Article — Noldin, Summa of Moral Theology
Article Fourth. On Vain Observance
159. Notions. 1. Vain observance (Zauberei) is a superstition by which the demon is invoked for obtaining some effect by his help.
- Vain observance, like divination, is twofold: one with explicit invocation of the demon, the other with implicit invocation, namely by employing vain means which have power neither from nature nor from God to produce such an effect. These means are called sacraments of the devil, because, when they have been placed, he produces the intended effect, as it were, by promise.
Vain observance differs from divination in this, that the latter is ordered to knowing hidden things by the help of the demon, but the former to obtaining by his help any external effects whatsoever. He who for obtaining an effect employs a vain and useless means, which neither by nature nor by the Church nor by God has been instituted for producing this effect, cannot expect this effect except from the demon.
Note. 1. Among the diverse forms of vain observance there widely wanders the observance of healings (magical medicine), which is the art of curing diseases or of avoiding misfortunes by employing diverse signs, inhalations, prayers, charms (Besprechungen), sacred things, etc. This superstition, like the rest, is found no more among Catholics than among non-Catholics, nor more among the lowest populace than among the cultivated and learned; indeed among the pagans it was already spreading widely. Therefore only by calumny can it be affirmed that superstition has arisen from the Catholic religion, inasmuch as that religion teaches that divine effects can be obtained from the use of prayer and sacramentals.1
Prayers of this kind are made especially in three ways. For either physical means are employed (touchings, inhalations, ointments, etc.), which nevertheless do not have a known power of healing; or besides physical means there are also employed moral means (prayers, charms, adjurations); or finally only moral means (sympathetic cures).2 Not every use of means of this kind must be charged with superstition: for besides the fact that God can produce the effect of health by His special influence on account of prayer, there are natural remedies which can contain a power of healing still unknown to us; nor finally can it be denied that a man by moral influence (in whatever way this is effected, for example by suggestion) can produce various effects of cure in another man. Yet frequently the use of these means is either plainly superstitious, or something of superstition is mixed with the use of a natural or supernatural means.
Pastors of souls should strive to know the diverse forms of superstition which are in use among the faithful committed to them, and should endeavor to root them out: for superstitious uses do not foster true religion and its exercises, but harm them as much as possible; for they obscure the purity of faith, impede a truly religious life, and retard the perfection of Christian life. To obtain this end, let him collect and destroy booklets which teach superstition, and let him instruct the people concerning the mode of acting which God observes, concerning the vanity of superstition, and also concerning the dangers which arise from its exercise.
1 Cf. concerning this matter Stohr-Kannamuller, Handbuch der Pastoralmedizin, Freiburg: Herder, 1900, p. 403 ff.; Walter, Aberglaube und Seelsorge, Paderborn: Schoningh, 1904, p. 92 ff.
2 By this name (Sympathiekuren) are called those cures which are not effected by natural remedies, but through the moral influence of some person endowed with a hidden power, which power they call sympathy.
160. Concerning the moral and specific malice of vain observance, the same must be said as concerning divination:
a. Vain observance with explicit invocation is always a mortal sin; vain observance with implicit invocation is frequently excused from mortal sin, both because of ignorance, and because of defect of certain faith, and because of defect of serious will.
Thus those do not sin mortally who hold it as an indication of misfortune that a certain person (an old woman) meets them on the first day of the year; who are unwilling to be present at a banquet where thirteen sit at table; who do not undertake a journey on Friday. Indeed, properly speaking, a sin of superstition is not committed by these, since they think neither of the demon nor of some higher power. Yet these things are foolish and contrary to sound reason.
b. Its malice consists both in illicit commerce with the demon and in superstition, by which some worship is exhibited to the demon by recurring to him and by expecting from him what ought to be expected from God alone.
c. Divination and vain observance do not differ from each other in species: for in both the virtue of religion is injured in the same way, because in the genus of morals it makes no difference whether knowledge of a hidden thing or some external effect is sought from the demon.
