Moral Theology - BestLightNovel.com
You’re reading novel Moral Theology Part 63 online at BestLightNovel.com. Please use the follow button to get notification about the latest chapter next time when you visit BestLightNovel.com. Use F11 button to read novel in full-screen(PC only). Drop by anytime you want to read free – fast – latest novel. It’s great if you could leave a comment, share your opinion about the new chapters, new novel with others on the internet. We’ll do our best to bring you the finest, latest novel everyday. Enjoy
Example: t.i.tus does not like to see his children drunk, but he likes to get drunk himself occasionally, knowing all the while that his example encourages them to drink.
1451. In the following cases there is no intention of scandal: (a) when one does an act that has no appearance of evil, and one neither directly nor indirectly wills that it should be an occasion of sin to anyone. Example: Balbus performs his duties faithfully, although he knows to his regret that his fidelity occasions envy and hatred in Claudius; (b) when one does an act that is evil or apparently evil, but is invincibly ignorant of the scandal it may give. Example: Semp.r.o.nius and t.i.tus converse together in a foreign tongue which they confidently think Caius does not understand. The conversation is disedifying, and Caius, who does understand, is shocked by what they say.
1452. The act of the scandalizer who intends, directly or indirectly, the spiritual ruin of his neighbor, is called active scandal, while the act of the person who takes occasion from the active scandal to incur spiritual ruin, is called pa.s.sive scandal. Active and pa.s.sive scandal are sometimes together, sometimes apart. (a) Thus, there is both active and pa.s.sive scandal, when the scandalizer wills the fall of his neighbor, and the scandalized does fall. (b) There is active but not pa.s.sive scandal, when the scandalizer wills the fall of his neighbor, but the latter does not fall into the snare. (c) There is pa.s.sive but not active scandal, when one makes the good action rightly performed by another an occasion of sin. Thus, some made the life and pa.s.sion of our Lord a pretext for not accepting Him (Matt., xiii. 57; John, vi. 62; I Cor., i. 23), and are said to have been scandalized at Him.
1453. As to the act that occasions the spiritual ruin of another, it must be wrong either in reality or in appearance. (a) The scandalous act is wrong in reality, when it is forbidden as a sin--for example, offering sacrifice in the temple of an idol, or diverting to personal use money collected for the poor. (b) The scandalous act is wrong in appearance, when on account of circ.u.mstances it seems to be an act forbidden as a sin. Thus, to take part in a banquet held in a pagan temple might seem like partic.i.p.ation in sacrificial rites (I Cor., viii. 10), to expend secretly the money collected for the poor might have the appearance of improper use of funds (II Cor., viii. 20, 21).
Hence, St. Paul directs; "From all appearance of evil refrain yourselves" (I Thess., v. 22).
1454. The acts wrong in reality or in appearance that give scandal are innumerable, since the whole world is seated in wickedness (I John, v.
19). But today there are a number of acts that should be specially mentioned, as they occasion sin oftener or for more persons than other acts. Among these are: (a) occasions of sin against faith, such as atheistical literature, as discussed in the section on faith; (b) occasions of sin against morals, such as obscenity in dress, pictures, plays, writings, and dances. These last-mentioned will be discussed now in separate paragraphs.
1455. Obscenity.--Obscenity is a quality of words, acts or objects by which impure thoughts are conveyed, or impure desires or actions suggested. We may consider it either internally (i.e., in the intention of the person who uses the words, acts or objects) or externally (i.e., in the nature of the things themselves which are used).
(a) Thus, internal obscenity, or the will to use what will corrupt the minds and morals of others, is of course a mortal sin. If the intention is to deprave another, the guilt of direct scandal is incurred; if the intention is only to satisfy one's own wish to use the sinful words, acts or objects, the guilt is that of indirect scandal. Thus, a woman who dresses fas.h.i.+onably in order to excite impure love is guilty of direct scandal; if she dresses immodestly, not to excite impure love, but to follow a fas.h.i.+on, she is guilty of indirect scandal.
(b) External obscenity is the tendency of words, acts or objects themselves to call up impure images in the mind, or to excite impure desires or actions in those to whom they are presented. The use of such words, acts, etc., is therefore a mortal sin. For, if the thing said or done is wrong in itself (such as obscene language), it is a scandalous sin against purity, if it is wrong on account of those who will be influenced (such as a talk on s.e.x matters to immature or weak persons), it is a sin of scandal. Hence, a good or even religious motive (such as instruction, refutation of error, health, or mysticism) does not excuse the employment of what is clearly obscene, for the end does not justify the means.
