““While it is possible for the con fessor in some cases to obtain such knowledge without confession, this is not the rule, because the confessor, not the penitent, is the competent judge of the latter's state of conscience and without a close insight into the number and gravity of the sins submitted he cannot decide whether to give or to withhold absolution. 14 Conse- 14 Cfr. St. Jerome, In Matth., 16, varietates, scit qui ligandus sit 29: " Quum peccatorum audierit quive solvendus." igo THE THREE ACTS OF THE PENITENT quently the confessor has the right and the duty to de mand an accurate and circumstantial description of the penitent's state of conscience, i. e. a complete confes sion of his sins. But the office of the penitential judge does not end here. Even if the penitent has the right disposition, the priest may not absolve him without at the same time enjoining an appropriate penance* This again cannot be justly determined without a com plete knowledge of the facts, because a penance must correspond to the number and gravity of the sins for which it is imposed. " It is manifest," says the Council of Trent, " that priests could not have exercised this judgment without knowledge of the cause; neither indeed could they have observed equity in enjoining punishments, if the faithful should have declared their sins in general only, and not rather specifically, and one by one." 15””
