Duties of the Confessor Before Confession

Duties of the Confessor before Confession.—(a) Fitness to Hear Confessions.—The confessor should have sufficient knowledge to be able readily to solve the usual cases and to work out or find the solution of the more difficult cases; sufficient prudence to be able to apply his knowledge well and to avoid what is dangerous or suspicious; sufficient goodness to be sincerely desirous of the spiritual advantage of the penitent, and to be patient in hearing him and firm in correcting him.

(b) Willingness to H ear Confessions.-The confessor is obliged either from justice or charity (2676) to hear the confessions of those who reasonably request it. He should observe the rules of the Ritual and of the Code as to the manner and place of confession (Canons 908-910).

The confessor must prepare himself for hearing confessions by acquiring for himself: 1. sufficient knowledge; 2. necessary prudence; 3. Christian virtues.

432. 1. Knowledge necessary for the confessor.

St. Alphonsus says:³⁷⁵ "I affirm that the confessor who exposes himself to hearing confessions without sufficient knowledge is in the state of damnation." The reason is that otherwise the confessor exposes himself to the proximate danger of badly administering so venerable a sacrament, with great harm to penitents. Hence Christ says: "And if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit."³⁷⁶

That knowledge is judged sufficient which renders the priest fit to administer the sacrament worthily and fruitfully. Accordingly, equal knowledge is not required in all confessors. Thus, in a case of grave necessity, any priest whatsoever has sufficient knowledge, especially since today no one is accustomed to be admitted to the priesthood who has not devoted himself to theological studies for at least four years. But even outside a case of necessity, a confessor hearing confessions in a humble village, where penitents almost never bring difficult cases, does not need as much knowledge as is needed by a confessor hearing confessions in great cities, where penitents of every kind are accustomed to assemble. This can be held as a general rule: That confessor is endowed with sufficient knowledge who a) knows how to resolve cases which commonly occur, and b) knows how to doubt prudently concerning more difficult ones. The confessor is not bound always to judge concerning individual sins whether they are mortal or venial, since this is sometimes truly impossible.

To possess sufficient knowledge of moral theology, it does not suffice that the confessor once passed a good examination, but he is also bound continually to preserve and increase the knowledge acquired by new study. For every year new decisions of the Roman Congregations are issued, which must be attended to by the confessor. But this is impossible if the confessor is not assiduous in study. Nor should it be said that sound sense or natural prudence suffices for resolving cases, because so many positive laws in the matter of the sacraments, justice, the precepts, and so forth, must be applied that natural prudence is altogether insufficient. Nor does experience alone suffice; for unless continual study directs experience, many errors are necessarily committed. Hence someone rightly said: "The long experience of a confessor who lacks study and knowledge is the old age of error"; and Benedict XIV says:³⁷⁷ "Some priests, who at the beginning had undertaken the office of confessor most excellently, afterward, after a long time with all care for studies neglected, lose their former knowledge of moral theology, so that those who had been most skilled in an art of this kind are at last, instructed with a scanty and confused knowledge of the art itself and with its first rudiments, scarcely numbered among novices." Since these things are so, a confessor who for a long time neglects the study of moral theology sins, because he exposes himself to the proximate danger of committing grave errors and harming penitents. To foster moral knowledge in priests, ecclesiastical law prescribes that pastoral collations or conferences, in which moral matters are treated, be held several times in the year.³⁷⁸

³⁷⁵ Praxis confess., n. 18.

³⁷⁶ Matt. 15:14.

³⁷⁷ Instit. 32, n. 4.

³⁷⁸ Code of Canon Law, cc. 131, 448, 591.

433. 2. Prudence must be added to knowledge.

For the governance of souls is the art of arts. Prudence is right reason concerning things to be done, that is, it chooses the best means for obtaining the end. But the end to be obtained by the confessor is principally the salvation of souls. Therefore let the confessor take care to counsel and prescribe suitable means of salvation for each penitent. But this is impossible if the confessor does not know the character of each penitent. Therefore let the confessor be prudent: a) in asking questions, especially in matters which concern the sixth precept of the Decalogue; b) in rendering judgment, insofar as he attentively considers all the circumstances both of the sins and of the sinner; c) in suggesting remedies; d) in giving counsels; e) in imposing satisfactions.

The means by which prudence is acquired are principally: a) prayer; therefore the confessor acts most excellently who, before the administration of the sacrament of penance, devoutly says the prayer set forth above at n. 329, note 2; b) purity of intention, which strives to please God alone and not men; for God enlightens those who seek nothing except divine things; c) docility of mind, which is especially necessary for younger confessors and which demands that in more difficult cases the confessor seek the counsel of wise men; but let him seriously beware lest the seal be injured.

434. 3. Christian virtues are exceedingly necessary for the salutary exercise of the office of confessor.

The confessor not only must himself be in the state of sanctifying grace, but must also direct penitents in the way of the virtues. But he who knows the way of virtue from theory alone and not from his own experience is not accustomed to be a suitable guide. The principal virtues which become a confessor are:

a) An ardent zeal for souls, which urges him so that he becomes all things to all men.

b) Unfailing patience, which is certainly necessary for instructing the unlearned, arousing the tepid, and assisting those insufficiently prepared.

c) Fortitude, which does not fear to admonish the rich and the powerful, in season and out of season, if this is necessary.

d) Exceptional purity. For even in our days "all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth."³⁷⁹ Very often the confessor must hear the foulest sins. But if his mind is not then most chaste, the depraved motions which arise allure him to consent. Especially, however, in hearing the confessions of women, every prudence and purity is necessary, because otherwise grave danger arises both for the confessor himself and for the penitents.

³⁷⁹ Gen. 6:12.

1785. "Now besides the power of Order and jurisdiction, which are altogether necessary, first of all there is need," says the Roman Catechism, "that the minister of this Sacrament be endowed both with knowledge and learning and with prudence; for he bears at once the person of JUDGE and PHYSICIAN."¹¹ He also bears the person of FATHER, and indeed of a most excellent father, namely of Christ the Lord conferring upon the penitent the life of grace. Nor this alone, but he bears besides the person of TEACHER, because it is his part to admonish the penitent, and to teach him, as much as there is need, things useful or necessary to know. And because so many and so grave offices cannot be fulfilled unless they are continually supported by goodness or integrity of life: hence, so that all the qualities which every minister of Penance ought to furnish may be recalled, it occurs to treat: 1. of the knowledge of the confessor; 2. of his prudence; and 3. of his goodness or integrity of life.

1786. Principles. I. The confessor is bound, and indeed UNDER GRAVE obligation, to have KNOWLEDGE of all those things which are required for the function of his office. - St. Alphonsus says gravely to the point:¹² "And to dispatch myself more briefly, I affirm that the confessor who, without sufficient knowledge, exposes himself to receiving confessions is in the state of damnation." The reason is because, this knowledge being lacking, the confessor certainly commits himself to danger of fulfilling his most holy office badly, with injury to the Sacrament and with harm to penitents.

Nor let it be said that knowledge is supplied by experience; for this, although it helps knowledge, nevertheless never fills its role. Hence "no confessor ought to interrupt the study of moral theology, because, from so many things so diverse and different among themselves which pertain to this knowledge, many things, although read, because they occur more rarely, fall from the mind with the passage of time: for which reason it is necessary always, by frequent study, to recall them into memory."¹³ (cf. n. 4).

Hence it is inferred: 1. A priest who, ignorant in moral matters, receives confessions sins gravely. Nor does the approbation of the Superior excuse him; for this supposes the knowledge due, but by no means infuses it. 2. A Superior who grants the faculty of receiving confessions to an unlearned priest sins gravely; for he consents to and cooperates in this one's sin. - 3. The penitent himself sins gravely who, placed in grave spiritual necessity, approaches a confessor whose knowledge he recognizes to be unsuitable to his state; because, besides the spiritual harm which he suffers, he is the cause why the Sacrament of Penance is administered in an undue manner.¹⁴

1787. II. As regards the QUALITY of knowledge, "It would surely be desirable," says Benedict XIV,¹⁵ "that every confessor possess that knowledge which they call eminent; but since this quality belongs to few, it is altogether necessary that he be instructed at least with competent knowledge." But this knowledge will be competent if he himself can always bring a prudent judgment in this forum; for judicial power requires this, that the things which must be judged be well discerned.

Therefore the confessor must know: 1. which sins are mortal, which venial, at least from their kind; - 2. the species and circumstances necessarily to be explained; - 3. things pertaining to restitution of goods and reputation; - 4. reserved cases, so that he may know to which his jurisdiction does not extend; likewise excommunications, censures, and irregularities, at least the more common; - 5. matrimonial impediments, and the common obligations of states; - 6. the requisites in the penitent for good disposition; - 7. opportune remedies to be opposed to sins.¹⁶

For the rest, FOR PRACTICE, it is useful to advert: 1. It is enough if the confessor is at least skilled in those things which more frequently occur, and concerning more difficult matters knows at least how to doubt, so that thus he can consult books, or learned men with due leave if he needs this. - 2. The same knowledge is not required in all; but greater or lesser knowledge according to the diversity of places and penitents: thus greater knowledge is required for hearing confessions in a city than in villages; greater for receiving confessions of Bishops, priests, and clerics, than of seculars and farmers. - 3. In more involved doubts, especially if the case is public, or easily to be made public, not only should learned men of greater experience be consulted, but often it is expedient, if time permits, that recourse be had to the Bishop himself.

IT IS ASKED. Whether a priest is bound to render himself FIT for receiving confessions?

Resp. Since Christ the Lord instituted priests for this end, that souls might be saved, and since the salvation of souls is obtained especially through the Sacrament of Penance: it follows that the office of receiving confessions is one of the chief offices of the priesthood; and therefore priests ARE BOUND, at least in grave necessity of peoples, to exercise it, and consequently to render themselves fit for it.

Hence St. Alphonsus:¹⁷ "I do not see," he says, "how those priests who, on account of idleness, withdraw themselves from this burden, can be safe in conscience, and be excused from the reproach of the Lord, and from the punishment of damnation inflicted on that idle servant who hid his talent.... Nor let priests of this sort say that they sufficiently fulfill their obligation if they assist souls in another way, namely by instructing, correcting, praying, without ministering the Sacrament of confession; for they are bound to assist them in that in which they have need for their own salvation. For if the neighbor needs food, you must assist him in food, not in garments. Nor is it valid to say that the office of hearing confessions is a work of charity, and charity does not oblige with so much inconvenience: for it is answered that this office does not have its origin from a simple motive of charity, but from the proper priestly office, as has been said."¹⁸

1788. Great prudence is required in the confessor, because the rule of souls is the art of arts, and because his office abounds in many difficulties and dangers. This prudence ought especially to show itself: 1. in choosing approved opinions; 2. in granting liberty of confession; 3. in receiving the confessions of women; 4. in questioning and admonishing penitents; 5. in giving or deferring absolution; 6. in correcting his own errors; 7. in guarding the sacramental seal. Here we shall treat only of the first three, since we shall speak of the others below.

1789. I. The confessor ought, in the CHOICE OF OPINIONS, to use the greatest prudence. - To this pertain the following RULES assigned by our Holy Doctor.

Rule 1. "If the penitent shows himself ready to follow that which is SAFER, the confessor is bound, speaking in itself, to direct him according to the safer opinions; because, since this belongs to greater perfection, the confessor is indeed bound to apply himself to the greater progress of his penitent. - But afterward it belongs to the prudence of the confessor to weigh whether the use of the safer or less safe opinion will be profitable to his penitent. Therefore I said, speaking in itself; because although that, in itself, is safer and more perfect, nevertheless it will be more dangerous to impose upon many the obligation of always acting according to the more rigid opinions. - Therefore, in practice, the confessor rather, as far as can be done, ought to be benign rather than rigid with penitents."¹

Rule 2. "The confessor, in the choice of opinions, ought then to follow the more BENIGN opinions, when these rather induce the penitent to avoid sin. But otherwise, if they rather conduce to the transgression of the law: such as those opinions which, although speculatively they may seem probable, nevertheless in practice are very dangerous; as in the matter of the sixth precept there are some concerning touches, kisses, dances, plays, repressing sensual motions, and similar things. Likewise, in the matter of simony and usury, where many things seem to be excused by reason of liberal gratitude, but in practice involve great danger. Likewise, when there is question of making compensation, or of pursuing an accusation against offenders, where there is easily danger of injustice or revenge."² (cf. n. 83. 2).

Moreover it is to be noted that the Holy Doctor judges that special severity must be used when there is question of procuring the common good, as will be declared below (n. 1810, Rule 32).

Rule 3. Absolution cannot be denied to a penitent, otherwise disposed, if he wishes to use some probable opinion contrary to that which the confessor holds.³ - The reason is because a penitent truly disposed, after confession has been made, has a certain and strict right to absolution. Nor is it valid to say that the penitent is therefore not disposed because he refuses to follow the judgment of the confessor; for it is answered that the confessor is not judge of opinions and controversies as the Supreme Pontiff is, but is only judge of the disposition of his penitent, and of the penance which the sins deserve, as is plain from Trent, sess. 14, cap. 5. "But the disposition of the penitent consists only in having true sorrow for the sins confessed, and a firm will not to sin in the future."

Nevertheless it is required: 1. That the penitent not be rude and unlearned, but capable of forming for himself a right conscience from the opinion or probability which he judges solid, at least extrinsically, e.g. from the response of another learned and prudent man; for if he wished to act imprudently, he would not be disposed. - 2. That there not be question of judgment, whether concerning the disposition of the penitent or concerning the administration of the Sacrament; e.g. if the confessor judged that he lacked jurisdiction over such a case, the penitent must stand by his judgment; "for otherwise by absolving without due jurisdiction, or one whom he himself judges indisposed, he (the confessor) sins by acting against his own conscience." - 3. That the opinion of the penitent be not only speculatively, but also practically probable, i.e. that it lack every certainly probable danger of formal sin; because the penitent is bound to avoid such danger. - 4. That the confessor, although he does not judge the penitent's opinion as solidly probable, nevertheless does not hold it as wholly false, or resting on a false foundation; for in such a case St. Alphonsus,⁴ with Navarrus and St. Antoninus, denies that the penitent can and ought to be absolved, unless he withdraw from his opinion (but see what will be said at n. 1810).

1790. II. The confessor should especially beware of taking away from his penitents LIBERTY OF CONFESSION. To the point St. Thomas says:⁵ "A priest would sin if he were not easy in granting permission to confess to another; because many are so weak that they would rather die without confession than confess to such a priest: whence those who are too solicitous to know the consciences of their subjects through confession cast many into a snare of damnation, and consequently themselves." And St. Alphonsus:⁶ "Let the confessor beware lest he prohibit his spiritual penitents, especially women, from approaching another confessor; and when he notices that they have approached, let him show that this was pleasing to him: indeed, let him impose upon them that sometimes they confess before others; except if someone should be very scrupulous, concerning whom he prudently fears that, if he should approach another who is ignorant of his conscience, he would be notably disturbed." It is also to be desired that pastors from time to time summon unknown confessors; and that access to them may be easier and freer, let the pastors themselves abstain at this time from receiving confessions. Mothers of families also should cautiously be persuaded that, in this matter, they grant full liberty to their sons and especially to their daughters.

1791. III. In receiving the confessions of persons OF THE OTHER SEX, especially of those who profess piety, the confessor ought to be MOST CAUTIOUS. Wherefore let him diligently observe these prescriptions, and let him judge it unlawful to violate them:⁷

1. From the decree of the S. C. of Bishops, Jan. 21, 1610: "Confessors, without necessity, ought not to hear the confessions of women after the evening twilight and before dawn." But if necessity is present, let this not be done without a lighted lamp and without a witness. Access should always be granted to men before women, where this can conveniently be done.

2. In receiving their confession, especially if they are younger, let him be austere rather than affable and familiar; in no matter let him intimate that they are known to him; let him also be most restrained as to the eyes, so that he never, while they remain in the confessional, look them in the face, nor, when they depart, follow them with his eyes. - Let him abstain especially from all flattering and rather tender words, lest the tribunal of the immaculate Lamb be changed into a den of thieves.

3. Outside confession, let him flee all familiarity with them, nor let him visit them at home, except in the case of grave illness; but not even then let him receive their confession unless the door of the room is open. - Little gifts, flatteries, praises, and whatever usually conciliates friendship, are to be entirely avoided on both sides. Nor are women less to be guarded against because they are more holy; for, St. Thomas testifying, the holier and purer they are, the more they allure the mind. See other things at nn. 833, 1841 sqq., 1847 sqq.

4. "Never, without necessity, let him speak of the defects of other confessors; but rather let him sedulously seek to excuse them from some error committed."⁸

5. "Let him not undertake the direction of anyone who wishes to leave his own director, unless there is an urgent cause... And let him advert that, for changing a confessor, it is not enough that the penitent feels some abhorrence toward him, or that he seems no longer to have faith in his words: for, as St. Teresa says, often this is a temptation of the devil. - Hence St. Francis de Sales teaches thus: 'The confessor is not to be changed without grave reason. But, on the contrary, neither is it expedient in this to be unchangeable, if legitimate causes of change supervene.'"⁹

6. "Let the confessor avoid showing himself partial with some penitent. Some attach too much benevolence of soul to some soul, when they take upon themselves every care, time, and labor for that one. - It is not to be denied that some soul will sometimes need greater assistance than another; but assistance is one thing, attachment another, which brings it about that less care is had for other penitents. Therefore it will be expedient that the confessor assign to that more needy person some particular day or time, without others receiving inconvenience."¹⁰

7. "In receiving the confessions of these spiritual persons, the confessor ought to beware lest he raise his voice too much, although he is not speaking of sins: because from this it can happen that others are frightened from confessing their faults, out of this fear that the confessor speaks with a loud voice."¹¹

See also the ROMAN RITUAL: Order of Ministering the Sacrament of Penance.

