On Fraternal Correction

Why men need to judge each other more

Men in the past used to hold each other to higher standards. Honour — conformity to moral standards — meant more. Men who pumped and dumped other men’s sisters or daughters were shamed. Duels were once fought over what bros now barely notice because the worm of liberalism has eaten its way so deeply into the heart of Western culture that many men now think it’s not masculine to judge anyone.

But “don’t judge me, bro” is effeminate. Seneca wanted a mentor who, by advice and reproof, would guard him against bad influences. And according to Plautus, a friend who won’t correct the faults of his friend is himself blameworthy. Masculinity means more judgement, not less, and Christianity has always understood this.

Spiritual alms

Traditionally, almsgiving is assistance to those in need, given out of compassion and for the love of God. And spiritual alms are better than corporal alms: they are higher by nature, and they benefit the recipient more. “While we have time, let us work good to all men” (Gal., vi. 10), and this means giving instruction, counsel and comfort to those suffering from ignorance, doubt and sadness, but it also involves trying to convert men from sin to virtue.

If you love someone, you want what is good for him. You don’t allow degeneracy to destroy him. That’s why fraternal correction matters. It’s an act of not only charity but also mercy. When you feed a hungry man, you alleviate his bodily misery. When you tell a sinner to stop sinning, you alleviate his spiritual misery. The correction might be given after the sin has already been committed or beforehand to prevent it. Either way, it aims at the spiritual welfare of the sinner.

But it isn’t easy to correct someone well. Should you give a sad look? Change the subject? Give a direct warning? Offer instruction? Nevertheless, the difficulties of fraternal correction do not excuse us from it. It’s a serious duty — more important, remember, than corporal almsgiving — and Scripture is insistent: ‘Admonish thy friend: for there is often a fault committed.’ (Sirach 19:15)

To correct or not to correct?

We aren’t obliged to go out and deliberately seek people living in sin, but we should try to help the people we meet. But this is only the case if the correction is likely to convert or improve the sinner; otherwise, it’s neither good nor a duty. If the sinner rejects the warning, it actually does more harm than good. And he can easily become hardened and embittered, doubling down on his sin. In fact, if you know that someone is actually made worse by trying to correct him, it’s a sin to correct him: ‘Rebuke not a scorner lest he hate thee’ (Proverbs 9:8).

This point bears repeating. ‘Corrupt minds cannot be reasoned with,’ as Elizabeth Anscombe said. Since a correction is counterproductive, we can only hope that suffering the consequences of sin — one of the many excellent reasons there’s suffering in the world — will eventually bring the sinner back to God. Yes, this can be hard to accept, but God knows best.

But if we deliberately omit the correction because we want our neighbour to be harmed spiritually, that’s mortally sinful. Imagine, for example, hoping that someone will spiral into a life of crime. And if we fail to give the correction because we’re afraid to offend him, that’s venially sinful — a fault stemming from our own effeminacy.

Effeminacy and soft preaching

Such effeminacy is common among men today as a reflection of the effeminacy in the Church. Since fraternal correction is directed at an individual, it’s not the same thing as the general censure of vice that preachers give. But there’s still a parallel. And one reason men have gone soft on each other is that priests have gone soft on the public. Too many are afraid of saying something unpopular.

Christ, however, didn’t chase likes. He loved us too much to do that. At the height of His popularity, followed by multitudes, He persisted in teaching the hard truths, and they turned away from Him. Barabbas got more likes than Christ did. Priests afraid to give homilies that risk offending their parishioners don’t love them enough. Similarly, Christian social media influencers who tone down Christ’s message to make it easier on their audiences are also spiritually damaging them.

We see the same thing in individual relationships. Parents afraid to risk offending their children don’t love them enough. Husbands, too, have a duty to correct their wives, and those who fail to do so through effeminacy or negligence do not truly love them either. And the same goes for teachers and their students. To tolerate ignorance or laziness in a student is to sin against him.

An inferior may even correct a superior, and the superior should respond with gratitude and humility, as St. Peter did when reproved by St. Paul (Galatians 2:11). Aquinas notes that the superior actually stands in greater need of correction because he is in greater danger given that he will be judged by a higher standard. The many theologians who have criticised Pope Francis are actually being loving.

Don’t be a meddler

But unless we’re sure serious sin is involved and the correction is likely to help, fraternal correction should be avoided. One reason is that quarrels and enmities will result. Another reason is that, since charity means that we must give each other the benefit of the doubt, the person you’re trying to correct can easily accuse you of lacking charity. Finally, wanting to correct slight sins turns you into an irritating meddler, and they’re so numerous that it would be impossible to correct them all anyway.

Being sinful ourselves, however, isn’t a reason to avoid giving a fraternal correction. Thankfully, we don’t have to be impeccable to help others avoid sin, or we’d never be able to help anyone. Only Christ and Mary were free from all sin. But we mustn’t correct others to distract attention from our own sins or to get revenge. And we mustn’t correct pridefully as if we’re above correction: “Wherein thou judgest another thou condemnest thyself, for thou dost the same things which thou judgest” (Rom, ii. 1).

In fact, since love of self is the standard for love of neighbour — i.e., we must love our neighbour as ourselves — we must prioritise correcting ourselves first of all. For example, a husband who can’t enforce discipline because he himself lacks it should fix himself first so he can help his family better. ‘The soul of reform,’ said Emerson, ‘is reform of soul.’

The order of charity

Do you need to correct your friends often? No. You have more of a duty to save your own soul first. Your wife comes next, and then your children. Next come your parents, followed by your siblings, extended relatives and only then your friends. Before you finally get to random people in internet comment sections — where the majority of the few attempts at fraternal correction still made in the world today occur — you’d also have to add in your benefactors. That is the order of charity. Yet men today are far more likely to correct a total stranger when they shouldn’t than to correct their wives when they should do.

We need more good fraternal corrections, but we also need fewer bad ones. To check whether you should do it or not, remember these conditions:

1. If a serious sin isn't going to be corrected except by you

2. And you have good reason to hope your correction will benefit the sinner

3. And it won't be unreasonably harmful to you

When all these conditions are met, it’s probably appropriate to give a fraternal correction. But remember friends are a long way down the list of people you have a duty to correct. And strangers are last on the list. Furthermore, it’s probably not a serious sin; you’re probably not the only person who can correct it; the sinner will probably just be made worse by your correction; and you’re likely going to be drawn into discord and up speaking in a way you’ll later regret

If you still feel a fraternal correction is warranted, perhaps because your sibling is talking about cheating on his wife, for example, then meet these conditions as well:

4. Get into the right frame of mind, proceeding with charity because you must bear with the weaknesses of others (Galatians 6:2).

5. Act with humility because you must not proudly prefer yourself to others (Philip 2:3).

6. Remember your relationship to the person: correct inferiors paternally, equals kindly, and superiors respectfully. In all cases, mingle seriousness and mildness.

7. Finally, always give the correction privately when possible.