talk after this rate of the death of the body and pretend that he who had voluntarily and without necessity done an action which he foresaw would be followed by the death of a man should nevertheless not cease to be innocent provided that he had not an actual and express intention to kill him such a man would be judged worthy to be hated by all men And these Divines nevertheless fear not to talk thus of the death of the soul and to testifie that they fear lesse the justice of God then of men The principle of all this Doctrine concerning scandal may be seen in Bauny in the 39. chap. of his Summe pag. 623. where treating of this matter purposely he demands Whether he who doth some thing from which his action he foresees that others will take matter of offence and sin ought to accuse himself thereof and what is this sin to be termed He saith frankly that Navarre and others whom he cites say that it is scandal But he adds in his following discourse This is not my judgement See upon what I build Taking scandal properly and for one special kind of sin such an one is not guilty thereof save onely when by a formal design he saith or doth some thing for the ghostly destruction of his Neighbours This is the general principle upon which his Fraternity build as well as he the foundation of all this matter He must be utterly forsaken of God and in the extremity of black and affected malice who falls into this excesse and into this sort of hatred of his Neighbour which is proper onely unto Devils and to reduce the sin of scandal to this disposition is to declare that it is committed no where but in Hell and to take it quite out of the world or rather it is to entertain and protect it in the world by disguising it in such sort as that we may not know when we commit it and by consequence to give all men licence to commit it freely and without scruple in making them believe that they commit it not in doing these actions Bauny also makes use of the pretence of a good intention to justifie Usury For after he had furnished us with an invention to palliate and cover it before the eyes of men by means of three contracts of which he himself prescribes us the form he endeavours to hide it from God himself if he could and also to justifie it by a good intention For greater surety saith he in the 14. chap. of his Summe p. 219. it is good that the creditour say to him that is his debtor that his intention in this contract is not usurarious though he let out his money to him for profit with protestation on his part that he would do nothing therein against God and his conscience For hereby he declares that he is determined onely to that which is good and far off from sin Thus he mocks God and Man intending to surprize them by such grosse contrivances as if he could change the nature of things by innevating the turms and manner of expressing them It is easie to see the contradiction which is in these words but it will appear yet more clearly if we compare that which he saith here with what he tells us elsewhere in his practique l. 3. chap. 6. pag. 362. where treating of benefices he saith when any one causeth a benefice with cure incompatible with a dignity to be provided for him he is reputed to renounce it without any expression thereof in words c. 1. de consult in 6. although he make protestation that he will not part with it because this protestation is contrary to his action A man that is in a dignity and who causes a cure also to be provided for him cannot hold them both although he would and protesteth that it is his intention because this protestation is contrary to his action And an Usurer who gives his money to interest to make profit thereof may deliver himself from usury and restitution by protesting that it is not his intention to make an usurarious contract though in very deed he do make one and his protestation be contrary to his action One of the greatest abuses that these Doctors make of the intention is in the use of the Sacraments and particularly of that of penance When a man is altogether overwhelmed with crimes which he often doth reiterate and into which he doth fall many times they pretend that he needs but a moment to reduce himself into good terms with God and that one onely word uttered with his lips or drawn thence by a Confessor will suffice to make so great a change and provided he say he will mend and promise it unto the Priest he shall be obliged to repose himself upon this pretended good intention and upon this promise although it may be presumed for the most part that such resolutions proceed onely fro the lips as Bauny confesseth in his Summe chap. 46 pag. 717. of which he brings a good proof and as it were a certain mark in these follwing words As it will come to passe if notwithstanding all this which these people have said and promised for the time past to the said Confessor they do not cease to behave themselves with greater excesse and liberty in those crimes then before And though also we see by experience of what is past that they will not amend and that their present disposition makes it also sufficiently appear that they have no true will he forbears not to maintain that we must believe what they say cum ipsi sint sui accusatores defensore testes being they are their own accusors defenders and witnesses though many times it may be presumed that such resolutions come not from beyond their lips Such are the most part of the resolutions promises good intentions of the greatest sinners upon which notwithstanding these directors ground themselves