Case 2. A Convert's Confession

Albert, an Anglican, was received into the Church at Rome by a certain Roman priest who did not require from him, as one doubtfully baptized in the Anglican sect, an integral confession. Returning to his native country, Albert related this to Titius, his parish priest and confessor, who was thereafter tormented by scruples. For he had read in a recent author that the question of requiring an integral confession from those doubtfully baptized when they are received into the Church had been practically resolved, and that it was now established that such persons must make an integral confession by divine law. If this opinion is true, Albert seems to be bound by divine law by an obligation which he has not yet satisfied. Titius therefore wishes to know whether he ought to warn him of this obligation. Hence it is asked:

1. What is the matter of the sacrament of Penance?

2. What ought a confessor who receives a new convert into the Church to do?

3. What principal documents have emanated concerning the confession to be required in such a case?

4. What is to be said of the case?

The first question is answered above, p. 151.

2. What ought a priest to do when he receives a convert into the Church?

He must first of all see to his instruction in the Catholic faith, and then inquire about his Baptism. If the convert was never baptized, he is only required to make a profession of faith. If he has been validly baptized, besides a profession of faith he must be absolved from censures, and then be absolved in confession from his sins. If there be a doubt about his Baptism, he must make a profession of faith and be baptized conditionally, in England with holy water in secret without the ceremonies. He must, furthermore, make a full confession of all the mortal sins of his life, and receive conditional absolution from them. In some dioceses leave from the bishop is required to receive a convert. 1

3. What are the chief documents that have been issued about, requiring a full confession in such a case?

The following: I Westmon. d. XI, n. 8; S. 0. 17 Junii 1715, 17 Dec. 1868, 20 Julii 1859; S. C. de P. F. 12 Julii 1869; Tanquerey, De Poenit. n. 133; Collectanea S.C.deP.F.

4. The case. Albert, an Anglican doubtfully baptized, was received into the Church by a priest in Rome who did not require him to make a full confession of his life. When Albert returned to England, he told this to Titius, his parish priest, who was in doubt whether a full confession was not still obligatory by divine law.

According to the principles laid down by some theologians (v.g. Lehmkuhl, Casus, II, n. 288; Tanquerey, De Poenit. n. 34,) Albert would seem still to be under the obligation of making a full confession. It is advisable that he should do so, but the strict obligation is difficult to prove. The arguments adduced to prove it are not conclusive. The Cardinal Prefect of Propaganda indeed 1 Form for the Reception of a Convert, C. T. S., 1901.

did declare July 10, 1869, that the answer of the Holy Office Dec. 17, 1868, “ contained a universal law,” but a private assertion made by a Prefect of Propaganda could not make it a universal law if it was not one already. No universal legislative authority has ever made such a law. Nor is there a presumption of law with regard to the matter in hand. There is such a presumption with regard to a question of the validity of marriage. It is a well-recognized rule of law that doubtful Baptism is presumed valid in questions concerning the validity of subsequent marriage, but this presumption of law must not be transferred to quite another matter such as this is. And if it be said that the Church has jurisdiction over those who are doubtfully baptized, this has to be proved. If in fact the person is not baptized, the Church has no jurisdiction over him: “ For what have I to do to judge them that are without?” (1 Cor. v. 12).¹ It seems still to be probable that a full confession is only necessary by positive law, and in places where such positive law binds, as in Great Britain and in the United States of America. But as Albert was received in Rome where there is no positive law on the point, he need not be required to make a full confession after his return to England.

1 Cf. Wernz, Jus Decretalium, iv, n. 508.