Article II. On the Dispositions Required in the Subject of the Eucharist: 1. as to the Soul, 2. as to the Body

324. Principles. - I. For receiving the Sacrament of the Eucharist there is required the state of grace, at least prudently judged to be present. Otherwise a most grave sacrilege is committed. The reason is clear from the nature of the thing, and also from the words of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 11:28: But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of that Bread and drink of the Chalice. For he who eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord.

II. It is not sufficient that the state of grace be acquired by perfect contrition, but it is required that confession of mortal sins be premised and sacramental absolution be received, except in a case of necessity, namely either when there is lacking the supply of a Confessor, and Communion cannot be omitted without grave note or suspicion, or when a Priest must celebrate so that the people may assist at Mass on a feast day. - Trent, sess. 13, c. 7. - See St. Ligorius, n. 256 and following.

325. Questions. - QUESTION 1. When is the supply of a Confessor considered lacking?

Resp. It is considered lacking: 1. If no Confessor is present, and, the circumstances of weakness, age, business, distance, air, shortness of time, etc., having been considered, an absent one cannot be approached without grave difficulty.

2. If otherwise no Confessor is present except one ignorant of the language, or lacking jurisdiction, or one to whom you cannot confess without grave harm to yourself or another. Yet in these cases perfect contrition is required. But the supply of a Confessor is not considered lacking if the one to whom you are accustomed to confess is absent, but any approved one must be lacking. - St. Ligorius, n. 264.

But a cause excusing from confession for laymen occurs most rarely. Indeed it can more easily be present with respect to Priests; but they must certainly beware lest, deterred by a vain pretext or by shame and embarrassment, they imagine for themselves a chimerical impossibility.

QUESTION 2. What distance is required for the Priest to be considered lacking?

Resp. It cannot be rigorously determined, but depends on circumstances. Some require a distance of two leagues; others one league and a half or a quarter; others one league only. But besides the account of the journey, other reasons often press, for example infirmity or shortness of time. Thus a priest already about to celebrate can be excused from confession, even if the Confessor is 50 paces distant. - St. Ligorius, n. 264.

326. • QUESTION 3. Whether one who remembers a mortal sin which through inculpable forgetfulness he did not declare in confession is bound to confess it before Communion?

Resp. 1. Certainly no, if the penitent is already sitting at the sacred table, or there is present a grave cause of communicating, and he can confess again only with difficulty. The reason is that even if the precept of confession were present, it would not urge with so great an inconvenience. - Thus all.

Resp. 2. If the penitent can without inconvenience confess or omit Communion, it is controverted. More probably he is neither bound to confess nor to abstain from Communion, because the sin involuntarily omitted has certainly been remitted, although only indirectly; and therefore it in no way stands in the way of receiving Communion. Nor should you say that the Tridentine precept of confessing before Communion urges; for the penitent, since he has already been duly confessed and justified through the Sacrament of Penance, has been sufficiently proved even according to the mind of the Council of Trent. - St. Ligorius, n. 257, On the Eucharist. - Collet. - Pontas. - Gousset, n. 249, and others, against others who more commonly and not improbably held the opposite. - St. Ligorius inclines more to the former opinion, yet judges that the second is to be advised in practice ¹, provided that some cause does not advise otherwise. - Homo apostolicus, n. 23.

¹ Do not understand this as if in practice you ought to teach with the second opinion that in the case there is present an obligation to confess again before Communion; the meaning of St. Alphonsus here is, namely, that it is more advisable to confess again; especially because the memory of the omitted fault may impede the tranquil peace of conscience, and that devotion which is especially conducive to tasting the sweetness of this divine food and receiving abundant fruit.

327. • QUESTION 4. Whether a Priest who celebrated, or a layman who communicated conscious of mortal sin, without confession, on account of urgent necessity, is bound to confess AS SOON AS POSSIBLE?

Resp. 1. With respect to the Priest, affirmatively. For thus expressly the Tridentine Council, ibid., c. 7: But if, necessity urging, a Priest has celebrated without previous confession, let him confess AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

Resp. 2. With respect to the layman, no, more probably. The reason is that the Council of Trent speaks only of Priests, as is clear from the text. - Thus most commonly, says St. Ligorius, n. 268.

QUESTION 5. How is that precept imposed on Priests of confessing AS SOON AS POSSIBLE to be understood ²?

² You have two propositions concerning this matter condemned by Alexander VII. For the thirty-eighth is: The mandate of Trent made to a priest sacrificing from necessity with mortal sin, of confessing as soon as possible, is a counsel, not a precept; but the thirty-ninth: That particle, As soon as possible, is understood when the priest will confess in his own time.

Resp. More probably it suffices if the Priest confesses within three days; because since this precept is only ecclesiastical, the word as soon as possible can be understood morally, as it is understood in other human laws, where that word, or another similar one, by common interpretation is extended to the space of three days. - St. Ligorius, n. 266, and others. - Yet a Priest cannot celebrate again before he has been confessed, because he was not excused from confession except because of the instant necessity. Hence if the same necessity of celebrating urges on the following day, and he can confess ³, he cannot put off confession to another day.

³ But if the same necessity of celebrating urges on the following day, indeed also on the third thereafter, or even on the fourth, etc., day, and through those days also the supply of a Confessor is not present, the priest will be excused no otherwise than before.

328. • QUESTION 6. Whether a Priest celebrating after confession, in which he inculpably forgot some mortal sin, is bound to confess AS SOON AS POSSIBLE?

Resp. 1. No, if he remembers the sin after the celebration; because he did not celebrate conscious of that sin, as Trent speaks. - Thus commonly.

Resp. 2. No, more probably, even if he remembers the sin before the celebration; because since he has premised confession, although he forgot some grave sin, nevertheless he cannot be said to have celebrated conscious of mortal sin without previous confession. St. Ligorius, n. 267, says that this opinion is probable after Lacroix and others against Suarez, Lugo, etc.

QUESTION 7. Whether a Priest celebrating SACRILEGIOUSLY, when necessity is not urging, or if it is urging, when the supply of a Confessor is not lacking, is bound to confess AS SOON AS POSSIBLE?

Resp. No. The reason is that the precept of the Council of Trent is ordered only to striking fear into those who, under the pretext of necessity, defer confession, but not to those celebrating sacrilegiously, to whom a precept of this kind would very rarely be useful; for those who, with the divine precept contemned, dare to celebrate sacrilegiously, would certainly more easily contemn the precept of the Church. - Thus most commonly and more truly St. Ligorius, n. 266.

QUESTION 8. Whether affection for some venial sin impedes the whole fruit of Communion?

Resp. No. The reason is that the will can well experience pious movements toward God and the Sacrament, although it retains some lightly disordered affection for a particular thing; therefore one communicating with such an affection is not deprived of every fruit of the Eucharist. - St. Ligorius, n. 270, and others more commonly.

A twofold disposition is required on the part of the body, namely 1. fasting; 2. decency.