Preliminary Notices

What is moral theology? - If the name is considered, it is that part of theology which is concerned with morals. But if the thing itself is considered, it can be defined: that part of theology which, resting upon divine law manifested through revelation, inquires what is lawful and what is unlawful in human actions, so that it may direct these actions in order to eternal life. The human act is the subject of this science. The lawfulness or unlawfulness of human acts is the material object of this science. But the lawfulness or unlawfulness of human acts, insofar as it is demonstrable by divine law manifested through revelation, or by the revealed word of God, constitutes the formal object of this science. From this also the proper source of this science is clear. Therefore moral theology is distinguished from moral philosophy, because the former directs human acts to the supernatural end, the latter to the natural end of man; the former rests especially upon the light of faith, but the latter upon the natural light of reason. Hence it is easily clear how great is the excellence, necessity, and usefulness of moral theology.

By divine law manifested through revelation; for the principles of morals flow from the same sources as dogmas. They are contained first of all in Scripture, and are made known by Tradition, of which splendid monuments exist in the writings of the holy Fathers. Writings of this kind do not contain a distinct and methodical account of moral discipline, but certainly, together with the dogmas of faith, they present the principles of morals, besides also several particular cases, in which what is lawful and what is not lawful is discussed, as is especially to be seen in Tertullian, Cyprian, Chrysostom, and Augustine. But those who afterward treated moral discipline according to the method of the schools explained those principles more fully, adapting them to the individual cases which arise day by day.

What is lawful, what is unlawful; for in this it is distinguished from Ascetic and Mystical theology. Ascetic theology adds to Moral theology, commonly so called, in that it does not so much direct human acts so that they may simply be good, as hand down the manner by which human life may be adorned with all the virtues. Mystical theology, moreover, adds to common sanctity the manner of a special union with God, which is granted not to all, but only to some. Moral theology is also distinguished from Canon Law. For in the latter the laws by which the Church is governed are properly explained, especially as regards her whole external government. But Moral Theology also considers these laws, certainly, yet insofar as they bind in conscience and must be observed, and consequently what, also in regard to them, is lawful or unlawful in conscience. S. Th. I. p. q. I., 1. 2. q. 91. a. 4.; Commentary On the Nature of Moral Theology.

What have been the vicissitudes of Moral Theology? - There have been various vicissitudes of Moral Theology, both as regards its didactic development and as regards the development of the general rule of morals in doubtful cases.

As regards its methodical form, various ages can be distinguished in it, and they are the following six.

The first age, from the beginning, in the time of the Apostles, was when moral doubts were resolved by the decisions of the Supreme Pontiffs, by the decrees of Councils, and by the opinions of the Fathers, who especially in their homilies and sermons to the people explained those things which are necessary for rightly informing morals and for salvation.

The second age succeeds a little later, when in the first centuries of the Church the use of canonical penance became established, and Penitential Books were employed. Special treatises on moral matters were gradually multiplied in this age, either together with speculative doctrines or separately, up to the twelfth century, when, after St. Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury, who died in the year 1033, and after St. Bernard, first Abbot of Clairvaux, who died in 1153, Peter Lombard, called the Master by antonomasia, wrote the books of the Sentences, in the third of which he treats of the virtues and of vices; he died in 1164. Benedict XIV, de Syn., l. 11, c. 11; Decree of Gratian, at the end.

The third age extends from the thirteenth century to the fourteenth. In this age sacred practical doctrine made great progress, especially through the work of William of Paris, who died in 1249, St. Bonaventure, O. Min., who died in the year 1274, St. Thomas Aquinas, O.P., who died in the year 1274, called the Angelic Doctor, St. Raymond of Pennafort, of the Order of Preachers, who died in the year 1275, and Peter Paludanus, O.P., who died in the year 1342, who for St. Alphonsus is a doctor of perfect knowledge.

The fourth age embraces the two following centuries, the fifteenth and the sixteenth; and it is distinguished by the notable saints who flourished in this age. Among others are celebrated St. John of Capistrano, O. Min., who died in the year 1440, St. Bernardine of Siena, O.S. Fr., who died in the year 1444, St. Lawrence Justinian, who died in the year 1455, St. Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence, who died in the year 1459, Thomas Cardinal Cajetan, O.P., who died in the year 1534, a man of most subtle genius, Francis de Vitoria, O.P., who died in the year 1546, Dominic Soto, O.P., who died in the year 1560, Peter Soto, O.P., who died in the year 1563, Bartholomew Medina, O.P., who died in the year 1581, St. Charles Borromeo, who died in the year 1584, Martin Azpilcueta, called Navarrus, who died in the year 1590, Cardinal Francis Toletus, S.J., who died in the year 1596, and Louis Molina, S.J., who died in the year 1600.

