What parent hasn’t told their child “don’t be a tattletale”? What child hasn’t gone to great lengths, including getting in trouble themselves, to avoid being a “snitch”? What adult has turned the other way to avoid becoming a narc or a whistleblower? Whether a child or an adult, a teen or a parent, it seems that we never quite know how to avoid pledging our allegiance to what might aptly be called the Canary Code of Honor. For Catholics, especially those committed to living a moral life, this represents a serious challenge that, unfortunately, we do not give enough thought to. How can we avoid being a “snitch” while still doing the right thing? Thankfully, St. Thomas Aquinas has already done much of the intellectual and moral legwork on this question and gives us a set of rules we can live by.
In one of his Quodlibetal questions, St. Thomas addresses the issue of correcting an erring brother. In his usual cogent manner, the Angelic Doctor takes two seemingly conflicting Scriptural commandments and helps to reconcile them. On the one hand, Our Lord says, “if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone” (Mt 18:15). On the other hand, St. Paul tells Timothy that “them that sin reprove before all: that the rest also may have fear” (1 Tim 5:20). To reconcile them, St. Thomas begins by reminding us that the order of charity gives more weight to the common good than the good of individual reputation or conscience. Therefore, a public sin that is, one that is manifestly known and draws other people into it (through scandal and the like) takes a certain precedence over the private sin. In general then “if your brother sins against you”, that is, it is private (Mt 18:15) then it should be corrected privately. If it is public then you should rebuke publicly following 1Tim 5:20 “Rebuke the sinner before all.”
As a side note, someone might go to the individual in private to rebuke them for a public sin first. This is because it is always better for the person who committed the public sin to correct themselves in public rather than to be corrected. Nevertheless, if the person obstinately refuses to acknowledge their wrongdoing then it remains for another person to correct them.
When snitching pertains to a public sin, then it is manifestly appropriate that a man turn the offender over to some authority figure. In fact, St. Thomas says it is morally obligatory. But when it is a private sin then the snitching becomes problematic.
Snitches get…
Snitching is almost always done, not for the improvement of the offender, but in order to punish the person, get revenge upon them, belittle them or win the favor of someone in authority. When it is done for these reasons, St. Thomas says that snitching would constitute a grave sin. But he says it is also a grave sin not to follow Our Lord’s prescription for fraternal correction.
It is not that denunciation has no place within the realm of fraternal correction, but its place is not primary. It requires that there first be fraternal admonition. This admonition might come from another individual with whom the offender is more likely to receive the correction well. As St. Thomas says, “in all these cases charity should be preserved, and what seems best and most expedient should be done.” It is only when the person does not receive the correction, according to Our Lord, that denunciation to an authority figure may occur.
Forming the Potential Snitch
A young person’s abhorrence to snitching is well founded then, even if for the wrong reason. Understanding how fraternal correction works then is vitally important, especially because Aquinas thinks that a failure to properly observe the manner in which fraternal correction occurs is a grave sin. There is an art to fraternal correction and it is something that we rarely teach young people how to do. They think that the only choice is between minding their own business or becoming a snitch. Fraternal correction is an act of charity and thus it binds the corrector and the correctee more closely together.
Rather than correcting the potential corrector as a tattletale, it is a formative moment to teach them how to properly correct another person whenever they come to tell on one of their peers. In larger families and Catholic schools children often seek acceptance from the adults by snitching on their siblings and peers. It is then an obligation of parents and formators to teach the children how fraternal correction works. Any adults who encourage, or at least do not correct snitching without fraternal correction are likely to earn a giant millstone for themselves.
If we are to finally undo the Canary Code of Honor then we need to learn the art of fraternal correction.