Tell grandma something that you DID like within the potato salad, i.e. "I liked the saltiness/the herbs/whatever", because that's not a lie. And if there's nothing about the salad that you like, when she asks, say, "Sorry grandma, but I found it unfavorable." Good luck, and blessings.
What great timing and insight! I had done this recently where “I lied to bring about good”. Nonetheless, I consulted the Catechism and made my confession. May God bless you and keep you.
If killing in self defense is not sinful, then lying in self defense being sinful seems rather inconsistent. So you can shoot the gestapo in the face but you can't lie to them, apparently.
No one acting as a private person (military and police are a bit different) may directly will the death of another person. However, you may use force to prevent an unjust action against you or a defenseless person, to be emphatic, no more than is necessary to prevent the attacker from completing his unjust act. However, there may be situations when even the minimum level of force necessary to stop an assailant does kill him. In this case the death is an unintended secondary consequence (i.e. you were simply trying to stop him, and you couldn't do that without killing him), and the act of self-defense is still justified.
@@goncalojesus7583 I don't like the concept of "unintended consequence". For many reasons, but a good argument would be that the majority of criminals commit murders and robery as an "unintended consequence" to an intention to have money, for example. I think the better argument regarding the topic of the video is that lying is just worse than letting someone die. Physical death is a relatively natural, also unavoidable, phenomenon, and only unnecessary murder becomes a sin. On the other hand, lying is both unnatural and avoidable.
Lying is weakness and cowardice. There is not a single positive virtue that can be applicable to it. The ability to defend yourself takes courage, and strength which are good moral virtues. God often exercises strength and he exercised courage when he did not deny his godhood even in the face of death.
Great, succinct thoughts! Loved this. It is jaw-dropping to me that if we deny Jesus to men, that some Christians say Jesus will not deny them to His Father. He actually explicitly said He would deny them. We simply cannot prioritize our physical life and comforts over our faith in Christ. “You don’t have to be faithful if life gets really, really hard” says the world. “I have overcome the world” says our Lord, Jesus, God Incarnate. Who should we strive to listen to and follow?
Thank you for clarifying this. Today is the 1st Friday devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and I believe in have committed a venial sins. However, I think it's best to withhold goung to Mass as I can't go to confession until tomorrow and don't want to offend Our Lord anymore, as he is already so much offended. Thanks for the explanation. It is helpful.
It seems did touch on the issue of mental reservation(whether wide or strict). Some people undoubtedly have no right to know certain truths and while it is impermissible to lie we can use at least wide mental reservation in those situations. Wide mental reservation is not a lie but a way of wisely concealing knowledge to those who have no right to that knowledge. There is also strict mental reservation which is a lie which conceals from those who have a right to know. There is more that can be added here.
I have always found it interesting how different christians talk about people like Jacob, Tamar, Rahab (obvious parallel with your example), and even David (for my argument I’m talking about his feigned madness). In the first two most people see their actions as wrong and a small minority seem to think that there’s an exception to be made because they were still used of God in their deceit. With Rahab I have found probably half who recognize that regardless of her virtuous intentions it’s nonetheless a sin. In war, it seems, there is some allowance, through the example of Gideon, for forms of deception. Also the two spies sent to Jericho were spies sent by Joshua (with the assumed approval of God since He commanded Moses to send 12 spies earlier) and ostensibly had to act in a deceptive manner in order to get inside of a city with such thick walls. So we aren’t told that marching in a wide open plain in bright colors is the only way to honorably fight. At the same time shouldn’t David when he fled to Gath have trusted God because He promised to make him king and not faked madness? And now we come to the modern age where things seem to be even more complicated.
@@Unclenate1000 I spoke about this in a bible study group and another woman made a good point how some people could use the truth to cause harm and in the end we need only be truthful to Christ.
I believe there is as much difference between a malicious lie and an officious lie as between killing and murder. Malicious lie is like murder, which can never be justified and officious lie is like killing, which is justified in cases like Just War. And I think it's not for nothing that the 8th commandment is worded like "shall not BEAR FALSE WITNESS against your neighbor", rather than "shall NOT LIE"... Only malicious lie can qualify as BEARING FALSE WITNESS AGAINST our NEIGHBOR.
In the biblical story of King Solomon and the two mothers, did King Solomon lie to be able to know who the real mother was? If so, does that justify lying as a means to a good end?
What’s the distinction between lying and deception? My question involves more trivial examples: sarcastic expressions, Santa Claus, story-telling, etc. While in general story-telling doesn’t involve deception, in some cases a certain amount of deception may be intended. Ghost stories around a campfire, for example, depend on a certain amount of deception to draw the audience in. Or if your wife asks if you like her new hairstyle, or the birthday present she bought you. Or when my daughter sends me a link to a TH-cam video she thinks is funny but I think is inane. I’ll pretend to laugh so I don’t hurt her feelings. What about deception through selective truth-telling? Even if you don’t outright lie with words, to the Nazis at your door, your intent is to convince them through other means there are no Jews in your basement.
As St. Augustine would put it, lying to the Nazis is sinning, albeit venial, and therefore compromises your eternal life for the temporal life of another.
I found the original debate interesting and respect the diversity of opinion on this -- to a point. For example, I think the most interesting counterpoints of the debate were that we might interpret Jesus as having told a lie (though that's debatable), and the question of: 'If killing to defend others is morally permissible, why not lying to defend others?' But I'm concerned about how far people seem to slip when they begin to rationalize lying; for example, stretching permissibility to defend apostasy and various lies of convenience. I've been disheartened by hearing even a consecrated religious person describe how she regularly tells lies to achieve what she considers good ends. It honestly undermines trust, and beyond that I think we lose out on so many unforeseen fruits that God would intend to give us if we only stopped trying to 'control' things, and just conducted ourselves with honesty. It doesn't mean blabbering everything all the time to the wrong people in the wrong way... but I still come down myself on the side of not telling lies. So though I think it's the less popular position, I'm glad you continued to defend the position that lying is always sinful. It takes courage and creativity (and trust in God's providence) to persevere in conducting ourselves by virtue, rather than compromising with vice in the vain attempt to 'control' the world and 'force' a good end. God will make all things right, in the end. We need to trust Him. PS I also agree with you that jokes (and stageplays, etc) aren't 'lies' in the real sense! Insofar as a good joke contains a 'lie' (a deceptive setup to the punchline), it is only because the punchline is coming and the speaker want to delight you by the reveal. A joke is an illustration of incongruity: the truth is always meant to be known by the hearer of the joke; the joke is a single speech act that isn't complete until after the punchline, and the punchline clarifies the truth. So when that gets suggested as problematizing the 'don't lie' position, I just don't see it fitting.
