259. The Mode of Virtue and Charity in Divine Law

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Mode of Virtue and Precept (Article 9) #

Whether performing virtuous acts with the proper internal disposition (i.e., from virtue or habit) falls under the precept of law.

• The distinction between the external act commanded and the internal mode (virtue, habit, disposition) from which it proceeds
• How the law commands what to do but not necessarily from what virtue one must do it
• The lawgiver’s ultimate intention: to make people virtuous over time, but the direct object of precept is the act itself
• Key resolution: The mode of virtue does NOT fall under precept in the strict sense; neither divine nor human law punishes one who honors parents without the habit of piety, provided the act itself is performed

The Mode of Charity and Precept (Article 10) #

A more complex question: whether acting from charity falls under the divine precept.

• Thomas presents two contrary opinions before offering his own resolution
• First opinion: The mode of charity absolutely falls under precept; one can dispose oneself to receive charity
• Second opinion: The mode of charity does not fall under precept at all
• Thomas’s synthesis: Charity must be considered in two ways:
  1. As its own act: The commandment “Love the Lord your God” and “Love your neighbor” directly command the act of charity itself; this falls under precept
  2. As the mode of other acts: Insofar as charity formally orders other virtuous acts to their end, it does NOT fall under the precept of those individual acts. One can honor parents (fulfilling that precept) without acting from charity (and thus transgress the precept of charity, but not the precept of honoring parents)

Key Arguments #

On the Mode of Virtue #

• Objection from Scripture: Deuteronomy 16:20 commands “carry out justice justly” (faceré iustitiam iuste), suggesting the manner itself is commanded
• Objection from the lawgiver’s intention: Since the lawgiver intends to make men virtuous (per Aristotle’s Ethics II), the mode of virtue should fall under precept
• Objection from Scripture: Psalm 91 and 2 Corinthians 9 command serving the Lord in joy and with cheerfulness, indicating the emotional mode is required
• Thomas’s response:
  • The law commands the act (honor parents) according to the order of justice, not necessarily from the habit of justice
  • The lawgiver’s intention and the object of the precept are distinct: the end is virtue, but what is directly commanded is the act
  • Doing “without sadness” does fall under precept insofar as it follows from the love of God and neighbor (which IS commanded), but doing “with delight” as a sign of acquired habit does not
  • A military man confirmed this by saying that each time one enters battle, one must learn anew or overcome fear again—suggesting that even habituated virtues require continued effort

On the Mode of Charity #

• Objection from Matthew 19: The commandment to “observe the precepts” suffices for entering life, but 1 Corinthians 13 says works without charity profit nothing—apparent contradiction
• Objection from grace: If the mode of charity does not fall under precept, then one could fulfill precepts without grace, leading to Pelagianism (condemned by Augustine)
• Thomas’s resolution through distinction:
  • Charity as a per se act (the commandment to love) DOES fall under precept
  • Charity as the formal mode of other acts does NOT fall under precept—one fulfills “honor your parents” without charity, though one may transgress the separate precept of charity
  • The precept to honor parents commands the honor, not that it proceed from charity
  • An affirmative precept (“love”) does not obligate always but at appropriate times

Important Definitions #

Mode (modus) #

The manner or way in which an act is performed—its internal character (from what disposition, with what feeling, from what habit). Distinguished from the act itself (the external performance).

Precept (praeceptum) #

A command of law that binds the one to whom it is given. The precept directly concerns the act, not necessarily the internal mode of the act.

Habit (habitus) #

A stable disposition of the will or intellect, acquired through repeated performance of acts, that makes future similar acts easier and more spontaneous. Central to Aristotelian virtue.

Affirmative vs. Negative Precepts #

• Negative precepts: Bind always and in all circumstances (e.g., “Do not commit adultery”)
• Affirmative precepts: Bind at the appropriate time, not perpetually (e.g., “Honor your father and mother”)

Charity (caritas) #

The theological virtue of love of God and neighbor. Can be considered either as its own act (commanding love) or as the formal mode of other virtuous acts (the end to which they are ordered).

Examples & Illustrations #

Anecdote on Honesty and Habit #

Berquist recalls finding a billfold as a boy in Minneapolis and returning it (without accepting the reward his parents refused). This act, repeated over time through parental formation, created such a strong habit of honesty that he cannot bring himself to steal even when tempted—he physically cannot move himself to do so. This exemplifies how virtue becomes habitual and internalized through repeated virtuous acts, even to the point of affecting choice itself.

Paying Debts with vs. without Joy #

One can pay what is owed with satisfaction and joy (acting charitably and virtuously) or merely out of obligation (fulfilling the external act without the internal mode). The precept commands the payment; the joy is not strictly required by the precept, though it would follow from charity.

Honoring Parents Without Piety #

One can show suitable honor to parents (fulfilling the precept “honor your father and mother”) without possessing the habit of piety (pietas). The precept is satisfied; the habit is not required. However, if one lacks charity, one transgresses a different precept—the precept of charity itself.

Fulfilling Mass Intentions #

When fulfilling a Mass intention for a deceased person, one need not have good feelings toward or sorrow for that person to fulfill the obligation. The external act suffices for the precept, though charity (if present) would perfect the act.

Notable Quotes #

“The mode of virtue does not fall under the precept of the divine law nor the human law. For neither by man nor by God is one punished if he transgressed the precept, who gives suitable honor to his parents, although he does not have the habit of piety.”

“Charity can be considered in two ways. In one way, according as it is an act by itself… In another way, one can consider charity according as it is the mode of the acts of other virtues.”

“The intention of the lawgiver is about two things: one, that he intends through the precepts of the law to induce virtue; another thing is that about which he intends to put forth a precept… the act of virtue. But it is not the same thing, the end of the precept, and that about which the precept is given.”

Questions Addressed #

Does the manner of performing a virtuous act fall under the precept of law? #

Resolution: No, not strictly. The law commands the act (honor parents) but not necessarily from what virtue or habit one performs it. However, acting without sadness does fall under precept insofar as it flows from love of God and neighbor—which ARE commanded. The internal mode becomes relevant when it is the direct subject of a precept (as charity is in the commandment to love).

Can one fulfill individual precepts of the law without charity? #

Resolution: Yes. One can honor parents, refrain from stealing, and so forth without charity, thus fulfilling those particular precepts. However, one cannot fulfill the precept of charity itself without charity. Therefore, while individual precepts may be kept externally, the person who lacks charity transgresses the precept commanding charity and thus does not fulfill the law perfectly.

What is the relationship between the precepts of law and the acquisition of virtue? #

Resolution: The precepts command acts; virtue is the end toward which the precepts aim. The law presupposes that by repeatedly doing virtuous acts (as commanded), one will gradually acquire the habits of virtue. But the acquisition of habit is not itself what the precept commands—it is what the precept’s repeated observance produces over time. This explains the apparent paradox in Aristotle: one becomes brave by doing brave things, even though initially one may not be doing them as a brave man would.

How do human and divine law differ regarding the mode of virtue? #

Resolution: Neither human nor divine law punishes one for lacking the internal mode (virtue or charity) if the external act itself conforms to justice. However, divine law, unlike human law, does punish internal dispositions such as hatred or internal lust (as Christ teaches in Matthew 5 regarding anger toward one’s brother). Yet even divine law does not require that one perform precepts from the acquired virtue, but rather that the acts themselves be just and orderly.