised by men; and if the confessor does -not allow them to approach holy communion as often as they wish, they -are angry with him. In the confessional they wish to talk much to the -confessor when there is neither use nor necessity for it. The spirit of -mortification is utterly wanting in them; they are, therefore, attached -to the pleasures of the table, dislike work, and are loquacious. They are -neither humble nor obedient; they do not submit to the guidance of their -confessor, but act as though he should rather obey them; they deceive him -by confessing trivial sins and concealing grave ones. They seek praise -and honor, are impatient under correction, despise others, and blame them -arrogantly. They are wanting in charity, and, consequently, cause trouble -among their familiars; they envy others, are given to anger, have no -care for the honor and good name of others, etc. With these hypocritical -persons must be classed those, particularly women, who wish to unite -piety to a worldly life. - -But there is another class of women who adorn themselves with a show of -piety; namely, those _quæ sunt captæ amore Confessarii. Malum profecto, -quo non ipsæ tantum in perniciem ruunt, sed etiam Confessarium, nisi eos -dimittat, ruinæ participem reddunt. Persona talis nullam habet requiem; -torquet eam desiderium colloquendi cum Confessario unde, quoties facultas -ipsi est, ad Confessarium redit; torquet eam sollicitudo, qua illi -placere gestit, diffidentia et metus ne ab ipso deseratur, zelotypia ne -aliæ apud ilium gratia magis polleant._ The confessor must reprimand -them in season or out of season, that they may enter into themselves, -and strive after true and solid piety. If he is not successful, he must -endeavor to rid himself of them, or dispatch their confessions quickly. -There are, moreover, _extraordinary_ possibilities of _hypocrisy_ in some -women. “All malice is short compared to the malice of a woman,” according -to Jesus Sirach (25, 26). _Inde contigit, ut feminæ falso devotæ -finxerint se infirmas, postea miraculo sanatas atque publicas gratiarum -actiones impetrarint pro valetudine sic recuperata; aliæ finxerunt -vexationes et verbera a dæmone ipsis illata; aliæ ementitæ sunt visiones -et revelationes, necnon extases simularunt aliaque portenta fabricatæ -sunt._ By such cunning contrivances these persons wish to draw the -attention of others towards themselves, and to be honored and admired, or -to excite the pity of priests, _vel, quod pejus est, castitati alicujus -Sacerdotis insidias struere volunt_. The best remedy against all this is -not to believe such things, and to ignore the persons in question.[922] - - -72. Scrupulous Penitents. - -No little trouble is caused to confessors by scrupulous persons. The word -“scruple,” in its real and primary sense, means a little stone which -inconveniences the wayfarer. Similarly, in its transferred sense, it -means some little spiritual obstacle which prevents a man from performing -an action because, for some vain and worthless reason, he fears that -he will commit sin. A scruple is, therefore, fear of sinning, where no -ground for fear exists. The confessor must know the signs of scruples, -their causes, and their remedies. - -I. Marks of scrupulosity:— - -We will premise that: (1) a person is not scrupulous because he has a -scruple occasionally, but only when he is habitually subject to them; -(2) frequently a man himself cannot tell if he is scrupulous or only of -an anxious conscience; he must, therefore, rely upon the judgment of a -prudent confessor; (3) the confessor himself cannot always positively -decide when he first treats a penitent if he is scrupulous or not; he -must, therefore, abide and observe till he knows the penitent better, -for as it is dangerous to treat a scrupulous person according to general -rules, it is injurious to guide others by the rules applicable only to -the scrupulous; (4) the confessor must use very great discretion and -prudence in dealing with penitents who are scrupulous on one point but -lax as regards other things. - -The characteristic signs of a scrupulous person show themselves in this: -(_a_) that, upon slight grounds, or none at all, he changes his judgment, -holding the same thing to be allowable one moment, and forbidden the -next; (_b_) that he fears to commit sin by doing something which a -competent confessor has already told him to be allowed, and which he -sees other conscientious men do and which he himself would, in his own -judgment, consider to be allowed if he were not obliged or did not wish -to do it at that time; (_c_) that he is agitated for fear he should sin, -and cannot account to himself for this anxiety; (_d_) that he clings -obstinately to his own judgment, placing no confidence in the decisions -of learned men, or the confessor; (_e_) that he repeatedly asks whether -a thing is allowed, although he has several times received an answer -on the point; (_f_) that he ponders over circumstances connected with -an act which exercise no influence at all upon the moral value of the -action, and which other men generally disregard altogether; (_g_) that -he holds for a sin that which the most conscientious men commonly do -without thinking of sin; (_h_) that he is perpetually anxious about -his confessions, lest they should be invalid, although the confessor -has declared them to be valid, even after a careful repetition of the -confessions has already taken place.[923] - -From these indications the confessor is able to judge if his penitent -is scrupulous. We must not mistake them, however, for the following -circumstances, which would be of little assistance in recognizing the -malady, as they are found not only with the scrupulous, but also with -those who have tender consciences. - -1. If the penitent is concerned, and reasonably anxious, not to offend -God even in the slightest degree or to atone immediately for a sin -committed, he is not on this account a scrupulous person. - -2. If some one after living a long time in grave sin is converted, makes -a good confession to the best of his ability, and, within a moderate -period, say half a year, for example, still thinks he cannot do enough -and wishes two or three times to reconfess his sins, he must not be at -once set down as scrupulous. After that time, however, the penitent must -be forbidden to say anything about former sins, or even to investigate -whether he has confessed everything correctly. Only if the penitent was -accustomed to conceal sins in the confessional might he be allowed to -continue during a longer time to confess sins which might occur to his -mind after the general confession.[924] - -3. If a person doubts whether he has sinned in some particular instance -we are not to conclude that he is scrupulous; for a doubt may be -absolutely, or relatively, reasonable.[925] - -If the confessor tells the penitent that he is scrupulous, the latter -must certainly believe him; but it is often very difficult to convince -the penitent. He is rather disposed to consider others thoughtless and -less conscientious, not excluding the confessor, or to think that the -latter does not properly know him or has misunderstood him. Here the -cunning of the devil is seen, who is wont to instill into perplexed -souls a peculiar presumption and obstinacy of judgment. This error is -very pernicious; it springs from pride and makes the penitent scorn the -remedies which are offered to him. - -II. The causes of scruples:— - -Scruples may proceed from God, from the devil, and from a natural -disposition. - -1. God sometimes permits scruples (_permissive_), withdrawing from just -motives His supernatural light. If the trials thus proceed from God, they -are, _per se_, useful, produce a profounder contrition, humility, and -detachment from the world. - -2. Scruples proceed from the devil also (_effective_), who has a peculiar -skill in producing them by confusing the imagination with false shows -and suggestions. He does not plague great sinners with scruples, because -he is content to leave them in their state of presumption, and so cast -them ever deeper and deeper into ruin. Nor are great saints troubled by -him, because in them fear has been conquered by perfect love. It is only -those who have begun to give themselves to God, and chiefly those who -have abandoned great sins and entered upon the right road. His object is -to perplex and hamper them in their spiritual progress, to plunge them -into despair, or, at least, to disturb their interior peace. Scruples -emanating from Satan must, therefore, be combated with all energy, _for -they tend to evil_. - -3. Scruples may also be traced to natural causes (_dispositive_), the -individual having a keener and more sensitive perception of evil, or a -wavering, unsettled judgment. - -These natural causes are partly physical and partly moral: (_a_) -Bodily constitution: a melancholy temperament may incline an otherwise -sagacious man to suspicion, obstinacy and scrupulosity. Others who in -consequence of a physical disposition are low-spirited, despondent, and -timid, readily conceive an unreasonable fear of sin, and if they do -not quickly banish this fear, they frequently fall a prey to scruples. -(_b_) Nervousness and disease of the brain: the imagination becomes -excited and perplexed, so that vivid conceptions of the imagination -are not sufficiently distinguished from the judgments of reason. This -affection may be hereditary, or it may arise from overwork, late hours, -or immoderate fasting. (_c_) Dullness of mind, which cannot adequately -distinguish real from seeming motives; but acuteness of intellect, if the -judgment is not well balanced, may produce the same result. (_d_) Hidden -pride and obstinacy of private judgment: a man subject to these moral -defects becomes easily entangled in doubts and scruples. (_e_) Too great -anxiety to avoid everything—I will not say in any way evil, for that we -must avoid, but which has even the appearance of evil; thus is formed the -habit of adopting the stricter and the speculatively more certain view, -a proceeding which in practice does not by any means tend to the safer -course.[926] (_f_) Intercourse with scrupulous people, reading books in -which only the stricter opinions are advanced, confessing to a scrupulous -confessor.[927] - -III. The following considerations will show when the scruples proceed -from God: (1) when they excite sincere detestation of sin; (2) when they -do not last long and end in great calm of mind; (3) when they are called -forth by hatred of sin. - -Scruples may be recognized as proceeding from the evil one: (1) when they -produce lukewarmness and despair of salvation; (2) when the scruples -occur in connection with the holiest actions, especially where a man is -otherwise not accustomed to be much troubled with them; (3) when a man -detests only this or that kind of sin—others not so much; God detests all -sin; (4) when a man yields to grave temptations while at the same time he -is anxious about trifles.[928] - -But when, without apparent reason, the heart becomes uneasy and the head -affected, when a sudden tremor takes possession of the limbs and the mind -is filled with scruples, we may justly assume that the latter proceed -from natural causes, and this sign is the more certain if in all places -and in all actions the penitent is molested by them. - -IV. Scruples are _very pernicious_, causing perplexity and dejection of -spirit, placing obstacles in the way of the soul’s progress towards -virtue, closing the heart to the consolation of the Holy Ghost, producing -dryness of spirit, aversion to prayer, and neglect of the ordinary -duties. Scruples frequently undermine health, not seldom exposing the -subject of them to the danger either of becoming insane or of falling -into great sins of impurity, despair, blasphemy, or suicide.[929] - -St. Alphonsus distinguishes three kinds of scruples, and theologians -universally follow him in this division: (_a_) scruples concerning -former confessions, the person being always uneasy about them, although -they have been made properly and completely; this kind of scruple is -not so difficult to overcome; (_b_) scruples concerning the consent to -sinful thoughts about different matters; here the scruple as a rule -comes after the action—these scruples may be a heavy burden; (_c_) -scruples concerning all actions, or at least innumerable things about -which other men do not at all trouble themselves. These are the worst -scruples. The remedies which the confessor has to employ for the cure -of scruples are the following: (1) He must find out if the penitent is -scrupulous about everything, or only some things, and what is the cause -of the scruples. (2) He must convince the penitent that, where sin is not -evident, the safest course for him is obedience to his confessor; and -that, on the other hand, it is very dangerous not to obey his confessor. -(3) He must, therefore, ask the penitent if he has confidence in him, -and if he will obey him even against his own judgment; the confessor -must undertake to guide the penitent only after these questions have -been answered in the affirmative, otherwise he must tell him plainly -to apply to another confessor in whom he has confidence and whom he is -willing to obey. If this is not done, the confessor’s pains would be -simply thrown away. (4) The confessor in most cases ought to be kind -to the scrupulous penitent, though severity is sometimes necessary, -especially where obstinacy in private judgment is manifested, or when -the penitent presses for repetition of a confession against the advice -of the confessor. Under no pretext whatever, not even when tears are -added, should the confessor allow this. This extreme severity is a -kindness; but it should be tempered with gentleness. (5) To doubts, let -the confessor answer _without hesitation_ and _without much questioning_, -and interpret everything according to the more lenient view. He should, -in most cases, give no reasons for his answers, lest the penitent might -think that after all his scruples were not to be despised, and because -the latter will weigh these reasons, and make them doubtful by opposing -to them his futile objections. Nor should he listen to new doubts and -scruples, but when he is morally certain that a scruple is in question, -he should sometimes without listening to the penitent order him to lay -aside all anxiety and quickly to receive holy communion. (6) He should -give the penitent some general rules to follow; the more general and -the easier the application of these rules and the more comprehensive of -individual circumstances, the better they are.[930] Such general rules to -be given to the penitent are the following: (1) He must be convinced that -he really is scrupulous—but that scruples by no means lead to holiness; -he should, therefore, firmly resolve to combat them. (2) He should pray -with great humility, confidence, and resignation to the divine Will for -light and peace of conscience. (3) He should cling to one and the same -confessor in whose learning and goodness he trusts, and whom he must obey -most strictly, as the representative of God. The confessor’s decisions -must be regarded as final by the penitent. Never should the penitent -seek a solution of his doubts elsewhere than from his confessor. He -should abide with this decision even if doubts again arise. (4) He must -accustom himself to consider God as infinitely good, and occupy himself -with thoughts which awaken confidence in God, avoiding any which have -the opposite effect. (5) He should flee idleness, so that the devil may -always find him busy. He should avoid intercourse with scrupulous people, -as also reading about things which excite scruples. (6) As soon as a -scruple arises, he should banish it, and think of something else, as if -it were a temptation to evil. He should not allow his mind to dwell upon -his scruples by opposing reasons to them, but energetically lay aside all -doubt. (7) He must not give way to a scruple by obeying its suggestions; -on the contrary, he must act boldly in opposition to the scruple, and -not fear that he will sin, even when his conscience does not seem to him -to be very clear about the matter. For a scrupulous person it should -suffice to know that he must despise his scruples, and that in spite -of them, he may do any act of which he cannot say _positively at first -sight_ that it is a sin; and that, in order to commit a mortal sin, it -is necessary for him to be able to say at once, without hesitation and -without examination, that the thing in question is forbidden under mortal -sin. (8) Let him be assured that he is by no means obliged to confess -his doubts; indeed, that this is not even useful and must be forbidden. -_Doubtful sins_ a scrupulous person is _certainly_ not bound to confess. -Speculative doubts the scrupulous person is not bound to regard; for what -for others is a reasonable motive for investigation, is not so for the -scrupulous. From this results:— - -(1) For a scrupulous person an act which he does not recognize at once as -a sin is not a sin; (2) he may do that which he sees other conscientious -people do without scruple, even when it is contrary to his own judgment -or his own opinion; (3) scruples are, for him, no reasonable ground for -doing or for not doing an action, or for hesitating; and this applies to -the doubt as to whether a scruple or a valid reason is in question.[931] - -With regard to different kinds of scruples Reuter gives the following -good rules:— - -1. He who is troubled with doubts _as to whether he has consented to -interior temptations_, and is otherwise conscientious, may regulate his -conduct according to the following principles: (_a_) He is never to -believe that he has consented to a mortal sin if he does not positively -know that he fully recognized the gravity of the sin, and fully consented -to it. (_b_) If the person tempted is seized with fear, abhors the object -of the temptation as he considers it more closely and remains determined -not to offend God, he has not completely consented. This applies to -non-scrupulous persons also; and theologians maintain that he who has -a God-fearing conscience, and is not accustomed to consent to sin with -full attention, may believe, in a case of doubt, that consent has not -been complete, for _ex communiter contingentibus fit prudens præsumptio_. -(_c_) Nor may we conclude that he has fully consented because the -temptation lasted a long time, or because the sensual excitement was -violent, for this is material and involuntary, and sometimes appears more -considerable than it really was. - -2. If the penitent is tempted against _faith_, or against _hope_, let him -ignore the temptation, turn his mind to other things, especially to God, -but let him not be perplexed by trying to awaken a positive act of these -virtues. And if he thinks that he has had blasphemous thoughts, let him -proceed in the same manner, despising them, and disbelieving that he has -consented to them, although he may have felt a certain pleasure in these -thoughts and emotions; indeed, the devil can create in the imagination a -certain semblance of consent, while the individual himself and his will -are far removed from the criminal act. When the soul has been calmed it -is always useful to make an act of the love of God. - -3. If the temptation refers to conditional events in the future, for -instance, “what would you do if you were obliged either to sin or to -endure this or that evil?” let him turn away energetically from such -thoughts, not answering directly or positively but rather indirectly, “I -will not offend God now; and should I ever be so situated, the grace of -God will help me to do His will.” With this answer let him calm himself, -and not rashly entangle himself in difficulties, lest he suffer the -punishment of presumption, like the Apostle Peter. - -4. If, _when looking at perfectly innocent things, impure images and -emotions_ arise, let him look at them boldly if they are objects and -pictures (for example, holy pictures), modestly and transiently if human -beings; let him act as other conscientious men do in these things and -despise the emotions or thoughts. He should proceed in the same manner if -these things happen when he is saying certain prayers; let him not omit -the prayers on this account, but devoutly proceed with them. - -5. The _Divine Office_ may be a source of scruples. The penitent may -doubt whether he had the intention of reciting it; this scruple is -ridiculous, for the very fact of his saying it shows that the intention -is there. He may doubt that he has recited it properly, having mutilated -words, or been voluntarily distracted; in this case he should not repeat -anything at all, for since he honestly wished to perform his duty, it is -to be presumed that he did it properly. While he is saying his Office -he must not stop, but proceed according to previous intention without -hesitation, without straining the mind, without hurry, without anxiety. -As the requisite attention is not prevented by any action which, of its -nature, is consistent with interior attention, the person should not be -troubled if he has done such an action, unless it were of a kind which -conscientious men would, during prayer, be careful to avoid. After the -completion of the Office, an anxious person should repeat nothing, even -if he fears that he has said it badly. If he is very scrupulous, and -requires too much time for saying his Office, his Superior or confessor -can fix a certain time in which conscientious clerics are accustomed -to say it conveniently, and if, after devoting this time to it, he has -not quite finished it, he shall omit the part still remaining. Indeed, -according to the same author, and Gobat, whom St. Alphonsus quotes (in -approval of his opinion), the Office could even be absolutely _forbidden_ -to such a person till it could be assumed that he was able to recite it -without such worry; for grave inconvenience releases from obedience to -the commandments of the Church.[932] - - -73. Converts. - -As it is not every belief that saves, but only the true faith taught by -Christ, the zealous priest will be anxious to contribute, as much as he -is able, to the conversion of heretics. He will, therefore, in continued -prayer, implore for them the light of grace, that they may recognize -their error and seek the truth; he will, when occasion presents itself, -exhort them to avoid sin, “because error does not produce sins, but sins -produce error,” and “darkness does not comprehend the light.” He will -also, in a judicious manner, encourage them to attend our religious -services, to hear sermons, to read books in which the Catholic doctrine -is exposed and explained; he will not object to friendly intercourse -with them, in order to lead them gradually to a recognition of their -errors, as they begin to doubt of the truth of their teachings, and -salutary scruples arise in them. When a heretic wishes to accept the -Catholic faith and be instructed, he should: I. Be received with great -love and kindness and be asked discreetly why he wishes to change his -religion and embrace the Catholic faith. Whatever motive he assigns, -caution is necessary,—because there are designing people who, under the -cloak of piety, seek, not the salvation of their souls, nor the truth, -but temporal advantages, such as marriage, sustenance, etc., and, -having obtained these, live bad lives, and return to their old vices, as -examples both amongst Jews and heretics teach us. He has, therefore, to -be taught that, in returning to the true Church, he must seek simply and -solely the kingdom of God, and the salvation of his soul. If, however, -he should say that he is poor and deprived of the means of sustenance, -he should not be promised assistance till there is proof of his good -intentions. But, in order that the priest may not be deceived, he should, -if he does not already know the man sufficiently, examine him by various -questions at different times, and only when he finds him sincere, -recommend him to others. The priest should not show familiarity, nor do -or say anything in private intercourse, which he would regret if the -catechumen should, perchance, return to heresy. - -Moreover, he should endeavor to acquire the confidence of the convert, -so that the latter may gladly unfold to him all his errors, doubts, and -wounds. - -The convert must be admonished to attach great importance to the business -of his conversion, as upon it depends his eternal salvation; he should, -therefore, often and fervently pray for its happy issue, and perform good -works; the priest himself should also most zealously pray and induce -others to pray for him. - -II. Having convinced himself of the good dispositions and steadfastness -of the convert, the priest should readily offer to supply him with the -necessary instruction, or, if he is really prevented from doing so, -provide for his instruction at the hands of some other reliable person. - -In the matter of the instruction the following points must be observed:— - -1. First of all it must be ascertained if the convert is a material -or a formal heretic. He is a formal heretic if he has knowingly and -voluntarily adhered to any error against the truth of the Catholic -faith, after that truth had been adequately exposed to him, and he -had recognized it as truth. A material heretic is one who professes -error through ignorance, or in consequence of perverse instruction or -education. Perhaps most of the non-Catholics of the lower classes belong -to the latter kind; seeing that, from childhood, they have been reared -in every prejudice and calumny against our religion. But when reasonable -doubts arise in them, they are bound to investigate, to pray for divine -light, to search for the truth, and as soon as they recognize it to adopt -it. Otherwise they become formal heretics, because they adhere with -obstinacy to error. - -2. Then we must investigate to what extent the convert has been -instructed in the tenets of his sect, and what doubts trouble him with -regard to the Catholic doctrine. For there are mainly two classes of -heretics who become converts; the first consists of simple uneducated -people, who require sound instruction in Christian truth, but who should -be informed of points of controversy with great caution, in order that -they may not learn new errors and hence new doubts. The other class is -formed of educated people whom one must instruct especially on all points -of divergence, so that their doubts are dispelled. - -3. But as faith must be the rational and invincible assent to all -revealed truths, the credibility of our dogmas must first be demonstrated -to the heretic; and these are to be accepted if the Catholic Church -alone is the true Church of Christ. He should, therefore, be taught that -the true faith is necessary to salvation, and that there is only _one_ -true religion, and only _one_ Church of Christ, as the true religion -must come from God, and God who is truth itself cannot reveal what -is self-contradictory. He should then be shown that the true Church -of Christ must have definite marks which distinguish her from every -false sect, and that these marks of the true Church of Christ are only -possessed by the Catholic Church. After this we may expose particular -doctrines, especially those articles in which Catholics differ from -heretics, namely: the Sacraments, the Real Presence of Christ in the -Holy Eucharist, purgatory, veneration of the saints, the infallibility of -the Pope. - -III. When the convert has been (according to his intelligence) fully -instructed, he must be prepared for the reception of Baptism, if he be -not baptized, of the Sacrament of Penance, and holy communion, and for a -profession of faith. As converts generally dread confession, the priest -must endeavor to remove their fear by reminding them of the seal of -confession, the peace of mind following upon a good confession, and by -lessening the difficulties of the examination of conscience. The manner -of making a good preparation and thanksgiving for holy communion should -be well explained. Finally, give him a formula of confession of faith in -his native language, and explain it to him. - -IV. Not till the priest is satisfied as to the convert’s knowledge and -constancy should he receive him into the communion of the Church. _The -reception itself_ may take place in three different ways, according to -the circumstances of the convert:— - -1. If he has not been baptized, or if the nullity of his Baptism is -certain, Baptism is administered to him _absolutely_; but then no -abjuration of heresy on the part of the convert takes place, nor is -absolution given to him, because the Sacrament of Regeneration cleanses -from all sins. - -2. If Baptism has to be repeated _sub conditione_, the _abjuratio -hæresis_, or the _professio fidei_ takes place in the vernacular, then -Baptism is administered _sub conditione_, after which the convert -confesses and receives absolution _sub conditione_. - -3. If the Baptism which the convert formerly received is regarded as -valid, he abjures his heresy by pronouncing the profession of faith, and -is then absolved from the ecclesiastical censures.[933] - -An _abjuratio hæresis_ is not to be demanded from children who have not -arrived at the age of puberty, _i.e._ about their fourteenth year; nor -is absolution from the censures to be administered, as they have not -incurred any; they need only make the _professio fidei catholicæ_ before -they are admitted to the Sacraments. For these young converts the Symbol -of the Apostles seems to suffice. But from such as have passed this age, -a formal abjuration of the sect to which they have hitherto belonged is -to be demanded.[934] Although a _material_ heretic can be absolved by -every confessor _pro foro interno_, it is more advisable and safer to -procure from the bishop the _facultas absolvendi ab hæresi_, as there are -difficulties in the matter, and the confessor may easily be deceived in -his judgment. This faculty is always to be requested _pro foro externo_. -If, at his conversion, a heretic must be baptized, his admission to the -Church belongs to the right of the _parochus loci_. The bishop must be -consulted as to the repetition of Baptism _sub conditione_. - -V. After his reception into the bosom of the Church the convert, if his -former Baptism was valid, or if he was rebaptized _sub conditione_, -must make a complete confession of the sins of his former life. Let -the confessor treat him with all charity, assist him with questions, -being careful, however, not to institute a rigid examination. The -confessor may ask him if he has uttered blasphemies or insults against -the Catholic Church, or induced others to do so; if he has entertained -doubts concerning his religion and how long he despised or neglected the -truth. If the penitent has committed many grave sins, the confessor must -be careful not to reprove him severely or harshly, rather praise his -good disposition in confessing them, exhort him kindly but earnestly, -henceforth to lead a truly Christian and good life. No great penance -should be imposed at first, so as not to dispirit the penitent. Finally, -the confessor administers absolution, _absolute_ or _sub conditione_, -according as Baptism was either not repeated or was again administered -_sub conditione_. - -If a non-Catholic in the hour of death wishes to embrace the Catholic -faith, he must make the _professio fidei_ before two witnesses, at least -with regard to the doctrines which must be believed _necessitate medii -et præcepti_. To avoid difficulties later this act should be taken down -in writing, and the document signed. After which the dying person may be -prepared by acts of faith, hope, and charity, contrition, and purpose of -amendment; he should then confess; absolution from excommunication and -from sin should be given him; after this the viaticum and Extreme Unction. - -But if the dying person shows no disposition to accept the Catholic -faith, the priest should seek to gain his confidence, and then gradually -approach the question of his salvation. Let the priest endeavor first to -awaken in the dying man an act of faith in all that God has revealed, -especially in all that must be believed _necessitate medii_, then an -act of hope, of perfect contrition, and resignation. In such a case it -is not prudent to ask the man bluntly to join the true Church, for fear -of exposing him to a great temptation. In order, however, to be able to -administer to him the conditional absolution, he should be induced to -acknowledge himself a sinner before God, and, having elicited contrition, -to declare also that he wished to be assisted as much as possible by the -services of the priest the better to obtain eternal life.[935] Absolution -_sub conditione_ can then be administered to the dying man, by secretly -pronouncing the form of words, without making the sign of the cross. - - - - -CHAPTER II - -THE TREATMENT OF PENITENTS IN DIFFERENT EXTERNAL CIRCUMSTANCES - - -74. The Confession of Children. - -The confessor must devote special care to the confessions of children, -for this is a matter of much importance.[936] As with adults, so with -children, confession exercises a great influence upon the spiritual life, -and forms a factor in their education which cannot be estimated too -highly. For even a child can commit sins with full advertence or malice, -and hence requires the Sacrament of Penance in order to recover the lost -life of grace, and to obtain the necessary assistance in preserving -itself from future sin. The child also has its temptations; evil -inclinations and passions awaken in the child’s soul. Who does not know -that many a child is entangled in a net of evil habits and occasions of -the worst kind? In truth, the child stands much in need of supernatural -strength in order to preserve its most precious treasure of innocence. -This strength conferred by grace is more necessary to the child than all -exhortations and instructions. A good confession will eradicate obstinate -faults and evil habits which have long defied all the arts and wisdom -of educational systems. Confession is in many cases the sole means of -discovering in the child hidden and ruinous habits and of correcting -them, thus safeguarding its innocence and purity. Even when parents -and the other agencies of education, home influence and the school, -fail in their duty, attaching importance only to the cultivation of the -intelligence and to outward morality and propriety, the confessional can -still be the child’s salvation by shielding its heart from evil. This -great and fundamental significance of the confessional for the child and -its education must be realized by the confessor. He will then readily -undergo the labor involved in the preparation of children for confession, -and the confessions themselves. Here, preëminently, he will scatter the -good seed from which he may expect an abundant harvest. Here he is the -true representative of the divine Friend of children, of Him who suffered -the little children to come unto Him, of Him who uttered the momentous -words: “He that shall receive one such little child in My name, receiveth -Me” (Matt. xviii. 5; xix. 13-15). - -I. The first consideration is the admission and the preparation of the -children for confession. - -In the admission to confession, age must certainly be considered, but -not chiefly; the mental capacities and development must be taken into -account. The declaration of the IV. Council of the Lateran that a child -is bound to receive the Sacrament of Penance as soon as it has reached -the years of discretion (_anni discretionis_) is based on the nature of -the case. But when this period arrives cannot be precisely stated in -years and days; it depends much on individual circumstances. The seventh -year is generally regarded by theologians as the limit, and they teach -that a child who has completed the seventh year is bound to receive the -Sacrament of Penance. And if a child has average mental capacity, has -received religious training at home, and from the sixth year regular -religious instruction at school, it _can_, and generally _should_, go to -confession when it is seven years old, or even before this, as would be -desirable if such a child were seriously ill, or if there were reasons -for supposing that it had committed grave sin. In the latter event the -child would be bound, in order to comply with the precept of the Church, -to confess within a year.[937] But as it happens that very many children -are not sufficiently developed and instructed so early, it follows that -the regular admission is left to the judgment of the priest. St. Charles -Borromeo gave his clergy the following precept on this head: _Qui ad -septem aut octo annos pervenerint, pro modulo de necessitate et virtute -sacramenti illudque frequentandi instruentur_.[938] And the Cologne -Provincial Council of the year 1860 decrees that the first confession of -children _shall not be put off longer than the ninth year_. The priest -should certainly not delay the preparation of a child for his first -confession any longer, unless its incapacity is demonstrated. With the -seventh or eighth year the children should be admitted to instruction -for confession, and if a child shows in the course of this instruction -that it has arrived at a sufficient understanding of the Sacrament of -Penance, it should be immediately prepared for it. But those children -who are not qualified should take part in the preparation for the next -(second) confession of the course, in order that they may be admitted -then, or later, in any case as soon as possible, to this holy Sacrament. -For the zealous priest will not only instruct the children concerning the -Sacrament at the beginning of every school year, as is the regulation -in many dioceses, but each reception (at least in the children’s first -years) will be preceded by a solid preparation consisting in a general -repetition of the essential truths. If the less gifted children are -present at these instructions and preparations, and if special attention -is given to them, they will soon be in a condition to make a good -confession. The final decision concerning the capacity or incapacity -of a child to receive absolution, or, in other words, concerning its -dispositions, must be left to the confessor, who will and must arrive at -some settled judgment on this point, and give absolution conditionally or -unconditionally, or postpone it, as he shall find necessary. - -The special instruction which precedes the children’s confession must -be given according to a definite and practical plan, and with great -care and prudence.[939] At the outset the children must be solemnly -admonished that they are shortly to be admitted to their first -confession, and that for this purpose they are to receive a special -instruction. The importance of this instruction must be impressed upon -them as an initiatory preparation for the reception of the Sacrament, -thus encouraging them to diligent application and attention. There -is probably no religious instruction which more attracts little ones -and more wins their interest, than the instruction for confession, on -account of the exceedingly beautiful truths which are here discussed. -It must be emphasized and brought home to the children that it is a -great happiness, an unmerited favor to be cleansed from sin in the holy -Sacrament of Penance; it would be ill timed to represent confession -as something hard or difficult or as a kind of punishment. One must -rather awaken enthusiasm within them, so that they may take pleasure in -preparing themselves for it carefully, and they must be assured that the -confessor will make easy everything which they think will be difficult -in the confessional if only they show good will. Admission to confession -must also be represented to them in the light of a distinction, and as a -reward of diligence and attention. - -As to the matter of the instruction,—the doctrine of the Sacrament -of Penance must be treated thoroughly, clearly, attractively, and in -a manner adapted to a child’s intelligence. Then the most important -doctrines of the catechism with reference to confession must be repeated, -especially the doctrine of God and His attributes; furthermore, the -doctrine of sin and the Redemption. These truths are to be set forth -in a manner at once easily intelligible to the mind and stimulating to -the feelings. Particular care must be taken that the children learn to -say correctly and with understanding the usual prayers before and after -confession. It is very useful at the end of this instruction (of the -remote preparation) and shortly before the confession, to make with -the children an examination of conscience. In this manner as complete -a confession as possible will result, and many abuses be prevented; -especially will children not accuse themselves of things which they do -not in the least understand and which they have not committed; while, at -the same time, the suitable, intelligible, and becoming expressions for -the different sins will be put into their mouths.[940] Furthermore, it is -much to be recommended that the children should, in common, be incited -to contrition and purpose of amendment (say in the Church, immediately -before confession) by laying before them the motives for contrition, -and this slowly, intelligibly, and in a manner adapted to children; -afterwards repeating to them a short and forcible formula of contrition -and purpose of amendment, concluding with another short exhortation to -sincerity in confession and to gratitude to God after the confession.[941] - -II. Treatment of children in the confessional. - -If the children have been well prepared, the confessor’s work is much -facilitated. But he must, nevertheless, always bear in mind the words of -St. Alphonsus de Liguori: “_The confessor must expend all his love on the -children, and treat them in the gentlest manner possible_.”[942] - -But even when there has been careful preparation the confessor must: -(1) see that the confession is a complete one, and supply any possible -defects in it; (2) instruct the child, and, if necessary, dispose it -for absolution; (3) judge of his disposition, and, according to this -judgment, give absolution conditionally or unconditionally or defer it. - -In addition to the rules already laid down and discussed, the following -special remarks will be serviceable:— - -1. If the confession of the child is _incomplete_ or vague, the confessor -can easily discover the principal sins or at least sufficient matter by -means of questions if the child has some little intelligence. He may ask -the child if it has neglected daily prayers, if it has through his own -fault missed Mass on Sundays or holidays (especially during vacation -time); if it has behaved disrespectfully in Church, by laughing, talking, -looking about, and disturbing others; if it has been disobedient and -naughty towards his parents and superiors; if it has quarreled with his -brothers and sisters and other children; if it has been angry or cursed -in anger; if it has taken dainties by stealth or stolen; if it has lied -and said untrue things of other children.[943] Where there are grave -sins, he must, of course, ask the number, if it was not stated; and he -must insist upon the child’s examining itself concerning the number, -and stating it as precisely as possible. Everything connected with -children’s confessions must claim the confessor’s attention, but he must -be especially careful that they learn to confess well. Children will have -great difficulty in giving account of their thoughts, desires, and the -intentions by which they have been influenced, and the confessor may thus -find himself obliged to put questions on these matters. - -2. If the child has made a definite confession, but the confessor still -believes that there has been insincerity,—from false shame or fear, or, -perhaps, from inability to make the sin known, it often requires great -prudence to detect the sin omitted.[944] It is mostly sins against the -sixth and seventh commandments which, for the above reasons, children -conceal. If the confessor therefore, suspects that a sin against the -sixth commandment has been omitted, he must exercise prudence in two -ways: first, that he does not, by unsuitable questions, make the child -acquainted with sins of which it knows nothing, and that he does not put -the questions in such a general way that they fail to disclose the sin. -If the child confesses that it spoke immodest words, or did something -immodest, or permitted it, the confessor must not at once conclude that -he has to do with real sins against the sixth commandment; for sometimes -children take unbecoming words, which are no sin against holy purity, -for immodest words and confess them as sins; they also regard certain -things as immodest actions which are by no means sinful,[945] but on -the contrary necessary. There is ground for this supposition especially -when an otherwise good child accuses itself of having very frequently -committed such sins.... The confessor may also ask the child if it knows -what impurity is. As he must not investigate the matter further he must -form his judgment in accordance with the whole confession or suspend a -definite judgment; and he should not forget that it is better to leave -a confession doubtfully complete than to expose innocence to danger by -asking questions. But if he discovers that the case is really so, and -that the child suffers from _conscientia erronea_ on this point, he must -suitably instruct it. If, however, it is clear the child has accused -itself of sins against holy purity, and the confessor believes that real -sins are in question,[946] let him not fail to investigate what led up to -them—a sinful, necessary, or voluntary occasion, or a vicious habit. Not -infrequently the confessor will discover the distressing fact that home -and school, instead of being nurseries of that flower of the virtues, -the child’s innocence, are the cause of its destruction, either with or -without the fault of parents or superiors; and this through sleeping -together, the bad example or open seduction of corrupted brothers and -sisters, some imprudence on the part of parents, or the talk, buffoonery, -and doings of some tainted child at school. Such circumstances will -not only awaken deep and painful regret in the confessor, but also his -endeavors as physician of the soul, to help and heal, and save the -poor child from complete ruin. He must here apply with special care -and prudence the rules concerning occasions and sinful habits. If the -confessor perceives that a child suffers from _false shame_, or that it -is immoderately timid, he must seek to induce it to candor and confidence -by kind persuasion, affectionate encouragement, or also by serious -exhortation. - -In the preparatory instruction the confessor must specially accentuate -the seal of the confession, and not fail to represent the confessor to -the child as the substitute of Christ, who, like our divine Savior, -receives children (and children who have sinned also) as a loving father, -and as the Good Shepherd rejoices over the return of the child by a -sincere confession. - -3. If a child has concealed a sin against the seventh commandment, it -is easier for the confessor to discover the insincerity. He must ask -what was stolen, where and from whom it was stolen, if other things than -eatables were stolen, what was done with them, etc. Stealing and eating -dainties by stealth generally go together, as the longing for these -dainties often makes the child a thief. Another form of theft is keeping -back money when parents or others have sent the child to make purchases. -Study and experience, especially in the cure of souls, and light from -above, for which the confessor must always pray before confessions and -during them in more difficult cases, will enable him to discover other -points which cannot be here discussed. - -The next task of the confessor is _to instruct the child, to prescribe -remedies, and to dispose it for the absolution_. The sins which have -been confessed will furnish the occasion for the instruction; but -instruction concerning the necessary truths of faith may also be -required, especially when absolution cannot be deferred. The confessor -must particularly inform the child concerning the malice and hatefulness -and evil consequences of its sins; then also concerning the beauty and -rewards of virtue and the duties of its station. Nor should he fail to -remind the children of their sublime pattern, the divine Child Jesus. The -confessor should inspire them with love and confidence in the Blessed -Virgin, their heavenly Mother, and teach them devotional practices in -her honor and service. Finally, he should recommend to them, as a means -of obtaining virtue, zealous and regular prayer, recollection of the -presence of God, and avoidance of bad companions; and let him not tire -of telling the children all this over and over again, and implanting it -in their hearts. It will remain there, and in due time bring forth good -fruit. Though he has imparted these precepts and exhortations during -the religious instruction, he should repeat them at the confession in -suitable form; they will be more effective there; but they must be -adapted to the intelligence of the child and be short and forcible. - -With the performance of this duty he must combine another, the -healing of the wounds of the child’s soul. This healing begins with -the acknowledgment of the evil in the examination of conscience and -confession, is carried on by the sorrow, and completed by the absolution, -through which grace is poured into the soul. By means of the instruction -which the confessor gives the child, he will seek to move it to real -sorrow and firm purpose of amendment. This is a principal task of the -confessor in children’s confessions. How often and how easily the latter -become invalid, or doubtfully valid, from the child’s having been too -superficial and thoughtless in awakening sorrow and firm purpose, not -having been properly attentive during the preparation, and having -repeated an act of contrition and purpose of amendment more with the -mouth than with the heart. The confessor must have due regard for this, -and employ the necessary care for warding off such evil. If the immediate -preparation for confession was a good one, he may set his mind at rest -as regards most of the children; nevertheless he will here, once more, -seek to move the child to sorrow and renewal of purpose in a few forcible -words. But if the immediate preparation above described was entirely left -to the individual children, and if the confessor has misgivings about it, -he must supply what is wanting by short but earnest admonitions. - -Let the confessor be persuaded that his endeavors are not in vain, and -even if it should be his experience that the child has turned to no -advantage these preparations for confession, let him not be disheartened. -The child will recognize the representative of Christ in him better -in the confessional than at the instruction, and if he speaks as such, -inspired by a pure intention and a holy zeal for the love of Jesus, he -may confidently expect that his words, aided by the grace of God, will -make their way to the child’s heart, and there find fruitful soil. The -child’s heart, though fickle and thoughtless, is not so insensible to -contrition; the feeling of gratitude and love is there, and the love -of God is more easily excited in it. Still easier will it be for the -confessor to move the child to a firm purpose of amendment. In this -work of healing he must pay special attention to certain sins, which -often occur with children, and are particularly ruinous in them—lying, -stealing, and impurity. - -(_a_) If the child shows a tendency to lying, the confessor must first of -all emphasize the sinfulness of lying, as it is often scarcely regarded -as a sin and confessed as a matter of custom, in many cases, it must be -feared, without due sorrow and purpose of amendment. He should point out -to the child the particular hatefulness of lying, as expressed by the -Holy Ghost in Holy Writ: “Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord” -(Proverbs xii. 22), and that “a lie is a foul blot in a man” (Eccles. -xx. 26); that God, as the eternal truth, especially hates, detests, and -punishes lying (Eccles. vii. 14); that men also detest a liar, for one -who has once lied is not trusted again; that lying brings a child no -good, as everything comes to light sooner or later. - -(_b_) If the child has stolen something, the confessor must inquire -concerning the cause of the theft. Causes of theft may be: _Want_, in the -case of very poor children, who do not receive sufficient food, or who -cannot procure the necessary articles for school use. This cause will be -discovered without much difficulty by the question: “What did you steal?” -“What did you do with the stolen money?” Of course such children must be -treated leniently, but forbidden to steal again; at the same time they -should be told that if they are again in need of anything, to come to -him, the confessor (or the parish priest), and make known their trouble, -and they will be helped. Sensuality may be another cause; inducing them -to pilfer sweets, or buy them with stolen money. These children should -be earnestly admonished, often to think that God sees them. Finally, a -cause of stealing may be _an innate or acquired tendency_. In these cases -the amendment of the child is very difficult, but the confessor should -not give up hope, even when the tendency is deeply rooted. In the first -place, he should point out to the child the sinfulness of stealing, -and suggest the necessary measures (according to the circumstances) -for overcoming and eradicating the evil—daily renewal of purpose and -prayer for grace, recollection of the presence of God. If the children -are induced by their parents to steal, the confessor can only command -them not to obey their parents in future, and to declare that they must -obey God who has forbidden stealing; the rest he must leave to the -grace of God. If the child is led into stealing by others, it must, of -course, give up all intercourse with them at once, and (according to -the circumstances) inform parents and teachers of the fact. The duty of -restitution is not to be imposed upon children, as they are generally -incapable of making restitution,[947] excepting the case where the child -still possessed the stolen object; it should then be admonished to -restore the object, in order effectually to deter it from stealing.[948] - -(_c_) The most dangerous and worst sin with children is that of -_impurity_. If a child accuses itself of this, and if the priest -believes that real sins of impurity are in question, he must investigate -if the child has fallen into them through his _own desire_, or through -the _seduction_ of others. If the former is the case, the confessor -should point out clearly and in a manner adapted to its comprehension, -the heinousness of this sin, which ruins body and soul, and makes us, -as does no other sin, an object of horror to an infinitely pure God. He -should remind the child of our divine Redeemer at the pillar, where, -by the dreadful pain and shame which He suffered, He atoned for this -sin. All this he should set before the child in eloquent, impressive -words, so that it may recognize how much his confessor detests these -sins and loves the virtue of purity. Let the confessor take occasion -to glorify this holy virtue, pointing out how much it is loved by God -and man, how much praised by the Holy Ghost, how it ennobles a man, -making him like the angels. This recommendation of holy purity will be -especially fruitful if accompanied by a special devotion to holy and -chaste young saints, especially to the Virgin of virgins, to St. Agnes, -St. Aloysius, St. Stanislaus, and St. John Berchmanns. In this manner -let him bring the child to a detestation of its sins, and to a firm and -determined purpose of resisting wicked desires and all temptations of -Satan, and to adopt the necessary means for this. As means of amendment -he can prescribe according to circumstances: daily renewal of the good -resolutions, daily prayer to the Blessed Virgin, frequent and regular -reception of the holy Sacraments; especially confessions each time the -sin is committed (this latter remedy is particularly to be recommended -if the sin has already become habitual, or has led to pollution). Other -devotional exercises are the honoring of St. Aloysius, especially by -the six Sundays of Aloysius (the celebration of which may very well be -recommended to older children); little mortifications for the purpose of -overcoming sensuality are also very appropriate. If _seduction_ by others -was the cause of the fall, the confessor must direct the child to avoid -intercourse with the evil companion; but if this is morally impossible -(for instance, when older brothers and sisters, or children of the same -school, are the seducers), he must give suitable rules by means of which -the immediate occasion may become a remote one. Whether the child may be -commanded to denounce the seducer to parents or superiors depends upon -circumstances, and the priest must examine into these; a denunciation is -a very efficacious means by which the sins of others also may be checked. -He must then tell the child how it can do this. - -The third task devolving upon the confessor is _to judge of the child’s -disposition_, and according to his decision to give absolution or to -defer it. If the child has made a sincere confession, answered candidly -the confessor’s questions, listened attentively to his exhortations, -said the act of contrition devoutly and earnestly, if its behavior -has been generally good (before confession also, in the church, at -the preparation), or if in answer to the confessor’s question it has -declared that it was sorry for its sins, and that it wished to amend, the -confessor may be satisfied as to its dispositions. If he still doubts as -to the child’s dispositions (even after he has taken pains to dispose -it, for, in doubt, the confessor must, as shown above, seek to dispose -the penitent), or if he doubts as to the necessary _usus rationis_, and -if the child will not come again for two or three months (as is mostly -the case) or if it is in danger of death, he should give conditional -absolution. This also is allowed (in a case of doubtful disposition) -when the child has confessed venial sins only, and it is not likely -that it will soon come to confession again. Concerning the postponement -of absolution, see the principles laid down above, which apply here -also.