Is one obgliated to obey the law if it doesn't commit sin?

[tankthedog]

I know that in cases that would require you to sin to obey the law (such as doctor’s you are legally obligated to perform abortion) it is not only your right but duty of a Catholic to break the law.

My question is if it is wrong to break the law if it doesn’t violate teachings in the Church? Recently me and one of my protestant (not really sure if that’s important or not) friend’s got in a debate on whether or not it was a sin to break the law by doing things such as smoking pot or drinking underage. His feelings were that it is God’s will for us to follow the laws of the nation. I disagreed however, saying that there are many legal things that are sins and many illegal things that aren’t sins and it is more important to not commit sin than to not break the law. I support this by saying that when I was under 21 (I’m old enough to drink now) I would drink here in the USA and according to some be doing an immoral act but those same people would not feel it was immoral for someone the same age in Europe to drink. (Same applies to countries where weed is legal).

According to Catholic doctrine am I in the right or wrong with this?

 

[CapIV]

Well to disobey the laws of the land is to undermine the authority and order of the land, and if taken to the extreme could cause society to break apart.

On the other hand, the government has many laws that aren’t necessarily logical.

It is best to try to change the laws before you break them. I am pretty sure regarding marijuana usage, that in moderation (as with alcohol) the Church believes it is OK. But it is not OK if it is against the law where you live because that would undermine the authority of the gov’t.

 

[m134e5]

I know that in cases that would require you to sin to obey the law (such as doctor’s you are legally obligated to perform abortion) it is not only your right but duty of a Catholic to break the law.

My question is if it is wrong to break the law if it doesn’t violate teachings in the Church? Recently me and one of my protestant (not really sure if that’s important or not) friend’s got in a debate on whether or not it was a sin to break the law by doing things such as smoking pot or drinking underage. His feelings were that it is God’s will for us to follow the laws of the nation. I disagreed however, saying that there are many legal things that are sins and many illegal things that aren’t sins and it is more important to not commit sin than to not break the law. I support this by saying that when I was under 21 (I’m old enough to drink now) I would drink here in the USA and according to some be doing an immoral act but those same people would not feel it was immoral for someone the same age in Europe to drink. (Same applies to countries where weed is legal).

According to Catholic doctrine am I in the right or wrong with this?

The bible says something about obeying the laws of the land. I don’t think it’s a *mortal *sin if you were to drink underage or smoke pot or whatever, but you could still sin mortally if you were to get drunk (or do something else because you broke the law). I think these things are venial sins- you shouldn’t do them, but you probably aren’t rejecting God (U.S. law never had an endorsement from God, though sometimes it seems like people think otherwise).

 

[rpp]

We are obligated to follow civil laws that are not in conflict with Church teachings.

The catechism makes it pretty clear.

**The duties of citizens **
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.

{snip}

2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” 48 “We must obey God rather than men”: 49

When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel. 50

This is only one paragraph of a an important section. I encourage you to read the whole section on the duties of a citizen.

Hillair Beloc wrote an very nice essay on this. That essay is available online in the Catholic Answers library. catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0403clas.asp

The Catholic Encyclopedia has a section on Civil allegiance and civil authority.
newadvent.org/cathen/03794b.htm
newadvent.org/cathen/02137c.htm

I do not know about other countries, but in the USA, a doctor is not obligated to perform an abortion. However, in Mexico city, the recently enacted law required doctors to perform an abortion if asked. Health care workers were warned by local bishops and the Vatican that they face excommunication if they assist in an abortion.

 

[Genesis315]

Yes, you are obligated as such. Since all authority to govern comes from God, resisting lawful authority is a sin agains God. Here are two of many examples of Church teaching on this:

This is from Pope Bl. John XXIII’s Pacem en Terris (my emphasis):
Pacem en Terris:

Authority is before all else a moral force. For this reason the appeal of rulers should be to the individual conscience, to the duty which every man has of voluntarily contributing to the common good. But since all men are equal in natural dignity, no man has the capacity to force internal compliance on another. Only God can do that, for He alone scrutinizes and judges the secret counsels of the heart.

1. Hence, representatives of the State have no power to bind men in conscience, unless their own authority is tied to God’s authority, and is a participation in it. (32)
2. The application of this principle likewise safeguards the dignity of citizens. **Their obedience to civil authorities is never an obedience paid to them as men. It is in reality an act of homage paid to God, the provident Creator of the universe, who has decreed that men’s dealings with one another be regulated in accordance with that order which He Himself has established. **And we men do not demean ourselves in showing due reverence to God. On the contrary, we are lifted up and ennobled in spirit, for to serve God is to reign. (33)

And here is what Pope Leo XIII says (my emphasis):
Diuturnum:

