Are Lying and Deception Always Sinful?

  • Thread starter Thread starter scameter18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Catechism of the Catholic Church (please note that this is a quote …the only change I made was bolding a few words)
**

1753 A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as **lying **and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means.

Case closed.

Lying though is to be distinguished from “discreet language” and good forms of Mental Reservation …and of course the “hiding” of the Jew per se is not lying…

Readers may also wish to read what I observed above: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8841830&postcount=21

(the only possibility that one could argue is that in the case of the Nazi there is some different “object” entirely that is involved. But that would have to be worked out by the professional theologians and perhaps confirmed by the Magisterium)
 
CEM5 said:
David was not richly rewarded for committing adultery and murder. He was punished. His firstborn child with Bathsheba was taken from him by God. David was reprimanded by God’s prophet. David repented and was sorry for his sins. Then David was blessed.

Now, those others (i.e. Judith, Jacob…) were not punished for their lies. In fact, Judith prayed to be very good at lying in order to save her people, and she was rewarded - never once was she punished, nor did she have to repent. Same with the midwives: they were not reprimanded by God nor were they punished: Instead God blessed and rewarded them. As the CCC 2489 states they were protecting “The good and safety of others” and " the common good".

That is a big difference from what David did.
Click to expand...
You know that liars were not punished? Funny, give Rev 28:8 a read. Unless those liars were forgiven, they are bound for a reward of a different kind.

There is a MONUMENTAL difference between lying and revealing the truth.

How much money do you make?

You can answer “That is none of your business” or you can answer “a quazillion dollars” or you can answer “my boss pays me a just wage”. One is a lie. The other two are not.
 
Frankk said:
Returning to the Nazi scenario. It is not permitted to lie about whether there are Jews in your house.

On the other hand, if the Nazi comes to your house with the intent to kill you, you can kill him. This is justified because the proper translation of the Commandment is thou shalt not ‘murder’; murder and killing being seen as different things.

In my CCC (1995 edn.) §2266 the death penalty is permitted in cases of extreme gravity. In later editions it is still permitted but the wording has changed to suggest this would be unlikely.

Nevertheless we have a seeming contradiction where taking someone’s life is permitted in certain circumstances - but lying never is, even where this was to save someone else’s life.

There seems to be something fundamentally flawed with the reasoning behind this [whatever that may be?]
Click to expand...
One must “always distinguish”.

Murder is intrinsically disordered.

Killing is not intrinsically disordered.

Killing in self defense can be justified it is not murder.

Capital punishment can be justified it is not murder.

Lying too is intrinsically disordered it can not be justified.

A legit mental reservation or discreet speech is not lying - it can be justified.

Catechism:

1753 A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).39

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a4.htm#II
 
Castello said:
How much money do you make?

You can answer “That is none of your business” or you can answer “a quazillion dollars” or you can answer “my boss pays me a just wage”. One is a lie. The other two are not.
Click to expand...
There is a huge difference between that question and the Nazi dilemma, because in your scenario, giving an answer that is not a lie will have zero consequences. But for the Jewish protectors, failing to give a direct lie would immediately cause them to search the house and find the innocents.

I don’t dispute your premise, but having life-and-death consequences makes it a much stickier point of moral theology.
 
Frankk said:
Returning to the Nazi scenario. It is not permitted to lie about whether there are Jews in your house.

On the other hand, if the Nazi comes to your house with the intent to kill you, you can kill him. This is justified because the proper translation of the Commandment is thou shalt not ‘murder’; murder and killing being seen as different things.

In my CCC (1995 edn.) §2266 the death penalty is permitted in cases of extreme gravity. In later editions it is still permitted but the wording has changed to suggest this would be unlikely.

Nevertheless we have a seeming contradiction where taking someone’s life is permitted in certain circumstances - but lying never is, even where this was to save someone else’s life.

There seems to be something fundamentally flawed with the reasoning behind this [whatever that may be?]
Click to expand...
One must “always distinguish”.

