Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It seems that the four species of pride are unfittingly assigned by Gregory, who says (Moral. xxiii, 6): "There are four marks by which every kind of pride of the arrogant betrays itself; either when they think that their good is from themselves, or if they believe it to be from above, yet they think that it is due to their own merits; or when they boast of having what they have not, or despise others and wish to appear the exclusive possessors of what they have." For pride is a vice distinct from unbelief, just as humility is a distinct virtue from faith. Now it pertains to unbelief, if a man deem that he has not received his good from God, or that he has the good of grace through his own merits. Therefore this should not be reckoned a species of pride.

Objection 2: Further, the same thing should not be reckoned a species of different genera. Now boasting is reckoned a species of lying, as stated above (Question 110, Article 2; Question 112). Therefore it should not be accounted a species of pride.

Objection 3: Further, some other things apparently pertain to pride, which are not mentioned here. For Jerome says that "nothing is so indicative of pride as to show oneself ungrateful": and Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xiv, 14) that "it belongs to pride to excuse oneself of a sin one has committed." Again, presumption whereby one aims at having what is above one, would seem to have much to do with pride. Therefore the aforesaid division does not sufficiently account for the different species of pride.

Objection 4: Further, we find other divisions of pride. For Anselm divides the uplifting of pride, saying that there is "pride of will, pride of speech, end pride of deed." Bernard also reckons twelve degrees of pride, namely "curiosity, frivolity of mind, senseless mirth, boasting, singularity, arrogance, presumption, defense of one's sins, deceitful confession, rebelliousness, license, sinful habit." Now these apparently are not comprised under the species mentioned by Gregory. Therefore the latter would seem to be assigned unfittingly.

On the contrary, The authority of Gregory suffices.

I answer that, As stated above (Articles 1,2,3), pride denotes immoderate desire of one's own excellence, a desire, to wit, that is not in accord with right reason. Now it must be observed that all excellence results from a good possessed. Such a good may be considered in three ways. First, in itself. For it is evident that the greater the good that one has, the greater the excellence that one derives from it. Hence when a man ascribes to himself a good greater than what he has, it follows that his appetite tends to his own excellence in a measure exceeding his competency: and thus we have the third species of pride, namely "boasting of having what one has not."

Secondly, it may be considered with regard to its cause, in so far as to have a thing of oneself is more excellent than to have it of another. Hence when a man esteems the good he has received of another as though he had it of himself, the result is that his appetite is borne towards his own excellence immoderately. Now one is cause of one's own good in two ways, efficiently and meritoriously: and thus we have the first two species of pride, namely "when a man thinks he has from himself that which he has from God," or "when he believes that which he has received from above to be due to his own merits."

Thirdly, it may be considered with regard to the manner of having it, in so far as a man obtains greater excellence through possessing some good more excellently than other men; the result again being that his appetite is borne inordinately towards his own excellence: and thus we have the fourth species of pride, which is "when a man despises others and wishes to be singularly conspicuous."

Reply to Objection 1: A true judgment may be destroyed in two ways. First, universally: and thus in matters of faith, a true judgment is destroyed by unbelief. Secondly, in some particular matter of choice, and unbelief does not do this. Thus a man who commits fornication, judges that for the time being it is good for him to commit fornication; yet he is not an unbeliever, as he would be, were he to say that universally fornication is good. It is thus in the question in point: for it pertains to unbelief to assert universally that there is a good which is not from God, or that grace is given to men for their merits, whereas, properly speaking, it belongs to pride and not to unbelief, through inordinate desire of one's own excellence, to boast of one's goods as though one had them of oneself, or of one's own merits.

Reply to Objection 2: Boasting is reckoned a species of lying, as regards the outward act whereby a man falsely ascribes to himself what he has not: but as regards the inward arrogance of the heart it is reckoned by Gregory to be a species of pride.

Reply to Objection 3: The ungrateful man ascribes to himself what he has from another: wherefore the first two species of pride pertain to ingratitude. To excuse oneself of a sin one has committed, belongs to the third species, since by so doing a man ascribes to himself the good of innocence which he has not. To aim presumptuously at what is above one, would seem to belong chiefly to the fourth species, which consists in wishing to be preferred to others.

Reply to Objection 4: The three mentioned by Anselm correspond to the progress of any particular sin: for it begins by being conceived in thought, then is uttered in word, and thirdly is accomplished in deed.

