Chapter II — The axioms of certain casuists, which are as it were theological loci, or fountains, whence they draw their conclusions and resolutions

At the beginning of the first volume of this Compendium I set forth with a brief pen the loci of Christian theology. At present I shall set forth certain axioms which very many casuists, probabilism having been invented, hold as it were for theological loci, whence they draw their conclusions. Probabilism, as has been shown in its own place, constitutes as the rule of the honesty of conscience both truth and falsity, provided the latter be clothed with the garb of probability and invincible ignorance. And indeed, a new manner of opining having been invented, principles had to be devised which should be consonant with such a system. I say nothing which Pope Alexander VII, the Gallican Church, and the graver theologians did not foretell. But lest anyone could rightly suspect that I write these things to create odium against all casuists, I declare first that I venerate and look up to all authors; then openly and plainly I declare that I do not ascribe generally to all casuists the axioms which I shall presently subjoin, but only to those who in just so many words teach the same, and use the same. Finally, if what I am about to write shall appear to some less true, let there be full liberty of confuting and overthrowing the same. What now seem certain to me I bring forth. Beyond doubt I can be deceived, and therefore I subject them to the judgment of others. Moreover I have reserved this place for the refuting of these axioms, because their use chiefly obtains in the administering of the sacrament of Penance, as experience known to all makes plain. To the matter.

Beware of Rigorism, beware of the Rigorists. Holy kindliness is to be maintained: and Rigorism, daily growing stronger, is to be exterminated in the administering of the sacrament of Penance.

Public experience, known to all, argues the falsity of this first axiom. Matrons and little matrons, mistresses and lovers, mimes and sometimes mime-women, frequent the sacrament of Penance. What are their penances, what their fasts, what their hair-shirts, what their vigils, what their disciplines, what the correction of their morals? Rigorism therefore is a chimera. Where then is that Rigorism to be guarded against? Assuredly among those Christians to whom you say that the sacrament of Penance is administered you will not find Rigorism. Where then? Among those who refuse to administer the sacrament to the aforesaid Christians unless they first bid farewell to the amatory art, to games of money and of chance, to comedies, tragedies, theatres, dances, and usuries. But this is the evangelical doctrine and that of the universal Church, unless all things deceive me. And if those Christians in fact leave behind both sins and the occasions of sinning, they are at once absolved by those very theologians who are proclaimed as Rigorists. Guard is therefore to be kept against Laxism, which unfurls its banner higher, not against Rigorism, driven into exile by all Catholics. Do you appeal from experience open to all, to books? Behold, on one side Merbesius, Morinus, Gennet, Natalis Alexander, Pontas, Besombes, Antoine, who are called Rigorists. Behold, on the other side Caramuel, Bordon, Diana, Bonacina, Zanardi, Moya, La Cruz, Veracruz, Leander, Tamburini, Gobat, Castropalao, Sánchez, La Croix, Escobar, Alcover, Bizozer, Burgaber, Sporer, Razemberger. I ask all that they object even one single proposition of Rigorism, condemned or to be condemned, extracted from the works of the former class, and then let them call those men Rigorists. I on the contrary will give from the books of the second class not one, but hundreds and hundreds, partly certainly condemned, and partly such as to my weakness seem to be condemned. Let the wise now judge whether complaint is to be made of Rigorism. See the preface to Volume IX.

Every law is grave and burdensome. Therefore it is to be expounded in favour of subjects.

This is the second locus which certain casuists hold as it were for a theological one, that they may thence deduce kindly opinions. Beyond doubt all laws are adverse to human appetitions, to the flesh, and to the blood. But this casuistical axiom being admitted, all laws divine and human fall to the ground. Everywhere the Gospel of Christ cries out and commands that we crucify the flesh with our concupiscences, that we daily impose the cross upon our shoulders and follow, that we wage continual war upon our appetitions, that we renounce worldly spectacles, delights, and pomps, that finally we turn our eyes and senses away from vanity. What is graver, what more burdensome to humanity? If laws are to be interpreted in favour of human liberty, it is all up and done with the whole Gospel and with the rest of human laws.

So great is the divine mercy and kindliness toward men, that it holds in the same place truth and falsity adorned with the cloak of probability. Wherefore Christ the Lord on the dreadful day of the last judgment will say: Come, ye blessed of my Father, because you were liars, perjurers, and avaricious, judging probably that such things were lawful and honourable.

