In our highly politicized culture, sin is rarely discussed as a violation of God’s law. Even more rarely do we acknowledge sinful inclinations as the interior sources of sinful acts. Instead, we often reduce moral questions to political positions, confusing theological anthropology with ideology.
Authentic and orthodox Catholic moral theology, however, provides the conceptual clarity necessary to distinguish between inclination, action, and moral responsibility.
The judicial system offers an instructive example. So-called “hate crimes” are punished more severely than the same offenses committed without passionate motives. Institutionally, politically, and judicially, certain expressions of hatred are singled out as uniquely contemptible. One might imagine a defendant testifying, “Your Honor, I committed the crime, but not out of hatred. I acted coldly and without passion. I am a psychopath. Please reduce my sentence.”
Whatever one thinks of hate-crime legislation, it is at least arguable that crimes of passion reveal something recognizably human, whereas psychopathic violence reflects a deeper moral disorder.
Catholic theology teaches that original sin is the source of every sinful inclination. Every human being suffers from its effects. Jesus Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary were preserved from original sin; nevertheless, they willingly bore the suffering present in a fallen world—Christ redemptively through the Cross, and Mary through her unique participation in His suffering.
Each of us carries a range of disordered inclinations corresponding to the capital sins. Some remain mostly dormant; others dominate our moral struggles. Yet none is absent. Dormant inclinations are often the focus of temptation, as the Devil seeks to awaken them through occasions of sin. Claims of immunity from particular sins are themselves expressions of pride—and pride always precedes a fall.
Racist bigotry must be understood within this framework. It is a sinful inclination rooted in pride, and racist actions violate the demands of justice articulated in the Ten Commandments by judging persons according to racial characteristics rather than their inherent human dignity as images of God. This does not mean that noticing racial or cultural patterns is itself racist; nor does it exclude reasonable situational judgment in the Burkean sense—that is, prudential judgments guided by experience and context—provided such judgments do not lead to deliberately unjust treatment. Criticism of a nation’s policies is not necessarily racist.
Most people neither openly embrace nor consciously acknowledge racist tendencies. Occasionally, racism is explicit, as in organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan. More commonly, however, racist inclinations are concealed and sometimes even rationalized, perhaps unconsciously, as moral virtue, as can occur in the misuse or abuse of policies such as affirmative action. In such cases, injustice may persist under the guise of moral progress. When policies classify persons primarily by race and assign benefits or burdens accordingly, they risk perpetuating precisely the racial injustice they claim to remedy.
Sinful inclinations are also obscured when they are publicly celebrated. In much of the Western world, June is designated as “Gay Pride Month”. Catholics who promote LGBTQ ideologies—including some within the Church’s hierarchy—often frame objections as vague “judgmentalism,” implying that moral critique itself is sinful because it presumes that individuals act upon disordered inclinations.
Yet the question remains unavoidable: why is disordered sexual pride celebrated in one domain of vice but condemned in others? We do not designate months for the celebration of gluttony, greed, or wrath. The selective celebration of disordered sexual desire (or lust) reveals a confusion about the nature of sinful inclination rather than its absence.
Every human being struggles with sinful inclinations in some form. Some are predominantly prone to arrogance, others to miserliness, and still others to sins of the flesh. The central moral question is not whether these inclinations exist—they do—but whether we acknowledge them honestly and resist acting upon them.
When people insist that they do not have “a racist bone” in their bodies, they reveal a serious deficiency in self-knowledge. Such claims implicitly deny the doctrine of Original Sin and misunderstand the nature of moral struggle. This denial is characteristic of a distinctly modern mindset, illustrated by familiar claims:
- If I had lived in the Old South, I never would have owned slaves, because I am not a racist.
- After the sinking of the RMS Lusitania, I never would have referred to Germans as “Huns,” because I am not a racist.
- During World War II, I never would have used racial slurs to describe the Japanese, because I am not a racist.
- Had I lived near concentration camps, I certainly would have objected to the Holocaust, because I am not a racist.
Such assertions presume moral superiority detached from historical, social, and spiritual realities. They deny the effects of original sin, underestimate the power of cultural pressure, and overestimate personal virtue. Racist behavior, like all unjust behavior, is rooted in pride—the disordered belief in one’s own superiority.
It is sometimes said that a white supremacist is defined primarily by racism. More fundamentally, however, such a person is a “me supremacist”—one who believes himself superior to others. This disorder of pride is not confined to any race or ethnicity but is a universal temptation of fallen humanity.
Catholic organizations frequently promote programs aimed at combating racism. But opposition to racism—like opposition to wrath, lust, and avarice—is already central to the mission of the Church. Who needs another program?
Rather than investing primarily in sociological programs, we might more fruitfully emphasize integral confession, frequent reception of the sacraments, and faithful participation in Sunday Mass. Authentic conversion of heart, not ideological formation, is the Church’s most effective response to sin.
A renewed understanding of sin, sinful inclinations, and the effects of Original Sin would dispel much of the confusion and dishonesty in contemporary moral discourse. “There, but for the grace of God, go I.” I acknowledge my own tendencies toward pride and racial bigotry, as all fallen human beings do, and I strive to identify them, resist them, and refuse to act upon them.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
All violent crimes are “hate crimes”.
