Is Breaking Human Law Sinful?

[FAH]

Obviously breaking some laws will certainly leave you guilty of sin, murder, theft, reckless driving.
But what about human laws that prevent you from chopping down trees or uprooting birds nests. If you break these laws or employ someone else to do so are you guilty of sin?
I don’t see how throwing out a nuisance birds nest with eggs in is a mortal sin. After all God said “Rule over the earth”
So my question is if you break a human law only created by man have you sinned against God?

 

[Bookcat]

Depends on the law. Its kind etc.

 

[Mark1970]

Obviously breaking some laws will certainly leave you guilty of sin, murder, theft, reckless driving.
But what about human laws that prevent you from chopping down trees or uprooting birds nests. If you break these laws or employ someone else to do so are you guilty of sin?
I don’t see how throwing out a nuisance birds nest with eggs in is a mortal sin. After all God said “Rule over the earth”
So my question is if you break a human law only created by man have you sinned against God?

Interesting question - I must say, I’m not sure what the answer is! It would have to depend on the morality of the human law you’re breaking, is the human law intrinsically immoral in itself? Or is the human law moral of itself but with circumstances in which breaking the law is justifiable and therefore no sin? I could imagine certain circumstances in which breaking a law would quite likely not be sinful. For example you refer to driving - I can imagine certain circumstances in which breaking a law may be justifiable. So it depends on circumstances and the intention of the person performing the act.

 

[fakename]

Obviously breaking some laws will certainly leave you guilty of sin, murder, theft, reckless driving.
But what about human laws that prevent you from chopping down trees or uprooting birds nests. If you break these laws or employ someone else to do so are you guilty of sin?
I don’t see how throwing out a nuisance birds nest with eggs in is a mortal sin. After all God said “Rule over the earth”
So my question is if you break a human law only created by man have you sinned against God?

I think the rule is that a law isn’t a law when it interferes with something that is both important and immediate. But if it isn’t important then follow the law and ask the legislator to give a dispensation.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

If you wantonly destroy birds nests, I believe that you would be guilty of a sin. There is simply no valid reason to do something like that

Jaywalking on the other hand would not be a “sin”, but it MIGHT be hazardous to your health.

 

[davidv]

Obviously breaking some laws will certainly leave you guilty of sin, murder, theft, reckless driving.
But what about human laws that prevent you from chopping down trees or uprooting birds nests. If you break these laws or employ someone else to do so are you guilty of sin?
I don’t see how throwing out a nuisance birds nest with eggs in is a mortal sin. After all God said “Rule over the earth”
So my question is if you break a human law only created by man have you sinned against God?

This excerpt for the Catechism clearly indicates that unless the law requires one to do something immoral, it is a sin to disobey civil law.

2238 Those subject to authority should regard those in authority as representatives of God, who has made them stewards of his gifts:43 "Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution. . . . Live as free men, yet without using your freedom as a pretext for evil; but live as servants of God."44 Their loyal collaboration includes the right, and at times the duty, to voice their just criticisms of that which seems harmful to the dignity of persons and to the good of the community.
2239 It is the duty of citizens to contribute along with the civil authorities to the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom. The love and service of one’s country follow from the duty of gratitude and belong to the order of charity. Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community.
2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country:
Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.45 [Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.46
The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way."47

 

[FAH]

If you wantonly destroy birds nests, I believe that you would be guilty of a sin. There is simply no valid reason to do something like that

Jaywalking on the other hand would not be a “sin”, but it MIGHT be hazardous to your health.

What if you don’t destroy birds nest and the eggs out of malicious intent, for the fun of it, but rather you want to cut back the tree where they have a nest or the noise they make is bothering you. Surely it’s no sin to destroy the nest in these circumstances even though a man made law says you can’t?

 

[revert_jen]

I think the answer tends to be “yes.” As long as the law is not itself immoral (e.g. it is not immoral to leave the bird’s nest in place) it would be sinful to break it.

I was reading the Catechism on the subject of the duties of citizens (#2238-2243). If it said directly that we are bound to obey all laws that are not contrary to God’s Law, I missed it. However, the discussion of the cases in which it is OK not to obey the law indicate (to me, anyway) that in the case of any morally neutral law like the ones you refer to, we are obliged to follow it. But you can read the section for yourself and see if you agree.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P7W.HTM (scroll down about half a screen)

The idea I get is that it is really difficult to have a society where each person just decides for himself which laws he thinks are morally relevant and obeys only them. The problem is that people will disagree on which laws are morally relevant. For example, you think the law about birds’ nests is morally irrelevant, but probably whoever instituted the law thinks it is morally relevant. On the other end of the spectrum, there are actual organizations out there who think there is nothing immoral about pedophilia, and would therefore find those laws morally irrelevant.

