|
Objection 1: It would seem that the listener who suffers a backbiter
does not sin grievously. For a man is not under greater obligations to
others than to himself. But it is praiseworthy for a man to suffer his
own backbiters: for Gregory says (Hom. ix, super Ezech):
"Just as we ought not to incite the tongue of backbiters, lest they
perish, so ought we to suffer them with equanimity when they have been
incited by their own wickedness, in order that our merit may be the
greater." Therefore a man does not sin if he does not withstand those
who backbite others.
Objection 2: Further, it is written (Ecclus. 4:30): "In
no wise speak against the truth." Now sometimes a person tells the
truth while backbiting, as stated above (Article 1, ad 3).
Therefore it seems that one is not always bound to withstand a
backbiter.
Objection 3: Further, no man should hinder what is profitable to
others. Now backbiting is often profitable to those who are
backbitten: for Pope Pius [St. Pius I] says [Append. Grat.
ad can. Oves, caus. vi, qu. 1]: "Not unfrequently backbiting
is directed against good persons, with the result that those who have
been unduly exalted through the flattery of their kindred, or the favor
of others, are humbled by backbiting." Therefore one ought not to
withstand backbiters.
On the contrary, Jerome says (Ep. ad Nepot. lii): "Take care
not to have an itching tongue, nor tingling ears, that is, neither
detract others nor listen to backbiters."
I answer that, According to the Apostle (Rm. 1:32), they
"are worthy of death . . . not only they that" commit sins, "but
they also that consent to them that do them." Now this happens in two
ways. First, directly, when, to wit, one man induces another to
sin, or when the sin is pleasing to him: secondly, indirectly, that
is, if he does not withstand him when he might do so, and this happens
sometimes, not because the sin is pleasing to him, but on account of
some human fear.
Accordingly we must say that if a man list ens to backbiting without
resisting it, he seems to consent to the backbiter, so that he becomes
a participator in his sin. And if he induces him to backbite, or at
least if the detraction be pleasing to him on account of his hatred of
the person detracted, he sins no less than the detractor, and
sometimes more. Wherefore Bernard says (De Consid. ii, 13):
"It is difficult to say which is the more to be condemned the
backbiter or he that listens to backbiting." If however the sin is
not pleasing to him, and he fails to withstand the backbiter, through
fear negligence, or even shame, he sins indeed, but much less than
the backbiter, and, as a rule venially. Sometimes too this may be a
mortal sin, either because it is his official duty to cor. rect the
backbiter, or by reason of some consequent danger; or on account of
the radical reason for which human fear may sometimes be a mortal sin,
as stated above (Question 19, Article 3).
Reply to Objection 1: No man hears himself backbitten, because
when a man is spoken evil of in his hearing, it is not backbiting,
properly speaking, but reviling, as stated above (Article 1, ad
2). Yet it is possible for the detractions uttered against a person
to come to his knowledge through others telling him, and then it is
left to his discretion whether he will suffer their detriment to his
good name, unless this endanger the good of others, as stated above
(Question 72, Article 3). Wherefore his patience may deserve
commendation for as much as he suffers patiently being detracted
himself. But it is not left to his discretion to permit an injury to
be done to another's good name, hence he is accounted guilty if he
fails to resist when he can, for the same reason whereby a man is bound
to raise another man's ass lying "underneath his burden," as
commanded in Dt. 21:4 [Ex. 23:5].
Reply to Objection 2: One ought not always to withstand a backbiter
by endeavoring to convince him of falsehood, especially if one knows
that he is speaking the truth: rather ought one to reprove him with
words, for that he sins in backbiting his brother, or at least by our
pained demeanor show him that we are displeased with his backbiting,
because according to Prov. 25:23, "the north wind driveth away
rain, as doth a sad countenance a backbiting tongue."
Reply to Objection 3: The profit one derives from being backbitten
is due, not to the intention of the backbiter, but to the ordinance of
God Who produces good out of every evil. Hence we should none the
less withstand backbiters, just as those who rob or oppress others,
even though the oppressed and the robbed may gain merit by patience.
|
|