[949] - -As to the penance, let the confessor observe the teaching discussed above -(§ 33). Let him be careful not to impose any severe penance upon the -child, though it should be easier at one time, and severer at another, -corresponding to the sins. Moreover the penance should not be extended -over any long period, on account of the forgetfulness of children; nor -be such as the child must perform before others, and thus be exposed to -confusion. - -In conclusion, we briefly refer to the question: How often should -children confess? If there are diocesan regulations on this point,—and -there are in most dioceses,—they must, of course, be observed. Where -no such direction exists, the zealous and conscientious priest will—as -confession is of such great importance for children, and as it is one -of the most powerful means of preservation from sin and the practice -of virtue, especially with those who have not yet made their first -communion—assuredly be glad to follow the precept which St. Charles -Borromeo gave to his clergy, namely, to induce children to confess -frequently. Let confession four times a year be the rule, and if he -considers it necessary, on account of particular circumstances, he -will readily grant the children more frequent opportunities; those who -are preparing for their first communion, especially, he will admit to -confession frequently during the last year before the reception; say, -every month, as is the regulation in some dioceses.[950] - - -75. The Confession of Young Unmarried People. - -Youth, the springtime of life, is the most beautiful, but at the same -time the most dangerous, period of existence. The young man and the young -woman, more or less removed from parental care and observation, come into -closer contact with the world; many young people are obliged to leave the -parental roof to learn a business or trade, or to earn money for their -own support or for that of their relations, in factories, workshops, or -in strange houses as servants. And the dangers which, either temporarily -or constantly threaten them in these places, are not slight. Others, -more happily situated, can remain at home, but even here they are not -sheltered from all the dangers which the world, and contact with it, -prepare for them. And youth is so trustful, so easily beguiled, dazzled, -and misled; the youthful heart is so susceptible, the youthful ear so -open, evil often finds its way to the guileless heart in the guise of -what is good or harmless or indifferent; it is excused, or represented as -necessary, whereas virtue is despised as weakness or reviled as folly, or -denied as impossible. In the heart the passions and the sensual impulses -awaken, while the enemy of all good constantly watches to achieve the -ruin of the soul. The greatest dangers are _pleasure, bad company, bad -books, and human respect_. Therefore is it so very important that the -young should have an experienced, wise, circumspect confessor who knows -youth well,—the youthful heart with its inclinations, the youthful mind -with its aspirations and the dangers that beset its path; a confessor -who can admonish, instruct, and guide it, incite it, and awaken its -enthusiasm, restrain and warn it; who will hold fast to right principles, -but enforce them with wise moderation; who will lead his young penitents -into the ways of goodness and virtue without exciting their resistance—a -confessor who has a warm heart for youth. Let him, therefore, gladly -take upon himself the difficult but noble and blessed task of being a -father and guide to youth. Of this labor St. John Chrysostom[951] says -truly: “What is equal to the art of guiding the souls of the young, of -forming their minds and hearts? He who is equipped with the capacity -for it must exercise more care than a painter or a sculptor upon his -work.” That the confessor of young people may work with success it is -necessary _that he should win their hearts_ by the absolute confidence -with which his truly fatherly love inspires them. Let him not repel these -young people by cold, harsh treatment, but make due allowance for their -weakness, their inexperience, their inconstancy; they will then follow -his instructions, admonitions, and counsels with docility and with the -enthusiasm which is peculiar to youth. Moreover, let him make the work of -confessing easy to them so far as may be, in order that they may _gladly_ -and _often_ confess and communicate. If it is possible, let him induce -and accustom them to the constant habit of confessing every month, or at -least every two or three months; for frequent confession and communion is -of especial benefit to young people, in order—(1) to preserve them from -sinful _habits_, for they will rise the quicker from sin the oftener they -approach the Sacrament of Penance, and sin cannot settle into a habit -if the heart is quickly cleansed from it. In any case the beginnings -will be easily overcome. If, however, a sinful habit has already taken -root, frequent confession and communion is the most certain, often the -only, remedy. (2) By it _they accustom themselves to pious exercises_, -which are learnt and performed more easily in youth than later on, and -by continued practice they will be confirmed in piety, which is itself a -firm support of weak and vacillating youth, a safe and protecting bulwark -against danger. - -(3) _They will then also receive the holy Sacraments frequently in -later life, and will be preserved from that pernicious fear of the -confessional_, from which so many men and women suffer in our days. -For, as the Holy Ghost teaches, and experience proves, a youth will not -forsake easily in old age the path which he trod in early years. But -those who in youth seldom receive the holy Sacraments will, as experience -also proves, shun confession more and more as age advances.[952] - -When the confessor has a suspicion that his young penitents have not -confessed sincerely, he may (as it shall seem to him advisable, and -having regard always to the rules applicable to questioning) ask if they -have been much troubled by temptations against holy purity, if they have -had intercourse with corrupt people, if they have read bad books? He may -also ask, especially where the preceding questions were answered in the -affirmative, if they have done anything immodest or permitted it? But -in all these questions let the confessor be modest and careful in his -expressions, lest he wound by awkward questions and teach the penitent -some sin before unknown to him, or excite his curiosity. He will more -easily attain to his end with young men, as these are generally more open -than persons of the other sex. Sometimes young people of both sexes do -not know what a sin of impurity is, although they accuse themselves of -impure thoughts. - -_The faults peculiar to youth_ are:— - -(_a_) _Disobedience_ to parents and superiors, which results in -much evil. The confessor must find out in what they have been -disobedient—neglecting divine service, religious instructions and the -holy Sacraments, attending forbidden entertainments, frequenting bad -company, keeping up dangerous and sinful connections with persons of -the other sex (familiarities, flirtations). Then let him point out the -evil consequences of their disobedience, the obligation of obeying which -still remains in force when they have become older, are earning money, or -supporting their parents, in fact as long as they remain under parental -control. He should remind them of the promises of the fourth commandment, -and the threats of God against those children who disobey this -commandment. At the same time let him instill in their hearts reverence -and love for their parents and superiors. Then let him lay special -stress upon sincerity toward parents, superiors, and the confessor; and -inculcate a deep abhorrence of dissimulation and lying, which make the -education, protection, and guidance of inexperienced youth impossible, -and expose it to great dangers. - -(_b_) _Love of pleasure._ It excites the young man (and also the young -woman) to a craving for enjoyment, withdraws him more or less from useful -pursuits. It leads the young man into dangerous society, the young woman -into ruinous and sinful intimacies, which are secretly and prematurely -carried on, and are fruitful in sins and excesses; it ultimately leads -both of them into disobedience toward their parents, to lying, to -extravagance, to deception and theft practiced on parents, and to still -worse things. Moreover, it takes from them all devotion and fear of God. - -(_c_) If love of pleasure appears more in young men, _desire of pleasing_ -is characteristic of young women; it induces vanity, levity, distraction, -and sins against chastity. The confessor should combat these passions -with all his zeal and show how they may be suppressed. - -He should recommend to young people as excellent means of acquiring and -cultivating the fear of the Lord and true virtue:— - -1. _Regular daily prayer, and attendance at divine service_, Mass, -sermons, and Christian instruction. As long as a young man or a young -woman say their daily prayers and attend Mass, it is well with them; -but as soon as they begin to grow negligent in these practices, it is a -certain sign that they are no longer in the path of virtue, and if they -have not yet reached the broad highway of vice, they are certainly on the -road which very soon leads into it. Experience teaches that a man does -not become all at once corrupt and wicked; he usually falls imperceptibly -and by degrees. He no longer confesses and communicates regularly every -four weeks,—first five elapse, then six or seven; morning and night -prayers are no longer said punctually and kneeling,—they are sometimes -omitted, shortened, said in bed, now and then the religious instruction -and the afternoon devotion are missed, and excuses are forthcoming; -at the same time there is no longer the earnest endeavor to resist -temptation, there is no longer the same fear of sin. Upon the lesser -negligences supervene greater ones, and upon the smaller faults greater -sins. This is the usual progress. Let the confessor, therefore, urge -punctual prayer and regular attendance at divine service. - -Many young men and women cannot attend at Mass on weekdays; if they -are absent from it on Sundays also, they are not only robbed of many -necessary graces, but they neglect the first duty of man, the service -of God, become more and more estranged from God and holy things, and -in the same measure attached to the world and worldly things, with the -result that sin and passion are more easily and more deeply rooted in -them. If young people come with the excuse that they were obliged to -work on Sunday, and therefore were not able to be present at Mass, the -confessor must investigate the validity of this excuse and give the -necessary directions and instructions. He should not be overready to -admit its validity; in towns especially, by a little good will and zeal, -though at cost of some effort, Mass may be heard before work begins. -These same people will often deprive themselves of necessary rest when it -is a question of pleasure! Work on Sundays is not always inevitable and -absolutely necessary, and other situations are to be found in which it is -not demanded. The confessor must inquire into all this. - -2. Great esteem for holy purity and a great horror of impurity. For this -purpose the confessor should encourage (_a_) the reading of good books, -warn his penitents against idleness, and instill in them a love of virtue -(§ 66, IV). He should also (_b_) caution them against sinful talk and -familiar intercourse with persons of the opposite sex, and against bad -company; this warning should be especially addressed to young women, -who should also be admonished to be decent and modest, as becomes -virtuous women, at all times and in all places—at work, at recreation, -in the house, out of the house, in dress, and in manners; (_c_) he -should endeavor, to the best of his ability, to keep them from dangerous -pleasures, especially from theaters, dances, shows (§ 66, II. III), and -certain pleasure trips, which, unfortunately, in our days are so general, -and for which so many opportunities are afforded; indeed, he will be -obliged to forbid many of them to certain penitents as they are for these -penitents _occasio proxima relativa_; (_d_) he should also seek to hinder -young men from joining certain societies, the principal object of which -is pleasure, and which so often give occasion for profanation of Sundays -and holidays and for other scandals, and in which the ruling spirit is -not one favorable to religion and virtue. On the other hand, he should -recommend them, and young women also, to join a well-conducted religious -society or sodality; (_e_) he should induce them confidently to unfold -to their confessors all their temptations, struggles, and difficulties; -(_f_) finally, he should recommend and urge frequent reception of the -holy Sacraments after careful preparation and an earnest endeavor to -sanctify the day of communion. - -But only the _regular confessor_ can, in this prescribed manner, produce -permanent effect upon young men and women. Only he who has known and -guided his penitent a long time can effectively warn him against -threatening dangers; and when the latter has gone astray, a confessor -can easily lead him back, and preserve him from future dangers and -relapse. It is, therefore, of the greatest importance that young people -should not change their confessors without a good reason. They should be -advised to choose a regular confessor and to give him their confidence, -ready to submit with docility to his admonitions and precepts. But if -his penitents confess once or twice to another priest, the permanent -confessor must by no means express displeasure or irritation; under -certain circumstances he must even express satisfaction at it, for it -is better that they should confess sincerely to another priest than -sacrilegiously to him. When they return to him he should show even -greater love and concern for them, and resume their guidance with the -accustomed conscientiousness. The priest to whom these penitents come -without the knowledge of their former confessor must receive them kindly, -dispose them, if necessary, and induce them to be sincere after they -return to the former confessor. - -The confessor must devote special attention to a vice with which so many -young people are infected—the _vitium pollutionis_—in order to preserve -those who are still untainted by this pest, and to deliver and cure those -who are its victims. In a former section (§ 69, II) we have said what was -necessary on this point, and enumerated the remedies which the confessor -must apply to these unfortunate penitents.[953] If the young penitents -(male or female) are inmates of an educational establishment, the -confessor must not overlook the possibility of _particular friendships_, -as these prove to be very injurious. At first they are merely matters -of fanciful preference, without harm. But later on such friends like -to separate themselves from others when they are able to do so, and by -degrees the relationship between them tends toward sensuality and to -sins against purity. This evil the confessor must judiciously endeavor -to avert; if he observes such friendships, he must demand that they be -broken off, if necessary, under threat of refusing absolution. And if -one of the parties continues to be a cause of temptation, he must be -denounced to the Superior if this is possible. The confessor may be -assured that only by legitimate severity will anything be accomplished in -this matter.[954] - - -76. The Confessor as Adviser in the Choice of a State of Life. - -It will often happen that the confessor is in a position to help young -people in the choice of a state of life; we will, therefore, lay down a -few rules on the point. - -1. The confessor is by his calling an adviser to his penitents in this -matter; for he knows the souls of his penitents, their inclinations, -faults, and weaknesses, and the duties of the different states of life. -He is likewise apt to receive a special illumination of divine grace in -the exercise of his office, and he is probably always the most impartial -of those concerned in the decision of this question. Hence the penitent -usually lays this question of his future before his confessor with the -greatest confidence. - -2. The right choice of a vocation is of supreme importance for a young -man or young woman; upon it depend not only the temporal and eternal -welfare of the party in question, but also the happiness and unhappiness -of many others. The confessor ought, therefore, to expend very much care -upon this question; he must consider, investigate, pray, and admonish the -penitent to do the same. The decision of such a weighty matter should -never be hasty. _Noli præcipitanter agere; diu considera, magnum est, -quod proponis_, writes St. Bernard.[955] The confessor must inquire -into the abilities of the young man or woman, the moral condition, and -also the exterior circumstances of the person; he must consider the -question of means and foresee difficulties which may arise. He must then -investigate if the intentions of the person in entering upon this state -are pure and acceptable to God. Finally, he must have recourse to God in -earnest prayer, that he may be able to give his penitent the right advice -in so important a matter. _Tria sunt difficilia mihi et quartum penitus -ignoro_, namely: _viam viri in adolescentia_ (Prov. xxx. 18, 19). St. -Philip Neri, the paternal friend and guide of youth, recommends in the -choice of a vocation, _time, prayer, and counsel_. - -3. The confessor should not seek to persuade young people to embrace -some particular calling: “_Circa statum ab aliquo adolescente eligendum -non audeat Confessarius illum ei determinare, sed tantum ex indiciis -curet suadere statum illum, ad quem prudenter judicare potest ipsum a -Deo vocari_,” is the admonition of St. Alphonsus to confessors.[956] The -confessor should, therefore, direct the young man to submit the matter -to Almighty God, who determines the station in life of every individual, -and teach him that each one must seek to know the will of God, and be -ready to follow the divine call, whatever it may be, for a man can be -permanently and truly happy only in that state which God has allotted -him. He should admonish him to implore with perseverance light from on -high, and to this end perform some special devotion—a novena to Our Lady -of Good Counsel, or to St. Aloysius, the patron of youth, or to St. -Joseph; to receive the holy Sacraments, and preserve himself from all -grave sin, so as to place no obstacle in the way of the divine light of -grace. - -All this being done, the confessor can, trusting to the grace of God, -give an answer which shall be, if possible, decisive. God is wont to make -known to a man the station destined for him in a threefold manner: (_a_) -_by miracles_, as He did in the case of St. John the Baptist, St. Paul, -and many other saints; (_b_) by interior illumination and suggestion, -by means of which the individual is enabled to recognize the will of -God clearly, as we see illustrated in the lives of very many saints in -quite a remarkable manner; (_c_) and generally, by means of outward -circumstances, by pronounced inclination and special capacity for some -state of life; among these circumstances may be reckoned the exterior -providential guidance of men, which the world calls chance, but which the -Christian enlightened by faith recognizes as the providence of God. - -Respecting individual callings, the confessor should observe the -following:— - -I. Religious Orders. - -If a young man or woman shows an inclination to enter a Religious Order -and consults the confessor about the matter, the latter should first -investigate if the penitent has the ordinary abilities for such a life, -if he has sound judgment and a good character, if he is disposed to -obedience, if he possesses relatively sufficient talent and knowledge, -and if he is healthy. For one who is not of sound judgment is subject -to many hallucinations, and St. Teresa used to say, very wisely, that -she did not wish to have either scrupulous or melancholy persons in her -Order, that is, such as were subject to these faults in a considerable -degree, because such persons are a cause of much trouble both to -themselves and the community. Those who have not good health will not -be able to observe the general regulations of the establishment, and, -therefore, will be more of a burden than a benefit to the community, -and will not be able to set a good example. The priest should then -test the penitent’s intention in entering the Order, to see if it is -the right one, namely, to unite himself more intimately and closely to -God, to atone for the errors and sins of his former life, and to avoid -the dangers of the world. If the confessor should discover that the -intention has been influenced by some such motive as the expectation -of leading a life free from cares, or of escaping from the tutelage of -harsh relations, or by desire of complying with the wishes of parents, -he should proceed cautiously, for under the circumstances it may be -suspected that there is no vocation.[957] If, however, the intention -is right, and there is no obstacle in the way, the confessor may not, -and cannot, under grave sin,[958] prevent or dissuade the person from -following his vocation; nor may any one else do so. The confessor must -also investigate if _the purpose_ of the individual in question _is -firm and steadfast_; in order to make sure of this, it is sometimes -advisable to defer for a time the execution of the intention, especially -if the confessor knows the young person to be rather fickle, or when the -resolution to enter the Order was taken during a Mission, or under the -influence of a Retreat, because resolutions are sometimes made on such -occasions, which, when the first zeal has cooled down, are not kept.[959] -The confessor must be especially careful with penitents who, on account -of frequent relapses into sins of impurity, give rise to the suspicion -that they do not lead chaste lives; and also with those who have reached -middle age, because it is to be presumed that, being settled in their -habits and views, they would find obedience too difficult; finally, he -should also be extremely careful with those who have already belonged to -an Order, because these do not generally persevere, or are not adapted to -a life in community. - -When the confessor has satisfied himself, as far as possible, concerning -the vocation for a Religious Order, he will have no difficulty in -discovering to what Order the young person is called. Here he must pay -special attention to the inclinations and dispositions of the candidate, -and whether regular observance prevails in the Order under consideration. -But as long as the question of the calling is not quite decided, he must -insist: (1) that the person maintain silence with every one, even his -parents, concerning it, till it is recognized as his vocation, and is -to be carried out; (2) that he should persevere in prayer for guidance, -and frequently receive the holy Sacraments; (3) that he should shun the -distractions, pleasures, and vanities of the world, otherwise he will run -the risk of losing his vocation. - -II. The priesthood.[960] - -Holy Writ, both in the Old and New Testament, teaches that a vocation -from God (_vocatio divina_) is necessary for receiving Orders (_status -clericalis_). Our Savior Himself expressed this truth very clearly when -He said to the first priests of the New Law: “_Non vos me elegistis, sed -ego elegi vos_,” and His Apostle also, who writes: “_Nec quisquam sumit -sibi honorem, sed qui vocatur a Deo tanquam Aaron_” (Heb. v. 4). The -confessor must, therefore, carefully examine the candidate’s vocation to -the priesthood; indeed, this investigation is even of greater importance -than in the case of the candidature for a Religious Order. For if the -religious takes upon himself greater burdens with regard to obedience -and voluntary poverty, and if the love of community life and a submissive -spirit is not to such a high degree necessary in the secular priest, yet -greater dangers threaten the latter, and fewer safeguards are at his -disposal than are possessed by the religious, who, in the rule of his -Order and the regular life of a monastery, finds a powerful help.[961] - -The chief signs, by means of which the confessor may recognize a vocation -for the priesthood, are: (1) right intention—not seeking a comfortable -life, a future free from care, and honor in the eyes of the world, but -only the honor of God, and the salvation of souls; (2) a persistent -inclination to the spiritual state, joy in the spiritual life, and in -the offices of the priesthood; (3) confirmed virtue (“_virtus probata_,” -or _probitas vitæ, positiva nempe, iis virtutibus subnixa, quæ dignum -efficiant altaris ministrum_); especially purity of heart, temperance, -piety, modesty, and zeal;[962] (4) ability to perform the duties of this -station. As, in our days, nearly all who enter the clerical state wish -to become priests also, and by far the greater number of priests have -_cura animarum_, this ability consists in an average mental endowment -and the necessary knowledge, joined to a love of ecclesiastical science, -in prudent judgment and right conscience (very scrupulous youths are -unsuitable). According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus, one who intrudes -himself into the priestly office without a vocation cannot be acquitted -of great presumption, as he exposes himself to the great danger of losing -his own soul and of giving scandal to the faithful. He will, therefore, -not be free from grave sin.[963] But it sometimes happens that those who -were certain of their vocation become doubtful and vacillate; temptations -of the evil one arise and cause confusion; friends and relatives exert -their influences in order to turn them from the spiritual state, joy in -worldly pleasures and diversions makes itself felt; they fear and shrink -from the duties of the office, thinking they will not be able to perform -them, or they believe themselves unworthy to enter such a holy state. -If a confessor finds a penitent tempted in this manner, he must try to -inspire him with courage and confidence, make him understand that every -state in life has its burdens, but that in none is the yoke lighter than -in the one assigned by God. He should point out to him the deceits with -which the enemy of all good and the “father of lies” so often confuses -souls; remind him of the teaching of Jesus, that the kingdom of heaven -suffereth violence and that only the violent carry it away, that he who -will follow Jesus must take up his cross and carry it daily. At the same -time he must recommend prayer and absolute submission to the will of God. - -III. The state of virginity (_status virginitatis in sæculo_). - -If a woman living in the world has a serious wish to preserve virginal -purity, the confessor must confirm and support her in so good and -salutary a resolution, for it is very pleasing to Jesus, the lover of -pure souls. It offers a safer and easier way to holiness, and the state -of virginity by far exceeds in merit and dignity that of matrimony. The -confessor should, however, only allow those to take the vow of _perpetual -virginity_ whom he knows to be truly steadfast in piety and virtue, and -of firm and decided will. As a rule, he should allow younger persons to -take this vow for a short time only at first,—say for six months,—and -afterwards, when they have proved themselves steadfast, and he sees -that it is beneficial to them, he can extend the period to one or two -years, and only later permit them to bind themselves by vow to perpetual -virginity; or he should permit the perpetual vow under a conditional -resolution, such as: “_nisi Confessarius pro tempore judicaverit -expedire, ut votum desinat_.”[964] - -The confessor should give special attention to those penitents who have -really taken the vow of virginity, instructing them not only to be -faithful to their vow, but to lead a perfect life according to their -station and capacity. - -IV. The state of _matrimony_. - -Although the state of virginity possesses a very exalted dignity, the -state of matrimony has divine sanction. The Church has always esteemed it -highly, faithfully following in this respect the example of her divine -Founder, and has always defended the dignity of Christian marriage -wherever it was called for. God has ordained marriage for most men as -their state of life; and, since upon the faithful performance of the -duties of married people depend, not only their own temporal and eternal -welfare, but also that of the family and of society, let the confessor, -when occasion is offered: (1) direct his endeavors to prevent young -people from entering into the state of matrimony too soon, without -preparation, without knowledge of its duties, or capacity to perform -them, and with an impure motive; (2) oppose most energetically those -forbidden and pernicious intimacies which are the worst imaginable -preparation for marriage, and generally the occasion of grave sins, -and tolerate only the acknowledged and necessary intimacies a short -time before the marriage, with due observance of the necessary measures -of precaution; (3) instruct those penitents who have a vocation for -marriage, and wish to enter that state, concerning its duties;[965] (4) -admonish them to inform their parents of their intention to marry, in -order to obtain their advice and assistance. For, as on the one hand, -parents would sin who deterred their children, _sine justa causa_, from -contracting an honorable marriage, so, on the other hand, children would -sin who wished, against the will of their parents, to contract a marriage -calculated to bring shame and dishonor upon a family, without some valid -ground which would constitute an excuse for so doing.[966] - - -77. Betrothal and Marriage. - -“_Maxima prudentia ac zelo hic opus habet Confessarius_,” justly remarks -Scavini, and continues (quoting the “Méthode pour la direction des -ames”), “Les personnes, qui vont se marier ont besoin de plusieurs avis -pour ne rien omettre de leurs devoirs, ne rien faire contre la sainteté -du mariage.” The confessor should particularly observe the following -points: 1. Betrothed persons should not, as a rule, live in the same -house.[967] Let the confessor insist with unrelenting severity in this -matter.[968] - -2. The time of betrothal should be one of preparation for contracting a -marriage well pleasing to God; but it would be a very bad preparation -on the part of the betrothed persons to burden their souls with grave -sins against holy purity. Let the confessor, therefore, admonish them -to preserve themselves free from all sins during this time, especially -from those of impurity; and he has the more reason for giving this -advice because very great dangers threaten their virtue on account of -the intimacy of their relationship, the frequency of their intercourse, -and their mutual inclination; moreover, this time of betrothal is, often -enough, a career of continued sin, and an almost uninterrupted round of -distractions, pleasures, and worldly cares. It often happens that young -women, who before their betrothal led a zealous, religious, and pure -life, become during this time lukewarm and indifferent in the exercises -of piety, in the reception of the holy Sacraments, and even in attendance -at Mass. With this comes carelessness in combating temptation; and moral -perversion, alas! often of the worst kind is the result. Therefore let -the confessor watch, warn, and admonish. - -(_a_) He should explain to them that whatever is forbidden by God in the -sixth and ninth commandments is no more allowed to them than to unmarried -people in general; on the contrary, the prospect of a speedy union, their -mutual love and weakness may lead them into greater temptations and -dangers, and that they should, therefore, be more watchful and careful -now, should pray more than before for the necessary grace and strength -to remain pure, and to be able to approach the altar for the nuptial -ceremony with hearts undefiled. He should also call their attention to -the misfortunes in married life with which God, even here on earth, is -wont to punish sins committed against the sanctity of the Sacrament by -the betrothed. - -(_b_) He should forbid them any too familiar intercourse with each -other, especially _solius cum sola_, in retired places at night or in -the evening. He must not allow them to meet without some attendance -and supervision. How many have been exposed to the greatest dangers by -merely going to the door in the evening, and tainted a virtue which -had been preserved spotless for years. Frequent visiting of engaged -persons without supervision of parents or relations is, in general, to -be regarded and treated as an _immediate_ occasion of sin, and that, -not _per accidens_, but _per se_.[969] St. Alphonsus inveighs severely -against engaged persons and the parents who permit these visits and -familiarities, and defends his severity by appealing to experience.[970] -Moralists teach (and experience confirms their teaching) that too much -familiarity on the part of persons engaged constitutes the very greatest -danger to chastity.[971] Frassinetti’s words are to the point: “Let -parents see that their sons do not meet with too great familiarity, and, -above all, not alone and without witnesses, the young women whom they -think of marrying. I say ‘with too great familiarity,’ for it would be -useless to preach that betrothed persons should never visit one another. -Such visits are partly necessary, in order that there may be mutual -knowledge of one another, before they are joined by the indissoluble -bond of matrimony. Moreover, they would, in any case, wish to visit one -another, on account of their mutual attachment, which, in view of their -future marriage, is not reprehensible.... But the priest must earnestly -impress upon parents the necessity of exercising great watchfulness over -these visits. _Great watchfulness_, in order that the young people may -observe the strictest propriety in their intercourse with each other. -The parents should, therefore, always have them under their observation. -Such visiting should not be prolonged nor be too frequent. For, in these -cases, it cannot be presumed that divine grace will assist the young -people, as such conduct is neither necessary nor becoming; and, on this -account, there will unfailingly be many dangers.” - -(_c_) He should urge speedy marriages, as this will obviate many -temptations and dangers of sin. Protracted engagements are seldom good; -circumstances may supervene which make speedy marriage difficult or -impossible; but if it can take place soon, the confessor must not easily -consent to postponement from slight motives.[972] The cause of the -postponement should be inquired into, and all possible efforts be made -to remove it. Every betrothed person _can_ demand the fulfilment of the -promise of marriage (even in _foro externo_) and the other party is, -_sub gravi_, bound to accede to this demand if he has no valid reason -for refusal or postponement. As postponement of marriage generally -means great moral dangers for the betrothed, it can only be justified -by weighty motives.[973] If one of the parties intends to dissolve the -engagement, the confessor should explain its binding nature. To break off -an engagement out of levity, in momentary anger or on account of some -sudden passion, is wrong, and dishonorable, even if the dissolution be -valid.[974] To make engagements lightly and as lightly to break them is -contrary to the sanctity of matrimony. - -(_d_) He should enjoin zealous prayer, frequent reception of the -Sacraments,[975] and especially a general confession (which will be -useful for all and necessary for many)[976] and good works, that they -may receive the Sacrament of Matrimony worthily, thus laying a solid -foundation for a happy life. But it is not well to defer the confession -till the last hours or minutes before the wedding, and the confessor -should energetically dissuade from this practice, which may cause him -and those about to be married difficulties and embarrassment. In order -to avoid this, and also to contribute to a better preparation, he should -recommend confession (general confession) _before or after the_ first -publication of the banns, and then confession again immediately before -the wedding. - -For if the confession is not made till shortly before the wedding, the -following difficulties may arise: 1. _The penitent may not be disposed -or cannot be rendered disposed._ The confessor will certainly do -everything which zeal for souls and the light of grace suggest, in order -to dispose the penitent for the worthy reception of absolution. But if -the disposition remains doubtful, despite all his endeavors, he may -absolve the penitent _sub conditione_, as the reception of the Sacrament -of Matrimony is a sufficient reason for administering conditional -absolution.[977] If his efforts to dispose the penitent remain -fruitless,—the bridegroom, perhaps, being bad and wishing only to make a -show of receiving the holy Sacraments, influenced by his better disposed -bride, or by relations; or because he will not satisfy some necessary -condition, such as avoiding some immediate occasion, making restitution, -giving up an enmity,—the confessor must refuse absolution. Of course, -such a person may not receive holy communion, and the confessor must -tell him so. As to the reception of the Sacrament of Matrimony, there -are two possible cases to consider: either he does not know that a state -of grace is necessary for the lawful reception of this Sacrament, or he -does know it. If he does not know it, and if the confessor is obliged to -presume (knowing the penitent’s frame of mind) that he would not respect -his admonition concerning the unlawful reception of the Sacrament of -Matrimony in a state of mortal sin, he must leave him in his state of -ignorance and _bona fides_, in order that he may not formally sin. If -the penitent does know that it is not allowed to receive the Sacrament -of Matrimony in mortal sin, the confessor should lay before him in -forcible terms the enormity of the sacrilege of which he will be guilty, -in order, if possible, to bring him to a better disposition. And if this -is of no avail, he should admonish him with suitable prudence, to make an -act of perfect contrition before the marriage, and to come to confession -as soon as possible after it.[978] - -2. Another difficulty arises when the penitent confesses a reserved sin -from which the confessor cannot absolve. As here _gravis causa confitendi -urget_, we are face to face with a case which was discussed earlier -in this work and solved by St. Alphonsus, namely, that any priest can -indirectly absolve from sins reserved to the bishop, and also from those -reserved to the Pope, _si episcopus non possit adiri_; even when the sin -is reserved _cum excommunicatione_.[979] - -3. Finally, another difficulty may arise: the confessor may discover -in the confessional an _impedimentum matrim. occultum ex causa -infamante exortum_; the marriage for which all the preparations have -been made cannot be postponed without disgrace and great detriment to -the parties, and dispensation from the impediment cannot be obtained. -Here the following circumstances have to be taken into consideration: -(_a_) If both parties know the impediment, and have concealed it from -a bad motive, they must, if possible, postpone their marriage till the -dispensation has been obtained. If they are not willing to do this, -the confessor must refuse them absolution. But if they are not able -to postpone the marriage on account of the great disgrace or scandal -which would result, and if they are otherwise in good dispositions, he -can give them absolution; but he must instruct them that they have to -be married before the priest, on the supposition that the Pope will -dispense, then to live merely as brother and sister till the dispensation -has been obtained;[980] after that they must repeat before him their -consent to marry. He must tell them how this has to be done, make it -as easy for them as possible, so as not to deter them. (_b_) If both -parties are ignorant of the impediment, and are quite _bona fide_ and -if the confessor cannot assume that they will live continently till the -dispensation is procured, he should leave them in their ignorance, _bona -fide_, and request a dispensation _pro foro interno_, then proceeding -according to the rules for rendering valid an invalid marriage _in foro -interno_; for it is better to let them commit material sins, than to -furnish them with occasion for formal sins. (_c_) If only one of the -two parties is aware of the obstacle, and, on account of the disgrace -attaching to it, cannot reveal it to the other, a “_communissima et -probabilissima sententia_” of the theologians teaches that the bishop can -grant a dispensation in this case,[981] and recourse must, therefore, -be had to him. If the latter is not possible, the confessor (or parish -priest) can, according to what St. Alphonsus calls the “not unfounded” -teaching of many theologians, declare “_ex Epikeia_” that the _lex -impedimenti_ does not bind in this case, because it would be injurious. -But the confessor must _pro securitate et ad salvandam reverentiam -legibus Ecclesiæ debitam, quantocius_ apply to the Roman Penitentiary, -or to the Ordinary who possesses the quinquennial faculties, in order to -obtain a dispensation. But it is to be carefully observed that only a -secret impediment, arising from a sin, is here in question; for in the -case of a public impediment arising from no dishonorable cause, there is -neither scandal nor disgrace, but only the inconvenience of postponing -the marriage.[982] It depends entirely upon circumstances, since it is -the duty of the pastor to instruct those about to marry, whether the -confessor should give special suggestions and admonition in this last -confession on the _usus matrimonii_,[983] explaining what is allowed -to married people, and what is forbidden.[984] He may speak to them of -the intention which, as Christians, they should have in this state; -of matrimonial harmony and mutual love and fidelity. If the confessor -deems it necessary, or advisable and beneficial, he will not fail in -his zeal for souls to instruct his penitents concerning this matter, -and to admonish them to lead a truly Christian family life, where sin -and vice are carefully avoided, whilst God is being faithfully served. -If matrimony is based upon this foundation, the husband and wife may -confidently expect God’s abundant graces: if they depart from these -principles, they will deprive themselves of this blessing.[985] - - -78. The Confessor’s Attitude toward Mixed Marriages. - -The confessor will often have occasion to speak to penitents concerning -mixed marriages, because they either wish to contract such a marriage, -or have already done so. The following principles will serve him in this -equally important and difficult matter. - -I. Even if the essence of marriage is not destroyed by the obstacle of -mixed religion, as in _disparitas cultus_, it falls short of the ideal. -For marriage should not only represent the unity of the Church; it -should, as much as is possible, produce this unity; now the Church is, -in a special manner, _one_ through its faith. Conscious of this, and in -view of the many great disadvantages which accrue from mixed marriages, -the Church has always energetically protested against them. She has -always taught that such a marriage is a reprehensible _communicatio in -sacris_, that there is danger to the Catholic party of falling away -from religion or of becoming indifferent to it, and that a proper -education in the Catholic faith of children born from such marriage, if -not exactly impossible, is certainly rendered very difficult, as the -necessary coöperation is wanting, and opposition easily made by word and -example.[986] In 1858 the Apostolic See anew admonished the bishops to -deter the faithful from such mixed marriages. - -Only by three conditions will the dangers of mixed marriages be, if not -removed, at least reduced; and only under these three conditions does the -Church, _præsertim ob privatas causas_, permit mixed marriages. These -conditions are: (1) Both parties, especially the non-Catholic, must -promise, ordinarily in writing and before witnesses, to bring up all -their children in the Catholic religion (without distinction of sex). (2) -The non-Catholic party must promise solemnly not to hinder in any way the -Catholic party in the practice of his (or her) religion. (3) The Catholic -must use every lawful means to effect the conversion of the heretical -partner.[987] - -From these three conditions the Church cannot recede,[988] for, as -not only the ecclesiastical, but also the natural and the divine law, -absolutely forbid that anybody expose himself or his offspring to -the danger of perversion, it naturally results that these sureties -should be prescribed and demanded, in order that together with the -canonical precepts, the natural and divine law may not be criminally -transgressed.[989] When these conditions are satisfied, and officially -guaranteed[990] by a contract, dispensation from the _impedimentum mixtæ -religionis_ may then be requested from the bishop, and given by him in -virtue of the usual faculties conferred upon him. - -II. By these regulations of the Church, his _modus procedendi_ in the -matter of a mixed marriage is mapped out for the priest or the confessor. - -1. If the confessor receives information of an intended mixed marriage, -he should emphatically dissuade from it, but with pastoral prudence, and -without offensive words. - -2. If his endeavors are of no avail, and if he cannot prevent the -marriage, he must persuade the penitent to fulfill the stipulated -conditions. - -3. If the penitent agrees to this, the confessor will do well not to -administer absolution at once unless there is some special reason for -so doing (for example, the fulfilment of a commandment of the Church, -necessity of communicating, to prevent gossip, etc.), but let him urge -that the consent of the non-Catholic party to the three conditions should -first be obtained. - -4. When this consent is obtained, there is no obstacle to the absolution -of the penitent. - -5. But if the penitent will not consent to the fulfilment of the three -conditions, but still intends to contract the mixed marriage, he purposes -to commit a grave sin, and cannot be absolved. For he who, without -obtaining a dispensation from the _impedimentum mixtæ religionis_, -contracts a mixed marriage before a non-Catholic minister, is guilty of -three grave sins: he disobeys the Church; he endangers the salvation of -the children which God may give him; he is _hæreseos fautor_, guilty of a -_communicatio in sacris_, and incurs ecclesiastical censure.[991] - -III. Concerning the reconciliation of those persons who, in disobedience -to their Church, have contracted a mixed marriage before a non-Catholic -minister, the confessor must be guided by the following principles:— - -1. It is certain that a Catholic having contracted marriage before a -Protestant clergyman cannot be absolved as long as he remains unwilling -to make good the above-mentioned conditions. Even if the refusal of -absolution does not produce its immediate effect (the fire of passion -obscuring the light of conscience), it, nevertheless, instills salutary -fear. But it would be very wrong on the part of the confessor to wound -such a penitent by harshness and reproaches. The confessor (parish -priest) must take all pains to bring such penitents to a consciousness of -their error.[992] - -2. But if the penitent truly repents of his error, and if he is ready to -make good the scandal given, and to take immediate steps towards bringing -up his children as Catholics, he is worthy of absolution and it may not -be refused to him. - -3. It is, above all, necessary to find out if the marriage was valid -according to the Decree _Tametsi_. If the marriage has been invalidly -contracted, a dispensation from the _impedimentum mixtæ religionis_ and -from the banns is to be sought; and when this is obtained, according to -the regulations of the Church, the consent is to be renewed. If this -renewal of consent cannot be effected, _sanatio in radice_ must be -requested.[993] If the marriage is valid, dispensation is not necessary. - -4. Moreover, the _facultas absolvendi a censuris propter hæresim_ must -be obtained. For the censure reserved _speciali modo_ to the Pope is, -according to an explicit decision of Rome, incurred in _all cases_ by -those _qui matrimonium coram ministro hæretico ineunt_; even when the -existence of censure was not known to the parties, because it is a -question of the _forum externum_, and the contract of marriage is, of -its nature, an external act. By virtue, however, of the quinquennial -faculties, the bishop can absolve from this censure, or confer this power -_subdelegando_ upon others. The confessor must, therefore, refer the -penitent to the parish priest, in order that the latter may procure from -the bishop the _facultas absolvendi a censuris pro foro externo_. Not -till then can the confessor give sacramental absolution. - -Only when, from _special reasons_, determined by the circumstances, an -_absolutio in foro externo_ would not be advisable, may the confessor -apply for the _facultas absolvendi a censuris pro foro interno_, and -administer this absolution after he has obtained the faculty. We add that -absolution from the censure _in foro externo_ can take place without -witnesses, and that it is not necessary to make use of definite words at -the absolution _in utroque foro_, but it is always necessary to declare -that the absolution is administered by virtue of special powers from the -Holy See, subdelegated by the bishop. - -Married people who were allowed to receive the Sacraments before the -promulgation of the answer of the Holy Office, 18 May, 1892, requiring -the _absolutio a censuris pro foro externo_, are not to be disturbed. - -5. The confessor should also help a penitent of this kind to keep his -resolution of bringing up his children as Catholics, by showing him -what steps he must take. He should encourage him to overcome possible -difficulties which may occur. This will be easier for the Catholic father -than the mother. If the children have reached an age when they are -removed from parental authority, the Catholic party must at least promise -to exert its influence by prayer, exhortation and good example, to gain -the children for the Catholic Church.[994] - -Of course the confessor must demand that the penitent should inform his -parish priest of his resolution to bring up the children in the Catholic -faith. Only very weighty grounds should induce the confessor to refrain -from exacting this, and then he would be obliged to apply to his Ordinary -for advice. - -6. It may also be the case that a woman repents of the step which she -took, but which she cannot now retrace, not being able, in spite of her -good will, to induce her husband to consent to the Catholic education of -the children. It would be hard, in such a case, to leave her unassisted. -The repentance which she has evidenced, the willingness which she has -shown (and which will continue) to repair as far as possible the harm -done; the efforts which she may have already made; the promise to -influence husband and children by the means at her disposal—prayer, -a good life, words of advice—suffice for her to be admitted to the -Sacraments. This satisfies the demands which the Holy Office in Rome -makes in such cases.[995] - -7. If the confessor believes that there is reason for doubting the -sincere and earnest will of penitents who are joined by an illicit mixed -marriage, he is free to make inquiry, and, according to the nature of -the case, to postpone absolution for a time. It is always well not to -admit such penitents to the holy Sacraments shortly after contracting -the illicit marriage, unless they have guaranteed the Catholic education -of their children in a manner which satisfies the ecclesiastical -regulations; unless, moreover, they show sorrow for their lapse from -duty, and by faithful performance of their religious obligations, -effectually prove that they wish to be obedient to the Catholic Church -in future. Persons who are dangerously ill, emigrants, etc., of course, -constitute exceptions to this rule. - -8. An illicit marriage contracted by a Catholic before a non-Catholic -minister is a public act and causes public scandal; the satisfaction -must, therefore, as a rule, be made publicly. The confessor must not -overlook this, lest he make himself an accomplice in the scandal, and -lest this dreadful evil of our days (for such mixed marriages are in -reality, especially when contracted without dispense) be rendered more -numerous, by want of due severity in the conditions of reconciliation. As -public acts of reparation may be regarded: an oral or written declaration -of sorrow before the parish priest; the promise of bringing up their -children as Catholics made to the pastor. The confessor should follow the -directions which may have been given by his bishop in this matter, and if -there are none, he must proceed with pastoral prudence and charity. It -may happen that, in the place where the Sacraments are to be received, -the scandal given is not known, the parties having changed their place -of residence. In this case the reconciliation may take place in all -privacy. The confessor should not forget in such cases that the salvation -of souls is the highest law. - - -79. How to deal with Penitents joined in “Civil” Marriage only. - -The confessor’s treatment of _penitents living in “civil” matrimony_ must -be essentially different from the above. - -Here the chief question is whether there is a real _consensus maritalis_; -that is, whether the persons in question had the consciousness and -intention of entering upon a true matrimonial relationship by the -declaration which they made before the public official, or if they -believed they were concluding an external agreement only and one not -permanently binding upon the conscience. In the second place, the -confessor must investigate if there are any—and what—impediments to -marriage. If there are no diriment impediments, and if there was -a true _consensus maritalis_ in those places where the Tridentine -Decree “_Tametsi_” is not in force (therefore, where the _impedimentum -clandestinitatis_ does not apply), such informal contract of marriage -must be regarded as valid. On the other hand, these informal marriages -are ecclesiastically invalid in all places where the Tridentine Decree -is in force, on account of the “_impedimentum clandestinitatis_.” The -confessor must, however, in every individual case have recourse to the -Ordinary. - -Apart from this question of validity, all persons living in mere “civil” -matrimony must be exhorted (if no obstacle from which there is no -dispensation be in the way) to be married in _forma Tridentina_, and to -receive the blessing of the Church. If difficulties arise in connection -with this, the confessor should apply to the bishop, in order to obtain -_sanatio in radice_, according to the circumstances. - -A penitent living in “civil” marriage is not to be absolved till he has -promised to be married in the Church and has actually made preparation -for this marriage. Under particular circumstances—if the persons live -apart—absolution can be given, even if the ceremony is postponed. -Admission to holy communion must be deferred till immediately before the -marriage. - - -80. The Confessor’s Conduct towards Women. - -Occasion has already several times[996] presented itself for remarks -concerning the confessor’s conduct when hearing the confessions of -women. The importance of the subject demands for it special treatment. -Amongst penitents women probably form nearly always the majority. However -regrettable it may be that men so seldom, and often reluctantly, approach -the tribunal of confession, it is a source of joy that women should be -zealous in the reception of the holy Sacraments, for this justifies the -hope that their influence upon their husbands and upon those around them -will be the more salutary. The influence which a truly Christian woman -exercises upon her husband, a mother upon her children, the mistress of -a house upon her subordinates, is very great. Truly Christian, pious, -and chaste young women are a real blessing in a family and a household. -Moreover, woman is generally more inclined to the exercise of Christian -piety, and can thus, if properly treated and guided, attain to great -perfection. - -Nevertheless, it is not to be overlooked that, owing to certain -weaknesses and faults which are peculiar to their sex, the hopes of the -confessor are not infrequently disappointed and his endeavors rendered -fruitless. “Their piety may easily become a matter of feeling, without -solidity and worth; they are much inclined to form an inordinate -attachment for the confessor, which is perhaps not free from a sensual -element. The practice of piety also easily serves as a means of -gratifying vanity. Many are disposed to dissimulation and hypocrisy.”