B. On the Excellence and Authority of the Moral Doctrine of St. Alphonsus

I. We understand the excellence of the moral doctrine of St. Alphonsus in this sense: that, if you take together all the titles of pre-eminence, he is easily the chief of all who have written on moral matters up to this time. For:

1° Among those whom we call the great Moralists, he is the most recent. Therefore he was able to investigate and weigh the excellent sayings and reasonings of the other Doctors; and he investigated and weighed them most diligently, most patiently, with a mind free from every preconceived opinion, and illumined by the heavenly light which he obtained by his prayers and virtues.

2° He brings into the open the opinions of all the distinguished Doctors who have treated of moral matters, so that he can supply the place of the other Authors who wrote before him.

3° Scarcely, or not even scarcely, is another Doctor found who has written so much, and so particularly, concerning moral matters.

4° An indefatigable practice of the sacred ministry, prolonged for many years, especially in missions, which furnish a harvest of very varied and very intricate cases, preceded his writing; this practice is lacking in many Authors, but is scarcely found in any other so abundantly as in our Saint.

5° He was of a most acute genius, so that, being scarcely sixteen years old, he obtained the laurel of both laws in the University of his native land.

6° He excelled very greatly in holiness of life; and this indeed must be considered of very great moment in a writer on moral matters, since to saintly Authors this is before all other things dear to heart: that they teach nothing which is not most consonant both with the doctrine and with the sense of the Church; nothing which, whether by too great laxity or by too great rigor, could even lightly hinder the glory of God and the salvation of souls; nothing which they have not meditated upon after fervent prayers sent beforehand to God, and, according to that humility and prudence which are theirs, after others have been consulted, maturely and without excited or inordinate affection. While the illustrious De Wit¹ contemplates this holiness of life in Alphonsus, he addresses his reader most beautifully in this way: "You see how the whole Work inwardly nourishes and pervades the spirit of sanctity, and how much confidence those things deserve which the man of God thinks, teaches, affirms, as one who, joining to the greatest industry of labor the perpetual exercise of prayer and heroic virtues, was also suffused with heavenly light."

7° He has been declared Doctor of the Universal Church by the oracle of the Pontiff; but no one is declared Doctor of the Church unless his eminent doctrine has been approved by Apostolic judges.

8° The moral doctrine of no Author has been commended by so many and such great praises of so many Roman Pontiffs. See above p. LXXVI sq., where the praises of the Roman Pontiffs concerning the moral writings of St. Alphonsus are displayed in one view.

9° No one's moral doctrine has been received with such confidence in the whole Catholic world, as far as it extends, and reduced into practice, and this because:

10° No one's moral doctrine has been endowed with so great an authority by the Church herself, as will be clear from the things to be said.

II. The authority of the moral doctrine of St. Alphonsus in the Church. - The moral doctrine of no Author enjoys in the Church so great an authority as that of St. Alphonsus; for the moral doctrine of no Author has been approved by the Church in the way in which his has been.

With Vittozzi² we distinguish a twofold approbation which can be given by the Church to the Writings of some Saint: one negative, the other positive. - Negative is

that judgment of the Church by which the doctrine of some Saint is declared immune from every theological censure whatsoever, without however anything being decreed concerning its merit or excellence. But if the judgment of the Church is borne also upon the merit and excellence of the doctrine, it is called positive. - Positive is subdivided into tacit, or usual, and express. Tacit or usual "is called that which is made by long use, and is established as it were by the glory of the name by which one has filled the Christian world."¹ Express, which is also called solemn, is that which is declared in the public acts of the Church by set words. - Express is subdivided into general, special, and most special. General "consists in this: that the writings of someone are generally received, and are permitted to be read in public Schools or Churches, and are commended to the faithful as useful, true, and Catholic. And in the number of writers of this kind they hold the first place who ... have been adorned ... with the excellent title of Doctors."² "Moreover, a general declaration of this kind has a threefold effect: for, first, it removes from the authors the suspicion of voluntary heresy; secondly, it grants to the faithful the faculty of reading the books of those who have obtained such approbation, indeed it also praises their reading as useful and fruitful; thirdly, it commends the authors to that degree that, if anyone shall appeal to them for proving a sentence, he is protected at least by a certain probability, even 'other reasons' being excluded, until the contrary is proved."³ - Special consists in this: that the works of some Saint in a certain matter are declared to be preferred to the writings, taken separately, of the rest in this kind, and his doctrine on this subject is declared Catholic and free from error, although not as a rule of Faith. An example of special approbation of this kind is furnished by the writings of St. Augustine on Grace and Free Will against the Pelagians and Semipelagians, as being more often commended to the Christian world either by the Supreme Pontiffs or by Councils, either naming them expressly, or using them by their act and example for defining dogmas.⁴ - Most special is had if the little work of some Father or Doctor is proposed by the Church as a rule of Faith to be held by all. Thus the letter of St. Cyril of Alexandria with the twelve anathemas against Nestorius was approved, and the synodical Letter of St. Leo the Great to Flavian against the Eutychian heresy.⁵ There are some who add to these another approbation besides, namely that given by Paul III, in the Brief Pastoralis officii cura, dated July 31, 1548, to the book of the Exercises of St. Ignatius, by which all and singular things contained in that book are approved, praised, and fortified by Apostolic authority. - By others negative is also called permissive; positive special is called elective; most special definitive. - These things having been premised:

