Understanding Oppostion to the HHS Mandate (Part 1): Why the Church Won’t Pay for Contraceptives.

In discussing the Health and Human Services (HHS) Mandate that will attempt to force the Catholic Church to pay for contraceptives, abortifacients, and sterilization, I have discovered that many Catholics, while generally understanding why we object to paying for sterilization and abortifacients, are less than enthusiastic about our refusal to pay for contraceptives. This “lack of enthusiasm” for the Church’s position on Contraception, along with political irritation, makes many Catholics ambivalent or even hostile to the Bishop’s call that we oppose the HHS mandate.

Why we won’t pay for contraceptives – While the fundamental issue is this matter is Religious Freedom and the First Amendment, (which we have discussed here before and will again in the future), it may be worthwhile to focus for a moment on why we religiously oppose the use and funding of contraceptives. This discussion on contraception cannot be complete in a brief blog post, but setting forth the principled reasons of the Church teaching may be helpful.

In looking at the issue, we might begin by looking at the “big picture.” For while many people fail to see why contraception is harmful in a particular marriage, it is easier for them to begin to see the harm that contraceptives have caused in our wider culture. Looking at some of the harm may be of help in addressing the overall negative attitude that many, including most Catholics, bring to the Church teaching on Contraception.

For indeed, a generation has passed since the publication of the boldly pastoral and prophetic encyclical Humanae Vitae which upheld the ancient ban on the use of artificial contraception. Perhaps no teaching of the Church causes the worldly to scoff more than our teaching against artificial contraception. The eyes of so many, Catholics among them, roll and the scoffing begins: Unrealistic! Out of touch! Uncompassionate! Silly! You’ve got to be kidding!

The Lord Jesus had an answer to those who ridiculed him in a similar way: Time will prove where wisdom lies. (Matt 11:16-18)

And to a large degree time has proven where wisdom lies. For some forty or more years after widespread acceptance of contraception many grave cultural consequences have set in, related to sexuality and mistaken notions of sex. Among the consequences are: widespread and open promiscuity, which has led to higher and higher levels of STDs, abortion, teenage pregnancy, single parent homes, divorce, and to a decline in marriage rates. Recall that advocates of contraceptives, beginning in the 1950s and into the 1960s made many promises of the “benefits” of contraceptives.

The Promises of the Contraception Advocates:

  1. Happier Marriages and a lower divorce rates since couples could have all the sex they wanted without “fear” of pregnancy.
  2. Lower abortion rates since there would be far fewer “unwanted” children.
  3. Greater dignity for women who will no longer be “bound” by their reproductive system.
  4. More recently contraceptive advocates have touted the medical benefits of preventing STDs and AIDS especially by the use of condoms.

Paul VI in refuting these benefits made a few predictions of his own.

What were some of the concerns and predictions made by Pope Paul VI? (All of these are quotes from Humanae Vitae)

  1. Consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity (Humanae Vitae (HV) # 17)
  2. A general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. (HV # 17)
  3. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection. (HV # 17)
  4. Who will prevent public authorities from…impos[ing] their use on everyone. (HV # 17)

So, forty years later, who had the wisdom to see the true effects of Contraception, the world or the Church? Well lets consider some of the data:

  1. The divorce rate did not decline. It skyrocketed. Divorce rates soared through the 1970s to to the 1990s to almost 50% of marriages failing. In recent years the divorce rate has dropped slightly but this may also be due to the fact that far fewer people get married in the first place, preferring to cohabitate and engage in a kind of serial polygamy drifting from relationship to relationship. The overall divorce rate despite its slight drop remains high, hovering in the low 40% range. Contraceptive advocates claim that divorce is a complicated matter. True enough. But they cannot have it both ways, claiming that contraception would be a “simple” fix to make marriages happier and then, when they are so horrifyingly wrong, claiming that divorce is “complicated.” Paul VI on the other hand predicted rough sailing for marriage in advent of contraception. Looks like the Pope was right.
  2. Abortion rates did not decrease. They too skyrocketed. Within five years the pressure to have more abortion available led to its “legalization” in 1973. It has been well argued that, far from decreasing the abortion rate, contraception actually fueled it. Since contraception routinely fails, abortion became the “contraception of last recourse.” Further, just as the Pope predicted sexual immorality became widespread and this too led to higher rates of abortion. It is hard to compare promiscuity rates between periods since people “lie” a lot when asked about such things. But one would have to be very myopic not to notice the huge increase in open promiscuity, cohabitation, pornography and the like. All of this bad behavior, made more possible by contraceptives, also fuels abortion rates. Chalk up another one for the Pope and the Church.
  3. The question of women’s dignity is hard to measure and different people have different measures. Women do have greater career choices. But is career or vocation the true source of one’s dignity? One’s dignity is surely more than their economic and utilitarian capacity. Sadly, motherhood has taken a real back seat in popular culture. And, as the Pope predicted women have been hypersexualized as well. (Yesterday’s Superbowl Ads featured large amounts of female nudity to sell even products like Doritos). The dignity of women as wives and mothers has been set aside in favor of the sexual pleasure they offer. As the Pope predicted many modern men, no longer bound by marriage for sexual satisfaction, use women and discard them on a regular basis. Men “get what they want” and it seems many women are willing to supply it rather freely. In this scenario men win. Women are often left with STDs, they are often left with children, and as they get older and “less attractive” they are often left alone. I am not sure this is dignity. But you decide who is right and if women really have won in the “new morality” that contraception helped usher in. I think the Pope wins this point as well.
  4. As for preventing STDs and AIDS, again, big failure. STDs did not decrease and were not prevented. Infection rates skyrocketed through the 1970s and 1980s. AIDS which appeared on the scene later continues to show horribly high rates. Where is the promised deliverance? Contraceptives it seems, do not prevent anything. Rather they encourage the spread of these diseases by encouraging the bad behavior that causes them. Here too it looks like the Church was right and the world was wrong.
  5. Add to this list the huge teenage pregnancy rates, the devastation of single parent families, broken hearts and even poverty. The link to poverty may seem obscure, but the bottom line is that single motherhood is the chief cause of poverty in this country. Contraception encourages promiscuity. Promiscuity leads to teenage pregnancy. Teenage pregnancy leads to single motherhood (absent fatherhood). Single motherhood leads to welfare and poverty. Currently in the inner city over 80% of homes are headed by single mothers. It is the single highest factor related to poverty.
  6. Declining birth rates are also having terrible effects on contracepting cultures. Europe as we have known it is simply going out of existence. And while many debate endlessly over demographic data and how to interpret it,  Europe’s future seems increasingly Muslim and the social network wherein the young care for the old has been largely gutted.  I have written more on this HERE: Contraception is Cultural Suicide! Likewise here in the USA white and African American communities are below replacement level. Thankfully our immigrants are largely Christian and share our American vision. But for the Church the declining birthrates are now resulting in closing schools, parishes, declining vocations and the like. We cannot sustain what we have on a population that is no longer replacing itself. Immigration has insulated us from this to some extent, but low Mass attendance has eclipsed that growth and we are starting to shut down a lot of our operations.
  7. Sexual Confusion – Contraception “decouples” sex from having children. It emphasizes sex as pleasure. for its own sake,  and simply for the bonding of the adults involved. And while the Church does teach that marital sex does have a unitive dimension, it is not to be separated from its link to the procreative dimension. Having largely separated out the procreative dimension from sex, leads to a loss in the sacredness of sex. For if sex is just for pleasure, and not intrinsically related to having children, why should it be thought of as so sacred or serious. And why wait until marriage and maturity to start having it? And if sex is just about adults having pleasure and sharing intimate love, then many stop understanding why homosexual acts (which cannot be open to procreation) are flawed and intrinsically disordered.
  8. Thus we have sown in the wind and are now reaping the whirlwind.
  9. And of course it is the children who ultimately pay. For, even though we have tried through a contraceptive mentality to say that sex has little to do with having children, the fact is it does. And our children are born into a cultural whirlwind that is largely caused by sexual confusion and irresponsibility. And contraceptives and the contraceptive mentality have been a huge factor in the unraveling of our sexual sensibilities, and the breakdown of our families. Bad behavior has been encouraged, and all the bad consequences that flow from it are flourishing.

