Lecture 11 Lectio 11 Against revenge Contra ultionem ^5:38 You have heard that it was said: an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. [n. 525] ^5:38 Audistis quia dictum est: oculum pro oculo, dentem pro dente. [n. 525] ^5:39 But I say to you not to resist evil: but if one strike you on your right cheek, turn to him also the other. [n. 527] ^5:39 Ego autem dico vobis, non resistere malo; sed si quis te percusserit in dexteram maxillam, praebe illi et alteram. [n. 527] ^5:40 And if a man will contend with you in judgment, and take away your coat, let go your cloak to him also. [n. 532] ^5:40 Et ei qui vult tecum iudicio contendere, et tunicam tuam tollere, dimitte ei et pallium. [n. 532] ^5:41 And whoever will force you one mile, go with him the other two, [n. 534] ^5:41 Et quicumque te angariaverit mille passus, vade cum illo et alia duo. [n. 534] ^5:42 give to him who asks of you and from him who would borrow of you turn not away. [n. 535] ^5:42 Qui petit a te, da ei; et volenti mutuari a te, ne avertaris. [n. 535] 525. You have heard that it was said: ‘an eye for an eye.’ Above, the Lord fulfilled the law as to the permissive precepts that pertain to God; now, he does it as to those that pertain to our neighbor. And this in two respects: as to the act, and as to the emotion. The second is found at, ‘you shall love your neighbor’ (Matt 5:43). 525. Audistis quia dictum est: ‘oculum pro oculo.’ Supra Dominus adimplevit legem quantum ad praecepta permissiva quae pertinent ad Deum; nunc quantum ad ea quae pertinent ad proximum. Et hoc quantum ad duo: quantum ad actum et quantum ad affectum. Secundum, ibi ‘diliges proximum.’ Concerning the first he does two things: Circa primum duo facit: first, he quotes the words of the law, primo ponit dictum legis, second, he fulfills it. secundo adimplet. 526. Therefore he says, you have heard that it was said, that you ought to require ‘an eye for an eye’ (Ex 21:24: Deut 19:21). But in these words of the law different things were understood by the lawgiver than by the Jews, for the intention of the lawgiver was to establish a mode of judging in justice for the judges, so that they could impose a predetermined penalty. The Jews understood it as each one taking his own retribution for the injuries he had suffered, which was against the law: seek not revenge (Lev 19:18). 526. Dicit ergo audistis etc ‘oculum pro oculo’ debes exigere, Exod. XXI, 24 et Deut. XIX, 21. In istis autem verbis legis alius fuit intellectus legislatoris et Iudaeorum, quia legislatoris intentio fuit statuere modum iudicandi iustitiae quantum ad iudices, ut scilicet poenam determinatam inferrent. Iudaei intelligebant quod unusquisque vindictam acciperet de iniuria sibi illata: quod erat contra legem Lev. XIX, 18: non quaeras ultionem. Therefore the Lord gives the fulfillment as to the wrong understanding. Hence, but I say to you. Adimplet ergo Dominus quantum ad malum intellectum. Unde ego autem. And concerning this he does two things. For he fulfills it in two ways: Et circa hoc duo facit. Dupliciter enim adimplet: first, as to the fact that retribution is not to be sought; primo quantum ad hoc quod non expetatur vindicta; second, that one should do good to anyone inflicting an injury, at give to him who asks of you. secundo quantum ad hoc quod bonum faciat inferenti iniuriam, ibi qui petit a te. Concerning this he does two things: Circa primum duo facit: first, he gives the fulfillment in general, primo adimplet in generali, second, in the particular, at but if one strike you. secundo in speciali, ibi sed si quis. 527. As to the surface meaning of the letter, it seems to be a bad law. And vice versa. But according to Augustine, the Lord did not destroy, but fulfilled. For the intention of the law was to draw men away from extreme and unregulated revenge. But God completely prohibits revenge. Hence if the law had said ‘do not seek revenge beyond your due,’ and the Lord says: ‘do not seek it at all,’ he would be fulfilling the words of the law. 527. Quantum ad superficiem litterae videtur quod mala lex. Econverso. Sed secundum Augustinum Dominus non destruit, sed implet. Legis enim intentio erat retrahere homines a nimia ultione et immoderata. Dominus autem totaliter prohibet ultionem. Unde si lex dixisset: non quaeras ultionem ultra debitum, et Dominus: nullo modo quaeras, adimplesset dictum