Introduction to Human Dignity and our Economy...

Human Dignity in One Lesson

Our nation is facing challenging economic times. Such times often cause tremendous change in roles of government, private sector, and family. It is the purview of the faithful and all in our society to assess how to best meet our moral obligations. As hierarchy in the Catholic Church, it is our responsibility to remind both our faithful and all people in our society of what these moral responsibilities are.

Always and everywhere it is the responsibility of every individual, and all grouping of society, including government, to serve and uphold the dignity of every human being. To accomplish this, it is necessary to understand what is meant by human dignity, and what is required to uphold it.

Human Dignity
Human dignity is the innate and unalienable quality bestowed on every human at conception. We each have a value beyond reckoning and a God-given potential that only we can fulfill. Our nation's Declaration of Independence is founded on this most fundamental natural law.

Three principles must be fully, mutually, and equally met in order to uphold human dignity: the common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity. If any of these three is absent or slightly lacking, then, human dignity is not uphold, and is in fact undermined -- a three legged stool with a missing or shortened leg can not uphold the person sitting on it.

The Common Good
The common good is the mutually shared responsibility of all individual people to corporately realize our full human potential as individuals.

Subsidiarity
Subsidiarity is the responsibility of individuals to realize the fullest potential of the smallest groupings, down to the family and individual, by placing ownership at the smallest feasible and practical level. Indeed, not only is it the responsibility of smaller groupings to claim and act upon their local authority, but it is the responsibility of larger groupings to encourage and support ownership at smaller levels as required.

Solidarity
Solidarity is the responsibility of individuals to realize that what happens to one effects all and thus to stand together, with our strongest helping support our weakest, that we might realize our fullest human potential.

The Most Common Error in Trying to Uphold Human Dignity
Any well intentioned act by an individual, group, society or government which fails to uphold human dignity does so for one or both of two very simply reasons:

It examines the impact of its cause and effect for too short a time and/or on too small a group.

Abortion is the perfect example of this grave error. Examining the rights of the woman only at the time of her pregnancy and anticipated motherhood, her right to not be bothered by anything she doesn't want to be falsely makes abortion seem a moral option. However, doing so fails to consider the effect of the abortion on her unborn child (death), on the mother's life-long mental, spiritual, and physical well being (tremendously harmful effects in all areas), on the father (who has a right to know he's a father and who suffers mental, spiritual, and physical effects as well), and on society at large, which fails to value human life and dignity leading to the harming or killing of millions because of being blind to evil.

To the extent that government, corporations, and other larger groups usurp actions, rights and ownership which rightfully belong at an individual, family, or smaller group level, human dignity is undermined.

To the extent that we as a society fail to reach out and help our brothers and sisters overcome their poverties to the point they have equal opportunity, human dignity is undermined.

To the extent that individuals turn to others for what they themselves can provide, even through struggle, human dignity is undermined.

To the extent that government takes the fruit of individual's labor beyond what is essential to fulfill government's rightful role to protect its people's fundamental, God give, unalienable rights, human dignity is undermined.

Our Call to Uphold Human Dignity:
Christ's challenging invitation to each of us: making decisions effecting the dignity of ourselves and others, to examine the full effect of our actions and laws, and ensure our actions uphold human dignity as fully as possible. Doing so is essential for our nation to continue to be a vibrant, free beacon of democracy, and to us to live our faith.

Ask yourself two simple questions: What is the effect of this action if I consider it's full impact over a long period of time? Does it fully, equally, and mutually uphold the common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity, and thus human dignity?

New Year's Resolution: Lexio Divina

Yup. It's that time. Obligatory promises to self. The secular version of Lent. My challenge to myself each Lent, and thus round New Years as well, is to find a new way to Run Toward Christ.

I've made the commitment to create Lexio Divina video's in preparation for each Sunday's Mass. It's one way I try to run toward Christ. Whether you join me via video or do Lexio Divina with others or on your own -- it's a powerful way to Run Toward Christ!

My Lexio Divinas are posted here each week (feel free to follow the RSS).

Where Hope is Found

Eucharist plants seeds,
Christ's Mass Grows within,
Prepare ye the way!

Eucharist plants the seeds of Christmas in our mind, our heart, our soul. How do we nurture the seed of Christ? What fruit will we eventually bring forth?

