Download the Full Version of textbook for Fast Typing at textbookfull.

com

Project and program management a competency based

approach Fourth Edition Mitchell L. Springer

https://textbookfull.com/product/project-and-program-
management-a-competency-based-approach-fourth-edition-
mitchell-l-springer/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Download More textbook Instantly Today - Get Yours Now at textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

The Standard for Program Management Fourth Edition Project

Management Institute

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-standard-for-program-management-
fourth-edition-project-management-institute/

textboxfull.com

The Standard for Program Management Fourth Edition Project

Management Institute

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-standard-for-program-management-
fourth-edition-project-management-institute-2/

textboxfull.com

A Project Based Approach to Translation Technology 1st

Edition Rosemary Mitchell-Schuitevoerder

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-project-based-approach-to-
translation-technology-1st-edition-rosemary-mitchell-schuitevoerder/

textboxfull.com

Project Manager Competency Development Framework Project

Management Institute

https://textbookfull.com/product/project-manager-competency-
development-framework-project-management-institute/

textboxfull.com
Phlebotomy: A Competency-Based Approach 5th Edition
Kathryn A. Booth

https://textbookfull.com/product/phlebotomy-a-competency-based-
approach-5th-edition-kathryn-a-booth/

textboxfull.com

Implementing project and program benefit management Dolan

https://textbookfull.com/product/implementing-project-and-program-
benefit-management-dolan/

textboxfull.com

Project Management A Managerial Approach Jack R. Meredith

https://textbookfull.com/product/project-management-a-managerial-
approach-jack-r-meredith/

textboxfull.com

Project Management A Practical Approach 5th Edition Roel

Grit

https://textbookfull.com/product/project-management-a-practical-
approach-5th-edition-roel-grit/

textboxfull.com

The Standard for Portfolio Management Fourth Edition,

Edition Project Management Institute

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-standard-for-portfolio-
management-fourth-edition-edition-project-management-institute/

textboxfull.com
Project and Program Management
Project and Program Management

A Competency-Based Approach,
Fourth Edition

By Mitchell L. Springer

Purdue University Press, West Lafayette, Indiana

Copyright 2019 by Purdue University. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Springer, Mitchell L., 1959- author.

Title: Project and program management : a competency-based approach / by
Mitchell L. Springer.
Description: Fourth edition. | West Lafayette, Indiana : Purdue University
Press, [2019] | Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2018041532| ISBN 9781557538581 (hardback : alk. paper) |
ISBN 9781612495705 (epdf) | ISBN 9781612495712 (epub)
Subjects: LCSH: Project management.
Classification: LCC HD69.P75 S684 2019 | DDC 658.4/04--dc23
LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018041532

Front cover by Santiago Grandlienard.

About the Author

Dr. Mitchell L. Springer, PMP, SPHR, SHRM-SCP

Dr. Mitchell L. Springer currently serves as an executive director for Purdue University’s Polytechnic Insti-
tute located in West Lafayette, Indiana. He has over thirty-five years of theoretical and defense industry-based
practical experience from four disciplines: software engineering, systems engineering, program manage-
ment, and human resources. Dr. Springer possesses a significant strength in pattern recognition, analyzing,
and improving organizational systems. He is internationally recognized, has contributions to scholarship of
nearly 300 books, articles, presentations, editorials, and reviews on software development methodologies,
management, organizational change, and program management. Dr. Springer sits on many university and
community boards and advisory committees. He is the recipient of numerous awards and recognitions, most
recently the Indiana Council for Continuing Education Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Award. Dr. Springer
is the president of the Indiana Council for Continuing Education as well as the past chair of the Continuing
Professional Development Division of the American Society for Engineering Education.
Dr. Springer received his Bachelor of Science in computer science from Purdue University, his MBA
and doctorate in adult and community education with a cognate in executive development from Ball State
University. He is certified as a Project Management Professional (PMP), Senior Professional in Human
Resources (SPHR & SHRM-SCP) in Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR), and in civil and domestic media-
tion. Dr. Springer is a State of Indiana Registered domestic mediator.
Contents

