SIXTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 64, Art. 6]

Whether It Is Lawful to Kill the Innocent?

Objection 1: It would seem that in some cases it is lawful to kill

the innocent. The fear of God is never manifested by sin, since on

the contrary "the fear of the Lord driveth out sin" (Ecclus. 1:27).

Now Abraham was commended in that he feared the Lord, since he was

willing to slay his innocent son. Therefore one may, without sin,

kill an innocent person.

Obj. 2: Further, among those sins that are committed against one's

neighbor, the more grievous seem to be those whereby a more grievous

injury is inflicted on the person sinned against. Now to be killed is

a greater injury to a sinful than to an innocent person, because the

latter, by death, passes forthwith from the unhappiness of this life

to the glory of heaven. Since then it is lawful in certain cases to

kill a sinful man, much more is it lawful to slay an innocent or a

righteous person.

Obj. 3: Further, what is done in keeping with the order of justice is

not a sin. But sometimes a man is forced, according to the order of

justice, to slay an innocent person: for instance, when a judge, who

is bound to judge according to the evidence, condemns to death a man

whom he knows to be innocent but who is convicted by false witnesses;

and again the executioner, who in obedience to the judge puts to

death the man who has been unjustly sentenced.

_On the contrary,_ It is written (Ex. 23:7): "The innocent and just

person thou shalt not put to death."

_I answer that,_ An individual man may be considered in two ways:

first, in himself; secondly, in relation to something else. If we

consider a man in himself, it is unlawful to kill any man, since in

every man though he be sinful, we ought to love the nature which God

has made, and which is destroyed by slaying him. Nevertheless, as

stated above (A. 2) the slaying of a sinner becomes lawful in

relation to the common good, which is corrupted by sin. On the other

hand the life of righteous men preserves and forwards the common

good, since they are the chief part of the community. Therefore it is

in no way lawful to slay the innocent.

Reply Obj. 1: God is Lord of death and life, for by His decree both

the sinful and the righteous die. Hence he who at God's command kills

an innocent man does not sin, as neither does God Whose behest he

executes: indeed his obedience to God's commands is a proof that he

fears Him.

Reply Obj. 2: In weighing the gravity of a sin we must consider the

essential rather than the accidental. Wherefore he who kills a just

man, sins more grievously than he who slays a sinful man: first,

because he injures one whom he should love more, and so acts more in

opposition to charity: secondly, because he inflicts an injury on a

man who is less deserving of one, and so acts more in opposition to

justice: thirdly, because he deprives the community of a greater

good: fourthly, because he despises God more, according to Luke

10:16, "He that despiseth you despiseth Me." On the other hand it is

accidental to the slaying that the just man whose life is taken be

received by God into glory.

Reply Obj. 3: If the judge knows that a man who has been convicted by

false witnesses, is innocent he must, like Daniel, examine the

witnesses with great care, so as to find a motive for acquitting the

innocent: but if he cannot do this he should remit him for judgment

by a higher tribunal. If even this is impossible, he does not sin if

he pronounce sentence in accordance with the evidence, for it is not

he that puts the innocent man to death, but they who stated him to be

guilty. He that carries out the sentence of the judge who has

condemned an innocent man, if the sentence contains an inexcusable

error, he should not obey, else there would be an excuse for the

executions of the martyrs: if however it contain no manifest

injustice, he does not sin by carrying out the sentence, because he

has no right to discuss the judgment of his superior; nor is it he

who slays the innocent man, but the judge whose minister he is.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 441 / 1128 题