Chapter II: The Accessory Duties of the Confessor (1)

The essential office of the confessor is the judicial office. It is of the highest significance. Connected with it are other supplementary duties of equal importance. They refer to the preparation of the confessor for his responsible office, the exercise of the office itself, and his conduct after its completion.

ARTICLE I

THE PREPARATION

53. The Virtues which the Confessor must possess.

1. As in the administration of other Sacraments, the confessor must first of all be in a state of grace. If he hears confessions in a state of mortal sin, he commits as many sacrileges as he administers absolutions.[701] And what a dishonor to God, what a calamity for the priest is one single sacrilege! St. Alphonsus admonishes confessors, who have been so unhappy as to commit a grave sin, to cleanse their own consciences by confession before administering the Sacrament, or, if they cannot confess, but must hear confessions, to elicit perfect contrition. Whoever absolves in mortal sin dishonors the holy Sacrament intrusted to him by God, and while he delivers others from the chains of sin, reconciles them to God, and opens the gates of heaven to them, his own soul becomes more and more entangled in sin, displeasing to God and exposed to perdition, and will he be able to discharge his holy office in a proper manner? Will he who is himself given to sin effectively destroy the kingdom of sin by his admonition, instruction, and exhortation? The right administration of the Sacrament of Penance demands of the priest a deep hatred and personal abhorrence of sin.

2. The minister of the Sacrament of Penance must, therefore, _be confirmed in virtue_. He who will lead others to virtue (and that is surely also a duty of the confessor) must first be virtuous himself. _Qui sibi nequam est, cui alii bonus erit_, exclaims the wise man in the Old Testament (Eccli. xiv. 5). Nothing exercises such great power over the minds of the people as the good example of a priest, and only then do they believe firmly when they see him practice what he teaches. “That voice penetrates deeper into the heart which the life of the speaker confirms,” says Gregory the Great (Reg. Past.). St. Antoninus recalls the words of St. Augustine: “The priest to whom every malady is to be exposed must not fail in any one of the points which he is to judge in others; else he condemns himself while sitting in judgment over others. When the adulterous woman was taken before the Lord, He said to the Pharisees, ‘Let him amongst you who is without sin cast the first stone upon her.’ But as none seemed free from sin, they all withdrew, and did not care to condemn the woman.” “Therefore,” adds St. Augustine, “priests are more culpable than the Pharisees if they, though guilty themselves, dare to condemn others.”[702] It is an irrefutable maxim of the Angelic Doctor that, in the administration of this divine Sacrament, the Confessor coöperates in a personal way with God. It is not sufficient for him to live in a state of grace in order to be a useful servant in the work of saving sinners; he must be solicitous about the practice of all the virtues, for a lukewarm confessor, without interest in his work, who does not exercise himself in prayer and mortification, can only discharge this divine office carelessly. His words will not be inflamed by love, nor his warnings animated by zeal, nor his counsels beget confidence.[703]

3. Amongst the virtues which the confessor must possess, charity occupies the first place. As St. Alphonsus says emphatically, _the confessor must have a heart full of love_, in order to discharge his office properly. This love of the confessor, as Louis de Ponte says, must have all the dimensions which the Apostle in his letter to the Ephesians demands; the love of the confessor must be _so broad_ that he embraces in his heart all the sinners of the whole world, excluding no one that will do penance, and, like the father in the Gospel, hastening with open arms to meet and receive every prodigal son who returns home; _so long-suffering_ that he does not grow weary if he has to wait a long time for the sinner, and has often (seventy times seven) to deplore his relapse if only he will return repentant; _so highly spiritual_ that he readily incites sinners to a greater perfection; _so humble_ that he stoops to the most abandoned criminal to lend him a helping hand, however low he may have fallen by repeated indulgence in the most shameful sins. “Remember,” writes St. Francis of Sales, “that penitents address you all as ‘father.’ You must, therefore, have a fatherly heart for them; receive them with love, listen to them with patience; do not grow tired of their unmannerly behavior, their ignorance, their fickleness; do not cease helping them, that you may at any cost save their souls. Defiled though they be, they are not on that account less precious; like pearls, they lose nothing by the dirt into which they have fallen. Only try to cleanse them in the Precious Blood of the innocent Lamb, and unite them to God, that they may become heirs of eternal glory, and may one day eclipse the stars by their splendor.”[704] And St. Alphonsus teaches: “When an unhappy sinner comes, good confessors receive him with cordial love, and rejoice like a conqueror who has made booty, reflecting that it has been given to them to snatch a soul from the hands of Satan. They know that this Sacrament was really instituted not for the just, but for sinners ... that Jesus Christ said: ‘I am not come to call the just, but sinners’ (Mark ii. 17). Therefore are they filled with love, and the deeper they see the soul sunk in the filth of sin, the greater love do they show in order to win it for God.”[705] The good confessor exercises in his office all the works of mercy by which charity manifests itself, as Louis de Ponte so beautifully says: “Hearing confessions and absolving penitents is a _truly heroic act_, and unspeakably well pleasing to the divine Majesty; because in a special manner he exercises here the corporal and spiritual works of mercy. He teaches the ignorant, guides the erring, repairs injuries, comforts the sorrowful and the downcast, imparts salutary counsel to the doubting, makes effectual intercession with God for those whose salvation is endangered. He breaks the cruel chains of the captive and liberates him from shameful slavery, clothes the clean with the garment of grace, offers to the needy and to the weary spiritual food and drink. Therefore I am convinced that God shows mercy to the good and zealous confessor: since ‘Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.’”[706] Therefore, the office of the confessor is very _meritorious_. But in order that he may gain from it undiminished merit, let him administer it out of love, pure love for God and for souls. And that he may always do so Lehmkuhl recommends him frequently to consider: (1) who He is whose office he discharges; (2) who he is who discharges it; and (3) who he is for whom he discharges it. For the priest represents in this holy tribunal the person of Christ as Redeemer, who gave Himself as ransom for souls, who had this individual soul before His eyes when He suffered, when He instituted the Sacrament of Penance, who as God from all eternity, as Man, from the first moment of His incarnation, chose this hour of His special love, in which, by the influence of grace, the sinner would be brought to the feet of the priest, by whose help and endeavor he might be sanctified and saved. But the confessor who discharges this divine office and coöperates with Christ in the divine work of the salvation of sinners, must recognize that it is without any merit on his part that he has been raised to such an exalted dignity. The confessor has, perhaps, himself grievously failed and in no way can he better atone for his faults than by zeal in blotting out and preventing the sins of others; and if he should have no sins of his own to expiate, he should not forget that he owes this singular favor to Christ and His grace.

