Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that fear is unfittingly divided into filial, initial, servile and worldly fear. For Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii, 15) that there are six kinds of fear, viz. "laziness, shamefacedness," etc. of which we have treated above (1.2, Question 41, Article 4), and which are not mentioned in the division in question. Therefore this division of fear seems unfitting.

Objection 2: Further, each of these fears is either good or evil. But there is a fear, viz. natural fear, which is neither morally good, since it is in the demons, according to James 2:19, "The devils . . . believe and tremble," nor evil, since it is in Christ, according to Mk. 14:33, Jesus "began to fear and be heavy." Therefore the aforesaid division of fear is insufficient.

Objection 3: Further, the relation of son to father differs from that of wife to husband, and this again from that of servant to master. Now filial fear, which is that of the son in comparison with his father, is distinct from servile fear, which is that of the servant in comparison with his master. Therefore chaste fear, which seems to be that of the wife in comparison with her husband, ought to be distinguished from all these other fears.

Objection 4: Further, even as servile fear fears punishment, so do initial and worldly fear. Therefore no distinction should be made between them.

Objection 5: Further, even as concupiscence is about some good, so is fear about some evil. Now "concupiscence of the eyes," which is the desire for things of this world, is distinct from "concupiscence of the flesh," which is the desire for one's own pleasure. Therefore "worldly fear," whereby one fears to lose external goods, is distinct from "human fear," whereby one fears harm to one's own person.

On the contrary stands the authority of the Master (Sent. iii, D, 34).

I answer that, We are speaking of fear now, in so far as it makes us turn, so to speak, to God or away from Him. For, since the object of fear is an evil, sometimes, on account of the evils he fears, man withdraws from God, and this is called human fear; while sometimes, on account of the evils he fears, he turns to God and adheres to Him. This latter evil is twofold, viz. evil of punishment, and evil of fault.

Accordingly if a man turn to God and adhere to Him, through fear of punishment, it will be servile fear; but if it be on account of fear of committing a fault, it will be filial fear, for it becomes a child to fear offending its father. If, however, it be on account of both, it will be initial fear, which is between both these fears. As to whether it is possible to fear the evil of fault, the question has been treated above (1.2, Question 42, Article 3) when we were considering the passion of fear.

Reply to Objection 1: Damascene divides fear as a passion of the soul: whereas this division of fear is taken from its relation to God, as explained above.

Reply to Objection 2: Moral good consists chiefly in turning to God, while moral evil consists chiefly in turning away from Him: wherefore all the fears mentioned above imply either moral evil or moral good. Now natural fear is presupposed to moral good and evil, and so it is not numbered among these kinds of fear.

Reply to Objection 3: The relation of servant to master is based on the power which the master exercises over the servant; whereas, on the contrary, the relation of a son to his father or of a wife to her husband is based on the son's affection towards his father to whom he submits himself, or on the wife's affection towards her husband to whom she binds herself in the union of love. Hence filial and chaste fear amount to the same, because by the love of charity God becomes our Father, according to Rm. 8:15, "You have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry: Abba "; and by this same charity He is called our spouse, according to 2 Cor. 11:2, "I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ": whereas servile fear has no connection with these, since it does not include charity in its definition.

Reply to Objection 4: These three fears regard punishment but in different ways. For worldly or human fear regards a punishment which turns man away from God, and which God's enemies sometimes inflict or threaten: whereas servile and initial fear regard a punishment whereby men are drawn to God, and which is inflicted or threatened by God. Servile fear regards this punishment chiefly, while initial fear regards it secondarily.

Reply to Objection 5: It amounts to the same whether man turns away from God through fear of losing his worldly goods, or through fear of forfeiting the well-being of his body, since external goods belong to the body. Hence both these fears are reckoned as one here, although they fear different evils, even as they correspond to the desire of different goods. This diversity causes a specific diversity of sins, all of which alike however lead man away from God.

Articulus 2

Argumentum 1

Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod inconvenienter dividatur timor in filialem, initialem, servilem et mundanum.

Damascenus enim, in II Lib., ponit sex species timoris, scilicet segnitiem, erubescentiam, et alia de quibus supra dictum est, quae in hac divisione non tanguntur.