1792. "Let suitable confessors be had" (said St. Pius V), "behold the complete reform of all Christians. For it is not to be doubted that, if all confessors were strong in that knowledge and goodness of morals which so great a ministry demands, neither would the world be so befouled with the filth of sins, nor would hell be filled with so many souls of the baptized. - And when I say goodness, here I do not understand only habitual goodness, that is, the simple state of grace, but positive goodness, which befits the minister of Penance. For he must handle the wounds of so many sinners without defiling himself: he must often deal with women and adolescents, receiving their confessions about those things of which they are greatly ashamed, without feeling that any harm has come to himself; with distinguished persons, all respect of human things having been cut away, he must be armed with great fortitude; and, that I may embrace all things in one word, he ought to be rich in charity, honey-sweet in meekness, grave in prudence. - Wherefore, that all these parts may be fulfilled as is fitting, there is need of no common goodness, which certainly he will never attain for whom prayer is not most familiar, nor meditation daily: for by no other way can anyone obtain the light and graces necessary for this so great office, formidable, as it is said, even to angelic shoulders."¹²

But first of all the confessor ought to abound in great and sincere charity, by which he is so led that he spends and is spent wholly for souls, and proposes to himself nothing other than their salvation and spiritual progress. But it is manifest that nothing is more opposed to this charity than the execrable and truly diabolical malice of a priest who impiously and sacrilegiously abuses this most holy ministry unto the ruin of penitents, namely by soliciting them to base things. - The Supreme Pontiffs, in order effectively to exclude so nefarious an abuse and so impious a prevarication from the sacred Tribunal, have sanctioned by various Decrees that those most wicked confessors who solicit to base things be DENOUNCED before competent ecclesiastical Judges.

Hence we must here treat: 1. of the zeal and charity of the confessor; 2. of denouncing the crime of solicitation.

1793. In the confessor there is required, so that he may be able fruitfully to perform his office, eminent CHARITY. - For since confession is an entirely voluntary act, by which the highest trust is shown to the confessor, it is manifest that such trust cannot be provoked unless the confessor in turn shows the highest kindness to the penitent who approaches him to open the secrets of his conscience.¹³ - Wherefore the following admonitions are handed down by our Holy Doctor:

Admonitions. - 1. Let the confessor show great charity and zeal in BENIGNLY RECEIVING all, whether poor or rich; since with God there is no acceptance of persons. - Indeed, in imitation of Christ, who says: "I came not to call the just, but sinners," a good confessor, with the inmost parts of charity, the greater the number and the more foully stained by the filth of sins he finds souls to be, with so much the greater charity he embraces them, that he may win them for God, and he supplies courage to them with these or similar words: "Come, brother! Be of good heart! Do not fear; confess your sins without dread!" etc.

2. Let him show greater charity in HEARING the penitent. "Let him beware lest he exhibit himself impatient, or appear to be struck with wonder at the sins which are being narrated... In the act of confession let him abstain from making correction, lest perhaps, terrified, penitents keep back their sins. Nevertheless this is understood regularly speaking; for many times it is expedient not to proceed to further things, and immediately to correct the penitent, especially when he confesses a very enormous sin, or if he himself has been habituated in some vice, so that he may comprehend the gravity of the sin. Yet let the confessor advert that he not exasperate him, nor terrify him. Wherefore, after he has corrected him as much as there was need, immediately let him give him courage to confess the remaining sins."¹⁴ Let him not appear to the penitent impatient of delay, nor let him forget that that is always done quickly enough which is done well enough. Toward the badly disposed let him use much patience, and, every motion of an inflamed soul being restrained, let him endeavor sweetly and at the same time strongly to recall them to good fruit.

3. But let him show the greatest charity and zeal in WELL DISPOSING the penitent, and in helping him, as far as can be done, that thus he may cause him to obtain all the goods which flow from the Sacrament, namely justification, progress in grace, and the gift of perseverance. "Wherefore, with more vehement ardor and zeal, let him apply himself so that he cause the penitent to perceive the gravity and multitude of his sins, and the miserable state of damnation in which he is found; but let this always be done with the greatest charity... so that the penitent may understand that what is said to him proceeds not from an angry mind, but from singular love and compassion toward his soul... Afterward, he will help him to form an act of sorrow, and, if he is disposed, let him absolve him."¹⁵

"But if he should be incapable of absolution, or if it will seem expedient that absolution be deferred, let him assign to him the day on which he ought to return, saying to him thus: 'Come, brother! On such a day I await you; do not omit returning to me; be of strong and great soul, as I have said to you. Commend yourself daily to the Blessed Virgin, and come to me. If, perhaps, then you find me receiving the confessions of others, approach; for I will hear you before the others. If I am elsewhere, arrange that they summon me; I will leave all things so that you may confess.' And thus let him dismiss him from himself with sweet words. 'This is the way by which sinners can be made saved, namely to act with them with as much charity as can possibly be done; otherwise, if they fall upon a confessor who acts harshly with them, they will dread confession, they will neglect to confess, and unbridled they will go to perdition.'"¹⁶

The RITUAL also admonishes: "For those confessing more rarely or later, or easily falling back into sins, it will have been most useful to counsel that they confess often, say once a month, or on certain solemn days, and, if it is expedient, communicate."

1794. First of all it is useful to report the words of BENEDICT XIV, who, confirming the Bull of GREGORY XV, speaks thus in the Constitution Sacramentum: "We command all local Ordinaries... that diligently, and with every human respect set aside, they inquire and proceed against each and every priest, both secular and regular, however exempt... and of whatever dignity... who shall have attempted to solicit or provoke any penitent, whatever person he may be, either in the act of sacramental confession, or before, or immediately after confession, or on the occasion or pretext of confession, or even outside the occasion of confession in the confessional, or in another place destined or chosen for hearing confessions, with the simulation of hearing confession there, to dishonest and base things; whether by words, or signs, or nods, or touch, or through writing, either then or afterward to be read; or with them shall have had illicit and dishonest conversations or dealings with rash daring."¹⁷

"Let each and all priests appointed for hearing confessions remember besides that they are held and obliged sedulously to admonish their penitents, whom they know to have been solicited by others as above, according to the circumstances of the cases occurring, concerning the obligation of denouncing to the aforesaid local Ordinaries the person who has committed solicitation, even if he be a priest who lacks jurisdiction for validly imparting absolution, or the solicitation was mutual between confessor and penitent, whether the penitent consented to the solicitation or by no means furnished consent, or a long time has already flowed by after the solicitation itself, or the solicitation was performed by the confessor not for himself, but for another person."

On these matters three things come to be weighed: 1. when the crime of solicitation is present; 2. what the obligation of denouncing is; 3. how in practice the confessor ought to proceed.

1795. By the word SOLICITATION, in the Sacrament of Penance, is understood an invitation, incitement, or provocation to venereal things, made by a confessor, under certain clauses. It is a MOST GRAVE sin, both because it inflicts grave injury on the Sacrament, and because it brings mortal harm upon the penitent, offering him poison for medicine. If the one soliciting is the pastor himself, solicitation contains a special malice, or a special sin against justice, because from justice he is bound to feed his sheep by word and example (cf. n. 786, note 2).

It is said, 1. Invitation, namely one which is made by words or signs inductive to lustful acts. Hence solicitation must be held as complete (whether the penitent in fact consents to the sin, or resists), whenever an act suitable for alluring to venereal things is placed.¹⁸ - Nor does it matter whether the act is, in itself, evil or indifferent, provided from the circumstances it is afterward known that it was placed for soliciting; for example, if the confessor imposed upon a woman that she wait for him at home, or if he asked where she lived.¹⁹

It is said, 2. to venereal things; for a denunciation is not to be made if the solicitation was to other crimes. Nor does the obligation of denouncing press unless the solicitation was gravely culpable; wherefore it is to be noted that some acts can be held in themselves as venial, which nevertheless, if they are done by a priest engaged in the act of administering the Sacrament of Penance, become gravely culpable.²⁰ - But denunciation is to be made whether he solicited a male or a female, whether he solicited to sin with himself or with another, or finally whether he solicited the penitent immediately or, through the penitent, some other person.²¹

It is said, 3. under certain clauses, by which namely the law defines solicitation to have sufficient connection with the Sacrament, and to be denounced as an abuse of it.

CLAUSE 1. In the act of sacramental confession. For this it is sufficient if confession has been begun, although not perfected. Note here the sixth proposition condemned by Alexander VII, which said: "A confessor who, in sacramental confession, gives the penitent a paper to be read afterward, in which he incites to venery, is not judged to have solicited in confession."²²

CLAUSE 2. Immediately before or after. This word immediately, according to the more common opinion, is to be understood so strictly that no interval or action intervenes between the solicitation and the sacramental confession.²³ - Hence a confessor is to be denounced: 1. if, before the confessional, he dishonestly touches with hands or feet a woman waiting for the sake of confession, not by chance, but by design. 2. If immediately after confession, while she approaches to kiss his hand, he himself basely touches her. Likewise, if he at once leads her into a room and there solicits her; or if immediately he says: Wait a little while, and after some interval (but not on the following day) begins to solicit: for in either case he immediately places the means of solicitation. But otherwise, if, with no such means having been placed, he approaches and solicits her when she has already gone out of the confessional.²⁴ Yet attend to

CLAUSE 3. On the occasion or pretext of confession. It is said on the occasion of confession, when the confessor takes the opportunity of soliciting from a confession truly sought, or truly made; but on the pretext, when he takes the same opportunity from a fictitious confession, that is, from a confession which was proposed solely for this end, that it might serve solicitation.

Hence: 1. From the first head, a confessor is to be denounced who, having been asked for confession, diverts the conversation elsewhere and solicits, even if he has not yet sat down, nor the woman knelt. And this same must be said, although he is asked that he hear the confession only on the following day; provided the solicitation is then made in the confessional, or in the place of confession, or under pretext of confession. Likewise, he is to be denounced if, on account of the fragility of the woman known from her confession, he afterward solicits her at home; provided, from indications, it is sufficiently evident that he was induced to solicitation from that knowledge, and not from other causes.

2. From the second head he is to be denounced if, on account of an evil end, he fictitiously invites a woman to confession, and then solicits; likewise, if, called by a mother to hear the confession of her daughter, he approaches this daughter with an evil end and solicits her; or if, called to absolve a woman deprived of her senses, he comes under such pretext or occasion, and dishonestly touches her. Likewise, if he persuades a woman, already solicited outside confession and refusing on account of fear of defamation, that, pretending herself sick, she summon him for sinning. But otherwise, if he uses such a pretext not to solicit the woman, but only to deceive the Superior, members of the household, etc.; or if the woman herself, with no prior agreement, uses the pretext of confession to call and solicit the confessor; "although afterward they have relations."²⁵

CLAUSE 4. In the confessional, or in another place destined or chosen for hearing confessions, with simulation of hearing confession. Therefore, that the obligation of denouncing may arise from this clause, it is necessary that simulation of confession have intervened. That is, the priest must so conduct himself that he can deservedly be believed actually to be receiving confession, e.g. by applying his ears. Hence, one is not to be denounced who, sitting in the confessional and in no way simulating confession, solicits a woman standing or sitting before the confessional. Thus from the Declaration of the HOLY OFFICE, Feb. 11, 1661, under n. 15. But otherwise, if he solicits her kneeling in the confessional, or in the place of confession. Otherwise also, according to many, if both IN THE CONFESSIONAL treat of dishonest matters, without simulating confession; for, from the Decree of Paul V (July 10, 1614), all those are to be denounced who have abused the Sacrament of Penance by employing confession, or the confessional, for dishonest ends.²⁶ Others, however, not improbably contradict: because the cited Declaration of the Holy Office, which Benedict XIV approved, seems to have derogated from the Decree of Paul V by an authentic interpretation.²⁷

1796. IT IS ASKED. Whether denunciation is to be made if the solicitation was DOUBTFUL?

Resp. Distinguish. 1. If from some fact or saying solicitation is indeed certain, but it is not evident who the one soliciting was, denunciation is to be made, so that the Superior may be able to inquire concerning the person soliciting, in the case where such inquiry is easy, without danger of defaming an innocent person. - 2. If the one suspected of solicitation is certain, and it is doubted whether the fact or saying was true solicitation, denunciation is not to be imposed on the penitent; both because in penalties the more benign interpretation is to be made, and because, in doubt, no one is to be deprived of the reputation which he possesses. Except: 1. If vehement indications of solicitation accede, e.g. on account of the evil life or bad reputation of the confessor, which would found moral certitude. - 2. If the words of themselves carry solicitation before them, and only it is doubted whether the confessor uttered them for an evil end; because, unless something else stands in the way, the presumption of intention is to be taken according to the proper meaning of the words.²⁸

To this point belong two Responses of the HOLY OFFICE taken from the declaration of February 11, 1661:²⁹ To the 12th: "Whether a confessor, if he praises the penitent for beauty and gracefulness, is said to solicit her, and therefore is to be denounced? They judged that if that is serious and smells of no evil intention, the negative opinion is probable. - To the 16th: Whether a confessor is to be denounced who, while hearing confession, gives a gift to a woman, so that by this deed he is said to solicit her? They answered the same as to the twelfth."

1797. We pre-note: 1. "The end of the law of denunciation, as Eusebius Amort skillfully adverts,³⁰ is not the correction of a particular person, but the public security of the Sacrament and of souls from the certain chastisement of so abominable a crime, and from the inevitable fear of all confessors of incurring the gravest punishments, even by a single act, or one repeated only once; indeed also the indemnity of the Church, lest pests of this sort steal into public offices, than which nothing is more harmful to the common good of the Church."³¹

2. But the end of each denunciation is: 1) That, if the person denouncing is otherwise very honest and worthy of faith, and suspected of no malice, revenge, enmity, or subornation, and the denounced person otherwise is a man of little fear, he may make such a denounced person suspect, so that he may be observed by the Ordinary. - 2) That, if greater indications from another source concur on the part of the denounced person, e.g. otherwise suspicious conversation, they may furnish the Ordinary a motive for employing, the first time, a paternal admonition, by which he indeed does not impute the crime, but exhorts to caution, yet in such a way that he does not render the denouncing person suspect to the denounced. For, very often, one is accustomed to proceed to judgment only from the third denunciation (Instruction of the HOLY OFFICE, Feb. 20, 1867, under n. 11).³² - From these things you will understand the response to the following.

1798. Questions. Q. 1. Who OUGHT to be denounced?

Resp. 1. From the Pontifical Bulls and decrees of the Holy Office, one is to be denounced: 1) A priest of whatever dignity, who is certainly guilty of the crime of solicitation, from the rules and clauses explained above. Nor does it matter that he lacked jurisdiction, if he solicited in confession³³ (from the Response of the Holy Office, Feb. 11, 1661, to doubt 5, and Instr. of the year 1867 under n. 2). - 2) A confessor consenting to solicitation; nor is he excepted who, immediately ceasing to speak of base matter, deferred the completion of it to another time, and did not furnish absolution to the penitent; likewise if he consented induced by fear; and a fortiori, if the solicitation was mutual between him and the penitent. From Resp. of the Holy Office 1661 to the 2nd and 9th.³⁴ - 3) He is to be denounced, even if a long time has flowed by from the solicitation, and the crime has remained wholly occult. Nor, more probably, does the law of denunciation cease if the one soliciting has been corrected, or because of another denunciation has already abjured before the Inquisitor, i.e. has purged himself of suspicion of heresy, or has been punished, or even has spontaneously denounced himself. A fortiori if he has offended again, he must again be denounced.³⁵ - 4) Likewise he is to be denounced who solicited a girl who, on account of her simplicity and candor of soul, suspected nothing about the malice of impurity. She, as soon as she has become conscious of the wicked solicitation, is bound to denounce.

Resp. 2. One is not to be denounced: 1) The one soliciting, if already deceased, because the total end of the law ceases, namely both correction and punishment of the guilty. Except if there is question of repairing damage perhaps inflicted on others.³⁶ - 2) A penitent who solicited the confessor, and an interpreter who solicited the penitent; likewise one commanding the confessor to solicit; a layman and a simple cleric who simulated themselves as confessors. Nevertheless these, if they received confession, are to be denounced, from the Constitution Officii nostri partes of Gregory XIII (Aug. 6, 1574) and the Edict of the Holy Office, as suspected of heresy.³⁷ - 3) Finally, a priest is not to be denounced who, amid the administration of other Sacraments, has fallen into the crime of solicitation.³⁸ Except if the circumstances of the matter are such that there is an obligation from natural law. For all, having seen the wolf in the sheepfold, ought to cry out.

