KMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) // V c?. x? L<'/ M/j 1.0 I.I 1.25 •ana 12.5 s iffl IB ||||22 2,0 III— U IIIIII.6 ^ <^ /}. » O^. e. CA. 6^ -'\ 'V,- >/ 9 <$> '# %^ ej r5^^ O / « • '^ Photographic = Sciences Corporation m. iV ^^ ^^ \ k ,-0^' \ \ a^ «^ \j ■^ 6^ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) S/2-4S03 © CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. e 9 ® e I « CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. • • • *. ./ • • • • • • Canadian Institute for Historical Microre^/roductions . • IMI . • •• • • Institut Canadian de microreproductions Kistpriques S # . 1980 o o o O© 9 • • m • • • Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibiiographically unique, wliich may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checited below. J U D D D D \ Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et.^'ou pellicul6e Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur Coloured inl< (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ ^ Relid avec d'autres documents w,«. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. D D Q Q D D D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur6es et/ou pellicul^es Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolor6es, tachetdes ou piqudes ■ / Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6e^ Showthrough/ Transparence QualitV^of print varies/ QuaUft^ indgale de I'impression' Th to Th po of filr Ori bei the sic oti firs sio or Thi shi Tir wh Ma difl enf • • • { I Tight binding may causo shadows or dis^tion fj^ v|~~| Only editioq^^vaiiable/ I — I along interior margin/ j^ .a ^ I I Seule Edition disponibl • I j Incfpdes suppljmenj^ry material/ L— J COVnprend du m< t matdriei supplement^e • m along La reliure serree peut causer de I'onYl^re ou m!5j * • .•e rigl req me Seule Edition dispomble ^ »#^* ails du >difier une nage # 01 The copy fifmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each micirofiche shall contain the symbol — •»> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. differenkj'eductior W \VThi etc., may be filmed at btios. Those too large to be Maps, plates, charto. rwre entirelVITicluded in one exposure are filmed ^^ • # )eginning in the tipper left hand corner, left to Z*^ right and top to bottom, as many frames as, iL required. The following diagrams illustrate ihe. ► -•method:^ ^ ^ ^ WW .• 9 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grfice d la g6n6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmaga. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont filmds en commenpant pur le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commenpant paria premidre page qui comporte une eaapreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en '(terminant par la dernidre page qui comportl^ une telle empreinte. ^^'' Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s d des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour 6tre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd d partir de I'angle supdrieur gauche, de fiauche & droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Les^diagrammes suivant^ illustrent ^mdthode. '^ '-. •;C«- # "w. # # ^ w^^ l|| n If, « ry •*•/?.. n • o I* 'a a. ».«•** ' W fs •< * tei • «• t %. V a« % ••• *? ••• r^«,* •••• 9« • •• >• • <* VS' i 7 • V r ••• » PROVEN, FROM JESUIT AUTHORS, H^ beenTaugh- a6 \^^*%M%ii ,© © ^^L^ PREFACE. • In a Lecture delivered in St Patrick's Church, Ottawa, on Sunday evening, February 24th, 1889, and which was afterwards published, the Rev. M. J. Whelan gave the following challenge : — *' A reward of five hundred dollars will be given by me to any one jipologists and theim^ IV. THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. agreed that all passages to be cited from Jesuit authors, or other approved Catholic casuists shall be filed with the Commission, at least thirty days before the inquiry begins ; < two copies of each passage, or extract, to be supplied, with the title and the page, from which it is said to be taken." 0fk {Ibid. p. 40). ^^ After full deliberation I formally accepted this chal- lenge previous to the 12th day of July, and appointed the Rev. Principal MacVicar and the Rev, Professor Scrimger, of the Presbyterian College, Montreal, as my representa- tives on the Commission of Inquiry. Father Whelan, on his part, appointed the Rev. Father Jones and the Rev. Father Doherty, boU^esuits.ajiJi is representatives. By arrangement these'iRur mer*at St. Mary's College, ^ lonfealj^n thi|^^,,j^li|^J^ast last, for the purpose of flP e fi(th'*4h3hibW^of tlvK|Commi«ionJ@My re- caenmwEs pr<>j(i)soaVtlie name oL tkeyjfev. I\ilSv!'%Jw).^,]W^S30tLpf mental s:]^ily^r,\^ ^ (JP nawLi sii}0 gennemafiKwhoCiff wefl lecls # i4 rally qualiflOO ;^J^>*^t^'Mt ratlvfl^s declined X Pro|aife6r t' ^^$^L hfc7Mus|3lj^Jj*^,Iiie inqur^necfiS- saril£^eiv^SSuglp 2nTcLJj|had ngS4t})poritmitp(^ ''iyVli m before them the passaoesVFiida^l nacOcady frdin vacttr'US _,^ Jesuit autb&rs in suppoE of mw(lg|^l^n. JM^^^^v^ ^ %J O 0< PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. V. m now lay them before the public that all may judf^e for them- selves as to what the Jesuit teaching on this point really is* The passages, except a few too offensive for the eye of the general reader, have been translated into English, but as a guarantee for the correctness of the rendering, the original Latin, some short quotations excepted, is given in an appendix, with full references, so that they may be found in the works without difficulty by those who have them withinl'^Rich. The public have a right to know the principles of the Order which has been chartered and subsidized by the Government, and encouraged to extend its operations in the country. I feel satisfied that no uribiissed mind can study the extracts given here without being convinced that they practically teach the obnoxious principle that ** the end justifies the mjMis." r-O W condense quota 'intehtlgd ; none m credited writers having^ iri^tlo-falye Maijj^l sl^JDns — the il^al answer Kf L^d Jesirft teaciiinffsp TIioQddition^reproach f jN^sijj^tfwatin, iT|| is Latin, is taken as a evMa' jflRfi sch(jk: . *^® nrfriencif^llcPfla^ve auied me in^this^work, \ iiin \^i gH^c>M 1-t hjli.i :c ly sh^W a^howledg eciaJl^feme tke l^v. Jlrind^i^MacVicar ^d the }i(|*i;3an Tl^olo 'Co|ea|| MontrAl, whc^mt^nl^^Bpt^^ih .irliuitors n o^'T \w^ave valualjje hf^M^Vdncb^ Q- ^ advhowledern^Kiu Wi heir at>:>' stance, i these, I nioiig.sL ; tbe Kfev.J|-i ^^^r^r tne^^|J,)}i«*i;3an TH?oloeical ^ Hjajgui o^'T \yaft-^ave valuafjf^e ?i^Wj,sLanc(V W' ^ A • •••• THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. % I . Cui concessus est finis, concessa cti.im sunt media ad finem ordinata, {Layman's Theologia Moralis^ idsj). Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita, (Bmembaum's Medulla,, Frank. 1653). Cui licitus est finis, etiam licent media, (id). Cui enim licet finis ei et media permissa sunt. {Voit, JVursdurg; iSOo) . Visum est nobis in Domino proeter expressum votunn, quo Societas summo Pontifici pro tempore existenti teneter, ac tria alia essentialia paupertatis, castitatis, et obedientire, nuUas constitudones, declarationes, V2I ordinem ullum vivendi posse obligationem ad peccatum mortale vel veniale inducere. JVt'si superior ea in nomine Domini jnostrijesu Christi, vel in virtute sancUv obedient ice juberet ; quod in rebus, vel personis illis, in quibus judicabitur, quod ad particularem unius-cujusque, vel ad universale bonum mnltum conveniet, fieri poterit. {Constituiiones So. fesu^ Rome, iS?o, ch. 5, part VI. See translation ^. 37). "Their doctrines destroy the law of nature ; they break all the bonds of civil society, by authorizing theft, lying, perjury, the utmost licentiousness, murder, criminal passions, and all manner of sins ; their doctrines root out all sentiments of humanity, overthrow all govern- ments, excite rebellion, uproot the foundation of religion, and substitute all sorts of superstition, irreligion, blasphemy and idolatry. {Act of Parliament of France, 1762, dissolving and banishing the Jesuit Society). My brethren, consider the dangers to which the church must be sub- ject when it takes its teachings from the Jesuits, as their doctrines are in contradiction to history, to the fathers of the church, to the "Word of God, to everything, in short, that is held most sacred by true Christians. (Bishop Strossmayer,at the Ecumenical Council in Rome, 186^). Pope Clement XIV., in suppressing the Jesuits, in 1773, charged them with idolatrous ceremonies, scandalous maxims, contrary to good morals, producing dangerous seditions, tumults, discords, scandals, which weak- ened or entirely broke the bonds of Christian charity. For these and other reasons stated, he decreed the eternal suppression and annihilation of the 'Company of Jesus, 'not to be rescinded in aftertime by any one or upcn any grounds." {Clement's brief, rjfs). *' Like lambs have we crept into power; like wolves have we used it ; but like dogs shall we be driven out." {Borgia, 3rd General of the Jesuits, 1563.) \- i una PASSAGES FROM APPROVED JESUIT AUTHORS SHOWING THAT THEY TEACH THE PRINCIPLE THAT ''THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS," AS THAT MAXIM IS VULGARLY UNDERSTOOD, U. "THAT IT IS LAW- FUL TO DO EVIL THAT GOOD MAY COME." BUSEMBAUM. The first author to be quoted is HERMANN BUSEMBAUM. His famous work, the Medulla Theo- logics Moralis, or Marrow of Moral Theology, was first published at Mlinster, Westphah'a, in 1645, and has been reprinted more than two hundred times. It was issued recently under the authority of the Congregation de Propaganda Fide. The edition quoted from is that published simultaneously in two volumes at Paris, Leipsic, and Tournay, in 1876, and bears the double imprimatur of Fr. Dominicus Buttaoni, O.P.S.P.A.M.,and of Joseph Canali Archiep. Colossen. Vicegerens. It also states on the title page that it is "according to the last edition of the Holy Congregation of tl^e Propaganda." {Juxta editionem tdtimani S. Cohgregationis de Propaganda Fide). All the quotations are made from the first volume. Busembaum states the maxim in the following terms: "When the end is lawful the means ALSO are lawful." {Cum fiftis est licitus, etiani media sunt licita). o * o 8 JHE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. o The paragraph in which it occurs is part of the dis- cussion on the question as to the lawfulness of escape on the part of a prisoner, and reads as follows : — o (i) "it is lawful also, at least in the court of coa- science, as long as violence and injury are avoided, to deceive one's jailers, e,g. by giving thefti fo6d and drink so that they may be overcome with sleep, or^by taking means to get them out of the way, also to break through fetters and prison walls, l3ecause when the end is Icfwful the means aHo ar"e lawful. And althouglioOther prison- ers should escape at the same timg through the break- ing of the wall, he wiH not he responsible for the Jigirm, for he is o\\\f its= accidental cause, since he ^^oes what he has a risrht to do. Nor does it mafter that certain . O o laws and magistr^es severely punish suc;|i jaikbrfiak- ers, for that is done either bfcause they follow the contrary opinion, or on the assumption that violerjce is done to the jailers °becaifse that punishment has been enacted in the public interest."o (pp. 386-7). tC'-to In one form oroanother this°case is discussed by all %e Jesuit .and other Rom°an Catholic casuists, and" substq.ntially the same answer is °given Sy tjicm all. The means indicated": deliberate deception of the guards and jail-breakitag by for&° are such as are puniphable by the laws of all countries, byt <^qy areo regarded as justified by the en4. The usual m(J<;le of rebutting the charge, as based on °this citation, is to asser t that the means are not necessarily evil. If they mean by this that it is not necessarily evil to give _ '. a * These figures at the end oi the translalions refer toothe Latiii text in the appendix. o o o o o o Ool 00 c? PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 9 % • o o o o o o IcOo O meat and drink to another,aor to make a Role through ap wall, then it can "only be oharacterized ^s an evasion * o of the point ; for the otJier in this case is a jailer who is l^eing thereby tiicked, and the wall is the wall ofij • °a pri§on which noo°©ne has a right "to break throifgh, * o except when oduly authoriz&'(|. If tke^ mean ^hat« these things are stfll not evil uncfer the cirt:iigi stances, '° then all othat can obe saidois,°that undei the inflfiotjce * '^ofo their systofftoof casuistry they «iia\^ devejoped * o peculiar ideas of rigjit 'kndowrerc°mikh°less^is(?L|,s§ed. ^(2). « Far n^jOrG frequently. hbwQ,ver,the ffryieijjcofehat Uie end jusj:iffes the meaiis is^fkught indirectly, fs ynpje^ ^^ °^° withcfuf being "itetql °For rfie sake°of°certaJh ends, o ° means whidi else\yherfe artP charact^rize^lo^s evif are^ o declared ° to be permissible.o or at, least regarded*' as _ •. o Oo o 09 • • • o O ©• (p „o o © • • -t • • • • ^ • /i.*LO • THE END«rUSTIFI|IS TH#MEANS .• ^ # • ^ I _ ^ st«§triking^of *J^ tlfbse. 9\^ far cfi ijbssible, tlrey ha^/e Been er|»iui^(!L % ^K I ^-#venifl,4n other vv%f as ^o ajg^iaivT; ^ _^ L » SVpt > IF • OO Q .0 c) a *^ llAJs*^ l^lWf -JU-. i- mmmmmmimmmmmmm >>^ »_,.°* tf I^QscPanv oblicat i^tiili^ no rigft toMntca:oc:at 8 lonxni the accused. i^ cPo W-tial^roo^ has , •^ is becaiis^T^ these (-«§scs ulie ©• 'i'v^^iHivJ??:'" *■'* •^' J5-- ^^^^^ !• te .°#^* o^ crime^jpnl^or some ffi.