These things will perchance seem blasphemies to upright Christians. But let them hold for certain that this axiom is the chief and as it were the first theological locus of probabilistic theology, and the fountain whence the probabilists infer that men lying, perjuring themselves, fornicating, polluting themselves, and taking usury out of invincible ignorance, and judging probably that these and like works are honourable and worthy of praise, merit an eternal reward — by accident indeed. Holy Scripture cries out to the contrary: Thy law is truth. All thy commandments are truth. God is truth. Invincible ignorance excuses from sin, but it cannot change sin into a virtue worthy of the eternal kingdom, neither of itself nor by accident. To approve falsity and iniquity God can in no conceivable manner, because these things repugn the divine nature; for evil arises from any defect whatsoever, but good from an entire cause. These things have been utterly routed in Vol. II of the Apparatus to Christian Theology.

A law brought into controversy, and disputed on either side, is doubtful, nor sufficiently promulgated to oblige. But a doubtful law does not oblige, because the condition of the possessor is the better. Human liberty possesses against all laws, whether divine or human, doubtful in this manner.

This is the other chief and universal theological locus of the new manner of opining, or of Probabilism. I have overthrown the same in the place cited. Human liberty is born subject to the eternal law of God. Wherefore in doubt this law possesses against liberty, not liberty against the law. Hence it is that the sacred canons cry out: In doubtful matters the safer part is to be chosen. The sophisms of the probabilists have been shattered in the place cited.

Positively doubtful sins are not to be confessed. And this locus, says a celebrated probabilist, DAILY STRIKES DEEPER ROOTS.

The probabilists themselves confess, as I shall show below by their own words adduced, that this doctrine is new, but that, probabilistic kindliness growing strong, it daily strikes deeper roots and grows stronger. The axe is to be applied to these poisonous roots, as I at least judge, lest they infect and corrupt the ancient and sound doctrine of the Gospel, according to the prediction of the Apostle Paul: For there shall be a time when they will not endure sound doctrine … but will be turned unto fables. Below I shall of set purpose cut off entirely this shoot of Probabilism.

What grave, pious, and upright authors teach is lawful and honourable. Pious, upright, and grave authors teach that it is lawful to frequent theatres and comedies represented by persons coming forth upon the stage under the appearance of a diverse sex, that they may teach the amatory art to the hearers: they teach that these contracts, these games, these conversations, these solaces are lawful. Therefore Christians following the opinions of these pious, upright, and grave men are safe in conscience.

St. Paul cries out to the Galatians, chapter 1, that we must firmly cleave to the Gospel of Christ, whatever smooth-tongued men may say to the contrary. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. … For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. Who are those grave, pious, upright authors? Are they Fathers of the Church? Are they Doctors of the Church? What of this, that even if they were angels, St. Paul teaches that no credence is to be given them? Whence shall I know whether they are true or false Doctors? By their fruits, Christ answers. If they conform your morals and your life to the life of Christ, if they lead you by the narrow way and with the few, these are grave, upright, and pious men. If on the contrary they direct you by the broad and spacious way with the multitude; if they permit you to be fattened with the solaces and delights of the world; if they indulge you that you may embrace pomps, luxury, and worldly manners of living — these assuredly are false prophets and blind directors: and if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit.

My yoke is sweet. Favours are to be enlarged, odious things to be restricted.

This is almost the only testimony of the Gospel which very many probabilists everywhere inculcate. But of the same I inquire, how the yoke of Christ is sweet, if it commands a continual crucifixion of the flesh, a daily carrying of the cross, to pray for persecutors and calumniators; if it prescribes an unspotted chastity and a perpetual hatred of the world and of those things which are of the world; if it commands us to walk by the narrow and strait way; if it commands us to shed our blood and to exchange life for death, that his faith may be maintained before a tyrant. Is that a sweet yoke? Is that a light burden? Assuredly, all the Fathers answer, because human strength is so cherished, restored, and raised up by the strength of charity and the unction of divine love, that the yoke becomes light and sweet. Let it suffice to allege one of the Fathers, St. Augustine: See that thou art not burdened, if thou hearest him: for my yoke is light. … This bundle is not the weight of one burdened, but the wing of one about to fly. Birds have the bundles of their own feathers. … They carry them on earth, they are carried by them in heaven. If thou wouldst show mercy to a bird, especially to one standing by, and say: This wretched little bird, the feathers burden it; and thou take away this burden, it will remain upon the earth, whom thou didst wish to succour. Carry therefore the feathers of peace, take up the wings of charity. This is the bundle. So shall the law of Christ be fulfilled. Sermon 14, On the Words of the Apostle.

