가톨릭 신앙생활 Q&A 코너
|
Ia IIae q62 향주덕들 (대신덕들) < 덕들 [신학대전여행] |
|---|
|
2011-08-09 ㅣ No.1092 신학 대전 여행 Ia q62. The Theological Virtues
62. 향주덕들 (대신덕들)
1. The supernatural virtues which guide and direct us to God are called theological virtues. These are faith, hope, charity.
1. 우리를 하느님께로 인도하며 그리고 향하게 하는 초자연적 덕(supernatural virtues)들은 향주덕(theological virtues, 대신덕)들이라고 불립니다. 이들은 믿음(faith, 신앙, 신덕), 희망(hope, 망덕), 사랑(charity, 애덕)을 말합니다.
2. These theological virtues are not acquired by any act or effort of man. They are supernaturally infused; they are poured into the soul by almighty God. The existence and nature of these virtues are made known to us by divine revelation. Hence these virtues are essentially distinct from the moral and intellectual virtues. The theological virtues are supernaturally infused; the moral and intellectual virtues are acquired. And we must be careful to distinguish the supernatural theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity, from the natural virtues which are known by the same names.
2. 이들 향주덕(대신덕)들은 사람의 어떤 행위 혹은 노력에 의하여 습득되지 않습니다. 그들은 초자연적으로 주입되며(infused); 그리고 그들은 전능하신 하느님에 의하여 [사람의] 영혼 안쪽으로 부어집니다. 이들 덕들의 존재 및 본성(existence and nature)은 하느님의 계시(divine revelation)에 의하여 우리에게 알려집니다. 따라서 이들 덕들은 본질적으로 윤리덕들 및 지성덕들(the moral and intellectual virtues)로부터 구분됩니다(distinct from). 향주덕들은 초자연적으로 주입되며, 그리고 윤리덕들 및 지성덕들은 습득됩니다. 그리고 우리는 믿음(faith, 신앙, 신덕), 희망(hope, 망덕), 사랑(charity, 애덕)으로 이루어진 초자연적 향주덕(the supernatural theological virtues)들을 동일한 이름들에 의하여 알려져 있는 자연덕(the natural virtues)들로부터 구분하기 위하여 유의하여야 합니다.
-----
3. St. Paul says (I Cor. 13:13), "Now, there remain faith, hope, charity, these three." Faith enlightens the intellect by imparting knowledge of supernatural truths. Hope directs the will to its supernatural last end as to something that requires effort and cooperation with grace, but as something attainable. Charity unites the will with God, its end and object; charity sets the soul into the love and friendship of God.
3. 성 바오로(St. Paul)은 "이제 믿음과 희망과 사랑 이 세가지는 계속됩니다" (1코린토 13,13)라고 말합니다. 믿음(faith, 신앙, 신덕)은 초자연적 진리들에 대한 지식을 전함으로써(by imparting) 지성(the intellect)을 교화(敎化)합니다(enlightens). 희망(hope)은, 은총과 함께 하는 노력과 협조를 요구하는 그 무엇으로서, 그러나 획득할 수 있는 그 무엇으로서, 그 초자연적 최총 목표로 의지(the will)를 향하게 합니다(directs). 사랑(charity, 애덕)은 의지를, 그 목표이며 대상인, 하느님과 결합하며(unites), 그리하여 사랑(애덕)은 하느님의 사랑(love)과 하느님의 우의(友誼, friendship) 안쪽으로 영혼을 (자리잡아) 앉힙니다(sets).(*)
-----
4. The three supernatural virtues called theological virtues are all infused into the soul as habits; they are infused by almighty God; they are infused together at one and the same instant. Yet in the operation of these virtues we discern priority: faith gives knowledge which arouses hope, and hope tends to set up union with the end desired. Thus faith precedes hope, and hope precedes charity. But on the score of perfection, charity comes first, for it is more noble and valuable to embrace the desired object than merely to know it or hope for it. Says St. Paul(loc. cit.), "Now, there remain faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
4. 향주덕들이라고 불리는 이 세 개의 초자연적 덕들은 모두 영혼의 안쪽으로 습관(habits)들로서 주입되며(infused), 그리고 그들은 전능하신 하느님에 의하여 주입되며, 그리고 그들은 한 번 그리고 동시의 순간에 함께 주입됩니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 이들 덕들의 작용에 있어 우리는 순위(priority)를 다음과 같이 인식합니다(discern): 믿음(faith, 신앙, 신덕)은 희망을 불러일으키는 지식을 주며, 그리고 희망(hope, 망덕)은 바라는 목표와의 결합(union)을 설정하는 경향이 있습니다(tends to). 따라서 믿음은 희망에 앞서가며(precedes), 그리고 희망은 사랑(charity, 애덕)에 앞서갑니다. 그러나 완미(完美)(perfection)의 점에 관해서는, 애덕(charity, 사랑)이 우선하는데(come first), 이는 그것이, 바라는 대상을 단순히 알거나 혹은 희망하는 것보다 바라는 대상을 껴안는(embrace), 더 고귀하고 그리고 가치롭기 때문입니다. 성 바오로는 "이제 믿음과 희망과 사랑 이 세 가지는 계속됩니다. 그 가운데서 으뜸은 사랑입니다" [앞에서 인용한 곳(loc. cit.)]라고 말합니다.
