Part 2 — CHAPTER III CONFESSION (continued 3)

The practice of many confessors is to be deprecated, who, after hearing one or two confessions of a penitent, urge him to make a general confession, moved by imprudent zeal or in order to obtain better knowledge for the guidance of the penitent. Equally reprehensible is the conduct of many priests who give way to their penitents, allowing them to make often a general confession, or, at least, whenever they choose a new confessor. Such general confessions are quite useless and are a mere waste of time.⁠[368]

31. The Manner of Hearing General Confession.

As to the method of hearing general confessions, the following rules, the outcome of the long experience of learned confessors, should be observed:—

1. In order to be fit for this office a confessor should be well instructed and already experienced in hearing confessions; he must have great patience and zeal for souls, and during the whole course of the confession be very sympathetic and encouraging towards the penitent.

2. If a penitent expresses his desire to make a general confession, the priest should first inquire whether it be necessary or useful. In order to discover this it is not recommended to ask the penitent bluntly if he has ever concealed a sin in his former confessions, or any question of the kind, for it is quite possible that the penitent, though guilty of the sin, may in his bewilderment deny it and never again dare to confess it; it is much better if the confessor ask the penitent why he wishes to make a general confession, whether he feels uneasy, etc. By such questions or the like he may try to discover if there have been sacrilegious confessions. He will often receive one or other of the following answers: (a) “Because I have kept sins back;” he will then encourage his penitent, showing himself very kind towards him and urging him to be perfectly sincere. (b) “I have never yet made a general confession;” he may then find out if it be necessary or only useful. (c) “I have made a general confession before, but it was not a good one.” He may then ask why the last general confession was not a good one; if the penitent can give no other reason, except his own fears, there is a fair presumption that he has to deal with an overanxious or scrupulous penitent. (d) “I heard in a sermon that my confessions were bad;” here again the reason must be asked. (e) The following reason may also be given especially during a mission: “I want to begin a better life;” in such a case the general confession will be at least very useful.

3. If the general confession is necessary in consequence of former confessions having been sacrilegious or invalid, it must be made with great accuracy and the number and species must be given, so far as possible, just as though the sins had never been confessed before. It may easily happen, however, that the confessor, though convinced of the necessity of a general confession, cannot at once hear it for want of time or on account of the great number of penitents kept waiting; while the penitent frequently cannot return again and is quite uninstructed or of weak intellect, or is really anxious to receive absolution or must receive it in order to fulfill the obligation of going to communion. In such a case, and especially when the penitent discloses at once to his confessor that his previous confessions have been bad by reason of not giving the number of the sins, and when the confessor can, from the account of sins committed in the past year, form a fair estimate of the past life of the sinner, St. Alphonsus recommends that absolution should be given without any repetition of previous confessions. He assumes that the confessor is able to form a gross estimate as to the whole life from what he hears concerning one year, and that he further inquires whether the penitent, besides his ordinary sins, is conscious of any special ones in the course of his life. The detailed general confession may be put off to some more opportune occasion which can be arranged at once with the penitent. The holy Doctor adds another instance to those just mentioned—when the confessor after hearing the confession discovers that the penitent has failed in former confessions to give the number of his sins and when, at the same time, he has a distincta notitia of the sins and can form upon them a distinctum judicium on the past career of the penitent; if, however, he have only a notitia confusa of the sins confessed, he is obliged to form a notitia distincta of the former mortal sins imperfectly confessed. With only a notitia confusa of the penitent’s previous condition he may not give absolution, for the penitent is obliged to confess each single sin once, and the confessor is obliged to pronounce once a distinct judgment on the sins.⁠[369] In the case, however, where the general confession is not of necessity, these precautions in putting questions need not be adopted; if the concourse of penitents is very large, and if, as frequently occurs, in missions or on similar occasions the general confession cannot be put off to a more convenient time, the confessor may at least make a summary examination, asking only for the species of the sins and the time of duration of the habits of sin without laying stress on the exact number and circumstances of each particular sin. The priest must, of course, give the penitent sufficient time to unburden his conscience and to say all he wants to accuse himself of, even though such accusation be not necessary in this voluntary general confession, so that the penitent may leave the confessional with his mind quite at ease; thus he may ask him in general: “Do you accuse yourself of all sinful thoughts, words, etc.?” On this account it is recommended to impress upon the penitent that in a voluntary general confession he is not bound to accuse himself of each particular sin; indeed this instruction is very useful, for a penitent may, in the course of his confession, incur sacrilege through false shame and an erroneous conscience by keeping back a sin which he imagines he is obliged to tell in general confession. It is an invariable rule to avoid too great haste or abruptness, otherwise the penitent is not put at his ease; hence it not infrequently happens that a penitent accuses himself of not having said all he wanted to say because the priest had been too quick.

