We are not to judge others

[SpiritMeadow]

Is this not contradictory? Objective truth is just that objective regardless of who does or does not accept such.

I think that a person can reasonably run down a series of statements of belief that objectively reach a conclusion that is objectively true for that person. However, I would also suggest that another person, having an entirely different faith tradition for instance could easily deny any one of the statements as not objective for them, and be perfectly correct in so saying. Something can be perfectly true for an individual but still not be universally true to all.

I find this peculiar reasoning. You assert rape is wrong simply because it is illegal in this society? Further, you assert it is dangerous to prove objective moral truth? I see, once again, we head toward relativism.

I

My point was I don’t need to discuss with the rapist the moral wrong of the act. It is sufficient to tell him it is illegal. There are plenty of basic moral truths that most all peoples everywhere agree with, murder is usually wrong everywhere, incest is usually wrong everywhere, stealing is usually wrong everywhere, lying is usually wrong everywhere. however there are a plethora of moral wrongs in the Catholic church that are not usually wrong everywhere else, in fact they are often considered perfectly correct. Homosexuality, premarital sex, sex outside marriage, contraceptives, and a whole host of issues are not objective wrongs to society at large, but they may be to particular folks and to particular faith traditions. You cannot thrown “moral relativism” at every post as an answer.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Why is it so nasty to tell someone what you think!?

Jesus said that we will be judged as we judge others. So, if we tell other people what we think about them, we’ll be subjected to the same in return? What’s the big deal about that? It’s not like we’re punishing people, we’re just telling them what we think! Why would anyone fear being judged like that?

It’s hard to take your comment seriously. We live in a social atmosphere. All of us learn, hopefully at an early age the means by which we get along with others. One is to mind your own business. If your neighbors came to you and explained they detested the color of your car, and disliked the shrubs you had chosen for your yard because it clashed with the color design next door, and if your subordinate at work indicated he tought your choice of suit material most ugly and your tie selection was cheap, you might be inclined to tell any and all of them to go take a flying leap. It’s simply none of their business. Do you go around offering advice to near strangers or even workmates about their choice of spouse, or how they raise their kids? One would hope not if you value your nose.

It is not fear. It’s a matter of how you conduct yuourself in a civilized way. Plenty of priests complain about busybodies at their Church who interefer in things not their business, often to the detriment of all parties.

 

[adrift]

One is to mind your own business.

Then the LORD asked Cain, “Where is your brother Abel?” He answered, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?”

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Hi SpiritMeadow,

It’s hard to take your comment seriously. We live in a social atmosphere. All of us learn, hopefully at an early age the means by which we get along with others. One is to mind your own business. If your neighbors came to you and explained they detested the color of your car, and disliked the shrubs you had chosen for your yard because it clashed with the color design next door, and if your subordinate at work indicated he tought your choice of suit material most ugly and your tie selection was cheap, you might be inclined to tell any and all of them to go take a flying leap. It’s simply none of their business. Do you go around offering advice to near strangers or even workmates about their choice of spouse, or how they raise their kids? One would hope not if you value your nose.

No, I don’t usually go around offering unsolicited advice. But on the other hand I don’t usually mind advice as long as it isn’t pushy or malicious. I would love to be able to see myself as others see me and as God sees me, and get some real intense advice that way.

If this is the kind of judging Jesus was talking about, then I’m quite prepared to be judged that way myself. I suspect Jesus was talking about the kind of judgement where you cause harm to someone by destroying their reputation, ostracizing them, or punishing them under the law. We have to forgive people, not judge them for how they have hurt us. That’s very different from just telling them that they’ve done something wrong.

So while your version of “not judging” might help you get along with others, I don’t think it’s what Jesus was talking about.

It is not fear. It’s a matter of how you conduct yuourself in a civilized way. Plenty of priests complain about busybodies at their Church who interefer in things not their business, often to the detriment of all parties.

I agree that people should mind their own business. How would you feel about telling them that their busybodyness is wrong?

I think if someone asks for advice, like if someone asked me if I think their gay relationship is sinful, I would have to give honest advice. But that rarely happens. If I hear someone giving bad advice, or speaking up with their opinion, I might feel I have to respond with my own opinion though. I don’t think it’s wrong just to tell someone that I believe they are doing something wrong, especially when such circumstances call for it.

 

[minimom]

I think that the priest was correct. It is a very fine line between judging acts and judging the person. I find very few people who can actually do so, though most all claim they can. Jesus was very clear on this point. He counseled against judging others or telling them of their sins, when they themselves had sin to a degree that should keep them fully occupied.

While it may sound correct to say, actions can be judged, I would argue that this is not what is meant either. Our responsibilites in a civil context (jury duty for instance) requires us to judge actions based on certain well stated principles. We are given rules by which to do so, and yes, we do not pass judgement, A judge does this. But this does not mean that we can carry this over to our lives in general.