to conferre on hem the Sacraments though they themselves judge them unworthy and to justifie the greatest crimes and which they themselves who commit them durst not at all take upon them to defend if these Doctors did not maintain and assure them falsely by this pretended good intention which they teach them to form in a moment and by one onely word in saying onely that they have or that they would have it In which they are so ingenious that when they cannot find this sort of good intentions in him who hath done amisse they go to seek it without him in some other accessary to the action As if that would suffice to clear it of malice and crime Thus Bauny exempts from mortal sin children who rob their parents In as much saith he as the Parents cannot be supposed to be willing to oblige their children not to meddle with what is theirs upon this penalty there being good reason to believe that they had rather see all their goods wasted by their hands then their said children out of grace and
of the Society of Jesus and I would not have it believed that the resolutions which I have ordinarily given as my own are any other than conclusions evidently drawn from the principles of the School of the Society 2. Of all the Casuists of the Society he chose 24. particularly the most knowing and experimented whom he considered and hearkned to as his Masters or rather as the Masters of all the World and he represents them as sitting upon 24. Thrones to teach the whole Church abusing in this that place of the Revelation where 24. Elders sitting about the Throne of God are spoken of a Consident lectiores 24. Jesuitae seniores quidem non aetate solum sed scientia videlicet Sanctius Azorius Toletus c. Ibid. in principio I present unto you saith he 24. Jesuits sitting on so many Thrones having chosen them as the most antient and most elevate of the Society not only for age but also for knowledge that is Sanctius Azor Tolet c. 3. Neither yet doth he take indifferently all that these knowing-men have said or written he hath chosen that only which is best and most certain in every of them concerning all the matters which they handle yet without depriving himself of the liberty of reporting also out of other Authors of the Society whatsoever he could that was good in them b Qualibet in materiâ inprimis authorum Societatis exbaurio medullam Confessariorum in examen exponendam Ibid. ad finem In every matter saith he I have kept close peculiarly to the principal Authors of the Society and I have chosen out of them the best and as it were the marrow of their discourse leaving it to the discretion of Confessors to make use thereof as they shall judge to be convenient 4. And that he might give all kind of repute to these 24. Elders of the Society whom he compares to the 24. Elders of the Revelation he proposes their Resolutions in matter of Conscience as so many Revelations made unto them and which they had received from the mouth of God and Jesus Christ Here are his terms c Ego solummodo memoro reserationem factam ab Agno suis authoribus Jesuitis quorum scripta absumere curavi Ibid. ad finem I only report the Revelation which the Lamb hath made to the principal Jesuits whom he hath chosen for his Secretaries whose Writings I have devoured like as St. John in the Revelation devoured the Book presented to him by the Lamb. After this none can easily judge but that the Resolutions of these Authors ought to pass in the Society not only for common and assured Opinions but also for Oracles and almost for Articles of Faith of which they are not permitted to doubt And indeed the Book of this Jesuit is in so great reputation in the Society and they have so dispersed it all over that it hath been already printed 39. times as is observed in the first Page Emanuel Sa who laboured near upon 40. years in the study of Moral Divinity and to compose a Book which he hath published in form of Aphorisms as he saith himself in his advice to the Reader treating of Charity is not contented to say with Bauny and Escobar that one may without mortal sin desire never more to behold ones Enemy but he addes thereto that it is permitted to desire his death and to be well pleased that it is come upon him d Potes optare hosti tibi alioqui valde nocituro mortem non odio sed ad vitandum damnum tuum item de morte ejus gaudere ob bonum inde secutum Emanuel Sa verbo Charitas n. 5. p. 46. You may saith he desire the death of an Enemy that is capable of doing you much hurt provided you do not this out of hatred but only to avoid the evil which he would do you It is also permitted you to rejoyce in his death because of the good which may come to you thereby We need only according to this Author love our own Interest that we may without crime desire the death of our Neighbour and rejoyce in it when it befalls him That is to say that Covetousness or Ambition may justifie a murtherous and inhumane soul and that instead of being doubly culpable it ought to pass for innocent For he condemns only these who desire the death of a man in a frolick and without being transported by any interest There is no Murderer nor Parricide who may not very well fit unto himself this maxim and who may not easily make use thereof to cover his crime and his passion If you reproach him that in the fight of God he hath killed his Brother by the will and desire he hath had to see him dead he will tell you with this Jesuit that he had not desired his death but that he feared he would do him some mischief non odio sed ad vitandum damnum not out