A penance performed in the state of sin

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

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

Does one satisfy who fulfills the penance in mortal sin? - Resp. In the affirmative. The reason is that for satisfying the precept it suffices to place the work of satisfaction enjoined, although the end of the precept is not obtained. - L. 552. Hence he also satisfies if in fulfilling the penance he sins venially, e.g., because he is distracted; nor then is the fruit from the work worked of such a penance impeded because of the other sins already remitted. - L. 552.

Does one sin who fulfills the penance in mortal sin? - It is certain that he does not sin gravely. According to some he sins venially. The reason is that one who voluntarily places an obstacle to even a partial effect of the sacrament does not seem able to be excused from some fault. Nevertheless several grave theologians probably hold that he is exempt from every fault, because there is no fault in placing an obstacle only to the remission of punishments. But when the obstacle is removed, then the effect of satisfaction is obtained. - L. 523.

529. • QUESTION 4. Does one satisfy who fulfills penance while in mortal sin?

Reply. Affirmative, with the common opinion. The reason is that, for satisfying the precept, it suffices to place the work of satisfaction enjoined, even though the end of the precept is not obtained. - St. Lig., no. 522.

QUESTION 5. Does one sin who fulfills penance while in mortal sin?

Reply 1. It is certain that he does not sin gravely. - Thus commonly the Theologians.

Reply 2. According to some, he sins venially. The reason is that one who voluntarily places an obstacle to an effect, even a partial effect, of the Sacrament does not seem capable of being excused from some fault. Nevertheless, several grave Theologians probably hold with Lugo that he is exempt from every fault, because there is no fault in placing an obstacle solely to the remission of punishments ⁵. - St. Lig., no. 523.

⁵ This ought to hold especially when the penance must be prolonged over several days. For who would say that the penitent is bound to recover grace in order that he may fulfill the penance? Otherwise, as the Salmanticenses note (De Poenit., ch. 10, no. 70), the penitent would sin both by fulfilling the penance and by not fulfilling it: by fulfilling it, indeed, because he fulfills it in the state of sin; by not fulfilling it, because he would omit it. And this second opinion is indeed all the more probable in the opinion of those who say that the effect of satisfaction is obtained in the case when the obstacle is afterward removed.

** Here also, as often elsewhere, the VV. (p. 938, note 2) observe that in earlier editions of Father Gury it read: more probably he sins venially.

Reply. Gury seems previously to have followed St. Alphonsus, who says (bk. 6, no. 523): Others more probably hold that he sins venially. Afterward, however, he altered the opinion somewhat, perhaps moved by the reasons of the Salmanticenses, who add to the reason adduced here in the Note: Indeed, it would have to be said that one existing in mortal sin who has not yet fulfilled penance is bound first to justify himself and afterward to fulfill the penance; all of which things do not seem to have been received into common usage. But did not St. Alphonsus also alter his opinion somewhat here? For in the edition of the year 1748 (bk. 6, tract 4, doubt IV, art. 1, note E) he has merely these things: Indeed, the Salmanticenses, Lugo, and Dicastillo probably teach that it is not even venial to fulfill penance in mortal sin.

Besides, since the VV. consider it worthwhile to mention wherever Father Gury in preceding Editions preferred another opinion, as being one which pleases the VV. more, let them not therefore take it badly that others do the very same with St. Alphonsus and prefer the earlier, unchanged opinion of the same Doctor to his opinion afterward changed, as being one which they judge more plausible.

558. Principle II. The penitent is obliged to accept and fulfill the penance reasonably imposed on him by the confessor. - This is certain, because of Lateran Council IV, which declares: "Let each of the faithful strive according to his powers to fulfill the penance enjoined on him"; and because of Trent, sess. 14, c. 8, from whose doctrine it can be concluded; and because of the Code of Law, can. 887.

It is proved: 1) The confessor, as judge, has the power of binding or obliging to punishment, and the right and office of imposing penance. But to this office and right, unless it were useless, there corresponds in the penitent, as accused, an obligation of accepting and fulfilling the penance.

2. The penitent, no less than the confessor, is obliged to procure the integrity of the sacrament; but sacramental satisfaction is an integral part of the sacrament.

3. Finally, each one is bound to obey a judge rightly judging and punishing. The confessor is a judge. Therefore, if he judges and punishes rightly and reasonably, the penitent must accept and fulfill the penance.

