He writes:
Thanks for your tireless and faithful work; your writing’s had a tremendous influence on my thinking as a Christian - -especially your explanations of the problems of consequentialism.
Here’s a question for you, though:
I’m slowly working through some of the Fathers, and I’m on John Cassian’s Conferences. At one point, he suggests using sin against sin; that is, to use one’s pride (at being oh-so-holy in the eyes of others) as a way to keep from giving in to temptations of the flesh: I won’t engage in gluttony or fornication or what-have-you simply because I want to preserve my reputation with the folks around me.
(Here’s a relevant passage, right at the beginning of the link)I’m wondering, though, how to square this with the imperative not to do evil that good might come of it.
I know that the writings of one saint aren’t dogmatic, but Cassian’s seems like good advice to me. (Something similar has worked for me in the past: To avoid being tempted by lustful thoughts, daydreams about Star Trek can do wonders—precisely because Star Trek can be an occasion of sinful idleness for me; it’s captivating. In other words, I’m replacing a more serious sin [since lust is an offense against another person] with a less serious one.) And yet it’s doing something that’s evil so that good might come of it.
I’m not sure how much sense I’m making, but I wanted to try to think through this. Any help would be welcome!
I think the thing to remember with St. John Cassian is that he is here writing as a pastor and shepherd (and, I might add, a very shrewd psychologist) and not as a dogmatic theologian, as you note. He is doing what good spiritual guides do: helping us spiritual weaklings do the best we can with what we have. The key, I think, is in the title: “How to make use of vainglory.” In other words, vainglory is not a sin to be cultivated, but a fact of life to be exploited for good as best we can. There’s a certain whimsy to what he writes, a kind of playfulness. Read it in that spirit. I don’t think it’s consequentialist at all. He’s not urging us to try to be vainglorious. He’s simply noting that since we tend to care about what people think of us (which is the peccadillo of vanity, not the grave sin of pride), we might as well use that energy to steer us away from more serious sin. But of course, the ultimate goal is to be neither vain nor lustful. Vainglory is the wind resistance the soul faces as it takes flight in the Spirit. It slows us down, but if we arch our wings right we can exploit it to fly higher.
Comments
Post a Comment
(To your correspondent) I don’t think you are replacing one sin with another when you distract yourself from the temptation to lust with thoughts of Star Trek. Thinking about Star Trek can’t be a sin (I would think) unless circumstances make it so (e. g. you spend much too long on it, or you purposely daydream about it at Mass instead of thinking about God). In this case circumstances would seem to make it a good and sensible thing to do, if it is effective in counteracting temptation.
baby steps, baby steps…..our path to heaven is made in little babysteps as St. John Cassian recommends
Sorry, but I had to laugh a bit, being a Trekkie myself..
All I could do was think of the Robin Williams’ line about “Think Baseball, baseball!” in a similar (though not identical) context..
“Think Star Trek, Star Trek!!”
What would Kirk think?
Judging from the Captain’s behavior and exploits, Star Trek might not be the best choice.
John
Perhaps Captain Sisko or Captain Archer would be a better choice.
I don’t see how it could possibly be a good idea to use pride against lust. Pride is the deadlier of the two sins; it is the sin of Lucifer.
To Kirt H. : One problem with the word “pride” in the English language (note: my first language is French) is that it can have more than one meaning. In my view, consistently think, and act as if, I was superior to everybody else as a person and treating others that way is part of the meaning of “pride” as a sin (which is called “orgueil” in French). On the other hand, taking pride in having done a good job and feeling good about it might be what the French call “fierté”, which has the same translation in English, but has a totally different meaning. “Fierté” has a lot more to do with self-respect, which is certainly not a sin. For example, if someone is proud of the ability, or gift, to do a good job, or good deeds, in any field, it is probably one of the best motivator to continue on that path. Always boasting about it, however, might be the problem…
I’m using the word pride in the sense the Church uses it in English to mean one of the seven deadly sins. That’s the context since the article refers to fighting sin with sin. If you use it to mean self-respect or satisfaction in a job well done, that would not be a sin at all.
In my view, consistently think, and act as if, I was superior to everybody else as a person and treating others that way is part of the meaning of “pride”? as a sin (which is called “orgueil” in French).
Hmm-m… so… you mean acting a bit like Newt Gingrich? Right? LOL
Vainglory is the wind resistance the soul faces as it takes flight in the Spirit. It slows us down, but if we arch our wings right we can exploit it to fly higher.
Wow, that is a great way to explain the important truth of channeling your negative tendencies to make them work for the good, instead of trying to supress them outright which is often futile.
I think the concept of using “pride” to combat another sin (such as “lust”) is similar to the concept of imperfect contrition, which is sorrow for sin because of fear of the pains of Hell and separation from God. Perfect contrition is sorrow for sin because of love for God, Whom sin offends and Whom we should love above all things.
So avoiding sins because we are “prideful” is good enough, but not the highest good.
Pride is not the same as imperfect contrition and even imperfect contrition for mortal sins isn’t good enough outside of sacramental confession. Pride is saying I don’t commit such-and-such a sin because I’M TOO GOOD to sin. Arrogant reliance on self rather than humble reliance on God’s grace is not pleasing to God. Not for nothing is it said that “pride goes before a fall and a haughty spirit before destruction”. God is his mercy may well permit the prideful sinner to fall into the sin of lust just to show him that it is not his own goodness that will save him and to lead him to true (even if imperfect) contrition.
Of course Catholics don’t lie—they declare that everything they say and do is the will of God, who directly communicates through the Pope. The doctrine of the infailability of the Pope makes everything He says exempt from scrutiny.
The argument about “pride” in the combox seems irrelevant. What is being discussed by both the LW and Cassian is vanity, not pride (though the LW did misname it). Vanity is a desire to be esteemed in the eyes of others while pride does not required that same judgement by others. Vanity is the lesser sin of the two, and that should be kept in mind when considering its use as a combatant against larger sins. There’s no need to make this an argument about something the author’s not even saying.
Perhaps the situation can be likened to the shrewd servant who knows how to use unrighteous mammon?
Try Sloth, the enemy of all the other sins. Once you figure out how much work sin is, you learn to avoid it….
@Marthe Lapine, I think my husband could benefit from a little knowledge of French. I’ve been trying to say something like you said for years to him. Alas, it’s too late. The Stabosz clan eschews the use of the word “pride”. My husband started it years ago, telling the kids, when they did something cool, “I’m so humble of you.” Now I hear my adult kids saying it to their little ones. “You pooped in the potty? Oh Simon, I’m so humble of you!” Kinda cute, but it confuses guests…
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.