Theft in extreme circumstances

[RichSpidizzy]

So I was on another forum (not faith based at all), and a member asked what to do if an employer were doing something unethical.

I responded that it would depend on what the employer is doing, but that my employers ethics are very import to me, and that I would walk out in the middle of a work day with no other job prospects and no way to put food on my table before I compromise my morals and ethics.

Someone then asked me if I wouldn’t steal food or do something equally unethical to feed my family. I responded that there are almost always options out there without resorting to stealing (such as selling my non-essential possessions like my tv and car, soup kitchens, public assistance, minimum wage burger-flipping toilet-scrubbing jobs, etc) but if there were really and truly no other options I would steal food to save my family and I don’t think it would be immoral or unethical to do so.

My question is what does the Church say about a situation like that? Would it be alright for me to steal food in order to feed my starving family if there were absolutely no other choice? Where can I go to find good resources on the moral teachings of the church? Is this in the catechism somewhere?

 

[katy]

There is something called the “universal destiny of goods” or some such phrase. I just happened to be looking this up today. You can find it with a Google search, and it is also in Gaudium et Spes, but I forget where exactly. I just did a word search on the document from the Vatican web site. The general idea is that there is no such thing as the absolute right to property in extreme situations. The goods of the world were made for everyone, even tho property rights are important. There is a lot of discussion about this.

 

[baltobetsy]

See the CCC, #2408, which refers to Gaudium et Spes.

It says:

The Seventh Commandment forbids theft, that is usurping another’s property against the reasonable will of the owner. There is no theft if consent can be presumed or if refusal is contrary to reason and the universal destination of goods. This is the case in obvious and urgent necessity when the only way to provide for immediate, essential needs (food, shelter, clothing…) is to put at one’s disposal and use the property of others.

The discussion of the universal destination of goods begins in section 2402.

The fine distinction here is that the CCC does not say theft is permissible under certain dire circumstances, but that the taking of the property of others under these circumstances is not theft at all.

Betsy

 

[RichSpidizzy]

Thank you both, that was pretty much exactly what I needed

One question about Gaudium Et Spes though… The Scripture references footnoted in Gaudium Et Spes in regards to the Universal Destination of Goods doesn’t seem to be relevent to the topic. Am I reading the footnotes wrong or am I missing something:
Gadium Et Spes:

1. God intended the earth with everything contained in it for the use of all human beings and peoples. Thus, under the leadership of justice and in the company of charity, created goods should be in abundance for all in like manner.(8) Whatever the forms of property may be, as adapted to the legitimate institutions of peoples, according to diverse and changeable circumstances, attention must always be paid to this universal destination of earthly goods. In using them, therefore, man should regard the external things that he legitimately possesses not only as his own but also as common in the sense that they should be able to benefit not only him but also others.(9) On the other hand, the right of having a share of earthly goods sufficient for oneself and one’s family belongs to everyone. The Fathers and Doctors of the Church held this opinion, teaching that men are obliged to come to the relief of the poor and to do so not merely out of their superfluous goods.(10) If one is in extreme necessity, he has the right to procure for himself what he needs out of the riches of others.(11) Since there are so many people prostrate with hunger in the world, this sacred council urges all, both individuals and governments, to remember the aphorism of the Fathers, “Feed the man dying of hunger, because if you have not fed him, you have killed him,”(12) and really to share and employ their earthly goods, according to the ability of each, especially by supporting individuals or peoples with the aid by which they may be able to help and develop themselves.

In economically less advanced societies the common destination of earthly goods is partly satisfied by means of the customs and traditions proper to the community, by which the absolutely necessary things are furnished to each member. An effort must be made, however, to avoid regarding certain customs as altogether unchangeable, if they no longer answer the new needs of this age. On the other hand, imprudent action should not be taken against respectable customs which, provided they are suitably adapted to present-day circumstances, do not cease to be very useful. Similarly, in highly developed nations a body of social institutions dealing with protection and security can, for its own part, bring to reality the common destination of earthly goods. Family and social services, especially those that provide for culture and education, should be further promoted. When all these things are being organized, vigilance is necessary to present the citizens from being led into a certain inactivity vis-a-vis society or from rejecting the burden of taking up office or from refusing to serve.

