point — Gury-Ballerini, Compendium of Moral Theology (8th ed., 1884)
Point IV. On Forgotten Sins
- Sins omitted through inculpable forgetfulness must be accused if they return to the memory of the penitent 1. For by divine precept all sins committed after Baptism must be declared in sacramental confession; nor can present forgetfulness excuse from so great an obligation even for the future. This is established from Proposition 11 condemned by Alexander VII, to be reported below at no. 497.
1 This must be understood, as is evident of itself, with regard to necessary matter of confession, namely, sins certainly grave.
- Questions. - QUESTION 1. Must sins omitted through forgetfulness or another just cause be accused AS SOON AS POSSIBLE?
Reply. More probably, negative. For an obligation of this kind is to be understood morally, especially since these sins have already been blotted out and consequently there is no danger to the soul in delay. - Thus more commonly. - Sporer; Laymann; etc.
Indeed, according to several grave Theologians, the penitent can probably defer the confession of these sins until he is again bound to confess by virtue of another obligation. Thus it could be deferred for several months and even until the time of annual confession. - Thus Bonacina, disp. 5, q. 5, sect. 2, point 4, no. 32. Nevertheless, no other confession can intervene while those sins are omitted. The reason is that it pertains to the integrity of confession to declare in the present accusation all mortal sins not yet accused which occur to the memory, or of which one has consciousness, as Trent says, sess. 14, ch. 5. Moreover, according to Suarez, De Poenit., disp. 22, sect. 1, no. 1: Those sins are in the present consciousness which, having been committed after Baptism, have not been duly subjected to the keys through another confession 2.
2 In fact, it does not appear whether the words of Suarez pertain here. For he gives as the reason (ibid., no. 6), with St. Thomas, that one sin cannot be remitted without another. But here the question concerns sins already remitted.
QUESTION 2. Must sins omitted through forgetfulness be accused before Communion if they first occur to the mind?
Reply. More probably, negative, even if the penitent can confess without inconvenience. - Recall what was said in the Treatise on the Eucharist, no. 326.
QUESTION 3. Is a penitent who remembers a forgotten sin, but cannot (or does not wish to) confess, bound to elicit an act of contrition before Communion?
Reply. Negative, with St. Lig., no. 257; Lugo, De Eucharistia, disp. 14, no. 122; and with others commonly against certain others. The reason is that no foundation appears for why this contrition should be required. For it is not required by precept, because this is nowhere found prescribed; nor from a necessity of purification, because the sin has already been indirectly blotted out through the preceding confession and consequently does not need remission.
- QUESTION 4. Must a penitent who accuses a grave sin omitted in the preceding confession through forgetfulness or another legitimate cause, and already indirectly remitted, necessarily be absolved again?
Reply. Affirmative, with the most common opinion. The reason is that by the institution of Christ all mortal sins must be subjected to the keys so that they may be directly remitted. For although they have already been remitted, they were nevertheless not remitted by virtue of the Sacrament, or by virtue of absolution, but only by virtue of the grace infused through the sacrament, and concomitantly with the other sins. - Sporer, no. 627; Collat. Andeg., 35, q. 3; etc., against the few who are not to be heard.
Although the Confessor can omit absolution with penitents who are accustomed to return to the same Confessor, since they will be directly absolved in another confession, it is nevertheless better to impart absolution to all when this can easily be done, for the consolation and tranquility of soul of the penitent, and also on account of the fruit to be received from the Sacrament. Add the danger that the penitent may no longer be able to approach the same Confessor.