|
Objection 1: It would seem that simony is not "an express will to
buy or sell something spiritual or connected with a spiritual thing."
Simony is heresy, since it is written (I, qu. i [Can. Eos qui
per pecunias.]): "The impious heresy of Macedonius and of those
who with him impugned the Holy Ghost, is more endurable than that of
those who are guilty of simony: since the former in their ravings
maintained that the Holy Spirit of Father and Son is a creature and
the slave of God, whereas the latter make the same Holy Spirit to be
their own slave. For every master sells what he has just as he wills,
whether it be his slave or any other of his possessions." But
unbelief, like faith, is an act not of the will but of the intellect,
as shown above (Question 10, Article 2). Therefore simony
should not be defined as an act of the will.
Objection 2: Further, to sin intentionally is to sin through
malice, and this is to sin against the Holy Ghost. Therefore, if
simony is an intentional will to sin, it would seem that it is always a
sin against the Holy Ghost.
Objection 3: Further, nothing is more spiritual than the kingdom of
heaven. But it is lawful to buy the kingdom of heaven: for Gregory
says in a homily (v, in Ev.): "The kingdom of heaven is worth as
much as you possess." Therefore simony does not consist in a will to
buy something spiritual.
Objection 4: Further, simony takes its name from Simon the
magician, of whom we read (Acts 8:18,19) that "he offered
the apostles money" that he might buy a spiritual power, in order, to
wit, "that on whomsoever he imposed his hand they might receive the
Holy Ghost." But we do not read that he wished to sell anything.
Therefore simony is not the will to sell a spiritual thing.
Objection 5: Further, there are many other voluntary commutations
besides buying and selling, such as exchange and transaction.
Therefore it would seem that simony is defined insufficiently.
Objection 6: Further, anything connected with spiritual things is
itself spiritual. Therefore it is superfluous to add "or connected
with spiritual things."
Objection 7: Further, according to some, the Pope cannot commit
simony: yet he can buy or sell something spiritual. Therefore simony
is not the will to buy or sell something spiritual or connected with a
spiritual thing.
On the contrary, Gregory VII says (Regist. [Caus. I, qu.
i, can. Presbyter, qu. iii, can. Altare]): "None of the
faithful is ignorant that buying or selling altars, tithes, or the
Holy Ghost is the heresy of simony."
I answer that, As stated above (FS, Question 18, Article
2) an act is evil generically when it bears on undue matter. Now a
spiritual thing is undue matter for buying and selling for three
reasons. First, because a spiritual thing cannot be appraised at any
earthly price, even as it is said concerning wisdom (Prov.
3:15), "she is more precious than all riches, and all things
that are desired, are not to be compared with her": and for this
reason Peter, in condemning the wickedness of Simon in its very
source, said (Acts 8:20): "Keep thy money to thyself to
perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may
be purchased with money."
Secondly, because a thing cannot be due matter for sale if the vendor
is not the owner thereof, as appears from the authority quoted
(Objection 1). Now ecclesiastical superiors are not owners, but
dispensers of spiritual things, according to 1 Cor. 4:1, "Let
a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the
dispensers of the ministers of God."
Thirdly, because sale is opposed to the source of spiritual things,
since they flow from the gratuitous will of God. Wherefore Our Lord
said (Mt. 10:8): "Freely have you received, freely give."
Therefore by buying or selling a spiritual thing, a man treats God
and divine things with irreverence, and consequently commits a sin of
irreligion.
Reply to Objection 1: Just as religion consists in a kind of
protestation of faith, without, sometimes, faith being in one's
heart, so too the vices opposed to religion include a certain
protestation of unbelief without, sometimes, unbelief being in the
mind. Accordingly simony is said to be a "heresy," as regards the
outward protestation, since by selling a gift of the Holy Ghost a man
declares, in a way, that he is the owner of a spiritual gift; and
this is heretical. It must, however, be observed that Simon
Magus, besides wishing the apostles to sell him a grace of the Holy
Ghost for money, said that the world was not created by God, but by
some heavenly power, as Isidore states (Etym. viii, 5): and so
for this reason simoniacs are reckoned with other heretics, as appears
from Augustine's book on heretics.
Reply to Objection 2: As stated above (Question 58, Article
4), justice, with all its parts, and consequently all the opposite
vices, is in the will as its subject. Hence simony is fittingly
defined from its relation to the will. This act is furthermore
described as "express," in order to signify that it proceeds from
choice, which takes the principal part in virtue and vice. Nor does
everyone sin against the Holy Ghost that sins from choice, but only
he who chooses sin through contempt of those things whereby man is wont
to be withdrawn from sin, as stated above (Question 14, Article
1).
Reply to Objection 3: The kingdom of heaven is said to be bought
when a man gives what he has for God's sake. But this is to employ
the term "buying" in a wide sense, and as synonymous with merit: nor
does it reach to the perfect signification of buying, both because
neither "the sufferings of this time," nor any gift or deed of ours,
"are worthy to be compared with the glory to come, that shall be
revealed in us" (Rm. 8:18), and because merit consists
chiefly, not in an outward gift, action or passion, but in an inward
affection.
Reply to Objection 4: Simon the magician wished to buy a spiritual
power in order that afterwards he might sell it. For it is written
(I, qu. iii [Can. Salvator]), that "Simon the magician
wished to buy the gift of the Holy Ghost, in order that he might make
money by selling the signs to be wrought by him." Hence those who
sell spiritual things are likened in intention to Simon the magician:
while those who wish to buy them are likened to him in act. Those who
sell them imitate, in act, Giezi the disciple of Eliseus, of whom
we read (4 Kgs. 5:20-24) that he received money from the
leper who was healed: wherefore the sellers of spiritual things may be
called not only "simoniacs" but also "giezites."
Reply to Objection 5: The terms "buying" and "selling" cover
all kinds of non-gratuitous contracts. Wherefore it is impossible for
the exchange or agency of prebends or ecclesiastical benefices to be
made by authority of the parties concerned without danger of committing
simony, as laid down by law [Cap. Quaesitum, de rerum
Permutat.; cap. Super, de Transact.]. Nevertheless the
superior, in virtue of his office, can cause these exchanges to be
made for useful or necessary reasons.
Reply to Objection 6: Even as the soul lives by itself, while the
body lives through being united to the soul; so, too, certain things
are spiritual by themselves, such as the sacraments and the like,
while others are called spiritual, through adhering to those others.
Hence (I, qu. iii, cap. Siquis objecerit) it is stated that
"spiritual things do not progress without corporal things, even as the
soul has no bodily life without the body."
Reply to Objection 7: The Pope can be guilty of the vice of
simony, like any other man, since the higher a man's position the
more grievous is his sin. For although the possessions of the Church
belong to him as dispenser in chief, they are not his as master and
owner. Therefore, were he to accept money from the income of any
church in exchange for a spiritual thing, he would not escape being
guilty of the vice of simony. In like manner he might commit simony by
accepting from a layman moneys not belonging to the goods of the
Church.
|
|