I
have not written this post in defence of any particular blog that has closed,
or address it to any particular Bishop who asks that a blog be closed. Rather, I
am writing it because blogs do close at the request of their Bishop, and that brings
me to ask what I, as a blogger, am about, and how long I think I should
continue to blog.
For
me, blogs are a way of communicating ones thoughts, feelings, reactions etc. Running
a blog brings one both affirmation and challenge and as such, can be very
growth-producing. However, writing a Catholic blog in order “to contend for the faith that was once and for
all entrusted to God's holy people” (Jude.1v3) has an added reality which
brings with it an ever-present danger. The reality is that Catholic blogging
can be a holy work if it does the truth in charity (Eph.4v15); the ever-present
danger is that if blogging is not done with charity it can become a work of the
enemy (though harsh words may be
required to halt a train in its tracks:
doing the truth in charity does not equate with being a sparrow when an eagle is
needed...). Surely bloggers must always seek to do a holy work; to defend and
proclaim the Truth in charity? I think this is certainly true of clerical
bloggers who tend to measure their words carefully and avoid detraction of any persons
whose words or deeds they consider inconsistent with the Faith.
Now
the Faith has been “delivered once for
all”. Nothing may be removed from the Sacred Deposit; nothing can be added to
it or altered within it, and development of it must never veer into distortion
so that what was once held is no longer held or what was once repudiated is now
accepted. Further, the Faith is “delivered to
the saints”; it belongs to the whole people of God, right back to those alive
in Apostolic times. It is not the property of one generation to do with as they
please -much less is it the property of Popes and Bishops who serve God (and the
saints) by guarding the Sacred
Deposit.
If
Popes, Bishops, Priests (or prominent Catholic laypersons) compromise by word
or deed the Faith delivered to the saints, they must be prepared to be challenged;
to be called to account by ‘saints’ loyal
to the Sacred Deposit (not to those who share their compromise in word or in
deed). But bloggers who provide the challenge
must do so in charity if they are to do a holy work; they must be careful
to criticise positions and acts, not persons. Yet persons -be they Pope, Bishop,
Priest or prominent lay Catholic- must not take offence when they are
identified with their words or deeds, because holding a sacred office cannot
exclude one from criticism of the way that office is discharged: public office inherently
leaves one open to public refute. Indeed, we are obliged to challenge (Lumen
gentium, 37) for the sake of the Truth.
Similarly,
Traditional Catholic bloggers must also be open to challenge, but they should
not be assailed if they are “doing the truth in charity”, because to assail Truth
is to assail Christ. That said, clerical
bloggers who lack charity in their posts or allow uncharitable comments to
go unedited, may require suppression by ecclesiastical authority for the sake
of Charity, and to defend a person’s good name. Such use of authority could be called a holy act. However, when
a blog avoids criticism of persons to
question and condemn only positions and
acts, suppression of that blog by ecclesiastical authority becomes a work of the Father of Lies, who is always
behind any attempt to suppress Truth.
I
think all bloggers must take care to do the truth in charity; to criticise positions and acts but never persons. Similarly, I think ecclesiastical
authorities must take care not to suppress
blogs simply because they do not like to see themselves or others called to
account. Such suppression would be an abuse of authority which is “given unto
edification and not unto destruction” (2.Cor.10v8; 13v10). At the end of the
day, blog-writing is not about freedom of speech, it is about the defence and
promulgation of the Truth, even by charitable challenge.
PS While we have to be very respectful in challenging Popes, and certainly respectful of their person, we have every right to follow the example of St Catherine of Sienna and challenge a Pope whose words or deeds seem to us to be off-side.
PS While we have to be very respectful in challenging Popes, and certainly respectful of their person, we have every right to follow the example of St Catherine of Sienna and challenge a Pope whose words or deeds seem to us to be off-side.
Father,thanks for this post,but please put me right.What if the truth is not charitable,must we sacrifice truth for the sake of charity?
ReplyDeleteThank you for this.
DeleteWe should not need to sacrifice truth for the sake of charity; speaking the truth is the act of charity, even if it offends -not to speak the truth is not charity in that it is not good for the soul of the one considered to be in error. I think that we have to speak the Truth respectfully without disrespecting the person, but it has to be spoken.
Truth and charity are never in opposition - they are one.
DeleteIndeed, Lynda. Thank you for that.
DeleteI don't know how anyone can divide God as they regularly do today by implying it is wither truth or charity; justice or mercy. St Paul's demand that we do the truth in charity has been sacrificed on the altar of today's so-called 'pastoral care'.
God Bless.
Thank you Father.
ReplyDeleteYou are most welcome!
DeleteGod Bless