Question V: Which servile works are forbidden on a feast day

A servile work can thus be described by St. Bonaventure, serm. 4. in decem praecepta, et in 3. dist. 37. dub. 3. litt. D. Thom. ibidem art. 5. quaest. 2. ad 2. whom Suarez follows, Tom. 1. de Relig. lib. 2. de diebus festis, cap. 10. Fagundez in primum Eccl. praeceptum, lib. 1. cap. 10. num. 6. Servile works are those to whose exercise the mechanical arts are directed, distinct from the liberal arts. Others add, besides these, that we are accustomed also to employ and assign servants. D. Bonaventure: etiam servos adhibere, et deputare solemus. — "we are accustomed also to employ and assign servants."

THEREFORE not all bodily works are servile, but only those exercised by the mechanical arts, and those which are habitually done by servants, according to some; but of this I shall speak below.

The holy Doctor admirably enumerates the mechanical arts, and their sufficient enumeration, in the Opusculo, Reductio artium ad Theologiam, et serm. 4. in decem praecepta, together with Hugh of St. Victor lib. 2. Didasc. cap. 22.

SEVEN therefore are counted: wool-working, armor-making, agriculture, hunting, navigation, the theatrical art, medicine.

He sets out their sufficiency thus: every mechanical art is either for solace, whether to banish sadness or need; or for utility, whether it benefits or delights. If it is for solace and delight, then it is the theatrical art, which is the art of games, containing every kind of game, whether in songs, or in instruments, or in images, or in gestures of the body.

But if it is ordered to utility, or the profit of the outward man, this can be either with respect to covering, or with respect to nourishment, or with respect to both supports. If it is with respect to covering: either that is of soft and gentle material, and so it is wool-working, linen-working, and silk-working; or it is of strong material, and so it is armor-making, or the smith's art of all arms for defense and offense, whether of metal, or wood, or stone, as ramparts, towers, etc. walls, citadels, houses. But if they help with respect to nourishment, this can be twofold, because we are fed by vegetables and by sentient things. If with respect to vegetables, it is agriculture. If with respect to sentient things, then it is hunting, fishing, fowling. Or in another way: because helping with respect to food can be twofold, either with respect to the generation and multiplication of foods, and so it is the cultivation of fields; or with respect to the preparation of foods, and so it is hunting, fowling, fishing, and every preparatory art of foods; such as are those of bakers, cooks, innkeepers. All these are included under the name of hunting, on account of its preeminent excellence in preparing choice and abundant fare. But if toward both supports, this is twofold: either by supplying a lack, and so it is navigation, under which is contained all commerce, whether of things pertaining to covering or to nourishment; or by removing impediments, such as harms; and so it is medicine, whether that which consists in the compounding of electuaries, potions, ointments by the apothecaries (who also prepare spices and the like for the wholesome seasoning of foods;) so too surgery is ordered to the care of wounds, incision, etc. But the theatrical art is unique. This St. Bonaventure sets forth in the cited opuscule.

From which the holy Doctor deduces that not only those works are mechanical which we are accustomed to perform through servants, but also certain others, such as hunting, fishing, fowling, which are also practiced by nobles, to which add playing musical instruments, preparing foods, etc., as Fagundez also concedes cap. 11. num. 1. Wherefore he does not rightly place, cap. 10., in the definition of a mechanical work, that it is exercised by servants. Better are almost all mechanical works called servile, because servants are employed for them, at least for some of them. So in hunting, stretching the nets, etc.; rather are they called mixed and common. There are also certain others which are reduced to works of the soul, such as reading, writing, studying, and transcribing: there are yet others, though not servile, nevertheless forbidden by the Church, namely markets and the exercises of the forum.

Of all these I shall treat briefly here.

The holy Doctor asserts first, serm. 4. citato, that merely servile works are forbidden, necessity being set aside.

It is proved from Exodus 20, Levit. 23 and other passages cited, quaest. 4. There follow D. Thom. 1. 2. quaest. 122. art. 4. ad 3. D. Antonin. 2. part. tit. 9. cap. 7. §. Quantum ad tertium, Alens. 3. part. quaest. 32. memb. 4. art. 4. Richardus 3. dist. 37. art. 2. quaest. 5. Angel. and Tabien. see Feriae, Sylvester see Dominica, quaest. 3. Toletus lib. 4. cap. 24. Clavis Reg. lib. 7. cap. 1. Suarez Tom. 1. de relig. lib. 2. de diebus Festis, cap. 20. Fagundez lib. 1. cap. 11. and commonly the rest, collected by Bassaeus, see Festum 2.