List of Illustrations xii

Preface xix
Introduction 1
Chapter 1. Program/Project Management Competencies 5
Student PM Competency Model Paper Guidelines 7
Chapter 2. The Importance of Program/Project Management 11
Chapter 3. Process Management—Evolution and Definition 19
Historical Orientation 19
General Program Planning Models 25
Integrated Linear Models versus Integrated Nonlinear Models 26
Evaluation Methodologies and Accountability 27
Composition of a Planning Process 28
Chapter 4. Contract Types—What Type of Contract Should I Enter Into? 31
Factors in Selecting a Contract Type 32
Fixed Price Contracts 33
Cost Reimbursement Contracts 35
Time and Materials Contracts 37
Labor Hour Contracts 37
Letter Contracts 38
Exercises 38
Chapter 5. The Bidding Process—Obtaining a Price Quote 41
Bid Organization 43
Responsibility Assignment Matrix 45
Before the Request for Proposal 45
On Receipt of the Request for Proposal 45
Proposal Generation Process 48
Review and Approval Process 48
Submittal Process 50
Post-Submittal Process 50
Post-Decision Process 51
Statement of Work 52
Technical Specification 53
Work Breakdown Structure 54
Classes of Estimates 54
Chapter 6. Defining the Work to be Performed 57
A Shortened Perspective 57
A More Detailed Perspective 65
Chapter 7. Scheduling and Staffing the Work 77
Types of Schedules 77
Network Approaches 82
Closing Thoughts on Developing a Network Diagram 87
Master Schedule 88
Intermediate Schedule 88
Detailed Schedules 89
Human Resource Plan 90
A More Detailed Perspective 91
Chapter 8. Risk Management—Mitigating the Impact 103
Risk Planning 104
Risk Assessment 105
Risk Analysis 107
Risk Handling 110
Chapter 9. Disruptive Technologies—Thinking Outside of the Box 113
Chapter 10. Cost, Schedule, and Performance Management—
A Quantitative Premise 121
Defining the Initial Budget 121
Determining How We Are Performing against the Initial Budget 122
Keeping Track of Actual Costs 123
Getting Back on Schedule and Within Cost 124
A More Detailed Perspective 125
Course Project Details and Examples 141
Chapter 11. Multiple Generations in the Workplace—
It’s How We Grew Up 147
Late Adulthood Gerontological Life Phase (60+) 151
Middle Adulthood Gerontological Life Phase (40–60) 153
Early Adulthood Gerontological Life Phase (20–40) 154
Adolescence Gerontological Life Phase (10–20) 155
Cohort Group (Veterans) 155
Cohort Group (Boomers) 160
Cohort Group (Generation X’ers) 166
Cohort Group (Gen Y; Nexters; Millennials) 171
The New Next Professional Working Adult Learner (2019 Perspective) 176
Who Are the Students? 177
Why Are College Costs So High? 179
Moving Back Home and Its Implications 181
Postponing Marriage and Children 182
Postponing the Purchasing of Material Possessions 186
Concluding Thoughts 187
Cohort Group (Gen Z; iGen) 187
Concluding Remarks on the Nurture Side 194
Chapter 12. Connecting Generational Cohorts to Associative Thinking 195
Understanding the Breadth and Depth of a Discipline 195
“Seeing” across Disciplines 195
Practical Experience and Ability to Recognize the Bigger Picture 196
Ability to Recognize Cultural Realities 196
Understanding of Current Technologies 196
 Unbounded by Hierarchical Pressures 197
Propensity for “Just Trying It” 197
Chapter 13. Leadership and Gender—A Science-Based Understanding 199
Differences in Neural Blood Flow Patterns 201
Differences in Structures of the Brain 202
Differences in Brain Chemistry 203
Leadership—Interpersonal Relationships 203
Leadership—Management Styles 204
Leadership—Things We Might See 204
Leadership—In Meetings 204
Chapter 14. Motivation and Leadership—Why We Do What We Do 207
Need Theories 207
Goal-Setting Theory 209
Reinforcement Theory 210
Equity Theory 210
Expectancy Theory 210
Chapter 15. Organization Design Models—
Not Right or Wrong, More or Less Applicable 213
Traditional 213
Product 215
Matrix 216
Project Management 218
Criteria for Selecting an Organizational Structure 219
Summary Remarks 219
Chapter 16. Building Teams—
Understanding Ourselves and Others through MBTI 221
Sensing (S) and Intuition (N) 221
Thinking (T) and Feeling (F) 222
Extraversion (E) and Introversion (I) 222
Judging (J) and Perceiving (P) 223
Type Combinations 223
Type and Organizational Change 223
Type Dynamics 224
Summary Thoughts by Type 225
Chapter 17. Capitalizing on the Collective Knowledge of the World 229
Availability of Skilled Labor 229
Skilled Labor Shortage Forecasts 230
Aging World Population 231
Retirement and the Working Senior Population 236
Science and Engineering Demographics 243
International Impact 247
Growing World Population 252
World’s Education 253
Outsourcing of Goods and Services 263
Concluding Thoughts on the International Impact 269
Innovation, Technology, and the Systems Integrator 269
Understanding Technology as a Discipline 271
Integrating Intersectional Ideas 278
 Creating an Integrative Mind-set 279
Systems Engineering—
The Cross-Discipline Eclectic Nature of Knowledge 280
Diversify Our Knowledge through Multiple Job Experiences 281
Summary Thoughts 282
Technology from a Worldwide Perspective 282
The Bio-Economy—A Truly Worldwide Experience 284
Dwindling Graduate Student Enrollments
in Distance-Based Programs (An Example) 290
Chapter 18. Establishing Program/Project Management as a Discipline 305
Chapter 19. Managers, Leaders, and Entrepreneurs 315
Defining Management 315
Management Functions 316
Management Roles 316
Management Skills 318
Leaders 319
Theories of Leadership 319
Power 322
Military Leadership Fundamentals 323
Entrepreneurs 325
Ethics at All Levels 327
Concluding Thoughts 328
Chapter 20. The American Social Economic Context 329
Prior to 1920 331
1920 to 1945 338
1945 to 1960 340
1960 to 1980 344
1980 to Present 346
Chapter 21. Career Development—Models 349
Moving Forward—The Four Questions 353
Educational Requirements of Engineering and Technology
Professional Working Adult Learners (Real-Life Example) 365
Mapping Employee Training and Development to Market
Requirements: Using a Corporate Market-Based Approach 372
Chapter 22. Succession Planning—Providing Opportunities for Growth 375
Why Is Succession Planning Important? 375
Who Is Succession Planning For? 376
Activities of Effective Succession Planning 376
What Do We Do When a Position Vacates? 376
Things to Remember 378
Who Is Responsible? 378
Chapter 23. The Business Case for Diversity and Inclusivity 379
Business Case for Diversity and Inclusivity: It’s All about Growth 382
Millennials Usher in Minority Majority 385
The Millennial View of Diversity and Inclusivity 387
Coercion, Groupthink, Bias, and Inherent Discrimination 390
The Need to Survive and Reproduce 390
Reexamining Our Subconscious and Unconscious Mind 394
We Are More Alike Than Different—Genomically Speaking 395
Chapter 24. Effective Communication Skills 397
Encoding and Decoding Skills 398
Basic Rules for Addressing an Audience 399
Questions After the Presentation 400
Nonverbal Communication Skills 400
Listening Skills 400
Reading Skills 401
Skipping Judiciously 401
Communication Barriers 402
Organizational Communication 402
Conducting an Effective Meeting 403
Chapter 25. Change Management—People, the Hardest Part 405
Organizational Development—The Context of Change 405
Models of Change Management 407
Activities or Phases of the Change Management Process 409
Why Change Fails 410
Trust Through Character, Communication, and Capability 411
Managing Our Own Personal Change 412
Running the Academy as a Business (An Example) 415
The Synergistic Implications of Personal Ownership
(A Comprehensive Example) 424
Creating Pride in Individual Efforts 425
How to Create Vision through Market-Based Analysis 427
Ownership Can Create Motivation 428
Fear Can Equally Stifle Action 430
Motivation is Hampered Through Entitlement 432
Closing Thoughts 434
Appendix A—Evaluating the Program Plan 435
Committee of Stakeholders 435
Primary Activities 435
Interviewing Program Participants 436
Outcome-Based Evaluation Methodology 437
Summary of Outcome-Based Evaluation Data Analysis Method 439
Appendix B—Executing the Program Plan 441
Appendix C—Changes to the Program Plan 447
Recognizing Changes 451
What Is a Change? 452
What Determines How a Contract Is Changed? 453
How Do Contractual Relationships Affect Changes? 453
Why Are Government Contract Changes Unique? 453
Why Do Changes Occur? 454
When Are Changes Likely to Occur? 456
What Are the Elements of a Change? 457
Common Names Given to Changes 457
What Types of Change Orders Can Occur? 460
Who Has the Authority to Order Changes? 461
When Can Changes Be Ordered? 463
What Changes Can Be Ordered? 463
 What Response Does a Change Order Require? 464
When Is Changed Work Performed? 464
Appendix D—Program Planning Master Process Flow 467
Establish Planning Organization 467
Establish Program Management Library 469
Generate Requirements Database 472
Generate Master Program Schedule 473
Generate Preliminary Extended CWBS and Dictionary 475
Generate Preliminary Responsibility Assignment Matrix 477
Generate Intermediate Schedules 479
Generate Preliminary Detailed Schedules 480
Generate Human Resource Plan 482
Establish Program Organization 484
Post-Contract Award 485
Glossary 489
Bibliography 521
Index 531
List of Illustrations
1.1. Most Identified Behaviors across Companies 8
2.1. Projected New Positions by Sector Groups 13
2.2. IBM 1998 Newspaper Seeking PMI Certification 14
2.3. PM Education, Training, and Continued Knowledge Acquisition 15
3.1. Context Diagram 20
3.2. Cyclical Nature of a Sequential Process 27
3.3. Program Management Process Flow 29
5.1. Overall Bidding Process 42
5.2. Pre-RFP to RFP Interaction 42
5.3. Typical Bid Organization 43
5.4. Bid and Proposal Responsibility Assignment Matrix 46
5.5. Pre-RFP Process Flow 47
5.6. RFP Process 47
5.7. Proposal Generation Process 48
5.8. Review and Approval Process 49
5.9. Submittal Process 50
5.10. Post-Submittal Process 51
5.11. Post-Decision Process 52
5.12. Example Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) 55
6.1. Derived Requirements—Four Bedroom House 58
6.2. Hosting a Thanksgiving Dinner 59
6.3. Business Process Reengineering 60
6.4. WBS for Building a House—by Function 61
6.5. WBS for Building a House—by Phase 62
6.6. WBS—Heaven on Earth Wedding Planners 63
6.7. Heaven on Earth Wedding Planners Responsibility Assignment Matrix 64
6.8. Requirements Management Process Flow 65
6.9. Work Breakdown Structure 67
6.10. Example Subcontract Cost Account Content 69
6.11. WBS Element Dictionary 71
6.12. WBS and Dictionary Detailed Process Flow 71
6.13. Detailed Costed Preliminary Responsibility Assignment Matrix 72
6.14. Preliminary RAM Detailed Process Flow 73
6.15. Budget Development Process 75
7.1. Gantt Chart 78
7.2. Symbology of Milestone Charts 79
7.3. Example Milestone Chart 80
7.4. Permutation of Gantt and Milestone Chart 81
7.5. AOA Rule #1—One and Only One Arrow in the Network 83
7.6. AOA Rule #2—No Two Head and Tail Events 83
7.7. Dummy Activities are Like One Way Water Pipes Full of Data 83
7.8. Is “E” Preceded by “B” and “C” Alone? 84
7.9. Exercise #1—Correct Solution 84
7.10. Exercise #2—Correct Solution? 85
7.11. Exercise #2—Correct Solution 85
7.12. Example of Early/Late Start and Finish Times 86
7.13. Example with Total Slack Calculated 87
7.14. Example Master Program Schedule 89
7.15. Example Intermediate Schedule 89
7.16. Example Detailed Schedule 90
7.17. Lead and Lag Relationships 90
7.18. Example Human Resource Plan 91
7.19. Example Master Program Schedule 92
7.20. Master Program Schedule Process Flow 92
7.21. Example Intermediate Schedule 94
7.22. Intermediate Schedule Detailed Process Flow 94
7.23. Example Detailed Schedule 95
7.24. Detailed Schedules Detailed Process Flow 96
7.25. Example Human Resource Plan 100
7.26. Human Resource Plan Detailed Process Flow 101
8.1. Gain versus Acceptability of Risk 103
8.2. Consequence versus Acceptability of Risk 104
8.3. Probability versus Seriousness of the Risk 105
8.4. Decision Analysis Decision Tree 108
8.5. Risk Management Analysis to Handling 111
8.6. Risk Management Phases 112
9.1. iPhone as a Disruptive Technology 115
9.2. Apple Macintosh 116
9.3. Reintroduction of Extinct Species (Google CRISPR images) 119
9.4. DNA-Modified CRISPR Images (Google CRISPR images) 120
10.1. Setting the Cost Baseline; Identifying the Value of Each Activity 121
10.2. Amount Paid for the Work Performed 122
10.3. Actual Cost to Do the Work 123
10.4. Estimate at Complete 124
10.5. Schedule Hierarchy Development and Statusing 127
10.6. Planned Schedule Timeline 128
10.7. Worked Scheduled and Performance Credit 128
10.8. Work Performed and Actual Costs 129
10.9. Actual Costs—Cumulative Representation 130
10.10. Earned Value Management Concepts Chart 130
10.11. The Language of Earned Value Management 131
10.12. BCWS/BCWP/ACWP Exercise 133
10.13. BCWS/BCWP/ACWP Exercise Solutions 133
10.14. 25/75 Earned Value Management Technique 135
10.15. Example of Milestone Weights 136
10.16. Milestone Weights with Percent Complete 136
10.17. Apportioned Effort Example 138
10.18. Example Cost Account Plan 139
10.19. Cost Account Plan Detailed Process Flow 139
10.20. Risk Management Analysis to Handling 146
11.1. Births by Year 148
11.2. Baby Boomer Cohort Movement through Time 149
11.3. Millennials Surpass Boomers and GenX, in Population and at Work 150
11.4. Myths and Facts About Aging—Veterans 160
11.5. At What Age Do You Plan To Retire—Survey Report, Age Wave 164
11.6. Reasons for Wanting to Work Later in Lif52
Survey Report, HSBC, USA Today 165
11.7. Biggest Fear is Cost of Illness—Survey Report 165
11.8. International Reduction in Working Age Population 166
11.9. Predominance of Working Mothers and Peaked Divorce Rate,
BLS/NCHS 170
11.10. Then and Now—AARP 2008 173
11.11. Comparison of Perspectives 175
11.12. A Brief History of “Cool” and Other Slang Terms, Fast Company 176
11.13. Newest Students of Professional Distance Programs 179
11.14. Student Debt to Other Household Debt 180
11.15. Percent of Young Adults Living with Parents 182
11.16. Percent Young Adults Living with Family 183
11.17. Impact of Economic Conditions 183
11.18. Median Age of First Marriage 184
11.19. Education vs. Total Fertility Rate 185
11.20. Household Income vs. Total Fertility Rate 185
11.21. Images of Technology from Prior Generations (Google Images) 188
11.22. New Minority Majority in U.S. 189
13.1. Male and Female Brains at Rest 200
13.2. Leadership Traits More True of . . . , Survey Results,
Pew Research Center 205
14.1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs 208
14.2. Perception of Equity 210
14.3. Expectancy Theory 211
15.1. Traditional Organizational Design Model 214
15.2. Product Organizational Design Model 215
15.3. Matrix Organizational Design Model 217
15.4. Project Management Organizational Design Model 219
16.1. Type Combinations 223
16.2. Order of Preferences by Type 224
16.3. Type Preference Order Potential for Conflict 225
17.1. Skills Gap in Manufacturing 2015–2025 232
17.2. Reasons for Working by Age—
Percent Who Say This is a “Big Reason” They Work, Pew 235
17.3. Job Satisfaction by Age, Pew 235
17.4. Ratio of Workers to Retirees 237
17.5. Projected Growth of Baby Boomer Segment of Population
through 2024 (BLS, Dec. 2015) 237
17.6. Men’s Pensionable Age in OECD Countries, 1949–2050 240
17.7. Women’s Pensionable Age in OECD Countries, 1949–2050 241
17.8. Decomposition of the Life Course, OECD 242
17.9. 2012–2022 Projected Growth Rate Comparison, NSF 2016 242
17.10. International Students Enrolled in U.S. Higher Education
Institutions by Broad Field and Academic Level 2008 – 2014 246
17.11. Current U.S. World Standings, OECD 2010 249
17.12. Tertiary-Educated Population 15 Years Old or Older,
by Country/Economy: 1980 and 2000, NSF, 2010 255
17.13. First University Degrees by
Selected Region/Country/Economy, 2012 255
17.14. First University Degrees in Natural Sciences
and Engineering, Selected Countries: 2001–2010, NSF, 2014 256
17.15. First University Degrees by Country (NSF 2016, P. O-7) 257
17.16. Destination Countries of
Internationally Mobile Students (NSF 2016, O-9) 258
17.17. Researchers in Selected
Regions/Countries/Economies: 1995–2011, NSF, 2014 259
17.18. Researchers in Selected
Regions/Countries/Economies: 2000–2013, NSF, 2016 260
17.19. Average Annual Growth in Number of Researchers
in Selected Regions/Countries/Economies: 1995–2007, NSF, 2010 260
17.20. Researchers as a Share of Total Employment in
Selected Regions/Countries/Economies: 2000–2013 261
17.21. Education Pays, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016 262
17.22. Top Reasons Companies Outsource,
Outsourcing World Summit, 2002 264
17.23. Top Reasons Companies Outsource (Deloitte, 2017) 265
17.24. Share of Global High-Technology Exports, by Region/Country:
1995–2008, NSF, 2010 267
17.25. Share of Global High-Technology Exports, by Region/Country:
1995–2008, NSF, 2010 268
17.26. Levels of Integration 274
17.27. Systems Integrator Framework 275
17.28. Management Level versus Expected Skill Sets 278
17.29. Enrollments by Type of Institution 292
17.30. Number and Percent of Student Decline from 2012–2015 293
17.31. Student enrollment Decline by Institution Sector 294
17.32. Enrollment Past and Future Through 2032 298
17.33. Private Religious and Nonsectarian Declines 298
17.34. Declining High School Enrollment Impact by Region 299
17.35. Break Even Perspective from 2008–2009 Academic Year 299
17.36. Increase in Distance Education by Type 300
17.37. Distance Enrollments Increased at Both the Undergraduate
and Graduate Levels 300
17.38. Distance Education Enrollments by Type of Institution 301
17.39. Enrollments Unevenly Distributed by Institution Type 302
17.40. Distance Enrollments Percent Change 2012–2015 302
17.41. Distance Enrollment Differences by Institutional Sector 303
18.1. Corporate Program Office 306
18.2. Corporate PM Office Responsibility Assignment Matrix 306
18.3. Level Three Work Breakdown Structure 307
18.4. Breakdown of Define Program Management Process 308
18.5. Breakdown of Implement Program Management Process 309
18.6. Breakdown of Perform Program Management Quality Assurance 310
18.7. Breakdown of Manage Program Management Personnel 310
18.8. Program Management Process Master Schedule 311
19.1. Resource Utilization versus Goal Attainment 316
19.2. Management Levels versus Required Skills 319
19.3. Managerial Grid 321
20.1. Context Diagram 330
21.1. The Four Levels of Decision 350
21.2. Basic Career Development Model 360
21.3. Initial Job Requirements 363
21.4. Requirements Gap Analysis 363
21.5. Gap Analysis—Chart Depiction 363
21.6. Career Development Responsibility Assignment Matrix 364
21.7. Career Development Schedule of Activities 364
21.8. Technologist and Engineering Titles/Roles Mapping to
Product Life-Cycle Phases 367
21.9. Participant Originating Disciplines 369
21.10. Engineering-Technology Higher Education Continuums 370
21.11. Potential Engineering—Technology Curriculum Mapping 371
21.12. Flow of Potential Students into Technology Prog 371
21.13. Strategic and Tactical Model for Business Growth 374
21.14. Example Strategic and Tactical Training Plan 374
22.1. Highly Integrated, Fully Synchronized Effort 375
22.2. Potential Successors by Position 377
22.3. Position Incumbent Characteristics 377
23.1. Growth, Innovation, Ideas, and Inclusion 384
23.2. Race and Ethnic Profiles by Age Group (Frey, 2018) 386
23.3. Net Population Gains/Losses by Race/Ethnicity:
2000–2015 (Frey, 2018) 386
23.4. Millennial Definitions of Diversity Distinguish
Them from Other Generations 388
24.1. Basic Communications Model 398
25.1. Five Stems of Organizational Development 406
25.2. Lewin’s Model of Planned Change 408
25.3. Action Research Model 408
25.4. Appreciative Inquiry Model (Positive Model) 408
25.5. General Model of Planned Change 409
25.6. Phases of Personal Change; adapted
from Managing Personal Change 414
25.7. Profits vs. the Good of the Nation 416
25.8. The Mentality of Investing 417
25.9. Continuum of Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities 425
25.10. Hierarchy of Maximum Potential 425
25.11. If You Don’t Know Where You Are Going,
Any Road Will Get You There 426
25.12. Strategic and Tactical Model for Business Growth 428
25.13. Levels of Fear 430
25.14. The Burning Platform 432
A.1. Evaluation Process Activities 436
A.2. Sample Likert Scale Question 438
A.3. Example of an Observation Form 438
B.1. Example Variance Analysis Report 443
B.2. Example Cost Performance Report 445
B.3. Execution Phase Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM) 446
C.1. Change Management Process 448
C.2. Identify the Change Process 449
C.3. Determine Impact of the Change Process 450
C.4. Implementing the Change Process 452
D.1. Program Planning Master Process Flow 468
D.2. Establishing Planning Organization Process Flow 470
D.3. Example Data to be Placed in Program Management Library 471
D.4. Program Management Library Process Flow 472
D.5. Master Program Schedule Process Flow 475
D.6. Extended CWBS and Dictionary Process Flow 478
D.7. Generating the RAM Process Flow 479
D.8. Generate Intermediate Schedule Process Flow 481
D.9. Generate Detailed Schedules Process Flow 483
D.10. Human Resource Plan Process Flow 484
D.11. Program Organization Process Flow 486
D.12. Cost Account Plans Process Flow 488
Preface
Over thirty-five years ago I graduated from Purdue University in computer science. I was the first college
graduate in my family. Walking down the aisle at graduation, I couldn’t believe it was real. My family was
very poor. I could tell stories that would bring most to tears. We lived a meager existence, struggling to get
by. I remember how I decided to go to college. I was a senior in high school, and our school was hosting a
college day. Colleges came from all over Indiana and the region, set up their tables, and passed out litera-
ture. I remember thinking that I didn’t want to be poor anymore. I was tired of not having what my friends
had, of worrying about whether we could afford oil for our furnace to heat our home, and not being able
to buy the essentials at the grocery store. I remember hearing how education would provide opportunity,
which in turn would provide a chance to live a normal life like most of my friends had. I walked that day to
the table where an Indiana University recruiter sat. I told him my strengths were computers and math, and
asked if they had something that would take me out of poverty. What that gentleman from IU did for me on
that day changed my life forever. He pointed to the Purdue table and said, “See that guy at the Purdue table?
Purdue has a degree in computer science that you might be suited for.”
As I walked down the aisle of Hovde Hall that graduation day, I had never felt the commitment to an
organization or the love for a place as I had, and do, for Purdue University. Purdue was, and is, more than
a place. It’s where I grew up mentally and emotionally. It’s where I learned true independence and real
responsibility. Although I didn’t have any idea where it would take me in life, I knew my Purdue education
would pave the way for a very bright future.
As I walked down the aisle in Hovde Hall to accept my diploma, I remember choking back tears. They
were tears of disbelief, of happiness, of love for a place, for the people, and for a life I had come to deeply
appreciate. I knew right then that one day, I would return to Purdue in some capacity, to dedicate my life
to serving the greater good, as others had done for me. I wanted to be a part of the Purdue family; I wanted
to one day live and work in the heart of the campus and immerse myself in the rich tradition of one of the
greatest universities in the world; I wanted to change people’s lives forever. At that time, I made a commit-
ment to return to serve in a different capacity.
Over the next nearly thirty years, with support and guidance from numerous members of my Purdue
family, I methodically did as I was instructed to do. I pursued and earned my MBA and then my doctorate.
I published professionally refereed articles and presentations. I even wrote a number of books. My career
took me away from Indiana to Texas and by no accident, back to Indianapolis. During that time my two
sons had graduated from Purdue and had subsequently gone on to law school. Then the most ideal job op-
portunity presented itself and I was able to return home—to my Purdue family. There is not a single day
that goes by that I don’t stop and simply look around at the campus, giving thanks for this life I have been
given. I am living proof that dreams do come true. I love my life, my job, my Purdue family, and being able
to live the dream. Being at Purdue is a great honor; I do not take it for granted. I am honored to be a member
of the Purdue family, and extremely thankful for the opportunity.