of hatred but to avoid damage or because he might hinder him from enjoying some good ob bonum inde secutum So almost all mortal hatreds and all revenges shall be permitted because they do not arise commonly but from worldly interest of Ambition Covetousness and Pleasure and it belongs only to Devils and Desperadoes to desire the death of men of pure malice and without design of drawing therefrom any worldly advantage Bauny extends this maxim indifferently to all sorts of persons and giveth the self-same liberty to a Mother who according to him may desire the death of her Children One may saith he in the 6. Chapter of his Summe p. 73. desire evil to befall his Neighbour without sin when he is urged thereunto by any good motive So Bonacina on the First Commandment d. 3. q. 4. n. 7. exempts a Mother from all fault who desired the death of her Daughters a Quando ob deformitatem aut inopiam nequeat juxta animi sui desiderium eas nuptui tradere quia occasione earum male secum agitur à marito aut injuriis afficitur Non enim proprie detestatur filias ex dispticentia earum sed in detestationem proprii mali when she could not dispose of them in mariage according to her desire because of their deformity and poverty or because for their sakes she was abused by her Husband or injured For she did not properly detest her Daughters out of a displeasure towards them but in detestation of her own evil He terms a lawfull motive to carry a Mother on to desire the death of her Daughters the want of beauty for that they were not handsome ob deformitatem or because they were not rich enough aut inopiam and because she could not marry them according to her desire that is not after her ambition or so advantagiously as she would I leave it to the Reader to reflect upon this abominable maxim and to draw consequences from it I wonder only that Bauny did not carry it yet
casu proposito potest Confessarius judicare quod peniteus commissum peccatum tacuerit justa aliquitâ—ex causa oc proinde tuta conscientia poterit illum absolvere Ibid. In this occurrent the Confessor may judge that the penitent hath concealed his sin for some good or just reason and for that he may absolve him with a safe conscience The reason he makes use of for a foundation to build this answer on is c Probabiliter prudens Consessarius judicare poterit tale peccatum esse quod vel reipsa vel juxta probabilem opinionem poenitentis ipse putat non esse in confessione explicandum Ibid. that a prndent Confessor may judge probably that the sin in question is of it self and indeed or according to some probable opinion of the penitent of such a nature that he is not obliged to tell it in Confession This is not only simply to oblige a Confessor to yield an entire submission to a sinner contrary to the nature of his charge which requires that he should receive it from him but also to yield unto him a blind submission and obedience without knowing even what he thinks which is not only shamefull and extravagant for a Director and a Guide who ought to conduct and not suffer himself to be conducted and follow those who are under his charge without knowing whither they go nor what way they take but it is also unjust in a Confessor who being a Judge and a Divine Judge holding the place of Jesus Christ cannot judge in that manner without cognisance of the Cause but by Sacrilegious rashness and unjustice concluding that an opinion which he knows not is probable and that an action which he hath all the reason in the world to mistrust is innocent Filliutius declares openly that he desires to oblige men and comply with their humours when he saith that the I oclesiasticks are not obliged under mortal sin to have any manner of attention in rehearsing their Office For reporting the opinion of those who hold f Neminem teneri sub mortali ed attentiâ—nem internam Respondes â—ico prime hane primam opinionem probabilem esse Fillutius tom 1. qq mor. tr 23. c. 8. n. 253. p. 126. that no man is obliged under mortal sin to have any inward attention I answer saith he this opinion is probable He confesseth indeed that the contrary is more probable but according to his principles it is sufficient that this same is probable to follow it with a safe conscience in quitting the more probable And the reason which induceth him to approve this opinion is g Quia satis accommodata est hominum fragisitati difficultati quam humanus intellectus experitur in attendendo diu uni ret Ibid. because it is very accommodant and conformable to mans frailty and to the difficulty which men have commonly to settle their spirits a long time upon one thing He is not content at all that this opinion is indulgent to the softness and fickleness of men but he cannot forbear to declare that it is even for this cause that he approves it and to testifie that the Jesuits Divinity hath for its scope to flatter and nourish vices instead of fighting with and destroying them Celot having undertaken to defend the Casuists of his Society saith that one of the conveniences which may be received thereby is that it delivers men from scruples which trouble them that it dischargeth them of restitutions which they believe themselves obliged to make and gives them expedients to break marriages after they have been lawfully contracted h Accedit ad te perplexo vir animo lancinantibus conscientiae vulneribus cruentatus videt faciendum quod morte gravius timet vult quae ut faciat nunquam inducetur se suae omnia salva cupit sed-fieri non potest Hinc urget animae salus hinc honoris bonorum fa miliae