The confessor must see in the penitent a brother of Christ, sprinkled with the Blood of Christ, who now, to the shame of Christ, has fallen into the most wretched captivity and slavery of the devil; who, nevertheless, is dearly loved by God and Christ, and is called to eternal and blissful union with Him; who will, perhaps, one day be a great saint in heaven, and, if he dies before the confessor, will there be an intercessor for him; or will certainly, out of gratitude, pray for him here on earth.[707] The confessor should often read what St. Alphonsus writes in his _Homo apostolicus_ about the love of the confessor:[708] “This love must be chiefly exercised in receiving all, especially the poor, the ignorant, and sinners in a friendly manner.... A still greater love must the confessor exercise in hearing the confession itself.... And at the end of the confession the confessor should, with much zeal, show to the sinner the heinousness of his sins. This is the way by which you may gain sinners if you employ the very greatest love in dealing with them.” This love of the confessor produces in him that zeal for souls which should especially animate him. When the confessor discharges his office with zeal, souls (as experience shows) are not less effectually led to God than by preaching. “Be certain,” exclaims St. Leonard of Port Maurice, “that in a single morning which you have dedicated to God in the confessional for the purpose of helping poor sinners, you acquire more merit than if you were to perform other good and holy works for a whole year. Indeed, I venture to say that it is sometimes better to interrupt meditation, reading, the Breviary, or any other pious exercise in order to hear confessions.... We should be content to sacrifice for a time even the contemplation of God in order to comfort poor sinners. St. Ignatius declared that he would very gladly submit to a postponement of the bliss of heaven in order to be able to work for the salvation of a poor soul. Does not that passage in the Gospel terrify you where the servant is damned because he had not used the talent which he had received? And you, who have received from the Lord not _one_, but three and four, and perhaps ten talents, you will let them lie unused!”[709]

The most beautiful, the most efficacious pattern of true, wise, indefatigable zeal for souls is He whose place the confessor occupies, who in His boundless love shunned no trouble, effort, persecution, or suffering, in seeking sinners, teaching them, moving them to sorrow and penance, and pardoning them, and who for them gave up His life in shame and agony.

Under the influence of this love, the confessor will also avoid certain mistakes which are very injurious to his ministry, and by no means becoming in a representative of Christ.

(_a_) He will not prefer the rich and the high-placed to the poor and the unfortunate, but, after the example of our Saviour, will embrace the poor and the unfortunate with special love.[710]

(_b_) He will not, in this love for penitents, be influenced by any natural inclination, still less by any sinful affection; hence he will not regard himself as fortunate if his confessional is besieged by a great number _devotarum mulierum_, nor will he detain them in the confessional longer than is necessary, nor treat them with too great familiarity, but rather with a paternal severity, so that, in this holy service, he may not incur temptation and ruin.

(_c_) He will not allow himself to be influenced by the rank of the penitent, but rather remind high and low, rich and poor, of their duties and obligations, and thus be all to all.[711]

(_d_) He will employ special diligence with those who are stained with many sins, who have long lived in evil habit, and have often relapsed, that they may be lifted out of the slough of sin, and led to God and a new life. He will ponder the celebrated words of St. John Chrysostom: “When you see one whose soul needs cure, do not say to yourself: why did not this one or that one cure him? Cure him of his illness, and ask not why others have been negligent. If you see gold lying on the ground, do you say to yourself: why did not this one or that one pick it up? Do you not hasten to pick it up before others? Even so, think of your fallen brothers, that you have found a treasure in them.”[712]

(_e_) In hearing confessions he will increase his love and show it by kindness and gentleness; he will manifest no sign of impatience or wonder, even when the penitent confesses very great sins, or shows a hardened unrepentant heart, or is uncouth and tires the confessor by wrong answers and confused statements.

