Justice is one of the four cardinal virtues — along with prudence, temperance, and fortitude — around which, the Catechism says, “all the others are grouped”[1]. And it is probably, of the four, the one whose name is most contested today. It is brandished on placards, demanded in courts, invoked as “social justice,” “climate justice,” “tax justice” — yet its true meaning is often unclear. For many, “justice” is confused with equality, or with the assertion of one’s rights, or with indignation at scandal. It has become such a broad word that it no longer denotes anything precise.
Yet justice, in the sense understood by Christian moralists, is not primarily a political program or a feeling: it is a personal virtue, a stable disposition of the will. The Catechism defines it as “the moral virtue that consists in the constant and firm will to give to God and neighbor what is due to them”[2]. St. Thomas expresses it even more succinctly: the habit by which “one renders to each his due”[3]. Two words govern everything: give — justice first concerns what I owe, not what is owed to me; and each — beginning with God, to whom the first of all debts is owed. It is this humble and precise virtue that contemporary slogans have obscured.
“Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.” — Jesus, Gospel according to Saint Matthew 5:6[4]
This article reviews the most frequent misunderstandings about justice, grouped according to whether they concern its nature, its scope, or its relationship to mercy and grace. For each, it states the error as commonly expressed, explains why it is appealing, why it is false, and then recalls what the Church truly teaches, supported by citations.
This is neither a compendium nor a practical guide: for the saints’ own voice on justice, see What the Saints Say About Justice; for the detailed nature of the virtue, its types (legal, commutative, distributive), its concrete means of growth, and its pitfalls, see How to Grow in Justice. Here, as in the twin article Common Misunderstandings About Temperance, we clear the ground: first learning to recognize counterfeit coins in order to better receive the true gold.
Why Is Justice So Misunderstood?
A Word Confiscated by Slogans
Few words are as frequently used and as emptied of meaning. “Justice!” has become a rallying cry attached to every cause — social, racial, climatic, memorial — to the point that the word ends up meaning “what I consider just,” that is, my indignation elevated to a norm. The more it is used, the less it is defined. The error is not in demanding justice: it is in believing one knows what it is because one demands it.
For the slogan reverses the meaning of the virtue. Justice, in tradition, is not primarily what I am entitled to demand from others: it is what I am bound to give them. “To render to each his due”[5]: the subject of the phrase is me who must give; the beneficiary is the other. The culture of demands has turned the phrase inside out — “I am owed” has replaced “I owe” — and it is from this reversal that most of the following errors arise.
A Virtue Confused with the Passion It Arouses
A second, more intimate source of misunderstanding: justice is confused with the emotion that injustice provokes. Faced with scandal — the innocent crushed, the powerful unpunished — a strong, sometimes holy, indignation arises within us. This is mistaken for the virtue of justice itself: “I have a sense of justice” often means “I get indignant easily.”
But justice is not a feeling. Tradition teaches that it is a virtue of the will, not of sensibility: it resides in the rational appetite and concerns acts, not emotions. One can be very indignant and not just at all; one can be deeply just without the slightest thrill of indignation. St. Thomas places here one of the reasons for justice’s excellence: unlike temperance or fortitude, which govern our inner passions, it “resides in the will” and concerns the good of others[6]. An emotion regards my feelings; justice regards the rights of the neighbor — these are two entirely different things.
Errors about the Nature of Justice
“Justice is equality: treating everyone exactly the same”
This is the most widespread error of our time: just would mean equal. A society that gives everyone the same thing would be just; one that distinguishes would be unjust. Equality becomes the sole criterion, and any difference in treatment is seen as injustice. This error is appealing because it is simple and rests on a real truth: before the law, before God, in their dignity as children of God, all men are equal, and Leviticus explicitly forbids judging according to a person’s status, in the terms taken up by the Catechism — “You shall show no partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great”[7].
But justice is not mechanical equality: it is “to give each his due”[8] — and this due is not always the same for everyone. Tradition here distinguishes commutative justice, which indeed requires strict equality in exchanges (a price equal to value, a debt paid to the amount borrowed), and distributive justice, which distributes goods and burdens in proportion to the needs, merits, and role of each person[9]. Giving the same ration to a child and a laborer, the same responsibility to an expert and a novice, the same care to the healthy and the sick would not be just: it would be unjust by way of equality. Justice gives each what belongs properly to him — which precisely requires seeing differences, not denying them. The details of the types of justice are treated in How to Grow in Justice.
