Dist. 17, Part 1, Art. 2, Q. 4
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 17
Quaestio IV. Utrum confessio necessario sequatur iustificationem.
Quarto quaeritur, utrum confessio necessario sequatur iustificationem. Et quod sic, videtur:
1. Quia iste peccator tenetur confiteri; sed constat, quod gratia non absolvit ipsum a praecepto confessionis: ergo post gratiam susceptam adhuc tenetur1.
2. Item, contritus et confessus tenetur satisfacere; sed confessio non absolvit a satisfactione, quae est posterior ipsa: ergo nec contritio a confessione. Sed contritus est iustificatus: ergo iustificatus tenetur confiteri.
3. Item, Dominus praecepit poenitentiam agere, Matthaei quarto2; sed in perfectione poenitentiae sunt ista tria, « scilicet contritio, confessio et satisfactio », sicut dicit Magister in littera supra distinctione decima sexta in principio: ergo non implet homo praeceptum, nisi confiteatur: ergo tenetur homo confiteri quantumcumque iustificatus.
4. Item, iustificationi necessarium est propositum confitendi; sed propositum aut desinit esse efficax, aut exit in actum, cum se offerunt tempus et locus. Sed proposito confitendi desinente, desinit aliquis esse iustus, et necesse est, non3 esse propositum efficax, vel hominem confiteri: ergo vel necesse est, quod post iustificationem homo confiteatur, vel quod a iustitia cadat.
Contra: 1. Qui habet iustitiam habet omne quod ad salutem est necessarium: sed omnis iustificatus habet iustitiam: ergo habet omne quod ad salutem est necessarium. Si ergo confessio non est necessaria ad iustificationem, nec post iustificationem est necessaria ad salutem: ergo iustificatus ad confessionem non tenetur.
2. Item, si iustificatus tenetur ad confessionem, aut ergo propter deletionem culpae, aut propter deletionem poenae; non culpae, iam quia culpa deleta est; non poenae, quia tanta potest esse contritio, quod delet totam poenam4, et si aliquod residuum est, potest deleri per satisfactionem exteriorem: ergo nullo modo tenetur.
3. Item, duplex est forum, scilicet forum Dei et forum Ecclesiae; secundum forum Dei punitur quis in purgatorio multo gravius quam in hoc mundo5; secundum forum Ecclesiae in hac vita; sed potest quis renuntiare iudicari in foro minori, ut transferat se ad forum maius: ergo aliquis licite post contritionem potest exspectare poenam purgatoriam: ergo non tenetur iudicari in foro Ecclesiae: ergo nec confiteri.
4. Item, ponatur, quod aliquis conteratur et nihil cogitet de confessione, constans est, quod iste habet gratiam, et non omittit6: ergo non cadit a gratia, quia non intervenit contemptus: ergo quamdiu non cogitat, non peccat. Esto quod sic moriatur, constat, quod salvatur etiam sine confessione: ergo etc. — Et ad hoc sunt multae auctoritates, quas adducit Magister in littera7.
Conclusio. Confessio etiam post iustificationem est necessaria necessitate praecepti, a qua tamen impossibilitas excusat.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod confessio est instituta sub praecepto, sicut melius patebit infra8; et ideo, quia ab hoc praecepto peccans per susceptionem gratiae non absolvitur, adhuc confiteri tenetur; et ideo, si non confitetur, cadit a iustitia. — Sicut enim nullus potest iustificari, qui Sacramenta contemnat; sic nullus in iustitia perseverat, si post iustificationem ex contemptu negligat confiteri. Et ideo, si potest confiteri et non curat, cadit a iustitia, cum cadit a proposito confitendi, sine quo iustificari non poterat. — Concedendum ergo, quod confessio post iustificationem est necessaria necessitate praecepti, a qua tamen excusat impossibilitas. Unde et rationes ad hanc partem sunt concedendae.
Ad argumenta in oppositum:
Ad 1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur: qui habet iustitiam habet omne quod necessarium est ad salutem; dicendum quod verum est, si perseveret in illa; sed quamvis sine confessione possit quis iustitiam adipisci, tamen in illa non potest diu permanere sine confessione, quin omittat. Non solum autem sunt necessaria ad salutem illa quae necessario requiruntur ad iustitiae adeptionem, verum etiam illa quae requiruntur ad habitae conservationem.
Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur: aut est necessaria propter deletionem culpae etc.; dicendum, quod ista non est ratio, sed institutio. Quia enim confessio instituta est sub praecepto, ideo nemo absolvitur, sed quilibet tenetur, quantumcumque poena et culpa deleatur. Valet tamen ad deletionem culpae quantum ad eos qui se non paraverunt sufficienter omnino, et etiam poenae quantum ad alios, et ad multas utilitates, sicut infra9 melius apparebit, propter quod eam Dominus instituit.
Ad 3. Ad illud quod obiicitur de duplici foro, dicendum, quod poenitens, quamdiu est in hac vita, subiectus est foro Ecclesiae, ita quod ab ipso non potest appellare. Praeterea, fecit iniuriam Ecclesiae, et ideo, si potest comparere, tenetur, nisi per impossibilitatem excusetur. Nemo enim ad forum purgatorii admittitur, qui forum Ecclesiae contempsit, cum in nullo fiat iniuria peccatori, sed in utroque iustitia.
Ad 4. Ad illud quod obiicitur de illo qui nihil cogitat, dicendum, quod hoc potest esse duplici ex causa: vel propter intensionem doloris, vel propter occupationem superfluae sollicitudinis. Quantum ad primum, quia Dominus cor eius occupavit, si non fuit mora superflua nec indiscretio aliqua; credo, quod Dominus absolvit et voluntatem pro opere computat; et computatur iste cum illis qui excusantur propter impossibilitatem, habentes devotionem in Sacramento. — Si autem non cogitat nec curat, aliis sollicitudinibus occupatus, maxime si locum et tempus habuit confitendi ore; tunc non excusatur, immo ob peccatum omissionis reputabitur reus mortis, maxime si non fuerit sic morte praeventus, quin bene posset et deberet recogitare et petere Sacramentum Ecclesiae10.
---
Question IV. Whether confession necessarily follows justification.
Fourthly it is asked whether confession necessarily follows justification. And that it does, seems [to be shown thus]:
1. Because this sinner is bound to confess; but it is established that grace does not absolve him from the precept of confession: therefore after grace has been received he is still bound1.
2. Likewise, one who is contrite and has confessed is bound to make satisfaction; but confession does not absolve from satisfaction, which is posterior to it: therefore neither does contrition [absolve] from confession. But the contrite person is justified: therefore the justified person is bound to confess.
3. Likewise, the Lord commanded that penance be done, in Matthew chapter four2; but in the perfection of penance there are these three things, « namely contrition, confession, and satisfaction », as the Master says in the text above, in distinction sixteen at the beginning: therefore a man does not fulfill the precept unless he confess: therefore a man is bound to confess however much he is justified.
4. Likewise, for justification a purpose of confessing is necessary; but the purpose either ceases to be efficacious, or issues into act, when time and place present themselves. But when the purpose of confessing ceases, a person ceases to be just, and it is necessary either that the purpose not be efficacious, or that the man confess3: therefore either it is necessary that after justification a man confess, or that he fall from justice.
On the contrary: 1. Whoever has justice has everything that is necessary for salvation: but every justified person has justice: therefore he has everything that is necessary for salvation. If, then, confession is not necessary for justification, neither is it necessary for salvation after justification: therefore the justified person is not bound to confession.
2. Likewise, if the justified person is bound to confession, then either on account of the blotting-out of guilt, or on account of the blotting-out of punishment; not of guilt, since the guilt is already blotted out; not of punishment, because the contrition can be so great that it blots out the whole punishment4, and if any remainder is left, it can be blotted out by exterior satisfaction: therefore in no way is he bound.
3. Likewise, there is a twofold court, namely the court of God and the court of the Church; according to the court of God one is punished in purgatory far more severely than in this world5; according to the court of the Church, in this life; but one can renounce being judged in the lesser court, so as to transfer himself to the greater court: therefore someone may licitly, after contrition, await the punishment of purgatory: therefore he is not bound to be judged in the court of the Church: therefore neither to confess.
4. Likewise, suppose that someone is contrite and thinks nothing about confession; it is established that this person has grace, and does not omit [it]6: therefore he does not fall from grace, since no contempt intervenes: therefore as long as he does not think [of it], he does not sin. Suppose he die thus, it is established that he is saved even without confession: therefore etc. — And for this there are many authorities, which the Master adduces in the text7.
