Case XXXIV: Perfect Contrition

(1) Is perfect contrition combined with the resolution to confess, only in case of necessity a valid substitute for the Sacrament of Penance?

(2) Must the resolution to confess, the votum Sacramenti, be expressly joined to the act of contrition, to make the contritio efface mortal sin?

(3) Must the resolution to confess, joined to perfect contrition, include the intention of one going to Confession as soon as possible?

Those who have searched theological handbooks and commentaries on the Catechism for information about perfect contrition will not have found uniform nor precise and plain answers to these three questions. And yet it is obvious that just about these three questions there should be no doubt whatsoever.

Ad. 1. It is taught generally that perfect contrition effaces mortal sin in case of necessity; i. e., in the case that some one is in the danger of death and a priest not there to whom he might confess. Is this correct? Is the efficacy of perfect contrition restricted to the case of necessity? The Church teaches otherwise. The Council of Trent speaks not of such case of necessity, but teaches generally that (sess. XIV., c. 4) the contrition perfected by charity reconciles man again with God before this Sacrament (namely, Penance) is actually received. Therefore, in all cases, whether there is danger of death or not, at all times, and in all situations of human life, those in mortal sin may regain through perfect contrition the state of grace even before Confession. But how about the votum sacramenti, the resolution to confess?

Ad. 2. The Tridentine teaches (l. c.) that without this votum Sacramenti the contritio has no such power to efface sin. But does the Tridentine require that this votum be expressly made (explicite), or is it sufficient if the votum is implicite included in the contrition? According to the literal meaning of the Tridentine the latter suffices. The holy Synod teaches . . . nevertheless, that the reconciliation itself is not to be ascribed to contrition itself without the desire for the Sacrament, which is included in it. To this St. Alphonsus remarks in his Theologia Moralis, in Tract. de poenit. cap. 1, n. 437, de contrit: what is included in another thing is implicit, not explicit. That a votum confessionis be made expressly and explicite in awakening perfect contrition, is, according to the opinion of St. Alphonsus, not required for the reason also: because for him who has knowledge of confession it is not necessary that, while making an act of contrition, he remember confession; it suffices that he not exclude it.

Every Christian, however, has this notitia confessionis, and perfect contrition, therefore, suffices for the forgiveness of mortal sin, even if there is no explicit thought of confessing. Perfect contrition would lose its power of effacing mortal sin only then if the sinner had the explicit intention not to confess his sin, but to content himself with an act of perfect contrition. For this reason we hold with Lehmkuhl (Theol. Mor. tom. II, n. 279): that desire for the Sacrament suffices which exists by the very fact that someone elicits an act of perfect contrition or charity. And this indicates the answer to our third question.

Ad. 3. We answer in the words of Lehmkuhl, /. c.: The desire for the Sacrament does not necessarily contain the resolution to receive it as soon as possible. What does it really mean: to go to Confession as soon as possible? Can this not be done almost any day, or at least every Saturday or Sunday, by many of those who commit mortal sins?

Were this propositum required with the act of perfect contrition, then notwithstanding perfect contrition many would remain in mortal sin, because they do not desire to confess as soon as possible. If Lehmkuhl’s dictum contains the Church’s teaching, then there can be no doubt that perfect contrition will efface the mortal sins even of a Christian who confesses only once a year, in compliance with the ecclesiastical precept, even though he may commit these sins almost a year before Confession, but is resolved to confess these sins when going to Confession next Easter time. It will not do, therefore, to tell people that they must go to Confession immediately upon committing mortal sin, it will be more correct to tell them, in sermons and instructions, that if someone has committed mortal sin, he should not hesitate to awaken perfect contrition, and through perfect contrition he will regain the state of grace; that it will be necessary, nevertheless, to confess this sin when next, going to Confession. This is ecclesiastically correct and it suffices for the Christian who has had the misfortune to sin grievously. Nor is it particularly difficult for a well-disposed Christian, who prays for this grace, to make an act of perfect contrition.

Whether, notwithstanding all this, an early Confession should not be advised, after mortal sin has been committed, is quite another matter. In praxi the priest will often have to advise early Confession, because one or the other may not be capable of a contritio and may content himself with an attritio, which only cleanses from grievous sins in connection with absolution.

Dr. Spath.