Q. 2. Who are HELD to denounce?

Resp. 1. All and each of the solicited penitents are held, even if they consented to the solicitation; nor can they be absolved unless they first denounce, or, if there is a just cause for deferring, e.g. the necessity of communicating, at least promise to denounce.³⁹ - But from the decree of the Holy Office, Sept. 27, 1624:⁴⁰ "If a woman consents to the confessor soliciting, she is not bound to manifest her consent, nor can she be questioned about this by the Bishop."

2. Besides the solicited persons themselves, every witness of this delict is held, whether by sight or by hearing, and any other person (even an impubescent) who has understood the solicitation, immediately or mediately from the sayings of the one soliciting himself, or of the person solicited (provided this person is worthy of faith), outside confession.⁴¹ - Nor does the obligation cease to press even if there is question of denouncing one's own blood-relatives; indeed, even if the crime is known under a natural secret, or with an oath promised. Except if the solicitation was manifested for seeking counsel; because the common good requires that such a secret be kept.⁴²

3. The solicited person is not exempted from the law of denunciation because another has already denounced; for each solicited person is bound to denounce.⁴³ Nor is anyone exempted from this law on account of intrinsic and common difficulties, such as: shame of the solicited person; fear of stirring up against herself the suspicion of the judge; danger of undergoing a slight inconvenience, or of inflicting damage on the Church and souls; indeed, danger of grave, but scarcely probable, damage: for difficulties of this sort are not of such weight that they give place to epikeia.⁴⁴ Nevertheless, a founded fear will be able to be a motive either for deferring the denunciation, or for obtaining a dispensation, as will be said below.

4. No one is bound to denounce himself; hence no confessor is bound to admonish a penitent whom he solicited that he denounce him. Nevertheless, if the solicitor spontaneously appears, he will enjoy the benefit of those spontaneously appearing, that is, he will be punished only with salutary admonitions and penances, unless perhaps he had already been denounced by others; in which case the penalty will only be diminished.⁴⁵

Q. 3. What PENALTIES were established or threatened in the present law?

Resp. 1. The solicited penitent (and this one alone) incurs an excommunication reserved to no one, if he culpably omits for a month to denounce the guilty person, according to what was said at n. 1354. - 2. One falsely denouncing, or commanding, counseling, etc., another to denounce, falls into a case reserved to the Roman Pontiff, as was said at n. 1772. And he is bound, as is plain, to retraction. - 3. The solicitor, from the Decree of Benedict XIV of August 5, 1745, incurs perpetual inability for celebration of Mass. The Bishop, the matter having been well considered, is ordered to interdict him in perpetuity from receiving confessions, depriving him of all faculties, not even excepting those which had been granted to him by the Holy See. - But all these penalties, like the others threatened by Gregory XV, namely privation of benefice, of active and passive voice, etc., are of ferendae sententiae, and suppose that the guilty person had been admitted to defense, as the laws demand (from the Instr. of the Holy Office, year 1867, n. 12).⁴⁶

Note. Besides, inquiry must be made: 1. Whether the case of solicitation, as is customary, is reserved in the diocese. - 2. Whether the solicitor attempted to absolve the accomplice: in which case the penalties are incurred which we have recalled at nn. 1781 and 1782.

1799. 1. The confessor, hearing in confession that a person was solicited, before all things ought to EXAMINE: 1) whether this person is worthy of faith, whether led by hatred or malice or even levity she wishes to calumniate the priest; 2) whether all the circumstances are present which make certain the obligation of denouncing. - But let him beware of inquiring into the name of the one soliciting, and let him admonish the penitent that the case of false denunciation is reserved to the Supreme Pontiff.

2. If the solicitation is plainly evident, he is bound sedulously to admonish the solicited person, although existing in good faith, concerning the obligation which binds her, under penalty of excommunication, to denunciation. And indeed he is bound to this, even if he foresees that it will happen that the person refuses to denounce.⁴⁷ "Those who do not admonish their penitents about this obligation ought to be punished" (from the Instr. of the HOLY OFFICE, Feb. 20, 1867, n. 4).

3. Let him sedulously weigh the excuses which the solicited person usually brings forward. If they seem just, let him examine whether there is a cause for deferring the denunciation, or even for petitioning relaxation of the law. - If the first, e.g. if the Bishop is absent, or if the necessity of communicating presses, the penitent will be able to be absolved, provided he seriously promises that, as soon as possible, he will satisfy his obligation.⁴⁸ If the second, e.g. if there is probably danger of undergoing grave damage in the goods of reputation, fortune, or body, let the penitent, by himself or through another, e.g. through the confessor, have recourse to the Superior, explaining the nature of the impediment by which he is detained from making denunciation, and ask what is to be done by him. If necessity presses, and he pledges that he will stand by the decision of the Superior, he can be absolved.⁴⁹

4. If the excuses are vain, e.g. if the penitent, on account of gifts received or to be received, says that he is impeded from denouncing by gratitude or necessity, etc.: let the confessor oppose the gravity of the sacrilege, the necessity of obeying the laws of the Church, and the penalty of excommunication to be incurred. Let him also show that no danger of infamy is present, because the solicited woman is not bound to manifest her consent; indeed, if she should spontaneously manifest it, or if the accomplice should reveal it, it will not happen that the judge ever alludes to such a fall. If he consents, absolution should not be granted to him at once, but prudently deferred until he has actually denounced.⁵⁰

5. If, detained by no impediment, he wholly refuses denunciation, "the confessor is to be praised who has not denied his effort to the penitent." Therefore in this case, let him not indeed absolve the person, but make him return to himself at another convenient time. Meanwhile, let him consult either the Ordinary or the Holy See through the Sacred Penitentiary or Sacred Inquisition, all the circumstances having been explained, for an opportune remedy, the name of the penitent nevertheless being suppressed.⁵¹

1800. IT IS ASKED. How is denunciation to be made?

Resp. The burden of denunciation is personal, and to be fulfilled by the solicited person himself,⁵² and this in judicial form. - Hence, either let the person himself approach the competent judge, or see that the judge by himself, or through another, meet with him. - Therefore, if impeded from personally approaching the Ordinary, either let him inform him, through an intermediary or through a letter, that he has a denunciation to be made pertaining to the ecclesiastical tribunal, and that he asks that a delegated person be sent to receive it; or let him manifest the delinquent by letters.

This memorial can also be drawn up by the confessor, the sacramental seal always being safe, if the person is unable to write, or performs this with difficulty. - But if, on account of too much shame or fear of infamy, the person refuses to depose before another delegate, let the Bishop be admonished about this matter, who will be able to delegate that confessor himself to receive the denunciation in judicial form.⁵³ Generally, indeed, it is not expedient that the confessor take this burden upon himself, because he would be exposed to not a few detractions and dangers. Yet sometimes he can be held by the law of charity to do this.⁵⁴

The substantial things which must altogether be observed in a denunciation to be accepted judicially are these:⁵⁵ 1. Let the day of denunciation be noted. - 2. Let an oath be received from the denouncer about speaking the truth. - 3. Let the place of the crime, its time, qualities and circumstances, and witnesses be expressed. - 4. Let the name both of the one soliciting and also of the one solicited be expressed; but if the name is unknown, it must be expressed in an equivalent way, i.e. from stature, age, features, etc. - 5. Let the denouncer and witnesses emit an oath about keeping silence, and, the acts having been drawn up, let them subscribe.

Note. For more things about the manner of proceeding in these cases, see in the cited Instruction of the HOLY OFFICE edited in the year 1867. In this it is also found noted under n. 15 what is to be done in distant regions, where the ordinary form of trial cannot be observed. See also the Canonists.⁵⁶

1801. In this chapter we shall treat: 1. of the obligation of the confessor in general, or of his obligation toward all and each of the penitents; 2. of the obligation of the confessor in species, or of his varied obligation toward various penitents.

There are many obligations of the confessor in the sacred tribunal, namely: 1. the obligation of hearing confessions; 2. of questioning the penitent; 3. of teaching the ignorant penitent; 4. of disposing the indisposed; 5. of imposing satisfaction; 6. of bringing a just sentence, whether in giving, or denying, or deferring absolution. Of all these things one by one we must now treat, except, however, the question of imposing satisfaction, concerning which we have already treated above (nn. 1715-1720).

This obligation can arise from a twofold head, namely from justice, and from charity.

1802. I. Pastors, or those having care of souls, are held, FROM JUSTICE, and indeed UNDER GRAVE obligation, to hear, whether by themselves or through others, the confessions of penitents committed to them, as often as these reasonably ask to be heard. The reason is because they have obliged themselves to this by undertaking the care of souls, from a tacit contract entered with their subjects, from whom they receive support or honor.⁵⁷ "But the following are called pastors: Superiors, with respect to Religious; and with respect to seculars, Bishops and pastors, or those who have subsidiary care with obligation."⁵⁸

Hence, authors teach that "that pastor sins who shows himself morose and difficult in hearing confessions; especially if he has been summoned by the sick, to whom, as St. Charles Borromeo commands, he ought to hasten immediately and at any hour. Yet if the Curate once or twice, outside necessity, should refuse to hear someone's confession, Suarez and others say, probably, that he does not sin gravely, unless some urgent occasion is present, e.g. of a Jubilee, of a solemn feast... But if the pastor has an oeconomus (or coadjutor) approved by the Bishop, he is not held with so much rigor to be free for hearing confessions; but let him advert that it is altogether required that it be evident to him that the oeconomus is suitable, both as to knowledge and as to morals; otherwise he himself will have to render an account to God for all the damages which will come about on account of his ignorance and wicked morals."⁵⁹

1803. II. Priests not having care of souls are not held to hear confessions from justice; but SOMETIMES they are held to this from CHARITY. For charity obliges us to succor a neighbor placed in spiritual necessity, as is, e.g., a sinner in danger of death deprived of his own pastor. Wherefore:

IT IS ASKED. Whether a confessor who is not a Curate is bound, WITH DANGER OF LIFE, to absolve a DYING person existing in mortal sin?

Resp. 1. The first opinion denies; the reason is because, since the dying person can absolutely free himself from danger of damnation by eliciting an act of contrition, he is not constituted in such necessity that another is bound to succor him with danger of life. He is excepted if he labors under so great ignorance that he does not know how to elicit an act of contrition.

Resp. 2. "The truer opinion affirms; because although the dying person can supply by contrition, nevertheless, since this is difficult, it cannot be denied that, if he is left unabsolved, he remains in great danger of his damnation. Hence it happens that, just as in the case in which the neighbor without your absolution will certainly perish, you are held to undergo certain death, so that you may absolve him; so in the case in which he remains in probable danger of damnation, you are held to expose yourself to probable danger of death; for, in equal danger, each one is bound to postpone his own temporal life to the eternal life of his neighbor.⁶⁰ But if the priest does not know that he is in mortal sin, he is not held to absolve with danger of life."⁶¹ - Recall what was said at nn. 1786 and 1787.

1804. "The priest ought to search out the conscience of the sinner in confession, as a physician the wound, and a judge the cause." Thus St. Thomas.¹ - Wherefore hold the following:

Principles. I. The confessor is bound, sometimes under grave obligation, TO QUESTION the penitent. Thus all Theologians; and it is proved:

1. By the authority of the Church, especially from cap. Omnis utriusque, de Poenit., in which one reads: "But let the priest be discreet and prudent... diligently inquiring both the circumstances of the sinner and of the sin." And from the ROMAN RITUAL: "If the penitent has not expressed the number, species, and circumstances of sins necessary to be explained, let the priest prudently question him."

2. By manifold reason. - The first is that omission of opportune questions redounds TO THE DAMAGE OF SOULS: for, 1) it can furnish occasion for many sacrilegious confessions, because there are many penitents who, unless they are questioned, pass over more grave sins in silence. "Frequently," says St. Thomas,² "things which one confessing would keep silent out of confusion, when questioned he reveals." 2) Many penitents will lack opportune remedies; for the confessor, not questioning about habit, occasions, causes of sins, diligence used or not used for amendment (all of which things are usually kept silent), cannot indicate remedies by which new falls are prevented. - 3) Damage will very easily be brought also upon others; for things which turn to the detriment of others are usually passed over in accusation: such are scandals, neglect in fulfilling the very grave duties of one's own state, e.g. in the education and custody of children. Hence, unless penitents are questioned and suitably admonished, no amendment will be able to follow.

The other reason is because the omission of questions redounds TO THE PREJUDICE OF THE SACRAMENT; for, 1) it frequently prejudices its integrity: for, questions being omitted, the accusation will be made in this or a similar way: "Father, I have blasphemed, I have committed base things, I have had quarrels, etc.," with species and number not explained; - 2) it also frequently prejudices its validity: for unless the penitent is questioned, e.g. whether he has used any care not to fall again, whether he has used the prescribed remedies, etc., it will not be possible prudently to judge whether he is disposed, or whether he needs a more ardent exhortation, so that he may be rightly disposed. Hence it can most easily happen that absolutions are given which are wholly invalid.³

We said, 1. under grave obligation; for there is question of a grave matter, which regards the salvation of the penitent and the reverence of the Sacrament. - Nevertheless there can be negligence lightly culpable, as is plain.

We said, 2. he is bound sometimes; for if the penitent explains his sins and his state as much as there is need, it is clear that the confessor is held to no further questions.⁴

1805. II. The confessor is bound to question AS MUCH AS this is NECESSARY for procuring the validity of the Sacrament, the integrity of confession, and the healing of the penitent. - The reason is because these three things must be cared for by him, insofar as he is minister of the Sacrament. Hence, as often as he reasonably presumes, or prudently thinks, that something of those things which are required for the aforesaid has not been sufficiently declared, so often he is bound to inquire.⁵ (See also n. 1809.)

Therefore: 1. For procuring the VALIDITY of the Sacrament, it may be necessary, by questioning, to investigate: whether sufficient matter is present, e.g. if there is question of imperfections, or of light faults which are often committed without advertence; - whether the penitent is keeping something back out of shame, as happens especially in boys and girls; - whether sufficient disposition is present: for knowing this, it will often be necessary to question the penitent, e.g. whether and how, after confession, he abstained from faults; whether and how he fulfilled the prescribed means.

2. For the INTEGRITY OF CONFESSION it may be necessary to question the penitent - about the number of sins; - about their species; - about circumstances changing the species (whether objective or theological); - about certain sins which he is accustomed, from inconsideration, wholly to keep back, e.g. sins of thought, and sins of omission concerning the obligations of his own state (cf. n. 1810, Rule 32).

3. For the HEALING OF THE PENITENT, questions can be necessary by which it becomes known, e.g., what the causes of his sins are, namely whether they proceed from some occasion, or habit, from lack of custody of the senses, from impure thoughts, etc.

Hence, the PRACTICE of certain confessors is especially to be disapproved, who not only do not question penitents, but do not even allow them to bring their confession to an end, and who, having heard one or another sin, interrupt the accusation, saying: "Come now, that is enough, I absolve you from all your sins." Nor can such a practice be used with that penitent who declares only venial sins (unless he is scrupulous); for often penitents begin from venial sins, being about to confess mortal sins only toward the end, which therefore, on account of the fear injected by the confessor, are easily kept back. For the rest, confession made so very hastily and cursorily usually disturbs them exceedingly, far from calming their mind.⁶

1806. III. Questions, where they must be made, should be MODERATE, DISCREET, and TIMELY, namely such that no greater inconvenience stands in the way than would be the defect itself of the integrity of confession.

1. MODERATE; therefore the confessor: 1) should never inquire into matters foreign to confession, nor suffer them to be narrated to himself. - 2) let him remember that he is not held to question the penitent except with ordinary diligence. - 3) Let him remember, moreover, that less distinct knowledge is required from one who, either because of incapacity, or because of sickness, or because of the multitude of sins, or for another reason, could more difficulty render exact knowledge (cf. nn. 1703 and 1705). - Hence the penitent is not to be questioned about sins which he has probably not committed; because, in this case, there is lacking a reasonable presumption and prudent doubt that the things which must be declared are not being sufficiently declared. - But because of the contrary presumption, let him be questioned about sins which usually abound in men of such a condition.⁷

2. DISCREET, especially in those things which regard the sixth precept. For theologians, without any exception, affirm that it is rather to be permitted that material integrity be lacking to confession than that scandal be furnished to the penitent. And the Roman Ritual admonishes concerning the same thing. Wherefore: "Questions, in the matter of chastity, ought to be few and cautious, lest (the confessor) either give occasion for investigating or betraying confession, or teach the ignorant, or offend, or expose himself or the other to danger. And if he fears these things, he ought rather to suffer something to be lacking to material integrity. And indeed, if in this matter thoughts are denied, there is no need to proceed to works. Yet the more rude deny thoughts; when asked, they confess words and works, because they do not equally recognize or advert to those thoughts."⁸ (cf. n. 1694).