(_f_) And if the penitent is poorly prepared and badly disposed, the confessor must use every endeavor, especially at the end of the confession, to render him perfectly disposed by instructing him, admonishing him, and (as the penitent’s condition may suggest) by blaming or reproving, by recalling the thought of God’s justice, yet so as rather to inspire confidence and to open the door of love and mercy.[713]

(_g_) Nor let the priest be sad, despondent, and dejected if he perceives no progress, or only a little, and very slow progress in those on whom he has expended so much trouble. Zeal for souls will guard him against this dangerous rock.[714]

4. The confessor must, moreover, be eminently pure. He hears so many sins of impurity; the saddest lapses from virtue are disclosed to him; he must put questions in order to draw out and complete the confession of these sins; some penitents express themselves very awkwardly, and, alas! by most lamentable abuse of the holy Sacrament, snares are laid to the chastity of the confessor. In order to escape these dangers and that he may not be defiled while cleansing and healing others, the confessor must have a great love for holy purity, and be confirmed in this virtue so as to suppress resolutely and at once all rising temptations and sensual emotions. Let him arm himself with a pure and holy intention, seeking only the honor of God and the salvation of souls; let him avoid all familiarity with female penitents, ever having as witnesses of his words and actions God and his own and his penitent’s guardian angels; finally, let him shield himself by frequent prayer, especially to Mary, the purest of Virgins.

5. Lastly, the confessor must be equipped with _inexhaustible patience_. Intrusive, scrupulous, melancholy, distrustful, rough, obstinate penitents, will easily rouse to impatience and anger a confessor who is vehement and excitable. Great patience is, therefore, necessary that, while correcting the faults of others and giving peace to souls, he may not fall into faults himself, become perplexed in heart, and lose his peace of mind. He who will take away the sins of the world must be as _meek_ as a lamb.

54. The Scientific Equipment of the Confessor.

St. Alphonsus teaches[715] that the confessor who hears confessions without sufficient knowledge is in danger of eternal reprobation. And justly does the sainted teacher express himself so seriously. If the Lord demanded from the priests of the Old Testament that their lips should keep knowledge, and that the law should be sought at their mouths (Malach. ii. 17), and if He threatens the priest of the Old Testament by the mouth of the prophet: (Os. iv. 6) “Because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will reject thee, that thou shalt not do the office of priesthood to me,” this applies in a much higher degree to the priest of the New Law, who, as representative of God, discharges the office of judge of souls, and holds in his power their eternal welfare or their eternal ruin. An ignorant priest, one not equipped with the knowledge necessary for so responsible and important a Sacrament, exposes himself to the danger of pernicious error, the Sacrament to the danger of dishonor, and the penitent to the danger of damnation. _An ignorant confessor works much ruin._

How great the knowledge of the confessor must be is shown by the consideration that he discharges the office of teacher, physician, and judge, to people in the most diverse positions and circumstances of life and the most unequal conditions of soul and mind. He is appointed for them all; they all, without exception, come to him, and he must instruct them upon the most important matters; he must know all diseases and wounds, must examine and cure them; upon all sins he must pronounce judgment, a just judgment, and one as much as possible in accordance with the judgment of God! Truly, if any one who undertakes an office ought to be provided with the knowledge requisite for its fitting discharge, it is the priest, for upon the fitting discharge of his office depends, not some temporary good or evil, but eternal salvation—his own and that of his penitent! St. Teresa was moved to the following utterance in her biography (chap. 5): “Half-instructed confessors have done my soul great harm; for I could not always have such learned ones as I would have desired. They certainly did not wish to deceive me, but the fact was that they knew no better. Of something which was a venial sin, they said it was no sin, and out of a very grave mortal sin they made a venial sin. This has done me such harm, that my speaking here of so great an evil, as a warning to others, will be readily understood.” The following principles are to be laid down respecting the scientific outfit of the confessor:—

I. The confessor is bound _sub gravi_, to possess all the knowledge which is necessary to discharge his office without committing serious errors.

(1) Generally speaking, the confessor must, therefore, know his moral theology thoroughly. He must know particularly what he has to do in order to administer the Sacrament rightly; he must know upon what subject he has to instruct the penitents, what he may permit, and what he must forbid; he must especially understand how to dispose penitents who are not disposed; how, and through what motives, acts of faith, of hope, of love, and contrition (both _attritio_ and _contritio_) are to be awakened; for he must very often rouse the penitents to such acts, and even in many cases recite them for his penitents.

(2) Moreover, he must know accurately which of the sins that usually occur are mortal, and which venial, at least _ex genere suo_; “he must understand how to distinguish them _secundum principia communia_, though not _in causis difficillimis_,” or, as Lugo says: “This knowledge need not be of such a kind that in all cases he is able to distinguish between mortal or venial sins, but only in those of frequent occurrence; as for the rest, let him hear and understand, and then absolve with the necessary intention.”[716] He must know: (3) the _species_ and _circumstantiæ_ and how the number is expressed; (4) what is usually necessary for the validity of documents, for valid contracts, for a valid marriage, and what circumstances invalidate contracts and marriages, etc.; (5) when restitution in matters of property and of honor must take place; the duties of individuals according to their different stations, occupations, and obligations; (6) what powers belong to him, what limits there are to these powers, the _casus reservati_, and ecclesiastical censures; (7) how the disposition of the penitent may be recognized, what means of amendment he should and must prescribe, what penance he can or must impose.[717]