[997] - -Hearing the confessions of women is thus indisputably one of the greatest -and most imminent dangers for the confessor. He must, therefore, be very -circumspect and prudent, reasonably fear this danger, for in this fear -lies his safety; “he who fears this rock runs no danger of suffering -shipwreck.”[998] These shortcomings ought not to mislead us into -condemning the whole sex, as is sometimes wrongly done. This is unjust. -We must help them to overcome their faults, and if no improvement results -from our endeavors, suitable severity is to be employed. - -Bearing in mind the exhortation (Eccl. lxi. 15): “_Curam habe de bono -nomine_,” the circumspect and prudent confessor will have regard for his -good name, and seek to preserve and guard it; not only remaining pure -of heart, but preserving himself free from every suspicion of impurity, -herein faithfully following the example of Our Lord, who patiently bore -many an accusation leveled against Him, but never tolerated any on the -subject of purity. For nothing detracts so much from a priest’s authority -and efficiency as the suspicion that he is not absolutely clean of -heart. Let the confessor, therefore, place a guard upon his eyes, let -him never look at those who stand before his confessional, and never -glance at the face of the person whose confession he hears; he should -not try to find out who his female penitents are; it is sufficient for -him to know the state of their souls. He should carefully avoid, as far -as it is possible, all intercourse with them outside the confessional, -not visiting them in their houses, except at times of severe illness; -he should refuse _munuscula_ under whatever name they may be offered to -him; he should confide no secrets to them, and avoid familiarity.[999] -His words should be reserved, serious, respectful, even if the -penitent’s station and circumstances do not actually command respect. -When the priest hears the confessions of young women, and such as are -distinguished by station, beauty, education, etc., he must still more -carefully avoid familiarity. Concerning delicate matters the confessor -should put only few questions, and then only with the greatest prudence, -and content himself with knowing the nature of the sin, or its kind; he -should carefully guard against inquiring after superfluous details.[1000] - -The confessor must not lose sight of the dictates of prudence which -have been discussed, when he hears the confessions of “_personæ -spirituales_.” Here, as St. Alphonsus warns us,[1001] prudence is -most necessary, on account of the _periculum majoris adhæsionis_. His -teaching on this point is as follows: “_Dicebat Ven. P. Sertorius -Capotus, diabolum ad conjungendas inter se personas spirituales, ab -initio uti prætextu virtutis, ut deinde affectus a virtute transeat ad -personam_,” and justifies this statement by a word of St. Augustine, -which St. Thomas quotes (Opusc. 64 de Famil. Dom. etc.): “Speech with -these persons must be short and reserved; it is not because they are -more holy that one must be more on his guard, but because the holier -they are, the more attractive they become.” And St. Thomas adds to -these significant words of the holy Bishop of Hippo: “_Licet carnalis -affectio sit omnibus periculosa ipsis tamen magis perniciosa, quando -conversantur cum persona, quæ spiritualis videtur; nam quamvis principium -videatur purum, tamen frequens familiaritas domesticum est periculum; -quæ quidem familiaritas quanto plus crescit, infirmatur principale -motivum et puritas maculatur._” He also adds that such persons do not -observe this at once, _quoniam diabolus ab initio non emittit sagittas -venenatas, sed illas tantummodo, quæ aliquantulum feriunt et augent -affectum. Sed brevi hujusmodi personæ eo deveniunt, ut non amplius agant -secum tanquam angeli, quemadmodum cœperant, sed tanquam carne vestiti; -vicissim se intuentur mentesque sibi feriunt blandis allocutionibus, -quæ adhuc a prima devotione videntur procedere: hinc alter alterius -præsentiam incipit appetere; sicque spiritualis devotio convertitur -in carnalem. Et quidem oh quot sacerdotes, qui antea erant innocentes -ob similes adhæsiones, quæ spiritu cœperant, Deum simul et spiritum -perdiderunt_.[1002] - -In order to act with the necessary prudence, the confessor will (1) hear -the confessions of women, as far as possible, only in the Church, or in -some place which is always accessible for hearing confessions; (2) he -will dispatch matters, especially with those who often confess; will not -tolerate talk about subjects which do not belong to the confession, and -will carefully avoid long exhortations and unnecessary questions. - -The confessor must observe all this, and take all precautionary -measures,—if he is young, because it is then particularly necessary, but -also in more advanced years, and even in old age, in order to give others -good example, and also because experience shows that even for those who -are mature and old, the danger exists, though it be lessened. “If the -confessor follows these precepts, he realizes in himself a miracle, -which is one of the most beautiful proofs of the truth of the Catholic -religion; the miracle, namely, that priests who preserve their hearts in -the holy fear of God, hear the confessions of women for years without -ever having to accuse themselves that their holy office has been for them -an occasion of sin, even of one single sin.”[1003] - -If the penitents are _married women_, let the confessor encourage and -instruct them in the complete fulfilment of their duties towards their -husbands, above all, their duty of matrimonial love, giving a good -example, bearing faults with patience, and not ceasing, though their -husbands have gone astray, to use every endeavor to reform them, -especially by praying for them with indefatigable zeal. How many wives -have saved their husbands by their patience, their loving, prudent -exhortations, and their prayers. - -If circumstances appear to call for it, let him admonish them to preserve -matrimonial chastity, and warn against transgressions, pointing out that -complete preservation of this matrimonial chastity is the very condition -and foundation of lasting matrimonial happiness, and of eternal salvation. - -He should not permit pious women to devote themselves to the exercises -of piety, especially hearing Mass and frequent reception of the holy -Sacraments, to such an extent that important household duties are thereby -neglected, or members of the family aggrieved and irritated. - -Finally, he must not be overready to believe complaints of wives about -their husbands; but if he finds that the complaints are justified, he -will tell the woman how to act and gravely comfort her. If she complains -of the severity and bad temper of her husband, he must advise her to -remain patient and obedient to him, to perform punctually every service -which he desires, to show her love for him by the greatest willingness -and kindness; to be silent when her husband is angry or intoxicated; not -to drive him to still greater violence even when she suffers injustice; -and admonish him affectionately when he has become calm, and sober, and -good-humored, but not till then. She should answer her angry husband with -meekness when she is _obliged_ to answer him, for a gentle answer turns -aside wrath, whereas a harsh one only embitters. - -The _mother_ will claim the confessor’s special zeal; he should expose -to her the importance and responsibility of her duties, the obligation -of admonishing and instructing her children in prayer, in attendance at -Mass, reception of the holy Sacraments, and of correcting their faults; -of warning and protecting her children against the dangers which threaten -youth, of daily praying for them, of preventing dangerous intercourse -with other persons, of not allowing children of different sex to sleep -together, etc. - -As so much depends upon the loyalty of _teachers, male and female_, to -their duties the confessor will not fail to admonish them at all times -to discharge faithfully these important and exalted duties, reminding -them of their grave responsibility. Teachers should zealously instruct -children in the truths of religion, always assisting the endeavors of -the priest according to their capacity, and working with him; see that -the education of the children is conducted upon Christian principles; -give the children and the parish good example by conscientious discharge -of their religious duties—attendance at Mass, reception of the holy -Sacraments, and by their conduct in general. They must be encouraged to -bear patiently the manifold, and by no means slight, hardships of their -position. The confessor will also show constant interest in their work in -the school. - -The mistress of a house must be reminded by the confessor of the duties -of Christian employers—the duty especially of having a watchful eye -on the servants, not allowing them to go out late in the evening; of -preventing male and female servants being together at unseasonable times; -of treating servants in a Christian manner, and of giving them sufficient -time to fulfill their religious obligations. - - -81. The Confessions of Men. - -It is a deplorable fact that men approach the confessional more seldom -than women, and especially since their position in life is more -influential, and consequently a high degree of piety is particularly -desirable in them, in order that this influence may be a salutary one. At -the same time, they are exposed to greater dangers and temptations.[1004] - -1. Men must, therefore, be more welcome to the confessor as penitents -than women. St. Alphonsus bewails the fact that so many confessors spend -a good part of the day in hearing the confessions of certain pious -persons (_quas vulgo dicunt Bizocas_), and that when men or married -women, who are weighed down with misery and distress, and who at a great -sacrifice leave their homes and business, approach the confessional, -the priest dismisses them, saying: “Go to some other confessor, I have -too much to do”; and thus it comes to pass that such people live months -and years without the Sacraments. This is not hearing confessions to -please God, but rather to serve self-love. I know, and, in opposition -to others who maintain that the time is wasted which is devoted to the -confessions of these pious persons, I firmly hold that leading souls to -perfection is a work very pleasing to God; but I assert also that good -confessors who hear confessions only to please God (like St. Philip Neri, -St. John of the Cross, and St. Peter of Alcantara) do not hesitate to -prefer to these pious souls one whom they perceive to be in need of their -help.[1005] What St. Alphonsus says in another place is also undoubtedly -true, namely, that a perfect soul is more pleasing to God than a thousand -imperfect ones; but for them there are other times and other occasions, -and even leading souls to perfection does not demand such expenditure of -time and care that others should be neglected. Moreover, such a manner -of administering the Sacrament of Penance may easily give occasion to -malevolent misconstructions and rumors, and thus scandalize the men who -see themselves neglected.[1006] Hence men who come to confession must not -be kept waiting long. The confessor should show himself ready to answer -any call, even when the hour is unseasonable and troublesome to him. -If there are both men and women who wish to confess, Frassinetti[1007] -recommends hearing the men first; they generally have more important -business than women, and are also as a rule more impatient. Women have -more leisure and greater patience. - -2. The confessor must always treat men courteously, “indeed with a -certain affability, as if he considered himself particularly fortunate, -and took a special pleasure in hearing their confessions.” Even if they -belong to the lowest classes and are coarse and repulsive, he should -always address them with politeness and kindness. “One can never show -them too much love and friendliness, for it makes the best impression -upon their minds, encourages them to make a good confession, and -in course of time incites them to a more frequent reception of the -Sacraments.”[1008] - -3. The confessor must not speak of perfection to those who have no -understanding for it. He must generally be content with instilling into -their hearts hatred and detestation of mortal sin. “This is necessary, -lest they regard him as what they call a ‘saint,’ and be afraid to come -to him again.” But the confessor must not go too far in his indulgence, -nor permit to the men who are his penitents, anything which might become -a great danger for their souls; he must here be particularly careful -concerning circumstances in their lives which are to them _occasiones -proximæ_. - -4. The confessor must urge them to fulfill their duties as Christian men -faithfully, punctually, and fervently. - -5. He should especially warn them against negligence in prayer, admonish -them to observe Sundays and holy days conscientiously, and particularly -to be present at sermons, as those who seldom or never hear a sermon will -hardly persevere in a truly Christian life. - -6. Then if it be opportune, he should enjoin moderation in drinking, in -case they have been guilty of drunkenness. - -7. If he has reason to doubt the firmness and integrity of their faith, -in which they may be remiss, he must probe into the matter; perhaps he -will have to censure the reading of bad newspapers, or the frequenting of -doubtful society. - -8. Upon husbands he should impress the duty of cultivating a loving and -peaceable disposition towards their wives, and, if there is reason for -it, the duty of avoiding all impropriety in married life. He should, -especially, denounce the evil habit of carrying on improper talk in the -presence of servants, companions, young people, and in the home circle. - -9. Fathers should be earnestly admonished to assist their wives as much -as possible in the work of education, and to set their children a good -example in every respect. - - -82. The Confession of Nuns.[1009] - -1. We have already stated that a priest requires special approbation -from the bishop to hear the confession of nuns.[1010] But in order -to discharge this office fruitfully, he must be well instructed and -experienced in spiritual things, prudent, and possessed of great charity -and patience. As already pointed out, proficiency in theology, especially -in moral theology, is indispensable to all confessors; “but greater -knowledge is necessary to the confessors of nuns, since the Church -exercises greater care in selecting them.” Without solid knowledge, -the unusual circumstances which may arise are often mismanaged and not -rarely with fatal results. The confessor of nuns must possess an accurate -knowledge of the spiritual and ascetic life, of the duties of religious -in general,[1011] and of the particular obligations of the Order (or -Congregation) to which the women committed to his care belong. First of -all, distinction is to be made between nuns who lead a contemplative and -those who lead an active life. The former are devoted in a special manner -to the love of God, are far removed from the dangers of the world, and -can more easily sanctify themselves; they also contribute toward the -general welfare by their prayers; but they are tried by temptations and -interior struggles. The others are not wholly withdrawn from the dangers -of the world, as they are inevitably brought into contact with it by the -exercise of the works of charity; society benefits much by their high -merits. Both forms of life are ordained by God, and are of great use in -the Church. Moreover, the separate Orders have their characteristics, -corresponding to the particular object for which they were founded. With -these, and with the constitutions of the Order, the confessor must be -familiar. - -But in _rebus spiritualibus_ he must not only possess theoretical -knowledge, he must be _well experienced_ in them, “because _spiritualia_ -cannot be rightly and perfectly understood without personal experience.” -If this experience is not possessed, he will be a blind man leading the -blind.[1012] - -Supernatural love and patience are necessary to the confessor, in -order that he may zealously further the spiritual progress of those -committed to him, and bear with equanimity their faults, weaknesses, -and deficiencies. And though only a few souls may be confided to his -spiritual care, let him not forget that by the perfection of a few a -greater honor is shown to God than by the imperfect endeavors and virtues -of many. Let him also keep in mind that those who devote themselves to -the service of God have to endure more temptations of every kind than -others, and that he to whom the spiritual care of them is intrusted -must bear no small portion of this burden with them. If, therefore, the -confessor does not possess the supernatural love of God and his neighbor -which enables him to sustain these trials, he is not suited for his -office. - -2. It must be his care that the nuns disclose to him the state of their -consciences with full confidence; they must place great trust in their -confessor, as he is almost their only refuge; and, like sheep without a -shepherd, they will be exposed to many anxieties and temptations if this -support fail them. He must, therefore, always show great patience and -gentleness towards all, and if he perceive in a nun a certain shyness in -the confessional which hinders her from making known her interior state, -he must lend her special assistance in laying aside this shyness; but at -the same time there is a certain kind of unnecessary tenderness which he -should avoid in his whole demeanor. - -3. It must also be his care that nuns observe their vows faithfully and -perfectly, and adhere to the special rules and regulations of their -institute; moreover, that they perform their exercises of piety with -devotion and zeal, that their daily occupations are executed with a -perfect intention, with frequent recollection of the presence of God. -They must, therefore, be taught a good method of meditation and of the -examination of conscience (_examen generale_ and _particulare_), the -manner of receiving holy communion, making a good confession, hearing -holy Mass, saying the Office, and other vocal prayers. All these things -are generally provided, however, in the religious rule. - -4. He must make it his concern that the nuns should advance in virtue. -The following virtues are especially necessary for them: (_a_) the love -of God, not a sensual love, but a strong love, one which urges to the -fulfilment of the will of God, in all things, even the most difficult; -(_b_) humility and modesty; (_c_) obedience to rules and to superiors; a -sacrificing, cheerful, punctual obedience, which does not ask a reason -for the command, but which, when no sin is apparent and certain, blindly -submits itself; (_d_) love of the members of the community, which has -for a practical result that they avoid wounding or grieving others, -that offenses are gladly forgiven, faults patiently borne, and mutual -assistance rendered, as far as is possible; (_e_) chastity, which avoids -every dangerous attachment and familiarity. - -5. The confessor should encourage and promote the authority of the -Superioress of the convent, but not to such an extent that, if she should -happen to be in error or to go beyond her powers, he should render -himself inaccessible to the complaints of the subordinates; he should -discourage the spirit of grumbling in the community, because authority is -thereby weakened; but he should prudently weigh complaints which may be -laid before him, to see if they are justified, and so remedy them; others -he must dismiss. - -6. In his capacity of confessor, he must observe the following points: -(_a_) to associate with the nuns rather too seldom than too often, and if -he is obliged to speak to them, let it be done as briefly as possible; -(_b_) in answering questions submitted to him, he should not be too -hasty, but in more important matters or cases of doubt, he should request -time for consideration; (_c_) in the confessional he should show no -weariness, no impatience, and no haste, for this lessens confidence in -him; (_d_) he must not be immoderately disturbed, nor take scandal if he -should hear a sin of greater gravity in the confessional, for he must -remember that persons dedicated to God are subject to violent attacks -from the evil one; let him, therefore, rather show pity than agitation, -admonish the erring one with paternal earnestness, encourage her, -reawaken her lost fervor, in order that by greater zeal and mortification -she may atone for her error and avoid sin in the future; (_e_) he should -be very careful to give no ground for any suspicion that he makes use of -knowledge gained in the confessional, in his actions or words outside -the confessional; (_f_) he must not interfere at all in the management -of the house, nor in any matter which concerns the Ordinary or the -Superioress, nor readily give advice in such things, but remain firmly -and strictly within the limits of his office, looking after the spiritual -welfare and the progress of his penitents. For this reason, he should -introduce no innovations, and if, on weighty grounds some change appears -desirable, it should not take place without the advice and consent of the -Superioress and the greater part of the community; otherwise peace in the -community will be destroyed. - -7. The confessor must be especially on his guard against the following -abuses, lest they creep in, and establish themselves: (_a_) everything -which is detrimental to community life, or derogatory of the vow of -poverty in any way, even if only in slight measure; (_b_) disobedience -towards the Superioress, murmuring against her, complaining about her -to the other sisters, aversion, etc.; (_c_) offenses against charity, -even if these latter are common and not of grave nature; the confessor -must not tolerate the least offense against charity which is committed -with deliberation, and he must firmly insist upon reconciliation and -suppression of antipathies; (_d_) particular friendship, even if there -be no danger connected with it, is to be avoided, for it divides the -heart, hinders familiar intercourse with God, lessens the love of the -community, and gives occasion to complaints and recriminations; (_e_) -familiarity with, or voluntary intercourse with, persons not belonging to -the house; this causes great dangers, and weakens the religious spirit. -The confessor must, therefore, strictly insist upon the inclosure being -observed, and upon the portress being thoroughly trustworthy. If there -are nuns whose duties oblige them to be in contact with the world, or -who are occupied out of the house attending to the sick, the confessor -must see that danger of sin does not result to any one of them through -this occupation; (_f_) lukewarmness and spiritual sloth; the confessor -must direct his endeavors to prevent drooping of the first ardor, and to -encourage the practice of true piety; he should, therefore, insist that -the prescribed recollections take place regularly and are well observed; -also that there is a Retreat every year, or at least every two years. - -8. In order that the Superioress may duly exercise her office, the -confessor should, when occasion offers, admonish her that: (_a_) -she must love all her sisters as her daughters without making any -distinction; and she must, therefore, gladly lend her ear to any one of -them, and help her to the best of her ability; (_b_) she must not at once -credit reports made secretly to her, but carefully investigate them, and -if she has to reprimand, it should generally be done privately; (_c_) she -must take care that the regular Observance is strictly fulfilled, and she -herself must be a model for all; (_d_) if she perceives abuses, she must -rectify them in a prudent manner; (_e_) she must look to it that members -of the Order who are sick are carefully tended and often visited by the -other sisters; (_f_) in the expenses she must avoid both avarice and -extravagance; (_g_) in admitting and dismissing novices she must exercise -great prudence; (_h_) in unusual circumstances she must have timely -recourse to the advice of the _Ordinarius_; (_i_) she must be guided -by the Papal Decree in the matter of the account of conscience. (The -constitutions of many Orders permitted the unfolding of the conscience to -the Superior, in order to obtain help and advice, but “a more intimate -investigation of the conscience, such as is reserved solely to the -Sacrament of Penance,” was wrongly introduced by some. In consequence -of which Pope Leo XIII strictly forbade Superioresses, whatever rank -and eminence they might occupy, to induce persons under them, directly -or indirectly, by command, advice, threats, or kind words, to make such -revelation of conscience to them. On the other hand, the Pope leaves it -to subordinates voluntarily and freely to disclose their interior state -to their Superiors, so that, in doubt and trouble of conscience, they may -receive from their wisdom advice and guidance);[1013] (_k_) finally, she -must never encroach on the rights of the regular confessor by determining -for individual sisters the number of weekly communions.[1014] - - -83. The Confession of Priests. - -A good confessor is very necessary for a priest. The priest instructs, -warns, and guides others; he himself is seldom admonished and warned, -and yet for him, too, reproof, instruction, and warning are sometimes -necessary. And who should give it but his confessor? The latter has a -solemn duty to do so. And does not the priest, too, sometimes require -encouragement and comfort, especially if he finds himself in a difficult -situation, or is troubled with anxiety? And here the confessor must come -to his assistance and comfort him. - -Hearing the confessions of priests is a matter of the highest importance, -as priests are appointed by God shepherds, teachers, and guides of souls; -they are the light of the world and the salt of the earth. A worthy -priest effects much good amongst the faithful by a holy, pious, pure, -virtuous, and zealous life! But how harmful is the lukewarmness, the -neglect of duty, the levity of one who by his faults and open sins gives -scandal to the people. What a great and significant task is it for the -confessor to teach, rouse, warn, threaten, and encourage his brother in -the holy priesthood! - -Let the confessor treat his penitent with reverence; although the -latter kneels before him to accuse himself as a sinner, he is still a -priest, clothed with exalted dignity. He must also treat him with true, -fraternal, zealous and courageous _love_, which discloses the wounds of -the soul, points out dangers and evil inclinations, blames when blame is -necessary, and punishes when punishment is necessary. It would, indeed, -be rendering bad service to a fellow-priest simply to listen to him, to -give him a few general exhortations, and then to absolve him. - -If the penitent is a conscientious, well-instructed priest (which may -without difficulty be inferred from the manner of the confession, if -he is not already known to the confessor), it is not necessary to put -questions to him; if the confessor has doubts as to the gravity of -a sin confessed, he can ask the penitent if he thought that he was -committing a mortal sin. The exhortation, however, should scarcely ever -be omitted; let it be short and appropriate; it may be given in indirect -form, “we priests,” etc. If the penitent is frivolous and superficial, -questions must be put to him, in order to complete his confession. These -questions may turn on the recitation of the Office, the celebration of -Mass, administration of the Sacraments, and other priestly and pastoral -duties.[1015] - -Toward such penitents the confessor must be fearless, and administer -to them, whoever they may be, regardless of rank, esteem, and dignity, -reproof, and refuse absolution, if necessary; for example, when they are -_occasionarii_ or relapsing sinners. St. Alphonsus adds: _Potissimum hac -fortidudine agendum est cum sacerdotibus, qui in gravia peccata relapsi, -quin se unquam emendaverint, ausi sunt tamen celebrare, aucupando -absolutionem ab aliquo confessariorum qui hoc funguntur officio et -laborant, ut damnentur. Hi sacerdotes pravis habitibus detenti palam -solent in sacristia confiteri, ut absolutionem, quæ eis denegenda esset, -extorqueant sub prætextu scandali, quod eveniret (quemadmodum illi -exponunt), si a celebrando desistere deberent. Sit constans confessarius -cum hujusmodi sacrilegis in differenda absolutione, eos adstringat ad -repetendas confessiones tanquam irritas, et ad confitendum de omnibus -Sacrificiis celebratis: et interim ad abstinendum a celebratione, -usquedum suæ emendationis perspicua indicia præbebunt. Quod si quis -diceret, ob scandalum a celebrando abstinere non posse, respondeat quod -deesse non possunt justi prætextus, si vellet desistere a celebrando; -ceterum si ipse id facere renuit, dicat quod celebrare potest si est -certus, se habere contritionem, sed quod ipse pro tunc non potest eum -absolvere, dum certus non est, ut oportet, de ejus dispositione; imo -justum habet motivum credendi oppositum, cum observet tot lapsus sine -emendatione. Et hoc modo agendi potest sperari, fore ut recipiscat et -salvetur ille miser sacerdos, secus ambo damnabuntur._[1016] - -But the priest (especially a young one) must not be bewildered if an -unfortunate brother priest, burdened with grave sins, approaches him to -make his confession. Let him remember that there was a Judas amongst the -apostles; that the chief of the apostles was guilty of a very grave sin; -let him also bear in mind the words of the Lord: _Necesse est, ut veniant -scandala_ (Matt. xviii. 7). - -As to the _exhortations_ which the confessor should give to priest -penitents, they should be chiefly: (1) to remember their calling, their -exalted dignity, their duties, their reward; (2) to devote themselves -wholly to their sublime office, to labor for the salvation of souls, -and for the glory of God by their prayers, their example, and the -exercise of the sacred ministry; to have special care for the sick and -dying, the poor and the young; (3) to avoid, especially, four vices, as -being, above all, unworthy of their spiritual calling and presenting -particular dangers for priests,—sloth, impurity, drunkenness, and -avarice (covetousness). The priest must often renew his purpose of -leading a virtuous life and of striving to obtain perfection. This -resolution always revives the priest’s zeal in the performance of his -sacred functions, gives joy in the exercise of virtue, strength to resist -temptations, and perseverance in his efforts. But that the priest may be -true to this resolution, he must employ various means, especially:— - -1. Zeal in prayer; the priest must be a man of prayer; he must practice -mental and vocal prayer. _Sine oratione mentali difficillime bonus -erit Sacerdos; nam sine ea intellectus carebit lumine, quo cognoscat -veritates æternas et mysteria divini amoris, atque inde deerit in -voluntate calor fervoris, quo novatur ad sancte vivendum._[1017] The -priest should, therefore, fix a definite time everyday—at least a quarter -of an hour, if at all possible, half an hour—during which to devote -himself to meditation. Morning is the best time, as one is less exposed -to distractions then than in the midst of the occupations and cares of -the day. Those who answer, however, that they have no time for daily -meditation should consider if their lukewarmness and carelessness are -not much more to blame than want of time. If they gave up superfluous -pleasures, visiting, and other unnecessary things, or at least reduced -them, they would certainly be able to spare a quarter of an hour on most -days for meditation.[1018] - -Not less necessary for the priest is oral prayer. _Clama ad me et ego -exaudiam_, says the Lord (Jerem. xxxiii. 3); for if it is certain that -the priest daily requires new graces, it is also certain that he must ask -for them daily. Besides the priest is the mediator between God and His -people, and therefore must supplicate for them. “_Absit a me poc peccatum -in Dominum, ut cessem orare pro vobis_” 1 Kings xii. 23 (Samuel); “_Et -rogante pro eis Sacerdote, propitius erit eis Dominus_” (Lev. iv. 20). - -2. Of all the prayers that the priest must say, none is more excellent, -with the exception of the holy Mass, none is more efficacious than the -_Officium divinum_. Let the priest say it punctually, faithfully, with -recollection and with pleasure. - -3. The center of the sacred ministry is the celebration of the holy -sacrifice. For this most holy mystery he should prepare himself with -care, celebrate it with the greatest possible purity of heart, interior -devotion, and exterior reverence, and with careful observance of the wise -precepts of the Church which bind under grave sin (_ex genere suo_). The -priest must be on his guard against three chief faults in the celebration -of Mass: celebration in _haste_, out of _custom_, and _in a state of -grave sin_. - -4. Another means of sanctification is _frequent confession_. At least -every eight days the priest should make a good confession, and only -on account of great distance from a confessor should he delay it a -fortnight. So St. Charles Borromeo determined in the first provincial -council and in his celebrated Instructions. But the priest should -also observe the other advice of this enlightened Saint (_in Decretis -visitatoris_): _Valde utile esset, ut Sacerdos unusquisque ... certum -ac firmum Confessarium Sacerdotem haberet ex approbatis, a quo nisi in -magna necessitate recederet; si quidem animæ solet non minus obesse -Confessariorum mutatio, quam corpori Medicorum._ - -5. The good priest loves the _study of wisdom_, and observes the -admonition which St. Paul gave to his pupil, Timothy: _Attende tibi et -doctrinæ; insta in illis. Hoc enim faciens te ipsum salvum facies et -eos qui te audiunt_ (1 Tim. iv. 13, 16). Continual, zealous study of -theology alone enables the priest to do his duty, to be a teacher of the -people in the science of salvation, and to administer the holy Sacrament -of Confession rightly and successfully; at the same time it preserves -him from many evils and dangers, and it is to him a source of exalted -pleasure. - -6. Another means which contributes much to sanctification is to be found -in the _Exercitia spiritualia_, which priests should make every year, at -least every two years. Immense is the blessing which results to the whole -Church and to the individual priests who zealously perform them in the -right spirit and in the right manner.[1019] - - - - -CHAPTER III - -PENITENTS IN EXTREME DANGER - - -84. The Importance of the Priest’s Ministry at the Bedside of the Sick -and the Dying. - -As the grace of perseverance and eternal salvation depends upon a good -death, as a bad death can never be remedied, and as man’s helplessness is -never greater than in that terrible last struggle, in which a thousand -things disturb and confuse him, the bitterest pains afflict and the most -violent temptations beset him, it is a work most pleasing to God, and -most conducive to the salvation of souls, to bring spiritual aid to the -sick and dying. The good, zealous priest is an ardent friend of the sick -and the dying, following in this the example of our divine Savior (Matt. -ix. 35). It was always the glory of Catholic priests that they were to be -found at the bedside of the sick and the dying, making no distinction, -and undeterred by the worst infectious diseases. And when all flee, the -priest remains and is prepared to sacrifice himself in order to save the -sick one. Therefore Dr. Stöhr says most truly in his “Pastoral Medicine” -(p. 241): “The chronicles of epidemic disease record upon each of their -pages the most splendid examples of that joyful self-sacrificing courage -with which the whole secular and Regular clergy have stood faithfully at -their posts in the hour of the greatest need, in the days when a reign -of terror dissolved all ties of society. For the Catholic pastor of -souls this form of courage is just as much a principle of professional -honor, and, therefore, I venture to say, as much a matter of course, as -in an officer bravery before the enemy.” In the moment of greatest need -(_in articulo mortis_) any priest, as already stated, can administer the -consolations of religion; reserved cases and censures do not exist. And -_every_ priest should, therefore, be solicitous to obtain the necessary -knowledge in order to be able to administer the holy Sacraments to a -dying person in case of necessity. As visiting the sick is, of itself, -forbidden to no one, and, as St. Alphonsus remarks,[1020] “_Every_ -priest, even he who has no talent for preaching, can engage upon it, -rendering by so doing the greatest service, not only to the sick man -himself, but also to his relations and friends,” _every_ priest should -acquire a facility in comforting the sick according to their special -needs and circumstances. - -In order, therefore, that the priest may effectually assist the sick and -the dying, he should, before he betakes himself to the sick-room, observe -the following:— - -1. Reflect that he is about to perform a work of the greatest importance, -and that the errors which he commits in it are of the worst kind, and -cannot, as a rule, be remedied.[1021] - -2. Remember that in this most important work the help of God is necessary -to him; he should not, therefore, trust in himself, but wholly in God. - -3. Endeavor to awaken and preserve the purest and most perfect intention -possible, the intention of saving a soul which Jesus Christ has purchased -by His blood. - -4. Earnestly pray for the success of his work. - -5. Study well what he has to do and to say. He should consider the -particular manner in which he has to treat the patient to whom he is -going; for he is undertaking a more important work than preaching a -sermon, and yet he must prepare for every sermon.[1022] - -6. Learn the character, the habits, the circumstances, and the situation -of the sick person, if he is not already in possession of this -knowledge.[1023] - - -85. The Confessions of the Sick. - -_I. Some preliminary remarks._ - -1. The confessions of the sick and the dying are of the greatest -importance, as, in many cases, they open the gates of heaven to them, -and prepare them for the worthy reception of the other Sacraments. On -this account parish priests, and priests in general who have the care -of souls, are strictly bound to hear the confessions of those in danger -of death, even in face of great difficulties and of danger to their own -lives. The priest may, in such a case, even interrupt Mass (even during -the Canon) if no other priest is at hand.[1024] Let him, therefore, -before he visits the sick person to hear his confession, earnestly pray -for grace; let him enter upon this important duty with zeal and love, but -also with great prudence and judgment, confiding in God, and where there -is danger, let him face it with apostolic courage. Let him not forget -that the eternal salvation of the sick person is in his hands, that he -can save his soul; but that this soul may also be lost by his fault if -his action is careless, tardy, imprudent, and faulty. - -2. In the presence of the sick person, however the latter may be -circumstanced, and, however he may have lived, the confessor must -manifest for him a great love and a sincere sympathy. - -3. If he were not called by the sick person to hear his confession, -but by those around him, or if he went unsummoned,[1025] and if there -is no danger of death, he should not mention confession at once during -the first visit, but address the patient in a friendly manner, ask him -sympathetically about his illness, etc., as sick people like to talk -about these things. He should then admonish him to resign himself to the -will of God, to unite his sufferings to the bitter sufferings of Jesus, -and to bear them patiently in satisfaction for sin.[1026] In subsequent -visits, he should gradually prepare him for confession; ask him when he -made his last confession; remark that it is better to confess before the -illness increases, because this will render it more difficult; that the -graces of the holy Sacrament of Penance procure for the soul the peace -which it desires; that they conduce to patience in suffering. Let the -priest awaken in the sick person a hope that God will restore his health, -but at the same time, be careful that he recognizes the gravity of his -illness, and that he does not place undue confidence in doctors and their -skill. In order not to expose the patient to the danger of dying without -the Sacraments by misjudging the gravity of the case, the priest should -ask the doctor whether the condition of the patient is precarious. The -friends may also be privately asked if the sick person wishes to confess -to another priest, adding that there would be no objection whatever to -his doing so.[1027] - -4. If the sick person is a _peccator publicus_, living, for example, in -concubinage, or in the so-called “civil marriage,” the confession should -not, as a rule, be heard before amendment and due satisfaction have been -seriously promised; for if the priest hears the confession, and the -person refuses to fulfill the conditions, the priest will, on account of -the seal of the confessional, be obliged to allow viaticum and Extreme -Unction to be administered to one who is unworthy,—indeed, perhaps be -obliged to administer these Sacraments himself. - -5. If the sick person begs that the confession may be deferred, and if -danger of death, lethargy, or delirium is not imminent, this postponement -should be granted, but the patient must at once fix a time for the -confession, perhaps on the same or the following day. The priest should -not consent to indefinite postponement. If, however, danger threatens, -he should not consent to postponement at all, but use all his efforts -to induce the patient to confess at once, firmly but kindly, and -considerately removing all his objections; especially pointing out to him -the great danger to which he exposes himself by this postponement; as God -has promised pardon to the penitent sinner, but has not promised to give -him the next day.[1028] The confessor must, therefore, investigate the -patient’s reasons for wishing to postpone his confession. The real reason -is generally either (1) because _his conscience is burdened with sin_, -he has not confessed for a long time, or confessed badly, and therefore -despairs of unburdening his conscience, the task being above his -strength, as he thinks; or (2) because he has an _obdurate heart_, not -caring about his salvation, or he so despairs of his salvation that he -rejects all attempts from outside as useless and troublesome. The priest -may not give up such a patient, nor leave him till the last moment; he -must pray much, and cause others to pray for him, endure humiliations -cheerfully, and exhaust every means that love, zeal for souls, and wisdom -can possibly suggest. - -In the first of the two cases, the priest should offer the sick person -his help, and promise him to make the confession quite easy for him, -telling him that with a little good will, he will certainly make a good -confession, and so obtain pardon, grace, and salvation. The inexhaustible -mercy of God should be especially and most earnestly impressed upon him; -he should be reminded of the sufferings and death of Jesus for sinners; -of the parables of the prodigal son, the lost sheep, the joy of the -angels over _one_ sinner doing penance, of the great examples of mercy: -Peter, Mary Magdalen, the thief on the cross, etc. - -In the other case the difficulty is greater, for it is indeed difficult -to soften an obdurate heart. Here, fervent, continued prayer is -necessary. Those terrible and consoling truths which our faith supplies -so abundantly should, at suitable intervals, and with eloquence and -_unction_, be laid before him: the misery of the impenitent sinner, -the severity of the divine judgment, the eternity of punishment, the -happiness of the sinner reconciled to God, the peace of the soul adorned -with sanctifying grace, the eternal joys which await him, etc. If all -this does not produce upon the sick person the desired effect, he should -be left to himself for some time, in order that he may reflect upon what -he has heard. In the meantime, pray; then visit him again, and speak to -him again, and proceed in this manner till success results, or till an -impenitent death closes an impenitent life.[1029] - -II. _The confession of the sick person._ - -1. If the sick person shows himself ready to make his confession, the -confessor must help him in every way to fulfill the conditions necessary -for the reception of the Sacrament of Penance; thus he should help him -to examine his conscience, to elicit contrition, to make a complete -confession, and to perform the penance. - -And first, as to the completeness of the confession, the penitent’s -condition must be taken into consideration. If the confession can be put -off without danger, he should be admonished to examine his conscience -according to his ability and to prepare for a general confession.[1030] -If it cannot be put off, or if the confessor is under the necessity of -supposing that the patient is not well able to make such an examination -of conscience, he must help him. But he must be careful to avoid worrying -him by asking too many questions.[1031] - -The following cases deserve special attention:— - -(_a_) If the sick person has lost the power of speech, and can thus only -indicate a few sins by signs, or in some other way. In this case the -priest will be able to elicit the confession of a few sins, and that -suffices. - -(_b_) If the sick person is so weak that he can only confess a few sins, -or having confessed a few, faints, or seems about to faint, or when the -patient has not confessed for some considerable time, or invalidly, and -the gravity of the illness or the nearness of death does not permit of -postponing the absolution. - -(_c_) When the confessions of many dangerously sick or dying persons are -to be heard, and there is no time for a complete confession. - -(_d_) When the priest has arrived at the house of the sick person with -the viaticum, and cannot, without endangering the good name of the -sick person, hear a complete confession.[1032] In this case, let the -priest visit the sick person as soon as possible after administering the -Sacraments and supply what was wanting. - -(_e_) When a dangerously sick or a wounded person, or _mulieres -parturientes_, require the assistance of another even during the -confession. In this case, the sick person may confess some sin of which -he is not ashamed to accuse himself before others, or the confessor may -ask him if he accuses himself of all the sins he has committed, and -repents of them, because by them he has offended God, and ask him, in -particular, if he has committed this or that (slight) sin, such as people -of his class are generally guilty of.[1033] Similarly when the priest -does not understand the language of the sick person, and the latter -confesses through an interpreter.[1034] - -(_f_) When the sick person has a contagious disease, and, in the opinion -of experts, there would be danger of infection to the priest if the -confession lasted long. Nevertheless, the priest would, in this case, do -well to overcome the fear of infection, trusting in God and making use -of the necessary precautions, and be ready to sacrifice his life in the -service of God and his neighbor. - -In all these and similar cases, the patient must duly repent of all grave -sins, and have the will to confess the sins which he has omitted if he -is able to make a new confession. Indeed, there are cases in which a -purely general accusation by word or sign, or a request for absolution, -expressed in any way, suffices for obtaining absolution, that is, when -no other means of confession is available. Even if a wish expressed to -others, or the desire for a priest, can be regarded as confession when -the penitent has become unconscious.[1035] - -2. The confessor should question the patient so that he need simply -answer without being obliged to talk much. If he is not well acquainted -with the state of his soul, let him ask the patient if he has always -confessed validly (this question may also be put to all sick penitents), -or if, in his past life, he always wished to confess well, if he ever -voluntarily concealed a grave sin, and has not yet confessed it, if he -has anything else upon his conscience which disturbs him. According to -his character, and the state in which the confessor finds the penitent, -he should, moreover, ask if he still has in his possession anything -belonging to another, or if, for some other reason, he still has -restitution to make of property, or honor and good name; if he harbors -hatred and enmity toward any one; if he has ever lived in a sinful habit, -and if he has expiated these sins in a general confession. If restitution -has to be made, and he can make it at the time, the duty of so doing at -once must be imposed upon him, and he must not be allowed to leave this -duty to his heirs; unless the latter be thoroughly trustworthy, the dying -person believing this to be sufficient and not easily being induced to -another expedient. If the restitution cannot at once take place, he must, -at least, have an actual intention of making it as soon as possible, and -of taking the necessary steps toward insuring its being made—either by a -will, or by an injunction to those belonging to him.[1036] - -If the sick person is in a state of invincible ignorance concerning the -duty of restitution, and if it is anticipated that he will not be willing -to make it, or that great difficulties will arise, the confessor ought -not to call his attention to this duty, but leave him in his state of -ignorance. For, by such exhortation, the material sin would become a -formal one, and the confessor’s duty is rather to guard against injury -to the soul of the penitent than to ward off a temporal injury from a -neighbor. If, however, the confessor is questioned by the sick person -concerning such a duty, he must give an answer, but give it with such -caution that neither truth nor justice suffer, and that the salvation of -the sick person be not imperiled.[1037] The confessor should then exhort -the sick person to forgive from his whole heart every one who has ever -offended him, and to beg pardon of those whom he has ever offended, or -injured. - -3. If the sick person is in a _voluntary immediate occasion of sin_, he -must remove this at once, or form a firm purpose of doing so as soon as -possible. Without this resolve, even _in articulo mortis_, absolution -could not be given, for the necessary dispositions would be wanting. If -there is no danger in delay, the confessor must insist, with inexorable -severity, upon the removal of this occasion, if it is a public one, -and postpone absolution till it is removed.[1038] Such occasions may -be dangerous objects, or persons whom the sick man hates, or a person -with whom he maintains sinful intercourse. The latter occasion presents -greater difficulty, and it is to be disposed of according to the rules -laid down for those living in concubinage. If the matter has remained -secret, or is only known through confession, and if public scandal is to -be feared from immediate removal of the person, the penitent must form -the firm purpose either of marrying her, if no obstacles which cannot be -removed are in the way, or of dismissing her as soon as possible, and -till then, of keeping her at a distance as much as possible.[1039] - -If the person were an _occasio necessaria_, that is, if the sick man had -no one else to wait upon him, the matter becomes still more difficult. -Supposing that the _occasio proxima_ has really lost its character in -this situation, the circumstances might call for some forbearance; -however, if the matter is notorious, some explanation should be made in -order that the scandal caused may be atoned for; that is, the sick man -should be obliged to declare, perhaps before witnesses, that he would -dismiss the person when he had recovered health; but this declaration -would not be necessary if the circumstances which make the dismissal of -the concubine impossible are publicly known. - -This tolerance is the more justifiable if the immoral relationship -had not become generally known, but were only learnt through the -confessional, and difficulties stood in the way of contracting the -marriage _in extremis_. But here also the sick man must promise that he -will marry, or dismiss the person who is the occasion of sin to him, etc. -However, in all cases where the concubine cannot be dismissed, the sick -man must take care that she does not sleep near him, that she only goes -to him when it is necessary, in order to avoid dangerous intimacy and -temptation. - -4. If the person who is dangerously ill is living in so-called “civil -matrimony,” and there is no canonical impediment, a promise to marry made -before the parish priest and two witnesses suffices, and the marriage -must take place as soon as possible. If there is a canonical impediment, -for which a dispensation can be obtained, let the confessor induce the -sick man to submit himself to the laws of the Church. On this condition -he may be absolved; the confessor should then procure the dispensation -if the patient is not already _in extremis_. If he is already very near -death, the bishop can dispense, in order that the marriage may proceed, -as it may, for many reasons, be desirable. If the impediment cannot be -removed by a dispensation, it suffices that the sick person promises -to submit to the laws of God and the Church, in case he is restored to -health. If he is not aware of the obstacle, he may be left in his _bona -fides_. If the matter is publicly known, the scandal given must be -repaired. - -5. If a dying woman has separated from her husband on her own authority, -the confessor must demand that the separation should be revoked as soon -as possible; if the person does not wish this, and there is canonical -ground for separation, she must be left in peace. If the reasons -are futile, she must declare that she will resume married life upon -the restoration of health (if occasion requires, she must make this -declaration before witnesses, in order to remedy the scandal given). If -she had been divorced by the civil court _in bona fide_, she must not -be disturbed. Of course, the conduct of the confessor would be modified -according as he had learnt the matter through the confessional, or -previously, by general report. In the latter case the explanations and -promises in question must be duly given before the administration of the -Sacraments.