tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post3423267733378814533..comments2024-03-05T11:44:26.154-08:00Comments on The New Theological Movement: It is a sin to lie, even to Planned ParenthoodFather Ryan Erlenbushhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comBlogger115125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-29613865890793402762011-02-13T18:13:45.222-08:002011-02-13T18:13:45.222-08:00Reginaldus,
Thanks for your replies to my questio...Reginaldus,<br /><br />Thanks for your replies to my questions. They were partially helpful.<br /><br />I do see and embrace the Church's teaching that one is never justified in lying, though one's moral responsibility for doing so may be mitigated depending on the freedom of one's will when acting, freedom of the will being a necessary element of sin.<br /><br />I'm satisfied that the Church teaches that, while all lying is an offense against God, not all deception is lying. I suppose when applying this teaching in practical matters the key question is: what methods can one employ in the effort to deceive before you've crossed the line into lying?<br />For instance, I know that, were I asked by an unjust aggressor intent on killing an innocent, where I was hiding him, I would answer, "He is not here" meaning: "He is not here for you (to kill)." That seems well within the range of wide mental reservation. Which duty is primary in such a situation: the duty to tell the truth, the duty to keep a confidence (ie: keeping the innocent's whereabouts out of the knowledge of the unjust aggressor) or the duty to justice (ie: protecting the innocent from the unjust aggressor)? <br /><br />In any case, most people are not theologians, and I think it pastorally wise to remember that, when people are in dangerous situations where they are pressed to make quick judgements, we ought to give them room to do the best they can with what they have.<br /><br />Pax et bonum.BobRNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-15016796369335728992011-02-13T15:48:04.897-08:002011-02-13T15:48:04.897-08:00BobRN (5:50am),
Thanks for your questions...
I wil...BobRN (5:50am),<br />Thanks for your questions...<br />I will make a brief response...<br />1) Regardless of the initial ambiguity in the Catechism's formation, the Catholic Tradition is very strong on this point...not only has lying been entirely condemned, but even strict mental reservation was condemned by Innocent XI in 1679.<br />2) If the final intention is to save lives, but the means of gaining that is a lie; then the lie is also part of the intention. The means to the end are intended together with the end.<br />3) Indeed, not all deception is lying...there are times when one can use words which will deceive (without actually lying) -- for more on this see my article on Mental Reservation: http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/02/lying-to-planned-parenthood-or-is-it.html<br />4) You are correct: There are times when we can kill, but there is never a time when we can lie. Part of the reason for this is that a lie is an offense against God himself -- it is the most direct offense against the truth. Lying is always contrary to the truth, and so cannot ever be done.<br />Killing, on the other hand, is not necessarily contrary to God, nor even contrary to life: There are times when killing another is actually a defense of life (i.e. in a just war) or an upholding of the dignity of life (i.e. the just use of capital punishment).<br /><br />I hope that this helps...Peace.Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-9153828199992900772011-02-12T20:50:56.514-08:002011-02-12T20:50:56.514-08:00Reginaldus,
I hope it's not too late to join ...Reginaldus,<br /><br />I hope it's not too late to join the discussion.<br /><br />While it's true that the CCC edited out the "right to know" clause from the definition of lying, can we be so sure that this is because the Church now rejects that definition, especially since the CCC still includes similar language in #2488: "No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have a right to know it"? What is one to do in a situation where remaining silent, employing discreet language or otherwise attempting to withhold the truth effectively reveals it? It would be interesting to see what those involved in the revision of the CCC have to say about it. Possibly their discussions on the matter are available.<br /><br />Another thought. The CCC says "To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error." But what is the intention of the one who is wilfully deceiving the Nazis who are hunting Jews? Is it to lead into error or save life? Is it both? Can the two intentions be separated. Also, is the wilfull deception of the Nazis intended to lead them into error or lead them away from the error of killing Jews, even if they would disagree with that intent?<br /><br />It's not simply a matter of is all lying sinful, but is all deception lying? Also, while lying to another may be objectively evil, we have to remember that a sin is not simply acting in a way that is objectively evil, but of doing so freely and with an understanding of the consequences. How free is one's will when they are under the pressure of saving lives? What takes priority, the telling of the truth regardless of the consequences, the keeping of a confidence or the duty to justice when all three cannot be secured at the same time?<br /><br />Finally, the Church clearly teaches that one is justified in killing an unjust aggressor in defense of one's life or another's life. Killing an aggressor is certainly more severe an action than deceiving him. What principles of Catholic moral theology justifies killing an unjust aggressor in order to save a life, but never justifies merely deceiving him?<br /><br />Thank you for your kind consideration.BobRNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-59060726442269147722011-02-09T19:51:32.279-08:002011-02-09T19:51:32.279-08:00Jesse,
