96. On Workmen

1. Titius, a carpenter, very often ceases from daily labor, because labor greatly displeases him, although he has strong powers. Hence he often indulges in leisure, and is content to sustain himself very sparingly; and, when he has nothing by which he may be sustained, he prefers asking alms along the public ways, or stealing the things of others, to labor.

It is asked: What as to the Case?

R. Titius cannot be excused from sin. For the obligation of labor is present for him, both from the necessary providence to be had for himself, so that by a licit means he may procure for himself those things which are necessary for an honorable support of life, and for avoiding leisure, which is the occasion of so many sins.

The Angelic Doctor says aptly: “Judgment concerning each thing must be taken according to the end to which it is ordered. Now manual labor is found to be useful for three things. First, for removing leisure; whence Jerome to Rusticus the Monk: always do some work, that the devil may find you occupied.... Secondly, for taming the body; whence in 2 Cor. 6:5 it is joined with other mortifications of the flesh, where it is said: In labors, namely of works, because he worked with his own hands, and he adds: in watchings and fastings, etc. Thirdly, it is ordered to seeking livelihood, Acts 20:34: To those things which were necessary for me and for those who were with me, these hands ministered.

“If therefore manual labor is considered according as it is ordered to removing leisure or to taming the body, in this way there is the same judgment concerning manual labor and concerning other exercises ordered to the same things. For it is not necessary that leisure be removed by this or that occupation; but for removing leisure it suffices that one withdraw from leisure by any licit occupation; and thus the occupation of manual labor is not in precept, this end being considered.

“And the reason is similar concerning manual labor according as it is ordered to taming the body; because by many exercises the body can be tamed, such as watchings, fastings, and many things of this sort. Whence none of them, insofar as it is ordered to such an end, is in precept specifically, although in general it is in precept to tame the body by some exercise by which deadly concupiscences are restrained.

“But according as it is ordered to seeking livelihood, in this way it seems to be in precept; whence it is said in 1 Thess. 4:2: Work with your hands, as we have commanded you; and not only in precept of positive law, but also of natural law. For those things are of the natural law to which man is inclined from his natural things. But as is evident from the very disposition of the body, man has a natural ordering to manual work, on account of which it is said, Job 5:7: Man is born to labor, and the bird to flying. But since nature has sufficiently provided other animals in those things which pertain to the sustaining of their life, in foods and arms and coverings, it has not provided man in these things, because he himself is endowed with reason, by which he will be able to provide for himself in all the aforesaid things; whence in place of all the aforesaid things there will be for him a hand, suitable for diverse works, by which he may carry out the conceptions of reason by diverse arts.

“It must be known, however, that the precept of the natural law is twofold. One is ordered to removing the defect of one individual person, either spiritual, as concerning the acts of the virtues, or bodily, as the precept which the Lord gave to man, Gen. 2:16: Of every tree that is in paradise, eat, etc. But another is ordered to removing the defect of the whole species, as that which is said in Gen. 1:28: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth; for in this is prescribed the act of generation, by which nature is preserved and multiplied.

“But there is this difference between these two kinds of precepts: that each one is held individually to observe the first precept of the natural law; but each one is not held individually to the second precept. For in those things which pertain to the species, all men are to be counted as if one man; for by participation in the species many men are one man. But just as one man has diverse members, by which he is occupied in diverse offices ordered to removing his own defect, which cannot all be exercised by one member, as the eye sees for the whole body and the foot carries the whole body; so it is fitting in those things which pertain to the whole species. For one man would not suffice for exercising all things which human society needs; and therefore it is fitting that diverse men be occupied in diverse offices, as is said in Rom. 12:4.... And this diversification of men in diverse offices happens first from divine providence, which so distributes the states of men that nothing necessary for life is ever found to be lacking; secondly also from natural causes, from which it happens that in diverse men there are diverse inclinations to diverse offices or to diverse modes of living.

“Because therefore by manual labor someone can assist both his own defect and another’s, since one man cannot be sufficient for himself in all things but needs another’s assistance, it is clear that the precept concerning manual labor is in some way contained under both kinds of the aforesaid precepts. For insofar as by the manual labor of one man assistance is given to the necessities of others, it thus pertains to the second kind of natural precepts; but insofar as someone by this assists his own necessities, it pertains to the first kind, as the precept concerning eating. But a precept which is ordered to removing a bodily defect does not oblige except when the defect exists; whence if there were someone who could live without food, he would not be obliged by the precept concerning eating. Thus therefore the precept concerning manual labor does not oblige someone individually, according as it is ordered to removing a common defect in some way, nor according as it is ordered to removing his own defect, unless the defect exists. And therefore he who has that by which he can live licitly is not held to work with his hands; but he who does not have the means by which he may otherwise live, or unless he acquire livelihood by some illicit business, is held to labor with his hands. And this is clear from the Apostle in three places, where he gives a precept concerning the working of hands. First, at Eph. 4:28, where, by prohibiting theft, he enjoins the working of hands: He who was stealing, let him now not steal, but rather let him labor with his hands. Secondly, in 1 Thess. 4:2, where he prescribes manual labor by prohibiting covetousness of the things of others: Work, he says, with your hands, as we have commanded you, that you may walk honorably toward those who are outside, and desire nothing of anyone. Thirdly, in 2 Thess. 3:2, where he prescribes the working of hands by prohibiting base businesses by which some were seeking livelihood: We hear, he says, that some among you walk restlessly, doing nothing, but acting curiously. The Gloss: Those who with foul care provide necessities for themselves; and he adds: But those who are of this sort, we denounce and beseech in the Lord Jesus Christ, that working with silence they eat their own bread.

“It must also be known that, just as sight is chief among the other senses, by reason of which all the other senses receive the name of sight...., so the hand, because it is necessary for very many works, is called the organ of organs.... And therefore by manual operation is understood not only what is done by the hands, but by any bodily instrument whatever; and briefly, whatever office a man does, by which he can licitly acquire livelihood, is comprehended under manual labor. For it does not seem reasonable that masters of mechanical art can live from their art, and masters of the liberal arts cannot live from their art. Similarly also advocates can live from the patronage which they furnish in cases; and it is similar concerning all other licit occupations. Therefore, because it is a precept, but does not oblige all, therefore etc.” St. Thomas, Quodl. 7, a. 17.

2. Lucretius the sculptor, an agreement having been made and a price fixed, promised Fulgentius the pastor that he would make a statue of St. Anthony. Since afterwards several other statues, and at a higher price, were committed to him by others to be made, he omitted making the statue of St. Anthony. But when Fulgentius complained, then Lucretius committed the statue to his friend Caius to be made.

It is asked: What as to the Case?

R. When an obligation consists in doing something and the debtor by contract does not do it, he is held to reparation of damages, and the creditor also has power to petition the judge that it be done at the expense of the debtor. C. I. 1218, 1220; C. G. 1142, 1144. But the debtor is permitted to furnish even through another those things which he owes, unless it matters to the creditor that it be done by him himself. C. I. 1239; C. G. 1237. Hence, if grave damage is present to Fulgentius because of the statue of St. Anthony not made, and it gravely matters to Fulgentius that that statue be made only by Lucretius, Lucretius, omitting to make it, sins gravely, because he fails faith in a grave matter, and is held to reparation of damages. C. I. 1218; C. G. 1142.