Eucharist plants seeds,
Christ's Mass Grows within,
Prepare ye the way!

Science Fiction and Salvation

Science Fiction is a powerful tool for exploring and understanding how we human collectively see ourselves.

"No," some might argue, "it's simply the result of a few minds and how they see the world."

Indeed. That's true of any given work. But, those that make it to the masses and become popular, have somehow spoken to people "en mass" and it has a lot to say about how we collectively see ourselves.

Jules Vern, Doyle, Asimov, Roddenberry, Lucas. These are among the minds that have asked us, collectively, to ponder our human potential and how we recognize and choose good and evil, God or Satan.

Of modern note are creations that in recent decades have become popular TV series. Star Trek, Babylon 5, Star Gate series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Battlestar Galactica, Terminator: Sarah Connor Chronicles, Heros, Sanctuary.

There is a tendency among the modern sci-fi creations to be highly cynical. There is a distinct lack of hope. There is the premise that evil has won and survival equals victory. There is an underlying belief that humanity is doomed, and that being human means being irreprably connected with evil. This is an accurate and scary reality of the world without Jesus our Christ.

Mutations that are advancing humanity to our fuller potential and to greater potential for destruction abound. There is an awareness that humanity is called to more than we realize, but they very rarely point to God as the avenue for our salvation. 

Watching them, it can be easy to forget the through Jesus our Christ, we can rise up to fulfill a destiny far greater than we imagine -- the one God created us to be. It can be easy to forget we are each made in God's image, and if we can say "Yes!" to Christ being born within us, just as Mary did 2000 years ago, that God's grace gives up hope of living up to being fully human.

Bizarre and Artificial Rift Between Pro-Life and Social Justice “Camps”

This is the Enemy of human dignity clearly at work, dividing a house that should clearly be
united. There are errors on both sides, both of which boil down to not understanding our own
Catholic social teaching.

The battle against abortion is a clear moral “trump” issue. Without life, there is no opportunity
for human dignity here on earth. At the same time, our faith requires us to recognize Jesus our
Christ in every person and seek to help each person overcome the barriers between then and
equal opportunity.

One Body, In Christ

We can have both. We need to strive and struggle, together, toward both.
My prayer is that this model of Catholic social teaching can help move people beyond this evil
rift. We are one body. It’s time we started working like one, including that we realize we’re only one part and that other parts have other jobs and we work best when we realize we are one part, serving all parts.

Christmas Abundance in Today's Economy

I thought I'd share how we're responding to the much tighter budget this year as we prepare for Christmas.

We talked with our daughters and explained that this year we will be making our presents for each other. We've long read about the Christmases Laura Ingles Wilder had growing up -- and they really like the idea of Christmas gifts being made by us for each other and family and friends.

So our wee house of elves is busy at elven activity! The joy it brings to be doing that is a wonderful gift in itself! It looks to be a wondrously industrious and joy-filled Advent as we prepare for Christ's Mass!

How will your family find abundance this Christmas? Share your thoughts in the comments section.

Dialogue Begins

Note: I've learned that Ramon Tulio is a literary device by a blogger to humorously discuss Catholic Social Teaching. I've decided to leave this interaction up because it is reflective of interactions I've had with real people in various areas of social justice, from Pax Christi to a real professor at Regis University. However, I will not knowing engage in dialogue with fictional persona. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Thank you, Ironic Catholic, for the chance to have a hearty laugh at myself! Grin.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Professor Ramon Tulio was gracious in responding in the comments below. I thought his comments, and the equally important example of spirited dialogue, worth it's own post.

Prof. Ramon Tulio here. Dcn Patrick, I like this attempt to visualize the principles here. I do have one comment. Although many, including myself, would agree with you regarding the centrality of the life and dignity of the human person, I think there may be a reason the Compendium has four principles. Perhaps the source and summit, as you say, is ultimately Eucharistic...not just in systematic theology but also Catholic Social Teaching. Our life in the world is a step into the paschal mystery, if you take discipleship seriously...the paschal mystery is the pattern of our lives and the imitation of Christ in our various states of life.

This is all a long way to say that I'd rather keep that Eucharistic center in the middle of it all, and allow the four principles the Compendium allows.

