A question on Imperfect Contrition and it's development over time

[CatholicHere_Hi]

Can someone tell me what is meant by this paragraph from Theory and Practice of the Confessional?

What is meant by sorrow based on fear only being sufficient when there is joined with it some beginning of the love of God?

And I noticed they used the word ‘opinion’. Are the teachings on imperfect contrition able to change then?

The second opinion holds that the sorrow based on fear is sufficient only when there is joined with it some beginning of the love of God, as our highest good. This view supported by the most eminent theologians rests on solid foundations, and is now the more usual opinion among theologians. That there is nothing in this view opposed to the Council of Trent is clear from what has been said above on this point. In another place in the Sixth Session (cap. 6) there is indirect authority for it, where the Council, in describing the progress towards preparation for in first grace, teaches that the sinner who is disposing his soul for justification must begin to love God as the source of all justice.

Theory and Practice of the Confessional: A Guide in the Administration of ... - Caspar Erich Schieler - Google Books

 

[Richca]

The author from the book you cite is talking essentially about a controversy among various theologians in the Church in the seventeenth century revolving around what is known as contritionism and attritionism and it gets a little complicated. All we really need to know according to the official teaching of the Church is that there are two kinds of contrition, namely, perfect and imperfect (cf. CCC#1451-1453). Essentially, perfect contrition includes charity and sanctifying grace so that a person in the state of mortal sin is restored to charity and sanctifying grace by perfect contrition even before receiving absolution from the priest in the sacrament of penance although perfect contrition in this manner must include the intention of confessing one’s sins in confession. ‘It arises from a love by which God is loved above all else…(contrition of charity)’ (CCC#1452).

Imperfect contrition or attrition does not bestow charity and sanctifying grace on the soul before confession but it suffices to receive charity and sanctifying grace on the soul from the absolution from the priest and the grace received in confession. Essentially, the sacrament of penance itself makes up for imperfect contrition. ‘It is born of the consideration of sin’s ugliness or the fear of eternal damnation and the other penalties threatening the sinner (contrition of fear)’ (CCC#1453)

Both imperfect and perfect contrition are gifts of grace from God and it seems there is some degree of a love of God in imperfect contrition or some beginning of it such as like a natural love of God moved by grace. For perfect contrition contains the supernatural theological virtue of charity while imperfect contrition does not. The motive for imperfect contrition may spring from fear of God’s punishments but as Sacred Scripture as well as the Church teaches this is a holy fear or a gift from God. For it is written ‘The beginning of wisdom is the fear of the Lord’ (Proverbs 9:10) and ‘The fear of the Lord is the beginning of love for him’ (Sirach 25: 12). And Jesus said ‘fear not them who can kill the body but rather fear him who can destroy both body and soul in hell’. Imperfect contrition that springs from fear of God’s punishments is like a servile fear and if it includes the hope of God’s pardon and a firm purpose of amendment such as excluding the wish to sin than this contrition suffices for the sacrament of penance. Perfect contrition detests sin itself and as an offence against God who is loved above all things. It springs from charity or love of God and fear of offending him but not primarily from punishment which is a consequence of sin but because it offends God who is infinitely good and lovable.

St Thomas Aquinas teaches that love is the first movement of the will and so I don’t think it is possible to have sorrow for sin or fear of God’s punishments without love. So, I think imperfect contrition based on fear of God’s punishments and as a gift and grace of God is going to include some degree of love in it even if just a beginning of love or inchoately like.

 

[Richca]

(cont.)

Apparently, in the contrition/attrition controversy, Melchoir Cano, a dominican theologian I believe, was an extreme attritionist in that he thought any sort of love or act of love could be excluded from attrition to suffice for the sacrament of confession. Being a dominican, I don’t know how he could have concluded such a view from say St Thomas Aquinas, the chief dominican theologian. Like I said, it gets a little complicated. Pope Alexander VII in 1667 issued a decree that both sides of the debate were not to declare each other heretics until the Holy See defined something on the subject which apparently hasn’t been done to this day (cf. Denzinger 2070). Accordingly, this is where in your OP the author of the book your citing uses the word ‘opinion’.

The decree of Pope Alexander VII actually states that the opinion which ‘denies the necessity of any act [act of the] love of God, [as] in the aforementioned attrition, conceived through the fear of hell’ is one of the legitimate opinions concerning attrition which suffices for the sacrament of confession. The Council of Trent taught that imperfect contrition or attrition conceived from the fear of hell and punishment, excludes the will to sin, and accompanied by the hope of pardon suffices for obtaining the grace of God (sanctifying grace and charity) in the sacrament of penance (cf. Council of Trent, Session XIV, Chapter 4, On Contrition). Pope Alexander VII reiterates the conditions for imperfect contrition from the Council of Trent in his decree of 1667 but then he adds which appears was the controversial question whether in addition to these conditions there is required ‘some act of the love of God in order to obtain the grace of the sacrament of penance’.