• xix
“. . . for wisdom will come into your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to
your soul; discretion will watch over you, understanding will guard you”
Proverbs 2:10-11
Introduction
The first edition of this text evolved from nearly 17 years of research, teaching, and writing. It came to be
through an iterative process of understanding the research and development phases of the program/proj-
ect management life-cycle of major system product development. The text began with a basic underlying
understanding and desire to write about program planning, that being the pre-contract award period of the
overarching process for managing programs.
Program Planning was written in 1995. It dealt primarily with the program/project management plan-
ning process; again, that being prior to a contract being awarded. It identified a process made up of a series
of activities, each with its own attendant products. Back in 1995, the whole discipline of program and proj-
ect management was just starting to evolve into a recognized and accepted discipline. Now, it can be readily
argued that program/project management has been around since the beginning of time, and in fact the most
widely recognized credentialing authority, the Project Management Institute, has been around since 1959.
The Defense Systems Management College has equally been around since that time. But, program and
project management as a recognized and essential discipline didn’t really begin to proliferate in literature
until around 1995.
Program Planning defined a planning process with multiple time-phased, semi-sequential activities
and their attendant products. In retrospect, although somewhat narrow in perspective, the book covered the
basics of the quantitative aspects of program/project management. Through teaching program/project man-
agement in multiple universities, primarily to working professionals and graduate students, came the real-
ization that a text for planning programs that was entirely quantitatively focused was insufficient. It became
clear that the actual practice of program/project management, if taught correctly, needed to include more
than the quantitative component; it also needed to include the peripheral disciplines and concepts. This
more thorough understanding, evolving from actual teaching experience, led to Program Management: A
Comprehensive Overview of the Discipline. This book gained recognition internationally and was published
in seven countries around the world. Interestingly enough, the title itself brought many questions. How can
something be a comprehensive overview? Can’t something be less than a comprehensive overview? It was
the breadth of the discipline that was gaining the breadth of discussion.
Again, as before, it was the numerous and varied disciplines as represented by the students that led to
the natural conclusion that my defense industry background had caused the use of a very defense industry-
specific set of terminology and an unnecessarily complex process. The terminology, process, and practice as
defined and implemented in the defense industry is the most complex in any industry and certainly doesn’t
lend itself readily to assimilation from those not in the more acronym-oriented defense industry. What was
needed was a much simpler overview and discussion of the process and products themselves. To this end,
A Concise Guide to Program Management evolved.
The value of A Concise Guide to Program Management was that the process and products were dis-
cussed in terms of a much simpler industry, one oriented toward something with which a large number of
students had at least some familiarity: home building. This book, then, focused on describing program/proj-
ect management from a commercial perspective, versus the previous attempts at describing the discipline
from a defense-oriented perspective.
To summarize, at the time of A Concise Guide to Program Management, experience with students had
led to an enlarged writing perspective from simply planning programs to describing the comprehensive
nature of program/project management to describing program/project management from a commercially
oriented perspective. Through additional teaching, it was discovered that students preferred to actually have
a little of the defense perspective, with a more detailed discussion involving the commercial perspective. In
this sense, both books served to more completely define the program/project management process, such that
a more comprehensive understanding could be attained. This was good and would prove to be the winning
combination for maximum assimilation and subsequent application.

• 1
2 • Introduction

What is left then to write about on this topic? The answer: another perspective that entails the work pre-
viously discussed and now formalizes the knowledge into a structure that allows the exhibition of behaviors
believed to be required for success as program managers of the future. In other words, we need a model of
competencies premised on behaviors that entail the concepts presented in previous work around planning
and other interrelated disciplines: a competency-based approach.
Aren’t there already books on competency-based approaches to program/project management? The
answer is yes, but they do not include the breadth of discussion required to fully understand the discipline.
Other books on competency-based approaches to program/project management simply discuss what the
authors feel are required competencies, and not all authors agree.
What differentiated the first edition of this book from other competency-based perspectives, then, was
that the book rounded-out the discussion on competencies required for future program/project management
success by incorporating the more complex discussion already evolved and expanded on in previous works
on planning and the interrelatedness of peripheral disciplines. The first edition of this book used a broader
stroke to paint a more complete perspective of not only the process and products identified to be the pro-
gram/project management process, but equally, placed these elements into a competency-based framework,
which could then be tied directly to a competency model and subsequent training.
The second edition of Project and Program Management: A Competency-Based Approach really took
the first edition to a new level. To begin with, through years of teaching and writing, there were a number of
new chapters, significant expansion of existing ones, and a major shuffling of the order of the material. This
revision had expanded and new chapters recognizing the qualitative significance of the discipline—this idea
coming directly from the students. Additionally, the many students over the years have helped to evolve a
much greater understanding of the competencies required to be a successful program/project manager. This
effort was reflected through 315 references to 107 unique companies. Where within those 107 unique com-
panies, there are a total of 54 unique behaviors identified; across those 54 unique behaviors, there are 229
unique skills, where each behavior had two or more skills, and on average around four skills per behavior.
The work provided significant insight into the business and industrial perspective of what constitutes a well-
rounded program/project manager.
The quantitative chapters, those dealing directly with the program/project management process, ac-
tivities, and outcomes (products), had been refined to bring together the non-jargon-oriented commercial
perspective, then followed by what may be termed a deeper dive. This more detailed perspective provided
insight into the complexities of each activity and attendant outputs. The deeper dive is for those who wish
a more thorough understanding and the challenges that might arise from a large-scale implementation of
the process.
The new qualitative chapters included material dealing with disruptive technologies, leadership and
gender, succession planning, change management, and, perhaps most excitedly, providing an insight into
what it means to capitalize on the world’s collective knowledge. As before, all of these chapters were re-
searched, taught on more than one occasion, and suggested by the many students to be part of this revised
edition.
Included in the second edition was a chapter summarizing the entire program/project management
process outputs by identifying in a concise manner the ordered outputs from the many process activities.
This chapter, as others, was highly regarded and recommended by the students. It brought together the
quantitative discussion from applicable chapters into one brief chapter, with reference to other chapters for
further understanding.
Lastly, the material had been significantly restructured and reorganized. To better integrate the qualita-
tive and quantitative material, the students felt the new organization presented in the revised second edition
supported a greater perceptual flow, which in the end enhanced student understanding and assimilation.
The third edition of Project and Program Management: A Competency-Based Approach expanded on
the second edition in every chapter, bringing fresh and updated insight gained from the continuation of
 Introduction • 3

teaching and research. Additionally, the third edition delved deeper into the qualitative nature of program/
project management. It opened the aperture further than previous editions by following paths of logic rela-
tive to the new student learner and in particular professional working adult learners in the multifaceted
discipline of program/project management.
This fourth edition has been again significantly revised, with every chapter being impacted. When we
discuss the qualitative nature of program/project management—that is, the art form of the discipline—
the literature proliferates at an unparalleled pace. Our understanding of generational cohorts continues to
evolve in real-time with extensive research from numerous credible institutions and organizations. Further,
our understanding of the connectedness of our one world sheds nearly daily light on our international
interactions—socially, politically, technologically, and in every other way. Each of these many changes,
coupled with advances in PM technologies and real-world applications, provides a rich basis for furthering
our understanding of the complexities when managing our many programs and projects. This fourth edition
considers the magnitude of these many changes and their impact on each of the chapters of this book. Not
forgotten are the many inputs from the numerous students who continue to bring to the forefront their cur-
rent real-world practices; this across their many represented businesses, industries, and disciplines. These
are perhaps the most important of considerations when comparing previous material to current-day realities.
Chapter 1

