Must We Answer Fools?
By DEACON JAMES H. TONER
“I myself shall give you a wisdom in speaking that all of your adversaries will be powerless to resist or refute” (Luke 21:15).
- + + No: Do not respond to a fool’s comments: “Do not answer a fool in the terms of his folly for fear that you will grow like him yourself” (Prov. 26:4 JB).
Yes: Your duty is, in fact, to respond cogently to the fool: “Answer a fool in the terms of his folly for fear that he imagines himself wise” (Prov. 26:5 JB).
Notes in various Bibles are at pains to argue that these two verses are complementary, not conflicting. The Catholic New American Bible, for instance, insists that there “is no contradiction between these two proverbs,” and the Protestant New International Version, similarly, contends that verses four and five “do not contradict each other, as is often thought.”
The plain sense of the matter, however, is that a contradiction does, in fact, exist: Do we answer the fool, or not? The Jerusalem Bible is unafraid to point out what is linguistically obvious — the two verses disagree: “The contradiction between this [verse five] and the preceding proverb is deliberate and plays on the two meanings of the phrase ‘in terms of his folly’.”
The New American Bible warns us: “In any answer the wise man gives he must protect his own interest against the fool.” Doesn’t that note, though, contradict St. Paul’s teaching that we should “look out for one another’s interests, not just for your own” (Phil. 2:4)? That same Bible — and I ought to state that the NAB’s text and notes are not, in my judgment, to be regularly and singularly relied upon — continues (in some editions) by supposing that “perhaps the juxtaposition of the two proverbs suggests that no single proverb can resolve every problem in life.”
What, then, are we to make of Prov. 3:5, which teaches us: “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, [and] on your own intelligence rely not; in all your ways be mindful of [H]im, and [H]e will make straight your ways”? Is that not a single proverb which, at its core, “can resolve every problem in life”? We are called to faith in God, not in creatures (CCC n. 150), especially not in political creatures (Psalms 118:8-9, 146:3).
Are we to suppose, then, that no single proverb is entirely trustworthy, or that some proverbs are, in fact, entirely trustworthy? Are some proverbs self-contradictory or of ethical value only when read in tandem with others? Should we forsake biblical notes and commentaries, or consult them? Which notes, in which Bibles, are reliable?
Proverbs is part of the Word of God, who can neither deceive nor be deceived. If something is not plain in the text, the difficulty in understanding and interpretation rests with us. Nothing prevents — indeed good sense commends — our reading, not isolated pericopes, but long contextual passages of the Bible and, if and when helpful or necessary, consulting reliable Bible aids to clarify or to improve our understanding. As an example, it’s helpful to know that the Old Testament often employs a common form of parallelism in which one idea, or verse, builds upon another one, so reading two, or more, verses together is often astute exegesis.
The two verses quoted above disagree about the wise and charitable course of action to take in the presence of foolishness. This does not mean, though, that the contradiction is absolute and ubiquitous. The NIV helps us: “Sometimes folly must be plainly exposed and denounced.” What are the “terms of the folly” involved? A modern translation of Sirach similarly helps us: “You can lose all your self-respect by being reluctant to speak up in the presence of stupidity” (20:22), and “A gentle answer quiets anger, but a harsh one stirs it up” (Prov. 15:1).
There are times, then, to admonish the fool — and other times to preserve silence, as Ecclesiastes tells us (3:7). In such admonitions, we are to be firm but gentle (cf. 1 Peter 3:15-16). And prudence counsels us to assess our circumstances and our audience, for the “answer” we provide to alert, polite listeners may well differ in kind or in degree from the answer we give, or not (cf. Matt. 27:12), to others, who may be ignorant or hostile. In Ephesians, St. Paul teaches: “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen” (4:29, emphasis supplied).
“Stupid people have no respect for wisdom,” one modern translation tells us, “and [they] refuse to learn” (Prov. 1:7; just in that book alone, see also 1:22; 10:21; 12:15; 14:8-9; 15:2, 14; 18:2; and 23:9). This is the reason that we read in Sirach: “Don’t allow yourself to be dominated by someone who is stupid” (4:27). Additionally, Sacred Scripture teaches us that there are, in fact, times not to be “hospitable” — and to stay away from the morally profligate (Matt. 18:17, 1 Cor. 5:11, 2 John 10-11). Here we discern the sense of our Lord’s lesson: “Do not throw your pearls before swine” (Matt. 7:6).
By the way: One is reminded here of Psalm 19 (v. 12): “No one can see his own errors; deliver me, Lord, from hidden faults!” There are certainly times for us to receive others’ advice or admonitions: So “[let us] be careful, then, how you [and I] listen” (Luke 8:18).
“A wise man,” Sirach tells us, “will be silent until the right moment” (20:7). Prudence is a cardinal virtue (Wisdom 8:7; CCC, n. 1806), and we are called upon to exercise it at times and in places when we must decide what to do about the prattling of fools. St. Paul advises us: “Keep away from profane and foolish discussions which only drive people farther away from God” (2 Tim. 2:16).
There is, however, no counsel there about what separates profane and foolish discussions (to be avoided) from sacred and serious discussions (to be embraced). After all, we must be ready both by word, as St. Peter urges us, “to answer anyone who asks you to explain the hope you have” (1 Peter 3:15) and by deed, “to silence the ignorant talk of foolish people by the good things you do” (2:15; cf. 2 Thess. 2:17).
The Catechism teaches that Catholics do not practice a “religion of the book” (n. 108), but that we necessarily integrate Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium (nn. 75-82, 85-87, 112-119). Neither do Catholics subscribe to fideism, which holds that faith is the only means of knowing God. Confronted with troubled people or troubling circumstances, we are called to reason together (Isaiah 1:18 RSV) in a manner proceeding from, and formed in, faith. Therefore, the two synergistic proverbs we have analyzed provide a firm foundation for reason, but the full construction — the edifice of both faith and reason — will depend both upon our educated conscience (see CCC, nn. 1790-1802) and our mature judgment of exigent circumstances:
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone” (Col. 4:6; cf. Matt. 5:13).
That is precisely the sense and spirit of the wise counsel found in Prov. 26:4 and 5, taken together. In silly or inconsequential matters, we can morally and safely ignore foolish talk and, in fact, we should. In more serious matters, however, we can and must speak up — “Do not refrain from speaking at the crucial time” (Sirach 4:23) — lest, to repeat the point, we lose “all [our] self-respect by being reluctant to speak up in the presence of stupidity.”
On such warranted occasions, speak with charitable conviction, knowing that “the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say” (Luke 12:12).