“To be just is to claim one’s rights”
A variant directly stemming from the culture of demands: to be just would be to know one’s rights and defend them, not to let oneself be wronged, to demand what is due. Justice then sides with the one who claims, and the word evokes the courtroom, the lawyer, the power struggle. This error is appealing because it flatters self-love: it makes me the creditor and others the debtor.
Yet the virtue of justice looks primarily in the opposite direction. It is the “will to give […] what is due to them”[10]: its proper act is to give back, not to claim[11]. The just man of Scripture is not distinguished by harshness in defending his interests, but by “the habitual uprightness of his thoughts and the rectitude of his conduct toward his neighbor”[12] — a man who can be trusted, who pays what he owes, keeps his word, wrongs no one. This is how the Gospel describes Saint Joseph at his first appearance, even before the Annunciation: “a just man”[13] — not because he asserted a right, but because he was quietly preparing not to wrong anyone. Saint Paul himself sums up justice with a demand addressed not to the weak but to the strong: “Masters, grant your slaves what is just and fair”[14]. The virtue of justice thus begins where the justice of claims ends: not “let them give me what is due”, but “let me give each his due”. Claiming one’s right may be legitimate; but that is not yet being just — it is only being wronged.
“Justice is indignation at what offends”
This was hinted at above: many confuse the virtue with the feeling aroused by injustice. Having a sense of justice would be to be moved by scandal, to vibrate for the oppressed, to be inflamed against the powerful. Indignation becomes the sign — and measure — of someone’s justice.
But indignation is a passion, and a passion is neither just nor unjust in itself: it all depends on what the will enlightened by reason does with it. History is full of sincere indignations that produced terrible injustices — summary trials, mass revenge, convictions without proof, “popular justice”. The virtue, however, does not stop at emotion: it wants to firmly and constantly give each his due[15], including to the one who offends me, even when my feeling would want to crush him. It is even when indignation is strongest that justice is most demanding: for the temptation is then to slip from justice into vengeance. Scripture settles this: “Do not take revenge yourselves […] for I will take revenge; I will repay, says the Lord”[16]. On this slide from justice to vengeance, see How to Grow in Justice.
“Justice concerns only relations between men; God has nothing to do with it”
A reduction error, and the gravest for a Christian: justice would be a horizontal matter, between men — paying debts, respecting contracts, wronging no one. God would belong to prayer or feeling, not justice. One can thus believe oneself “a just person” while rendering nothing to God. This error is appealing because it is convenient: it exempts from the first debt, the most forgotten.
But the very definition of justice names God first: “to give to God and neighbor what is due to them”[17]. Justice toward God has a name — it is the virtue of religion — and it commands all the rest, for we owe God, as creatures, adoration, gratitude, worship. The Catechism states it plainly:
“Charity moves us to render to God what in justice we owe him as creatures. The virtue of religion disposes us to this attitude.” — Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2095[18]
The prophet Micah already placed justice toward men and walking with God in one and the same demand: “to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God”[19]. A justice that scrupulously renders what is due to men but nothing to God would be a justice amputated of its head: it would have forgotten the greatest creditor. That is why the first work of justice is not a won lawsuit, but adoration, the “first act” of religion[20]. On this first justice rendered to God, see What the Saints Say about Justice.
Errors about the Scope of Justice
“To be just is simply not to do harm”
A very common reduction, because it is reassuring: to be just would be to not steal, not kill, not deceive. A wholly negative justice, reduced to abstention. As long as one harms no one, one believes oneself free and clear. This error is appealing because it sets the bar very low and immediately puts us on the right side: “I have never wronged anyone.”
But justice involves positive debts, which are violated not by doing wrong, but by failing to act. To give each their due is not only to refrain from taking; it is to restore what one has unjustly kept, pay wages on time, speak the truth to those entitled to it, keep one’s promises, give thanks to benefactors and to God. Refusing to pay a fair wage, leaving a wrong unrepaired, breaking one’s word, failing to give due honor: these are injustices by omission, just as real as theft. Justice is not a wall that attacks no one; it is a hand that gives. The details of these positive debts—restoration, truth, fidelity, gratitude—are developed in How to Grow in Justice.
