HASSLACHER
149
HATTO
ment of music, where his critical judgment and culti-
vated taste tlid much for the advancement of the
highest musical art. lie had a peculiarly impartial
mindj and in his writings displayed a remarkable
purity of style and vigour of expression. Most of his
literary life was spent as a journalist, but in addition
to his work as such and his contributions to the
magazines he wrote a very comprehensive life of
Archbishop John Hughes of New York, and a short
one of Pope Pius IX. He also prepared a " History of
the United States" in both extended and abridged
forms for use in Catholic colleges and schools.
The Catholic Family Annual (New York, 1S89); Freeman's Journal; Tribune (New York, April, 18S8}, files; Encycl. of Am. Biog., s. V.
Thomas F. Meehan.
Hasslacher, Peter, preacher; b. at Coblenz, 14 August, 1810; d. at Paris, .5 July, 1876. He was one of that baud of missionaries from the Society of Jesus whose fruitful laliours throughout Germany, from Frei- burg to Berlin and Danzig, reawakened and strength- ened the country's Catholic forces after the stormy year of 1846. Hasslacher's youth was somewhat tem- pestuous. As a medical student at the university in Bonn, in 18.31, he identified himself with the German student movement, which was looked upon as revolu- tionary; and he was compelled, in consequence, to undergo seven years' confinement at Berlin, Magde- burg, and Ehrenbreitstein. During these years he underwent a spiritual change, and in particular, by studying the Fathers of the Church, stored his mind with theological knowledge; after his liberation he entered, in the spring of 1840, the novitiate of the Society of Jesus, at >St-Acheul, I<"rance. He was or- dained to the priesthood, on 1 Sept., 1844, and then preached with much success in the cathedral of Stra.s- burg, until the year 1849. It was at this time that the popular missions were inaugurated in Germany; but Hasslacher's delicate health could not long with- stand the physical exertions entailed; and this appar- ent difficulty and disadvantage led the zealous- hearted missionary into a field of activity which was Peculiarly his own, namely, the conference. This he imself explains in a detailed letter (Deutsches Or- densarchiv) written from Bad Ems to his provincial in 1860. He gave conferences in all the larger cities of the district of the Rhine and Westphalia. His strength failing, he was sent in 1863 to conduct, in Paris, the St. Joseph's Mission for German Catholics; but even this labour became after ten years too much of a tax on his physical powers, so that he was com- pelled to abandon it and to take up similar but lighter duties at Poitiers. After a year he was brought back, very ill, to Paris, where he died.
Hertkens, Erinnerungtn an P. Hasslacher (Miinster. 1S79), with numerous letters and twenty-three sketches for lectures; the author makes use of Beda Weber, Cartons aus dem deuts- chen Kirchenleben (Mainz, 1858), 451 sqq.; Hasslacher's letter on his lectures is not used in these works; many corrections and supplementary data, therefore, must be borne in mind in its connexion; this criticism holds also for the articles in the Kirchenlex. and the Allgem, Detdsch. Biographie.
N. SCHEID.
Hatred in general is a vehement aversion enter- tained by one person for another, or for something more or less identified with that other. Theologians commonly mention two distinct species of this passion. One {odium abominalionis, or loathing) is that in which the intense dislike is concentrated primarily on the qualities or attributes of a person, and only secon- darily, and as it were derivatively, upon the person himself. The second sort {odium inimicitice, or hos- tilitj^) aims directly at the person, indulges a pro- pensity to see what is evil and unlovable in him, feels a fierce satisfaction at anything tending to his dis- credit, and is keenly desirous that his lot may be an unmixedly hard one, either in general or in this or that specified way. This kind of hatred, as involving a
very direct and absolute violation of the precept
of charity, is always sinful and may be grievously
so. The first-named species of hatred, in so far
as it implies the reprobation of what is actually
evil, is not a sin and may even represent a vir-
tuous temper of soul. In other words, not only
may I, but I even ought to, hate what is con-
trary to the moral law. Furthermore one may
without sin go so far in the detestation of wrong-
doing as to wish that which for its perpetrator is a
very well-defined evil, yet under another aspect is a
much more signal good. For instance, it would be
lawful to pray for the death of a perniciously active
heresiarch with a view to putting a stop to his ravages
among the Christian people. Of course, it is clear
that this apparent zeal must not be an excuse for
catering to personal spite or party rancour. Still,
even when the motive of one's aversion is not imper-
sonal, when, namely, it arises from the damage we
may have sustained at the hands of others, we are not
guilty of sin unless besides feeling indignation we
yield to an aversion unwarranted by the hurt we have
suffered. This aversion may be grievously or venially
sinful in proportion to its excess over that which the
injury would justify. When by any conceivable
stretch of human wickedness God Himself is the object
of hatred the guilt is appallingly special. If it be that
kind of enmity {odium inimicitive) which prompts the
sinner to loatlie God in Himself, to regret the Divine
perfections precisely in so far as they belong to God,
then the offence committed obtains the undisputed
primacy in all the miserable hierarchy of sin. In fact,
such an attitude of mind is fairly and adequately
described as diabolical; the human will detaches itself
immediately from God; in other sins it does so only
mediateltj and by consequence, that is, because of its
inordinate use of some creature it is averted from
(!o(l. To be sure, according to the teaching of St.
Thomas (II-II, Q. xxiv., a. 12) and the theologians,
any mortal sin carries with it the loss of the super-
natural habit of charity, and implies so to speak a sort
of virtual and interpretative hatred of God, which,
however, is not a separate specific malice to be referred
to in confession, but only a circumstance predicable of
every grievous sin.
Slater, Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908); RicK- ABY, Aquinas Ethicus (London, 1896); Ballerini, Opus Theo- logicum Morale (Prato, 1898); Lehmkuhl, Theologia Moralis (Freiburg, 1887).
Joseph F. Delany.
Hatto, Archbishop of Mainz; b. of a noble Swabian family, c. 850; d. 15 May, 913. He was educated at the monastery of EUwangen in Swabia, became a Benedictine monk at Fulda, was elected in 888 Abbot of Reichenau, and, a year later, also Abbot of EUwan- gen. As abbot of these two imperial monasteries he exercised a great infiuence on the political affairs of Germany. On account of his deep insight, his energy, and his unselfish devotion to the royal throne. King Arnulf of Germany appointed him Archbishop of Mainz in September, 891. In 892 he presided over a synod at Frankfort., at which the rights of the Arch- bishop of Cologne over the Diocese of Bremen were discussed by order of Pope Formosus. He likewise presided over the great politico-ecclesiastical assem- bly at Tribur (now Trebur), near Mainz, in May, 895 (Mansi, Coll. Cone. Ampl., XVIII, 129-166). When in 894 Pope Formosus called upon Iving Arnulf to de- fend him against Guido (or Wido) of Spoleto and his son Lambert, Hatto accompanied the king to Italy. He also accompanied him on a second expedition to Italy (from the autumn 895 to the spring 896), on which occasion he received the pallium from Pope Formosus at Rome.
In his far-reaching political activities Hatto was guided by the idea of a consolidated German kingdom with a strong king possessing the central authority.
