| <<<home page | index to Virtues>>> |
Conferences on the Virtues
By Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, ocd
Number 24
The Cardinal Virtue of
Justice and
Its Affiliated Virtues
Here we are with
the 24th conference in this series. Our first was dated October 1990. In a sense it seems that I just began a short time ago, and in another,
that I’ve always been doing it. You will remember my saying many conferences
ago, after I finished the Conferences on Prudence, that I was going to depart
from the “order” or sequence in which the material is treated in my textbook.
The reason I gave at that time is that so much space is devoted to
the Cardinal virtue of Justice, the next in order after Prudence, that I feared
I would be out of office before I finished it.
It appears that my calculation was correct.
The total number of pages devoted to Fortitude and Temperance combined
is 134. The total number of pages
devoted to JUSTICE is 711. Those of
you who are mathematicians know that 134/711 is smaller than 12/21. That is, it took me twelve months to cover
134 pages (I began treating of in the September 1991 conference), so therefore
I would never have been able to cover 711 pages on Justice in the 21 months
from September 1991 to June 1993!!!
To see just where
Justice fits into the overall “scheme” of the Cardinal virtues, let me reproduce
and expand (quite a bit, it turns out) upon the introduction of my author
to the Treatise he entitles: The
Cardinal Virtue of Justice and Its Affiliated Virtues:
Besides Prudence,
which disposes reason itself rightly to judge and correctly to mandate
particular deeds, so that the soul remains “ordered and directed to”
an authentic GOOD consistent with and leading to the ultimate GOOD which God
our creator desires for us, there are three other Cardinal Virtues
and their allied virtues which bring it about that the other powers of the
human soul also participate in the GOOD which Reason enjoys through
the virtue of Prudence. Those other
powers are the “appetites” of the soul. These
are “drawn” toward those things that each of the three, in its own way, perceives
as good. The “virtues” which “reside”
in each of them guarantee that the appetites “reach out and embrace” only
those perceived goods which are in accord with the GOOD of Prudence,
and that they do so “in the manner” that is consistent with the “mandate”
of Prudence. Obviously, it would be
of no profit to the human soul to have its Reason ordered to the ultimate
GOOD that can alone fulfill it, while the other three “powers” embrace and
adhere to a “perceived good” which in truth is NOT A GOOD and therefore
cannot lead the soul to the possession of the ultimate GOOD that alone can
make it eternally happy.
[As we have already
seen in previous conferences] two of those other “powers” of the soul comprise
the SENSE APPETITE, and are called, respectively, the Concupiscible
and the Irascible Appetites. It
is the former which is “drawn” by “goods” that give delight to the senses. It is the Cardinal virtue of TEMPERANCE which
moderates and restrains this “appetite” to guarantee that it does not go after
those delights of sense which do not participate in the GOOD of Prudence.
The latter, the Irascible Appetite, is “drawn” to what it perceives
as an “escape” from a threatened harm. That is, from anything that would cause the
sense appetite to experience pain or difficulty. It is the Cardinal virtue of FORTITUDE which
moderates and strengthens the soul so that it is able to endure the pain and
difficulty which are required to remain firmly rooted in the GOOD of Prudence,
i.e., a “good” that leads to the final, permanent possession of the only GOOD
that can make the soul everlastingly happy.
The overall effect
of the Virtues of Temperance and Fortitude is that a person is “properly ordered”
considered in himself alone. That, of course, is a requisite for being
finally united to God Himself, our authentic, ultimate GOOD, since what is
“disorder” cannot possibly become ONE with God, who is the Supreme and Perfect
“Order”.
The third “powers”
of the soul, (other than Reason) is the WILL (the Rational Appetite).
Even though the Will participates (by obeying the commands of Prudence)
in setting a human person “in order in relation to himself” (through the exercise
of the virtues of Temperance and Fortitude), its most proper function is to
set a person “in order” in regard to other human beings.
This should not
surprise us, since the Will is the power (or faculty) of the soul by means
of which we “love”. The very notion
of “love” requires “another”. To love
in the true, accurate sense means to be “other-centered”. That is to say, there cannot be “love” where
there are not “distinct” persons. To
BE a person means to “stand in a relationship” with some other person. When a person is “self-centered” it becomes
utterly impossible for that person to “love”.
As a matter of fact, “self-centeredness” destroys PERSONHOOD. A self cannot be “itself” and “another
self” at the same time. One’s “self”
is a “person” ONLY WHEN standing in a relationship to “another self”.
To be “self-centered” is to be UNREAL (a non-being), since God, the
ultimate, unlimited REALITY (the Supreme Being), is a Trinity of Persons.
The expression
is often used: You cannot love
others until you first love yourself.
