Pints With Aquinas - 168: Backbiting, Slander, and Calumny

Episode Date: August 27, 2019

Today we're going to talk with Aquinas about backbiting, slander, and calumny. --- We're reading from the Secunda Secundae, Q. 73. A. 1;4. On the contrary, It is written (Ecclesiastes 10:11): "If a serpent bite in silence, he is nothing better that backbiteth." I answer that, Just as one man injures another by deed in two ways—openly, as by robbery or by doing him any kind of violence—and secretly, as by theft, or by a crafty blow, so again one man injures another by words in two ways—in one way, openly, and this is done by reviling him, as stated above (II-II:72:1)—and in another way secretly, and this is done by backbiting. Now from the fact that one man openly utters words against another man, he would appear to think little of him, so that for this reason he dishonors him, so that reviling is detrimental to the honor of the person reviled. On the other hand, he that speaks against another secretly, seems to respect rather than slight him, so that he injures directly, not his honor but his good name, in so far as by uttering such words secretly, he, for his own part, causes his hearers to have a bad opinion of the person against whom he speaks. For the backbiter apparently intends and aims at being believed. It is therefore evident that backbiting differs from reviling in two points: first, in the way in which the words are uttered, the reviler speaking openly against someone, and the backbiter secretly; secondly, as to the end in view, i.e. as regards the injury inflicted, the reviler injuring a man's honor, the backbiter injuring his good name. --- On the contrary, Jerome says (Ep. ad Nepot. lii): "Take care not to have an itching tongue, nor tingling ears, that is, neither detract others nor listen to backbiters." I answer that, According to the Apostle (Romans 1:32), they "are worthy of death . . . not only they that" commit sins, "but they also that consent to them that do them." Now this happens in two ways. First, directly, when, to wit, one man induces another to sin, or when the sin is pleasing to him: secondly, indirectly, that is, if he does not withstand him when he might do so, and this happens sometimes, not because the sin is pleasing to him, but on account of some human fear. Accordingly we must say that if a man list ens to backbiting without resisting it, he seems to consent to the backbiter, so that he becomes a participator in his sin. And if he induces him to backbite, or at least if the detraction be pleasing to him on account of his hatred of the person detracted, he sins no less than the detractor, and sometimes more. Wherefore Bernard says (De Consid. ii, 13): "It is difficult to say which is the more to be condemned the backbiter or he that listens to backbiting." If however the sin is not pleasing to him, and he fails to withstand the backbiter, through fear negligence, or even shame, he sins indeed, but much less than the backbiter, and, as a rule venially. Sometimes too this may be a mortal sin, either because it is his official duty to cor. rect the backbiter, or by reason of some consequent danger; or on account of the radical reason for which human fear may sometimes be a mortal sin, as stated above (II-II:19:3). SPONSORS EL Investments: https://www.elinvestments.net/pints Exodus 90: https://exodus90.com/mattfradd/  Hallow: http://hallow.app/mattfradd  STRIVE: https://www.strive21.com/  GIVING Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mattfradd This show (and all the plans we have in store) wouldn't be possible without you. I can't thank those of you who support me enough. Seriously! Thanks for essentially being a co-producer coproducer of the show. LINKS Website: https://pintswithaquinas.com/ Merch: https://teespring.com/stores/matt-fradd FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: https://www.strive21.com/ SOCIAL Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mattfradd Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattfradd Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mattfradd MY BOOKS  Does God Exist: https://www.amazon.com/Does-God-Exist-Socratic-Dialogue-ebook/dp/B081ZGYJW3/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586377974&sr=8-9 Marian Consecration With Aquinas: https://www.amazon.com/Marian-Consecration-Aquinas-Growing-Closer-ebook/dp/B083XRQMTF/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586379026&sr=8-4 The Porn Myth: https://www.ignatius.com/The-Porn-Myth-P1985.aspx CONTACT Book me to speak: https://www.mattfradd.com/speakerrequestform

What's up everybody, welcome to Pints with Aquinas. Today we are going to chat with Thomas Aquinas about detraction, calumny, backbiting, all those sorts of things that if I'm not mistaken, we don't often give a great deal of thought to. Welcome back to Pints with Aquinas. This is the show where you and I pull up a barstool next to the angelic doctor to discuss theology and philosophy. I hope you enjoyed the last three weeks here at Pints with Aquinas. We just did a three-part series on happiness with Father Ryan Mann. series on happiness with Father Ryan Mann. I got a lot of terrific feedback from y'all, either on social media or some of you texted me because you know my number. And it was really cool to see. So I hope it was a help to you in your walk with the Lord. I want to let you know

what's coming up these next four weeks because I'm pretty excited about it. Today, as I already said, we're going to be talking about backbiting, calumny, these sorts of things. And we'll get into that in a moment. But then next week in the week after, I'm going to be talking with Father Gregory Pine about the emotions. Aquinas has a lot to say about the emotions or the passions, and it's really fascinating stuff. So next week, we're going to do a whole overview of the passions. It gets a little complicated, so we've put together a chart and some things for you. And then the week after, we'll delve into the Sumer, see exactly what Aquinas has to say. The week after that, I'm going to be chatting with Emily Sullivan. I haven't recorded the episode yet, but it's going to be

soon, on the marital debt. And no, I'm not talking about finances. I'm talking about the marital act that one spouse, all things being equal, has an obligation to give to the other, to pay to the other. Now, I know that this is a very sensitive topic. And so this is why I have Emily Sullivan coming. Oh, Sullivan's not her last name anymore. Barry, that's right. I knew her before she was married. We've had her on the show before to discuss modesty. Basically, my rule of thumb now is if I'm ever going to do an episode that's going to get everyone infuriated with me, especially if it has to do with women, from this point on, I'm just going to interview a woman about it. And hopefully that'll help.

