De inuidis et detractoribus
The Poison of Envy
The author warns against the hypocrisy of those who pursue worldly vanity while harboring the destructive poison of envy.
Look at the miserable end of hypocrites who, as sacred scripture testifies, will be destroyed like dung—than which nothing is more unclean. In vain, therefore, did they pursue the shadow of good works; for if they were truly good, they would by no means be lost. To satisfy the desires of the flesh, which lusts against the spirit, they endured much in hunger and thirst, in cold and nakedness, and similar things, by which the precious pearl of Christ could have been bought. For the works of the flesh don't consist only in impurity or gluttony; the Apostle, speaking to the Galatians, proves that they are manifest in many vices, such as fornication, impurity, greed, lewdness, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, contentions, rivalries, anger, quarrels, dissensions, heresies, factions, envy, murder, drunkenness, carousing, and the like, and those who commit these will not possess the kingdom of God. Whether, therefore, works are directed toward the end of impurity and licentiousness, or toward the outcome of vainglory or greed, because they are deprived of their true end, they incur death. Hence the same Apostle says: 'Let us not become greedy for vainglory, provoking one another, envying one another.' Indeed, he prudently and elegantly expressed the vices by which false justice is known, since the swelling of arrogance easily provokes that from which it thinks victory will come, and envy begrudges those whom it considers superior or equal. I would believe that nothing is more miserable than this, although no misery moves mercy less (and rightly so) than the calamity of those who have voluntarily cast away blessedness. For who could feel compassion for those who, through the gall of malice, would rather be miserable than blessed? The Fathers long ago agreed that blessedness consists in virtue, and that there can be no virtue without love—the most delightful fruit of which, as the Apostle testifies, is clearly opposed to the works of the flesh, which are the works of the Spirit that lead to life; these are peace, patience, long-suffering, goodness, joy, gentleness, self-control, and chastity. Those, therefore, who cut these branches of virtue from the soil of their own hearts and destroy the root of love from which they spring—what path are they walking toward blessedness? Clearly, nothing attacks love more than the poison of envy. Envy, as the philosophers have held, is sadness arising from the apparent prosperity of another. If someone is saddened by the apparent prosperity of a tyrant or a perverse citizen, they aren't stained by the blemish of envy. It even displeases good people when someone believed to be prone to evil succeeds in a way that leads to the ruin of many. If, therefore, envy is afflicted by the good fortune of others, it's plain that it's very far from the love that doesn't seek its own, but the things of others.
The Torment of the Envious
Envy is described as a self-inflicted torture that blinds the soul to the grace of God and leads to malice against the innocent.
Love considers nothing its own when it comes to good, and nothing foreign when it comes to bad; it suffers with the troubles of others and pours out its own blessings upon its neighbors, for it unites souls so that they desire the same things and reject the same things. The great father Augustine says: "Take away envy; what is mine is yours, and what is yours is mine." And perhaps there won't be anything that is 'mine' or 'yours,' but everything will be ours. For it is envy itself that wants what it has to be absent from others. It desires that the same thing be absent from a neighbor, and if it isn't absent, it is miserably tormented; and it is often tortured by something it doesn't even want, just because it sees that thing present in a neighbor. This is right, for even the moralist says there is nothing more just than envy, which immediately gnaws at its own author, tormenting the soul. And don't think it's a light torment; the Sicilian tyrants could devise none more severe. Naso depicted this plague elegantly and truly, even if through the cloud of poetic fiction: 'Pallor sits on the face, emaciation in the whole body; the gaze is never straight, teeth are livid with rust, breasts are green with bile, and the tongue is suffused with poison.' Laughter is absent, unless it's the kind triggered by visible sorrows, and the envious person barely holds back tears because they see nothing worth crying about. They don't enjoy sleep, stirred up by wakeful worries; instead, they watch others' successes with resentment and waste away at the sight of them, tearing others down while being torn apart themselves, and they are their own punishment. This description is no less true, even if the author attributes a physical composition to an incorporeal thing, since the power of the figure—what is called sarcofegia or sarcographia—consists in the fact that it freely assigns the features of a body to incorporeal things. It's worth noting, however, that no power of kindness or nature can extinguish the flame of envy. For the author describes Envy as moved by both the strength and beauty of Pallas; and the sister, stung by envy, couldn't bear her sister's happy marriage, and she couldn't be swayed by any price to keep the promise she had made to the deity or to her own sister. She often wished to die so that she wouldn't have to see anything of the sort. Envy incited the patriarchs to the crime of fratricide against their brother, so that it wasn't even permissible to reveal without punishment the grace that the Spirit was showing to the innocent one in his dreams. Therefore, the innocent brother is condemned to slavery, the father to bereavement, and, in order to thwart the arrangement of God's grace, wickedness obtained from the just Judge the famine, the yoke of slavery, the calamity of exile, the slanders of the Egyptians, and the cruelty of Pharaoh.
