Chapter III: On Piety Toward Children

Offices. Besides the perpetual debt of love, parents are held by a grave office of piety to feed and institute their children. And the vow of nature is that the offspring, whom they began to generate by common counsel and as if made one, they should with the same cooperation and similar unity feed and institute, or continue to generate.

In this work ascendants, according as they have the possibility, must supply for parents. Wherefore:

1. Parents must procure a good birth, also by a fitting solicitude for avoiding abortion or an acceleration of childbirth that is not necessary.

2. That they may preserve the honor of the offspring and his very reputation, if he is legitimate, they must acknowledge the offspring and call him by their own name, so that those sin gravely who expose the offspring in a hospital or public place. Yet they are excused by grave danger of life, reputation, or another grave necessity, provided they have turned away every grave danger from the physical life or religious childish institution.

Since foundling-hospitals lie open to all, an obligation of justice by which rich parents would be compelled to pay the expenses of support cannot be demonstrated.

Although several affirm the same, at least when abandoned offspring is supported at public expense.

For the public administration seems to have freely undertaken these cares; and it could undertake them because of the public utility of diminishing infanticides. Yet parents are seriously to be exhorted that, by repaying expenses, they exercise their piety toward the offspring.

3. To feed the offspring with her own milk is a natural office of the mother; yet this cannot be urged under grave obligation if the physical and moral safety of the offspring is sufficiently provided for, nor grave harms are to be feared to another's offspring, another's wife, another's family. A just excuse can also be taken from one's own weakness or necessary occupations.

But, of itself, both the pastor and the confessor should greatly exhort mothers to fulfill their parts, and not to imitate many worldly women who, from desire of worldly liberty or a vain fear of losing beauty, abdicate that function. For they inculcate this exhortation:

a) The bodily good of their own offspring, for whom the milk of his own mother is more useful than the milk of another person, and still more than the milk of an animal, at least if it alone is used. When, with war raging, necessity itself compelled mothers to give breasts to their offspring, fewer infants died, although mothers were nourished with less good foods. Nor can the cares of a solicitous mother be expected from another woman. b) The moral, spiritual good of the offspring. The question being omitted concerning contagion of vices and propensions through nursing, it is agreed that moral education is begun from the very beginnings of life, so that through the first six years of life the moral "character" is said to be formed. Therefore the disposition, prudence, and morals of the person who continually turns about the infant are of very great value. c) Cooperation in the sin of the nurse is to be avoided, if she, in order to feed another's offspring, is compelled gravely to neglect her own. d) The public morals themselves, to which no small harm is done by that usage. For either a wife is separated from her husband, to whom in this way an obligation of continence is imposed and every faculty of corruption is permitted; or a girl is taken who has fornicated: she obtains no small money as if the wages of sin. And whether she was wife or girl, both grow accustomed to living richly and delicately, so that they conceive distaste for their own humbler condition and fare. Besides, by that venal manner of servitude, social peace is little strengthened. Therefore a mother must be said to sin gravely who, for a light reason, admits an external wet nurse in adjuncts which make a grave danger for the husband, or for the woman, or for the offspring. But if a grave reason is present for admitting a nurse, nevertheless she will sin gravely who does not try to avert those harms.

A certain manner of consulting for the physical safety of another's offspring is this: that a nurse be chosen who already for some time has been able to feed her offspring, so that this child, made stronger, may more easily bear another nourishment. And more mildly, as is clear, one must speak of mothers who, the wet nurse omitted, themselves feed their own offspring by an artificial manner.

By the office of piety parents are also obliged to apply at least moderate diligence so that they acquire goods by which children may be fed and obtain an inheritance according to their state. Therefore they sin both by their sloth, and by dissipation of goods, and by arbitrary denial either of a dowry or of an inheritance.

Yet to a child who has made an unworthy marriage or by his own fault has dissipated goods it will be enough to furnish a subsidy for indigence or necessary support.

Neither in the Italian Civil Code (art. 117) nor in the French Civil Code is an action conceded for seeking a dowry for marriage or for entering a state; but each Code sanctions a reciprocal obligation of support, which is owed with account taken of the necessity of one and the faculties of the other. Cf. Italian Code, art. 138-146. Unless the tribunal defines the mode, it is intact to the debtor of support either to offer a pension or to receive under his roof and feed the person to whom he owes support.

It is also necessary that parents furnish to children the possibility of learning art and letters according to their condition, while nevertheless taking care lest imprudently, i.e., without a peculiar cause, they wish to institute them more liberally than their condition bears and, deceived by vain ambition, prepare men impatient of their own lot, ungrateful to parents, harmful to the state. In today's adjuncts of our regions, a certain elementary learning seems to be procured for all.

When there is question of a natural child who has not been civilly acknowledged by the father, theologians judge it enough that he be instituted according to the condition of the mother.

