Is lying to someone always a sin?

[abb]

Recently someone asked me why I needed to goto confession after I told them that I was going to go. After they asked this question I didn’t tell them the reasoning behind wanting to go, I told them “just because I like going to confession” I confessed this to my priest but he didn’t comment on it so I wasn’t sure what to think about it.

I really care about this person and I feel that I need to talk to them about everything, but I’m reluctant to mention why I need to goto confession and I’m not ready at this point in my relationship with them to confess all my sins to them as well as God. Has anyone else come across this problem/dilemma?

Thanks for your help & God Bless!

 

[bilop]

Recently someone asked me why I needed to goto confession after I told them that I was going to go. After they asked this question I didn’t tell them the reasoning behind wanting to go, I told them “just because I like going to confession” I confessed this to my priest but he didn’t comment on it so I wasn’t sure what to think about it.

I really care about this person and I feel that I need to talk to them about everything, but I’m reluctant to mention why I need to goto confession and I’m not ready at this point in my relationship with them to confess all my sins to them as well as God. Has anyone else come across this problem/dilemma?

Thanks for your help & God Bless!

Lying is only a sin if the person has a right to know the information.

e.g. If the Nazis asked if there was a Jew hiding in your house, you can say no.

This person has no right to know why you are going to confession. In fact, NO ONE, has a right to know what we confess.

So don’t worry. You didn’t sin. It might have been better to just say, “I’m sorry, I’m not comfortable sharing that information”.

God Bless

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Lying is only a sin if the person has a right to know the information.

Bilop,

I’m not so sure about the way you formulated that, it seems problematic. For instance, you don’t have a right to know what my actual name is, but if you ask for it should I give you the name of, say, my next door neighbor? That then would cause all the things that I write on this forum to be falsely attributed to my neighbor.

What do you think?
VC

 

[abb]

It might have been better to just say, “I’m sorry, I’m not comfortable sharing that information”.

God Bless

I’m afraid if I mentioned something like this it would sub-consciously separate our relationship. (This is my fiancee fyi)

 

[Carlton1993]

I read somewhere that there are three types of lie…

A Jocose lie, a lie told to make a joke or a point, not hurting anyone.

A lie told to benefit yourself or another, again, not hurting anybody.

A malicious lie, a lie told to malign another or give them a bad reputation.

The first two are nearly always venial sins. The 3rd however, is always mortal.

 

[quasimodo]

Some months ago we went round and round on this issue.

I rest my position on the fact that the midwives in Exodus lied through their teeth to protect the children of Israel. God rewarded them.

That does not sound like a venial sin to me. I therefore maintain that some untruths are positive goods. God does not reward sin.

Now in the present case…

I think it was a bad answer because you missed an opportunity to catechize and evangelize. Venial at worst.

 

[puzzleannie]

Recently someone asked me why I needed to goto confession after I told them that I was going to go. !

no one not even your parents has the right to this information. lying pertains only to what you say to someone who has a legitimate right to know the answer. Telling a phone caller “she can’t come to the phone now” is not a lie because the caller has no right to know what she is doing. tell the person who asked you gently that he has no right to ask such questions and ask him to please stop it.

I just saw that this person is your fiancee. you better iron out right now issues such as sharing and confidentiality or they will break up your marriage. for instance, your wife has no right to hear what your best friend told you in confidence. If you share everything with your spouse, you are obliged to tell your best friend: don’t tell me anything you don’t want Bob to know because we share everything. No, your fiance or spouse has no right to know matters of confession, that confidentiality is absolute.

 

[pyropam]

My husband would never ask me “Why” I’m going to confession. However, should anyone ever ask me, my response would be that “we are supposed to go” it is recommended that we go from time to time.

Lying is not always a sin. If you tell someone that they look “beautiful”, and they truly don’t, then you have made their day and you haven’t offended anyone or done harm to anyone.

It would be wrong if the lie was told to “make yourself look better in the eyes of others” in order to gain something by it. It would definately be wrong if it were done to harm someone.

 

[Sr_Sally]

I’m afraid if I mentioned something like this it would sub-consciously separate our relationship. (This is my fiancee fyi)

I can see how saying you are not comfortable sharing wouldn’t be the best thing to say to your fiance. But you should be able to say something like “Confession is private between God and me. Of course, if I’ve done anything to hurt you, please let me know so we can make up and I can confess that also.” This would be in line with the scripture about making up with your brother while on the way to give your gift to God. Hopefully you will take every opportunity to share your love of confession and the other sacrements with your fiance. Instead of asking why you are going, he/she would ideally be suggesting you both go.

