Undercover FBI Agents

[James_2_24]

What are the moral implications of being an undercover agent for the FBI? To go undercover means that one must deceive many people and tell lies to get out of tight situations…

How does this deception and lying fall into our moral theology as Catholics?

Is it acceptable to do these things for the greater good?

 

[tuopaolo]

James_2:24:

What are the moral implications of being an undercover agent for the FBI? To go undercover means that one must deceive many people and tell lies to get out of tight situations…

I’m not sure you would need to tell any lies.

How does this deception and lying fall into our moral theology as Catholics?

Lying is always wrong because it profanes the purpose of speech. So when your speech says something other than what the purpose of speech is (i.e. to signify what is actually the case), you have lied and sinned. As for deception it depends on what you mean by the word:

newadvent.org/summa/304003.htm

*I answer that, The object of laying ambushes is in order to deceive the enemy. Now a man may be deceived by another’s word or deed in two ways. First, through being told something false, or through the breaking of a promise, and this is always unlawful. No one ought to deceive the enemy in this way, for there are certain “rights of war and covenants, which ought to be observed even among enemies,” as Ambrose states (De Officiis i). *

*Secondly, a man may be deceived by what we say or do, because we do not declare our purpose or meaning to him. Now we are not always bound to do this, since even in the Sacred Doctrine many things have to be concealed, especially from unbelievers, lest they deride it, according to Mt. 7:6: “Give not that which is holy, to dogs.” Wherefore much more ought the plan of campaign to be hidden from the enemy. For this reason among other things that a soldier has to learn is the art of concealing his purpose lest it come to the enemy’s knowledge, as stated in the Book on Strategy [Stratagematum i, 1 by Frontinus. Such like concealment is what is meant by an ambush which may be lawfully employed in a just war. Nor can these ambushes be properly called deceptions, nor are they contrary to justice or to a well-ordered will. For a man would have an inordinate will if he were unwilling that others should hide anything from him *

In the context of a game like some card games where in the course of the game you represent how many cards of what suite you are laying down and are not required by the rules to be accurate, if you represent it innaccurately you wouldn’t be lying and sinning because that is simply part of what is provided for by the rules of the game about which everyone is aware – so in that restricted context the purpose of that restricted speech changes from one of signifying what actually is the case to one of facilitating the enjoyment of the game (or competition) The same kind of thing is at work if you are an actor and as part of your role your character tells lies – in that context too the purpose of that restricted speech changes from one of signifiying what actually is the case to one of portraying accurately the character one is playing. I don’t know if this would apply if at all to FBI undercover agents, but according to Star Trek Voyager’s Tuvok, it does

Is it acceptable to do these things for the greater good?

It’s never acceptable to lie for the greater good.*

 

[Didi]

What about people who are relocated in the witness protection program and have to start whole new lives and take on new identities?

 

[Mom_of_one]

I’m reminded of the story of the Hebrew midwives in Egypt when Pharoah wanted all the male babies killed. They(the midwives) lied and were blessed by God.

 

[tuopaolo]

Momofone:

I’m reminded of the story of the Hebrew midwives in Egypt when Pharoah wanted all the male babies killed. They(the midwives) lied and were blessed by God.

They weren’t blessed because they lied though.

 

[tuopaolo]

Didi:

What about people who are relocated in the witness protection program and have to start whole new lives and take on new identities?

A person is allowed to have more than one name so the witness protection program would just give you a new name. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with changing your name.

 

[JCPhoenix]

It really depends upon what the undercover job requires.

Yes, they may take on a false name. I was once asked to do some undercover work on a drug bust where I was to go in wiht the other police officer as his girlfriend, to “set the scene” and basically make it appear as though we did not represent the police.

This ended up not happening, but that was the basic idea.

There is no problem with this from what I can see. The purpose of the “buy” is to provide evidence that Mr. Drug Dealer is in fact dealing drugs. We do not put the drugs in his hand or open his mouth for him and send him out to sell to others. He does this of his own accord and gets busted. End of story. No entrapment.

I’ve also worked with women in prostitution from the side of probation. Over and over I read the police reports where the prostitute asked the officer, "Are you a cop? ANd of course they would say “no”. Is this a lie? Yes, they are cops. But if they admit to being the law, there goes the bust. And thus prostitution would be even more rampant than it is.