The twelve degrees mentioned by Bernard are reckoned by way of opposition to the twelve degrees of humility, of which we have spoken above (Question 161, Article 6). For the first degree of humility is to "be humble in heart, and to show it in one's very person, one's eyes fixed on the ground": and to this is opposed "curiosity," which consists in looking around in all directions curiously and inordinately. The second degree of humility is "to speak few and sensible words, and not to be loud of voice": to this is opposed "frivolity of mind," by which a man is proud of speech. The third degree of humility is "not to be easily moved and disposed to laughter," to which is opposed "senseless mirth." The fourth degree of humility is "to maintain silence until one is asked," to which is opposed "boasting". The fifth degree of humility is "to do nothing but to what one is exhorted by the common rule of the monastery," to which is opposed "singularity," whereby a man wishes to seem more holy than others. The sixth degree of humility is "to believe and acknowledge oneself viler than all," to which is opposed "arrogance," whereby a man sets himself above others. The seventh degree of humility is "to think oneself worthless and unprofitable for all purposes," to which is opposed "presumption," whereby a man thinks himself capable of things that are above him. The eighth degree of humility is "to confess one's sins," to which is opposed "defense of one's sins." The ninth degree is "to embrace patience by obeying under difficult and contrary circumstances," to which is opposed "deceitful confession," whereby a man being unwilling to be punished for his sins confesses them deceitfully. The tenth degree of humility is "obedience," to which is opposed "rebelliousness." The eleventh degree of humility is "not to delight in fulfilling one's own desires"; to this is opposed "license," whereby a man delights in doing freely whatever he will. The last degree of humility is "fear of God": to this is opposed "the habit of sinning," which implies contempt of God.

In these twelve degrees not only are the species of pride indicated, but also certain things that precede and follow them, as we have stated above with regard to humility (Question 161, Article 6).

Articulus 4

Argumentum 1

Ad quartum sic proceditur. Videtur quod inconvenienter assignentur quatuor superbiae species quas Gregorius assignat, XXIII Moral., dicens, quatuor quippe sunt species quibus omnis tumor arrogantium demonstratur, cum bonum aut a semetipsis habere se aestimant; aut, si sibi datum desuper credunt, pro suis hoc accepisse meritis putant; aut cum iactant se habere quod non habent; aut, despectis ceteris, singulariter videri appetunt habere quod habent.

Superbia enim est vitium distinctum ab infidelitate, sicut etiam humilitas est virtus distincta a fide. Sed quod aliquis existimet bonum se non habere a deo, vel quod bonum gratiae habeat ex meritis propriis, ad infidelitatem pertinet.

Ergo non debent poni species superbiae.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, idem non debet poni species diversorum generum.

Sed iactantia ponitur species mendacii, ut supra habitum est.

Non ergo debet poni species superbiae.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, quaedam alia videntur ad superbiam pertinere quae hic non connumerantur.

Dicit enim Hieronymus quod nihil est tam superbum quam ingratum videri.

Et Augustinus dicit, XIV de CIV. Dei, quod excusare se de peccato commisso ad superbiam pertinet.

Praesumptio etiam, qua quis tendit ad assequendum aliquid quod supra se est, maxime ad superbiam pertinere videtur.

Non ergo sufficienter praedicta divisio comprehendit superbiae species.

Argumentum 4

Praeterea, inveniuntur aliae divisiones superbiae.

Dividit enim Anselmus exaltationem superbiae, dicens quod quaedam est in voluntate, quaedam in sermone, quaedam in operatione.

Bernardus etiam ponit duodecim gradus superbiae, qui sunt, curiositas, mentis Levitas, inepta laetitia, iactantia, singularitas, arrogantia, praesumptio, defensio peccatorum, simulata confessio, rebellio, libertas, peccandi consuetudo.

Quae non videntur comprehendi sub speciebus a Gregorio assignatis.

Ergo videtur quod inconvenienter assignentur.

Sed Contra

In contrarium sufficiat auctoritas Gregorii.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod, sicut dictum est, superbia importat immoderatum excellentiae appetitum, qui scilicet non est secundum rationem rectam. Est autem considerandum quod quaelibet excellentia consequitur aliquod bonum habitum.

Quod quidem potest considerari tripliciter. Uno modo, secundum se.

Manifestum est enim quod quanto maius est bonum quod quis habet, tanto per hoc maiorem excellentiam consequitur. Et ideo cum aliquis attribuit sibi maius bonum quam habeat, consequens est quod eius appetitus tendit in excellentiam propriam ultra modum sibi convenientem. Et sic est tertia superbiae species, cum scilicet aliquis iactat se habere quod non habet.