====================
출처: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2062.htm
신학대전 Ia IIae Question 62. The theological virtues
1. Are there any theological virtues?
Article 1. Whether there are any theological virtues?
Objection 1. It would seem that there are not any theological virtues. For according to Phys. vii, text. 17, "virtue is the disposition of a perfect thing to that which is best: and by perfect, I mean that which is disposed according to nature." But that which is Divine is above man's nature. Therefore the theological virtues are not virtues of a man.
Objection 2. Further, theological virtues are quasi-Divine virtues. But the Divine virtues are exemplars, as stated above (Question 61, Article 5), which are not in us but in God. Therefore the theological virtues are not virtues of man.
Objection 3. Further, the theological virtues are so called because they direct us to God, Who is the first beginning and last end of all things. But by the very nature of his reason and will, man is directed to his first beginning and last end. Therefore there is no need for any habits of theological virtue, to direct the reason and will to God.
On the contrary, The precepts of the Law are about acts of virtue. Now the Divine Law contains precepts about the acts of faith, hope, and charity: for it is written (Sirach 2:8, seqq.): "Ye that fear the Lord believe Him," and again, "hope in Him," and again, "love Him." Therefore faith, hope, and charity are virtues directing us to God. Therefore they are theological virtues.
이와는 달리, 율법의 규범들은 덕의 행위(acts of virtue)들에 관한 것입니다. 이제 하느님의 법(Divine Law, 신법)은 믿음(faith, 신앙, 신덕), 희망(hope, 망덕), 그리고 사랑(charity, 애덕)의 행위들에 관한 규범들을 포함하고 있는데, 이는 "주님을 경외하는 이들아, 그분을 믿어라", 그리고 또다시, "주님에 희망을 걸어라", 그리고 또다시. "주님을 사랑하라" (집회서 2,8, 그리고 뒤따르는 절들) 라고 쓰여져 있습니다. 그러므로 믿음, 희망, 그리고 사랑(애덕)은 우리를 하느님께로 향하게 하는 덕들입니다. 그러므로 그들은 향주덕(theological virtues)들입니다.
I answer that, Man is perfected by virtue, for those actions whereby he is directed to happiness, as was explained above (Question 5, Article 7). Now man's happiness is twofold, as was also stated above (Question 5, Article 5). One is proportionate to human nature, a happiness, to wit, which man can obtain by means of his natural principles. The other is a happiness surpassing man's nature, and which man can obtain by the power of God alone, by a kind of participation of the Godhead, about which it is written (2 Peter 1:4) that by Christ we are made "partakers of the Divine nature." And because such happiness surpasses the capacity of human nature, man's natural principles which enable him to act well according to his capacity, do not suffice to direct man to this same happiness. Hence it is necessary for man to receive from God some additional principles, whereby he may be directed to supernatural happiness, even as he is directed to his connatural end, by means of his natural principles, albeit not without Divine assistance. Such like principles are called "theological virtues": first, because their object is God, inasmuch as they direct us aright to God: secondly, because they are infused in us by God alone: thirdly, because these virtues are not made known to us, save by Divine revelation, contained in Holy Writ.