Most people seem largely disinterested in this data. Hearts have become numb and minds have gone to sleep. I hope you are not among them, and that you might consider this information well and share it with others. Time HAS proved where wisdom lay. It’s time to admit the obvious

What I have tried to do here is to show some of the reasons the Church opposes the use and promotion of contraceptive practices. There are actually insights that bring forth this opposition. It is not just a backward bunch of clerics in the Vatican opposing sex. Rather it is an ancient wisdom that makes good sense.

When sex is decoupled from child-bearing many grave distortions are introduced into a culture. As the proper understanding of sex becomes unraveled, so does the family. And it is children who suffer most.

While the crisis of Western Culture has more than contraception for its cause, contraception has still played a huge role in setting off many whirlwinds that have swept away much that was good. It is no accident or mere coincidence that in the very 50 years that contraceptives have become widely available and used, that the family has gone into a kind of nuclear winter. The statistics make it clear that more than half of children (and far more in minority communities) will never know the two parent family that most of us who are over fifty experienced as normal and ubiquitous.

Of course another fundamental reason we oppose Contraception is rooted in the ancient practice, stretching back into biblical times and carried forward all through the Christian era. Until the 1940 Lambeth conference there never was a Christian Church or communion who approved of contraception. In that fateful year the Anglican Church of England gave the first tip of the hat to contraceptive practice, and slowly, the Protestant denominations all followed. But Catholics, Orthodox and Orthodox Jews have never changed. We continue to hold the ancient and wise insight that sex is intrinsically linked to child bearing, and that the link should never be broken and replaced by other intentions in isolation from that. To do so invites disaster, as we can plainly see.

It will be granted that living the Church teaching on Contraception is not easy. Yet some of the difficulty must also be traced to our seeming obsession with small families. We have argued on this blog at some length about economic realities and many have voiced strong opinions that more than 2 children is just not economically feasible. And yet others with larger families say they do fine. It would seem that a lot has to do with what we want and what our priorities are going to be. And while the arguments will surely continue, it is remains true to this author that the absolute necessity for only 1 or 2 children is  not an unassailable fact.

In the end however, Catholics are encouraged to look beyond merely their own family and see what contraception has done to us. Life is bigger than merely what is hard for me, or what I like or don’t like, think or don’t think. Contraception has been a bitter pill that the West has swallowed.

While our fight against the HHS ruling is essentially about religious liberty, Catholics and others must understand that we do not seek to religious freedom merely for some arcane doctrine of no importance, that Catholics or others should say “What’s the big deal?” Rather, opposition to contraception is an essential component in the Catholic teaching on sexuality by which we stand against grave forces that wreak havoc on our culture. We cannot pay for something we see as sinful and destructive.

Catholic Nuns to Battle Sex Trafficking at Super Bowl

Here is a story that makes me glad and very sad at the same time. Religious sisters of various congregations are joining together to fight the horrific practice of human trafficking in underage “sex slaves.” One of the dirty secrets of large sports events is that not only is prostitution common, but that tragically, many underage girls are also being prostituted, most of them against their will, as sex slaves.

It is a shocking thing to think that slavery of any sort exists in this land. While some argue that the problem is exaggerated, I would like to ask them how many young slave girls they are willing to tolerate until we no longer “exaggerate” the problem. Many of the victims of this wretched trade come from the far east, places such as Singapore, and Indonesia in general. But some are kidnapped right here. Most of them are vulnerable because they are poor, or have broken homes, some are also runaways. In effect they are captured by the sex traders and their lives are threatened if they try to leave or to report the evil pimps and slave traders.

Aware of this dreadful problem, Religious Sisters have come together, and trained to both identify and work with police to make arrests, and also to prevent human trafficking altogether at this week’s Super Bowl. They will also put pressure on local hotels to be serious in their awareness and noncooperation in this problem. One of the sisters is quoted as saying, “We want the traffickers to know that we will be watching.”

Good for you Sisters. Anything we can do to make life difficult and risky for sex traffickers (especially those who exploit minors), is welcome and appreciated. Pray God they will be able to rescue some of the girls. Thanks for your courage, Sisters.

Here is the news report that details the story.

Envy is THE Diabolical Sin

A short while back we read from First Samuel at daily Mass and encountered an envious Saul. Upon David’s return from slaying Goliath the women sang a song praising him. Saul should rejoice with all Israel but he is resentful and envies David as he hears the song: Saul was very angry and resentful of the song, for he thought: “They give David ten thousands, but only thousands to me. All that remains for him is the kingship.” And from that day on, Saul looked upon David with a glarring eye. Saul discussed his intention of killing David with his son Jonathan and with all his servants. (1 Sam 18:6-9). His reaction is way over the top but this is what envy does.

What is envy? Unfortunately most people use the word today as merely a synonym for jealously. But traditionally, jealously is not the same as envy.

When I am jealous of you, you have something I want and I wish to possess it inordinately. But the key point is that there is something good about you or something good you have and I want to have it for myself. When jealousy is sinful I want it inordinately or unreasonably.

But in traditional theology envy is very different (cf Summa II IIae 36.1). Envy is sorrow, sadness or anger at the the goodness or excellence of someone else, because I take it to lessen my own excellence. And the key difference with envy is that (unlike jealousy) I do not want to possess the good or excellence you have. I want to destroy it.

Notice in the reading above that Saul wants to kill David. He wants to do this because he thinks David’s excellence makes him look less excellent, less great. Saul SHOULD rejoice in David’s gifts for they are gifts to all Israel. David is a fine soldier, and this is a blessing for everyone. The proper response to David’s excellence should be to rejoice, be thankful to God and, where possible imitate David’s courage and excellence. Instead Saul sulks and sees David stealing the limelight from him, and possibly even the kingdom. Envy rears its ugly head when Saul concludes David must die. The good that is in David must be destroyed.

