Today, I wanted to share a conversation I had a couple weeks ago with Ann Yeong for her podcast, Becoming Me. After attending one of my workshops, Ann invited me on her podcast to talk about the Church’s teaching on human dignity, spiritual abuse, and navigating the Church in the midst of religious trauma.
I don’t think I would have been exposed to half the writings of Pope Francis if you hadn’t quoted excerpts from them in your podcasts. This podcast particularly resonated with me! Thanks you!
Please forgive a long comment. I enjoyed this interview. For me as a priest, it was a sobering reminder of how easy it is to use spiritual authority in ways that do not honor the dignity and freedom of those in my care.
I found especially interesting the latter part of the discussion, where justice was presented as a virtue one can exercise towards oneself: as in, not permitting someone else to dishonor my dignity and freedom; not permitting someone else to disregard appropriate boundaries. This has been difficult for me to learn and practice.
It has also been difficult for me to synthesize into a complete theological vision. While I often hear it presented (as here) in terms of a deepened realization of God's unconditional love, of Christ's respect for the inviolable dignity of man, etc., I do often wonder about passages in the New Testament that appear to run counter to this paradigm. "Turn the other cheek." "If they demand you go one mile with them, go two." "If someone steals your cloak, give him your coat as well." 1st Peter: "For what credit is it, if when you do wrong and are beaten for it you take it patiently? But if when you do right and suffer for it you take it patiently, you have God’s approval. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps." The prayer from St. Ignatius of Loyola quoted here seems to be in the same vein. I can add, from my own monastic background, that the monastic Patristic writings are *full* of this kind of thing. That the monk must "embrace the waters of derision." Monks who submitted to years or decades of abuse from their elders are canonized as saints. St. Acacius who is mentioned in the _Ladder of Divine Ascent_ comes to mind. This same text and others exhort abbots that they must at times test and even publicly humiliate their monks.
It really is not hard to immerse yourself in Scripture and the Fathers and Saints and come away with the belief that if I allow myself to be abused, then I am carrying my cross as a good disciple of Christ.
I mention all this not because I disagree with the fundamental stance of your presentation, but because for a good while I have been in search of a discussion that really faces this quite prominent aspect of the tradition head on and integrates it. Perhaps you can suggest a presentation (from yourself or others) that makes some headway in that direction? Perhaps there is something from the Holy Father?
I think a partial answer must include a recognition that the world as we know it—post-industrial revolution, post-world WWI and WW2, etc.—is very different than in premodern times. Psychologically, humanity seems to be much more delicate and fragile. And hence, there is a necessary element of *enculturation.* And yet, we must also maintain that there is something perennial about the Church's moral and ascetical vision, and certainly something perennial about our vocation to carry the cross. How to thread this needle?
Fr. Herman, thank you for your comment and for the questions that you're raising. You're right, it's difficult to walk away from Scripture and some of the great spiritual writers with a sense of a need to protect my own dignity. I don't know of a specific resources that addresses this concern yet.
Something that does come to mind though is in Pope Francis's change on the teaching about the death penalty, one of the reasons listed for the change is that the Church now has an increasing understanding of human dignity. Also, since Vatican II, there's an increased emphasis on respecting human freedom and the dignity of conscience. So this seems to be an area where the Church is actively growing and developing it's teaching. Which, in my understanding, means that I must read Scripture and the Church Fathers through the more developed framework, keeping what is good and rejecting what diminishes human dignity.
Fr Herman, thank you for this wonderful, sincere sharing and question in response to the interview I had with Paul! What you wrote here is something I had struggled with for almost my entire life as a Catholic, and there are so many different angles from which we can approach the question you ask! I hope you don't mind a long response on my part because I really appreciate what you are asking.
In Paul's response to you, he points to the importance of having the appropriate "hermeneutical key" with which to interpret and understand scripture, the writings of the saints, and even Church teaching. To me, that itself is a really important point. In his Spiritual Abuse Workshop, Paul also shared with us how there is no completely unmediated access to revelation - even scripture, magisterial teaching etc are mediated through the authors' and interpreters' historical and cultural contexts. This does not negate the role of divine grace - yet divine grace does not give anyone an access to Truth in a way that is not still "on the way" as humanity, and the Church, mature in consciousness, wisdom, and love.
Practically, what this means is that a "historically conscious" approach to theological vision and tradition would differ in essence from a "classicist" approach that does not consider that the hermeneutical key we need to apply in understanding scripture etc is even now still being formed, tested, and matured.
From a different angle - that of the interior life of the disciple - I'd consider how without freedom, there can be no love. And if there is not love, then as St. Paul says, no act no matter how praiseworthy - even the giving up of our life - counts as nothing (1 Cor 13: 1-3).
