The difference between killing and murder

Status
Not open for further replies.
Suudy

Suudy

Active member
I initially posted on the Ask an Apologist forum this question (see forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=92282), but I wanted to explore it further with everyone else was well. While the reference to Jimmy Akin’s article was useful, it didn’t get down to the nitty-gritty that I’m looking for.

I was in a discussion over the holidays with a friend regarding moral relativism. He’s a big supporter of the concept that we each define our own truths. I objected saying that there are objective truths that exist, such as the prohibition on murder. Surpisingly, he agreed, but he and I disagreed on what murder is.

He has strictly defined it as the intentional killing of any person, regardless of circumstances. Now the Catechism (para 2310) indicates that the state can raise, maintain, and use a military provided that the conditions for the war are just. The question that comes up is are those combatants that kill in that war committing murder?

I would suggest that they are not, since the war is itself just, so objectively speaking, it is not murder.

Similarly in the case of capital punishment. Assuming the restrictions in the Catechism (para 2267) for the death penalty are met (which should be very, very rare), is the executioner (or executioners) committing murder?

Again, I would suggest this is not murder.

I took this approach with my friend saying that there is a distinction between murder and killing, and that killing in a just war and being the executioner in a just application of the death penalty is not murder.

So we expand this to an unjust war or unjust application of the death penalty. Is killing in these situations murder? Can a person, in good faith, participate in a military action that they and their leaders believe is just, but is in fact objectively unjust? Are they committing murder?

If it is not murder, then we are caught in the conundrum of moral relativity. If the person believes the war is just, then killing within that war is not murder. We are back at square one in my argument with my friend.

I’m confident that there are objective truths, and that the prohibition on murder is one of those. But given the above reasoning we went through, it almost appears there isn’t objective truth (at least in the case of murder). Certainly there is a problem in our argument, and I’d love to get some thoughtful responses to it.

Any takers?
 
Hello Suudy,

When Moses brought down from Mt. Sini God’s ten commandments, including the commandment not to kill and God’s commandments to love God, love your neighbor, take no revenge and the like, the first thing he did was to kill three thousand of his country men to put a stop to the golden calf abominations. God then set the Levites apart as special ministers to Him for their allegance to God and Moses in battle. Obvioulsy Moses and the Levites did not break God’s commandment “Thou Shalt Not Kill”.

Also. I do not think that the Church has ever taught that all the Germans and Italians who fought for Hitler’s unjust war were murderers. I do not think you have it right on all killing in unjust wars is murder.

**EXO 32:7 **

With that, the LORD said to Moses, “Go down at once to your people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt, for they have become depraved. They have soon turned aside from the way I pointed out to them, making for themselves a molten calf and worshiping it, sacrificing to it and crying out, ‘This is your God, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt!’ I see how stiffnecked this people is,” continued the LORD to Moses. “Let me alone, then, that my wrath may blaze up against them to consume them. Then I will make of you a great nation.”

But Moses implored the LORD, his God, saying, “Why, O LORD, should your wrath blaze up against your own people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt with such great power and with so strong a hand? Why should the Egyptians say, ‘With evil intent he brought them out, that he might kill them in the mountains and exterminate them from the face of the earth’? Let your blazing wrath die down; relent in punishing your people. Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac and Israel, and how you swore to them by your own self, saying, ‘I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky; and all this land that I promised, I will give your descendants as their perpetual heritage.’” So the LORD relented in the punishment he had threatened to inflict on his people.

Moses then turned and came down the mountain with the two tablets that were written on both sides, front and back; tablets that were made by God, having inscriptions on them that were engraved by God himself.
**NAB DEU 6:4 The great commandment. **

"Hear, O Israel! The LORD is out God, the LORD alone! Therefore you shall love the LORD, you God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength.**NAB LEV 19:18 **

“Take no revenge and cherish no grudge against your fellow country men. You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” **NAB EXO 20:13 **

“You shall not kill.” (SIR 6:10)​
**NAB EXO 32:17…//…EXO 32:25 **

When Moses realized that, to the scornful joy of their foes, Aaron had let the people run wild, he stood at the gate of the camp and cried,** “Whoever is for the Lord, let him come to me!” All the Levites then rallied to him, and he told them, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: Put your sword on your hip everyone of you! Now go up and down the camp, from gate to gate, and slay your own kinsmen, your friends and neighbors!” The Levites carried out the command of Moses, and theat day there fell about three thousand of the people. **Then Moses said, "Today you have been dedicated to the LORD, for you were against your own sons and kinsmen, to bring a blessing upon yourselves this day."
 
