Quod nullum uitium peius auaritia, nec amari
The Deformity of Greed
Greed is a detestable vice that stands in direct opposition to the noble and virtuous practice of true liberality.
It concerns those suspected of greed; the double source of liberality and which is better; and the accounts of Considius and Gillia. Yet, even if prodigality is considered a fault, I don't think it leaves any room for greed. For no vice is worse, none more detestable, especially in those who hold some position of leadership or office in the public sphere. It's not just the act itself that must be avoided, but even the reputation for it; and it's completely impossible for someone to be seen as trustworthy or worthy of love by anyone if they have earned a reputation for greed among serious and circumspect men. When, however, praise and human favor flow from a double source—namely, service and money—the latter is easier, especially for the wealthy, but the former is more noble, more splendid, and more worthy of a strong and distinguished man. For those who are generous through the work and industry of virtue will find that the more people they help, the more helpers they will have for doing good. Furthermore, through the habit of doing good, they'll become more prepared and, as it were, more practiced in deserving well of many. If, however, one had the resources, nothing is more glorious than that liberality which consists in giving; especially since Socrates, as it is said, when asked what the substance of happiness was, replied: 'To give to those who are worthy.'
The Discernment of Charity
True charity requires wisdom and discernment, imitating God's providence rather than blindly satisfying every demand.
I personally believe Socrates' definition should be interpreted to mean that dignity is found in the need or the merit of those who receive. It's just to give to those who have earned it, and it's a pious act to help those in need; yet, we must look at each case in a way that could be revealed before a wise person without shame or reproach, since we ought to imitate Him who makes His sun rise on the good and the bad, and rains on the just and the unjust. If we see a poor actor or a mime, we certainly shouldn't encourage their malice; instead, once they've been corrected and, if possible, reformed, we should support their nature by the law of brotherly love. It's indeed helpful to offer everyone who asks either a kind word or the comfort of charity. Sometimes, however, it's more wholesome to rebuke the lazy or to shame a prostitute or an actor than to give them what they demand. Why do I delay? Whatever charity gives away is repaid by the Lord; whatever vanity spends vanishes. Valerius records the liberality of Quintus Considius, which is a most wholesome example and not without its own small fruit. When the Republic was so shaken by Catiline's madness that even the wealthy couldn't pay their debts because the value of their property had plummeted, Considius—who had fifteen million sesterces out on loan—didn't allow any of his debtors to be pressed for either the principal or the interest. As much as he could, he mitigated the bitterness of the public confusion with private tranquility, opportunely and marvelously testifying that he was a lender of money, not a lender of citizens' blood.
Models of Munificence
Historical examples like Considius and Gillias demonstrate the power of wealth used for the common good rather than personal hoarding.
For those who are now primarily obsessed with business, when they bring home blood-stained money—money they exult in with a joy that should be condemned—they will understand, if they don't find it beneath them to carefully read the senate decree by which thanks were given to Considius. He follows this with Gillias of Agrigentum, whom it is agreed possessed a heart that was, in effect, the very seat of generosity. He was outstanding in his wealth, but even richer in spirit than in money, and was always more focused on giving it away than hoarding it, to the point that his house was seen as a kind of workshop of munificence. For there, monuments suitable for public use were built; there, spectacles pleasing to the public eye were staged; there, magnificent banquets were prepared and aid for those suffering from grain shortages was provided. And when these things were distributed to everyone—food privately to those struggling with poverty, dowries to young women pressed by need, and relief to those shattered by the onset of disaster—guests were also most kindly received in both his city homes and his country estates, and were sent away adorned with various gifts. At one point, he even fed and clothed five hundred Gela cavalrymen at once after a storm drove them onto his lands. What more is there to say? You would say he was not just some mortal man, but the very bosom of a kindly fortune.
The Fruit of Wisdom
Generosity that serves the common good is a lasting treasure, while the hoarding of the greedy yields no true praise.
Therefore, what Gillias possessed was, as it were, the common patrimony of all, for whose well-being and growth both the city of Agrigentum and the neighboring regions kept watch with their prayers. Since those who take the opposite path keep their coffers locked away with unyielding bolts, wouldn't you consider that kind of spending far more excellent than this hoarding? In short, whatever wisdom arranges is approved; what recklessness presumes never earns the fruit of true praise.
