Friedrich Bernard Christian Maassen
United Sees of Macerata and Tolentino
Vicariate Apostolic of Mackenzie
Marie-Edmé-Patrice-Maurice de MacMahon
Joseph-Anna-Marie de Moyria de Mailla
François-Pierre-Gonthier Maine de Biran
Françoise, Marquise de Maintenon
Joseph-Marie, Comte de Maistre
Marcellinus of Civezza, O.F.M.
Margaret of the Blessed Sacrament
Prefecture Apostolic of Mariana Islands
Congregation of the Missionaries of Mariannhill
Sts. Maris, Martha, Audifax, and Abachum
Lucius Perpetuus Aurelianus Marius Maximus
Vicariate Apostolic of Marquesas Islands
Moral and Canonical Aspect of Marriage
Diocese of Marseilles (Massilia)
Vicariate Apostolic of the Marshall Islands
Diocese of Marsico Nuovo and Potenza
Luigi Ferdinando, Count de Marsigli
Missionaries of the Company of Mary
Servants of Mary (Order of Servites)
Society of Mary (Marist Fathers)
St. Mary Frances of the Five Wounds of Jesus
Richard Angelus a S. Francisco Mason
Devises and Bequests for Masses (United States)
Feast of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary
Marcus Aurelius Valerius Maximianus
Caius Julius Verus Maximinus Thrax
Prefecture Apostolic of Mayotte, Nossi-Bé, and Comoro
Charles Joseph Eugene de Mazenod
Abbey and Congregation of Melk
Vicariate Apostolic of Méndez and Gualaquiza
Francisco Sarmiento de Mendoza
Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy
Sisters of Mercy of St. Borromeo
Frédéric-François-Xavier Ghislain de Mérode
Delegation Apostolic of Mesopotamia, Kurdistan, and Armenia
Metal-Work in the Service of the Church
Prince Klemens Lothar Wenzel von Metternich
Francis, Joseph, and Paul Mezger
Military Orders of St. Michael
Giovanni Francesco Pico della Mirandola
Congregation of the Sisters of Misericorde
Prefecture Apostolic of Misocco and Calanca
Congregation of Priests of the Mission
Congregation of Missionaries of St. Charles Borromeo
Missionaries of St. Francis de Sales of Annecy
Missionary Society of St. Paul the Apostle
Mission Indians (of California)
Catholic Indian Missions of Canada
Catholic Indian Missions of the United States
François-Napoléon-Marie Moigno
Diocese of Molfetta, Terlizzi, and Giovinazzo
Jean-Baptiste Poquelin Molière
Principality and Diocese of Monaco
Canonical Erection of a Monastery
Monophysites and Monophysitism
Monothelitism and Monothelites
Montagnais Indians (Chippewayans)
Charles-Forbes-René, Comte de Montalembert
Marquis de Louis-Joseph Montcalm-Gozon
Diocese of Monterey and Los Angeles
Charles-Louis de Secondat, Baron de Montesquieu
Anne, First Duke of Montmorency
Alexis-François Artaud de Montor
Antoine-Jean-Baptiste-Robert Auget, Baron de Montyon
Dioceses of Mostar and Markana-Trebinje
Feast of the Most Pure Heart of Mary
Toribio de Benavente Motolinia
Congregations of Mount Calvary
Feast of Our Lady of Mount Carmel
Karl Ernst, Freiherr von Moy de Sons
Johann Chrysostomus Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
St. Clair Augustine Mulholland
Baron Eligius Franz Joseph von Münch-Bellinghausen
Archdiocese of Munich-Freising
The name applied to a doctrine which has grown out of the common Catholic teaching about lying and which is its complement.
The Catholic Doctrine on Lying
According to the common Catholic teaching it is never allowable to tell a lie, not even to save human life. A lie is something intrinsically evil, and as evil may not be done that good may come of it, we are never allowed to tell a lie. However, we are also under an obligation to keep secrets faithfully, and sometimes the easiest way of fulfilling that duty is to say what is false, or to tell a lie. Writers of all creeds and of none, both ancient and modern, have frankly accepted this position. They admit the doctrine of the lie of necessity, and maintain that when there is a conflict between justice and veracity it is justice that should prevail. The common Catholic teaching has formulated the theory of mental reservation as a means by which the claims of both justice and veracity can be satisfied.