It's interesting that the Compendium has these four principles...whittled down from the seven principles in the USCCB's Sharing Catholic Social Teaching...whittled down from popular articulations of 10 or more!

I agree the principles need to be held in balance.

More later (re: the above posts), Thanks for all the work on my favorite subject!
--Professor Tulio

Dear Professor Tulio,

Thank you for engaging in this dialogue. It is well worth celebrating the common faith and mission we share -- for it is within that common ground that we exchange these ideas.

If I'm understanding what you wrote above, and please correct me if I'm wrong, you make two primary points: Eucharist as the center of it all and the subsequent flattening of the four principles -- the elimination of the three-legged stool concept. I see the first as excellent but incomplete, and the second as mistaken.

To your first point, Jesus our Christ is at the center, is the source and summit, of all Catholic teaching. Eucharist and human dignity are inseparable from who Jesus our Christ is. The act of Eucharist and the anthropology of being both divine and human (a simple way of defining human dignity) are unique revelations that are essential for knowing who Christ is by nature and who we are called to be by grace.

Your first point is well taken: I could say it better than I do and will change that in my paper.

Which brings me to your second point. If I am understanding you correctly, you are pushing back against the notion that human dignity is the preeminent principle among the 4 permanent principles. The Compendium itself refutes this: human dignity is “the foundation of all other principles and content of the Church’s social doctrine” (Compendium, #160).

Indeed, the USCCB's "Sharing Catholic Social Teaching" states: "These principles build on the foundation of Catholic social teaching: the dignity of human life. This central Catholic principle requires that we measure every policy, every institution, and every action by whether it protects human life and enhances human dignity, especially for the poor and vulnerable." Clearly upholding human dignity is the central principle of Catholic Social Teaching.

You mention these four principles have been whittled down from the seven given by the USCCB's "Sharing Catholic Social Teaching" (and from other, larger lists of principles). There is one problem with this: subsidiarity is not among those seven (which are: Dignity and Live of the Human Person, Call to Family, Community, and Participation, Rights and Responsibilities, Option for the Poor and Vulnerable, Dignity of Work and Rights of Workers, Solidarity, and Care of God's Creation). It is mentioned once, in passing, under "Care for God's Creation." Frankly, I'm puzzled by the document's neglecting to highlight one of the four permanent principles.

These four are not whittled down from anything. Saying so is like saying breathing, eating, and drinking are a whittled down list of biological activities. Hardly. They are the essential structure upon which all other principles of Catholic Social Teaching must be positioned. Without any one of them, Human dignity dies. All Catholic social teaching principles serve to uphold human dignity, and all principles outside the permanent four must meet the demands of each of the three pillars in order to uphold human dignity. Indeed, I don't believe we can discuss any principle or assess an action in regards to Catholic Social Teaching without mentioning how it either relates to or upholds human dignity and meets the three pillars of common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity.

Freedom Primary to Human Dignity

Freedom to choose who we associate with, what we do and how we do it, so long as we do not usurp the rights of others is foundational to the human experience. That's why subsidiarity is so critical to upholding human dignity. The largest usurper of individual freedoms is our government.

Catholic Social Teaching tells us we should be extremely leery of any institution larger than the family taking to it power that rightly belongs to the family or the individual. Advocates of social justice often extoll a larger government role for addressing our poor through government programs, or interference with individuals rights to freely negotiate contracts with each other (minimum wage laws). What they fail to realize is that such actions infringe on our fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of our poor (they also, as near as I can tell, tend to have the opposite, negative, effect on our poors' economic status). This undermines human dignity and only serves to repress equal opportunity rather than promote it.

The chart below shows that the larger the institution the less power it ought to have, affording individuals the maximum amount of freedom (as shown by the green triangle). However, there is a strong tendency for larger institutions to take to themselves rights, privleges, and responsibilities that justly belong in the free market, private organizations, family, or individuals (as shown by the dashed triangle).

We should be deeply concerned anytime additional power is sought by any institution larger than family. We should also be fighting to return all rights, powers, and responsibilities to the free market, private organizations, family, and the individual that can be owned at those levels.

As we come to truly understand how many of the solutions Catholics often currently advocate actually undermine human dignity, then we can begin to look for actions that can more fully uphold human dignity. Only through mutual collaboration and dialogue will we advance human dignity as much as possible.

