Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On the Sacrament of Penance · Book I: On the Kind and the Parts of the Sacrament of Penance
Chapter 17: On the Material Parts of the Sacrament of Penance: A Question among Catholics
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. III, De Sacramento Poenitentiae, Book I, the fourth general controversy on the sacraments. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
There follows the second partition of Penance, by which its material part is again distributed into three parts, contrition, confession and satisfaction. About this partition there are two questions; one among Catholics, the other with the heretics. The former question is not whether contrition, confession and satisfaction are necessary and altogether to be employed, but whether they are all true parts of the sacrament. For it was the opinion of Durandus, on book 4, distinction 16, question 1, that confession alone is the material part of the sacrament of Penance, and that contrition is a disposition, and satisfaction a fruit, of Penance. His chief arguments are two. First, because any part of a true sacrament ought to be sensible; but contrition is not sensible. Second, because the sacrament of Penance does not necessarily require satisfaction in fact, but only in vow; for it will be a true sacrament if absolution is given to one confessing his sins, even if he never afterwards makes satisfaction.
But the common opinion of the theologians, on the same distinction 16, and of Saint Thomas, part 3, question 90, articles 2 and 3, teaches that not only confession, but also contrition and satisfaction, are true material parts of the sacrament of Penance. Which opinion is most certain, nor can it any longer be called in doubt, since in the ecumenical councils of Florence and Trent we read in express words that the acts of the penitent, contrition, confession and satisfaction, are as it were the matter of the sacrament of Penance. Nor is it against this that in the holy Scriptures the works of satisfaction are called fruits of Penance; for it is one thing to speak of the virtue, another of the sacrament, of Penance. The virtue of Penance is not composed of parts, since it is a certain simple habit; therefore contrition, confession and satisfaction are not its parts, but its acts. Contrition indeed is its inward act; confession and satisfaction, outward acts; and in this way the Scriptures speak when they call the outward works fruits of Penance. But the sacrament of Penance consists of two parts, as we said, the material and the formal. And to the material belong those three acts of the virtue of Penance, which are also the actions of the penitent himself; to the formal, the absolution of the priest. But because contrition is an inward action, that it may be called a part of the sacrament, which is bodily and sensible, it ought to be shown by some outward sign.
And by this the first argument of Durandus is solved; for we contend that contrition is a part of the sacrament, not as it is in the heart alone, but as it is manifested by signs. Someone will say perhaps that it often happens that contrition is shown by no other sign than the confession of sins itself; and that therefore contrition, in so far as it is a sensible part of the sacrament, is then not distinguished from confession; and so there are only two parts of the sacrament, confession and satisfaction, not three. I answer: it can indeed happen that by the same words contrition is disclosed and confession set forth, yet in those words two sensible signs are contained; and it is plainly one thing for contrition to be expressed by a word, another for confession to be set forth by a word. For if someone confesses that he has committed theft, adultery, murder and many other things of that kind, but relates them boasting and glorying, or simply in conversation, he will indeed confess sins, but will not show contrition. Wherefore it is one thing to confess sins so that another may understand how many and of what kind they are; another to confess with sorrow and detestation, so that not only the number of the sins, but also the contrition of the sinner, is disclosed by that confession.