The Ubiquity of Detraction
The author observes how envy manifests in the obstruction of grace and the rise of slanderous detraction in human society.
Joseph's hands served in labor, and their succession is considered unworthy, relegated to mud, brick, and straw. You can see many driven by these same stings of envy, trying to place whatever obstacles they can in the way of grace and attempting to hinder the plan of the Most High. If by chance they imagine someone is making progress, they obstruct and resist, trying to hand them over to the Ishmaelites like a brother; if they don't kill them, they tarnish their very sincerity, and to disguise their own wickedness, they display the innocent's blood-stained tunic. I see this pattern in many who are consumed by every shift in the winds of fortune, and who would wish to see fortune turn against others, provided those others were hurt more severely. And, if you believe Aesop or Avianus, you'll see those who rejoice to have one of their own eyes gouged out, provided their neighbor is deprived of both. There's no way to avoid envy unless you become utterly miserable. For it's a famous ancient proverb that only misery knows no envy, and the most miserable human fortune is that which is not envied. It's said that Plato, when his fellow students envied him, asked Socrates how he could avoid the envy of others. Socrates replied to him, "Be as Thersites." As the envious are tormented, they want others to share in their misery, seeking on every side to do harm, and they even think that innocence itself is a kind of death. So that you might learn about all from one, Maro says of the envious person: "If you hadn't done some harm, you'd be dead." Nothing is less becoming to a philosopher or a person of serious character and standing. Hence Socrates—not the ancient one, but the one Cassiodorus praises as the author of events in his Tripartite History—said: "That Julian expelled barbers and cooks from the palace was the act not only of an emperor but of a philosopher; but to slander and tear people apart is the act of neither a philosopher nor a prince." For when good works cease for any reason, people fall back into the malice of slander. This is surely the undoubted offspring of envy, and it gives clear evidence that charity is absent. At times it twists the good deeds of others, and at other times it diminishes them; it either invents evils that don't exist, or it magnifies and extols those that do. Love doesn't act wrongly; yet this alone delights in perversity. When the Apostle lists the many vices of the Gentiles, he places detractors last—or, I might more accurately say, at the very peak or depth of evil—describing them as enemies of divine goodness with a unique mark, pronouncing them as if they alone are hateful to God. Yet I would believe those who harbor hidden hatred to be more hateful to God than the rest, for in order to do more harm and be trusted more faithfully, they proclaim the praises of others and feign friendship, while inserting at the end of their speech some small thing that contradicts their previous titles: 'Happy in his children, happy in his wife, Protheus,' and 'to whom, if you remove the crimes of the murdered Phocus, all things had happened.' Doesn't the stain of such great parricide wipe away not only the gifts of fortune but also the grand titles of even the most magnificent virtue? Such is that saying of the orator: 'I admit that Julius Fortunatus was a strong man and one who clearly acted vigorously in many things; yet I would indeed wonder how he escaped the judgment of extortion before just judges, if the power of his eloquence were unknown to me.' Isn't this poison, and in a way, doesn't it extinguish the appearance of a good work and, if I may say so, the very life of virtue? Indeed, much has been said above about the Gnathonics—that is, the flatterers—but whom would I call worse: the Gnathonics or the detractors? It isn't sufficiently clear.
