Article I: On Customary Sinners and Relapsers

657. A customary sinner, or one habituated in sin, is said to be one who has contracted a habit, or a constant internal propensity and facility for committing the same sin, from custom or frequently repeated acts. This habit, therefore, is distinguished:

1. from a mere occasion of sin: for this is external to the sinner, whereas habit is intrinsic; yet habit is often connected with an occasion, inasmuch as it not rarely arises from it or is much increased by it;

b) from a habitual affection toward sin, by which someone with a constant will deliberately adheres to sin: for this is sin and must altogether be put away in confession, whereas habit does not necessarily render one indisposed, since even after it has been retracted it can remain involuntarily.

A habit is acquired by repeated acts. Hence three things are required for contracting it:

1. Frequency, or the number of falls; but how many acts are required and suffice cannot be determined absolutely, but depends on various circumstances: on the character of the sinner, namely on his greater or lesser fragility; on the nature of the sin, more or less alluring, since in certain matters, such as drunkenness or luxury, evil habits are more easily and quickly acquired; on the difficulty or facility of committing the sin; on the mode in which it is committed, with greater or lesser deliberation or adherence of the will, etc.

2. Duration of time: for one who sins several times on the same day and afterward abstains for a long time does not so easily contract a habit as one who regularly commits sin once or twice, daily or every week.

3. Uninterrupted continuation: for just as a habit is lost by cessation from acts, so, if the acts are too distant, it cannot be contracted. Hence:

a) The more easily some sin is committed, the more acts are required for contracting a habit: thus more acts are required for merely internal sins, which are more easily completed, than for external sins; more for sins of the mouth than for sins of deed; more for external sins begun than for consummated sins, and for those which are perpetrated alone than for those which require an accomplice.

Thus, according to St. Alphonsus, Praxis Conf., n. 70, to commit an external sin of deed five times in a month, provided that some interval intervenes between the various acts, can suffice for contracting a habit, as if someone falls each week for several months into drunkenness or pollution; whereas, if there is question of a sin of the heart or of the mouth, a much greater number is required, namely twice or three times in a week; but if there is question of external sins which can be perpetrated only with an accomplice, a smaller number is required, so that one who fornicates once a month for a year, or commits sodomy, can be said to be habituated.

b) One custom is contracted from mere fragility, and another is deliberately contracted from a perfect choice of the will: for there are incontinent customary sinners, who sin only from fragility or from the passing and, as it were, extrinsic impulse of passion, so that habitually their will is opposed to sin, and when the sin has passed they abhor it and easily repent and desire to be freed from the custom; as sometimes happens in those who consent to passions of the flesh, of intemperance, or of anger, and easily happens in blasphemies, imprecations, and pollution; - on the contrary, there are intemperate customary sinners, or those habituated in the will of sinning, who sin from true habit and therefore from malice of will, or from a permanent intrinsic evil inclination and habitual affection toward sin, even without the impulse of passion; and consequently they do not easily detest the sin or are moved to penance,1 as often happens in base love, constant hatred, conjugal onanism, injustice of theft, and transgression of the precepts of the Church from acedia or human fear, or also in sins of the flesh, for those who rejoice in them or from inveterate custom seek them. Hence, says St. Thomas, I-II, q. 78, a. 2: "Whoever sins from habit sins from certain malice." Namely, sin from passion is, as it were, an interpolated disease; sin from habit is a continuous disease (ibid., a. 4).

As we noted II, n. 1032, 2, one who by a firm purpose has efficaciously retracted a vicious habit but has not yet extirpated it is not simply intemperate, since the habit is no longer voluntary to him; hence if from the inclination of the remaining habit it happens that he sins, he seems more to be likened to the incontinent man who falls from passion than to the intemperate man who sins from a voluntary habit. But if afterward he neglects to extirpate the habit, the habit will again be voluntary to him, and he himself again intemperate.

658. A relapser in general is said to be one who falls again into sin; hence a relapsing penitent is one who, after having confessed a sin and been admonished concerning it, falls back into it, even once. Therefore, strictly speaking and per se, there can be a customary sinner who is not a relapser, as one who has never confessed the sin in the custom of which he perseveres; and there can be a relapser who is not a customary sinner, as one who after confession falls back into a sin several times. Nevertheless, in present-day theological acceptation, a relapser is usually said to be one who, after he has confessed some sin, often falls back into the same without amendment, or into the same habit of sin, whether from an internal cause or from an external cause. Hence there must not be confused with such a customary relapser one who relapses into sin without habit or custom, or one who relapses into the occasion of sin alone, such as one who does not keep a promise concerning removing an occasion and again approaches or does not expel the occasion.

Hence one relapser is formal, another material.

He is formally a relapser if the relapse is supposed to proceed from defect of a firm purpose of the will.