He asserts secondly that certain servile works are permitted on a feast day on account of ordinary necessity, such as cooking and preparing foods. Although so many labors in the seasoning and preparation of foods were not in use in ancient times, yet they are now permitted by custom, as Suarez notes cap. 21. Fagundez cap. 10. in fine, et cap. 11. a num. 19. The reason of D. Bonaventure is, because necessity is not bound by laws; these are natural works, not simply servile, and necessary for living.

In the same way, and advancing further, are the works necessary in the medical art.

Nor do other works of nature press less, such as eating, drinking, clothing oneself, undressing, washing oneself, etc. So also Suarez num. 2. Fagundez num. 9. cap. 11. Bassaeus loco cit. and others among them.

Likewise making a journey is necessary, not servile, whether on foot or on horseback. So Angel. see Feriae, num. 15. Rosella num. 26. Azor below, Suarez loco cit. num. 27. Diana part. 4. tract. 4. miscel. resol. 221. Per accidens, however, it can be forbidden, if it is done with great labor in procuring a horse, a carriage, etc. So Azor Tom. 1. lib. 1. cap. 27. quaesito 8. Suarez loco cit. and others: and Caietanus quaest. 121. art. 4. Sà in Aphorism. see Festum, say these are servile works; but permitted by custom; and Sà adds, when accompanied by much baggage: Fagundez indeed num. 9. says this is to be understood when a Prince or Prelate makes the journey. Diana moreover adds p. p. tract. 15. resol. 36. et part. 2. tract. 1. miscellaneor. resol. 36. et 4. part. tract. 4. resol. 221. that grooms and the like can, without mortal sin, having heard Mass, lead laden beasts of burden, indeed even load them. Nevertheless, if in loading they spend a notable time, which must exceed two hours, it will be a mortal sin. So also others with Bassaeus num. 10.

But sweeping the whole house for many hours is forbidden, says Fagundez.

The holy Doctor asserts thirdly that certain mechanical arts instituted for mere pleasure are licit on a feast. But he calls these the moderate theatrical art, such as song and instrumental music. The reason is, because the Church permits them on account of our infirmity. So also Fagundez cap. 10. Tolet. lib. 4. cap. 24. Tannerus disp. 5. quaest. 6. num. 7. and others among them, and Bonacina punct. 2. num. 25. Bassaeus 2. num. 10.

IT IS DOUBTED: Whether on these days fishing, hunting, fowling, and the like are licit.

The first opinion is that such works are liberal, if done on feast days for recreation. So Angelus, see Feriae, num. 26. Sylvester, see Dominica, numero 7. Sotus lib. 2. de Iustitia, quaest. 4. art. 4. Rosella, see Feriae, num. 15. and others collected by Azor part. 1. lib. 1. cap. 27. quaesito 7. But Granado 2. 2. tract. 12. disp. 14. sect. 7. num. 65. following Medina, Navarro, and Lopez adds, that neither hunting done for gain, etc. is a servile work, and says that only that fishing is servile which consists in carrying nets, rowing, and performing similar labor. Filliucius indeed teaches tom. 2. tract. 27. cap. 9. num. 172. that hunting and fishing as an office, which consist wholly in the weariness of the body, are servile, not that which is devoted to recreation. Azor loco cit. subscribes; all are cited by Diana part. 4. Tract. 4. miscell. resol. 222. and he attends to those who disagree. Almost subscribes Bassaeus num. 12.

The second opinion judges altogether that hunting, etc. is a servile work. So Suarez cap. 28. Fagundez lib. 1. cap. 11. num. 16. Yet by reason of custom it is licit to hunt, but not to fish, unless on account of urgent necessity. Toletus indeed lib. 1. cap. 24. Caietanus art. 4. quaest. 122. Sotus above, all say that by custom all are licit.

The holy Doctor serm. citato, better than all, says that hunting, etc. is indeed a servile and forbidden work, yet that with respect to those things ordered to sustenance it is licit, for instance, to catch a hare on that day.

That they are servile works is proved from Dialectic, where among the mechanical arts even servile ones are counted. It is confirmed, because they consist in great labor. That they are also illicit is proved from cap. licet, de feriis.

That they are licit with respect to sustenance is proved, because just as seasonings for preparing are licit, so is preparing what is to be seasoned. For they are natural works, necessary in this respect.

