Case III: Formal and Material Cooperation

Case.—John, a public hack driver, declares, in confessing his sins, that he is in the habit of driving people to brothels. This he does at times on their simple request. At other times, in response to their demand if he knows of such places, he replies affirmatively, and drives them there. John argues that since such resorts are allowed to exist, it is not unlawful to drive his patrons to them, nor wrong to inform them of their existence and location; otherwise his business and income will suffer gravely, as others are prepared to do this work.

Questions:

1. What is formal, what is material cooperation?

2. What constitutes a grave cause sufficient to make material cooperation lawful?

3. What of the existence and the renting of houses to prostitutes?

4. Did John act rightly?

5. What is the confessor’s duty?

Solution.—1. Formal cooperation is that by which we aid another in his sin, and consent to the malice of the sin. Material cooperation is the aid we give to the action of another, not as it is sinful, but precisely as it is a physical action. It is either: (1) immediate, if one take part in the sinful deed; or (2) mediate, if one performs acts that lead up to or follow the sin.

Formal cooperation is never lawful. It includes the consent of the will to the sin of another. It contains a two-fold malice: against charity and against the particular virtue violated.

Material cooperation is lawful if the two following conditions are present: (1) The action of the one cooperating must be good, or at least indifferent; (2) there must exist for his action a just cause, proportioned to the gravity of the sin, and the proximity of the cooperation.

2. What constitutes a grave cause in this matter depends on the estimation of prudent men. St. Alphonsus (Theol. Mor. Lib. II, No. 59) gives the following rules: The cause which permits material cooperation must be proportionately more serious and more weighty, (1) when the sin committed is graver; (2) when it is more probable that without your cooperation the other will not sin, or when the effect is more certain; (3) when your cooperation touches more proximately on the sin; (4) when you have less right to place the cooperating action; (5) when the sin is against justice, detrimental to a third party.

3. In large cities, in order to avoid greater evils, brothels are permitted by law, and according to a probable opinion it is morally lawful to rent houses for such purposes (Sabetti, No. 187). If, however, grave injury would thereby result to an otherwise respectable neighborhood, or if the location were such as to offer a greater opportunity for vice, such renting would not be permissible.

4. To answer the fourth question, we must determine the nature of John’s cooperation. It does not appear that he cooperated formally, since he did not intend the evil involved. His cooperation, then, was only material. Further, it was not immediate, as it preceded the sins committed. Since, therefore, John’s action of driving his “fares” was morally indifferent and since his livelihood depends on the good will of his patrons, it does not seem that he was guilty of serious sin. It is clear, though, that material cooperation is not Permissible without a sufficient reason. The first reason assigned by John for his course of action viz. that such places are allowed to exist, was not sufficient. It should be remarked also that if John’s passengers would be unable to resort to the houses they seek without his assistance and information, his cooperation would be much more proximate than it is and the reason for it would have to be correspondingly much graver.

5. One of the reasons given for John’s actions seems to be sufficiently grave to exempt him from mortal sin. The confessor should admonish him, however, of the danger that lies even in material cooperation and of the duty of avoiding it in future or of making it more remote, as far as this may be possible.