Volume I, Treatise IV, Chapter XI

That We Ought to Abstain from Disputes and Contentions with Our Brethren, and Also from Reprehending Them

We must also carefully avoid entering into any dispute or contention with any one, it being a thing very contrary to union and fraternal charity. St. Paul gives us warning of this, when writing to Timothy, he says, “Do not dispute or contend in words, for it serves for nothing else but to subvert. and give scandal to the hearers” (2 Timothy 2:14): and a little after he adds,—“A servant of God must not be contentious, but mild and sweet towards all men, and be patient and apt to learn.” (Ibid. 2:24) All the saints recommend the same thing to us, aud St. Ignatius, in particular, has inserted this point in his rules. St. Dorotheus says, that he had rather things should be left undone, than perceive any disputes or contests arise amongst brethren in doing them; and adds, that should he repeat this sentiment of his a thousand times, he should not repeat it too often. St. Bonaventure also affirms that there is nothing more unworthy or unbecoming God’s servants, than to be at variance and to contend one with another about nothing, as women are wont to do. And St. John Climachus, moreover, assures us, that obstinacy, though it be in a matter of truth, can come from none but the devil. The reason is, because that which usually moves a man to maintain his own opinion with any heat, is the desire he has of being esteemed. Hence, it happens, that to appear more able or learned than his adversary, he endeavours to convince him that he is in an error; and if he cannot be victorious in his dispute, he endeavours at least to make it appear he had not the worst of it; and thus it is always the devil of pride, who is the occasion of this obstinacy.

But in this, two sorts of faults may be committed; the first and greatest is his who first contradicted the other; because it is he who begins the dispute, and first kindles the fire. And though, for the most part, the subject they dispute about is in reality of so small consequence, that it is no matter whether the thing in debate be the one way or the other; yet, it is of great importance not to lose peace or charity, which ordinarily are very much impaired by these sorts of debates. A man, for example, advances an assertion, which he fancies and firmly believes to be true. Well! leave to him his opinion, because you are not at all interested therein; and according to the counsel of the Wise Man: “Dispute not about what does not concern you.” (Ecclesiasticus 11:9) The spirit of contradiction is a very bad one: wherefore endeavour to cast it off, though the thing in question be of consequence; and if you imagine that your brother may indeed receive some prejudice, by adhering to his erroneous opinion, yet you ought to bear with him for the present by not opposing him; but what remains is, that upon the first occasion you take him aside, and sweetly inform him of the truth, and then in private convince him of his mistake. By this means you will be able to fulfil your duty, or at least to avoid such inconveniences as otherwise may be feared.

The other fault we must avoid is, the maintaining with too much obstinacy what we have once advanced. If, then, it happens that any one contradicts you, insist not much upon it, nor suffer yourself to be carried on by a desire of getting the better of him; but explain yourself once or twice, with all mildness possible, and shew him your idea of the question, and after that, let him believe what he pleases; and impose silence upon yourself, as if you had nothing more to say about the matter. But do not, as many frequently do, who, though they yield in appearance, yet, either by muttering to themselves, or by some other exterior sign, make it appear that they submit only out of politeness, and that they drop the dispute only for quietness sake, and that they still judge their own opinion to be right. ‘He that avoids contentions gains honour” (Proverbs 20:3), says the Wise Man, and without doubt, there is a great deal of merit in politely yielding to another, and permitting one’s self seemingly to be overcome on such like occasions. In effect, he that does this exercises at the same time an act of charity towards his neighbour, by avoiding such disquiets and heats as ordinarily accompany these disputes; he exercises an act of humility by overcoming the desire that all men have to get the better of another, and to attract glory to themselves; and he exercises also an act of love towards God, by cutting off the occasion of Many sins, which are almost inseparable from such sorts of debates, according to what the Wise Man says: “Abstain from all debates, and you will diminish the number of sins.” (Ecclesiasticus 28:10) On the contrary, he that contests, besides the scandal he gives, is the cause that peace and charity are violated; he interferes in the debates and disputes of his brethren, whence spring many other inconveniences; and instead of gaining the esteem he aimed at, he makes himself pass for an obstinate and quarrelsome person, who is tied to his own opinion, and who seeks always to have the upper hand, never yielding upon any account to another. It is related of St Thomas of Aquin, that in his disputations he always proposed his opinion with meekness and sweetness, with an unspeakable moderation, without any show of presumption, and without the least offence to any one; but behaved as a man who regarded not gaining the victory, but merely endeavoured to make known the truth. The ¢ affair of the two old men is sufficiently known, who having lived along time together in one cell, without the least contention, would one day try whether they were able to dispute about a subject; and casting their eyes upon a brick, which accidentally lay before them in their cell, they resolved to contend, to which ofthe two it belonged; but they reciprocally yielding the right to each other could never enter into any dispute. We ought to have such a disposition of mind as this was, so far estranged from all kinds of debates, as if we were absolutely incapable of

