§ II. On the Offices of the Confessor in Particular

The four aforesaid offices of father, physician, teacher, and judge must be exercised by the confessor toward all penitents, although not in the same degree nor in the same manner; but according to the diversity of penitents special difficulties can be present, to be resolved by him, and which consequently introduce special obligations. Here we shall treat especially of the manner of acting of the confessor 1°. toward those who are situated in an occasion of sin; 2°. toward habitual sinners and relapsers; 3°. toward pious and timorous penitents.

An occasion of sin is generally defined as an external circumstance which, whether from its own nature or from the frailty of the man who is found in it, allures or induces to sinning. Hence it differs from the danger of sinning, under which appellation comes whatever impels to sin, whether it is intrinsic or extrinsic. - Occasion is distinguished manifoldly, namely proximate or remote; voluntary or necessary; present or not present. Therefore:

1°. A proximate occasion is that in which men commonly for the most part sin; but a remote occasion is that in which men commonly for the most part do not sin. But each is called either absolute or of itself, when of itself it thus much or little induces to sinning, so that it is such with respect to men taken commonly; or relative or by accident, when it is such only with respect to someone, his frailty being considered, if it is proximate; his firmness of soul, piety, or prudence being considered, if it is remote.

2°. A voluntary occasion is one which can easily be dismissed; but a necessary occasion is one which physically or morally cannot be removed, or at least one which can be dismissed only with great difficulty, that is, by undergoing notable temporal detriment in life, reputation, or fortune.

3°. A present occasion, or one in esse, is one which a person has with himself without actually seeking it, for example, if he keeps a concubine at home or is accustomed to sin with a maidservant; but a non-present occasion, or one not in esse, is one which a person indeed does not have in act, but easily finds, as a tavern is relative to a drunkard, a mistress with respect to a lover. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 452.

I say. Absolution must never be denied to a penitent constituted in a remote occasion, even if he is unwilling to leave it; nevertheless it must be denied to one constituted in a proximate occasion if the occasion is at the same time voluntary; but if it is necessary, it cannot be denied, at least by force of that occasion. The reason of the first is both because a remote occasion does not induce a proximate danger of sin, and because otherwise we would have to depart from this world. But the reason of the second is because then the penitent is not sufficiently disposed. Besides, it is established from proposition 61 condemned by Innocent XI, which reads thus: "He can sometimes be absolved who is situated in a proximate occasion which he can and does not wish to omit; indeed, he directly and deliberately seeks it or thrusts himself into it." But the reason of the third is because, on the one hand, no one is held to the impossible, whether that is physically impossible or only morally impossible; and on the other hand an occasion of sin of itself is not a formal sin. - I said at least by force of that occasion, because the other dispositions must be present, and especially a firm promise of applying remedies by which the danger of sinning formally may be removed. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 455.

You Will Resolve. 1°. He can be absolved who does not wish to undergo notable temporal detriment in order to flee a proximate occasion, if otherwise he is found disposed, because then there would be moral impossibility of avoiding the occasion. But notable detriment is not the same for all, but is diverse according to the diversity of persons, and must be measured by the common estimation of timorous men.

2°. It is not always necessary that the penitent in fact leave a proximate and voluntary occasion before absolution is given, but often a sincere promise suffices. This must be said especially concerning the case in which the penitent gives extraordinary signs of sorrow, or some extrinsic cause is present impelling to the giving of absolution, for example, danger of incurring disgrace in omitting Communion, the desire of gaining an indulgence, etc., etc.

3°. Nevertheless, if the penitent is found in those circumstances which require some effort, for example, in fleeing some companion or not going, in certain circumstances of time, persons, etc., to some house; or if there is question of an occasion in esse which can easily and immediately be dismissed, then it will belong to the prudence of the confessor to weigh whether it is expedient that first the penitent conquer the difficulty and in fact leave the occasion, and afterward receive absolution. For that is commonly expedient.

A habitual sinner is called one who, from frequency in a certain kind of sins, has contracted a habit or depraved inclination of committing those same sins. But what frequency is required and suffices for contracting a habit cannot be accurately defined, although it seems certain that a habit is more easily acquired in external sins committed uniformly than through an interrupted frequency of internal sins.

But a relapser, at least in the theological sense, is called that sinner who, having confessed many times, always relapses in the same way. Wherefore a relapser is almost always a habitual sinner, but not conversely. I said in the theological sense, because by force of the word a relapser simply is one who, after some sin once confessed, commits it again. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 459. - Lehmkuhl, nn. 490 and following.

I say 1°. Every habitual sinner can always be absolved, although no amendment has preceded, provided he seriously proposes this and shows sufficient signs of contrition. The reason is because a depraved habit is not properly a sin, but a certain inclination and facility toward committing it, and consequently of itself it ought not to impede absolution from being given; otherwise those who have more vehement passions and a greater proclivity to evil ought not to be absolved, which certainly is absurd.

