Section — Prümmer, Manuale Theologiae Moralis
§ 1. On the Essence and Necessity of Confession
358. Definition. Sacramental confession is the accusation of one's own sins committed after baptism, made to a competent priest in order to obtain absolution from them. Therefore three things pertain to the essence of sacramental confession: a) The accusation of one's own sins. Hence confession is not a mere historical narration, but properly an accusation made to a spiritual judge; the object of this accusation is one's own sins committed after baptism, and therefore neither original sin, nor another's sin, nor mere imperfections which do not have the character of sin. b) Confession must be made to a competent priest. Therefore a confession knowingly made to a layman, as was customary in the Middle Ages, or to a priest who manifestly does not have the necessary jurisdiction, is not sacramental confession. c) Confession must be undertaken in order to obtain sacramental absolution. Therefore, if a penitent confesses his sins, for example, to test the confessor or for the sake of counsel, sacramental confession is not present. All these things are indeed to be noted when there is question of the seal of confession, because the obligation of the seal arises from sacramental confession alone and not from another confession.
The necessity of sacramental confession was denied by Wycliffe, who said: "If a man has been duly contrite, every exterior confession is superfluous and useless to him";159 by Peter of Osma;160 by Luther, who called confession "a most bloody torture chamber which torments wretched consciences"; by Calvin, who contended that auricular confession was introduced by Innocent III in the thirteenth century; and by modern Protestants, all of whom deny its necessity, although some acknowledge the utility of confession. Against all these it is established:
159 Cf. Denz., n. 587.
160 Ibid., n. 724 ff.
359. Thesis. Sacramental confession is necessary both a) by divine precept and b) by ecclesiastical precept.
a) Necessity by divine law. The Council of Trent161 sets forth Catholic doctrine thus: "The universal Church has always understood that the complete confession of sins was instituted by the Lord and is necessary by divine law for all who have fallen after baptism, because Our Lord Jesus Christ, being about to ascend from earth to heaven, left priests, His own vicars, as presidents and judges, to whom all mortal crimes into which Christ's faithful have fallen are to be brought, so that, by the power of the keys, they may pronounce the sentence of remission or retention of sins. For it is evident that priests could not have exercised this judgment without the cause being known, nor indeed could they have observed equity in enjoining punishments, if the faithful had declared their sins only in general and not rather in species and individually. From these things it is gathered that penitents must recount in confession all mortal sins of which they are conscious after a diligent examination of themselves, even if those sins are most hidden." From this text two things can be elicited: the necessity of confession introduced by divine law and the object of confession, namely, all mortal sins.
Proof 1. From Sacred Scripture. Although Christ said nothing directly concerning confession, nevertheless He certainly instituted it. For Christ instituted the sacrament of penance in the form of a judgment. But the form of a judgment cannot be observed without confession. Therefore Christ instituted confession. It has already often been said that the sacrament of penance was instituted in the form of a judgment, and this manifestly follows from the words of institution: Whose sins you shall forgive ... they are forgiven ...; whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. For if the apostles and their successors can remit certain sins but not remit others, they must first institute a judgment which is not arbitrary but diligent. Now they cannot institute such a judgment unless they know the sins themselves in particular. Moreover, they cannot know them in the ordinary manner unless the penitent himself has manifested them fully. Therefore confession is indirectly included in the judicial form of the sacrament of penance, and consequently is necessary by divine law, so that without it the sacrament of penance is administered invalidly. Nevertheless, the integrity of confession is not necessarily absolute, but is to be measured according to the strength of each man, since God demands nothing impossible. Therefore, if someone is unable to confess sins because of forgetfulness, or because he is deprived of his senses, he is capable of sacramental absolution.
To prove from Sacred Scripture the divine institution of confession, two further texts are adduced by certain authors, namely, in Acts 19:18 it is read: "Many of them that believed came, confessing and declaring their deeds," and in the Epistle of St. James 5:16 we are admonished: "Confess therefore your sins one to another." These texts can indeed be understood of sacramental confession, as several exegetes teach, though others contradict them.
