FOURTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 73, Art. 4]

Whether It Is a Grave Sin for the Listener to Suffer the Backbiter?

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.

Obj. 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 (A. 1, ad 3). Therefore it seems that one

is not always bound to withstand a backbiter.

Obj. 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 (Rom. 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 listens 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 correct 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 (Q. 19, A. 3).

Reply Obj. 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 (A. 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 (Q. 72, A.

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 Deut. 21:4 [*Ex. 23:5].

Reply Obj. 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 Obj. 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.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 493 / 1128 题