A (0:05)

Hi, my name is Fr. Mike Schmitz, and you're listening to the Catechism in a Year podcast, where we encounter God's plan of sheer goodness for us, revealed in Scripture and passed down through the tradition of the Catholic faith. The Catechism in a Year is brought to you by ascension. In 365 days, we'll read through the Catechism of the Catholic Church, discovering our identity in God's family as we journey together toward our heavenly home. This is day 321. We're reading paragraphs 2475 to 2487. As always, I am using the Ascension edition of the Catechism, which includes the Foundations of Faith approach, but you can follow along with any recent version of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You can also download your own Catechism in a Year reading plan by visiting ascensionpress.com ciy and lastly, you can click follow or subscribe on your podcast app for daily updates and daily notifications. Today is day 321. We're reading paragraph 2475-2487. So yesterday we started talking about what the truth is, right? There's a subjective truth that's true for you, but not necessarily true for me. There's also objective truth and truth. Of course, we defined it as truth is simply what is right. So a statement is either true or false to the degree that it conforms to reality. And we're made for the truth. In fact, our nature tends towards the truth because we have an intellect, and our intellect is meant to grasp the truth. Therefore, all human beings, but especially Christians, are called to live the truth and to bear witness to the truth. Okay, that was a very quick summary of yesterday. Today we're looking at what are some offenses against truth. And so you have false witness. We have perjury. We have things like rash judgment and detraction, calumny, some of those aspects also. But even looking at things like boasting or bragging, you know, we usually think immediately about lying as the offense against truth. And that is. We'll talk about that today. But all these other ways in which we just what are the ways that we are called to live the truth, to bear witness to the truth? And what are some of the offenses or some of the ways we can violate the call that we have to live the truth and bear witness to it? We're looking at those today. So let's buckle in and pray and let's ask our Heavenly Father to be with us right now as he continues to guide us as he continues to guard us. Father in heaven, in the name of your Son, Jesus Christ, we thank you and praise your name. May you be honored and glorified. May you be known by every human being the truth of what you are, the truth of who you are. May you be known. May you be known in the depths of our hearts and the depths of our intellect, Lord God. And not only help us to know the truth of who you are, help us to live that truth and in all ways. Lord God, we ask you to help us to live in humility. And humility is nothing more than telling the truth. Truth of who you are, the truth of who we are, and the truth of reality. Help us to walk in humility before you this day and every day. Help us to walk the truth this day and every day. In Jesus name we pray. Amen. In the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Once again it is day 321. These are paragraphs 2475 to 2487. Offenses against truth. Christ's disciples have put on the new man, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness. By putting away falsehood, they are to put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy, and all slander, false witness, and perjury. When it is made publicly, a statement contrary to the truth takes on a particular gravity. In court it becomes false witness when it is under oath, it is perjury. Acts such as these contribute to condemnation of the innocent, exoneration of the guilty, or the increased punishment of the accused. They gravely compromise the exercise of justice and the fairness of judicial decisions. Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty of rash judgment, who even tacitly assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbour of detraction, who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them of calumny who by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them. To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way. As St Ignatius of Ayola stated, every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it and if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love if that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation, so that he may be saved. Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one's neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation, and to respect. Thus detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity. Every word or attitude is forbidden, which by flattery, adulation, or complaisance, encourages and confirms another in malicious acts and perverse conduct. Adulation is a grave fault if it makes one an accomplice in another's vices or grave sins. Neither the desire to be of service nor friendship justifies duplicitous speech. Adulation is a venial sin when it only seeks to be agreeable to avoid evil, to avoid to meet a need, or to obtain legitimate advantages. Boasting or bragging is an offense against truth. So is irony aimed at disparaging someone by maliciously caricaturing some aspect of his behavior. A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving. The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil, as he states in John's are of your father the devil, there is no truth in him when he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error by injuring man's relation to truth and to his neighbor. A lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord. The gravity of a lie is measured against the nature of the truth. It deforms the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and and the harm suffered by its victims. If a lie in itself only constitutes a venial sin, it becomes mortal when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity. By its very nature lying is to be condemned. It is a profanation of speech. Whereas