The fifth age embraces the seventeenth and eighteenth century up to St. Alphonsus M. de Liguori, and it is distinguished by many learned scholastic theologians who expressly expounded and illustrated moral questions in copious treatises. Among many others there excel Thomas Sanchez, S.J., who died in the year 1610, Francis Suarez, S.J., who died in the year 1617, Leonard Lessius, S.J., who died in the year 1623, Basil Pontius, O.S. Aug., who died in the year 1629, the Salmanticenses, O. Carm. Disc., from 1631 to 1722, Martin Bonacina, who died in the year 1631, Giles Coninck, S.J., who died in the year 1633, Ferdinand De Castro Palao, S.J., who died in the year 1633, Paul Laymann, S.J., who died in the year 1635, Francis Sylvius, who died in the year 1649, Augustine Barbosa, who died in the year 1649, Cardinal John De Lugo, who died in the year 1660, Peter Marchant, O. Min., who died in the year 1661, Antoninus Diana, Cleric Regular Theatine, who died in the year 1663, Zacharias Pasqualigo, Cler. Reg., who died in the year 1664, Hermann Busembaum, S.J., who died in the year 1668, Henry Pirhing, S.J., who died in the year 1670, Thomas Tamburinus, S.J., who died in the year 1675, Anacletus Reiffenstuel, O.S. Franc., who died in the year 1703, Claude La-Croix, S.J., who died in the year 1714, Patrick Sporer, O. Min., who died in the year 1714, Prosper Lambertini, Benedict XIV, who died in the year 1758, and Lucius Ferraris, Ord. Min., who died in the year 1760.

The sixth age takes its beginning from St. Alphonsus M. de Liguori, who died in the year 1787, and extends down to our own times. St. Alphonsus, most outstanding in genius and doctrine as well as in sanctity of life, and divinely given for exterminating Jansenist errors and severities, wrote a Moral Theology in which he treats all questions learnedly, eruditely, and with the highest prudence, recounting almost all that had been handed down before him; hence he was deservedly adorned by the Church with the title of Doctor. Hence it happened that in more recent times Moral Theologians followed St. Alphonsus as leader and master. In our age very many compendia of Moral Theology have been published.

The name indeed is modest, but the works are certainly of notable merit. For in these compendia the whole doctrine of Moral Theology is handed down briefly and in order, and in them is contained, accurately set forth, not only the doctrine of the old theologians accumulated in the course of time, but also that which has been acquired for Moral Theology either from the more recent Acts of the Holy See and of the Sacred Roman Congregations, or also from the progress of the natural sciences. Nor indeed have more expansive treatments been lacking in this age, as can be seen in the treatises On Justice and Law and On Contracts of D. Carriere, and in the scholia, annotations, and dissertations of Fr. Anthony Ballerini, S.J. Zitelli, Enchirid.;

Hurter, Nomenclat.; D'Annibale, Summ., 4th ed., p. 1, n. 2 ff.; Bouquillon, Inst. Theol. Mor. Fundam., Introduction V.

As regards the development of the general rule of morals in doubtful cases, for several centuries each one defended his own opinion, according to the varying weight of the reasons, as seemed better to him. In the year 1572 Antonius Cordubensis first began to contend on behalf of law, because of the authoritative and obligatory prerogative of law, and accordingly he established that in doubt the safer part must always be held. But in the year 1577 Bartholomew Medina, professor at Salamanca, began, on the contrary, to contend on behalf of liberty because of the prerogative of its natural right, and accordingly he established that in doubtful matters he acts prudently and licitly who follows an opinion truly probable and favoring liberty, even after leaving aside the more probable opinion in favor of law. He was the first who reduced the doctrine concerning probable opinions into a system. From this Tutiorism and Probabilism arose.

In the following seventeenth century Synnichius, who died in the year 1666, brought Tutiorism down into Rigorism, while Caramuel brought Probabilism into Laxism: for the former denied that we can follow an opinion favoring liberty, even if it is most probable, which was condemned by Alexander VIII in the year 1690; the latter, on the opposite side, affirmed that we can follow an opinion even slightly probable, which was proscribed by Innocent XI in the year 1679. Hence in that same century Probabilism was widely diffused, and became a very common and very received doctrine in every school: of almost all the disciples of St. Thomas, of almost all the disciples of Scotus, of almost all the Fathers of the Society of Jesus, and of other theologians, with few exceptions.

But since many of these probabilists favored liberty too much, asserting that it was lawful to follow even an opinion that was probably and doubtfully probable, the Probabilists were divided among themselves, and there arose moderate Probabilism, standing in an opinion truly and gravely probable, and broad Probabilism, proceeding even to doubtful probability. Hence, while the Fathers of the Society of Jesus commonly remained in Probabilism, the Thomists passed over to Probabiliorism, requiring for liberty an opinion more probable than the opinion favoring law. Zitelli, in his Enchiridion, mentions as the head of the probabiliorists Francis Genet, who died in the year 1702.

In the eighteenth century, to overthrow broad Probabilism and Probabiliorism at the same time, St. Alphonsus M. de Liguori undertook to defend moderate Probabilism, establishing that it is lawful to use a probable opinion even in competition with one more probable for law, whenever the former has a certain and grave foundation. And for that reason the Holy Doctor called his system moderate Probabilism, against rigid Probabiliorists and lax Probabilists, Equiprobabilism, with aeque taken according to the nature of true probability, not according to equality of degree.