[1040] - -In respect to sick persons who have lived in habitual sin, or have -frequently or generally relapsed into the same grave sin, see §§ 67 and -68. - -6. As soon as the confession is completed, the confessor should exhort -the sick person in a few forcible words, and awaken in him true sorrow -and firm purpose of amendment. The thought of death, vividly suggested by -the circumstances, is well calculated to move a man to a holy fear and -repentance. In most cases it is advisable to make an act of contrition -with the sick person. - -7. Then, according to the express admonition of the Roman Ritual, a -slight penance should be imposed upon the sick person, which can be -performed at once. The confessor should help persons who are very ill, -and those who are dying, to perform the penance before, or after, the -absolution has been administered.[1041] - -8. When the sick person’s spiritual condition has been set in order, -attention must be paid to the regulation of his temporal affairs (Is. -xxxviii. 1). If it is considered necessary or advisable, he should, -therefore, be admonished to put his worldly concerns in good order, if he -has not yet done so, that he may afterwards occupy himself with God in -undisturbed peace. But he must so regulate everything that he may be well -prepared for the account which he will be obliged to render to God. - -III. The priest very often finds himself with sick persons who are -altogether uneducated and ignorant; or who, though well informed in -affairs of the world, are very ignorant in religious matters. Whilst he -can openly instruct the former class, he is often obliged to disguise -his instruction of the latter that they hardly observe it, so as not to -offend them and jeopardize the salvation of their souls. In this case -he can give an explanation of the truths of faith which are applicable: -(_a_) in the form of a prayer in which God is invoked; (_b_) in the form -of a thanksgiving; (_c_) in the form of a sacrifice, or (_d_) in the form -of an exhortation. Nevertheless, an explicit act of faith may be added. -The confessor should commit to memory different formulae by means of -which he can, when necessary, instruct ignorant patients in the truths -which they must know, and elicit the acts of the theological virtues with -them; he should also learn by heart short prayers and verses of Holy Writ -which contain acts of the different virtues necessary to the patient. - -9. In order to provide more abundantly for the salvation of the sick -person, the zealous priest should not content himself with what is -necessary for a valid and fruitful reception of the Sacrament of Penance, -but should endeavor, in subsequent visits[1042] (which should be repeated -oftener as death approaches): (1) to remove all obstacles to salvation; -(2) to counteract the attacks of the evil one; (3) to suggest remedies -helpful in the dangerous passage to eternity. - -(_a_) Such obstacles to salvation are, preëminently: attachment of life, -love of relatives, and care for earthly things. To remove these, it -is especially necessary to inform the sick person, prudently, and at -a suitable time, of the danger of death, at first by hints, but later -on, when death is nearer, openly and plainly.[1043] Then the priest -must explain to him how pleasing to God it is, and what great merits he -acquires for himself before God, if he submits to His will and makes the -sacrifice of his life. He should also be reminded of the miseries of the -life which he is leaving behind, and of the joys of heaven to which he is -passing; impressing upon him, moreover, that God who takes him away from -his own will provide for them. - -(_b_) Against the temptations of the devil, which are usually more -violent and numerous in the hour of death than in life, the general -remedies—invocation of the names of Jesus and Mary, the sign of the -cross, and short prayers—are to be used. A crucifix and one or two -religious pictures should be placed near the sick bed. In temptations -_against faith_, the patient may exclaim, “Oh, my God! I believe all that -Thou, the eternal Truth, hast revealed!” or he may thank God for the -grace of the true faith, and protest that he will live and die in this -faith; or, finally,—and this is an excellent proceeding,—reject these -temptations energetically, and direct his attention to other things, -making other acts—acts of sorrow, of confidence, of love of God, etc. And -should the temptations continue to molest the sick person more violently, -the _motiva credibilitatis_ may be explained to him. - -If the sick person is tormented by _temptations to despair_, the priest -must not speak to him of the justice of God, nor of the punishments of -the damned, nor of the gravity of sin, but of the exceedingly great mercy -of God, the sufferings of Christ, the divine promises, the intercession -of the most holy Virgin and the saints, and thus inspire him with -confidence. - -If, on account of great pain, the sick person is tempted to _impatience_, -remind him of the rewards of patiently borne suffering of Our Savior, who -bore with patience the greatest torments; of the example of the saints, -especially of the Queen of martyrs; of the duty of doing penance for our -sins; of the pains of purgatory, which he may partly expiate by patient -endurance of suffering; also of the fact that patience soothes and -lessens pain. As a remedy against _temptations to hatred_ and _feelings -of hostility_ remind him of the precept of Christ to love all men, and -to exclude no one, not even our enemies, from this love; moreover, of -the offenses we commit against God, who forgives us over and over again; -of God’s promise to forgive us if we forgive others; and, finally, place -before his eyes the glorious example of Jesus.[1044] - -(_c_) The confessor must assist the sick person by all the other means -which our holy faith so abundantly possesses, administer to him in -due time the last Sacraments, give him absolution repeatedly,[1045] -and (observing the precepts of the Church) frequently holy communion; -often suggest fervent ejaculatory prayers; say with him the acts of -faith, hope, and charity, and of perfect contrition for all past sins, -also of perfect resignation to God’s holy will; make him participate -in the indulgences of the Church, give him general absolution, let him -kiss the crucifix, sprinkle him with holy water, etc.[1046] And as it -is not certain that a priest will be with the sick person in his last -struggle and equally uncertain that the patient will not again commit -a sin, especially as the evil one continues his temptations till the -last moment, the priest should teach him to elicit acts of love and -contrition; he should also request a trustworthy person among those -around the patient to make frequent acts of perfect love and contrition -with him, especially during his agony.[1047] - - -86. Absolution of the Dying. - -The general principles laid down in the preceding sections apply also -to this particular case. _If it is certain that anything essential -is wanting to the disposition of the moribund, absolution may not be -administered_; but if it is in any way, even _tenuiter_, probable, that -everything essential is present, absolution not only _can_ but _must_ be -given. This, however, is not to be understood as meaning that there may -not be cases in which absolution can be given, but where no obligation -exists under pain of sin of giving it. Most of the cases which occur can -be solved by the rules which follow:— - -I. A dying person who, in the presence of the priest, has given a sign -of repentance, and has confessed any sin, or even only _in genere_ has -acknowledged himself to be a sinner, _must be absolved_, and that, -_absolute_, not _conditionate_. In this case the presence of sorrow is -sufficiently ascertained, and besides there is some sort of confession. -This is the express teaching of the Roman Ritual.[1048] The absolution -here bears directe on the sins confessed _generice_ by the signs of -repentance and the desire of absolution, and _indirecte_, on the special -sins, included in that _manifestatio doloris_. These sins, however, the -penitent must confess separately and distinctly when he has been restored -to health.[1049] - -II. _A dying person who is unconscious_, and who, _by the testimony -of those present_, before he became unconscious, _expressed a wish to -confess_, and showed signs of repentance, _must_ be absolved. This is -the constant practice of the Church, and the unanimous teaching of -theologians. For the desire of receiving sacramental absolution, whether -this is made known to the priest directly, or indirectly, through -witnesses, includes a _confessio in genere_. Although moralists[1050] -teach that in this case also absolution may be given _absolute_, -and the Roman Ritual directs simply: “_absolvendus est_,” it seems, -nevertheless, safer to follow the opinion of those[1051] who require that -the absolution be given conditionally, at least when it may be prudently -doubted whether any indication of sorrow was really given, especially if -the dying person is a _homo rudis_. Absolution must also be given—but -conditionally—if there is _aliqua probabilitas doloris et desiderii -confessionis_. - -III. According to the _sententia communis et probabilis_, absolution _sub -conditione_ _MAY_ be and _MUST_ be given to a dying person who _has shown -no sign of repentance_, and _of whom no witness has reported such sign -to the absent priest_, and in whom the priest, moreover, cannot detect -any such sign; provided the dying person is a _Catholic_. That he should -have lived a pious life is not necessary; it is also applicable to one -who has not lived very piously, and may be extended to all concerning -whose indisposition there is no certainty; for it may be presumed that in -their dangerous condition they would wish to receive the Sacrament. - -The whole difficulty in this and the following cases is—how, without -express manifestation of sorrow, and desire of absolution, the essential -elements of the Sacrament of Penance can be supposed with some degree of -probability to exist. I say, with some degree of probability, for it is -not necessary to prove that these essential elements are _certainly and -positively_ present; it suffices to show that some probability (slight -though it be) exists for the supposition that the essential elements of -the Sacrament are realized. - -In order that absolution may be administered, there is required: (1) a -probable conjecture that the dying person has interior sorrow; (2) some -outward manifestation which, with some degree of probability, may be -regarded as a manifestation of inward sorrow, and (3) some outward sign, -which, with some probability, can be understood as an accusation, if only -a general one. - -The question now is to what extent can we find these three things in -a dying person deprived of the use of his senses, who neither gives -perceptible signs himself, nor has previously given them to others? - -Many theologians appeal to such signs as anxious breathing, sighing, -winking of the eyes, various movements of the mouth, by means of which -the dying person “perhaps” wishes to manifest his sorrow and his desire -of absolution. For, frequently, those who appear to be unconscious are -only deprived of the exterior use of their senses; they perceive and -understand everything, think, reflect, are also capable of sorrow, etc., -as many declare, who have been in a similar state. As a man is more -withdrawn from the outer world, the more active is his inner life. -In the case of dying persons who have led _Christian_ lives, who are -mindful of their sins, and do not easily deceive themselves as to their -situation, who know that the decision of their eternity is near at hand, -as they will soon stand before their Judge—it is readily to be understood -that they should make attempts to reveal outwardly their interior sorrow, -and, therefore (the only conceivable course in a Catholic), their desire -for the absolution of the priest.[1052] Even if such signs are of -themselves no natural indication of repentance, we may assume that the -dying person wishes to make use of them for said purpose (which at the -time is to him of supreme importance), as he cannot reveal himself in -any other way. This is the teaching of St. Augustine, of St. Antonin, of -St. Alphonsus Liguori, of Sporer, Elbel, the Salmanticenses, Tamburini, -Lacroix, Aertnys, Müller, Gury, Konings, and others. The specified signs -may, therefore, be regarded as manifestations of sorrow and desire of -absolution. Now, it is allowed, in _urgente necessitate_, to administer -the Sacraments _sub conditione_, however doubtful the matter may be, -as, on the one hand, the reverence due to the Sacrament is preserved by -the appended condition, and on the other hand the salvation of a soul -is also provided for. When, therefore, the priest _can_ administer the -Sacraments, he is _bound_ to administer them _sub gravi peccato_.[1053] -He must, however, repeat to the dying person in a few words and in a -loud voice a general accusation and an earnest act of contrition, as -experience shows that the sense of hearing generally remains till death. - -Other theologians thought to solve the difficulty more satisfactorily by -the doctrine that the _actus pœnitentis_ were not _materia sacramentorum -ex qua_, but _materia circa quam_. But this, of itself, does not -contribute anything to the solution of the difficulty. For even the -theologians who, following the teaching of Scotus, consider the _actus -pœnitentis_ as _materia circa quam_, demand an _outward manifestation_ as -an _essential condition_ of the validity of the Sacrament. - -There may, however, be cases in which an _anxia respiratio_, _gemitus_, -etc., is not perceived. Some other probable marks of sorrow and of -accusation must then be sought. Lehmkuhl proposes the following:— - -_A._ As far as the interior sorrow is concerned, we can and must presume -that it exists; we shall, at least, never have a certitude that it is -wanting. Persons who seemed to be deprived of their senses, or really -were so, and have afterwards recovered their use, have declared that in -their anxiety they elicited sorrow for their sins, although they could -not give outward expression of it; and there is no reason why this could -not also be true even of those unfortunate ones who have laid violent -hands on themselves, or who in the act of committing any other sin have -lost consciousness. This sorrow must, of course, be awakened after the -last mortal sin, and must extend to all mortal sins not yet remitted. We -must assume that these conditions exist, or are not certainly wanting, -especially as God never refuses sufficient grace to any one, and desires -and wills, not the death of the sinner, but his conversion. - -_B._ We need not insist that the manifestation of _sorrow_ should -necessarily be the expression of _that_ sorrow which is an essential -disposition. It seems to be sufficient that the penitent indicates that -he either has had the necessary sorrow, or will have it before the -absolution, or wishes to have it. But this is _implicite_ contained in -the manifestation of a desire for absolution and, in reality, always -coexists with it. This manifestation of the desire for absolution also -contains, equivalently, the third element, a virtual accusation. We can, -therefore, deal with the two requisites at the same time. - -_C._ The _accusatio aliqualis_, which is indispensable, is conveyed by -the fact that the man gives outward evidence of his wish to be reconciled -to God in the last moment by the services of the priest, for he thereby -acknowledges to be a sinner, and that in view of the priestly functions -which are to be exercised at the moment of his death. - -Moreover, by the fact that the man has lived as a Christian, he seems -to indicate sufficiently his desire of being reconciled to God in the -last hour of his life through the ministry of a priest. He thus, in -truth, makes a general, public confession before the whole Church and -all priests by whom he can be absolved. All the Sacraments which he has -received, all the Christian virtues which he has practiced, could be -regarded as witnesses of his desire for absolution in the hour of death. -Nor is a similar manifestation of this desire altogether wanting in those -whose lives have been considerably below a Christian ideal, or who were -deprived of consciousness in the act of sinning; for, by remaining in the -Church, they show that they hoped and desired to be reconciled at the -hour of death. But it might be objected: is not this desire interrupted -and revoked by the mortal sin? If this were the case, our action would, -of course, be in vain; for, whilst absolution in such case would be valid -for him who does not need it, because he has committed no mortal sin, -yet for him who does need it, it would have no validity. However, we may -answer: The sorrow, in as far as it is a _necessary disposition_, is -revoked and interrupted, but the man’s declaration that he _wishes_ to -have contrition _at this time_ and desires absolution, is not repealed. -We admit that the case is hopeless, unless interior and true sorrow -is present. The validity of the absolution remains, therefore, _very -doubtful_. Nevertheless, that is not the point. That sorrow is “perhaps” -present, we are justified in assuming, and it is, therefore, allowed to -give absolution; it may possibly impart to the man who has only imperfect -sorrow sanctifying grace and eternal life. That the sorrow should coexist -with the absolution is certainly not necessary.[1054] - -IV. In accordance with our previous inference, a dying person, who, up to -the moment of his coma, _refused to receive the Sacraments_ and rejected -the priest, may not be absolved, as it cannot be presumed that he had -the will to receive absolution. _To be able_ to absolve such a one we -must discover some sign which we may construe as indicating (according to -Lehmkuhl, n. 515) _a change in his sentiments_; for example, pressure of -the hand, a look, sighing, etc. If there is any indication of the kind, -however doubtful, conditional absolution may be given. - -V. A dying person who was _deprived of his senses in actu peccati_, -for example, in adultery, a duel, drunkenness, _can_ be absolved _sub -conditione_, if he is a Catholic, and that on the same grounds as we have -specified above (n. III). For of a Catholic it may be presumed that, -in this utmost danger of eternal damnation, and under the influence -of divine grace, which never will be refused—he desires to secure his -eternal salvation. - -A non-Catholic in this situation may not be absolved, even though he has -given signs of sorrow, unless he has expressly asked for absolution; -for it cannot be reasonably supposed that he has given these signs _in -ordine ad confessionem sacram_, as he does not believe in it, and, on -this account, the _materia Sacramenti_ would certainly be wanting. It may -thus be maintained that _to scarcely any dying Catholic MUST absolution -be refused_, and that to all dying Catholics it _MAY_ be given, at least -_sub conditione_. - -We arrive at a different decision and must pursue another course with -regard to a Catholic, who, being born and brought up in the Catholic -religion, has apostatized and embraced heresy. - -VI. _A heretic_, who is deprived of his senses, but who, while he was in -health, manifested an inclination towards the Catholic religion, may, -in this decisive moment, be absolved _sub conditione_ from censures and -sins if he has already been baptized in his sect; if doubt is entertained -as to the validity of his Baptism, he must, previously, be baptized -_sub conditione_. It may be presumed of such a one that he wishes to -close his life in the community of the true Church of Christ. Indeed, as -Lehmkuhl adds, one might also give conditional absolution to a baptized -non-Catholic of whom it might be presumed, upon any probable ground, that -he is _in bona fide_ and would gladly accept the help of a priest if he -knew it was necessary to him. - -In such a case it is, of course, more difficult to produce anything out -of the past life which can, in any way, be construed as a confession, -and a desire for absolution, because he has not _explicite_ thought of -absolution, unless we are to be content with the man’s _bona fides_, -“_quam probabiliter adesse seu adfuisse, externe sit manifestatum_.” For, -if to this _bona fides_, sorrow has been added,—and it is not certain -that it has not been added,—it seems that there is, _implicite_, the -manifested desire to participate in those remedies which are necessary, -and, therefore, in the absolution of the priest.[1055] If we have -here, with Ballerini, Lehmkuhl, and Aertnys, proceeded to the utmost -limits, and if the arguments in favor of this extreme liberality in the -administration of absolution are not always cogent, let us not be accused -of laxity or of any want of reverence for the holy Sacrament of Penance. -Such liberality seems to have been fully intended by Him, “Who came to -seek and to save that which was lost,” and who wishes not the death but -the life of the sinner, who opened the gates of paradise even to the -thief on the cross, and who has placed the keys of heaven in our hands. -We safeguard the sanctity of the holy Sacrament by adding the condition, -and the Lord instituted His Sacraments for man; “_in extremis autem -extrema tentanda sunt_.” - -We may _repeatedly_ administer absolution to the dying when the -conditions necessary for its validity are fulfilled. The following rules -are of service:— - -1. If the dying person gives to the priest who is present undoubted signs -of a contrite disposition, it is advisable to administer absolution to -him as often as he renews these signs.[1056] - -2. If the dying person is unconscious, one may administer conditional -absolution to him two or three times, with an interval of about three -or four hours. For, in order that a Sacrament may be administered -conditionally, a _causa gravis_ is necessary, which could not exist -if the absolution were administered at shorter intervals and more -frequently. If the state of unconsciousness should continue, and there -is actual danger of death, absolution may be frequently repeated; for -example, three or four times in a day.[1057] This proceeding is justified -by the endeavor to give more certain and efficacious assistance to the -dying person. - -Such efforts in behalf of the dying person demand great zeal, but, as -Elbel rightly says,[1058] they are _very praiseworthy_, and form part of -our holy office. Our divine Redeemer deposited His graces in the hands of -His priests; faithful to their calling they will, with the greatest zeal, -dispense these graces to those who are worthy and in need of them. - -“_Fratres charissimi, munus quod in Ecclesia Dei geritis plane eximium -est; enimvero tantam vobis Christus ad judicandas animas auctoritatem -elargitus est, ut sententiæ a vobis in terris juste prolatæ, ratæ -habeantur in cœlis. Ora vestra canales esse mysticos dico, per quos vera -de cœlo pax in homines bonæ voluntatis descendit. Verba oris vestri tubæ -sunt magni Jesu, quæ muros iniquitatis seu mysticæ Jericho evertunt._” - -(_Ex monitis S. Francisci Salesii Ep. et Eccl. Doct. ad Confessarios._) - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] S. Th. S. Theol. III. Q. 84, art. 7 ad 7. - -[2] S. Th. S. Theol. III. Q. 85, art. 3 ad 3. - -[3] Cf. Müller, Theol. Mor. Lib. III. Tit. II. § 106. - -[4] Theol. Mor. Tom. II. § 1, De Pœnit. n. 251; cf. Palmieri, Tract. de -Pœnit. (Rome, 1879), p. 18 et seq. - -[5] While theologians are united in admitting a _virtus generalis -pœnitentiæ_ 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, l. c. - -[6] Cf. S. Th. III. Q. 85 et seq. _de pœnitentia secundum quod est -virtus_, Suarez, De Sacramento Pœnitentiæ Disp. per 2 Sectiones, _de -pœnitentia in communi_; Lugo, De Sacramento Pœnitentiæ, P. I. pp. 1-44 -(Romæ, 1879); Müller, Theol. Mor. Lib. III. Sect. 106; Lehmkuhl, Theol. -Mor. Tom. II. Tract. V. De Sacr. Pœnit. Sect. 1; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. -Lib. VI. Tract. V. De Pœnit. Pars I. - -[7] Cf. S. Th. Quodl. I. a. 12; S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 600 s.; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 255; Müller, l. c. Sect. 107, in fine. - -[8] Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 2. - -[9] Cf. S. Th. Quodl. I. a. 12; S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VII. n. 600 s. -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 255; Müller, l. c. Sect. 107, in fine. - -[10] See Sect. 4, p. 29. - -[11] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 662, 665; Gury-Ball. II. n. 466; Ballerini, -Ant. S. J. Opus Theol. Mor. Vol. V.; Tract. X. Sect. V. De Sacram. Pœn. -cp. III. n. 1025 ss.; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 229. - -[12] Such is the teaching of nearly all the moralists; cf. S. Alph. -Lib. VI. n. 667; Gury, I. n. 478; Scavini, De Sacram. Pœnit. 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 _determinativum divini præcepti_. - -[13] Suarez and Laymann teach the opposite. Cf. Scavini, l. c. n. 35, -nota 1. - -[14] Cf. Decretum Lateran. Concilii IV. cp. 21. - -[15] See Sect. 74, Children’s Confessions. - -[16] Lehmkuhl, I. Tract VI. n. 1202, 3. - -[17] S. Alph. l. c. n. 669; Gury, l. c. n. 479; Lehmkuhl, l. 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 _saltem -tacite_. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 1204. - -[19] Cf. Scavini, De Sacram. Pœnit. n. 36, who follows Suarez, Laymann, -Lugo, Salmanticenses, etc. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 1202. - -[20] Lacroix, De præcepto Confess. n. 2003; S. Alph. l. c. n. 668; -Scavini, l. c. n. 36, Q. 4; Gury, l. c. n. 478, nota 3; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -n. 1206. - -[21] Cf. Bened. XIV. De Syn. diœc. 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 (l. 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. Müller, l. c. Sect. 118, n. 6-4; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 1205. - -[22] Pauli Segneri, S.J., Instructio Pœnitent. cp. XV: _Fructus percepti -ex frequenti confessione_. - -[23] Sess. XIV. cp. 5. - -[24] Cf. S. Th. De Malo, Q. 7, art. 12 ad 4, and Summa Theol. III. -Q. 87, art. 1. St. Thomas demands for the forgiveness of mortal sin -a _perfectior pœnitentia_, that is, that a man actually detest his -mortal sins so far as he can; _sed non hoc requiritur ad remissionem -venialium peccatorum; non tamen sufficit habitualis displicentia quæ -habetur per habitum caritatis, vel pœnitentiæ 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 fertur secundum affectum in -Deum et res divinas, ut, quidquid sibi occurreret, quod eum ab hoc motu -retardaret, displiceret ei et doleret, se commississe, etiamsi actu -de illo non cogitaret, quod tamen non sufficit ad remissionem peccati -mortalis nisi quantum ad peccata oblita post diligentem inquisitionem_. -III. Q. 87, art. 1. Scavini, l. 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 -extensionem ad venialia peccata_, and an intensive _ex conatu potentiæ_. -Only the objective love which extends to venial sin is, according to this -learned theologian, 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, contrition. - -[25] Cf. III. Q. 87, art. 4 et 2. On the diverging views of Scotus and -Durandus, compare Suarez, De Sacram. Pœnit. Disp. II. Sect. 2, n. 2. - -[26] Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 5. - -[27] Disp. IX. Sect. 3, n. 53. - -[28] Cf. S. Th. III. Q. 87, art. 1 et 3. - -[29] Cf. Trid. Sess. V. Decr. de peccato orig. n. 5; Sess. XIV. de pœn. -cp. 3; S. Th. III. Q. 86, art. 2 ad 1. - -[30] Sess. XIV. de Extr. Unct. cp. 2, can. 2. - -[31] Sess. XIII. can. 5 et cp. 2. - -[32] III. Q. 79, art. 4. - -[33] Suarez, Comment, ad III. Thomæ, Q. 79, art. 4. Cf. Disputatio 63, -Sect. 10, n. 1. - -[34] Cf. S. Thom. Q. 87, art. 2 et 3. - -[35] Cf. S. Thom. Q. 72, art. 7 ad 2. - -[36] Cf. S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 26, art. 1 et 3. - -[37] Trid. Sess. XXII. de Sacrif. Missæ, cp. 2. - -[38] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 311. - -[39] Tappehorn, Die lässliche Sünde, p. 55. - -[40] Some theologians attribute to these two prayers an effect _ex opere -operato_. Suarez, Disp. 12, Sect. 2, n. 6. - -[41] Cf. S. Thom. III. Q. 87, art. 3. - -[42] Cf. Müller, l. c. Sect. 110, II. n. 4. - -[43] Cf. S. Thom. 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. Pœnit. 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). - -[45] For the arguments of those who oppose this teaching, see Suarez, -Disp. XI. Sect. 3, n. 5; Gury, I. n. 457; Scavini, l. c. n. 11 ss. - -[46] Cf. Suarez, Disp. 11, Sect. 3, nn. 8-10. - -[47] There are three prayers which have quite a special efficacy in -this matter: one has come to us from the Holy Ghost through David, the -other from Our Lord, and the third from the Church; they are the seven -penitential psalms, the Our Father, and the Confiteor. Cf. S. Thom. III. -Q. 87, art. 3; I. II. Q. 74, art. 8 ad 6. - -[48] On the remission of venial sins, defiling the faithful who die in -grace see S. Thom. De Malo, Q. 7, a. 11; Suarez, Disp. 11, Sect. 4; -Disp. 47, Sect. 1; Palmieri, Tract. de Pœnitentia, p. 190 ss.; Oswald, -Eschatologie, p. 84 ss.; Tappehorn, Die lässliche Sünde, Sect. 11, p. 61 -ss. - -[49] Cat. Rom. P. II. Cap. V. Q. XII. - -[50] Cat. Rom. l. c. - -[51] Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 2, 3 et 4, can. 4; S. Thom. III. Q. 86, -art. 6; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. 1. n. 2 ss. - -[52] Suarez, Disp. 20, Sect. 3, n. 8, and Disp. 58, Sect. 1, n. 3; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. Cap. III. Sect. 1, n. 258; Aertnys, l. c. Cap. III. art. -1, n. 174. Without satisfaction the Sacrament is there in its essence, -but it is not quite perfect, as a man without legs is, indeed, a man -essentially, but not a complete and perfect 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 Pœn. Disp. 12, n. 40. - -[53] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 258. - -[54] Aertnys, l. c. Cap. III. art. 1, n. 174. - -[55] 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 -confessor, 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, l. c. n. 256. Cf. Ballerini, -Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. 1, n. 14. - -[56] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. Cap. III. n. 171. - -[57] Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 5. - -[58] Lacroix, Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. P. II. n. 595 ss.; Mazzotta, Theol. -Moral. Tr. VI. Disp. l, q. 4, cp. 5. Hence Alexander VII condemned the -proposition (Prop. II. damnata) that sins omitted in confession, whether -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. - -[59] S. Alph. l. c. n. 427, dub. 2; Gury (Ed. Rom.), n. 418; Ballerini, -Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 17; Müller, l. c. Sect. 111; Aertnys, l. c. n. -172. Q. I. - -[60] Extravag. com. l. 5. tit. 7 (de privileg.), c. I. Const. “Inter -cunctas.” - -[61] Cf. Ballerini, l. c.; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 263. - -[62] Lugo, De Pœnit. d. 13, n. 73. - -[63] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 263. - -[64] Reuter, Neoconfessarius, P. II. Cap. III. Art. IV. n. 117. - -[65] _At accusare se de venialibus in genere dicendo v. g. Accuso me de -multis venialibus, nihil aliud exprimendo, probabilius non videtur licere -extra casum necessitatis; tum quia est contra praxim Ecclesiæ, tum quia -hoc Sacramentum est institutum per modum accusationis et judicii, quod -per se loquendo fieri debet circa materiam saltem in specie certam et -determinatam._ Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. c. II. Cf. -Suarez, Disp. 23, Sect. I. n. 10; Reuter, Neoconfessarius, P. II. C. III. -Art. 4, n. 117. - -[66] De Sacr. Pœnit. c. 5, n. 14. - -[67] Cf. Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. c. II. - -[68] Suarez, Disp. 23, Sect. I. n. 10. - -[69] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 266. - -[70] Cf. Gury-Ballerini, Compend. Theol. Moral. II. n. 421. - -[71] On this matter see the eminently practical hints of Reuter in his -Neoconfessarius, l. c. n. 117. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. nn. 266, 267. - -[72] Trident. Sess. XIV. cp. 3. - -[73] Trident. l. c. - -[74] III. Q. 84, a. 3. - -[75] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 430, Dub. 2; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. -n. 32. - -[76] S. Thom. 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. - -[78] S. Thom. III. Q. 84, n. 1 ad 3. Cf. Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Tract. -VI. Disp. II. Q. IV. c. 1. - -[79] Lugo, l. c. Dist. 13, Sect. 7; Lacroix, l. c. Lib. VI. P. 2, n. 645, -etc. - -[80] Cf. Decr. S. R. C. Feb. 27, 1847. - -[81] Cf. Stotz, Tribunal Pœnitentiæ, L. II. Q. III. art. 1, § 1; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 268: _etiam in frequentioribus confessionibus expedit -non omittere_. Though Tappehorn in his Anleitung zur Verwaltung des -heiligen Buss-Sakramentes, 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. - -[82] 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. - -[83] Rt. Rom. De Sacram. Pœnit. - -[84] Sess. XIV. cp. 3. Cf. S. Alph. n. 430, Dub. 4. - -[85] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. cp. IV. art. 1; Mazzotta, Theol. Moral. Tract. -VI. Disp. II. Q. IV. cp. I; Stotz, l. c. L. II. Q. III. art. 1, § 1, n. -215; Lehmkuhl, l. 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. Romæ 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 Pœnitent.; Binterim, Denkwürdigkeiten, Bd. 5, Teil -1, K. 6, § 3; S. Thom. III. Q. 84, a. 3; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 269, nota 2. - -[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 Clementine decree is to be taken not only _collectively_, -that is, as legislating for the case where both confession and absolution -are conveyed by absentees, but also _disjunctively_, that is, as -legislating for the case where confession has been made to an absentee, -the absolution being given when the penitent presents himself, and _vice -versa_. This was decreed by Paul V, July 14, 1605. More information may -be found in Palmieri, Tract. de Pœnit. pp. 141-143 (Rom. 1879). Cf. -Reuter, Neoconfessar. P. l. n. 31; Müller, l. c. L. III. T. II. § 132; -Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. I. n. 32 s. Absolution 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. l. 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 -presence. 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. - -[90] S. Alph. l. c. VI. n. 429. - -[91] The priest is, however, strongly advised not to be too nervous -in exercising his office for a penitent struck down by an infectious -disease; confidence in God joined to a little prudent foresight and -courage will be more useful to him than a cowardly nervousness. - -[92] Cf. Reuter, Neoconfess. l. c. n. 31; Scavini, Theologia Moralis -Universa, Tom IV. n. 77; Müller, l. c. § 132; Aertnys, l. 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 Sem. Gall. Romæ, La Confession par téléphone; -Melata, Manuale Theol. Moralis, De Pœnit. cp. II. art. I.) It is certain -that the use of the telephone for giving absolution is _extra casum -necessitatis_ a grave sin because it introduces 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 condemned _in contumaciam_. To -the question whether _in casu extremæ necessitatis dari possit absolutio -per telephonium_? the Pœnitentiaria replied, July 1, 1884: _Nihil esse -respondendum_.—Bucceroni, Enchiridion Morale (Romæ, 1887), p. 119. - -[93] Scavini, Theologia Moralis Universa, Tom. III. n. 479 (Ed. Par. -1867). - -[94] Cf. Gury, II. l. c. n. 432, 2; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. -I. n. 27. - -[95] Lehmkuhl, P. II. L. I. Tr. V. Sect. I. n. 272. - -[96] Cf. Gury, II. n. 434. - -[97] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 25; Stotz, l. c. L. II. Q. III. art. -I. § 4. - -[98] Cf. Declar. S. Inquis. 17 Juni 1715, 17 Dec. 1868, 20 Jul. 1859. - -[99] S. Alph. l. c. n. 432, etc. - -[100] Colletus, “_acerrimus probabilismi impugnator_.” - -[101] Aertnys, l. c. art. II. n. 217; Concina, according to the testimony -of St. Alphonsus, _in severas sententias generatim deflectens_. - -[102] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 273. - -[103] S. Alph. l. c. n. 432; Lacroix, L. VI. p. 2, n. 1797; Mazzotta, -Theol. Moralis, Tract. IV. Disp. II. Q. IV. cp. II.; Ballerini, Op. -Theol. Moral. l. c. cp. I. n. 27; Aertnys, l. c. art. II. n. 217; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 273; Gury, l. c. II. n. 435. - -[104] Compare S. Alph. De Sacram. in genere, n. 28, 29, 57, and De -Conscientia, n. 49; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Moral. l. c. cp. I. n. 27: “hæc -est _sententia certa_, licere in necessitate administrare sacramenta sub -conditione.” - -[105] 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 salvation. 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_.” - -[106] Gousset, Lettres à M. le Curé ... Lettre 8. Cf. Gury, l. c. II. -Tract. de Sacram. Pœnit. P. I. n. 430-439; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Moral. -l. c. cp. I. nn. 27 et 26, where he signalizes these objections as -_inanes objectiones nonnullorum, etiam recentiorum in Gallia, qui antiqua -præjudicia janseniana incaute ebiberunt_. - -[107] Sess. XIV. cp. 4. - -[108] Compare on this subject the lengthy discussions of Suarez, De -Pœnitentia, Disp. 3, Sect. 2; Lugo, De Pœnitentia, Disp. 4, Sect. 1; -Reuter, Theol. Moral. P. IV. n. 243; and particularly the very lucid -exposition of Palmieri, Tract. de Pœnit. (Roma, 1879) cap. IV. De act. -pœnit. art. I. § 1, p. 214 sq. - -[109] L. c. L. VI. n. 435. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. de -Contritione, n. 14. - -[110] Stotz, Tribunal Pœnitent. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I. art. II. - -[111] 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 _attritio_. -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 heilig. Sakramenten, II. Bd. -Fünft. Teil, Zweit. Abschnitt, Erst. Hauptst. § 7, S. 82.) - -[112] Lugo, De Pœnit. Disput. V. Sect. 9, n. 132; Palmieri, Tract. de -Pœnit. l. c. th. 21, p. 223. - -[113] Since perfect contrition arises from perfect love, it is of great -importance, 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 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 Conc., 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 I 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.” (Müller, Theol. Moral. l. c. § 112.) - -[114] Cf. S. Thomas, II. II. Q. 106, a. 5. - -[115] Compare Deharbe, Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes, § 6, pp. 139-179. - -[116] See Perfect Contrition by Von den Driesch, translated by Father J. -Slater, S.J. - -[117] Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. P. I. Lib. I. Tract. I. cp. III. § 1. - -[118] Deharbe, Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes, p. 158. - -[119] Cf. S. Thomas, Supplem. Q. 5. a. 3; S. Alphons. Lib. VI. n. 441; -Gury, II. n. 453; Palmieri, Tract. de Pœnitentia, Thes. XXIV. p. 262 sq. - -[120] Cat. Roman. P. II. cp. 5, n. 27. - -[121] Compare Oswald, Die dogmat. Lehre von den heil. Sakramenten, -Fünfter Teil, Zweiter Abschnitt, § 7, III. Aufl. S. 71 ff.; Deharbe, -Die vollkommene Liebe Gottes, §§ 2, 3, 6, 8; Suarez, De Pœn. Disp. II. -Sect. 3 et Disp. IV. Sect. 2; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 35-42; -Palmieri, Tract. de Pœn. Thes. IV, V; Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. P. I. L. I. -Tr. I. n. 318. - -[122] Sess. XIV. cp. 4. - -[123] The proof is well developed by P. Palmieri, S.J., Tract, de -Pœnitent. Theses XXII et XXIII, p. 224 (Romæ, 1879). Cf. S. Thomas, II. -II. QQ. 23-27. - -[124] I. John iv. 16. - -[125] Supplem. Q. 5, a. 3. _Quantumcunque parvus sit dolor, dummodo ad -contritionis rationem sufficiat, omnem culpam delet._ - -[126] Lib. VI. n. 441. - -[127] S. Thom. Supplem. Q. 5. a. 2 ad 1. _Contritio vera non fuit, nisi -propositum confitendi habuerit annexum; quod debet ad effectum reduci -etiam propter præceptum quod est de confessione datum._ - -[128] John xiv. 23. - -[129] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 437, Dub. 4. - -[130] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 275; Müller, l. c. § 113, 2. - -[131] S. Thom. III. Q. 89, a. 4; Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. X. Sect. 2. - -[132] Sess. VI. c. 14; Sess. XIV. c. 8 et can. 12. - -[133] S. Bonavent. Theol. verit. L. VI. c. 24. S. Thomas, Suppl. Q. 5, a. -2. Ballerini, De Pœnit. L. VI. c. 6. - -[134] Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. l. c., from which we infer that penance is -necessary for salvation _necessitate medii_. - -[135] Ballerini deals excellently with this point in his Op. Theol. Mor. -in cp. III. De præc. et oblig. confession, n. 138 ss. Cf. Suarez, De -Pœnit. Disp. 15, Sect. 6, n. 7; Sporer, De Pœn. n. 186. - -[136] In Ezechiel, Lib. I. Hom. 11, n. 24. - -[137] I. II. Q. 109, a. 8. - -[138] Lib. VI. n. 437. - -[139] Tract. 16, cp. 2, n. 10. - -[140] 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 _præceptum caritatis_ which we ought to obey _sæpius in vita_ -calls for an act of contrition. - -Aertnys reconciles this affirmative opinion of Lugo, Suarez, St. -Alphonsus, 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 obligatione per accidens_, so that the sinner who -fails to elicit an act of perfect contrition within a reasonable period -is not to be acquitted of incurring a new mortal sin. Aertnys, l. c. -Lib. VI. Tract. V. cp. 3, n. 168. St. Alphonsus expressly condemns the -view of Concina and Roncaglia that a delay of a week is a considerable -period; and similarly he rejects the opinion of Laymann, Lugo, the -Salmanticenses, 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 general -answer is made that the object of any given precept does not fall under -the precept. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. III. n. 1035 ss. - -[141] Müller, l. c. Lib. III. I. II. § 115, I; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 278; -Aertnys, l. c. n. 168, Q. I. - -[142] H. A. l. c. n. 11, Lib. VI. n. 437, Dub. 2; Suarez, Disp. 15, Sect. -4, n. 19; Lacroix, Lib. II. n. 142, etc. - -[143] 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 contrition, founded on the fear of hell, by making a man a -hypocrite, makes him a greater sinner. Cf. Bellarmin, De Pœn. Lib. II. -cp. 2; Möhler, Symbolism, § 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 “Unigenitus,” proscript; Prop. 15 et 16 damn. ab -Alexandro VIII, in which some of Quesnel’s errors are again condemned. - -[144] Cf. Bellarmin, l. c. Lib. II. cp. 17; Perrone, De Pœnitent. n. -46 s.; Ripalda, De Ente supernaturali, Tom. IV. Disp. 22, Sect. 4-11, -et Lib. VI. Disp. ult. n. 458-460; Palmieri, Tract. de Pœnitentia, -pp. 280-353 (Rom. 1879); Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. I. De -sufficientia attritionis, n. 42-50. - -[145] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 440; Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. -Q. III. cp. III. § 2; Stotz, l. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I. a. VI; Aertnys, -l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. n. 176; Palmieri, Tract. de Pœnit. Thes. XXV. p. -286 ss. - -[146] II. II. Q. 19, a. 2-9. - -[147] II. II. Q. 19, a. 2; Stotz, l. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. I. - -[148] Pallavicini, Hist. Concil. Trid. L. XIII. c. 10. Palmieri tries to -weaken the force of this argument; see Tract. de Pœnit. Thesis XXX. p. -331 ss. - -[149] “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. -s.” - -[150] Cf. _Proœmium_ to the Fourth Session _de s. Pœnitent. sacram._: -“Although the œcumenical ... 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. - -[151] Sess. XIV. cp. IV. - -[152] The words at the beginning of the fourth chapter: “_non solum -cessationem a peccato et vitæ novæ 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. - -[153] Compare § 12. - -[154] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 442. Objic. III; Scavini, Theol. Moralis -Universa, T. IV. Tract. X. Disp. I. cp. II. art. I. n. 23; Mazzotta, -l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. III. cp. III. § 2; Aertnys, l. c. n. 177; -Lehmkuhl, l. 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. Fünfter -Teil, Zweiter Abschn. Erst. Hauptst. § 7, p. 86 ff. III. Aufl.; Müller, -l. 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_. - -[155] Scavini, l. c. Tract. X. Adnotat. n. 188 et 189. - -[156] S. Thom. De Spe, a. 3; and St. Francis de Sales writes: “La -pénitence nait dedans l’amour et plusieurs fois la pénitence venant en -nos esprits l’amour vient en la pénitence.” Theot. L. II. c. 20. - -[157] Reuter, S.J., Theol. Moral. P. IV. n. 2, § 3; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. -442 in fine. - -[158] Compare Trident. Sess. XIV. cp. 4 et can. 5. - -[159] Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. I. De attritione existimata, -n. 51 ss. - -[160] Matt. xv. 19. - -[161] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 449; Scavini, l. c. Tract. X. Disp. I. -cap. II. art. I. n. 12; Lacroix, Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. p. 2, n. 666; -Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. De attritione, n. 77 ss. Cf. Suarez, De -Pœn. Disp. 9, Sect. 1; Lugo, De Pœn. Disp. 4, n. 93. - -[162] Cf. Busenbaum, Theol. Moral. Tract. IV. (de Sacram. pœnit.) c. 1, -d. 11, resolv. 1 et 2; Lehmkuhl, l. c. P. II. Lib. I. Tract. V. Sect. II. -§ 2, n. 284; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. - -[163] Theol. Mor. p. IV. n. 247. - -[164] Cf. Vasquez, De Pœnit. Q. 86, Dub. 4, de proposito; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -Tract. V. De Sacram. Pœn Sect. II. § 2, n. 284. - -[165] Theol. Moral. l. c. n. 286; similarly Aertnys, l. c. Cf. Ballerini, -Op. Theol. Mor. cp. I. n. 141; Suarez, De Pœn. Disp. 4, Sect. 2, n. 7. - -[166] S. Alph. l. c. n. 439; Reuter, Theol. Mor. p. II. n. 36 et p. IV. -n. 247. - -[167] De Pœnit. Disp. 20, Sect. 2, n. 10. Cf. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 5, n. -137; S. Alph. L. VI. n. 443; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. I. n. -105-110. - -[168] Lehmkuhl, l. c. Tract. V. (Sacr. Pœnit.) Sect. II. § 2, n. 287; -Aertnys, l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. cp. III. art. 2, n. 179; Scavini, l. -c. Tract. X. Disp. I. cp. II. art. 1; Gury-Ballerini, l. c. Tract. De -Sacram. Pœnit. n. 452, Q. VII; Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. 3, -cp. 3, § 1, n. 2. - -[169] Ezechiel xviii. 21. - -[170] C. 22. - -[171] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 449, Dub. 2; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. -cp. I. De dolore venialiam, n. 96-105. - -[172] Suarez (De Pœnit. Disp. 20, Sect. 6, n. 7) and Lugo (Disp. 14, n. -48) teach clearly that a penitent who confesses (venial) sins for which -there is no sorrow, along with others without indicating the known defect -of sorrow, would sin venially by mixing up proper and improper matter. -Their view, however, is singular and is combated by other theologians. -In particular Mazzotta (l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. III. § 2, v. f.) -gives the correct solution to the objection that to confess venial sins -for which there is no sorrow, is a lie and a nullifying of the Sacrament, -because the act of confessing these sins is _exercite_ a declaration of -sorrow for them. He replies that, even granting the objection, it is in -any case a lie in a matter of less moment, and so at the most a venial -sin, whence there can be no nullifying of the Sacrament. He denies also -that such confession is a lie, for, in accordance with the feeling and -practice of the faithful, the penitent by such confession of venial -sins states _exercite_ that he is sorry for _some_ of them and wishes -to be absolved; with regard to the rest he reveals them for his greater -humiliation and shame, or in order to disclose the state of his soul, -just as he may also reveal his evil inclinations and irregular desires, -though they are not sins. Even when a penitent is sorry only for the -greater sins, and yet says at the end of his confession, “For these and -all my other sins I am sorry,” he tells no lie, for these words have no -other meaning in their ordinary acceptance than this, that he is sorry -for all the sins from which he can and wants to be absolved. It is just -the same when a man confesses many venial sins and is sorry only on -account of their great number, for he can easily see a peculiar malice -in the habit of committing such venial sins, and on that account can -more easily excite himself to sorrow for them. Mazzotta, l. c.; Lugo and -Suarez, l. c.; Stotz, Trib. Pœnit. Lib. I. Pars II. Q. I. art. 4, n. 20; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 290, 291. - -[173] Cf. S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 3, art. 1; Stotz, Tribunal Pœnit. l. c. art. -IV. n. 16, 17; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 110. - -[174] S. Thom. Quodlib. 1, art. 9 (_non modo imprudentiæ sed stultitiæ -eum morem arguit_); S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 433; Stotz, l. c.; Ballerini, -Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 116 s. - -[175] Cf. S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 3, art. 2; Martin, Lehrbuch der kath. Moral. -§ 243. - -[176] Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. I. n. 111; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -Tract. V. Sacr. Pœn. Sect. II. cp. I. § 2, n, 285, 3. On the subject of -the _dolor quo non doleas_ see Ballerini, l. c. n. 114 s. - -[177] This is in accordance with the Roman Ritual, which, Tit. III. cp. -I (Ordo ministrandi Sacr. Pœnit. n. 17), says: “After the confessor has -heard the confession ... he should try by earnest exhortation to move the -penitent to contrition.” - -[178] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 447; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. I: -_an dolor ordinandus ad sacramentum_, n. 120-129; Lehmkuhl, l. c. Sect. -II. cp. I. § 1, n. 280; Gury-Ballerini, Compend. Theol. Mor. Tract. de -Sacr. Pœn. art. I. § 1, n. 447, Q. 7; Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. 20, Sect. -4, n. 29; Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 37-40; Vindic. Alph. p. 935, n. -108 et pp. 411-418; Aertnys, l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. cp. III. art. II. -n. 179, Q. 4. - -[179] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 446; H. Ap. Tract. 16, n. 20. - -[180] Cf. Tamburini, Method. conf. Lib. I. cp. 3, § 4; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -Sect. II. cp. I. § 1, n. 281. - -[181] Cf. Gury-Ballerini, II. l. c. n. 448; Baller. Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. -cp. I. n. 129 ss.; Aertnys, l. c.; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 282; Mazzotta, l. -c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. III. q. I. § 3. - -[182] Müller (l. c. Lib. III. Tract. II. § 116) founds his advice as to -renewing the act of sorrow on the rule _in praxi tutius est sequendum_, -since it is a case of securing the validity of a Sacrament. He is in -error, however, for the other (affirmative) opinion hardly deserves to -be considered probable on account of the very weak grounds on which it -rests. We must at the same time remember that the penitent in this case -is certainly justified, and that he has fulfilled the divine precept of -demanding direct absolution for all his sins when he confesses his sins -in accordance with the first opinion. - -[183] Compare § 42; Gury-Ballerini, l. c. This doctrine is pushed still -farther, and it is taught that a man may be absolved several times from -sins, even though he has confessed them or other sins two or three times -without renewing his contrition, so long as he has not revoked the -contrition, and so long as it remains habitual and virtual. This is not -to be understood as though the absolution may be given after the lapse -of weeks and months on the strength of a single act of contrition; this -would be a very doubtful proceeding, since the virtual continuance of the -sorrow which is required is not to be understood of the mere habitual -disposition of the heart, but only of the virtual existence which may -still intentionally unite the sorrow with the absolution. Cf. Tamburini, -l. c. Lib. I. cp. 2, § 5; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 282. - -[184] Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 447, Nota a. - -[185] Scavini, l. c. Tract. X. Disp. I. cp. II. art. I. Adnot. - -[186] Cf. Stotz, l. c. art. VI. n. 114. - -[187] Cf. Scavini, l. c. Adnotat. n. 191, and Trucchi, Metodo practico -per la facile e sicura amministrat. del Sacr. della Penit. - -[188] Sess. XIV. cp. IV. - -[189] De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 52 s. - -[190] Ballerini points out particularly that the older theologians, -as Petrus Lombardus, St. Thomas, Blessed Albert, Scotus, Durandus, -were quoted without reason as upholders of this view, for, though they -insisted on the necessity of some sort of purpose of amendment, they made -no distinction between a formal and a virtual purpose. Cf. Bellarmin, De -Pœnit. Lib. II. cp. 6. Moreover, Suarez, Cajetan, Bonacina, Henriquez, -and Gregory of Valentia are wrongly quoted in favor of this view; they -taught the very opposite. Cf. Ballerini, Notæ, l. c. ad n. 462. - -[191] The purpose of amendment must be universal, and, as we shall show -later, with a universality distinct from that of the contrition. If the -sorrow proceeded from a particular motive which _nec actu nec virtute_ -extended to the other sins, it is clear that the resolution to amend -implied in such sorrow could hardly be universal. If, for example, a man -conceived sorrow for the sin of impurity only on account of the peculiar -ugliness of that vice, the purpose of amendment contained in such a -sorrow would suffice indeed so far as it applied to impurity, but not -for other sins, because the motive is a particular one not extending to -other sins. If, then, the sorrow is based on some particular motive, an -explicit purpose of amendment must be made extending to all sins. - -If the sorrow proceed from a general motive applicable to all sins (if a -man, for example, is sorry for having committed a serious theft because -it is a grave offense against God), it is impossible that he should be -willing to offend God again by any other grave sin, for in consequence of -his act of contrition he hates and detests whatever offends God. Whoever -heartily detests his sins from a universal motive will be slow ever -to fall into them again; for no man will do that which he hates as an -offense against God. “But when the Council of Trent speaks of the purpose -of amendment, it speaks of it in the same way as of the resolution to go -to confession and make satisfaction, and this need not be explicit. As it -is sufficient that this resolution be virtual, it is also enough to make -a virtual resolution of reforming one’s life and sinning no more; it is -always a real resolution, though it be only a ‘virtual one.’ And since -eminent authorities interpret the Council of Trent in this manner, we may -without misgiving follow their decision.” Stotz, l. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. -II. art. III n. 88 ss. - -[192] Ballerini, Notæ ad n. 462, pp. 348-356 (Ed. Romana, 1887), and Opus -Theolog. Morale, l. c. (_An sufficiat propositum virtuale_), n. 143-155. - -[193] This is also the doctrine of the Council held at Rome in 1725 under -Benedict XIII in the Lateran Basilica. - -[194] Suarez, De Pœn. Disp. 20, Sect. 4, n. 33. - -[195] S. Alph. Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. n. 450. - -[196] The Turin edition of his Moral Theology defends the doctrine -held in the present work, and shows that the holy Doctor was always -expending labor on the text of the Moral Theology and correcting it up -to the end of his life. Aertnys, moreover, declares (appealing to S. -Alph. Theol. Moral. Lib. I. n. 53, Lib. III. n. 700, and Lib. VI. n. -505) that there is no obligation of repeating the confession; and Marcus -(Institut. Moral. Alphons. P. III. Tract. V. Diss. II. cp. I. art. II. -n. 1680) adopts Scavini’s view: _In praxi_ no one need be disturbed in -this matter, since it can hardly happen that a really contrite penitent -will omit the formal purpose of amendment. Müller (l. c. § 117) requires -for the validity of the confession a formal resolution to amend, and -maintains that confessions made without the formal resolution are to be -repeated. - -[197] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 298. Cf. Stotz, l. c. n. 92. - -[198] Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. 