Question — Bontempi, Palladium Theologicum V · from Schola Thomistica
Question IV: Who share in prudence
FIRST a question arises: Whether Prudence is in subjects; for Aristotle 3. Eth. capit. 3. seems to deny it; but he speaks of subjects, as subjects are. For truly, since Prudence is connected with the other moral virtues, with which even subjects can be endowed, there is no doubt that prudence is in them. Aristotle therefore speaks of subjects formally, as subjects are, as D. Thomas says in article 12.
Quinam sint PRUDENTIAE participes.
PRIMO oritur quaestio : An Prudentia sit in subditis; nam id videtur negare Aristoteles 3. Eth. capit. 3. sed loquitur de subditis, ut subditi sunt. Enim vero cum Prudentia connexa sit cum caeteris virtutibus moralibus, quibus praediti esse possunt etiam subditi, non est dubium, quin in eis sit prudentia. Loquitur ergo Aristoteles de subditis formaliter, ut subditi sunt, ut ait Divus Thomas articulo 12.
There is doubt also concerning sinners; for Aristotle 6. Ethic. cap. 12. says: It is manifest that no one can be prudent unless he be good. But on the contrary it stands strong, because in cap. 5. he says that even many wicked men are strong in counsel.
De peccatoribus etiam dubitatur; nam Aristoteles 6. Ethic. cap. 12. ait : Manifestum esse, non posse quempiam prudentem esse, nisi bonus sit. In contrarium vero viget, quia cap. 5. multos etiam improbos consilio valere dicit.
I SAY, first, that in sinners prudence is false; I speak of those sinning mortally: Of this Rom. 8. The prudence of the flesh is death. And Luke 16. The children of this world are more prudent than the children of light in their generation, as S. Bonaventure notes on this passage, and in the places adduced at the beginning of quest. 1.
DICO primo, in peccatoribus falsam esse prudentiam; loquor de mortaliter peccantibus : De hac Rom. 8. Prudentia carnis mors est. Et Lucae 16. Filii huius saeculi prudentiores filiis lucis in generatione sua sunt, ut advertit S. Bonav. ad hunc locum, et locis adductis initio quaest. 1.
I SAY, secondly, that infused prudence is not in those sinning lethally.
DICO secundo, prudentiam infusam non esse in peccantibus lethaliter.
IT IS PROVED: For the moral virtues are infused, connected with Charity; as I showed in the first part of the second part, Treatise on the Virtues.
PROBATUR : Sunt enim virtutes infusae morales, connexae Charitati; ut ostendi prima secundae, Tract. de Virtutibus.
I ASSERT, thirdly, that acquired true Prudence is not in those who sin very frequently. For it is connected with the moral virtues, and is destroyed by frequently opposite acts.
ASSERO tertio, Prudentiam acquisitam veram non esse in iis, qui valde frequenter peccant. Est enim connexa cum virtutibus moralibus, et actibus frequenter oppositis destruitur.
I ASSERT, fourthly, that infused Prudence concerning one's own good is in the just.
ASSERO quarto, Prudentiam infusam circa bonum proprium esse in iustis.
IT IS PROVED, because it is connected with charity, as I showed in the place cited above.
PROBATUR, quia connexa est cum charitate, ut ostendi loco supra citato.
I ASSERT, fifthly, that in the young there is no acquired prudence.
ASSERO quinto, In iuvenibus non esse prudentiam acquisitam.
IT IS PROVED from Aristotle 6. Ethic. cap. 8. But the cause is, that prudence is of particular things, which become known to us by experience; but the young man is without experience; for experience is produced by length of time.
PROBATUR ex Aristotele 6. Ethic. cap. 8. Causa autem est, quia prudentia est singularium, quae experientia nobis innotescunt; Iuvenis autem expertus non est; experientiam enim temporis efficit longitudo.