Article III: On the Fidelity of Confession

St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 6, a. 4.

529. Principle. Confession must be faithful, i.e., true and sincere, in this sense, that it be made without falsity and lying, so that the penitent confesses sins according as they are in conscience, namely certain things as certain, doubtful as doubtful, mortal as mortal, etc., and in the declaration does not fall short, as in denying or lessening sins committed, nor exceed, in exaggerating them or adding fictitious faults. Concerning this, a threefold rule can be stated:

I. To lie in confession concerning a grave thing necessarily to be declared is, from its nature, a grave pernicious lie and grave sacrilege, namely, if it is done concerning matter necessary for the integrity of confession or concerning the dispositions required for absolution, because it is in a grave matter to pervert the sacramental judgment and to deceive the judge, and thus the confession would not be integral and therefore would be void and the absolution invalid; which also would be gravely pernicious to the penitent himself.

Thus of itself he sins gravely who in confession denies a circumstance changing the species of a grave sin, - who denies a mortal sin not yet confessed, or so covers it or says it in a reduced way that it can scarcely be understood by the confessor, - who confesses a certainly mortal sin as doubtful or vice versa, - who from malice accuses himself of a grave sin not committed, - who increases the number of mortal sins unless perhaps this is done from scruple, disturbance of mind, simplicity, or ignorance, for greater security, - who expressly or equivalently confesses a recently committed sin as an old sin already previously declared (otherwise, if by the accusation this is left in doubt), - who falsely denies a habit, relapse, or occasion about which the confessor asks, or studiously avoids this declaration lest it be sought by the confessor.

II. To lie concerning a slight thing or concerning free grave matter is of itself a venial sacrilege, because this does not pervert the judgment in a grave matter, nor make the sentence void, nor render the sacrament invalid, or impede its effect. Thus he sins lightly who falsely accuses himself of a light sin which was not committed, - or denies a venial sin which was committed, - or denies a mortal sin which has already been duly accused.

Yet accidentally it could be mortal a) if the penitent falsely accused himself of a venial sin, bringing no other matter, or b) if he denied things which he is bound to say for rightly forming the judgment of the confessor or for exercising the office of physician, e.g., with respect to habit, custom, occasion, restitution to be enjoined or satisfaction, a remedy against relapse, etc., in one word, if the confessor asked about those things or about free matter as belonging to the present grave matter (cf. condemned prop. 58, by Innocent XI).¹

¹ "We are not held to confess to the confessor asking the habit of some sin."

III. To lie concerning a thing which does not pertain to confession, e.g., concerning name, age, parents, domicile, etc., or by narrating a false story, although it is said in the sacred tribunal while confessing, is not for this reason sacrilege, because it in no way perverts the sacramental judgment.

Hence the sin remains as it was before, mortal or venial; - nevertheless to mix a light lie with confession, for another reason, is a venial irreverence toward the sacrament, namely, to sin at the same time at which remission of sins is sought; but a grave lie is mortal sacrilege because it renders one indisposed for absolution.

530. Practical corollaries. - From the foregoing it is understood:

1. That he does not of himself lie nor sin, at least gravely, who does not declare a recently committed mortal sin negatively as recent, but does not distinguish new mortal sins from old remitted ones and mixes them, yet in such a way that he does not positively affirm but leaves in doubt that they have been previously remitted; e.g., one who in a general confession does not distinguish mortal sins committed since the last confession, even if he does this purposely in order to hide the time at which they were committed. For it is not a lie but an equivocal speech.

Yet accidentally the circumstance of time would have to be declared if it were necessary for removing a proximate occasion, or because of a reserved case, or if otherwise the species of sin would not be understood and thus the confessor could not render a just judgment or impose a congruent penance, e.g., he could not know whether a base sin was committed before or after marriage, before or after a vow of chastity. Hence the confessor can ask about this and then the penitent is bound to answer.

2. On the contrary, that he of himself lies and sins gravely who positively confesses a mortal sin not yet accused, committed after the last confession, as not recent, but as an old one already previously declared, whether by saying explicitly: "I accuse myself of such a sin which I already declared before," or "which I committed last year," or equivalently by using this formula: "then I accuse myself of the sins of my whole life or of my past life, especially of this..." For it is positively to deceive the confessor in a grave matter, namely, in necessary matter of confession, concerning a thing necessary to be known.

Consequently this is grave not only if other recent mortal sins were not declared and therefore the penitent was falsely thought to be in the state of grace, or if otherwise he would escape a fitting penance, or it would be unknown that he is in a proximate occasion, but of itself and generally: both because each mortal sin is a distinct and separate cause to be subjected to the keys (n. 522), and because a lie in such a case is of itself going gravely to pervert the judgment of the confessor, in the same way as adding to committed mortal sins one not committed is a grave sin. And although the circumstance of time is not of itself to be declared, nevertheless it cannot be positively excluded with falsity in an accusation to be made by precept; because the sinner, by positively excluding it, by that very fact denies that he has sinned recently, which is false, and thus accuses a sin which he did not commit before and denies the sin which he now committed.

3. That he does not of himself sin, at least gravely, who feigns that he is making a general confession and nevertheless voluntarily omits some mortal sin previously confessed; indeed, he does not sin at all if there is a just cause of withholding it.

Unless, however, that mortal sin because of some reason had to be necessarily set forth: for then he would sin gravely.

4. That he does not of himself sin who accuses venial sins to one confessor, namely the ordinary one, but mortal sins to another, extraordinary one; not indeed if he obtains absolution from venial sins before he is absolved from mortal sins (for then he sacrilegiously receives the former absolution without the due dispositions), but if first he is absolved from mortal sins, afterward from venial sins,2 provided this is done from an honorable motive, e.g., for the sake of shame, or lest perhaps he be exposed to the danger of withholding a mortal sin; but if he intends the deception of the ordinary confessor, his own glory, or something else inordinate, it is a light sin.

Yet accidentally it is gravely sinful if a grave danger is present from this, because the state of the penitent is unknown to the ordinary confessor, e.g., if the penitent acted in this way in order to sin more freely, or thus remained in a proximate occasion, or if a young person did this so that he could be admitted to religious profession or the clerical state, while otherwise because of a habit of sinning perhaps he would be kept away.

5. That he does not of himself sin gravely who simulates voice or sex or uses other means so that he may not be recognized by the confessor, provided he opens all his mortal sins; for it is not necessary that the penitent be known by name. Indeed, if there is a legitimate cause and a right intention is had, a dissimulation of this sort is not sinful.

Yet accidentally it would be a grave sin if it were done purposely by one habitual in sin or relapsed, for deceiving the confessor and more easily extorting absolution, or if in this way the species of sin were no longer understood, as if a woman simulating the male sex were to confess that an abortion had been procured, which she procured in herself.

1. Indeed according to some he could not only keep this silent from the ordinary confessor, but even say: I have not approached for fifteen days, understanding underneath: to you; but this does not seem to be admitted unless there is a sufficiently grave reason for acting thus.

531. Remarks. - 1. The aforesaid concealments of themselves and generally are not to be approved, but rather reproved, because they harm perfect sincerity.

2. The penitent is bound to answer sincerely a confessor who asks, whenever the latter asks legitimately, e.g., about habit, time, relapse, proximate occasion, in one word about those things without which a prudent judgment cannot be rendered.

3. But if the question is manifestly indiscreet, as easily happens if it concerns name, native land, place of dwelling, whether he has confessed elsewhere, etc., the penitent is not bound to answer, since these things do not regard sacramental confession; indeed, if there is a just cause, he can use restriction in his answers.