SECOND ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 29, Art. 2]

Whether Love Is a Cause of Hatred?

Objection 1: It would seem that love is not a cause of hatred. For

"the opposite members of a division are naturally simultaneous"

(Praedic. x). But love and hatred are opposite members of a division,

since they are contrary to one another. Therefore they are naturally

simultaneous. Therefore love is not the cause of hatred.

Obj. 2: Further, of two contraries, one is not the cause of the

other. But love and hatred are contraries. Therefore love is not the

cause of hatred.

Obj. 3: Further, that which follows is not the cause of that which

precedes. But hatred precedes love, seemingly: since hatred implies a

turning away from evil, whereas love implies a turning towards good.

Therefore love is not the cause of hatred.

_On the contrary,_ Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiv, 7, 9) that all

emotions are caused by love. Therefore hatred also, since it is an

emotion of the soul, is caused by love.

_I answer that,_ As stated above (A. 1), love consists in a certain

agreement of the lover with the object loved, while hatred consists

in a certain disagreement or dissonance. Now we should consider in

each thing, what agrees with it, before that which disagrees: since a

thing disagrees with another, through destroying or hindering that

which agrees with it. Consequently love must needs precede hatred;

and nothing is hated, save through being contrary to a suitable thing

which is loved. And hence it is that every hatred is caused by love.

Reply Obj. 1: The opposite members of a division are sometimes

naturally simultaneous, both really and logically; e.g. two species

of animal, or two species of color. Sometimes they are simultaneous

logically, while, in reality, one precedes, and causes the other;

e.g. the species of numbers, figures and movements. Sometimes they

are not simultaneous either really or logically; e.g. substance and

accident; for substance is in reality the cause of accident; and

being is predicated of substance before it is predicated of accident,

by a priority of reason, because it is not predicated of accident

except inasmuch as the latter is in substance. Now love and hatred

are naturally simultaneous, logically but not really. Wherefore

nothing hinders love from being the cause of hatred.

Reply Obj. 2: Love and hatred are contraries if considered in respect

of the same thing. But if taken in respect of contraries, they are

not themselves contrary, but consequent to one another: for it

amounts to the same that one love a certain thing, or that one hate

its contrary. Thus love of one thing is the cause of one's hating its

contrary.

Reply Obj. 3: In the order of execution, the turning away from one

term precedes the turning towards the other. But the reverse is the

case in the order of intention: since approach to one term is the

reason for turning away from the other. Now the appetitive movement

belongs rather to the order of intention than to that of execution.

Wherefore love precedes hatred: because each is an appetitive

movement.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 205 / 746 题