Sin, Punishment, and Consciousness

[coberst]

Sin, Punishment, and Consciousness

A few days ago I saw in the newspaper a cartoon showing a distraught, anguished, and horrified Uncle Sam holding in his arms the body of a child while he looked over his shoulder at the flames of Iraq.

I was raised as a Catholic; I was taught by the nuns the Catholic doctrine regarding sin, punishment, and consciousness. Venial sins were like misdemeanors and mortal sins were like felonies. However, this is not a completely accurate analogy because if a person dies with venial sin on the soul s/he would be punished by having to spend time in purgatory before going to heaven but if a person died with mortal sin on the soul s/he went directly to hell for eternity.

Confession was the standard means for ‘erasing sin from the soul’. A confession was considered to be a ‘good confession’ only if the sinner confessed the sins to a priest and was truly sorry for having committed sin. A very important element of a good confession was an examination of consciousness, which meant the person must become fully conscious of having committed the sin.

Ignorance of the sin was no excuse just as ignorance of the law is no excuse. Herein lays the rub. Knowledge and consciousness of sin were necessary conditions for the erasure of sin from the soul in confession.

In the matter of Iraq what must the American Catholic citizen recognize before s/he could make a good confession? For the non Catholic American citizen who considers him or her self to be a moral person, what is required?

 

[Mr Clingford]

Are you sure that atheists are the best group of people to ask?

 

[Rufo]

In the matter of Iraq what must the American Catholic citizen recognize before s/he could make a good confession? For the non Catholic American citizen who considers him or her self to be a moral person, what is required?

While it seems you have something interesting to say, I don't quite follow here. Surely you are not suggesting that every single American citizen has committed a sin or otherwise behaved immorally towards Iraq?

Are you sure that atheists are the best group of people to ask?

First, there are not only atheists here. I remind you because I often forget that myself.
Second, this view of moral and immoral behavior is not necessarily Catholic, or even religious. I would definately say that the first steps towards not carrying out an immoral act again are:
- realizing that it was an immoral act
and
- wishing one had not carried it out before.

I find this a reasonable part of a moral framework entirely without God.

 

[fuelair]

All that is required is that they not have voted for Bush. If they did, then they must atone according to their faiths' procedure(s). If they are not religious it is meaningless.

 

[coberst]

While it seems you have something interesting to say, I don't quite follow here. Surely you are not suggesting that every single American citizen has committed a sin or otherwise behaved immorally towards Iraq?


First, there are not only atheists here. I remind you because I often forget that myself.
Second, this view of moral and immoral behavior is not necessarily Catholic, or even religious. I would definately say that the first steps towards not carrying out an immoral act again are:
- realizing that it was an immoral act
and
- wishing one had not carried it out before.

I find this a reasonable part of a moral framework entirely without God.

The cartoon I speak of leads me to think that America may have some moral responsibility for this killing of innocent people. If a nation that is a democracy act in an immoral way does the citizens have some more responsibility for that act. Do the citizens of Germany have any moral responsibility for the Holocaust?

 

[Cosmo]

Do the citizens of Germany have any moral responsibility for the Holocaust?

No, assuming you mean the citizens that are alive today.

Do the citizens of the US (alive today) have any moral responsibility for slavery?

 

[fuelair]

And I did my part by not voting for any of the Bushes any time!!

 

[Rufo]

The cartoon I speak of leads me to think that America may have some moral responsibility for this killing of innocent people. If a nation that is a democracy act in an immoral way does the citizens have some more responsibility for that act. Do the citizens of Germany have any moral responsibility for the Holocaust?

The citizens of Germany who opposed the Holocaust and attempted to stop the nazis do not. Nor do those who could not do anything (including those who, as mentioned, were yet to be born).
But I suppose you are talking about the majority of the American people here, and in that case you may be correct.

How do you suggest we tackle this question philosophically? Will it not end up a politics debate?

 

[slingblade]

I voted against Bush both times.
I said the war was wrong from the outset, and have never changed my mind about that.

I feel no sense of responsibility or guilt for this war. I haven't done anything wrong, and don't require anyone's forgiveness for it.

 

[Tanstaafl]

What slingblade said.

 

[coberst]

Rufo

This is a matter of morality and not one of politics unless one considers that being a Republican or a Democrat is a matter of morality. I do not think morality generally attaches to ideology. Although there are instances when such might be the case. I think that what is important is the attention to the matter, the consciousness of these issues is what the individual must keep in mind.

 

[Tanstaafl]

I'm not sure you can separate politics and morality when a political decision has major moral consequences.

But I'm really having trouble getting your point here.

Are you saying as a US citizen I am morally at fault here? I can't see that. Are you saying that the country as a whole has moral culpability here? That I would agree with. But I am genuinely having trouble understanding your point. Maybe I'm just dense today (a real possibility) but please explain again as simply as possible.