Envy is diabolical – St. Augustine called Envy THE diabolical sin (De catechizandis rudibus 4,8:PL 40,315-316), since it seeks to minimize, end or destroy what is good. Scripture says By the envy of the Devil death entered the world (Wis 2:24). Seeing the excellence that Adam and Eve had, made in the image of God, and possibly knowing of plans for the incarnation, the Devil envied Adam and Eve. Their glory lessened his, or so he thought, and he set out to destroy the goodness in them. Envy is very ugly and it is diabolical.

Examples of Envy – I remember experiencing envy in my early years. Picture the scene. In every classroom there was always one student, sometimes a few, who got A’s on every test. They always behaved, and the teacher would sometimes praise them saying, “Why can’t the rest of you be like Johnny? (or Susie).” Some hated students like this since  they made them look bad. So what did some of them do? They sought to pressure the “teacher’s pet” to conform to their mediocrity. In effect they sought to destroy the goodness or excellence in A student. They would taunt them with names and pelt them with spit balls. If ridicule and isolation didn’t work sometimes they’d just plain beat them up. This is envy. Sorrowful and angry at the goodness of another student, because they made them look bad, they set out to destroy what was good in them.

The Virtues which cancel envy – The proper response to observing goodness or excellence in another is joy and zeal. We rejoice that they are blessed because, when they are blessed, we are blessed. Further we respond with a zeal that seeks to imitate where possible their goodness or excellence. Perhaps we can learn from them or their good example. But envy rejects joy and zeal and with sorrow and anger sets out to destroy what is good.

Envy can be subtle – Envy isn’t isn’t always this obvious. Sometimes it is more subtle and something we do almost without thinking. When someone at work is a rising star, we may easily engage in gossip and defamation to undermine their reputation or tarnish their image. We may do this at times in an unreflective manner. Almost without thinking, we diminish and belittle others and their accomplishments by careless and insensitive remarks. We often do this because we need to knock others down to feel better about ourselves. This is envy. Sometimes we show envy passively by omitting to praise or encourage others or by failing to call attention to their accomplishments.

Envy concealed with a smile – Finally there is an odd form of envy out there that is particularly annoying because it masquerades as sensitivity and kindness. Go with me to a typical neighborhood soccer game or baseball game. The children are on the field and playing their hearts out. But on the sidelines a decision has been made not to keep score. Why? Because the kids little egos might be damaged by losing. Frankly, it isn’t the egos of the children we’re probably protecting here, it is the parents. The fact is that the kids know the score in most cases. But God forbid that on the sports field there should be winners or losers! The losers might “feel bad.” The solution is to destroy or to refuse to acknowledge goodness and excellence in some children, because it is taken to lessen the goodness or excellence of the “losers.” This is envy and it teaches terrible things by omission. First of all it fails to teach that there are winners and losers in life. This is a fact. Sometimes I win, sometimes I lose. Either way I should be gracious. Secondly it fails to reward excellence and this is unjust for excellence should be rewarded and the reward should motivate others to be excellent. Much is lost when we fail to praise what is good.

Another example of this envious practice is at school award ceremonies where sometimes (literally) hundreds of awards are given out. There are the traditional Honor Roll awards but then a plethora of made up awards so that everyone “gets something.” I’ve even witnessed awards given for the nicest smile. But the problem is that when every one is awarded no one is awarded. Once again envy rears it ugly head, but this time it’s wearing a smiley face. God forbid that some kids little ego might be bruised he doesn’t get something. God forbid that someone else’s excellence might make me look less excellent by comparison.

The bottom line is that it is envy: sorrow at someone else’s excellence because I take it to lessen my own. And frankly this isn’t the kids’ issue, it’s usually parents and teachers projecting their own struggle with envy on the kids. But the fact is, there are simply some people who are better than I am a certain things. And that’s OK. I don’t have all the gifts, you don’t have all the gifts. But together we have all the gifts.

Envy is ugly, even when it masquerades as misguided kindness and fairness. It diminishes, and often seeks to destroy goodness and excellence. The proper response to excellence and goodness is and should always be joy and zeal.

In Snow White, the wicked Queen had envy for Snow White, the fairest of them all. Considering Snow White’s beauty as a threat to her standing, the evil queen cast a spell on snow white to remove her beauty from the scene. Envy consumes the evil queen.

Painting above by Marta Dahlig

Some Principles for Prophets Based on the Life and Teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

While the official title of this reflection is “Principles for Prophets” the unofficial title is My Feet is Tired, but my Soul is at Rest. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., used these words, quoting an elderly Black woman who said this during the Montgomery Bus Boycott. She, though well into her 70s, had been walking to work for the better part of a year, to protest the law requiring Blacks to ride in the back of buses, and give up their seats to white passengers. It was a great sacrifice for an elderly woman, but she was willing to make the sacrifice to see justice done. And as Dr. King asked of her well being she said in her own way: My feets is tired, but my soul is at rest.

And herein lies a great principle of all God’s prophets, that they were willing to suffer for the sake of God’s Kingdom, and for the sake of his Truth and Justice.

This weekend in America we celebrate the Birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and recall the astonishing legacy he left, of what it means to be committed to God’s justice and truth. And we cannot fail to note how different things are in this country because of the struggle that he, and so many others undertook, to end the horrifying, embarrassing, and painful legacy of racism, and Jim Crow segregation. Such dramatic change came at great cost, as Dr. King and others suffered arrest, death threats, hatred, disrespect and endless other hideous outrages.

I am only 50 years old, but do still remember, living in the deep south from 1969-1971, that some of the “Colored” and “Whites” signs were still hanging, rusting away at the back of buildings. I attended my 3rd grade year, (in 1969), in what had been the “Colored” school just a few years before. It was a poor excuse for a school building: run down, little plumbing, sulphur water, leaky roof, dim lights, and poorly maintained. It had been, up until a few years prior, a separate but “equal” school facility. I couldn’t wait to get out of that school and go to the 4th grade,  and move over to the former “white” school. The outrageous difference between the facilities was obvious, even to my untrained, 9 year old eyes.

Thank God that some folks, like Dr. King, and that 70-some year old woman got angry enough and committed enough to end this hideous part of our history. And we ought not fail to honor the sacrifices they made to do it.

In what follows, I would like to articulate some principles for prophets, articulated by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail. For indeed, prophets are still needed today to speak out and work to end abortion, to address the lack of affordable housing, increasing threats to religious liberty, and to assist immigrants in the the legal morass that many of them face. Prophets too are needed to reach out to women in crisis pregnancy, to help secure the rights and dignity of the disabled, and to assist those returning from prison to reconnect with the community. Frankly there are endless opportunities where God needs to send his people to work for justice. In the principles that follow, lengthy though they are, Dr. King enunciates some basic understandings that all who would be prophets must grasp. Unless otherwise noted, all the quotes are from the Letter from a Birmingham Jail.

