FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 161, Art. 4]

Whether Humility Is a Part of Modesty or Temperance?

Objection 1: It would seem that humility is not a part of modesty or

temperance. For humility regards chiefly the reverence whereby one is

subject to God, as stated above (A. 3). Now it belongs to a

theological virtue to have God for its object. Therefore humility

should be reckoned a theological virtue rather than a part of

temperance or modesty.

Obj. 2: Further, temperance is in the concupiscible, whereas humility

would seem to be in the irascible, just as pride which is opposed to

it, and whose object is something difficult. Therefore apparently

humility is not a part of temperance or modesty.

Obj. 3: Further, humility and magnanimity are about the same object,

as stated above (A. 1, ad 3). But magnanimity is reckoned a part, not

of temperance but of fortitude, as stated above (Q. 129, A. 5).

Therefore it would seem that humility is not a part of temperance or

modesty.

_On the contrary,_ Origen says (Hom. viii super Luc.): "If thou wilt

hear the name of this virtue, and what it was called by the

philosophers, know that humility which God regards is the same as

what they called _metriotes_, i.e. measure or moderation." Now this

evidently pertains to modesty or temperance. Therefore humility is a

part of modesty or temperance.

_I answer that,_ As stated above (Q. 137, A. 2, ad 1; Q. 157, A. 3,

ad 2), in assigning parts to a virtue we consider chiefly the

likeness that results from the mode of the virtue. Now the mode of

temperance, whence it chiefly derives its praise, is the restraint or

suppression of the impetuosity of a passion. Hence whatever virtues

restrain or suppress, and the actions which moderate the impetuosity

of the emotions, are reckoned parts of temperance. Now just as

meekness suppresses the movement of anger, so does humility suppress

the movement of hope, which is the movement of a spirit aiming at

great things. Wherefore, like meekness, humility is accounted a part

of temperance. For this reason the Philosopher (Ethic. iv, 3) says

that a man who aims at small things in proportion to his mode is not

magnanimous but "temperate," and such a man we may call humble.

Moreover, for the reason given above (Q. 160, A. 2), among the

various parts of temperance, the one under which humility is

comprised is modesty as understood by Tully (De Invent. Rhet. ii,

54), inasmuch as humility is nothing else than a moderation of

spirit: wherefore it is written (1 Pet. 3:4): "In the

incorruptibility of a quiet and meek spirit."

Reply Obj. 1: The theological virtues, whose object is our last end,

which is the first principle in matters of appetite, are the causes

of all the other virtues. Hence the fact that humility is caused by

reverence for God does not prevent it from being a part of modesty or

temperance.

Reply Obj. 2: Parts are assigned to a principal virtue by reason of a

sameness, not of subject or matter, but of formal mode, as stated

above (Q. 137, A. 2, ad 1; Q. 157, A. 3, ad 2). Consequently,

although humility is in the irascible as its subject, it is assigned

as a part of modesty or temperance by reason of its mode.

Reply Obj. 3: Although humility and magnanimity agree as to matter,

they differ as to mode, by reason of which magnanimity is reckoned a

part of fortitude, and humility a part of temperance.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 964 / 1128 题