deceive themselves that they may deceive others And as for the most part men have not spirit and invention enough for this they want some body to aide and furnish them with reasons to blinde and perswade themselves that they may with a good conscience do that which even their conscience it self teaches them they cannot do when they consult and hearken to it without preoccupations The Jesuits of all the persons of the world are most capable to do these good offices and sufficiently inclinable of themselves to pleasure the whole world It must needs be a very strange and extraordinary case in this matter if they find not expedients to resolve it to the content of him who consults with them There is no person of what condition soever he be who doth prudently make use of their advise who may not do all his affairs by deceit and yet not pass for all that for a cheat or unfaithful according to the maximes of their Divinity First of all if a Child be tempted to take something of his Father and Mothers goods secretly and that the fear of God or Man restrain him in any sort Escobar takes away this scruple from him and makes him see that he may do it with good conscience especially if he do any service to his Father as there is no child but is obliged to do and who doth not do it according to his condition when they are of age and in capacity to do their duties He proposes this question a Filius mercatoris patris bona administrat potest à patre salarium exigere quantum alicui extraneo deberet Siistud non possit à patre pretium impetrare potestne clam accipere Potest quidem ad justam aestimationem labor is industriae fuae computat is tamen in dicta aestimatione expensis quas pater in ipso fecit alendo Escobar tract 1. exam 10. n. 31. p. 163. A Merchant hath a Son whom he employs in the manage of his estate and who may by reason thereof demand of him as much for his salary as he would give unto a stranger See here the thesis supposed and upon which he founds the case If his Father will not give him that which he earns may he take it himself in secret He answers clearly that he may according to the proportion of his labour and his industry He permits him to estimate and rate his own labour and pains and pay himself with his own hands deducting onely out of his pretended wages what his Father hath laid out in his education and maintenance in such manner that this estimation depends upon his own judgement and will for that he dare not inquire of his Father how much he hath expended therein Bauny in his summe ch 10. 2. 4. p. 138. saith the same thing in these terms When Fathers for whom their children are imployed and employ themselves continually do not content them as where children being now grown up are employed by them in their Shops and labour in their Trades or in the field for their Fathers affairs are not obliged to do this for nothing they may in conscience exact so much as strangers receive of them And if it happen that through fear or other humane consideration they dare not take this liberty where there is need to demand a just recompense of their Fathers Leo num 81 aâ—deth that it is lawful for them by all sorts of reason deducting the charges their Fatâ—er hath been at in their education to take so much for their labour and industry as they would give to a stranger unless they intend to serve freely This answre is an Oracle and contains a mystery which it were not convenient to reveal to all the world saith my Author and to cover this mystery it was needfull saith he to pronounce it in Latin the last clauses are so in the Original that they might be tempted thereby who understand not that language and to oblige them to go and demand the knowledge and practice thereof from them that understand it 2. Lessius speaking of theft saith in favour of men and maid servants b Adverte furta esculentorum poculentorum quae committuntur à famulis ancill is etiamsi sensim perveniant ad notabilâ—m quantitatem non esse peccata mortalia si furentur ea ut ipsimet consumant Lessius de just jur lib. 2. c. 12. d. 8. n. 48. p. 118. Observe that theft which men and maid-servants commit in meats and drinks are not mortal sins though insensibly they amount unto a notable quantity if they steal them onely to eat and drink them themselves Escobar saith the same thing and takes it of him c Coalâ—scuntne furta minuta famulorum de rebus comestibilibus quae claudi non solent Minime si non vendenda sed comedenda abripent Escobal tract 1. â—xam 9. n. 25. p. 162. These petty thefts inquires he which servants make of things to eat and which are not wont to be locked up can they by accumulation become a great sin He answers No if they steal these things to eat and not to sell I will not stay to make reflections upon these petty thefts nor to reherse many other cases in which children may according to the Jesuits Divinity take the goods of their Fathers and Mothers and Servants those of their Master reserving that to be done in its proper place when I shall handle that command of God which forbids them and the duties of children and servants in particular I will onely here reherse another passage of Lessius which of it self is sufficient to authorize all sorts of theft which a child or a servant or any other sort of person may commit First of all he saith d Crediderim non esse peccatum mortale quando sciret vel bona fide putaret inferior eum esse eiga se Superioris affectum ut libenter esset concessurus si ipsum sciret tali re egere vel tale quid desiderare Tunc enim censetur habere ex voluntate Superioris saltem virtuali quae in affectu illo latet ..... Pari modo in furto non est peccatum mortiferum quando quis scit affectum Domini in se talem esse aut certe quando Dominus rem parvi aestimat aut ita in aliquem esse affectus ut nollet illum gravi obligatione teneri Lessius de just jur lib. 2. c. 41. d. 9. n. 79. p. 496. That he believes not that a religious person sins at least not mortally in taking something without asking it of his Superiour believing that he would have given it him if he had asked it or if he had known that he had need of it or onely that he deserved it From hence he draws this consequence and this maxime general in the matter of theft So it is no mortal sin to steal when he knows that his Master hath the very fame affection for him as the
and Conclusions which their Authors have taught it will be very hard for them not to be surprized therein and not to be powerfully struck by so many detestable Opinions Who knows but God hearing the prayers which have now for a long time been ordained by the whole Clergy of France and which have been made publickly in some particular Diocesses to beg for them that he would open their eyes may touch them and bring them on highly to disowne the Authors of so many abominations and to make it appear by their condemning them themselves as publick Plagues and declared Enemies of all Truth and Justice that the Crimes with which they have been reproached belong only to some private men and not to the whole Society The approbation of the Doctors hath not been sought after for the Publication of this Book For besides that there was no apparent need to expose the Approbators to the indignation of a Society who hold it for a Maxime that they may with a safe conscience kill them who pretend to hurt them in their reputations it was believed that this precaution would not be necessary on this occasion Indeed the Author producing nothing of his own in this Book and having prescribed unto himself only therein to represent faithfully those Maxims alone of the Jesuits Morals which are notoriously wicked and which are the very same against which all the Parochial Rectors of the most considerable Towns of the Realm have been stirred up so that the Pope the Bishops the Sorbonne and the other Catholick Faculties have condemned by their Censures the Apology of the Casuists and that the Faculty of Divinity in Paris have now very lately censured in the Books of Vernant and Amadeus we believe all these Censures to be as so many Approbations of this Book and that for that cause the Pope the Bishops the Sorbonne and the other Faculties and the Parochial Rectors of the principal Towns of France may pass for its Approbators or at least of the Doctrine contained therein For as to the knowing whether the Author hath been a faithful Relator of the Propositions of the Authors whom he cites every one in particular may well be allowed to judge thereof because indeed better Judges of this sort of differences than the eyes of those who shall have any scruple in this point cannot be had But if the Jesuits and some of the Partisans of their Society complain of this Author because he hath so exactly represented their Extravagances there is cause to hope that all other faithful people will be satisfied therewith because that one may say in truth that he gives by his Book unto every one that which belongs unto him and which the Casuists of the Society have used their utmost force to ravish from them He gives unto God the love the acknowledgment and the worship which belongs unto him to the Church the belief and submission of the Faithful to worldly Powers their honour and the fidelity of their Subjects safety to their Estates to Fathers and Mothers the obedience and respect of their Children to Children the love and tenderness of their Fathers and Mothers Conjugal fidelity to Husbands and Wives to Masters the fidelity of their Servants to Servants kindness of their Masters to the Ecclesiasticks Piety and Religion equity and integrity to Judges true honour unto the Nobility fair dealing unto Merchants Finally he establishes in the World all those Vertues which the Jesuits seem resolved to banish from thence that they might entertain and cause to reign there all the disorders which the malice of men or the Devil himself was capable to invent The Translators Conjecture concerning the Author of this Advertisement and of the Book it self THis Advertisement seems to be Father Arnolds the Preface and Work his Nephew Monsieur Pascals who is also supposed to have written the Porvincial Letters not without his Uncles privity and assistance whose head and hand could not be wanting to this Work also if his The style much differing and Lewis Montalt affirming himself to be no Doctor makes me suspect a third hand to have been made use of in drawing up those Letters however these Doctors as I am credibly informed were the Head-contrivers of them There are also many passages in the Provincials which seeming to promise this Work confirm my Conjecture The Preface of the Author The Design and Order of this Work THE end of Morality not only among Christians but also among the Pagans hath always been to make known that which is good and to separate it from the bad to carry men on to vertue and to good actions and to turn them away from vice and from sin and in pursuit thereof to teach them the means to proceed from the one to the other It cannot be shewed more easily and more evidently how dangerous and prejudicial the Moral Divinity of the Jesuits is than by making it appear that it tends and leads to a quite contrary end and that it walks in ways opposite to Reason and to the Law of Nature as well as those of Christian Piety that it confounds good and evil or to use the words of Scripture it calls evil good and good evil that the more part of the resolutions which it gives upon the points and particular cases which respect conscience tend to the stopping up in men the lights and motions of conscience it self and favours lust which corrupts it that the Principles from which they draw their Resolutions and the Reasons of which they make use for to support them are so many means and expedients proper for to authorize vice to sustain sin to excuse the most criminal actions and to entertain loosness and disorder in all sorts of Professions This is that which I have a design to make appear in this Book And to the end that I may before-hand give a general Idea of all that which I handle therein and represent most clearly the Method and consequence of the means whereof I make use to justifie that which I pretend I will expose here in a few words the whole order and disposition of my Discourse I reduce all these matters to certain principal Points which I handle after such manner and in such order as seems to me most clear and most proper to make appear the consequence of the Moral Doctrine of the Jesuits the connexion of their Principles with their Conclusions and the conformity of their practice with their Opinions For the consort and the resemblance which is between their Doctrine and their Conduct is so perfect that it is visible it proceeds from the same Spirit tends to the same end which is to please men to satisfie them by flattering their passions and their interests and to train them up in vice and disorder To see clearly the truth of this point which is the whole subject of this Book it must first be considered that there seems not possible to be found a way more proper to
