Establishing Clear Boundaries When Sharing Sensitive Information
The careful management of sensitive information, including when to conceal and when to reveal, is a recurring theme in Christian thought, with various traditions offering guidance on establishing appropriate boundaries. This involves discerning the nature of the information, the audience, and the potential impact of its disclosure.
One foundational principle is the idea of prudence in communication. A "prudent man concealeth knowledge," not out of a desire to hoard it, but to ensure it is shared at the right time, in the right place, and with the right people [2]. This suggests a deliberate and thoughtful approach to information sharing, avoiding unnecessary or untimely disclosures. The intent is not to withhold truth but to communicate it effectively and appropriately.
The New Testament provides specific instructions regarding discretion, particularly in acts of charity. Jesus teaches that when giving alms, one's left hand should not know what the right hand is doing, emphasizing extreme secrecy in benevolent acts [5]. This hyperbolic phrase underscores the importance of privacy in giving, preventing self-aggrandizement and ensuring the purity of the motive. Similarly, the Apostle Paul encourages believers to "distribute to the necessity of saints," implying a careful and discerning approach to supporting fellow believers in need [1]. While this primarily concerns material aid, the principle of thoughtful distribution can extend to other forms of support, including the sharing of sensitive information that might benefit or protect others within the community.
The concept of "intimate" knowledge, as described in the Old Testament, highlights the depth and personal nature of certain information. The Hebrew word often translated as "been intimate" (as in Amos 3:2) signifies a personal and experiential understanding that goes beyond mere intellectual awareness [4]. This kind of knowledge can involve formal recognition, personal experience, or even sexual relations, and is frequently used to describe God's relationship with Israel [4]. The implication is that some knowledge is inherently personal and should be treated with a level of respect and discretion commensurate with its intimate nature. God holds people accountable based on the knowledge they have received, suggesting a responsibility tied to the depth of understanding [4].
In the context of church discipline, the process of fraternal correction outlined by Jesus in Matthew 18 emphasizes a gradual escalation of disclosure, beginning with private confrontation [8]. Aquinas notes that the Lord intended the initial stage of correction to be hidden, with only the final stage, if necessary, becoming public [8]. This structured approach underscores the importance of maintaining privacy and limiting the spread of sensitive information until absolutely necessary, prioritizing reconciliation and the protection of individuals' reputations.
The Catholic tradition, particularly in scholastic theology, addresses the strict confidentiality required in the sacrament of confession. Aquinas discusses the "seal of confession," debating whether a priest can reveal information heard in confession even if he knew it from another source [7]. The prevailing view is that the priest is absolutely barred from revealing what he heard in confession, regardless of other knowledge [7]. This highlights an extreme boundary around sensitive information shared in a sacred context, emphasizing the inviolability of trust and the sanctity of the confessional.
Augustine, in his writings, also offers guidance on the dissemination of complex or sensitive theological truths. He advises that certain difficult passages should either "never be brought before the people at all, or only on rare occasions when there is some urgent reason" [9]. This suggests a pastoral sensitivity to the audience's capacity to understand and properly interpret challenging information. He also notes that sometimes things are "imperfectly revealed to the more learned" to test their "patient and humble charity" [10]. This implies that God sometimes withholds full clarity, and human communicators should similarly exercise discernment in what they reveal and to whom, especially when the information is complex or potentially misunderstood.
The concept of Christian liberty, as articulated by John Calvin, also touches on the boundaries of information sharing, particularly concerning actions that might cause a brother to stumble. Calvin discusses Paul's instruction in 1 Corinthians 10:28-29 regarding eating meat offered to idols, noting that while a believer's conscience might be free, they should abstain if warned that their action would offend another's conscience [6]. This principle, while applied to actions, can be extended to speech and the sharing of information: even if one has the liberty to speak, the potential impact on another's conscience or faith should be considered. The law, Calvin argues, binds the external work but leaves the conscience free, suggesting an internal freedom that is nevertheless exercised with external responsibility towards others [6].
Conversely, there are instances where information must be communicated. The book of Revelation, for example, contains an instruction not to "seal up" its message, emphasizing that what has been written must be communicated so that people understand its seriousness and the imminence of the time [3]. While God does not reveal everything, what has been revealed is intended for broad dissemination [3]. This provides a counterpoint to the principles of concealment, indicating that some truths are so vital that they demand open and widespread communication, overriding concerns about sensitivity or difficulty.
