Summaries / Resúmenes - Studia Moralia

THE SUBJECT-OBJECT RELATION IN CONTEMPORARY CATHOLIC MORAL THEOLOGY 51date my interpretations. However, unfortunately, I did not findany indications of such further research in Selling’s article.Selling himself engages in sweeping assessments of wholeperiods. He asserts, to take one example, that “The structure ofpost-Tridentine moral theology was built upon theCommandments…” Is this true, though commonly asserted?Depending on how widely or narrowly one wants to definemoral theology, there were certainly some who followed a differentapproach, for example the “French school” and Cardinalde Bérulle. Even if one stays within the narrow definition ofmoral theology as that represented by the manuals of the post-Tridentine Church, care is needed. The work of ThomasSanchez, S.J. Opus Morale in Praecepta Decalogi, 18 clearly isorganized on the basis of the commandments. However, theCursus Theologiae Moralis, of the Discalced Carmelites ofSalamanca, 19 is not. The treatment of the ten commandments isfound in the fifth and last volume. Joannes Vincentius Patuzzi,O.P., in his Ethica Christiana sive Theologia Moralis, 20 dividedthe material thus: I: Law, Reason, Conscience; II: Duties,Human Acts; III: Virtues; the Decalogue; IV: Justice; V:Contracts; VI: Sacraments. The Commandments do not providethe central, organizing frame. It is simply not correct to saythat all post-Tridentine moral theology was based on the commandments.Later, in his response, Selling makes much of the problemscaused when moral theologians no longer worked with Latintexts, and he comments on the translation of objectum in supportof his views. Even in Latin, “objectus” has the seeds of theproblem that I identify: the meaning of objectus in Lewis andShort’s standard Latin Dictionary, is “lying before or opposite.”The confusion is not caused by later vernacular moralists. Therupture between subject and object has historical and philosophicalnot linguistic roots.If Selling has another interpretation and would proposeauthors, other than those I have indicated, as more significant,then I am only too ready to learn about them. He offers a sug-18(Parma: Paulus Monti, 1723).19(Venice: Nicolaus Pezzana, 1728).20(Milan: Fredericus Agnellus, 1781).