This interior dimension is not usually emphasised enough in the way we seek to understand Jesus' teaching. For example, we know we are meant to take up our cross and follow him, we are meant to love as he loves and to forgive our enemies. But how do we reach a truly authentic understanding and praxis of that? The Church teaches that we are assisted by the Holy Spirit and by graces through the sacraments, but in the full reality of the life of a disciple, much more is involved in that long process of divinisation that also goes beyond the scope of the disciplines of philosophy and theology. I believe the Church herself understands this, which is why over the centuries we see Church teaching evolve together with humanity's evolving consciousness about Truth which is informed by disciplines beyond the sacred sciences!
Jesus had said "No one takes my life from me, but I lay it down on my own accord" (Jn 10:18) There is such great freedom and dignity in that. Jesus was not coerced or manipulated or pressured into laying down his life. If we are to follow him, through entering the relationship he has with the Father, would we not expect that God desires the same freedom and dignity for us?
If my interior freedom has matured (with the aid of divine grace and God's ongoing help) such that I can freely choose to love someone with compassion even to the extent of accepting ill-treatment and abuse from another, then I do not lose my dignity by not drawing boundaries etc. But that would have been freely discerned on my part and freely chosen.
If on the other hand the reason I allow myself to be mistreated and abused is because I believe I need to do so in order to please someone else (even if that is God himself), then I am not choosing it freely. If I allow myself to be treated as less than who God says I am because I am afraid of being rejected by my community, of losing my reputation, of being seen as disobedient, or because I fear punishment, then it is not a true "choice" on my part at all because my action or inaction is a reaction to duress.
Perhaps it takes a long and winding process for us human beings to grow and develop through different stages of faith and human development to be able to integrate our understanding of scripture and Church teaching with the interior freedom and disposition of Christ! And let's not forget how in recent times we are learning so much more about the impact of trauma - historical, cultural, systemic, intergenerational and individual - has on each person's ability to have healthy, life-giving connections with others!
You shared, "It really is not hard to immerse yourself in Scripture and the Fathers and Saints and come away with the belief that if I allow myself to be abused, then I am carrying my cross as a good disciple of Christ." I believe this is a great question and "problem" to bring to God in our prayers because it is this belief - shared by many Catholics - that seems to have really facilitated and enabled so much abuse and cover-up in our Church!
I don’t think I would have been exposed to half the writings of Pope Francis if you hadn’t quoted excerpts from them in your podcasts. This podcast particularly resonated with me! Thanks you!
Thank you, Caral
Please forgive a long comment. I enjoyed this interview. For me as a priest, it was a sobering reminder of how easy it is to use spiritual authority in ways that do not honor the dignity and freedom of those in my care.
I found especially interesting the latter part of the discussion, where justice was presented as a virtue one can exercise towards oneself: as in, not permitting someone else to dishonor my dignity and freedom; not permitting someone else to disregard appropriate boundaries. This has been difficult for me to learn and practice.
It has also been difficult for me to synthesize into a complete theological vision. While I often hear it presented (as here) in terms of a deepened realization of God's unconditional love, of Christ's respect for the inviolable dignity of man, etc., I do often wonder about passages in the New Testament that appear to run counter to this paradigm. "Turn the other cheek." "If they demand you go one mile with them, go two." "If someone steals your cloak, give him your coat as well." 1st Peter: "For what credit is it, if when you do wrong and are beaten for it you take it patiently? But if when you do right and suffer for it you take it patiently, you have God’s approval. For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps." The prayer from St. Ignatius of Loyola quoted here seems to be in the same vein. I can add, from my own monastic background, that the monastic Patristic writings are *full* of this kind of thing. That the monk must "embrace the waters of derision." Monks who submitted to years or decades of abuse from their elders are canonized as saints. St. Acacius who is mentioned in the _Ladder of Divine Ascent_ comes to mind. This same text and others exhort abbots that they must at times test and even publicly humiliate their monks.
It really is not hard to immerse yourself in Scripture and the Fathers and Saints and come away with the belief that if I allow myself to be abused, then I am carrying my cross as a good disciple of Christ.
I mention all this not because I disagree with the fundamental stance of your presentation, but because for a good while I have been in search of a discussion that really faces this quite prominent aspect of the tradition head on and integrates it. Perhaps you can suggest a presentation (from yourself or others) that makes some headway in that direction? Perhaps there is something from the Holy Father?