the purpose of speech is to communicate known truth to others. The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity. The culpability is greater when the intention of deceiving entails the risk of deadly consequences for those who are led astray. Since it violates the virtue of truthfulness, a lie does real violence to another. It affects his ability to know, which is a condition of every judgment and decision. It contains the seed of discord and all consequent evils. Lying is destructive of society. It undermines trust among men and tears apart the fabric of social relationships. Every offense committed against justice and truth entails the duty of reparation, even if its author has been forgiven. When it is impossible publicly to make reparation for a wrong, it must be made secretly. If someone who has suffered harm cannot be directly compensated, he must be given moral satisfaction in the name of charity. This duty of reparation also concerns offenses against another's reputation. This reparation, moral and sometimes material, must be evaluated in terms of the extent of the damage inflicted. It obliges in conscience. Right, There we have it. Paragraphs 2475 to 2487, just. I think this is fascinating. I think that to look at all the ways we can offend truth. This is important for all of us because there's some things like, oh, yeah, yeah, of course. Like at the end we're talking about lying. Like, no, no, no, I totally know that that's not good. But let's. What are all the ways that we can offend against truth? So let's kind of do a little quick review. Paragraph 2476 says false witness and perjury. There can be grave, grave sin when it comes to. When made public contrary to truth takes on a particular gravity. In court, it's false witness. When it's under oath, it's perjury. And that is remarkable because the Church is saying that there are real consequences to our speech. That our speech can, even in court here, it can lead to the condemnation of the innocent, the exoneration of the guilty, or the increased punishment of the accused. That also compromises the juridical process. And so to realize, again, all of these things have consequences. All of our sins have consequences. They have eternal consequences, right? They cut us off from the Lord and they lead us to spiritual death. But they also have temporal or earthly consequences. And it's just. It says, so powerful to. To be able to highlight this. Now, the very next paragraph, 2477, talks about respect for the reputation of persons. That we must have respect for the reputation of persons. And what that does is forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury and highlights three ways that we can be guilty of this. The first is rash judgment. What's rash judgment? It means even tacitly, like, even just kind of like, oh, I kind of sort of, without even thinking it through, I assume is tr. Without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor. No one's proven this to me. I just assume it's true someone's fault. Second one is detraction. So rash judgment is. It happens more or less, you know, in my mind that I just kind of like, yep, I see that person and this is what I think. I assume their moral fault. Detraction is. I don't have a. An objectively valid reason, but I disclose another's faults and failings to someone who did not know them. So basically gossip is one example, but it's a particular kind of gossip where I'm revealing the actual faults of another person to someone that didn't need to know them. So they're true, but I did not have a good reason for this. And then calumny is, by remarks contrary to the truth, I harm the reputation of others and give occasion for false judgments concerning them. So calumny is the kind of gossip that's not true. So in this case, you look at this like this gossip. Detraction would be. I'm telling something that's true about another person to someone who doesn't need to know that calumny is. It's not even true. And so to recognize, I think this is just so powerful. And now I look. I want to look at two things. One is. Is all talking about another person gossip. Well, I remember in seminary talking about there. There were some Jewish documents. They were discussing that all speech about another is to be avoided. I can't remember what book. All I know is that we had a teacher for a couple classes who was a local rabbi in the Twin Cities, and he taught some of these classes. And he had pointed out that in some Jewish tradition, maybe not all across the board, but one he was familiar with that he related to us, he said that when it came to all speech, in order to avoid sinning against the eighth commandment, one did not even talk about another, even in positive things, because they would say that to speak about another person at all, even if it's positive, opens the door for the possibility of there being detraction or of calumny, you know, and this happens to us a lot. And I'm not saying this is the church rule. It's not, in fact the rule here. We just. We're talking about those. But you realize how this could be the case and this might be a rule for you or maybe it could be a guideline for you, because we know this happens where like, oh, Jill. Jill is the best, isn't she? Oh, yeah, Jill's wonderful. You know, she came over to the house and, you know, we really needed help. And she brought over a. A meal, you know, for the family. It was so good about Jill and I. You know, actually, it's kind of funny, though, because when she dropped it off, she kind of made a note like, that she wanted us to really, really, really thank her. And I'm like, yeah, no, I'm grateful for it. But I don't know, she kind of seemed kind of full of herself that she was doing such a nice thing. Right? So talking about Jill and how great Jill is, and she did this nice thing, and then I insert this, you know, gossip. I say something that I don't need to say about Jill. Does that make sense? So sometimes when it comes to guarding our speech, we even guard the beginnings of speech. Does that make sense? Hopefully it does. Again, I'm not saying you can't