Question II: Concerning Penitents Who Are to Be Questioned

I. Obligation of questioning. - There is an obligation, of itself grave, of questioning penitents, as is proved in the Treatise on Penance, where it treats of the minister. The omission of questioning redounds to the detriment of souls, or to the prejudice of the sacrament:¹

¹ Cf. Marc, Th. M., II, n. 1804.

A. to the detriment of souls: 1) because it furnishes an occasion for many sacrilegious confessions, since there are many penitents who, unless they are questioned, pass over graver sins: "frequently," says St. Thomas, "those things which the penitent would keep silent because of shame, when questioned he reveals" (IV Sent., d. 19, qu. 2, art. 3, exp. textus);

2. because it is the cause that many penitents lack opportune remedies against relapse; for the confessor who does not question concerning the causes, occasions, and habit of sins, concerning diligence in amendment used or omitted, cannot prudently indicate the opportune means by which new falls may be forestalled;

3. because harm is easily brought upon others also, from the fact that the penitent does not remove scandal, or neglects the duties of his state, e.g., in the education and custody of children;

B. to the prejudice of the sacrament, whose integrity is exposed to danger, indeed also its validity, since often it cannot prudently be judged whether the penitent is disposed, or whether he needs a more ardent exhortation that he may be duly disposed.

II. What questions are to be made. - Questions are to be made only when, and insofar as, they are necessary for procuring the validity of the sacrament, the integrity of confession, or the amendment of the sinner:²

² Ibid., n. 1803.

1. for procuring the validity of the sacrament, e.g., for knowing whether there is sufficient matter of confession, whether the penitent conceals something out of shame, as often happens in boys and girls, whether the penitent is sufficiently disposed;

2. for the integrity of confession, e.g., concerning the number, species, and circumstances changing the species of sins; or concerning sins of which penitents are not accustomed to accuse themselves, as concerning internal sins, concerning omission of the duties of state;

3. for the correction of the penitent, e.g., concerning the cause and occasion of sins, frequency, gravity, malice, etc.

Nevertheless not all are to be questioned, but only those for whom, whether from the manner of confessing, or from the common state or condition of the person, there is for the confessor a special reason for conjecturing that one of the aforesaid defects is present.

III. Norms to be attended to. - From what has been said the following norms are understood:³

³ Cf. Aertnijs, Th. M., II, n. 276; Tanquerey, de Poen., n. 468. In referring to the author Aertnijs, we follow the earlier editions, not those which were made under the care of Father Damen.

A. Concerning penitents to be questioned: 1) The confessor is not bound to question penitents who, on the one hand, seem sufficiently instructed, and on the other, are diligent in confessing, such as clerics or religious are accustomed to be, and those who frequently receive the sacraments; unless, however, in some case from their accusation there arises a probability that something necessary to be known is being omitted.

2. On the contrary, ordinarily those are to be questioned who rarely approach the sacred tribunal, especially if they seem little instructed, because it is deservedly presumed that their accusation is not integral.

3. The practice of those who never question penitents, as though they erected this into a principle, is to be disapproved; indeed, they do not even allow them to bring confession to its end, but, after a few sins have been heard, immediately impart absolution. Such a manner of acting often troubles souls, far from tranquilizing them, and is the reason why even grave sins are kept silent; accordingly, generally, and unless it is a question of the scrupulous, it is to be disapproved even for those who accuse only venial sins, for a mortal sin can be left for the end of confession.

B. Concerning solicitude in questioning: 1) The confessor is not bound to a greater solicitude in questioning than penitents are in confessing; indeed, strictly speaking, he is rather bound to a lesser one, since the integrity of confession directly obliges the penitent and only indirectly the confessor.

2. The confessor therefore is not bound to use anything except ordinary and moderate diligence, which is proportioned to the diverse capacity of penitents. Thus the rude and uncultivated man is not to be examined as accurately as the well-instructed one, nor the sick man as the healthy and robust, because the former are not obliged to so minute an examination.

3. Ordinary diligence having been used, the confessor does not sin who abstains from further questions, lest he render confession odious, although he foresees that by greater diligence more sins could be discovered: for it is better that confession lack material integrity than that it become odious to many.

C. Concerning the gravity of the obligation: The obligation of questioning is of itself grave; nevertheless, if, from slight negligence, inadvertence, instability of memory, or distraction, or weariness, the confessor omits to inquire into something which of itself is necessary for the integrity of confession or for the amendment of the penitent, there will be no sin or a light sin: for he is not bound with so much difficulty or even moral impossibility to supply the defects of others; but when many confessions are being heard, it is morally impossible always to avoid these defects.

