THIRD ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 72, Art. 3]

Whether Sins Differ Specifically in Reference to Their Causes?

Objection 1: It would seem that sins differ specifically in reference

to their causes. For a thing takes its species from that whence it

derives its being. Now sins derive their being from their causes.

Therefore they take their species from them also. Therefore they

differ specifically in reference to their causes.

Obj. 2: Further, of all the causes the material cause seems to have

least reference to the species. Now the object in a sin is like its

material cause. Since, therefore, sins differ specifically according

to their objects, it seems that much more do they differ in reference

to their other causes.

Obj. 3: Further, Augustine, commenting on Ps. 79:17, "Things set on

fire and dug down," says that "every sin is due either to fear

inducing false humility, or to love enkindling us to undue ardor."

For it is written (1 John 2:16) that "all that is in the world, is

the concupiscence of the flesh, or [Vulg.: 'and'] the concupiscence

of the eyes, or [Vulg.: 'and'] the pride of life." Now a thing is

said to be in the world on account of sin, in as much as the world

denotes lovers of the world, as Augustine observes (Tract. ii in

Joan.). Gregory, too (Moral. xxxi, 17), distinguishes all sins

according to the seven capital vices. Now all these divisions refer

to the causes of sins. Therefore, seemingly, sins differ specifically

according to the diversity of their causes.

_On the contrary,_ If this were the case all sins would belong to one

species, since they are due to one cause. For it is written (Ecclus.

10:15) that "pride is the beginning of all sin," and (1 Tim. 6:10)

that "the desire of money is the root of all evils." Now it is

evident that there are various species of sins. Therefore sins do not

differ specifically according to their different causes.

_I answer that,_ Since there are four kinds of causes, they are

attributed to various things in various ways. Because the _formal_

and the _material_ cause regard properly the substance of a thing;

and consequently substances differ in respect of their matter and

form, both in species and in genus. The _agent_ and the _end_ regard

directly movement and operation: wherefore movements and operations

differ specifically in respect of these causes; in different ways,

however, because the natural active principles are always determined

to the same acts; so that the different species of natural acts are

taken not only from the objects, which are the ends or terms of those

acts, but also from their active principles: thus heating and cooling

are specifically distinct with reference to hot and cold. On the

other hand, the active principles in voluntary acts, such as the acts

of sins, are not determined, of necessity, to one act, and

consequently from one active or motive principle, diverse species of

sins can proceed: thus from fear engendering false humility man may

proceed to theft, or murder, or to neglect the flock committed to his

care; and these same things may proceed from love enkindling to undue

ardor. Hence it is evident that sins do not differ specifically

according to their various active or motive causes, but only in

respect of diversity in the final cause, which is the end and object

of the will. For it has been shown above (Q. 1, A. 3; Q. 18, AA. 4,

6) that human acts take their species from the end.

Reply Obj. 1: The active principles in voluntary acts, not being

determined to one act, do not suffice for the production of human

acts, unless the will be determined to one by the intention of the

end, as the Philosopher proves (Metaph. ix, text. 15, 16), and

consequently sin derives both its being and its species from the end.

Reply Obj. 2: Objects, in relation to external acts, have the

character of matter "about which"; but, in relation to the interior

act of the will, they have the character of end; and it is owing to

this that they give the act its species. Nevertheless, even

considered as the matter "about which," they have the character of

term, from which movement takes its species (Phys. v, text. 4;

_Ethic._ x, 4); yet even terms of movement specify movements, in so

far as term has the character of end.

Reply Obj. 3: These distinctions of sins are given, not as distinct

species of sins, but to show their various causes.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 465 / 746 题