Article — Gury-Ballerini, Compendium of Moral Theology (8th ed., 1884)
Article I. On the Works Which Are Prohibited on Feast Days
- Three kinds of works must be distinguished: 1. servile works, or works of the body 1, which are accustomed to be done by servants or hirelings; 2. liberal works, or works of the mind, which are ordinarily exercised by free persons; 3. common or natural works, which are done indiscriminately by all. Forensic works also are distinguished, which pertain to the judicial forum or to the market. - St. Alphonsus, n. 272.
1 Understand by works of the body those which both serve the utility of the body and are exercised by the powers of the body rather than of the mind. But works of the mind are those which are performed rather by the powers of the mind and tend rather to cultivating the mind. Yet this distinction does not contribute very much to defining what is lawful or not lawful. For in this matter much must be deferred to custom, by which it also happens that things which are lawfully performed in one place are not without reproach and offense in another.
Meanwhile this must generally be laid down in advance, that the character of a servile work must be drawn neither from the intention, nor from the profit received, nor indeed from the fatigue of the body. Thus to plow another's field will be servile, although it is done from mere charity and entirely gratuitously; on the contrary, playing the organ or dancing will not be servile, however long and laborious, nor transcription prolonged for the whole day for the sake of profit.
- Principles. - I. Properly so-called servile works are prohibited per se under grave obligation to all the faithful on whole feast days, that is, through the whole natural day, from midnight to midnight. This is clear from canon law, c. 3, de Feriis, from custom and the perpetual practice of the Church 2.
2 Nevertheless the Church, as a benign mother, that she might reconcile divine worship with the temporal utility of the faithful, has from time to time indulged in some places that on certain feast days servile works could be exercised after Mass had been heard. - See St. Alphonsus (lib. 3, n. 268).
II. Forensic works also are prohibited, namely forensic actions which are held with judicial apparatus, such as to interrogate the parties, to hear witnesses and advocates, to render sentence, etc. Thus from canon law, ibid. 3. Yet except if sometimes a criminal cause already begun cannot be interrupted without grave inconvenience or damage. - St. Alphonsus, n. 284.
3 Indeed from canon law (c. Conquestus 5, De Feriis) judicial acts held on a feast day are declared void.
Moreover, both the cause of necessity, as the Author adds, and also that of piety excuses. Causes of necessity are had: 1. if a thing or action would perish with time; 2. when the debtor is suspected of flight, squandering, or deterioration of the thing concerning which he is to be sued; 3. if the litigating parties, as poor and rustic men generally are, cannot appear or be called into court on other days without notable inconvenience; 4. if proceedings must be taken against robbers, and there is danger in delay (from L. Provinciarum 10, C. De Feriis), lest the "betrayal of the counsels" of criminals, as the law has it, be delayed; 5. if, on account of the atrocity of the crime, for the example and terror of others, it would be of public interest that the delinquent be publicly punished in a great concourse of people; 6. when there is danger of public or private damage, spiritual or corporal; because damage of this sort imposes moral necessity, and necessity has no law.
But by reason of piety and mercy, on feast days there can be expedited: 1. causes concerning food, prisoners, wards, widows, the poor, and the miserable; because in works of mercy a distinction of days is not to be had, as the gloss has at the final chapter, h.t., v. Pietas; 2. when otherwise, if cognizance of the cause were deferred, a pious cause would suffer inconvenience; because the highest reason is that which acts on behalf of Religion; 3. when piety and observance toward one's homeland requires this; 4. if the cause is matrimonial, and danger of incontinence is present unless judgment is made on feast days concerning the validity of the marriage and of the impediment; 5. on any holiday whatsoever, those things can be expedited which pertain to peace and concord; whence at the same time transactions and pacts can also be made. - Thus Schmalzgrueber (lib. 2, tit. 9, n. 52-55).
III. By the same law markets, fairs, public sales, and other similar things which are done with noise are prohibited. Nevertheless fairs appointed for a certain day are excepted, by reason of generally received custom, if they fall on a feast day. - Thus Benedict XIV declared, Const. Ab eo tempore, etc. - See St. Alphonsus, n. 286.
IV. Liberal works, common works, and some works which seem servile but are required for daily use, sustenance, necessity, and the disposition of the body, clothing, or house, are lawful; such as to cook foods, make beds, sweep the house, and other things which either cannot conveniently be deferred or anticipated, or are not accustomed to be so 4. Thus from common practice and the sense of all.
4 Here a subtle inquiry must be avoided, whether in matters of this sort something perhaps can be anticipated or deferred, lest we decline to empty observances of Judaism.