BTW, in my position I saw many women get out of the life through the justice system which was able to help some find alternatives to their street life.

There are times when lying is acceptable. Maybe not moral, but if you can find any other way for one of the “good guys” to get evidence sufficient to put a stop to some major social ills, then please make suggestions to your local and federal departments.

Your question is a loaded one and can seriously be debated for hours.

 

[Daniel_Kane]

Morally, I look at a lie as the intentional deception of a person who has a right to the truth for the purposes of personal gain.

Criminals do not have a right to the truth regarding the identity or presence of law enforcement in their midst so to me, it is not a sinful act to deceive them, in the example given.

 

[777]

So weaving a tangled web is considered a neccessary evil? How shocking…

 

[Mom_of_one]

tuopaolo:

They weren’t blessed because they lied though.

But they still were blessed because they saved many lives.

My dad, a former cop, was shot three times, with his own gun while on duty. The gunman also shot my dad’s partner and killed him(he died later at the hospital) The gunman then asked my dad for the keys to the handcuffs. My dad flat out lied and said that he didn’t have them. This murderer was handcuffed to two other men(this is how they did it back then) and because he had to take the two other men along, he was hampered in how fast he could move. He didn’t make it across the parking lot before he was caught(He may have even have just gotten out the door of the courthouse) Anyway, if my dad hadn’t lied, this murderer would have gotten away and possibly(probably) killed more people.

They said my dad was a hero and that he saved lives that night, even though he had 3 bullet holes in him. One bullet deflected off a rib, otherwise it would have hit his heart. He was hurting, but he still saved lives just by lying.

 

[tuopaolo]

The Catholic Church teaches that the ends do not justify the means. So if something is intrinsically evil, like lying, then regardless of what the end may be, it is is not right to do it – even to save many lives. Catechism of the Catholic Church:

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. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).

scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1753.htm

The midwives were not blessed because they lied. The scripture states why they were blessed and it says that they were blessed “because they feared God”

Jimmy Akin comments on this scripture here (excerpted):

jimmyakin.org/2005/03/desperate_midwi.html

21: And because the midwives feared God he gave them families.
While many folks look at this passage and conclude that God blessed the midwives for lying, this conclusion does not seem to be borne out by the text, which expressly states that the reason for the blessing was the midwives’ fear of God. This fear of (reverence for) God was manifest chiefly in the midwives’ refusal to kill the Hebrew baby boys. What they told Pharaoh in their desperation was just a secondary attempt to keep what they had done from being exposed and them from being executed.

The lie thus seems secondary to the main thing, which was their defiance of Pharaoh’s evil order so that they might honor God. It’s a “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). Since they obeyed God, God blessed them, as well as excusing the lie they told.

That being said, when reading the Old Testament one must recognize that due to progressive revelation not everything, in particular not everything regarding God’s will, was as clear at the time as it later came to be. (Indeed, the Ten Commandments hadn’t even been given at the time of Exodus 1; they weren’t given until Exodus 20). The total incompatibility of lying with God’s will thus may not have been as clear to the people of the day as it is to us, and this may have played a role in God treating them as he did (i.e., not holding the lie against them).

 

[tuopaolo]

JCPhoenix:

There are times when lying is acceptable. Maybe not moral

Something can’t be both acceptable and immoral at the same time. If something is immoral then it is by that very fact unacceptable. That which is immoral must be rejected, not accepted.

, but if you can find any other way for one of the “good guys” to get evidence sufficient to put a stop to some major social ills, then please make suggestions to your local and federal departments.

It doesn’t matter whether there are other ways or not:

**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. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).

scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1753.htm

In the cases involving the prostitutes I think a kind of mental reservation could be made. But lying is intrinsically evil and cannot be justified even to save a million lives or a billion souls.