IV. Qualities of questions. - Questions must have three qualities: they must be moderate, discreet, and opportune.⁴ St. Thomas already teaches, l. c.:

⁴ Cf. Reuter, Neo-Conf., p. I, c. II, n. 3; Theol. Mechl. (4), de Poen., n. 48, p. 132 sq.; Billuart, de Poen., diss. 6, a. 10, § 2; Aertnijs, Th. M., II, n. 277; Th. P., n. 27 sq.; Marc, Th. M., II, nn. 1806-1807; Tanquerey, de Poen., nn. 467-471; Berardi, Praxis conf., nn. 1085-1106; Lehmkuhl, Th. M., II, nn. 542-546; Noldin, Th. M., III, nn. 395-396.

"The priest must search out the conscience of the sinner in confession as a physician the wound and a judge the cause, because frequently those things which the one confessing would keep silent because of shame, when questioned he reveals. But nevertheless in making questions three things must be attended to:

1. that each sinner be questioned concerning the sins which are accustomed to abound in men of that condition, so that... a soldier is not asked concerning the sin of clerics, or conversely;

2. that no explicit question be made concerning sins, except concerning those which are known to all; concerning others... a question must be made from afar, so that, if he has committed it, he may say it; if he has not committed it, he may not learn it;

3. that, in sins chiefly carnal, he not descend too much to particular circumstances that are not necessary... lest he harm himself and the penitent," or impede the latter in confession, or render the sacrament of Penance odious.

Therefore a question must be:

A. moderate, that is, not concerning curious or useless matters, foreign to confession, but only concerning those which regard conscience; nor even with questions multiplied too much: for excessive questions are accustomed to exasperate penitents and to excite a suspicion of curiosity against the confessor.

Hence: 1) let the confessor not question concerning all sins, but only concerning those which have likely been committed by the penitent according to each one's condition and disposition;

2. likewise let him question each one according to his capacity and knowledge, but not according to the knowledge with which the confessor himself is furnished. Therefore in vain will he seek from ordinary penitents the more minute specific and numerical distinctions of sins, which are not accustomed to be discerned by such persons; likewise from those who have not confessed for a long time, a determined number of sins; likewise from children little developed, the ignorant, the half-witted, etc., more than a confused knowledge of sins: for the more he questions, the less these understand;

3. ordinarily it is not expedient to ask from the rude their own judgment concerning their sins, and by name whether they held a sin committed by them as mortal; for not rarely they will answer not according to the truth of the matter, but according to that which occurs to their mind. In certain cases, however, especially in the matter of chastity, and chiefly if it is feared that the penitent would be scandalized by a direct question, it can be asked whether, in doing that, he was conscious that he was sinning gravely.

4. But let a few questions be made, not obscure but clear, according to the grasp of the penitent; not too general, but concrete; not long but brief, and to be repeated in changed terms.

And that suffices even if the confessor cannot thus form a certain judgment concerning the gravity or lightness of the sins which he has heard; for it suffices to have sufficient knowledge concerning the dispositions of the penitent, to use ordinary diligence in searching out sins, and to form a serious and prudent judgment about them, as far as he can. But if he has erred in that judgment, absolution is nevertheless valid.

B. Discreet or prudent, both in the matters concerning which he is questioned, and in the manner of questioning, by avoiding all things which can probably scandalize penitents, or be the cause of exciting curiosity, offense, or temptation, or of introducing suspicion toward the confessor, or of teaching those things which it is better to ignore. This had often to be attended to in relation to blasphemies and simonies; now especially in relation to frauds and injustices, to superstitions, to means of bringing about death or procuring abortion, etc.; most especially in the matter of chastity, above all with regard to women, or with regard to younger persons who perhaps do not know sins of this kind. And yet, because it is established by experience that sins of lust are not easily accused by some unless they are questioned concerning them, certain few and cautious questions even about them are to be prudently proposed; but in such a way that the rule handed down by all is preserved: it is better to be deficient in questions as to the material integrity of confession than to abound with probable scandal and the ruin of the penitent.

Hence: 1) let the confessor first use general terms, so that if the penitent is guilty, he may understand; but if innocent, he may learn nothing new, e.g., have you sinned against modesty, decency, purity?

2. with younger persons, who are presumed innocent, let those proper words which can excite dangerous curiosity be carefully avoided, such as: seminal emission, fornication, sodomy, bestiality, onanism, etc.;

3. even with regard to the married, let it be asked whether they have fulfilled mutual duties, without explicit mention being made of the marital debt, or whether anything bites them in conscience regarding the use of marriage. If they answer negatively, nothing further is to be asked unless there is a special reason; if affirmatively, it suffices to propose those questions by which it is known whether they voluntarily use means preventing conception or birth;

4. ordinarily, and especially if there is suspicion that a sin is being concealed from ignorance or simplicity, it is expedient to begin the question from lighter sins and gradually pass to graver ones, e.g., first concerning thoughts (but if they deny these, one must not continue), then concerning words heard or uttered, looks, excessive familiarities, touches, or also concerning something worse: with oneself, with others, of the other or same sex, and so forth;

5. sometimes, however, namely if there is suspicion that a sin is being concealed from shame or fear, it is expedient to begin from greater ones; when these have been accused, the remaining things are easily declared. And so also among the more rude and ignorant, who deny thoughts or even desires, but confess words and deeds, because they do not know that internal sins are to be declared, or do not equally acknowledge or advert to them. Hence if they affirm external sins, it is further asked whether, apart from the actions committed, they also thought about these things or had a desire.