We are simply unable to know most of the time the heart and reasons behind actions. It will often be incorrect when we attempt to do so. Thus we should follow Jesus, IMO and not judge. Certainly when called upon, advice is appropriate, but I would argue that except in exceptional instances when there is very good cause to believe that the person may be unaware of the “sin” unsolicited advice is inappropriate.

One of the reasons I say this is that you might well be interfering by your attempt to tell someone of their “misdeeds” of an ongoing relationship of priest/penitent for instance. You cannot look upon a situation and assume you know anything but the most obvious of facts. To intervene in someone’s life without welcome could do a grave injustice to them and others.

I wouldn’t speak so assuredly on this myself, but the fact that Jesus took two occassions to speak so strongly on the point, seems to suggest it was a very important point to him. His and others experiences with the Pharisees and their constant remonstrance with those who deviated from their believed righteousness, serve as a serious point to us, or should.

I think we need to remember that though the Lord said not to judge, He also said to instruct the ignorant.( I heard a wonderful sermon on this by a devout priest awhile back and was ready to stand and cheer!!) And, as Catholics it is our responsibility to lead others to salvation as best we can. If someone is in a sinful situation, we are WRONG not to speak up and gently correct them. I’m more than a little tired of liberals who constantly wiggle their fingers and say ‘no no --we can’t judge!’ and then find they are constantly judging those of us who are trying to live our faith. Such hypocrasy! Just today I had an editorial in the paper, and a liberal contacted me and said I was wrong because ‘you only get your sources from blogs so it’s not the truth!’ I had a good laugh at that and am still laughing, because I had gotten the information from numerous sources- none of them blogs! He was judging me and he had no clue, yet he is the first to say ‘we can’t judge’ which really means we can’t judge what liberals do, but they can judge what everyone else does. Brainwashed!!

 

[surfinpure]

Christ told us to reprove our brother in private. How are we to do this if we do not first acknowledge that he is sinning?

I love the Fulton Sheen quote. That sums it up very, very nicely.

 

[E.E.N.S]

I think that a person can reasonably run down a series of statements of belief that objectively reach a conclusion that is objectively true for that person. However, I would also suggest that another person, having an entirely different faith tradition for instance could easily deny any one of the statements as not objective for them, and be perfectly correct in so saying. Something can be perfectly true for an individual but still not be universally true to all.

What you are referring to is subjective truth, not objective truth.

 

[surfinpure]

On Matthew 18:15-17…

Here our Lord calls on us to work with him for the sanctification of others by means of fraternal correction, which is one of the ways we can do so. He speaks as sternly about the sin of omission as he did about the sin of scandal. --St. John Chrysostom, Homily on St. Matthew

And from the Navarre Bible:

There is an obligation on us to correct others. Our Lord identifies three stages in correction: 1) alone; 2) in the presence of one or two witnesses; and 3) before the Church. The first stage refers to causing scandal and to secret or private sins; here correction should be given privately, just to the person himself, to avoid unnecessarily publicizing a private matter and also to avoid hurting the person and to make it easier for him to mend his ways. If this correction does not have the desired effect, and the matter is a serious one, resort should be had to the second stage – looking for one or two friends, in case they have more influence on him. The last stage is formal judicial correction by reference to the Church authorirties. If a sinner does not accept this correction, he should be excommunicated that is, separated from communion with the Church and sacraments.

 

[Ender]

It is foolish to believe that we are not to make any judgments about what others do. No one really believes that: how could you even say “judging is wrong” and not acknowledge that this itself is a judgment? We are obligated to judge justly, not to avoid all judgments. This means we may judge only those things which we can know - actions - and not those things which we cannot know - the intentions behind them, and we must judge without bias or anger.

(CCC 1861) *“However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.”

*(2423) *“The Church’s social teaching proposes principles for reflection, it provides criteria for judgment …” *

Ender

 

[RachelsAlumni]

It is foolish to believe that we are not to make any judgments about what others do.

(CCC 1861) *“However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.”

*(2423) *“The Church’s social teaching proposes principles for reflection, it provides criteria for judgment …” *

Ender

Neither of the quotes from the CCC given here say anything about us judging “what others do”. It says “we can judge that** an act** is in itself a grave offense”. This is an objective judgment, judging ‘an act’ and not a person committing ‘an act’. IMO it is for our guidance in forming a proper conscience, to discern and make choices to obey the Lord’s commands for ourselves not a free for all to judge others. IMO it boils down to where my focus is placed. Am I focusing on my brothers’ acts or my own? Am I looking for the speck in my brother’s eye or trying to remove the log from my own eye?

