Question Three: On the Fulfillment of Satisfaction or On Satisfactory Works

S. Th., Suppl., q. 15.

555. Principle I. All and only good and penal works can be satisfactory. - For, that a work may be truly satisfactory, it must repair a past offense and preserve from future fault. But all and only penal works do this. Therefore. For:

1. They compensate the offense inflicted upon God: for although, as far as concerns God on his part, properly nothing can be taken away from him, nevertheless the sinner, so far as in him lies, has taken away something of honor by sinning, while he attributed more to himself than was just, indulged his own will too much, and was delighted in created good too much, more than he ought. Hence for compensation, i.e., for restoring equality, something must be taken away from the sinner in honor of God;¹ and therefore it is necessary that a satisfactory work be not only good in honor of God, but also penal. For a good work, insofar as it is such, does not take away something from the one acting, but rather perfects him. Hence taking-away cannot be done through a good work unless it is penal, whereby something is taken away from the sinner, and he himself suffers something contrary to the natural inclination of his own will, or is deprived of a created good, useful or delightful. - But if the work were good and not penal, it would be only meritorious, not satisfactory.

¹ "Recompense for an offense imports an equalization, which must be of the one who offends toward him against whom the offense has been committed. But equalization in human justice is attended to by taking away from one who has more than is just, and adding to the other from whom something has been taken away" q. 15, a. 1.

2. Penal works also preserve from future fault, because a man does not easily return to sins from which he has experienced punishment. - Nor let it be said that God does not delight in our punishments; indeed he does not delight in them insofar as they are punishments, but insofar as they are just (q. 15, a. 1; cf. III, q. 86, a. 4).

In the present state of fallen nature there can scarcely be any good work which is not in some way penal, arduous, and laborious, namely, having affliction of the flesh and lack of a greater delight: for since of ourselves we tend toward creatures and toward sensible and earthly things, when, during some time, we act supernaturally for the sake of God, we make the work difficult and indeed afflictive and penal. This is true a fortiori if the work to be done is enjoined upon us.

556. The principal satisfactory works are alms, fasting, and prayer. - To these all other works can be reduced, for:

1. Satisfaction must be such that through it we take something away from ourselves in honor of God. But we have only three goods, namely, goods of the soul, goods of the body, and goods of fortune and external goods. From goods of fortune we take away something by alms, from goods of the body by fasting; from goods of the soul nothing is to be taken away as to their essence, because by these we are acceptable to God, but their use is to be taken away by prayer, by which we submit our faculties to God.

2. Satisfaction cuts away the causes of sins. But there are three roots of sins, namely, the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life. But against the concupiscence of the flesh fasting is ordered, against the concupiscence of the eyes alms, against pride prayer.

3. Satisfaction must not grant entrance to the suggestions of sins. But there are three kinds of sins: for sin is committed either against God, or against neighbor, or against ourselves. Against sins against God prayer is ordered; against sins against neighbor alms; against sins against ourselves fasting (q. 15, a. 3).

To these must be added scourges, i.e., the evils and adversities of the present life, which for sins are inflicted or permitted by God (Council of Trent, sess. 14, c. 9, can. 13): these, if they become in some way the very acts of the one suffering, insofar as he voluntarily accepts them for the purgation of sins, obtain satisfactory force. And indeed it is more laborious to will the punishment which in fact is inflicted than that which is voluntarily chosen (q. 15, a. 2).

557. Observations. - 1) Do not conclude that a work done from greater charity is so much less satisfactory because it is less penal. For although it is less penal and afflictive on the part of the subject, nevertheless it is not so objectively and in itself. Hence St. Thomas, q. 15, a. 1, ad 2:

"As in satisfaction penality is considered, so in merit difficulty is considered. But the diminution of difficulty which is on the part of the act, or object, diminishes merit, other things being equal; but the diminution of difficulty from the promptitude of the will does not diminish merit, but increases it. And similarly the diminution of penality from the promptitude of the will which charity causes does not diminish the efficacy of satisfaction but increases it."

2. All penal and satisfactory works are easily reduced to the three classes aforesaid. Because satisfaction is made by fasting insofar as by it goods of the body are taken away, through which affliction is caused; and whatever affliction is caused by the taking-away of some good of one's own, therefore "whatever pertains to the affliction of the body is wholly referred to fasting; and for a similar reason, whatever is expended for the utility of the neighbor has wholly the nature of alms; and likewise whatever worship is exhibited to God receives the nature of prayer; and therefore even one work can have several notions of satisfying" (q. 15, a. 3, ad 5), e.g., when someone prays to God for the neighbor, and when someone afflicts the flesh for another.

