Article I. On Necessity

I Say 1st. The internal act of faith is necessary for all adults by necessity of means for justification, and also by necessity of precept sometime in life. The first is clear both from the Apostle saying, Hebr. xi, 6, "Without faith it is impossible to please God," and from the Council of Trent, sess. 6, cap. 6, where the mode of preparation for justification is described, and among other things necessarily required faith is assigned. But the other is clear from proposition 1 condemned by Alexander VII, which holds thus: "Man at no time of his life is bound to elicit an act of faith, hope, and charity, by force of the divine precepts pertaining to those virtues." - Cf. Mazzella, disp. 3, art. 10.

I say 2nd. There exists both a negative precept prohibiting one from denying the true faith, and an affirmative precept sometimes obliging one to confess it, even with danger to life. The reason for the first is that to deny the faith is to deny God himself. But the reason for the second is that the honor of Christ sometimes demands that the faithful despise even life for confessing him. Hence Christ himself says, Luke ix, 26, "He who shall be ashamed of me ... of him the Son of man will be ashamed, when he shall come in his majesty." - I said sometimes, for this affirmative precept, precisely because it is affirmative, does not oblige always and for always, but only then when the honor due to God, or the spiritual utility of the neighbor, would be withdrawn in a notable way; for example, if from omission of the confession of the true faith there would follow contempt of religion, or scandal, or the perversion of others; as is clear from Can. 1325, § 1.

§ 1. The faithful of Christ are bound openly to profess the faith as often as their silence, evasion, or manner of acting would bring with it implicit denial of the faith, contempt of religion, injury to God, or scandal of the neighbor (Can. 1325).

§ 1. It is by no means lawful for the faithful in any way actively to assist or take part in the sacred rites of non-Catholics.

§ 2. Passive or merely material presence can be tolerated, for the sake of civil office or honor, for a grave reason to be approved by the Bishop in a case of doubt, at the funerals, weddings, and similar solemnities of non-Catholics, provided danger of perversion and scandal is absent (Can. 1258). - Cf. St. Thom. 2-2, q. 3, art. 2. - St. Alphonsus, n. 10.

Question 1. When does the precept of eliciting the internal act of faith press?

Response. It certainly presses of itself not only after the use of reason has been completed, or after the truth of our faith has been sufficiently proposed to an adult infidel, for beginning the Christian life, but also more often in life, as theologians commonly hold, and as is sufficiently clear both from the condemnation of the proposition already cited and from proposition 17, condemned by Innocent XI, which lies thus: "It is enough to elicit an act of faith once in life." - But the particle more often is understood in different ways by different persons, but it can safely be held that it does not include greater frequency than once a year. - But it presses by accident as often as some end is to be obtained for which an act of faith is necessarily required.

Yet note that this precept, as St. Alphonsus holds, is sufficiently fulfilled by those who have already learned and believed the truths to be held by faith, by exercising other acts of religion in which an act of faith is implicitly contained, for example, by devoutly hearing Mass, adoring the crucifix, receiving the sacraments, etc. Hence:

1st. It follows that the faithful who live as Christians, or at least once a year approach the sacraments of Penance and the Eucharist, are not to be disturbed concerning the fulfillment of this precept.

2nd. It follows that the question whether the dying are bound of themselves, namely by force of a special obligation imposed by the virtue of faith itself, to eliciting some act of it, has been resolved, at least practically. For the dying are certainly bound to some acts of religion, especially to receiving the last sacraments; but they cannot perform this without eliciting an act of faith. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 7; and Hom. Ap., n. 13. - Baller., note (a), p. 161, note (b), p. 174, note (c), p. 178, and note (a), p. 180. - Amer. Eccl. Review, Vol. 2, p. 442.

Question 2. When questioned concerning the faith, can you use ambiguous words?

Response. Negatively, when evasion or silence is equivalent to denial, or to shame which from the circumstances is known to yield to contempt of God and scandal of the neighbor. Besides, as regards public power questioning, this is clear from proposition 18, condemned by Innocent XI, which sounds thus: "If someone is questioned by public authority, I counsel him to confess the faith ingenuously, as glorious to God and to the faith; I do not condemn silence as sinful of itself." - But Kenrick says: "Among us, where the laws wish that no account be had of the religion or faith of citizens, one will generally be able to use his own right and reject the interrogation as out of order." - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 13. - Kenrick, n. 30. - Amer. Eccl. Review, Vol. 2, p. 266.

Question 3. Is it lawful to use the signs or garments of infidels?