“The greatest difficulty in general confessions,” says Blessed Leonard of Port Maurice, “is the accusation of the number of sins.” To meet this the following rules will be of service:—

(a) If the confessor can get at the precise number of sins, he is obliged to do so.

(b) If the penitent cannot give the exact number, he must be asked to give about the number, as near as possible. For this purpose the priest will suggest numbers, and if the penitent choose the largest number, a still larger one may be suggested to see if the penitent will accuse himself also of that.

(c) In the case of frequently recurring sins or habits of sin it is necessary to find out whether they have been of daily, weekly, or monthly occurrence. As to which of these periods will apply to the penitent depends on his state as learnt from his last confession, and on the nature of the sin itself. In mentioning the period the confessor should always add a number, e.g. how often each week, three, four, or five times? and as we said under (b), the whole time during which the sin or habit of sin lasted must be found out. Finally it is useful in order to ascertain the state of the penitent’s soul to find out whether there has at any time been improvement and how long it lasted.

(d) It is the sententia communis and the teaching of St. Alphonsus that by one and the same internal and external act a number of sins may be committed, when, for instance, the object aimed at in the sin includes several ends. A man, for instance, spreads a calumny about a community,—by so doing he incurs as many sins as there are persons in the community; this occurs usually in cases of enmity, scandal, etc. When, therefore, there is a diversitas objectorum totalium, questions must be put concerning the number of these objects.

(e) In putting questions as to the number and species of the sin, care must be taken not to bewilder the penitent with questions; if two or three questions do not effect the desired result, no more need be put; for St. Alphonsus teaches: The priest, who, after two or three questions, fails to obtain any definite result, need not worry even if he cannot come to any clear decision, nam ex conscientiis implicatis et confusis moraliter impossibile est majorem claritatem sperare.⁠[370]

In conclusion, St. Leonard⁠[371] remarks: If the confessor cannot get at the exact or probable number, or even the more frequent repetitions, it is in my opinion sufficient to find out the evil habit and the time of its duration. By this means the confessor, so far as is possible, will gain an idea of the state of his penitent and be able to form a judgment about him. The greater or less frequency of repetition must not, however, involve other consequences, as in the case of stealing. Here great care must be used to find out the number of the sins and, in particular, the value of the sum stolen.

4. If the general confession is a voluntary one and the penitent unprepared, it is not advisable to receive it, but to give the penitent some days to prepare by examining his conscience, making acts of contrition, and praying with more than usual fervor,—a method which will insure greater fruit in the general confession. At the same time the confessor might show the penitent that a general confession is not such a difficult matter once it is undertaken courageously. If, however, the penitent will be prevented from returning to the priest to whom he wishes to make his general confession, the confession may be made at once. If the general confession is one of necessity, there is all the more reason for a good preparation. If, however, as frequently happens, there is reason to fear that the penitent will not return, the confessor should not send him away to make his preparation, but receive the confession at once.

As to the preparation required on the part of the penitent, especially with regard to the examination of conscience, the confessor will be careful not to exact a written accusation; such a process, as a rule, only causes confusion and adds to the burdens of the confessor. If the penitent is afraid of not being able to retain in his memory the results of his examination of conscience, he may confine himself to a quiet examination according to his powers, and the confessor will help him. It may be permitted to the penitent to make notes of the more necessary points. If the confession is voluntary, the confessor may take the notes and read them for himself; if it be a general confession of necessity, the penitent himself should read them.

