Is lying always wrong?

[SilverCamellia]

I want to talk about an experience I had a couple of days ago, in which I lied as a form of self-protection.

I was shopping in a supermarket and I met a girl in an aisle who said she’d seen me around and I said she probably had and then left her. Then I met her again and she asked if I had the store’s loyalty card. I didn’t know why she was asking and so I told her no, although I do have one. She wanted me to put my shopping through on her card so she’d get the points onto her card. It makes sense but as I didn’t know her I was suspicious of her and I didn’t know if she had other intentions (fraud or something).

So she followed me around the store and kept asking me questions about myself, which I answered truthfully if briefly. At one point I tried to evade her by doubling back on myself and walking fast but when she found me again she asked me why I’d left and I lied and said I’d gone to check if something was in stock. At one point she said bye to me but I still ended up at the checkout with her next to me (she was buying two items). And because she was there I couldn’t use my loyalty card nor a coupon I had to go with it. She followed me outside and while I was getting my bike ready she asked me if I had a mobile phone. I do have, but I was afraid she’d want my number and so I lied again and said no. I was finally able to leave her but since then I’ve been worrying a bit about my lying. Since I’ve become a Christian I aim never to lie but in this case it was to protect myself from somebody I didn’t know, so is it still a sin?

 

[Bookcat]

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2482 "A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving."281 The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: "You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."282

2483 Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. By injuring man’s relation to truth and to his neighbor, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord.

2484 The gravity of a lie is measured against the nature of the truth it deforms, the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims. If a lie in itself only constitutes a venial sin, it becomes mortal when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity.

2485 By its very nature, lying is to be condemned. It is a profanation of speech, whereas the purpose of speech is to communicate known truth to others. The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity. The culpability is greater when the intention of deceiving entails the risk of deadly consequences for those who are led astray.

2486 Since it violates the virtue of truthfulness, a lie does real violence to another. It affects his ability to know, which is a condition of every judgment and decision. It contains the seed of discord and all consequent evils. Lying is destructive of society; it undermines trust among men and tears apart the fabric of social relationships.

…

2488 The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional. Everyone must conform his life to the Gospel precept of fraternal love. This requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it.

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it.283

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a8.htm#III

 

[Robertanthony]

Catechism of the Catholic Church

:

2482 "A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving."281 The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: "You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."282

2483 Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. By injuring man’s relation to truth and to his neighbor, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord.

2484 The gravity of a lie is measured against the nature of the truth it deforms, the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims. If a lie in itself only constitutes a venial sin, it becomes mortal when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity.

2485 By its very nature, lying is to be condemned. It is a profanation of speech, whereas the purpose of speech is to communicate known truth to others. The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity. The culpability is greater when the intention of deceiving entails the risk of deadly consequences for those who are led astray.

2486 Since it violates the virtue of truthfulness, a lie does real violence to another. It affects his ability to know, which is a condition of every judgment and decision. It contains the seed of discord and all consequent evils. Lying is destructive of society; it undermines trust among men and tears apart the fabric of social relationships.

…

2488 The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional. Everyone must conform his life to the Gospel precept of fraternal love. This requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it.

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it.283

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a8.htm#III

I can quote pretty much anything and make it say whatever the hell I want to if I leave out context. If someone weird follows you around and creeps you out, you’re damn right you’re allowed to tell him something that is not factually true if it means he’s not going to stick around and harass you some more. OP if it worries you mention it in Confession and see what the Priest says. Lying to keep a creep at a distance is most likely not not a sin, at most a venial one acc. to 2484. If lying was intrinsically evil then why didn’t God (or someone else) rebuke those who did in Genesis 34:15-16?

 

[Robertanthony]

Yeah right, you’re in RCIA I’d forgotten that part. At the very, very most, you committed a venial sin. You had no intention but to not be bothered and potentially defrauded, no evil intention there.