1. Cf. Matt. 24:13; 13:24-30 and 36-43.
2. Cf. 2 Cor. 6:10.
3. Cf. John 1:3 and 14.
4. Cf. Eph. 1:10.
5. Cf. John 3:16; Rom. 5:8.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Thank you both, that was pretty much exactly what I needed

One question about Gaudium Et Spes though… The Scripture references footnoted in Gaudium Et Spes in regards to the Universal Destination of Goods doesn’t seem to be relevent to the topic. Am I reading the footnotes wrong or am I missing something:

I do not understand your question in this post. I think your original question was framed backwards. The church teaches the possessor has a duty to share God’s fruits. If that duty is refused the party in dire need may take the food, but must acknowledge they are taking the food only as necessity and will if able pay restitution for it. Yes the food changes from one person to the next, but the issue here is both people agree on who had earthly ownership of the food, thus the consumer in now indebted. Second about the job question, if you are involved in grave matter you must stop. Your family benefits better from a moral provider. In less grave circumstances you have to actively seek a stop to the sin. This may take many paths, as sitting a good example, counseling, etc, however if the sin continues for extended periods or becomes increasing in severity you must leave, because you are developing a participatory scenario.

 

[RichSpidizzy]

I do not understand your question in this post.

Ahh, let me try and clarify. In Gadium Et Spes, there are many footnotes which are scripture references. For instance:

1. God intended the earth with everything contained in it for the use of all human beings and peoples. Thus, under the leadership of justice and in the company of charity, created goods should be in abundance for all in like manner.(8)

1. Cf. Matt. 24:13; 13:24-30 and 36-43.

The portion of Gadium Et Spes I just quoted references Matt. 24:13, Matt. 13:24-30, and Matt. 13:36-43. However, the referenced scripture does not seem to say anything about Universal Destination of Goods or anything about goods in general.

Matt 24:13 is talking about how the Pharisees and scribes were an obstacle to people’s entrance to heaven, and Matt 13:24-30 and 36-43 is a parable and explanation of that parable that deals with the final judgment when God will separate the good (wheat) from the sinners (weeds).

As for the job, according to her, what her employer is doing is illegal (doctors office and fraudulent insurance claims). I told her not only should she leave the job, but she should also report her employer to the authorities, so I’m right with you on that one

EDIT: Oops, nevermind. I was reading the footnotes wrong. In my defense, the footnotes are hard to follow on the online version on the vatican website

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Betsy, Katy, Rich and Texas:

I know that we aren’t Jews, but they’ve wrestled with this issue for some 3,000+ years and much of what we’re trying to codify is based on what thy’ve said.

You might want to look this up in a book titled A Code of Jewish Ethics, by Rabbi Joseph Telus.

You can also look at a passage in the Torah which says:

Leviticus 19:9-10 NAB
“When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not be so thorough that you reap the field to its very edge, nor shall you glean the stray ears of grain. Likewise, you shall not pick your vineyard bare, nor gather up the grapes that have fallen. These things you shall leave for the poor and the alien. I, the LORD, am your God.”
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P35.HTM

In other words, a widow should be able to make a meal for her family from what the pickers leave unpicked in your field.
The poor are to be provided for by the people of God.

The overwhelming majority of Orthodox Jewish moralists don’t consider the theft of a food to be a violation of the Commandment against stealing if the person taking the food is doing so from necessity (his own severe hunger or that of his family - meaning he and/or they have missed at least one full meal and will probably miss another when those around are eating). In fact, most of the Sages/Rabbis would consider the taking of sufficient food to make a full meal for him and/or his family to be within the Commandment.

Of course, we all know the Legal Implications of stealing food in our society unless you’re lucky enough to have me as a jurer, so don’t take your chances. Try to find a soup kitchen or beg at every church in town instead.