( t> i^^B^^^ ^j6^e kj^evyjhfttruth he^iv^uTci^be^inS^o^ Q) ^/X 1" 20 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. !! through a window to a concubine, carrying love-letter^ to his mistress, accompanying him to a duel, etc., the simple fact of his place is not enough ; there must be greater necessity and cause to make them lawful, e.g. danger of grave or at least appreciable loss if he refuses. * * This doctrine is now rejected on account of prop. 5 1., condemned by Innocent XI. * * " Those things which are very closely related to the sin, or lead to it, or are opposed to justice, although from their own nature they are indifferent, e.g. giving a sword to one's master to kill another, pointing out one whom he is seeking to kill, ringing the bell (although without scandal) f«r an heretical meeting, calling from the house a prostitute, though ready by previous appointment, and bringing her down to his master, holding a ladder for a thief, furnishing loans for waging an unjust war, selling an estate to a heretic owner, require a very grave cause, i.e. the fear of so very grave an evil that, according to the laws of charity, no one is bound to endure it for the sake of avoiding the evil of another, eif^ if otherwise he would be killed. " In states in which it is permitted for the sake of avoiding a greater evil, it is lawful to let a house to a Usurer (unless foreigner) and^to prostitutes, especially if there are no other tenants to be had, unless the prostitutes seriously injure^honest neighbours, or, on account of the situation, give greater' opportunity for sin." (pp. 87-8.) (14). In every one of^ these cases the solution is based upon the principle that theoend justifies the means. When the end is Sufficiently important, it is lawful to * iwi w iia»^x.. PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 21 use means that under ordinary circumstances would be wrong. In face of these quotations, the fairness of which cannot be challenj^ed unless they want the whole book cited, it is futile for the Jesuits or anybody else to deny that Busembaum used the principle in detail, as well as taught it in the abstract. It will be observed that several of these passages cited contain clauses marked by asterisks, (;^lling attention to the propositipns condemned by Alexander Vll. and Innocent XI. It is not stated by whom these are inserted. But certainly they did not form part of the original work ; for it was published in 1645, and these propositions were condemned in 1665 and 1679 respectively. It is obvious thatni a number of these instances the doctrines of the Jesuit father were not such as could obtain papal approval. The truth is that Busembaum and others went so far in the practical application of the principle that the end justifies the means, that the Pope had to intervene in order to save the credit of the church. According to their own principles, the Pope's condemnation was proof that these doctrines were taught, and ought, forever, to have put an end to such laxity. But the advantage which it gave them in populariiing the confessional in their hands was too great to be readily surrendered. An examination of any of their modern writers will show how little they have really given up. o • SANCHEZ. ® We give one extract from Thomas Sanchez, a Spanish Jesuit (1551-1610), in order to show how far Mi ^^ 22 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. some of the earlier writers actually went ; and yet is a fair sample of how entirely the Roman Catholic o ^ Church, in all their schools, teach doctrines at variance with the Scriptures, as Bishop Strossmayer declared at the Ecumenical Council in 1869. Sanchez is one of their most famous authors, and though his \yo%ks are no longer used as text-books, he is frequently quoted as an authority by tlieir most recent theolo- gians. The extract relates to the subjecl of mental reservation, and justifies deliberate deception 'On oath, for ^he most trivjal reason or without any jeason at all^i (15) " Third rul^ Words can also be useS without lying, although from their meaningo they are not ambiguous, and do not reall]/ admit the sdise °given to them, either of themselves^ or from atteryiifig cir- cumstances, but yield ihe true seftse only from something additional retained in^ the jnir\^ of the speaker, whatever that may be. So that -if any one, either alone or before others, whether interrogated or of his ov n accord, /or the sake of spprt or for any other purpose, swears that he has not done a thing which he actually has done, meaning, in his own mind, something else which he has not done, or another day from that on which he did if, 01 with spmething else which makes it true, he does not lie, nor is he a perjurer. He would be merely uttering, not tlie special truth which the hearers understand and which the words of themselves express, but another truth different from it. This rule is not so certain as the two preceding ones, for the writers quoted in §12 deny it ; but it is adopted by Angelus, Sylvester and many others." CD . O 0% o O O oo Oo PRO\^N°FROM JESUIToA%°THORS, 6> o o e 23 o o , ^ o o O « • o «® * o o • •• ooi cP 5 o ® o Oo° ."S Qo o o O O ^ O - o o Q • CP O o o ;Sanchez,°6J^//j Morale in Decalogum,^o\. I., p. ^Sc^,' lTf..Viterbo°edition, i7c38-9.) /15). ^ 0° °° °° ^ As ^Iref^dy intimatedg this '^ropositiSri ^was^ con,^' demne^ by Pqpe Innocent XIq, but, as^willopresentjy ^f^pear^JthQ, sam^ thing is "still taught, with thiso single (difference, thaf thg reason foj- the "dfee^gjtfon n\,ust h% ngore pressing. '^°°°°%° 0° ° ° °o ° °°° , o ° o°^RY. o ° io ° o Amongo moderno Jesuit vpiters^ ^hep^b^^l "k^Swn and ^ ^ ^ mqst widely studiedois "^9^^ Beter Gury^? wk^se ° 08 iifte/^ iSjo o Roman Cafhplic s,emin^r1es in alj lands as aste^dard ° o o manual of mor^l thediogy. Jt°has bfeen° freq^i^ntly ° q^ r^rinted, .pbotli at^^^omcb and elsewhere, o^jvith^ th^ o,, S appr^ation of ^tgh ecclesic^siical autho^Sti&s. °It\^as °o published vs\ 1^87^ by th<^ Congregation of tHeo^6pa-^o^'^ gandll The comp^niqrt v^ork to this is \v^ Ca^\ Conscientice, which is equaHy aj5proved. The foUowing° o quot;ationso cft-e^ taken" from the Lyons o (]liSgdiiniir° 0° °° O Q O O /~ ° O ' editionsjof 1875, oeiiig the second of the, fgrmer Work and the fifth of the tetter, each in two volumes? ^^^TEe,^ Compendium is printed with the approbation of Garcyfas Archi^pisc. Turonensis', the CasuSy with that oi^°Petrus Episc. Aniciensis.° o o o o ^ o o o 00 o o o o o o o 000 cP o o ►I [••i i »« J r :^&5?^ ¥n h^he wflls f^S(*ius^'he|j^ • | is^fto^areyawfiB \\tien in •^ histis ^ Liguog'^f^obaijle ^Jm* 'iir^kf^ nowever, not1a*^&^ to bifbe tn? jaf er, ZV m^ vvioSla be co-J)pc^'jjti^g iiifiis^iii." ^^es, ^ f*f bic^f^e fii^ vviofllcl be co-J)pt^'gting iiifii [• U I )-B ail i i A ^ ^ M DISSIMU (lo; " Question L^^sJ^ever lawful to dissefllble ^e's faiths* # "AnswerTi — It is never lawful to pretend tcftioldia false faitn, because ^hat would be equivalent to an open denial of the true, which is intrinsically evil, as is clear from Christ's words on^is point. **^nswer II.— Jt is lawltil for grave cause to dis- semfte or conceal the true faitn, all danger of scandal ^9 "HW >■'■ « ■> ■ »■ '# badges of ^belSversT # ^ ^ %( I • "Answer^— ^^s ^f niese are 1|i% dress and badges ^f some country, althoughHtft country may be wholly an unbelieving on^: beSluse these have no necessary relation to religion. # "Answer 11^— But if the dress an(y3adges are reli- gious, a distinSion is to be made. I say yes, as the more prpbaDle opinion, when they are worn for grave cause, and the dress is not merely one used to distin- J 1 1 ft t • • i '1 i1 tal i rest and dissemble? ^SDl ifess hinj^elf a C^tholft, and coula he d«*iy die ^v «nd dissemble? ^ ^ ' m^ "iHswer to I. — According to natural^aw one is w ab^lutely obliged to p'-ofess the FJUJk^h, when the honour due to God or the good of one's neighbour would otherwise be neglected, or would suffer serioil^ injury:" (according to Gury's teachings, in many !• •object of hk iaierrofators is not that of incftinng gpnore fully as t^the CathoUcWaith, sTiA they havdP ah'eady learned the flSth from him, but only that of discovering the #ccidental qualities of a crime. Therefore Mathurinus, by a lawful, mental reservation coulcPdeny these other facts." (Cases, vol. I., pp. 84-5.) (19). (20) " Edmund, a rnissionary among unbeliey|rs, % f Hfiinctidff just||given.VT^or df^ss^eivS primarily to*^ ^| cm^er the bo(i^, and M^iflb iWiot mere]%|y|ie b^lge of^ * anyse(^" (Cases, ^i^jll, pptB5-6.) Jb). ^ ^ ^ ||(2i) " PatCTnus^ Jrotestant cle%yi™3jpna in ex- treme per^oCdeatrfliawng come to believe the Catholic ^r to be ^one true, has requestc 1 a priest to be religion called in, but stipulates that he^houlcLcome dressed as a layman to avert all suspiciolf or the convert's being about to ab_^*e heresy. To this priest Paternus UJ perSIaded, as a ^st %sort, he shoulcFDe induc^ declare, bef?lre several witnesses, that#ie professflf to the ^ratholic religion and vvishej^^k) die i *it, ^' le#hin^ |declare #iat||;ie has%ntrustea * imfrortant se secret to a Catholic p^s*t(fT!dhiade known after his d^th. In this way he^night, perhaps, discharge ^is obligation. h *''V;(»as?s,/Voi.A,*V:i i'. 1 ' 1 ; 1 ij ^i ! \ » i I so to swear, because this is simply falsehood M's setgiled also by Props. 26, 27 ^id 28 condem In^cenr^U • Thif • • l^id 28 condemned hjt^ V • # •• • ^C^HifJjft^s forJu^5:ausc' to rnake use ^•_th^is*to saf,^mpi1Sperly ivorffi, wheff the ^sf nac^ capable of^eing iinder^ jvilin iiself,<^irj's uiei^- ipeakiif^^ deqeivecf, but^nly * _ for j^iR cause. Besides, tH^ Is th%t ther^ should be^ means * 1^ ^^oJawfuy;^F5de ^secret. •Now mere is ly^ other way p*«* •man byj eggaju^ation or resc^aiion broadly and '•^f^^r^pdflj* nftiTftal.^I ^av, forjiist cause, fo*- if the^ .•lu9C of ^jJch* reservations be ftlFbwed vvithoutlWMe Ause, ^n\*o^e c^uld oi*wc?ul?l»»behev^ another — a state ^f# #* JfiisiggTwhich t^ould be«fii^uglj wkh the w^t inj^rioifs % . ^onseqtiences to humaj^i^«ci«ty. • ^ ** • » • •" II i§ lavvfu4| moreover, ^j[imake use^f thi^ kind of res|r^Wofi| ^e« oy oath, ^though tffen the^ miilt U^^8ia^reater»rfason f»r it,*ince the witn^s of God^J^ ^ not tg^^ ligHll/ it^(^ed. lieftce : « ''^^ulpfy:, when mterrogated in a non-jj^idi«ial cy ijilawful tva)4 by a judge, may answer l^at he has ^ committed n^ecrftne. meaning tftlti^ that he can be /(|lie^ticfned a*bq^t, or nonc^thattie is bound to confess. • • "This mode of r^^rvation may be usdfi by all I • pftbf: functionj^ri^l \vnen oiicstioned on things coqj I 5 fi(^d fb their discretion, such as»secretaries, ambassa- dors, geifftra^Ii magistrates, lawyers, physicians, ^ surgeonsJmidwive% and all th(^e who have reason to hid^ some truth relative t« their charge. ^ Because, th(?«ecrets cmifided to those persons were violated, ^ grave inconvenience4VOuRi result for society. ^ 1 1 34 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. ! li " A servant, when so instructed by his magter, may deny that he is at home, though in fact he is so, because this phrase is generally taken t(^ mean that he cannot be seen or visited. Olq^erve, however, the custom of different places." Compend., vol. I., p. 345-6). (22.)° ° Here, again, one ofc Gury's own cases is the best commentar)j on his meaning. "Anna, gui^iyoof adultery, when her suspicious hi?i?band questioned her, answered him at first that sh5 had not ©roken her marriage vow. Then, having received absolution for her sirf she answered : I suchoa crime. A third time, on beiner pressed by her husband, she absolutely denied the fault. 1 have not committed it, said she; meaning, ♦adultery such as I am obliged to reveal^ or, I have not committed an adultery that must be revealed ^o you. " Question. — Must Anna be condemned ? "Answer. — In tjie three cases, Anna may be excused from any lie^ because : — "In the first case, she could say that she had not broken the marriage bond, it being yet existent. "In the second case, she could call herself innocent of adultery, because, after having been to confession and having received absolution, her conscience is at rest, having the moral certainty that her sin was pardoned. She could even, according to S. Liguori, affirm it under oath. "In the third case, she could deny her sin, according to the probable opinion, meaning, she had not com- mitted it in such a way that she was obliged to reveal PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 35 it to her husband; as a culprit may say to a judge who does not question him legitimately: I have not committed any crime, meaning, in such a manner that he is bound to declare it. This is the opinion of S. Liguori, and of many others." (Cases, Vol. I., p. 183-4.) (23). "This is a peculiarly gross case, and one hardly knows which to reprobate most, the thrice-repeated lie or the excuses that are made for it. Jesuit apolo- gists defend Anna's course on the ground that her hu^and had no right to know the truth, and allege that, if the case had been reversed any husband would give similar answers to his wife. Family peace is here made more important than truthfulness: the preser- vation of the one justifies the violation of the other. The confes,">or, it seems, is the only one who is bound to know the whole truth — a convenient doctrine, truly, that plays at once into the hands of profligate spouses o and of mother church. Alongside this case of Anna is another that will be interesting to business men. (24) " Theofride, having received an inheritance and hidden this property, out of which he is not bound to pay his creditors, answers that he has hidden nothing. Another time, having returned some money he had borrowed, being interrogated by the judge, he denies having received it. At a third time, questioned by an officer of customs if he was carrying goods liable to duty, he answered negatively. "Question. — Must Theofride be condemned as a liar ? 1 j 1 . 