I have hypothesized for some time that modern American society is paradoxically permissive yet very unforgiving. The attitude I often witness goes something like this: “do whatever you want, as long you don’t hurt me, but if you cross me, I’ll hold it against you for life.” How can people who are nonchalant about morals and behavior, who are even sheepish to speak of “right and wrong,” be so unforgiving when someone does something wrong to them? I think it is because this approach is centered on the self, not on love (willing and doing what is best for others). If serving the self is at the root of one’s life, then it makes sense that a person will be permissive so long as he isn’t bothered, and then react harshly and in an unforgiving way when someone does dare cross or inconvenience him. What seems paradoxical is actually easily explained: it results from being self-centered. I think we see this a lot in politics (on each side), in that it is wrong to attack someone that you like (or their family), yet very easy to attack those whom you don’t like. Once again, this is not consistent morality, but explained easily when it is considered that this approach springs from a self-centered perspective.
Of course, this “permissive-yet-unforgiving” approach to life is the exact opposite of what Christ taught, because Christ taught true love and service towards others. This means holding ourselves and others to high standards of holiness, yet forgiving others who seek forgiveness when they miss the mark (which we all will). To liken this to a football game, the Christian would say to the running-back, “run your best at all times, and when you get knocked down, get back up and try your best again.” Of course, Christians also believe in a reality called grace, which gives us the strength to continue striving toward holiness as we experience forgiveness in Christ. In the Catholic experience of grace, holiness and forgiveness are intricately connected.
My response to Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is that she made a mistake, but we can hardly blame her parents for a decision their 17-year old made (any parents of teens will tell you that you can only do so much). And if Obama’s daughters did something similar, I would be willing to give them the benefit too. Also, Bristol Palin is bringing the baby to term, and is apparently dealing with her decision in a mature way, when it would have been far easier to consider the child within her an inconvenience and do away with it. It is so strange that some who claim to be so “inclusive” and “tolerant” would feel that attacking a 17-year old and her family is a noble endeavor. Sometimes I think the press forgets that Christians believe in holiness and forgiveness, and that just because John McCain, Sarah Palin, and other conservatives speak out against pre-marital sex, doesn’t mean we believe it doesn’t exist, or that it is unforgivable. Part of this is that the media isn’t willing to educate itself about religion, and part of it is that Christians often forget to emphasize the forgiveness part, while strongly emphasizing right behavior. Nonetheless, classical Christianity emphasizes both high standards and forgiveness, something an increasingly libertine and unforgiving society probably has trouble grasping.
David Bennett
Jennifer
asimplesinner
Fr. J.
Chad Toney
Jorge Flores
Jonathan B
carmelbennett
nicenehobbit
Jason S
jaybird68
papaz
September 2, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Thanks, David, for this important post. Please pray for the Palins.
September 2, 2008 at 2:45 pm
David:
When I read about Bristol Palin’s pregnancy, I thought her mother’s reaction was just one more proof that Sarah Palin is a woman who is accustomed to dealing with life as it really is.
How it really is — I have always viewed premarital and extramarital sex as sinful. This was true during my lifetime as a Jehovah’s Witness, my decade or so as an agnostic, and now as a devout practicing Catholic. I lived this view. So did my husband of 34 years. I taught my children (three daughters) all the reasons why sex belonged in marriage and nowhere else, and they all totally ignored me.
I have six beautiful grandchildren and only one of them was born within a marriage. I love them all; I presently have been entrusted with the care of one of them for an indefinite time.
I can attest that teenagers and young adults will follow their own standards without regard to what their parents teach them. Would my daughters have done better if I had raised them Catholic? Perhaps. But young couples have been reversing the marriage–baby order for as long as there have been young couples.
Sarah and her daughter and future grandchild and the expectant father are all in my prayers. It would be nice if a society that claims to pride itself on “to each its own” would leave the new little family in peace — but that is probably too much to ask for.
I come from a religious background where wrongdoing and wrongdoers were treated very harshly and the picture was presented of a “clean congregation” — a picture that was far from accurate. The Church is a hospital for sinners, not a country club for saints.
One of the aspects of Catholicism that I love the best is this: Here comes everybody!! The true Church is not comprised of perfect people, it is a body of forgiven people.
Watch out world, Sarah Palin gives evidence of knowing how to handle a crisis.
Pax,
Nana Ruth Ann
September 2, 2008 at 4:09 pm
…”My response to Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is that she made a mistake, but we can hardly blame her parents for a decision their 17-year old made (any parents of teens will tell you that you can only do so much”
Very well put. You took the words out of my mouth.
Using an old axiom, …you can lead a horse to water, but can’t make them drink.
Bristol Palin is a sentient being, and exercised her free will, which was contrary to the example (both professed AND lived) by her Mom.
Outlets like Daily Kos are having a field day with this, as if they “got” her.
September 2, 2008 at 7:18 pm
[...] at work in the lives of Christians and others. For example, we read about Bristol Palin who is pregnant at 17. Likewise, a well known Australian evangelical minister lied about having terminal cancer in order [...]
September 3, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Hey, only two of our four children were born in wedlock (Well, our second child was born a month after the wedding. Does that count?)
I’m not saying we should encourage this sort of thing, but it is laughable that people are shocked by it, becuase it really is pretty commonplace and always has been. Do they really think all those medieval peasants in remote villages were waiting for monthly or biannual priest’s visits to get married? Nope. People shacked up and the priest came when he could and sanctified (consecrated, validated, what have you) the already existing marriage.
We break things and God fixes them.
But, lest we get lax and let it all go, we should also remind ourselves that it isn’t as hard as it was 1,000 years ago, and we should be striving to do better than our ancestors, not the same.
Still, it’s just unfortunate that this all has to be in public. What if the boy leaves her? Two weeks ago, he would have been just some dumb kid who screwed up. Now, he will be Satan-himself if he does that. And Bristol? She would have been just another kid (among millions) who made a mistake. Now she is everything from the Virgin Mary to a cheap trollop, depending on who you talk to.
I wouldn’t enjoy the exposure.