Confessarius

CONFESSARIUS. - He is the priest who administers the sacrament of Penance. His figure emerges clearly from the nature of Penance and from the place it occupies in the general plan of salvation.

It is well known that Confession is a sacrament administered in the form of an absolutory sentence upon the repentant sinner and tends, as an instrument of divine mercy, to make it possible even for the sinner to attain sanctifying Grace and heavenly beatitude.

The fact that it is a Sacrament imposes on the c. all the requirements for the valid and licit administration of the Sacraments (intention of doing what Christ instituted or at least what the Church does; state of grace, etc.).

The fact that Penance is exercised in the form of a judgment immediately entails that the c. be provided with jurisdiction. As for the relationship in which it stands to the priestly character and, above all, as to how it is acquired, v. PENITENZA. Here it suffices to have mentioned its necessity in order to dwell on what are the tasks of the c.

The judicial form of Penance further entails that the c. assure himself at least morally — always with a view to salvation — of the possibility, the opportuneness and the necessity of granting or denying absolution. In practice this judgment revolves around three points: a) ascertaining whether the penitent has sinned and to what extent; b) determining whether he is repentant for the sins committed and whether he has a true purpose of not falling back into them; c) seeing whether to give, deny or defer absolution for a while.

The c.'s is not an abstract judgment, but a concrete one. It is not enough, in fact, that abstractly a given act be gravely injurious to the norm of conduct to conclude that all those who perform it are stained with grave guilt. For this to exist, full awareness and free consent are required in the subject: two things that can sometimes be lacking or vary widely from subject to subject and from case to case.

In judging the penitent's sorrow — and consequently his purpose — one must attend to the present will more than to the foresight of the future: a purpose can be real even if it is foreseen that, due to the weakness of the one proposing it, it will not be fully translated into practice, at least not immediately.

In the judgment concerning absolution, especially as regards the opportuneness of deferring it, the c. must let himself be guided only by the spiritual good of the penitent, attending to his dispositions (cf. CIC, can. 886). Any other consideration would clash with the general destination of the Sacraments — and of Penance in particular — to the advantage of men.

This openness to the final objective of the greatest spiritual good of the penitent and to his salvation introduces the second aspect of the c.'s work: that which, by analogy with what the professional who cares for the health of the body does, is called the task of "physician" (cf. CIC, can. 888 § 1). Confession is not an end in itself; it is only a means for the attainment of the divine life in us and of its blessed fulfillment in heaven. It therefore aims not only at erasing the sins committed; it also aims at preventing new ones from being committed.

In order for this to be truly so, the c. will take care to identify the roots of the evil and to suggest the remedies. In this last regard it is necessary that he stay far from two equally harmful extremes: an extreme naturalism and an abstract supernaturalism. Human activity unfolds according to determinate laws (think, for example, of the law that ideas tend toward acts and tend toward them all the more strongly the more concrete they are, of the law according to which acts tend to arouse the corresponding ideas, of the law that governs the formation of habits, etc.). The wise educator — and first of all the c. in the guise of "physician" — must not forget this if he does not wish to expose himself to failure or to ask God for miracles. On the other hand, however, one must not forget that with natural forces alone it is not possible to observe even the law of nature for long. These observations must be kept in mind especially in setting up what is called "penance" and "satisfaction." A penance that is the same for everyone makes no sense, just as a medicine that is the same for everyone makes no sense. For the same reason a generic penance makes no sense. In indicating or imposing it, the c.-physician must take into account the situation of the penitent as it emerges from the Confession.

In this way the answer takes shape to certain questions on which casuistry dwells at length: what must the c. say? On what may he be silent, and on what must he speak? He cannot, evidently, be silent on all that whose omission, even involuntary, would close to the penitent the way of salvation (for example, the minimum of truths to be believed) or would harm others whether considered individually or collectively (for example, the restitution of ill-gotten goods or the reparation of damages unjustly caused). In the first case one would go against the destination of Confession to the advantage of the penitent; in the second case one would violate others' right not to be unjustly harmed. The c. may instead be silent when his words would have no other effect than to transform material sins into formal sins, that is, into true and proper guilt — acts which, for lack of awareness or of free consent, fall outside the field of morality.

To correspond completely to his function, the c. must be provided with great learning, great knowledge of the penitent, great experience, great love of Christ and of souls.

First of all, great learning. The c. must know what each individual man must do in each individual case. He could not in fact judge in what the penitent has failed if he did not know what he was supposed to do and has not done; nor could he surely guide him to his end if he did not have clearly in mind what it consists in. And all this not in the abstract, but in the concrete.

His knowledge therefore entails: a) a profound knowledge of natural law, that is, of what reason derives with the forces and means at its disposal; b) of revealed law, that is, of what Christian Revelation has added to the natural norm of conduct; c) of general and particular ecclesiastical law, and the most common norms of civil law, that is, of what the legislator has added to clarify and determine the natural and revealed norm. It is not enough, for example, that he know what reason says about the attitude to be held with regard to God; it will also be necessary to know what God Himself has positively established and the determinations that the authority of the Church has added thereto (precepts of the Church, CIC, synods, etc.).

To this must be added a great knowledge of the penitent. How could he in fact judge in what the penitent has fallen short of the norm of conduct if he did not also know what he has done? How could he give a judgment founded on the moral responsibility of the penitent without knowing the motives that generate his actions? How could he indicate with certainty the path to choose if he does not know his condition, his tendencies, his habits, the environments he frequents and the persons with whom he lives?