Program/Project Management Competencies

Every discipline, to be a discipline, must have competencies. Competencies define the behaviors indica-
tive of what is required to be successful in the respective discipline. Competencies, then, allow us to judge
ourselves in terms of how much we know about a given competency, which, in turn, allows us to pursue a
better understanding of a given competency through training and education. In other words, since compe-
tencies are nothing more than manifested behaviors, which we can form through training, competencies are
things we can develop in ourselves and others. The question to be asked, however, is what are the agreed-to
competencies of a given discipline?
The answer to the question “what are the required program/project management competencies for suc-
cess in practice?” is not uniformly agreed upon. In fact, looking through the proliferation of literature, it
appears there is not a single set of program/project management competencies agreed to by all. What we can
do, however, is to pull from the many already defined competencies a set that we can then apply our own
experience to create an acceptable set. Certainly, without question, we can define the basic competencies.
So, to this end, this book defines the basic competencies and a few others oriented around successful lead-
ers and leadership that is proposed to form a complete set of program/project management competencies.
J. Davidson Frame, in his 1999 book entitled Building Project Management Competence, defines
eleven competencies program/project managers must possess to ensure at least some facsimile of, or op-
portunity for, success. These eleven competencies are:
‰‰ Be results oriented
‰‰ Have a head for details
‰‰ Possess a strong commitment to the project
‰‰ Be aware of the organization’s goals
‰‰ Be politically savvy
‰‰ Be cost-conscious
‰‰ Understand business basics
‰‰ Be capable of addressing needs of staff, customers, and management
‰‰ Be capable of dealing with ambiguity, setbacks, and disappointments
‰‰ Possess good negotiation skills
‰‰ Possess the appropriate technical skills to do the job
Frame goes on to separate competencies into three categories: knowledge-based, socially rooted, and
business-judgment.
According to Frame, knowledge-based competencies are objective knowledge that individuals are ex-
pected to possess in order to carry out their jobs effectively. An Ada programmer should know something
about Ada as a programming language; a restaurant owner should know something about running a restau-
rant; and a builder should know something about building a house.

• 5
6 • Chapter 1

Socially rooted competencies are more subjective as defined by Frame. He writes, “They focus on
abilities such as good judgment and human relations skills. Task leaders who are able to mediate conflicts
on their teams possess some measure of socially rooted competence, as do project managers who can moti-
vate borrowed resources to put in needed extra hours of work and technical workers who display sensitivity
to their customers need” (p. 6).
The last category of program/project management competencies are business-judgment competencies.
These are “tied to the ability of individuals to make decisions to consistently serve the best business inter-
est of the organization. People who are strong in this area are able to assess the risks and rewards associ-
ated with decisions they are about to make. They look beyond the immediate impact of their decisions and
understand their opportunity costs. Although they recognize the importance of establishing and following
good methods and procedures for the effective functioning of the organization, they do not behave like
mindless bureaucrats. When they see an opportunity to improve the business performance, they seize it,
even when it lies outside the realm of business procedures” (p. 6).
Harold Kerzner, in his 2009, tenth edition book entitled Project Management: A Systems Approach to
Planning, Scheduling and Controlling, defines ten skills he believes project managers must possess to be
effective in their pursuits. These ten skills are:
‰‰ Team building
‰‰ Leadership
‰‰ Conflict resolution
‰‰ Technical expertise
‰‰ Planning
‰‰ Organization
‰‰ Entrepreneurship
‰‰ Administration
‰‰ Management support
‰‰ Resource allocation
Kerzner goes on to say that “it is important the personal management style underlying these skills
facilitate the integration of multidisciplinary program resources for synergistic operation. The days of the
manager who gets by with technical expertise alone or pure administrative skills are gone” (p. 905).
Others, and there are many, have separated a program/project manager’s competencies into two cat-
egories of leadership and those specific to program/project management, although there seems to be much
confusion on a common set of defined competencies. Others have added the following competencies, some
derived from the Project Management Institute’s (PMI’s) definitions:
‰‰ Strategic thinking
‰‰ Customer focus
‰‰ Business alignment
‰‰ Domain knowledge
‰‰ Decision making
‰‰ Ethical behavior
‰‰ Self-management
‰‰ Global awareness
‰‰ Risk and opportunity management
‰‰ Program planning and execution
Over the last thirty-plus years of teaching program/project management, professional working adult
learners have been asked to build competency models in much the same manner as is being described here.
They were asked to visit online organizations, download their respective competency model for program/
project managers, and then compare and contrast their findings. Ultimately, they have been asked to create
 Program/Project Management Competencies • 7

their own version of a “good” competency model from their research findings and their own personal expe-
riences. Below are the guidelines provided to students for these many papers.

Student PM Competency Model Paper Guidelines

1. Research and document three program/project management-oriented competency models.

These can generally be found on the internet.
2. From the above three researched models, create your own (fourth) perspective of what behav-
iors, and skills per behavior, are most important, or, alternatively, you can use your current
company competency model as this fourth model; your choice.
3. You should have three to five behaviors and three to five skills per behavior in your fourth
model.
4. You should define three (3) levels of program/project manager; example, Level 1, Level 2,
Level 3. For each level of PM define:
a. Experience required
b. Education required or desired
c. Size of programs responsible for; value ($$), complexity, etc.
d. Type of program responsible for; component, subsystem, system, platform, etc.
5. You will deliver one (1) item; a Word document—if you wish to send me an Excel file from
which you cut and pasted into your master Word document you may do that as well, but I will
only be looking at and grading the Word file. Summarizing, submit:
a. A complete Microsoft Word document that documents your three researched models
found (placing one researched model per appendix for three total appendices), and your
chosen (fourth model) specific model behaviors and skills, where your fourth model
behaviors and skills are mapped to your three levels of PM. Again, in an effort to keep
the body of the Word document to a minimum, please place the three researched models
in separate appendices (Appendix A, Appendix B, Appendix C) at the end of your Word
document. To be specific:
i. Word document with three total appendices; one each for the three models
researched.
ii. Your fourth model should be in the body of the Word document, not an appendix.
b. Potentially, an additional Microsoft Excel document, if you used one to cut and paste into
your Word document from. The information in this file needs to be cut and pasted into
your Word document, therefore forming a complete, all-encompassing Word paper. I do
not necessarily need the Excel file, but I must have a complete Word file.
6. Name both files (Word required, Excel if you wish) as: Lname, Fname, Paper (e.g., Doe, Jane,
Paper). The .docx and .xlsx postfixes will differentiate the files, therefore allowing the same
name on each file.
7. Your name should be on the paper (.docx) title page.
8. Make sure to include page numbers in your Word document.
9. You must have a Table of Contents in your Word document.
10. Single-space the paper.
11. There is no page limit.
The result of this student research has been over 3,000 references to hundreds of unique companies.
Within those hundreds of unique companies, there are a significant number of behaviors identified. Across
those many behaviors, there are hundreds of attendant skills, where each behavior has three or more skills,
and on average around four skills per behavior. Figure 1.1 depicts the top 20 of those predominantly identi-
fied behaviors of the many companies researched.
8 • Chapter 1

