Summaries / Resúmenes - Studia Moralia

24 JOSEPH A. SELLINGthe manner in which Christians dealt with non-Christians.The fact that Suarez recognized the ius gentium as a validsource of moral insight built upon the customs of different peoplesdid not mean that this was disconnected from the conceptof natural law available to all human beings. The latter was nota collection of rational principles that spelled out a single orderof creation but, in Suarez’ opinion, relied much more upon thewill of God who created human beings with the ability to discerngood and evil. Suarez’ approach to natural law could copewith heterogeneity and a variety of civil structures, somethingthat the medieval worldview could not accommodate. This wasnot the demise of reason but rather its liberation from singlemindedthinking. Without it, the concept of international lawwould never have been able to develop.There is, however, another important element of Catholic(moral) theology in the seventeenth century that seems to haveescaped Johnstone’s consideration, although it is implicitlyreflected in the Cursus of the Salamanca Carmelites. 5 When theleaders of the counter-reformation were designing seminarycourses for the training of the clergy, they had to decide upon aframework for approaching questions of practical or appliedethics. Aquinas had used virtue for his framework, but hisobjectives were very different from those putting together a curriculumfor the seminary.Aquinas wanted to outline what the moral life should looklike, and he did so by demonstrating how virtue could motivatebehavior that was appropriate for a Christian. The seminaryprofessors of the counter-reformation, however, were attemptingto train the clergy to hear confessions. The focus of the confessionalwas not what moral life should look like but ratherhow one dealt with the fact that one had failed to be moral. Theenumeration of sins demanded in confessional practice needed5In note 31, Johnstone admits that he is commenting upon the Cursustheologicus as it is “cited in Pinkaers” (sic: Pinckaers), Ce qu’on ne peutjamais faire (Ed. Univ.: Fribourg, 1986), 55.