1 '■■\ - 36 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. Ill I ■ "Answer. — Theofride has not sinned against truth in the first case ; because in reality he has hidden nothing, according to the sense of the questioner or the sense in which one could justly interrogates him. So by answering that he has hidden nothing, it is as if he had said, I have committed no injustice against my creditors, this being the only sense in which the judge and creditors can interrogate him. "And he has not sinned in the second case, for the same reason; because he is only questioned on his debt, whether he has received the borrowed money, and has r t returned it. " Neither in the third case, at least according to the probable and common opinion, which looks upon customs laws affecting the transport of objects from one place to another as purely penal. So to say, I have nothing, is as if one was saying, I have nothing to declare of myself ; it i? your duty to look for it instead of r/aestioning. But ecclesiastics are advised to be candid and tell the truth, to avoid the scandal that would arise, if it came to be known after their denial." (Cases, Vol. I., pp. 183-4,) (24)- r y t M DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER. (25) "What are the causes which excusv? from restor- ing the good name of another? The following are generally admitted : .... (3) If the restoration cannot be made with ut risk of life, since life is of a higher order than reputation. Also if the restoration of the person slandered be of much less value than the injury which the slanderer would suffer by so doing, o o PROVEN^ FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. o 37 o e.g. if he were of high rank, and especially ifphe wer^ serviceable tc^ th°e public or tb religion.' ^(Compend., Vol. I., pp. 353-4.) (2°5). ° It is not hard to see how this doctrine justifies the policy of slander that has been soosystematically pursued by the Jesuits from the beginning, in thfe interests of the church and of their own order. What comparison can there be between the reputation of a Jesuit priest and that of a heretic ! The following case shows how defamation may be brought within the reach of humbler people: — o (26) ** Sylvia, a servant, leaves her master, an hon- ourable man, and learns that Veronica, an honest girl, has entered his service. She tries by all means to o induce her to leave him, affirming that he is a^hard and fussy master. As she is not believed by Veronica, sl^e adds that he is an immoral man, ver^ dangerous^to the virtue of his servants. "Question. — Did Sylvia sin by defaming her master ? "Answer. — Not at all ; because defamation includes an unjust reviling of another. Now, Sylvia's defa'hia- tion was not unjust, having been done for a grave and just motive, for the good of her soul or the salvatioii of Veronica." (Cases, Vol. I., pp. 187-8.) (26). It would be difficult to imagine a clearer case of the doctrine, that the end justifies the means. o o o o o o SECRET COMPENSATION, COMMONLY CALLED THEFT. (27) "Secret compensation may be just and per- missible, if it presents the required conditions " I ' .■ u o „y Innocent Xl.ic T/iat serv^^ts,jU>ket/ier^ niUleror' /ema/e, can secretly abstrc. ctfropi ihetr employers payment ° for their services^ when they consider these tf more vcdu^^^ than the zvages they receive. (2) P'rom reason. ^ FOr ^ they would be acting contrary to their agFeerfient i when they consented to the lower price, and nothings c is due but what is agreed on. Besides, If lihis wa% ° allowable, the way would be open for numberless, thefts, for servants would easily persuade themselves that their wages were too low, and there would be ^no security for employers. The same is to be said "^or like reasons, of all workmen, tradesmen and< merchants, who may wish to have recourse to self- comperteation on the pretext of the price being too low at which |:)iey have engaged their services or sold their wares. ° o "''o "I s^y^y generally speaking; for not a few writers except the following; (i) If a servant is compelled by force or intimidation to agree to an unfair wage, (2) If he agrees to it, driven to necessity,oonly, however, in cases wher^ his employer could not faiHy have obtained others at the s^me price, or did' not take him ® o , o t> o o • ••. or 'o „ do eo If* o n * d It ■ fa; i o o id ■ id f- )o Id rs hd e. m O o'i, c3»o ^ • ^ J O'- 00 |cO r O ^iti^d •onef tekei^ /lojhiifg^^ore^ ^^h^rt. what> is due ; and sa'dBfe* is°°ik)t /under tMigati<5n tpi^ , • Tl!e reason |ts,°thaf, Itfier this compons^tioi^, e^ualitytis ©^ ""^established! J hav^ said, /"^r jf; because ^scwifefime^*^® • •»* an injury might result to the 4ebtQi- frornthe;lp»§®^ * • of some certain article, *?.^.v ahorse, b^^ some other o^/? ^« 4j eVaiuable object. J'"'- ' '^ o' ^•''^r u"^' "Answer II.— In general there /'is'nd gra,ve "siiik; ° ©^ be.yc*use no scandal results from it ordinarily>nb^°any° o q" gra^^e disorder for the stafe. ^ "Answer III. — T6ere°is no^in, ifoit \s difticuk to^o have recourse" to° die judge, if ther^ is °dan^er° of pScandal^ or extraordinary expeiS«c§,£tc.,lDe^ause therf., tiie r^pourse is morally impossible." (Cpmpend., yol. coI.,^p. 423-5.) f27). fc(28) " One night Tytirus' donkey is carried away by a thief ; but he escapes into tlie neighbouring fields and there causes certain damage. For this Tytirus is ■ punished j but, filled with indignation, he compensates himself for it. ^ ° " Question. — Ought Tytirus to have accepted the sentence ; or had he a right to cortipensate himself in this case ? o ^ c "Answer.— In this case the presumption ^f theojyiidge is false, Tytirus having committed no fault, not even oiudicial'. He "could not be Bunished for his lack°of © • o o o •• • • • • • * • • • 40 ^ • THE E^D ftlSTIFIES THE MEANS. ^ •• . diligenceJ^bftrtuSe he was not able to^prc^nj^ the * fe^fimag^,%hicl^ar]^in »cbway^e iijfbuteito him. If' ^"^ ' • • *lfc ^as condemr^d on pre^giption of*neg^^t, whfljji ^ ^ ** A ^^ J^e has iffet committed ana coulS n8t commit, theJudc^ • .• %ient is f^.Js^ and^ff^t^iall) imjust. Therefoi^. a^fa; • • ©*i Q^. O o © © • o ®g|s Tytirus is°cQXj8^-nedQtl^(^mattenwasQbe^bed hi? con'^q} and he m .^ be absoWe^. There i.^no vvror^ •dpmg on°hi^ part^andohe ha^ the right % take cSmp6fe^tioft» (Cas|3,Vcpl. L, p^!^|6-7^'0 (28^ o Q (:^)^^Marci?^, cfo servant, attending &> the w'SrK of his charge, ore'^fes.^nmtentioSmllyPa crt^stal \f5ise. His ^ mastep, prd^ok^d, rej^ains from nfe wages ^h)e value^f tfi'e^vase. ^arc^J^ incJpmnifiesliirAself secretly. ® " Questi6^ri.-2,Could^ Marcus thus raaKe Qp secretins for the rQ<^ct9©n°on°his wa^^ ? o © @ "Answer.— He i^nofe to be conderr\ge4ifQhe has had f^courserto'^*^cret c6nk)ensation fe ind(^nifyjikflsel^^ o o © © o G^ P ® O o c- c ° in the ^se of°th^invo]u'?itaryi)reaki'ftg93f the vasco^ ^wfthoift oomiftittfng any^fheofogicil fa\ijt f because no ^ne is obh'ged to ^ep^ir °an invohifitary misfortune^ ,0 o o^coi o o o o o o o o o n o o oo o m o \w excgpt in'^^SDcivil court, after the^udge's senteri^ce, as we shalbsee lat^ about unjust condemnation. There- 'fof^,^the' n:>^ster has no right oto exact reparation, ancb ° thtb sei^aftt is warranted Jn takinc: back what 'he was O o " o o Q not t^bliged to pay ; for Marcus could only be obliged by^liis conscience or by a judgment. Now, there is no o judicial obligation in this hypgthesis, tliere naving Deen no ju^gm(^nt, nor any obligation of conscier^effbr orje 3 is obligedoin consequence to make restitution or>)y o 6 o. cP when the fault has been committed with guilty o intension." (Cases, Vol. I., pp. 249-50.) (29)^ 01 o o o „.-„„,,., cu. o o o Q o O O "mimms tSR o 10 ® © J n O o PROVUN^ROJV^EStr IT AUTHORS. ^ IS hece ma(ie to justify means for whiclj ^ law would very proper^ send Tytirus a^d Marcus tct)tlft pegitentiary. No civilized government could aflfordoto*^ allow every man to beconll: a court of appeal in his oVn rase, and practically carry out his Gown judgments in tms fashion. This is the advice i^pposed to (pt given by a Christian minister to a o (J o o o ^0 o o o o member of his flock) cDne is remptea to wonder whether the good father had ever hc^ard of the Sermon on^theOMountQ)r of the Eighth Comftand- ^O O o On. g^ent. oo . ^ o © "^ O FORGEl^Y. o O o (30)0'' What are we tO(^hink of those who make up O o o a ^o o or adter deeds, liotes, ^r receipts ta replace lost docu-. O o r-N O o o (jTients or to ^^r^tecfo their mst right? Answer I.— Tfife^ is at least a venial sin of^lying, because the document, ovvhatever it may be, is different from that ^hich is valid in law. '•Answer If? — 6ne (Js occa^'or.ally liable to sin grid^ously against charity toward oneself 6y running o o .0 o o in danger of suffering a very severe punishment if o o o forgery was detected. ''Answer bPI. — One sins by no means^gainst com .0 .. o. .. o o , ., . °. o o mutative justice, and o to ©lak^any restitution o "/ o consequently is not compelled Dn." (Lompend^ vol. II., p^ 14.) o • o ® o o (30).% " .^o r ° ° ^ n As is very frequ^tly trueowith Guf)^ the case best illustrative ef this cftily makes the inattB" worse, for if Ris that ofoa willomaoe in favour of one out of the natural succession, wherq-^ the original written docu- o ment constitutes the on^ ground of his right. o o o u o o u o o o o o o n ^ o O O o 42 _ • THE ENlf JUSTIFIES Tllf: MEANS, (31) '* Chrysanthus on his deathbed hands to* AdriSiPa j^lograph will in his favour. After ine ^death of Chrysanthus, the haf^ Adrian reads o^r the will with deliglit, then plaoe^it on 9i table, wmle he goes to dIow the fire. Unluckily the door op^ns biO some way, and tne draugh^throws the sheet of paper in*the fire. Adrian hastens and endeavours to save it from^ffe flames, but without success. It is entirely consumecL. Adrian would haup fallen into d^pair but for a clever tliou^ht which came into his head.® He imitates perfectjej^ the de^d marrs handwri^ng ♦id signature, and thereb3A>jreconstructs the will. q ■'Qufl>tion I. — Did Adrian sm, and how, by forging the will? © ^ ^ "Question II. — Is hcJDOund,Jn jastioL to make restitution to the natural heirs^ O Answer to^st quesiion. — (a.) Aarian cannot be excused from a sitr. against truth, because he asserts ^hat the existing docurOentJsCilY^ original will, and that it is sign(5& by the testator, which is untrue. I^r the same reason, anyone would si ix against trulli wh(9 o should make use of such a document concocted by another. Compare Lacroix ana others &ainst9everal who deny that this is contmry to truth, inasn&uch as in supplying a lost document he does not intend to deceive out only to secure his oj^n. lo any case, the falsehood is not ^t^re than a veniS sin j)er "se. "(2.) Adrian is not perse to be excused from a grave sin^gainst charity towards himsey, since he exposed himself to the risk of a very severe penalty as a forger." (Adrian's only thought here, according to Gury, should ^O O Q, O o 00 (J o © o o I o Q to« 'O e o I o >er ve Ay lir id.O ng P e O O ke be rts nd O O hS) o by as to he O ve ed r." Id or Plft)VEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS.^ ^ 43 be, \}jhetl^r he would be punished for tbrgery.) "An exception maybe'^made if he did not think of that ^ danger. * % " • , " (3.) He can hardly be excused from a mortal sin a^nst legal justice, which prohibits all forgery iinder the severest j|^n"ties, because, although it mjures no one, this is declared unlawful, and is rigidly prohibited, ®so as to avoid occasional of frauds. Some, however^ h<^ that tms is not a mortal sin. (See Lacroix.) "Answer to 2nd question. — No ; as, naving^Deen appointed legitimate heir through a valid will, he *^therefore imiSediately after the death of the testator, evidently acquired a c^tain and strict right to the in|^ritance. Now, this right, once acquired, cannot be lost by the destruction of the deed, but only by a . v(%Lntary assignment, or a legal transfer of ownershjjp. Consequently AdriSi has not lost h'^ righ^ Is the right in itself, or the strict right, burnt and reduced to icTshes, like the paper title which is the proof of it ? Not at air ^ Now, if Adrian has a strict right to the inheritance, q he cannot be acting unjustly by using such means, although they may be unlawful, in order to secure his rights, and he does not wrong tSe other relatives, if Q by any device he can preven^^ them from inheriting, as they have no right to it." (This teaches that forgery is right.) ® @ ® " It may be objected that the natural #ieirs ^e hindered by this fraud from having recourse to the courts, since, apart from this pretended ^tle, AdriOTi ^ would have been dispossessed qf the inheritance by a I D I» , 44 ; * 111 J D © THE #ID JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. judiciaL sentence. By ^ they are hindered from appealing to the c§urts, and so are injured m their right# # • ^ '* Answer. — A distinction must be made. I grant they are injifred in their supposed right, but not in their true and strict right. For thou^ they hav^a right to make Adrian prove his claim, not bein^^ound to take his word for it, this arises only from their honest belief in tneir own claim or from erroiu Though they would be ^ting justlj as to the form, in reality they would be wrong in appealing to the courts. If any of them had actually seen the genuine will before it was destroyed, would he have been able afterward to impugn it with a good conscience?" (That is, the forgery might be tcfl^ ^kil fully done to be detected.) "Hence the difference between this case and the preceding ones. ^In tl#s Adrian has a certain right from a valid will ; but in the other the legatees, had only a probable right ^lom an informal will, and destroyea the probable right of the other heirs by fraud." (Cases, Vol. I., pp. 363-4.) (31). To all intents and purposes foi-^ery is here justified as a means of obtaining what %ne believes to be his just rights. About the only sin in the whole business is the danger of being found out and sent to the penitentiary. . CO-OPERATION. (32) " Question I. — Can a servant, through fear of death or mutilation, put his shoulder under his master when entering a window for immoral purposes ? PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 45 I "Answer. — Yes; according to the rnore probable opinion, since he d^^s not perform an act intrinsically bad. So Liguori. But he is bound to leave his master's employment afterwards, if he has reason to fear anything of this kind again. The same solution holds in all similar cases. " Question II. — Can a servan4|open the door of the house to a prostitute? "^nswer. — Most writers say yes, only if there is any one else who would open it, if he did not." (Would one be justified in doing a wrong because some one else might do it ?). " This circumstance makes the co-operation*ufficiently remote. " Several, however, contend that it is never lawful to open the door to a prostitute, and base their view on Prop. 51, condemned by Innocent 5Q. (even the Pope's decisions are evaded or explained away): iffl'kat a Severn ( 7a/io, by yieldirig his shoulders^ knoiMngly aids his master to enHkr a zvindoiv for immoral purposes ^ and se^i'es his ends repeatedly by carryiiig a ladder^ opening the door, or the like, does not sin mortally, if he does it from fear of serious injury, eg., that of being maltreated by his master, regarded with displeastire, or dismissed ^om his employment. But these words, openvig the door, must clearly be understood of opening the door of some one else's house by force, as appears from the context. Besides, this proposition is deserving of condemnation, because it permits co-operation even for a very sligh^eason, namely, lest the servant should be regarded with displeasure. "In cities where, for the sake of avoiding a greater ^ Mi 46 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. evil, money-lenders and prostitutes are allowed to live, 4t is lawful to let houses to them, if other tenants are ^ nor to be had, or if^it is easy for them to obtain other houses (!); unless, however, .the prostitutes should grAtly annoy honest neighbours, or on account of the situation of the house greater opportunity^hould be afforded for sin. "Question III.