Conclusion. Confession even after justification is necessary by the necessity of precept, from which, however, impossibility excuses.
I respond: It must be said that confession is instituted under a precept, as will better appear below8; and therefore, because one who sins against this precept is not absolved by the reception of grace, he is still bound to confess; and therefore, if he does not confess, he falls from justice. — For just as no one can be justified who despises the Sacraments, so no one perseveres in justice if, after justification, out of contempt he neglects to confess. And therefore, if he can confess and does not care to, he falls from justice, since he falls from the purpose of confessing, without which he could not be justified. — It must therefore be conceded that confession after justification is necessary by the necessity of precept, from which, however, impossibility excuses. Hence the reasons for this side too are to be conceded.
To the arguments to the contrary:
To 1. To that which is objected: whoever has justice has everything that is necessary for salvation; it must be said that this is true, if he perseveres in it; but although someone can attain justice without confession, yet he cannot long remain in it without confession, without omitting [it]. For not only are those things necessary for salvation which are necessarily required for the attainment of justice, but also those which are required for the conservation of what has been attained.
To 2. To that which is objected: it is either necessary on account of the blotting-out of guilt etc.; it must be said that this is not the ground, but the institution. For because confession is instituted under a precept, therefore no one is absolved [from it], but everyone is bound, however much punishment and guilt be blotted out. Yet it avails for the blotting-out of guilt as regards those who have not prepared themselves altogether sufficiently, and also for [the blotting-out] of punishment as regards others, and for many useful ends, as will better appear below9, on account of which the Lord instituted it.
To 3. To that which is objected concerning the twofold court, it must be said that the penitent, as long as he is in this life, is subject to the court of the Church, in such a way that he cannot appeal from it. Moreover, he has done an injury to the Church, and therefore, if he can appear, he is bound, unless he be excused through impossibility. For no one is admitted to the court of purgatory who has despised the court of the Church, since no injury is done to the sinner thereby, but in both [there is] justice.
To 4. To that which is objected concerning the one who thinks nothing [of it], it must be said that this can be from a twofold cause: either on account of the intensity of sorrow, or on account of the occupation of superfluous anxiety. As regards the first, because the Lord has occupied his heart, if there was no superfluous delay nor any indiscretion; I believe that the Lord absolves [him] and reckons the will for the deed; and this person is reckoned among those who are excused on account of impossibility, having devotion toward the Sacrament. — But if he does not think [of it] nor care, occupied with other anxieties, especially if he had place and time of confessing by mouth; then he is not excused, but rather on account of the sin of omission he will be reckoned guilty of death, especially if he was not so prevented by death that he could not well [confess], whereas he could and ought to have reconsidered and sought the Sacrament of the Church10.
---
- 1Codd. F G adhuc tenetur.Codices F and G read adhuc tenetur ("is still bound").
- 2Vers. 17: Poenitentiam agite etc. — Mox pro in perfectione poenitentiae cod. F in perfecta poenitentia.Verse 17: Do penance etc. — Shortly after, for in perfectione poenitentiae ("in the perfection of penance") codex F reads in perfecta poenitentia ("in perfect penance").
- 3Plures codd. perperam omittunt non, codd. R S legunt necesse enim est, esse etc.Several codices wrongly omit non; codices R and S read necesse enim est, esse etc.
- 4Cfr. Luc. 7, 47. seq., ubi de Maria Magdalena, et 23, 42. seq., ubi de bono latrone.Cf. Luke 7:47ff., where [it speaks] of Mary Magdalene, and 23:42ff., where [it speaks] of the good thief.
- 5Ut ostenditur infra d. 20. p. 1. q. 2.As is shown below, dist. 20, p. 1, q. 2.
- 6Sensus hic et ad 1 est: et non peccat omittendo. — Inferius post Esto codd. I K L V addunt ergo.The sense here and at [reply] 1 is: and he does not sin by omitting. — Below, after Esto, codices I, K, L, V add ergo.
- 7Hic c. 1.Here, ch. 1.
- 8Partis II. a. 2. q. 1.[See] Part II, art. 2, q. 1.
- 9Partis II. a. 1. q. 1. in fine et a. 2. q. 3. — Mox propter quod codd. R S T bb addunt etiam.[See] Part II, art. 1, q. 1 at the end, and art. 2, q. 3. — Shortly after, for propter quod codices R, S, T, bb add etiam.
- 10Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.See the scholion to the preceding question.