CHAPTER II: ON THE MATTER OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

1339. - As in the other Sacraments, so in the Sacrament of Penance there is a twofold matter, one remote, but the other proximate.

The remote matter is all sins committed after Baptism; which are called the matter about which, because absolution is concerned with destroying them. But it is either necessary, or merely sufficient and free.

The necessary remote matter is all mortal sins committed after Baptism, and never yet directly remitted by the power of the keys; because by divine precept sins of this kind are to be subjected to the keys. - But sufficient and free matter is all venial sins, and all sins, whether mortal or venial, already otherwise duly subjected to the keys. It is called sufficient, because any sins, even the least, can be the object of sacramental pardon. But it is called free, because there is no precept of subjecting them to the keys. Concerning these things there is proof from the perpetual practice and tradition of the Church, and also from the definition of Trent.²

But the proximate matter of the Sacrament of Penance is the three acts of the penitent, namely contrition, confession, and satisfaction, which are called as it were the matter of this Sacrament, because they are in the place of the sensible matter which in the other Sacraments is subjected to the form; for through these acts sins are proposed to be destroyed by the words of the form. This is clear especially from Trent.¹

1340. Questions. - Query 1° Are sins already duly confessed and remitted through absolution sufficient matter of the Sacrament of Penance?

Resp. Affirmatively. This is certain among all, says St. Alphonsus.²

The reason is, 1° because a sin, although remitted, is always a sin committed; and just as contrition for the same sin can be repeated with fruit, so also confession; and it happens only per accidens that the sin, as already remitted, is not remitted, though nevertheless per se, as committed, it is capable of remission. - Nor is it an obstacle that then the Sacrament does not delete this sin; for it suffices that it have the effect in first act, namely that it bestow grace destructive of sin, although per accidens in second act it does not delete the sin, as happens when someone approaches the Sacrament already perfectly contrite. For in each case absolution has the same force, namely an increase of grace, remission of punishment, etc.; and this grace, or increase of justice, can truly be called justification, just as an increase of heat is called heating, as Sylvius says.

2° Because a sentence already rendered can be confirmed for greater security, and greater consolation and quiet of soul, as is sometimes wont to be done in civil matters; and if perhaps the sin submitted to the keys has not yet been remitted, then it will be able to be remitted.

3° It is clear also from the Declaration of Benedict XI, in the Canon Law:³ "Although," he says, "it is not of necessity to confess the same sins again, nevertheless ... that the Confession of the same sins be repeated, we judge salutary." It is clear besides from the constant practice of the faithful, with the Church approving.

Query 2° Is an adult to be baptized conditionally, in doubt concerning the preceding Baptism, bound to confess sins already accused?

Resp. Negatively. The reason is that those sins have already been remitted through the Sacrament of Penance, if the prior Baptism was valid; but if it was not valid, they are not matter of Confession, and they will be remitted through the second Baptism. - Reuter.⁴

Query 3° Is the aforesaid adult bound to accuse sins not yet confessed, or committed after the last Confession?

Resp. Affirmatively, as is clear from what has been said n. 1264. IV. 2), and from Resp. S. Inq. p. LIX. related. The reason is that all obligations which are joined by some nexus with an act certainly performed, and which is not established to be null, remain in their force. Wherefore, since after Baptism there remains in the Church no other Sacrament by which sinners can be reconciled to God, they neither ought nor can be sent away freed from this obligation, who certainly have received Baptism, concerning whose valid collation only doubt is present.

Query 4° Must an adult who is to be baptized and absolved conditionally first be baptized or absolved?

Resp. From the Resp. S. Inq. in the preceding question 3°, he ought first to be baptized conditionally, and then to be absolved under condition. Yet it is expedient to premise Confession before Baptism for the better disposition of the one to be baptized, but to confer absolution immediately after Baptism. (6) p. 414.

Query 5° Is a sin accused only in general sometimes sufficient matter of the Sacrament of Penance, e.g. if someone says: I ACCUSE MYSELF OF ALL MY SINS?