ever talk about someone else. I'm just saying that it pays to be guarded. Now, before we even speak, there's this thing, rash judgment. And I love paragraph 2478 because there's this quote from St. Ignatius of Loyola, you know, the founder of the Jesuits. And remember coming across this years and years ago and thinking, this is just brilliant. It is so powerful. And I wonder how many lives, how many relationships, how many more people that would still be in relation with each other if this is what we did? And so paragraph 2478 says, to avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret, insofar as possible, his neighbor's thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way. You know, someone might say, that sounds really naive. That's what someone from a small town would say, like, okay, maybe, but not from the big city. Well, I'm not from the big city. And also realize that a lot of people are strangers. And yet at the same time, there is a call to accept the people who we are in relationship with at face value, and also to not only accept them at face value, but to assume the best. To assume the best. So here's this quote from St. Ignatius. He says, every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. Again, maybe like, now, there's no good way to say what you just said, but what do you mean by that? Okay, good. And if the latter understands it badly, like, no, I said the mean thing, and I meant the mean thing. Okay, well, then let the former correct him with love. And if that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the Other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved. So it's not being stupid, right? It's not being naive. It's not being innocent as doves without also being as clever as serpents. We need to do both detraction and calumny. They destroy the reputation and honor of one's neighbor. And honor is a good thing. It's the social witness given to human dignity. And so it offends against the virtue of justice and charity. Now, if we think about what are some of the ways we give ourselves a pass on detraction and calumny? Like, what are some of the ways we give ourselves a pass when it comes to assuming the worst about someone else or, you know, pulling down someone else's reputation? And I think a lot of times it's when we don't know them. It's someone who's in the public eye, right? So whether that be a famous celebrity or actor, actress, athlete, politician, we say, well, no, no, that's the price. That's the price of being in the public eye. That, you know, people will have an opinion about you and they're going to talk about your faults and talk about your relationships that have failed or all these kind of things. And we realize that, no, unless it's my job to talk about this, unless it's actually part of my responsibility and part of my role to talk about these things. And I don't have a responsibility to do that. In fact, my responsibility is to not be involved in the detraction or the calumny of someone else. Now, I remember talking about this with a man who was. He was in a management position, kind of a co manager position, with another person. And he said it was really hard for him because he was trying to process, trying to understand, okay, I'm meeting with this other manager, we're joint managing. You know, Michael and Jim were talking there, and in this case, Michael's talking to Jim and saying, okay, we have to talk about Phyllis. Like, there's something wrong with Phyllis because she's doing X, Y and Z. And here's Michael, the who. He feels really badly. He's like, are we gossiping about Phyllis? Is that what's happening right now? The reality, of course, is like, no, that's actually your role. I mean, yes, if you're talking about Phyllis's home life, if you're talking about Phyllis's character faults that have nothing to do with her work, then yes, that is gossip. But if you're talking about Phyllis in a way that says, okay, this is what we Need. Our job is to assess the productivity, to assess the work of our employees, the people that we're managing. Therefore, we need to talk about them. But we also have to keep in mind we. We're using wise language and honest language, and so keep that in mind. So there are times when you might have to talk about someone, you might have to even talk about someone's faults, but that's very different than talking about those other person's faults to someone who does not need to know them. Paragraph 2480. This is something that's just like, wow. This is remarkable because this is what easily can happen. It says, every word or attitude is forbidden by which flattery, adulation or complacence encourages and confirms another in malicious acts and perverse conduct. So adulation is a grave fault if it makes one an accomplice and another's vices or grave sins. So if someone else is going to do a grave sin, grave crime, grave vice, and I praise them for that, then I am now an accomplice in that grave sin. And I love this. This next sentence is just like wow, because it highlights the motivation. And sometimes this is the motivation we find ourselves when it comes to flattery or adulation or even complacence. It says, neither the desire to be of service nor friendship justifies duplicitous speech. Think about that like, I just want to help. I just want to help. So here is the encouragement I'm going to give to this person. Or you know, hey, I'm a true friend and a true friend is going to, you know, so I'm going to support you no matter what you do. Neither the desire to be of service nor friendship justifies duplicitous speech. He says adulation is a venial sin when it only seeks to be agreeable to avoid evil, to meet a need, or to obtain legitimate advantages. But that adulation can still be a venial sin. It seeks to be agreeable. I mean, think about this. When was the last time you thought, oh, being agreeable could be a sin, but when it comes to someone else's acts of vice, someone else's sins, to be agreeable could be a sin to meet a need or to obtain legitimate advantages. I'm just going to praise this person, you know, like someone who's, we