Article Six. Concerning Absolving Recidivists.

394. Notion. A recidivist simply and generally is said to be that habituated person who after confession has relapsed into the same sin; but a recidivist formally, or in the theological sense, is said to be that habituated person who has already confessed the same sin several times and always relapses in the same way. Therefore three things are required in order that someone can truly be called a recidivist:

a. That he has contracted a depraved habit of sinning.

Per se it is not indeed necessary that a recidivist be a habitual sinner; for if someone confesses four times a year and at each time accuses himself of one sin of pollution committed, he is a recidivist, but is not a habitual sinner; for four lapses in a year do not suffice for contracting a habit. In fact, however, a recidivist will almost always be at the same time a habitual sinner.

b. That he has already confessed the same sin several times (three or four times).

Therefore a penitent who confesses the same sin during the first two or three times is not strictly a recidivist; consequently he is to be treated as a simple sinner if he has not yet contracted a depraved habit, or as a simple habitual sinner if he has already contracted the habit of sinning. Therefore there is no particular reason for doubting their disposition when they seriously say that they are sorry.

c. That he has relapsed without any effort of amendment having been employed; therefore he who for some time has employed the means prescribed by the confessor and has fought strenuously against temptations, even if afterward he has fallen again, is not properly a recidivist.

395. Norm of Absolving. 1. A recidivist who is prudently judged disposed can per se always be absolved: for he who can truly be judged disposed can be absolved, even though he is a recidivist; for nothing else is required for valid and licit absolution except that he be actually disposed; but future amendment is not required for true disposition, nor does foresight of future relapse prevent it.

2. But as regards recidivists the difficulty is in forming a judgment concerning their disposition; for from frequent relapse into the same sins there arises a grave suspicion of some depraved attachment, of slight horror of sin, and of defect of a serious will to amend oneself. This suspicion renders their disposition doubtful, even if they affirm that they are sorry for their sins, and therefore prevents them from being prudently judged disposed, unless some particular reason is added by which the doubt concerning disposition is sufficiently removed.

a. Much is always left to the prudence and discretion of the confessor, to whom the help of grace is always present, so that he may form for himself a judgment concerning the disposition of the penitent. In forming this judgment, first his own experience, and then also attention to certain particular signs, will help him (n. 390).

b. In order that a judgment concerning the disposition of a recidivist can be more easily formed, it must be noted that there are many recidivists from fragility. Of this kind are those who indeed often relapse into the same sins, but to whom sin habitually is displeasing, who therefore immediately detest the sin after the lapse and propose amendment, and who resist temptation in some way even for a time, but then succumb again both from weakness of will and from vehemence of temptation. Concerning the disposition of these one must not doubt. But there are also other recidivists from evil will, namely those who adhere with depraved affection to the object of sin and from this depraved affection often relapse into the same sins; nevertheless, either from custom or from human respect, they sometimes approach the sacraments, nor do they conceive a true and sincere will of amendment. The disposition of these is not doubtful, but rather null. Yet a good confessor does not dismiss these miserable sinners without absolution, but will try by salutary warnings to dispose them to amendment of life. But if he truly detects in them indications of a changed will, he can absolve these recidivists too.

396. Whether Absolution Should Be Deferred for a Recidivist.

a. If the recidivist, otherwise rightly disposed, has relapsed from internal fragility, as into sins of pollution, morose delectation, hatred, blasphemy, etc., ordinarily greater fruit is to be hoped from the grace of the sacrament than from the delay of absolution. Sometimes, however, even in this kind of sinners, delay of absolution will seem profitable to a prudent confessor, especially if the remedies are employed negligently.

b. If the recidivist, otherwise rightly disposed, has relapsed in an external occasion or because he has not fulfilled an obligation (e.g., of retracting calumny, of reconciling himself), it is ordinarily expedient that absolution be deferred until the occasion has been dismissed or the obligation fulfilled; for he who has already often broken faith must have his will, though good, strengthened by this remedy of deferred absolution.

Delay of absolution, with a suitable warning, especially in younger penitents of lighter character who are otherwise piously and religiously educated, and who either do not fulfill an obligation or do not lay aside a depraved habit, is an excellent means of striking in a greater detestation of sin and of strengthening their weak will.

c. If the recidivist is doubtfully disposed and the necessity of absolving him under condition does not urge, absolution per se must be deferred so that in this way the will of the penitent can be established by experience. But because in our times, especially in cities in which faith languishes and Christian duties are neglected, denial or delay of absolution generally profits little, indeed rather renders sinners offended and indignant and hardens them more, ordinarily the confessor acts better who tries to dispose such a penitent to sorrow and purpose, prescribes to him particular means of amendment, and absolves him.

Note. Lest the theory of St. Alphonsus concerning extraordinary signs of disposition be wrongly understood and applied, it must be noted: a. In occasionaries and recidivists extraordinary or greater sorrow and a firmer purpose are not required; for provided sufficient disposition is present, they can safely be absolved. b. The occasionary and the recidivist can always be absolved, provided he can be prudently judged by the confessor to be truly disposed, whatever may be the sign on which his judgment is founded: whether ordinary or extraordinary, whether the penitent has brought it to confession or finally exhibited it in confession at the warning of the confessor. g. Wherefore the confessor would act imprudently who judged an occasionary or recidivist simply indisposed unless he detected in him one or another of the extraordinary signs, and more imprudently still he who absolutely deferred absolution for a recidivist of this kind without having applied care and effort by salutary warnings to lead him to sorrow and purpose. But if the confessor has suitably performed this, it will generally happen as is asserted in these words: "it cannot happen that the penitent does not exhibit some sufficient sign of his soul; and therefore, when he affirms that he acts sincerely and that he wishes to perform those things which the confessor requires, the confessor can with a safe conscience impart absolution, even if the penitent has given no other sign of his conversion in advance."¹

Case. Recidivists in drunkenness and publicly known as such, who almost every week or even more often become drunk, are not altogether to be repelled from the sacraments, but ordinarily they are not to be admitted to them at once either. Not the first, because one must not despair of the amendment of any man; not the second, first because he cannot be absolved who is foreseen to be about to violate his purpose after a short time, unless necessity urges; for scandal would have to be feared if he relapsed immediately after receiving the sacraments. Then, because public scandal must first be repaired. Therefore absolution must be deferred for a penitent of this kind until he has at least somewhat amended himself. Indeed, even in the case in which, on account of an extraordinary sign of penance, he had been absolved at once, it is preferable not to admit him immediately to holy communion, both so that the public scandal may in the meantime be repaired by real amendment, and so that scandal perhaps about to arise from relapse may be avoided.

¹ Salvatori in Ballerini-Palmieri V, n. 187.