Purpose

RESOLUTION. — Here it is to be understood as the penitent’s act, namely, the will not to sin in the future. It must therefore be neither a mere wish nor, on the other hand, need it include an actual promise or vow to avoid all sins. The resolution may be twofold: explicit and formal, if it is made by a special act distinct from contrition; implicit and virtual, if it is already included in another act in which it is necessarily required, e.g., contrition.

I. NECESSITY

For the validity of the Sacrament of Penance, at least an implicit purpose is required, and this is necessarily contained in every true and universal contrition, since true contrition consists of two distinct moments: detestation of past sins and the will to avoid them in the future. Whoever detests an act already committed in the past must necessarily have the will to avoid it in the future; otherwise, the detestation would be neither true nor certain. This is the opinion commonly held by moral theologians; it is opposed, however, by Bellarmino (De Sacramento Poenitentiae, I, II, Venice 1599, chap. 6) and Concina (Theol. dogm. mor., Rome 1749, de Sacr. poen., I, I, diss. 3, chap. 1, q. 8), who require an explicit purpose. The latter bases his argument on the fact that

the Council of Trent requires a «propositum non peccandi de coetero» (sess. XIV, chap. 4, de Poen.). This argument is false, so much so that the Council, in enumerating the explicit acts of the Sacrament of Penance on the part of the faithful, lists only contrition, confession, and satisfaction, without any mention of the necessity of an explicit purpose. Just as the acts of faith and hope are implicitly required in this Sacrament, so the same must be said of the purpose. In practice, it is almost impossible to have sincere contrition without a true and genuine purpose, since this is an essential part of it; just as it is impossible to believe in God’s mercy and justice without the act of faith, or to obtain forgiveness, together with the graces needed to avoid occasions of sin in the future, without the act of hope. Nevertheless, for the greater efficacy of the Sacrament, a universal and particular explicit purpose, according to the penitent’s needs, is preferable.

For one who repents of mortal sins for a particular reason, at least an habitual aversion to every mortal sin is required for the very validity of the Sacrament: so teaches the majority of authors, although this opinion is not shared by all moral theologians.

II. QUALITIES

The resolution must be genuine: that is, it must actually be intended to do what one promises, as the effect of the present will, which commands a particular action and forbids another, even though in the future one may fail to comply with this imperative demand: constancy, therefore, does not belong to the resolution’s actual efficacy. It is required only that at this moment one sincerely and efficaciously resolve not to sin again, since the object of the resolution is the present will, not the future event, which may not lie within our power and is subject to various circumstances that human reason can scarcely assess at present. It follows that the resolution must be carefully distinguished from the penitent’s conviction: one may have a good resolution, while at the same time fearing that, on account of past experience, one may fall again into sin because of the inconstancy and frailty of human nature. In this case, if the resolution is strengthened by trust in divine Grace, it is certainly a true and sincere resolution. In this matter the acts of the will must not be confused with those of the intellect: the resolution is an act of the will, conviction an act of the intellect.

The resolution must be efficacious; that is, the will must be required to move the intellect to employ all the necessary means, both positive and negative, to avoid sin and its proximate occasions, and to make reparation for any harm that may have resulted from sin. Whoever wills the end must also will the means of attaining II. For this quality, too, it is required that the penitent presently have the serious intention of using every means to remove sin.

Finally, the resolution must be universal, inasmuch as it must extend to the exclusion of all mortal sins. In this it differs from sorrow, which embraces only the sins committed, whereas the resolution must also extend to sins not perpetrated. Nevertheless, a particular resolution for each individual sin is not necessary; the general resolution not to sin mortally again is sufficient. With regard to venial sins, a firm and efficacious resolution is required, as for mortal sins; it need not, however, be universal. On the other hand, although the Council of Trent (sess. VI, can. 23) teaches that, without a special privilege, it is impossible to avoid all venial sins, nothing nevertheless prevents one from practically making a firm and efficacious resolution to avoid all venial sins, each and every one, including those that are only semi-deliberate.