But since the word nevertheless was not free from ambiguity in itself, hence after St. Alphonsus another system arose, which the Redemptorist Fathers defend, namely the system of Equiprobabilism, by which it is established that it is lawful to follow an opinion favoring liberty when it is equally or a little less probable than the opinion favoring law; but that it is not lawful when the latter is much more probable than the former, which in truth falls back into Probabiliorism. La-Croix, vol. 1, prodromal book, Franc. Ant. Zachariae and Quaest. facti of Stephen De Champs; Zitelli, Enchir.; D'Annibale, p. 1, n. 8 ff.; Bouquillon, Inst. Theol. Mor. Fundam., Introduction II; E. E. M. n. 114, 119.

What is the division of Moral Theology; and what is the order of the treatises? - All the questions of moral theology are reduced to certain principal treatises into which it is divided. That we may proceed in order, we shall speak: 1. On human acts, which are as it were the proper subject of honesty and sin. 2. On conscience, which proximately regulates human actions. 3. On laws in general, which remotely regulate the same actions. 4. On sins, which arise from the lack of conformity of human actions with respect to the rule, whether proximate or remote. 5. On laws in particular, by which what is lawful or unlawful in human actions is determined in particular. The first four treatises constitute fundamental or general Moral Theology, while the remaining treatises, on particular laws, constitute special Moral Theology.

Now the following order must be used in treating of these particular laws: 1. On the properly evangelical precepts, which are established by revealed divine law, namely on the precepts of the theological virtues, faith, hope, charity, by which man immediately tends to his end. Moreover, "law is not imposed by any lord except upon his subjects.... But the first subjection of man to God is through faith.... And therefore faith is presupposed for the Precepts of the Law." S. Th. 2. 2. q. 16. a. 1. But through hope man is led to the observance of the law, and from charity follows the observance of the precepts. S. Th. 2. 2. q. 22. a. 2.

2. On the precepts of the Decalogue, properly constituted by natural law, although also positively confirmed by divine law, as is clear from Matt. 19:17 and Trent, sess. 6, c. 19. 3. On the precepts of the Church, which depend upon human law. 4. On the obligations of various states. For after the more general precepts one must proceed to the more particular.

By the observance of all these latter precepts man tends mediately to his end. For other precepts concern various acts of the moral virtues. And as God is immediately attained by the theological virtues, so by the other moral virtues there is immediately attained only the honesty of some created thing.

5. On the precepts of the sacraments, which contain a law at once commanding and assisting; for through them sanctifying grace is infused, and other aids of grace are given, by which man can observe the whole law, so that he may thus be preserved in the friendship of God, or be restored to it if, by transgressing the law, he has sinned gravely against God.

6. On censures, which are ecclesiastical penalties, preventing and following upon the transgression of certain special laws; and on irregularities, which are partly penalties and partly impediments to receiving sacred orders. 7. On indulgences, through which, sins having otherwise been remitted, the temporal punishment still due to them is remitted; and thus man is proximately disposed to attain eternal life. Theol. Wirceburg., on the Theological Virtues, 32 ff., on the Virtue of Religion, 9 f.

By what method is Moral Theology treated? - Moral theology can be treated by a threefold method: positive, casuistic, and scholastic. The first sets forth and proves moral precepts and dogmas in an orderly way from properly theological sources. The second insists upon resolving practical cases, by applying general principles to particular cases determined by various circumstances. The third proceeds by the discourse of reason rather than by authority. For moral precepts and dogmas, already positively proved by properly theological arguments, it confirms and illustrates by philosophical principles and reasons, and declares their connections, relations, and consequences.

That threefold method can easily be joined and employed together, and from this threefold method, mixed together, there is had a perfect and excellent treatment of moral theology. In the present Institutions we shall insist a little more upon reason than upon authority. For the disputation which is instituted in the schools is not directed to removing error, but to instructing and leading the mind to the understanding of the truth which it intends; "and this ought to rest upon reasons which investigate the root of truth and cause one to know how that which is said is true; otherwise, if the master determines the question by bare authorities, the hearer will indeed be made certain that it is so, but he will acquire nothing of science or understanding, but will depart empty." S. Th. Quodl. 4, a. 18.

This latter scholastic method is of itself brief in the treatment of questions. But since several of the older scholastics often undertook a long examination of the opposed opinions of others, in order to refute them directly, hence, especially as regards moral theology, it has happened that their most learned works were handled only by few. In order that these, our whatever-sort-of Institutions, may be of greater use and utility, we have determined to proceed in them in scholastic form, omitting that long discussion of the opinions of others, which we also observe was done in the Summa Theologica by the Angelic Doctor. - Pius VI, Constitution Auctorem fidei, August 28, 1794, proposition 76; Pius IX, Syllabus, proposition 13.