|
Objection 1: It would seem that covetousness is not the root of all
sins. For covetousness, which is immoderate desire for riches, is
opposed to the virtue of liberality. But liberality is not the root of
all virtues. Therefore covetousness is not the root of all sins.
Objection 2: Further, the desire for the means proceeds from desire
for the end. Now riches, the desire for which is called
covetousness, are not desired except as being useful for some end, as
stated in Ethic. i, 5. Therefore covetousness is not the root of
all sins, but proceeds from some deeper root.
Objection 3: Further, it often happens that avarice, which is
another name for covetousness, arises from other sins; as when a man
desires money through ambition, or in order to sate his gluttony.
Therefore it is not the root of all sins.
On the contrary, The Apostle says (1 Tim. 6:10): "The
desire of money is the root of all evil."
I answer that, According to some, covetousness may be understood in
different ways. First, as denoting inordinate desire for riches: and
thus it is a special sin. Secondly, as denoting inordinate desire for
any temporal good: and thus it is a genus comprising all sins, because
every sin includes an inordinate turning to a mutable good, as stated
above (Question 72, Article 2). Thirdly, as denoting an
inclination of a corrupt nature to desire corruptible goods
inordinately: and they say that in this sense covetousness is the root
of all sins, comparing it to the root of a tree, which draws its
sustenance from earth, just as every sin grows out of the love of
temporal things.
Now, though all this is true, it does not seem to explain the mind of
the Apostle when he states that covetousness is the root of all sins.
For in that passage he clearly speaks against those who, because they
"will become rich, fall into temptation, and into the snare of the
devil . . . for covetousness is the root of all evils." Hence it
is evident that he is speaking of covetousness as denoting the
inordinate desire for riches. Accordingly, we must say that
covetousness, as denoting a special sin, is called the root of all
sins, in likeness to the root of a tree, in furnishing sustenance to
the whole tree. For we see that by riches man acquires the means of
committing any sin whatever, and of sating his desire for any sin
whatever, since money helps man to obtain all manner of temporal
goods, according to Eccles. 10:19: "All things obey money":
so that in this desire for riches is the root of all sins.
Reply to Objection 1: Virtue and sin do not arise from the same
source. For sin arises from the desire of mutable good; and
consequently the desire of that good which helps one to obtain all
temporal goods, is called the root of all sins. But virtue arises
from the desire for the immutable God; and consequently charity,
which is the love of God, is called the root of the virtues,
according to Eph. 3:17: "Rooted and founded in charity."
Reply to Objection 2: The desire of money is said to be the root of
sins, not as though riches were sought for their own sake, as being
the last end; but because they are much sought after as useful for any
temporal end. And since a universal good is more desirable than a
particular good, they move the appetite more than any individual
goods, which along with many others can be procured by means of money.
Reply to Objection 3: Just as in natural things we do not ask what
always happens, but what happens most frequently, for the reason that
the nature of corruptible things can be hindered, so as not always to
act in the same way; so also in moral matters, we consider what
happens in the majority of cases, not what happens invariably, for the
reason that the will does not act of necessity. So when we say that
covetousness is the root of all evils, we do not assert that no other
evil can be its root, but that other evils more frequently arise
therefrom, for the reason given.
|
|