Case LXXIII: Is It Possible to Hear the Mass of Obligation While Making Confession at the Same Time?

It is a common practise to hear confessions during the early Mass on Sundays and on holidays of obligation. It often happens that people who go to confession at this time do not think of hearing any other Mass, and, especially in the country, it would frequently be impossible for them to do so. On ordinary Sundays, in the towns also, there are many people, chiefly servants, who could hardly find another opportunity for confession than during the time when they are hearing their obligatory Mass. It is therefore a question of practical importance whether they obey the commandment of the Church requiring us to hear Mass on Sundays and holidays, if they make their confession during this Mass. A discussion of the matter would be particularly opportune, because several theologians have answered in the negative.

Answer (1).—In order to elucidate the subject fully, we may begin by calling to mind the general principles laid down with reference to the positive commandment requiring us to hear Mass on Sundays and holidays of obligation. Dr. Joh. Ev. Pruner writes: " In order to comply with the command, it is requisite (a) to hear a complete Mass said by a priest who is not excommunicated... (b) to participate with presence of body and soul. We satisfy the first requirement if we are immediate witnesses of the sacred act performed at the altar, or if we join the congregation and observe the acts by which they express their participation in the holy Mass.... Presence of the soul demands α that we should assist at Mass voluntarie et libere, that is to say, with the intention of honoring God and performing a religious act. Simply to be present in order to see the church, or from motives of curiosity, would not be a religious act, but such is necessary in order to obey the commandment; β that we should assist at Mass with attentio externa, i. e., we must set aside any occupation incompatible with paying attention to the sacred action, and we must have at least that degree of attentio interna without which the act cannot be called a humanly free act in the species of religion; in other words we must have attention of spirit, so far as to be aware that the sacred act, at which we intend to assist in order to practise the virtue of religion, is now being accomplished at the altar " (Lehrbuch der katholischen Moraltheologie, p. 316, etc.).

The question under consideration is whether confession is a transaction incompatible with hearing Mass, or, in other words, " Is the commandment of the Church observed by people who go to confession during Mass on Sundays and holidays, but have the intention to assist at holy Mass at the same time? "

Unless their confession is unusually long, so as to occupy the chief part of holy Mass, and unless it is made during the most important part of the Mass, there can scarcely be any doubt that they fulfil their obligation;1 it is not questioned even by theologians who have a great tendency to rigorism.

(2) The case is different, however, where the confession lasts a long time, perhaps through the whole of Mass, or the greater part of it, and especially if it is going on during the most important actions of the Mass. Under such circumstances very many theologians deny that the duty of hearing Mass has been fulfilled. As

1 Cf. Goepfert, Moraltheologie, (2d ed.), I. 408, c; Lehmkuhl, Theol. mor., I. 538. members of the older school who take this view, we may mention Suarez, Bonacina, Lugo, Kollet, Natalis, Alexander, Antoine, S.J.1 and St. Alphonsus.2

Among more recent writers, Dr. Pruner writes as follows on the subject: "Confession during Mass cannot be regarded as fulfilling the obligation to assist at the Holy Sacrifice, if it absorbs the penitent's whole attention for so long that he cannot be said to have been present at a complete Mass" (S. Lig., n. 314).

Gury may also be quoted; in answer to the question: "Does one who confesses his sin during Mass satisfy the precept?" he says: "Negatively, at least if the confession is lengthy—that is, if it lasts throughout the whole Mass or the greater part of it—because then both internal and external attention are lacking; for one who confesses his sins acts the part of the accused, not of one offering sacrifice with the priest, nor is he morally judged to hear Mass."3

The question is answered in the negative also by Cardinal Gousset, Paul Palasthy, and Friedhoff. Gousset writes: " It is generally assumed that a person satisfies the obligation [to hear Mass] if, during the Mass, he examines his conscience with a view to confession, or reads devoutly some spiritual book, such as the ' Following of Christ/ or says his Office. It is improbable, however, that he can (at the same time) hear Mass while making his confession."4

1 Theologia moralis universa, Romae, 1757, pars prima. Tract. de virtute religionis, cap. II. quaest. V. resp. 4.

2 Theologia moralis, lib. III. n. 314 and 315.

3 Compendium Theol. moralis, Ratisbon, 1874, Manz. ed. in Germ., V. p. 1, n. 346.

4 This opinion is expressed rather more decidedly than that of St. Alphonsus Liguori, who admits that there are not unimportant grounds for supposing that it is possible to hear Mass and go to confession at the same time; but hesitates to pronounce this view as probable (although he previously considered it so for internal reasons), because his modesty prevents him, for external reasons, from contradicting the eminent authorities who consider it improbable.

