Case 17. A Lie in Confession

While confessing to Julius, a priest, Anna says that she is anxious about her last confession because she lied in it. Julius asks her how this happened. Anna replies that the confessor asked whether she had eaten meat on days of abstinence since her last confession, which she denied, although she was conscious that she had once eaten meat on a Friday because of weakness, on account of which she thought this was lawful for her; now, however, so that she may enjoy a tranquil conscience, she wishes to confess everything sincerely to Julius. Julius considers whether or not Anna ought to repeat her last confession integrally. Hence it is asked:

1. What is the necessary matter and what is the free matter of the sacrament of Penance?

2. Are aggravating or diminishing circumstances necessary matter of this sacrament?

3. Is there an obligation to answer sincerely when a confessor asks a question?

4. What is to be said of the case?

The first question is answered above, p. 151.

2. Are circumstances which increase or lessen the malice of sin the necessary matter of Penance?

The question is disputed, but probably circumstances which only increase or lessen the malice of sin and do not change its moral or theological species, are not necessary matter for Penance.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, 165 f.

3. Is the penitent obliged to give a sincere answer to questions put to him in confession?

Yes, whenever the confessor questions him about what is necessary to make his confession full and integral, or about what is necessary in order to judge of his dispositions or obligations, so as to be able to counsel and direct him aright.²

2 Bucceroni, vol. ii, 716.

4. The case. Ann when asked in confession whether she had eaten flesh meat on days of abstinence denied that she had, although she was conscious that she had taken meat once on a day of abstinence when she thought that she was justified in taking it on account of feeling weak. In her next confession Ann told this to her confessor and said she was anxious about it.

Objectively, of course, Ann committed no fault, for she answered her confessor according to the sense of his question. The confessor wanted to know whether she had broken the law of abstinence, and in answering No, Ann told the truth. Therefore unless Ann thought at the time when she gave the answer to her confessor that she was committing a grave sin, she should now be told not to trouble further about it. Her subjectively erroneous conscience might, of course, have caused her to commit grave sin subjectively, and then it would be necessary to confess this, and repeat the former confession.