Calling Out A Person's Sin Publicly

  • Thread starter Thread starter MysticMissMisty
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MysticMissMisty said:
Again, here, I would argue that the key here is “without good reason”.

OK, here’s a scenario by way of example with a very modern twist:

A person is quite sick of the negativity on Twitter directed at him and other people, not because his personal pride is offended but because he hates the sin of rashness he so often sees. So, when someone comes at him, he retweets their retweet and corrects them for their negativity. Would this be sinful to do? After all, in his doing this, he is trying to help bring attention to and correct a problem that he sees. He is also, arguably, trying to correct the individuals doing it and possibly to shame them (in a good way) so that they come to their senses and realize how both sinful and dishonorable their behavior is. He is also doing this because he feels righteous anger/indignation at the negativity. When he corrects, he does so firmly but not rashly and not by returning the personal attack. So, again, is the person doing this sinning?
Click to expand...
Put it to you this way.
You seem to get really defensive when people tell you that your personal interpretation of various random scripture passages is NOT Catholic teaching.
I think that should sufficiently answer your question.
People don’t like it, and bottom line…**it never does any good. **
 
pianistclare said:
Put it to you this way.
You seem to get really defensive when people tell you that your personal interpretation of various random scripture passages is NOT Catholic teaching.
I think that should sufficiently answer your question.
People don’t like it, and bottom line…**it never does any good. **
Click to expand...
I’ve rarely, if ever, gotten “defensive” about anyone’s interpretation ofanything…
 
MysticMissMisty said:
So, you think that it is sinful even to honor a person for doing rightly?
Click to expand...
No but it is scandalous in the classical sense of the word to propose that a person’s public reputation is subject to another person’s admittedly flawed judgment and whim.

That’s putting your flawed perceptions and sense of justice ahead of another person’s human dignity.

Scandal is a sin.
So is detraction.
Either can be mortal, depending on the factors involved.
 
clem456 said:
No but it is scandalous in the classical sense of the word to propose that a person’s public reputation is subject to another person’s admittedly flawed judgment and whim.

That’s putting your flawed perceptions and sense of justice ahead of another person’s human dignity.

Scandal is a sin.
So is detraction.
Either can be mortal, depending on the factors involved.
Click to expand...
But when honor or dishonor is based on a (correct) general societal perception of what is right and wrong and when someone can be reasonably sure that another person has violated those principles, I see no issue.

Also, as I understand it, “detraction” in the sense of being sinful implies sinful intent. Jesus could have been said to have engaged in “detraction” against the Pharisees, but not with malicious intent.

P.S. to you and all: If I come off very often as sounding harsh, it is rarely my intent to do so. Very often, even in other spheres of my life, I come off as rather too blunt, though my intention is not malicious, I can assure you. I just don’t always know how to put things so that people won’t take them as being too harsh. (may be an “aspie” thing, I’m not sure.)
 
pianistclare said:
I didn’t say that.
You read very selectively.
That’s the issue.
Get a good Catholic Scripture study and dig in!
Click to expand...
I don’t think I read selectively (at least, I try not to). All I am doing is bringing out the implications that I can see stemming from this or that statement, implications which may or may not be realized by the person making it.
 
MysticMissMisty said:
But when honor or dishonor is based on a (correct) general societal perception of what is right and wrong and when someone can be reasonably sure that another person has violated those principles, I see no issue.
Click to expand...
Reasonably sure? So, what if you were to call out someone publicly on their “sin” and you wound up being wrong? Then what? Wouldn’t you wind up being the one sinning at that point?

If someone called you out on a “sin” that you supposedly committed, but really didn’t, would you be okay with that? The consequences of that, such as difficulties with friends/family, employment, etc.?

If you want to call out others publicly on their sins and have no issues with others doing it to you, then I guess go ahead. However, I doubt it will work out very well, if at all.
 
Graceful_Lamb said:
Reasonably sure? So, what if you were to call out someone publicly on their “sin” and you wound up being wrong? Then what? Wouldn’t you wind up being the one sinning at that point?

If someone called you out on a “sin” that you supposedly committed, but really didn’t, would you be okay with that? The consequences of that, such as difficulties with friends/family, employment, etc.?

If you want to call out others publicly on their sins and have no issues with others doing it to you, then I guess go ahead. However, I doubt it will work out very well, if at all.
Click to expand...
👍

The problem is when these issues are fought out on twitter or other social media. A person can cause a great deal of damage to another person and never know the harm they have done.
 
MysticMissMisty said:
Hmm, was just thinking…

Perhaps if a sin has already become known outside of just the sinner and the one sinned against, publicly calling it out becomes justifiable? This may be the private/public distinction that was alluded to a few times earlier? In other words, we shouldn’t seek to make a sin public if it has not already been made so. We shouldn’t take our own initiative to reveal it if it has not already been revealed outside of the two parties affected. But, if it hasalready come ot light outside ofthe two parties, it is, as they say, fair game to be called out as example, as deterrent, and for other reasons such as turning the other person around? Thoughts? Reasons for or against?
Click to expand...
You need to consider the scandal, which I do not believe you are doing.

Will handling it publicly cause more scandal, or is more scandalous to say nothing?
 
Graceful_Lamb said:
Reasonably sure? So, what if you were to call out someone publicly on their “sin” and you wound up being wrong? Then what? Wouldn’t you wind up being the one sinning at that point?