I found some more detailed information concerning the controversy surrounding contritionism and attritionism on google books from The Sacraments: A Dogmatic Treatise - Volume 3, by Joseph Pohle. Go to Section 2 - Imperfect Contrition or Attrition.

Besides the apparent controversy whether imperfect contrition or attrition includes at least some beginning or act of the love of God or not which it seems to me only makes common sense that it does include some act of the love of God at least implicitly or virtually contained in the grace of imperfect contrition, there are some qualities as the Council of Trent decreed that need to be contained in imperfect contrition for it to suffice for the sacrament of confession or for it to be called contrition or sorrow for sin at all. These are the hope for pardon and excludes the wish or desire to sin which this last is another way of saying I think a firm purpose of amendment. I mean we can’t hope for God to forgive us our sins if we have no desire to stop committing them or at least try not to commit them in the future. A firm purpose of amendment accompanies true contrition, it’s indispensable to it.

The Baltimore Catechism lists five conditions for receiving the sacrament of penance worthily:

1. examine our conscience
2. be sorry for our sins
3. have the firm purpose of not sinning again
4. confess our sins to the priest
5. be willing to perform the penance the priest gives us

 

[CatholicSpirit]

We can sin again. It happens, you do not void a confession by falling into temptation. Rather, it is good to pray the our father prayer which expresses that we explicitly need help from temptation.

Imperfect contrition can be motivated by fear of hell, if that is why you are confessing, it’s still good.

 

[CatholicHere_Hi]

Pope Alexander VII in 1667 issued a decree that both sides of the debate were not to declare each other heretics until the Holy See defined something on the subject which apparently hasn’t been done to this day (cf. Denzinger 2070). Accordingly, this is where in your OP the author of the book your citing uses the word ‘opinion’.

So does that mean that the Church’s teaching on imperfect contrition being motivated by the fear of hell/loss of heaven is still up in the air? If so, how can we trust it?

 

[Vico]

Can someone tell me what is meant by this paragraph from Theory and Practice of the Confessional?
…

In that book the author explains that the fear of God in imperfect contrition is the beginning of love, but not the same love in perfect contrition. The two loves he lists are:

• perfect: amor benevolentiae (Love as Goodwill) p. 94
• impertect: amor cupiscentiae (love of God because He is good to us). p. 95

 

[Richca]

So does that mean that the Church’s teaching on imperfect contrition being motivated by the fear of hell/loss of heaven is still up in the air? If so, how can we trust it?

No, it is not up in the air. The issue is not about imperfect contrition being motivated by the fear of God’s punishments such as hell and the loss of heaven. The Council of Trent defined as a dogma of the faith that imperfect contrition or attrition inspired by the fear of God involving his punishments and hell is a gift and grace of the Holy Spirit and if included with this fear, the penitent has the hope of God’s pardon and excludes the wish to sin which involves the very substance of contrition or sorrow for sin with a firm purpose of amendment, than such attrition suffices for receiving the grace of the sacrament of penance or sanctifying grace and charity. The Council defined this in Session XIV, Chapter 4, On Contrition as well as in Canon V in the Canons on the Most Holy Sacrament of Penance. The Council defined this dogma because Martin Luther and the protestant reformers were teaching that imperfect contrition or attrition motivated by the fear of God’s punishments made man a hypocrite and a greater sinner.

This teaching on imperfect contrition motivated by the fear of God’s punishments or hell from the Council of Trent is from the Tradition of the Church such as the teaching of the Fathers of the Church and scholastic theologians, Holy Scripture, and Jesus himself.

The controversial question that sprang up in the contritionism/attritionism debate in the 17th century concerning imperfect contrition or attrition revolved around the issue of some act of the love of God, either explicit or implicit or formal or informal or something of this nature. The decree of Pope Alexander VII in 1667 cites the issue of some act of love of God as something in addition to what the Council of Trent fathers laid down concerning imperfect contrition or attrition. And there were and are various opinions on this and this is what the author from the book you cite is referring to concerning the various opinions. It gets pretty technical concerning the different kinds of fears and loves as I glanced over the issue from Joseph Pohle’s book I mentioned in the last post. Apparently, the Church is not concerned with getting itself involved in this debate and various technicalities. What the Church teaches concerning imperfect contrition which may be inspired by the fear of God’s punishments such as hell is pretty straight forward and common sensible and the Church doesn’t require that penitents have perfect charity obviously in order to receive the sacrament of confession and the forgiveness of their sins worthily. Also, the priest in confession normally asks us to make an act of contrition which includes in it an act of love of God.