Ergo videtur quod haec divisio timoris sit inconveniens.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, quilibet horum timorum vel est bonus vel malus.

Sed est aliquis timor, scilicet naturalis, qui neque bonus est moraliter, cum sit in Daemonibus, secundum illud Iac. II, Daemones credunt et contremiscunt; neque etiam est malus, cum sit in christo, secundum illud Marc. XIV coepit iesus pavere et taedere.

Ergo timor insufficienter dividitur secundum praedicta.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, alia est habitudo filii ad patrem, et uxoris ad virum, et servi ad dominum. Sed timor filialis, qui est filii in comparatione ad patrem, distinguitur a timore servili, qui est servi per comparationem ad dominum. Ergo etiam timor castus, qui videtur esse uxoris per comparationem ad virum, debet distingui ab omnibus istis timoribus.

Argumentum 4

Praeterea, sicut timor servilis timet poenam, ita timor initialis et mundanus. Non ergo debuerunt ad invicem distingui isti timores.

Argumentum 5

Praeterea, sicut concupiscentia est boni, ita etiam timor est mali.

Sed alia est concupiscentia oculorum, qua quis concupiscit bona mundi; alia est concupiscentia carnis, qua quis concupiscit delectationem propriam. Ergo etiam alius est timor mundanus, quo quis timet amittere bona exteriora; et alius est timor humanus, quo quis timet propriae personae detrimentum.

Sed Contra

Sed contra est auctoritas magistri, XXXIV dist. III Lib. Sent..

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod de timore nunc agimus secundum quod per ipsum aliquo modo ad deum convertimur vel ab eo avertimur.

Cum enim obiectum timoris sit malum, quandoque homo propter mala quae timet a deo recedit, et iste dicitur timor humanus vel mundanus. Quandoque autem homo per mala quae timet ad deum convertitur et ei inhaeret. Quod quidem malum est duplex, scilicet malum poenae, et malum culpae. Si igitur aliquis convertatur ad deum et ei inhaereat propter timorem poenae, erit timor servilis. Si autem propter timorem culpae, erit timor filialis, nam filiorum est timere offensam patris. Si autem propter utrumque, est timor initialis, qui est medius inter utrumque timorem.

Utrum autem malum culpae possit timeri, supra habitum est, cum de passione timoris ageretur.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Damascenus dividit timorem secundum quod est passio animae. Haec autem divisio timoris attenditur in ordine ad deum, ut dictum est.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod bonum morale praecipue consistit in conversione ad deum, malum autem morale in aversione a deo.

Et ideo omnes praedicti timores vel important bonum morale vel malum. Sed timor naturalis praesupponitur bono et malo morali.

Et ideo non connumeratur inter istos timores.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod habitudo servi ad dominum est per potestatem domini servum sibi subiicientis, sed habitudo filii ad patrem, vel uxoris ad virum, est e converso per affectum filii se subdentis patri vel uxoris se coniungentis viro unione amoris. Unde timor filialis et castus ad idem pertinent, quia per caritatis amorem deus pater noster efficitur, secundum illud Rom. VIII, accepistis spiritum adoptionis filiorum, in quo clamamus, abba, pater; et secundum eandem caritatem dicitur etiam sponsus noster, secundum illud II ad Cor. XI, despondi vos uni viro, virginem castam exhibere christo.

Timor autem servilis ad aliud pertinet, quia caritatem in sua ratione non includit.

Ad 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod praedicti tres timores respiciunt poenam sed diversimode. Nam timor mundanus sive humanus respicit poenam a deo avertentem, quam quandoque inimici dei infligunt vel comminantur. Sed timor servilis et initialis respiciunt poenam per quam homines attrahuntur ad deum, divinitus inflictam vel comminatam. Quam quidem poenam principaliter timor servilis respicit, timor autem initialis secundario.

Ad 5

Ad quintum dicendum quod eadem ratione homo a deo avertitur propter timorem amittendi bona mundana, et propter timorem amittendi incolumitatem proprii corporis, quia bona exteriora ad corpus pertinent. Et ideo uterque timor hic pro eodem computatur, quamvis mala quae timentur sint diversa, sicut et bona quae concupiscuntur. Ex qua quidem diversitate provenit diversitas peccatorum secundum speciem, quibus tamen omnibus commune est a deo abducere.