Nevertheless the obligation does not urge: a) if the confession was invalid, because, the sacrament being deficient, no obligation arises;

b) likewise if absolution was not given, unless nevertheless a medicinal penance is imposed as the condition of future absolution, or is now prescribed so that a lesser one can be enjoined when the penitent is absolved: for then it must be fulfilled by reason of the absolution to be received;

c) if the penance was not reasonably imposed, considering the present discipline of the Church, as if it were openly unjust or impossible, e.g., a fast on water and bread for an idle word, or a pilgrimage for a sick man. But if it seems too burdensome to the penitent, he can ask that it be changed or diminished, and the confessor will regularly acquiesce in this desire; and, if he refuses, the penitent can depart without absolution and confess to another, or accept the penance and ask another confessor to commute it. - But if someone were to refuse every satisfaction grave in itself, even a reasonable one, and were willing to accept only a light one, of himself he would not be excused from mortal sin, nor should he be absolved.

559. The obligation of fulfilling penance is grave from its kind, so that the penitent is held under grave obligation to fulfilling a penance which is legitimately enjoined under grave obligation. - This is certain.

For the confessor, as minister and judge, has the power of prescribing the things which pertain to the integrity of the sacramental judgment and of the sacrament, and indeed under grave obligation in a grave matter. But satisfaction pertains to the integrity of the judgment and of the sacrament; and it is an integral part of grave moment, when a notable punishment is imposed for grave offenses. Therefore the confessor can prescribe satisfaction, and indeed for grave offenses a notable punishment under grave obligation. - And therefore not to fulfill such satisfaction is to render the sacrament incomplete and mutilated in a grave matter. And it is irreverence toward the sacrament to accept a penance which someone would be unwilling to fulfill.

But that in fact there be a grave obligation, three conditions are required: 1) on the part of the penitent, a grave fault not yet rightly subjected; 2) on the part of the matter, satisfaction grave in itself; 3) on the part of the confessor, the intention of obliging under grave obligation. Hence:

a) He sins gravely who omits totally, or in notable part, a satisfaction obliging under grave obligation.

b) Nevertheless the confessor can, for grave offenses, impose a grave penance under light obligation, because the obligation depends on the intention of the one prescribing.² Yet this is generally not expedient, both because of itself it is not fitting for grave sin, to which, according to the Council of Trent, sess. 14, c. 8, the penance is to be proportioned, and because ordinarily the obligation ought to be proportioned to the matter; hence the confessor is judged to oblige under grave obligation when grave satisfaction is imposed for mortal sins not yet accused, unless he expressly says the contrary. - Nevertheless perhaps he could oblige under light obligation when another penance has already been imposed under grave obligation: then another, graver one can be added under light obligation, so that counsel may be taken for the infirmity of the penitent, or so that satisfaction may be greater.

² Nevertheless the confessor could not enjoin satisfaction without obligation and under counsel only, because thus he would not use the power of binding nor truly prescribe, since there is no precept without obligation.

c) A light penance obliges under light obligation, because light matter is not capable of grave obligation.

d) Satisfaction grave in itself, imposed for venial sins or for mortal sins directly remitted, probably obliges under light obligation, because the confessor is judged not to have wished to oblige under grave obligation, and otherwise penance of itself ought to be proportioned to the gravity of the sin; an exception is made if grave penance is enjoined for light sins which dispose greatly to mortal sins, so that that danger may be removed, e.g., for a tepid religious, for a girl exposed to danger: for then the natural law of avoiding proximate occasions of sin urges.

e) He who omits a circumstance of the penance sins gravely or lightly according as the circumstance is grave or light, according as in itself or relatively to the penitent it causes grave or light trouble. Thus a light circumstance is: to recite the rosary before an image of the Blessed Virgin or on bended knees; but grave, on the contrary, to do this with arms extended. In practice it is not expedient to impose many circumstances; and, if they are imposed, ordinarily they are not grave, unless they render the work much more difficult.

560. Principle III. Satisfaction must be fulfilled in that manner in which it is determined by the confessor, both in itself and in its circumstances. - For the whole obligation depends upon the intention of the one prescribing. Hence:

A. Satisfaction must be fulfilled:

1. At the time assigned by the confessor; and if no time has been stated, as soon as morally possible, as the presumed intention of the confessor, the good of the penitent himself, and the integrity of the sacrament require, which remains defective and incomplete until the satisfaction is fulfilled.