@Bok Choy I think that's actually a really good example to bring up! I'm not going to claim that I 'know' the answer (though I'd be interested in Fr. Pine's perspective), but in a conversational way just chit-chatting with you off the top of my head, I wonder if a resolution to this could be related to the fact that the *purpose* of a sting operation is actually to ultimately reveal truth? Similar in that sense to a joke, where inherent to the purpose of the joke is that a punchline will clarify any temporary deception involved in setting up the punchline. The purpose of a sting operation is that the truth about who is/isn't a child predator will be uncovered: the deception stage is temporary by design, and the ultimate goal of the people perpetrating the 'deception' is that the predators find out the truth themselves: when they're under arrest and being held accountable in a court of law. While it may be the case that some sting operations don't make it to their intended conclusion (so the temporary deception stage never gets 'resolved', with the predators accidentally disappearing before they find out they were being stung), I wonder if that's just accidental to the moral question, in the same way that if a person happens to get hit by a car before finishing a joke, that doesn't mean they were 'telling a lie' by telling the joke (even if the clarifying reveal *happens* not to happen before the car hits them). Again, I want to reiterate that I respect the diversity of opinion on this, and my understanding is that Catholics are permitted to advance both sides of this argument. I'm just suggesting these ideas as a possible way of advancing the side of the argument that's less popular in our current culture. :)
@Bok Choy Alternately, maybe some people would argue that sting operations like that *are* fundamentally immoral/impermissible in their level of deception, however temporarily intended? I assume such people would also argue that spying is always wrong, to the degree that it involves deception? I'm personally inclined to try to resolve the question differently, but just pointing out that someone could *technically* argue this way. I'm actually really looking forward to a promised eventual episode of Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World where he addresses the ethics of spying from a Catholic perspective; I hope to hear a more rigorous explanation of the possible opposing positions at that time! :)
@Bok Choy Cheers friend! :) I didn't feel like you were "got-cha"-ing me. I think it was a very good question, and I'm not sure how good my speculative response was (that is, logically/morally). Yours is definitely the kind of question I think deserves central consideration when discussing this kind of topic, and I'd *love* to hear Fr. Pine address it specifically.
Confronting wicked nazis with truth leads me to know that Earthly evil is a grain of sand compared to God’s goodness. Of course, we don’t know how we would respond to evil at that moment , but God’s goodness is still infinite compared to earthly evil.
9:53 … Newman says it be better for the world to be annihilated than that one soul should commit one VENIAL sin. He doesn’t say mortal sin. This strengthens Fr’s argument. Important distinction I thought
Welcome to level 2. I was wondering a similar scenario. I mean you do not have to bring it up if they do not ask it. And you can try to evade the issue I believe. I would be very surprised if Fr.Pines` debate did not at least touch on this though. One thing that I find helpful is to reflect situations in the light of other virtues as they all compliment one another.
I don’t know if someone answers this for Fr Pine but James references Rahab from Joshua who aided the spies by what seems like lying and she is credited as a good example. If like a commentary on that
How about this for the Gestapo thought: The Gestapo defined their targets as 'less-than-human". If you respond in affirmative you are participating in their socially-accepted lie. You briefly mentioned another slightly analogous situation in which there is a socially accepted lie; that of same-sex marriage. If two men stand before you to bless their union; society says they are married; the civil authorities say they are married; they are standing in front of you, though, Father Pine. Are these two men married to each other? Can any answer you give not be a lie?
Re: lying to the Nazis. Are you aware of the ten Boom family? The movie The Hiding Place was based on them. They were a Dutch extended family that hid Jews during the occupation. Corrie ten Boom recounts w/o making a judgement that her father lied to the Nazis when they asked. They were eventually betrayed, arrested, & all of the family died the camps except her. However her aunt’s family refused to lie. They were arrested. On the same night the Resistance broke into the jail where they were held, they were smuggled into England & never spent one night in jail. Corrie basically said to draw your own conclusions. Amazing story of her life, many miracles occurred including her release before she was shipped to be exterminated.
Mm tough topic. But the church teaches that if one do something against his conscience commits a sin. In the scenario to lie to save the innocent life, in the mind of the common person the right thing to do is to do so..and If he doesn't do that going against his conscience he will commit mortal sin. (See Moral theology for seglars from P. Antonio Royo Marin, Op) pages 132-136
Hi. Been thinking about this subject. I have a child who is bisexual. He was beating himself up about it for awhile. Went to therapy and is more accepting. He knows how I feel about it I don’t want to add to his anxiety by explaining anymore how I feel. What does a mother do besides prayer etc
@Bok Choy Thank you for taking the time to reply. Lots in it. Yes, I think pornography played a hand in this. He told me he had an addiction to it as well. He lives in states. I’m in Ireland He’s a grown man 27. it’s breaking my ❤️. Thanks
What about Rahab the harlot? It was considered good of her to lie to save the Jews. Christ is even of her lineage. God saved her & her family because she lied.
Rahab the harlot is commended not because she lied but because she saved the two Israelite spies. They lived in the age of imperfection, but now that the perfect has been brought to light through Jesus, imperfection is not countenanced.
@Gangari_the_WandererBoth Moses and Aquinas were followers of Christ. Moses was a Christian in so that he was awaiting the same Messiah that we Worship. The Catholic Church is the tree that has grown from the seed of the Old Covenant Patriarchs and Religion - Jesus did not establish a New Religion - the Old was just fulfilled at His coming.
In the catechism of the Catholic Church it says we have a responsibility to protect our lives as well as others through self defense, even if the blow is lethal. CCC 2263;2265). So, it only makes sense, if we can morally kill another through self defense, we can also morally protect another from death through a lie. What’s worse, killing somebody with a 12 gauge, or protecting someone through a lie? Everyone gets to go home to live another day.
Isn’t Rahab’s lie to the king of Jericho’s men praised in Scripture? It’s very similar to the hiding the Jews in the basement example and she lies, becoming a prophetic sign of Christ’s salvation in the process. “And in the same way was not also Ra'hab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?” - James 2:25
If you were to deceive a N azi looking for Jews by misleading but true statements would that still be a problem.? For example saying that you would turn Jews away if they came to your door. Which would be true as your cellar is already full to capacity but could be interpreted differently by the N azi.
Perhaps it can be thought of in this way; if a government is acting justly then I owe it the truth, but if they want me to help facilitate an atrocity then I don't. I owe the Gestapo the truth like I owe tax to Nazi Germany. Give to Hitler what is Hitler's, give to God what is God's.
A Lie: To say what you think to be false, so as to deceive another person. A Joke: To say what you think to be false, so as to deceive another person. Thomists: BUT A JOKE ISN'T A LIE!!!
