Question I: What detraction is, and of how many kinds

Detraction is the unjust injury and darkening of another's good fame by occult words. So D. Thomas here, where the Thomists, and D. Bonaventure in the Mirror of the Soul, chapter 1. toward the middle, and p. 1. Centil. sect. 13. at the end, and the little work Declaratio terminorum Theologiae.

I note, however, that occult utterance is not intrinsic to detraction, but pertains to the manner in which it is for the most part done; for if anyone imputes a secret, or false, crime to another in the presence of others, this man certainly sins also by detraction, and not by contumely alone. But it pertains to the manner of detraction that it be about an absent person, according to that, Ecclesiasticus 10: The serpent bites in silence; but he is nothing less than he that detracteth secretly, as Valencia notes, question 17. p. 1. after D. Bonaventure, cited in the first place, and this S. Thomas indicates in his reply ad 1.

The differences, or divisions, of Detractions are taken from the various ways in which one can voluntarily darken someone's fame, as is seen in D. Bonaventure in the places alleged, Adrian quodl. 11. D. Thomas here ad 3. Alensis 2. p. question 146. member 1. Sotus l. 5. on Justice, question 10. article 1. Navarrus Manual. chapter 18. number 21. Valencia in the place cited.

Detraction is divided, on the part of the will, into direct and indirect.

It is direct when one detracts in order to darken fame; indirect, when one speaks imprudently, or ignorantly, something that harms fame. So D. Bonaventure, loc. cit. of the Mirror: the direct is called formal Detraction; the indirect, material.

Secondly it can be divided into Direct and Indirect on the part of the external act, or of the manner in which one defames another. And on this part detraction is direct, according to D. Thomas here ad 3. and D. Bonaventure in the places adduced, Centil. and of the Mirror, when one defames another by attributing to him something evil; which happens in four ways, namely, either by falsely imputing a crime to another, or by augmenting it in words; or by revealing a hidden crime, even if true; or by saying that it was done by him with an evil intention — and if this is said lightly, without proofs, it is also rash judgment, as all say with D. Bonaventure, chapter one of the Mirror of the Soul, toward the middle.

But indirect detraction, from the same chapter, is when one defames another by conducting himself in a manner undue toward the other's fame; and this in three ways, either by denying that person's good, or by maliciously keeping silence when it ought to be said, or also by diminishing it. The Gloss on Daniel 7. adds also indicating by nods, and feigning that one says it out of charity and piety — which modes are the worst; and the Gloss says these ten modes are those ten horns of the great Beast.