FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591  
592   593   594   595   596   597   598   599   600   601   602   603   604   605   606   607   608   609   610   611   612   613   614   615   616   >>   >|  
ction he has infringed. Nor again would there be equality of passion in voluntary commutations, were one always to exchange one's chattel for another man's, because it might happen that the other man's chattel is much greater than our own: so that it becomes necessary to equalize passion and action in commutations according to a certain proportionate commensuration, for which purpose money was invented. Hence retaliation is in accordance with commutative justice: but there is no place for it in distributive justice, because in distributive justice we do not consider the equality between thing and thing or between passion and action (whence the expression _contrapassum_), but according to proportion between things and persons, as stated above (A. 2). Reply Obj. 1: This form of the Divine judgment is in accordance with the conditions of commutative justice, in so far as rewards are apportioned to merits, and punishments to sins. Reply Obj. 2: When a man who has served the community is paid for his services, this is to be referred to commutative, not distributive, justice. Because distributive justice considers the equality, not between the thing received and the thing done, but between the thing received by one person and the thing received by another according to the respective conditions of those persons. Reply Obj. 3: When the injurious action is voluntary, the injury is aggravated and consequently is considered as a greater thing. Hence it requires a greater punishment in repayment, by reason of a difference, not on our part, but on the part of the thing. _______________________ QUESTION 62 OF RESTITUTION (In Eight Articles) We must now consider restitution, under which head there are eight points of inquiry: (1) Of what is it an act? (2) Whether it is always of necessity for salvation to restore what one has taken away? (3) Whether it is necessary to restore more than has been taken away? (4) Whether it is necessary to restore what one has not taken away? (5) Whether it is necessary to make restitution to the person from whom something has been taken? (6) Whether the person who has taken something away is bound to restore it? (7) Whether any other person is bound to restitution? (8) Whether one is bound to restore at once? _______________________ FIRST ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 62, Art. 1] Whether Restitution Is an Act of Commutative Justice? Objection 1: It would seem that restitu
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   567   568   569   570   571   572   573   574   575   576   577   578   579   580   581   582   583   584   585   586   587   588   589   590   591  
592   593   594   595   596   597   598   599   600   601   602   603   604   605   606   607   608   609   610   611   612   613   614   615   616   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Whether

 

justice

 
restore
 

person

 

distributive

 
greater
 

action

 

commutative

 
restitution
 

passion


received

 

equality

 

persons

 

conditions

 
commutations
 

voluntary

 

accordance

 

chattel

 

exchange

 

necessity


inquiry

 

QUESTION

 

salvation

 

points

 

Articles

 

RESTITUTION

 

Restitution

 

ARTICLE

 

restitu

 
Objection

Commutative

 

Justice

 

difference

 
infringed
 
considered
 
stated
 

things

 

proportionate

 
equalize
 

Divine


judgment

 
proportion
 
contrapassum
 
retaliation
 

invented

 

expression

 
commensuration
 

purpose

 

respective

 

happen