Humility as the Remedy
Through examples from history and monastic life, the author suggests that humility and legal justice are the necessary responses to the pervasive culture of criticism and envy.
Yet I find that the ancients punished both of these vices with death. For instance, the Athenians executed Thiraagoras for fawning over King Darius during formal greetings, as was the custom of that people; and the Spartan senate ordered Caristolura to be killed because he preferred to carp at the deeds of great men rather than openly challenge them with manly consistency. Among well-ordered people, it has always been permitted for everyone to use their own judgment and to openly criticize what they felt was not done rightly. Indeed, liberty—when supported by love—approves of this freedom to criticize, whereas tyrannical rage merely fears and hinders it. Otherwise, you’ll see detractors and the envious abounding in court, as if they had all flowed into it like the cesspool of the entire world. There is no group of people living together that isn't touched by the sting of envy, unless they are truly religious. Yet everywhere, those who shine with more illustrious merits are gnawed all the more sharply by the poisoned tooth of envy. For someone who outshines and weighs down the skills of those beneath him burns with his own brilliance; once he is gone, that same person will be loved. But above all others, servants pursue their masters, and subordinates pursue those set over them. It’s the same with servants as it is with subordinates: they’re generally a complaining lot, claiming they’re being treated unfairly, that their hard work is poorly rewarded, or that their duties are being badly managed. You’ll find people who will criticize their leader for something, even when everything is being handled perfectly well. Read the comedies, look through the tragedies, and you’ll see that a household is almost always ungrateful to its head. But you’ll be surprised to find this same attitude not only in the royal court, but in the school, the cloister, and the capitol—if, that is, domestic faults are to be grouped under the heading of character. The venerable father Gilbert, Bishop of Hereford, used to tell me about a monastic habit that he admitted he had experienced in himself. When he first entered the monastery, still burning with the fire he had newly caught, he used to criticize the laziness of his superiors. But before long, once he had been promoted to a minor position, he was moved by compassion for his fellow monks; yet he still didn't spare those in higher positions. A little later, he rose to the rank of prior, and feeling for the priors, he never stopped criticizing the abbots. He himself became an abbot, and, showing favor to his fellow abbots, he began to see the faults of bishops. Eventually, he himself became a bishop and began to spare his fellow bishops. I don't think he struggled with envy, but as a prudent man, he elegantly expressed something that is, in a way, innate to human beings. Perhaps this father took it upon himself to say this so that, by identifying with the crowd of those who struggle, he might be heard more kindly. Indeed, Julius Caesar, upon hearing of Cato's death, finally felt compassion for the labors and hardships of the man who had been extinguished, and he mourned the loss of an outstanding citizen from human affairs. Publicly, however, he confessed that Cato had envied his virtue, and that he himself had envied Cato's glory. The old man in the Andria teaches what the most direct path to favor without envy is, when he relates that his son should comply with everyone and harm no one. Augustine, the father of the beatitude we seek, also says that the most cautious humility will either avoid the dog's tooth or the most solid truth will blunt it; for by no other virtue does one escape the stings of detraction, yet a healthy mind should not despise the medicine of honest criticism, even if insults and libelous pamphlets are rightly punished by law. For if someone writes malicious verses against another, there is a legal remedy and a judgment; a law has long been established against slanderers, and the chorus has fallen silent regarding the foolish license of those who presume and abuse it so shamefully, now that the right to do harm has been taken away.