II. The confessor, however, is not obliged to possess a _scientia eminens_ (or _exquisita_) so as to be able to pronounce the right decision at once in every question which occurs. What the theologians call a _scientia mediocris_ suffices; that is, he must know, but know thoroughly and well, cases of more usual occurrence, and in more difficult things _saltem prudenter dubitare_; that is, he must know, in a given case, that a difficulty exists and what the difficulty is, and that he should obtain information before he decides. He must also be acquainted with good books which he may consult, and, finally, he must, when necessary, seek guidance from well-informed men. What Lacroix writes (l. c.) upon this point is worthy of attention: “However well informed a confessor may seem to be, it is not well to solve intricate questions at once, especially in cases of obstacles to marriage, simony, or restitution; in such cases you must rather tell the penitent that you do not dare to decide the matter at once, in view of its difficulty, and request him to wait a little while. By doing so, the confessor will not lose the esteem of the penitent; on the contrary, the latter will understand that he takes the matter conscientiously and seriously, and will place all the more confidence in the confessor’s decision, whereas scruples frequently remain when a decision is given quickly and without specifying the grounds for it. In this way errors will be avoided. This exhortation applies especially to confessors who are not very well instructed, but who absolve and give dispensations in all possible directions, the more confidently the less their ignorance permits them to entertain a doubt.” And to this the learned author adds the following remark: “Moreover, a _mediocris_, but _solida doctrina_, is more useful than a _summa et exquisita cognitio_ when the latter is not united to prudence and discretion. For those who have no sober judgment treat everything with such theological subtlety that they often involve themselves and others in scruples and other difficulties; it is, therefore, better to adapt one’s self in such questions to the usage of the Church and of prudent confessors.”

The confessor must obtain this knowledge and conserve it (_a_) by serious study of moral theology. _Continuous_ study is necessary; for as moral theology embraces such various matters, they would in time be forgotten unless recalled to memory by repeated study.[718] The Roman Ritual admonishes confessors to acquire the greatest possible knowledge and wisdom, by zealous prayer to God, as well as by the study of approved authors and the prudent counsel of experienced men.[719] And Benedict XIV says in his Constitution “Apostolica” (26 June, 1749), n. 21: “It were, indeed, to be desired that every confessor should possess that degree of knowledge which is called _eminens_, but as this is the gift of a few only, it is absolutely necessary that each one should be furnished with at least competent knowledge.” St. Alphonsus gives the reason for this when he says:[720] “We know well that the sacramental confessions will not produce the fruit which we expect and desire, if they are not heard by blameless, learned priests, and priests well instructed in the salutary doctrines of the Church.”

(_b_) The confessor would err if, as confessor, he should wish to dispense with the study of dogmatic theology. For the confessional is the place in which he who is wavering in faith must be instructed and confirmed; it is precisely in the guidance of souls that the Christian moral law is shown to be the outcome of the doctrine of faith; the dogmas of the Church supply the strongest motives for amendment and a holy life; it is in the minds that have grasped with full and enthusiastic hold the Church’s doctrines in whom we find that masterly authority and certainty to which the soul gladly submits; and, without this, a ministry is exposed to thousands and thousands of errors in the decision of questions of conscience. “Give me a soul thoroughly firm in faith, and in that faith the soul finds, as if spontaneously, its rule of life: _Justus ex fide vivit_. A priest imbued with his Church’s teaching is as a bright star leading others on the right road.”[721]

(_c_) In addition to dogma and moral the confessor needs a third science—and this we may call the science of the saints, the doctrine of Christian virtues or perfection. It is not foreign to moral theology; it properly belongs to it as a part to the whole. At the Synod of Westminster, in the year 1873, Bishop Ullathorne of Birmingham spoke of this science as follows: “Moral theology has two branches: the first is occupied with the right _judgment of sins_; the second aims at the _practice of virtue_. As a science, the former is much more developed than the latter; the former enables the priest to become a judge; it deals with the Commandments of God, the duties of individual classes; it draws the boundary line between what is sin and what is not sin, what is of obligation and what is not of obligation. This is moral theology; if its rules are applied to individual cases, we have casuistry. The second science is called the science of the saints, asceticism, and it makes the priest a guide of souls on _the road to perfection_. While the first is more cultivated in the schools, the latter is left more to the individual’s zeal and devotion. Yet the science of perfection is necessary; for that which is known in scientific form makes a deeper impression. There is great danger in cultivating the former without the latter. If, in the discharge of his office as judge, a man does not cast his eyes upward, he judges of sin and duty according to the standards of lawfulness and not according to the light of perfection which must guide us.”

