If push comes to shove I choose conscience over Church teaching

  • Thread starter Thread starter goodcatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I just thought of a very recent time in the news where an organization misled to achieve a goal. Lila rose and David Daleiden both used trickery to uncover things at planned parenthood.

The trafficking of human body parts.
 
Last edited:
CCC 2485 “By its very nature, lying is to be condemned.

This includes lying to entrap people you consider to be doing bad things.

CCC 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.

An excellent article:

https://bustedhalo.com/features/building-a-culture-of-lie
 
So would you be against undercover police officers busting pedophile rings?

They are lying to entrap people who are committing crimes and doing bad things.
 
Last edited:
I believe exactly what the Church teaches.

There is no good lie, no noble lie.

The ethics of “undercover police work” is debatable. I fall on the side that it is possible to morally enforce the laws of the land, that there is no need to resort to lies.
 
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. My father worked for about 15 years in the special victims unit as a detective. He daily worked with children who had been victims of murder, kidnapping, abuse, pedophilia, as well as domestic abuse victims.

If cops can go undercover and capture some of these criminals, then I am all for it.

If lying is always wrong, then I think there are times when the culpability is zero.
 
goodcatholic said:
If I value my conscience highly, does that make me more Protestant than Catholic?..But it is not just lying. I think we need to dig deep often. Not just “oh what is the rule here? forgive …ok forgive.” that is kind of superficial in my way of thinking. We need to pray on the spot for discernment. No doubt someone will raise the notion of “informed conscience”. yes I agree.
I respect Church teachings but I don’t see a need to follow them to the letter of the law all the time. The spirit of the law is more important too.
Click to expand...
I agree, it is more of a statement than a question. I just don’t see the unwillingness here. It seems to be that there was an a priori statement about the “informed conscience” and a desire to delve into the spirit of the law vs letter. In fact, what is here is primarily banging over the head about dogmatically following the rigid teaching.

I think the OP has something on his mind that he may not want to disclose - a moral dilemma.
TheLittleLady said:
Putting one’s own feelings, opinions above God does not have a great rack record.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand how we got from following one’s own conscience to putting one’s own feelings and opinions above God? Really, it is like CAF members don’t believe the OP has a conscience at all, and is not struggling to do something in life conscientiously!
 
Why would it be a contradiction as it is not addressing the subject of theft?
I know you are angry at what I posted but it is in line with what the Church teaches. You can have all sorts of scenarios but it comes back to what is the principle being advocated and as the Church states in the Catechism
2408 The seventh commandment forbids theft, that is, usurping another’s property against the reasonable will of the owner. There is no theft if consent can be presumed or if refusal is contrary to reason and the universal destination of goods. This is the case in obvious and urgent necessity when the only way to provide for immediate, essential needs (food, shelter, clothing . . .) is to put at one’s disposal and use the property of others.
Click to expand...
The Church does not regard it as theft. It is not immoral or against the commandment. It would not be a sin not even a venial sin. You can state all sort of other circumstances but it doesn’t change the central point that it is not a sin. I follow what the Church says.
 
You are welcome. As to faith and morals, we are called to give the assent of our will to the Church, trusting in the judgments of the Church. This is particularly thorny when we get into moral issues that are unique to the 20th and 21st centuries. What has changed, I wonder? Movements and sentiments that have never arisen before, and even then not on such a grand scale.

That is a huge caution flag to me. If there is a sticking point between the self and the Church, it behooves us to investigate Church teaching, the reasons behind it and to ponder it in all seriousness.

For example, abortion seems clear, but not to many of us. Fetal stem cell research is clear once one understands that a human life is created only to destroy it. Knowing the purpose and value of suffering, and that God calls us home according to His will and not ours, euthanasia is clearly out.

Same sex unions are an extremely pressing issue, as each of us knows someone whom we love, that is either battling this or shall we say, succumbing to it. But it is not marriage, as marriage is of complementary parts. It is a novelty as morality goes and the ‘marriage’ aspect is very recent.

Anything new is a caution, as human morality and behavior has been set for millennia. In any event, do delve into those teachings that you are struggling with. Reason them out and pay particular attention to the Church’s reasoning - remembering that the Church is not simply a human organization that is morally neutral, but rather Christ’s mystical Body on earth. That sheds a completely new light on it.
 
Thank you. It seems to me a generalized assertion of a well formed conscience,
verses a legalistic implementation of The Catechism or any official Teaching Instrument of The Church that has Magisterial Authority — is too vague;
One of the gifts of The Holy Spirit is Counsel; and since we are in this together;
it would be wise to privately ask, seek, and knock for counsel for a specific reason
to discern whether or not something specific opposes The Spirit of The Catechism.
In this way, it helps our well formed conscience to continue to develop; and
we as ‘Church,’ speak and act as ‘one’ as Jesus Christ earnestly prayed that
we do just before His Passion.
 
