Article — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Article First. On Blasphemy Itself
202. Definition of blasphemy. Etymologically, blasphemy signifies insulting speech;1 but from common use it signifies insulting speech against God.
a. It is said speech, because blasphemy is ordinarily committed by words, although it can also be committed by thought or deed; insulting: for blasphemy properly consists in this, that by a word something is done by which divine majesty and excellence is dishonored; against God, either immediately or mediately, insofar as God is dishonored in saints or sacred things. For insulting words against saints or sacred things are blasphemies insofar as they redound upon God and thus injure the honor owed to God: for just as the worship of saints and sacred things redounds upon God, so also does the dishonoring of them.
b. Only blasphemy committed by words is blasphemy properly so called; blasphemy committed by deeds alone (to spit toward heaven, to make a fist at God, to trample a crucifix) is improperly called blasphemy; wherefore this is not judged to be reserved wherever blasphemy would be a reserved case. For blasphemy properly is a vice of the tongue: for it is directly opposed to praise, which is exhibited by words; but a written word suffices for committing blasphemy properly so called.2
1 Blasphemy, considered as to the origin of the word (blapto = I injure, pheme = fame), signifies injury of fame, which, if it is committed against men, is insult; if it is committed against God, is blasphemy.
2 Cf. Suarez, De religione, tract. 3, l. 1, c. 4, n. 1 ff.
203. Division. Blasphemy is divided: a. by reason of the sense of the words, into heretical, imprecatory, and reproachful (simple), according as the blasphemous words contain heresy (God is a tyrant), or an imprecation by which evil is wished to God (May God perish, cursed be God), or a mere reproach by which something is uttered insultingly concerning God (Ah, thou who destroyest the temple of God and in three days rebuildest it, save thyself).1
b. By reason of the object or term, into immediate, which dishonors God in Himself, and mediate, which dishonors God in creatures which have a special relation to God, such as saints and sacred things.
c. By reason of intention, into direct (diabolical), which is done with the intention of dishonoring God, and into indirect, which is not done with the intention of dishonoring God, yet with advertence that contempt of God is contained in the words or deeds.
d. By reason of mode, into verbal and real, according as it is committed by words or deeds.
1 Matt. 27:40.
204. Malice. 1. Blasphemy is a sin grave from its whole genus: for any blasphemy, even that which is directed against saints, is an insult inflicted upon God; but any insult inflicted upon the supreme majesty is grave. Therefore Sacred Scripture says: The man who shall curse his God shall bear his sin; and he who shall blaspheme the name of the Lord, dying let him die.1
a. Yet not rarely blasphemies are either no sin or only venial sin, namely when blasphemous words are uttered either without any advertence or with only light advertence, which ordinarily happens to those who blaspheme in the heat of some passion, for example anger, unless the anger is borne against God Himself or the saints. But defect of advertence does not excuse him from grave sin who neglects to amend a depraved custom of blaspheming.
b. Expressions which are uttered against saints, not as they are saints and have a special relation to God, but as they were men living here on earth, as if Saints Crispin and Crispinian are called vile shoemakers, St. Peter is said to be bald, St. Charles Borromeo to have a nose, are not blasphemies: for no abuse is uttered against God if someone speaks about the natural defects of men, even of the friends of God. But if this is done from jest, it is a venial sin; if from contempt, a grave sin against dulia.
The three blasphemies, heretical, imprecatory, and simple, differ from one another in species, because to the violation of religion there is added the injury of another virtue also: for simple blasphemy is opposed to religion alone, heretical blasphemy moreover to faith, and imprecatory blasphemy to charity; wherefore these must be distinguished in confession.
Blasphemies in the reason of blasphemy are all of the same species: for all are opposed to the same virtue of religion, which they do not injure in an essentially diverse mode. Wherefore it suffices in confession to say: I have gravely blasphemed so many times.2
2 Cf. Ballerini-Palmieri, II, n. 518; Lugo, De poenitentia, disp. 16, n. 178 s.
205. Conditions required for blasphemy. Therefore for committing the sin of blasphemy two things are required: that blasphemous words be uttered, and indeed with advertence that they contain dishonoring of God.
a. Therefore he who in anger and indignation against men or beasts utters words or sacred names which do not contain dishonoring of God, such as Himmel, Herrgott, Kruzifix, Sakrament, does not properly blaspheme, but sins venially by vain usurpation of the name of God or of sacred things, provided the indignation is not borne against God. Yet because of an erroneous conscience there can be grave sin.
