Part III (Secunda Secundae) Part 42 (1/2)
Hence, just as unity is the principle of union, so the love with which a man loves himself is the form and root of friends.h.i.+p. For if we have friends.h.i.+p with others it is because we do unto them as we do unto ourselves, hence we read in _Ethic._ ix, 4, 8, that ”the origin of friendly relations with others lies in our relations to ourselves.” Thus too with regard to principles we have something greater than science, namely understanding.
Secondly, we may speak of charity in respect of its specific nature, namely as denoting man's friends.h.i.+p with G.o.d in the first place, and, consequently, with the things of G.o.d, among which things is man himself who has charity. Hence, among these other things which he loves out of charity because they pertain to G.o.d, he loves also himself out of charity.
Reply Obj. 1: Gregory speaks there of charity under the general notion of friends.h.i.+p: and the Second Objection is to be taken in the same sense.
Reply Obj. 3: Those who love themselves are to be blamed, in so far as they love themselves as regards their sensitive nature, which they humor. This is not to love oneself truly according to one's rational nature, so as to desire for oneself the good things which pertain to the perfection of reason: and in this way chiefly it is through charity that a man loves himself.
_______________________
FIFTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 25, Art. 5]
Whether a Man Ought to Love His Body Out of Charity?
Objection 1: It would seem that a man ought not to love his body out of charity. For we do not love one with whom we are unwilling to a.s.sociate. But those who have charity shun the society of the body, according to Rom. 7:24: ”Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” and Phil. 1:23: ”Having a desire to be dissolved and to be with Christ.” Therefore our bodies are not to be loved out of charity.
Obj. 2: Further, the friends.h.i.+p of charity is based on fellows.h.i.+p in the enjoyment of G.o.d. But the body can have no share in that enjoyment. Therefore the body is not to be loved out of charity.
Obj. 3: Further, since charity is a kind of friends.h.i.+p it is towards those who are capable of loving in return. But our body cannot love us out of charity. Therefore it should not be loved out of charity.
_On the contrary,_ Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 23, 26) that there are four things that we should love out of charity, and among them he reckons our own body.
_I answer that,_ Our bodies can be considered in two ways: first, in respect of their nature, secondly, in respect of the corruption of sin and its punishment.
Now the nature of our body was created, not by an evil principle, as the Manicheans pretend, but by G.o.d. Hence we can use it for G.o.d's service, according to Rom. 6:13: ”Present ... your members as instruments of justice unto G.o.d.” Consequently, out of the love of charity with which we love G.o.d, we ought to love our bodies also, but we ought not to love the evil effects of sin and the corruption of punishment; we ought rather, by the desire of charity, to long for the removal of such things.
Reply Obj. 1: The Apostle did not shrink from the society of his body, as regards the nature of the body, in fact in this respect he was loth to be deprived thereof, according to 2 Cor. 5:4: ”We would not be unclothed, but clothed over.” He did, however, wish to escape from the taint of concupiscence, which remains in the body, and from the corruption of the body which weighs down the soul, so as to hinder it from seeing G.o.d. Hence he says expressly: ”From the body of this death.”
Reply Obj. 2: Although our bodies are unable to enjoy G.o.d by knowing and loving Him, yet by the works which we do through the body, we are able to attain to the perfect knowledge of G.o.d. Hence from the enjoyment in the soul there overflows a certain happiness into the body, viz., ”the flush of health and incorruption,” as Augustine states (Ep. ad Dioscor. cxviii). Hence, since the body has, in a fas.h.i.+on, a share of happiness, it can be loved with the love of charity.
Reply Obj. 3: Mutual love is found in the friends.h.i.+p which is for another, but not in that which a man has for himself, either in respect of his soul, or in respect of his body.
_______________________
SIXTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 25, Art. 6]
Whether We Ought to Love Sinners Out of Charity?
Objection 1: It would seem that we ought not to love sinners out of charity. For it is written (Ps. 118:113): ”I have hated the unjust.”
But David had perfect charity. Therefore sinners should be hated rather than loved, out of charity.
Obj. 2: Further, ”love is proved by deeds” as Gregory says in a homily for Pentecost (In Evang. x.x.x). But good men do no works of the unjust: on the contrary, they do such as would appear to be works of hate, according to Ps. 100:8: ”In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land”: and G.o.d commanded (Ex. 22:18): ”Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live.” Therefore sinners should not be loved out of charity.
Obj. 3: Further, it is part of friends.h.i.+p that one should desire and wish good things for one's friends. Now the saints, out of charity, desire evil things for the wicked, according to Ps. 9:18: ”May the wicked be turned into h.e.l.l [*Douay and A. V.: 'The wicked shall be,'
etc. See Reply to this Objection.].” Therefore sinners should not be loved out of charity.
Obj. 4: Further, it is proper to friends to rejoice in, and will the same things. Now charity does not make us will what sinners will, nor to rejoice in what gives them joy, but rather the contrary. Therefore sinners should not be loved out of charity.
Obj. 5: Further, it is proper to friends to a.s.sociate together, according to _Ethic._ viii. But we ought not to a.s.sociate with sinners, according to 2 Cor. 6:17: ”Go ye out from among them.”
Therefore we should not love sinners out of charity.
_On the contrary,_ Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 30) that ”when it is said: 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor,' it is evident that we ought to look upon every man as our neighbor.” Now sinners do not cease to be men, for sin does not destroy nature. Therefore we ought to love sinners out of charity.
_I answer that,_ Two things may be considered in the sinner: his nature and his guilt. According to his nature, which he has from G.o.d, he has a capacity for happiness, on the fellows.h.i.+p of which charity is based, as stated above (A. 3; Q. 23, AA. 1, 5), wherefore we ought to love sinners, out of charity, in respect of their nature.