What do the probabilists say to these things, very many of whom have so attenuated the mandate of divine love that some teach it to oblige scarcely once in a whole lifetime, others once in five years, others once in two years, and all commonly deny the necessity even of an inchoate divine love for the worthy receiving of the sacrament? Therefore in the sense of the probabilists the evangelical law is not sweet by the unction of charity, but by the delectation of carnal senses. Therefore the probabilists are adverse to the common doctrine of all the Fathers. Since indeed the probabilists oppose this evangelical oracle, My yoke is sweet, in an evidently false, not to say erroneous, sense. For hence they infer that the rigour of the law is to be filed down, and that the law is to be relaxed and accommodated to human appetitions and desires; and by force of Probabilism to be interpreted in favour of men: since favours are to be enlarged, and a law odious to humanity is to be restricted. But these things evidently fight with the whole doctrine of the Church. They cut off the wings of divine love, which cannot be associated with love of a raving world. Moreover, charity being taken away, the law, as St. Augustine says, becomes hard from hard. Hence it is that to the just the law is sweet, but to sinners hard and troublesome.

Christians are to be accustomed to the frequenting of the sacraments: because although while they are young and robust they do not reform their morals, nevertheless when they decline into old age, then, being accustomed to frequent the sacraments, they bring forth worthy fruits. Wherefore absolution is never, or most rarely, to be denied them. Otherwise they thrust themselves into a reprobate sense.

Shall lovers and mistresses, mimes and mime-women, the avaricious and adulterers therefore nourish, foster, and fatten their youth and their manly life with sacrileges and outrages; and when their strength fails, shall they then become white and pure, then holy men and holy women? What if in mid-course their strength fail? What if they be overspread with the darkness of blindness? Whence can they promise themselves the gift of conversion? From God, upon whom through their whole life they waged war, that they might serve the devil and the world? That axiom is erroneous and most full of scandal.

A good Summist, or Casuist, is to be esteemed more in the government of souls than all the Fathers together. The cases of the times require the Doctors of the times. It will be a pretty thing to me if he shall resolve from Basil, Augustine, or Gregory the cases which occur in our age.

O unhappy Christians of the first golden age, who were directed by those most holy Fathers, who received their light from the Apostles themselves, and these from Christ Jesus! Is a younger casuist to be preferred to all the Fathers in the government of souls? What if we heard these things from heretics? And yet these things are published in public print by Catholic theologians. Holy Scripture cries out against it: Let not the discourse of the ancients escape thee: for they have learned of their fathers. Ecclesiasticus 8. And again, Deuteronomy 32: Ask thy father, and he will declare to thee: thy elders, and they will tell thee. Innumerable are the testimonies of the Scriptures which send us to the counsels of our elders. What befell Roboam, who, the counsel of the elders being forsaken, embraced the petty opinions of the younger men, is narrated 3 Kings 12. Whether that theology which, the Scriptures and the Fathers and the Councils being neglected, consults only certain younger casuists, is to be called Christian, let the wise judge. In their books what other things occur in no small number save these: It is lawful, and it is not lawful; he sins, and he does not sin; it is mortal, it is not mortal; he is bound, he is not bound; it is venial, it is not venial; it obliges, it does not oblige; he can, and he cannot; it is probable that it presses, it is probable that it does not press; it is probable, it is not improbable; he who operates probably, the more probable opinion being rejected, operates prudently? This is the common probabilistic idiom. Whether this reason and manner of opining is apt for the reformation of morals, let others, who are endowed with a common sense void of prejudices, sit as judges. This is certain to me, that to prefer younger casuists to the ancient Fathers of the Church is not free from rashness, and brings scandal even to the heretics themselves, who hence snatch a handle for contemning the holy Fathers. What the probabilists are going to answer to those objecting that by certain Catholics one good casuist is esteemed more than all the Fathers, I am utterly ignorant. St. Paul admonishes that even the appearance of evil is to be guarded against. All the Scriptures, all the Fathers cry out that the dangers of sinning are to be avoided. On the contrary today it is taught by very many that one must approach sin and abstain from it. Do they not persuade that one must approach sin who teach that familiar conversations of both sexes are lawful, that games of chance are lawful, that a frequenting of theatres, comedies, dances, and so forth is lawful?

There is given an invincible ignorance of almost all natural precepts. If a man does not advert that he sins, he does not sin. When a prudent confessor adverts that a penitent is held under some mortal sin, but is difficult toward receiving the remedy, he will be able to leave him in good faith, which excuses from sin, and to defer the admonitions to an opportune time. Let this above all be noted for the confessors of merchants and of princes.

That invincible ignorance of natural law, and at least of the precepts of the Decalogue and of those things which follow proximately from them, is rare, has already been shown above. The necessity of actual advertence has also already been routed. The last part, which teaches that a prudent confessor ought to leave penitents growing foul in mortal sin when he foresees that an admonition will not profit, because good faith excuses them, I shall rout below of set purpose.

