Article — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Article Second. On proximate matter.
233. The proximate matter of this sacrament is the three acts of the penitent: contrition, confession, and satisfaction as to be accepted. By the Council of Trent these acts are called the quasi-matter of the sacrament of penance.1 In what manner the acts of the penitent stand in this sacrament, whether they are true matter from which the sacrament is constituted and confected, or only a necessary condition so that sacramental absolution may obtain its effect (n. 222), dogmatic theologians dispute.2
a. With the Thomists, the common opinion of more recent authors affirms that the acts of the penitent are the true matter of this sacrament, which together with priestly absolution constitutes the sacramental sign efficacious of grace. These think that the Council of Trent calls these acts quasi-matter because they are not a material thing as water is in baptism.
b. The Scotists with a few more recent authors teach that the acts of the penitent are not matter from which the sacramental sign is essentially constituted, but only a condition necessarily prerequired so that absolution, which alone is the efficacious sign of grace, may produce its effect. These judge that by the Council of Trent these acts are called quasi-matter because they do not truly and properly have the character of sacramental matter. Nevertheless, this must be added: the Scotists conceive their opinion in a diverse manner. For several, especially the older ones (Bosco, Sporer, Holzmann, etc.), require contrition and sensible confession as a condition of valid absolution, because the nature of sacramental judgment demands knowledge of the cause; but others, especially the more recent authors (Ballerini, Berardi, etc.), teach that merely internal acts suffice for valid absolution, namely contrition, in which the purpose of confessing is always implicitly contained, and which alone is a sufficient disposition for obtaining pardon of sins through absolution.
alpha. The Church in the Council of Trent deliberately abstained from deciding this question (whether the acts of the penitent are the matter of this sacrament);3 wherefore we can follow either opinion theoretically and practically. But because the opinion which teaches that the acts of the penitent are the proximate matter of the sacrament does not lack its probability, absolutions cannot be held certainly valid when a sorrowful confession of the penitent, in some way sensible, has not preceded them. And since the opinion which teaches that the acts of the penitent have only the character of a necessary condition is not destitute of all probability, those also can be absolved under condition who manifest no sign of sorrow and confession.
beta. The practical importance of this controversy is seen especially in the absolution of the dying: for if the acts of the penitent are essential parts and true matter of this sacrament, which by its nature ought to be sensible, he cannot validly be absolved who does not outwardly manifest those acts by a sensible sign; but if they have only the character of a necessary condition and disposition, absolution will be valid even if those acts are not manifested outwardly.
2 Cf. Palmieri, De poenitentia, p. 144 ff.; Pesch, VII, n. 75 ff.; Ballerini-Palmieri, V, n. 9 ff.
3 Cf. Pallavicini, Historia concil. trid., l. 12, c. 10, 27.