Cannibalism during the Holocaust...sinful?

[hasikelee]

Tonight in class we were reviewing the topic of cannibalism in the concentration camps during the Holocaust.

Of particular interest to me was Wiesel’s account of watching a fellow prisoner sit in the road, eating a raw piece of meat. Wiesel talked of how he stood there the entire time the man ate the meat, hoping the man would throw him a piece.

The next day, the man was hung by the other men in his bunker. He had eaten a dead human. As he was being hung, he yelled out, “I did no wrong; he was already dead!”

In cases such as these, does cannibalism become an acceptable method of survival? Or is it just a case of reduced culpability for an inherently evil action?

I am wondering this because particularly the man did not kill the other man.

 

[Danny_OC]

I am not positive of the exact wording, but Jesus said that nothing that comes into the body can make it unclean. It is what we put out with our choices that achieve such an end. If you are starving it would seem wrong *not *to eat someone else who is already dead!

 

[Hastrman]

I am not positive of the exact wording, but Jesus said that nothing that comes into the body can make it unclean. It is what we put out with our choices that achieve such an end. If you are starving it would seem wrong *not *to eat someone else who is already dead!

Going too far the other way.

Objectively eating other humans is a violation of the duty to bury the dead, but in desperate times one’s guilt is mitigated. It’s still wrong, and it’s certainly not wrong not to.

Intentionally eating human flesh, with no survival considerations, whether to gain the person’s strength or simply to transgress a taboo, is a mortal sin–and in fact a form of diabolism.

 

[ChristIsTheWay]

If the person were already dead and you had no other source of food, I don’t think it would be a mortal sin. I would imagine that cannibalism is an inherently evil thing but I don’t think one would commit the act with complete consent. One would be committing the act out of desperation, rather than any meaningful consent.

 

[Danny_OC]

Going too far the other way.

Objectively eating other humans is a violation of the duty to bury the dead, but in desperate times one’s guilt is mitigated. It’s still wrong, and it’s certainly not wrong not to.

Intentionally eating human flesh, with no survival considerations, whether to gain the person’s strength or simply to transgress a taboo, is a mortal sin–and in fact a form of diabolism.

Without the survival aspect I can certainly see it being a mortal sin; but in the case of life or death, would you argue that it is simply a sin with mitigated guilt, or is in fact not a sin at all? (Assuming of course mitigation refers to only a partial remission).