If someone called you out on a “sin” that you supposedly committed, but really didn’t, would you be okay with that? The consequences of that, such as difficulties with friends/family, employment, etc.?

If you want to call out others publicly on their sins and have no issues with others doing it to you, then I guess go ahead. However, I doubt it will work out very well, if at all.
Click to expand...
If they had good reason to believe I did commit it, I would certainly understand. I would try to correct the matter, but I would understand.

Again, wht ever happened to good reason and prudent judgment? I think that, in this case, the same principles could be said to apply?

Sometimes I think many Christians in this modern era have succumbed to becoming “too soft” and even too “politically correct”. They’ve taken certain aspects of the Bible to extremes and ignored others. In fact, as I recall, though I’d have to look it up, even God is said to “shame” people for their sin, or, at least, nations, such as Israel. There is love but also justice. Love isn’t all blue skies and rainbows and cotton candy and sweethearts.

A bit tangential, but just my :twocents:.
 
Graceful_Lamb said:
Reasonably sure? So, what if you were to call out someone publicly on their “sin” and you wound up being wrong? Then what? Wouldn’t you wind up being the one sinning at that point?

If someone called you out on a “sin” that you supposedly committed, but really didn’t, would you be okay with that? The consequences of that, such as difficulties with friends/family, employment, etc.?

If you want to call out others publicly on their sins and have no issues with others doing it to you, then I guess go ahead. However, I doubt it will work out very well, if at all.
Click to expand...
Even if one is absolutely sure, and is in fact absolutely correct in the facts, without good reason, one should not publicize what would otherwise be a secret sin. That would be detraction, and is itself sinful. Again, even if the “outer” ended up not being wrong in the facts.
 
porthos11 said:
Even if one is absolutely sure, and is in fact absolutely correct in the facts, without good reason, one should not publicize what would otherwise be a secret sin. That would be detraction, and is itself sinful. Again, even if the “outer” ended up not being wrong in the facts.
Click to expand...
I am not sure this is totally correct.

What if the sin is also a crime?

Although I suppose that is where the good reason part comes into play…
 
jmjZelie said:
I am not sure this is totally correct.

What if the sin is also a crime?

Although I suppose that is where the good reason part comes into play…
Click to expand...
That is where “good reason” does come into play because a crime is an offense against public order, and especially when there is a victim.
 
porthos11 said:
That is where “good reason” does come into play because a crime is an offense against public order, and especially when there is a victim.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the example I had in mind was abuse or assault. Many people have been accused of slander or detraction when they come forward to report a crime committed against them or someone else. A lot of the sins that would be “big” enough to puclically call out, to my mind, would also be serious crimes. I can’t imagine a need to publicly call someone out on a sin that is not a crime. I think Jesus’ teaching about the speck in the eye vs. the log in the eye applies in this sort of situation, where no crime has been committed.
 
MysticMissMisty said:
If they had good reason to believe I did commit it, I would certainly understand. I would try to correct the matter, but I would understand.

Again, wht ever happened to good reason and prudent judgment? I think that, in this case, the same principles could be said to apply?

Sometimes I think many Christians in this modern era have succumbed to becoming “too soft” and even too “politically correct”. They’ve taken certain aspects of the Bible to extremes and ignored others. In fact, as I recall, though I’d have to look it up, even God is said to “shame” people for their sin, or, at least, nations, such as Israel. There is love but also justice. Love isn’t all blue skies and rainbows and cotton candy and sweethearts.

A bit tangential, but just my :twocents:.
Click to expand...
God is the only being who is purely just, or purely anything. He can do that kind of thing if he wills. If he willed to shame someone, he is who he is.
The rest of us are just human beings. We have no claim to the same prerogatives.

And you could make a good case that shame is not God’s will for anyone. He might let it happen by his permissive will. And shame serves God’s good pleasure and purpose, as all things do.

But his active will? You could make a good case that shame is not His game.
 
clem456 said:
God is the only being who is purely just, or purely anything. He can do that kind of thing if he wills. If he willed to shame someone, he is who he is.
The rest of us are just human beings. We have no claim to the same prerogatives.

And you could make a good case that shame is not God’s will for anyone. He might let it happen by his permissive will. And shame serves God’s good pleasure and purpose, as all things do.

But his active will? You could make a good case that shame is not His game.
Click to expand...
But, you could also use the “we are just human” argument to justify closing all the lawcourts down as well.

Also, the passive will thing is a good point. But, why would God even make mention of this if He didn’t see some good in its outcome?
 
MysticMissMisty said:
I don’t think I read selectively (at least, I try not to). All I am doing is bringing out the implications that I can see stemming from this or that statement, implications which may or may not be realized by the person making it.
Click to expand...
You’re interested in Catholicism.
You ask on a Catholic board.
Catholics answer.
And then you continue to argue your position which seldom concedes that the Catholic might know something about the Catholic teaching. :confused:
The question has been answered again and again.
We are not to call people out.
It’s uncharitable, there’s no guarantee that we know the whole story…and we are to do unto others as we would have them do to us.
I am thinking right now of people are so “hot” to believe that a crime was committed, that innocent people are accused and then prosecuted.
That’s where the sin lies. Calling people out when there’s no real foundation to do so.
If we don’t point fingers we don’t have to worry.
I’m out.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top