Superiour of the Religionary hath for him or when his Master makes no account of that which is stoln from him or when he is of such a disposition that he would not have him who had stoln it from him obliged therefore to any great punishment In these few words Lessius hath put together three reasons to excuse in a manner almost all sorts of thefts from mortal sin and hath given liberty to commit them without fear of sinning mortally e Quando quis scit affectum Domini in se talem esse c. First of all when any one perswades himself that his Father or his Mother or his Master or his friend or his neighbour or any one whomsoever might give that which he steals if it were asked or if he knew that he had need of it A child may easily promise himself this of his Father or a servant of his Master and generally every one whosoever of him whom he believes to have some inclination or affection towards him 2. f Aut certe quando Dominus rem parvi aestimat aut ita in aliquem est affectus ut nollet illum gravi obligatione teneri When the person from whom something is stoln makes small account thereof or hath not much affection for it or gives not himself much to it this gives liberty to rob persons that are gentle prodigal and good people above all who because they sit loose from the things of this world do make no great matter thereof 3. When a person is of that disposition that he would be loath that the thief should therefore be subjected unto great pains as to fall into mortal sin and by consequence into eternal damnation There are no persons so barbarous as to desire to engage him to eternal damnation who hath robbed him of something and much lesse a Father a Master a Friend a Neighbour if he be not bereft of all sense of Christianity and altogether unnaturall If then mortal sin in the matter of theft depend on the disposition and will of him that is robbed as this Casuist pretends it will come to passe that no Child Servant Friend or other person almost can at all offend mortally in thest 4. g Potestne Thesaurarius vel Procurator Principis Domino inscio cum ipsius pecuniis in suum commodum negotiari Potest ex Doctrina Lessii modo nullum incommodum aut gericulum domino obveniat Escebar tract 3. cxam 4. n. 95. p. 392. They hold that a Treasurer a Factor a Sollecitor a Servant and such like may traffique with their Masters money without his privity and retain the profit for themselves 5. They teach that a Vintner who hath better wine then ordinary for that he may not sel it by reason of some politique order above the common price may recompense himself therein by mingling water therewith This is also the opinion of Escobar who after he had reported the opinion of those who condemn this deceit he adds that notwithstanding their opinion and their reasons h Attamen Lessius posse dilui affirmat quia nuâ—la injuria infertur emptori Escobar tract 3. exam 6. n. 70. p. 423. Lessius maintains that it is lawful because those that buy this Wine have no prejudice thereby Amicus saith the same thing of grain as well as of Wine i Infertur posse veaditorem qui vinum vel triticum venale habet optimum tantum aquae in vino sâ—ligin is intritico miscere quantum sat is est ad reducendum vinum vel triticum ad eam qualitatem cujus est aliud vinum vel triticum quod eodem pretio venditur Amicus de just jur dispen 21. Sect. 6. n. 87. p. 282. That a man who selleth Wine or Grain which is very good may mingle so much of water with his Wine and Rie with his Wheat as will reduce one with the other to the quality of the common Wine and Grain which are sold at same price with his 6. Tailors also may find their advantage in Escobar who justifies that deceit which is very common amongst them k Sartor cui cura emendi pannos serica pro vestibus conficiendis committi solet si unius mercator is officinam frequentans invenit pretia mitiora potesine pretii illius excessum sibi remissum retinere Negat Salas dub 45. n. 6. quia mercalor revera nihil ei dimittit sed dimittere mentitur ad eum alliciendum Porro Filliutius tom 2. tr 35. c. 6. n. 149 affirmat Escobar tract 3. exam 6. n. 60. p. 421. He demands whether a Tailor who hath been accustomed to buy Cloath or Silk by command from another for to make his Cloaths and goes on this occasion most commonly to a Shop of a Merchant who for this reason sells him a good penny worth may retain to himself the benefit of his good market He confesses presently that Salas condemns this as a manifest cheat because the Merchant gives nothing of his own to this Taylor and that which he makes shew of abating him is effectually paid by him for whom he bought it But he concludes at last for the Taylor with Philliutius The reason upon which they do both ground this is because this practice is past into a custom l Quia revera assolet mercator aliquid remittere ob officinae frequentionem For saith he the Merchant is indeed accustomed to abate something to the Taylor because he comes usually to his Shop Filliutius reports also another reason in this matter which is never a whit better m Non apparet ulla injustitia in accipiendo illo pretio Revera enim magni refert mercatorem ut sartores potius ad suam officin am veniant quam ad alis Filliutius supra It doth not seem saith he that the Taylor sins against Justice in taking this money which comes by the good pennyworth which the Merchant affords him because the Merchants are greatly concerned that Taylors should rather come to their Shops than to other men's He pretends that because the Merchant finds his advantage therein therefore the Taylor ought also to have his benefit thereof It seems to him reasonable that they divide that which comes of this deceit between them and that the Merchant should give the Taylor that which he hath promised he believes that he is obliged thereto and this is without doubt by the same law that obliges him who hath employed a man to commit a murder to pay the murderer what he had promised him as Layman maintains Also the Taylor may in good conscience receive that which the Merohant gives him upon Filliutius his words who saith n Non apparet ulla injustitia in accipiendo illo pretio that he sees no injustice therein Preoccupation hinders him to see it which yet is not so strong as to take from him altogether the sense thereof for the check of his own conscience makes him
design to commit if he could all venial sins sinneth onely venially Escobar makes thereof a probleme proposing it in this manner l Habens voluntatem peccata omnia venialia perpetrandi peccat non peccat mortaliter Escobar Theol. Mor. l. 3. pag. 83. It may be held that he who hath a will to commit all venial sins sinneth mortally and it may also be said that he doth not sin mortally The reason for this second part of this probleme is the very principle that we now speak of m Non peccat quia malitia interni actus voluntat is desumitur ab objecto prout propenitur à ratione Sed objectum hujus internae voluntat is sunt omnia venialia nulla major malitia proponitur à ratione praeter venialem Ergo interna volunt as perpetrandi omnia peccata venialia non potest esse culpa lethalis Because that saith he the malice of an inward action of the will is taken from the object towards which it warps according as it is represented to it by the understanding But the object of this will are all venial sin and the malice which the understanding represents unto it is but venial and for that cause a will to commit all venial sins can be but a venial sin So that a man may have a will to commit all the venial sins which he can commit in the matter of theft and all those which can be committed by intemperance and by all other vices without sinning otherwise then venially that is to say that without mortal sin we may have a will to steal all the goods of the world if we could taking it at many times and every time in small quantity which according to this rule of these Casuists could not be matter sufficient for a mortal sin and so in the other vices and sins The same Escobar in the abridgement which he made of moral Divinity in one sole Book proposeth the same question but not any longer as a probleme but as a resolution and an opinion constantly assented to by the Society For he professes to relate no others and to advance nothing of himself no more then from strange Authors n Rogo auex numero venialium exurgat moâ—ta'e Unde v. g. per impossibile quie omnia peccata venialia committeret culpam levem non excederet Escobar tract 2. exam 1. c. 12. n. 57. p. 385. It is demanded saith he whether of many venial sins one mortal may be made and by consequent if one committed all venial sins which is impossible if the fault were more then a sleight one He confesses himself that this case is so extravagant that it is impossible Yet he forbears not to propose and resolve it in this sort o Negative respondeo cum Granado 1.2 cont 6. tract 2. d. 2. sect 7. docente volentem uno actu omnia peccata venialia perpetrare solum venialiter delinquere Then with Granades who holds that he who hath a will to commit all at once and by one sole act all venial sins sins onely venially There is some cause to doubt whether the question be more strange or the answer For if it be a thing altogether unsufferable and which would have been grievously punished in the Church heretofore to propose a case and an excesse so extraordinary which no man could not onely not commit but which even could not come possibly into the heart of the most forlorn in vice it is not less strange to endeavour to make it be believed that he who would commit this excesse which passeth the corruption of all men that is to say who would commit more wickedness then either he or any other could possibly act and would do this deliberately and out of more malice should commit onely a small sin Who can perswade himself that a person can be in favour with God who is resolved to offend him as much as he can so that he may not be damned and doing all the evil that he is able against him with resolution to do yet also more if he could do it without destroying himself If a child should deal thus with his Father or a friend with his friend or a servant with his Master he would make himself an object of publick hate and an abomination to the whole world and there would be no person who would not judge them entirely unworthy of the quality and name of a Son friend or servant And neverthelesse these Jesuits pretend that he who demeans himself thus towards God ceases not to be in truth his servant his friend and his son and that he doth nothing which deserves displeasure and that he may not be taxed of mortal sin Sanchez proposes a case which is not far from that of Escobar He speaks of a man who entring into a Religious Order had made a resolution not to observe any rule or constitution of that Order nor of all the counsels or commands of his Superiours but those things onely which he could not neglect without mortal sin and for all the rest whereto he thought not himself obliged under the pain of mortal sin as vigils silence abstinence Justes of the Order and other such like Religious observations and mortifications of the spirit of the body he would not trouble himself at all and would dispense with himself as much as he could He asks what judgement ought to be made of a Frier who should be in such an estate whether his resolution and will which he hath absolutely to violate all the points of his rule and all the duties of his profession wherein he believed he should not sin at all or but venially should be a mortal sin whether this would hinder him from being a good Monk and whether this would be a great fault against the obligation which he had to move towards perfection The answer of this Doctor is that such a man ceased not for all that to be in a good estate before God and that he should be a good Frier though not perfect and that he sinned not at least not mortally against the obligation he had in the quality of a Religious person to pursue after perfection One of his reasons is that because he sins but venially as he supposes in violating severally every one of the points of his rule and the regular observations which he is resolved not to observe the will which he hath to transgresse them all is but a will to sin venially and which hath for its object venial sins onely and which by consequence it self could be no other then a venial sin We shall consider more particularly this case of Sauchez and his answer in handling the duties of Friers and perhaps elsewhere speaking of mortal and venial sin I was willing onely to mark this here by the by as a dependence and conclusion of the principle which is the subject of this Chapter that the greatness of the sin ought to estimated from and according to
follow that which he believes to be less probable and to prove their opinion he lends them a reason of which he oftentimes made use before in like cases about other matters e Quia nec temere nec imprudenter agit utpote qui ratione probabili ducitur Ibid. n. 46. Because a Judge doth not herein behave himself rashly or imprudently guiding himself as he doth by a probable opinion Which obligeth him to approve the opinion of these Authors though he dares not follow it f Quamvis autem hoc sit probabile probabilius judico eum teneri sententiam serre juxta opinionem probabiliorem Ibid. n. 47. Because though it be probable yet he believes it to be more probable that a Judge is obliged to Judge according to the more probable opinion There are none therefore but Casuists and directors of consciences alone that are absolutely exempt from this obligation It is of them alone that we are to understand that which Filliutius said above g Licitum est sequi opinionem minus probabilem etiamsi minus tuta sit It is lawful to follow the less probable opinion though it be also less safe And it is to them onely that we are to referre all those maximes and conclusions which we have seen him and his fraternity draw from this principle And though in this they favour indeed those of other professions in fixing them more unto truth and Justice and leaving them less liberty to depart from it yet it is not this they regard particularly their principal design is to favour themselves in giving to themselves a power to dispose of the power of Jesus Christ of his ministry of the consciences and Salvation of men according to their fancy and do in the Church whatsoever they please without considering that there is no greater misery then to love licence and to be able to do what one will against justice and truth II. POINT The pernicious consequences and effects of the Jesuits Doctrine of probability IF the Tree may be known by its fruit and if a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit as Jesus Christ saith in the Gospel we may confidently affirm that the Doctrine of probability is the most dangerous that ever appeared in the Church and in the world because it overturns all things in them both There is no Chapter in this book that proves not this truth but because it is important and that there are it may be many persons that will hardly believeit and will not easily observe it through the whole extent of this treatise I will represent here some of the principal proofs of the pernicious consequences and unhappy effects of this Doctrine 1. It favours and nurses up weak and disorderly persons in their mistakes and disorders sinners and libertines in their bad courses hereticks in their heresies and Pagans in their infidelity 2. It teaches to elude the Commandments of God and the Church and it overturns Laws Civil Ecclesiastick and Divine 3. It destroys the authority of Princes over their Subjects of Pastors of the Church over the Faithful of Fathers over their children Masters over their Servants of Superiours in Religious Orders over their Inferiours and generally of all Superiours over their Inferiours 4. It introduces independence and leads to irreligion 5. It cannot be destroyed nor hindred from having course in the world if it be once therein received and taught Every one of these points are handled largely enough in