3. TIMELY, i.e. made at the time and in the manner in which it is fitting. - Hence: 1) Certain questions are to be made before confession, but few, lest the penitent be offended: e.g. from what time he has not confessed? whether he was absolved? whether he fulfilled the penance? - 2) But questions concerning the condition of life, state, age, etc., if these do not appear from the confession itself, will more fittingly be made when an occasion has been given in the course of confession: for thus, on the one hand, every suspicion of curiosity and levity will be avoided, and on the other, the penitent will more easily respond, since his trust in the confessor has increased more.⁹ - 3) Let the penitent first be allowed to explain himself as much as he can, as is fitting; then let him be helped from time to time by questions.¹⁰ - 4) Toward the end, unless a better occasion has previously offered itself, let it be benignly asked of an unknown penitent whether there is anything which still troubles his conscience, whether he has omitted nothing in prior confessions. "Through these questions many souls are usually freed from sacrileges."¹¹

St. Alphonsus also notes:¹² "1) It is better if the confessor examines the sins one by one, as soon as the penitent exposes them, than that he defer the examination until the end; because either the confessor easily forgets those things which he heard, or the penitent would have to be obliged, with his grave burden, to repeat what had been confessed." 2) "Regularly speaking, it is not expedient that the confessor rebuke the penitent in the course of confession, lest he, being terrified, omit some sin; nevertheless, sometimes it is expedient within confession to set before him the malice of some graver sin, provided courage is immediately furnished to him," according to what was said at n. 1793, 2.

1807. Q. What ought the confessor to do with a penitent concerning whom he KNOWS or SUSPECTS some sin which that one does not confess?

Resp. Distinguish. 1. "If he knows outside confession, and knows from his own knowledge, for example by seeing him stealing, or hearing him blaspheming, without doubt he ought not absolve, if that one denies it: provided there is not present a prudent doubt whether he has confessed to another; or he has a just cause for keeping silent. Thus commonly."¹³

2. "But if the confessor has this from suspicion or from the report of others, the Doctors also commonly say that after diligent inquiry, if the penitent still denies, he must be absolved; for then the confessor is not able to refuse faith to the penitent, nor, on account of a suspicion or another's report, can he deprive him of the right which he has acquired to absolution by confession and by signs of contrition."¹⁴

3. Finally, if the confessor knows the sin from the confession of an accomplice, he certainly will not be able, without violation of the sacramental seal, to question the penitent in a special manner about that sin, unless he has obtained express permission for this (but this permission is not ordinarily to be sought); but only in a general manner, that is, in the manner in which he is accustomed to question other similar penitents. But whether he ought to absolve one denying is disputed. But St. Alphonsus, having brought forward the opinions of others, concludes in this manner: "In my judgment, Croix, etc., thinks better, that in that case he should in no way absolve, but only pray something, to hide the denial of absolution." Nor is the conclusion of the Blessed Doctor supported by a reason of little moment: for the confessor, by using the knowledge of confession in the aforesaid manner, by no means violates the sacramental seal; wherefore he is bound to do this for denying the Sacrament to the unworthy person secretly asking it, according to those things which we said above, nn. 1426 and 1430.¹⁵

The penitent sometimes needs special instruction concerning things which he ought to know or do. - Hence the following are established:

1808. Principles. I. The confessor is bound TO INSTRUCT the penitent when he observes, or prudently judges, that he is ignorant of things necessary for faith and salvation. - The reason is because one who labors under such ignorance is not capable of absolution (cf. n. 427).

Nor rarely in modern times does it happen that, amid so great a neglect of divine things, men otherwise liberally educated are involved in ignorance of this sort. - Nevertheless a long instruction is not required. It is sufficient that the one to be absolved be taught the principal mysteries, and those things which pertain to receiving the Sacrament here and now rightly. As to the rest, concerning things necessary by precept to be known, it is enough if he promises that he will learn them from others, at least as to the substance. But confessors who are led by the true spirit of charity do not refuse to teach them by themselves.¹⁶

1809. II. The confessor is bound TO ADMONISH the penitent concerning his various obligations, and concerning the gravity of the sins to which he is liable; nevertheless WITH PRUDENCE. - The reason is because he is bound, from his proper office, to direct the penitent into the way of salvation. Obligations of this sort, concerning which he is bound to admonish him, are: the obligation of restoring reputation, honor, or goods; the obligation of avoiding dangerous occasions; the obligation of laying aside hatred, repairing scandal, making fraternal correction, bestowing alms according to his condition, etc.; likewise the obligations of his own state.¹⁷ We said with prudence, namely lest he harm the penitent more than he profit him.

But let him use these FOUR CAUTIONS:¹⁸

1. Lest he present as mortal that concerning which it is probably disputed on either side among the Doctors whether it is such (cf. n. 337).

2. Before he makes a conscience of mortal sin for the penitent, let him be sufficiently certain that he has rightly understood the sense of his words; for not rarely penitents use such expressions which at first sight seem to indicate mortal sins, while in reality there is in no way question of mortal sin. - Thus, e.g., when a penitent says: I have hatred against my neighbor, sometimes there is question only of displeasure and unavoidable antipathy because of some injury received. - The same sometimes happens in girls, who say: I had evil thoughts; I had evil conversations with other girls; I committed immodesties, etc.; or in boys, who say: I did base, foul things, etc. (cf. n. 1806).

3. Let him attend whether a sin truly committed by the penitent is also truly mortal. Thus a confessor would act imprudently if, hearing a penitent accusing himself of some sin against the sixth Precept, immediately and in every case he argued that he was guilty of mortal sin. For although the principle is most true, that in venereal matter there is no smallness of matter, nevertheless this must be understood in the sense in which we spoke at nn. 768 and 769.

4. Let him attend lest perhaps the penitent is in good faith, insofar namely as that which he does is indeed, in itself, a mortal sin, but he thinks that he either does nothing evil, or sins only venially. - But he will seek this from the natural disposition of the penitent, from his instruction, from his manner of expressing himself, and from similar probable conjectures; yet taking care lest he give him occasion for doubting, and bring upon him bad faith, which he previously lacked.

1810. Questions. Q. 1. Whether a penitent who labors under ignorance concerning some obligation is ALWAYS TO BE ADMONISHED?

Resp. Negative; for the RULES of correction must be attended to, which can be reduced to three.¹⁹

Rule 1. The penitent is to be admonished, even if no fruit of amendment is hoped for, as often as he labors under VINCIBLE ignorance. For he who labors under such ignorance is already involved in the state of sin, or at least in the proximate danger of sinning formally, because he acts with a practical doubt, or from culpable ignorance. Therefore admonition cannot harm; and it can profit, since it can happen that afterward it produces its desired fruits.

Whence it follows: 1. As often as the penitent, pressed not indeed by mere scruple but by grave doubt, questions the confessor, the confessor is bound to disclose the truth, nor can he dissemble; because what the penitent was previously doing from ignorance, this same thing he will do after the question, relying on the testimony of the confessor. Nevertheless the confessor ought not respond more than he is asked: e.g. if someone bound by a vow of chastity asks whether marriage was invalid because of the vow, let him respond negatively, keeping silence about the debt; if he asks whether he ought to render the debt to the spouse, let him respond affirmatively, keeping silence about petitioning.²⁰ - 2. The penitent is similarly to be admonished as often as his ignorance concerns those things which he cannot be ignorant of for a long time, especially if the vice, with the progress of time, increases and is rooted out with greater difficulty. Thus impubescents who begin to contract the habit of pollution are to be strongly admonished, even if they are found in some good faith. And the same must be said of those who perhaps in good faith had contracted a merely civil marriage. - 3. Finally he is to be admonished as often as, the admonition being omitted, he would remain in a proximate occasion of formal sin.

Rule 2. The penitent is to be admonished, although he labors under INVINCIBLE ignorance, as often as fruit of amendment is hoped for. - Hence, although it is foreseen that he will not immediately obey, nevertheless the admonition is not to be omitted if there is hope that he will shortly obey; for it sometimes happens that the penitent, disturbed in mind at the beginning, rejects the correction; but afterward, the mind having become calm, thinks it over again with fruit.²¹

We said, as often as fruit is hoped for. For if from the admonition no fruit is hoped for, the common and true opinion teaches that the confessor, speaking in itself (i.e. unless another reason presses, e.g. of the public good), is bound to omit the admonition, and to leave the penitent in his good faith. Hence, e.g., "if the confessor knows that the penitent contracted marriage invalidly, because of some occult impediment, and there is danger of infamy, scandal, or incontinence if he manifests the nullity, he ought to leave him in good faith until a dispensation is obtained"²² (cf. n. 2081). Likewise, the admonition about making restitution, about repairing reputation, etc., is to be omitted if the confessor foresees that it will happen that the penitent, who is in good faith, will not obey the admonition. - The most valid reason is because of two evils the lesser must be permitted. Wherefore, in this case, the confessor ought to be silent and, by not opening the truth of the matter, permit material sin in the penitent, "because one formal sin outweighs all material sins."²³

IN DOUBT whether the admonition will profit or harm, it is to be omitted; on account of the reason already brought forward, namely because formal sins are rather to be avoided than material sins. We said in doubt; because if the admonition will more probably profit, it is still to be made.²⁴ And "Viva and Roncaglia rightly advert that it is not easily to be judged that the penitent, the truth being known, will not obey the admonition."²⁵

Rule 3. The penitent is to be admonished, even if indisposed, as often as, the admonition being omitted, damage would redound to the spiritual COMMON good. - The reason is "because then the confessor, since he himself is constituted a minister for the good of the Christian republic, is bound to prefer the public good to the private good of the penitent."²⁶ Nor does it stand in the way that the admonition here and now may seem to be made uselessly, or even with scandal of the penitent; for such a penitent, when he afterward sees that he is absolved by no one, will more easily be amended; and meanwhile the scandal of others will cease, when they see that he is not admitted to the Sacraments.

Hence: 1. Princes, Governors, Bishops, Prelates, pastors, masters, who fail in their proper office as to those subject to them, must altogether be admonished. The reason is both because their ignorance is not easily to be supposed invincible (since each one is bound to know the obvious obligations of his duty), and "because their ignorance, even invincible, will always be for damage to the community, since with easy business others can think that what they see to be done by Superiors is licit for themselves." And, on account of this same reason, those are to be admonished, as Benedict XIV teaches, who frequently receive the Sacraments, lest namely that be judged licit by others which is noticed to be practiced by these with impunity.²⁷

"Moreover, Lugo well adds that if the confessor reasonably doubts whether penitents of this sort satisfy their duty, he is bound to question them about it."²⁸

2. Penitents are similarly to be admonished as often as the silence of confessors would be the cause why some false dogma, whether against faith, or against the law of God or of the Church, would gradually be scattered among the people: as if it were believed or said that certain illicit things, e.g. the reading of wicked books, frequenting modern dances, entrance into a masonic sect, are not illicit, because confessors seem little to oppose them.

Note. If some admonition is to be made, and it is greatly feared lest the penitent take it in a bad part, there are many authors who think that the penitent is to be admonished in more obscure words only after absolution has been given. Nor does this opinion seem to be rejected, provided it is understood of the sole case in which, on the one hand, it is despaired that the penitent will obey a clear admonition, and on the other hand, no good effect is foreseen as going to flow from denied absolution.²⁹

1811. Principles. I. The confessor is bound, as much as he can, RIGHTLY TO DISPOSE the penitent who approaches indisposed. - Thus commonly.

To the point St. Alphonsus says thus: "I do not know," he says, "how those slothful confessors can be excused from fault, who, as soon as they know that the penitent is not sufficiently disposed, dismiss him, with no diligence or very slight diligence first used for healing him. For I say that the confessor is bound, from a rigorous obligation of charity, to dispose him as much as he can, by exposing to him the deformity of sin, the value of divine grace, the danger of damnation, and similar things, even if he ought to spend much time in this. Nor ought it to be a care to him that other penitents are waiting: for then the confessor is not bound to attend to the good of others, but only of his penitent, for whom alone he will then have to render an account to God, not for the others."

But if the penitent approaches conveniently disposed, it is sufficient that the confessor exhort him to renew the act of sorrow and firm purpose.

1812. II. The confessor, in exhorting the penitent, ought chiefly to attend to THREE things: namely, TO CORRECT him, to move him to CONTRITION, and to INDICATE TO HIM THE MEANS by which holy perseverance is obtained. On this matter St. Alphonsus says thus:³⁰

1. "The origin and gravity of the sickness being known," he says, "let the confessor proceed to making the due observations. - And although he, as father, ought to listen to penitents in charity, nevertheless as physician he is bound, as much as there is need, to admonish and correct them, especially those who, burdened with many mortal sins, rarely approach the Sacrament of Penance. And he ought also to fulfill this office if the penitent shines with some illustrious quality (namely if he were a magistrate, Prince, priest, pastor, or Prelate), if, without too much feeling of soul, he accused himself of some omission of his duty." Indeed, even the fervent themselves are to be rebuked when they fall into negligence, so that they may carry away more abundant fruit from the Sacrament. "Benedict XIV says³¹ that the admonitions of the confessor are more efficacious than sermons themselves; and deservedly by right, because the particular circumstances are hidden from the preacher, but openly become known to the confessor, and therefore he will be better able to use due observations and to apply remedies which are suited to the sicknesses."³²

2. "After due corrections, or admonitions, it is better that labor be applied to disposing the penitent for absolution by acts of true sorrow and purpose. - Wherefore I wish confessors to be warned that there are very few penitents, especially rude ones, who approach to confess with the act of sorrow placed beforehand. Some confessors think that they have done enough for their office if they only question penitents of this sort in the following manner: Come, do you ask pardon from God for all these things? (Which in reality is not a true act of sorrow.) Are you sorry from the heart for all your sins? And with no other word inserted, they bestow absolution upon them. The manner of good confessors is wholly other than this; for these first of all labor so that penitents (the speech is about those who are held by mortal sins) conceive true sorrow and detestation of sins."³³ - To this end, let the confessor first of all set forth the motives of attrition: such as the deformity of sin, the value of divine grace, the danger of damnation to be incurred through unexpected death, etc.; then the motives of contrition, namely the infinite goodness of God offended by sin, the Holy Spirit saddened, the lovable heart of Jesus afflicted with grief, and similar things.

But if the penitent is stained only by venial sins, recall what was said at n. 1648, qq. 2 and 3.

3. For consulting the perseverance of the penitent and guarding it, the confessor, as physician, ought to assign to him REMEDIES, both general and particular, which drive away the danger of relapse and confirm him in holy purposes.

A) "The GENERAL remedies to be insinuated to all are: 1. Love toward God, since He created us for this end alone. And let care likewise be taken that the penitent know the interior peace with which those who enjoy the friendship of God are endowed, and the hell which those who are alien from God experience before the time; with added temporal ruin, which sin frequently drags along with itself. - 2. Prayer, i.e. often commending oneself to the Blessed Virgin by reciting the rosary; commending oneself to the guardian Angel, and to some Saint as particular protector. - 3. Frequency of the Sacraments, and if ever he falls into some mortal sin, that he confess immediately. - 4. Consideration of the eternal truths, and before the rest consideration of death: and to fathers of families daily mental prayer (or pious reading) in common with the family is to be insinuated, or at least the rosary with the children. - 5. The presence of God, when temptation presses, by saying: God sees me. - 6. Every evening to examine conscience, with sorrow of soul and purpose. - 7. To seculars, that they enroll themselves in some Congregation; and to priests, mental prayer and thanksgiving after Mass, and that they read through at least some little spiritual book before and after Mass."³⁴

B) "But PARTICULAR remedies will be assigned according to the diversity of vices: e.g. to him who is held by some hatred, let it be insinuated that daily he commend to God the one whom he hates, reciting for him the Lord's Prayer and the Angelic Salutation; and when he feels himself disturbed by the memory of the injury inflicted upon him, let him remember the insults with which he himself has affected God. To him who has fallen into base sins, let it be enjoined that he avoid idleness, flee evil companions and wicked occasions. To him who for a long time has contracted a wicked habit in this vice, let it be prescribed that he avoid not only proximate occasions, but also certain remote ones, which for one so weak in resisting have become as proximate for him." But especially let the confessor take care that he frequently communicate; because the Eucharist is called "wine bringing forth virgins."³⁵ And so concerning the others (cf. n. 1831, q. 3).

1813. Penitents, after admonitions and exhortations have been heard, can be divided into a threefold class: for some are certainly disposed, others doubtfully disposed, and others finally positively indisposed. - Therefore the confessor, so that he may rightly and fruitfully perform his twofold office toward each, i.e. the office of JUDGE and PHYSICIAN, ought to attend to the following:

Principles. I. Absolution IS TO BE GIVEN to capable and worthy penitents, or the RIGHTLY DISPOSED, unless the good of the penitent counsels delay, as will be said at n. 1816. "The reason is because the penitent, after confession has been made, since he is disposed, has a strict right to absolution; by denying which the confessor would inflict grave injury upon him, both because he would deprive him of the grace of the Sacrament, and because he would oblige him to undergo a great burden, namely to repeat before another his grave sins."³⁶

1814. II. Absolution must altogether BE DENIED to incapable and unworthy persons. The reason is because to administer a Sacrament where essential conditions are lacking is a great sacrilege; and often also a most grave deception of the penitent, namely when, from invalid absolution received, he incurs greater danger of eternal damnation.

We said, 1. to the incapable, namely to those who either have never had the use of reason, or are ignorant of necessary things with necessity of means (cf. n. 1808), or are not morally present, or bring no matter to the Sacrament.

We said, 2. to the unworthy, i.e. to those certainly indisposed (cf. n. 1817, q. 4).