 

[chriswl]

I don't believe in "sin" and have no time for the idiotic guilt trips that the Catholic church is so fond of. The only time moral discussions aren't a pointless waste of time is when you are thinking about what to do next (the past has already happened, you can't change it).

The interesting moral question for me about Iraq would be this: I was against the Iraq war right from the beginning but if I now say pull the troops out and the country collapses into civil war am I morally responsible for those consequences? Or can I just say that I was under no obligation to continue with policies I disaproved of from the start and the consequences are the responsibility of those who started the war in the first place?

 

[slingblade]

Chris, unless you are directly involved in making policy or ordering troops, I can't see where what you think makes you in any way responsible. Nor I.

We have several forces at work here: morality, politics, government, groups, individuals...actions....

From my perspective, George W. was going to have his war, regardless of what America thought or said. Frankly, I'm not sure what, short of armed rebellion, we citizens could have done to stop him. We said we didn't need a war, and were called unpatriotic. We said we didn't have good enough reasons to go to war, and were called traitors. We said there were other ways to deal with Hussein, and were laughed at and called naive. We said our military was understaffed, undermanned, and underprepared, and we were told to shut up and leave this to the experts.

I don't even think the citizens who support the war are to blame. They're just cheerleaders; glad-handers and hanky-wavers. Bush was going to have his war. Period. Those supporters can't end the war, can't keep it going, can't really affect it. Those decisions are in someone else's hands and always have been.

I'm trying to imagine if anything might have been different if all Americans had protested the war from the start. Loudly, and with demonstrations, and burning draft cards, and all that. Would Bush have changed his mind? I really don't know. He did a lot more than just the war; the Patriot Acts, GITMO, all kinds of things many of us don't like.

Do I blame the people who put him back in office for a second term? Maybe somewhat, but in a general sense. The war was already in motion. I can see people not wanting to change horses, but what would have happened if we'd voted him out? Sometimes, I wish we'd found out....

All I know for sure is that none of this is my fault. Anyone who does feel blame has to take it up with themselves, I guess.

 

[chriswl]

From my perspective, George W. was going to have his war, regardless of what America thought or said. Frankly, I'm not sure what, short of armed rebellion, we citizens could have done to stop him.

I think you're probably right. I was going to say that he wouldn't have gone to war if there was a majority against it because he wanted to win the upcoming election. But this didn't bother Blair with a majority of us Brits against the war. Bush would probably have done what Blair did - just assume that the people would come round once the fighting started.

However, if the electorate had been solidly against the war they would surely have removed Bush in 2004 which would have sent a clear message to future Presidents that the people do not like having their wishes ignored on issues like this.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I think you're probably right. I was going to say that he wouldn't have gone to war if there was a majority against it because he wanted to win the upcoming election. But this didn't bother Blair with a majority of us Brits against the war. Bush would probably have done what Blair did - just assume that the people would come round once the fighting started.

However, if the electorate had been solidly against the war they would surely have removed Bush in 2004 which would have sent a clear message to future Presidents that the people do not like having their wishes ignored on issues like this.

The critical success among the pro war party (the idealogues who were hard over for it) seems to me the appl;ication of a curious sort of political black mail based on uncertainty about attacks subsequent to 9-11. The "if you are not for us, you must be against us" line was not solely addressed to foreign governments.

Had the House or Senate held a Democrat majority (if you look at the vote, over 100 voted against) the ability to get through the House might have been the show stopper. Don't know. I get the sense that a threat of "you are on the enemies list if you don't vote for" was backed up by promises of "no earmarks for you."

A guess, can't back it up.

DR

 

[Beerina]

The cartoon I speak of leads me to think that America may have some moral responsibility for this killing of innocent people. If a nation that is a democracy act in an immoral way does the citizens have some more responsibility for that act. Do the citizens of Germany have any moral responsibility for the Holocaust?

In an absolute sense, the deaths are on the heads of the killers, not those who "stirred up the hornet's nest". It is like blaming the police when a hostage taker shoots a hostage. They do their best, but the death is ethically still on the heads of those who pulled the trigger.

The US has bungled the aftermath in that sense, but that doesn't erase the guilt that the deaths are mostly directly and deliberately caused by a bunch of nasty, evil totalitarian wannabees. People fighting for the "freedom" to become a dictator there. The "self determination" of only themselves.

 

[RandFan]

I voted against Bush both times.

I don't think people can be held accountable simply for voting for Bush.

I said the war was wrong from the outset, and have never changed my mind about that.

I feel no sense of responsibility or guilt for this war. I haven't done anything wrong, and don't require anyone's forgiveness for it.

I supported the war and will accept some degree of regret for the deaths there. I didn't support the war in the hopes that innocent Iraqis would die. I supported the war in large part because they were suffering before the war.