Okay, so that's exciting. Really excited about that. And then finally, before we get into today's show, I want to let you know that in the fall, autumn as we call it in Australia, you call it fall, we are running a book study on Flannery O'Connor. It will be led by Father Damien Ference, who is an expert in Flannery O'Connor. He's currently writing his PhD dissertation right now on the philosophical underpinnings of the art of Flannery O'Connor. Flannery O'Connor loved Thomas Aquinas. Father Damien Ference loves Thomas Aquinas. So it's going to be a really cool synthesis.

It's going to be a five-part video series. He's going to give us an outline to read from. He's going to be commenting with us in the comments section. This course is available just for patrons. So if you're not yet a patron and you want to be, or if you've been wanting to be for a while, go to patreon.com slash mattfradd, patreon.com slash mattfradd. And this is going to be something we're all going to go through together, myself included. I'm actually really excited about it because I love Flannery O'Connor and I'm excited to delve in. So that'll be good.

All right. Let me tell you what we're going to do today. First, we're going to define some terms. What do we mean by backbiting, slander, calumny, detraction? I want to look at what the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say about these things. I want to look at what Holy Scripture has to say on these things. Then I want to read from Thomas Aquinas, see what he has to say directly about backbiting. This comes from the second part of the second part, question 73, if you're interested in following along. And then after

we've done all of that, I want to take some questions from my patrons. And I think you're going to agree that the questions are a little, what do you say? Very interesting. Very interesting. And yeah, let's just leave it at that. You'll see what I mean when the time comes. All right, let's begin by defining terms. So what do we mean by backbiting? Because this is directly what Aquinas talks about, backbiting. It's a funny word, backbiting. It's funny for a couple of reasons that I can think of. One, when I wrestle Peter, my son on the bed, he bites. He's vicious. And, you know, it's always awesome wrestling with your sons, I think, you know, because you're training them to use their strength appropriately.

So I say, no, you cannot bite. You cannot gouge my eyeballs. I love that you have to tell kids this. You cannot pull my hair you cannot scratch you know can i punch you yes you can punch me you know so we're jumping around the bed and fighting yesterday we were wrestling and he has this new thing i don't know where he got it he said he was standing up and i was laying down and he said one two three and then he jumps as high in the air as he can like pretty much on my face like onto my face and he says footprints so that's his new thing um but sometimes he'll bite me and uh i've got to say don't do that and sometimes he'll bite me on the back and that's not okay the other reason it's

funny is i guess backbiting is actually a massage technique if you i wouldn't necessarily recommend this who knows what you'd find but if you go online and find backbiting massages, masseuses, masseuses, I'm not sure what the plural is. But yeah, you can actually pay somebody to actually bite your back up and down. So that's a bit weird. But when we're talking about backbiting, we're talking about malicious talk about someone who is not present. So if somebody bites you on the back, they are attacking you from behind. And the reason we use the term backbiting is this is when you say bad things about somebody who isn't present. Now, what's the difference between calumny and detraction? Calumny and detraction. So first, let's start with detraction. This is what the Catholic Encyclopedia says.

Detraction is the unjust damaging of another's good name by the revelation of some fault or crime of which that other is really guilty or at any rate is seriously believed to be guilty by the defamer. Now, how does that differ from calumny? Well, the calumniator, the person engaged in calumny, doesn't say what he knows to be true or believes to be true. Rather, he says what he knows to be false in order to damage another person's good name. So, whereas detraction, you're saying something bad about somebody else that you believe to be true. Calumny is when you're saying something bad about somebody else that you know isn't true, or at least you believe isn't true. So those are some definitions there. Let's see what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says.

there. Let's see what the catechism of the Catholic church says. This begins here in around 2477. So like we have a right to a good reputation and that's why things like backbiting, calumny, sins, right? The catechism says that respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. So, it says of detraction, right? Someone is guilty of detraction who without objectively valid reason discloses another's faults or failings to persons who did not know them, right? Calumny, on the other hand, someone is guilty of calumny who by remarks contrary to the truth harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them. So there are times when speaking badly about another person is necessary, right? If my daughter runs up from the basement and says, you know, that Liam said

