In The Real World, We Can’t Get Away From Evil

Last updated on: June 14, 2008 at 2:32 pm by Henry Karlson

In The Real World, We Can’t Get Away From Evil 2008-06-14T14:32:21-05:00 Henry Karlson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The world we live in is a fallen world. Until the eschaton, it will never find perfection. This fact should not mean that we can be lazy and give up working for the betterment of the world. No, we should always strive for perfection, even if we know it is unattainable. In a sense, however, it is attainable and indeed, Christians in their experience of Christ at communion do encounter it and find it for one great moment at the Lord ‘s Table.

Christians should always have their eye on the end, on perfection, while realizing the state of the world they live in. They must understand what the world is like, and how powerful evil can be and is in it. But they must engage the world. They can’t turn their backs on it. Such a gnostic response is always the response of a coward. Yet they must be realistic; what they can do for the world is good, even if it is limited. If they engage politics, it means they must understand that no political position will be perfect in and of itself. They can expect no politician or political idea to fix all earthly problems. More importantly it means that when engaging politics, they will be engaging a fallen structure, and they will have to make deals with people who do evil. There is no way out of it. There is no way beyond the fact that politics requires compromises, and the end result of any political action will never meet any ideal. People involved with a given political action will be cooperating with one kind of evil or another.

In cooperating with one who does evil, one is themselves not necessarily doing evil. Some forms of cooperation, of course, would be. But others must not be seen as such. Cooperation does not necessarily mean agreement. One must look at how the cooperation is engaged and see if the kind of cooperation is acceptable or not in itself. We really must be realistic and truly understand this fact. “Working with” someone does not mean “agreement with” all aspects of that person’s policies or decisions. St Thomas More clearly worked with Henry VIII, and was willing to help him out, even after Henry VIII’s defection from the Catholic faith. Henry, by this time, was engaging quite a bit of evil, but St Thomas More thought that not only was there a level of cooperation he could have with the king, it was required of him to give as much cooperation as he could if his conscience didn’t cry out against it. St Thomas More understood a fact which people have forgotten today: there are many ways to work for a given end. St Thomas More wanted to help his old friend back into the Church and to protect England from disaster. While his way might not have worked out, no one could have predicted failure. If he were alive today, pundits might besmear his reputation for his working with Henry; Catholics in his day understood the situation and understood there were no easy answers.

Christians are required to look for and try to bring about the good, but they are expected to use their wits and conscience to find prudential means by which the good can come about. Sometimes that means temporal cooperation with evil, but when that is the case, that kind of cooperation must have a limit (as St Thomas More also shows us). What is that limit? When a given means breaks the moral law, one can not practice it, even if the positive law of the land demands it. Many times, however, working with someone who is evil, and even enacting evil (as Henry VIII did) does not mean one is themselves working for or enforcing such evil means.

When people disagree about the best means to an end, some think that those who disagree with them must be working for evil. They don’t understand the complexity of the situation and how people will think things through differently. To argue against other possible means as being the result of some amoral motives is to judge the situation with an insight few can really possess, and if you don’t, then it is a judgment call which is itself sinful.

Yes, people can be naïve and follow or trust someone they shouldn’t. But that happens to all of us in life. To judge whether or not such an action is naïve (let alone evil) requires hindsight, the kind which can look to history and judge it, and the kind which we do not have when we are working for some future which hasn’t yet manifested itself. Of course, in political debates, it’s a common enough expression by people from all sides of an issue. It’s a kind of self-affirmation we need, because we are often in doubt of our own answer. If we can’t understand the ways of others, and so we judge what they say to be foolish just because we can’t understand it, this makes us feel as if our answer is indeed the best possible one even if it is not. Historically, indeed, such assumptions about others have often led to devastating results because the one who thought it was the one who was foolish. Perhaps one of the greatest historical examples of this fact can be found in the life and work of St Alexander Nevsky.

