Defending One's Reputation

[MarysLittleFlower]

I'm just trying to understand the Church teaching... Let's say hypothetically that your reputation has been damaged. I believe everyone has the right to a good reputation and if someone's good name has been damaged, I'd want to help restore it.

However... Is it permissible, for oneself only, to simply accept this as a trial and not try to fix your own reputation? I mean only if it happens to you not someone else.

I'm thinking of the movie about St John Bosco from Ignatius press, and ***spoiler*** in the end, he is accused of something he didn't do, but he apologizes anyway and then later his reputation is cleared through some investigation. I always really admired his humility there.. I know that's really hard to do. If its another persons reputation I would always want to try and clear it - but are we obligated to do this about ourselves? Could it be a special act of humility and suffering with Christ, who was also accused though He is innocent?

Thank you!

[Nihil Obstat]

Yes, absolutely. Many saints did not defend their own reputations out of humility.

Padre Pio is the one who comes to mind first of all.

[Seven77]

Sometimes it is necessary to defend one's reputation so as not to give scandal. And it could be a matter of justice to do so.

[PhuturePriest]

Yes, absolutely. Many saints did not defend their own reputations out of humility.

Padre Pio is the one who comes to mind first of all.

 

Saint Padre Pio's humility throughout his many accusations are very noteworthy. I know of no other Saint who was accused of so many things and given so many restrictions because of them, and he took them all with grace and humility. I definitely treasure that I chose him as my Confirmation Saint.

[superblue]

I'm just trying to understand the Church teaching... Let's say hypothetically that your reputation has been damaged. I believe everyone has the right to a good reputation and if someone's good name has been damaged, I'd want to help restore it.

However... Is it permissible, for oneself only, to simply accept this as a trial and not try to fix your own reputation? I mean only if it happens to you not someone else.

I'm thinking of the movie about St John Bosco from Ignatius press, and ***spoiler*** in the end, he is accused of something he didn't do, but he apologizes anyway and then later his reputation is cleared through some investigation. I always really admired his humility there.. I know that's really hard to do. If its another persons reputation I would always want to try and clear it - but are we obligated to do this about ourselves? Could it be a special act of humility and suffering with Christ, who was also accused though He is innocent?

Thank you!

 I am not familiar with St. John Bosco at all, my question is the bolded part;

 

Why did he apologize ?

[PhuturePriest]

 I am not familiar with St. John Bosco at all, my question is the bolded part;

 

Why did he apologize ?

 

Humility. He apologized for something he didn't do out of humility, rather than becoming indignant and trying to set the record straight out of pride.

[superblue]

Humility. He apologized for something he didn't do out of humility, rather than becoming indignant and trying to set the record straight out of pride.

 

 

clearing ones name, wouldn't be a form a pride, I mean if the answer was it was a sarcastic apology to hopefully get people to quiet down that might make sense, but still. An if he wanted to avoid showing rightful indignation why not just ignore the rumors an let it be.

 

 

I was hoping for some factual information not speculation.

[PhuturePriest]

clearing ones name, wouldn't be a form a pride, I mean if the answer was it was a sarcastic apology to hopefully get people to quiet down that might make sense, but still. An if he wanted to avoid showing rightful indignation why not just ignore the rumors an let it be.

 

 

I was hoping for some factual information not speculation.

 

That is factual information. He didn't do it out of humility, as have many, many Saints who were accused of doing something they didn't do.

[Nihil Obstat]

Saint Padre Pio's humility throughout his many accusations are very noteworthy. I know of no other Saint who was accused of so many things and given so many restrictions because of them, and he took them all with grace and humility. I definitely treasure that I chose him as my Confirmation Saint.

Joan of Arc would be another excellent example. Accused of heresy and witchcraft, burned to death by the very people charged with safeguarding her soul.

She did defend herself, of course, by the direct prompting and inspiration of God Himself. But her defense was not for herself, but for God and at His instruction.

I guess bishops even in her day were sometimes not all that concerned with asking what God wanted. :P

[PhuturePriest]

Joan of Arc would be another excellent example. Accused of heresy and witchcraft, burned to death by the very people charged with safeguarding her soul.

She did defend herself, of course, by the direct prompting and inspiration of God Himself. But her defense was not for herself, but for God and at His instruction.