Wherefore St. Alphonsus gravely admonishes, saying:³⁷ 1) Let the confessor be inflexible in deferring or denying absolution as often as it is proper; especially with priests and Ordinands. 2) Let him be full of charity, both by bringing it about according to his strength that the indisposed penitent become disposed, and by dismissing with sweet words the one whom he cannot absolve, so that this one may not be reluctant to return (cf. n. 1793, 3).

1815. III. Absolution IS TO BE DEFERRED for the penitent DOUBTFULLY DISPOSED; unless there is present a GRAVE CAUSE because of which absolution can be imparted under condition. - The reason of the first part is because otherwise the confessor would expose the Sacrament to danger of nullity, and so would commit grave sacrilege. The reason of the second part is because the Sacraments are for men, and therefore in a case in which the salvation of a man is endangered, they are to be administered in every better manner by which it can be done; but irreverence toward the Sacrament is removed by a just cause and condition. See individual cases under n. 1663, q. 4, where concerning the conditioned form. But here:

Let it be noted: 1. Delay of absolution, when it can be used, is a most efficacious REMEDY; for it shakes the drowsy, lest they fall into the sleep of death; as a carbuncle it rouses those deceived by the fallacy of sin, so that they open their eyes and know their dangerous state. - Even if they should not return to the same confessor, a just and prudent delay is not useless; because, like a strong admonition, it will be a seed of reflection and conversion, which will bear fruit in its own time.³⁸ It was said: when it can be used; for among penitents doubtfully disposed there are found some who, dismissed, would not return, and would waste away in their sins, although it is not impossible for them to dispose themselves better. These ought rather to be absolved under condition.³⁹

2. The delay ought to be brief, i.e. for eight or ten days, if the sin proceeds from intrinsic frailty; indeed sometimes for a shorter time, e.g. for a day, or an hour, or even for a quarter of an hour. - But if it proceeds from an extrinsic cause, e.g. from a proximate occasion, the delay can be longer, e.g. of one month, if from the circumstances it is required (cf. n. 1831).

And indeed these principles press the Confessor insofar as he is considered solely as judge. But since the parts of physician also must be performed by him, it must be established:

1816. IV. The confessor, insofar as he performs the office of PHYSICIAN, CAN, indeed OUGHT, sometimes TO DEFER absolution for a penitent, even one RIGHTLY DISPOSED, namely when he prudently judges that such a delay will be profitable for his amendment and salvation. To the point St. Alphonsus says thus:⁴⁰ "It is certain and common among all that the confessor can defer absolution for a penitent even disposed, and even without his consent, whenever he prudently judges that delay is useful for his amendment. The reason is because the penitent, although he has a right to absolution by reason of confession performed, nevertheless does not have a right to be absolved at once: for the confessor, to whom not only the duty of judge but also of physician belongs, can well, indeed in my judgment is bound to, defer absolution when he judges such a remedy to be necessarily useful to the salvation of his penitent." But that the Blessed Doctor in this matter by no means departs from the opinion of the ancient Theologians (of the sixteenth century) is found demonstrated splendidly in the Alphonsian Vindications.⁴¹

We said, 1. when he judges that the delay will be profitable: as, e.g., when there is probable danger lest the penitent, after receiving absolution, break his purpose: as often happens to those who must make restitution, make a denunciation, remove an occasion of sin, reconcile themselves with enemies, learn things necessary to be known, shake off culpable negligence, etc. But the delay, in these cases, will be able to be of the very briefest time, namely until they have fulfilled the obligation. - But the obligation itself of deferring absolution will be grave or light, according as the delay itself will be judged necessary, or only useful.⁴²

We said, 2. when he judges PRUDENTLY; because one must proceed considerately. For absolution is never to be put off for one sufficiently disposed if the delay is foreseen as more harmful than profitable, or if from it a mark or danger of infamy would arise for the penitent. And the same must be said if, all things weighed, the delay would seem useless, or if such a remedy could be used with too little convenience.⁴³

Note. - According to the diversity of places and times it is expedient to defer absolution more frequently or more rarely. Thus, in great cities or in impious regions, where faith has collapsed, it hardly ever seems expedient that absolution be deferred; otherwise elsewhere, where faith is living.

1817. Questions. Q. 1. Whether and what sort of CERTITUDE is required concerning the disposition of the penitent, so that he can be absolved?

Resp. The extreme opinions being passed over, of the Rigorists, who will that no one, outside danger of death, is to be absolved before he has put forth most certain arguments of conversion; and of the Laxists, who think that absolution is to be denied to no one unless evidence holds signs of indisposition, we say with St. Alphonsus:

1. In this Sacrament, since the matter is moral, as the acts of the penitent are, MORAL or respective CERTITUDE suffices... "Hence, as regards our purpose, it is sufficient that the confessor have prudent probability concerning the disposition of the penitent, and that, on the other hand, no prudent suspicion of indisposition stands in the way; otherwise scarcely anyone could be absolved, since whatever signs of penitents furnish nothing except probability of disposition... And this seems to be sufficiently expressed in the Roman Catechism, where it is said: If, the confession having been heard, the priest has judged that neither diligence in enumerating sins, nor sorrow in detesting them, was wholly lacking to the penitent, he will be able to be absolved"⁴⁴ (cf. n. 1424).

2. The dispositions of the penitent ought to become known to the confessor through certain signs, whether ordinary or extraordinary. ORDINARY SIGNS indeed suffice if no indication of indisposition appears to the contrary. But if they are attacked by some positive presumption, or in other words, if there is present a founded suspicion concerning the indisposition of the penitent, e.g. because of his new and continuous falls into sin, they no longer suffice; but SOME EXTRAORDINARY SIGN is required. The reason is because the presumption which ordinary signs introduce concerning the disposition of the penitent is destroyed by the presumption which founded reasons furnish concerning his indisposition. Hence the confessor necessarily becomes hesitating and doubtful (in which case see what was said at n. 1815). But where some extraordinary sign (which either precedes the accusation of sins, or, with the confessor admonishing and exhorting, follows it) supervenes, suspicion concerning indisposition is (for the most part) removed, and the confessor judges that his penitent is now sufficiently disposed.⁴⁵

Q. 2. What are the ORDINARY SIGNS of sufficient disposition?

Resp. According to St. Alphonsus,⁴⁶ they are the confession itself rightly made, and the protestation of the penitent asserting that he is sorry and proposes. For the presumption is in favor of the penitent, and he is to be believed when nothing stands in the way to the contrary.

Q. 3. What are EXTRAORDINARY or special SIGNS?⁴⁷

Resp. St. Alphonsus enumerates nine signs of this sort, which can be recalled to two heads, namely some zeal for amendment, and a special manifestation of sorrow.

1. Some ZEAL FOR AMENDMENT, for example: 1) The use of means, e.g. if the penitent diligently avoided the occasion, carried into execution the means prescribed by the confessor, used prayers, alms, etc., for rooting out the vice. - 2) Perseverance for some time, e.g. absolutely speaking, for about three weeks, or relatively to temptations, for one or another week, when previously he was accustomed to fall many times in the week. That continence can happen after confession, which is a better sign, or even before he approaches confession, so that he might dispose himself for it. - 3) A more difficult or rarer fall: more difficult, i.e. after notable resistance; rarer, namely in the same occasions and temptations. - 4) Fulfillment of some difficult obligation, as, e.g., of restitution, repairing the neighbor's reputation, etc.

2. Some SPECIAL MANIFESTATION OF SORROW, e.g. 1) Tears and sighs, at least for the most part, but especially cordial words. - 2) Spontaneous confession made, not from custom, but from an internal impulse of grace, so that divine friendship may be received, especially if there accedes a long journey, loss of notable profit, grave inconvenience, great internal or external conflict. - 3) External impulse of grace, in some extraordinary event, for example because of a sermon heard, because of the death of a friend, because of fear of an imminent scourge. - 4) Confession of sins previously concealed. - 5) Signification of a new knowledge of one's sin, or of the danger of damnation. - 6) Request for means of amendment, and similar things: for example, "if the penitent says that he repented immediately after the sin, if he desires to make satisfaction, if he accepts a great penance with a good mind, if of himself he protests that he would rather die than fall again." From signs of this sort it is rightly gathered that the penitent asserts sorrow and purpose not only with the mouth, but from the soul.⁴⁸

"The following things are to be noted concerning these: 1. Zeal for amendment can sometimes stand with slight amendment, on account of special difficulties of amendment, which can proceed: 1) from a habit very deeply rooted, since it demands great efforts; 2) from assiduous and vehement temptations, because they entangle a man; 3) from a very light and changeable disposition, which is especially proper to adolescents, and by which it happens that with equal facility they pass to good and to evil; 4) from the facility with which some sins are committed, for example sins of heart and of mouth.⁴⁹

"2. Spontaneity of confession is to be presumed especially in those regions in which faith has grown weak; for there human respect does not impel one to receiving the Sacraments, as in others in which religion flourishes, but rather draws one back from them. For the rest, even in regions of this sort, there are not lacking those who approach the sacred Tribunal from custom alone, or from other natural motives.⁵⁰

"3. In the time of a Mission which turns out prosperously, recidivists for the most part are usually rightly disposed, if they diligently attended the sermons, and at this time abstained from sin."⁵¹

Q. 4. What are the signs of INDISPOSITION?

Resp. 1. The ABSOLUTELY indisposed, and therefore incapable of the benefit of absolution, are to be judged, from the Roman Ritual:⁵² "Those who give no signs of sorrow; who DO NOT WANT to lay aside hatreds and enmities, or to restore the goods of others, if they can, or to leave a proximate occasion of sinning, or in another way to leave sins, and amend life for the better; or who have given public scandal, unless they publicly satisfy and remove the scandal"; and generally, whoever refuse to fulfill a known grave obligation.

Resp. 2. The DOUBTFULLY disposed are to be judged: 1) Those who approach the sacred tribunal compelled, or only from human consideration, or without any preparation; - 2) those who confess without any sense of humility, narrating their sins historically and almost jokingly, or without any submission to the confessor, namely excusing their own wicked manner of acting, accusing others, etc.; - 3) those who use crafty words, seeking rather to cover over than to expose sins, or not confessing them unless they have been detected by the industry of the confessor; - 4) those who are very difficult in accepting penances and remedies necessary for sins; - 5) those finally who, remedies being neglected, have fallen back into a wicked habit after they have already been admonished by the confessor.⁵³

But let it be noted FOR PRACTICE: - 1. In the Confessor there is necessary the industry of ardent charity, by which namely, according to his strength, "not without prayers poured out to God from the inmost heart" (as Leo XII says),⁵⁴ he strives to make the unprepared prepared: and this often succeeds with true zeal.

2. "In the penitent there is not necessary an interpretative disposition, namely that if he were found in this or that conflict of circumstances, he would not sin, when he does not at all reflect on this; because otherwise, if confessors wished to presume the interpretative indispositions of penitents, they could absolve few, since they could judge that many of those whose children had been killed certainly would be moved with hatred against the killers; if they were tempted by tyrants with torments, they would fall away from the Faith, etc. - Therefore it suffices to find in the penitent that actual disposition, so that he may be absolved; namely that here and now he resolves no longer to sin in any case in general. Nor does it stand in the way that he would be indisposed by interpretative will, namely if he were admonished."⁵⁵

1° In Confession; 2° after Confession.

There must be treated 1° of the duties of the confessor in general; 2° of his manner of acting with the various kinds of penitents.

A fourfold duty or office of the confessor is assigned, namely 1° of Father; 2° of Physician; 3° of Doctor; 4° of Judge.

1413. - The Confessor is a spiritual father, who gives spiritual life to the penitent, or restores and fosters it; for in the tribunal of Penance he acts in the place of the best of all parents, namely Christ Himself, and therefore by penitents he is called by the sweetest name of father. But that which especially stands out in the true name of father is remarkable and inexhaustible charity. For what affection is stronger than the affection of a father? What is truer, purer, more chaste, more constant, fuller of solicitude and more alien from one's own advantage, indeed readier and more prompt for every kind of privation and inconvenience? Therefore such must be the charity of the confessor, so that, clothed with the bowels of mercy of Christ Jesus, Who came not to call the just, but sinners, he may know how to deal zealously, patiently, and meekly with sinners. Thus, as a good father, he will sustain all things for his spiritual children: for charity is patient, ... bears all things, ... endures all things.

The Confessor must be full of charity toward penitents, both at the beginning, and in the course, and at the end of Confession. It is pleasing to hear St. Alphonsus himself speaking on these things.

1414. - I. At the beginning of Confession. "First he" (the Confessor) "must employ charity in receiving kindly all, whether they are poor, or rude, or sinners. Some spend time only in hearing the Confessions of certain devout persons or persons of rank, because they have not so much courage as to repel these from themselves. But if some miserable sinner approaches them, he is heard unwillingly and is driven away loaded with reproaches: whence it happens that that wretched one, after he has brought the greatest force upon himself so that he might come to confess his sins, feeling himself so harshly received, conceives hatred for the Sacrament of Penance, and, despairing that he can find someone who may help him and absolve him from sins, rushes headlong with loosened reins into the slippery way of a lost life, and falls into despair of salvation. Good confessors act otherwise. When sinners of this kind flow together to them, they receive them kindly, and, as a victor over captured prey, they exult, considering that the lot has fallen to them to snatch a soul from the hands of the demon. They know that this Sacrament was instituted properly not for the just, but for sinners; for venial faults, in order to be remitted, do not need sacramental absolution, since they can be blotted out in many other ways. They know also that Christ protested in these words: I came not to call the just, but sinners. Therefore the confessor, clothing himself with the bowels of charity, the more he finds souls stained by the multitude and atrocity of sins, the more, that he may gain them for God, should embrace them with greater charity, and give them courage with these or similar words: Come, brother, be of good courage, do not fear; confess your sins fearlessly. Open all things confidently; be ashamed of nothing: it does not matter if you have not looked into all the recesses of your conscience; it suffices if you answer what is asked. Give thanks to God, Who has awaited you until now for penance. Now your life must be changed. Rejoice, because God certainly remits all sins to you, however great, if you have a good will, and therefore He has awaited you, that He might spare you: therefore say all things with a cheerful soul, cover nothing with wrappings."

1415. - II. In the course of Confession. "He must show far greater charity in hearing the Confession. Let him take care not to show himself impatient or affected by weariness; nor let him show himself struck with amazement at the sins which are narrated; provided the penitent is not so hard or insolent in soul that he exposes several and more atrocious sins without any shame, and without any displeasure and sense of soul; because then one must labor with all one's powers that the penitent may perceive how great is their deformity and magnitude; and therefore then a sharper correction is required, so that he may be awakened from lethal lethargy. It is indeed true that... in the act of Confession confessors must abstain from making correction, lest perhaps penitents, frightened, hold back sins; nevertheless this is understood when speaking regularly: besides, many times it is expedient not to proceed to further things, and immediately to correct the penitent, especially when he confesses a very enormous sin, or if he has been habituated in some vice, so that he may comprehend the gravity of the sin. Yet let him advert not to exasperate him, nor to terrify him. Wherefore, after he has corrected him as much as shall have been needed, immediately let him give him courage for confessing the remaining sins, saying: Come, brother, do you wish to recover from this vice? Is it not so? And since you are prepared to do this, be of cheerful soul. Therefore narrate the remaining sins, holding back nothing. Take care, I beg you, lest you commit some sacrilege; for this would be the greatest of all the sins which you have committed until now. Therefore say all things with a strong soul; conquer yourself: confess all things sincerely: for God is prepared to spare you."

1416. - III. At the end of Confession. "At the end of Confession also it is necessary that the confessor apply himself with a more vehement ardor and zeal, so that he may make the penitent perceive the gravity and multitude of his sins, and the miserable state of damnation in which he is found; but let this always be done with the greatest charity. Nevertheless it is more fitting then to use graver words, so that thus he may better be able to return to a good fruit of mind; nevertheless he must effect that the penitent understand that what is said to him proceeds not from an angry soul, but from singular love and commiseration toward his soul, which can be expressed in this way: My son, do you consider the life of a damned one which you have led? Do you perceive the evil which you have worked? What evil has your God ever done to you, Whom you have so recklessly despised? If there had been no one more hostile to you than Jesus Christ, could you have borne yourself worse toward Him? But, I ask you, consider who this Jesus is? He is the one Who, though He was God, needing nothing, was made man for you, wished to die on the cross, that He might redeem you from hell. Ah! son, if meanwhile you had died, if on this night, whither would you have gone? Where would you now be? You would be in the eternal fire of hell. What will become of you, if you go on in the future to live the life you have led until now? Will you be able to be saved thus? Awake and see that, unless you change your morals for the better, you are already damned. What good have you gathered for yourself from so many sins? Do you not consider that you prepare for yourself a double hell, one here of anguish and misery, another there of punishments? Come, son, turn away from evil, cease to sin, and commit yourself wholly into the arms of God, which are extended to receive you: enough, as much as you have sinned against Him. I wish to help you with all my powers and with my whole heart; come to me always and whenever you please, since you will find a father who will receive you kindly. Behold, now firmly resolve that you wish to be made holy. It depends on you. For God is always prepared, and has imparted this time to you for this, that you may turn yourself away from evil and do good. O how good it is to have God as a friend! etc."

