ccore/rhetoric-saint-thomas-aquinas · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 80
but has done nothing brave."

By sin man loses his ecclesiastical dignity, because thereby he
becomes unworthy of those things which appertain to the exercise of
the ecclesiastical dignity. This he is debarred from recovering:
first, because he fails to repent; wherefore Isidore wrote to the
bishop Masso, and as we read in the Distinction quoted above (Obj.
3): "The canons order those to be restored to their former degree,
who by repentance have made satisfaction for their sins, or have made
worthy confession of them. On the other hand, those who do not mend
their corrupt and wicked ways are neither allowed to exercise their
order, nor received to the grace of communion."

Secondly, because he does penance negligently, wherefore it is
written in the same Distinction (Objection 3): "We can be sure that those
who show no signs of humble compunction, or of earnest prayer, who
avoid fasting or study, would exercise their former duties with great
negligence if they were restored to them."

Thirdly, if he has committed a sin to which an irregularity is
attached; wherefore it is said in the same Distinction (Objection 3),
quoting the council of Pope Martin [*Martin, bishop of Braga]: "If a
man marry a widow or the relict of another, he must not be admitted
to the ranks of the clergy: and if he has succeeded in creeping in,
he must be turned out. In like manner, if anyone after Baptism be
guilty of homicide, whether by deed, or by command, or by counsel, or
in self-defense." But this is in consequence not of sin, but of
irregularity.

Fourthly, on account of scandal, wherefore it is said in the same
Distinction (Objection 3): "Those who have been publicly convicted or
caught in the act of perjury, robbery, fornication, and of such like
crimes, according to the prescription of the sacred canons must be
deprived of the exercise of their respective orders, because it is a
scandal to God's people that such persons should be placed over them.
But those who commit such sins occultly and confess them secretly to
a priest, may be retained in the exercise of their respective orders,
with the assurance of God's merciful forgiveness, provided they be
careful to expiate their sins by fasts and alms, vigils and holy
deeds." The same is expressed (Extra, De Qual. Ordinand.): "If the
aforesaid crimes are not proved by a judicial process, or in some
other way made notorious, those who are guilty of them must not be
hindered, after they have done penance, from exercising the orders
they have received, or from receiving further orders, except in cases
of homicide."

Reply Objection 1: The same is to be said of the recovery of virginity as
of the recovery of innocence which belongs to man's secondary dignity
in the sight of God.

Reply Objection 2: In these words Jerome does not say that it is
impossible, but that it is difficult, for man to recover his former
dignity after having sinned, because this is allowed to none but
those who repent perfectly, as stated above. To those canonical
statutes, which seem to forbid this, Augustine replies in his letter
to Boniface (Ep. clxxxv): "If the law of the Church forbids anyone,
after doing penance for a crime, to become a cleric, or to return to
his clerical duties, or to retain them the intention was not to
deprive him of the hope of pardon, but to preserve the rigor of
discipline; else we should have to deny the keys given to the Church,
of which it was said: 'Whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be
loosed in heaven.'" And further on he adds: "For holy David did
penance for his deadly crimes, and yet he retained his dignity; and
Blessed Peter by shedding most bitter tears did indeed repent him of
having denied his Lord, and yet he remained an apostle. Nevertheless
we must not deem the care of later teachers excessive, who without
endangering a man's salvation, exacted more from his humility,
having, in my opinion, found by experience, that some assumed a
pretended repentance through hankering after honors and power."

Reply Objection 3: This statute is to be understood as applying to those
who do public penance, for these cannot be promoted to a higher
order. For Peter, after his denial, was made shepherd of Christ's
sheep, as appears from John 21:21, where Chrysostom comments as
follows: "After his denial and repentance Peter gives proof of
greater confidence in Christ: for whereas, at the supper, he durst
not ask Him, but deputed John to ask in his stead, afterwards he was
placed at the head of his brethren, and not only did not depute
another to ask for him, what concerned him, but henceforth asks the
Master instead of John."
_______________________

FOURTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 89, Art. 4]

Whether Virtuous Deeds Done in Charity Can Be Deadened?

Objection 1: It would seem that virtuous deeds done in charity cannot
be deadened. For that which is not cannot be changed. But to be
deadened is to be changed from life to death. Since therefore
virtuous deeds, after being done, are no more, it seems that they
cannot afterwards be deadened.

Objection 2: Further, by virtuous deeds done in charity, man merits
eternal life. But to take away the reward from one who has merited it
is an injustice, which cannot be ascribed to God. Therefore it is not
possible for virtuous deeds done in charity to be deadened by a
subsequent sin.

Objection 3: Further, the strong is not corrupted by the weak. Now works
of charity are stronger than any sins, because, as it is written

but has done nothing brave."