3. Therefore a) under the name of alms are comprehended all works of mercy, whether corporal or spiritual: corporal, for example, to furnish money, food, clothing to the needy, to visit the poor man, or the sick man, or the captive, and to bring him even the least help; spiritual, for example, to console the sorrowful, to furnish counsel to anxious and troubled families, to instruct the ignorant man even with a few words, to correct the delinquent even once, to forgive injuries, to bear patiently the defects of others, to pray for others. - As to monetary alms, lest he incur suspicion of avarice, the confessor should not impose Masses to be celebrated by himself, nor accept for himself those imposed, nor alms to be distributed by himself or to come to his own. "Confessors," says the Ritual, n. 21, "should not apply monetary penances to themselves; nor should they ask or accept anything from penitents as a reward of their ministry."

b) By the name of fasting is understood every act of mortification, whether internal or external. Such is fasting properly so called and integral, which nevertheless today it is often not expedient to impose; the taking away of some part, especially a delicate one, at breakfast, dinner, or supper; abstinence from meats on a certain day; deprivation of food or drink outside breakfast, dinner, and supper; total deprivation of intoxicating drink for a brief time; moderation in sleep or recreations, indeed also abstinence from play, hunting, banquets, from dances or spectacles, from useless and dangerous conversations; mortification, for a certain time, of vain curiosity, in sight, hearing, in reading books or newspapers; rising more quickly from bed; keeping silence for a certain time; afflictions of the flesh by hair-shirts or scourgings; holding oneself on bended knees or with arms extended; kissing the ground; interior acts of obedience, humility, charity toward enemies, etc.; - finally patience, for a determined time, for those who labor much or feel bitter pains, or suffer persecution, to whom it is expedient to suggest acts of resignation, e.g., Into thy hands, O Lord, I commend my spirit; - Not my will, but thine be done; - For thee, O Jesus, to suffer and be contemned.

c) By the name of prayer is understood every work of religion and piety which regards the worship of God, namely, both prayers properly so called, for example, five Our Fathers and Hail Marys; Hail Mary three times morning and evening; the Angelus of the Lord; recited acts of faith, hope, and charity; an act of sorrow elicited in the evening; the rosary; various litanies; certain psalms or hymns; the Office or part of the Office; the Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary; the sacrifice of the Mass; novena prayers in honor of the Saints; ejaculatory prayers so many times during the day; - and mental prayers, such as a short meditation on the last things or on the Passion of the Lord; pious reading of some chapter of Scripture, or of the book On the Imitation of Christ, or another; offering of oneself and of all one's actions and sorrows in the morning and several times during the day; renewal of a good purpose; - and any practice of piety, such as visitation of the Blessed Virgin and imploring perseverance from her; the exercise of the Way of the Cross; hearing a sermon; pilgrimage; frequent reception of the sacraments; sacramental confession to be made immediately after a fall or at a stated time.

558. Principle II. The penitent is obliged to accept and fulfill the penance reasonably imposed on him by the confessor. - This is certain, because of Lateran Council IV, which declares: "Let each of the faithful strive according to his powers to fulfill the penance enjoined on him"; and because of Trent, sess. 14, c. 8, from whose doctrine it can be concluded; and because of the Code of Law, can. 887.

It is proved: 1) The confessor, as judge, has the power of binding or obliging to punishment, and the right and office of imposing penance. But to this office and right, unless it were useless, there corresponds in the penitent, as accused, an obligation of accepting and fulfilling the penance.

2. The penitent, no less than the confessor, is obliged to procure the integrity of the sacrament; but sacramental satisfaction is an integral part of the sacrament.

3. Finally, each one is bound to obey a judge rightly judging and punishing. The confessor is a judge. Therefore, if he judges and punishes rightly and reasonably, the penitent must accept and fulfill the penance.

Nevertheless the obligation does not urge: a) if the confession was invalid, because, the sacrament being deficient, no obligation arises;

b) likewise if absolution was not given, unless nevertheless a medicinal penance is imposed as the condition of future absolution, or is now prescribed so that a lesser one can be enjoined when the penitent is absolved: for then it must be fulfilled by reason of the absolution to be received;

c) if the penance was not reasonably imposed, considering the present discipline of the Church, as if it were openly unjust or impossible, e.g., a fast on water and bread for an idle word, or a pilgrimage for a sick man. But if it seems too burdensome to the penitent, he can ask that it be changed or diminished, and the confessor will regularly acquiesce in this desire; and, if he refuses, the penitent can depart without absolution and confess to another, or accept the penance and ask another confessor to commute it. - But if someone were to refuse every satisfaction grave in itself, even a reasonable one, and were willing to accept only a light one, of himself he would not be excused from mortal sin, nor should he be absolved.