legis. And here, according to Augustine, five degrees should be considered: one, the man who inflicted an injury, and this is the greatest degree of wickedness; second, the man who retaliates with an equal injury, and this is less of iniquity than the first; the third, someone who strikes back but less than he suffered; fourth, someone who repays no penalty; fifth, someone who not only does not repay, but also does not hinder even if another evil is inflicted on him. And this is what the Lord teaches: hence but I say to you not to resist evil. And it is understood to be about an evil, not of guilt, but of penalty or injury: do not revenge yourselves (Rom 12:19); and this fits well enough with what has been said. Et considerandi sunt hic secundum Augustinum quinque gradus: unus, illius qui iniuriam intulit et hic est maximus in nequitia; secundus, eius qui iniuriam infert equalem: hic minor est iniquitatis positio; tertius, qui rependit sed minorem quam passus sit; quartus, qui nullam penam rependit; quintus, qui non rependit, sed etiam non impedit quod etiam aliud malum sibi inferatur. Et hoc Dominus docet: unde ego autem dico vobis non resistere malo etc. Et intelligitur scilicet de malo non culpae sed penae vel iniuriae, Ro. XII, 19: non vos defendentes; et istud satis convenit cum praemisso. 528. But someone could say: I wish to be vindicated, not in order to delight in revenge, but so that I may not be offended again; but the Lord also excludes this: do not resist evil. 528. Sed posset aliquis dicere: volo vindicare me non ut deiceretur in vindicta, sed ut de cetero non offendar; sed hoc etiam excludit Dominus: non resistere etc. 529. But it should be seen how these sentences of the Lord may be understood. For two kinds of objections are made, according to two errors. One, as Augustine says in his letter against Marcellinus, is the error of the gentiles, who argued that without retribution no state could be preserved. It is how a stand is made against enemies, and thieves are punished: which measures must be done thoroughly, or the state would perish. Therefore, the Gospel law destroys human society: therefore it should be obliterated. On the other hand, heretics say that the Gospels support revenge and do not wish to take away those things that pertain to society by abolishing it. Hence it should be said that those proceed from a false understanding. For someone can resist evil in two ways: out of love for a public good or for a private one. But the Lord did not intend to prohibit us from resisting evil for the good of the community, but rather that no one should burn with revenge for his own private good. For nothing preserves the society of men more than that a man not have the power of doing evil for his own private ends. 529. Sed videndum est quomodo intelligenda sit ista sententia Domini. Dupliciter enim obicitur, secundum duos errores. Unus gentilium, ut dicit Augustinus in epistola contra Marcellianum, qui ita arguunt quod sine vindicta nulla res publica conservetur. Sic resistitur hostibus et puniuntur fures: quod si non fieret totaliter res publica periret. Ergo lex Evangelica destruit societatem hominum: ergo est abicienda. E converso haeretici dicunt quod sustinent Evangelia, et nolunt detrahere ea quae pertinent ad societatem, auferendo vindictam. Unde dicendum quod isti ex falso intellectu processerunt. Potest enim aliquis resistere malo dupliciter: ex amore publici boni et privati. Deus autem non intendit prohibere quod non resistatur malo pro bono rei publicae, sed quod non exardescat quis in vindictam pro bono privato. Nihil enim magis conservat societatem hominum quam quod homo non habeat potestatem malefaciendi in privato. But again it seems that the Lord does not intend to prohibit this; for the natural inclination of anything is to resist evil corrupting its good; therefore this precept cannot be kept. But it should be said that the natural inclination is that everything repel its own harm. And similarly the natural inclination is that everything expose itself to its own detriment so as to avoid damage to the community, as a hand exposes itself to danger for the sake of the body, and any part for the sake of its whole. Hence it is natural that a man endure an evil for the good of the nation, and political virtue, like fortitude and such, pertains to this. Sed item videtur quod Dominus non intendat hoc prohibere; quia naturalis inclinatio est cuiuslibet rei quod resistat malo corrumpenti bonum suum; ergo istud praeceptum non potest servari. Sed dicendum quod naturalis inclinatio est quod quaelibet res repellat proprium nocumentum. Et item naturalis inclinatio quod quaelibet res exponat se ad proprium detrimentum ut vitet detrimentum commune, sicut manus exponit se periculo propter corpus et quaelibet pars pro suo toto. Unde naturale est quod homo sustineat malum pro bono rei publicae, et ad hoc pertinet virtus politica, sicut fortitudo et huiusmodi. 