Principle 1: Non violence. One of the most fundamental principles for any prophet is that he loves God’s people; yes, even his enemies. A true prophet in this land, loves America, loves this land and what she stands for. A true prophet loves God and his kingdom and wants to effect a marriage between the God he loves and the people he loves.

Hence, no true prophet will advocate violence or destruction. He will advocate a non-violent resistance of what is evil and unjust. He does have an anger, but this anger is born in love and does not seek to do violence, even to the enemy.

This love of one’s enemy of course is difficult and irksome, but God can do this for us. Many in the Civil Rights movement often remarked that Dr. King taught, it was not enough simply not to retaliate, we were actually to love those who hated and feared us.

Dr. King writes:

So we decided to go through a process of self-purification. We started having workshops on nonviolence and repeatedly asked ourselves the questions, “Are you able to accept blows without retaliating?” and “Are you able to endure the ordeals of jail?”

And elsewhere he wrote:

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Hate multiplies hate, violence multiplies violence, and toughness multiplies toughness in a descending spiral of destruction….The chain reaction of evil –hate begetting hate, wars producing more wars –must be broken, or we shall be plunged into the dark abyss of annihilation. (Strength to Love, 1963)

Principle 2: No Tension No Change – Generally people like to avoid tension. But as the prophets well knew, sometimes the role of a prophet is to introduce tension, and to be willing to hold it. Prophets are often called to ask uncomfortable questions, to “call the question” and point to inconsistency and hypocrisy. This usually makes people uncomfortable. But prophets must learn that the role of a true evangelizer is to comfort the afflicted AND afflict the comfortable. There are just some things that need to be confronted in a loving but clear way. And tension is part of the picture.

Dr. King writes:

But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly worked and preached against violent tension, but there is a type of constructive nonviolent tension that is necessary for growth….we must see the need of having nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men to rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. So, the purpose of direct action is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation….My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. History is the long and tragic story of the fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups are more immoral than individuals. And thus We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.

Principle 3: Now is the Time – (Holy Impatience). There is the tendency for a human being, so easily overwhelmed, to postpone what they know must happen. Many of the Founding Fathers of this country knew Slavery was a terrible blight on the vision they had articulated, and yet, for many reasons, facing the slavery issue was postponed. Then too even after slavery, a mitigated form of the same institution (Jim Crow) descend on the South, especially. African Americans were often counseled to “wait” and that justice would “inevitably” come. But there comes a moment when a holy impatience wells up in a people and God delivers a grace to transform that impatience into action. For those who are hungry and thirsty for righteousness, “wait” is not a legitimate instruction and it serves only to deepen injustice.

To those who seek justice in the question of abortion, in the selective abortion of the disabled, in the lack of affordable housing, in increasing unemployment and so forth, the question goes up: “Are you impatient enough? Angry enough? Hungry and thirsty enough? Do you have a holy impatience, or are you just going to watch the news, shake your head, say “Ain’t it awful…Someone ought to do something about that” ??

Of Holy Impatience, Dr. King writes:

For years now I have heard the word “wait.” It rings in the ear of every Negro with a piercing familiarity. This “wait” has almost always meant “never.” ….I guess it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say “wait.” But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate-filled policemen curse, kick, brutalize, and even kill your black brothers and sisters with impunity; when you see the vast majority of your twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight cage of poverty in the midst of an affluent society;…. when you suddenly find your tongue twisted and your speech stammering as you seek to explain to your six-year-old daughter why she cannot go to the public amusement park that has just been advertised on television, and see tears welling up in her little eyes when she is told that Funtown is closed to colored children, and see the depressing clouds of inferiority begin to form in her little mental sky, and see her begin to distort her little personality by unconsciously developing a bitterness toward white people; when you take a cross-country drive and find it necessary to sleep night after night in the uncomfortable corners of your automobile because no motel will accept you; when you are humiliated day in and day out by nagging signs reading “white” and “colored”; when your first name becomes “nigger” and your middle name becomes “boy” (however old you are) and your last name becomes “John,” and when your wife and mother are never given the respected title “Mrs.”; — then you will understand why we find it difficult to wait. There comes a time when the cup of endurance runs over and men are no longer willing to be plunged into an abyss of injustice where they experience the bleakness of corroding despair. I hope, sirs, you can understand our legitimate and unavoidable impatience.

Principle 4: Persistence is the Key. It is not enough to get angry or be impatient for a moment. We have have to allow the Lord to put a deep hunger and thirst in us for what is right and be willing to stay committed to the course laid out for us in securing justice. Are you willing to go to bed tired? Are you will to say with the older woman quoted by Dr. King, “My feet is tired but my soul is at rest.” ??  It’s one thing to turn out to a pep rally and say “Yes!” But where will you be on Monday morning? Where will you be six months from now? An old spiritual laments: Some go to Church for to sing and shout, before six months they’s all turned out. Will you persist in the work that needs to be done or just dabble in it?

Of Persistence, Dr. King writes:

We must come to see that human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability. It comes through the tireless efforts and persistent work of men willing to be coworkers with God, and without this hard work time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation.

Principle 5: Silence is Unacceptable – Many years ago W.B. Yates wrote: The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. Too many supposed Christians remain silent in the face of injustice. Is it fear? Yes. Is it individualism that says, “Not my problem?” Yes. But in the end silence about injustice can come to equate to affirmation of that injustice.

Of the silence of the “elect” Dr. King writes:

We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people.

He wrote elsewhere:

The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands in moments of challenge and controversy. (Atlanta recognition dinner -1965)

Principle 6: Creative Anger – Most of us are trained that anger is a sin. I can be. But not all anger is sinful. Jesus was often angry. There are some things worth being angry about. We have to recover a more distinguished notion anger that accepts that some anger is given by God as a creative energy, as passion to set things right. Most of the prophets exhibited anger, but it was an anger born in love for God and neighbor, for truth and justice. One of the most fundamental gifts of Dr. King was to able to tap into the legitimate anger of many who suffered and opposed segregation and racism, and to channel that energy to creative ends.

Of this creative anger, Dr. King writes:

The Negro has many pent-up resentments and latent frustrations. He has to get them out….If repressed emotions do not come out in nonviolent ways, they will come out in ominous expressions of violence. This is not a threat; it is a fact of history. So I have not said to my people, “Get rid of your discontent.” But I have tried to say that this normal and healthy discontent can be channeled through the creative outlet of nonviolent direct action.

Principle 7: The Church must be lighthouse not a clubhouse – Too many parishes and churches exist more for the social purposes of the members than as true outposts of the Kingdom, where the Word of God shines forth to transform the community. The Sodality debates with the Knights over who gets to use the hall for an occasion, meanwhile the poor go uncared for and un-evangelized. Parishes exist in neighborhoods where thousands have never been called to Christ, where the poor and the downcast are uncared for, where poor and single mothers hear the call of the abortionist, not the local pastor. Meanwhile back at the parish the main even is to argue about who left the kitchen a mess and worry about paying for the new roof since our numbers are diminishing. Why are the numbers diminishing? Many reasons, but among them is that, increasingly, the Church is seen as irrelevant building in the neighborhood rather than a refuge for sinners and and a place to find solidarity and real solutions. Is your parish a clubhouse or a lighthouse?

