What is one question that you think should be answered concerning miracles?
Dash down in the comments section below.
Dash down in the comments section below.
👍3
Natural Theology pinned «What is one question that you think should be answered concerning miracles? Dash down in the comments section below.»
❤2
Natural Theology
https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~SCG1 Aquinas works-Summas, commentaries on Scripture, etc.
There's nothing edifying like reading more ;) I recommend his commentaries on Aristotle for now.
👏2
Natural Theology pinned «https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~SCG1 Aquinas works-Summas, commentaries on Scripture, etc.»
Aristotle and Aquinas both see stinginess and extravagance as moral failures that arise from an improper relationship with wealth, and both emphasize the importance of what Aristotle called the “Golden Mean”—the virtuous balance between extremes. For Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics (Book IV), the virtue connected to wealth is liberality, a generous and thoughtful use of money, particularly in giving and spending for noble purposes. On either side of liberality lie the vices: stinginess, or meanness, as a deficiency, and prodigality or extravagance, as an excess. Stinginess, in Aristotle’s view, is particularly destructive because it is inward and isolating—it corrodes community by hoarding wealth and refusing to share even when it is proper and just. He observes that such individuals are unwilling to spend on good causes but may still spend when it directly benefits themselves, showing a distorted view of what is truly valuable. This is strikingly similar to people I know who are extremely reluctant to spend, unless it is for their own indulgence; even then, they require no justification, while others must offer layers of explanation to be deemed "worthy" of their generosity.
Aquinas builds on Aristotle’s framework in his Summa Theologiae (II-II, q.117), where he also locates liberality between the vices of covetousness (stinginess) and prodigality. For Aquinas, stinginess is even more serious because it is rooted in an inordinate love of money and a lack of trust in God’s providence. It is not simply a personal quirk—it becomes a moral and spiritual fault. He connects it with the sin of avarice, pointing to Scripture such as 1 Timothy 6:10: “The love of money is the root of all evils.” Stingy people, he argues, can become unjust, withholding what is due to others, such as fair wages, help to the poor, or support for the common good. A powerful biblical image Aquinas uses is the Rich Fool from Luke 12, who hoards his grain, only to die that very night—an example of how useless and foolish hoarded wealth becomes when separated from virtue. Yet, he notes that extravagance, though wrong, often comes from a misdirected generosity. Prodigals can still be open-hearted; their vice lies in being undisciplined rather than closed off. That’s why Aquinas says the prodigal is easier to correct than the miser.
Both thinkers agree that stinginess is a dangerous vice not only because it harms others, but because it hardens the soul. A person who clutches their money tightly, who constantly demands justification from others but is lax when indulging themselves, reveals a profound imbalance. They do not relate to others with charity or justice, and they treat money not as a tool for virtue, but as a shield or idol. By contrast, true liberality—a virtuous use of wealth—requires freedom of heart, generosity of spirit, and the ability to recognize that money is meant to serve the good, not dominate it.
Primary Source Citations:
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book IV, Chapter 1:
“The liberal man is praised not in respect of the amount he gives, but in respect of his giving in a certain spirit. This giving must be according to his means, and to the right people, at the right time, and for the right purpose… The mean is liberality, the excess and the deficiency are prodigality and meanness.”
Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q.117, a.6:
“The prodigal is more easily corrected than the miser, for he is generous in heart, though immoderate in action; while the miser is hard-hearted and narrow-minded.”
And II-II, q.118, a.1:
“Covetousness denotes immoderation in the desire for wealth, inasmuch as a man desires more than he ought.”
Scripture cited by Aquinas: 1 Timothy 6:10:
“For the love of money is the root of all evils.”
Gospel of Luke 12:20–21 (The Rich Fool):
“But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you; and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’ So is the one who lays up treasure for himself and is not rich toward God.”
#short_note@naturaltheology
Aquinas builds on Aristotle’s framework in his Summa Theologiae (II-II, q.117), where he also locates liberality between the vices of covetousness (stinginess) and prodigality. For Aquinas, stinginess is even more serious because it is rooted in an inordinate love of money and a lack of trust in God’s providence. It is not simply a personal quirk—it becomes a moral and spiritual fault. He connects it with the sin of avarice, pointing to Scripture such as 1 Timothy 6:10: “The love of money is the root of all evils.” Stingy people, he argues, can become unjust, withholding what is due to others, such as fair wages, help to the poor, or support for the common good. A powerful biblical image Aquinas uses is the Rich Fool from Luke 12, who hoards his grain, only to die that very night—an example of how useless and foolish hoarded wealth becomes when separated from virtue. Yet, he notes that extravagance, though wrong, often comes from a misdirected generosity. Prodigals can still be open-hearted; their vice lies in being undisciplined rather than closed off. That’s why Aquinas says the prodigal is easier to correct than the miser.
Both thinkers agree that stinginess is a dangerous vice not only because it harms others, but because it hardens the soul. A person who clutches their money tightly, who constantly demands justification from others but is lax when indulging themselves, reveals a profound imbalance. They do not relate to others with charity or justice, and they treat money not as a tool for virtue, but as a shield or idol. By contrast, true liberality—a virtuous use of wealth—requires freedom of heart, generosity of spirit, and the ability to recognize that money is meant to serve the good, not dominate it.
Primary Source Citations:
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, Book IV, Chapter 1:
“The liberal man is praised not in respect of the amount he gives, but in respect of his giving in a certain spirit. This giving must be according to his means, and to the right people, at the right time, and for the right purpose… The mean is liberality, the excess and the deficiency are prodigality and meanness.”
Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q.117, a.6:
“The prodigal is more easily corrected than the miser, for he is generous in heart, though immoderate in action; while the miser is hard-hearted and narrow-minded.”
And II-II, q.118, a.1:
“Covetousness denotes immoderation in the desire for wealth, inasmuch as a man desires more than he ought.”
Scripture cited by Aquinas: 1 Timothy 6:10:
“For the love of money is the root of all evils.”
Gospel of Luke 12:20–21 (The Rich Fool):
“But God said to him, ‘Fool! This night your soul is required of you; and the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’ So is the one who lays up treasure for himself and is not rich toward God.”
#short_note@naturaltheology
👍3❤2
Forwarded from Diet of Worms
Justin Martyr after proving Christianity from many passages of the Old Testament:
“Are you acquainted with them, Trypho? They are contained in your Scriptures, or rather not yours, but ours” - St. Justin Martyr, Dial. 49.2
“Are you acquainted with them, Trypho? They are contained in your Scriptures, or rather not yours, but ours” - St. Justin Martyr, Dial. 49.2
🆒10🔥1