Termite Damage

Michael Metzger

The trailer looked good but it was actually gutted.

When my parents—snowbirds—set their sights on purchasing a trailer in Florida, they found one that looked good. A closer inspection revealed termite damage. Americans got a closer look at Congress when the House censured Representative Charles Rangel. How many saw termite damage? It goes well beyond Congress to a culture where shame, conscience, and guilt have been gutted.

In Washington, shame isn’t what it used to be. When the House of Representatives censured Representative Charles Rangel on December 2nd, Rangel felt no shame. His offenses included using congressional letterhead to solicit donations for an academic center named for him, housing campaign offices in rent-controlled apartments and failing to pay taxes on a Dominican villa. After House Speaker Nancy Pelosi finished reading out the censure statement, Rangel asked for a minute to address his colleagues. “In my heart, I truly feel good,” he said. “I know in my heart that I’m not going to be judged by this Congress.” So much for censure.

“Congress has long relied on shame to enforce its norms,” writes David A. Fahrenthold. “Rule-breaking members were driven out not by force, but by their own consciences and their embarrassed constituents.”1 Before Rangel, Congress has only censured 22 people. Their crimes included assault, bribery, payroll fraud and sexual misconduct. Professor Julian Zelizer, a historian at Princeton University, said Rangel’s arrogant response laid bare the weakness at the heart of this punishment. “If you are not shamed by a censure,” Zelizer said, “there’s not that much more that censure does.”

It did not always work this way. Censure was based on a Judeo-Christian understanding of human nature. Shame was a feeling supported by a stud in the wall—conscience. Every individual has a conscience. Since individuals build institutions, every institution has a conscience. When individuals and institutions do wrong, they should feel guilt. And from guilt they should feel shame. Conscience was the stud in the wall supporting guilt and shame. Erecting sound institutions required straight studs. If termites gutted the conscience studs, the feeling of guilt and shame was dismissed as fiction. This began to occur in the 19th century.

Darwin, Nietzsche, and Freud fundamentally formed the 19th century. Darwin reframed “What is a human being?” Humans were no longer designed in God’s image but descended from animals. No conscience. Nietzsche reframed “What is right and wrong?” Morality became rooted in might rather than right. No guilt. Freud reframed “What is wellbeing?” A sense of wellbeing became rooted in the self rather than in shalom. No shame. Philip Johnson writes that these three helped “cut society adrift from its traditional moorings in the faith and morals of the Judeo-Christian culture.”2 Freud was most influential. In The Triumph of the Therapeutic: Uses of Faith After Freud, Philip Rieff summarizes Freud’s legacy as reframing conscience. Conscience wasn’t a solid stud in the wall but a sham. What then can be done?

In October of this year, Congresswoman Susan M. Collins asked what has gone wrong with Congress. In a Washington Post op-ed piece, she wrote: “Not long ago, I happened upon George Washington’s ‘Rules of Civility and Decent Behavior,’ a transcription of various guides to etiquette, written when Washington was but a teenager.” Collins notes that Washington recorded at total of110 points. She writes that it is not until point 110 that young George got to the heart of the matter: “Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire called conscience.”3

She’s right. But laboring to keep alive conscience is similar to keeping termites out of a home. It takes diligence. We saw the lack of diligence in the termite damage on October 2nd. It’s easy to look at Congress and be taken with the marble walls and gilded halls. But any institution cannot remain standing if there is termite damage. What’s true for Congress is true for our culture. My parents never bought the termite-infested trailer because replacing the studs would prove to be prohibitive. We don’t have that luxury when it comes to our national institutions such as Congress.

1 David A. Fahrenthold, “As Rangel demonstrates, shame no longer required after political wrongdoing,” Washington Post, December 4, 2010, A4.
2 Paul Johnson, Modern Times: The World From the Twenties to the Nineties (New York, NY: HarperCollins, 1991), p. 5.
3 Susan M. Collins, “Congress got nasty. Here’s how to fix it.” Washington Post, October 10, 2010; B04.


Morning Mike Check


The Morning Mike Check

Don't miss out on the latest podcast episode! Be sure to subscribe in your favorite podcast platform to stay up to date on the latest from Clapham Institute.


  1. Mike,

    It sounds like some walls are going to be falling down soon. When do we start rebuilding? How do we start rebuilding? And from where do we cut our new studs?

    Great stuff this week. Thank you for sharing your insight.

  2. Aside from knowing who we are voting for and corresponding with them on important matters, what can we do: we have work, family, personal growth, community commitments, etc. Even “reformers” who go to our capitals are smothered by the quagmire.

    Is a depression part of the answer?

  3. Great Article!

    Can I respectfully add a “no” value that I think only helps express what you are saying? I think that Darwin reframed a position of “No Meaning” rather than no conscience. Not being designed or having roots in the image of a loving, creating and, transcendent Being; as opposed to chance, randomness or extreme probability. (We currently see this in the message of Dawkins) I think the “no guilt” was Nietzsche’s result; no objective morality evades a moral conscience producing no guilt.

    You said “it takes diligence” I am asking myself diligent at what. I don’t think it successful that we simply point out that “no meaning, no guilt, no shame” as a way of change, not that you are suggesting that! I think the Church did this from a culturally isolated position and came out very imperialistic. -Now for the diversity that you and I have had in previous blog conversation – that is, I think that the “no meaning, no guilt and no shame” are results or symptoms; a result of a missing worldview that intellectually and existentially reveals truth. (I am giving worldview front seat here) “No meaning, no guilt and, no shame” can only be revealed respectfully when a diligently contrasting worldview has the power and means to do so.

    If you have time, I am interested in your thoughts!

  4. Mark:

    I agree with your analysis, although Nietzsche is ore often cited as defining a world with no meaning and no morality, since there is no God. But Darwin did similar damage and your point is well taken.

    As to John and Marc’s questions, I unashamedly point you to previous columns where we discussed these very issues.


  5. Mike,

    As has been commented, the article provides a starting place for a great conversation: how do we rebuild conscience in our culture.

    For today though, I am glad for the article, because it does blow upon the spark of that celestial fire in my own soul.

    May I be diligent to keep out the termites of self-centeredness and pride and let the defining attribute of my life be the shalom of others. This is as lofty prayer and one should almost be embarrassed to consider it, but if we are not to live in such a way, how can we live with ourselves.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *