LASSISM. – More than a distinct moral system, laxism is a tendency, a *laxus opinandi modus*, as Alexander VII put it, by which certain authors in the 17th century proposed in Catholic moral theology, as certain, opinions that were highly doubtful and only apparently probable, thereby "relaxing" the norms of Christian life. For this reason, although none of them formally and explicitly professed laxism, they overstepped certain points of Christian morality by denying or minimizing the scope of the law (in direct opposition to laxism stands tutiorism [v.] or rigorism in general), though it is true that some laxist theologians, in certain parts of genuine moral theology, proved not to be laxist in others. Thus, laxism itself is part of the 17th-century movement of elaboration of moral systems and represents its most relaxed extreme.
Subjectively, conscience is not merely an aspect of erroneous conscience, which judges licit what is not, or prohibited *sub levi* what is *sub gravi*, and after the fact judges the morality of its own action in its own favor or diminishes its imputability. Insufficient exact information and polemical concerns led to the identification of laxism with Molinism and probabilism, whereas, especially the former, are quite different things. It is not accurate, however, to view laxism as the most excessive solution of probabilism (v.), because in every nuance of probabilism (and also of probabiliorism and equiprobabilism) one is always dealing with deciding on a "true probability," whereas generally for the laxists any probability, even the slightest, holds value.
Some laxist opinions met with no favor at all, others fell into disrepute because of the controversies they aroused; but in some cases the Church’s magisterium had to intervene, condemning the books that defended such doctrines or individual propositions that threatened to gain credence by corrupting sound morality. Particular prominence and sometimes even harshness of tone characterized the disputes over laxism in France beginning in the 17th century.
With a decree of 26 Sept. 1640, the following works were placed on the Index: *Pratique du droit canonique au gouvernement de l'Eglise, correction des moeurs et distribution des bénéfices*; *Somme des péchés, qui se commettent en tous états, de leurs conditions et qualités et en quelles occurences ils sont mortels ou véniels* by Fr. Étienne Bauny; on 16 Dec. of the same year, *De sacramentis ac personis sacris* was also placed on the Index. The first two works had also been referred in Nov. 1640 to the Faculty of Theology of Paris (laxist propositions concerned chastity, usury, excommunications, reserved cases, etc.). In Apr. 1641, the Assembly of the French clergy declared that Bauny, with his writings, was pushing souls toward libertinism and resolved to thank the Pope for the condemnation.
Among the first to attack casuists and laxists was Pascal (v.) with *Les Provinciales* (1656–57), who in turn, in combating them, was more meticulous than the casuists themselves in splitting hairs, exaggerating accusations, and manipulating texts; he particularly targeted the Jesuits, whom he accused of being masters of laxism.
Censure against the laxists was also issued by the Faculty of Paris in 1658. In Rome, the Holy Office continued to condemn laxist writings: on 21 Aug. 1659, *Apologie pour les casuistes contre les calomnies des jansénistes* by Giorgio Pirot; Marco Vidal, *Arca vitalis* (23 Sept. 1653); id., *Arca salutaris consultus utriusque iuris includens* (8 Mar. 1661); Angelo Maria Verricelli, *Quaestiones morales et legales* (21 Apr. 1654); Giovanni Caramuel, *Apologema pro antiquissima et universalissima doctrina de probabilitate* (15 Jan. 1664); Francesco Verde, *Theologiae fundamentalis Caramuelis positiones selectae* (28 June 1664); Onorato Fabri, *Apologeticus doctrinae moralis Societatis Iesu* (17 Jan. 1672); Zaccaria Pasqualigo, *Decisiones morales iuxta principia theologica, et sacras atque civiles leges, difficultatum, quae in utroque foro passim occurrunt* (11 May 1683). The work of the Jesuit Mathieu de Moya, *Adversus quorundam expostulationes contra nonnullas Iesuitarum opiniones morales* (published under the pseudonym Amadeus Guimenius and containing serious errors regarding the administration of the sacraments), was condemned by the Sorbonne in Feb. 1665 and by the Holy Office in Apr. 1666.
Under Alexander VII, on two occasions (24 Sept. 1665 and 18 Mar. 1666), at least 45 propositions contrary to divine and ecclesiastical law were condemned as scandalous (Denz.-U., 1101–45); then on 2 Mar. 1679, under Innocent XI, the Holy Office condemned a further 65 propositions as laxist (ibid., 1151–1215). Clearly, no single moralist had upheld all the condemned propositions; they had been defended by theologians of various schools in different works, concerned to reconcile as much as possible the worldly prejudices of their age with the spirit of the Gospel.
The condemnation of laxism did not involve the principle of casuistry itself, because the latter, despite its dangers of legalistic formalism, corresponds to that healthy exigency of the spirit by which, case by case, one can align with freedom or with the law. The exigency of probability remained an inheritance to be developed in the century of St. Alphonsus Liguori; but in the 18th century, in Catholic theology, laxism was dead: it was perhaps taken up by libertines; but it is clear that these operated outside of metaphysics, and thus the problem is different. As for the question of whether laxism stimulated the capitalist world in its speculations, it may well be so; but laxism, rather than directing it, had made itself its slave, indulging in justifying its illicit race toward the vortex of wealth accumulation.