Resp. 1° Affirmatively, certainly in a case of necessity, or when the penitent, e.g. one at the point of death, cannot accuse any sin in species, even generically. - Thus most commonly with St. Thomas. - But I think the case of moral impossibility is to be likened to the case of necessity, when a sufficient cause is present, on account of which the penitent is not to be sent away without absolution. Such a case would be given if the confessor, as not rarely happens, wastes oil and labor while he tries in vain to induce an untaught person, or one dull from old age, or a pious person not having any certain venial sin, and not absolved from them for a rather notable time, to declare some certain venial sin concerning which they sufficiently grieve, or a mortal sin already confessed. - A general accusation also suffices, when there is question of a penitent whose sins already confessed are sufficiently known to the confessor.¹

Resp. 2° Negatively, at least as to liceity, since Doctors dispute concerning the sufficiency of such accusation for the validity of the Sacrament outside the cases under 1°, and because inconveniences arise from it.²

Query 6° If the penitent offers only doubtful sufficient matter, is the confessor bound to inquire about the past life, so that he can absolve?

Resp. 1° Affirmatively, if he wishes to absolve, because otherwise the Sacrament would be exposed to danger of nullity. Except if a case occurs in which the penitent can be absolved conditionally, concerning which below.

Resp. 2° Negatively, if he does not wish to absolve, but to send the penitent away with only a blessing; because the penitent who does not bring matter certainly sufficient has no right to absolution. - Likewise, if the penitent seems to have doubtful sorrow concerning only venial sins, ordinarily the confessor is not bound to use great diligence to move him to sorrow, although he does this much better.¹ - But the contrary must be said if there is question of doubtful mortals, on account of danger to the penitent.

But the confessor sending away the penitent with only a blessing is not always bound to procure efficaciously that the penitent himself understand this well. For in fact certain causes sometimes demand that with certain persons, either very ignorant, or scrupulous, or ostentatious of piety, one proceed in this or a similar manner: "You will recite, therefore, three Hail Marys; elicit an act of contrition, and may God bless you. The blessing of God almighty," etc.

Query 7° Must a penitent be necessarily absolved who does not bring necessary matter?

Resp. Negatively per se, if the penitent does not ask for absolution; but even without absolution he can be permitted to receive Holy Communion; because, since he is in the state of grace, the Sacrament of Penance is not required for disposing him to that. Yet ordinarily it is expedient to absolve such a person, if he has confessed sufficient matter, concerning which he sufficiently grieves, so that he may receive both an increase of sanctifying grace and sacramental graces, and an easier remission of venial sins and punishments, etc.

But if he has not received the Sacrament for a notable time, or if he needs special helps, e.g. for overcoming temptations, or if the penitent himself, offering, as above, sufficient matter and being disposed, desires or asks it, he must be absolved.¹

1341. Resolves. - 1° Sufficient and licit matter of Confession is venial sins, or mortal sins otherwise confessed, according to their own species, even generic, prescinding from number and from any circumstances whatever. The reason is that thus there is had Confession of a sin, and indeed of a determinate sin, at least of one in species; nor is there an obligation of adding the number of venial sins, or of mortal sins already remitted.¹

2° If someone accuses himself of no sin in particular, and says, e.g. I know nothing, except that I must often have sinned like other men, he should be examined as children are wont to be examined. If nothing can be elicited from the last Confession, let him be asked about his past life, ... whether he ever lied in his life ... whether he ever offended his parents, or was angry, or disparaged his neighbor, etc., etc.

3° With little women, devout women, and others of this sort, who confess only confusedly and about very light things, care must be taken that they add some fault from their past life in species, at least generically. Then, however, you will try to excite them to sorrow and purpose, and, having absolved them, you will dismiss them in peace.

4° For greater security and for perceiving the fruit more surely, penitents are to be induced so that, besides doubtful sins or even daily light sins, they always join from sins already confessed at least generically some other certain sin, concerning which they grieve more vehemently, lest perhaps the Sacrament be exposed to danger of frustration. But if the accusation of some mortal sin already confessed cannot prudently be obtained, then it will suffice if the penitent accuses himself of some venial sins, at least insofar as he has committed them innumerable times in his life, the confessor leading in this or a similar manner: "Now you accuse yourself of all sins committed in the time before this, i.e. of all disobediences, lies, murmurings, etc."

5° But penitents who observe the aforesaid practice are to be admonished that they not subject again to the keys a sin of past life only from a certain custom, especially if that sin is light; because there is fear lest they do not grieve sufficiently, and so do not attain the purpose of providing for the validity and fruit of the Sacrament.²