Subsidiarity?

Subsidiarity is one of the 4 foundational principles of Catholic Social Teaching. Of the four, it is the black sheep. It's there, but no one really ever talks about it. Why? I don't know. It's absolutely essential to upholding human dignity.

In theological geek speak subsidiarity is the responsibility of society to realize the fullest potential of the smallest
groupings, down to the family and individual, by placing ownership at the smallest feasible and
practical level. Indeed, not only is it the responsibility of smaller groupings to claim and act upon
their local authority, but it is the responsibilownership at smaller levels as required.

In common speak, subsidiarity is "power to the people."

Misconceptions of subsidiarity abound. Among them, I focus on three:

One misconception of subsidiarity is that if a needed responsibility is not being met by society,
including the free market, then the state, as owner of last resort, has permission and moral
mandate to take ownership of meeting the collective responsibility. Wrong. Subsidiarity requires
the state to take measures to encourage and support ownership at a lower level. An example of
this misunderstanding is our current system of social welfare is bloated, impersonal, and
ineffective in empowering people beyond poverty, and it actually undermines human dignity
because it fails to meet the test of subsidiarity, which states that the more local and freely entered
the solution, the more fully human dignity is upheld. It is the State’s responsibility to promote
and support ownership at the smallest feasible and practical (practicable) level. In general, this
means creating and supporting free choice endeavors within the free market. The state has at its
disposal a variety of tools (many of which are likely underdeveloped and poorly understood for
lack of experience and require further development) including: tax incentives and voucher
systems.

Another misconception of subsidiarity presumes a false dichotomy: either we meet society’s
responsibility via the State or we leave it to individuals to choose to overcome the obstacles
before them. This erroneous dichotomy has led to the classic belief that all people who oppose
social welfare programs are crudely saying our poor “should pull themselves up by their own
boot straps.” Again, wrong. There are a vast number of unexplored possibilities for meeting our
collective responsibility and they are to be found somewhere between the State and the
individual.

Finally, a third misconception of subsidiarity confuses applying subsidiarity to the method of
selection vs. to the potential solutions themselves. For example, in Colorado’s November 2006
elections we had a statewide initiative increasing taxes and increasing the state’s social welfare
programs. When I asked a well formed Catholic leader of the initiative how subsidiarity applied,
they informed me that it had been applied, as it was being voted on by the people. This is an
example of applying subsidiarity to the method of selection (voting by the people) but not to the
potential solutions themselves. In effect voting had passed the test of subsidiarity but it had never
been applied to potential solution of a tax increase. By this way of thinking, any measure on the
ballot, including a shift to totalitarian dictatorship, passes the test of subsidiarity. Clearly, this is
an example of confusing the process of selection with the the proposed action itself.

These three misconceptions illustrate both the lack of development and understudying of
subsidiarity within Catholic theology and part of the reason for such lack. Herein lies the greatest
challenge to both this model and to people’s willingness to explore and understand it:
Subsidiarity has a lot to say about solutions we currently support as socially just, but which
subsidiarity shows us actually leaves human dignity tottering on a two-legged stool. The
challenge before us is to become willing to take a new look at social issues to which we thought
we knew the solutions. If we want to uphold human dignity as fully as possible, we need to let go
of some of our current answers and venture into unknown territory in search of answers.subsidiarity shows us actually leaves human dignity tottering on a two-legged stool. The
challenge before us is to become willing to take a new look at social issues to which we thought
we knew the solutions. If we want to uphold human dignity as fully as possible, we needof some of our current answers and venture into unknown territory in search of answers.

Tests for Each Leg of the Stool

(Click a picture to see it full size)

The Pillars upholding human dignity are common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity. Here we briefly explore the common good. It's important to realize that none of these principles can be fully understood without the other three.

The above are tests I propose (which are inherently subjective and a tool for dialogue, not a tool for finality) for assessing if a given action upholds each aspect of human dignity. Their primary usefulness is as a dialogue tool, providing a common foundation from which to begin talking with someone who disagrees with you about raising minimum wage, so you can begin to understand where and why you disagree, why there are holes in your approach or theirs, and perhaps to begin seeing what needs to happen to create an action that more fully upholds human dignity than we currently have.

