Contempt

Passages

Every passage tagged with this emotion in the Vela corpus. Search the body text, narrow by source or register, click through to a book’s profile to see how the passage sits with the rest of the work.

Page 63 of 253 · 20 per page

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  OBJ 2. Further, as Chrysostom [*Hom. xliv in the Opus Imperfectum on St. Matthew, falsely ascribed to St. John Chrysostom] says, “it is a greater thing to swear by God than by the Gospels.” Now it is not always a mortal sin to swear by God to something false; for instance, if we were to employ such an oath in fun or by a slip of the tongue in the course of an ordinary conversation. Therefore neither is it always a mortal sin to break an oath that has been taken solemnly on the Gospels. Objection 3: Further, according to the Law a man incurs infamy through committing perjury (VI, qu. i, cap. Infames). Now it would seem that infamy is not incurred through any kind of perjury, as it is prescribed in the case of a declaratory oath violated by perjury [*Cap. Cum dilectus, de Ord. Cognit.]. Therefore, seemingly, not all perjury is a mortal sin. On the contrary, Every sin that is contrary to a divine precept is a mortal sin. Now perjury is contrary to a divine precept, for it is written (Lev. 19:12): “Thou shalt not swear falsely by My name.” Therefore it is a mortal sin. I answer that, According to the teaching of the Philosopher (Poster. i, 2), “that which causes a thing to be such is yet more so.” Now we know that an action which is, by reason of its very nature, a venial sin, or even a good action, is a mortal sin if it be done out of contempt of God. Wherefore any action that of its nature, implies contempt of God is a mortal sin. Now perjury, of its very nature implies contempt of God, since, as stated above [3134](A[2]), the reason why it is sinful is because it is an act of irreverence towards God. Therefore it is manifest that perjury, of its very nature, is a mortal sin. Reply to Objection 1: As stated above ([3135]Q[89], A[7], ad 3), coercion does not deprive a promissory oath of its binding force, as regards that which can be done lawfully. Wherefore he who fails to fulfil an oath which he took under coercion is guilty of perjury and sins mortally. Nevertheless the Sovereign Pontiff can, by his authority, absolve a man from an obligation even of an oath, especially if the latter should have been coerced into taking the oath through such fear as may overcome a high-principled man. When, however, it is said that these persons are not to be punished as for a mortal sin, this does not mean that they are not guilty of mortal sin, but that a lesser punishment is to be inflicted on them.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. in Matt. 11.) Now they say that the female viper kills the male in copulation, and the fœtus as it increases in the womb kills the mother, and so comes forth into life, bursting open the womb in revenge as it were of its father’s death; the viper progeny therefore are parricides. Such also were the Jews, who killed their spiritual fathers and teachers. But what if he found them not sinning, but beginning to be converted? He ought not surely to rebuke them, but to comfort them. We answer, that he gave not heed to those things which are outward, for he knew the secrets of their hearts, the Lord revealing them to him; for they vaunted themselves too much in their forefathers. Cutting therefore at this root, he calls them a generation of vipers, not indeed that he blamed the Patriarchs, or called them vipers. GREGORY. (in Hom. 20, in Ev.) Because the Jews hated good men, and persecuted them, following the steps of their carnal parents, they are by birth the poisonous sons, as it were, of poisonous or sorcerous parents. But because the preceding verse declares that at the last judgment Christ shall be seen by all flesh, it is rightly added, Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? The wrath to come being the awarding of final punishment. AMBROSE. We see these men through the compassion of God, inspired with prudence to seek repentance of their crimes, dreading with wise devotion the terror of the judgment to come. Or perhaps, according to the precept, Be ye wise as serpents, (Matt. 10:16.) they are shewn to have a natural prudence, who perceive what is coming, and earnestly desire help, though they still forsake not what is hurtful. GREGORY. (ubi sup.) But because he cannot then flee from the wrath of God, who now has not recourse to the sorrows of repentance, it is added, Bring forth therefore fruits. CHRYSOSTOM. (ubi sup.) For it is not sufficient for the penitent to leave off his sins, he must also bring forth the fruits of repentance, as it is in the Psalms, depart from evil and do good, (Ps. 34:14.) just as in order to heal, it will not do to pluck out the arrow only, but we must also apply a salve to the wound. But he says not fruit, but fruits, signifying abundance.