1456. It is not always easy to determine in particular cases when a thing is obscene from its very nature, but the following general rules can be given:
(a) Pictures, statues and other images are obscene, when they represent scenes of immoral or s.e.xual acts, or lascivious att.i.tudes or postures; also, when they represent nude or partly nude human figures, ut quando depinguntur verenda adultorum vel pectora aut partes minus honest mulierum.
(b) Female dress or adornment is lascivious, when there is a notable display of the person through abbreviated skirts, necks, and sleeves; or a suggestiveness expressed in transparency of material or a closeness of fit that brings out the lines and curves of the figure; or in an extremity of fas.h.i.+on whose striking color or design will make the wearer conspicuous and direct special attention to her physical charms.
(c) Plays on the stage or moving picture screen are obscene by reason of the lesson taught (as when purity is derided or impurity condoned), by reason of the thing represented (as when the main theme is impurity, or when acts of impurity are represented or suggested, or when s.e.xual pa.s.sion is emphasized), or by reason of the players (as when they are noted for immorality, or when their dress is indecent, or their language objectionable).
(d) Dances are obscene in themselves when the postures, movements, or contact of the dancers is indecent; they are obscene by reason of the dancers, when these are indecently attired. Public dance halls, cabarets, road houses, and night clubs--where there is no supervision and young girls come unattended to dance until late hours with men unknown to them, and where there is intoxication and boisterousness--are the natural haunts of the obscene dance, but it may be found even in more respectable places.
(e) Books or other writings contain obscenity When they inculcate or recommend impure acts, or advise how these may be committed; when they treat sins of impurity or narrate immoral facts or stories in such a manner as to make vice seem alluring or pardonable to the intended reader; when an erotic composition by language, allusions, details, sympathetic treatment, etc., gives prominence to animal pa.s.sion.
1457. As is stated elsewhere (see 1461 sqq.), scandal is not given unless the persons affected by one's conduct are susceptible to evil influence. Hence, there is no obscenity when on account of circ.u.mstances there is no suggestion of evil in things which under other conditions would be immoral and seductive.
(a) Images of the nude in the studio of an artist, and anatomical charts, figures or ill.u.s.trations in a book intended for the instruction of medical men, are not cla.s.sed as obscene, since the persons for whom they are made are supposed to be so much under the influence of the esthetic or scientific principles of their professions that no harm will be taken.
(b) The obscenity of dress is largely dependent on its novelty, for things that are usual cease to excite special attention. This we can see from the fact that styles that are conservative today would have been extreme ten years ago. And so the scanty attire of hot countries, the dress of the bathing beach, and the moderate decollet tolerated in private gatherings are not obscene in their own proper times and places.
(c) Plays which contain gross or unseemly expressions or pa.s.sages are not therefore obscene, if in the main they uphold decency and morality; otherwise, we should have to regard as immoral even the cla.s.sic drama.
Newman says of Shakespeare: "Often as he may offend against modesty, he is clear of a worse charge, sensuality, and hardly a pa.s.sage can be instanced in all that he has written to seduce the imagination or to excite the pa.s.sions." It is a simple matter to omit from plays of this kind the word or phrase that is offensive to modern ears or to the innocence of youth.
(d) The fact that some individuals find all dancing a strong stimulus to impure pa.s.sion does not prove that every dance is obscene. Some types of dance, it is true, might be rightly called "the devil's march"; other dances, named after various animals, may also be suggestive. But there are also standard types of dance in which many experience not temptation, but innocent pastime, and which have also physical, esthetic and social values.
(e) To books and other writings should be applied what was said about plays, namely, that they are not to be cla.s.sed as obscene on account of isolated pa.s.sages unsuited for the reading of children or other susceptible persons, or excitable to prurient or impure minds. Even the Bible may seem objectionable to a prude, and the indecent will go through its pages with a fine-tooth comb in the search for indecent matter; but public opinion will rightly cla.s.s as a lunatic the person who would endeavor to have the Bible rated as obscene.
1458. Persons Who Give Scandal on Account of Obscenity.--(a) In case of obscene pictures or statues, scandal is given by the artists, painters, sculptors or others who make the images, and by the responsible persons who place them in museums, galleries, parks or other places to which there is general admission.