Care to participate in that dialogue? Feel free to dive in in the comments section. For the whole schtick, please see my Model of Catholic Social Teaching.

How Does this Stool Help?

So, we've got this three-legged stool. what do we do with it?

For starters, we can now see that we need all three legs for the stool to remain standing - to uphold human dignity.

Common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity form a trinitarian means of assessing and refining an actions ability to uphold human dignity. The more fully each is present, the stronger the upholding of human dignity. Each principle is its own person in upholding the one goal of human dignity. Each interrelates with the other two, yet is distinct from them. We cannot truly talk about one without referencing the others (though it is possible, and even common, to neglect one, generally subsidiarity).

The stool helps because it becomes a tool for dialogue on any given possible social action and how well it actually upholds human dignity. The stool becomes helpful because it begins to show us the shortcomings of the solutions we often advocate in the name of social justice. It becomes useful in that it can challenge us to find new and better ways to uphold human dignity rather than ignorantly supporting actions which actually undermine human dignity.

A Three-Legged Stool to Uphold Human Dignity

I believe Catholic social teaching is wondrously rich and deep and offers us far more moral guidance than we perhaps think it does. However, to unlock this richness, we have to understand the inherant structure of the various principles involved and how they relate with each other.

We have the teaching of Jesus our Christ, the many and various writings of our Saints and papal encyclicals from relatively modern times. These are the source of our beautiful, living, breathing Catholic social teaching.

The Compendium offers us a first glimpse at what an underlying structure of these many principles might be. Catholic Social teaching has four “permanent principles”: human dignity, common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity. These are “the very heart of Catholic social teaching” and human dignity is “the foundation of all other principles and content of the Church’s social doctrine” (Compendium, #160).

Clearly, any systemic approach to Catholic social teaching must have human dignity as its foundation and any social action must have the upholding of everyone’s human dignity as the measure of its goodness. To borrow a phrase from Eucharistic theology, human dignity is the source and summit of Catholic social teaching and praxis.

That leaves us with the three permanent principles: common good, subsidiarity, and solidarity. Understanding how these three relate to each other and to human dignity is the obvious next step to creating a systematic understanding of Catholic social teaching.

Based on my understanding of these concepts and the overall way in which they are presented, albeit largely, if not entirely, independent of one another, I believe these three remaining permanent principles are mutually essential to the upholding of human dignity. Like the three legs of a stool holding up the seat upon which a person rests, these three pillars of human dignity are each required if a particular action is to uphold the dignity of the human person. Should any one be missing to any degree, the stool falls, and we've failed to uphold human dignity.

If this model is true, then any and all understanding and application of Catholic Social Teaching must show how it upholds all three pillars in order to show it upholds human dignity. The natural result of this is highly subjective, and requires a lot of dialogue.

Care to participate in that dialogue? Feel free to dive in in the comments section. For the whole schtick, please see my Model of Catholic Social Teaching.

How our Church Fails to Uphold Human Dignity

Note: I've learned that Ramon Tulio is a literary device by a blogger to humorously discuss Catholic Social Teaching. I've decided to leave this interaction up because it is reflective of interactions I've had with real people in various areas of social justice, from Pax Christi to a real professor at Regis University. However, I will not knowing engage in dialogue with fictional persona. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Thank you, Ironic Catholic, for the chance to have a hearty laugh at myself! Grin.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kudos to Professor Ramon Tulio for teaching Catholic Social Teaching via the Ironic Catholic. We need more of that. Unfortunately, Professor Tulio does not stick to Catholic Social Teaching, but throws in poor logic and reasoning. Referring to the financial crisis that came to a near boiling point last week, he says:

"And capitalism without much regulation--as it has been practiced in the past handful of years--has clearly hurt many families and communities, and has played havoc with workers' rights. Wall Street just had a big mammon orgy and now we're all going to pay...and many have been "paying" for years, inside the United States and out."

Where to start? First, I make some presumptions on knowledge of Catholic Social Teaching, which can be found here. Also, the Compendium of Social Doctrine of the Church may be helpful.

"Capitalism without much regulation." Really? Compared to what? Many economists argue we have far too much regulation, that the government's role is to create safe boundaries and make sure everyone plays by the rules inside those boundaries, and stop regulating anything else.