Quid tot liberi Quid plena ut inter cives dignitatdomus Celot l. 8. c. 16. p. 717. A man saith he agitated by the remorses of his conscience and all torn with the wounds it hath given him addresses himself to you He acknowledges that he must do that which he fears more than death he desires it also but can never obtain force to resolve upon it He would save himself and his wealth both at once but this is impossible The desire to save his Soul presseth him on one side and that of preserving his Estate his Honour his Family presses him on the other side What shall become of his Wife of his Children of his whole Family great and honourable for a private one See here without doubt a man in a strange estate and a sick person reduced to extremity betwixt life and death he had need of some extraordinary medicine to succour him and above all with that sweetness which is necessary for a spirit that is almost in despair A learned Doctor may see some little ray of light after he hath a long time pondered upon an affair so difficult and encumbered Omnia ut doctus es versanti tibi radius consilii non incommedi affulget But you shall never meet with day nor entire clearness untill you seek it amongst the Jesuits the principal of whom are as the shining Stars and Sun of Divinity who by their influences will in a moment recover this desperate spirit Hunc tibi scrupulum eximant Suarez aut Lessius aut Molina aut omnes tres consulti casum tuum explicent rationibus stabiliant securam faciant conscientiam tuam After this there is no means according to Celot to hinder them from kissing their Books and lifting up their cryes of Joy unto Heaven Non erumpes in coelum non triumphabis gaudio Abstinebit cliens ille tunâ— ab osculo libris salutaribus imprimendo But he confirms this goodly discourse by an History worthy to be rehearsed i Scimus repertum aliquando qui summam ingentem pecuniae Confessarii judicio restituendam deferret atque ex itinere in amici Bibliopolae officina confliterit In qua roganti num aliquid novi oblatus est recens Theologiae Moralis scriptor quem ille neglectim omnia alia cogitans cum evolvit in casum forte suum incidit restituendi obligationem solutam didicit Tum enim vero dòjecta scrupuli sarcina retento auri pondere leviorem domum repetiisse Ibid. I knew saith he a certain man who carried a great sum of money by the order of his Confessor but passing by the Shop of a Book-seller his Friend he staid there and asked if he had any new Book He was presented with a Book of Moral Divinity printed a while before which turning over negligently and without any design he by accident met with his own proper case and learned that he was not at all obliged to restitution Whereupon discharging himself of his scruple and keeping his Coyn he returned lighter hearted than
which is not to be found in the most holy exercises and best works He who grieves for his sins for fear of damnation if he love not God at the least he fears him but he that hath not this grief neither testifies that he hath neither love nor fear for him and yet he will have it that in this estate he may be reconciled unto God that is that he may return unto God without any good motion and come to him without making only the first step since the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom and of a good life Bauny in the same place relates another opinion of some Casuists in these terms 4 Quod si quis in articulo mortis conatur facere quod in se est nihil aliud occurrat quam actus attritionis quo dicit Domine miserere mei cum animo placandi Deum hic justificabitur supplente Deo absolutionis necessitatem If a man being at the point of death endeavours to do what he can and having in his mind only an act of attrition present he saith unto God these words Lord have mercy on me with design to pacifie him he shall be justified God himself supplying the want of absolution This is the true thought of Libertines and debauched persons who are accustomed to say when they are pressed to be converted and to think on death that they need only one good Peccavi to obtain pardon for all their sins It is true that Bauny saith that he approves not this opinion Because it is founded only on the mercy of God and not on any good or solid reason But it is enough to vent it into the world that he proposeth it as being maintained by some Casuists since that he thereby testifies that it is probable and may therefore be followed with a safe conscience according to the Principles of the Divinity of his Society Father Anthony Sirmond hath been yet more bold For he makes no bones to say that attrition alone when more cannot be done sufficeth to deface all sins be it at the point of death or when the Sacrament is to be received or administred There are saith he who refer this to the extremity of life He speaks of the obligation to exercise the love of God Whereunto is opposed the small appearance that so great a Commandment should be given us not to obey but so late Neither am I of opinion to be perswaded that upon every reception or administration of the Sacrament that we ought of necessity excite in our selves that holy flame of love to consume therein the sins of which we are guilty attrition is thereto sufficient with some strong endeavour after contrition or with confession when there is câ—nvenience for it We must not dispute after this whether attrition be sufficient to receive the Grace of the Sacrament of Penance This Jesuit gives no place for this difficulty pretending that attrition alone is sufficient to