• From The Golden Ass (Metamorphoses) (2)

  The Baker which bought me was an honest and sober man; but his wife was the most pestilent woman in all the world, insomuch that he endured many miseries and afflictions with her, so that I my selfe did secretly pitty his estate, and bewaile his evill fortune: for she had not one fault alone, but all the mischiefes that could be devised: shee was crabbed, cruell, lascivious, drunken, obstinate, niggish, covetous, riotous in filthy expenses, and an enemy to faith and chastity, a despise of all the Gods, whom other did honour, one that affirmed that she had a God by her selfe, wherby she deceived all men, but especially her poore husband, one that abandoned her body with continuall whoredome. This mischievous queane hated me in such sort, that shee commanded every day before she was up, that I should be put into the mill to grind: and the first thing which she would doe in the morning, was to see me cruelly beaten, and that I should grind when the other beasts did feed and take rest. When I saw that I was so cruelly handled, she gave me occasion to learne her conversation and life, for I saw oftentimes a yong man which would privily goe into her chamber whose face I did greatly desire to see, but I could not by reason mine eyes were covered every day. And verily if I had beene free and at liberty, I would have discovered all her abhomination. She had an old woman, a bawd, a messenger of mischiefe that daily haunted to her house, and made good cheere with her to the utter undoing and impoverishment of her husband, but I that was greatly offended with the negligence of Fotis, who made me an Asse, in stead of a Bird, did yet comfort my selfe by this onely meane, in that to the miserable deformity of my shape, I had long eares, whereby I might heare all things that was done: On a day I heard the old bawd say to the Bakers wife:

• From The Golden Ass (Metamorphoses) (2)

  THE THIRTY-EIGHTH CHAPTER Of the deceipt of a Woman which made her husband Cuckold. There was a man dwelling in the towne very poore, that had nothing but that which he got by the labour and travell of his hands: his wife was a faire young woman, but very lascivious, and given to the appetite and desire of the flesh. It fortuned on a day, that while this poore man was gone betimes in the morning to the field about his businesse, according as he accustomed to doe, his wives lover secretly came into his house to have his pleasure with her. And so it chanced that during the time that shee and he were basking together, her husband suspecting no such matter, returned home praising the chast continency of his wife, in that hee found his doores fast closed, wherefore as his custome was, he whistled to declare his comming. Then his crafty wife ready with shifts, caught her lover and covered him under a great tub standing in a corner, and therewithall she opened the doore, blaming her husband in this sort: Commest thou home every day with empty hands, and bringest nothing to maintaine our house? thou hast no regard for our profit, neither providest for any meate or drinke, whereas I poore wretch doe nothing day and night but occupie my selfe with spinning, and yet my travell will scarce find the Candels which we spend. O how much more happy is my neighbour Daphne, that eateth and drinketh at her pleasure and passeth the time with her amorous lovers according to her desire. What is the matter (quoth her husband) though Our Master hath made holiday at the fields, yet thinke not but I have made provision for our supper; doest thou not see this tub that keepeth a place here in our house in vaine, and doth us no service? Behold I have sold it to a good fellow (that is here present) for five pence, wherefore I pray thee lend me thy hand, that I may deliver him the tub. His wife (having invented a present shift) laughed on her husband, saying: What marchant I pray you have you brought home hither, to fetch away my tub for five pence, for which I poore woman that sit all day alone in my house have beene proffered so often seaven: her husband being well apayed of her words demanded what he was that had bought the tub: Looke (quoth she) he is gone under, to see where it be sound or no: then her lover which was under the tub, began to stirre and rustle himselfe, and because his words might agree to the words of the woman, he sayd: Dame will you have me tell the truth, this tub is rotten and crackt as me seemeth on every side. And then turning to her husband sayd: I pray you honest man light a Candle, that I may make cleane the tub within, to see if it be for my purpose or no, for I doe not mind to cast away my money wilfully: he by and by (being made a very Oxe) lighted a candle, saying, I pray you good brother put not your selfe to so much paine, let me make the tub cleane and ready for you. Whereupon he put off his coate, and crept under the tub to rub away the filth from the sides. In the meane season this minion lover cast his wife on the bottome of the tub and had his pleasure with her over his head, and as he was in the middest of his pastime, hee turned his head on this side and that side, finding fault with this and with that, till as they had both ended their businesse, when as he delivered seaven pence for the tub, and caused the good man himselfe to carry it on his backe againe to his Inne.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  I answer that, The magic art is both unlawful and futile. It is unlawful, because the means it employs for acquiring knowledge have not in themselves the power to cause science, consisting as they do in gazing certain shapes, and muttering certain strange words, and so forth. Wherefore this art does not make use of these things as causes, but as signs; not however as signs instituted by God, as are the sacramental signs. It follows, therefore, that they are empty signs, and consequently a kind of “agreement or covenant made with the demons for the purpose of consultation and of compact by tokens” [*Augustine, De Doctr. Christ. ii, 20; see above Q[92], A[2]]. Wherefore the magic art is to be absolutely repudiated and avoided by Christian, even as other arts of vain and noxious superstition, as Augustine declares (De Doctr. Christ. ii, 23). This art is also useless for the acquisition of science. For since it is not intended by means of this art to acquire science in a manner connatural to man, namely, by discovery and instruction, the consequence is that this effect is expected either from God or from the demons. Now it is certain that some have received wisdom and science infused into them by God, as related of Solomon (3 Kings 3 and 2 Paralip 1). Moreover, our Lord said to His disciples (Lk. 21:15): “I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to resist and gainsay.” However, this gift is not granted to all, or in connection with any particular observance, but according to the will of the Holy Ghost, as stated in 1 Cor. 12:8, “To one indeed by the Spirit is given the word of wisdom, to another the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit,” and afterwards it is said (1 Cor. 12:11): “All these things one and the same Spirit worketh, dividing to everyone according as He will.” On the other hand it does not belong to the demons to enlighten the intellect, as stated in the [3120]FP, Q[109], A[3]. Now the acquisition of knowledge and wisdom is effected by the enlightening of the intellect, wherefore never did anyone acquire knowledge by means of the demons. Hence Augustine says (De Civ. Dei x, 9): “Porphyry confesses that the intellectual soul is in no way cleansed by theurgic inventions,” i.e. the operations “of the demons, so as to be fitted to see its God, and discern what is true,” such as are all scientific conclusions. The demons may, however, be able by speaking to men to express in words certain teachings of the sciences, but this is not what is sought by means of magic. Reply to Objection 1: It is a good thing to acquire knowledge, but it is not good to acquire it by undue means, and it is to this end that the magic art tends.

