Summaries / Resúmenes - Studia Moralia

THE SUBJECT-OBJECT RELATION IN CONTEMPORARY CATHOLIC MORAL THEOLOGY 45Thomas worked was “pre-scientific” in terms of our contemporarynotion of science and Thomas himself does not take intoaccount contemporary science. (How could he?) This wouldpreclude an uncritical return to his way of thinking. But, if Imay repeat, I did not claim that we should simply return to thethought of St. Thomas. That is why I am proposing a newapproach based on the notion of gift.Much less do I present thirteenth century society as amodel that is somehow normative for all subsequent centuries.Thus, Selling’s account of the deficiencies of this society isbeside the point of the argument. I am not trying to resurrectWalsh’s thesis of “The Thirteenth, Greatest of Centuries.”With regard to St. Thomas’s treatment of “moral theology”as we call it, it is true, of course, that the II-II of the Summadeals with the virtues. But the whole point of the Summa wasto try to integrate the virtues into a unified theological vision.This vision of reality had an important bearing on St. Thomas’sresolution of certain problems.Consider the particular question mentioned by Selling,namely, the overriding of the claims to private property in considerationof the deprivation of a poor person. 9 The justificationfor this overriding rests not merely on the consideration of therequirements of virtue as opposed to a narrow interpretation ofthe seventh commandment, but on the reason why the goods ofthe earth were created. They were created for the good of all:that is their “nature” as created realities. Thus, when the goodsof creation are distributed so that some are unduly, that isunreasonably, deprived, the claims of private property yield tothe basic purpose of those created goods.The order of creation is not a “restriction.” It is the foundationof the justification of private property, which is legitimatedby reason as the best way, in historical circumstances, of makingsure that the goods of creation serve the good of all.“Restriction” would be better applied to a certain interpretationof law in moral theology. I would question the word “attitude”as used here by my critic. It is too loose a word to capture whatSt. Thomas meant by virtue. For St. Thomas, the notion of9S. Th. II-II, 66, 7.