Point I. On the Necessity of Integrity in General

469. I. All mortal sins committed after Baptism must be accused by divine law, insofar as it can morally be done.

This is evident: 1. from the very words of the institution of the Sacrament of Penance; for Christ the Lord says thus, John 20:22: Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. Hence thus: By these words Christ conferred judicial power concerning the remission of sins upon both the Apostles and their successors. But He would have conferred this power upon them uselessly unless all sins were to be declared to them individually. For a judge can in no way exercise such power when the case is unknown, nor discern whether sins are to be remitted or retained. Therefore, from the very institution of confession in the form of a judgment, there follows the strict obligation of declaring all mortal sins as to number and species.

This is evident: 2. from the words of Trent, sess. 14, ch. 5: The universal Church has always understood that the complete confession of sins was instituted by the Lord and is necessary by divine law for all who have fallen gravely after Baptism; because our Lord Jesus Christ, when about to ascend from earth to heaven, left Priests as His own vicars, as presidents and judges, to whom all the mortal crimes into which the faithful of Christ had fallen were to be brought, so that, by the power of the keys, they might pronounce the sentence of remission or retention of sins. For it is evident that Priests could not have exercised this judgment when the cause was unknown, if penitents had declared their sins only in general and not rather in species and individually. From these things it is gathered that all mortal sins of which penitents have consciousness after a diligent examination of themselves must be recounted in confession, even if they are most secret. - And canon 7 defined thus: If anyone says that in the Sacrament of Penance, for the remission of sins, it is not necessary by divine law to confess each and every mortal sin which is remembered after due and diligent consideration, even secret sins and those which are against the last two Precepts of the Decalogue, and the circumstances which change the species of sin, let him be anathema.

470. II. Material integrity is not always necessary for the validity and fruit of confession; for sometimes it is morally impossible, whether from inculpable forgetfulness or from other causes; but God does not command impossibilities. Therefore, etc. This is evident also from the Council of Trent, loc. cit., in these words: But the remaining sins which do not occur to one thinking diligently are understood to be included universally in the same confession; for these we faithfully say with the Prophet: FROM MY HIDDEN SINS CLEANSE ME.

III. For the integrity of confession, a diligent examination, according to the capacity of the penitent, is prerequired concerning sins committed since the last valid confession; for he who is bound to the end is also bound to the necessary means. - See the Appendix on the examination of conscience, below, no. 507.

471. Resolutions. - 1. In the confession of mortal sins, we are bound to accuse not only the generic species of sins but also the lowest species; for these are properly called species, and Trent requires the accusation of all species.

2. He who cannot disclose the lowest species must manifest the higher or generic species; for example, if someone, knowing that he sinned against chastity, does not remember the specific sin, he must say that he sinned gravely against chastity.

3. He who knows that he sinned mortally but is ignorant of, or does not remember, even the generic species of his sin must say in general that he sinned gravely, but does not remember of what sin he is guilty.

4. He who cannot remember the certain number is bound to accuse the more probable number, or that which approaches nearer to the truth, adding the word about; because where certainty is lacking, he ought to accuse that which is more likely.

5. He who cannot give even a likely total of the sins is bound to say whether he sinned frequently or rarely; about how many times in a month, in a week, in a day, etc.

6. The Confessor cannot exempt from the obligation of confessing integrally because of a great concourse of penitents, for example, on some more solemn feast day. This is evident from what has been said and also from Proposition 39 condemned by Innocent XI, which is as follows: It is lawful to absolve sacramentally those who have confessed only by halves because of a great concourse of penitents, such as, for example, can occur on the day of some great feast or indulgence.

7. A defect of sincerity concerning even one mortal sin which is omitted constitutes a grave sin, because the divine precept of confession is violated in a grave matter.

