|
Objection 1: It would seem that the mode of charity falls under the
precept of the Divine law. For it is written (Mt. 19:17):
"If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments": whence it
seems to follow that the observance of the commandments suffices for
entrance into life. But good works do not suffice for entrance into
life, except they be done from charity: for it is written (1 Cor.
13:3): "If I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor,
and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity,
it profiteth me nothing." Therefore the mode of charity is included
in the commandment.
Objection 2: Further, the mode of charity consists properly
speaking in doing all things for God. But this falls under the
precept; for the Apostle says (1 Cor. 10:31): "Do all to
the glory of God." Therefore the mode of charity falls under the
precept.
Objection 3: Further, if the mode of charity does not fall under
the precept, it follows that one can fulfil the precepts of the law
without having charity. Now what can be done without charity can be
done without grace, which is always united to charity. Therefore one
can fulfil the precepts of the law without grace. But this is the
error of Pelagius, as Augustine declares (De Haeres. lxxxviii).
Therefore the mode of charity is included in the commandment.
On the contrary, Whoever breaks a commandment sins mortally. If
therefore the mode of charity falls under the precept, it follows that
whoever acts otherwise than from charity sins mortally. But whoever
has not charity, acts otherwise than from charity. Therefore it
follows that whoever has not charity, sins mortally in whatever he
does, however good this may be in itself: which is absurd.
I answer that, Opinions have been contrary on this question. For
some have said absolutely that the mode of charity comes under the
precept; and yet that it is possible for one not having charity to
fulfil this precept: because he can dispose himself to receive charity
from God. Nor (say they) does it follow that a man not having
charity sins mortally whenever he does something good of its kind:
because it is an affirmative precept that binds one to act from
charity, and is binding not for all time, but only for such time as
one is in a state of charity. On the other hand, some have said that
the mode of charity is altogether outside the precept.
Both these opinions are true up to a certain point. Because the act
of charity can be considered in two ways. First, as an act by
itself: and thus it falls under the precept of the law which specially
prescribes it, viz. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God," and
"Thou shalt love thy neighbor." In this sense, the first opinion
is true. Because it is not impossible to observe this precept which
regards the act of charity; since man can dispose himself to possess
charity, and when he possesses it, he can use it. Secondly, the act
of charity can be considered as being the mode of the acts of the other
virtues, i.e. inasmuch as the acts of the other virtues are ordained
to charity, which is "the end of the commandment," as stated in 1
Tim. i, 5: for it has been said above (Question 12, Article
4) that the intention of the end is a formal mode of the act ordained
to that end. In this sense the second opinion is true in saying that
the mode of charity does not fall under the precept, that is to say
that this commandment, "Honor thy father," does not mean that a man
must honor his father from charity, but merely that he must honor him.
Wherefore he that honors his father, yet has not charity, does not
break this precept: although he does break the precept concerning the
act of charity, for which reason he deserves to be punished.
Reply to Objection 1: Our Lord did not say, "If thou wilt enter
into life, keep one commandment"; but "keep" all "the
commandments": among which is included the commandment concerning the
love of God and our neighbor.
Reply to Objection 2: The precept of charity contains the
injunction that God should be loved from our whole heart, which means
that all things would be referred to God. Consequently man cannot
fulfil the precept of charity, unless he also refer all things to
God. Wherefore he that honors his father and mother, is bound to
honor them from charity, not in virtue of the precept, "Honor thy
father and mother," but in virtue of the precept, "Thou shalt love
the Lord thy God with thy whole heart." And since these are two
affirmative precepts, not binding for all times, they can be binding,
each one at a different time: so that it may happen that a man fulfils
the precept of honoring his father and mother, without at the same time
breaking the precept concerning the omission of the mode of charity.
Reply to Objection 3: Man cannot fulfil all the precepts of the
law, unless he fulfil the precept of charity, which is impossible
without charity. Consequently it is not possible, as Pelagius
maintained, for man to fulfil the law without grace.
|
|