Reconciliation

Reconciliation with enemies is necessary, in order that peace may be maintained. It includes: (a) internally, the putting away of thoughts and feelings contrary to concord; (b) externally, signs of renewed charity, if there has been an open breach.

The duty of reconciliation does not necessitate the forgiveness of every kind of wrong suffered from an enemy—that is, it does not always oblige one freely to remit the consequences of an enemy’s acts. There are three kinds of wrong: (a) offenses, which are such contradictions offered to the will of another as do not trespass on any strict right or occasion any damage. Example: Balbus, who is in great distress, asks his friend Titus to secure employment for him. Titus could easily do this favor, but he refuses; (b) injuries, which are violations of the strict right of another, but without damage. Example: Claudia addresses Caia in very disrespectful language when no witnesses are present; (c) damages, which are the taking from another of what is his, or harm done to him as regards his soul, his life, his fame, or his fortune. Examples are theft, scandal, assault and slander.

Whether an offender asks pardon or not, one is obliged to forgive the offense—that is, to put aside all aversion, indignation and hatred: “Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us” (Matt., vi. 12). But, granting that one desires salvation for the offender as for others, shows the common signs of charity, and is not prompted by hatred, the following are not required: (a) that one so pardon the offense as to take the offender back to the same special friendship as may have existed before; (b) that one overlook an injury so as not to require satisfaction (and hence, without acting against charity, Gaia may insist on an apology from Claudia for the disrespectful language used by the latter); and (c) that one renounce restitution or reparation for damage done one. No one is obliged to give to another what is one’s own, and, if there is no other way of securing one’s rights, one may have recourse to court. If the result of prosecution will be punishment of the offender rather than restitution (as in case of libel or slander), it is not uncharitable to prosecute the offender, if one’s motive is the fulfillment of justice, the prevention of the same wrong to others, or the honor of one’s family (Lev., xix. 17).

There are cases, however, in which charity requires one to forgive a debt of satisfaction or restitution, namely, when this would impose too heavy a burden on the offender, compared with the benefit that would be derived therefrom. (a) Thus, restitution should not be insisted on, when the offender is repentant and can ill afford to pay the debt, and the party offended can easily get along without the payment. (b) Punishment should not be insisted on, if the harm done the offender or his family will be out of proportion to any good that may result. (c) Prosecution should not be used, if a wrong can be amicably adjusted out of court (I Cor., vi. 1).

Who should make the advances towards reconciliation after a rupture of charitable relations? (a) If only one party was the offender, he should normally make the first move towards reconciliation. It is of counsel, but not of precept, that the innocent party ask for reconciliation, unless the circumstances require that he should do so, as when the offended party can much more easily make the advances, or when great scandal will arise, or when the offender will become hardened in hate and lose his soul, if the party offended does not make efforts for peace. (b) If both parties were offenders, he who offended more seriously should make the advances. (c) If both offended equally, he who was first to disturb the peace should also be first to work for its restoration. (d) If it does not appear which of the parties was more to blame in any of the foregoing ways, both are equally bound.

The manner of seeking reconciliation is as follows: (a) Reconciliation can be sought either in person, or through an intermediary who is a friend to both parties. (b) It can be sought either explicitly (by expressing regret and asking pardon), or implicitly (by a friendly conversation or favors shown). Generally speaking, an inferior (e.g., a child) should explicitly request reconciliation with a superior (e.g., a parent); but it will suffice for a superior to seek forgiveness from an inferior implicitly.

The time for seeking reconciliation is the earliest possible moment: “If thou offer thy gift at the altar, and there thou remember that thy brother hath anything against thee, leave there thy offering before the altar, and go first to be reconciled to thy brother, and then coming thou shalt offer thy gift” (Matt, v. 23, 24). (a) Thus, internal reconciliation (i.e., repentance on the part of the offender and forgiveness on the part of the one offended) should not be delayed, and should precede any sacred action, such as offering a gift to God, if this latter is to be acceptable and meritorious. (b) External reconciliation (i.e., asking pardon and making satisfaction) and the manifestation of forgiveness should be attended to as soon as the circumstances of time and place permit. The resolve to be reconciled externally is included in internal reconciliation, but prudence dictates that one wait for the suitable occasion, lest precipitation make matters worse.

S. Th. III, q. 84, a. 3; Suppl., q. 28.

669. The penitential rite formerly existed as public and solemn; according to present-day discipline it usually no longer exists except as private. In the Latin Church the Roman Ritual generally obtains; nevertheless there are some, such as the Preachers, who have a particular rite. According to the Roman Ritual, tit. 3, c. 2:

"1. When the priest wishes to absolve the penitent, after first imposing on him, and after he has accepted, a salutary penance, he first says: May God have mercy on thee... Amen.

