Case 28. Requisite Knowledge in the Confessor

Paul, a priest, for several years almost entirely neglected the study of moral theology. Sometimes indeed, when a theological conference is approaching, he hastily looks through authors so that he may have something to say, except perhaps when it happens to him to propose a case. With regard to cases that commonly occur, he does not know whether he always knows the solution; and with regard to more difficult cases, he has a considerable suspicion that he scarcely knows enough even to doubt the solutions. If cases happen to occur that require investigation, he has discovered that he has forgotten matters of great importance concerning impediments of marriage, conditions of contracts, especially sale and purchase, and the roots of restitution. Caius, the confessor to whom Paul discloses all these things, denies absolution unless, as St. Alphonsus teaches, he promises that he will never interrupt that study. It is asked:

1. What knowledge is required under grave obligation in a confessor?

2. Can a confessor after several years sufficiently trust his memory of the knowledge of theology once acquired in the seminary without its being refreshed by study?

3. What is to be said of the case?

(From the cases of the Diocese of

Liverpool for the years 1898–1899.)

1. What knowledge must the confessor have sub gravi?

The confessor must know how to administer the sacrament of penance validly, and he must have the knowledge required to give a prudent judgment in this tribunal. For this purpose he must know: “Which sins are mortal and which venial, at least by their kind; the species and circumstances that must necessarily be explained; matters pertaining to the restitution of goods and reputation; reserved cases and at least the more common excommunications; the more common censures and irregularities; what is required in a penitent for a good disposition; appropriate remedies for sins. It is enough if the confessor understands the things that occur more frequently and knows that he must doubt concerning the others.”¹

1 St. Alphonsus, Theol. Moral, lib. vi, n. 627.

2. Can a confessor after many years trust his memory about what he learned in the seminary without refreshing it by study?

No, he certainly can not do so. Daily experience teaches most men how readily things once known drop out of memory, and most priests know how easy it is to forget the principles of moral theology unless they are kept fresh by constant study.

3. The case. Caius, the confessor of Paul, who also was a priest, was quite right to threaten the withholding of absolution from him unless he promised to keep up the study of moral theology. It is clear from the case that he was deficient in that knowledge which theologians require sub gravi in a confessor. He was not sure about the right solution of ordinary cases, and he had grave suspicions that he did not know enough to doubt more about difficult cases. Occasionally, when he found it necessary to look into matters, he found that he had forgotten things of great importance about the impediments of marriage, the conditions of contracts, especially of sale, and the roots of restitution. All these are indeed matters of importance, and of frequent occurrence, and Paul should lose no time before refreshing his memory, about them; otherwise he will not escape serious sin.