diverse places of this Book where may beseen the passages of the Jesuits Authors which I have cited for their verification Wherefore to avoid repetitions I shall often onely give a short touch here as I passe of what they say upon the most part of these points relating upon the rest some other new passages of their Authors I will also recite some out of one of their principal and most faithful disciples and partakers Caramuel by name This is the onely exception to be found in all this work of my design which I have to rehearse onely the Authors of the Society if yet in this it can be said that I depart from my design since it is still onely the Jesuits that speak by the mouth of one of their disciples who doth nothing but deduce and explicate their opinions But if sometimes he seem to be transported and to expatiate too far in the licence of their Doctrine he draws always his conclusions from their Doctrines and he often supports them by their very reasons and in all the liberty of his stile and spirit he advances nothing but what is comprised and contained in the maximes of the Society which I have represented in the preceding Articles It had not been hard for me to have drawn the very same consequences with him But besides that I make some scruple to aggravate or publish the mischief before it appeares and breaks forth of its own accord it goes sometimes to such an excesse that it seems incredible if they themselves who are the Authors thereof did not both own and publish it And this hath caused me to take this disciple of the Jesuits for the interpreter of their opinions as being proper to represent most clearly and most surely the pernicious effects of their Doctrine of probability But because the matter is of great extent I will divide them into several Paragraphs according to the points I even now observed SECT I. That the Jesuits Doctrine of probability favours disorderly persons libertins and infideles 1. IT favours weak and disorderly persons and nuzzles them in their looseness because according to the rules of this probability there is no person of any condition who may not easily be excused of the most part of his duties general and particular continue to live in his disorder and in the abuse which the corruption of the age hath introduced and exempt himself from alms from fasting and from other good works which he may and ought to do according to the order of God and the Church that he might come out of his weaknesses and disorders since these holy exercises are the strength and nourishment of the faithful soul But all these proofs and others also which might be produced upon this point are contained in one sole maxime of the Jesuits Divinity reported by one of their chiefest disciples and defendours a Omnes opiniones probabiles sunt peraeque tutae ac securae benigniores etsi aliquando siut minus probabiles per accidens sunt semper utiliores securiores Caramuel Comment in Reg. S. Bened. l. 1. d. 6. n. 58. Item Theol. fundam p. 134. That all probable opinions are of themselves as safe the one as the other but the more pleasant although they be less probable are always more profitable and more safe by accident That is to say because of their sweetness which renders them more easie more proportionable to the inclinations of men and more favourable to their interest and softness And
sufficiently its intent and the thoughts of the Council of Trent upon this Point in the Ceremonies which it prescribes and would have observed in the Betrothing for the Publication of the Bains he saith 3 Praeceptum de denuntiationibus non obligat quando ex illius observatlone notabile damnum sequitur Quaprepter in talibus occasionibus nulla requiritur dispensatio etiamsi ordinatius poffet commode adiri sitque paratus dispensationem concedere non solum quando est certum sed etiam quando est probabilis suspicio Ibid. disp 3. dub 27. num 212. That we are not obliged to observe them when any notable damage would follow thereupon that we are not obliged to demand a dispensation though we might conveniently demand it of the Ordinary and he were ready to grant it That this is not only lawful then when the damage is certain but also when we have some probable suspicion The Order of the Church for the Bains is express as for the Betrothing this Jesuit would abolish the one and the other which are as it were the Preparatives unto lawful Marriage and the Precautions against the clandestine that he might better favour and authorize them against the prohibition of the Council which condemns them In which he doth like them who seize on the Suburbs and Avenues of a City which they would carry by force For after what he lately spoke thus for abolishing the Bains and authorizing clandestine Contracts of Marriage he maintains 4 Addendum verum esse valide etsi matrimonium ab incolis loci in quo Tridentinum viger in loco in quo non viget etiamsi eo transierit eum ob finem clandestine contrahendi non solum valide sed licite posse fieri servando in aliis jus antiquum quamvis eum ob finem transierit ut non obligaretur Tridentini decreto quo obligabatur in proprio loco cujus erat incols Ibid. dub 6. num 42. That not only clandestine Marriage is valid even amongst the Inhabitants of a Country where the Council of Trent is received when they go into another Country where it is not observed that they may marry in secret but that this Marriage is lawful provided that in other things they observe the ancient Laws though they have purposely changed place that they might be discharged from the Law of the Council of Trent by which they were obliged in their own Country We must say then according to this Casuist that it is lawful to make Marriages which the Church doth nullifie and which it never approved in those very times in which it suffered them For these sorts of Marriages have been heretofore indeed valid but they were never lawful on the contrary they have been always censured in the Church But if the Jesuits make Marriages good which are null on the contrary they make those null which are good 1 Dico effe probabile matrimonium metu levi injuste ad hoc incusso celebratum nullum esse in foro conscientiae Tamb. lib. 1. decal cap. 2. sect 6. n. 12. Ex metu quoque justè incusso hujusmodi matrimonium nullum esse non puto improbabile sect 7. n. 3. I say saith Tambourin that it is probable that a Marriage contracted by some slight fear unjustly induced is null in conscience and even some fear justly raised probably may nullifie the Marriage It must then be affirmed that Marriages to which persons are condemned by the Judges which Fathers cause their Children to make which Masters make of their Servants and Princes of their Subjects are null because commonly these Marriages are made with some sort of fear And the same thing must be said of the Professions made by Monks and Nuns and consequently of all sorts of Engagements and Contracts Nevertheless it is apparent that the Jesuits make use of fear as well as hope sometimes for a motive to engage young persons in their Society and they would not refuse a donation or foundation which should be made to them with some fear without doubting whether it might be null For what concerns the use of Marriage albeit the bodies of married persons are not in their own power according to the words of Scripture 2 Non solum publica mere rix sed etiam occulta matitata potest retinere pretium sornicationis adultâ—…ii Dicastill lib. 2. tr 〈◊〉 disp 6. dub 1. 〈◊〉 â—8 Dicastillus forbears not to permit a married woman to retain to her self the price of her Adultery The reason Tambourin brings for it is considerable 3 Ratiomihi viâ—… esse quia vir nonâ—…st ita dominus corporiâ— uxoris ut in illud perfectissimum dominium habeat sed solum ita ut illo uti queat in debito conjugali omnibus aliis exclusis quod certè non tollit uxori facultatem acquirendi licet cum peccato ex turpi sui corporis concessione Tambur lib 7. decal cap. 3. sect 3. num 〈◊〉 The Husband saith he is not so master of the body of his Wife that he hath a perfect dominion over it but he hath only the power to use it according to the Law of Marriage with exclusion of all others which certainly takes not from the woman power to gain something though not without sin by prostituting her body This reason is worthy the Proposition which it is brought to prove For it is a manifest contradiction to say that a husband hath a right to use the body of his wife with exclusion of every other and that nevertheless the woman may sell the use of the same body unto another if in selling this use she sell not that which belongs unto her husband she doth no injustice and she doth not properly commit adultery and her sin will not be more than a simple fornication This Author makes no difficulty to say 4 Expresse excludere finem multiplicandae prolis imo etiam cupere filios non procreare veniale est Tambur lib. 7. cap. 3. sect 5. num 7. That it is no more than a venial sin expresly to exclude from the use of Marriage the end of having children to desire even to have none at all without considering that the begetting of children being the end of Marriage to use it without this end and even against this end excluding it positively by a contrary desire is to abuse Marriage voluntarily is to profane a Sacrament is to reject and contemn the blessing which is especially given to obtain children it is finally to live with a woman in Marriage as out of Marriage abusing her to satisfie a brutal passion and for sensual pleasure alone as debauched persons abuse women single or married who abandon themselves unto them and yet all these excesses are but a Peccadillo according to this Jesuit When we doubt of the validity of a Marriage and have cause to apprehend that it is null Dicastillus gives an invention unto persons whom the fear of God
with joy and those who shall adhere to them through passion or interest may be brought to testifie the horrour they have conceived against them by the renunciation which they shall make of them or at least by the silence they shall keep and wherein they shall bury them so as neither to hold nor teach them any more for the future But if they shall not draw hence the fruit which is desired and they persist both the one and the other to maintain the same Maxims they testifie openly hereby that they also admit all the consequences whereof they cannot be ignorant any longer And by consequence they shall make themselves responsible for all the consequences and all the unhappy effects which are therefrom inseparable And if after all this they make an out-cry in the world and hold themselves offended when such disorders are imputed to them and when they are declared the Authors and Cherishers of these Irregularities of Corruption of Libertinism which are spread over all conditions in these last times they cannot attribute it to any other than themselves because they are reproached with nothing but what they have avowed themselves in that they would not disavow it after it hath been represented unto them and they have been condemned by the Church The Faithful shall at least draw hence this advantage that they may hereby discover the false Prophets and false Pastors from the good and true ones and take heed of those who under a pretence of piety do corrupt piety it self seducing simple and innocent Souls so far as to endeavour to hale them out of the bosom of their true and lawful Pastors and to turn them away from their conduct and engage them in horrible precipices Reasons wherefore we take the Morals of the Jesuits for the Subject of this Book rather than those of other Casuists THat I produce in this Work no other Authors than those of the Society of the Jesuits is not through any passion towards them or toward others For though I speak not of other Casuists yet do I not neglect them entirely as neither do I approve them nor excuse them in their opinions which they have common with the Jesuits and which are conformable to those which I reprove But as he who would cut down a Tree amuses not himself in cutting off the branches one after another but betakes himself to its body and root which being cut the branches must necessarily fall and so I believe that destroying the pernicious Doctrine of the Jesuits touching Manners and Cases of Conscience I overturn all at once whatsoever there is conformable unto it amongst the new Casuists because they are in a manner all their Disciples having learned that which they say in their Schools or in their Books After all this the Jesuits declare themselves the Masters of this sort of new Learning and they give this name to their principal Authors whom they would have pass for the Doctors and Masters of the whole World And they would even that they might assure themselves of the possession of these Titles eject the holy Fathers therefrom endeavouring to hinder men from hearing them from following them and from imitating the example and holiness of their lives by this pernicious Maxime which they have invented and established as a Principle of their Divinity that it is not the ancient Fathers but the new Divines and Casuists of these times who must be taken for the Rule of Manners and Christian life It is with the same Spirit that did testifie so great an esteem for Novelty they profess to follow it and many amongst them as Posa Celot have taken in hand to defend it to praise it and to make Apologies for it Quae circa fidem emergunt difficultates consons veteribus sancienda quae vero circa mores homine Christiano dignos à novetiis scriptoribus Reginald Praesat ad lect And hereby without doubt they designed to make the presumption pass for current that they borrowed nothing at all from others and especially nothing from the Ancients but that they produced their Opinions themselves and found them in their own heads and that they have no other Rule for their conduct and their knowledge but their own sense and humane reason and not the Authority of the Saints and that being as it were Independents they ought not to pass for Children of the Fathers and for Disciples of the holy Doctors but Masters of Novelties amongst the Authors of these times But although they think hereby to exalt their Doctrine and to acquire more honour unto it they disgrace and ruine it themselves in effect because that Novelty hath always been blamed as a mark of Errour not only by the Catholicks but also by the Hereticks who have always affected and attempted to make people believe that their Doctrine as well as their Religion were ancient so that there were never any found who would suffer themselves to be reproached much less who would boast themselves to advance new Maxims as is to be seen in the Example of the Lutherans and Calvinists who vaunt themselves though falsly to follow the Doctrine of the ancient Church and of the Disciples of Jesus Christ and hold it for a great injury to be called Innovators though indeed they be such The Jesuits on the contrary seem to affect this odious Title since they despising the Authority of the holy Fathers and renouncing the Doctrine of the Ancients prefer Novelty before them and make open profession to follow and invent new Opinions which none had over produced before them as is manifestly seen in the proper declaration of Molina Posa Amicus Maldonat and as may easily be proved by many other Casuists of the Society As they are the chief Masters in this novel Science so they are sollicitous to make themselves many Disciples who in time becoming Masters make up a Body so puissant and an Assembly of probable Doctors so numerous that it would be hard to find so many in all other Societies taken altogether So that whether we consider the Votes or compute them they will still prevail above all others and remain the sole Arbiters and Masters of this new Morality And the better to maintain themselves for ever in this advantage above other Casuists and novel Doctors knowing that Empire and Dominion amongst the Learned as well as amongst the Vulgar is supported by union and ruined by division they are expresly ordered by their Superiors to agree in the same opinions and to maintain them all at least as probable and above all when they are advanced by some of the Heads and principal Authors of the Society and they believe that the interest and honour of their whole Body is in question This Conspiration in the same Opinions whereto the Glory of the Society hath engaged them does hold them fastned thereto with so much obstinacy that no Consideration nor Authority whatsoever no not even of the Church can oblige them to acquit
