SECOND ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 69, Art. 2]

Whether It Is Lawful for the Accused to Defend Himself with

Calumnies?

Objection 1: It would seem lawful for the accused to defend himself

with calumnies. Because, according to civil law (Cod. II, iv, De

transact. 18), when a man is on trial for his life it is lawful for

him to bribe his adversary. Now this is done chiefly by defending

oneself with calumnies. Therefore the accused who is on trial for his

life does not sin if he defend himself with calumnies.

Obj. 2: Further, an accuser who is guilty of collusion with the

accused, is punishable by law (Decret. II, qu. iii, can. Si quem

poenit.). Yet no punishment is imposed on the accused for collusion

with the accuser. Therefore it would seem lawful for the accused to

defend himself with calumnies.

Obj. 3: Further, it is written (Prov. 14:16): "A wise man feareth and

declineth from evil, the fool leapeth over and is confident." Now

what is done wisely is no sin. Therefore no matter how a man declines

from evil, he does not sin.

_On the contrary,_ In criminal cases an oath has to be taken against

calumnious allegations (Extra, De juramento calumniae, cap.

Inhaerentes): and this would not be the case if it were lawful to

defend oneself with calumnies. Therefore it is not lawful for the

accused to defend himself with calumnies.

_I answer that,_ It is one thing to withhold the truth, and another

to utter a falsehood. The former is lawful sometimes, for a man is

not bound to divulge all truth, but only such as the judge can and

must require of him according to the order of justice; as, for

instance, when the accused is already disgraced through the

commission of some crime, or certain indications of his guilt have

already been discovered, or again when his guilt is already more or

less proven. On the other hand it is never lawful to make a false

declaration.

As regards what he may do lawfully, a man can employ either lawful

means, and such as are adapted to the end in view, which belongs to

prudence; or he can use unlawful means, unsuitable to the proposed

end, and this belongs to craftiness, which is exercised by fraud and

guile, as shown above (Q. 55, AA. 3, seqq.). His conduct in the

former case is praiseworthy, in the latter sinful. Accordingly it is

lawful for the accused to defend himself by withholding the truth

that he is not bound to avow, by suitable means, for instance by not

answering such questions as he is not bound to answer. This is not to

defend himself with calumnies, but to escape prudently. But it is

unlawful for him, either to utter a falsehood, or to withhold a truth

that he is bound to avow, or to employ guile or fraud, because fraud

and guile have the force of a lie, and so to use them would be to

defend oneself with calumnies.

Reply Obj. 1: Human laws leave many things unpunished, which

according to the Divine judgment are sins, as, for example, simple

fornication; because human law does not exact perfect virtue from

man, for such virtue belongs to few and cannot be found in so great a

number of people as human law has to direct. That a man is sometimes

unwilling to commit a sin in order to escape from the death of the

body, the danger of which threatens the accused who is on trial for

his life, is an act of perfect virtue, since "death is the most

fearful of all temporal things" (Ethic. iii, 6). Wherefore if the

accused, who is on trial for his life, bribes his adversary, he sins

indeed by inducing him to do what is unlawful, yet the civil law does

not punish this sin, and in this sense it is said to be lawful.

Reply Obj. 2: If the accuser is guilty of collusion with the accused

and the latter is guilty, he incurs punishment, and so it is evident

that he sins. Wherefore, since it is a sin to induce a man to sin, or

to take part in a sin in any way--for the Apostle says (Rom. 1:32),

that "they . . . are worthy of death . . . that consent" to those who

sin--it is evident that the accused also sins if he is guilty of

collusion with his adversary. Nevertheless according to human laws no

punishment is inflicted on him, for the reason given above.

Reply Obj. 3: The wise man hides himself not by slandering others but

by exercising prudence.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 471 / 1128 题