- Resolves. - 1. Rural works are prohibited on feast days, such as to plow, dig up the earth, sow, reap, tend vines, etc. Likewise the works of mechanical arts, for example masonry, smithing, carpentry, tailoring, shoemaking, roofing, etc. Likewise most works which serve the typographic art. They probably except the setting of characters. - Elbel, n. 401. - Laymann. - Sporer. - Tamburini. - St. Alphonsus, n. 282.
- Likewise it is not lawful to make certain things which require light labor and which are accustomed to be made by Nuns, for example rosaries, scapulars, wax images, artificial flowers, etc.; because these in common usage are numbered among servile works. Yet since these labors and other similar ones are rather light, and do not greatly occupy the mind nor greatly fatigue the body, according to several authors they can be permitted, provided they are not prolonged beyond two hours. Similarly the same Doctors excuse maidservants who are occupied in plucking roses or peeling apples, even when urgent necessity is excluded. - Thus Elbel, n. 408, Bonacina, Filiucci, etc. - But it seems rather that it must be said that in these works a greater space of time is required for lethal fault to be present. Thus St. Alphonsus opines, n. 282. - Yet they are not to be charged with any fault who spend a short time in such occupations 5.
5 Here you have examples of opinions which, not without reason, you may think can scarcely, or not even scarcely, be reduced to common and received principles. For what does the fatigue of the body or the occupation of the mind contribute to the question of servile work? Is it that because the body is very lightly fatigued and the mind is occupied in nothing while spinning or knitting stockings with the hands, the work will be called less servile? Besides, if the work is not servile, why will it be permitted for only two hours? But if it is servile, why will it be free from fault to spend two hours on it? Therefore these things are better explained by reason of custom, which teaches the practice of observing precepts, and indeed legitimately establishes it.
But as regards scapulars or rosaries, another element enters besides, namely piety, if these labors are undertaken gratuitously and in a manner directed to fostering piety. In this matter custom and the sense of the faithful contradict the principle which we touched on above, namely that it makes no difference whether something is done gratuitously or for the sake of profit. For here there holds what, according to the sense of the faithful, must also be admitted concerning sacred vestments or certain ornaments of the Church to be made on a feast day: that these things are lawful if done gratuitously and for the honor of God; not lawful if they are done by an artisan for pay. And the reason is that in the one case a mere work of piety appears, but in the other by no means.
- By received custom, foods, drinks, shoes, candles, cloth for making clothes, and other things of this sort are lawfully sold and bought in public shops. Yet merchants ought to close their shops 6, so that they may show that they distinguish the Lord's day from other days.
6 In these things also custom claims very much for itself, and there is varied necessity according to varied places, and from this also varied diocesan laws congruent with the necessities of the place.
- Houses, horses, cattle, and other merchandise, whether present or absent, whether in small or in great quantity, are lawfully sold and bought, even if notable time is spent on this, provided these things are done among private persons 7.
7 The precept of not celebrating contracts, concerning which St. Alphonsus, lib. 3, n. 286, mentions a decree of St. Pius V and of the Congregation of Rites, has been derogated by custom, as Schmalzgrueber well observes (lib. 2, tit. 9, n. 23). Indeed St. Alphonsus notes (l.c.) that custom allows contracts not only to be celebrated privately, but also by instruments, provided they do not require judicial noise, for example testaments, instruments of betrothals, of sales, etc.; although he observes that in some places Notaries are accustomed to seek a general license for this, which otherwise is commonly granted. But again, also in these matters the customs of each place will have to be considered.
- Public sales under the spear, after the divine Offices have been performed, are also tolerated in some places; because on other days there would be fewer persons coming together, etc. Likewise it is tolerated that merchants of things of small moment, in French petits merciers, carry goods from one place to another, show them, and sell them. - Bouvier.
- Questions. - Q. 1. Whether it is lawful to write or transcribe on a feast day?
Resp. to the first. It is affirmed, because this work is wholly liberal, since in it the mind chiefly acts. - Thus all.
Resp. to the second. It is affirmed, also more probably, because to transcribe, like to write, is ordered to instructing the mind. - Thus commonly with St. Alphonsus, n. 279, against Billuart and others.
Hence 1. it is also lawful to sketch out the designs of craftsmen and builders, and to form musical notes. - Elbel, n. 400, and others.
- Likewise it is also permitted to correct books, whether this is done by deleting lines, or by placing glued paper over them. For although this may seem servile, nevertheless it is accessory, since it is done accidentally by the one correcting. - Elbel, n. 401, etc.
Q. 2. Whether it is lawful to sculpt or to paint?
Resp. to the first. No, per se, because sculpture is commonly held among the mechanical arts. - St. Alphonsus, n. 281; Hom. apost., n. 10. - Yet probably an exception must be made if there is question only of the perfection of the work.
