Article — Billuart, Summa Summae · from Schola Thomistica
Whether mortal sin, as an offense, is of simply infinite gravity?
Note 1°. Sin is an evil of God, not indeed physically damaging, for it takes nothing real away from God, but dishonoring and offensive by way of contempt — not only by reason of disobedience but chiefly by reason of violation of the strict right which he has to be the last end of all human actions, as he is their first principle, from which last end the sinner mortally turns away, constituting it in a creature, as was said in the preceding article. Now this injury consists in some morality and denomination whereby the person is said to be injured and offended, not effectively and entitatively, but morally and according to right estimation.
Nota 1°. Peccatum est malum Dei, non quidem physice damnificativum, nihil enim reale aufert a Deo, sed inhonorativum et offensivum per modum contemptus, non solum ratione inobedientiae, sed maxime ratione laesionis juris stricti quod habet ut sit finis ultimus omnium actionum humanarum, sicut est earum primum principium, a quo ultimo fine avertitur peccans mortaliter, ipsum constituens in creatura, ut articulo superiori dictum est. Haec vero injuria consistit in aliqua moralitate et denominatione qua persona dicitur laesa et offensa, non effective et entitative, sed moraliter et secundum aestimationem rectam.
Note 2º. This dishonoring or offense can be considered in two ways: on the part of the act or of its object and circumstances, and on the part of the subject, namely God whom it affects and in whom it is morally subjected; for as, it is commonly said, honor is in the one honoring, so offense is in the one offended.
Nota 2º. Haec inhonoratio seu offensa potest considerari dupliter : ex parte actus seu ejus objecti et circumstantiarum, et ex parte subjecti, scilicet Dei quem afficit et in quo moraliter subjectatur; sicut enim, ut communiter dicitur, honor est in honorante, ita offensa est in offenso.
I say: It is more probable that mortal sin, in the character of offense considered on the part of God whom it affects, is of gravity simply infinite.
Dico : Probabilius est, peccatum mortale, in ratione offensae consideratae ex parte Dei, quem afficit, esse gravitatis simpliciter infinitae.
It is proved 1° from St. Thomas, 3ª parte, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2: « Sin, he says, committed against God has a certain infinity from the infinity of divine majesty; for the offense is so much graver, as greater is he against whom offense is given. Whence there was need, for condign satisfaction, that the act of the satisfier have infinite efficacy, as being that of God and man. »
Probatur 1° ex D. Thoma, 3ª parte, q. 1, a. 2, ad 2 : « Peccatum, inquit, contra Deum commissum quamdam infinitatem habet ex infinitate divinae majestatis; tanto enim offensa est gravior, quanto major est ille in quem delinquitur. Unde oportuit, ad condignam satisfactionem, ut actus satisfacientis haberet efficaciam infinitam, utpote Dei et hominis existens. »
Nor let it move you that he said, « a certain infinity. » For he said thus because it is not infinite in every way, neither on the part of the act nor in the physical genus, but morally only; not however because it is not infinite absolutely and without diminution. It appears because otherwise he would badly infer from it the necessity of infinite satisfaction.
Nec te moveat quod dixerit, « quamdam infinitatem. » Ita enim dixit, quia non est infinita omnibus modis, neque ex parte actus, neque in genere physico, sed morali tantum ; non autem quia non est infinita absolute et sine diminutione. Patet quia alias male inde inferret necessitatem satisfactionis infinitae.
It is proved 2º by reason taken from the principle laid down by the holy Doctor. Gravity of offense grows according to the dignity of the person upon whom it is inflicted: thus injury inflicted on a general is greater than on a soldier; greater inflicted on a king than on a general. And the reason is, because offense morally is in the one offended, as honor is in the one honoring, according to the common adage; and truly the offended one is the sufferer of injury, but the sufferer is the subject receiving; whence, as honor grows according to the dignity of the person honoring, so grows offense according to the dignity of the person offended. Yet the dignity of the person offended, namely God, is simply infinite. Ergo.
Probatur 2º ratione desumpta ex principio posito S. Doctoris. Gravitas offensae crescit juxta dignitatem personae cui irrogatur : sic major est injuria irrogata duci, quam militi; major irrogata regi, quam duci. Et ratio est, quia offensa moraliter est in offenso, sicut honor est in honorante, ut fert commune adagium, et revera offensus est patiens injuriam, patiens autem est subjectum recipiens; unde, sicut crescit honor secundum dignitatem personae honorantis, sic crescit offensa secundum dignitatem personae offensae. Atqui dignitas personae offensae, scilicet Dei, est infinita simpliciter. Ergo.
Neither say that offense grows according to the dignity of the person offended, not arithmetically and according to equality, but geometrically and only according to proportion: from which only follows that the offense of God be of higher order than offense of creatures. — Against is the fact that God himself confers upon the offense committed against himself that it be of higher order. Yet he is not only of higher order, but infinite. Ergo he also confers upon the offense committed against himself that it be infinite; for he is not less powerful to confer infinity than superiority of order.
Neque dicas offensam crescere secundum dignitatem personae offensae, non arithmetice et secundum aequalitatem, sed geometrice et secundum proportionem tantum : ex quo solum sequitur, offensam Dei esse superioris ordinis ad offensam creaturarum. — Contra est enim quod idem Deus confert offensae contra ipsum commissae, quod sit superioris ordinis. Atqui, non solum est superioris ordinis, sed et infinitus. Ergo etiam confert offensae contra ipsum commissae quod sit infinita; non est enim minus potens conferre infinitatem, quam superioritatem ordinis.
If you reply, that communicating infinity is impeded by the limitation of the sinner's effort — I answer. this limitation is in the physical genus, and the infinity of offense in the moral genus. But this physical limitation does not impede moral infinity; just as, although the actions of Christ theandric were physically finite, nevertheless by reason of the divine supposit they were infinite morally and in being of value. — It is confirmed. The effort of the sinner is not only finite, but also of lower order than God offended. Yet, notwithstanding this inferiority, God communicates to him gravity of higher order, as the adversaries say. Ergo, though it be finite, he can communicate to it infinity.
Si reponas, impediri ne communicet infinitatem, ex limitatione conatus peccantis, — resp. hanc limitationem esse in genere physico, et infinitatem offensae in genere morali. Haec autem limitatio physica non impedit infinitatem moralem; sicut, licet actiones Christi theandricae essent physice finita, ratione tamen suppositi divini erant infinita moraliter et in esse valoris. — Confirmatur. Conatus peccantis non solum est finitus, sed etiam inferioris ordinis ad Deum offensum. Atqui, non obstante hac inferioritate, Deus communicat illi gravitatem superioris ordinis, ut dicunt adversarii. Ergo, licet sit finitus, potest illi communicare infinitatem.