Is it ever OK to lie?

[kage_ar]

You really think that you could just not answer nazi’s? You think they would just let you not answer? Are you serious…I can only imagine you would get smashed with the butt of a rifle in your face and then get asked again.

And Jesus endured worse torture than that. Many have been hurt or tortured or killed before they would sin against God, God never told us “sin not, except when you might get smashed in the face”.

To quote an old gospel song

"It’s a battlefiend, brother
Not a recreation room

It’s a fight and not a game

Run if you want to
Run if you will
But I came here to stay."

 

[hellopeople]

Negative moral precepts prohibiting intrinsically evil acts do not allow for any legitimate exception. There is no room for any creativity in order to devise a contrary determination. The only option is to obey the moral law and refrain from the intrinsically evil act.

Nazis:“Are there any Jews here”
Person harboring Jews: “Yes”

So that is the right answer? Are you serious?!?!?!?!?

This is absurd.

 

[hellopeople]

And Jesus endured worse torture than that. Many have been hurt or tortured or killed before they would sin against God, God never told us “sin not, except when you might get smashed in the face”.

To quote an old gospel song

"It’s a battlefiend, brother
Not a recreation room

It’s a fight and not a game

Run if you want to
Run if you will
But I came here to stay."

The thing is that if you don’t answer them, they will beat you up AND assume you have jews. There is nothing that it solved other than getting you beat up. You aren’t sinning to prevent getting smashed in the face, you are sinning to save the lives of innocents. If you cannot see that lying to ruthless and evil people to save good and innocent people’s lives is the right thing to do, there is something wrong with you IMO.

 

[kage_ar]

If you cannot see that lying to ruthless and evil people to save good and innocent people’s lives is the right thing to do, there is something wrong with you IMO.

Again, I am sorry that you cannot understand that one cannot do good by doing evil. God does not work that way.

 

[Doc_Keele]

Are you talking about the Magisterium being wrong or lying being wrong? Anyway, I agree with you if you say that the Magisterium is wrong.

That the Magisterium must be wrong if that’s what it says.

 

[hellopeople]

Again, I am sorry that you cannot understand that one cannot do good by doing evil. God does not work that way.

So did God want those innocent Jews to die? Is that part of his plan? You not lying to the nazi’s so innocent people can get slaughtered?

 

[kage_ar]

So did God want those innocent Jews to die? Is that part of his plan? You not lying to the nazi’s so innocent people can get slaughtered?

God’s plan is that all men go to heaven.

What we do on this earth determines if we cooperate with God’s plan or if we thwart it. We are also given the awesome responsibility to help others get to heaven.

I am required to love my fellow man, to give them food and shelter and clothing and dignity, and to die for them if so asked. The one thing I am not required to do for my fellow man is to sin for them.

 

[Bookcat]

Can an intrinsically evil venial sin, done with full knowledge and full deliberation, become a very very very slight sin, almost to the edge of not being a sin, due to good intention and dire circumstances?

No. This approach is a version of proportionalism, the idea that we can weigh the good against the bad in any act, so as to justify that act. The only difference between this approach and proportionalism is that the act is still said to be a ‘sin’, although the very meaning of the word sin becomes lost when it is called very very very slight…to the edge of existence.
.

It is not a version of proportionalism. It is simply recognizing that the circumstances CAN lessen the guilt of the person. And I think the circumstances of Nazi’s at ones door demanding to know if there are Jews there…they will kill you and the Jews if you say yes…and they may kill you if you and the Jews if you are silent (well ok they will kill you) And you may know be able to really give a good ‘careful language’ answer…so one is forced into a very very stressful and difficult circumstance…one where if you say the wrong other people and you will die! one may not be able to think on ones feet so quickly…so one may end up with a lie. It is still a venial sin…but due to the grave circumstances …grave duress…it is lessened…greatly!

As the Church Teaches in the Catechism:

1754 The circumstances, including the consequences, are secondary elements of a moral act. They contribute to increasing or **diminishing **the moral goodness or evil of human acts (for example, the amount of a theft). They can also diminish or increase **the agent’s responsibility **(such as acting out of a fear of death). Circumstances of themselves cannot change the moral quality of acts themselves; they can make neither good nor right an action that is in itself evil.

