towards perfection; and the despising of perfection is opposed to this."

St. Thomas distinguishes between what belongs to the substance of poverty, chastity and obedience, violations of which he teaches may extend to the degree of mortal sin, and what are mere regulations in the Rule, directions for exterior observance, etc., which cannot be mortal sin "unless done through contempt of the Rule, which would indeed be directly opposed to one's profession." So by disobeying any portion of his Rule a Religious may "sin venially, or even mortally, if it be through carelessness, voluptuousness or contempt."

All theologians agree with this teaching of St. Thomas. The grave question is, What constitutes contempt?" He sins through contempt when his will rejects anything laid upon him by law or Rule, and when he proceeds to act against the law or Rule. But on the other hand, when anyone is led by some particular cause, as, e.g., concupiscence or anger to do something in violation of law or Rule, he sins not through contempt, even if he does the same thing many times, from these or similar causes. But frequent sinning disposes one to contempt, as is said in Proverbs xviii. 3, 'When the wicked cometh, there cometh also contempt.' "'

In his Spiritual Conferences given to the Sisters of the Visitation, St. Francis de Sales amplifies the teaching of St. Thomas with such clearness that we cannot do better than present his statement in extenso.5

1 St. Thomas, Summa. 2. 2, Q. 186, Art. 9. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 St. Francis de Sales, Spiritual Conferences, p. 7, seq.

"If anyone," he says, "should wilfully and intentionally violate the Constitutions, with contempt or with scandal, either of the Sisters or of strangers, she would without doubt commit a great offence; for it would be impossible to exempt from fault one who disgraces or dishonours the things of God, contradicts her profession, overthrows the Congregation, and dissipates the fruits of good example and of good odour which she should produce towards her neighbour. Voluntary contempt of this kind would be followed at length by some great chastisement from heaven, and particularly by the privation of the graces and gifts of the Holy Ghost, which are usually taken away from such as abandon their good purposes, and leave the path in which God has placed them.

"Now contempt of the Constitutions, as well as that of all good works, may be distinguished by the following considerations :

That person is guilty of it who violates or neglects some rule, not only voluntarily but with some special purpose, because if he violates it through inadvertence, forgetfulness, or the surprise of some passion, that is a different thing; for contempt includes in itself a deliberate will which purposely determines to act in that manner. Therefore it follows that whoever violates the Rule, or disobeys through contempt, not only disobeys, but intends to disobey; he not only commits an act of disobedience, but he commits it with the purpose of being disobedient. It is forbidden to eat out of meal-times; a sister eats some plums, some apricots, or other fruit ;

she violates the rule and is disobedient. Now if she eats, attracted by the pleasure she expects to receive therefrom, she disobeys, not out of disobedience, but out of greediness; but if she eats because she sets no value upon the Rule, and will not either regard it, or submit herself to it, she disobeys out of contempt and disobedience.

"It also follows that whoever disobeys in consequence of a temptation, or through the force of some sudden passion, would be glad to be able to satisfy his passion without disobeying, and that while he takes pleasure, for instance, in eating, he is at the same time sorry to be disobedient: in which case the disobedience follows or accompanies the deed, but in the other the disobedience precedes it and is both the cause and the motive of it, although through greediness. ...

"Now this formal disobedience, and this contempt of good and holy things, is never without some sin, at least venial, even when the things themselves are only counsels. For although it is quite possible without any sin to choose other things rather than to follow holy counsels, it is impossible to neglect them through contempt without guilt; because, though we are not bound to follow everything that is good, we are bound to honour and esteem it, and therefore with still more reason to avoid despising and depreciating it.

"Further, it follows that whoever violates the Rule and Constitutions out of contempt, considers them despicable and useless, which is in itself great presumption and temerity; or if he considers them to be

useful, and yet will not submit himself to them, then he gives up his former purpose to the injury of his neighbour, to whom he gives scandal and bad example; while he breaks the engagement and promise he made to the community, and brings disorder into a religious house, and these are very great faults."

IV. Of the Signs of Contempt of Rule

St. Francis de Sales gives us four signs by which contempt of the Rule or of a Superior's direction may be recognized.

1. When, on being corrected, one shows scorn and no repentance.

2. When he continues without showing any desire or will to amend.

3. When he complains that the Rule or command is unsuitable.

4. When he endeavours to draw others into the same fault, and to quiet their fears by telling them that it is nothing, and that there is no harm in it.1

These signs are not to be applied too literally, however, but must be considered in connection with other conditions. A person may turn a Rule or directions into ridicule because of a want of esteem for him who administers it; or he may offend, even habitually, against it through infirmity, sloth, anger, or some other form of sin; and he may draw others into his fault in order to have the consolation of companionship in his wrongdoing.

All of these conditions would indeed be sinful, but

1 St. Francis de Sales, Spiritual Conferences, p. 10.

they would not be the sin of contempt for Rule or authority. Such is St. Thomas's teaching.1

One sometimes is tempted not to count it as a matter for serious consideration when he esteems but lightly certain minor points of Rule, while having regard for all the rest. The principle of contempt for authority is, however, violated as completely in a small matter as in a great; and even the smallest degree of formal contempt is utterly destructive of the virtue of Obedience.

Furthermore, if I can allow myself to despise one point to-day, why not another to-morrow; and so on, until my whole Rule, and the entire authority of the community, are brought into contempt? St. Thomas warns Religious against this self-deception, showing that if the offence is small, it nevertheless disposes the will to greater offences, just as habitual venial sin creates a disposition in the soul that easily and swiftly leads on to mortal sin.2

If any want of esteem for Rule be tolerated, it might easily come about that one person in a community would despise a certain small point, a second person another, a third still another; and so on, until the whole body of Religious law and all authority would be brought into contempt to such an extent that the community would become an abode of confusion, and many vocations be wrecked.

The only safety for one's own vocation, and for the integrity of the virtue of Obedience, is not to consider the relative value of this or that point, but to have regard solely to the principle of obedience, and to see 1 St. Thomas, Summa. 2. 2, Q. 186, Art. 9. 2 Ibid.