But it is not required that it be fulfilled before absolution or Communion (prop. 22 condemned by Alexander VIII),1 or even, at least for validity, before the following confession; although it should be urged upon all that after confession has been completed it be fulfilled at once, lest perhaps it fall into forgetfulness. Hence:

a) he sins who, without reason, delays penance for some time, even not very long;

b) but he sins gravely if he delays a penance obliging under grave obligation: 1) if inability to fulfill it afterward is foreseen; 2) if the substance of the prescribed work is notably diminished; 3) if it is medicinal, so that delay impedes the end and induces danger of relapse; 4) if danger of forgetfulness is imminent, and therefore in practice, because of this danger, to delay for a long time is mortal;

c) he sins only lightly who, even if the time has been determined by the confessor, delays a little, unless perhaps in fixing the term the circumstance of time is equally principally intended by the confessor, e.g., fasting on the vigil of a feast in honor of it;

d) he sins only lightly who long delays a light penance or one imposed under light obligation;

e) if the penance has not been discharged at the stated time, the burden of performing it as soon as possible remains, because time is something accessory in relation to the essence of the obligation, and was prescribed not for ending but for urging the obligation: for the precept of the confessor primarily regards the thing to be rendered, secondarily the circumstance of time.

2. By the penitent himself, but not by another unless with the consent of the confessor: for satisfaction is an integral part of the sacrament, whose matter is the acts of the penitent; and therefore it must be accomplished by the penitent himself, just as contrition and confession; as is clear from prop. 15 condemned by Alexander VII.2

Yet a) the confessor can, when a just cause is present, permit satisfaction to be furnished by another, e.g., fasting, pilgrimage, from the motion and petition of the penitent: then the satisfaction imposed on the penitent is to ask this from another, or the very procuring of the work through another. Yet ordinarily this is not expedient, because then the penance is not medicinal, especially if it is an act altogether personal and as such afflictive.

Also b) the penitent can fulfill the real satisfaction of alms merely ministerially through another as a mandatary, whether that person pays from the goods of the penitent, or even from his own goods, because it would be the same as if he made a donation to the penitent, who would spend it in alms; - unless nevertheless the confessor expressly prohibits this last thing.

3. From the intention of fulfilling satisfaction, which intention nevertheless is already had by the very fact that satisfaction is accepted. Hence:

a) If someone, unmindful of the penance, fulfills the prescribed work, which is due by no other title and is ordered to no other end, by that very fact he fulfills it, because he is judged to will to satisfy before he wills to do a supererogatory work.

b) On the contrary, if, mindful or unmindful, he positively orders the work to another end and explicitly or implicitly excludes the intention of fulfilling, he does not fulfill the satisfaction. Thus, for example, if a rosary is imposed on one who recites it daily, he can at his own choice choose that the first rosary be said for the sake of devotion, the second as sacramental penance; or, on the contrary, fulfill the penance by the first daily rosary.

B. On the contrary, satisfaction does not necessarily have to be fulfilled in the state of grace, because ordinarily the intention of the confessor is not to impose that it be fulfilled in the state of grace, although he desires this, unless by accident the state of grace is necessary for the substance of the prescribed work, e.g., Communion or an indulgence: for to fulfill the precept the prescribed work as to its substance suffices, although the end of the precept is not immediately obtained; the end of the precept does not fall under the precept.

1. "They are to be judged sacrilegious who claim a right to receiving Communion before they have done condign penance for their offenses."

2. "The penitent, by his own authority, can substitute another for himself, who fulfills the penance in his place."

561. The obligation of fulfilling satisfaction ceases:

1. When fulfillment becomes physically or morally impossible for someone.

2. When the penitent has forgotten it, even if from culpable negligence, and cannot conveniently approach the confessor who can be presumed to remember it: for to repeat the confession before the same confessor, or to ask commutation from another confessor, is an extraordinary means and a grave burden to which no one is strictly obliged, although it is better. Nevertheless it is expedient that the penitent, in this case, voluntarily impose a work upon himself, to supply in some way for sacramental penance.

3. When someone has legitimately obtained commutation of the penance.