Chapter III. On the Form of the Sacrament of Penance

A twofold form of the Sacrament of Penance can be distinguished: one essential for the validity of the Sacrament, and the other merely preceptive or rubrical.

425. • I. The essential form consists in the words: I absolve thee from thy sins. This is established from the Council of Trent, sess. 14, ch. 3, where it says:

The Holy Synod teaches that the form of the Sacrament of Penance, in which its force principally consists, is placed in those words of the Minister: I ABSOLVE THEE, etc.; to which, according to the custom of holy Church, certain prayers are laudably added.

426. • II. The preceptive or rubrical form consists in those prayers which precede or follow the essential form. Thus it is contained in the Roman Ritual: May almighty God have mercy on thee and, thy sins having been forgiven, bring thee to everlasting life. Amen.

May the almighty and merciful Lord grant thee indulgence, absolution, and remission of thy sins. Amen.

May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve thee; and I, by His authority, absolve thee from every bond of excommunication (suspension) and interdict, insofar as I am able and thou hast need; then ¹: I absolve thee from thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

¹ This word, then, is marked in different type even in the Ritual; and this seems to indicate that it pertains not to those things which the priest must pronounce, but merely to designating their order.

And indeed, that this order be observed is required by the most well-known law which prescribes that penitents be absolved first from censures and afterward from sins.

There have nevertheless been some who thought that the contrary must be held by force of a certain Response of the S. Congregation of Rites. For when the doubt had been proposed, Whether in the form of absolution, before the words - I absolve thee from thy sins - the word - THEN - is to be said or omitted; the S. Congregation replied on February 27, 1847: Let the Decree in the Veronese case of March 11, 1837, be given. But this Decree is of the following kind: Nothing is to be changed. In order for anyone to conclude from this response that this word is to be pronounced by the absolving priest, he must certainly presuppose that the words Nothing is to be changed are synonymous with the words is to be said in the petition.

May the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of all the Saints, and whatever good thou shalt have done and evil thou shalt have endured, be unto thee for the remission of sins, an increase of grace, and the reward of everlasting life. Amen.

The hand is raised from the word Indulgence as far as the words Passion of the Lord; and the sign of the cross is made over the penitent while saying: In the name of the Father.... The word suspension is omitted for laymen. Moreover, it is a pious custom for the Confessor, before the confession, while blessing the penitent, to say: May the Lord be in thy heart and upon thy lips, that thou mayest rightly confess all thy sins, or to recite a similar prayer. - But this does not fall under obligation.

In practice the prayers May He have mercy and Indulgence can easily be omitted, as is established from the Roman Ritual. Indeed, according to the more common opinion, they can always be omitted without sin. They say the same also concerning the prayers which follow absolution; but since, according to a probable opinion, these elevate the good works of the penitent to the merit of sacramental satisfaction, it is fitting that they be omitted as rarely as possible. - But the words May our Lord... do not appear capable of being omitted without venial fault unless necessity presses, since the Roman Ritual says: In more frequent confessions it will suffice to say: May our Lord... as far as Passion of the Lord..., exclusively. - S. Congr. of Rites, February 27, 1847.

427. Questions. - QUESTION 1. Is absolution valid if the Priest says only: I ABSOLVE; or, I ABSOLVE FROM THY SINS; or, I ABSOLVE THEE?

Reply to the first. Negative. The reason is that the word I absolve alone conveys no determinate sense and falls upon no subject; therefore, it cannot be a valid form.

Reply to the second. Affirmative, more probably, as it seems, at least speculatively. The reason is that by these words the subject is sufficiently determined; for the pronoun thee is sufficiently expressed in the word thy. - Thus Lugo, disp. 13, no. 26. - St. Lig., no. 430, as more probable, etc. Not a few deny it, however, and their opinion, as St. Liguori says (ibid.), must be followed as the safer.

Reply to the third. Affirmative, more probably, with the common opinion. The reason is that the whole effect of the Sacrament is expressed in these words, without the addition from thy sins. - Furthermore, this also appears to be established from the Catechism of the Council of Trent, On the Sacrament of Penance, no. 14, where it says only: But the form is: I ABSOLVE THEE. And nothing else is added there. - Roncaglia, Lugo, etc. - Nevertheless, some with Lacroix deny this not improbably, and in practice this opinion must be followed.

