Page images
PDF
EPUB

given the rein freely to carnal sins of every description;* they have left it doubtful whether suicide be a sin at all, or at most a trifling sin; † they have established the lawfulness of murder, as a matter of probability in some cases, as a matter of certainty in others, more especially in the case of offenders against the Papacy and the religious orders; § they have given the adulterer leave to slay the injured husband,|| and declared the son blameless if he kill his father in a drunken fit, allowing him even to rejoice at his consequent succession to the inheritance;¶ they have sanctioned

has a probable reason for believing, that if his father were asked, he would grant him what he steals, without reluctance; for then the owner is not averse to the matter, but to the manner, of the transaction; 2. If the amount is not thought considerable in respect to his condition; 3. If he steals with the intent to give alms to one who is in great need; for then his parent is not reasonably averse to it; 4. If he robs his father to procure an innocent diversion suited to his rank.” (Jac. Gordon, Theol. Mor. Univ., tom. i., lib. v., qu. 3, cap. iv., § 1. Extr., p. 201.)

* We cannot defile our pages with any of the turpitudes which under this head are collected together in the Jesuit treatises on moral theology. Suffice it to say, that from the amount which may lawfully (sic!) be taken as the wages of prostitution, to the commission of the most horrible and unnatural crimes, nothing has escaped the disquisition of these casuists, and that the whole subject is handled in the same revolting spirit of palliating, excusing, nay, sanctioning, sin, which runs through their whole system of morality.

66

A man never sins unless he actually reflects upon the moral wickedness of the action or omission.........As if the mind, in a violent transport of anger or of grief, is so absorbed in the thought of what may be convenient or useful, that it either reflects not at all, or very slightly, upon the sinfulness and discredit of the action in which case it will either be no sin, or only an imperfect and venial sin; which, I think, sometimes happens with those who are so completely absorbed in the excess of their sorrow, that they commit suicide." (Paul Laymann, Theol. Mor., lib. i., tr. 3, cap. v., n. 13. Extr., p. 126.)

"It is probable that it is never lawful for a private person directly to intend the death of another. Thus St. Thomas, &c. Yet the opposite opinion of many persons who are quoted and followed by Lessius, Diana, and de Lugo, is more common, and sufficiently probable." (Busembaum, Theol. Mor. aucta a R. P. Cl. Lacroix, tom. ii., lib. iii., p. 1, tr. 4, cap. i., dub. 3, qu. 181, § 9, n. 821. Extr., p. 215.)

99

"It is lawful for us to kill a man, when, if we kill him not, another will kill us.' (Steph. Fagundez, In Præc. Decal., tom. i., lib. v., cap. vi., n. 11. Extr., p. 208.)

§ "A man put under the Pope's bann may be killed anywhere, as Filliucius, Escobar, and Diana teach; because the Pope has jurisdiction, at least indirectly, over the whole world, even in temporal things, as far as is necessary for the administration of things spiritual, as all Catholics maintain, and as Suarez proves against the King of England." (Busembaum, Theol. Moralis, aucta a R. P. Cl. Lacroix, tom. ii., lib. iii., p. 1, tr. 4, cap. i., dub. 2, qu. 178, § 4, n. 795. Extr., p. 260.)

"It is lawful for an Ecclesiastic, or one of a religious order, to kill a calumniator who threatens to spread atrocious accusations against himself or his order, when other means of defence are wanting." (Franc. Amicus, Curs. Theol., disp. 36, s. 5, n. 118. Extr., p. 209.)

"If an adulterer, even though an Ecclesiastic, aware of the danger, enter the house of an adulteress, and, being attacked by her husband, kill his assailant in necessary defence of life and limb, it does not appear that he is irregular." (Hen. Henriquez, Summ. Theol. Mor., tom. i., lib. xiv.; De Irregul., cap. x., § 3. Extr., p. 206.)

