|
Objection 1: It would seem that sacrilege cannot be a species of
lust. For the same species is not contained under different genera
that are not subalternated to one another. Now sacrilege is a species
of irreligion, as stated above (Question 99, Article 2).
Therefore sacrilege cannot be reckoned a species of lust.
Objection 2: Further, the Decretals (XXXVI, qu. 1
[Append. Grat. ad can. Lex illa]), do not place sacrilege
among other sins which are reckoned species of lust. Therefore it
would seem not to be a species of lust.
Objection 3: Further, something derogatory to a sacred thing may be
done by the other kinds of vice, as well as by lust. But sacrilege is
not reckoned a species of gluttony, or of any other similar vice.
Therefore neither should it be reckoned a species of lust.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xv, 16) that
"if it is wicked, through covetousness, to go beyond one's earthly
bounds, how much more wicked is it through venereal lust to transgress
the bounds of morals!" Now to go beyond one's earthly bounds in
sacred matters is a sin of sacrilege. Therefore it is likewise a sin
of sacrilege to overthrow the bounds of morals through venereal desire
in sacred matters. But venereal desire pertains to lust. Therefore
sacrilege is a species of lust.
I answer that, As stated above (FS, Question 18, Articles
6,7), the act of a virtue or vice, that is directed to the end of
another virtue or vice, assumes the latter's species: thus, theft
committed for the sake of adultery, passes into the species of
adultery. Now it is evident that as Augustine states (De Virgin.
8), the observance of chastity, by being directed to the worship of
God, becomes an act of religion, as in the case of those who vow and
keep chastity. Wherefore it is manifest that lust also, by violating
something pertaining to the worship of God, belongs to the species of
sacrilege: and in this way sacrilege may be accounted a species of
lust.
Reply to Objection 1: Lust, by being directed to another vice as
its end, becomes a species of that vice: and so a species of lust may
be also a species of irreligion, as of a higher genus.
Reply to Objection 2: The enumeration referred to, includes those
sins which are species of lust by their very nature: whereas sacrilege
is a species of lust in so far as it is directed to another vice as its
end, and may coincide with the various species of lust. For unlawful
intercourse between persons mutually united by spiritual relationship,
is a sacrilege after the manner of incest. Intercourse with a virgin
consecrated to God, inasmuch as she is the spouse of Christ, is
sacrilege resembling adultery. If the maiden be under her father's
authority, it will be spiritual seduction; and if force be employed it
will be spiritual rape, which kind of rape even the civil law punishes
more severely than others. Thus the Emperor Justinian says [Cod.
i, iii de Episc. et Cler. 5]: "If any man dare, I will not
say to rape, but even to tempt a consecrated virgin with a view to
marriage, he shall be liable to capital punishment."
Reply to Objection 3: Sacrilege is committed on a consecrated
thing. Now a consecrated thing is either a consecrated person, who is
desired for sexual intercourse, and thus it is a kind of lust, or it
is desired for possession, and thus it is a kind of injustice.
Sacrilege may also come under the head of anger, for instance, if
through anger an injury be done to a consecrated person. Again, one
may commit a sacrilege by partaking gluttonously of sacred food.
Nevertheless, sacrilege is ascribed more specially to lust which is
opposed to chastity for the observance of which certain persons are
specially consecrated.
|
|