PARENTS
479
PARENTS
his children was not less complete than that over his
slaves. He possessed an undisputed right of life and
death; he might sell them into slavery and dispose of
any property they had acquired. Compatible with
this general idea, abortion, infanticide, and exposi-
tion were widespread. The laws seemed to contem-
plate these crimes as venial offences and to have been
largely inoperative in such cases.
In consequence the filial observance implied in the ancient pietas could not always be translated as af- fection. This earlier condition was modified by de- crees of the later emperors. Alexander Severus dis- tinguished the right of a father to put an adult child to death, whilst Diocletian made it illegal for fathers to sell their children.
Uniler Christianity parents were not merely the re- positories of rights and duties whose affirmation na- riire demanded, but they were to be regarded as the representatives of God Himself, from whom "all pa- ternity is named", and found in this capacity the way to mingle love and reverence, as well as the strongest motive for a cheerful obedience on the part of the children.
The first duty of parents towards their children is to love them. Nature inculcates this clearly, and it is customary to describe parents who lack this afTection as unnatural. Here the offence is against a distinct virtue which the theologians call pictns, concerned with the demeanour reciprocally of parents and chil- dren. Hence the circumstance of this close relation- ship must be made known in confession when there is question of sins of this sort. In the case of serious damage done by parents to their children, besides the sin against justice there is contracted the quite dif- ferent malice derived from this propinquity. This virtue, interpreting the precept of the natural law, also requires parents diligently to care for the proper rearing of their children, that is, to provide for their bodily, mental, and spiritual well-being. This is so even in the supposition that the children are illegit- imate. Parents are guilty of grievous sin who treat their children with such cruelty as to indicate that their conduct is inspired by hatred, or who, with full intent, curse them or exhibit a notable and unreason- able preference for one child rather than another. Parents are bound to support their children in a man- ner commensurate with their social condition until these latter can support themselves. The mother is bound to do nothing to prejudice the life or proper development of her unborn infant, and after birth she must under pain of venial sin nurse it herself un- less there is some adequate excuse.
A father who is idle or unthrifty so that his family is left without fitting maintenance is guilty of griev- ous sin. Parents must see that their chiklren obtain at least an elementary education. They are bound with special emphasis to watch over the spiritual welfare of their children, to afford them good exam- ple, and to correct the erring. The teaching of the Church is that the right and duty to educate their own offspring abides natively and primarily with the parents. It is their most important task; indeed understood in its full sense it is ranked by no obliga- tion. In so far as it means instruction in the more elementary branches of human knowledge it is in most cases identical with the obligation of bestowing care in the selection of a school for the children.
Hence, in general, parents may not with a safe con- science send their children to non-Catholic schools, whether these be sectarian or secularist. This state- ment admits of exception in the instance where there are grave reasons for permitting Catholic children to frequent these schools, and where such dangers as may exist for their faith or morals are by fitting means either neutralized or rendered remote. The judge in such cases, both of the sufficiency of the reasons al- leged as well as of the kind of measure to be em-
ployed to encounter successfully whatever risks there
are, is, in the United States, the bishop of each diocese.
The attendance at non-Catholic schools by Catholic
children is something which, for weighty motives and
with due safeguards, can be tolerated, not approved.
In any case parents must carefully provide for the
child's religious instruction.
As to higher education, parents have a clear duty to sec that the faith of their children is not imperilled by (heir going to iKjn-C'athdlic univi isitirs and oolleges. In the lack of jjositive legislation before parents can assent to their children attending non-Catholic uni- versities or colleges there must be a commensurately grave cause, and such dangers as may threaten faith or morals are to be rendered remote by suitable remedies. The last-named requirement is obviously the more important. Failure to fall in with the first, provided that means had been taken faithfully to comply with the second, vv'ould not oblige the con- fessor to refuse absolution to such parents. There is an undoubted and under ordinary circumstances in- alienable authority to be exercised by parents. The extent of this is a matter to be determined by positive law. In the instances in which it becomes necessary to decide upon one of the parents rather than the other as custodian of the children, the rule of legal preference in the United States is that the children are confided to the charge of the father. There is, however, a growing disposition to favour the mother. Parents have the right to administer chastisement to delinquent children. Their omission to punish suit- ably may be a serious offense before God.
II. Duties op Children towards Parents. — Children have a threefold obligation of love, rever- ence, and obedience toward their parents. This is enjoined by the virtue which St. Thomas calls pietas, and for which the nearest English equivalent phrase is "dutiful observance". As religion makes it oblig- atory for us to worship God, so there is a virtue dis- tinct from all the others which inculcates the attitude we ought to hold towards parents, in so far as they in a secondary sense are the principles of our being and of its regulation. The violation of i his obligation there- fore is reputed a grievous sin unless the smallness of the matter involved make the offence a venial one. Of the obligations referred to, love and reverence are in force during the parents' lifetime. Obedience ceases when the children pass from under the parental au- thority. The duty of love of parents, strongly inti- mated to the conscience by the natural law, is ex- pressly emphasized by the positive law of God. The Fourth Commandment, "Honour thy father and thy mother", is universally interpreted to mean not only respect and submission, but also the entertaining and manifestation of affection they deserve at the hands of their children.
Those children are guilty of grievous sin who hab- itually exhibit towards their parents a heartless de- meanour, or who fail to succour them in serious need, either bodily or spiritual, or who neglect to carry out the provisions of their last will and testament in so far as the amount devised will permit. It is not merely the external bearing which has to be governed. The inward sentiment of affection must be deep- seated. The Christian concept of parents as being the delegates of God carries with it the inference that they are to be treated with peculiar respect. Chil- dren incur the guilt of grievous sin who strike their parents, or even raise their hands to do so, or who give them well-founded reason for great sorrow. The same is to be said of those who put their parents in a violent rage, who curse them or revile them, or refuse to recognize them.
Besides the parental relationship and dignity ac- count is to be taken of their authority. Children, so long as they remain under its yoke, are bound to obey. This does not mean, according to the teaching of St.
