V. On Vain Observance

What is vain observance? - Vain observance consists in this, that someone employs means neither proportioned by their nature nor instituted by God or by the Church for obtaining a certain effect. It differs from divination in that the latter is ordered to knowledge of hidden things, but vain observance to any effects whatsoever to be obtained. It agrees with divination because it also rests upon a pact, express or tacit, with a demon. It matters little indeed that a demon is not expressly invoked; for he is invoked equivalently. For since God does not mingle himself with vain things, the effect can be expected only from a demon. Since someone uses inept means, he uses them not as causes but as signs, and thus they pertain to pacts of significations entered into with demons. S. Th. 2. 2, q. 96, aa. 1, 2, 3; L. 24.

Of how many kinds is vain observance? - There are four species of vain observance, which are distinguished only materially by reason of effects. 1. If certain useless things are observed for acquiring an infusion of knowledge, without other study, and it is called the notory art. It differs from divination because the latter directly regards speculative knowledge; the former directly regards an infusion of knowledge for one's own convenience, but indirectly the knowledge itself. Thus they sin who take a prepared potion, or employ a certain prayer, so that they may immediately become learned. 2. If useless things are observed for obtaining health, and it is called the observance of healths. Thus they sin who use unknown names and certain empty ceremonies for driving away animals; or who carry amulets, wrappings, or something similar for repelling diseases. L. 18; S. Th. 2. 2, q. 178, a. 2. 3. If from consideration of some trifling event it is determined what will be future, and someone thence regulates his actions, and it is called the observance of events. It differs from divination, both because observations of this sort are without any reason and art, whence they are more vain and superstitious, and because they look to directing one's own acts; but divination rather intends speculative knowledge of hidden things. Thus he would sin who refused to sit with thirteen at table as though this were a sign of death, although this for the most part can be excused, since no true faith is given to this matter, but there is a certain simple and empty fear. 4. If the observance concerns bodies to be variously changed and other wondrous or harmful effects to be produced, and it is called magic or malefice. Malefice contains a threefold moral malice against religion, charity, and justice. One malefice is amatory, or a philter; another is poisonous. The former is for exciting carnal love or hatred toward some person, the demon moving the phantasy of the man or the humors of the body, yet doing nothing upon the will; whence it does not induce necessarily to committing sin. But the latter is for inflicting harm upon someone, whether in his goods or in his health.

Job 1:12; S. Th. 2. 2, q. 178, a. 2. But here it must be noted that possession consists in this, that a demon in some way is united to a human body, and works extraordinary things in it and through it. But if the demon does not seem to reside in the body of a man, but only works externally, vexing it in various ways, then there is obsession. It must be noted besides that "power over demons has not been committed to man, so that he could licitly use them for whatever he wished." S. Th. 2. 2, q. 96, a. 2 ad 3. Struggl 28, 41, 42, 43; Suarez, cc. 15, 16; L. 15, 23; S. Th., Quodl. 4, q. 9, a. 16; 2. 2, q. 96.

What kind of sin is vain observance? - As divination, so also vain observance is a grave sin, both because it attributes divine honor to a creature by expecting from it what ought to be looked for from God alone, and because it rests upon a pact, and consequently imports society with a demon. Yet many times that which contains only an implicit invocation of a demon can be excused from mortal sin by reason of ignorance and lack of consideration, or of very doubtful faith. L. 15; S. Th. 2. 2, q. 96.

You will resolve: Those are guilty of superstition who wear ligatures marked with certain characters, who invoke certain unknown names, or employ a certain number of crosses or prayers for healing wounds, for making themselves invulnerable, etc. Likewise those who wear certain prayers to St. Bridget or other prayers, expecting an altogether infallible effect from them. Yet they are not to be blamed, indeed they are very much to be praised, who wear pious medals, sacred effigies, or relics of the Saints, hoping that they will specially obtain divine help for themselves. Those also are guilty of superstition who hold some days as fortunate and others as unfortunate, so that they direct their actions from this; or who for expelling diseases require herbs gathered on such a feast, etc.

But it is not superstitious to observe the moon or the times more apt for gathering herbs, cutting trees, etc.; nor to wear sacred things or words of Sacred Scripture for the honor of God or of the Saints, and for imploring their help. Likewise it is not superstitious to recite a certain number of prayers, nor to do all those things which can increase devotion, provided that an infallible force is not attributed to them. Nor is it in any way superstitious, indeed it is very religious and pious, to recite novena prayers, or to repeat prayers so many times in the worship of Our Lord, or of the Blessed Virgin, or of some Saint, by reason of indulgences which are attached to such a number of prayers, or by reason of mystical signification for increasing devotion; for example, a ternary in honor of the Most Holy Trinity, a quinary in honor of the five wounds of Our Lord Jesus Christ, a septenary because it recalls to mind the six days of creation and the seventh on which the Lord rested, a novenary in honor of the nine months in which Christ was in the womb of his Mother, etc., provided that infallible force is not attached to such a number, to a certain day, or to a fixed time. Struggl 33, 34; Cajetan, in q. 96, aa. 3, 4; L. 17-22; S. Th. 2. 2, q. 96.

In doubt concerning the natural cause of some effect, is it permitted to make an experiment? - Vain observance is discerned from the insufficiency of the cause, from some vain circumstance, and from the infallibility which is attributed to a fallible thing. L. 16. In doubt whether effects come from a natural cause or from a demon, they can be attributed to the powers of nature; for the possession of right prevails, since many things lie hidden from us which are altogether natural, and we can altogether investigate them. And therefore it is licit to procure those effects by experiment, since it is not established that the thing is evil. Yet a protestation against any intervention of a demon is deliberately made beforehand. Holy Office, 26 July 1899. But in doubt whether effects are produced by a demon or by God, if it is certain that they cannot come from a natural cause, they are to be attributed to a demon, unless the sanctity of the operator or other clear indications persuade the contrary; because it is rash to think that miracles are always being done. Whence then it is not licit to try whether the effect will follow or not. L. 20; S. Th. 2. 2, q. 96, aa. 1, 2; Struggl 32; La-Croix, l. 3, p. 1, n. 28; E. M. 485.

