EIGHTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 27, Art. 8]

Whether It Is More Meritorious to Love One's Neighbor Than to Love

God?

Objection 1: It would seem that it is more meritorious to love one's

neighbor than to love God. For the more meritorious thing would seem

to be what the Apostle preferred. Now the Apostle preferred the love

of our neighbor to the love of God, according to Rom. 9:3: "I wished

myself to be an anathema from Christ for my brethren." Therefore it

is more meritorious to love one's neighbor than to love God.

Obj. 2: Further, in a certain sense it seems to be less meritorious

to love one's friend, as stated above (A. 7). Now God is our chief

friend, since "He hath first loved us" (1 John 4:10). Therefore it

seems less meritorious to love God.

Obj. 3: Further, whatever is more difficult seems to be more virtuous

and meritorious since "virtue is about that which is difficult and

good" (Ethic. ii, 3). Now it is easier to love God than to love one's

neighbor, both because all things love God naturally, and because

there is nothing unlovable in God, and this cannot be said of one's

neighbor. Therefore it is more meritorious to love one's neighbor

than to love God.

_On the contrary,_ That on account of which a thing is such, is yet

more so. Now the love of one's neighbor is not meritorious, except by

reason of his being loved for God's sake. Therefore the love of God

is more meritorious than the love of our neighbor.

_I answer that,_ This comparison may be taken in two ways. First, by

considering both loves separately: and then, without doubt, the love

of God is the more meritorious, because a reward is due to it for its

own sake, since the ultimate reward is the enjoyment of God, to Whom

the movement of the Divine love tends: hence a reward is promised to

him that loves God (John 14:21): "He that loveth Me, shall be loved

of My Father, and I will . . . manifest Myself to him." Secondly, the

comparison may be understood to be between the love of God alone on

the one side, and the love of one's neighbor for God's sake, on the

other. In this way love of our neighbor includes love of God, while

love of God does not include love of our neighbor. Hence the

comparison will be between perfect love of God, extending also to our

neighbor, and inadequate and imperfect love of God, for "this

commandment we have from God, that he, who loveth God, love also his

brother" (1 John 4:21).

Reply Obj. 1: According to one gloss, the Apostle did not desire

this, viz. to be severed from Christ for his brethren, when he was in

a state of grace, but had formerly desired it when he was in a state

of unbelief, so that we should not imitate him in this respect.

We may also reply, with Chrysostom (De Compunct. i, 8) [*Hom. xvi in

Ep. ad Rom.] that this does not prove the Apostle to have loved his

neighbor more than God, but that he loved God more than himself. For

he wished to be deprived for a time of the Divine fruition which

pertains to love of one self, in order that God might be honored in

his neighbor, which pertains to the love of God.

Reply Obj. 2: A man's love for his friends is sometimes less

meritorious in so far as he loves them for their sake, so as to fall

short of the true reason for the friendship of charity, which is God.

Hence that God be loved for His own sake does not diminish the merit,

but is the entire reason for merit.

Reply Obj. 3: The _good_ has, more than the _difficult,_ to do

with the reason of merit and virtue. Therefore it does not follow that

whatever is more difficult is more meritorious, but only what is more

difficult, and at the same time better.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 209 / 1128 题