b. He who from anger and indignation against men or beasts utters blasphemous words, without attending to the injury and dishonoring of God, does not commit formal blasphemy. For the most part, blasphemies which are uttered without advertence happen from custom. Now what kind of sin blasphemy uttered from a depraved custom of blaspheming is has been said elsewhere.1
c. Therefore he who in anger and indignation utters blasphemous words, whether for demonstrating anger, or for frightening children, or for spurring horses, not indeed with the mind of dishonoring God, but nevertheless adverting to the irreverence which is contained in those words, commits the sin of blasphemy.
1 Cf. De principiis, 7th ed., n. 85.
206. Which formulas are blasphemous. For discerning blasphemous expressions from those which are not blasphemous, these rules must be attended to:
- Words are judged blasphemous which from their proper signification, or from common acceptance, or from the mode in which they are uttered, for example ironically or with contempt, contain dishonoring of God.
a. For it can happen that words which of themselves are not blasphemous are grave blasphemies from common estimation; therefore one must carefully consider what expressions in a certain region are commonly held as blasphemous: for in nearly individual regions there are certain formulas which are held by all as blasphemous, whose assumption there therefore dishonors God, although etymologically they are not insulting, which authors from France and Belgium affirm concerning the formula: sacre nom de Dieu.1
b. Likewise it can happen that words which of themselves are blasphemous are not formal blasphemies, because from common estimation they are not held as insulting. Thus the French formula Mille nom de Dieu and the German formulas Tausend Sakrament, Tausend Herr Gott of themselves contain heretical blasphemy; yet those who use these formulas neither intend nor know the heresy latent in them. Wherefore by these words, which for the most part are uttered from admiration, ordinarily nothing is committed except venial irreverence of vain assumption of a sacred name.
Expressions which have an incomplete sense, and in like manner corrupted and halved words, are not blasphemies, unless in some region from common apprehension they are held as insulting.
In doubt concerning the signification of words, attention must be given to the intention and affection of the speaker: for in sins of words it seems that especially this must be considered, from what affection someone utters the words;2 and while doubt remains, they must not be held as blasphemous.
To say: God has plainly forgotten me; why did God create me? if God existed, these things would not happen to me, is blasphemy, unless they are uttered, as often happens, only for showing the gravity of sorrow or from mere levity. God unjustly weighs me down with tribulations; God unjustly allows the wicked to be happy in the world, is heretical blasphemy if they are uttered seriously and advertently. Bei Gott, beim Sakrament is not blasphemy, but rather a formula of oath, and therefore the venial sin of vain assumption of the name of God. Herrgott Sakrament is not blasphemy, because it does not have a perfect sense nor contain contempt, but it is a venial irreverence toward God and the sacraments, unless it is said with indignation and contempt against God. Sakramentspfaff, Sakraments-schelm, Sakramentsvieh are blasphemous, since because of the contemptible name added they contain contempt of the sacraments. May the blood of Christ destroy you seems to some a mere imprecation, but to others also a blasphemy, because it also falls into contempt of God.
1 Cf. Genicot, I, n. 293.
2 St. Thomas, II-II, q. 72, a. 2.
207. In how many ways blasphemy is committed. The sin of blasphemy can be committed especially in five ways:
a. If something is attributed to God which is repugnant to Him, as God is cruel; or if something is denied to God which belongs to Him, as God is not omniscient.
b. If there is attributed to a creature what belongs to God alone, as if someone were to say: I can do this as well as God; for by that very fact a divine perfection as proper to God alone is denied, and thus injury is brought upon God.1
In this way those blaspheme who swear by false gods; likewise insane lovers who call the beloved person a goddess, their every and only good, their beatitude, if indeed they speak in this way seriously and not by a certain exaggeration.
c. If true things indeed are said about God, but irreverently and with contempt.
d. If, with anger against God, divine or sacred things (sacraments, the blood of Christ, the holy cross) are named, or if the same are uttered with a contemptible name added.
e. If insulting words are said against the Blessed Virgin or against the saints, insofar as they are saints and friends of God.
To utter the name of God or of sacred things in the heat of anger against men or irrational creatures is not blasphemy, unless it is done with indignation or contempt toward God.
1 Cf. Lehmkuhl, I, n. 368.