Just a quick note until I have more time to reply more completely. I don’t want people misunderstanding me.

Steven Merten said:
****Also. I do not think that the Church has ever taught that all the Germans and Italians who fought for Hitler’s unjust war were murderers. I do not think you have it right on all killing in unjust wars is murder.
Click to expand...

I do not think the average GIs who fought for the Axis powers in WWII are murders. I think murder and killing are two very different things, and that murder is objectively evil–killing is not.

The point of the argument was more along the lines of moral relativism and how can we objectively know that murder is evil.
 
Hello Suudy,

I am possibly still not sure exactly what you are trying to discern.

Possibly the killings of King David are a better example of the difference between killing and murder.

King David showed his faith in God many times through killing on the battle field. God was well pleased with David as a faithful servant to Him. Then David commits adultery with Bethsheba and she becomes pregnant. David as commander and chief, has her husband Uriah moved up on the battle field where he is sure to be killed. Uriah is killed by the enemy. God, through prophet Nathan, askes David, why have you murdered this man?

In King David’s killings, it is the reason from the heart for the killing which determines non-evil killing from the sin of murder.

What do you think?
**NAB 2SA 12:9 **

Why have you spurned the LORD and done evil in his sight? You have cut down Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you took his wife as your own, and him you killed with the sword of the Ammonites. Now, therefore, the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah to be your wife.’**NAB 2SA 12:13 **

Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” Nathan answered David: “The LORD on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die.”
 
The Church has always taught that murder is intrinscically evil. Not that killing is intrinsically evil. Murder is the killing of an innocent human being. St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of this in much of his writings on moral theology which largely provides the basis for Church teaching. Under the theory of just war, enemy combatants are NOT innocents and therefore killing them cannot possibly constitute murder.

I highly recommend reading Veritatis Splendor by Pope JPII. Particularly the sections devoted to human acts. It specifically addresses the concept of moral relativism and “proportionalism” to which your friend apparently subscribes.
 
OK, so let’s throw a bit more gasoline on the fire.

It cannot be assumed that killing of an enemy combatant in a just war is always protected; it may be circumscribed by the fact that innocent civilians may be killed; it is argued that non-innocent civilians (that is, those actively supporting the war) may or may not be killed (see, for example, those working in a munitions factory, as in the bombing of Dreseden, and those who would take up arms during an invasion of Japan, nee Hiroshima); and anyone who has gone to war knows that innocents will be killed (perhps we have the play of double effect).

further, killing of enemy combatants may be circubscribed by whether or not they are directly engaged (fire fight; some appear to be breaking off and pulling wounded/dead comrades from the battlefield; can one shoot them as they flee? If they are still armed while they flee? In the back? ). How about snipers?
 
There are deaths which result from human actions which take place daily that don’t fall under ‘justifiable’:
  • person under the influence of drugs or alcohol unable to control temper or unable to discern reality from hallucination who stab, shoot, beat another person in the room to death. This would be manslaughter (unexpected killing) but not murder (pre-meditated intent to kill)
  • people who for whatever reason - distracted, overly tired, preoccupied - while driving a vehicle strike a pedestrian or bicyclist killing them. Again, involuntary manslaughter (killing), but not murder
  • people who overdose on drugs or alcohol or a combination of the two…think college campuses where groups of kids gather to get high, egging each other on, supplying the drugs and distributing them, and one ends up dead. Murder? or Killing?
The bottom line there is some innocent becomes the victim, paying with his/her life at the hands of another human. Death occurs. “Justification” doesn’t wash for these situations as there is no justifiable explanation for the loss of life.

A soldier can believe his being there is just or not. He is obliged to fulfill his duty so any deaths at his hands is not on his conscience but on the administration/military leaders who direct him to kill. It’s not a matter of the soldier’s good faith in his own belief of the justifiability of the war, as it is the soldier’s good faith in his belief that the people executing his orders is doing so ‘justifiably’.

For the jihadist (a soldier of the terrorist regime, the cells have a definite military structure to them even though they are not endorsed by any government, yet they are funded by governments), all deaths against the ‘infidels’ at their hands is ‘just’ by their interpretation of their religious/organizational laws.(they definitely get admonished by everyone in and around their base operation when they kill a non-infidel as we’ve seen.)

