Chapter I: The Treatment of Penitents in Different Spiritual Conditions (1)

Sinful habits, and the immediate occasions of sin, are the nets with which the arch-enemy of mankind ensnares and holds innumerable souls. Especially in our own times have the occasions of sin become more numerous and dangerous, and carelessness with regard to them has increased. Many souls are thus lost! The more alarming this condition proves, the more should the priest be animated by zeal to prevent its fatal consequences. This requires great prudence and sound knowledge. For this prudence the priest must continually pray and consult wise and approved teachers. St. Alphonsus is recognized by all as a most safe guide amongst these teachers; for this eminent Doctor has been given to the Church by divine Providence in our days, that he might show us the middle path between opinions which are either too lax or too strict.[818]

ARTICLE I

63. Sinful Occasions and the Duty of avoiding them.

By “occasion of sin” (_occasio peccandi_) we mean, in general, a person, or some external object constituting for any one a danger of sinning. It comprises two elements: an external object which incites to sin, and an internal inclination to sin.

For a right understanding, we must distinguish between the _danger_ and the _occasion_ of sinning.[819]

Danger is the impulse to sin, and if this impulse proceeds from a person or an external object, this person, or this external object, is called an _occasion_ of sin; but if the impulse to sin comes from within only, namely from the devil or in consequence of a sinful habit, it is called simply _danger_.[820] There is a danger in every occasion but not every danger proceeds from an external occasion of sin.

1. The occasion of sin is either _immediate_ (_proxima_) or _remote_ (_remota_), according as the danger of sinning is great and probable, or slight. The immediate occasion is “absolutely immediate,” when for the generality of mankind it presents a serious and probable danger of sinning; or it is “relatively immediate” when the danger exists for some individual person on account of his particular disposition. A _per se proxima occasio_ may, therefore, be _remota_ for a very pious and prudent man, whereas an occasion _per se remota_ may be for a weak person and one much inclined to sin _proxima_.

The existence of an _occasio proxima_ may be inferred: (1) _a posteriori_ from a sad experience that the person did, in fact, generally, or at least often, fall into sin whenever the occasion presented itself. If, however, his trespasses were notably less numerous than his victories, the occasion cannot be called an _immediate_ one.[821] (2) _A priori_, from the attraction of the object, from the weakness of the person, from his passion, from a sinful habit, from the violence of the temptation to which he is exposed in this occasion. Although sin has not yet been committed, there is always great danger in _presumptuously_ exposing one’s self to violent temptation.[822]

It may be assumed that an _occasio proximo_ has become _remota_: (1) when it is known from experience that the sins have become less, and are no longer frequent; (2) when some circumstance has supervened which has caused the danger to be no longer a great one, such as a marriage, a quarrel, etc.

2. Furthermore, the occasion is _continua_, continual, _seu in esse_, or, with interruptions, _interrupta_, _non continua_, _non in esse_. It is present interruptedly, when one is not always exposed to it, but only occasionally, for instance in visits to dancing rooms, inns, etc.; it is present continuously when one is always, uninterruptedly exposed to it; for instance, in the case of a concubine or a servant living in the same house and with whom one is accustomed to sin; an obscene statue in one’s room.

3. Again, the immediate occasion is _voluntary_ (_voluntaria_), which can easily, and without much detriment, be given up; and necessary (_necessaria_) which the person cannot, even if he will, remove or relinquish. The necessary occasion is either physically or morally necessary; physically, when the person absolutely cannot remove it; morally, when it cannot be abandoned or avoided without sin, or great scandal, or great detriment to honor, or property, or without placing one’s self in a similar or worse danger of sin.

The following principles are to be laid down respecting the duty of avoiding the occasions of sin:—

I. The duty of avoiding mortal sin imposes upon us the strict duty of avoiding also the immediate danger of mortal sin.

He who is bound under grave sin to reach a certain end is also bound under grave sin to employ the means without which this end cannot be reached; but flight from the immediate occasion of sin is the morally necessary means of avoiding sin, consequently this immediate danger must be avoided. Further, as a man is bound by love for his own person not to expose his bodily life voluntarily to the danger of death, he is, _a fortiori_, bound by the law of charity not to expose his supernatural life voluntarily to the danger of death, that is, the danger of mortal sin. It is, therefore, _in re morali_, a sin of the same kind to place one’s self in an immediate occasion of sin, or to desire and commit the sin. It follows from this that a man sins grievously as often as he exposes himself without necessity to the immediate occasion of sin, even if he does not actually sin in this occasion. On the other hand, it is no sin to expose one’s self to a remote danger of sinning if there is a reason for so doing, or if precautionary measures are taken. For such danger can be easily overcome.[823]

II. It is allowed, in case of moral necessity, to expose one’s self to the immediate occasion of sin; only suitable means must then be employed to protect one’s self against the danger. In this case one does not love the danger, but incurs it unwillingly, and if a man strengthens himself by firm resolutions, prayer, etc., God will not suffer him to fall into sin, and in this manner the danger becomes a remote one. From this it results that a man is always bound to avoid _formal_ danger either by flight or by precautionary measures.[824]

III. From the duty to avoid the risk of sinning results _the duty to avoid the immediate occasions of sinning_ as these imply an immediate danger of sinning. This same conclusion, moreover, follows from two propositions condemned by Innocent XI: “The immediate occasion of sinning is not to be avoided when there is any _causa utilis aut honesta_ for not avoiding it” (Prop. 62). “It is permissible to seek directly an immediate occasion of sinning _pro bono spirituali vel temporali nostro vel proximi_” (Prop. 3).