I say 2°. A relapser who gives no hope of amendment at all cannot be absolved; nor does the simple and bare fact of approaching confession ordinarily found that hope; and consequently it is false to assert that a relapser can be absolved as often as he approaches the sacrament. The reason of the first is because only he gives no hope of amendment who here and now lacks an efficacious purpose and true contrition. But the reason of the second is because the presumption stands against the relapser who simply and barely performs confession in the very same way in which until now he had been accustomed to perform it; and the confessor, if he wishes to be prudent, cannot abstract from this presumption. Besides, it is established from proposition 60 condemned by Innocent XI, which reads thus: "To a penitent having a habit of sinning against the law of God, of nature, or of the Church, although no hope of amendment appears, absolution is neither to be denied nor deferred, provided he says with his mouth that he is sorry and proposes amendment." I said ordinarily, because cases can be given and truly are given in which the simple and bare petition of absolution after confession, performed with customary humility, can lead the confessor prudently to think that the relapsing penitent does not lack sufficient disposition, and to confer upon him the benefit of absolution, especially if some extrinsic reason for receiving Communion is added. But when this judgment can be made, the prudent confessor must gather from the circumstances.

I say 3°. A relapser who offers some special or extraordinary or new sign of sorrow can be absolved as often as this occurs. The reason is because in that case every prudent suspicion is removed which the preceding falls and confessions performed without any amendment could have induced; and consequently the confessor can prudently judge that the penitent is sufficiently disposed. - I said can be absolved, but not necessarily must be; for the confessor can defer absolution in this case if he judges that delay will be useful to the penitent, although ordinarily it is more expedient that it not be deferred. - Cf. Baller. note (a), pp. 602 and following.

Question. What are those special or extraordinary or new signs?

Resp. The following are commonly enumerated: 1°. if the penitent has applied a greater effort than before toward amending himself, or if he has been notably amended; a fortiori if he has already wholly changed his life for the better; 2°. if he confesses with great shame a sin long concealed; 3°. if he has more diligently used the remedies prescribed by the confessor; 4°. if he has undertaken a long journey for rightly performing confession; 5°. if he earnestly seeks to institute a general confession or wishes to repeat the greater part of the sins of his past life; 6°. if he has been induced to confess by an extraordinary motive, namely from having heard a sermon, from the death of some friend, etc.; 7°. if he confesses with great humility and words breathing forth compunction of heart, at least ordinarily; 8°. if he spontaneously asserts that he wishes altogether to avoid sin with every inconvenience, and a fortiori if he says that he would rather die than sin; 9°. if he sends forth sighs or groans, or pours out tears, at least ordinarily; 10°. not rarely even spontaneous confession can be had as an extraordinary sign of sorrow, especially in those youths and men who must conquer themselves and human fear in order to approach confession. - But these are brought forward as examples; the general rule can be that everything is to be held as an extraordinary sign which adds something to the common and ordinary sign, namely to confession made in a due or suitable manner, and therefore supplies a sufficient motive for removing the prudent suspicion which in the case is supposed to be had concerning the indisposition of the penitent.

Therefore it must be concluded that the confessor who is led by the Spirit of God and has true charity is scarcely ever obliged to deny absolution, because even from the most hardened relapsers he can obtain not one, but several of the aforesaid signs by his persuasions and exhortations. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, nn. 460 and following. - Baller. note (a), pp. 613 and following.

I say. Although the confessor has been constituted primarily for the good of those who are bound by great bonds of sins, he must nevertheless devote his labor also to those who are pious and wish to be directed in the way of perfection. For to all confessors are to be applied the words which were once spoken to Jeremiah: "Behold, I have constituted you over the nations, that you may root out and destroy, build and plant." But that direction in the way of perfection may be done by a prudent manner, attention must be given to the following practical rules.

Rule I. Before all things let the confessor study to see through the intimate motions and condition of soul of penitents, so that he may be able to accommodate instruction to their capacity and nature; for not all are to be led by the same spirit, nor are all to be governed in one way.

Rule II. Let him lead penitents to perfection by degrees and in order, so that they first strive to attain the first degree of virtue before they contend for the highest; for example, let them first learn to act with a right intention and rightly perform ordinary actions before they think out higher things; let them first learn to bear light things patiently before they seek grave things; let them first learn to suffer with a calm soul before they wish to rejoice concerning adversities.

Rule III. Let him teach all that the perfection of each is situated in this: that they perform ordinary works well, for example, that they pray well, be present at Mass, exercise themselves in labors, take refreshment of the body in the manner in which it is fitting, converse inoffensively with their neighbor, and finally rightly carry out all things to which they are bound from office and state.

Rule IV. Let him opportunely test penitents professing devotion, so that he may notice by what spirit they are led, whether of God or of the world, of love or of fear; and what affection is predominant in them, which must first be mortified. Nevertheless not all are to be tested and treated in the same manner, but caution and discretion are necessary: thus those who are prone to sadness are to be received more benignly, lest they fall into dejection of soul; souls still tender, whom God first conciliates to himself, are to be treated more gently; but if the souls are nobler or stronger, or have extraordinary benefits of God, a certain severity must be joined to sweetness. But let the confessor beware lest the test be open; for otherwise it helps nothing.

Rule V. Let him not impose, indeed, where there is need, let him temper extraordinary penal practices; but let him so instruct souls that they themselves spontaneously request them; nor is their spirit to be believed when they are found eagerly to pursue extraordinary things, unless certain signs are present that they are led by divine impulse. If someone is noticed to be tenacious of his own judgment in doing things, he is to be corrected strongly and at the same time sweetly. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, Prax. Confess. nn. 90 and following.