Article V. On the Absolution of the Dying.

292. In absolving the dying, of itself the same rules must be observed which are established concerning the absolution of others; wherefore it is not licit to absolve a dying person who with moral certitude is judged indisposed, as if he refuses to fulfill a grave obligation, because it is not licit knowingly to frustrate a sacrament. Yet since in absolving the dying a threefold difficulty especially is usually encountered, on account of defect of entire confession, on account of defect of disposition, and on account of defect of sensible accusation, these matters must be treated in particular.

1. The dying are excused from the precept of integrity on account of either physical or moral impotence: for no one is bound to the impossible.

Hence a. if the dying man, after one or another sin has been said, fails or is deprived of the senses, he is meanwhile to be absolved. b. Likewise, if the sick person cannot institute a longer confession without grave detriment to health or without great difficulty, after the sins which he can accuse without too great difficulty have been heard, he is to be absolved. c. If the sick person on account of weakness of the head cannot institute a more accurate examination of conscience, after those things which he can declare without examination have been heard, he is to be absolved. d. Indeed, if only in general, either by words or by other signs, he can declare that he has sinned, he is to be absolved, and indeed absolutely, unless for another reason a condition must be added; nevertheless, in all these cases the omitted things must afterward be supplied, if this can be done.

293. 2. As regards disposition, this is always supposed in the dying deprived of the senses unless it is certain that it is lacking. Therefore under condition are absolved: a. not only those who lived as Christians, even if before they were deprived of the senses they gave no sign of penance; but b. also those who lived not very Christianly; indeed c. even those who in the very act of sin, e.g., in a duel, in theft, from suicide, etc., were deprived of the senses. For it can happen that they have lucid intervals, in which they know their state and the danger of eternal damnation, and, after an act of sorrow has been elicited, desire to be reconciled with God through absolution. If, therefore, they can morally be sufficiently disposed, in this extreme necessity it is licit to absolve them.

Therefore those cannot be absolved at death in whom an act of penance can be supposed by no reasonable foundation; or, as the Roman Ritual has it, the "impenitent and those who die in manifest mortal sin" are not to be absolved.¹ Of this kind are, first, those who up to that time at which they were deprived of the senses expressly rejected the minister of the Church and its sacraments; then also those who lived so impiously that they knowingly persevered in sin and impenitence up to the extreme moments of life, although they did not reject the sacraments of the Church which had not been offered to them. For with no probability, not even a slight one, can these be presumed disposed, unless God converts them to himself by an extraordinary miracle of grace; but extraordinary miracles of grace are neither to be presumed nor can they be the norm in administering the sacraments.

¹ Roman Ritual, tit. 5, c. 1, n. 8.

294. 3. Finally, as regards sensible accusation, it is licit to absolve not only the dying who manifest before the confessor by words or other signs the desire of confessing, but also dying persons deprived of the senses who signified the desire of confessing through others, for example by asking for a confessor, who testify this to the confessor; indeed also those who manifested the desire of confessing outwardly by no sign: for this is held by the common practice received today in the Church.

a. Absolution is to be given absolutely if the dying person, whether by himself or by another, manifested the desire of confession; and it is to be given conditionally if he gave no sign of confession and sorrow.¹ Moreover, since according to a probable opinion it suffices that the condition be added virtually and implicitly, and anyone who administers the sacraments according to the mind of the Church adds it thus,² it is not necessary that the confessor be very anxious about conditional absolution.

b. The greatest difficulty of this matter is in explaining the validity of absolution which is given to a dying man who shows no external sign of sorrow and confession: for if the acts of the penitent outwardly manifested are said to be either an essential part of the sacrament or a necessary condition of valid absolution, it does not appear by what reason a dying man of this kind can be validly absolved.

For this reason the older authors commonly declare this absolution invalid and illicit.³ Nevertheless, in the course of time the number of authors who called this absolution licit so increased that Lacroix could call their opinion common,⁴ and St. Alphonsus could call the same the more common.⁵

The authors try to explain that such absolution is valid in a twofold way. Some say that it can be piously and not imprudently presumed that the dying man manifests outwardly, by sighs, anxious respirations, and other movements of the body, the desire of confessing inwardly conceived, since he cannot do it otherwise. But others say that a man who lived piously, indeed also one who, even if he did not live piously at all, nevertheless did not depart from the Church, by the very fact that he lived piously, or at least remained in the Church, manifested the desire that he wished at death to be reconciled with God through the sacrament of penance.