restore a man unto grace provided only That he endeavour after contrition or that he confess himself when he hath convenience So that for him who hath not this convenience being in mortal sin he maintains that attrition is sufficient and that he may himself all alone blot out his sins be it at the point of death or when he comes to receive some Sacrament And that he may leave no cause to doubt of his opinion nor of the vertue he ascribes to attrition he saith That it alone is sufficient to take away sin For he establisheth as it were two ways to return from sin to grace attrition alone with endeavour for contrition and attrition with confession giving as it were the choice unto the sinner of which he please He will have it then that attrition alone without the help of contrition will suffice to take away sin He believes indeed that confession is good with attrition but it is to him that hath convenience for it He affirms also that a strong endeavour after contrition is commendable but he is not of opinion to believe that we ought of necessity excite in our selves this holy flame of love to consume therein the sin whereof we are guilty He confesses that this is the best expedient the most safe and perfect but he pretends that we may dispense with it and that attrition is sufficient thereto It is remarkable that he speaks of attrition in the self same sense as Father Bauny though it be not entirely in the self same terms For he speaks of attrition which ariseth from self-love and which is without any love of God as his words evidently testifie I am not of opinion to believe that we ought of necessity excite in our selves this holy flame of love to consume therein the sin whereof we are guilty He excludes then the obligation and necessity of exciting in us the love of God to destroy mortal sin So that when he saith that attrition is sufficient he intends that attrition which is without the love of God the attrition and regret for offending God which takes it rise from love of ones self and not of God as Bauny saith Dicastillus extends also the effect of this attrition yet farther For he saith that this alone is sufficient to cause that one may suffer Martyrdom that death and torments undergone not through a Principle of Charity and Love of God but only through fear are capable to justifie and make everlastingly happy the greatest sinners There is not then any remedy more universal than attrition by the opinion of these Fathers since as we have now made appear it hath so many different effects Martyrdom it self not being excepted which we hitherto believed to have been an effect of love and that not of any sort neither but strong and powerful majorem charitatem We must not only say of this fear altogether earthly and servile what the Scripture faith indeed of the most noble Initium sapientiae timor Fear is the beginning of wisdom but we ought also to add Consummatio sapientiae timor Fear is the compleating of wisdom since it causeth us to produce the most Heroick act of Christian Religion and conducts us even into Glory ad conferendam gratiam gloriam and contrary to what the Apostle saith When my body is in the midst of flames if at the same time my heart be not inflamed with this heavenly fire of divine love all these torments are unto me unprofitable Si tradidero corpus meum ita ut ardeam charitatem autem non habeam mihi nihil prodest If I give my body to be burnt and have not charity it profits me nothing This Jesuit would have it that death which the Philosophers call terribilium terribilissmum sufficeth with attrition only that is to say by the motive of fear alone and without any mixture of love it is capable to purge away all blemishes and to bestow glory on the most criminal person of the whole world ad conferendam gratiam
Sacramentum novae legis Ibid. That Christians who live under the Law of Grace are not obliged under the pain of mortal sin to love God so often with a love of supernatural charity to obtain life and avoid death eternal because it is sufficient for them to have attrition receiving at the same time some Sacrament of the new Law Amicus saith the same thing of the Commandment of Contrition for our conversion unto God after sin But I will not stand here to alledge or make reflection on what Molina saith because it is spoken of elsewhere I will only add to clear up the conformity of the Jesuits upon this Point that which Filliutius saith He demands 1 Pro quo tempore urgeat ejus obligatio An statim post pâ—ccatum commissum Secunda sententia negat etiamsi occurrat opportunitas facile fieri possit Respondeo dico 1. tenendum cum secunda sententia Filliut tom 1. qq mor. tr 6. cap. 8. num 198. 199. pag. 157. In what time we are obliged unto contrition and whether it be so soon as we have sinned And after he hath reported two opinions of which the second saith he denies that we are so soon obliged though we have conven ience and that we may easily do it he concludes in these terms I answer and say in the first place that we must follow the second opinion which holds that we are not obliged He descends also yet farther in particular and demands 2 Quibus temporibus per se obliget contritio ex jure naturali Ibid. num 205. Respondeo dico 1 si respiciatur lex justitiae qua homo tenetur satisfacere Deo pro injuria peccati sic non videtur obligari nisi quando adest periculum mortis Ibid. on what occasion the Precept of Contrition obliges by the Law of Nature Whereto he gives three Answers The first is that if we regard the Law of Justice by which a