C. opportune, that is, made at a convenient time and in a convenient manner, namely with kind and peaceful words, lest the penitent be offended or, seized by fear, not dare to answer.

1. Before confession: a) if the penitent is unknown, let him be asked in a few kind words from what time he has confessed, whether he was absolved, whether he is perfectly quiet concerning his past life.

b) if he is disquieted, let him be fatherly induced to explain the cause of anxiety, by saying that all sins, even the gravest, are remitted to the contrite of heart, and that every anxiety is put away by sincere confession.

c) questions can also be made concerning state and condition; but often they are better made in the course of confession, when opportunity is given, lest from the beginning the penitent be frightened by questions, or a suspicion of curiosity arise.

2. In the very act of confession: a) if the penitent does not begin of his own accord, let the confessor kindly ask what evil he has admitted since the other confession.

b) during the accusation, let him first permit the penitent to explain himself without interruption, except that sometimes by one or another word he may help him to proceed with confidence. He will be able to propose only a few rare and brief questions, e.g., concerning number and circumstances changing the species; but let him not interrupt the penitent too frequently, so that the latter may be able to confess all things in order, nor may several things fall from his memory. Hence, for the most part, it will be better to defer questions, at least longer ones, to the end.

c) let him patiently and kindly hear even the gravest sins, without any sign of astonishment or horror, but gently interpose certain things concerning divine mercy. Let him admonish one who accuses himself of useless matters that it is not necessary to say those things. Let him help one who accuses himself hesitantly or with difficulty by a few questions.

d) let him abstain from all rebuke and correction before the confession is finished.

3. After the confession has been heard: a) by running through the declarations, the penitent must be questioned concerning those things which he likely omitted; or also concerning the occasion, causes, and habit of sins, so that judgment can be made concerning dispositions and due remedies.

b) among the rude who rarely confess, it must be examined whether they grieve for sins from the soul, and whether they have a serious purpose of avoiding them.

c) from unknown persons let it be asked whether anything troubles their conscience, or whether they have omitted anything in confession.

d) the same thing is often useful with the timid, after the questioning, immediately before they are absolved, to ask with fatherly affection: for there are some who do not uncover all things until after the confessor has won confidence for himself by kindness.

e) finally, those who at last accuse sins previously concealed are to be treated most gently, and to be induced that they grieve not only concerning their sins, but also concerning the malice of concealing them.

V. Observations.

1. Especially to be questioned are the rude who are judged not to have searched their conscience sufficiently. For this the schema handed down above, qu. 1, n. IV, can be of service.

2. Sometimes penitents ask to be questioned by the confessor. If he detects that this happens from a grave defect of examination, or from vain curiosity, let him fatherly correct the penitent; indeed he can dismiss him, unless the spiritual necessity of the same counsels otherwise.

3. If someone is so rude and dull that he accuses no sin, not even from his past life, even after repeated questions, after questions concerning those things to be known by necessity of means, and the recitation of the acts of faith, hope, charity, and contrition, he can sometimes be absolved, at least under condition, at least if it is thought that perhaps he needs absolution. For, for valid absolution, when otherwise the penitent cannot accuse himself, it suffices that by signs he confesses himself a sinner, which he does by presenting himself before the confessor in the tribunal of Penance.

4. Even more cultivated persons (such as physicians, judges, advocates, priests, confessors, parish priests) are to be questioned concerning the duties of state, but only if consciences have been neglected, or if the confessor otherwise has a founded doubt lest they fail in their duties, e.g., physicians concerning the care and visitation of the sick, concerning illicit means commended, concerning negligence in admonishing about the reception of the sacraments; judges and advocates concerning an unjust sentence pronounced or a cause defended, and concerning harms brought about; priests concerning the breviary, burdens of Masses discharged at the due time, study necessary for confessions, excessive rigor or kindness toward penitents, alms distributed, catechism, preaching, visitation of the sick, fatherly correction; religious women concerning vows, especially of poverty, concerning peculiar duties, dangerous friendships, aversion, and, if she is a superior, concerning vigilance and abuses in the monastery.⁵

⁵ Cf. Aertnijs, Theol. Past., n. 41 sq.