FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240  
241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   >>   >|  
he will be said to sin, if he intend to produce a bad work, and does so in effect, so that another is taken in thereby. But this sin is not proper to the artist as such, but as man. Consequently for the former sin the artist is blamed as an artist; while for the latter he is blamed as a man. On the other hand, in moral matters, where we take into consideration the order of reason to the general end of human life, sin and evil are always due to a departure from the order of reason to the general end of human life. Wherefore man is blamed for such a sin, both as man and as a moral being. Hence the Philosopher says (Ethic. vi, 5) that "in art, he who sins voluntarily is preferable; but in prudence, as in the moral virtues," which prudence directs, "he is the reverse." Reply Obj. 3: Weakness that occurs in voluntary evils, is subject to man's power: wherefore it neither takes away nor diminishes guilt. ________________________ THIRD ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 21, Art. 3] Whether a Human Action Is Meritorious or Demeritorious in So Far As It Is Good or Evil? Objection 1: It would seem that a human action is not meritorious or demeritorious on account of its goodness or malice. For we speak of merit or demerit in relation to retribution, which has no place save in matters relating to another person. But good or evil actions are not all related to another person, for some are related to the person of the agent. Therefore not every good or evil human action is meritorious or demeritorious. Obj. 2: Further, no one deserves punishment or reward for doing as he chooses with that of which he is master: thus if a man destroys what belongs to him, he is not punished, as if he had destroyed what belongs to another. But man is master of his own actions. Therefore a man does not merit punishment or reward, through putting his action to a good or evil purpose. Obj. 3: Further, if a man acquire some good for himself, he does not on that account deserve to be benefited by another man: and the same applies to evil. Now a good action is itself a kind of good and perfection of the agent: while an inordinate action is his evil. Therefore a man does not merit or demerit, from the fact that he does a good or an evil deed. _On the contrary,_ It is written (Isa. 3:10, 11): "Say to the just man that it is well; for he shall eat the fruit of his doings. Woe to the wicked unto evil; for the reward of his hands shall be given him." _I answer
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240  
241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

action

 

blamed

 

person

 

artist

 

reward

 

Therefore

 
master
 
belongs
 

related

 

prudence


punishment

 

account

 

demerit

 

demeritorious

 

Further

 

actions

 

meritorious

 

matters

 

reason

 
general

chooses

 

destroyed

 

punished

 

intend

 

destroys

 

produce

 

Consequently

 

relating

 
proper
 

deserves


effect

 

purpose

 

answer

 

wicked

 

doings

 
written
 

contrary

 

deserve

 

benefited

 

acquire


putting

 
applies
 

inordinate

 

perfection

 

occurs

 

voluntary

 
Weakness
 

directs

 

reverse

 
subject