|
Objection 1: It would seem that we ought not to pray for our
enemies. According to Rm. 15:4, "what things soever were
written, were written for our learning." Now Holy Writ contains
many imprecations against enemies; thus it is written (Ps.
6:11): "Let all my enemies be ashamed and be . . . troubled,
let them be ashamed and be troubled very speedily." Therefore we too
should pray against rather than for our enemies.
Objection 2: Further, to be revenged on one's enemies is harmful
to them. But holy men seek vengeance of their enemies according to
Apoc. 6:10, "How long . . . dost Thou not . . . revenge
our blood on them that dwell on earth?" Wherefore they rejoice in
being revenged on their enemies, according to Ps. 57:11, "The
just shall rejoice when he shall see the revenge." Therefore we
should not pray for our enemies, but against them.
Objection 3: Further, man's deed should not be contrary to his
prayer. Now sometimes men lawfully attack their enemies, else all
wars would be unlawful, which is opposed to what we have said above
(Question 40, Article 1). Therefore we should not pray for our
enemies.
On the contrary, It is written (Mt. 5:44): "Pray for them
that persecute and calumniate you."
I answer that, To pray for another is an act of charity, as stated
above (Article 7). Wherefore we are bound to pray for our enemies
in the same manner as we are bound to love them. Now it was explained
above in the treatise on charity (Question 25, Articles 8,9),
how we are bound to love our enemies, namely, that we must love in
them their nature, not their sin. and that to love our enemies in
general is a matter of precept, while to love them in the individual is
not a matter of precept, except in the preparedness of the mind, so
that a man must be prepared to love his enemy even in the individual and
to help him in a case of necessity, or if his enemy should beg his
forgiveness. But to love one's enemies absolutely in the individual,
and to assist them, is an act of perfection.
In like manner it is a matter of obligation that we should not exclude
our enemies from the general prayers which we offer up for others: but
it is a matter of perfection, and not of obligation, to pray for them
individually, except in certain special cases.
Reply to Objection 1: The imprecations contained in Holy Writ may
be understood in four ways. First, according to the custom of the
prophets "to foretell the future under the veil of an imprecation,"
as Augustine states [De Serm. Dom. in Monte i, 21].
Secondly, in the sense that certain temporal evils are sometimes
inflicted by God on the wicked for their correction. Thirdly,
because they are understood to be pronounced, not against the men
themselves, but against the kingdom of sin, with the purpose, to
wit, of destroying sin by the correction of men. Fourthly, by way of
conformity of our will to the Divine justice with regard to the
damnation of those who are obstinate in sin.
Reply to Objection 2: As Augustine states in the same book (De
Serm. Dom. in Monte i, 22), "the martyrs' vengeance is the
overthrow of the kingdom of sin, because they suffered so much while it
reigned": or as he says again (Questions. Vet. et Nov. Test.
lxviii), "their prayer for vengeance is expressed not in words but in
their minds, even as the blood of Abel cried from the earth." They
rejoice in vengeance not for its own sake, but for the sake of Divine
justice.
Reply to Objection 3: It is lawful to attack one's enemies, that
they may be restrained from sin: and this is for their own good and for
the good of others. Consequently it is even lawful in praying to ask
that temporal evils be inflicted on our enemies in order that they may
mend their ways. Thus prayer and deed will not be contrary to one
another.
|
|