Catholic social teaching gives us four primary principles: human dignity, which is upheld through mutual, synergistic application of the common good,  subsidiarity, and solidarity. Often theologians say we need to uphold the common good, as if it is the preeminent principle of the four. It's not. Human dignity is what we need to uphold.

Every time government takes more power to itself, we have to look toward the principle of subsidiarity. Is government usurping a role and responsibility that can legitimately be done elsewhere? Rather than running to government as the answer, Catholic social teaching urges us to strongly question what is truly necessary for government to do. In today's economic climate we ought to be asking just what roles and responsibilities has the government wrongly taken to itself? 

"Capitalism ... has clearly hurt many families and communities." This is utterly false. Capitalism is simply a means for individuals to freely negotiate the exchange of goods and services. Capitalism hasn't hurt anybody. People sinning has hurt many families and communities, most often their own. Think of it this way: if two people met in the foyer of your parish, shook hands, and then one mugged the other, would you blame the foyer? No. Would the police need to step in and regulate who comes in? No. You'd blame the mugger's choice to mug and request the government do it's proper job of enforcing the law by arresting and prosecuting the perpetrator.

We would be wise to note that while capitalism is a neutral system of economics, which in itself does not infringe upon human dignity (and indeed affords it tremendous opportunity to be upheld), socialism inherently undermines human dignity because it's very tenets usurp the rights and privileges of individuals and families, including right to the fruit of one's labor and private ownership. Socialism is inherently inhuman, and thus inherently evil.

"Capitalism ... has played havoc with worker's rights." Again, really? It's against worker's rights to have the freedom to negotiate work for wealth? Or to move anywhere they wish, train in any area they wish, push and sacrifice to support their family by any moral means possible? Because that's what capitalism offers. The justice of capitalism isn't that every job affords a just wage (whatever that is in application) or the perfect schedule. The justice of capitalism is that every job offers the dignity of freedom to choose, and that choice always and everywhere includes the option to strive for more and better.

Our Failure as a Church

As a Church, we fail to understand our role to help people overcome their poverty, whatever that may be. We have to do a better job of increasing our moral authority so our voice helps shape the morality of those who do business. We have to do a better job of striving to remove barriers between people and their ability to obtain the job they want and are capable of. We would do well to understand our own social teaching and learn from the tremendous wisdom it offers us. We would also do well to better understand capitalism and economics.

To the extent that we advocate actions which undermine subsidiarity and thus human dignity (often in the name of upholding the common good), and the the extent to which we fail to help remove the many and various poverties which prevent us and others from achieving our fullest human potential, we contribute to the failing and suffering of our economy and society. Of course until the Second Coming, we will continue to fail, but perhaps we can get better at failing less.

Olympic Spirit, Choosing God, and Dara Torres

As a parent I always have my eye pealed for teaching moments (and likely drive our kids crazy with some of them!).

Like many, we've been watching the Olympics. What a wondrous metephore for faith life. Focus, determination, saying "Yes!" to one thing and "No." to the rest... and we never really know when and how we will be tested or how our simplest choices can influence others.

Take Dara Torres, the 41 year old wife, mom, and returning Olympic swimmer. My understanding is that Torres is Jewish, having been inducted into the International Jewish Sports Hall of Fame. It seems clear she is a woman of faith, and a woman who understands what it means to uphold human dignity.

In one of the prelims, her opponent in the lane next to her asked for help zipping her swimsuit. It was torn and had to be changed. Torres left her starting block, loosing her focus on her preparation, and talked with an official and the other swimmers asking them to wait. Wait they did.

Clearly Torres had trained extensively for this moment. She put all that training on hold to care for the needs of another over her own. That also takes discipline and consistant nurturing of the soul to have that as your natural reaction when the opportunity comes.

"In the pool we're competitors, out of the pool they're my friends," was Torres' simple explanation.

What a beautiful example of the fruit that comes from valuing others, knowing that even when we compete, everyone is made in God's image, and caring more about doing what is right than settling for what is easy.

I have no idea when and how such teaching moments will appear in the actions of our daughters. But I see their innate generosity toward others, despite the occasional spat or whollop, and know that it does help shape them into who God has created them to be. And I pray I may learn my own lesson, and have my natural reaction always be one of upholding dignity of others, regardless of whether a world is watching or not.

Blessings,
Patrick