 

[quiet52]

from minimom:

Re: We are not to judge others

Originally Posted by SpiritMeadow
I think that the priest was correct. It is a very fine line between judging acts and judging the person.

I find very few people who can actually do so, though most all claim they can. Jesus was very clear on this point. He counseled against judging others or telling them of their sins, when they themselves had sin to a degree that should keep them fully occupied.

While it may sound correct to say, actions can be judged, I would argue that this is not what is meant either. Our responsibilites in a civil context (jury duty for instance) requires us to judge actions based on certain well stated principles. We are given rules by which to do so, and yes, we do not pass judgement, A judge does this. But this does not mean that we can carry this over to our lives in general.

We are simply unable to know most of the time the heart and reasons behind actions. It will often be incorrect when we attempt to do so. Thus we should follow Jesus, IMO and not judge. Certainly when called upon, advice is appropriate, but I would argue that except in exceptional instances when there is very good cause to believe that the person may be unaware of the “sin” unsolicited advice is inappropriate.

One of the reasons I say this is that you might well be interfering by your attempt to tell someone of their “misdeeds” of an ongoing relationship of priest/penitent for instance. You cannot look upon a situation and assume you know anything but the most obvious of facts. To intervene in someone’s life without welcome could do a grave injustice to them and others. …

I think we need to remember that though the Lord said not to judge, **He also said to instruct the ignorant. ** ( I heard a wonderful sermon on this by a devout priest awhile back and was ready to stand and cheer!!) And, as Catholics it is our responsibility to lead others to salvation as best we can. If someone is in a sinful situation, we are WRONG not to speak up and gently correct them. I’m more than a little tired of liberals who constantly wiggle their fingers and say ‘no no --we can’t judge!’ and then find they are constantly judging those of us who are trying to live our faith. Such hypocrasy! …

I agree, minimom.

We are able to judge that many actions are evil, without knowing the intentions behind them and without judging the person commiting the actions.

How are we to help each other go to heaven if we don’t acknowledge and admonish each other for our sins?

Part of our mission to evangelize is to teach the faith – and we’re not teaching – in fact we’re avoiding our mission – when we pretend that those we know, especially, aren’t sinning grieviously when they are.

And how are we supposed to help build up God’s kingdom here on earth if we ignore social sin?

Yes, I have confronted relatives, friends, and parishioners about their sins of cohabitation, adultery, abortion, stealing, abuse, and other grievious sins. I believe it would be a grave injustice on MY part NOT to talk to them about some of their behaviors. Some have listened and appreciated it, others have accused me of being judgmental (I try to explain I’m not judging them personally, but that their actions are morally wrong). My conscience is clear for attempting to teach them. I would feel troubled for ignoring my duty.

I have written, e-mailed, and phoned legislators and other public officials about various issues, and why I believe they are wrong about their actions on the issues.

 

[fix]

Neither of the quotes from the CCC given here say anything about us judging “what others do”.

I think you are making a distinction where none exists.

It says “we can judge that** an act** is in itself a grave offense”. This is an objective judgment, judging ‘an act’ and not a person committing ‘an act’.

Right, we may not judge their conscience. We may judge their action. Why would we not judge another’s action? If someone says they want to go rob 10 banks would we say , hmm, I better reflect on my own sins before I mention that robbing a bank is wrong?

IMO it is for our guidance in forming a proper conscience, to discern and make choices to obey the Lord’s commands for ourselves not a free for all to judge others. IMO it boils down to where my focus is placed. Am I focusing on my brothers’ acts or my own? Am I looking for the speck in my brother’s eye or trying to remove the log from my own eye?

Here again I see the assertion that we really should not judge bad actions because Scripture mentions the log/speck teaching. But, the two are not incompatible.

 

[fix]

It is foolish to believe that we are not to make any judgments about what others do. No one really believes that: how could you even say “judging is wrong” and not acknowledge that this itself is a judgment?
Ender

That is the point. If we cannot “judge” right from wrong how can we raise children, protect society, formulate just laws, evangelize the culture?

Even when we forgive that implies we “judged” someone sinned against us. I think our post modern, Western, psychologized, culture has wrenched out of context one part of Scripture and uses it as a cudgel to reinforce relativism.

 

[Fitswimmer]

I think the issue here is not do we make judgements and discernments, but how do we express those judgements and discernments and to whom do we express them.

I don’t enter into serious discussions about morality with people I’m not personally close to. For example: I’ve talked to gay friends about Church teaching on homosexuality because they’ve asked why I’m not “active”. The reason is important to me so I shared it with them. If I saw a person that I thought was gay at Mass, I wouldn’t be running over to them to expound on Church teaching. (not to say that hasn’t happened to me… )

I don’t believe that we should be running around looking for people to “admonish” and I honestly don’t think most people do. I think most of the “admonishing” goes in in forums like this and with people that we already know pretty well.