Read the original Latin
Eece quam miser est finis ypocritarum qui (sacro testante eloquio) perdentur ut sterquilinium quo nichil immundius est. Frustra ergo affectauerunt umbram bonorum operum; nam, si bona essent, reuera nequaquam perderentur. Vt desideria camis implerent, quae aduersus spiritum concupiscit, multa sustinuerunt in fame et siti, in frigore et nuditate et similibus, quibus Christi pretiosum emi poterat margaritum. Non enim in sola iramunditia uel gula consistunt opera camis, cum Apostolus ad Galathas loquens ea in multis uitiis manifesta esse conuincat, ut sunt fornicatio, immunditia, auaritia, impudicitia, luxuria, idolorum seruitus, ueneficia, inimicitiae, contentiones, emulationes, irae, rixae, dissensiones, hereses, sectae, inuidiae, homicidia, ebrietates, commesationes, et similia, quae qui committunt, regnum Dei non possidebunt. Siue ergo ad finem immunditiae et luxuriae siue ad inanis gloriae uel auaritiae exitum opera referantur, quia priuantur fine suo, mortem incurrunt. Vnde idem Apostolus: Non efficiamur, inquit, inanis gloriae cupidi, inuicem prouocantes, inuicem inuidentes. Sane uitia, quibus falsa iustitia innotescit, prudenter et eleganter expressit, cum arrogantiae tumor facile prouocet unde sibi prouenire uictoriam opinatur, et liuor illis inuideat quos superiores putat esse uel pares. Quo quidem nichil crediderim esse miserius, licet nulla miseria minus moueat misericordiam (et hoc recte) quam calamitas eorum qui sponte beatitudinem abiecenint.
Quis enim compatiatur eis qui a felle malitiae malunt esse miseri quam a beati? Patribus siquidem pridem placuit beatitudinem consistere in uirtute, et nullam sine caritate posse esse uirtutem, cuius utique fructus iocundissimus est, Apostolo testante qui operibus carnis haec opera Spiritus quae ad uitam proficiunt euidenter opponit; quae sunt pax, patientia, longanimitas, bonitas, gaudium, mansuetudo, continentia, castitas. Qui ergo hos uirtutis ramos a terra cordis sui succidunt et radicem caritatis, de qua oriuntur, exterminant, quanam uia ad beatitudinem pergunt? Plane nichil est quod magis caritatem impugnet quam uenenum inuidiae. Est autem inuidia, ut philosophis placuit, tristitia ex apparenti prosperitate alicuius initium (habens). Si enim de tiranni uel peruersi ciuis apparenti quis prosperitate tristab tur, nequaquam deturpatur inuidiae macula. Nam et bonis displicet, cum in perniciem multorum succedit his qui ad mala creduntur proniores. Si ergo liuor bonis affligitur alienis, planum est quod a caritate plurimum distat quae sua non quaerit sed proximorum.
Caritas in bonis nichil suum, in malis nichil reputat alienum; malis compatitur alienis, bona sua diffundit in proximos; nam et animos unit ut idem uelint idemque nolint. Ait magnus pater Augustinus: Tolle inuidiam; meum tuum est et tuum meum. Et forte non erit aliquid meum uel tuum sed omnia nostra erunt. Ipsa enim est quae, quod sibi uult abesse. idem proximo abesse desiderat et, si non absit, infeliciter cruciatur, et saepe in eo quod non desiderat, dum illud proximo uidet adesse, torquetur. Recte quidem, cum et ethicus dicat quia iustius inuidia nichil est quae protinus ipsum auctorem rodit, excrucians animum. Nec leue tormentum credas quo nullum grauius potuerunt Siculi excogitare tiranni. Pestem hanc, licet poetici nube figmenti, Naso depinxit eleganter quidem et uere: Pallor in ore sedet, macies in corpore toto; nusquam recta acies, liuent rubigine dentes, pectora felle uirent, sufFusa est lingua ueneno.
Risus abest, nisi quem uisi fecere dolores, uixque tenet lacrimas quia nil lacrimabile cernit. Nec fruitur sompno uigilantibus excita curis, sed uidet ingratos intabescitque uidendo successus hominum, carpitque et carpitur una, suppliciumque suum est. Non est autem minus uera descriptio, licet rei incorporali corporis compositionem auctor adscribat, cum in eo figurae quae sarcofegia uel sarcographia dicitur uis consistat quod rebus incorporalibus corporis lineamenta licenter adtribuit. Hoc quidem potius adtendendum quod nulla uis beneficii aut naturae flammam restinguit inuidiae. Nam et Palladis uiribus et forma motam describit Inuidiam; et sororis felices thalamos soror stimulata ferre non potuit et ut promissam numini uel germanae fidem seruaret, nullo pretio potuit inclinari. Saepe mori uoluit ne quiequam tale uideret. Ad parrieidii facinus in fratrem patriarchas excitauit ina uidia, ut nec impune reuelare licuerit gratiam quam Spiritus innocenti monstrabat in sompnis. Ergo seruitute dampnatur innocens frater, pater orbitate, et, ut dispositionem gratiae Dei euacuet, in se famem, seruitutis iugum, calamitatem exilii, calumpnias Egiptiorum, seuitiam Pharaonis a iusto iudice iniquitas impetrauit.