know all the phrases, brown noser, kiss up, suck up, all those kind of people, that I'm just here to obtain the legitimate advantages. Well, that is duplicitous, right? That is manipulative of another person. Paragraph 2481. Boasting or bragging is an offense against truth. Now, one of those old timey actors who was also a cowboy kind of a person, and I think he said something like, it ain't bragging if you can do it. And so there's a. There's a sense of how is boasting or how is bragging an offense against truth? Well, if we keep in mind it thinks something like this, boasting or bragging is not just saying that you can do something that is impressive. That's not boasting or bragging. Boasting or bragging would be something along the lines of a violation of humility. And humility. Remember, we go back to this. Humility is not saying, aw, shucks, I'm no good. Humility is not looking down on yourself. Humility is not thinking less of yourself. Humility is thinking of yourself less. Sure. But really, humility is living the truth. It's acknowledging the truth of reality. So someone who say, here's I don't know what the task is. The task is who can cut down this tree. This tree needs to get cut down. We need someone who's strong enough to cut down this tree. I don't know. I'm just coming up with an example, right? For someone to come up and say, I can cut down that tree and I could cut down that tree probably in the next 20 minutes, that's not boasting. That's not bragging. That's simply speaking the truth. Boasting or bragging would be not living the truth, but extolling or vaunting one's abilities beyond those abilities that make sense. Okay, next. Then it says, so is irony aimed at disparaging someone by maliciously caricaturing some aspect of his behavior? Now, irony as humor is, I would say, this is not what this is talking about. Irony as humor is quite funny. Now, at the same time, keep in mind that, like irony as humor oftentimes comes across as sarcasm. And sarcasm can be wounding, right? So can irony be wounding. Sarcasm itself, in fact, comes from two Latin words which mean rending flesh or tearing flesh, right? Sarx is flesh. And that chasm making that chasm is rending the flesh. And so irony as sarcasm can come across in a way that is malicious, a way that hurts another person. Now, not all irony is like that. Not all irony is hurtful. Some irony just is comical. Some irony is funny. We're not talking about that kind. We're talking about the irony aimed at disparaging someone by maliciously Caricaturing some aspect of their behavior. Now think about, think about this. How often does someone say something, let's say someone in the public eye, but you also could say, here is an argument or a discussion you had with someone you love or someone you're related to. And what we might be tempted to do is take something that they said and put it out of context. So here's one aspect, one thing that they're like, you know, making a caricature. You know what a caricature is? Obviously, you know, you could walk by at the fair and there's someone who's drawing a picture of this couple who's sitting in front of them, and they're picking on one aspect of their features and overemphasizing it. So someone has a slightly larger than normal nose in the caricature, has this giant nose, someone with a slightly larger smile, has this giant smile, you know, that kind of thing. So the caricature that is meant to be malicious is taking some aspect of a person's behavior, some aspect of a person's character and overemphasizing it to the point where now it's no longer true. That that's the key. That's the key. That's why we're looking at this in, in the Context of the 8th Commandment. It's taking this one aspect that, okay, on its own, might have some merit, might have some. We need to pay attention to this. But overblowing it so much or caricaturing it so much that it's no longer true. So again, here's a celebrity, here's a politician, and that politician or celebrity says X and everyone's like, oh, dogpiling on them because I can't believe they said this thing. Well, what does that mean in the context of everything that they said, not just this one thing. We have a tendency to do that, especially if they belong to the, say, the other political party or especially if that's a person that we, we don't particularly like. This also happens in our relationships, as I said, the people that we love. How often have you been kind of backed against the wall in some kind of argument or discussion with someone you loved? And they say one thing and you take that and overblow it. That would be another example. You're not hearing everything they're saying. You're taking one thing they said and saying, I'm not going to let go of this. And essentially you're maliciously caricaturing some aspect of what they said or of their behavior. Hopefully that makes Sense. Now, the last number of paragraphs have to do with lying, and that's the most direct offense against truth. It says this in paragraph 2483. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. And that is a great definition of what it is to lie, to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. Now, the gravity of a lie in paragraph 2484 says it's measured against a couple things. One is the nature of the truth it deforms the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims. So whether that lie is a venial sin or that lie could be a grave sin is measured against the nature of the truth it deforms. So as an example, if I am lying about something related to God, that's going to have a greater gravity to it because I'm distorting the nature of the truth of God himself. Now, the circumstances and intentions also affect the gravity of this lie. So the intention is to look at that and realize, yep, there are times where here's a person who. No, I don't mean anything malicious by this. My intention here is, I want to spare your feelings. And so I'm not going to tell you the truth about reality. Now, again, it's still a lie. It is still a lie. At the same time, the gravity of that lie might be mitigated. And