If you know that not lying is very likely to lead to the deaths of the Jews in the basement, then not lying makes you an accomplice in murder. The choice then is between two sins: lying and murder. Given that lying in that circumstance would be a venial sin and that being an accessory to murder would obviously be a mortal sin, it is preferrable to lie. Not because we'd be doing evil that good may come. But because we'd be doing evil that a inconceivably worse and more tragic evil may not come.
I love Fr. Pine and Saint Thomas Aquinas, but I have a hard time swallowing the idea that the Nazi deserves to hear the truth about the Jews in the basement. That's not exactly the same thing as doing evil so that good may result - it's more like denying the truth to someone who doesn't deserve it. I also don't feel satisfied with work-arounds like deception by mental reservation just so long as we don't say words that don't match reality. I'm not saying I reject the strict view argued for here, but it certainly isn't easy to accept. God bless Fr. Pine for explaining it clearly, at least.
I agree. The natural consequence is that Christians were morally obliged to turn away Jews who need protection (in order to not put themselves in a situation that would cause them to lie) or else give up the Jews. It seems to me that when it's either lying or having people tortured and murdered, lying is the better option.
@@YardenJZ Good point! Hiding a Jew in your basement is already a kind of deception, even if it isn't an act of speech. Some Catholic priests even gave out unconsecrated hosts at Mass to fool the Nazis into thinking the Jews weren't Jews.
@@FrJohnBrownSJ Right! And I believe St Thomas viewed all forms of deception as equal, verbal or otherwise. I did not know about unconsecrated hosts, but that's awesome! I heard Pius XII sent religious Jews to live as "capuchins", thus they did not have to shave. Definitely a form of deception, and if you ask me, the right thing to do.
@Gangari TheWanderer You are right. I'm not saying difficult doctrine is dispensable just because it's difficult, though. I'm not even saying Aquinas is wrong. I'm saying this view causes difficulties, maybe even apparent contradictions, that still need to be worked through.
@Gangari TheWanderer No, I am not saying they are the same. But a person who gives up the Jews in his basement is literally handing innocent people to be tortured and executed. If you'd rather do that than tell a lie, that's your choice. Your shooting an abortionist example doesn't work, because we are not talking about actively hunting nazis. What we are talking about is more akin to driving an abortionist to work, or buying someone's bus fare to the "clinic". Unless, of course, you think that handing a Jew to nazis does not mean you are complicit. In which case we are having the wrong discussion. And the Real Presence is divinely revealed truth. This is Aquinas' view. I think CCC 2484 allows for other views. If it's easier think of giving up Catholics or consecrated hosts rather than Jews.
@@dwightschrute900 does the church say anything about situations where you’re forced to choose between two sins? Should you pick the “less bad” one? Are you cleared if you do so?
@@lebecccomputer287I think there is always a third, non-sinful option. I think God will provide effectual graces in these moments of intense hardships.
As much as I love Fr. Pine, I’m afraid this is argument is deceptively (see what I did there? :) ) unclear. What is "lying"? Initially Fr. Pine seems to have in mind any sort of deliberate deception, whether word or deed, on the grounds that it offends justice. For example: *"When we talk about truthfulness we’re talking about something that is due to another human being. … They’re the types of things without which society cannot flourish. … If everyone were to lie to each other society would crumble."* *"Truth ensures that our externals, namely words and deeds, are duly ordered in relation to something as a sign to a thing signified."* *" …the signs which we project, the signs which we communicate actually correspond to what’s interior."* *"This is what our mouths and this is what our bodies are for. For communicating the truth."* *"Lying is a vice, contrary to the truth, and therefore sinful."* And so forth. But nothing in the above would seem to limit itself to speech acts. But then: *"So what is a lie? It’s when you **_say_** what you think to be false so as to deceive another person."* *"It’s against the natural orientation of speech acts."* Suddenly, Fr. Pine seems to restrict himself to deceptive speech acts alone in view, and his grounds are that such acts are contrary to the natural ordering of speech toward communication. He seems to be conflating two very different arguments. From this point his discussion moves on to malicious vs. jocose vs. officious lies. Yet it’s hard to see how this distinction would limit itself to speech acts alone, but would not extend to all forms of deliberate deception.
One hypothetical always leads me to a more serious one. What if,in said case one is harboring “Jews” and is fully prepared to defend them. And your response to those searching for them is the truth. Yes. They are here, but if you mean to do them harm I will not allow such a thing to happen. The next question is, is it a sin to use violence to defend those in your care? Again just a hypothetical. I know that St. Thomas talks about self defense and defense of others.
I wonder if the Nazi at the door is lawfully entitled to the truth in this case. Is someone intent on committing evil entitled to truth that would aid them in committing that evil? Theft is wrong when somebody is lawfully entitled to the property. But is it theft to take something that somebody possesses unlawfully? And by "lawfully" I mean natural law or God's law, not human law (which can of course be false and even evil).
Is every position of Thomas infallible ? But St. Augustine was against the concept of immaculate conception and believed that original sin is transmitted through sexual intercourse. So I guess also his and s. Thomas' position on truth-telling should not be taken as a deposit of faith. Of course, Father Pine is right that probably if the German Nazis were standing on our doorstep then our answer to the question "are there Jews in the basement" would no longer matter. But it would be a different matter if, for example, a baker in an occupied country was asked by the Gestapo whether he had noticed that a family had been buying more bread lately (which might indicate that he was hiding someone, such as Jews, or someone else whom the Gestapo was pursuing).
Did you know that God's Word is loaded with scriptures against lying? Her are just a couple: Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, But those who deal faithfully are His delight. Proverbs 12:22 A trustworthy witness will not lie, But a false witness utters lies. Proverbs 14:5
Is there any sense that lying must be a consensual act and thus any statement under extreme coercion or duress cannot be considered a lie? We recognize this in law, where an act typically must be volitional in order to be held against you. I’d argue that lying under the force of a Gestapo gun wouldn’t be a volitional act because you, your family, and the Jewish family are all acting under threat of execution. I could be wrong but it’s just my intuition that telling an innocuous lie under grave threat or torture wouldn’t be considered a freely chosen lie. On top of that, I’d argue that the idea that truth being necessary for society to function could also be made for certain lies. If not for undercover police work, military spies and tactics (which involve deception), diplomatic negotiations (bluffing), any Christian society would’ve been conquered a millennium ago by those willing to lie, and society would not function properly without them
Ok why is no one talking about and has no answer to Rahab the harlot being praised by God for lying about hiding the Jews? Someone please explain this contradiction to me.
@@carlos.sierra She did lie though when she told the King's men that they left and she didn't know where they had gone when in fact she knew full well they were hiding. That's a direct lie. She was commended twice for this. Also she was never condemned for lying either. Furthermore the actual definition of what constitutes a lie in the commandments is not simply "telling a falsehood of any kind" but actually "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" which means in a legal setting you cannot say a fellow believe did something they are accused of if they did not. That's entirely different than deceiving an enemy.