— Can a servant, by reason of his place, saddle his masters horse when going out for an immoral purpose^r accompany him ? "Answer.— It does not appear to be uiflawful, if he ♦ %nly saddles his horse, because then^he hardly co- -j operates in the sin any nifcre than by opening the door to a prostfiute. But, unless threatened with serious injury, it would not be right for him to accompany his master where the sin is to be perpetrated, because this ^ is a ij|ore intimate co-operation. "It is not lawful, moreover, for a servant to accom- pany his masf er, if his eagerness thereby is increased, as S. Liguori says. But a servant is to be excused when he is not certain of his master's evil purpose. " Question tV. — Is it lawful for a servant to carry presents to a prostitute ? "Answ(^. — No; at least not without grave cause; for as these presents are apt^to stimulate lust, the co- operation is very close. So writers generally. S. Liguori in fact considers this intrinsically evil, because it necessarily increases the passion. But the con- trarj^ opinion of Viva and others is more probable.j (Probabilism comes in everywhere.]^ PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 47 " Question V. — Can a servant ©carry his master's love-letters to a»concubine ? « "Answer. — No; not without very grave reasons. According to S. Liguori it is never lawful, even for the greatest reason, because, as he says, it is intrinsi- cally evil. But Vogler and others hold the opposite. Anyway a servant is not bound to ask what may be in the letters. • "What is<*ere said with regard to servants applies also to other inferiors or dependents, t'.^.,dto children, wives, etc." (Compend, Vol. I., pp. 238-9.) (32). «• The answer to the second of these questions is interesting as showing the skill with which many •Jesuit writers manage to dodge even the papal thunderb^^lts. By means of some subtle distinction, si^^i as the Pope in his simplicity probably never dreamed of, they preserve as much freedom as they want, while appearing to bow most respectfully to his authority. It is not much to be wondered at that they should be even less scrupulou§ in repelling the charges brought against them w.th much greater directness by Jansenist and Protestant writers. Presuming upon the ignorance of the public, they boldly deny them, and with well-simulated indigna- tion demand proofs from their accredited writers. ¥(ft one of th^se charges the proofs are here given at length. The authors cannot be repudiated, and we believe that any unprejudiced reader who care- fully examines these passage will be forced to come tobthe conclusion, as we have, that the Jesuits hold, teach, and therefore may also practise, the maxim 48 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. s that the end justifies the means, in the rcnse that it is lawful to do evil that good may come. It is true they do not formally lay down the maxim in the philosophical portion of their writings as a recognized principle of ethics. They are too wary for that. Nor when they have been attacked have any of their apologists defended the principle or been willing to confess that they held it. On the contrary, they always repudiate it with indignation. It is true also that in their writings there are many passages which teach the very opposite of what is thus imputed to these authors. Such passages are especially abundant in Gury, and are emphasized as if he felt the necessity of furnishing material to rebut this very charge. More than once he says plainly and decidedly : " Evil is never to be done that good may coined But consistency is not one of his virtues, and he shows great deftness in evading the spirit of his own principles. Compc.re, for instance, the two following passages, which occur within twenty pages of each other. " It is never lawful to perpetrate evil, however slight, to obtain any good whatever, for according to the common maxim taken from the Apostle's words (Rom. III., 8), evil is never to be done that good may come. Thus it is not lawful to lie, even to save a man's life." (Gury, Compend., vol. I., p. 99.) (33). " If anyone lies to deliver his neighbour from deadly peril, thinking he is bound to do so out of charity, he does a good act ; and if he does not tell PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 49 the lie, he sins against charity." (Compend., vol. I., p. 120.) (34). Or take the following case, which shews that these evasions are not mere slips. " Monica, an innkeeper's wife ... in order to prevent quarrels and blasphemies, to which her hus- band is prone, is in the habit of fibbing to him. Experience has shown her that this is quite necessary to keep peace in the household. "Question. — Can we approve of this method of keeping her husband civil ? "Answer. — No. For a lie can never be lawful, not even to obtain a great benefit, since evil must not be done that good may come. And a lie is something intrinsically evil from its very nature, although it may be only a venial sin. But, although Monica must abstain carefully from lying, she is not obliged to tell the whole truth to her irascible husband." (Gury, Cases, Vol. I., pp 11-12.) (35). It is just this letting down of the law of right and wrong in detail, that forms the gravamen of the charge against the Jesuits. With great virtuousness they lay down rigorous principles, and then proceed to explain them away in dealing with actual cases, by adding one extenuating circumstance after another, or ad- mitting one exception after another, until the whole character of the principle is changed, and the laxity desired is obtained. It may be said that the quotations given do not imply that the principle is held as one of universal application, or, in other words, that the end always D ( \ '. - i« ) ill llil HE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. justifies the means. But no one in his senses ever accused them of teaching that. What they do teach is, that the end ofte^i justifies the means. These quotations fairly interpreted, teach that jail-breaking, bribery, equivocation, mental, reservation, even on oath, stealing, defamation, slander, assumption of a false character, murder, homicide,co-operation, forgery, fraud, and other like things, may be lawfully resorted to, whenever the persotial advantage or necessity is great enough, or, in other words, whenever the temptation is strong enough. As practically everyone must judge for himself when the reason is sufficient, this is about all the liberty anyone wants who cares to preserve his respectability, and there is little room for the further extension of the principle. If they had confined it to those well-recognized cases in which, from their neces- sary publicity, there is some guarantee against the abuse of it, such as is found in war, or in the adminis- tration of justice by public officials, the world would never have heard anything of this immoral principle of the Jesuits. But when they practically brought the use of it within the reach of every private individual whose conscience was elastic enough to employ it, and under the teaching of p'-obabilism, every honest thinker saw that there was danger. As their most recent writings show that they have not repudiated the principle in detail, whatever they may do in general, that danger still continues wherever they are allowed to teach. And it is largely because of this that, whenever public sentiment fairly seizes the real character of their teaching, it everywhere refuses to PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 51 tolerate it. Hence their frequent expulsions from so many countries even in recent times. They are in the habit of claiming that the treatment they have received, and the suspicion with which they are regarded, are wholly unwarranted by anything in their teaching, which is simply that of the Roman Catholic church in general. If this be true of that whole church, the charge would be a still more serious one. It is true that they have succeeded very largely in imposing their views on the Roman Catholic church, notwithstanding much open opposition and much more inward dislike. But it is also true that these views have never yet been heartily accepted by the great mass of the more moderate clergy and people, however it may be in the future. And the world still continues rightly to see in the Jesuits the great cham- pions of principles, which, morally as well as politically, are calculated to undermine the foundations of the social fabric, if carried to their legitimate conclusions. They may make friends for a time by artfully con- cealing the worst of these principles, but sooner or later they are found out, and, notwithstanding the high standard of personal character which they generally manage to preserve, are treated as the social criminals they really are. PROBABILISM. In order to estimate aright the amount of laxity allowed by the teaching of Gury and other modern Jesuit writers, one has to take into account also their doctrine of probabilism. It will have been noticed II 52 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. that they frequently quote the opinions of other authors. Some of these they approve fully ; others they approve, only with some reserve, as probable. These last are always more or less lax, and should be avoided. But, according to them, even a probable opinion may be acted upon with a good conscience by anybody who chooses to adopt it, and a confessor is bound to absolve a penitent who claims to have acted upon such an opinion, though he may believe it wrong. This is clear from the following passage in Gury. > "Question. — Can or ought a Confessor absolve a penitent who wishes to follow an opinion, probable indeed, but contrary to what he himself holds? "Answer. — Yes, if the penitent holds an opinion really probable with full conviction, because he has the right to follow a really probable opinion, nor has any confessor the right to impose his own opinions on him, even if they seem to him to be more probable, for the confessor is not a judge of the opinions which the penitent is bound to follow, but only of his spiritual state, as is plain from the Canons of Trent, Session XIV., Chap. 5. This is the opinion of S. Liguori and others generally." (Gury, Compend., vol. I., p. 140.) (36), So that it is ihe wider circle of liberty instead of the narrower that is practically granted to each individual. He has only to plead that certain authors believe this or thst means allowable, even though others may deny ii:. and he can claim full absolution for using it. For him the end may justify all the -^-^— ^-K,.,-^-.^- PROVEN FRdk JESUIT AUTHORS. 53 means that have ever been regarded as allowable by the la^cest school of Jesuit writers, except such as have been formally condemned by the Papal See. How much that means is apparent from the quotations that have been given. The charge which is here brought against the Jesuits, and which they repel with admirably simulated indig- nation, namely, that "the end justifies the means," that evil may be done with a good object, is not founded merely upon the writings of their theologians, the maxim itself is embodied in a paragraph of the charter of the Society, the constitutions themselves, sanctioned by the Pope. It is here cited textually in the original Latin, also translated, from the ''Constitu- iiones SocietaUs Jesul' dated Rome. 1570, 5th ch., 6th part. The principle is here recognized and enforced with the authority, unbounded over the Society, of the constitution, the General of the Order (who stands to the members in the place of God), and of the Pope. . The doctrine is there laid down, that in certain circumstances it is not only right, but the bounden duty of every member of the order, to do evil, knowing it to be such, in order that good (pu^rely imaginary good) may come. "Part VI. — That the Constitutions involve no obligation to commit sin. "Chap. V.— Although the Society desires all its Constitutions, Declarations, and Order of Life to be observed according to our Institute,in no wise deviating in any matter, it is, nevertheless, fitting that all its members should be secured, or at least aided, against o 54 o o THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. o H '' III o o falling into the snare of any sin, which niay arise from othe force of its constitutions or injunctions. It seems good to USD in the Lord that, excepting tne express vow whereby the^' Society is bound to the Supreme Pontiff for theotime being, and the three other essential vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience, no constitu- tions, declarations, or any order of living, can involve obligation to sin, mortal or venial, unlesi the Superior com^nand them in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, or in virtue of holy obedience ; which sfiall be done in those cases or peisons wherein it shall be judged that it may be dorfe, in ofder to contribute greatly to the tarticular good of each sifigly^ or that of all; and instead of the fear of offence, let the love and desire of all perfection prevail, that the greater glory and praise of Christ, our Creator and Lord, may follow." (37). Here, then, is the principle explicitly laid down, that when the Superior is of opinion that a sinful act may prove advantageous, then the Jesuit who is com- manded to commit it must do so. But those who are unacquainted with the Jesuit system may naturally ask : " Has he not the option of refusal ? " To that question the Constitutions themselves supply a com* plete answer. First, candidates who do not appear likely to be obedient, who do not subject their own opinions and judgment, are to be dismissed, in accordance with Part H., Chapter 2, of the Constitu- tions. Next, the twenty-third and fourth rules for the training of probationers run thus : " It is especially conducive to improvement, and very necessary, that all should yield themselves up to o m PROVEN FROM JESUIT XuTHORS. 