To this profound knowledge of the penitent the Confession that he spontaneously makes undoubtedly contributes much. But it will not always be sufficient. Hence appears the necessity that the c. question the penitent. In doing this, however, he must remain within the scope of the ends of Confession. Indeed, even within that scope, he must carefully avoid everything that could make Confession more burdensome than necessary or in any way give the impression of curiosity or morbidity. The CIC expressly recalls the prohibition against asking the name of the accomplice (can. 888§2). One must be able to glimpse what hides behind a timid or discreet hint, to catch on the wing the content of a delicate or suffering accusation. Such dignified discretion «is imposed especially in sexual matters, particularly with regard to women and children. An old axiom says that «in materia luxuriae multo melius est in pluribus deficere ratione integritatis Confessionis, quam in uno superabundare». Worthy of being recalled here, alongside the prescriptions of the CIC, can. 888§2, is the circular of the Holy Office of 16 May 1943 «de agendi ratione confessariorum circa VI decologi praeceptum», where precise and detailed norms are given. The sense of nuances is here the infallible sign of open and experienced minds.

The right fusion between the theoretical preparation of the confessor and its exact application to the life of those who have recourse to him will be ensured, or at least favored, by experience. He will see more each day how difficult it is sometimes to judge the concrete moral value of an action. He will realize more and more how complicated life is and how arduous it is sometimes to indicate to a person the goal to pursue and the best way to reach it. Above all, prolonged contact with life will teach the confessor how great human weakness is, especially in certain fields, and how difficult it is to remain faithful at every moment to one's ideal of life.

He will not then be surprised that different opinions and sometimes contrasting ways of resolving the same «cases» emerge. As one moves away from the solar clarity of the supreme principles written in the heart of every man, the divergence of opinions grows and the series of opinions lengthens. In this regard the confessor will cultivate a great modesty. His concern must not be to impose his own way of seeing on everyone and always, but to seek the best way to free the penitent from his state of guilt and lead him to salvation. It is natural that he tend to give preference to his own opinion, but he must always be ready to sacrifice it when this appears necessary for the good of the penitent. In any case he must remember that the penitent has the right to follow the opinion he prefers provided it is truly (at least extrinsically) probable (cf. C. Cruysberghs, De conscientia, 5th ed., Malines 1928, pp. 101-102).

The same thing must be said of the different schools of spirituality. The confessor must not tend to align all penitents with his ideal of spiritual life, but must seek in all things the greatest good of the souls who have recourse to him.

The experience, moreover, of the great difficulty connected with the search for and practice of the moral life will teach the confessor an immense goodness toward «sinners». Usually he does not have before him obstinate rebels or degenerate perverts, diabolically devoted to evil and closed to the light. Usually he has before him victims of inexperience or of concupiscence. Above all he has before him souls who are «contrite» (that is, broken) or at least repentant. He must therefore have an immense understanding, an infinite patience and a boundless goodness. He will be patient in welcoming, patient in listening, patient in counseling, patient in dismissing. He will be good in reproving, understanding in correcting. He must constantly inspire himself with the example of Christ and with his conduct toward the Samaritan woman, Mary Magdalene, the adulteress, Judas, St. Peter, the Apostles. According to the happy expression of Leo XII, «indutus viscera misericordiae Christi Iesu... sciat studiose, patienter et mansuete cum (peccatori) agere» (bull Charitate Cristi). There will be no lack of cases in which he must be strong in reproving and severe in demanding. But he will always be one «qui condolere possit iis qui ignorant et errant» (Hebr. 5, 2). Traditional doctrine summarizes all this by saying that the confessor, besides being judge and physician, must also be «father».

It is not difficult to see, at this point, how Penance is the Sacrament that requires the greatest participation from the minister. In the others it is enough to apply a certain «matter» to a determined «form», that is, to pronounce determined words while performing determined rites, having the intention of doing what the Church does. It does not matter much whether the minister is intelligent or mediocre, learned or ignorant, prudent or not. The result for the purposes of salvation is the same. In Penance, on the other hand, the healing action also depends on the activity of the priest. Moreover, in the confessor a participation in the sentiments and attitude of Christ is required far greater than in the other Sacraments.

For all the reasons mentioned, it is necessary that the confessor have a particular maturity, to which greatly contribute, besides natural balance and grace, age and experience of souls. As for age, certain recent dispositions tending to raise the minimum age required to hear confessions, especially of certain groups of persons, fall within this order of ideas. For the same reasons the exercise of individual confessions requires a certain time. Once the confession is concluded, the duties of the confessor do not end. On the contrary, precisely from then on begins one of the most serious obligations: that of the sacramental seal (v.).

For the confessor of the Pontifical Family, v. FAMIGLIA PONTIFICIA.

General works: P. Segneri, Il c. istruito, Venice 1761; the work of St. Alphonsus, Pratica del c. per esercitare il suo ministero, ed. G. M. Blanc, Rome 1912 (Latin version), ed. I. Pistoni, Modena 1948, is classic. Cf. also: F. Chassière, Ego te absolvo..., trans. by C. Cammada, Milan 1914; E. Gombart, s. v. in DDC, IV, coll. 14-46; A. Grazioli, La pratica dei c., Colle Don Bosco 1946.

Concerning the manner of acting of the confessor with certain categories of persons, cf. the individual entries (FANCIULLI; OCCASIONARI; SCRUPOLOSI; etc.).

On the instruction of the Holy Office, cf. I. Pistoni, De agendi ratione confessariorum circa sextum decalogi praecceptum, 3rd ed., Modena 1948. G. Battista Guzzetti