If we as a Church would TITHE according to the Biblical standard, I can’t see how any Catholic (at least in this country pre-persecution) would find himself faced with the situation we’ve described here.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Betsy, Katy, Rich and Texas:

I know that we aren’t Jews, but they’ve wrestled with this issue for some 3,000+ years and much of what we’re trying to codify is based on what thy’ve said.

You might want to look this up in a book titled A Code of Jewish Ethics, by Rabbi Joseph Telus.

You can also look at a passage in the Torah which says:

Leviticus 19:9-10 NAB
“When you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not be so thorough that you reap the field to its very edge, nor shall you glean the stray ears of grain. Likewise, you shall not pick your vineyard bare, nor gather up the grapes that have fallen. These things you shall leave for the poor and the alien. I, the LORD, am your God.”
vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P35.HTM

In other words, a widow should be able to make a meal for her family from what the pickers leave unpicked in your field.
The poor are to be provided for by the people of God.

The overwhelming majority of Orthodox Jewish moralists don’t consider the theft of a food to be a violation of the Commandment against stealing if the person taking the food is doing so from necessity (his own severe hunger or that of his family - meaning he and/or they have missed at least one full meal and will probably miss another when those around are eating). In fact, most of the Sages/Rabbis would consider the taking of sufficient food to make a full meal for him and/or his family to be within the Commandment.

Of course, we all know the Legal Implications of stealing food in our society unless you’re lucky enough to have me as a jurer, so don’t take your chances. Try to find a soup kitchen or beg at every church in town instead.

If we as a Church would TITHE according to the Biblical standard, I can’t see how any Catholic (at least in this country pre-persecution) would find himself faced with the situation we’ve described here.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

I think you will find a refernce to the best 10% goes to God, the bottom 1/3 is to be left. Some basically 40% goes to society and 60% goes to the producer. Today we pay about 40% in taxes, we are just as human as they were.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

**

So I was on another forum (not faith based at all), and a member asked what to do if an employer were doing something unethical.

**

I responded that it would depend on what the employer is doing, but that my employers ethics are very import to me, and that I would walk out in the middle of a work day with no other job prospects and no way to put food on my table before I compromise my morals and ethics.

Someone then asked me if I wouldn’t steal food or do something equally unethical to feed my family. I responded that there are almost always options out there without resorting to stealing (such as selling my non-essential possessions like my tv and car, soup kitchens, public assistance, minimum wage burger-flipping toilet-scrubbing jobs, etc) but if there were really and truly no other options I would steal food to save my family and I don’t think it would be immoral or unethical to do so.

My question is what does the Church say about a situation like that? Would it be alright for me to steal food in order to feed my starving family if there were absolutely no other choice? Where can I go to find good resources on the moral teachings of the church? Is this in the catechism somewhere?

**## Although there is no absolute, unqualified, right to property, as is ****pointed out by an OP, ****ISTM that it’s this kind of uncertainty that is met by the Commandments. “Thou shalt not steal” is absolutely clear - & there are further drawbacks with that justification for taking what is not one’s own: **

**What bothers me is that it is so terribly easy to find excellent reasons to do wrong - especially when we can help those dear to us. I think that the very attempt to justify this, reveals it as theft; and therefore as utterly & absolutely forbidden, under all circumstances. If there can be exceptions to this - why not to the prohibition of euthanasia ? “Thou shalt do no murder” is in the Decalogue too: it too is reaffirmed in the NT; so if one can be broken even so, why be scrupulous about the rest ? That IMO is the serpent in Eden’s voice: it too undermined the unambiguous & declared Will of God. But we Christians are supposed to be a light in the world - not just a tiny bit better than others; so something is wrong if our moral outlook allows us to be indistinguishable from others. **

Nothing could be easier than to say this when one is not at all tempted by need, poverty, or suffering to do otherwise - but it’s when one is not tested, that one should build up one’s moral character for the times when one is tested. If we love God - nothing will induce us to break His Law, written in our hearts; not even great need. That’s the basic issue, ISTM.

