Article 7: Sacramental Satisfaction

1. NECESSITY. —The necessity of imposing a sacramental satisfaction or penance (satisfactio vel poenitentia) arises from the nature of the Sacrament.¹ However, since satisfaction is merely an integral part of Penance, absolution would be valid even if the confessor imposed no satisfaction or if the penitent failed to perform the penance imposed. Still, for the valid and worthy reception of the Sacrament it is essential that the penitent be willing to receive and perform the sacramental satisfaction imposed by the confessor.

¹ Conc. Trident., Sess. VI, c. 14; Sess. XIV, De Poenit., c. 8, can. 12-15. —St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, Suppl., qu. 12-15.—St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., l. VI, n. 506-530 (ed. Gaudé, III, 516).

2. DUTY OF THE CONFESSOR. —As a faithful "steward of the mysteries of God/' ² the confessor is in duty bound to impose upon every penitent a sacramental penance. Since this penance is intended as a satisfaction for the sins committed, as a remedy for the wounds of the soul, and as an antidote against future sins, it should be proportioned to the penitent's guilt and adapted to age, sex, profession, disposition, etc.³

² 1 Cor. IV, 1-2. SATISFACTION

³ Conc. Trident., Sess. XIV, Dt Poenit., c. 8; Sess. XXIV, cap. 8, De Reform. —Rit. Rom., tit. 3, c. 1, n. 18-21: "Finally, let him impose a salutary and suitable satisfaction, as spirit and prudence suggest, taking account of the state, condition, sex, and age, and likewise of the disposition of the penitents. Let him see that he does not impose the lightest penances for grave sins, lest, if he should connive at sins, he become a participant in the sins of others. Let him keep this before his eyes: that satisfaction be not only a remedy for a new life and a medicine for weakness, but also a chastisement for past sins. Therefore let him take care, insofar as can be done, to impose penances contrary to the sins: alms upon the avaricious, fasts or other afflictions of the flesh upon the lustful, offices of humility upon the proud, and practices of devotion upon the slothful. It will be most useful to advise those who confess more rarely or tardily, or who readily relapse into sins, to confess frequently—for example, once a month or on certain solemn days—and, if expedient, to receive Communion. Let confessors not apply monetary penances to themselves, nor ask or accept anything from penitents as a reward for their ministry. For occult sins, however grave, let them not impose a public penance." —Gury, Comp. Theol. Mor., II, n. 402: "The confessor is bound to impose suitable and salutary penances, both punitive and medicinal, namely penances proportioned in some manner to the number and gravity of the sins and also to the penitent’s powers and dispositions. The reason is evident from the nature of the matter, since sacramental satisfaction is ordered to the punishment of sins, which are greater or less, more or fewer, and also to preventing new faults."

3. OBLIGATION OF THE PENITENT. —The penitent is strictly obliged to perform the penance imposed, provided, of course, it be just and reasonable. ⁴ To go to confession with the express purpose of not accepting or not performing the penance imposed, would be to receive the Sacrament invalidly as well as unworthily.⁵

⁴ Cfr. Gury, op. cit., II, n. 409: "The penitent is altogether bound to accept and fulfill a reasonable penance sacramentally imposed, because acceptance of the penance pertains to the essence of the Sacrament and its fulfillment to the integrity of the Sacrament."

⁵ St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., 1. VI, n. 516: "It is doubted whether the penitent is bound to accept a just penance imposed by the confessor. The common and true opinion says that one sins who does not accept or does not will to fulfill the penance and wills to receive absolution. The reason is that, as Benedict XIV teaches, just as the confessor is bound to impose a just penance, so the penitent is bound to accept it."

If a penitent deems the appointed penance too severe, or unacceptable for some other reason, he may ask to have it commuted or consult another priest.⁶

⁶ St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., 1. VI, n. 516: "It is probable, however, that if the penance appears to the penitent graver than is just or too burdensome in relation to his weakness, then, if the confessor were unwilling to moderate it, he could at least depart without absolution and approach another confessor without grave fault. This, however, must be understood if that penance is truly unreasonable or unequal to the penitent’s weak powers. But if, on the contrary, the penance could easily be fulfilled by him and he were unwilling to accept it from mere sloth and wished to be absolved with a light penance, he does not seem able to be excused from grave sin; because, as Lugo well says, just as a priest would sin by imposing a light penance without just cause for grave faults, so the penitent would sin by wishing without cause to receive absolution with a penance lighter than is just."

Failure to perform a reasonable penance imposed for mortal sins and accepted in the confessional, is a mortal sin, unless the matter involved is small or some weighty reason diminishes the guilt.⁷

⁷ Gury, Comp. Theol. Mor., II, n. 409: "A penitent is bound under grave sin to perform a grave penance imposed for grave sins, because grave matter of itself binds under grave sin. So all teach. More probably, however, the penitent is bound only under venial sin to perform a light penance imposed for light faults, because light matter is not capable of a grave obligation."

A penitent is not free to substitute some other penance for the one imposed, but he may, for good reasons, ask in a subsequent confession to have his penance commuted either by the same or by a different confessor.⁸

⁸ Th. Slater, S.J., A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. II, p. 174. —Gury, Comp. Theol. Mor., II, n. 412: "Who can commute a penance? First, it can never be commuted by the penitent himself, not even for a better one, because a penance cannot be raised to the merit of sacramental satisfaction unless it was imposed by the minister of the Sacrament of Penance himself. Second, it can be commuted: (1) by the penitent’s own confessor, or by him who imposed it, because a legislator can change his own law; (2) by any other confessor approved to hear confessions, because any other confessor can be judge of the same cause if the penitent submits himself to his tribunal, for a successor in the same authority can do whatever his predecessor could do. But for the commutation to be made lawfully, a just cause is required, such as: (1) if the penance seems too difficult; (2) if it is foreseen that the penitent will not perform it because of excessive repugnance, frailty, forgetfulness, etc."