To the other argument of Durandus it is easy to answer. For without satisfaction the sacrament of Penance can exist, but maimed and mutilated; for those three parts are called not essential but integral; and without some integral part a thing can indeed exist, but cannot be whole. This we admit, that of the integral parts some are principal, without which the essence of the thing would in no way stand, such as in a man are the head and the heart; and such in the sacrament of Penance are contrition and confession; for unless some signs of sorrow are seen, and unless some manifestation of sins precedes, absolution cannot be bestowed by the priest. Others are secondary integral parts, without which the essence of the thing can stand, though imperfect and useless, such as in a man are the hands and feet; and of this kind in the sacrament of Penance satisfaction seems to be. But some object: either satisfaction is a part of the sacrament as it is in the vow and purpose of the penitent, or as it is exercised in fact. If in the former way, it is not a sensible thing; if in the latter, it is not present when the sacrament is completed, since when the word of absolution is added to the element of confession the sacrament is completed, while satisfaction is performed after the absolution has been given and received. I answer: in both ways satisfaction is a part of the sacrament; for it begins in a certain way when it is enjoined and accepted, and afterwards in its time is completed. And although, as it is in vow and purpose, it does not seem to be sensible, yet it is made sensible by outward signs, when it is enjoined by the word of the priest and admitted by the word or nod of the penitent. Nor is it absurd if, after the absolution has been given and received, the satisfaction is completed; for when the word of absolution is added to the element of confession, the sacrament is completed indeed as regards the essence, but not altogether wholly and perfectly, if the integral parts are considered. Just as also, while in the mother’s womb the human body is being formed, and the heart and some other parts being completed, the soul is joined to the body and a man thence exists, even if perhaps the eyes, fingers and certain other parts are not yet seen completed and distinct.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XYII. De partibiis matej-ialibtis sacramenii Poenileniiae : Quaeslio intcr calholicos. Sequilur altera parlitio Poenilentiac, qua pars ejus materialis rursum in parles tres,conlritionem, confessionem et satisfacUonem distribuilur.De qua parlitionc duae sunl quaesUones; una inler catho- licos, altera cum haerelicis. Quaestio prior non cst, An contrilio confessio et satisfactio sint necessariae et omnino adhiben- dae; sed, An sint omnes verae parles sacramenti. Fuit enim opinio Durandi in 4. dist. 10. quaest. i. solam confessionem partem esse materialem sacramenli PoeQitenliae: Conlritionem aulem es- se disposilionem et satisfaotionem fructum Poe- nitenliae. Argumenta ejus praecipua duo sunt. Priraum, quia quaelibet veri sacramenti pars debet esse sen- sibilis; contrilio autem non est sensibilis. Sccun- duin, quia sacraraentum PoenitenUae non neces- sario exigit saiisfacUonem in re, sod in voto dura- tiixat: verum enim sacramenlum »rit, si confitcnli peccata sua. detur absolulio, etiarasi is numquam postea satisfaciat. At senlentia theologorum communis, in cadem disUnct. 10. et s. Thomae 3. par. quaest. 