man is obliged to satisfie God for the injury which he hath done unto him by sin in this manner he seems not to be obliged to contrision and sorrow for his sin but only when he finds himself in danger of death His other Answer is 3 Si respiclatur lex charitatis erga Deum jute naturali obligat ante mortem Ibid. num 206. That if we respect the love which is due unto God we are obliged unto it by that Law of Nature before death That is to say that though in rigour and without any injustice a sinner may remain in his sin and aversion from God until his death notwithstanding he ought of charity to prevent that time and to love God sometimes without attending for this extremity if he will not ask him forgiveness as soon as he hath offended him nor even for many years after it is reasonable that at least he pass not above five or seven years before he do it This is the charitable advice which Filliutius gives him in these terms 4 In universum intra annum non videtur obligare quolibet septennio vel quinquennio est probâ—bile 〈◊〉 alibi dicam de charitate Ibid. n. 208. Speaking generally it seems that a man is not obliged thereto within one years time that he should be obliged thereto within five or from seven years to seven is very probable as we shall see elsewhere where I shall speak the same thing of Charity He holds that a sinner after he hath passed five or seven years in his sin and in a voluntary aversion from God and all others in like manner who have passed over so long a time without once thinking of loving God will be obliged the one to ask God pardon and the other to love him at least after so long a time If this be probable as he saith the contrary is also and by consequence of two probable opinions we may follow which we will with a safe conscience according to the Jesuits Divinity a sinner may persist in his sin and in his aversion from God and every other man in his insensibleness without having any motion of love unto God after he hath already past seven years without thinking of him The third Answer of Filliutius is 5 Si respâ—ciatur lex charitatis propriae probabile est obligare etiam extra articulum Ibid. num 206. That if we regard the Law of Charity which every one owes unto himself it is very probable that he is obliged to have contrition and sorrow for sin before the article of death And as if he feared lest this should also torment some consciences and give them too much trouble and scruple he adds 6 Ob authoritatem autem Doctorum quos citavimus in praecedenti quaesito non est improbabile quod non obliget Ibid. For all that because of the Authority of the Doctors whom we have quoted in the former question it is probable that he is not obliged thereto That is to say that a man who is in mortal sin may with a safe conscience according to this probable opinion persist voluntarily all his life in a state of enmity against God and delay his conversion until the point of death demanding only forgiveness of God when he is ready to dye and can offend him no longer without doing herein any thing against the charity he owes to himself any more than against that which he owes unto God I can hardly believe that a Jesuit would approve a Child who should deal with his Father in this manner as he saith we may carry our selves towards God and I know not whether he would counsel any of his Brethren who had a mortal disease to suffer it five or seven years or even until he should see himself nigh unto death without calling for the Physitian and without applying any remedy thereto and whether be believes he may do this without danger of killing the body of his Brother by this delay and his own Soul by so remarkable a negligence especially if he had an assured remedy whereof it was only his own fault if he did not make use I know well at the least that if herein he pretend not to offend against the Laws of Justice and Christian Charity he shall transgress those of the Society who have so well provided for the health of all their Brethren that inftead of delaying to the extremity they have ordained to cause the Physitian to visit them from time to time though there be none of them sick What kind of prudence must this be which hath so great care of the health and life of the body and so little of the Souls Father Celot is not content to say as Filliutius and others that a sinner is not obliged to seek God after he hath offended him but even that God himself preventing and seeking as we may say his friendship by the inspirations and good motions he bestows on him he may refuse and reject them effectually
because he favours him not Here is the case to which he answers precisely and without hesitation in these words If you desire only or receive with joy the effect of this death to wit the Inheritance of a Father the Charge of a Prelate the deliverance from some trouble he procured you the answer is easie that you may desire all these things lawfully and that because you rejoyce not in the evil of another but in your own proper good Dicastillus durst not at first determine upon this question because it seemed to him uncertain the Authority and Example of Castropalao having made him more bold he approves and propounds it as probable and Tambourin makes thereof a Maxime in which there is no difficulty at all facilis responsio Thus it comes to pass that these Doctors who make profession of a complacent Theology go on still advancing not to the better but to the worse as S. Paul speaks and labour to stretch or rather to corrupt mens consciences by stretching and