**
Massimo Petrochi
**LASSO (di), Orlando (Roland de Lattre, Orlandus Lassus).** – Musician, b. at Mons (Belgium) probably in 1532, d. at Munich on 14 June 1594. As a young singer in the Church of St. Nicholas at Mons, he was sought after everywhere for his magnificent voice and outstanding musical talent. The Viceroy of Sicily, Ferdinando Gonzaga, met him in 1544 and took him to Italy. He was first in Mantua, then in Sicily, Milan, Naples, and in Rome in 1552. In 1551 he had been summoned by Pope Julius III to direct the papal musical chapel.
In 1555 in Antwerp he published his first work: *Il primo libro di Madrigali, villanesche, canzoni francesi e motetti a quattro voci*. In the same year in Venice he published the *Primo libro di Madrigali a 5 voci*, which met with very flattering success. Meanwhile, Ludwig Senfl, master of the ducal chapel in Munich—one of the most renowned in Europe—had died, and Duke Albrecht V invited the young Orlando to take over its direction. Orlando, delighted by the invitation, moved to Munich in 1556. Warmly received with an annual stipend of 400 florins, in addition to his usual remuneration, he also received frequent and lavish gifts from his patrons (even houses and gardens), knighthood diplomas, and so forth. Between 1573 and 1576 the dukes of Bavaria, at their own expense, had his sacred music printed; it was collected in seven large folio volumes, known under the title *Patrocinium musices*. The *Seven Penitential Psalms of David*, set to music by L., were transcribed at great expense into two sumptuously illuminated codices by the dukes themselves.
He remained steadfast in the service of the Munich chapel until his death. Yet before his death, in 1585 he made a pilgrimage to the sanctuary of Loreto and revisited Rome, where he was graciously received by the Pope, who conferred upon him the Order of the Golden Spur. The Roman maestros and singers, at that time gathered in the Congregation of St Cecilia, admitted him on that occasion to their young confraternity. L. was a fine humanist, as evidenced by his elegant Latin discourses, his refined taste in selecting texts—both sacred and profane—to set to music, his passion for Horace’s Odes and Virgil’s Eclogues (of which he set several episodes to music), and his knowledge of French and German poets. He was also a poet: in the dedication of one of his books of new songs he composed the verses himself in honor of Charles IX.
Two distinct periods can be discerned in the life of this great master. The first period presents a man full of vigor, who loved life and wished to live it as a bon vivant; this is also reflected in his compositions, for the works written before 1565 are more oriented toward celebrating earthly pleasures than exalting pure spiritual joys.
As the spirit of the Catholic Reformation gradually entered the court of Munich, the dukes of Bavaria, openly opposing the pseudo-Reformation of Lutheranism, became staunch champions of the Catholic confession in the German world. Orlando too felt the change in atmosphere and grew more serious, devoting himself increasingly to works of Christian charity. Psychological disturbances connected with severe nervous exhaustion embittered the final years of his life. The *Seven Penitential Psalms* for five voices, published in 1584 (though some parts date earlier), are an unmistakable sign of the transformation that had begun about fifteen years earlier. His musical output became less secular in quantity and acquired a more religious character, often reaching the heights of profound and heartfelt mysticism. Evidence of this profound change is also found in the *Cantiones sacrae* that L. dedicated to the Bishop of Augsburg in 1593. In the dedication of that work he refers to a *vultus gravior*.
The artistic production of L. is of the highest quality and exceeds 2,000 compositions. It can be said that he set to music everything worthy of being clothed in sound that came within his reach: from the most daring Neapolitan song to the Mass. A catalogue was compiled by R. Eitner (*Verzeichnis der gedruckten Werke von Hans Leo Hassler und Orlandus de Lausanne*, Berlin 1874). An important collection of L.’s manuscripts is preserved in the Munich Library, including the Masses *Je suis deshéritée* and *On me l’a dit* for four voices, *Trieste departa* for five voices, and *Domine, Dominus noster* for six voices, among others. Besides the *Patrocinium musices* in five volumes—containing 21 motets (vol. I), 5 Masses (vol. II), various Offices (vol. III), Passions and Vigils (vol. IV), and 10 Magnificats (vol. V)—a collection of 100 Magnificats edited in 1619 by his son Rodolfo should be noted. The motets and *Sacrae cantiones* number about 1,200, more than half of which are included in the *Magnum opus musicum* published in 1614. His madrigals and secular songs are extremely numerous, printed in various volumes or collections from 1555 onward. In 1581 the *Villanelle* appeared. Notable too is the body of songs and dances published in various translations: French, Italian, English, Dutch, etc. The complete edition of L.’s works was begun in 1894 by Breitkopf & Härtel under the direction of A. Sandberger and F. Haberl.
L. was a universal genius. Undoubtedly he felt the powerful influence of the Italian masters of his time and, in part, that of contemporary German masters such as N. Isaac and L. Senfl; yet he did not renounce the resources of contrapuntal technique, but rather employed the most refined contrapuntal learning in the service of his art. He created within the forms of his age, drawing abundantly from the sources of musical naturalness, whose laws his genius instinctively understood. Criticisms, though isolated, were not lacking; yet of all the masters of classical vocal polyphony he alone, in the general estimation, could be compared or even almost equalled with Palestrina.