something negative or that Peter hit her or, you know, these are my sons, by the way, Peter and Liam, or, you know, I have a right to know these things as their father. And so even though it causes me to have a negative, if you want, kind of opinion of this particular child, at least in that particular time and place, I have a right to know that. And likewise, if I go to the police and I report that something has happened, that someone has done something, yeah, I'm not being guilty of that sin either because that person has a right to know it. But when it comes to backbiting, calumny, these sorts of things, the reason they're sins is because the person doesn't have a right to know this information. All right. So let me just pause here and say something. I suspect that this is going to offend some of us. And I kind of hope that it

does. Not because I want to offend us, but because I think sometimes we need to be kind of shaken out of our lethargy and forced to see some of these sins that you and I are engaged in that we don't often think about. Honestly, the reason I'm doing a whole episode on backbiting is because I was guilty of detraction a couple of weeks ago, maybe a month ago now. I called a friend of mine and I started saying negative things about somebody else that this person had no right to know. And it was kind of like, I don't know, why did I do it? I think I did it because, I don't know, we like people to find us interesting. We like to be the person in the know. And so by sharing these faults with this person, I was both in the know and interesting to this

person. I don't know if at the time I thought I'm detracting. I was just like, hey, this is crazy, like about this person. And I started sharing. It was only after that I realized this is clearly the sin of detraction and I need to repent of it. So in regards to how this could offend us, and I need to repent of it. So in regards to how this could offend us, I think that we as Orthodox Christians, I presume that most people who listen to this podcast are practicing Christians who wish themselves to be Orthodox or see themselves as such. I know we have atheists who listen and even Muslims who listen and you're very welcome and maybe you can apply this to yourself. But at least for people like us who try to be orthodox, right, try to be faithful Christians, I think sometimes we have a litmus test for what constitutes a faithful Christian. So, in the day and age that we live,

many Christians are rejecting certain Christian teachings, such as the existence of hell or certain sexual moral issues. Someone might begin to deny that homosexual acts are sinful or that fornication is a sin. These are things the Christian church has always taught. Someone might begin to deny those things. Or they'll say, I mean, it's Catholics, right? In the Catholic Church, we teach that contraception is immoral. And so, there are Catholics who perhaps don't care and yeah, you know, so they're all about contraception and they don't think that that negatively impacts their Christian standing. Other people deny the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and yet they go to mass week after week. And so we look at those people

and we say, those people are bad Christians. And in a sense, we're right. I mean, they are bad Christians. If you are a Christian who is for abortion, you need to repent of that, that you're a bad Christian. Okay. But here's the thing. There are a whole host of other issues that Christ calls us to be faithful to that we don't often think about. Like, when's the last time you went to confession and confessed envy? Honestly. I mean, maybe you've confessed masturbation or pornography use. Maybe you've confessed getting drunk. pornography use. Maybe you've confessed getting drunk. Maybe you've confessed not being faithful to your times of prayer. And if you've been guilty of those things, you should confess those. But we don't often confess other things. We don't even look at them. We're not even aware that we're guilty of them. So envy, for example, I think that's a good example. When's the last time you and I confessed that? Or, you know, you read the scriptures, Christ says, bless those who curse you.

He wasn't suggesting it. He wasn't saying when somebody curses you, like one idea for your emotional health would be that you would say something nice about it. Like he commanded us to do that. So an uncomfortable question for you and for me is, do we do that? And what does that even look like? And why is it that you and I aren't thinking about these things?

I was driving my family somewhere the other day and I was just in an irritable mood. And we were at a four-way stop. And I thought that it was my turn to turn. And so I did and the bloke behind me drove like right up to me and like held his hand on the horn and I did this like I just very child childishly put my hand on the horn like beeping back at him like that'll teach him you know and I was and Cameron's like what are you doing? I'm like, I don't know. But at my better times, I'll say, Lord, I bless this person. I pray that they come to know you and would be happy. Like we're called to bless those who curse us, but we often don't do it.

We don't even think about it. Christ calls us to visit the imprisoned, to clothe the naked, to feed the poor. And I think we can fall into the trap of thinking, well, those are optional. And I'm talking about me too, not just you. So this is supposed to make all of us here feel uncomfortable. Okay. But, you know, all right. So we're called to be faithful in all of these areas. called to be faithful in all of these areas. We're not just called to hold to the church's teaching on sexual morality or to accept the sacraments of the church, the reality of those

sacraments, okay? We're called to all of this. Now, this isn't meant to kind of throw us into despair or to cause us to be scrupulous, but it is to say, let's take serious these things like backbiting, because maybe today when you saw this episode come out, like backbiting, who cares? Like whatever. And now you wouldn't have said that, but if it was on something like sex outside of marriage or homosexual acts or something like that, or Catholics denying the Eucharist, maybe you would have found that really exciting or interesting rather. But these things we don't often find interesting because quite frankly, we don't even think about them and we're not even aware oftentimes when we're committing them.

But backbiting is a really serious sin. And I just want to read a couple of verses from the word of God, which talks about this. Proverbs 16, 28 says, a dishonest man spreads strife and a whisperer separates close friends. Romans 16 verses 17 through 18 says, I appeal to your brothers to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught. Avoid them. For such persons do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. And by smooth talk and flattery, they deceive the hearts of the naive. James chapter 4 verses 11 through 12 says, Do not speak evil against one another, brothers. The one who speaks against a brother or judges his brother speaks evil against the law and judges the law.

