FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 125, Art. 4]

Whether Fear Excuses from Sin?

Objection 1: It seems that fear does not excuse from sin. For fear is

a sin, as stated above (A. 1). But sin does not excuse from sin,

rather does it aggravate it. Therefore fear does not excuse from sin.

Obj. 2: Further, if any fear excuses from sin, most of all would this

be true of the fear of death, to which, as the saying is, a

courageous man is subject. Yet this fear, seemingly, is no excuse,

because, since death comes, of necessity, to all, it does not seem to

be an object of fear. Therefore fear does not excuse from sin.

Obj. 3: Further, all fear is of evil, either temporal or spiritual.

Now fear of spiritual evil cannot excuse sin, because instead of

inducing one to sin, it withdraws one from sin: and fear of temporal

evil does not excuse from sin, because according to the Philosopher

(Ethic. iii, 6), "one should not fear poverty, nor sickness, nor

anything that is not a result of one's own wickedness." Therefore it

seems that in no sense does fear excuse from sin.

_On the contrary,_ It is stated in the Decretals (I, Q. 1, Cap.

Constat.): "A man who has been forcibly and unwillingly ordained by

heretics, has an ostensible excuse."

_I answer that,_ As stated above (A. 3), fear is sinful in so far as

it runs counter to the order of reason. Now reason judges certain

evils to be shunned rather than others. Wherefore it is no sin not to

shun what is less to be shunned in order to avoid what reason judges

to be more avoided: thus death of the body is more to be avoided than

the loss of temporal goods. Hence a man would be excused from sin if

through fear of death he were to promise or give something to a

robber, and yet he would be guilty of sin were he to give to sinners,

rather than to the good to whom he should give in preference. On the

other hand, if through fear a man were to avoid evils which according

to reason are less to be avoided, and so incur evils which according

to reason are more to be avoided, he could not be wholly excused from

sin, because such like fear would be inordinate. Now the evils of the

soul are more to be feared than the evils of the body, and evils of

the body more than evils of external things. Wherefore if one were to

incur evils of the soul, namely sins, in order to avoid evils of the

body, such as blows or death, or evils of external things, such as

loss of money; or if one were to endure evils of the body in order to

avoid loss of money, one would not be wholly excused from sin. Yet

one's sin would be extenuated somewhat, for what is done through fear

is less voluntary, because when fear lays hold of a man he is under a

certain necessity of doing a certain thing. Hence the Philosopher

(Ethic. iii, 1) says that these things that are done through fear are

not simply voluntary, but a mixture of voluntary and involuntary.

Reply Obj. 1: Fear excuses, not in the point of its sinfulness, but

in the point of its involuntariness.

Reply Obj. 2: Although death comes, of necessity, to all, yet the

shortening of temporal life is an evil and consequently an object of

fear.

Reply Obj. 3: According to the opinion of Stoics, who held temporal

goods not to be man's goods, it follows in consequence that temporal

evils are not man's evils, and that therefore they are nowise to be

feared. But according to Augustine (De Lib. Arb. ii) these temporal

things are goods of the least account, and this was also the opinion

of the Peripatetics. Hence their contraries are indeed to be feared;

but not so much that one ought for their sake to renounce that which

is good according to virtue.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 782 / 1128 题