Case 2. Scandal

Julius, an English commander in India, when he saw that very many soldiers were being rendered unfit for war because of venereal diseases contracted from common prostitutes, expelled from the camps all the prostitutes infected with disease, and asked Caius, a subordinate officer and a Catholic, to provide healthy women for the use of the soldiers. Although Caius knew that according to the laws of the army Julius could not enforce the command, he acquiesced and procured several healthy women. Wounded and returned to England, while confessing to a priest, he asked whether he had acted lawfully. Hence it is asked:

1. What is the sin of scandal, and how are direct and indirect scandal distinguished?

2. Whence arises the obligation of abstaining from scandal, especially direct scandal?

3. Is it the sin of scandal to induce to sin someone already prepared for it?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. What is the sin of scandal and what is the difference between direct and indirect scandal ?

Scandal is any word or action having at least the appearance of evil which is the occasion of sin to another. When another’s sin is intended by him who gives scandal, this scandal is direct; when it is foreseen but not intended, it is indirect.

2. Whence arises the obligation of abstaining from direct scandal especially ?

We are obliged to abstain from giving scandal in the first place because it is against charity, and against the special obligation of fraternal correction which has its root in charity. He who gives scandal is the cause of sin to his neighbor, whereas he should do what he can to prevent the sinner from falling into sin, and to recover him when he has fallen. Direct scandal is also against that special virtue which is violated by him who sins through scandal. Thus he who incites another to drink to excess sins against charity and against temperance.

3. Is the sin of scandal committed by one who invites another to sin who was already determined to commit that sin?

St. Alphonsus teaches that at least with regard to those things that are intrinsically evil, such as fornication, the sin of scandal is committed by inviting another to execute what he was already determined on doing. The reason is because the execution of an evil purpose constitutes with that purpose a complete and perfect sin, distinct in species from the merely internal and habitual intention of sinning.¹

1 St. Alphonsus, book ii, treatise 3, no. 47.

4. The case. From the answer to the last question it is clear that Caius was not justified in acting as he did. His superior officer had no authority to give him such an order according to the regulations of the British army, and in any case Caius could not execute it without committing sin. In reality he became procurer for the soldiers. This solution does not preclude the medical examination of prostitutes so as to guard against the infection of the soldiers.