Figure 1.1. Most Identified Behaviors across Companies

Something most interesting in figure 1.1 is that qualitative behaviors outnumber quantitative behaviors
significantly. In fact, depending on how one wishes to argue it, there appears to be 17 qualitative behaviors
to just three quantitative ones; in other words, 85 percent of the behaviors of the top researched companies
believe qualitative behaviors are at least as important as quantitative, and from the data, more so.
When most of us become program/project managers, we are given key training on the tools and tech-
niques that enable us to monitor our cost, schedule, and technical performance baseline. In other words, we
are taught about: (1) scheduling techniques; the differences between Gantt charts and network diagrams,
(2) earned value; how to compare a program’s actual cost to credit earned for work performed and baseline
cost, and perhaps (3) we may be indoctrinated into the organization’s departmental budgeting process. Most
all of these, as one would notice, are quantitative measures, which while essential, are arguably not the en-
tirety of what is required for successful program/project management.
To provide an example premised on the findings from the above research, I’d like to share a story.
Earlier in my career, I was working on a program as the software engineering manager. We were a sub-
contractor to a larger prime contractor located in the southern United States. At this particular point in our
relationship with this prime contractor, the program manager, contracts manager, marketing manager, and I
(the software engineering manager) were flying down to see our prime for what is termed fact finding. Fact
finding is the process a prime contractor goes through with a subcontractor to determine appropriateness of
the subcontractor’s cost basis for the subcontractor’s bid to do their portion of the job.
After some number of hours and numerous discussions on the many line items that formed the basis of
our bid, we stumbled onto a particular document that we felt would take five months of a single person’s
time to complete. The prime, our customer, felt it should only take two months to complete. After what ap-
peared to be a standstill, their contract manager stood up and said, “We don’t think you are negotiating in
Discovering Diverse Content Through
Random Scribd Documents
spoken—a work in which he shows quite another spirit from that
which appears in his former compilation from your four-and-twenty
elders. At that time he thought that there might be opinions
probable in speculation, which might not be safe in practice; but he
has now come to form an opposite judgment, and has, in this, his
latest work, confirmed it. Such is the wonderful growth attained by
the doctrine of probability in general, as well as by every probable
opinion in particular, in the course of time. Attend, then, to what he
says: “I cannot see how it can be that an action which seems
allowable in speculation should not be so likewise in practice;
because what may be done in practice depends on what is found to
be lawful in speculation, and the things differ from each other only
as cause and effect. Speculation is that which determines to action.
Whence it follows that opinions probable in speculation may be followed
with a safe conscience in practice, and that even with more safety than
those which have not been so well examined as matters of
speculation.”[250]
Verily, fathers, your friend Escobar reasons uncommonly well
sometimes; and, in point of fact, there is such a close connection
between speculation and practice, that when the former has once
taken root, you have no difficulty in permitting the latter, without any
disguise. A good illustration of this we have in the permission “to kill
for a buffet,” which, from being a point of simple speculation, was
boldly raised by Lessius into a practice “which ought not easily to be
allowed;” from that promoted by Escobar to the character of “an
easy practice;” and from thence elevated by your fathers of Caen, as
we have seen, without any distinction between theory and practice,
into a full permission. Thus you bring your opinions to their full
growth very gradually. Were they presented all at once in their
finished extravagance, they would beget horror; but this slow
imperceptible progress gradually habituates men to the sight of
them, and hides their offensiveness. And in this way the permission
to murder, in itself so odious both to Church and State, creeps first
into the Church, and then from the Church into the State.
 A similar success has attended the opinion of “killing for slander,”
which has now reached the climax of a permission without any
distinction. I should not have stopped to quote my authorities on
this point from your writings, had it not been necessary in order to
put down the effrontery with which you have asserted, twice over, in
your fifteenth Imposture, “that there never was a Jesuit who
permitted killing for slander.” Before making this statement, fathers,
you should have taken care to prevent it from coming under my
notice, seeing that it is so easy for me to answer it. For, not to
mention that your fathers Reginald, Filiutius, and others, have
permitted it in speculation, as I have already shown, and that the
principle laid down by Escobar leads us safely on to the practice, I
have to tell you that you have authors who have permitted it in so
many words, and among others Father Hereau in his public lectures,
on the conclusion of which the king put him under arrest in your
house, for having taught, among other errors, that when a person
who has slandered us in the presence of men of honor, continues to
do so after being warned to desist, it is allowable to kill him, not
publicly, indeed, for fear of scandal, but IN A PRIVATE WAY—sed clam.
I have had occasion already to mention Father Lamy, and you do
not need to be informed that his doctrine on this subject was
censured in 1649 by the University of Louvain.[251] And yet two
months have not elapsed since your Father Des Bois maintained this
very censured doctrine of Father Lamy, and taught that “it was
allowable for a monk to defend the honor which he acquired by his
virtue, EVEN BY KILLING the person who assails his reputation—etiam
cum morte invasoris;” which has raised such a scandal in that town,
that the whole of the curés united to impose silence on him, and to
oblige him, by a canonical process, to retract his doctrine. The case
is now pending in the Episcopal court.
What say you now, fathers? Why attempt, after that, to maintain
that “no Jesuit ever held that it was lawful to kill for slander?” Is
anything more necessary to convince you of this than the very
opinions of your fathers which you quote, since they do not
condemn murder in speculation, but only in practice, and that, too,
“on account of the injury that might thereby accrue to the State?”
And here I would just beg to ask, whether the whole matter in
dispute between us is not simply and solely to ascertain if you have
or have not subverted the law of God which condemns murder? The
point in question is, not whether you have injured the
commonwealth, but whether you have injured religion. What
purpose, then, can it serve, in a dispute of this kind, to show that
you have spared the State, when you make it apparent, at the same
time, that you have destroyed the faith? Is this not evident from
your saying that the meaning of Reginald, on the question of killing
for slanders, is, “that a private individual has a right to employ that
mode of defence, viewing it simply in itself?” I desire nothing beyond
this concession to confute you. “A private individual,” you say, “has a
right to employ that mode of defence” (that is, killing for slanders),
“viewing the thing in itself;” and, consequently, fathers, the law of
God, which forbids us to kill, is nullified by that decision.
It serves no purpose to add, as you have done, “that such a mode
is unlawful and criminal, even according to the law of God, on
account of the murders and disorders which would follow in society,
because the law of God obliges us to have regard to the good of
society.” This is to evade the question: for there are two laws to be
observed—one forbidding us to kill, and another forbidding us to
harm society. Reginald has not, perhaps, broken the law which
forbids us to do harm to society; but he has most certainly violated
that which forbids us to kill. Now this is the only point with which we
have to do. I might have shown, besides, that your other writers,
who have permitted these murders in practice, have subverted the
one law as well as the other. But, to proceed, we have seen that you
sometimes forbid doing harm to the State; and you allege that your
design in that is to fulfil the law of God, which obliges us to consult
the interests of society. That may be true, though it is far from being
certain, as you might do the same thing purely from fear of the civil
magistrate. With your permission, then, we shall scrutinize the real
secret of this movement.
 Is it not certain, fathers, that if you had really any regard to God,
and if the observance of his law had been the prime and principal
object in your thoughts, this respect would have invariably
predominated in all your leading decisions, and would have engaged
you at all times on the side of religion? But if it turns out, on the
contrary, that you violate, in innumerable instances, the most sacred
commands that God has laid upon men, and that, as in the instances
before us, you annihilate the law of God, which forbids these actions
as criminal in themselves, and that you only scruple to approve of
them in practice, from bodily fear of the civil magistrate, do you not
afford us ground to conclude that you have no respect to God in
your apprehensions, and that if you yield an apparent obedience to
his law, in so far as regards the obligation to do no harm to the
State, this is not done out of any regard to the law itself, but to
compass your own ends, as has ever been the way with politicians
of no religion?
What, fathers! will you tell us that, looking simply to the law of
God, which says, “Thou shalt not kill,” we have a right to kill for
slanders? And after having thus trampled on the eternal law of God,
do you imagine that you atone for the scandal you have caused, and
can persuade us of your reverence for him, by adding that you
prohibit the practice for State reasons, and from dread of the civil
arm? Is not this, on the contrary, to raise a fresh scandal?—I mean
not by the respect which you testify for the magistrate; that is not
my charge against you, and it is ridiculous in you to banter, as you
have done, on this matter. I blame you, not for fearing the
magistrate, but for fearing none but the magistrate. And I blame you
for this, because it is making God less the enemy of vice than man.
Had you said that to kill for slander was allowable according to men,
but not according to God, that might have been something more
endurable; but when you maintain, that what is too criminal to be
tolerated among men, may yet be innocent and right in the eyes of
that Being who is righteousness itself, what is this but to declare
before the whole world, by a subversion of principle as shocking in
itself as it is alien to the spirit of the saints, that while you can be
braggarts before God, you are cowards before men?
Had you really been anxious to condemn these homicides, you
would have allowed the commandment of God which forbids them to
remain intact; and had you dared at once to permit them, you would
have permitted them openly, in spite of the laws of God and men.
But your object being to permit them imperceptibly, and to cheat the
magistrate, who watches over the public safety, you have gone
craftily to work. You separate your maxims into two portions. On the
one side, you hold out “that it is lawful in speculation to kill a man
for slander;”—and nobody thinks of hindering you from taking a
speculative view of matters. On the other side, you come out with
this detached axiom, “that what is permitted in speculation is also
permissible in practice;”—and what concern does society seem to
have in this general and metaphysical-looking proposition? And thus
these two principles, so little suspected, being embraced in their
separate form, the vigilance of the magistrate is eluded; while it is
only necessary to combine the two together, to draw from them the
conclusion which you aim at—namely, that it is lawful in practice to
put a man to death for a simple slander.
It is, indeed, fathers, one of the most subtle tricks of your policy,
to scatter through your publications the maxims which you club
together in your decisions. It is partly in this way that you establish
your doctrine of probabilities, which I have frequently had occasion
to explain. That general principle once established, you advance
propositions harmless enough when viewed apart, but which, when
taken in connection with that pernicious dogma, become positively
horrible. An example of this, which demands an answer, may be
found in the 11th page of your “Impostures,” where you allege that
“several famous theologians have decided that it is lawful to kill a
man for a box on the ear.” Now, it is certain, that if that had been
said by a person who did not hold probabilism, there would be
nothing to find fault with in it; it would in this case amount to no
more than a harmless statement, and nothing could be elicited from
it. But you, fathers, and all who hold that dangerous tenet, “that
whatever has been approved by celebrated authors is probable and
safe in conscience,” when you add to this “that several celebrated
authors are of opinion that it is lawful to kill a man for a box on the
ear,” what is this but to put a dagger into the hand of all Christians,
for the purpose of plunging it into the heart of the first person that
insults them, and to assure them that, having the judgment of so
many grave authors on their side, they may do so with a perfectly
safe conscience?
What monstrous species of language is this, which, in announcing
that certain authors hold a detestable opinion, is at the same time
giving a decision in favor of that opinion—which solemnly teaches
whatever it simply tells! We have learnt, fathers, to understand this
peculiar dialect of the Jesuitical school; and it is astonishing that you
have the hardihood to speak it out so freely, for it betrays your
sentiments somewhat too broadly. It convicts you of permitting
murder for a buffet, as often as you repeat that many celebrated
authors have maintained that opinion.
This charge, fathers, you will never be able to repel; nor will you
be much helped out by those passages from Vasquez and Suarez
that you adduce against me, in which they condemn the murders
which their associates have approved. These testimonies, disjoined
from the rest of your doctrine, may hoodwink those who know little
about it; but we, who know better, put your principles and maxims
together. You say, then, that Vasquez condemns murders; but what
say you on the other side of the question, my reverend fathers?
Why, “that the probability of one sentiment does not hinder the
probability of the opposite sentiment; and that it is warrantable to
follow the less probable and less safe opinion, giving up the more
probable and more safe one.” What follows from all this taken in
connection, but that we have perfect freedom of conscience to adopt
any one of these conflicting judgments which pleases us best? And
what becomes of all the effect which you fondly anticipate from your
quotations? It evaporates in smoke, for we have no more to do than
to conjoin for your condemnation the maxims which you have
disjoined for your exculpation. Why, then, produce those passages of
your authors which I have not quoted, to qualify those which I have
quoted, as if the one could excuse the other? What right does that
give you to call me an “impostor?” Have I said that all your fathers
are implicated in the same corruptions? Have I not, on the contrary,
been at pains to show that your interest lay in having them of all
different minds, in order to suit all your purposes? Do you wish to kill
your man?—here is Lessius for you. Are you inclined to spare him?—
here is Vasquez. Nobody need go away in ill humor—nobody without
the authority of a grave doctor. Lessius will talk to you like a Heathen
on homicide, and like a Christian, it may be, on charity. Vasquez,
again, will descant like a Heathen on charity, and like a Christian on
homicide. But by means of probabilism, which is held both by
Vasquez and Lessius, and which renders all your opinions common
property, they will lend their opinions to one another, and each will
be held bound to absolve those who have acted according to
opinions which each of them has condemned. It is this very variety,
then, that confounds you. Uniformity, even in evil, would be better
than this. Nothing is more contrary to the orders of St. Ignatius[252]
and the first generals of your Society, than this confused medley of
all sorts of opinions, good and bad. I may, perhaps, enter on this
topic at some future period; and it will astonish many to see how far
you have degenerated from the original spirit of your institution, and
that your own generals have foreseen that the corruption of your
doctrine on morals might prove fatal, not only to your Society, but to
the Church universal.[253]
Meanwhile, I repeat that you can derive no advantage from the
doctrine of Vasquez. It would be strange, indeed, if, out of all the
Jesuits that have written on morals, one or two could not be found
who may have hit upon a truth which has been confessed by all
Christians. There is no glory in maintaining the truth, according to
the Gospel, that it is unlawful to kill a man for smiting us on the
face; but it is foul shame to deny it. So far, indeed, from justifying
you, nothing tells more fatally against you than the fact that, having
doctors among you who have told you the truth, you abide not in
the truth, but love the darkness rather than the light. You have been
taught by Vasquez that it is a heathen, and not a Christian, opinion
to hold that we may knock down a man for a blow on the cheek;
and that it is subversive both of the Gospel and of the decalogue to
say that we may kill for such a matter. The most profligate of men
will acknowledge as much. And yet you have allowed Lessius,
Escobar, and others, to decide, in the face of these well-known
truths, and in spite of all the laws of God against manslaughter, that
it is quite allowable to kill a man for a buffet!
What purpose, then, can it serve to set this passage of Vasquez
over against the sentiment of Lessius, unless you mean to show
that, in the opinion of Vasquez, Lessius is a “heathen” and a
“profligate?” and that, fathers, is more than I durst have said myself.
What else can be deduced from it than that Lessius “subverts both
the Gospel and the decalogue;” that, at the last day, Vasquez will
condemn Lessius on this point, as Lessius will condemn Vasquez on
another; and that all your fathers will rise up in judgment one
against another, mutually condemning each other for their sad
outrages on the law of Jesus Christ?
To this conclusion, then, reverend fathers, must we come at
length, that as your probabilism renders the good opinions of some
of your authors useless to the Church, and useful only to your policy,
they merely serve to betray, by their contrariety, the duplicity of your
hearts. This you have completely unfolded, by telling us, on the one
hand, that Vasquez and Suarez are against homicide, and on the
other hand, that many celebrated authors are for homicide; thus
presenting two roads to our choice, and destroying the simplicity of
the Spirit of God, who denounces his anathema on the deceitful and
the double-hearted: “Væ duplici corde, et ingredienti duabus viis!—
Woe be to the double hearts, and the sinner that goeth two
ways!”[254]
 LETTER XIV.

TO THE REVEREND FATHERS, THE JESUITS.

IN WHICH THE MAXIMS OF THE JESUITS ON MURDER ARE REFUTED FROM THE
FATHERS—SOME OF THEIR CALUMNIES ANSWERED BY THE WAY—AND THEIR
DOCTRINE COMPARED WITH THE FORMS OBSERVED IN CRIMINAL TRIALS.

October 23, 1656.