III. An extensive knowledge is not necessary to all confessors; the necessary knowledge must rather be _relative_; that is, adapted to the condition of the penitents who come to confess. He, therefore, who hears confessions at a place to which penitents of various stations, professions, and circumstances, with various degrees of education resort, must possess much greater, more comprehensive, knowledge, than another priest who only hears the confessions of illiterate, simple people. Although a priest who is conscious of his ignorance, or of his defective knowledge of moral theology, and yet hears confessions, is, as St. Alphonsus says, _in statu damnationis_, there may be cases in which an ignorant confessor can and must hear confessions, namely, in cases of extreme necessity, and when no other priest is present, thus:—

(_a_) In _the hour of death_, when a better-informed confessor is wanting; (_b_) in any similar case of necessity, for instance, when Christians are the captives of infidels and can only obtain an ignorant, unlearned confessor—this situation being rightly regarded as “_necessitas moraliter extrema_.”[722] “On these grounds Superiors may frequently be excused who appoint priests not well instructed to little parishes in the country; this they generally do because they have none better instructed to send to these parishes. As provision cannot be otherwise made for such places, it is better that they should have a confessor who is not well instructed than none at all. The bishop, however, must remind such a priest of his lack of knowledge, and admonish him to acquire, as his duty strictly requires him to do, better knowledge, in order that he may well discharge his office as confessor. _This duty is always incumbent on the parish priest_, even when, in view of the necessitous state of a flock, a bishop may be forced to intrust a parish to a priest who is not sufficiently instructed. The same applies to other priests in charge of souls.”[723] Nevertheless, it must be the most serious concern of every bishop to procure well-trained and educated priests.

IV. If a priest is in doubt as to whether he possesses the requisite knowledge for discharging the office of confessor, he can rest content with the judgment of his Superior, if the latter is sufficiently informed of his education and capacity by means of the examination for approbation, or some other theological test, or in consequence of long intercourse with him, or has been informed concerning it by some other prudent man. Of itself, _the approbation which he has received cannot satisfy a priest, nor excuse the confessor who is conscious of his defective knowledge_; for the approbation presupposes the necessary knowledge but does not impart it. St. Alphonsus teaches—in agreement with all authors: “A confessor who is not conscious of being quite incapable of hearing confessions, is justified in contenting himself with the judgment of his Superior, and, indeed, must be so; to rely upon the approbation of the bishop, and then believe that one is freed from study, is presumption.”[724] Moreover, the Church has never tired of admonishing confessors in the strongest terms, of their strict duty to acquire and maintain the knowledge requisite for the administration of the Sacrament of Penance; for an ignorant confessor causes terrible ruin and burdens himself with a dreadful responsibility.

V. The knowledge of the confessor must be _practical_ in order to further the salvation of souls and solve the _casus conscientiæ_ which occur. On this point St. Alphonsus expresses himself in the following manner: “Many who pride themselves on being instructed and distinguished theologians disdain to read the moralists; they call them casuists, an opprobrious name in their estimation. They say that, in order to hear confessions properly, it is sufficient to know the general moral principles by which all individual cases can be solved. Who denies that all cases must be solved by principles? The difficulty lies in applying the principles to individual cases complicated with so many circumstances. This cannot be done without carefully weighing the grounds on both sides. Here the moralists step in to solve the difficulty; they seek to explain by what principles the many particular cases must be solved. Moreover, there are in our days so many positive laws, Bulls, and decrees, with which we can only become acquainted through the study of the casuists who have collected and classified them, as the different subjects require. The more recent the moralists are, therefore, the more useful are they in comparison with the earlier ones (in this respect, of course). The author of the work _Instructio pro novis Confessariis_ (p. 1, n. 18) rightly says that with regard to many theologians the more deeply versed they are in the speculative science, the more ignorant they are of moral, which, as Gerson writes, is the most difficult of all; and however familiar any one may be with it, he will always be obliged to add to his information. The learned Sperelli[725] likewise says, that those confessors who wholly give themselves up to the study of scholastic theology, in the belief that time devoted to the study of moral is wasted, are in great error, for they can no longer distinguish sin from sin; and this, he says, is an error which involves confessors and penitents in eternal ruin.”[726]

With these words, the sainted teacher demonstrates the necessity of the study of theological casuistry. At the same time he shows also (and that _a fortiori_) the necessity of practical instruction concerning the administration of the Sacrament of Penance, as in this the confessor learns the method of hearing confessions rightly and with fruit.

VI. Nothing can supply the defect of learning in the confessor. 1. It is true that tact and a natural sagacity greatly assist the confessor, but without solid knowledge this natural capacity profits him nothing, but rather often exposes him to the danger of lightly deciding a matter against all principles of sound doctrine. But he who does not possess this innate sagacity must the more study how casuists decide cases, in order to sharpen his judgment and learn the application of principles.[727]

2. Nor can experience or long years of practice in the confessional supply the place of learning. By experience alone one cannot learn what is allowed and what is not allowed, still less how consciences are to be guided; “for experience which is not based upon knowledge is nothing else than a long custom of erring,”[728] and worse than the condition of a still inexperienced but well-instructed confessor is that of a gray-haired, unlearned one, who, trusting in his experience, errs in his own judgment. Solid knowledge and experience must, therefore, be united in an able confessor. A long practice without erudition in the confessional is rather a danger than a help.