 

[ilySHJ]

Satan is the father of all lies.

When I was younger, I might have done the same thing you did – lie to try and get away from her.

What would have happened had you answered her first question truthfully?

When she wanted to follow you and asked where you were going, what if you’d been direct and blunt: “I don’t know you, and I’m uncomfortable with your advances. I have shopping to do. Good day.”

All “I”-statements. People can’t effectively argue what you say if you phrase it that way. Then if she’s completely wacko and keeps after you, tell the manager. It’s healthier for you, AND no lies. .

You can still be your sweet caring self – even moreso when you stand up for yourself.

 

[TeenageConvert]

Not always. Sometimes we are morally obligated to lie. (Think people hiding Jews from Nazis during the holocaust) . Sometimes the truth is really none of their business too.

 

[shaky]

Not always. Sometimes we are morally obligated to lie. (Think people hiding Jews from Nazis during the holocaust) . Sometimes the truth is really none of their business too.

I agree that lying for the Right Reason is not Wrong:thumbsup:

What about some christian men that see themselves as righteous and NOT Sinners ?

 

[mcw013]

Why did you not just tell her the truth? If I was in your case I would have told her “Yes I do have a loyalty card.”. If she proceeded to tell me to give her points or whatever it was, I would have simply said, “Sorry I am not able to help you here, you see I have had bad experiences in my past with fraud and stuff (which I actually did), and you look like a nice girl, but still I will not take any risks, unless I know you for a while”.

If she then followed me around, no problem with that: many people talk to each other in the supermarket.

Again if she asked me If I own a phone, my response would be: “Yes I do, why do you ask?” If she then asked me for my number I would have given it to her as well. If it did turn out that she was calling me for the wrong purposes, I can always block her number, and in the very worst cases get the law involved.

You should not be so paranoid about little things, I met many people in similar situations, and we did exchange phone numbers. Some people turn out to be friends, you cannot assume that everyone is full of evil motives. If a person does turn out to be bad, simply ignore their calls, or block their number, etc, etc. I even experienced stalkers who threatened me before, but even they were stopped by the things I mentioned in this paragraph and the previous one. Dont be so paranoid. Worst case scenario involves a restraining order, and that following your encounter in a supermarket will be very, very, unlikely.

 

[ambevil]

I can quote pretty much anything and make it say whatever the hell I want to if I leave out context.

Sure, however that which Bookcat quoted spoke entirely for itself, and without much room for personal interpretation. The catechism says what it really says: lying is an intrinsic evil, that which is to be condemned according to its “nature” (i.e. an intrinsically evil one). There is an objectivity to that truth, since lying is and always will be a “direct offense against the truth;” that is, in fact, its definition. Personal interpretation and subjectivity allow lying to be okay “sometimes,” or water down the truth of lying by calling some lies “innocent white lies.” There is no innocence in lying. That doesn’t make it always mortal, but it certainly is never good. That also doesn’t make it ever easy. Heroic holiness exercises virtue and flees from any and all invitation to sin, even the smallest and most venial of intended sins. If were are going to be honest with ourselves, if our goal is to aspire towards true holiness and in so doing to reach Heaven, we are going to have to admit that every intentional act of lying is a participation in evil, whether we’re being hassled by nosy shoppers or interviewed by the Fuhrer himself.

But there’s good news. If you read to the end of that post, there was a section on using “discreet language” or selectively choosing which information to reveal to a person in certain situations in order to protect the “good and safety of others”:

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it.283

This was a very important point that seemed to have been missed, and one which could be remembered in moments when safety is at stake and lying is a temptation.

