Article II: Concerning the Duties Previous to Absolution

I. The confessor, as judge, is sometimes bound from office to question the penitent with moral diligence, and indeed of itself under grave obligation, as often as he probably judges that the penitent, whether culpably or inculpably, perhaps omits certain things necessary to know for absolution.

It is said 1) sometimes, for if from the confession itself or from the condition of the person of the penitent he judges that he knows the sins in full and the dispositions of soul sufficiently, the confessor is not bound to question: for then questioning would become idle and odious; whence neither are the rude to be questioned if they seem to be sufficiently instructed and diligently to confess their sins with number and circumstances according to their state and capacity;

2. with moral diligence, because the confessor is only bound to question in order to supply the defect of the penitent, who himself is not bound to greater diligence; and besides, excessive diligence would render the sacrament burdensome and odious;

3. of itself, under grave obligation: for it concerns a grave matter, as pertaining to the salvation of the penitent and to the reverence of the sacrament; although nevertheless there can be negligence lightly culpable, as if in a long series of sins one or another question should be omitted. As a judge acts perfidiously if he believes that a witness is keeping back something which it is necessary to declare for judging the case, and omits to ask that, and dissimulates; so the confessor who in grave matter is lacking in this office, of itself gravely offends. This sin pertains to the genus of sacrilege.

It is proved: a) from the authority of the Church, namely from the Fourth Lateran Council, chapter Omnis utriusque sexus: "Moreover let the priest be discreet and prudent... diligently inquiring both into the circumstances of the sinner and of the sin"; and from the Roman Ritual, tit. III, c. 1, n. 16: "if the penitent has not expressed the number, species, and circumstances of sins necessary to be explained, let the priest prudently question him";

b) by reason: The confessor, as judge, cannot bear sentence unless he knows the case, namely, both the sins which the penitent has committed as to number, species, and gravity, and his dispositions, and also often the occasions and causes of sins, which he must be disposed to leave or combat. But for this it is often not sufficient that he hear the penitent, but it is required that he question him: for not rarely the penitent, because of ignorance, or forgetfulness, or confusion, or negligence in examination, or a slight disposition of sorrow or purpose, is silent about sins or at least the number or circumstances of sins; more often he says or manifests nothing concerning dispositions, and still less concerning the causes and occasions of sins. Therefore the confessor sometimes cannot know these things except by questioning, and he is bound to do this as often as he knows or reasonably doubts or presumes that the penitent does not sufficiently open them.

Therefore he is bound to question concerning three things, namely those which, and insofar as they, are necessary for procuring 1) the validity of the sacrament, 2) the integrity of confession, or 3) the correction or amendment of the penitent.¹

¹ Concerning the mode in which questioning is to be done in practice, see our little work: Concerning Various Categories of Penitents, p. 18 sq.

II. The confessor, the case having been inspected from sufficient accusation or, if necessary, from supplementary questioning, as judge is bound from office to form for himself a prudent judgment concerning it, namely concerning the sins committed and concerning the dispositions of the penitent.

It is proved: 1. The confessor is bound to form a judgment concerning sins, which is necessary for knowing what satisfactions or remedies are to be imposed, and whether the dispositions of the penitent are sufficient. Hence he must bear judgment concerning the morality of sins, that is, concerning their species and gravity both objective and subjective, insofar as possible. And indeed a) concerning objective morality it is required at least that, endowed with habitual knowledge of the principles by which the gravity and diverse species of sins can be distinguished, he hear the penitent and, in hearing, judge according to the said common principles; b) concerning subjective morality he can presume it to be the same as the objective, unless there is a special reason for doubting, in which case he must question the penitent; c) concerning all things let him judge as much as he can by ordinary diligence, for it is not always possible concerning individual delicts to say whether they are of such species or gravity, mortal or venial, which not even great theologians can do; because often the matter is difficult in itself, and besides not even the penitent himself is always able to say whether he fully consented; - but if he lacked the aforesaid knowledge or from ignorance judged falsely concerning sins, confession would not for that reason be invalid; d) but if because of distraction or noise or singing he did not hear certain sins, it is necessary to question if it is probable that in these perhaps grave matter is present; e) nevertheless he is not bound distinctly to remember all sins at the moment of absolution, but it suffices that confusedly he remember the state of the penitent.

2. The confessor is also bound to bear judgment concerning the sufficient disposition of the penitent, which is necessary for knowing what sentence he ought to pronounce, namely, whether to grant or deny absolution; - which disposition can be known by conjectural signs, concerning which a. 3, n. III.

