Case LXII: Lack of Absolution

Case.—Father Julius while hearing confessions is about to give Edward absolution when he suddenly decides to interrogate this penitent. This consumes some time, as it involves long explanations on the part of Edward. Satisfied at length Father Julius, after a few words of exhortation, pulls the slide, and goes on with hearing the next penitent. After the lapse of a quarter of an hour the priest becomes conscious of the fact that Edward had not been absolved. The next morning while distributing Holy Communion he sees this same man at the communion rail. He is perplexed. What is he to do? He concludes he cannot deprive the man of the Sacrament without causing wonder, even scandal, and so he determines to give him the Sacred Host and let the matter rest there.

Question.—Was Fr. Julius right in giving Communion to Edward?

Solution.—The defect here recited we class as a culpable one, affecting the validity of the Sacrament. The general theological doctrine is that such a defect must be repaired by the confessor, even at great inconvenience to himself or to the penitent, provided the latter is exposed to grave evil arising from the culpable action of the confessor. The reason for this is the obligation in justice, which the priest contracts when he assumes the rôle of confessor. But if no grave spiritual damage is to be feared, then the confessor may leave his penitent in good faith. If the confession involved only venial sins, the confessor need not be disturbed, as these sins can be, and are, removed in many other ways, as for example by the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. If Edward had accused himself of mortal sin, the priest, if possible, should call him to his presence and explain the situation to him. He should then urge him to a renewed act of contrition and, on the presumption that no new mortal sin had been committed, should absolve him. But, beyond doubt, in nearly every instance such procedure would be very embarrassing to both, penitent and priest. If this be so, or if the penitent cannot be easily recalled, conditional absolution may be given him, provided he is theologically present. The fact that Edward was already at the altar rail, waiting to receive Holy Communion, makes it impossible for the priest to acquaint him with the defect of absolution. He is not justified under the existing conditions in sending him away from the altar, hence he must leave him in good faith and give him Holy Communion. Julius should not be disturbed about the difficulty, as the sins of Edward, even the mortal sins, can be forgiven by his reception of the Holy Eucharist, and by absolution in his next Confession. However, we are of the opinion that Julius should have given conditional absolution to his penitent at the altar rail before the administration of the grace-giving Sacrament of the Body of the Lord. |