To the OP (although, I realize this was posted about 2 years ago…), try your best to limit, if not stop lying altogether. In those difficult moments, it is hard to know what to do, and I know I’ve struggled with this myself. Using selective and discreet language so as not to reveal truths you don’t wish to reveal, or even changing the subject in a way that is not awkward but gets the point across (an unspoken message such as: “Hey there, miss, you’re kind of being strange…”) is the best way get out of a situation like yours without having to commit a venial sin. I don’t think that it was mortal by any means. The situation did not include grave matter and it seems you were under a bit of duress. Just try your best to stop. Continued voluntary practice encourages habit; and when maintaining the integrity of truth is your habit, you defend truth in the most difficult and subtle of human spiritual battles. God bless.

 

[Robertanthony]

Why did you not just tell her the truth? If I was in your case I would have told her “Yes I do have a loyalty card.”. If she proceeded to tell me to give her points or whatever it was, I would have simply said, “Sorry I am not able to help you here, you see I have had bad experiences in my past with fraud and stuff (which I actually did), and you look like a nice girl, but still I will not take any risks, unless I know you for a while”.

If she then followed me around, no problem with that: many people talk to each other in the supermarket.

Again if she asked me If I own a phone, my response would be: “Yes I do, why do you ask?” If** she then asked me for my number I would have given it to her as well.** If it did turn out that she was calling me for the wrong purposes, I can always block her number, and in the very worst cases get the law involved.

You should not be so paranoid about little things, I met many people in similar situations, and we did exchange phone numbers. Some people turn out to be friends, you cannot assume that everyone is full of evil motives. If a person does turn out to be bad, simply ignore their calls, or block their number, etc, etc. I even experienced stalkers who threatened me before, but even they were stopped by the things I mentioned in this paragraph and the previous one. Dont be so paranoid. Worst case scenario involves a restraining order, and that following your encounter in a supermarket will be very, very, unlikely.

You don’t mention where you’re from because it’s personal, but you would give away your cell phone number to a weirdo who’s following you around in a store? Who knows, they might turn out to be great friends…

 

[Robertanthony]

Sure, however that which Bookcat quoted spoke entirely for itself, and without much room for personal interpretation. The catechism says what it really says: lying is an intrinsic evil, that which is to be condemned according to its “nature” (i.e. an intrinsically evil one). There is an objectivity to that truth, since lying is and always will be a “direct offense against the truth;” that is, in fact, its definition. Personal interpretation and subjectivity allow lying to be okay “sometimes,” or water down the truth of lying by calling some lies “innocent white lies.” There is no innocence in lying. That doesn’t make it always mortal, but it certainly is never good. That also doesn’t make it ever easy. Heroic holiness exercises virtue and flees from any and all invitation to sin, even the smallest and most venial of intended sins. If were are going to be honest with ourselves, if our goal is to aspire towards true holiness and in so doing to reach Heaven, we are going to have to admit that every intentional act of lying is a participation in evil, whether we’re being hassled by nosy shoppers or interviewed by the Fuhrer himself.

But there’s good news. If you read to the end of that post, there was a section on using “discreet language” or selectively choosing which information to reveal to a person in certain situations in order to protect the “good and safety of others”:

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it.283

This was a very important point that seemed to have been missed, and one which could be remembered in moments when safety is at stake and lying is a temptation.

To the OP (although, I realize this was posted about 2 years ago…), try your best to limit, if not stop lying altogether. In those difficult moments, it is hard to know what to do, and I know I’ve struggled with this myself. Using selective and discreet language so as not to reveal truths you don’t wish to reveal, or even changing the subject in a way that is not awkward but gets the point across (an unspoken message such as: “Hey there, miss, you’re kind of being strange…”) is the best way get out of a situation like yours without having to commit a venial sin. I don’t think that it was mortal by any means. The situation did not include grave matter and it seems you were under a bit of duress. Just try your best to stop. Continued voluntary practice encourages habit; and when maintaining the integrity of truth is your habit, you defend truth in the most difficult and subtle of human spiritual battles. God bless.

What was posted two years ago?

Do you think saying to a pushy weirdo that you don’t have the card they enquire about is from the devil? If you do, our conversation is over, but my point is that Bookcat bolded the part about “lying comes from Satan”. Pray tell, saying to your 4 year-old son on the morning of December 25th that Santa came by in the night, is that from Satan also?