¶ "Father Fagundez (In Decal., lib. ix.) thus expresses himself: 'It is lawful for a son to rejoice at the murder of his parent, committed by himself in a state of drunkenness, on account of the great riches thence acquired by inheritance ;.... since it is supposed, on the one hand, that the parricide was blameless, as well from deficiency of deliberation caused by drunkenness, as through the absence of premeditation; and, on the other, that very great riches would result from this parricide,

corruption on the seat of judgment,* and prevarication in the witnessbox; they have abetted resistance to the civil Magistrate, even to open murder and sedition; they have made perjury a matter of harmless

an effect which is either good, or certainly not bad.' It follows that the doctrine of Father Fagundez, which may seem a paradox, is true in theory, although it may be dangerous in practice.........He would be mistaken who should infer from what has been said, that, for the sake of such results, it would be lawful to desire voluntary drunkenness, or to rejoice in it. He would more rightly infer, that it is sometimes lawful to desire a blameless drunkenness, by which the great benefit would be produced. See Caramuel, in Theologia Regulari." (George Gobat, Oper. Mor., tom. ii., p. ii., tr. 5, cap. ix., s. 8, n. 54, 55, 57. Extr., pp. 212, 213.)

"If the Judge should think either opinion equally probable, for the sake of his friend he may lawfully pronounce sentence according to the opinion which is more favourable to the interest of that friend. He may, moreover, with the intent to serve his friend, at one time judge according to one opinion, and at another time according to the contrary opinion, provided only that no scandal result from the decision." (Greg. de Valentia, Comm. Theol., tom. iii., disp. 5, qu. 7, p. 4. Extr., p. 89.)

"A Judge may follow the less probable opinion, rejecting that which is more probable." (Poinant, Res. Quæd. Diff. ex Judice. Extr., p. 107.)

"Is a Judge bound to restore a bribe which he has received for pronouncing judgment? If he has received it for a just sentence, he is bound to restore it; because the sentence was otherwise due to the pleader, and he has therefore received no benefit for his money. If the Judge has received it for an unjust sentence, he is not bound by natural right to make restitution, as Bannez, Sanchez, &c., teach, because he was not obliged to pronounce that unjust sentence; but this action is useful to the pleader, and the unjust Judge exposes himself to great danger by it, especially in his reputation, if he should be convicted of injustice. Now the exposure to such danger in the service of another may be valued at a price." (Busembaum, Theol. Mor. aucta a R. P. Cl. Lacroix, tom. iv., lib. iv.; De Jud., cap. iii., dub. 2, art. 4, qu. 268, n. 1498. Extr., p. 197.)

"You believe that a Judge examines you lawfully upon the crime of some great and honourable man, of high importance to the state; still you are not fully assured of it, but you have some scruple and some doubt. Then you may keep silence, and not answer him according to his meaning, deciding it to be probable in such a case that you may refrain from speaking;.........for in instances of this kind, a great necessity renders an opinion probable, which otherwise would not have been probable." (Ferd. de Castro Palao, De Virt. et Vit. Contr., par i., tr. 1, disp. 2, p. 2, n. 5. Extr., p. 98.)

"If a Judge examines concerning an action which has been committed without sin, at least without mortal sin, the witness and the accused are not obliged to answer according to the meaning of the Judge." (Leon. Lessius, De Just. et Jure, lib. ii., cap. xxxi., dub. 3, n. 14. Extr., p. 192.)

"There is no obligation to swear according to the meaning of the Judge; but equivocation and mental reservation may be used." (Ibid., n. 17. Extr., p. 193.)

"Subjects are either excused or not excused from paying tribute in consequence of an opposite probable opinion. Certainly they are excused; for as the Prince rightly levies tribute upon a probable opinion that it is just, so may the subject also rightly refuse the tribute upon a probable opinion that it is unjust." (Sanchez ap Ant. Escobar, Univ. Theol. Mor., tom. i., lib. ii., s. 2, p. 18, n. 91, 92. Extr., p. 105.)

