CHAPTER III: ON THE FORM OF THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE

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

1342. - I. The essential form consists in the words: I absolve thee from thy sins. This is clear from Trent.¹

II. The preceptive or rubrical form consists in those prayers which precede or follow the essential form. But thus it is had in the Roman Ritual: May Almighty God have mercy on thee, and, thy sins having been forgiven, bring thee to eternal 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 needest; then: I absolve thee from thy sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

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

The right hand is raised toward the penitent from the word Indulgence up to the word 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 lay persons. But there is a pious custom that the confessor before Confession, while blessing the penitent, say: May the Lord be in thy heart and on thy lips, that thou mayest rightly confess all thy sins, or recite a similar prayer.

In practice the prayers May Almighty God have mercy and May the almighty and merciful Lord grant thee indulgence can easily be omitted, as is clear from the Roman Ritual. Indeed according to the more common opinion they can always be omitted without sin. The same also is said concerning the prayers which follow absolution; but since, according to the probable opinion, these elevate the good works of the penitent unto the merit of sacramental satisfaction, it is fitting that they be omitted as rarely as possible. - But the words May our Lord Jesus Christ ... cannot be omitted without venial fault, unless necessity urges, since the Roman Ritual says: "In more frequent Confessions it will be enough to say: May our Lord ... up to the Passion of the Lord ... exclusively." - S. C. R.¹ and Conf. dir. per le C. 15. n. 2.

1343. Questions. - Query 1° Is absolution valid if the priest says only: I ABSOLVE; or I ABSOLVE FROM THY SINS; or I ABSOLVE THEE?

Resp. to the 1st. Negatively. The reason is that the word I absolve alone does not of itself carry any determinate sense, and it falls upon no subject; therefore it cannot be a valid form.

Resp. to the 2nd. Affirmatively as more probable, 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.² - St. Alphonsus,³ as more probable, etc. Yet not a few deny it, whose opinion, as St. Alphonsus says,⁴ as safer, is to be followed.

Resp. to the 3rd. Affirmatively as more probable, with the common opinion. The reason is that the whole effect of the Sacrament is expressed in these words, without adding from thy sins. - Besides, it seems to be clear also from the Catechism of the Council of Trent,⁵ where only this is said: "But the form is: I absolve thee." And nothing else is added there. - Roncaglia, Lugo, etc. - Yet not improbably some deny it with Lacroix, and this opinion is to be stood by in practice.

Query 2° Is the deprecative form valid, e.g. May God absolve thee?

Resp. Negatively, at least more probably, with St. Alphonsus,⁶ Lacroix,⁷ and very commonly others. The reason is that the Sacrament of Penance was instituted after the manner of a judgment; hence Christ wished that the priest as judge would pronounce a sentence, and would express this: therefore sins must be remitted by the priest himself as minister of Christ; therefore it does not suffice that he beseech God to remit them. Therefore, etc. Besides, from the Council of Florence the indicative form alone is prescribed as the true form of the Sacrament of Penance.

Query 3° Is the elevation of the hand and the formation of the Sign of the Cross necessary in imparting absolution?

Resp. 1° It is certain that it is not required for the validity of the Sacrament, because it pertains neither to the matter nor to the form. This is clear from the Council of Florence and Trent, and also from the unanimous consent of Theologians, at least after Trent.

Resp. 2° Nor is it required under mortal sin for liceity according to the common opinion, against a few; because it is only a Rubric, which does not seem grave. Indeed several grave authors assert that this can be omitted without sin, as Busembaum, reported and implicitly approved by St. Alphonsus,¹ and many others. At least the elevation of the hand can be omitted without sin while the prayers which precede formal absolution are recited.

Query 4° Can a priest validly absolve several by one form, saying: I ABSOLVE YOU FROM YOUR SINS?

Resp. Affirmatively, because all things required for validity are found. And it can also licitly be done in a case of necessity, e.g. in shipwreck, before battle, or in the battle itself, etc.; and such absolution would be multiple, not indeed formally, but virtually and equivalently, and there would be as many Sacraments as there were men who, through some Confession and sufficient sorrow, were disposed. - Lacroix,² and all others.