“Justice is the business of courts, laws, and the State”
Another narrowing: justice would be an institution—judges, codes, prisons, police—much more than a personal virtue. It would be “administered in court”; the ordinary citizen would only have to obey the law. This error rests on a real fact: there is indeed a legal or general justice, which orders the citizen toward the common good and which the State is charged to administer[21]. But it confuses the judicial apparatus with the virtue.
Yet justice is first a disposition of the soul, and it is exercised “to give each their due”[22] in the most everyday acts, far from any court: the exact change returned, the work honestly done for the wages received, the fair share left to another, the reputation not sullied, the promise kept. Human law can only reach a fraction of these duties; the vast majority of just acts escape any judge—except God, who “judges with justice”[23]. A society entirely governed by courts and devoid of inwardly just men would be unlivable; conversely, “to do justice and to love kindness is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice”[24], so that no court ever needs to intervene. Virtue precedes the institution and overflows it on all sides.
“Justice is reduced to social justice and political struggle”
A very contemporary error, often well-meaning: “true” justice would be social justice—the fight against inequalities, the defense of the oppressed, the transformation of structures. Everything else would be considered narrow, bourgeois morality. This error is appealing because it rests on a genuine demand: Scripture is passionate about the rights of the poor, and indifference to unjust structures is a real sin. “But let justice gush forth like a spring […]”, cries the prophet[25].
But reducing justice to collective struggle is to displace it: one projects it onto society to excuse oneself from practicing it in one’s own life. One can loudly campaign for “justice” and be, up close, profoundly unjust—harsh with one’s family, dishonest at work, slanderous, ungrateful to God. Christ targeted exactly this imbalance in the Pharisees, meticulous about the secondary and blind to the essential:
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. […]” — Jesus, Gospel according to Saint Matthew 23:23[26]
Social justice is a real part of justice, not its whole: it presupposes, to be true, persons who are themselves just. Justice demanded for society but not practiced in one’s own home is not the virtue of justice: it is an opinion. On this trap of the activist unjust up close, see How to Grow in Justice.
Errors about Justice, Mercy, and Grace
“Justice and mercy are opposed”
A persistent error, taking two opposite forms. For some, being just means applying the rule without weakening—mercy would be a softness, a breach of justice. For others, mercy being the supreme virtue, justice would be an outdated rigor, almost suspect. In both cases, the two virtues are set against each other, as if one must choose.
But the Gospel never separates them: Christ reproaches the Pharisees for neglecting in one and the same movement “justice, mercy, and faithfulness”[27]—three demands, not three competing options. Mercy is not the opposite of justice: it is its fullness. It does not exempt one from giving what is due; it adds, beyond what is strictly due, the free gift. Saint James warns that the two meet in God’s very judgment:
“For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.” — Saint James, Letter 2:13[28]
Mercy “triumphs”—not by abolishing justice, but by surpassing it: it gives more than what is due, never less. Justice without mercy becomes cruelty; mercy without justice becomes indulgence. The articulation of the two is treated in How to Grow in Justice and What the Saints Say about Justice.
“God’s justice is His anger and punishment”
A deeply rooted misreading: when Scripture speaks of the “justice of God,” one immediately thinks of His anger, His tribunal, the punishment of the guilty. A just God would be the God who condemns; His justice would be opposed to His love. This error is appealing because it corresponds to our human experience of justice—the courts and sanctions—and because some biblical passages do speak of judgment.
But the primary biblical meaning of the “justice of God” (in Hebrew tsedaqah, in Saint Paul dikaiosynē Theou) is not primarily retributive: it is the saving faithfulness of God, His way of keeping His covenant and making sinners just. God’s justice, for Paul, does not crush the sinner: it justifies him.
“But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law […] the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show, at the present time, what his justice consists in: to show that he is just and makes just the one who has faith in Jesus.” — Saint Paul, Letter to the Romans 3:21-26[29] Just himself, and making just the one who believes: here lies the heart of the matter. The justice of God is not the balance of an accountant but the faithfulness of a Savior who, by pure grace, imparts His own justice to the sinner who believes. Reducing divine justice to punishment misses the Good News itself. This does not deny judgment—God “will repay each person according to their works”[30]—but places this judgment at the service of a plan of salvation, not vengeance.