Sources
- Romans (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Romans 12:13: Distributing to the necessity of saints,.... Or "communicating", as many versions render the word; "distributing" more properly belongs to the officers of the church, the deacons, and communicating to the members of it in common. All men in general are to be relieved that are in want, even our very enemies, and particularly such as are our own flesh and blood, nearly related to us, aged parents, &c. and especially they that are of the household of faith, here called "saints"; and indeed, such only come under the care and notice of a church: and they are such, whom Go”
- Proverbs (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Proverbs 12:23: A prudent man concealeth knowledge,.... Of things natural or divine, which he is furnished with; not but that he is willing to communicate it, as he should, at proper times, in proper places, and to proper persons; but he does not needlessly and unseasonably speak of it; he does not make a show of it, or boast and brag of it: he modestly forbears to speak of what he knows, but when there is a necessity for it, even of that which may be lawfully divulged; which is a point of prudence and modesty; otherwise it is criminal to reveal secrets, or publish what should be ”
- Revelation (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Revelation 22:10: 22:10 Do not seal up: The angel expands John’s initial instruction to “write in a book” (1:11) and warns against curtailing its communication. Although some things are sealed—God does not reveal everything (cp. 10:4)—what has been written must be communicated so that people will understand the seriousness of the message and that the time is near (see 1:1, 3; 22:6-7; cp. Dan 12:4).”
- Amos (Protestant academic) “Tyndale House on Amos 3:2: 3:2 The word translated been intimate indicates personal and experiential knowledge that often extends beyond mere intellectual awareness. It can indicate formal recognition and acknowledgment (Exod 1:8; 5:2), personal experience (Gen 2:17), or sexual relations (Gen 4:1). This word is frequently used of God’s relationship with Israel (Hos 5:3) and of Israel’s ideal relationship with God (Hos 2:20). Because of Israel’s privileged status, God would hold them accountable for all their sins, not just some of them. God holds people accountable in terms of what has been gi”
- Matthew (Baptist/Reformed) “John Gill on Matthew 6:3: But when thou dost alms,.... Do it so privately, and with so much secrecy, that, if it was possible, thou mightest not know it thyself, much less make it known to others: let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doth; acquaint not thy nearest and dearest friend with it; let not one that sits at thy left hand know what thou art doing with thy right hand; it is a proverbial and hyperbolical phrase, expressing the secrecy of the action. It is a Jewish canon (p), that "he that gives a gift to his friend out of love, may make it known, , "but not if it be by way ”
- CCEL (Reformed) “John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, section 92: conscience sake;” “conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other” ( 1 Cor. 10:28, 29 ). A believer would sin, if, after being warned, he should still eat such kind of meat. But however necessary abstinence may be in respect of a brother, as prescribed by the Lord, conscience ceases not to retain its liberty. We see how the law, while binding the external work, leaves the conscience free. 5. Let us now return to human laws. If they are imposed for the purpose of forming a religious obligation, as if the observance of them was i”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Supplement (Supplementum), Of the Seal of Confession, Art. 5: Article: Whether a man may reveal that which he knows through confession and through some other source besides? I answer that, There are three opinions about this question. For some say that a man can by no means tell another what he has heard in confession, even if he knew it from some other source either before or after the confession: while others assert that the confession debars him from speaking of what he knew already, but not from saying what he knew afterwards and in another way. Now both these op”
- theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part (Secunda Secundae), Of Fraternal Correction, Art. 8: Article: Whether before the public denunciation witnesses ought to be brought forward? I answer that, The right way to go from one extreme to another is to pass through the middle space. Now Our Lord wished the beginning of fraternal correction to be hidden, when one brother corrects another between this one and himself alone, while He wished the end to be public, when such a one would be denounced to the Church. Consequently it is befitting that a citation of witnesses should be plac”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 2: Augustine — City of God, Christian Doctrine — CHAP. 9.--HOW, AND WITH WHOM, DIFFICULT PASSAGES ARE TO BE DISCUSSED.: 23. For there are some passages which are not understood in their proper force, or are understood with great difficulty, at whatever length, however clearly, or with whatever eloquence the speaker may expound them; and these should never be brought before the people at all, or only on rare occasions when there is some urgent reason. In books, however, which are written in such a style that, if understood, they, so to speak, draw their own readers, and if not underst”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 4: Augustine — Anti-Manichaean, Anti-Donatist — CHAP. 5.--6. And so it is that often something is imperfectly revealed to the more learned, that their patient and humble charity, from which proceeds the greater fruit, may be proved, either in the w (part 1): 428 way in which he preserved unity with those from whom he differed in opinion. For he says, 'Judging no one nor depriving any one of the right of communion if he differ from us."(1) And the other, viz., in what temper he could receive the truth when found to be different from what he thought it, though his letters are silent on”