Of this sad fact of too many churches and parishes, Dr. King writes:

In deep disappointment I have wept over the laxity of the Church. But be assured, my tears have been tears of love. There can be no deep disappointment where there is not deep love. Yes, I love the Church, how could I do otherwise. I am the son, and grandson and great grandson of preachers. . Yes, I see the Church as the Body of Christ. But Oh!, how we have blemished and scarred that body through social neglect and fear of being non-conformists. There was a time when the church was very powerful. It was during that period that the early Christians rejoiced when they were deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was the thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Wherever the early Christians entered a town the power structure got disturbed and immediately sought to convict them for being “disturbers of the peace” and “outside agitators.” But they went on with the conviction that they were “a colony of heaven” and had to obey God rather than man. They were small in number but big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be intimidated. They brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide and gladiatorial contest. Things are different now. The contemporary church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. It is so often the arch supporter of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s often vocal sanction of things as they are. But the judgment of God is upon the church as never before. If the church of today does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century. I meet young people every day whose disappointment with the church has risen to outright disgust.

Well, there you have it. I know it is a long article, but I pray, well worth reading. These are some important principles that Dr. King enunciated for those of us who are passionate for justice.

What about you? What are you passionate about? There are so many issues of justice that ought to concern us today: Unemployment, abortion, mothers in crisis pregnancy, affordable housing, dignity and help for immigrants, hunger, homelessness, the rights and dignity of the disabled and elderly, religious liberty and the list goes on.

But it’s not enough to say, ain’t it awful. The legacy of Dr. King and others like him is that on Monday morning, after the rousing Church service and call to Jesus, there must be a will to get out and do the work persistently and consistently. To say at the end of the day, “My feet is tired but my soul is at rest!”

Again, what of you? Next year in the diocese (I pray) and surely in my parish, the observance of the Birthday of Dr. King is going to have a practical aspect. Every one of our social ministries are going to be available to sign some new folks up for the Christian jubilee. And NO ONE ought to leave without committing to work in the area of justice that they are most passionate about and to which God summons them.

It is not enough to praise Dr. King. We have to imitate his example.

Hmm…My Feet Is Tired But My Soul Is At Rest

On Bioethics and the Birth of Jesus – A Meditation on Certain Moral Questions in the Light of Christmas

In these past days, as Advent draws to a close and birth of Christ draws near, the readings at Daily Mass have recounted the divine initiative in the miraculous births of John the Baptist, and Samson. To this list we could add Isaac, Samuel and, of course Jesus. In these cases, women who were barren, or aged, or, in Mary’s case, a virgin, all conceive as the result of God’s special act.

For, although God most often acts to create us through the natural order of things, it remains true that God can overrule the usual course, such that a woman in her 90s (Sarah) can conceive, or that other women though aged or barren (Such as Elizabeth, Hannah, and the Mother of Samson) bring forth Children in very unlikely circumstances. Most miraculously of all is Jesus who is, in terms of his human nature, born of Mary, though clearly a virgin.

Stories like these highlight God’s involvement in the origin of human life. There are other texts as well that speak to the fact of God’s specific intention in creating us and of His role in bringing us forth.

Hence we are told in Jeremiah: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations (Jer 1:5). And thus we are taught that God knows of us, and plans for us, long before we are conceived, and that it is He Himself who forms us in our mother’s womb.

We also read in Psalm 139: For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made (Ps 139:13-14). In these magnificent verses, it is clear that we are God’s personal handiwork, and thus we are wonderful, and that a holy fear should surround the existence of every human being.

As we approach Christmas we ought to ponder the magnificence of human conception, gestation, birth and life. Even as we extoll the birth of Jesus, we also do well to acknowledge the awesome and mysterious truth that every human person emerges not merely from a biological process, but from the very mind and heart of God, from his will and as an act of his love. None of us are here by accident.

Yet in modern times there are many ways that God’s sovereignty over human conception and life are usurped or ignored. Among these are:

1. In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) In IVF, a fertilizable ovum is removed from a woman’s ovary and put in a petri dish (the Latin for dish is vitrum) to which a few concentrated drops of sperm are added. This removes human conception from the marriage act, its sacred and proper place, where God acts to bestow life. IVF puts it in the laboratory where man controls the process and conception is treated as a technology and consumer product, rather than as part of a mystery of fruitful love caught up in the marriage embrace and the love God.

There is a sense on the part of many today that couples (even single people) have a right to have a child. Hence they proceed to do what they please to exercise their right. Never mind that “excess” embryos are frozen or destroyed, it’s all for a “good cause,” namely, to give the parent(s) what they want, and supposedly have a “right” to.

From a faith perspective, IVF simply rejects God’s “failure” to act in accord with the wishes of the parents, and removes the decision from God. God may be teaching something to the couple due to their infertility. Perhaps he wants them to adopt, perhaps he has a special work or cause he wants them to be devoted to. But IVF suspends such discernment, and forces the solution.

In this way the mystery and divine origin of human life is both compromised and undermined. When life is merely a technology to do with as we please, it is not long before we end up in some pretty dark places.

2. Irreverence for sexuality – Human sexual activity is sacred because it is tied to the ordinary ways in which God brings us into existence. But having set aside a deep appreciation for the sacredness and divine origin of human life, it is evident that human sexuality is both misunderstood and treated irreverently. It is ridiculed by comedians, treated casually by fornicators and degraded through the explosively high levels of pornography.

Through contraception we have sown in the wind, and are now reaping the whirlwind. For if sex is just about fun and pleasure and not linked to children, marriage or the dignity of life, then just about anything goes: teen sex, “gay” sex, premarital sex, extramarital sex, and ten thousand other aberations. Whatever feels good and gives the participants pleasure. Contraception severs the connection between sex, and life, and God. Thus endless confusions ensue, and grave darkness has come upon us as our families disintegrate, sexually transmitted diseases proliferate, teenage pregnancy and abortion escalate, and homosexuality ingratiates itself into a deeply confused populace.

But, for the Church, sex is sacred and linked to the dignity of human life and its creation by God. Conception is holy, an act of God, and those who would engage in the holy act of sex that points to conception,  must do so from the sanctity of the marriage bed (for children deserve parents and a stable home), in an act open to and inviting of God, who alone is the author of sex, its meaning and the life that flows from it.

3. Abortion – We have spoken here at length of the tragedy and evil of abortion. Man usurps God’s role and claims for himself the right to kill that which God has clearly created, and is knitting together in the womb. Abortion snatches the knitting from God’s hands and says boldly to him “What are you doing?! ….This shall not be.” The mystery and dignity of every human person is undermined and endangered by this.

4. Rejection of the disabled and the imperfect – God permits, and allows that some among us have special needs. While we may wonder as to God’s ways, anyone who has worked with the disabled or had them as a member of the family know that, though hardships are surely present, the disabled bring many gifts and call forth great strength in those with whom they live and interact.