530. But Augustine says that let him not resist should be understood according to the preparation of the soul: for a man should be prepared to endure or undergo all evils for the benefit of his neighbor, and he gives an example. For if someone were taking care of a deranged man who struck him or did something like that, the first man, if he had good will toward the other, would be prepared to endure even other evils for his welfare: and this you must do for the benefit of the Church. 530. Sed Augustinus dicit quod istud non resistat etc. Intelligendum est secundum praeparationem animi: quia homo pro utilitate proximi debet esse paratus omnia mala sustinere vel sufferre, et ponit exemplum. Si enim aliquis custodiret freneticum et ille percuteret eum vel huiusmodi, hic si habet benevolentiam ad eum debet esse paratus pro sua salute etiam alia mala sustinere: ita et nos pro utilitate Ecclesiae. And it should be noted that what the Lord says is in some cases a precept, and in some cases, a counsel. It is a precept to someone who would abandon what he is bound to by fear of some temporal inconvenience; as a prelate who cares for a flock should be prepared in his soul to endure any losses before he will abandon what he is bound to. It is a counsel, when it does not involve overlooking what one is bound to, as when someone endures many injuries from his parents for the sake of entering religious life, the counsel is that he not let go of what is better. Et notandum quod hoc quod Dominus dicit quodammodo est praeceptum, quodammodo consilium. Praeceptum, si aliquis dimitteret ea ad quae tenetur timore alicuius incommodi temporalis, sicut praelatus qui custodit gregem debet esse paratus in animo sustinere omnia damna antequam dimittat ea ad quae tenetur. Consilium, si non praetermitteret ea ad quae non tenetur, sicut si aliquis propter introitum religionis sustinet plura damna a parentibus, consilium est ut non praetermittat quod melius est. 531. Accordingly, what the Lord said he demonstrates in general and in particular: but if one strike you. Three different kinds of harm can be inflicted on someone: by wounding his body, by taking his things, or by forcibly restricting his action. And he gives an example of these three. 531. Consequenter quod dixerat Dominus in generali manifestat in speciali: sed si quis te percusserit. Triplex damnum potest inferri alicui: in lesione corporis, in ablatione rerum, in coactione operum. Et ponit exemplum de hiis tribus. Therefore he says, but if one strike you on your right cheek, turn to him also the other: he will give his cheek to him who strikes him (Lam 3:30); I have given my body to the strikers and my cheeks to those who plucked them (Isa 50:6). How those things should be understood can be seen from the acts of holy men. For the Lord who began to do and to teach this did not fulfill it: if I have spoken evil, give testimony of it; but if not, why do you strike me? (John 18:23); and the Apostle: God will strike you, you whited wall (Acts 23:3). And from this Augustine concludes that we know from the acts of holy men how the Scriptures are to be understood. Hence he says this is to be understood in the preparation of the soul, and explain this as above. Dicit ergo sed si quis te percusserit in unam maxillam praebe alteram maxillam; Tren. III, 30. Dabit percutienti se maxillam, Is. L, 6: dedi corpus meum percutientibus et genas meas vellentibus. Quomodo ista debeant intelligi considerandum est ex gestis sanctorum. Dominus enim qui cepit facere et docere hoc non adimplevit: Io. XVIII, 23: si male locutus sum etc., et post cur me caedis; et Apostolus, Act XXIII, 3: percutiet te Deus, paries dealbate. Et ex hoc Augustinus argumentatur quod nos per gesta sanctorum scimus qualiter intelligenda est Scriptura. Unde dicit esse intelligendum in praeparatione animi; et expone hoc sicut supra. 