Also, there needs to be addressed the fact that no one with a heart or a soul would give up innocent people hiding in their basement to the authorities who meant them harm. Not only would that be cruel but it would make you an accessory to the murder it's itself which is wrong. There is such a thing as a riotous lie just as there is such a thing as riotous killing. There is nuance. Are we expected to give our children over to authorities who meant to take them from us? Certainly not that would be horrible and God would not approve of such an action. Just as it would be wrong to not protect your family with violence against an attacker upon a home invasion.
@@katie-scarlettgooding4486 you need to watch Fr. Pine’s debate with Janet Smith. Also, you’re in opposition with St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. I recommend you read St. Augustine’s book from the Retractations “On Lying” and the corresponding questions from St. Thomas in the Summa.
Same with King Solomon. Didn’t he lie about cutting the baby in half, so as to elicit the truth and know who the true mother was? Please answer me. I’m confused.
My most frequent time to lie is when people demand I express an opinion on a topic I neither know nor care about, and I often don’t even realize it’s happening until later. I pick an opinion and think it’s my real opinion until I realize “oh, I don’t actually care about this topic at all either way!” Usually I notice when the people I thought I agreed with start working themselves into more and more extreme positions that I just look at and finally go Hmmm, satan got me again
THIS. for real it's like a phenomenon straight out of screw tape letters. This seems like evidence to me that we need help from within as from without. I also find myself lying when I am afraid of hurting someone's feelings or making them feel bad about themselves so I will tell a story or "fact" about myself or allude to some kind of "fact" that is false in order to help ease the situation because I don't know how else to handle social tension and panic. I can think after the fact "this is why God says do not be afraid 🤦♀️" but it's very hard for me to avoid this because I feel conflicted about being a peacemaker, not lying, not befriending wickedness, and also being wise as a serpent. Especially when there are so many contentious issues about right now and it's so easy to step on toes.
Dr. Janet's point is that you are not obligated do give someone an information they don't have a right to. An Instruction from the Holy Penitentiary says that a priest can lie about hearing something in Confession to maintain the seal with no problem to his conscience because he doesn't hear it as a man but as God. As for the Apostasy exemple I guess if Dr. Janet thinked a while longer she would get a more coherent answer: You cannot lie about your faith in Jesus because to witness to Him is an information that everyone has a right. You just can't deny your faith because Salvation is public and Christ wants to be known by all. It is always an information people have a right to... Know in Whom we put our hope. A nazi doesn't have a right to know about Jews. Nobody has a right to know what was said in Confession. One could get in a situation that if you don't lie, or if you simply remain silent you are in effect breaking the seal. But everyone has a right to know Jesus.
According to what Father says, it would be better if you said: yes Jews are in the basement and they would be killed than If you said No (under death penalty) and saved other people with no gain for you except that you know you acted honorable. Please explain why does then God use evil people for his plans or even for helping the ones that try to walk His ways? It’s that using evil to bring out good?
@@Unclenate1000 We live in a fallen world of particular evils. Because of this, ideal ethical universals are not always applicable or proper to pursue in our lives.
Exodus 1:15-21 would seem to closely parallel the nazi example, and in that case God blesses the midwives who lied. Seems like Thomas’ approach is wrong
How many Dominicans went in the realms of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I dressed as laymen to minister to the faithful? The clothing is a lie. Necessary and not a sin. May you never be in a situation where you have to hand over someone to evil people instead of withholding the truth from someone who has absolutely no right to the information. Aquinas is not infallible, great as he is. This one he got wrong.
@@TheZeroSbr the Catholic priests incognito in Elizabethan England I was talking about were hanged, drawn and quartered when they were identified. Life and death ☠️
I think Father is mixing evil with sin! Those are not the same! You can’t say a man lying to a German to save Jews is doing evil act and therefore can’t be used for good! We give our sins to God and he takes them to Calvary because we can’t lift them on our own. If you sin out of being limited although your intention seemed good you shall take it to Him, you can’t bear it alone! Evil on the other hand is celebrating horror, evil is when you tell people: “Arbeit macht frei” when you know the way to freedom is through chimney. Evil is when you force people to work to earn freedom and tell them to carry bags with wet salt forth and back purposelessly. Evil is when you say you need 75 years to release trial data of an experimental drug and you say you have no people to do it in a shorter time when you employ 75 000 people around the globe! Evil is demonic it often uses terrible jokes to mock God and dehumanize people. Sin does however open your soul to the demonic therefore never should be taken lightly!
Let's say Aquinas was right (for the sake of argument 😳). He would be the first person to recognize that the "liar" hiding the Jew from the gestapo was acting with "an erroneous conscience" and would be required under pain of mortal sin to follow that conscientious choice to deceive the goon who wants to kill the Jew. No sin incurred. How many other of the pieces of this puzzle are you NOT able apply? God help us.
“Otherwise we despair of the real prospect of a life of sanctity”…that did it for me right there! Thank Fr.Gregory.
Forget the Gestapo... The real question is what you say when grandma asks you if you liked her potato salad.
Tell grandma something that you DID like within the potato salad, i.e. "I liked the saltiness/the herbs/whatever", because that's not a lie. And if there's nothing about the salad that you like, when she asks, say, "Sorry grandma, but I found it unfavorable." Good luck, and blessings.
What great timing and insight! I had done this recently where “I lied to bring about good”. Nonetheless, I consulted the Catechism and made my confession.
May God bless you and keep you.
@@TheVeganVicar Good and Bad are definitely not relative
@@TheVeganVicar I am so certain!! If good and bad were relative I think the world would fall into chaos
@@TheVeganVicar now that we do say good and bad are relative we may slip into huge fallacies and sins
@@TheVeganVicar can you prove that statement?
If killing in self defense is not sinful, then lying in self defense being sinful seems rather inconsistent. So you can shoot the gestapo in the face but you can't lie to them, apparently.
No one acting as a private person (military and police are a bit different) may directly will the death of another person. However, you may use force to prevent an unjust action against you or a defenseless person, to be emphatic, no more than is necessary to prevent the attacker from completing his unjust act. However, there may be situations when even the minimum level of force necessary to stop an assailant does kill him. In this case the death is an unintended secondary consequence (i.e. you were simply trying to stop him, and you couldn't do that without killing him), and the act of self-defense is still justified.
@@goncalojesus7583 I don't like the concept of "unintended consequence". For many reasons, but a good argument would be that the majority of criminals commit murders and robery as an "unintended consequence" to an intention to have money, for example.
I think the better argument regarding the topic of the video is that lying is just worse than letting someone die. Physical death is a relatively natural, also unavoidable, phenomenon, and only unnecessary murder becomes a sin. On the other hand, lying is both unnatural and avoidable.