Gentlewoman of good quality not to refuse a man to enter into her house with whom she hath offended God if she cannot so do it but that the world wil talk thereof a maid-servant not to depart from the house of her Master who abuseth her if he will not pay her her wages a servant not to quit the service of his Master who imployes him in his debauches if he receive or hope therefrom any good recompence These are the consequences which the Jesuits themselves draw from this principle with many other which we shall see in their Casuists Sanchez who is the principal author of this maxim after he hath established it upon divers soundations which he proposeth amongst many Conclusions which he drawes therefrom puts this same for the fifth a Quinto deducâ—…ur posse famulos sternere equum herum comitari expectare quando non custodiae causa de quo numcro sequenti dicemus quamvis norâ—nt ipsum ad fornicandum abire Sanchez op mor. l. 1. c. 7. n. 22. p. 23. It follows from this principle that a servant may saddle the horse of his Master accompany and attend him if it be not to defend him or stand centry for him of which we speak in the next following numbers although he well know that he goes to visit debauched women And to expound what he intends by that restriction quando non custodiae causa comitantur He adds in the sequel b Si enim comitantur ut rivales illius mulier is in vadant cum eis pugâ—aturi nulla ratione licet quòd sit intrinsece malum Si autem ut à rivalibus aggredientrbiu horum tueantur vel ut admoneant herum advenience aliquo qui ipsum offendere possit ut sic incolumis evadat adhuc rarissime erit licitum urgentissima necessitate concurrenti Ibid. n. 23. For if they go with their Master with a design to assault and combat his Corrivals that is not lawfull because it is an action evil of it self but if they go only to defend their Master against those who shall assail him or to give him notice of any come to offend him to the end that he may save himself without receiving any hurt it is lawfull though this very rarely and only upon great necessity It is therefore true according to Sanchez that a servant may be innocent in all these occurrences because that he pretends that all these offices he doth for his Master c Quia etsi hae actiones indifferentes sint utpote qâ—ae bono malo usui possunt deservâ—re ideo posse aliquando licitas esse affirmo Ibid. n. 23. p. 24. are things of themselves indifferent and which may be well or ill used This is his general principle and his principal reason whereby he maintains that these things are lawfull for servants only he wills that they be done rarely and upon great extremities because he avows that they are dangerous and easie to be abused the servants who are imployed on these occasions having commonly more courage than discretion and moderation So that instead of contenting themselves to defend their Master as is lawfull for them they are easily transported to assault and outrage those who would interrupt their dishonest pleasures For this cause he is wise and considers that he shall not give warranty to their excessive heat if he be content to maintain that all this is permitted because it is lawfull and indifferent in it self and it is only needfull to consider the ill use that may be made thereof and the danger that therein may occurre d Quia famuli hi manifesto se non solius defâ—nfionis sed pugnae ineundae periculo exponunt atque herus ea severitate animosior ad peccandum redditur ac majorl libidine peccat Ibid. because the servants that are imployed on these occasions expose themselves to the danger not only of barely defending their Masters but also of fighting and assayling which makes their Masters more bold and confident in their sin He draws also this Conclusion from this Principle e Sexto deducitur licere famulis cibos condire ad mensamque ministrare lectum sternere concubinae heri Ibid. n. 24. That it is lawfull for a servant to make meat ready to wait at the Table and to make the bed for his Masters Concubine And he quotes for this opinion Ledesma and Emanuel Sa whom be makes to say with some others f Fas est ornare beram meretricem Ibid. That it is no fault for one that serves a Whore to help her to dresse her self which is not found so express'd in Emanuel Sa. But the secret passion which Sanchez hath for this affair hath drawn him on to borrow the quill of another to write that which he durst not publish in his own proper name contenting himself with a reason deduced from his principle which is g Quia haec omnia sunt ex se indifferentia valde remote se habent ad peccatum Ibid. n. 24. that all these things are of themselves indifferent and have no reference to sin but from afarre off He finds that to prepare a banquet for debauched men and women to attend them at the table to make their bed are actions farr remote from sin though it follows so close thereupon and therefore they are lawfull to men and maid-fervants and that there needs no other reason to justifie them in these affairs than the service they owe to their Masters and Mistresses That is to say that for a servant to perform all these good offices to his Master without fear of sin it is enough that he be hired to serve him But for a friend or any other person that would do so much it behoves that he have some particular reason as he declares in expresse terms saying h At in non famulis aliqua justa causa desideraretur ibid. that if they are not serwants it behoves that they have some just reason for to do it which thing seems to agree very well with his principle For if these actions in themselves be indifferent as he presupposes they may as well be lawfull for a friend as a servant the quality of a friend giving no lesse liberty to serve a friend than that of a servant a Master So that Hurtado is more reasonable and acknowledging the natural consequence of this principle he gives absolutely the same liberty to a friend a son and to any other as to an houshold servant For after he had said i Famulus potest jussu heri videre quò foemina aliqua eat ubi habitet eique munuscula deferre herumque comitari ad domum concubinae sive causa honoris sive desensionis heri ei pedem sustinere ad ingrediendum per senestram domus concubinae ei picturam concubinae emere ire ad concubinam ei dicere herus meus te vecat eam ad domum heri
comitari januam aperire eis lectum sternere non tamen potest eam invitare ad actum ipsum inhonestum cum hero Gaspar Hurtado apud Dian. part 5. p. 435. in addendis atque emend and is in par 5. resp mor. in tr 7. de Leand. That a servant might watch a woman whither she went or where she abode if his Master command him and carry her little presents and accompany his Master whether it be to honour him or to defend him when he goes to see her hold him by the foot when he goes in to her through the window buy for him the pourtraiture of his Mistresse go to tell her that his Master prayes her to come to meet him accompany her and conduct her to the place where he is open the door for her make the bed but not incite her to sin with him After all this I say he adds k Et eadem omnia potest filius ad mandatum patris praesertim si ex omissione indignationem patris timeat Et eadem omnia quae possunt famulus filius etiam potest quilibet alius titulo alicujus considerabilis utilitat is sibi accrescentis multo melius titulo vitandi aliquod grave incommodum aut damnum Ibid. That a son may do all the same things if his father command him especially if he fear he shall draw on him his indignation if he refuse What a servant or a son may do in these occurrents any other may do as well as they if he hopes that thereby there may some considerable benefit come to him and much more for avoiding some great losse or some great evil It remains only that we affirm the same thing of a daughter towards her father and a wife towards her husband For it is not worse for a wife to do these dishonest offices for her husband than for a son or a daughter to perform them for a father or mother and the reasons of this Casuist prove it equally or they prove nothing at all And although shame as it seems kept him back from this yet he hath notwithstanding sufficiently discovered his thoughts by these general terms etiam potest quilibet alius also any other may do it shews plainly that what he speaks expresly of a son in regard of his father ought also to be extended to a wife towards her husband and he condemns not it may be these good offices even in a Monk or Priest since he excepts no person at all etiam potest quilibet alius As for carrying of presents to dishonest persons Sanchez makes no difficulty thereof for servants And he drawes this also from his principles l Nono deducitur licere famulis jussu heri poitare aliqua munuscula aut esculenta ad concubinam cum haec sint indifferentia Sanchez l. 1. c. 7. n. 29. p. 25. It followes saith he that it is lawfull for a servant to carry at his Masters commandment to a woman whom he keeps little presents and things to eat and the reason of his principle alwayes returns because these things are indifferent He is a little more troubled to permit servants to deliver messages and to appoint meetings and to carry them Love-letters but that which hinders him principally is that this opinion is not commonly received and that there are some who condemn this traffique as a thing that is evil in it self m Quidam hoc tanquam intrinsece malum damnant Ibid. n. 26. Some saith he do condemn this as a thing evil in it self and not only as evil but also as shamefull saying that those who meddle with this commerce are decried and noted with an infamous name which is at this day of so little credit in France that we must content our selves to rehearse it in Latine as Sanchez also hath set it quod communis existimatio testatur hos lenones appellans which the common opinion testifies whilst these are called panders and bauds But there is cause to beleeve that it is rather the name than the thing which displeaseth him For after he had cited some Authors who condemned justly these infamous servants he adds in their favour that n Alii vero excusant à peccato famulos qui ratione famulatus haec internuntia aut scripta deferunt in quibus herus petit à concubina ut ea nocte ad se veniâ—t â—tsi norint velle ut veniat ad sornicandum Ibid. n. 26. Others exempt from sin these servants who because of the service they owe their Masters do these messages and carry these Letters by which their Master commands a woman to come meet him in the night although they know that he causes her not to come in the night but that he may sin with her And to make us perceive that this is his opinion though he dares not say it openly he applyes his principle to it o Quod haec rem indifferentem contineant cum non ad sornicationem sed ad adventum inducanâ— Ibid. Because saith he these letters and these messages are indifferent things inducing the person only to come without speaking of the sin He beleeves that this mental distinction and restriction is sufficient to shelter this crime and any other how great soever they may be Molina saith that in places where Whores are tolerated p Peccatum non est locare eis demum modo locator non intendat fornicationem earum ibi sed locare solum domum ad habitationem illarum sciens eas abusuras ea habitatione ad peccata Molina de just tom 2. tr 2. disp 500. p. 1122. It is no sin to let them a house provided that he who sets it have only an intention to let it them to lodge in and not to prostitute themselves therein though he knows that they will abuse his house to sin in it According to this resolution it is lawfull to lend or sell a sword to a man who is known to demand it for no other reason than to kill himself or some other provided only there be no expresse intention to co-operate with his sin Escobar makes Valentiae to say the same thing For demanding q Licet ne ex justa causa locare domum meretrici vel alicui peteuti ad fornicandum Valentia docet licere quia locare domum est res per se indifferens quae ex sola pravâ— abutentis intentione ad malum ordinatur Escobar tract 1. Exam. 8. n. 98. p. 155. If it be lawfull to let ones house to Common Women or to any who desires it to keep such therein He answers That Valentia holds that this is lawfull because to set ones house is a thing in it self indifferent which is not evil but through the evil intention of these who abuse it And because the question is important he puts it again the second time in these terms r Num liceat locare meretrici aut usurario domum Escobar tract 3. Exam. 9.