Question 1°. Which of these approbations belongs to the Moral Doctrine of St. Alphonsus?

Response 1°. Negative, as is clear from the Decree of the S. R. C. dated May 18, 1803, confirmed by Pius VII (p. LXXVII under 1).

Response 2°. Positive tacit; for, among other reasons, Pius P. P. IX was moved by this reason to admit the cause of the concession of the title of Doctor in honor of St. Alphonsus: that, as he says in the Decree dated March 23, 1871, "the nations tell forth his wisdom and the Church proclaim his praise."

Response 3°. Positive express general, as is established from the concession of the title of Doctor of the Church; and among other causes of this concession the Supreme Pontiff mentions that "among the intricate opinions of Theologians, whether laxer or more rigid, he paved a safe way, by which the Moderators of the souls of the faithful could walk with unoffending foot" (p. LXXXII. 9, 10).

Question 2°. What may be concluded, A) and what may not be concluded, B), from those various approbations given by the Church to the moral doctrine of St. Alphonsus?

Response to A). I. From the negative approbation you conclude:

1° No moral sentence which St. Alphonsus defends was, at the time when he wrote,⁶ worthy of any censure, except perhaps one then universally unknown.⁷ The list of the principal theological censures, and their sense, see, if you wish, in Scavini.⁸

2° The sentences of St. Alphonsus not only, like those of the other Authors whom the Church has not declared immune from every censure, are simply tolerated, but are also positively permitted. The matter is illustrated by examples by the illustrious Grandclaude,¹ and is clear from the Decisions and Responses of the S. Penitentiary in the years 1831 and 1855 (see p. LXXIX. 3 and LXXX. 4), by which it is declared: 1) that a professor of sacred Theology is safe; 2) that a confessor is not to be disturbed who follows all the sentences of St. Alphonsus, led by his authority alone; 3) that it is lawful for a Professor to follow the doctrine of St. Alphonsus in all things and to hand it down publicly, without his needing a dispensation from the oath furnished of defending Probabiliorism and the sentences of the Probabiliorists. Nor let the word "to be disturbed" in the Response of 1831 delay anyone; for by that word, in Roman style, not mere toleration but positive permission is indicated; see this in St. Alphonsus himself,² and it is clear from the context itself of the Response. For the S. Penitentiary was not more severe toward the confessor than toward the professor, whom it calls safe.

3° With the exceptions to be excepted in the Response to B), "those sentences which St. Alphonsus de Liguori expressly taught, held, followed, or simply called probable, are to be held as truly probable,"³ namely at least extrinsically; that is, the authority of the Saint is so great that by itself alone it renders some opinion truly probable. This follows from the Response just cited of the S. Penitentiary, dated July 5, 1831, where to the question: "Whether a Confessor is to be disturbed who follows all the opinions of Blessed Alphonsus de Liguori in the practice of the sacred tribunal of Penance, for this reason alone, that by the Holy Apostolic See 'nothing worthy of censure was found in the Works'?" the Response was: "In the negative." But if a confessor is not to be disturbed, but on the contrary is safe, who follows all the opinions of St. Alphonsus, although he does not perceive their intrinsic value, or their intrinsic probability, and follows them only on account of the authority conferred on them by the negative approbation of the Church, it is evident that from that approbation the opinions of the Saint obtain true probability, and at least extrinsic probability. For the Church cannot permit anyone to follow opinions which are not truly, and at least extrinsically, probable.

4° This at least extrinsic probability is not extended only to the whole body of the moral doctrine of the Saint, but also to each and every one of his opinions. For the Confessor of whom there is question in the Response just cited of the S. Penitentiary does not reduce into practice the whole body of the moral doctrine of St. Alphonsus in the tribunal of S. Penitence, but all his opinions taken distributively.⁴

5° It will be lawful also to teach and to bring into practice those opinions of St. Alphonsus which may be contrary to the more common, or even to the common, sentences of theologians. This clearly follows from 3° and 4°.

6° An attack upon the opinions of St. Alphonsus will be unlawful unless it is modest and is made with a preface of honor. This follows from the things which Benedict XIV hands down.⁵

II. From the positive tacit approbation you conclude:

The opinions of St. Alphonsus today must be called universally common, as having been universally received in the Christian world.