• From Collected Essays (1998)

  In the beginning one accepts this as a gentle kind of mockery, but, later on, when Mr. Lockridge has become more explicit about his concept of writing and his attitude towards Shakespeare-whose greatest play, by virtue of a dialect we have no room t<>r here, concerned the shooting of Abraham Lincoln and was, unhappily, never written-and has further allowed us to read some of the work produced by his Hero, one concludes that Mr. Lockridge was in earnest all the time. This terrible, blind, indiscriminate dependence on all things literary, which operates to dignity any and all rhet oric and makes of Shakespeare merely a superior rhetorician, is an integral part of this novel; perhaps, indeed, Raintree County would be inconceivable without it. An enduring part of our myth is the right of cvci1'onc to be heard, and this theoretical right has somehow become sufficiently debased so that the mere act of verbalization is endowed with a wholly disproportionate grandeur. This is due, in part perhaps, to the national uneasiness in the presence of a work of art and it is part of our culture, our popular culture: in America anyone can do anything. The writer has, of course, failed unless he is able to reach a large audience; if he is not sufficiently 'close' to the people, sufficiently 'American' he is regarded with sus picion and dislike. We have, in effect, defied the individual out of existence. At the same time there is a lurking distrust and dissatisfaction with the product of this psychology; we arc, as a nation, accused of being artistically shallow. Hence, 'greater' and 'greater' novels, 'mightier' movies, more 'searching' plays. (We have done dreadful things to the adjective, too.) Long articles appear in wide-selling periodicals concerning our na tive talent: we have artists, too, not one whit interior to those of other times and places, and ours arc better paid. The re sultant confused struggling is further cont(mnded by the ne cessity to be ultimately affirmative. (Weekly, Mr. Adams in the Times charts the wretched path trodden by those writers who arc not.) Gloom must have a comedy relict� the acid comment must be t< >llowcd by a cheer. In a word, since a work of art, literary art specifically, is almost always dangerous, we arc aim ing at a product which will be indisputably Art, which will be resoundingly popular-and financially successful-and, so tar LOCKRI DGE: 'THE AMERICAN MYTH ' 59 1 from being disturbing, will gratify the national ego and cause no-one-cxccpt, perhaps, our enemies-any trouble at all. This is not, of course, new; it is remarkable only because the complacent mechanisms of our culture have made this attitude so widespread.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  BEDE. Either by giving them temporal gifts, or by inspiring His heavenly gifts with a wonderful grace. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. Great then is the praise of mercy. For this virtue makes us like unto God, and imprints upon our souls certain signs as it were of a heavenly nature. Hence it follows, Be ye then merciful, as your heavenly Father also is merciful. ATHANASIUS. (Orat. 3. cont. Arian.) That is to say, that we beholding His mercies, what good things we do should do them not with regard to men, but to Him, that we may obtain our rewards from God, not from men. 6:37–3837. Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: 38. Give, and it shall be given unto you: good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again. AMBROSE. The Lord added, that we must not readily judge others, lest when conscious of guilt thyself, thou shouldest be compelled to pass sentence upon another. CHRYSOSTOM. Judge not thy superior, that is, thou a disciple must not judge thy master, nor a sinner the innocent. Thou must not blame them, but advise and correct with love; neither must we pass judgment in doubtful and indifferent matters, which bear no resemblance to sin, or which are not serious or forbidden. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. He here expresses that worst inclination of our thoughts or hearts, which is the first beginning and origin of a proud disdain. For although it becomes men to look into themselves and walk after God, this they do not, but look into the things of others, and while they forget their own passions, behold the infirmities of some, and make them a subject of reproach. CHRYSOSTOM. You will not easily find any one, whether a father of a family or an inhabitant of the cloister, free from this error. But these are the wiles of the tempter. For he who severely sifts the fault of others, will never obtain acquittal for his own. Hence it follows, And ye shall not be judged. For as the merciful and meek man dispels the rage of sinners, so the harsh and cruel adds to his own crimes. GREGORY OF NYSSA. Be not then rash to judge harshly of your servants, lest ye suffer the like. For passing judgment calls down a heavier condemnation; as it follows, Condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned. For he does not forbid judgment with pardon. BEDE. Now in a short sentence he concisely sums up all that he had enjoined with respect to our conduct towards our enemies, saying, Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven, wherein he bids us forgive injuries, and shew kindness, and our sins shall be forgiven us, and we shall receive eternal life.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  THEOPHYLACT. For when several are questioning a man on different subjects, since he can not reply to all at once, foolish people think he is doubting. This also was part of their wicked design against Him; but they sought also in another way to control His power of speech, namely, by provoking Him to say something by which He might be condemned; whence it follows, Laying in wait for him, and seeking to catch something out of his mouth, that they might accuse him. Having first spoken of “forcing,” Luke now says to catch or seize something from His mouth; at one time indeed they asked Him concerning the Law, that they might convict as a blasphemer Him who accused Moses; but at another time concerning Cæsar, that they might accuse Him as a traitor and rebel against the majesty of Cæsar. CHAPTER 12 12:1–31. In the mean time, when there were gathered together an innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. 2. For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known. 3. Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops. THEOPHYLACT. The Pharisees sought indeed to catch Jesus in His talk, that they might lead away the people from Him. But this design of theirs is reversed. For the people came all the more unto Him gathered together by thousands, and so desirous to attach themselves to Christ, that they pressed one upon another. So mighty a thing is truth, so feeble every where deceit. Whence it is said, And when there were gathered together a great multitude, insomuch that they trode upon one another, he began to sag unto his disciples, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. For they were false accusers; therefore Christ warned His disciples against them. GREGORY NAZIANZEN. When leaven is praised it is as composing the bread of life, but when blamed it signifies a lasting and bitter maliciousness. THEOPHYLACT. He calls their hypocrisy leaven, as perverting and corrupting the intentions of the men in whom it has sprung up. For nothing so changes the characters of men as hypocrisy. BEDE. For as a little leaven leaveneth a whole lump of meal, (1 Cor. 5:6.) so hypocrisy will rob the mind of all the purity and integrity of its virtues.