But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law, but a judge. There is only one lawgiver and judge, he who is able to save and to destroy, but who are you to judge your neighbor? Romans talks about this very clearly too, and we'll get into this because Aquinas quotes this directly about, you know, essentially backbiters not being able to inherit the kingdom of God. So, this is really serious stuff. Psalm 101 verse 5 says, whoever slanders his neighbor secretly, I will destroy. Whoever has a haughty look and an arrogant heart, I will not endure. Like, listen to that. Whoever slanders his neighbor secretly, I will destroy. And yet we sometimes talk negatively. We detract from people without even giving it a second thought. Let's just do two more.

1 Timothy 5.13 says, besides that, they learn to be idlers, going about from house to house, says, besides that, they learn to be idlers, going about from house to house, and not only idlers, but also gossips and busybodies saying what they should not. So again, really serious issue. Yeah, so that'll do. So all that is to say that this is a serious issue that we ought to take seriously. I want to take a look at what Aquinas has to say in the Summa Theologiae, in the Secunda Secunda, question 73. In verse 1, verse 1, I beg your pardon, article 1, he's addressing the question, what is backbiting? So let me just put my spectacles on and we'll go through this. Let me just kind of read the first objection so you kind of get an idea of what he's responding to. The first objection, this is not Aquinas' point of view for those who are not familiar with Aquinas' writings.

This is something he's going to respond to. It says, by words uttered in secret. For secretly and openly are circumstances that do not constitute the species of a sin because it is accidental to a sin that it be known by many or by few. Now that which does not constitute the species of a sin does not belong to its essence and should not be included in its definition. Therefore, it does not belong to the essence of backbiting, that it should be done by secret words. So the said contra is, it is written, if a serpent bite in silence, he has nothing better that backbiteth. There you go. So if you detract from your neighbor, if you backbite them, say malicious things about them when they are not present, you're like a serpent who doesn't even announce its arrival and just strikes without warning. Here's the respondio. Just as one man injures another by deed in two ways, openly as by robbery

or by doing him any kind of violence, and secretly, as by theft or by a crafty blow, crafty blows. I guess that's like my son jumping on my head before I have a chance to respond. So again, one man injures another by words in two ways. In one way openly, and this is done by reviling him, and in another way, secretly, and this is done by backbiting. Now, from the fact that one man openly utters words against another man, he would appear to think little of him, so that for this reason he dishonors him, so that reviling is detrimental to the honor of the person reviled.

On the other hand, he that speaks against another secretly seems to respect rather than slight him, so that he injures directly not his honor, but his good name. Insofar as by uttering such words secretly, he for his own part causes his hearers to have a bad opinion of the person against whom he speaks. For the backbiter apparently intends and aims at being believed. It is therefore evident that backbiting differs from reviling in two points. First, in the way in which the words are uttered, the reviler speaks openly against someone, the backbiter secretly. Secondly, as to the end in view, that is as regards to the injury inflicted, the reviler injures a man's honor, right? The backbiter injures his good name. So both the sins, right? Like reviling somebody publicly

and backbiting would be done secretly. But it seems to me just from reading this, just thinking about it, that it's more kind of insidious to backbite. If you say something bad about me to a friend and I don't know about it, I can't defend my reputation. I can't defend my honor or my good name. Now, the next thing I want to talk about before we delve into this just a little deeper is whether the listener is guilty. So, if I say something bad about someone else, I've sinned. And to the degree that this damages this person's good name will be how serious the sin is. So in Article 2, Aquinas addresses, yeah, Article 2, he addresses whether or not it's a mortal sin. And the point is that it has to, how much damage is it causing? I can say something that slightly kind of

puts a black eye on somebody's reputation, then I can ruin it, you know, and so it's going to depend on the gravity of what I'm sharing. But what about the listener? You know, is this person innocent? Because, you know, just actually think about it. I mean, there's so much backbiting and slander that goes on in our society. I mean, even these like tabloid magazines that you see at the checkout that speak negatively of these movie stars and whoever else, you know, it's bad that they do it and it's bad that we read it. So here is article four, whether it's a grave sin for the listener to suffer the backbiter, that is to listen to him. Let's read the first objection just so we can kind of get an idea of

what someone might say against Thomas's position. It would seem that the listener who suffers a backbiter does not sin grievously. For a man is not under greater obligations to others than to For Gregory says, when they have been incited by their own wickedness in order that our merit may be the greater. Therefore, a man does not sin if he does not withstand those who backbite others. In other words, somebody says something bad about you, you should endure it. And so, okay, well, if other people are supposed to endure it, then, you know, I can endure it being said, you know. So here's the response to that objection. No man hears himself backbitten because when a man is spoken evil of in his hearing, it is not backbiting, properly speaking, but reviling, as stated above. Yet it is possible

for the detractions uttered against a person to come to his knowledge through others telling him. And then it is left to his discretion whether he will suffer their detriment to his good name, unless this endanger the good of others, as stated above. Wherefore, his patience may deserve commendation for as much as he suffers patiently being detracted himself. Here's what Aquinas says, though, in relation to just, is the listener sinning and being kind of complicit in this? Is he complicit in this? First of all, the said contra comes from Jerome.