ex Doctorum meorum mente Escobar tr 2. Exam. 1. n. 58. p. 215. that it is sin to co-operate to the sin of another and that he that contributes to it only at distance sins not at all He inquires Whether it may be said that he co-operates to the sin of another as a near cause who lends his Chamber to his friend to corrupt himself with women to the end that he may avoid some great evil I answer no saith he according to the opinion of my Masters He would have us know that this is not his particular private opinion nor of two or three but of all his Fraternity and especially of the 24. elders whom he had taken for his Masters and whom he makes profession to follow ex Doctorum meorum mente And the reason of this answer is g Quia tal is commâ—datio tubiculi ex se est indifferens sola abutent is voluntate vitiatur Ioid. because to lend a Chamber in this manner is a thing of it self indifferent and is rendred bad only by the evil intention of him that abuseth it This Author speaks yet more largely and makes many questions about the good offices which one friend may do for another and a servant to his Master in Tredtise 1. Examen 1. page 285. But I passe all this in silence as many other things which I could relate out of other Jesuits to cut short as much as I can a matter whereof I desire not to speak at all I will only observe farther that which he saith in the 7th Treatise Examen 4. chap. 8. p. 835. which is as it were an abridgement of all that which he had said and is in a manner all that can be said or done in this matter according to the rules and morals of the Jesuits For the 7. and 8. Chapters of the book which I have now cited are intitled The first h Praxis cirâ—a materiam de poenitentia ex Societatis Jesu Doctoribus The practice upon the matter of penance taken out of the Doctors of the Society of Jesus And the other which follows immediately i Practicae adbue speciaâ—es resolutiones Confessarium ad munus recte obeundum instruentes Other decisions of particular cases for the instruction of Confessors how they may well discharge their offices In the latter of these two Chapters he makes this question concerning the Confessor k Quonam modo se geret cum libidials mediatore n. 223. p. 835. How shall he deal with those persons who mediate betwixt debauched persons First he makes some distinctions about things which a Confessor ought to tolerate and those things which he is to forbid these persons after he saith that all indifferent things are lawfull for them and by consequence that they ought not be forbidden them And to relieve the Confessor he observes unto him in particular many actions he calls indifferent l Indicaâ—o quaenam actiones communiter à famulis assumptaeind fferentes siat parare equum quo dominus prosecturus est ad amasiae domum cum mibi commorantem foris cuslodire amasiae mensam apponere chos praeparare ad domum reducere epistolas desâ—…re de quarum turpitudine gravi non moraliter conslet Escobar tract 7. Exam. 4. n. 223. p. 835. I will observe unto you saith he in particular what actions are indifferent amongst the services which Masters are wont to receive from their servants to saddle the horse on which their Master must go to see his Mistresse to stand at the door and keep it so long as his Master stayes with her to make ready diet to cover the table and wait at it to bring his Master home again to carry Letters if he be not assured that they are extremely dishonest That is to say that it sufficeth that the servant be not assured that they are full of words and discourses manifestly filthy but that he beleeveth that his Master will content himself to testifie discreetly to her whom he loveth the affection which he beareth her which he expresseth by these words which he addeth m Licot affectu sint exaratae Ibid. 832. Though they be written with passion He also sets down in the number of services which servants may do their Masters on these occasions n Dona fâ—rre ac reserre ostia aut fenâ—stias aperire domum amasiae ostendere auxilium domino paaestare ut ascendat Ibid. p. 832. To carry and bring back presents to shew her house whom his Master loves to open the doors or windows for him to help his Master to get over a wall or to passe through a window as he saith expresly in another place and to hold the ladder if the wall or the window be too high There may be many of those people whom he calls mediatores libidinis mediators for lust who are grown old in the mystery without ever having known or practised all that which he teaches and I am assured that he will not find any so hard or so untoward who will not be content and serve himself very advantageously of what he allows him But I doubt whether the most obdurate and desperate can give credit unto his word and that of his Fraternity which permits them to do that in Conscience and before God which the light of reason alone and the resentments of honour which remains unto them in so miserable a profession represents unto them as so shamefull and infamous that they are constrained to hide themselves therein from men and to blush secretly in the presence of God He hath only forgotten to speak in this place of the appointments which a servant may make with a Curtesan on the behalf of his Master if it be not that he beleeved that this was sufficiently comprised in the words which I have related epistolas deferre licet affectu sint exaratae to carry letters though they be passionately written or in these others a little above n Literae quibus advocatur amasia indifferentes sunt Ibid. n. 223. Tract 2. Exam. 2. n. 61. p. 286. The letters which a man writes to her whom he loveth or whom he keepeth to desire her to come and meet him are indifferent things Notwithstanding for the convenience of a Confessor whom he pretends to instruct as well as for the repose of the conscience of these honourable mediators it seems to him that he ought to explicate it a little more clearly or at least to remit them to the place where he decides this controversie more clearly and places it in the rank of things indifferent and by consequence lawful in this traffique o Dicere nomine heri concubinae Dominus dicit ut hac nocte expectes aut in domum accedas aut signare locum ubi sit concubina tr 2. Exam. 2. n. 61. p. 286. For a servant to say on the behalf of his Master to a woman my Master commands me to tell you that you
must be very dull who cannot make use of this invention since it is not of necessity no not to know in particular nor what he doth nor what he saith whether it be true or not indeed and that it is sufficient to believe or suppose in general that it may be so and that a nimble witted man may finde some sense in which he can make the words true which are false in their natural and onely sense and which by consequence are not equivocations though he who pronounces them cannot do it SECT V. The method of the same Jesuits to hinder their equivocations from being ever discovered and that no person may be deprived of his liberty to make use of them AFter they have made the use of equivocations so free so common and so easie that all the world may make use of them indifferently on all occasions there remains nothing for the Masters of this art that is to say the Jesuits to do but to establish well the practice and to fortify themselves in such sort against all opposition that whatsoever precaution they use no person may be able to hinder them from making use thereof when they will nor to discover it when they have used it This Sanchez hath attempted to do and in this he hath laboured with great care and he hath proceeded therein beyond all other who have written on this matter After he hath established many rules given many advices about equivocations and the manner to form and make use of them he concludes with this advice as the last and most important a Tandem id observandum est quotier licitum est ad se tuendum uti aliqua aequivocatione id quoque erit licitum etsi interrogans urgeat excludens illam aequivocationem Sanch. op mor. l. 3. c. 6. n. 45. p. 30. That so often as it is lawful in our own defence to use equivocations they may be used though he who examines us do presse us to answer him without making use of this very equivocation That is to say that so often as you believe that you may use equivocations which is alway lawful according to this Casuist and his Fraternity as we have already reported on all occasions and even without necessity and reason though you be admonished not to make use of it when it is forbidden you when you are caused to promise and even to swear that you will make no use of it notwithstanding all these precautions these defences these promises and the oath that you have made you have always the liberty to make use thereof None can speak more clearly and more favourably Notwithstanding if the practice of this rule seem to you too hard or too large he will help your understanding by examples which he brings and your belief by the authority of other Casuists whom he cites for you in these terms b Atque idem docent de reo qui rogatus de delicto secreto urgetur ut dicat sive fecerit publice sive occulto sive ipse Judex juridice interroget sive noa dicentes posse adhuc respondere se non fecisse intelligendo non ut tu in iniquitate tua rogas sed ut teneris tanquam Judex rogare Ibid. The Casuists say the same thing of a man accused who being axamined upon any secret crime is prest to answer whether it be publiquely or privately whether it be before a Judge juridically or not For they hold in this very case that he may answer that he hath not done it intending his answer not in that manner as the Judge examines him maliciously but in the manner he ought to examine him in the quality of a Judge It is sufficient that a malefactor or a witness form within himself a probable opinion that the Judge who examine him juridically ought not to examine him in the manner that he doth for to mock him and to elude his interrogatories by equivocation or by confidently denying most clear and certain things so that this mischief cannot possibly be hindred or prevented by him what precaution soever he useth The Judge is malicious and he interrogates this malefactor maliciously according to Sanchez because that in examining he uses the precautions which he believes necessary to draw the truth out of his mouth This malefactor is not malicious he answers not malicously but reasonably and wisely according to the Divinity of this Father because he observes exactly the rules of the equivocations and omits no jugling slight of mind to obscure the truth and to deceive the Judge who interrogates him by lying and perjury He brings also another example of the same subject c Atque idem docet de rogato à custodibus urbis aliqaem locum peste infectum esse falso ex stimantibus rogantibus quempiam an ex co loco venerit sive infectus peste sit five non nempe posse ipsum respondere non venire ex eo intelligendo non ut vos rogatis sed ut deberetis rogare Ibid. He holds the same thing saith he speaking of Navarre touching him who is interrogated by a Town-guard who believe falsely that the Town from whence he comes is infected with the plague and demands from him if he came from thence whether it be infected or it be not infected he may answer that he came not thence making this mental restriction in his minde I came thence not according to the question you make but according to the question you ought to make This method is not very favourable to civil government nor gives it much weight to the authority of Magistrates and their Officers also it is not very favourable for the establishment of Laws and for assuring the obedience which people owe unto Princes When a Soveraign commands any thing to his subjects there is no private man who shall receive his orders who may not promise to obey him though he be resolved to do nothing of that he shall command him by making use of this mental restriction and saying in himself d Non ut tu imperas sed ut deberes imperare I will do this not according as you command me but as you ought to command me Also in like manner when he is demanded any thing whereunto he imagines that he is not obliged to answer according to truth he may speak contrary to that which he thinks and to that which is true by the favour of this equivocation and of this secret thought which he bears in his minde e Non ut tuâ—ogas sed ut debâ—es interragaâ—e In answer saith he in himself not to that which you demand of me but according to that you ought to have demanded of me One may say by proportion the same thing of a child in relation to a Father of a servant in relation to a Master of a Monk or any other inferiour in relation to his Superior and so this rule banisheth absolutely truth and sincerity out of
the outward decence and composement that such an action requires So the outward appearance will be more necessary to prayer and the actions of Religion then the inward motion of piety since they can subsist without this inward motion but not without the outward shew I wonder that he remember'd not this common maxime of the Schools a Bonum ex integra causa malum antem ex minimo defectu To do good all the good conditions must concurre but the least defect is sufficient unto evil This perhaps might have kept him from concluding so ill and he might have considered that there is more required to do good then to do ill and to an action of Religion then to an action of Idolatry And if to do good all conditions must concurre thereto by much stronger reason the intent which is the principal and as it were the soul of all the rest But Escobar saith yet more then Bauny For he maintains that it is not onely not necessary for satisfying the precept of reciting the office to intend it but also that it is necessarily satisfied in the recital though the intention be expresse and formal not to satisfie it For having demanded b Requiriturne satisfaciendi intentio Alii prohabiliter jam defendunt intentionem ejus necessariam non esse immo satisfierietiam ab co qui cum expressa intentione non saciendi pro tune recitaret eâ—osbar tr 5. exam 6. c. 13. n. 136. p. 677. if an intention to fulfil it be required He answers that many Divines do now hold that it is probable that this intention is not necessary and though in reading the office there even be a formal intent not to satisfie our duty yet we do not fail to fulfil it He saith the same thing concerning an oath in his first Treatise where after he hath said absolutely that to be discharged of a promise made with an Oath it is not necessary to intend it he adds in the sequel that c Addit Lessius l. 1. c. 37. d. 10. n. 59. juram ntum impleri etiam i res jurata praestetur cum animo expresso non satisfaciendi Ibid. tract 1. ex r. c. 7. n. 41. p. 77. Lessius saith moreover that one is discharged of his Oath though in doing what he swore to do he have an expresse intent not to fulfil it That is to say that we may satisfie promises made unto God with an oath in performing outwardly that which we have promised though we have a formal will not to fulfil but to elude it Lessius alledges for reason of this opinion that when God or the Church commands us any thing the action onely is commanded us and not the intention The reason is saith he because that which is commanded us is not for example to hear masse with intent to accomplish the precept but simply to attend the Masse with attention and devotion which is performed though it be done with design not to accomplish the precept So that according to this marvellous Divinity we may hear the Masse with attention and devotion though we have a formal design not to obey the Church and to despise its commandment They must have a strange Idea of devotion who believe that it can subsist with so great impiety Layman talks more openly and more boldly then the rest He saith not onely with them that it is not needful that we have a will to obey the Church in observing her