PENANCE 165 



come a formal sin. The same rule holds good 

 whenever there is reason to apprehend that in- 

 struction of the penitent would result in quarrels, 

 enmity, scandal, or other serious evil. 



When a confessor has reason to doubt whether 

 instruction is likely to prove useful, he had better 

 say nothing. 7 



b) If the penitent asks for instruction, it 

 should always be given regardless of its probable 

 effect. However, in such cases the confessor had 

 better not go beyond the question asked, unless 

 additional instruction is sure to prove beneficial. 

 For instance, if a penitent has married in spite of 

 the vow of chastity, and asks whether the mar- 

 riage is valid and whether he is allowed to ren- 

 der the debitum, the confessor should reply in the 

 affirmative, without informing the penitent that 

 he has no right to demand that which he may 

 render. 



c) The confessor is obliged to remove invinci- 

 ble ignorance by instruction whenever failure to 

 do so would result in injury to the common good, 

 or whenever it can reasonably be expected that 

 the penitent will obey, either now or later; or 



7 Cfr. St. Alphonsus, Theol. Mor., pensare debet damnum et utile, item 



I. VI, n. 616: "Utrum autem gradum timoris damni ac spei utili- 



facienda sit monitio in dubio, an sit tatis, et eligere id, quod iudicat prae- 



profutura vel obfutura? Responde- ponderare. Ceterum in dubio regu- 



tur: Si non timetur de damno, Iariter mihi videtur dicendum, quod 



omnino quidem fieri debet; si vero mala formalia potius evitanda sint, 



dubitatur tarn de damno quam de quam materialia." (Ed. Gaude, III, 



fructu secuturo, tunc confessarius 640- 



