Question X: Whether anyone can defame himself

The FIRST opinion is, that it is deadly to defame oneself without cause. Thus Cajetan 2. 2. quaest. 73. art. II., and in the summa, v. Detractio. St. Antoninus, 3. part. tit. 8. cap. IV. §. 1.; Angelus, V. detractio, §. ult.; Sylvester, num. 4., who excuse two cases, when it is done out of fear of death; but Valencia, disp. cit. quaest. 17. puncto 2., says it is against CHARITY, which Malderus too thinks probable, tract. VII. cap. I. dub. 10.; but Turrianus, 2. 2. Tom. II. disput. 54. num. 11., says it is mortal against magnanimity. Tannerus also, disp. IV. quaest. VIII. num. 148., and others at his place.

The SECOND opinion is, that to defame precisely oneself is not mortal. Thus St. Thom. 2. 2. quaest. 57. art. IV., and quaest. 58. art. II.; Couar. lib. I. var. cap. II.; Toletan. lib II. de restit. cap. IV. part. 2. lib. I. num. 123., and part. 3. disp. I. num. 366.; Molina tract. IV. disp. 37.; Lessius lib. II. cap. XI. disp. 6.; Maldet. tract. VII. cap. I. disp. 10.; Sayrus lib. XI. cap. III. num. 33.; Filliucius tom. II. tract. 40. cap. IV. n. 123.; Tolet. lib. V. cap. 66.; Sotus lib. V. quaest. X. art. II.; Navar. sum. cap. XVIII.; Adrian. in IV. de restit. famae, q. 35.; Fagundez in VIII. praeceptum, lib. VIII. cap. VIII.

The SERAPHIC Doctor seems to me constant for the first opinion, lib. IV Pharetrae, cap. 47., where he shows the necessity of good fame from the Fathers.

St. GREGORY in the Register, lib. VII. Ind. II. cap. II., says: Whatever can weigh down either your opinion or your soul, refuse it altogether, and consent to commit yourself to it by no one's persuasion. The same, lib. XXVI. moral. cap. 23.: He tortures the just when his [honor] is wounded, exalts the wicked: but while he tortures the just, he purifies them.

St. AUGUSTINE, de moribus, et vita clerici serm 53.: With the help of the Lord our God we ought to guard both our life and our reputation, so that those who praise us do not blush before detractors. And de bono viduitatis, cap. XXII.: In all the spiritual delights which the unmarried enjoy, their holy conversation must also be cautious, lest perhaps, although their life is not evil through wantonness, their reputation be evil through negligence.

And a little later: Our life is necessary to us; our fame to others, and whatever we mercifully minister to others for salvation, redounds also to our own utility.

See also what is related in C. Noli, 12. quaest. 1.: He who, trusting in his conscience, neglects his reputation, is cruel. And l. 1. de civit. cap. 10.: No less guilty is he who admits a false crime about himself than if about his neighbor.

St. Jerome, epist. 2. ad Nepotianum: Beware of all suspicions, and whatever can probably be feigned, avoid beforehand that it not be feigned. And epist. 11. ad Agetuch.: Flee persons in whom there can be suspicion of evil conversation: nor have ready that saying of the street-corner. My conscience suffices me: I care not what men say of me. And certainly the Apostle provided good things not only before God, but also before men, lest through him the name of God be blasphemed among the nations.

And epist. 9. ad Salvian.: The fame of chastity in women is a tender thing, like a most beautiful flower, which quickly withers in a light breeze and is corrupted by a light gust.

St. Bernard, serm. 46. in Cant.: They who are placed over others must be strong and constant, who, spreading everywhere the good odor of their faith and conversation, can say with the Apostle: We are the good odor of Christ to God in every place.

And in sermon 71.: Virtue indeed will be joined with the whiteness of conscience, where the odor of fame cannot follow it; nor will it suffice to excuse the blemish of a discolored conscience; yet a man of good virtue will always provide, as far as in him lies, not only before God, but also before men.

And de considet. l. 3.: It concerns your perfection to avoid both evil things and equally evil appearances: in the one you consult your conscience; in the other, your fame. Be strong in faith, comely in glory, and you have proved yourself an imitator of God. Your strength is the faith of your conscience: and your comeliness is the splendor of good opinion. Such is St. Bernard.

Nor indeed are these simple admonitions, as Fagundez thinks, num. 4., but precepts for guarding against grave evils. Indeed, from this an occasion of scandal is given, a way is opened to sins, when a man of good reputation is heard to fall most disgracefully; but the rules must be taken from what usually follows. Usually also fame is necessary, as in a Father of a family, a Lord, a Pastor, etc.; usually it redounds to others, as to a family. Therefore the adversaries are forced to give many exceptions.

They object. Everyone is the Lord of his own reputation, as of his own goods.

It is answered with St. Bonaventure in the Speculum animae, cap. 1., by denying the parity; for, as is said in Proverbs 28., reputation is of a higher order.

They object secondly that of Matth. 23., where we are commanded not to seek the first places.

I answer; It is one thing not to seek the first places, and another to defame oneself, as the holy Doctor deduces from the authorities cited.

They ask here: Whether, in order to avoid tortures, someone can confess a grave crime that is false and imposed upon us, which they wish to extort by torments.

Many say many things at Fagundez l. 8. cap. 9., and Tanner num. 149.

First I say, that one cannot impose a false crime upon oneself. Cajet., 2. 2. quaest. 73. art. 2.; Armill. and Sylvester, v. detract. num. 4.; St. Antonin., 3. p. tit. 8. cap. 4. §. 1.; Valencia, disp. 5. quaest. 17. punct. 2. The same judge those who teach that he who has imposed a false crime upon himself is bound to retract it in the place of execution. Thus the Abbot, in cap. ex parte 2. num. 2. de sepulturis.; Felin., C. causam, num 7.; Archid., 2. p. tit. 11. cap. 21. §. 3.; Socin., in repetit. C. Ad audientiam; Sanches, Tom. 1. Decal. l. 3. cap. 7. num. 12.

It is proved, because no one is the Lord of his own life.

Wherefore the opinion of Fagundez does not seem proven to me, num 2., who cites other Doctors, num. 9.; nor that of Tanner, who cites Valencia, Soto, Navarrus, and Lessius for the opposite opinion, which he subscribes to, holding that one can impose upon oneself a false defaming crime.

He asks also in cap. 10.: Whether a man, in dispensations that are sought from the Supreme Pontiff, is bound to defame himself by manifesting an occult coupling with an affine or blood-relative.

He answers that nowhere in the law is there a precept of explaining such a coupling and defaming oneself; but it is more probable that one is bound by the decree of the Congregation of the most Eminent Cardinals upon the Council of Trent, sess. 24. cap. 5., and this is the style of the Roman curia; for the style of the curia makes law, C. in causis, C. ex litteris de constitut., and C. quam gravi de crimine falsi. And for this he reports many Doctors. Mascard. vol. 3. de probat. consil. 1312. num. 21.