Article VIII. On Blasphemy

529. Notion. Blasphemy⁸⁰⁸ is customarily defined: speech contumelious toward God.

It is called speech because blasphemy properly and strictly so called is committed by words alone; nevertheless, under the name of blasphemy are also included any other signs whatsoever that are contumelious toward God. Indeed, there are authors who distinguish blasphemy of the heart, of the mouth, and of deed. Blasphemy of the heart consists of thoughts inflicting contumely upon God. Blasphemy of the mouth is speech contumelious toward God. Blasphemy of deed is an external work signifying contumely toward God, for example, to spit toward heaven, to trample a crucifix underfoot, to crush a consecrated host underfoot, etc. But blasphemy in the strict sense is speech contumelious toward God; and therefore, if blasphemy in some diocese is a reserved sin or is punished by other penalties, only blasphemy uttered by mouth or in writing is understood.

St. Thomas treats blasphemy among the sins which are opposed to the due confession of faith, because, just as through the confession of faith something befitting the divine excellence is asserted, so through external blasphemy something repugnant to the divine excellence is asserted with a certain detestation of affection.⁸⁰⁹ Nevertheless, every blasphemy is also opposed to the virtue of religion, since religion has for its object the worship and honor of God, whereas blasphemy does the altogether contrary thing, namely, it inflicts contumely upon God.⁸¹⁰ Moreover, it often happens that one sin is opposed to diverse virtues. Modern theologians, and also the Code of Canon Law, c. 2323, treat blasphemy as an offense against religion.

⁸⁰⁸ The name blasphemy seems to be taken from the Greek words βλάπτω and φήμη, which signify injury to reputation. But the reputation of God cannot be injured by detraction and calumny, since God is present everywhere. There remains only contumely, which is uttered against one who is present. But just as contumely uttered against a man who is present gravely injures him, so contumely inflicted upon the omnipresent God through blasphemy is a grave offense against God.

⁸⁰⁹ Cf. S. theol. 2, 2, q. 13.

⁸¹⁰ Thus also Billuart teaches, De fide tr. 5, a. 5.

530. Divisions. Blasphemy is distinguished:

1. Heretical and non-heretical.

Heretical blasphemy contains true heresy, whether formal or material; for example: God is a tyrant; or if a Calvinist says: God is the cause of sin. When the blaspheming man truly believes the heresy uttered, he is a formal heretic; but if he only utters this externally without interior assent, he is a material heretic, as if some Catholic from despair were to say: God has altogether forgotten me. Non-heretical blasphemy contains no heresy, but only an imprecation or contumely against God, and is customarily subdivided into simple (opprobrious) and imprecatory blasphemy. The former is simple contumely or mockery. In this manner the Jews blasphemed, saying to Christ: "Vah, thou that destroyest the temple of God and in three days dost rebuild it, save thy own self."⁸¹¹ The latter is imprecatory blasphemy, by which evil is wished to God, for example: May God perish! If this is done truly and deliberately, it is joined with hatred of God, which is simply the gravest of all sins.

2. Immediate and mediate blasphemy.

The former dishonors God Himself directly; the latter dishonors saints or sacred things, not indeed according to themselves, but insofar as they have a close relation to God. Thus, for example, if someone were to say of the Blessed Virgin that she is an unchaste Venus, he would commit mediate blasphemy, provided that in the Blessed Virgin he willed to dishonor God. But if he were to say the same thing intending solely the dishonor of the Blessed Virgin as she is a human being, it would be a sin against hyperdulia, but not properly a sin of blasphemy.⁸¹²

⁸¹¹ Matt. 27:40.

⁸¹² Cf. S. theol. 2, 2, q. 26, a. 2.

531. Malice. Blasphemy is a mortal sin in its whole genus, and therefore cannot become venial from slightness of matter, but only from imperfection of the act.