Murder is intrinsically disordered.

Killing is not intrinsically disordered.

Killing in self defense can be justified it is not murder.

Capital punishment can be justified it is not murder.

Lying too is intrinsically disordered it can not be justified.

A legit mental reservation or discreet speech is not lying - it can be justified.

Catechism:

1753 A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).39

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a4.htm#II
 
surritter said:
T

I don’t dispute your premise, but having life-and-death consequences makes it a much stickier point of moral theology.
Click to expand...
Yes…and we are weak…especially in such a very intensely stressful event!

One can use certain licit “mental reservations”…“discreet language”…

But in the very serious event of the Nazi at the door… and one can not find those discreet words…and others lives are at stake …and one thus ends up lying. What then? Well of course one should have found the other way. But in our weakness we sin …indeed we commit venial sins daily …hence they are called at times “daily sins” for which we pray daily “forgive us our trespasses”…and certainly ones culpability will likely be even further reduced by the event of the Nazi’s with the guns at your door…so ones venial sin will be reduced to an even smaller venial sin…which God in his knowing mercy can wipe away as one glances at the Crucifix with prayer after the Nazi’s leave…

God knows that in our seeking to live the varied virtues in our lives we will have venial sins in the process…that we being “saints” …being a new creation in Christ in the state of grace…in charity …living in Christ will still have “daily sins” to pray for. He loves us and continues to purify us with his love. (Not that such is an excuse to not seek to overcome our sins more and more in our lives …nor ought we seek or plan to lie in this case …but rather seek to find the right way)

Now all this does not make it “good” to lie. Or not a sin to lie. Nor does the ends in this circumstance “justify” the means of the lie. It remains a lie. A sin.
Catechism: 1753 A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means.
Click to expand...
It remains a sin. But so too does the intemperance that one exhibited that morning at breakfast with too many eggs or the little anger one expressed at ones spouse that afternoon. If one falls here too…it will be another venial sin. Another weakness. Something that ought not have happened. One ought to have found a good way.

But it is somewhat understandable that it may happen in such events of Nazi’s at the door… even to Christians… to saints.

And there is really no point in trying to argue too much about such…
 
Is there anyone here who would not tell the lie in the scenario that I described? If so, then you are only concerned about yourself and your own well being rather than the well being of others.

That is abhorrent behaviour.

As a Jew turned Roman Catholic, it is especially disturbing to realize that people think in such narrow lanes.

To preserve a human life comes above and beyond any other religious precept that one can offer here.

I will take punishment that G-d may yield to me for lying rather than taking the sin of being complicit to murder.

Actually, the more that I think about it, the more that I realize that I should not be a member of this group.

Daniel49
 
Please note, if you are ever being chased around by mad thugs, please be careful who’s house you choose to hide in, as some people will give you up! My house however will be very safe as I am not so insane on details as some people are. 😛
 
It is good to know that there are people out there like you. For people like myself, some of us still remember what happened to our families, some of whom were saved by folks like you who were willing to risk their own situations for the benefit of others. They were selfless and need to be admired.

Daniel49
 
Daniel49 said:
Is there anyone here who would not tell the lie in the scenario that I described? If so, then you are only concerned about yourself and your own well being rather than the well being of others.

That is abhorrent behaviour.

As a Jew turned Roman Catholic, it is especially disturbing to realize that people think in such narrow lanes.

To preserve a human life comes above and beyond any other religious precept that one can offer here.
Click to expand...
Please note that it would be a gravely wrong thing for one to tell the Nazi’s that the Jews are hiding there!

What is being argued here is the fact that lying remains a sin (in this case if one should not be able to find the right way and end up lying…I would say a very mitigated very slight venial sin…). That it is intrinsically disordered. It is an argument about the nature of things…not about someone handing over hidden Jews to the Nazis.