472. Questions. - QUESTION 1. What number is judged to be comprehended in the word ABOUT?

Reply. This cannot be determined by an altogether certain rule; nevertheless, not every excess, nor a notable deficiency, is comprehended, but only a moderate one, greater or less in proportion to the number expressed. Theologians commonly determine it thus: a moderate excess or deficiency relative to about five sins will add or subtract one unit on either side; relative to about ten, two; relative to twenty, three or four; relative to forty, four or five; relative to one hundred ¹, five or six.... And it will prudently be judged ², in the first case, that the penitent sinned four, five, or six times; in the second, eight, nine, ten, eleven, or twelve times; and resolve similarly concerning the others. - See St. Lig., no. 466.

¹ But when it is believed that the number of sins has increased to these limits, the Doctors aptly warn (see St. Alph., bk. 6, no. 466) that the state of the penitent can be known better by inquiring about falls by days, weeks, months, etc., than if the Confessor should wish to form a judgment concerning the number, which will easily be fallacious.

² The Confessor would judge thus prudently when it was established that penitents use these calculations accurately. But penitents generally do not know those rules, and in an uncertain matter more often answer rashly. Otherwise, moreover, the Confessor cannot undertake the wearisome labor of always inquiring whether the penitent answers according to those rules. Therefore, the foregoing admonition of St. Alphonsus (bk. 6, no. 466) must be kept before the eyes, namely, lest the Confessor think that some more exact judgment is to be sought or hoped for in these circumstances.

473. QUESTION 2. Must a notable excess be declared afterward if it is discovered after confession?

Reply. Affirmative. The reason is plain from what has been said; for since a notable excess is not comprehended in the number declared with the word about, the penitent does not satisfy the obligation of confession as regards that excess. Therefore.... - Thus all.

QUESTION 3. If someone has erred notably by exaggerating the number, must he afterward declare this also in confession?

Reply. Negative, if in good faith he expressed that notably larger number. The reason is that he fully and integrally satisfied the obligation of confession; for the true number was comprehended in the larger one, and therefore remitted. - Reuter, no. 313, and others commonly.

474. QUESTION 4. Is it always a mortal sin to lie in confession?

Reply. Of itself, a mortal sin is committed only when the lie concerns matter necessary for confession concealed without a just cause, or grave matter falsely supposed, namely, by accusing oneself of a grave sin not committed.

Therefore a lie concerning matters not pertaining to the confession or conscience of the penitent is not of itself mortal; because, as is supposed, it is neither gravely harmful to the penitent nor gravely injurious to the Sacrament, since it is not referred to it. - Thus commonly with St. Lig., Homo Apostolicus, no. 28; Billuart, against the few who say that every lie in confession is mortal.

475. QUESTION 5. Does it injure the integrity of confession if someone accuses himself of venial sins to his ordinary Confessor, but of mortal sins to another?

Reply 1. Negative, speaking of itself, provided he never receives absolution without having manifested all mortal sins to one Confessor and being absolved by the same. The reason is that the confession which embraces all mortal sins is integral, since venial sins need not necessarily be accused.

Reply 2. In practice, however, attention must be given to the circumstances of penitents and to the motives by which they are led. For those who sometimes confess graver sins to an unknown Confessor but submit lighter ones to their ordinary Confessor are not to be condemned if, from the shame with which they would be suffused before a Confessor known to them familiarly, they would expose themselves to the danger of confessing sacrilegiously ³. - St. Lig., no. 474.

³ Therefore, the Confessor should never inquire curiously about this, and much less vex with questions a penitent perhaps attempting to conceal it; nor, if he knows, should he show that it displeases him, but rather that he approves the use of the liberty which the Church most amply permits when she provides the faithful access to several confessors.

476. QUESTION 8. Does it injure integrity if someone feigns another voice so that he is not recognized by the Confessor?

Reply. Negative, of itself; for provided that he discloses all mortal sins, he makes an integral confession. Nor is it necessary that he be known by name to the Confessor; for it suffices that the Confessor intend to absolve the sinner who is present: but the intention of the Confessor is of itself always determined toward the penitent who is present. - Lacroix, De Sacramentis in Genere, no. 68.