But what must be done by a confessor who doubts concerning the sincerity of the penitent, or knows or presumes that he is keeping back a sin? Resp.: He must attend to the principle: the penitent speaking both for himself and against himself must be believed, unless it certainly appears that he is lying: for he is at once the accused and the witness, whose testimony of itself has force in this tribunal alone and is better than any other, since he himself knows better than anyone else whether he has sinned or not, whether a sin committed has already been declared or not. Hence:

a) if there is doubt concerning the sincerity of the penitent, the confessor is bound to question diligently, and can exhort him to perfect sincerity; but if the penitent perseveres in his declaration, he must be believed and absolved;

b) if the confessor certainly knows that the penitent is keeping back a grave sin committed, and indeed from his own experience, he must convince the penitent, and if he continues to deny, he must be dismissed without absolution, unless it can be thought that he is in good faith, ignorant of the gravity of the fault, or that he has already confessed it, or has a just reason for keeping silent;

c) if the confessor knows this by the testimony of others, he is bound to question the penitent specially concerning the sin, but if he continues to deny, he is to be absolved, unless nevertheless the testimony of others were of altogether greater authority so that it made true or perfect certitude;

d) if the confessor knows it from the confession of another, for example, of an accomplice, wife, betrothed woman, etc., he cannot question him except generally as he is accustomed to question, and not specially unless he also would have questioned persons of the same condition in that way; nor is it expedient to ask from the accomplice permission to use the knowledge acquired, because in the case it would render confession odious. But while the penitent perseveres in keeping silent, he can absolve him as if he had not received the confession of the other; because he is not bound to use knowledge acquired in confession, and on the other hand he cannot impede the sacrilege; - indeed he seems to be bound to absolve (at least under condition), because otherwise he would break the seal, since he would quite openly use knowledge of confession for the governance of another.

St. Alphonsus, however, asserts that absolution is to be denied, but that somewhat of prayer is to be said and that the denial of absolution is to be dissembled: on the one hand, he says, the priest does not break the seal because he manifests nothing and causes burden to neither; on the other hand he consults the reverence of the sacrament, by impeding its frustration.

III. The confessor, as teacher, is bound from office to instruct the penitent, as far as possible, concerning those things which are strictly necessary for duly receiving the sacrament, unless absolution can be deferred to another time; - indeed regularly and of itself at least to admonish concerning the Christian truths and precepts to be learned, both common and particular to his state, which the penitent ought to know.

It is said 1) he is bound to instruct or teach the things necessary for duly receiving the sacrament; therefore he is not to instruct him concerning all things which the penitent is bound to know and can learn elsewhere (unless accidentally from charity if it were impossible for someone to learn elsewhere), but of itself concerning all things which he is bound to know for receiving the sacrament here and now duly; - nevertheless there is an exception: a) if to teach here and now is impossible and there is extreme necessity of receiving the sacrament which cannot be deferred; b) if absolution can be deferred to another time;

2. concerning other truths and obligations to be learned he is bound only to admonish, and indeed of itself and regularly; because accidentally he can not be bound if from it a greater evil would follow (for the penitent or for others).

It is proved: The minister of penance 1) is bound from office to procure valid and fruitful administration, and therefore he is teacher for teaching those things which are necessary for valid and fruitful reception; and 2) since the sacrament is for amendment and liberation from sins, he is also bound concerning the truths to be learned and known and the duties to be fulfilled, from office (and not only as any man from charity if it can be done without inconvenience), at least to admonish insofar as it contributes to the aforesaid end, because from office he is bound to lead the penitent away from future sin and lead him into the way of salvation. This is confirmed by the authority of the Roman Ritual, tit. 3, c. 1, n. 11 and 18.

And indeed, since for the validity of the sacrament the confessor needs jurisdiction, he is either the proper pastor of the penitent, or from a certain delegation he holds the place of the proper pastor. Hence it pertains to him from office to teach subjects their duties and obligations, and the means for avoiding defects in the future; indeed, since in ministering the sacrament he is the minister of the Church, he is also bound to procure the common good if possible.²

² "For although the confessor is bound by reason of his office principally to devote himself to the good of the penitent, nevertheless, since he himself is part of the commonwealth and is constituted minister for the good of the Christian commonwealth, he is bound to prefer the public good to the private good of the penitent. Thus with Busembaum..., Lugo..., Roncaglia..., the Salmanticenses... with Aversa, Dicastillo, and others commonly," St. Alphonsus, Th. M., l. VI, n. 615.

Hence he must 1) teach, and indeed before absolution, the truths necessary for receiving the sacrament here and now, namely those which, even only probably, are necessary to know by necessity of means for salvation, and those which pertain to the necessary dispositions of contrition, confession, purpose, satisfaction, as to substance and according to the capacity of each;

2. likewise admonish concerning duties which result from the sins declared, for example, as to restitution to be made, scandal to be removed or repaired, hatred to be laid aside, reconciliation to be sought, etc.;

3. admonish concerning truths necessary to know by necessity of precept, to be learned, and concerning the duties of Christian life, both common and particular to one's state: a) if ignorance of them is vincible or soon becomes so, b) even if it is invincible but fruit is hoped for from admonition, c) even if fruit is not hoped for but ignorance is to the greater detriment either of the penitent himself (for example, because it exposes him to danger of sinning or of persevering in sin), or of others or of the common good.³

³ More practical matters concerning the obligation of instructing and admonishing you will be able to see in the little work: Concerning Various Categories of Penitents, p. 24 sq.