As I noted:

Now lets say one is in the very serious event of the Nazi at the door… and one can not find those discreet words…and others lives are at stake …and one thus ends up lying. What then? Well of course one should have found the other way. But in our weakness we sin …indeed we commit venial sins daily …hence they are called at times “daily sins” for which we pray daily “forgive us our trespasses”…and certainly ones culpability will likely be even further reduced by the event of the Nazi’s with the guns at your door…so ones venial sin will be reduced to an even smaller venial sin…which God in his knowing mercy can wipe away as one glances at the Crucifix with prayer after the Nazi’s leave…

God knows that in our seeking to live the varied virtues in our lives we will have venial sins in the process…that we being “saints” …being a new creation in Christ in the state of grace…in charity …living in Christ will still have “daily sins” to pray for. He loves us and continues to purify us with his love. (Not that such is an excuse to not seek to overcome our sins more and more in our lives …nor ought we seek or plan to lie in this case …but rather seek to find the right way)

Now all this does not make it “good” to lie. Or not a sin to lie. Nor does the ends in this circumstance “justify” the means of the lie. It remains a lie. A sin. But so too does the intemperance that one exhibited that morning at breakfast with too many eggs or the little anger one expressed at ones spouse that afternoon. If one falls here too…it will be another venial sin. Another weakness. Something that ought not have happened. One ought to have found a good way…but under the pressure of the need to save innocents one lied… God knows the stuff of which we are made…he knows that such little sins will happen…and he lovingly forgives them…

It is understandable that it may happen in such events of Nazi’s at the door… even to Christians. To saints.

And there is really no point in trying to argue too much about such…
 
Daniel49 said:
Is there anyone here who would not tell the lie in the scenario that I described? If so, then you are only concerned about yourself and your own well being rather than the well being of others.

That is abhorrent behaviour.

As a Jew turned Roman Catholic, it is especially disturbing to realize that people think in such narrow lanes.

To preserve a human life comes above and beyond any other religious precept that one can offer here.

I will take punishment that G-d may yield to me for lying rather than taking the sin of being complicit to murder.

Actually, the more that I think about it, the more that I realize that I should not be a member of this group.

Daniel49
Click to expand...
Remember that we are all talking about a specific fine point in the world of moral theology. Any one of us would most likely lie, because of our concern for innocent lives. And as Bookcat mentioned (several times), God obviously sees our love for others and that mitigates our culpability. We do our best and move on.

However, it is erroneous to say that “to preserve a human life comes above and beyond any other religious precept that one can offer here.” Many canonized saints would rather have died than commit even one venial sin!

God Himself showed us that your premise is not true: He did not save His own life when standing before Pilate. He understood that the greater responsibility was obedience to His Father.

The logic you propose here is tempting, but it is the same logic that many use today to justify embryonic stem-cell research: “we might be able to save lives.” But the bottom line remains: objectively speaking, the ends never justify the means.
 
I think that there is some perverse thinking going on here. I will re-iterate my position.

There are times when it would be a sin not to tell the lie. My example stands. Does anyone here really believe that G-d would not condem the person who revealed the presence of persons knowing that they would be subsequently murdered?

That is why I quoted those two references in the Catechism - - I will not re-quote them. Just go back and read them again.

It is very clear that not everyone deserves to be given the truth. You folks who take the deadly road on that can rationalize it all day long. If you take that route it is simply self serving and completely without regard to the well being of others. Not telling that lie would be the true sin. For most human beings, it would be impossible to live with that on ones shoulders.

Daniel49
 
Daniel49 said:
I think that there is some perverse thinking going on here. I will re-iterate my position.

There are times when it would be a sin not to tell the lie. My example stands. Does anyone here really believe that G-d would not condem the person who revealed the presence of persons knowing that they would be subsequently murdered?

That is why I quoted those two references in the Catechism - - I will not re-quote them. Just go back and read them again.

