FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   924   925   926   927   928   929   930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   941   942   943   944   945   946   947   948  
949   950   951   952   953   954   955   956   957   958   959   960   961   962   963   964   965   966   967   968   969   970   971   972   973   >>   >|  
8). Now whoever transgresses a precept of the law, deserves to be punished. Hence it would follow that a man who has not the habit of virtue, would deserve to be punished, whatever he does. But this is contrary to the intention of the law, which aims at leading man to virtue, by habituating him to good works. Therefore the mode of virtue does not fall under the precept. _I answer that,_ As stated above (Q. 90, A. 3, ad 2), a precept of law has compulsory power. Hence that on which the compulsion of the law is brought to bear, falls directly under the precept of the law. Now the law compels through fear of punishment, as stated in _Ethic._ x, 9, because that properly falls under the precept of the law, for which the penalty of the law is inflicted. But Divine law and human law are differently situated as to the appointment of penalties; since the penalty of the law is inflicted only for those things which come under the judgment of the lawgiver; for the law punishes in accordance with the verdict given. Now man, the framer of human law, is competent to judge only of outward acts; because "man seeth those things that appear," according to 1 Kings 16:7: while God alone, the framer of the Divine law, is competent to judge of the inward movements of wills, according to Ps. 7:10: "The searcher of hearts and reins is God." Accordingly, therefore, we must say that the mode of virtue is in some sort regarded both by human and by Divine law; in some respect it is regarded by the Divine, but not by the human law; and in another way, it is regarded neither by the human nor by the Divine law. Now the mode of virtue consists in three things, as the Philosopher states in _Ethic._ ii. The first is that man should act "knowingly": and this is subject to the judgment of both Divine and human law; because what a man does in ignorance, he does accidentally. Hence according to both human and Divine law, certain things are judged in respect of ignorance to be punishable or pardonable. The second point is that a man should act "deliberately," i.e. "from choice, choosing that particular action for its own sake"; wherein a twofold internal movement is implied, of volition and of intention, about which we have spoken above (QQ. 8, 12): and concerning these two, Divine law alone, and not human law, is competent to judge. For human law does not punish the man who wishes to slay, and slays not: whereas the Divine law does, according to Matt.
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   924   925   926   927   928   929   930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   941   942   943   944   945   946   947   948  
949   950   951   952   953   954   955   956   957   958   959   960   961   962   963   964   965   966   967   968   969   970   971   972   973   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Divine

 

virtue

 
precept
 

things

 

regarded

 

competent

 

framer

 
intention
 

punished

 

judgment


stated

 

inflicted

 

respect

 

ignorance

 
penalty
 

knowingly

 

subject

 

Accordingly

 

consists

 

states


Philosopher

 

spoken

 
volition
 
internal
 
movement
 

implied

 
wishes
 

punish

 
twofold
 
deliberately

pardonable
 

judged

 
punishable
 
action
 

choice

 

choosing

 
accidentally
 
lawgiver
 

answer

 
brought

compulsion

 

compulsory

 

Therefore

 

deserve

 

follow

 

deserves

 
transgresses
 

contrary

 
habituating
 

leading