Gluttony (Secunda Secundae Partis, Q. Is gluttony a sin? Is it the greatest of sins? Its species Is it a capital sin? Its daughters. Article 1. Whether gluttony is a sin?
THE HISTORY OF THE GLASGOW HOMOEOPATHIC HOSPITAL Presented by Peter Morrell & Sylvain Cazalet. HOMEOPATHY IN GLASGOW – A PREFACE. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and. Is it the greatest of sins? Its species; Is it a capital sin? Alice Joyce (October 1, 1890 – October 9, 1955) was an American actress, who appeared in more than 200 films during the 1910s and 1920s. She is known for her roles. Some Known Still Codes Part 2: Codes starting with numbers. Most stills will have a number or letter sequence, which identifies the film, and a.
Objection 1. It would seem that gluttony is not a sin. For our Lord said (Matthew 1. Therefore, since every sin defiles a man, it seems that gluttony is not a sin.
Now gluttony is immoderation in food; and man cannot avoid this, for Gregory says (Moral. Further, in every kind of sin the first movement is a sin. But the first movement in taking food is not a sin, else hunger and thirst would be sinful. Therefore gluttony is not a sin. Therefore gluttony is a sin. Now desire is said to be inordinate through leaving the order of reason, wherein the good of moralvirtue consists: and a thing is said to be a sin through being contrary to virtue. Wherefore it is evident that gluttony is a sin.
That which goes into man by way of food, by reason of its substance and nature, does not defile a man spiritually. But the Jews, against whom our Lord is speaking, and the Manichees deemed certain foods to make a man unclean, not on account of their signification, but by reason of their nature . It is the inordinate desire of food that defiles a man spiritually. As stated above, the vice of gluttony does not regard the substance of food, but in the desire thereof not being regulated by reason. Wherefore if a man exceed in quantity of food, not from desire of food, but through deeming it necessary to him, this pertains, not to gluttony, but to some kind of inexperience.
It is a case of gluttony only when a man knowingly exceeds the measure in eating, from a desire for the pleasures of the palate. The appetite is twofold. There is the naturalappetite, which belongs to the powers of the vegetal soul.
On these powers virtue and vice are impossible, since they cannot be subject to reason; wherefore the appetitive power is differentiated from the powers of secretion, digestion, and excretion, and to it hunger and thirst are to be referred. Besides this there is another, the sensitive appetite, and it is in the concupiscence of this appetite that the vice of gluttony consists.
Hence the first movement of gluttony denotes inordinateness in the sensitive appetite, and this is not without sin. Whether gluttony is a mortal sin? Objection 1. It would seem that gluttony is not a mortal sin. For every mortal sin is contrary to a precept of the Decalogue: and this, apparently, does not apply to gluttony. Therefore gluttony is not a mortal sin.
Further, every mortal sin is contrary to charity, as stated above (II- II: 1. But gluttony is not opposed to charity, neither as regards the love of God, nor as regards the love of one's neighbor. Therefore gluttony is never a mortal sin. Further, Augustine says in a sermon on Purgatory .
Augustine'sworks: Serm. Therefore gluttony is accounted among the lesser, that is to say venial, sins. Therefore gluttony is a mortal sin.
Now the order of reason in regulating the concupiscence may be considered from two points of view. First, with regard to things directed to the end, inasmuch as they may be incommensurate and consequently improportionate to the end; secondly, with regard to the end itself, inasmuch as concupiscence turns man away from his due end. Accordingly, if the inordinate concupiscence in gluttony be found to turn man away from the last end, gluttony will be a mortal sin. This is the case when he adheres to the pleasure of gluttony as his end, for the sake of which he contemns God, being ready to disobey God'scommandments, in order to obtain those pleasures. On the other hand, if the inordinate concupiscence in the vice of gluttony be found to affect only such things as are directed to the end, for instance when a man has too great a desire for the pleasures of the palate, yet would not for their sake do anything contrary to God's law, it is a venial sin. The vice of gluttony becomes a mortal sin by turning man away from his last end: and accordingly, by a kind of reduction, it is opposed to the precept of hallowing the sabbath, which commands us to rest in our last end. For mortal sins are not all directly opposed to the precepts of the Decalogue, but only those which contain injustice: because the precepts of the Decalogue pertain specially to justice and its parts, as stated above (II- II: 1.
In so far as it turns man away from his last end, gluttony is opposed to the love of God, who is to be loved, as our last end, above all things: and only in this respect is gluttony a mortal sin. This saying of Augustine refers to gluttony as denoting inordinate concupiscence merely in regard of things directed to the end.
