|
Objection 1: It would seem that it is lawful to communicate with
unbelievers. For the Apostle says (1 Cor. 10:27): "If
any of them that believe not, invite you, and you be willing to go,
eat of anything that is set before you." And Chrysostom says
(Hom. xxv super Epist. ad Heb.): "If you wish to go to dine
with pagans, we permit it without any reservation." Now to sit at
table with anyone is to communicate with him. Therefore it is lawful
to communicate with unbelievers.
Objection 2: Further, the Apostle says (1 Cor. 5:12):
"What have I to do to judge them that are without?" Now
unbelievers are without. When, therefore, the Church forbids the
faithful to communicate with certain people, it seems that they ought
not to be forbidden to communicate with unbelievers.
Objection 3: Further, a master cannot employ his servant, unless
he communicate with him, at least by word, since the master moves his
servant by command. Now Christians can have unbelievers, either
Jews, or pagans, or Saracens, for servants. Therefore they can
lawfully communicate with them.
On the contrary, It is written (Dt. 7:2,3): "Thou shalt
make no league with them, nor show mercy to them; neither shalt thou
make marriages with them": and a gloss on Lev. 15:19, "The
woman who at the return of the month," etc. says: "It is so
necessary to shun idolatry, that we should not come in touch with
idolaters or their disciples, nor have any dealings with them."
I answer that, Communication with a particular person is forbidden to
the faithful, in two ways: first, as a punishment of the person with
whom they are forbidden to communicate; secondly, for the safety of
those who are forbidden to communicate with others. Both motives can
be gathered from the Apostle's words (1 Cor. 5:6). For after
he had pronounced sentence of excommunication, he adds as his reason:
"Know you not that a little leaven corrupts the whole lump?" and
afterwards he adds the reason on the part of the punishment inflicted by
the sentence of the Church when he says (1 Cor. 5:12): "Do
not you judge them that are within?"
Accordingly, in the first way the Church does not forbid the faithful
to communicate with unbelievers, who have not in any way received the
Christian faith, viz. with pagans and Jews, because she has not the
right to exercise spiritual judgment over them, but only temporal
judgment, in the case when, while dwelling among Christians they are
guilty of some misdemeanor, and are condemned by the faithful to some
temporal punishment. On the other hand, in this way, i.e. as a
punishment, the Church forbids the faithful to communicate with those
unbelievers who have forsaken the faith they once received, either by
corrupting the faith, as heretics, or by entirely renouncing the
faith, as apostates, because the Church pronounces sentence of
excommunication on both.
With regard to the second way, it seems that one ought to distinguish
according to the various conditions of persons, circumstances and
time. For some are firm in the faith; and so it is to be hoped that
their communicating with unbelievers will lead to the conversion of the
latter rather than to the aversion of the faithful from the faith.
These are not to be forbidden to communicate with unbelievers who have
not received the faith, such as pagans or Jews, especially if there
be some urgent necessity for so doing. But in the case of simple
people and those who are weak in the faith, whose perversion is to be
feared as a probable result, they should be forbidden to communicate
with unbelievers, and especially to be on very familiar terms with
them, or to communicate with them without necessity.
This suffices for the Reply to the First Objection.
Reply to Objection 2: The Church does not exercise judgment
against unbelievers in the point of inflicting spiritual punishment on
them: but she does exercise judgment over some of them in the matter of
temporal punishment. It is under this head that sometimes the
Church, for certain special sins, withdraws the faithful from
communication with certain unbelievers.
Reply to Objection 3: There is more probability that a servant who
is ruled by his master's commands, will be converted to the faith of
his master who is a believer, than if the case were the reverse: and
so the faithful are not forbidden to have unbelieving servants. If,
however, the master were in danger, through communicating with such a
servant, he should send him away, according to Our Lord's command
(Mt. 18:8): "If . . . thy foot scandalize thee, cut it
off, and cast it from thee."
With regard to the argument in the contrary sense the reply is that the
Lord gave this command in reference to those nations into whose
territory the Jews were about to enter. For the latter were inclined
to idolatry, so that it was to be feared lest, through frequent
dealings with those nations, they should be estranged from the faith:
hence the text goes on (Dt. 7:4): "For she will turn away thy
son from following Me."
|
|