FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236  
237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   >>  
though it cannot be said that they were formally and avowedly at conflict with the Casuists, the origin and object of their system were nevertheless essentially different from those of Casuistry. It is necessary to call attention to this difference, because it involves the question of the influence of Roman law on that department of thought with which both systems are concerned. The book of Grotius, though it touches questions of pure Ethics in every page, and though it is the parent immediate or remote of innumerable volumes of formal morality, is not, as is well known, a professed treatise on Moral Philosophy; it is an attempt to determine the Law of Nature, or Natural Law. Now, without entering upon the question, whether the conception of a Law Natural be not exclusively a creation of the Roman jurisconsults, we may lay down that, even on the admission of Grotius himself, the dicta of the Roman jurisprudence as to what parts of known positive law must be taken to be parts of the Law of Nature, are, if not infallible, to be received at all events with the profoundest respect. Hence the system of Grotius is implicated with Roman law at its very foundation, and this connection rendered inevitable--what the legal training of the writer would perhaps have entailed without it--the free employment in every paragraph of technical phraseology, and of modes of reasoning, defining, and illustrating, which must sometimes conceal the sense, and almost always the force and cogency, of the argument from the reader who is unfamiliar with the sources whence they have been derived. On the other hand, Casuistry borrows little from Roman law, and the views of morality contended for have nothing whatever in common with the undertaking of Grotius. All that philosophy of right and wrong which has become famous, or infamous, under the name of Casuistry, had its origin in the distinction between Mortal and Venial Sin. A natural anxiety to escape the awful consequences of determining a particular act to be mortally sinful, and a desire, equally intelligible, to assist the Roman Catholic Church in its conflict with Protestantism by disburthening it of an inconvenient theory, were the motives which impelled the authors of the Casuistical philosophy to the invention of an elaborate system of criteria, intended to remove immoral actions, in as many cases as possible, out of the category of mortal offences, and to stamp them as venial sins. The fa
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236  
237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   >>  



Top keywords:

Grotius

 

Casuistry

 

system

 

morality

 

question

 

origin

 
conflict
 
philosophy
 

Natural

 

Nature


conceal

 

distinction

 

illustrating

 

infamous

 

famous

 

derived

 

sources

 

reader

 

cogency

 
unfamiliar

Mortal

 

argument

 

common

 

contended

 

borrows

 

undertaking

 

mortally

 

intended

 
remove
 

immoral


actions

 

criteria

 

elaborate

 

impelled

 

authors

 
Casuistical
 

invention

 

venial

 

offences

 

category


mortal

 
motives
 

theory

 

consequences

 

determining

 

escape

 
natural
 

anxiety

 

defining

 
sinful