90. arl. 2. et 3. non solara confessionem, sed eliam con- tritioiiemm el salisfaclionera.veras sacraraenti Poe- nilentiae partes materiales esse docet. Quae sen- tentia certissima est, ncqiie jam amplius in dubi- nm revocari potest, cura in conciliis oecumcnicis, ilorenUno ct tridcntino disertis verbis legamus, a- ctus Poenitentis, conlrilionem, confessionem et salisfacUonem, csse quasi maleriam sacramenti Poenitentiae. Keque iis repugnat, quod in Scripturis sanctis salisfactionis opera dicunlur fruclus Poenilentiae: nam aliud est loqui de virtute, aliud de sacraracn- to PoenitenUae. Yirtus Poenitentiae non componi- tur ex partibus, cum sit habilus quidam simplex: LIBEU PIllMUS G19 proindc noii sunl pnrles, sed aclus ejiis, conlrilio, confcssio cl salisfaclio. Conlrilio quidem esl aclus ojus intcrnus, confessio el salisfaclio, aclus exler- t\i: cl lioc niodo Scriplurae loquuntur, curn opera externa fruclus Poenilenliac vocant. Sacrauienluni vero Pocnilentiae duabus parlibus constal, ul di- xinius. maleriali alque formali. El ad malcrialem quidem pcrlinent ires illi Poenitcntiae virlutis a- clus, qui sunl etiam ipsius Poenileotis actiones:ad formalem aulcm absolulio sacerdolis. Quia vero conlritio aclio csl inlerna.ut pars sacramcnli.quod esl corporale ac sensibile, dici possit,signo aliquo exlerno prodi debel. Et per lioc solvilur Prinium Durandi argumen- tum: non enim conlrilionem, ut in corde scilem habet. sed ul per signa manifestalur, sacramenti partem esse coutendimus. Diccl fortassis aliquis, saepe accidere, ut con- trilio non aliosigno, quam ipsa peccalorum cou- fessionc prodatur:proinde tunc non dislingui con- Irilionem.qualeuus est pars sacramenli sensibilis. a confessione; ac per hoc duas lanlum sacrumenli parles esse^coiTfessionem el satisfactionem,non au- lem Ires. Kcsqoudeo: Fieri (luidem posse, ul iis- dem verhis contrilio delegalur el confessio e.vpli- cetur, veruntamen in iilis verbis duo signa scnsi- bilia contineri; el plane aliud esse, conlrilionem verbo expressam, aliud, confessioncm verho ex- plicatam. i>am. si quis fatealur se furtum, adultc- rium, houiicidium, el alia id genus mulla commi- sisse, sed jactando ct gloriando, vcl simplicilcr colloquendo illa narrel; ille quidem con[ilcbilur peccala,scd contrilionem non prodel. Quare aliud esl. peccata coulitcri, ul aller inlelligat quot et qualia ilia sint; aliud, cum dolorc ac clctcslatione confileri. ul non solum pcccalorum numerus, sed eliam peccaloris conlritio ilia confcssione aperi- alur. Ad allerum argumenlum Durandi facile esl res- pondcre. Nam sine satisfaitione,sacramentum Poe- nilentiae essc potcst, sed mancum ac mutilum:ne- (pie cnim tres illae partes, cssenlialcs, sed inle- gralcs dicunlur: sinc aliqua aulem parle inlcgrali res (pjidem cssc polest, sed iulcgra essc non po- tcsl. Illud admittimus. cx integralibus parlibus quasdam cssc principales, sine quibus essenlia rei nullo modo consisleret, qualcs sunl in homine ca- put el cor; et tales in sacramenlo Pocnilcnliae sunt conlritio el confcssio: nam nisi signa doloris aliqua conspiciantur, el nisi manifcstalio aiicpia I)eccatorum pra(;ccdat, absolulio a sacerdole im- pendi non potesl. Aliae suril [)artes inlegrales se- cundariac, .sine (luibus rei essentia consislerc, li- cet impcrfccla et inuiila. potcst^^pialcs sunlin ho- mine, manus el pcdes: el ejusuuxli in sacrumento Poenitentiae videtur esse satisfaclio. Sed ohjiciunl aliqui: Aut satisfactio pars csl sa- cramenli, ul est in volo ct proposilo Pocnilenlis, aul ul rcipsa cxercetur. Si priore modo, non esl res sensibilis; si poslcriorc, non cst pracsens cura perlicilur sacramenlum.Siqiiidem accedcnlc vcrbo absolulionis ad confcssionis cleincnlum, pcrlicilur sacramenlum. Satisfactio vcro posl absolulioncm dalam, alque acccplam peragitur. Kespondeo: Utroque modo satisfaclio pars esl sacramenli; incipit eiiim quodaminodo,dum injun- gilur et acceptatur: et postea lempore suo comple* tur. Et quamvis, ul esl in voto et proposilo, nun videatur esse sensibilis,tauien signis extcrnis sen- sibilis redditur, dum verbo sacerdolis indicitur,et verbo aut nulu pocnileulis admiltilur. Neque ab- surdum esl, si post ahsolutioncm datam atquc ac- ceptam. satisfaclio complcalur:nam accedentc ver- bo absolulionis ad elemenlum confcssionis sacra- mcntum perncilur quidcin, quod atlinct ad essen- liam, scd non omnino inlcgrc el pcrfecle, si par- les inlcgrales considerentur.Quernadmodum etiarn dum in ulero malris corpus humanum formalur et corde, aliisf[ue nonnullis parlibus perfcctis, con- jungilur anima corpori, homo indc existit, eliamsi forle oculi, digili cl aliae quaedam parles nondum pcrfectae, alquc distinclae conspicianlur.