|
Objection 1: It would seem that we ought not to love sinners out of
charity. For it is written (Ps. 118:113): "I have hated
the unjust." But David had perfect charity. Therefore sinners
should be hated rather than loved, out of charity.
Objection 2: Further, "love is proved by deeds" as Gregory says
in a homily for Pentecost (In Evang. xxx). But good men do no
works of the unjust: on the contrary, they do such as would appear to
be works of hate, according to Ps. 100:8: "In the morning I
put to death all the wicked of the land": and God commanded (Ex.
22:18): "Wizards thou shalt not suffer to live." Therefore
sinners should not be loved out of charity.
Objection 3: Further, it is part of friendship that one should
desire and wish good things for one's friends. Now the saints, out
of charity, desire evil things for the wicked, according to Ps.
9:18: "May the wicked be turned into hell." Therefore sinners
should not be loved out of charity.
Objection 4: Further, it is proper to friends to rejoice in, and
will the same things. Now charity does not make us will what sinners
will, nor to rejoice in what gives them joy, but rather the contrary.
Therefore sinners should not be loved out of charity.
Objection 5: Further, it is proper to friends to associate
together, according to Ethic. viii. But we ought not to associate
with sinners, according to 2 Cor. 6:17: "Go ye out from among
them." Therefore we should not love sinners out of charity.
On the contrary, Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 30)
that "when it is said: 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor,' it is
evident that we ought to look upon every man as our neighbor." Now
sinners do not cease to be men, for sin does not destroy nature.
Therefore we ought to love sinners out of charity.
I answer that, Two things may be considered in the sinner: his
nature and his guilt. According to his nature, which he has from
God, he has a capacity for happiness, on the fellowship of which
charity is based, as stated above (Article 3; Question 23,
Articles 1,5), wherefore we ought to love sinners, out of
charity, in respect of their nature.
On the other hand their guilt is opposed to God, and is an obstacle
to happiness. Wherefore, in respect of their guilt whereby they are
opposed to God, all sinners are to be hated, even one's father or
mother or kindred, according to Lk. 12:26. For it is our duty
to hate, in the sinner, his being a sinner, and to love in him, his
being a man capable of bliss; and this is to love him truly, out of
charity, for God's sake.
Reply to Objection 1: The prophet hated the unjust, as such, and
the object of his hate was their injustice, which was their evil.
Such hatred is perfect, of which he himself says (Ps.
138:22): "I have hated them with a perfect hatred." Now
hatred of a person's evil is equivalent to love of his good. Hence
also this perfect hatred belongs to charity.
Reply to Objection 2: As the Philosopher observes (Ethic. ix,
3), when our friends fall into sin, we ought not to deny them the
amenities of friendship, so long as there is hope of their mending
their ways, and we ought to help them more readily to regain virtue
than to recover money, had they lost it, for as much as virtue is more
akin than money to friendship. When, however, they fall into very
great wickedness, and become incurable, we ought no longer to show
them friendliness. It is for this reason that both Divine and human
laws command such like sinners to be put to death, because there is
greater likelihood of their harming others than of their mending their
ways. Nevertheless the judge puts this into effect, not out of hatred
for the sinners, but out of the love of charity, by reason of which he
prefers the public good to the life of the individual. Moreover the
death inflicted by the judge profits the sinner, if he be converted,
unto the expiation of his crime; and, if he be not converted, it
profits so as to put an end to the sin, because the sinner is thus
deprived of the power to sin any more.
Reply to Objection 3: Such like imprecations which we come across
in Holy Writ, may be understood in three ways: first, by way of
prediction, not by way of wish, so that the sense is: "May the
wicked be," that is, "The wicked shall be, turned into hell."
Secondly, by way of wish, yet so that the desire of the wisher is not
referred to the man's punishment, but to the justice of the punisher,
according to Ps. 57:11: "The just shall rejoice when he shall
see the revenge," since, according to Wis. 1:13, not even God
"hath pleasure in the destruction of the wicked" when He punishes
them, but He rejoices in His justice, according to Ps. 10:8:
"The Lord is just and hath loved justice." Thirdly, so that this
desire is referred to the removal of the sin, and not to the punishment
itself, to the effect, namely, that the sin be destroyed, but that
the man may live.
Reply to Objection 4: We love sinners out of charity, not so as to
will what they will, or to rejoice in what gives them joy, but so as
to make them will what we will, and rejoice in what rejoices us.
Hence it is written (Jer. 15:19): "They shall be turned to
thee, and thou shalt not to be turned to them."
Reply to Objection 5: The weak should avoid associating with
sinners, on account of the danger in which they stand of being
perverted by them. But it is commendable for the perfect, of whose
perversion there is no fear, to associate with sinners that they may
convert them. For thus did Our Lord eat and drink with sinners as
related by Mt. 9:11-13. Yet all should avoid the society of
sinners, as regards fellowship in sin; in this sense it is written
(2 Cor. 6:17): "Go out from among them . . . and touch
not the unclean thing," i.e. by consenting to sin.
|
|