‘Full of scorpions is my mind’, said Macbeth – and this is a good a description of scruples as any. Fr William Doyle sets out the problem.
Editor’s Notes
This is the first part of a serialisation of Fr William Doyle SJ’s guide for dealing with scrupulosity.
Fr William “Willie” Doyle SJ was an Irish Jesuit priest, who died serving as a military chaplain, shortly before the end of the First World War.
He lived a remarkable life of penance, and his exploits as a military chaplain are legendary: he lived in the trenches with his men, and would frequently venture into No-Man’s-Land in search of dying men to anoint, absolve and usher into eternity. He was present at the Battle of the Somme, and was nominated for military awards for his bravery. It seems that he died just after assisting a group of soldiers beyond the front line, being hit by a German shell. His body was never recovered.
Those who wish to read about his life, exploits and spiritual life will find ample materials – even the short Catholic Truth Society pamphlet contains enough to demonstrate Fr Doyle’s sanctity. His cause for canonisation is under consideration by the Conciliar/Synodal Church – but one cannot hold that against him.
In addition to his life, he also wrote a number of pamphlets, which have been collected by Cenacle Press. These included materials about vocation and Ignatian retreats for working men (as prospered in Spain and elsewhere in the twentieth century).
This mini-series will focus on his pamphlet on the problem of scrupulosity.
Scrupulosity
Many Catholics, especially those who have converted from a life of laxity, are affected by scrupulosity. Scrupulosity may be defined as a kind of religious obsessive-compulsive disorder, which prompts the scrupulous person to anxiety and fear about the morality of his acts and state.
Although he was referring to remorse for grave sins actually committed, Macbeth’s words portray the state of the scrupulous person:
“O, full of scorpions is my mind!”
Moral theologians distinguish between a scrupulous conscience and the state of scrupulosity itself, and both are considered significant enough as problems to warrant treatment in works of moral theology.
Contrary to Kathleen M. Yang, M.D's hit pieces against “sedevacantism”, published by Eric Sammons’ Crisis Magazine with shamelessness typical of that outlet, anecdotal experience indicates that scrupulosity thrives not amongst traditionalists or “sedevacantists”, but amongst conservatives attempting to be Catholics in the Novus Ordo milieu.
Even at the best of times, the scrupulous person may fear that the traditional advice for their direction feels “lax” or “liberal”; in the Novus Ordo milieu it is even worse. In that milieu, it is nearly impossible for the new and conservative Catholic to follow the traditional advice, or to put obedient trust in one's confessor – because the priests are so often infected with the true laxity and liberalism of the new religion.
That Novus Ordo milieu, rather than any traditionalist milieu, is the native home of the scruple for such people. One cannot even reach the traditionalist milieu (let alone the “sedevacantist” conclusion) without overcoming scruples: in many cases it is a scruple or excessive timidity that holds a person back from looking reality directly in the face.
Further, someone attempting to be a Catholic in the Novus Ordo milieu is essentially engaged in a DIY reconstruction project – whereas the traditionalist milieu is (by and large) simply a continuation of what came before. The person in latter has objective standards of faith and morals, and no need of reconciling them with modern contradictions; the person in the former must find some way of reconciling them, and without any objective standard is more liable to fall into the mental anxiety of scruples. Unlike the traditionalist, he simply cannot rest in the “lived tradition” of the Church and entrust himself to it.
Finally, those who return to the vomit of the Conciliar/Synodal Church and its new religion very frequently do so under the influence of a scruple, which leads them to prioritise a positivist conception of law and a fear of violating it, and to obscure, in their own intellects, an apprehension of reality as it is.
That is not to say that scruples never occur in traditionalist chapels; after all, they occurred before the Council. And some who suffer with them there will indeed find relief in the Conciliar/Synodal Church – in the deadening of their conscience in the embrace of the “new morality”, and in the blindness that comes from denying the known truth.
In short, it is risibly false to allege a link between “sedevacantism” and scrupulosity. Such a claim can only put one in mind of Our Lord's words in the Gospel:
“Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.”
Fr Doyle's pamphlet
Fr Doyle can by no means be suspected of either laxity or liberalism (as a perusal of his personal writings will demonstrate). His comprehensive account of the problem, and how to fix it, can go a long way towards helping scrupulous persons – even those in the Novus Ordo milieu.
The work itself was never published, but was found in manuscript form in Fr Doyle’s papers after his death. It was an adaptation of a longer 1897 work by Fr R.P. Dupois SJ, titled L’Ange Conducteur des Ames Scrupuleuses ou Craintive (‘The Guardian Angel of Scrupulous or Fearful Souls’). The main website dedicated to Fr Doyle states that this original went through at least sixteen editions and was approved by the Holy Office, as well as many churchmen. Fr Doyle’s version was reduced in size and published posthumously.
The pamphlet will be published on The WM Review in six parts over the coming days.
This first part sets out the nature of the problem of scruples, and the serious problems that can arise if they are left unchecked.
Scruples and their Treatment
Fr William Doyle
General Considerations
Definition
Scrupulosity, in general, is an ill-founded fear of committing sin.
There are two kinds of scruples: those which affect only the intelligence; those which affect also the sensitive will.
