Author Topic: Keeping Detraction vague is still Detraction (Read 992 times)

Matthew · « **on:** February 11, 2013, 11:25:31 AM »

Either AIR the dirty laundry, or STOP making insinuations, hints, or vague accusations.

How can Catholics think this is morally acceptable?

So it's detraction to say,

"John Doe tends to have sticky fingers. He steals things and once even fraudulently altered the company's expense records for his own gain."

But it's 100% pure Catholic to say:

"John Doe is bad news. He never should have become an accountant. I'm not going to give any details...let's just say we should all pray for him."

:confused1:

I just don't see it.

How is the latter ANY MORE GENTLE to the poor man's reputation? How is the latter not JUST AS BAD -- IF NOT WORSE than the former?

Let me explain something. Leaving things to the imagination is a very powerful device.

I could give a hundred examples, but I think most of you understand. Leaving the viewer to imagine something scary for himself is 1000X more powerful that plopping ANY creature on the screen by WETA or any another Hollywood special effects studio.

After all, "your worst nightmares" is always scarier that something a third party thinks up.

Alfred Hitchcock made himself famous using exactly this technique. All good scary movies do this.

For the younger among you, imagine you're in an MMORPG (multiplayer online RPG) and a guy comes on and starts killing other players. Which would make you respect/fear him more?

A) He starts trash talking
B) He doesn't say a word

With option B), he could be the devil, a super intelligent bot, some famous player, etc.

But once he opens his mouth, all the other options are no longer possible.

Remember the saying, "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." -- Mark Twain

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** February 11, 2013, 11:26:16 AM »

So when you say, "Fr. X is bad news for the Resistance." I am forced to wonder WHY.

You've done opened your mouth and damaged his reputation by saying that. Do you understand I had no idea there were ANY dents in his reputation? Now several people have testified that he's "bad news" and that he has a "past".

In my mind now, his reputation is less than it was before your thread started.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND? The damage has already been done.

You can play pious Catholic all you want, but you're hypocritical for keeping your detraction vague.

Now I have to wonder WHAT exactly Fr. X "did" to merit this reputation with some people.

Who/what do I need to "lock up" when Fr. X comes over to say Mass?

My wife? My daughters? My son? My valuables? Any alcoholic beverages? Any weapons?

Not knowing the "details" of Fr. X's "problem", wouldn't I have to play it safe and over-protect ALL OF THE ABOVE?

You know, if you're unsure about the justice of letting something be known, it's best to say NOTHING. Not redact all the specific details from your accusation.

Like this:

"Hey everyone! I feel compelled to let you know that Fr. X likes to ___ ______ __ ________, and/or ____ __ ______ ___ ___. So just be careful when you have him at your Resistance chapel. But I can't say anything more; I wouldn't want to harm his reputation."

MrsZ · « **Reply #2 on:** February 11, 2013, 01:52:43 PM »

I agree with this and continue to struggle all the time with having conversations about various people and saying things that are less than positive. The area where it's the most difficult is when said person may have some harmful tendency and you want to protect your family from them. But I guess rather than discussing the rumours or even the TRUTH of the matter, you would just decide to keep your family from spending time alone with this person and teach your children to be observant in general so that they don't end up victimized. There's fine line between charity and self-protection ... you can't be gullible.

Matthew · « **Reply #3 on:** February 11, 2013, 02:01:23 PM »

Quote from: MrsZ

I agree with this and continue to struggle all the time with having conversations about various people and saying things that are less than positive. The area where it's the most difficult is when said person may have some harmful tendency and you want to protect your family from them. But I guess rather than discussing the rumours or even the TRUTH of the matter, you would just decide to keep your family from spending time alone with this person and teach your children to be observant in general so that they don't end up victimized. There's fine line between charity and self-protection ... you can't be gullible.

You seem to be missing a major point.

When you're talking with fellow parishioners, or those who have a right to know something, because it could affect them, you can simply talk openly about what you know about a given person, priest, etc.

Detraction is speaking about the true faults of others without sufficient reason.

Warning fellow parishioners who might end up victims of a given person/priest? That's called a SUFFICIENT REASON.

Don't let scruples get you. Cleave to the truth -- that includes true Catholic morality.

Do you know that it's mortally sinful to withhold information that a priest is a pedophile, for example, from someone who's sending their son to that priest's house on a regular basis to be trained as an altar server? (To take a hypothetical example). Yes, a mortal sin. You're basically an accomplice to whatever happens to that boy.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #4 on:** February 11, 2013, 04:31:57 PM »

So, you either say it or you don't ... vagueness is often worse than being straightforward about a matter when you have sufficient reason to pass along the information.

But, I think we should also realize that sufficient reason in many cases declines sufficiently with the passage of time. We should consider the possibility that the problem was something the person has overcome.

To what degree the passage of time negates having "sufficient reason" depends largely upon the nature of the situation. Some sins are more permanently damaging to the person than others.

MrsZ · « **Reply #5 on:** February 11, 2013, 09:30:34 PM »

Quote from: Matthew

Quote from: MrsZ
I agree with this and continue to struggle all the time with having conversations about various people and saying things that are less than positive. The area where it's the most difficult is when said person may have some harmful tendency and you want to protect your family from them. But I guess rather than discussing the rumours or even the TRUTH of the matter, you would just decide to keep your family from spending time alone with this person and teach your children to be observant in general so that they don't end up victimized. There's fine line between charity and self-protection ... you can't be gullible.

You seem to be missing a major point.

When you're talking with fellow parishioners, or those who have a right to know something, because it could affect them, you can simply talk openly about what you know about a given person, priest, etc.

Detraction is speaking about the true faults of others without sufficient reason.

Warning fellow parishioners who might end up victims of a given person/priest? That's called a SUFFICIENT REASON.

Don't let scruples get you. Cleave to the truth -- that includes true Catholic morality.

Do you know that it's mortally sinful to withhold information that a priest is a pedophile, for example, from someone who's sending their son to that priest's house on a regular basis to be trained as an altar server? (To take a hypothetical example). Yes, a mortal sin. You're basically an accomplice to whatever happens to that boy.

Thank you for setting me straight. I wasn't paying close enough attention and wasn't thinking it through. Believe me, I am not the type who would just stay silent when someone had done something that needed to be known.