Question

1. In your own words, what is “fraternal correction”?

2. According to Aquinas, why is fraternal correction an act of charity?

3. According to Aquinas, under what circumstances is it morally permissible to refrain from fraternal corrections? What is it about such conditions that makes refraining from fraternal correction morally permissible?

4. In your own words, summarize the argument voiced in Article 5, Objection 3.

5. According to Aquinas, under what circumstances may a sinner rightfully correct a friend? Why is it that such conditions make it possible for a sinner to correct a friend?

6. Explain the three ways in which a previous sin hinders one’s ability to correct a friend.

Answer 1

Fraternal correction is an act of warning or reprimanding a person from doing a sinful behavior. For example, when a person is about to hurt another person, it is necessary that one must stop him or else other people involved would be pain. But, it is not always easy to correct the behaviors of others because the consequences could sometimes be negative. When someone is engaging in an inappropriate behaviors, people usually think that it is not their responsibility to correct their behavior, and someone else would do it.

According to Aquinas, fraternal correction is a divine precept and must be done as an spiritual act of mercy. If a person knows that someone is going to commit a sinful behavior and does not stop him from doing it, then the person is considered worse than the sinner itself. In the same way, correcting someone in the wrong place, for the wrong thing, in the wrong time or in a wrong way may also cause problems. So, fraternal correction must be done in the appropriate way with the intention of bringing good to that person and not with the intention of intimidating or accusing them.

In the article 5, objection 3 states that if a man is a wrongdoer himself, he is not ineligible to correct another person. When a wrongdoer corrects another person, it is not seen as a behavior done out of charity, as a masking to cover up his sins. Also, the wrongdoer would be considered to justify himself by saying that the other person had done something worse than what he had done, thereby defending himself. Not everyone is free of guilty because every human would have done something wrong in some point of their life whether it is big or small. If all those who have done something wrong are not eligible to correct the behaviors of others, then there would be no one to correct each other.  

Even though a person is a sinner, he could still correct other people, especially people he know because the intention is to stop the sinful behavior and to help the person from becoming a sinner. For example, a person had abandoned his old mother and left her at an orphanage. She then passed away as she had nobody to take care of her. After this the person feels very guilty that he was not there with her during her last days and regrets he had never done such a sinful thing. Later this person comes to know that one of his friends was also thinking of leaving his parents at an orphanage, on hearing this, the person tries to convince his friend by saying that he cannot do such a thing and he is responsible for taking care of them.

In this case, the person himself had done a sinful act, but he tries to correct his friend from doing such a thing because he had realized what he had done and feels guilty about it. So, it is does not matter whether the person engaging in fraternal correction is a sinner or not, but what is more important is to stop the sinful act.

When a wrongdoer thinks of correcting his friend, there are many things that would hinder him from doing so. He may feel guilty that he himself had done a sinful behavior and that he may not be worthy enough to correct other's behaviors. Even if he tries to do so, his friend would accuse him saying that he does not deserve to tell what is right or wrong, or tell him what he must or must not do.