We should hate sin, especially in ourselves. As sin is contrary to a person’s good and to love is to “will the good of another”, the only way to truly “love your neighbor as yourself” is to hate the sins of others as much as you hate your own. As sin threatens immortal souls, there is nothing that we should despise more than sin. A sinner is distinct from their sins and should be treated as such.
Dear Veritas248,
Cordial greetings and a very good day.
Your above remark is bang on target and I think many men nowadays fail to differentiate between the sinner and his sin. The former we love unreservedly whilst it is only the latter that we loathe, be it in ourselves or in our brethren.
Our Lord’s word’s in the Gospel, “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get” (St. Matt. 7: 1,2), are sometimes misinterpreted to mean that it is always wrong, under any circumstances, to pass an unfavourable judgment upon the conduct or opinions of others. In any case, that oft cited text does not mean that it is wrong or uncharitable to reprove the sins, faults and catastrophic errors of prudential judgment of other men. Such an erroneous elucidation of the Sacred text would effectively debar a man from ever denouncing error or false doctrine, which, of course, is plainly preposterous.
St. Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians envisages the possibility of fraternal correction by our brethren, “if any man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Look to yourself lest you too be tempted” (6: 1). No doubt mindful of man’s frailty and the Devil’s subtlety, St. Paul recognizes that Christians will not always live a consistently devout life without ever stumbling. In such cases, those who are walking worthy of their vocation by the earnest pursuit of holiness, must gently and tactfully seek to restore their fallen or errant brethren. However, the emphasis must always be upon* restoration* and not merely rebuke. Having said that, we do, nonetheless, have a duty to use the appropraite means of convincing an erring brother of his sin or want of discretion in a matter, thus bringing him, hopefully, back to the path of truth and virtuous living.
What is out of place is, and what our Lord condemned in the Gospel, is a *censorious and **fault-finding spirit *that almost seems to take a perverse delight in the existence of error and which is always ready to pounce. We are talking here about a readiness to blame others for trifling offences or matters of
genuine indifference. Clearly, we must watch against a disposition to magnify the errors and weaknesses of our brethren and make the worst of them; we should, as St. Paul advises, look to ourselves lest we also be tempted (Gal. 6: 1). Christian charity demands that we believe all things and hope all things as regards the motives and conduct of our fellow Christians (cf. I Cor. 13: 7).
As you quite correctly state, dear friend, “a sinner is distinct from their sins”, and it is precisely this that is frequently forgotten by some modern Catholics. By negatively evaluating a man’s actions and words, we are not necessarily being uncharitable or even harsh. Thus because we must not judge
individuals, it does not therefore follow that we must refrain from reproving their sins or fallacious arguments. Indeed, by gently but firmly reproving our brother, we may be saving a soul from eternal ruin by encouraging them to have a change of heart about their present ungodly or worldly living, based upon their defective reasoning and earthbound thinking. Surely, such loving rebuke is called for nowadays, when so many modern Catholics have succumbed to the secular drift of the age with a degree of weakness and nervelessness unmatched in the history of the Church.
Warmest good wishes,
Portrait
Pax
