Part III (Secunda Secundae) Part 32 (1/2)

Obj. 2: Further, that which grows from a good root, seems to be no sin, because ”a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit” (Matt.

7:18). Now despair seems to grow from a good root, viz. fear of G.o.d, or from horror at the greatness of one's own sins. Therefore despair is not a sin.

Obj. 3: Further, if despair were a sin, it would be a sin also for the d.a.m.ned to despair. But this is not imputed to them as their fault but as part of their d.a.m.nation. Therefore neither is it imputed to wayfarers as their fault, so that it is not a sin.

_On the contrary,_ That which leads men to sin, seems not only to be a sin itself, but a source of sins. Now such is despair, for the Apostle says of certain men (Eph. 4:19): ”Who, despairing, have given themselves up to lasciviousness, unto the working of all uncleanness and [Vulg.: 'unto'] covetousness.” Therefore despair is not only a sin but also the origin of other sins.

_I answer that,_ According to the Philosopher (Ethic. vi, 2) affirmation and negation in the intellect correspond to search and avoidance in the appet.i.te; while truth and falsehood in the intellect correspond to good and evil in the appet.i.te. Consequently every appet.i.tive movement which is conformed to a true intellect, is good in itself, while every appet.i.tive movement which is conformed to a false intellect is evil in itself and sinful. Now the true opinion of the intellect about G.o.d is that from Him comes salvation to mankind, and pardon to sinners, according to Ezech. 18:23, ”I desire not the death of the sinner, but that he should be converted, and live”

[*Vulg.: 'Is it My will that a sinner should die ... and not that he should be converted and live?' Cf. Ezech. 33:11]: while it is a false opinion that He refuses pardon to the repentant sinner, or that He does not turn sinners to Himself by sanctifying grace. Therefore, just as the movement of hope, which is in conformity with the true opinion, is praiseworthy and virtuous, so the contrary movement of despair, which is in conformity with the false opinion about G.o.d, is vicious and sinful.

Reply Obj. 1: In every mortal sin there is, in some way, aversion from the immutable good, and conversion to a mutable good, but not always in the same way. Because, since the theological virtues have G.o.d for their object, the sins which are contrary to them, such as hatred of G.o.d, despair and unbelief, consist princ.i.p.ally in aversion from the immutable good; but, consequently, they imply conversion to a mutable good, in so far as the soul that is a deserter from G.o.d, must necessarily turn to other things. Other sins, however, consist princ.i.p.ally in conversion to a mutable good, and, consequently, in aversion from the immutable good: because the fornicator intends, not to depart from G.o.d, but to enjoy carnal pleasure, the result of which is that he departs from G.o.d.

Reply Obj. 2: A thing may grow from a virtuous root in two ways: first, directly and on the part of the virtue itself; even as an act proceeds from a habit: and in this way no sin can grow from a virtuous root, for in this sense Augustine declared (De Lib. Arb. ii, 18, 19) that ”no man makes evil use of virtue.” Secondly, a thing proceeds from a virtue indirectly, or is occasioned by a virtue, and in this way nothing hinders a sin proceeding from a virtue: thus sometimes men pride themselves of their virtues, according to Augustine (Ep. ccxi): ”Pride lies in wait for good works that they may die.” In this way fear of G.o.d or horror of one's own sins may lead to despair, in so far as man makes evil use of those good things, by allowing them to be an occasion of despair.

Reply Obj. 3: The d.a.m.ned are outside the pale of hope on account of the impossibility of returning to happiness: hence it is not imputed to them that they hope not, but it is a part of their d.a.m.nation. Even so, it would be no sin for a wayfarer to despair of obtaining that which he had no natural capacity for obtaining, or which was not due to be obtained by him; for instance, if a physician were to despair of healing some sick man, or if anyone were to despair of ever becoming rich.

_______________________

SECOND ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 20, Art. 2]

Whether There Can Be Despair Without Unbelief?

Objection 1: It would seem that there can be no despair without unbelief. For the certainty of hope is derived from faith; and so long as the cause remains the effect is not done away. Therefore a man cannot lose the certainty of hope, by despairing, unless his faith be removed.

Obj. 2: Further, to prefer one's own guilt to G.o.d's mercy and goodness, is to deny the infinity of G.o.d's goodness and mercy, and so savors of unbelief. But whoever despairs, prefers his own guilt to the Divine mercy and goodness, according to Gen. 4:13: ”My iniquity is greater than that I may deserve pardon.” Therefore whoever despairs, is an unbeliever.

Obj. 3: Further, whoever falls into a condemned heresy, is an unbeliever. But he that despairs seems to fall into a condemned heresy, viz. that of the Novatians, who say that there is no pardon for sins after Baptism. Therefore it seems that whoever despairs, is an unbeliever.

_On the contrary,_ If we remove that which follows, that which precedes remains. But hope follows faith, as stated above (Q. 17, A.

7). Therefore when hope is removed, faith can remain; so that, not everyone who despairs, is an unbeliever.

_I answer that,_ Unbelief pertains to the intellect, but despair, to the appet.i.te: and the intellect is about universals, while the appet.i.te is moved in connection with particulars, since the appet.i.tive movement is from the soul towards things, which, in themselves, are particular. Now it may happen that a man, while having a right opinion in the universal, is not rightly disposed as to his appet.i.tive movement, his estimate being corrupted in a particular matter, because, in order to pa.s.s from the universal opinion to the appet.i.te for a particular thing, it is necessary to have a particular estimate (De Anima iii, 2), just as it is impossible to infer a particular conclusion from an universal proposition, except through the holding of a particular proposition.

Hence it is that a man, while having right faith, in the universal, fails in an appet.i.tive movement, in regard to some particular, his particular estimate being corrupted by a habit or a pa.s.sion, just as the fornicator, by choosing fornication as a good for himself at this particular moment, has a corrupt estimate in a particular matter, although he retains the true universal estimate according to faith, viz. that fornication is a mortal sin. In the same way, a man while retaining in the universal, the true estimate of faith, viz. that there is in the Church the power of forgiving sins, may suffer a movement of despair, to wit, that for him, being in such a state, there is no hope of pardon, his estimate being corrupted in a particular matter. In this way there can be despair, just as there can be other mortal sins, without belief.

Reply Obj. 1: The effect is done away, not only when the first cause is removed, but also when the secondary cause is removed. Hence the movement of hope can be done away, not only by the removal of the universal estimate of faith, which is, so to say, the first cause of the certainty of hope, but also by the removal of the particular estimate, which is the secondary cause, as it were.

Reply Obj. 2: If anyone were to judge, in universal, that G.o.d's mercy is not infinite, he would be an unbeliever. But he who despairs judges not thus, but that, for him in that state, on account of some particular disposition, there is no hope of the Divine mercy.

The same answer applies to the Third Objection, since the Novatians denied, in universal, that there is remission of sins in the Church.

_______________________

THIRD ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 20, Art. 3]

Whether Despair Is the Greatest of Sins?

Objection 1: It would seem that despair is not the greatest of sins.

For there can be despair without unbelief, as stated above (A. 2).

But unbelief is the greatest of sins because it overthrows the foundation of the spiritual edifice. Therefore despair is not the greatest of sins.

Obj. 2: Further, a greater evil is opposed to a greater good, as the Philosopher states (Ethic. viii, 10). But charity is greater than hope, according to 1 Cor. 13:13. Therefore hatred of G.o.d is a greater sin than despair.