|
Objection 1: It would seem that religious are bound to manual
labor. For religious are not exempt from the observance of precepts.
Now manual labor is a matter of precept according to 1 Thess.
4:11, "Work with your own hands as we commanded you"; wherefore
Augustine says (De oper. Monach. xxx): "But who can allow
these insolent men," namely religious that do no work, of whom he is
speaking there, "who disregard the most salutary admonishment of the
Apostle, not merely to be borne with as being weaker than others, but
even to preach as though they were holier than others." Therefore it
would seem that religious are bound to manual labor.
Objection 2: Further, a gloss [St. Augustine, De oper.
Monach. xxi] on 2 Thess. 3:10, "If any man will not work,
neither let him eat," says: "Some say that this command of the
Apostle refers to spiritual works, and not to the bodily labor of the
farmer or craftsman"; and further on: "But it is useless for them
to try to hide from themselves and from others the fact that they are
unwilling not only to fulfil, but even to understand the useful
admonishments of charity"; and again: "He wishes God's servants
to make a living by working with their bodies." Now religious
especially are called servants of God, because they give themselves
entirely to the service of God, as Dionysius asserts (Eccl.
Hier. vi). Therefore it would seem that they are bound to manual
labor.
Objection 3: Further, Augustine says (De oper. Monach.
xvii): "I would fain know how they would occupy themselves, who are
unwilling to work with their body. We occupy our time, say they,
with prayers, psalms, reading, and the word of God." Yet these
things are no excuse, and he proves this, as regards each in
particular. For in the first place, as to prayer, he says: "One
prayer of the obedient man is sooner granted than ten thousand prayers
of the contemptuous": meaning that those are contemptuous and unworthy
to be heard who work not with their hands. Secondly, as to the divine
praises he adds: "Even while working with their hands they can easily
sing hymns to God." Thirdly, with regard to reading, he goes on to
say: "Those who say they are occupied in reading, do they not find
there what the Apostle commanded? What sort of perverseness is this,
to wish to read but not to obey what one reads?" Fourthly, he adds
in reference to preaching [Cap. xviii]: "If one has to speak,
and is so busy that he cannot spare time for manual work, can all in
the monastery do this? And since all cannot do this, why should all
make this a pretext for being exempt? And even if all were able, they
should do so by turns, not only so that the others may be occupied in
other works, but also because it suffices that one speak while many
listen." Therefore it would seem that religious should not desist
from manual labor on account of such like spiritual works to which they
devote themselves.
Objection 4: Further, a gloss on Lk. 12:33, "Sell what
you possess," says: "Not only give your clothes to the poor, but
sell what you possess, that having once for all renounced all your
possessions for the Lord's sake, you may henceforth work with the
labor of your hands, so as to have wherewith to live or to give
alms." Now it belongs properly to religious to renounce all they
have. Therefore it would seem likewise to belong to them to live and
give alms through the labor of their hands.
Objection 5: Further, religious especially would seem to be bound
to imitate the life of the apostles, since they profess the state of
perfection. Now the apostles worked with their own hands, according
to 1 Cor. 4:12: "We labor, working with our own hands."
Therefore it would seem that religious are bound to manual labor.
On the contrary, Those precepts that are commonly enjoined upon all
are equally binding on religious and seculars. But the precept of
manual labor is enjoined upon all in common, as appears from 2
Thess. 3:6, "Withdraw yourselves from every brother walking
disorderly," etc. (for by brother he signifies every Christian,
according to 1 Cor. 7:12, "If any brother have a wife that
believeth not"). Now it is written in the same passage (2 Thess.
3:10): "If any man will not work, neither let him eat."
Therefore religious are not bound to manual labor any more than
seculars are.
I answer that, Manual labor is directed to four things. First and
principally to obtain food; wherefore it was said to the first man
(Gn. 3:19): "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat
bread," and it is written (Ps. 127:2): "For thou shalt eat
the labors of thy hands." Secondly, it is directed to the removal of
idleness whence arise many evils; hence it is written (Ecclus.
33:28,29): "Send" thy slave "to work, that he be not
idle, for idleness hath taught much evil." Thirdly, it is directed
to the curbing of concupiscence, inasmuch as it is a means of
afflicting the body; hence it is written (2 Cor. 6:5,6):
"In labors, in watchings, in fastings, in chastity." Fourthly,
it is directed to almsgiving, wherefore it is written (Eph.