Read the original Latin
posse qui suspectus est auaritiae; et de duplici fonde lihei alitaiis, et uter sit potior; et de Considio et Gillia. Nec tamen, etsi prodigalitas uideatur in culpa, locum arbitror auaritiae relinquendum. Nullum enim uitium deterius est, nullum detestabilius, praesertim in his qui principatum aut magistratum aliquem in re publica gerunt. Non enim res ipsa sed etiam opinio eius uitanda est; et omnino impossibile est ut fidelis uideatur alicui aut amore dignus qui ex merito apud graues et circumspectos uiros auaritiae suspicionem incurrit. Cum uero laus et fauor humanus quasi a duplici fonte proueniant, operae scilicefc et pecuniae, facilior est haec praesertim locupleti, sed illa lautior et splendidior et dignior uiro forti et claro. Nam qui uirtutis opera et industria liberales erunt, quo pluribus profuerint, eo plures ad benefaciendum habebunt adiutores. Deinde benefaciendi consuetudine paratiores erunt et tamquam exercitatiores ad bene de multis promerendum. Si tamen archa suppeteret, nichil gloriosius est ea liberalitate quae consistit in donis; maxime cum et Socrates, ut dicitur, interrogatus quaenam esset substantia beatitudinis: Dignis donare, respondit.
Ego quidem Socraticam diffinitionem sic interpretandam arbitror ut dignitas in accipientium necessitate credatur esse uel meritis. Hlis enim qui praemeruerunt donare iustum est, et eis qui indigent subuenire pium; ita tamen ut id respiciatur in singulis quod in facie eapientis sine rubore et nota ualeat denudari; siquidem imitari debemus eum qui solem suum facit oriri super bonos et malos et pluit super iustos et iniustos. Si enim pauperem histrionem uideamus aut mimum, non debemua utique fouere malitiam, sed correpta et, si fieri potest, emendata, fraternae caritatis iure oportet sustentari naturam. Expedit quidem omni petenti tribuere uel afFectum mentis uel solatium caritatis. Interdum tamen increpare pigrum, meretricem uel histrionem confundere salubrius est quam quod exigunt elargiri. Quid moror? Quicquid caritas erogat, remuneratur a Domino; quod dispensat uanitas, euanescit. In Quinto Considio saluberrimi exempli nec sine paruo ipsius fructu liberalitas referente Valerio adnotata est; qui, Cathelinae furore ita consternata re publica ut ne a locupletibus quidem debitae pecuniae (propter cumulum pretii possessionum diminuti) solui creditoribus possent, cum centies atque quinquagies sextertii summam in fenore haberet, neque de sorte quemquam debitorum suorum neque de usura a suis passus est conueniri, quantumque in ipso fuit amaritudinem publicae conf usionis a priuata tranquillitate mitigauit, oportune mirificeque testatus se nummorum suorum, non ciuilis sanguinis, esse feneratorem.
Nam qui nunc praecipue negotiationi delectantur, cum pecuniam domum cruentam retulerunt, quam improbando exultant gaudio cognoscent, si diligenter senatus consultum, quo Considio gratiae actae sunt, legere non fastidierint. Subnectit huic Agrigentinum Gilliam, quem propemodum ipsius liberalitatis praecordia constat habuisse. Erat opibus excellens, sed multo etiam animo quam diuitiis locupletior, semperque in eroganda potius uel efquam in corripienda pecunia occupatus, adeo ut domus eius quasi quaedam munificentiae officina crederetur. IUic enim publicis usibus apta monumenta extruebantur, illinc grata publicis oculis spectacula edebantur, illinc epularum magnifici apparatus labentique annonae subsidia oriebantur. Et cum haec uniuersis, priuatim alimenta inopia laborantibus, dotes uirginibus paupertate pressis, subsidia detrimentorum incursu quassatis solatia erogabantur; hospites quoque, tum urbanis penatibus, tum etiam rusticis tectis benignissime excepti, uariis muneribus omati dimittebantur. Quodam uero tempore quingentos simul Gelensium equites ui tempestatis in possessiones suas compulsos aluit ac uestiuit. Quid multa? Non mortalem aliquem sed propitiae fortunae benignum esse diceres sinum.
Ergo quod Gillias possidebat, omnium quasi commune patrimonium erat, pro cuius salute et incrementis tum Agrigentina ciuitas tum etiam uicinae regiones (uotis excubabant). Cum loca ex contraria parte sint archas habentia inexorabilibus claustris obseratas; nonne praestantiorem aliquanto existimes illam impensam quam hanc custodiam? Denique quicquid sapientia disponit, approbatur; quod temeritas praesumit, uerae laudis fructum nequaquam assequitur.
Policraticus companion
Study the argument weekly; pray the tradition daily
Pair the outline with the Chosen Portion app, which serves short daily portions from the same royal devotional tradition — free on iOS.
John of Salisbury argued that rulers must keep the law of God before their eyes daily; Chosen Portion gives modern readers that same daily discipline in five minutes a morning.
- 8 weeks, one book per week, with the 3-4 key chapters flagged in each
- Discussion questions usable for a reading group from week one
- A daily 5-minute companion portion in the app alongside your weekly study