|
Objection 1: It seems that presumption is not a sin. For the
Apostle says: "Forgetting the things that are behind, I stretch
forth myself to those that are before." But it seems to savor of
presumption that one should tend to what is above oneself. Therefore
presumption is not a sin.
Objection 2: Further, the Philosopher says (Ethic. i, 7)
"we should not listen to those who would persuade us to relish human
things because we are men, or mortal things because we are mortal, but
we should relish those that make us immortal": and (Metaph. i)
"that man should pursue divine things as far as possible." Now
divine and immortal things are seemingly far above man. Since then
presumption consists essentially in tending to what is above oneself,
it seems that presumption is something praiseworthy, rather than a
sin.
Objection 3: Further, the Apostle says (2 Cor. 3:5):
"Not that we are sufficient to think anything of ourselves, as of
ourselves." If then presumption, by which one strives at that for
which one is not sufficient, be a sin, it seems that man cannot
lawfully even think of anything good: which is absurd. Therefore
presumption is not a sin.
On the contrary, It is written (Ecclus. 37:3): "O wicked
presumption, whence camest thou?" and a gloss answers: "From a
creature's evil will." Now all that comes of the root of an evil
will is a sin. Therefore presumption is a sin.
I answer that, Since whatever is according to nature, is ordered by
the Divine Reason, which human reason ought to imitate, whatever is
done in accordance with human reason in opposition to the order
established in general throughout natural things is vicious and sinful.
Now it is established throughout all natural things, that every action
is commensurate with the power of the agent, nor does any natural agent
strive to do what exceeds its ability. Hence it is vicious and
sinful, as being contrary to the natural order, that any one should
assume to do what is above his power: and this is what is meant by
presumption, as its very name shows. Wherefore it is evident that
presumption is a sin.
Reply to Objection 1: Nothing hinders that which is above the
active power of a natural thing, and yet not above the passive power of
that same thing: thus the air is possessed of a passive power by reason
of which it can be so changed as to obtain the action and movement of
fire, which surpass the active power of air. Thus too it would be
sinful and presumptuous for a man while in a state of imperfect virtue
to attempt the immediate accomplishment of what belongs to perfect
virtue. But it is not presumptuous or sinful for a man to endeavor to
advance towards perfect virtue. In this way the Apostle stretched
himself forth to the things that were before him, namely continually
advancing forward.
Reply to Objection 2: Divine and immortal things surpass man
according to the order of nature. Yet man is possessed of a natural
power, namely the intellect, whereby he can be united to immortal and
Divine things. In this respect the Philosopher says that "man ought
to pursue immortal and divine things," not that he should do what it
becomes God to do, but that he should be united to Him in intellect
and will.
Reply to Objection 3: As the Philosopher says (Ethic. iii,
3), "what we can do by the help of others we can do by ourselves in
a sense." Hence since we can think and do good by the help of God,
this is not altogether above our ability. Hence it is not presumptuous
for a man to attempt the accomplishment of a virtuous deed: but it
would be presumptuous if one were to make the attempt without confidence
in God's assistance.
|
|