Doubt II: Whether there is parvity of matter in lust

I treated this question in my Disput. de Virtutibus Iustitiae adnexis, sect. 4. de Veritate, et Mendacio, quaest. 2. dubitatione 4. ad argumenta; where, with D. Bonaventure, I upheld the negative opinion, and there I laid down the rule for discerning when there is parvity of matter in sins. But again I find in the Compend. Theol. verit. lib. 3. cap. 28. that the Saintly Doctor openly upholds the negative opinion ex professo.

That parvity of matter exists in these matters was asserted by Sanchez de matrim. lib. 9. d. 46. Zanchus in the Directorium Confessariorum part. 1. de Sacram. matrim. cap. 41. quaest. 28. Salas, prima secundae d. 6. sect. 21. num. 149. Villalobos, tom. 2. tract. 40. dub. 9. See also Seraphinus Freitas in the addit. ad tract. de confess. sollic. quaest. 7. num. 33. Sanctius in select. d. 11. and Maldonatus says it is probable speculatively, p. 2. quaest. 74. art. 10.

Along with these go those who hold that touches and kisses, by reason of merely sensible delectation, without any other intrinsic circumstance, are not mortal. So Franciscus Sylvius, 2. 2. quaest. 154. art. 4. and others cited by him. I add Comitoli, resp. moral. lib. 4. quaest. 20. Ioannes Salas, prima 2. quaest. 74. tract. 13. dub. 6. sect. 20. num. 139. Lessius, lib. 4. cap. 3. d. 8. num. 58. Lublinus, verb. osculum.

But as to touches and kisses, Diana dissents, and deservedly, part. 4. Tract. 4. Miscell. resol. 136. with Filliuccius, tom. 2. tract. 30. cap. 9. num. 119. Sanchez, in summa, tom. 2. lib. 5. cap. 6. Rebellus, p. 2. lib. 3. quaest. 19. sect. 3. wherefore the other opinion was condemned by Alexander VII, as we saw in the place cited below.

And that in general there is no parvity of matter in these things the Saintly Doctor teaches, loc. cit. whom followed Tanner, prima 2. d. 4. quaest. 8. num. 109. Castro Palao, in opere moral. tom. 1. tract. 2. d. 1. part. 10. §. 2. Basil Ponce, de matrim. lib. 10. cap. 16. §. 2. Lessius, lib. 4. cap. 3. d. 15. num. 109. Rebellus, loco supra citato, and Claudius Acquaviva, the Father General, in the year 1612 commanded this opinion to be taught in the Society of Jesus.

Therefore Sanchez in summa, tom. 2. lib. 5. cap. 6. asserts this, singing his palinode, and Diana warns that it must be asserted outright, part. 3. tract. 5. resol. 1.

The reason used by Rebellus, Diana, and others is that of D. Bonaventure here; for these things are induced by nature as dispositions to the act of generation, to inflame the flesh with the fire of pleasure in order to copulation and semination: Therefore it is an enormous perversion when they are employed toward pleasure amid dissolutions.

Another reason is brought forward by the Saintly Doctor, because this is the difference between the nutritive and the generative power; the latter is more material, more corrupt, and so rushes headlong, not so the nutritive; whence in gluttony it is more easily venial.

I confess that I tremble with my whole being when I see the danger there is in touches and kisses: Therefore I teach that this opinion must altogether be held. Nor does the Spanish Emphasis move me, whereby Villalobos cries out Los tocamientos leves paruidad de materia.

As to kisses, it was defined by Alexander VII that they are mortal; as is clear from the Decree of 18 March 1666. and as I proved, tom. 4. disp. 17. quaest. 10. sect. 37.