Reply Obj. 5: The scandal which the Apostle avoided, arose from an error of the gentiles who were not used to this payment. Hence it behooved him to forego it for the time being, so that they might be taught first of all that such a payment was a duty. For a like reason the Church refrains from demanding t.i.thes in those countries where it is not customary to pay them.
_______________________
QUESTION 44
OF THE PRECEPTS OF CHARITY (In Eight Articles)
We must now consider the Precepts of Charity, under which there are eight points of inquiry:
(1) Whether precepts should be given about charity?
(2) Whether there should be one or two?
(3) Whether two suffice?
(4) Whether it is fittingly prescribed that we should love G.o.d, "with thy whole heart"?
(5) Whether it is fittingly added: "With thy whole mind," etc.?
(6) Whether it is possible to fulfil this precept in this life?
(7) Of the precept: "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself";
(8) Whether the order of charity is included in the precept?
_______________________
FIRST ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 44, Art. 1]
Whether Any Precept Should Be Given About Charity?
Objection 1: It would seem that no precept should be given about charity. For charity imposes the mode on all acts of virtue, since it is the form of the virtues as stated above (Q. 23, A. 8), while the precepts are about the virtues themselves. Now, according to the common saying, the mode is not included in the precept. Therefore no precepts should be given about charity.
Obj. 2: Further, charity, which "is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 5:5), makes us free, since "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Cor. 3:17). Now the obligation that arises from a precept is opposed to liberty, since it imposes a necessity. Therefore no precept should be given about charity.
Obj. 3: Further, charity is the foremost among all the virtues, to which the precepts are directed, as shown above (I-II, Q. 90, A. 2; Q. 100, A. 9). If, therefore, any precepts were given about charity, they should have a place among the chief precepts which are those of the decalogue. But they have no place there. Therefore no precepts should be given about charity.
_On the contrary,_ Whatever G.o.d requires of us is included in a precept. Now G.o.d requires that man should love Him, according to Deut. 10:12. Therefore it behooved precepts to be given about the love of charity, which is the love of G.o.d.
_I answer that,_ As stated above (Q. 16, A. 1; I-II, Q. 99, A. 1), a precept implies the notion of something due. Hence a thing is a matter of precept, in so far as it is something due. Now a thing is due in two ways, for its own sake, and for the sake of something else. In every affair, it is the end that is due for its own sake, because it has the character of a good for its own sake: while that which is directed to the end is due for the sake of something else: thus for a physician, it is due for its own sake, that he should heal, while it is due for the sake of something else that he should give a medicine in order to heal. Now the end of the spiritual life is that man be united to G.o.d, and this union is effected by charity, while all things pertaining to the spiritual life are ordained to this union, as to their end. Hence the Apostle says (1 Tim. 1:5): "The end of the commandment is charity from a pure heart, and a good conscience, and an unfeigned faith." For all the virtues, about whose acts the precepts are given, are directed either to the freeing of the heart from the whirl of the pa.s.sions--such are the virtues that regulate the pa.s.sions--or at least to the possession of a good conscience--such are the virtues that regulate operations--or to the having of a right faith--such are those which pertain to the worship of G.o.d: and these three things are required of man that he may love G.o.d. For an impure heart is withdrawn from loving G.o.d, on account of the pa.s.sion that inclines it to earthly things; an evil conscience gives man a horror for G.o.d"s justice, through fear of His punishments; and an untrue faith draws man"s affections to an untrue representation of G.o.d, and separates him from the truth of G.o.d. Now in every genus that which is for its own sake takes precedence of that which is for the sake of another, wherefore the greatest precept is that of charity, as stated in Matt. 22:39.
Reply Obj. 1: As stated above (I-II, Q. 100, A. 10) when we were treating of the commandments, the mode of love does not come under those precepts which are about the other acts of virtue: for instance, this precept, "Honor thy father and thy mother," does not prescribe that this should be done out of charity. The act of love does, however, fall under special precepts.
Reply Obj. 2: The obligation of a precept is not opposed to liberty, except in one whose mind is averted from that which is prescribed, as may be seen in those who keep the precepts through fear alone. But the precept of love cannot be fulfilled save of one"s own will, wherefore it is not opposed to charity.
Reply Obj. 3: All the precepts of the decalogue are directed to the love of G.o.d and of our neighbor: and therefore the precepts of charity had not to be enumerated among the precepts of the decalogue, since they are included in all of them.
_______________________
SECOND ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 44, Art. 2]
Whether There Should Have Been Given Two Precepts of Charity?
Objection 1: It would seem that there should not have been given two precepts of charity. For the precepts of the Law are directed to virtue, as stated above (A. 1, Obj. 3). Now charity is one virtue, as shown above (Q. 33, A. 5). Therefore only one precept of charity should have been given.
Obj. 2: Further, as Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 22, 27), charity loves none but G.o.d in our neighbor. Now we are sufficiently directed to love G.o.d by the precept, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy G.o.d." Therefore there was no need to add the precept about loving our neighbor.
Obj. 3: Further, different sins are opposed to different precepts.
But it is not a sin to put aside the love of our neighbor, provided we put not aside the love of G.o.d; indeed, it is written (Luke 15:26): "If any man come to Me, and hate not his father, and mother ... he cannot be My disciple." Therefore the precept of the love of G.o.d is not distinct from the precept of the love of our neighbor.