• From Collected Essays (1998)

  But we know that he JVilllive. The star of a film is rarely put to death, and certainly not this star, and certainly not in this fi lm. The entire burden, therefore, of such suspense as the film may claim to have falls squarely on the shoulders of the Sheriff (Rod Steiger). The life ofVirgil Tibbs (Sidney Poirier) is en dangered precisely to the extent that we are concerned about the salvation of the SherifFs soul. One ought, indeed, I sup pose, to be concerned about the soul of any descendant of The Birth of a Nation, and the Sheriff is certainly such a de scendant, as is the film itself. On the other hand, it is difficult to sustain such a concern when the concern is not reciprocal, and if this concern demands one's complicity in a lie: which state of affairs, having gone beyond progress, is sometimes called brotherhood, the achievement of which state of grace is exactly what In the Heat of the Night imagines itself to be about. The film is breathtaking, not to say vertiginous, in the speed with which it moves fr om one preposterous proposition to another. We are asked to believe that a grown black man, who knows the South, and who, being a policeman, must know something about his colleagues, both South and North, would elect to change trains in a Southern backwater at that hour of the early morning and sit alone in the waiting room; that the Sheriff imagines that he needs a confession fr om this black Northern vagrant, and so elects to converse with him before locking him up, turning him over to his deputies, and closing the case. (Of course, it is suggested, at that moment and quite helplessly, the truth of the white and black male meeting living far beneath the moment of this manipulated scene-that the Sheritl is being something of a sadist, and is playing cat and mouse.) And the film betrays itself, in the early sequences, in quite a curious way. One might suppose, after all, since the film was made after the 1 9 64 Civil Rights Act, that the Sheritl might be concerned about the pressure which might be brought to bear by the Federal Government: but this possibility, astoundingly enough, docs not appear to enter CHAPTER TWO 517 his mind. He reacts to the fact that the black man makes more money than he does: which has the effect of eliciting our sym pathy for this doubly poor white man. Virgil's continued pres ence on the case is due entirely to the reaction of the widow of the murdered man; this man, conveniently enough (as con cerns the necessities of the plot) was in the process ofbringing new industry to the town when he was murdered.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  8. But he knew their thoughts, and said to the man which had the withered hand, Rise up, and stand forth in the midst. And he arose and stood forth. 9. Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing; Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil? to save life, or to destroy it? 10. And looking round about upon them all, he said unto the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he did so: and his hand was restored whole as the other. 11. And they were filled with madness; and communed one with another what they might do to Jesus. AMBROSE. The Lord now proceeds to another work. For He who had determined to make the whole man safe, was able to cure each member. Hence it is said, And it came to pass also on another sabbath, that he entered into the synagogue and taught. BEDE. He chiefly heals and teaches on the sabbaths, not only to convey the meaning of a spiritual sabbath, but because of the more numerous assembly of the people. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. But He taught things far beyond their comprehension, and opened to his hearers the way to future salvation by Him; and then after having first taught them, He suddenly shewed His divine power, as it follows, and there was a man there whose right hand was withered. BEDE. But since the Master had excused by an undeniable example the breach of the sabbath, with which they charged His disciples, their object is now by watching to bring a false accusation against the Master Himself. As it follows, And the Scribes and Pharisees watched him, if he would heal on the sabbath, that if He did not, they might accuse Him of cruelty or impotence; if He did, of violation of the sabbath. Hence it follows, that they might find an accusation against him. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. For this is the way of the envious man, he feeds in himself his pang of grief with the praises of others. But the Lord knew all things, and searches the hearts; as it follows, But he knew their thoughts, and said to the man who had the withered hand, Rise up, and stand. And he arose, and stood forth, that perchance he might stir up the cruel Pharisees to pity, and allay the flames of their passion. BEDE. But the Lord anticipating the false charge which they were preparing against Him, reproves those who by wrongly interpreting the law thought that they must rest on the sabbath-day even from good works; whereas the law commands us to abstain from servile works, i. e. from evil, on the sabbath. Hence it follows, Then said Jesus unto them, I ask you, Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath, &c.