Response. Affirmatively, if they are garments or signs proper to some region, although this whole region is infidel; because these of themselves are not referred to religion. But if they are garments and signs of religion, a subdistinction must be made, and again it must be affirmed, if it is done for a grave cause and the garments are not only distinctive of sect from sect, because then their primary use is for covering the body, and only secondarily for distinguishing the sect. - But the response must be negative if the garments or signs are instituted either uniquely or primarily for professing the sect, as are the garments and ornaments which priests use in the exercise of their functions. - Cf. Salmant., tract. 21, cap. 2, n. 110.

153. Question 4. Who are bound by canon law to emit the profession of faith?

Response. By ecclesiastical law, as is clear from Canon 1406, § 1:

§ 1. By the obligation of emitting the profession of faith, according to the formula approved by the Apostolic See, there are bound:

1st. Before the president or his delegate, those who attend an Ecumenical or particular Council or diocesan Synod with a vote, whether consultative or deliberative; but the president before the same Council or Synod;

2nd. Before the Dean of the Sacred College, the Cardinals first in the order of priests and deacons, and the Camerarius of the Holy Roman Church, those promoted to the cardinalitial dignity;

3rd. Before a delegate from the Apostolic See, those promoted to an episcopal see, even a non-residential one, or to the rule of an Abbey or Prelature nullius, an Apostolic Vicariate, or an Apostolic Prefecture;

4th. Before the cathedral Chapter, the Capitular Vicar;

5th. Before the local Ordinary or his delegate and before the Chapter, those who have been promoted to a dignity or canonry;

6th. Before the local Ordinary or his delegate and before the other consultors, those assumed to the office of diocesan consultors;

7th. Before the local Ordinary or his delegate, the Vicar General, pastors, and those for whom provision has been made concerning any benefices, even manual ones, having care of souls; the rector and professors of sacred theology, canon law, and philosophy in Seminaries, at the beginning of any scholastic year or at least at the beginning of the office undertaken; all who are to be promoted to the order of subdiaconate; censors of books, of whom in can. 1393; priests designated for hearing confessions and sacred preachers, before they are endowed with the faculty of exercising those duties;

8th. Before the Ordinary or his delegate, the Rector of a University or Faculty; but before the Rector of the University or Faculty or his delegate, all professors in a canonically erected University or Faculty, at the beginning of each scholastic year or at least at the beginning of the office undertaken; likewise those who, after examination, are endowed with academic degrees;

9th. Before the Chapter or Superior who nominated them or their delegate, Superiors in clerical religions.¹

§ 2. Those who, the prior office having been dismissed, obtain another office or benefice or dignity even of the same species, must again emit the profession of faith according to the norm of this canon (Can. 1406).

He does not satisfy the obligation of emitting the profession of faith who emits it through a procurator or before a layman (Can. 1407).

The prescriptions concerning Councils of vigilance and the anti-modernist oath remain in their full force until it shall have been otherwise established concerning this matter. - S. Off., 22 Mar., 1918.

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1143, n. 114.

You Will Resolve. 1st. He would deny the faith externally: 1st. who, when asked whether he were a Romanist or Papist, would respond that he is not such, unless nevertheless from the circumstances it were gathered that he had rejected words of this kind as being full of envy and insult; 2nd. who, among Quakers, would sit silent and as if meditating; but not if he used only their garments, for example, a large hat; 3rd. who would approach places where conversions of Presbyterians, Methodists, and others are received, and, praying among them, would bend the knees, as if about to receive the spirit; but not if, standing at a distance, he looked upon their manner of acting from levity or curiosity. - Cf. Kenrick, n. 30.

2nd. He should not be accused of denied faith who on days of abstinence would eat meats in order to avoid troubles from heretics; and much less a girl who does the same, fearing lest her father become violently inflamed when he perceives that she has passed over to the Catholic Church. The reason is that from one side we are not always bound externally to profess the true faith, and from the other the eating of meats of itself does not necessarily import denial of the faith, since often this is done from gluttony or from necessity. Indeed someone can hide conversion to the true faith for avoiding very grave evils, when neither the honor due to God nor the good of the neighbor demands manifestation of the faith. - Cf. Kenrick, ibid. - Il Monitore Ecclesiastico, Sec. Ser., Vol. 1, p. 211.

3rd. He does not sin against faith who flees in time of persecution; indeed flight generally is in some way commanded, as is clear from the words of Christ, Matt. x, 23: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee into another." - But this especially holds if someone's salvation is necessary for the utility of the faithful, or someone fears a fall. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 14. - Kenrick, n. 31.