On the other hand, this obligation is not incumbent in respect to _remote_ occasions, because they do not present an immediate danger of sinning, and because it is, for the most part, morally impossible to avoid all these occasions; we should be obliged simply to leave the world, as the Apostle says (1 Cor. v. 10), for they occur in all circumstances.

But it must here be observed that the occasions of sin may be avoided in two ways, according to the nature of the occasion. As this consists in an external object and an interior inclination to sin, occasions can be avoided: (1) _physically_ or _materially_ by separation from the external object, and (2) _morally_, or _formally_, when the danger is neutralized by other means which weaken the interior inclination without physical separation. The first method must come into operation in cases of _voluntary_ occasion, for he who _wishes_ to remain in immediate occasion of sin has no real intention of avoiding sin. And when it is a question of a really voluntary immediate occasion, where there is frequent sinning, or violent passion, or a sinful habit, or great incitement to sin, no success is to be hoped without separation, nor will the use of remedies convert the immediate into a remote occasion. For a great temptation cannot be overcome without the help of God’s grace, but God does not assist those who presumptuously expose themselves to temptation—as experience often shows. This is especially true of the immediate voluntary occasions of sin against purity.[825] The second method suffices in the case of the necessary occasion, for he who through _necessity_ remains in a danger of sin, may hope for the divine help to avoid sin.

From this consideration we deduce the following rules:—

1. An _occasio proxima libera_ of grave sin, whether _absolute_ or _relative proxima_, must absolutely be avoided; to remain voluntarily in such occasion or to seek it is itself a grave sin.

2. It is absolutely necessary to avoid or remove an _occasio proxima necessaria_; but for him who finds himself in it there exists a disjunctive duty, either of employing suitable means of reducing it to a remote occasion, or of removing it in spite of all difficulties and obstacles.

3. Not to remove a _remote occasion_, even when there is no particular reason for exposing one’s self to it, is, of itself, no grave sin; but this occasion must remain a _remote_ one, and he who finds himself exposed to it must be resolved to avoid the temptations possibly arising from it. For it is sometimes possible to foresee that what is now a remote danger will very soon become a grave and immediate danger; in this case it is the confessor’s duty to cut off such an occasion and to forbid it to the penitent lest he fall into formal sin. And when, on the contrary, the danger of a certain sin is _very remote_ and, in addition, there is a steadfast intention not to sin, the virtue to which that sin is opposed does not seem to suffer, even when this risk is incurred without cause. If the danger is in any way considerable, and it is incurred without cause, the virtue suffers; in a case of immediate danger of sin this is certainly the case.[826] But the venial sin which a man commits who is careless about keeping from a remote occasion increases in gravity in proportion to the danger. If a man exposes himself to the danger which such an occasion offers from a more or less weighty motive, he commits no sin at all, provided his resolution not to sin remains firm.

4. If danger of venial sin is to be apprehended, he who presumptuously exposes himself to it commits a venial sin; but if the danger of venial sin proceeds from an action _in se_ commendable and useful, this character of the action is sufficient ground for lawfully undertaking it; indeed, we ought to disregard the danger in a case of this kind, at the same time insuring ourselves against sin by employing preventive measures. If we did not adopt this counsel, innumerable actions which are useful would remain unperformed out of fear of sin, and this would bespeak timidity rather than prudence and conscientiousness. On the other hand, it is a mark of wisdom and zeal for perfection to avoid useless actions which, _ex se_, cannot be done without venial sin, and to avoid them the more because they may lead to other venial sins.[827]

64. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in Occasione Proxima Voluntaria.

Upon the foregoing explanations are based the following rules, according to which the confessor has to proceed with penitents _in occasione proxima libera_:—

I. Penitents who are _in occasione continua_ cannot, as a rule, be absolved, even the first time, before they have given up that which constitutes the occasion, however much they may promise to do so. For so long as a penitent remains under the influence of this occasion, he is in immediate danger of breaking his resolution to abandon it, as its removal, after an attachment to it has been formed and its fascination experienced, is very difficult and demands great self-command; so that there is reason for fearing that the presence of the sinful object will again enslave the penitent. Hence, the penitent who knows this and would, nevertheless, expose himself to the danger of breaking his resolution, must be regarded as not disposed, and the confessor who indulges him sins against his duty as judge by absolving an ill-disposed penitent, and also against his duty as physician of the soul by not applying the necessary means of amendment.[828]

To this rule there are, however, some exceptions, though in every case the penitent must faithfully promise to remove the occasion as soon as possible:—

1. When the penitent shows signs of extraordinary sorrow and firmness of purpose, thus giving hope that he will carry out his resolutions faithfully.

