Eh. Confused, Unsure, Etc.

[Spem in alium]

A couple of days ago I saw this conversation on Facebook by two members of the university association I'm a part of:

 

S: And M please when have you ever cared about Catholic ethos :)

M: S, since I decided that I like to exert control over people.

S: Haha M that would fit with not only Catholic ethos but Catholic method as well haha

 

Would you find this kind of thing offensive? I wasn't offended per se, but didn't think it was in good taste at all seeing as M is the president of the association at a Catholic uni. 

 

The worse part is that my friend (who was originally elected as president, got booted out due to poor grades and has a couple of hang-ups) found out about the comments and wants me to send him the details of the conversation so that he may be able to use it against M. I have reservations against this, but really don't know how I should be handling the situation. 

 

Any advice would be helpful. Above all, I want to defend my faith and morals in the best way possible.

 

 

 

 

[Gabriela]

That's tough. I think it's inappropriate. I wouldn't be personally offended, because to me it's just another case of an individual who's been brainwashed by the media with negative stereotypes about Catholics. Of course, the whole exchange could be ironic. But you seem to think not, and you know the context better.

 

As for whether I'd turn it over to the friend who wants to use the exchange against M: That's the harder part. Doing that might lead to nasty, prideful conflict, which would be a sin, no? But doing it might also lead to better, more respectful leadership of a Catholic organization, which would be good, right? Obviously I'm thinking in consequentalist terms here, cuz I don't know how else to think about this.

 

But then there is the consideration that the Facebook conversation, while technically "public", was not public to the person requesting you pass on the exchange. And that being the case, passing it on would be like gossip, or possibly even detraction, no? The fact that it was public to some doesn't mean you should go spreading it about. The fact that it was online doesn't mean it isn't still a legitimate object of gossip/detraction.

 

Know what I mean?

 

I dunno... I don't envy you your position, spem... :-(

Edited May 4, 2013 by curiousing

[Spem in alium]

Thanks for your reply. It definitely wasn't ironic, as far I could tell. It was in relation to a party a uni society was having and which others were claiming was inappropriate.

 

My friend told me he is planning to speak to the university's head about it, as he will apparently "bite the head off" anyone who has a go at Catholicism. I do think my friend is far too preoccupied with how the association is going. Every time we talk, he talks about the president. I think he's trying to make the president look bad in order to validate himself a bit more. He does say fairly rude things about him, which I don't buy into. I don't mind the president as a person, but his administration in my opinion has been fairly dreadful. 

 

The conversation was on the association's secret group, so my friend couldn't see it. I'm really unsure what to do as I don't want to fall into sin through this. If I talk to my friend and tell the truth about how I feel, things may become strained between us, but honestly I would rather that than act any more wrong than I already have and end up feeling as though I'm in moral crisis.

 

 

 

 

But then there is the consideration that the Facebook conversation, while technically "public", was not public to the person requesting you pass on the exchange. And that being the case, passing it on would be like gossip, or possibly even detraction, no? The fact that it was public to some doesn't mean you should go spreading it about. The fact that it was online doesn't mean it isn't still a legitimate object of gossip/detraction.

 

Know what I mean?

 

I dunno... I don't envy you your position, spem... :-(

 

[beatitude]

Spem, I would not pass on the details of the conversation to your friend. It doesn't sound like it's his place to handle it, and it also doesn't sound like he'd handle it well.

 

He was made to leave the position of president because of poor grades, and from what you say it seems as though he is a bit fixated on that - 'preoccupied with how the association is going', as you put it - and possibly carrying a grudge towards the current president. Because of this, I don't think he is the right person for you to talk over your concerns about the new president's administration skills - it will just feed into his resentment and hurt at no longer having the position. Why don't you go to the president directly and say you were a bit concerned about the tone of the comments in the Facebook group, and ask if it was meant to be ironic? That seems to be far the simplest way to deal with things, rather than involving extra people (especially people who perhaps aren't able to be very impartial).

 

To me the whole thing sounds like it's probably a joke. The other night a Jewish friend made some humorous comment about me as a Catholic burning Jews at the stake. I replied, "To be fair, that was only the one time. Because it was cold. And I had run out of Protestants." Other people listening might have thought these were really nasty jokes for us to be telling, but we both know each other well and we didn't mean any harm by it. It might be a similar thing here, and as it was in a secret group anyway, I don't think it's terribly serious - it's not as if a potential new visitor to your association would look at it and get put off. But voice your concerns directly to the president if you think it's warranted.

[cappie]

As to sharing the "confidential group" discussion to a third party simple: detraction is "Revealing something about another that is true but harmful to that person's reputation."

 

Detraction is one of a number of related sins that the Catechism of the Catholic Church classifies as "offenses against truth." When speaking of most of the other sins, such as bearing false witness, perjury, calumny, boasting, and lying, it is easy to see how they offend against the truth: They all involve saying something that you either know to be untrue or believe to be untrue.