More than the care of the body and of profane learning, parents must take care of the soul and spiritual salvation of children. Wherefore they must:

a) Negatively, turn occasions of sin away from them, for example a common bed, especially if they are of different sex; bad companions; and still more their own bad examples;

b) Positively, correct those sinning with gentle firmness; provide religious instruction for children; take care that, in due time and according to the mind of the Holy See, they approach the sacraments of penance and Eucharist, and frequent the same, much less impede timely and frequent access; bring it about, according to their strength, that literary instruction be imbued with moral and religious institution.

Question concerning schools. Here belongs today the most grave question concerning the choice of schools. From what has been said, it is already clear that parents fail in their office who, when they have the possibility of a truly Catholic school, prefer another which brings less security for solid piety or pure morals. But, that we may say something more concerning the gravity of sin:

1. It will be grave for parents to send boys or adolescents to a non-Catholic school:

a) If proximate danger of perversion in faith or morals will not be avoided, whether because remedies cannot be applied, or because illicit things are prescribed: for example, that heretical prayers be recited;

b) If a grave danger must be sustained, as in a "neutral" school, unless a grave cause has excused, for example a very troublesome vexation of law, necessity of procuring a state for children, etc.;

c) If children are thereby deprived of positive religious education;

d) If, at least by external appearance, parents seem to favor a non-Catholic sect or indifferentism, or give a grave scandal of example which is not excused by the general rules.

2. These things set aside, the fault of those who choose a non-Catholic school will be able to be light, while a Catholic school is at hand, but with greater inconvenience, provided the teacher utters nothing against religion. For if he positively detracts from it, a graver cause of excusing is required. And it is necessary that what is lacking to public institution, parents try to supply by private institution.

3. As priests and counselors, we cannot sufficiently inculcate the most grave office of Catholic institution; and in every way we must add courage to those who determine, even to their own harm, to give abundant spiritual bread to their children.

As confessors we shall sometimes have to dissemble, lest a certain good faith of parents be disturbed in vain. But we shall strive to obtain this: that cautions be applied to diminish the danger, and that positive Catholic education be procured in some way. Cf. what Lehmk., I, 937-939, has concerning that argument.

N.B. The school so-called "neutral" harms adolescents most of all, who are placed under the continual action of teachers. For children depend more on parents than on schoolteachers; but youths more easily preserve the pious morals which they have put on, and are also helped by their aggressive propension to resist professors whom they know to be less well affected toward religion. But greater harms are to be feared from a false exposition of juridical or moral doctrine in higher schools, except that remedies can more easily be applied. Yet especially into those who excel in talent the frequent insinuation of error will instill a poison which will scarcely be fully evacuated in the rest of life. Nor do they receive now a light detriment from this, that they are deprived of the proposition of truth.

To young men who approach "general studies," or civil Universities, it is to be commended in the highest degree: a) that they frequently approach the sacraments; b) that they choose for themselves a stable, learned, and pious confessor, with whom even outside confession they may willingly communicate difficulties; c) that they carefully choose for themselves friends of honest conversation, who may be a mutual help and add courage to them; d) that in certain literary or scientific groups they become accustomed to proposing and defending approved theses. Parents can help their children in this matter at least by counsel. Opportunely they should commend them to a trustworthy man; yet he will be able to do little if the young men themselves do not visit him spontaneously.

Sum. The Code, c. 1113, embraces the offices of parents excellently in this formula: "Parents are held by a most grave obligation of caring according to their powers for the education of offspring, both religious and moral, and physical and civil, and also of providing for their temporal good."

Since paternal filiation is not subject to direct proof, the status of a legitimate child is defined both canonically and civilly by presumptions. Therefore:

1. Canonically, from c. 1114: "Children are legitimate who are conceived or born from a valid or putative marriage, unless because of solemn religious profession or received sacred order, the use of a previously contracted marriage was prohibited to the parents at the time of conception."

Therefore observe that for canonical legitimacy it is enough that the child was born during marriage, although he had been conceived before marriage. But a putative marriage is that which has been celebrated in good faith by at least one party; and it remains such until each party has become certain of its nullity. Cf. c. 1015, §4.

Can. 1115, moreover, introduces these presumptions: "§1. The father is he whom just nuptials demonstrate, unless the contrary is proved by evident arguments. §2. Children are presumed legitimate who were born at least after six months from the day of celebrated marriage, or within ten months from the day of dissolved conjugal life."

Therefore the presumption of c. 1115, §1 is of law only (iuris tantum) (cf. I, 178), since it admits direct contrary proof; but it is strong, since it is overcome only by evident arguments.

Besides, what individual civil laws establish concerning this matter must be attended to.

That we may give examples:

The German Code similarly regards as legitimate children who are born during marriage, provided that, at the time of conception, the husband had cohabited with the mother; which cohabitation is presumed. But the time of conception is defined by the interval between the 181st (inclusive) and the 302nd (inclusive) day before birth, or even beyond, if the infant is demonstrated to have been carried longer (art. 1591, 1592).