Commonly the faithful of the Catholic Church are directed by probabilistic doctrine. Confessors in the government of souls commonly employ probabilistic casuists. Probabilism ranges through men of every state whatsoever. Are all these damned? Are all these reprobate? Away with cruel Rigorism!

Even the pagan Seneca, in his book On the Happy Life, disapproved this sophism: No thing implicates us in greater evils than that we compose ourselves to rumour, reckoning those things best which have been received with great assent; of which the examples are many: nor do we live according to reason, but according to likeness. … There is no reason why you should answer me: This seems to be the greater part. For therefore it is the worse. Things do not go so well with human affairs that better things should please the more. The crowd is an argument of the worst. Let us seek what is best done, not what is most usual; and what constitutes us in the possession of eternal felicity, not what is approved by the vulgar, the worst interpreter of truth.

God willed those truths to be published by the mouth of the pagans, that he might suffuse with eternal shame those Christians who in the midst of the evangelical light are not ashamed, says St. Basil, to defend a falsehood by the multitude. The most holy Martyr Cyprian cried out of old, in his epistle to Donatus: Among laws men sin, and that begins to be lawful which is public. Often does St. Augustine object this sophism to himself: How many do this! Who does not do it? Is God going to destroy all? To whom the holy Doctor thus meets: Let us not bring forward deceitful things, but let us bring forward the divine balance from the holy Scriptures. But holy Scripture stops their mouths, Exodus 23: Neither shalt thou follow the multitude to do evil: neither shalt thou yield in judgment to the opinion of the most part, to stray from the truth. That they stray from the truth even the probabilists themselves confess, since they abstract from truth and falsity, that they may follow contrary probabilities. But even if the whole world should become probabilistic — which will never happen — the word of God, which is the word of truth, will not on that account fail even in the least. But holy Scripture cries out, Psalm 24: All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth. Not some, but all; all the ways of the Lord are the way of truth and of mercy. Let the probabilists cry out, let the multitude of probabilists grow to an immense size, never will the divine oracle become liable to change. Divine grace, conferred upon us from God's mercy alone, not on account of any merit of ours, not on account of any chimerical pact, and truth revealed by God, lead us to the heavenly kingdom. Because, says John 1, Christ is the Word made flesh, full of grace and truth. … Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. They who take away from the grace of Christ its intimate and implanted efficacy, and they who mingle falsity with the truth of Christ, close the way of the heavenly kingdom, no probability availing; which, although it can sometimes excuse from malice, cannot lead to the eternal country.

Why therefore do you object the multitude? cries St. Augustine, sermon 224 to the newly baptized. I fear for you not so much from the pagans, not so much from the Jews, not so much from the heretics, as from evil Catholics. Choose for yourselves in the people of God whom you may imitate. For if you shall have wished to imitate the CROWD, you will not be among the few walking the narrow way. We do not follow the crowd, but grave, pious, and upright men. Very well. Do those pious, upright, and grave men lead you with the few by the narrow and strait way, or with the great crowd by the broad and spacious way of pomps, theatres, games, comedies, dances, and solaces? What to these things? If they lead you by the smooth way sprinkled with delights, even though they be pious and grave, they deceive and seduce you, cries the same St. Augustine: Men will come and say: That is a great man, that is a great fellow. … You see, because there shines from them some flame of speech, and some fire is kindled from them. What thence? replies the holy Doctor. They are princes, they are learned, they are great, they are eloquent. What further will you say? Are they angels? And yet (hear Paul himself), if an angel from heaven shall announce to you besides what you have received, let him be anathema. Strangers, as it were, and inept and outrageous men rarely seduce the good, because they are avoided like ravening wolves. Those seduce who in the clothing of sheep, says the book of Confessions, colour their speeches. There are those who seduce, colouring and painting their discourses with a great, smooth, and honourable name. Innumerable other testimonies of the Fathers I now pass over.

Those who could confess, and those who could hear confessions, and administer the sacrament of Penance, if, the casuistical and probabilistic books being dismissed, the Gospels were to be read, or the works of Gennet, Pontas, Natalis Alexander, Merbesius, Antoine, and the like, would come out very few. Our churches would become deserted.

That this axiom is carried about and published by the mouths of very many is most well known. What would happen on this hypothesis I would not divine. This I know: that the evangelical doctrine and the eternal salvation of souls, for which Christ died, ought to be at heart to the ministers of God. But as the sacraments rightly frequented tend straight to this end, so above all do sacraments unworthily or carelessly received turn men away from it, when it is done only that satisfaction be made to custom. To this the sacred ministers ought to bend all their limbs, that the morals of Christians be so composed to the norm of the divine law that they may worthily frequent the sacraments.