Chapter 15

Love of Neighbor

Submitted To: Ms. Ladylyn Mabutol

Submitted By: John Israel Siaron
Cejay Arias
Crishella Ramos
 LOVE OF NEIGHBOR
Neighbor is any person other oneself – parents, relatives, friends, officemates,
superiors and strangers. Even our enemies are neighbor whom we ought to respect. In
its widest sense, it includes all creatures.
PRINCIPLES OF NEIGHBORLINESS
How we should treat others is expressed negatively by the golden rule – “do not
do unto others what you do not want to be done to you”. The positive formulation of this
rule is the command “Love your neighbor as yourself”. Jesus Christ teaches that the two
greatest commandments are, first, to love God and, second, to love the neighbor.
Two significant virtues regulate our relationship with one another – charity and
justice. Justice requires that we render to another what is due to Him. Justice implies a
law binding us to give what we owe to another either in terms of respect or payment of a
debt. Charity on the other hand, is rendering to another to another something which is
not due to Him by the demand of a law. Charity is expression of goodwill and love on
the part of the giver.
MEANING OF JUSTICE
St. Thomas Aquinas defines justice as the firm and constant to give each his due
(Summa Theologica, II-II, 58).
“Proportional Equality” is not treating all persons the same way to strict
mathematical equation.
TYPES OF JUSTICE
1. Commutative Justice – regulates the rights of persons towards one another in
accordance with the principle of equality in give and take.
2. Distributive Justice – guarantees the common welfare by sharing what God has
created.
3. Legal Justice – regulates rights of the community or those charged with the
welfare of the community.
4. Social Justice – regulates of rights of persons towards the weaker members of
the community – those who are poor and needy.
5. Vindictive Justice – regulates the rights of the community or State to restore
public order by punishing criminals in proportion to their guilt.
The Goals of Social Justice
Vitaliano Gorospe explains social justice as a preferential option for the poor and
a way of sharing one’s talent, treasure and time with the needy. “In practice he says,
magpakatao para sa kapwa means three things:
 (1) Sharing with others especially with the poor
(2) “Subversion” in the sense of struggling for structural and cultural change
(3) Simplicity of Life style because having more and more the great majority of
the poor may have less and less.

Social Justice is a prominent concept in the social philosophy of the Catholic

Church ever since Pius XI wrote Quadragesimo Anno in 1931. The goal of Social
Justice is the promotion of equal chances and opportunities in life.

DUTIES TOWARDS NEIGHBORS

Rights and duties are reciprocal, any rights we claim for our self becomes our
duty towards our neighbor.
*We may classify our duties towards the neighbor as:

1.) Duties to our Neighbor’s Body

It becomes therefore our duty with regards to our neighbor’s right over his
body and life, to refrain from any activity that may, directly or indirectly, violate
such right.

These prohibited acts are intrinsically evil, such as murder, abortion, rape,
slavery, human trafficking, drug pushing, kidnapping, torture, and other unjust
acts that threaten a person with bodily harm.

2.) Duties to our Neighbor’s Soul

Every person has the right to the truth and to the good that benefits his
rational soul. Man is endowed with the Intellect for knowing the truth and the will
for desiring that which is good.
Actions prohibited in this regard are lies, cheating, fraud, slander, gossip,
misrepresentation, falsification, perjury, rumor mongering, superstition, fortune
telling, and other acts which hide, obscures, or muddles the truth.

3.) Duties to our Neighbor’s Property

Every person has the right of ownership over things honesty acquired.
“Property” refers to external and material goods which, strictly speaking, can be
possessed, disposed of, or consumed, such as food, clothes, house, land, and
money.
 Prohibited acts in this regard are – stealing, trespassing, invasion of
privacy, plagiarism, arson land grabbing, vandalism, squatting, malversation, and
many other acts which deprives a person the right to own and use his property.

CORRECTING AN INJUSTICE

One who willfully violates the right of another person is bound by natural law,
and, also by the laws of society, to rectify any act of injustice he has done. This effort to
correct injustice is called – restitution from the verb “to restore” or bring back”.