2. When the occasion is such that the penitent can give it up without doing great violence to himself.

3. When there is a solid reason for administering absolution at once; for it is allowed, where such reason exists, and if the necessary cautions are employed, to expose one’s self and another to a danger which then becomes a remote one; and if the penitent must receive absolution before he can remove the occasion, he is to be regarded as one _in occasione necessaria_, and he has a right, therefore, to immediate absolution. The following are held to be sufficient reasons: (_a_) _Danger of death_; that is, when the penitent is in danger of death and the occasion cannot be removed at once for want of time, or because great disgrace or scandal is to be feared. (_b_) _Difficulty in going to the same confessor again_; if this is the case, or if the penitent could not return till after a long time, nor repeat the confession to another confessor except under great difficulties, he may also be absolved before giving up the occasion. This holds good when the penitent confesses at a place far removed from his own domicile, so that it would be very difficult for him to go to the confessor again. (_c_) _Danger of disgrace_, if, on the same day or the following, he were obliged to contract a marriage, or receive holy communion, and could not withdraw without great disgrace. The case is similar if one confesses during the time of a mission, and cannot during this time remove the occasion without incurring infamy, as is frequently the case. Here the confessor may content himself with the removal of the occasion some weeks after the mission, but he must demand that the penitent should take the preliminary steps towards this at once if it can be done. (_d_) _Danger of spiritual injury_; that is, when the confessor has grounds for fearing that, on account of the postponement of absolution, the penitent would be estranged from the confessional and perish in his sins; in this case, postponement of absolution would rather increase the danger of not being faithful to his resolution.

In the above-named cases the confessor would be obliged to explain to the penitent that he must not hope to receive absolution in the future if he does not keep his promise.[829]

II. Those penitents who are _in occasione interrupta_ can be absolved _aliquoties_ (two or three times) before they have abandoned the occasion if they seriously promise to do so. They do not live _actu_ in the occasion, and their resolution not to seek the occasion may, therefore, be regarded as a firm one; but the confessor must urge them to abandon the occasion.

If the penitent does not subsequently amend, absolution must be deferred till he has really abandoned the occasion. As he could easily give up the occasion, and does not do so, according to his promise, doubts as to the firmness of his resolution arise; extraordinary signs of good dispositions would, however, remove these doubts.

If the penitent shows some improvement, although he has not yet completely given up the occasion, and if it is to be feared that deferring absolution would do more harm than good to the penitent, he may be absolved, seeing that his improvement indicates a firm resolve and preludes complete amendment.[830]

III. Penitents who have relapsed into an _occasio continua_, that is, those who have not kept their promise to remove the occasion, cannot be absolved unless they prove their worthiness by some extraordinary sign. But even in the latter case, that is, when these penitents give extraordinary signs of their good dispositions, the confessor where it seems feasible and useful may defer their absolution _ex officio medici_ till they have removed the occasion.[831]

65. The Duties of the Confessor toward Penitents who are in Occasione Necessaria.

The following are the rules for the treatment of this very numerous class of penitents:—

I. Penitents who are _in occasione proximo necessaria_ can be absolved without giving up the occasion if they are disposed and _are willing_ to adopt _means of amendment_. “For,” as St. Alphonsus says, “an opportunity of sinning is really, _in se_, no sin, and induces no necessity of sinning; true sorrow and a firm purpose not to relapse may, therefore, be quite consistent with an occasion; and although it is right that every one should be bound to remove the immediate occasion of sin, this simply means that no one may expose himself voluntarily to such risks. But if the occasion is necessary, the danger becomes, by the application of remedies, a remote one, and God does not withdraw the helps of His grace from him who is firmly resolved not to offend Him.”[832]

II. If penitents who live _in occasione proxima necessaria_ have relapsed, that is, have not employed the means prescribed by the confessor, absolution must be deferred till they have amended, unless they remove all doubts about their disposition by some extraordinary sign.[833] But how are penitents to be dealt with who have employed the means prescribed but yet have relapsed in the same way?

While many theologians believe that such persons can be absolved (and that _toties quoties_) if they seriously promise amendment, St. Alphonsus teaches (maintaining that this is the _sententia verior et communis_) that they must give up the occasion before they can be absolved, even if they suffer thereby great injury or detriment (_etiam, si opus sit, cum jactura vitæ_), provided that, _after many attempts, there is no improvement and no probable hope of improvement_. For in this case (he says) the danger of sin remains a formal one and cannot be separated from a sin. Physical separation from the occasion is, therefore (he continues), the only means of salvation, and the words of Christ are binding: “If thy eye scandalize thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee; for it is better to enter into life with one eye than in possession of both eyes, to be cast into hell fire.” (Matt, xviii. 9.) “What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world, but suffer the loss of his own soul?” (Matt. xvi. 26.) The holy Doctor excepts the case in which the penitent gives such extraordinary signs of repentance that improvement can be reasonably hoped for.[834] Ballerini, however, urges the possibility of supposing that in the case of such penitents there is something more in question than the want of the necessary dispositions, namely, that the means prescribed and employed were not the right ones, and, therefore, that others should be prescribed. This, he says, is not to be understood of the general means simply, such as prayer and other pious exercises, almsgiving, and abstinence, and frequent reception of the holy Sacraments, etc., but much more of the special means which are adapted to overcome temptations and dangers, and which are to be determined according to circumstances; for if these were faithfully employed, they would make relapse morally impossible, especially when external sins were in question; for instance, avoiding of intercourse _solius cum sola_.