5. It is not per se required that a penitent declare first the sins committed since the last confession before repeating his former confessions, nor is he obliged to make a distinction between the sins committed since the last confession and those told in former confessions, since the sin is the same whether confessed or not, and it makes no difference that the former sins have been remitted because the sin is not the object of confession in so far as it is habitual or leaves enduring stain, but in so far as it has been actually committed.⁠[372] Still it is recommended to make the general confession precede the particular confession of the sins committed since the last time, in order that the priest may better ascertain the state of his penitent and assure himself that there is no obstacle to his giving absolution.

6. If the penitent is a well-instructed person and prepared, and is really desirous of confessing, the priest may allow him first to make his confession, and then he can put any questions that may be necessary, for many persons feel the need to reveal what is on their mind and have no peace until they do it. If, however, the penitent is persuaded that confession consists in the priest putting questions and the penitent answering, or if he wishes to make his confession in this manner, the confessor may adopt this mode. With ignorant penitents it is recommended and is indeed preferable. The confessor must then give the penitent time and opportunity to mention anything that disturbs his peace of mind.

7. If the confessor receives a general confession by way of question and answer, he must adopt some method, going through the Ten Commandments, the Commandments of the Church, the Seven Capital Sins, and the duties of the state of life.

For the sake of greater clearness and to avoid repetitions he might indeed bring all sins under the Ten Commandments, those even which are against the Commandments of the Church, the Seven Capital Sins, and other varieties of sins, for the Decalogue, as the Roman Catechism teaches, is the sum of all the Commandments.

It is not, however, recommended to divide the confession into parts answering to the different periods of one’s life, for such a practice protracts the confession and involves many burdensome repetitions; still in the case of the sixth Commandment it has its advantages, and questions might be put as to sins committed before marriage, during the married state, and after the death of the other party. Finally penitents who can be questioned as to the actus consummati should be asked according to the different species of the act as well as on the actus imperfecti, internal and external, with regard to the species.

8. The priest should not omit to exhort the penitent to acknowledge honestly his sins, and not to conceal from false shame anything which he is obliged to tell.⁠[373] The confessor should never give any sign of astonishment or anger, no matter how numerous or atrocious the sins may be. Let him show rather that he would not be surprised at hearing even worse sins; let him come to the help of the penitent and even praise him for having succeeded in confessing some one or other of the more difficult sins. He may congratulate the penitent on winning a victory over himself and the devil, and encourage him again to complete candor and to make the confession as perfect as though it were to be the last of his life.

32. Plan for making a General Confession.

In this paragraph we present a plan of questions suitable for a general confession and offer it especially for the guidance of younger confessors. A few preliminary remarks, however, are necessary to secure clearness.

This plan need not contain all the sins which are treated of in moral theology, but only such as may or do actually occur. Nevertheless, if a confessor adhere to this schedule in his questions he may be quite satisfied as to the integrity of the confession.

Such a schedule should be as short as possible so that the confessor may easily retain it in his head; hence the subdivisions, which he should know from his moral theology, may be omitted.

Since in a general confession venial sins ought not to be lost sight of on account of their close connection with mortal sins and because they are of great moment in determining the state of the penitent’s soul, some of the more serious venial sins will find a place in the catalogue. The confessor should know, in addition, how a sin in itself and objectively venial may become mortal per accidens, and, on the other hand, how a sin grave ex genere suo may per accidens become venial.⁠[374]

Moreover, the priest should be careful not to examine all penitents on every sin; a single question to which a negative answer is given will show that a whole series of other questions may be omitted, and thus he will only inquire after those sins which are likely to have been committed. In putting his questions he should pay due regard both to the physical and the spiritual condition of the penitent. From sins already confessed an indication may easily be drawn as to the further inquiries to be made, and while he omits many questions in the catalogue he may deem it advisable to add others. If he discovers in the penitent a habit of sin, he must inquire how long it lasted, when it began, and when it was broken off.