Friedhoff and Palasthy speak as if it were certain that a person cannot go to confession and at the same time fulfil his obligation to hear Mass. Both rely upon internal reasons, which St. Alphonsus knew perfectly well, and which certainly were familiar to those other theologians who, in spite of them, did not feel bound to adopt this opinion. These internal reasons, therefore, are not of such a nature as to justify the certainty with which Friedhoff and Palasthy speak.

(3) If we ask what the internal reasons are upon which the above-mentioned opinion is based, we are told that in order to hear Mass we ought to pray; but making a confession, though a religious act, is not a prayer; a penitent is enumerating his sins, not praying. Confession is, however, undoubtedly an act of worship, and very weighty authorities teach that it is enough to hear Mass with the intention of worshipping God. This argument then seems to prove nothing, as is admitted by St. Alphonsus and others, who maintain that a negative answer should be given to the question under discussion. They proceed therefore to say: Confession is certainly an act of worship, but not one that is compatible with hearing Mass; for the penitent does not act as one who sacrifices with the priest, but as one who acknowledges his sins: "he acts the part of the accused, not of one offering sacrifice with the priest" (Gury). Self-accusation has nothing to do with sacrifice: the accusation or the role of the accused does not pertain to the sacrifice; the recital of sins is not a thing pertaining to the sacrifice. The penitent, being engaged in enumerating his sins, is so distracted with regard to the Mass as hardly to give it a thought; he is absent in spirit, and therefore we cannot say in a moral sense that he was present at the holy Sacrifice. "It is lawful to do sacred and pious reading and to pray from a book or breviary; only those things that would draw the mind away from the Mass may not be done—for example, making confession or reading profane works." (Palasthy) Friedhoff uses similar language.

(4) Other moralists, amongst them theologians of repute, " haud parvi nominis theologi" (Kenrick, tract. 4, p. 2, n. 12), answer the question affirmatively. Edmund Voit, S.J.,1 who follows Lacroix, writes: "One who makes confession for a long time during Mass hears Mass, because he has the intention of hearing it, as I suppose; he is present in body because he confesses in the church; he assists morally because he is present in a human and religious manner; he can pay sufficient attention, and although perhaps he does not actually attend, he is nevertheless occupied in a pious action and is judged to offer worship to God with the celebrant and those present."— It would of course be possible to argue that not every actio pia can be regarded as compatible with hearing Mass, otherwise, as Cardinal Lugo points out, this would be applicable not only to confession, but also to attendance on the sick, etc. The only act of worship compatible with hearing Mass is one which has reference to the sacrifice. No sound answer can be given to this objection, but we must ask whether there is really no reference to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, when a person does not merely state what he has done amiss during a given period, but with contrite heart makes his confession to a priest as God's representative, and forms good and serious purposes of amendment in the sight of God.

(5) We cannot possibly adopt the opinion underlying the abovementioned doctrine, viz., that a Catholic confessing his sins to God and His representative with contrition, imploring grace and mercy, and purposing amendment, in reliance on the grace of Christ, whence all our strength proceeds, is accomplishing a religious act

1 Theologia moralis, Wirceburgi, 1769, pars secunda, n. 480. Cf. Busenbaum, Medulla theol. mor., lib. III. tract. III. cap. 1, dub. III. edit. Monasterii Westphaliae, 1659. that has no reference whatever to the Eucharistic sacrifice, and that in this respect may be placed on a level with the study of the inscriptions in the church, wilful distractions, or the reading of profane books. If we seriously consider the close connection between the unbloody renewal of the sacrifice of the Cross and the Sacrament in which sins committed after baptism are forgiven, we shall certainly arrive at the conclusion that a Catholic obeys the positive command to hear Mass on Sundays and holidays of obligation, if he makes his confession during this obligatory Mass, even though it should occupy the greater part of it. Is not the Eucharistic sacrifice κατ’ ἐξοχήν the sacrifice of reconciliation, and therefore also a sacrifice of participation in the grace of justification through the Sacrament of penance, which is certainly something more than a mere enumeration of sins?

