We are the Author of Our Sins

An adage that irks me is, “Hate the sin; Love the sinner”. The clear implication is that the sin is distinct from the sinner, which encourages people to “view the sinner as a victim of his sin, rather than the author of the sin he commits”. (“Hate the Sin but Love the Sinner': Not Scriptural, Not Catholic Doctrine” by Erven Park , New Oxford Review, June 2006) This is a dangerous concept with eternal repercussions.

Separating the sin from the sinner implies that the offender is not damaged by his wrongful action. For ex., the man who slanders another needs to worry only about how the victim is hurt by his act—as if he himself is not adversely affected by it.

Quite the contrary, it is only by recognizing the sinner as the source of his sin that we can understand Canon Ripley’s warning that “sin is disastrous for both the soul and the body.” (This is the Faith, p 57) And as the catechism explains it, sin is like a snowball rolling down a hill, gathering speed and size as it travels:

“Sin creates a proclivity to sin; it engenders vice by repetition of the same acts. This results in perverse inclinations which cloud conscience and corrupt the concrete judgment of good and evil. Thus sin tends to reproduce itself and reinforce itself, but it cannot destroy the moral sense at its root.” (The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1865)

Only through penance (reconciliation) can the marred soul be healed. “Those who approach the sacrament of Penance obtain pardon from God's mercy for the offense committed against him, and are, at the same time, reconciled with the Church which they have wounded by their sins and which by charity, by example, and by prayer labors for their conversion." (Catechism, 1422)

How can we ask for pardon if we don’t recognize ourselves as authors of our sin?

The biblical account of the stoning of an adulterer offers testimony to the importance of recognizing sinners as the source of their sin. An angry mob is on the verge of stoning an adulterer when Christ instructs, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” (John 8:7) Shamed, the angry mob disperses. Christ informs the woman that since nobody remains to condemn her, then neither will he. But he adds these departing words:

“Go, and now sin no more.” (John 8:11)

Christ’s warning is clear. He is telling the woman, “You may go, but do not assume that my words to the crowd were approval of your actions. You have sinned and are responsible for it. Do not offend my Father again.”

If hating the sin were enough, there would have been no need for this final warning.

Donald Tremblay

The Scattering of the Flock

After His Crucifixion our Lord appeared to His disciples on several occasions. One of these instances was on the Sea of Tiberias . Several of His disciples were unsuccessfully fishing until He instructed them to cast the net on the right side of the ship. It was then that they recognized Him. According to John’s Gospel there were seven in the group: “There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas, who is called Didymus, and Nathanael, who was of Cana of Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples” (John 21:2). As they sat around the fire eating the fish they’d caught, the Lord charged Peter to “Feed my lambs” (twice) and “Feed my sheep”. Six other disciples sat with Peter, but only Peter was given these instructions. Why?

“Thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” (Matthew 16:18-19)

Through these words Jesus announces to all that Peter would lead the faithful after His death. As stated by the Catechism of Catholic Church, “Simon Peter holds the first place in the college of the Twelve; Jesus entrusted a unique mission to him. . . . His mission will be to keep this faith from every lapse and to strengthen his brothers in it.” (Catechism, 552) The catechism also teaches that “the power to ‘bind and loose’ connotes the authority to absolve sins, to pronounce doctrinal judgments, and to make disciplinary decisions in the Church” (Catechism 553). Thus, Peter becomes the first Bishop of Rome, the first Pope.

Why is this important today?

Today, The Telegraph, a daily newspaper in London , reports that “ Hardline Church leaders have formally declared the end of the worldwide Anglican Communion, saying they can no longer be associated with liberals who tolerate homosexual clergy. The traditionalists dealt a serious blow to Dr Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, by claiming that he can no longer hold the Church together.” (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2153935/Hardline-archbishops-declare-Anglican-split.html)

The Archbishop of Canterbury does not hold the authority of the Pope. There is no central authority in the Episcopal Church, meaning there is nothing to stop rogue dioceses or movements from scattering the flock. Decisions are made jointly by bishops. Painfully, Archbishop Williams is learning that democracy may be great for governments, but not for religions. The “buck” needs to stop with someone. What is doctrine if there is nobody to enforce it? I am reminded of an adage I learned from one of my college professors: “Never accept ‘No’ from someone who can’t say ‘Yes’.” The liberals in the Episcopal Church have clearly learned this. Archbishop Williams is in no more of a position to strike down their changes than he is to install them as doctrine.

Once again the Holy Spirit-inspired wisdom of the Roman Catholic Church makes itself apparent.

Donald Tremblay