I get that, but I think it is not unreasonable to have a category for crimes intended to provoke or intimidate a group of people. The real mistake is to say that “hate crimes” only count as such if they are committed against a few special, government-approved groups. For example, Harvey Updyke should have been charged with a hate crime for poisoning the oaks at Toomer’s Corner, because he intended to antagonize the whole Auburn University community.
When speaking of racism, I am reminded that when Nicole Brown Simpson and her male friend were brutally murdered, polls indicated that an overwhelming majority of African-Americans expressed the notions that OJ Simpson was innocent. That was almost as shocking as the murders themselves.
Humility month?
(“There, but for the grace of God, go I”.)
Thank you. I thought the same thing.
I appreciate this clarity on racism and sin in general. Our culture ( Satan) confuses us. We get confused on calling out a sin in recognition or are we being unrightfully judgmental? Are we being a racist or recognizing sin? It’s a messy world we live in.
While there’s no such thing as “race” there are still some racists.
What I’ve personally observed is that colour based racism has become more generational. Younger people care less about it and it’s not a barrier for marriage.
The old school racism was often more out in the open where people on the lower rungs of the social/income ladder needed a class below them to feel superior to. Or a scapegoat to blame for their circumstances and lack of opportunities. Some of that still applies today.
“While there’s no such thing as “race” there are still some racists.”
If there’s no such thing as “race” (and apparently, sex is indeterminate unless one is a biologist according to one jurist) then how was it that I sat in front of an HR thing and was told “you are not part of a protected class”. I should have said “yeah, actually I am, as I just turned forty and that is a category protected by the ADEA or Age Discrimination in Employment Act, you blithering imbecile”.
When I asked what was a protected class, the explanation-recited by rote-specifically listed certain races and excluded a category called “whites, not of Hispanic origin”.
Since the HR thing didn’t any familial or genetic information about me, how was it that it could categorize me as “white” and more precisely, “White, not of Hispanic Origin” by mere sight alone, but couldn’t determine my age?
I’m still digesting your declaration with a now three decade old article in a magazine called Runner’s World entitled “White Men Can’t Run”.
Or this gem from “King LeBron”.
“I went to an all-white Catholic high school. So, when I first went to the ninth grade in high school, I was also like, I’m not ****ing with white people. I was so institutionalized growing up in the hood, it was like, ‘they don’t ***k with us, they don’t want us to succeed,”
-The Shop, August 28, 2018.
People share differing combinations of DNA but “race” and eugenics are outdated 19th century junk science we need to leave behind. Just as we should move forward away from other social hysterias like transgenderism.
Doing Dignity is a meaningful project. Evangelization and conversion are ongoing and never-ending challenges. Racism they say diminishes the dignity of the practitioners of that primitive craft. We need to pray for the conversion and wellbeing of the racists and their victims.
I can’t respect an essay like this that ascribes sin and blame for racism even if one might be “unconsciously” so. Really??? Sorry but I dont buy into the woke argument of systemic racism and everyone white is guilty even if you dont know it. My understanding about sin from a Catholic point of view is that it requires a knowledge that a certain act is sinful and that one freely choses to indulge in it anyway. Being “unconsciously” racist ( whatever THAT might be) doesnt appear to meet the criteria.
I think this topic has worn out it’s welcome and many of us are tired of being tarred as something we are not. At some point priests who continue to spout this nonsense will find themselves talking to empty pews. I am so glad that Father Pokorsky is far away in Virginia because I could not imagine going to confession to a priest who is assuming I am guilty of things I do not know I have supposedly done. I am sick to death of hearing from the constantly aggrieved crowd who have made a cottage industry of blaming their situation in life on others. I dont see any evidence of that ongoing racism in real life.
Once at a family gathering, someone asked our nephew (who is biracial) if he had ever been subject to a racial incident because of his color. My then 40-something nephew replied “never”. Al Sharptons of the world, go away.
LJ: When I hear reference to Al Sharpton my mind immediately averts to Tawana Brawley.
When you go to confession you do an examination of conscience and tell what your sins are; it’s doubtful the priest knows them already.
Racial profiling going on big time with our Latino community! No other word for it. It wouldn’t surprise me if we just celebrated our last MLK day. There are many who are trying to downplay black history and even some who deny the holocaust! Many of these same people claim to be Christians.
“There are many who are trying to downplay black history”.
Define “downplay”.
What do you mean by “black history”? How is “black history” distinguished from history without an ethic or racial adjective. Is there difference between history with other ethic racial adjectives?
Who is doing this? How are they doing this? When are are they doing it?
There is also the problem of making ridiculous claims like, “Michael Jordan was the greatest black basketball player of all time,” or, “Louis Armstrong was a great black musician.” Instead, “Michael Jordan was the greatest basketball player of all time,” and, “Louis Armstrong was a great musician.” They were great on an absolute scale, not merely on a scale limited by race or ethnicity.
James Connor: the usual spinmeister spewing the party line.
… but, und this is a big but, we in the National Bocialist Party believe das Überleben muss gestammen sein mit der schneaky Armstrong-Jones. Historische Taunton ist Volkermeinig von Meinhead.