IT IS DOUBTED secondly: Whether barbers may shave beards on feasts.

Diana answers p. p. Tract. 15. miscell. resol. 54. that on account of the parvity of matter they do not sin if they shave the beard of one or another, and he cites Graffius decis. part. 1. lib. II. cap. 23. Navarr. cap. 13. Vega Tom. 1. cap. 114. casu 2. Rodriguez tract. 1. c. 21. Sayrus lib. VII. cap. 2. Molfesius Tom. 1. tract. 11. cap. 17. num. 68. Azor lib. I. cap. 28. quaestio 5. Tom. 2. He adds, if they shave all who come, they are excused by reason of custom, if it exists; for since the things forbidden on a feast day were introduced by human custom, nothing prevents their being removed by a contrary custom, tolerated by prelates, as Sotus and Caietanus note, cited by Reginaldus tom. 2. lib. XIX. cap. 3. and others, cited in the Clavis Regiae lib. VII. cap. 2. Fernandez adds, in exam. part. 1. cap. 7. that they are also excused for another reason, namely cessation of gain, because on weekdays, on account of occupations, they do not come for haircutting; and he relies on cap. licet, where the Pontiff grants fishing for herrings on feasts for this cause: But I say with Reginaldus Tom. 2. lib. XIX. cap. ciu. num. 51. Suarez cap. 33. Diana above, that the reason is unlike; for that fishing is granted because it occurs at a fixed season of the year and passes; but it is not the same with daily hair-cutting; otherwise it will be licit to frequent almost all servile works.

Indeed Fagundez lib. I. cap. 14. with others says, that one hour will be light, if they cut hair on one or another feast; but if they continue on every feast, it will be lethal, by reason of the continuation of matter. But this is not proved to me, for the time of one hour of this Sunday is not continued with the hour of the future Sunday.

IT IS DOUBTED thirdly: Whether it is licit to paint on a feast day.

Ludovicus Lopez p. p. Institut. cap. 25. Medina Instruct. lib. I. cap. 14. assert that it is licit even for gain.

Others deny that it is licit for gain, but only without gain. So Azor Tom. 2. lib. II. cap. 27. quaestio 6. Sylvester, see Dominica, quaest. 5. Armill. see Festum, Angelus, Rosella, Tabiena, under the word feria, Saytus lib. VII. cap. 2. num. 16. and others cited by Pasqualigo decis. 142.

Suarez cap. 26. Caietanus art. 4. Fagundez cap. 11. num. 10. judge the art of painting to be mechanical and altogether forbidden; who, num. 13., proclaims it altogether prohibited, even gratis. And so they reprehend this license: for painting is a mechanical art in itself, nor does it change its nature from an extrinsic liberal end, as I said above, as Fagundez notes loco citato, and Bassaeus num. 7.

Nor does it help that certain nobles sometimes exercise it; for this is per accidens.

You will ask fourthly: Whether fighting (bellari) is forbidden on a feast day.

It is answered, that it is a mechanical work. So Suarez cap. 28. Fagundez num. 12. with D. Bonaventure serm. 4. citato, and the Opusc. Reductio artium ad Theol. For the military art is mechanical, as is clear from Dialectic. Yet it seems to have been introduced by custom, that the art of fencing may be licitly learned on feast days.

Yet acts of warring can be licit on account of necessity, as is clear from cap. Quod non licet, de reg. iuris, in 6. where among the things not licit on a feast day is placed military action, unless on account of necessity. See the Doctors in Bassaeus num. 13.

A truly defensive war is licit, of which is understood leg. omnes Iudices, Cod. de feriis, et leg. Divus, ff. de feriis. But an aggressive one is not ordinarily licit, unless through Epikeia in a just war there be an occasion of victory.

You will ask fifthly: Whether transcribing is forbidden on a feast.

It is answered, that transcribing is not a servile work, even if done for gain. So Suarez cap. 25. Medina Instruct. lib. I. cap. 14. §. 8. Ludovicus Lopez p. p. cap. 52. Sà see Festum, Sayrus lib. VII. cap. 2. num. 14. Fagundez lib. I. cap. 11. num. 7. Diana p. p. Tract. 15. resol. 35. citing others with Bassaeus l. num. 8.

It is proved, because this action is in itself liberal and mental: therefore from the extrinsic end of gain it does not become mechanical. Others, however, judge it a servile work, but not liberal. As also arranging types for the printer. See Bassaeus loco cit. contra Dianam part. IV. tract. 4. resol. 62.