Ballerini urges, moreover, that, _ex lege naturæ_, the penitent is, indeed, bound to avoid the immediate danger, but this can be done in two ways, by employing suitable means by which the danger becomes a remote one, or by removing or avoiding the occasion; but the penitent, he says, is bound to only one of the two _ex lege naturæ_; with what right, therefore, can the confessor bind the penitent to the one more than to the other? Nor must we impose upon the penitent what is too difficult, indeed, in many cases morally impossible. Moreover, if the confessor is obliged to choose that course which removes the penitent from the danger of sinning, he will certainly never choose that means through which the penitent will certainly sin by refusing to make use of it. Another way is also open to the confessor, without insisting on this indiscreet obligation, namely, to defer absolution sometimes till the penitent has employed the suitable remedies with successful results. But in this case it is to be observed that complete amendment is not necessary in order that absolution may be given. It suffices that the number of sins should indicate that it can be truly said that the occasion is no longer immediate.[835]

“To put it in a few words, there is no need to deal with these penitents otherwise than with those who have contracted sinful habits. I will only add one remark, that if the confessor is harsh, strictly demanding the more difficult step, the only result will be that the penitent will become more entangled in sin; on the other hand, mildness and patience will at least save him from complete ruin; thus theologians speak of the confessions of a _meretrix_, a usurer, or of any other penitent who is not sufficiently disposed, but has a desire to amend.”[836]

As to the remedies for penitents _in occasione necessaria_, the confessor must endeavor:—

1. _To lessen the power of the sinful occasion._ A few resolute and boldly spoken words, a serious threat, or rebuke, a cry for help, a complaint at the proper place, will often suffice to discourage an insolent tempter and prevent any further annoyance. The confessor must, moreover, require that the penitent should no longer associate _solus cum sola_, that he should shun all intimacy, and, as far as is possible, avoid even the sight of the _complex_ and give up speaking and thinking of her, etc.

2. _To lessen the power of the passion_,—by work, fasting, and exercises of penance.

3. _To increase spiritual strength_,—by prayer, frequent reception of the Sacraments, meditation upon the eternal truths.[837]

It is, however, to be carefully observed that the penitent is bound to employ the means which he is able to employ; otherwise, though the occasion would be necessary, the danger would be voluntary. Let the confessor instruct the penitent as to this duty, select the means corresponding to the danger, the character, and the circumstances of the penitent, and also show him how to apply them.[838]

In the treatment of the _occasionarius_ the confessor must be very prudent. P. Segneri calls attention to a double trick by which penitents try to deceive themselves and the confessor. (_a_) They are wont generally so to represent the occasion that it seems to be only a remote one, or they pretend that shunning it would cause them great difficulties, whereas there is frequently no other difficulty than that their passion finds it hard to break chains that have become dear to them. When, therefore, penitents speak of the scandal or the great injury which removing or avoiding the occasion would cause, the confessor must not be too ready to believe them, but must carefully weigh the matter, for it is one of great importance. (_b_) The second, not less dangerous, deception, is that they declare themselves ready to leave the _occasio in esse_; but in reality this is only in words; when the confession is over they do not perform what they have promised to perform. “I know well that many teach that the penitent can be absolved the first time, if he has made the promise to discharge his duty as soon as possible. But I repeat what I have said: as a rule do not do so, for ... experience shows that penitents who have obtained absolution in this manner do not subsequently endeavor to break through the net of sin; they find a hundred evasions, and before the occasion has been removed the sins have been multiplied, till, at the expiration of the year, Easter approaches, when they proceed to another confessor, who is equally imprudent. If a penitent has already deceived you or other confessors, I declare to you that on no account may you or can you give him absolution. For he is not disposed. If you, nevertheless, should believe that the present words of the penitent ought to be esteemed as of more value than his former deeds, and if, without just grounds, you hold him sufficiently disposed and worthy of absolution, listen, at least, to what I say to you: you do not act like a good confessor, and even if you fulfill the duties of the judge, you neglect the duties of the physician which are also incumbent upon you. Even if the penitent is contrite, as he seems to you to be, it is not fair to leave him in the jaws of the dragon when you can snatch him from the terrible danger of relapse by means of that remedy which is the only one against this evil, namely, by forcing him first to do that which he is bound to do, and by deferring absolution till he has done it. This just severity is still more necessary in the case of public sinners, for with these scandal is added to the sin of occasion.”[839]

66. Some Commonly Occurring Occasions of Sin.

The application of the principles developed in the foregoing to many occasions of sin—such as concubinage, dancing, the theater, bad reading, and intimacies—presents to the young confessor at times no small difficulty. These occasions are, moreover, so numerous nowadays that they form a large part of the confessor’s work. We will, therefore, devote a short discussion to them.

I. _Concubinage._ That is, _frequentatus concubitus cum eadem femina, quam quis instar uxoris in propria vel aliena domo retinet_. It generally occurs with unmarried people, but also in any other species of unchastity. The confessor must devote a very special attention to this occasion, for public scandal usually accompanies it. Those who practice it are exposed to immediate danger of eternal damnation and are with great difficulty brought to amend and separate.[840]

As _remedy_, the confessor may (1) sometimes _recommend marriage_ when this is practicable. Marriage is often the only remedy for such unhappy people, as the occasion of sin is, in this way, removed. The confessor should especially encourage it in the following cases: (_a_) when the concubine lives in the house of her accomplice, is supported by him, and cannot otherwise procure her livelihood; (_b_) when the two parties love each other very much, and especially (_c_) when the concubinage has lasted a long time, is legalized, as regards the state, by a so-called civil marriage, when children have resulted from this sinful connection; and, finally (_d_), when one of the parties is in danger of death. On the other hand, separation will be preferable to marriage when the concubine lives in another house, and when not love but sensual passion is the motive of their sinful life.