Obj. 4: Further, the Apostle says (Rom. 13:8): "He that loveth his neighbor hath fulfilled the Law." But a law is not fulfilled unless all its precepts be observed. Therefore all the precepts are included in the love of our neighbor: and consequently the one precept of the love of our neighbor suffices. Therefore there should not be two precepts of charity.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (1 John 4:21): "This commandment we have from G.o.d, that he who loveth G.o.d, love also his brother."
_I answer that,_ As stated above (I-II, Q. 91, A. 3; Q. 94, A. 2) when we were treating of the commandments, the precepts are to the Law what propositions are to speculative sciences, for in these latter, the conclusions are virtually contained in the first principles. Hence whoever knows the principles as to their entire virtual extent has no need to have the conclusions put separately before him. Since, however, some who know the principles are unable to consider all that is virtually contained therein, it is necessary, for their sake, that scientific conclusions should be traced to their principles. Now in practical matters wherein the precepts of the Law direct us, the end has the character of principle, as stated above (Q. 23, A. 7, ad 2; Q. 26, A. 1, ad 1): and the love of G.o.d is the end to which the love of our neighbor is directed. Therefore it behooved us to receive precepts not only of the love of G.o.d but also of the love of our neighbor, on account of those who are less intelligent, who do not easily understand that one of these precepts is included in the other.
Reply Obj. 1: Although charity is one virtue, yet it has two acts, one of which is directed to the other as to its end. Now precepts are given about acts of virtue, and so there had to be several precepts of charity.
Reply Obj. 2: G.o.d is loved in our neighbor, as the end is loved in that which is directed to the end; and yet there was need for an explicit precept about both, for the reason given above.
Reply Obj. 3: The means derive their goodness from their relation to the end, and accordingly aversion from the means derives its malice from the same source and from no other.
Reply Obj. 4: Love of our neighbor includes love of G.o.d, as the end is included in the means, and vice versa: and yet it behooved each precept to be given explicitly, for the reason given above.
_______________________
THIRD ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 44, Art. 3]
Whether Two Precepts of Charity Suffice?
Objection 1: It would seem that two precepts of charity do not suffice. For precepts are given about acts of virtue. Now acts are distinguished by their objects. Since, then, man is bound to love four things out of charity, namely, G.o.d, himself, his neighbor and his own body, as shown above (Q. 25, A. 12; Q. 26), it seems that there ought to be four precepts of charity, so that two are not sufficient.
Obj. 2: Further, love is not the only act of charity, but also joy, peace and beneficence. But precepts should be given about the acts of the virtues. Therefore two precepts of charity do not suffice.
Obj. 3: Further, virtue consists not only in doing good but also in avoiding evil. Now we are led by the positive precepts to do good, and by the negative precepts to avoid evil. Therefore there ought to have been not only positive, but also negative precepts about charity; and so two precepts of charity are not sufficient.
_On the contrary,_ Our Lord said (Matt. 22:40): "On these two commandments dependeth the whole Law and the prophets."
_I answer that,_ Charity, as stated above (Q. 23, A. 1), is a kind of friendship. Now friendship is between one person and another, wherefore Gregory says (Hom. in Ev. xvii): "Charity is not possible between less than two": and it has been explained how one may love oneself out of charity (Q. 25, A. 4). Now since good is the object of dilection and love, and since good is either an end or a means, it is fitting that there should be two precepts of charity, one whereby we are induced to love G.o.d as our end, and another whereby we are led to love our neighbor for G.o.d"s sake, as for the sake of our end.
Reply Obj. 1: As Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 23), "though four things are to be loved out of charity, there was no need of a precept as regards the second and fourth," i.e. love of oneself and of one"s own body. "For however much a man may stray from the truth, the love of himself and of his own body always remains in him." And yet the mode of this love had to be prescribed to man, namely, that he should love himself and his own body in an ordinate manner, and this is done by his loving G.o.d and his neighbor.
Reply Obj. 2: As stated above (Q. 28, A. 4; Q. 29, A. 3), the other acts of charity result from the act of love as effects from their cause. Hence the precepts of love virtually include the precepts about the other acts. And yet we find that, for the sake of the laggards, special precepts were given about each act--about joy (Phil. 4:4): "Rejoice in the Lord always"--about peace (Heb. 12:14): "Follow peace with all men"--about beneficence (Gal. 6:10): "Whilst we have time, let us work good to all men"--and Holy Writ contains precepts about each of the parts of beneficence, as may be seen by anyone who considers the matter carefully.
Reply Obj. 3: To do good is more than to avoid evil, and therefore the positive precepts virtually include the negative precepts.
Nevertheless we find explicit precepts against the vices contrary to charity: for, against hatred it is written (Lev. 12:17): "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart"; against sloth (Ecclus. 6:26): "Be not grieved with her bands"; against envy (Gal. 5:26): "Let us not be made desirous of vainglory, provoking one another, envying one another"; against discord (1 Cor. 1:10): "That you all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you"; and against scandal (Rom. 14:13): "That you put not a stumbling-block or a scandal in your brother"s way."
_______________________
FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 44, Art. 4]
Whether It Is Fittingly Commanded That Man Should Love G.o.d with His Whole Heart?
Objection 1: It would seem that it is unfittingly commanded that man should love G.o.d with his whole heart. For the mode of a virtuous act is not a matter of precept, as shown above (A. 1, ad 1; I-II, Q. 100, A. 9). Now the words "with thy whole heart" signify the mode of the love of G.o.d. Therefore it is unfittingly commanded that man should love G.o.d with his whole heart.