The Sacraments
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE SACRAMENTS A DOGMATIC TREATISE BY THE RT. REV. MSGR. JOSEPH POHLE, PH.D., D.D. FORMERLY PROFESSOR OF APOLOGETICS AT THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA ADAPTED AND EDITED BY ARTHUR PREUSS VOLUME III Penance SECOND, REVISED EDITION B. HERDER BOOK CO. 17 SOUTH BROADWAY, ST. LOUIS, MO. AND AT 68 GREAT RUSSELL ST., LONDON, W. C. 1918 NIHIL OBSTAT Sti. Ludovici, die 15. Nov. 1917 F. G. Holweck, Censor Librorum IMPRIMATUR Sti. Ludovici, die 16. Nov. 1917 XJoannes J. Glennon, Archiepiscopus Sti. Ludovici Copyright, 1917 by Joseph Gummersbach All rights reserved TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PART I. THE POWER OF THE CHURCH TO FORGIVE SINS CH. I. The Catholic Church Has the Power to Forgive Sins § 1. Proof from Sacred Scripture ART. 1. The Promise ART. 2. The Grant § 2. Proof from Tradition ART. 1. Protestant Errors vs. the Teaching of the Church ART. 2. The Teaching of the Fathers ART. 3. The Penitential Discipline of the Early Church CH. II. The Church’s Power to Forgive Sins is Unlimited, Necessary, and Judicial § 1. The Church’s Power to Forgive Sins is Unlimited ART. 1. Montanism and Novatianism vs. the Teaching of the Church ART. 2. Proof from Holy Scripture and Tradition § 2. The Church’s Power to Forgive Sins is Necessary § 3. The Church’s Power to Forgive Sins is Judicial PART II. PENANCE AS A SACRAMENT CH. I. Matter and Form § 1. The Matter § 2. The Form CH. II. Sacramental Effects CH. III. The Minister CH. IV. The Recipient PART III. THE THREE ACTS OF THE PENITENT: CONTRITION, CONFESSION, AND SATISFACTION CH. I. Contrition § 1. Perfect Contrition ART. 1. Perfect Contrition Defined ART. 2. Perfect Contrition as a Means of Justification ART. 3. Perfect Contrition not a Requisite of Sacramental Absolution § 2. Imperfect Contrition, or Attrition ART. 1. Attrition Defined ART. 2. Imperfect Contrition Sufficient for the Validity of Penance ART. 3. Attritionism vs. Contritionism CH. II. Confession § 1. The Divine Institution and Necessity of Confession Proved from Sacred Scripture § 2. The Divine Institution and Necessity of Confession Proved from Tradition ART. 1. Heretical Errors vs. the Teaching of the Church ART. 2. The Argument from Prescription ART. 3. The Patristic Argument CH. III. Satisfaction § 1. Sacramental Satisfaction, or Penance for Sins Confessed § 2. The Remission of Temporal Punishments Outside the Sacrament of Penance, or the Catholic Doctrine of Indulgences ART. 1. An Indulgence Defined ART. 2. The Power of the Church to Grant Indulgences ART. 3. Indulgences for the Dead INDEX INTRODUCTION 1. PENANCE AS A VIRTUE, OR REPENTANCE.—Before the institution of the Sacrament of Penance the only means by which an adult sinner could become reconciled to God, was the virtue of penance (virtus poenitentiae), i. e. perfect contrition coupled with a firm purpose of amendment.1 Even to- day this remains the only means of justification for those who live in good faith outside the Church. a) That penance, in the sense of penitence or repentance, is a distinct virtue is not admitted by all theologians. Alexander of Hales defines penance as the sum-total of all those virtues violated by sin. Durandus classes it as a part of distributive justice. Cardinal Cajetan subordinates it to the three virtues of charity, religion, and retributive justice. We hold that penitence is a distinct virtue for the reason that it has its own formal object. This formal object lies in the fact that sin is an offense against God, expiable by contrition and satisfaction. That penitence can be called forth by other virtues does not argue that it is not an independent virtue, any more than obedience, which all admit to be a virtue, can be proved not to be one merely because it can be dictated by higher motives. As a moral virtue, penitence is rooted in the will. Contrition and the resolve to avoid sin are acts of the will. Penitence need not be accompanied by a sensible feeling of regret, because the human emotions are not entirely subject to the will. b) The material object of penance is as wide as the range of its formal object. Since the latter produces contrition and a purpose of amendment, the material object of penance comprises everything that falls within the range of these two acts of the will. The virtue of penance is directed partly to the sins of the past and partly to those of the future. In regard to the former the penitent sinner says: “I wish I had not committed them.” This is contrition. In regard to the latter he says: “I will not commit them.” This is the purpose of amendment. It is easy to see that there is a real connection between the two. They are related to each other as cause and effect. The purpose