Berardi well observes that those who expect certain effects from foolish things are not immediately to be charged with the sin of superstition. For often they act from simplicity and error, without thinking about the influence of the demon; but for a sin of superstition to occur, it is required that the agent advert to the invocation of the demon and intend it in some way. Therefore if the confessor detects that penitents otherwise pious, who do such things, are in good faith, let him not charge them with sin, but rather teach them how vain their means are for obtaining the effect, or, if the matter so requires, let him tell them that the means employed by them, with some vain circumstance and the infallible expectation of the event removed, are entirely licit.1
1 Cf. Berardi, Praxis confessariorum, I, n. 433 ff.
161. Criteria for discerning vain observance. 1. Signs of this kind are especially these three: a. the insufficiency of the cause for producing the effect, since it has no such power either from itself or from God; b. the addition of a vain or false circumstance as necessarily required for obtaining the effect, even if the signs or means in themselves are good and holy; c. the infallible expectation of the effect on account of the mere application of these signs, as if from the work having been worked.
a. Therefore if certain prayers, images, blessed things, etc., are employed in such a way that there is attributed to them an infallible power of obtaining some effect, for example of escaping death or disease, of not falling into misfortune, of not dying without confession, etc., they are superstitious; but if they are employed in honor of God without vain adjuncts, with pious confidence of obtaining, if it shall have pleased God, that which is asked, they are pious and religious.
b. The faithful must very especially be taught and instructed not to foster superstitions in the use of sacred things and the sacramentals of the Church, lest, for example, they think that the greater effect is produced in the use of holy water the more abundantly it is sprinkled, and things of this kind.
- In doubt whether the means employed possess a natural or supernatural power of causing such an effect, this twofold rule must be attended to:
a. If there is doubt whether some effect proceeds from a natural cause or from the demon, it must be attributed to natural powers, because very many powers of natural causes are unknown even to wise men. Therefore a means about which it is doubted whether it has natural power of causing the effect or not may be employed, yet with a protestation added against the influence of the demon.
It is licit to employ a means of this kind, because it is not established that the thing is evil; on the contrary, from the circumstances it can rather be considered honorable. Hence, so that such a means can licitly be employed, there ought to be at least a probable reason, especially drawn from comparison with other effects certainly natural, which suggests that the effect is produced by a natural power. Besides, it is always advisable that in a case of this kind a protestation against the intervention of the demon be sent before: for as long as the matter is doubtful, the protestation removes the invocation of the demon.
b. If the effect certainly is not from a natural cause and there is doubt whether it is from God or from the demon, it must be attributed to the demon, because miracles are not easily presumed. Wherefore in this case it is not licit to employ the doubtful means, because it contains a tacit invocation of the demon.1
Nevertheless, a means of this kind which is truly doubtful, with the certain expectation of the effect excluded, can be excused from mortal sin if it is employed only once or twice, both because of the imperfection of the act and because there is no grave danger of commerce with the demon.
1 Cf. Lacroix, l. 3, pr. 1, n. 28.
162. Criteria for discerning the grace of healings. Sometimes it happens that men, even rude men who do not enjoy a reputation for holiness, by the sign of the cross or by sacred prayers and inhalations heal diseases and wounds. These are not all at once to be condemned of superstition: for it can piously be believed that God even at the present time confers on some men, although they are not saints, the grace of healings for the common good.1 But the signs to which one must attend in particular cases, so that vain observance can be distinguished from the grace of healings gratuitously given, are especially these:
a. Whether he who heals is alone in producing the same effect by the same means, or whether others also produce it, and whether he himself learned such power from others: for God ordinarily confers the grace of healings in such a way that it is a personal grace conferred upon a certain person. b. Whether the means which he employs are vain and foolish: indeed it can happen that the effect of a grace granted by God depends on certain external signs as on a condition, but these signs are never vain. c. Whether he thinks that the power of healing is in the very words or signs employed: for God confers the grace of healing upon the person, not upon external signs. Nevertheless supernatural powers of this kind gratuitously given will be very rare.2
If there are found those who heal diseases and wounds, whether of men or of animals, which not infrequently happens, these things are to be noted for practice:
a. First of all it will have to be inquired whether the means employed by them can produce the effect by natural power. If by at least probable reason the effect can be attributed to powers of nature, their use can be permitted, with a protestation against the influence of the demon premised.
b. But if the effect can be attributed to the powers of nature by no probable conjecture, the matter is not immediately to be rejected a priori as superstitious and illicit, but the fact with all its adjuncts must be examined diligently.
c. If, when the examination has been instituted, it is established that the matter is not certainly superstitious, especially if the prayers and invocations contain nothing false or foolish, if an infallible effect is not expected, and finally if those who employ the means are in good faith and attribute no infallible power to the means themselves or to the invocatory formulas, it is not necessary that the use of those means be interdicted. Yet it must always be advised that before the use a protestation be premised for rejecting any effect which may be produced by the help of the demon.
1 Cf. 1 Cor. 12:9; St. Thomas, II-II, q. 178, a. 2; St. Alphonsus, l. 3, n. 18.
2 Cf. Laymann, l. 4, tr. 10, c. 4, n. 4.