Calumny and detraction--what's the difference?

Today I was reading about the strange case of Fr. John Corapi, a Catholic priest I used to hear occasionally on the radio.  He was an excellent, challenging speaker, yet one day in 2011 he just disappeared.  Is his case calumny or detraction? Frankly, I don't know that I still understand the difference, and no one seems to know what has happened to Father Corapi.

"To put it in simple terms, calumny is the telling of a lie about someone, almost always with malicious intent—for instance, to damage his reputation. Detraction, on the other hand, is the telling of the truth about someone to a third party who has no right to that truth. Detraction is often done with malicious intent as well, but not always.

In more common terms, most of what we call gossip is detraction; most of what we call backbiting is calumny. The Catechism of the Catholic Church classifies detraction and calumny as "offenses against the truth" (and specifically, as the venerable Baltimore Catechism notes, both are violations of the Eighth Commandment). Both are sins, which can be either venial or mortal, depending on their intent and effects. Even when committed carelessly, without malicious intent, detraction and calumny can cause grave damage to the person being discussed, and the person guilty of detraction or calumny has an obligation to try to repair the damage done by his action."

Happy Birthday, Heidelberg Catechism

"One of the best known catechisms of all time is the Heidelberg Catechism. It is named for a German city, where it was prepared by theologians of the University of Heidelberg at the request of Elector Frederick III, a friend of the Protestant Reformation. Frederick hoped the new catechism would secure harmony among Protestants in his territories and strengthen the hold of the Reformed faith on his provinces. He wrote the preface of the Catechism himself, which is dated this day, January 19, 1563. The Heidelberg Catechism is used by the Reformed Church. Hundreds of thousands of people have memorized it and lived by its teachings over the years since then."

Of course, his plan to unite Protestants didn't go well--today there are about 35,000 different denominations and non-denominations or "just the Bible" churches, which if it weren't for the pro-life movement probably would have little to agree on.

 http://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1501-1600/questions-and-answers-the-heidelberg-cat

Wait Till Next Year by Doris Kearns Goodwin

Our next book club selection is “Wait till next year; a memoir” by Doris Kearns Goodwin the story of a young girl growing up in the 1950s and loving baseball. I’m not very far into the book, and although I think I know where this religious memory will go as she ages out of innocence and trust, I thought this passage very charming, and so different from my own “believer’s baptism” on Palm Sunday 1950 and 6 weeks of instruction on Sunday afternoon for an hour or so with Rev. Statler.

“Sister Marian introduced us to the text familiar to generations of Catholic schoolchildren: the blue-covered Baltimore Catechism with a silver Mary embossed on a constellation of silver stars. The catechism was organized around a series of questions and answers we had to memorize word for word to help us understand the meaning of what Christ had taught and, ultimately, to understand Christ Himself. “Who made us? God made us.” “Who is God? God is the Supreme Being who made all things.” “Why did God make us? God made us to show happiness in Heaven.” Although it was learned by rote, there was something uniquely satisfying about reciting questions we had to memorize, both the questions and the answers. No matter how many questions we had to memorize, each question had a proper answer. The Catholic world was a stable place with an unambiguous line of authority and an absolute knowledge of right and wrong.

We learned to distinguish venial sins, which displeased our Lord, from the far more serious mortal sins, which took away the life of the soul. We memorized the three things that made a sin mortal: the thought or deed had to be grievously wrong; the sinner had to know it was grievously wrong; and the sinner had to consent fully to it. Clearly, King Herod had committed a mortal sin when, intending to kill the Messiah, he killed all the boys in Judea who were two years old or less. Lest we feel too far removed from such a horrendous deed, we were told that those who committed venial sins without remorse when they were young would grow up to commit much larger sins, losing their souls in the same way that Herod did.” pp. 90-91, hardcover edition

My goodness! That’s more than I know today about the Baltimore Catechism, or even Luther’s Small Catechism. I’ve never understood the difference between mortal and venial sins before. But ratcheting up venial to mortal because of lack of remorse does sound serious to me today--although in 1950 I’m not so sure I would have understood as well as she did. It sounds a lot like our own criminal justice system, doesn’t it? Awareness and remorse. But then, I only had a few hours of instruction, and I’m not sure we even covered sin! As well written as this is, and as intense as she was (she goes on to write about baptizing her dolls in case the need ever came up, having been instructed that Catholics could do this for an unbaptized, dying person), there’s no indication in this charming story of what she believes today--only what she was taught then. At least not by page 91.

Monday Memories--Bible Studies I have known

Over at Daniel's site (Alaskan Librarian) I saw a note about John Cotton's Milk for Babes, a catechism published in 1646 and in print for 200 years, intended for children and new Christians. It has been digitized by the University of Nebraska. What makes it interesting (for me) is that it includes in this version, information on how it was digitized, including corrections of typographic errors. Sample:

Quest. What is Prayer ?
£nsw. It is a calling upon (a ) God
in the Name of Christ, by the helpe of
the Holy Ghost, according to the will
of God.

I think this is a great definition for prayer, because I've had a bit of a struggle seeing it as "conversation," and "a relationship," which is what we hear these days. I see nothing wrong with the word prayer. Christ's disciples didn't say, "Lord, teach us conversation techniques."

That aside, it did get me to thinking about all the Bible studies I've attended over the years, including last night's led by me, on Matthew's account of Jesus teaching his people how to pray.

My very earliest memories of Bible study are from Faith Lutheran in Forreston, Illinois, and Mrs. T.B. Hirsh using the flannel graph. She (the pastor's wife) was very dramatic and no child ever watched TV more closely than I watched those brightly painted disciples and shepherds move quickly around a flannel field of green and gold, blue and gray. Her nimble fingers would press a cloud in the sky, or a grove of trees on the horizon, or a staff into a hand, all the while I was waiting for the climax of the story from her deep, booming voice. Oh, it was wonderful. I'm sure I had Bible stories at my home church in Mt. Morris before we moved to Forreston, because I remember the little handouts and glossy Sunday School papers with full color pictures, but in my memory bank they've been relegated to the bleacher seats by the more entertaining Mrs. T.B.