Last edited:
Hardly “angry.” Is everyone who disagrees with you “angry?”
And how is stealing from someone else who is equally destitute excused by the Catechism?
 
I weigh in on the side of diplomacy or keeping my mouth shut if I don’t have anything nice to say. Ex: If my daughter asks me what I think of a participate outfit, knowing that she wants me to be honest with her as to modesty and whether it looks nice on her, I’ll tell her if I think “it does nothing for her”, and/or if I think she really rocks it. On the occasions when she doesn’t ask me I don’t offer my opinion. For example, her spring formal pictures were posted on Facebook, and I didn’t think the dress did anything for her. I didn’t tell her that, I liked the post and moved on. I liked the post because it looked like she had a great time at the event, not because of what she was wearing. I did later take an opportunity, without referring to that event to mention that burgundy is not her color at all.

Someone I’m not so close to, I might defer to “you look very nice” because I know they took some effort and what they are wearing is just one part of the effort. They don’t need to necessarily know I think it looks awful.

Having said that, I’m not a fan of letting the little sins slide, as I believe that venial sins can accumulate, and create in us a habit that can easily lead us down the road of performing mortal sins.
 
I understand partly where you are coming from. I don’t agree with using “white lies”, or not “forgiving”. But the church does teach the “spirit of the law”, over the “letter”. I’ve never been good with “on-the-spot” questions, when it comes to telling the truth. It takes a lot of thought to come up with a truthful, tactful answer. Because of the sin of lying. When someone asks, “do you like my new hat?” and I don’t, I might say something like, “well it’s certainly something new and different”. And won’t elaborate when pushed.
You don’t need to be blunt to be truthful. And a round-about -answer like the above may be the only truthful answer you can give.
 
So many of the supposed ‘ruthless answers’ to questions are predicated on subjective judgments as opposed to absolute truth.

The question about, “do these pants make me look fat” is one of those. Both men and women can (and do) have views of what constitutes fat, normal, and thin (for themselves and for others) that are widely variant.

A woman with anorexia could think that an outfit makes her look like a blimp when in fact most women without anorexia would think she looked gaunt. A man whose ‘ideal woman’ was Twiggy would think a slim woman looked ‘big’; a man whose ‘ideal woman’ was on the zaftig side would think a woman looked perfectly normal, etc. etc.

So a question like that doesn’t mean that you get to make your ‘value judgment’ into the one and only ‘truth’ when it’s not a question of absolute but simply of your personal ‘view’ and remarks of any nature, “I like the color” etc are perfectly true. . .and complete. You aren’t lying.
 
And since Church teachings are required by Catholics to follow, maybe read what the Catechism teaches and why. The why of it is the “spirit of the law”.
 
You are again applying other scenarios to the basic principle that is it isn’t considered stealing.
Let me give you another circumstance. A person is hiking in the mountains. A freak snowstorm occurs. The person is totally unprepared. Doesn’t have a coat, food or proper clothing. Luckily there is a cabin that the person finds. There is no one there but there is food, clothing, and big stack of wood. Which the person uses to start a fire, makes a meal and changes into warmer clothes. According to you he is committing a sin according to the Church he is not. He is preserving his life. He is using goods that do not belong to him and he has no permission to use. The Church does not regard it as theft. Now please don’t go into what would happen afterwards that is not the point.
 
JanetF said:
Having said that, I’m not a fan of letting the little sins slide, as I believe that venial sins can accumulate,
Click to expand...
cou;dnt agree more. If we slacken off too much we become backsliders. At the same time, we need to show mercy to ourselves when we make mistakes.
 
I respect the Church’s overall stance on things. Their commitment to not changing to please society. It is an attitude we need in a world that has become too fond of relativism.
At the same time, I respect a Church who respects my need to use an informed conscience and discernment when the need arises.
 
guanophore said:
I think the OP has something on his mind that he may not want to disclose - a moral dilemma.
Click to expand...
Since he won’t discuss the dilemma it’s impossible to give any further advice. Moral dilemmas can be resolved utilizing Church teaching; however, it’s not always what people want.
guanophore said:
Really, it is like CAF members don’t believe the OP has a conscience at all, and is not struggling to do something in life conscientiously!
Click to expand...
Oh, I believe that he has a conscience! He’s obviously conflicted otherwise he wouldn’t be posting here. I believe that the OP knows the Correct Catholic Choice; however, it will take courage.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top