III. From the positive express general approbation, or from the title of Doctor of the Church conferred on the Saint, you conclude that his doctrine is eminent.⁶

Response to B). 1° It is not lawful to conclude that the individual sentences of the Saint either a) are intrinsically probable; for the approbation given to them is not most special or even special; or b) are, or will always remain, extrinsically probable. For the authority of the Church, by which they become extrinsically probable, cannot be invoked in favor of those sentences of the Saint against which there stand Pontifical Decrees or Declarations of the Sacred Congregations, furnished with those characteristics which we shall enumerate in the Treatise on Laws.

2° It is not lawful to conclude that the authority of the Saint is exclusive; for in the Response of the S. Penitentiary dated July 5 (see p. LXXIX. 3) it is expressly said that those are not to be reprehended who follow opinions handed down by other approved authors.

3° It is not lawful to conclude that no new force or probability has accrued to the sentences of the Saint from the approbation of the Church; for there has accrued to them:

a) Extrinsic probability, and indeed as great as is that of the Doctors of the Church, that is, public. Concerning the authority of the Holy Doctors, see the things said above, and compare, if you wish, the Sixth Book of the Decretals, L. III, T. XXII, c. unic., and Benedict XIV, Const. Militantis Ecclesiae.

b) A presumption, and indeed a most vehement one, of intrinsic probability; for extrinsic probability supposes intrinsic.¹

c) Since a presumption does not yield except to truth, no opinion of the Saint must necessarily be deserted unless its improbability is evidently established. Compare the things said above concerning the force of express general approbation.

d) A most notable extrinsic probability has accrued to the moral System of St. Alphonsus, to his doctrine concerning habitual sinners and relapsers, and to those special sentences to which, as safe, the Sacred Roman Congregations refer those proposing doubts.

I say: 1) To the moral System and to the doctrine concerning habitual sinners and relapsers. This is clear from the Decree dated May 7, 1807, by which Pius VII solemnly declared: "That it is established concerning the theological and cardinal Virtues of the Venerable Servant of God Alphonsus and those annexed to them, in heroic degree." That the signification of this Decree may be clearer, it must be known that, after the Decree concerning "nothing worthy of Censure" had already been issued, and while the heroic virtues of Alphonsus were now being discussed, a new Position or disputation concerning the Virtues of the Saint, specifically concerning his Prudence, had been instituted in the year 1806 by command of the Pontiff at the instance of the Promoter of the Faith, and this on account of some rules of morals contained in his Works. Hence, besides other particular questions, the moral System and the doctrine concerning habitual sinners and relapsers were called back especially to a more severe weighing. The outcome of this peculiar inquiry is displayed by the Decree just cited,² dated May 7, 1807. Therefore, by force of this Decree, St. Alphonsus must be called heroically prudent not only with respect to the whole body of his moral doctrine, but specifically also with respect to the moral System, and with respect to the doctrine concerning habitual sinners and relapsers, since these two points were submitted more especially to the examination of the Most Eminent Fathers, nor were they seen to stand in the way of his heroic prudence. Therefore St. Alphonsus was declared heroically prudent individually also with respect to these two heads of his moral doctrine.

I say: 2) And to those special sentences to which, as safe, the Sacred Roman Congregations refer those proposing doubts. See these on p. LXXX (at the top of the page) and p. LXXXI under 5, 6, 7, 8.

We conclude that anyone may licitly and more safely follow the opinions of St. Alphonsus, except if there stand against these: - either a) Pontifical Decrees or Declarations of the Sacred Congregations which are furnished with those characteristics which we shall enumerate in the Treatise on Laws; - or b) legitimate Custom; - or c) some Synodal Statute, especially of a Provincial or Plenary Council; - or d) just civil Law; - or e) the certain and evident progress of the natural and physical sciences; - or f) a changed, yet just, condition of commerce; or g) one's own persuasion, not changed by the reflective principle concerning the excellence and authority of the moral doctrine of the Saint, that some opinion of his is false;³ for in this case one would act against his own conscience, which is never lawful. - I said, however: and by the reflective principle, etc. But outside the cases alleged in this conclusion, anyone will easily be able to change his persuasion from this twofold reflective principle: 1) The authority of St. Alphonsus, in moral matters, is surpassed by no other private authority, such as mine is. 2) If the Holy Doctor himself, although endowed with heroic prudence and eminent knowledge, could err, much more will I be able to err in rendering judgment concerning the greater or lesser probability, or even falsity, of some opinion.

Therefore the proposition which I undertook to prove stands, namely: The moral doctrine of no Author enjoys in the Church so great an authority as that of St. Alphonsus.