Case XXXIII: Shortening of Confession to Save a Penitent’s Reputation

The Confession of Cajus is being so protracted that bystanders must come to the conclusion that he has committed many sins of a complicated nature. To save him from this danger to his good name the confessor, Father Levis, tells Cajus: “You have now confessed enough sins; make the intention that all your other sins be included in this Confession, awaken contrition and good resolution, and I will now give you absolution, as people may otherwise find your long stay here suspicious.” What is to be said about this view and practise of Father Levis? How should the penitent have been dealt with?

1. Without any doubt whatever Father Levis’s views and practise are lax, erroneous and detrimental. He imagines, of course, that he is taking this course upon a right principle, but he applies the same wrongly. It is true that defamation before others, to which the material integrity of the Confession would expose a penitent, is sufficient reason in order to content one’s self, hic et nunc, with the required formal integrity, reserving obligation and intention to confess later, in the following Confession, any grievous sins not now confessed. There is presumed also the necessity not to postpone the Confession altogether. (St. Alphonsus Theolog. Mor. 1. VI. 484, 485.) As an example, let us suppose the case that a sick man who has confessed for the reception of holy Viaticum, has made a sacrilegious Confession, and then asks the priest who brings the holy Viaticum, to hear his Confession once more, intending to make this a General Confession, that would take very long. To prevent unavoidable injury to the good name of the penitent, the confessor should in this case listen to a few sins, and give absolution after admonishing the sick man to attend to the completion of his Confession later on pro posse.

This correct doctrine and prudent practise Father Levis applies in a lax, erroneous, and pernicious way. St. Alphonsus says (/. c. n. 595): Nor can an exception (from material integrity) be admitted if, because of the length of the confession, others might easily suspect that the penitent was burdened with many sins.

The opposite view carried out consistently would frustrate to a great extent the Divine command of completeness of Confession, for the reason especially, that Father Levis neither acknowledged nor urged the obligation to make up the deficiency in the following Confession, and thus just the greatest and most careless of sinners would comply least to the Divine command. There would, furthermore, be no fixed rule at what moment the confessor might stop a confession of sins, for the duration of Confessions differs greatly, and one cannot say just at what moment a just suspicion of bystanders might begin to be excited. Again, such practise would violate seriously the most important office of the confessor, the one of physician of souls, also of teacher and judge, and often and easily it might occur that just such sins would not be confessed on account of which the confessor would refuse absolution, or would give it only upon certain conditions, or which at least would require earnest exhortation and advice. Penitents might even with intention reserve such sins for the end of their Confession, hoping of being dispensed from their mention. Finally, this practise would promote in many penitents carelessness in sinning.

It will, therefore, not be permissible to eliminate for Cajus a danger to his good name at the cost of the necessary completeness of Confession. But may and should there be no consideration of a danger to good reputation under such circumstances? Yes, there should be, in as far as the necessary completeness of Confession may be preserved; and this may be done in two ways: either by curtailing the Confession, on part of penitent and confessor, in all not essential things. Or, the Confession might be divided by directing the penitent, and stating the reason for it, to retire for a little while and then return at a suitable moment, to complete the Confession or to receive instructions and advice. Indeed, one might in such case, the necessary completeness of Confession presumed, for greater security grant absolution immediately, with the intention afterwards, as explained, to supplement what the office of physician of souls directs in this case, for this is the duty of the confessor no less than solicitude for material completeness of a Confession, and certainly belongs to the salutary completeness of the Sacrament of Penance. In conclusion it should be kept in view for the guidance of confessors that it is, first of all, necessary to do all that which the Sacrament requires and which is necessary and salutary for the welfare of the penitent’s soul, and only then discretion and charity, in everything that will facilitate the reception of the Sacrament of Penance, may claim consideration, to avoid and eliminate anything that would make it distasteful and difficult. J. P. Arnold, C.SS.R.