"A subject who thinks that the command of his Superior exceeds the limits of his authority, ought not to obey him." (Louis de Scildere, De Princ. Consc. Form., tr. ii., cap. iv., n. 55, ass. 3. Extr., p. 110.)

"If a Judge were unjust, and had proceeded without adhering to the course of law, then the accused might by all means defend himself by assaulting and even by slaying the Judge, because.........in that case he cannot be called a Judge, but an unjust aggressor and a tyrant." (Steph. Fagundez, In Præc. Decal., tom. ii., lib. viii., cap. xxxii., n. 5, Extr., p. 208.)

"What is sedition ? The disagreement of citizens, a special offence against charity. If the state is drawn away from its obedience to its Prince, it is the crime

ingenuity; they have established the Papal supremacy, with all its practical consequences, as an article of the faith,† and converted the duty of allegiance into a mere mockery, and regicide into a glorious achievement.S

(To be continued.)

of high treason; but if it extends only to the deposition of Magistrates, it is simple sedition. Furthermore, as against a tyrant, it is no sin, nor sedition, properly speaking; because a tyrannical government aims not at the common weal." (Ant. Escobar, Lib. Theol. Mor. xxiv.; Soc. Jesu Doct. Reser., tr. 5, ex. 5, cap. v., n. 69. Extr., p. 248.)

* "Since you are not bound to swear according to the meaning of the inquirer, you may according to your own; which some deny, affirming, that words which are absolutely false, are not excused by such an understanding of intention. There are learned men in favour of either opinion, who maintain either side with probability." (Emm. Sa, Aphor. Confess. v. Juramentum, n. 6. Extr., p. 186.)

"It is not intrinsically wrong to use equivocation, even in making oath; whence it is not always perjury. This is the sure and common opinion." (Franc. Suarez, De Virt. et Statu Relig., tom. ii., lib. iii.; De Juram. Præc. et Pecc. eis Contr., cap. ix., ass. 1, n. 2. Extr., p. 188.)

"He would not sin mortally who, without deception, but, influenced by his reverence for an oath, and from scruple, should feign to swear, so that the bystanders and the Notary might think that he did swear." (Thom. Sanchez, Op. Mor. in Præc. Decal., p. 2, lib. iii., cap. vii., n. 2. Extr., p. 191.)

"If there be a lawful cause for using equivocation or artifice in swearing, even though he to whom the oath is sworn should understand it in a sense different from that in which it is understood by him who swears it, and would thus be deceived, a mortal sin is not committed; and sometimes it does not even amount to a venial sin." (Valer. Reginald, Praxis Fori Pœnit., tom. ii., lib. xviii., cap. vii., s. 1, n. 90. Extr., p. 191.)

"Equivocation is nothing more than this, that the swearer understands the words in a sense different from that in which another person receives them.........It is not in itself a sin to use equivocation in swearing." (Vinc. Filliucius, Mor. Quæst. de Christ. Offic. et cas. Consc., tom. ii., tr. 25, cap. xi.; De Juram, n. 321, 322. Extr., p. 194.)

"With what precaution is equivocation to be used? When, for instance, the swearer begins by saying, 'I swear that,' let him, in a low voice, insert the mental restriction to-day,' and then continue aloud, 'I have not eaten such a thing;' or, 'I swear,' inserting that I say,' then again finish aloud, that I have not done this or that; for in this manner the entire speech is most true." (Ibid., n. 328. Extr., p. 195.)

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

+"Princes are bound to obey the command of the Pope as the word of Christ; and if they resist, he can punish them as rebellious persons; and if they undertake anything against the Church and the glory of Christ, he may deprive them of their empire and kingdom, or he may transfer their dominions to another Prince, and absolve their subjects from their allegiance which they owe to them, and from the oath which they have sworn; that the word of the Lord, which he spake to Jeremiah the Prophet, may be verified in the Roman Pontiff: 'Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth. See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out and to pull down, and to destroy and to throw down, to build and to plant.' (Alph. Salmeron, Comm. in Ev. Hist. et. in Acta App., tom. iv., p. 3, tr. 4, p. 410. Extr., p. 220.)

