Bibliotheca Catholicaa library of libraries
Summa Theologiae · Suppl., q. 98, a. 3

Whether the damned by right and deliberate reason would wish not to be?

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Supplement, question 98, Of the Will and Intellect of the Damned, article 3. About 3 min.

Read in the reading room → This article at New Advent

From the Supplement, compiled after Aquinas’s death from his Commentary on the Sentences and transcribed here from the 1917 to 1922 printings. About the Supplement.

Text: Summa Theologiae, Supplement to the Third Part (Supplementum Tertiae Partis), transcribed from Internet Archive scans, translated by the Fathers of the English Dominican Province. The Supplement, compiled after Aquinas’s death from his earlier Commentary on the Sentences, in the same English Dominican translation as the Gutenberg Parts. Transcribed by Bibliotheca Catholica from the OCR of four Internet Archive scans of the pre-1931 printings (Questions 1 to 33 from the 1917 Washbourne and Benziger volume, 34 to 68 from the 1922 volume, 69 to 86 from the 1921 volume, and 87 to 99 from the 1922 Benziger volume), with OCR errors corrected and doubtful passages marked, not rewritten. 99 questions and 446 articles. The two appendices printed after Question 99 are not included. Sources, SHA-256 of each OCR file, and the method are in the source record. Rights: Public domain (US)

The Supplement is not a Project Gutenberg text. It is Bibliotheca Catholica’s transcription of public-domain scans at the Internet Archive; obvious OCR errors were corrected, and passages marked “OCR uncertain” could not be confidently corrected, so check them against the linked scan page.

One passage on this page is marked “OCR uncertain”; check it against the scan.

Objection 1: It would seem impossible for the damned, by right and deliberate reason, to wish not to be. For Augustine says (De Lib. Arb. iii. 7): Consider how great a good it is to be; since both the happy and the unhappy will rt; for to be and yet to be unhappy is a greater thing than not to be at all.

Obj. 2: Further, Augustine argues thus (ibid. 8): Preference supposes election. But mot to be is not eligible; since it has not the appearance of good, for it is nothing. Therefore not to be cannot be more desirable to the damned than to be.

Obj. 3: Further, The greater evil is the more to be shunned. Now not to be is the greatest evil, since it removes good altogether, so as to leave nothing. Therefore not to be is more to be shunned than to be unhappy: and thus the same conclusion follows as above.

On the contrary, It is written (Apoc. ix. 6): In those days men... shall desire to die, and death shall fly from them.

Further, The unhappiness of the damned surpasses all unhappiness of this world. Now in order to escape the unhappiness of this world, it is desirable to some to die, wherefore it is written (Ecclus. xli. 3, 4): O death, thy sentence is welcome to the man that is in need, and to him whose strength falleth,; whois in a decrepit age, and that is in care about all things, and to the distrustful that loseth wisdom (Vulg.,--patience). Much more, therefore, is not to be desirable to the damned according to their deliberate reason.

I answer that, Not to be may be considered in two ways. First, in itself, and thus it can nowise be desirable, since it has no aspect of good, but is pure privation of good. Secondly, it may be considered as a relief from a painful life or from some unhappiness: and thus not to be takes on the aspect of good, since to lack an evil is a kind of good as the Philosopher says (Ethic. v.1). In this way it is better for the damned not to be than to be unhappy. Hence it is said (Matth. xxvi. 24): It were better for him, if that man had not been born, and (Jerem. xx. 14): Cursed be the day wherein I was born, where a gloss of Jerome observes: It is better not to be than to be evilly. In this sense the damned can prefer not to be according to their deliberate reason.*

Reply Obj. 1: The saying of Augustine is to be understood in the sense that not to be is eligible, not in itself but accidentally, as putting an end to unhappiness. For when it is stated that to be and to live are desired by all naturally, we are not to take this as referable to an evil and corrupt life, and a life of unhappiness, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. ix. 4), but absolutely.

[*Ci. P.1L, Q. V., A. 2, ad 3.] [OCR uncertain: P.1L. Check the scan, image 197, 198.]

Reply Obj. 2: Non-existence is eligible, not in itself, but only accidentally, as stated already.

Reply Obj. 3: Although not to be is very evil, in so far as it removes being, it is very good, in so far as it removes unhappiness, which is the greatest of evils, and thus it is preferred not to be.

_______________________

Also online, linked only: the same translation at New Advent and the Latin text at Corpus Thomisticum. Neither is copied here.

Source: Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologica, Supplement to the Third Part. Internet Archive scans: Third Part, Fourth Number (QQ. LXXXIV to Suppl. XXXIII), 1917, Third Part (Supplement), QQ. XXXIV to LXVIII, 1922, Third Part (Supplement), QQ. LXIX to LXXXVI, 1921, and Third Part (Supplement), QQ. LXXXVII to XCIX and Appendices, 1922; two curled pages of the 1921 volume are read from another scan of the same printing. Public domain in the USA. Printed in 1917, 1921, and 1922, before 1931. Outside the U.S., check local copyright rules. Transcription, OCR file checksums, and method: source record.