저는 다음과 같이 답변합니다: 사람은 덕에 의하여 완미(完美)하게 되는데, 이는, 위에서 설명되었듯이 (Question 5, Article 7) 그러한 행위들에 의하여 그가 행복을 향하게 되기 때문입니다. 이제 사람의 행복은, 또한 위에서 서술되었듯이(Question 5, Article 5), 2겹입니다(twofold). 하나는 인간의 본성에, 즉, 사람이 자신의 본성적 원리(natural principles)들에 의하여 획득할 수 있는 어떤 행복(a happiness)에, 비례합니다. 또 다른 하나는 사람의 본성을 능가하는(surpassing), 그리고 사람이, 하느님 홀로의 힘에 의하여, 이것에 관하여 그리스도에 의하여 우리는 "하느님의 본성에 참여하게" 됩니다 (2베드로 1,4)라고 쓰여져 있는 신성(Godhead)에의 참여의 어떤 종류에 의하여, 획득할 수 있는 어떤 행복입니다. 그리고 왜냐하면 그러한 행복이 인간 본성의 능력을 능가하기 때문에, 자신이 능력에 따라 잘 처신하도록 허락하는 사람의 본성적 원리들은 이 동일한 행복으로 사람을 향하게 하는 데에 충분하지 않습니다. 따라서 사람은 하느님으로부터 어떤 추가적인 원리(principles)들을 받아들여야 할 필요가 있으며, 그렇게 함으로써, 하느님의 조력 없이가 아님에도 불구하고, 자신의 본성적 원리들에 의하여, 심지어 자신의 선천적인 목표로 그가 향하게 되듯이, 그는 초차연적 행복(supernatural happiness)으로 향하게 될 수도 있을(may) 것입니다. 그러한 유사한 원리(like principles)들은 "향주덕(theoratical virtues)들"이라고 불리는데, 첫 번째로, 왜냐하면 우리를 하느님께로 올바르게 향하게 하는 한, 그들의 대상이 하느님이기 때문이며, 두 번째로, 왜냐하면 그들이 우리 안에 하느님 홀로에 의하여 주입되기 때문이며, 세 번째로, 왜냐하면 이들 덕들이, 성전(聖典, Holy Writ, 즉 성경)에 포함된, 하느님의 계시(Divine revelation)에 의하여서 이외에는(save), 우리에게 알려지게 되지 않기 때문입니다.
Reply to Objection 1. A certain nature may be ascribed to a certain thing in two ways. First, essentially: and thus these theological virtues surpass the nature of man. Secondly, by participation, as kindled wood partakes of the nature of fire: and thus, after a fashion, man becomes a partaker of the Divine Nature, as stated above: so that these virtues are proportionate to man in respect of the Nature of which he is made a partaker.
Reply to Objection 2. These virtues are called Divine, not as though God were virtuous by reason of them, but because of them God makes us virtuous, and directs us to Himself. Hence they are not exemplar but exemplate virtues.
Reply to Objection 3. The reason and will are naturally directed to God, inasmuch as He is the beginning and end of nature, but in proportion to nature. But the reason and will, according to their nature, are not sufficiently directed to Him in so far as He is the object of supernatural happiness.
Article 2. Whether the theological virtues are distinct from the intellectual and moral virtues?
Objection 1. It would seem that the theological virtues are not distinct from the moral and intellectual virtues. For the theological virtues, if they be in a human soul, must needs perfect it, either as to the intellective, or as to the appetitive part. Now the virtues which perfect the intellective part are called intellectual; and the virtues which perfect the appetitive part, are called moral. Therefore, the theological virtues are not distinct from the moral and intellectual virtues.
Objection 2. Further, the theological virtues are those which direct us to God. Now, among the intellectual virtues there is one which directs us to God: this is wisdom, which is about Divine things, since it considers the highest cause. Therefore the theological virtues are not distinct from the intellectual virtues.
Objection 3. Further, Augustine (De Moribus Eccl. xv) shows how the four cardinal virtues are the "order of love." Now love is charity, which is a theological virtue. Therefore the moral virtues are not distinct from the theological.
On the contrary, That which is above man's nature is distinct from that which is according to his nature. But the theological virtues are above man's nature; while the intellectual and moral virtues are in proportion to his nature, as clearly shown above (Question 58, Article 3). Therefore they are distinct from one another.
이와는 달리, 사람의 본성 위에 있는 것은 그의 본성에 따른 것으로부터 구별됩니다. 그러나, 위에서 본명하게 보았듯이 (Question 58, Article 3), 지성덕 및 윤리덕들은 그의 본성에 비례하는 데에 반하여, 향주덕들은 사람의 본성 위에 있습니다. 그러므로 그들은 서로 서로로부터 구분됩니다.
