Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 6.djvu/434

 GAMS

376

GAMS

fliiencing prices as the dissemination of false reports, cornering, and the fierce contests of "bulls" and "bears", i. e. of the dealers who wish respectively to raise or lower prices.

Hitherto we have prescinded from positive law in our treatment of the question of gambling. It is, however, a matter on which both the civil and the canon law have much to say. In the United States the subject lies outside the province of the Federal Government, but many of the States make gambling a penal offence when the bet is upon an election, a horse-race, or a game of chance. Betting contracts and securities given upon a bet are often made void. In England the Gaming Act, 1845, voids contracts made by way of gaming and wagering; and the Gam- ing Act, 1S92, renders null and void any promise, ex- press or implied, to pay any person any sum of money under, or in respect of, any contract or agreement ren- dered null and void by the Gaming Act, 1845, or to pay any sum of money by way of commission, fee, reward, or otherwise, in respect of any such contract or agreement, or of any services in relation thereto or in connexion therewith. From very early times gam- bling was forbidden by canon law. Two of the oldest (41, 42) among the so-called canons of the Apostles forlmde games of chance under pain of excommunica- tion to clergy and laity alike. The 79th canon of the Council of Elvira (306) decreed that one of the faithful who had been guilty of gambling might be, on amend- ment, restored to communion after the lapse of a year. A homily (the famous "De Aleatoribus") long as- criljcd to St. Cyprian, but by modern scholars vari- ously attributed to Popes Victor I, Callistus I, and Melchiades, and which undoubtedly is a very early and interesting monument of Christian antiquity, is a vigorous denunciation of gambling. The Fourth Lat- eran Council (1215), by a decree subsequently in- serted in the " Corpus Juris ", forbade clerics to play or to be present at games of chance. Some authorities, such as Aubespine, have attempted to explain the severity of the ancient canons against gamblinf» by supposing that idolatry was often connected with it in practice. The pieces that were played with were small-sized idols, or images of the gods, which were invoked by the players for good luck. However, as Benedict XIV remarks, this can hardly be true, as in that case the penalties would have been still more severe. Profane writers of antiquity are almost as severe in their condemnation of gambling as are the councils of the Christian Church. Tacitus and Am- mianus Marcellinus tell us that by gambling men are led into fraud, cheating, lying, perjury, theft, and other enormities ; while Peter of Blois says that dice is the mother of perjury, theft, and sacrilege. The old can- onists and theologians remark that although the canons generally mention only dice by name, yet under this appellation must be understood all games of chance ; and even those that require skill, if they are played for money.

The Council of Trent contented itself with ordering all the ancient canons on the subject to be observed, and in general prescribed that the clergy were to ab- stain from unlawful games. As Benedict XIV re- marks, it was left to the judgment of the bishops to decide what games should be held to be unlawful ac- coriling to the different circumstances of person, place, and time. St. Charles Borromeo, in the first Synod of Milan, put the Tridentine decree into execution, and drew up a list of games which were forbidden to the clergy, and another list of those that were allowed. Among those which he forbade were not only dicing in various forms, but also games something like our criM|Uot and football. Other particiilar councils de- flared tli.it playing at dice and curds was unbecoming anil torliiddcn to clerics, and in general they forbade all games which were unbecoming to the clerical state. Thus, a council held at Bordeaux in 1583 decreed that

the clergy were to abstain altogether from playing in public or in private at dice, cards, or any other for- bidden and imbecoming game. The council held at Aix in 1585 forbade them to play at cards, dice, or any other game of the like kind, and even to look on at the playing of such games. Another, held at Narbonne in 1609, decreed that clerics were not to play at dice, cards, or other unlawful and unbecoming games, espe- cially in public. There was some doubt as to whether chess was to be considered an unbecoming, and there- fore an unlawful, game for clerics. In the opinion of St. Peter Damian it was certainly unlawful. On one occasion he caught the Bishop of Florence playing chess, to while away the time when on a journey. The bishop tried to defend himself by saying that chess was not dice. The saint, however, refused to admit the distinction, especially as the bishop was playing in public. Scripture, he said, does not make express mention of chess, but it is comprised under the term dice. And Baronius defends the saint's doctrine. Some sciolist, he remarks, may say that St. Peter Da- mian was under a delusion in classing chess under dice, since chess is not a game of chance but calls for the ex- ercise of much skill and talent. Let that be as it may, he proceeds, priests must at any rate be guided in their conduct by the words of St. Paul, who declared that what is not expedient, what is not edifying, is not allowed.

Modern ecclesiastical law is less exacting in this matter. The provincial Councils of Westminster are content with prescribing that clerics must abstain from unlawful games. The Plenary Synod of May- nooth, held in 1900, says that since not a little time is occasionally lost, and idleness is fostered by playing cards, the priest should be on his guard against such games, especially where money is staked, lest he incur the reproach of being a gambler. He is also exhorted to deter the laity by word and example from betting at horse-races, especially when the stakes are high. The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore made a dis- tinction between games which may not suitably be in- dulged in by a cleric, even when played in private, and games like cards which may be played for the sake of mnocent recreation. It repeated the prohibition of the First Plenary Council of Baltimore that clerics are not to indulge in unlawful games, and only in modera- tion are to use those that are lawful, so as not to cause scandal. Nowadays, it is commonly held that posi- tive ecclesiastical law only forbids games of chance, even to the clergy, when in themselves or for some ex- trinsic reason, such as loss of time or scandal, they are forbidden by the natural law.

Ferraris. 'Prompla Bibliolheca. s. v. Ludus (Paris, 1861); Benedict XIV, De Synodo diacesana (Ferrari, 1756); Hefele, Conciliengeschichte (Freiburg. 1873), I; Slater, A Manual of Moral Theology (New Yorlt, 1908), I; Ecclesiastical Review (New York, 1905), XXXII, 134; Thomassin. Vetus Eccl. Disciplina. III. Ill, cc. xlv, xlvi; Deshaves, in Vacant, Diet, de Thiol, cath.y a. V. Alcatoires.

T. Slater.

Gams, Pius Bonifacius, ecclesiastical historian, b. at Mittelbuch, Wiirtemberg, 23 January, 1816; d. at Munich, 11 May, 1892. His classical studies were made at Biberach and Rottweil (1826-1834), he studied philosophy and theology at Tubingen (1834- 38), entered the seminary of Ro'ttenburg in 1838, and was ordaiiiecl priest on 11 September, 1839. He filled various jiosls as t\itor, vicar, parish priest, and pro- fessor until 1 May, 1847, when he was appointed to the chairs of ]iliilnsi>phy and general history by the theo- logical faculty of llildesheim. Finally he entered the Abbey of St. Boniface at Munich, which belonged to the Bavarian enugregation of the Order of St. Bene- dict, and pniiio\uiced the monastic vows, 5 October, 1856, adding the name of Pius to that of Boniface. Gams filled several monastic offices, being successively master of novices, sub-prior, and prior. He is best known for his " Kirchengeschichte von Spanien", 3