FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   662   663   664   665   666   667   668   669   670   671   672   673   674   675   676   677   678   679   680   681   682   683   684   685   686  
687   688   689   690   691   692   693   694   695   696   697   698   699   700   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   711   >>   >|  
Obj. 2: Further, it is written (Prov. 20:3): "All fools are meddling with revilings [Douay: 'reproaches']." Now folly is a vice opposed to wisdom, as stated above (Q. 46, A. 1); whereas anger is opposed to meekness. Therefore reviling does not arise from anger. Obj. 3: Further, no sin is diminished by its cause. But the sin of reviling is diminished if one gives vent to it through anger: for it is a more grievous sin to revile out of hatred than out of anger. Therefore reviling does not arise from anger. _On the contrary,_ Gregory says (Moral. xxxi, 45) that "anger gives rise to revilings." _I answer that,_ While one sin may arise from various causes, it is nevertheless said to have its source chiefly in that one from which it is wont to arise most frequently, through being closely connected with its end. Now reviling is closely connected with anger's end, which is revenge: since the easiest way for the angry man to take revenge on another is to revile him. Therefore reviling arises chiefly from anger. Reply Obj. 1: Reviling is not directed to the end of pride which is excellency. Hence reviling does not arise directly from pride. Nevertheless pride disposes a man to revile, in so far as those who think themselves to excel, are more prone to despise others and inflict injuries on them, because they are more easily angered, through deeming it an affront to themselves whenever anything is done against their will. Reply Obj. 2: According to the Philosopher (Ethic. vii, 6) "anger listens imperfectly to reason": wherefore an angry man suffers a defect of reason, and in this he is like the foolish man. Hence reviling arises from folly on account of the latter's kinship with anger. Reply Obj. 3: According to the Philosopher (Rhet. ii, 4) "an angry man seeks an open offense, but he who hates does not worry about this." Hence reviling which denotes a manifest injury belongs to anger rather than to hatred. _______________________ QUESTION 73 OF BACKBITING [*Or detraction] (In Four Articles) We must now consider backbiting, under which head there are four points of inquiry: (1) What is backbiting? (2) Whether it is a mortal sin? (3) Of its comparison with other sins; (4) Whether it is a sin to listen to backbiting? _______________________ FIRST ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 73, Art. 1] Whether Backbiting Is Suitably Defined As the Blackening of Another's Character by Secret Words? Objection 1: It w
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   662   663   664   665   666   667   668   669   670   671   672   673   674   675   676   677   678   679   680   681   682   683   684   685   686  
687   688   689   690   691   692   693   694   695   696   697   698   699   700   701   702   703   704   705   706   707   708   709   710   711   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

reviling

 

revile

 

Therefore

 

Whether

 

backbiting

 

arises

 
chiefly
 
Philosopher
 

hatred

 

closely


connected

 
opposed
 

reason

 

According

 
diminished
 

revilings

 

revenge

 
Further
 

manifest

 

denotes


injury

 

foolish

 

wherefore

 
suffers
 

defect

 
imperfectly
 

listens

 

belongs

 

account

 

offense


kinship

 

ARTICLE

 

Backbiting

 

listen

 

comparison

 

Suitably

 

Defined

 

Objection

 

Secret

 

Character


Blackening
 

Another

 

mortal

 

Articles

 

detraction

 

QUESTION

 

BACKBITING

 

points

 

inquiry

 

excellency