Resp. to the second. It is disputed.
The first opinion affirms, because painting is a liberal art, or at least midway between liberal and servile arts; for it is something very similar to writing, provided nevertheless that the painting is done without great labor, such as would be had by mixing colors, preparing panels, etc. - Thus Laymann, Azor, Sporer, etc.
The second opinion denies, because it cannot be called a liberal action, since it is not directed, as writing is, to cultivating the mind, and because to paint is almost the same as to sculpt, which is a servile work. - Thus the Salamancans, Sanchez, Suarez, etc. - St. Alphonsus, n. 280, rightly calls each opinion probable 8.
8 The probability of the first opinion, which affirms, is freely conceded even by those authors who followed the negative opinion: and therefore it is certain that it is not clear that that work is servile and prohibited.
Yet something in this matter also seems to have to be deferred to common sense, which exhibits custom, the best interpreter of laws. Now the common sense of the faithful, while it generally does not condemn the work of painting as servile, nevertheless abhors that apparatus which displays the hired labor of an artisan, especially in decorating walls with some ornament, as they say.
- Q. 3. Whether it is lawful to paint images with a needle?
Resp. It is disputed. Many excuse it: for this is referred more to exercising ingenuity than to laboring. - St. Alphonsus, n. 281. - Sporer, n. 45, etc.
Q. 4. Whether it is lawful to hunt and to fish?
Resp. It is affirmed. Because these are not servile works, and they are tolerated by custom, provided they are not done with great labor, exertion, noise, or apparatus. - St. Alphonsus, n. 283, and others commonly against a few.
Q. 5. Whether it is lawful to make a journey on foot, by horse, by carriage? - Likewise whether it is lawful to lead a carriage or laden beasts?
Resp. to the first. It is affirmed, as is plainly clear from universal practice. The opposite opinion must be left behind as antiquated, says St. Alphonsus, n. 275, after Roncaglia. Likewise it is lawful to use a litter carried by men, where such a custom flourishes. - St. Alphonsus, ibid.
Resp. to the second. It is disputed, outside the case of necessity. The opinion now more probable affirms that it is lawful, not only for continuing a journey begun, but also for beginning it, provided that for loading the carriage an immense and long labor is not required; yet from this labor there easily excuses either the cause of avoiding grave damage, or of procuring public utility, or custom, which perhaps has prevailed in a contrary direction in some place. - St. Alphonsus, n. 276.
Q. 6. Whether it is lawful to grind on a feast day?
Resp. It is affirmed more probably, if the mill is turned by water or wind, because little or almost no labor of men is required. But otherwise if it is driven by beasts, unless the cooperation of the man is slight. - St. Alphonsus, n. 277. - Lacroix, n. 578. - Tamburini, etc.
- Q. 7. Whether it is lawful for barbers to shave the beard on a feast day?
Resp. It is affirmed. The reason is drawn: 1. from general custom 9; 2. because for the most part only on feast days do workmen, and especially rustics, seek the shops so that their beard may be shaved. Therefore if barbers did not furnish their work to those requesting it, these men would be left to their great detriment. - Thus Viva, Tamburini, Gousset, Bouvier, etc.
9 ** Here what St. Alphonsus (lib. 3, n. 290) has concerning these customs is not to be omitted. "It must be noted," he says, "concerning custom, what Viva says, namely that a probable custom suffices for excusing; for, as the Salamancans say with Salas, Granada, etc., the saying of one distinguished doctor, even a modern one, who adduces a custom, suffices. But Mazzotta well observes that in doubt concerning custom the precept possesses, whence a dispensation must be sought; otherwise, if it is probable that the custom is present." Therefore in this place he seems to depart from that principle which they call of possession, concerning which see also the observations of the VV. above in the note to Q. 5, n. 79.
Q. 8. What matter is grave in a work performed on feast days?
Resp. Many require at least three hours. St. Alphonsus, n. 305, after bringing forward several opinions, inclines more to the opinion of Lacroix, generally concluding that the more common and more probable opinion now is that it is not mortal unless one works at least much beyond two hours, say two and a half hours. - And in Homo apostolicus, n. 25, he adds with Mazzotta that even a greater space of time is excused by some necessity. He adds, n. 307, that in forensic and judicial matters the quantity of matter is not drawn from the quantity of time, but from the quality of the work.
Q. 9. Whether he sins gravely who on a feast day commands six servants to work for an hour?
Resp. No, more probably per se, whether the servants work simultaneously or successively, because the works of the servants are not united into one, and each sins only venially; therefore the master inducing them to a work forbidden under venial fault sins only venially. - St. Alphonsus, n. 306, and others more commonly.