We open our discussion with a powerful statement from Father Pedro Arrupe, S. J., former head of the Jesuit order, in his 1973 Address to Graduates of Jesuit Schools in Europe:

“It is easy to be good in a good world. What is difficult is to be good in an evil world, where the egoism of others and the egoism built into the institutions of society attack us and threaten to annihilate us. Under such conditions, the only possible reaction would seem to be to oppose evil with evil, egoism with egoism, hate with hate; in short, to annihilate the aggressor with his own weapons. But is it not precisely thus that evil conquers us most thoroughly? For then, not only does it damage us exteriorly, it perverts our very heart. Evil is overcome only by good, hate by love, egoism by generosity. It is thus that we must sow justice in our world. To be just, it is not enough to refrain from injustice. One must go further and refuse to play its game, substituting love for self-interest as the driving force of society.”

Evil is a mystery. But we can say something about the elements of an evil act:

An example of an evil act is murder in the first degree: Someone wills an evil effect—that is, the criminal death of the victim, with no mitigating circumstances and with full understanding that murder is wrong. (Psychopaths have an organic deficit of empathy, a lack of conscience, so the question of choice becomes moot.)

Not even a good end justifies an evil means, but when evil happens anyway, good can sometimes come of it, though this does not justify evil choices.

Sometimes we choose the cause that leads to a harmful end while not deliberately willing that effect.

Sometimes evil is willed in both the cause and effect. For instance, the

© Psychology Today