Killing is not intrinsically evil
Lying is weakness and cowardice. There is not a single positive virtue that can be applicable to it. The ability to defend yourself takes courage, and strength which are good moral virtues. God often exercises strength and he exercised courage when he did not deny his godhood even in the face of death.
Great, succinct thoughts! Loved this.
It is jaw-dropping to me that if we deny Jesus to men, that some Christians say Jesus will not deny them to His Father. He actually explicitly said He would deny them.
We simply cannot prioritize our physical life and comforts over our faith in Christ.
“You don’t have to be faithful if life gets really, really hard” says the world.
“I have overcome the world” says our Lord, Jesus, God Incarnate.
Who should we strive to listen to and follow?
Thank you for clarifying this. Today is the 1st Friday devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus and I believe in have committed a venial sins. However, I think it's best to withhold goung to Mass as I can't go to confession until tomorrow and don't want to offend Our Lord anymore, as he is already so much offended. Thanks for the explanation. It is helpful.
As always, a courageous and cogent summary of a multifaceted question. Thanks, Fr. Gregory!
It seems did touch on the issue of mental reservation(whether wide or strict). Some people undoubtedly have no right to know certain truths and while it is impermissible to lie we can use at least wide mental reservation in those situations. Wide mental reservation is not a lie but a way of wisely concealing knowledge to those who have no right to that knowledge. There is also strict mental reservation which is a lie which conceals from those who have a right to know. There is more that can be added here.
I have always found it interesting how different christians talk about people like Jacob, Tamar, Rahab (obvious parallel with your example), and even David (for my argument I’m talking about his feigned madness). In the first two most people see their actions as wrong and a small minority seem to think that there’s an exception to be made because they were still used of God in their deceit. With Rahab I have found probably half who recognize that regardless of her virtuous intentions it’s nonetheless a sin. In war, it seems, there is some allowance, through the example of Gideon, for forms of deception. Also the two spies sent to Jericho were spies sent by Joshua (with the assumed approval of God since He commanded Moses to send 12 spies earlier) and ostensibly had to act in a deceptive manner in order to get inside of a city with such thick walls. So we aren’t told that marching in a wide open plain in bright colors is the only way to honorably fight. At the same time shouldn’t David when he fled to Gath have trusted God because He promised to make him king and not faked madness? And now we come to the modern age where things seem to be even more complicated.
My greatest delight in these videos is Father endlessly shilling all of the good work that he does. Keep it up!
I’m confused. If I had people intending to harm, asking me if I had someone housed in my home and I lie and say no, that’s not a good thing?
@@Unclenate1000 I spoke about this in a bible study group and another woman made a good point how some people could use the truth to cause harm and in the end we need only be truthful to Christ.
I believe there is as much difference between a malicious lie and an officious lie as between killing and murder. Malicious lie is like murder, which can never be justified and officious lie is like killing, which is justified in cases like Just War. And I think it's not for nothing that the 8th commandment is worded like "shall not BEAR FALSE WITNESS against your neighbor", rather than "shall NOT LIE"... Only malicious lie can qualify as BEARING FALSE WITNESS AGAINST our NEIGHBOR.
Thank you for your sincere words. We need honest priests. God bless you.
God bless you! You are a great witness to the faith!
In the biblical story of King Solomon and the two mothers, did King Solomon lie to be able to know who the real mother was? If so, does that justify lying as a means to a good end?
What’s the distinction between lying and deception?
My question involves more trivial examples: sarcastic expressions, Santa Claus, story-telling, etc. While in general story-telling doesn’t involve deception, in some cases a certain amount of deception may be intended. Ghost stories around a campfire, for example, depend on a certain amount of deception to draw the audience in.
Or if your wife asks if you like her new hairstyle, or the birthday present she bought you. Or when my daughter sends me a link to a TH-cam video she thinks is funny but I think is inane. I’ll pretend to laugh so I don’t hurt her feelings.
What about deception through selective truth-telling? Even if you don’t outright lie with words, to the Nazis at your door, your intent is to convince them through other means there are no Jews in your basement.
I like the last one! Or wearing German uniform when smuggling Jews.
As St. Augustine would put it, lying to the Nazis is sinning, albeit venial, and therefore compromises your eternal life for the temporal life of another.
I found the original debate interesting and respect the diversity of opinion on this -- to a point. For example, I think the most interesting counterpoints of the debate were that we might interpret Jesus as having told a lie (though that's debatable), and the question of: 'If killing to defend others is morally permissible, why not lying to defend others?' But I'm concerned about how far people seem to slip when they begin to rationalize lying; for example, stretching permissibility to defend apostasy and various lies of convenience. I've been disheartened by hearing even a consecrated religious person describe how she regularly tells lies to achieve what she considers good ends. It honestly undermines trust, and beyond that I think we lose out on so many unforeseen fruits that God would intend to give us if we only stopped trying to 'control' things, and just conducted ourselves with honesty. It doesn't mean blabbering everything all the time to the wrong people in the wrong way... but I still come down myself on the side of not telling lies.
So though I think it's the less popular position, I'm glad you continued to defend the position that lying is always sinful. It takes courage and creativity (and trust in God's providence) to persevere in conducting ourselves by virtue, rather than compromising with vice in the vain attempt to 'control' the world and 'force' a good end. God will make all things right, in the end. We need to trust Him.
PS I also agree with you that jokes (and stageplays, etc) aren't 'lies' in the real sense! Insofar as a good joke contains a 'lie' (a deceptive setup to the punchline), it is only because the punchline is coming and the speaker want to delight you by the reveal. A joke is an illustration of incongruity: the truth is always meant to be known by the hearer of the joke; the joke is a single speech act that isn't complete until after the punchline, and the punchline clarifies the truth. So when that gets suggested as problematizing the 'don't lie' position, I just don't see it fitting.
@Bok Choy I think that's actually a really good example to bring up! I'm not going to claim that I 'know' the answer (though I'd be interested in Fr. Pine's perspective), but in a conversational way just chit-chatting with you off the top of my head, I wonder if a resolution to this could be related to the fact that the *purpose* of a sting operation is actually to ultimately reveal truth? Similar in that sense to a joke, where inherent to the purpose of the joke is that a punchline will clarify any temporary deception involved in setting up the punchline. The purpose of a sting operation is that the truth about who is/isn't a child predator will be uncovered: the deception stage is temporary by design, and the ultimate goal of the people perpetrating the 'deception' is that the predators find out the truth themselves: when they're under arrest and being held accountable in a court of law.
While it may be the case that some sting operations don't make it to their intended conclusion (so the temporary deception stage never gets 'resolved', with the predators accidentally disappearing before they find out they were being stung), I wonder if that's just accidental to the moral question, in the same way that if a person happens to get hit by a car before finishing a joke, that doesn't mean they were 'telling a lie' by telling the joke (even if the clarifying reveal *happens* not to happen before the car hits them).