But each explanation is pressed by great difficulties. The first, indeed, because it does not appear by what right physical movements, which of themselves signify only distress of the body, can be held as signs of sorrow and confession. But the other, because it cannot be applied at least to those dying persons who are deprived of the senses in the act of sin: for "it would be ridiculous," says de Lugo, "that today someone would wish to accuse himself of a sin to be committed tomorrow, so that tomorrow he may be absolved from it by force of this accusation."⁶ Wherefore some recent authors, with Ballerini leading, think that no external sign of sorrow and confession is required so that a dying person deprived of the senses can be validly and licitly absolved. For the acts of the penitent have only the ratio of necessary disposition; therefore a dying person deprived of the senses can be validly and licitly absolved, who by a certain slight probability can be presumed to have elicited an act of attrition concerning his sins either before or after he was deprived of the senses (n. 233).⁷

Note 1. From physiological experiments it seems to be established that real death, i.e., the very separation of soul and body, does not occur at the same time at which the vital functions of respiration and circulation cease, but that life after the last expiration still continues latently for some time. How long life still endures latently after apparent death depends both on the quality of the disease and on the constitution of the dying person. In sudden death life can be prolonged beyond a day (some think through three days), in ordinary death beyond a half hour (others think through a day). From these things it is gathered that to a man who by common estimation is already judged dead, if he died from a long illness, within a half hour, but if he died from sudden disease or a sudden accident, within two, indeed several, hours, the necessary sacraments ought to be administered under condition; but the non-necessary sacraments can be administered under condition, because he probably is at least still living.⁸ And indeed extreme unction is administered in the briefest way, i.e., with one form and one anointing on the forehead, because there is the greatest danger in delay. Nor is it necessary that in this case, besides the prayers placed in the Ritual, anything afterward be supplied, since there is no further doubt concerning the sacramental validity conferred in this way.

Note 2. As regards the manner of acting with dying persons of this kind, it helps to note these things. Because it is established by experience that the dying apparently deprived of the senses sometimes have the use of reason and hearing, before the sacraments themselves are administered they are to be warned about the sacraments which are administered to them, and acts of contrition and also of the theological virtues are to be recited very briefly at their ear.

¹ Roman Ritual, tit. 3, c. 1, n. 24.

² Cf. Gury, Theol. mor. II, n. 206.

³ Laymann, l. 5, tr. 6, c. 8, n. 4; Suarez, disp. 23, sect. 1, n. 13; Coninck, disp. 7, dub. 10, n. 96; Lugo, disp. 17, sect. 3.

⁴ Lacroix, l. 6, pr. 2, n. 1162.

⁵ St. Alphonsus, n. 482.

⁶ L.c., n. 39.

⁷ Cf. Ballerini-Palmieri V, n. 240 ff.

⁸ Cf. Villada, Casus conscientiae, pr. 3, p. 235 ff.; Ferreres, La morte reale e la morte apparente (Rome: Typograph. Salesiana, 1905); Antonelli, Medicina pastoralis 3 (Rome: Pustet, 1909), II, n. 979 ff.; Ferreres-Geniesse, Der wirkliche Tod und der Scheintod (Coblenz: Central-Auskunftsstelle, 1908).

295. Whether absolution can be granted to heretics in the article of death, whether they are in possession of their senses or deprived of them. Authors have diverse opinions in this question. St. Alphonsus with very many others denies that absolution can be granted to them (n. 483), unless they expressly ask for it, because they manifest no desire of absolution; rather they must be judged to abhor it. Nevertheless there are several authors (such as Gobat, Lacroix, Reuter, Elbel, etc.) who judge that absolution can be granted to them, because in those who are in possession of their senses an implicit desire of absolution can be stirred up by suitable warnings; but in those who are deprived of the senses that implicit desire is supposed with at least slight probability.

a. A dying non-Catholic still in possession of his senses, who on account of peculiar circumstances cannot be warned about conversion to the Catholic Church, after the things to be premised have been premised, can licitly be absolved secretly under condition, provided he is prudently judged to be a material heretic who lives outside the Catholic Church in good faith.

Before absolution, let the confessor take care to elicit with the dying man acts of faith, hope, charity, and perfect contrition; of faith indeed explicit in the absolutely necessary articles, but implicit in the others; that he declare himself a sinner before God and the priest; and finally that he show that he desires to be helped by the priest, as far as this one can, in attaining eternal life, or at least that he wishes to perform all things which by the precept of Christ are necessary for salvation. For the absolution which is given to a heretic of this kind can be invalid either from defect of intention or from defect of sorrowful confession; now, both implicit intention and sorrowful confession made in general are contained in those acts.

b. A dying non-Catholic deprived of the senses, after the acts mentioned above have been premised at his ear, can secretly be absolved under condition if by at least slight probability he can be held disposed. But whether in a heretic, even a material one only, the desire of absolution can or cannot be supposed with slight probability, others judge otherwise. St. Alphonsus indeed denies it.

c. But outside the article of death it is not licit to absolve a heretic (or schismatic), even if only material and existing in good faith, if he intends to persist in heresy, because this could not be done without scandal to others: for heretics would be confirmed in error and Catholics would conceive horror of the matter.¹

d. If in a dying heretic there exists a doubt concerning the validity of baptism, or only a light doubt, he himself, after the necessary acts have first been premised, must secretly be baptized under condition.

¹ Holy Office, 20 July 1898. Cn. 731, 2.