Les Miserables

+

JMJ

David Brooks wrote an interesting commentary on the Penn State situation.  (Its about as theological as the NY Times can be, which isn't saying much. ) He writes how many people like to believe that would have acted differently if they were in the same position as Joe Paterno or the Athletic Director or the man who witnessed the abuse.  He points to both studies and historical examples like the Holocaust to prove the point that many "good" people have witnessed crimes and have failed to intervene.  (Read Brooks' whole article here.)  

Brooks points to the relativist reality that many have created for themselves apart from a moral value system rooted in the Truth.  He then reminds his readers that people's "failings" used to have a specific name:

"In centuries past, people built moral systems that acknowledged this weakness. These systems emphasized our sinfulness. They reminded people of the evil within themselves. Life was seen as an inner struggle against the selfish forces inside. These vocabularies made people aware of how their weaknesses manifested themselves and how to exercise discipline over them. These systems gave people categories with which to process savagery and scripts to follow when they confronted it. They helped people make moral judgments and hold people responsible amidst our frailties."

But the absence of objective Truth, leads people point to other ambiguous sources for a heinous crime:

"We live in a society oriented around our inner wonderfulness. So when something atrocious happens, people look for some artificial, outside force that must have caused it — like the culture of college football, or some other favorite bogey. People look for laws that can be changed so it never happens again."

Sin has existed since the beginning of time, but the main difference between now and centuries past is that people then acknowledged it as sin. Sexual abuse is not "wrong" like saying two plus two equals five. Sexual abuse is wrong because it is sinful.  Failing to correctly label immoral behavior diminishes its gravity.  It is important to reintroduce this into our everyday vocabulary.  Saying an action is sinful makes it personal, and definitive. It provides the root and the solution of the problem.  It also allows us to condemn a situation while acknowledging and perfecting our own weaknesses.   The definition of sin from the Compendium of the Catechism is:

"Sin is 'a word, an act, or a desire contrary to the eternal Law' (Saint Augustine). It is an offense against God in disobedience to His love.  It wounds human nature and injures human solidarity.  Christ in his passion fully revealed the seriousness of sin and overcame it with his mercy."

 Acknowledging an action as sinful reveals that, that action has wounded the soul of the perpetrator, the victim, the whole body of Christ, and God Himself.  Some sins more obviously reveal their offenses than other ones.  We may realize that our sin offends God, but do we remember that it also wounds our own souls and the souls of others. Imagine how a small wound, like a paper cut or mouth ulcer, affects one's whole body; just in the same way, the sins of one person affect the whole Body of Christ. On the flip side, our sacrifices and sufferings can help to heal the whole body as well.


Many deceive themselves of their sin because they live in willful ignorance, knowing that if they recognize sin, they must change their lives.

"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just, and will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (1Jn 1:8-9)

Recognizing that offense has occurred will lead to recognition that reparation must be made and mercy obtained.  All of which cannot not help but lead us and others to the One who took on our sin and obtained God's mercy for us.