Case XXV: A Case of Conscience Regarding External Profession of Faith

A young man, brought up as a Protestant, has for some time been convinced that the Catholic is the only true Church. He resolves accordingly to enter it, but there are serious difficulties in his way. He lives with his parents, who are strict Protestants, and the least hint of his intention would at once arouse their anger; it would be impossible for him to continue to live peaceably in his parents' house; he would have to hear all manner of bitter remarks and finally would be compelled to quit his home. He will not be in a position to support himself for about three years; after that time he will be free from his parents' authority and able to take the important step openly. Being perplexed as to how to act, he succeeds in having a private conversation with the local Catholic priest, to whom he reveals his difficulties. The priest, as is his duty, has recourse to the Bishop. How will the latter decide the case?

The question is this: Is the young man bound to confess his faith in spite of all obstacles, and publicly to be received into the Catholic Church, or may the Bishop allow him to be received secretly, and to keep the fact of his conversion concealed until he can leave his father's house?

Against an affirmative answer may be quoted our Lord's words: " Qui confitebitur me coram hominibus, confitebor et ego eum coram Patre meo " (Matth. x, 32); and also the threat: " Qui me erubuerit et meos sermones, hunc Filius hominis erubescet, cum venerit in majestate sua " (Luke ix, 26). To obtain a just appreciation of these severe words, we must notice the contrasting clause, added by our Lord Himself. To the words, " Qui 'confitebitur me," etc., the contrasting clause is not: " Qui me confessus non fuerit," etc., as it is with reference to faith: " Qui non crediderit, condemnabitur," but it is: " Qui negaverit me," " Qui me erubuerit." Christ shows us plainly in this way that it is not permissible positively to deny His name and doctrine, and that false shame is no sufficient reason for a man's concealing his faith.

After setting aside this objection, we may adduce the following principle in support of an affirmative answer: Praecepta affirmativa obligant semper, sed non pro semper, or Praecepta affirmativa non obligant ad semper, sed certis duntaxat temporibus agendum. The Confessio exterma fidei is precisely a praeceptum affirmativum. It is, moreover, a generally accepted doctrine that weighty reasons, such as the certainty of incurring serious injury, relieve us from the duty of obeying laws that are not absolutely necessary to our salvation. The Confessio externa fidei is a law of this kind. It is permissible to conceal our religious convictions, where neither the honor of God, nor our own salvation, nor our neighbor's welfare, require us to reveal them, provided that we have good reasons for keeping them secret.

In the case under consideration a Confessio externa does not affect the honor of God nor the welfare of a neighbor. The young man's own salvation might be imperiled in his present circumstances, as, should it be made his duty to proclaim his faith, he might put off his conversion, and possibly never be converted.

My conclusion is, therefore, that the Bishop can give the young man permission to be received into the Catholic Church secretly, and can at the same time dispense him from observing the commandments of the Church, although he ought to hear Mass occasionally, when he is able to do so. He can easily receive the Sacraments secretly, in some other town for instance.

Another question arises in connection with this subject: What is the young man to do if his parents wish him to accompany them to a Protestant church? How is he to behave? If he cannot avoid yielding to their wishes or commands, he may go with them, but he must not take part in the singing or prayers of the service.

In support of the opinions expressed above, we may quote the following passage from St. Thomas Aquinas: “If a disturbance among unbelievers arises from an open profession of faith without any benefit to the faith or to the faithful, it is not praiseworthy in such a case to profess the faith publicly; hence the Lord says in Matthew 7: ‘Do not give what is holy to dogs, nor scatter your pearls before swine, lest they turn and tear you to pieces.’ But if some benefit to the faith is hoped for or necessity is present, a man must profess the faith publicly, disregarding the disturbance among unbelievers; hence it is said in Matthew 15 that, when the disciples told the Lord that the Pharisees had been scandalized on hearing His word, the Lord answered: let them alone—that is, let them be disturbed—they are blind and leaders of the blind” (II.—II. qu. 3, a. 2, ad 3).—Professor Josef Aertnys, C.SS.R.