55 o o o o perfect obedience, recognising the Superjpr (whoever he may be) as in the place of Christ our Lord, and regarding him with inward reverence and affection, not merely obeying him in ^e outward execution of his injunctions fully, promptly, vigorously, and with fitting humility, without excSses and murmurings, though he may commafid things difficult and. repug- nant to tfieir feelings ; but shall also strive to have inwardly resignation of tneir own will and judgment, and the) are to accustom themselves, not to consider who it is whom they obey, but rather Him for Whom and to Whom they obey in all things, which is Christ the Lord." (Const. III., i.) Th'xdly, the explanation oi the scope and force of the vow of obedience contains the following clause, in perfect accordance with the whole context : " And let each be persuaded that they who live under obedience ought to suffer themselves to be moved and guided by Divine Providence through their Superiors, as if they were a dead body, which allows itself to be moved any whither and handled anyhow ; or as the staff of an old man, which serves him who holds it in his hand, wherever and for what- ever purpose he chooses to employ it." (Const. VI., i.) And as a process mpst skilfully contrived for breaking down and subjugating the will is brought unremittingly to bear upon the probationer during his protracted noviciate, it may be readily understood that there is no probability of disobedience to any command of a Superior, whatever be its moral character. 56 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. O Father Drummond, of Winnipeg, has called in© question the correctness of Dr. Littledale's translation of the above quotations from the Jesuit constitutions. Without entering into the discussion between these gentlemen, I may appropriately reproduce here' some of Dr. Littledale's expressions in his reply to Father Drummond, and leave the reader to judge as to the knowledge of the Latin of the one trained in the classics of the best ages of Roman literature, and of the other in the jumble of words — the Jesuit Latin — which is not and never was the language of any people. Father Drummond also charges Dr. Littledale with being guilty of " Deliberate mistranslations or falsifica- tion of the Latin," and of "being skilfully disingenuous." Here, too, we must leave the reader to judge between the Jesuit and the tnglish divine. " I adhere," says Dr. Littledale, " to the correctness of^my translation." "Which alone agrees with the Latin idiom." " The hopeless untenability of Father , Drummond's gloss." " Sheer nonsense, and I need not wa^te my time over it." The doctrine taught in the constitutions " I allege is definitely to be found in the writings of such well-known Jesuit authors as Busembaum, Wagemann and Gury; and that it has been so persistently acted on by the Society as to earn their expulsion from several [all] states of Europe, as dangerous to society." CLEMENT'S BRIEF OF SUPPRESSION. A few clauses from the brief of Clement XIV. for the suppression of the Jesuits may be fitly cited here o o o TTT V o o fROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 57 e in conclusion. >he Pope first cites a number of precedents for the suppression of religious societies which had ceased to edify, and after saying that he "has omitted no ^re,no pains, to arrive at a thorough know* ledge of the origin, progress and actual condition of the company commonly called the Company of Jesus," goes on to charge them with practising " idolatrous ceremonies," with employing maxims "which the Holy See has with reason proscribed as scandalous and " manifestly contrary to good morals," while the results of these maxims as put into practice are declared to have been "dangerous seditions, tumults, discords, dissension, scandals, which, weakening or entirely breaking the bonds of Christian charity, excited the faithful to all the rage of party hatreds and enmities," so that the Kings of France, Spain, Portugal and Sicily found themselves reduced to the necessity of expelling and driving from their states, kingdoms and provinces these very Companions of Jesus, persuaded that there remained no other remedy to such great evils, and that this step was necessary in order to prevent Christians from rising against one another and from massacring each other in the very bosom of our common Mother, the Holy Church. For these and other reasons stated in the brief, it is declared to be designed not for any mere temporary suspension of the society, but for its eternal suppression and annihilation, not to be rescinded in aftertime by any one or upon any grounds. \i bS THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. BISHOP STROSSMAYER'S INDICTMENT. We cannot close these quotations better than by giving the burning words of the great Stross- mayer, bishop of Bosnia and Servia, addressed to the y6/^ cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops and bishops, titular and real, who composed the Ecumenical council at Rome in 1869. The Civilta Cattolica, the Papal organ, edited by the Jesuits, had published 2nd Oct, two months before the council was to meet (9th Dec, 1869), "that the bishops had not been summoned to Rome in order to discuss, but in order to approvfe of all the propositions which would be made in the name of the Pope." " Consider well," my honourable brethren," Bishop Strossmayer exclaimed to the assembled prelates, " the situation in which these men (the Jesuits) stand. It if' they who initiate and determine all the proceed- ings of the council. Consider the danger to which the church must be subject when it takes its teaching from the Jesuits, as their doctrines are in contradiction to history^ to the Fathers of the Churchy to the word of God, to everything^ in short, that is held most sacred by true Christians!' " The end justifies the means." This is one of those condensed forms of expression which take possession of the English ear. " The. end sought to be attained justifies or sanctifies the means necessary or chosen for the accomplishment of the destined purpose." Some of the chief Jesuit Latin phrases are : PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 59 "Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita." (Busembaum's medulla, Frank., 1653.) " Cui licitus est finis, etiam licent media." (Idem). '* Cui conce.s.sus est finisj concessa etiam sunt media ad finem ordinata." (Layman's Theologia moralis, Munich, 1625.) " Cui enim licet finis, ei et media permissa sunt." (Voit, Wursburg, i860.) When we render into English the Jesuit Latin, we are usually met with the objection that the words have another mea,ning, which at once suggests to us the dicta of these fathers : — . "It is allowable to make use of words of double meaning." (De Cardinas.) "Thou canst take refuge in dissimulation in such cases " (as those named, no matter what) " without being guilty of the least trans- gression." (The much admired Father Castropalos.) " To this view of mine," he adds, " our most learned theologians agree." " One asks whether it is allow- able to take an equivocative oath, a secret mental reservation being kept concealed. I answer, yes, only the chief thing is that the answer must be so framed that another interpretation may be given it, if found necessary!" (The greatly admired Filliutius.) JESUIT LATIN. Jesuit Latin is not the Latin of Crispus Sallustius, Titus Livius, Cornelius Tacitus, or Marcus TuUius Cicero. It is not even a dialect of the Latin, like the dialects of the English in the outlying counties of the kingdom ; or of the French in the arrondissements of , 60 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. 11 ^1 1 that republic or in the parishes of Quebec ; it is not even a cognate language of the Latin, as the Portu- guese is of Spanish, or the Chaldee was of the Hebrew. It is merely a concatenation of phrases put together by rule. The Latin language is not the vernacular tongue of the Jesuits : it is a dead language. We have specimens similar to the Jesuit Latin every day from those who think in one tongue and try to express themselves in another. The pupils in the Jesuit schools are trained too much, if not chiefly, in Jesuit Latin instead of in the grand old classic literature of that language, and taught many words and phrases which, like " media " in the sentences given above, are not classical Latin. I • THE JESUITS AND THEIR MORALITY. Thf case against the Jesuits, says Dr. Littledale, differs in one most important and significant particu- lar from the whole of the controversy directed against , other parts of the Roman Church, whether doctrinal or practical. In every other case the accusations and strictures are formulated by non-Roman Catholics, with perhaps some occasional help from disaffected papists, who may therefore be not unreasonably excepted against as more or less prejudiced and unfair witnesses ; while either the facts on which the <::harges are based, or the conclusions drawn from those facts, are strenuously denied by the whole remaining body of the church. But in the case of the Jesuits all this is fundamen- tally different. Their chief accusers are not Protes- PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 61 tants, but Roman Catholics, and they, moreover, no mere disaffected members of the Roman Church, but whole nations of that faith, and even a Pope himself When, therefore, we find that they have been pronounced dangerous and even noxious to society and morals, have been expelled by every nation pro- fessing their religion on these precise grounds, and finally suppressed on the same grounds by a Papal Brief, we are compelled to believe that the evil is one which is inherent and essential in the very nature of the Jesuit Institute, and not capable of being cured, or so much as abated, by any conceivable reforms within the Society itself, short of a complete aban- donment of the laws which have hitherto governed its being. LAYMAN'S NOTORIOUS PASSAGE. The maxim that the end justifies the means occurs variously worded, but with identical meaning, in several Jesuit authors of repute. It was first used by Layman in his Tkeologia MoraliSy and runs : — " Cui concessus est finis ^ concessa etiam sunt media ad finem ordinata,'^ — that is, " To whomso an end is permitted are permitted also the means appointed for that end." Fini subordinata is the reading iq the Munich edition of 1625, published by Layman himself. EXAMPLES OF JESUIT TEACHING. Some examples of Jesuit teaching on truthfulness may be usefully given. In the " Opus Morale in ' 62 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. Praecepta jJecalogi " of Tliomas Sanchez (Antwerp, 1624), there is a long discussion on the nature and obh'gation of oaths, and on the use of equivocation, which Sauchez reduces to a set of rules for the guidance of his readers. The first of these rules is : "It is not a lie to use ambiguous words, which the swearer employs in one sense and the hearers, with him to whom the oath is made, understand in another, et/en if there he no just cause." " The second r jle is that it is not a lie to use perfectly unambiguous words with a meaning misunderstood by the hearer, if there be 6ome attending circumstances qualifying them, which the hearer, if especially on the alert, might have noticed or taken into account." One of the illustrations given is that of swearing that you have not seen a certain person, meaning thereby not to deny having ever seen him, but only the having seen him recently or in connection with the matter then in hand ; but the rule is shown to cover much more ground than this kind of occasion. The third rule goes much beyond this, and lays down that unam- * bigvious words may be sworn to so as to deceive the hearer, provided the sv/earer secretly adds some qualifying words unheard. Thus, he may swear, " I did not do so and so," adding " to-day " under his breath. Another of these rules is that a man put upon his oath by an unofficial interrogator is at liberty to swear falsely in reply, because a private person, having no right to put anyone upon oath, is not entitled to a true answer. . Even a judge may be PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 63 treated in the same way, if there be any informality in the form of his interrogation, as the technical irregularity justifies the witness (or the accused, as the case my be) in returning a false answer. [In this case a witness might refuse to swear, but would not be justified in swearing falsely.] : The definition of a "just cause" supplied by Sanchez is that it applies to all cases affecting one's bodily safety, honour, or property, to the accomplish- ment of any virtuous act, and to the concealment of the truth when it is not expedient to disclose it. Suarez, a still more famous and authoritative Jesuit author, sets himself to refute the following maxim of St. Isidore of Seville, who was a strong opponent of lying in all its forms : "With whatever craftiness of words anyone may swear, nevertheless God, who is the witness of the conscience, takes it as he to whom the oath is sworn understands it. He becomes twice guilty who takes God's names in vain, and snares his neighbour by deceit." (Sent, 11-31.) And the manner in which Suarez succeeds in setting it aside is by saying that it does not hold good as just stated : that the true maxim is that God under- stands the oath as he who relies on it ought to have understood it, not as he actually did understand it^ so that if by reason of ignorance or any fault of his own he misunderstands the oath, and does anything in consequence of such misunderstanding, and relying on the oath as his security, the swearer of the oath is in no way morally bound to perform it in the sense 11 64 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. which it seemingly bore. [What obliquity of moral perception.] Opus df Statu et Virtute Religionism Moguntiae, >62.3, Vol. II., Lib. iii., De Juramento. Not dissimilar to this is the opinion of Scavini, a casuist whose moral theology was dedicated to Pius IX. He states the case as follows : " He who pro- mises something on oath, but without any intention of binding himself, gravely sins, they say more commonly, seeing that it seems grave irreverence to adduce God as witness, and not mean to be tied down by His testimony. There are, however, some who teach that it is only a venial sin ; and, indeed, very probably, for there cannot be any oath without the intention of binding one's self, and thus the oath cannot be violated, and therefore there is only (!) the taking of God's name in vain." Tract V., disp. ii., cap. ii., art. iii. It is to be borne in mind that by a decree of the Council of Trent venial sins need not be confessed, and do not quench grace. (Sess. XIV., chap, v.) The statement of Busembaum, "Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita," and again, " Cui licitus est finis, etiam licent media," will be found in the edition of Frankfort, 1653, at pages 320 and 504. WAGEMANN ON MEANS AND ENDS. The edition of Wagrmann's " Synopsis Theologian: Moralis" consulted is that of Augsburg, 1762. A longer extract than that previously cited will best define his position on the relation of means and ends. " Is the intention of a good end rendered vicious PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 65 c J? by the choice of bad means? Not if the end itself be intended, irrespective of the means." Then the following example is given as an illustration : " Caius is minded to bestow alms, without at the time tak':.