THIRD ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 26, Art. 3]

Whether Out of Charity, Man Is Bound to Love God More Than Himself?

Objection 1: It would seem that man is not bound, out of charity, to

love God more than himself. For the Philosopher says (Ethic. ix, 8)

that "a man's friendly relations with others arise from his friendly

relations with himself." Now the cause is stronger than its effect.

Therefore man's friendship towards himself is greater than his

friendship for anyone else. Therefore he ought to love himself more

than God.

Obj. 2: Further, one loves a thing in so far as it is one's own good.

Now the reason for loving a thing is more loved than the thing itself

which is loved for that reason, even as the principles which are the

reason for knowing a thing are more known. Therefore man loves

himself more than any other good loved by him. Therefore he does not

love God more than himself.

Obj. 3: Further, a man loves God as much as he loves to enjoy God.

But a man loves himself as much as he loves to enjoy God; since this

is the highest good a man can wish for himself. Therefore man is not

bound, out of charity, to love God more than himself.

_On the contrary,_ Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 22): "If thou

oughtest to love thyself, not for thy own sake, but for the sake of

Him in Whom is the rightest end of thy love, let no other man take

offense if him also thou lovest for God's sake." Now "the cause of a

thing being such is yet more so." Therefore man ought to love God

more than himself.

_I answer that,_ The good we receive from God is twofold, the good of

nature, and the good of grace. Now the fellowship of natural goods

bestowed on us by God is the foundation of natural love, in virtue of

which not only man, so long as his nature remains unimpaired, loves

God above all things and more than himself, but also every single

creature, each in its own way, i.e. either by an intellectual, or by

a rational, or by an animal, or at least by a natural love, as stones

do, for instance, and other things bereft of knowledge, because each

part naturally loves the common good of the whole more than its own

particular good. This is evidenced by its operation, since the

principal inclination of each part is towards common action conducive

to the good of the whole. It may also be seen in civic virtues

whereby sometimes the citizens suffer damage even to their own

property and persons for the sake of the common good. Wherefore much

more is this realized with regard to the friendship of charity which

is based on the fellowship of the gifts of grace.

Therefore man ought, out of charity, to love God, Who is the common

good of all, more than himself: since happiness is in God as in the

universal and fountain principle of all who are able to have a share

of that happiness.

Reply Obj. 1: The Philosopher is speaking of friendly relations

towards another person in whom the good, which is the object of

friendship, resides in some restricted way; and not of friendly

relations with another in whom the aforesaid good resides in totality.

Reply Obj. 2: The part does indeed love the good of the whole, as

becomes a part, not however so as to refer the good of the whole to

itself, but rather itself to the good of the whole.

Reply Obj. 3: That a man wishes to enjoy God pertains to that love of

God which is love of concupiscence. Now we love God with the love of

friendship more than with the love of concupiscence, because the

Divine good is greater in itself, than our share of good in enjoying

Him. Hence, out of charity, man simply loves God more than himself.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 189 / 1128 题