Sinfulness of Internal Hatred Without External Expression
The concept that internal hatred without external expression is sinful is rooted in biblical teachings. In Leviticus 19:17, the Israelites are commanded, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart" [5]. This directive is reinforced by Jesus in Matthew 5:21-22, where He equates hatred with murder, emphasizing the gravity of internal malice.
The sinfulness of internal hatred is understood differently across various Christian traditions. According to Aquinas, hatred is considered a more grievous sin than external actions that harm others because it originates from a disorder in the person's will, which is the primary aspect of a human being [3]. This perspective underscores the severity of internal hatred.
In the Reformed tradition, John Calvin views internal hatred as a manifestation of the carnal mind, which is inherently at enmity with God. This enmity is not just a passive state but an active opposition that reasons against God's being and perfections [7]. Calvin's Institutes further elaborate that even desires unaccompanied by deliberate assent can be considered sinful if they enter the heart through the absence of fear of God or love for Him [6].
The Baptist/Reformed interpretation, as seen in John Gill's commentary on Romans 8:7, also emphasizes that the carnal mind is enmity against God, involving reasoning against God's existence, forming unworthy notions of Him, and attempting to erase memories of Him [7]. Similarly, Gill's commentary on Leviticus 19:17 highlights that hatred in the heart is a breach of the sixth commandment and can manifest in failing to save a neighbor from danger or not reproving them for sin [5].
The Jewish (Rabbinic) tradition, as represented by Maimonides in the Mishneh Torah, suggests that while it is pious to refrain from admonishing someone who is incapable of benefiting from rebuke, there is an expectation to admonish those who can learn from it. This indicates a nuanced view on internal hatred and the importance of addressing wrongdoing [8].
The Patristic tradition, as reflected in Augustine's writings, emphasizes the distinction between righteousness and unrighteousness, not just externally but also within the Church. This underscores the importance of internal dispositions and the sinfulness of harboring hatred or unrighteousness within oneself [4].
The Catholic (Scholastic) tradition, through Aquinas' Summa Theologica, also discusses the nature of penance, distinguishing between internal and external penance. Internal penance involves grieving for sin and should last until the end of life, as one should always be displeased at having sinned [9].
The biblical basis for considering internal hatred sinful is further supported by Proverbs 26:26, which warns that hatred covered by dissimulation will be made manifest [2]. II Timothy 3:3 lists "bitter haters" among those who are characterized as being without natural love, underscoring the negative consequences of harboring hatred [1].
The various traditions converge on the understanding that internal hatred is a serious issue, though they may differ in their articulation of its implications and the appropriate responses to it. The emphasis on internal dispositions and the call to address or overcome hatred reflect a common concern across these traditions.
The historical development of this doctrine is tied to the interpretation of biblical commands and the understanding of human nature and sin. The early Church Fathers and subsequent theologians have grappled with the complexities of internal states and their moral implications, leading to a rich and nuanced discussion across Christian traditions.
Sources
- II Timothy “II Timothy 3:3 (BBE) — Without natural love, bitter haters, saying evil of others, violent and uncontrolled, hating all good,”
- Proverbs “Proverbs 26:26 (Darby) — Though [his] hatred is covered by dissimulation, his wickedness shall be made manifest in the congregation.”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part (Secunda Secundae), Of Hatred, Art. 4: Article: Whether hatred of our neighbor is the most grievous sin against our neighbor? I answer that, Sins committed against our neighbor are evil on two counts; first by reason of the disorder in the person who sins, secondly by reason of the hurt inflicted on the person sinned against. On the first count, hatred is a more grievous sin than external actions that hurt our neighbor, because hatred is a disorder of man's will, which is the chief part of man, and wherein is the root of sin, so that if”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 4: Augustine — Anti-Manichaean, Anti-Donatist — CHAP. 13.--20. There is therefore "no fellowship between righteousness and unrighteousness,"(7) not only without, but also within the Church; for "the Lord knoweth them that are His," and "Let every o: 456 unrighteousness justify,"(1) as Cyprian again says, I ask, how could those men baptize within the very Church herself ? I ask, how could those vessels which the large house contains not to honor, but to dishonor, administer what is holy for the sanctifying of men within the great house itself, unless because that holiness of the sacra”
- Leviticus (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Leviticus 19:17: Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart,.... Although no hatred may be expressed either by words or deeds, yet being in the heart is a breach of the sixth command, see Mat 5:21; and of this a man may be guilty, when he does not attempt to save the life of his neighbour, either by bearing a testimony for him, or by delivering from danger, as preserving him from drowning, from wild beasts and thieves, as in Lev 19:16; or when he does not reprove him for sin, as in the next clause, but suffers him to go on in it to his ruin, either of which by interpretation i”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 44: great mystery in this term Law. 58. The same must be said of their application of the term, venial sin, both to the hidden impiety which violates the First Table, and the direct transgression of the last commandment of the Second Table. 223 223 See Book 3 chap. 4 sec. 28, where it is also shown that this is not the dogma of the Stoics—that all sins are equal. They define venial sin to be, desire unaccompanied with deliberate assent, and not remaining long in the heart. But I maintain that it cannot even enter the heart unless throu”
- Romans (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Romans 8:7: Because the carnal mind is enmity against God,.... These words contain a reason why the issue of carnal mindedness is death; because the carnal mind, the wisdom of the flesh, is not only an enemy, but enmity itself against God: against his being; it reasons against it; it wishes he was not; it forms unworthy notions of him; thinks him such an one as itself; and endeavours to bury him in forgetfulness, and erase out of its mind all memorials of him: it is at enmity against his perfections; either denying his omniscience; or arraigning his justice and faithfulness; or de”
- Mishneh Torah (Maimonides) (Jewish (Rabbinic)) “Mishneh Torah (Maimonides), Mishneh Torah%2C Human Dispositions 6:9: It is pious behavior if a person who was wronged by a colleague would rather not admonish him or mention the matter at all because the person who wronged him was very boorish or because he was mentally disturbed, 1 The Rambam's words appear to indicate that if the person who committed the wrong was sophisticated enough to learn from the rebuke, he should be admonished so that he will develop his character. Only when the person would be incapable of benefiting from the rebuke, does the Rambam suggest withholding admonishment. ”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part (Tertia Pars), Of the Sacrament of Penance, Art. 8: Article: Whether Penance should last till the end of life? I answer that, Penance is twofold, internal and external. Internal penance is that whereby one grieves for a sin one has committed, and this penance should last until the end of life. Because man should always be displeased at having sinned, for if he were to be pleased thereat, he would for this very reason fall into sin and lose the fruit of pardon. Now displeasure causes sorrow in one who is susceptible to sorrow, as man is in this life; but af”