And if we love someone, & trust them, we won’t go looking for loop-holes in what they ask of us; but will trust them - most of all, when the Someone is God**. IMO, this doctrine betrays a lack of trust: it’s too reasonable to be Christian; it relies too much on mere natural ethics - it ignores the newness of life that Christians are called to live by; that should characterise them. But precisely because we are imperfect, ISTM we can’t afford not to be Christian in our thinking - which includes our social ethics**

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Michael, Texas, Rich Betsy and Katy:

I think the main problem is the reason why we’re talking about this at all. Yesterday, I had someone gush gratitude all over me because I helped her friend when no one else would so much as give him the time of day, and that included people who were obviously Christians (Bibles, crosses and a Rosary or two). All I had I done was to give the man $4.00 and to send him to a homeless agency that I know would help him and would refer him to retraining.

Another poster here once posted his embarrassment at offering a voucher for $20.00 from the “Body of Christ” in response to hearing that a family of 6 had had their lights, heat and phone cut off and had been given a “pay or quit” notice after the disabled father had been fired and after seeing an empty refirator that was to feed 4 kids.

Is this really the best we can do? Ignore someone because he’s homeless and is begging for money? Give a family $20.00 in response to seeing an empty refigerator nd hearing that their lights, heat and phone have been cut off and that they’ve been given a “pay or quit” notice?

I’m not saying that we should take care of the problems of the world. We can’t even come close. But could we try to help each other out so that our Catholic brothers and sisters are in these desparate straights?

This is what the Book of Acts said:

*They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. And fear came upon every soul; and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. And all who believed were together and had all things in common; and they sold their possessions and goods and distributed them to all, as any had need.

And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they partook of food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.*
Acts 2:42-47 RSV

*Now the company of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one said that any of the things which he possessed was his own, but they had everything in common. And with great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all.

There was not a needy person among them, for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles’ feet; and distribution was made to each as any had need.

Thus Joseph who was surnamed by the apostles Barnabas (which means, Son of encouragement), a Levite, a native of Cyprus, sold a field which belonged to him, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet.*
Acts 4:32-37 RSV

To be continued with the next post, Michael

 

[Traditional_Ang]

Michael, Texas, Rich Betsy and Katy:

Continued from the Precious Post…

The Didache established some rules for assisting Christians within the Church:

Chapter 4. Various Precepts. My child, remember night and day him who speaks the word of God to you, and honor him as you do the Lord. For wherever the lordly rule is uttered, there is the Lord. And seek out day by day the faces of the saints, in order that you may rest upon their words. Do not long for division, but rather bring those who contend to peace. Judge righteously, and do not respect persons in reproving for transgressions. You shall not be undecided whether or not it shall be. Be not a stretcher forth of the hands to receive and a drawer of them back to give. If you have anything, through your hands you shall give ransom for your sins. Do not hesitate to give, nor complain when you give; for you shall know who is the good repayer of the hire. Do not turn away from him who is in want; rather, share all things with your brother, and do not say that they are your own. For if you are partakers in that which is immortal, how much more in things which are mortal? Do not remove your hand from your son or daughter; rather, teach them the fear of God from their youth. Do not enjoin anything in your bitterness upon your bondman or maidservant, who hope in the same God, lest ever they shall fear not God who is over both; for he comes not to call according to the outward appearance, but to them whom the Spirit has prepared. And you bondmen shall be subject to your masters as to a type of God, in modesty and fear. You shall hate all hypocrisy and everything which is not pleasing to the Lord. Do not in any way forsake the commandments of the Lord; but keep what you have received, neither adding thereto nor taking away therefrom. In the church you shall acknowledge your transgressions, and you shall not come near for your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life.

Chapter 12. Reception of Christians. But receive everyone who comes in the name of the Lord, and prove and know him afterward; for you shall have understanding right and left. If he who comes is a wayfarer, assist him as far as you are able; but he shall not remain with you more than two or three days, if need be. But if he wants to stay with you, and is an artisan, let him work and eat. But if he has no trade, according to your understanding, see to it that, as a Christian, he shall not live with you idle. But if he wills not to do, he is a Christ-monger. Watch that you keep away from such.

