Insults And Brothers

Si quis dixerit fratri suo Racha, sine causa, reus erit concilio.  Id est, ut sit unus ex concilio eorum, qui adversus Christum fuerunt, sicut apostoli in canonicis suis interpretanter. Si quis autem dixerit, Fatue, reus erit gehenae. Racha quidem dicitur Hebraice vacuus, quamvis quantum ad sensum verbi, unum est dicere, Fatue, et, Racha. Nam qui vacuus est, ille fatuus est: et qui fatuus est, sine dubio vacuus est, et utriusque verbi una videtur esse injuria. Nam sicut indigna res est illi dicere, Faute, qui habet in se sapientiam spiritualem in agnitione Dei Patris et Christi: sic indigna res est, dicere hominem vacuum, qui habet in se Spiritum Sanctum. Nam nemo dicitur vacuus, qui habet in se Spiritum Sanctum, et nemo fatuus, qui Christum cognoscit. Et quare illud quidem  verbum, id est Racha, habet poenam concilii: hoc autem verbum, Fatue, gehennae? Nam si unum peccatum est, una debet esse et poena amborum. Sed quantum ad dicentis propositum, differentiam jam habent haec verba, etsi quantum ad sensum similia sunt. Racha enim vulgare verbum erat apud Judaeos, quod non ex ira, neque ex odio, sed ex aliquo motu vano dicebant, magis fiduciae causa, quam iracundiae. Nam unaquaequa provincia habet in consuetudine aliquod exprobratorium verbum, quod non rixae causa, sed familiaritatis gratia dicere solent ad eos, quorum fiduciam habent. Utputa patronus suscepto liberto suo, aut dives pauperi, aut urbanus rustico, contemnens personam ejus, magis quam inimicans. Sed forte dicis, si Racha iracundiae causa non dicitur, quare peccatum est. Quia contemptionis causa dicitur, non aedificationis. Nam etsi persona illius tibi contemptibilis videbatur, tamen dignitas Christianitatis illius contemptibilis non erat. Et si illum aspicere non volebas, tamen Christum, qui in eo est, aspicere debuisti. Deinde et alia ratione peccatum est dicere Racha, quia etsi ille aliquid vanum audire merebatur, te tamen, dicere vanum aliquid non oportebat, cum sic scriptum est: Amen dico vobis, pro omni verbo otioso, quodcumque loquuti fueritis, dabitis rationem. Quicquid non est lumen, tenebra est: sic et quicquid bonum non est, malum est. Dicit Apostolus: Omnis sermo malus ex ore vestro non procedat. Et non dicit, Si quis bonus, tantummodo, sed, Si quis bonus ad aedificationem fidei. Si ergo nec bonum verbum sine causa dicere debemus, nisi fuerit pro occasione aedificationis, ne ipsum verbum bonum, dum sine causa dicitur, inveniatur esse otiosum, et fiat malum: quanto magis illud verbum dicere non debemus, quod a semetipso naturaliter malum est, et ad injuriam pertinet audientis? Deinde, numquid membrum oris nostri, quod ad aedificationem aliorum creatum est, aut ad usum corporis, aut ad gloriam Dei, trahimus illud ad ministerium vanitatis? Omnis enim sermo vanus qui dicitur, immundo spiritu dictante profertur. Vanum ergo sermonem dicentes, non tantum ideo peccamus quia per illum sermonem aliquem laedimus, sed quia damus locum in nobis immundis spiritibus agendi quod volunt. Hoc sciens Salomon, dicebat ad Dominum: Duo postula a te, ne auferas gratiam tuam a me, priusquam moriar, et vanum verbum non exeat de ore meo. Opus Imperfectum in Matthaeum, Homilia Undecima ex capite quinto Migne PG 56.690-691

If someone says to his brother Racha, without cause, he shall be guilty in the council. 1 That is, he will be like one of the council who were opposed to Christ, as the apostolic canons understand it. 'And if someone says 'Fool', he shall be guilty of hell.' 1; Racha is a Hebrew word meaning vacuous, although such is the meaning of the word, that it is one and the same to say, Fool, and Racha. For he who is vacuous is a fool and he who is a fool is without doubt vacuous and both words seem to do the same harm. For as it is unworthy to say to another, 'Fool' who has in himself the spiritual wisdom of the knowledge of God the Father and Christ, so unworthy it is to call a man vacuous when he has the Holy Spirit in himself. For no one is called vacuous who has the Holy Spirit in himself and no one is a fool who knows Christ. And why is it that one of the words, that is, 'Racha', has the punishment of the council, and the other word, 'Fool', of hell? For if the sin is one, then one should be the punishment of both. But on account of the purpose of saying them, these words do differ, even if they have similar sense. For Racha is a word commonly used among the Jews, not from anger, nor from hatred, but arising from some petty passion and spoken more as a matter of trust than anger. For every province has the custom of a word of reproach which, not on account of conflict, but because of familiarity is accustomed to be spoken to another of whom one has the trust. So a master treats his freedman, or the rich man a poor man, or the town dweller the rustic, having contempt for his person, more than enmity. But perhaps you say, If Racha is not spoken out of anger, why is it a sin? Because it is spoken out of contempt and not to edify. For even if some person seems contemptible to you, yet the dignity of his Christianity is not something contemptible. And if you do not wish to look at him yet you should look at Christ who is in him. And then for another reason to say 'Racha' is a sin, for even if someone deserves to hear something vain, you, however, should not speak anything in vain, when it is written 'Truly I say to you, for every useless word that you have spoken you shall receive judgement.' 2 Whatever is not of the light is of the darkness, as even whatever is not good is evil. The Apostle says, 'Let not your mouth let go any evil word.' 3 And he does not then say 'Unless something good', but 'Unless something good for the building up of faith.' If, then, neither a good word without cause we should speak unless there be an opportunity for edification, lest the good word, being spoken without cause, is found to be useless, and becomes an evil, much more should we not speak that word which in itself is naturally evil and intends the harm of the listener. Should we hand over to the service of vanities the member of our mouth, which is created for the edification of others, either for corporeal uses, or the praise of God? Every vain word that is spoken is brought forth by the dictation of an unclean spirit. Therefore speaking vainly is not only a sin because through our speech we injure another, but because we give a place in us to the unclean spirits that they might do what they wish. Solomon, knowing this, said to the Lord, 'Two things I ask of you, do not take your grace from before I die, and may a vain word never leave my mouth.'  4 Opus Imperfectum on Matthew, from The Eleventh Homily on The Fifth Chapter 1 Mt 5.22 2 Mt 12.36 3 Ephes 4.29 4 Prov 30.7-8