We are told that a penitent confessing his sins appears as a sinner, not as one doing sacrifice, but do I not participate in the sacrifice of reconciliation on the altar, when I confess my sins with true contrition to Christ in the person of His representative, if I do so in the spirit of the penitent thief and with the intention of hearing Mass? if I implore mercy and make good resolutions for the sake of the most holy Sacrifice? if I bring my sacrifice of penance to unite it with that offered by our Saviour on the altar? If once it is admitted that we do nothing incompatible with hearing Mass if we confess our sins to God with true contrition, why should we not do so in sacramental confession, where it is to Him principaliter that we confess them? No one objects to our fixing our minds during the whole of Mass upon the Confiteor, Kyrie eleison, Agnus Dei, or some other prayer for forgiveness, and such a devotion is quite in keeping with hearing Holy Mass. In a genuine confession there is the same devotion, in all essentials, and therefore we believe that the commandment of the Church, requiring us to hear Mass on Sundays and holidays of obligation, is obeyed, if during that Mass a person makes his confession, having the intention to hear the Mass at which he is bodily present.

(6) In our opinion, those who take the contrary view lay far too little stress upon the penitent disposition, contrition for the sake of Christ, who was an offering for our sins. The sacramental confession is the outward expression of this contrition, and by overlooking this fact they come to regard confession as an enumeration of sins and a conversation with the confessor. Such an impression would probably be made upon any one reading the following passage in Antoine (l. c.): "One who makes confession during a notable portion of Mass does not satisfy the precept, for he lacks the attention required for Mass—namely, attention to God and the divine mysteries—which cannot be present while recounting and investigating sins and their circumstances and in conversation with the confessor." A similar impression is given by the comparison of confession during Mass with wilful distractions (Friedhoff), and with reading profane books (Palasthy), although in each case the comparison is made only by way of illustration to show the incompatibility of going to confession and of hearing Mass.

Gury 1 and others admit that a person obeys the commandment of the Church with regard to hearing Mass, if he spends his time during Mass in examining his conscience; and therefore we can not see why the same admission should not be made if any one in a spirit of contrition confesses the state of his conscience to the representative of Christ. We may ask, with Gobat, "Who will deny that one who confesses his sins to Christ satisfies the Mass?" When we confess to a priest as God's representative, we confess to God Himself.

1 Gury, l. c., n. 347: Those who examine their conscience during Mass in order to confess satisfy the precept. (7) We believe, therefore, that there are good internal grounds for our opinion; but what is to be said, if a priest doubts whether this view is to be regarded as justifiable? Even in this case it would be well to avoid the rigorism of Natalis Alexander, who would have a confessor inquire whether any penitent, entering the confessional during the last Mass, has already heard Mass, and if the answer is in the negative, he thinks the confessor should refuse to hear the confession until Mass is over—he might hear it then or on some other day.

St. Alphonsus is far more lenient. Although he thinks that it is impossible to go to confession and hear Mass at the same time, he sanctions confession during Mass in a case where the penitent would otherwise have to remain some time out of the state of grace, and he adopts the theory that servants who cannot go to confession at another time satisfy the requirements of the Church if they make their confession during Holy Mass. The Saint goes so far as to quote, without any adverse criticism, an opinion expressed by the Jesuit Lacroix, who says that we may even advise servants and others, who otherwise could not perhaps go to confession at all, to do so during the Mass that they are hearing. "But if confession would otherwise have to be omitted, as would often happen with maids and servants, it may be advised that it be made during Mass, because the will of the Church is presumed to be rather that Mass be heard in this way and confession be made than that Mass be heard more attentively and confession not be made."1—Josef Schweizer.

1 Lehmkuhl takes the same view, for he writes: "But if someone was fully absorbed in enumerating his sins during the principal part of the Mass, he indeed does not seem to have satisfied the precept; nevertheless, sometimes from this very fact arises a cause excusing him from hearing another Mass. Namely, if time for another Mass is unavailable, and thus a choice is given either to omit confession and hear Mass, or to omit Mass and make confession, the latter may safely be chosen by one who otherwise, since he needs reconciliation with God, would have to remain for some time in the state of sin, or for whom it would be too grave to remain long deprived of the Sacrament of Penance. Thus also Lacroix, I, number 676." Theol. moralis, 1901, I. n. 558.