On the contrary, by the Codes of France and Italy he is not civilly legitimate unless he was conceived during marriage. But he is presumed to have been conceived during marriage who was not born before 180 days from the celebrated marriage, nor after 300 days from the marriage dissolved or annulled (Italian Code, art. 60; French, 312). The husband, moreover, is judged the father of offspring who is conceived during marriage (Italian, art. 159; French, 312). But if the offspring was born before 180 days from the celebrated marriage or after 300 days from its dissolution or declared nullity, the husband or heirs can deny paternity, except in the cases foreseen in art. 161. (Cf. art. 169, Italian Code; French, 314, 315.)

The presumption of legitimate filiation in more than one civil law is of itself of law and concerning law (iuris et de iure). Yet in a few cases the Italian Civil Code admits the husband to denying paternity, i.e.: a) if, through the time in which the offspring is presumed to have been conceived during marriage, he proves that he could not physically have had carnal commerce with his wife; b) if through the same time he lived legally separated from his wife, and that without even a temporary interruption (art. 162, 163).

Legitimated children are of themselves equated with legitimate children. By the present canonical law, c. 1116, "By the subsequent marriage of parents, whether true or putative, whether newly contracted or convalidated, even not consummated, offspring is made legitimate, provided the parents were able to contract marriage between themselves at the time of conception, or pregnancy, or birth." (Therefore observe that it is enough that at one of the three times, even transitorily, this ability was present.) Although the Code is silent concerning another source of legitimation which before the Code was chiefly alleged, i.e., concerning legitimation by rescript of the Holy See, it must be said to subsist, since nothing has been taken away from the absolute power of the Pontiff. Moreover, the faculty of making offspring legitimate is customarily conceded to those to whom dispensation from matrimonial impediments is committed; but concerning him who possesses a general faculty of dispensing, c. 1051 establishes that use of the faculty at the same time legitimates the offspring; i.e., that as often as they dispense in an impediment, the offspring is actually legitimated, with adulterine and sacrilegious offspring excepted. The equation of legitimate and legitimated child suffers certain exceptions, by which the legitimated are excluded from the dignity of the cardinalate (c. 232), from the episcopate (c. 331), from the office of abbot or prelate nullius (c. 330, collated with 320, §2). A major Superior of a religion must be legitimate or legitimated by subsequent marriage (arg. c. 1117 and 504).

Adulterine and incestuous children are also excluded from civil legitimation. The ordinary mode of legitimation is the subsequent marriage of the parents. By an extraordinary way, with certain conditions posited, it lies open from the Italian Code, art. 198, through a decree of the king. The effects of each legitimation are the same. Cf. art. 201.

This disposition of law is sufficiently general, that children are legitimated either by subsequent marriage of the parents or by an act of public power.

Among several nations, as morals slide and through zeal for equality, attempts are made that illegitimate children may use the same right as legitimate ones.

Acknowledgment of children. Finally, in civil law, besides legitimation there is also the acknowledgment of a child by the mother and especially by the father, since he is of himself uncertain. Acknowledgment is one voluntary, another coerced. For today the previously absolute prohibition of French law concerning inquiring after the father is tempered. Cf. art. 189 of the Italian Code. Moreover, the effect of acknowledgment is limited to the parent alone who has acknowledged the offspring as his own; but it gives to the acknowledged one the name (of the family), the guardianship of the one acknowledging, and the right to support. Cf. Italian Code, art. 179-201.

Piety toward children induces a perpetual debt of love, which of itself brings with it the office of feeding and instituting children. And the vow of nature is that, by the unity by which the offspring was generated, by the same it be fed and instituted. In this office parents are to be supplied by ascendants, according as the possibility will be given. Wherefore, parents must procure a good birth, a relatively honored place, through acknowledgment and communication of the name; secure foods of first infancy, especially through the mother's breasts; an honorable condition in society, and therefore an education in letters congruent with state. The gravity of the obligation is to be estimated according to the gravity of the harm to be avoided. Grave necessity, physical or moral, can excuse parents who commit offspring to a public foundling-hospital to be fed well and religiously; nor, even if they were rich, must they rigorously repay the expenses.

Parents must prudently remove occasions of sins from children, and positively provide for them a good moral and religious institution.

Hence, there is the obligation of choosing, if the possibility is had, a truly Catholic school; the grave prohibition of sending children to a school where a proximate danger of perversion in faith or morals remains for them; and the very defect of religious institution must be compensated otherwise. As counselors, we shall have to persuade toward better things; as confessors, we shall sometimes have to dissemble more things, lest worse things happen. In the estimation of danger, account must be taken both of the institute and of the talent and age of the child. Concerning the offices of parents, cf. the excellent formula, c. 1113.

Which children are legitimate is to be drawn canonically from c. 1114, civilly from various laws. Both canonical and civil laws admit legitimation by subsequent marriage of parents for offspring at least not adulterine or spurious. Besides, legitimation is had through a special act, which canonically the Holy See alone concedes. In civil law, acknowledgment of offspring by one or other or each parent, whether voluntary or coerced, also has a certain efficacy.