I think a partial answer must include a recognition that the world as we know it—post-industrial revolution, post-world WWI and WW2, etc.—is very different than in premodern times. Psychologically, humanity seems to be much more delicate and fragile. And hence, there is a necessary element of *enculturation.* And yet, we must also maintain that there is something perennial about the Church's moral and ascetical vision, and certainly something perennial about our vocation to carry the cross. How to thread this needle?
Fr. Herman, thank you for your comment and for the questions that you're raising. You're right, it's difficult to walk away from Scripture and some of the great spiritual writers with a sense of a need to protect my own dignity. I don't know of a specific resources that addresses this concern yet.
Something that does come to mind though is in Pope Francis's change on the teaching about the death penalty, one of the reasons listed for the change is that the Church now has an increasing understanding of human dignity. Also, since Vatican II, there's an increased emphasis on respecting human freedom and the dignity of conscience. So this seems to be an area where the Church is actively growing and developing it's teaching. Which, in my understanding, means that I must read Scripture and the Church Fathers through the more developed framework, keeping what is good and rejecting what diminishes human dignity.
Fr Herman, thank you for this wonderful, sincere sharing and question in response to the interview I had with Paul! What you wrote here is something I had struggled with for almost my entire life as a Catholic, and there are so many different angles from which we can approach the question you ask! I hope you don't mind a long response on my part because I really appreciate what you are asking.
In Paul's response to you, he points to the importance of having the appropriate "hermeneutical key" with which to interpret and understand scripture, the writings of the saints, and even Church teaching. To me, that itself is a really important point. In his Spiritual Abuse Workshop, Paul also shared with us how there is no completely unmediated access to revelation - even scripture, magisterial teaching etc are mediated through the authors' and interpreters' historical and cultural contexts. This does not negate the role of divine grace - yet divine grace does not give anyone an access to Truth in a way that is not still "on the way" as humanity, and the Church, mature in consciousness, wisdom, and love.
Practically, what this means is that a "historically conscious" approach to theological vision and tradition would differ in essence from a "classicist" approach that does not consider that the hermeneutical key we need to apply in understanding scripture etc is even now still being formed, tested, and matured.
From a different angle - that of the interior life of the disciple - I'd consider how without freedom, there can be no love. And if there is not love, then as St. Paul says, no act no matter how praiseworthy - even the giving up of our life - counts as nothing (1 Cor 13: 1-3).
This interior dimension is not usually emphasised enough in the way we seek to understand Jesus' teaching. For example, we know we are meant to take up our cross and follow him, we are meant to love as he loves and to forgive our enemies. But how do we reach a truly authentic understanding and praxis of that? The Church teaches that we are assisted by the Holy Spirit and by graces through the sacraments, but in the full reality of the life of a disciple, much more is involved in that long process of divinisation that also goes beyond the scope of the disciplines of philosophy and theology. I believe the Church herself understands this, which is why over the centuries we see Church teaching evolve together with humanity's evolving consciousness about Truth which is informed by disciplines beyond the sacred sciences!
Jesus had said "No one takes my life from me, but I lay it down on my own accord" (Jn 10:18) There is such great freedom and dignity in that. Jesus was not coerced or manipulated or pressured into laying down his life. If we are to follow him, through entering the relationship he has with the Father, would we not expect that God desires the same freedom and dignity for us?
If my interior freedom has matured (with the aid of divine grace and God's ongoing help) such that I can freely choose to love someone with compassion even to the extent of accepting ill-treatment and abuse from another, then I do not lose my dignity by not drawing boundaries etc. But that would have been freely discerned on my part and freely chosen.
If on the other hand the reason I allow myself to be mistreated and abused is because I believe I need to do so in order to please someone else (even if that is God himself), then I am not choosing it freely. If I allow myself to be treated as less than who God says I am because I am afraid of being rejected by my community, of losing my reputation, of being seen as disobedient, or because I fear punishment, then it is not a true "choice" on my part at all because my action or inaction is a reaction to duress.
Perhaps it takes a long and winding process for us human beings to grow and develop through different stages of faith and human development to be able to integrate our understanding of scripture and Church teaching with the interior freedom and disposition of Christ! And let's not forget how in recent times we are learning so much more about the impact of trauma - historical, cultural, systemic, intergenerational and individual - has on each person's ability to have healthy, life-giving connections with others!
You shared, "It really is not hard to immerse yourself in Scripture and the Fathers and Saints and come away with the belief that if I allow myself to be abused, then I am carrying my cross as a good disciple of Christ." I believe this is a great question and "problem" to bring to God in our prayers because it is this belief - shared by many Catholics - that seems to have really facilitated and enabled so much abuse and cover-up in our Church!
Thank you both for your replies! There is a lot here to chew on and I plan to revisit this next week! Thanks again!