Proof 2. From tradition. Already in the second century mention is made of confession in the text of the Didache cited above: "But on the Lord's Day, coming together, break bread and give thanks after you have confessed your offenses, so that your sacrifice may be clean."162 In the third century St. Cyprian163 says: "Let each one confess his offense, I beseech you, dearest brethren, while he who has offended is still in this world, while his confession can be admitted, while satisfaction and remission made through the priests is pleasing before the Lord." From the writings of Origen it is possible to see that both public and private confession were in use at that time and were employed according to the discreet judgment of the priest. "There is also a seventh remission of sins, although hard and laborious, through penance, when the sinner washes his bed with his tears and his tears become bread for him day and night, and when he is not ashamed to show his sin to the priest of the Lord and to seek medicine."164 From the fourth century texts of the Holy Fathers abound which speak of sacramental confession, for example, St. Ambrose,165 who himself heard the confessions of the faithful with great fervor. For Paulinus the deacon166 relates concerning him: "He was also rejoicing with those who rejoiced and weeping with those who wept, since, whenever anyone confessed his falls to him in order to receive penance, he so wept that he compelled him also to weep.... But the causes of the crimes which they confessed to him he spoke to no one except the Lord alone, with whom he interceded." For many other texts of ancient writers, see Billuart167 or Tanquerey168 or Paul Galtier.169
Proof 3 is commended from the manifold utility and fittingness of confession. For confession is: a) An excellent exercise of humility, by which the ruinous pride of the sinner is subdued. Therefore even the prodigal son in the Gospel had to say: "Father, I have sinned." b) A cause of interior peace and security. For although the sinner endeavors to destroy sin by sincere contrition and satisfaction, nevertheless he often remains doubtful whether he is worthy of the love or hatred of God, since no one is a judge in his own cause; but when he has candidly confessed all his sins to a pious and wise priest and has received absolution and salutary admonitions from him, he obtains peace of soul. Moreover, the confessor, knowing the interior state of the penitent's soul, can counsel him efficacious means for acquiring virtues. c) A safeguard of social order. For a prudent confessor urges the observance of divine and human laws, rightly orders the peace of domestic society and the republic, settles quarrels and dissensions, reconciles enemies, requires restitution for violated justice, and repairs or forestalls many scandals.
b) By ecclesiastical law sacramental confession is likewise necessary. For the Code of Canon Law, can. 906, establishes: "Every member of the faithful of either sex, after he has arrived at the years of discretion, that is, at the use of reason, is bound faithfully to confess all his sins at least once a year." The Fourth Lateran Council already established similar things in the year 1215.170
161 Session 14, c. 5, On Penance (Denz., n. 899).
162 Chapter 14, 1; cf. c. 4, 14. Rauschen (Euchar. u. Bußsakr. § 10) confidently, but without solid proof, asserts that this confession was not sacramental.
163 De lapsis c. 29 (Migne, Patr. lat. 4, 489).
164 Hom. in Lev. 2, 4 (Migne, Patr. graec. 12, 418).
165 De poenit. l. 2, c. 1 (Migne, Patr. lat. 16, 497).
166 In Migne, loc. cit. 14, 440.
167 De poenit., diss. 5, a. 1.
168 Synopsis Theol. mor., De poenit. c. 2.
169 De poenitentia, tractatus dogmatico-historicus, n. 421 ff.
170 Denz., n. 437.
360. Time of the obligation. 1. The divine precept of sacramental confession obliges both per se and per accidens.
Per se it obliges the sinner: a) at the point of death or in imminent danger of death, because the sinner must then altogether recover sanctifying grace, which in the present economy of salvation by the will of Christ is not restored to him who is able and neglects to confess mortal sins; hence he sins gravely who, conscious of a mortal sin not yet directly remitted, neglects confession at the point of death or in imminent danger of death. Hence, for example, a gravely ill person who through inculpable forgetfulness omitted a grave sin in confession, and who afterward worthily received Viaticum and Extreme Unction, is nevertheless bound, if he can, to confess the omitted sin before death, although it has already been indirectly remitted; b) several times in life. A sinner confessing at least once each year seems sufficiently to fulfill both the divine and the ecclesiastical precept.