• From The Golden Ass (Metamorphoses) (2)

  But Alcinus, though he were a man of great enterprise, yet could he not beware by Lamathus, nor voide himselfe from evill fortune, for on a day when he had entred into an old womans house to rob her, he went up into a high chamber, where hee should first have strangled her: but he had more regard to throw down the bags of mony and gold out at a window, to us that stood under; and when he was so greedy that he would leave nothing behinde, he went into the old womans bed where she lay asleep, and would have taken off the coverlet to have thrown downe likewise, but shee awaked, and kneeling on her knees, desired him in this manner: O sir I pray you cast not away such torn and ragged clouts into my neighbours houses, for they are rich enough, and need no such things. Then Alcinus thinking her words to be true, was brought in beleefe, that such things as he had throwne out already, and such things as hee should throw out after, was not fallen downe to his fellowes, but to other mens houses, wherefore hee went to the window to see, and as hee thought to behold the places round about, thrusting his body out of the window, the old woman marked him wel, and came behind him softly, and though shee had but small strength, yet with sudden force she tooke him by the heeles and thrust him out headlong, and so he fell upon a marvellous great stone and burst his ribs, wherby he vomited and spewed great flakes of blood, and presently died. Then wee threw him to the river likewise, as we had done Lamathus before.

• From Great Authors of the Western Literary Tradition (2004)

  530 Lecture 78: Franz Kafka Warning Josef not to be too hasty, Huld shows him how he treats another defendant—the client named Block. Sitting in bed in his gloomy apartment, Huld summons a client named Block—just to humiliate him. Block is a grain dealer who has been awaiting trial for more than fi ve years; Huld summons him to teach Josef a lesson in patience. From the moment he arrives, Huld twists Block like a pretzel. Though Block comes promptly at his summons, Huld complains that he has come at an inopportune time. When Huld tells Block that he has discussed his case with a judge, Block begs to know what was said. Huld crushes Block by telling him the opening bell for his trial hasn’t yet rung. Seeing that Huld is treating Block like a dog, Josef can’t imagine how this whole performance would impress him with Huld’s concern for his clients. Kafka started writing fi ction even as he rose through the ranks of an insurance company. Born to upwardly mobile Jewish parents, he was rigorously educated in German schools. He studied law at German University in Prague and earned a doctorate in law in 1906. Shortly after, he went to work for an insurance company and rose to vice secretary of the company in 1913—the year before he started writing The Trial. Though he seemed, at 30, all ready to follow the script written for him by his bourgeois parents, he could never forget his Jewishness or forsake his ambition to write. He wrote in a German language salted with Yiddishisms as well as with Czech idioms. By age 30, he had written several stories and started a novel. Kafka’s fi rst efforts at autobiographical fi ction broke down in the face of Modernism. In earlier examples of fi ctive autobiography, a young protagonist rebels against one or more authority fi gures but eventually “grows up” into marriage or a career. Modernism complicates this process by spotlighting the isolation of the self. Unlike modernity, which is a historical condition defi ned by technical advances and changes in fashion, Modernism is a way of thinking and feeling that emerged in the fi rst part of the 20 th century. It spotlights the isolated self, cut off from all traditional sources of support.

