|
Objection 1: It seems that covetousness is always a mortal sin.
For no one is worthy of death save for a mortal sin. But men are
worthy of death on account of covetousness. For the Apostle after
saying (Rm. 1:29): "Being filled with all iniquity . . .
fornication, covetousness," etc. adds (Rm. 1:32): "They
who do such things are worthy of death." Therefore covetousness is a
mortal sin.
Objection 2: Further, the least degree of covetousness is to hold
to one's own inordinately. But this seemingly is a mortal sin: for
Basil says (Serm. super. Luc. xii, 18): "It is the hungry
man's bread that thou keepest back, the naked man's cloak that thou
hoardest, the needy man's money that thou possessest, hence thou
despoilest as many as thou mightest succor."
Now it is a mortal sin to do an injustice to another, since it is
contrary to the love of our neighbor. Much more therefore is all
covetousness a mortal sin.
Objection 3: Further, no one is struck with spiritual blindness
save through a mortal sin, for this deprives a man of the light of
grace. But, according to Chrysostom [Hom. xv in the Opus
Imperfectum, falsely ascribed to St. Chrysostom], "Lust for
money brings darkness on the soul." Therefore covetousness, which is
lust for money, is a mortal sin.
On the contrary, A gloss on 1 Cor. 3:12, "If any man build
upon this foundation," says (cf. St. Augustine, De Fide et
Oper. xvi) that "he builds wood, hay, stubble, who thinks in the
things of the world, how he may please the world," which pertains to
the sin of covetousness. Now he that builds wood, hay, stubble,
sins not mortally but venially, for it is said of him that "he shall
be saved, yet so as by fire." Therefore covetousness is some times a
venial sin.
I answer that, As stated above (Article 3) covetousness is
twofold. In one way it is opposed to justice, and thus it is a mortal
sin in respect of its genus. For in this sense covetousness consists
in the unjust taking or retaining of another's property, and this
belongs to theft or robbery, which are mortal sins, as stated above
(Question 66, Articles 6,8). Yet venial sin may occur in
this kind of covetousness by reason of imperfection of the act, as
stated above (Question 66, Article 6, ad 3), when we were
treating of theft.
In another way covetousness may be take as opposed to liberality: in
which sense it denotes inordinate love of riches. Accordingly if the
love of riches becomes so great as to be preferred to charity, in such
wise that a man, through love of riches, fear not to act counter to
the love of God and his neighbor, covetousness will then be a mortal
sin. If, on the other hand, the inordinate nature of his love stops
short of this, so that although he love riches too much, yet he does
not prefer the love of them to the love of God, and is unwilling for
the sake of riches to do anything in opposition to God or his
neighbor, then covetousness is a venial sin.
Reply to Objection 1: Covetousness is numbered together with mortal
sins, by reason of the aspect under which it is a mortal sin.
Reply to Objection 2: Basil is speaking of a case wherein a man is
bound by a legal debt to give of his goods to the poor, either through
fear of their want or on account of his having too much.
Reply to Objection 3: Lust for riches, properly speaking, brings
darkness on the soul, when it puts out the light of charity, by
preferring the love of riches to the love of God.
|
|