IV. The confessor, especially as spiritual physician, is bound from office to indicate salutary remedies for obtaining the perseverance of the penitent and for guarding against his future fall.

It is proved: For the sacrament of penance was also instituted for the healing of souls and their preservation from future sins; and therefore the minister would frustrate it as to its partial end if he did not indicate remedies against future sins. "Although penance," says St. Thomas, q. 12, a. 3, ad 3, "from its first institution or intention regards the past, nevertheless consequently it regards the future, insofar as it is a preserving medicine." This is confirmed from the Roman Ritual, tit. 3, c. 1, n. 18.

But for this it is necessary to know (also by questioning concerning these things) the causes and occasions of sins, as a physician investigates the causes of diseases; which causes, besides, must rather often already be investigated for judging the dispositions of the penitent, among which it is required that he himself be willing to avoid or combat the said causes (as was said n. I). The causes, I say, and occasions of sins must be known a) because otherwise they cannot be extirpated by the root, and, unless they are extirpated, they will again produce evil effects; b) because according to diverse causes diverse opportune remedies are to be assigned: thus, for example, some remedies are to be indicated against lust, whether it comes from an external occasion, or from the internal complexion of the body, or from depraved thoughts or temptations.

In proposing such remedies the confessor, besides the satisfaction itself, cannot impose a strict obligation, unless nevertheless he declares those things to which the penitent is already bound from elsewhere, for example, avoiding proximate danger of sinning: for it belongs to a physician, as such, to counsel, not to command in a strict mode.

Therefore the confessor must 1) know by what things depraved habits are corrected, temptations overcome, and relapses guarded against;

2. question penitents concerning the habit of sinning, concerning proximate occasions, concerning the time, the place, the persons with whom, and by what concurrence of things, they are accustomed to slip into sins;

3. prescribe apt remedies which suit the penitent more according to his condition, age, temperament, etc.;

4. also remedies proportioned to the gravity and origin of the sins, whether:

a) general, such as frequent prayer, frequent reception of the sacraments of Penance and Eucharist, especially confession to be instituted immediately after a fall, the imposition of a previously determined penance after a relapse, devout consideration of the last things and recollection of the divine presence, serious daily examination of conscience with an exploration of the causes of sin and the formation of sincere contrition and purpose, the choice of a prudent confessor and frequent recourse to his counsels, flight from evil associates and other occasions of sinning, practice of mortification, custody of the senses and chastisement of the voice, acts of charity toward God frequently repeated, works of mercy, devotion toward the Holy Eucharist, the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Sacred Heart of Jesus, etc.; or

b) particular, which are better and more directly opposed to each vice, for example: Let it be insinuated to him who is held by hatred that daily he pray for him whom he hates, and at the memory of the injury let him recall the insults by which he himself has affected God. - Let it be enjoined upon him who has slipped into shameful sins that he avoid idleness, flee evil associates and occasions. - To him who for a long time has contracted a depraved habit in this vice, let it be prescribed that he avoid not only proximate occasions, but even certain remote ones, which to him, so weak for resisting, have become as proximate (cf. St. Alphonsus, Pr. Conf., n. 15-16); but

c) first of all it is better to impose medicinal satisfactions; then to insinuate spiritual remedies;

5. finally to correct, even strongly, and to furnish admonitions of salvation.

6. Moreover they are gravely lacking in the office of confessor who, content with the remission of past sins, wholly neglect the guarding of the new life and the medicine of infirmity. Cf. St. Alphonsus, Pr. Conf., n. 6-7.

V. The confessor, as father, generally is bound from charity, insofar as it can be done, to propose apt motives of contrition to the indisposed and thus prepare them for absolution.

It is said 1) to the indisposed: for if the confessor prudently judges that the penitent is well disposed, he is strictly bound to nothing, although to exhort to contrition is always expedient because the exhortation of the confessor is effective before others, and at least he can briefly exhort him to renew the act of contrition;

2. apt motives, such as the deformity of sin, the value of divine grace, danger of damnation, the brevity of life and danger of death, the goodness of God, the love and benefits of Christ, and like things, according to the capacity and disposition of each;

3. from charity, and not strictly from office, because for this it suffices to absolve those who are disposed, but he can send away the indisposed until they are disposed; but from charity he is often bound to act otherwise;

4. insofar as it can be done, that is, if there is founded hope, and time for disposing to contrition; unless nevertheless in extreme necessity, in which there is a grave office of attempting all things even with the greatest inconvenience.

It is proved: From charity we are generally bound to procure the good of the penitent and avert grave damage from him, at least if it can be done easily. But a sinner who is dismissed without absolution incurs grave damage, since he is exposed to the danger of remaining for a long time in the state of mortal sin, and perhaps is deterred from confession. But since the indisposed cannot be absolved, insofar as it can be done the confessor must dispose him. Whence the Roman Ritual, l. c., n. 18: "he will strive to lead him by efficacious words to sorrow and contrition, and will induce him to amend and better institute his life, and will hand down remedies for sins."

This obligation of itself is grave, at least if the neighbor is in grave spiritual necessity and without great inconvenience can be induced to due disposition.