Purely intellectual scruples are really only doubts. They are most frequently met with in straightforward souls, who exercise self-control and are not habitually scrupulous. As soon, therefore, as these souls become morally certain that the act in question is not sinful, the scruple vanishes. This kind of scruple is harmless, and needs no treatment.
The contrary is the case with scruples which affect the inferior part of the soul. From the strong impression produced on the senses these draw a force which resists the mere statement of facts. Such scruples chiefly afflict impressionable souls; in fact, it is their emotional nature which engenders scrupulosity. A practical definition of this kind of scruple would be: an uneasy, ill-founded fear of committing sin, increased by the impressions made on the inferior part of the soul.
An example may help to make clearer these different kinds of scruples. Two persons leave the church on a Sunday morning, fearing that, owing to their many distractions, they have not complied with their obligation of hearing Mass. Having listened to their doubts, their confessor reassures both. However, one only is entirely satisfied. The other soon becomes troubled again, gets nervous, and feels an almost irresistible longing to be quite sure, either by fuller explanation or by hearing another Mass. The first of these persons had only an intellectual scruple, the harmless fear of a loyal soul; the second suffers from nervous fear, which stirs the sensitive part of the soul, and causes a real scruple.
Difficulty in the Treatment of Scruples
A true scruple, being involuntary and spontaneous, the cure will consist, not in preventing it, as this is impossible, but in despising it. But in this lies all the difficulty. How deluded is the scrupulous person who imagines himself “cured” when he has fully understood his director’s decision, and realised the foolishness of his fears! He fancies that it is quite easy to do what he now so “clearly” sees to be “the best.” Yet it is only now that the real struggle will begin. For the first time he realises to what lengths the tyranny of his impressions leads him.
His feelings become so many iron chains; at every effort made by his confessor’s orders, to get free, his hands and feet feel tied down by almost invincible bonds. God will help him, but his cure will be complete only when, by dint of repeated victories, he will have acquired the habit of conquering himself.
God’s Plan and the Devil’s
God, Who is wisdom and light, wishes man to be guided by his intelligence, and not by the blind feelings of his animal nature. It is, therefore, very far from God’s plan that man should regulate his conduct by doubt, which is the enemy of his intelligence. This is so far true, that even God’s laws do not bind unless when clear and beyond doubt. The way to heaven is difficult enough for man, on account of the many real obligations which meet him almost at every step. What would it be if he were obliged, under pain of sin, to overcome the obstacle of a thousand doubtful obligations? Such an intolerable state of things would be quite unworthy of the divine wisdom and goodness.
The demon of scrupulosity wishes to upset this merciful design of Providence. In the guidance of man, he tries to replace certainty by doubt, reason by feeling. An angel of darkness himself, he plunges the scrupulous soul into the darkness of ignorance, and imposes on him, as his tyrannical guide, his own wretched doubts, and with fearful results.
Deadly Effects of Scrupulosity
Scrupulosity completely deforms the judgment in moral matters. It takes away one’s common sense. It places before the eye of conscience a magnifying glass, which enlarges the slightest cause of alarm, and makes a timid soul see a thousand phantom sins, whilst by false reasoning it seeks to persuade it that these are undoubted faults.
Scrupulosity stops all progress in perfection. It is a fundamental truth that we cannot love God unless we believe in His love for us. Scrupulosity completely represses such a belief, and thus paralyses all generous effort.
At every moment it creates trouble between the soul and its Creator by pessimistic feelings about the past, and about its present dispositions and actions. The conclusions foolishly arrived at under the influence of these feelings boldly give the lie to the wise decisions of the confessor, and lead the soul to rebel against his spiritual guidance, and to put itself at the mercy of its enemy. Soon the soul, seriously believing itself to be in a bad way, becomes discouraged, and often begins to commit real sin.
Even though sin does not follow from scruples, scrupulosity, nevertheless, retards the soul’s progress in several other ways. It represents prayer as full of difficulties. It stops the ears of the poor downcast soul to the consoling voice of the Holy Ghost. It destroys confidence. It prevents the frequentation of the Sacraments, and thus stops their strengthening effects. It almost takes away the power of resisting temptation. It causes discouragement, and may even lead to despair.
HELP KEEP THE WM REVIEW ONLINE WITH WM+!
As we expand The WM Review we would like to keep providing free articles for everyone.
Our work takes a lot of time and effort to produce. If you have benefitted from it please do consider supporting us financially.
A subscription gets you access to our exclusive WM+ material, and helps ensure that we can keep writing and sharing free material for all.
You can see what readers are saying over at our Testimonials page.
And you can visit The WM Review Shop for our ‘Lovely Mugs’ and more.
(We make our WM+ material freely available to clergy, priests and seminarians upon request. Please subscribe and reply to the email if this applies to you.)
Subscribe to WM+ now to make sure you always receive our material. Thank you!
Read Next:
The Church’s teaching on suicide: Everything you need to know
It’s not a sin to be depressed: What St Philip Neri and St Thomas Aquinas have to say
Follow on Twitter, YouTube and Telegram:
Twitter (The WM Review)
“One cannot even reach the traditionalist milieu (let alone the “sedevacantist” conclusion) without overcoming scruples: in many cases it is a scruple or excessive timidity that holds a person back from looking reality directly in the face.”
This^^^
This is very, very helpful.