The Doctrine of Wide Mental Reservation
The doctrine was broached tentatively and with great diffidence by St. Raymund of Pennafort, the first writer on casuistry. In his "Summa" (1235) St. Raymund quotes the saying of St. Augustine that a man must not slay his own soul by lying in order to preserve the life of another, and that it would be a most perilous doctrine to admit that we may do a less evil to prevent another doing a greater. And most doctors teach this, he says, though he allows that others teach that a lie should be told when a man's life is at stake. Then he adds:
Such expressions as "He is not at home" were called equivocations, or amphibologies, and when there was good reason for using them their lawfulness was admitted by all. If the person inquired for was really at home, but did not wish to see the visitor, the meaning of the phrase "He is not at home" was restricted by the mind of the speaker to this sense, "He is not at home for you, or to see you." Hence equivocations and amphibologies came to be called mental restrictions or reservations. It was commonly admitted that an equivocal expression need not necessarily be used when the words of the speaker receive a special meaning from the circumstances in which he is placed, or from the position which he holds. Thus, if a confessor is asked about sins made known to him in confession, he should answer "I do not know," and such words as those when used by a priest mean "I do not know apart from confession," or "I do not know as man," or "I have no knowledge of the matter which I can communicate." All Catholic writers were, and are, agreed that when there is good reason, such expressions as the above may be made use of, and that they are not lies. Those who hear them may understand them in a sense which is not true, but their self-deception may be permitted by the speaker for a good reason. If there is no good reason to the contrary, veracity requires all to speak frankly and openly in such a way as to be understood by those who are addressed. A sin is committed if mental reservations are used without just cause, or in cases when the questioner has a right to the naked truth.
The Doctrine of Strict Mental Reservation
In the sixteenth century a further development of this commonly received doctrine began to be admitted even by some theologians of note. We shall probably not be far wrong if we attribute the change to the very difficult political circumstances of the time due to the wars of religion. Martin Aspilcueta, the "Doctor Navarrus," as he was called, was one of the first to develop the new doctrine. He was nearing the end of a long life, and was regarded as the foremost living authority on canon law and moral theology, when he was consulted on a case of conscience by the fathers of the Jesuit college at Valladolid. The case sent to him for solution was drawn up in these terms:
Navarrus was asked whether Titius told a lie, whether he had committed perjury, or whether he committed any sin at all. He drew up an elaborate opinion on the case and dedicated it to the reigning pontiff, Gregory XII. Navarrus maintained that Titius neither lied, nor committed perjury, nor any sin whatever, on the supposition that he had a good reason for answering as he did. This theory became known as the doctrine of strict mental reservation, to distinguish it from wide mental reservation with which we have thus far been occupied. In the strict mental reservation the speaker mentally adds some qualification to the words which he utters, and the words together with the mental qualification make a true assertion in accordance with fact. On the other hand, in a wide mental reservation, the qualification comes from the ambiguity of the words themselves, or from the circumstances of time, place, or person in which they are uttered.
The opinion of Navarrus was received as probable by such contemporary theologians of different schools as Salon, Sayers, Suarez, and Lessius. The Jesuit theologian Sanchez formulated it in clear and distinct terms, and added the weight of his authority on the side of the defenders. Laymann, however, another Jesuit theologian of equal or greater weight, rejected the doctrine, as did Azor, S.J., the Dominican Soto, and others. Laymann shows at considerable length that such reservations are lies. For that man tells a lie who makes use of words which are false with the intention of deceiving another. And this is what is done when a strict mental reservation is made use of. The words uttered do not express the truth as known to the speaker. They are at variance with it and therefore they constitute a lie. The opinion of Navarrus was freely debated in the schools for some years, and was acted upon by some of the Catholic confessors of the Faith in England in the difficult circumstances in which they were frequently placed. It was, however, condemned as formulated by Sanchez by Innocent XI on March 2, 1679 (propositions 26, 27). After this condemnation by the Holy See no Catholic theologian has defended the lawfulness of strict mental reservations.
T. Slater.