But if marriage cannot be at once contracted, the confessor must urge separation if this is any way feasible, so that the occasion of sin may, in the meanwhile, be removed; if separation is impracticable, the confessor must prescribe suitable measures for diminishing the danger of sin.[841]

On the other hand, confessors and parish priests should not have recourse to a _matrimonium secretum_ or _conscientiæ_,[842] unless one of the two living in a state of concubinage is in danger of death, or when they are publicly regarded as married; for in other cases, _divortium_ is to be feared, and if the concubinage _is secret_, scandal will arise as soon as children are born, or there will be danger of a continued state of onanistic cohabitation in order that no scandal may arise.

2. If marriage is either morally impossible, or if an unhappy marriage is to be feared, the confessor must impose separation upon the parties, where separation can take place, as it is the necessary means of removing the occasion of sin. If immediate separation is impossible, let him prescribe the remedies given above for penitents _in occasione necessaria_. If, for instance, the concubine lives with the accomplice as a servant or in any other capacity, she must, in order to avoid sin in the meantime, tell the man plainly that she does not wish to live such a life any longer, and resist him in every possible way, lock the door of her bedroom at night, and apply the other remedies referred to above. If she is dismissed from her service on this account and left houseless and without sustenance, let the confessor (preserving his own honor and avoiding scandal) procure her admission into a house of refuge for women, or in some other way make provision for her need. If the parties live in separate houses, let the confessor forbid the man to visit his accomplice and have further intercourse with her. The woman must, in addition to the remedies already prescribed, employ the following: (_a_) never again to admit the accomplice to her dwelling; (_b_) to take rooms with some respectable woman, so as not to be found alone; and (_c_) to change her place of residence.

3. But if very weighty and insurmountable reasons prevent both marriage and separation, the confessor must have recourse to such measures as will remove the formal danger of sin; for in this case the occasion is a necessary one, and he must act accordingly.

4. If one of the parties living in concubinage is seriously ill or in danger of death, marriage must take place at once. If they cannot marry, and if the concubinage is _public_, the man must dismiss his accomplice and engage another respectable servant to wait upon him. If the woman is dangerously ill, she must, her illness and circumstances permitting, take steps to obtain admission into a public hospital if one is accessible. Where the concubinage is _not publicly_ known, a separation will present difficulties on account of the danger of disgrace. If it is not practicable, the confessor must take care that the danger of sin be removed as much as possible, and to this end prescribe the aforesaid remedies. The following measures are also to be recommended: removal of the portrait of the accomplice from the room; if such removal is not possible, the sick person should, either personally or through the confessor, beg pardon of the accomplice for the scandal given, and advise the latter to provide for his (or her) soul’s salvation by true repentance.[843]

5. As to the absolution of those living in concubinage, the following rules will be serviceable to the confessor: if a _public_ concubinage and a _voluntary occasion_ are in question, the parties cannot be absolved till they have really separated. To the reasons already given above is to be added the fact that it would cause scandal if the man who kept a concubine in his house or who often visited her at her house, or the woman who still lived with her accomplice or received him at her house, were seen approaching holy communion. A _peccator publicus_ also cannot be absolved till he has _publice_ done penance and atoned for his scandal.[844]

If it is a question of a _necessary_ occasion with a _public concubinage_, absolution must be deferred till the penitent has refrained from sin for some considerable time and has repaired the scandal given.[845] The confessor, however, must not readily believe that the occasion is a necessary one, for the attachment to sin of these unhappy people causes them to exaggerate the difficulties of separation, or, indeed, to suppose difficulties where they do not exist.[846] An occasion is only to be regarded as necessary when the penitent would suffer great injury by leaving it, when it might mean the surrender of the social position which he held at the time.[847] The public scandal might be regarded as atoned for if the parties caused it to be made known (if it were not already known) that they could not separate; furthermore, if they publicly gave signs of their conversion by attending divine service, receiving the Sacraments, etc., and, finally, if they marry, in case this were possible. An exception to the above rule could only be made in the following cases, certainly very rare ones: if the sinful intercourse had long ceased but was still a subject of talk and the scandal could not at once be removed, but the penitent were willing to atone for it as soon as possible, he might then be absolved before the scandal was made good if he promises not to go to holy communion, at least not in the place where his former sinful career was a matter of notoriety.[848]

When a man living publicly in concubinage falls seriously ill, or is in danger of death, he must be absolved _sub conditione_, if he is already unconscious, and Extreme Unction must also be given to him; for it cannot be maintained that he persists in manifest mortal sin, unless he had expressly refused the holy Sacraments before unconsciousness set in. If he is still conscious, but dying, and there is no time either for a marriage or for arranging a separation, he must be helped to make an act of contrition and absolved, and the other Sacraments should then be administered to him. But care must be taken that the accomplice does not come near him, and that, if it is still possible, the dying person asks pardon before witnesses in atonement for the scandal, either personally, or through the priest. If this form of atonement is not practicable, the priest should provide for it in some other way.[849] But if there is still sufficient time to atone for the scandal, and to remove the occasion of relapse (exterior and interior), either by marriage or separation, absolution must not be given till the scandal is atoned for and the occasion removed. If neither expedient is practicable, this impossibility must be declared before witnesses, so that it may become known, and the sick person must promise to bring about the separation as soon as he recovers.[850]