 

[777]

tuopaolo:

The Catholic Church teaches that the ends do not justify the means. So if something is intrinsically evil, like lying, then regardless of what the end may be, it is is not right to do it – even to save many lives. Catechism of the Catholic Church:

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. Thus the condemnation of an innocent person cannot be justified as a legitimate means of saving the nation. On the other hand, an added bad intention (such as vainglory) makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can be good (such as almsgiving).

scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1753.htm

The midwives were not blessed because they lied. The scripture states why they were blessed and it says that they were blessed “because they feared God”

Jimmy Akin comments on this scripture here (excerpted):

jimmyakin.org/2005/03/desperate_midwi.html

21: And because the midwives feared God he gave them families.
While many folks look at this passage and conclude that God blessed the midwives for lying, this conclusion does not seem to be borne out by the text, which expressly states that the reason for the blessing was the midwives’ fear of God. This fear of (reverence for) God was manifest chiefly in the midwives’ refusal to kill the Hebrew baby boys. What they told Pharaoh in their desperation was just a secondary attempt to keep what they had done from being exposed and them from being executed.

The lie thus seems secondary to the main thing, which was their defiance of Pharaoh’s evil order so that they might honor God. It’s a “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). QUOTE]

Don’t forget women too. We must obey God instead of women too.

 

[tuopaolo]

Daniel Kane:

Morally, I look at a lie as the intentional deception of a person who has a right to the truth for the purposes of personal gain.

It’s notable that the definition of lying was corrected and clarified in the 2nd edition of the Catechism. In the 1st edition it read like this:

“To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead into error someone who has the right to know the truth.”

But in the 2nd this has been corrected as follows:

“To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error.”

So the part about “right to know the truth” was cut out.

Criminals do not have a right to the truth regarding the identity or presence of law enforcement in their midst so to me, it is not a sinful act to deceive them, in the example given.

I may agree with you that it would not be sinful but that fact can’t be based on them not having the right to the truth as the part about the right to the truth was purposefully left out of the 2nd edition of the Catechism and lying is about profaning the purpose of speech – this is what I believe at least

 

[tuopaolo]

[Don’t forget women too. We must obey God instead of women too.

On a serious note, here’s the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the notion of mental reservation:

newadvent.org/cathen/10195b.htm

The article appears to be focused on mental reservations as they apply to those obliged to keep secrets as opposed to the topic of this thread which is about undercover work, but perhaps it could apply to undercover work all the same:

An excerpt:

The name applied to a doctrine which has grown out of the common Catholic teaching about lying and which is its complement.

The Catholic Doctrine on Lying According to the common Catholic teaching it is never allowable to tell a lie, not even to save human life. A lie is something intrinsically evil, and as evil may not be done that good may come of it, we are never allowed to tell a lie. However, we are also under an obligation to keep secrets faithfully, and sometimes the easiest way of fulfilling that duty is to say what is false, or to tell a lie. Writers of all creeds and of none, both ancient and modern, have frankly accepted this position. They admit the doctrine of the lie of necessity, and maintain that when there is a conflict between justice and veracity it is justice that should prevail. The common Catholic teaching has formulated the theory of mental reservation as a means by which the claims of both justice and veracity can be satisfied.
[/quote]

 

[JCPhoenix]

Let’s look at a possible scenario.

Three college students pull up to a club and immediatley get into a vehicle. During the ride around the block they exchange money with the passenger in the front seat and after a drive around the block they are dropped off in front of the club. They have exchanged the money for the drug “Extacy”, “Ecstacy” or “E” or whatever is the going name.

They produce their ID’s and go into the dance club. They are your children and friends of your children.

In the meantime, the driver picks up a new customer and his friend. They get into the back seat. The driver does not know these people, although they are college-age-appearing.

“Are you cops?”

“Nah”. One of them is searching his pockets for the money.

“Here.” The front seat passenger passes a joint to the guys in their back seat. He thinks that if they refuse, then they are cops. Both of them inhale, hold the pot smoke, and exhale. In the eyes of the dealer, both are now “innocent”. They “toked” so they are OK.

Cops can’t lie, they can’t “toke up” and they won’t do drugs. These guys must be OK. They are now committed and are high, therefore they cannot represnt the law.

So they do the deal. The dealers ask the passengers how much they want. They give the prices of the varieties they have if there are more than one type of drug.

“Gimme 4 hits…”

“You gotta take your own in front of us. Sorry, man, but I dont’ know you and if you’re cops…”

“You got 'em?”

“Yeah…$50 each…you got it?”

Both rear passengers hand over the money and as the exchange is made they ask the driver to pull over. They both take 1 of the pills and drink them down with bottled water. They also purchase dime bags (pot) and small amounts of coke.