Reverend Fathers,—If I had merely to reply to the three remaining
charges on the subject of homicide, there would be no need for a
long discourse, and you will see them refuted presently in a few
words; but as I think it of much more importance to inspire the
public with a horror at your opinions on this subject, than to justify
the fidelity of my quotations, I shall be obliged to devote the greater
part of this letter to the refutation of your maxims, to show you how
far you have departed from the sentiments of the Church, and even
of nature itself. The permissions of murder, which you have granted
in such a variety of cases, render it very apparent, that you have so
far forgotten the law of God, and quenched the light of nature, as to
require to be remanded to the simplest principles of religion and of
common sense.
What can be a plainer dictate of nature than that “no private
individual has a right to take away the life of another?” “So well are
we taught this of ourselves,” says St. Chrysostom, “that God, in
giving the commandment not to kill, did not add as a reason that
homicide was an evil; because,” says that father, “the law supposes
that nature has taught us that truth already.” Accordingly, this
commandment has been binding on men in all ages. The Gospel has
confirmed the requirement of the law; and the decalogue only
renewed the command which man had received from God before the
law, in the person of Noah, from whom all men are descended. On
that renovation of the world, God said to the patriarch: “At the hand
of man, and at the hand of every man’s brother, will I require the life
of man. Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be
shed; for man is made in the image of God.” (Gen. ix. 5, 6.) This
general prohibition deprives man of all power over the life of man.
And so exclusively has the Almighty reserved this prerogative in his
own hand, that, in accordance with Christianity, which is at utter
variance with the false maxims of Paganism, man has no power even
over his own life. But, as it has seemed good to his providence to
take human society under his protection, and to punish the evil-
doers that give it disturbance, he has himself established laws for
depriving criminals of life; and thus those executions which, without
his sanction, would be punishable outrages, become, by virtue of his
authority, which is the rule of justice, praiseworthy penalties. St.
Augustine takes an admirable view of this subject. “God,” he says,
“has himself qualified this general prohibition against manslaughter,
both by the laws which he has instituted for the capital punishment
of malefactors, and by the special orders which he has sometimes
issued to put to death certain individuals. And when death is inflicted
in such cases, it is not man that kills, but God, of whom man may be
considered as only the instrument, in the same way as a sword in
the hand of him that wields it. But, these instances excepted,
whosoever kills incurs the guilt of murder.”[255]
It appears, then, fathers, that the right of taking away the life of
man is the sole prerogative of God, and that having ordained laws
for executing death on criminals, he has deputed kings or
commonwealths as the depositaries of that power—a truth which St.
Paul teaches us, when, speaking of the right which sovereigns
possess over the lives of their subjects, he deduces it from Heaven
in these words: “He beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the
minister of God to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.” (Rom.
xiii. 4.) But as it is God who has put this power into their hands, so
he requires them to exercise it in the same manner as he does
himself; in other words, with perfect justice; according to what St.
Paul observes in the same passage: “Rulers are not a terror to good
works, but to the evil. Wilt thou, then, not be afraid of the power?
Do that which is good: for he is the minister of God to thee for
good.” And this restriction, so far from lowering their prerogative,
exalts it, on the contrary, more than ever; for it is thus assimilated to
that of God, who has no power to do evil, but is all-powerful to do
good; and it is thus distinguished from that of devils, who are
impotent in that which is good, and powerful only for evil. There is
this difference only to be observed betwixt the King of Heaven and
earthly sovereigns, that God, being justice and wisdom itself, may
inflict death instantaneously on whomsoever and in whatsoever
manner he pleases; for, besides his being the sovereign Lord of
human life, it is certain that he never takes it away either without
cause or without judgment, because he is as incapable of injustice
as he is of error. Earthly potentates, however, are not at liberty to
act in this manner; for, though the ministers of God, still they are but
men, and not gods. They may be misguided by evil counsels,
irritated by false suspicions, transported by passion, and hence they
find themselves obliged to have recourse, in their turn also, to
human agency, and appoint magistrates in their dominions, to whom
they delegate their power, that the authority which God has
bestowed on them may be employed solely for the purpose for
which they received it.
I hope you understand, then, fathers, that to avoid the crime of
murder, we must act at once by the authority of God, and according
to the justice of God; and that when these two conditions are not
united, sin is contracted; whether it be by taking away life with his
authority, but without his justice; or by taking it away with justice,
but without his authority. From this indispensable connection it
follows, according to St. Augustine, “that he who, without proper
authority, kills a criminal, becomes a criminal himself, chiefly for this
reason, that he usurps an authority which God has not given him;”
and on the other hand, magistrates, though they possess this
authority, are nevertheless chargeable with murder, if, contrary to
the laws which they are bound to follow, they inflict death on an
innocent man.
Such are the principles of public safety and tranquillity which have
been admitted at all times and in all places, and on the basis of
which all legislators, sacred and profane, from the beginning of the
world, have founded their laws. Even Heathens have never ventured
to make an exception to this rule, unless in cases where there was
no other way of escaping the loss of chastity or life, when they
conceived, as Cicero tells us, “that the law itself seemed to put its
weapons into the hands of those who were placed in such an
emergency.”
But with this single exception, which has nothing to do with my
present purpose, that such a law was ever enacted, authorizing or
tolerating, as you have done, the practice of putting a man to death,
to atone for an insult, or to avoid the loss of honor or property,
where life is not in danger at the same time; that, fathers, is what I
deny was ever done, even by infidels. They have, on the contrary,
most expressly forbidden the practice. The law of the Twelve Tables
of Rome bore, “that it is unlawful to kill a robber in the day-time,
when he does not defend himself with arms;” which, indeed, had
been prohibited long before in the 22d chapter of Exodus. And the
law Furem, in the Lex Cornelia, which is borrowed from Ulpian,
forbids the killing of robbers even by night, if they do not put us in
danger of our lives.[256]
Tell us now, fathers, what authority you have to permit what all
laws, human as well as divine, have forbidden; and who gave
Lessius a right to use the following language? “The book of Exodus
forbids the killing of thieves by day, when they do not employ arms
in their defence; and in a court of justice, punishment is inflicted on
those who kill under these circumstances. In conscience, however,
no blame can be attached to this practice, when a person is not sure
of being able otherwise to recover his stolen goods, or entertains a
doubt on the subject, as Sotus expresses it; for he is not obliged to
run the risk of losing any part of his property merely to save the life
of a robber. The same privilege extends even to clergymen.”[257] Such
extraordinary assurance! The law of Moses punishes those who kill a
thief when he does not threaten our lives, and the law of the Gospel,
according to you, will absolve them! What, fathers! has Jesus Christ
come to destroy the law, and not to fulfil it? “The civil judge,” says
Lessius, “would inflict punishment on those who should kill under
such circumstances; but no blame can be attached to the deed in
conscience.” Must we conclude, then, that the morality of Jesus
Christ is more sanguinary, and less the enemy of murder, than that
of Pagans, from whom our judges have borrowed their civil laws
which condemn that crime? Do Christians make more account of the
good things of this earth, and less account of human life, than
infidels and idolaters? On what principle do you proceed, fathers?
Assuredly not upon any law that ever was enacted either by God or
man—on nothing, indeed, but this extraordinary reasoning: “The
laws,” say you, “permit us to defend ourselves against robbers, and
to repel force by force; self-defence, therefore, being permitted, it
follows that murder, without which self-defence is often
impracticable, may be considered as permitted also.”
It is false, fathers, that because self-defence is allowed, murder
may be allowed also. This barbarous method of self-vindication lies
at the root of all your errors, and has been justly stigmatized by the
Faculty of Louvain, in their censure of the doctrine of your friend
Father Lamy, as “a murderous defence—defensio occisiva.” I
maintain that the laws recognize such a wide difference between
murder and self-defence, that in those very cases in which the latter
is sanctioned, they have made a provision against murder, when the
person is in no danger of his life. Read the words, fathers, as they
run in the same passage of Cujas: “It is lawful to repulse the person
who comes to invade our property; but we are not permitted to kill
him.” And again: “If any should threaten to strike us, and not to
deprive us of life, it is quite allowable to repulse him; but it is against
all law to put him to death.”
Who, then, has given you a right to say, as Molina, Reginald,
Filiutius, Escobar, Lessius, and others among you, have said, “that it
is lawful to kill the man who offers to strike us a blow?” or, “that it is
lawful to take the life of one who means to insult us, by the common
consent of all the casuists,” as Lessius says. By what authority do
you, who are mere private individuals, confer upon other private
individuals, not excepting clergymen, this right of killing and slaying?
And how dare you usurp the power of life and death, which belongs
essentially to none but God, and which is the most glorious mark of
sovereign authority? These are the points that demand explanation;
and yet you conceive that you have furnished a triumphant reply to
the whole, by simply remarking, in your thirteenth Imposture, “that
the value for which Molina permits us to kill a thief, who flies without
having done us any violence, is not so small as I have said, and that
it must be a much larger sum than six ducats!” How extremely silly!
Pray, fathers, where would you have the price to be fixed? At fifteen
or sixteen ducats? Do not suppose that this will produce any
abatement in my accusations. At all events, you cannot make it
exceed the value of a horse; for Lessius is clearly of opinion, “that
we may lawfully kill the thief that runs off with our horse.”[258] But I
must tell you, moreover, that I was perfectly correct when I said that
Molina estimates the value of the thief’s life at six ducats; and, if you
will not take it upon my word, we shall refer it to an umpire, to
whom you cannot object. The person whom I fix upon for this office
is your own Father Reginald, who, in his explanation of the same
passage of Molina (l. 28, n. 68), declares that “Molina there
DETERMINES the sum for which it is not allowable to kill at three, or
four, or five ducats.” And thus, fathers, I shall have Reginald in
addition to Molina, to bear me out.
It will be equally easy for me to refute your fourteenth Imposture,
touching Molina’s permission to “kill a thief who offers to rob us of a
crown.” This palpable fact is attested by Escobar, who tells us “that
Molina has regularly determined the sum for which it is lawful to
take away life, at one crown.”[259] And all you have to lay to my
charge in the fourteenth imposture is, that I have suppressed the
last words of this passage, namely, “that in this matter every one
ought to study the moderation of a just self-defence.” Why do you
not complain that Escobar has also omitted to mention these words?
But how little tact you have about you! You imagine that nobody
understands what you mean by self-defence. Don’t we know that it
is to employ “a murderous defence?” You would persuade us that
Molina meant to say, that if a person, in defending his crown, finds
himself in danger of his life, he is then at liberty to kill his assailant,
in self-preservation. If that were true, fathers, why should Molina say
in the same place, that “in this matter he was of a contrary
judgment from Carrer and Bald,” who give permission to kill in self-
preservation? I repeat, therefore, that his plain meaning is, that
provided the person can save his crown without killing the thief, he
ought not to kill him; but that, if he cannot secure his object without
shedding blood, even though he should run no risk of his own life,
as in the case of the robber being unarmed, he is permitted to take
up arms and kill the man, in order to save his crown; and in so
doing, according to him, the person does not transgress “the
moderation of a just defence.” To show you that I am in the right,
just allow him to explain himself: “One does not exceed the
moderation of a just defence,” says he, “when he takes up arms
against a thief who has none, or employs weapons which give him
the advantage over his assailant. I know there are some who are of
a contrary judgment; but I do not approve of their opinion, even in
the external tribunal.”[260]
Thus, fathers, it is unquestionable that your authors have given
permission to kill in defence of property and honor, though life
should be perfectly free from danger. And it is upon the same
principle that they authorize duelling, as I have shown by a great
variety of passages from their writings, to which you have made no
reply. You have animadverted in your writings only on a single
passage taken from Father Layman, who sanctions the above
practice, “when otherwise a person would be in danger of sacrificing
his fortune or his honor;” and here you accuse me with having
suppressed what he adds, “that such a case happens very rarely.”
You astonish me, fathers: these are really curious impostures you
charge me withal. You talk as if the question were, Whether that is a
rare case? when the real question is, If, in such a case, duelling is
lawful? These are two very different questions. Layman, in the
quality of a casuist, ought to judge whether duelling is lawful in the
case supposed; and he declares that it is. We can judge without his
assistance, whether the case be a rare one; and we can tell him that
it is a very ordinary one. Or, if you prefer the testimony of your good
friend Diana, he will tell you that “the case is exceedingly
common.”[261] But be it rare or not, and let it be granted that Layman
follows in this the example of Navarre, a circumstance on which you
lay so much stress, is it not shameful that he should consent to such
an opinion as that, to preserve a false honor, it is lawful in
conscience to accept of a challenge, in the face of the edicts of all
Christian states, and of all the canons of the Church, while, in
support of these diabolical maxims, you can produce neither laws,
nor canons, nor authorities from Scripture, or from the fathers, nor
the example of a single saint, nor, in short, anything but the
following impious syllogism: “Honor is more than life: it is allowable
to kill in defence of life; therefore it is allowable to kill in defence of
honor!” What, fathers! because the depravity of men disposes them
to prefer that factitious honor before the life which God hath given
them to be devoted to his service, must they be permitted to murder
one another for its preservation? To love that honor more than life,
is in itself a heinous evil; and yet this vicious passion, which, when
proposed as the end of our conduct, is enough to tarnish the holiest
of actions, is considered by you capable of sanctifying the most
criminal of them!
What a subversion of all principle is here, fathers! And who does
not see to what atrocious excesses it may lead? It is obvious,
indeed, that it will ultimately lead to the commission of murder for
the most trifling things imaginable, when one’s honor is considered
to be staked for their preservation—murder, I venture to say, even
for an apple! You might complain of me, fathers, for drawing