4th. He does not sin against faith who goes to the temples of heretics or infidels for the sake of mere curiosity, without any communication in sacred rites: indeed he sins in no way, or certainly not gravely, if neither scandal is present, nor danger of perversion, nor a particular law forbidding this approach. The reason is that, as to approach profane buildings, so also to approach the temples of heretics is an act indifferent of itself, which is made evil only by an evil end or from circumstances. Thus S. Congr. S. O., 14 Jan. 1818, Dub. 3 (in Cretoni, vol. 1, p. 544, note C). - Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 16.

5th. Yet he will sin against faith if such approach has been commanded by a heretical government as a protestation of heretical faith, or if in any way it is commonly held as a mark of one and the same religion between Catholics and non-Catholics.

6th. Catholics regularly are not permitted to be present at the sermons, baptisms, and marriages of heretics or schismatics. Thus S. Cong. S. O., on 10 May 1770. - It is said regularly, because if the presence is merely material, as can sometimes happen, and from the circumstances it is sufficiently perceived to contain or show no participation with the rites of heretics, it can be excused from sin, especially among us, where this is held as an indication of civil respect. - Cf. Kenrick, n. 33.

7th. To perform the office of sponsor in the baptism of heretics, or to enter marriage before a heretical minister, is always illicit because of cooperation and communication in divine things, as S. Cong. S. O. expressly declared in the cited decree in the year 1770, and S. P. Pius VI, both in the Instruction of 26 Sept. 1791 and in the Responses to the clergy of France of 28 May 1793. - As regards funerals, a distinction must be made: those things which pertain to a merely civil office, such as accompanying the body, can be permitted; other things which have the nature or appearance of communion with heretics are to be prohibited. - Cf. Kenrick, ibid.

8th. Servants can carry their masters to the temples of heretics, and accompany their daughters or wives to them for the sake of protection; for this is held as an office of service, but not as participation of worship. By the same reason a maidservant is excused who holds an infant in her arm while he is baptized by a minister. - Cf. Kenrick, ibid.

9th. Among us it seems lawful for Catholics on Government ships, in fortresses, in prisons, and in other public places, to stand by at the prayers of heretics; for from one side this is demanded for the sake of order rather than favor of the sect, and from the other they would incur great inconvenience if any refused it. Nor is it valid to say that Paul V prohibited this to English Catholics, because there at that time the circumstances were entirely different. - Cf. Kenrick, nn. 33 and 34.

10th. It does not seem able to be permitted to Catholics, in this region, that they play organs or sing in the temples or assemblies of heretics, unless perhaps in some very rare case and with the following conditions acceding: 1st. that there be nothing in the hymns and songs which is opposed to the true faith; 2nd. that no scandal or danger of perversion be had; and 3rd. that a very grave necessity press. The reason for this tolerance is that, when all the aforesaid conditions have been verified, the malice does not seem to hold itself on the part of the act, but only on the part of the agents, and therefore the cooperation will be only material, which, when a just cause intervenes, can be permitted. But if anywhere it has been solemnly declared by the local Ordinary that tolerance of this kind must in no way be admitted, in practice one must stand by this declaration. Indeed such tolerance seems to us illicit in itself. For to sing, while religious offices are exercised in temples, is an active part of the worship of that assembly to which the temple belongs, which then worships God by its own religious rites. But actively to participate in heretical worship is intrinsically evil. In the mouth of men commonly such an act is held as protestative of heresy. Besides, singers entice men to these churches of heretics and thus give favor to heresy. Wherefore let it be lawful for us to depart from the milder opinion and to affirm that to sing in the temples of heretics, while heretical worship is exercised there, is intrinsically evil and never to be permitted. He who places some work which by its intrinsic nature and here and now is directly and immediately ordered to an evil action formally cooperates in that action: hence the intention of the one singing does not change the signification of this act placed here and now. - Bucceroni, Cas., v. 2, n. 30.11. - Lehmkuhl, v. 1, n. 813.

11th. Likewise it does not seem able to be permitted to Catholics that they contribute money to the increase or splendor of fairs, bazaars, or suppers (oyster suppers), when it is known that these fairs or suppers are instituted for this purpose, that money may be obtained for building synagogues or temples of heretics. Nevertheless otherwise would have to be said if sometimes from the circumstances it appears that Catholics wish to show not indeed favor of sects, but only a sign of grateful spirit or benevolence.