If the concubinage is not publicly known and the occasion is voluntary, the parties may not as a rule be absolved till they have actually separated, even if they give signs of great sorrow. An exception might be made to this rule when a prompt dismissal would be impossible, and the penitent would be under an urgent necessity of receiving holy communion in order to avoid great infamy or some equivalent injury, supposing also that the penitent were in very contrite dispositions in consequence of some external occurrence—the death of a friend, deliverance from death, etc., or if he and the accomplice did not live in the same house, or if there were well-grounded fear that, on account of the postponement of absolution, the penitent might become estranged from the confessional and perish in his sins.[851]

If, with secret concubinage, the occasion is a necessary one, the properly disposed penitent may be absolved, but absolution could be postponed in accordance with the rules here applicable (§ 52).[852] Let it be added that if the penitent maintains that the occasion is necessary to avoid scandal or disgrace, he should not, as a rule, be believed.

II. _Dancing._[853]

Dancing with persons of different sex, when there is no question of sinful circumstances, is, of itself, not forbidden, as it is not _ex se actus libidinis_.[854] But it may become very sinful: (_a_) through sinful intention; (_b_) through the danger of sinning; (_c_) by the scandal given, and (_d_) by the prohibition of parents or of an ecclesiastical law.[855]

Dancing is very sinful when those engaged in it have the intention of exciting _venereas delectationes_, of employing _tactus malitiosos_, or of indulging in _turpes sermones_. In this respect the so-called masked balls (_choreæ larvatæ_, _bals masqués_) are a source of great danger.[856]

Dancing may give rise to the following sins: (_a_) _malitiosæ manuum constrictiones affectu nempe impudico_, differing from the simple, and, of itself, not dangerous _manuum apprehensio_;[857] (_b_) _amplexus pressi_; (_c_) _tactus obscæni_ (especially, _extra actum saltandi_) before or after; (_d_) _amatorii et turpes sermones_; _aspectus malitiosi_ (in the _obscænæ choreæ_); (_e_) _delectationes morosæ et desideria turpia_. The confessor will, however, observe that the external sins referred to occur less frequently in respectable dancing assemblies.

If dancing is a _periculum proximum_ to those engaging in it, and if there is no _causa gravis_ for doing so, it must be avoided under grave sin; if it constitutes only a _periculum remotum_ or is excused by some _causa gravis_, it would be a venial sin only, or none at all. The confessor must, therefore, take into consideration the danger and its nature, as also the existence of a _causa gravis_.

He can judge if such danger is in question: (1) _from experience_,—that is, when the penitent has taken part in dancing, and has often (_frequenter_) sinned in consequence of it, and when the circumstances are the same in some given case; (2) from other circumstances,—especially the nature of the dance, too great frequency, the time of night, the moral character of the other persons present at the dance, _indecens feminarum pectoris nudatio_. General rules, applicable for all places and persons, cannot be given here. _Public_ dances to which all have access are, generally speaking, more dangerous than private ones.

If there is only _periculum remotum_ in question, any _causa rationabilis_ excuses from sin, certainly from grievous sin; for instance, to recreate one’s self, to have a little amusement (once and again in the year), to find more easily an opportunity of marrying, to show courtesy towards those who give invitations to the dance, to avoid the talk and ridicule of others, etc. If, however, there is question of _periculum proximum_, the _causa_ must be a _gravis_ to constitute an excuse; for instance, to avoid giving serious offense to wife, husband, parents, brothers and sisters, or to avoid family quarrels. But then there must be no other way of escaping these quarrels, and the penitent who exposes himself to these dangers must protect himself by suitable means.[858]

With reference to the confessor’s conduct in this matter, we may add the following remarks: (1) Let him equally avoid excess and deficiency of zeal; (2) let him estimate the danger to which dancing exposes his penitent, by asking him if he has committed sin at other dances, or been subjected to great temptation. If it results from this examination that the penitent is strictly bound to avoid these pleasures, let the confessor forbid them to him even under threat of refusing absolution; if no such obligation is evident, let him not show himself too ready in permitting indulgence in this dangerous and doubtful pleasure, and let him tell the penitent how he should conduct himself.[859]

III. _Frequenting theaters._

Theatrical performances (in the wider sense of the term) are, according to the teaching of St. Thomas,[860] _secundum se_, not sinful, but may become gravely so, by offending against religion and good morals, in the matter represented or in the manner of representing it. Very many modern dramas are of the latter kind, and full of dangers, treating as they do of anti-religious subjects or of such as are hostile to faith, or lascivious; degrading the Catholic faith, distorting historical facts to its detriment, extolling the enemies of the Church, holding up holy rites and even the Sacraments of the Church to mockery and contempt, calumniating priests, making vices, such as adultery, revenge, suicide, and sins of the flesh, appear lawful or even glorifying them; characterizing religion in general as ridiculous, superstitious, etc., treating not only of obscene and dangerous subjects, but also offending decency in the manner of representation.