[ocr errors]

"We are not so timid or faint-hearted that we fear to affirm openly, that the Roman Pontiff can, if occasion require, absolve Catholic subjects from their oath of allegiance, if the Prince should use them tyrannically, and destroy the true religion; and we add, moreover, that if it be done discreetly and circumspectly by the Pontiff, it is a meritorious work." (Jac. Gretzer, Vespert. Hæret., p. 882. Extr., p. 256.) "The rebellion of an Ecclesiastic against a King is not a crime of high treason, because he is not subject to the King." (Emm. Sa, Aphor. Confess. v. Clericus. Extr., p. 216.)

"The whole school of theologians and ecclesiastical Lawyers maintain, (and it is

687

DESIDERIUS ERASMUS.

(Concluded from page 581.)

THE Colloquies may be certainly considered as a sort of autobiography, illustrative of many particulars in the lives of Erasmus and of his contemporaries. When we read that interesting volume, we can easily fancy ourselves to be thrown back amid the learned, the courtiers, the Clergy, the bourgeoisie of the sixteenth century, the rotten eggs of Montaigu College, the ignorant Monks, the "gentlemen of the press," well read in Latin and in Greek; all the several and most minute features of the times are brought before our eyes, and vividly delineated. No wonder that the Colloquies were printed, reprinted, eagerly sought for, and even made a text-book of in schools and public seminaries: we would say more, we would add that if, notwithstanding the continual efforts made by the Roman Catholic Clergy, the Colloquies still continued the most popular manual for classical students; such a fact proves that the strength of opinion has ever been known to prevail against the spirit of despotism.

It is not our intention to enter upon a lengthened disquisition with respect to the warfare carried on by Erasmus; but we must notice his Μωρίας Εγκώμιον, a book in which the Doctor of Rotterdam embodied an idea already rendered popular in Germany by the fables of Brant and

both certain and a matter of faith,) that any Christian Prince, if he has manifestly departed from the Catholic religion, and has wished to turn others from it, is immediately divested of all power and dignity, whether of divine or of human right, and that, too, even before the sentence pronounced against him by the supreme Pastor and Judge; and that all his subjects are free from every obligation of the oath of allegiance which they had sworn to him as their lawful Prince; and that they may and must, if they have the power, drive such a man from the sovereignty of Christian men, as an apostate, a heretic, a deserter of Christ the Lord, and as an alien, and an enemy to his country, lest he corrupt others, and turn them from the faith by his example and command." (Andr. Philopater, Resp. ad Edictum, s. 2, n. 157. Extr., p. 217.)

"The sovereign Pontiff, as the Vicar of Christ and the Superior of all Christendom, can directly annul and remit any obligation contracted with another upon the faith of an oath, when there is a just cause for it; which remission is no less valid than if it had been granted by the person himself in whose favour the oath was sworn." (Leon. Lessius, De Just. et Jure, lib. ii.; De Juram., cap. xlii., dub. 12, n. 64. Extr., p. 242.)

"Does a Prince, by reason of his apostasy, lose his sovereignty over his subjects, so that they are no longer bound to obey him? No; because sovereignty and infidelity are not incompatible, and may subsist together; but the Church can deprive him of his sovereignty by a decree. Wherefore, as soon as he is declared excommunicate on account of his apostasy from the faith, his subjects are absolved from the oath of allegiance." (Pet. Alagona, S. Thomæ Aquin. Summ. Theol. Comp. ex. Sec. Sec., qu. 12. Extr., p. 244.)