sanguinary inferences from your doctrine with a malicious intent,
were I not fortunately supported by the authority of the grave
Lessius, who makes the following observation, in number 68: “It is
not allowable to take life for an article of small value, such as for a
crown or for an apple—aut pro pomo—unless it would be deemed
dishonorable to lose it. In this case, one may recover the article, and
even, if necessary, kill the aggressor; for this is not so much
defending one’s property as retrieving one’s honor.” This is plain
speaking, fathers; and, just to crown your doctrine with a maxim
which includes all the rest, allow me to quote the following from
Father Hereau, who has taken it from Lessius: “The right of self-
defence extends to whatever is necessary to protect ourselves from
all injury.”
What strange consequences does this inhuman principle involve!
and how imperative is the obligation laid upon all, and especially
upon those in public stations, to set their face against it! Not the
general good alone, but their own personal interest should engage
them to see well to it; for the casuists of your school whom I have
cited in my letters, extend their permissions to kill far enough to
reach even them. Factious men, who dread the punishment of their
outrages, which never appear to them in a criminal light, easily
persuade themselves that they are the victims of violent oppression,
and will be led to believe at the same time, “that the right of self-
defence extends to whatever is necessary to protect themselves
from all injury.” And thus, relieved from contending against the
checks of conscience, which stifle the greater number of crimes at
their birth, their only anxiety will be to surmount external obstacles.
I shall say no more on this subject, fathers; nor shall I dwell on
the other murders, still more odious and important to governments,
which you sanction, and of which Lessius, in common with many
others of your authors, treats in the most unreserved manner.[262] It
was to be wished that these horrible maxims had never found their
way out of hell; and that the devil, who is their original author, had
never discovered men sufficiently devoted to his will to publish them
among Christians.[263]
From all that I have hitherto said, it is easy to judge what a
contrariety there is betwixt the licentiousness of your opinions and
the severity of civil laws, not even excepting those of heathens. How
much more apparent must the contrast be with ecclesiastical laws,
which must be incomparably more holy than any other, since it is the
Church alone that knows and possesses the true holiness!
Accordingly, this chaste spouse of the Son of God, who, in imitation
of her heavenly husband, can shed her own blood for others, but
never the blood of others for herself, entertains a horror at the crime
of murder altogether singular, and proportioned to the peculiar
illumination which God has vouchsafed to bestow upon her. She
views man, not simply as man, but as the image of the God whom
she adores. She feels for every one of the race a holy respect, which
imparts to him, in her eyes, a venerable character, as redeemed by
an infinite price, to be made the temple of the living God. And
therefore she considers the death of a man, slain without the
authority of his Maker, not as murder only, but as sacrilege, by which
she is deprived of one of her members; for whether he be a believer
or an unbeliever, she uniformly looks upon him, if not as one, at
least as capable of becoming one, of her own children.[264]
Such, fathers, are the holy reasons which, ever since the time that
God became man for the redemption of men, have rendered their
condition an object of such consequence to the Church, that she
uniformly punishes the crime of homicide, not only as destructive to
them, but as one of the grossest outrages that can possibly be
perpetrated against God. In proof of this I shall quote some
examples, not from the idea that all the severities to which I refer
ought to be kept up (for I am aware that the Church may alter the
arrangement of such exterior discipline), but to demonstrate her
immutable spirit upon this subject. The penances which she ordains
for murder may differ according to the diversity of the times, but no
change of time can ever effect an alteration of the horror with which
she regards the crime itself.
For a long time the Church refused to be reconciled, till the very
hour of death, to those who had been guilty of wilful murder, as
those are to whom you give your sanction. The celebrated Council of
Ancyra adjudged them to penance during their whole lifetime; and,
subsequently, the Church deemed it an act of sufficient indulgence
to reduce that term to a great many years. But, still more effectually
to deter Christians from wilful murder, she has visited with most
severe punishment even those acts which have been committed
through inadvertence, as may be seen in St. Basil, in St. Gregory of
Nyssen, and in the decretals of Popes Zachary and Alexander II. The
canons quoted by Isaac, bishop of Langres (tr. 2. 13), “ordain seven
years of penance for having killed another in self-defence.” And we
find St. Hildebert, bishop of Mans, replying to Yves de Chartres, “that
he was right in interdicting for life a priest who had, in self-defence,
killed a robber with a stone.”
After this, you cannot have the assurance to persist in saying that
your decisions are agreeable to the spirit or the canons of the
Church. I defy you to show one of them that permits us to kill solely
in defence of our property (for I speak not of cases in which one
may be called upon to defend his life—se suaqae liberando): your
own authors, and, among the rest, Father Lamy, confess that no
such canon can be found. “There is no authority,” he says, “human
or divine, which gives an express permission to kill a robber who
makes no resistance.” And yet this is what you permit most
expressly. I defy you to show one of them that permits us to kill in
vindication of honor, for a buffet, for an affront, or for a slander. I
defy you to show one of them that permits the killing of witnesses,
judges, or magistrates, whatever injustice we may apprehend from
them. The spirit of the church is diametrically opposite to these
seditious maxims, opening the door to insurrections to which the
mob is naturally prone enough already. She has invariably taught her
children that they ought not to render evil for evil; that they ought
to give place unto wrath; to make no resistance to violence; to give
unto every one his due—honor, tribute, submission; to obey
magistrates and superiors, even though they should be unjust,
because we ought always to respect in them the power of that God
who has placed them over us. She forbids them, still more strongly
than is done by the civil law, to take justice into their own hands;
and it is in her spirit that Christian kings decline doing so in cases of
high treason, and remit the criminals charged with this grave offence
into the hands of the judges, that they may be punished according
to the laws and the forms of justice, which in this matter exhibit a
contrast to your mode of management, so striking and complete that
it may well make you blush for shame.
As my discourse has taken this turn, I beg you to follow the
comparison which I shall now draw between the style in which you
would dispose of your enemies, and that in which the judges of the
land dispose of criminals. Everybody knows, fathers, that no private
individual has a right to demand the death of another individual; and
that though a man should have ruined us, maimed our body, burnt
our house, murdered our father, and was prepared, moreover, to
assassinate ourselves, or ruin our character, our private demand for
the death of that person would not be listened to in a court of
justice. Public officers have been appointed for that purpose, who
make the demand in the name of the king, or rather, I would say, in
the name of God. Now, do you conceive, fathers, that Christian
legislators have established this regulation out of mere show and
grimace? Is it not evident that their object was to harmonize the
laws of the state with those of the Church, and thus prevent the
external practice of justice from clashing with the sentiments which
all Christians are bound to cherish in their hearts? It is easy to see
how this, which forms the commencement of a civil process, must
stagger you; its subsequent procedure absolutely overwhelms you.
Suppose, then, fathers, that these official persons have demanded
the death of the man who has committed all the above mentioned
crimes, what is to be done next? Will they instantly plunge a dagger
in his breast? No, fathers; the life of man is too important to be thus
disposed of; they go to work with more decency; the laws have
committed it, not to all sorts of persons, but exclusively to the
judges, whose probity and competency have been duly tried. And is
one judge sufficient to condemn a man to death? No; it requires
seven at the very least; and of these seven there must not be one
who has been injured by the criminal, lest his judgment should be
warped or corrupted by passion. You are aware also, fathers, that
the more effectually to secure the purity of their minds, they devote
the hours of the morning to these functions. Such is the care taken
to prepare them for the solemn action of devoting a fellow-creature
to death; in performing which they occupy the place of God, whose
ministers they are, appointed to condemn such only as have incurred
his condemnation.
For the same reason, to act as faithful administrators of the divine
power of taking away human life, they are bound to form their
judgment solely according to the depositions of the witnesses, and
according to all the other forms prescribed to them; after which they
can pronounce conscientiously only according to law, and can judge
worthy of death those only whom the law condemns to that penalty.
And then, fathers, if the command of God obliges them to deliver
over to punishment the bodies of the unhappy culprits, the same
divine statute binds them to look after the interests of their guilty
souls, and binds them the more to this just because they are guilty;
so that they are not delivered up to execution till after they have
been afforded the means of providing for their consciences.[265] All
this is quite fair and innocent; and yet, such is the abhorrence of the
Church to blood, that she judges those to be incapable of
ministering at her altars who have borne any share in passing or
executing a sentence of death, accompanied though it be with these
religious circumstances; from which we may easily conceive what
idea the Church entertains of murder.
Such, then, being the manner in which human life is disposed of
by the legal forms of justice, let us now see how you dispose of it.
According to your modern system of legislation, there is but one
judge, and that judge is no other than the offended party. He is at
once the judge, the party, and the executioner. He himself demands
from himself the death of his enemy; he condemns him, he executes
him on the spot; and, without the least respect either for the soul or
the body of his brother, he murders and damns him for whom Jesus
Christ died; and all this for the sake of avoiding a blow on the cheek,
or a slander, or an offensive word, or some other offence of a similar
nature, for which, if a magistrate, in the exercise of legitimate
authority, were condemning any to die, he would himself be
impeached; for, in such cases, the laws are very far indeed from
condemning any to death. In one word, to crown the whole of this
extravagance, the person who kills his neighbor in this style, without
authority, and in the face of all law, contracts no sin and commits no
disorder, though he should be religious, and even a priest! Where
are we, fathers? Are these really religious, and priests, who talk in
this manner? Are they Christians? are they Turks? are they men? or
are they demons? And are these “the mysteries revealed by the
Lamb to his Society?” or are they not rather abominations suggested
by the Dragon to those who take part with him?
To come to the point with you, fathers, whom do you wish to be
taken for?—for the children of the Gospel, or for the enemies of the
Gospel? You must be ranged either on the one side or on the other;
for there is no medium here. “He that is not with Jesus Christ is
against him.” Into these two classes all mankind are divided. There
are, according to St. Augustine, two peoples and two worlds,
scattered abroad over the earth. There is the world of the children of
God, who form one body, of which Jesus Christ is the king and the
head; and there is the world at enmity with God, of which the devil
is the king and the head. Hence Jesus Christ is called the King and
God of the world, because he has everywhere his subjects and
worshippers; and hence the devil is also termed in Scripture the
prince of this world, and the god of this world, because he has
everywhere his agents and his slaves. Jesus Christ has imposed
upon the Church, which is his empire, such laws as he, in his eternal
wisdom, was pleased to ordain; and the devil has imposed on the
world, which is his kingdom, such laws as he chose to establish.
Jesus Christ has associated honor with suffering; the devil with not
suffering. Jesus Christ has told those who are smitten on the one
cheek to turn the other also; and the devil has told those who are
threatened with a buffet to kill the man that would do them such an
injury. Jesus Christ pronounces those happy who share in his
reproach; and the devil declares those to be unhappy who lie under
ignominy. Jesus Christ says, Woe unto you when men shall speak
well of you! and the devil says, Woe unto those of whom the world
does not speak with esteem!
Judge then, fathers, to which of these kingdoms you belong. You
have heard the language of the city of peace, the mystical
Jerusalem; and you have heard the language of the city of
confusion, which Scripture terms “the spiritual Sodom.” Which of
these two languages do you understand? which of them do you
speak? Those who are on the side of Jesus Christ have, as St. Paul
teaches us, the same mind which was also in him; and those who
are the children of the devil—ex patre diabolo—who has been a
murderer from the beginning, according to the saying of Jesus
Christ, follow the maxims of the devil. Let us hear, therefore, the
language of your school. I put this question to your doctors: When a
person has given me a blow on the cheek, ought I rather to submit
to the injury than kill the offender? or may I not kill the man in order
to escape the affront? Kill him by all means—it is quite lawful!
exclaim, in one breath, Lessius, Molina, Escobar, Reginald, Filiutius,
Baldelle, and other Jesuits. Is that the language of Jesus Christ? One
question more: Would I lose my honor by tolerating a box on the
ear, without killing the person that gave it? “Can there be a doubt,”
cries Escobar, “that so long as a man suffers another to live who has
given him a buffet, that man remains without honor?” Yes, fathers,
without that honor which the devil transfuses, from his own proud
spirit into that of his proud children. This is the honor which has ever
been the idol of worldly-minded men. For the preservation of this
false glory, of which the god of this world is the appropriate
dispenser, they sacrifice their lives by yielding to the madness of
duelling; their honor, by exposing themselves to ignominious
punishments; and their salvation, by involving themselves in the peril
of damnation—a peril which, according to the canons of the Church,
deprives them even of Christian burial. We have reason to thank
God, however, for having enlightened the mind of our monarch with
ideas much purer than those of your theology. His edicts bearing so
severely on this subject, have not made duelling a crime—they only
punish the crime which is inseparable from duelling. He has checked,
by the dread of his rigid justice, those who were not restrained by
the fear of the justice of God; and his piety has taught him that the
honor of Christians consists in their observance of the mandates of
Heaven and the rules of Christianity, and not in the pursuit of that
phantom which, airy and unsubstantial as it is, you hold to be a
legitimate apology for murder. Your murderous decisions being thus
universally detested, it is highly advisable that you should now
change your sentiments, if not from religious principle, at least from
motives of policy. Prevent, fathers, by a spontaneous condemnation
of these inhuman dogmas, the melancholy consequences which may
result from them, and for which you will be responsible. And to
impress your minds with a deeper horror at homicide, remember
that the first crime of fallen man was a murder, committed on the
person of the first holy man; that the greatest crime was a murder,
perpetrated on the person of the King of saints; and that of all
crimes, murder is the only one which involves in a common
destruction the Church and the state, nature and religion.