^ thought as to the means ; subsequently from avance he resolves to give the alms out of the profit of theft, ^ which he accordingly commits," and then Wagemann concludes that Caius is entitled to the merits of charity by reason of the alms so procured for dis- bursement. A few specimens of Jesuit teaching on various cases of conscience may be conveniently set down. "* ' est Cui in 504. COLLUSION OF BRIBED JUDGES. . " Is a judge bound to restore what he has received for an unjust sentence ? Some affirm that he is. , . The reason is that a judge cannot receive anything, either for a just or an unjust sentence. Nevertheless, he is bound to restore that which he has received for a just sentence, because the giver is accounted as having given it under compulsion since he had a right to the just sentence. But it is otherwise with him who has obtained an unjust sentence to which he had no right, for then the judge is not bound to restore until required by a judicial sentence to do so. (Honoratus Fabri, Apologeiicus Doctrince M oralis Societatis Jesu^ Anonymus contra Anonymum, c. 30, Cologne, 1672.) Question V. — " Is a judge bound to restore the bribe he has received for passing sentence ? . . . "Answer.— If he has received the bribe for passing an unjust sentence, it is probable that he may keep II TTWT ^^^W^ 1 ! n 1 1 66 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. it. . . This opinion is maintained and defended by fifty-eight doctors. (J. B. Taberna, Synopsis Theologice PracticcB, Pars. II., tr. ii., c. 31, Cologne, 1736.) " Is a judge bound to restore the bribe which he has received for passing judgment ? Answer. — If he has received it for a just sentence he is bound to restore it, because it was due on other grounds to the litigant, and he has thus got no value 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, etc., teach, because he was not bound to pronounce that unjust sentence. But this iiis action is beneficial to the litigant, 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 estimated at a price." (Lacroix, S. J., Theologia M oralis, Tom. IV., Lib. iv. De Judice, c. 3, art. 4, quaest. 268, num. 1498.) This book is a^i expanded edition of Busembaum. MURDER. " If A poisons wine and sets it before B, with intent to cause his death, and C, who is ignorant of the design, drinks it, being suffered so to do by A, lest the crime should be detected, then A is not guilty of C's murder, nor bound to make compensation for any injury that may follow from C's death, because A had no intention of killing C,did not foresee what happened, and was not bound to prevent it by exposing himself to danger by confessing his act." (Lacroix, Tom PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 67 III., Lib. iii., pars, ii., tr. 5, c. 2, dub. vi., quaest xlvi., num. 202). Ift another edition of Busembaum, published at Padua, the editor admits that Pope Alexander VII. condemned forty-five propositions in his work as contrary to Christian morality. Innocent XI. con- demned sixty-five more, and Alexander VIII. thirty- one in addition, thus making no fewer than a hundred and forty-one propositions false and dangerous in this single author. Here are a few articles: — " A monk or clergyman may kill a slanderer who is spreading, falsehoods about him, if he has no other way of defending his character." " A man charged with a legal crime may lawfully kill a false accuser, false witnesses, and a judge who he has reason to believe will condemn him unjustly." " A son may lawfully rejoice in the parricide com- mitted by him.self when drunk, if thereby he inherits great riches." " No one is bound under pain of mortal sin to make restitution of the product of a num.ber of small thefts, even if the aggregate amount be large." " It is probable that it is not a mortal sin to bring a false accusation to defend one's own right or honour, ' and if this be not probable, there is no such thing as a probable opinion in theology.' '* "A people commits no sin in refusing, even with- out any reason, to accept a law promulgated by the Sovereign." The number of similar quotations could be extended ad infinitum. 68 t:ie end justifies the means. THE SPIRIT OF THE PRECEPTS. FatherAiraut(proposition sur le cingqui^me precepte du Decalogue, p. 322) writes: — " One asks whether a woman may make use of means to obtain abortion. I answer, yes, if quickening has not taken place, and the pregnancy is not danger- ous. But even if there has been quickening already, it may be effected as soon as a conviction is arrived at that she must die by the birth. Under all circum- stances, however, a young person who has been led astray may do so, as her honour must be to her " (that is all she is to consider) " more precious than the life of the child." Again Father Airaut says: — " In order to cut short calumny most qui kly, one may cause the death of the calumniator, but as secretly as possible to avoid observation." ( The end justifies the mea?is.) The Jesuit Herreau dictated the following precept to his pupils at the college in Paris in 1641 : — " If any one by a false accusation should calumniate me to a prince, judge or other man of honour, and I can maintain my good name in no other way than by assassinating him secretly, I should be justified in doing so; moreover, I should be also justified had the crime of which I was accused been actually committed by me, though concealed under the veil of secrecy in such a way that it would not be easy to discover it through judicial investigation." The father seems here to impress on his pupils that the precept " cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 69 mt Hcita " should not be to them a dead letter in their intercourse with mankind. ' Father Escobar, likewise, in his moral philosophy (these fathers are partial to the term " moral " at the head of* their immoral precepts), published in 1655, teaches : — " That it is absolutely allowable to kill a man whenever the general welfare or proper security demands it." The great Hermann Busembaum in the work above quoted teaches the same doctrine: — " In order," he says, " to defend his life, preserve his limbs entire or save his honour, a son may even murder his father, a monk his abbot, and a ..^ojeot his prince." This last precept was put in force or attempted in every country of Europe. And this from one of the most distinguished and trusted theologians of the Jesuits, whose morality has been so highly prized that his works have run through more than 200 editions. " Cum finis est licitusl' etc. Father Francis Lamy enters into particulars (Vol. V. of his work, Disp. Nam. 148). I can give only a few of these, before coming to his conclusion, " It cannot be denied," he states, " that ecclesiastics and members of the monkish orders are compelled to maintain their honour, etc. ; if then, one of them loses the same he can neither be any longer useful. On that account, is it not an established truth (?) that ecclesiastics must save their honour at any price, even at that of the life of the person insulting them?" ** Yes," he answers, " they are indeed forced to remove Ml > ! 70 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. their calumniator, when by .this means alone they can make themselves secure; and this is especially the case when the loss of their honour would tend to the disgrace of the whole order." The word " remove " used here has been introduced from Jesuit" authors into Irish campaign literature. To commit murder is a novel way to save a priest's honour. An eye, it would seem, is had all through these didactic deliver- ances to the *' Company of Jesus," the aristocracy of the religious world, " Cut concessus est JiniSy concessa etiam simt media ad finem ordinatay (The great father Layman, Theologia moralis, Munich, 1625.) Father Henriques teaches the same doctrine under the significant heading of Summa Theologian Moralis (Venet 1600). " If an ecclesiastic," he says, " caught in adultery by the husband of a woman with whom he has a love affair, kills the man in order to defend his own life and honour, he is not only quite justified in doing so, but he is on that account not incapacitated from continuing the exercise of his ecclesiastical functions ! " " Is' the inteption of a good end rendered vicious by the choice of bad means ? Not if the end itself," he answers, " be intended irrespective of the means." Then he gives the illustration of Caius stealing the means to bestow charity, and says, " he is entitled to the merit of charity." This is taken from the moral philosophy (moral again) of the illustrious Jesuit, Wagemann, professor of morals (!) at the University of Innspruck (1762). The precept is coolly laid down by the famous in. lus PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 71 Sanchez: "That it is allowable to murder every one who advances an unjust accusation or bears false evidence against us, as soon as we are assured that a great injury will thereby be occasioned to us. Such actions cannot be properly designated as murders, but merely allowable defences (' an enim licet finis ei et media permissa sunt ')." The means used to accom- plish an end, justifiable in the mind of the actor, are also justifiable, although those means are murders. The great Benedict Stattler, before quoted, expresses himself most clearly (in his moral (!) philosophy, Vol. I., p. 337). " A real injury," he says, '* bringing disgrace on one, as, for instance, a horse-whipping or blow on the face, may be retaliated by the murder of the insulter, if it cannot be remedied in any other manner. Other grievous offences, especially calumni- ations, need not certainly be obviated in general by the murder of the offender, but is very allowable in the following cases: i. When there seems to be a certainty of the false calumniator finding credence among men. 2. If he cuts off from us thereby all means of saving our honour. 3. If we can remove, by the murder of our enemy, the danger of our suffering shame." " Quia ubi licitus est finis^ etiam licita sunt media per se indijferentia " (Gury) " the end justifies the means, although indifferent in themselves." What frightful consequences such doctrines bring in their train, as when Parson Riembauer adduced the great authority of Father Stattler's " Cliristian moral (!) philosophy," in justification, when he was tried for the murder in cold blood of Anna Eichstatter, because she y 72 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. threatened (" only threatened ") to make certain reve- lations about him. FALSEHOOD RECOMMENDED. Father Benedict Stattler, in his celebrated work, AU- gemeine Katholisch Christliche Sittenlehre (Munich, 1790, Vol. i), says: " It is still more allowable to bring the calumniator to universal notice by a disclosure of his secret trans- gressions or crimes, also to attribute a false crime to the calumniator is allowable for such object; if this shouM be the only sufficient, indispensable, or even serviceable means to deprive him of all belief and credit for his calumniation." Tamburin, in his Decalogus (Lib. 9, Cap. 2, §2), recommends reprisals against any one by whom one may have been insulted, not merely by means of judicial complaints, but by retaliation, and before ever^'thing, by detraction and calumny, to deprive such person of honour and good repute. A number of people will .soon be found who will swear to the calumny, as naturally men have much desire for wickedness, and thus the person insulting always falls into greater disgrace, until at length everyone points a finger at him. MORE OF BUSEMBAUM. Hermann Busembaum, one of the earliest and most noted Jesuit fathers who wrote on this subject, and the first to teach the doctrine in his medulla, " cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita " (p, 320, K in PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 73 Frankcoforti, 1653 ; " When the end is allowable or justifiable, the means are also allowable,"), says, in his Christian Theology, Book III., Partvi., Ch. i, that: " In the case of anyone unjustifiably making an attack on your honour, when you cannot otherwise defend yourself than by Impeaching the integrity of the person insulting you, it is quite allowable to do so." Busembaum proceeds to give a kind of a sliding scale of immorality, or morality, as the Jesuit would call it, in the retaliation ; " no greater insult," he