4:28): "He that stole, let him now steal no more; but rather
let him labor, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he
may have something to give to him that suffereth need." Accordingly,
in so far as manual labor is directed to obtaining food, it comes under
a necessity of precept in so far as it is necessary for that end: since
that which is directed to an end derives its necessity from that end,
being, in effect, so far necessary as the end cannot be obtained
without it. Consequently he who has no other means of livelihood is
bound to work with his hands, whatever his condition may be. This is
signified by the words of the Apostle: "If any man will not work,
neither let him eat," as though to say: "The necessity of manual
labor is the necessity of meat." So that if one could live without
eating, one would not be bound to work with one's hands. The same
applies to those who have no other lawful means of livelihood: since a
man is understood to be unable to do what he cannot do lawfully.
Wherefore we find that the Apostle prescribed manual labor merely as a
remedy for the sin of those who gained their livelihood by unlawful
means. For the Apostle ordered manual labor first of all in order to
avoid theft, as appears from Eph. 4:28, "He that stole, let
him now steal no more; but rather let him labor, working with his
hands." Secondly, to avoid the coveting of others' property,
wherefore it is written (1 Thess. 4:11): "Work with your own
hands, as we commanded you, and that you walk honestly towards them
that are without." Thirdly, to avoid the discreditable pursuits
whereby some seek a livelihood. Hence he says (2 Thess.
3:10-12): "When we were with you, this we declared to you:
that if any man will not work, neither let him eat. For we have heard
that there are some among you who walk disorderly, working not at all,
but curiously meddling" (namely, as a gloss explains it, "who make
a living by meddling in unlawful things). Now we charge them that are
such, and beseech them . . . that working with silence, they would
eat their own bread." Hence Jerome states (Super epist. ad
Galat. [Preface to Bk. ii of Commentary]) that the Apostle
said this "not so much in his capacity of teacher as on account of the
faults of the people."
It must, however, be observed that under manual labor are comprised
all those human occupations whereby man can lawfully gain a livelihood,
whether by using his hands, his feet, or his tongue. For watchmen,
couriers, and such like who live by their labor, are understood to
live by their handiwork: because, since the hand is "the organ of
organs" [De Anima iii, 8], handiwork denotes all kinds of work,
whereby a man may lawfully gain a livelihood.
In so far as manual labor is directed to the removal of idleness, or
the affliction of the body, it does not come under a necessity of
precept if we consider it in itself, since there are many other means
besides manual labor of afflicting the body or of removing idleness:
for the flesh is afflicted by fastings and watchings, and idleness is
removed by meditation on the Holy Scriptures and by the divine
praises. Hence a gloss on Ps. 118:82, "My eyes have failed
for Thy word," says: "He is not idle who meditates only on God's
word; nor is he who works abroad any better than he who devotes himself
to the study of knowing the truth." Consequently for these reasons
religious are not bound to manual labor, as neither are seculars,
except when they are so bound by the statutes of their order. Thus
Jerome says (Ep. cxxv ad Rustic Monach.): "The Egyptian
monasteries are wont to admit none unless they work or labor, not so
much for the necessities of life, as for the welfare of the soul, lest
it be led astray by wicked thoughts." But in so far as manual labor
is directed to almsgiving, it does not come under the necessity of
precept, save perchance in some particular case, when a man is under
an obligation to give alms, and has no other means of having the
wherewithal to assist the poor: for in such a case religious would be
bound as well as seculars to do manual labor.
Reply to Objection 1: This command of the Apostle is of natural
law: wherefore a gloss on 2 Thess. 3:6, "That you withdraw
yourselves from every brother walking disorderly," says, "otherwise
than the natural order requires," and he is speaking of those who
abstained from manual labor. Hence nature has provided man with hands
instead of arms and clothes, with which she has provided other
animals, in order that with his hands he may obtain these and all other
necessaries. Hence it is clear that this precept, even as all the
precepts of the natural law, is binding on both religious and seculars
alike. Yet not everyone sins that works not with his hands, because
those precepts of the natural law which regard the good of the many are
not binding on each individual, but it suffices that one person apply
himself to this business and another to that; for instance, that some
be craftsmen, others husbandmen, others judges, and others teachers,
and so forth, according to the words of the Apostle (1 Cor.
