Chapter VII — On Infidelity, and its various species opposed to the virtue of faith

I. Infidelity is threefold. The first is negative, which is the mere absence, so to call it, of faith in one who has in no way heard the faith. This is not a sin, but a punishment of sin. Wherefore this thesis stands condemned: Purely negative infidelity, in those to whom Christ has not been preached, is a sin. The second infidelity is privative. This positively resists the preaching of the faith, and refuses to receive the faith. The third is positive or contrary infidelity, in one who not only shuts his eyes to the light and preaching of the faith, but also obstinately defends errors contrary to the true faith. This contrary infidelity is threefold: Paganism, Judaism, Hereticism. Paganism is a voluntary error resisting a faith not yet received. To Paganism are reduced Atheism, Deism, and Mahometanism. Judaism is an error against the faith received in figure. Hereticism is an error resisting with pertinacity the faith received in the manifestation of the truth.

II. Question I. Can Infidels be licitly tolerated among Catholics? Answer. Absolutely, and prescinding from every respect, this tolerance seems illicit. The hope of a greater good, of common utility, and of avoiding a greater evil can induce Princes to tolerate Infidels in their dominions, if they bring no prejudice upon the faith. The tolerance of Heretics demands a greater cause.

III. Question II. Can the Church, either immediately of herself, or by the aid of Princes, compel Infidels who are not her subjects to receive the faith? Answer. The common opinion denies it, with St. Thomas, II-II, q. 10, art. 8; and it is drawn from St. Paul, 1 Corinthians 5, saying: For what have I to do to judge them that are without? Wherefore the Church cannot compel Infidels who are not her subjects even to hear the preaching of the Gospel: for if she cannot compel them to receive the faith, neither can she compel them to hear it. But if the discourse be of Jews who are subjects, she can compel them to hear the Gospel, because with regard to the Jews a peculiar reason holds. For they, in the figure and in the promises of the old Law which they profess, have received the Gospel. And the usage of the Roman Church, compelling the Jews dwelling at Rome to hear the Gospel, confirms our opinion. Nor does compulsion to the faith follow from this: because although the hearing of the Gospel prepares for the faith, it in no way compels. For the hearers all remain free. But all Infidels, whether subjects or not subjects, who impede the preaching of the Gospel, the Church can restrain. The Preachers, however, must announce the Gospel of Christ adorned not with arms or soldiers, but with patience, humility, meekness, penance, peace, and tranquillity. But the Church cannot deprive infidel Princes not subject to her of the dominion which they hold over their Christian subjects and slaves, as is had from the Gospel itself, Matthew 22: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And the same St. Peter teaches, first epistle, chapter 2. But Infidels in catholic kingdoms are not capable of jurisdiction over Catholics. Wherefore it is not to be permitted that Jews have Christian menservants and maidservants, as is evident from the chapter Cum Judaei, 2, On the Jews.