To the charity of Father can also be referred the following warning of the Second Plenary Council of Baltimore: "Lest any delay hinder those wishing to confess, we earnestly exhort and beseech pastors of souls that they be present at the confessionals for hearing penitents on each Sabbath, and on the Vigils of Feasts at least in the evening time, and on Sundays and feast days in the morning before the first Mass.... But if the number of the faithful is greater than that all who approach can be heard on one day, let him also choose other times, other days, which he may spend on this necessary work."

1417. - I. The Confessor must know the cause of the disease. "For the Confessor, that he may meet the infirmities of his penitent with opportune remedies, the origin and cause of all his spiritual diseases must be known. Some... beyond the species and number of sins inquire nothing else: if they see the penitent disposed, they immediately absolve him; but if not, without spending one word, they dismiss him at once, saying with a turned eye: Depart from me, because I cannot absolve you. Good confessors proceed otherwise: for these first begin to investigate the origin and gravity of the disease, by questioning concerning the habit of sinning, concerning occasions, concerning the time, concerning the place, concerning the persons with whom, and with what concurrence of things. For thus they will be better able to correct the penitents, dispose them for absolution, and add salutary remedies."

1418. - II. He must heal the disease. "When the origin and gravity of the disease have been known, let the confessor proceed to make the due admonitions. And although he as Father must listen to penitents with charity, nevertheless as physician he is held, as much as is needed, to warn and correct them, especially those who, burdened with many mortal sins, rarely approach the Sacrament of Penance.... Nor then must the confessor attend to other penitents who surround him. For, as St. Francis Xavier used to say, it is better to hear the rightly made Confessions of a few than the disordered and fruitless Confessions of many. Here it is necessary to advert how wrongly those confessors act who, if they find a penitent indisposed, immediately order him to go away from them, lest they spend some time with him.... And it matters little that others wait or depart unconfessed; for the confessor must render an account on the day of judgment concerning this one only, who now confesses to him, not concerning others." - I think an exception from this rule conformable to the mind of the holy Doctor in the case in which, on the one side, there is a crowd of penitents who, unless they are heard now, cannot or are foreseen not to be about to return except after a long time, and on the other side, the penitent who needs a longer time, e.g. on account of a necessary general Confession, can easily return and is hoped with foundation to be about to return.

"After due corrections or warnings, it is better that labor be spent on disposing the penitent to absolution through acts of true sorrow and purpose; wherefore I wish confessors to be warned that those penitents are very few, especially the rude, who come to confess with an act of sorrow premised. Some confessors think that they have done enough for their office if they merely question penitents of this kind in the following way: Come, do you ask pardon from God for all these things (which in truth is not a true act of sorrow)? Are you sorry from the heart for all your sins? and, with no other word interposed, they bestow absolution on them. Altogether different from this is the method of good confessors. For these first of all labor so that penitents (the discourse is about those who are held by mortal sins) may conceive true sorrow and detestation of sins. And first they prepare them through an act of attrition, e.g.: My son, where now ought you to be in eternity? In hell. Ah! in that fire you would always be tortured! Nor would any hope remain to you any longer that you could be rescued thence! There you would be dwelling, abandoned by all, rejected by God for all eternity! Therefore, are you sorry that you have offended God on account of the hell which you have deserved?... Afterward let him take care that an act of contrition be elicited, in this way: My son, what have you done? You have sinned against God, the highest and infinite good; you have had no regard for Him; you have turned your face away from Him: you have cast Him behind your back; you have despised His friendship and grace. Come therefore, because you have offended God, infinite goodness, are you now sorry from your whole heart? Detest and hate, above all evils, all the injuries by which undeservedly you have affected so good a God. Are you not now ready to die a thousand times rather than commit these things in the future?"

1419. - III. He must prevent relapse. The confessor will prevent relapse by assigning to the penitent remedies suited to the disease. But remedies are either general or particular.

1° General remedies are 1) pious prayer and love toward God; 2) frequent invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, of the holy Guardian Angel, and of the holy Patron; 3) frequency of the Sacraments and Confession as soon as any mortal sin has been committed; 4) consideration of the eternal truths, especially of death and of the last end, according to that saying: Remember thy last things, and thou shalt not sin forever; 5) recollection of God present when temptation presses, by saying: God sees me; 6) evening examination of conscience with sorrow of soul and purpose; 7) mental prayer and pious readings, especially for priests.

2° Particular remedies will be assigned according to the diversity of vices: e.g. to him who is held by some hatred, let it be suggested that daily he commend to God him whom he hates, reciting for him the Lord's Prayer, etc. And when the memory of the injury disturbs him, let him recall the insults by which he himself has affected God. - To him who has fallen into shameful sins, let it be enjoined that he avoid idleness, flee evil companions and depraved occasions. - To him who has contracted a depraved habit through a long time in this vice, let it be prescribed that he avoid not only proximate occasions, but even certain remote ones, which to one so weak are as if proximate. But especially let the confessor take care that this one communicate frequently; because the Eucharist is called: wine bringing forth virgins. And thus concerning others.

The confessor will assign other remedies according to his prudence, the circumstances of occasions, persons, etc., having been inspected. For prudence is the chief quality which must stand out in a physician. - See St. Alphonsus in Praxis Confessarii; and in H. A. Cf. n. 1389.

1420. Principles. - I. The Confessor is held under grave obligation to know all those things which are required for rightly fulfilling his duty. - Thus all with St. Alphonsus, who speaks thus: "I affirm that that confessor is in a state of damnation who exposes himself to hearing Confessions without sufficient knowledge." The reason is that otherwise a confessor of this kind exposes himself to the evident danger of badly discharging so grave a duty, with injury to the Sacrament and with great detriment to souls.

Therefore God requires special knowledge from His Ministers, as is clear from various words of Sacred Scripture: The lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law from his mouth. - Because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will reject thee, that thou shalt not perform the priesthood for Me. - If the blind offer leadership to the blind, both fall into the pit. - Woe to you, blind guides! - It is clear also from innumerable testimonies of the Holy Fathers: "No art is presumed to be taught, unless it is first learned by attentive meditation. Therefore the pastoral magisterium is undertaken by the unskilled with great rashness, since the governance of souls is the art of arts." - St. Gregory. Cf. what was said p. XCIII. under IV.

II. Nevertheless the Confessor is not held:

1) To have knowledge so perfect that he can always immediately and by himself solve all doubts that occur; but it suffices if he can do this in cases commonly occurring, and concerning more difficult ones knows at least how to doubt, so that he may consult books or, with due permission (if he has need of it), learned men. For greater knowledge can be had with more difficulty, since not even the more learned themselves are able immediately to solve all cases. Hence in more involved doubts, especially if the case is public or easily to be made public, not only are other learned men and men of greater experience to be consulted, but especially the Bishop is to be heard, if time is available. - Sometimes also the warning which Lugo gives will be useful: "When counsel must be given for the future, or restitution imposed, or a doubtful contract prohibited, or something similar, if the confessor cannot by himself" (or not immediately) "resolve it, it will be good counsel to ask the penitent whether he is prepared to consult skilled men and to stand by their judgment concerning that doubt" (or to return to himself, the confessor): "but if the penitent promises, let him absolve, telling him the obligation which he has of consulting someone or some persons concerning that doubt" (or of returning to himself, the confessor). Nor even

2) Is the confessor held to discern concerning each of the sins accused whether they are mortal or not; since this is often impossible; but it suffices that he hear each thing as it was done, and know how to judge concerning them, both according to common principles and according to the adjuncts of things set forth by the penitent, and to apply a suitable remedy. Nor ought it then move the confessor that afterward he certainly knows that, while the confession was being made, it was uncertain to him. On the matter St. Alphonsus warns with Suarez, that although in some case the confessor does not discern which things are grave or light; if nevertheless the penitent in good faith says his sin, the Confession is valid; and although afterward it is noticed that it was mortal, there is no reason that it be repeated in another Confession. Nor

3) Is the same knowledge required in all, but greater or lesser according to the diversity of places, penitents, and adjuncts. It is said: a) of places, and thus lesser knowledge is required in small towns. - It is said: b) of penitents, and thus likewise lesser knowledge is required for hearing the Confessions of boys or country people than for hearing merchants, judges, etc., who have more difficult cases. But for the Confessions of a learned Theologian much less knowledge is required, because the confessor can be instructed by the penitent himself, provided nevertheless, I would add, that he is God-fearing, concerning whom you may not legitimately suspect that he chose one less learned in order that he might be absolved more easily. - It is said: c) of adjuncts; for the scarcity of priests will be able to excuse a Bishop, so that, if on account of it the faithful otherwise would have to lack a confessor for a long time, as happens more easily in Mission places, he may send a less sufficient minister.

Nevertheless the less sufficient are held diligently to apply themselves to studies, and they are to be warned by the Bishop concerning this obligation. - Lugo.

It is clear of itself that in the article of death, another being lacking, even an ignorant and unlearned priest must hear the Confession and absolve.

1421. Resolves. - 1° Any Confessor whatsoever is held to know all those things which regard the value, substance, integrity, and effect of the Sacrament of Penance, and which are required for its licit administration, both on his own part and on the part of the penitent. Hence also what is the difference between a Confession simply null or invalid and one which, besides, is sacrilegious.

2° He must know also the common obligations and the proper obligations of states; the various species of sins; their adjuncts changing the species; the principles of discerning between mortal and venial sins, and what things are mortal and venial in individual precepts, at least according to general principles and the common opinion of Theologians. Likewise which acts are valid and licit. The reason is clear, because he must know that concerning which he must judge; otherwise he will not be able to render an equitable judgment.

3° He must know cases and censures from which he cannot absolve, and with respect to those from which he can absolve, under what conditions he can do this; impediments of Matrimony; conditions of contracts; various causes of restitution; roots and occasions of sins; remedies to be brought to them; salutary and suitable satisfactions to be imposed, etc.

4° Therefore a confessor sins who certainly knows that the aforesaid knowledge is lacking to him, even if he hears Confessions from charity alone and obedience. Nor does the approbation of the Bishop excuse him of itself; for this does not give the knowledge due from the nature of the thing, nor supply its defect. I have said: certainly knows; for he who doubts concerning his aptitude will be able to lay aside the doubt, when the Prelate, who knows him well, imposes that duty on him.

5° The Superior also sins who gives permission to an ignorant confessor to hear Confessions, because he consents to and cooperates with his sin. H. A. Tr. XVI. 99 in fine.

6° The penitent himself also sins who deliberately chooses an inept confessor. Nevertheless, if someone is in good faith, the Confession will be valid; because on the part of the penitent there intervenes an integral declaration of sins and due disposition of soul; on the part of the confessor there intervenes at least cognition of sins under the confused notion of sin, which suffices for the matter of the Sacrament. L. VI. 628 sub 1 and 2.

7° Experience cannot supply knowledge, but only assist it; but where knowledge is destitute of support, it will drive a rash confessor into very many errors, and those most grave.

8° Therefore every Confessor whatsoever is held diligently to apply himself to the study of Moral Theology; and, as St. Alphonsus asserts, he must never interrupt that study; "because from so many diverse things and things disparate among themselves, which pertain to this knowledge, many things, although read, since they happen more rarely, in the progress of time fall from the mind; wherefore it is necessary always by frequent study to recall them into the mind."

9° Hence it is clear how gravely they err who consider the knowledge of Moral Theology easy and hardly worthy of any attention, repeatedly saying that nearly all cases can be solved by some common sense, with knowledge of general principles. - Aptly the same St. Alphonsus says: "Let those who aspire to this duty of hearing Confessions not easily persuade themselves that they can render themselves sufficiently suitable for so great a duty without prolonged study of moral knowledge, for which certainly it does not suffice to run through some little summary of those which are carried about; nor is it enough to know the general principles of this faculty, as certain men think, who (despising Casuists) arrogate to themselves the name of literati. For moral knowledge is not only very necessary to the Christian commonwealth, since the good governance of souls depends upon it, but it is also supremely difficult; both because it requires a general knowledge of all other sciences, offices, and arts; and because it embraces so many diverse matters separated among themselves; and because in great part it consists of so many positive laws, which are found cited only among Casuists, and especially among more recent ones, since laws of this kind come forth day by day. - Finally it becomes most difficult on account of innumerable circumstances of cases, upon which the variation of resolutions depends: for from the diversity of circumstances diverse principles must be applied, and in this the difficulty consists, since this cannot be done without great discussion, or the accurate reading of several books which examine and elucidate matters."

1422. Principles. - I. The confessor is held to teach penitents all those things which pertain to the Sacrament being rightly received here and now. The reason is that, since the priest is the minister of the Sacrament, he must procure its valid and licit reception, and therefore deliver the instruction necessary here and now.

II. He must teach penitents, when he adverts that someone is ignorant of something from those things which are necessary for living Christianly, such as, e.g., the obligations of his own state.

III. Nevertheless, per se and strictly, he is not held to instruct them concerning all things which they ought to know and can learn from elsewhere. The reason is that the duty of doctor in a confessor pertains of itself only to the right administration of the Sacrament of Penance. Yet per accidens there could be an obligation from charity, when with the greatest difficulty the penitent could acquire this knowledge for himself either by himself or through another.

IV. In teaching or warning a penitent concerning the gravity of sin, the confessor should employ these four cautions:

1° That he not set down as mortal that concerning which it is disputed among Doctors with probability on each side whether it is such.

2° Before he makes a conscience for his penitent concerning a mortal sin, let him be sufficiently certain that he has rightly understood the sense of the penitent's words; for not rarely penitents use such expressions which at first sight seem to indicate mortal sins, while in truth there is no question of a mortal sin in any way. Thus, e.g., when the penitent says: I have hatred against my neighbor, sometimes there is question only of displeasure and inevitable antipathy on account of some injury received. The same sometimes happens in girls, who say: I had bad thoughts; I made bad conversations with other girls; I committed immodesties, etc.; - or in boys, who say: I did shameful things.

3° Let him advert whether the sin truly committed by the penitent is also truly mortal. Thus the confessor would act imprudently if, hearing a penitent accusing himself of some sin against the Sixth Precept, immediately and in every case he accused him of mortal sin. For although the principle is most true that in venereal matter there is not smallness of matter, nevertheless it must be understood in the sense in which we spoke n. 484. 485. Wherefore, speaking with St. Alphonsus concerning sins of non-consummated luxury, we taught (n. 486-492 and 503. 3°) that certain things, although, for the most part, especially among persons of different sex, they are not done without mortal sin, nevertheless can sometimes be done without mortal sin, because they are done from curiosity, levity, etc., and with the proximate danger of consent, grave scandal, lustful intention (under which in practice also comes the intention of merely sensible delight), and grave influence on pollution set aside.

4° Let him advert whether perhaps the penitent is in good faith, insofar, namely, as that which he does is indeed in itself a mortal sin; but he thinks that he either does nothing evil or sins only venially. On this matter let there be the following:

1423. Questions. - Query 1° Must a penitent laboring under ignorance concerning some obligation always be warned?

Resp. 1° Affirm., if the ignorance seems vincible, i.e. if the confessor adverts that the penitent doubts in such a way that good faith is now lacking. The reason is that in the admonition being made no danger is imminent; but otherwise the penitent, acting with that doubt, is not free from sin.

Resp. 2° If the ignorance of some obligation is invincible, the penitent is to be warned if fruit from the admonition is hoped for; but otherwise, generally speaking, if it is not hoped for. The reason is that on the one hand this admonition would not profit, and on the other hand it would harm him; since, having been warned, he would sin formally in the future. Therefore if no fear of harm is present, it is to be made.

Therefore the penitent is to be warned, 1° whenever he himself asks concerning the malice of some thing; because, since he doubts concerning the licitness of the thing, he is no longer in invincible ignorance, and because the silence of the confessor would often be an approval of error, which is never licit. Yet prudently the confessor will not extend the response beyond that concerning which the penitent asked; 2° whenever the silence of the confessor would harden him in the purpose of performing an evil thing; 3° whenever his ignorance turns upon the primary principles of natural law, or upon their proximate conclusions; because such ignorance, although possible as regards proximate conclusions (n. 167. q. 1°. Resp. 2°), cannot be invincible for long; 4° whenever, the warning omitted, the penitent would remain in a proximate occasion of sinning formally; 5° if the ignorance would yield to the common harm, as in a Pastor, Bishop, confessor, etc., since the public good must prevail over the private good. Besides, there is hope that the penitent, if he is absolved by no one, will finally amend himself; next, public scandal must be met, arising thence e.g., namely that penitents would say that such a thing cannot be impious or iniquitous, because confessors are little solicitous concerning it, and say nothing; rarely, finally, will such ignorance be inculpable; 6° if the penitent is going to obey a brief warning, although in the beginning he does not acquiesce; 7° if the ignorance turns upon those things which must be known by necessity of means, as is clear from what was said n. 257-259 and 1422. I.

Query 2° Must an admonition be made in doubt whether it will profit or harm?

Resp. 1° Affirm., if it is more probably going to profit; otherwise, if it is more probably going to harm.

Resp. 2° In a doubt equal on each side, generally speaking, formal evils are rather to be avoided than material ones.

Query 3° Must a spouse be warned concerning the invalidity of Matrimony on account of an occult impediment which the confessor detects?