 

Detraction, however, is a special case. As the definition indicates, in order to be guilty of detraction, you have to say something that you either know to be true or believe to be true. How, then, can detraction be an "offense against the truth"?

 

The answer lies in the likely effects of detraction. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church notes (para. 2477), "Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury." A person is guilty of detraction if he, "without objectively valid reason, discloses another's faults and failings to persons who did not know them."

 

 

[CatholicsAreKewl]

A couple of days ago I saw this conversation on Facebook by two members of the university association I'm a part of:

 

S: And M please when have you ever cared about Catholic ethos :)

M: S, since I decided that I like to exert control over people.

S: Haha M that would fit with not only Catholic ethos but Catholic method as well haha

 

Would you find this kind of thing offensive? I wasn't offended per se, but didn't think it was in good taste at all seeing as M is the president of the association at a Catholic uni. 

 

The worse part is that my friend (who was originally elected as president, got booted out due to poor grades and has a couple of hang-ups) found out about the comments and wants me to send him the details of the conversation so that he may be able to use it against M. I have reservations against this, but really don't know how I should be handling the situation. 

 

Any advice would be helpful. Above all, I want to defend my faith and morals in the best way possible.

I highly doubt someone would say his main motivation is power on a public forum and mean it. I'm sorry to say this but, from how I interpreted this story, it seems like your friend might be in the wrong. Tell him you don't want to get involved. If he doesn't respect that, he's not a good friend. 

[CatholicsAreKewl]

On the bright side, you could always invite them both over to chat it out over tim tams!

I'd like to meet the man who first thought of dipping these in hot tea.

[4588686]

I'm surprised.  I had expected this thread to be about Ardil's sexuality.

 

 

BAM!

[Spem in alium]

Thanks everyone.

beatitude, I do agree. He rang me last night and asked me to pass on the details, and asked me what I thought about him wanting to use it against M. I told him I would look at the conversation (mainly because I couldn't exactly remember what was said) and that I felt it would have negative consequences. His response was something like, "Yeah, for M..." He also stressed the point that he would never reveal that I was the one who gave him the information. I don't care about that so much as I do about acting right. I don't want to betray anyone or make anyone feel as though they've been betrayed. He is very fixated on not being president - every time we talk, he mentions the association. I tell him the truth, that things aren't going the best, but I don't really like talking about it much with him. Though I saw the conversation a couple of days ago, it actually happened a few weeks ago, so I'm not sure that he would remember. It could be a joke, but it didn't seem it to me. I don't know, maybe I'm reading too much into it.

cappie, thank you. I have already spoken to my friend about the issue (except for telling him what was actually said). I don't see how I can tell my friend what was said without him attacking M, because that's what he's told me he wants to use the information for. What seems best at the moment is telling my friend that I can't do it or that the conversation wasn't as serious as I thought.

 

CAK, thanks for that. I am a bit tired of his obsession with the association and this hang-up he seems to have about M. He speaks very unkindly about M. Though from what he's told me, M hasn't been particularly nice to him. I'm not sure if all that he tells me is true, so I try to take most of what he says with a pinch of salt.

 

On the bright side, you could always invite them both over to chat it out over tim tams!

I'd like to meet the man who first thought of dipping these in hot tea.

 

Now, I like this idea. In normal circumstances, they may end up killing each other if they're put in the same room together. But with Tim Tams, I doubt it :P

 

I'm surprised.  I had expected this thread to be about Ardil's sexuality.

 

 

BAM!

 

I'm getting to that :P

[Spem in alium]

I just sent my friend a message telling him that I can't send the information out. I asked him to respect me. If he can't deal with that, I know where his priorities lie. I feel a lot more relieved now - just need to wait for a response.

Thanks, everyone. You've been such a great help :)

[CatholicsAreKewl]

I just sent my friend a message telling him that I can't send the information out. I asked him to respect me. If he can't deal with that, I know where his priorities lie. I feel a lot more relieved now - just need to wait for a response.

Thanks, everyone. You've been such a great help :)

That took a considerable amount of courage. Kudos!

[Spem in alium]

That took a considerable amount of courage. Kudos!

Thank you. Though I definitely could do with one of these right now:

 

Who am I kidding? Give me a whole packet of these things! :P

[CatholicsAreKewl]

Thank you. Though I definitely could do with one of these right now:

 

Who am I kidding? Give me a whole packet of these things! :P

Me too! I don't understand why they haven't caught on in America. 

[Spem in alium]

Me too! I don't understand why they haven't caught on in America. 

 

You and me both!

[Spem in alium]

My friend replied.   :sweat:

 

He apologised profusely and said he hadn't meant to challenge my integrity and that he should have stuck with his original intuitive instincts. He sounded fairly genuine. Hopefully that's the last of this issue.