 

[surfinpure]

I am baffled as to why this is even a point of discussion, honestly. Has anybody prayed the Our Father lately?

These are the words that Christ Jesus told us to use:

“…and forgive us our tresspasses, as we forgive those who tresspass against us…”

How in the name of all common sense does anyone expect us to forgive someone if we cannot first determine they sinned against us?

What did Our Lord mean by “tresspasses,” anyway, if not sins?

Only sins need forgiveness.

Good grief.

 

[buffalo]

I am baffled as to why this is even a point of discussion, honestly. Has anybody prayed the Our Father lately?

These are the words that Christ Jesus told us to use:

“…and forgive us our tresspasses, as we forgive those who tresspass against us…”

How in the name of all common sense does anyone expect us to forgive someone if we cannot first determine they sinned against us?

What did Our Lord mean by “tresspasses,” anyway, if not sins?

Only sins need forgiveness.

Good grief.

Because the “don’t judge me” indoctrinization has been very successful.

 

[Pug]

I am baffled as to why this is even a point of discussion, honestly. Has anybody prayed the Our Father lately?

These are the words that Christ Jesus told us to use:

“…and forgive us our tresspasses, as we forgive those who tresspass against us…”

How in the name of all common sense does anyone expect us to forgive someone if we cannot first determine they sinned against us?

What did Our Lord mean by “tresspasses,” anyway, if not sins?

Only sins need forgiveness.

Good grief.

“Sins/Trespasses” can denote things a person has done, even though they are not culpable. It is still a bad thing for a consecrated host to get trampled underfoot, but the person doing it may have no idea at all that it is there, so they are not culpable in the standard sense, even though they did do it. The person would likely feel terrible if they turned around on impulse and then realized what they had done. Some of those sacrifices in the OT were for just such inadvertent sins as these.

I don’t think we need to determine the culpability of the person who just ran over our child in the street before we ought to forgive them. Only God knows their inner heart. Even if they come to us and express their horror at what they have done, this tells us nothing. They may have a good time running people over intentionally and then falsely falling over themselves in abject apology. Who knows? They came to us for forgiveness. So, forgive them.

*Luke 17:4 And if he wrongs you seven times in one day and returns to you seven times saying, ‘I am sorry,’ you should forgive him.

*Pug=Hypocrite! Do as I say, not as I do. Sigh. No, make that a double Sigh.

 

[surfinpure]

“Sins/Trespasses” can denote things a person has done, even though they are not culpable. It is still a bad thing for a consecrated host to get trampled underfoot, but the person doing it may have no idea at all that it is there, so they are not culpable in the standard sense, even though they did do it. The person would likely feel terrible if they turned around on impulse and then realized what they had done. Some of those sacrifices in the OT were for just such inadvertent sins as these.

I don’t think we need to determine the culpability of the person who just ran over our child in the street before we ought to forgive them. Only God knows their inner heart. Even if they come to us and express their horror at what they have done, this tells us nothing. They may have a good time running people over intentionally and then falsely falling over themselves in abject apology. Who knows? They came to us for forgiveness. So, forgive them.

Luke 17:4 And if he wrongs you seven times in one day and returns to you seven times saying, ‘I am sorry,’ you should forgive him.

Pug=Hypocrite! Do as I say, not as I do. Sigh. No, make that a double Sigh.

This sounds like a bit of a loophole. Let’s say someone didn’t trample my foot, then. Let’s say they became angry and knocked my teeth out.

Are you seriously suggesting that we are never, ever to judge a situation of deliberate sin? This is ludicrous.

And why has nobody commented on my earlier quotes regarding the reproof of a brother who is in sin (otherwise known as “fraternal correction”)? Can no one answer this?

 

[buffalo]

This sounds like a bit of a loophole. Let’s say someone didn’t trample my foot, then. Let’s say they became angry and knocked my teeth out.

Are you seriously suggesting that we are never, ever to judge a situation of deliberate sin? This is ludicrous.

And why has nobody commented on my earlier quotes regarding the reproof of a brother who is in sin (otherwise known as “fraternal correction”)? Can no one answer this?

We really don’t like to confuse a opinion with facts? Don’t ya know?

Who teaches the justice side of God? We hear perfectly loving, perfectly merciful, but no one wants to touch perfectly just. It opens too many unpleasant doors.

 

[surfinpure]

We really don’t like to confuse a opinion with facts? Don’t ya know?

Who teaches the justice side of God? We hear perfectly loving, perfectly merciful, but no one wants to touch perfectly just. It opens too many unpleasant doors.

I’m afraid you’re right. God help us.