Just as they get out all of them are accosted by police. They are surrounded on all sides. The passengers are cuffed and thrown to the ground. The driver and passenger are removed at gunpoint, both known dealers.

The passengers are known cops. They go with the act and they spit the "E " they cheeked, providing evidence for the bust.

The driver and passenger are held on charges and both of them have deaths and addicitons under thier belt…alll of which they caused and encouraged for their financial benenfit. The hidden cameras carried by the passengers are marked as evidence and the audo tapes likewise.

The dealers don’t see a problem with their version of “capitalism”.

In the meantime, one of the original "riders’ is in the club. She can’t breathe. She’s hot but she wants to keep dancing…something about this music…something about the peopel she is with…something about the lights. THIS IS THE COOLEST THING EVER!.

This is your daughter. She collapses on the dance floor. This is her first time doing any drug because she is a good Catholic girl. She grew up in a good home with good, Catholic parents. She just passed major test that day and decided that she was going on the grad school. She needed to “let loose” and against her better judgment she allowed herself to be led by other good Catholic friends also trying the drug for the first time.

Your daugher overheated and collapsed on the dance floor. At first they thought she was just drunk and waited to call for help. When she stopped breathing they realized ther was a problem.

Your daughter dies as another victim of Ecstacy when she gets to the ER.

Is it OK for police officers to lie to dealers and deny being cops in order to prevent them from distributing this drug? Some cops are Catholic…should they avoid this type of work just in case it conflicts, in case they have to lie to a drug dealer or pimp and say they are not representative of the law?

More importantly, is it better that your child die because some cops are too “noble” to lie to a dealer?

(BTW, I have done this drug and I have both experienced and seen the real effects I have watched a friend suffer the addiction…and the effect on her 8 year old daugher.)

 

[Viki59]

The classic case, of course, is the Nazi Gestapo at the front door demanding to know if you have hidden Jews in your attic.
You do, but the correct answer is, No way. I’d lie and worry about the moral fallout later. Such people do not have a right to the truth, because they will misuse it.

 

[JCPhoenix]

Lying is not always a mortal sin. Maybe sometimes.

Personally, I would rather lie to save someone from mortal sin or furthe rmortal sin. I will then take my offering to God for judgment and if my act was incorrect I offer it to God on behalf of not only myself, but on behalf of the soul I may have affected.

I took a class in morality in college and we discussed this very issue. It was taught by a very holy priest.

He had no problem with undercover work per se, however there are the obvious issues of getting “too deep” into the work. I will leave you all to figure out what that means…it’s pretty obvious.

As en ex-cop I also take my ex-dilemmas to my confessor and to God to sort out. Within Catholic orthodox theology I stand by everything I have done and I have reconciled those dilemmas I faced during that time period.

I hope you all recognize the sacrifices being made on your behalf every single day by police officers making the moral decisions you debate here on this forum. I hope you pray for them every single day.

They literally give up their lives so that we can engage in Monday morning quarterbacking.

Thank God for getting me out of that career…and Thank God even more that others are called and respond to that call on our behalf.

 

[tuopaolo]

JCPhoenix:

Lying is not always a mortal sin. Maybe sometimes.

But it is always a sin. And sin should never be embraced, accepted or condoned, whether it is mortal or venial.

 

[wcknight]

tuopaolo:

But it is always a sin. And sin should never be embraced, accepted or condoned, whether it is mortal or venial.

I tend to disagree that lying is always a sin. When asked by a reporter, Mayor Koch replied he would never lie, except in 2 cases.

One, if he needed to fire someone, rather than tell that person they were a bad employee or incompetent, he would lie to them to spare their feelings.

and two, if he knew someone was dying and they asked him, he would lie to ease their suffering.

I think in some situations, the greater good is far better served with a lie rather than the truth.

If a young child is terminally ill, the parents or doctor may decide that rather than panic or further depress the child, lying about their condition or chances for recovery may be the best course of action. In some cases a positive mental attitude may the difference between life and death.

Telling someone they have no hope or very little chance for survival may be the worst thing that can be said to them. Studies have shown that patients going into major operations, who have a postive mental attitude survive in far large numbers that those who go in with fellings of dread or hopelessness.