559. The obligation of fulfilling penance is grave from its kind, so that the penitent is held under grave obligation to fulfilling a penance which is legitimately enjoined under grave obligation. - This is certain.

For the confessor, as minister and judge, has the power of prescribing the things which pertain to the integrity of the sacramental judgment and of the sacrament, and indeed under grave obligation in a grave matter. But satisfaction pertains to the integrity of the judgment and of the sacrament; and it is an integral part of grave moment, when a notable punishment is imposed for grave offenses. Therefore the confessor can prescribe satisfaction, and indeed for grave offenses a notable punishment under grave obligation. - And therefore not to fulfill such satisfaction is to render the sacrament incomplete and mutilated in a grave matter. And it is irreverence toward the sacrament to accept a penance which someone would be unwilling to fulfill.

But that in fact there be a grave obligation, three conditions are required: 1) on the part of the penitent, a grave fault not yet rightly subjected; 2) on the part of the matter, satisfaction grave in itself; 3) on the part of the confessor, the intention of obliging under grave obligation. Hence:

a) He sins gravely who omits totally, or in notable part, a satisfaction obliging under grave obligation.

b) Nevertheless the confessor can, for grave offenses, impose a grave penance under light obligation, because the obligation depends on the intention of the one prescribing.² Yet this is generally not expedient, both because of itself it is not fitting for grave sin, to which, according to the Council of Trent, sess. 14, c. 8, the penance is to be proportioned, and because ordinarily the obligation ought to be proportioned to the matter; hence the confessor is judged to oblige under grave obligation when grave satisfaction is imposed for mortal sins not yet accused, unless he expressly says the contrary. - Nevertheless perhaps he could oblige under light obligation when another penance has already been imposed under grave obligation: then another, graver one can be added under light obligation, so that counsel may be taken for the infirmity of the penitent, or so that satisfaction may be greater.

² Nevertheless the confessor could not enjoin satisfaction without obligation and under counsel only, because thus he would not use the power of binding nor truly prescribe, since there is no precept without obligation.

c) A light penance obliges under light obligation, because light matter is not capable of grave obligation.

d) Satisfaction grave in itself, imposed for venial sins or for mortal sins directly remitted, probably obliges under light obligation, because the confessor is judged not to have wished to oblige under grave obligation, and otherwise penance of itself ought to be proportioned to the gravity of the sin; an exception is made if grave penance is enjoined for light sins which dispose greatly to mortal sins, so that that danger may be removed, e.g., for a tepid religious, for a girl exposed to danger: for then the natural law of avoiding proximate occasions of sin urges.

e) He who omits a circumstance of the penance sins gravely or lightly according as the circumstance is grave or light, according as in itself or relatively to the penitent it causes grave or light trouble. Thus a light circumstance is: to recite the rosary before an image of the Blessed Virgin or on bended knees; but grave, on the contrary, to do this with arms extended. In practice it is not expedient to impose many circumstances; and, if they are imposed, ordinarily they are not grave, unless they render the work much more difficult.

560. Principle III. Satisfaction must be fulfilled in that manner in which it is determined by the confessor, both in itself and in its circumstances. - For the whole obligation depends upon the intention of the one prescribing. Hence:

A. Satisfaction must be fulfilled:

1. At the time assigned by the confessor; and if no time has been stated, as soon as morally possible, as the presumed intention of the confessor, the good of the penitent himself, and the integrity of the sacrament require, which remains defective and incomplete until the satisfaction is fulfilled.

But it is not required that it be fulfilled before absolution or Communion (prop. 22 condemned by Alexander VIII),1 or even, at least for validity, before the following confession; although it should be urged upon all that after confession has been completed it be fulfilled at once, lest perhaps it fall into forgetfulness. Hence:

a) he sins who, without reason, delays penance for some time, even not very long;

b) but he sins gravely if he delays a penance obliging under grave obligation: 1) if inability to fulfill it afterward is foreseen; 2) if the substance of the prescribed work is notably diminished; 3) if it is medicinal, so that delay impedes the end and induces danger of relapse; 4) if danger of forgetfulness is imminent, and therefore in practice, because of this danger, to delay for a long time is mortal;

c) he sins only lightly who, even if the time has been determined by the confessor, delays a little, unless perhaps in fixing the term the circumstance of time is equally principally intended by the confessor, e.g., fasting on the vigil of a feast in honor of it;

d) he sins only lightly who long delays a light penance or one imposed under light obligation;

e) if the penance has not been discharged at the stated time, the burden of performing it as soon as possible remains, because time is something accessory in relation to the essence of the obligation, and was prescribed not for ending but for urging the obligation: for the precept of the confessor primarily regards the thing to be rendered, secondarily the circumstance of time.