Take care not to have an itching tongue nor tingling ears, that it neither detract others nor listen to backbiters. I answer that according to the apostles, they are worthy of death, not only they that commit sins, but they also that consent to them that do them. This is coming from Romans chapter 1 verse 32. Now, this happens in two ways. First, directly when one induces another to sin or when the sin is pleasing to him. Secondly, indirectly, that is, if he does not withstand him when he might do so. And this happens sometimes, not because the sin is pleasing to him, but on account of some human fear. Accordingly, we must say that if a man listens to backbiting

without resisting, he seems to consent to the backbiter so that he becomes a participator in his sin. And if he induces him to backbite, or at least if the detraction be pleasing to him on account of his hatred of the person detracted, he sins no less than the detractor and sometimes more. than the detractor and sometimes more. Wow. Did you hear that? Listen to that again. If he induces him to backbite, or at least if the detraction be pleasing to him on account of his hatred of the person detracted, he sins no less than the detractor and sometimes more. So case in point, there might be a particular priest that you do not like. Maybe he's a public figure. Maybe he says things that are confusing to the faithful. And then maybe there are certain Catholic groups, news networks that point out his flaws.

Okay. Now, again, we're not talking about calumny where they know that his flaws are false, but are peddling them. We're talking about detraction. That is to say, they're saying a bunch of stuff about this particular priest that you don't have a right to know, right? Necessarily. Now you're reading this and you're feeling delight because this person has been caught or something or found out, right? Thomas is saying that you are sinning. And it's easy to kind of read this stuff and think, well, whatever, like I'm just educating myself. No, Thomas is saying that you could be sinning as much as the detractor and sometimes more. He says, wherefore, Bernard says, it is difficult to say which is the more

to be condemned, the backbiter or he that listens to backbiting. If, however, the sin is not pleasing to him and he fails to withstand the backbiter through fear, negligence, or even shame, he sins indeed, but much less than the backbiter and as a rule, venially. Sometimes too, this may be a mortal sin, either because it is his official duty to core, sorry, it is his official duty to correct the backbiter or by reason of some consequent danger or on account of the radical reason for which human fear may sometimes be a mortal sin, as stated above.

Sometimes when you and I are challenged, we seek to find exceptions to the challenge, and we focus all our mental energy on those exceptions, as if this will excuse us. So maybe some of you are listening to me right now and a whole litany of, yeah, but is arising in your mind, right? Yeah, but I mean, the public have a right to know what is being done publicly. Yeah, but journalists are reporting something, the public have a right to know, and then I'm just sharing this. And I just want to invite you and me

to not let our yeah buts let us off the hook too easily. That's all I'm doing. That's all I'm asking here. We live in a time where we do take great delight and entertainment in the detraction of others in society and in the church. And I think if we're honest, we would say that some of these news outlets, YouTube channels, whatever, have become a source of entertainment for you and me. Like we wake up in the morning and maybe we see a particular video that's gone up

that's speaking out about a particular priest or cardinal or bishop or pope or whatever. Not a particular pope, I guess there's just one. And we watch it and like, can we just be honest? You're doing it out of entertainment and so am I. And you just gotta, again, there might be a lot of yeah buts, but can you just put them aside for one second and try and look at your situation

honestly? Can I actually do that? Because I think as good Christians, at least those of us who wish to be good Christians, that is something that we ought to do. We absolutely ought to do that. And we should repent of the ways in which we have detracted, calumniated, and we should even do an examination of conscience. And not only that, but we should repent of the ways that we have delighted in detraction. So in news articles and in videos that speak negatively about other people, and we've watched it and we've delighted in it. Now, I'm not putting myself above any of you. Do you understand this? This is not me saying I'm not guilty of this. Of course, I'm guilty of this. I began today's episode by saying I went to confession because I'm guilty of this.

But rather, this is just on my heart to kind of call you and me and to say like, yeah, detraction is a sin. Delighting in detraction is a sin and we shouldn't stand for it and we should repent of it. Let me just kind of give one more example to try and drive this point home before I take some questions. Yeah, this line from Aquinas here, when he talks about someone listening, like if a man listens to backbiting without resisting it, so like how does one resist it? So someone starts talking to you about so-and-so and they're saying negative things about them. It takes courage to resist that

because this person is sharing this with you. They're trying to be intimate with you in a way, confiding in you. And to shut that down will probably do two things. It might offend that person. They might look at you like, oh, look at him. He thinks he's better than me or gosh. And also it might mean that this person

won't share things with you in the future. And maybe you like that open relationship. So it does take courage. And I think prudence will help us figure out how we're to say to this person, yeah, you know what? We should pray for him. You know, like, do you pray for him? Yeah.