I have just seen the answer of your apologist to my Thirteenth

Letter; but if he has nothing better to produce in the shape of a
reply to that letter, which obviates the greater part of his objections,
he will not deserve a rejoinder. I am sorry to see him perpetually
digressing from his subject, to indulge in rancorous abuse both of
the living and the dead. But, in order to gain some credit to the
stories with which you have furnished him, you should not have
made him publicly disavow a fact so notorious as that of the buffet
of Compiègne.[266] Certain it is, fathers, from the deposition of the
injured party, that he received upon his cheek a blow from the hand
of a Jesuit; and all that your friends have been able to do for you
has been to raise a doubt whether he received the blow with the
back or the palm of the hand, and to discuss the question whether a
stroke on the cheek with the back of the hand can be properly
denominated a buffet. I know not to what tribunal it belongs to
decide this point; but shall content myself, in the mean time, with
believing that it was, to say the very least, a probable buffet. This
gets me off with a safe conscience.
 LETTER XV.[267]

TO THE REVEREND FATHERS, THE JESUITS.

SHOWING THAT THE JESUITS FIRST EXCLUDE CALUMNY FROM THEIR
CATALOGUE OF CRIMES, AND THEN EMPLOY IT IN DENOUNCING THEIR
OPPONENTS.

November 25, 1656.

Reverend Fathers,—As your scurrilities are daily increasing, and as
you are employing them in the merciless abuse of all pious persons
opposed to your errors, I feel myself obliged, for their sake and that
of the Church, to bring out that grand secret of your policy, which I
promised to disclose some time ago, in order that all may know,
through means of your own maxims, what degree of credit is due to
your calumnious accusations.
I am aware that those who are not very well acquainted with you,
are at a great loss what to think on this subject, as they find
themselves under the painful necessity, either of believing the
incredible crimes with which you charge your opponents, or (what is
equally incredible) of setting you down as slanderers. “Indeed!” they
exclaim, “were these things not true, would clergymen publish them
to the world—would they debauch their consciences and damn
themselves by venting such libels?” Such is their way of reasoning,
and thus it is that the palpable proof of your falsifications coming
into collision with their opinion of your honesty, their minds hang in
a state of suspense between the evidence of truth which they
cannot gainsay, and the demands of charity which they would not
violate. It follows, that since their high esteem for you is the only
thing that prevents them from discrediting your calumnies, if we can
succeed in convincing them that you have quite a different idea of
calumny from that which they suppose you to have, and that you
actually believe that in blackening and defaming your adversaries
you are working out your own salvation, there can be little question
that the weight of truth will determine them immediately to pay no
regard to your accusations. This, fathers, will be the subject of the
present letter.
My design is, not simply to show that your writings are full of
calumnies: I mean to go a step beyond this. It is quite possible for a
person to say a number of false things believing them to be true;
but the character of a liar implies the intention to tell lies. Now I
undertake to prove, fathers, that it is your deliberate intention to tell
lies, and that it is both knowingly and purposely that you load your
opponents with crimes of which you know them to be innocent,
because you believe that you may do so without falling from a state
of grace. Though you doubtless know this point of your morality as
well as I do, this need not prevent me from telling you about it;
which I shall do, were it for no other purpose than to convince all
men of its existence, by showing them that I can maintain it to your
face, while you cannot have the assurance to disavow it, without
confirming, by that very disavowment, the charge which I bring
against you.
The doctrine to which I allude is so common in your schools, that
you have maintained it not only in your books, but, such is your
assurance, even in your public theses; as, for example, in those
delivered at Louvain in the year 1645, where it occurs in the
following terms: “What is it but a venial sin to calumniate and forge
false accusations to ruin the credit of those who speak evil of
us?”[268] So settled is this point among you, that if any one dare to
oppose it, you treat him as a blockhead and a hare-brained idiot.
Such was the way in which you treated Father Quiroga, the German
Capuchin, when he was so unfortunate as to impugn the doctrine.
The poor man was instantly attacked by Dicastille, one of your
fraternity; and the following is a specimen of the manner in which he
manages the dispute: “A certain rueful-visaged, bare-footed, cowled
friar—cucullatus gymnopoda—whom I do not choose to name, had
the boldness to denounce this opinion, among some women and
ignorant people, and to allege that it was scandalous and pernicious
against all good manners, hostile to the peace of states and
societies, and, in short, contrary to the judgment not only of all
Catholic doctors, but of all true Catholics. But in opposition to him I
maintained, as I do still, that calumny, when employed against a
calumniator, though it should be a falsehood, is not a mortal sin,
either against justice or charity: and to prove the point, I referred
him to the whole body of our fathers, and to whole universities,
exclusively composed of them, whom I had consulted on the
subject; and among others the reverend Father John Gans,
confessor to the emperor; the reverend Father Daniel Bastele,
confessor to the archduke Leopold; Father Henri, who was preceptor
to these two princes; all the public and ordinary professors of the
university of Vienna” (wholly composed of Jesuits); “all the
professors of the university of Gratz” (all Jesuits); “all the professors
of the university of Prague” (where Jesuits are the masters);—“from
all of whom I have in my possession approbations of my opinions,
written and signed with their own hands; besides having on my side
the reverend Father Panalossa, a Jesuit, preacher to the emperor
and the king of Spain; Father Pilliceroli, a Jesuit, and many others,
who had all judged this opinion to be probable, before our dispute
began.”[269] You perceive, fathers, that there are few of your opinions
which you have been at more pains to establish than the present, as
indeed there were few of them of which you stood more in need. For
this reason, doubtless, you have authenticated it so well, that the
casuists appeal to it as an indubitable principle. “There can be no
doubt,” says Caramuel, “that it is a probable opinion that we contract
no mortal sin by calumniating another, in order to preserve our own
reputation. For it is maintained by more than twenty grave doctors,
by Gaspard Hurtado, and Dicastille, Jesuits, &c.; so that, were this
doctrine not probable, it would be difficult to find any one such in
the whole compass of theology.”
 Wretched indeed must that theology be, and rotten to the very
core, which, unless it has been decided to be safe in conscience to
defame our neighbor’s character to preserve our own, can hardly
boast of a safe decision on any other point! How natural is it,
fathers, that those who hold this principle should occasionally put it
in practice! The corrupt propensity of mankind leans so strongly in
that direction of itself, that the obstacle of conscience once being
removed, it would be folly to suppose that it will not burst forth with
all its native impetuosity. If you desire an example of this, Caramuel
will furnish you with one that occurs in the same passage: “This
maxim of Father Dicastille,” he says, “having been communicated by
a German countess to the daughters of the empress, the belief thus
impressed on their minds that calumny was only a venial sin, gave
rise in the course of a few days to such an immense number of false
and scandalous tales, that the whole court was thrown into a flame
and filled with alarm. It is easy, indeed, to conceive what a fine use
these ladies would make of the new light they had acquired. Matters
proceeded to such a length, that it was found necessary to call in
the assistance of a worthy Capuchin friar, a man of exemplary life,
called Father Quiroga” (the very man whom Dicastille rails at so
bitterly), “who assured them that the maxim was most pernicious,
especially among women, and was at the greatest pains to prevail
upon the empress to abolish the practice of it entirely.” We have no
reason, therefore, to be surprised at the bad effects of this doctrine;
on the contrary, the wonder would be, if it had failed to produce
them. Self-love is always ready enough to whisper in our ear, when
we are attacked, that we suffer wrongfully; and more particularly in
your case, fathers, whom vanity has blinded so egregiously as to
make you believe that to wound the honor of your Society, is to
wound that of the Church. There would have been good ground to
look on it as something miraculous, if you had not reduced this
maxim to practice. Those who do not know you are ready to say,
How could these good fathers slander their enemies, when they
cannot do so but at the expense of their own salvation? But if they
knew you better, the question would be, How could these good
fathers forego the advantage of decrying their enemies, when they
have it in their power to do so without hazarding their salvation? Let
none, therefore, henceforth be surprised to find the Jesuits
calumniators; they can exercise this vocation with a safe conscience;
there is no obstacle in heaven or on earth to prevent them. In virtue
of the credit they have acquired in the world, they can practise
defamation without dreading the justice of mortals; and, on the
strength of their self-assumed authority in matters of conscience,
they have invented maxims for enabling them to do it without any
fear of the justice of God.
This, fathers, is the fertile source of your base slanders. On this
principle was Father Brisacier led to scatter his calumnies about him,
with such zeal as to draw down on his head the censure of the late
Archbishop of Paris. Actuated by the same motives, Father D’Anjou
launched his invectives from the pulpit of the Church of St. Benedict
in Paris, on the 8th of March, 1655, against those honorable
gentlemen who were intrusted with the charitable funds raised for
the poor of Picardy and Champagne, to which they themselves had
largely contributed; and, uttering a base falsehood, calculated (if
your slanders had been considered worthy of any credit) to dry up
the stream of that charity, he had the assurance to say, “that he
knew, from good authority, that certain persons had diverted that
money from its proper use, to employ it against the Church and the
State;” a calumny which obliged the curate of the parish, who is a
doctor of the Sorbonne, to mount the pulpit the very next day, in
order to give it the lie direct. To the same source must be traced the
conduct of your Father Crasset, who preached calumny at such a
furious rate in Orleans that the archbishop of that place was under
the necessity of interdicting him as a public slanderer. In his
mandate, dated the 9th of September last, his lordship declares,
“That whereas he had been informed that Brother Jean Crasset,
priest of the Society of Jesus, had delivered from the pulpit a
discourse filled with falsehoods and calumnies against the
ecclesiastics of this city, falsely and maliciously charging them with
maintaining impious and heretical propositions, such as, That the
commandments of God are impracticable; that internal grace is
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com