2. Then, with the right hand raised toward the penitent, he says: May the almighty and merciful Lord grant thee indulgence... Amen. May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve thee; and I, by his authority, absolve thee from every bond of excommunication, suspension, and interdict, insofar as I am able and thou hast need. Then I absolve thee from thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, + and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

3. If the penitent is a layman, the word suspension is omitted.

May the Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and of all the Saints, whatever good thou hast done and whatever evil thou hast borne, be unto thee for the remission of sins, the increase of grace, and the reward of eternal life. Amen.

4. For a just cause May God have mercy, etc., can be omitted, and it is enough to say: May our Lord Jesus Christ, etc., as above, as far as that: May the Passion of our Lord, etc.

5. But when some grave necessity urges in danger of death, he will be able to say briefly: I absolve thee from all censures and sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, + and of the Holy Spirit. Amen."

Concerning these things it must be noted:

1. It is a pious custom, not obliging under sin, that before confession the priest say: May the Lord be in thy heart and on thy lips, for worthily confessing all thy sins, in the name, etc., or at least bless with the sign of the cross, by which "the penitent... is admonished that... on bended knees he fortify himself with the sign of the cross" (Rit., c. 1, n. 11).

2. The ceremony of raising the hand, from the word Indulgence until the formation of the cross in imparting absolution, does not oblige under grave sin, just as neither does the sign of the cross under the absolution; indeed according to some not even under venial sin, which can be admitted, at least while the form itself is not being pronounced.

3. The prayers May God have mercy and May the almighty and merciful Lord grant thee indulgence can be omitted for a just cause, such as can easily occur in more frequent confessions, as if there is a great concourse of penitents, or in shorter confessions, as if the penitent often returns or after absolution remembers a sin, or because of lack of time; otherwise it is not fitting to omit them, although it can be done without sin, because they are not of precept but of counsel, since the Council of Trent, sess. 14, c. 3, says that they are "laudably added." This counsel the Code again inculcates in can. 885: "Although the prayers joined by the Church to the absolution formula are not necessary for obtaining the liberation itself, nevertheless, unless there is a just cause, let them not be omitted." These things also hold concerning the words: May the Passion of the Lord..., although certain men think that by this prayer all the works of the penitent in some way participate in the efficacy of satisfaction, as we noted in n. 563, 5, and for that reason say that it is less fitting to omit it.

4. By precept of the Church and as a precaution, absolution from censures is prefixed to absolution from sins; because it is not fitting that one be reconciled to God through the ministry of the Church who has not first been reconciled with the Church herself. Hence a) a confessor who certainly knows a censure which impedes reception of the sacrament sins gravely if he absolves from sins before censures; nevertheless the absolution is valid in one having the power; b) to omit absolution from censures where the confessor is morally certain that censures are not present is, of itself, not a sin; nevertheless, as a precaution for rectitude it is to be prefixed because of the custom of the Church; c) it is of itself venial if there is a probable suspicion of a censure.

5. The word suspension is omitted if it is a matter of laymen, since they cannot be suspended; but it is prescribed for those who are in sacred Orders, and by counsel it is to be used for clerics.

6. Hence a voluntary omission or corruption of a non-essential word in the form itself, without sufficient reason, is a grave or light sin according as the change itself is regarded as notable or not: for although it would not invalidate the sacrament, nevertheless it imports irreverence against the ordinance of the Church concerning sacred worship.

Thus the omission of the words in the name... is judged light; on the contrary, the change of the word I absolve into some other equivalent word, or the omission of the words from sins, would be notable, and even the omission of absolution from censures can be grave, as was said.

670. The place of confession and the vesture to be worn. - From the Ritual, tit. 3, c. 1, n. 7 sq.:

a) "The proper place of sacramental confession is a church or public or semi-public oratory" (can. 908).

b) "The confessional seat for hearing the confessions of women is always to be placed in an open and conspicuous place, and generally in a church or public or semi-public oratory destined for women;... let it be furnished with a fixed and finely perforated grating between the penitent and the confessor" (can. 909).

c) "Confessions of women are not to be heard outside the confessional seat, except because of illness or some other true necessity, and with the precautions which the Ordinary of the place has judged opportune. It is permitted to receive the confessions of men even in private houses" (can. 910).

d) The priest "is to use a surplice and a violet stole, according as the time or custom of places may permit."

It is judged grave of itself, necessity excluded, to receive the confessions of women without the cautions indicated above, namely, outside the confessional seat or without an intervening grating, or also in a place not open and conspicuous. The reason is that the Church prescribed these things for consulting modesty, and for forestalling grave dangers, suspicions, and scandals which could arise on the occasion of the ministry of Penance. Yet if it were done once or twice, in circumstances in which danger, suspicion, or scandal is not to be feared, it could seem only venial; not so if on repeated occasions.

The confessions of men in a church or public or semi-public oratory are also not to be heard outside the confessional seat (com. int., Nov. 24, 1920); but this seems to be prescribed only under light sin.