2. By the penitent himself, but not by another unless with the consent of the confessor: for satisfaction is an integral part of the sacrament, whose matter is the acts of the penitent; and therefore it must be accomplished by the penitent himself, just as contrition and confession; as is clear from prop. 15 condemned by Alexander VII.2

Yet a) the confessor can, when a just cause is present, permit satisfaction to be furnished by another, e.g., fasting, pilgrimage, from the motion and petition of the penitent: then the satisfaction imposed on the penitent is to ask this from another, or the very procuring of the work through another. Yet ordinarily this is not expedient, because then the penance is not medicinal, especially if it is an act altogether personal and as such afflictive.

Also b) the penitent can fulfill the real satisfaction of alms merely ministerially through another as a mandatary, whether that person pays from the goods of the penitent, or even from his own goods, because it would be the same as if he made a donation to the penitent, who would spend it in alms; - unless nevertheless the confessor expressly prohibits this last thing.

3. From the intention of fulfilling satisfaction, which intention nevertheless is already had by the very fact that satisfaction is accepted. Hence:

a) If someone, unmindful of the penance, fulfills the prescribed work, which is due by no other title and is ordered to no other end, by that very fact he fulfills it, because he is judged to will to satisfy before he wills to do a supererogatory work.

b) On the contrary, if, mindful or unmindful, he positively orders the work to another end and explicitly or implicitly excludes the intention of fulfilling, he does not fulfill the satisfaction. Thus, for example, if a rosary is imposed on one who recites it daily, he can at his own choice choose that the first rosary be said for the sake of devotion, the second as sacramental penance; or, on the contrary, fulfill the penance by the first daily rosary.

B. On the contrary, satisfaction does not necessarily have to be fulfilled in the state of grace, because ordinarily the intention of the confessor is not to impose that it be fulfilled in the state of grace, although he desires this, unless by accident the state of grace is necessary for the substance of the prescribed work, e.g., Communion or an indulgence: for to fulfill the precept the prescribed work as to its substance suffices, although the end of the precept is not immediately obtained; the end of the precept does not fall under the precept.

1. "They are to be judged sacrilegious who claim a right to receiving Communion before they have done condign penance for their offenses."

2. "The penitent, by his own authority, can substitute another for himself, who fulfills the penance in his place."

561. The obligation of fulfilling satisfaction ceases:

1. When fulfillment becomes physically or morally impossible for someone.

2. When the penitent has forgotten it, even if from culpable negligence, and cannot conveniently approach the confessor who can be presumed to remember it: for to repeat the confession before the same confessor, or to ask commutation from another confessor, is an extraordinary means and a grave burden to which no one is strictly obliged, although it is better. Nevertheless it is expedient that the penitent, in this case, voluntarily impose a work upon himself, to supply in some way for sacramental penance.

3. When someone has legitimately obtained commutation of the penance.

562. Principle IV. Sacramental penance can be commuted, for a just cause, not indeed by the penitent himself, but by a confessor who has equal power with him who imposed it.

A. Satisfaction cannot be commuted by the penitent, nor by another, whether layman or priest lacking jurisdiction, not even into a more perfect or graver one, otherwise than for a vow, where the one vowing is his own legislator. For 1) a change of penance imports a new judgment which cannot be rendered except by a judge; - 2) an inferior cannot commute the law of a superior even into something better; - 3) no work can be elevated to the dignity and efficacy of sacramental satisfaction except by the power of the minister himself, by force of the keys. This is also clear from the condemned prop. 15 of Alexander VII, already cited in n. 560, A, 2.

B. It can be changed either by the same confessor or by another having equal power. For penance is imposed by way of particular law; but law can be changed either by the legislator, or by a successor, or by a superior. Likewise satisfaction is the complement of absolution; therefore no one except him who can absolve from sin can also commute satisfaction: for the accessory follows the principal. Hence a penance imposed by a superior for a reserved case can be commuted only by a confessor having power to absolve from reserved cases, unless a grave inconvenience for the penitent is present and access to the superior is not easy, in which case the reservation itself can cease (can. 900).

