Thomas Aquinas

===Economics===
Thomas Aquinas addressed most economic questions within the framework of justice, which he contended was the highest of the moral virtues.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.newadvent.org/summa/2066.htm#article4 |title=''Summa Theologica'', Question 64, Article 4, "Whether justice is the chief of the moral virtues?" |access-date=29 May 2020 |archive-date=19 April 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210419033704/https://www.newadvent.org/summa/2066.htm#article4 |url-status=live }}</ref> He says that justice is "a habit whereby man renders to each his due by a constant and perpetual will."<ref>{{Cite book |title=Summa Theologica |last=Aquinas |first=Thomas |publisher=English Dominican Fathers |year=1981 |location=New York |pages=II-II, Q58, A1}}</ref> He argued that this concept of justice has its roots in natural law. Joseph Schumpeter, in his ''History of Economic Analysis'', concluded that "All the economic questions put together matters less to him than did the smallest point of theological or philosophical doctrine, and it is only where economic phenomena raise questions of moral theology that he touches upon them at all."<ref>{{Cite book |title=History of Economic Analysis |last=Schumpeter |first=Joseph |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1954 |location=New York |page=90}}</ref>

Modern Western views concerning [[capitalism]], [[unfair labor practice]], [[living wage]], [[price gouging]], monopolies, fair trade practices, and [[predatory pricing]], inter alia, are remnants of the inculcation of Aquinas' interpretation of natural moral law.<ref>Colish, Marcia, ''Medieval Foundations of the Western Intellectual Tradition, 400–1400'', Yale University Press, 1997, pp. 333–334</ref>

====Just price====
Thomas Aquinas distinguished the [[Just price|just]], or natural, price of a good from that price which manipulates another party. He determines the just price from a number of things. First, the just price must be relative to the worth of the good. Thomas held that the price of a good measures its quality: "the quality of a thing that comes into human use is measured by the price given for it".<ref>{{Cite book |title=Summa Theologica |last=Aquinas |first=Thomas |publisher=English Dominican Fathers |year=1981 |location=New York |pages=II-II, Q77, A1}}</ref> The price of a good, measured by its worth, is determined by its usefulness to man. This worth is subjective because each good has a different level of usefulness to every man. The price should reflect the current value of a good according to its usefulness to man. "Gold and silver are costly not only on account of the usefulness of the vessels and other like things made from them, but also on account of the excellence and purity of their substance."<ref>{{Cite book |title=Summa Theologica |last=Aquinas |first=Thomas |publisher=English Dominican Fathers |year=1981 |location=New York |pages=II-II, Q77, A2}}</ref>

==== Social justice ====
{{Integralism |expanded=people}}
Thomas defines [[distributive justice]] as follows:<ref>{{Cite web |title=Summa Theologiae: The parts of Justice (Secunda Secundae Partis, Q. 61) |url=https://www.newadvent.org/summa/3061.htm |access-date=30 August 2022 |website=www.newadvent.org}}</ref><blockquote>[I]n distributive justice something is given to a private individual, in so far as what belongs to the whole is due to the part, and in a quantity that is proportionate to the importance of the position of that part in respect of the whole. Consequently, in distributive justice a person receives all the more of the common goods, according as he holds a more prominent position in the community. This prominence in an aristocratic community is gauged according to virtue, in an oligarchy according to wealth, in a democracy according to liberty, and in various ways according to various forms of community. Hence in distributive justice the mean is observed, not according to equality between thing and thing, but according to proportion between things and persons: in such a way that even as one person surpasses another, so that which is given to one person surpasses that which is allotted to another.</blockquote>Thomas asserts that Christians have a duty to distribute with provision to the poorest of society.<ref>Gilson, Etienne, ''The Christian Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas'', University of Notre Dame Press, 1994</ref>

"[[Social justice]]" is a term that arose in the 19th century in the writings of Luigi Taparelli,<ref>{{Cite web |date=8 October 2014 |title=The Origins of Social Justice: Taparelli d'Azeglio |url=https://isi.org/intercollegiate-review/the-origins-of-social-justice-taparelli-dazeglio/}}</ref> and it was his term for the reality Thomas Aquinas called "legal justice" or "general justice". Legal or social justice is the contribution of the individual to the common good. So for Thomas, distributive justice goes in the direction from the [[common good]] to the individual, and is a proportional distribution of common goods, to individuals based on their contribution to the community. Legal or general justice, or what came to be called social justice, goes in the other direction, from the individuals to the common good.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~Eth.Bk5|title=Aquinas|website=aquinas.cc}}</ref>

It is helpful to understand as well other related types of justice: if social justice is from the individual to the community, and distributive justice is from the community to the individual, there is also commutative justice (between two individuals, as in buying and selling, or stealing and returning) as well as retributive justice (rectifications that occur to restore justice, once justice has been violated).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://aquinas.cc/la/en/~ST.II-II.Q61|title=Aquinas|website=aquinas.cc}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.newadvent.org/summa/3061.htm|title=SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The parts of Justice (Secunda Secundae Partis, Q. 61)|website=www.newadvent.org}}</ref>

==== Usury ====
The [[Second Lateran Council]] called the practice of loaning money "detestable and shameful... insatiable rapacity of money lenders, forbidden both by divine and human laws throughout the Old and New Testament, we condemn, and separate from the ecclesiastical consolation".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Denzinger EN 712 |url=http://www.clerus.org/bibliaclerusonline/en/dwy.htm |access-date=30 August 2022 |website=www.clerus.org}}</ref> The [[Fifth Lateran Council]] defined [[usury]] as "when, from its use, a thing which produces nothing is applied to the acquiring of gain and profit without any work, any expense or any risk".<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Red Herring of Usury |url=https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-red-herring-of-usury |access-date=30 August 2022 |website=Catholic Answers}}</ref>

Thomas Aquinas also wrote extensively on [[usury]], that is, the lending of money with interest. He condemned its practice: "to take usury for money lent is unjust in itself, because this is to sell what does not exist, and this evidently leads to inequality which is contrary to justice".<ref>{{Cite book |title=Summa Theologica |author=Thomas Aquinas |publisher=English Dominican Fathers |year=1981 |location=New York |pages=II-II, Q78, A1}}</ref> Money, and other similar goods, are consumed only when they are used. Charging a premium for money lent is a charge for ''more'' than the use of the good. Thus, Thomas Aquinas concluded that the lender is charging for something not his own, in other words, not rendering to each his due.