For this three conditions are required at the same time: a) frequent relapse after several confessions, after, namely, the penitent has been admonished by the confessor concerning the gravity of the fault and concerning the means necessary for avoiding it; b) relapse into the same sin, but not into others of a different kind; c) defect of all amendment, even begun, so that in almost the same way, with the same facility, at once or shortly after confession, without serious effort either to repel temptations or to apply the means of amendment, he has relapsed. Thus if someone after individual confessions has frequently relapsed deliberately, beginning from one or another day after confession.

He is materially a relapser if the relapse is supposed to proceed from mere infirmity, inconstancy, or fragility of the will.

Such is one who 1) has not been seriously admonished by the confessor, or 2) although admonished, did not relapse into the same sins but into others of a different kind, or 3) although admonished and having relapsed, shows some amendment or diminution of sin, because he has not sinned so often, - or for a rather notable time has seriously tried to resist temptations, - or has applied some one of the assigned means, even if on account of the greater vehemence or frequency of temptation he has sinned as often as before.

659. Principles and rules. - Concerning customary sinners and relapsers three practical rules are usually enumerated:

A. Simple customary sinners who are not relapsers regularly can be absolved whenever they are found truly and sincerely prepared to exhibit the necessary means for conquering the custom.

It is explained: For their disposition it is required and suffices that they retract the custom, and not voluntarily retain the cause and danger of sin; but the custom is retracted through the will of not sinning any more and of extirpating the evil habit through suitable means. These means are both general or common, as prayer, meditation, remembrance of the presence of God, reception of the sacraments, etc., and particular means, which are directly opposed to the evil custom, for example mortification of the senses against impurity, abstinence from drink against intemperance.

It is proved: A confession rightly made, and the declaration of the penitent asserting that he truly grieves and firmly proposes amendment, are sufficient signs of sorrow and disposition, if no presumption to the contrary stands in the way.

But a bad habit alone per se does not give such a presumption: for it is not a sign of indisposition, but of greater facility and probability for sinning. "Although," says St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., l. VI, n. 459, "a bad habit renders the sinner more prone to sin, nevertheless it does not give a presumption of his weak will."

Therefore a simple customary sinner who is truly and sincerely prepared to apply the means is judged sufficiently disposed, and consequently can be absolved.

It is confirmed: a) certainly it is not required that he has already extirpated the custom;

b) besides, by applying the prescribed means, he will diminish the force of the custom and gradually extinguish it: for custom is conquered by a contrary custom.

Hence: 1) One who for the first time confesses a bad habit must be absolved, although no amendment has preceded, provided he seriously promises it: for since he has not violated promises, he is to be supposed sincere, and can and must be believed.

2. One who has already confessed a bad custom rather often, but had not been admonished concerning the remedies to be applied, can be absolved if, better instructed, he promises to use them. For the fact that he has not applied the means must be attributed to ignorance rather than to malice.

3. One who, after being admonished, did not sufficiently apply the necessary means and relapsed is a relapser, and is to be treated as such.

B. Material relapsers or incontinent persons, who relapse from fragility and infirmity of will, regularly can be absolved, if they seriously propose amendment and furnish the ordinary signs of the sincerity of their disposition.

For they have fallen either because they were insufficiently admonished, - or, after a serious effort of amendment, from the greater vehemence or frequency of temptation, or from inconstancy of the will in persevering, - or from mere fragility, so that the sin habitually displeases them; and consequently after a fall they at once detest the sin, but from infirmity of will or from the mobility and vehemence of passion they again succumb. Now ordinarily there is no doubt concerning the disposition of these persons.

C. Formal and intemperate relapsers regularly cannot be absolved, unless by special signs they show that they have true contrition and a firm purpose.

Such relapsers are from an evil will, who adhere to the object of sin and from this affection are driven into new sins; hence they are suspected concerning disposition.

For one who sincerely and strongly proposes a thing morally possible to himself, in the case, to avoid sin and to apply the necessary means, does not so easily nor so suddenly change his mind and will, but at least perseveres for some time and applies the means. Hence frequent relapse from a depraved will, without almost any effort and any amendment, generates a prudent suspicion and a founded presumption that the purpose of someone was not sincere and efficacious but only weak, and that even now it is such, if he proposes in the same way as before under common signs.

But this presumption is not destroyed by a simple assertion, which no longer deserves anything but slight faith, but only by special and extraordinary signs.

Therefore such a penitent remains suspected concerning disposition, and consequently the confessor cannot form for himself a prudent judgment concerning his due disposition.

And therefore such penitents are to be held as doubtfully disposed, and they cannot be absolved unless a) they furnish a special disposition or at least extraordinary signs of good disposition, by which they appear morally certainly disposed, so that they can be absolved absolutely; or b) unless there is present a proportionately grave reason, namely one sufficient that they can be absolved under condition, which is verified in the cases enumerated above, n. 616.