corrupting the most holy and inviolable Rules of Faith and Morality and making those things probable which in themselves are incredible If to desire the death of ones father be of itself a crime as none can question it the crime is yet greater when he is carried thereto by some wicked motive as that of having his estate which comes from covetousness and injustice and contains in it also a notorious ingratitude and it is in the sight of God a kind of theft and usurpation to desire to have the estate of another and which is more of ones father against his will the appointment of God and all the Laws of Reason and Nature So that to justifie the desire a child hath of the death of his father by that which he hath of his goods is to justifie one crime by another wherein many more are also contained This injustice and disorder may appear yet more visible in the other Example brought by Tambourin of an Inferior who desires the death of his Superior A Monk for Example or a Clerk of his Abbot or Bishop that he might enter upon his Office For the desire alone of a Charge of this nature even under pretence of a good motive as to be serviceable unto Souls is a kind of ambition and presumption which renders a man unworthy of that Office which he desires in that manner as S. Thomas after the Scripture and Fathers doth expresly teach us he who hath not this good motive and desires to enter by a way so odious and criminal as is the death of his Superior is not only unworthy of the Office which he so desires but also deferves to be excluded from the Clergy and even to be chased out of the Church as a rebellious and unnatural child from the house of his father who desires to see his death though he dares not kill him himself How then can one of these desires justifie the other How can we say that an Inferior may lawfully desire the death of his Superior if we pretend not that one may be a murderer because he is an Usurper and desire the death of a man because we would have his goods without having either right or capacity but only an unjust and unreasonable pretence unto the one or the other This yet sufficeth not this barbarous and murthering Theology to permit children to desire the death of their father and mother they permit them also to be willing to kill them themselves to attempt their lives and effectually to kill them in some cases It is from this Principle that Dicastillus saith 2 Colligitur ulterius â—…citum esse fillis contra parentes servis contra dominos vassallis contra principes vi vim repellere quando actu invaduntur injuste cum praedictis conditionibus idemque de Monachis aut subditis contra Abbates Superiores Dicastill lib. 2. de just tr 1. d. 10. dub 3. num 30. An in casibus praecedentis dubitationis liceat directe velle intendere mortem injusti aggressoris ad defendendam propriam vitam Negat S. Thomaâ— His tamen non obstantibus asserendum est tanquam verissimum sicut honestum est in executione repeilere aggressorem illum occidendo pari raâ—lone honestum est directe illum velle intendere occidere Dub. 4. num 4. That a child who defends himself against his father who assaults him unjustly may kill him as also Servants their Masters Vassals their Princes Monks their Abbots and their Superiors Which he understands not only in such manner that a Son may kill his Father by accident and besides his intention in his own defence but so as he may have a design to kill him voluntarily For after he had proposed this case which I have now related and many others he concludes that in this case it is lawful to desire to kill him who assails us As for what concerns the respect due unto Fathers and Mothers Tambourin declares confidently 1 That a Son is to be excused from mortal sin who will not acknowledge his Father if he do it not of contempt but to avoid some inconvenience or that he might not be put to the blush in acknowledging him It is manifest that according to Scripture this is to renounce ones father as it is to renounce Jesus Christ to be ashamed to acknowledge and confess him and yet this is a small fault in the Jesuits Divinity Neither is he more religious about their obedience concerning which he demands 2 Filius si recognoscere nolit patrem non ex contemptu sed ad vitandum aliquod incommodum aut crubescentiam à mortali culpa sic puto esset excusand us Tambur lib. 5. decal cap. 2. sect 2. num 17. Whether children may lawfully contract Marriage with persons unworthy of their alliance against the will of their fathers and mothers He answers Though some believe they cannot without mortal sin which is very probable yet he avouches that it is probable and safe in conscience that they may ..... and that Sanchez hath reason to say that a daughter is so free as to Marriage that though she have not yet attained so much as twenty five years of age she may marry her self unto a person unworthy of her without her fathers consent Whence it follows according to this Author that Isaac exceeded his power when he so expresly forbad his Son Jacob to marry in the family of Chanaan which was unworthy of his alliance If the disobedience of a Daughter towards her Father in these circumstances be not criminal it seems it never can be so since it cannot be in a more important matter than this same wherein Marriage is concerned which imports an engagement for the whole time of life and a Marriage with an unworthy person and which proves a disadvantage and dishonour not only to the Daughter who enters it but also to her kindred and whole family But if we object to this Father that