SÁNCHEZ, TOMÁS. - Jesuit, moralist, born in Córdoba ca. 1550, died in Granada on 19 May 1610.
He spent his entire life, marked by great austerity, as a novice master, confessor, and for several years professor of moral theology and canon law. The work that made him famous and is still consulted by theologians and jurists (cf. Wenz-Vidal, IV, no. 20) is: *De sancto Matrimonii sacramento* (3 vols., Madrid 1605, with many subsequent editions). Regarding this work, Clement VIII declared that no other author had treated the controversies and doubts concerning marriage with greater breadth and accuracy. This does not mean that SÁNCHEZ did not have to retract what he had conceded as probable: namely, that in cases of direct lust, there could be a light matter. Moreover, the third volume was placed on the Index on 4 February 1627; however, the condemnation did not pertain to the doctrine expounded but rather to the omission of a paragraph in which SÁNCHEZ upheld the Pope’s right to legitimize illegitimate children independently of any civil authority. This paragraph was offensive to the government of the Venetian Republic, which led to its removal in the Venice edition of 1614; this is the edition that was condemned. With the revision of the Index in 1900, SÁNCHEZ’s name was removed from II. The work also faced violent attacks as scandalous due to the delicate and sensitive details it addressed. It may be conceded that certain minute analyses lack all delicacy; yet it must be observed that the work was intended for confessors, who necessarily must distinguish between various kinds of guilt, just as physicians and jurists do in legal medicine.
Two other works by SÁNCHEZ were published posthumously: *Opus morale in praecepta decalogi* (originally *Explicatio mandatorum decalogi*, 2 vols., Madrid 1613); and *Consilia seu opuscula moralia* (2 vols., Lyon 1625), concerning justice and its various applications. These are less important than the first work, also because it is uncertain whether they represent only the author’s thought or that of the editors. Nevertheless, Pascal spared no reproaches against them in the *Lettres provinciales* (5th, 7th, 8th, and 9th letters), accusing SÁNCHEZ of laxity and exaggeration in the use of mental reservation. Upon closer examination, however, SÁNCHEZ adheres to a moderate probabilism, though not always within clearly defined limits (cf. A. Schmitt, *Zur Geschichte des Probabilismus*, Innsbruck 1904, pp. 107–50).