Articulus I
Whether the Beatitudes Differ from the Virtues and Gifts?
Arg. 1 Objection 1
Ad primum sic proceditur. Videtur quod beatitudines a virtutibus et donis non distinguantur. Augustinus enim, in libro de Serm. Dom. in monte, attribuit beatitudines in Matthaeo enumeratas, donis spiritus sancti, Ambrosius autem, super Lucam, attribuit beatitudines ibi enumeratas quatuor virtutibus cardinalibus. Ergo beatitudines non distinguuntur a virtutibus et donis.
It would seem that the beatitudes do not differ from the virtues and gifts. For Augustine (De Serm. Dom. in Monte i, 4) assigns the beatitudes recited by Matthew (v 3, seqq.) to the gifts of the Holy Ghost; and Ambrose in his commentary on Luke 6:20, seqq., ascribes the beatitudes mentioned there, to the four cardinal virtues. Therefore the beatitudes do not differ from the virtues and gifts.
Arg. 2 Objection 2
Praeterea, humanae voluntatis non est nisi duplex regula, scilicet ratio, et lex aeterna, ut supra habitum est. Sed virtutes perficiunt hominem in ordine ad rationem; dona autem in ordine ad legem aeternam spiritus sancti, ut ex dictis patet. Ergo non potest esse aliquid aliud pertinens ad rectitudinem voluntatis humanae, praeter virtutes et dona. Non ergo beatitudines ab eis distinguuntur.
Further, there are but two rules of the human will: the reason and the eternal law, as stated above (Q. 19, A. 3; Q. 21, A. 1). Now the virtues perfect man in relation to reason; while the gifts perfect him in relation to the eternal law of the Holy Ghost, as is clear from what has been said (Q. 68, AA. 1, 3, seqq.). Therefore there cannot be anything else pertaining to the rectitude of the human will, besides the virtues and gifts. Therefore the beatitudes do not differ from them.
Arg. 3 Objection 3
Praeterea, in enumeratione beatitudinum ponitur mititas, et iustitia, et misericordia; quae dicuntur esse quaedam virtutes. Ergo beatitudines non distinguuntur a virtutibus et donis.
Further, among the beatitudes are included meekness, justice, and mercy, which are said to be virtues. Therefore the beatitudes do not differ from the virtues and gifts.
Sed contra On the contrary
Sed contra est quod quaedam enumerantur inter beatitudines, quae nec sunt virtutes nec dona; sicut paupertas, et luctus, et pax. Differunt ergo beatitudines et a virtutibus et a donis.
On the contrary, Certain things are included among the beatitudes, that are neither virtues nor gifts, e.g. poverty, mourning, and peace. Therefore the beatitudes differ from the virtues and gifts.
Respondeo I answer that
Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut supra dictum est, beatitudo est ultimus finis humanae vitae. Dicitur autem aliquis iam finem habere, propter spem finis obtinendi, unde et philosophus dicit, in I Ethic., quod pueri dicuntur beati propter spem; et apostolus dicit, Rom. VIII, spe salvi facti sumus. Spes autem de fine consequendo insurgit ex hoc quod aliquis convenienter movetur ad finem, et appropinquat ad ipsum, quod quidem fit per aliquam actionem. Ad finem autem beatitudinis movetur aliquis et appropinquat per operationes virtutum; et praecipue per operationes donorum, si loquamur de beatitudine aeterna, ad quam ratio non sufficit, sed in eam inducit spiritus sanctus, ad cuius obedientiam et sequelam per dona perficimur. Et ideo beatitudines distinguuntur quidem a virtutibus et donis, non sicut habitus ab eis distincti, sed sicut actus distinguuntur ab habitibus.
I answer that, As stated above (Q. 2, A. 7; Q. 3, A. 1), happiness is the last end of human life. Now one is said to possess the end already, when one hopes to possess it; wherefore the Philosopher says (Ethic. i, 9) that "children are said to be happy because they are full of hope"; and the Apostle says (Rom. 8:24): "We are saved by hope." Again, we hope to obtain an end, because we are suitably moved towards that end, and approach thereto; and this implies some action. And a man is moved towards, and approaches the happy end by works of virtue, and above all by the works of the gifts, if we speak of eternal happiness, for which our reason is not sufficient, since we need to be moved by the Holy Ghost, and to be perfected with His gifts that we may obey and follow him. Consequently the beatitudes differ from the virtues and gifts, not as habit from habit, but as act from habit.
Ad 1 Reply to Objection 1
Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Augustinus et Ambrosius attribuunt beatitudines donis et virtutibus, sicut actus attribuuntur habitibus. Dona autem sunt eminentiora virtutibus cardinalibus, ut supra dictum est. Et ideo Ambrosius, exponens beatitudines turbis propositas, attribuit eas virtutibus cardinalibus; Augustinus autem, exponens beatitudines discipulis propositas in monte, tanquam perfectioribus, attribuit eas donis spiritus sancti.
Augustine and Ambrose assign the beatitudes to the gifts and virtues, as acts are ascribed to habits. But the gifts are more excellent than the cardinal virtues, as stated above (Q. 68, A. 8). Wherefore Ambrose, in explaining the beatitudes propounded to the throng, assigns them to the cardinal virtues, whereas Augustine, who is explaining the beatitudes delivered to the disciples on the mountain, and so to those who were more perfect, ascribes them to the gifts of the Holy Ghost.
Ad 2 Reply to Objection 2
Ad secundum dicendum quod ratio illa probat quod non sunt alii habitus rectificantes humanam vitam, praeter virtutes et dona.
This argument proves that no other habits, besides the virtues and gifts, rectify human conduct.
Ad 3 Reply to Objection 3
Ad tertium dicendum quod mititas accipitur pro actu mansuetudinis, et similiter dicendum est de iustitia et de misericordia. Et quamvis haec videantur esse virtutes, attribuuntur tamen donis, quia etiam dona perficiunt hominem circa omnia circa quae perficiunt virtutes, ut dictum est.
Meekness is to be taken as denoting the act of meekness: and the same applies to justice and mercy. And though these might seem to be virtues, they are nevertheless ascribed to gifts, because the gifts perfect man in all matters wherein the virtues perfect him, as stated above (Q. 68, A. 2).