Query 5° What presence of the penitent is reckoned moral with respect to absolution?

Resp. 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 moral presence is reckoned sufficient within which men can and are wont to speak in a common voice, although a higher one. Many extend it to 20 paces, especially if the penitent is not outside the sight of the confessor. In necessity at least the penitent is to be absolved under condition whenever he is perceived by some sense. - Thus commonly with St. Alphonsus.³

Hence: 1° One who seems about to fall from a roof, to fall into a river, or to be submerged in the sea, is to be absolved, at least if he is not far distant from the confessor. 2° If the confessor, on account of danger of infection or for another cause, cannot enter the room of the sick person, he ought to absolve him from the door. 3° If a penitent were to withdraw from the confessor not yet absolved, thinking himself absolved, he would have to be absolved if he were seen at a small distance, or were certainly known to be present within the nearby crowd; yet he would have to be called back if this could conveniently be done.

Query 6° Through the words: I ABSOLVE THEE FROM THY SINS, can the confessor validly absolve the penitent both from censures and from sins?

Resp. Affirmatively, because these words: I absolve thee from thy sins, involve absolution from every bond arising from sins; and nothing prevents the confessor from being able to direct his intention to absolution both of sins and of censures. - Thus commonly. - St. Alphonsus,¹ Lacroix.²

Query 7° Is absolution valid if the confessor absolves from sins before he absolves from censures?

Resp. Affirmatively, because censure is not an obstacle to the validity of the Sacrament, but only to its licit reception or administration. Yet he would sin gravely who first absolved from sins before censures, because he would act against a grave prohibition of the Church: except if there is question not of excommunications, but only of suspensions and interdicts; because those censures do not of themselves deprive one of the reception of the Sacrament of Penance.³

1344. - Query 8° Whether and when is a conditioned form valid and licit?

Resp. to the 1st. It is certain that absolution under a condition concerning the present or the past is valid in every case, provided the other requisites for the validity of the Sacrament are present; for the condition in no way changes the sense of the sacramental form, which it does not affect at all; but it affects only the will of the confessor, who does not intend to absolve unless the condition added is fulfilled; but once this has been fulfilled, the form becomes absolute; and therefore nothing is found which can stand in the way of its validity. - Thus St. Alphonsus,⁴ who says that all agree concerning this. Cf. what was said n. 1218. q. 5°.

Resp. to the 2nd. It is equally certain that conditioned absolution is sometimes licit; for if it is valid, it must also be licit when necessity urges. - Thus most commonly the Theologians.⁵

Yet the doctrine of some is to be rejected as plainly lax, who hold that conditioned absolution can be imparted for any light cause whatever, and when no necessity urges, even if the sufficient disposition of the penitent, though burdened with mortal sins, is doubted in any way whatever. For no one fails to see how many sacrileges a practice of this kind would induce. Indeed the confessor would no longer be a prudent dispenser of the Sacraments, but would cast pearls before swine; and by this facility of absolving he would effect that penitents waste away in sins.¹

But no more is the doctrine of those to be admitted, who with Collet and certain others hold that absolution under condition is not to be imparted except in extreme necessity, or in extreme danger of life; for doctrine of this kind is supremely harmful to penitents, who can return to the confessor only with difficulty, and, dismissed without absolution, incur danger of eternal damnation.

But concerning the necessity in which absolution under condition can or ought to be imparted, according to the common doctrine and practice, the following rules seem to be established:

Rule I. - Absolution can and ought to be given under condition whenever, if granted absolutely, it would expose the Sacrament to danger of nullity, and, if denied absolutely, it would expose the penitent to danger of grave spiritual harm.

Rule II. - Even if necessity of this kind does not urge, nevertheless absolution can be given under condition whenever, if granted absolutely, it would expose the Sacrament to danger of nullity, and, if denied absolutely, it would deprive the penitent of some notable spiritual good, although not a necessary one.