1. And it is impossible that any should be found not only more true but even more advantageous than this opinion. For the authority of the rulers of a State, if it be a certain communication of divine power, will by that very reason immediately acquire a dignity greater than human - not, indeed, that impious and most absurd dignity sometimes desired by heathen emperors when affecting divine honors, but a true and solid one received by a certain divine gift and benefaction. Whence it will behoove citizens to submit themselves and to be obedient to rulers, as to God, not so much through fear of punishment as through respect for their majesty; nor for the sake of pleasing, but through conscience, as doing their duty. And by this means authority will remain far more firmly seated in its place. For the citizens, perceiving the force of this duty, would necessarily avoid dishonesty and contumacy, because they must be persuaded that they who resist State authority resist the divine will; that they who refuse honor to rulers refuse it to God Himself.
2. This doctrine the Apostle Paul particularly inculcated on the Romans; to whom he wrote with so great authority and weight on the reverence to be entertained toward the higher powers, that it seems nothing could be prescribed more weightily: “Let every soul be subject to higher powers, for there is no power but from God, and those that are, are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power resisteth the ordinance of God, and they that resist purchaseto themselves damnation . . . wherefore be subject of necessity, not only for wrath, but also for conscience’ sake.”(16) And in agreement with this is the celebrated declaration of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, on the same subject: “Be ye subject, therefore, to every human creature for God’s sake; whether it be to the king as excelling, or to governors, as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of the good, for so is the will of God.”(17)
3. The one only reason which men have for not obeying is when anything is demanded of them which is openly repugnant to the natural or the divine law, for it is equally unlawful to command to do anything in which the law of nature or the will of God is violated.

 

[tankthedog]

I appreciate all the feedback so far on this issue, especially being my first post on the forum.

In response to those who have said that it is a sin to ignore the law of the land I have in the past and now largely agree with that. However, I am always confused by the paradox that this presents.

How is it possible that an action can be a sin in one nation but not another?
For example, if an 18-year-old living in San Antonio drank it would be a sin. However, if that same person drove to Mexico and then drank would he/she still be committing a sin.
Another more personal example would be that I recently returned from a country where weed is legal and I fail to see how I am now sinning not by my actions but by being in the USA while performing these actions.

 

[tankthedog]

Yes, you are obligated as such. Since all authority to govern comes from God, resisting lawful authority is a sin agains God.

I forgot to include my response to this in my last post.

I feel it is extremely dangerous to say that all authority to govern comes from God, because some of the most evil people in history and of today were/are in power from a legal democratic process. I once heard someone say, “One does not have to be a sheep to be part of God’s flock.”

 

[Genesis315]

I
How is it possible that an action can be a sin in one nation but not another?
For example, if an 18-year-old living in San Antonio drank it would be a sin. However, if that same person drove to Mexico and then drank would he/she still be committing a sin.
Another more personal example would be that I recently returned from a country where weed is legal and I fail to see how I am now sinning not by my actions but by being in the USA while performing these actions.

Because the sin is not in the act itself, but the general act of disobedience. In other words, the act itself is not intrinsically evil in either place–what is evil is the violation of the just authority–and violation of a just authority is a sin everywhere.

I hope that makes sense!

 

[Genesis315]

Here’s another example that might help–honor thy mother and father.

Timmy’s parents tell him to mow the lawn every Saturday.

Johnny’s parents let him watch cartoons and play every Saturday.

Neither mow the lawn this Saturday. Timmy has sinned, Johnny has not.

 

[rpp]

I forgot to include my response to this in my last post.

** I feel it is extremely dangerous to say that all authority to govern comes from God**, because some of the most evil people in history and of today were/are in power from a legal democratic process. I once heard someone say, “One does not have to be a sheep to be part of God’s flock.”

From the Catechism:

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.

Emphasis mine.

The footnote (43) refers to this scripture passage:

1 1 Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God.

2 Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves.

(Romans 13:1-2)

And then there is Jesus’ exchange with Pilate.

10 So Pilate said to him, “Do you not speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you and I have power to crucify you?”

11 Jesus answered (him), “You would have no power over me if it had not been given to you from above. For this reason the one who handed me over to you has the greater sin.”
(John 19:10-11)

Leaders may get their authority from God, but they are still human. And God has a purpose in everything.

 

[kettle]

I know that in cases that would require you to sin to obey the law (such as doctor’s you are legally obligated to perform abortion) it is not only your right but duty of a Catholic to break the law.

I just want to clarify that there are no doctors who are legally obligated to perform an abortion. That is all; carry on.

 

[HM8404]

We’re to follow the laws of our lands, yes?

Explain the Catholics harboring *illegal *immigrants then, please…they’re undermining the government and the working class.

 

[rpp]

We’re to follow the laws of our lands, yes?

Explain the Catholics harboring *illegal *immigrants then, please…they’re undermining the government and the working class.

You are correct. This is an area where I disagree with what some people are doing while using the name of the Church. Not everyone, including priests and bishops, behave in a perfect way. Misplaced charity and misguided mercy have hurt many people.

I think that before a person violates the law, that person should be able to prove very clearly what moral law they are upholding. Easy to do with abortion, very hard to do when talking about harboring illegal aliens.