I guess bishops even in her day were sometimes not all that concerned with asking what God wanted. :P

 

Sort of reminds you that we shouldn't always be so quick to be up in arms when people wrongly accuse us of something. I heard recently that Saint Joseph is the perfect example of holy and prudent silence, because he is never recorded saying anything in the Gospels.

[superblue]

clearing ones name, wouldn't be a form a pride, I mean if the answer was it was a sarcastic apology to hopefully get people to quiet down that might make sense, but still. An if he wanted to avoid showing rightful indignation why not just ignore the rumors an let it be.

 

 

I was hoping for some factual information not speculation.

 

 

 K well you have me confused on the humility part now considering you brought it up, 

 

now to be clear I am just trying to make sense of things, and Nhil posted a good response in regards to St.Joan of Arc,

 

 

but, with things as we see today, court trials and the like, a lawyer would not advise a client who is innocent of a crime or at least is considered innocent until proven guilty to just go an give an apology to ones accusers.

 

it doesn't follow logic to apologize for something someone didn't do. someone I don't know can come up and accuse me of something and demand I apologize, I am not going to apologize.

 

but anyhow, if there is an article that is easily accessible on St. Bosco if anyone knows of one off hand, i'll probably just look it up later.

 

anyhow

[beatitude]

This is up to your good judgment. There is no page in the catechism that goes, "Here is exactly what to do if Fred Bloggs says something defamatory about you." Sometimes quietly accepting unfair criticism is the right and loving thing to do. In other cases, it isn't, and you need to protect your reputation, but not vindictively.

 

An example from my own life: several years ago an eminent specialist in my field stole my idea for a book. As she's Professor Expert and I'm not, she was able to publish before me - she already had a publisher lined up for her books and as she's written so many things they trust the quality of her writing and expedite the publication process for her in a way that they don't for new authors. As a new writer, I had to work from the beginning (finding a suitable publisher, negotiating with them, etc.) and my book came out a year after hers. Now, she hasn't done anything illegal; I mentioned my idea to her in a series of emails and she ran with it (cutting off contact in the process). It was a pretty low-down thing to do, but not something she could be sued for. Anyway, last year, on a Facebook discussion group, I saw someone mentioning my book in a critical light. They said that they thought I must have copied my idea from Professor Expert, as my book came out so soon after hers and it deals with the same themes.

 

I was in a dilemma. Part of me was a bit hurt, because I put my blood, sweat, and tears into that book and it's unpleasant to be accused of copying. I have got the emails from Prof. Expert that contain proof positive that she had no idea of writing such a book until I told her I was working on it. Part of me wanted to step in and share those details. In the end I didn't. I reasoned that the opinion of one or two readers on Facebook isn't going to hurt me, and it's not worth exposing Prof. Expert for that. Expert has subsequently avoided me at conferences and events, so I think she feels a bit shame-faced and I don't want to rub her nose in it. So I decided to let this criticism slide and say nothing. I think this was the right thing to do in the circumstance. If, however, a publisher was refusing to publish my future work because they believed I'd copied from Prof. Expert, then I would disclose to them in confidence what happened. As Christians we should be forgiving, and not act in a vindictive way, but that doesn't mean lying down and being a doormat - justice is important too.

[Norseman82]

Humility. He apologized for something he didn't do out of humility, rather than becoming indignant and trying to set the record straight out of pride.

 

I fail to see how that is humility.  If anything, it is a failure against the truth, unless there is a strategy of "lying low" until one has enough evidence to convict the perpetrator (like an undercover cop sometimes has to do).   

 

Besides, if you are falsely accused by someone, there is a chance you are not the only one, so you have a duty to the other victims to see that the perpetrator is stopped from doing it again. Or, it can serve as a deterrent to others. 

 

Another thing to consider is that the consequences of the false accusation may become an occasion of sin.  An example:  suppose you were falsely accused and sent to prison, or otherwise it goes on your record.  Suppose then you were unable to find a job and that affected your ability to attract a spouse.  That could lead to anger and frustration and/or it could lead to someone engaging in immoral sexual behavior because the doors to marriage were closed to him, since he discerned he could not handle lifelong celibacy.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Norseman82