Manus loseph in laboribus seruierunt, et successio eorum in luto et latere ipsisque paleis reputatur indigna. Videas multos eisdem liuoris urgeri stimulis, ut quos possunt obices opponant gratiae et dispositionem Altissimi nitantur impedire. Si forte quasi sompniando coniciunt alicuius prouectum, obstant, reluctantur, ut quasi fratrem Ismahelitis exponant; si non occidant, incrustant ipsam sinceritatem et, ut proprium praetexant scelus, innocentis tunicam ostendunt cruentatam. Hanc enim in multis uideo descriptionem, qui ad omnia felicioris aurae momenta uruntur, sibique uellent aduersari fortunam, dum alii grauius lederentur. Et, ut Esopo uel Auiano credas, uidebis qui sibi oculum alterum erui gaudeat, dum utroque priuetur proximus. Nec est qua uia declines inuidiam, nisi miserrimus fias. Celebre namque est ab antiquo prouerbio quia sola miseria nescit inuidiam, fortunaque hominis miserrima est eui non inuidetur. Fertur Plato, cum ei condiscipuli inuiderent, Socratem interrogasse qua ratione posset hominum declinare inuic diam.
Cui Socrates: Esto, inquit, ut Tersites. Dum ergo torquentur inuidi, alios miseriae suae uolunt esse participes, undique quaerentes ut noceant, et ipsam innocentiam quandam putant esse mortis imaginem. Vnde Maro, ut ab uno discas omnes, notans inuidum ait: Et, si non aliqua nocuisses, mortuus esses. Quo nichil minus decet philosophum aut uirum auctoritate uel moribus grauem. Vnde Socrates, non ille antiquus sed quem auctorem gestorum Cassiodorus in Tripertita laudat Historia: Quod, inquit, lulianus tonsores et cocos a palatio expulit, non modo imperatoris sed et philosophi opus egit; ut autem detraheret atque dilaceraret, neque philosophi neque principis fuit. Cum enim ex quacumque causa cessant opera, decurritur ad malitiam detrahendi. Haec est utique indubitata proles inuidiae et caritatem abesse manifesto indicio protestatur. Et nunc quidem bona aliena peruertit, nunc minuit; mala aut fingit quae non sunt, aut magnificat et extollit si qua sunt.
Caritas non agit perperam; at haec sola peruersitate letatur. Cum Apostolus uitia gentium multa enumeret, nouissime et quasi in culmine malorum (siue profundo rectius dixerim) posuit detractores, eosque tamquam singulari nota diuinae bonitatis hostes exprimens quasi solos Deo odibiles esse pronuntiat. Verumtamen illos Deo odibiliores inter ceteros esse crediderim, qui latenti odio, ut magis noceant eisque a credatur fidelius, laudes praedicant alienas, amicitiam simulant, subicientes tamen in calce sermonis uel modicum quod praecedentibus tituhs aduersetur: Felix et nato, felix et coniuge Protheus; et cui, si deraas iugulati crimina Phoci, omnia contigerant. Numquid tanti parricidii labes omnes non modo fortunae dotes sed quamuis magnificae uirtutis titulos grandes non obliterat? Tale est illud oratoris: lulium Fortunatum fateor uirum fortem et quem constat strenue egisse quam plurima; quo tamen pacto iudicium repetundarum apud iudices iustos euaserit mirarer quidem, si uis eloquii eius michi esset incognita. Hoc nonne uenenum est et quodammodo speciem boni operis et, ut ita dicam, uirtutis uitam extinguit? Et quidem de Gnatonicis, id est de adulatoribus, multa superius dicta sunt; sed quos deteriores dixerim, Gnatonicos an detractores? Non satis liquet.