If what I have said above is true, then the underlined expression is
false. Well, actually, it is misleading. We do not really mean, “love” in the most strict
sense when we say, “love yourself”. We
really use it to mean what we mean when we say we love some “thing” or “non-person”.
To say we “love something” really means we esteem it highly.
(Esteem is a function of the intellect). And intimately connected with the notion of
“esteem” – inseparable from it – is the “desire” (which IS a function of love,
a function of the Will) that that object remain “unharmed”, or more strictly
speaking, that we wish it well. And
this latter is called “benevolence”. So the statement really should be rephrased: You cannot have benevolence for another
unless you first have benevolence toward yourself. However, the object of our benevolence when
we “love ourselves” IS NOT our PERSON, IT IS our HUMANITY. Thus, if we do not have a proper esteem for
our own “humanity” (not our PERSON), we cannot possibly have esteem for another
person’s “humanity”, and thus we couldn’t have the type of “love” for that
person that we call benevolence.
We “love” our
own humanity (not our person) by wanting (wishing, willing) the very best
for it, namely, that it attains the destiny for which God created it. And that is none other that our Intellect be
in “possession” of God under the aspect of Truth, that our Will be in “possession”
of God under the aspect of GOOD, and that our Imagination be in “possession”
of God under the aspect of Beauty. However,
we CAN desire (wish, want, will) the best for ourselves in so far as we are
PERSONS considered in the abstract, by AFFIRMING our Personhood, namely,
WILLING that we remain in the most proper relationship with every other PERSON,
that is, in the most proper relationship with every distinct “other”.
And that is exactly where JUSTICE fits in.
It is the cardinal Virtue which guarantees that our relationships are
in “perfect order”.
Having said that,
I see that I really meant something else. Let me explain: Relationships
are “spiritual” entities. They either
“exist” or they “do not exist”. So when I say that Justice is the virtue that guarantees that my
“relationships” are in “perfect order”, I really mean that my deeds
(including speech, thoughts and desires) are perfectly in harmony with my
existing relationships.
Our relationships
come into being either “naturally” (without our acting to bring them into
being), or by an act of our own volition. Some are permanent (are indissoluble) and some are temporary (do
terminate or can be terminated). An
example of a natural, indissoluble relationship would be that of kinship.
I will always be the biological son and brother of my parents and of
my siblings, respectively. Examples of voluntarily created and indissoluble
relationships are those of a sacramental marriage and those forged by the
Solemn Vows of religion. As I think
about it, it seems to me that most (if not all) “natural relationships” are
permanent (will never go out of existence), and most (but not all) relations
created by the human will are dissoluble.
Before going further,
let me say a few more things about “love”. We are obliged to have the “love of benevolence” for every human
being, really for every other PERSON. We
are “naturally” related to every other human being (and each of them to us)
because we are descended from the same First Parents. We are also “naturally” related to the Divine
Persons. God the Father is our Creator. And so, “naturally”, the Eternal Word and the
Holy Spirit are also our Creators, since They do all things together.
However, the Most
Holy Trinity was not satisfied with just being related to us as an artisan
is related to the articles he fashions. God,
the Trinity of persons, also wanted to be “personally” related to each one
of us. But to do that, He had to create
us “Persons.” (Surely that
is why “male and female” he created us!)
Then again, were we not PERSONS, in no way could we be His image and
likeness. Thus He is also “naturally”
related to all human beings as their GOD, even though many are not aware of
Him, and that was the basis of His COVENANT with His chosen people.
But that still
was not enough for the Divine Persons of the Holy Trinity. BY GRACE, God the Father extended to
us the invitation to be members of His FAMILY.
He would be our Father by spiritual adoption. God the Son (Jesus) would be our Brother (by nature and by Grace)
and more: our Saviour and the Spouse
of our souls. God the Holy Spirit
would be related to us as Sanctifier, as “generator” of the Life of Grace
in us that causes us TO BE God’s children by adoption.
Therefore these
are more important reasons why we must have the love of benevolence for all
human beings: We owe them “esteem”
not only as creatures of God, but also because, if they are not already our
brothers and sisters in the family of God by Sanctifying Grace, they have
the potential or capacity of being such.
There is, however,
a different kind of “love” which, for lack of a name, I will call “unitive
love”. This kind of love certainly
includes “benevolence”, but goes beyond it.
All of our “natural” relationships are “shared” relationships. (Even our being an only child means
we are the son or daughter of a mother and a father). But there is some mysterious quality about
the human person that requires that it enter into an “exclusive” relationship,
that is, one that is shared with only one other. On the human level, that “only one other” must
be a person who in some sense “complements” our specific humanity in such
a way that in virtue of this “exclusive relationship” the two terms of the
relationship form a “new being”. This
is “other-centered-ness” in the most perfect sense; each term of the relationship
is “identified” with the other.