As an excuse for not studying moral theology, many confessors contend that: Practice and theory are different things. If by this is meant that it is far more difficult to put in practice the rules for the administration of the Sacrament of Penance than to learn them, this contention is right and just, and the deduction is that even a very well-informed confessor must not trust to his own insight, but must unceasingly implore light from on high. But if the above argument is to be understood (as ignorant confessors use it) to mean that something which is true in theory is in practice not always true, and that it is impossible always to observe the rules taught by theology, this would be a very pernicious error. If this were true, souls would be no longer led by the doctrine approved in the Church, but by the intelligence or the arbitrary will of the individual confessors. Practice is nothing else than the application of certain rules. How could a confessor understand the practical art of hearing confessions without possessing the theoretical science which consists in a knowledge of the rules? Right practice in the administration of the Sacrament of Penance is nothing else than right application of rules.[729]

St. Alphonsus puts the question: Must a simple priest qualify himself for hearing confessions by the study of moral theology, if he sees that (in his diocese) there is a great want of confessors? And he answers in the affirmative, “as Christ appointed priests expressly for the purpose of saving souls, and the salvation of souls is chiefly effected by the holy Sacrament of Penance. Accordingly, how can a priest be pronounced free from sin who, out of negligence, does not hear confessions, or does not qualify himself to do so when he sees great need for it—how will such a one avoid the reproaches of the Lord, or escape the punishments with which He threatens the idle servant? Such priests must not say that they did their duty if they helped souls in another way, by instruction, by prayer, by exhortation; that, I say, is not enough, because they must help their neighbor in that which is necessary to his salvation. Nor must it be said that hearing confessions is a duty of charity, and that charity does not bind under such great difficulty as is involved in undertaking the labor which the acquirement of the knowledge necessary for the administration of the Sacrament of Penance entails. For it may be answered that even if hearing confessions is a duty of charity, it is of the essence of the sacerdotal office, and incumbent on every priest when necessity requires it.”[730]

55. The Prudence of the Confessor.

In addition to knowledge the confessor must possess great prudence, as his office is beset with difficulties and dangers.

The necessity for prudence in the confessor is shown in the very meaning of the word; for prudence is nothing else than the good use and the right application of principles and rules in any business, or, according to the Angelic Doctor, the right application of general principles to the individual case.[731] It is, therefore, called the right way of acting. It is not, of course, the prudence of the world and the flesh which we have here in view, that prudence which, before God, is folly (1 Cor. iii. 19), which sacrifices higher things for earthly profit; nor is it human respect, which in weakness and fear, abandons principles for a momentary success (_prudentia diabolica_, Jac. iii. 15), but the _supernatural virtue_ of prudence,[732] which springs like a flower from sanctifying grace and the love of God; which, in Confirmation, the Holy Ghost bestows for individual use, and which is renewed for the public good in the ordination of the priest: this is that prudence which our divine Saviour recommended to His disciples, when He said to them: “_Estote prudentes sicut serpentes._”[733] Now the office of the confessor is of a thoroughly practical nature, difficult, and of the highest importance, as, in the exercise of it, he may benefit or injure both himself and others, according as his conduct is prudent or imprudent. Prudence, therefore, not less than knowledge, is necessary to the confessor. Prudence is the queen of the virtues, which counsels well, judges rightly, and effectually conducts to the goal proposed.[734]

The confessor must be prudent both towards the _penitent_ and towards _himself_, that he may injure neither the penitent nor himself, nor administer his office to the detriment of religion and the scandal of others.

According to the teaching of St. Alphonsus,[735] the confessor must conduct himself prudently towards the penitent, especially in the following points:—

(1) _In the questions_ which he puts to the penitent, so as only to ask what is suited to the station, age, and condition of the penitent, and so as not to teach him sins which he did not know; as already remarked, very special care is necessary in questions concerning the sixth commandment; (2) _in the instructions_ which he gives the penitent; instructing him or preserving a discreet silence and leaving him in his good faith, as the welfare of the penitent may demand (Praxis, n. 8, 9); (3) _in prescribing the means of amendment_, so that these latter may be adapted to the state of the penitent’s soul and to his circumstances (Praxis, n. 15); (4) _in imposing sacramental penance_, so that, as above stated, it may correspond with the penitent’s sins and his station (Praxis, n. 11, 12); (5) _in giving, deferring, or refusing absolution_ (Praxis, n. 10, 63-77); (6) _in the choice of opinions_, in case of the existence of probable opinions for and against a point, whether he must choose the severer or the milder decision for the penitent in question[736] (Praxis, n. 114); (7) _in preserving the seal of the confessional_, so as to avoid every danger of breaking it either directly or indirectly (Praxis, n. 117); (8) _in the treatment of very difficult and complicated questions_, carefully weighing all the circumstances, and, when necessary, asking the penitent for time, in order to seek advice from books or learned men (Praxis, n. 194).

