FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 59, Art. 4]

Whether Whoever Does an Injustice Sins Mortally?

Objection 1: It would seem that not everyone who does an injustice

sins mortally. For venial sin is opposed to mortal sin. Now it is

sometimes a venial sin to do an injury: for the Philosopher says

(Ethic. v, 8) in reference to those who act unjustly: "Whatever they

do not merely in ignorance but through ignorance is a venial matter."

Therefore not everyone that does an injustice sins mortally.

Obj. 2: Further, he who does an injustice in a small matter, departs

but slightly from the mean. Now this seems to be insignificant and

should be accounted among the least of evils, as the Philosopher

declares (Ethic. ii, 9). Therefore not everyone that does an

injustice sins mortally.

Obj. 3: Further, charity is the "mother of all the virtues" [*Peter

Lombard, Sent. iii, D. 23], and it is through being contrary thereto

that a sin is called mortal. But not all the sins contrary to the

other virtues are mortal. Therefore neither is it always a mortal sin

to do an injustice.

_On the contrary,_ Whatever is contrary to the law of God is a mortal

sin. Now whoever does an injustice does that which is contrary to the

law of God, since it amounts either to theft, or to adultery, or to

murder, or to something of the kind, as will be shown further on (Q.

64, seqq.). Therefore whoever does an injustice sins mortally.

_I answer that,_ As stated above (I-II, Q. 12, A. 5), when we were

treating of the distinction of sins, a mortal sin is one that is

contrary to charity which gives life to the soul. Now every injury

inflicted on another person is of itself contrary to charity, which

moves us to will the good of another. And so since injustice always

consists in an injury inflicted on another person, it is evident that

to do an injustice is a mortal sin according to its genus.

Reply Obj. 1: This saying of the Philosopher is to be

understood as referring to ignorance of fact, which he calls

"ignorance of particular circumstances" [*Ethic. iii, 1], and which

deserves pardon, and not to ignorance of the law which does not

excuse: and he who does an injustice through ignorance, does no

injustice except accidentally, as stated above (A. 2)

Reply Obj. 2: He who does an injustice in small matters falls

short of the perfection of an unjust deed, in so far as what he does

may be deemed not altogether contrary to the will of the person who

suffers therefrom: for instance, if a man take an apple or some such

thing from another man, in which case it is probable that the latter

is not hurt or displeased.

Reply Obj. 3: The sins which are contrary to the other virtues

are not always hurtful to another person, but imply a disorder

affecting human passions; hence there is no comparison.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 408 / 1128 题