• From Collected Essays (1998)

  These novels utilize-compulsively-a rather shabby trick: Treat Negroes as human beings, the nov elists cry; but this contains a clause: there are some Negroes you ought to admire; and finally: many of them, most of the best of them, are not much darker than you are. This might be forgivable, were there not at the same time an exploitation of the more familiar myth which these novels are loudly en gaged in tearing down. Thus, when the heroine of Q;tality goes home-to a landscape not notably different fr om that made familiar by Margaret Mitchell-her greatest humiliation comes when she is treated in exactly the same manner as a dark, gin-drinking, razor-toting hussy-concerning whom the author, through the heroine's eyes, comments: "In a way [her hysteria] com pensated for her ignorance, her low standing in the social scale. Maybe the same thing was true of the great mass of the colored people, simple, ignorant, yet uninhibited in their emotional expression." It is the heroine, with her great ad mixture of white blood, who will lead her people fr om these 5 86 OTHER ESSAYS low grounds. Similarly, when Neil Kingsblood discovers his ancestry, his wife waits apprehensively for the signs--expect ing him to turn into a "shambling, f( >olish" darky. But this does not happen and she sticks to him; after all, he has not really changed; he is as white as ever; he has merely become a crusader f( >r a downtrodden people. The really remarkable plots, counter-plots, and sub-plots that make these novels as impossible to remember as they are difficult to read, again betray an essential desperation. The plots are all concerned with the sexual aggressions of whites against blacks; these constitute, before the books begin, the essential a priori dilemma; they operate to burden every en counter within the novel proper with a clandestine, historic significance; the atmosphere inside which these people move is made heavy with unfulfilled desire. The considerable prob lem this presents to the American psyche is partially solved by keeping the protagonists as light as possible or, at any rate, making it abundantly clear that the Negro under discussion is not subject to the same passions and cannot therefore be bound by the same laws as saddle other Negroes. These novels arc, really, exceedingly timorous studies of transgression, and they all have two sets of transgressors: the ancestors, who are a Negro woman and a white man; and the protagonists, who, in all cases but one, are a Negro man and a white woman. The exception is Q;tality, whose heroine f( >rsakes her white would-be lover and is last seen making plans for a Negro hos pital with a quite satistyingly dark young doctor.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Now, as we proved above, wicked spirits, in the endeavour to corrupt the true of faith: abuse the working of miracles in order to lead men into error, and to weaken the proofs of the true faith: not however by working real miracles, but by doing things which appear to men miraculous. In the same way they abuse the foretellings of prophecy, not indeed by uttering real prophecies, but by foretelling things in accordance with an order of causes unknown to man, so as to appear to foresee future events in themselves. And though contingent effects arise from natural causes, these same spirits, by the acuteness of their intelligence, are able to know better than men when and how the effects of natural causes can be hindered: and so, in foretelling the future, they seem to be more wonderful and truthful than the wisest of men. Now, among natural causes, the highest and furthest removed from our knowledge are the powers of heavenly bodies: and that these are known to the aforesaid spirits as regards the property of their nature, has been shown above. Since, then, all bodies in this lower world are ruled through the powers and movement of higher bodies, the spirits in question are able, much better than any astrologer, to forecast future winds and storms, changes of weather, and other like events which occur through changes in these lower bodies brought about by the movement of the bodies above. And although heavenly bodies are unable to cause a direct impression on the intellective part of the soul, as we have proved, yet many there are who follow the bent of their passions and their bodily inclinations, which the heavenly bodies are clearly able to influence: for none but the wise, who are few, are able to curb these passions by their reason. Hence also they are able to foretell many things regarding human actions: albeit sometimes even they fail in their forecast, on account of free-will. Moreover when they foretell what they foresee, they do not enlighten the mind, as God does when He reveals anything: for it is not their intention to perfect the human mind unto the knowledge of truth, but on the contrary to turn it away from the truth.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  2. And, behold, there was a certain man before him which had the dropsy. 3. And Jesus answering spake unto the Lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? 4. And they held their peace. And he took him, and healed him, and let him go; 5. And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day? 6. And they could not answer him again to these things. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. Although our Lord knew the malice of the Pharisees, yet He became their guest, that He might benefit by His words and miracles those who were present. Whence it follows, And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the sabbath day, that they watched him; to see whether He would despise the observance of the law, or do any thing that was forbidden on the sabbath day. When then the man with the dropsy came into the midst of them, He rebukes by a question the insolence of the Pharisees, who wished to detect Him; as it is said, And, behold, there was a certain man before him which had the dropsy. And Jesus answering, &c. BEDE. When it is said that Jesus answered, there is a reference to the words which went before, And they watched him. For the Lord knew the thoughts of men. THEOPHYLACT. But by His question He exposes their folly. For while God blessed the sabbath, (Gen. 2:1.) they forbade to do good on the sabbath; but the day which does not admit the works of the good is accursed. BEDE. But they who were asked, are rightly silent, for they perceived that whatever they said, would be against themselves. For if it is lawful to heal on the sabbath day, why did they watch the Saviour whether He would heal? If it is not lawful, why do they take care of their cattle on the sabbath? Hence it follows, But they held their peace. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. Disregarding then the snares of the Jews, He cures the dropsical, who from fear of the Pharisees did not ask to be healed on account of the sabbath, but only stood up, that when Jesus beheld him, He might have compassion on him and heal him. And the Lord knowing this, asked not whether he wished to be made whole, but forthwith healed him. Whence it follows; And he took him, and healed him, and let him go. Wherein our Lord took no thought not to offend the Pharisees, but only that He might benefit him who needed healing. For it becomes us, when a great good is the result, not to care if fools take offence.