Per accidens the divine precept obliges: a) if the sinner wishes to receive the Most Holy Eucharist; for then elicited contrition does not suffice, as was stated above in nn. 192 ff.; b) when the state of grace is required and the sinner is unable with moral certainty to elicit an act of perfect contrition; c) when a grave temptation and especially an evil habit cannot be overcome without the aid of confession.171
171 Cf. St. Thomas, Suppl., q. 6, a. 5.
361. 2. The ecclesiastical precept of confession establishes the following:
The subject of this ecclesiastical precept is all men capable of the use of reason who are conscious of mortal sin. Therefore neither the completely insane, nor children before the use of reason, nor those who are not conscious of mortal sin are bound to confession.
Before completing the first seven years of age, a person is very rarely obliged to confession. In our regions children are judged to have sufficient use of reason for making confession in the seventh or eighth year of their age.
Since the ecclesiastical precept seems to be nothing other than the determination of the divine precept, which indeed does not prescribe the confession of venial sins, hence he who has not committed mortal sins, either never or at least since his last confession, is not strictly bound to annual confession. Therefore in strict law he could approach Easter Communion without previous confession. Thus the precept of annual confession obliges only sinners, while the precept of Easter Communion obliges absolutely all the faithful capable of the use of reason. Thus the truer and more common opinion.172 It is evident of itself, however, that it is unbecoming and harmful if someone should refuse to confess even once a year. For 1. he deprives himself of many graces and notably of the grace conferred in the sacrament of penance; 2. he easily errs in judging something to be a venial sin which is in truth mortal; 3. it is unbecoming that someone burdened even only with venial sins should approach the Eucharist. Now it is not likely that one who refuses annual confession cleanses himself from venial sins by other remedies.
172 Cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 901; St. Alphonsus, Theol. mor. l. 6, n. 667. St. Thomas (loc. cit., a. 3 ad 3 and q. 8, a. 5 ad 4) thinks that even one who has not committed mortal sin ought once a year to present himself to the priest, not indeed to make confession, but so that the subjects may become known to the ruler of the church, lest a wolf lie hidden within the flock. In the time of the Angelic Doctor there still existed a law that the faithful had to make annual confession to their own pastor. Today, however, this law has been abolished, and therefore the faithful who have committed only venial sins are not bound even once a year to present themselves to the pastor.
362. The object of this ecclesiastical precept is the determination 1. of the time, namely, the space of one year, and 2. of the matter, namely, mortal sin.
As regards 1, the Council says: "at least once a year." Theologians do not agree as to how this year is to be computed. Some compute it according to the civil year, that is, from January to the following January; others from Easter to Easter; others think that the year begins from the time when the first mortal sin was committed. Today there exists the universal custom of computing the year from Easter to Easter, so that the faithful who confess during each Easter season do not transgress the precept of annual confession. But if someone guilty of mortal sin has not confessed during the Easter season, he must confess as soon as possible when an opportunity is given, because the ecclesiastical law of annual confession was imposed not to terminate the obligation, but to urge it. But one who did not confess his mortal sins in the preceding year satisfies by a confession made in the present year, nor is he bound to confess again in order to satisfy the obligation of the present year.173
As regards 2, only the confession of mortal sins is required. When someone had only venial sins in confession during the Easter season, but shortly afterward commits a mortal sin, according to certain authors he must confess again before the end of the year, for by accusing himself of venial sins he did not fulfill the precept of annual confession; nevertheless, other authors, for example, Ballerini-Palmieri174 and Génicot,175 probably teach that such an obligation is not established. Therefore the faithful who have confessed once in the year commonly think that they have satisfied the precept of annual confession.
The ecclesiastical precept is not satisfied through a sacrilegious confession, as is evident from proposition 14 condemned by Alexander VII: "He who makes a confession voluntarily null satisfies the precept of the Church."176 Before the Council of Trent it was sometimes required that annual confession be made before one's own priest, that is, the pastor, or at least before another priest with his express permission. Today the faithful can confess before any legitimately approved confessor, even one of another rite.177
A twofold penalty was inflicted upon those transgressing this precept of annual confession, namely, interdict from entrance into the church and deprivation of ecclesiastical burial. But each of these penalties was ferendae sententiae, that is, it was not incurred except after the sentence of the bishop, and today it is not customarily applied.
173 Cf. St. Alphonsus, l.c., n. 668.
174 Opus theol., De poenit., n. 1061.
175 Theol. mor. II, 323.
176 Denz., n. 1114; cf. Code of Canon Law, c. 907.
177 Code of Canon Law, c. 905.