Lying - Is it Ever Acceptable?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lynx
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In Judaism human life is so highly valued that it is permitted to act against Torah (except for committing idolatry, incest or murder) in order to save another life. This is found in the moral value concept of “pikuach nefesh”. For the Jew there is no moral dilemma if he/she should lie to save another life; the value of saving a life, takes precedence over the value of not telling a lie.

Here are some discussions from the Jewish perspective:

chizukshaya.com/2009/11/i…ng-values.html

yna.edu/torah/wx-display…_ne62tldt.html

jewishvirtuallibrary.org/…ch_nefesh.html

on1foot.org/sourcesheet/p…sion-questions
 
Someone wrote: “As for it (lying) being a sin, period. The reasons are numerous. Culpability is reduced in certain situations, but the sinful nature of lying is not removed. Why do I believe it? Because God and the Church say so.”

“Because God and the Church say so.” This is an extraordinarily uncritical statement. It will cause you nothing but trouble.

In this case, you are absolutely wrong in your understanding of the Catechism.

You quote Catechism statement 1753: “A good intention (for example, that of helping one’s neighbor) does not make behavior that is intrinsically disordered, such as lying and calumny, good or just. The end does not justify the means.”

The Catechism is merely stating a principle. It does not follow from this that all (or even most) lying is mortally sinful. You seem to be implying such in your post. Such an interpretation would be flatly wrong.

You also quote Catechism statement 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.”

Sounds quite terrifying, doesn’t it? “By its very nature, lying is to be condemned.” A layman unschooled in Church philosophy and theology might simply conclude from this that virtually all lying is mortally sinful.

But this not how the Catechism is to be understood. I spoke to a Vatican Catechist Professor a few years ago. He said very specifically that there is an awful lot of flexibility in the Catechism, as well as in Church Canon Law. Most of it cannot be taken exactly as written.

For instance, the section of the Catechism that forbids lying sounds really ironclad. But it’s not. Children lie all the time. It’s not a mortal sin. Adults lie often. But it’s often not a mortal sin in any way. Lying can usually be very trivial. But the way some versions of the Catechism put it, it doesn’t sound trivial at all. It can sound like a mortal sin, even though IT DOESN’T SAY THAT. Just keep in mind that this is not how the Catechism is to be taken – as some kind of ironclad rulebook. It is mostly common sense.

If you take the Catechism exactly as written, you are going to have problems. There is even a section in the Catechism about how wasting time or possessions is “to be condemned.” I have seen some Catholics take this section so seriously that they regard wasting even one single square of toilet paper as an Offense against God’s Bounty (Charity,) and thus as a mortal sin. This is just plain bizarre. The Catechism is merely stating a principle. Unless the wasting constitutes some kind of Grave Matter, mortal sin does not even enter the picture. End of story.

In the case of lying: to qualify as a mortal sin, a lie has to be about a Grave Matter. If it is not, then it’s not mortal sin. Simple as that. Any other view will simply cause confusion, and is wrong. A Grave Mistake, shall we say. No Catholic should ever worry about such opinions. They are not in accord with official Church teaching. And no one is obligated to believe them.
 
I hear so many say that all types of lying and deception are inherently immoral. Yet Jesus Himself engaged in deception! Read Luke 24:28, where Jesus “gave the impression that he was going on further…” Our Lord Himself indirectly deceived two disciples in order to achieve an objective.

Therefore, it appears that it is sometimes acceptable to establish a situation that seems to imply one thing which is not factually true. I’m think of the group Live Action, which taped undercover video at Planned Parenthood to expose PP’s evil practices. That type of deception is akin to what Our Lord did on the road to Emmaus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top