The concept of restitution in the ancient law of talion demands “an eye for an eye
and a tooth for a tooth”, which the Filipino translates as “buhay ang inutang, buhay ang
kabayaran”.

Restitution is a difficult thing, especially where the damage done is not materially
quantifiable, such as in case of physical injury, damage to one’s honor, or death.

THE PRINCIPLE OF SELF-DEFENSE

Apolinario Mabini refers to the principle of seld-defense when he states “Love
your neighbour as yourself because God has imposed upon him as well as upon you
the obligation to help and not to do to you what he does not want to be done to him by
you. But if your neighbour, failing in this sacred duty, attempts against your life, liberty,
or interest, therefore you must destroy him and annihilate him, because the law of self-
preservation must prevail”(Verdadero Decalogo no.9).
Our inalienable right life includes its defense from an unjust aggressor. An unjust
aggressor in anyone who without proper authority and just reason attempts against our
life or interests, such as robber, rapist, kidnapper,or a murderer.
Under normal circumstances, in justice done to us by another is settled in a Court of
Justice, after the commission of a crime.
In order for an act of self-defense to be legal and moral, the following conditions
must apply:
1. The attack is unjust. The attack comes from an aggressor who is acting in his
own private authority and not from duly constituted authority. A criminal who is
sentenced to be executed by the State may not claim self-defense and kill the
prison guards. Inversely, police officers do not have the authority to summarily
“Salvage” criminals unless they are attacked first and placed in immediate
danger to their life.
2. The attack is serious in nature. An attack is serious when it is an attempt to
cause death to a victim who is them placed in a grave danger to his life.
 3. The defense must be simultaneous to the attack. The defense should be made at
the same time as that of the actual attack.
4. The means employed for defense are reasonable. The purpose of self-defense is
to protect oneself and not to commit murder. Therefore the victim may not kill the
aggressor when it is possible to incapacitate him and thwart his evil purpose.
5. The motive of the defender is honest. The only laudable motive for self-defense
is to save one’s life from an unjust attack. It should not be taken as an
opportunity to exact vengeance or punishment on the aggressor.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Capital Punishment or the Death Penalty is a controversial topic. Some countries
demand it. Others condemn it as an unjust and immoral punishment even for them whose
guilt had been established the death penalty for “heinous crime” as defined by law (RA
7659). Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, however using her presidential powers has suspended
the death penalty on Eastern Sunday, 2006 The debate on the issue continues.
The pros and cons: The “pros” or those who are in favour of death penalty, like the
volunteers against Crime and Corruption, believe that the State, like private individual,
has the right self-defense in defending society from criminals.
God has given to the State the right over life and death, as he has given to every man to
right of self-defense against injust aggression.
However, death penalty is morally permissible under the following conditions:
1. The criminal is given “due process” in court.
2. The crime must be grave and serious.
3. The guilt of the criminal is sufficiently proved beyond any doubt.

The “Cons” or those who are not in favour of capital punishment, like Catholic Bishops
Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) consider death penalty inhuman and unchristian.
Theologian Brendan Soane points out that the sacred text in the Scripture in support of
death penalty belong to an old order, “Written at a time when blood vergeance was
exacted murder and it was believed that the blood of the victim cried out from earth until
it had been avenged by the blood of the murderer”. He writes: “Precisely, Jesus
repudiated the law of talion, which demanded an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
Instead, Jesus taught us to our enemies and do good to those who harm us.
It is also argued against the death penalty that it does not deter criminals to indulge
themselves in their evil way. If death penalty is a deterrent against crime, then society
would have rid itself of criminality long time ago. The fact is that there are other ways for
punishing criminals, punishments which are humane and just.
Capital Punishment should not be compared to a medical surgery to remove a tumor for
the purpose of preserving life. The life of the victim of a crime is not preserved by taking
away the life of the murderer.
A Supreme Court that practically forces parents to send their children into an
educational system where the teaching of religion and an ethics based on faith of
forbidden should not be entitled to endorse the death.