QUESTION 2. Is the deprecatory form valid; for example, May God absolve thee?

Reply. Negative, at least more probably, with St. Lig., no. 430; Lacroix, no. 639; and very commonly with others. The reason is that the Sacrament of Penance was instituted after the manner of a judgment; accordingly, Christ willed that the Priest, as judge, should render a sentence and express it. Therefore, sins must be remitted by the Priest himself as the minister of Christ; therefore, it does not suffice that he beseech God to remit them. Therefore, etc. Moreover, from the Council of Florence, the indicative form alone is prescribed as the true form of the Sacrament of Penance.

428. • QUESTION 3. Are the raising of the hand and the formation of the sign of the cross necessary in imparting absolution?

Reply 1. It is certain that they are not required for the validity of the Sacrament, because they pertain neither to the matter nor to the form. This is established from the Councils of Florence and Trent, and also from the unanimous consent of Theologians, at least after the Council of Trent.

Reply 2. Nor are they required under mortal sin for liceity, according to the common opinion against a few, because it is only a Rubric which does not appear grave. Indeed, several grave authors assert that this can be omitted without sin; thus Busembaum, related and implicitly approved by St. Lig., no. 425, and many others. At least the raising of the hand can be omitted without sin while the prayers which precede formal absolution are being recited.

QUESTION 4. Can a Priest validly absolve several persons with one form, saying: I ABSOLVE YOU FROM YOUR SINS?

Reply. Affirmative, because all things required for validity are found. And this can also be done licitly in a case of necessity, for example, in shipwreck, before battle, or in the battle itself, etc.; and such absolution would be multiple, not formally indeed, but virtually and equivalently, and there would be as many Sacraments as there were persons who were disposed through some confession and sufficient sorrow. - Lacroix, no. 645, and all others.

429. • QUESTION 5. What presence of the penitent is regarded as moral with respect to absolution?

Reply. It must be such that the words I absolve thee, according to the moral estimation of men, are judged to fall upon the penitent; but that presence is regarded as sufficiently moral within which men can and are accustomed to speak with an ordinary voice, although a louder one. Many extend it to twenty paces, especially if the penitent is not outside the sight of the Confessor. In necessity the penitent can and must be absolved whenever he is perceived by some sense. - Thus commonly with St. Lig., no. 429.

Hence: 1. one is to be absolved who is seen to fall from a roof, to fall into a river, or to be submerged in the sea, at least if he is not far distant from the Confessor. 2. If the Confessor, because of danger of infection or for another cause, cannot enter the room of a sick person, he must absolve him from the doorway. 3. If a penitent should withdraw from the Confessor without yet having been absolved, thinking himself absolved, he would have to be absolved if he were seen at a short distance or were certainly known to be present within a nearby crowd; nevertheless, he would have to be recalled if this could conveniently be done.

430. • QUESTION 6. By the words, I ABSOLVE THEE FROM THY SINS, can the Confessor validly absolve the penitent both from censures and from sins?

Reply. Affirmative, because these words, I absolve thee from thy sins, involve absolution from every bond arising from sins; and nothing prevents the Confessor from directing his intention toward absolution both from sins and from censures. - Thus commonly. - St. Lig., no. 430. - Lacroix, no. 1567, etc.

QUESTION 7. Is absolution valid if the Confessor absolves from sins before absolving from censures?

Reply. Affirmative, because a censure does not impede the validity of the Sacrament, but only its licit reception or administration. He would sin gravely, however, who absolved from sins before absolving from censures, because he would act against a grave prohibition of the Church. Except if excommunications are not at issue, but only suspensions and interdicts, because these censures do not of themselves deprive one of the reception of the Sacrament of Penance. - St. Lig., no. 430. - Lacroix and others commonly.

QUESTION 8. Is a stole required for the Sacrament of Penance?

Reply. Although the Rubric of the Ritual appears to be directive and not preceptive, nevertheless the Sacred Congregation of Rites commands the use of the stole for hearing confessions in a Church (September 11, 1847), in the Paduan case.