Detraction/calumny

  • Thread starter Thread starter BarbaraTherese
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BarbaraTherese

Guest
Recently I have had occasion to consider what exactly is the difference between calumny and detraction as theological concepts. I have been truly astounded at the amount of Catholic consideration and reasoning of these two somewhat commonly used words. New Advent has a mind bender of a definition and in parts I found it questionable at least to my sometimes faulted thinking. This one was somewhat simpler though a number of paragraphs involved.

trosch.org/for/scan/har-detr.htm
The Catholic Catechism” by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.** - (**p. 408)
COMMANDMENTS OF GOD
DETRACTION AND CALUMNY
 
It’s a good article.

Question: Is it ever permissible to express a negative comment about another person? What if I don’t agree with how someone conducts their business, or treats other people? Is it wrong to tell someone else my opinion, or am I supposed to just keep my mouth shut?
 
According to the Catechism
**
2477
Click to expand...
Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.278 He becomes guilty:
  • of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
  • of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;279
  • of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
Calumny is making false statements to the detriment of another.

Detraction is harming another by telling the truth about their faults to one who does not need to know.

Both violate the Eighth Commandment.**
 
mommyof4 said:
Um, can you explain this to me like I’m a 10 year old?🙂 😊
Click to expand...
…um …me too please!😃 I read Question 72 in part and realized I think by the second line, it was useless for me to persue things through to Question 76, let alone the conclusion of 72.
I very rarely will go near the Summa and for good reasons with me.😃 …
Yeah there are occasions when one can and should speak up…but to my mind it becomes something of a moral mind bender and minefield. It just astounded me that there was so much written about these two words. New Advent, and I may be completely incorrect ( as I understood the definition ) that the sin can be mitigated with the effect or result of the detraction/calumny. I have always thought that the venial or mortal nature of sin is determined by motivation…calumny is a downright lie(s) and that is rather clear as to the moral implication.
I am still of the opinion that the seriousness of the sin is in the motivation…and not the result.:confused: Except it has just occured to me that if I intend to do little harm…and in fact do much then the result does come into moral play since I am always responsible and accountable for my actions. However if I intend to do much harm and in fact do little…then I think I am still seriously in moral question. And goodness knows with the long and at times involved articles on detraction and calumny perhaps that is covered in 'Question 76:D ’

…Barb:)
I think perhaps I should be in the Moral Theology Forum! Although I guess it is too a spiritual subject.
 
Joe_Kelley said:
According to the Catechism

**Calumny is making false statements to the detriment of another. **

**Detraction is harming another by telling the truth about their faults to one who does not need to know. **

Both violate the Eighth Commandment.
Click to expand...
Thanks heaps! Obviously I should have gone to the CCC and been satisfied with that. It is very clear and much as I had thought to be the definition of detraction and calumny.

Barb:)
 
I read parts of 72 with regard to ‘reviling’ and noted that the matter can be mortal sin in some instances. However, wouldn’t the three conditions need to be present in order to make it mortal? … even though the ‘matter’ be grave? Doesn’t one need to be fully conscious, in addition to the matter being mortally sinful, together with the person’s willingness to do it anyway?

It seems that some motivation to lash out stems from extremely wounded anger that has not yet been dealt with. The culpability may be lessened, if person’s motive is to vent, or to obtain counsel to deal with the matter.

This is very interesting and timely, for I have encountered this situation personally last week and have been trying to determine how serious my detraction was. My husband died, and when I called to file the death claim with the insurance company, I learned that my daughter cashed in the policy four years ago and kept the money my husband had prepaid in order to cover his final expenses. The balance was intended to be divided with another daughter after these were paid.

Initially my anger and shock was great, and I did try to obtain counsel as to what my next step should be. The persons I disclosed this to were very trusted friends who would not judge her, and who would offer good spiritual advice.

However, in telling the other children what took place, one of them is so livid that she told me she would spread the news of that daughter’s actions to everyone she knew. So how culpable am I for disclosing this to the angry daughter? I have to go back on the three conditions and also examine my sense of reviling at the moment I disclosed it to her. I’m sure my anger came out in a not-so-nice expression!

I was pleased to read the part about “vengence is mine.”
 
mommyof4 said:
It’s a good article.

Question: Is it ever permissible to express a negative comment about another person? What if I don’t agree with how someone conducts their business, or treats other people? Is it wrong to tell someone else my opinion, or am I supposed to just keep my mouth shut?
Click to expand...
There are instances when we commit sins of omission when we DON’T speak up about another person. We MUST speak up about people who advocate anti-Christian values and run for public office, or priests who teach heresy, or family members and others who present a potential harm to ourselves or others. There can be objectively valid reasons to disclose another’s faults and failings, for the good of society or individuals (for justice).
Detraction is harming another by telling the truth about their faults to one who does not need to know.
Click to expand...
2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.
He becomes guilty:
of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them
Click to expand...
 
Will be absent for a few days but will catch up with posts eventually. Apologies. Barb:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top