You are right in pointing out just how diff...Jesse,<br />You are right in pointing out just how difficult this teaching is to accept in the practical circumstances of real life! Nevertheless, I am convinced that we must live in the truth and in the light.<br /><br />I would emphasize that, when it seems that committing a venial sin is the right thing to do, we should recall that sin can only formally contribute to the kingdom of Satan.<br /><br />Regarding the "undercover" situation...please see my most recent article: http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/02/lying-to-planned-parenthood-or-is-it.html<br /><br />Like you, I am trying to reconcile this teaching with the real world -- something that is indeed very difficult! We must trust so much in the goodness of divine providence! <br />Peace to you, and many blessings!Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-14851971425282235652011-02-09T18:54:07.345-08:002011-02-09T18:54:07.345-08:00Reginaldus,
This whole article has really caused ...Reginaldus,<br /><br />This whole article has really caused much trouble for me. I too am a committed Catholic and admire both Augustine and Aquinas greatly. After reading the article and researching several catechisms I have to admit to the point you are making, although I found some specific points problematic. <br /><br />I just don't understand how the church came to define ALL lying as inherently evil, while at the same time take a situational approach to killing.<br /><br />Here is a more specific point (trying to be devil's advocate here). In reference to the whole nazi scenario, you quoted Augustine as saying it is better for someone to lose their life than for someone to harm their soul through lying. However in the situation of lying to the nazi's to protect innocent life one would be committing a venial sin. Now, we cannot judge the state of someone's soul. One of the people we are willing to let die to avoid venial sin could in fact be in a state of mortal sin and in danger of eternal damnation if they were to die. So by this reasoning, it's Ok to risk someone's eternal life than commit a venial sin. Or the situation could go like this. If one had sufficient power to resist the nazi's one could use force to repel them and protect the innocents. Depending on how the situation unfolded, deadly force may ensue as a result. Now in this situation, one would be justified in his actions and free from sin. However now it is the nazi(s) who are dead (and even more likely to be in a state of mortal sin). This just doesn't seem to sit right with me, when the committing of one venial sin could have avoided this. Don't get me wrong, if there is another way to avoid lying and protect innocent lives I would obviously choose that option. This is a "devil's advocate" position I am taking to work through this complex issue.<br /><br />I'll address the "undercover" situation later.Jessenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-25648669635521821682011-02-09T14:54:07.816-08:002011-02-09T14:54:07.816-08:00Please see my latest post on the subject:
http://n...Please see my latest post on the subject:<br />http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/02/lying-to-planned-parenthood-or-is-it.htmlFather Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-69915116289660778062011-02-09T12:14:48.962-08:002011-02-09T12:14:48.962-08:00@Marcel (6:50pm),
Contrary to what you have claime...@Marcel (6:50pm),<br />Contrary to what you have claimed, I care nothing at all for what you think of me personally, or if you think I am correct.<br />I am, however, very happy to hear that you are starting to become more open to the absolute prohibition of all lies -- a prohibition which comes both from natural law and from divine positive law, and is taught explicitly by the Church.<br /><br />Peace to you.Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-3436032483089276802011-02-09T09:50:55.159-08:002011-02-09T09:50:55.159-08:00Reginaldus - one final comment for you. It appears...Reginaldus - one final comment for you. It appears you are not very good at internet dialogue and is not interested in actually discussing the issue at hand. Rather, you just want to show you are right. <br /><br />You have shown a bit of ad hominem, which is never good and you have been much more dismissive of others than they have been of you.<br /><br />To let you know, I have started to waffle on my argument quite a bit - but not because of you, but rather a friend who wrote me the following:<br /><br />"Abortion is a lie, and it will not be vanquished with more lies. If we do have the truth on our side, why don’t we believe it? Why do we feel that to expose the lie, we need to resort to tactics such as posing as pimps or prostitutes, because they are moral agents who herald our cause? Consider a person who embodies the qualities of a moral agent, like Blessed Teresa of Calcutta. Imagine her sitting across a table from the Planned Parenthood worker and telling her that some of her novices have gotten into trouble and she needed some ‘quiet’ assistance to skirt some legal entanglements. My gut response at this prospect is disgust. Of course, replace Mother Teresa with a pimp, who, by the way, is also made in the image and likeness of God and is equally called to be a moral agent, and I suddenly feel better with the whole situation and whatever information is gathered from it. Mother Teresa carried the weight of representing Christ in the world, so I am much more comfortable asking someone else to act like a pimp to do God’s work. I don’t think it would have entered Mother Teresa’s mind to deceive the clinic worker. No, she would have just repeatedly pleaded with outstretched arms: “I want the babies, can you please give me the babies?” This would be truth without nuance.