So I'm going to talk to you today about Aquinas and the problem of pagan virtue.

Augustine purportedly said that the apparent virtues of the pagans were no more than splendid vices.

This claim is given rise to great controversy because it seems to assert that every act of a non-believer is necessarily sinful.

And it's easy to see why one might think that this is indeed the case.

After all, Christians believe that all morally perfect acts are motivated by supernatural love for God.

They also believe that the very ability to have such a motive is impossible without God's saving grace,

which is itself a gift from God.

One might naturally conclude then

that if non-Christians are incapable

of morally perfect action,

the only alternative is that all their acts are sinful.

Indeed, some believe this is the correct interpretation

of Paul's claim in Romans 1423 that all that is not of faith is sin.

Even if there are understandable reasons for holding this view, though, it can also seem rather harsh.

For it requires us to agree that many of the actions that we have historically admired,

and indeed many of the acts that we admire in our own acquaintances, are in fact sinful. It requires us to agree,

for instance, that Socrates was sinning when he died for truth, that the Spartan king, Leonidas,

and his men sinned when they sacrificed their lives to save all of Greece from the Persian hordes,

that our atheist neighbor is sinning when she shovels our walk for us, and the list goes on.

More importantly, even if we agree that Socrates and Leonidas and our atheist neighbor did not act out of supernatural love for God,

is the only alternative really to conclude that their acts were sinful?

Mightn't there be some kind of middle ground?

...