• From Collected Essays (1998)

  I am leaving a great deal out, but, in any case, the renegade politician is brought brutally to his senses when his mulatto ward, now a rising congressman, so far forgets himself as to offer himself in marriage to the renegade politician's beautiful daughter, Miss Lillian Gish. The Klan rides out in fury, mak ing short work of the ruffian, and others like him. The niggers are last seen, heads averted and eyes down, returning to their THE DEVIL FINDS WORK cabins-none of which have been burned, apparently, there being no point in burning empty cabins-and the South rises triumphantly to its feet. It is not clear what happens to the one presumably remain ing mulatto, the female. Neither of the two mulattoes had any sexual interest in the other; given what we sec of their charms, this is quite understandable. Both arc driven by a hideous lust for whites, she for the master, he for the maid: they arc, at least, thank heaven, heterosexual, due, probably, to their lack of imagination. Their lust for the whites, however, is of such a nature that it suffers fr om all the manifestations of hysterical hatred. And this is not quite so understandable, except in the gaudy light of the film's intention. The film presents us, after all, with the spectacle of a noble people, brought to such a pass that even their loyal slaves arc subverted. for the sake of the dignity of this temporarily defeated people, and out of a vivid and loving concern for their betrayed and endangered slaves, the violated social order must, at all costs, be re-established. And it is re established by the vision and heroism of the noblest among these noble. The disaster which they must overcome (and, in future, avert) has been brought about, not through any fault of their own, and not because of any defection among their slaves, but by the weak and misguided among them who have given the mulattoes ideas above their station. But how did so ungodly a creature as the mulatto enter this Eden, and where did he come fr om? The film cannot concern itself with this inconvenient and impertinent question, any more than can Governor Wallace, or the bulk of his confreres, North or South. We need not pursue it, except to observe that almost all mulattoes, and especially at that time, were produced by white men, and rarely indeed by an act of love. The mildest possible word is coercion: which is why white men invented the crime of rape, with the specific intention (and effect) of castrating and hang ing the nigger. Neither did black men fasten on the word, mulatto, to describe the issue of their own loins.

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Reply to Objection 3: Nothing hinders two vices being contrary to one another. Wherefore even as detraction is evil, so is flattery, which is contrary thereto as regards what is said, but not directly as regards the end. Because flattery seeks to please the person flattered, whereas the detractor seeks not the displeasure of the person defamed, since at times he defames him in secret, but seeks rather his defamation. Whether flattery is a mortal sin?Objection 1: It seems that flattery is a mortal sin. For, according to Augustine (Enchiridion xii), “a thing is evil because it is harmful.” But flattery is most harmful, according to Ps. 9:24, “For the sinner is praised in the desires of his soul, and the unjust man is blessed. The sinner hath provoked the Lord.” Wherefore Jerome says (Ep. ad Celant): “Nothing so easily corrupts the human mind as flattery”: and a gloss on Ps. 69:4, “Let them be presently turned away blushing for shame that say to me: ’ Tis well, ’ Tis well,” says: “The tongue of the flatterer harms more than the sword of the persecutor.” Therefore flattery is a most grievous sin. Objection 2: Further, whoever does harm by words, harms himself no less than others: wherefore it is written (Ps. 36:15): “Let their sword enter into their own hearts.” Now he that flatters another induces him to sin mortally: hence a gloss on Ps. 140:5, “Let not the oil of the sinner fatten my head,” says: “The false praise of the flatterer softens the mind by depriving it of the rigidity of truth and renders it susceptive of vice.” Much more, therefore, does the flatterer sin in himself. Objection 3: Further, it is written in the Decretals (D. XLVI, Cap. 3): “The cleric who shall be found to spend his time in flattery and treachery shall be degraded from his office.” Now such a punishment as this is not inflicted save for mortal sin. Therefore flattery is a mortal sin. On the contrary, Augustine in a sermon on Purgatory (xli, de Sanctis) reckons among slight sins, “if one desire to flatter any person of higher standing, whether of one’s own choice, or out of necessity.”

• From Saint Thomas Aquinas Collection (22 Books) (2016)

