|
Objection 1: It would seem that the daughters of lust are
unfittingly reckoned to be "blindness of mind, thoughtlessness,
inconstancy, rashness, self-love, hatred of God, love of this
world and abhorrence or despair of a future world." For mental
blindness, thoughtlessness and rashness pertain to imprudence, which
is to be found in every sin, even as prudence is in every virtue.
Therefore they should not be reckoned especially as daughters of lust.
Objection 2: Further, constancy is reckoned a part of fortitude,
as stated above (Question 128, ad 6; Question 137, Article
3). But lust is contrary, not to fortitude but to temperance.
Therefore inconstancy is not a daughter of lust.
Objection 3: Further, "Self-love extending to the contempt of
God" is the origin of every sin, as Augustine says (De Civ. Dei
xiv, 28). Therefore it should not be accounted a daughter of
lust.
Objection 4: Further, Isidore [Questions. in Deut., qu.
xvi] mentions four, namely, "obscene," "scurrilous," "wanton"
and "foolish talking." There the aforesaid enumeration would seem to
be superfluous.
On the contrary, stands the authority of Gregory (Moral. xxxi,
45).
I answer that, When the lower powers are strongly moved towards their
objects, the result is that the higher powers are hindered and
disordered in their acts. Now the effect of the vice of lust is that
the lower appetite, namely the concupiscible, is most vehemently
intent on its object, to wit, the object of pleasure, on account of
the vehemence of the pleasure. Consequently the higher powers, namely
the reason and the will, are most grievously disordered by lust.
Now the reason has four acts in matters of action. First there is
simple understanding, which apprehends some end as good, and this act
is hindered by lust, according to Dan. 13:56, "Beauty hath
deceived thee, and lust hath perverted thy heart." In this respect
we have "blindness of mind." The second act is counsel about what is
to be done for the sake of the end: and this is also hindered by the
concupiscence of lust. Hence Terence says (Eunuch., act 1, sc.
1), speaking of lecherous love: "This thing admits of neither
counsel nor moderation, thou canst not control it by counseling." In
this respect there is "rashness," which denotes absence of counsel,
as stated above (Question 53, Article 3). The third act is
judgment about the things to be done, and this again is hindered by
lust. For it is said of the lustful old men (Dan. 13:9):
"They perverted their own mind . . . that they might not . . .
remember just judgments." In this respect there is
"thoughtlessness." The fourth act is the reason's command about the
thing to be done, and this also is impeded by lust, in so far as
through being carried away by concupiscence, a man is hindered from
doing what his reason ordered to be done. To this "inconstancy" must
be referred. Hence Terence says (Eunuch., act 1, sc. 1) of a
man who declared that he would leave his mistress: "One little false
tear will undo those words."
On the part of the will there results a twofold inordinate act. One
is the desire for the end, to which we refer "self-love," which
regards the pleasure which a man desires inordinately, while on the
other hand there is "hatred of God," by reason of His forbidding
the desired pleasure. The other act is the desire for the things
directed to the end. With regard to this there is "love of this
world," whose pleasures a man desires to enjoy, while on the other
hand there is "despair of a future world," because through being held
back by carnal pleasures he cares not to obtain spiritual pleasures,
since they are distasteful to him.
Reply to Objection 1: According to the Philosopher (Ethic. vi,
5), intemperance is the chief corruptive of prudence: wherefore the
vices opposed to prudence arise chiefly from lust, which is the
principal species of intemperance.
Reply to Objection 2: The constancy which is a part of fortitude
regards hardships and objects of fear; but constancy in refraining from
pleasures pertains to continence which is a part of temperance, as
stated above (Question 143). Hence the inconstancy which is
opposed thereto is to be reckoned a daughter of lust. Nevertheless
even the first named inconstancy arises from lust, inasmuch as the
latter enfeebles a man's heart and renders it effeminate, according to
Osee 4:11, "Fornication and wine and drunkenness take away the
heart." Vegetius, too, says (De Re Milit. iii) that "the
less a man knows of the pleasures of life, the less he fears death."
Nor is there any need, as we have repeatedly stated, for the
daughters of a capital vice to agree with it in matter (cf. Question
35, Article 4, ad 2; Question 118, Article 8, ad 1;
Question 148, Article 6).
Reply to Objection 3: Self-love in respect of any goods that a man
desires for himself is the common origin of all sins; but in the
special point of desiring carnal pleasures for oneself, it is reckoned
a daughter of lust.
Reply to Objection 4: The sins mentioned by Isidore are inordinate
external acts, pertaining in the main to speech; wherein there is a
fourfold inordinateness. First, on account of the matter, and to
this we refer "obscene words": for since "out of the abundance of
the heart the mouth speaketh" (Mt. 12:34), the lustful man,
whose heart is full of lewd concupiscences, readily breaks out into
lewd words. Secondly, on account of the cause: for, since lust
causes thoughtlessness and rashness, the result is that it makes a man
speak without weighing or giving a thought to his words. which are
described as "scurrilous." Thirdly, on account of the end: for
since the lustful man seeks pleasure, he directs his speech thereto,
and so gives utterance to "wanton words." Fourthly, on account of
the sentiments expressed by his words, for through causing blindness of
mind, lust perverts a man's sentiments, and so he gives way "to
foolish talking," for instance, by expressing a preference for the
pleasures he desires to anything else.
|
|