(b) As regards female dress, the guilty parties are proximately the wearers, but remotely and princ.i.p.ally the designers and society leaders who impose their will in making the fas.h.i.+ons dangerous and in causing one extreme mode to follow quickly upon another.
(e) With respect to obscene plays, the scandal is given by playwrights, managers, actors and actresses, and those who patronize or applaud them. The public itself and the civil authorities share in the guilt, when they supinely tolerate the degradation of the stage and the corruption of morals.
(d) In the case of obscene dances, the givers of scandal are the proprietors of resorts where the dances are held, the musicians and singers (especially when the songs themselves are obscene), and the dancers, spectators and other patrons.
(e) In the case of salacious publications or writings, authors, publishers, printers, vendors, and the reading public share responsibility for the scandal. Government censors.h.i.+p of the press is not desirable, but government suppression of obscenity has always been the policy of countries of English origin. The private citizen, then, is not free of guilt if he takes no interest even when he sees piles of indecent magazines, pictures, etc., being sold openly on the newsstands. Canon Law (Canon 1404) forbids booksellers to sell, lend, or keep books that deal _ex professo_ with obscenity, though there is no objection to expurgated editions, as in the case of cla.s.sical works.
1459. Results of Scandal.--The spiritual ruin occasioned by scandal is sin.
(a) Thus, formal or material sin may be the result of scandal. Example: t.i.tus blasphemed before a boy who did not understand the meaning of the word and before a youth who did understand, with the result that both repeated the same blasphemy. Thus, the scandal given by t.i.tus produced material sin in the boy and formal sin in the youth.
(b) Mortal sin or venial sin may be the result of scandal, just as a stone in the road may cause either a fall or a stumble.
(c) Sin of the same species or sin of a different species from that committed by the scandal-giver may be the result of scandal. Thus, a calumny spoken against a neighbor may induce a hearer either to repeat the calumny, or to imitate the act imputed by the calumniator, or to give up religion.
(d) Sin already committed by the person scandalized or sin which is new to him, sin he had in mind to commit or sin he had not contemplated--any one of these results suffice for scandal. Example: It is scandal to recall to drunkenness by bad example a person who had reformed, or by bad example to bring back to another's mind and desire a sin on which he was once resolved.
1460. Scandal resembles solicitation and complicity, since like them it exercises an evil influence on others; but it is not identical with them.
(a) Thus, solicitation influences another to evil by counsel, persuasion, command, or invitation; scandal may influence to evil either in these ways or by mere example. Again, solicitation does not necessarily intend the fall of another into guilt, as does scandal.
Thus, one may solicit another to get drunk who had already determined to get drunk, or one may persuade another that drunkenness is no sin, and then solicit him to drunkenness. But, if one who intends the demoralization and corruption of his neighbor solicits him to drunkenness, solicitation is joined with scandal.
(b) Complicity or coperation influences another to evil by helping him in the commission of sin; scandal influences him to evil by suggesting that he commit sin. Example: t.i.tus, an elderly man, gets drunk or praises drunkards in the presence of Balbus, a youth. Influenced by these acts and words, Balbus tells his acquaintance Claudius that he intends to get drunk, and Claudius supplies him with the intoxicants.
t.i.tus is guilty of scandal, Claudius of coperation.
1461. The persons before whom disedifying words, deeds or omissions are done, are of two cla.s.ses. (a) Persons apt to be scandalized are those who are not experienced either in vice (especially that to which the disedifying example would lead), or in virtue (especially the opposite virtue); for such persons are readily subject to bad influence. Thus, young persons Whose character is yet unformed, the ignorant and well-meaning persons who are weak, are peculiarly disposed to be led astray by example. (b) Persons not apt to be scandalized are those who are habitually so bad or so good that anything disedifying done before them is not calculated to influence their att.i.tude towards evil.
1462. May a person hold himself guiltless of scandal, therefore, because his wrongdoing was committed before those who are not apt to be scandalized?
(a) If he is certain that the witnesses will not be weakened morally on his account, and if he does not intend their fall, he is free of the guilt of scandal. Thus, if one blasphemes in the presence of a lady renowned for piety, or of a rough crowd of men whose daily talk is interspersed with blasphemies, it is practically sure that no scandal is given.