The Project Gutenberg EBook of Vice Versa, by F. Anstey This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. Dermot McEvoy is the author of 'The 13th Apostle: A Novel of a Dublin Family, Michael Collins, and the Irish Uprising.' This passage is taken from his. A Project Gutenberg of Australia eBook Title: Only Yesterday: An Informal History of the 1920's (1931) Author: Frederick Lewis Allen (1890-1954) eBook No.
For Gregory says (Pastor. Whether gluttony is the greatest of sins? Objection 1. It would seem that gluttony is the greatest of sins.
For the grievousness of a sin is measured by the grievousness of the punishment. Now the sin of gluttony is most grievously punished, for Chrysostom says . Therefore the sin of gluttony is the greatest of all. Further, in every genus the cause is the most powerful. Now gluttony is apparently the cause of other sins, for a gloss on Psalm 1. Further, man should love himself in the first place after God, as stated above (II- II: 2. Now man, by the vice of gluttony, inflicts an injury on himself: for it is written (Sirach 3.
First and foremost it depends on the matter in which the sin is committed: and in this way sins committed in connection with Divine things are the greatest. From this point of view gluttony is not the greatest sin, for it is about matters connected with the nourishment of the body. Secondly, the gravity of a sin depends on the person who sins, and from this point of view the sin of gluttony is diminished rather than aggravated, both on account of the necessity of taking food, and on account of the difficulty of proper discretion and moderation in such matters. Thirdly, from the point of view of the result that follows, and in this way gluttony has a certain gravity, inasmuch as certainsins are occasioned thereby. These punishments are to be referred to the vices that resulted from gluttony, or to the root from which gluttony sprang, rather than to gluttony itself. For the first man was expelled from Paradise on account of pride, from which he went on to an act of gluttony: while the deluge and the punishment of the people of Sodom were inflicted for sins occasioned by gluttony. This objection argues from the standpoint of the sins that result from gluttony.
Nor is a causenecessarily more powerful, unless it be a direct cause: and gluttony is not the direct cause but the accidentalcause, as it were, and the occasion of other vices. The gluttonintends, not the harm to his body, but the pleasure of eating: and if injury results to his body, this is accidental. Hence this does not directly affect the gravity of gluttony, the guilt of which is nevertheless aggravated, if a man incur some bodily injury through taking too much food. Whether the species of gluttony are fittingly distinguished?
Objection 1. It seems that the species of gluttony are unfittingly distinguished by Gregory who says (Moral. Sometimes it forestalls the hour of need; sometimes it seeks costly meats; sometimes it requires the food to be daintily cooked; sometimes it exceeds the measure of refreshment by taking too much; sometimes we sin by the very heat of an immoderate appetite. Now circumstances, being the accidents of an act, do not differentiate its species. Therefore the species of gluttony are not distinguished according to the aforesaid. Further, as time is a circumstance, so is place. If then gluttony admits of one species in respect of time, it seems that there should likewise be others in respect of place and other circumstances.
Further, just as temperance observes due circumstances, so do the other moralvirtues. Now the species of the vices opposed to the other moralvirtues are not distinguished according to various circumstances. Neither, therefore, are the species of gluttony distinguished thus. Now two things are to be considered in eating, namely the food we eat, and the eating thereof. Accordingly, the inordinate concupiscence may be considered in two ways.
First, with regard to the food consumed: and thus, as regards the substance or species of food a man seeks . The corruption of various circumstances causes the various species of gluttony, on account of the various motives, by reason of which the species of moral things are differentiated. For in him that seeks sumptuous food, concupiscence is aroused by the very species of the food; in him that forestalls the timeconcupiscence is disordered through impatience of delay, and so forth. Place and other circumstances include no special motive connected with eating, that can cause a different species of gluttony.
In all other vices, whenever different circumstances correspond to different motives, the difference of circumstances argues a specific difference of vice: but this does not apply to all circumstances, as stated above (I- II: 7. Whether gluttony is a capital vice? Objection 1. It would seem that gluttony is not a capital vice.
For capital vices denote those whence, under the aspect of final cause, other vices originate. Now food, which is the matter of gluttony, has not the aspect of end, since it is sought, not for its own sake, but for the body's nourishment. Therefore gluttony is not a capital vice. Further, a capital vice would seem to have a certain pre- eminence in sinfulness.
But this does not apply to gluttony, which, in respect of its genus, is apparently the least of sins, seeing that it is most akin to what is in respect of its genus, is apparently the least gluttony is not a capital vice. Further, sin results from a man forsaking the food of virtue on account of something useful to the present life, or pleasing to the senses. Now as regards goods having the aspect of utility, there is but one capital vice, namely covetousness.