Again, I want to reiterate that I respect the diversity of opinion on this, and my understanding is that Catholics are permitted to advance both sides of this argument. I'm just suggesting these ideas as a possible way of advancing the side of the argument that's less popular in our current culture. :)
@Bok Choy Alternately, maybe some people would argue that sting operations like that *are* fundamentally immoral/impermissible in their level of deception, however temporarily intended? I assume such people would also argue that spying is always wrong, to the degree that it involves deception? I'm personally inclined to try to resolve the question differently, but just pointing out that someone could *technically* argue this way. I'm actually really looking forward to a promised eventual episode of Jimmy Akin's Mysterious World where he addresses the ethics of spying from a Catholic perspective; I hope to hear a more rigorous explanation of the possible opposing positions at that time! :)
@Bok Choy Cheers friend! :) I didn't feel like you were "got-cha"-ing me. I think it was a very good question, and I'm not sure how good my speculative response was (that is, logically/morally). Yours is definitely the kind of question I think deserves central consideration when discussing this kind of topic, and I'd *love* to hear Fr. Pine address it specifically.
I agree with Fr. Gregory, beautiful words. Thank you very much.
Confronting wicked nazis with truth leads me to know that Earthly evil is a grain of sand compared to God’s goodness. Of course, we don’t know how we would respond to evil at that moment , but God’s goodness is still infinite compared to earthly evil.
9:53 … Newman says it be better for the world to be annihilated than that one soul should commit one VENIAL sin. He doesn’t say mortal sin. This strengthens Fr’s argument. Important distinction I thought
Thank you so much!
How about the angel Raphael's lie in Tobit?
Once again, awesome insight and explanation. Thank you!!!🙏
Thank you Fr. Pine for the thoughtful explanation, how would you explain a lie of omission? Is that permissible in the same scenario?
Welcome to level 2. I was wondering a similar scenario. I mean you do not have to bring it up if they do not ask it. And you can try to evade the issue I believe.
I would be very surprised if Fr.Pines` debate did not at least touch on this though.
One thing that I find helpful is to reflect situations in the light of other virtues as they all compliment one another.
I don’t know if someone answers this for Fr Pine but James references Rahab from Joshua who aided the spies by what seems like lying and she is credited as a good example. If like a commentary on that
How about this for the Gestapo thought: The Gestapo defined their targets as 'less-than-human".
If you respond in affirmative you are participating in their socially-accepted lie.
You briefly mentioned another slightly analogous situation in which there is a socially accepted lie; that of same-sex marriage.
If two men stand before you to bless their union; society says they are married; the civil authorities say they are married; they are standing in front of you, though, Father Pine. Are these two men married to each other?
Can any answer you give not be a lie?
Most lies a mortally sinful but only a few are venial. The latter will depend on the circumstances surrounding the act
Re: lying to the Nazis. Are you aware of the ten Boom family? The movie The Hiding Place was based on them. They were a Dutch extended family that hid Jews during the occupation.
Corrie ten Boom recounts w/o making a judgement that her father lied to the Nazis when they asked. They were eventually betrayed, arrested, & all of the family died the camps except her. However her aunt’s family refused to lie. They were arrested. On the same night the Resistance broke into the jail where they were held, they were smuggled into England & never spent one night in jail.
Corrie basically said to draw your own conclusions.
Amazing story of her life, many miracles occurred including her release before she was shipped to be exterminated.
BOOM! So good! thank you! Pre-ordering your book for sure!
@@TheVeganVicar moral compasses change subjectively. morality is enforced because it is objective
Mm tough topic. But the church teaches that if one do something against his conscience commits a sin. In the scenario to lie to save the innocent life, in the mind of the common person the right thing to do is to do so..and If he doesn't do that going against his conscience he will commit mortal sin. (See Moral theology for seglars from P. Antonio Royo Marin, Op) pages 132-136
Hi. Been thinking about this subject. I have a child who is bisexual. He was beating himself up about it for awhile. Went to therapy and is more accepting. He knows how I feel about it I don’t want to add to his anxiety by explaining anymore how I feel. What does a mother do besides prayer etc
I recommend checking out Courage, which is a Catholic organization dedicated to LGBT people.
@Bok Choy Thank you for taking the time to reply. Lots in it. Yes, I think pornography played a hand in this. He told me he had an addiction to it as well. He lives in states. I’m in Ireland He’s a grown man 27. it’s breaking my ❤️. Thanks
@@loganw1232 Thanks for info
Beautiful truth
What about Rahab the harlot?
It was considered good of her to lie to save the Jews.
Christ is even of her lineage. God saved her & her family because she lied.
The Hebrew midwives in Exodus chapter 1 also lie to Pharoah to save the male babies, and are subsequently rewarded by God.
@Gangari TheWanderer “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil.”
Rahab the harlot is commended not because she lied but because she saved the two Israelite spies. They lived in the age of imperfection, but now that the perfect has been brought to light through Jesus, imperfection is not countenanced.
@Gangari_the_WandererBoth Moses and Aquinas were followers of Christ. Moses was a Christian in so that he was awaiting the same Messiah that we Worship. The Catholic Church is the tree that has grown from the seed of the Old Covenant Patriarchs and Religion - Jesus did not establish a New Religion - the Old was just fulfilled at His coming.
In the catechism of the Catholic Church it says we have a responsibility to protect our lives as well as others through self defense, even if the blow is lethal. CCC 2263;2265). So, it only makes sense, if we can morally kill another through self defense, we can also morally protect another from death through a lie. What’s worse, killing somebody with a 12 gauge, or protecting someone through a lie? Everyone gets to go home to live another day.
Killing is not intrinsically evil; lying is. Watch Fr. Pine debate Janet Smith.
I enjoyed and benefited from the simplicity of the explanation.
Thank you.
Saint Maximilian Kolbe pray for us!
Isn’t Rahab’s lie to the king of Jericho’s men praised in Scripture? It’s very similar to the hiding the Jews in the basement example and she lies, becoming a prophetic sign of Christ’s salvation in the process.
“And in the same way was not also Ra'hab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?” - James 2:25
If you were to deceive a N azi looking for Jews by misleading but true statements would that still be a problem.? For example saying that you would turn Jews away if they came to your door. Which would be true as your cellar is already full to capacity but could be interpreted differently by the N azi.
Perhaps it can be thought of in this way; if a government is acting justly then I owe it the truth, but if they want me to help facilitate an atrocity then I don't. I owe the Gestapo the truth like I owe tax to Nazi Germany. Give to Hitler what is Hitler's, give to God what is God's.