By sin man loses his ecclesiastical dignity, because thereby he

becomes unworthy of those things which appertain to the exercise of

the ecclesiastical dignity. This he is debarred from recovering:

first, because he fails to repent; wherefore Isidore wrote to the

bishop Masso, and as we read in the Distinction quoted above (Obj.

3): "The canons order those to be restored to their former degree,

who by repentance have made satisfaction for their sins, or have made

worthy confession of them. On the other hand, those who do not mend

their corrupt and wicked ways are neither allowed to exercise their

order, nor received to the grace of communion."

Secondly, because he does penance negligently, wherefore it is

written in the same Distinction (Objection 3): "We can be sure that those

who show no signs of humble compunction, or of earnest prayer, who

avoid fasting or study, would exercise their former duties with great

negligence if they were restored to them."

Thirdly, if he has committed a sin to which an irregularity is

attached; wherefore it is said in the same Distinction (Objection 3),

quoting the council of Pope Martin [*Martin, bishop of Braga]: "If a

man marry a widow or the relict of another, he must not be admitted

to the ranks of the clergy: and if he has succeeded in creeping in,

he must be turned out. In like manner, if anyone after Baptism be

guilty of homicide, whether by deed, or by command, or by counsel, or

in self-defense." But this is in consequence not of sin, but of

irregularity.

Fourthly, on account of scandal, wherefore it is said in the same

Distinction (Objection 3): "Those who have been publicly convicted or

caught in the act of perjury, robbery, fornication, and of such like

crimes, according to the prescription of the sacred canons must be

deprived of the exercise of their respective orders, because it is a

scandal to God's people that such persons should be placed over them.

But those who commit such sins occultly and confess them secretly to

a priest, may be retained in the exercise of their respective orders,

with the assurance of God's merciful forgiveness, provided they be

careful to expiate their sins by fasts and alms, vigils and holy

deeds." The same is expressed (Extra, De Qual. Ordinand.): "If the

aforesaid crimes are not proved by a judicial process, or in some

other way made notorious, those who are guilty of them must not be

hindered, after they have done penance, from exercising the orders

they have received, or from receiving further orders, except in cases

of homicide."

Reply Objection 1: The same is to be said of the recovery of virginity as

of the recovery of innocence which belongs to man's secondary dignity

in the sight of God.

Reply Objection 2: In these words Jerome does not say that it is

impossible, but that it is difficult, for man to recover his former

dignity after having sinned, because this is allowed to none but

those who repent perfectly, as stated above. To those canonical

statutes, which seem to forbid this, Augustine replies in his letter

to Boniface (Ep. clxxxv): "If the law of the Church forbids anyone,

after doing penance for a crime, to become a cleric, or to return to

his clerical duties, or to retain them the intention was not to

deprive him of the hope of pardon, but to preserve the rigor of

discipline; else we should have to deny the keys given to the Church,

of which it was said: 'Whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be

loosed in heaven.'" And further on he adds: "For holy David did

penance for his deadly crimes, and yet he retained his dignity; and

Blessed Peter by shedding most bitter tears did indeed repent him of

having denied his Lord, and yet he remained an apostle. Nevertheless

we must not deem the care of later teachers excessive, who without

endangering a man's salvation, exacted more from his humility,

having, in my opinion, found by experience, that some assumed a

pretended repentance through hankering after honors and power."

Reply Objection 3: This statute is to be understood as applying to those

who do public penance, for these cannot be promoted to a higher

order. For Peter, after his denial, was made shepherd of Christ's

sheep, as appears from John 21:21, where Chrysostom comments as

follows: "After his denial and repentance Peter gives proof of

greater confidence in Christ: for whereas, at the supper, he durst

not ask Him, but deputed John to ask in his stead, afterwards he was

placed at the head of his brethren, and not only did not depute

another to ask for him, what concerned him, but henceforth asks the

Master instead of John."

_______________________

FOURTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 89, Art. 4]

Whether Virtuous Deeds Done in Charity Can Be Deadened?

Objection 1: It would seem that virtuous deeds done in charity cannot

be deadened. For that which is not cannot be changed. But to be

deadened is to be changed from life to death. Since therefore

virtuous deeds, after being done, are no more, it seems that they

cannot afterwards be deadened.

Objection 2: Further, by virtuous deeds done in charity, man merits

eternal life. But to take away the reward from one who has merited it

is an injustice, which cannot be ascribed to God. Therefore it is not

possible for virtuous deeds done in charity to be deadened by a

subsequent sin.

Objection 3: Further, the strong is not corrupted by the weak. Now works

of charity are stronger than any sins, because, as it is written