 

[bilop]

Bilop,

I’m not so sure about the way you formulated that, it seems problematic. For instance, you don’t have a right to know what my actual name is, but if you ask for it should I give you the name of, say, my next door neighbor? That then would cause all the things that I write on this forum to be falsely attributed to my neighbor.

What do you think?
VC

Well, that might be a different sin if what you were posting would reflect badly on your neighbor, and we knew your neighbors name. But, if you told me your name was “John Smith” it wouldn’t be sinful in and of itself.

Even legally, you can use another name if there is no intent to defraud. Look at actors.

God Bless

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Hi bilop,

Thank you for your thoughtful response, and for pointing that out. I see now that my example of a false name isn’t a very good example because it complicates the issue by adding positive harm done to another (which would be a malicious, or at least reckless, lie). However, in the case of an actor using a stage name that can’t in any sense be considered a lie because that name still designates that person, without any intent to deceive. A closer case might be an an author’s use of a pseudonym.

But I still have some difficulty with this formulation:

Lying is only a sin if the person has a right to know the information.

It seems to me that while it is true that there are many cases where someone does not have a right to information, that fact in itself does not change our obligation to tell the truth, WHEN we tell something.

We readily see this principle at work when someone is being questioned and they respond “no comment,” or “I am not at liberty to say”, etc. Would you hold that in those situations the person being questioned has a right to lie to the questioner because they are prying, or asking for information to which they are not entitled?

The following from the Catechism seems to indicate that speaking falsely is an offense:

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.

And in those cases where someone does not have a right to know something:

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.

The portions that I put in bold text seem to indicate that our options are silence or discreet language – but not a direct falsification. The concluding sentence, “no one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it” doesn’t seem to give license to lie.

What are your thoughts on these portions of the Catechism?

Thanks!
VC

 

[joanofarc3]

Recently someone asked me why I needed to goto confession after I told them that I was going to go. After they asked this question I didn’t tell them the reasoning behind wanting to go, I told them “just because I like going to confession” I confessed this to my priest but he didn’t comment on it so I wasn’t sure what to think about it.

I really care about this person and I feel that I need to talk to them about everything, but I’m reluctant to mention why I need to goto confession and I’m not ready at this point in my relationship with them to confess all my sins to them as well as God. Has anyone else come across this problem/dilemma?

Thanks for your help & God Bless!

I’ve been in similar situations. Lying is always a sin, but not always serious. Just tell anyone who asks that it’s between you and the priest. It’s telling them very charitably that it’s none of their business and you’re not lying. Hope this helps.

 

[joanofarc3]

Some months ago we went round and round on this issue.

I rest my position on the fact that the midwives in Exodus lied through their teeth to protect the children of Israel. God rewarded them.

That does not sound like a venial sin to me. I therefore maintain that some untruths are positive goods. God does not reward sin.

Now in the present case…

I think it was a bad answer because you missed an opportunity to catechize and evangelize. Venial at worst.

God did not reward their lying but their refusing to commit graver sins.

 

[bilop]

Hi bilop,

Thank you for your thoughtful response, and for pointing that out. I see now that my example of a false name isn’t a very good example because it complicates the issue by adding positive harm done to another (which would be a malicious, or at least reckless, lie). However, in the case of an actor using a stage name that can’t in any sense be considered a lie because that name still designates that person, without any intent to deceive. A closer case might be an an author’s use of a pseudonym.

But I still have some difficulty with this formulation:

It seems to me that while it is true that there are many cases where someone does not have a right to information, that fact in itself does not change our obligation to tell the truth, WHEN we tell something.

We readily see this principle at work when someone is being questioned and they respond “no comment,” or “I am not at liberty to say”, etc. Would you hold that in those situations the person being questioned has a right to lie to the questioner because they are prying, or asking for information to which they are not entitled?

The following from the Catechism seems to indicate that speaking falsely is an offense:
And in those cases where someone does not have a right to know something:

The portions that I put in bold text seem to indicate that our options are silence or discreet language – but not a direct falsification. The concluding sentence, “no one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it” doesn’t seem to give license to lie.

What are your thoughts on these portions of the Catechism?

Thanks!
VC

I think that it would be better to say nothing or use discreet language. I think I indicated this when I suggested to the OP what he ought to have said.

