Questo articolo è disponibile anche in: Italian English Spanish

Hello Father Angelo,

I am writing to ask you for clarification on how we should behave with annoying people.

Jesus asks us to exercise charity, to love our neighbor, including our enemy.

In daily life, it may happen that we must deal with colleagues, friends, family and relatives, acquaintances, whom we do not get along with, as our character and our way of doing happen to conflict with theirs.

Particularly, I get annoyed by attitudes of pride, arrogance, presumption, and the will to subjugate and humiliate others. In these circumstances, I react in decisive and self-confident ways to diminish their confidence and get them a bit humbler, not out of resentment or pride, but simply so that they would not forget the respect for others. Regrettably, I cannot tolerate those attitudes, and my only love towards these people stays in praying for them to change and know the love of God.

I am ready to forgive those who harmed me, but obviously there should be sincere repentance and awareness of the harm that was done, otherwise I see no point in forgiveness.

According to you, how should we behave with annoying people?

Is it a serious sin the inability to love enemies?

Thank you again for the service you offer.

I heartily remember you in my prayer

Riccardo

The Priest’s answer

Dear Riccardo, 

1. The Gospel reports that, during Jesus’ trial, one of the guards struck him (rf. Jn 18:22). During the trial, Jesus remained silent several times, but that time so He spoke: “If I have spoken wrongly, testify to the wrong; but if I have spoken rightly, why do you strike me?” (Jn 18:23).

St. Thomas commented: “Jesus justified himself, saying, «if I have spoken evil» in my answer to the high priest, «give testimony of the evil». That is, if you have reason to reproach me for what I have just said, show that I have spoken badly, […]. But if well, if you cannot show I have spoken badly, why do you strike me? Why flare up against me?” (Commentary on John 18,23, n.2320).

2. St. Thomas also commented: “I say to this, with Augustine, that the statements and commands found in Sacred Scripture can be interpreted and understood from the actions of the saints, since it is the same Holy Spirit who inspired the prophets and the other sacred authors and who inspires the actions of the saints. As we read: moved by the Holy Spirit, holy men of God spoke (2 Pet 1:21); and for all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God (Rom 8:14). Thus, Sacred Scripture should be understood according to the way Christ and other holy persons followed it. Now, Christ did not turn his other cheek here; and Paul did not do so either (Acts 16:22). Accordingly, we should not think that Christ has commanded us to actually turn our physical cheek to one who has struck the other. We should understand it to mean that we should be ready to do this if it turns out to be necessary to do so. That is, our attitude should be such that we would not be inwardly stirred up against the one striking us but be ready or disposed to endure the same or even more. This is how our Lord observed it, for he offered his body to be killed. So, our Lord’s defense is useful for our instruction” (Ib., n.2321).

3. In Summa Theologiae, he gave the reasons in greater depth: “the precepts of patience in those things done against us refer to the preparedness of the mind, according to Augustine’s (De Serm. Dom. in Monte i, 19) exposition on our Lord’s precept, “If one strikes thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other”: that is to say, a man ought to be prepared to do so if necessary. 

But he is not always bound to do this actually: since not even did our Lord do so, for when He received a blow, He said: “Why strikest thou Me?” (Jn. 18:23). Consequently the same applies to the reviling words that are said against us. For we are bound to hold our minds prepared to submit to be reviled, if it should be expedient. Nevertheless it sometimes behooves us to withstand against being reviled, and this chiefly for two reasons. First, for the good of the reviler; namely, that his daring may be checked, and that he may not repeat the attempt, according to Prov. 26:5, “Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he imagine himself to be wise.” Secondly, for the good of many who would be prevented from progressing in virtue on account of our being reviled” (Summa Theologiae, II-II, 72, 3).

4. Coming to your case: if you foresee no negative effect and if you consider it useful to repress someone’s arrogance, you can reply condemning the sin, but not the sinner who always remains to be loved according to the teaching by Jesus.

5. Prayer is the most concrete form of love when it is accompanied by a behavior which knows how to deal in an urban manner with everyone without refusing a greeting.

I thank you from my heart deepness for the prayer you promised and which I willingly reciprocate.

I wish you all the best and I bless you.

Father Angelo