Sin and The Rule
Summa Theologiae II. II
Question 186 a.9
Summa Theologiae II. II
Question 186 a.9
It looks as if it is always a mortal sin for religious to contravene what it says in their Rule: 1.Is it always a mortal sin if religious contravene what it says in their Rule?
| 1. | Doing anything contrary to your vow is the kind of sin that brings damnation, as we can see from what the apostle says about widows who want to marry: "They incur damnation because they have made their first promise void." 2. But religious are bound to their Rule by the vow involved in their profession. Therefore they commit mortal sin by contravening the contents of their Rule. |
| 2. | A Rule is like a law to which religious are subject. And breaking any of the commandments of the law is a mortal sin. So it looks as if a monk who contravenes what it says in his Rule commits mortal sin. |
| 3. | Contempt for the law makes for mortal sin. But if someone keeps |
1.
This was a "topical" question; it had been raised in a Quodlibetal disputation at
Christmas 1269 (I a.20) in the form, "Is it a mortal sin for a monk to eat meat?" In his response
Thomas generalizes the discussion and tackles the question whether it is a sin for a religious
to contravene any of the contents of his Rule (which is the question aired in q. 186 a.9); though
Thomas confines himself to male religious, his comments would no doubt be the same about
women religious. The background to the question is probably to be sought in the many-sided
controversies that surrounded the early Dominicans, which seem to have tempted some of
the brethren to score points off their critics by accusing them of being in mortal sin. The
General Chapter of 12 34 admonishes the friars "not to preach that it is a mortal sin for monks
to eat meat" (MOPH III p. 4:23-4). In similar vein an Oxford Dominican precipitated a major
row with the Franciscans in 1269 by "proving" that they were all in a state of mortal sin because of the possessions they owned contrary to their Rule (cf. A. G. Little, The Grey Friars
in Oxford [Oxford, 1892], pp. 320-35).
2.
1 Tim. 5:12. Lombard's Gloss (PL 192:353CD) points out that Paul must be talking
about widows who have made a vow of chastity, and the same comment is made by Thomas
in his lectures on 1 Timothy (Marietti ed., para. 204).
-601-
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information:
Book title: Albert & Thomas: Selected Writings.
Contributors: Simon Tugwell - Editor.
Publisher: Paulist Press.
Place of publication: New York.
Publication year: 1988.
Page number: 601.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.
One moment ...
- Georgia
- Arial
- Times New Roman
- Verdana
- Courier/monospaced
Reset