<br /><br />Conclusion: I’ll put my money on one loving, little old lady over an army of lying pimps any day."<br /><br />Good day to all of you. Please remember that the others in this debate are not the enemy.Marcelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18121158394600137195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-85056773598093147492011-02-09T09:50:41.623-08:002011-02-09T09:50:41.623-08:00http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09469a.htm
The abo...http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09469a.htm<br />The above article may help shed some light.<br /><br />Some flaws in your article are:<br />Your article does not deal with mental reservation. Nor is the intention to deceive necessary for a lie to be a lie. <br /><br />As to the lies:<br />I'd have to review the video but as I recall it seemed like we had only the intention to deceive. Much of the "lies" are statements that while not false allow the inferring of falsehoods. Which is not itself a lie which if you ask me is the best way to deceive in such a circumstance.<br />and probably the only moral way.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15311021423380727921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-47987148398613507352011-02-09T08:10:24.696-08:002011-02-09T08:10:24.696-08:00@Reginaldus
You have misrepresented my position. I...@Reginaldus<br />You have misrepresented my position. I have not put myself up against Church teaching....I have put myself up against your interpretation of Church teaching. I am not convinced that you are correct. If, however, I can be convinced that your view is authentic Catholic teaching then I will change my mind.Robert Simmshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957786024332264856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-61007882180001143402011-02-09T07:19:46.727-08:002011-02-09T07:19:46.727-08:00Pardon my error....I had forgotten that St. August...Pardon my error....I had forgotten that St. Augustine was infallible.Robert Simmshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957786024332264856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-68775228992894908032011-02-08T09:37:21.359-08:002011-02-08T09:37:21.359-08:00Fascinating and illuminating discussion! Thanks, ...Fascinating and illuminating discussion! Thanks, everyone...<br /><br />Just for the record: I don't think the LiveAction "actors" ever declared themselves explicitly to be "pimp" and "prostitute", did they? The "pimp" said that he and the lady were "into sex work", or some other vagary, I think. Mind you, conjuring non-existent 14-year-old sex slaves from overseas might be another matter... but just FWIW.paladinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17097301774804069480noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-75969550456872606612011-02-07T14:35:23.950-08:002011-02-07T14:35:23.950-08:00@Robert (5:27pm),
You have classified yourself (in...@Robert (5:27pm),<br />You have classified yourself (in your own blog post) among those most radical of thinkers who are willing to deny the Church's teaching that lying is always sinful and cannot ever be justified.<br /><br />Recall the words of the Catechism of Trent (I have already quoted the current Catechism at length): "In a word, lies of every sort are prohibited. [...] Hence, liars are excluded from a participation in the bliss of heaven."<br /><br />You have failed to heed St. Augustine's warning: What good is it if you save the life of another, only to lose for yourself life everlasting?Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-52470969855932401322011-02-07T12:29:45.528-08:002011-02-07T12:29:45.528-08:00If there is a lie, it was not saying that "we...If there is a lie, it was not saying that "we are going to be role-playing" or that it was a hypothetical scenario. The two who went in were hired actors. In a very real way this was a street morality play intended to expose the vice of the unwitting player.<br /><br />This was done in the defense of the thousands of young girls who are subject to abuse and are not reported. Since the officials in the government are not doing their job, it has fallen to others to come to the defense of the helpless.Baron Korfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07215856728880521796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-52939319343285391102011-02-07T08:27:04.751-08:002011-02-07T08:27:04.751-08:00After much thought, I find that I cannot agree wit...After much thought, I find that I cannot agree with your answer to blogger Stacy.<br />I've posted my thoughts on your answer on <a href="http://sorryalltheclevernamesaretaken.blogspot.com/2011/02/is-it-always-sin-to-tell-lie.html" rel="nofollow">my blog.</a>Robert Simmshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06957786024332264856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-11250243071212859232011-02-07T04:23:15.877-08:002011-02-07T04:23:15.877-08:00@Mark of the Vineyard:
Where does sarcasm fall?