If, therefore, the dramas in question are _Religioni notabiliter contraria_, or if the subject-matter or the manner of representing it are _nimis turpia_, attendance is certainly a grave sin. For what may not be seen, or heard, or read, _extra theatrum_, without great sin, cannot be, as the Angelic Master expresses himself, _ratione theatri leviora_.[861]

If they are _notabiliter_, but not _nimis turpia_, they may be _occasio relativa_, and frequenting them out of curiosity or for amusement (if there is no danger of consenting _in turpem delectationem_) may be free from grave sin. But this danger will, in the case of young people, be absent only when they have very tender consciences, conduct themselves very prudently, and when, after being repeatedly present at such performances, they are able to say that they have not committed mortal sin.[862] Performances, however, which are _non notabiliter turpia_, may be an _occasio proxima_ for those who know by experience their own weakness, the more so as nowadays doubtful attractions are introduced even into otherwise good or harmless plays.

The so-called _choreæ scenicæ_ (ballet), _quæ inter actus miscentur, utpote in quibus ob vestitum saltatricum, obscænos saltandi modos aut lascivas gesticulationes, maxima apparere solet turpitudo_, will probably be for many theatergoers an _occasio proximo_.

When, therefore, one goes to a theater without exercising any discrimination as to the choice of the play or the manner of its performance, he exposes himself to a probable danger of sin, _ex communiter contingentibus fit prudens præsumptio_. Some, however, maintain that they attend chiefly to the music, not to the plot and its representation; this, of course, would materially reduce the danger, but not wholly remove it.

Frequenting the theater may also become sinful on account of the _sinful intention_ connected with it, and by the scandal thereby given. Besides the actors and actresses in a bad play, those also give scandal who coöperate _in spectacula notabiliter turpia aut Religioni graviter adversa_, positively, by money or applause, and, negatively, by not preventing them when _ex officio_ they were bound to do so, or at least could have prevented them by some other means; for example, by refusing to coöperate, etc.[863] Moreover, parents and other superiors give scandal who do not effectually prevent their children and those under their care from being present at improper representations, or when they give permission to go there, without having previously ascertained the character of the play. Finally, those give scandal who encourage others (especially young people) by their example to attend theaters, also clerics and religious who, contrary to ecclesiastical regulations, are present at secular performances.[864]

If, therefore, by going to the theater, a person exposes himself to only _slight danger_, and only gives _slight scandal_, he is free from grave sin if he takes the necessary precautions.

But if he suffers great danger, or gives great scandal, only a _causa gravis_ would excuse him from grave sin if he takes the necessary precautions, and tries to the best of his power to make good the scandal. Such _causa gravis_ would be, for instance, a well-founded fear of great detriment, continued irritation of parents, of husband or wife, etc.; the loss of the subscription fee would not be a _causa sufficiens_. But even when there is a _causa_, and, in spite of precautions, faith is endangered, or if the person often succumbs to temptation, he is absolutely bound to avoid the occasion. Hence no _causa_ will excuse frequentation of a very immoral or godless performance, because it will not be possible to avoid the formal danger which accompanies it.

In cases where it is necessary, the penitent must be strictly bound to avoid the theater or certain plays; even where this obligation is not strictly binding, he must still be persuaded to avoid the theater, and if this is not possible or opportune, the priest must at least instruct the penitent cautiously to conduct himself.

The actors in immoral and godless plays cannot, of course, be admitted to the Sacraments till they have either given up their profession, or no longer take part in such performances, for they are _peccatores publici, publicum scandalum præbentes_.[865]

IV. _Bad reading._

The reading of bad books is a source of great danger, and this occasion of sin is very common, unceasingly estranging countless numbers from faith and robbing them of innocence.

We must distinguish between: (1) books which, _ex professo_, are written against religion and faith (defending the errors of heretics and infidels) and those which are not, _ex professo_, directed against it (only here and there attacking religion); (2) books which, _ex professo_, are obscene (which, if not wholly, yet to a great extent, treat of obscene things) and such as are _subobscæni_ (in which a good deal of obscenity is to be found).

Books _ex professo impii_ are very dangerous and pernicious.

Few persons who are not learned and pious theologians can read them without injury to their faith. Hence the Church (in the second rule of the Index) has strictly prohibited the reading of such books, and if they _hæresim propugnant_, reading them consciously entails censure of excommunication reserved to the Pope.[866] Books which are hostile to religion, but not so _ex professo_, are also a source of danger, and, therefore, reading them is permitted to no one without necessity. The degree of the danger depends upon the object which the reader has in view, upon his age, his religious sentiments, and knowledge.

Books _ex professo_ obscene are certainly dangerous, for they excite violent temptations, and they are still worse when, as is often the case, they are illustrated with obscene pictures. Reading such is strictly forbidden by the seventh rule of the Index.

The _libri erotici_ (_de amoribus agentes_), for instance many comedies, tragedies, dramas, novels, and romances, are sources of relative danger; the reading of them is, in many respects, injurious, especially to young people.

_Bad newspapers and periodicals_ must be classified in the same way as books, and what has been said above concerning the reading of bad books holds good as to newspapers and periodicals. If they are written _ex professo_ against faith and morals, they are even more dangerous than such books.

Accordingly, the confessor is bound: (1) when there is ground for suspicion that the penitent has sinned by such reading and has been silent about it, to ask him on the matter; omitting to do so would be very injurious to the penitent, as it would be leaving him in great danger, and if he had purposely concealed it, he would have confessed sacrilegiously.