Moreover, we must not intrude ourselves into the office of reprimanding our brother, though we should discharge it with ever so much precaution and charity, for this belongs only to the superior; and though, perhaps, subjects may suffer one or two superiors to reprehend them for their faults, yet they do not willingly permit those who are not superiors to usurp to themselves this authority; and, in fine, generally speaking, men are not willing to be reprehended by their equals. We have also a rule that forbids every one either to command or reprehend another, without having express orders from the superior to do so. And in effect it does not become every one to do it; and even the superior himself, if he desires that the reprehension he gives should be well taken, and become profitable to him he reprehends, ought to think well of it beforehand—he ought to wait for a fit opportunity, and consider very well what he will say, as well as in what manner he will do it; since he cannot be too circumspect in this point. And yet a particular person, without reflecting upon anything, out of pretended zeal, will sometimes take upon him to reprehend his brother, without any consideration at all, even as soon as he committed the fault, at which time he is less disposed to hearken to, or profit by, that which is said unto him. This is not the effect of a discreet zeal, but what is very contrary to charity, and what is wont to do more hurt than good. For though you may have reason for what you do, yet it is very probable it will exasperate your brother, and make him think within himself, nay, perhaps, even object to you; “Who has set you over us, to be our Judge?” (Exodus 2:14) Why do you meddle with what does not belong to you? And if you tell him it belongs to you, because what he does is against the rule, he may answer you very well, it is also contrary to our rules that you should take upon you to correct him.

We read of Socrates, that dining one day with his friends, and happening in a large company to reprehend a little too sharply one of the guests, Plato, who was present, could not refrain from saying to him, would it not have been better for you to have deferred this reprehension to another time, and secretly to have told him of his fault? But would not you also, replied Socrates, have done much better to have told me of mine in private? And thus he answered one reprehension with another, letting him see that he fell into the same fault he admonished him of. Behold here to what little purpose such unseasonable reprehensions as these are made, which for the most part proceed not from a motive of zeal and charity, but are an effect of ill-nature, impatience, anger, and levity of mind, which makes us dogmatize after this manner upon our brother’s fault, and oftentimes upon what is no fault at all, so that sometimes we cannot refrain even from telling the corrector himself of it; which, when we have done, our heart seems to be at ease, and we find a satisfaction and content within us. Thus, though we cannot mortify ourselves, or at least will not, yet we desire that others should be mortified. It is good, therefore, that every one should have the spirit of mortification, severity, and rigour

towards himself, and the spirit of love, meekness, and sweetness towards his brethren. It is this that the saints recommend to us in their writings; it is this they teach us by their examples;

and it is this that helps very much to preserve union and fraternal charity. By what has been said, we may see, that if it is

not permitted to reprehend our brother, when it seems to be

done with civility, charity, and sweetness, it is far less lawful or

permitted when it is done without this circumspection. We

must, therefore, abstain from reprehending our brethren, and in

general from saying the least word that may give them any

mortification.:

Cassian reports, that the abbot Moyses, disputing with the abbot Macharius, and having said a cross and mortifying word, God presently chastised him upon the spot, permitting the devil at the same time to possess him, and such a foul devil also, that made him speak all sorts of filthy and impure words; which punishment lasted till the abbot Macharius, by his prayers, rescued him from slavery so wretched. Such a chastisement, in so great a person, and in sucha servant of God as the abbot Moyses, who was a man of approved sanctity, very clearly evinces that God extremely abhors such faults as these. We read in the Chronicles of St. Francis, that in imitation of this punishment, an ancient brother, permitting himself to be so transported with anger, as to give some harsh and choleric words to his companion in the presence of a gentleman of Assisium, he presently percelving that his companion was moved, and the secular also scandalized, resolved to revenge this fault upon himself; wherefore gathering together a great deal of dirt, he crammed it into his mouth, “Let my mouth,” says he, “eat this filth, since it has Vomited out such gall and poison against my brother.” ‘I’he secular was so surprised at, and so edified by the fervour where- With this good religious punished his own fault, that he became more attached than ever to those that lived under that rule, and offered both his person and whatsoever belonged to him to the service of the order.

About ReligiousBookshelf.com · A Supernerd Media project