Chapter 13. Support of Prophets. But every true prophet who wants to live among you is worthy of his support. So also a true teacher is himself worthy, as the workman, of his support. Every first-fruit, therefore, of the products of wine-press and threshing-floor, of oxen and of sheep, you shall take and give to the prophets, for they are your high priests. But if you have no prophet, give it to the poor. If you make a batch of dough, take the first-fruit and give according to the commandment. So also when you open a jar of wine or of oil, take the first-fruit and give it to the prophets; and of money (silver) and clothing and every possession, take the first-fruit, as it may seem good to you, and give according to the commandment.

earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

If we do as the Early Christians did, I can’t see how anyone of us would ever be faced with the dilemma were talking about above.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[KathleenElsie]

I have found that gift certificates and vouchers that I have purchased do more good them the taxes we pay to the government. Mainly it seems to me that most people do not do good works in private. They shout them from the rooftops and make sure others see them.

Give from the heart and do so in private. Don’t judge others for you (we) don’t know what they do in private.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Michael, Texas, Rich Betsy and Katy:

Continued from the Precious Post…

The Didache established some rules for assisting Christians within the Church:

Chapter 4. Various Precepts. My child, remember night and day him who speaks the word of God to you, and honor him as you do the Lord. For wherever the lordly rule is uttered, there is the Lord. And seek out day by day the faces of the saints, in order that you may rest upon their words. Do not long for division, but rather bring those who contend to peace. Judge righteously, and do not respect persons in reproving for transgressions. You shall not be undecided whether or not it shall be. Be not a stretcher forth of the hands to receive and a drawer of them back to give. If you have anything, through your hands you shall give ransom for your sins. Do not hesitate to give, nor complain when you give; for you shall know who is the good repayer of the hire. Do not turn away from him who is in want; rather, share all things with your brother, and do not say that they are your own. For if you are partakers in that which is immortal, how much more in things which are mortal? Do not remove your hand from your son or daughter; rather, teach them the fear of God from their youth. Do not enjoin anything in your bitterness upon your bondman or maidservant, who hope in the same God, lest ever they shall fear not God who is over both; for he comes not to call according to the outward appearance, but to them whom the Spirit has prepared. And you bondmen shall be subject to your masters as to a type of God, in modesty and fear. You shall hate all hypocrisy and everything which is not pleasing to the Lord. Do not in any way forsake the commandments of the Lord; but keep what you have received, neither adding thereto nor taking away therefrom. In the church you shall acknowledge your transgressions, and you shall not come near for your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life.

Chapter 12. Reception of Christians. But receive everyone who comes in the name of the Lord, and prove and know him afterward; for you shall have understanding right and left. If he who comes is a wayfarer, assist him as far as you are able; but he shall not remain with you more than two or three days, if need be. But if he wants to stay with you, and is an artisan, let him work and eat. But if he has no trade, according to your understanding, see to it that, as a Christian, he shall not live with you idle. But if he wills not to do, he is a Christ-monger. Watch that you keep away from such.

Chapter 13. Support of Prophets. But every true prophet who wants to live among you is worthy of his support. So also a true teacher is himself worthy, as the workman, of his support. Every first-fruit, therefore, of the products of wine-press and threshing-floor, of oxen and of sheep, you shall take and give to the prophets, for they are your high priests. But if you have no prophet, give it to the poor. If you make a batch of dough, take the first-fruit and give according to the commandment. So also when you open a jar of wine or of oil, take the first-fruit and give it to the prophets; and of money (silver) and clothing and every possession, take the first-fruit, as it may seem good to you, and give according to the commandment.

earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-roberts.html

If we do as the Early Christians did, I can’t see how anyone of us would ever be faced with the dilemma were talking about above.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

A vigorous to both parts of that ​