Chapter V. Satisfaction

IT is part of the law of eternal justice that when we sin by following our own will instead of the will of God we must be brought back again into the right way by suffering what we would not. And so sin brings with it its penalty; when we have sinned we must suffer for it either in this world or the next. It is in keeping with this principle that by the institution of Christ one of the elements of the sacrament of Penance by which sin is forgiven is satisfaction. By satisfaction is understood some action which entails labour and pain, imposed by the priest in confession on the repentant sinner and accepted by him. We have already seen that the Council of Trent teaches that satisfaction is an element in the material part of Penance, and the same council in another place¹ adds: “‘ Therefore the priests of the Lord ought, as far as the Spirit and prudence shall suggest, to enjoin salutary and suitable satisfactions according to the quality of the crimes and the ability of the penitent.”

Confessors, then, are under the obligation of giving a penance to their penitents in satisfaction for the sins which they confess, As a general rule, they must give a grave penance for grave sins, otherwise they will sin grievously; but probably only a venial sin would be committed by neglecting to give a suitable penance for light faults, In the early Church the penances enjoined were very severe, but, according to modern discipline, that is considered a grave penance and suitable for a penitent who has confessed grave sins which would bind under a grave obligation if it were imposed by ecclesiastical law. The Church encourages her children to make up by gaining indulgences for what the justice of God may require in addition to the comparatively light penances which are imposed nowadays.

The natural sequence of judicial acts in the tribunal of Penance requires that a penance should be enjoined by the priest before giving absolution, but it will be valid if imposed after absolution.

The Ritual expresses a wish that, as far as possible, penances should be given which are contrary to the sins confessed, as almsgiving for avarice, fasting or other bodily affliction for lust, humiliations for pride, acts of devotion for sloth. For such as but seldom confess more frequent reception of the sacraments may be enjoined. The confessor should never apply to personal objects alms imposed on his penitents, nor enjoin public penance for secret sins.

¹ Sess. xiv, c. 8.

The penitent is bound to accept and to execute a reasonable penance which his confessor has imposed on him. This obligation will be grave when a grave penance has been imposed for serious sins, otherwise it will bind under pain of venial sin. As the penitent is bound to accept the penance, so he is obliged to execute it at the time prescribed, if any time was fixed, or if not, then at a reasonable time. To defer its execution so long as to be in danger of forgetting it would be equivalent to not fulfilling it. It is best to execute the penance as soon as can conveniently be done.

If the penitent forgets the penance which was enjoined, he is excused from fulfilling any penance, as he is not bound to confess the same sins a second time, and he cannot substitute some other of his own choice, as he is not the minister of the sacrament.

In order to be sure of obtaining the sacramental effect of fulfilling the penance enjoined by the confessor, the penitent must be in the state of grace when he fulfils it, for God does not remit temporal punishment due to past sins in favour of one who is at enmity with him. However, by fulfilling the penance even in the state of mortal sin, what had been enjoined would have been executed, though it would not then effect its object of remitting temporal punishment due to sin confessed. It is a disputed point among theologians whether fulfilment of penance while in a state of sin would produce its effect when the sinner repented and again recovered the state of grace. Many theologians hold that it does so, and that it revives in the same way as a sacrament revives which has been validly received, but which does not produce grace at the time of its reception on account of the presence of some obstacle in the soul.

Although it is better and safer to execute the penance while in the state of grace, and if it is executed in a state of mortal sin it does not at any rate at once obtain its effect, yet it is not certain that any fault is committed by doing one’s penance while in sin, any more than it is sinful to assist at Mass while out of the friendship of God. One who in sin hears Mass on Sunday satisfies the precept, though he does not obtain the full fruit of the sacrifice; in the same way one, who while in sin says his penance, fulfils indeed his obligation, but does not thereby obtain at the time the sacramental fruit of his action.

Although a penitent may not of his own authority substitute another penance for that which was imposed by his confessor, yet he may for good reason get this commuted either by the same or by a different confessor. The same confessor may commute the penance which he himself imposed either in or out of confession, provided that so long an interval has not elapsed that the commutation cannot be considered one moral act with the confession and the imposition of the penance which is commuted. If the penitent goes to another confessor and asks for a commutation of a penance which has been enjoined him, the commutation must be granted in confession, otherwise the new confessor will have no jurisdiction over the penitent. The former confession need not be repeated; it is probable that it will be sufficient if the new confessor knows the penance which was given and for which a commutation is asked, together with the difficulty which the penitent feels in executing it.