It is very clear that not everyone deserves to be given the truth. You folks who take the deadly road on that can rationalize it all day long. If you take that route it is simply self serving and completely without regard to the well being of others. Not telling that lie would be the true sin. For most human beings, it would be impossible to live with that on ones shoulders.

Daniel49
Click to expand...
There is never a time when refusing to lie is a sin. Never. The most holy of us would choose to die before we would allow someone to be harmed. The rest of us would likely be weak and sin by lying. We would then ask a merciful God to forgive us.
 
Okay absolute moralists, put this in your pipe and smoke it.

A lunch lady makes a special cake for the staff. She leaves the lunchroom for a smoke.

An hour later a little girl, we will call her Lena, comes to the priest and asks for confession. The priest hears her sins and absolves them, including the theft and eating of the cake.

Another lunch lady is walking by and sees Lena going into the priests office.

About 20 minutes later, Lena is back in class and the priest is walking through the cafeteria making sure all the tables are set up for lunch.

All of a sudden one of the lunch ladies sees that a piece of cake has been stolen! She runs out and asks the priest if he knows who took the cake!

Another lunch lady runs out and says that she saw Lena going into the priests office, and asks the father if that has anything to do with the missing slice of cake?

Now you tell me how the priest should react in this case?
  1. He says “I cannot tell a lie, it was Lena!” This has to be ruled out because the priest is bound by the seal of the confessional!
  2. The priest says “I do know who did it, but I cannot say because it is a matter of confession” This is also out because it still indirectly points the finger at Lena, more so in this case where somebody SAW Lena going to the priest.
  3. The priest says “I do not know who took the cake” According to you, he CANNOT lie, so the priest is in an impossible situation.
In the Early Modern period, some casuists (Thomas Sanchez, etc.) justified mental reservation, a form of deception which does not involve outright lying, in specific circumstances including when such an action is necessary to protect confidentiality under the seal of the confessional. Other casuists considered “grey areas” in which it was unclear whether or not the seal was being violated. A priest who says “I do not know” is thus to be understood “I do not know with knowledge outside the Seal of the Confessional”; St. Thomas Aquinas goes even farther and says that the priest knows the confession “not as man, but as God knows it”.

I feel that if a justified mental reservation is allowed to protect Lena who only took a piece of cake, that I could use the same justified mental reservation to protect the lives of beings made in the image and likeness of God himself! 😃
 
Hi Speedy,

It is good to see that someone here really does get it.

Daniel49
 
Faced with a Nazi at the door…

One can make use of say a mental reservation such as the kind used when someone calls and asks if so and so is home and one says no (with the understandable meaning of “he is not home for you to talk with”. Or other similar thing.

But most of us would likely not even be able to do such…and might fall into a little lie.
Lying to a Nazi at the door – is for the person either:
  1. A slight venial sin (due to it being a lie) mitigated by the fear etc into a very slight venial sin quickly forgiven. (God knows our weakness…and he sees all the aspects involved here)
  2. Objectively a slight venial sin (due to it being a lie) but subjectively due to an error in not recognizing it as a lie but seeing it as good not subjectively a sin even in the least.
  3. Objectively a slight venial sin but subjectively not an actual sin due to various reasons.
But it is important to note that objectively it would still be a lie.
Or it may not be a lie.
  1. Objectively not a sin at all due to it being a “different moral object” than lying. Such I leave to the professional moral theologians and of course to the Magisterium of the Church to determine.
It is important to note that if such could be argued…it would not be the intention or circumstance that “justifies” a lie (such can not happen) but rather such and such was not a lie (the moral object is different). Just like the taking of food in extreme circumstances can be “simply not theft”. It is not that the theft is ok due due to the circumstances…but rather it is “simply not theft” due to the universal destination of goods etc (see CCC).
 
As you know, one commandment is:

“Thou shalt not commit murder”

If you know that your truthfullness (or attempted word games - rationalizations) will cause those entrusted to your care to be murdered, you would be commiting a serious sin not to lie in the case in point.

Daniel49
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top