St Alexander Nevsky, the Grand Prince of Novgorod and Vladimir, inherited the throne in the middle of the Tatar Yoke. While it is clear that Mongol rule over Rus was terrible, and his people wanted independence from them, Alexander Nevksy understood the reality of the situation: they were not capable of attaining freedom and any attempts at it would cause severe reprimands from the Golden Horde. He knew that, for his lifetime, the best thing to do was to cooperate with the Mongols, no matter how difficult it made things, and no matter what kinds of evils were done at their hands. Not everyone agreed with him. Indeed, many thought ill of him because of it. More than once in his life he had to overcome rebellion, even against members of his own family. When political intrigue indicated that a certain region under his control was planning to revolt, he would do what he could to squash it, but if he couldn’t, he would tell the Mongols what was happening, and even help them to end the rebellion. Such tactics, of course, satisfied the Mongols: since he was seen to be loyal to them, he was able to gain many benefits from them for his people. For example, he was able to exempt his people from joining the Tatar army, a remarkable feat which could not have been done save for his acts of fidelity. More importantly, it left his people with a sort of independence, since he was trusted to rule over them, and it gave them more than enough time to eventually gain the strength needed to overcome Mongol rule (something which would happen after his lifetime). Clearly, Alexander Nevsky cooperated with evil when he worked with the Mongols, especially when he even helped enforce their rule upon his people. However, he also knew that it was such a means which was needed to buy his people enough time to grow and become strong in their own right. Without it, they would have easily perished. But with it, he was able to preserve his cultural and religious heritage intact (one of the reasons why he was canonized by the Orthodox). Those around him often considered him a traitor: he was naïve, because everyone knew that Mongol rule was wrong. Yet, they were shown to be the one in the wrong when their rebellions were overcome and Alexander Nevsky’s political aims were achieved after his death.

Perhaps it is time we realize that the difficult situation we face in politics requires people to have strange bedfellows. Arguing against someone because of those they associate with is always fallacious (though, of course, if it is more than mere association, but pure agreement with an evil means, it’s no longer guilt by association, but guilt by action). We might not understand why they think a given action will result in an ends, especially when the means seems contrary to the ends (such as St Alexander Nevsky’s cooperation with the Mongols). But it is wrong to impute upon them evil intentions, or naiveté, just because we disagree with them. If we do, we will begin to criticize actions of the saints. And it won’t be just any kinds of actions, but the actions which they followed that led to their canonization. Is this really what we want to happen as a result of our political theories?

Previous Post

June 14, 2008

Ireland, the Lisbon Treaty, and the Church

Next Post

June 15, 2008 U.S. Bishops stand up for life

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2019 A Consistent Ethic of Life Aaron Weldon Abortion absurdity Abuse Scandal Academics Adoption Advent Africa agreement/disagreement with Church teaching Alexander Schmemann Alexham Alterity America Amnesty International Anarchism angels Anglicanism Animals Annual Statistics Anthony Anxietas Apocalyptic Apophatic Appalachia Aquinas Art Atheism Atonement Augustine Authority Baptism Beauty Bible biblical criticism biblical scholarship Bioethics Bishops Black Catholics Black Theology Blackadder Blogs Books Breastfeeding Brett Salkeld Buddhism Bush administration Byzantine Catholic Calvinism Canada Canon Law Capital Punishment Capitalism Caryll Houselander Catholic Blog Awards Catholic Blogging Catholic League Catholic Social Teaching Catholic Worker Movement Catholicity CFL Charity Children Chris West Christ and Culture Christian Democracy Christian Unity Christmas Christology Church Church Doctrine Church History Climate Change Cohabitation Colbert Collegiality Communion Communism Comparative Theology Competition Conferences conscience conscience rights Consequentialism Consistent Life Ethics Consumerism Contraception Contrition Conversion Converts Coptic COVID-19 Creation Critical Thinking Cross Cuba Culture Culture of Death Culture of Life Darfur David Cruz-Uribe David Wheeler-Reed Death Death Penalty Democracy Demons Desert Fathers Devil Dialogue dignity Disability Disarmament discernment Discipleship discrimination Dissent Distributism Division Doctrine Domestic Church Dorothy Day Double Effect Doubt Down syndrome Driving Early Church Easter Eastern Churches Ecclesiology Economics Economy Ecumenism Education El Salvador Election Election 2020 Ellul Embryonic Stem Cell Research Empire Energy Enlighenment Environmentalism Ephraim Radner Episcopal Church epistemology Equality Eschatology Ethics Eucharist Europe Euthanasia Evangelization Evil Evolution Excommunication F.X. Durrwell Facism Facts Fair Trade Faith Family Fashion Feddie Feminism Feminist theology Fertility Fetal Rights Fiction Film Finances First Things flags Folk Religion Food Foreign Affairs Forgiveness Frank Sheed Free Speech Freedom gay & lesbian persons Genocide George W. Bush George Weigel Gerald L. Campbell Girard/Mimetic Theory Global Warming Globalization Gnosticism Good Friday Grace Gratitude Greed Grey Cup 2009 Guadalupe Guest Post Guest Posts Gun Control Gustave Martelet Habitat for Humanity Hans Urs von Balthasar Harry Potter Hate Speech Health Health Care Healthcare Heather King Hebrew Bible Henri de Lubac Henry Karlson Herbert McCabe Heresy HHS Mandate Controversy History Holidays Holiness Holy Spirit Homiletics Homily Homosexuality Hope Hospitality How Far Can We Go? How Far Can We Go? Human Person Human Rights Humanae Vitae Humility Humor Hunger Hunting Identity Idolatry Ignacio Ellacuría Imagination Immigration In Memoriam Income Inequality Inculturation Indigenous People Individualism Inklings Intellect Interdependence Internet Interpretation Interviews Introduction Iraq War Islam Israel Jain James Alison James Martin Jazz Jesus Christ Jews Joe Biden Joe Hargrave Johann Baptist Metz John Allen John Henry Newman John Paul II John the Baptist John XXIII Jonathan Josef Pieper Joseph (the husband of Mary) Joseph Bernardin Joseph Ratzinger Josh Brumfield Journals Joy Judgment Just War Justice Kari Lundgren Karl Rahner Katerina Ivanovna Kenya Keynes Kingdom of God Kyle R. Cupp Labor Language Latin America Law Leanne Ogasawara Legion of Christ Leisure Lent Liberalism Liberation Theology Libertarianism Libya Lies Life life & dignity & responsibility of the human person Literature Little Way Liturgical music Liturgical Year Liturgy Living Simply Living Wage Local Church Lombard Lord of the Rings Louis Dupre Love M.Z. Magic Magisterium Mark DeFrancisis Mark Gordon Marriage Martin Luther Martin Luther King Jr. Martyrdom Marxism Mary Masculinity Matt Talbot Matthew Fish Matthew Levering McCain Media Memorial Day Mennonites Mental Illness mercy Michael Iafrate Middle East militarism Miroslav Volf Mitt Romney Modesty Moral Theology Morality Mormonism Morning's Minion Mother Teresa Music Muslims Natalie Nate Wildermuth Nationalism Native Americans Nature Nazis Neuhaus New Evangelization New York City News NFP nihilism Nonviolence Not Abortion Nova's Ordo Nuclear weapons Nuns Obama Occult Old Age Opus Dei Ordination ordination of women original sin Orthodoxy Oscar Romero Other Voices Pacifism Palestine Palin Papacy Papal Peace Messages Papal Social Encyclicals Particular Affections Partisanship Patriotism Paul Paul Ryan Paul VI Peace Pentimento persecution Personalism Phantastes Philosophy PKD Planned Parenthood Pluralism Poetry Policraticus Politcal Apathy Politics Poll Pope Benedict XVI Pope Francis Pope John Paul II Pope Leo XIV Population Postcolonialsim Poverty Power Prayer Preaching Predictions Predictions for 2012 President Barack Obama priestly formation & discernment Pro-Life Progress Prophetic Witness Proportionalism Public Diplomacy Public Policy Question Quotes Rachel Maddow Racism Radical Catholic Mom Radical Catholicism Raymund Schwager Real Catholic TV Real Presence Reconciliation Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Religion religious freedom Responsibility Ressourcement Resurrection Rick Garnett Ridiculous Crap You Never Thought You'd See Robert Barron Roe v. Wade Roman Curia Rome Russia Sacraments Saints Salvation History Sam Harris Sam Rocha Same-sex Marriage Saskatchewan Roughriders Satire School of the Americas Science Scripture Seamless Garment Second Vatican Council Seeing Sex sexual violence Sexuality Sia Sin social justice Social Security Socialism Society of Jesus Sofia Loves Wisdom Solidarity Sophia soteriology Soutenus Spirituality Sports St. Dismas St. Joseph Stanley Hauerwas Statistics Stimulus Suffering Sunday Reflections Supernatural Supreme Court Symbolism Syria Taxing Technology Terrorism The State The Tea Party The Trump Administration Theological Anthropology Theology Theotokos Thomas Merton Throwaway Culture Tim Muldoon Tim Riley Tim Tebow Time Titian Tolkien Torture Toys Trade Traditionalism Transgender Transportation Transubstantiation Trinity Truth TV U.S. Affairs Uncategorized Unions unity among people who disagree US Catholicism USCCB Usury Utilitarianism Utopia Valentine's Day Vatican Vatican II Veterans Vicarious Suffering Video Violence Virgin Mary Vocations Voluntary Associations Voluntary Poverty Voting Vox Nova vox nova blog war War and Peace War Strategy Wealth Weirdness Welfare state Women Women Priests Work Woundedness Youth

Select a Month June 2026 May 2025 February 2025 January 2025 July 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 July 2023 March 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 November 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

The great day of the Lord is near—a day of wrath, distress, anguish, trouble, ruin, and what?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Plague and famine Blood and thunder Fire and brimstone Darkness and gloom