In all his questions he will observe the rules which hold on this subject in every confession;⁠[375] in particular he should bear in mind the words of St. Leonard of Port Maurice: “Treat your penitent,” he says, “as you would like to be treated yourself if you were in the same painful situation; receive him in a friendly manner and with affectionate kindness; encourage him to have confidence in you and to open his heart to you. Refrain from harsh and blunt forms of address which serve rather to irritate and embitter the penitent than to make him docile, obedient, and pliant; and even when he is gross and ignorant, rebellious to all advice and unwilling to fulfill his duties, do not, on that account, treat him harshly or frighten him by a display of overbearing rigor. Remember that in the confessional you must be a martyr of patience, seeking always to win the penitent by the gentleness of your manners, and that your duty is to incline rather to mildness than strictness. If your words are to have the power of gentle persuasiveness, you must deal with him in the spirit of our holy faith, and he will become humble and convinced of the truth of your words.”⁠[376]

If the penitent is not already well known to the confessor, the latter must by a few questions at the beginning of the confession inform himself as to the age, position, calling, and other circumstances of his penitent since such knowledge is necessary for the choice and arrangement of the questions to be put.

If in the course of the confession some question must be asked on some rarely occurring and horrible sin, it should be pleaded by way of excuse that a special advantage of a general confession is to secure a thorough examination of conscience; and that this explains the unusual questions.

If during the confession the discovery is made that the penitent lies under some special obligation to avoid occasions of sin, to make restitution or some such burden, he should be told of it and disposed for it at once without waiting for the end of the confession for fear of forgetting it or of giving a wrong judgment. All other directions, however, in the way of advice or instruction should only be given at the end for fear of annoying and repelling the penitent, and also in order to avoid prolixity and repetition. If on general principles the absolution ought to be put off and the penitent fails to show necessary dispositions by signs of extraordinary sorrow and penitence, the confession should be interrupted and not resumed till a decided improvement is seen. If the penitent is judged to be in good dispositions, the confession may go on after the promise of performing the necessary obligations has been exacted, and the penitent should be reminded that if he is not sincerely determined to stand by his promises, his trouble is all in vain and his confession invalid, and that he is putting a seal on his condemnation by a new offense against God. In longer confessions it is a good practice even during the accusation (especially if some particularly grave sin be mentioned) to remind the penitent of the greatness of his crimes, of God’s goodness and grace by which he has been freed from all these great sins, and then to encourage him to make a thoroughly good confession. The penitent should also be reminded of all his bad confessions and communions, of his neglect of his Easter duties, etc.

If it be observed that the penitent is unusually disturbed, the cause of it should be found out; if it be the avowal of some one sin, the confessor should seek to obtain some hint about it and then push the questions so that the penitent has only to answer yes or no; thus a penitent may be consoled who is troubled because he has not sufficiently examined himself, or cannot express his meaning correctly or has forgotten what he wished to say. If no definite cause can be assigned, the confessor should encourage him in a general way, telling him that the confession is made to God, reminding him of the sacredness of the seal, recalling to him that the priest is also but a man, subject to faults and weaknesses; impressing upon him that the priest is ordained in order to sympathize with others, to help them by his kindness and patience, etc. Furthermore the way of beginning a general confession depends on the circumstances of the penitent, and these must be inquired into at once.⁠[377]

Having laid down these principles we enter into details:—

I. Preliminary Questions.

1. The penitent should be asked his age, his condition of life, and his calling.

2. Then he may be asked if his previous confessions have been valid (the uninstructed should be assisted to form a correct judgment in the matter), whether he has ever intentionally concealed a grave sin or a notable circumstance in confession—given intentionally the wrong number of his sins—examined his conscience carefully—tried to be really contrite at least for all graver sins. Then he may be asked if he has always faithfully performed the penance imposed. If the confessor discovers any sacrilegious confessions, he must at once ascertain their number as closely as possible, asking when the first bad confession was made, how long the habit lasted, whether any of them were set right, how often the penitent in this condition was accustomed to confess or communicate, whether the Easter duties were neglected by reason of such confessions and communions, whether in making such confessions and communions the penitent was conscious of committing sacrilege; whether during that period other Sacraments were received such as Confirmation, Matrimony, Extreme Unction. If the penitent is persuaded that his confessions were not sacrilegious, but some grounds of suspicion remain, the confessor might on occasion of some accusation against the sixth Commandment, make inquiry if the sin has been confessed before; or he might even ask plainly, “You have never yet confessed this sin?” or, “You have never had the courage to confess this sin?”