Hence false is both the opinion of the Laxists and of some moderns, who say that they can be held as disposed and absolved with ordinary signs, unless at the same time from positive circumstances indications of indisposition are present - as is clear from the proposition condemned by Innocent XI, prop. 60;1 - and the opinion of the Rigorists, who said that they were not to be absolved unless by long experience they had proved amendment.

660. How one must proceed in practice. - From this it is clear how one must act practically:

1. The relapser is to be examined, whether he has notably diminished the number of falls, or has abstained for a notable time after confession, or has fought strenuously even if he has fallen more often than before: such a one can be absolved at once, because he has applied a serious zeal for amendment, of which there is a threefold sign: a) application of means; b) rarer, more difficult, or later relapse; c) perseverance for some not altogether brief time.

2. If serious effort is lacking, special or extraordinary signs are to be sought; and when these have been posited, the relapser can be absolved at once. But extraordinary signs are not necessarily extraordinary dispositions, since simple attrition suffices; but they are signs, more proving, clearer, more numerous, and those which had been given before by the same penitent, of this required attrition at least; hence they are to be considered relatively to the character of the penitent, to the nature of the temptations, and to the other circumstances. Several things are found indicated in n. 617.

3. If even extraordinary signs are lacking, the penitent is not immediately to be dismissed, but is to be disposed to contrition by a paternal and fervent exhortation, even by proposing more efficacious remedies. This work will be easier with an incontinent relapser, who has relapsed from ignorance or from mere fragility, than with an intemperate one, who has relapsed from affection toward sin. Nevertheless, if after the exhortation he furnishes extraordinary signs of a changed will and promises to apply more efficacious remedies, he can be absolved.

4. If after fervent exhortation the relapser remains doubtfully disposed, he can be absolved under condition ("if you are capable") if a special and grave necessity urges, namely danger of death, marriage to be contracted here and now, grave difficulty of returning (unless restitution must be made or an occasion removed), danger of infamy, a very well-founded danger of alienation from the sacrament or of abandonment of it, namely that the penitent will not return, or imperfect use of reason; - otherwise absolution is to be deferred, because delay is necessary for exploring the firm purpose of the penitent, and the sacrament cannot be exposed to the danger of nullity without urgent necessity.

5. Finally, if it is morally certain that the relapser remains indisposed, he is to be dismissed without absolution.

In the case in which absolution is deferred and the penitent is dismissed, let this be done a) for a brief time, for example 8 or 15 days, not longer, lest he come into despair and sin more often; b) with very humane, not harsher words, lest the penitent say farewell to confession; c) by explaining the reason why absolution is deferred, so that in this way the penitent may understand that the confessor acts thus not from hatred or anger, but from paternal solicitude, and as if unwillingly, because his office requires it; d) by assigning the means which must be applied for obtaining a better disposition, so that thus the penitent may know what must be done in order that he be able to obtain absolution: for delay of itself is not able to change the mind, unless at the same time opportune remedies are prescribed to him.

661. Warning. - In the aforesaid cases the confessor should not be too rigid, lest he cast penitents into despair, nor too benign, lest he allow the negligent to remain in filth.

But concerning a relapser he is bound to form a right judgment for himself. For this, one must regularly inquire whether he has already been admonished by another confessor and what remedies had been assigned to him; whether he has used them; whether he has relapsed as often as before, whether shortly after confession, or after struggle and resistance often offered; when he last sinned, etc. Then it must be considered what are the actual dispositions of the penitent. For this kind of questioning, says Aertnijs, Theol. Mor. II, n. 484, q. 2, just as in the care of bodily diseases, so in the healing of spiritual diseases, is fundamental.

Thus generally, unless the state of the penitent is otherwise sufficiently clear, or the examination in the given circumstances seems useless or inopportune.

662. Corollaries. - Marc, Theol. Mor. II, n. 1830, posits three conclusions:

1. A relapser returning for the first time can more easily be absolved than the second or third time, because lesser signs are required.

2. Incontinent persons from passion can more easily be absolved than intemperate persons from habit, because sufficient or extraordinary signs are found chiefly in the former, in the latter rarely.

3. A formal relapser, unless certainly indisposed, can be absolved under condition only in those cases (six) in which a doubtfully disposed person can be absolved.

1. Concerning these questions Ter Haar, De Occasionariis et Recidivis, deserves specially to be inspected.

1. Cf. I-II, q. 78, a. 2, ad 3; II-II, q. 156, a. 3, ad 2; Q. D. De Ver. 24, a. 10; a. 11, ad 4; De Malo 3, a. 10.

1. "To a penitent having a custom of sinning against the law of God, of nature, or of the Church, even if no hope of amendment appears, absolution is neither to be denied nor deferred, provided he utters with his mouth that he grieves and proposes amendment." But in the case no hope of amendment appears.