 

[shondrea]

I know full well what the church teaches about lying being evil., but if me telling a white lie was guarenteed to save someone’s life, I would have no fear standing before God, admitting I had sinned but assured it was the lesser of two evils.

Lie, or be an accessory to murder. Evil or not, I would lie.

 

[Rascalking]

I’m curious-swap holocaust for unborn baby.

HYPOTHETICAL ONLY.

A lady will get an abortion unless you ::gasp:: tell an untruth.

WIth all respect to those who disagree, I’d rather save a life then feel self-righetous and say, “Oh, yeah? But I didn’t lie. I’m better than you.”

God does have common sense. Never, ever forget it. Feeling holier than thou because “You didn’t lie” while people enter a gas chamber or get shot isn’t going to put you in a good light to the Lord.

 

[Havard]

Here’s an except from Dr. Jeffrey Mirus’ article on lying from This Rock which may help:

"Over the past hundred years there has been a growing movement among moral theologians to tweak the definition of lying as follows: “To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead into error someone who has the right to know the truth.” This very sentence, in fact, is taken from the initial edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2483, 1994 edition).

When the Catechism was first published in French in 1994, and translated into other languages from the French, it contained the sentence quoted above, and so there was some speculation that the Holy See had finally decided to throw at least a modicum of magisterial weight behind this solution to our dilemma. This very precise definition, with its inclusion of the right to know, enables us to handle lying and falsehood in a manner very similar to the way we handle murder and killing. Through a person’s intention to use particular knowledge for an evil end, that person would presumably forfeit his right to know. Thus it would be morally acceptable to speak a falsehood to the murderous thugs. But we would no more call this “lying” than we would call an act of self-defense “murder.”

Alas, the matter is not so easily resolved. For, as it turns out, when the official Latin text of the Catechism was released in 1997 after a process of revision, the right to know was dropped. The operative sentence now reads simply: “To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error.” Of course, the Catechism is intended as a basic compendium of Catholic doctrine, assembled with due ecclesiastical care, and not as a collection of definitive infallible pronouncements permanently settling every question on every topic it covers. In other words, the change in definition does not mean the original formulation was wrong. But it does mean that the editors of the Catechism were not prepared to endorse it in an official Catholic reference work."

Underlining is mine, for emphasis.

 

[kage_ar]

WIth all respect to those who disagree, I’d rather save a life then feel self-righetous and say, “Oh, yeah? But I didn’t lie. I’m better than you.”

God does have common sense. Never, ever forget it. Feeling holier than thou because “You didn’t lie” while people enter a gas chamber or get shot isn’t going to put you in a good light to the Lord.

No person here said that they were better than anyone.

What is said is that lying is always a sin, and there is never an “excuse” to sin.

Give me one example in Scripture where a lie was ever rewarded by God. It simply does not happen.

How impotent do some think God is?

BTW, anyone here honestly think that if the Nazi’s asked “are you hiding Jews” and you said “no” that they are going to thank you and go on down the road? Those make believe situations are just that, make believe. If you were suspected of hiding Jews, they would believe you only after they had searched every nook and cranny of your property.

 

[Rascalking]

Havard makes a great point. Instead of being silent to murders and thugs, (which, in the real world, wouldn’t work) it might be venial to lie to them.

Lying in this situation might be like the “ticking time bomb” argument. I don’t mean to open up another Pandora’s box, but ask yourself-Would you smack a terrorist in the face to find out where a bomb is hidden?

Both are unpleasant, physical assault and falsehoods-both not all that is unpleasant is mortally reprehensible.

And for the record, I would do both, under those circumstances-lie to a Nazi and smack around a terrorist. I don’t mean to change the subject, I apologize if I did.

 

[Rascalking]

No person here said that they were better than anyone.

What is said is that lying is always a sin, and there is never an “excuse” to sin.

Give me one example in Scripture where a lie was ever rewarded by God. It simply does not happen.

How impotent do some think God is?

BTW, anyone here honestly think that if the Nazi’s asked “are you hiding Jews” and you said “no” that they are going to thank you and go on down the road? Those make believe situations are just that, make believe. If you were suspected of hiding Jews, they would believe you only after they had searched every nook and cranny of your property.

Kage, with all due respect, and I mean that seriously, I beleive some people do feel self-righteous about it. They would feel morally superior and pat themself on the back because, “They didn’t lie”

And, it’s quite the oppisite-I feel that God is all-powerful. I also feel that He places a value on human life, and that He DOES have common sense.