532. Mystically, however, it should be known that the man who strikes you in the face insults you in your sight: if a man is lifted up, if a man strike you on the face (2 Cor 11:20). The right cheek has to do with spiritual things, the left one with temporal things. Therefore it means that if you endure an injury in spiritual things, much more should you in temporal matters; against which prelates act who endure the loss of their churches but not of their relatives. 532. Mystice tamen sciendum quod ille in faciem te cedit qui in conspectu tuo tibi contumelias infert, II Cor. XI, 20 Sustinetis enim si quis in faciem vos cedit. Maxilla dextera pertinet ad spiritualia, sinistra ad temporalia. Vult ergo dicere quod si sustines iniuriam in spiritualibus, multo magis in temporalibus; quam quod praelati faciunt qui sustinent damna ecclesiarum sed non consanguineorum. And if a man will contend with you in judgment. This can happen in two ways: someone may contend in order to receive his own things, and then it is no great thing if you yield; but if it is to take away your things, this belongs to perfection if you yield. And this is: and take away your coat, that is, any temporal thing, let go your cloak to him also, that is, any other thing. And this is also in the preparation of the soul, for if someone speaks some calumny against you, nevertheless, do not let go of the charity you have for him: already indeed there is plainly a fault among you, that you have lawsuits with one another (1 Cor 6:7). Et qui vult tecum in iudicio contendere. Hoc contingit dupliciter: ad hoc quod aliquis recipiat sua, et tunc non magnum si cedas; sed quod auferat tua, hoc perfectionis si cedas. Et hoc est: et tunicam tollere, idest quamcumque rem temporalem, dans et pallium, idest quamcumque aliam rem. Et hoc etiam in praeparatione animi; quia si aliquis calumniam tibi facit, caritatem tamen non dimittas quam habes ad eum, I Cor. VI, 7: iam omnino delictum est vobis quod iudicia habetis inter vos. 533. This judgment is to be avoided for two reasons. One is that if a cleric is subjected to secular judgment it diminishes his dignity. The other reason is that although he does not intend any calumny, nevertheless if he sees the cause of his contention calumniated, an occasion for doing the same thing will be given to him; and thus it is dangerous to contend in judgment. 533. Istud iudicium vitandum est propter duas rationes. Una est quia si clericus est, se subdendo iudici saeculari renogat dignitati suae. Alia ratio quia quamvis non intendit aliquam calumniam, tamen si videt causam suae contentionis calumniari datur ei occasio similia faciendi; et ideo contendere in iudicio periculosum est. Likewise to seek redress in court can happen in two ways: licitly, and illicitly; it is illicit to go to court with unbelievers. Also, one may not go to court contentiously: for contention is an assault against the truth with the boldness of shouting; it is an honor for a man to separate himself from quarrels (Prov 20:3). On the other hand, a licit claim can happen two ways: when it is about the affairs of the poor or of the Church; hence if the bishop does not go to court over these, he sins. Another case is when someone who steals becomes even more insolent and more shameless unless he is resisted, charity is that in this case his soul should be delivered from death; but when it is a private matter and no correction is hoped for, then he is not to be condemned. Nevertheless, all these things are to be understood as referring to the preparation of the soul. Item, repetere iudicio contingit, dupliciter: licite et non licite. Illicitum est repetere in iudicio infidelium. Item quod non repetat cum contentione: est enim contentio impugnatio veritatis cum confidentia clamoris, Prov. XX, 3: honor est homini qui separat se a contentionibus. Licitum immo quasi votivum est dupliciter: quando sunt res pauperum vel ecclesiae; unde si praelatus non repetat peccat. Alia causa est quando ille qui auffert insollentior efficitur et magis procax nisi ei resistatur caritas est, quia tunc anima eius liberatur a morte; quando autem esset res privata et non speraretur correctio, tunc non est contendendum. Omnia ista tamen intelligenda sunt in praeparatione animi. 