“One can be just by the sheer force of will, without grace”
The last error, more subtle, affects upright natures and the wise: justice would be a matter of character, natural honesty, and firmness, where God would have no role. Indeed, there is a purely acquired justice: men without faith pay their debts, keep their word, wrong no one, and this is to their credit. The Church does not deny this natural justice; she acknowledges it.
But she knows it is fragile and incomplete. First, because man wounded by sin does not maintain his uprightness for long by his own strength alone: the Catechism reminds us that human virtues “are purified and elevated by divine grace”[31]. Secondly and above all because integral justice includes the debt owed to God—religion, worship, gratitude—that no willpower can discharge without grace. One does not make oneself just before God by sheer willpower; one receives His justice. This is the pinnacle of the New Testament: Christ Himself “became for us righteousness”.
“It is because of God that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption.” — Saint Paul, First Letter to the Corinthians 1:30[32]
Christian justice is therefore both humbler and higher than the justice of the wise: humbler because it does not rely on oneself but on Christ “our righteousness”; higher because it aims not only at uprightness among men but at holiness received from God. This is also why Christ demands a justice that surpasses purely human justice: “If your righteousness does not surpass that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of Heaven”[33]. This superabundant justice, which is no longer measured by effort but united to the very will of God, flourishes—according to the hope handed down in the writings of the Servant of God Luisa Piccarreta—in the gift of living IN the Divine Will, that is, letting God Himself act in us, the soul letting itself be “carried in His Arms”[34]: a hope of interior sanctification coming from a private revelation, not a teaching of the Catechism—a theme developed in How to grow in justice.
Error and truth at a glance
The table below summarizes the misunderstandings covered: on the left, the error in its common formulation; in the center, why it is false; on the right, what the Church actually teaches, with its source. It is read line by line, as a quick antidote to common misconceptions.
| Common error | Why it is false | What the Church teaches |
|---|---|---|
| Justice is equality: treating everyone the same | Confuses mechanical equality with “to each his due,” which can be unequal | Distributive justice: distributing according to needs and merits (Thomas, II-II q. 61)[35] |
| Being just means claiming one’s rights | Reverses the virtue: justice concerns what I owe, not what is owed to me | “The will to give […] what is due to others” (CCC § 1807)[36] |
| Justice is indignation at scandal | Confuses the virtue (of the will) with a passion (of the feelings) | A virtue “firm and constant” residing in the will (Thomas, II-II q. 58 a. 12)[37] |
| Justice concerns only men, not God | Forgets the primary debt: what the creature owes to its Creator | Justice toward God is the virtue of religion (CCC §§ 1807; 2095)[38] |
| Being just means not doing harm | Ignores positive debts: restoring, paying, telling the truth, keeping promises | “Rendering to each his due”, by action as well as omission (Thomas, II-II q. 58 a. 11)[39] |
| Justice is the business of courts and the State | Confuses the judicial system with the personal virtue | “Practicing justice […] pleases the Lord more than sacrifice” (Pr 21:3)[40] |
| Justice is limited to militant social justice | One can demand justice for society and be unjust personally | Christ demands “justice, mercy, and faithfulness” together (Mt 23:23)[41] |
| Justice and mercy are opposed | Mercy is not the opposite of justice but its fullness | “Mercy triumphs over judgment” (Jas 2:13)[42] |
| God’s justice is His anger and punishment | The primary biblical meaning is faithfulness that justifies the sinner | God “is just and makes just the one who has faith in Jesus” (Rm 3:26)[43] |
| One can be just without grace | Natural justice is real but fragile and cannot discharge the debt to God | Virtues “purified and elevated by grace”; “Christ, our righteousness” (CCC § 1810; 1 Cor 1:30)[44] |
Justice, law, equity, religion: do not confuse them
Many errors simply arise from unclear vocabulary, where a part is taken for the whole. A few classic distinctions suffice to clear the fog. Justice is the general cardinal virtue: the constant will to give each one their due. Law (in Latin ius) is not the virtue but its object — the just thing itself, what is owed; justice is the virtue, law is what it aims at. Equity (epikeia) is not the enemy of justice but its higher form: it corrects the general law where its literal application would produce, in a particular case, an injustice — not to free itself from what is just, but to better attain it.