teaches, " must be inflicted on the person than has befallen yourself, an exact comparison being made between your own worth and that of the insulter." If, he seems to mean, the insulted person, say a Jesuit priest, has a standing ten times higher than the insulter, the latter should be slandered ten times more than he slandered the priest ; and if the insulted should be the general of the order, there would seem to be no limits, within measurable bounds, of the amount of abuse which could, justifiably, be heaped upon the offender. It would be simply a bi^; scolding match. Leonard Lassius expresses himself more freely (LiJ). II., De Anst, Cap. 2). "Has any one," he writes, " made an attack on your honour, you may then at once make use of retaliation, and you have thereby nothing else to observe than to keep up a comparison as much as possible." ■ 74 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. THE JESUIT THEOLOGIANS. A word as to the fathers from whom the quotations are taken. The earliest of these, Layman, whose Theologia Morah's was published at Munich in 1625, was pronounced by Father Gury, one of their most distinguished writers, as " inter maximos theologise moralis doctores." Hermann Busembaum, whose medulla was published at Frankfort in 1653, was one of the first to propound tb*'^ very peculiar, not to say infernal, morality, " cu' '^ ..o est licitus, etiarn media sunt licita." His wow. ,ias oeen recentl}'- stamped with the authority of the \. ^ess of the " propaganda " at Rome. Father Voit's " moral theology " has gone through at least sixteen editions, the last in i860. Many of the other authorities are referred to in the notes above, where they are quoted. Will not the reader, in looking over these precepts, and the facts adduced in illustration, exclaim, with the student who has solved a problem in Euclid, gtiod erat demonstrandum? Is there an ingenuous mind who will not admit that " what was proposed has been demonstrated." In the trial of the Jesuit Father LaVallette, by the Parliament of France in 1760, the Prague edition of the Corpus Institutorum Jesu laid before the Parliament by the Jesuits in their defence, was ordered to be examined by a committee of learned men (Papists, be it remembered) ; on their report, Parliament declared the " institutions as through and through offensive," and caused twenty-three of their leading works to be PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 75 *> " torn up and burned at the foot of the great staircase at the palace of Parliament." From these works my space will allow me to give only brief samples of what a Parliament (infidel as the Romanists declare) called ** offensive through and through." They belong not to individuals merely, but to the whole society. Of Murder. The Jesuit Herreau dictated the fol- lowing precept to his pupils at the college in Paris in 1 64 1 (100 years after the order was established) : " If anyone, by a false accusation, should calumniate me, — and I can maintain my good name in no other way, I should be justified in assassinating him, — I should also be justified, had the crime of which I was accused been committed." Father Escobar, in his Moral Philosophy, taught : " That it is quite allowable to murder one bearing false (witness) against you, if such act compromises your life or your honour. It may be done also if the false witness has temporal good in view. One may secretly kill a calumniator if there are no other means of warding off the peril," (p. 414). Busembaum, Fathers Lamy, Henrique, the great Stattler, and others, express themselves most clearly to the same effect. Father Henrique (Summa Theologice M oralis) says : " If an ecclesiastic, caught in adultery by the husband of the woman, kills the man to defend his own life and honour, he is not only quite justified, but is not incapacitated from exercising his ecclesiastical functions." The famous Father Sanchez cooly asserts : " It is allowable to murder anyone who advances an unjust accusation, or bears i ;■■' 70 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. false witness against us." Parson Riembauer adduced Stattler's Christian Moral Philosophy d^s a justification when he murdered Anna Eichslatter in cold blood, because she threatened to make certain revelations about him. Surely the doctrine taught in this and the other quotations is, that " the end justifies the means." Of Theft. Father Pierre Aragon says : "It is allowable to steal in consequence of the straits in which one finds himself — iccretly or openly ; all things are common property according to the rights' of nature." Father Longuet says : " The theft must be done secretly." Father Escobar asserts that " the person robbed must be rich," therefore, " when thou findest a thief who intends to rob a needy person, thou must point out a rich one whom he may plunder." Father Paul Gabriel goes into particulars, and fixes the sum at three francs which one may steal at one time, but he may repeat the offence as long as he is. in want. From masters, too, ** servants may steal in compensation, etc." Of false oaths and perjury I have given quotations above. On Adultery the Jesuit Fathers are particularly rich and copious, but I can venture to give only brief extracts, in their least offensive outlines, of the dis- gusting details. Father Francis Zaver Fegeli (in his practical questions regarding the functions of a father confessor !) says : " He who leads a young maiden astray with her own consent is not guilty of sin^ because she is mistress of her own person, and can dispense her favours as she wishes." Fathers Escobar PROVEN FROM JESLIT AUTHORS. 77 aKt and Mcullet affirm the s.ime. If, says the latter, the transgression should remain a secret, the woman is not entitled to compensation. If any one enters into a guilty relation with a married woman, not on account of being married, but because she is beautiful, the sin of adultery is not chargeable, only an impropriety. Father Tamburini says ; " The woman gives her favours and the iBan the money, exactly as the host the wine and the guest the drink-money." On Abortion : Father Airaut taught that " a woman may make use of abortion to get rid of an immature child." On Fraud in Trade : Father Tolet taught that : " When one cannot sell his wine at the price he con- siders it worth, he can give smaller measure, and mix it with water, in siich a way, of course, that everyone believes he has the full measure, and that the wine is pure ! " I. " Positive Divine and human law is not binding in general, if its observation happens to cause serious injury or serious damage." Gi^ry : Compendium theol., mor. Ed. altera, Romae, 1869, I., §100, IV., page 80. " If an officer has been offended, he may at once turn upon the offender and retaliate ; /le must only not have the inte?ition of returning evil for evily but only to save his honour ; — non ut malum pro malo reddat, sed ut conservat honorem." Reginaldus : Vide Pascal ; Les Provinciales, Amsterdam, 1735, II., page 87. 78 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. " If the son of a merchant manages the estates of his father, and the lacter wants to give him no salary, then the son can take it secretly.". Thus Layman, Escobar, and others,. Escobar Liber theologiae moralis, Bruxellae, 165 1, page 163, 31. " Subjects who do not accept a law without sufficient reason commit no wrong if no great disadvantage ^ accrue to the State therefrom." Diana, Resolutionum Moi ilium, Tomus Primus, Res. II.* Antwerpiae, 1647. ^' Every citizen of an oppressed State is allowed to kill a tyrant. . . . The people have the right to revolt against a prince who, from being a shepherd of the people, has become a wolf" Ta?m''r^ Eisele Jes. Cath., page 1 50. "If a king tramples upon public laws and the holy religion, he mu3t not longer be tolerated. The easiest way to get rid of such a prince is that the States declare him to be an enemy to the Fatherland, who is to be killed v/ith the sword. Even every private man, who wishes to stake his life for the salvation of the State, has the right to do th'is." Mariana, De rege et Regis institutione, 1598, page 78 ; 51-64. '■' The third and most villainous kind of tyrants are the heretical kings ; every heretical king is necessarily a tyrant." Thu Rainold. See Eisele, Jesuitismus and Katholizismus, page 149 f " There cannot easily be another evil for a Catholic prince which v/ould be so serious that he, in order to avoid th's evil, could allow, or ratify under oath, free- dom of religion to his heretical subjects." Layman, I ! Ill PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 79 " Theologia Moralis," I. Fol, page 268, n. 4. Werce- bugi, 1748. " Freedom of religion must never be allowed; it is against the Divine commandment, it is dangerous to the state. It is not lu be commanded, approved or introduced by any prince or government, but is to be prohibited and suppressed by all means, if at all possible. But where this cannot be done conveniently without : rious disadvantage to the state, then it may be tolerated for some time; if this is the outcome of a treaty it must be kept. It is allowed to tolerate freedom of religion in order to avoid a greater evil. Beccanus." Opera omnia aliquot tractatibus posthumis aucta, [., pag. 362, quaest IV., Fol. Moguntice 1649. " A woman is resolved to take her life in order to avoid disgrace on account of pregnancy. May one advise her to artificially bring about an abortion ? Cardinal Nugo answers in the affirmative : if she can in no other manner be persuaded to desist." (Escobar Liber Theologize Moralis, Bruxellae 165 1, p. 126-64.) " A woman may bring about an artificial abortion by the means of baths, medicines, etc., only she must thereby not have the intention of directly endangering the foetus, but to preserve life and health. (Azorius, Institutionum moralium, Tom. Ill , p. 138, n., 22, ed. Coloniae, 1608.) So Molina and Salonius teach that a disagreeable witness may be defamed and slandered so that others place no faith in him, "quando enim fides data est, persevcrat injuria." Just so, Diana, Dicastill and many others teach. (Diana Rcsolutionum moralium, ( - V 80 THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS. Tom. IX., n. IX., res. XLIII., p. 377 seq., Antvverpiae 1647; Aumma Diana, etc., p. 625, n. 6, Lug. 1664.) Here you have the key to Ultramontane Jesuitical polemics : slander your opponent and so blacken his character that few people will believe him. This is genuine Jesuitical doctrine, " The end justifies the means." According to Busembaum, servants commit no sin if they do certain services which they cannot refuse without considerable disadvantage to themselves. (Lib. 2, tr. 3, art. 4, sub. 4.) " An honourable man may secretly steal his neces- saries of life if begging should prove too great a burden to him." (Diana (C), p. 245, n. 2, " Tractica: Resolutiones," Antwerpiae 1641.) Escobar and Salas allow druggists to give a cheaper medicine instead of the more expensive, if the fornrc^r is just as useful, or nearly as useful, as the expensive, which latter of course must be paid for. Lopes allows to mix water with wine or chaff with wheat if a person is compelled to sell good ware just as cheap as others sell poor ware. {Lessms " De justitia et jure," folio, Lugduni 1611, p. 262, n. 83.) It is allowed to cheat while playing a game if it is done on both sides and if it is according to the rules of a game. (Filliucius " Resolutioniim moralium cursus," II. Vol., folio, p. 674, n. icx), n. 202.) Such and similar doctrines did the Jesuits teach their pupils in their boasted schools. Are we not, then, justly alarmed when these men, driven out of countries of their own faith, fasten themselves upon PROVEN FROM JESUIT AUTHORS. 81 this young dominion, get an act of incorporation (denied them in all other countries) and receive an endowment from the public exchequer? Can we help being filled with horror when we consider that the youth of the land are to be committed at tender ages to the care of such teachers of iniquity, corrupt- ing the fountain of life and perverting every moral and religious precept? How many Riembauers will come from their schools in Canada, sweeping through the land like " a pestilence that walketh in darkness." Hence the uprising of even Romanist countries against these vaunted fathers as educators, especially when it w^as found how little of an actually scientific education was given in their schools, and how per- verted, defective and injurious was their whole method. " They taught the sciences with the abstraction of the noblest portions," all that might enlighten the under- standing, raise and ennoble the sentiments — all that might in any way lay bare the objects of the Jesuits. f- t i Il APPENDIX. As a guarantee for the accuracy of the translations contained in the foregoing collection, we here give the original Latin of the passages quoted, and, to facilitate reference to them by those who have the works in other editions, the chapters and sections are indicated, rather than the pages. In all cases the passages are given com- plete just as they stand, except that in several instances cases grouped together are separated, and detailed references to other authors usually omitted. Neither of these in any way affects the sense. (i) " Licet etiam, saltern in foro conscientiae, custodes (praecissi vi et injuria) decipere, tradendo v. gr. cibum et potum ut sopiantur, vel procurando ut absint : item vincula et carceres effringere : quia cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita. Et licet alii captivi per efTractum parietem elebantur, non tenebitur de damno : quia tantum est ejus causa per accidens, cum jure suo utatur. Nee refert, quod leges et magistratus quidam tales effractores graviter puniant : id enim fit, quod vel contrariam sententiam sequantur, vel ex pr?esumptione quod vim intulerint custodibus, vel quod propter bonum reipublicae ea poena statuta sit." (Busembaum, Medulla Theologian Moralis, Lib. 4, Cap. 3, Dub. 7, Art. 2.) (2) " Quoeres. — An, et quando liceant tactus, aspectus, et verba turpia inter conjuges. " Resp. — Tales actus per se iis licent ; quia cui licitus est finis etiam licent media, et cui licet consummatio, etiam licet inchoatio. Unde licite talibus naturam 84 APPENDIX. excitant ad copulam. Quod si. vero separatim et sine ordine ad copulam, v. gr. voluptatis causa tantum fiant, sunt venialia peccata ; eo quod ratione status qui illos actus cohonestat, habeant jus ad illos. Nisi tamen, ut saepe contingit, sint conjuncti cum periculo poUutionis, aut conjuges habeant votum- castitatis : tunc enim sunt mortalia, ut dictum est supra." (Busembaum, Med. Theol. Mor., Lib. 6, Tract. 