Resp. Neg., generally speaking, until the confessor has obtained a dispensation, unless this can be obtained immediately and easily from the Pope or Bishop. The reason is that most often the greatest inconveniences would follow thence, e.g. danger of infamy, scandal, quarrels, or incontinence, etc., and therefore material fornication would become formal. - Thus commonly with St. Alph.

But can the confessor oblige a spouse, ignorant of the impediment and denying the debt, to render it? Resp. affirmative. The reason is that, with the persuasion of the spouse standing that the Matrimony is valid, he is held to render the debt, so that he may follow the dictate of conscience. More safely he will say to the penitent in general, that he cannot be absolved who refuses to satisfy his obligation, and that it is now known that a spouse is held to render the debt.

Query 4° Must a penitent, about to contract Matrimony, be warned concerning an unknown impediment?

Resp. Generally speaking, the warning is to be made. - Thus commonly with St. Alph. - The reason is that after Matrimony ignorance can cease by no means with difficulty, e.g. from the fact that it is detected that consanguinity, affinity, etc., is present between the spouses; and then, besides the easy danger of sinning formally, other most grave inconveniences can follow, namely scandals, quarrels, and perhaps even separation of the spouses, etc. - Yet St. Alphonsus excepts the case in which no fruit at all is hoped for from the warning, nor can the impediment easily be detected; because it is better to permit a material sin until a dispensation is obtained than to furnish the occasion of a certain formal sin.

Note. - Let the Confessor take care that he be neither too easy nor too difficult in supposing the good faith of the penitent. Let him take counsel from probable conjectures, drawn e.g. from the natural character of the penitent, from his instruction, from the nature itself of the sin, and especially from the words and expressions of the penitent himself.

1424. - Principle I. The practice of making no questions is not a little to be disapproved, especially for these reasons:

1° It is because that practice redounds to the harm of souls; for: a) it can produce not a few sacrileges, insofar as many are those who, unless they are questioned, do not reveal graver sins. "Frequently," says St. Thomas, "those things which the penitent would be silent about from confusion, when questioned he reveals"; - b) it leaves many without opportune remedies; for the confessor not questioning concerning habit, concerning occasions, concerning causes of sins, concerning diligence employed or not employed for amendment, etc. (which things penitents for the most part pass over in silence), will not be able to assign suitable remedies for preventing relapses; - c) it harms others also than penitents, insofar as penitents, for the most part, do not accuse themselves of scandal, or of most grave omissions in the duties of their own state, e.g. in the education and custody of children; and thus, unless they are questioned and suitably warned, they do not cease from the same scandals and omissions.

2° It is because it redounds to the prejudice of the Sacrament; for: a) very often it prejudices its integrity, as if the confessor does not question a penitent accusing himself in this way: Father, I have done shameful things, the species and number not having been explained; - b) it often prejudices validity also; for if the confessor does not question penitents, e.g. whether they have employed any care for not relapsing, whether they have fulfilled the remedies assigned, etc., he will never be able prudently to judge whether they are disposed, or whether they need a more fervent exhortation in order that they may be disposed, and thus he will often give absolutions that are altogether invalid.

3° It is because it is opposed to the concordant opinion of Theologians.

4° It is because it is opposed to the authentic rules of the Church, as is clear from the Canon Omnis and from the Roman Ritual.

Principle II. Since the confessor must procure three things, i.e. the validity of the Sacrament, the integrity of Confession, and the cure of the penitent: therefore, whenever he reasonably presumes or prudently doubts that something of those things which are required for these has not been sufficiently declared, he is held to inquire concerning it. - Hence:

1° For procuring the validity of the Sacrament, it can be necessary to investigate by questioning - whether sufficient matter is present, e.g. if there is question of imperfections, or of light faults which are often committed without advertence; - whether the penitent holds back anything from shame, as especially happens in boys and girls; - whether sufficient disposition is present, for knowing which it will often be necessary to question the penitent, e.g. whether and how after Confession he has abstained from faults; whether and how he has fulfilled the prescribed means.

2° For the integrity of Confession, it can be necessary to question the penitent - concerning the number of sins, - concerning their species; - concerning circumstances changing either the objective or the theological species (n. 27); - concerning some sins which he is accustomed from thoughtlessness altogether to pass over in silence, e.g. sins of thought, and sins of omission concerning obligations of one's own state.

3° For the cure of the penitent, questions can be necessary through which it becomes known, e.g., what are the causes of his sins, whether namely they proceed from some occasion; from some habit; from a defect of custody of the senses; from impure thoughts, etc.

4° The penitent must not be questioned concerning sins of which it is not likely that he committed them; for then a reasonable presumption and prudent doubt are lacking that those things which must be declared are not sufficiently declared. - But on account of the contrary presumption "he should be questioned concerning the sins which are accustomed to abound in men of such a condition."

5° If the penitent seems sufficiently instructed, as devout persons, Religious, Ecclesiastics, and is sufficiently accurate in explaining his sins, he is to be questioned concerning nothing, unless perhaps there is fear lest he hold back something from shame, or unless it is necessary to add some question for assigning opportune remedies to him. The reason for each part of the resolution is the same as that which was just alleged under 4°.

Principle III. Questioning, where it must be made, should be moderate, prudent, opportune.

1° Moderate. Hence the confessor:

a) Should never ask useless things, nor suffer them to be narrated to him.

b) Should be mindful that he is not held to question the penitent except with ordinary diligence.

c) Should remember besides that a less distinct knowledge is required "from him who either on account of incapacity, or on account of sickness, or on account of the multitude of sins, or for another cause, could render an exact knowledge with more difficulty.... And this is the reason why from a prostitute and a concubinary and the like we ask less exactly and distinctly the number of sins than if for one month or for one week only e.g. they had been in that sin." Besides "it must be adverted," says St. Alphonsus, "concerning the number of sins of which some are held by a depraved habit, since a certain number cannot be had, let the confessor take care to know the state of the penitent, namely the manner of living, the application which he spends on other affairs, the time of habit with the accomplice, the place where he especially stayed; and then let him question concerning the number, questioning the penitent how often approximately he sinned in a day, or in a week, or month, proposing to him several numbers, e.g. three or four times, eight or ten times, so that he may see to which number he rather adheres. And if the penitent adheres to the greater number, the best thing to do will be if he is again questioned concerning a greater number. But in this the confessor should advert not to form a certain judgment concerning the number; let him note the frequency in general, and make a judgment in a confused way, apprehending the sins as many as they are before God. Some Doctors say that concerning the internal sins of the habituated, such as sins of hatred, of depraved delights and desires, it suffices for the most part to question concerning the time through which the evil habit endured; but this altogether does not satisfy me, because it can be that someone is more intent on external business, or stays where fewer occasions of depraved thoughts occur to him; another will be more allured by another passion of soul; and therefore general questions must be employed concerning one's own application, concerning place, concerning inclination of soul, etc., so that he may form a judgment of greater or lesser frequency of internal acts."

d) Those confessors err who, from boys, half-witted persons, the hard of hearing, stammerers, men of confused mind (who now affirm, now deny to the same question), would wish to know how the matter precisely stands. Moreover in this manner, the more they question, the less they understand, and the more they confound both the penitents and themselves. Hence St. Alphonsus wrote: "After two or three questions, the confessor should not be anxious if the judgment which he makes seems to him to be too confused; for from involved and confused consciences it is morally impossible to hope for greater clarity."

2° Prudent. Concerning this quality of questions it will soon be treated more broadly, where there is question of questions concerning shameful things.

3° Opportune. The question, namely, must be made at the time and in the manner in which it is suitable. Hence:

a) Certain questions must be made before Confession, but few, lest the penitent be offended: e.g. from what time has he not confessed? was he absolved? has he fulfilled the penance? is he not anxious about his past life? Yet this last question must be made only when the penitent has not confessed for a long time, or when a general Confession is being instituted from a determinate time. - But questions concerning the condition of life, state, age, etc., if these are not made manifest from the Confession itself, will be made more suitably when an occasion is given in the course of the Confession: for thus on the one hand every suspicion of curiosity and levity will be avoided; but on the other hand the penitent will more easily respond, since his confidence in the confessor will have grown more.

b) "It is better" if "the confessor examines the sins one by one as soon as the penitent sets them forth, than that he defer the examination until the end; because either the confessor easily forgets those things which he heard, or the penitent would have to be obliged with his own grave burden to repeat the things confessed." Yet this warning of St. Alphonsus, according to the mind of the holy Doctor himself, does not hold where there is question of easier or shorter Confessions, nor in the case in which the penitent accurately declares his sins. For apart from necessity the accusation of the penitent is not to be interrupted by any questions, or even warnings, lest namely fear or confusion be injected into him thence.

c) Those confessors would be vehemently disapproved who would scarcely concede to penitents time for responding to questions, and would urge them with an impatient voice, repeating: What further? Do you know other things? etc. For they would disturb and confound the penitent.

1425. - Principle IV. Questions concerning carnal sins must be: 1) necessary; 2) prudent; 3) modest; 4) such as do not bring grave harm to the confessor himself. I explain each.

1) Necessary, i.e. they must be made from a just cause; for without a just cause it is illicit to expose - oneself to temptations, - the penitent to the same temptations, and besides to the suspicion that the confessor delights in such conversations, or even that he is practically versed in things of this kind, - the Sacrament, Religion, and the priestly body to reproach, insofar as to the penitent an occasion is easily given afterward of laughing and joking concerning inept questions made to him.

But questions are necessary, or are made from a just cause, if they are required either for aiding the shame of the penitent, or for knowing what remedies are to be assigned to him, or for procuring the integrity, even material, of Confession.

1° For aiding the shame of the penitent. This can more easily be present in boys and adolescents. Therefore St. Alphonsus wisely warns: "Many times, even if boys deny" that they have committed shameful things, "it is profitable to use suggestive questions with them, e.g. and now tell me, how often have you done these things? Five times? ten times?" - Yet those confessors exceed who in every Confession make and repeat questions for aiding the shame of the penitent, even with those concerning whom it is not likely that they commit shameful things and hold them back. Indeed, although this suspicion is present, one must beware of questions too often repeated and multiplied. - But much more and in a very worse manner do those confessors exceed who, under the pretext of aiding the shame of penitents, make many particular and minute questions, even when one or another, expressed in generic words, would suffice.

2° For knowing what remedies are to be applied. For this it ordinarily suffices to inquire whether sins arise from some occasion, or from an evil habit, or from freedom of the senses, or from depraved thoughts. - I have said: ordinarily suffices; because if the penitent could employ fasts and other macerations (which indeed is a rarer case), it would be useful also to know whether his sins arise chiefly from carnal motions, and whether these arise from a more robust constitution of body. But it is not necessary to question directly concerning these motions; for if the penitent is asked whether he always rushes into sins on account of evil thoughts, from his response the confessor will be able to infer whether the cause of his sins is to be placed in thoughts of the mind rather than in motions of the body.

3° For procuring the integrity, even material, of Confession. For this not only do questions suffice which are necessary for knowing the species, and, insofar as it can be morally known, the number of mortal sins, but questions concerning other things besides species and number are altogether to be disapproved. Hence confessors exceed when they question: whether a) concerning circumstances only aggravating; - or b) concerning imperfect acts preliminary to copula or done immediately after copula, when the penitent already accuses himself of copula (n. 218. 4°; 222); - or c) concerning the manner in which the sin was committed, if that manner does not change the species; - or d) concerning the number of imperfect acts which were done in the same impulse of passion (n. 220. Note).

I said: the species and... number of mortal sins; for it is not necessary to question concerning simple temptations, concerning carnal motions, concerning involuntary pollutions, concerning light disorders in the use of Matrimony, unless from another head a good reason urges for questioning concerning some of these. Hence, if someone moved by a vain scruple comes to Confession saying that he committed shameful things in childhood without cognition of malice, and now wishes to accuse them because he never confessed them, the confessor will teach him that no obligation is present of accusing such things; yet if the penitent desires to disclose them for greater tranquillity, this can be permitted to him; but it will not be necessary to add questions.

Note. - In questioning penitents concerning the species of sins, the distinctions of Theologians are to be followed as a norm, provided the penitents are not such that concerning them (either on account of childish age, or on account of extraordinary ignorance or stupidity) it cannot be presumed that they have formally contracted those special malices. Cf. n. 199. Resolves 2°.

2) Prudent. For Theologians cry out with one voice that it should rather be permitted that material integrity be lacking to Confession than that scandal be furnished to penitents through imprudent questions. - But an imprudent question is one which contains the danger lest it produce evil rather than good; and especially lest penitents learn the malice which perhaps they are ignorant of, and thus on account of that very question begin to sin. Cf. Lit. Rom.

3) Modest. But questions will not be modest if the confessor uses words too free, shameless, and least fitting to priestly modesty.

But what expressions will the confessor be able to use in particular cases, so that with due prudence and modesty he may question penitents?

Behold some particular examples of questions for some cases often occurring in practice.

A girl says: I made indecent jokes with my sister in bed; - the Confessor should ask: were these touches very shameful?

A married woman says: I had copula in a preposterous manner. - The Confessor will ask: in this manner can you conceive offspring?

A husband says: I touch my wife with my hands; - the Confessor will ask: do you linger in these touches, without coming to the conjugal act? On account of these touches did an evil effect happen?

An adolescent says: I did shameful things with my brother in bed; - that the confessor may understand whether sodomy was present, he will ask: therefore did you touch your brother with your hands? To the one responding affirmatively he will add: did you do something worse with him?

A man says: I sinned with a woman, or I slept with a woman, or I did what I wished with a woman; - these things are to be understood of perfect copula, and therefore no question is to be made, except for knowing whether that woman was married, consanguineous, etc.

A married man says: I did shameful things with a girl; - the Confessor will question him, saying: did you make the matrimonial act with her?

A girl says: I did shameful things with a lover; - the Confessor will add: did you do these things with the hands, or also in a worse manner? - Thus he will understand whether there was, or was not, union of bodies, in which there is present the malice of fornication. Yet if the confessor sees the necessity of knowing whether this fornication was effectively completed, he will also be able to say: by that which you did, could you become pregnant? To the one responding affirmatively he can further question, saying whether she actually remained pregnant, that he may forearm her against temptations to abortion, and that he may strive to impede scandal in the best possible way.

A man says: I have a vice of touching women; - the Confessor will be able to add: are these touches very shameful?

A married woman says: I did not well perform the matrimonial act; - the Confessor will be able to say: in the manner in which you bear yourself with your husband, can you conceive offspring? If she affirms, then he will teach her that in that manner there is a light fault, or even none, if the husband wishes to do this; but if she denies, then the confessor will add: explain therefore what you did.

A girl or boy says: I touched myself. - Should it then be inquired whether pollution was present? Certainly not at all. "Let him take care," says St. Alphonsus, "not to inquire of girls or boys whether emission of semen was present," lest namely "they apprehend what they had not yet known, or be placed in curiosity of learning." The same caution is to be had generally with respect to unmarried women, even adult ones; whence P. a Bergamo wrote: "Nevertheless nothing is to be hinted concerning pollution; since this is not equally sensible to all women; indeed to many it is altogether unknown;... whence one must abstain from these words: pollution, corruption, and the like.... Worthy of being known is that the vice of pollution is not so common generally among women as among males, and very many women are in no way infected with this lust. Therefore one must speak more cautiously with women, lest they draw malice from our expressions."

Here finally it can be asked what questions are to be made to girls or young persons who accuse nothing at all concerning faults against the Sixth Precept, if the confessor fears lest they hold something back from shame? He can say: have you heard evil conversations? have you had evil thoughts? Have you done some indecent thing? Have you made evil jokes? These questions can induce no danger, because, if the penitent does not know the malice, he will not learn it; nor will he be placed in curiosity of learning what these words of the confessor signify, because he will understand that there is question of indecent things and jokes in another kind. Meanwhile, if they respond negatively, sometimes the confessor will be able to use a suggestive question, saying, as was noted above from St. Alphonsus: And now say, how often have you done these things? If they affirm that they have committed indecent things, or have made evil jokes, then the confessor will be able to say, e.g.: explain what these indecent things and these evil jokes are which you did? Did you do them secretly? Were you alone? Where were you? Would you have done thus, if your mother had been there? If your mother had seen you, would you have been suffused with shame? And on account of shame you have never accused these sins; is it not so? Ordinarily from the responses the confessor will know either certainly or almost certainly whether that boy truly did shameful things, and thence, according to the rules given above, he will be able to come to other questions, if they seem necessary. - Some confessors instead of saying: have you done some indecent thing? say: have you committed some dishonesty? or: have you committed something against the virtue of holy purity? I judge that these questions made thus abruptly are not sufficiently prudent; because, if the girl does not know the malice, she will not be able to attach any sense to these questions, and therefore she will easily be in curiosity of learning what those words mean; whence also she will easily seek an explanation from other girls, and thus she will badly learn what she was well ignorant of. - Other confessors behave much worse, and to nearly all boys, girls, and adolescents they say abruptly: have you touched yourself? But they do this because from experience they know that other questions, made in general and under a certain veil, are not effective, as this one is, for extorting the confession of sin. I indeed confess that this open question is more effective, so that, if other questions extort confession from seven or eight boys, this one will extort confession from nine or ten; but I judge altogether that it is not ordinarily to be employed; for if it were ordinarily employed, it would teach malice to very many; but is it fitting, in order to aid some, to inflict harm of this kind on very many others? - At most, therefore, such a question will be able to be made in some rare case, when namely the confessor is certain of the sin committed by the penitent, the confession of which he could not obtain unless by employing the aforesaid question.

