FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   629   630   631   632   633   634   635   636   637   638   639   640   641  
642   643   644   645   646   647   648   649   650   651   652   653   654   655   656   657   658   659   660   661   662   663   664   665   666   >>   >|  
led to thieve through necessity. This necessity diminishes or entirely removes sin, as we shall show further on (A. 7). Hence the text continues: "For he stealeth to fill his hungry soul." Secondly, theft is stated not to be a great fault in comparison with the guilt of adultery, which is punished with death. Hence the text goes on to say of the thief that "if he be taken, he shall restore sevenfold . . . but he that is an adulterer . . . shall destroy his own soul." Reply Obj. 2: The punishments of this life are medicinal rather than retributive. For retribution is reserved to the Divine judgment which is pronounced against sinners "according to truth" (Rom. 2:2). Wherefore, according to the judgment of the present life the death punishment is inflicted, not for every mortal sin, but only for such as inflict an irreparable harm, or again for such as contain some horrible deformity. Hence according to the present judgment the pain of death is not inflicted for theft which does not inflict an irreparable harm, except when it is aggravated by some grave circumstance, as in the case of sacrilege which is the theft of a sacred thing, of peculation, which is theft of common property, as Augustine states (Tract. 1, Super Joan.), and of kidnaping which is stealing a man, for which the pain of death is inflicted (Ex. 21:16). Reply Obj. 3: Reason accounts as nothing that which is little: so that a man does not consider himself injured in very little matters: and the person who takes such things can presume that this is not against the will of the owner. And if a person take such like very little things, he may be proportionately excused from mortal sin. Yet if his intention is to rob and injure his neighbor, there may be a mortal sin even in these very little things, even as there may be through consent in a mere thought. _______________________ SEVENTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 66, Art. 7] Whether It Is Lawful to Steal Through Stress of Need? Objection 1: It would seem unlawful to steal through stress of need. For penance is not imposed except on one who has sinned. Now it is stated (Extra, De furtis, Cap. Si quis): "If anyone, through stress of hunger or nakedness, steal food, clothing or beast, he shall do penance for three weeks." Therefore it is not lawful to steal through stress of need. Obj. 2: Further, the Philosopher says (Ethic. ii, 6) that "there are some actions whose very name implies wickedness," and among t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   629   630   631   632   633   634   635   636   637   638   639   640   641  
642   643   644   645   646   647   648   649   650   651   652   653   654   655   656   657   658   659   660   661   662   663   664   665   666   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

things

 

inflicted

 

mortal

 

stress

 

judgment

 

necessity

 
irreparable
 
inflict
 

stated

 

penance


person

 
present
 

Whether

 

proportionately

 
excused
 

presume

 

thought

 
SEVENTH
 

ARTICLE

 

consent


intention

 

injure

 

neighbor

 
sinned
 

Therefore

 
lawful
 

Further

 

Philosopher

 

clothing

 

implies


wickedness

 

actions

 

nakedness

 

hunger

 

unlawful

 

imposed

 

Objection

 

Through

 

Stress

 

furtis


Lawful
 

sacrilege

 

sevenfold

 

adulterer

 

destroy

 

restore

 

punishments

 

reserved

 

Divine

 

pronounced