I answer that, As stated above (54, 2, ad 1), habits are specifically distinct from one another in respect of the formal difference of their objects. Now the object of the theological virtues is God Himself, Who is the last end of all, as surpassing the knowledge of our reason. On the other hand, the object of the intellectual and moral virtues is something comprehensible to human reason. Wherefore the theological virtues are specifically distinct from the moral and intellectual virtues.
저는 다음과 같이 답변합니다: 위에서 서술되었듯이(54, 2, ad 1), 습관들은 그들의 대상들의 형상적 차이의 점에 있어 서로 서로로부터 명확히 구별됩니다. 이제 향주덕들의 대상은, 우리의 이성의 지식을 능가하기에, 모든 이의 최후의 목표인, 하느님 당신 자신입니다. 다른 한 편으로, 지성덕 및 윤리덕의 대상은 인간의 이성에 이해 가능한 어떤 것입니다. 그런 까닭으로 향주덕들은 윤리덕 및 지성덕으로부터 명확하게 구별됩니다.
Reply to Objection 1. The intellectual and moral virtues perfect man's intellect and appetite according to the capacity of human nature; the theological virtues, supernaturally.
Reply to Objection 2. The wisdom which the Philosopher (Ethic. vi, 3,7) reckons as an intellectual virtue, considers Divine things so far as they are open to the research of human reason. Theological virtue, on the other hand, is about those same things so far as they surpass human reason.
Reply to Objection 3. Though charity is love, yet love is not always charity. When, then, it is stated that every virtue is the order of love, this can be understood either of love in the general sense, or of the love of charity. If it be understood of love, commonly so called, then each virtue is stated to be the order of love, in so far as each cardinal virtue requires ordinate emotions; and love is the root and cause of every emotion, as stated above (27, 4; 28, 6, ad 2; 41, 2, ad 1). If, however, it be understood of the love of charity, it does not mean that every other virtue is charity essentially: but that all other virtues depend on charity in some way, as we shall show further on (65, A2,5; II-II, 23, 7).
Article 3. Whether faith, hope, and charity are fittingly reckoned as theological virtues?
Objection 1. It would seem that faith, hope, and charity are not fittingly reckoned as three theological virtues. For the theological virtues are in relation to Divine happiness, what the natural inclination is in relation to the connatural end. Now among the virtues directed to the connatural end there is but one natural virtue, viz. the understanding of principles. Therefore there should be but one theological virtue.
Objection 2. Further, the theological virtues are more perfect than the intellectual and moral virtues. Now faith is not reckoned among the intellectual virtues, but is something less than a virtue, since it is imperfect knowledge. Likewise hope is not reckoned among the moral virtues, but is something less than a virtue, since it is a passion. Much less therefore should they be reckoned as theological virtues.
Objection 3. Further, the theological virtues direct man's soul to God. Now man's soul cannot be directed to God, save through the intellective part, wherein are the intellect and will. Therefore there should be only two theological virtues, one perfecting the intellect, the other, the will. On the contrary, The Apostle says (1 Corinthians 13:13): "Now there remain faith, hope, charity, these three."
이와는 달리, 이 사도는 "이제 믿음과 희망과 사랑 이 세 가지는 계속됩니다" (1코린토 13,13) 라고 말합니다.
I answer that, As stated above (Article 1), the theological virtues direct man to supernatural happiness in the same way as by the natural inclination man is directed to his connatural end. Now the latter happens in respect of two things. First, in respect of the reason or intellect, in so far as it contains the first universal principles which are known to us by the natural light of the intellect, and which are reason's starting-point, both in speculative and in practical matters. Secondly, through the rectitude of the will which tends naturally to good as defined by reason.
저는 다음과 같이 답변합니다: 위에서 서술하듯이(Article 1), 향주덕들은, 자연적 기울어짐에 의하여 사람이 자신의 선천적(connatural) 목표로 향하게 되듯이, 사람을 초자연적 행복(supernatural happiness)으로 향하게 합니다. 이제 후자는 두 가지 것들의 점에 있어 발생합니다. 첫 번째로, 이성 혹은 지성의 점에 있어, 그것이 지성이라는 자연적 빛에 의하여 우리에게 알려지게 되는, 그리고 사변적 및 실천적 일들 둘 다에 있어, 이성의 시작하는 점인, 첫 번째 보편적 원리들을 포함하고 있는 한. 두 번째로, 이성에 의하여 정의되기에 자연적으로 선(good)으로 향하는 성항이 있는 의지의 올바름을 통하여.