II. Sins against the Sixth and Ninth and the Other Commandments.⁠[378]

The confessor may next, in order to learn the general state of the penitent, ask quite generally: “Were you ever led astray when young? at what age? Did you indulge in any impure habits?” If the priest discovers that the penitent is quite innocent of such sins, he should go on at once to the other Commandments. He might perhaps ask further: “Were you troubled with temptations against holy purity? Had you to listen to bad conversation? Has any one ever taken liberties with you?”

Sins of luxuria consummata may be reduced to four species, pollutio, fornicatio, sodomia, and bestialitas. These species have their actus imperfectos, external, for instance tactus, and internal, namely, delectatio morosa and desideria, and in addition may have three circumstances which change the nature of the sin, adulterium, incestus, sacrilegium. The questions may be modeled on these four species, and in the case of each sin the circumstances inquired into which affect the species of the sin. Any compendium of Moral Theology will suggest the necessary detail.⁠[379]

He may add: “Have you confessed all the sins you have committed against holy purity? Does anything else disturb your mind with regard to the sixth Commandment? Perhaps you can manage now to make a general confession and to set in order your past life.”

Against the First Commandment.

1. Against Faith. The confessor may ask whether the penitent has been troubled by doubts against faith, or really doubted of the truths of faith and suggested such doubts to others; whether he has denied any truth of faith; whether he has acted or spoken against faith and before how many persons; whether he has induced others to jeer or mock at faith; has he spoken against religion and priests? has he listened to speeches of others directed against faith and applauded or encouraged them? has he read, sold, given or recommended to others the reading of books and articles against faith? has he himself written for such publications? has he frequented the society of men who mocked at religion or were enemies of the faith? has he taken part in the religious services of non-Catholics? has he joined any society which is hostile to religion?

2. Against Hope. Has he doubted of his salvation or of God’s mercy? or of the possibility of reforming? has he presumed on God’s mercy and put off his conversion?

3. Against Charity. Has he under stress of suffering hated God? indulged feelings of indifference or resentment against God and holy things? has he murmured against God in his sufferings and crosses? has he banished God from his mind for long periods, neglected prayer?

4. Against the Reverence due to God. Has he believed in superstitious practices and employed them? has he used sacred objects without reverence or for wrong purposes? has he received any of the Sacraments (Penance, Holy Communion, Confirmation, Matrimony, Extreme Unction) unworthily? has he desecrated holy places? has he injured persons consecrated to God?

Against the Second Commandment.

Has he blasphemed? before children? Has he a habit of swearing? Has he ever sworn to what was false, or to anything of which he was doubtful? in a court of justice? to the injury of others? Has he been accustomed to use rash oaths?

Against the Third Commandment and the Commandments of the Church.

Has he by his own fault missed Mass on Sundays and holidays of obligation? has he absented himself by his own fault from a considerable portion of the services? Has his behavior during the services been irreverent and scandalous? Has he done servile work without necessity on Sundays or holidays of obligation? for how long? before others? or has he required such work from others? Has he broken the law of fasting without cause, or eaten meat on forbidden days without a dispensation? Has he neglected his Easter duties?

Against the Fourth Commandment.

Are the parents still living? Has he deliberately offended them by frequent disobedience in matters of moment (e.g. frequenting certain company against their will, staying late in public houses, by not giving up bad companions, by neglecting religious duties or important business at home)? Has he despised them in his heart? treated them with contempt or given them great trouble? used harsh and contemptuous language to them? wished them harm seriously? in the presence of others? Has he been ashamed of them? neglected them in their necessities, treated them badly, not carried out their last wishes?

Servants, etc., should be asked whether they are faithful to their master’s services: have they offended him by contempt or rudeness? damaged his reputation with his neighbors? obeyed him in things forbidden? Have they given scandal to others in the house, particularly children?

