Is lying always wrong?

[Scottgun]

So by God’s grace you would spill the beans and turn them over?

I would everything to protect them, but I would try to resist the temptation to resort to lying. Also, I would think before hiding jews, I would have a heart-to-heart with them. Letting them know up front the risks involved and while I will do all I can to protect them, I won’t do something morally wrong to do it. I think since I’m putting myself at risk, anyone in the universe could respect that.

I doubt that is the way God would want his grace to be used.

We don’t need to be God mind-readers on this because we have His direct and unambiguous teaching from His 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.

 

[deb1]

No, not because of the lie. Because they feared God. It’s state explicitly in verse 22 of Exodus 1; their fear of God was the cause of their reward, not their lie to Pharaoh.

But didn’t they lie because they feared the Lord?

 

[MilesXpisti]

Well, I don’t see where I said they were rewarded for lying, but have it your way …

They were rewarded for their fear of the Lord. How was their fear of the Lord manifested, according to scripture?

That’s precisely the point. It was manifested in an unjust way. A person in love with the Church could feel justified in robbing a rich and corrupt individual and giving the money to the Church. The Church of Christ would benefit, but the act would be tainted by sin. This is why the reward to the midwives was material, he built up their houses, and not a spiritual one.

 

[quasimodo]

That’s precisely the point. It was manifested in an unjust way. A person in love with the Church could feel justified in robbing a rich and corrupt individual and giving the money to the Church. The Church of Christ would benefit, but the act would be tainted by sin. This is why the reward to the midwives was material, he built up their houses, and not a spiritual one.

I see. God rewarded them for being unjust…riiiight.

 

[MilesXpisti]

I see. God rewarded them for being unjust…riiiight.

shrugs Don’t look at me. I didn’t make it up.

Per the Bible Commentary at the Catholic Encyclopaedia:

newadvent.org/bible/exo001.htm

 

[JimG]

I don’t think that Nazi’s looking for Jews or anybody else to kill are entitled to the truth. Consequently I wouldn’t consider myself morally compelled to give it to them.

Further, I can’t imagine hiding innocent fugitives from evil men while giving them the warning, “I’ll hide you here to keep you from being killed, but of course, if anyone should ask me a direct question, I’ll have to turn you in.”

Isn’t the very fact of hiding them a method of evading the truth–withholding the truth from the Nazi’s or whoever is seeking to kill them? Why is that OK, but verbally misleading the killers is wrong?

 

[MilesXpisti]

I don’t think that Nazi’s looking for Jews or anybody else to kill are entitled to the truth. Consequently I wouldn’t consider myself morally compelled to give it to them.

Further, I can’t imagine hiding innocent fugitives from evil men while giving them the warning, “I’ll hide you here to keep you from being killed, but of course, if anyone should ask me a direct question, I’ll have to turn you in.”

Isn’t the very fact of hiding them a method of evading the truth–withholding the truth from the Nazi’s or whoever is seeking to kill them? Why is that OK, but verbally misleading the killers is wrong?

I’ve made clear my position on what I’d do in that situation so I won’t rehash it. Whether or not your conscience would compel you to lie in this case is inconsequential. Catholicism does not support the rule of conscience as a meter of moral truth, thankfully.

And to answer your question, no, hiding them is not a method of evading the truth; it is an act of charity and action against an unjust law, which St. Augustine has equated to be no law under God. But to lie, to commit an offence against the truth is a violation of moral law as given to us by our Lord. If you feel this is unjust, then I’m not the one you should be arguing with.

I’ve done my best to show that at least where objective moral law is concerned, lying is never justified and is always morally wrong. I’ve done it the Catechism, writings of the Church fathers, and Holy Scripture. I’ve got nothing else, so I’m calling it a day on this thread. Many thanks to everyone that participated in a very intellectually compelling thread!

 

[JimG]

And to answer your question, no, hiding them is not a method of evading the truth; it is an act of charity and action against an unjust law, which St. Augustine has equated to be no law under God. But to lie, to commit an offence against the truth is a violation of moral law as given to us by our Lord. If you feel this is unjust, then I’m not the one you should be arguing with.

Thanks, I agree that everyone’s position is clear and so the thread has probably served its purppose.