Alio modo, ex parte causae, prout excellentius est quod aliquod bonum insit alicui a seipso, quam quod insit ei ab alio. Et ideo cum aliquis aestimat bonum quod habet ab alio, ac si haberet a seipso, fertur per consequens appetitus eius in propriam excellentiam supra suum modum. Est autem dupliciter aliquis causa sui boni, uno modo, efficienter; alio modo, meritorie.

Et secundum hoc sumuntur duae primae superbiae species, scilicet, cum quis a semetipso habere aestimat quod a deo habet; vel, cum propriis meritis sibi datum desuper credit.

Tertio modo, ex parte modi habendi, prout excellentior aliquis redditur ex hoc quod aliquod bonum excellentius ceteris possidet.

Unde et ex hoc etiam fertur inordinate appetitus in propriam excellentiam. Et secundum hoc sumitur quarta species superbiae, quae est cum aliquis, despectis ceteris, singulariter vult videri.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod vera existimatio potest corrumpi dupliciter. Uno modo, in universali. Et sic, in his quae ad finem pertinent, corrumpitur vera existimatio per infidelitatem.

Alio modo, in aliquo particulari eligibili. Et hoc non facit infidelitatem. Sicut ille qui fornicatur, aestimat pro tempore illo bonum esse sibi fornicari, nec tamen est infidelis, sicut esset si in universali diceret fornicationem esse bonam. Et ita etiam est in proposito.

Nam dicere in universali aliquod bonum esse quod non est a deo, vel gratiam hominibus pro meritis dari, pertinet ad infidelitatem. Sed quod aliquis, ex inordinato appetitu propriae excellentiae, ita de bonis suis glorietur ac si ea a se haberet vel ex meritis propriis, pertinet ad superbiam, et non ad infidelitatem, proprie loquendo.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod iactantia ponitur species mendacii quantum ad exteriorem actum, quo quis falso sibi attribuit quod non habet. Sed quantum ad interiorem cordis arrogantiam, ponitur a Gregorio species superbiae.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod ingratus est qui sibi attribuit quod ab alio habet. Unde duae primae superbiae species ad ingratitudinem pertinent. Quod autem aliquis se excuset de peccato quod habet, pertinet ad tertiam speciem, quia per hoc aliquis sibi attribuit bonum innocentiae, quod non habet. Quod autem aliquis praesumptuose tendit in id quod supra ipsum est, praecipue videtur ad quartam speciem pertinere, secundum quam aliquis vult aliis praeferri.

Ad 4

Ad quartum dicendum quod illa tria quae ponit Anselmus, accipiuntur secundum progressum peccati cuiuslibet, quod primo, corde concipitur; secundo, ore profertur; tertio, opere perficitur.

Illa autem duodecim quae ponit bernardus, sumuntur per oppositum ad duodecim gradus humilitatis, de quibus supra habitum est.

Nam primus gradus humilitatis est, corde et corpore semper humilitatem ostendere, defixis in terram aspectibus. Cui opponitur curiositas, per quam aliquis curiose ubique et inordinate circumspicit. Secundus gradus humilitatis est, ut pauca verba et rationabilia loquatur aliquis, non clamosa voce. Contra quem opponitur Levitas mentis, per quam scilicet homo superbe se habet in verbo. Tertius gradus humilitatis est, ut non sit facilis aut promptus in risu. Cui opponitur inepta laetitia. Quartus gradus humilitatis est taciturnitas usque ad interrogationem. Cui opponitur iactantia. Quintus gradus humilitatis est, tenere quod communis regula monasterii habet.

Cui opponitur singularitas, per quam scilicet aliquis sanctior vult apparere. Sextus gradus humilitatis est, credere et pronuntiare se omnibus viliorem. Cui opponitur arrogantia, per quam scilicet homo se aliis praefert. Septimus gradus humilitatis est, ad omnia inutilem et indignum se confiteri et credere. Cui opponitur praesumptio, per quam scilicet aliquis reputat se sufficientem ad maiora. Octavus gradus humilitatis est confessio peccatorum. Cui opponitur defensio peccatorum.

Nonus gradus est, in duris et asperis patientiam amplecti.

Cui opponitur simulata confessio, per quam scilicet aliquis non vult subire poenam pro peccatis, quae simulate confitetur.

Decimus gradus humilitatis est obedientia. Cui opponitur rebellio.

Undecimus autem gradus est, ut homo non delectetur facere propriam voluntatem. Cui opponitur libertas, per quam scilicet homo delectatur libere facere quod vult. Ultimus autem gradus humilitatis est timor dei. Cui opponitur peccandi consuetudo, quae implicat dei contemptum.

In his autem duodecim gradibus tanguntur non solum superbiae species, sed etiam quaedam antecedentia et consequentia, sicut etiam supra de humilitate dictum est.