But that satisfaction can be commuted, three conditions are required:

1. The very exercise of judicial power or of sacramental judgment, and therefore moral union between the commutation and absolution: for satisfaction is the complement of absolution, and the elevation of a work to the dignity of sacramental satisfaction cannot be done by the minister except insofar as he is judge and insofar as he exercises sacramental judgment and pronounces absolution. Hence:

a) The same confessor can change the penance immediately after absolution before the penitent departs, because the same judgment morally perseveres; indeed also outside confession for one day or perhaps even for several days, provided the confessor remembers the sins at least in a confused way, because the new penance imposed is morally united with the absolution given; it is the same judgment continued. - But if the time were a little longer, for security a new confession would have to be instituted and a new absolution granted, so that the commutation certainly may be valid, and the new penance certainly valid and sacramental. Namely, the safer thing must be done in favor of the penitent, who has a certain right to this, and because it concerns the validity of sacramental penance.

b) But if commutation is sought from another confessor, because he does not have the power of commuting except in sacramental judgment, he cannot change it except in confession and with the granting of a new absolution, whether to be given at once or afterward; otherwise the injunction of penance would not be a judicial act, nor would the satisfaction itself be sacramental.

2. Sufficient knowledge of the state of the penitent; otherwise the new penance could be neither proportioned nor medicinal. Hence:

a) If the penitent approaches the same confessor, who remembers at least in a confused way the state of the penitent, it is not necessary to repeat the confession.

b) If he approaches another confessor, neither is it necessary to repeat the confession integrally, but it suffices to make a summary one, or even, in the confession of other sins, to declare the penance previously imposed, if this suffices for knowing the state of the penitent sufficiently.

3. A just cause, namely, the spiritual good of the penitent. For the power conferred by Christ is not judged to be conferred unto destruction but unto edification; indeed power which is exercised in the name of God is granted only to be exercised reasonably. But a just cause is judged to be necessity, notable utility of the penitent, such as spiritual progress or a more opportune medicine, excess in the former penance or grave difficulty in its execution, danger of transgression, etc. Hence:

a) The petition alone of the penitent is not sufficient: in that case let the confessor urge fulfillment, say that the penance is proportioned to the sins, etc., unless he fears, because of frailty, that the penitent will not fulfill it.

b) Provided a just cause is present, a change can be made even if it is not sought by the penitent, provided nevertheless he consents; for indeed he can stand in the way of the change if he regards it as a burden.

c) Although medicinal penances can validly be changed, nevertheless let them not be commuted if they have not become morally impossible.

563. Corollaries. - 1. The penitent can discharge the enjoined penance even while he fulfills another prescribed work; for example, by hearing Sunday Mass he can recite prayers or the rosary for the penance: for when the Church prescribes good works, she does not exclude other pious works compossible with them.

2. Enjoined prayers, unless something else is expressly determined, are imposed in that manner in which generally according to the practice of the Church they are discharged; for example, psalms, litanies, the rosary, can be recited alternately with a companion; the hearing of daily Mass is to be understood so that on Sunday it is heard only once, etc. On the other hand, prayers which are customarily recited vocally by the faithful, such as psalms, litanies, and other things, it does not suffice to run through with the eyes and mind only, from a book; the contrary is true for meditation. If penitents as to these things are in good faith and think mental recitation suffices, they are not to be disturbed, because it does not regard the value of the sacrament; but if they ask how the penance is to be discharged, they must be instructed according to the principles handed down.

3. Once commutation has been made, the penitent can, if he wills, choose the satisfaction previously enjoined, because commutation, as favoring the penitent, is judged to be made under this condition: unless the penitent wishes to return to the former one.

4. The penitent is by no means freed from the first penance if, by repeating the confession before another confessor, he makes no mention of the prior confession and penance, both because he is bound to render the first sacrament integral, and because for commuting the penance there is required on the part of the confessor a positive act of will by which the prior obligation is revoked.

5. Many judge, because of some saying of St. Thomas,³ that by the prayer: The Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ..., all subsequent good works of the penitent, or "whatever good he has done and evil he has sustained," are elevated by the confessor to the dignity of sacramental satisfaction. Yet this has no foundation at all, "for the words, in the way in which they are pronounced, seem rather to be the prayer of a priest imploring that all things be well for the penitent: for he does not elevate to sacramental being the Passion of Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin, and of all the Saints." Thus Billuart, de Poen., diss. IX, art. 9, who nevertheless adds that this can be admitted if the confessor intended this concerning the future goods of the penitent, and indicated this to him. - Since the matter is very doubtful, there is no reason for diminishing the sacramental penance to be imposed on penitents.

³ Quodl. III, q. 13, a. 28.