A Lie: To say what you think to be false, so as to deceive another person.
A Joke: To say what you think to be false, so as to deceive another person.
Thomists: BUT A JOKE ISN'T A LIE!!!
You should directly confront someone you're accusing of lies.
If I'm being accused of a lie, I should be allowed to face my accuser publicly.
I have definitely lied, though. And that's the truth.
What about lying in a game?
If you know that not lying is very likely to lead to the deaths of the Jews in the basement, then not lying makes you an accomplice in murder. The choice then is between two sins: lying and murder. Given that lying in that circumstance would be a venial sin and that being an accessory to murder would obviously be a mortal sin, it is preferrable to lie. Not because we'd be doing evil that good may come. But because we'd be doing evil that a inconceivably worse and more tragic evil may not come.
I love Fr. Pine and Saint Thomas Aquinas, but I have a hard time swallowing the idea that the Nazi deserves to hear the truth about the Jews in the basement. That's not exactly the same thing as doing evil so that good may result - it's more like denying the truth to someone who doesn't deserve it. I also don't feel satisfied with work-arounds like deception by mental reservation just so long as we don't say words that don't match reality. I'm not saying I reject the strict view argued for here, but it certainly isn't easy to accept. God bless Fr. Pine for explaining it clearly, at least.
I agree. The natural consequence is that Christians were morally obliged to turn away Jews who need protection (in order to not put themselves in a situation that would cause them to lie) or else give up the Jews.
It seems to me that when it's either lying or having people tortured and murdered, lying is the better option.
@@YardenJZ Good point! Hiding a Jew in your basement is already a kind of deception, even if it isn't an act of speech. Some Catholic priests even gave out unconsecrated hosts at Mass to fool the Nazis into thinking the Jews weren't Jews.
@@FrJohnBrownSJ Right!
And I believe St Thomas viewed all forms of deception as equal, verbal or otherwise. I did not know about unconsecrated hosts, but that's awesome!
I heard Pius XII sent religious Jews to live as "capuchins", thus they did not have to shave. Definitely a form of deception, and if you ask me, the right thing to do.
@Gangari TheWanderer You are right. I'm not saying difficult doctrine is dispensable just because it's difficult, though. I'm not even saying Aquinas is wrong. I'm saying this view causes difficulties, maybe even apparent contradictions, that still need to be worked through.
@Gangari TheWanderer No, I am not saying they are the same. But a person who gives up the Jews in his basement is literally handing innocent people to be tortured and executed.
If you'd rather do that than tell a lie, that's your choice.
Your shooting an abortionist example doesn't work, because we are not talking about actively hunting nazis. What we are talking about is more akin to driving an abortionist to work, or buying someone's bus fare to the "clinic".
Unless, of course, you think that handing a Jew to nazis does not mean you are complicit. In which case we are having the wrong discussion.
And the Real Presence is divinely revealed truth. This is Aquinas' view. I think CCC 2484 allows for other views. If it's easier think of giving up Catholics or consecrated hosts rather than Jews.
"One cannot sin to save a life"
Seems to me telling the Gestapo that Jews are harbored in your house would be material cooperation with genocide and would constitute a mortal sin.
@@dwightschrute900 does the church say anything about situations where you’re forced to choose between two sins?
Should you pick the “less bad” one? Are you cleared if you do so?
@@lebecccomputer287I think there is always a third, non-sinful option. I think God will provide effectual graces in these moments of intense hardships.
As much as I love Fr. Pine, I’m afraid this is argument is deceptively (see what I did there? :) ) unclear. What is "lying"? Initially Fr. Pine seems to have in mind any sort of deliberate deception, whether word or deed, on the grounds that it offends justice. For example:
*"When we talk about truthfulness we’re talking about something that is due to another human being. … They’re the types of things without which society cannot flourish. … If everyone were to lie to each other society would crumble."*
*"Truth ensures that our externals, namely words and deeds, are duly ordered in relation to something as a sign to a thing signified."*
*" …the signs which we project, the signs which we communicate actually correspond to what’s interior."*
*"This is what our mouths and this is what our bodies are for. For communicating the truth."*
*"Lying is a vice, contrary to the truth, and therefore sinful."*
And so forth. But nothing in the above would seem to limit itself to speech acts. But then:
*"So what is a lie? It’s when you **_say_** what you think to be false so as to deceive another person."*
*"It’s against the natural orientation of speech acts."*
Suddenly, Fr. Pine seems to restrict himself to deceptive speech acts alone in view, and his grounds are that such acts are contrary to the natural ordering of speech toward communication.
He seems to be conflating two very different arguments.
From this point his discussion moves on to malicious vs. jocose vs. officious lies. Yet it’s hard to see how this distinction would limit itself to speech acts alone, but would not extend to all forms of deliberate deception.
Might this thought be based? I totally love this Father. Pray for me.
One hypothetical always leads me to a more serious one. What if,in said case one is harboring “Jews” and is fully prepared to defend them. And your response to those searching for them is the truth. Yes. They are here, but if you mean to do them harm I will not allow such a thing to happen. The next question is, is it a sin to use violence to defend those in your care? Again just a hypothetical. I know that St. Thomas talks about self defense and defense of others.
Gestapo knocking on the doors to enforce consequentialism.
how lying is intrinsically evil if there are accounts of God lying or having a third party lie in the scriptures
I wonder if the Nazi at the door is lawfully entitled to the truth in this case. Is someone intent on committing evil entitled to truth that would aid them in committing that evil? Theft is wrong when somebody is lawfully entitled to the property. But is it theft to take something that somebody possesses unlawfully? And by "lawfully" I mean natural law or God's law, not human law (which can of course be false and even evil).
Is every position of Thomas infallible ? But St. Augustine was against the concept of immaculate conception and believed that original sin is transmitted through sexual intercourse. So I guess also his and s. Thomas' position on truth-telling should not be taken as a deposit of faith.
Of course, Father Pine is right that probably if the German Nazis were standing on our doorstep then our answer to the question "are there Jews in the basement" would no longer matter. But it would be a different matter if, for example, a baker in an occupied country was asked by the Gestapo whether he had noticed that a family had been buying more bread lately (which might indicate that he was hiding someone, such as Jews, or someone else whom the Gestapo was pursuing).
Did you know that God's Word is loaded with scriptures against lying? Her are just a couple:
Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, But those who deal faithfully are His delight.
Proverbs 12:22
A trustworthy witness will not lie, But a false witness utters lies.
Proverbs 14:5
test! my comments seem to be getting deleted.