(b) If a person is not certain that the witnesses will suffer no moral harm through his example, he cannot hold himself as not guilty of scandal. For, no matter how good or how bad the witnesses may appear to him, they may not be as fixed in character as he thinks, and his misconduct may be the starting point for them of a downward course or of a more rapid descent into evil. Generally speaking, there is this uncertainty about the influence of bad example, for the reading of character is no easy matter, and many sins are internal.
1463. There are two cases especially, when even the very good may become bad or the very bad become worse through force of evil example: (a) when the sin committed is from its nature very alluring. Sic auctores censent vix fieri posse quin in materia luxuri malum exemplum peccati motus cieat; (b) the second case is when the authority of the one who gives scandal is great. For the fact that he sides with or seems to side with evil, will demoralize the good and encourage the wicked in wrongdoing.
1464. Pa.s.sive scandal (see 1452), that is, the spiritual fall consequent on the example of another, is of two kinds: (a) scandal given, which is a fall into sin occasioned by conduct really disedifying, as when a youth becomes drunk because he has seen his elders intoxicated; (b) scandal taken, which is a fall into sin occasioned by conduct irreproachable in itself, but wrongly interpreted, either out of malice (Pharisaic scandal), or out of ignorance or frailty (scandal of little ones). The Pharisees were scandalized at our Lord's dining with sinners, because they themselves were unmerciful (Matt., ix. 11 sqq.), and the weak brethren at Corinth were scandalized at the eating of certain meats, because their consciences were tender (I Cor., xi. 23 sqq.).
1465. Sinfulness of Scandal.--(a) Scandal in the wide sense is not necessarily a sin. Thus, St. Peter acted out of love for his Master when he wished to dissuade Him from the Pa.s.sion, but our Lord, in order to correct more vigorously the wrong ideas of Peter, called them a scandal (Matt., xvi. 23).
(b) Pa.s.sive scandal is always a sin in the one who falls because of the conduct of another; but it does not always suppose that the conduct which occasioned the fall was a sin, as is clear from the remarks made above on Pharisaic scandal and the scandal of little ones.
(c) Active scandal is always a sin in the one whose conduct occasions the fall of another, since that conduct is either sinful, or has such an appearance of sin that it should have been omitted. But it does not always suppose a sin in the person who witnesses the scandal, for he may proceed without a fall in spite of the obstacle placed in his path.
1466. Is scandal a distinct species of sin, or only a circ.u.mstance that may happen to any kind of sin?
(a) Pa.s.sive scandal is not a special kind of sin. For the scandalized person may fall into any and every kind of sin, and the fact that example occasions his fall does not add any special or new opposition to the virtue against which he offends. Thus, he who breaks the fast because he saw others break the fast, is guilty of the same sin of intemperance as those who gave him scandal. But pa.s.sive scandal may be an aggravating or an extenuating circ.u.mstance, aggravating if the scandal was taken, extenuating if the scandal was given.
(b) Active scandal, if it is only indirectly intentional (see 1450) and is offered by conduct evil in itself, is not a special sin. The reason is that in such scandal one does not specially intend the spiritual ruin of a neighbor, but only the satisfaction of one's own desire.
Thus, he who breaks the fast before others to satisfy his own appet.i.te, does not directly wish the corruption of those others, and hence his sin is that of intemperance with the added circ.u.mstance of bad example.
(c) Active scandal, if it is only indirectly intentional and is offered by conduct not evil but evil-appearing, is reductively the special sin of scandal, For, since all active scandal is sinful, and in this case there is no other species of sin, the conduct not being really evil in itself, the sin in question must be reduced to scandal. Thus, one who is dispensed from the law of abstinence and who eats meat on a day of abstinence in the presence of others who know he is a Catholic but do not know he is dispensed, does not sin against temperance, but against edification. His sin is that of scandal only reductively, since he does not directly will the fall of others. There is also the circ.u.mstance that the law of abstinence may suffer as a result of the scandal.
(d) Active scandal, if it is directly intentional (see 1450), is directly also the special sin of scandal. For this kind of scandal directly intends the spiritual ruin of a neighbor, and so is directly opposed to a special good of another person and to the special charitable act of fraternal correction. Hence, a person who breaks the fast in order to lead his neighbor into a like transgression is guilty of both intemperance and scandal; he who to make his neighbor sin appears to break the fast, is guilty of scandal, but not of intemperance.