4) That they bring no grave harm to the confessor himself. For if the confessor on account of some special questions would be cast into grave danger of sinning mortally, certainly he neither ought, nor would be able, to make them. That he ought not is clear; because, just as a penitent is not held to the material integrity of Confession with his own grave spiritual harm, much less will the confessor be held to procure the same integrity with grave harm to his own soul. Besides, all know that charity begins from oneself. But that then he cannot make those questions is clear from the general obligation itself of avoiding grave dangers of sinning mortally, when it is possible to avoid them. Besides, if there were question only of some temptation or of some carnal motion, through these things the confessor would not be obliged to abstain from necessary, prudent, and modest questions; but rather he should fortify himself with prayer, and, before he begins to hear Confessions, renew his right intention. Thus almost concerning questions Berardi.

1426. Questions. - Query 1° What must the confessor do in doubt concerning the sincerity of the penitent?

Resp. There is a common rule, and as it were a received axiom: The penitent is to be believed, both when speaking for himself and against himself. The reason is that the penitent in the Sacred Tribunal is at once defendant and witness, his own accuser and advocate, and otherwise in doubt is always to be presumed truthful. Wherefore, after opportune questions, the confessor must absolve the penitent denying.

Query 2° What must the confessor do if he knows certainly that some sin is being sacrilegiously held back or denied by the penitent?

Resp. 1° If he knows it from the Confession of another, and has not obtained from this one license to speak with the accomplice concerning the sin declared (which license is not ordinarily to be sought), he must, lest the seal of Confession be violated, only question generally, as he otherwise would have done or ought to have done; but if the penitent questioned has denied it, let him answer nothing, but, where this can be done without suspicion, let him merely exhort generally that the conscience be opened with all confidence. But whether the confessor must absolve such a penitent is controverted. - St. Alphonsus, after reporting the opinions of others, concludes thus: "Better, in my judgment, Croix thinks,... that in that case he should in no way absolve, but only pray something to conceal the denial of absolution." And rightly indeed. For whenever, as in the case, injury to the seal can be avoided, the Sacrament cannot be ministered to one unworthy who asks it occultly.

Resp. 2° If he knows it outside Confession, of itself he must absolve the penitent denying, because the penitent speaking for himself and against himself is to be believed; nor of itself can the report of another make greater faith than the declaration of the penitent himself; nor therefore is the confessor held to believe others more than the penitent himself. For if the penitent committed that sin, the confessor must presume that he either has forgotten his sin, or has confessed it to another, or has a just cause for holding it back, or that the reporters rather were deceived.

I said: of itself; for, if the confessor is altogether certain concerning the sin committed by the penitent, because e.g. he himself saw him stealing, heard him blaspheming, etc., or knows it from the certain report of others, he cannot absolve the one denying, provided he is certain that he had not forgotten his sin, nor has any motive for holding it back; for this rule: The penitent is to be believed, etc., holds indeed in a less certain matter, but not in an evidently certain matter.

In practice let confessors take care not easily to give faith especially to women, although pious, by whom they are informed concerning the sins and the manner of life of those who are going to approach them; for very often some things are exaggerated, and not rarely reports of this kind bend the judgment of the confessor concerning the disposition of those approaching him to the worse side than is fitting.

1427. Principles. - I. Absolution must be granted from justice and under grave obligation to every penitent rightly confessed and disposed. The reason is that in the very act of Confession there is entered into a certain quasi-contract, by force of which the penitent rightly confessed and disposed has the right to receive the Sacrament. But otherwise an intolerable burden would be imposed on the penitent without just cause, namely that he institute Confession before another, without besides being able certainly to trust that he is going to receive absolution from that new confessor. Moreover this is also required by the end of the institution of the Sacrament and of the tribunal of Penance, which was instituted by Christ for the sake of imparting mercy. Therefore the priest, denying absolution to a penitent disposed, would act unjustly, would abuse the power of the keys, and would render the Sacrament odious.

II. Nevertheless absolution can be delayed for a brief time, even for a penitent sufficiently disposed, and even without his consent, when namely the confessor judges that this is useful for his amendment. The reason is that the delay of absolution is not the denial of the same; and, although a disposed penitent has a right to absolution, nevertheless he does not have a right, at least speaking of itself, to obtaining it immediately. For the confessor is not only judge, but also physician; and therefore, if he judges such a remedy to be going to profit the amendment of the penitent, he will be able to use it prudently; indeed he will be held to use it, when he judges that a remedy of this kind is necessarily useful for the salvation of the penitent. - Thus expressly St. Alphonsus, from whom that Theologians, even older ones before the Sixteenth Century, do not dissent, the Vindiciae clearly prove.

I said: at least speaking of itself; because if the delay of absolution 1° is judged more likely to harm than to profit, or 2° cannot be done without a sufficiently notable inconvenience of the penitent, it must be granted immediately: for the penitent is then considered to have a strict right to obtaining it immediately.

III. Absolution is altogether to be denied in every case, even of extreme necessity, to penitents certainly indisposed. But to penitents doubtfully disposed, absolution is to be delayed, or, according to the rules handed down n. 1344. q. 8°. pag. 93. col. 2., can be imparted under condition, or even sometimes must be.

IV. In order that the delay of absolution may be the more profitable, the penitent is gently to be drawn to consent to it.

1428. Questions. - Query 1° Is it often expedient to delay absolution for a sufficiently disposed penitent, without his consent?

Resp. Outside the two cases alleged n. 1427. II., "it is better to say," says St. Alphonsus, "that a certain rule cannot be established in this; but the confessor must direct himself from the occurring circumstances, and, after he has commended himself to God, as he shall have been inspired by God, let him delay or impart absolution." Then he distinguishes a twofold kind of recidivists, and for each brings forward its proper resolution, as will be explained n. 1480.

Query 2° Is certitude concerning the disposition of the penitent required, so that he can be absolved?

Resp. 1° Absolute certitude is not required, nor even strict moral certitude, such as is required in other Sacraments, e.g. concerning wine for the consecration of the Eucharist. The reason is that the Sacrament of Penance scarcely admits a more certain judgment of this kind.

Resp. 2° Prudent probability is required and suffices, to which no prudent suspicion of indisposition is opposed. For evidence is not possible.

Query 3° What are the ordinary signs of sufficient disposition?

Resp. A rightly made Confession with a protestation of penance and purpose.

Query 4° Is the confessor held to excite sorrow in the penitent?

Resp. 1° Affirm., if the penitent does not seem sufficiently disposed; the reason is that one absolving an indisposed person exposes the Sacrament to the danger of frustration; "but if he dismisses him without absolution, he exposes him to the danger of remaining long in the state of mortal sin, or even of not returning any more." - Nor is he excused from this because he must spend much time on it, or because others are waiting, provided nevertheless that there is hope that he is to be disposed here and now.

Resp. 2° Neg., if the penitent seems sufficiently instructed and disposed, as are mature penitents, and those who confess frequently. For then the confessor is held to nothing, neither by reason of charity, since the penitent does not need special help, nor by reason of reverence of the Sacrament, which is exposed to no danger.

Query 5° Can, indeed must, a penitent be absolved who wishes to follow an opinion opposed to the sentence of the confessor?

Resp. Affirm., provided 1° the opinion of the penitent is somewhat probable, at least extrinsically; for the confessor is not a judge of opinions; 2° the penitent is not so unlearned that he is unable to form for himself a right conscience from probability, at least extrinsic, e.g. from the response of another learned and prudent man, with whom, against the opinion of the confessor, he wishes to stand: for he would act against conscience; 3° there is not question of a judgment which directly regards the administration of the Sacrament, e.g. the disposition of the penitent or the jurisdiction of the confessor, because then there is question not only of permitting the penitent his own opinion, but of following it in one's own operation: I add, from the mind of St. Alphonsus, 4° the opinion of the penitent must be not only speculatively but also practically probable, or not joined with a certainly probable danger of formal sin, as was said n. 87. Reg. 1. 2°: for then there is question of judgment concerning the disposition of the penitent.

603. Before confession the confessor must acquire the required endowments. - Besides the power of order and of jurisdiction, which are necessary for the value of the sacrament, several qualities or endowments are required in the minister, without which he could not licitly and fruitfully execute his office for the spiritual salvation of those confessing. Therefore the confessor must prepare himself for receiving confessions, by acquiring the qualities which are necessary for duly fulfilling this office: on the part of the speculative intellect, knowledge; on the part of the practical intellect, prudence; on the part of the will, goodness of life. Thus the Roman Ritual, t. 3, c. 1, n. 1.

604. On the knowledge of the confessor. - The confessor is bound under grave obligation, outside the case of extreme necessity, to have that knowledge which is required and competent for duly undertaking his office: not eminent knowledge, namely, but mediocre knowledge, by which he can solve cases which commonly occur in the place where he is accustomed to hear confessions, and at least prudently doubt concerning more difficult matters, so that he can consult books or others more learned.

For when this knowledge is lacking, he exposes himself to a proximate and morally certain danger of badly fulfilling his office, with injury to the sacrament and harm to penitents. For, as minister, he must procure the validity and integrity of the sacrament; as teacher, he is bound to instruct the ignorant concerning duties; as judge, he must judge concerning the sins, dispositions, and obligations to be urged upon penitents; as physician, he must investigate the spiritual cause of illnesses and propose opportune remedies. All these things certainly require no small knowledge.

Therefore:

1. It is necessary that the confessor be able to solve cases commonly occurring. Hence he is bound to know those things which pertain to the essence and effects of the sacrament of Penance, to its valid and licit administration and reception; - the principles of discerning between mortal and venial sins both in general and in individual precepts; - those things which regard the species, number, and circumstances of sins necessarily to be declared; - those things which regard restitution of reputation and goods; - reserved cases and the censures which occur more frequently; - impediments of marriage and obligations of states; - the roots and occasions of sins and opportune remedies. Yet it is impossible to know or rightly understand these things unless he knows the general principles of moral science concerning human acts, conscience, sins, and laws.

But as to more difficult cases, which otherwise rarely occur, it is not expedient to solve them immediately; rather, it must be said to the penitent that he should give time for considering the matter more maturely and for consulting books and more learned men. Yet meanwhile he can be absolved, provided he is prepared to obey the decision to be given.

2. The required knowledge must be measured according to the place where confessions are customarily heard; for the same knowledge is not required in all confessors, but greater or lesser according to the diversity of places, times, and penitents. Thus, for example, greater knowledge is required in a city than in a remote village, for hearing any faithful whatever of diverse condition than for hearing faithful of the same state or condition.

3. The aforesaid knowledge is required outside the case of necessity. For if necessity presses, not only extreme but also grave necessity, a less learned confessor licitly receives confessions, since for the most part the ignorance of the confessor does not stand in the way of the validity of the sacrament, but only of its integrity or of its fruitful administration; indeed, in a case of necessity it is not always illicit to administer a sacrament with danger lest it remain defective or invalid. But a priest who fears that the sacrament may be null can absolve only conditionally.

4. A priest sins gravely who, while he certainly knows that he lacks competent knowledge, accepts the office of confessor even from charity alone or obedience, even if formerly he well underwent the danger of examination and has the approval of the Bishop, since this supposes but does not supply knowledge; although nevertheless, in doubt whether this knowledge is lacking or not, he can follow the judgment of the bishop, if the bishop knows the priest well. Likewise he easily sins gravely who for a long time neglects the study of moral theology, if thus he exposes himself to the danger of committing grave errors and harming penitents.

5. A bishop also would sin gravely who approved a confessor whom he knew to be ignorant, because thus he would cooperate with his sin; - although nevertheless he can be excused if he approves one less suitable in a case of necessity, e.g., for small and remote places, when he cannot find one more learned: for it is better for the faithful to have an unlearned confessor than none. In this case the bishop is bound to warn him of the obligation of acquiring competent knowledge as soon as possible.

6. Likewise a penitent would sin gravely who deliberately chose an inept confessor, if thus he exposed himself to grave spiritual harm, since, besides the harm which he would suffer, he would be the cause that the sacrament was ministered in an undue way.

605. On the prudence of the confessor. - To knowledge there must be added prudence, i.e., practical wisdom which orders the best means to the end. For it is especially necessary to the confessor, that he may know how to lead principles into practice and to apply general precepts according to the condition of persons and circumstances; so that he may sin neither by excess nor by defect, nor run into laxity or into rigor, but safely lead to an upright Christian life, and to perfection and eternal life.

For it belongs to a judge and physician rightly to adapt those things which are required for judging cases or curing illnesses; but the confessor is judge and physician of souls. Therefore for this it is required that he know the character of the penitent and that he treat diverse penitents not in the same way, but according to their diverse character and condition. - Moreover, difficult cases not rarely occur, whose circumstances can vary to infinity, and in which the confessor cannot proceed rightly unless prudence directs him.

But he must be prudent both toward the penitent and toward himself, so that he may harm neither; and toward the Christian commonwealth, lest, with detriment to religion, he give scandal, but according to his powers procure the public good.

A. Toward the penitent he must be prudent:

1. As to contrition, so that he proposes motives of contrition according to the talent, character, and sins of each one; and is not too easy in judging that the penitent is contrite, nor too rigid, but from indications and circumstances forms an equitable judgment.

2. In confession: a) In forming judgment concerning the morality of actions, so that he regards not only the object, but also the subjective circumstances, the dispositions of each one, and conscience, which more often change the species or gravity.

b) In interrogations, which in no way should be immoderate, indiscreet, or untimely or inopportune, but adapted to the character, age, and condition of each one, namely, to take care lest he teach simple and innocent persons sins unknown to them and lead them into temptation, or offend penitents; and nevertheless that they be sufficient for detecting hidden wounds and the causes, occasions, and gravity of spiritual illnesses.

c) In giving counsels, by selecting opinions and warnings according as the spiritual good of penitents requires, and in instructions, by warning the ignorant or leaving them in good faith, generally as he knows to be more expedient for their good.

d) In leaving perfect liberty of approaching another confessor.

3. In absolution, so that he rightly discerns the disposition or indisposition of the penitent, and grants, denies, or defers absolution according as it is expedient for his salvation, especially with occasionarii and recidivists.

4. In satisfactions, so that he imposes salutary and fitting ones, accommodated to the quality of the sins, but more to the good of the penitent; likewise that he suggest opportune remedies accommodated to the sins, above all by removing the causes of sins.

5. In the attendant consequences of confession: a) in correcting his own errors; and b) in keeping the seal, so that he avoids every danger that anything be revealed directly or indirectly, and indeed so strictly that in doubt he does that which is safer (II, n. 90-91); indeed c) in abstaining from every word concerning the defects of other confessors.

B. Toward himself: a) In searching out the circumstances of sins, especially against chastity, lest by these very minute ways he excite temptation in himself.

b) In avoiding the sight of women, especially younger women.

c) In acting cautiously with women, even those devoted to spirituality or tending to perfection, namely by avoiding superfluous conversations or familiarity, by not receiving little gifts, by not visiting them at home without necessity, by showing himself rigid and austere rather than pleasing, etc.

C. Toward the Christian commonwealth. For although the confessor, by reason of his office, is bound principally to devote himself to the good of the penitent, nevertheless, since the sacraments are for the Church and he himself is constituted as minister for the good of the Church, not only the private good but also the public good is to be procured by him as far as possible, which is not to be harmed and to which the private good of the penitent is to be subordinated, as St. Alphonsus warns, Th. M., l. VI, n. 615.

But in order that he acquire prudence, attention must be given to the nature, qualities, and conditions of prudence according to the doctrine of St. Thomas.¹

¹ Cf. II, n. 11-12 and 23-25; and our little work On the Minister of Penance, c. 4, q. 1, a. 2.

606. On goodness of life required in the confessor. - Besides knowledge and prudence there is also required goodness or honesty of life. This consists not only in the state of grace, which is necessary for avoiding sacrilegious ministration of the sacrament, and therefore is ordinarily required in one who is accustomed to hear confessions and is not to be exposed to a proximate occasion (n. 78, 3); - but also in the complex of virtues which are desired for duly fulfilling the office of confessor, both so that he himself may not be contaminated by handling the ulcers of sins, and so that he can direct others in the way of sanctity.

The principal virtues necessary for a confessor are customarily enumerated: supernatural zeal of souls, by which from sincere charity toward God and neighbor he consults solely and only the honor of God and the salvation of the neighbor, spends himself entirely, and loves penitents with a special paternal love as spiritual children of God; for this there are required great meekness of mercy and paternal gravity, which demands reverence with every too sensible affection excluded; - patience, - fortitude, - eminent purity, - and great humility.²

² Concerning these, cf. St. Alphonsus, Homo Ap., tr. 21, n. 1 ff.; and Praxis Confessarii; Aertnijs, Th. P., n. 18 ff.; Lehmkuhl, Th. M., II, n. 560-565; and our little work On the Minister of Penance, c. 4, q. 1, a. 3.