So God have mercy on us for the ways that we have fallen into this. This too about listening, right? If he induces him to backbite, in other words, if I get you to say something bad about somebody, like, hey, I know you just met with him. Like, what's he doing? And we do it in crafty ways, you know? We're like, hey, I mean, you don't have to tell me anything. Obviously, I'm not getting you to say anything. But like, even that is a way to kind of get that person to say stuff to us about the person. So inducing someone to backbite is a sin. And this bit here, or at least if the detraction be pleasing to him on account of his hatred of the person detracted. So like, again, this is the final thing I'll say before we get into questions

from our patrons, but suppose, imagine two people. And again, I'm just going to use the example of in the church. Maybe there's two bishops, right? Or two priests. One priest or bishop you love, you believe them to be solid and orthodox, you know. The other person you really despise. I mean, you think this guy is a scoundrel. He teaches things contrary to the faith. He confuses people. scoundrel. He teaches things contrary to the faith. He confuses people. He's arrogant. Okay, right. So person A, person B. Person A is the one you like and believe to be orthodox. Person B is the scoundrel. Suppose you open up an article that talks about person A being caught with a woman and you love person A, you know, and maybe you feel tremendous sorrow about this. Or maybe your first response is to defend that person and say, this can't be true.

Person B, the scoundrel gets caught. Do you experience sorrow? Like, do I? Or am I like, ah, good. Like, that'll do him in. I just want to leave you with that. And I know that there's a bunch of yeah buts, but I just want us to face that in our own heart and to ask the Holy Spirit to enable us to be

honest with ourselves and to repent of the ways that we have been guilty of either backbiting or delighting in the backbiting of others. All right, let's take some questions. biting of others. All right, let's take some questions. All right, now I haven't read these questions ahead of time, so who knows what they will be and who knows if I'll be able to give a good answer to them, but let's begin. Alfred Ben says, Matt, you are a Catholic superhero to me. That's nice, Alfred. I always loved the origin stories of superheroes. If you could, please give us a brief or detailed description of how Pints with Aquinas came to be. Maybe get into the challenges in getting it off the ground. I'm always fascinated by people who turn dreams and good ideas into reality. Please continue your great work. Thank you, Alfred.

So Pints with Aquinas began about three years ago before podcasting was a big deal, or at least a big deal in the Catholic Church. Like I could name about five podcasts that existed in the Catholic world. There may have been a lot more, but I hadn't heard of them, you know? So I wasn't even that interested in quote unquote, getting it off the ground. It wasn't like, all right, I got to ramp this thing up. You know, I think a lot of people look at their podcast that way today, which is fine, but that's just not how I was thinking about it. When I recorded Pines with Aquinas episodes, I was actually get more credit for a university

course that I was doing. So I remember I uploaded about seven or eight and I hadn't even told anybody about it. I think 10 episodes came out before I even mentioned it on Twitter, but people began finding it, I guess, by typing my name in or something like that. So that's how it began. I remember speaking to a close friend of mine. I wanted to start a podcast, right? And interestingly enough, I recorded a podcast called The Matt Fradd Show because, you know, other people have these things and I'm like, yeah, it's called The Matt Fradd Show. It's interesting now, right, that I have a YouTube show called The Matt Fradd Show, but that's what initially this podcast was going to be, the Matt Fradd Show, where I just discuss stuff. And then I thought,

yeah, it's a bit boring. What else could I do? And I looked on my shelf and I had all these books by Thomas Aquinas. And it occurred to me, I'm like, oh my gosh, like Thomas Aquinas addresses issues in a really cool way. You know, he sets objections to himself, he then responds to them. And I thought, well, he's addressed almost every issue, like in the Catholic kind of intellectual space. So that would be a cool thing to base a podcast around. And I called a good friend of mine. I won't mention his name because I don't want to embarrass him. But I said, I'm thinking about doing a podcast on Aquinas. What should I call it? And I really respect this guy. He's a terrific guy. But he said

to me, and I lost all respect for him after he said this, just joking, but yeah. He said, what about the Aquinas return? Like what? He said, yeah, the Aquinas return. Like, what does that mean? It's like, well, you know, like in tennis, like you hit it to him and then he returns it. And I'm like, I will never ask your advice again. That is literally the worst name that has ever been suggested for a podcast in the history of podcasting. So I didn't take that name. And I just thought, well, you know, when I was a younger man, I used to love drinking and getting into conversations with people. Like I'm talking like as a teenager, like we'd get drunk, God have mercy on us. And we just have conversations, you know, about God and stuff, even when we didn't believe in God. And that's

kind of carried over into like my adult life. I don't get drunk, but I'll have a drink and I'll talk to people about the faith. And I love going into bars. I don't do it often. I mean, I love going into nightclubs. No, but there's been a couple of times where I've been with friends at a nightclub and we'll just have a couple of drinks and then he's like, oh my goodness, it's getting late. And then there'll be this crazy group who start talking with us and they've had a few too many and we get into conversations about the faith. And I love it. There's this Latin phrase in vino veritas, where there is wine, there is truth. And there's something about having a drink that brings our defenses down and people can be a lot more honest. And so I thought pints with

Aquinas, you know, just like kind of just, let's have a real honest conversation where we bring this awesome academic theologian down from the ivory tower of academia and have a chat with him. So that's basically how it happened. So thanks very much. John, uh, uh, Stern, Stern, Sterniolo, forgive me. Oh, Josh. who are 100% on board with the apparitions of Medjugorje? Shouldn't we be skeptical of anything unless the church takes a stand on it? I don't know if we have to be skeptical of...