The enormous malice of blasphemy can already be suspected from the most grave penalty of death inflicted upon it in the Old Testament: "The man that curseth his God shall bear his sin; and he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, dying let him die."⁸¹³ Even in law, both canon and civil, grave penalties are inflicted upon blasphemers.⁸¹⁴ Indeed, St. Pius V decreed that the tongue of blasphemers could be pierced.⁸¹⁵ The intrinsic reason, however, why blasphemy is so grave a sin is its hostile opposition both to the charity of God, to the virtue of religion, and often to theological faith. Hence whenever truly voluntary and deliberate blasphemy is present, it is always a mortal sin.⁸¹⁶

Because of imperfection of the act, blasphemous words often are not grave sins. For sufficient advertence and intention are not rarely lacking in blasphemers. From anger, from sudden affections, or from a habit not altogether voluntary, men, especially the uneducated, break forth into blasphemous words without in any way intending to insult God or sacred things. If someone has a bad habit of uttering blasphemous words, he must lay it aside according to his powers; otherwise, acts produced from the habit are imputed to him, although he does not attend to the malice of each. Cf. the things said above in I, n. 90 concerning the influence of habit upon the morality of human acts.

⁸¹³ Lev. 24:15ff.

⁸¹⁴ Code of Canon Law, c. 2323. Cf. German Penal Code § 166 and Staatslexikon, s.v. "Religious offenses" (Religionsverbrechen).

⁸¹⁵ Constitution Cum pridem, issued in 1566.

⁸¹⁶ Cf. S. theol. 2, 2, q. 13, aa. 2 and 3, where the Angelic Doctor says: "Since the blasphemer intends to inflict injury upon the divine honor, simply speaking, he sins more gravely than a murderer"; and with St. Augustine he says: "It is worse to blaspheme than to perjure oneself."

532. Practical rules for discerning whether gravely sinful blasphemy is present in a particular case.

It is necessary to attend especially to three things:

1. the intention of the speaker or agent;

2. the natural sense of the words;

3. the common estimation in the place.

When it is established that the speaker or agent truly willed to blaspheme, the matter is clear, since a depraved intention deforms every human act. But if it is not clearly established that the speaker or agent willed to inflict contumely upon God, and indeed it appears rather that he intended something else, then it is necessary to attend to the natural sense of the words and especially to the common estimation prevailing in the place. According to the natural sense of words, it is blasphemy if a) something true is denied of God or something false is imputed to Him; for example, the following expressions are blasphemies: God is not just; God is cruel; God does not care for me; b) some divine attribute is attributed to a creature; for example, if someone says: I can do this as well as God; or if a lover seriously calls his beloved a Goddess. Commonly, however, expressions of this kind are rather exaggerations and are not seriously intended; nevertheless, they are always diligently to be avoided, as is evident of itself; c) if someone utters things contumelious against the Church founded by Christ, against the sacraments, against the worship of God, etc.

But especially to be attended to is the common estimation prevailing in the place; for blasphemous words are often truncated: in one place they are held as blasphemous, but in another they are not. Thus, for example, the Dutch words "God dom" were held in former times as blasphemous, but now this acceptance is already ceasing. Whether the same is to be said of the similar English expression "God damn," I do not dare to affirm; for it seems to be blasphemy. The German expressions "Tausend Sakrament" [a thousand sacraments] and "Tausend Herrgott" [a thousand Lord Gods], as also the French expression "Mille noms de Dieu" [a thousand names of God], according to common estimation are not blasphemies, but vain uses of a sacred thing. For those who employ such expressions by no means intend or understand that there are a thousand sacraments, a thousand Gods, or a thousand names of God.