32, Sect. 2, n. 2. - -[199] Cajetan, Card. Sum. V. Confess. ad 12 qualit. - -[200] Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 7, n. 238. - -[201] Compare Lehmkuhl, l. c. Tract. V. Sacr. Pœnit, Sect. II. cp. I. § -3, n. 295. - -[202] S. Thomas, III. Q. 84, a. 10 ad 4. Compare S. Bonaventure in IV. -Sent. Dist. 14, p. 1, d. 4; S. Alph. Praxis Confess. cp. 1, n. 20; Theol. -Mor. Lib. VI. n. 451. - -[203] Tit. III. cp. I. De Sacr. Pœn. n. 19. - -[204] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 459. - -[205] Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. De Pœn. n. 451. Cf. Ballerini, Op. -Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 162. - -[206] Medulla Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. De Sacr. Pœn. cp. 1. - -[207] Lib. VI. p. 2, n. 1822. - -[208] This may be regarded as the _communis theologorum doctrina_; -indeed many theologians (St. Alphonsus mentions among others _loco -citato_ Laymann, Sporer, Suarez, Henriquez) hold that a penitent who -believes (_credat_) that he will fall again can always and absolutely -be considered as being in good disposition. They do not mean by this a -despair of reform, but rather a grave fear which may be consistent with -a firm hope in the aids of grace and a fixed determination of never -sinning. Besides, as Lacroix explains, the phrase _si credat_ must be -taken in a mitigated sense and be understood of the misgiving natural to -a careful person. It is the duty of the penitent to take courage and free -himself from this misgiving. Compare Lacroix, l. c., and Gury-Ballerini, -l. c. Tract. de Pœn. P. II. cp. I. art. II. n. 461, Nota a, and Op. -Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 159 ss. - -[209] Cf. Gury-Ballerini, l. c. - -[210] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 451; Stotz, l. c. Lib. I. P. II. Q. -II. art. V. n. 102 s. - -[211] Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 4; S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 451. - -[212] The reason for this doctrine is very clearly put in Lugo’s -_Responsa Moralia_, Lib. I. dub. 29, where he answers the difficulty -how a man may make an efficacious and sufficient act of contrition with -respect to one species of sin, excluding other species. The learned -author remarks:— - -1. That if a man repent of his sins from a universal and general motive, -he embraces of necessity all his sins in this act of contrition. If, -then, such a motive excite a man to repentance, he is of necessity moved -to shun all sin. - -2. Such motives, however,—and this is a point well worth noticing,—may -excite contrition in a more restricted manner; for instance, the graver -the sins, the more they displease and offend God; hence a man may be -led to hate this excess of wickedness. In this case “the motive of the -contrition is not the offense of God as such, but that gravity of the -offense which is not found in other venial sins.” - -3. All this being now assumed, the difficulty remains whether a penitent, -for instance, who is contrite for slight lies, must at least virtually -repent of other venial sins of another species, which are graver -than, or at least as grave as, that class of lies, or whether he can -have contrition sufficient for sacramental absolution for those lies -without repenting virtually of venial sins of another species as great -or greater. This may be the case if the formal motive of sorrow is a -particular one; for instance here the hatred which God, the Eternal -Truth, must have for lies. It does not hold if the sorrow proceed from -the motive of penance, for we could not hate anything as offensive -to God and at the same time be ready to offend Him in other matters. -The same holds true if we are really sorry for sin through fear of -hell-fire. “There are occasions, however, when the motive of sorrow may -be particular—when, for instance, a man is sorry for the irreverence done -to God because it is an injury to His divine Majesty (such a motive is -called a motive of religion); he is not obliged even virtually to repent -of graver or equally grave venial sins of another species, except they -involve an irreverence equally incompatible with the virtue of religion.” - -Lugo also shows that a similar case happens when a man repents of some -particular species of sin, _e.g._ of lying, not on account of the -disobedience to God which every sin includes, but on account of the -disobedience involved in transgressing a special command of God, or -rather on account of the opposition of these sins to the special law of -God which forbids us to violate the truth. - -Moreover, he adds that the same holds true in regard of the special -temporal sufferings which God inflicts for particular species of sins, -_e.g._ disrespect to parents. - -[213] S. Alph. Praxis Confessarii, n. 71; Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 449. -Cf. S. Thom. III. Q. 87, a. 1. - -[214] Compare above, § 3. - -[215] Sess. XIV. cp. 2. - -[216] Compare § 46. - -[217] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. P. II. cp. II. Confessio, art. I. § 2, n. 313, -314; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. I. art. 3, n. 457. - -[218] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 495-497; H. Apost. Tr. 16, n. 28. - -[219] See §§ 47, 54. - -[220] Philothea, Part I. Chap. 4. - -[221] Suarez, Disp. 28; Stotz, l. c. Lib. I. P. I. Q. II. art. II. - -[222] Ecclus. vi. 14 ss. - -[223] Compare Philothea, _ibid._ - -[224] Cf. Stotz, l. c. Lib. I. P. I. Q. II. art. II. n. 116-124. - -[225] Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 5. - -[226] Cap. Omnis utriusque sexus. - -[227] Cf. Declar. S. C. S. Off. 28 Feb. 1633 et 10 Feb. 1668; item S. C. -Prop. Fid. 1633 in Collectan. S. Sedis, n. 476-478. - -[228] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 479; Lugo, De Pœn. Disp. XV. Sect. V; Aertnys, -l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. n. 196. - -[229] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 328. - -[230] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 429, 493; Suarez, Opusc., Lugo, Coninck, etc., -Konings, Theol. Mor. T. II. Tract. De Sacram. Pœn. cp. II. art. II. n. -1358. - -[231] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 479; H. A. n. 35; Gury-Ballerini (l. c. -II. n. 503) and Lehmkuhl (l. c. n. 328) object to binding the dumb to a -written confession; _a fortiori_ the confessor may refrain from putting -questions in writing with a view of making the confession more complete. -If, however, a dumb person desire to confess in writing, the confessor is -at liberty to comply with his wish. - -[232] The following well-known definition is much like the above: the -confession is materially entire in which nothing is wanting which _per se -loquendo_ ought to be confessed, _i.e._ when nothing is wanting which _de -se_ forms the necessary matter of confession; the confession is formally -entire when nothing is wanting in the accusation through the fault of the -penitent. Cf. Konings, l. c. n. 1359. - -Moralists are not of one mind on the definition of formal and material -integrity; some understand by material integrity the avowal of all -mortal sins not yet confessed which occur to the mind (after a careful -examination of conscience, as Müller expressly adds, l. c. 120), since -they form the _materia necessaria sacramenti et confessionis_; formal -integrity, on the other hand, consists in the avowal of all mortal sins -which here and now (_hic et nunc_), taking all the circumstances into -consideration, can and ought to be confessed. Thus Gury, l. c. Edit. -Romana (Ballerini) et Edit. Lugd. (Dumas), n. 468 (where, however, the -author is not quite consistent, cf. n. 470); while on the other hand -the Edit. Ratisb. as also Laymann, De Pœnitent. cp. 8, n. 5, and Stotz, -l. c. Lib. I. P. III. Q. II. art. IV; Scavini, l. c. Tom. IV. Tract. -X. Disp. I. cp. II. art. II. n. 38, have the above definition. We give -the preference to it on grounds which will appear in the course of the -treatise; moreover, it is more common and is in harmony with the teaching -of the Council of Trent. The words which St. Alphonsus employs in the -definition of material integrity seem to favor the latter view. Cf. Lib. -VI. n. 465. - -[233] Sess. XIV. cp. 5, De Confessione. - -[234] Sess. XIV. can. 7. - -[235] L. c. cp. 5. - -[236] Trid. l. c. cp. 5. Compare Palmieri, l. c. Thes. XXXIII; Gury, l. -c. II. n. 469; Aertnys, l. c. n. 185; Lehmkuhl, l. c. cp. II. (Confessio) -art. I. n. 302. - -[237] It is to be noted that in speaking of the classification of sins -we abstract from the _physical_, we confine ourselves to the _moral_ -species which indicates the peculiar _malice_ of the sin; for instance, -the ordeal by fire is _physically_ distinct from the ordeal by water, but -_morally_ they are in the same species, because the malice is the same in -both sins. Cf. Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. 22, Sect. 2, n. 3. - -[238] Sess. XIV. cp. 5. - -[239] Lehmkuhl, l. c. P. II. Lib. I. Tract. V. Sacr. Pœnit. Sect. II. cp. -II. art. I. § 2, n. 307. - -[240] _Cum actu interno a quo procedit facit unum complete individuum -in genere moris, actus enim externus se habet veluti materia, internus -veluti forma unius operationis humanæ._ Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. -I. Q. IV. cp. III. - -[241] Reuter, Theol. Mor. P. IV. Tract. V. De Confess. Q. VI. n. 317; -Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. cp. III. - -[242] The effect of a mortal sin is _omne id quod consequitur ad totum -peccatum completum in individuo_; _e.g._ the wish to kill is externally -completed _in esse peccati_ by the giving of poison; the death which -ensues is called the _effectus peccati_. - -[243] Mazzotta, l. c. cp. III. with Lugo, Salm., Tamb., etc. Cf. Marc, P. -Cl., Institut. Moral. Alphons. Tom. II. P. III. Tract. V. De Pœnit. n. -1692. - -[244] This is _communis theologorum doctrina_. Cf. S. Alph. l. c. Lib. -VI. n. 466; Reuter, l. c. Tract. V. De Confess. n. 312; Lugo, Disp. 16, -Sect. 2. - -[245] Lehmk. l. c. cp. II. Confessio, art. I. § 1, n. 305. - -[246] S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 20. Compare Casus Bened. XIV, pro anno -1744, mens. Jun. cas. 3. A man confesses that for a month he has -been harboring evil thoughts against his friend, and during the same -time entertaining impure thoughts about a woman; the question is put -whether such a confession is sufficiently complete. The answer is -given _distinguendo_: 1. If the penitent has occasionally recalled his -unfriendly wishes or impure desires, and has not fallen into them very -often, the confession is not sufficient. 2. If he has never retracted -in either case and has fallen frequently into those sins every day, the -statement will suffice as it stands. - -[247] Cf. Lugo, l. c. Disp. 16, n. 573; Sporer, Theolog. Moral. Sacram. -P. III. cp. III. Q. IV. n. 452. - -[248] Lugo, l. c. n. 574; Sporer, l. c. n. 453; Reuter, l. c. n. 313. - -[249] Lugo, l. c. n. 575; Sporer, l. c. n. 453. - -[250] Cf. Lugo, l. c., and Sporer, l. c. - -[251] Disp. 16, n. 146 et seq. - -[252] L. c. 1060, etc. - -[253] De matrimon. L. 7, Disp. 27 et seq. - -[254] Editio in Germania V (Ratisb. 1874), P. II. Tract. de Confess. n. -492. - -[255] Gury-Ballerini, Ed. IX (Romæ, 1887), P. II. Tract. de Confess. n. -492, Q. 12 et P. I. n. 286. - -[256] L. c. Tract. V. De Sacram. Pœnit. Sect. II. cp. II. Confess. art. -I. Sect. 2, n. 310, and P. I. L. I. Tract. II. cp. II. art. II. n. 385, -and cp. III. art. II. n. 455. - -[257] Cf. S. Thomas, II. II. Q. 88, art. 3; Suarez, l. c. n. 1 et seq., -Tract. VI. l. 5, c. 3, n. 2 et seq. - -[258] Cf. Gury, ed. Ratisbon, l. c. - -[259] Lugo, Disp. 16, n. 298. - -[260] Gury-Ballerini, I. n. 286, and Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 16, n. 466 sqq. - -[261] Cf. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 16, n. 213 sqq. - -[262] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. Tract. V. Sacr. Pœn. Sect. II. cp. II. Conf. -art. I. § 2, n. 308, and Th. M. Gen. Tract. I. cp. III. § 2, n. 31. - -[263] Propos. 58 damn. - -[264] See § 48, The Duty of the Confessor with regard to asking -Questions. Compare §§ 64, 65. - -[265] Cf. Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. Disp. I. Q. IV. De Confess, cp. 3; -Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 485. - -[266] De considerat. II. 13. - -[267] Cf. S. Thomas, II. II. Q. 186, art. 9 ad 3. - -[268] Cf. S. Thomas, I. II. Q. 88, art. 2. - -[269] Cf. S. Thomas, I. II. Q. 88, art. 5; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 59-63; -Gury-Dumas, I. n. 153; Scavini, I. n. 734. - -[270] Cf. S. Thomas, I. II. Q. 88, art. 1 et 2; S. Alph. l. c. n. 54; -Gury-Dumas, l. c. - -[271] On this controversy see, in addition to S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. -468-471 and Lugo, l. c. Disp. 16, Sect. 3, Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. -c. cp. I (de integr. mat.), n. 352-365. - -[272] De Pœnit. Disp. 16, n. 115. - -[273] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. De Pœnit. P. II. cp. III. art. 3, n. 192. - -[274] P. II. De Pœnit. cp. 5, n. 47. - -[275] S. Alph. l. c. n. 468 ad prob. 3 ex ratione. - -[276] Gury-Ballerini, l. c. P. II. cp. 2, art. II. n. 484; Aertnys, l. c. - -[277] Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 484, nota c. - -[278] S. Alph. l. c. n. 473 and H. A. n. 30; Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. -Disp. 1. Q. IV. de Conf. cp. 4. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. (de -peccatis dubiis) n. 374. - -[279] Cf. Lugo, Disp. 16, n. 58. - -[280] Compare in particular Sanchez, Suarez, Lugo, Laymann, Sporer, etc. - -[281] Nearly all the later theologians hold this doctrine. Ballerini -(Not. ad Gury et Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 377) calls the opinion that one -is obliged to confess _peccata dubia_ downright false. Cf. Müller, l. c. -Sect. 121; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 317; Gury, l. c. n. 477; Marc, l. c. Tract. -V. De Pœnit. Diss. II. cp. II. art. II. Sect. l, n. 1695, etc. - -[282] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 317. - -[283] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c.; Mazzotta, l. c. De oris confessione, cp. 4. -St. Alphonsus declares very precisely that St. Thomas’ doctrine on this -matter is not against us: “He does not speak of a penitent who after -diligent examination of conscience comes to the conclusion that his sin -is doubtfully mortal and then lays aside his doubt in accordance with -the rule that there is no certain obligation where it is question of a -doubtful transgression; he is rather considering the case of the penitent -who is certain that he has performed a sinful act but cannot decide -whether it was gravely sinful or not; such a penitent is, of course, -obliged to take pains to remove the doubt, and if he cannot settle he -must submit it to the judgment of his confessor, whose office it is to -distinguish between sin and sin.” S. Alph. l. c. n. 474 (fin.). - -[284] S. Alph. l. c. n. 475. - -[285] Habert, t. 3 de consc. Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 476. - -[286] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 476; Reuter, l. c. P. IV. n. 306 ss. - -[287] Cf. Lacroix, l. c. Lib. VI. P. 2, n. 612; S. Alph. l. c. n. 476. - -[288] S. Alph. l. c. n. 478. Cf. H. A. De Sacr. Pœnit. cp. 3, n. 34. - -[289] Lugo, l. c. Disput. 16, n. 52, n. 87, n. 78. - -[290] Cf. Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, l. c. n. 480, and Op. Theol. Mor. l. -c. n. 380 ss.; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 318; Aertnys, l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. V. -P. II. cp. 3, art. 3, n. 193, Q. 4; Müller, l. c. Lib. III. T. II Sect. -121, is wrong in calling the affirmative opinion _communissima et vera_. - -[291] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 319. Cf. Aertnys: _In praxi, præsumptio amovet -dubitationem_; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 379. - -[292] Suarez, Bonacina, Lugo, Salmanticenses, Lacroix, etc. - -[293] S. Alph. l. c. n. 477. Thus the holy Doctor does not express a -general obligation of confessing the sins in this case. In the _Quæst. -rec. reform._ n. 16 he appeals from Suarez, Lugo, etc., to Concina, -who, along with others, teaches the obligation of confession _cum dubia -sit confessio et certa sit confessionis obligatio_ (see _Vindiciæ -Alphonsianæ_). Meanwhile, as Ballerini shows, St. Alphonsus in the Roman -edition of his Moral Theology of the year 1757, which is dedicated to -Benedict XIV, releases the penitent from the obligation of repeating the -confession _ut etiam communiter dicunt Suarez, Sanchez, Lugo_, etc., -etc. And Lugo writes (De Pœnit. Disp. 16, n. 58): _Communiter docent -omnes non teneri_ (_quempiam_) _ad confitendum illud_ (_peccatum_) _quod -probabiliter judicat se ... confessum jam fuisse_. Cf. n. 59, where the -same subject is treated of: _nihil frequentius apud theologos_, etc. -Hence the _sententia communis_ of theologians is that within the given -limits there is no obligation, so that Ballerini justly exclaims: “Who -would not rather abide by St. Alphonsus when he follows those great -theological luminaries than when he clings to Concina!” “And has Concina -thereby taught anything new? Indeed, since the whole question rests on -a general principle, are we to rate so low the common teaching of such -great theologians as to grant the privilege of clearer intuition to the -judgment of the rigorist Concina?” Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, l. c. n. 479. -Cf. Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 382 ss. - -[294] S. Alph. l. c. n. 478; Sanchez, l. c. Lib. I. c. 10, n. 69; Suarez, -l. c., etc. Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 193, Q. 4. - -[295] Cf. S. Antonin. Summa, P. III. Tit. 14, c. 19, § 14. - -[296] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 321 ss.; Aertnys, l. c. De Pœnitent. Art. -III. Confessio, n. 187, Q. 1, and Acta S. Sedis, Vol. 4, p. 320. Cf. the -note of Fr. Haringer, C.SS.R., to St. Alphonsus’ Moral Theology, Lib. -VI. Tract. IV. De Pœnit. n. 488; Wilmers, Lehrbuch der Religion, Fourth -Edition, 1886, Vol. IV. § 74, p. 674. - -[297] Cf. _Appendix ad Concil. plen. Baltim._ II. in _Collect. Lac._ T. -III. col. 550. - -[298] See § 27. - -[299] Cf. Mazzotta, l. c. De Oris Confess. cp. 5; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 323 -s.; Gury-Baller. II. De Pœn. n. 494 s. - -[300] Lugo, De Euchar. n. 126; Suarez, Disputat. 66 s. 3; Lacroix, n. -539; Salmanticenses, De Euch. c. 7, p. 3, n. 30, etc. - -[301] Sess. XIII. cp. 7. - -[302] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. III. De Euchar. cp. II. Dub. II. -n. 257; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 325; Aertnys, l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. De -Euchar. Art. III. n. 98, Q. II. - -[303] Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 495; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 326. - -[304] Sess. XIII. cp. 5. - -[305] Cf. Gury, l. c. n. 497; Aertnys, l. c. n. 104; and Lehmkuhl, l. c. -art. III. n. 327. - -[306] S. Alph. l. c. L. VI. n. 485. - -[307] Reuter, Theol. Moral. Quadripartita, Tom. IV. Tract. V. Q. IX. n. -331, exempl. - -[308] Reuter, l. c. n. 331, exempl. 5; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 329. - -[309] Compare § 20, Confessions of the Dumb who are Able to Write. - -[310] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 644; Prax. Conf. n. 104; H. Ap. n. 155; -Gury-Ballerini, l. c. II. n. 503, Not.; Aertnys, l. c. n. 297, Q. III. - -[311] Aertnys, l. c. n. 195, Q. I; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 330. - -[312] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 195, and Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 332. - -[313] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 331; Stotz, l. c. Lib. I. P. III. Q. II. nn. 68 -et 69. - -[314] S. Alph. l. c. n. 488; Aertnys, l. c.; Elbel, Theol. Moral. Vol. -III. P. IX. De Pœnit. n. 150. See § 72, Treatment of the Scrupulous in -Confession. - -[315] S. Alph. l. c.; Stotz and Aertnys, l. c. - -[316] L. c. n. 331. Cf. St. Alph. l. c. n. 487. - -[317] Cf. Aertnys, Lib. III. Tract. VIII. De octavo Præcepto Decalogi, n. -534, Q. 2. - -[318] Lugo, l. c. n. 398. - -[319] In IV. dist. 16, Q. 3, a. 2. - -[320] Disp. 34, Sect. 2. - -[321] Disp. 16, n. 398 sq. - -[322] Q. 91, dub. 3, a. 2. - -[323] C. 8, n. 128. - -[324] P. IV. n. 321. - -[325] L. c. n. 489. - -[326] S. Alph. l. c. 490; Gury-Baller. II. 500, Q. II. - -[327] De Pœnit. Disp. I. Q. IV. cp. 7, § 1 _ab initio_. - -[328] Cf. Lugo, Disp. 16, l. c.; Tamburini, Meth. conf. 1. 2, c. 9, § 2. - -[329] Thus Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 334 ss.; cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 196, Q. -10; Lugo, l. c. Ballerini, however, l. c. n. 499, Q. I, concludes thus -in his notes: Ergo, seclusis aliis incommodis, _integra manere videtur -obligatio_ circumstantiam illam tacendi quando ex ejusdem confessione -alterius infamia consequatur. Cf. Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. (_de Complicis -manifestat._) n. 439-450. - -[330] Cf. Lugo, Disp. 16, n. 420; Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 502; Lehmkuhl, -l. c. n. 338. - -[331] Sess. XIV. cp. 5 et can. 7 (examen diligens). - -[332] Lugo, l. c. Disp. 16, nn. 590-594; cf. Laym. Lib. V. Tr. 6, 8. - -[333] L. c. n. 366. - -[334] Mazzotta, l. c. Disput. I. Q. II. cp. I. - -[335] Part II. cp. 5, n. 60. - -[336] L. c. n. 311. - -[337] Theol. Sacram. Tom. III. De Pœnit. n. 365. - -[338] Instructio Pœnit. cp. II. - -[339] Mazzotta, l. c.; cf. Suarez, Disp. 22. - -[340] Mazzotta l. c.; Aertnys, l. c. De Pœnit. cp. III. § 2, n. 186. - -[341] Aertnys, l. c. De Pœnit. cp. III. art. III. § 2, n. 186. - -[342] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 344. - -[343] Cf. Stotz, _Tribunal Pœnitentiæ_, Lib. I. P. I. Q. I. art. 9, -_Praxis examinis pro Confessione_, and Lib. I. P. III. Q. III. art. 1 ss. -_Syllabus peccatorum_. - -[344] Mazzotta, l. c. Disp. I. Q. II. cp. I (Lacroix); Reuter, Theol. -Mor. P. IV. n. 311; Sporer, l. c. n. 367. - -[345] Compare Renninger-Göpfert, Pastoraltheologie, I Bd. I Tl. § 66. - -[346] Cf. Gury-Ballerini, II. De Censuris, n. 960, Not. 1-4, also n. 430, -Q. 7; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 430, in fine; Aertnys, l. c. De Censuris, n. -39. - -[347] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 498, 499; Lugo, Disp. 16, n. 607; Suarez, -Disp. 28, s. 2, n. 12 (_sententia communis_). - -[348] Cf. §§ 63, 64, where the _recidivi_ are treated of, and Lehmkuhl, -l. c. Sacr. Pœnit. Sect. II. cp. II. Confessio, art. III. § 2, n. 347. - -[349] S. Alph. l. c. n. 502; H. A. n. 44; Lacroix, l. c. n. 216; Lugo, -Disp. 16, n. 638; Elbel, n. 253, etc. - -[350] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 502, dub. 2; also Suarez, Lugo, Vasquez, -Laymann, and other theologians. - -[351] Suarez, Disp. 22, Sect. 6, and Lugo, Disp. 16, Sect. 15, n. 636. - -[352] Lugo, l. c. Disp. 16, nn. 637, 638. Cf. Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. 22, -Sect. 6, n. 5; Coninck, Disp. 4, n. 45; Illsung, De Pœnit. Disp. 6, n. -152, etc. - -[353] Aertnys, l. c. art. III. Confessio, § 4, n. 203, Q. 2. - -[354] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 348. - -[355] Silva, part 3, cp. 6. - -[356] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. cp. 9. If the confessor is morally certain that -the former confessions were bad, he must unquestionably insist on their -repetition; if he has only doubts, he cannot impose on the penitent an -absolute obligation. _In dubio standum est pro valore actus._ Cf. S. -Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 20; Segneri, Instr. pœn. cp. 15; Carol. Borom. Act. -Med. p. 877; Benger, Pastoraltheologie, Bd. II. § 70, S. 470, 2. Auflage. - -[357] S. Alph. Praxis Confess. n. 22; cf. Aertnys, Theol. Pastor. -complectens Practicam Institut. Confessarii, P. III. cp. VIII. art. II. -n. 245. - -[358] S. Franc. Sal. Oper. Ed. Paris 1669. Tom I. p. 914, n. 6. - -[359] Benedict XIV. Const. Apostolica, 26 Jun. 1749, nn. 16, 17. - -[360] Instruct. pœnit. cp. 16. - -[361] Instit. catech. P. II. cp. 5, n. 11. - -[362] Cf. Reuter, Neo-confessarim, P. III. cp. 2, n. 191; Müller, Theol. -moral. Lib. III. T. II. § 124. - -[363] H. A. app. IV. § 1, n. 15. - -[364] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 20. - -[365] S. Alph. Vera Sponsa, cp. 18, § 2. - -[366] Marc, Instit. Morales, II. T. II. P. III. Tract. V. Diss. II. n. -1712. - -[367] Anleitung zur Generalbeichte, S. 90-92. - -[368] Cf. Aertnys, Pract. Instit. Confess. l. c. art. II. n. 247. - -[369] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 504; cf. Lugo l. c. Disput. 16, nn. 600, 640; -Benger, Pastoraltheologie, II. Bd. § 171, S. 479 (2. Aufl.). - -[370] Praxis Confess. cp. I. n. 20, 4. - -[371] Anleitung zur Generalbeichte, S. 64-70. - -[372] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 425, H. A. n. 4; Lugo, l. c. Disp. 16, -nn. 46-49; Aertnys, l. c. n. 200, Q. 2. - -[373] P. Heilig, _Methodus Confess. generales ... excipiendi_; -Gury-Baller. l. c. II. Tract. de Sacr. Pœnit. n. 519; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -Sect. II. art. III. nn. 346, 349; Aertnys, Pract. Instit. Confessor. P. -III. cp. VIII. art. III. - -[374] See § 24. - -[375] See § 49. - -[376] Anleitung zur Generalbeichte, S. 88-90. - -[377] Leonard von Port Maur., Anleitung zur Generalbeichte; Benger, -Pastoraltheologie, Bd. III. S. 607-619 (1. Aufl.), Bd. II. S. 475-486 (2. -Aufl.); Schüch, Pastoraltheologie, § 320. - -[378] Some experienced confessors advise to begin with these -commandments, because sins against holy purity are frequently the cause -of invalid confessions. Many penitents, however, would be shocked and -disgusted at such a proceeding. - -[379] The greatest prudence should be employed in putting these questions -for fear of teaching evil or giving scandal. In this matter it is better -that the completeness of the accusation should suffer. For instance, -Ballerini disapproves of asking directly whether the accomplice is bound -by vows, since such cases are rare, and when they occur the penitent -would be certain to mention the circumstance spontaneously, while to put -such a question would frequently cause astonishment and give scandal. - -[380] Aertnys, l. c. cp. 8, art. 4, nn. 251, 252; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 351; -Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 520; Heilig, Methodus Conf. gen. n. 40 ss. - -[381] Sess. XIV. De Pœnit. cp. 8. - -[382] S. Thom. _Amplius valet ad expiandum peccatum quam si proprio -arbitrio homo faceret idem opus._ Quodl. Lib. 3, Q. 14. Summa Theol. -Supplem. Q. 12-15; Suarez, De Sacr. Pœnit. Disp. 37 per 10 Sectiones, -Disp. 38, Sect. 1 and 2; Lugo, De Sacr. Pœnit. Disp. 24 per 5 Sectiones; -Billuart, Compend. Theol. Tom. VI. De Sacr. Pœnit. Diss. VIII. a. I. -6-8; cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. Vol. V. Tract. X. Sect. V. cp. I. n. -478 ss.; Schanz, Die Lehre von den hl. Sakramenten, II. Tl. § 42, Die -Genugthuung, S. 538 ss. - -[383] Sess. XIV. cp. 8. - -[384] S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. nn. 506, 507; H. Ap. n. 47. - -[385] Busenbaum, Medulla, Lib. VI. Tract. IV. cp. I. De Satisfact. Art. -I; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 513; Lugo, Disp. 25, n. 50. - -[386] Sess. XIV. cp. 8. - -[387] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. Sect. II. cp. III. Satisfactio, n. 355. - -[388] Rituale Rom. De Sacram. Pœnit. - -[389] S. Thom. Suppl. Q. 15, a. 3. - -[390] S. Alph. _cum communi sententia_. Lib. VI. l. c. - -[391] S. Alph. _ibid._; Scavini, l. c. n. 383; S. Thom. Quodl. 3, a. 28. - -[392] This is the teaching of St. Alphonsus _cum innumeris scriptoribus -contra paucos_ (n. 513). - -[393] S. Alph. l. c. n. 524. - -[394] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 512. - -[395] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 356 (8). - -[396] Homil. 43 in Matth. c. 23. - -[397] Cf. Martin, Moral. S. 591. - -[398] S. Alph. l. c. n. 516, H. A. n. 55; Sporer, l. c. n. 588. - -[399] Cf. Rit. Roman. tit. III. cp. I. n. 25. - -[400] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 513. - -[401] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 509, 510, 526; H. Ap. nn. 49, 50; Lugo, l. c. -Disp. 25, n. 60; Reuter, l. c. p. 4, nn. 591, 404; Ballerini, Op. Theol. -Mor. l. c. nn. 489, 493. - -[402] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 517, 518. - -[403] Thus, among others, Lugo. - -[404] Thus, among others, Suarez, Fillince, Segneri, St. Alphon. l. c. n. -518. - -[405] Aertnys, Theol. Moral. Lib. VI. Tract. V. De Pœnit. cp. III. art. -IV n. 206, Q. 4. - -[406] S. Alph. l. c. n. 514 (in fine). - -[407] Gury-Ballerini, l. c. Appendix, n. 535. Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 200; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 368. - -[408] Summa Theol. P. III. tit. 17, s. 20. - -[409] Instruct. Confess. cp. 20. - -[410] Quodl. 3, a. 28; cf. Opusc. 65, § 4. - -[411] Lib. VI. n. 510. - -[412] S. Alph. l. c. n. 517. - -[413] S. Alph. l. c. n. 521. - -[414] S. Alph. l. c. n. 521; H. A. n. 57; Mazzotta, l. c. Tract. VI. -Disp. I. Q. V. cp. 2. - -[415] Lugo, l. c. Disp. 25, Sect. 5, n. 92; Sanchez in decalog. l. 4, c. -10, n. 21; Elbel, de Pœnit. n. 229. - -[416] Mazzotta, l. c.; Gury II. n. 535; S. Alph. H. A. n. 57. - -[417] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 364. - -[418] Lib. VI. n. 523. - -[419] Suarez, De Pœn. Disp. 38, s. 8, n. 5; Lugo, l. c. Disp. 25, s. 3, -n. 39; Laymann, Theol. Mor. Lib. V. Tract. VI. cp. 15, n. 15; Lacroix, -Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. P. II. n. 1245, and many others. - -[420] Mazzotta, l. c. Q. 5; cf. 2 Suarez, l. c. Disp. 38, s. 7. Lugo, l. -c. Disp. 25, n. 68, says that this doctrine is _verum et certum_, and is -a direct consequence of the teaching of the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV. -cp. 8); cf. Elbel, l. c. n. 227. - -[421] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 515, 516; Mazzotta, l. c. - -[422] Lugo, l. c. n. 77. - -[423] Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 25, nn. 107-110. Cf. Disp. 15, n. 107. - -[424] L. c. n. 529, dub. III. - -[425] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 366. - -[426] S. Alph. l. c. n. 529, dub. I; Aertnys, l. c. n. 213, Q. I; Müller, -l. c. § 128. - -[427] S. Alph. l. c. n. 529, dub. II; H. A. n. 61. - -[428] S. Alph. l. c. n. 520; H. A. n. 59. - -[429] H. A. Tr. 6, n. 33, in fine. - -[430] S. Alph. H. A. n. 58; Theol. Mor. Lib. III. n. 700, Q. 2. - -[431] Lehmkuhl, l. c. Sect. III. cp. I. art. I. n. 369. - -[432] Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 7. - -[433] Suarez, Disp. 16, s. 3. - -[434] Palmieri, Tract. de Pœnitentia, cp. II. Thes. XVI. p. 172 ss. - -[435] Trid. Sess. XXIII. cp. 15, reform. - -[436] Ben. XIV. De Syn. Lib. 9, cp. 16, n. 7; Instit. n. 14 ss. et -Instit. 86; S. Carol. Borrom. Conc. Provinc. I. part 2 et VI. part 3, etc. - -[437] Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. n. 546 ss. - -[438] Cf. Palmieri, l. c. Thes. XVI; Lehmkuhl, l. c. Sect. III. cp. I. -art. II. n. 374. - -[439] Benedict XIV, Notificatione 9, n. 16; Scavini, l. c. Tract. X. -Disp. I. cp. 4, n. 96, nota 229. Cf. Decr. S. C. Concil. quoted by -Scavini. The same author goes on to observe that by a decision of the -Rota a _causa sufficiens_ for a new examination may be _libitum et sola -quies episcopi_ when there is question of priests who have been examined -by his predecessors; as for those whom he has himself examined, he -is justified in calling them to account again _quando adest vehemens -suspicio de illorum imperitia_, nor is it necessary that judicial proof -of this _imperitia_ be forthcoming. Decr. 15 Jan., 1667 et 22 Sept., -1668. Cf. Bened. XIV, De Synod. diœc. l. 13, cp. 9, n. 21. - -[440] Scavini, l. c. n. 98, nota 230; S. Alph. l. c. nn. 555-558; H. A. -n. 81. - -[441] Sess. XXIV. cp. 8 de reform. - -[442] Scavini, l. c. n. 231; Benedict XIV, Quoniam, 28 Maj., 1746. - -[443] Acta S. Sed. Vol. I. p. 681, Resp. 6 Mart., 1694, 29 Jan., 1707, in -Frising. - -[444] Bouix, De Parocho, p. iv. cp. 14. - -[445] Gobat, l. c. Tract. 7, n. 45; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. not. ad n. 552. - -[446] After the Council of Trent, a lengthy controversy arose among -the theologians as to which bishop ought to give the approbation to -the confessor; many thought it was the confessor’s bishop, others the -penitent’s; with regard to exempted Regulars, it seemed probable that -a single approbation, without restrictions from any bishop at all, was -sufficient, since they are not the subjects of the bishops; this had -been granted by Clement VII and Sixtus V; moreover, Gregory XIII gave -Religious, when on a journey, the power of hearing confessions, provided -they had the sanction of their Superior and approbation from any bishop; -this privilege, however, was not to be made use of in the towns or places -where the bishop was actually residing, without the latter’s permission. -Innocent XII, however, withdrew all privileges contrary to his bull. S. -Alph. l. c. n. 458. - -[447] Trid. l. c. and the Constit. “Superna,” Clem. X, etc. - -[448] S. Alph. l. c. n. 552; H. A. 75. - -[449] S. Alph. l. c. n. 570; H. A. n. 83. Lehmkuhl is of opinion that -a priest who is convinced of the bishop’s consent to his demand for -approbation, may give absolution validly, but not licitly, when the paper -granting the faculties has been signed and sent off, so that it cannot be -reclaimed or changed except by a message directed to the priest himself, -or when the bishop has given the paper containing the approbation to the -priest’s messenger, who has not yet delivered it. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 380, -nota. - -[450] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 543, 582; H. A. 76, 132. - -[451] Confirmed by Greg. XIII, 1 Dec., 1582. - -[452] Cf. S. Alph. and the other authors quoted above. Ballerini, Op. -Theol. Mor. l. c., _Quid sit approbatio et a quo petenda_, n. 546 ss. - -[453] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 544; H. A. n. 77. - -[454] S. Alph. n. 551; H. A. n. 75. - -[455] Whenever both jurisdiction and approbation are granted on account -of the office which the priest exercises as a subject of the bishop, they -lapse on the office being surrendered. Hence a secular priest who has had -faculties to hear confessions in some diocese in virtue of a chaplaincy -or other appointment, is deprived of these faculties on being changed -to another diocese unless the bishop is distinctly understood to wish -to continue them. The same holds true for a Religious who has received -faculties from his local Superior; his faculties lapse when he is removed -to another diocese and do not revive merely by his return to the scene of -his former labors. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 381, nota 1. - -[456] Lehmkuhl, l. c. Sect. I. art. III. n. 379. Gury, II De Sacram. -Pœnit. P. III. cp. I. art. II. Append. n. 557. Scavini, Tract. III. -Disp. I. cp. 3, art. 3, 519. Aertnys on Approbation says: _in sensu -quo Concilium Tridentinum usurpat, approbatio dicenda videtur facultas -audiendi confessiones ab Episcopo facta Sacerdoti qui idoneus judicatus -est_—and he supposes that Regulars do not, as many maintain, receive -jurisdiction from the Pope. He appeals to the S. C. Ep. et Reg. 2 Mar., -1866, also Extrao. comm. cp. 2 de sepult ex clement., cp. 2 de sepult. -and Extrao. comm. cap. un. de judic., where the Pope gives jurisdiction -to a Regular only when it has been refused by the bishop, whence it would -seem that jurisdiction proceeds from the bishop except in the cases -where he refuses to give it. Still it remains to be proved that Regulars -do not receive jurisdiction from the Pope through their Superiors and -approbation from the bishop. Cf. Gury, Edit. Ratisb. V. in Germania, Nota -Editoris ad n. 557. - -[457] Cf. Thesis 13 ab Alexand. VII. proscript. - -[458] Const. Superna. - -[459] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 382; cf. Gury, l. c.; cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. -Mor. l. c. cp. II. n. 583 ss. - -[460] The case is solved by Aertnys, who quotes a decree S. C. Ep. et -Reg. 2 Mar., 1866 (Acta S. Sedis, vol. I. p. 683): “_An religiosus non -approbatus juxta leges proprii Ordinis a suo Superiore vel ipso invito -cum sola facultate ordinarii valide excipiat confessiones sæcularium._” -R. “_Affirmative._” It is needless to say, of course, that such conduct -is illicit. - -[461] In accordance with the Rule of Boniface VIII, l. 5, tit. 10, cp. 2 -in 6ᵒ. - -[462] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 383. - -[463] Cf. Gury, l. c. n. 555, Q. 13, Edit. Roman. Whether a bishop can -forbid his diocesans to make their confessions outside his diocese under -pain of invalidity. - -[464] Gury, cf. l. c. Edit. Ratisb. ad nn. 554, 555, also Nota Edit. - -[465] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 569: _spectato consensu Episcoporum et -consuetudine_. - -[466] Zeitschrift für kathol. Theol., Innsbruck. 1881; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. -385. - -[467] See Müller, l. c. § 135, n. 5. Müller also appeals to St. -Alphonsus; Lugo, Disp. 20, Sect. 5, nn. 70, 72; Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. -30, Sect. 1, n. 4; and many others. - -[468] Cf. Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, l. c. ad n. 555, Q. 14; Ballerini, Op. -Theol. Mor. vol. V. l. c. cp. II. nn. 613-627, _Appendix-Dissertatio_: De -absolutione peregrinorum, pp. 769-855, and Lehmkuhl, l. c. nn. 379 et 384. - -[469] Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Moral. l. c. cp. II. De jurisdict. Conf. -nn. 613-627. - -[470] Decr. 4 Apr., 1900. - -[471] Lessius, De justitia et jure, l. 2, cp. 29, nn. 65 and 68. - -[472] A priest, for example, who has obtained a parish by simony, has, -according to canon law, an invalid title. But if he was appointed to the -parish by a lawful bishop, he has an “apparent title.” - -[473] Cap. “infamis,” caus. 3, Q. 7 (c. 1). - -[474] S. Alph. l. c. n. 572. - -[475] In forming a judgment as to whether _error communis_> or _error -paucorum_ is in question, we must not consider if many or few seek -administration of the Sacrament of Penance from one possessing no lawful -power, but if many or few have been aware of the absence of power. - -[476] S. Alph. n. 572. - -[477] Instit. 84, n. 22. - -[478] S. Alph. l. c.; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. V. ad n. 548, Q. II; Aertnys, l. -c. n. 226, Q. III; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. nn. 636-639. - -[479] Lib. VI. nn. 571, 573. - -[480] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 432; Lacroix, l. c. L. VI. P. I. n. 110 ss.; -Lessius, l. c. L. II. cp. 28, nn. 67 et 68; Reuter, Theol. Mor. P. IV. n. -53. - -[481] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 572; Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 548, Edit. -Ratisb. l. c.; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. De Jurisdict. nn. -628-636. - -[482] Lehmkuhl adds the following case: when a priest has, _bona fide_, -began to hear a confession, and a doubt has arisen in his mind as to -whether the period of his approbation has expired, there being no -possibility of satisfying himself upon the point, this confession, begun -and considerably advanced, may be concluded if great inconvenience would -otherwise result to confessor and penitent; the confessor must, however, -inform the penitent that the absolution administered was of doubtful -validity; but if he could, without great inconvenience to either party, -break off the confession, he must do so. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 390, nota 1. - -[483] L. c. n. 432. - -[484] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. nn. 390 and 391. - -[485] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 573, 600; H. A. n. 91, with Suarez, Gobat, -Elbel, Sporer, etc. - -[486] Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. c. 7, where reserved cases are spoken of, -and the following is decreed: “That no one may perish, it has always -been the usage of the Church that there should be no reservation at -the hour of death, and, therefore, that all priests may absolve any -penitent from any sins and censures whatever.” These words of the Council -are variously interpreted, some believing that all priests, without -exception, receive jurisdiction from the Church, others believing that -it is necessary to affix a limitation: when no other approved priest -is at hand to whom the dying person could easily and without danger -confess; these latter, therefore, limit the words “_omnes sacerdotes_” -on account of the intention expressed in the preceding words: “_ne quis -pereat_,” and the other ones: “_ut nulla sit reservatio_,” maintaining -that these words indicate that there is question of priests who otherwise -possessed jurisdiction, namely, “when no otherwise approved priest is -at hand.” According to the first interpretation, and the opinion based -upon it, a _sacerdos simplex_ (therefore _non approbatus_) could _valide_ -administer absolution to a dying person in presence of approved priests. -A great number of theologians defend this opinion (Ballerini mentions -twenty-five in his notes to Gury, l. c. ad n. 551, Q. 8, and in his Opus. -Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. De jurisdict. Conf. n. 581), and St. Alphonsus -does not venture to reject it, though, in spite of the reasons advanced -by these authorities, he maintains that a _simplex sacerdos_ can only -absolve a dying person when no other approved priest is at hand, and -he is supported in this opinion by the authority of the Roman Ritual, -which (De Sacram. Pœnit. sub init.) teaches that: when danger of death -threatens, and an approved priest is not present, any priest can absolve -from all sins and censures. This opinion of St. Alphonsus is the most -general, though, according to Ballerini and Lehmkuhl, probability is not -to be denied to the other opinion, in view of the authority of so many -theologians, and in accordance with the rules of interpretation. - -[487] Such a priest may _valide_ absolve a dying person if no other -priest be present, for the Tridentine says: _quilibet sacerdos_ may -absolve _in articulo mortis_. Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 560 circa fin.; -Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 550. But it is not difficult to see why -_deficiente alio sacerdote_ is added here; for the _communicatio in -sacris_ with heretics and with excommunicated persons who are to be -avoided (_excommunicati vitandi_) is a grave sin, unless when excused -by necessity; a penitent, therefore, would himself commit a grave sin -if he should solicit absolution from a heretical priest, or one to be -avoided (a _vitandus_), unless no other priest should be at hand. To ask -the Sacrament of Penance from such an unhappy priest, and to receive it, -even when it is allowed, appears, however, to be in any case a dangerous -proceeding; evil influence at the most important moment of human life, -and also scandal to others, are to be feared. - -[488] See § 46. - -[489] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 562, 563. - -[490] There is _periculum mortis_ when the illness is such as may, -according to the judgment of the physicians, and experience, result in -death, _sive id absolute, idest generatim pro omnibus verificetur, sive -respective propter circumstantias hujus infirmi_. Ballerini, l. c. - -[491] S. Alph. l. c. n. 561. - -[492] Const. Clem. VIII, Rom. Pontif. 1599. - -[493] Decret. Clem. VIII, Sanctissimus. - -[494] Cf. Mazzotta, l. c. de Pœnit. Disp. 2, Q. 1, cp. 3, § 2. - -[495] S. Alph. l. c. n. 575; Aertnys, l. c. n. 232, II. Q.; Lehmkuhl, l. -c. n. 395, ad II. 2; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 640. - -[496] This freedom, as Lehmkuhl remarks, exists for the members of the -Society of Jesus, so that they are not obliged, when on a journey, to -seek a priest of their own Order. Certain theologians, however, are -unwilling to concede this to all Orders. Benedict XIV, in the Brief “Quod -communi,” 30 March, 1742, allowed the Capuchins to confess to others not -of their Order, attaching the conditions, however, that the priest to -whom they confessed must be approved; the same condition was laid down -for members of the Augustinian Order on June 3, 1863 (Acta S. Sedis, -vol. 1, p. 677), and the S. Pœnitent., 18 April, 1867, the S. C. Ep. et -Regul., 3 July, 1862 and 27 Aug., 1852 (see Bucceroni, Enchirid. pp. -127 et 128), demand the same condition for the dispersed Regulars. From -which it is to be concluded that the _Sacerdotes idonei_, of whom the -privileges of Sixt. IV and Innoc. VIII speak, must be approved priests. -Cf. Aertnys, l. c. This seems also to hold for the congregations under -_vota simplicia_, who possess the privilege of exemption from episcopal -jurisdiction, as this regulation is based not upon the solemnity of the -vows, but upon the said exemption. - -[497] This follows from the Bull Clem. X, Superna, 21 July, 1670, -already mentioned, partly printed in Gury, Ed. Ratisb. II. ad n. 559. -According to the Council of Trent, all those lay persons are free from -episcopal jurisdiction who belong to the household of (real and exempted) -Religious Orders. But in order that the servants of a monastery may enjoy -this privilege, the following conditions must concur: (1) they must -really serve the religious of the monastery; (2) they must live within -the inclosure at the expense of the monastery; (3) they must be under -obedience to the religious of the Order; this obedience need not be the -obedience of the religious; it must, however, be such as servants owe to -their masters. Cf. Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. II. de ref.; Barbosa, de Parocho -cum animadvers.; Giraldi, p. 2, cp. 20, n. 12; Gury, l. c. ad 562. - -[498] Cf. Bouix, de Regul. T. II. p. 5, Sect. 3, c. 2. - -[499] Cf. Bouix, l. c.; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. ad n. 564, nota. - -[500] Although, according to the rules of interpretation, by the word -_Moniales_ in the Papal Bulls, only _Moniales_ in the strict sense are to -be understood, that is, the members of a Religious Order approved by the -Holy See, who observe the Papal inclosure; yet Benedict XIV has expressly -declared, in his Bull “Pastoralis curæ,” that the ordinances of the Trid. -Sess. XXV. cp. 10 de Regul. et Mon. which contain a part of the present -discipline, only apply _claustralibus monialibus_. - -[501] This is clear from a note of the S. C. Ep. et Reg. to the -constitutions of the Sisters of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin -(23 July, 1860): “As regards the confessors, the Constit. Bened. -XIV, Pastoralis curæ is to be observed, in accordance with which the -confessors are to be appointed by the respective bishops.” In the -constitutions of the Sisters of Nazareth, who have no inclosure, the -same congregation decreed on 27 Sept., 1861: “As regards the _Confessor. -extraordin._, the ordinances of the Council of Trent are to be observed, -as also the Constit. Benedict XIV, Pastoralis curæ.” Cf. Müller, l. c. S. -140. - -[502] Cf. Const. Inscrutabili, Gregor. XV; Const. Superna, Clem. X (21 -June, 1670); Const. Pastoralis Officii et Pastoralis curæ, Bened. XIV. - -[503] Cf. Declarat. S. C. C. ad dub. 7 et 8, post Const. Inscrutabili, in -Bullario posita. - -[504] Scavini, Tract. X. Disp. I. cp. 4, art. 2, n. 123. Ferraris ad v. -Moniales, art. 5, n. 49. - -[505] Gury, Ed. Ratisbon. T. II. l. c. ad n. 565. - -[506] Cf. Decret. S. C. Ep. et Reg., 20 Sept., 1642. - -[507] Const. Bened. XIV, Benedictus Deus, 25 Dec., 1750. - -[508] Cf. Trident. Sess. XXV. cp. 10 de Regul. et Mon. and Const. Bened. -XIV, Pastoralis curæ, 5 Aug., 1748. - -[509] All these precepts are contained in the Trid. Sess. XXV. cp. 10 de -Regul. et Mon. and the Constit. Benedict XIV, Pastoralis curæ. Pope Leo -XIII, quoted above, has renewed the same _quoad confessarios ordinarios -et extraordinarios_ by a Decretum S. Congregat. Ep. et Regul. de -conscientiæ ratione Confessariis extraordinariis, etc., d. 17 Dec., 1890, -and exhorts _Præsules_ and _Superiores_, “_ne extraordinarium denegent -subditis Confessarium quoties ut propriæ conscientiæ consulant ad id -subditi adigantur, quin iidem Superiores ullo modo petitionis rationem -inquirant aut ægre id ferre demonstrent. Ac ne evanida tam provida -dispositio fiat, Ordinarios exhortatur_ (_sc._ _Sanctitas sua_), _ut in -locis propriæ Dioeceseos Sacerdotes facultatibus instructos designent, ad -quos pro Sacramento Pœnitentiæ recurrere eæ facile queant_.” This decree -was occasioned by precepts in the constitutions “_plurium Congregationum, -Societatum aut Institutionum sive mulierum, quæ vota simplicia aut -solemnia nuncupant, sive virorum professione ac regimine penitus -laicorum_.” - -[510] Cf. Declar. S. C. C. ad dub. I. poss. Const. Inscrutabili et -Constit. Clem. X, Superna. - -[511] “Reservatio est: ablatio seu nonconcessio jurisdictionis ad -absolvendum ab aliquo peccato, quamvis circa alia concedatur.” Ballerini, -Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. n. 657. - -[512] Sess. XIV. cp. 7, can. II. Cf. Perrone, De Pœn. cp. 5; Zenner, -Instruct. pract. P. 1, cp. II. § 44; Palmieri, Tract. De Pœn. Thes. XVII. -p. 178 ss. - -[513] Const. Bened. XIV, Sacramentum Pœnitentiæ, 1 June, 1741. - -[514] Const. Clem. VIII, Religiosæ Congregationes, 19 June, 1594, et -Urban VIII, Nuper a Congregat. 16 Oct., 1640. Cf. S. Alph. l. c. nn. 580, -693; H. A. Tr. 13, nn. 8, 9; Ferrar, ad v. Regular, art. I. nn. 67-69. - -[515] S. Alph. l. c. n. 583; H. A. n. 130. These specified cases are the -following: 1. Apostasy from the Order, even when the habit of the Order -is still retained. 2. Secretly absenting one’s self from the monastery -at night. 3. Three forms of superstition: _Veneficia_, _incantationes_, -_sortilegia_. 4. Possession of property against the vow of poverty, -which constitutes a mortal sin. 5. Theft (to the extent of mortal sin) -of goods belonging to the monastery. 6. _Lapsus carnis voluntarius -opere consummatus._ 7. Perjury before a lawful judge. 8. _Procuratio, -consilium vel auxilium ad abortum fœtus animati._ 9. Killing or wounding -or severely beating any one. 10. Forging the handwriting or the seal of -the officials of the monastery. 11. Maliciously obstructing, delaying, -or opening written communications from Superiors to subordinates, or -subordinates to Superiors. The confessors of Regulars must know these -cases, so that, should one of them occur, they may send the penitent -to the Superior or to a confessor possessing the necessary faculties -for absolution; or that they may, according to circumstances, procure -for themselves the necessary faculties for this case. But if a Regular -priest confesses to a secular priest or to a priest of another Order (for -example, on a journey—see above), it is disputed whether this confessor -possesses the power to absolve from the reserved cases of the monastery. -For Capuchins sojourning out of their monastery the power has been given -by Benedict XIV (30 March, 1742) and confirmed by Pius IX (1852), with -the understanding, however, that the penitent appears before his Superior -or the confessor appointed by him as soon as possible and receives -absolution anew. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 575-583. - -[516] S. Alph. n. 579; Bened. XIV, De Synodo, Lib. V. cp. 5. The Pope -says: “Although in this matter no absolute and universal standard can -be established, the general exhortations and decrees which the Sacred -Congregations at Rome have issued upon the subject may serve as a guide:— - -“On January 9, 1601, the Sacred Congregation of Bishops and Regulars -issued the following exhortation to the bishops: In order that the -bishops who are empowered to reserve may not unduly burden their subjects -and confessors with reserved cases, they are all exhorted to reserve -only a few cases, and those only which they believe themselves bound to -reserve in the interests of Christian morality, and for the welfare of -the souls committed to them, according to the condition and character -of each diocese. This exhortation was repeated on Nov. 26. On the same -day, the same Congregation issued a circular letter to the bishops, in -which the following exhortations are addressed to them: The bishops -should take care that they do not indiscriminately reserve those cases -to which the greater excommunication is by law attached, absolution for -which is reserved to no one, except when the special reservation of such -cases appears necessary on account of frequent scandal, or some other -urgent ground; nor those cases in which absolution is granted only when -restitution has been made, or that performed which the penitents are -bound to perform; nor should they reserve those cases which, although -great sins, are yet matters of lesser importance, and of frequent -occurrence amongst uneducated people; such as cases of _damnificatio -injusta_, etc. In reserving sins of the flesh they must proceed with -great circumspection on account of the danger of scandal, especially -when suspicion might fall upon persons either from their going to -extraordinary confessors, or frequently recurring to the bishop. Finally -the bishops are admonished to adopt and adhere to that course of action, -which, after mature consideration of the customs, natural disposition and -tendency of the neighborhood and people appears to them to be the best -before the Lord. The decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Council -are couched in a similar strain. This Council ordered a bishop who had -accumulated too many reserved cases to choose ten or at most twelve of -the more considerable offenses, as he thought proper, and to strike out -the rest.” - -[517] Reuter, Theol. Mor. De Pœnitent. n. 371. Cf. Stotz, Trib. Pœnit. -Lib. II. Q. 2, § 5, n. 64. Schmalzgrueber, l. c. Lib. I. Tit. 29, n. -31, and many others. This is, in fact, the doctrine which is generally -received as valid amongst the older moralists. Many of the later ones, -it is true, teach that a stranger cannot be absolved from a sin which -is reserved in the diocese in which he confesses, falsely assuming that -the priest who hears the confession of a penitent coming from a strange -diocese is restrained by his own bishop from absolving. See Ballerini, -Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 573, and Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. De Reservat. -Casuum, n, 709 ss. - -[518] If the strange penitent confesses a sin which is reserved in his -own diocese but not in that in which he confesses, he can undoubtedly be -absolved by a priest of a Religious Order, in virtue of the privilege -granted by the Pope to Regulars, Const. “Superna,” Clem. X. As regards -secular priests, the older theologians maintain that they could not -absolve the stranger in this case (they appeal to the Caput Si Episcop. 2 -de Pœnit. in 6ᵒ), while the later theologians unreservedly allow secular -priests to participate in the privileges of the priests of Religious -Orders; for there exists, they say, a general custom that strangers, -in this case also, are absolved by secular priests, and as the bishops -approve of this proceeding, the strangers would be _valide et licite_ -absolved. Cf. Gury-Ballerini, l. c. n. 573, notæ; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 403; -Aertnys, l. c. n. 239, in both cases decides otherwise Princ. III; and -Marc, l. c. n. 1771, Quæsit. III. - -[519] Cf. Mazzotta, l. c. Disp. 2, Q. 3, cp. 3, Sect. 2 in fine; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 404; Ballerini adds, “_si Episcopus expresse invitus -sit_.” Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 573, Q. 5, nota II in fine. Cf. S. Alph. n. -589. - -[520] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 403. Aertnys teaches otherwise, l. c. n. 239. - -[521] L. c. n. 602. - -[522] Gury, Ed. Ratisb. ad n. 570. - -[523] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 583; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 403; Aertnys, l. c. -III. 2, n. 239. - -[524] Sess. XIV. cp. 7. Cf. Decr. S. C. Conc. 26 Nov., 1602. - -[525] Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. De Reservatione -Casuum, n. 661 ss. - -[526] L. c. n. 600. - -[527] S. Alph. l. c. n. 600; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 405; Aertnys, l. c. n. -242. - -[528] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 582, with Suarez, Lugo, Tamburini, and others. - -[529] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 582. - -[530] Cf. Gury-Ballerini, Notæ ad n. 571, Q. 1, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. -cp. II. nn. 724-735. - -[531] This reason is plainly not a valid one, since all theologians, -including the opponents of this view, admit that reservation directly -limits jurisdiction; these latter, however, declare that certain -circumstances are required to make a sin reserved, and that it is -questionable if the knowledge of the reservation is such a circumstance -or not. - -[532] This is not convincing; for as soon as the penitent confesses a -reserved sin, the confessor will tell him of the reservation, and thus a -check will be put upon the relaxation of morality for the future; for the -sins that have been already committed, neither one opinion nor the other -can offer any preventive remedy. - -[533] The Theol. of Salamanca, Tr. 18, cp. 6, n. 12; Lugo, De Pœn. Disp. -20, n. 11; Sanchez, De Matrim. l. 9, Disp. 32, nn. 17, 18; Sporer, De -Pœnit. n. 735; Mazzotta, Tract. 