As you mentiioned, an unjust law is no law at all under God.

So, if there were a law that mandated that no one hide Jews and that everyone should turn them in: if I were asked, “Are you breaking any laws?” I would not hesitate to answer “No,” because the law in question is no law at all. According to their understanding of the law, however, my answer would be a lie.

Moral theology texts are full of discussions and distinctions of how the commandments are to be applied to particular cases. Even such absolute commandments as “Thou shalt not kill,” seem to allow for some distinctions to be made. I just don’t see that this particular commandment about not bearing false witness should be the only one to be interpreted in an absolutist manner.

 

[MilesXpisti]

Thanks, I agree that everyone’s position
As you mentiioned, an unjust law is no law at all under God.

Except in this case, we are dealing with God’s law

So, if there were a law that mandated that no one hide Jews and that everyone should turn them in: if I were asked, “Are you breaking any laws?” I would not hesitate to answer “No,” because the law in question is no law at all. According to their understanding of the law, however, my answer would be a lie.

Moral theology texts are full of discussions and distinctions of how the commandments are to be applied to particular cases. Even such absolute commandments as “Thou shalt not kill,” seem to allow for some distinctions to be made. I just don’t see that this particular commandment about not bearing false witness should be the only one to be interpreted in an absolutist manner.

While I understand your meaning with the 5th commandment, it cannot stand as an example in this case, as the Hebrew for it is lo tirtzach, which means specifically premeditated murder. Further, there are no cases in which the any of the precepts behind the Ten Commandments can be broken with moral justification. That is specifically why they are commandments. And before the example in the Gospel of St. Matthew, of Jesus performing work on the Sabbath, is brought up, the Catechism, § 2173.

 

[quasimodo]

Using the logic of paragraph 2173 … the commandment against lying was made to protect people from the harm done by lies. This rule, too, was made for man - to do man good and not harm. Man was not made for this rule. Telling the truth - simply because it is true - can and does hurt people. In the case of the the example used in this thread, it can get them tortured and killed. You must discern if the application of the commandment is for the good of man.

Nor can we write the scenario such that we always finesse ourselves out of a sticky situation - avoiding the lie that saves our hidden friend from the ememy. it doesn’t work that way very often.

 

[Scottgun]

Using the logic of paragraph 2173 … the commandment against lying was made to protect people from the harm done by lies. This rule, too, was made for man - to do man good and not harm. Man was not made for this rule. Telling the truth - simply because it is true - can and does hurt people. In the case of the the example used in this thread, it can get them tortured and killed. You must discern if the application of the commandment is for the good of man.

Nor can we write the scenario such that we always finesse ourselves out of a sticky situation - avoiding the lie that saves our hidden friend from the ememy. it doesn’t work that way very often.

Ok, let’s end it this way–the Church unambiguously teaches that lying is always and intrinsicly wrong, even to save lives or do good. This IS the Church’s teaching and it will do no good pretending it does not teach this.

Scott

 

[punisherthunder]

What about that Dateline: Catch a Predator show? Is how they catch those sickos wrong?

 

[quasimodo]

Ok, let’s end it this way–the Church unambiguously teaches that lying is always and intrinsicly wrong, even to save lives or do good. This IS the Church’s teaching and it will do no good pretending it does not teach this.

Scott

I’ll see your paragraph 2482 and raise you paragraphs 2488 & 2489

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

A person will not always be given the opportunity to simply remain silent. A person cannot expect to finesse the question with discreet language. The good and the safety of others trumps everything else because the commandments and the rules in the catechism are made for man, man is not made for them. The catechism is intended to be a guide. It cannot foresee all the situations that a person might face in evil and violent times. I will choose charity over rules and principles divorced from the real world. In this I believe I am following the example if Jesus when he pointed out that the commandments were made for man and not visa versa. I choose to follow the example of the midwives who have been praised through out history for their action in saving the Jewish male children. By their lie they manifested their fear of the Lord.

 

[Scottgun]

I’ll see your paragraph 2482 and raise you paragraphs 2488 & 2489

Sorry, but none of that permits deliberately telling an untruth in order to decieve. Yes, while people do not have the right to the truth sometimes. That does *not *authorize lying. Being silent or using discreet language is not the same as lying.