  Here he advances reasons for the negative side. He does this, first (210), for the purpose of showing that the Forms are not separate from sensible things; and, second (211:C 410), for the purpose of showing that the objects of mathematics are not separate ( “ Furthermore, if anyone ” ). Now above in Book I (103:C 208) he gave many arguments against those who posited separate Forms; and, therefore, passing over those arguments, he gives the line of reasoning which seems most effective. He says (210) that while the position of those who posit separate Forms contains many difficulties, the position of those which is now given is no less absurd than any of the others, i.e., that someone should say that there are certain natures in addition to the sensible ones which are contained beneath the heavens. For the heavens constitute the limit of sensible bodies, as is proved in Book I of The Heavens and the World. But those who posited the Forms did not place them below the heavens or outside of it, as is stated in Book III of the Physics. Hence, in accordance with this he says that they posited certain other natures in addition to those which exist in the heavens. And they said that these opposite natures are the same as these sensible things both in kind and in their intelligible constitution, and that they exist in these sensible things; or rather they said that those natures are the Forms of these sensible things. For example, they said that a separate man constitutes the humanity of this particular man who is perceived by the senses, and that a man who is perceived by the senses is a man by participating in that separate man. Yet they held that these differ in this respect, that those immaterial natures are eternal, whereas these sensible natures are corruptible. 408. That they hold those natures to be the same as these sensible things is clear from the fact that, just as man, horse, and health are found among sensible things, in a similar way they posited among these natures “ a man-inhimself, ” i.e., one lacking sensible matter; and they did the same with regard to horse and health. Moreover, they claimed that nothing else existed in the class of separate substances except [the counterpart of] what existed materially in the sensible world. This position seems to be similar to that of those who held that the gods are of human form, which was the position of the Epicureans, as Tully states in The Nature of the Gods. For just as those who held that the gods are of human form did nothing else than make men eternal in nature, in a similar way those who claimed that there are Forms do nothing else than hold that there are eternal sensible things, such as horse, ox, and the like.

• From Great Authors of the Western Literary Tradition (2004)

  277 ● Folly makes the interesting observation that fools are the only people able to speak the truth to those in power. ● Folly also discusses fl attery, which was a great concern of Renaissance humanists. The tone shifts to one of savage irony and satire when Folly tackles religious abuse. Erasmus attacks theologians, especially scholastics who feverishly pursue their own learning at the expense of a Christian life. This rejection of scholastic methods is a hallmark of Renaissance humanism. Erasmus attacks the religious authorities and monks for religious hypocrisy and mistaking the letter for the spirit. He attacks religious leaders, including the popes of his time. The Praise of Folly shows how Erasmus deals with the religious upheaval of his time. In his attack on the abuses of the Church, Erasmus was close to Martin Luther, with whom he exchanged letters. In his theological positions, however, Erasmus remained a staunch Catholic and broke with Luther as Luther broke with the Church. In the last section of the work, there is a sudden shift in the meaning of Folly, as folly becomes the mark of a true Christian. Folly exposes the folly of Christ’s adoption of the foolish human condition. Thus, Paul is able to say that we are fools for Christ. What at fi rst appears to be folly turns out to be the deepest kind of wisdom that Erasmus can imagine. ■ Erasmus, The Praise of Folly. Sowards, Erasmus, chapters 1–2. What at fi rst appears to be folly turns out to be the deepest kind of wisdom that Erasmus can imagine. Essential Reading 278 Lecture 38: Erasmus 1. How does Erasmus reconcile his love of classical texts with his Christian faith? 2. In what ways does The Praise of Folly refl ect Erasmus’s views on the state of Christianity in his own time? Questions to Consider

• From Great Authors of the Western Literary Tradition (2004)

  356 Lecture 53: Alexander Pope author and the audience, because all poets and critics must exercise their judgment. All writers and critics look to the same source for the “light” of judgment—Heaven, or divine reason. Pope de fi nes one of the central claims of Neoclassical critical theory: that the standard for what should be depicted in art and the rule by which that art should be judged can be found in the universal and the permanent, in other words, in nature. Pope insists upon classical authors as the proper literary models for contemporary authors—thus distinguishing the “real” writers from the popular hacks who write “novels.” In the second part of the poem (lines 201–599), Pope discusses the obstacles to judgment, fi rst addressing the pride in showing off one’s knowledge. Pride corrupts right reason and obscures the truth. Authors should not give in to the desire for fame, and critics should condemn the real vices of the age, the blasphemies of a liberated press. In the third part of the poem (lines 560– 744), Pope describes the moral and aesthetic rules that produce good writing and good criticism. The Rape of the Lock (1717) was occasioned by a quarrel between two prominent Roman Catholic families, brought on when Lord Petre (the Baron in the poem) cut a lock from the head of Arabella Fermor (the Belinda of the poem) without her permission. John Caryll, Pope’s friend and publisher and Lord Petre’s cousin, asked Pope to write a poem to make a joke of the affair and bring the families together through laughter. The poem, a Horatian satire, is obsessively local in its details, yet it speaks to a larger culture of pleasure. The poem’s genre is mock-epic, which employs the conventions of epic form and content but substitutes the contemporary world and its follies for the heroic actions of men and gods. The poem contains many of the standard elements of the epic form, including a dream message from the gods and the act of arming for battle. In each case, however, Pope substitutes the events and moral values of his superfi cial society. In Canto I, Pope invokes the muse to help him in his epic task, an account of “mighty Contests” provoked by “trivial Things.” Belinda’s “Morning Dream” introduces us to the supernaturals who will guide the action of the poem. Belinda rises and elaborately prepares to attend a party, a satiric version of the arming for battle.