534. And whoever will force you one mile. Force is properly to enslave someone in some servile work without justice. Go . . . the other two, that is, miles: you suffer it if anyone brings you into bondage (2 Cor 11:20). 534. Si quis te angariaverit. Angariare proprie est sine iustitia ad aliqua servilia opera mancipare. Vade alia duo, scilicet milia, II Cor. XI: sustinetis si quis in servitutem redigit. And it should be noted that the Lord proceeded in a certain order. First he said that evil was not to be resisted; afterward that a man should be prepared not only to not resist, but to endure an equal penalty, but more since he ascends to the double. Et notandum quod Dominus quodam ordine processit. Primo dixit non esse resistendum malo; postea quod debet homo esse paratus non tantum non resistere, sed penam equalem sustinere, modo plus quia ascendit usque ad duplum. 535. Give to him who asks of you. Here he says that we should do good to evildoers in two ways: by the mode of simple giving and of loaning. As to the first, he says who asks: if you have much, give abundantly (Tob 4:9); if I have denied to the poor what they desired (Job 31:16). But it is objected that the poor cannot do this. Likewise, if the rich were always giving, nothing would remain to them. And Augustine resolves this two ways. The first, thus, because you should not give everything that someone asks, for not something indecent or unjust or irrational or something that you need more; but when someone asks rightly, you should give: and this is a precept if you are bound, a counsel if you are not bound. Jerome, though, says that it is understood as referring to a spiritual good because that can be harmful to no one. 535. Qui petit a te. Hic dicit quod debemus benefacere malefaciendum dupliciter: per modum simplicis dationis et mutui. Quantum ad primum dicit qui petit, Tob. IV, 9: si multum tibi fuerit, abundanter tribue. Iob XXI, 16: si negavi quod volebant pauperibus. Sed obicitur quia hoc non possunt facere pauperes. Item divites si semper darent nihil eis remaneret. Et solvit dupliciter Augustinus. Primo sic: quod non omnia debes dare quae petit, quia non inhonestum nec iniustum vel irrationabile vel illud quo tu magis indiges; sed quando iuste petit aliquis debes dare: et hoc est praeceptum si teneris, consilium si non teneris. Ieronymus tamen dicit quod intelligitur de bono spirituali quia tale nulli potest esse nocumentum. 536. From him who would: receive a loan. Here two things: for anyone doing a service to another, even if he simply gives him something, expects retribution: who has mercy on the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him (Prov 19:17); cast your bread on running waters, for . . . you will find it again (Eccl 11:1). Or another way, who would receive something that he would return, turn not away. And it could seem to someone that God did not recompense the property that he hoped for from a man, and thus he might be moved to give rather than loan, or he would receive it back from God. But the Lord says that he will also receive it back from God. Or he says turn not away because sometimes they fear being cheated and so they refuse to make a loan: many have refused to lend, not out of wickedness, but they were afraid to be defrauded without cause (Sir 29:10) and further, lose your money for your brother (Sir 29:13). And it should be noted that this can be a precept and a counsel according to different situations: which is clear from what has been said. 536. Et volenti: mutuum accipere. Hoc dupliciter: quia quicumque benefacit alteri etiam si simpliciter det aliquid, expectat retributionem, Prov. XIX, 17: feneratur Domino qui miseretur pauperis, et vicissitudinem suam reddat ei, Eccl. XI, 1: mitte panem tuum super transeuntes aquas quia post multa tempora invenies illum. Vel aliter, volenti aliquid accipere ut reddat, non avertaris. Et posset videri alicui quod Deus non recompensaret proprium quod speraret ab homine, et ideo posset magis moveri ad dandum quam mutuandum vel reciperet a Deo. Sed Dominus dicit quod etiam a Deo recipiet. Vel dicit non avertaris, quia timent aliquando defraudari et ideo non mutuant, Eccli XXX, 12,13: multi non causa nequitiae non feneraverunt sed fraudai gratis timuerunt etc., et post, perdet pecuniam pro fratre et amico. Et notandum quod hoc potest esse praeceptum et consilium secundum diversas conditiones: quod patet ex dictis.