§"When the state is oppressed by the tyranny of the Prince, and the people are deprived of the power of assembling, the will is not wanting to abolish the tyranny, or to avenge the manifest and intolerable crimes of the Prince, and to restrain his mischievous efforts: as if he should overthrow the religion of the country, and introduce a public enemy within the state. I shall never consider that man to have done wrong who, favouring the public wishes, would attempt to kill him." (Joh. Mariana, De Rege et Regis Instit., lib. i., cap. vi., p. 61. Extr., p. 224.)

"It is useful that Princes should be inade to know, that if they oppress the state, and become intolerable by their vices and their pollution, they hold their lives upon this tenure, that to put them to death is not only lawful, but a laudable and a glorious action." (Ibid. Extr., p. 225.)

Geiler.*"He introduces Folly herself as interlocutor. Moria, the daughter of Plutus, born in the Happy Islands, nursed by Drunkenness and Rudeness, is mistress of a powerful kingdom, which she describes, and to which all classes of men belong. She passes them all in review, but dwells longer and more earnestly on none than on the Clergy; who, though they refuse to acknowledge her benefits, are under the greatest obligations to her. She turns into ridicule the labyrinth of dialectic in which theologians have lost themselves; the syllogisms with which they labour to sustain the Church, as Atlas does the heavens; the intolerant zeal with which they persecute every difference of opinion. She then comes to the ignorance, the dirt, the strange and ludicrous pursuits of the Monks, their barbarous and objurgatory style of preaching: she attacks the Bishops, who are more solicitous for gold than for the safety of souls; who think they do enough if they dress themselves in theatrical costume, and under the name of the most reverend, the most holy, and most blessed fathers in God, pronounce a blessing or a curse: and, lastly, she boldly assails the court of Rome and the Pope himself, who, she says, takes only the pleasures of his station, and leaves its duties to St. Peter and St. Paul." +

[ocr errors]

This system of censure, supported by all the resources of an inexhaustible fund of learning and wit, was well calculated to prevent or disturb the otium cum dignitate which Erasmus seems to have kept constantly in view. Honest old Burton has the following remark :-"One had better, as Alexander, the sixth Pope, long since observed, provoke a great Prince than a begging Friar, a Jesuit, or a seminary Priest.' I will add, For inexpugnabile genus hoc hominum, they are an irrefragable society, they must and will have the last word." And the last word they had, too, with Desiderius ; they worried him so thoroughly, that he was obliged to make a few concessions.

Then came the Ciceronians, a set of conceited scholars, who swore by Tully, and maintained that there was no salvation for Latin scholars beyond the writings of the Roman orator. Erasmus had ridiculed their exclusiveness: Scaliger retorted, and set up a cry of murder and threefold parricide. He gave full vent to the spirit of gross invective, called his opponent a thousand times a drunkard; in fine, did what he could to destroy the character of the worthier and more distinguished critic.

It was a consequence of the station assumed by Erasmus, that he should continually be engaged in a literary warfare with those by whom he was surrounded. And yet how carefully did he not seek to keep aloof from all the momentous discussions which then began to move the world! How earnestly did he not strive to steer midway between two rocks, and to shift

* Sebastian Brant's "Ship of Fools," Warrenschiff, is a curious representation of the defects and vices of human society. "The ridicule is not directed against individual follies on the one side is vice, nay, crime; on the other, lofty aspirations and pursuits, which rise far above vulgar ends, are treated as folly. Glory and beauty are despised as transient; nothing is abiding but learning." (Ranke's Reformation, vol. i., pp. 279, 280. Mrs. Austin's Translation.) Geiler von Keisersperg translated Brant's volume into Latin, under the title, Navicula Fatuorum. Ranke says, that the Latin version "is even more instructive as to the history of morals than the original." The Fastnachtspiele, "Carnival Sports," the Eulenspiegel, "Owleglass," and the edition of Reineke Fuchs, "Reynard the Fox," were three other popular works which had the same characteristics,—hostility to the Church of Rome.

+ Ranke.

Anatomy of Melancholy.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »