|
Objection 1: It would seem unfitting to distinguish six kinds of sin
against the Holy Ghost, viz. despair, presumption, impenitence,
obstinacy, resisting the known truth, envy of our brother's spiritual
good, which are assigned by the Master (Sent. ii, D, 43).
For to deny God's justice or mercy belongs to unbelief. Now, by
despair, a man rejects God's mercy, and by presumption, His
justice. Therefore each of these is a kind of unbelief rather than of
the sin against the Holy Ghost.
Objection 2: Further, impenitence, seemingly, regards past sins,
while obstinacy regards future sins. Now past and future time do not
diversify the species of virtues or vices, since it is the same faith
whereby we believe that Christ was born, and those of old believed
that He would be born. Therefore obstinacy and impenitence should not
be reckoned as two species of sin against the Holy Ghost.
Objection 3: Further, "grace and truth came by Jesus Christ"
(Jn. 1:17). Therefore it seem that resistance of the known
truth, and envy of a brother's spiritual good, belong to blasphemy
against the Son rather than against the Holy Ghost.
Objection 4: Further, Bernard says (De Dispens. et Praecept.
xi) that "to refuse to obey is to resist the Holy Ghost."
Moreover a gloss on Lev. 10:16, says that "a feigned
repentance is a blasphemy against the Holy Ghost." Again, schism
is, seemingly, directly opposed to the Holy Ghost by Whom the
Church is united together. Therefore it seems that the species of
sins against the Holy Ghost are insufficiently enumerated.
On the contrary, Augustine (De Fide ad Petrum iii) says that
"those who despair of pardon for their sins, or who without merits
presume on God's mercy, sin against the Holy Ghost," and
(Enchiridion lxxxiii) that "he who dies in a state of obstinacy is
guilty of the sin against the Holy Ghost," and (De Verb.
Dom., Serm. lxxi) that "impenitence is a sin against the Holy
Ghost," and (De Serm. Dom. in Monte xxii), that "to resist
fraternal goodness with the brands of envy is to sin against the Holy
Ghost," and in his book De unico Baptismo (De Bap. contra
Donat. vi, 35) he says that "a man who spurns the truth, is
either envious of his brethren to whom the truth is revealed, or
ungrateful to God, by Whose inspiration the Church is taught," and
therefore, seemingly, sins against the Holy Ghost.
I answer that, The above species are fittingly assigned to the sin
against the Holy Ghost taken in the third sense, because they are
distinguished in respect of the removal of contempt of those things
whereby a man can be prevented from sinning through choice. These
things are either on the part of God's judgment, or on the part of
His gifts, or on the part of sin. For, by consideration of the
Divine judgment, wherein justice is accompanied with mercy, man is
hindered from sinning through choice, both by hope, arising from the
consideration of the mercy that pardons sins and rewards good deeds,
which hope is removed by "despair"; and by fear, arising from the
consideration of the Divine justice that punishes sins, which fear is
removed by "presumption," when, namely, a man presumes that he can
obtain glory without merits, or pardon without repentance.
God's gifts whereby we are withdrawn from sin, are two: one is the
acknowledgment of the truth, against which there is the "resistance of
the known truth," when, namely, a man resists the truth which he has
acknowledged, in order to sin more freely: while the other is the
assistance of inward grace, against which there is "envy of a
brother's spiritual good," when, namely, a man is envious not only
of his brother's person, but also of the increase of Divine grace in
the world.
On the part of sin, there are two things which may withdraw man
therefrom: one is the inordinateness and shamefulness of the act, the
consideration of which is wont to arouse man to repentance for the sin
he has committed, and against this there is "impenitence," not as
denoting permanence in sin until death, in which sense it was taken
above (for thus it would not be a special sin, but a circumstance of
sin), but as denoting the purpose of not repenting. The other thing
is the smallness or brevity of the good which is sought in sin,
according to Rm. 6:21: "What fruit had you therefore then in
those things, of which you are now ashamed?" The consideration of
this is wont to prevent man's will from being hardened in sin, and
this is removed by "obstinacy," whereby man hardens his purpose by
clinging to sin. Of these two it is written (Jer. 8:6):
"There is none that doth penance for his sin, saying: What have I
done?" as regards the first; and, "They are all turned to their
own course, as a horse rushing to the battle," as regards the
second.
Reply to Objection 1: The sins of despair and presumption consist,
not in disbelieving in God's justice and mercy, but in contemning
them.
Reply to Objection 2: Obstinacy and impenitence differ not only in
respect of past and future time, but also in respect of certain formal
aspects by reason of the diverse consideration of those things which may
be considered in sin, as explained above.
Reply to Objection 3: Grace and truth were the work of Christ
through the gifts of the Holy Ghost which He gave to men.
Reply to Objection 4: To refuse to obey belongs to obstinacy,
while a feigned repentance belongs to impenitence, and schism to the
envy of a brother's spiritual good, whereby the members of the Church
are united together.
|
|