My own sister’s mental illness was a great trial for our family and yet I must declare she bestowed gifts and brought forth love in me I never knew I had. I will never forget her struggle that ended tragically, and the gift of her life and example are with me always.

But today, there are many who jettison these gifted people through abortion. A recent issue of the Ethics and Medics states the problem well:

Increasingly, the delivery of a healthy baby is perceived less as a blessing from God and more as an entitlement, a modern benefit associated with ever progressing medical technology. As a result, when there is a poor prenatal diagnosis, the medical focus shifts away from the baby’s condition to the pregnancy itself as a medical problem.

In a survey conducted by the American College of obstetricians and gynecologists, 90% of the doctors who responded considered abortion a justifiable treatment option for fatal fetal anomalies, and 63% considered it justifiable for nonfatal anomalies. [Monica Rafie & Tracie Windsor in Ethics and Medics Vol 36.10]

Tragically, just over 90% of unborn babies with a Down Syndrome prognosis are aborted. It is a horrifying rejection to behold. True enough, a poor prenatal diagnosis can be earth shaking, but human life is sacred and the disabled bring gifts. And even if those gifts seem to come in strange packages, God works his wonders still. Maybe they are the very way God will save us, and disarm our pride and self-reliance! Trust God, no one is an accident, no one is a mistake.

I am mindful of a quote that pertains to this last issue but also brings us back to where we started. It is from Isaiah:

Woe to him who contends with his Maker; a potsherd among potsherds of the earth! Dare the clay say to its modeler, “What are you doing?” or, “What you are making has no hands”? Woe to him who asks a father, “What are you begetting?” or a woman, “What are you giving birth to?” Thus says the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, his maker: You question me about my children, or prescribe the work of my hands for me?! It was I who made the earth and created mankind upon it; It was my hands that stretched out the heavens; I gave the order to all their host. It was I... (Isaiah 45:9-15)

At Christmas we celebrate the glory of conception, birth and the dignity of human life joined to divine life. God is the author of every human life. Not just the ones we we like, find acceptable, useful, pretty or perfect. All life comes from him and belongs to him. Jesus came to us miraculously from the Virgin Mary. And this is a solemn reminder that the initiative is always God’s. It is he who acts.

And though most all of us have been conceived in the more usual way, we too miraculously stir forth from the mind, the heart, the love of God. Human life is sacred. Sexuality is sacred, conception, gestation, and birth are all sacred. The great feast of the incarnation affirms all of this.

If You Find A Good Fight, Get In It! On another threat to religious liberty and an important summons to act.

We have discussed on this blog before the slow but steady erosion of religious liberty here in America (HERE, HERE, & HERE). We are experiencing a time wherein it is increasingly asserted that the only place for religious expression in our culture is inside church buildings. Religious involvement of any sort in the public forum is often intentionally forbidden.  Interpretations of the “separation of Church and State” (a phrase not found in the Constitution) are becoming more extreme in the secular sense. In addition, another threat to religious liberty is that common Catholic teachings are increasingly be labeled as “hate-speech.”

All this has meant that the Church is beginning to face legislation that, if enacted, will limit our practice of the faith or seek to compel us to act against our faith. A lawsuit was recently initiated against the Catholic University of America indicating that it’s policy of single sex dorms violates the human rights law of the District of Columbia. Catholic Charities recently had to give up its adoption agency (one of the largest in the City) because it could not accept being required to give no favor to heterosexual couples over homosexual ones. Many Church agencies have also face various suits and actions by State and local governments requiring our medical plans to provide contraceptives and/or pay for abortions.

Even where there are “religious exemptions” written into laws (so they can pass legislatures), State and Federal agencies are increasingly interpreting these in a very strict sense. Hence, a Catholic agency or university can only be considered Catholic (and therefore exempt) if it serves only Catholics and employs only Catholics. This standard can obviously not be met in 99% of the cases, since Catholic institutions, agencies and parishes serve everyone and usually employ non-Catholics in many positions.

So here we are, in an increasingly hostile and secular atmosphere wherein our religious liberty is being threatened. As would be expected from the currently hyper-sexualized culture, most of the threats center around our teaching on human sexuality. And this is seen from the examples above.

A recent and national threat comes from the Obama Administration and it centers on requiring ALL insurers to provide contraceptives for their clients. Here in the Archdiocese our Archbishop, Cardinal Wuerl, was informed us of what he calls an unprecedented attack on religious liberty:

In implementing the new health care reform law, HHS recently issued a rule that requires private health care plans nationwide to cover contraception and sterilization as “preventative services” for women. The new rule would force all insurance plans to cover “all Food and Drug Administration approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity.” The mandate includes drugs that may cause an abortion both before and after implantation of a newly conceived human being. Never before has the federal government required private health plans to include such coverage.

The narrow religious exemption in HHS’s new rule protects almost no one. It covers only a “religious employer” that has the “inculcation of religious values” as its purpose and primarily employs and serves persons who share its religious tenets. Most Catholic charitable organizations that serve the public, including hospitals, health care clinics, social service programs, and schools, colleges and universities, will be ineligible. Individuals and religiously affiliated health insurers will not qualify for the exemption.

The public comment period on this rule ends September 30. The USCCB is encouraging Catholics to send an e-mail message to HHS urging our government leaders to ensure that such federal regulations do not violate Americans’ moral and religious convictions. This can be easily done simply by visiting The USCCB Website on Conscience and Religious Liberty

Please share the attached information with your parishioners and encourage them to send their comments to HHS by the September 30th deadline.

Well, you know I would like you, who read this to do the same. Please send your comments before September 30 to HHS.The Fundamental message to HHS is this:

“Pregnancy is not a disease, and drugs and surgeries to prevent it are not basic health care that the government should require all Americans to purchase. Please remove sterilization and prescription contraceptives from the list of ‘preventive services’ the federal government is mandating in private health plans. It is especially important to exclude any drug that may cause an early abortion, and to fully respect religious freedom as other federal laws do. The narrow religious exemption in HHS’s new rule protects almost no one. I urge you to allow all organizations and individuals to offer, sponsor and obtain health coverage that does not violate their moral and religious convictions.”

Please note, as we have been saying, as our world gets more secular, threats to religious liberty and efforts to compel the religiously observant to comply with secular norms is going to increase. We have to fight this at every stage and insist on our rights or they will be taken from us. Sadly, since the attacks are occurring on many fronts, we have to remain very vigilant and at times will sound like a broken record as we bring these threats before the people of God. But bring them we must.

Further, do not allow the militant secularists to attempt to shame you into silence or submission. They will inevitably raise charges (probably right in this combox) that we hate homosexuals, or women, or “sexual freedom” and want to impose our values etc. Do not give way to the notion that anyone should be able to compel us by Law to act against what our faith teaches, or pay for things we consider immoral and in some cases murderous (i.e. abortion). Others will try and say “You’re making a mountain out of a mole hill…no one is taking away your liberty.” But asking us to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients  is no mole hill and any attack against our liberty that is ceded is sure to bring more.