12th. In danger of death, when a Catholic priest is lacking, it is lawful to seek absolution from a heretical or schismatic priest, provided scandal is not offered to the other faithful, nor is there danger that the faithful person be perverted by the heretic, and it is probably believed that the heretical priest will administer this sacrament according to the rites of the Church. (S. Off., 7 Jul. 1864.) But outside the case of death it is not lawful, as is clear from this response: "In no case, not even of necessity, is it lawful for a Catholic to confess his sins and obtain absolution from a schismatic priest." S. C. de Prop. Fide, 17 Feb. 1761.

13th. "Communication with heretics can be either in a matter of approved doctrine or in rites or other signs protestative of a false sect with scandal of the faithful, for which reason communion with them is forbidden by the Church, lest faith be understood either to be lost or to be placed in danger. Hence St. John the Evangelist commands so severely: 'If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into the house, nor say "hail" to him; for he who says "hail" to him communicates in his evil works.' II St. John 10. Most evidently from these words it is inferred that whatever expresses a hail of this kind is to be prohibited, as are liturgical actions which were instituted for signifying ecclesiastical unity. Wherefore we read it sanctioned by the Fathers of the Council of Carthage, 'with heretics neither must one pray nor sing psalms,' as Benedict XIV reports, de Syn., c. 5, lib. 6. Therefore it is illicit in sacred functions to invite heretics into the choir, to sing psalms alternately, to give them peace, sacred ashes, and other things of this kind of external worship, which by right and merit are judged signs of an interior bond and agreement, both in the active sense, namely by giving similar things to them, and in the passive, by receiving them from them in their sacred rites." - S. C. S. Off., 22 Jun. 1859.

Besides, the Most Holy Lord Pope Alexander VII, 9 May 1663, proposed the following question to be resolved by the Qualifiers of the Holy Office: What things can with a safe conscience be permitted to be done or omitted for hiding the Catholic religion and what things cannot ...? "All present agreed that those actions which, the circumstances having been considered, are indifferent for signifying worship of a false religion can be permitted; but those which determinately signify, either of themselves or from circumstances, the worship of a false religion are not to be permitted." And when certain special actions which can be permitted had been proposed, it is added: "These things are understood with contempt of the faith, scandal, and danger of perversion excluded." Finally the case of a Baron or petty ruler wishing to embrace the faith but entangled in difficulties is resolved: "All likewise said: since it is certain that no signs protestative of heresy can be permitted to the aforesaid petty ruler ... we judged that first there must be explained what we understand by the name of a sign protestative of heresy. And this indeed we say is that sign, seen or heard which, commonly all conceive that the one using such a sign is a heretic. But we say that sign is indifferent, seen or heard which, commonly, a presumption of heresy is not determinately conceived." Once the questions concerning presence or assistance at heretical worship had been resolved, it is added: "But truly, that ecclesiastical precepts concerning foods, hearing Mass, etc., can be not observed: for this disobedience is not determinately a sign of a false religion, and moreover precepts of this kind do not seem to oblige with so great an inconvenience." - Jur. Pontif. de P. F., Part ii, p. 126 and seq.

It is not permitted for Catholics to be present at dances and other recreations which are accustomed to be held by members of a masonic society, and as such.

§ 7. Praise of a perpetrated delict, participation in its fruits, concealment and reception of the delinquent, or other acts following upon a delict already fully completed, can constitute new delicts, namely if they are punished by a penalty in the law; but, unless there had been agreement with the delinquent concerning those acts before the delict, they do not bring with them imputability of the perpetrated delict (Can. 2209).

14th. 1. Whether the decree by which Catholics are prohibited from being present at the Masses of schismatics and their prayers is understood also for places in which Catholic priests are not found and concerning prayers in which nothing against the faith and Catholic rite is had? S. C. of the Office, 7 Aug. 1704, responded to I: His Holiness judged: Affirmatively.

15th. It is not lawful for Catholics to give alms of Masses to schismatic priests. S. C. de Prop. Fide, 12 Mar. 1789.

16th. That it is not only lawful, but that Catholics are bound to adore the Most Holy Sacrament when they meet a Schismatic Priest carrying it to a sick person, but that they are bound nevertheless to abstain from accompanying him, the S. C. de Prop. Fide responded, 15 Dec. 1764, ad 4.

Concerning many other solutions pertaining here, discourse will be had below, where scandal and cooperation are treated. - For the rest, in all these things attention must be paid to the customs of the region, and to peculiar circumstances, from which it can happen that the same action has a different signification among us than elsewhere. Wherefore not all the responses which are reported in Amer. Eccl. Review, Vol. VI, p. 152, ought to be applied to those who live in this region.¹

¹ Cf. Addenda, p. 1143, n. 115.