Besides conscientiously performing the penance imposed in confession, penitents are bound to atone for their sins by voluntary good works (prayer, fasting, almsgiving, humility, patience, resignation to the will of God, mortification, and self-denial). The duty of giving satisfaction in this wider sense implies a strenuous effort to neutralize the evil consequences of sin by making restitution of illgotten goods, repairing scandal, etc.⁹

⁹ Cfr. Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, p. 236; Th. H. Simar, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, 3rd ed., p. 361.

4. INDULGENCES. —Indulgences are an effective means of making satisfaction and intensifying penitential zeal.¹⁰ An indulgence is a remission of temporal punishments due to sin.¹¹ No one is bound to gain indulgences, but it is a very salutary practice to avail oneself of this privilege. The Tridentine Council "teaches and enjoins that the use of indulgences for the Christian people, most salutary and approved by the authority of sacred councils, is to be retained in the Church." ¹² To gain an indulgence one must be in the state of sanctifying grace and have the right intention (intentio lucrandi). The good works prescribed must be conscientiously performed.¹³ When confession and communion are prescribed for the gaining of a plenary indulgence, both conditions must be complied with, even though the conscience is not burdened with mortal sins.¹⁴

¹⁰ St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, SuppL, qu. 25-27. —St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., 1. VI, n. 531-534. — Gury, Comp. Theol. Mor., II, n. 834-853. —F. Beringer, Die Ablasse, 11th ed., Paderborn 1906. —A. M. Lepicier, Indulgences, New York 1906. —Pohle-Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. III, 2nd ed., pp. 232 sqq. —Chr. Pesch, Praelect. Dogmat., Vol. VII, 2nd ed., pp. 199 sqq. —P. Mocchegiani, Collectio Indulgentiarum, Quaracchi 1897.

¹¹ "An indulgence is the remission, granted by a legitimate minister outside the Sacrament of Penance through the application of the treasury of the Church, of temporal punishment owed to God for sins remitted as to guilt." (Gury, Comp. Theol. Mor., TI, n. 834).

¹² Conc. Trident., Sess. XXV, De Indulg.: "The use of indulgences is most salutary for the Christian people and approved by the authority of sacred councils."

¹³ St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., 1. VI, n. 533. —Gury, Comp. Theol. Mor., II, n. 837: "Four things are required in the subject for gaining indulgences: that he be baptized, because the Church’s treasury cannot be dispensed to unbelievers, as is evident, and that he not be excommunicated, because otherwise he would be deprived of the communion of spiritual goods; that he be subject to the one granting; that he fulfill the enjoined works within the prescribed time, because indulgences are granted under this condition; and that he be in the state of grace, at least when he performs the last prescribed work, because punishment is not remitted unless guilt has been remitted."

¹⁴ See the Constitutions of Benediet XIV, "Accepimus in civitate," 1746, and "Inter praeteritos," 1749. The confession may be made within eight days, and Communion received on the vigil of the day to which the indulgence is attached. Codex lur. Can., Can. 931, § 1. See also § 2 of same canon.

The so-called jubilee indulgence (iubilaeum mains, annus sanctus) differs from an ordinary plenary indulgence chiefly in this that the confessors enjoy larger faculties.¹⁵

¹⁵ H. Thurston, S.J., The Holy Year of Jubilee, London 1900; IDEM in the Cath. Encyclopedia, s. v.; P. Bastien, De lubilaeo Anni Sancti aliisque lubilaeis, Maredsous 1901.

In view of the fact that every indulgence presupposes a more than ordinary measure of penitence, faith, and worship, and that the gaining of indulgences usually leads to greater frequentation of the Sacraments, the moral effect of the Catholic doctrine of indulgences must be rated very high.¹⁶ Gaining an indulgence always involves contrition, penitence, and a firm purpose of amendment.¹⁷

¹⁶ See Linsenmann, Lehrbuch der Moraltheologie, p. 237.

¹⁷ E. Goller (Die papstliche Ponitentiarie von ihrem Ursprung bis eu ihrer Umgestaltung unter Pius V.t Vol. I, Rome 1907, pp. 213-242) shows that the concept of indulgentia plenaria is genetically contained in the most ancient penitential letters or confessionalia. He refutes the Protestant contention that the Church by indulgences meant to forgive the guilt rather than the punishment of sin and demonstrates that the remissio peccatorum or remissio culpae always depended on valid confession.

READINGS. —St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, 3a, Suppl., qu. 12- 15. —St. Alphonsus, Theologia Moralis, 1. VI, n. 506-530 (ed. Gaude, Vol. III, p. 516).—Pohle-Preuss, The Sacraments, Vol. III, pp. 217 sqq. —Th. Slater, S.J., A Manual of Moral Theology, Vol. II, pp. 171 sqq., 443 sqq.—Sabetti-Barrett, S.J., Compendium Theologiae Moralis, pp. 682 sqq., 1058 sqq. —Ad. Tanquerey, S.S., Synopsis Theologiae Moralis, Vol. I, pp. 124 sqq., 277 sqq. —M. J. O'Donnell, "Penance in the New Code," in the Irish Ecclesiastical Record, No. 601 (Jan. 1918), pp. 14-24.