Within justice, tradition further distinguishes its kinds: commutative justice governs exchanges between persons and demands strict equality (price, debt, contract); distributive justice allocates common goods and burdens in proportion to each one[45]; legal or general justice orders the citizen toward the common good[46]. And justice toward God is called religion. These words are therefore not synonyms: they name applications or parts of the same virtue. To confuse justice with one of them — to reduce it to distributive equality, to the law of the state, or to only the relationship between men — is precisely the error of scope already encountered. The details of these kinds and their related parts are developed in How to grow in justice.
Restoring justice to its true greatness
Once the counterfeits are set aside, the virtue appears in its light. Far from being the humblest of the cardinal virtues, justice is, according to Saint Thomas, the most excellent of the moral virtues — even superior to fortitude and temperance:
“If we speak of particular justice, it surpasses the other moral virtues in excellence for two reasons. The first, taken from the side of the subject, is that justice has its seat in the noblest part of the soul, that is, the rational appetite or the will, whereas the other moral virtues have their seat in the sensitive appetite […]; […] justice is praised, moreover, for the good that the virtuous man achieves in his relations with others […]” — Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 58, a. 12, body of the article[47]
Two traits make its nobility. First, it dwells in the will and not in the sensibility: it is therefore more fully human, freer, less dependent on mood than temperance or courage. Second — and this is decisive — it is entirely turned toward others: while the other virtues perfect me in relation to myself, justice perfects me in relation to neighbor and God. It is the virtue of relationship, the one that makes human relations livable and which, without it, would deliver society to the “great robberies” denounced by Saint Augustine[48].
Above all, it is inseparable from love. Giving each their due is not a cold calculation: it is the first form of charity, which cannot love the neighbor without first refusing to wrong them. “You have been shown what is good […]: to do what is right, to love faithfulness, and to walk humbly with your God”[49]: justice holds together the neighbor’s right and the walk toward God, the horizontal and the vertical. This is its true greatness, the exact opposite of the slogans that have hijacked it: not a weapon to claim, but a humble and tenacious will to give — to God His worship, to neighbor their due, to each what belongs to them — until receiving from Christ the only justice that saves.
“Justice consists in the constant and firm will to give God and neighbor what is their due.” — Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1836[50]
Further reading
- What the saints say about justice — the anthology: the voice of the Fathers, Doctors, and holy just ones on the debt owed to God and the poor.
- How to grow in justice — the practical guide: nature, kinds (commutative, distributive, legal), related virtues, concrete means, pitfalls, and fruits.
- Common errors concerning temperance — the twin article in the same series: misunderstandings about the other cardinal virtue of the “golden mean.”
- How to grow in prudence — the virtue that discerns, in each case, where the just lies to be given.
Notes and References
Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1805: “Four virtues play a pivotal role. For this reason they are called ‘cardinal’; all others cluster around them. They are prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance.” Quoting Wisdom 8:7: “Who loves righteousness? Virtue is the fruit of her works; she teaches moderation and prudence, justice and courage.”
1Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1807: “Justice is the moral virtue that consists in the constant and firm will to give God and neighbor what is their due. Justice toward God is called the ‘virtue of religion.’ Toward men, justice disposes one to respect the rights of each and to establish in human relationships the harmony that promotes equity with regard to persons and the common good. The just man, often mentioned in Sacred Scripture, is distinguished by the habitual uprightness of his thoughts and the rectitude of his conduct toward his neighbor.” The paragraph cites Leviticus 19:15 (“You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor.”) and Colossians 4:1 (“Masters, treat your slaves justly and fairly, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven.”).
2 7 10 12 14 15 17 36Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 58, a. 1, body of the article (respondeo): “Justice is the habit by which one renders to each his right (or due) with a constant and perpetual will” (iustitia est habitus secundum quem aliquis constanti et perpetua voluntate ius suum unicuique tribuit). Thomas takes up and clarifies the definition received from Roman jurists and Aristotle: “will” marks that every act of justice is voluntary; “constant and perpetual” indicates firmness of disposition.
3Gospel according to Saint Matthew 5:6, official liturgical translation (AELF): “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.” Fourth Beatitude of the Sermon on the Mount.
4Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 58, a. 11, body of the article (respondeo): “The proper act of justice is nothing else than to render to each what is his own” (proprius actus iustitiae nihil est aliud quam reddere unicuique quod suum est). The act of justice is properly called “rendering” (reddere), because it presupposes a preexisting debt.