6, Disp. 2, Q. 3, cp. 2, § 2, and many -others; see Gury-Ballerini, l. c. - -[534] L. c. n. 407. Cf. Gury-Ballerini, l. c. This may at least -constitute a rule for most dioceses. We must, in fact, assume that the -bishop has reserved sins in the manner in which they are generally -understood by the confessor to be reserved, unless it is shown by -positive evidence that the bishop adopts the opinion of those theologians -who teach that a reservation is not incurred by one who is not aware of -its existence. Till the later controversy, however, it was always the -general conviction that reservation was understood to be incurred by -one who did not know of it; this is testified by many authors. We must, -therefore, assume that the legislator so understood his law. But if, -with the knowledge of the bishop and without protest on his part, it be -anywhere taught that a sin is not to be regarded as reserved for one who -does not know of the reservation, this may be considered a sufficiently -valid indication that the bishop does not wish to bind those who are -ignorant of the reservation. Lehmkuhl, l. c.; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. ad n. 571. - -[535] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 580, 581, dub. 2; Lacroix l. c. n. 1614; Gury, -Ed. Ratisb. V. n. 571. - -[536] Cf. Archive für Kirchenrecht (1871), XXV. 148. The other sources of -the Papal reserved cases are the Council of Trent, of which the censures -still remain in force which were directly imposed by this Council and are -not touched by the Bull “Apost. Sed.,” and those Papal decrees which have -been issued for the imposition of censures since the appearance of the -Bull “Apost. Sed.,” that is, after the year 1869. - -[537] The two Papal cases spoken of above in which the sin is reserved, -are, therefore, not quoted in it, but are in force. - -[538] They are (1) those which, in an especial manner (_speciali modo_) -are reserved to the Pope, (2) those which are _simply_ reserved to the -Pope, (3) those which are reserved to the bishops, and (4) those which -are reserved to no one. The two first classes are to be kept apart from -each other, for a person possessing the faculty to absolve from the Papal -cases does not necessarily possess the faculty to absolve from the cases -which are _speciali modo_ reserved, if this addition is not expressly -made. By virtue of the _jus commune_ (Conc. Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. 6) it -belongs to the bishop to absolve from the second class if the cases are -secret. - -[539] Jan. Bucceroni (S.J.), Commentar. de Constitut. Ap. Sed. (Romæ, -1888); Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VII. Tract. I. II. III.; Lehmkuhl, -Theol. Mor. P. II. Lib. II. Tract. I. n. 920 ss.; Avanzini, De Constit. -Ap. Sed. Commentarii (Rom., 1872); Heiner, Die Kirchlichen Censuren. -Paderb. 1884, S. 52 ff.; Kirchenlexikon (2. Aufl.) Apost. Sed. Vol. I. 1, -1125 ff. - -[540] There are twelve of them in the Bull “Ap. Sed.” which were all, -with the exception of the tenth, contained in the Bull “Cænas,” but not -all _eodem modo_; to these is added the thirteenth ex Constit. Pii IX, -Romanus Pontifex, 28 Aug., 1873. - -[541] Cf. Pruner, Moraltheol. p. 121; Heiner, a. a. O. § 53, p. 53. - -[542] Cf. S. Thom. II. II. Q. 11, art. 1; Suarez, De virt. Theol. Disp. -19, Sects. 1 and 5. - -[543] Pastoral Theology, a. a. O. § 57, p. 158. - -[544] Cf. Suarez, De Fide, 20, 2, 18. - -[545] Regula juris in VI. - -[546] The _gravitas materiæ_ is here to be estimated both _ex re quæ -tractatur_ and _ex quantitate_; if the exposition or defense of a -heretical doctrine is read, the half, or the third, of a page suffices. - -[547] Some authors, as d’Annibale and Melata, restrict the censures to -printed books. - -[548] But if these lesser publications are parts of a book of the same -contents, they are (subject to the above-mentioned conditions) in the -category of forbidden books, especially if they are bound together in -one volume. Periodical publications, therefore, of which every separate -number is regarded as a part of the whole yearly issue, fall under the -reserved censure; but not newspapers, as with these there is no question -of parts belonging to each other, each separate number being regarded as -complete in itself. (Act. S. Sed. Vol. VI. fasc. 5, p. 9, Append. 3, p. -133.) - -[549] It remains to be remarked that the ten rules of the Index itself -are not touched by this ordinance of the Bull, but that the _Excomm. -lat. sent._ attached at the end of the regul. X falls away, as it was -not directly attached by the Council of Trent itself, but by Pius IV. -Consequently the reading and keeping of heretical books, or of such as -are condemned by a decree of the Congregation of the Index remains, -indeed, still forbidden in the future, but the punishment of the now -specially reserved excommunication is incurred only in two cases: (_a_) -when the author of the book is an apostate or a heretic, and the book, -moreover, not only contains heresy, but _ex professo_ defends it, -and (_b_) when the latter, be the author who he may, is, with exact -specification of the title, forbidden by a Papal Brief, or a Bull, or -an Encyclical Letter. Although the Constitution Officiorum ac Munerum -of Leo XIII (25 Jan., 1897) has considerably mitigated the prohibitions -of Clement VIII, Alexander VII, and Benedict XIV, in regard to the -reading and propagating of noxious literature, nevertheless the warnings -against the intellectual and moral dangers of bad books, which the -Index Congregation addresses to Catholics, retain their full force. The -confessor should of course remember that the censures attached to the -reading of forbidden books are applicable only where there is a conscious -violation of the prohibition; furthermore, that not only ignorance, but -also a general _consuetudo_ lessening the danger to faith or morals, -constitute a mitigating circumstance which demands wise discrimination -on the part of confessors who apply the laws of the Index. Few Catholics -in English-speaking countries know what books are on the Index, and that -fact itself is a reason for moderate judgment. - -[550] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VII. nn. 295, 284, 292. - -[551] This does not add a new condition for incurring the censure leveled -against the _impedientes exercitium jurisdictionis_, but only introduces -another class of the same offenders (as Avanzini and Heiner, p. 87, -assume). - -[552] As to the disputed question whether one is included amongst the -_cogentes_ who denounces and prosecutes a cleric before the civil court, -so that the judge, in consequence of this denunciation, is officially -compelled to summon the accused cleric, and pronounce sentence upon -him according to the provisions of existing law, we refer the reader -to Heiner, who discusses this point. According to him, the _sententia -communior et fere communis_ teaches that such a one falls under the -censure, while the negative opinion is not improbable. Moreover, a -declaration of the S. C. Inq. 23 Jan., 1886, favors this latter opinion. -Cf. Aertnys, l. c. Lib. VII. Tract. 1, n. 82; d’Annibale (Melata) Manuale -Theol. Mor. p. 260. - -[553] Cf. Heiner, a. a. O. S. 124 ff.; Gury-Ballerini, II. n. 973. -Aertnys, l. c. n. 88. - -[554] Heiner, a. a. O. S. 127 ff. - -[555] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 945. The bishop can _jure_ absolve, if the -_percussio_ was _levis, etiam publica_ (thus the vicars-general also -can absolve), and when the _percussio_, no matter whether _enormis_, -_gravis_, or _levis_, is a _delictum occultum_. The _Prælati regulares_ -can, _ex privilegio_, absolve their subordinates from this censure. - -[556] By a decree of the S. O. 20 Aug., 1894, the American societies of -Odd Fellows, Good Templars, and Knights of Pythias were condemned; v. -Bucceroni, Supplementum bibliothecæ; Ferraris, s. v. Sectarii; S. C. Inq. -12 Jan., 1870. Cf. Gen. Index _Ecclesiastical Review_. - -[557] Heiner, a. a. O. S. 226; Aertnys, l. c. 103. - -[558] Cf. Trid. Sess. XXII. cp. 11 de ref. - -[559] By the name “_Ordinarii_” are to be understood not only the bishops -and capitular-vicars, but also vicars-general, _Prælati regulares_ -and others who possess episcopal jurisdiction. The _confessarii -regulares_ also can absolve from this class of excommunication in _foro -conscientiæ_. Pius IX has only revoked the privileges to absolve _a -casibus R. Pontifci reservatis; ex sententia probabiliori_. Regulars can, -_vi complurium privilegiorum a S. Sede concessorum_, absolve from the -censures reserved by the _common_ law to the bishops. Cf. S. Alph. l. -c. n. 99, and De Privil. n. 100. Those censures are excepted which the -Ordinaries have reserved to themselves. - -[560] It is _verus abortus_ which is here punished, that is, _fœtus -immaturi ejectio adeo ut mors ipsius inde secuta sit_, therefore, not the -_partus præmaturus fœtus vitalis_, when procured for just motives. Pius -IX abolished the old distinction between _fœtus animatus et inanimatus_. -It is the _procuratio abortus_, moreover, that is punished, that is, _per -se sive per alias interpositas personas_—_studiose_ or _ex industria_. -The censure is, therefore, not incurred by one who employed the means -without the effect resulting. Compare Heiner, a. a. O. S. 243 ff.; -Aertnys, l. c. n. 109; Theol. Mor. Lib. III. n. 192; Lehmkuhl, Theol. -Mor. P. I. Lib. II Tract. II. n. 840 ss.; P. II. Lib. II. Tract. I. n. -970. - -[561] Cf. Trid. Sess. XXIV. de ref. cp. 6, “Liceat” and the Constit. -Apostolicæ Sedis Pii IX. - -[562] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VII. n. 84. Corpus jur. can. cp. “Eos qui” de -sent. excomm. in 60. Whether bishops and others possess still greater -powers, is to be gathered from the special faculties which the Apostolic -See may have granted them. - -[563] Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. De Reservat. cas. n. -772 ss.; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 411, ad II. Concerning the privilege of the -Mendicants as regards the absolution from the _Casus Episcopal._, and -from the _Casus qui Episcopis tantum a jure reservatur_, see Ballerini, -l. c. - -[564] Formerly, in accordance with the prescription of the canon law, -the teaching universally held was that (_a_) one who is prevented -during a very long time, or always (five years or longer) from going -to the Superior or his delegate, is absolved by a subordinate priest -without any further obligation, and (_b_) one who is prevented for a -long time (from six months to five years) is absolved, with the duty of -presenting himself before the Superior when the obstacle is removed, -while one who is prevented only for a short time may not be absolved -from reserved sins; but if necessity urges _hic et nunc_, absolution -for the non-reserved sins can be given him, so that the reserved sins -may be indirectly blotted out, the obligation of obtaining absolution -from the reservation or censure from the Superior or delegated priest -remaining in force. This theory was based upon the assumption that he -who was not able to appear before the Pope was not bound to employ any -other means of communication (a letter, for example) unless this were -expressly prescribed by the legislator. Moreover, on July 8, 1860, in -answer to the question: Are penitents who are prevented from going to -Rome in person bound to seek absolution from reserved cases at least -by letter or through the agency of another? the S. C. Officii replied -that the decision of approved authorities, especially of St. Alphonsus -of Liguori, should be adhered to. Now the latter teaches (Lib. VII. -n. 89) as _sententia probabilior et communis_, that one is not bound -to this. On June 23, 1886, another line of conduct in this matter was -prescribed by the S. Officium. The questions there put were: 1. May one -positively adopt and act upon the teaching that the absolution from -reserved sins and censures, also from those _speciali modo_ reserved to -the Pope, devolves upon the bishop, or upon any approved priest, when -the penitent finds himself unable to go to the Pope? 2. If the answer -to this question be in the negative, is one obliged to communicate by -letter with the Prefect of the Penitentiary with regard to all cases -reserved to the Pope, if the bishop has not a special Indult (the hour -of death excepted), in order to receive the faculty to absolve? To -these questions the above-named Congregation returned the following -answer sanctioned and confirmed by the Pope (30 June, 1886): Ad I. With -regard to the practice of the Sacred Penitentiary, especially since the -appearance of the apostolical constitution of Pius IX which begins with -the words “_Apostolicæ Sedi_,” _Negative_. Ad II. _Affirmative_; but in -the really more urgent cases in which the absolution cannot be deferred -without danger of great scandal or disgrace, as to which the confessor -is answerable to his own conscience, the absolution can be administered, -_injunctis de jure jungendis_, also from the censure _speciali modo_ -reserved to the Pope; under pain, however, of “reincidence” in the -same censures (that is, under pain of again incurring the censures) if -the person absolved does not, at least within a month, and through the -confessor, apply to the Holy See. (Linzer Theolog. prakt. Quartalschrift, -1887, S. 380. See Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 410; Müller, l. c. § 145; Bucceroni, -Enchirid. Morale et Supplementum. Compendio Theol. Mor.; Gury-Ballerini, -Commentar. IV. p. 224 ss.; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. n. -664, Nota p. 356; Aertnys, l. c. De Censuris, n. 27.) On this Lehmkuhl -remarks: “The rule laid down by the Apostolic See is clear. It does not -distinguish between reserved cases with censure and without censure, and -to follow it is now everywhere allowed, without waiting for a further -promulgation, in _all Papal_ reserved cases; indeed it seems to be -becoming a general rule.” (L. c. n. 413.) Ballerini adds the remark: -_Ergo_ (1) _urgente rationabili causa, quilibet confessarius absolv’d a -censura, censuræ autem absolutio non est nisi directa: cessante autem -censura cessat reservatio peccati, a quo proinde Confessarius directe -absolvit. Absolutio proinde, quæ in casibus urgentibus diferri non posse -dicitur, est absolutio directa. Jam vero vides_ (2) _heic de absolutione -indirecta a peccatis reservatis, quia in casibus urgentioribus -succurri potest necessitati pœnitentis ne verbumquidem fieri: Nimirum -cum necessitati pœnitentis succurrendum est, absolutionem directam a -reservatis dandam esse et hunc esse Ecclesiæ sensum supposuerunt Patres._ - -[565] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 584, Praxis Confess. n. 80. But see -Ballerini on this point. Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. n. 664. - -[566] Lugo, l. c.; Ballerini, l. c. n. 694. - -[567] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 586; II. A. n. 134. - -[568] Laymann, L. V. Tr. 6, c. 13; Lugo, Disp. 29, nn. 188 et 20, n. 141; -Suarez, De Pœn. Disp. 30, s. 4, n. 8; Busenbaum, l. c. n. 105; Ballerini, -Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. nn. 688, 689. - -[569] Schneider, _Manuale Sacerdotum_ contains formularies for the -request. - -[570] S. Alph. l. c. n. 584. - -[571] Lib. VII. n. 88. - -[572] Cf. Mazzotta, De Pœnit. Q. 3, c. 3, § 1. - -[573] See Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. n. 667 ss.; S. Alph. -Lib. VI. n. 265. - -[574] Disp. 31, Sect. 4, n. 14, et seq. and n. 16. - -[575] Suarez, l. c.; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. II. n. 581, Notæ; Aertnys, l. c. -n. 244, Q. II. - -[576] Cf. Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 753 ss.; Gury-Ballerini, II. n. 581, -Q. 10, et Vindiciæ Alphons. pp. 572-578. - -[577] Cf. Prop. 59 damn. ab Innoc. XI; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 595; -Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 743. - -[578] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 600, Q. 2; Gury, II. n. 581, Q. II. - -[579] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 601; Scavini, Tract. X. Adnotationes, 236. Cf. -Bucceroni, Jan. Commentarii De Casibus reservatis, Romæ, 1889. - -[580] In the _first_ constitution addressed ad _Episcopos Lusitaniæ_, the -Pope describes and condemns the crime of inquiring after the name of the -_complex_; in the _second_, addressed to the same bishops, he decrees the -punishment for the transgressors of the command, and prescribes the _Ordo -procedendi_ against them; in the _third_ constitution he extends the two -former decrees to the whole Church. - -[581] Cf. Gury-Ballerini, II. n. 500, Notæ. - -[582] Lugo, Disput. 16, nn. 432 sq.; Ballerini, Not. ad Gury, II. n. 502; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 340; Aertnys, l. c. 248, Q. I and II. Although St. -Alphonsus (Lib. VI. n. 492) admits that the penitent is sometimes obliged -to make known the _complex_ in order to avert a great evil, yet he dares -not maintain, in view of the strict prohibition of the Pope, that the -confessor is ever allowed to ask the name of the _complex_. He has not -sufficiently considered the word _passim_—and the other words, _doctrinas -veras et sanas male applicando_—in the constitution of Benedict. - -[583] Constit. Benedicti XIV, “Sacramentum Pœnit.,” 1 June, 1741, et -Const. “Apostolici muneris,” 8 Feb., 1745; Constit. Pii IX, “Apostolicæ -Sedis,” 12 Oct., 1869. Cf. Bucceroni, Jan. Commentarius in Constitutionem -Benedicti XIV, “Sacram. Pœnit.,” Romæ, 1888; Pars altera, pp. 106-141. - -[584] Cf. Declar. S. Pœnitent. 16 May, 1877. - -[585] Cf. Constit. “Sacramentum Pœnitentiæ,” 1 June, 1741, Benedicti XIV. - -[586] St. Thomas, Supplem. Q. 20, Art. 2, ad 1; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 555. -Cf. Gury-Ballerini, Notæ ad 587; Gury, Edit. Ratisb. Notæ ad n. 587; -Aertnys, l. c. n. 249. - -[587] _Cum jurisdictionem in illud crimen nullam sacerdos complex -habeat._ Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. - -[588] _Non habita ratione peccati illius_ (_in quo complex fuit_) _cujus -confessio ut quid impertinens consideranda erit._ Ballerini, Opus Theol. -Mor. l. c. cp. II. De absolut. complicis. n. 648. - -[589] Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, l. c. - -[590] Cf. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. De absol. compl. n. -654. - -[591] Cf. C. Eos qui 22, De Sentent. Excomm. in VI; C. Ea noscitur 13, De -Sent. Excomm., et C. Quamvis 58, eod. tit. - -[592] Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 655. - -[593] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. P. II. Lib. II. Tr. I. De Censuris, Sect. II. -n. 937. - -[594] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 554. - -[595] S. Alph. l. c. Cf. Declar. S. C. Inq. 28 May, 1873, in Acta S. Sed. -Vol. 10, append, p. 345. Aertnys, l. c. n. 249. Some wrongly exclude the -_sermones impudici_; the most that can be urged for such a view is that -there might be a doubt, _num fuerit peccatum mortale ex utraque parte_, -and, on account of such a doubt, the _causa complicitatis_ which the law -requires may the more easily be absent. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 935. - -[596] This results from the tenor of the Bulls “Sacrament. Pœnitent.” of -Benedict XIV and “Apostolicæ Sedis” of Pius IX. A simple, non-approved -priest is, _per se_, to be preferred to the _sacerdos complex_ (if no -defamation arises), but a _sacerdos publice suspensus, excommunicatus_, -is not to be preferred, as it is not becoming to call such a one to the -dying person, and in this case it will scarcely be possible to avoid -suspicion. - -[597] Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. De absolut. compl. n. 652 -ss. - -[598] Cf. Constitutio Benedicti XIV, “Sacrament. Pœnit.” and Pii IX, -“Apostolicæ Sedis” (see § 43, p. 326). - -[599] Cf. Berardi, Praxis conf. n. 1076. - -[600] This question was before decided in the same sense by the S. Pœnit. -9 Jul., 1751, et Mart., 1878. Cf. Linzer Theol. Quartalschrift, 1882, p. -389. Revue theol. 1884, p. 363. St. Alphonsus had already (Lib. VI. n. -556) maintained, _eum, qui fingat absolutionem, non incurrere censuram_, -deducing this from the words of the Constitution of Benedict XIV, and -this interpretation of the Pope’s words was probable; this opinion of -the sainted teacher seems still to coincide with the words of the Bull -of Pius IX, which reads _Absolventes_. But the Sacred Penitentiary -has declared otherwise. The latter evidently here takes the word -_absolventes_ in the wider sense. Cf. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. -n. 656. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 936, Nota. - -[601] Cf. Decret. S. C. Inq. 27 June, 1866, and the Instructio S. C. Inq. -20 Feb., 1867. (Gury, Cas. Conscient. T. 2, n. 647.) Revue des sciences -ecclès. Vol. 18, p. 359. - -[602] S. C. Inquis. 30 June, 1886, the decision which Leo XIII approved -and confirmed. Cf. Revue theolog. 1886, p. 378. - -[603] The Sacred Penitentiary is accustomed to add a few clauses to its -Rescript, and it will be useful to explain them briefly: - -1. Before the _confessarius delegatus_ can carry out the Rescript, the -occasion of again sinning against the sixth commandment _cum persona vel -personis complicibus_ must be removed. Hence the voluntary occasion (and -there is generally such in this case) must be physically removed, and a -necessary occasion morally removed. See § 63. - -2. The _Confessarius complex_ must inform his _complex_, when he again -comes to him to confess, of the invalidity of the former confessions and -refer him to another confessor. - -3. The duty of not again hearing the confessions of the _persona complex_ -in the future will be imposed upon the _Confessarius complex_, when this -can be done without great scandal, and he would, therefore, sin gravely -if he should disobey this command. According to the number and gravity -of the cases the Penitentiary subjoins still severer clauses: (_a_) -those who _duas personas complices_ only once, or _unam bis a peccato -in re turpi absolvere attentaverint_ the Sacred Penitentiary orders -to give up their office as confessors. (_b_) But those _qui duas aut -plures personas sive unam ter aut pluries absolvere ausi fuerint_, it -commands to relinquish as soon as possible the office which they have -so misused, and that within the time which is to be determined by the -priest who administers the absolution, and which must not be prolonged -beyond three months, if they are simple priests; if they are parish -priests, the period may be longer, but not beyond six months. And if -within this time the priest is unable, for weighty reason, to give up his -office, the delegated confessor must again address himself to the Sacred -Penitentiary, and lay the whole matter before him; in the meanwhile, -however, the _sacerdos complex_ may not hear the confessions _cujuscunque -personæ complicis_. The Sacred Penitentiary will, for weighty reasons, -extend the period, and when, after a time, the unhappy priest seems to -have amended, will allow him to continue to exercise the duties of a -confessor. - -4. The censures must be removed first, then the sins remitted, and -finally the dispensation from the irregularity is given. Cf. Aertnys, l. -c. n. 250. - -[604] The Constitutions, “Cum sicut nuper,” of Pius IV, “Dilecte fili,” -of Paul V, “Universi Dominici gregis,” of Gregory XV, and in an especial -manner, “Sacramentum pœnitentiæ,” and “Apostolici muneris,” of Benedict -XIV, cover this matter. Cf. Bucceroni, Jan. Commentar. Constit. Benedicti -XIV, “Sacrament. Pœnit.” P. I. pp. 1-150. Romæ, 1888. Ed. altera. - -[605] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. IV. n. 564, sub 3. - -[606] Cf. Decl. S. C. Inq. 11 Febr., 1661, dub. 2 et 9, et Instruct. 20 -Febr., 1867, n. 2. - -[607] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 704. - -[608] Cf. Resp. S. C. Inq. a. 1661 ad dub. 5, Instruct. a. 1867, sub 2. - -[609] Cf. Propos. 6 ab Alex. VII damn. - -[610] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 676-680. - -[611] Illud immediate (ante vel post) aliqui moraliter intelligi volunt, -ita ut, si physice tantum aliquid intermediat, seu intervallum adeo -breve sit, ut pro nihilo debeat computari, confessarius adhuc vi harum -clausularum sollicitans dicendus, ergo denuntiandus sit. Communis -sententia, quam sequitur St. Alph. (n. 677) illud stricte, _i.e._ physice -accipit. Ex praxi tribunalis S. Officii non censetur confessarius -sollicitasse immediate post confessionem, si sollicitatio post transactum -integrum diem accidet, dummodo nullo modo pravum animum suum in -confessione indicaverit. Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 590. Opus Theol. -Mor. l. c. Appendix De Sollicitatione, n. 1094 ss. - -[612] Illud: “occasione” duplici hic significatione sumitur: altera -opportunitatis, altera motivi. - -[613] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 678; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. -1098. Ballerini, Not. ad Gury, II. n. 590; Nouv. Rev. Theolog. Tom. 12, -p. 31 ss. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 976. - -[614] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 678 and 679. Hinc sollicitans dicendus est -Confessarius, si mulier, nulla conventione præmissa prætextu confessionis -vocet ipsum in domum suam, qui cum accesserit, a muliere sollicitatus -turpiter peccat eum illa; nam juxta decreta S. C. Inq. sollicitatio etiam -a pœnitente emanare potest. Etiam sollicitans dicendus est Confessarius, -qui extra confessionem sollicitat feminam huicque renuenti ob timorem -diffamationis, suadet, ut fingens se ægrotam eum ad peccandum accerseret. -S. Alph. n. 679; vide Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 1102. - -[615] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 680. Ballerini, Opus. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. -1107. - -[616] Compare the above-cited Constitutions of the Popes, and the -Instruction of the S. C. Inquis. 20 Feb., 1867. - -[617] Cf. Instr. S. C. Inq. 1867, sub 11. - -[618] Cf. Instruct. cit. - -[619] Amort. Theol. Mor. De Pœn. Q. 19. - -[620] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 687. Cf. Resp. S. C. Inq. a. 1661, ad dub. 13. - -[621] Lib. VI. n. 701, II. A. Tr. 16, n. 175. Bucceroni, Commentar. in -Constit. Bened. XIV, “Sacrament. Pœnit.” art. II. Sect. 2, p. 66. - -[622] Cf. Bucceroni, l. c. p. 66. - -[623] Not, be it remarked, _virtute Constitutionum Pontificiarum contra -sollicitantes, but virtute præcepti denuntiandi intra mensem hæreticos et -suspectos de hæresi_. Cf. Bucceroni, l. c. art. II. § 1, p. 56. - -[624] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 698. They are not bound to denounce: (_a_) -when the solicited person has already given the information; (_b_) when -they would suffer great detriment by so doing, except in the case of a -priest of great influence who had already solicited many persons; (_c_) -when the person soliciting is related to them within the fourth degree. -Cf. Mazzotta, l. c. Tr. 2, Disp. 1, Q. 1, cp. 2, Sect. 4; Ballerini, Op. -Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 1136 ss. - -[625] Cf. S. Alph. nn. 700, 697, 695. Bucceroni, l. c. p. 65. - -[626] Compare the Constitutions of the Popes and the above-cited Instr. -S. C. Inq. S. Alph. nn. 686, 688. - -[627] Cf. Instruct. nn. 3 and 4. - -[628] Cf. Instruct. S. C. Inq. a. 1661, ad dub. 12, 16. - -[629] Constitutiones cit. et Instruct. Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 615-694, -ratio: _ob vitandum damnum commune_. - -[630] The denunciation must be made to the _Episcopus loci_, where the -penitent is staying, even when the _Confessarius sollicitans_ belongs to -another diocese; it is then the duty of this bishop to receive the sworn -denunciation, and to forward it to the bishop of the confessor. Cf. Gury, -Cas. Cons. Tom. II. n. 652; Kenrick, Theol. Moral. Tract. 18, 245. - -[631] Cf. Instruct. 1867, n. 7; Marc, Institut. Alph. Tom. II. n. 1800. - -[632] Cf. Bucceroni, Commentar. in Constit. Bened. XIV, “Sacram. Pœnit”, -Romæ, 1888, art. II. § 3, p. 74. - -[633] Cf. Instruct. 1867, n. 7. - -[634] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 699. - -[635] Cf. Instruct. 1867, n. 6. - -[636] Cf. Instr. 1867, n. 6. - -[637] Cf. Bucceroni, l. c. art. II. § 2, p. 62 ss.; Ballerini, Op. Theol. -Mor. l. c. n. 1141. - -[638] Cf. Instruct. 1867, nn. 5 et 7; S. Alph. l. c. n. 693; Bucceroni, -l. c. art. II. § 1, n. 35. - -[639] Cf. Bucceroni, l. c. art. II. § 2, n. 38; Decr. S. C. S. Off. 21 -Febr., 1630, etc. - -[640] Const. Pii IX, “Apostolicæ Sedis.” - -[641] Cf. Bucceroni, l. c. art. II. Sect. 1, n. 36, p. 61 s. For the -_Modus recipiendi denuntiationem_, see Instruct. cit. 1867, n. 6 ss. Acta -S. Sedis, Vol. III. pp. 505 seq. The Instr. cit. nn. 9-16 describes the -_Modus procedendi contra Sollicitantes_; cf. Bucceroni, l. c. art. II. -§ 4, pp. 86-100. In this place the learned Roman professor also treats -the question: can the bishop make a law _denuntiandi sollicitantes extra -confessionem_—or a law _denuntiandi sollicitantes in confessione ad alia -peccata quam ad turpia_? p. 99, etc. - -[642] Instruct. 1867, n. 12. - -[643] Cf. Rituale Roman. Sacram. Pœnit. tit. 3, cp. 1, n. 15. Concil. -Later. IV. cp. 21, in Cap. 12 de Pœnit. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 607, 629. -H. Ap. n. 102. - -[644] Cf. n. 19. - -[645] Gury, Casus Conscient. II. n. 669. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. Sacram. -Pœnit. Sect. III. n. 419. - -[646] Moreover, the confessor must not only take care that the confession -be complete; he must also have regard for human weakness, lest through -much questioning the confession become troublesome and odious. Cf. -Lacroix, l. c. n. 1748; Aertnys, l. c. n. 276; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 419, ad -1, 3. - -[647] St. Alphonsus teaches: “The confessor should not be too solicitous -in questioning; let him ask the penitent about that which, having -regard to his position, probably concerns him.” And in another place -his advice is: “Let him ask only about the sins which the penitents -might easily commit, considering their station and intelligence.” And -Billuart says: “The confessor must make his investigations in a humane -and temperate way, but not in every imaginable way. For the priest is -not bound to examine the penitent more than the latter is bound to -examine himself.... Nor is it to the point to say that the priest would -perhaps find more if he sought more, for we have not only to consider -the material completeness of the confession, but also that the Sacrament -of Penance must not be made irksome and odious to penitents by overgreat -and exaggerated anxiety in questioning; it, therefore, suffices if the -confessor can be prudently convinced that the penitent is omitting -nothing that he ought to confess.” Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 607; H. Ap. -Tract. 16, n. 102; Gury, Ed. Ratisb. Not. ad n. 615. - -[648] Tit. III. cp. 1, De Sacrum. Pœn. n. 16. - -[649] Cf. Aertnys, Practic. Inst. Confessar. P. II. Cap. II. art. 1, § 1, -p. 27, n. 30; Theol. Moral. l. c. n. 276; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 420; Gury, -l. c. II. n. 616; Reuter, Neo-Confessar. P. 1, cp. 3. Cf. P. II. cp. II. -art. 1, 2, 3, cp. 3, art. 1; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. -n. 895 (where also some examples are given); Benger, Pastoraltheologie, -II. Vol. 4 Book, § 162, p. 412 ff. (2 ed.); Zenner, l. c. P. II. Sect. -1, cp. 1, art. II. § 83-96. Segneri’s most appropriate instruction -deserves to be taken to heart by the confessor: _Cupio magnopere, te -parcum, gravemque esse interrogando circa materiam luxuriæ, ne tibi -accidat, quod pictori, qui cum Helenam exquisita diligentia depingeret, -ejusdem cupiditate exardescere cœpit et accendi. Utere proinde verborum -modestia, et quamvis subinde circumstantia maneret tecta, quæ alioquin ad -integritatem materialem spectaret, nihil interest: aliud enim majus bonum -prævalet. Adeo fœtet palus ista, ut consultum non sit, vel a Pœnitente -vel a Confessario ubi opus non sit, moveri: sufficit requirere speciem -patrati sceleris, non vero modum: et si ipsi vel ex irreverecundia vel ex -ignorantia hunc vellent declarare, suaviter mone, necessarium non esse. -Expediret hac in re imitari Philosophum illum, qui veritus, ne loquendo -os conspurcaret, carbone descripsit._ Instruct. Confessar. cap. II. Cf. -Lugo, l. c. Disp. 16, Sect. 14, n. 595; Coninck, De Sacram. Disp. 8, dub. -17, n. 121. - -[650] Cf. S. Pœnit. 8 June, 1842; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 420. - -[651] An exception can be made when the penitent has written his sins, -and reads them, moreover, when the penitent is not able to make known his -sins, and the confessor is obliged from the beginning of the confession -to help by means of questions, he should not in that case proceed to -another point till he is quite clear as to the one in question. When -the penitent wishes to explain something to the confessor, the latter -should not prevent him (unless it is concerning things which are useless, -not to the point, or mere excuses, or which incriminate others), he -should rather allow him time to reveal his misery and his scruples; this -especially applies when the penitent seldom confesses, or has come from -a distance, or is making a general confession; the confessor must then -receive him with all love and kindness, and must see that his conscience -is quite set at rest. - -[652] Cf. Monita S. Francisci Salesii ad Confessarios, cp. 1, art. 2, § -7. Aertnys, Instr. pract. Confess. l. c. n. 29, Q. 2. - -[653] Praxis Confess. n. 20. - -[654] Stang, Pastoral Theology, Book II. c. 4, § 25. - -[655] _Ibid._ § 33, n. 3. - -[656] Cf. Aertnys, Institut. pract. l. c. n. 30. - -[657] Cf. S. Alph. Silva, part 3, cp. 10; Segneri, Instructio Pœnitent. -cp. 16 _et seq._ - -[658] Instructio Confessar. cp. 2. - -[659] Cf. Aertnys, Instr. pract. l. c. § 1, p. 32 s. Cf. S. Alph. Praxis -Confess. n. 19 ss. - -[660] See Stang, Pastoral Theol. l. c. on general confession. - -[661] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 631; S. Thom. Opusc. 12, Q. 6, and Quodlib. 1, -a. 12 et 17. Cf. Gury, II. n. 618. Ed. Ratisb. - -[662] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 631; H. Ap. n. 120; Lacroix, Lib. VI. P. -II. n. 1969; Müller, l. c. Lib. III. Tr. II. § 152; Scavini, Lib. III. -n. 381; Kenrick, Tract. 18, n. 216; Schneider, Manuale Sacerd. Ed. VI. -pp. 428-429; Konings, etc. This opinion and practice was first introduced -by Illsung (a German Jesuit, who died in 1695), Theol. practica univers. -Tract. 6, Disp. 6, Q. 4, art. 7, § 4, n. 128, erroneously appealing to -the testimony of Suarez, who (De Pœn. Disp. 32, Sect. 3, n. 9), however, -teaches the exact opposite: _Respondetur, regulariter standum esse -confessioni et dicto pœnitentis: unde quantumcunque confessor sciat -peccatum pœnitentis ex aliorum relatione_ (therefore, _in confessione_ -also) _tenetur, in hoc judicio magis credere ipsi pœnitenti, propter -rationem factam_. Lacroix took this opinion from Illsung with the alleged -testimony of Suarez, adding, _ex inadvertentia_, Dicastillo as a further -witness, whom Illsung had quoted for another purpose. St. Alphonsus -reckons Viva also among these, who, however, does not adhere to this -opinion. Cf. Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 619, who finally remarks: -_Ista opinio igitur tota debetur hallucinationi, quæ perperam Suaresii, -Dicastilli et Vivæ auctoritatem adduxit_. Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. II. -nn. 890-895. - -[663] Cf. Lugo, Disp. 22, n. 22; Elbel, De Sacram. in gen. confer. 2, -n. 44 et de Pœnit. n. 453; Laymann, Lib. V. Tract. 6, cp. 14, n. 24; -Mazzotta, Tr. 6, Disp. 2, Q. 2, cp. 2, § 3; Billuart, Diss. 6, art. 10, -§ 2; Gury, l. c.; Aertnys, l. c. n. 278. Lehmkuhl (l. c. n. 429) says -that, considered by itself, the confessor may but is not obliged to -adopt the opinion of St. Alphonsus; that there is only this point in its -favor, that without inconveniencing the penitent, or without revealing -the other confession, sacrilege can be avoided. But the penitent commits -a sacrilege whether the confessor gives him absolution or not. On the -other hand, the administration of the absolution by the confessor is only -a material coöperation, and one cannot oblige him, in order to avoid -this, to make use of knowledge gained from the confession of another. Cf. -Gobat, l. c. Tract. 7, n. 875. - -[664] L. c. n. 627; H. Ap. n. 104. - -[665] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 421. He also cites some examples from -other authors, for instance, Gobat (Tract. 7, n. 338): “_Si religiosus, -a castitate mihi notus, diceret, se semel turpia locutum esse, -præsumerem, hæc esse scurrilia, non contra castitatem_.” _Attamen hæc -potius per exceptionem dicuntur; nam generalis regula est ut, si brevi -interrogatione confessarius dubium de gravi aut levi peccato solvere -possit, hanc instituere debeat._ Mazzotta furnishes a further example (l. -c. Q. II. cp. 2, § 2): “A confessor who (involuntarily or accidentally) -is distracted, and, because knowing the state of the conscience of his -penitent, can presume that what he missed was something unimportant, may -remain silent about it and absolve, if questions would be regarded as -troublesome.” Indeed, Gobat adds: If the confessor knew from experience -that his penitent generally committed no mortal sins, but (_e.g._) -only accused himself of little falsehoods, he can absolve him even -if, on account of distraction, he does not know a single sin of which -the penitent accused himself; but it is advisable in practice to make -the penitent repeat at least a venial sin, perhaps the last, and then -absolve. Lehmkuhl’s caution, however, is to be observed, namely, not to -apply in a more general way that which is prescribed for an extraordinary -case. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 421. - -[666] Cf. Suarez, De Pœnit. Disp. 22, s. 6, n. 7; Mazzotta, l. c. - -[667] Cf. S. Alph. H. Ap. n. 117. - -[668] De Pœnit. Disp. 32, s. 2. - -[669] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 461; Bucceroni, Commentar. III. De absolut. -danda, etc. Edit. alt. Romæ. 1889. § 1, n. 3. - -[670] De Pœnit. n. 82. - -[671] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 279, III. Nota 1. - -[672] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 459, Prax. Conf. n. 71; Bucceroni, l. c. -n. 4; S. Thom. in 4, Dist. 17, Q. 5, a. 3. - -[673] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 279; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 424, who remarks on -this: _Attamen in re aliqua “extraordinaria” insistendum non est. Neque -quodlibet horum signorum in quibuslibet adjunctis certam probationem -facit._ - -[674] Cf. Lib. VI. n. 460. - -[675] Neo-Confessar. n. 177. Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 279 and Append. de -recidivis. n. 314. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 427. - -[676] See in Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 624. - -[677] See § 63. - -[678] It is not enough to say to indisposed penitents something of this -kind: “Well, beg pardon of God for all your sins” (this is no true act -of sorrow), or, “Are you heartily sorry for all your sins?” Effort must, -above all things, be directed towards awakening in penitents (who have -committed grave sins) a real abhorrence of sin; to this end they must -first be prepared by an act of imperfect contrition, and then we must -seek to bring them to perfect contrition. - -[679] Instruct. Confess. cp. 8. - -[680] Cf. Polancus, Directorium Confessarii, cp. 2. - -[681] S. Alph. Praxis conf. cp. 1, nn. 7 et 10. He says, very aptly: -_Perpauci sunt pœnitentes, præsertim rudes et magni peccatores, qui -dolore et proposito prius elicito ad confessionem accedunt. Hos igitur -quoad potest confessarius disponere fortiter et suaviter adlaboret._ - -[682] H. Ap. Tr. 16, n. 105. - -[683] Prax. Conf. cp. 1, n. 7; Lib. VI. n. 608. Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. -Mor. l. c. cp. 1, nn. 313-323. - -[684] Cf. Reuter, Neo-conf. P. 1, cp. V. n. 11. - -[685] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 603; H. Ap. n. 117; Suarez, De Pœn. D. 32, -S. 5, n. 2; cf. Lugo, Disp. 14, n. 166; Marc, Instit. Alph. P. III. Tr. -V. Diss. III. cp. 3, art. 1, n. 1813; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 428; Bucceroni, -Commentar. III. De Absolut danda, etc. § 1, n. 2, § 3, n. 13. - -[686] See § 50, V. The confessor, therefore, must not absolve a penitent -who will not fulfill an important duty incumbent upon him, who does not -heartily repent of his past sins, and has not a firm purpose to sin -no more in future. Cf. Bucceroni, l. c § 4, n. 15; Leo XII, Encycl. -Charitate Christi, Kal. Jan. 1826. - -[687] Cf. B. Humbertus, General. Mag. Prædicatorum, Instructio, et -Bartholomæus Medina ex Ord. Præd. Instruct. Confessar. Lib. I. cp. 3. - -[688] Leonard of P. M., Instructions for Confessors (Regensburg, 1878), -p. 97, etc. - -[689] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 430. Cf. Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 34. - -[690] Upon the origin of this practice, of which no trace is found in the -works of the older theologians, Ballerini enlarges in his notes on Gury, -II. n. 621. He does not discover it in the practice and teaching of the -Jansenists, but rather in the endeavor of the younger theologians to find -means by which the faithful may be better assisted in laying aside a bad -habit, roused from indolence and negligence, and moved to holy zeal. - -[691] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 431. Cf. Marc, l. c. n. 1816; Aertnys, l. c. n. -280. The benefit which the confessor expects from the postponement of -absolution, must, however, always be greater than that which the disposed -penitent receives from actual reception of the holy Sacrament. - -[692] Cf. Bucceroni, l. c. n. 10, _ad brevissimum tempus. Nam per se -loquendo magis prodest absolutio statim data quam ejus dilatio._ “For,” -so he continues, “it is burdensome to remain in a state of mortal sin -even one or two days: (1) on account of the danger of death, against -which we are never safe, etc., and (2) on account of the priceless -blessings of which we are deprived,—grace and merit. Moreover, the -penitent is better prepared by absolution for again receiving the -Sacrament, than by postponement of absolution, etc.” Gury (II. n. 622) -remarks that, where it can be easily done, absolution may be deferred for -one day or for a few hours. - -[693] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 463 and 464. - -[694] Cf. Salmant. Tract. 26, cp. 2, p. 2, § 1, n. 37. - -[695] Cf. Bucceroni, l. c. § 2, n. 8; Suarez, Lugo, Sanchez, Filliucius, -Palaus, Toletus, Gury, II. n. 621. - -[696] Cf. Epistol. S. Francisci Xaver. Lib. IV. Epist. IV. - -[697] Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. P. 1, cp. 8, n. 34. - -[698] S. Leonard a P. M., Discorso mistico e morale, § 11. - -[699] Cf. Lugo, l. c. Disp. IV. Sect. 10, n. 166; Suarez, l. c. Disp. 32, -Sect. 5, n. 2, who adds: _quod prudenti judicio confessoris relinquendum -est, qui hoc sine gravi causa et magna consideratione facere non debet_; -S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 642. - -[700] Segneri, l. c. cp. IV (in fine). - -[701] Cf. S. Alph. De Sacrament, n. 36. - -[702] Cf. S. Leonard a Port-Maur., Instruction, etc., pp. 15-16. - -[703] Instructions for Confessors, n. 3, p. 24 ff. - -[704] Monita ad Confessarios, cp. 1. art. 1. - -[705] Praxis Conf. n. 3. - -[706] Sensa pretiosa, P. 6, n. 17, sqq. - -[707] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 432. - -[708] Tract. 21, nn. 1, 2, 3. - -[709] Instruction, pp. 121-123. - -[710] Praxis Conf. n. 3. - -[711] Cf. Lugo in Benedict. XIV, Const. “Apostolica,” 26 June, 1749, n. -20; S. Alph. Homo Ap. Tr. 21, n. 4. - -[712] Orat. 8, advers. Judæos in Migne Ser. græca, T. 48, col. 932. - -[713] S. Alph. Praxis, n. 77. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 434; Aertnys, -Instruct. pract. P. I. cp. IV. nn. 18-25. - -[714] Cf. S. Bernard. De Considerat. IV; S. Bonavent. De sex alis, cp. 5. - -[715] Praxis Confess. n. 18. Cf. Rituale Rom. Tit. III. cp. 1, De Sacram. -Pœnit. - -[716] De Pœnit. Disp. 21, n. 70. - -[717] Cf. Lacroix, Lib. VI. P. II. n. 1789; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 627; -Marc, l. c. n. 1787; Aertnys, l. c. n. 266; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 439. - -[718] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 18. - -[719] Rituale Roman. Tit. III. cp. 1, n. 3. - -[720] Praxis Confess. n. 18. - -[721] Renninger-Göpfert, Pastoraltheologie, I. Buch, I. Tl. § 82, S. 225 -f. - -[722] Cf. Lugo, l. c. Disp. 21, n. 70. - -[723] Lugo, l. c. - -[724] Praxis Conf. n. 18. - -[725] De Episc. p. 3, c. 4. - -[726] Praxis Conf. n. 17. - -[727] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 438. - -[728] Hobert, Praxis Sacra. Pœnit. Tract. 1, cp. 4. Cf. Aertnys, Instr. -pract. P. 1, cp. 1, n. 7. - -[729] Cf. Aertnys, Instit. pract. l. c. n. 8. - -[730] Homo Apost. Tr. 16, cp. 6, n. 127. - -[731] II. II. Q. 14, art. 3. - -[732] S. Thom. II. II. Q. 47, art. 4. - -[733] Stang, Pastoral Theol. l. c. IV. 28. - -[734] Cf. Aertnys, Instit. pract. P. 1, cp. II. n. 9. - -[735] Praxis Confessar. Cf. Marc, Instit. Moral. l. c. n. 1788. - -[736] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 605; Marc, Inst. Mor. l. c. n. 1789. - -[737] Marc, Inst. mor. l. c. n. 1791. - -[738] Constit. “Apostolica,” 26 June, 1749, n. 21. - -[739] Aertnys, Instruct pract. l. c. n. 10. - -[740] _Necessitate medii_ the Christian must believe those truths -without the knowledge and express belief of which, justification and, -in consequence, the attainment of everlasting salvation, is never -possible for any one having the use of reason. Certainly necessary is -the explicit belief: (1) in one God; (2) the Rewarder of good and the -Avenger of evil. Although it is quite probable that _fides explicita_ is -necessary in these truths only, it is, nevertheless, not certain that -_fides explicita_ is not also necessary (3) in the mystery of the Blessed -Trinity and (4) in the mystery of the Incarnation and the Redemption. - -[741] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 608-610; Prop. damnat. 64 ab Innoc. XI. - -[742] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 22; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. II. Tr. -1, n. 4; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 442. - -[743] Cf. S. Alph. Theol. Mor. Lib. II. n. 3, Praxis Conf. n. 22; Salm. -Tract. 21, cp. 2, nn. 62, 63; Aertnys, l. c. n. 4. - -[744] Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 22. - -[745] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 608, 609. - -[746] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 616. - -[747] Cf. S. Alph. H. Ap. Tr. 16, n. 115. - -[748] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 611; H. Ap. n. 113. - -[749] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 614. - -[750] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 612; H. Ap. n. 113. - -[751] Cf. Benedict XIV, De Syn. Lib. 9, cp. 2, nn. 2, 3; S. Alph. Lib. -VI. n. 613; H. Ap. n. 114, Prax. Conf. n. 8; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. -VI. n. 273; Marc, l. c. n. 1810. - -[752] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 616 (fin.). Cf. n. 614. - -[753] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 610. - -[754] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 615. Cf. Praxis Conf. n. 9. - -[755] Constit. “Apostolica,” 26 June, 1749, n. 20. - -[756] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 615, Praxis Conf. n. 9. - -[757] Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 39. - -[758] Praxis Conf. nn. 6, 180. - -[759] Cf. Trid. Sess. XIV. cp. 8. - -[760] Praxis Conf. n. 7. - -[761] Benedict XIV, “Apostolica,” § 22. - -[762] Cf. Polancus, l. c.; Segneri, l. c. - -[763] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. nn. 148-155; Hom. Ap. App. 1, nn. -28-36; Vera Sponsa, cp. 18, § 3; Aertnys, l. c. Lib. VI. Tract. IV. De -Eucharist. nn. 93-95; this author discusses also the difference between -the teaching of St. Alphonsus and that of St. Francis of Sales. Lehmkuhl, -l. c. P. II L. I. Tr. IV. De Euchar. n. 156. - -[764] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 15 (Ed. Le Noir, Par. 1880); Lacroix, -Lib. VI. p. 2, n. 1825; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 447; Aertnys, Instruct. pract. -Pars II. cp. 3, art. 1, n. 59. - -[765] Reuter, Neo-Confessar. P. II. cp. 1, art. 1-8, nn. 56-99. Cf. -Lehmkuhl, l. c. nn. 448-455; Aertnys, Instr. pract. l. c. n. 62; Theol. -Mor. Lib. I. nn. 245-261. - -[766] Cf. Lugo, l. c. Disp. 22, n. 50; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 619 ss.; -Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. 2, De officio et obligat. Confess. -nn. 836-862; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. V. cp. 4, art. 2, nn. -282-285. - -[767] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 619. Lehmkuhl proposes the following -case: If I had invalidly absolved any one—especially from grave sins—and -met him shortly afterwards, I should be bound to absolve him without, -however, intimating it, if I could presume that he had not committed any -other grave sin in the meantime. Whether I should be bound to seek this -person, _cum gravi meo incommodo_, would depend both upon the risk to -the penitent’s salvation, and also upon the error of which I had been -guilty; I should also be obliged to avoid endangering the seal of the -confessional. If some time had elapsed since the confession, I could not -give the absolution till I had exhorted the penitent to dispose himself -by a new act of contrition. To give such an exhortation or to make an -avowal to the penitent of the error made in the confession, would not -of itself be a breach of the seal; for every penitent, whether he has -confessed mortal or venial sins, is entitled to absolution. But if, on -account of circumstances, it might be considered a disclosing of a grave -sin heard in the confessional, the confessor would be obliged previously -to ask the penitent’s permission to speak to him concerning matters of -the confessional; in so doing, he should explain that something very -salutary and profitable to the penitent was in question. Lehmkuhl, l. c. -n. 471; Ballerini, l. c. n. 840. - -[768] Cf. Gobat, Theolog. experimental. de VII. Sacram. Tract. VII. n. -298. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 473. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 22, n. 65 seq. Suarez, -De Pœnit. Disp. 32, s. 6. - -[769] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 620. - -[770] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 621; H. A. n. 122; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 472; -Aertnys, l. c. n. 284. - -[771] L. c. n. 299. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 475. - -[772] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 635. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 23, nn. 1-16. - -[773] Cap. 21. - -[774] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 635. Cf. Ballerini, l. c. n. 902. - -[775] The duty is here considered in so far as it belongs to _virtus -religionis_, for the defamation arising from breaking the seal may be -very slight, or wholly absent, and the breach of confidence may easily -be of small significance. But _levitas periculi_ of breaking the seal is -by no means to be confounded with _parvitas materiæ_; for there exists -no duty to avoid every slight and improbable danger of breaking it; this -would cause too great anxiety of conscience. Nevertheless every confessor -will be very careful to preserve this seal intact. Cf. S. Alph. l. c. nn. -633, 661. - -[776] L. c. n. 634. - -[777] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 634, 635, 651; H. Ap. n. 147. - -[778] S. Alph. l. c.; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 457; Aertnys, l. c. n. 288. - -[779] S. Alph. H. Ap. n. 148; Lib. III. n. 153. - -[780] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 651. - -[781] S. Alph. l. c. n. 651; H. Ap. n. 156. - -[782] S. Alph. l. c. n. 651. - -[783] Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 976 ss. - -[784] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 455. - -[785] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 636; H. A. n. 156. - -[786] S. Alph. l. c. - -[787] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 633; H. Ap. n. 164; Gury-Ballerini, Notæ ad -Gury, II. n. 650; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 458; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. -c. n. 901 ss. - -[788] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. nn. 645, 648. - -[789] S. Alph. l. c. n. 647; Stotz, l. c. Lib. II. n. 199. - -[790] Cf. Lugo, l. c. Disput. 23, n. 29. - -[791] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 650. Cf. Lugo, l. c. Disp. 23, n. 47 ss. -Laymann, De Pœnit. cp. 14, n. 19. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. 3, -n. 971 ss. - -[792] S. Alph. l. c. n. 647. Cf. Suarez, De Pœn. Disp. 33, Sect. 4, n. 2; -Ballerini, l. c. n. 975. - -[793] S. Alph. l. c. n. 657. - -[794] Cf. Ballerini, l. c. n. 926 ss.; Lugo, l. c. Disp. 23, n. 68. - -[795] Cf. Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. nn. 947-948; Lugo, l. c. n. -54; Suarez, l. c. Disp. 33, Sect. 3, n. 5. - -[796] Cf. Ballerini, l. c. nn. 956-960. - -[797] Cf. Reuter, Theol. Mor. Tom. IV. n. 377; Lugo, l. c. n. 57; Sporer, -De Pœnit. n. 833; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 460. - -[798] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 644; Lugo, l. c. n. 60; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. -460; Aertnys, l. c. n. 293; Ballerini, l. c. n. 960. - -[799] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. nn. 643, 659 (in fine); Ballerini, Op. Theol. -Mor. l. c. n. 959. - -[800] S. Alph. l. c. n. 641. - -[801] S. Alph. l. c. n. 661. Cf. Stotz, l. c. Lib. II. art. V. s. 1-8. - -[802] Lugo, l. c. n. 61; Lacroix, Reuter, and Stotz, however, explain -the matter thus: The confessor is not ordinarily allowed to say that the -penitent had not been absolved; but if the penitent were to say casually, -in presence of the confessor and others, that he had not been absolved, -permission would thereby be given to the latter to say it also; but the -confessor is by no means allowed to disclose the reason for refusing the -absolution, if the indisposition of the penitent has been the motive of -it, or if the disclosure is in any way unpleasant to the penitent. - -[803] Cf. Lugo, l. c. n. 61; Reuter, l. c. n. 378. - -[804] S. Alph. H. Ap. n. 156. - -[805] S. Alph. l. c. n. 657; Gury, l. c. nn. 665-666; Ballerini, Op. -Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 983. Cf. 976 ss. - -[806] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 657, 638. - -[807] S. Alph. H. Ap. n. 156. - -[808] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 652. - -[809] It is not necessary to tell those whom one consults for advice -that the case occurred in the confessional, nor should the matter be -discussed publicly before many, but only before those who are capable of -giving suitable advice. Mazzotta adds another notable limitation (Tract. -VI. Disp. 2, Q. 5, c. 2): “Therefore, let confessors ask judicious -men everywhere for advice in cases which have come before them in the -confessional, and, in so doing, conceal the name of the penitent. But -they have no right to do so if any suspicion should fall upon the person -in question, or were there even a danger of this.” But what is to be done -in the latter case when the confessor requires advice? Let him either -present the case as an imaginary one, or let him request permission of -the penitent to make use of the knowledge gained in the confessional, or -let him seek a judicious man to whom the penitent is unknown, or let him -send the penitent to another confessor. If none of these methods can be -used without breaking the seal, let him trust to the divine assistance, -employ other suitable means,—such as prayer and study,—and then let him -solve the difficulty himself in the best way he can. - -[810] S. Alph. l. c. n. 654; H. Ap. n. 158. - -[811] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 654; H. Ap. n. 157. Cf. Ballerini, Notæ ad -Gury, II. n. 666, et Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 987 ss., et Vindiciæ -Alphons. Par. V. Q. 24; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 469; Aertnys, l. c. n. 297, Q. -II. - -[812] S. Alph. l. c. n. 659; H. A. n. 161. Cf. Lugo, l. c. - -[813] Cf. Decret. Clementis VIII. 26 May, 1594 et Decr. S. C. Inq. 18 -Nov., 1682 (auctor. Innoc. XI). Cf. Gury, II. Ed. Ratisb. n. 670. - -[814] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. nn. 656-658; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. -1000; Lugo, l. c. Disp. 23, n. 93. - -[815] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 639 et 661. Cf. Gury, II. Ed. Ratisb. nn. 660, -661; Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 916; Laymann, De Pœnit. cp. 14, -n. 8; Sporer, De Pœn. n. 839; Lacroix, Lib. VI. P. II. n. 1914. - -[816] S. Alph. l. c. n. 659; H. A. n. 160. Cf. Ballerini, l. c. n. 1012 -ss. - -[817] Cf. Theol. Mechlin, n. 117, Q. 3; Aertnys, l. c. n. 297, Q. 9. - -[818] Cf. Aertnys, Tract. De praxi servanda cum occasionariis et -recidivis Theol. Mor. II. Appendix, nn. 298-350. - -[819] Cf. Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Append. (ut supra cit.). Ballerini, Opus -Theol. Moral. Tom. V. n. 167 ss.; Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 628 ss.; Lehmkuhl, -l. c. n. 485 ss.; Marc. Inst. Mor. Tract. V. Dissert. III. n. 1818 ss. - -[820] Some theologians call that which incites to sin from within the -“interior occasion,” but, generally, only a person or external object is -defined as _occasio_. - -[821] Cf. Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 628, et Opus Theol. Moral. Tom. -V. n. 167. Theologians do not agree in defining the _occasio proxima_. -Departing from the above definition, some teach—and in this they are -in accordance with St. Alphonsus—that, “to constitute the _occasio -proxima_, it is not necessary that a person should, _fere semper aut -frequentius_, sin in that occasion, but that it suffices if he often, -_frequenter_, falls, as _frequens lapsus_ in the past makes a fall in -the future probable.” Aertnys, l. c. n. 302, Q. 1; Marc, l. c. n. 1820; -Berardi, De occas. n. 13. The _frequentia lapsuum_ is either _relativa_ -or _absoluta_. Relative frequency is reckoned according to the number of -cases in which the person has been exposed to the occasion; so it would -be, for instance, an _occasio proximo_ if in twelve visits a person has -sinned five or six times. Similarly, if a man should visit a woman only -three or four times in two years, and generally sinned with her; or -when the visit took place only once a year during three years and each -time sin was committed. On the other hand, the frequency is absolute -when the number of cases is, in itself, considerable; for instance, -if two persons meet every Sunday, and sin ten or twelve times in the -year. However, this stricter definition does not seem to be that of St. -Alphonsus; at least he defines the _occasio proximo_ in two passages -of his works (Homo Apost. Tr. ult. n. 1, and Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. -452) as that in _qua communiter ut plurimum deficiunt_, while into one -definition he also introduces the _frequenter peccare_ in contrast to -_frequentius_. According to Ballerini these conflicting passages may be -reconciled with each other, and Lugo’s definition is, he says, the basis -of the agreement: that constitutes an immediate occasion of which a man -never, or scarcely ever, _consideratis circumstantiis_ makes use without -sinning. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 149. Cf. Vindic. Alph. n. 140, p. -942. - -[822] Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 168. - -[823] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. V. n. 63; Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 157; -Sanchez, Decal. Lib. I. cp. 8, n. 4. - -[824] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. V. n. 63. - -[825] Cf. S. Thomas, Summ. Theol. II. II. Q. 154, art. 3, ad 1. - -[826] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 486. - -[827] Cf. Lehmkuhl, n. 486, IV; Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. Tom. V. -Tract. X. Sect. V. n. 172. - -[828] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 454. Prax. Conf. n. 66. - -[829] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 454; Prax. Conf. nn. 67, 68; -Berardi, l. c. nn. 44, 45, 49, 50; S. Leonard a Port-Maur. Disc. mist. n. -22. Cf. Proposit. 61 damn. ab Innoc. XI et Proposit. 41 damn. ab Alex. -VII; Aertnys, l. c. n. 306, III. - -[830] S. Alph. l. c. n. 454. Prax. Conf. n. 66. - -[831] S. Alph. l. c, nn. 456, 463, 464; Prax. Conf. n. 69; Berardi, l. c. -nn. 53, 54; Aertnys, l. c. n. 306, IV. V. - -[832] S. Alph. H. Ap. Tr. ult. n. 6. Cf. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. n. -185. - -[833] S. Alph. l. c. n. 456. - -[834] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. nn. 456, 457; H. Ap. Tr. ult. n. 7; Prax. Conf. -n. 69. Cf. Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. 14, n. 156 ss. - -[835] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 456; Prax. Conf. n. 69. - -[836] Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. nn. 196, 197. Cf. Ballerini, Notæ -ad Gury, II. n. 631, et Vindiciæ Alph. pp. 603-620. - -[837] Cf. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 68; Berardi, l. c. nn. 79-83. - -[838] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. V. n. 63; Segneri, Instr. Conf. cap. 5; -Berardi, l. c.; Aertnys, l. c. n. 308, Q. 1. - -[839] Segneri, Conf. Instr. cp. 5. - -[840] Cf. Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. 8, _ref. matrim._ - -[841] Compare § 65, Penitents in _occasione necessaria_, for the same -principles apply to this case. - -[842] See Benger, Pastoraltheologie, Vol. II. Book 4, § 191, n. 28, p. -665 (2 ed.). - -[843] Cf. Berardi, De occas. n. 117 ss.; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. II. Lib. -VI. Tract. V. Append. Part III. n. 315 ss. - -[844] Segneri, Instruct. Conf. cp. 5; S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 436. - -[845] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 436. - -[846] Cf. Segneri, Instruct. Conf. cp. 5 et 6. - -[847] Cf. Gobat, l. c. Tract. VII. cas. 16, n. 530; Sporer, Theol. sacr. -P. III. n. 328; S. Alph. Lib. III. nn. 437, 441, Lib. II. n. 31, Lib. VI. -n. 455. - -[848] Segneri, l. c. cp. 5; Berardi, l. c. n. 151. - -[849] Cf. Rit. Rom. Tit. IV. cp. 4, n. 1. - -[850] Cf. Berardi, l. c. n. 148; Aertnys, l. c. n. 319, Q. - -[851] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 436; Segneri, Instr. Conf. cp. 5. - -[852] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. nn. 437, 441. - -[853] “If, considering the present corruption of our society and -the manner in which dancing entertainments are conducted, a priest -publicly protests against them, he may be perfectly justified. But the -place in which he can exercise his influence against this evil is the -confessional. Here he can positively forbid dancing to the young man or -girl for whom it is an _occasio proxima_ of sin, whether the sin consists -in bad thoughts and desires, or in external acts, or he will proceed in -accordance with the principles laid down above (concerning the _occasio -necessaria_).” Renninger-Göpfert, Pastoral Theology, Vol. I. Part I. § -90, p. 265. - -[854] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 429. - -[855] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 429; Berardi, l. c. n. 155. - -[856] Cf. Berardi, l. c. n. 156. - -[857] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 429; _certe veniale non excedit_. - -[858] Cf. Konings, Theol. Mor. Compend. n. 1441; S. Francisc. Sales. -Instit. vit. devot. P. III. cp. 34; Aertnys, l. c. n. 323, Q. II; -Lehmkuhl, l. c. P. I. Lib. II. cp. 3, n. 643. - -[859] Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 112; Franc. Sales. Inst. vit. devot. l. -c. cp. 33; Berardi, l. c. nn. 167-169; Aertnys, l. c. art. II. n. 324, Q. -1. - -[860] II. II. Q. 168, art. 3. - -[861] S. Thom. 4 Sent. dist. 16, Q. 4. art 2. - -[862] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 427. - -[863] _Ibid._ - -[864] Benedict XIV, De Synod. Lib. II. cp. 10, n. 11. Cf. S. Alph. Lib. -III. n. 427. - -[865] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 327; Lehmkuhl, l. c. P. I. L. II. cp. 3, n. -644. - -[866] Compare § 43; S. Alph. App. de prohib. libr. cp. 1; cf. Benger, -Pastoraltheologie (2 Ed.), Vol. II. § 129, n. 7, p. 53 ff.; Clement XIII, -Encycl. 1766; Pius IX, “Qui Pluribus,” 20 Nov., 1846; many pastorals of -bishops. - -[867] Cf. Propos. 61 damn. ab Innoc. XI. - -[868] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 429. - -[869] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 331, Q. II. - -[870] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 330, Q. II; Gury, Tom. I. n. 256; Varceno, -Theol. Mor. Tract. 8, cp. 2, art. 3; Berardi, Praxis Conf. nn. 66 et 240; -Müller, Theol. Mor. Lib. II. § 36, n. 6. - -[871] By “intimacies” is here understood friendly intercourse established -between two persons of different sex. - -[872] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 65. Cf. Roncaglia, in S. Alph. _ibid._; -Gousset, Moraltheologie, II. n. 566. - -[873] Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 65; S. Leonard a Port-Maur. Disc. mist. -nn. 23, 24. - -[874] Theol. Mor. l. c. Append. P. III. n. 340. - -[875] Notæ ad Gury, Tom. I. n. 413. - -[876] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 65; S. Leonard, Disc. mist. n. 23 s.; -Berardi, l. c. nn. 233-238; Konings, l. c. n. 1453; Aertnys, l. c. - -[877] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 204; H. Ap. Append. IV. n. 6; Benedict -XIV, Inst. 46, nn. 17, 21; Sporer, De Matrim. n. 429. - -[878] S. Alph. H. Ap. Tr. 7, n. 32; Praxis Conf. n. 52. - -[879] S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 65; S. Leon. Disc. mist. n. 24. - -[880] Therefore, _quando fiunt inter eos, qui sunt disparis conditionis -propter scandalum et periculum mortaliter peccandi; si fiant cum illis, -cum quibus impossible est contrahi matrimonium, ut sunt uxorati, -claustrales et in sacris ordinibus constituti ... si fiat in ecclesia, -tum propter irreverentiam, tum propter periculum audiendi sacrum sine -debita attentione, tum etiam propter scandalum; si adsit præceptum patris -vel matris aut tutoris rationabiliter prohibens talem amorem_. - -[881] _Quando clam fiunt et occulte, tempore nocturno, si eo modo fiat, -ut ex se involvat periculum proximum osculorum, tactuum, etc., etiam -si aliunde ille amor esset licite exercitus, quia est inter solutos -et causa matrimonii ... si amator animadvertat, complicem amoris esse -graviter tentatum vel alterum urgere verbis turpibus vel alio modo ad -inhonesta etc., etiamsi alter complex nihil tentetur et nullam sentiat -inclinationem ad peccandum; denique universaliter loquendo, quotiescunque -ob causam amoris amator vel amatrix frequenter labitur in aliquam gravem -noxam; tunc amor induit rationem occasionis proximæ mali et est omnino -illicitus._—From the decree of Cardinal Pico de Mirandola. Cf. Gaume, l. -c. - -[882] Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 65; Aertnys, l. c.; Gousset, -Moraltheologie, II. n. 567. - -[883] Handbook for Confessors, chap. III. art. 5, n. 328. - -[884] See Ballerini’s Discussion of the definition of St. Alphonsus (Lib. -VI. n. 453) and Gury’s (l. c. n. 632) in his Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. 1, -n. 214; on the other hand, Aertnys, l. c. Append. P. II. cp. 1, n. 310. - -[885] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 490. - -[886] S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 459. - -[887] S. Alph. H. Ap. Tr. ult. n. 8. - -[888] Instr. sacerd. Lib. V. c. 13, n. 6. - -[889] Lib. VI. n. 464. - -[890] St. Alphonsus distinguishes between _formal_ relapsing sinners -and _material_. A _formal_ relapsing sinner is one who, having been -instructed and having promised amendment, has returned to his former -sin in the same, or nearly the same way, and with the same ease; that -is, without having endeavored to amend, and without having adopted any -one of the prescribed remedies. A _material_ relapsing sinner is one -who was never seriously admonished, or who, in spite of efforts toward -improvement, and in consequence of inconstancy of will, has again fallen -into the sins already confessed. H. Ap. Tr. ult. n. 9 (cf. Vind. Alph. -P. VI. cp. 1, Tom. II. p. 276). In a word, a relapsing sinner is one who -has contracted a sinful habit, and, after confession, has fallen into the -same sin. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 457. Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 310; Ballerini, -Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 632; Op. Theol. Mor. l. c.; Lugo, De Pœnit. Disp. -14, n. 166; Salmant. Tr. 17, cp. II. n. 167. According to the concurrent -teaching of theologians, the following elements are included in the -idea of relapse in the theological sense: (1) _frequens relapsus post -plures confessiones_; (2) _relapsus in eadem_ (_specie_) _peccata_; (3) -_defectus omnis, etiam inchoatæ, emendationis_. (Suarez, Tr. V. Lib. III. -c. 8, n. 7.) - -[891] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 491. - -[892] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 313; Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 493. St. Alphonsus -teaches that such penitents can only be absolved when, by extraordinary -signs, they have removed the prejudice against their actual disposition -(as we have learnt above, § 50); and the holy Doctor, whom many later -theologians follow, represents this teaching as _sententia communis_. -Lib. VI. nn. 459 and 505; Prax. Conf. n. 20 in fine. But Ballerini -questions this, remarking that even of the authors cited by St. Alphonsus -not all held this opinion. Cf. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. nn. -232-313; Notæ ad Gury, II. n. 636. Only the theologians of Salamanca -teach, indeed, that these extraordinary signs are a help in forming -a judgment as to the penitent’s preparation, or that, when they are -present, postponement is not to be resorted to, while they recommend -this remedy as occasionally profitable and beneficial in uprooting the -evil habit. Moreover, they always teach that to the habitual sinner -the general rule of the Roman Catechism may be applied: “When (the -priest), after hearing the confession, judges that neither diligence -in the confession of the sins nor sorrow in their detestation has been -wholly wanting in the penitent, he can absolve him,” without limiting -(as does St. Alphonsus, n. 459) these and similar expressions to the -habitual sinner who confesses the sinful habit for the first time. The -confessor need not be convinced, they add, that the penitent will keep -his resolution, if only he believes that the latter is, at the time, -really and firmly resolved to amend. But if they sometimes maintain -that habitual sinners cannot be absolved, it is clear from the context -(Ballerini continues) either that only those are meant who are quite -certainly unworthy and not disposed, or that they prescribe this in -order to avoid scandal. Ballerini remarks further that relapse does not -show positively that the purpose of amendment in former confessions was -not sufficiently efficacious; the human will is liable to alteration; -still less can want of sorrow and purpose of amendment in the actual -confession be inferred (at least directly). Cf. Gury, Edit. Ratisb. V. -1874. According to Ballerini, the controversy turns upon the question, -When has the confessor obtained a _judicium prudens seu probabile_ -concerning the disposition of the relapsing penitent? and declares -(after emphatically rejecting the teaching of St. Alphonsus, who finds -this _judicium_ in the _signis extraordinariis_), that there are two -things indicating the actual disposition of the penitent: _modus -confessionis et confessio seu testimonium pœnitentis_. As to the _signa -extraordinaria_—after having characterized most of them as deceptive and -untrustworthy, and only admitting a few as partly or wholly conducive -to a better knowledge of the disposition of the penitent, Ballerini -observes: “_Hisce indiciis utique utendum esse at neque iis insistendum -adeo esse, ut alia, quæ insita sunt ipsius sacramenti naturæ, negligantur -neque propter eorum defectum debere Confessarium desperare de cognoscenda -pœnitentis dispositione ac multo minus certum de defectu dispositionis -inde judicium ferre._” Cf. n. 310. It is not to be denied that the -relapsing habitual sinner _can_ be truly repentant and firmly resolved -in the actual confession; the confessor must also believe the penitent, -whether he speaks in his own favor or against himself. But, on the other -hand, it is not to be denied that the penitent has shaken belief in his -declaration as to his repentance and resolution, by not amending at all -and by not adopting remedies; that he is, therefore, to be regarded as a -_dubie dispositus_. Finally, the confessor must provide for the reverence -due to the Sacrament and for the salvation of the penitent, and therefore -must not straightway content himself with the latter’s assertion that -he is sorry, etc. According to Gury (Ratisb. edit.) the teaching of St. -Alphonsus may, without difficulty, be reconciled with the general view of -the older theologians. For the signs which he calls extraordinary are not -supposed to be different from those which others call regular and usual. -From all this it is plainly evident that St. Alphonsus and the later -theologians do not demand anything more than what the older theologians -demanded; namely, _sufficient signs of true repentance_; sufficient, -also, making allowance for the circumstances. Gury, II. Edit. Ratisb. n. -640. Appendix. De dilatione absolut., etc. - -[893] Cf. Bucceroni, Comment. III. De absolut. danda, etc., § 5, De -absol. consuetud, et recidiv. This author points out, in his excellent -treatise, that this is the teaching of the great theologians, Lugo and -Suarez, and the practice of the saints. - -[894] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 608; Const. Leonis XII, “Charitate Christi,” -25 Dec., 1825. - -[895] Cf. Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 311. - -[896] Berardi, l. c. n. 116. Cf. S. Alph. l. c. n. 460. - -[897] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 459; Praxis Conf. n. 5; Leo XII, Const. -citat.; Ballerini, Opus Theol. Mor. n. 313 ss. Compare § 52, Postponement -of absolution. - -[898] L. c. nn. 431, 28. - -[899] S. Alph. l. c. n. 432. Cf. Berardi, De recidivis, etc., n. 119 ss. - -[900] Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 494. - -[901] Cf. § 52, IV. - -[902] Cf. S. Alph. n. 459; cf. 432. - -[903] L. c. nn. 463, 464; Praxis Conf. nn. 76, 77. - -[904] See above, IV. - -[905] Confess. Lib. VIII. cp. 11. - -[906] Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 181; cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 314, Q. 8. - -[907] Compare Capellmann, Pastoral Medicine, B. The sixth commandment I. - -[908] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 209, Lib. V. n. 8, Lib. VI. nn. 464, 75; -Prax. Conf. n. 6, nn. 16, 124; Segneri, Instr. Conf. cp. 12; S. Leonard a -Port-Maur. Discors. mist. n. 19; Aertnys, l. c. n. 314, Q. 7. - -[909] Suppl. Q. 35, a. 1, ad 3. - -[910] II. II. Q. 184, a. 8. - -[911] S. Alph. H. Ap. Tr. ult. nn. 16, 17, Lib. VI. nn. 63-77; Benedict -XIV, De Synod. Lib. XI. c. 2, n. 17. - -[912] Suppl. Q. 36, art. 4, ad 1. Cf. Innoc. III. in cap. 14, de act. et -qual. - -[913] Cf. Collectanea S. Sedis, nn. 497, 494. - -[914] Praxis Conf. cp. 9, n. 121. Compare the excellent treatise in -Benger’s Pastoral Theology, Book 4, § 172. Perfection. - -[915] Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 245. Cf. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 499; Benger, § -174, n. 5, I. - -[916] Cf. Lugo, De Pœn. Disp. 16, Sect. 2, n. 103. - -[917] Cf. S. Franc. Sales. Philoth. P. III. cp. 1 et 2. - -[918] Franc. Sal. _ibid._, cp. 35. - -[919] Reuter says: “It is indeed true, as the Apostle remarks in the -First Epistle to the Corinthians, that the Spirit of God is wont to -instruct us Himself and through the ministry of His good angels. Not -seldom, however, Satan transforms himself into an angel of light, -deceiving men with the intention of ruining their souls. Those become -easily entangled in these snares who are presumptuous in spiritual -matters.” Neo-Conf. n. 247. - -[920] Scaramelli, Directorium mysticum; S. Alph. Praxis Confess. nn. -247-251; St. Ignatius of Loyola, Book of Exercises; Comp. Zenner, Instr. -pract. Confess. P. II. Sect. II. cp. 1, § 261; the Monita S. Philippi -Nerii. - -[921] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 505. Compare Benger, Pastoraltheologie, (1 Ed.) -Vol. III. § 174, (2 Ed.) Vol. II. Book 4, § 174. - -[922] Cf. Aertnys, Instr. pract. P. III. cp. 6, art. 2, n. 213; -Benger, l. c.; Stöhr, Pastoral Medicine, 2 Ed. p. 334; Kerschbaumer, -Paterfamilias, Part IV. chap. 7, 8. - -[923] S. Alph. Lib. I. n. 11; Aertnys, l. c. Lib. I. Tract. II. n. 49; -Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. Gener. Tract. II. n. 57; Stotz, Trib. Pœnit. I. P. -V. Q. III. n. 176. - -[924] Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 266. - -[925] Cf. Lacroix, l. c. Lib. I. n. 519 ss.; Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. Gener. -Tr. II. n. 58. - -[926] S. Alph. De Mor. Syst. - -[927] Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. l. c. Lib. III. § 159; Lehmkuhl, l. -c. n. 55; Aertnys, l. c. n. 50; Müller, l. c. II. § 159; Benger, -Pastoraltheologie, a. a. O. § 174, n. 5; Scaramelli, Direct. ascet. Tom. -III. nn. 433-440; Zenner, Instr. pract. Conf. P. II. Sect. II. cp. 1, § -256. - -[928] Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. l. c. n. 260; S. Ignat. l. c. Regula 5; -Benger, l. c.; Scaramelli, l. c.; Zenner, Instr. pract. Conf. P. II. -Sect. II cp. 1. § 255. - -[929] S. Alph. l. c. n. 13; Reuter, Neo-Conf. l. c. n. 261; Aertnys, l. -c. n. 51. - -[930] S. Alph. Lib. I. n. 13; Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 262; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -n. 61; Aertnys, l. c. n. 53. - -[931] Cf. Reuter, Neo-Confess. n. 263 ss.; Stotz, l. c. n. 185; Lehmkuhl, -l. c. n. 63; Aertnys, l. c.; Zenner, Instructio pract. Confess. P. II. -Sect. II. cp. 1, § 257. - -[932] S. Alph. Lib. IV. n. 177; Reuter, Neo-Conf. n. 268; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -n. 64. - -[933] Cf. S. Congreg. S. Offic. 20 Jul., 1859 (Coll. Lacens. Concil. Tom. -III. p. 550). - -[934] Cf. Instr. S. C. Inq. 20 Jul., 1859 et 20 Nov., 1878; Bucceroni, -Enchirid. p. 84. There is an (abridged) _professio fidei_, which the -S. C. S. Officii, 20 July, 1859 gave for America; the wording of the -Instruction clearly indicates that it may be used in all places where the -diocesan law does not decide to the contrary. - -[935] Thus Lehmkuhl. Aertnys, however, does not assent to this teaching, -_quia voluntas conditionalis confitendi non est reapse confessio, atque -adeo prorsus deesse videtur materia_. Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. n. 196, Q. 4, -5. Lehmkuhl rejects the opinion that a dying person in this state must -be asked whether he would confess and receive absolution; for here the -question is not what the man would wish, but what he wishes; at most it -might be said of this velleity that it includes a certain will and actual -accusation. Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 515. - -[936] Zenner, Instr. pract. Confess. l. c. cp. 2, § 263: _Summi momenti -munus subit confessarius, dum puerorum confessionibus se offert -excipiendis_. Dubois, “The Practical Pastor,” Pt. 2, chap. 18, n. 381; -Frassinetti, “Practical Instruction for Young Pastors,” Pt. 2, Chap. 3, -n. 411 (in the Italian); Renninger-Göpfert, Pastoraltheologie, Book 1, -Pt. 1, § 84, p. 240. - -[937] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 432, 666; Gury, l. c. I. n. 478; Stang, -Pastoral Theol. Bk. II. 4, § 31. Schulze, Pastoral Theol. Sect. I. 4, n. -3. - -[938] Cf. Statut. Leod. n. 344. - -[939] Stang, Pastoral Theol. Bk. II. 4, § 31. - -[940] The question whether a formula of an Examination of Conscience -should be placed in the hands of children, is treated by Dubois, l. c. -Certainly not in the hands of the younger children; and Examinations, -such as are contained in prayer-books for grown-up people, should not -be given to older ones. Nor are all Examinations for Children to be -recommended. The instruction is the most important thing; an Examination -is a poor substitute for good instruction. Certain it is that these -Examinations are very often misused by children. - -[941] Aertnys says in his Institut. practica, cp. 2, art. 1, n. 122, that -the confessor must ask the children if they know the articles of faith -which every Christian is bound to know, and if they do not, he must, if -time allows, patiently instruct them concerning these articles, at least -concerning the doctrines necessary to salvation, etc., but this can only -happen in exceptional cases, scarcely when there has been given a good -course of previous instruction. - -[942] Prax. Conf. cp. 6, n. 90. - -[943] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 90. - -[944] Cf. Catech. Roman. P. III. cp. 7; Renninger, l. c. - -[945] Aertnys writes upon this point (Instr. pract. cp. 2, art. 1, n. -127): _Actiones inhonestæ puerorum, qui luxuriæ adhuc ignari sunt, -plerumque non sunt habendæ ut peccata mortalia; quia vel commotionem -veneream non habuerunt vel hujus malitiam nondum apprehendunt_. And -St. Alphonsus teaches (Vera Sponsa, cp. 18, § 1, n. 14): _Sunt quædam -actiones naturales, quas manifestare puderet, attamen declarare propterea -non tenemur. Sic. e. c. si quis commiserit in pueritia levitates aut -jocos indecentes, quorum malitiam ignorabat, non tenetur ea confiteri. -Neque ex eo, quod actio secreto facta fuerit, concludere licet conscium -quem fuisse ejusdem malitiæ; quasdam namque faciunt pueri actiones -naturales secreto, quamvis non sint peccata._ But there are children, -and in towns especially not a few of them, who are early corrupted, and -in whom wickedness and impure knowledge are in advance of their age, -with reference to whom it must, alas! be said: _Tantillus puer et tantus -peccator!_ Cf. Aertnys, l. c. - -[946] Whether immodest acts and jokes which children have practiced be -sins or not, let the confessor admonish them, in accordance with the -principle _principiis obsta_, to avoid carefully for the future these -things and everything impure. But let him do so with fatherly love, in -order that, should they do these things again, the children may not be -afraid to confess them. - -[947] The reason which Aertnys (Instr. pract. l. c.) adds to this: _quia -hanc obligationem non intelligunt_, can certainly not be allowed to hold -in the case of older and more educated children. - -[948] Tappehorn, l. c., says that _in all cases_ the confessor _must_ -insist that the thing stolen should, if possible, in some way or other, -even with the help of the confessor, be restored; but, surely, this is -too severe, even with the limitation “if possible,” and the addition that -absolution might rather be deferred till the restitution had been made, -must be limited to the case of a more considerable theft, when the stolen -object is still in the possession of the penitent, and, perhaps, to the -case of a child who had repeatedly committed thefts. - -[949] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 432; Prax. Conf. n. 91; Aertnys, l. c. n. -126. - -[950] Tappehorn, Anleitung zur Verwaltung des Buss-Sakramentes, § 48; -Aertnys, Instr. pract. cp. 2, art. 1, nn. 120-128. Dubois, The Practical -Confessor; Frassinetti, The Confession of Children. - -[951] Hom. 59 in Matt. xviii, n. 7. - -[952] It is good to invite them at stated times to monthly communions in -regular turns, and if a number of the young people of the parish approach -holy communion every Sunday, it will edify, and will induce older persons -to frequent reception of the holy Sacraments. Attendance at the regular -communion should be urged again and again; the latter should also be -celebrated with some exterior solemnity. - -[953] Here we will only insert the _Notanda_ from the Instr. pract. P. -III. art. II. § 1, n. 131, by Aertnys: (1) _Animadvertat confessarius, -quod docuit experientia, nempe nullum cœlibem, qui ad provectam -ætatem usque in habitu hujus vitii vixerit, ad frugem redire posse -nisi extraordinaria Dei gratia præveniatur; principiis ergo obstet, -ne malum per multas invaleat moras et sero medicina paretur._ (2) -_Interdum inveniuntur juvenes utriusque sexus, qui habitu pollutionis -antehac irretiti, valde cupiunt hac miseria soluti esse, sed vehementer -tentantur, et, quamvis resistant et orent, pollutio nihilominus sæpe -evenit. Idem aliquando contingit ob corporis complexionem nervosam aut -sanguinosam, quæ vehementes tentationes causat. Qui doceantur pollutionem -omnino involuntariam non esse peccatum._ Nevertheless, the confessor -must be careful, and not _readily_ believe that the penitent had -sufficiently resisted, but duly investigate if this has been the case. -(3) Others resist at the beginning, but lose courage if the temptation -does not cease, wrongly imagining that resistance is in vain. Such must -be encouraged to further resistance; _si tamen pollutio sequitur sua -sponte, involuntaria censenda est utpote præter voluntatem secuta_, and, -therefore, there is no sin. (4) _Alii demum timoratæ conscientiæ, sed -nervosæ complexionis, in lecto vehementes commotiones carnis identidem -patiuntur; si positivam resistentiam opponere pergant, obdormiscere -nequeunt, et, si tandem sopiantur, pollutio in somno evenit._ These -should be admonished to pray for divine help, to make a firm act of -disapproval, and then, with a quiet conscience, to assume a passive -attitude, in accordance with the teaching of St. Alphonsus, Lib. V. _de -peccato_, n. 9. - -[954] Aertnys, l. c. art. II. § 1, nn. 128-133; Tappehorn, Anleitung zur -Verwaltung des Buss-Sakramentes, 4 Abschn. § 85. - -[955] Serm. super Ecce nos. - -[956] Praxis Confess. n. 92. - -[957] To deny absolutely the existence of a vocation under such -circumstances is too severe a doctrine; higher and purer motives may -exist along with those of a distinctly lower order, and the aim of the -confessor should then be to foster the higher motives while eliminating -the lower ones. Great caution, unquestionably, should be used where -inferior motives are detected, but we should never lose sight of the -possibility of God’s grace being granted to those whose ideals are not at -first of the very highest order. - -[958] Cf. S. Thomas, Quodlib. III. art. 14. - -[959] Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 92; Aertnys, l. c. n. 134. - -[960] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 93; Aertnys, l. c. n. 135; Tappehorn, -Anleitung, etc., § 85; Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. VII. nn. -398, 408. - -[961] “_Unde concludes, gravissimi momenti esse munus tum Seminarii -directoris, tum alumnorum confessarii, ut mature alumnos dirigant, eorum -animos efforment, defectum aptitudinis aperiant, imo nisi de confessario -confessionisque sigillo vel simili secreto agitur, ineptos etiam -relegendos curent._”—Lehmkuhl, l. c. - -[962] Concerning purity of heart, compare § 69. “_De divina vocatione -hic imprimis nota, debere positiva probatione constare de vitæ probitate -tum Superiori, ut ad Ordines, maxime sacros, admittere possit, tum ipsi -candidato, ut sacrum ordinem suscipere sibi liceat._”— Lehmkuhl, l. -c. And very justly Aertnys writes (Instr. pract. l. c. n. 135 fin.): -_Nisi juvenes innocentiam servent, dum in Seminario ad sacerdotales -virtutes efformantur, vix spes est fore, ut illam servent in Sacerdotio -constituti. Unde turpiter seipsos illi decipiunt, qui arbitrantur, se -in Sacerdotii gradu positos emendaturos esse vitia, in quibus laici vel -clerici sorduerunt._ - -[963] S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 802-804; Examen Ord. n. 45. - -[964] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 93. Cf. Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. III. -Tract. II. n. 112. We may suggest that the following distinctions are to -be made: (1) _votum non nubendi seu cælibatus_; (2) _votum virginitatis_; -(3) _votum_ (_perpetuæ_) _castitatis_. The first prohibits marriage -(_ergo non formaliter sed consequenter tantum inducit obligationem -perfectæ castitatis_); the second, any _peccatum consummatum_, by which -virginity is violated, _i.e. voluntariam seminis effusionem, si de viro -agitur, sive per copulam, sive per pollutionem fit; si de muliere agitur, -copulam aut innaturalem corporalis integritatis læsionem culpabiliter -factam_; the third forbids (_formaliter et per se_) every interior or -exterior act which is contrary to chastity _ex motivo religionis_. Cf. -Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. P. II. Lib. I. Tract. VIII. n. 719. - -[965] See the following section. But he must by no means meddle with -engagements; every pastor, every priest, should be on his guard against -this, “for the zeal of relations in this matter is already great enough,” -remarks Frassinetti, who continues: “In matrimonial matters the world -wishes to act independently; and it is well that it does. Priests who do -not interfere in these matters act well in the eyes of God, and meet with -the approbation of men” (Frassinetti, l. c. VI. chap. On the Sacrament -of Matrimony, § 1, n. 458). On the other hand, it would be no dangerous -interference, and would not be taken ill by any one, if the confessor -endeavored to induce a man who had dishonored a young woman to marry her -as soon as possible. However, one cannot speak of an _absolute_ duty -to marry the woman under these circumstances, nor may one always adopt -this remedy. For if the woman were so immoral that infidelity toward -her husband might be safely presupposed, or if the seducer were such a -dissolute man that he would hear nothing about the bond of marriage, and -it was to be presumed that he would abandon or illtreat his wife if he -were forced into marriage, it would be highly imprudent to bring about -such a marriage. The same applies to all other cases in which it could -be foreseen that the marriage would result in misery. This would be -trying to remedy one misfortune, as seduction certainly is, by a lasting -evil, namely, a wretched marriage. The confessor must, therefore, first -investigate the circumstances. - -[966] Theologians teach that, _per se loquendo_, children are not _bound_ -to obey their parents in the matter of their vocation (they might, -_per accidens_, be sometimes bound to this, _non vi præcepti, sed ex -charitate_), that children who wish to join a Religious Order are _not_ -always bound to obtain the advice and assent of their parents, etc. -Children should, however, take into consideration the objections raised -by their parents against their choice of a partner in life. This duty of -children to ask their parents’ advice and consent is one which ordinarily -binds under grave sin, _quia gravis contemptus est ac signum diffidentiæ, -tantam rem sine eorum consensu aggredi ac nurum aut generum ipsis insciis -adducere_. Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 849; Lib. VII. n. 335; Lib. IV. n. -68; S. Thom. II. Q. 104, art. 5, Suppl. Q. 47, art. 6. Cf. Aertnys, -Theol. Mor. Lib. III. Tract. IV. n. 153. - -[967] Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. 1 de ref. Compare the Ordinances of many -provincial and diocesan synods, many diocesan regulations, and even civil -legislation. - -[968] Compare the doctrine of the _occasio proxima, præsens libera_. S. -Alph. H. A. Tract. VII. n. 32; Scavini, Theol. Mor. Univ. Tract. X. n. -262. This is especially necessary when a dispensation for the intended -marriage is sought, as this dispensation generally contains the clause, -_dummodo separate vivant_. Cf. Bangen, Instr. pract. de spousal. et -matrim. I. p. 27 ss. - -[969] Cf. Benedict XIV, Inst. pastor. _Sponsos eorumque parentes_ -(_parochi_) _admoneant, ne unquam sponsi sine testibus ac præsertim -consanguineis, colloquium simul ineant, si illud aliquando permittendum -videtur; indecorum esse vetitumque eos simul habitare, graviter -puniendos, si de hac re certiores facti fuerimus._ - -[970] Cf. H. A. Tract. 7, n. 32; Tract, ult. n. 3; Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. -n. 452; Praxis Confess. n. 204. Cf. n. 65. - -[971] Cf. Sanchez, De Matrimon. Lib. IX. Disp. 46, n. 52; Salmant. Tr. -26, cp. 3, n. 59; Sporer, De Matrim. n. 429; S. Leonard, Disc. mist. -nn. 23, 24; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Append. _De prax. serv. cum occas. et -recidivis_, P. III. cp. VII. n. 340 ss. The question whether _sponsis -amplexus et oscula honesta in signum amoris_ are allowed is answered by -theologians _affirmative communiter, si fiant honesto modo juxta morem -patriæ sicut solutis permittantur; sunt enim connaturalia signa amoris. -Non licent vero oscula pressa sæpiusque repetita, neque diuturnæ manuum -constrictiones._ Cf. S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 854. - -[972] Hence, engagements which are entered into without prospect of -speedy marriage are much to be disapproved. See § 66, V. - -[973] Cf. Bened. XIV, Instr. 46; S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. n. 846. - -[974] Concerning dissolution of betrothal, see S. Alph. l. c. Lib. VI. -Tract. VI. De matrim. Dub. III. quomodo dissolvantur sponsalia, n. 855 -ss.; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. VIII. De Matrim. n. 433 ss. - -[975] Cf. Trid. Sess. XXIV. cp. 1, de ref. mat. Rit. Rom. Tit. VII. cp. 1. - -[976] “_Optimum et ut plurimum etiam necessarium erit confessionis -generalis consilium, ut sponsi labes suas plenius abluant et sanioribus -instituantur principiis atque impedimenta occulta et defectus, quibus -non raro laborant, quosque alteri parti aperire tenentur, sincere -detegantur._”—Instr. Eyst. p. 352. - -[977] Compare § 8; Gury, Casus Conscientiæ, II. nn. 733, 394. - -[978] Scavini, l. c. de Matrim. Disp. 4, Q. 3; Gury, Theol. Mor. II. 640. - -[979] Compare above, § 44. Absolution from reserved sins, S. Alph. l. c. -Lib. VI. nn. 584, 585; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. V. De Pœnit. -n. 245; Gury, l. c. II. n. 575. - -[980] Or, as is the common custom in many places, not at once to set up -house together, but to wait till the dispensation has been granted. - -[981] _Prouti in aliis Legibus, quando aditus ad Papam est impossibilis -et periculum in mora_ (cf. Bened. XIV, De. Syn. Lib. IV. cp. 2, nn. 2, -3); indeed according to the probable opinion of some theologians, the -bishop can delegate this power, as a _potestas ordinaria_, to others, -_etiam generaliter pro omnibus casibus occurrentibus_. S. Alph. Theol. -Mor. Lib. VI. n. 613; Prax. Conf. n. 8. - -[982] Cf. S. Alph. l. c. and H. A. n. 114; Scavini, l. c.; Gury, l. c. -II. 771; Cas. Consc. II. n. 1045; Aertnys, Theol. Mor. l. c. n. 273. - -[983] Benger holds that confession affords the most suitable occasion -for giving the necessary instruction concerning the _sacredness_ of the -matrimonial duties. Dubois (l. c.) urges that persons about to be married -should be well instructed in what concerns that state, in order that they -may never do anything which is against their conscience, or concerning -which they are in doubt, and that they should obtain advice from pious -and judicious people, or _from their confessor_; Aertnys (Theol. Mor. l. -c. n. 515) speaks of an _officium parochi et confessarii_, to instruct -married people concerning _licita et illicita in matrimonio_. The -confessions of married people and the questions which they put to the -confessor, may afford reason and occasion for instructing them concerning -the _debitum conjugale_. The confessor must, therefore, be prepared -for this; he should also be able to impart necessary information in -a becoming manner; and it requires judgment and skill so to instruct -in this difficult matter as to convey the information without giving -offense or saying more than is necessary. We append the wise remark of -Cardinal Gousset (Moral Theology, II. n. 897).... _Sacerdos, qui, ut ait -Apostolus, debet exemplum esse fidelium in castitate, tacebit, etiam -in sacro tribunali, de modo utendi matrimonio, seu de circumstantiis -ad actum conjugalem spectantibus, nisi forte fuerit interrogatus. -Explicare fusius, quæ licita sunt conjugibus aut illicita, ipsis æque ac -confessariis periculosum foret._ Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 41. - -[984] Everything is allowed which is necessary, or conducive, to the -furtherance and attainment of the object of matrimony. The chief object -of matrimony is the _procreatio prolis_; the secondary object _remedium -concupiscentiæ_, and _mutuum adjutorium et solatium in vitæ societate_. -All that is necessary, and conducive, to the attainment of the principal -object, or which serves these secondary objects, having regard for the -first, is allowed; whatever _frustrates_ the principal object is mortally -sinful, whatever goes beyond this principal object, without counteracting -it, is venial sin. For further particulars upon this subject, the -confessor should consult the compendiums of moral theology; for example, -Aertnys, De Matrim. P. IV. cp. 2, n. 479 ss.; Lehmkuhl, l. c. De Matrim. -Sect. IV. n. 834 ss. - -[985] Cf. S. Alph. Praxis Conf. n. 94; Aertnys, Instr. pract. l. c. n. -137; Frassinetti, Practical Instruction for Young Confessors (Lucerne, -1874), 2. Pt. 6 Chap. §§ 4, 5; Dubois, The Practical Confessor, 2 Pt. 19 -chap. n. 402, etc. - -[986] Benedict XIV, Decl. 4 Nov., 1741; Pius VII, Bull 27 Feb., 1809; -Gregory XVI, Encycl. 27 May, 1832, to the archbishops and bishops of -Bavaria. Finally, Leo XIII, Circular 10 Feb., 1880 declares: “A warning -voice must also be raised against marriage lightly contracted with a -person of another faith; for where the souls are disunited in religion, -union in other matters is scarcely to be expected. It is clear that -such marriages must be particularly shunned, for the reason that they -give occasion for unlawful communication and participation in religious -exercises, that they are a source of danger for the religion of the -Catholic party, an obstacle to the good education of the children and -not infrequently a temptation to hold all religions equally justified, -denying all difference between true and false.” Even Protestant divines -and authorities have frequently expressed themselves decidedly against -mixed marriages, and earnestly warned people against them. - -[987] Ex facultat. a Pio. IX. datis. See Bangen, De Sponsalibus et de -Matrimonio, II. p. 161. - -[988] Brief of Pius VIII, 25 March, 1830. Instruction of Pius IX, 15 -Nov., 1858. - -[989] Lehmkuhl, l. c. n. 715, justifies the dispensation of the Church, -under the conditions laid down, upon the following grounds: 1. _Propter -magnum bonum publicum_, such mixed marriages may be allowed even -when there is some risk, only the Catholic party must have the firm -intention not to yield to this danger (cf. Lugo, De sacr. in gen. Disp. -8, sect. ult., et De Fide Disp. 32, n. 33). 2. But when on account of -circumstances those dangers disappear, or become slight, a _magnum bonum -privatum_, such as the hope of leading the non-Catholic party to the true -faith, can also make such a marriage permissible. 3. When they cannot be -entirely removed, but yet are not really grave; or, on the other hand, -when a _bonum_, though no very great _bonum_, is to be hoped for from the -mixed marriage, it may happen that contracting such a marriage is not a -grave sin against the natural law, but a venial sin. - -[990] The Roman Congregation demands _pacta notoria, de quibus spes est -servari_, that is, a documentary declaration made before the parish -priest, or a legal contract at the hand of a notary. - -[991] Cf. Instructio. S. Congregat. Inquisit. 17 Febr., 1864; Decret. S. -Congr. Inq. 29 Aug., 1888. - -[992] _Si quando connubium sine cautionibus necessariis initum fuerit, -non propterea_ (_parochi_) _conjugem catholicam negligant, sibique ac -suo peccato relinquant, sed studeant earn ad pœnitentiam adducere, ut -suæ obligationi quoad catholicam educationem prolis, quantum potest, -satisfaciat; quod quamdiu non præstiterit aut saltem sincere promiserit, -sacramentis suscipiendis utique imparatus censeri debet._ (_S. Congreg. -Officii 29 Jul., 1880 ad Cardin. Primatum et Archiep. Strigon._) - -[993] Cf. Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. nn. 637, 654, 664. - -[994] Cf. Bangen, Instructio practica, Tit. 4, p. 29. “_Si pater est -catholicus, sane liberorum educatio in ipsius potestate est: Ergo quod -potest facere debet; promittens coram testibus vel jurato vel juramenti -loco, se prolem educaturum in catholica religione; sed id de facto etiam -præstare tenetur. Excipe tamen, si proles jam in ea ætate sit, ut a -patre jam non dependeat; tunc enim sufficit, ut vere sit attritus atque -in hujus doloris signum id quod pro viribus efficere possit, peragere -sit paratus. Si mater est catholica, distinguendum videtur. Aut adducere -potest virum, ut in catholicam prolium educationem consentiat; et tunc -ambo conjuges formaliter expositas cautiones emittant coram parocho; -aut virum ad hoc movere nequit; tum attendatur, an indubitata ediderit -contritionis signa idque præstare pro liberorum educatione sit parata, -quod in ipsius viribus est._” - -[995] See above, p. 603, Remark 2. - -[996] Compare chiefly § 71 and § 49. - -[997] “_Sed est aliud feminarum ingenium, quod considerationem -nostram meretur, nimirum, cum factæ fuerint propter virum, libenter -hujus societate gaudent et ea animi propensio, qua se in virum ferri -sentiunt, et vice versa, laqueus est non minus suæ, quam Confessarii -saluti periculosus. Ideo necesse est, ut Confessariis monita demus -et præcautiones indicemus, quibus pericula evitent in frequentibus -et prolixis mulierum confessionibus latentia. Verum enimvero adhæsio -mulieris personæ Confessarii tantum est malum, ut morte ipsa diligentius -est evitandum._” Aertnys, Instruct. practica, P. III. cp. II. art. -3, n. 139. _Mulier sensibili affectu magis succenditur et instinctu -cordis magis quam rationis usu sese dirigit ... uti debilior astutiâ -finem intentum assequitur ... si cui passioni se dedit, magis insanit, -... tempore menstruorum et prægnationis mulieres obnoxiæ sunt variis -motibus passionum, puta morositatis, iracundiæ, anxietatis, et.... Horum -consideratio juvabit sane Confessarium in directione mulierum._ Aertnys, -l. c. - -[998] Frassinetti, Pract. Instr. l. c. § 5, p. 280. - -[999] Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 119. - -[1000] Even those theologians who teach that the _aggravating_ -circumstances must also be stated in confession, admit, _in puncto -VI præcepti_, especially in the confessions of women, an exception. -“Heedless questioners! have care for yourselves, have care for weak -souls, respect the holy Sacrament,” exclaims Frassinetti; and the Angel -of the Schools says, “_Potius estis contaminatores quam confessores_.” -Cf. Gousset, Moral Theol. for the use of parish priests and confessors, -II. n. 424; Gury, l. c. n. 1261. - -[1001] Praxis Confess. n. 119. - -[1002] Cf. Gaume, Handbook for Confessors, Third Chapter, nn. 156-159; -Aertnys, Instr. pract. l. c. n. 141; Ricardi, Dei doveri et dello spirito -degli eccles. 15 a 15 in Le Noir; S. Alph. Praxis Confess. l. c.; Zenner, -Instructio practica Confessor. P. II. Sect. II. cp. 2, §§ 270, 271. - -[1003] Frassinetti, l. c. p. 283. We will not leave unnoticed two -special dangers to which Aertnys calls attention: (1) _Siquando -Confessarius, junior præsertim advertat pœnitentem aliquam carnali amore -sibi adhærere asperis verbis eam retundat, et si hoc non sufficiat ad -alium Confessarium remittat, idque tum præcipue faciendum est, cum -et Confessarius sensualem affectum in se sentit; alioquin incautus -Confessarius seipsum et pœnitentem magno periculo exponet._ (2) He -then reminds confessors that the devil especially likes to direct his -efforts against priests, as, at one blow, he ruins not only one, but -many other souls if he succeeds in corrupting a priest. _Inde nonnunquam -contingit, ut procaces feminæ consilium ceperint insidias parandi virtuti -alicujus Sacerdotis, simulando conversionem, infirmitatem, aut quid -aliud excogitando, ut paulatim ad seductionem devenirent. Evenit quoque, -ut salax puella prolixam seriem obscænitatum in Confessione enarret et -inverecunde describat, eo animo, ut turpes commotiones in Confessario -suscitet. Confessarius debere ejusmodi serpentes a se repellere, res ipsa -monet._ And Berardi (Praxis Confess. n. 1099) adds: “_Cavendum quoque -est ab illis puellis, quæ ex curiositate malitiosa cupiunt interrogari a -Confessariis, ut addiscant ea quæ adhuc ignorant et in hunc finem semper -affirmative respondent. Sunt etiam aliæ adhuc magis malitiosæ, quæ, sive -ex libidine, sive ut postea in conversationibus rideant de Confessario, -non solum ad quaslibet interrogationes affirmative respondent, sed etiam -ruborem fingunt et enixe petunt, ut interrogentur. Ab his scopulis -interdum difficile est cavere; sed utile erit, quod Confessarii juniores -sciant, quousque malitia feminæ pertinqere possit._” Cf. Eccle. 25, 26. - -[1004] On this account the Provincial Council of Bordeaux (Conc. -Burdigal. 1556, Tit. III. c. 5, in Coll. Lacens. Tom. IV. p. 711) -declares that, in our times especially, solicitude for men constitutes -a principal part of the priest’s work. “_Sane hoc ævi nostri opus -præcipuum reputamus, viros videlicet quam solertissima industria et -quovis indefesso zelo provocare, ut ad meliorem vitæ christianæ rationem -instituendam, ad exequenda integrius cujusque status et conditionis -officia, tandem se recipiant. Non saperet sacerdos, qui laboris -difficultatibus solummodo intentus, de divinis promissionibus et virtute -gratiæ diffidens, hoc opus aggrederetur segniter aut minus strenue -prosequeretur._” This care for men the priest will especially exercise -in the confessional. “The divine authority with which the priest is -invested, the reverence with which the penitent appears before him, the -candor with which he unbosoms himself, the obedience which he shows him, -_give an efficacy to the confessor’s work in the confessional, such as he -is unable to exercise in any other place or occasion_.” Göpfert. - -[1005] Praxis Confess. n. 120. - -[1006] Cf. Göpfert, l. c. p. 283. - -[1007] L. c. p. 278, n. 397; also Dubois, l. c. n. 368, p. 434, and -Göpfert, l. c. p. 284. - -[1008] He should not be repelled if the penitent—as is peculiar -to many men, generally less from malice than from awkwardness or -embarrassment—shows a rough, sullen, insolent disposition; if his -expressions are blunt, short, and ill chosen; indeed, the priest should -be impressed favorably by the fact that men generally confess their sins -with a certain honest fearlessness. Cf. Synod vic. Sutchuensis, 1803; -Coll. Lac. Tom. VI. p. 608; and Conc. Aqu. 1850, Tit. VII. c. 5. Coll. -Lac. Tom. IV. p. 992: _Alacri animo et in multa patientia suscipiat -pœnitentes, præsertim viros, qui ad sacrum tribunal summo studio omnique -charitatis industria alliciendi sunt._ Conc. Baltim. 1866, Tit. V. c. 5 -(Coll. Lac. Tom. III. p. 40). - -[1009] Zenner, Instructio pract. Conf. l. c. §§ 273, 274; Lehmkuhl, l. c. -Sacram. Pœn. Sect. III. cp. 4, art. 3, nn. 506-510; Aertnys, Instruct. -pract. l. c. art. II. n. 148; Gaume, Handbook for Confessors, n. 185. - -[1010] See § 41. - -[1011] For this purpose he should make a diligent study of those ascetic -books which treat of these matters; for example, the works of St. -Alphonsus, Rodriguez, Scaramelli. - -[1012] _Idque_, proceeds Lehmkuhl, _adeo verum est, ut in extraordinariis -donis divinis, teste Sancta Theresia, Deus, non raro directorem vel -confessarium experientia instruat, ut alios, qui ejusmodi charismatibus -dotati sint, recte instruere et dirigere possit._ The more, therefore, -the confessor sees himself deprived of the extraordinary gifts, the -more prudent and cautious he must be; if he should have a penitent who -enjoys a special intercourse with God, such penitent must not be lightly -treated. But even in the treatment of ordinary, everyday matters, -the confessor of nuns must proceed with great prudence, in order to -give wholesome advice and correct answers; “_quo enim sagacioris et -suspicacioris indolis sint feminæ et quo majus otium ruminandi et -indagandi monialibus relinquatur, eo cautior et prudentior esse debet -illarum confessarius, ne errorum det ansam_.” Lehmkuhl. It is also a part -of prudence to content himself with what devolves upon him as confessor, -and not to interfere in the temporal affairs of the nuns, lest, by more -familiar intercourse with one or other of them, he expose himself or her -to danger, or give occasion for ill feeling or petty jealousy. - -[1013] Decretum 17 Dec., 1890. - -[1014] Compare on this point S. R. C. 2 Dec., 1885; S. C. Ep. et -Reg. 4 Aug., 1888; Ballerini, Notæ ad Gury, Theol. Mor. II. n. 241; -moreover, S. Rom. et Univ. Inquis. 2 July, 1890; Linzer Theol-prakt. -Quartalschrift, 1889, S. 630; 1893, S. 138 (both articles by W. E. -Hubert). According to these decisions, the right to give permission to -nuns to receive holy communion oftener (than on the days fixed by the -constitutions) belongs, not to their director or their Superioress, but -only to the usual confessor, who, in the exercise of his right, is free -and independent. Only in one case could the Superioress forbid holy -communion, namely, when a nun had _publicly_ committed a _serious_ fault -which had caused _scandal_ to the other sisters (cf. S. C. Ep. et Reg. -27 June, 1876); this prohibition, however, would only hold good till the -next confession. When the _Confessor ordinarius_ has given permission for -special occasions, it need not be referred to the Superiors; but if the -permission is granted once for all, the Superior should be informed; the -penitent herself ought to do so, but only once. Cf. S. Rom. et Univ. Inq. -2 July, 1890. - -[1015] St. Alphonsus wishes that such a priest (_conscientiæ parum -meticulosæ_) should be asked: 1. _Si distulerit celebrationem missarum -per mensem, præsertim si sint defunctorum_ (cf. H. A. Append. III. -n. 107). 2. _Si festinanter celebravit_ (H. A. Tract. 15, nn. 84 ad -86). 3. _Si satisfecit obligationi divini officii, præsertim si est -beneficiatus._ H. A. Append. IV. § 1, n. 9; Prax. Conf. n. 183. Cf. -Aertnys. Instr. pract. P. III. cp. 2, 3, art. 3, n. 154 and P. II. cp. 2, -n. 42; Gaume, Handbook, 4. chap. 2. art. §§ 182, 183, 184. - -[1016] H. A. Append. IV. § 1, n. 9. - -[1017] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 183. - -[1018] Prax. Conf. nn. 122, 127, 219. _Contemplatio in ceteris hominibus -quæritur per consilium, in sacerdotibus vero exigitur per præceptum._ -Rup. Tuit. Lib. II. in Lev. cp. 40. St. Gregory trembles for those -bishops who admit to the service of the sanctuary men who have neither -reverence nor love for prayer. St. Bernard admonishes Pope Eugenius to -impose hands upon those only who have taste and zeal for meditation. St. -Charles Borromeo objects to ordaining any priest without being certain -that he possesses the science of meditation.... And everything that has -been written upon this subject since the days of St. Vincent de Paul, -St. Francis of Sales, and Olier, may be summed up as follows: “If one -becomes a priest only by ordination, one becomes a good priest only by -meditation.” Compare Chaignon, Meditations, Introduction, p. x ff. - -[1019] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 48 ss.; Aertnys, Instr. pract. l. c. n. -156 ss.; Zenner, Instr. pract. Conf. §§ 276, 277. - -[1020] The Priest in Solitude, Div. I. chap. ix. n. 30. - -[1021] Rit. Rom. Tit. V. cp. 4, n. 1; S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 228. - -[1022] Rit. Rom. Tit. V. cp. 4, n. 7. - -[1023] Cf. Polancus, Methodus juvandi moribundos (Dilling, 1578); -Scupoli, The Manner of Comforting the Sick, and Preparing Them for a -Good Death (3. Supplement to the Spiritual Combat); Carol. Borrom. -Instructiones de cura et visit. infirm. (Act. Med. pp. 595-608); S. Alph. -Prax. Conf. nn. 227-292; H. A. II. Append.; Hettinger, Herr, den du -liebst, er ist krank. Wurzburg, 1854; Aertnys, Instruct. pract. P. III. -cp. 5, art. 2; Zenner, Instruct. etc. P. II. Sect. II. cp. 2, §§ 301-311; -Schüch, § 317; Frassinetti, a. a. O. 2. Teil. 2. Cap. I. anh. §§ 1-7; -Dubois, The Practical Pastor of Souls, 2. Part, 12. Chap. pp. 317-336, -etc.; Stang, Pastoral Theology. - -[1024] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 354; De Herdt, Sacræ Liturg. praxis, Tom. II. -P. III. n. 20, IV. - -[1025] Cf. Rit. Rom. l. c. _Quum primum noverit, quempiam ex fidelibus -curæ suæ commissis ægrotare, non expectabit, ut ad eum vocetur: sed ultro -ad illum accedat, idque non semel tantum, ted sæpius, quatenus opus -fuerit: horteturque Parochiales suos, ut ipsum admoneant, quum aliquem -in parochia sua ægrotare contigerit, præcipue si morbus gravior fuerit._ -The sick person should, therefore, be visited _early_, the visit should -be repeated, but with _discretion_, so that he may not be in any way -inconvenienced. Various circumstances, however, cause patients or those -belonging to them to conceal the illness from the priest, such as, fear -of troubling him, the erroneous idea that his visit will entail expense, -anxiety lest his appearance might have an injurious effect upon the -patient’s condition; lack of conscientiousness on the part of the doctor, -malice, unbelief. In such cases the priest must endeavor to remove these -objections, and to obtain timely access to the sick person. - -[1026] Cf. Rit. Roman. l. c. - -[1027] The priest should not forget the exhortation of the Rit. Rom.: -“_Ægrotos visitans ea ex qua Sacerdotes Domini decet honestate et -gravitate se habeat, ut non ægris solum, sed sibi et domesticis verbo -et exemplo prosit ad salutem._” Special care is necessary in visiting -persons of the other sex. The sick-room should not be entered without -due notice, the visits should take place as much as possible during the -day, and not be too frequent nor too long; the priest should avoid being -alone; even when hearing the confession the door should be left open, so -that others can always see from a distance; certainly the door should -not be locked, and he should never remain in the dark, nor alone longer -than is unavoidably necessary. Everything of the nature of tenderness -or sentimentality should be avoided, and holy decorum and gravity be -observed. Comp. Benger, Pastoraltheologie, a. a. O.; Frassinetti, -Practical Instruction, chap. 2, Appendix I. § 3, nn. 353-356. - -[1028] S. Aug. Enarrat. in psalm. 