the last one is the harm suffered by its victims. If there is a grave harm that's suffered by the person who is the topic of the lie or the one receiving the lie, then of course, that increases in gravity. Now, all of this, it says, by its very nature, lying is to be condemned. And the deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity. Now, the big question that comes up almost every time we talk about this is, let's go back in time to World War II and say, you and your family are hiding Jews in your basement and the Nazis come to your door and they ask you, do you have any Jews here? So here's the question. Is lying and saying no in that moment, is that a violation of truth? Is that a sin? Is a Christian obligated to say, okay, I can't tell a lie. Yes, they're in the basement. What is a person to do? Right? Because in this case, you have two competing things, two competing goods. One is the good of the truthful speech. The other is the good of keeping innocent human beings alive. Now, I've heard this answered in a couple different ways, and this is. I'm not going to answer it completely because they're actually. I've come across some places that have an ongoing argument, ongoing debate when it comes to this, in Catholics coming at this very question from the perspective of wanting to know what is the right thing to do, and still disagreeing. Many agree that we're only bound to tell the truth to those who deserve the truth. In this case, the Gestapo are not owed the truth. And saying, no, there are no Jews here wouldn't be an issue because they're going to do something evil with that knowledge. Others say that in this case, saying, no, there are no Jews here would be lying. But since the Gestapo are not owed the truth, other things could be said that are not lies, which would hopefully satisfy the Gestapo so that they move on without discovering the Jews in the house. And so if you're like, ah, I don't know if that still doesn't resolve it in my mind or my heart, that's okay, because there's an ongoing debate about how do we understand this when we have these two competing goods, the good of truth and the good of charity. It's. It's a good question to ask, I think, though, and in many ways there is some merit when it comes to this question of I am only obliged to tell the truth to those who deserve to know the truth, deserve to hear the truth. Because remember, as we said before, we're always toying that line between honesty and discretion, between truthfulness and discretion. What is that line? And we need to walk that. We need to walk it every single day. Now, the last little note here is paragraph 2486 and 2487, where it talks about the fact that there's consequences to our lives, there's consequences to our gossiping, there's consequences to our speech. And it says in 2487, every offense committed against justice and truth entails the duty of reparation, even if its author has been forgiven. And so there's this reality that, okay, if I've lied, do I have a duty to tell the truth at some point? And there are many people who have recognized this. I remember hearing a story of a man, he was driving drunk years before this, and he hit someone and was hit and run. He drove away, the person died. It plagued him. It obviously weighed on him heavily. He got away with it. Essentially, years later, he became a Christian and was moved by this exact teaching. And so after a lot of prayer, after a lot of Discernment. After a lot of talking with his family, he went down and turned himself in. And he said, this is the truth and this family deserves to know. The family of the victim, that I was the one who, in the middle of the night, I was drunk. It was my fault. I chose actions that led to the death of this family member. And it could be that Christians are called to this. It could be that Christians are called to live in this much radical honesty in the course of our lives, this much radical reparation. And that's the big question that we have to be willing to wrestle with, which is, okay, I know I'm forgiven in Jesus, in Jesus Christ, I'm forgiven in the sacrament of reconciliation, I've been forgiven. Is there anything more that is required of me? And there can be times when one must do what they can to make reparation for their sins. And so this is the moment today where I'm like, okay, do I need to go back now? Will it do more damage than it will do help? And that's one of the questions that we need to also pray through. We need to also discern. Will it do more damage to tell the truth than it would to remain silent? That is an important question that every one of us needs to continue, also continue to discern. Because there can be times when, okay, I'm going to tell you the truth, but it's not going to help you. In fact, it's going to hurt you. But it'll make me feel better in those cases. Maybe, maybe not. This is my editorial comments, so we're all going to keep discerning this. This is just simply editorial comments. But. But it could be the case that I need to discern the whole situation. And if it's just to make me feel better, then maybe it's best to let sleeping dogs lie, right? In those cases, if it's going to make someone else's life worse, then maybe it's best to let sleeping dogs lie. And that's probably not every situation. But I think it's worth discerning our own situation and say, okay, am I called to do what that man did and turn himself in so that a family can have healing? They can know, okay, this is the person who took the life of our loved one? Or would it be another situation where it's like, actually, if I were to bring this to another person, this truth to another person, it would do more harm than good. It would hurt them in a way that they do not deserve to be hurt. And so in that case, I can discern to remain silent. Either way, discernment is necessary. Courage is necessary. Humility is necessary. Walking and living the truth is necessary. And so we pray for God's grace to help us do those things. I'm praying for you. Please pray for me. My name is Father Mike. I cannot wait to see you tomorrow. God bless.