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

Obj. 3: Further, in the sin of despair there is nothing but inordinate aversion from G.o.d: whereas in other sins there is not only inordinate aversion from G.o.d, but also an inordinate conversion.

Therefore the sin of despair is not more but less grave than other sins.

_On the contrary,_ An incurable sin seems to be most grievous, according to Jer. 30:12: ”Thy bruise is incurable, thy wound is very grievous.” Now the sin of despair is incurable, according to Jer.

15:18: ”My wound is desperate so as to refuse to be healed.” [*Vulg.: ”Why is my wound,” etc.] Therefore despair is a most grievous sin.

_I answer that,_ Those sins which are contrary to the theological virtues are in themselves more grievous than others: because, since the theological virtues have G.o.d for their object, the sins which are opposed to them imply aversion from G.o.d directly and princ.i.p.ally. Now every mortal sin takes its princ.i.p.al malice and gravity from the fact of its turning away from G.o.d, for if it were possible to turn to a mutable good, even inordinately, without turning away from G.o.d, it would not be a mortal sin. Consequently a sin which, first and of its very nature, includes aversion from G.o.d, is most grievous among mortal sins.

Now unbelief, despair and hatred of G.o.d are opposed to the theological virtues: and among them, if we compare hatred of G.o.d and unbelief to despair, we shall find that, in themselves, that is, in respect of their proper species, they are more grievous. For unbelief is due to a man not believing G.o.d's own truth; while the hatred of G.o.d arises from man's will being opposed to G.o.d's goodness itself; whereas despair consists in a man ceasing to hope for a share of G.o.d's goodness. Hence it is clear that unbelief and hatred of G.o.d are against G.o.d as He is in Himself, while despair is against Him, according as His good is partaken of by us. Wherefore strictly speaking it is a more grievous sin to disbelieve G.o.d's truth, or to hate G.o.d, than not to hope to receive glory from Him.

If, however, despair be compared to the other two sins from our point of view, then despair is more dangerous, since hope withdraws us from evils and induces us to seek for good things, so that when hope is given up, men rush headlong into sin, and are drawn away from good works. Wherefore a gloss on Prov. 24:10, ”If thou lose hope being weary in the day of distress, thy strength shall be diminished,”

says: ”Nothing is more hateful than despair, for the man that has it loses his constancy both in the every day toils of this life, and, what is worse, in the battle of faith.” And Isidore says (De Sum.

Bono ii, 14): ”To commit a crime is to kill the soul, but to despair is to fall into h.e.l.l.”

[And from this the response to the objections is evident.]

_______________________

FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 20, Art. 4]

Whether Despair Arises from Sloth?

Objection 1: It would seem that despair does not arise from sloth.

Because different causes do not give rise to one same effect. Now despair of the future life arises from l.u.s.t, according to Gregory (Moral. x.x.xi, 45). Therefore it does not arise from sloth.

Obj. 2: Further, just as despair is contrary to hope, so is sloth contrary to spiritual joy. But spiritual joy arises from hope, according to Rom. 12:12, ”rejoicing in hope.” Therefore sloth arises from despair, and not vice versa.

Obj. 3: Further, contrary effects have contrary causes. Now hope, the contrary of which is despair, seems to proceed from the consideration of Divine favors, especially the Incarnation, for Augustine says (De Trin. xiii, 10): ”Nothing was so necessary to raise our hope, than that we should be shown how much G.o.d loves us. Now what greater proof could we have of this than that G.o.d's Son should deign to unite Himself to our nature?” Therefore despair arises rather from the neglect of the above consideration than from sloth.

_On the contrary,_ Gregory (Moral. x.x.xi, 45) reckons despair among the effects of sloth.

_I answer that,_ As stated above (Q. 17, A. 1; I-II, Q. 40, A. 1), the object of hope is a good, difficult but possible to obtain by oneself or by another. Consequently the hope of obtaining happiness may be lacking in a person in two ways: first, through his not deeming it an arduous good; secondly, through his deeming it impossible to obtain either by himself, or by another. Now, the fact that spiritual goods taste good to us no more, or seem to be goods of no great account, is chiefly due to our affections being infected with the love of bodily pleasures, among which, s.e.xual pleasures hold the first place: for the love of those pleasures leads man to have a distaste for spiritual things, and not to hope for them as arduous goods. In this way despair is caused by l.u.s.t.

On the other hand, the fact that a man deems an arduous good impossible to obtain, either by himself or by another, is due to his being over downcast, because when this state of mind dominates his affections, it seems to him that he will never be able to rise to any good. And since sloth is a sadness that casts down the spirit, in this way despair is born of sloth.

Now this is the proper object of hope--that the thing is possible, because the good and the arduous regard other pa.s.sions also. Hence despair is born of sloth in a more special way: though it may arise from l.u.s.t, for the reason given above.

This suffices for the Reply to the First Objection.

Reply Obj. 2: According to the Philosopher (Rhet. i, 11), just as hope gives rise to joy, so, when a man is joyful he has greater hope: and, accordingly, those who are sorrowful fall the more easily into despair, according to 2 Cor. 2:7: ”Lest ... such an one be swallowed up by overmuch sorrow.” Yet, since the object of hope is good, to which the appet.i.te tends naturally, and which it shuns, not naturally but only on account of some supervening obstacle, it follows that, more directly, hope gives birth to joy, while on the contrary despair is born of sorrow.

Reply Obj. 3: This very neglect to consider the Divine favors arises from sloth. For when a man is influenced by a certain pa.s.sion he considers chiefly the things which pertain to that pa.s.sion: so that a man who is full of sorrow does not easily think of great and joyful things, but only of sad things, unless by a great effort he turn his thoughts away from sadness.

_______________________

QUESTION 21

OF PRESUMPTION (In Four Articles)

We must now consider presumption, under which head there are four points of inquiry:

<script>