Do the ends justify the means?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Timothy_Garber
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Timothy_Garber

Guest
I have heard before that the Catholic position on murder is something like “one can only kill another to stop something worse from happening”. First off, is this true?

And if so, then is it true to say that the ends DO justify the means, provided that the means do not override the cause?

I have never really been to sure on this subject, since my philosophy on this has always been “there is a way to come out of this clean”, so I would always look for the option in life where you don’t have to lie or steal, etc. Is there a conceivable situation where one would HAVE to lie, etc. in order to achieve good, without overriding the end?
 
Timothy_Garber said:
I have heard before that the Catholic position on murder is something like “one can only kill another to stop something worse from happening”. First off, is this true?

And if so, then is it true to say that the ends DO justify the means, provided that the means do not override the cause?

I have never really been to sure on this subject, since my philosophy on this has always been “there is a way to come out of this clean”, so I would always look for the option in life where you don’t have to lie or steal, etc. Is there a conceivable situation where one would HAVE to lie, etc. in order to achieve good, without overriding the end?
Click to expand...
You can only kill under certain, very specific situations. A justified war is one, if you’re a soldier. To protect your own life if it is in immediate danger. To protect the lives of others if they are in immediate danger. Or, in the odd situation that you can’t keep a prisoner in a facility and he would pose a sever threat to the public, he can be executed. But in today’s societies, with prisons in the plenty, that doesn’t come up much.
 
OxygenMan said:
You can only kill under certain, very specific situations. A justified war is one, if you’re a soldier. To protect your own life if it is in immediate danger. To protect the lives of others if they are in immediate danger. Or, in the odd situation that you can’t keep a prisoner in a facility and he would pose a sever threat to the public, he can be executed. But in today’s societies, with prisons in the plenty, that doesn’t come up much.
Click to expand...
In all cases the action taken cannot intend the death of the aggressor.

CCC said:
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65
Click to expand...
 
OxygenMan said:
You can only kill under certain, very specific situations. A justified war is one, if you’re a soldier. To protect your own life if it is in immediate danger. To protect the lives of others if they are in immediate danger. Or, in the odd situation that you can’t keep a prisoner in a facility and he would pose a sever threat to the public, he can be executed. But in today’s societies, with prisons in the plenty, that doesn’t come up much.
Click to expand...
So what about other sins? What if you had to lie, cheat, and steal your way to a good thing? Can someone give an example?
 
Timothy_Garber said:
So what about other sins? What if you had to lie, cheat, and steal your way to a good thing? Can someone give an example?
Click to expand...
The Church teaches that the ends don’t justify the means, because that line of logic can lead to horrible things. That being said, it can get difficult. The old example of hiding a Jewish family and lying to a band of NAZI soldiers comes up. What can one be expected to do in such a situation? It’s a tough question.
 
No, the ends do not justify the means. Machiavelli had it wrong. If we would be following His line of logic, the world would be worse than it already is!!
 
No–the self-defense example follows from the doctrine of double effect, not from an “ends justify the means” mentality. As has been said already, the intended consequence can’t be to kill.
 
I’m not sure, but I believe the original commandment is “Thou shall not bare false witness…” that is to say something false about someone else. Now, one should not get in the habit of lying, but often deft semantics/sophistry can get you technically off the hook (see politicians and some prelates, which shall remain anonymous…), but with the Nazi/Jew example, the Nazi’s don’t have a right to know if you are harboring a Jew, so artfully decieve away…I believe a prostitute (Rahab?) helped Joshua (not sure if I got the name right…) escape detection from pagan detection in the Old Testament, and he escaped out of her window. I love The British Martyrs (Our fate may be the same soon. Just squeeze Obama into Queen Elizabeth’s dress…) and the faithful hid, lied, and schemed to break the law so that the Faithful could have access to the sacraments. I think Pius XII did the same with faking passports for the Jews in WW II. Blessed Miguel Pro and the Mexican (“CHRISTEROS”) martyrs to the masonic persecution, at the beginning of the last century, also did similarly… VIVA CHRISTA REY!!! 🙂
 
OxygenMan said:
You can only kill under certain, very specific situations. A justified war is one, if you’re a soldier. To protect your own life if it is in immediate danger. To protect the lives of others if they are in immediate danger. Or, in the odd situation that you can’t keep a prisoner in a facility and he would pose a sever threat to the public, he can be executed. But in today’s societies, with prisons in the plenty, that doesn’t come up much.
Click to expand...
👍

Great response… specific and to the point.
 
Ignore knighttt. Lying (as opposed to other forms of deception) is intrinsically evil and may never be done.
 
So, we’re in a bad part of towm, your (mom/wife/sister/daughter) is in a house with yours truly, and three men. with bad intentions, knock on the door wanting to know if your loved one is there and if she wants to “party”…Do they deserve to know the truth OR may I prevent a rape? Your call, sir…but I know what I’m doing…:knight2:
 
It is morally licit to use mental reservation in such circumstances. One way of doing this would be to use ambiguous language example: She is not here (since “here” could mean anything from in the state to at the door where the conversation is occurring). All of the Church’s teachings make sense if they are considered properly.
 
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one’s own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65

2268 The fifth commandment forbids direct and intentional killing as gravely sinful. The murderer and those who cooperate voluntarily in murder commit a sin that cries out to heaven for vengeance.69

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a5.htm#I
 
Devout Christian…I think you’re making my point, but please, mentally-reserve away! :rolleyes:
 
knighttt said:
Devout Christian…I think you’re making my point, but please, mentally-reserve away! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I take it from your rolling eyes emoticon that you disagree with the Church’s teaching on this subject?
 
OxygenMan said:
The Church teaches that the ends don’t justify the means, because that line of logic can lead to horrible things. That being said, it can get difficult. The old example of hiding a Jewish family and lying to a band of NAZI soldiers comes up. What can one be expected to do in such a situation? It’s a tough question.
Click to expand...
There are exceptions where it’s okay to lie and that old example would be an exception.
 
OxygenMan said:
The Church teaches that the ends don’t justify the means, because that line of logic can lead to horrible things. That being said, it can get difficult. The old example of hiding a Jewish family and lying to a band of NAZI soldiers comes up. What can one be expected to do in such a situation? It’s a tough question.
Click to expand...
The best answer is probably ‘humility’. Mother Riccarda Beauchamp Hambrough, who saved at least 60 Jews from the Nazis in her convent, reportedly confessed the lies she told to protect them.

It seems pretty clear that, like the Good Samaritan, the reverend mother protected the foundation of the moral law over the strict letter, but she did not break God’s commandments lightly or with great confidence.
 
ChibiViolet said:
There are exceptions where it’s okay to lie and that old example would be an exception.
Click to expand...
No such is not an exception. There are no exceptions.

Such is “understandable” slip (not being able to find the good way) but not an exception – such does not “justify” the lie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top