 

[shaky]

Sure, however that which Bookcat quoted spoke entirely for itself, and without much room for personal interpretation. The catechism says what it really says: lying is an intrinsic evil, that which is to be condemned according to its “nature” (i.e. an intrinsically evil one). There is an objectivity to that truth, since lying is and always will be a “direct offense against the truth;” that is, in fact, its definition. Personal interpretation and subjectivity allow lying to be okay “sometimes,” or water down the truth of lying by calling some lies “innocent white lies.” There is no innocence in lying. That doesn’t make it always mortal, but it certainly is never good. That also doesn’t make it ever easy. Heroic holiness exercises virtue and flees from any and all invitation to sin, even the smallest and most venial of intended sins. If were are going to be honest with ourselves, if our goal is to aspire towards true holiness and in so doing to reach Heaven, we are going to have to admit that every intentional act of lying is a participation in evil, whether we’re being hassled by nosy shoppers or interviewed by the Fuhrer himself.

But there’s good news. If you read to the end of that post, there was a section on using “discreet language” or selectively choosing which information to reveal to a person in certain situations in order to protect the “good and safety of others”:

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it.283

This was a very important point that seemed to have been missed, and one which could be remembered in moments when safety is at stake and lying is a temptation.

To the OP (although, I realize this was posted about 2 years ago…), try your best to limit, if not stop lying altogether. In those difficult moments, it is hard to know what to do, and I know I’ve struggled with this myself. Using selective and discreet language so as not to reveal truths you don’t wish to reveal, or even changing the subject in a way that is not awkward but gets the point across (an unspoken message such as: “Hey there, miss, you’re kind of being strange…”) is the best way get out of a situation like yours without having to commit a venial sin. I don’t think that it was mortal by any means. The situation did not include grave matter and it seems you were under a bit of duress. Just try your best to stop. Continued voluntary practice encourages habit; and when maintaining the integrity of truth is your habit, you defend truth in the most difficult and subtle of human spiritual battles. God bless.

I had a situation where 4 black blokes got into my taxi. It was Just towards the end of my shift about 1 am. I had a good evening and took quite a bit of cash. During the Journey one of them asked me how much cash i have taken have you had a good night.
My immediate response was i am on the all night shift and Just started my shift and you lot are my first Customers.
What was i supposed to do Answer them truthfully and say i have had a good night and tell them how much cash i have taken ? That is certainly going to invite them to rob me if that was their Intention.
If i would have ignored them and remained silent or told them none of your business that would Probably Invite trouble.
Let me ask you. If you had a family member that came to you to hide in the house from some gang members who were out to kill him. Then they came to your door asking you do you know where he is. Are you going to say yes he is here in the house ?

I have read in the Old testament people of God lying for RIGHT reasons in certain situations.

 

[JamesATyler]

I listened in on a conversation where a lady was asking the same thing. The example she used was what if you lived during WW2 and the nazis came to your door and asked if any Jews were there. Say you were hiding one. Is it wrong to lie?

Strictly speaking the answer is yes. But it is also wrong to tell the truth. In that situation you can’t avoid the question. You have to choose.

That’s where sayings like “Choosing the lesser of two evils” come in.

 

[Ron_Conte]

The Magisterium teaches that intrinsically evil acts are always immoral:

“These are the acts which, in the Church’s moral tradition, have been termed ‘intrinsically evil’ (intrinsece malum): they are such *always and per se, *in other words, on account of their very object, and quite apart from the ulterior intentions of the one acting and the circumstances.” Veritatis Splendor, n. 80.

Intrinsically evil acts are immoral by their very nature, since the object (moral object) of the act determines the essential moral nature of the act.

2485 By its very nature, lying is to be condemned.

This assertion by the CCC indicates that lying is intrinsically evil.