But these two fall short of the order of supernatural happiness, according to 1 Corinthians 2:9: "The eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath prepared for them that love Him." Consequently in respect of both the above things man needed to receive in addition something supernatural to direct him to a supernatural end. First, as regards the intellect, man receives certain supernatural principles, which are held by means of a Divine light: these are the articles of faith, about which is faith. Secondly, the will is directed to this end, both as to that end as something attainable--and this pertains to hope--and as to a certain spiritual union, whereby the will is, so to speak, transformed into that end--and this belongs to charity. For the appetite of a thing is moved and tends towards its connatural end naturally; and this movement is due to a certain conformity of the thing with its end.
그러나 이들 두 개는, 다음과 같은 1코린토 2,9 에 따라, 초자연적 행복의 순서(the order of supernatural happiness)에 미치지 못합니다: "어떠한 눈도 본 적이 없고 어떠한 귀도 들은 적이 없으며 사람의 마음에도 떠오른 적이 없는 것들을 하느님께서는 당신을 사랑하는 이들을 위하여 마련해 두셨다." 결과적으로 위의 것들 둘 다의 점에 있어 사람은 자신을 어떤 초자연적 목표로 향하게 하기 위하여 초자연적인 어떤 것을 추가적으로 받아야 할 필요가 있었습니다. 첫 번째로, 지성에 관련하여, 사람은 어떤 하느님의 빛(a Divine light)에 의하여 유지가 되는,특정한 초자연적 원리들을 받는데, 이들은 믿음에 관한 것인 믿음의 조항(the articles of faith)들 입니다. 두번 째로, 이 의지는, 획득할 수 있는 그 무엇으로서 - 그리고 이것는 희망에 적합한(pertains to) 것으로서, 그리고 그것에 의하여 의지가, 말하자면, 바로 그 목표로 변화되는, 어떤 특정한 영적인 결합(union)으로 - 그리고 이것은 사랑(charity, 애덕)에 속하는 것으로서, 둘 다로서, 바로 이 목표로 향하게 됩니다. 이는 어떤 사물에 대한 욕구(appetite)는 자연적으로 그것의 선천적 목표를 향하는 성향이 있기 때문이고, 그리고 이러한 움직임은 이 사물과 그것의 목표와의 어떤 특정한 부합(a certain conformity)에 기인합니다(due to).
Reply to Objection 1. The intellect requires intelligible species whereby to understand: consequently there is need of a natural habit in addition to the power. But the very nature of the will suffices for it to be directed naturally to the end, both as to the intention of the end and as to its conformity with the end. But the nature of the power is insufficient in either of these respects, for the will to be directed to things that are above its nature. Consequently there was need for an additional supernatural habit in both respects.
Reply to Objection 2. Faith and hope imply a certain imperfection: since faith is of things unseen, and hope, of things not possessed. Hence faith and hope, in things that are subject to human power, fall short of the notion of virtue. But faith and hope in things which are above the capacity of human nature surpass all virtue that is in proportion to man, according to 1 Corinthians 1:25: "The weakness of God is stronger than men."
Reply to Objection 3. Two things pertain to the appetite, viz. movement to the end, and conformity with the end by means of love. Hence there must needs be two theological virtues in the human appetite, namely, hope and charity.
Article 4. Whether faith precedes hope, and hope charity?
Objection 1. It would seem that the order of the theological virtues is not that faith precedes hope, and hope charity. For the root precedes that which grows from it. Now charity is the root of all the virtues, according to Ephesians 3:17: "Being rooted and founded in charity." Therefore charity precedes the others.
Objection 2. Further, Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i): "A man cannot love what he does not believe to exist. But if he believes and loves, by doing good works he ends in hoping." Therefore it seems that faith precedes charity, and charity hope.
Objection 3. Further, love is the principle of all our emotions, as stated above (2, ad 3). Now hope is a kind of emotion, since it is a passion, as stated above (Question 25, Article 2). Therefore charity, which is love, precedes hope.
On the contrary, The Apostle enumerates them thus (1 Corinthians 13:13): "Now there remain faith, hope, charity."
이와는 달리, 이 사도는 그들을 이런 식으로 열거합니다(enumerates) (1코린토 13,13): "이제 믿음과 희망과 사랑 이 세가지는 계속됩니다."
