Accomplice in Shameful Sin

ACCOMPLICE IN SHAMEFUL SIN. - He who consciously and voluntarily participates with others in the commission of a grave and external sin against the sixth precept of the Decalogue. In canon law the figure of the a. in a t. s. takes on particular importance, for the purposes of the validity and licitness of the absolution that a priest imparts to one who has joined with him - it matters not whether before or after his ordination - in a sinful act contra sextum.

Until the middle of the 18th century the absolution of the accomplice was generally considered valid and licit, notwithstanding that certain diocesan synods (for example, Liège 1662, Velletri 1698) had decreed its nullity. But Benedict XIV, with the constitution Sacramentum Poenitentiae of 1 June 1741 (followed, in 1746 and 1749, by the Apostolici muneris and the Inter praeteritas), prohibited for evident reasons the absolution of the a. in a t. s., invalidated it, withdrawing in this case the jurisdiction from the accomplice confessor, and further imposing excommunication on transgressors. This provision was retained by Pius IX in the constitution Apostolicae Sedis and is reproduced with few variations by the CIC.

According to can. 884, the absolution of the a. in a t. s., whether in regard to the sin of complicity or in regard to the other sins confessed together, is invalid whenever the penitent is not in danger of death; and even in this case it is gravely illicit on the part of the confessor unless he is constrained thereto by reasons of urgent necessity. Even if the confessor is in good faith and absolves either through ignorance, not knowing that he lacks jurisdiction, or through inadvertence, not having recognized the penitent, according to some authors he would absolve invalidly, while others hold the absolution valid in such cases, because the deprivation of jurisdiction has here the value of a penalty, and ignorance excuses from it. Finally, according to some, the absolution of the a. in a t. s. would be invalid even if the penitent accused to the accomplice confessor the sin committed together as free matter, while others more rightly hold that once the sin has been remitted the confession of the same may validly be repeated, either alone or with other sins, before the accomplice confessor, the reservation having ceased after the first absolution. In keeping with the principles set forth, can. 2367 § 1 imposes the excommunication latae sententiae reserved in a most special manner to the Apostolic See against the priest who absolves or pretends to absolve the a. in a t. s., even if this should occur "in articulo mortis". In this latter case, however, the offense ceases if one of the two following conditions is met: a) that it is not possible, without danger of scandal or infamy, to have the confession received by another priest, even one lacking jurisdiction; b) that the dying person refuses to confess to others.

The same penalty applies (can. 2367 § 2) to one who absolves or pretends to absolve the accomplice who does not confess the sin because he has been directly or indirectly induced by the same confessor not to speak of it. In this connection there should be recalled the response of 16 Nov. 1934 of the S. Congregation of the Holy Office, according to which the provision of can. 2367 § 2 is applicable also to the confessor who, whether within or outside sacramental confession, has convinced someone of the no or slight sinfulness of the turpitudinous acts that they were about to commit together, and who then, receiving his confession concerning other sins, absolves him or pretends to absolve him (AAS, 26 [1934], p. 634).

Ferruccio Liuzzi