144, n. 11. - -[1029] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. nn. 231, 232. - -[1030] See §§ 30, 31, 32, General Confession. - -[1031] Lugo, l. c. Disp. 16, sect. 14, n. 598. - -[1032] Comp. § 27, S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 260; H. Ap. Tract. 15, n. 24; -Tract. 16, n. 39; Gury, l. c. II. n. 498. - -[1033] S. Alph. Hom. Ap. Tract, ult. n. 46, Prax. Conf. n. 105. - -[1034] Compare § 27; S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 479. - -[1035] See § 86. - -[1036] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. III. n. 682; Prax. Conf. n. 105; Reuter, n. 235. -Cf. 211, 6. - -[1037] Cf. S. Alph. Lib. VI. nn. 609, 614, 616. - -[1038] See § 66, 1. Those living in concubinage. - -[1039] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 454; Reuter, n. 211, 6. Cf. 173; Gury, Cas. -consc. II. nn. 722-725; Gaume, Handbook, n. 376. - -[1040] Compare Renninger-Göpfert, Pastoraltheologie, § 100; Müller, -Theol. Mor. Lib. III. Tract. II. § 167. - -[1041] See also § 33, III. - -[1042] It would be very wrong to take no further trouble about the sick -after they have received the last Sacraments. Benger, a. a. O. n. 17; -Dubois, n. 264; and others. - -[1043] It would be best that the physician should tell the patient of -this danger. But if none else will do it, the priest must perform this -service of love, and that, not only when the patient is in a dangerous -condition as to his soul, but also when he is well prepared. - -[1044] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. nn. 237-253. - -[1045] S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. 276, n. 11. See § 86. - -[1046] S. Alph. l. c. nn. 234, 235; 267, 368. Rit. Rom. Tit. V. cp. 4, -nn. 6, 13, 14. - -[1047] With regard to the Indulgence for the dying we append the -following from the various decrees: The sick person can gain only once -the Plenary Indulgence for the dying _in eodem mortis articulo_. S. C. -Ind. 5 Febr., 1841. And it is forbidden to give the General Absolution -more than once (whether it be by the same or by different priests) _in -eodem mortis articulo_, or to grant the Plenary Indulgence for the dying -repeatedly on the plea that the patient has claims to it from various -titles, for instance, by membership in the confraternities of the Rosary -and of the Scapular. S. C. Ind. 12 Mar., 1855, 22 Mar., 1879. The formula -prescribed by Benedict XIV must be used by all under pain of invalidity, -and according to a declaration of Leo XIII, 1882, even by Regulars -and Tertiaries, yet with mention of the founder of their Order in the -_Confiteor_. Compare Schneider-Beringer, Die Ablässe, 10. Aufl. S. 473 f. - -[1048] Ordo ministrandi Sacr. Pœn. n. 24. - -[1049] Cf. Aertnys, Theol. Mor. Lib. VI. Tract. V. n. 196, Q. 1; -Lehmkuhl, Theol. Mor. l. c. Sect. III. art. IV. n. 510; Müller, Theol. -Mor. Lib. III. T. II. § 166. - -[1050] Lehmkuhl, l. c., who, however, adds: “_Attamen culpandus non est, -qui forte conditionem” si capax es “adjungat, quum possint occurrere -circumstantiæ, quæ absolutionis valorem dubium reddant._” - -[1051] Aertnys, l. c., S. Antoninus, Suarez, Bonacina, etc. Müller, also, -recommends the _absol. condit._ - -[1052] “_Moraliter fieri nequit in hac nostra natura composita, ut -dolor et desiderium, se subjiciendi clavibus Ecclesiæ, quæ interne -habentur, nullo actu sensibili se manifestent, licet ab aliis forte non -animadvertatur, vel quia præsentes non sunt vel quia signa non valent -distinguere. Hinc sicut in moribundo sensibus destituto potest præsumi -pœnitentia, ita pari omnino jure præsumitur pœnitentia manifestata in -ordine ad se subjiciendum clavibus._”—Franzelin, De Sacr. in genere. -Romæ, 1868, p. 39. - -[1053] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 482; Aertnys, l. c. n. 196, Q. 3; Müller, l. -c. § 166, II. - -[1054] Lehmkuhl, l. c. nn. 512-515; Lacroix, Lib. VI. P. II. n. 1162; -Ballerini, Op. Theol. Mor. l. c. cp. 1, _De absolutione morientium_, nn. -394-420. - -[1055] Cf. Aertnys, l. c. n. 196, Q. IV et V, Müller, l. c. § 166, II. -_b_ and _c_, and his dissertation upon the sacramental absolution of -the dying in the Linzer Theol-prakt. Quartalschrift, 1884, pp. 259-264; -Kenrick, Theol. Mor. Tract. 18, n. 211; Konings, Theol. Mor. II. n. -1371. Concerning dying non-Catholics who are still conscious, see § 73 -(Conclusion). - -[1056] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 480. - -[1057] S. Alph. Lib. VI. n. 482; Prax. Conf. n. 276; H. Ap. n. 37; -Aertnys, l. c. n. 196, Q. VI; Müller, l. c. § 168. - -[1058] De Sacram. Pœnit. Conf. VIII. n. 219. Cf. S. Alph. Prax. Conf. n. -276. - - - - -TOPICAL INDEX - - - A - - Abortionists, excommunicated, 339. - - “About” as a numerical qualification of sin, 163. - - Absence of penitent when absolution is given (note), 57. - of contrition, how known, 120. - - Absolution, form of, 50-53. - from censures, 54. - presence of penitent for, 55. - in writing, 56. - conditional, 59-69, 645. - objections urged against conditional, 66-69. - given at a distance, 58. - by telephone (note), 59. - from reserved sins, 340-350. - direct and indirect, 345. - of _complex in peccato turpi_, 354-363. - of those who refuse to denounce a _sollicitans_, 375. - postponement of, 529. - to the dying, 645-654. - repeated in cases of the dying, 653. - - _Absolventes complicem in peccato turpi_, 333. - - Abuse of the sacrament, 351. - - Apostates, excommunicated, 328. - - _Apostolicæ Sedis_, bull on censures, 326. - - Appeal to secular judge in ecclesiastical cases, 332. - - Appreciative sorrow for sin, 108. - - Approbation of confessors, 279-283. - for hearing confessions of nuns, 311. - - _Articulus mortis_, removes reservation, 347. - - _Attritio_, 74, 88-98. - - Attritionists, teaching of, 96. - - Avarice, remedies of, 456. - - - B - - Bad confessions, 391, 394. - - Banns, dispensation from, 604. - - Baptism, sins before, 39. - sins after, doubtfully valid, 190. - of converts, 558. - - Betrothals, 592. - - Blessing before confession, 53. - - _Bona fide_ penitents, 443. - - Books, _ex professo_ bad, 512. - on the Index (note), 331. - reading of good, 580. - - - C - - Careless examination of conscience, signs of, 220. - - Cases reserved, 316, 327. - - Casuistry, study of, necessary, 432. - - Catholics, dying, as a rule to be absolved, 651. - - Censures, absolution from, 54. - reserved, 326. - - Certain and doubtful matter for absolution, 40. - - Change of penance, 275. - - Child, age of, for receiving sacraments, 25. - - Children’s confessions, how to be heard, 561. - - Choice of state of life, 583. - - Circumstances of sins to be confessed, 166-180. - changing venial into mortal, 173. - - _Circumstantiæ aggravantes_, 174. - _speciem mutantes_, 175. - - Civil government pastors, 335. - marriages, 607, 640. - - Clandestine marriages, impediment of, 607. - - Classification of sins (note), 158. - - Commerce, missionaries forbidden to engage in, 338. - - _Communicatio in sacris_, by clerics, 338. - mixed marriages, 600, 603. - - Communion, frequent, 453. - - Communion, frequent, for young unmarried people, 577. - - Commutation of penance, 274-276. - - Company-keeping of young people, 592. - - Complete, sin to be reserved must be, 324. - - Completeness of confession, 158, 198. - reasons excusing from, 200, 203. - - _Complex absolvens_, excommunicated, 333. - - _Complex in peccato turpi_, absolution of, 354. - inquiring the name of, unlawful, 351. - - Concealing sins, habit of, 391, 394. - - _Concina_, favors rigorous views (note), 65. - - Concubinage, 501. - - _Conditio de præsenti et de præterito_, 62. - - Conditional absolution, 59-69. - - Conditions placed in mixed marriages, 601. - - _Confessio ficta ex pravo fine_, 367. - - Confession, annual, 24, 26. - necessity of, 137. - in writing, 151. - of children, 561. - of women, 608. - - Confessor, regular, 145-148. - of religious, 308, 309. - of nuns, 311. - - Confirmation, blots out venial sin, 34. - - Conscience, examination of, 215. - erroneous, 568. - - Constituent parts of penance, 37. - - Contracting marriage before Protestant minister, 603. - - Contrition, 19, 36. - extent and efficacy of, 71. - perfect and imperfect, 74, 88-98. - qualities of, 98-111. - motives of, 105. - in children, 570. - - Converts, treatment of, 555. - baptism of, 558. - - - D - - _Damnificator injustus_, confessor as, 464. - - Dancing, 506. - - Danger to life of confessor, 201. - - Dangerous intimacies, 514-518, 592. - - Deaf penitents, 202. - - Death, danger of, 65, 645. - - _Debitum conjugale_, questions concerning, 387, 599. - - Defenders of heretics, 329, 331. - - Deferring absolution, duty of, 407, 411, 413. - - Deficient jurisdiction, 300. - - Definite matter for absolution, 48. - - _Deinde_, in the form of absolution (note), 55. - - Delegated jurisdiction not to be presumed, 288-290. - - Denouncing the _sollicitans_, 372. - - _Deprecatoria forma_, not in use in Latin Church, 55. - - Desire of pleasing in women, 579. - - Despair, temptation to, in the dying, 643. - - Different spiritual conditions, penitents in, 487. - - _Diligentia moralis_, required in examining conscience, 215. - - Direct and indirect absolution, 345. - remission of sin, 41. - - Discretion in penitent, 145. - in imposing penance, 270. - in questioning the penitent, 383. - - _Disparitas cultus_, impediment of, 600. - - Disposition of penitents, 49, 398. - - Distance, absolution given at a, 58. - - Distracted confessor (note), 397. - - _Doctoris munus_ in the sacrament, 438. - - Dogmatic theology, knowledge of, 428. - - _Dolor intellectivus_, not contrition, 72. - _in fieri et in facto esse_, 112. - - Doubt of jurisdiction, 64. - disposition, 49, 65, 402, 412. - - Doubtful matter for absolution, 40. - sins to be confessed, 180. - - Duellists, 336. - - Duty of denouncing the _confessarius sollicitans_, 368-371. - confessor to dispose penitent, 402. - - Dying penitents doubtfully disposed, 409. - ministry of confessor to the, 630-632, 645. - penitents, in the act of sin, 651. - - - E - - Effects of perfect contrition, 81. - sins, evil, 161. - - Efficacious resolution, 131. - - Efficacy of contrition, 71. - - _Efficax affectu_, 131. - _executione_, 131. - - Engaged people, how to treat, 592. - - Engagements of marriage, pastors not to meddle in (note), 591. - - Envy, remedies of, 457. - - _Epikeia_, 445. - - _Error communis_, about jurisdiction, 302. - _privatus_, about jurisdiction, 302. - - Errors committed by confessor, 460. - - Essential form of sacrament, 50. - - Eucharist removes venial sin, 33. - - Examination of conscience, 215-221, 452. - for children, 565. - - Excommunication by neglect of annual confession, 28. - reserved to the Pope, 327. - _latæ sententiæ_, 335. - reserved to the ordinary, 339. - - _Excommunicationes non reservatæ_, 339. - - Excusing, reasons, from complete confession, 198. - - Exempted from going to Rome in reserved cases, 346. - - Exhorting the penitent, duty of, 438. - - Experience not a substitute for science, 432. - - Extraordinary confessors of nuns, 313-315. - jurisdiction, 300. - - - F - - _Facultas absolvendi a censuris_, 604. - - Faith (implicit) essential for contrition, 73, 102. - - Faults peculiar to youth, 578. - - Fear as an element of attrition, 90. - of relapse, 130. - - Fenians excommunicated, 336. - - _Ficta confessio ex pravo fine_, 367. - - Forbidden books, 512. - - Forgotten penance, 277. - sins, 116, 195. - reservation, 348. - - Form of sacrament, 50. - essential, 50, 51. - sufficient, 52. - - Formal heresy, 328. - - Freemasons excommunicated, 336. - - Free matter of confession, 45. - - Frequent confession, 28. - communion, 453. - - - G - - General accusation, 44. - confession, 228-236. - manner of hearing a, 238. - plan for making a, 245-255. - - Good works blot out venial sin, 36. - - _Gousset_, Cardinal, defends St. Alphonsus, 68. - - - H - - Habitual sinners, 518-520. - - Hearing words of absolution not essential, 56. - - Heretics excommunicated, 328. - - Hypocritical penitents, 543-545. - - - I - - Ignorance of reservation, 324. - - Ignorant penitents, 185, 439, 441, 447, 642. - - Impediment, occult, in marriage, 597. - - Imperfect contrition, 88-98. - - Imposition of penance, 256. - - Impurity, remedies against, 457. - habit of, in children, 572. - - _Index_ of forbidden books (note), 331. - - Indications of true sorrow for sin, 119. - - Indirect violation of the _sigillum_, 477. - - _Indulgentiam_ in the form of absolution, 53. - - Inquiring the name of accomplice, 351. - - Insincere confessions, 394. - of children, 567. - - Institution of penance, 22. - - Instruction of children, 25, 569. - penitents, 438. - those about to be married, 591. - - Integrity of confession, 153. - - Intemperance, remedy against, 457. - - Interdict, 340. - - Intimacies, dangerous, 514. - - Invalid confessions, 222. - absolution in reserved cases, 348. - - Invincible ignorance, 442. - - - J - - Jansenist teaching about amendment, 128. - - Judge, the confessor as, 379. - - Judging of child’s disposition, 574. - of penitent’s disposition, 398. - - Judicial power and process, 20. - - _Jurisdictio dubia_, 303. - _in articulo mortis_, 305. - - Jurisdiction of confessors, 279-283. - delegated, 288. - directly limited by reservation, 325. - - - K - - Knowledge of sins requisite for absolution, 226, 379. - necessary, of the confessor, 424. - - - L - - _Læsio sigilli_, danger of, 204, 466-476. - - _Lex disciplinaris_, reservation a, 325. - - _Libri erotici_, 512. - - _Librorum Index_, 331. - - Lies told in confession, 141, 143, 571. - - Long marriage-engagements, 594. - - Love, degrees of, in contrition, 76. - of pleasure in youth, 578. - - - M - - _Malus effectus peccati_, whether to be confessed, 162. - - Marriage, instruction for, 600. - secret, 502. - vocation to, 590. - mixed, 600. - before Protestant minister, 603. - - Married people, confessions of young, 599. - - _Materia proxima_, _remota_, _ex qua_, _circa quam_, 39, 40, 112. - - _Matrimonium secretum_, 502. - - Matrimony, destroys venial sin, 34. - call to, 590. - - Matter of sacrament, 37, 40, 112, 197. - - _Medicinalis pœna_, reservation a, 325. - - Members of religious orders as penitents, 307. - - Men, confessions of, 614. - - Mildness in giving penances, 263. - - Minister of sacrament, 279, 378. - Protestant, contracting marriage before, 603. - - _Misereatur_ in absolution, 35. - - Mistakes of confessor, 421. - - Mixed marriages, 600, 602. - - _Mixtæ religionis_, impediment, 603. - - Moral theology, study of, 427. - - _Mortalia negative dubia_, 184. - - Mothers, confessor’s care of, 613. - - Motives of contrition, 103. - - _Mulieres devotæ_, 422, 610. - _parturientes_, 637. - - _Munus doctoris_, 438. - - - N - - Name of accomplice not to be asked, 351. - - Natural inclinations to be repressed, 421. - - Necessary matter of penance, 40. - qualities of contrition, 98-111. - - _Nemo malus præsumendus_, 399. - - _Notitia confusa_ of sins, 226. - - Number of sins to be expressed, 163, 241, 390. - - Nuns, confessors of, 311, 618-623. - - - O - - Objections against conditional absolution, 66. - - Obligation to receive the sacrament, 23. - of annual confession, 24, 26. - procuring perfect contrition, 81-88. - - _Occasio proximo peccati_, 488. - _remota_, 488, 492. - _continua_, 489. - _immediata_, 491. - _voluntaria_, 493, 639. - _interrupta_, 495. - _necessaria_, 496, 499, 639. - - Occasion of sin, duty of avoiding the, 487. - - “Odd Fellows” condemned, 336. - - Office, divine, as a source of scruples, 554. - - Omission of sins to be confessed, 41. - - Omitted, sins, through forgetfulness, 193. - - Order, vocation to a religious, 585. - - Orders, sacred, blot out venial sin, 34. - as a requisite for jurisdiction, 278. - confessors of religious, 307. - - _Ordinarius_, includes vicar-general, 339. - - Ordinary, excommunication reserved to, 339. - jurisdiction, 284. - confessor of nuns, 313. - - - P - - Papal reservations, 326. - - Parish priest can hear his subjects anywhere, 287. - has ordinary jurisdiction, 285. - as confessor, 213. - - “_Passio Domini_,” prayer after absolution, 52. - - Pastors appointed by civil government, 335. - - Patience requisite in confessor, 423. - - _Peccata externa_ reserved, only, 324. - - _Peccator publicus_, 504, 634. - - Penalties imposed on _sollicitans_, 377. - - Penance, virtue of, 17. - act of the will, 19. - sacrament, 20. - imposition of, 256. - public, 261. - - Penances repugnant to penitent to be avoided, 262. - for venial sins, 266. - commutation of, 274. - object of the _sigillum_, 474. - - Penitents aiming at perfection, 536-543. - - _Percussores clericorum_, 335. - - _Peregrini_ may be absolved, 296. - - Perfect contrition, 76. - obligation of, 84. - - _Periculum scandali_, 205. - _læsionis sigilli_, 204. - - Persons prevented from going to Rome, 346. - - Physician, confessor as, 448. - - Pollution, the vice of, 531, 582. - - Pope has universal jurisdiction, 284. - - Postponement of absolution, 411, 415, 529. - - _Potestas jurisdictionis_, 280. - _ordinis_, 279. - - Practical knowledge required in confessor, 431. - - Precept of confession, 23. - - Predominant passion to be discovered, 450. - - Preparation for making confession, 126. - for hearing confession, 416. - - Presence, moral, of penitent, 55, 57, 58. - - Preserving the seal of confession, 466-470. - - Pride, remedy against, 456. - - Priesthood, signs of vocation to the, 588. - - Priests, confessions of, 624-629. - - Profession of faith by converts, 558, 560. - at the hour of death, 560. - - Promises required in mixed marriages, 601. - - Properties of confession, 139. - - _Propositum non peccandi_, 121. - - _Proprio sacerdoti_, meaning of, 28. - - _Proxima materia_, 39. - - Prudence of confessor, 434, 436. - - Public sinners, 504. - - Purpose of amendment, 126, 639. - - Pythias, Knights of, condemned, 336. - - - Q - - Qualities of contrition, 98. - - _Quasi-materia_, 37. - - Questions not to be answered by penitent, 142. - to be put to penitent, 214, 380, 435. - for general confession, 244, 248. - - - R - - Raising the hand at _Indulgentia_ (note), 53. - - Readers of heretical books, 330. - - Reading, bad, 511. - of good books, 580. - - Reasons excusing from complete confession, 198. - - _Receptores_ of heretics, excommunicated, 329. - - Recipient of penance, 70. - - Refusing absolution, 407. - - Regular confessor advisable for the young, 581. - - Regulars receive jurisdiction from the Pope, 292. - may receive it conditionally from the ordinary, 295. - require approbation from ordinary, 293. - may be deprived of faculties by ordinary, 294. - confessors of, 308. - - Relapsing sinners, 448-459, 521-536. - - Relation of contrition to the sacrament, 111. - - Religious order, vocation to a, 585. - - Remedies against relapse, 448. - scruples, 550. - - Remorse of conscience, not contrition, 72. - - Repeating confession, when necessary, 224. - - Reproving penitent, duty of, 451. - - Reservation in case of strangers, 320. - ceases, when, 347. - forgotten by confessor, 348. - - Reserved cases, 316. - not to be multiplied unduly, 319. - papal, 326. - - _Retinentes libros hæreticos_, 330. - - Retractation of heresy _in foro externo_, 329. - - Revealing the accomplice, 208. - - Rules for confessors, 465. - scrupulous penitents, 552. - - - S - - Sacramental seal, 466-476. - - Sacramentals destroy sin, 35. - - _Sanatio in radice_, 443, 604. - - Satisfaction, 38. - - Schismatics, excommunicated, 332. - - Science of perfection, 428. - required in confessor, 424. - - Scruples as object of the _sigillum_, 475. - kinds of, 550. - remedies against, 550. - - Scrupulosity, causes of, 547. - marks of, 545. - - Scrupulous penitents, how to treat them, 545-552. - - Seal of confession, 466. - - Sensible contrition, 118. - - Servile fear, 91. - - Sick, confessor’s ministry to the, 630, 632-645. - - _Sigillum sacramentale_, 466. - - Signs of repentance, 20, 645. - in the dying, 649. - proper disposition, 400. - vocation to priesthood, 588. - - Simulation of confession, 368. - - Sincerity in confession, 27. - - Sinful occasions, 487. - - Sins forgiven may be again confessed, 42. - - Sloth, remedies against the sin of, 458. - - Small penances, 264. - - _Sollicitatio proprii pœnitentis_, 364, 368. - - Sorrow for sin, quality of, 72. - supreme (appreciative), 108. - test of, 119. - - Special care of relapsing sinners, 530-536. - - _Species infima_, 159. - - State of life, choice of a, 583. - - Stealing relics, 337. - habit of, in children, 571. - - Striking a cleric _suadente diabolo_, 335. - - Sufficient matter for absolution, 40. - - _Supplet ecclesia_, 300. - - Supplying deficient jurisdiction, 300. - - Suspension, 340. - - _Suspensionis_ in the form of absolution, 52. - - - T - - Teacher, the confessor as, 438-448. - - Telephone, absolution by (note), 59. - - Testifying to confession made, 483. - - Theaters, frequenting, 509. - - Tickets, certifying to confession made, 483. - - _Timor mundanus_, _naturalis_, _servilis_, _filialis_, _mixtus seu - initialis_, 90. - - Timorous conscience, 186. - - _Titulus coloratus_, 300-302. - - Travelers on sea, who absolves, 299. - - Treatment of scrupulous penitents, 545-555. - - Trial, penance a judicial, 21. - - Tribunal, difference between civil and sacramental, 21. - - Trusting statements of penitent, 395. - - - U - - Unconscious penitents, at the hour of death, 646. - - Uncouth penitents, 447. - - Universality of purpose of amendment, 132. - sorrow for sin, 106. - - Unmarried, confessions of young, people, 575. - - Urgent confessions, what to omit in, 52. - - Usurpers of ecclesiastical rights, 333. - - _Usus matrimonii_, instruction regarding the, 599. - - - V - - Vagrants (_vagi_) may be absolved anywhere, 299. - - Vague accusations in confession, 44, 48. - - Valid absolution requires pronouncing of words, 56. - - Venial sin, how forgiven, 29, 32. - purpose of amendment in case of, 183. - penance for, 266. - - Vicars-general have jurisdiction, 285. - - Violation of the _sigillum_, 476. - - Virginity, state of, in the world, 589. - - Virtual contrition, 30. - - Virtues required in confessor, 416. - - Visits to the sick to be repeated, 642. - - _Vitium pollutionis_, 531, 582. - - Vocation, choice of a, 583. - to the priesthood, signs of, 588. - - Vow of virginity, 589. - - Vows of nuns, 620. - - - W - - Wedding, confessions immediately before, 596. - - Women, conduct of confessor toward, 608. - - Words required for valid absolution, 56. - - Worthy preparation for marriage, 595. - - Writing, absolution by, invalid, 55. - absolution by, from censures, valid (note), 57. - - - Y - - Young men, love of pleasure in, 579. - - Young unmarried people, confessions of, 575. - - Youth, faults peculiar to, 578. - - - - -STANDARD CATHOLIC BOOKS - - -PUBLISHED BY BENZIGER BROTHERS, - -CINCINNATI: 343 MAIN ST. - -NEW YORK: 36-38 BARCLAY ST. - -CHICAGO: 211-213 MADISON ST. - -Books marked _net_ are such where ten per cent. must be added for -postage. Thus a book advertised at _net_ $1.00 will be sent postpaid on -receipt of $1.10. Books not marked _net_ will be sent postpaid on receipt -of advertised price. - -DOCTRINE, INSTRUCTION, DEVOTION. - - ABANDONMENT. CAUSSADE, S.J. _net_, 0.50 - ADORATION OF BLESSED SACRAMENT. TESNIERE. _net_, 1.25 - ALPHONSUS LIGUORI, WORKS OF, ST. 22 vols. Each, _net_, 1.50 - ANECDOTES ILLUSTRATING THE CATECHISM. SPIRAGO. _net_, 1.50 - ANGLICAN ORDINATIONS. SEMPLE. _net_, 0.35 - ART OF PROFITING BY OUR FAULTS. TISSOT. _net_, 0.50 - BIBLE HISTORY. 0.50 - BIBLE HISTORY. EXPLANATION. NASH. _net_, 1.60 - BIBLE STORIES. Paper, 0.10; cloth, 0.20 - BIBLE, THE HOLY. 1.00 - BOOK OF THE PROFESSED. Vol. I, II & III. Each, _net_, 0.75 - BOYS’ AND GIRLS’ MISSION BOOK. By the Redemptorist Fathers. 0.35 - BREAD OF LIFE, THE. Complete Communion Book. _net_, 0.75 - CATECHISM EXPLAINED, THE. SPIRAGO-CLARKE. _net_, 2.50 - CATHOLIC BELIEF. FAA DI BRUNO. Paper, _net_, 0.15; cloth, _net_, 0.35 - CATHOLIC CEREMONIES. DURAND. Paper, _net_, 0.15; cloth, _net_, 0.35 - CATHOLIC GIRLS’ GUIDE. LASANCE. _net_, 1.00 - CATHOLIC PRACTICE AT CHURCH AND AT HOME. KLAUDER. Paper, - _net_, 0.20; cloth, _net_, 0.40 - CATHOLIC TEACHING FOR CHILDREN. WRAY. 0.40 - CATHOLIC WORSHIP. BRENNAN, LL.D. Paper, 0.20; cloth, 0.30 - CEREMONIAL FOR ALTAR BOYS. BRITT, O.S.B. _net_, 0.35 - CHARACTERISTICS OF TRUE DEVOTION. GROU, S.J. _net_, 0.75 - CHILD OF MARY. Prayer-Book for Children. 0.60 - CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS. DEVIVIER. _net_, 2.00 - CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, SPIRAGO’S METHOD OF. _net_, 1.50 - CHRISTIAN EDUCATION. O’CONNELL. _net_, 0.60 - CHRISTIAN FATHER. CRAMER. Paper, _net_, 0.13; cloth, _net_, 0.25 - CHRISTIAN MOTHER. CRAMER. Paper, _net_, 0.13; cloth, _net_, 0.25 - CHRISTIAN SCHOOL. MCFAUL. Paper, 0.10 - CONFESSION. Paper, 0.05 - CONFESSION AND ITS BENEFITS. GIRARDEY. 0.25 - CONFIRMATION. Paper, 0.05 - COUNSELS OF ST. ANGELA. _net_, 0.25 - DEFENCE OF THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS, HENRY VIII. O’DONOVAN. _net_, 2.00 - DEVOTION TO SACRED HEART OF JESUS. NOLDIN, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR THE SICK-ROOM. KREBS, C.SS.R. - Cloth, _net_, 1.25 - DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS. _net_, 1.25 - DEVOTIONS FOR FIRST FRIDAY. HUGUET. _net_, 0.40 - DIGNITY AND DUTIES OF THE PRIEST. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - DIVINE GRACE. WIRTH. _net_, 1.60 - DIVINE OFFICE. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - EDUCATION OF OUR GIRLS. SHIELDS. _net_, 1.00 - EPISTLES AND GOSPELS. Large print. _net_, 0.25 - EUCHARISTIC CHRIST. TESNIERE. _net_, 1.25 - EUCHARISTIC SOUL ELEVATIONS. STADELMAN. _net_, 0.50 - EXPLANATION OF THE BALTIMORE CATECHISM. KINKEAD. _net_, 1.00 - EXPLANATION OF THE GOSPELS. LAMBERT. Paper, _net_, 0.15; - cloth, _net_, 0.35 - EXPLANATION OF THE HOLY SACRAMENTS. ILLUSTR. _net_, 1.00 - EXPLANATION OF THE MASS. COCHEM. _net_, 1.25 - EXPLANATION OF THE OUR FATHER AND THE HAIL MARY. BRENNAN, - LL.D. _net_, 0.75 - EXPLANATION OF THE PRAYERS AND CEREMONIES OF THE MASS, - ILLUSTRATED. LANSLOTS, O.S.B. _net_, 1.25 - EXPLANATION OF THE SALVE REGINA. LIGUORI. _net_, 0.75 - EXTREME UNCTION. Paper, 0.10 - FIRST COMMUNICANT’S MANUAL. 0.50 - FLOWERS OF THE PASSION. TH. DE JESUS-AGONISANT. 0.50 - FOLLOWING OF CHRIST. KEMPIS. - With Reflections, 0.50 - Without Reflections, 0.45 - Edition de Luxe, 1.25 - FOUR LAST THINGS, THE. Meditations. COCHEM. _net_, 0.75 - GARLAND OF PRAYER. With Nuptial Mass. Leather. 0.90 - GENERAL CONFESSION MADE EASY. KONINGS, C.SS.R. Flexible. 0.15 - GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF RELIGIOUS LIFE. VERHEYEN, O.S.B. _net_, 0.30 - GIFT OF THE KING. 0.60 - GLORIES OF DIVINE GRACE. SCHEEBEN. _net_, 1.60 - GLORIES OF MARY. LIGUORI. 2 vols. _net_, 3.00 - Popular ed. 1 vol. _net_, 1.25 - GLORIES OF THE SACRED HEART. HAUSHERR, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - GOFFINE’S DEVOUT INSTRUCTIONS. 140 Illustrations. Cloth, 1.00 - GOLDEN SANDS. Little Counsels for the Sanctification and - Happiness of Daily Life. Third, Fourth and Fifth Series. - Each, _net_, 0.50 - GREAT ENCYCLICAL LETTERS OF POPE LEO XIII. _net_, 2.25 - GREAT MEANS OF SALVATION. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - GREAT SUPPER OF GOD, THE. COUBE, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - GREETINGS OF THE CHRIST-CHILD—Poems. 0.60 - GUIDE FOR SACRISTANS. _net_, 0.85 - GUIDE TO CONFESSION AND COMMUNION. _net_, 0.50 - HANDBOOK OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. WILMERS, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - HARMONY OF THE RELIGIOUS LIFE. HEUSER. _net_, 1.25 - HELP FOR THE POOR SOULS IN PURGATORY. _net_, 0.50 - HELPS TO A SPIRITUAL LIFE. SCHNEIDER, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - HIDDEN TREASURE. ST. LEONARD of Port Maurice. _net_, 0.50 - HISTORY OF ECONOMICS. DEWE. _net_, 1.50 - HISTORY OF CATHOLIC EDUCATION IN THE U. S. BURNS. _net_, 1.25 - HISTORY OF THE MASS. O’BRIEN. _net_, 1.25 - HOLY EUCHARIST. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - HOLY HOUR OF ADORATION. STANG. _net_, 0.50 - HOLY MASS. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - HOW TO COMFORT THE SICK. KREBS, C.SS.R. _net_, 1.25 - HOW TO MAKE THE MISSION. By a Dominican Father. Paper, 0.10 - ILLUSTRATED PRAYER-BOOK FOR CHILDREN. 0.35 - IMITATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. BENNETT-GLADSTONE. - Plain Edition, _net_, 0.50 - Edition de luxe, _net_, 1.50 - IMITATION OF THE SACRED HEART. ARNOUDT, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - IMMACULATE CONCEPTION, THE. LAMBING, LL.D. 0.35 - INCARNATION, BIRTH, AND INFANCY OF CHRIST. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - INDULGENCES. A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO. BERNAD, O.M.I. _net_, 0.75 - IN HEAVEN WE KNOW OUR OWN. BLOT, S.J. _net_, 0.60 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CATHOLIC FATHER. EGGER. _net_, 0.50 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CATHOLIC MOTHER. EGGER. _net_, 0.50 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR CATHOLIC YOUTH. _net_, 0.50 - INSTRUCTIONS FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS. SCHMITT. _net_, 0.60 - INSTRUCTIONS ON COMMANDMENTS AND SACRAMENTS. LIGUORI. - Paper, _net_, 0.13; cloth, _net_, 0.25 - INTERIOR OF JESUS AND MARY. GROU. 2 vols. _net_, 2.00 - INTRODUCTION TO A DEVOUT LIFE. ST. FRANCIS DE SALES. _net_, 0.50 - LESSONS OF THE KING. 0.60 - LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS DE LIGUORI. 4 vols., each vol., _net_, 1.50 - LIGHT FOR NEW TIMES. FLETCHER. _net_, 0.60 - LITTLE ALTAR BOYS’ MANUAL. 0.25 - LITTLE BOOK OF SUPERIORS. _net_, 0.75 - LITTLE CHILD OF MARY. A Small Prayer-Book. 0.35 - LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY. LASANCE. Illustrated. 0.25 - LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. JOSEPH. LINGS. 0.25 - LITTLE MONTH OF MAY. MCMAHON. Flexible. _net_, 0.25 - LITTLE MONTH OF THE SOULS IN PURGATORY. _net_, 0.25 - LITTLE OFFICE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION. 0.05 - LITTLE PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. New cheap edition. 1.25 - LOVER OF SOULS, THE. BRINKMEYER. _net_, 1.00 - MANUAL OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST. LASANCE. _net_, 0.75 - MANUAL OF THE HOLY FAMILY. _net_, 0.60 - MANUAL OF THE HOLY NAME. 0.50 - MANUAL OF THE SACRED HEART, NEW. 0.50 - MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY, NEW. _net_, 0.50 - MANUAL OF THEOLOGY FOR THE LAITY. GEIERMANN. Paper, - _net_, 0.20; cloth, _net_, 0.40 - MARIAE COROLLA. Poems. HILL. _net_, 1.25 - MARY THE QUEEN. 0.60 - MASS DEVOTIONS AND READINGS ON THE MASS. LASANCE. _net_, 0.75 - MEDITATIONS FOR ALL DAYS OF YEAR. HAMON, S.S. 5 vols. _net_, 5.00 - MEDITATIONS FOR EVERY DAY. BAXTER. _net_, 1.50 - MEDITATIONS FOR EVERY DAY. VERCRUYSSE, S.J. 2 vols. _net_, 3.50 - MEDITATIONS FOR MONTHLY RETREATS. _net_, 1.25 - MEDITATIONS FOR USE OF SECULAR CLERGY. CHAIGNON. _net_, 4.50 - MEDITATIONS FOR THE USE OF SEMINARIANS AND PRIESTS. Vol. - I. BRANCHEREAU. _net_, 1.00 - MEDITATIONS FOR RETREATS. ST. FRANCIS DE SALES. _net_, 0.75 - MEDITATIONS ON THE LIFE, THE TEACHINGS, AND THE PASSION - OF JESUS CHRIST. ILG-CLARKE. 2 vols. _net_, 3.50 - MEDITATIONS ON THE MONTH OF OUR LADY. _net_, 0.75 - MEDITATIONS ON THE PASSION OF OUR LORD. 0.50 - METHOD OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, SPIRAGO’S. MESSMER. _net_, 1.50 - MIRACLES OF OUR LORD. 0.60 - MISCELLANY. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - MISSION BOOK FOR THE MARRIED. GIRARDEY, C.SS.R. 0.50 - MISSION BOOK FOR THE SINGLE. GIRARDEY, C.SS.R. 0.50 - MISSION BOOK OF REDEMPTORIST FATHERS. LIGUORI. 0.50 - MOMENTS BEFORE THE TABERNACLE. RUSSELL, S.J. _net_, 0.50 - MONTH, NEW, OF THE HOLY ANGELS. ST. FRANCIS DE SALES. _net_, 0.25 - MONTH OF MAY. DEBUSSI, S.J. _net_, 0.50 - MONTH OF THE SOULS IN PURGATORY, The Little “Golden Sands.” _net_, 0.25 - MORAL BRIEFS. STAPLETON. _net_, 1.25 - MORES CATHOLICI; or, Ages of Faith. DIGBY. 4 vols. 25.00 - (Easy payment plan, $1.00 down; $2.00 a month.) - MOST HOLY ROSARY. CRAMER, D.D. _net_, 0.50 - MY FIRST COMMUNION, the Happiest Day of My Life. BRENNAN. _net_, 0.75 - MY LITTLE PRAYER-BOOK. Illustrated. 0.12 - NEW MONTH OF THE HOLY ANGELS. _net_, 0.25 - NEW SUNDAY-SCHOOL COMPANION. 0.25 - NEW TESTAMENT. Cheap Edition. 32mo, flexible cloth, _net_, 0.15 - NEW TESTAMENT. Illustrated Edition. 16mo, printed in two - colors, with 100 full-page illustrations, _net_, 0.60 - NEW TESTAMENT. India Paper Edition. American Seal, limp, - round corners, gilt edges, _net_, 0.90 - NEW TESTAMENT. Large Print Edition. 12mo, large, _net_, 0.75 - NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES. CONATY, D.D. 0.60 - OFF TO JERUSALEM. BENZIGER. _net_, 1.00 - OFFICE, COMPLETE, OF HOLY WEEK. 0.45 - Cheap Edition, cloth, cut flush, 0.20 - OUR FAVORITE DEVOTIONS. LINGS. _net_, 0.75 - OUR FAVORITE NOVENAS. LINGS. _net_, 0.75 - OUR MONTHLY DEVOTIONS. LINGS. _net_, 1.25 - OUR OWN WILL. ALLEN, D.D. _net_, 0.75 - PARADISE ON EARTH OPENED TO ALL. NATALE, S.J. _net_, 0.50 - PARISH PRIEST ON DUTY, THE. HEUSER. _net_, 0.60 - PASSION, A FEW SIMPLE AND BUSINESS-LIKE WAYS OF DEVOTION - TO THE. HILL, C.P. 0.25 - PASSION AND DEATH OF JESUS CHRIST. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - PASSION FLOWERS. Poems. HILL. _net_, 1.25 - PASSION, THOUGHTS AND AFFECTIONS ON, FOR EVERY DAY OF THE - YEAR. BERGAMO. _net_, 2.00 - PEARLS FROM FABER. BRUNOWE. _net_, 0.50 - PEARLS OF PRAYER. 0.35 - PERFECT RELIGIOUS, THE. DE LA MOTTE. _net_, 1.00 - PIOUS PREPARATION FOR FIRST HOLY COMMUNION. LASANCE. Cloth, _net_, 0.75 - POCKET MANUAL. A Vest-Pocket Prayer-Book in very large type. 0.25 - POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON MARRIAGE. GIRARDEY, C.SS.R. Paper, - _net_, 0.13; cloth, _net_, 0.25 - POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON PRAYER. GIRARDEY, C.SS.R. Paper, - _net_, 0.13; cloth, _net_, 0.25 - POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS TO PARENTS. GIRARDEY, C.SS.R. Paper, - _net_, 0.13; cloth, _net_, 0.25 - PRAYER-BOOK FOR RELIGIOUS. LASANCE. _net_, 1.50 - PREACHING. Vol. XV. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - PREPARATION FOR DEATH. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - QUEEN’S FESTIVALS. 0.60 - RELIGION OF SOCIALISM, THE CHARACTERISTICS AND. MING, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - RELIGIOUS STATE, THE. LIGUORI. _net_, 0.50 - ROSARY, THE CROWN OF MARY. By a Dominican Father. 0.10 - ROSARY, THE. Scenes and Thoughts. GARESCHE, S.J. _net_, 0.50 - ROSARY, THE MOST HOLY. Meditations. CRAMER. _net_, 0.50 - SACRAMENTALS. LAMBING, D.D. Paper, _net_, 0.15; cloth, _net_, 0.35 - SACRAMENTALS—Prayer, etc. MÜLLER, C.SS.R. _net_, 1.00 - SACRED HEART BOOK, THE. LASANCE. _net_, 0.75 - SACRED HEART, DEVOTION TO, FOR FIRST FRIDAY OF EVERY - MONTH. By PERE HUGUET. _net_, 0.40 - SACRED HEART, NEW MANUAL OF. 0.50 - SACRIFICE OF MASS WORTHILY CELEBRATED. CHAIGNON, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - ST. ANTHONY. KELLER. _net_, 0.75 - ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI. Social Reformer. DUBOIS, S.M. _net_, 1.00 - SECRET OF SANCTITY. ST. FRANCIS DE SALES. _net_, 1.00 - SERAPHIC GUIDE, THE. A Manual for the Members of the Third - Order of St. Francis. By a Franciscan Father. 0.60 - SHORT CONFERENCES ON THE LITTLE OFFICE OF THE IMMACULATE - CONCEPTION. RAINER. _net_, 0.50 - SHORT STORIES ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. From the French - by MCMAHON. _net_, 1.00 - SHORT VISITS TO THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. LASANCE. 0.25 - SICK CALLS. MULLIGAN. _net_, 1.00 - SOCIALISM AND CHRISTIANITY. STANG, D.D. _net_, 1.00 - SOCIALISM. CATHREIN, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - SODALIST’S VADE MECUM. 0.50 - SPIRIT OF SACRIFICE, THE. GIRAUD. _net_, 2.00 - SPIRITUAL DESPONDENCY AND TEMPTATIONS. MICHEL, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - SPIRITUAL EXERCISES FOR TEN DAYS’ RETREAT. SMETANA. _net_, 1.00 - SPIRITUAL PEPPER AND SALT. STANG. Paper, _net_, 0.20; cloth, _net_, 0.40 - ST. ANTHONY. KELLER. _net_, 0.75 - ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI, Social Reformer. DUBOIS, S.M. _net_, 1.50 - STORY OF THE FRIENDS OF JESUS. 0.60 - STORIES FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS. KELLER, D.D. 0.50 - STRIVING AFTER PERFECTION. BAYMA, S.J. _net_, 1.00 - SUNDAY SCHOOL TEACHER’S GUIDE TO SUCCESS. _net_, 0.75 - SURE WAY TO A HAPPY MARRIAGE. TAYLOR. Paper, _net_, - 0.13; cloth, _net_, 0.25 - TALKS WITH LITTLE ONES ABOUT APOSTLES’ CREED. 0.60 - THOUGHTS ON THE RELIGIOUS LIFE. LASANCE. _net_, 1.50 - TRUE POLITENESS. DEMORE. _net_, 0.75 - TRUE SPOUSE OF JESUS CHRIST. LIGUORI. 2 vols. _net_, 3.00 - The same, one-volume edition, _net_, 1.25 - VENERATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN. ROHNER, O.S.B. _net_, 1.25 - VEST-POCKET GEMS OF DEVOTION. 0.20 - VICTORIES OF THE MARTYRS. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - VISITS, SHORT, TO BLESSED SACRAMENT. LASANCE. 0.25 - VISITS TO JESUS IN THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. LASANCE. _net_, 0.50 - VISITS TO JESUS IN THE TABERNACLE. LASANCE. _net_, 1.25 - VISITS TO THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT and to the Blessed - Virgin Mary. LIGUORI. _net_, 0.50 - VOCATIONS EXPLAINED. 0.10 - WAY OF INTERIOR PEACE. DE LEHEN, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - WAY OF SALVATION AND PERFECTION. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - WAY OF THE CROSS. Paper, 0.05 - WAY OF THE CROSS. By a Jesuit Father. _net_, 0.15 - WAY OF THE CROSS. According to Method of St. Francis - Assisi. _net_, 0.15 - WAY OF THE CROSS. According to Eucharistic Method. _net_, 0.15 - WAY OF THE CROSS. According to Method of St. Alphonsus - Liguori. _net_, 0.15 - WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. DRURY. Paper, _net_, 0.20; cloth, _net_, 0.40 - -JUVENILES. - - ADVENTURE WITH THE APACHES. FERRY. 0.45 - ARMORER OF SOLINGEN. HERCHENBACH. 0.45 - AS TRUE AS GOLD. MANNIX. 0.45 - BELL FOUNDRY, THE. VON SCHACHING. 0.45 - BERKELEYS, THE. WIGHT. 0.45 - BEARNE, REV. DAVID, S.J. - SHEER PLUCK. 0.85 - MELOR OF THE SILVER HAND. 0.85 - THE GUILD BOYS’ PLAY AT RIDINGDALE. 0.85 - NEW BOYS AT RIDINGDALE. 0.85 - THE WITCH OF RIDINGDALE. 0.85 - RIDINGDALE FLOWER SHOW. 0.85 - CHARLIE CHITTYWICK. 0.85 - BISTOURI. By A. MELANDRI. 0.45 - BLACK LADY AND ROBIN RED BREAST. By CANON SCHMID. 0.25 - BLISSYLVANIA POST-OFFICE. By MARION AMES TAGGART. 0.45 - BOB O’LINK. WAGGAMAN. 0.45 - BOYS IN THE BLOCK. By MAURICE F. EGAN. 0.25 - BUNT AND BILL. CLARA MULHOLLAND. 0.45 - BUZZER’S CHRISTMAS. By MARY T. WAGGAMAN. 0.25 - BY BRANSCOMBE RIVER. By MARION AMES TAGGART. 0.45 - CAKE AND THE EASTER EGGS. By CANON SCHMID. 0.25 - CANARY BIRD. By CANON SCHMID. 0.45 - CARROLL DARE. By MARY T. WAGGAMAN. 1.25 - THE CHILDREN OF CUPA. MANNIX. 0.45 - COLLEGE BOY, A. By ANTHONY YORKE. 0.85 - COPUS, REV. J. E., S.J.: - HARRY RUSSELL. 0.85 - SHADOWS LIFTED. 0.85 - ST. CUTHBERT’S. 0.85 - TOM LOSELY: Boy. 0.85 - DADDY DAN. WAGGAMAN. 0.45 - DAUGHTER OF KINGS, A. HINKSON. 1.25 - DIMPLING’S SUCCESS. By CLARA MULHOLLAND. 0.45 - DOLLAR HUNT, THE. MARTIN. 0.45 - DOUBLE KNOT AND OTHER STORIES, A. WAGGAMAN AND OTHERS. 1.25 - EVERY-DAY GIRL, AN. By MARY C. CROWLEY. 0.45 - FATAL DIAMONDS. By E. C. DONNELLY. 0.25 - FINN, REV. F. J., S.J. - HIS FIRST AND LAST APPEARANCE. Illustrated. 1.00 - THE BEST FOOT FORWARD. 0.85 - THAT FOOTBALL GAME. 0.85 - ETHELRED PRESTON. 0.85 - CLAUDE LIGHTFOOT. 0.85 - HARRY DEE. 0.85 - TOM PLAYFAIR. 0.85 - PERCY WYNN. 0.85 - MOSTLY BOYS. 0.85 - “BUT THY LOVE AND THY GRACE.” 1.00 - MY STRANGE FRIEND. 0.25 - FIVE O’CLOCK STORIES; or, The Old Tales Told Again. 0.75 - FLOWER OF THE FLOCK, THE, and the Badgers of Belmont. EGAN. 0.85 - FOR THE WHITE ROSE. HINKSON. 0.45 - FRED’S LITTLE DAUGHTER. SMITH. 0.45 - GODFREY THE HERMIT. SCHMID. 0.25 - GOLDEN LILY, THE. HINKSON. 0.45 - GREAT CAPTAIN, THE. HINKSON. 0.45 - HALDEMAN CHILDREN, THE. MANNIX. 0.45 - HARMONY FLATS. WHITMIRE. 0.85 - HEIR OF DREAMS, AN. O’MALLEY. 0.45 - HOP BLOSSOMS. SCHMID. 0.25 - HOSTAGE OF WAR, A. BONESTEEL. 0.45 - HOW THEY WORKED THEIR WAY. EGAN. 0.75 - INUNDATION, THE. SCHMID. 0.45 - “JACK.” By a Religious of The Society of The Holy Child Jesus. 0.45 - JACK HILDRETH AMONG THE INDIANS. 2 vols., each, 0.85 - JACK HILDRETH ON THE NILE. TAGGART. Cloth, 0.85 - JACK O’LANTERN. WAGGAMAN. 0.45 - JUVENILE ROUND TABLE. First, Second, Third Series. Each, 1.00 - KLONDIKE PICNIC. DONNELLY. 0.85 - LAMP OF THE SANCTUARY. WISEMAN. 0.25 - LEGENDS OF THE HOLY CHILD JESUS from Many Lands. LUTZ. 0.75 - LITTLE MISSY. WAGGAMAN. 0.45 - LOYAL BLUE AND ROYAL SCARLET. TAGGART. 0.85 - MADCAP SET AT ST. ANNE’S. BRUNOWE. 0.45 - MARY TRACY’S FORTUNE. SADLIER. 0.45 - MASTER FRIDOLIN. GIEHRL. 0.25 - MILLY AVELING. SMITH. Cloth. 0.85 - MORE FIVE O’CLOCK STORIES. In Prose and Verse. By a Religious - of The Society of The Holy Child Jesus. 0.75 - MYSTERIOUS DOORWAY. SADLIER. 0.45 - MYSTERY OF CLEVERLY. BARTON. 0.85 - MYSTERY OF HORNBY HALL. SADLIER. 0.85 - MY STRANGE FRIEND. FINN. 0.25 - NAN NOBODY. WAGGAMAN. 0.45 - OLD CHARLMONT’S SEED-BED. SMITH. 0.45 - OLD ROBBER’S CASTLE. SCHMID. 0.25 - ONE AFTERNOON AND OTHER STORIES. TAGGART 1.25 - OUR BOYS’ AND GIRLS’ LIBRARY. 14 vols., each. 0.25 - OVERSEER OF MAHLBOURG. SCHMID. 0.25 - PANCHO AND PANCHITA. MANNIX 0.45 - PAULINE ARCHER. SADLIER. 0.45 - PETRONILLA. DONNELLY. 0.85 - PICKLE AND PEPPER. DORSEY. 0.85 - PILGRIM FROM IRELAND. CARNOT. 0.45 - PLAYWATER PLOT, THE. WAGGAMAN. 0.60 - QUEEN’S PAGE. HINKSON. 0.45 - RECRUIT TOMMY COLLINS. BONESTEEL. 0.45 - ROSE BUSH. SCHMID. 0.25 - ROUND THE WORLD. Vols. I, II, III, IV. Each, 0.85 - SEA-GULL’S ROCK. SANDEAU. 0.45 - SHADOWS LIFTED. COPUS, S.J. 0.85 - SPALDING, REV. H., S.J.: - THE MARKS OF THE BEAR CLAWS. 0.85 - CAVE BY THE BEECH FORK. 0.85 - THE SHERIFF OF THE BEECH FORK. 0.85 - THE RACE FOR COPPER ISLAND. 0.85 - STRONG-ARM OF AVALON. WAGGAMAN. 0.85 - SUMMER AT WOODVILLE. SADLIER. 0.45 - TALES AND LEGENDS OF THE MIDDLE AGES. DE CAPELLA. 0.75 - TALISMAN, THE. SADLIER. 0.60 - TAMING OF POLLY. DORSEY. 0.85 - THREE GIRLS AND ESPECIALLY ONE. TAGGART. 0.45 - THREE LITTLE KINGS. GIEHRL. 0.25 - TOM’S LUCKPOT. WAGGAMAN. 0.45 - TOORALLADY. WALSH. 0.45 - TRANSPLANTING OF TESSIE. WAGGAMAN. 0.60 - TREASURE OF NUGGET MOUNTAIN. TAGGART. 0.85 - TWO LITTLE GIRLS. MACK. 0.45 - VIOLIN MAKER, THE. SMITH. 0.45 - WAGER OF GERALD O’ROURKE, THE. FINN-THIELE. _net_, 0.35 - WAYWARD WINIFRED. SADLIER. 0.85 - WHERE THE ROAD LED AND OTHER STORIES. SADLIER and others. 1.25 - WINNETOU, THE APACHE KNIGHT. TAGGART. 0.85 - WRONGFULLY ACCUSED. HERCHENBACH. 0.45 - YOUNG COLOR GUARD, THE. BONESTEEL. 0.45 - -NOVELS AND STORIES. - - “BUT THY LOVE AND THY GRACE.” FINN, S.J. 1.00 - CARROLL DARE. WAGGAMAN. 1.25 - CIRCUS RIDER’S DAUGHTER, THE. BRACKEL. 1.25 - CONNOR D’ARCY’S STRUGGLES. BERTHOLDS. 1.25 - CORINNE’S VOW. WAGGAMAN. 1.25 - DION AND THE SIBYLS. KEON. 1.25 - FABIOLA. WISEMAN. Illustrated. 0.90 - FABIOLA’S SISTER. CLARKE. 1.25 - FATAL BEACON, THE. BRACKEL. 1.25 - HEARTS OF GOLD. EDHOR. 1.25 - HEIRESS OF CRONENSTEIN, THE. Countess HAHN-HAHN. 1.25 - HER BLIND FOLLY. HOLT. 1.25 - HER FATHER’S DAUGHTER. HINKSON. _net_, 1.25 - IDOLS; or, The Secrets of the Rue Chaussee d’Antin. DE NAVERY. 1.25 - IN THE DAYS OF KING HAL. TAGGART. _net_, 1.25 - IN GOD’S GOOD TIME. ROSS. 1.25 - “KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS.” HARRISON. 1.25 - LET NO MAN PUT ASUNDER. MARIÉ. 1.00 - LINKED LIVES. DOUGLAS. 1.50 - MARCELLA GRACE. Mulholland. Illustrated Edition. 1.25 - MIRROR OF SHALOTT. BENSON. _net_, 1.25 - MISS ERIN. FRANCIS. 1.25 - MONK’S PARDON. THE. DE NAVERY. 1.25 - MR. BILLY BUTTONS. LECKY. 1.25 - “NOT A JUDGMENT.” KEON. 1.25 - OTHER MISS LISLE, THE. MARTIN. 1.25 - OUT OF BONDAGE. HOLT. 1.25 - OUTLAW OF CAMARGUE, THE. LAMOTHE. 1.25 - PASSING SHADOWS. YORKE. 1.25 - PERE MONNIER’S WARD. LECKY. 1.25 - PILKINGTON HEIR, THE. SADLIER. 1.25 - PRODIGAL’S DAUGHTER, THE. By LELIA HARDIN BUGG. 1.00 - RED INN OF ST. LYPHAR, THE. A Romance of La Vendée. SADLIER. 1.25 - ROMANCE OF A PLAYWRIGHT. By Vte. HENRI DE BORNIER. 1.00 - ROSE OF THE WORLD. MARTIN. 1.25 - ROUND TABLE OF AMERICAN CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. Complete Stories, - with Biographies, Portraits, etc. 1.50 - ROUND TABLE OF FRENCH CATHOLIC NOVELISTS Complete Stories, - with Biographies, Portraits, etc. 1.50 - ROUND TABLE OF GERMAN CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. Illustrated. 1.50 - ROUND TABLE OF IRISH AND ENGLISH CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. Complete - Stories, Biographies. Portraits, etc. Cloth, 1.50 - RULER OF THE KINGDOM, THE, and other Phases of Life and - Character. KEON. 1.25 - SECRET OF THE GREEN VASE. COOKE. 1.25 - SENIOR LIEUTENANT’S WAGER. 1.25 - SOGGARTH AROON. GUINAN, C.C. 1.25 - THAT MAN’S DAUGHTER. ROSS. 1.25 - TRAIL OF THE DRAGON. 1.25 - TRAINING OF SILAS, THE. DEVINE, S.J. 1.25 - TRUE STORY OF MASTER GERARD, THE. SADLIE. 1.25 - UNRAVELING OF A TANGLE, THE. TAGGART. 1.25 - VOCATION OF EDWARD CONWAY. EGAN. 1.25 - WAY THAT LED BEYOND. By J. HARRISON. 1.25 - WHEN LOVE IS STRONG. KEON. 1.25 - WOMAN OF FORTUNE, A. By CHRISTIAN REID. 1.25 - WORLD WELL LOST. By ESTHER ROBERTSON. 0.75 - -LIVES AND HISTORIES. - - AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF ST. IGNATIUS LOYOLA. Edited by - O’CONOR, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - ANGLICAN ORDINATIONS. SEMPLE, S.J. _net_, 0.35 - BEGINNINGS OF CHRISTIANITY. SHAHAN. _net_, 2.00 - CHURCH HISTORY. BUSINGER. 0.75 - GOLDEN BELLS IN CONVENT TOWERS. _net_, 1.00 - HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. BRUECK. 2 vols., _net_, 3.00 - HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. SHEA. _net_, 1.50 - HISTORY OF THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION. COBBETT. _net_, 0.75 - LIFE OF BLESSED VIRGIN. Illustrated. ROHNER. _net_, 1.25 - LIFE OF CHRIST. Illustrated. COCHEM. _net_, 1.25 - LIFE OF POPE PIUS X. 2.00 - LIFE OF MOST REV. JOHN HUGHES. BRANN. _net_, 0.75 - LIFE OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST AND OF HIS - VIRGIN MOTHER MARY. BRENNAN. 4to. _net_, 10.00 - (Easy payment plan, $1.00 down, $1.00 a month.) - LIFE OF SISTER ANNE KATHERINE EMMERICH. WEGENER, O.S.A. _net_, 1.75 - LIFE OF VEN. MARY CRESCENTIA HOESS. DEGMAN, O.S.F. _net_, 1.25 - LITTLE LIVES OF SAINTS FOR CHILDREN. BERTHOLD. Ill. Cloth, 0.60 - LITTLE PICTORIAL LIVES OF SAINTS. New, cheap edition. 1.25 - LOURDES. CLARKE, S.J. 1.00 - MIDDLE AGES, THE. SHAHAN. _net_, 2.00 - PATRON SAINTS FOR CATHOLIC YOUTH. 3 vols. Each, 0.60 - PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. _net_, 2.00 - ST. ANTHONY, THE SAINT OF THE WHOLE WORLD. WARD. Cloth. _net_, 0.75 - STORY OF JESUS. Illustrated. _net_, 0.60 - STORY OF THE DIVINE CHILD. LINGS. 0.60 - VICTORIES OF THE MARTYRS. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.50 - -THEOLOGY, LITURGY, SERMONS, SCIENCE, AND PHILOSOPHY. - - ANGLICAN ORDINATIONS. SEMPLE, S.J. 0.35 - BENEDICENDA. SCHULTE. _net_, 1.50 - BREVE COMPENDIUM THEOLOGIAE. BERTHIER. _net_, 2.50 - BUSINESS GUIDE FOR PRIESTS. STANG. _net_, 1.30 - CANONICAL PROCEDURE. DOSTE. _net_, 1.50 - CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS. DEVIVIER. _net_, 2.00 - CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY: God. DRISCOLL. _net_, 1.50 - CHRIST IN TYPE AND PROPHECY. MAAS, S.J. 2 vols., _net_, 4.00 - CHURCH TREASURER’S PEW COLLECTION AND RECEIPT BOOK. _net_, 1.00 - COMPENDIUM JURIS CANONICI. SMITH. _net_, 2.00 - COMPENDIUM JURIS REGULARIUM. BACHOFEN. _net_, 2.50 - COMPENDIUM SACRAE LITURGIAE. WAPELHORST. _net_, 2.50 - CONSECRANDA. SCHULTE. _net_, 1.50 - DATA OF MODERN ETHICS EXAMINED. MING, S.J. 2.00 - DIARY, ORDO AND NOTE-BOOK. Cloth, _net_, 1.00; flexible - leather, _net_, 1.50 - ELEMENTS OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAW. SMITH, D.D. 3 vols., each, _net_, 2.50 - GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURES. - GIGOT, S.S. _net_, 2.50 - GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF HOLY SCRIPTURES. - Abridged Edition. GIGOT, S.S. _net_, 1.50 - GOD KNOWABLE AND KNOWN. RONAYNE, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - GOOD CHRISTIAN, THE. ALLEN, D.D. 2 vols. _net_, 5.00 - HISTORY OF THE MASS AND ITS CEREMONIES IN THE EASTERN - AND WESTERN CHURCH. O’BRIEN. _net_, 1.25 - HUNOLT’S SERMONS. 12 vols., _net_, 25.00 - INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF OLD TESTAMENT. Vol. I and II. - GIGOT. Each, _net_, 1.50 - JESUS LIVING IN THE PRIEST. MILLET-BYRNE. _net_, 2.00 - LIBER STATUS ANIMARUM; or Parish Census Book. _Pocket - Edition, net_, 0.25; _Large Edition_, half-leather, _net_, 3.00 - MARRIAGE PROCESS IN THE UNITED STATES. SMITH. _net_, 2.50 - MANUAL OF THEOLOGY FOR THE LAITY. GEIERMANN. Paper, - _net_, 0.20; cloth, _net_, 0.40 - MEDULLA FUNDAMENTALIS THEOLOGIAE MORALIS. STANG. _net_, 1.00 - MORAL PRINCIPLES AND MEDICAL PRACTICE. COPPENS, S.J. _net_, 1.00 - NATURAL LAW AND LEGAL PRACTICE. HOLAIND, S.J. _net_, 2.00 - OUTLINES OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY. HUNTER, S.J. 3 vols., _net_, 1.50 - OUTLINES OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. GIGOT. Cloth. _net_, 1.50 - OUTLINES OF SERMONS. SCHUEN. _net_, 2.00 - PASTORAL THEOLOGY. STANG, D.D. _net_, 1.50 - PHILOSOPHIA MORALI, DE. RUSSO. _net_, 2.00 - POLITICAL AND MORAL ESSAYS. RICKABY, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - PRAXIS SYNODALIS. _net_, 0.75 - PRIEST IN THE PULPIT. SCHUECH-LUEBBERMANN. _net_, 1.50 - REGISTRUM BAPTISMORUM. _net_, 3.50 - REGISTRUM MATRIMONIORUM. _net_, 3.00 - RELATION OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY TO PHILOSOPHY. DE - MERCIER. _net_, 0.35 - RIGHTS OF OUR LITTLE ONES. CONWAY, S.J. Paper, 0.10 - RITUALE COMPENDIOSUM. _net_, 0.90 - SANCTUARY BOYS’ ILLUSTRATED MANUAL. MCCALLEN, S.S. _net_, 0.50 - SERMONS, ABRIDGED, FOR SUNDAYS. LIGUORI. _net_, 1.25 - SERMONS FOR CHILDREN OF MARY. CALLERIO. _net_, 1.50 - SERMONS FOR CHILDREN’S MASSES. FRASSINETTI-LINGS. _net_, 1.50 - SERMONS FOR THE SUNDAYS AND CHIEF FESTIVALS OF THE - ECCLESIASTICAL YEAR. POTTGEISSER, S.J. 2 vols. _net_, 2.50 - SERMONS FROM THE LATINS. BAXTER. _net_, 2.00 - SERMONS ON DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART. BIERBAUM. _net_, 0.75 - SERMONS ON THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. SCHEUER-LASANCE. _net_, 1.50 - SERMONS ON THE ROSARY. FRINGS. _net_, 1.00 - SHORT SERMONS FOR LOW MASSES. SCHOUPPE, S.J. _net_, 1.25 - THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE CONFESSIONAL. SHIELER. 3.50 - VADE MECUM SACERDOTUM. Cloth, _net_, 0.25; Morocco, _net_, 0.50 - -MISCELLANEOUS. - - ACROSS WIDEST AMERICA. DEVINE, S.J. _net_, 1.50 - BENZIGER’S MAGAZINE. The Popular Catholic Family Magazine. - Subscription per year, 2.00 - BONE RULES; or, Skeleton of English Grammar. TABB. 0.50 - CATHOLIC HOME ANNUAL. Stories by Best Writers. 0.25 - CORRECT THING FOR CATHOLICS. BUGG. _net_, 0.75 - ELOCUTION CLASS. O’GRADY. _net_, 0.50 - GENTLEMAN, A. EGAN. _net_, 0.75 - HOW TO GET ON. FEENEY. _net_, 1.00 - HYMN-BOOK. 0.35 - LADY, A. Manners and Usages. BUGG. _net_, 0.75 - LITTLE FOLKS’ ANNUAL. 0.10 - READINGS AND RECITATIONS FOR JUNIORS. O’GRADY. _net_, 0.50 - RECORD OF BAPTISMS. 14×10 inches, 3 styles. 3.00, 4.00, 6.00 - RECORD OF MARRIAGES. 14×10 inches, 3 styles. 3.00, 4.00, 6.00 - SELECT RECITATIONS FOR CATHOLIC SCHOOLS AND ACADEMIES. - O’GRADY. 1.00 - SONGS AND SONNETS. EGAN. 1.00 - SURSUM CORDA. Hymns. Paper, 0.15; cloth, 0.25 - SURSUM CORDA. With English and German Text. 0.45 - VISIT TO EUROPE AND THE HOLY LAND. FAIRBANKS. 1.50 - WHAT CATHOLICS HAVE DONE FOR SCIENCE. BRENNAN. _net_, 1.25 - PRAYER BOOKS. - Benziger Brothers publish the most complete line of prayer-books in - this country, embracing Prayer-books for Children; Prayer-books for - First Communicants; Prayer-books for Special Devotions; Prayer-books - for General Use. Catalogue will be sent free on application. - SCHOOL-BOOKS. - Benziger Brothers’ school text-books are considered to be the finest - published. They embrace New Century Catholic Readers (Illustrations - in Colors); Catholic National Readers; Catechisms; History; - Grammars; Spellers; Elocution; Charts. - - -A HOME LIBRARY FOR $1 DOWN. - -_Original American Stories for the Young, by the Very Best Catholic -Authors._ - -20 COPYRIGHTED BOOKS and a YEAR’S SUBSCRIPTION to BENZIGER’S MAGAZINE (in -itself a library of good reading.) - - Regular Price of Books, $11.70 } Regular Price, - Regular Price of Benziger’s Magazine, 2.00 } $13.70 - ------ - - _Special Net Price, $10.00_ _$1.00 Down._ _$1.00 a Month._ - -You get the books at once, and have the use of them, while making easy -payments. Send us only $1.00, and we will forward the books at once. -$1.00 entitles you to immediate possession. No further payment need be -made for a month. Afterward you pay $1.00 a month. - -THIS IS THE EASY WAY TO GET A LIBRARY. - -_And remember these are the Best Books that can be placed in the hands of -Catholic Youth AT ANY PRICE._ - -ANOTHER EASY WAY OF GETTING BOOKS. - -Each year we publish four New Novels by the best Catholic authors. These -novels are interesting beyond the ordinary; not strictly religious, but -Catholic in tone and feeling. - -We ask you to give us a Standing Order for these novels. The price is -$1.25 a volume postpaid. The $5.00 is not to be paid at one time, but -$1.25 each time a volume is published. - -As a Special Inducement for giving us a standing order for these novels, -we will give you _free_ a subscription to Benziger’s Magazine. This -Magazine is recognized as the best and handsomest Catholic magazine -published. The regular price of the Magazine is $2.00 a year. - -Thus for $5.00 a year—paid $1.25 at a time—you will get four good books -and receive in addition _free_ a year’s subscription to Benziger’s -Magazine. The Magazine will be continued from year to year, as long -as the standing order for the novels is in force, which will be till -countermanded. - -Send $1.25 for the first novel and get your name placed on the -subscription list of Benziger’s Magazine. - - -_THE BEST STORIES AND ARTICLES_ - -1000 ILLUSTRATIONS A YEAR - -BENZIGER’S MAGAZINE - -_The Popular Catholic Family Monthly_ - -RECOMMENDED BY 70 ARCHBISHOPS AND BISHOPS - -Subscription, $2.00 a Year - -What Benziger’s Magazine Gives its Readers: - -Three complete novels of absorbing interest—equal to three books selling -at $1.25 each. - -Fifty complete stories by the best writers—equal to a book of 300 pages -selling at $1.25. - -One thousand beautiful illustrations. - -Forty large reproductions of celebrated paintings. - -Twenty articles—equal to a book of 150 pages—on travel and adventure; on -the manners, customs and home-life of peoples; on the haunts and habits -of animals. - -Twenty articles—equal to a book of 150 pages—on historic events, times, -places, important industries. - -Twenty articles—equal to a book of 150 pages—on the fine arts; celebrated -artists and their paintings, sculpture, music, etc., and nature studies. - -Twelve pages of games and amusements for in-doors and out-of-doors. - -Seventy-two pages of fashions, fads, and fancies, gathered at home -and abroad, helpful hints for home workers, household column, cooking -recipes, etc. - -“Current Events,” the important happenings over the whole world, -described with pen and pictures. - -Twelve prize competitions, with valuable prizes. - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 77819 *** diff --git a/images/cover.jpg b/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 7b3c646..0000000 --- a/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null |