5 8 11 22 39Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 58, a. 12 (“Does justice surpass all other moral virtues?”), body of the article (respondeo): justice is “the most excellent of the moral virtues” for two reasons: first from the perspective of the subject, because it resides in the will (rational appetite) and not in the sensitive appetite; secondly from the perspective of the object, because it is exercised “towards another” and regards the good of another. Thomas cites in this connection, in the sed contra of this same article 12, the words of Cicero (De officiis, I, 7): “Justice is the most shining of the virtues, and it is from her that men are called good.”
6 37 47Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 61: distinction of the species of particular justice. Commutative justice regulates exchanges between private persons and requires an equality of arithmetic proportion (what is owed is strictly equal to what is given: price, debt, contract). Distributive justice regulates the distribution of common goods and burdens among members of the community, according to a geometric proportion (in proportion to merit, need, function).
9 35 45Gospel according to Saint Matthew 1:19, official liturgical translation (AELF): “Joseph, her husband, was a righteous man…” — the biblical formula of “the righteous man” applied to Saint Joseph, a figure of the righteous developed in the neighboring articles.
13Letter to the Romans 12:19, official liturgical translation (AELF): “Beloved, do not take revenge yourselves, but leave room for the wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.’”
16Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2095: “The theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity inform and vivify the moral virtues. Thus charity moves us to give to God what in all justice we owe Him as creatures. The virtue of religion disposes us to this attitude.”
18 38Micah 6:8, official liturgical translation (AELF): “O man, answers the prophet, he has told you what is good, and what the Lord requires of you: only to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God.”
19 49Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2096: “From the virtue of religion, worship is the first act. To worship God is to acknowledge Him as God, as Creator and Savior, Lord and Master of all that exists, infinite and merciful Love.” Quoting Luke 4:8: “You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only shall you serve.”
20Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 58, a. 5-6: legal or general justice is the general virtue which orders the acts of all the other virtues to the common good; it is what makes the good citizen.
21 46First Letter of Saint Peter 2:23, official liturgical translation (AELF): “When insulted, he did not return the insult; when suffering, he did not threaten, but entrusted himself to the One who judges justly.”
23Proverbs 21:3, official liturgical translation (AELF): “To do justice and to love kindness is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.”
24 40Amos 5:24, official liturgical translation (AELF): “But let justice gush forth like a spring; righteousness, like a torrent that never runs dry!”
25Gospel according to Saint Matthew 23:23, official liturgical translation (AELF): “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faithfulness. […]” (the rest of the verse: “That is what should have been practiced, without neglecting the rest.”)
26 27 41Letter of Saint James 2:13, official liturgical translation (AELF): “For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.”
28 42Letter to the Romans 3:21-26, official liturgical translation (AELF): “But now, apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been made known […]. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption in Christ Jesus. […] He intended to show, at the present time, the righteousness of God: that he is just and makes just the one who has faith in Jesus.” This is the central passage of Pauline doctrine on justification.
29 43Letter to the Romans 2:6, official liturgical translation (AELF): “who will repay each one according to his works.”
30Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1810: “Human virtues acquired by education, deliberate acts, and perseverance in effort are purified and elevated by divine grace. With God’s help, they form character and give ease in doing good. The virtuous man is happy to practice them.”
31 44First Letter to the Corinthians 1:30, official liturgical translation (AELF): “It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.”
32Gospel according to Saint Matthew 5:20, official liturgical translation (AELF): “For unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
33Jesus to Luisa Piccarreta (Servant of God, 1865-1947), The Book of Heaven, volume 34, dictation 34-33 of 25 April 1937: “It knows and can put this Divine Art to work in the creature, provided the latter lends itself to living in It and lets itself be carried in Its Arms.” (“for private use” edition, GE – La Volonté Divine – Lumen Luminis, p. 130). Degree of authority: private revelation received — not a teaching of the Magisterium.
34Saint Augustine, The City of God, Book IV, Chapter 4 (“Empires, without justice, are but great bands of robbers”): “What are empires without justice but great assemblies of robbers?” (Remota itaque iustitia, quid sunt regna nisi magna latrocinia?).
48Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1836 (“In brief”): “Justice consists in the constant and firm will to give God and neighbor what is their due.”
50