You are wise to look at that point closely, Ut.
A little context is needed here. St. Josemaría was a passionate, passionate defender of people’s freedom. He was always very much opposed to trying to impose a point of view or opinion as the “one right Catholic” solution to a problem. I can’t remember the details now, but there was some kind of political issue that came up in Spain in the late 60s. Quite a few of the Spanish bishops were actually willing to speak from the pulpit, arguing that people ought to support such and such a policy. (I apologize for the lack of detail, I genuinely can’t remember now, but it was in Vol. 3 of the biography of St. Josemaría.)
Whatever the political issue was, it wasn’t one of those “clear cut” Catholic issues like gay marriage or abortion. It was much more a prudential judgment issue. Anyway, St. Josemaría would NOT play ball when he was asked to “use” Opus Dei channels to encourage support for whatever the policy was. And he always made it clear that one of the quickest ways to get shown the door out of the Work was to run around laying “Catholic Guilt” on people for not supporting your personal opinion about some issue where Catholics could legitimately hold a range of viewpoints.
Now, I realize the point you’re raising doesn’t speak to politics directly, but I wanted you to have that background first. Living through the bitter partisanship leading up to, and the brutal chaos of the Spanish Civil War gave St. Josemaría a very firsthand, deep-rooted appreciation for freedom. So bear that in mind when looking at points like this.
Obviously, no one can compel another to change their heart or mind. It’s impossible. The most one can do is attempt to persuade, with charity and truth. I think that what these points are referring to are the temptation to give in to cowardice, human respect, laziness, and the like, when it comes to confronting people with the truth. It’s so much easier to give up and give in, when you initially attempt to show someone the truth, and they respond with some kind of sophistry about “what’s true for you isn’t necessarily true for me.” At least, I know that’s something I continue to struggle with to this day.
Taking the points you cited in context with one just before it, point 395 from The Way,
Listen to a man of God, an old campaigner, as he argues: 'So I won’t yield an inch? And why should I, if I am convinced of the truth of my ideals? You, on the other hand, are very ready to compromise… **Would you agree that two and two are three and a half? You wouldn’t? Surely for friendship’s sake you will yield in such a little thing? **
And why won’t you? Simply because, for the first time, you feel convinced that you possess the truth, and you have come over to my way of thinking!
So while St. Josemaría would be the last man to suggest that one should literally coerce, or in some way manipulate a person, to get them to agreement, I think he’s plainly a believer in holy intransigence, even the “holy shamelessness” he speaks of earlier in the chapter.
Taking them as a whole, I don’t suddenly want to run out and forcibly baptize the heathens but frankly, I do want to take another look at my dealings with my friends and acquaintances. I want to make sure that I haven’t compromised the truth, and that on some level I haven’t given up on the idea that yes, they too, practicing Hindu, active cohabiter, fallen away Catholic, abortion-rights advocate, whatever they may be, are still called to the radical holiness preached by Jesus Christ.
There is a line to be walked between being so aggressive that you rupture a relationship permanentaly and can no longer have any positive effect, and compromising the truth. The point you cited from the Way to be just serves as an antidote to that really strong temptation to “respect people’s freedom” so much that I never actually say what needs to be said.
Does that make any sense?
Margaret
PS I’ll try my best to stay involved in this conversation, but I kind of promised myself that I was going to get some seriously cleaning done on my disaster of a house this week. Bear with me if it takes me a day or two to respond to things.
then I certainly couldn’t be in it…
