them. There are temptations of faith and opinion, and they are to be resisted sometimes by indirect ways of proceeding, and artifices of the spirit; and sometimes men in sickness are afflicted with doubting and trembling consciences, but yet are supported only with general remembrances; they consider that there are comforts, and excellent promises, and instruments of hope, and wise and holy sayings by which they were nursed up to that height of strength, that they are now able to fight in the dark: if the speculative doubting conscience should always prevail in practice, the ignorant might be abused and miserable in all things, and the learned in most. RULE VII. Every Dictate and Judgment of the Conscience, though it be little and less material, is sufficient and may be made use of for the Deposition of a Doubt. EVERY little reason is not sufficient to guide the will, or to make an honest or a probable conscience, as I have proved in the foregoing chapter; but in a doubting conscience, that is, where there are seemingly great reasons of either side, and the conscience not able to determine between them, but hangs like a needle between two loadstones, and can go to neither, because it equally inclines to both; there it is, that any little dictate, that can come on one side and turn the scale, is to be admitted to counsel and to action; for a doubt is a disease in conscience, like an irresolution in action, and is therefore to be removed at any just rate, and any excuse taken rather than have it permitted. For even to wash in Jordan may cure a leprosy, and a glass of wine may ease the infirmities of the stomach; and he is too ceremonious in the matter of life and death, that stands upon punctilios with nature, and will not be cured but by rich medicines. For in a doubting conscience the immediate cure is not to choose right, that is the remedy in an erring conscience; but when the disease or evil is doubting or suspension, the remedy is determination; and to effect this, whatsoever is sufficient may be chosen and used. a Rule 7. Every conscience that proceeds probably, proceeds honestly, unless by a greater probability it be engaged against the less; now to make a conscience that is probable, yet even more probable, a little advantage is sufficient; which is to be understood with these cautions: 1. When the doubt is equal and the danger alike on either side, then a smaller superfetation of argument will do the work, that is, cure the doubting; for though a little argument is not alone a ground for the action of a wise man, yet a little overplus of reason will take off this calamity of irresolution and trepidation; it is not enough to outweigh any danger, but it can, with the portion of the equal measures which stand on its own side, by its little weight cast the balance. 2. This is not so easily to be admitted when the judgment of the man is discernibly and perceivably little and not to be trusted, for then the superaddition that is made by him to any part of the doubt, may be as wholly inconsiderable as the doubt itself is troublesome; and though this may make the doubt to be laid aside, as it will also determine such a man in the whole traverse of the question, yet it is the worst remedy of the doubt, and an insufficient introduction of the probability. In this case the doubt is to be laid aside by the advice and authority of some person fit to lead him, rather than by the confidence of his own little superadded impertinency. For indeed it is not good to have the sacredness of a conscience governed by weakness and contingency. 3. When the doubting person is inconstant, let him not speedily act what he lightly determines by the sudden intervening humour; for he that changes quickly, judges lightly, but fancies strongly, and acts passionately, and repents speedily and often; therefore let such a man when he perceives his own infirmity stop at the gates of action, lest the laying down one doubt multiply many, and he become more miserable in his remedy than in his sickness. In pursuance of this rule it is to be taken care of, that fear be not mistaken for doubt; for there is oftentimes a doubt no where but in the will, and the more slender and weak the judgment is, oftentimes the fear is greater; and sometimes they fear because they fear, and not because they have reason; when therefore the doubt does not rely upon such a reason as can be formed into an argument and discourse, but is an unreasonable trouble, and an infinite nothing; the doubt ought directly to be laid aside, for it is no way considerable, but only that it is a considerable trouble. RULE VIII. When two Precepts contrary to each other meet together about the same Question, that is to be preferred which binds most. THIS rule we learn from the eighth council of Toledo 2; “Ubi periculi necessitas compulerit, id debemus resolvere, quod minori nexu noscitur obligari. Quid autem ex his levius, quidve sit gravius, pietatis acumine investigemus." The council instances in the keeping wicked oaths and promises; where though the instance be mistaken, and that in the -matter of wicked promises the case is not perplexed, and it is no sin to break them, but a sin to keep them; yet upon supposition that the conscience is doubtful whether it be lawful to break them, and whether it be lawful to keep them, and fears a sin on either