The confessor is bound (2) to admonish penitents who have read bad books, etc., to refrain entirely from such reading, to buy no more books, etc., of the kind, not to borrow them, nor in future to have them in their possession. He must especially instruct parents and superiors on this head, and incite them to watchfulness. He is bound (3) to refuse absolution to those who will not refrain from such reading.[867] (4) To prescribe for the penitent who reads infidel writings _ex necessitate_ suitable safeguards in order that the poison may not injure him, such remedies as reading good books and newspapers, praying for the preservation of faith, frequent reception of the Sacraments, etc. (5) To do his best to keep young people from novel reading.[868]

The confessor must, to the best of his ability, endeavor to prevent the reading of so-called “liberal” books, newspapers, and periodicals, which are, indeed, bad, though not, _ex professo_, godless or obscene; especially (_a_) when the penitent is conscious of his duty to refrain from such reading, or is in doubt about it; (_b_) when, although not aware of this duty, good results are to be expected from exhortation; and (_c_) when the confessor perceives that such reading is beginning to harm the penitent. On the other hand, the confessor must be silent concerning the duty of avoiding such reading (_a_) when the penitent is _invincibiliter_ ignorant of this duty; (_b_) when the confessor could not hope that his admonition would be acted upon, or when, on the contrary, he would have to fear still greater evils; but he must then inspire his penitent with distrust of these newspapers, etc., and endeavor by exhortation and request to wean him from such dangerous reading.[869] A man of business might be permitted to keep and to read bad newspapers on account of the advertisements, when such advertisements are not to be found (or not so fully) in a good paper, but he must be admonished to subscribe for this end only, and not to leave the newspaper about for others, especially children, to read. It is not allowed to inn-keepers to have bad newspapers in their establishments in order to attract customers by such reading, for that would be an _actio ex se ordinata ad malum_. Under the heading of “bad newspapers” are not included those producing here and there incorrect judgments upon religion.[870]

V. _Intimacies_ (_procationes_).[871]

1. If this intimacy is begun with a view to matrimony it is not, _de se_, forbidden, for none is bound to marry a person who is unknown to him; he may, during a certain time, study the character and morals of the person by means of lawful intimacy.[872]

But such intimacies, _in praxi_, very easily become an _occasio proxima_ of grave sin amongst young people and those who have not much conscience, especially when greater familiarity and freedom of intercourse sets in, and the time of marriage approaches.[873] That an intimacy may not degenerate into an _occasio proxima_, or, having become such, may cease to be so, the following rules must be observed: Only such as wish, and are able, to contract marriage within a reasonable time (_tempus rationabile_) should be allowed this kind of intimacy. They must, therefore, be of proper age, so that the intimacy may not be too much prolonged; there must be no impediment in the way of their marriage, that is, they must possess the necessary liberty, being free from bondage of any kind; the parents must not (from just motives) be opposed to their child’s marriage, or to marriage with the particular person in question. Moreover, there must be a firm intention of marrying. This intention may be presumed to be wanting in the case of a rich young man who enters into such relationship with a poor girl, or one who, at the very outset of the acquaintance, induces her to sin, or neglects the necessary precautions, or who, at the expiration of a suitable time, shows no disposition whatever to contract marriage, etc. How long such intimacy may last (_rationabile tempus_) cannot be determined by hard and fast rules applicable to all cases; it must be left to the intelligent discretion of the persons in question; half a year, or a whole year, may generally be regarded as not too long. Let the confessor, therefore, take care that the intimacy is not prolonged for years with danger of sin, and if it has already lasted too long, let him provide that it should either be broken off, or interrupted for a time, or that marriage should take place as soon as possible.

2. In order that the intimacy may proceed honorably, the persons must adopt suitable measures of precaution. Those therefore, between whom such intimacy exists, _must not live in the same house_; they must, as soon as possible, obtain the consent of the parents or their representatives, for if they frequently meet without the knowledge, or against the will of their parents, they will do it secretly, and in this lies a great danger. If the parents are opposed to the marriage without just reason, the confessor must suggest some other means for their honorable intercourse. They must not associate solus cum sola, especially secretly in retired places at night time—“_id quippe, si non fortuito sed consulto fiat, nonnisi ex fine libidinis aut cum summo periculo libidinis fiet_,” remarks Aertnys,[874] and Ballerini[875] says: “Those especially who have care of the persons in question must pay attention to this. Parents, and particularly mothers, must be very earnestly appealed to, and their strict duty of watchfulness and care most forcibly insisted upon. And in this they must be influenced not only by conscience, but by the fear that the daughters ‘_semel corruptæ in paterna domo dehonestatæ consenescant_.’” Moreover, their visits must not be too frequent nor too long; and if they should be alone, they must not offend against the rules of morality, but conduct themselves honorably in every respect; and, lastly, they must procure for themselves the necessary graces in this dangerous time by prayer and the reception of the Sacraments.[876]

3. Still greater prudence is necessary after engagement, as the danger of sin becomes greater, _cum sponsus respiciat sponsam tanquam suam, magna familiaritas sit quasi inevitabilis, imaginatio copulæ conjugalis brevi secuturæ libidinem commoveat et timor prægnationis evanescat_, etc.[877] Therefore, let the confessor, to the best of his ability, bring about that the time of betrothal may not be deferred too long.[878]