THIRD ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 59, Art. 3]

Whether Sorrow Is Compatible with Moral Virtue?

Objection 1: It would seem that sorrow is incompatible with virtue.

Because the virtues are effects of wisdom, according to Wis. 8:7:

"She," i.e. Divine wisdom, "teacheth temperance, and prudence, and

justice, and fortitude." Now the "conversation" of wisdom "hath no

bitterness," as we read further on (verse 16). Therefore sorrow is

incompatible with virtue also.

Obj. 2: Further, sorrow is a hindrance to work, as the Philosopher

states (Ethic. vii, 13; x, 5). But a hindrance to good works is

incompatible with virtue. Therefore sorrow is incompatible with

virtue.

Obj. 3: Further, Tully calls sorrow a disease of the mind (De Tusc.

Quaest. iv). But disease of the mind is incompatible with virtue,

which is a good condition of the mind. Therefore sorrow is opposed to

virtue and is incompatible with it.

_On the contrary,_ Christ was perfect in virtue. But there was sorrow

in Him, for He said (Matt. 26:38): "My soul is sorrowful even unto

death." Therefore sorrow is compatible with virtue.

_I answer that,_ As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiv, 8), the Stoics

held that in the mind of the wise man there are three _eupatheiai_,

i.e. "three good passions," in place of the three disturbances: viz.

instead of covetousness, "desire"; instead of mirth, "joy"; instead

of fear, "caution." But they denied that anything corresponding to

sorrow could be in the mind of a wise man, for two reasons.

First, because sorrow is for an evil that is already present. Now

they held that no evil can happen to a wise man: for they thought

that, just as man's only good is virtue, and bodily goods are no good

to man; so man's only evil is vice, which cannot be in a virtuous

man. But this is unreasonable. For, since man is composed of soul and

body, whatever conduces to preserve the life of the body, is some

good to man; yet not his supreme good, because he can abuse it.

Consequently the evil which is contrary to this good can be in a wise

man, and can cause him moderate sorrow. Again, although a virtuous

man can be without grave sin, yet no man is to be found to live

without committing slight sins, according to 1 John 1:8: "If we say

that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves." A third reason is because

a virtuous man, though not actually in a state of sin, may have been

so in the past. And he is to be commended if he sorrow for that sin,

according to 2 Cor. 7:10: "The sorrow that is according to God

worketh penance steadfast unto salvation." Fourthly, because he may

praiseworthily sorrow for another's sin. Therefore sorrow is

compatible with moral virtue in the same way as the other passions

are when moderated by reason.

Their second reason for holding this opinion was that sorrow is about

evil present, whereas fear is for evil to come: even as pleasure is

about a present good, while desire is for a future good. Now the

enjoyment of a good possessed, or the desire to have good that one

possesses not, may be consistent with virtue: but depression of the

mind resulting from sorrow for a present evil, is altogether contrary

to reason: wherefore it is incompatible with virtue. But this is

unreasonable. For there is an evil which can be present to the

virtuous man, as we have just stated; which evil is rejected by

reason. Wherefore the sensitive appetite follows reason's rejection

by sorrowing for that evil; yet moderately, according as reason

dictates. Now it pertains to virtue that the sensitive appetite be

conformed to reason, as stated above (A. 1, ad 2). Wherefore

moderated sorrow for an object which ought to make us sorrowful, is a

mark of virtue; as also the Philosopher says (Ethic. ii, 6, 7).

Moreover, this proves useful for avoiding evil: since, just as good

is more readily sought for the sake of pleasure, so is evil more

undauntedly shunned on account of sorrow.

Accordingly we must allow that sorrow for things pertaining to virtue

is incompatible with virtue: since virtue rejoices in its own. On the

other hand, virtue sorrows moderately for all that thwarts virtue, no

matter how.

Reply Obj. 1: The passage quoted proves that the wise man is not made

sorrowful by wisdom. Yet he sorrows for anything that hinders wisdom.

Consequently there is no room for sorrow in the blessed, in whom

there can be no hindrance to wisdom.

Reply Obj. 2: Sorrow hinders the work that makes us sorrowful: but it

helps us to do more readily whatever banishes sorrow.

Reply Obj. 3: Immoderate sorrow is a disease of the mind: but

moderate sorrow is the mark of a well-conditioned mind, according to

the present state of life.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 385 / 746 题