Question I: On gluttony

THIS vice is opposed to Abstinence, which is an integral part of Temperance. It is defined by D. Bonaventure p. 5. Cent. sect. 25. and in Opusc. declaratorio term. Theologiae: and in Diaeta, tit 1. cap. 8. Gluttony is an immoderate love of eating. To this vice also drinking belongs, insofar as it is a part of nourishment, and in this sense it is defined by the holy Doctor: Gluttony is an immoderate love of nourishment. Under another aspect, however, drinking, insofar as it exceeds unto insanity, pertains to drunkenness, as Tanner notes disp. 3. quaest. 3. dub. 3., and D. Bonaventure here.

The holy Doctor notes, second, four differences of Gluttony from D. Isidore lib. 2. sent. cap. 42.: What, How much, When, and How. What pertains to the thing itself: When, if one desires it before the lawful time: How much, is referred to immoderacy: How, if one desires it too eagerly.

According to D. Gregory lib. 30. moral. cap. 13. there are five differences, comprehended in this verse:

Praepropere, laute, nimis, ardenter, studiose.

PRAEPROPERE pertains to taking food before the proper time: Laute pertains to the substance of the food, when namely it is in itself precious and delicate: Nimis has regard to the quantity of food. Ardenter is considered on the side of the appetite. Studiose, on the side of cognition. Isidore comprehends these two last differences under the one that is the fourth manner.

The five daughters of Gluttony are, namely, Inept Joy, Buffoonery, Uncleanness, Much-Talking, and Dulness of mind, or of sense, in understanding.

INEPT joy is a will exciting lust in taste through exterior sports, and afterward excited by it.

BUFFOONERY is a will exciting the lust of taste through carnal words, and afterward moved in it.

UNCLEANNESS is a will desiring lust in taste continuously through excessive taking of food to itself.

MUCH-TALKING is a will, by a multiplication of words, intending to preserve lust in taste.

DULNESS of mind is a will of preserving the lust of one's own flesh, absorbed, despising to understand spiritual things. The same D. Thomas has art. 5. and 6.

According to Isidore in Deuter. cap. 16. there are two daughters of Gluttony: Comessation in food, and Drunkenness in drink. Comessatio is called Castrimargia, as the holy Doctor notes in Diaeta, tit. 1. cap. 8. It is called Castrimargia from Castro and Mergo, because it plunges all things into the castle of the belly. Drunkenness is called as it were extra-Bria; for Bria was anciently the name of a cup, which was the measure of drink: See the holy Doctor, and there you will read outstanding things.

According to Cassian lib. 5. de spiritu Castrimargiae, cap. 2. there are four species. The first is to eat before the proper time, or more often than is fitting, beyond necessity, in the manner of beasts. The second is, with excessive avidity and impetus, to call certain persons, like wolves and hungry dogs. The third, to fill oneself too much. The fourth, too delicately, as the holy Doctor relates de profectu Religiosi lib. 1. cap. 36., where he also sets forth the remedies of gluttony, which see in it; for I do not transcribe them, because they are long and outstanding, contained in that source, which consult.

The holy Doctor asserts lib. 3. Comp. Theol. cap. 27. that Gluttony of its genus is a venial sin, because the appetite of eating, by its nature, is not subject to the dominion of the will, but is in us by nature, which can be in five ways. First, if it is a mere appetite for food, and this is no fault; nor even is the delight following the food a sin, insofar as it is ordered against no defect of the contrary food; for these things are purely natural, in which there is neither merit nor demerit. Second, if to the appetite of necessity there is joined an appetite of delight and pleasure in food, and this is venial sin: Third, if there is there a transgression of a precept, as if one breaks without necessity the fast of the Church, or eats meats forbidden to him under a moral precept. Fourth, when the appetite of eating is with lust, or when it adheres with excessive and formal affection to the delight of food, and this is mortal. Fifth, if it leads into such a habit as makes the whole life of a man assigned to delights of this kind, and this is near to mortal. Almost the same S. Thomas Valencia has disp. 9. quaest. 3. puncto 1., Tannerus disp. 3. quaest. 3. dub. 3.

He hands down in the Confessional, moreover, how the penitent is to be interrogated in confession concerning this vice, according to the three degrees of gluttony. First, if he has stuffed himself, and frequently, and has preferred feasting to the love or delight of God, so that doing any good thing did not delight him. Second, when he is unwilling to fast, or fasts uncleanly, drinking wine before dinner. Third, if he eats so that he may be stronger for sinning. Let him ask also according to the species of gluttony adduced, whether he has sinned too often in them? whether he has used various foods? whether he has sought new ones? precious ones? whether he has eaten harmful things for pleasure, especially in infirmity?

