Section IV. The Confessor as Judge

As judge in the tribunal of Penance the confessor passes sentence and imposes satisfaction proportionate to the sins confessed. If the penitent makes a full confession, is truly sorry for his sins, and is ready to fulfil to the best of his ability all his grave obligations at least, there is nothing to prevent the confessor giving a penance and absolution at once. There is no necessity for putting questions to well-instructed penitents who make their confession with care and diligence, or to those who have only light matter to confess. If, however, the penitent does not fully declare the number and species of his grave sins, or if the confessor is not satisfied about his dispositions, he is bound to question him to procure a full confession and the necessary dispositions before giving absolution.¹ If the confessor knows that the penitent has committed some serious sin, but says nothing about it in confession, he should question him as to whether there is anything else on his conscience. If the penitent denies that there is, he should as a rule be absolved; it is a received maxim that “ the penitent must be believed in his own favour as well as against himself.” Even if the sin was known to the confessor from the confession of someone else, he must not, of course, put any question which would amount to a violation of the seal, but he may put a general question as to whether there is anything else, and if the penitent denies that there is, he may as a rule absolve even then. It may be that the penitent did not commit formal sin, or that he has forgotten it, or thinks that he is not bound to mention it to this confessor, or there may be some mistake on the part of the confessor or the informant. Still, if it is quite evident to the confessor that the penitent is making a bad confession, and so is not disposed for absolution, he cannot, of course, absolve him.

¹ 4 Lat., c. 21; Ritual.

The confessor’s obligation of putting questions to the penitent in order to supply any defect on the part of the latter is a grave one. Still it is only secondary; the obligation lies with the penitent in the first place, and so the confessor may be excused from grave sin if occasionally he does not put questions even to obtain what is necessary matter for confession. We may allow this especially when the confessor is weary after hearing a great many confessions, and, partly through weariness, partly through some slight negligence, fails to ask questions which are per se necessary.

The Ritual and theologians warn the confessor against putting unnecessary and indiscreet questions to the penitent. By doing so he may easily scandalize him or even teach him to commit sin. This is especially the case with regard to the young. In the matter of chastity it is a maxim that it is better to fail in putting many questions than to put one which is not necessary.

The confessor should be moderate in questioning the penitent, and only put questions about matter in which it is probable that he has committed sin. He should remember that the penitent is only bound to confess what his own conscience accuses him of; he does not sin nor is he bound to confess according to the conscience of his confessor.