The Church is quite practical, and does not expect a theocracy. So, there is no way to build into society a way to say that you can pull down the nest contrary to the law, without saying that the pedophile can also do what he wants, contrary to the law. The distinction in your mind would be that the Church says pedophilia is wrong, but doesn’t have anything to say about nests. However, that distinction (even though I agree with it) would not work in society as a whole.

That is why I think the Catechism indicates that it is part of the duties of a citizen to obey any laws that are not in themselves morally wrong.

I think the proper course would be to use whatever moral means are available to have the law changed.

–Jen

 

[Corki]

If the law was lawfully enacted and if keeping the law does not cause you to sin, then you are expected to obey the law. Sometimes it’s just a venial sin. Destroying a bird’s nest - probably venial, unless you do it as a way to be cruel to animals or the bird is an endangered species.

 

[wjp984]

Only if you are caught and decide to resist (speeding and then refusing to pull over for the cop)

 

[FAH]

So to recap if I wish to remove the nest of a bird, not out of malicious intent purely because I wish the tree to be cut down or something of that nature, I have disobeyed a man made civil law. Then introducing the Catechism, work of the Holy Spirit, which says to disobey civil law is a sin (is that right??)
Therefore doing a task that is not permitted by law is a sin of civil disobedience even though your removing a birds nest not killing hundreds of people. Have I got this right?

Oh and what if you hire a laborer to remove the nest and don’t tell him that the simple task he is being employed to do, not out of malice, is illegal?

 

[EasterJoy]

You must obey the authority of legitimate political leadership working within its lawful boundaries, unless duty towards the law of God demands that you do otherwise.

Maintain good conduct among the Gentiles, so that if they speak of you as evildoers, they may observe your good works and glorify God on the day of visitation. Be subject to every human institution for the Lord’s sake, whether it be to the king as supreme or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the approval of those who do good. For it is the will of God that by doing good you may silence the ignorance of foolish people. Be free, yet without using freedom as a pretext for evil, but as slaves of God. Give honor to all, love the community, fear God, honor the king. 1 Peter 2:12-17

 

[revert_jen]

So to recap if I wish to remove the nest of a bird, not out of malicious intent purely because I wish the tree to be cut down or something of that nature, I have disobeyed a man made civil law. Then introducing the Catechism, work of the Holy Spirit, which says to disobey civil law is a sin (is that right??)
Therefore doing a task that is not permitted by law is a sin of civil disobedience even though your removing a birds nest not killing hundreds of people. Have I got this right?

Oh and what if you hire a laborer to remove the nest and don’t tell him that the simple task he is being employed to do, not out of malice, is illegal?

What does killing hundreds of people have to do with it? Lots of sins don’t involve killing hundreds of people.

Consider these examples:

Murder – In this case, the action is against both moral and civil law. When you commit murder, you have both the sin of murder (presumably mortal) and the sin of refusing to submit to legitimate authority.

Destroying nest – In this case, the action is against civil law but not moral law. When you willing disobey the legitimate law of a legitimate authority, that is the sin of refusing to submit to legitimate authority. I think this would probably not be a mortal sin (but ask a priest!).

Government-mandated sterilization – In this case, submitting to government-mandated sterilization would be against the moral law, but refusing to submit would be against the civil law. In this case, refusing to submit does not include any sin for breaking the civil law, because it is not a legitimate law.

As for not telling the laborer that you are asking him to do something illegal, for sure that would be a sin. The laborer wouldn’t be able to prove that he didn’t know it was illegal, possibly would get in trouble even if they believe that he didn’t know, because they may feel that he should know. You would be commiting a “lie of omission” by knowingly withholding information from him that he would need to make an informed decision about his actions. IMO (but I am not an authority), this would be a much worse sin than cutting it down yourself.

–Jen

 

[FAH]

What does killing hundreds of people have to do with it? Lots of sins don’t involve killing hundreds of people.

Consider these examples:

Murder – In this case, the action is against both moral and civil law. When you commit murder, you have both the sin of murder (presumably mortal) and the sin of refusing to submit to legitimate authority.

Destroying nest – In this case, the action is against civil law but not moral law. When you willing disobey the legitimate law of a legitimate authority, that is the sin of refusing to submit to legitimate authority. I think this would probably not be a mortal sin (but ask a priest!).

Government-mandated sterilization – In this case, submitting to government-mandated sterilization would be against the moral law, but refusing to submit would be against the civil law. In this case, refusing to submit does not include any sin for breaking the civil law, because it is not a legitimate law.

As for not telling the laborer that you are asking him to do something illegal, for sure that would be a sin. The laborer wouldn’t be able to prove that he didn’t know it was illegal, possibly would get in trouble even if they believe that he didn’t know, because they may feel that he should know. You would be commiting a “lie of omission” by knowingly withholding information from him that he would need to make an informed decision about his actions. IMO (but I am not an authority), this would be a much worse sin than cutting it down yourself.

–Jen

Thank You and everyone for the responses . I shall ask Father for his opinion.