12:17), "If the whole body were the eye, where would be the
hearing? If the whole were the hearing, where would be the
smelling?"
Reply to Objection 2: This gloss is taken from Augustine's De
operibus Monachorum, cap. 21, where he speaks against certain
monks who declared it to be unlawful for the servants of God to work
with their hands, on account of our Lord's saying (Mt.
6:25): "Be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat."
Nevertheless his words do not imply that religious are bound to work
with their hands, if they have other means of livelihood. This is
clear from his adding: "He wishes the servants of God to make a
living by working with their bodies." Now this does not apply to
religious any more than to seculars, which is evident for two reasons.
First, on account of the way in which the Apostle expresses himself,
by saying: "That you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking
disorderly." For he calls all Christians brothers, since at that
time religious orders were not as yet founded. Secondly, because
religious have no other obligations than what seculars have, except as
required by the rule they profess: wherefore if their rule contain
nothing about manual labor, religious are not otherwise bound to manual
labor than seculars are.
Reply to Objection 3: A man may devote himself in two ways to all
the spiritual works mentioned by Augustine in the passage quoted: in
one way with a view to the common good, in another with a view to his
private advantage. Accordingly those who devote themselves publicly to
the aforesaid spiritual works are thereby exempt from manual labor for
two reasons: first, because it behooves them to be occupied
exclusively with such like works; secondly, because those who devote
themselves to such works have a claim to be supported by those for whose
advantage they work.
On the other hand, those who devote themselves to such works not
publicly but privately as it were, ought not on that account to be
exempt from manual labor, nor have they a claim to be supported by the
offerings of the faithful, and it is of these that Augustine is
speaking. For when he says: "They can sing hymns to God even while
working with their hands; like the craftsmen who give tongue to fable
telling without withdrawing their hands from their work," it is clear
that he cannot refer to those who sing the canonical hours in the
church, but to those who tell psalms or hymns as private prayers.
Likewise what he says of reading and prayer is to be referred to the
private prayer and reading which even lay people do at times, and not
to those who perform public prayers in the church, or give public
lectures in the schools. Hence he does not say: "Those who say they
are occupied in teaching and instructing," but: "Those who say they
are occupied in reading." Again he speaks of that preaching which is
addressed, not publicly to the people, but to one or a few in
particular by way of private admonishment. Hence he says expressly:
"If one has to speak." For according to a gloss on 1 Cor.
2:4, "Speech is addressed privately, preaching to many."
Reply to Objection 4: Those who despise all for God's sake are
bound to work with their hands, when they have no other means of
livelihood, or of almsgiving (should the case occur where almsgiving
were a matter of precept), but not otherwise, as stated in the
Article. It is in this sense that the gloss quoted is to be
understood.
Reply to Objection 5: That the apostles worked with their hands was
sometimes a matter of necessity, sometimes a work of supererogation.
It was of necessity when they failed to receive a livelihood from
others. Hence a gloss on 1 Cor. 4:12, "We labor, working
with our own hands," adds, "because no man giveth to us." It was
supererogation, as appears from 1 Cor. 9:12, where the Apostle
says that he did not use the power he had of living by the Gospel.
The Apostle had recourse to this supererogation for three motives.
First, in order to deprive the false apostles of the pretext for
preaching, for they preached merely for a temporal advantage; hence he
says (2 Cor. 11:12): "But what I do, that I will do that
I may cut off the occasion from them," etc. Secondly, in order to
avoid burdening those to whom he preached; hence he says (2 Cor.
12:13): "What is there that you have had less than the other
churches, but that I myself was not burthensome to you?" Thirdly,
in order to give an example of work to the idle; hence he says (2
Thess. 3:8,9): "We worked night and day . . . that we
might give ourselves a pattern unto you, to imitate us." However,
the Apostle did not do this in places like Athens where he had
facilities for preaching daily, as Augustine observes (De oper.
Monach. xviii). Yet religious are not for this reason bound to
imitate the Apostle in this matter, since they are not bound to all
works of supererogation: wherefore neither did the other apostles work
with their hands.
|
|