Does magic introduce a new species beyond vain observance? - R. Negative. For magic does not differ from vain observance except merely materially, because its effects are more wondrous, for example, the changing of bodies, etc. But in moral species it differs neither from vain observance nor from divination, because it matters little whether knowledge of hidden things or wondrous effects are sought from a demon. Therefore these three in the moral line contain the same malice in species. But whether these three are distinguished from idolatry, some deny, because they contain implicitly the worship of a demon, and implicit and explicit do not change the species. Others affirm, because these three contain only commerce with a demon, whose help man implores. Ex. 22:18; Struggl 39.

What can be done to remove a malefice? - It is permitted to use natural remedies sought from medicine for correcting corrupt humors; exorcisms, sacraments, pilgrimages, invocations of Saints; and the destruction of the signs through which the demon harms, yet without another malefice. It is also permitted to place a contrary sign, provided it is honorable of itself. The reason is that this is nothing other than to remove the sign and dissolve the pact with the demon. If a sorcerer can remove the malefice in a licit way, it is permitted to summon him to this, to ask him, indeed even to induce him by money, and this even if it is established that he will do this through a new malefice, just as for a cause it is permitted to ask a usurer for a loan at usury. And the reason is that, since I have the right to ask what can rightly be furnished by him and is indifferent, it will be imputed to his malice if he does it badly.

If the sorcerer cannot remove the malefice except through a new malefice, it is not permitted to induce him to this, because this would be to induce him to sin and to cooperate in an intrinsically evil act. If it is doubted whether he can remove it without a new malefice, it is not permitted to ask it of him, because the presumption stands against it, that he knows no mode except an illicit one. But it can more easily be presumed that he who placed the signs can destroy them without a new malefice, than he who did not place them. Whence, if this latter offers his work, he must first be examined concerning the mode of dissolving it. Suarez, c. 17, n. 10; L. 24 seqq.; Struggl 44 seqq.

What must be thought concerning more recent superstitions which are circulated? - Of superstitions of this sort there are various effects known to all: mechanical, physiological, psychological, spiritual effects. Likewise various causes are employed or are said to be employed for producing effects of this sort; whence various names are taken either from the effects or from the causes, namely magnetisms, animal magnetism, spiritism, rotating tables, somnambulism, hypnotism. But two things are to be noted in a matter of this sort: namely the proportion or disproportion of the effect with the natural cause; and the honorableness or shamefulness of the acts which are employed, or of the conditions which are required beforehand, for example, that the magnetized person subject himself wholly to the will of the magnetizing person and hand himself over to his judgment. From the former disproportion or proportion, superstition is had or not; from the latter honorableness or shamefulness, even without superstition, the thing will be able to be illicit, as immoral.

As to the preternatural character of the aforesaid effects, that must be carefully observed: whether, although some effect can absolutely be produced by a natural cause, it is in fact produced by this cause, or rather by another preternatural cause, all its circumstances being considered. Moreover magnetism, animal magnetism, spiritism, rotating tables, somnambulism, and hypnotism, according to those effects which commonly happen in their use, are not permitted; since either in reality they do not differ from divination, vain observance, magic, and malefice, since the effects, considering their intrinsic nature, the mode by which they are produced, and other circumstances, exceed the powers of natural causes; or they are excited by shameful and immoral acts; or certainly they often bear before themselves both that disproportion and this shamefulness. Therefore it is also illicit to be present at experiments of these effects, although merely passively, since it is a sin of cooperation in an intrinsically evil thing, especially in the evocation and consultation of spirits. Holy Office, 30 March 1898; S. Th. 2. 2, qq. 95, 96; C. G. l. 3, c. 114; Quodl. 12, a. 13; Ferraris, Supplem., v. Magnetismus.

But if the discussion is merely about magnetism or electricity and about hypnotism applied to certain diseases to be cured, and about effects altogether of an inferior and natural order, although wondrous, which are obtained in hospitals and in the care of other sick persons, and due cautions are employed in their use, nothing indeed appears which contains superstition, nor are they per se opposed in any way to honorable morals. For the same effects are obtained by several other natural causes, especially in natural somnambulism, in sleep and dream. Therefore as to merely natural effects, magnetism is not illicit. But it is illicit as to preternatural effects, considering the mode in which natural causes operate, such as rotating tables, at which consequently it is not permitted to be present. Animal magnetism is likewise illicit as to the extraordinary effects of magnetic sleep, somnambulism, and clairvoyance. Somnambulism is a certain state midway between wakefulness and sleep, in which certain wondrous effects are produced in the faculty both sensitive and intellectual of the soul, which is placed under the command of the magnetizer. Nor indeed, as regards hypnotism, can there be any difficulty from suggestion by which it is excited; for nothing is more common and natural than suggestion, either from other persons or from things themselves, affairs and occupations, by which a certain idea is excited in us, by which we are struck and then led, and which in sleep also, with its various changes, is represented to us. Yet unless due cautions are employed, and its use is altogether moderate, as much as the necessity of the disease requires, there is not absent danger of grave harm, both physical and moral. And it is altogether illicit as to other wondrous and altogether preternatural effects. For at the same time insensibility and a wondrous excitation of the senses are had. E. M.