If you find a good fight – get in it. And this is a good and necessary fight, not only for Catholics but for people of all faiths, for militant secularism threatens us all. Write to HHS today by going here: The USCCB Website on Conscience and Religious Liberty

Photo credit: Department of HHS, thanks to Flickr user liangjinjian, available under by-nc-nd v2.0

But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken….” A Reflection on the Sin of Gossip

One of the more under-rated categories of sin are the sins of speech. There are many ways we sin, but perhaps the most common way is by speech. Too easily, almost without thought, do we engage in gossip, idle chatter, lies, exaggerations, harsh attacks, uncharitable observations and remarks. With our tongue we can spread hatred, incite fear and maliciousness, spread misinformation, cause temptation, discourage, teach error, and ruin reputations. We can surely cause great harm with a gift capable of such good!

And not only do we sin by commission but also by omission. For frequently we are silent when we should speak. We do not correct when we should. In our age the triumph of evil and bad behavior has been assisted by our silence as a Christian people. Prophets are to speak God’s word but too often we fulfill Isaiah 56:10 which says, Israel’s watchmen are blind, they all lack knowledge; they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; they lie around and dream, they love to sleep.

Well did James say: Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect! (James 3:2) And too easily do we dismiss sins of speech as of little account. While it may be true that not every sin of speech is serious or mortal, it is possible to inflict great harm with speech and thus have the matter become very serious, even mortal. Jesus warns, But I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every careless word they have spoken (Matt 12:36)

With this in mind, it may be of value to focus in on one aspect of the sins of speech commonly called “gossip.” (I was privileged to be on Catholic Answers Live last night and speak with Patrick Coffin and listeners on this very topic. You can listen to the hour-long broadcast here: Catholic Answers Podcast)

In defining gossip in a general way, the term can merely apply to talk of a personal or trivial nature. But the sin of gossip is more specifically considered to be idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others. It usually involves uncharitable or inappropriate conversation about others, not present and has a reputation for the introduction of errors and variations into the information transmitted. St Thomas includes it in his treatise on justice (II, IIae 72-76) in the Summa since, by it, we unjustly harm the reputation of others, through either lies or truths shared inappropriately. The Catechism of the Catholic Church includes gossip under its treatment of the 8th Commandment, “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

As he most often does, St. Thomas well distinguishes a number of different forms of gossip (injustice in speech) and we can look at them one by one.

1. Reviling – dishonoring a person, usually to their face, and often in the hearing of others. It is done openly, audibly and is usually rooted in anger and personal disrespect. It may include name-calling, caricature, profanity and even cursing (which will also be treated later). For the most part, we do not consider reviling to be a form of gossip per se, (since gossip is usually conducted apart from the offended person and reviling to their face). But reviling is a sin of speech that ought to be mentioned here, since it is annexed to the general dishonor and harming of the reputation of others that is at the heart of gossip. Reviling as such is intended to cause personal embarrassment or dishonor.

2. Backbiting – Generally we call this today, “talking behind someone’s back.” Backbiting is the secret and quiet injuring of a person’s good name to others. Here the key point is that the injured person is not present either to defend or clarify what is said. There are two forms of backbiting that St Thomas distinguishes:

A. Calumny – which is telling lies about someone behind their back. The written form of this is called slander.
B. Detraction – which is passing on harmful truths about others. What is said is true, but is not necessary information to be shared, and the information has the effect of diminishing a person’s reputation or harming their good name before others. For example, it may be true that Joe has a drinking problem, but it is not necessary information to share.

There may be times when it is important to share certain truths about others because it is necessary information but such information should be shared only by those who need to know it for a just cause. Further, the information must be certainly true and not merely hearsay. Finally, only the necessary information should be shared, avoiding a full rendering of everything you ever wanted to know about Joe.

3. Tale -Bearing – also called tale whispering – This may sound like backbiting, but St Thomas makes a distinction here. Whereas a backbiter seeks to harm the reputation of another absent person, the tale bearer seeks to stir up trouble and arouse people to action against a person. Perhaps he seeks to have others end professional, business, or personal relationships with the one gossiped about. Perhaps his goal is to incite angry responses toward him, or even violence. Perhaps too, some legal action is the desired outcome. But the tale-bearer seeks to incite some action against the one he gossips about, hence it goes further than the harming of reputation, to include the harming of relationships, finances, legal standing, and so forth.

4. Derision – is making fun of a person, perhaps of their mannerisms, perhaps of a physical trait, or personal quality. While some of this can be light-hearted, it often strays into hurtful and humiliating actions or words that diminish someone else’s standing or honor within the community.

5. Cursing – a spoken wish or command that another person be afflicted with some evil or harm. This may or may not be spoken to their face. Here too we see a dishonoring of a person in the presence of others. The usual goal is to incite from others, anger and dishonor towards the injured person. The cursing of a person is considered in the realm of gossip, whereas the cursing of irrational things is considered merely vain or futile speech, though not wholly sin-free.

How serious these sins of speech (forms of gossip) are will depend on a number of factors including the degree of harm caused to a person’s reputation, who and how many overhear, and circumstances of place, time and language used. Lack of intent to harm may lessen the culpability of the sinner, but not the fact of sinfulness of the act. However, to dishonor a person, especially with the intent of harming their reputation or necessary standing before others, can easily become a very serious sin.

One of the most precious things a person has is their reputation, for, on it rests their capacity to interrelate with others and engage in just about every other form of human interaction. It is a very serious thing, therefore, to harm the reputation of another. And while this harm may sometimes be mild, we ought not easily dismiss the possibility that, what we think to be a small matter, might actually cause greater harm that we imagine. St James says of the gossiping tongue: Consider how a great forest is set on fire by a small spark. The tongue also is a fire, a world of evil among the parts of the body. It corrupts the whole body, sets the whole course of one’s life on fire, and is itself set on fire by hell (James 3:11).

It remains true that we sometimes must have necessary conversations about others who are not present. Perhaps we are seeking advice about how to handle a delicate situation. Perhaps we need encouragement in dealing with a difficult person, or need to do legitimate fact-checking. Perhaps, especially in professional settings, we are asked to make and give evaluations of colleagues, employees, or situations. However, in cases like these we need to limit the scope our conversations to what is necessary and include only those who certainly ought to be included.

In seeking personal advice or encouragement we also ought to speak only with others who are trustworthy and can reasonably be of help. Where possible we should exclude unnecessary details, even the name of the person being discussed, (if feasible). Discretion is the key word in these necessary conversations.

It may also be important to balance the avoidance of gossip with a reminder that extreme secrecy may also be unhelpful in a community. There are times when egregious situations must be directly addressed. In cases like these we ought to follow the norms set forth by Jesus in Matthew 18:15-17

If your brother sins, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the Church; and if he refuses to listen even to the Church, treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.