However, if for some reason this does not work, e.g. the person is hounding you or puts undue pressure on you, I don’t think a “white lie” (i.e. one that has no other negative consequences) is not sinful.

For example, a teenager has committed a sin of impurity and needs to go to confession. He asks his mother to drive him and she hounds him to find out what he did. She has no right to know, but is so persitent and obnoxious that the son says he blasphemed to get her to stop bothering him. Not a sin in my opinion ( at least for the son, maybe for the Mom).

God Bless

 

[Verbum_Caro]

Thanks bilop.

I think I understand where you are coming from.

Classically lies were classified into three categories: the jocose (joking lie), the officious (white lie), and the injurious (malicious lie). An injurious lie could be matter for a mortal sin, while the jocose and officious lies were usually only venial sins (barring circumstances that might increase their gravity).

But, it seems like any type of lie would be at least a venial sin.

Of course fear, surprise, anger, habit, etc might all be mitigating factors which could lessen or negate culpability. But I don’t think we want to say that lying is sometimes justified. It seems like the catechism gives us a very clear statement that lying, by its very nature, ought to be condemned.

VC

 

[joanofarc3]

For example, a teenager has committed a sin of impurity and needs to go to confession. He asks his mother to drive him and she hounds him to find out what he did. She has no right to know, but is so persitent and obnoxious that the son says he blasphemed to get her to stop bothering him. Not a sin in my opinion ( at least for the son, maybe for the Mom).

God Bless

If he blasphemed to make her stop then it wasn’t a slip and is a serious sin.

CCC 2148

…Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and His Holy Name. It is in itself a grave sin.

CCC 2483

Lying is the most direct offense against the truth…

CCC 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 constitues a venial sin, it becomes mortal when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity.

Lying is always sinful, but not always mortally so.

 

[Joyousguard]

If he blasphemed to make her stop then it wasn’t a slip and is a serious sin.

CCC 2148

…Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and His Holy Name. It is in itself a grave sin.

CCC 2483

Lying is the most direct offense against the truth…

CCC 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 constitues a venial sin, it becomes mortal when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity.

Lying is always sinful, but not always mortally so.

I’d like to say I agree with lying as always being sinful but I can’t. I’d like to say it was black and white if you simply follow Aquanian theology. For example;

You are given a hideous birthday gift with the question “do you like it?” What is your response? First off, 99.9% of us who can’t come up with a way to dodge the question, or light something on fire quick enough as a distraction, or come up with a neutral answer that would not constitute a lie answer "of course its what I’ve always wanted…to shoot with a paintball gun that is. "

Your response would be “I love it” or “dinner was fantastic, noone cooks with cherrios quite like you mom.” There is a bit of moral latitude in our responses. I love the teflon scarf, not because its gorgeous but because you gave it to me. I love the cherrios caserole, not because it was good but because you made it it.

We do not always have to volunteer all information. Holding certain things back is not neccessarily lying. It is true that you love the scarf and the casserole but it is not needed to mention the rest of it.

There is a bit of a moral gray area for morality, it is not always a mathmatical formula, with the absolute answer after the equals sign, to say nothing of culpabality. The question truly becomes “Is it a lie to begin with?”

 

[bilop]

If he blasphemed to make her stop then it wasn’t a slip and is a serious sin.

CCC 2148

…Blasphemy is contrary to the respect due God and His Holy Name. It is in itself a grave sin.

CCC 2483

Lying is the most direct offense against the truth…

CCC 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 constitues a venial sin, it becomes mortal when it does grave injury to the virtues of justice and charity.

Lying is always sinful, but not always mortally so.

No, I meant he claimed to have blashphemed (to justify his need for confession).

 

[bilop]

There is a bit of a moral gray area for morality, it is not always a mathmatical formula, with the absolute answer after the equals sign, to say nothing of culpabality. The question truly becomes “Is it a lie to begin with?”

I think this an excellent point. I think it is only a lie when the other person has the right to know the answer.

God Bless

 

[Verbum_Caro]

bilop,

I think what Joyousguard is describing would be described as a form of mental reservation, i.e. holding back a portion of the truth.

But it still looks like to me that the Catechism condemns all lying – regardless if someone has a right to know something or not. It seems that if you decide to speak you must not utter a falsehood with the intent to lead into error.

Can you expound upon your take that its not lying if the person doesn’t have a right to know? Do you have any outside sources for that view that you can share with us?

VC