 

[Scottgun]

Dr. Ed Feser has done an extensive series on the intrinsic immorality of lying here: edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2011/02/live-action-lying-and-natural-law.html

In it (you may need to follow the links to his other entries) he covers the well known murderer-at-the-door scenario (aka the Nazis-at-the-door).

Executive summary: there is no such thing as a moral obligation to lie.

 

[Bookcat]

Catechism of the Catholic Church

:

2482 "A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving."281 The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: "You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."282

2483 Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. By injuring man’s relation to truth and to his neighbor, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord.

2484 The gravity of a lie is measured against the nature of the truth it deforms, the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims. If a lie in itself only constitutes a venial sin, it becomes mortal when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity.

2485 By its very nature, lying is to be condemned. It is a profanation of speech, whereas the purpose of speech is to communicate known truth to others. The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity. The culpability is greater when the intention of deceiving entails the risk of deadly consequences for those who are led astray.

2486 Since it violates the virtue of truthfulness, a lie does real violence to another. It affects his ability to know, which is a condition of every judgment and decision. It contains the seed of discord and all consequent evils. Lying is destructive of society; it undermines trust among men and tears apart the fabric of social relationships.

…

2488 The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional. Everyone must conform his life to the Gospel precept of fraternal love. This requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it.

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion.** No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it**.283

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a8.htm#III

 

[Bookcat]

… If lying was intrinsically evil then why didn’t God (or someone else) rebuke those who did in Genesis 34:15-16?

Regarding the Old Testament:

After the fall…

Pope Benedict XVI:

"Here it must be remembered first and foremost that biblical revelation is deeply rooted in history. God’s plan is manifested progressively and it is accomplished slowly, in successive stages and despite human resistance. God chose a people and patiently worked to guide and educate them.

Revelation is suited to the cultural and moral level of distant times and thus describes facts and customs,

such as cheating and trickery…

without explicitly denouncing the immorality of such things

This can be explained by the historical context…" Verbum Domini 42

 

[Robertanthony]

Ok then, so Catholics will have to choose between committing a venial sin for which they will spend 1 extra hour in Purgatory, or risk being assaulted by 4 black “gentlemen” or whateve the case may be. I f a serial killer with an axe wants to know where your child is, you may tell him the truth to avoid committing a venial sin or you may elect to spend a short amount of extra time in Purgatory so that God is satisfied and you child is spared. “Damned” if you do, “damned” if you don’t. To each his own.

 

[Robertanthony]

Regarding the Old Testament:

After the fall…

Pope Benedict XVI:

"Here it must be remembered first and foremost that biblical revelation is deeply rooted in history. God’s plan is manifested progressively and it is accomplished slowly, in successive stages and despite human resistance. God chose a people and patiently worked to guide and educate them.

Revelation is suited to the cultural and moral level of distant times and thus describes facts and customs,

such as cheating and trickery…

without explicitly denouncing the immorality of such things

This can be explained by the historical context…" Verbum Domini 42

Back then, it was perfectly fine to entrap men and kill them while they were experiencing the agony of circumcision, now telling an evil person that the people he’s looking for and wants to kill aren’t in your house when really they are is a sin. Go figure…I marvel at the logic involved.

 

[Bookcat]

Back then, it was perfectly fine to entrap men and kill them while they were experiencing the agony of circumcision, now telling an evil person that the people he’s looking for and wants to kill aren’t in your house when really they are is a sin. Go figure…I marvel at the logic involved.

Read again what the Pope is saying there – there is a misunderstanding present. He is not saying it was good to do such and such --but rather that the fact that something (say lying) is related in the The Old Testament without explicitly condemning it – is due to the historical context --and is not therefore an endorsement of the practice --(especially in regards to Christians who have the fullness of revelation in Christ). God had to meet them where they were (after the fall etc etc) and progressively educate them etc – until the coming of Christ.