The confessor must be prudent with regard to himself, that: (1) He may not prepare for himself temptation against holy purity in questioning and investigating the circumstances of sins, that he may not injure his good name, may not bring the office of the confessor into disrepute, may not render the institution of the confessional odious; (2) _in vitando aspectu fœminarum, juniorum præcipue et, nisi crates interfecta sit, manus certe cum sudario intercedat_ (Praxis, n. 119); and (3), by being _especially careful with regard to women_, being particular to avoid all superfluous talk, all familiarity, accepting no presents from them, not visiting them without necessity at their homes, treating younger ones with severity rather than leniency. These measures of precaution the confessor must adopt in the case of pious persons especially, _quibuscum est periculum majoris adhæsionis_ (Praxis, n. 119-120).[737] But how shall he obtain this prudence from which so many of the good effects of the Sacrament depend? By study, by circumspection, by experience, by docility, and purity of intention, the confessor can acquire for himself the necessary prudence, assisted, of course, by divine grace. 1. By study, for prudence derives its decisions and its opportune remedies from science. 2. By circumspection, by considering the different circumstances of the person and the case. This circumspection will enable the confessor to reveal the deceptive motives of passion and vice, to suggest means for the removal of obstacles in the way of amendment, to foresee and provide against the detriment which may ensue. The gift of right judgment is conferred upon us by God; maturity of judgment is acquired with age; but those who have not been richly endowed by nature can sharpen their judgment by the study of moral and pastoral theology and by taking counsel of wiser men. 3. By experience, which teaches the confessor what commonly occurs in practice, shows him how he must question, when he must instruct the penitent or leave him _in bona fide_, how he finds his way to the heart of the penitent, when he must show special indulgence, how to judge rightly of the penitent’s disposition and to find the proper remedies. Practical experience is thus an excellent school. 4. By docility, which is especially necessary for young confessors; it teaches them to mistrust themselves and to apply often to learned and experienced confessors for advice, thus profiting by the experience of others. Hence Benedict XIV advises confessors to beware of answering _divinando_ when a more difficult or a new case is brought before them. On the contrary, they should not decide the matter till after mature consideration; moreover, they should consult the theologians whose teaching is solid and sound.[738] 5. Purity of intention, that is the sole desire to please God, and to lead men to salvation. “It is certain that the Christian prudence of a confessor will be the greater, the greater is his love, and that, in general, the mind is stimulated by the intention or the desire to attain the end. The more a man is inflamed with the desire of a certain good, the more zealous is he in his search for the means of obtaining it, the more careful will he be in choosing the more suitable means, the more cautious will he be to omit anything that may be useful for his purpose, the more determined will he be in overcoming all difficulties, so as to gain that on which he has set his mind. A confessor who, with pure intention, seeks only God and the salvation of souls, will labor with fruit.”[739]

ARTICLE II

DUTIES OF THE CONFESSOR DURING CONFESSION

56. The Duty of instructing and exhorting the Penitent—Munus Doctoris.

The confessor will find many penitents either ignorant or under the influence of error. This ignorance may refer to some point connected with the reception of the Sacrament of Penance, the general duties of a Christian life, or some particular duty. The duty of the confessor to instruct the ignorant penitent varies with the subject on which the ignorance exists. Hence: I. The confessor is _always_ obliged at once to instruct the penitent who is ignorant of something which he must _hic et nunc_ know in order to receive validly the Sacrament of Penance, or to receive _licite_ the Holy Eucharist. 1. The confessor must therefore instruct penitents who are ignorant of the truths which they, _necessitate medii sive certo sive probabiliter_, ought to know and believe, and this instruction must be given before the administration of absolution.[740]

Moreover, the confessor must, before giving absolution, instruct the penitent if he does not know how to make an act of contrition and purpose of amendment. These instructions must also, of course, be imparted when the penitent is not responsible for his ignorance; therefore, in every case, because the penitent is incapable of receiving the Sacrament in such a state of ignorance.[741] The confessor might send away a penitent ignorant of these truths, imposing upon him the duty of first obtaining instruction from some competent person or the parish priest; but if there is no good reason to hope that he would fulfill this duty, the instruction must be given concisely in the confessional, and this should nowadays be done in most cases of the kind. 2. If the penitent is ignorant concerning the Holy Sacrament of the Altar, the confessor must certainly instruct him upon this point before allowing him to receive holy communion.

It is, however, not necessary to the valid reception of absolution that the penitent should retain all these truths in his memory; it is sufficient that he substantially understands them and makes an act of faith which the confessor recites to him. The confessor must impose upon such penitents the duty of subsequently obtaining fuller instruction.[742] It is also the duty of the confessor to ascertain whether they know these truths. Whenever he thinks it probable that a penitent does not know them, he must ask. He need not, as a rule, ask those who were brought up as children in a pious and Christian fashion. But others, who received Christian instruction in their youth, and have subsequently neglected sermons and instructions, must certainly be questioned, and this especially applies to our times, when so many Christians, particularly men (but also not a few women), absent themselves for a long time from sermons and neglect every other kind of Christian instruction; such people, even when well educated and instructed in worldly matters, are ignorant, _admodum rudes_, in religion, having forgotten nearly all they had formerly learnt. In the cares, labors, and pleasures of life, and frequently under the influence of pernicious and irreligious literature, they have perhaps become strongly infected with irreligion or heresy. If the penitents are such that one could not ask if they are ignorant of these truths without causing them confusion, the confessor might of his own accord explain what is most essential, and, in some way, move the penitents to an act of faith.[743]

II. If the penitent is ignorant of the truths of Christian doctrine and the precepts of Christian life, especially of those truths which the Christian must know and believe _necessitate præcepti_, the confessor must first of all inquire if the penitent is responsible for this ignorance or not. If he is, he can be absolved, but he must be sorry for, and confess, his neglect, and make a firm resolution to learn these truths; and if he does not keep his promise, absolution must, as a rule, be refused to him till he has performed his duty. If he is ignorant by no fault of his own, he can be absolved, but he must promise to obtain instruction.[744] If the confessor is, at the same time, the pastor of such penitents, he is bound, _ex officio_, or in justice, to provide them with opportunities for acquiring better instruction; if he is not their parish priest, he is not strictly bound in duty to do so, though he may be bound _ex charitate_, but he is always bound to inform the penitent as to his duty of becoming better instructed, and as to the sin of negligence of which he is guilty if the ignorance is culpable, and which he must confess.