...@Mark of the Vineyard:<br /><br /><i>Where does sarcasm fall?</i><br /><br />I think when one uses sarcasm he does not intend to deceive. When one uses sarcasm he might speak a falsehood, but his intention is not for the listener to take him literally. So in that sense sarcasm is not lying.<br /><br />One form of mental reservation might be to saying something that is true in a sarcastic manner. In that case the intention is to deceive, but one is not speaking a falsehood! So it wouldn't be lying in that case either.<br /><br />Personally, I have to be very careful with sarcasm as I have a son who takes everything literally.dcshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18424510747759223459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-55979325418282301842011-02-06T07:14:23.649-08:002011-02-06T07:14:23.649-08:00My husband is involved in the opening of a pro lif...My husband is involved in the opening of a pro life pregnancy center. This post is most helpful to illustrate a point I have been harping on - although even I missed it in this context! It is shocking how often the temptation arrises to stretch the truth in order to achieve the objectives to open the center. I maintain truth stretching and intentional misleading is still lying even when aimed at the good. Here you illustrate clearly and soundly that we can not win with lies. Most I appreciate your last sentence!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-54201682194088632222011-02-05T21:54:03.633-08:002011-02-05T21:54:03.633-08:00Where does sarcasm fall? As a figure of speach, yo...Where does sarcasm fall? As a figure of speach, you say the opposite of what you mean (though with the intention that what you mean will be conveyed by the way you deliver the message). Is it a form of lying?Marco da Vinhahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06092410765851812842noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-7905317215529107032011-02-05T05:55:34.002-08:002011-02-05T05:55:34.002-08:00@Lamont,
I do not think the person's intentio...@Lamont,<br /><br /><i>I do not think the person's intention is a determinate factor in cases like this. If it were, then the priest saying "I am a simple farmer." would be a lie since the intention is to mislead in that case as well.</i><br /><br />It's not intention alone that is the determining factor. A lie is a falsehood that is said with the intention to deceive, as Fr. Reginaldus pointed out at the very beginning of this post. Yes, when a priest says "I am a simple farmer," his intention is to deceive but it is not a lie because what he says is metaphorically true -- it is not a falsehood.dcshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18424510747759223459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-72605089222097049952011-02-04T22:52:12.700-08:002011-02-04T22:52:12.700-08:00Thanks for the great discussion. I have long thoug...Thanks for the great discussion. I have long thought the hard lineon this is correct....due in partto the examplesof saints. My favorite is athanasius, who while on the nile was approached by a garrison sent toarrest him. They called out asking if he knew where athanasius was, and he rejoined...keep rowing, he is just ahead of you.<br /><br />I think the teaching is simple. We are not to lie, and this includes about santa, and spies, and detectives, and nazis, and priests about confessions.<br /><br />As to the question of mental reservation, this indeed is a tricky subject. Ithink perhaps thedistinction canbe made along aquinas understanding of the senses of scripture. It is not the words themselves, but the realities to which the words attain that allow for multiple senses. In other words st escrivas phrase is correct about being a farmer, or a fisherman, etc, but not something like a rock-climber since he once walked up a mountain.<br /><br />Someone above indicated that in thetoughest positions either the holy spirit will give us the right words, or else give us the testimony of our deaths. I agree wholeheartedly.<br /><br />By the the way, the grandparents of our kids really dislike the no santa rule......but we are consoled with the realization that when our kids really need us, we hopefully can reply that since we have never lied to them about anything else, why would we start to do so now.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-25003795372886240392011-02-04T21:07:05.361-08:002011-02-04T21:07:05.361-08:00To all,
I have to get on with writing the next pos...To all,<br />I have to get on with writing the next post (on this Sunday's Gospel)...so I will not be able to keep up with comments as I have been. I think I (for my part) have said most of what I am able to say...I will have to leave the combox open for debate amongst readers -- perhaps I will still jump in here and there! :)Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-91780119932384344562011-02-04T21:04:03.404-08:002011-02-04T21:04:03.404-08:00@Dan O'Connor (5:56am),