Yeah, it probably would be a good idea, I think, in general, to be skeptical of Yeah, it probably would be a good idea I think in general To be skeptical of something supernatural Right? Unless the church Gives it stamp of approval And then you can be a little more open to it So

At the very least No one should criticize you For saying The same as what the church says You know what I mean? So if the church says like, we don't have an opinion on Medjugorje right now, for you to say, I don't have an opinion on Medjugorje right now and have somebody criticize you on holding the exact same view that the church does, seems to me to be going beyond what the church would want us to do. So that's, I haven't researched Medjugorje a lot i have been there a few times

um and i do respect certain people who say that it's a hoax i don't have an opinion one way or the other although i am inclined to maybe not give it much credibility um but again i haven't researched it so i can't really speak in any kind of authoritative sense in that, but I guess that would be my basic position, that if the church hasn't made a final statement on this, then you don't need to either, and that's okay. Also, there's all sorts of approved apparitions that they could look into. Will Herman says, in your podcast on Aquinas and santa claus you explained that aquinas thought thought lying under any circumstance even preventing murder was immoral how would he reconcile this with rahab the prostitute lying to hide the israelite spies and being commended

in scripture for doing so that is a bloody good question um i would have to look at the exact Like scripture reference you're referring to I know that we Like just because scripture records something It doesn't mean that it endorses it So just because Rahab is celebrated It doesn't mean she's celebrated for everything she did I mean she's obviously not celebrated for being a prostitute And I think that Aquinas would say that Rahab did lie, although there was a good outcome that came from that. But

I haven't looked into it enough to give a thorough response to that. Thanks, Will. Paul says, oh no, he's responding to somebody else. Mike says, I recently heard of some research in quantum physics. Oh, great. I got no idea how to respond to this already, but let's keep going. On the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and some in the field have been led to articulations of the necessity of an eternal observer who by observing all of existence sustains and keeps all existence in existence. Connections to Aquinas' theology, his metaphysics, and the psalmist come to mind. Could be worthwhile doing a pint show on this. All right, thank you. Justin Garrison says, have you looked into the reception Aquinas has received from Eastern Orthodoxy? No, I haven't. EP says, a friend of mine who initially helped me get back

to the Catholic tradition left the Catholic tradition because I'm assuming of doing something and engaging in something not in line with Catholic teaching. I tried to help him align with teaching during the process, but he instead chose to move away from it. I'm struggling to know how to interact with him now, as I want to remain friends as before, but I don't know how given the circumstances. Yeah, so, I mean, you can't force somebody to talk about what they don't want to talk about, especially if you want to remain friends with them. So I would recommend keeping the lines of communication open however you can.

If you have asked this person to have a discussion on this issue and they've been completely unwilling, you might just drop that for now and focus on being their friend. I say this a lot, but I think we have to take a holistic interest in people's lives, not just interest in the ways we think that they're failing or the ways we think that they're failing or the ways we think they need to grow. Nobody wants to be friends with somebody who, whenever you get together with them, are only interested in talking about the ways they think you're failing. And so even if you're right, and I think you are, in thinking that you shouldn't abandon the Catholic faith,

if that's all you're interested in talking about, he's not going to be perhaps very receptive. So I would just say, talk about other things that you both agree on so that he knows that you love him and want his good. And maybe out of that, you'll be able to address some of these more sensitive issues. Keenan LaSalle says, I'm struggling with finding the virtuous middle ground between the traditional movements of the charismatic and the charismatic movement, especially when it comes to the whole speaking in tongues bit. I know you shared a video about the tongues bit earlier, but I was wondering what advice you would have for someone who is

naturally literalistic and really struggling theologically with the charismatic movement. So thanks, Keenan. I think I responded to this on YouTube. But I would say I'm a fan of charismatic people. I think sometimes words garner a lot of baggage, and they're therefore difficult to recover. example, maybe, at least in your mind, a phrase which has garnered a lot of baggage. And when you hear it, you think of things that are sort of out of step with church teaching, or you might think of people who are a little bit off their rocker or something. But that isn't to say that there aren't amazing, faithful, traditional Catholics who hear from the Lord in unique ways and who are able to prophecy or who have been given gifts of healing or who have even been given the gift of tongues. So, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater would be what I'd say. If you're looking for a very traditional Catholic who is also involved

in the charismatic renewal, I would say look at Ralph Martin. Ralph Martin, I think, is a prophet of our time. He's got a terrific book called The Fulfillment of All Desire in which he talks about the doctors of the Catholic Church, right? Like, it's a very orthodox and spiritually enriching book. And here's a man who, to my understanding, prays in tongues and prophesies and prays for healing of people and things like this. So, that would be my suggestion, that you not throw the baby out with the bathwater, and that you not pit different groups within the church against each other unnecessarily. I think there is a real temptation for us to do that today, but we don't have to do that. I mean,

