Section — Sabetti-Barrett, Compendium of Moral Theology
§ I. On the Object of Dominion
I say. Although man can have both useful and direct dominion in goods of fortune legitimately acquired, nevertheless in relation to goods of soul and body he has only useful dominion. The reason of the first is that, on the one hand, material things have a natural aptitude for sustaining our life, and on the other, man not only can but also is held to conserve his life through their use; besides, there are many material things whose use involves their destruction, and this necessarily supposes direct dominion. But the reason of the second is that God alone is the supreme lord of the whole man; for it is said in Deut. xxxii, 39: "I will kill and I will cause to live." Yet man has useful dominion of soul and body, because he must use them that he may tend toward attaining his end.
Questions
Question 1. Does man have dominion of his own reputation?
Response. Affirmatively, according to the common opinion; for even concerning reputation there belong to man the primary acts of dominion, such as to acquire it by labor, to condone its restitution, etc. Therefore ... Nevertheless prudence requires that he not squander it without a just reason, and sometimes he is held under grave sin to preserve it diligently by reason of scandal, of removing damage to the family, etc. - Cf. St. Alphonsus, de octavo praec. Decal., n. 983.
Question 2. Can man have useful dominion over another man?
Response. Affirmatively; and the reason is that any man is lord of his own labor; and therefore he can alienate it for his own utility and hand it over into the dominion of another. For a lord can dispose of the object of his dominion according to his judgment. Hence by natural right man can even sell himself to another in perpetuity as regards useful dominion, because he is lord of his own labor not only for some time but in perpetuity. Wherefore servitude, or the perpetual state of subjection by which someone is held to furnish all his services to another in exchange for food, is not of itself repugnant to the right of nature. - But from how many titles servitude can arise is a matter full of difficulties, and as regards practice, today among us it has no utility. - Cf. Lugo, disp. 6, nn. 11 and seq. - Kenrick, tract. 8, n. 97.