side, the council hath given a right answer; the evil that is least, is to be chosen. "Etenim dum perjurare compellimur, creatorem quidem offendimus, sed nos tantummodo maculamus. Cum vero noxia promissa complemus, et Dei jussa superbe contemnimus, et proximis impia crudelitate nocemus, et nos ipsos crudeliori gladio trucidamus:" "He that having sworn to do an evil turn, breaks his oath, offends God by putting his name to a lie and a villany, and he pollutes his own soul: but he that keeps his oath when he hath so sworn, despises the commandments of God, and hurts his neighbour with an impious cruelty, and destroys himself with a worse." On this side, therefore, there being the more and worse evils than on the other, we must decline furthest from this. For if all evil is to be avoided, then all degrees of evil are; and when we cannot avoid as much as we should, we must avoid as much as we a Concil. Tolet. 8. Can. 2. temp. Martini P. can. We must choose none directly, but when we are forced upon some by our own infelicity or fault; it is the best remedy for the gangrene that we lose our arm or leg: and he that is in the fatal necessity, no otherwise can be permitted to choose a sin, than he is supposed to be desirous to be cut of the stone, when upon any terms he resolves he never will or can endure the torments of the disease. The great reason of this rule is that which was given by Aristotle, év åyaloữ γὰρ λόγῳ γίνεται τὸ ἔλαττον κακὸν πρὸς τὸ μεῖζον κακόν· ἐστὶ γὰρ τὸ ἔλαττον κακὸν μᾶλλὸν αἱρετὸν τοῦ μείζονος· τὸ δὲ αἱρετὸν, ἀγαθὸν, καὶ τὸ μᾶλλον μεῖζον· “ the less evil in respect of the greater evil is to be accounted good; because the less evil is rather to be chosen than the greater; and what is in any sense eligible, is in some sense good, and that which is more eligible is a greater good." 66 But it seems something harder to inquire concerning this case when it relates to others: for so it uses to be asked; Quest. Whether it be lawful to advise, to counsel, to petition, to determine, to make use of the doubt of another, or his necessity, or perplexity, and to call upon him to do that which is a sin? The case is this; Pollio, an intemperate and wanton young man, falls into adulteries and unnatural lusts; his friend Publius Asinius advises him, not so,-but if he will not leave his vileness, better it is to satisfy his lust by single fornication, and the less harmful complications: Et quas Euphrates, et quas mihi misit Orontes, Whether or no Publius does well in giving this advice, is the question? The reasons of doubting are these: because he that advises evil, is guilty of the sin which he procures ; and he that any way consents or induces another to sin, shall be partner in the punishment. To this I answer, that, in the whole intercourse, there are to be considered the formal sin, the material part of the action, and the degrees of the obliquity. The formal part, or the sinfulness, cannot, must not be countenanced, or assisted at all, directly or indirectly; and in the present case it is so far from being countenanced, that it is reduced to as little a proportion as it can, as near to a destruction as the present necessity or perplexity will permit, and it is out of hatred to the obliquity or sinfulness that this lesser way is propounded. Pilate, seeing the Jews resolved to do a spite to the holy and most innocent Jesus, propounded to them a lesser way than murdering him: "I will scourge him, and let him go." Pilate's conscience was not perplexed, though his interest was; and therefore there was no necessity for him to do either, and neither ought he to have propounded the lesser evil, which, it may be, themselves did not design: indeed if they were resolved to do one, he might have persuaded the less, not absolutely (for nothing could have made that lawful), but comparatively; that is, rather that than the other, if ye will do one. 2. But for the material part of the action, if it be already prepared, and the malice known and declared, it is lawful to propound a less instance of the sin without persuading to it; which is to be understood with these cautions: 1. That it be only with a purpose of hindering a greater. 2. When the lesser cannot be hindered, but at least so much must be done by way of redemption. As if Caius resolves to ravish a matron to satisfy his lust, it is lawful to divert his lust upon a common prostitute, who sells her soul for bread; because her malice is always ready and watches for an opportunity, and sins no less, if she wants opportunity which she thirsts after. 3. That it be ever without the prejudice of a third person: as if one of the banditti intends to kill one man, and this happens to be offered to a public and a brave man, it is not lawful to point out his sword to the striking of a meaner person to save the other; because, though, in respect of the effect, it be a less evil, yet it is a direct uncharitableness to a third, which can receive no warrant or legitimation by the intention of the propounder; for although he intends that a less evil be done for the public, yet he intends a greater evil to the particular. 4. That it be in a case certainly known where the malice is apparent and declared, and the matter prepared; for thus we see that God, who sees the hearts of men, diverts their prepared malice upon some special matter, which serves the |