§ II. On the Obligation of Repairing Defects Admitted in Confession

A defect committed in confession can regard either the validity, or the integrity of the confession, or another obligation.

I. A defect concerning validity is committed if the confessor does not absolve the penitent who is to be absolved, or does not absolve validly. Now a defect of this kind must of itself be repaired, and indeed from justice, because a tacit contract has intervened between confessor and penitent (St. Alphonsus, VI, 619). I said "of itself," for, considering the inconvenience often annexed to reparation, the obligation of repairing the defect is often lacking. For the rest, the obligation is more determined by these points:

1. If grave damage threatens the penitent, for instance if there is danger that he or she will die in the state of sin or remain in it for a long time, the confessor must repair the defect, and indeed with grave inconvenience: 1. if he committed it with grave fault; 2. if, although grave fault is absent, the confessor is a pastor, or the penitent is in grave danger of eternal damnation (St. Alphonsus, cited place).

2. If grave damage does not threaten the penitent, for instance if he or she has confessed again to another confessor, or is judged shortly to be going to confess; if, being at least attrite, which disposition can be presumed, he or she received the Holy Eucharist, the obligation of repairing the defect committed, and of admonishing the penitent about the invalidity of the prior confession, is had almost only insofar as there is an obligation of consulting for the integrity of the confession that will follow; in other words, the obligation of procuring that the penitent in the following confession subject again to the keys the sins of the prior confession. Of this obligation there will be discussion under II.

Corollary. If a penitent, not absolved or not validly absolved, returns to the same confessor, the latter is not bound to admonish him or her about the invalidity of the prior confession, provided that he consults for the integrity of the confession; to obtain this end it suffices to induce the penitent to accuse himself or herself collectively of the sins already confessed in the prior confession.

II. A defect concerning integrity must be repaired or supplied in this way:

1. If the confessor acted negatively, by not questioning when there was an obligation of questioning, he is not bound to supply the defect unless the penitent returns; in that case he is bound, because otherwise this new confession would not be integral (St. Alphonsus, VI, 620).

2. If the confessor positively induced the penitent to a defect of integrity, he is bound from justice to reparation, and indeed with grave inconvenience if he sinned gravely, with lesser inconvenience if he sinned lightly. If he did not sin, he is not bound, because admonition outside confession cannot be made without inconvenience (St. Alphonsus, cited place). I said above: he is bound from justice, because by a lie he took from the penitent the liberty of confessing in such a way as to be immune from the burden of integrity.

III. A defect concerning an obligation distinct from the obligation of integrity is to be repaired or supplied in this way:

1. If the confessor acted negatively, one must distinguish:

a) If from the uncorrected defect no grave damage threatens either the penitent or a third party, he is not bound to supply the defect unless the penitent returns.

b) If from the uncorrected defect grave damage threatens either the penitent or a third party, for instance if he did not admonish the penitent concerning the obligation of avoiding an occasion or of making restitution, the confessor is bound from charity to correct the defect, if it can conveniently be done. A graver or lighter inconvenience excuses according as the defect was committed with grave or light fault or without fault (St. Alphonsus, VI, 621).

2. If the confessor positively induced an error, one must likewise distinguish:

a) If from the uncorrected defect no grave damage threatens either the penitent or a third party, for instance if the confessor undeservedly exempted the penitent from the obligation of fasting, he is indeed bound of himself to correct the defect, because he is bound to prevent the cause of violating the law from remaining. But in practice there will easily be an excusing reason, especially if the confessor was not gravely culpable (St. Alphonsus, cited place).

b) If from the defect grave damage threatens either the penitent or a third party, for instance if he undeservedly exempted the penitent from the obligation of avoiding an occasion or of making restitution, he is bound from justice to repair the defect, and indeed with grave inconvenience if he committed the defect with grave fault; otherwise with lesser inconvenience (St. Alphonsus, cited place).

Insofar as the confessor himself can be bound to restitution because of a defect committed, see vol. I, n. 1005.

Corollary. If the penitent has departed but is foreseen to be going to return in time, it suffices to wait and to repair the defect in confession. Outside this case the defect cannot be repaired without the penitent being admonished about it outside confession. Now admonition of this kind, as being of a nature to introduce shame, cannot be made without the license of the penitent, except in the case in which the confessor omitted absolution through forgetfulness; for manifestation of this omission brings in no burden (St. Alphonsus, VI, 622).