Like I said, it’s just my opinion-Your right about the Nazi’s, they probably wouldn’t go next door, however-they may.

 

[kage_ar]

Let’s look at a New Testament example.

The wise men came from the East, Herod told them to come back and tell him where the Baby was. The wise men could have lied to Herod, however, they simply went home another way.

Do you think that the wise men could have stopped the slaughter of the innocents if they’d lied to Herod?

 

[Rascalking]

Let’s look at a New Testament example.

The wise men came from the East, Herod told them to come back and tell him where the Baby was. The wise men could have lied to Herod, however, they simply went home another way.

Do you think that the wise men could have stopped the slaughter of the innocents if they’d lied to Herod?

That’s a wonderful question. A very good point.

The only answer I can provide, and I know it won’t satisfy anyone, is that perhaps we don’t know the entire story, maybe it was dictated wrong, or they where divinely inspired, or something.

For what it’s worth, I personally simply cannot fathom that God would look down upon anyone who would lie to prevent a grave, hideous, and monstrous evil-like the ones perpetrated on the Jews, holy innocents, etc.

 

[fulbert4605]

This discussion of the Nazis and Jewish people scenario is an interesting one to be sure and I do not intend to derail from that discussion within this topic. But within the confines of the topic, I feel it would be also appropriate to explore the opposite end. That is, lying to oneself even though it causes no others visible harm. If I see what I reasonably know to be a brown bird and for pure vanity sake state, “That bird is blue.” while reasonably concluding there is no audience around me - that is still intrinsically evil, correct, since I have hurt my own soul by uttering a lie for sport?

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

For what it’s worth, I personally simply cannot fathom that God would look down upon anyone who would lie to prevent a grave, hideous, and monstrous evil-like the ones perpetrated on the Jews, holy innocents, etc.

I completely agree. In some cases lying is necessary. If you, in the case of Nazis, were to remain silent or refuse to answer they would then kill you, your whole family, find the Jews being hidden and kill them too. If you lie “there are no jews here” and defend it well, your family is spared, you are spared, and the Jews are spared.

And if we’re gunna talk about lying, lets get real here!! Lying isn’t limited to words, lying can be extrapolated to actions too! Isn’t the very act of hiding Jews committing a falsehood and therefore lying? You are perpetuating the lie “there are no jews in this area.”

I honestly would rather be a liar who saves the lives and relationships of people that a “virtuous” person who allows innocent people to be torn apart by the wills of evil. Honestly, the whole scenario reeks of the very things Jesus condemned the Pharasees about. They clung to their false sense of self-righteousness because they never sinned, but failed in the case of the biggest command: to love one another.

 

[Laurie_Gibson]

First of all may I say, as the person who initiated this discussion, that the courteous and informative discussion has been very helpful.

My summary of the discussion would be as follows.

It is always wrong to lie and you may not lie to bring about a good result.
So you may not lie to the Nazis when they ask about your Jewish neighbours.
However you can refuse to answer and, perhaps, a good Catholic would.
[Some of you did not like this answer and feel the right action is to mislead the Nazis but this would be, it seems, contrary to Catholic teaching]

One ray of hope though is if a lie was defined as ’ deliberately misleading…someone who has a right to know the information’. As the Nazis do not have a right to the information it is not a lie if we misinform them.

[But if you ask me my age, could I not argue that you do not have a right to this personal information and so lie? I am, of course a handsome 21 year old man!!]

Thanks to you all for your very helpful answers

Laurie Gibson

 

[Ron_Conte]

It is not a version of proportionalism. It is simply recognizing that the circumstances CAN lessen the guilt of the person.

Your previous claim, that circumstances can reduce a sin to become a very very very slight sin, even to the point of almost not being a sin, is not correct.

The degree of sinfulness and degree of culpability of a sin depends on:
the degree of knowledge
the degree of consent
intention
moral object
circumstances.

When knowledge and consent are both full, and the moral object is evil, as in the case of a fully deliberate lie, then the act is more serious than a semi-deliberate venial sin, or a venial sin in which the knowledge is not full. Fully deliberate venial sins, done with full knowledge, are not mortal sins, but they also are not vanishingly slight.