if somebody is teaching against the Catholic faith, then we can condemn that. We can call that out. But to pit people or groups against each other unnecessarily is unhelpful. At best, you know, I just think it's unhelpful. At worst, it just creates divisions within the church that's already terribly divided. I think we should affirm what we see that's good in certain people and groups, even when they don't kind of align with our temperament or with our ways of praying. Let's take one more question. I just dropped my phone. Let's take one more question before we wrap up. But today, here we go. This comes from Jonathan and Kristen Weiss. Thank you, Jonathan and Kristen for being

patrons. You said, how did you help your kids understand why you were leaving their established liturgical tradition for a more traditional one? In our case, we have moved our family from a Novus Autoparis to a traditional Latin mass one and need the tools to dialogue with our kids about why we're doing this. Yeah, that's a really good point. I guess it depends on how old your kids are. I would also say that if you're going to make this move, try to be consistent in it. I mean, that isn't to say that you can't go to a Novus Ordo mass or a Latin mass from time to time. That isn't to say that. But if you're worried about, you know, how to kind of explain this to your kids,

or if you think it's a little disorienting, disorientating, then you can talk, you know, it might be best if you stick to one sort of tradition if you want. So how do we do it? You know, our kids were young and at first it was kind of weird, but we, you know, for our oldest child, we just showed up one day and we started going and it was beautiful. And I remember there was a few weeks where our son, our eldest son didn't want to keep going. But we thought that it was best for our family that we did keep going to this Byzantine church. And so we just kept going. And he doesn't ask to go anywhere else anymore. So there's that.

Yeah, I mean, going from Novus Ordo to a Tridentine Mass, it might be difficult because the Tridentine Mass is longer usually, as is the Divine Liturgy. But that's okay. I think they can get used to it. And if you're the parents, which you are, and you think this is best, which you do, then you should just do that. But I wouldn't kind of, I think sometimes we can idealize certain parishes and we show up there and we think it's going to be the answer to all of our problems, and it's going to be perfect liturgically, and the people are going to be great. And so we jump in both feet, and then we realize that, you know, it's not as great as we thought, or people are a bit

rude or a bit weird or, you know, things like that happen. And the temptation is to just jump around from one parish to the next, to the next, until we finally find something that we like. I wouldn't do that though, you know, I would, yeah, I would stick with it, you know, unless there's something blatantly obvious, blatantly bad, blatantly obviously bad that you need to kind of move away from. I would say stick with it. All right, so that's it. That'll do for today. Thank you very much for tuning in to Pines with Aquinas.

I hope this has been a helpful episode. As I say, next week we're going to begin a two-part series on the passions with Father Gregory Pine. I learned a lot from doing the episodes, and you're going to learn a lot from listening to them. lot from doing the episodes and you're going to learn a lot from, from, uh, uh, listening to them. As I say, we have a whole course on Flannery O'Connor coming up in the fall for our patrons. If you are a patron, don't miss this. I know some of you are so generous. You start giving me 10 bucks a month or something, and then you don't even kind of check Patreon, but please check it for this one. Cause I'm really excited about this. That's going to be a blessing to you. And if you're not a patron, please subscribe. Even if you're listening to this podcast after the fall, maybe it's like you're kind of going

through all the pints episodes and this is one you're listening to in a summertime or something next year, like 2020 or something. Listen, you know, you can become a patron and you'll still have access to this whole book study, all the videos, all the comments, the reading and things like this. Also, just a reminder, we have that my Emma, my sister Emma recorded a whole album of study music, which is just available to you patrons, right? It's not available to anybody else. I paid her to record this. We've also just had a new audio book release, De Ragnarok on Kings by Thomas Aquinas. This came out last week and it's really great. So we have a growing, and I didn't record it. I paid somebody to professionally record it. So you can like listen to, you know, all sorts of

things. Like you might not want to pick up a book on Aquinas right now, but you could listen to it. And I think you get a lot out of it. There's just a lot of benefits from becoming a patron. So if you want to go to patreon.com slash Matt Fradd, and if you want to give to me directly, because some people have written to me and they said they hate Patreon, they don't agree with it for different reasons, you can give to me directly. I just can't recreate the Patreon experience for you. Because there's a reason people use Patreon, right? Like it's this big, sophisticated social media software side, basically. But if you aren't that interested in the gifts, you could go to pintswithaquinas.com slash donate. And I would still send you things,

you know, like a signed book and pints with Aquinas, be a sign and things like that. You'd get that. I just couldn't necessarily keep up with all of the posts I'm always putting out on Patreon. So it's up to you. But either way, a big thanks to you who've done that or who will do that. Also, if you want to review the show on iTunes, that really helps spread the word. So thank you very much. God bless. Let me know what you thought about today's show on Twitter. Just put hashtag Matt Fradd or God bless. Let me know what you thought about today's show on Twitter. Just put hashtag Matt Fradd or just at me and tell me what you thought about today's show. I'd love to get your take on it.

Thanks so much. Have a good day. Bye. And I would give my whole life to carry you, to carry you. And I would give my whole life.