Hence, discretion must also give way to some transparency in given circumstances, and communities may need to address some matters publicly and clearly.

But as a consistent rule, we ought to be very careful about sins of speech. Too easily and carelessly we risk ruining the reputation and standing of others by our gossip. Idle chatter about others can bring great harm and draw many others into sin. Scripture says, Set a guard over my mouth, O LORD; keep watch over the door of my lips. (Psalm 141:3). Indeed, Help Lord! keep Your arm around my shoulder and Your hand over my mouth! Put your word in my heart, so that when I do speak, it’s really you.

Painting above by Agostino Carracci

While this video features the ladies, men gossip too:

“But worldly sorrow brings death…” On Distinguishing a Good and Healthy Guilt From Morbid and Harmful Guilt

On of the trickier terrains to navigate in the moral world is the experience of guilt. Guilt is understood here as a kind of sorrow for sin.

On the one hand there is an appropriate sorrow for sin we ought to experience. Yet there are also types of guilt that can set up, either from our flesh or from the devil which are self destructive and inauthentic. Some forms of morbid or harmful guilt can cause great harm and actually increase the frequency of sin due to the way they render a person discouraged and self disparaging rather, rather than chastened but confident of mercy, healing and help. It may be of some value to make some distinctions so that we can discern what sort of guilt is healthy, and what is not.

St. Paul makes an important initial distinction for us to consider in the Second Letter to the Corinthians. Paul had rebuked the Corinthians in an earlier letter (esp. 1 Cor 5) for sinning, and tolerating sin their midst. Evidently his rebuke stung many of them significantly with sorrow. Paul writes:

Even if I caused you sorrow by my letter, I do not regret it. Though I did regret it—I see that my letter hurt you, but only for a little while— yet now I am happy, not because you were made sorry, but because your sorrow led you to repentance. For you became sorrowful as God intended and so were not harmed in any way by us. Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death. See what this godly sorrow has produced in you: what earnestness, what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what alarm, what longing, what concern, what readiness to see justice done. (2 Cor 7:8-11)

Notice how Paul distinguishes between “Godly sorrow” and “worldly sorrow.” And the way we can distinguish them, according to Paul is by their fruits.

For Godly sorrow has for it fruits:

  1. A repentance
  2. An earnestness to do what is right. The Greek word is σπουδή (spoude) which refers also a kind of swiftness rooted in enthusiasm.
  3. A longing for what is right. The Greek text speaks of how this Godly sorrow gave them ἐπιπόθησις (epipothesis): not just an eager longing but also understood as a strong affection for what is good and just.
  4. It also produced in them a kind of indignation for sin,
  5. And a kind of holy fear of it.

So, not a bad harvest, to be sure. Godly sorrow brings forth good things and will be known by its fruits. Paul goes on to say that Godly sorrow is a sorrow that God intends and that it does not harm us in any way. Further it leaves no regrets.

We might also add that Godly sorrow is rooted in love, our love for God and others, and our experience of God’s love for us. The sorrow is real and often quite sharp, but since it is rooted in love, it makes us run to the beloved we have offended, rather than from Him, as we sulk.

“Godly sorrow” would also seem to be related to the perfect contrition, which we refer to in the traditional Act of Contrition when we say, I detest all my sins, not only because I fear the loss of heaven and the pains of Hell, but most of all , because I have offended you, my God, who art all good and deserving of all my love. Perfect contrition regards love, whereas imperfect contrition regards fear of punishment. Hence Godly sorrow would also seem to assist and increasingly perfect contrition.

I think I once experienced something close to Godly sorrow, approaching perfect contrition, as a child, but somewhat in relation to a human person, my mother. It was my 8th birthday, and Mom knew I loved tall buildings. So she took me to the top of the new John Hancock building in Chicago where we lived and I was thrilled to look out from the 100th floor visitors’ center. Then we had a nice lunch and returned home. I remember going to the cookie jar and reaching for one, but mom said, “Not now, you’ll spoil your birthday dinner.” I must have been tired from the long day for I looked at her and said, “You’re mean and I hate you!” As I ran from the room I realized what I had done, and was deeply sorry. I was not afraid she would punish me, I just knew I had said something terrible to my mother, something I didn’t mean. In my love and sorrow I cried and went back to tell her how sorry I felt. But love, made my sorrow a Godly sorrow and it drew me back to my mother in a way that increased my love and made me adverse to ever speaking to her like that again. I eagerly helped her set the table and told her I really loved her.

What of “worldly sorrow” as Paul puts it? He says only it “brings death.” Here we must surmise that, whereas Godly sorrow gives live, restores relationship and love, worldly sorrow and guilt sever these things. When we have this kind of guilt or “worldly sorrow” it is not our sins we hate, so much as our self that we hate.

In worldly sorrow, Satan has us where he wants us. Indeed, worldly sorrow is most often a fraud. For, though it masquerades as humility it often pride wherein a person may think, in effect, “How could I have done such a thing?”

If we can know something by its fruits, then we also do well to observe that worldly sorrow will often make us run from God in avoidance, rather than to him in love. Further it will often provoke anger in us making us resentful of God’s law, and that we should have to seek mercy and humble ourselves to God, or to another person we have offended. Rather than make us eager to repent, we will often delay repentance out of embarrassment or resentment. Further, these sorts of attitudes can lead us to rationalizing sin and minimizing its significance.

Others go in a very different direction of self-loathing and despair. They may hyper-magnify what they have done or over-correct by descending into an unhealthy scrupulosity, rooted in fear of punishment, more than love of God.

All of these negative fruits, though they often masquerade as something pious, tend only to make sin even more frequent. For if one is self-loathing and despairing of one’s capacity to live in God’s love, and experience his correction, then there is little strength for them to draw on. They see only weakness and guilt, but miss love and the splendor of grace. Perceiving no basis out of which to get better, they descend deeper into sin, run further from God in unholy fear, and the cycle gets deeper and darker. Thus St. Paul describes worldly sorrow as bringing death.

When one starts to see “fruits” of this sort, it is increasingly certain we are dealing with worldly sorrow which produces all these death-directed drives. A confessor or spiritual director will often have to work long and hard to break some of these negative cycles and help a person find and experience Godly sorrow which brings with it real progress. Godly sorrow is a sorrow to be sure, but one rooted in love.

Discernment in regard to guilt, to sorrow for sin, is essential. Thankfully we are given some good principles by St. Paul and encouraged to distinguish these very different sorrows (Godly and worldly) by their fruits. Satan loves cheap imitations. He, wolf that he is, loves to masquerade in sheep’s clothing. But learn to know his cheap “imitation sorrow” by its fruits, which are death-directed, rather than God-directed.

After a serious topic here is a a humorous and remarkable video depicting “guilt” in a dog. I have to say, I remain fascinated how the dogs and cats I have had all seem to know when they’ve messed up. Their guilt, I am sure is rooted more in fear of punishment than love of me, God or the truth. But one nice thing about animals, they run back pretty fast and make friends again. Enjoy this remarkable video that has over 12 million views.