By our interpretation of our religious/governmental laws our killing of the jihadists and innocents in the line of fire is ‘just’. But for either side there is no definitive ruling to be made. That discussion can go on indefinitely. As we are still not in agreement over Vietnam, people will be debating the ‘justness’ of the Iraq war long after all our troops have returned home so I don’t place much weight on using the ‘just’ theory for determining whether or not a death resulting from a war is murder or killing.

The execution point is not much easier to work with except that according to Catholic teaching there is no justifiable reason for executions in the United States in this day and age. The teaching is clearer here than with regard to war but it still doesn’t address the state of the soul of the Catholic executioner.

If the U.S. government deems executions ‘justifiable’ and Catholic teaching does not, I would think the burden falls on the person asked to do the executing. In good conscience I don’t see how a Catholic could follow that order, but it’s similar to the soldier’s position, both are jobs the person voluntarily seeks and accepts knowing they will be ordered to kill: The government orders the executioner to flip the switch. The government orders the soldier to fire the weapon. I cannot wrap my mind around culpibility of either the soldier or the executioner except to definitively know that for me, being a Catholic, I would not seek either job so that I would not have to put my soul in that position. I pray for the souls of those who do.

Anyway, I guess my point was ‘justifiability’ isn’t a reliable way to distinguish ‘murder’ from ‘killing’. I believe, but I could be wrong, that intent is more reliable, especially since those other instances of death would clearly, by anyone’s standard, not be considered ‘murder’. What is it about those which make it so ‘obvious’? The personal intent to harm until death.

Soldiers and executioners do not personally intend to harm the opposition or the condemned. The soldier harms only if the officers believe there is no other way to protect the interest of those they are charged to defend. The executioner harms only those whom a judge, jury and governmental body have determined cannot be contained in order to protect the citizens. The people in the examples earlier did not intend to harm their victims.

But serial killers, contract killers, greedy or desperate spouses/ex-spouses, the Columbine kids…well, the deaths which resulted from them - those are definitively murder, are they not?
 
Hello all,

There seems to be some discussion here indicating that soldiers killing in an unjust war are murderers. If this is what the Church believes then this really opens up a can of worms.

If all the Germans Italians fighting the unjust war for Hitler were commiting murder (mortal sin) then it would not have been appropriate for Pope Pious XII to keep his mouth shut in order to save Jewish physical lives. A Pope’s job is to lead German and Italians and all to eternal life and not to abandon this tremendously important job because physical life is at stake. Even one German or Italian soldier going to hell for murder in war is more life lost than if a Pope saved eight bazzilion Jewish physical lives.

When Jesus came to earth some of the Jewish people thought He, their messiah, would deliver them from physical death perils. Jesus did not deliver the Jews from physical death perils. Jesus opened the path to eternal life for them. Many of Jesus’ followers were put to physical death for following the words of Jesus of eternal life. For a Pope, durring WWII, to put physical life above eternal life goes against the teachings and actions of Jesus.

If a soldier killing in an unjust war for Hitler is mortal sin murder, then Popes, bishops and priests in Germany and Italy all should have been boldly and loudly warning Christians to refuse to kill for Hitler. Regardless of lose of Pope’s lives, Vatican destruction, los of Jewish lives, loss of German and Italian lives for disent against Hitler’s command to kill in war, the Church is obligated to Jesus to teach, warn and preach to people what it takes to go to heaven. No amount of saved physical life can equate to even one German or Italian soldier going to hell for murder because Christ’s Church kept her mouth shut to save physical lives.

continued
 
Here is how a Pope, Bishop, priest or Christian should act when the choice is teaching, warning or preaching to bring people into eternal life or face physical death.

NAB 2MC 7:1 Martyrdom of a Mother and Her Sons.

It also happened that seven brothers with their mother were arrested and tortured with whips and scourges by the king, to force them to eat pork in violation of God’s law. One of the brothers, speaking for the others, said: What do you expect to achieve by questioning us? We are ready to die rather than transgress the laws of our ancestors. At that the king, in a fury, gave orders to have pans and caldrons heated. While they were being quickly heated, he commanded his executioners to cut out the tongue of the one who had spoken for the others, to scalp him and cut off his hands and feet, while the rest of his brothers and his mother looked on. When he was completely maimed but still breathing, the king ordered them to carry him to the fire and fry him. As a cloud of smoke spread from the pan, the brothers and their mother encouraged one another to die bravely, saying such words as these: “The LORD God is looking on, and he truly has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his canticle, when he protested openly with the words, ‘And he will have pity on his servants.’”
When the first brother had died in this manner, they brought the second to be made sport of. After tearing off the skin and hair of his head, they asked him, “Will you eat the pork rather than have your body tortured limb by limb?” Answering in the language of his forefathers, he said, “Never!” So he too in turn suffered the same tortures as the first. At the point of death he said: “You accursed fiend, you are depriving us of this present life, but** the King of the world will raise us up to live again forever. It is for his laws that we are dying.**”