6, Cap. 2, Dub. 2, Art. i.) (3) " Redimere pecunia ne de tua fide fiat inquisitio, licitum est : et saepe magna virtus discretionis est vitam ad Dei gloriam servare, ac fidem tegere modis licitis." (Bus., Medulla, L. 2, T. i, C. 3 ) (4) " Licitus autem modus est, quaiido subest causa (ut V. gr. ad evitandum grave periculum, ad obtinendam victoriam, eludendos hostes), uti vestibus et signis infi- delium, quae aliquem alium usum habent quam profitenda^ religionis, quales sunt vestes talis nationis (non religionis), quibus uterentur etsi converterentur : ut sunt vestes et signa nationis turcicoe. Quod veruni est, etsi sint vestes ipsorum religiosorum, dummodo non habeat peculiare signum profitendi erroris, sed sint tantum indicium niti- dioris cultus, ut saga prsedicantium in Germania, vel eminentioris vitae inter suos, ut togae Bonziorum in Japonia. Idem dicendum est de signis quibus judrei utuntur, v. gr. flavo annulo in pallio Francoforti, etc. ; quia hsec sunt signa mere politica et distinctiva unius generis horninum ab alio, et non proprie professiva fidei. Quae sent^entia probabilis est. " Licitus item modus est cum calholicus transit per loca haeretica, et periculum grave ei imminent vitae v. gr. vel bonorum (non tamen si derisio tantum vel vexatio, ut habet Bee), ad dissimulandam fidem vesci carnibus die prohibito, quia prseceptum Ecclesiae non obligat sub tali APPENDIX. 85 in irei > IS lei. Ler W- ut kie ali periculo. Nee hoc est fidem negare, cum esus carnium non sit institutus ad professionem religionis, et catholici etiam mali et gulosi id faciant. Si tamen ex circum- stantiis fieret signum professivum, ut si v. gr. in odium fidei conviva^ statuerent ut qui est hostis fidei pontificiae comedat carnes ; peccaret contra fidem, qui ederet sine protestatione : secus si protestaretur." (Bus., Med., L. 2, T. I, C. 3.) (5) " An in juramento liceat uti ajquivocatione. *' Resp. — Jurare cum jequivocatione, quando justa causa est et ipsa aequivocatio lieet, non est malum ; quia ubi est jus occultandi veritatem et occultatur sine mendacio, nulla irreverentia fit juramento. Quod si autem sine justa causa fiat, non erit quidem perjurium, cum saltern secundum aliquem sei\sum verborum vel restrictionem mentalem verum jurot : erit tamen ex genere suo mortale contra religionem, cum sit gravis irreverentia, ad alteVum in re gravi decipiendum u^urpare juramentum. Ita communiter DD. Hac de re vide pro- pos. 25, inter damnatas ab Innoc. XI. Unde resolvitur. " I. Graviter peccat, qui utitur cequivocatione quando non rogatus, sed sponte sua jurat; quia tunc tenetur uti vocal alis secundum communem significationcm, inquit Tolet, eo quod non habeat rations m aquivocandi. "2. Graviter item percat qui utitur lequivocatione quando juramei'um juste exigitur, ut a judice, vel superiori in re g avi. "3. Si autem uat tale juramentum in re levi, per jocum, et citra inobedientiam ac notabile damnum uterius, erit tantum veniale, ut probabiliter docet Sanch. contra alios ; quia sola discretione sive judicio caret. "4. Licet aequivoce jurare, si juramentum exigatur injuste : ut v. gr. si quis exigat juramentum, qui jus non 86 APPENDIX. habet, v. gr. judex incompetens, vel si non servet ordi- nem juris. Item si exigatur per vim, injuriam, metum : V. gr. si vir exigat juramentum ab uxore de adulterio occulto, si latrones exigant a te lytrum cum juramento. "5. Qui exterius tantum juravit sine animo jurandi, non obligatur, nisi forte ratione scandali : cum non juraverit, sed luserit. In foro tamen externo potest cogi ut servet." (Bus. Med., L. III., T. 2, C. 2, D. 4.) (6) " An, et quomodo reus teneatur fateri veritatem. "Resp, I. — Si non interrogetur legitime, non tenetur fateri suum crimen, sed potest judicem eludere vel ambiguis verbis, vel etiam negando, cum aliqua restric- tione et in bono sensu, ut mendacium absit. * Perpende tamen serio propos., 26, 27, et 28, inter, damn, ab Innoc. XI. * Ratio est, quia tunc judex non habet jus interro- gandi, aut obligationem imponendi reo. Unde resolves. *' I. Reus non tenetur fateri crimen suum. I. Si judex non sit legitimus. II. Si a seipso litis processum inchoet, sine prsevia accusatione, saltem virtuali. Ill, Si non praecessit semiplena probatio, nee infamia, nee manifesta criminis indicia extant. Ratio est, quia in his judex non interrogat legitime. **2. Nee tenetur, si dubitet an judex legitime interro- get ; quia non tenetur parere cum gravi suo darnno, nisi constet Superiorem posse praecipere. **3. Judex tenetur reo manifeslare statum causae, et quae sint indicia, quomodo probetur delictum, etc., ut reo constet an legitime interrogetur ; quia non tenebitur respondere alioqui, et seipsum honore aliisve bonis, qute bona iide possidet, spoliare. "4. Si reum juridice quidem interroget judex, sed nonnisi ex falsa prajsumptione delicti, v. gr. an exierit ex tali domo stricto ense, potest reus (idem est de teste), APPENDIX. 87 licet sciat semiplene probatum esse, id negare, ai exiit quidem, non tamen facto delicto, sed ob aliani carsam, quia si judex veritatem sciret, non posset interrogare. "Resp. II. — Etsi communior et verior sententia sit S. Th., si reus legitime interrogetur a judice, teneri in conscientia aperte veritatem dicere, probabile tamen est etiam quod ex Sylv. docet Sa, et Less., non teneri (saltern sub mortali) in causis capitalibus et gravioribus, si sit spes evadendi, et nullum grave damnum reipublicai time- atur. Tann. C. Lug., d. 40, n. 15, ubi dicit esse senten- tiam valde probabilem et in praxi tutam. Ratio est, tum quia lex humana communiter non oblig:at cum tanto periculo, v. gr. mortis tum quia inhumanum videtur, ut qui convinci non potest, teneatur prsebere .rma contra se, quibus occidatur, aut gravem poenam, v, gr. perpetui carceris subeat : tum quia non videtur tam heroicus actus praecipi posse. '* Dixi I.-— In capitalibus : quia aliud est de causis in quibus agitur de pcjena ecclesiastica, qna? est medicinalis. *' Dixi 2. — Si sit spes evadendi : quia absque ea, cessat ratio celandi veritatem. Unde resolves. " Non semper opus est, juxta dicta resp. 2, ut Con- fessarius reum urgeat ad crimen fatendum. " Post sententiam reus non tenetur confiteri crimen, quod ante injuste negavit; quia finito judicio, fmitur obligatio rei. Imo probabile est nee ante sententiam ad id teneri, etiamsi adhuc sit in potestate judicis, donee iterum interrogetur. " Rcsp. III. — Si quis ad evitanda tormenta gravia mentitus, falsum sibi crimen imposuit, per quod sit morte jplectendus, non, videtur mortale. Ita contra Nav. et alios docet Angl. Sylv. Less. Tann. Ratio est, quia non est mentitus perniciose, cum non teneatur tantis tor- ^ ■I 88 APPENDIX. mentis vitam conservare." (Bus. Med. L. 4. C. 3, D. 7, A. I.) (7) "Etsi ob contumeliam aliquam (v. gr. si viro honorato dicatur, mentiris) non liceat alterum occidere eo quod aliter repelii possit ac soleat, licere tamen, si aggressor fustem vel alapam viro valde honorato impin- gere conaretur, quam aliter avertere non possit, docent cum Dian. Less. Hurt, et alii 12. Verum et hoc videtur in praxi periculosum. * Et recenter damnatum ab Innoc. XI., per prop. 30." * (Bus. Med. L. 3, T. 4, C. I, D. III.) (8) "Non licet occidere, si injuria jam est contracta, vel aggressor jam fugit ; quia id non esset se dctendere, sed vindicare, ut docent Tol. Rodrig. ; sed Henr. ct Nav. Fern, dicunt, si lapsus jam magnam faceret jacturam honoris nisi fugientem mox persequeretur, posse eum persequi et percutere, quantum esset satis ad defensionem honoris. Quod Laym. Bon. Less. Fill, Card, Lug., etc., putant practice vix posse fieri sine vindicta, etsi specula- tive videatur esse probabile. Vide Dian. Concedit tamen C. Lug., Mol., Less., etc. cum Dian. licere furern fugientem v. gr. cum equo tuo conficere telo vel sagitta ; quia invasio adhuc durat. Etsi vero, id non liceat post- quam in tutum se recepit; si tamen per judicem non possis recuperare rem tuam, potes ingredi locum ubi ilia detinetur eamque tibi vindicare, et si alter vi impediat, vim vi repellere. " Ad defensionem vitae et integritatis membrorum licet etiam filio, religioso, et subdito se tueri, si opus sit, cum occisione, contra ipsum par<;ntum, abbatem, principem : nisi forte propter mortem hujus secutura essent nimis magna incommoda, ut bella, etc. " Licet quoque occidere eum, de quo certo constat APPENDIX. 89 IS quod de facto paret insidias ad mortem, ut si uxor v.gr. sciat se noctu occidendam a marito, si non potest effu- gere, licet ei pra^venire. '* Hinc etiam dicunt alii, ut Sanch. et alii, licere occidere eum, qui apud judicem falsa accusatione aut testimonio, etc., id agit unde certo tibi constat <]uod sis occidendus, vel mutilandus, vel etiam ((juod alii diffici- lius concedunt) amissurus bona temporalia honv>rem, etc. ; quia hjBc non est invasio, sed justa defensio, posito quod de alterius injuria tibi constet, nee sit alius evadendi modus. Less, tamen, Fill, et Laym. non p.udent id defendere, propter periculum abusuum. * Circa doctri- nam hujus animadverte propos. 17 et 18, inter proscriptas ab Alex. VII." * (Bus. Med. L. 3. T. 4, C.I.D. 3.) (9) " Hinc quoque, si quis injuste kedit famam tuam, nee potes earn tueri, nee recuperare alia vi quam imminuendo quoque famam illius, id licet, dummodo non falsa dicas (hoc enim prohibetur ad Innoc. XL in propos. 44, inter damnatas), in tantum quantum ad tuam famam conservandam necesse est, nee magis Icedas quam laedaris, coHata tua el alterius persona." (Bus. Med. L. 3, T. 6, CLD. 2.) (10) "Quaeres. — An- licet aliuni infamare ad tormenta gravia vitanda ? " Resp. I. — Licet si crimen sit verum ; quia nullam alteri faeit injuriam, eum habeat jus illud in necessitate revelandi." (Bus. Med. L. 3, T. 6, CLD. 2.) (11) " Excusatus es' a famai restitutione . . . ** 6. Si non possis absque periculo vitae, vel si fama restituenda sit minoris valoris quam fama detractoris. Sic V. gr. Praelatus non tenetur restituere vili homini, si aliter non potest quam cum amissione famae suae multo majoris momenti ; sed sufficit tunc, si infamatum laudet, I IMAGE EVALl'ATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. v< iP- ^/ 1.0 I.I f liM ilM - illitt 12.2 1^ 2.0 1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 6" — ► ^^ '/A #*- %. /, '^* ^y / %^ '#■ " ^/^^ -'>' .v c> // c% '% ^^ # .VwJ Photographi SciencLJ Corporation «■ ># ^v '^^ c\ \ 4^ ^^^ 6^ "^S^ % %"■ 23 WEST MAIN STREET WE3STER,N.Y. 14580 (716) 87:^-4503 w. I I 90 APPENDIX. aut- pecunia compenset," (Bus. Med. L. 3, T. 6; C.I.D. 3.) , (12) " Nee item furatur, qui accipit in compensationem justam si aliter sibi debitum accipere nequeat : v.gr. si famulus justum stipendium non possit aliter obtinere, vel inique inductus sit ad serviendum iniquo pretio. * Circa compensationem hanc lege accurate propos. 37, inter proscriptas ab Innoc. XI." * (Bus. Med. L. 3, T. 5, C.I.D. I.) (13) " Si filius v.gr. mercatoris, vel cauponis, adminis- tret bona parentis, po:est a patre exigere salarium, quantum dare deberet extraneo ; et si id impetrare non possit vel exigere non ausit, potest clam accipere. Ita probabiliter Laym. Dian." (Bus. Med. L. 3, T. 5, C.I.D.. 4.) (14) *' Excusantur a peccato famuli, si ratione sui famulatus prsestent -quaedam obsequia, qua2 sine gravi suo incommodo negare non possint: ut v.gr. vestiant dominum, stern ant equum, comitentur ad lupanar, mere- trici deferant munera, eidem venienti aperiant ostium; quia hiec tantum remote se ad peccatum habent, e1; sine iis peccatum fieret. Unde tamen non sequitur alteri cuivis licere ea prsestare, **Ad ea opera, quj« propinquius se ad peccatum habent aut juvant, v. gr. subjicere humeros, admovere scalas hero per fenestram ascendenti ad concubinam, deferre litteras amatorias ad meretricem, comitari ad duellum, etc., non sufficit communis ratio famulatus, sed exigunt majorem necessitatem et causam, ut licite fiant : v.gr. periculum gravis aut saltem notabilis damni, si detrectent. * Hi^c doctrina jam rejicitur ob damnatam ab Innocentio XL propos. 51. * *' Ea quse ad peccatum proxime concurrunt vel I 91 inducunt, vel turn justitia pugnant, etsi ex genere suo sint mdififerentia, v.gr. hero alterum occisuro gladium" dare, ostendere ilium qui ad necem quasritur, compulsare campanam (sine scandalo tamen) ad concionem haereti- cam, meretricem (etsi conductam ac paratam) e domo evocare et ad herum deducere, furi scalam applicare, gerenti injustum bellum dare mutuas pecunias, pagum hasretico domino vendere, gravissimam causam requirunt, hoc est metura tanti mali, quod secundum leges chari- tatis nemo teneatur subire ad evitandum malum alterius : v.gr. si alias occidendus esset. II "In civitatibus, in quibus id vitandi majoris mali causa permissum est, licet domum locare usurario (excipit tamen jus alienigenam) et meretricibus : maxima si alii conductores desint ; nisi tamen meretrices graviter nocerent vicinis honestis, vel ob siium ansam majorem darent peccatis." (Bus. Med. L. 2, T. 3, C. 2. D k A.3.) ^^ (i5)'"Tertia regula est: Possunt quoque absque mendacio ea verba usurpari, etiamsi ex sua significatione non sint ambigua, nee eum sensum verum admittant ex se, nee ex circurastantiis occurrentibus, sed tantum verum sensum reddant, ex aliquo addito mente proferentis retento, quodcunque illud sit. Ut si quis vel solus vel coram aliis, sive interrogans, sive propria sponte, sive recreationis gratia, sive quocimque alio fine, juret se non fecisse aliquid, quod revera fecit, intelligendo intra se aliquid aliud quod non fecit, vel aliam diem ab ea in qua fecit, vel quodvis aliud additum verum, revera non men- titur, nee est perjurus, sed tamen non diceret unam veritatem determinatam, quam audientes concipiunt ac verba ilia ex se significant, sed aliam veritatem dispara- tam. Hiec regula non est usque adeo certa, ut duae 92 APPENDIX. \— priores ; i'lara enim negant doctores num. 12 relati. Seel e