commandments and that we may do them though we contemn her in our heart but also that we may accomplish her commands by doing ontwardly that which she command though we have an intention directly opposite to hers See his words d Si aliquis jejunet vanae gloriae causa aut 〈…〉 〈…〉 is Ecclesiasticum jejunii praeceptum non violat Layman r. 1. tract 4. c 4 n. 6. p. 49. If a man fast for vain glory or to content his sensuality in eating and drinking Wine and so act contrary to the intent of the Church yet he doth not violate her commands And a little after He that doth in substance that is to say outwardly that which is commanded satisfies truly the commandment though he have no will to accomplish it but rather contrary I know not what Father or Master would be content with such obedience and that would not take it rather for true disobedience accompanied with contempt and thereby much greater and more offensive then if by simple negligence that had been omitted which was commanded The same Author repeats the example of him who fasted for gluttony and he adds that of a child who hears Masse by force and constraint of which he speaks thus f Sed quid dicendum est st metus verberum sit puero causa principalis audiendi Missam die festo ita ut expressam intentionem habeat non audiendi si paedagogus abesset â— Et similis ratio est si oblectatiopiscium sit causa principa is jejunandi ita ut si tam boni pisces non haberentur nellet quis jejunium servare Respondeo tamen talem implere totum opus quod ab Ecclesia praecipitur Ibid. n. 12. p. 51. But what shall we say of a child that goes to hear Masse on a Festival day principally for fear of whipping and who hath an expresse will not to hear it if his Master were not with him the same question respects him also who is induced to fast principally to satisfie the desire he hath to eat fish so that if he could not have got good fish he was resolved not to fast I answer that this notwithstanding they both fulfil the Churches command Filliutius saith in a manner the same thing concerning the precept of hearing Masse on Festival days and Lords days g Prava intentio adjuncta voluntati audiendi Missiam ut aspiciendi foâ—min as libidinose dummodo sit sufficiens aetenlio non est contraria praceptâ— quare satisfacit Filliutius mor. qq tom 2. tract §. c. 7. m 212. p. 128. A bad intent saith he joyned to that of hearing Masse as an intent of looking on women dishonestly c. is not contrary to the commandment For this cause he who hears with this intent fulfils it provided he be sufficiently attentive e Qâ—i 〈…〉 secundum subflantiam praestat etiamsi non babeat valuntatem implendi praeceptum immo contrariam habeat revera satisfacit Ibid. n. 7. Escobar is of the same judgement For speaking of a man who goes to Church with an intention to hear Masse he saith h Non obest alia prava intentio ut aspiciendi libidinose foeminas priori conjuncta Escobar tr 1. exam 11. c. 3. n. 31. p. 180. that another wicked intent as to behold women immodestly joyned to the first hinders not But Layman after all this which we have above reported from him concludes thus i Quare cum opus quod praecipitur impleas etsi per
before midnight that is to say flesh on Saturday and therefore by consequence it is probable that I am fasting For I may regulate my conscience by a probable opinion and therefore I may communicate He finds no difficulty herein Wherefore concluding for this man and for the devotion he hath to communicate after he had well broken his fast on the Lords day whether it were past midnight when he did eat or after he had filled himself with victuals on Saturday if he did eat before midnight he concludes thus b Et volo scire cur communicare noâ— possit nam stando Doctrinae praecedenti potest Et ego in hoc toto petii discursu quod possem negare aut reprehendere nihil invenio Ibid. I would know wherefore he may not communicate for he may according to the preceding Doctrine which renders all thing probable and as for me I find nothing in this reasoning which I can deny or refute See another case of Escobar which is no lesse strange c Non legis libeum haereticum scu de Religione tractantem sed audis alium qui te incitante aut petente illum legit Incidis non incid is in excommunicationem consequenter eges non eges Bullae indulto ut possis absolvi Escobar Theol. mor. lib. 7. sect 2. c. 33. probab 59. p. 289. You road not saith he an heretical Book or which treats of matters of Religion but you hear another who reads it upon your request and upon your motion we may say according to the Doctrine of probability that you incurre the danger of excommunication and that you incurre it not that you have and that you have not need of a Bull to be granted for your absolution You may then follow whether of these two opinions you please but if you be a man of conscience you will not fail to follow the more safe which is according to the principles of this learning that which is more sweet and more large Therefore to assure you yet farther yet Escobar repeats it again d Non incurris excommanicationem nec eges Bullae indulto ut absolvaris quia audire non est legere Ibid. that you do not incurre the danger of excommunication and that you have no need of the favour of a Bull to be absolved And his reason is manifest because to hear read is not to read So you are exempt from all censure according to Escobar though you have made this heretical Book to be read by another and so you have read it by his eyes and have been the cause of his sin and your own This very same thing he expresses in these following words e Hoc verum censeo etiamsi is qui audit legere legentem induxerit ad legendum Inducere enim alium ut legat non est legere Ibid. I hold that this is true though he who heard another read have induced him to read it For to induce another to read is not to read And if you would know the principle of this opinion this is it f Et censura contra facientem lata no illigat consulentem nisi in Bulla exprimatur Ibid. the censure which is ordained against him who doth a thing is not against him who counsels it onely if it be not exprest in the Bull. Here the question is not of him that counsels onely to read but of one who causeth it to be read before him that he may hear it and for this cause he in effect is the Reader more then he who lends him his eyes because he is the Author of the reading and the other is onely the Instrument g Incurret vero censuram famulus legens nisi ignorantia excusetur Ibid. As for the servant that reads unto his Master he runs the peril of being excommunicated saith Escobar if he be not excused by ignorance So that a servant that reads to his Master an heretical Book in Latin or it may be in the vulgar tongue without understanding more of it then if it were Latin for want of wit or learning shall be excommunicated and the Master who made him to read it of malicious intent and sucks up all the venom of this naughty Doctrine shall not and all the force of the Churches censures shall be stayed at the cilly servant who serve for a Buckler to his Masters wickedness The Council of Trent pronounces an excommunication against those who steal Women h Respondeo hoc decretum non habere lecum in quocumque raptu sed in aliquo dantaxat Quare si quis rapiat mulierem cousa libidinis non ad contrabendum cum illa matrimonium non incurrit praedictas coasilis poenas Ita Lessius lib. 4. num 70. Sanchez lib. 7. m. 85. d. 13. num 4. Tamb. lib. 7 c. 6. n. 11. Tambourin exempts from the curse and from all other punishment intended by the Decree of the Council those who steal or carry them away by fome to abuse them and not to marry them Escobar proposes also this question about indulgences i Scio debere apponi opera jejunium scilicet eleâ—mosynam confessionem c. Rogo si ejusmodi opera moraliter hoas ex circumstantiis fiant mala out venialitor ant mortaliter sufficianene ad Indulgentiae lucrationem I know saith he that unto indulgences there ought to be joyned certain works as fasting alms confession c. But I inquire whether when these works which are good of themselves become by some circumstances venial or mortal sins they be sufficient also to gain the indulgences He answers with Granado k Granadus disp 4. num 10. sufficere docet opus esse banum ex suo genere licet ex circumstantiis individuo malum sit Escobar mor. Theol. tract 7. exam 5. c. 8. n. 59. p. 850. that it suffices that the work be good in its kind though in particular it be naught by reason of its circumstances This is a thing unheard of and intirely incredible that an indulgence may be obtained by a mortal sin That is to say that a full remission of all sins may be obtained by a new sin and by a sin perhaps as great or greater then the others and so a man may be absolved and condemned together by one and the same action The paradoxes of the Stoicks are not more strange and yet this is probable according to Jesuits because Granado and Escobar have held it and it is lawful to follow their Counsel in rejecting the contrary Dispensations as well as indulgences are the graces and favours of the holy Chair and as the Pope doth not commonly grant indulgences but with a condition of doing certain actions which he prescribes for the gaining them so neither doth he grant any dispensations but for certain causes which are alledged to obtain them But as Escobar holds that indulgences may be gained by criminal actions so he saith also that a dispensation may
but that the help which sinners have one of another in the execution of their wicked designs is one of the outward principles of sin There are few crimes which are committed without the assistance of others and which can proceed without a Servant a Friend a Merchant or some person who favours and furnisheth with money for their execution Though the Holy Scriptures and all the most common rules of Morality do condemn all these voluntary instruments of sin the Divinity of the Jesuits nevertheless forbears not to excuse them I will only rehearse some of the principal decisions of Tambourin because he is the last Author that I know of who hath written on this and who hath taken care to collect almost all that is corrupt in their Morality 1. For Servants he excuseth those of Usurers Dishonest and Duellists who serve them in the execution of their sins a Si jussu heri ulurarti pecuniam numeret deferat recipiat reserat in libros si ejusdem jussu quem scit ire ad adulterandum sternat â—quum ipsum mere comitetur mereque expectet ante sores sternat lictum cibos condiat ministretque contubinae candemque mere ossociet ducendo ad locum ubi dominus peccaturus est januamque aperiat eidem ingressarae si honoret suam beram meretâ—icem si deserat scripta internâ—ntia solius urbanitatis plena si deferat munuscula esculenta praestetque alia officia quae alius famulus aeque praestaret num 18. Non ex sola famulatus ratione sed metu detrimenti V. G. torvis aspiciatur oculis demo expellatur excusatur si referat adulterae vel inimico tali hora ad domum beri vel ad dictum locum accedat si jussu heri insequatur puellam visurus vel requisiturus ubi ea habitet si jussu ejusdem non aperiat modo januam sed doceat ubi herus sit si dominum adjuvet ad ascendendum per fenestram quo ingrediatur in locum ubi peccaturus sit num 19. If a Servant saith he by the command of his Master who is an Vsurer tells the money carries it receives it Books it if by command of his Master whom he knows to be going to commit adultery he saddles his horse attends at the gate makes the bed makes ready meat serves at the table of his Whore accompanies her and conducts her to the place where his Master is to commit this sin if he opens her the door if he reverence this prostitute if he carry Lettors and Messages which contain Civilities only if he barry Presents to her with a Collation and perform all other services which a Servant commonly doth for his Master he is not only to be excused because of his servile condition but also because of the fear of loss if for example he fear that his Master will be angry or turn him out of his house He is to be excused if he go to tell the woman with whom his Master goes to commit adultery that he will be found at home at sush an hour or to his Masters enemy that at such an hour he shall find him at such a place If by the command of his Master he follows a Damsel to see or enquire where she lives if by his command he not only open the door but shew her where his Master is if he aid his Master to get up by the window to enter into the place where he is to commit that sin Wherefore takes he such pains to particularize such infamous actions if it be not for fear least a Servant should make any scruple upon any one of these circumstances and that the Master not being well served should fall short of executing his design or for fear this poor Servant should put himself by his scruple in danger of being frown'd upon by his Master for having hindred him from committing this crime But if you be not satisfied with the excuse of this Servant this Father will furnish him with another founded on the direction of his intention which may serve him as he saith himself b Ratiod scendendi multos à peccato saltem mortisero modo ut in casu proponitur non placeat eis peccatum faciant obsequia praedicta oò aliquem bonum suem puta co quod exhibeant illa officii sui causa Tambur l. 5. Decal cap. 1. sect 4. n. 30. to discharge many persons of sin at least of mortal sin which is that in the cases propounded the servant pleaseth not himself in the sin of his Master and that he do him the services whereof we have spoken for some good end as for the just reward which he expects It is not very necessary to advertise fervants to have this good intention and if it be capable to excuse them it is true that they need fear nothing on this part if this answer will serve them that their Masters sins please them not but so far as they receive some profit and benefit thereby But what this Father makes use of to excuse a servant he also allowes as lawful to a friend c Si amicus meuo vetit ut ego seram munuscula simlia tarpis sciâ—icet amoris incit mâ—nta quae ipse mittit ad suam concubinam possum sine peccato deferre ..... si tibi magni sit ejusmodi amicitia ac vere timeas amittere quiatuno notabilis momenti justus metus accedit Ibid. n. 18 19 20. If my friend saith he will have me carry presents to be given on the account of dishonest Love unto his Concubine to whom he sends them I may carry them without sin if I have an esteem for the love of this man and that I would not lose it because in this case I have a just cause of fearing a confiderable losse The friendship of an Adulterer is very considerable in the judgement of this Divine and this Jesuit and preferrable to that of God himself being he wills that against the command of God a friend may contribute to his crime for fear onely of putting himself in danger of losing his favours he may by the same motive carry on the behalf of this friend presents to a Murderer or to an Impostor to stir them up by false witnesses to dishonour or kill whom he pleaseth and it will not be easie according to this detestable Doctrine to condemn him that gives his friend a Sword to kill himself if he intreat him if it be not that perhaps the life of the Body is more precious and more considerable than that of the Soul and that it is more lawful to co-operate to this then to that or to contribute to an adulterie then to an homicide As for the Merchants they may according to this Author co-operate as much as their vocation or rather their Lust and Interest will permit them to the sins of Idolatry Whoredom unlawful gains and of all sorts of debaucherie d Popest quis vendere agnun
also upon some bad occasion as to affirm by oath that one hath committed murder or adultery is but a venial sin 1 Qula licet juramentum hoc adjungatur narrationi peccati mortalis ut juro me commisisse tale homicidium vel fornicationem tamen non fit cum complacentia in illo ex necessitate sed tantum fic sine causa leviter quare non excedet culpam venialem Ibid. n. 336. pag. 205. For though we make use of this oath in the relation we make of a mortal sin as when we say I swear that I have committed this murder or this fornication yet this may be done without any complacency in this crime and only out of levity and without cause Wherefore it is but a venial sin He adds that though a man who swears thus should take pleasure in the crime he relates and should scandalize and defame another person in his relation this oath according to Suarez would not be mortal which he also believes as probable with him For after he hath said that the more rational Casuists hold that 2 Si quis narret peccatum mortale infamando proximum ut adulterium cum muliere honesta vel complacendo in illo tunc juramentum additum videtur mortale Ibid. num 337. if any one reporting a mortal sin wrong the honour and reputation of his neighbour as by saying that he hath committed adultery with an honest woman or if he take pleasure therein if he swear to affirm that which he saith it is a mortal sin he opposeth unto theirs the opinion of Suarez as probable 3 Attamen Suarez loco citato n. 8. defendit à mortali si tantum habeatur ratio juramenti quia non cadit supra illam materiam quatenus mala sed tantum quatenus vera Quare nec erit peccatum saltem mortale quod est satis probabile Ibid. For all that Suarez saith he in the place now quoted n. 8. maintains that it is no mortal sin if it be considered only as an oath because this oath regards not the matter of this discourse as bad but only as true And by consequence there is none at the least no mortal sin therein which is probable enough And because this reason of Suarez is metaphysical enough Filliutius relates another or rather expounds the same in another manner and makes it more intelligible 4 Quia ejusmodi defectus nec est contra finem juramenti Potest enim confirmari per illud veritas nec facit Deum testem mendacii sed ad summum rei malae indecentis ut diximus At id per se non est injuria gravis Ibid. num 336. Because this defect saith he speaking of the injury done unto God by the man who takes him for a witness of the adultery he hath committed is not contrary to the end of an oath For it may serve to confirm the truth and he takes not God for a witness of a false but at the most of a wicked and dishonest thing as we have said and this in it self is no great injury against God By this reckoning we may say that a child should do his father no great wrong nor a servant his Master nor wife her husband to produce and take him for witness of her debauches provided they were true unless we will say that the honour of God is less considerable than that of men or that God ought to be insensible of all injuries and indignities committed against him Sanchez discharges of sin at least mortal all those who swear of custom 5 Qualiscunque illa fit nondum sit reâ—ractata Atque ita ut sint peccata lethalia requirit talem advertentiam qualis est necessaria in homine non sic ad jurandum assueto Sanch. op moral lib. 3. cap. 5. num 28. pag. 21. of what sort soever it be saith he though they have not yet recanted it If they in swearing have not so much presence of mind as to perceive what they say and do and what evil they cause as the most prudent have who have not this evil habit so their vice and wicked custom of swearing shall not hurt them but on the contrary upon this occasion it shall be favourable unto them For if they had it not they would perceive what they did in swearing and would make themselves Criminals But because the evil custom of swearing which they have contracted and wherein they persist still voluntarily blinds and hinders them from perceiving the crime they commit it secures them from it according to this Doctor By this reason if a man being in a dangerous way should pull out his own eyes and then fall into a precipice he might be excused by this that he could not see when he fell By all this which hath been said unto this present it is clear that the Jesuits excuse them who swear and forswear through an evil habit who swear rashly and without reason vainly and without necessity in wicked and scandalous matters which tend to the dishonour of our neighbour by defaming him and of God by taking him for witness of crimes and debauches of which in swearing they boast themselves So that there remains nothing in this matter but swearing and forswearing with full knowledge and black malice to be a crime and which properly retains the name of an oath and perjury in the Schools of these Fathers Escabar puts this Question 1 Lictuâ—e inducere aliquem ad jurandum falsum quod tamen ipse juraturus ex ignorantia verum putat Escobar tr 1. exam 3. cap. 7. num 31. p. 74. Is it lawful to suborn any person to swear a false thing which he notwithstanding ignorantly believes to be true And after he had said that Azor is not of this opinion because it is not lawful to cause that evil to be done by another which we cannot do our selves he adds 2 Affiâ—n ac autem Petrus Hartado But this is the opinion of P. Hurtado He might also have joyned Sanchez to him who holds the same opinion 3 Si absque inductione aliqua mea ille se effâ—…at ad jurandum quod bona fide putat esse verum etian si ego falsum norim conducat ad probandum quod scio verum esse ne jure meo defrauder licebit utique acceptare Sanch. op moral lib. 3. cap. 8. num 10. pag 35. If some one present himself to me saith he without my sollicitation to swear that which he in simplicity believes to be true though I know well that it is false if notwithstanding it serve to prove some other thing which I know to be true and conduces to hinder that I be not deprived of my right it is lawful for me to take his offer The reason of Escobar is 4 Quia proximus tunc non inducitus ad effâ—ctum formaliter malum cum jurando non delinquat Ibid. Escobar Because in
because he favours him not Here is the case to which he answers precisely and without hesitation in these words If you desire only or receive with joy the effect of this death to wit the Inheritance of a Father the Charge of a Prelate the deliverance from some trouble he procured you the answer is easie that you may desire all these things lawfully and that because you rejoyce not in the evil of another but in your own proper good Dicastillus durst not at first determine upon this question because it seemed to him uncertain the Authority and Example of Castropalao having made him more bold he approves and propounds it as probable and Tambourin makes thereof a Maxime in which there is no difficulty at all facilis responsio Thus it comes to pass that these Doctors who make profession of a complacent Theology go on still advancing not to the better but to the worse as S. Paul speaks and labour to stretch or rather to corrupt mens consciences by stretching and corrupting the most holy and inviolable Rules of Faith and Morality and making those things probable which in themselves are incredible If to desire the death of ones father be of itself a crime as none can question it the crime is yet greater when he is carried thereto by some wicked motive as that of having his estate which comes from covetousness and injustice and contains in it also a notorious ingratitude and it is in the sight of God a kind of theft and usurpation to desire to have the estate of another and which is more of ones father against his will the appointment of God and all the Laws of Reason and Nature So that to justifie the desire a child hath of the death of his father by that which he hath of his goods is to justifie one crime by another wherein many more are also contained This injustice and disorder may appear yet more visible in the other Example brought by Tambourin of an Inferior who desires the death of his Superior A Monk for Example or a Clerk of his Abbot or Bishop that he might enter upon his Office For the desire alone of a Charge of this nature even under pretence of a good motive as to be serviceable unto Souls is a kind of ambition and presumption which renders a man unworthy of that Office which he desires in that manner as S. Thomas after the Scripture and Fathers doth expresly teach us he who hath not this good motive and desires to enter by a way so odious and criminal as is the death of his Superior is not only unworthy of the Office which he so desires but also deferves to be excluded from the Clergy and even to be chased out of the Church as a rebellious and unnatural child from the house of his father who desires to see his death though he dares not kill him himself How then can one of these desires justifie the other How can we say that an Inferior may lawfully desire the death of his Superior if we pretend not that one may be a murderer because he is an Usurper and desire the death of a man because we would have his goods without having either right or capacity but only an unjust and unreasonable pretence unto the one or the other This yet sufficeth not this barbarous and murthering Theology to permit children to desire the death of their father and mother they permit them also to be willing to kill them themselves to attempt their lives and effectually to kill them in some cases It is from this Principle that Dicastillus saith 2 Colligitur ulterius â—…citum esse fillis contra parentes servis contra dominos vassallis contra principes vi vim repellere quando actu invaduntur injuste cum praedictis conditionibus idemque de Monachis aut subditis contra Abbates Superiores Dicastill lib. 2. de just tr 1. d. 10. dub 3. num 30. An in casibus praecedentis dubitationis liceat directe velle intendere mortem injusti aggressoris ad defendendam propriam vitam Negat S. Thomaâ— His tamen non obstantibus asserendum est tanquam verissimum sicut honestum est in executione repeilere aggressorem illum occidendo pari raâ—lone honestum est directe illum velle intendere occidere Dub. 4. num 4. That a child who defends himself against his father who assaults him unjustly may kill him as also Servants their Masters Vassals their Princes Monks their Abbots and their Superiors Which he understands not only in such manner that a Son may kill his Father by accident and besides his intention in his own defence but so as he may have a design to kill him voluntarily For after he had proposed this case which I have now related and many others he concludes that in this case it is lawful to desire to kill him who assails us As for what concerns the respect due unto Fathers and Mothers Tambourin declares confidently 1 That a Son is to be excused from mortal sin who will not acknowledge his Father if he do it not of contempt but to avoid some inconvenience or that he might not be put to the blush in acknowledging him It is manifest that according to Scripture this is to renounce ones father as it is to renounce Jesus Christ to be ashamed to acknowledge and confess him and yet this is a small fault in the Jesuits Divinity Neither is he more religious about their obedience concerning which he demands 2 Filius si recognoscere nolit patrem non ex contemptu sed ad vitandum aliquod incommodum aut crubescentiam à mortali culpa sic puto esset excusand us Tambur lib. 5. decal cap. 2. sect 2. num 17. Whether children may lawfully contract Marriage with persons unworthy of their alliance against the will of their fathers and mothers He answers Though some believe they cannot without mortal sin which is very probable yet he avouches that it is probable and safe in conscience that they may ..... and that Sanchez hath reason to say that a daughter is so free as to Marriage that though she have not yet attained so much as twenty five years of age she may marry her self unto a person unworthy of her without her fathers consent Whence it follows according to this Author that Isaac exceeded his power when he so expresly forbad his Son Jacob to marry in the family of Chanaan which was unworthy of his alliance If the disobedience of a Daughter towards her Father in these circumstances be not criminal it seems it never can be so since it cannot be in a more important matter than this same wherein Marriage is concerned which imports an engagement for the whole time of life and a Marriage with an unworthy person and which proves a disadvantage and dishonour not only to the Daughter who enters it but also to her kindred and whole family But if we object to this Father that
Jesuit approves and authorizes But if the Errour and Crime were not so evident as it is in this opinion its novelty alone of which this Casuist would make use to exempt it from the censure of the Church suffices to make us see that it is condemned by the Church it self For there is no Divine who knows not that Novelty and particularly in matters of Doctrine hath been always suspected and odious in the Church and that it hath always rejected and condemned it by the Laws and Mouths of all the Saints which governed it And by consequent this opinion of Amicus being novel by his own confession it hath been condemned by the Church before it proceeded from his imagination After Amicus had expounded this pernicious Doctrine so largely built it up with so great care and supported it with all the reasons he could he thinks to put himself under shelter by saying 3 Verum quoniam haec apud alios scriptanon legimus nolumus à nobis ita sint dictâ— ut communi sententiae adversentur sed solum disputandi gratia proposita maturo judicio relicto penes prudentem lectorem Amicuâ— supra â—om 5. disp 36. sect 7. num 118. pag. 544. That since he had not read these things in the Writings of any Author his design was not to oppose himself to the common opinion but only to propose it by way of dispute leaving it to him who should read these things to judge thereof according to his prudence But seeking to hide he discovers himself the more and his words render him more guilty since he acknowledges this Doctrine is novel and that he hath not found it in any Author He therefore by this makes known and declares openly that it is he who invented so abominable an opinion And therefore we may say with all truth that it had its birth in the School of the Jesuits that they are the Authors of it and that it is properly and particularly their Doctrine And it is to no purpose for Amicus to say that he doth not set on foot these Maxims so contrary to Justice Nature and humane Society but only by way of disputation and that he submits his unto others Judgment For this discourse makes not an opinion good which is bad of it self and this excuse and submission hinders him not from being blamable for publishing of it but it only testifies that he did this with fear and that he meant hereby to sound as it were the minds of men to see how this his first Proposal of it would be received in the world that he might afterwards declare himself more openly and maintain it with an absolute confidence if this first draught of his Essay should prosper with him and an opinion so strange and odious should only be tolerated But besides this it is an enterprise unsufferable and pernicious to the Church and Common-wealth to propose so horrible Errours and Maxims which carry on unto vice revenge and murder under a pretence that it is done only for disputation sake and for an exercise of wit without determining any thing at all absolutely There is no more certain way to teach men all sorts of villanies and to imprint in their minds all sorts of the most brutish and abominable imaginations III. POINT The Opinions of other Jesuits concerning Murder THis matter is too important to relye on the Judgment of Lessius and Amicus alone We must joyn thereto that of some others of their Fraternity the better to verifie what we have reported of their Writings Now if it fall out that they say in a manner all the same thing it will prove the truth of what I say that this Doctrine of Murder is not the opinion of one or two private persons only but of the principal Jesuits and of the Spirit of the Society 1. Dicastillus as well as Amicus whom we have already quoted with others also gives licence to any one whomsoever to kill all sorts of persons indifferently Father Mother Priest Monk all Superiors generally without excepting Princes and Kings no more than Bishops or Popes when they are perswaded that they assault them unjustly 1 Licitum est filiis contra parentes servis contra Dominos vassallis contra Principes vim vi repellere quando actu invaduntur injuste Idemque de Monachis aut subditis contrs Abbates Superiores est communis sententiâ— Dicast l. 2. tr 1. disp 10. dub 3. num 30. It is lawful saith he for Children to rise against their Parents Servants against their Masters Vassals against their Princes and to repel force with force when they are actually and unjustly assailed And the same is lawful for Monks against their Abbots and Inferiors against their Superiors So that if we should see a Son smite his Father we ought not lightly to condemn him for it may be this Father would have beaten him unjustly Molina speaking of an Adulterer doth not only not call it in question whether it be lawful for him to kill the Husband of the Woman with whom he hath sinned when he takes him in the fact but he takes it for granted as a certain thing that he may do it for the defence of his honour and life 2 Adulter aggressus à mâ—rito adulterae in facto deprehensus licite illum interficere potest Molina de just jur tom 4. tr 3. disp 14. pag. 1765. An Adulterer saith he may lawfully kill the Husband of a Woman with whom he hath committed Adultery if her Husband having surprised him in the fact do assault him Tambourin is also of the same opinion 3 Adulter in adulterio deprehensus pâ—test se defendere occidendo eos qui ipsum occidere aggrediuntur quia in foro conscientiae non juste invaditur merito Tambur lib. 16. decal cap. 1. sect 1. num 7. An Adulterer saith he taken in the fact may he defend himself and kill those that would kill him I answer he may Because according to the Laws of Conscience the Husband hath not right to assault him If then in Conscience and before God this Husband assaults him not according to Justice He kills him then unjustly And notwithstanding Tambourin forbears not to give him a dispensation also saying in the following Section 4 Potest maritus occidere juvenem vim infarentem uxori quomodocun que consentienti quando illum aliter avertere non potest sect 2. num 8. That a Husband may kill a young man that forces his Wife though she consent to it in any sort whatsoever This advice doubtless is very religious to permit a dishonoured Husband to revenge himself of treachery by injustice and it is also an excellent manner for an Adulterer to repair his fault and expiate his crime of prophanation of Marriage by taking away the Husbands life after he hath taken away the Wifes honour according as these Jesuits allow him Molina in the process of his discourse saith the same
Church and Nature it self since it can prevail without incurring any penalty against the Laws of the one and the other And since the Laws of the Church are also the Holy Ghost's who by it hath given us them and who guides it in all it doth and ordains if custom carry it against the Laws of the Church as this Casuists pretends it must needs be according to him that it hath more power than the Holy Ghost and that the Authority it hath in their School is more to be considered than that of 〈◊〉 himself since he believes that we ought to yield to the abuses it hath introduced into the Church to the prejudice of the primitive Orders and Laws which the Holy Ghost hath established But if these things seem extraordinary and incredible in themselves and considered according to the Rules of Truth and natural Sense alone yet they are not so in the Maxims of these new Doctors For it is not in this case only but in occasions of all other sorts that the custom being sound opposed and contrary to the Laws of God and the Church it ordinarily gains the cause by their Judgment as hath been observed in many places of these Writings Escobar follows the same Rules with Layman to determine what labour is lawful or forbidden on Feast-days that is 1 Servile opus est ad quod servi deputati sunt Nec opus servile fit quia â—b lucrum est factum si de se servile ante non erat Escobar tract 7. exam 5. cap. 2. num 4. pag. 99. Servile work saith he which is for servants and slaves And he adds as Layman that if a work be not servile in it self it doth not become servile when it is done for gain He afterwards sets down in the number of actions which are not servile studying writing travelling dancing And although he affirm that hunting and painting are servile actions he forbears not to say afterwards 2 Pingere ex suo genere servile est Venatio si fist ex officio servile est ut pictura ob voluptatem recrcaâ—ionem minime Ibid. num 8. Mundare scopis tapetibus vestire parietes Ecclesiarum hujusmodi nisi aliqua intercedat excusatio saltem venislia sunt Ibid. n. 6. Num misericordiae opera exercenda De se servilia non licent ut consuere vestem pauperi deferre ligna eidem c. Ibid. num 7. That if hunting be followed upon obligation and of duty as when a Hunts-man or a servant hunts at the command of his Master it is servile as well as painting but that it is not so if it be pursued of pleasure and for pastime That is to say that a servant may not go on hunting in obedience to his Master when he sends him but the Master may go for his pleasure and the servant also and by consequence that obedience in labour profanes a Holy day but pleasure in the same work profanes it not Speaking in the same place of those who labour in cleansing hanging and trimming Churches on Feast-days he saith that they sin at the least venially if they have not some lawful cause He saith the same thing of the outward works of mercy which are exercised towards our neighbour as to mend the cloaths of the poor to carry them wood or other things whereof they have need these actions according to him are servile and forbidden on Feast-days He would have it lawful to paint and hunt for pleasure on Feast-days and he will not have it lawful to sweep hang and adorn the Church for the Service of God He would have us have power to walk dance travel and go whither we will for our pastime but he will not have it lawful to visit the poor and sick and to give them some assistance pretending that works of mercy are more contrary to the Sanctification of Feasts than the sports and pastimes of the world He will not have it lawful to carry alms themselves unto the poor on Feast-days as he saith expresly a little after For having put the Question if those who by a motive of piety do actions which are called servile sin against this Commandment of the Church he answers in these terms 3 Excuiandine aliqui ratione pietatis Aliqui liberant à reatu exercentes die Festo opera servilia ad templa aedificanda vel resicienda gratis ad â—lâ—emosynam gerendam ad ornanda delubra c. At ego cum illis sentio qui laborantes vel hoc praetextu sint necessitate non excusant There are some who exempt them from sin who busie themselves in servile works on Feast-days to build or re-edifie Churches gratis to carry alms to the poor to adorn Temples c. But as for me I am of the opinion of those who exempt them not who labour without necessity on Feast-days though they do it under this pretence that is to say by a motive of piety He believes then that it is lawful to play dance walk abroad without necessity and for pleasure only on Feast-days because according to the Jesuits Divinity these actions are not servile He pretends also though painting and hunting be servile of themselves yet the motive of pleasure and contentment which we look for in them hinders them from being so and makes them lawful And yet he maintains that to sweep a Church for devotion or to take delight to dress an Altar to hang a Chappel to carry alms unto the poor are actions prohibited on Feast-days and that necessity only not pleasure can hinder them from being servile As if the pleasure taken in hunting or painting were more noble and holy â—…an that which is taken in serving the poor and God himself in the Churches He finds it difficult to exempt these actions of Piety and Religion from mortal fin so rigorous would he appear in this point They are saith he at the least venial sins Saltem venialia sunt Filliutius had said it before him in the same terms and yet more clearly 1 Mundate scopis templum vestice parietes tapetibus hâ—jusmedi vidertur servilia nisi aliqua excusatio intercedat erit saltem peccatum veniale non motrale secluâ—o contemptu Filliutius qq moral tom 2. tract â— cap. 9. n. 156. pag. 267. It seems that to sweep Churches to hang them and other such like actions are servile and to do them without lawful excuse is at least a venial sin though not mortal if not done through contempt Strange Divinity that we need not to fear to contemn the Command of God forbidding us to work on the Feast and Lords-days by working for our selves because we take our pleasure in the work as in hunting and that we ought to fear contempt and mortal sin in working only for the Service of God and the Church So that these days which God hath ordained particularly for his Service may be employed according to this Divinity to serve any thing but
forbidden unto Christians on Feast-days or to all sorts of persons indifferently He answers 1 Haud damnandus Dominos qui hujusmodi opera mancipio imponeret Infideli quia mancipium Infidele non pâ—ccat siquidem legibus Ecclesiae non tenetur Ib. cap. 4. num 13. pag. 101. That a Master is not to be condemned who commands an Infidel servant to employ himself in his work on Feast-days And his reason is because this Infidel slave sins not in as much as he is not obliged to observe the Laws of the Church He might have said the same thing of Atheists and Fools And indeed he saith that it is Laymans opinion 2 Unde putat Lâ—yman licitum esse imponere onera servilia perpetuo amentibus quia non delinquunt Ibid. at the least in fools But if this were so it were advantagious to take Atheists and Infidels for servants This is without doubt to testifie a great love to the Laws of God and the Church to cause them to be violated by others when we cannot do it our selves as if the act and fault of a Servant did not recoil upon the Master that commanded it A fool indeed sins not no more than a Horse when he works on Feast-days but he that makes the one and the other work shall bear the sin because he is the Author of the work and it is he properly that works as it is the Plow-man that turns up the land rather than the Plow and the Oxen which he uses thereunto And it seems that they ought to renounce reason who have renounced the obedience they owe unto God and the Church that they may imagine that they offend not in causing that to be done in their houses for their own interest alone which is forbidden and which they dare not do themselves Father Bauny in the 17. Chap. of his Sum pag. 266. wherein he treats expresly of this matter saith that those who neglect to honour and sanctifie the Lords-days do plunge themselves into a great and very enormous crime and he saith after that if they would avoid it as they are obliged they should take the pains to hear Mass and not to work He reduces all the Sanctification of Feasts to hearing Mass and not working whatsoever we do the rest of the day he pretends we are discharged To give authority to his imagination he saith that the holy Apostles have commanded us both these things by the testimony of S. Austin 261 Serm. de Tempore See here his words Apostoli Dominicum diem Apostolici viri ideo religiosa solennitate habendum sanxerunt quia in eodem Redemptor noster à mortuis surrexit quique ideo Dominica appellatur ut in eo terrenis operibus vel mundi illecebris abstinentes tantum divinis cultibus serviamus The Apostles and Apostolick men have therefore ordained that the Lords-day should be celebrated with Religious Solemnity because thereon our Saviour arose from the dead whence it is that it is also called the Lords-day that in it abstaining from all earthly labours and worldly pleasures we should give our selves only unto the Service of God He makes great account and lays a great stress upon this passage and he would have it observed as very important in this matter believing he had therein found all he sought for See saith he how he forbids us on the holy Lords-days to employ our selves in manual operations I will not insist on it that this learned Divine quotes a Sermon as S. Austins which notwithstanding is not his But I cannot but admire the simplicity of this good man who brings for proof of his Proposition a passage which destroys it and which proves evidently the quite contrary to what he pretends For the Author of this Sermon speaking of that part of the Commandment which forbids to work on Festival and Lords-days requires us on these days not only to cut off all businesses and cares about all earthly things but worldly pleasures and divertisements also Vt in eo terrenis operibus mundi illecebris abstinentes c. And on the contrary this Jesuit and his Brethren allow a multitude of persons to work and leave an entire liberty to the whole world to delight themselves with what pleasures and divertisements they please even with those which are forbidden by Gods Laws without herein doing any thing contrary to the Commandment of the Church or Sanctification of the Feasts provided only they take the pains to hear Mass as saith Bauny And for the other part of the Commandment which concerns the Sanctification of the Feast-days he makes his blindness to appear much more clearly in what he relates out of the same Author and the Councils who evidently condemn his opinion in the very places he alledges as we shall presently see in the second Part of this Chapter II. POINT SECTION I. That for the Sanctification of the Lords-day it suffices according to the Jesuits to hear one low Mass that we may hear it where we will the whole or part and at as many parcels as we please THis Author whom Father Bauny cites after he had said that the Apostles had ordained that we should abstain on the Lords-day from the business and pleasures of the world adds that they ordained this only the better to dispose us by this retrenchment of our pleasures and work to keep holy this day in the holy Service of God without employing our selves in any other thing ut in eo terrenis operibus vel mundi illecebris abstinentes tantum divinis cultibus serviamus And Father Bauny saith that we are quit of all obligation to sanctifie the Lords and Feast-days If we take the pains on those Holy-days to hear Mass And continuing to cite the same Author as if he were for him And for the Mass saith he which is part of the honour which God requires of us on this day he speaks thus In die vero nullus se à Missarum Saerarum celebratione separet neque quis domi remaneat caeteris ad Ecclesiam pergentibus neque in venatione se occupet On that day let no man separate himself from the celebration of the Sacred Mass nor let any stay behind at home whilst others go to Church nor spend his time in hunting If he would draw any advantage from this passage he ought at least to have cut off these last words neque in venatione se occupet For citing them as out of S. Austin who relates the Commandment of the Apostles he acknowledgeth that according to S. Austin and the Apostles hunting is forbidden on the Lords-day which nevertheless according to the opinion of this Father and his Brethren is lawful on this day for those persons who employ themselves therein only for recreation He ought also have taken notice that this place makes nothing at all for him and in no wise proves what he pretends For this Author whom he cites saith indeed that no person ought to