After him the third suffered their cruel sport. He put out his tongue at once when told to do so, and bravely held out his hands, as he spoke these noble words: “It was from Heaven that I received these: for the sake of his laws I disdain them.” Even the king and his attendants marveled at the young man’s courage, because he regarded his sufferings as nothing.

After he had died, they tortured and maltreated the fourth brother in the same way. When he was near death, he said, “**It is my choice to die at the hands of men with the God-given hope of being restored to life by him; but for you there will be no resurrection to life. **”

They next brought forward the fifth brother and maltreated him. Looking at the king, he said: “Since you have power among men, mortal though you are, do what you please. But do not think that our nation is forsaken by God. Only wait, and you will **see how his great power will torment you and your descendants. **”

After him they brought the sixth brother. When he was about to die, he said: “Have no vain illusions. We suffer these things on our own account, because we have sinned against our God; that is why such astonishing things have happened to us. Do not think, then, that you will go unpunished for having dared to fight against God.”
continued:
 
continued:

Most admirable and worthy of everlasting remembrance was the mother, who saw her seven sons perish in a single day, yet bore it courageously because of her hope in the LORD. Filled with a noble spirit that stirred her womanly heart with manly courage, she exhorted each of them in the language of their forefathers with these words: "I do not know how you came into existence in my womb; it was not I who gave you the breath of life, nor was it I who set in order the elements of which each of you is composed. Therefore, since it is the Creator of the universe who shapes each man’s beginning, as he brings about the origin of everything, he, in his mercy, will give you back both breath and life, because you now disregard yourselves for the sake of his law."

After he had urged her for a long time, she went through the motions of persuading her son. In derision of the cruel tyrant, she leaned over close to her son and said in their native language: “Son, have pity on me, who carried you in my womb for nine months, nursed you for three years, brought you up, educated and supported you to your present age. I beg you, child, to look at the heavens and the earth and see all that is in them; then you will know that God did not make them out of existing things; and in the same way the human race came into existence. Do not be afraid of this executioner, but be worthy of your brothers and accept death, so that in the time of mercy I may receive you again with them.”

She had scarcely finished speaking when the youth said: “What are you waiting for? I will not obey the king’s command. I obey the command of the law given to our forefathers through Moses. But you, who have contrived every kind of affliction for the Hebrews, will not escape the hands of God. We indeed, are suffering because of our sins. Though our living LORD treats us harshly for a little while to correct us with chastisements, he will again be reconciled with his servants. But you, wretch, vilest of all men! do not, in your insolence, concern yourself with unfounded hopes, as you raise your hand against the children of Heaven. You have not yet escaped the judgment of the almighty and all-seeing God. My brothers, after enduring brief pain, have drunk of never-failing life, under God’s covenant but you, by the judgment of God, shall receive just punishments for your arrogance.”

“Through me and my brothers, may there be an end to the wrath of the Almighty that has justly fallen on our whole nation.” At that, the king became enraged and treated him even worse than the others, since he bitterly resented the boy’s contempt. Thus he too died undefiled, putting all his trust in the LORD.
 
As I read all this about the soldier’s culpability what comes to mind is Pope Benedict. There was an example of a war with mandatory service of all men. Didn’t he risk death by going underground to avoid his civil obligation rather than kill anyone under orders?

In the U.S. service is not mandatory, it’s voluntary. A person volunteers to learn how to kill people. Granted the goal is to minimize the killing, but they are taught varying techniques of how to bring about the death of the opposition. The military is certainly a noble and honorable profession and vital to every civilized population. Our soldiers sign up trusting completely that they will only be ordered to kill justifiably and that’s why we keep all our leaders in our prayers. I believe this is what saves their individual souls.

