Shaming as societal self correction

[JMMJ]

I would prefer not to tell my friend but talking to myself would probably be seen even more creepy

Friend, or no friend, the whole thing is creepy. Don’t comment on peoples’ butts, their shorts, or how disgusted you are. No stranger cares what you think about her shorts.

 

[JMMJ]

Who advocated letting kids do whatever they want. I raised my kids and never hit any of them and they never behaved the way you described.

Poor parenting is lazy. Just as shaming is lazy. There are better ways, and they do often require a little more effort than hitting and/or shaming. That is the point. We are better than that, and we should strive for better than that.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Calling a person “triggered” and telling them to “block the thread” because they raise a thoughtful objection to content that reflects poorly on Catholicism is not a very thoughtful or mature response.

I don’t intend to “block the thread” because I think it needs to be responded to.

 

[Kei]

What was common was public penance. With a hood on so no one knew it was you, and you shouldn’t be doing it for self-righteous purposes.
Without a shared morality, the modern state is forced to use force such as police.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

You caught my interest! What are you refering to? Can you provide some link so I can read a little bit about it? Thanks

 

[Kei]

While this may not have all the particulars, this says some stuff about public penance.
http://sscdchurch.com/faith-devotions/sacraments/penance/public-penance-in-the-early-church/

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

Wow, we are living so comfortably in comparisson with those people. Having to tell my sins in front of public assembly must’ve been pretty rough, not even mentioning the several years long penance/waiting-for-absolution.

Tis_Bearself how do you feel about the people taking part in those assemblies (I am not saying it to be mean, I am genuinely interested in how you feel about this).

It makes me feel weird about the ease with which we can obtain absolution and planary indulgences.

 

[DeniseNY]

I never advocated for mean shaming.

But what you did to that girl was mean. Several people have told you that.

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

I really hoped that the triggered people I see all over internet is just some kind of leftie thing, but it seems like it is not. And I don’t mean it as an offense. I really think people should not be so scared of opinions…

People in this thread don’t seem triggered or scared of your opinions. You started a thread inviting people to discuss a topic which they are. Posters in the thread nearly unanimously disagree with your opinions and that makes us scared of them or triggered?

The disagreement you are being shown over and over again is because we respond from a Catholic perspective which would treat these themes differently than studying shame from a sociological perspective. If you wanted a sociological conversation that discussed only the patterns and effects of shame on society (removed from whether or not it is moral) you should have framed it that way.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

I don’t mind the disagreement - With the “triggering” I was responding to the comment aiming to censor the discussion because of “feelings”.

Look at the early church penance above where it was actually present. So dont dismiss everything as not-catholic just because it sounds bad. I have to point again to the st. Thomas Acquinas here. It is important to think even about thing seemingly bad at first glance and think if they actually be used for good. It’s like with some of our vices - we can also turn them into good use.

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

I was responding to the comment aiming to censor the discussion because of “feelings”.

Look at the early church penance above where it was actually present. So dont dismiss everything as not-catholic just because it sounds bad.

Feelings matter to the degree that how we make people feel has a lot to do with the degree to which we are able to evangelize them. The example of shaming the girl whose shorts were too short, the effect of shaming her might cause her not to wear them again, but it did nothing to teach her her dignity. Shame does not win hearts for Christ.

With early church public pennances the person was already contrite, mobs of laypeople weren’t trying to force contrition on random people through shaming.

 

[DeniseNY]

Perhaps thats how you should read the comments regarding your remarks to that girl - a penance for humiliating her.

Look at the early church penance

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

I can see what you are trying to say and I partially agree, however in the same time if the people in the assembly wouldn’t be judgy (I have no idea what the proper word in english should be), the penance would not have any effect if nobody would care what he did, because “shaming is bad”. So logically people had to “shame” him at least by looking at the person otherwise there would be no effect and no reason to do so - at least from a logical standpoint. Would you agree?

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

I can see what you are trying to say and I partially agree, however in the same time if the people in the assembly wouldn’t be judgy (I have no idea what the proper word in english should be), the penance would not have any effect if nobody would care what he did, because “shaming is bad”. So logically people had to “shame” him at least by looking at the person otherwise there would be no effect and no reason to do so - at least from a logical standpoint. Would you agree?

The effect is interior because the public penitents have already given a good confession and the pennance was decided by their confessor. By viewing the repentant sinners with anything other than love and mercy, people are in danger of bringing sin upon themselves. Do you perhaps misunderstand the purpose of a pennance after the sacrament of reconciliation?

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

How would that work then, if noone cares? Just logically… he is confessing his sins in front of other people- why would bishop decide to do it if it didn’t matter? Why wouldn’t he just hear it in private? Now I am just discussing the logic behind it (read: I am not advocating for it or against it, I am just curious how can it work if there is no “shame” - again I am not talking about the vocal shaming, but just the looks).

Hopefully you won’t answer again with something like “You just want to shame people and that makes you sinner” (which is false, and you just try to demonize me) to avoid discussing the concept on which it could stand:

If there was no shame brought by the community then it would not make sense to do such thing.

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

How would that work then, if noone cares? Just logically… he is confessing his sins in front of other people- why would bishop decide to do it if it didn’t matter? Why wouldn’t he just hear it in private?

The confession itself would likely have still been in private. The public pennance may have been in cases where the person was a very high profile public sinner and their sin was causing greater scandal if it seemed to the community they had not formally renounced their old sinful ways.

Hopefully you won’t answer again with something like “You just want to shame people and that makes you sinner” (which is false, and you just try to demonize me) to avoid discussing the concept on which it could stand:

I haven’t done any such thing. If you meant other posters, your characterization of how they answered misses the point.

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

Loosely related subject that illustrates a problem with shame : If one publicly shames a repentant adulterer, then they in effect also shame the innocent spouse already hurt by the situation.

 

[ThoughtfulMind]

By viewing the repentant sinners with anything other than love and mercy, people are in danger of bringing sin upon themselves.

I was thinking it is aimed towards me, but I you probably didn’t mean it like that. So I would like to appologize for automatically expecting something bad towards me in your response.

The public pennance may have been in cases where the person was a very high profile public sinner and their sin was causing greater scandal if it seemed to the community they had not formally renounced their old sinful ways.

I see where you are heading with this. Yeah I could see it as a public declaration of rejecting this particular sin IF it was meant to be used when the sin was publicly known, however I can’t see it specified there. Moreover even the confession could be public:

If the confessor deemed it necessary, he obliged the penitent to appear before the bishop and his council [presbyterium) and these again decided whether the crime was of such a nature that it ought to be confessed in presence of the people.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

What people? It’s just the OP who is saying this.

 

[DisorientingSneeze]

I was thinking it is aimed towards me, but I you probably didn’t mean it like that.

Correct. It was about the hypothetical crowd around the public pennance. If they reacted with rude jeers or delighted in like throwing rotten tomatoes or something, they are sinning. The proper response on their part is to look upon the person with love and mercy. The description made it sound as though they begged people to pray for them as those people walked into church (where they were not yet allowed). So praying for them is the right response.