Is there any sense that lying must be a consensual act and thus any statement under extreme coercion or duress cannot be considered a lie? We recognize this in law, where an act typically must be volitional in order to be held against you. I’d argue that lying under the force of a Gestapo gun wouldn’t be a volitional act because you, your family, and the Jewish family are all acting under threat of execution. I could be wrong but it’s just my intuition that telling an innocuous lie under grave threat or torture wouldn’t be considered a freely chosen lie. On top of that, I’d argue that the idea that truth being necessary for society to function could also be made for certain lies. If not for undercover police work, military spies and tactics (which involve deception), diplomatic negotiations (bluffing), any Christian society would’ve been conquered a millennium ago by those willing to lie, and society would not function properly without them
Ok why is no one talking about and has no answer to Rahab the harlot being praised by God for lying about hiding the Jews? Someone please explain this contradiction to me.
That is your incorrect interpretation. The Bible never specifically commends her “lying”
@@carlos.sierra
She did lie though when she told the King's men that they left and she didn't know where they had gone when in fact she knew full well they were hiding. That's a direct lie. She was commended twice for this. Also she was never condemned for lying either. Furthermore the actual definition of what constitutes a lie in the commandments is not simply "telling a falsehood of any kind" but actually "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" which means in a legal setting you cannot say a fellow believe did something they are accused of if they did not. That's entirely different than deceiving an enemy.
Also, there needs to be addressed the fact that no one with a heart or a soul would give up innocent people hiding in their basement to the authorities who meant them harm. Not only would that be cruel but it would make you an accessory to the murder it's itself which is wrong. There is such a thing as a riotous lie just as there is such a thing as riotous killing. There is nuance. Are we expected to give our children over to authorities who meant to take them from us? Certainly not that would be horrible and God would not approve of such an action. Just as it would be wrong to not protect your family with violence against an attacker upon a home invasion.
@@katie-scarlettgooding4486 you need to watch Fr. Pine’s debate with Janet Smith. Also, you’re in opposition with St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas. I recommend you read St. Augustine’s book from the Retractations “On Lying” and the corresponding questions from St. Thomas in the Summa.
Same with King Solomon. Didn’t he lie about cutting the baby in half, so as to elicit the truth and know who the true mother was? Please answer me. I’m confused.
My most frequent time to lie is when people demand I express an opinion on a topic I neither know nor care about, and I often don’t even realize it’s happening until later. I pick an opinion and think it’s my real opinion until I realize “oh, I don’t actually care about this topic at all either way!” Usually I notice when the people I thought I agreed with start working themselves into more and more extreme positions that I just look at and finally go Hmmm, satan got me again
THIS. for real it's like a phenomenon straight out of screw tape letters. This seems like evidence to me that we need help from within as from without.
I also find myself lying when I am afraid of hurting someone's feelings or making them feel bad about themselves so I will tell a story or "fact" about myself or allude to some kind of "fact" that is false in order to help ease the situation because I don't know how else to handle social tension and panic. I can think after the fact "this is why God says do not be afraid 🤦♀️" but it's very hard for me to avoid this because I feel conflicted about being a peacemaker, not lying, not befriending wickedness, and also being wise as a serpent. Especially when there are so many contentious issues about right now and it's so easy to step on toes.
Guys morality is obective btw😂
ONLY SUPPOSED CHRISTIAN DENOMINATIONS WOULD HAVE TO RAISE THIS QUESTION AS WRONG DOCTRINES ARE TO BLAME CREATING A NEED? FOR DEPENDANCE.
Dr. Janet's point is that you are not obligated do give someone an information they don't have a right to.
An Instruction from the Holy Penitentiary says that a priest can lie about hearing something in Confession to maintain the seal with no problem to his conscience because he doesn't hear it as a man but as God.
As for the Apostasy exemple I guess if Dr. Janet thinked a while longer she would get a more coherent answer:
You cannot lie about your faith in Jesus because to witness to Him is an information that everyone has a right. You just can't deny your faith because Salvation is public and Christ wants to be known by all. It is always an information people have a right to... Know in Whom we put our hope.
A nazi doesn't have a right to know about Jews.
Nobody has a right to know what was said in Confession.
One could get in a situation that if you don't lie, or if you simply remain silent you are in effect breaking the seal.
But everyone has a right to know Jesus.
According to what Father says, it would be better if you said: yes Jews are in the basement and they would be killed than
If you said No (under death penalty) and saved other people with no gain for you except that you know you acted honorable.
Please explain why does then God use evil people for his plans or even for helping the ones that try to walk His ways? It’s that using evil to bring out good?
Not True! It’s actually: Don’t bear false witness against the innocent!
It is not immoral to lie to evildoers who wish harm to you or your family.
@@Unclenate1000 We live in a fallen world of particular evils. Because of this, ideal ethical universals are not always applicable or proper to pursue in our lives.
Is it not immoral to do an immoral thing to people even if they do immoral things to you?
@@TheZeroSbr It is immoral to fail to protect your loved ones. Family first.
Exodus 1:15-21 would seem to closely parallel the nazi example, and in that case God blesses the midwives who lied. Seems like Thomas’ approach is wrong
How many Dominicans went in the realms of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I dressed as laymen to minister to the faithful? The clothing is a lie. Necessary and not a sin. May you never be in a situation where you have to hand over someone to evil people instead of withholding the truth from someone who has absolutely no right to the information. Aquinas is not infallible, great as he is. This one he got wrong.
If we take your reasoning to its logical conclusion, then LARPing and dressing up in general constitutes lying. That's utterly ridiculous.
@@TheZeroSbr thanks for your out of context fact check. I was talking about a life and death issue. I have no idea what you harped about. 😳
@@TheZeroSbr the Catholic priests incognito in Elizabethan England I was talking about were hanged, drawn and quartered when they were identified. Life and death ☠️
I think Father is mixing evil with sin! Those are not the same! You can’t say a man lying to a German to save Jews is doing evil act and therefore can’t be used for good! We give our sins to God and he takes them to Calvary because we can’t lift them on our own. If you sin out of being limited although your intention seemed good you shall take it to Him, you can’t bear it alone! Evil on the other hand is celebrating horror, evil is when you tell people: “Arbeit macht frei” when you know the way to freedom is through chimney. Evil is when you force people to work to earn freedom and tell them to carry bags with wet salt forth and back purposelessly. Evil is when you say you need 75 years to release trial data of an experimental drug and you say you have no people to do it in a shorter time when you employ 75 000 people around the globe! Evil is demonic it often uses terrible jokes to mock God and dehumanize people.
Sin does however open your soul to the demonic therefore never should be taken lightly!
It always gets me when he mistakens this with Godsplaining
Let's say Aquinas was right (for the sake of argument 😳). He would be the first person to recognize that the "liar" hiding the Jew from the gestapo was acting with "an erroneous conscience" and would be required under pain of mortal sin to follow that conscientious choice to deceive the goon who wants to kill the Jew. No sin incurred. How many other of the pieces of this puzzle are you NOT able apply? God help us.