Supererogation

Supererogatory (from the Latin super " about", "above" and erogare " distribute ", " donate " ) referred to in the Ethics Acts which someone does more than his duty required.

Theology

The term comes from the supererogatory Christian theology. The starting point is the parable of the Good Samaritan ( Luke 10, 25-37 ). There, beyond the compulsory part of the story of the Samaritan lies in the fact that he promises the host, even pay more for the additional costs:

From this formulation of the Latin Bible ( Vulgate ), starting the term opera supererogationis ( " over dutiful " or " supererogatory works" ) was coined in theology. The ecclesiastical writers of the patristic era distinguished since Tertullian between the provisions laid down in the law of God ( praecepta ) and the advice ( consilia ) in the New Testament. Among the suggestions was understood the evangelical counsels by which a life of poverty and celibacy ( chastity ) is recommended. Following these suggestions was understood as accomplishment supererogatory works. The practice of a particularly strict asceticism and special exercises of piety, this included. Such action served as well as the observance of generally binding bids to avoid sins. Moreover, one wanted to purchase by following the advice merits and thus improve the prospects of obtaining eternal salvation.

In the medieval scholastic doctrine was systematically developed by the supererogatory, especially by Thomas Aquinas. Thomas was the opinion of many Christians, especially the saints and martyrs, had voluntarily done far more than that to which they were obliged by divine law. Through these supererogatory they had generated a large excess of merit, not of them, but the church zukomme in its entirety. This credit is now the common property of the whole multitude of the faithful ( COMMUNIA multitudinis ) and could therefore at the discretion of that which of these projects amount to be distributed among the faithful. For the purposes of such a community understanding Thomas argued a culprit could a criminal discount ( remissio poenae ) be granted if another representative strip satisfaction for him. Based on such reasoning, the idea of ​​the collective services provided by supererogatory credit served as a justification for the penalty estate, which was granted under the ecclesiastical indulgences.

In the age of the Reformation, the supererogatory to a substantial difference and point of contention between Catholics and Protestants was. The Protestant theology rejects since Luther's critique of monasticism in the De votis monasticis (1521 ) the idea that there are supererogatory acts principally on. In particular, the idea that one could earn a merit with such acts before God will fight sharply because of their incompatibility with the principle of Sola gratia. In addition, the Protestant theologians see this as a weakening of the mandatory nature of the divine commandments.

The Anglican Church shares this regard the Protestant view. It condemns since the 16th century in the fourteenth of its Thirty-nine Articles, the doctrine of supererogatory: Of the more than meritorious works. Volunteers work alongside and above the commandments of God, called überverdienstliche works, can not be said without presumption and impiety. Because explained by the people that they not only render unto God as they are required, but do for his sake more than they owe, while Christ speaks clearly: "If you all have done things that are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants ( Luke 17:10 NIV ). ".

Philosophy

Immanuel Kant believes that every good act is only the fulfillment of an obligation which is for the doer. While there is in Kant a ranking of the duties, so that the performance of an obligation may be omitted if this duty is limited by another, but even then everything morally relevant action a form of duty; any action that is not carried out from duty is morally indifferent. Therefore, there are no supererogatory acts for Kant, if these are defined so that they, but not good duty. However, theorists of ethics have tried to bring Kant's ethics with the idea of supererogation in line.

In utilitarianism, the principle that it is always necessary to act so that the best possible result is achieved by the total amount will be maximized to the benefit of all valid. Therefore, falls off the distinction between dutifully oft and Supererogatorischem in purely utilitarian models. Nevertheless, attempts have been made to make utilitarian approach with a concept of supererogatory compatible.