No problem at all (ab...@Dan O'Connor (5:56am), <br />No problem at all (about making me repeat myself)! Truly, I hope that my very short and curt responses are not offensive, I'm just trying to answer as economically as possible.<br /><br />The Miguel Pro case is discussed above (I believe under "Josemaria Escriva, but the same idea)...The main point -- Miguel could say "I am a farmer" meaning, "A laborer in the Lord's harvest" -- this is wide mental reservation and is not a lie.<br /><br />What he could not say is, "I am not a priest". This would be a lie.<br />Dressing differently is not a lie either, because he is not directly stating a falsehood -- though he intends to mislead, he does not do this through presenting something false as true; he simply discloses only one aspect of the truth, or uses figurative imagery to tell the truth...<br /><br />I think we can all see that Lila is not a prostitute in the way that Miguel is a farmer. Hence, the comparison does not hold.<br /><br />Blessings!Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-9659879553616515192011-02-04T20:59:13.279-08:002011-02-04T20:59:13.279-08:00THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL OBJECTIONS/COMMENTS ABOUT ...THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL OBJECTIONS/COMMENTS ABOUT UNDERCOVER POLICE WORK, please allow me to offer the beginning of a response:<br /><br />1) As agents of the state, their deceptive undercover work does not harm society by disrupting the good order founded on human speech (whereas that of "vigilantes" perhaps does).<br />2) Therefore, I would hold that police have a lot more leeway in "mental reservation" than most...though they still cannot lie. Hence, they can (perhaps) say, "I am not a cop", meaning "I am not know working as a cop" -- and this is true, since they wouldn't blow cover in order to do any ordinary cop work. [I would say that this is really stretching it, but maybe it could be morally legitimate]<br />3) I think that they can say, "I'm a drug dealer"...since they really are selling the drugs (for example), even though they will immediately arrest the guy -- this could obviously be applied to other scenarios.<br />4) What I do not think they can say is, "I am not an undercover cop" -- that would be a strict lie. Also, they cannot say, "I have never worked for the cops" (also a strict lie).<br /><br />Truthfully, I really don't know. I myself am not too keen on undercover work...it seems to put people in extremely difficult moral dilemmas (not just with lying, but with many other sins - drugs, sex, violence, taking the Lord's Name, etc.)... however, I am doing the best I can to try and reconcile the absolute prohibition of lying with at least some level of undercover work.<br /><br />Obviously, these answers are provisional...I offer them not as certainties, but as something to get the thoughts going in the right general direction.<br />I hope that this helps.<br /><br />Peace to all! +Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-43395412102115546662011-02-04T20:56:45.148-08:002011-02-04T20:56:45.148-08:00Sorry Reginald, I did not mean to ask that you rep...Sorry Reginald, I did not mean to ask that you repeat yourself; I hadn't read the comment thread.<br /><br />"... in order to lead someone into error" is the key phrase.<br /><br />So, did Lila intend to lead anyone into error? <br /><br />Well, what would that error be? That there is a 14 year old girl impregnated by her 31 year old boyfriend seeking an abortion? That's no error; it just happens to not be so with Lila. Perhaps, like a translator, she was speaking in place of a real life girl in that situation and did not think it necessary to inform the Planned Parenthood employee of that fact.<br /><br />A stretch I know, but there is no real significant error, besides the fact that it was not Lila HERSELF (which is already relatively meaningless to the PP employee who does not know Lila) that was in the situation described.<br /><br />Was Blessed Miguel Pro sinning by dressing himself up in costume to evade capture by the police? This was done with the intent to deceive - yet we know he intercedes from beyond the grave.DOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18243481485409235583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5578980753063154388.post-27024217477729683312011-02-04T20:37:08.124-08:002011-02-04T20:37:08.124-08:00@Lamont (11:47pm)
You wrote: "Reginaldus, I a...@Lamont (11:47pm)<br />You wrote: "Reginaldus, I am glad that you recognize that I am not using ‘mental reservation’ according to its textbook definition."<br />Indeed, you are not using it according to its textbook definition... the problem is, you are not using it according to any meaningful definition whatever. <br /><br />You have not really been talking about mental reservation at all...this is what makes it hard for me to respond!Father Ryan Erlenbushhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07557817305024750902noreply@blogger.com