Hence, with due conditions observed, when necessity urges, or when a just and proportionate cause is present, it is lawful to absolve conditionally in the following cases: 1° in doubt whether the penitent is living or dead; 2° in doubt of sufficient matter, for example if there is question of a pious penitent who "confesses only imperfections, which do not reach sins certainly venial." Yet very rarely,² or once in a month,³ "and when he cannot assign certain matter from his past life, or not without great trouble";¹

3° in doubt of fact concerning jurisdiction in the cases and under the conditions to be handed down n. 1394. q. 4°.² (On doubt of law, n. 60. I.); 4° in positive doubt (n. 1213) whether the penitent has been, or has been duly, absolved; 5° in doubt whether the penitent is morally present; 6° in doubt whether a dying person destitute of the senses is capable of the Sacrament; 7° in doubt concerning the disposition of the penitent, if there is question either of the half-witted, - to whom I equate those who are so stupid or untaught that whatever you say or do, you effect nothing, as sometimes happens with our Negroes; likewise the mute who do not know how to write, unless and insofar as one can deal with them sufficiently through some signs; likewise the deaf and those somewhat deaf in the case treated n. 1369. q. 6°; likewise those having their mind so confused or their tongue so stammering that their disposition cannot be judged, - or of children who are not yet perfectly capable of reason, especially if they bring a doubtful mortal sin, indeed also, not improbably, only venial sins, - or of a relapsed person in mortal sins, and there is fear lest he not return to Confession and waste away in his sins,³ or, I add, despair, or apostatize, or pass over to heretics, - or of a dying person, or, I would add, of a woman in difficult childbirth, of a soldier about to go into battle, of one about to undertake a dangerous voyage, of one about to undergo a dangerous surgical operation, of one condemned to be beheaded, and the like; 8° if in some case the necessity of avoiding scandal or infamy would truly urge, because bystanders would see that he did not approach Communion after Confession had been made; yet the penitent could not communicate unless certainly disposed through contrition, on account of the precept of the Apostle, concerning which n. 1306 has been treated.⁴

But if the penitent is in good faith and no fruit is hoped for from admonition about not receiving Communion, the confessor should conduct himself permissively. - But if the penitent asks the confessor whether he can communicate, a distinction must be made; for he asks either because he is of doubtful faith, and then one must answer according to the things said above; - or solely because from youth he was taught to ask in this way after individual Confessions, and then the confessor, if he does not hope for fruit from admonition, should answer evasively. - This lamentable necessity, of which I have spoken, is sometimes found when there is question of a Communion called general of Societies, especially if the number of male or female associates is small. Likewise if there is question of Communion on the occasion of funerals or the first Communion of children. - Some equate to the aforesaid necessity the necessity of celebrating Matrimony.¹ (16) p. 418.

Query 9° With what sacred vestments ought the confessor to be clothed while he hears Confessions in church, and in what place are they to be heard?

Resp. to the 1st. With surplice and violet stole,² unless custom (e.g. of certain Regulars), or occasion, or place (e.g. for the Confession of a sick person, in necessity, outside the church, where no opportunity is given for assuming surplice and stole) suggests otherwise.³ - Nevertheless, notwithstanding custom, it is fitting that in church a stole be used, as the S. C. R. rescripted.⁴ But for Confession outside the church the confessor laudably keeps a stole at home.⁵

Resp. to the 2nd. "Confessionals are to be erected in churches, for hearing the Confessions of women. ... But by the name church ... the sacristy is not to be understood, unless the place is public and open ... and it will be lawful for no priest to receive the Confessions of women in another place, without the special license of the Ordinary. But this," say the Fathers of the Council, "we trust is never to be granted except to priests advanced in age, or infirm, or on account of penitents who are deaf; or in other cases in which grave inconveniences would arise from observance of this rule. We wish also that this condition always be added, that the Confessions of women never be received in private houses, unless with grates interposed, and in an open place, insofar as the character of the place permits."⁶