My only comment was without a definitive way of determining whether or not a war is just I, personally, and for my kids, could not risk our souls without knowing for certain any single death resulting from our own hands would be viewed by God as justifiable. Public and Governmental opinion is not my gage and the Vatican doesn’t rule definitively so it’s just too risky for me and mine. But for all those who are strong enough to serve, regardless of the lack of clarity of purpose, I pray daily in thanksgiving for their sacrifice and for their souls should any of them be responsible for the death of even one person - just in case.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
As I read all this about the soldier’s culpability what comes to mind is Pope Benedict. There was an example of a war with mandatory service of all men. Didn’t he risk death by going underground to avoid his civil obligation rather than kill anyone under orders?
Click to expand...
Hello YinYangMom,

Pope Benedict XVI served Hitler in combat as a Hitler youth.
 
Steven Merten:
Hello YinYangMom,

Pope Benedict XVI served Hitler in combat as a Hitler youth.
Click to expand...
At the vatican site it only has this one line about that time:

“During the last months of the war he was enrolled in an auxiliary anti-aircraft corps.”

Perhaps it was God’s will and plan that his term came into effect toward the end of the war…

Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy, though, always good to have reason to brush up on facts.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
At the vatican site it only has this one line about that time:

“During the last months of the war he was enrolled in an auxiliary anti-aircraft corps.”

Perhaps it was God’s will and plan that his term came into effect toward the end of the war…

Thanks for pointing out the discrepancy, though, always good to have reason to brush up on facts.
Click to expand...
Hello YinYangMom,

There were actually many German priests, and lay Catholics, who were executed by Hitler for sedition in refusing to be drafted into Hitler’s military. These Catholic clergy felt the need to make a stand against what they saw as an evil war where it would be evil to kill for Hitler and even evil to submit to joining his military. I feel shame as a Catholic that no one remembers the names of those Catholic clergy who actually did go to their deaths rather than be drafted into Hitler’s military. These are the Catholic leaders whom I see as those the Church should be focusing on as the true Catholic leader heros of the era. One must also remember these Catholic clergy martyrs when discussing God’s will and plan of the era.
 
Steven Merten:
I feel shame as a Catholic that no one remembers the names of those Catholic clergy who actually did go to their deaths rather than be drafted into Hitler’s military.
Click to expand...
What are their names?
 
40.png
Suudy:
The point of the argument was more along the lines of moral relativism and how can we objectively know that murder is evil.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying, I think.
  1. In Catholicism questions actually have answers.
  2. There are objective criteria for determining whether an act of taking someone’s life is licit or illicit.
  3. Those criteria are set out in the Church’s teaching on legitimate self-defence (including capital punishment) and just war, both of which involve the application of the principle of double effect. (Any time you hear the word ‘proportional’ you know the principle of double effect applies.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
Didn’t he risk death by going underground to avoid his civil obligation rather than kill anyone under orders?
Click to expand...
He was exempted from military duty because
  1. He objected to the War.
  2. He said he wanted to be a priest.
At the end of the War, when those who knew him could no longer justify keeping him from military duty, he served on an anti-aircraft gun. During those days, he escaped and hid until he arrived home. He was still very young. It was fortunate that no one recognized him while he was escaping.
 
Ani Ibi:
I understand what you are saying, I think.
  1. In Catholicism questions actually have answers.
  2. There are objective criteria for determining whether an act of taking someone’s life is licit or illicit.
  3. Those criteria are set out in the Church’s teaching on legitimate self-defence (including capital punishment) and just war, both of which involve the application of the principle of double effect. (Any time you hear the word ‘proportional’ you know the principle of double effect applies.
Click to expand...
Great Ani,

Please show us where the Church tells that German and Italian soldiers killing for Hitler in WWII, did or did not commit mortal sin murder.
 
Steven Merten:
Hello YinYangMom,

Pope Benedict XVI served Hitler in combat as a Hitler youth.
Click to expand...
Again you attempt by innuendo to disparage the Pope, but you don’t tell the whole story do you Steven?
 
Steven Merten:
Great Ani,

Please show us where the Church tells that German and Italian soldiers killing for Hitler in WWII, did or did not commit mortal sin murder.
Click to expand...
:rotfl: If you want others to follow your instructions, a really good idea would be for you to just show us how it’s done. I think a really good next step for you would be to go on your own rabbit chase; answer your own questions; and justify your own teaching.

I’ve given the applicable doctrines of the Catholic Church. There are likely more, but these are usually the ones folks start out with. If they are unfamiliar to you, you might try reading them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top