Chapter III. On The Method To Be Employed In Moral Theology

9. By the method of Moral Theology is here understood the mode and form which is employed in handing on and learning moral science. Now a threefold method is commonly distinguished:

1. The scholastic or speculative method, which considers all moral truths more accurately and more profoundly, illustrates them, compares them among themselves and with others, proves and defends them against adversaries, yet without neglecting practice. Besides the great scholastics of the Middle Ages, St. Thomas and St. Antoninus, Cajetan above all, de Lugo, Suarez, Billuart, and others used this method.

2. The casuistic method, which gathers together very many particular cases, whether true or fictitious, and concerning them judges what is licit and what indeed is illicit (gravely or only lightly). Deeper doctrine is often not present. This method has been called by some, not ineptly: spiritual pathology, or even the science of sins (Sundenlehre), because it labors especially in discerning sins. Many so-called "Summists" of the Middle Ages used this method, and besides them: Diana³¹ (who was called "Atlas of the casuistic world"), Escobar, Busembaum, and others (among moderns Berardi perhaps is to be numbered among the Casuists).

3. The ascetical (mystical) method, which above all considers the virtues and divine grace, and impels man toward Christian perfection in the threefold way, namely the purgative, illuminative, and unitive. St. Bernard, the Mellifluous Doctor, St. Bonaventure, the Seraphic Doctor, Thomas a Kempis, Henry Suso, O.Pr., Tauler, O.Pr., St. Francis de Sales, Scaramelli, S.J., Contenson, O.Pr., in his celebrated Theologia mentis et cordis, Valgornera, O.Pr., Ludovicus Blosius, O.S.B., Philip of the Most Holy Trinity, Order of Carmel, and many others used this method.

Certainly each of these methods is good and licit, nor has the Church prescribed any determinate method. But in order to discern which one is to be preferred, account must be taken both of the end and of the circumstances of times and places. The objective end of Moral Theology is to judge and direct human acts to the supernatural end. The subjective end is deservedly called that which each person intends in the study of Moral Theology. If someone chiefly intends to become a good confessor and to hear many confessions, then certainly he must cultivate the casuistic method; if someone intends to be a good preacher or instructor, he must cultivate the ascetical method; if someone intends to become a good apologist against the impugners of Catholic Moral Theology, or if he wishes to have a profound knowledge of moral truths, he must labor in the scholastic method. Certainly the best method is that which is at once scholastic, casuistic, and ascetical, and for this reason certain authors (although rare) have attempted to unite these three methods; and the better, more simply, and more briefly this has truly been done, the more perfect the method is. I deliberately said: the more simply and briefly this has been done; for usually any more prolix method makes Manuals too extensive, which harm rather than profit the study of disciples. Since these things are so, I also shall try according to my powers to unite this threefold method, and indeed with as much simplicity and brevity as I shall be able.

³¹ Cf. Concina, Apparatus ad Theol. christ. book 3, diss. 1, q. 2.