of amendment presupposes contrition for one’s past sins, whereas contrition would not only undo the sins of the past, if it could, but likewise prevent the commission of new ones in the future. A change of life demands both a terminus a quo and a terminus ad quem. The terminus a quo in the case of penitence is sin; the terminus ad quem is amendment.2 It follows that one can do penance only for one’s own sins. The angels could not do penance for the sins of men. Contrition can cover only personal sins. We may view the misdeeds of others with disfavor but we cannot feel contrition or do penance for them. For a similar reason it is impossible to do penance for original sin, which is in no wise personal.3 2. RELATION OF PENANCE AS A VIRTUE TO THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE.—The virtue of penance, far from becoming superfluous by the institution of the Sacrament of Penance, really is the very heart of that Sacrament. Christ, by adding the sacramental opus operatum, merely increased the efficacy of repentance. The Sacrament of Penance is inconceivable without the virtue of repentance. 1 Cfr. Ez. 18:30; 2 Cor. 7:9. 2 Poenitentia is derived from poenitere (poena, punire); its Greek equivalent is μετάνοια, from μετανοεῖν, i. e. to change one’s mind, to repent. 3 Cfr. Pohle-Preuss, God the Author of Nature and the Supernatural, 2nd ed., pp. 232 sqq., St. Louis 1915.—On the virtue of penance see St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 85; Palmieri, De Poenitentia, thes. 1–7, Rome 1879; De Lugo, De Poenitentiae Virtute (a very exhaustive treatise). Penance is usually defined as “a Sacrament in which the priest, in the place of God, forgives sins, when the sinner is heartily sorry for them, sincerely confesses them, and is willing to perform the satisfaction imposed on him.” This definition is based on the dogmatic teaching of the Council of Trent.4 The fact that the three acts required of the penitent, viz.: contrition, confession, and satisfaction, form essential elements of this definition, shows that the virtue of penance constitutes the essence of the Sacrament. The definition we have given furnishes an excellent basis for a division of our treatise into three parts: I. The Power of the Church to Forgive Sins; II. Penance as a Sacrament; III. The Three Acts of the Penitent: Contrition, Confession, and Satisfaction. GENERAL READINGS:—St. Thomas, Summa Theol., 3a, qu. 84–90; Supplementum, qu. 1–20, and the commentators.—Bellarmine, De Poenitentia.—Billuart, De Poenitentia.—On the teaching of the schismatic Greek Church see C. Rhallis, Περὶ τῶν μυστηρίων τῆς μετανοίας καὶ τοῦ εὐχελαίου, Athens 1905. Gr. Rosignoli, De Sacramento Poenitentiae et Extremae Unctionis, Milan 1706.—Collet, Tract. de Poenitentia (Migne, Theol. Curs. Complet., Vol. XXII).—J. J. Endres, Das Sakrament der Busse, 1847.—Dens, De Sacramento Poenitentiae, 2 vols., Mayence 1862.—*Palmieri, S.J., De Poenitentia, Rome 1879.—I. B. Becamel, Tract. De Virtute et Sacramento Poenitentiae, Paris 1887.—*De San, S.J., Tract. de Poenitentia, Bruges 1901.—M. J. O’Donnell, Penance in the Early Church, With a Short Sketch of Subsequent Development, Dublin 1907.—S. J. Hunter, S.J., Outlines of Dogmatic Theology, Vol. III, pp. 297–358.— Wilhelm and Scannell, A Manual of Catholic Theology, Vol. II, pp. 464–484, 2nd ed., London 1901.—E. J. Hanna, art. “Penance,” in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XI, pp. 618–635. 4 Conc. Trid., Sess. XIV, cap. 1–9; can. 1–15. PART I THE POWER OF THE CHURCH TO FORGIVE SINS Before treating of Penance as a Sacrament we must show, (1) That the Catholic Church has the power to forgive sins, (2) In what this power consists, and (3) What are its attributes. CHAPTER I THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HAS THE POWER TO FORGIVE SINS That the Catholic Church has the power to forgive sins can be demonstrated from Sacred Scripture and Tradition. The Tridentine Council bases its argument “principally” on the Gospel of St. John, Ch. 20, v. 20 sqq., thus intimating that there are other Scriptural texts from which the thesis can be proved. Such additional texts are Matth. 16:19 and 18:18. They contain our Lord’s promise to impart to His Apostles the power of forgiving sins. The actual bestowal of this power is recorded in John 20:20 sqq. SECTION 1 PROOF FROM SACRED SCRIPTURE ARTICLE 1 THE PROMISE 1. THE TEXTS.—In the Gospel of St. Matthew Christ promises to grant His Church the power of forgiving sins. He makes this promise first to St. Peter alone (Matth. 16:19) and later to all the Apostles (Matth. 18:18). In the latter passage the Apostles are promised the power of binding and loosing (potestas ligandi et solvendi), which virtually comprises that of forgiving sins.