Once again. The Church unambiguously teaches that lying is objectively wrong. Just like abortion is objectively wrong. And when something is objectively wrong, no amount of good intentions or relative circumstances (evil times and appeals to the “real” world for instance) make it acceptable. It’s not “rules”, it is Truth. Making a Faustian bargin is not charity.

Scott

 

[Zooey]

And I have said it once (actually twice), & I’ll say it again: If there are Jews hiding in my attic, & Nazis at the front door, I have 2 choices: I can tell a lie & save their lives, or I can tell the truth & get them killed. I will tell the lie every time, & if that means I am going to go to hell, I would rather go there for lying than for being the cause of those Jews ending up in the ovens at Auschwitz & Dachau!!
But hey, that’s me.

 

[quasimodo]

And I have said it once (actually twice), & I’ll say it again: If there are Jews hiding in my attic, & Nazis at the front door, I have 2 choices: I can tell a lie & save their lives, or I can tell the truth & get them killed. I will tell the lie every time, & if that means I am going to go to hell, I would rather go there for lying than for being the cause of those Jews ending up in the ovens at Auschwitz & Dachau!!
But hey, that’s me.

The moral teachings of the church are important and correct guidelines, but they do not and cannot tell us specifically how to behave in any given situation. Some situations will put our values in conflict, and we must make value judgments then act. In other words, in a dangerous and violent world our values can be placed in conflict. Choices have to be made that cause internal dissonance. Zooey, you indicate that you would want to choose genuine charity over rigid obedience to laws. That is the right choice because it is the path laid out for us by Christ. I pray we are never forced to make such choices.

 

[JimG]

What about that Dateline: Catch a Predator show? Is how they catch those sickos wrong?

Well, clearly, they use decoys who lie to online predators about who they are (underage kids) in order to entice them to commit an overt act such as coming to a house for sex–which never happens because the cops and the TV people are there.

I have no qualms about the procedure, although it comes close to entrapment, since there would have been no overt act had not the decoys lied to the predators. (And it does make for good TV)

Still, IF lying is wrong in every instance, then this would be against the moral law. But that is precisely the point we have been arguing here.

I suppose the same would apply to law enforcement “moles” placed inside criminal organizations to act as informers. To gain the trust of their bosses, they lie about who they are.

 

[Neo_Canaan]

And I have said it once (actually twice), & I’ll say it again: If there are Jews hiding in my attic, & Nazis at the front door, I have 2 choices: I can tell a lie & save their lives, or I can tell the truth & get them killed. I will tell the lie every time, & if that means I am going to go to hell, I would rather go there for lying than for being the cause of those Jews ending up in the ovens at Auschwitz & Dachau!!
But hey, that’s me.

Not me. Such stuff the nazis did were tests from the lord to see if we would lie or not.

Put simply, we must never lie, no matter what. Also, what of George Washington? From the day he was born, to the day The Angel Of Death called his name, he NEVER told a lie AT ALL, so much, the better.

 

[runandsew]

OK, I know lying is wrong, and I know that Jesus would never lie.
But can someone explain John chapter 7 verses1-10.
Jesus tells his brothers that he is not going to the feast, but then he goes there anyways, and in secret. If he told his brothers that he is not going, and then he does it anyway, can’t that be considered lying?

John 7:1-10
After this, Jesus moved about within Galilee; but he did not wish to travel in Judea, because the Jews were trying to kill him.
But the Jewish feast of Tabernacles was near.
So his brothers said to him, “Leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples also may see the works you are doing.
No one works in secret if he wants to be known publicly. If you do these things, manifest yourself to the world.”
For his brothers did not believe in him.
So Jesus said to them, “My time is not yet here, but the time is always right for you.
The world cannot hate you, but it hates me, because I testify to it that its works are evil.
You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, because my time has not yet been fulfilled.”
After he had said this, he stayed on in Galilee.
But when his brothers had gone up to the feast, he himself also went up, not openly but (as it were) in secret.

 

[JimG]

Not me. Such stuff the nazis did were tests from the lord to see if we would lie or not.

Oh my goodness.

The holocaust was a test from God to see whether we would lie to save Jews.

I am speechless.

Moral theology texts must be re-written.
Lying is the unforgivable sin.
Killing Jews is only a test.