Vtrumque tamen uitium apud antiquos inuenio morte multatum. Nara et Athenienses Thiraagoram inter officia salutationis Dario regi more gentis illius adulantem capitali supplicio affecerunt; et Lacedemoniorum senatus Caristolura interirai iussit eo quod magnorura uirorum carpere facta raaluit quam palam constantia uirili arguere; hoc enim apud bene compositos seraper licuit ut quisque suo iudicio uteretur palaraque reprehenderet quod nequaquam recte factum uideretur. Siquidem hanc reprehendendi licentiara caritate subnixara libertas approbat, et tirannica durataxat rabies perhorrescit et impedit. Ceterum detractores et inuidos sic in curia uidebis abundare ac si in eam, quasi totius orbis sentinam, confluxerint. Non est cetus conuiuentium, nisi religiosissimus sit, quem liuoris stiraulus non adtingat. Vbique taraen qui illustrioribus clarescunt meritis acrius inuidiae toxicato dente roduntur. Vrit enim fulgore suo qui praegrauat artes infra se positas; extinctus amabitur idem. Sed prae ceteris serui dominos, praelatos subditi insequuntur.
Nam sicut seruorum, ita et subditorum genus plerumque querulum est et aut se iniuste premi aut indigne remunerari studia aut officia male administrari causatur. Earoque inuenies qui in aliquo non detrahat praesidenti, etsi interdum omnia recte gerantur. Comicos relege, reuolue tragicos, familiam fere semper patrifamilias uidebis ingratam. At non modo in curia sed in scola, sed in claustro, sed in capitolio morem hunc, si tamen domestica uitia sunt moribus aggreganda, miraberis optinere. Venerabilis pater Gilebertus Herefordensis episcopus michi referre consueuit claustralium morem quem in se ipso se fatebatur expertum. Cum enim monasterium ingressus esset, feruens adhuc igne quem de nouo conceperat, magistratuum suorum ignauiam arguebat. Nec mora; promotus in modico, miseratione complicium motus est; a nondum tamen pepercit maioribus. Paulo post ad priores ascendit; prioribusque compatiens, carpere non cessauit abbates.
Factus est et ipse abbas; et, propitius in coabbates, episcoporum coepit uitia intueri. Tandem et ipse episcopus coepiscopis parcit. Nec tamen ipsum inuidiae uitio arbitror laborasse; sed uir prudens quod hominibus quodammodo ingenitum est eleganter expressit. Et forte hoc sibi praefatus pater imposuit ut sic laborantium turbae sponte consertus benignius audiretur. Sane lulius Cesar audita Catonis morte tandem compassus est laboribus et erumpnis extincti, et egregium ciuem rebus humanis defleuit exemptum. Publice tamen confessus est quod et Cato uirtuti eius inuiderat et quod ipse Catonis gloriae inuidebat. Quae uero ad gratiam sine inuidia uia expeditissima sit senex docet in Andria, dum filium omnibus obsequi, neminem ledere refert. Ait quoque sequendae beatitudinis pater Augustinus quia dentem caninum uel euitabit cautissima humilitas uel retundet solidissima ueritas; alia siquidem uirtute nemo detractionis declinat aculeos, liberae tamen reprehensionis medelam sana mens minime aspematur, licet iure conuitia puniantur famosique libelli.
Nam si mala condiderit in quem quis carmina, ius est iudiciumque; et aduersus conuitiatores pridem lex est accepta, chorusque de inepta licentia praesumentium et abutentium turpiter obticuit sublato iure nocendi.
Policraticus companion
Study the argument weekly; pray the tradition daily
Pair the outline with the Chosen Portion app, which serves short daily portions from the same royal devotional tradition — free on iOS.
John of Salisbury argued that rulers must keep the law of God before their eyes daily; Chosen Portion gives modern readers that same daily discipline in five minutes a morning.
- 8 weeks, one book per week, with the 3-4 key chapters flagged in each
- Discussion questions usable for a reading group from week one
- A daily 5-minute companion portion in the app alongside your weekly study