On Gluttony the holy Doctor has outstanding things from the holy Fathers in the Pharetra, lib. 2. cap. 12.

D. Gregory lib. 31. cap. 17. From the belly of gluttony arise inept joy, buffoonery, uncleanness, much-talking, dulness of sense in understanding, and lib. 30. cap. 15: In five ways the vice of Gluttony tempts us. Sometimes need anticipates the times. Sometimes indeed it does not anticipate the time, but seeks finer foods. Sometimes it seeks that whatever is to be taken be prepared more carefully. Sometimes again it accords both with the quality of the foods and the time, but exceeds the measure of refreshment in the very quantity of the foods. And cap. 14: Sometimes indeed what it desires is cheap, and yet by that heat of immense desire it sins the worse. An example of the first is found in Jonathan: of the second in the Israelites: of the third in the sons of Eli: of the fourth in Ezechiel: of the fifth in Esau.

D. Isidore de sum. bono, lib. 2. cap. 43. sent. 8. Let him attend to the punishment of burning riches to whom is the abundance of feasts, whose such poverty there was in hell among the fires, as great as here had been the plenty of feasts.

He adds, moreover, many practical propositions from the Fathers.

D. Gregory in Past. part. 3. cap. 2. admon. 20. Gluttony attends upon those given to it, superfluity of speech, levity of work, and luxury: but the abstinent are often attended by impatience and sadness, and often also by the fault of pride.

D. Bernard in Apol. ad Guliel. Abb. before the middle: Among animals of large bodies nature has given none so small a mouth, in proportion to the size of the body, as to man, which was done for the commendation of temperance and for the detestation of Gluttony. Seneca says: Obeying the belly, we live in the place of animals, not of men. And serm. de convers. ad cler. cap. 12. The pleasure of the throat, which is esteemed so great today, scarcely has the length of two fingers; it does not last except as long as that passage through the gullet lasts, and for that passage Lady Gluttony wills that so many and such great things be prepared for her.

From what has been said I assert, first, that Gluttony is a sin, and indeed mortal, if either one places his end in it, or omits some precept. It is proved from the Fathers adduced. D. Gregory loco ultimo, etc.

The reason of the holy Doctor is, because Gluttony is an inordinate appetite against reason, and if the end is placed in it, it is a grave inordinateness, as happens in every matter, as Valencia admonishes loc. cit., and Tanner, and D. Thomas art. 2. with D. Bonaventure loco citato.

I assert, second, that Gluttony is not the greatest sin. So D. Thomas art. 3. according to D. Gregory lib. 33. moral. cap. 11., saying that carnal vices are of lesser fault; because necessity is admixed to it, as S. Gregory says 30. moral. cap. 28.

Per accidens, however, it is grave enough because of its evil effects, as Ezech. cap. 6. intimates.

I assert that the five species of Gluttony adduced are distinct, even though they seem to be distinguished only from the circumstances. The reason is, because they have different motives in the genus of Gluttony. But moral species are diversified from these. For in the one who seeks delicate foods, concupiscence is excited from the very species of the food. In the one, however, who anticipates the time, he is disordered from impatience of delay. And the same is evident in the others, as Tanner admonishes num. 40. from D. Thom. ad argumenta, and D. Bonaventure locis adductis.

The holy Doctor in speculo animae, cap. 3. admonishes that the anticipation of those who wish to eat at once upon rising from bed, in the manner of brute beasts from bad habit, even without appetite, is grave sin, and can scarcely happen but that it proceeds from a mortal root.

Likewise in frequency he says it can be mortal, whence comessatio is numbered among the works of the flesh excluding from the kingdom of God, cap. 5. ad Galatas.

I assert, fourth, that to feed on human flesh is mortal. For thus they are gravely prohibited Genes. 9. The reason is, because food is ordered to the sustenance of human life, and therefore it ought to be something inferior in body to that which ought to feed on it, as a means to an end. Therefore natural light dictates that nothing nobler than human flesh itself is rightly used for food, as Valencia argues. It is confirmed by Victoria, for the eating of flesh is against the observance due to humankind.

From which both deduce that not even in extreme necessity is it lawful to feed on human flesh, or on the dead, against Cajetan quaest. 148. art. 2. and Tostatus in 6. cap. lib. 4. Regum.

It is proved, because of itself it is intrinsically evil, no less than to have intercourse with brutes for the sake of preserving the species, as D. Thomas indicates art. 4. ad 3. And if it were not such, it would already be lawful in sieges, which is false; for if at any time it was done, it was judged horrible, as Josephus relates lib. 7. de Bello Iudaico, cap. 8., as is had in 4. Reg. 6.