533. Remedies against blasphemies.

1. If there is question of fully deliberate blasphemies, blasphemers are seriously to be admonished not only how grave a sin blasphemy is, but also how senseless and foolish it is to wish to inflict contumely upon the Most High God. For just as it would be madness to wish to harm the sun or the moon, so it is still more irrational to wish to do something against God. For the Psalmist says most excellently: "Why have the nations raged, and the peoples devised vain things? ... He that dwelleth in heaven shall laugh at them."⁸¹⁷

2. If there is question of blasphemies which are customarily uttered from sudden anger or from other vehement affections, it is to be inculcated how vain those expressions are and how easily they cause scandal. If all admonitions have been fruitless, certain conventional penalties are a very salutary remedy against habitual blasphemies; for example, an alms is to be given as often as a blasphemy has been uttered, or after each blasphemy a pious ejaculatory prayer is to be said in reparation.

A curse and the vain use of the divine name or of sacred things must be clearly distinguished from blasphemy, although these two are not rarely confused with blasphemy by the simple.

⁸¹⁷ Ps. 2:1, 4.

534. A curse is to invoke evil upon another. One can invoke evil a) upon God or sacred things and persons, b) upon rational creatures, c) upon irrational creatures, d) upon the devil.

a) To curse God or sacred things and persons is blasphemy, as was explained above.

b) To curse rational creatures ordinarily is opposed only to charity or justice, and therefore St. Thomas treats cursing among the sins opposed to justice.⁸¹⁸ Curses of this kind are often poured forth from sudden anger without serious intention, and then they are only venial sins; for example, if an angry person exclaims: May the devil seize you! May lightning strike you! May you break your neck! etc. Such curses are especially to be avoided by parents and other superiors, both because scandal is accustomed to arise from them and because sometimes, beyond expectation, they are efficacious. For it happens that the evil which parents invoke upon their children from anger afterward truly occurs. Hence it is said: "The blessing of the father establisheth the houses of the children, but the curse of the mother rooteth up the foundation."⁸¹⁹ Curses seriously uttered against one's neighbor proceed from hatred and are gravely or lightly sinful according to the gravity of the hatred and of the evil wished.

c) To curse irrational creatures, for example, winds, horses, rains, etc., is not blasphemy, because then some relation to God is by no means customarily attended to and intended. Commonly it is nothing other than a light sin of impatience. Indeed, if there is an honorable end, such curses are no sin, as happens in exorcism. Thus David also cursed the mountains of Gilboa, Job and Jeremiah cursed the day of their birth, and indeed Christ Himself cursed the fig tree.⁸²⁰

d) To curse the devil as the enemy of God and of the human race is lawful.⁸²¹

Note. Exclamations such as: devil, heaven, lightning (Donnerwetter! [thunderstorm!]), etc., are not blasphemies; they are customarily nothing other than sudden eruptions of a vivid affection. In themselves they are not sinful, but per accidens they become unlawful if scandal arises from them, as if priests, parents, or teachers often use them. The faithful are especially to be admonished not to utter frequently the name of the devil, the most bitter enemy of our salvation; but they are also to be openly instructed that exclamations of this kind are not true blasphemies.

⁸¹⁸ S. theol. 2, 2, q. 76.

⁸¹⁹ Ecclus. 3:11.

⁸²⁰ Cf. S. theol., l.c., a. 2.

⁸²¹ Cf. ibid., a. 1 ad 4.

535. The vain use of the name of God is specially forbidden in the second precept of the Decalogue: "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain,"⁸²² by which precept we are forbidden vainly, that is, irreverently, to utter not only the name of God, but also the names of saints and of sacred things. Such vain uses of the name of God or of the saints are, for example: My God! Jesus, how shameful this is! Sacrament! Cross! etc. Apart from scandal, vain uses of this kind are a venial sin against the virtue of religion. For the irreverences inflicted upon God in this manner are not so grave that they constitute a grave sin, since neither from their signification nor from the intention of the speakers do they directly assail the honor of God. Nevertheless, all, but especially priests and religious, must diligently avoid such exclamations, since they are useful for nothing, sometimes provide scandal, and are always venially evil.

⁸²² Ex. 20:7.