Meanwhile, far from Samaria

Marcel is wary of “misapplication of a correct principle,” in this case one formulated by Thomas Aquinas:

It’s one thing to say a starving man doesn’t sin by taking bread to keep himself alive for another day. It’s another to say Question 66, Second Part of the Second Part means the US federal government in normal circumstances may take as much of anyone’s income as they please for redistribution.

I jump here to Luke 10:30:

And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead.

Examples follow, and then in 10:36:

Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?

You may be certain it was not the one who called for the organization of a task force and the hiring of a phalanx of specialists, assistant specialists, and deputy underassistant specialists, to be paid for by every second person between Jericho and Jerusalem.


  1. fillyjonk »

    21 September 2011 · 8:46 am

    I will observe that a lot of times, the people who declare “SOMETHING must be DONE” (to help) then seem to promote ideas that…don’t really do anything. (Of course, it’s harder, figuratively speaking, to put the wounded man on your donkey and find an inn and hand over that bag of gold, than it is to say “Someone should do something”)

  2. Charles Pergiel »

    21 September 2011 · 11:25 pm

    “It’s another to say Question 66, Second Part of the Second Part means . . .”

    ??? I’m sorry, no matter how I try to interpret that phrase it comes out as gibberish.

  3. Marcel »

    22 September 2011 · 8:33 am

    The Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas is divided into parts, questions, and articles. This one is “Of Theft and Robbery.”

RSS feed for comments on this post