III. If the penitent is ignorant of particular duties, the confessor must primarily consider the spiritual welfare of the penitent in deciding whether he shall instruct him or not; but this spiritual welfare must be taken in its full sense as comprising, therefore, the individual welfare of the penitent himself, and also the general welfare for which he has to provide. This instruction must, however, be given with prudence, for fear of causing more harm than good to the penitent. The following obligations of the penitent are here chiefly in question: the duties of his station in life, the duty of making restitution (honor, good name, property), of avoiding dangerous occasions, of reconciliation, of removing scandal, and of practicing almsgiving.[745] When he considers it necessary and appropriate, the confessor must, with special prudence, instruct persons engaged to be married concerning their conduct in that state. It may also be opportune to inform a penitent that he is not bound to fast or to abstain, so that he may not, from ignorance, believe that he commits sin where there is no sin at all. This duty of instructing the penitent must now be somewhat more clearly considered and particularized.

The confessor must instruct or exhort:—

1. When the ignorance of the penitent is not invincible, or when he is responsible for it (_vincibilis seu culpabilis_); when the penitent is in such a state of doubt concerning some duty that there can no longer be a question of _bona fides_. When a person is in such ignorance, he is already in a state of sin, or in immediate danger of formal sin, because he acts under reasonable doubt or culpable ignorance. The exhortation, therefore, so far from doing harm, can only result in good, as it will afterwards produce the desired fruit. When, therefore, the penitent, not out of mere scrupulosity, but in consequence of a serious doubt, questions the confessor about some duty, the latter must instruct him. In this case where the penitent has a substantial doubt and he is bound to remove it, the confessor’s duty is to tell him the truth; moreover, it is plain that the penitent is disposed to act in accordance with the confessor’s answer. If, however, the confessor thinks, in an exceptional case, that the penitent should not know the whole truth, he need say nothing more in reply to the penitent than what is necessary.[746] If, for instance, a person bound by a vow of chastity asks if the marriage which he has contracted without a dispensation is invalid on account of the vow, let him answer in the negative, but be silent about the _debitum conjugale_; if he asks whether he may render the _debitum_, let the confessor answer in the affirmative, and be silent about demanding the _debitum_.

2. When the penitent is ignorant of things which cannot long escape his knowledge, and when his ignorance, still _invincibilis et inculpabilis_, will soon cease to be so and become _culpabilis_, especially where a vice is growing with the lapse of time and its extirpation becomes more difficult—in such case the confessor must, _as a rule_, instruct and exhort the penitent at once; for instance, when young people who have not yet attained to puberty, begin to contract a _habitus pollutionis_, they must be seriously warned to desist from their dangerous and sinful practice, even when they are perhaps in _bona fide_. But in this the confessor must weigh well the circumstances, considering whether, perhaps, for the time being, a very heavy burden is not being imposed upon the penitent, which he will scarcely be able to bear, but which will very soon cease. In this case silence would be preferable.

3. If the ignorance is _invincibilis_, but a good result may be hoped from the exhortation, in this case the confessor must exhort even when in consequence a difficulty arises for the penitent, or when it is foreseen that the exhortation will certainly not do harm. For a material violation of a law must also be avoided, when this can be done without danger of a greater evil. The confessor must not fail, therefore, to admonish, although he foresees that the penitent will not immediately obey, if he has hopes that he will soon do so. For it may happen that a penitent, when he has learnt the truth, does not at first obey, but when he has become calmer, after serious reflection, amends his life.[747] If the confessor sees that the penitent does not receive the exhortation well at the time, but that he will receive it better at some more seasonable moment, he must defer it to a later occasion. If there is no likelihood of good resulting from the exhortation, the confessor, according to the general and approved teaching of theologians, is bound, _per se loquendo_ (that is, unless there is some other motive, such as regard for the _bonum publicum_), to omit the exhortation, and to leave the penitent in his _bona fide_.

When, therefore, the confessor learns in the course of the confession that the penitent has contracted an invalid marriage through some secret impediment, and danger of disgrace, scandal, or incontinence is to be feared from disclosing to him the nullity of the marriage, he must be silent on the subject of the invalidity, and leave the penitent _in bona fide_ until he has obtained a dispensation. And in the case where he could not disclose the nullity of the marriage at all without being obliged to face these difficulties, he should ask for a _sanatio in radice_, and conceal everything from the penitent. In such a case the confessor can even bind in duty the putative husband (or wife) who refuses the _debitum conjugale_, to render it; for if the husband (or wife) is convinced that he (or she) is living in lawful matrimony, he (or she) is bound in conscience to render the _debitum_. But the confessor will act more safely by telling the penitent quite in a general way that married people are bound to render the _debitum_, and that they cannot be absolved if they do not perform their duty.[748]