This relationship,
though, is the creation of the Will, or better, the Wills of the two persons
entering into that exclusive relationship.
We would not be
able to speak of “due order” in our relationships unless there existed a “hierarchy”
in our relationships. That is to say,
we “stand in closer relationship to” certain individuals, for one reason
or another, than we do to others. Thus
the obligation to “have benevolence” is stronger in regard to some than it
is to others. The relations that bind
us to God, a Trinity of persons, is one that is the absolute closest for all
of us. Thus we are obliged to have
the highest degree of benevolence for God. (“Anyone who loves father or mother, wife or children, brother or
sister more than Me, is not worthy of Me,” Jesus reminds us). Thus that divine relationship always takes
precedence over every mere human relationship.
Yet an amazing thing is true about loving God with a love of benevolence
that surpasses all others; it coincides with the highest “love” we can have
for any and all human “others”, even for that “other” person whom we may love
with that exclusive “unitive” love mentioned above.
A corollary to that would be: the
highest form of benevolence that can be directed to any and all human “others”
is to desire that each of them attain to “unitive love” of God, Who, in virtue
of His Divinity, is the only one who “completes us”. He created us in such a way that we are not
our true “selves” until we are completed by Him as Supreme Truth, Supreme
Good, and Supreme Beauty.
The Virtue of
Justice speaks to all of the above.
- - - - - -
My author proposes
to treat of the subject under six HEADINGS. They are: 1. Justice in General, 2. Legal Justice, 3. Commutative
Justice, 4. Distributive Justice, 5. The Virtues Annexed to Justice and 6.
The Commandments to Do Justice. I
don’t expect to be able to cover all the material the author does, for I will
be selective for one reason or another. Nevertheless,
I will include here the subheadings of each of the above in outline form.
I.
Justice in General
A. Justice
considered in itself
B. Rights,
the object of Justice
1. Rights,
in General
2. The
Kinds of Rights
3. The
Object of Rights and of Dominion
4. The
Subject of Rights and of Dominion
C. Injustice
and Injury in general
D. The
Division of Justice, that is, Its Integral, Subjective and Potential Parts
II.
Legal Justice
A. Pursuit
of the Common Good
B. Management
of the Common Good
C. Defense
of the Common Good
III.
Commutative Justice
A. Its
proper Act: Restitution in general
B. Justice
and Injustice in Involuntary Exchanges
1. Internal
Goods of Soul and Body
2. Conjugal
Goods
3. External
Goods
4. Reputation
and Honor
C. Justice
and Injustice in Voluntary Exchanges: Contracts
1. Contracts
in General
2. Unilateral
Contracts
3. Bilateral,
Mutually Binding Contracts
4. Bilateral,
Gratuitous Contracts
5. Contracts
Subject to Chance (Risk)
6. Subsidiary
Contracts
IV.
Distributive Justice
A. Judgment: The Primary and Formal Act of Distributive
Justice
B. Justice
and Injustice in the Distribution of Benefits
C. Justice
and Injustice in the Distribution of Responsibilities
D. Justice
and Injustice in Public Judgments.
V.
The Virtues Annexed to Justice
A. Religion
Considered in Itself
B. Acts
of Religion
C. Sins
Against the Virtue of Religion
D. Piety
and Observance
E. Truth
F. The
Other Virtues Annexed to Justice: Gratitude,
Vindication, Liberality, Affability, Equity, and Gift of Piety
VI.
The Commandments of Justice
In
a footnote to the above, the author assures us that this outline indicates
only the major divisions. I guess
that means that there will be further subdivisions of these here indicated.
The
introduction to the tract on justice concludes with a brief paragraph entitled,
“The Importance of this Treatise”. He
states:
A
Treatise on Justice stands out above all others, because of both 1. Its amplitude, since it has to do with
the Cardinal virtue which, among all the pure moral virtues, is most important
in the field of morality: upon it
almost all of social and moral life depends, for as St. Thomas says, the ten
Commandments all have to do with Justice, and 2. Its difficulty,
since it considers questions that are very problematic, and nevertheless of
great moment, especially in these our times (he wrote prior to 1946), when
the means by which we can communicate among ourselves have become more numerous,
more intricate and more diversified.
| <<<home page | index to Virtues>>> |
* * * * * * * * * * *
MISSION STATEMENT: This web site was created for the purpose of completing the work of Fr. Bruno Cocuzzi, O.C.D These conferences may be reproduced for private use only. Publication of this material is forbidden without permission of the Father Provincial for the Discalced Carmelites, Holy Hill, 1525 Carmel Rd., Hubertus, WI 53033-9770.