Selections from Three Works. Francisco Suárez

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ I have enjoyed your exceedingly generous benevolence and beneficence toward me, a generosity so great, and of so many years’ duration, a generosity expressed in your speech and made public in your deeds, that there is no need for me to make it known by my own proclamation. For in truth, you have always given—and still give, most lovingly—such signal proofs of your good will toward me, that no one in all Portugal, so it would seem, can have failed to witness, directly or by hearsay, your beneficent friendliness in my behalf. Therefore, reason demands and even insists that I should strive to emulate this kindness which you lavish upon me, although in truth, its magnitude is such that I am unable to make an equal return.

      Accept, then, most illustrious Bishop, the gift of this little book. Although it is unworthy of the love and benevolence bestowed by you upon me and upon our Society; although indeed, it cannot worthily repay you the many debts and favours by which we, who were already your debtors, are so bound that we are unable to render you full payment for them, in spite of the fact that we truly desire to do so; nevertheless, this gift can certainly be the evidence of a most grateful heart, and a memorial of my entire good will toward you and all yours. This is your book because it was brought to light at your bidding and under your leadership. Since, then, it came from you, let it return to you. And even as it first saw the light under so happy a star, may it thus dwell for ever under that same

      [print edition page 10]

      star, a token of my affection for you. It is yours, being your due for many reasons, although it is an insufficient and unequal repayment. May you, then, defend the work as your own, with that potent authority which you possess; may you accord it that patronage for which you are so rarely distinguished; and may you shed lustre upon it with your own bright renown. For so your courteousness demands, your kindness promises, and my reverence for you deserves.

      [print edition page 11]

      A Treatise on Laws and God the Lawgiver

PREFACE

      Setting Forth the Subject and Plan of the Whole Work

      It need not surprise anyone that it should occur to a professional theologian to take up the discussion of laws. For the eminence of theology, derived as it is from its most eminent subject-matter, precludes all reason for wonder. Surely, if the question is rightly examined, it will be evident that a treatise on laws is so included within the range of theology, that the theologian cannot exhaust his subject unless he tarries for a time in the study of laws. For just as theologians should contemplate God on many other grounds, so also should they contemplate Him on this ground: that He is the last end toward Whom rational creatures tend and in Whom their sole felicity consists. It follows, then, that the sacred science has this last end in view, and that it also sets forth the way to attain that end; since God is not only the end, and (as it were) the goal, towards which all intellectual creatures tend, but also the cause of that goal’s attainment. For He directs His creatures, and, having shown the way, leads them to Himself. Moreover, He checks them with admonitions, that they may not stray from the path of righteousness, and when they do stray from it, by His ineffable providence He recalls them and shepherds them back, enlightening them by His teaching, admonishing them with His counsels, impelling them by His laws and, above all, succouring them with the aid of His grace; so that Isaias most justly exclaims [Isaias, Chap. xxxiii, v. 22]: ‘the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our king: he will save us’.1

      [print edition page 12]

      Since, then, the way of this salvation lies in free actions and in moral rectitude—which rectitude in turn depends to a great extent upon law as the rule of human actions2—it follows thence that the study of laws becomes a large division of theology; and when the sacred science treats of law, that science surely regards no other object than God Himself as Lawgiver.

      All this is very well (someone may argue), if the theologian, keeping within the bounds of divine laws, does not invade the domain of human laws, which both the moral philosophers, and the professors of canon and civil law, may very justly claim as their own province. For if the theologian treats of laws only in so far as they are derived from God as Lawgiver, then surely he will be discharging an alien function, if he turns aside to discuss other legislators. Moreover, since theology is a supernatural science, it should be forbidden to descend to those matters which have their source in nature and in no way rise above her. If this be not true, then the natural philosopher may also study divine laws, in addition to natural laws; and the professors of Roman, or even of Pontifical law, may usurp for themselves the lessons of the divine laws; a supposition which is clearly opposed to an harmonious division of the sciences.

      These considerations, however, are not of great moment and may be disposed of almost by a single word, if one reflects that, even as all paternity comes from God, so, too, does [the power of] every legislator, and that the authority of all laws must ultimately be ascribed to Him. For truly, if a law be divine, it flows directly from Him; if, on the other hand, it be human, that law is surely ordained by man, acting as God’s minister and vicar, in accordance with the testimony of the Apostle in his Epistle to the Romans [Chap. xiii].3 Hence, it is not without cause that, from this

      [print edition page 13]

      standpoint, at least, a discussion of all laws should fall within the scope of the faculty of theology. For, in view of the fact that it pertains to theology to look upon God as Lawgiver, and since God is the Universal Lawgiver, either through the mediation of a deputy, or by the immediate action of His own virtue (to use the terminology of the philosophers), this same sacred science must of necessity deal with all laws.

      Moreover, it is a theological function to take thought for the consciences of men in this life, and rectitude of conscience rests upon the observance of laws, just as perversion of conscience rests upon their violation; for any law whatsoever is a rule which leads to eternal salvation if it is obeyed as it should be, and to the loss of that salvation if it is violated. Hence, the study of law as binding upon the conscience will also pertain to the province of the theologian.

      Finally, the Catholic faith teaches not only how far we must obey God when He commands in the supernatural order; it teaches also what nature forbids, commands, or permits; furthermore, it clearly reveals to us the extent to which we must submit to the higher powers (in the words of Paul) and, indeed, the extent to which we must observe both ecclesiastical and secular laws. From these foundations of the faith, then, it is for the theologian to deduce what should be held, with respect to this or that system of laws.

      One may understand, in this connexion, how theology fulfils the function in question without any imperfection or confusion; that is to say, it treats of law by the light of a higher inspiration. For, in the first place, the moral philosophers discuss many points relating to law. Thus, Plato wrote twelve books on the subject, compressed approximately into three, by Cicero.4 Aristotle, indeed, while he did not leave any work dealing strictly with laws, did write a great deal on that subject, here and there, throughout his works on morals;5 as did Seneca, Plutarch and others.6

      [print edition page 14]

      It would seem, however, that these philosophers recorded only the principles of jurisprudence. For their treatment was almost entirely limited to those human laws which help to keep a commonwealth or state in justice and in peace; and, at most, they touched somewhat upon natural law in so far as it can be made known by human reason and serves as guide for the moral rectitude of acquired virtues. The [Roman] emperors, too, adopted very nearly the same principle in establishing their laws; as did the other framers of civil laws; for, using philosophy as a foundation, they deduced therefrom civil laws which were in accord with reason. Wherefore, Cicero (On Laws, Bk. I [, chap. xxii, § 58]) makes a particular effort to confirm the statement that jurisprudence should be derived from the very springs of philosophy. Ulpian agrees with this (Digest, I. i. 1, § 1), when he says: ‘We strive […] for a true and not a simulated philosophy’. It follows thence that civil СКАЧАТЬ