I answer that, Order is twofold: order of generation, and order of perfection. By order of generation, in respect of which matter precedes form, and the imperfect precedes the perfect, in one same subject faith precedes hope, and hope charity, as to their acts: because habits are all infused together. For the movement of the appetite cannot tend to anything, either by hoping or loving, unless that thing be apprehended by the sense or by the intellect. Now it is by faith that the intellect apprehends the object of hope and love. Hence in the order of generation, faith precedes hope and charity. In like manner a man loves a thing because he apprehends it as his good. Now from the very fact that a man hopes to be able to obtain some good through someone, he looks on the man in whom he hopes as a good of his own. Hence for the very reason that a man hopes in someone, he proceeds to love him: so that in the order of generation, hope precedes charity as regards their respective acts.
저는 다음과 같이 답변합니다: 순서(order)는 다음과 같이 2겹(twofold)입니다: 생성(generation)의 순서, 그리고 완미(完美)(perfection)의 순서. 생성의 순서에 의하여, 그것과 관련하여 질료(matter)가 형상(form)에 앞서 가고(precedes), 그리고 완미(完美)하지 않은 것(the imperfect)들이 완미(完美)한 것(the perfect)들에 앞서 가며, 한 개의 동일한 대상에 있어, 그들의 행위들에 대하여 말하면, 신덕(믿음)은 망덕(희망)에 앞서 가며, 그리고 망덕(희망)은 애덕(사랑)에 앞서 가는데, 왜냐하면 습관(habits)들이 함께 모두 주입되기 때문입니다. 이는 욕구(the appetite)의 움직임은 어느 것(anything)을 향하여, 만약에 바로 그것이 감각에 의하여 혹은 지성에 의하여 감지되지 않는다면, 희망함(hoping) 혹은 사랑함(loving) 둘 다에 의하여서도, 기울어질 수 없기 때문입니다. 이제 지성이 희망과 사랑(love)의 대상을 감지하는(apprehends) 것은 바로 믿음(faith)에 의하여서 입니다. 따라서 생성의 순서에 있어, 믿음(faith)은 희망과 사랑(charity)에 앞서 갑니다. 마찬가지 방식으로 사람은 어떤 사물을 사랑하는데(love) 왜냐하면 그가 그것을 자신의 선(good)으로 감지하기 때문입니다. 이제 사람이 어떤 자(someone)를 통하여 어떤 선(some good)을 얻을 수 있기를 희망한다는 바로 그 사실로부터 그는, 그가 자신 고유의 어떤 선(a good)으로서 그에게 희망을 걸었던 자로, 그 사람을 바라봅니다. 따라서 사람이 어떤 자에 희망을 건다(hopes in)는 바로 그 사실 때문에, 그는 그를 사랑하기 시작하며(proceeds to love), 그리하여 그 결과 생성의 순서에 있어, 그들의 상대적 행위들에 대하여 말하자면, 망덕(희망)은 애덕(charity, 사랑)에 앞서 갑니다.
-----
그러나 완미(完美)의 순서에 있어, 애덕(charity, 사랑)은 신덕(faith, 믿음)과 망덕(hope, 희망)에 앞서 가는데, 왜냐하면 신덕(믿음)과 망덕(희망) 둘 다는 애덕(사랑)에 의하여 활기차게 되고(are quickened), 그리하여 애덕(charity, 사랑)으로부터 그들의 충만한 전량(全量, complement)을 덕(virtues)들로서 받기 때문입니다. 이렇게 하여(for thus) 애덕(charity, 사랑)은, 우리가 (II-II, 23, 8)에서 더 서술할 것이듯이, 그것이 그들 모두의 형상(form)인 한, 모든 덕들의 어머니이며 그리고 뿌리입니다.
This suffices for the Reply to the First Objection.
Reply to Objection 2. Augustine is speaking of that hope whereby a man hopes to obtain bliss through the merits which he has already: this belongs to hope quickened by and following charity. But it is possible for a man before having charity, to hope through merits not already possessed, but which he hopes to possess.
Reply to Objection 3. As stated above (Question 40, Article 7), in treating of the passions, hope regards two things. One as its principal object, viz. the good hoped for. With regard to this, love always precedes hope: for good is never hoped for unless it be desired and loved. Hope also regards the person from whom a man hopes to be able to obtain some good. With regard to this, hope precedes love at first; though afterwards hope is increased by love. Because from the fact that a man thinks that he can obtain a good through someone, he begins to love him: and from the fact that he loves him, he then hopes all the more in him. ---------- 0 1,554 1
|