Masters, etc., should be asked whether they take due care of those under them. Have they treated them unjustly? permitted evil practices? have they kept their servants to the practice of their religious duties and given them time for it? have they given their servants bad example or led them into sin?

Parents and Superiors should be asked if they take proper care of their charges, or have squandered the family property. Do they correct and punish the children with prudence and without anger? have they ever wished evil to befall them? Do they watch over their children, keeping them from bad companions, from sinful connections? Have they instructed the children in their religious duties? have they sent their children to irreligious schools? Have they given their children bad example? Have they said or done anything sinful in presence of the children?

Married people should be asked if they live together in peace? have their quarrels given scandal to the children?

Against the Fifth Commandment.

Has the penitent let himself be carried away by anger? broken out into curses or wished grave damage to betide his neighbor? Has he rejoiced in his neighbor’s misfortunes, entertained hatred, and inflicted harm or intended to inflict it? Has he fostered enmities or refused to make satisfaction to those whom he has injured? Has he lived in enmity with others, with how many and for how long? Has he promised to make peace and kept his promise? Has he ever seriously damaged his health or attempted his life, or seriously thought of doing so? Has he been in the habit of drinking, and been quite overcome by drink? Has this been the occasion of quarrels or other sins? Is it a habit? Has he neglected his duties to his wife and children in consequence, or ill treated them and destroyed the peace of the family? (The confessor must not forget his studies on occasio and consuetudo when dealing with cases of this sort.)

It might also be well to ask if the penitent has been hard in dealing with the poor in their grave needs and refused assistance.

Against the Seventh and Tenth Commandments.

Has he entertained desires of stealing or of cheating his neighbor? Has he actually committed theft, or cheated his neighbor in doing business? Has he inflicted losses on any one? Has he paid his debts or put off for a long time the paying of them? Has he made restitution and repaired the losses inflicted? Is he at least willing to make reparation? If not, why not?

Against the Eighth Commandment.

Has he told lies to the grave injury of his neighbor? Has he ever given false witness in a court of justice? Has he ever betrayed an important secret? Has he ever injured the reputation of his neighbor by revealing his faults without sufficient reason? to how many people was this communication made? Has he ever falsely accused his neighbor of a fault? to how many people? Did he restore the good name of the injured person? and did he make good to him the losses resulting from the calumny? Has he made rash judgments in things of great moment, and has he communicated them to others?

With respect to the Seven Capital Sins the confessor may ask:—

Has the penitent behaved in a proud, overbearing manner towards others? Has he devoted himself to inordinate amassing of wealth and coveted the same? Has he omitted to give the alms which he ought? Has he helped his neighbor when he ought? Has he indulged in envy of his neighbor on account of his fortune, his wealth, his graces, his virtues, etc.? Has he rejoiced in his neighbor’s misfortune, caused it or wished it? Has he neglected his work and duties through idleness, and injured his neighbor thereby?

With regard to the nine ways of participating in the sin of another the confessor might ask: Has he boasted of his sins? which? Has he advised others to commit sin, or praised the sin of others, or commanded others to sin? Has he failed to prevent the sins of others when he could do so easily?

After the priest has put all the questions which he thinks necessary he should proceed to advise the penitent to reflect if there is anything else disturbing his conscience about which no questions have been put; and he should also remind him that this confession may be his last. He may then try to move the penitent to contrition and to a firm purpose of amendment by the consideration of some effectual motives presented in a kind and fatherly manner. He might conclude with some words to this purpose:—

“Now thank God with all your heart for the great mercy He has shown you; if death had overtaken you while you were burdened with so many grave sins, you would certainly be at the present moment in hell, but now make your mind quite easy and don’t worry any more about these sins; I am now going to absolve you in God’s name from them all and your soul will be as pure as when it came from the baptismal font; but beware of sinning again and do not return God’s mercy with ingratitude.” The confessor will then give the penitent some directions how to reform his life; he must point out one or other of his sins that should be especially combated; and if at the same time he shows an interest in the penitent and promises to pray for him, the latter will go away consoled and encouraged to begin a new life in the Lord.⁠[380]